HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES
December 17,2019
PRESENT: Mamadou Coulibaly, Lynnsey Erickson, Thomas Fojtik, Michael Ford,John Hinz,
John Kiefer,Lori Palmeri, Thomas Perry,Kathleen Propp
EXCUSED: Derek Groth,Justin Mitchell
STAFF: Mark Lyons, Planning Services Manager;Justin Gierach, Engineering Division
Manager/City Engineer;Brian Slusarek, Planner;Mina Kuss, Recording Secretary
Chairperson Fojtik called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm. Roll call was taken and a quorum
declared present.
The minutes of December 3,2019 were approved as presented. (Hinz/Kiefer)
I. RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS VARIANCE TO ALLOW WINDOW AREA
REDUCTIONS ON THE FRONT FACADE AT 322 STERLING AVENUE
Site Inspections: Report: Ms. Propp reported visiting the site.
Staff report accepted as part of the record.
The applicant is requesting approval of a variance from the City's Residential Design Standards to
allow window area reductions on the front facade at 322 Sterling Avenue.
Mr. Lyons said he will be filling in for Mr. Wiley. Mr. Lyons presented the item and reviewed the
site and surrounding area as well as the land use and zoning classifications in this area. The
applicant is proposing to remodel the interior of the house. The applicant will remodel the kitchen
and has limited space for new cabinets, so he is looking to reduce the sizes of the two existing
double-hung windows and replace them with a smaller single window. Due to the fact that the
applicant is reducing the area of the existing double-hung windows on the front facade, a design
standards variance is necessary. The applicant has offered to add a window to the existing living
room to balance out the facade and compensate for the loss of glazing on the facade. Staff is of the
opinion that the proposed change will not have a detrimental impact on the home's architectural
integrity. He said staff currently recommends approval of a variance from the City's Residential
Design Standards to allow for window area reductions on the front facade with the conditions and
a finding as stated in the staff report.
Mr. Fojtik opened technical questions to staff.
Mr. Coulibaly asked if the top of the window would match the new window, the one above the
sink.
Plan Commission Minutes 1 December 17,2019
Mr. Lyons replied affirmatively. He said looking at the proposals, the two windows on the eastern
facade have the same top plane and the two windows on the western facade have the same top
place.
Mr. Fojtik thanked staff for working so hard with the applicant because it makes these types of
request much easier.
Mr. Lyons said he has to give the credit to Mr. Wiley for doing a nice job of trying to find a solution
that worked for everyone.
Mr. Kiefer asked if the work had been completed already.
Mr. Lyons responded that the work has not taken place yet.
Mr. Fojtik asked if there were any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any
statements.
There were no statements from the applicant.
There were no public comments on this item.
Mr. Fojtik closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing
statements.
There were no closing statements from the applicant.
Motion by Palmeri to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report.
Conditions:
1. Window trim to match color and appearance of the existing windows on the home.
2. Completed work to be revised so that the perimeter of this window maintains the same
appearance as the perimeter of existing windows on the same facade.
3. Applicant to add an additional window to the living room area of the home at the same size
as the existing living room window and the same head and sill height as the existing living
room window.
Finding:
1. The variance approval as conditioned will not be contrary to the public interest. The altered
front facade will continue to meet the intent of the ordinance and will not adversely affect the
structure's architectural design, the neighborhood character or curb appearance of the block.
Seconded by Hinz.
Plan Commission Minutes 2 December 17,2019
Mr. Fojtik asked if there was any discussion on the motion.
There was no discussion on the motion.
Motion carried 9-0.
II. SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENT FOR A REDUCED FRONT
YARD SETBACK FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1995 S.KOELLER STREET
Site Inspections: Report: Ms. Erickson and Mr. Hinz reported visiting the site.
Staff report accepted as part of the record.
The petitioner requests approval of a Specific Implementation Plan(SIP) amendment for a reduced
front yard setback for property located at 1995 S. Koeller Street.
Mr. Lyons said he would be filling in for Mr. Wiley. Mr. Lyons presented the item and reviewed
the site and surrounding area as well as the land use and zoning classifications in this area. The
applicant would like to expand the Aldi store and construct a 3,189 sq. ft. addition on the east edge
of the existing Aldi building. The petitioners are requesting a SIP amendment to allow a front yard
setback reduction from approximately 25 feet to 5 feet to accommodate a new building addition
and relocated parking and truck turning radii on the eastern edge of a confined site. In order to
offset the impact caused by the 20 foot setback reduction, the applicant proposes adding street
frontage landscaping well exceeding the code requirements along S. Koeller Street and W.20th
Avenue. The applicant will also update the lighting and the addition will enhance the east and
north building facades of the Aldi grocery store. Staff supports the changes proposed by the
applicant and has no concerns as long as the applicant provides the materials required for the Site
Plan Review process. He said staff recommends approval of the Specific Implementation Plan
amendment as proposed with the conditions and findings as stated in the staff report.
Mr. Fojtik opened technical questions to staff.
Ms. Palmeri said it looks like on the proposed elevation compared to the existing elevations that
they are adding some windows. She asked if this was correct.
Mr. Lyons replied correct. He showed the elevations and said they are adding that new front
entrance that Aldi typically has.
Ms. Palmeri asked if there were any transit stops at the location that may be impacted by the
landscaping.
Mr. Lyons pointed out the transit stop which was located at the northeast corner of W. 2011,Avenue
and S. Koeller Street.
Plan Commission Minutes 3 December 17,2019
Ms. Palmeri commended the applicant for going above and beyond.
Ms. Erickson asked if there would be any impact to the existing sidewalk.
Mr. Lyons answered it would not be impacted because the sidewalk is outside of the property line.
Ms. Palmeri questioned if there would be sidewalk added to the south.
Mr. Lyons replied there would not be. He pointed out the existing sidewalk on the south side.
Mr. Fojtik asked if there were any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any
statements.
There were no statements from the applicant.
There were no public comments on this item.
Mr. Fojtik closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing
statements.
There were no closing statements from the applicant.
Motion by Hinz to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report.
Conditions:
1. Base Standard Modification to allozv a reduction of the front yard setback along S. Koeller
Street (south of the Koeller access drive)from 25 feet to 5 feet.
2. Final landscaping plan shall be submitted and approved by the Department of Community
Development.
3. Base Standard Modification to allow light trespass at the east property line to exceed the
code maximum of 0.5 footcandles of illumination.
4. Petitioner shall submit additional information on the mounting heights of the pole-mounted
light fixtures proposed as part of this SIP amendment.
5. Base Standard Modification to allozv a decrease in parking from the code-required 64 spaces
to 60 spaces.
Seconded by Ford.
Mr. Fojtik asked if there was any discussion on the motion.
Mr. Perry said he would like to echo what everyone else is saying. He stated this is an exciting
example of how the petitioner can work with the city in ultimately making the space a better place
Plan Commission Minutes 4 December 17,2019
and going above and beyond with the landscaping plan. He stated it is great and he fully supports
it.
Mr. Fojtik commented this kind of model could be transported over to Jackson Street as there is a
struggle to add more landscaping.
Motion carried 9-0.
III A. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONE CHANGE FROM SUBURBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT
(SMU) TO SUBURBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT WITH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
OVERLAY(SMU-PD) AND APPROVAL OF A GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AND SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2120
JACKSON STREET
Site Inspections: Report: Mr. Fojtik, Mr. Ford,Mr. Hinz, Ms. Palmeri and Ms. Propp reported
visiting the site.
Staff report accepted as part of the record.
The applicant requests a zone change from the existing Suburban Mixed Use District(SMU) to
Suburban Mixed Use District with a Planned Development Overlay (SMU-PD). The applicant also
requests approval of General Development Plan and Specific Implementation Plan to allow for
construction of a commercial development.
Mr. Slusarek presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the land
use and zoning classifications in this area. The proposed development consists of a single story
approximately 6,900 sq. ft. commercial building and associated parking lot. The proposed building
will be used for an Advance Auto Parts store. The proposal includes a lot combination of the two
subject parcels with the proposed building being located on the south side of the newly created lot.
Proposed signage for the site includes a 20' tall pylon sign at the northwest corner of the property
as well as on-building signage on the west facade. The applicant is requesting BSMs related to
setbacks. To offset the requested setback reductions on the west side of the site, the applicant has
roughly tripled the required rear setback. This increased setback will enhance the buffer from the
neighboring residences and mitigate the impacts of a commercial development abutting a
residential district. Staff is comfortable that the applicant has adequately offset the requested
BSMs and the overall site is complimentary to the surrounding area. He said staff recommends
approval of the rezone, General Development Plan and Specific Implementation Plan with the
conditions and findings as stated in the staff.
Mr. Fojtik opened up technical questions to staff.
Ms. Palmeri asked if there was a requirement that would help break up the brick wall on the south
and east elevations.
Plan Commission Minutes 5 December 17,2019
Mr. Lyons replied the applicant meets base code as shown. He explained there is a 70 linear foot
requirement that requires at least a horizontal or vertical element and in this case they have the red
band and the color change which meet base code requirements.
Mr. Perry asked for confirmation that the sign is only 4 square feet over what is allowed.
Mr. Lyons replied they are 4 square feet over on just that facade but have 0 square feet on the
others. He said staff is comfortable with that as long as it is conditioned that there is no additional
signage. Mr. Lyons noted the applicant is well under the total allowable signage for the site.
Mr. Perry commented it is not even a foot longer.
Mr. Fojtik opened up the public hearing and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements.
Devon Winters (applicant), 100 Camelot Drive in Fond du Lac, said he is with Excel Engineering.
He clarified that the building signage was over by 4.81 square feet and not by 4 square feet. He
stated it is what the prototypical sign is but they understand there will be no additional signage on
the building other than the pylon sign that is out front which meets the code. He said in regard to
the landscaping, they will work with staff to meet the intent of the code for the bufferyard on the
east side. He explained the existing fence on the east side may remain as long as it is in good
working condition.
Mr. Lyons recommended to modify condition number 5 to give the opportunity for staff to work
with the applicant without bringing the item back to Plan Commission.
Plan Commission unanimously agreed.
Ms. Propp stated the fencing on the north side is deteriorating and asked if it will be torn down.
She said she did not notice the fence on the east side but would hope it would be replaced if it was
deteriorating. She also asked if the site will get cleaned up.
Mr. Winters replied affirmatively to all the questions. He pointed out the fence on the east side
and reiterated that the fence would remain if it is in good working condition. He said if it is not,
then it would be replaced and be code compliant.
Mr. Hinz asked if there would be grass on the east side by the trees.
Mr. Winters confirmed. He said he believe the east bufferyad is around 74 feet and well in excess
of the typical requirements.
Mr. Hinz thanked Mr. Winters for replacing the existing area with grass.
Mr. Winters inquired about the 0.4 foot candle lighting at the Jackson Street entrance. He said he
believes there is lighting on Jackson Street in the area where they are deficient and there may be
spillover onto the property.
Plan Commission Minutes 6 December 17,2019
Mr. Lyons said if that is the case, they would just need that information.
Mr. Winters stated he will look into it further and will work with staff to meet the intent of the
code.
There were no other public comments on this item.
Mr. Fojtik closed the public hearing and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing
statements.
There were no closing statements from the applicant.
Motion by Hinz to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report with the
amendment to condition number 5.
Conditions:
1. Approval of an Access Control Variances for reduced lateral clearance, driveway width and
corner clearance.
2. BSM to allow reduced front yard pavement setback to 16.5'(west).
3. BSM to allow reduced street side pavement setback to 4.5'(north).
4. BSM to allow reduced side yard pavement setback to 5.42'(south).
5. Final landscaping plan shall be approved by the Department of Community Development.
6. BSM to allow reduced front yard(north)setback for pylon sign to 20'.
Seconded by Ford.
Mr. Fojtik asked if there was any discussion on the motion.
Mr. Lyons stated they do have to add an additional Base Standard Modification related to the wall
signage.
Motion by Mr. Hinz to add the condition stating:
7. BSM to allow an 87.97 sq.ft. sign on the west building and no other wall signs allowed.
Seconded by Mr. Kiefer
Final Conditions:
1. Approval of an Access Control Variances for reduced lateral clearance, driveway width and
corner clearance.
2. BSM to allow reduced front yard pavement setback to 16.5'(west).
3. BSM to allow reduced street side pavement setback to 4.5'(north).
Plan Commission Minutes 7 December 17,2019
4. BSM to allow reduced side yard pavement setback to 5.42'(south).
5. Final landscaping plan shall be approved by the Department of Community Development.
6. BSM to allow reduced front yard(north)setback for pylon sign to 20'.
7. BSM to allow an 87.97 sq.ft. sign on the west building and no other wall signs allowed.
Ms. Palmeri stated other areas of the city were expecting increased designs standards. She said
certainly this is going to be a vast improvement over the existing situation but wonders if there
were any thoughts given to having a little more interest to the architecture that is being added
along Jackson Street. She said there has been previous discussions about the decrease in design
standards or just the very basic design standards. She said she is worried about going down the
wrong path with a continuous brick wall with square boxes.
Mr. Lyons explained that in 2017 design standards were added when there were none. He said
they have heard feedback from the development community that it is even a challenge to meet
base code requirements especially when there are contaminated sites or similar situations where
there is a substantial impact. He explained there are some cases where it does make sense to add
additional elevated design. He said with this site and the surrounding area,base code is a
substantial improvement. He said he does not understand why there is a negative connotation to
base code. He reiterated there were no design standards prior to 2017 but the city can choose to
modify or elevate the design standards if need be.
Ms. Palmeri said there may be some discussion regarding it with the corridor study.
Mr. Lyons agreed. He said the corridor study could recommend this corridor to have elevated
design standards
Motion carried 9-0.
III B. ACCESS CONTROL VARIANCES FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AT 2120
JACKSON STREET
Site Inspections: Report: Mr. Fojtik, Mr. Ford, Mr. Hinz, Ms. Palmeri and Ms. Propp reported
visiting the site.
Staff report accepted as part of the record.
The petitioner is requesting access control variances to permit the following:
1. Reduced lateral clearance from Jackson St. to 35'where code requires a minimum of
75 feet.
2. Increased driveway width (Allen Ave.) to 40', where code allows a maximum width
of 30 feet.
3. Reduced corner clearance from Jackson St./Allen Ave. intersection to 60',where
code requires a minimum clearance of 175'.
Plan Commission Minutes 8 December 17,2019
Mr. Slusarek presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the land
use and zoning classifications in this area. The proposed development will have one access
driveway along Jackson Street and one along Allen Avenue with both providing two-way access.
Staff does not have concerns with the requested lateral clearance reduction as the proposed 35'
lateral clearance provides for stacking of two vehicles and the proposed parking lot is relatively
small. Staff is also supportive of the increased driveway width to 40' as it is necessary to allow for
delivery semi-truck maneuvering to and from Allen Avenue. The proposed Jackson St. entrance
has a 60' clearance from the Jackson St./Allen Ave. intersection, where code requires a 175' corner
clearance. The required corner clearance cannot be met for this property as the lot has only 142.86'
of frontage along Jackson Street. Staff does not have concerns with the reduced corner clearance as
the location of the driveway is not changing from what is existing and it is not feasible to meet the
required 175' corner clearance. The Department of Public Works has reviewed the proposal and
has not noted any concerns. He said staff recommends approval of the access control variances as
requested.
Mr. Lyons added that though they are requesting for access control variances, it is a significant
improvement from the existing site.
Mr. Fojtik opened technical questions to staff.
There were no technical questions on this item.
Mr. Fojtik asked if there were any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any
statements.
There were no statements from the applicant.
There were no public comments on this item.
Mr. Fojtik closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing
statements.
There were no closing statements from the applicant.
Motion by Propp to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report.
Seconded by Coulibaly.
Mr. Fojtik asked if there was any discussion on the motion.
There was no discussion on the motion.
Motion carried 9-0.
Plan Commission Minutes 9 December 17,2019
IV. PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED CREATION OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
DISTRICT NO. 39 CABRINI SCHOOL REDEVELOPMENT DESIGNATION OF
BOUNDARIES AND APPROVAL OF PROJECT PLAN
Site Inspections: Report: Mr. Ford, Mr. Hinz, Mr. Kiefer, Ms. Palmeri and Ms. Propp reported
visiting the site.
Staff report accepted as part of the record.
Tax Incremental District No. 39 (the "TID" or "District") is a proposed 1.28 acre in need of
rehabilitation or conservation district comprising of the former St. Francis Cabrini School. The
proposed district is comprised of one parcel.
Mr. Lyons presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area. The City is projecting
that new land and improvements value of approximately$1.83 million will result from
redevelopment activity within the District. The applicant is proposing an adaptive reuse of the
former school building to senior living apartments. Per the submitted narrative, 35 units are
planned to be constructed within the former school. Finding appropriate uses for buildings of this
type can be challenging as they outlive their original intended use. The District is being created as
an area "in need of rehabilitation or conservation" within the meaning of Wis. Stat. 66.1337(2m)(a)
based on a finding that over 50% of the area is need of rehabilitation. The proposed Plan is in
general conformance with many of the City's Plans. He reviewed the Plan and explained most of
the sections. He noted that this TID scored a 98 on the Conservation and Rehabilitation TID matrix
which is the highest score to date. He said staff recommends approval of the Project Plan and
Boundaries for TID #39 as proposed.
Todd Taves (Senior Municipal Advisor, Ehlers) was present to answer any questions.
Mr. Fojtik opened technical questions to staff.
Ms. Palmeri asked if everyone was present at the Joint Review Board.
Mr. Lyons replied everyone but the public member because the public member has to be
appointed at the first Joint Review Board meeting.
Mr. Ford read from page 2 of the Plan. He asked if Council would be notified if there were
additional project expenditures
Mr. Lyons replied correct and it would still require that the developer's agreement with Council be
approved.
Ms. Palmeri asked what extent the ADA accessibility will be as far as visiting or residing. She said
there are different tiers.
Plan Commission Minutes 10 December 17,2019
Mr. Lyons replied the applicant can answer that question.
Mr. Fojtik opened up the public hearing.
Andy Dumke (applicant), 2062 Menominee Drive, said they are putting in an elevator and all units
will be accessible. He said about 15% of the units will have roll in showers and counter top heights
that meets the needs of anyone that is living there with a wheelchair.
Mr. Ford asked if the project would be viable without the TIF.
Mr. Dumke replied it would not. He said it is affordable housing and the cost to rehab historical
buildings is extremely expensive. He said with doing two of those, they are struggling. He
commented with the way the scoring works for affordable housing, some financial participation by
the municipality helps with the scoring.
Mr. Ford asked if it was the same deal with the tax credits.
Mr. Dumke replied affirmatively.
There were no other public comments on this item.
Mr. Fojtik closed the public hearing.
Motion by Ford to approve the project plan and recommending the boundaries to the council and
adopting the staff report as the findings.
Seconded by Hinz.
Mr. Fojtik asked if there was any discussion on the motion.
Mr. Ford commented it is a great use of a building which no longer has its original use.
Mr. Fojtik complimented staff on the presentations of each of the TIFs. He said it is helpful to
understand and understand that they are all different. He stated he has a much better
understanding of the process than he did before all thanks to staff.
Mr. Hinz thanked staff for having the workshops because it makes the TID process easier and
allows Plan Commission to ask questions ahead of time. He said the workshop was very
productive. He said he hopes they keeps doing this because it is nothing but good for the
community, especially being able to save buildings like this one.
Mr. Kiefer thanked Mr. Dumke for keeping the building alive. He commented that he went to
school there for eight years and it is good to see it remain viable and a part of the landscape.
Plan Commission Minutes 11 December 17,2019
Ms. Erickson stated she appreciates having this opportunity for affordable senior apartments,
which is a huge need the city has.
Motion carried 9-0.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 4:45 pm. (Hinz/Propp)
Respectfully submitted,
Mark Lyons
Planning Services Manager
Plan Commission Minutes 12 December 17,2019