Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES November 14,2018 PRESENT: Robert Cornell,Robert Krasniewski,Kathryn Larson EXCUSED: Dennis Penney,Wesley Kottke STAFF: Todd Muehrer,Zoning Administrator;Katie Breselow,Recording Secretary Chairperson Cornell called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. The minutes of October 10,2018 were approved as presented. (Krasniewski/Larson) ITEM I: 3601 OREGON STREET&0 W.35TH AVENUE Fox Valley Technical College-petitioner, Winnebago County-owner requests the following variances to permit additional exterior lighting: Description Code Reference Maximum Proposed Intensity of Illumination 30-190(E)(3) < .50 fc c P/L >.50 fc @ P/L Max fixture mounting height 30-190(E)(4) 20' 33' Mr. Muehrer presented the item and distributed photos of the subject site. The variance requests involve two properties that encompass Fox Valley Technical College's S.J. Spanbauer Aviation& Industrial Center with associated facilities at Wittman Regional Airport. The primary parcel located at 3601 Oregon Street is an irregular-shaped 10.43 acre mid-block lot and zoned Institutional Planned Development Overlay.The secondary parcel includes the adjoining runway/tarmac area as well as hangar and office space for operations associated with Wittman Regional Airport located at 0 W. 35t''Avenue. This 25.56 acre parcel is also an irregular-shaped mid-block lot and is zoned Institutional. Adjacent land uses to the subject project area include infrastructure to the north; residential and agricultural to the east;industrial to the south; and infrastructure and industrial to the west. The applicants are proposing to install two new light poles on the existing tarmac west of the S.J. Spanbauer Aviation&Industrial Center building. Variances are needed as the new fixtures will exceed the maximum fixture mounting height by 13' and the intensity of illumination will exceed the maximum of .50 footcandles allowed at the shared property line only. No lighting currently exists in the area and creates dangerous visibility conditions for pilot and maintenance personnel in the vicinity. The western- most proposed light pole will be located on 0 W. 351"Avenue and will create the higher than permitted illumination light level due to the proximity of the lot line with adjacent 3601 Oregon Street. The shared/cross access between parcels and campus configuration are unique physical property circumstances and creating justifiable hardships in this instance. There should be no impact on the surrounding neighborhood as the improvements are located behind the principal structure and both of the proposed new fixtures are 90-degree full cutoff/downward facing in orientation to mitigate effects on nearby parcels. Likewise,the proposed 33' overall pole height will match the existing poles in the parking lots located on the east and south sides of the facility. No harm to the public interest will occur as the project area is located adjacent to airport activities and needed to increase safety of the personnel utilizing the areas. Based on the information provided within this report,staff recommends approval of the variances as requested. Jerry Klein, 3649 Oregon Street, Oshkosh. He stated that he is one neighbor to the airport and was questioning how much the light would exceed the .50 footcandles allowed. Mr. Muehrer responded that he thought Mr. Hoppen would have the answer in greater detail as he did not have the photometric plan available. Board of Appeals Minutes 1 November 14,2018 George Hoppen,Director of Facilities&Operations at Fox Valley Technical College, 1825 N Bluemound Dr., Appleton. He answered they were exceeding the limit at the property line because the pole had crossed the property line. They received an easement from the airport to locate the pole approximately 20 feet off of the property line to give them wing clearance for the planes when they come around the corner. Mr. Muehrer stated in general the nearest/western-most pole is over 500 linear feet from any residential property to the east.The intensity of the light is on the plan and asked Mr.Hoppen to provide more detail. Mr. Hoppen answered the lighting directly under the pole is about five foot candles as it stretches out across the tarmac, by the time it gets to the primary building on the main hanger it is down to about zero foot candles. They do have wall lights on the hanger, the photometric plan addresses those foot levels also. The middle area would be a foot candle or less. Mr. Muehrer responded to answer the question at the property line the lighting is extremely high over the .50 footcandles but it very rapidly dissipates because it is a 90 degree full cut-off fixture. Light trespasses immediately shining down for a purpose to mitigate those impacts on the surrounding properties. Since they are getting further away from the residential properties the impact should be negligible. Mr. Klein stated he hopes that what they said was the truth.The main thing is he doesn't want it affecting his property and as long as they are trying to be safe he supports it. He doesn't understand what the variance is for though because the other light poles are 33 feet high. Mr. Muehrer explained that the property was developed in late 80's and there was not a standard for the pole heights; therefore, they developed them at 33 feet tall. In 2017 the ordinance was redone and now there is a cap on the total height to alleviate future problems they would run into. Now that there are standards the petitioner needs to meet those with their pole heights and thus needing the variance. Mr. Hoppen stated they did look at other lighting but it did not work with what they needed. Mr. Klein responded the pole height only makes a difference to them as they were promised to have shades and lights dimmed at a certain time and it did not happen.He then asked when they plan to illuminate the lights. Mr. Hoppen stated there are two lights and one will be on a timer switch that can be turned on by the professor for 2, 4, or 6 hours. The light may run a little past 10 pm depending when the instructor turned it on but will shut off on its own. He then stated that the tarmac light is on an automated system and in the winter will turn on at 6am and shut off at dawn and in the summer turn on at dusk and turn off at midnight. He also addressed the light would not reach the residential homes. Mr. Muehrer responded their intent was to have the light facing downwards not like stadium lighting where it is shining out into the horizon and to mitigate any problems the neighbors would have. Sheree Zellner,3669 Oregon Street,Oshkosh. She stated she feels up to this point in time Fox Valley Technical College had been a good neighbor and had accommodated any issues that had risen. She was wondering who she would contact for lighting issues going forward and stated that the current lighting does illuminate her backyard. Mr. Hoppen answered that Mrs.Zellner could contact himself and then addressed the lighting by saying they are changing the fixtures to zero cut off LED lighting to help. That is not part of the variance but it is being done to help the neighbors and the pilots. Mrs.Zellner then asked why it took so long for the college to figure out that this change was a necessity. Board of Appeals Minutes 2 November 14,2018 Mr. Hoppen answered he believed it was because there was a turnover in instructors and they are looking at things with a new perspective and using the area differently. Due to the topic being brought up he is in charge of addressing the issue and that is why the variance was proposed. Mrs.Zellner asked if there would be any lights installed on the taxi way of the airport. Mr. Hoppen answered that it would be an airport decision due to it being their property and not the schools. They are only requesting the location they are leasing. Mr. Muehrer responded that the issue was presented because the FVTC is leasing land from the airport and due to there not being just one owner they are unable to move a property line which would make it much easier. Mrs.Zellner stated that planes are flying until 11pm at night and wanted to make sure Mr. Hoppen was aware. Mr. Hoppen stated that he is aware. Mr. Krasniewski motioned to approve the variance as requested. Seconded by Ms.Larson. Ms.Larson stated that these variances are very clear cut and necessary. Mr. Krasniewski responded the problems the neighbor had are coming from another source and the variances would not affect the neighborhood. Approved 3-0. Findings of facts: Shared cross access between parcels and campus configurations are unique physical property circumstances and create justifiable hardships in this instance. Required aeronautics program utilizing aircraft and associated equipment to comply with the same set of standards would be unnecessarily burdensome in this case. There should be no impact on the surrounding neighborhood as the improvements are located behind the principal structure to reduce the lighting on the adjacent properties. There being no further business,the meeting adjourned at 3:55 p.m. (Krasniewski/Larson). Respectfully submitted, Todd Muehrer Zoning Administrator Board of Appeals Minutes 3 November 14,2018