Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes__________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 1 May 4, 2021 PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES May 4, 2021 PRESENT: Margy Davey, Michael Ford, Derek Groth, John Hinz, John Kiefer, Justin Mitchell, Thomas Perry, Kathleen Propp, Jay Stengel EXCUSED: Mamadou Coulibaly, Phil Marshall STAFF: Mark Lyons, Planning Services Manager; Allen Davis, Community Development Director; Justin Gierach, Engineering Division Manager; Jim Collins, Director of Transportation, Brian Slusarek, Planner; Jeff Nau, Associate Planner; Steven Wiley, Associate Planner; Brandon Nielsen, Assistant Planner; Chairperson Propp called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. The minutes of April 20, 2021 were approved as presented. (Hinz/Kiefer) I. ACCESS CONTROL VARIANCE FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AT SOUTHEAST CORNER OF W 9TH AVE AND LINDEN OAKS DRIVE Site Inspections Report: No commissioners reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The petitioner is requesting an access control variance to permit the following: 1. Increased driveway width on W 9th Ave. to 38’ where code allows a maximum of 30’ and increased driveway curb cut width to 48’ where code allows a maximum of 40’. Mr. Nielsen presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the land use and zoning classifications in this area. On January 26th, 2021 Common Council approved a 40- home pocket neighborhood for older adults. The proposed development will have two driveways access points, one along Linden Oaks Drive and one along West 9th Avenue. The driveway along W. 9th Ave. has a proposed driveway and curb cut width that is wider than code allows. This driveway is designed to have a 16’ one-way drive aisle on each side of a 6’ wide island, resulting in an increased driveway width of 38’ and 48’ curb cut. Staff is supportive of the requested driveway and curb cut width increase to accommodate safety concerns related to accessing the site and parking area at the proposed club house. Staff recommends approval of an access control variance with the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 2 May 4, 2021 Ms. Propp opened up technical questions to staff. There were no technical questions on this item. Ms. Propp asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Jack Richeson from Martenson & Eisele, Inc, applicant, said he was available to answer technical questions. There were no other public comments on this item. There were no public comments on this item. Ms. Propp closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing statements. There were no closing statements from the applicant. Motion by Ford to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report. Seconded by Hinz. Ms. Propp asked if there was any discussion on the motion. There was no discussion on the motion. Motion carried 9-0. II A. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONE CHANGE FROM NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE DISTRICT (NMU) 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 1700 BLOCK W 9TH AVENUE Site Inspections Report: Ms. Propp, Mr. Hinz, Mr. Perry, Mr. Groth, Ms. Davey, and Mr. Stengel all reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The applicant requests a zone change from the existing Neighborhood Mixed Use District (NMU) to Suburban Mixed Use District with a Planned Development Overlay (SMU-PD). The applicant __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 3 May 4, 2021 also requests approval of General Development Plan and Specific Implementation Plan to allow for construction of an auto service facility. 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 subject area consists of two vacant parcels, totaling approximately 0.65 acres in size, located on the south side of W 9th Avenue, east of S. Koeller Street. The parcels are zoned Neighborhood Mixed Use District (NMU). The surrounding area consists of commercial uses to the west and residential uses to the north, south, and east. The 2040 Comprehensive Land Use Plans recommends neighborhood commercial use for the subject area. Staff recommends approval of the rezone, General Development Plan and Specific Implementation Plan and the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Ms. Propp opened up technical questions to staff. Mr. Perry stated that the neighbors’ concerns are valid. He asked how often the city reevaluates situations like that. Mr. Collins said they do a crash analysis every year in the spring so any issues with high crash locations come up at the time. There hasn’t been any major issues there regarding crash incidents. There has been a few left turn crashes coming out of Kwik Trip and a few others where drivers slid on ice that are hard to prevent. But there are not any crash concerns. It is hard to turn left out of those drive ways, however this site will be redeveloped and this type of development is low traffic generator. Jiffy Lube estimated 25 clients per day as the national average. Mr. Perry asked what necessitates a review other than from the police department. Mr. Collins said that generally if the police department reports there’s a trend in incidents they will work with them to evaluate what the issues are and come up with solutions. Other than the annual review or the police department, that’s what will facilitate a review. If the public calls with concerns we will look into those as well. Mr. Mitchell asked where the parking requirement standards came from. Mr. Lyons said that it is a very common standard for in-service vehicle sales land uses. It’s a similar calculation to a lot of in-service sales like gas stations, or car washes. Mr. Mitchell said that he is all about reducing the parking spots. He wanted to know when that went into place. Mr. Lyons said it was a part of the 2017 update. Mr. Mitchell asked if any progress has been made with the goals from the sustainability board to help provide native landscaping to area businesses such as this. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 4 May 4, 2021 Mr. Lyons said they upped the point value for native landscaping. They will get more bang for their buck for choosing to use native landscaping. It’s 1 ½ times the normal points. Especially when you have tight sites like this, using native plantings is a way to achieve some landscaping totals while being true to the nature of the area. Mr. Hinz asked if there has been any thought to the cross access increasing the flow of traffic because of people trying to get away from the round-about and using Jiffy Lube’s lot instead of Kwik Trip. Mr. Lyons said it was viewed as a benefit to allow some of the Kwik Trip traffic to exit farther east giving greater separation from that round-about. Mr. Hinz asked what the location of the driveway was. Mr. Gierach said that it doesn’t exactly line up with Westfield, it is kind of further east but it is in the right of way within Westfield. Ms. Davey said that when the sustainability plan was originally written with the language about the native planting, it was accepted in 2012. In 2017 when the city did the new zoning ordinances and there are several pages of recommendations of plantings, which does include native plantings. The sustainability board is in the process of creating several pamphlets based on bushes, trees and that sort of thing for native plantings. Mr. Lyons asked that when sustainably is finished with that if they can get a copy to see if they should add anything into the zoning ordinance. Ms. Propp asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Ed Bowen from the Morgan Partners, applicant, said he is available to address questions or concerns with the project. It has been in the works for a few years but they are close to having something everyone is happy with. Ms. Propp asked to describe where the access points are. Mr. Bowen said that the building façade shows it’s in and out through the four bay doors. It is a pull-through. Entering east and exiting north onto 9th Ave. The pattern goes counter clockwise around the building. Mr. Ford asked Mr. Bowen to explain the traffic concerns that this site might impact compared to possible other uses for the site. Mr. Bowen said that the neighbors have a right to be concerned with traffic. Those concerns regarding this use aren’t appropriate because it’s such a low traffic use. In talking with Jiffy Lube, the national average for a strong performing Jiffy Lube is 25 visits per day with peak visits __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 5 May 4, 2021 between the hours of 11am-3pm. This offsets the times that Kwik Trip and Walgreens would be busiest, either early morning or afternoons. Kwik Trip in that location said they have 3600 trips per day. An average Walgreens or CVS store has 1500-1600 trips per day. The 25 trips a day for the Jiffy Lube would add .0037% increase in traffic. As it relates to this stretch of road, this use is properly as low traffic a use as is going to be economically viable in that location. In a straight zone situation, you could have something that could be a more traffic intense situation. By providing the cross access, it will also help to reduce some of the points of conflict and providing a little pressure relief valve for some of the backup that might happen in the Kwik Trip parcel. There were no other public comments on this item. There were no public comments on this item. Ms. Propp 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. Seconded by Mitchell. Ms. Propp asked if there was any discussion on the motion. Mr. Hinz said that the discussion they had with Mr. Bowen will help to alleviate the traffic concerns. They did a great job getting a development in that location that isn’t going to make traffic worse. Ms. Propp said to the public that they received all the emails and read them and is glad they reached out with their concerns. Motion carried 9-0. II B. ACCESS CONTROL VARIANCES FOR 1700 BLOCK W 9th AVENUE Site Inspections Report: Ms. Propp, Mr. Hinz, Mr. Perry, Mr. Groth, Ms. Davey, and Mr. Stengel all 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 W 9th Avenue to 27.2’ where code requires a minimum of 75 feet. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 6 May 4, 2021 2. Increased driveway width to 31’, where code allows a maximum width of 30 feet. 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 subject area consists of two vacant parcels, totaling approximately 0.65 acres in size, located on the south side of W 9th Avenue, east of S. Koeller Street. The parcels are zoned Neighborhood Mixed Use District (NMU). The surrounding area consists of commercial uses to the west and residential uses to the north, south, and east. The 2040 Comprehensive Land Use Plans recommends neighborhood commercial use for the subject area. The proposed development will have a single access along W 9th Avenue. In this particular case, staff does not have concerns with the requested lateral clearance reduction as the proposed 27.2’ lateral clearance provides for stacking of two vehicles and the proposed parking lot is relatively small with only 6 stalls and the site will have a cross-access connection to the neighboring Kwik Trip site to the west to provide an alternative entrance/exit for customers. Staff recommends approval of access control variance proposed with the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Staff is also supportive of the increased driveway width as it provides a slightly increased (by 1 foot) width for vehicles to maneuver in and out of the W 9th Avenue right-of-way. This is beneficial as it should improve ease of access to/from the site and mitigate further traffic concerns. Ms. Propp opened up technical questions to staff. There were no technical questions on this item. Ms. Propp asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Mr. Bowen said that the access control variances that they are approving on nearly every project is not because the project needs it but because the ordinance is outdated. He is supportive of the ordinance being re-written. There were no other public comments on this item. There were no public comments on this item. Ms. Propp closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing statements. There were no closing statements from the applicant. Motion by Ford to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report. Seconded by Mitchell. Ms. Propp asked if there was any discussion on the motion. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 7 May 4, 2021 Ms. Propp is supportive of larger driveway entrances. Motion carried 9-0. III. SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENT FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT & SHARED DRIVEWAY AT 1725 W 9th AVENUE Site Inspections Report: Ms. Propp, Mr. Hinz, Mr. Perry, Mr. Groth, Ms. Davey, and Mr. Stengel all reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The petitioner requests an amendment to the Specific Implementation Plan approval for a lot line adjustment and new shared driveway at 1725 W 9th Avenue. 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 applicant has submitted plans as well as a CSM application to expand the subject site slightly to the east by acquiring 4,480 sq. ft. of the neighboring vacant property. This lot expansion is intended to provide sufficient area on the subject site to construct a two-way cross-access drive for connection to the future commercial site to the east. As noted in Item II A, staff is supportive of the proposed cross-access drive as it will improve vehicular circulation for the site and provide relief to the amount of traffic currently using the Kwik Trip access. A CSM will need to be approved administratively for the lot expansion and a cross access agreement will need to be drafted for the shared driveway and filed with Winnebago County Register of Deeds. Staff recommends approval of the Specific Implementation Plan amendment as proposed with the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Ms. Propp opened up technical questions to staff. There were no technical questions on this item. Ms. Propp asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Mr. Bowen said that in the neighborhood meeting Kwik Trip had mentioned adding additional pumps and expanding the canopy. That is not something they are currently planning and not an improvement they anticipate making. There was some concern that expanding the pumps would create additional traffic. There were no other public comments on this item. There were no public comments on this item. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 8 May 4, 2021 Ms. Propp closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing statements. There were no closing statements from the applicant. Motion by Perry to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report. Seconded by Kiefer. Ms. Propp asked if there was any discussion on the motion. There was no discussion on the motion. Motion carried 9-0. IV A. GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN APPROVAL FOR INDOOR SALES AND SERVICE AND VEHICLE SALES USE AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF S. WASHBURN STREET AND W. RIPPLE AVENUE Site Inspections Report: Mr. Perry, Ms. Davey, and Mr. Hinz reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The applicant requests approval of a General Development Plan and Specific Implementation Plan (GDP/SIP) to allow for indoor sales and service and vehicle sales use at the northwest corner of S. Washburn Street and W. Ripple Avenue. Mr. Wiley presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the land use and zoning classifications in this area. The subject parcel is zoned Suburban Mixed Use with a Planned Development Overlay (SMU-PD). The parcel is approximately 32.46 acres (1,414,119 sq. ft.) in area. The applicant proposes dividing this parcel via CSM to create two parcels. The southern parcel would be approximately 13.11 acres in size and be used for the Camping World development. Currently the parcel is a vacant lot and is located at the northwest corner of S. Washburn Street and W. Ripple Road. Interstate 41 runs north-south just to the east of S. Washburn Street and the subject site. The current Oshkosh city limit runs along the western edge of the subject parcel. The surrounding area consists of mixed commercial, institutional, and industrial uses. The 2040 Comprehensive Land Use Plan recommends Interstate Commercial use for the subject area. Staff recommends approval of the General Development Plan with the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Ms. Propp opened up technical questions to staff. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 9 May 4, 2021 Mr. Kiefer said he was concerned with the base standard modification for the class 1 materials. They aren’t coming close on the three sides. He wants to know how it’s allowed to not meet any of the standards and just do a modification. Mr. Lyons said that it was something that staff struggled with as well. However because of the nature of the development, the location of the site, the length of the building and because of the cost of construction with a building this size it can be difficult to accomplish. We look for more added landscaping to help break it up. With the additional 400 points of landscaping, we feel that it is a reasonable compromise. Mr. Ford asked since the code prohibits class 4 materials, if that is that not the case in industrial use. Mr. Lyons said there are typical applications for industrial use. When possible, we try to avoid them. It’s the scale of development and material cost being elevated. Ms. Davey asked if there are other buildings along the corridor that would be similar in nature as far as the materials. Mr. Lyons said yes and no. There’s nothing immediately in the vicinity. The closest building north (Big Rig Chrome) has a similar layout. Ms. Davey is confused by the shape of the lot and the shape of what’s being built on the lot. She asked if they own the land north of here but not doing anything with it at this point. Mr. Lyons said they would be buying that southern portion of the property from the current owner for their development and there would be some developmental parcels. Mr. Mitchell asked if they could put in a giant parking lot without any shade or breaks. Mr. Lyons said the differentiation is if it’s a parking lot or for storage. Storage areas don’t require endcaps. Parking lots do require those. If the entire lot was a parking lot they would not be exempt from any of those requirements. They would have to have endcap islands and every 20 spaces would have to have a mid-row island. For outdoor storage land uses, they are not required those. Staff looks at those as agreeing with Justin. It is a huge area of uninterrupted asphalt. Through the planned development, we are asking they add something as its not traditional parking. Mr. Mitchell said he appreciates them putting in the landscaping and provides a nicer environment. Ms. Propp asked how much better the site would look with the increased landscaping. Mr. Lyons said that with the current yard landscaping missing including the 400 points they are suggesting in addition, we are looking at over 1000+ landscaping to the site. With the requirements and the missing landscaping, it will be a significant addition. It would be about 25% more. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 10 May 4, 2021 Ms. Propp asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Grant Duchac from Excel Engineering made himself available for questions. Mr. Perry asked if there was a requirement for galvanized vs not when it comes to steel siding. Mr. Lyons said that it is required to be galvanized. Chris Walters with DVS Group and Derek Mathers from Camping World clarified that the fencing will be black rod ironed fencing from the east site from the east side of the site separating the parking area from the inventory storage and black coated chain link in the other areas of the inventory lot. Mr. Lyons asked for clarification on the metal siding. Mr. Walters said it would be a painted prefinished metal product with a flat finish and a grey color. Ms. Propp asked if the applicant is willing to accept the extra landscaping. Mr. Walters said yes they are willing and would like to talk to staff about the locations in relation to light pole locations. Ms. Davey asked if it was painted metal if it could be something painted something that would match the front façade. Mr. Walters said it doesn’t have to be painted grey, it can be tan but there are limited color options. Mr. Perry said he is happy the metal panels are repairable without having the take the entire panel down. Mr. Walters said the panels come with a 25 year warranty on the paint finish. There were no other public comments on this item. There were no public comments on this item. Ms. Propp closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing statements. There were no closing statements from the applicant. Motion by Davey to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 11 May 4, 2021 Seconded by Mitchell. Ms. Propp asked if there was any discussion on the motion. Mr. Ford thanked Mr. Lyons for the clarification on the metal uses. Mr. Hinz encouraged staff and future developers said the workshops are phenomenal and make the process easier. Motion carried 9-0. IV B. ACCESS CONTROL VARIANCES FOR INDOOR SALES AND SERVICE AND VEHICLE SALES USE AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF S. WASHBURN STREET AND W. RIPPLE AVENUE Site Inspections Report: Mr. Perry, Ms. Davey, and Mr. Hinz 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 clearances from S Washburn Street to 50’ where code requires a minimum of 75 feet. 2. Increase in north driveway width from a 30’ driveway/40’ curb cut to a 40’ driveway/70’ curb cut Mr. Wiley presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the land use and zoning classifications in this area. The subject parcel is zoned Suburban Mixed Use with a Planned Development Overlay (SMU-PD). The parcel is approximately 32.46 acres (1,414,119 sq. ft.) in area. The applicant proposes dividing this parcel via CSM to create two parcels. The southern parcel would be approximately 13.11 acres in size and be used for the Camping World development. Currently the parcel is a vacant lot and is located at the northwest corner of S. Washburn Street and W. Ripple Road. Interstate 41 runs north-south just to the east of S. Washburn Street and the subject site. The current Oshkosh city limit runs along the western edge of the subject parcel. The surrounding area consists of mixed commercial, institutional, and industrial uses. The 2040 Comprehensive Land Use Plan recommends Interstate Commercial use for the subject area. Staff recommends approval of access control variances with the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Ms. Propp opened up technical questions to staff. There were no technical questions on this item. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 12 May 4, 2021 Ms. Propp 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 other public comments on this item. There were no public comments on this item. Ms. Propp 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. Seconded by Ford. Ms. Propp asked if there was any discussion on the motion. There was no discussion on the motion. Motion carried 9-0. V A. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONE CHANGE FROM URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT (UMU) TO URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT WITH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (UMU- PD) AND APPROVAL OF A GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 630-640 N MAIN STREET Site Inspections Report: Ms. Propp, Mr. Groth, Mr. Hinz, Mr. Perry and Ms. Davey all reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The applicant requests a zone change from the existing Urban Mixed Use District (UMU) to Urban Mixed Use District with a Planned Development Overlay (UMU-PD). The applicant also requests approval of General Development Plan and Specific Implementation Plan to allow for a gas station/convenience store and laundromat. 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 subject area consists of two parcels, totaling approximately 0.5 acres in size, located on the east side of N. Main Street, north of E Parkway Avenue. The site was previously used as an auto service facility and associated vehicle parking/storage area. The surrounding area consists primarily of commercial uses as well as residential uses to the east. The 2040 Comprehensive Land Use Plans recommends Center City use __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 13 May 4, 2021 for the subject area. Staff recommends approval of the rezone, General Development Plan and Specific Implementation Plan and the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Ms. Propp opened up technical questions to staff. There were no technical questions on this item. Ms. Propp asked if there were any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Travis Zimmerman from Alliance Construction, applicant, stated it’s a significant improvement to the property. There is going to be masonry fence between the residential neighborhood and this property. Del Singh, owner, said that he wants to make improvements to the site and do a traffic analysis to help alleviate any traffic concerns. He said he spoke with the neighbor about the fence and the most aesthetically pleasing material would be brick and would help to cancel out noise pollution. There are going to 3 gas pumps, 6 fueling position and 3 electric vehicles chargers so they are not expecting it to be high traffic. It will not be operating as a 24 hour location. It will be from 5am- 11pm. Mr. Groth asked what the hours of the connected laundromat would be. Mr. Singh said they are the same as the convenience store, from 5am-11pm. Barb Cayer, neighbor, said her biggest concerns with the site would be noise and people being able to see through the fence. She asked how tall the fencing would be. Mr. Lyons said the fence would need to be 6 feet tall at the time of construction. Mr. Singh said that they are working with Alliance Construction and they had mentioned to incorporate the masonry fence and if they could go taller they will talk about it, but it will at least be 6 feet. In addition, they will have the landscaping. He said they don’t anticipate much noise while in operation but will have staff to help manage it. It does help that it is not a 24 hour location. Mr. Lyons said the UMU zone does allow up to an 8 foot fence in rear yards so the applicant could go up to 8 feet. Ms. Cayer said that the 8 foot fence would be ideal. Ms. Propp agreed with the 8 foot fencing. Ms. Cayer asked if they were going to be painting the brick building that is facing her yard. Mr. Singh said that the plans are showing a reface with new brick materials. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 14 May 4, 2021 There were no public comments on this item. Ms. Propp closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing statements. There were no closing statements from the applicant. Motion by Mitchell to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report. Seconded by Davey. Ms. Propp asked if there was any discussion on the motion. Ms. Davey commended the owner for taking an eye sore on North Main to something that looks really nice. It will match the existing property across the street. Even though she said she’s not comfortable with putting more fossil fuel into the area, but they have done a remarkable job. Mr. Mitchell asked if there was a way to enforce the operation hours of the business in case they wanted to go to a 24-hour operation. Mr. Lyons said that business hours are typically not enforceable from a land use perspective. Mr. Mitchell said they have made considerable efforts to make downtown pedestrian friendly. He wants to know if there any sort of infrastructure they can require for bicycle racks or for non- vehicular transportation. Mr. Slusarek said they need to provide 4 spaces for bicycles. Mr. Zimmerman said they have 5 bike racks by vehicle chargers. Mr. Mitchell said the applicant and owner are doing a great job of addressing concerns of neighbors. He wants to know if there is any financial assistance to neighbors who want to put up landscaping as a part of the buffer. Mr. Lyons said there is not presently a funding source for it but it can be investigated. Motion carried 8-0. V B. ACCESS CONTROL VARIANCES FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AT 630-640 N MAIN STREET Site Inspections Report: Mr. Perry, Ms. Davey, and Mr. Hinz reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 15 May 4, 2021 The petitioner is requesting access control variances to permit the following: 1. Reduced lateral clearance from N. Main St. to 6’ where code requires a minimum of 75 feet. 2. Reduced driveway spacing to 77’ 2” (on-site driveways) and 10’ (neighboring driveway to the south), where code requires a minimum driveway spacing of 105’. 3. Increased number of driveways to two, where code allows a maximum of one. 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 2 one-way access driveways along N. Main Street. The intended use of the property is for a commercial development (gas station and convenience store/laundromat). Staff is supportive of the requested lateral clearance reduction as the site lacks sufficient space to increase the throat clearance and will be designed for one-way vehicle circulation which will alleviate concerns related to vehicle stacking. Also, the proposed parking lot is relatively small with 12 parking spaces and 6 gas pumps. Staff is also supportive of a second driveway for the site with reduced driveway spacing to 77’ 2” for the on-site driveways and 10’ from the existing Burger King drive-thru exit to the south. The second driveway is needed to accommodate one-way ingress/egress for the site and the lot is not wide enough to meet the 105’ spacing requirement. The applicant will be utilizing the existing curb cuts for access to the site, so there will be no change from the existing conditions. Staff recommends approval of access control variances with the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Ms. Propp opened up technical questions to staff. There were no technical questions on this item. Ms. Propp 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 other public comments on this item. There were no public comments on this item. Ms. Propp 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. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 16 May 4, 2021 Seconded by Kiefer. Ms. Propp asked if there was any discussion on the motion. There was no discussion on the motion. Motion carried 8-0. VI. GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT & SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN APPROVAL FOR A MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT SOUTHWEST CORNER OF PEARL AVENUE & RIVERWAY DRIVE Site Inspections Report: Ms. Propp and Mr. Groth reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The applicant requests approval for a General Development Plan (GDP) amendment and Specific Implementation Plan (SIP) for a multi-family 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 subject area is zoned Urban Mixed Use District with a Planned Development Overlay (UMU-PD) and consists of a 1.4 acre vacant parcel, located at the southwest corner of Pearl Avenue and Riverway Drive. The surrounding area consists predominantly of multi-family residential and institutional land uses. The 2040 Comprehensive Land Use Plan recommends Center City use for the subject area. Staff recommends approval of the General Development Plan amendment and Specific Implementation Plan and the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Ms. Propp opened up technical questions to staff. Mr. Mitchell asked if they could clarify the accessibility features or any areas that could be considered affordable housing. Mr. Lyons said that the developer should be able to help answer that. Ms. Propp asked if there were any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Peter Jungbacker representing the applicant, Morgan Crossing phase 2, said the project is an expansion of an existing phase that was started 12 years ago. Much of the landscaping that has been commented on will exist in the next phase. Over time they have expanded the height of the building by two floors from the originally three floors in phase 1. The have had to adjust according to demand. The parking demand will be different in this phase and over time. They will be installing electric charging units and have a large bicycle storage area in the lower level and underground parking. It’s unique from the first two developments in the area. It does eliminate the __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 17 May 4, 2021 need for large parking areas around the building. This is a true urban high density multi-family project that does need underground parking to work. In terms of the exterior, this is largely a block of red brick exterior with little other materials which is also different from the other developments. All of the units have exterior balcony systems. This is something that is not present in the other developments like The Annex. This has a higher cost but makes the units more livable. Mr. Lyons asked Mr. Jungbacker to answer Mr. Mitchell’s questions about accessibility and affordability. Mr. Jungbacker said if you look at WHEDA’s affordability chart for Winnebago County and the projected market rents for this project, we are not even getting into what WHEDA’s affordability numbers are for a WHEDA assisted project given the current market rates. This is a market rate property, albeit one that doesn’t achieve the WHEDA targeted rental rates. It’s a problem that results in supply issues in the community and the tight housing market that we are experience in Oshkosh and the rest of Wisconsin. It’s constrained by the inability to match up effective demand with costs to build these projects. One of the problems we are experiencing today is that we are finalizing our construction contract. Lumber prices have increased substantially since last spring. For context, a year ago 1000 board feet of southern pine which is what would be used for dimensional lumber for framing was in the market for about $300/1000 board feet. Today it is $1300. It is a substantial change in the economics which hasn’t allowed us to close the gap. It has made the economics of these buildings more difficult to build. During the last recession we lost a lot of the producers at the middle of logistics chains for the dimensional lumber and they haven’t come back. Now the market is roaring because of low interest rates. It’s not for lack of lumber, it’s for lack of producers. In terms of accessibility, we do meet all of the states requirements and several units are fully accessible for all handicap needs. Mr. Mitchell asked that when a project is proposed, are there any resources available so that a few units could be for affordable housing. Not directly related to this project, but so that future developments don’t exclude the population that say there isn’t enough housing for. How is it presented to the developer to do this? Mr. Jungbacker said that he does not develop housing with that population in mind but there are developers that specifically do that. They do that with the assistance of a variety of public sector programs that essentially provide subsidies in the cost of developing and managing these types of programs. Those subsidies are provided by investment tax credits. They are also assisted by Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority that has programs. Mr. Mitchell asked if the city is encouraging you or offering you support that might lead you to say that you would dedicate some units to lower income populations along with your normal clientele. Mr. Jungbacker said that the city staff does not have the flexibly to modify code. There are certain procedures and building products that might minimize costs. The answer isn’t going to come from city staff making adjustments on margins, the gap is too big. A significant part of the cost structure has been changed by market forces. The other problem is the WHEDA approved medians of fair __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 18 May 4, 2021 market rent is about $1400 for a two bedroom unit. We are barely going to be there. When we do this project, it’s going to take about 10 years for it to mature and to make sense economically. Riverside Apartments in the 80’s took 10 years for it to make financial sense. You don’t build these as a developer expecting a quick return. This project will be locally owned and locally managed. Ms. Davey said she understands why there is no outdoor recreation space but wonders if they have a requirement for parkland based on new buildings or construction. She wants to know if there is a fee paid per unit so that a park can be built elsewhere. Mr. Lyons said the only parkland code requirements are related to subdivision dedications, CSM’s or plats. New developments of this nature on an existing lot does not have a parkland fee associated with it. It is something that will be discussed at the upcoming joint workshop. There were no other public comments on this item. There were no public comments on this item. Ms. Propp closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing statements. There were no closing statements from the applicant. Motion by Mitchell to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report. Seconded by Davey. Ms. Propp asked if there was any discussion on the motion. Mr. Mitchell said that he appreciates the projects and does not ask questions to be derogatory towards the development at all. Motion carried 7-0. PLANNING DIRECTOR’S REPORT Mr. Lyons said that they have been directed by Council and City Manager Rohloff to have a discussion with all boards and commission members about moving in June to either in-person meetings or continue with virtual meetings. The discussion is an all or nothing proposition. Hybrid meetings will not be allowed. Mr. Lyons said that Mr. Coulibaly preferred to stay virtual, Mr. Marshall has no preference, Mr. Ford would prefer in-person, and Mr. Kiefer has no preference. Ms. Davey asked if it would include the public. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 19 May 4, 2021 Mr. Lyons said that it includes public as well as Plan Commission. Ms. Davey said that if the public was allowed, that there’s no way to enforce them to wear a mask and in the past staff had been advised to not engage. She is not comfortable allowing the public without masks. Mr. Lyons said that he will follow up but does not think this has changed. Ms. Davey said she might be comfortable going to in-person as long as everyone wears masks or until the 50% vaccinations plus social distancing. She is worried that even with social distancing, that having the public and Plan Commission in the same room for two hours, they are being put at risk. Mr. Hinz is in favor of in-person meetings and does not have any concerns because of ample spacing. Some people do have situations where they cannot wear masks and that’s not something we can get into. Ms. Propp is in favor of in-person meetings with social distancing and masking. Mr. Groth is in favor of in-person. Mr. Perry is in favor of in-person. Mr. Mitchell is in favor of in-person but is disheartened to hear that remote participation is not allowed for those who cannot physically attend a meeting. Mr. Lyons said that Council and City administration had a discussion about some of the technology limitations when you start to mix in-person and virtual. Mr. Stengel is in favor of in-person with social distancing. Ms. Davey said that even if people are sitting six feet apart that there is a lot if air and if not masked, they could be potentially putting any of us at risk of getting sick if we are not able to enforce masks. There hasn’t been any upgrades to City Hall’s ventilation system and are not adequate for our new normal. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 6:21 pm. (Hinz/Davey) Respectfully Submitted, Mark Lyons Planning Services Manager