Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Signage topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Ashwaubenon panel denies UNO West’s 15‑foot inflatable boot sign

Village of Ashwaubenon Site Plan Review Committee · September 4, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Site Plan Review Committee voted Sept. 3 to deny UNO West’s request to place a roughly 15‑foot inflatable “boot” sign at 2337 S. Oneida St., citing size, precedent and visibility concerns. The applicant said the display would be temporary this year and could reapply next year.

The Ashwaubenon Site Plan Review Committee voted Sept. 3 to deny a request from UNO West for a large temporary inflatable “boot” sign at 2337 South Oneida Street.

Committee members raised concerns about the sign’s scale and precedent. Committee member Gary Paul called the proposal “ridiculous,” saying the 15‑foot height “is way overboard” and that the village should not start allowing signs of that size. Village staff (Will) noted the village code does not permit inflatable signs by right and that inflatable signs require site plan review committee approval. The applicant, Adrian Rivas, told the committee the boot was intended to be temporary this year and that the store would request a new permit if it wanted the sign again next year.

Staff described the proposed inflatable as roughly 15 feet tall, 14 feet wide and about 5 feet deep (roughly 1,050 cubic feet) and said it would occupy approximately one to two of the five storefront parking spaces but would not block required parking or extend into the public right of way. Staff also said the configuration should avoid traffic‑vision triangle problems.

After discussion, a motion was made and seconded to deny the inflatable sign request. The committee voted to deny the request; the clerk announced the motion was denied and the meeting moved on. The applicant may return with a revised proposal or apply again in a future year.

The denial was purely a site plan committee decision on the temporary signage request; staff said any further permit applications or appeals would follow the village’s established review process.