Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes__________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 1 October 19th, 2021 PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES October 19, 2021 PRESENT: Mamadou Coulibaly, Margy Davey, John Kiefer, Phil Marshall, Thomas Perry, Kathleen Propp, Meredith Scheuermann, John Hinz EXCUSED: Derek Groth, Michael Ford STAFF: Mark Lyons, Planning Services Manager; Kelly Nieforth, Community Development Director; Justin Gierach, Engineering Division Manager / City Engineer; Brian Slusarek, Planner; Steven Wiley, Associate Planner; Chairperson Hinz called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. The minutes of October 5, 2021 were approved as presented. (Coulibaly/Scheuermann) Due to technical difficulties, Ms. Propp will take over the meeting for Chairperson Hinz. I. PARTIAL RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION OF S. MAIN STREET, WEST SIDE BETWEEN W. 8TH AND 9TH AVENUES *ITEM HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN BY PETITIONER* II. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR A VEHICLE SERVICE AND REPAIR USE AT 1465 S WASHBURN STREET Site Inspections Report: Ms. Propp reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to establish a vehicle service and repair use at 1465 S Washburn 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 applicant is proposing to utilize the existing building for a vehicle service and repair use (Caliber Collision Auto Body Paint and Repair shop). Per the applicant’s narrative, all repair activities will be conducted within the facility with overhead doors closed. Noise, dust and odors will be confined to inside the building and will not be detectable at the lot lines. The western portion of the existing parking lot as well as a proposed additional paved area will be used for enclosed storage of vehicles. The proposed auto service facility is a conditional use in the SMU district. The existing parking lot has a single access off of S Washburn Street. The plans include an additional 7,698 square feet of additional pavement as well as a dumpster enclosure on the west end of the parking lot. Six-inch curbing will be required for __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 2 October 19th, 2021 all new paved areas. This will be verified during the Site Plan Review. Staff recommends approval with the findings and conditions as 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. Brett Flory, Cross Architects, made himself available for questions. Ms. Davey asked about the mitigation for liquids and bio hazards and if they were using what was existing and adding on to it. Mr. Flory said there are some existing on each side of the building that most of them time the drainage side goes into. Some may go into the access road but not much. We are planning on not increasing the flow into that or changing the flow any more than it is now. We are planning to add a little bit of pavement, but it falls below the threshold of having to have a full blown drainage study. The city did ask for some grading plans in a site plan showing the drainage flows. Mr. Lyons said that based on the disturbance and the pavement added it is not triggering quality requirements through the storm water code but they will have to make sure it’s collecting through appropriate grading into the existing facilities. Ms. Davey said that she has been on the Plan Commission for just a few years and she had not seen before when someone listed the compatibility for the surrounding area and places you donate to. Mr. Mitchell asked if in the fencing area where they would be storing vehicles that may have been involved in accidents or other types of collisions, what the likelihood for there to be any sort of gasoline or oil runoff that might flow into one of the bio smalls and what the monitoring mechanism would be to identify when that type of pollution happens. Mr. Flory said they have OSHA approved spill containment kits. If the vehicle has been in a fairly significant accident, most of the fluids are spent at the crash site and they clean it up there. By the time the vehicle gets to us, there’s really nothing left. They do have the spill containment kits and 55 gallon drums for the typical fluids you have in a car and it has to be disposed of properly by a licensed waste hauler. One of the additional requirements for adding the paving in the parking lot is added curbs. These cars do not typically leak more than people just driving their car and the customer cars, employees, but if there were, the addition of these curbs will help it not get into the soil. There were no public comments on this item. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 3 October 19th, 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 Mitchell 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. III. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR A TEMPORARY USE PERMIT EXTENSION AT 2911 FOND DU LAC ROAD Site Inspections Report: No commissioners reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to extend a temporary use permit for outdoor material storage. 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 is using an approximately 320’ X 120’ area on the property for the temporary storage of gravel and an approximately 165’ X 195’ area for a temporary dewatering basin used for City of Oshkosh Contract 21-03 for reconstruction of Fond Du Lac Road. The TUP extension is needed to provide a storage location for materials until the reconstruction projects are completed. Staff is supportive of the TUP extension as the storage of materials is necessary for the City projects to be completed. Staff has not been made aware of any concerns since the area has been utilized for storage. The storage area will be required to be returned to green space after the project is complete. Staff recommends approval with the findings and conditions as listed in the staff report. Ms. Propp opened up technical questions to staff. Ms. Scheuermann asked if it expired on October 4th, is it custom to approve an extension after the date has gone by. Mr. Lyons stated that with some of these conditional use permits as related to these road projects it happened in the past where by the time they are aware of the material shortages or whatever may be that by the time they file, with the filing lag, they can expire. It comes down to timing of the legal notice. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 4 October 19th, 2021 Ms. Scheuermann said that if part of the condition to extend to December 31st and then return it to green space, that then it’ll be winter. Does the commission take their word and for it and hope that happens. Mr. Lyons said that they will follow up in spring and issue citation violations if it’s not restored. The code has a May 1st start of planting season where it’ll have to be done. Ms. Propp asked for 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 Scheuermann 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. VI. GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR A PARKING LOT ADDITION AT 1825 WEST POINTE DRIVE *ITEM HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN BY PETITIONER* V. SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENT FOR ROOFTOP ADDITION AT SOUTHWEST CORNER OF JACKSON STREET & MARION ROAD Site Inspections Report: Ms. Propp reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 5 October 19th, 2021 The applicant requests approval of a Specific Implementation Plan amendment to allow for a rooftop addition for a multi-family residential development located at Merge redevelopment Site J, at the southwest corner of Jackson Street and Marion Road. 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 previously approved GDP/SIP for the site was for a 74 unit apartment building. No changes are being proposed to the approved use of the site. The only proposed changes to the site are for a rooftop terrace with canopy and stair/elevator addition. There are no changes to the being proposed to the site layout as the additions will be entirely within the existing approved building footprint. The elevator/canopy additions will result in an increased building height of approximately 15’ to an overall height of 67’ 9”. Staff does not have concerns with the increased building height as there is no maximum building height in the RMU district and the overall height is well under the maximum airport zoning height of 165’. According to the applicant, the roof terrace is intended to provide a space with a view of the river for all tenants regardless of the location of their unit within the building. Staff recommends approval with the findings and conditions as 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. Steve Miller, SlingShot Architect, made himself available for questions. He stated that originally they weren’t providing balconies but this would be for each apartment in the building. Ms. Scheuermann asked if they had changed their mind and added it because of feedback or was it always planned but you couldn’t get it in time for first approval. Mr. Miller said that it was a late in the design process request from the client. They saw one somewhere else and really liked it and thought it would be a great asset to this project. Mr. Mitchell stated he was happy to see this addition and taking advantage of the higher up view. Is there a possibility of the general public being able to rent out or use any space. Mr. Miller said that this building is all residential but the fitness room in the glassy area, they have asked us about potentially converting to a commercial use. It’s possible to happen in the two buildings that are proposed as future development along Jackson St. Ms. Propp asked if the rooftop only open under the canopy area or is it further along. Mr. Miller confirmed it’s only under the canopy area. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 6 October 19th, 2021 Ms. Davey asked if the rooftop is going to rated enough load bearing that it could ever support a garden for the residents. Mr. Miller said there is plantings that surround the entire rooftop terrace. It does include green roof around the immediate vicinity of the roof terrace. Mr. Coulibaly asked how the balconies are attached to the building. Mr. Miller said the pergola and the structure that’s holding it is a prefabricated aluminum system that’s designed to withstand the same winds as the rest of the building. 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 Scheuermann 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. There was no discussion on the motion. Motion carried 9-0. VI. SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENT FOR SIGNAGE LOCATED AT 1212 SOUTH MAIN STREET Site Inspections Report: Ms. Propp reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The petitioner requests an amendment to the Specific Implementation Plan approval for signage modifications at 1212 South Main 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. A revised signage plan has been submitted. The revisions include removal of existing signage and installation of new wall/window signage. Signage to be removed includes the “Menominee Nation Area” wall signage and monument signage as well as “Menominee Casino Resort” and “Maple Pub” wall signage. This will result in __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 7 October 19th, 2021 a removal of 166 sq. ft. of wall signage on the west façade, 122.5 sq. ft. on the north façade, and 78.6 sq. ft. of ground signage (39.3 sq. ft. per monument sign side). Proposed new signage includes the following: - Oshkosh Arena logo (west elevation): 11’ ¾” X 39’ 6” - (2) Dr. Pepper logos (west elevation): 4’ 7 ½” X 5’ 8 ½” - Dr. Pepper logo (west elevation): 6’ X 4’ 3/16” - “1212 Sports Pub and Grill” (north elevation): 21’ X 22’ 1” According to the applicant, the sign revisions are needed as Fox Valley Pro Basketball is pursuing a naming rights partner. The existing signage will be removed and signage displayed reflecting the temporary stadium name (Oshkosh Arena) until a naming rights sponsor is secured along with signage for current sponsorships. The applicant also notes that the proposed signage will be vinyl- based window graphics which enable more flexibility for short-term deals with sponsors as the graphics are easier to install than three-dimensional block, framed, and illuminated signage. Window graphics would typically be considered a separate signage type from on-building signage and limited to 33% of individual window pane area. As the proposed window graphics will exceed this maximum, staff is contributing this signage area toward the overall wall signage allotment. The additional signage area on the north elevation will result in the wall signage area exceeding the maximum of 1 sq. ft. per linear foot of frontage (295 sq. ft.). A Base Standard Modification will be required for the additional signage on the north elevation. The applicant has stated in their narrative that the increased sign area allotment is needed to provide flexibility for changes in sponsorships. The proposed signage removal and additions will result in an overall decrease in signage for the site of about 4%, compared to what was previously approved. As the proposed signage will be covering existing window areas of the building, the approved architectural design of the building will be impacted. Staff did discuss with the application the possibility of reducing the size of the Oshkosh Arena sign, the applicant decided to move forward with their original proposal. Staff is recommending that Plan Commission make the determination on whether or not the proposed signage modifications are appropriate for the site. Ms. Propp opened up technical questions to staff. Mr. Mitchell asked if they were just discussing the signage or if they were discussing the outdoor usage. Mr. Lyons said they are looking at the request for signage. Mr. Mitchell stated that the glow sign they have, if there are any restrictions on the light level on that during different times. Mr. Lyons said that because it is the first of its kind in the area that there were restrictions placed on it. There were some concerns from the neighbors over light colored backgrounds and items like __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 8 October 19th, 2021 that. Even though they technically met the code requirements placed on it, it was still having some impacts on the neighborhood and Mr. Fields and his teams worked with their sign vendor to get it with some darker backgrounds. There are a number of restrictions like length of messages, type of messages, and hours of operation. Ms. Propp asked how this signage affects the desired window coverage on the two facades. Mr. Lyons asked if it was in terms of lighting and ventilation requirement from a building code standpoint or zoning requirements. Mr. Propp clarified she was referring to Plan Commission requirement. Mr. Lyons said that this was a planned development and it had very specific exterior design requirement above and beyond our normal window percentage that is used a lot. This is a primarily brick and glass building that had separate design standards we applied to it. It wouldn’t have the traditional metric that is used. Ms. Propp said that it doesn’t make it easy for Plan Commission to decide on if it’s appropriate signage. Mr. Lyons said the in the neighborhood of 50% are just under the glazing on the west elevation looks like it’s being covered with the vinyl graphics. The west elevation it looks like there’s more glazing to the east farther on the elevation than what is shown in the images we have. There is more glazing off to the side but not sure on percentage. Mr. Hinz asked if on the front of the building where it says Menominee Nation Arena, is that where the proposed new signage will go. Mr. Lyons said that they are proposing to remove the Menominee Nation Arena sign and replace it with a vinyl Oshkosh Arena sign. Ms. Davey asked if there is a timeframe this will be covered for. Since there is no sure way to know when they would get a new sponsor, are there limits being put on it for it. Mr. Lyons said that they want that area to be reserved indefinitely for vinyl graphics that if they strike a deal for the naming rights and they can put up a new vinyl sign. If that deal expires the old vinyl signage would be used. Mr. Marshall asked if the signage is going to get change of a new sponsor, if the white color is long lasting and can handle weathering or get dingy. Mr. Lyons said that there have been similar graphics used for the mini murals and they have held up well. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 9 October 19th, 2021 Jason Fields, Oshkosh Arena, said that these particular vinyls are a 20 year based vinyl so it can take up to a specific amount of time in order for that to start fading. Reality of it is we will have a new naming rights partner before you start to see any kind of deterioration or fading of that white. We hope to have a new naming rights partner within the next 12 to 18 months. The reality is naming rights can take six months up to a couple years depending on the scope of the potential partners. The vinyl will not show any fading or discoloration. They have no intention of putting up additional partner signage. The only other place they would put it is on 1,2,3,4 on the west elevation space pointing out. Currently Dr. Pepper is a naming rights sponsor which is why their image would be there. When there is a new naming rights partner, there will be an entirely different packet of renderings with what they would like. The applicant stated that they will attempt to try and have them follow suit with what is existing or previously approved. The applicant stated that it doesn’t make sense for the arena to have other signs made up when it is for a limited time. The Oshkosh Arena mockup allows them to keep the cost minimal on a temporary situation. If it was going to be called Oshkosh Arena permanently then they would be petitioning for something else. Sometimes sponsorship deals run for 12 months and then it has to come down. It requires them to have more flexibility for their partners and opens up to larger partners outside this area. Ms. Scheuermann asked if it was customary to have a blanket approval if they might not have a partner for the next 12-18 months. Mr. Lyons said that typically when dealing with signage, we deal in areas. A sign can be changed up as much as they want within that given area. They don’t need additional approval as long as the meet the same area requirements. This proposal would be similar with the flexibility to change out as long as they stay within the confines of the area. If they wanted to go in a different area of the building or increase size over what was previously approved, they would have to come back. Ms. Scheuermann asked how we know that the standards today are going to be the standards in two years if they are unsuccessful in getting a naming rights partner. Mr. Lyons said that Plan Commission could subset clause this and say these areas are approved for signage for X amount of time and before that would expire and if the arena would want to renew it they would have to come back. Ms. Scheuermann asked how long we would give them. Ms. Davey asked if the #1 area of glass where it says Oshkosh Arena will only be there for 12-18 months max but that areas #2, 3 & 4 that you hope to keep that way forever so they can continue to host one year sponsors. Mr. Fields said the 12-18 months is a reference to sometimes how long this takes. This is a post- COVID situation and a lot of businesses are going through financial ups and downs so that is weighing heavy on us being able to find an appropriate partner who can pay the price tag we have for naming rights. When that sign comes down with whatever amount of time that may be, we will __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 10 October 19th, 2021 not be putting any other vinyl in that space. Items #2, 3, & 4 is an indefinite and the reason for that is because that belongs to that gate name. If you have been to the arena and have seen the Signarama entrance and the Verve entrance, those are sponsors of those particular doors and they are long term deals with those sponsors and its apart of that particular deal with them. This gate would be the same thing. They are not looking to replace Oshkosh Arena will a bunch of sponsors to clutter the space. Mr. Lyons asked for clarification on the type of signage that will be used for the potential new naming rights partner. Mr. Fields said they are pushing traditional signage over having them put their brand on top of the arena. The vinyl was meant as a temporary solution for us to allow the name to be up front. Ms. Davey asked if once it comes down, that they are not planning to put anything else in that space. Mr. Fields said that is correct and it won’t even be offered to the new naming rights partner. The intent of offering would be the existing asset spaces that are already in place. They’ll do their best to retain that and sometimes the partners have big grandiose ideas. Mr. Lyons said that they may want to consider an additional condition be placed on the approval of the project if you move forward with this. The current structure of how it’s written the Menominee Nation Arena sign comes down and Oshkosh Arena goes up. There’s no mechanism or condition that would allow them to replace, like and kind the Menominee Nation Arena. If they did reach a new naming sponsor six months from now, they would have to come back to this body to put any signage for naming rights of the arena. You could condition it that a like size and location sign as the current Menominee Nation Arena’s sign be permitted once the Oshkosh Arena vinyl has been removed. Mr. Lyons asked about the north façade and if they are seeking that area indefinitely should a new restaurant or operator comes in. Mr. Fields said that is correct and would like that space for continued use. Mr. Coulibaly asked how the applicant feels about the max suggestions once the other signage does expire. Mr. Fields said they have no problem with the recommendation. Mr. Lyons said it should help you move forward a little quicker with naming rights if you can fit it within the 166 square feet area of the prior sign without having to come back. Ms. Propp asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 11 October 19th, 2021 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 Davey to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report. Seconded by Marshall. Ms. Propp asked if there was any discussion on the motion. Mr. Mitchell said he will be supporting the arena and they have done a great job of limiting extreme advertisements and in the future potentially limiting external signage and focusing on what’s inside. Motion by Davey to for allowance of 166 aq. Ft. wall sign to replace the prior Menominee Nation Arena sign subject to the removal of the 453 sq. ft. Oshkosh Arena sign. Seconded by Scheuermann. Motion carried 9-0. Ms. Davey asked how much a percentage of the pub sign is glass. Mr. Lyons said it’s 50% of the far eastern glass area, just past that there’s about two and a half story small glass section and then there is other glass on the front corner of the building. To the nature of these signs they would be considered wall signs. Mr. Slusarek said it’s 33% of a pane is by code. Mr. Lyons said they are probably under 33% of overall glazing of the north side. Motion carried 9-0. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 5:16 pm. (Mitchell/Scheuermann) Respectfully Submitted, __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 12 October 19th, 2021 Mark Lyons Planning Services Manager