Christian Mills, owner of the Legacy Center, didn’t ask permission to paint signs all over his 208,000-square-foot building, located at 925 N. Lapeer Rd., so now, he must seek forgiveness from Oxford Township’s Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA).

Mills is scheduled to go before the ZBA on Monday, Aug. 15 to request a variance to the section of the township zoning ordinance covering wall signs, which he’s currently in violation of.

“That’s their recourse,” said township Planner Brian Oppmann, who works for the Ann Arbor-based Carlisle/Wortman Associates. “You can either paint over them or you can go to the zoning board. But the zoning board may make them paint over them, too.”

The ZBA meeting begins at 7 p.m. and will take place at the township hall, located at 300 Dunlap Rd., just north of Seymour Lake Rd.

At issue are the 25 signs consisting of graphics, logos and words painted on the south, east and west sides of the Legacy Center, which is a privately-owned-and-operated recreation center and community hub featuring a mix of tenants focused on family entertainment, fitness and wellness, training for individual and team sports, education and dining.

Violations

Prior to painting his building, Mills never applied for or received approval from the township for any of his signs through the sign permit review process.

On or about Dec. 15, 2015, Mills was given verbal notice that he had violated the zoning ordinance with regard to signage and must bring his property into compliance, according to township Ordinance Enforcement Officer James Lehtola.

He was then given time to bring his case before the ZBA and seek a variance, but he didn’t do that, according to township Supervisor Bill Dunn.

As a result, Mills was issued a second violation notice – this time in writing – six months later.

“According to an inspection on June 2, 2016 and our records, you have not complied with this request (to bring the property into compliance with the ordinance). In addition to not complying with the December of 2015 request, you have added additional signage in violation of the zoning ordinance,” wrote Lehtola in the second notice.

Mills explained that back when he had the “artwork” painted on the building in August/September of last year, he did not realize it was something for which he needed approval.

“Initially, when we were painting them, they were murals, so I didn’t really view them as signs,” he said. “We weren’t ready to put signs up on the building. We were just painting the building.”

The “murals” Mills is referring to are images of faceless males and females engaging in various athletic activities such as gymnastics, boxing, swimming, football, baseball, golf, lacrosse and lifting weights.

But Mills is no stranger to the workings of local government. He serves on the Lake Orion Village Council and that municipality has a sign ordinance, which includes murals in its definition of signs and states, “No sign shall be erected or affixed or applied to any structure without first obtaining permission from the village.”

According to Mario Ortega, Lake Orion’s planning and zoning coordinator, it makes no difference under the village’s current sign ordinance if a mural is for artistic or commercial purposes, a permit is required in both cases.

Oppmann said even though they don’t contain any words or logos, the Legacy Center’s “murals” are not simply decorations.

“The artwork is signage,” he explained. “You’re advertising activities that are inside the building. That’s advertising. That’s signage . . . Court decisions have decided that.”

“If you look at our definition of a sign, it’s pretty clear that it’s advertising a business or services provided (at) the location,” Oppmann noted. “Those murals are signs.”

Instead of addressing the ordinance violation following the first verbal notice from the township, Mills told this reporter his “thought process” was “let’s finish up what we’re doing,” meaning paint the logos and signage for specific Legacy Center tenants, then “go in and submit our application” for a variance as a complete package.

In addition to lacking township approval, the signs themselves violate the zoning ordinance in terms of both their number and their size, according to Oppmann. “Granted, it’s neat. It looks cool, but unfortunately, it doesn’t meet the ordinance,” he said.

With regard to Legacy’s 25 signs, Oppmann said, “Without even looking at the plan, I can tell you they’re over the correct number. Each tenant’s allowed one wall sign by ordinance.”

According to Oppmann, there are examples where one tenant has multiple signs such as graphics of two swimmers for the not-yet-open Splash Swim School.

Or the multiple giant murals depicting athletes playing lacrosse, football and baseball, all sports associated with The Den Training Academy, which also has a word-based sign.

The other issue is the size, in terms of square footage, of all these signs.

Combined, the signs have a total square-footage of 6,936.16, according to measurements submitted to the township by Mills. Based on Mills’ interpretation of the ordinance, he would need a variance of 3,186 square feet.

Oppmann has not yet performed his own calculations, but he said the signage area is “greatly exceeding” what the ordinance allows for. “They’re thousands of square feet over,” he said.

Looking at the situation and the variance request, Oppmann said, “I don’t know how the ZBA’s going to handle this because it’s kind of a complicated thing.”

Looking for approval

Mills’ track record with regard to receiving approvals from the township is mixed.

In December 2015, the township board voted 4-3 to deny Mills’ request to have a commercial rehabilitation district established on his 19.74-acre Legacy Center property. Creating such a district was the first step in a process to seek a tax abatement.

In February of this year, the township board voted 6-1 to rezone Mills’ Legacy property from Research-Office (RO) to General Commercial (C-2). The recommendation to do this came from the township.

But the ZBA is a different animal than the township board. It’s a quasi-judicial, appointed body as opposed to a legislative, elected one.

“I know that ZBAs in general – it doesn’t matter what community you’re in – don’t really like it when you do things and then ask for forgiveness later,” Oppmann said.

But Mills is confident. “I think we meet all of the requirements for a variance,” he said.

Legacy’s case for a variance

In the packet of information Mills submitted to the ZBA, it’s stated that if the variance is not granted for Legacy’s signs, “it will unreasonably prevent our businesses from using the property for the permitted purpose and will be unnecessarily burdensome.”

That’s because, according to Mills, the Legacy Center can’t have other forms of signage.

One reason has to do with the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT). Mills said “we can’t put our signs out front” because, according to the Legacy packet, “the entire M-24 frontage is currently a preexisting, nonconforming MDOT Right of Way” that won’t allow for “monument or canopy signage.”

The second reason, according to the packet, is “due to the size, scale and number of tenants in the building, having individual signage would be excessive, unreasonable and burdensome.”

In the Legacy information packet, a number of reasons were stated as to why Mills believes his signs and murals are in line with the purpose of the township’s sign ordinance and beneficial to the community.

Some of them are:

• “The size and scale of the current artwork makes it easy to read by travelers. The pictures tell the story without being a distraction (to drivers).”
• “The family-friendly imagery is not only attractive, but also creates a sense of safety for the community.”
• “The current signage offers a less ‘cluttered’ and appealing option as opposed to each tenant being represented individually.”
• “Does not obstruct (the) vision of drivers or pedestrians as other sign options may.”

Community support

Mills is gratified by the “overwhelming amount of community support” his signs and murals have received.

Jennifer Geare, who is Mills’ assistant, started an online petition seeking support at www.change.org. The goal was to obtain 2,500 supporters and as of Aug. 2, the petition had garnered 1,743 supporters.

“I haven’t heard any negative feedback on the building,” Mills said.

The supporters have written “a lot of really nice comments about the building and what it means to the community,” he added. “It’s all been very positive.”

Mills hopes many of these folks will attend the ZBA meeting to voice their opinions in person. “We would welcome anyone and everyone who’d like to speak on our behalf,” he said.

If the ZBA denies Mills’ variance request, he has two options – paint over the signage or appeal the decision to the Oakland County Circuit Court. When asked which option he would choose should things not go his way, Mills replied, “We’ll just take it one step at a time. It would really be a shame if that were the case.

“I think the ZBA has a lot of discretion in this case and I think our case for the variance is pretty strong.”