Vernon Broadcaster

Viroqua city officials last week began probing into a pair of controversial issues regarding the development of the new Walgreens store in Viroqua.

The Walgreens store, which is slated to be open the end of June, has yet to have its developer's agreement finalized. Also, city officials were openly critical of Walgreens' sign being exempt from the city's new sign ordinance. The council voted unanimously to table the issue until the May 30 council meeting.

AT ISSUE...

1. The Walgreens store has been under construction since last year and is to be completed in late June. The city has yet to sign the developer’s agreement for the project.

2. The new Walgreens store’s sign does not comply with the city’s recently revamped sign ordinance. The developer received a variance for the sign three days before the new sign ordinance was approved by the council

The city council discussed finalizing the development agreement with the developer, GNI, on Tuesday, May 9, and began the process of issuing bonds to finance the TIF district. GNI is developing the property and will in turn lease it to Walgreens when it is completed. The city approved up to $600,000 in TIF district funding last year for improvements to the property. The improvements were approved despite opposition from local residents.

"I strongly supported this agreement when we set a precedent with the Food Co-op," Alderman Gail Frie said. "But I have major concerns about the landscaping and with the emergence of this sign dilemma. I think it sends a really bad message to the community to slide that in on a technicality three days before the new sign ordinance. I don't think that fits the intent of the agreement."

Under the old sign ordinance "reader board" signs or electronic signs that display scrolling messages were not allowed unless a variance was granted. GNI obtained that variance three days before the new sign ordinance was passed. The new ordinance does not allow reader boards except those that display time and temperature.

The issue has been further complicated in recent months when several businesses came forward to apply for the same type of reader board signs even though they are prohibited under the new ordinance. Lavon Felton, owner of Sleepy Hollow Auto Mart on the north end of Viroqua, had an electronic scrolling sign installed at his business only to find it was illegal.

"My sign has a message board the same as Walgreens," Felton said. "I wasn't aware of the new sign ordinance, and shame on me for not knowing. Walgreens got a permit three days prior to new ordinance, good for them, but we didn't. It kind of leaves a sour taste in my mouth. I feel like I am being discriminated against and I spent $20,000 on a sign and it's not lit."

Felton said he is on Main Street, but feels the intent of the ordinance was to preserve the historic district downtown not the north side of the city where he is located. Felton said he believed Sleepy Hollow has "every right as Walgreens" to have the sign.

Felton said other businesses, including Nelson Agri-Center and Vernon Memorial Hospital, have applied for similar signs.

Alderman Terry Noble said the issue of granting variances to businesses for such signs has been discussed by the Viroqua Partners and there is concern that the issue could undermine the new sign ordinance.

"If Walgreens can have a variance, then we have to give a variance to everybody, then we might as well take that right out of ordinance," Noble said. "The people who worked on that ordinance worked hard on it. They didn't feel electronic signs were appropriate in the city. I have great concern about Walgreens getting in three days ahead of that."

Noble asked that the developer's agreement and the vote on finalizing bonding be delayed until more information can be gathered.

"I don't think it's too much too ask for a person that is getting $600,000 in TIF district aid to comply with the sign ordinance like anyone else and not come in three days ahead of it taking affect just so they don't have to comply," Noble said. "I don't think that was the spirit of the ordinance."

Felton asked GNI representative Mike Casper if he would be willing to take his sign down. Casper said he would not be willing to do that.

"I applied for the variance the same time the building drawings were submitted and the city council voted on it," Casper said. "I followed the process that was in place at the time. The ordinance was rewritten after the variance was granted."

"I don't think you did do everything by the book," Noble said. "I asked many times why the developer's agreement was coming in at the end of the project. The developer's agreement should have come in ahead of the development."

"I won't disagree with you on that," Casper said. "Unfortunately, until now, the State of Wisconsin kind of drove the bus on the agreement because it wasn't until 10 days ago that we had the final drawings on storm sewer that we are paying for. We were putting pipe in and the DOT was changing the plan as we were going�

"The developer's agreement has gone back and forth and has been the victim of what the engineers wanted to see," Casper continued. "The amount of work has changed every two weeks."

Casper said he submitted landscaping plans with the rest of the drawings for the project.

"I disagree that landscape drawings were submitted the same time as the sign permit," Noble said. "Those drawings did not show specifically what I was looking for, and that was the landscaping between your building and the Food Co-op."

Casper said he has been in contact with the Viroqua Food Co-op and they are using the co-op's landscape designer to develop a plan between the buildings.

"Those plans are of great interest to this council," Noble said. "One of the concerns of the TIF district financing� We really did want to see the money put to good use and see something special happen between those buildings."

Casper said the landscape design has "morphed" over time and he was "disappointed" the council had not been given a copy of the design.

Noble said he wanted more time not just because of landscape issues but also to investigate the sign issue.

"It's a can of worms," Noble said. "The problems are already starting. I expected it to be a part of the developer's agreement. Now the city is left in the position of allowing it for everybody or not allowing it there (at Walgreens). Now we have all these other businesses up in arms about it. It's not fair to the other businesses."

"I am sorry the ordinance changed," Casper said. "When ordinances change some people fall under the old ordinance and some fall under the new ordinance. For me to be penalized, I am sorry I am confused by that. I understand people are upset about that.

"I have been accused of sneaking something in and I resent that fact," Casper continued. "We submitted our documents and we followed the laws of the city of Viroqua at the time and we were granted our variance. We do all of those things before we buy a property, so we know what we are giving our client. I am not going to buy a piece of property knowing I am not going to be able to put my building there. Those are the things we need to know ahead of time."

Casper asked if he should proceed with the street and sewer work.

"That was not a part of the original deal and I am fixing the public right of way," Casper said.

"That's going to be a business decision on your part whether you continue with street work because I would never support this if you are not going support the city on their vision of how this is going to look," Frie said. "In my mind this whole TIF district and bonding is going to be contingent on how we come to an agreement on landscaping and the sign. We are not going to tell you to stop or to continue."

City administrative consultant Jeff Gohlke said he is confident the city council will like the landscaping plan being developed, but conceded the sign was a sticking point. Gohlke said he consulted with city attorney David Jenkins and there may be larger legal issues, perhaps even constitutional issues, with denying this type sign.

"They are the sign of the future and you are going to see a lot more of them," Gohlke said. "I think you certainly can regulate them, but can we prohibit them? I don't know."

"Those who worked on the sign ordinance worked very hard on it and were very passionate about it," Frie said. "They had a real vision of what they wanted the city to look like and I think its well within the power of city government."

Alderman Gary Krause said the issue was not so much a matter of "penalizing" one business as it is a matter of "cooperation."

From Westby wrote on Jun 2, 2006 6:42 AM:

" Just be glad it's a sign and not a sandwich board! "

Former Resident wrote on Jun 1, 2006 7:59 AM:

" This is one of the reasons I moved away and only come back to visit friends and family. Why worry about signs there are more important issues to deal with. ITS A SIGN! "

TO: Another concerned resident wrote on May 28, 2006 7:27 AM:

" In the future, all resteraunts are Taco Bell! What happens when you no longer have a choice WHO to give your business to because ALL drug stores are Walgreens and ALL grocery stores are A&P and ALL gas stations are Kwik Trip? The big corporate chains are nice, but they're killing our way of life here in small town America. "

Resident wrote on May 25, 2006 9:17 PM:

" I guess I just don't see what the big deal is? Sleepy Hollow has a very nice sign that I see they were using to not only advertise for their business, but they were advertising Viroqua too when they had a "Don't miss Wild West Days" and the corresponding event dates. Now how does that hurt the town? For those concerned with the historic main street program...is it not written somewhere the number of blocks that is designated by this program? How far does it extend? I find it comical that the city wants to promote small business, yet Walgreens moves in, and locally owned Dahl drugstore moves out. Two dollar store chains move in, and Lonnie Sherry's locally owned dollar store moves out. Seems like the city wants it both ways. Are they worried about accidents caused from distracted drivers looking at the sign? To me it doesn't seem like it could be any more distracting than those new Viroqua banners that hang off the light posts...they are so small you can't even read them. I almost rear-ended a car when they were first put up because the writing was so small on them I couldn't figure out what it said! I say let anyone on the north or south side of town do what they want to grow and prosper, as long as it's not vulgar or offensive. The two downtown blocks of main street can be their historic district...although it sure would look a heck of a lot better if they did something with those buildings that are falling apart! "

Common Sense wrote on May 25, 2006 8:12 AM:

" The sign ordinance has good intent but should not be a black and white issue. Preserve the look and feel of the downtown (2 blocks) but let the rest of Viroqua have a pulse of life! There should be more focus on making the downtown area unique and less focus on restricting business development. "

Another concerned resident wrote on May 24, 2006 11:27 AM:

" This is for Concerned:(. Go buy somewhere else, that's the whole idea of free enterprise. No one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to buy at either one of these establishments. As for the sign issue, Wagreens followed the existing process at the time, what difference does it make if it was three days or three months before the new ordinance. I can't afford to buy everything from our existing "local" businesses. "

concerned:( wrote on May 22, 2006 12:05 PM:

" To me this is a prime example of big business moving in and taking over. So what is Viroqua going to have now? Two pharmacies? Wal-Mart and Walgreens? I think I will do ALL of my business elsewhere. Supporting the LOCAL community should take precidence over supporting corporate America! "

Bullitt wrote on May 19, 2006 9:47 PM:

" Does everyone know how many "Viroqua's" are in this nation??? This is nothing new...I moved away 19 years ago and have been to about 15 states and 4 countries...and I can tell you, you are not alone. It's time to change...if you don't, the city will fail to prosper. I love Viroqua and return every couple of years...but it's the same complaints over and over again. "This place closed", "this is a dead town", "nothing to do", "nothing to see", etc. What makes a town special is it's people...and Viroqua has great people. Accept change and move FORWARD! "

The Joker wrote on May 19, 2006 8:23 PM:

" The joke of the issue is the sign ordinance, which took 20 years to put in place, and because of the few who want Viroqua to look like it did in the 1890's, finally surfaced into an unreadable, unenforceable document that was outdated prior to its passage. Walgreen's will be a great asset to Viroqua, as are the many other businesses who realize that good; modern looks and signage are necessary to survive in the 21st century. Kudos to Spanky and the others that are making investments allowing them to prosper, thus allowing Viroqua to prosper in spite of itself. Is it right to chastise someone when they follow the rules the council put into place? Council, wake up...allow progress in a tasteful way or watch Viroqua die. "

Mike Kaspar wrote on May 19, 2006 3:46 PM:

" I believe it's important for all sides to look at all sides of an issue. I applied for the sign variance as a normal part of my process when I develop a site. I do the same process for all aspects of the development that require municipal approvals. It wouldn't make any sense to purchase property I am not able to develop. The City approved the sign variance. I applied for and was issued a Building Permit for the sign. We submiited a landscape plan to the City as a part of our approval process as well. And I had mentioned to Jan Rasikas from the Co-op at one of the meetings last year that I would help with the landscape design and construction on the Co-op's property adjacent to my site. As recently as today, I was working with Rebecca Wainscott of Sacred Ground Landscape to finalize a design. And that work will be done in conjunction with the completion of my site. With respect to the TID Agreement, the scope of the work I was doing as my part of the proposed agreement changed quite a bit. To clear up one item, the newspaper keeps using $600,000 as the amount of money I will be reimbursed over the twenty some odd year period. The actual amount is two thirds of that and includes $250,000 of work in the right of way including the construction of the storm sewer, sanitary sewer, curb and gutter, sidewalks and pavement for Church Street. Originally, the storm sewer work and the paving was to be paid for by the City and then the City would be reimbursed thru the TID proceeds (the real estate taxes paid on the project). But I agreed to make those changes. Walgreen's will open the end of June and they look forward to being a important part of the Viroqua community. And I have enjoyed the process in Viroqua because it demonstrates to me the sincerity and involvement the resident population displays and that means that Viroqua will be a great place for a long time to come. Thanks for letting me be a small part of that. "

Former & Hopefully Resident Again wrote on May 19, 2006 11:14 AM:

" Walgreen's must have acquired their sign permit/variance under an existing ordinance--if that is the fact, then the revised or new ordinance has no bearing on the subject! I agree that Viroqua needs the Walgreen's store & hope all the differences can be resolved amicably. Voters, get out there and vote those members out of there if they are not complying with their constituents' requests. "

Go Figure wrote on May 18, 2006 2:24 PM:

" Follow the law in place at the time, obtain the required permits and then be accused of "sneaking something through"! How about those businesses that applied 10 days, 20 days, 30 days before the new ordinance went in to effect? Those sneaky devils. Wake up Viroqua. You can't have your cake and it it too! Growing pains go with the territory! "

Another current resident wrote on May 18, 2006 2:16 PM:

" I agree with Current Resident, we need to change with the times. If we can't, or won't, draw new businesses into town, we'll continue to see our school system suffer, along with any businesses that may be left. "

Variance wrote on May 18, 2006 10:16 AM:

" Who granted the sign variance 3 days before new sign rules went into effect? "

Agree with current resident wrote on May 18, 2006 8:39 AM:

" Change is hard for some to bear but change helps everyone grow....we'd still be all riding horse and buggy if we didn't change; we'd probably be dead if it were not for the change in research and medical facilities during the past decades, etc. etc. Both Viroqua and Westby will be ghost towns if they don't go with change. Bypass or not, they will be left by the wayside if they don't support BOTH their current businesses AND any new businesses who wish to reside in their communities. Each town should quit worrying about themselves and combine both businesses and their schools to create a better place to live for everyone. People will then have a reason to want to come here to visit or to live. Many people will drive a long way to get somewhere, if they enjoy their final destination. "

Westby Resident wrote on May 18, 2006 6:46 AM:

" They may be better off bypassing Westby & heading to another small community like Readstown or Cashton. ;) "

Current Resident wrote on May 17, 2006 11:02 PM:

" The real question is.....What century are we living in? Yes, residents choose to live here because it is a small town, but that doesn't mean it has to be a ghost town. I think this new sign ordinance is a joke. Advertisement is VERY important in every business. Sleepy Hollow should be allowed to put up their sign and so should Walgreens. Kudos to Walgreens for sticking up for themselves. It is pretty sad that when I take my child to the emergency room at 2:00 am on a Sunday morning, I can't fill the prescription for another 6 or 7 hours because nothing is open. We need a Walgreens!!! The attitude this city has towards newcomers is horrible. There is a lot of resentment and I think that is the issue here. You are fine if you were born and raised here, but it takes a long time for someone new to "fit" in. That attitude will get us nowhere. Lay off the Walgreens, so they can open already!!! "

CONCERNED FORMER RESIDENT wrote on May 17, 2006 8:25 PM:

" OUNDS LIKE THE CITIZEN OF VIROQUA ARE GETTING JUST WHAT THEY VOTED FOR. A COUNCIL THAT FORGETS ABOUT WHATS RIGHT AND GOOD FOR THE COMMUNITY AND MORE IN SATISFYING BIG BUSINESS. I ONLY HOPE THAT THEY HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH WALGREENS TO GIVE BACK TO THEIR COMMUNITY. THE DAY IS LONG PAST WHEN PROJECTS SUCH AS THIS EVEN BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE. SINCE NO AGGREEMENT IS ON FILE OR NOT APPROVED IT WILL BE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT FOR THE COUNCIL TO EVER HOLD THIS COMPANY ACCOUNTIBLE. IE: LANDSCAPING LIGHTING OR WHATEVER COM TO PASS IT'S A SHAME THAT THE COUNCIL FAILED THE CITIZENS OF VIROQUA AND I HOPE THAT THEIR LACK OF ACTION WILL BE REMEMBERED AT ELECTION TIME. JUST OR INFO DOES THE CITY HAVE A LIGHTING ORDINANCE ON THE BOOKS IT MIGHT BE WISE TO LOOK INTO THIS BEFORE THE NEXT TIME. "

Former Resident wrote on May 17, 2006 12:04 PM:

" I guess the real questions here are: Do you find value in supporting those businesses that are locally owned and operated like Sleepy Hollow or do you only value the BIG BOYS? Beware Viroqua! The residents of your community chose to live there because it is a small town not a BIG CITY. If you get BIG CITY attitude in city hall, Westby's population is going to continue to grow! "

TOP HOMES

Comments »

Post a comment (150 word limit) »