HomeMy WebLinkAbout14. 19-278 MAY 14, 2019 19-278 RESOLUTION
(CARRIED 6-0 LOST LAID OVER WITHDRAWN )
PURPOSE: APPROVE SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENT TO
ALLOW A SECOND ELECTRONIC MESSAGE CENTER AT 2770
WESTOWNE AVENUE
INITIATED BY: PATRICK INVESTMENTS
PLAN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Approved w/conditions
WHEREAS, the applicant would like to amend the previously approved Specific
Implementation Plan to allow a second electronic message center at 2770 Westowne
Avenue.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Plan Commission finds that the planned
development to allow a second electronic message center at 2770 Westowne Avenue is
consistent with the following findings and criteria established in Section 30-387(C)(6) of the
Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance:
1. The proposed Planned Development project is consistent with the overall
purpose and intent of this Chapter.
2. The proposed Planned Development project would maintain the desired
relationships between land uses, land use densities and intensities, and land use
impacts in the environs of the subject site.
3. Sign clutter is minimized due to the reduction in size of the existing manual
reader board.
4. The hardship of the property is having two street frontages
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Oshkosh that
the amendment to the specific implementation plan to allow a second electronic message
center at 2770 Westowne Avenue, per the attached, is hereby approved with the following
condition:
1. The EMC sign shall be a static sign that changes no more than once every 24
hours.
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Common Council
FROM: Mark Lyons
Principal Planner
DATE: May 9, 2019
RE: Approve Specific Implementation Plan Amendment To Allow a Second
Electronic Message Center at 2770 Westowne Avenue (Plan Commission
Recommends Approval)
BACKGROUND
In January of 2000, the Oshkosh Common Council approved a Planned Development (PD) for
the general area which included the extension of N. Westhaven Drive and creation of
Westowne Avenue. The purpose of the plan was to encourage large commercial
developments including big box retail anchors, shopping centers and mixed-use commercial
outlot development. As individual projects were proposed, PD approvals were required to
ensure designs provided substantial buffers and transitions between uses, promote
architectural compatibility among adjacent structures and positively contribute to the physical
appearance of the area. In November of 2000, The Oshkosh Common Council approved a
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and PD for Culvers Restaurant on the north side of Westowne
Avenue. The plan met all base zoning requirements and did not receive any Base Standard
Modifications (BSM). Signage was not addressed with the PD approval meaning signage had
to meet base code requirements.
The subject site consists of one parcel approximately 1.86 acres and is fully developed. The site
contains a 4,500 square foot restaurant, associated off-street parking area, storm water
management facility, dumpster enclosure, landscape elements and three ground signs.
ANALYSIS
The only change being proposed for the site is an additional Electronic Message Center (EMC).
The applicant is not proposing any other changes from what was originally approved in the
CUP/PD from November, 2001. The site currently contains three ground signs, the first being a
30 -foot tall, 15 -foot by 21 -foot, 315 square foot dual pole off -premise sign located along State
Highway 21. The sign serves the Menards/Festival Foods/Goodwill property located on the
south side of Westowne Avenue. Placement of the sign was approved by Common Council in
City Hall, 215 Church Avenue P.O. Box 1 130 Oshkosh, WI 54903-1130 920.236.5000 http://www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us
June of 2000 as a means to limit clutter on Westowne Avenue by eliminating potentially three
individual ground signs. The other two signs are corporate identification pylon signs, one along
Westowne Avenue and the other along State Highway 21. Both signs are similar in size with
changeable copy cabinet.
In March, the applicant proposed to replace the changeable copy cabinets with 7-3" x 3'-5", 25
square foot EMC cabinets. The applicant was notified by staff that zoning code allows one EMC
per property; an amendment to the PD with a BSM would be required to allow a second EMC.
The applicant decided to move forward with the EMC fronting Westowne Avenue which has
been approved by the city. The applicant states in the submitted narrative that Culvers wants
to modernize their signs from labor-intensive, potentially hazardous daily changes of the
manual reader signs to EMCs to take advantage of available technology. The Culvers "Flavor
of the Day" could be updated via mobile device instead of manually changing the text each day.
The applicant lists other advantages of EMC's such as the use of graphics to promote products,
reach out to a broader range of consumers, provide wayfinding and increase safety. The
applicant's narrative also states the State Highway 21 EMC would only be updated once every
24 hours and would display a static message advertising the flavor of the day. This is essentially
the same function as the existing manual reader board except for the convenience factor and
makes all the technological features of the EMC moot.
While staff recommended denial of the 2nd EMC, the Plan Commission in a 4-3 vote supported
the applicant's request with a condition that the sign remain static with no more than one
message change per 24 hour period.
FISCAL IMPACT
The new sign may add some minor additional assessed value for the site.
RECOMMENDATION
The Plan Commission recommended approval of the Specific Implementation Plan amendment
with a condition at its May 7, 2019 meeting.
Respectfully Submitted,
Mark Lyons
Principal Planner
Approved:
Mark A. Rohloff
City Manager
City Hall, 215 Church Avenue P.O. Box 1130 Oshkosh, WI 54903-1130 920.236.5000 http://www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us
ITEM: APPROVAL OF A SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT TO ALLOW A SECOND ELECTRONIC
MESSAGE CENTER SIGN AT 2770 WESTOWNE AVENUE (CULVERS
RESTAURANT)
Plan Commission meeting of May 7, 2019.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: Lora Martinson, Springfield Sign
Owner: Patrick Investments, LLC
Actions Requested:
The applicant requests approval of a Specific Implementation Plan amendment to allow a second
Electronic Message Center (EMC) sign at 2770 Westowne Avenue.
Applicable Ordinance Provisions:
Planned Development standards are found in Section 30-387 of the Zoning Ordinance. The
original Planned Development and Conditional Use Permit addressed the use, building
elevations and other site considerations.
Code Reference Regulation
Section 30-280(A)(2) No more than (1) electronic message board is allowed on a lot.
Property Location and Background Information:
In January of 2000, the Oshkosh Common Council approved a Planned Development for the
general area which included the extension of N. Westhaven Drive and creation of Westowne
Avenue. The purpose of the plan was to encourage large commercial developments including big
box retail anchors, shopping centers and mixed-use commercial outlot development. As
individual projects were proposed, Planned Development approvals were required to ensure
designs provided substantial buffers and transitions between uses, promote architectural
compatibility among adjacent structures and positively contribute to the physical appearance of
the area.
In November of 2000, The Oshkosh Common Council approved a Conditional Use Permit and
Planned Development for Culvers Restaurant on the north side of Westowne Avenue. The plan
met all base zoning requirements and did not receive any base standard modifications. Signage
was not addressed with the Planned Development approval meaning signage had to meet base
code requirements.
The subject site consists of one parcel approximately 1.86 acres and is fully developed. The site
contains a 4,500 square foot restaurant, associated off-street parking area, storm water
management facility, dumpster enclosure, landscape elements and three ground signs.
Item — PD/SIP Amendment — 2270 Westowne Avenue
Subject Site
Existing Land Use
Zoning
Restaurant (Culvers)
SMU-PD
Adjacent Land Use and Zoning
Existing Uses
Zoning
North
Right-of-way / State Highway 21
N/A
West
Mixed Commercial
SMU-PD
South
Mixed Commercial
SMU-PD
East
Mixed Commercial
SMU
Comprehensive Plan
Com rehensive Plan Land Use Recommendation
Land Use
2040 Land Use Recommendation
Interstate Commercial
ANALYSIS
Ground Signage
The site currently contains three ground signs, the first being a 30 -foot tall, 15 -foot by 21 -foot, 315
square foot dual pole off -premise sign located along State Highway 21. The sign serves the
Menards/Festival Foods/Goodwill property located on the south side of Westowne Avenue.
Placement of the sign was approved by Common Council in June of 2000 as a means to limit
clutter on Westowne Avenue by eliminating potentially three individual ground signs.
The other two signs are corporate identification pylon signs, one along Westowne Avenue and
the other along State Highway 21. Both signs are similar in size, the Westowne sign being 24'-3"
tall, 16' x 8', 128 square feet with 12' x 5'-4", 69 square -foot changeable copy cabinet. The State
Highway 21 sign is 25 feet tall with a 7.5' x 15', 113 square foot corporate logo and 12' x T-4", 64
square foot changeable copy cabinet.
In March, the applicant proposed to replace the changeable copy cabinets with T-3" x T-5", 25
square foot electronic message center (EMC) cabinets. The applicant was notified by staff that
zoning code allows one EMC per property; an amendment to the Planned Development with a
base standard modification would be required to allow a second EMC. The applicant decided to
move forward with the EMC fronting Westowne Avenue which has been approved by the city.
The applicant states in the submitted narrative that Culvers wants to modernize their signs from
labor-intensive, potentially hazardous daily changes of the manual reader signs to EMCs to take
advantage of available technology. The Culvers "Flavor of the Day" could be updated via mobile
device instead of manually changing the text each day. The applicant lists other advantages of
EMC's such as the use of graphics to promote products, reach out to a broader range of
consumers, provide wayfinding and increase safety. The applicant's narrative also states the
State Highway 21 EMC would only be updated once every 24 hours and would display a static
message advertising the flavor of the day. This is essentially the same function as the existing
Item — PD/SIP Amendment — 2270 Westowne Avenue
manual reader board except for the convenience factor and makes all the technological features of
the EMC moot.
With this being a variance -type request, a hardship should be demonstrated as to what is unique
to the property warranting the need for a second EMC. The owner has already been approved for
an EMC for the Westowne Avenue sign and will have the ability to utilize the electronic features
of that EMC. The applicant does not make an argument for any hardships other than the
inconvenience of manually changing the reader board. Had this request been presented to the
Board of Zoning Appeals, it could be viewed the applicant does not demonstrate a uniqueness to
the lot, but rather a personal preference to the owner of the lot which is basis for denial per state
case law.
Staff is also of the opinion this request conflicts with the spirit of the Planned Development
approved for this corridor. Section 30-158(B)(2) states:
It is not intended that the City will automatically grant exceptions/base standard modifications in a
Planned Development Overlay District, and it is expected the City will grant only such exceptions
when they are consistent and comparable with benefits to the community that result from the Planned
Development.
Staff feels this request is doing the opposite. If approved, a precedent will be set allowing for all
the businesses along these corridors to seek similar requests. The intent original Planned
Development for the area was to minimize the amount of clutter and distractions along
Westowne Avenue, N. Westhaven Street and State Highway 21. A series of EMCs along State
Highway 21 will add to the number of distractions drivers are already exposed to, especially to
east -bound traffic fast -approaching the N. Washburn Street/Omro Road round -about.
Generally, when applicants seek relief from base zone district standards additional property
enhancements are proposed as a means of compromise (additional landscaping, etc.). Provisions
have not been presented to the city as to additional site improvements the applicant is willing to
make to help justify the request.
Staff feels the base standards for signage in the Suburban Mixed -Use District is adequate for
businesses to function and attract the local community and out-of-town visitors to their location.
Staff feels corporate imagery is well represented along State Highway 21 allowing the well-
informed public what goods and services these corridors provide.
Site Design Access and Circulation, Parking, Lighting, On -Building Signage, Landscaping, Storm
torm
Water Management, Building Facades
The applicant is not proposing any changes to the above items from what was originally
approved in the Conditional Use Permit/Planned Development from November, 2001.
Item — PD/SIP Amendment — 2270 Westowne Avenue
RECOMMENDATION/CONDITIONS
Staff believes that the proposed Planned Development amendment fails to meet the standards set
forth in Section 30-387(C)(6) of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends denial for the amendment
proposing a base standard modification to permit a second electronic message center as it is in
conflict with the following criteria:
(a) The proposed Planned Development project is consistent with the overall purpose and
intent of this Chapter.
(c) The proposed Planned Development project would maintain the desired relationships
between land uses, land use densities and intensities, and land use impacts in the
environs of the subject site.
(g) The proposed architecture and character of the proposed Planned Development
project is compatible with adjacent/nearby development.
(h) The proposed Planned Development project will positively contribute to and not
detract from the physical appearance and functional arrangement of development in
the area.
The Plan Commission approved of the Planned Development amendment as requested with a
condition. The following is the Plan Commissions discussion on this item.
Site Inspections Report: Mr. Ford, Mr. Hinz and Ms. Propp reported visiting the site.
Staff report accepted as part of the record.
The applicant requests approval of a Specific Implementation Plan amendment to allow a second
Electronic Message Center (EMC) sign at 2770 Westowne Avenue.
Mr. Nau presented the item, reviewed the site and surrounding area, land use and zoning
classifications in this area. The only change being proposed for the site is an additional Electronic
Message Center (EMC). The applicant is not proposing any other changes from what was
originally approved in the Conditional Use Permit/Planned Development from November, 2001.
The site currently contains three ground signs of which two signs have changeable copy cabinets.
In March, the applicant proposed to replace the changeable copy cabinets with EMC cabinets and
is now requesting a second EMC. The applicant states in the submitted narrative that Culvers
wants to modernize their signs from labor-intensive, potentially hazardous daily changes of the
manual reader signs to EMCs to take advantage of available technology. The Culvers "Flavor of
the Day" could be updated via mobile device instead of manually changing the text each day.
With this being a variance -type request, a hardship should be demonstrated as to what is unique
to the property warranting the need for a second EMC. The intent original Planned Development
for the area was to minimize the amount of clutter and distractions along Westowne Avenue, N.
Westhaven Street and State Highway 21. Staff feels the base standards for signage in the
Item — PD/SIP Amendment — 2270 Westowne Avenue
Suburban Mixed -Use District is adequate for businesses to function and attract the local
community and out-of-town visitors to their location
Ms. Propp opened technical questions to staff.
Mr. Bowen questioned if the site was permitted to have two pylons signs due to having frontage
on both rights -of -ways.
Mr. Nau replied that is correct. He said one ground sign is allowed per right-of-way frontage.
Mr. Bowen said he could not recall if surrounding businesses have a sign on each frontage.
Mr. Lyons pulled up Google street view and pointed out all the signs in the area.
Mr. Bowen stated when it was approved in 2000, it was approved with two signs and no base
standard modifications. He said the signs as they currently exist are permitted.
Mr. Nau confirmed Mr. Bowees statement.
Mr. Bowen said the EMC signs do look like a reduction compared to the manual signs. He said it
looks as the cabinets signs would be going from about 68-69 square feet to 25 square feet.
Mr. Hinz suggested that maybe the city code is falling behind on technology. He questioned if
the channel cabinet signs were more attractive than the EMC signs. He feels there is opposition in
allowing EMC signs. He said he has had experience in this field because he used to be a general
manager of a restaurant. He understands the safety aspect of having an EMC. He suggested
reviewing the code and focusing on the EMC sign area. He said the small EMCs are not putting
out a lot of light plus the subject site is not in a residential area. He reiterated what Mr. Bowen
said about the EMC signs being smaller than the channel letter signs. He questioned how many
other parcels have both highway frontage and road frontage like this area. He said it is a very
exclusive small segment of the city. He said if they would be setting a precedence for the area,
there is nothing that is similar to it.
Mr. Burich reviewed some of issues with the old sign code relating to allowing too much signage
and too many signs in the community. He explained those were the reasons the sign regulations
were tightened up during the zoning ordinance update. He said in his opinion, two reader
boards on the site are not necessary. He said one sign on any site is sufficient. He said the signs
facing Highway 21 serve less of a function for the reader board signs compared to the traffic
going down Westowne Avenue due to traffic speed and different mindsets of drivers. He stated
his main concern is the signage on Highway 21 because of potential hazards and contributing to
the sign clutter. He said he understands the EMC signs are 25 square feet but the code still only
allows one EMC sign per site. He said approving the two EMCs would set a precedent for
surrounding businesses. He said there is sign clutter along Interstate 41 and they have tried their
best to contain it. He said he does not want the same issues relating to sign clutter in this area.
Item — PD/SIP Amendment — 2270 Westowne Avenue
Mr. Hinz commented the businesses in that area are trying to obtain customers through two
different major roadways.
Ms. Palmeri pointed out in the staff report the section relating to the applicant not compromising
with improvements to the site in order to be allowed a second EMC sign. She asked if it had been
a factor and the applicant offered site improvements, if staff would then support the two EMC
signs.
Mr. Nau replied they would probably still not support it unless it was extremely exceptional. He
explained that section was in the staff report because there is usually a trade-off when it comes to
requesting BSM's to sites.
Ms. Palmeri said she appreciates that the applicant pointed out picture graphic overcomes
language barriers for tourists, international, learning disabilities and education discrepancies.
Ms. Palmeri asked if there was only one EMC sign allowed, if the applicant preferred, would they
be allowed to swap out the signs from Highway 21 to the Westowne Avenue.
Mr. Nau replied there has already been one EMC approved for the site on the Westowne Avenue
side. He said the applicant is requesting two EMC signs with the Highway 21 sign being a static
sign stating the flavor of the day.
Ms. Propp inquired about the height of the signs. She understands that the area of the EMC is less
but the images shown make the EMC area look larger than the ultimate sign height.
Mr. Nau said he reviewed the old building permits for the site and said one sign is 25 feet. He
said Culvers had to obtain an easement from the DOT because they were encroaching onto their
rights. He explained that the DOT limited the sign to 25 feet tall with a 25 feet setback from the
highway's right-of-way. He said the other sign is around 23 feet high.
Ms. Propp confirmed that DOT regulations would not permit the sign to go any higher whether it
is an EMC or channel sign.
Mr. Nau confirmed and said Culvers is within an easement with the DOT.
Mr. Vajgrt asked for clarification that the requested EMC is going to be a static message stating
only the flavor of the day.
Mr. Nau and Mr. Burich confirmed it would be a static message.
Mr. Vajgrt stated he does not understand where the additional distraction would be corning from
in replacing the existing sign with an EMC. He said the EMC would be smaller in area and only
changed once a day.
Mr. Nau said the additional EMC could create a precedent for surrounding businesses.
Item — PD/SIP Amendment — 2270 Westowne Avenue
Mr. Burich stated it is staff's concern about the sign clutter and gave the example of excessive
signage in Wisconsin Dells.
Ms. Propp asked if there were any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make
any statements.
Dan Lichtenwald (representing Culver's / applicant), said he is owner of that Culver's location.
He said he wasn't sure of what else he could add because a lot of it has already been discussed.
He did want to add that the site is unique to the area given the fact there are two existing signs.
He said they want to take advantage of current technology and upgrade the property to get away
from the changeable copy board. He said they want to go to a sign that is more visually
appealing and up to date. He stated they would be very sensitive to not having the Highway 21
sign to be anything more than just a static sign. He said they are not changing or adding signage
but rather upgrading the signage. He said if the second EMC front Highway 21 is not approved,
he would likely remove the changeable copy piece due to safety concerns. He stated that Culvers
is unique to the neighborhood. He feels allowing the second EMC would not set a precedent
because EMCs are very expensive.
Ms. Propp asked about the approved EMC sign on Westowne Avenue and if it would be a
scrolling sign and not static.
Mr. Lichtenwald replied yes and it would not be static.
Mr. Burich commented that EMCs cannot be scrolling or flashing.
Mr. Lyons stated the code does not permit scrolling, flashing, blinking or any similar type of
feature on EMCs. He said the code states one change every 10 seconds is the most the code
allows. He said six changes a minute and it cannot have animation.
Ms. Propp asked if Mr. Lichtenwald still anticipated some type of change to the sign.
Mr. Lichtenwald replied he would on the Westowne Avenue sign.
Mark Wessell (applicant), said he is the CEO of Springfield Sign & Neon. He highlighted sections
of the staff report. He agrees with the purpose of the Planned Development in encouraging
commercial development business. He said the property has two pylon signs and each has a
manual changeable message board. He said there are comments stating there are no hardships
presented except for convenience of technology. He said there is an acknowledgment from the
staff stating there is a need to attract local and out of town businesses. He said for a business to
sustain itself, it needs to attract existing and new customers. He said the second EMC request is
only going to be a static sign which negates all the technological features of an EMC. He believes
the statement about the applicant not providing any additional landscaping or enhancements is
far from the truth. He said they do feel they have offered in good faith this request. He noticed
there seems to be a fear for setting a precedents of additional signage at surrounding properties.
He commented that the site is in excellent condition for being 20 years old. He said the site is
maintained and landscaped and does not see any additional landscaping needed that would be
Item — PD/SIP Antertdittent — 2270 Westowne Avenue
prominent. He stated the property if unique because it is fronted on two sides with highway
which is not usual. He said when the two signs were previously approved, the city must have
seen a need for two signs with message boards. He said the signs are being reduced from 65
square feet to 25 square feet, which is a 60% reduction in area. He feels that is enough of a
compromise for the second EMC. He explained that graphics on an EMC can overcome language
barriers. He also mentioned the hazards of changing out the current board.
There were no other public comments on this item.
Ms. Propp closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing
statements.
Mr. Lichtenwald said Culver's has been a real good community partner with Oshkosh. He said
they will continue that good relationship whether the second EMC is approved or not. He said
the other Culvers in Oshkosh and the one in Fond du Lac have already been approved for this
upgrade. He stated they are willing to invest $130,000 in these properties to keep them fresh and
updated. He said all they ask is a little understanding that this property is unique. He feels the
neighboring businesses do not change their signage as much as Culvers does since Culvers
changes their signage every day.
Motion by Perry to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report.
Seconded by Bowen.
Ms. Propp asked if there was any discussion about the motion.
Plan Commission and staff discussed what the ayes and nays would mean when voting on the
item.
Mr. Ford stated it is not Plan Commission's duty to decide if Culvers is a good corporate citizen.
He urges Plan Commission to take that off the table when evaluating the proposed request. He
said he agrees with staff in terms of clutter being a problem and creating a precedents for other
businesses. He said a hardship needs to be demonstrated. He feels having a location with the
advantage of having two advertising points is not a hardship. He said there will be one EMC
regardless because the code permits it. He said he is intending to support staff on this item.
Mr. Perry stated he is really conflicted by this item. He said he supports overcoming language
barriers because of his experience and career. He said he is supposed to make his decision based
on rules, codes and laws, not based on his emotions. He will support staff's recommendation
even though he may not personally like it.
Ms. Palmeri reviewed the intent of the original Planned Development which was to reduce clutter
and distractions in the area. She said the 60% reduction in the signage would be reducing the
amount of clutter in volume. She said she is also conflicted because of the uniqueness, safety
concerns and overcoming language barriers. She commented she is challenged on this request.
Item — PD/SIP Amendment — 2270 Westowne Avenue 8
Mr. Hinz stated he is also conflicted on this item. He wished the applicant would have brought
up the hardship of having a flavor of the day because it is unique to Culvers. He explained that
people will stop depending on the flavor of the day. He believes the city is behind
technologically because all the signs will start changing to EMCs. He said this is the first EMC
where the only requested message is a static sign and no graphics. He said he will probably vote
to deny the request but not because he wants to. He said his obligation is to the code and believes
the code needs to be reviewed.
Mr. Bowen stated he is not conflicted. He said in form and function, the sign is essentially doing
the same thing as it currently is. He said the request works within our code but the only
differentiation is that the code allows one EMC. He said the code does not usually contemplate a
site with these types of frontages and rights -of -ways adjacent to it. He believes that is enough of
a hardship for the applicant. He said he is sensitive to the slippery slope comment but it may
only apply to six parcels of land in the city, which are all probably located in the area they are
talking about. He said he will support the dual EMC signs because it is essentially identical in
form and function and the reduction in size is a compromise.
Ms. Propp said they are all conflicted. She said she does have emotion and has a soft spot for
Culvers. She does want a sign located on the side of Highway 21. She stated she is conflicted.
She explains that she does not see a hardship. She appreciates what they are trying to do but she
is going to support staff.
Mr. Perry commented he is not convinced that the sign will remain static because of comments
about the technology of EMCs. He said he is showing there is an inconsistency of what is being
said.
Motion denied 3-4 (Ayes: Ford, Perry, Propp. Nay: Bowen, Hinz, Palmeri, Vajgrt).
Staff and Plan Commission discussed how to make a new motion including findings and
conditions.
Motion by Bowen to recommend approval of the Planned Development amendment to the Common
Council with the following conditions and findings:
Condition:
1. The EMC sign shall be a static sign that changes no more than once every 24 hours.
Findings:
The proposed Planned Development project is consistent with the overall purpose and intent of
this Chapter.
The proposed Planned Development project would maintain the desired relationships between
land uses, land use densities and intensities, and land use impacts in the environs of the subject
site.
Item — PD/SIP Amendment — 2270 Westowne Avenue
Seconded by Vajgrt.
Motion to amend by Palmeri to include additional findings that sign clutter is minimized due to the
reduction in size of the existing manual reader board and the hardship of the property is having two
street frontages. Final condition and findings as follows:
Condition:
1. The EMC sign shall be a static sign that changes no more than once every 24 hours.
Findings:
1. The proposed Planned Development project is consistent with the overall purpose and intent of
this Chapter.
2. The proposed Planned Development project would maintain the desired relationships between
land uses, land use densities and intensities, and land use impacts in the environs of the subject
site.
3. Sign clutter is minimized due to the reduction in size of the existing manual reader board.
4. The hardship of the property is having two street frontages
Seconded by Hinz.
Mr. Perry stated with the motion, he is no longer conflicted. He said the signs would be static
and there would be no opportunity to overcome language barriers. He said therefore, he would
still be against the second EMC sign.
Motion approved 4-3 (Ayes: Bowen, Hinz, Palmeri, Vajgrt. Nay: Ford, Perry, Propp).
Item — PD/SIP Amendment — 2270 Westowne Avenue 10
SUBMIT TO:
City of Oshkosh Dept. of Community Development
Cit215 Church Ave., P.O. Box 1130
Oof02Planned Development Application Oshkosh, WI 54901
shkosh PHONE: (920) 236-5059
For General Development Plan or Specific Implementation Plan
"PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT USING BLACK INK**
APPLICANT INFORMATION
Petitioner: Lora Martisnon
Date: 4/2/2019
Petitioner's Address: 4825 E Kearney St. City: Springfield State: MO Zip: 65803
Telephone #: ( ) 417.862.2454 Fax: ( ) 417.862.1884 Other Contact # or Email; loram@springfieldsign.com
Status of Petitioner (Please Check): ❑ Owner [D Representative U Tenant Ci Prospective Buyer
Petitioner's Signature (required): Lora,, +MDate: 4/2/2019
OWNER INFORMATION
Owner(s): Patrick Investments LLC
Owner(s) Address: 3378 Nelson Rd.
Telephone #: ( ) 920.231.6019 Fax: (
Date:
City: Oshkosh State: WI Zip; 54904
Other Contact # or Email:
Ownership Status (Please Check): ❑ Individual ❑ Trust ❑ Partnership ❑ Corporation
Property Owner Consent: (required)
culversfdlosh@gmail.com
By signature hereon, I/We acknowledge th ity offic' Is and/or em es may, in the performance of their functions, enter
upon the property to inspect or gather er' form n necess o pr cess this application. I also understand that all
meeting dates are tentative and may e �nby the P nning S vices Division for incomplete submis ions or other
administrative reasons. t 7 /
Property Owner's Signature:
TYPE OF REQUEST:
❑ General DeveloOation
ent la en
DP) ❑ eral Development Plan (GDP) Amendment
❑ Specific Implem Pian (SIP) I@ Specific Implementation Plan (SIP) Amendment
SITE INFORMATION
Address/Location of Proposed Project: 2270 WestoWne Ave. Oshkosh, WI 54904
Proposed Project Type: Removal of manual reader board and installation of an electronic message center onto existing freestanding sign
Current Use of Property: Restaurant Zoning: SMU-PD
Land Uses Surrounding Your Site: North: A touch of Class Pet Resort
South: Holiday Inn Express & Suites
East: McDonalds
West: Papa Murphys
Y It Is recommended that the applicant meet with Planning Services staff prior to submittal to discuss the proposal.
Application fees are due at time of submittal. Make check payable to City of Oshkosh.
➢ Please refer to the fee schedule for appropriate fee. FEE IS NON-REFUNDABLE
For more information please visit the City's website at www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us/Community_Development/Planning.htm
4 5!7S
C_4,1-41 7.3/zo
Staff Date Recd 7 72.0/p
Page 5
• Specific treatment and location of recreational and open space areas, including designation of
any such areas to be classified as common open space.
❑ Proposed grading plan.
❑ Specific landscaping plan for the subject site, specifying the location, species, and installation size of
plantings. The landscaping plans shall include a table summarizing all proposed species.
❑ Architectural plans for any nonresidential buildings, multi -family structures, or building clusters, other than
conventional single-family or two-family homes on individual lots, in sufficient detail to indicate the floor
area, bulk, and visual character of such buildings.
❑ Engineering plans for all water and sewer systems, stormwater systems, roads, parking areas, and
walkways.
❑ Signage plan for the project, including all project identification signs, concepts for public fixtures and signs,
and group development signage themes that may or may not vary from City standards or common
practices.
❑ Specific written description of the proposed SIP including:
• Specific project themes and images.
• Specific mix of dwelling unit types and/or land uses.
• Specific residential densities and nonresidential intensities as described by dwelling units per acre,
and landscaping surface area ratio and/or other appropriate measures of density and intensity.
• Specific treatment of natural features, including parkland.
• Specific relationship to nearby properties and public streets.
• Statistical data on minimum lot sizes in the development, the precise areas of all development lots
and pads; density/intensity of various parts of the development; building coverage, and
landscaping surface area ratio of all land uses; proposed staging; and any other plans required by
Plan Commission.
• A statement of rationale as to why PD zoning is proposed. This statement shall list the standard
zoning requirements that, in the applicant's opinion, would inhibit the development project and the
opportunities for community betterment that are available through the proposed PD project.
• A complete list of zoning standards that would not be met by the proposed SIP and the location(s)
in which such exceptions/base standard modifications would occur.
• Phasing schedule, if more than one development phase is intended.
❑ Agreements, bylaws, covenants, and other documents relative to the operational regulations of the
development and particularly providing for the permanent preservation and maintenance of common
open areas and amenities.
❑ A written description that demonstrates how the SIP is consistent with the approved GDP and any and all
differences between the requirements of the approved GDP and the proposed SIP.
I hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge all required application materials are included with this
application. I am aware that failure to submit the required completed application materials may result in denial or
delay of the application request.
Applicant's Signature (required): Loral Ma+t'o' u&rt/ Date: 4/2/2019
Page 6
SPRINGFIELDSIGN
� ic;ign I [mill 1 1 ',c1'/1(('
r
ADDRESS
4825 E Kearney St
Springfield, MO 65803
CONTACT US
800.845.9927
springfieldsign.com
Culver's located at 2270 Westowne Ave. currently has two existing freestanding signs with daily
notice bulletin boards. A sign permit application was submitted to remove the existing manual
reader boards on both freestanding signs and to install electronic message centers in their place.
Sec.30-280 Electronic Message Boards (A)(2) of the code states no more than (1) electronic
message board is allowed on a lot. Culver's would like to proceed with the approval of the sign
permit for the existing freestanding sign along Westowne Ave. and would like to request Planned
Development approval from the City Plan Commission, an advisory Board to the Common Council
to install an electronic message center onto the second existing freestanding sign (replacing the
daily notice bulletin board) along Hwy 21.
Culver's would like to keep the same design aspect on both of their freestanding signs by
providing a fresh new look with electronic message centers. Electronic message centers not only
allow businesses to take advantage of technology available, but the dynamic output allows a
business to be competitive in the marketplace. With approval of the request both freestanding
signs would be of consistent technology. Technology for change of message is available from any
mobile broadband device and no longer would require on-site manual change (that could be
unsafe).
Electronic message centers are safer to our employees than daily notice bulletin boards that have
to be changed by hand. In inclement weather use of ladders could cause hazardous falls.
Electronic message centers are programmable to meet City requirements along with automatic
dimming for day -time and night-time hours for public safety. Visual knowledge from the
electronic message center provides proper way finding, product education, and improves public
safety for the public traveling along Hwy 21 and Westowne Ave. Images on an electronic message
center are a better communication tool than text for the following reasons:
• Pictures (graphics) are more universal allowing quicker comprehension of message
(safer messaging).
• Picture (graphics) overcome language barriers (tourist or foreign nationals can
better understand business function & products).
• Pictures overcome learning disabilities or education discrepancies and enhance the
experience and comprehension of the message to those who otherwise may miss
the message.
• A picture is a worth a thousand words.
Building Images
that Build Business
Page 7
SPRINGFIELDSIGN
design I build I install I service
ADDRESS
4825 E Kearney St
Springfield, MO 65803,
CONTACT US
800.845.9927
springfieldsign.com
• Compatibility product/consumer education is enhanced with pictures and graphics.
The general welfare of the community is better served when product and customer service
messages are readily available. Culver's is willing to work with the City to provide visual
knowledge by displaying Amber Alerts or other needed messages to the community.
With the allowance of the second electronic message center to be installed along Hwy 21 we
would upload only one message per 24 hours which is equivalent use of the existing daily notice
bulletin board. Essentially, the Hwy 21 sign would have a static message only, while the
Westowne Ave electronic message center would allow for message changes up to every 10
seconds.
Page 8
ro
LQ
u
PYLON
RGB full color 16mm Electronic
Message Center (EMC) with RF
wireless communication
Broadband communication option
available
0019 Springfield Sign & Graphics Inc., Springlield Sign
RE9ENTATIVE FROM EMAIL ATTACHMENTS
'ALL MEASUREMENT5 ARE APPROXIMATE
FIELD VERIFIED SURVEY EXISTING: NO 02/18/19 -NEW
DATE 5U RVEY RECEIVED: 02/19/19 - REV 5wle Down EMC
03/15/19 - REV - 3'5"x7'3" EMC
MARK R EVANS/CW 1992® FILE PATH: T:\o19920 Culver_s of Oshkosh_ WI _140 (1843)Wrt
This drawing is Copyrighted material, it remains the property of Springfield Sign & Graphics Inc, unless otherwise agreed upon in writing. It Is unlawful to use
this drawing for bidding purposes, nor can it be reproduces, copied or used in the production of a sign without written permission from Springfield Sign. J
U -R NCLMALL\
This Is an artistic ren di I on and final colors / sizes may vary from that depicted hereinO iS
4tPISPRINGFIELDSIGN
www.spdngfieldsign.com
C-) CO
cy (T) IT gyri CO r- c co U7
Q) CD CD CD WCD a� (n
3 iD-� 4- 4- 4- 4--� 4- _0 = = 4-
4 `
M M M (6 (6 M (13 — C1 U Qy
c LL LL LL LL LL LL LL = _
P E � (0 F.90$1i�AE319
MA
o,
m
V .74 1
,pk AA' opp-
. r is • ,,,
Page 10
U u in
cy cY) �T gyri co r,- c 025 U�
] a] ay aJ aJ aJ (J a) 0 DJ
.- 4- 4 4-V j
Q] aJ a] aJ 4J aJ CD O 75
LL IL LL L1. IL IL LL. 2 2 :E
ML
li
1
kb
Page 11
Page 12
SIP AMENDMENT 2300 WESTOWNE AVE LLC MENARD INC
2270 WESTOWNE AVE 8730 COUNTY ROAD G 4777 MENARD DR
PC: 05-07-19 MOUNT HOREB WI 53572 EAU CLAIRE WI 54703
OSHKOSH PRO PARTNERS
2251 WESTOWNE AVE
OSHKOSH WI 54904
TOWN OF ALGOMA
ATTN: DEBORAH STARK
15 N OAKWOOD RD
OSHKOSH WI 54904
PJS OF DEPERE LLP
1722 CLARENCE CT
WEST BEND WI 53095
LORA MARTISNON
4825 E KEARNEY ST
SPRINGFIELD MO 65803
WESTOWNE SHOPPES LLC
631 S HICKORY ST
FOND DU LAC WI 54935
PATRICK INVESTMENTS LLC
3378 NELSON RD
OSHKOSH WI 54904
Page 13
9IY- I) V Er "Jro Iff I E
City of Oshkosh maps and data are intended to be used for general identification purposes only, and
the City of Oshkosh assumes no liability for the accuracy of the information. Those using the
information are responsible for verifying accuracy. For full disclaimer please go to
www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us/GlSdisclaimer
N
lin=0.1mi
A1 in= 550 ft
Printing Date: 4/8/2019 Oshkosh
Prepared by: City of Oshkosh, WI
�2tM
` ` jL�IrinAA-M�I
City of Oshkosh maps and data are intended to be used for general identification purposes only, and
the City of Oshkosh assumes no liability for the accuracy of the information. Those using the
information are responsible for verifying accuracy. For full disclaimer please go to
www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us/GlSdisclaimer
N
1 in=0.02 mi
lin=100 ft
A A
Printing Date: 4/8/2019 VV
Oshkosh
Prepared by: City of Oshkosh, WI
�2tM