Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout23. 21-391JULY 27, 2021 21-391 RESOLUTION CARRIED__5-1P_____LOST_______LAID OVER_______WITHDRAWN_______) PURPOSE: APPROVE GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN INDOOR INSTITUTIONAL USE AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF CEAPE AVENUE AND BROAD STREET INITIATED BY: DAY BY DAY WARMING SHELTER PLAN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Approved w/conditions WHEREAS, the Plan Commission finds that the General Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit for an Indoor Institutional Use for the property located at the northwest corner of Ceape Avenue and Broad Street, is consistent with the criteria established in Sections 30-382 and 30-387 of the Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Oshkosh that a General Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit for the property located at the northwest corner of Ceape Avenue and Broad Street, per the attached, is hereby approved with the following condition: 1. No base standard modification (BSM) shall be granted as part of the General Development Plan (GDP) approval. Rather, approval, conditional approval, or denial of each BSM will be undertaken as part of Specific Implementation Plan (SIP) approval. City Hall, 215 Church Avenue P.O. Box 1130 Oshkosh, WI 54903-1130 920.236.5000 http://www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Common Council FROM: Mark Lyons, Planning Services Manager DATE: July 22, 2021 RE: Approve General Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit for an Indoor Industrial Use at the Northwest Corner of Ceape Avenue and Broad Street BACKGROUND The applicant requests approval of a General Development Plan and a Conditional Use Permit for an indoor institutional use at the northwest corner of Ceape Avenue and Broad Street. The subject area included in the zone change request consists of a vacant commercial lot and a vacant residential lot totaling approximately 1.64 acres. The vacant commercial lot has frontage on Ceape Avenue, Broad Street, and Otter Avenue and the vacant residential lot has frontage on Broad Street. The surrounding area consists primarily of residential uses to the north and east along with Riverside Park to the south and Court Tower Condominium to the west. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan recommends Center City land use for the subject properties. ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing to combine the two subject parcels into a single lot for an institutional residential development (Day by Day Warming Shelter). A CSM is required to combine the parcels and will need to be submitted to the Department of Community Development for review. The proposed development includes a single story 12,970 square foot warming shelter to provide overnight accommodation for the local homeless population, allowing up to 50-60 guests per night. The site will also include a 16-stall parking lot for employee and guest parking, with one-way access from Broad Street to Otter Avenue. With approval of the rezone to Institutional District with a Planned Development Overlay (I- PD), the applicant may request a Conditional Use Permit for the proposed indoor institutional development. The proposed plan will require base standard modifications (BSMs) for reduced front setbacks along Otter Avenue and Ceape Avenue and reduced street side setback along Broad Street. A BSM will likely be needed for the impervious surface ratio as the site appears to exceed the maximum 60% for the lot. City Hall, 215 Church Avenue P.O. Box 1130 Oshkosh, WI 54903-1130 920.236.5000 http://www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us The proposal was discussed at a Plan Commission workshop as well as a neighborhood meeting on June 1, 2021. Both Plan Commission and the neighborhood residents in attendance voiced support for the plans. Staff is supportive of the General Development Plan as the site layout is generally compatible with the surrounding relatively high density urban area. Staff is recommending that any BSMs be addressed as part of the Specific Implementation Plan (SIP) review. Staff is also supportive of the request for a Conditional Use Permit as the proposed indoor institutional use is consistent with surrounding institutional and high density residential land uses as well as the 2040 Comprehensive Land Use recommendation of Center City. The proposed warming shelter will also provide a valuable service to the community. FISCAL IMPACT Approval of this project would not result in an increase in the assessed property value for the site as the Day by Day Warming Shelter is tax exempt. The applicant is anticipating spending approximately $3.5 million on the development. RECOMMENDATION The Plan Commission recommended approval of the General Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit on July 6, 2021. Please see the attached staff report and meeting minutes for more information. Respectfully Submitted, Approved: Mark Lyons John Fitzpatrick Planning Services Manager Assistant City Manager / Director of Administrative Services ITEM: GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR AN INDOOR INSTITUTIONAL USE AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF CEAPE AVENUE AND BROAD STREET Plan Commission meeting of July 6, 2021. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Day by Day Warming Shelter Owner: Oshkosh Housing Authority Action(s) Requested: The applicant requests approval of a General Development Plan and a Conditional Use Permit for an indoor institutional use at the northwest corner of Ceape Avenue and Broad Street. Applicable Ordinance Provisions: Planned Development standards are found in Section 30-387 of the Zoning Ordinance. Indoor Institutional uses are permitted only through a conditional use permit in the Institutional District (I) as regulated in Section 30-50 (C) of the Zoning Ordinance. Criteria used for Conditional Use Permits are located in Section 30-382 of the Zoning Ordinance. Property Location and Background Information: The subject area included in the zone change request consists of a vacant commercial lot and vacant residential lot with a total of approximately 1.64 acres. The vacant commercial lot has frontage on Ceape Ave., Broad St., and Otter Ave. The vacant residential lot has frontage on Broad St. The surrounding area consists primarily of residential uses to the north and east along with Riverside Park to the south and Court Tower Condominium to the west. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan recommends Center City land use for the subject properties. Subject Site Existing Land Use Zoning Vacant Commercial & vacant residential UMU & UMU-PD Adjacent Land Use and Zoning Existing Uses Zoning North Residential UMU & TR-10 South Riverside Park I-PD-RFO East Residential TR-10 West Multi-family residential I Recognized Neighborhood Organizations River East Comprehensive Plan Comprehensive Plan Land Use Recommendation Land Use 2040 Land Use Recommendation Center City ITEM X: GDP CUP NW corner Ceape Ave. & Broad St. 2 ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing to combine the two subject parcels into a single lot for an institutional residential development (Day by Day Warming Shelter). A CSM will be required to combine the parcels, and will need to be submitted to the Department of Community Development for review. The proposed development includes a single story 12,970 sq. ft. warming shelter which will provide overnight accommodation for the local homeless population, allowing up to 50-60 guests per night. The site will also include a 16-stall parking lot for employee and guest parking, with one-way access from Broad Street to Otter Avenue. The previous item was for a rezone of the subject site to Institutional District with a Planned Development Overlay (I-PD), as the existing Urban Mixed Use District with a Planned Development Overlay (UMU-PD) does not allow indoor institutional land uses. With approval of the rezone, the applicant may request a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the proposed indoor institutional development. The proposed plan will require base standard modifications (BSMs) for reduced front setbacks along Otter Ave. and Ceape Ave. (minimum 30’ setback) and reduced street side setback along Broad St. (minimum 25’ setback). A BSM will likely be needed for the impervious surface ratio as the site appears to exceed the maximum 60% for the lot. As noted in the Rezone staff report, the proposal was discussed at a Plan Commission workshop as well as a neighborhood meeting on June 1, 2021. Both Plan Commission and the neighborhood residents in attendance voiced support for the plans. Staff is supportive of the General Development Plan as the site layout is generally compatible with the surrounding relatively high density urban area. Staff is recommending that all needed BSMs be addressed as part of the Specific Implementation Plan (SIP) review. Staff is also supportive of the request for a Conditional Use Permit as the proposed indoor institutional use is consistent with surrounding institutional and high density residential land uses as well as the ITEM X: GDP CUP NW corner Ceape Ave. & Broad St. 3 2040 Comprehensive Land Use recommendation of Center City. The proposed warming shelter will also provide a valuable service to the community. Signage The submitted preliminary renderings show a monument sign along the Ceape Ave. frontage. As shown, the sign appears to meet sign dimension requirements for the Institutional District. Final signage plans will be addressed under the SIP request. Landscaping The preliminary plans did not include a landscaping plan. Final landscaping plans will need to be submitted as part of the SIP request. The applicant will need to meet all landscaping requirements for building foundation, street frontage, paved areas, and yards, or apply for base standard modifications. Storm Water Management/Utilities A preliminary storm water management plan was included with this request. The Department of Public Works has noted that the site will be classified predominantly as redevelopment site will be subject to the requirements of Chapter 14 of the City of Oshkosh Municipal Code Storm Water Management. This will be addressed during the SIP and Site Plan Review processes. Site Lighting Lighting plans for the site have not yet been submitted. Lighting plans will be required to be submitted as part of the SIP request. Building Facades Preliminary building renderings were submitted as part of the GDP request, and include a combination of masonry and siding as exterior materials. Final building elevations will be required to be submitted as part of the SIP request. FINDINGS/RECOMMENDATION/CONDITIONS In its review and recommendation to the Common Council on an application for a Planned Development district, staff recommends the Plan Commission make the following findings based on the criteria established by Chapter 30-387 (C)(6): ITEM X: GDP CUP NW corner Ceape Ave. & Broad St. 4 (a) The proposed Planned Development project is consistent with the overall purpose and intent of this Chapter. (b) The proposed Planned Development project is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and other area plans. (It is the responsibility of the City to determine such consistency.) (c) The proposed Planned Development project would maintain the desired relationships between land uses, land use densities and intensities, and land use impacts in the environs of the subject site. (d) Adequate public infrastructure is or will be available to accommodate the range of uses being proposed for the Planned Development project, including but not limited to public sewer and water and public roads. (e) The proposed Planned Development project will incorporate appropriate and adequate buffers and transitions between areas of different land uses and development densities/intensities. In its review and recommendation to the Common Council on an application for a Conditional Use Permit, staff recommends the Plan Commission make the following findings based on the criteria established by Chapter 30-382 (F)(3): (1) Is in harmony with the Comprehensive Plan. (2) Would not result in a substantial or undue adverse impact on nearby property, the character of the neighborhood, environmental factors, traffic factors, parking, public improvements, public property or rights-of-way, or other matters affecting the public health, safety, or general welfare. (3) Maintains the desired consistency of land uses, land use intensities, and land use impacts as related to the environs of the subject property. (4) The conditional use is located in an area that will be adequately served by, and will not impose an undue burden on, any of the improvements, facilities, utilities or services provided by public or private agencies serving the subject property. (5) The potential public benefits outweigh any potential adverse impacts of the proposed conditional use, after taking into consideration the applicant’s proposal and any requirements recommended by the applicant to ameliorate such impacts. Staff recommends approval of the General Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit with the findings listed above and the following condition: 1. No base standard modification (BSM) shall be granted as part of the General Development Plan (GDP) approval. Rather, approval, conditional approval, or denial of each BSM will be undertaken as part of Specific Implementation Plan (SIP) approval. Plan Commission approved of the General Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit with a condition on July 6, 2021. The following is Plan Commission’s discussion on the item. Mr. Mitchell excused himself from the discussion for items X and XI due to a conflict of interest. ITEM X: GDP CUP NW corner Ceape Ave. & Broad St. 5 Site Inspections Report: Mr. Perry, Ms. Propp, Mr. Kiefer, and Mr. Ford reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The applicant requests approval of a General Development Plan and a Conditional Use Permit for an indoor institutional use at the northwest corner of Ceape Avenue and Broad Street. 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 included in the zone change request consists of a vacant commercial lot and vacant residential lot with a total of approximately 1.64 acres. The vacant commercial lot has frontage on Ceape Ave., Broad St., and Otter Ave. The vacant residential lot has frontage on Broad St. The surrounding area consists primarily of residential uses to the north and east along with Riverside Park to the south and Court Tower Condominium to the west. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan recommends Center City land use for the subject properties. Staff is supportive of the General Development Plan as the site layout is generally compatible with the surrounding relatively high density urban area. Staff is recommending that all needed BSMs be addressed as part of the Specific Implementation Plan (SIP) review. Staff is also supportive of the request for a Conditional Use Permit as the proposed indoor institutional use is consistent with surrounding institutional and high density residential land uses as well as the 2040 Comprehensive Land Use recommendation of Center City. The proposed warming shelter will also provide a valuable service to the community. Staff recommends approval of the General Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit with the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Mr. Hinz opened up technical questions to staff. There were no technical questions on this item. Mr. Hinz asked if there were any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. There were no statements from the applicant. Mr. Keith Wirch, 402 Otter Avenue, stated that they moved here from Minneapolis a year and a half ago, but they lived here previously and it is great to return. Their neighborhood has a railroad that sits right there, an amphitheater a block away, the large Court Tower low income housing, and the fire department. In their time in Minneapolis, they had multiple negative interactions with the homeless population such as harassment, miscellaneous crime, and panhandling. In their opinion the addition of this shelter will cause excessive loitering as the population waits for it to open causing an unsafe environment for his family, especially for his wife who walks their dog in the neighborhood. He understands that there is a need to assist the homeless population here. He frequently goes down to Riverside Park and he sees them there and the tents. He does not enjoy being the “not in my yard” group of their neighborhood. ITEM X: GDP CUP NW corner Ceape Ave. & Broad St. 6 They’ve made accommodations to live with the railroad nearby and they’ve reached out to their new neighbors at Court Tower who cycle in and out. They also have the music from the amphitheater nearby. The addition of this is another burden onto their neighborhood and he asks that they at least consider that as they make the zoning change decision. Ms. Amanda Wirch, 402 Otter Avenue, stated that the report notes that the neighborhood association had voiced support for this. What she received for this regarding the neighborhood association was that the core leadership had met with the warming shelter. As a neighborhood association member based on her location, she never received a letter in the mail about this specifically. She thinks it is slightly misleading, although not intentionally so to say that the neighborhood as a whole has supported this. Some of the neighbors who live across the street do not support it, but they are not comfortable speaking here. She has a few things she thinks should be taken into consideration. One is that there needs to be more discussion with the neighborhoods. The house right next door did not receive notification because they rent. They are going to have to live next a property with no knowledge of what it is going to become. A lot of the area residents are renters. If their landlord doesn’t let them know about this change, then they have no idea. In the report it says this is an overnight only shelter. Her concern is that they’re potentially forcing a population who may or may not leave the area during the day back out onto the street. It would be one thing if services were provided all day, but she doesn’t know that based on the report provided. The homeless population statistically has mental health needs making it difficult to retain employment and housing. If there isn’t going to be supervision and services provided all day, then she thinks they are allowing for some possible negative interactions within the neighborhood and with the needs of the homeless population. She is wanting the City to at least take this into consideration and provide more information about what’s going to be happening there, who is taking responsibility, and who is taking care of the populations’ needs both day and night. They should also make sure that the majority of the neighborhood is actually notified, including renters. She doesn’t know if anyone in Court Tower received any notification. She thinks it is important to know who is going to take responsibility for the potential change in dynamic in the neighborhood. Ms. Courtney Sullivan, 406 Otter Avenue, asked where they are heading with this neighborhood and if it is more towards industrial and not residential. Mr. Lyons replied that this is a site that has long been owned by the Housing Authority and the expectation for this property was always for development of non-residential. That has no impact on the broader character of the area. They still encourage a viable and active neighborhood. Ms. Sullivan replied that this looks very institutional and does not seem to fit with the character of the neighborhood. Mr. Lyons replied that they can let the applicants address the reasoning for the look of the building. ITEM X: GDP CUP NW corner Ceape Ave. & Broad St. 7 Ms. Sullivan replied that she has had nothing but really negative experience from living close to a homeless shelter. She has already found drug paraphernalia outside of her home in her yard. They’re already there doing these things as it is now. She has young children and they play outside. What is she supposed to say when her kid finds a syringe on the ground? It’s insane. She chose to live in this neighborhood, but she didn’t choose to find these things or have people loitering around the area. Unless it’s an open all-day thing, it doesn’t help what’s happening during the day. This is great and they should have a place to go and she sees that and she’s sorry if she seems angry about this, but she is angry about it. She doesn’t think it’s helping the situation in the neighborhood. Homeowners like her did not receive a notification in the mail about the public meeting. They only got a letter from the neighborhood association and the City about how the neighborhood association core team met with them and she doesn’t even know who the core team is. She’s lived in River East for four years now and she thinks she’s gotten two letters in the mail about a neighborhood meeting. She feels like the neighborhood should have a little more information before it is brought here as a vote. As her neighbor said, the renters around the area weren’t even notified. She feels like they should have a say too. She also wants to know if there is going to be an increased police presence and if this is going to decrease the resale value of her home with having things rezoned. It’s not the best neighborhood in Oshkosh, but she would like it to be better. She doesn’t feel like this is going to help the neighborhood improve like it should. She is hoping that the petitioners have answers for her, but she really hopes the Plan Commission asks how the neighborhood really does feel and not just the core team. She doesn’t think anyone in the vicinity of this is in the core team. River East is a pretty decent sized neighborhood and she feels like they’re not being properly represented here. Mr. Coulibaly asked Ms. Sullivan if she is systematically opposed to the development or if she wants the issues addressed. Ms. Sullivan replied that she is systematically opposed to it. Mr. Brad Lasky, 1319 Bay Shore Drive, stated that he is really here to learn more about the project. Similar to the previous speakers, the first time he was notified was through the Oshkosh Examiner. He started talking to a number of people because the article stated that everyone thought this was a really good idea. He doesn’t think it is a good idea. He thinks it is well- intentioned, but in a very poorly located area for a number of reasons. He grew up in Oshkosh and has been here thirty five years and he is passionate about where he grew up. They’ve worked very hard to get their neighborhood to be more owner-occupied and this goes against that and the feel of the neighborhood. He also has concerns about what happens to their neighborhood when Washington School disappears. He is here to learn and he is interested to hear about the site selection and why this the right site for this development. There are other locations in the City that he feels are more suitable, but what those are is up for interpretation. He is here to learn because he doesn’t know much about this project. Ms. Carmen Scott, 521 Otter, stated that her home is directly in the line of sight of the building. She appreciates her neighbor’s viewpoints. She is on the core team. It is not a secret society. It is people who stepped up and said that they want their neighborhood to be a better place. If someone is not aware of the core team, they haven’t looked at flyers, been on Facebook, or come ITEM X: GDP CUP NW corner Ceape Ave. & Broad St. 8 to any of the meetings. Two mailings are sent out annually for the fall and spring meeting and at each of these meetings there is a sign up. There is a lot of communication and she understand there’s a lot of chatter that goes on. She understands that everyone is busy, but those of them that chose to be on the core team and others in the neighborhood attended an informative meeting on June 1st that involved Day by Day, the architects, and the security. She lives six houses away from the train. She walks her dog four or five times a day and goes by that site several times every day. She goes down to the river about four times per week. There are homeless already there. She made a choice when they moved here four years ago that walkability and the amenities overshadowed that. Moving into River East, she knew the reputation and she knew it wasn’t pristine, but she also knew it would take individuals who wanted to make a difference. They moved here from a different state. She doesn’t know how many of them have been homeless, but twice they came very close to homelessness because of her husband’s terminal brain injury. She’s gone bankrupt and been an abused spouse. She can’t tell you how her heart hurts when she hears people saying that the homeless are all mentally ill and that they’re all have substance abuse issues. There is a large percentage of individuals who are actually working poor. She’s sure that Day by Day is going to address the security issues. Her understanding is that the homeless population will be doubling meaning fifty to sixty individuals. She imagines a high percentage are already hanging out in the library or living by the river. She thinks the site selection is awesome. The police and fire departments are nearby. It’s a locked unit, so they can’t leave at night. They do security checks every day on every individual. She would rather have this that a vacant lot. She think it actually helps the neighborhood since the four years she has been there. She has neighbors who are renters and they’re fantastic and active and in the core group. It’s really up to each individual to decide how they want to perceive this. “Not in my backyard” is something she understands and she understands property values and wanting to have a great neighborhood. She thinks they are a great neighborhood. She’s seen that that they are a compassionate neighborhood and she thinks this goes right in line with the kind of neighborhood that she bought into for a lot of reasons. It’s actually a great location that is close to the bus route. There are a number of people who are homeless because they can’t work because they don’t have a car. So if they put this somewhere out where no one is going to see them and they aren’t going to bother anyone, they aren’t going to have transportation which is going to be a huge issue. It is a gigantic barrier. There are mentally ill individuals and individuals on drugs and alcohol, but it’s not everyone. She knows Day by Day will hopefully address these issues and it can be a discussion and not something that is shoved down someone’s throat. She can appreciate if people have not volunteered and been part of the neighborhood core group. They didn’t vote on anything as a neighborhood. Mr. Hinz closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing statements. Mr. Eric Spar stated that he is a member and treasurer of the Day by Day board. Currently the shelter is operating out of the basement of the church. It operates six months out of the year and that is the maximum it can operate with the permit it has right now. When it goes out of season when summer hits, then those individuals that stay at the shelter during the colder times are on their own. There isn’t an alternative place that will take all of them. There are other locations that are more restrictive than Day by Day. Essentially when summer hits, these individuals are all over the place. This is a population that is generally not very mobile. If the site is not in a ITEM X: GDP CUP NW corner Ceape Ave. & Broad St. 9 location where the population it’s meant to serve is already located, they’re not going to be able to get there. That was one of the things that went into site selection. There were other sites that were looked at, including existing sites that would not have been new construction. Ultimately this site was selected as the most appropriate. As far as the number of police calls, the number of calls and police attention needed at the shelter while operational is far less significant than the same population when the shelter is not operational. Law enforcement is needed much more when they don’t have a place to stay at night. He understands that there is always concern about that and he understand the concerns about this is population having a higher instance of mental health and substance abuse issues than the average population. Those are things that the shelter attempts to address and there are services in place there. There is a counselor during the day to provide services to those utilizing the shelter at night. It opens in the evening for people staying there overnight. They are served dinner there and have breakfast available and are sometimes provided food during the day. It’s not a place where they’re staying 24 hours and they are leaving during the day. There are some classes provided there as well both in and out of season. There is a group that is part of planning the shelter right now that is specifically dedicated to security concerns. It is something that they think about also. Their group doesn’t want there to be issues for neighbors because that causes problems for them as well. Some of the other sites they were looking at had more than one story which created some problems for staff being able to monitor the individuals staying at the shelter. Considerations were given to how appropriately people can be monitored by staff working there. They try to provide the best monitoring that they can. Mr. Jason Havlik stated that he is a member of the Day by Day Board. In regards to the selection of the particular site, they had a team that was looking at this for quite some time and they basically based this on three main principles. The first principle was the safety and security of their guests and the community, the second one was geographic location related to amenities and transportation, and the third principle was financial. It would be significantly more expensive to renovate an existing space. They are funded through different volunteers and so when it comes to looking at putting a building up, they have to be very cost-conscious to ensure that they’re making the best decisions for their guests and making sure they have a good program to be involved with. All of their principles around this building is making sure that they are caring for the needs of their guests. Ms. Propp asked if someone could speak more about the daytime services. Mr. Havlik stated that the best person to answer those questions is not here today, but they can get back to them on that. Mr. Lyons replied that based on the discussions they’ve had, it’s more beneficial to have them leave during the day to work or look for employment. At the same time, they provide needed services in the shelter. Although it is not 24 hours, there are services and classes available for the guests during the day. Based on the information provided, they have kind of a two sided approach. Mr. Spar stated that employees of the warming shelter are primarily there during the day. It’s not something where people are coming and going completely unsupervised. If someone is ITEM X: GDP CUP NW corner Ceape Ave. & Broad St. 10 going to be creating problems and they want access to the shelter, it’s probably not the area they want to be creating problems because the employees are going to see that. They haven’t seen a significant history of guests causing problems in the area where it is currently located. It’s not as residential of an area as the proposal is now though. Ms. Propp stated that Day by Day obviously has a PR problem. She strongly recommends that board members have another meeting and figure out how to engage the neighborhood so a lot of these things can be resolved before it goes to Council. Mr. Mike Karrels from Karrels & Associates stated that he can understand the neighbor’s viewpoints and the unknown is scary. Regarding the building composition, it is a very efficient building. They may not agree as far as the aesthetics, but a lot of institutional buildings are like this. It is an institutional building by nature. It doesn’t serve the neighborhood in the same way a Victorian home would. That is why they are going through the rezoning process. They do their best to try and meld the ideologies of the buildings in the surrounding area. They have the masonry from Court Tower rendered there and they are trying to tie alike things together. It may not be perfect, but it is an efficient vehicle for this process. Mr. Coulibaly asked if the residents are allowed in the building unless there are some instructional activities. He asked how close they are allowed to be to the facility during the day or if there is a buffer area around the building. Mr. Havlik stated that the guests are able to come in at 6:00pm. Everyone is registered and staff completes a full background check each and every day on every guest as they come through. Once they are in the facility, they are not able to leave. Each guest has a series of chores to do and then they need to be out by 8:00am the next morning. They will get a bag of food to take with them and they will have programs in the day the guests can utilize. Mr. Spar replied that he is not aware of a specific buffer area or rule, but what they’ve seen with the current location is that they tend to stay in the vicinity of the shelter. Part of what the staff will do with them is to help them find other things to do during the day such a job or job searching. They end up naturally getting out of the area. Mr. Ford stated that his understanding is that they are increasing the number of guests they can have from the old place. He asked if the design meets that need or if the concerns voiced on Facebook about attracting people outside of the community and creating additional need are justified. Mr. Spar replied that there is no way to go over 25 currently, but it was fairly common in previous seasons that there would have to turn people away because they hit the cap. He can’t speak to Facebook comments suggesting that it’s going to draw people, but it’s not really a mobile population. There was a need for increased capacity. This will accommodate 50 with overflow for up to over 60 in the new facility. ITEM X: GDP CUP NW corner Ceape Ave. & Broad St. 11 Mr. Havlik stated that a lieutenant is part of their board as well. They have been working directly with Karrels & Associates to develop the infrastructure for a security system within the shelter. Mr. Havlik and Mr. Spar thanked the Plan Commission for their time. Motion by Propp to adopt the findings and recommendations as stated in the staff report. Seconded by Perry. Mr. Hinz asked if there was any discussion on the motion. Ms. Propp stated that she is discouraged that other members of the board have been unable to attend these meetings to address the neighbor’s concerns. She understands the concerns that have been mentioned. She thinks that this is a good location and there is a huge need. She knows people that have volunteered and they have nothing but positive comments about how the shelter is run in the evening, how volunteers are utilized, and positive interactions with the guests. She thinks there is a lot of hope and opportunity here and she’d like to see this move forward. She would also like to hear from another board member who better understands the services and what will happen with the facility. Mr. Kiefer stated that he is a former resident of that area and his mom still lives in that neighborhood. He was on the Housing Authority board when they first started talking about the possible use of the land. He had mixed emotions about what is was going to do to the neighborhood. The neighborhood is in great need of development and redevelopment. The Neighborhood Associations have done a wonderful job encouraging growth. He also understands the need and the need has probably grown with COVID. There’s more people who are unable to stay in their residences. He wanted to let the neighbors know that he understands where they are coming from and he hopes that this could be the beginning of further development and redevelopment in that area. He is hoping that this area could be more targeted for redevelopment with the ARPA money the City receives. Mr. Ford stated that as a reminder, they are voting on whether or not this is an appropriate land use, which is a pretty narrow thing to look at. The larger question of whether or not it is a good idea is a policy question which comes up anytime they have institutional uses come up against residential uses. He understands where people are coming from. He hopes that before this gets to Council, some of the folks who are concerned about the location continue listening, asking questions, and articulating alternative plans. He hopes the folks at Day by Day continue their public education efforts to provide a better idea about what specifically will happen there. It would go a long way to reassure the City and the community that what’s going on there is what is supposed to be going on there. He hopes they are able to articulate how this plan for a specific project fits into the larger issue of addressing homelessness in the City. Those opposed and those in favor all agree that something needs to be done to address people experiencing homelessness in the community. It can’t just be a building. It needs to be a larger project. ITEM X: GDP CUP NW corner Ceape Ave. & Broad St. 12 Mr. Perry stated that he is the leader of a non-profit and his office is in the Oshkosh Public Library. In being there, especially during the winter, he can assure the community that there are far more than 25 or 30 individuals who are homeless because they come to the library because it’s one of the only places to go. He knows many of them on a first name basis. It might surprise some people to know that two of his volunteers are individuals who are no-fixed address and they are volunteering with them to teach people how to read, write, and speak English because they want to give back to the community. They’re good people and they want to make a difference in the community, but they’ve fallen on hard times. This is one of these situations of “if not here, where?” They’re moving the existing shelter four or five blocks to this area. It will be more centrally located to the services that they receive and need. He’s strongly in support of it because this is a small part of a systematic change that needs to occur. Mr. Marshall stated that he agrees with the comments that have been made by commission members. He does appreciate hearing the positives and he also empathizes with those in the neighborhood because there is sort of a PR problem here and they need more communication to really get neighbors on board with this and answer some questions. He is really hoping that can happen sooner rather than later. Getting more information is going to help the process along even further. He is excited to see a useful service that can be anchored on this spot. It has been blighted and sitting there for so long. Having some targeted service for a very fragile segment of the population is going to be a really good use for it, so he will be supporting this. Mr. Coulibaly stated that once the guests start using the facility, they will be neighbors of those who are already established there. A hostile environment is not very good for either side. He really feels the concern of the neighbors and he particularly appreciates the fact that they voice it so vehemently so that if something can be done about that it is done. At the same time, he understands that it’s going to function essentially as dormitory for people who are being coached to improve their lives. He hopes that communication between the neighborhood association and some of the neighbors improves so that they don’t feel left out. They want to create a welcoming community for all the residents. If approval can be delayed for that purpose, that would be good. If some of us here don’t have a place to stay as a human the least they can do is make that happen. If other places were scrutinized and this is the best alternative, then sacrifices have to be made, but it should be in such a way so that the least number of people possible are against it. Mr. Hinz stated that this going to prevent a tent city from growing along the river. He would much rather have people in a building with supervision than tents starting to pop up over by the railroad bridge or over by the bridges downtown. This will not get voted on by Council for three weeks. He suggests that both sides meet between now and then to address the questions that the neighborhood has and create some good will. His last point is that they had a mini home project north of town that came before them specifically for people who are trying to reenter society. If that project goes through and they have this downtown, he’d say they’re doing a lot to address the problems that they have in the City. This is a minor step in improving the lives of their fellow community members. There are other things coming down the road where hopefully this turns into a temporary facility for these people and then they can move into the mini homes if that project goes through. It’s not just this one thing. This is a big thing ITEM X: GDP CUP NW corner Ceape Ave. & Broad St. 13 and he’s proud to say that their City is working on it and he will definitely be supporting this tonight. Motion carried 7-0. 1934 Algoma Blvd | Oshkosh WI 54901 | P 920.426.4470 | F 920.426.8847 June 7, 2021 Project: Proposed Day by Day Warming Shelter 400 Ceape Ave Zoning Map Amendment (Rezoning) General Development Plan (GDP) Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Rezoning Request: A zoning map amendment is being requested to change the current zoning from UMU/UMU-PD to I-PD to allow the property to be used for Institutional Residential. The current zoning of the property does not allow this proposed use therefore requiring the zoning change. There are currently other Institutional zoned areas adjacent to this property, so this is not unique to the area. General Development Plan (GDP): The proposed property is currently a vacant lot that is partially paved from a previously demolished medical clinic building. The proposed use of this property is to construct a single- story warming shelter for the overnight accommodation of the local homeless population. Exterior materials of the proposed building would be a combination of masonry and siding materials which would be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. There will be onsite parking that will accommodate staff and guest parking needs. On street parking in the area or temporary use of a small number of stalls at the Leach across the street may be needed for the volunteers on a daily basis for evening meals. Landscaping will be provided to comply with code requirements, but some adjustments may be required at the building entrances for the safety and security of staff and guests. Conditional Use Permit (CUP): A conditional use permit is required for this project because the proposed use (Institutional Residential) is not allowed by right in the Institutional zoning district. This facility would regularly allow up to 50 guests per night with the ability to flex up to 60 guests under certain circumstances (extreme cold). The use of this facility by guests would be from 6:00 PM to 8:00 AM. Once a guest has checked into the facility for the night, they are not allowed to leave the building until the next morning. This facility will not generate a high volume of traffic or noise to the surrounding area. It is believed that this facility would be a benefit to the surrounding area and is an ideal location with proximity to the downtown area and services needed by the guests. GENERAL NOTES-ONSITE PARKING TO BE FOR 10 STAFF & APPROXIMATELY 4 GUESTS-TOTAL ON SITE PARKING PROVIDED 15 STALLS-EXTERIOR LIGHTING WILL BE PROVIDED FOR FUTURE SUBMITTAL-LANDSCAPING WILL BE PROVIDED AT FUTURE SUBMITTAL-HVAC LOCATIONS (POSSIBLY ROOF TOP) AND SCREENING TO BE DETERMINEDA0.1SITE PLAN1PLAN REV. DATE2PLAN REV. 11/11/213PLAN REV. 11/11/214PLAN REV. 11/11/215PLAN REV. 11/11/216PLAN REV. 11/11/217PLAN REV. 11/11/218PLAN REV. 11/11/219PLAN REV. 11/11/2110PLAN REV. 11/11/2111PLAN REV. 11/11/2112PLAN REV. 11/11/2113PLAN REV. 11/11/2114PLAN REV. 11/11/2115PLAN REV. 11/11/21TR KARRELS & ASSOC.1934 ALGOMA BLVD.OSHKOSH, WI 54901(920) 426 - 4470TRKARRELS.COMREVISIONSBY: TK, JK, KB, MTKPROJECT NUMBER: 18015SHEET TITLE:PROJECT INFOPROJECT NAME:STREET ADDRESS:CITY / STATE / ZIP:DAY BY DAY WARMINGSHELTER400 CEAPE AVE.OSHKOSH, WI 54901SHEET NUMBER:ISSUE DATE: JUNE 7, 2021PETITIONERDAY BY DAY WARMING SHELTER449 HIGH AVE.OSHKOSH, WI 54901(920) 203-4536OWNEROSHKOSH HOUSING AUTHORITY600 MERRITT AVE.OSHKOSH, WI 54901(920) 424-1450A / ETR KARRELS AND ASSOCIATES1934 ALGOMA BLVD.OSHKOSH, WI 54901(920) 426-4470CIVILDAVEL ENGINEERING1164 PROVINCE TERRACEMENASHA, WI 54952(920) 991-1866ONE WAY ONEWAYCEAPE AVE.BROAD ST.PROPOSED SETBACK 5'-0" ONE WAY GLASS BENCH SEAT GUESTENTRYSTAFFENTRYPROPOSEDSETBACK5'-0"PROPOSED SETBACK 7'-6"PROPOSEDSETBACK7'-6" PROPOSED SETBACK 7'-6"PROPOSEDSETBACK7'-6"ONE WAY TRAFFIC FLOW (IN) O N E W A Y T R A F F I C FLOWONE WAYTRAFFICFLOW (IN)ONE WAYTRAFFIC(EXIT ONLY)10 SPACES @ 9'-0"6 SPACES @ 9'-0"WASTE ENCLOSUREDESIGN TO BECOMPATIBLE WITHBUILDINGPROPOSED SETBACK 7'-6"PROPOSEDSETBACK25'-0"PRELIMINARYSTORM WATERRETENTIONScale:FIRST FLOOR(PRELIMINARY) 1/16" = 1'-0"FIRST FLOOR GROSS SF = 12,970 SF04'8'16'32'48' CUP 400 CEAPE AVE PC: 07-06-2021 MICHAEL L MILLER 3267 CLAIRVILLE RD OSHKOSH, WI 54904 OTTER WI/LINCOLN LLC 3267 CLAIRVILLE RD OSHKOSH, WI 54904 JOHN B SULLIVAN 406 OTTER AVE OSHKOSH, WI 54901 KEITH A/AMANDA M WIRCH 402 OTTER AVE OSHKOSH, WI 54901 BRIAN A/MARGART BREUER 5255 IVY LN OSHKOSH, WI 54904 CITY OF OSHKOSH PO BOX 1130 OSHKOSH, WI 54903 SARAH A MUELLENBACH 421 OTTER AVE OSHKOSH, WI 54901 THEODORE J FRANK/HEIDI L WHEATON N9587 COUNTY ROAD C ELDORADO, WI 54932 GABRIELSON PROPERTIES LLC 1731 MILL POND LN NEENAH, WI 54956 ANGELA J KOHNKE 112 BROAD ST OSHKOSH, WI 54901 SYMPHONY HOMES LLC 1130 SYMPHONY BLVD NEENAH, WI 54956 KATHY WEBB 543 OTTER AVENUE OSHKOSH, WI 54901 TAMMY HACKETT 349 BOWEN STREET OSHKOSH, WI 54901 DAY BY DAY WARMING SHELTER 449 HIGH AVE OSHKOSH, WI 54901 OSHKOSH HOUSING AUTHORITY 600 MERRITT AVE OSHKOSH, WI 54901 Riverside Park CEAPE AVCEAPE AV BROAD STBROAD STOTTER AVOTTER AV COURT STCOURT STWAUGOO AVWAUGOO AV POPLAR AVPOPLAR AVBROAD STBROAD STC:\Users\Public\Desktop\2020 Plan Commission Site Plan Map Template.mxd User: hannahs Prepared by: City of Oshkosh, WI Printing Date: 6/18/2021 1 in = 120 ft1 in = 0.02 mi¯400 CEAPE400 CEAPE City of Oshkosh maps and data are intended to be used for general identification purposes only, andthe City of Oshkosh assumes no liability for the accuracy of the information. Those using theinformation are responsible for verifying accuracy. For full disclaimer please go towww.ci.oshkosh.wi.us/GISdisclaimer I I TR-10 SR-9 HI CMU I TR-10-PD I-PD-RFO IUMU I TR-10 UMU RMU CMU-RFO RMU-RFO I-PD UMU UMU-RFO I-PD UMU UMU UMU RMU-PD-RFO CMU I UMU I-PD I UMU-PD CMU MR-36 I CMU-PD I CMU UMU-PD MR-20 I-PD RMU-PD-RFO CMU-PD CMU MR-20 MR-12PDLRO SR-5-LRO UMU CMU SR-5PD-LRO CMU-PD-RFO I-PD TR-10 I-RFO RMU-PD RMU-PD-RFO CMU-RFO SR-3-LRO MULTIPLE TR-10 I-PD CMU TR-10 RMU-RFO Roe ParkOshkosh City LimitOshkosh City LimitBBOOWWEENNSSTTCEAPE AVCEAPE AVN MAIN STN MAIN STWASHINGTON AVWASHINGTON AV S MAIN STS MAIN STHIGH AV HIGH AV ALGOMA BLVD ALGOMA BLVD OTTER AVOTTER AV BAY STBAY STBROAD STBROAD STMERRITT AVMERRITT AV WAUGOO AVWAUGOO AV MILL STMILL STPIONEER DR PIONEER DR BAY SHORE DR BAY SHORE DR SCHOOL AVSCHOOL AVBOYD STBOYD STCOURT STCOURT STSTATE STSTATE STDDIIVVIISSIIOONNSSTTE 10TH AVE 10TH AV POPLAR AVPOPLAR AVMMOONNRROOEESSTT W 8TH AVW 8TH AV JEFFERSON STJEFFERSON STWW 1111TTHH AAVV W 10TH AVW 10TH AV COMMERCE STCOMMERCE STGGRRAANNDDSSTTHHAARRNNEEYYAAVV E 7TH AVE 7TH AV BBRROOAADDSSTTI-PD C:\Users\Public\Desktop\2020 Plan Commission Site Plan Map Template.mxd User: hannahs Prepared by: City of Oshkosh, WI Printing Date: 6/18/2021 1 in = 500 ft1 in = 0.09 mi¯400 CEAPE400 CEAPE City of Oshkosh maps and data are intended to be used for general identification purposes only, andthe City of Oshkosh assumes no liability for the accuracy of the information. Those using theinformation are responsible for verifying accuracy. For full disclaimer please go towww.ci.oshkosh.wi.us/GISdisclaimer C:\Users\Public\Desktop\2020 Plan Commission Site Plan Map Template.mxd User: hannahs Prepared by: City of Oshkosh, WI Printing Date: 6/18/2021 1 in = 100 ft1 in = 0.02 mi¯400 CEAPE400 CEAPE City of Oshkosh maps and data are intended to be used for general identification purposes only, andthe City of Oshkosh assumes no liability for the accuracy of the information. Those using theinformation are responsible for verifying accuracy. For full disclaimer please go towww.ci.oshkosh.wi.us/GISdisclaimer