HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 1 January 4, 2022
PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES
January 4, 2022
PRESENT: Michael Ford, Phillip Marshall, John Kiefer, Justin Mitchell, Meredith Scheuermann,
Mamadou Coulibaly, Margy Davey, Kathleen Propp
EXCUSED: Brad Spanbauer
STAFF: Mark Lyons, Planning Services Manager; Kelly Nieforth, Community Development
Director; Justin Gierach, Engineering Division Manager / City Engineer; Brian
Slusarek, Planner; Alexa Naudziunas, Associate Planner
Vice Chair Propp called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm. Roll call was taken and a quorum
declared present.
The minutes of December 7, 2021 were approved as presented. (Davey/Scheuermann)
I. APPROVAL OF HISTORIC JACKSON NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
Staff report accepted as part of the record.
Staff requests approval of the Historic Jackson Neighborhood Plan, which focuses on the
neighborhood area along Jackson Street from Murdock Avenue to Church Avenue.
Ms. Naudziunas presented the item. The City of Oshkosh-Planning Services Division in
partnership with the Historic Jackson Neighborhood Association have worked together to develop
the Historic Jackson Neighborhood Plan. The Plan serves the following purposes:
Educate both city government and neighborhood residents about each other’s concerns and
visions for the future.
Promote collaboration between the City, the neighborhood, and local public, private and
non-profit organizations in order to achieve mutual goals to enhance the neighborhood.
Create “pride of place” within the community by identifying and developing the assets
within each neighborhood.
Initiate change, rather than simply reacting to it, by addressing specific issues and
opportunities.
Strengthen the city by improving the quality of life in neighborhoods.
This plan was prepared for the Historic Jackson Neighborhood Association with the intent to
support their efforts in addressing neighborhood challenges and promoting reinvestment. Created
during a resident led planning process; the plan may be used by the Historic Jackson
Neighborhood Association, the City of Oshkosh, and partner organizations to ensure
neighborhood improvements and activities are implemented to meet the needs of residents.
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 2 January 4, 2022
The plan first offers a brief neighborhood history, followed by a snapshot of current conditions,
including both assets and concerns identified throughout the planning process. The plan then
outlines four priority areas: Image, Market, Physical Conditions and Neighborhood Management.
Individual sections explore each focus area, assess current conditions, and provide goals,
objectives and specific action items to help achieve the intended goals.
Prior to Common Council consideration, this plan is reviewed by the Plan Commission for
consistency with the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan, official maps, and other planned activities of
the City. Staff has reviewed all proposed goals and objectives and believes they do not conflict
with the City of Oshkosh’s Comprehensive Plan, official maps, or other planning objectives of the
City. Staff recommends approval with the findings and conditions as stated in the staff report.
Ms. Propp opened up technical questions to staff.
Ms. Propp asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any
statements.
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 Perry.
Ms. Propp asked if there was any discussion on the motion.
Mr. Mitchell asked if there is a place to find the architectural history and significance of a building
in a neighborhood.
Mr. Lyons said there is no dedicated webpage to that, but if it is a historic district or a historically
dedicated building, that information is in the state preservation documentation. Some resources
might be available at the library or someone like Shirley Brabender-Mattox who has a lot of local
knowledge on specific buildings. But there is not a website that would have the history.
Ms. Propp said she likes the plan and they are paying attention to Jackson Street by reducing lanes.
Mr. Lyons said staff is continually working on these neighborhood plans and hopefully Congress
Fields will appear before the Plan Commission later this year.
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 3 January 4, 2022
Motion carried 8-0.
II. APPROVE LAND ACQUISITION OF 0 BROAD STREET AND 400 CEAPE AVE
Site Inspections Report: Ms. Propp, Mr. Perry, Mr. Mitchell, Ms. Scheuermann, and Ms. Davey
reported visiting the site.
Staff report accepted as part of the record.
The City of Oshkosh Department of Community Development is requesting approval to acquire
the property located at 0 Broad Street and 400 Ceape Avenue. The property will be transferred to
the Day by Day Warming Shelter and be utilized for the new year round facility.
Mr. Lyons presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the land use
and zoning classifications in this area. The Department of Community Development is proposing
to acquire 0 Broad Street and 400 Ceape Avenue for future transfer to Day by Day. Acquisition of
the property is consistent with The City of Oshkosh Community Development Block Grant 2021
Action Plan and previously approved Specific Implementation Plan (SIP). The City of Oshkosh
Common Council approved the 2021 Action Plan on April 13, 2021 and a Specific Implementation
Plan for the site on December 14, 2021. The 2021 Action Plan includes Goal 4: CD-1 Community
Facilities and Infrastructure. CD-1 was described as – Improve the City’s public facilities and
infrastructure through acquisition of property for public facility to serve LMI individuals. It is
staff’s opinion that acquisition of the subject properties would fulfill Goal CD-1 of the 2021 Action
Plan. Another overarching goal of the 2021 Action Plan is to address homelessness our community
and is outlined as a National Objective for LMI areas according to HUD. The 2021 Action Plan
allocated $150,000 for Goal CD-1.
The City of Oshkosh Comprehensive Plan 2040 identifies the subject area as Center City. Center
City includes desired land uses such as housing and public land uses. The previously approved
warming shelter land use compliments the Center City desired land uses. Examples of other
similar center city land uses would be: Oshkosh Housing Authority, Transit Center, Governmental
facilities, Christine Ann Center, Clarity Care, Salvation Army, NAMI and many others. The
proposed acquisition for the year round Day by Day warming shelter is consistent with similar
land uses within the Center City. Staff recommends approval with the findings and listings as
stated in the staff report.
Ms. Propp asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any
statements.
Bill Wyman, Community Foundation Board/Donors Representative, stated that the board and the
donors strongly support the homelessness community. Where they disapprove of is the site
selection. 20 years ago the City, the Chamber and the Community Foundation hired a city
planning consultant firm. They were hired to plan for the future development of our downtown in
our central city. Their findings were to promote the river front. The city has done a great job
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 4 January 4, 2022
promoting the river front by adding to the river walk, Waterfront Hotel, the Convention Center,
the Leach and private donors have donated to the Howard and downtown. Building a homeless
shelter at Ceape and Broad will negatively affect the development over the central city and the
downtown. I wouldn't be willing to bring my children to Touch-a-Truck or the Tuesday family
nights at the Leach knowing there's a chronic homeless shelter across the street. There are also
concerns about weddings in relation to the location. It’s an awful location for a homeless shelter.
The location is not close to many of the services that they use like the Salvation Army, St. Anne’s
Clinic and Most Blessed Sacrament. The location is right next to a residential neighborhood that is
improving. There are more owner occupied homes in that location than there has been in years.
There's been some advancements on two other sites in the community.
Jim Erdman and Kelsie Lally, speaking on behalf of TJ Rogers, stated that they are in strong
opposition of the location. They support of homeless, understanding its situations and creating
and supporting continuum programs. They are a funder of the tiny homes community project that
is in its process. They have recently acquired the Oshkosh Northwestern building and polled the
community with a majority interest in creating a boutique hotel at that location. In communication
with investors and owners, it was simply stated that the community will not get a boutique hotel
800 feet from this project. Homelessness is an issue there's no doubt and we're certainly doing
what we can to help resolve the situation but this location with the amount of community money
and effort that's gone into this area. Our stand is we're extremely disappointed that this is even
being considered as the site this close to this entertainment district.
Ms. Propp asked for clarification on if the boutique hotel will replace the Northwestern building.
Mr. Erdman confirmed that is the plan.
Bradford Lasky, resident, said he wanted to follow up with the email that he had sent and is also
disappointing to learn that the Oshkosh Area Community Foundation was not involved in the site
selection. The proper site selection is a key process in the sighting of emergency homeless shelters.
The key partner, the Oshkosh Area Community Foundation is important to Day by Day’s success
and it raises a bunch of red flags.
Jeff Trembly, Oshkosh Area Community Foundation Board President, said they have made a great
deal of progress working on the homeless continuum especially in the last 1 to 2 years. Day by Day
has been a part of that continuum and we fully support their mission. This location is not the best
site. The location they are proposing is in a job desert, and transportation is lacking. Going forward
if Day by Day is willing to come to the table to work with both community foundation and other
members in the community that have stepped forward that we can find a resolution to this that
would satisfy everybody
Jason Havlik, Day by Day Board Member, said that there is an issue with homelessness that needs
to be addressed. There is continually not enough capacity for the guests each day. This is not the
first time this project has come up and has already been delayed several times. . They have spoken
many times on the efforts that our team has put forward in trying to do the right site selection,
whether it’s a remodel of an existing building, looking at geographic locations, safety and security
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 5 January 4, 2022
and being financially responsible. Ceape and Broad makes logical sense to the team. They
understand that the community foundation is looking at alternative sites and the Day by Day
board has not asked them to do that. It is something that they have taken upon themselves. We
want to be good community partner but we have a homeless problem, and as the community we
need to address this soon. We can't continue to go year after year and continue to have our guests
on the street not being able to take advantage of the many needed programs in order to make sure
our guests are taken care of.
Gretchen Withers, Day by Day Board President, said that in 2017 or 2018, there was a feasibility
study conducted and then numerous community members were interviewed. There were 6 or 7
people from the community foundation were also included to get their input. We took that
feasibility study seriously and took the advice and that was offered from our community members
to go out and educate our public educate on the subject of homelessness. The location is
centralized next to Court Towers which is a great transition for the guests to go from homelessness
to having an apartment.
Molly Yatso Butz, Day by Day Executive Director, said that this project has been stalled three times
in the last 11 years. There is now a situation where every night is critical. So we are unable to
support the people who are homeless in our community. We turn away every night, which means
we turn people to the streets, giving them nothing but food and a sleeping bag, because we have
no other alternatives. We have no sufficient washing machines. So, when you're seeking basic
needs, so when we talk about a chronic situation, or even a non-chronic situation in which people
are coming to us, and probably the worst situation, worse predicament of their life and we provide
them basic needs food, shelter and clothing. We have a nonfunctional kitchen. We have not
adequate restrooms. We have 1 toilet for every man who uses this facility. We don't have the
laundry capacity to even do people's laundry and provide them clothing. We're in a critical time so
If this project is stalled again, it’s pushing it another two years out. More people sleeping at the
Convention Center, The Leach and the public bathrooms.
Mr. Mitchell asked Ms. Yatso Butz why she thinks it’s a good space for the Day by Day Shelter.
Mr. Havlik assisted by saying that they wanted to put a shelter that’s geographically located where
the guests are and where the amenities they need are located. When looking at vacant land, Ceape
and Broad met that criteria. They wanted to ensure that we would have the safety and wellbeing of
our staff and guests in our community. As we design this building safety and security were put
into every aspect of the process. Lastly is being financially responsible and making sure that the
dollars are utilized and that we're spending the money to better enhance our guests and giving
them the best experience versus spending it on additional operating costs or heating costs or tear
down whatever it may be. So when you look at safety and security geographic locations near
amenities and financial responsible as a facilities team we felt that Ceape and Broad met that
criteria.
Ms. Yatso Butz said that the previous Housing Authority Executive Director said that space was
being saved for Day by Day and they wanted it to go there for the last 11 years. Our research also
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 6 January 4, 2022
led us to the site. This site is good for our mission because the timing is critical. Day by Day is
consistently over capacity and turning away between 7-15 people per night.
Ms. Scheuermann stated there seems to be disconnect between the two groups. One team wants to
move forward because they have a viable spot. Then it also seems like there are two other spots
that might be even better. It doesn’t seem like the two groups or talking, and it seems like we’re
missing a piece which is important in making this decision. She asked for clarification from Ms.
Yatso Butz and Mr. Wyman.
Ms. Yatso Butz said they have received alternative plans from the Community Foundation. Day by
Day has not yet seen the proposals. During previous meeting, we had said Day by Day needed a
blank state. What had been proposed prior was a redo of the building they are currently in, which
is not recommended.
Mr. Wyman said that the Community Foundation has been working with Most Blessed Sacrament
and the local church who has the St. Mary’s project on Merritt. They have worked with the Diocese
in Green Bay and changed some of their location. Most Blessed Sacrament is willing to tear down
and make that site ready to build. CR Meyer and American Air Environmental Services are
working to give us a dollar amount of what it would cost to get that site ready to build. The other
option is right along Jackson right next to the Most Blessed Sacrament. There are two lots, Jackson
and High, and Jackson and Pearl that are already owned by the RDA. That would save the city
funds from having to acquire that property. There are some environmental issues because there are
some old gas station tanks that would have to be removed. That location is .84 acres and the site at
Ceape and Broad is .94 acres, so it is a little smaller. The Most Blessed Sacrament site is over one
acre, which is larger than the Ceape and Broad site. By January 11th there will be estimates
available.
Ms. Davey asked who currently owns the Ceape and Broad lots.
Mr. Lyons said the Housing Authority owns those lots.
Ms. Davey asked Mr. Wyman what he would like to see in that area if not a homeless shelter.
Mr. Wyman said the area has been developed as an entertainment district and they would like to
see something similar in that site.
Ms. Scheuermann asked for clarification on what they are voting on and if these funds are tied to
this location.
Mr. Lyons said the funds are not specifically tied to the action plan to this site. This site meets the
criteria for those funds. The funds through the action plan are just allocating 150 thousand dollars
for assisting acquisition of a property for a facility of this type. Staff is recommending this site for
them.
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 7 January 4, 2022
Ms. Scheuermann asked if they change the location down the road if they have to come back to
Plan Commission.
Mr. Lyons confirmed they do.
Ms. Scheuermann asked if essentially they are approving the funds to purchase.
Mr. Lyons said they are approving the funds to be used to purchase this site. The funds are not
earmarked or tied specifically to it, but we are recommending through this process they be used
for Ceape and Broad.
Ms. Nieforth said that when the action plan was being created the funds were allocated which is
150,000 dollars of our 850,000 dollars that are allocated annually to the city that were set aside for
this. So the funds can be used for any type of facility that would service low to moderate income
citizens in our community, if it's this site, if it's another site, we are able to use it, we have the
funds.
Mr. Erdman said that all of the things that this project is considering. So all of you who are voting
on this, just consider location. When voting, don’t vote on behalf of an emergency situation. The
project needs to be placed in the correct location.
Mr. Coulibaly said that it seems the two major parties don’t seem to have collaborated enough to
find a consensus. Thinking of sustainability and the community, these major players need to get
along for the betterment of the community in the long run. How much willingness is there to
reassess and to come back to negotiate.
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 Coulibaly.
Mr. Perry said he greatly appreciates the opinions of all the speakers who have spoken here
tonight. He works at the library which a small not for profit that provides services for many of the
individuals we talk about here. His office looks out down the street at a potential public boutique
hotel. The people that we are talking about, will go by this hotel, whether it's this homeless shelter
is where it's proposed, or where it's anywhere else because the public library is where they going
during the day. They will be more than to provide anybody with a personal tour during the day at
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 8 January 4, 2022
the public library to show you where the individuals go because it's warm, because there is an
electric socket to charge up phones, where there's resources to try and find jobs. The library isn’t
the only agency in the area that provides these services. No matter where the homeless shelter is
located, the group will come downtown during the day. It seems that we're only being concerned
about the night or our image as to the public, but they will come. This is our 3rd COVID winter.
When the library was closed at the beginning of this pandemic and the homeless shelter stopped
operating overnights, it was the saddest thing you could see. I will be emphatically supporting this
resolution tonight. Please make an appointment to come visit the library. We are happy to show
you the things that are probably not seen.
Council Member Ford said that his mother worked in a food pantry for decades, as a child he
volunteered helping the homeless and gave away meals in downtown Milwaukee for many years.
His children volunteer through their faith community to also help the homeless. They are seeing
firsthand the distance between those of us well off, and those of us who are not is not as far as
many of us think. There’s a lot of valid reasons to not like this location, but hopefully it just came
out poorly in that we don’t make fear of the homeless population in this community of residents
who are part of the reason we oppose any specific location. That is saying it’s not going to be put
anywhere. That’s opposite of the message they have been preaching as a community saying we
care about those experiencing homelessness in our community. This is still very much a dispute
between two independent organizations, Day by Day, and the Community Foundation who
doesn't like this location. We, as a city cannot be the arbiter in this in this dispute. All that said this
is the first time we're being asked as a city to commit any type of public funds to this initiative. It's
federal funds that pass through us, but we were in control of those funds. There should be a
reasonable expectation moving forward that Day by Day shares more operational details with
individuals, not just the city, but individuals from the public that want them and that work
together with the community foundation to try to resolve this dispute. The Foundation brings up
this plan from 20 years ago, and members of the community are asking me why nothing is there.
There is no good answer to that and it’s something that needs to be addressed in the eyes of the
public. Hopefully this can be worked out because there is a clear need in our community. It’s
something where we can't afford for the legacy of this to be divisive because all of those other
efforts that we've talked about, that are all great, like tiny homes, et cetera. All that stuff is, is going
to have a shaky foundation if we start this very noble project from place of division.
Mr. Mitchell said that the question of why something isn’t there related back from the downtown
study that was done. There was a medical clinic on that site that was operational and so the
downtown plan left it alone and didn’t include it in any river front plans. The Housing Authority
acquired that in 2003 and since there has been no approach for a development of any sort of
entertainment. A former director of the Housing Authority did indicate that they attempted to
work with local real estate development, and individuals to see if there could be some sort of
mixed income development, where on the upper levels would be a high end luxury apartment that
would be overlooking the river. The consensus across the board was the proximity to Court Tower
would eliminate anybody that had the financial resources from supporting or wanting to live in
that sort of venue. The opportunity has been available in the last 12 years and that kind of they
comment that it's never been approached to the extent where the Housing Authority actually
approached Day by Day and said you should consider this as a potential lot. The thing about
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 9 January 4, 2022
shelters is that it's not necessarily the field of dreams where, if you build it, they will come, it's 1 of
those things where if you build it where they are they will utilize that service. Everybody has to be
aware that we have a population of individuals that are present in that area. Bill mentioned that he
wouldn't take his children to Touch-a-Truck if there was a shelter present. The population is
present now and having a shelter that provides supportive services and provides the work to meet
the individual basic need. Wouldn’t that change the dynamic outside of that they would be more
supported in that area. The idea of an entertainment district may be a valid idea. It's just not one
that's been developed in any sort of city planning or city anything. We encourage you if that's of
interest to you to pursue potentially developing that. Mr. Laskey indicated that he was upset that
The Foundation wasn't involved in the process. From 2013 when members of the housing
continuum said there is a need for a shelter for Day by Day, they were directed to go to The
Foundation. They need to support that with data and funded a yearlong comprehensive affordable
housing in partnership with the Wisconsin Partnership for Housing and Development. In
communication with this project for the better part of six years and ongoing. It doesn’t mean they
agree with the placement, but to the point that they were not involved at all is not accurate.
Regarding the representative from the board who indicated that it’s not close to transportation, it is
directly along route 1 of the transit line with stops on Otter and Broad and Court and Broad and is
within walking distance. This is one of the key features of this location is the distance to the library.
It’s near the Salvation Army, the County Department of Human Services, and the Housing
Authority. The population is there because a lot of the amenities they use are present. The
placement of a shelter at that site has gone through our Plan Commission twice, and gone through
Council twice. The plan that was presented was done in partnership with the Planning department
and today we are looking at if it’s appropriate to use CDBG funds to support putting the shelter at
that location which we have already said is an appropriate land use for that location. These funds
are not development funds. They cannot be used for a building, but can be used for land
acquisition.
Ms. Scheuermann said that she will not be supporting this because there's new information out
there that she wasn’t aware of. The information hasn't been shared with the two parties. The
information hasn’t been talked about which is unfortunate. There is an obligation in the next 7
days if this goes before council to talk about if one of those locations is even better than the
proposed one.
Ms. Propp said the new information is concerning because the message we are hearing is that big
donors won’t be supporting the Day by Day Shelter in spite of the fact that they say they do. The
council should insist that the parties get together prior and come up with something reasonable. It
is concerning that Day by Day has not seen this new plan that was outlines to us briefly. Having
the shelter a few blocks down from the proposed boutique hotel should not be a deterrent.
Ms. Davey said that it is odd that every time this gets really close to somewhere, there's suddenly
new information that comes up. If this was happening at a federal level, we'd all be very
suspicious. People can become homeless from a single medical event they haven’t anticipated.
Oshkosh does not have enough low-income housing which makes it more difficult to get people
into a home or a situation where they could be self-supporting. People are missing the point when
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 10 January 4, 2022
it comes to the boutique hotel. Why would we want people sleeping in sleeping bags on the grass
when they could be inside safe, warm and unseen.
Mr. Marshall said that the question is do we approved funding and it’s not whether this is the site
or whether we think this is a good place for the site or not, but it’s do we think the funding is
appropriate for this. It would be good for the two institutions to come together and have a
conversation to decide the potential properties and is there somewhere that might even be better
than this site.
Mr. Coulibaly said his concern was the proximity to railroad track and how staff feels about it. If
the two parties can come back together and work something out that’ll be ideal.
Mr. Lyons said that because this being a relatively low traffic generating use staff does not see any
concern with the proximity to the railroad.
Motion carried 8-1.
III. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONE CHANGE FROM SUBURBAN MIXED USE
DISTRICT (SMU) TO SUBURBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT WITH A PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (SMU-PD) AND APPROVAL OF A GENERAL
DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 580 S KOELLER
STREET
Site Inspections Report: Ms. Scheuermann, Mr. Perry and Mr. Mitchell reported visiting the site.
Staff report accepted as part of the record.
The applicant requests a zone change from the existing Suburban Mixed Use District (SMU) to
Suburban Mixed Use District with a Planned Development Overlay (SMU-PD). The applicant also
requests approval of General Development Plan for a commercial development.
Mr. Slusarek presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the land
use and zoning classifications in this area. The applicant is requesting a zone change to add a
Planned Development Overlay for the southern portion of the parcel (proposed new lots). This
request is intended to provide some flexibility to the zoning ordinance to accommodate
redevelopment of the restaurant (Golden Coral) site. The applicant has submitted preliminary
plans for commercial development of the property, which will be addressed as General
Development Plan (GDP) review to follow. Staff is supportive of the proposed rezone as it will also
assist redevelopment of the site and provide further review to mitigate potential impacts on
neighboring properties. Staff recommends approval with the findings and conditions as stated in
the staff report.
Ms. Propp opened up technical questions to staff.
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 11 January 4, 2022
Mr. Perry stated on the plan there is access not through the properties themselves, but through
both adjoining properties and wants to know if that is acceptable.
Mr. Lyons said that to the north is the existing access into the current larger lot so they will have to
do an interior access agreement as part of their CSM. The owner of that is working with the client.
The property to the south would have to be contacted to work on the southern joint access. That
section of Koeller Street, staff does support using those cross access over adding curb cuts onto
Koeller. If we can minimize those curbs and use the internal access drive system it is probably a
better overall end product.
Mr. Perry asked if zoning goes from a use that does not include drive-throughs, changing the
zoning does allow the drive-throughs.
Mr. Lyons they are only adding the plan development overlay, we are already a base SMU zoning
district here.
Mr. Mitchell asked for clarification on why they want to have twice as many parking sports as
would be permitted by our standard code.
Mr. Slusarek said that it’s about 50 stalls for both lots and per lot they would be allowed 25
parking spaces.
Mr. Mitchell asked if they were to approve this, are there tradeoffs.
Mr. Slusarek said they would be required to offset those BSMs and landscaping is an example.
Ms. Scheuermann said that there’s 50 parking stalls there today, and there is going to be two
developments with 25 each. So that is not twice the parking stalls.
Mr. Lyons said the proposal is 50 on the Panda Express lot and 56 on the unidentified southern lot.
The code says 25. For small buildings, we do not calculate the 125%. If there is a parking lot that is
below 25 stalls, they are allowed to go up to 25. If it was at code, it would be at 12. Because it is a
small building, they are allowed up to 25.
Ms. Scheuermann asked if a drive-through restaurant need 50 spots.
Mr. Lyons said that staff took a look at what developments have gone in since 2017. 2017 is when
the code was updated. Some have shared parking. Pot Belly has 30 space on site with a 2100 square
foot building. Part of those 30 spaces is shared parking with the previous box store behind them.
That had about 1 space per 70 square feet of building area. Chick-Fil-A has 129 spaces, but that is
part of a three building multi-tenant center. Only 9 of their stalls were actually added specifically
for them. Popeye’s is a 2600 square foot fast food restaurant that has 11 parking spaces, or about 1
parking space per 239 square feet. The old Packers Pub site is looking at 15 spaces for 2400 square
foot building that are about 1 per 160 square feet. The proposed Panda Express is 50 spaces for
2500 square foot building or about 1 space per 50 square feet.
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 12 January 4, 2022
Ms. Davey asked why do they need so much parking.
Mr. Lyons said they are trying to work with them between now and SIP to get additional
information on why they need it. We have been made aware that there may be an existing shared
parking agreement with the building on the north. We are working on trying to get that additional
documentation to help justify that additional parking.
Ms. Propp asked if because there are concerns with the parking, and they approve the general
development plan, said plan can be reduced in parking.
Mr. Lyons said they could do an amended GDP and SIP to have this discussion with Plan
Commission. There have been lengthy conversations with them about the amount of stalls. If it
does significantly change between now and SIP, there would be an amended GDP and SIP before
the approval process.
Ms. Propp asked if the main access would be through the current driveway cut which had led to
the Golden Corral on one side and the strip mall on the north.
Mr. Lyons said that is correct.
Ms. Propp said she doesn’t like that entry because it’s got a rumble strip and the rumble strip
makes it difficult to turn in appropriately. She would prefer to not have a rumble strip there
because it is easier for cars to enter and exit. The driveway needs to be engineered appropriately
and it looks like the entrance to the south side to these new drive-throughs is pretty close to
Koeller.
Mr. Lyons said that it can be discussed with the applicant and the engineering department.
Ms. Scheuermann asked when the SIP will be coming to Plan Commission.
Mr. Lyons said to defer to the applicant since they have not filed yet.
Ms. Propp asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any
statements.
Ryan Talbott and Xavier Gavin, Klover Architects, said that with regards to the parking
requirement, the total operations for the Panda Express has increased in the drive-through
operations. Oftentimes the drive-through queuing will get backed up. Cars will typically be asked
to pull through and wait. That has taken some of the parking of the 50 stalls being proposed as
well as some 3rd party pick up services that are becoming increasingly popular has eaten into the
typically parking count. We are working with Brian and Kelly on providing documentation for
SIP.
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 13 January 4, 2022
Mr. Perry asked why the applicant didn’t choose to bring this up in a workshop. There are
multiple concerns.
Mr. Gavin said that this development went to the pre-application process with Todd Muehrer and
we have scheduled the GDP at the direction of the departments at the time.
Mr. Lyons said that all of the pre-submittal meetings we do offer a workshop to individuals so
they have the option to workshop or move forward with filing.
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 Kiefer to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report.
Seconded by Marshall.
Mr. Perry said that driving into that access point stinks. Something needs to be addressed with
that. They are concerned about the amount of parking spaces. If there has to be a drive-through it
doesn’t appear to be adequate and then because of the drive-throughs and the special
considerations that will eventually be needed due to them, there are great concerns if the buildings
were not up to code with landscaping, lighting, type 1 materials. Is it even appropriate now to
come to Plan Commission for a general development plan.
Mr. Kiefer said the site is difficult to get into, the rate of speed of traffic coming off that roundabout
and coming through there. It would have been nice to have had a chance to look at this a little bit
closer and in more detail before this point. We can come back to these things. Hopefully staff will
have some times to work with the developer to address some of the concerns.
Council Member Ford asked if staff could explain the process, when it comes back to us again,
what that would mean.
Mr. Lyons said that the processes are plated split into two steps. The first is GDP or general
development plan. It's taking a concept plan and making sure the appropriate base zoning and
land uses are approved. Our specific implementation plan is the 2nd step and that's really just as
the title says, it's the specific details of the plan. When an SIP comes forward, we need to have full
lighting, landscaping site design, building elevations as construction ready to review, make sure
it’s compliant with all codes and at that time is when we evaluate potential based standard
modifications and anything that an applicant is willing to do we're proposing to do offset any of
those base standard asks. The nice thing about separate in that process is if this would move
forward tonight, the GDP/zone change to be approved, there's nothing to stop us from continuing
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 14 January 4, 2022
to work with the applicant and bring this back as a workshop before we come back with SIP.
There’s nothing in the code that says you have to directly go to SIP.
Council Member Ford said that if we approved the land usage, there is still an opportunity to
workshop to address some of the concerns that Mr. Perry or others might have.
Mr. Lyons said that is correct.
Ms. Propp said that there should be a workshop. There is too much wrong with this layout. With
the materials not being up to speed, and parking issues that haven’t been resolved. I will support
this based on Mark’s comments that we could ask that there be a workshop on this before the SIP
comes forward.
Motion carried 9-0.
IV. SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENT FOR SIGNAGE AT 1844
OSHKOSH AVENUE
Site Inspections Report: Council Member Ford reported visiting the site.
Staff report accepted as part of the record.
The petitioner requests approval of a Specific Implementation Plan (SIP) amendment for a cabinet
sign and pre-menu board sign at 1844 Oshkosh 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 previously approved GDP/SIP for the site was for
two commercial buildings. The north building is a two-story 21,516 sq. ft. mixed use building
containing first floor retail and restaurant spaces and second floor office space. The south building
will be a 7,896 sq. ft. single story multi-tenant retail building which will also have a drive-thru lane.
The applicant is requesting an SIP amendment to allow for a cabinet sign and a pre-menu board
for the drive-thru lane on the on the east side of the building. The applicant is also requesting a
BSM to allow a pre-menu board sign in addition to the menu board, as code allows a maximum of
one daily notice sign per business. According to the applicant, the pre-menu board is a 6.72 sq. ft.,
5.4’ tall, freestanding menu sign that is intended to display seasonal or special menu options for
the customer before they reach the full menu to place their order. They also note that the pre-
menu board will improve the efficiency of the drive-thru as it will help customers to decide on
their order before they reach the order point. This will serve to prevent long drive-thru lanes and
move customers through more quickly. As proposed, the menu boards will have an 8’ side yard
(east) setback. Staff does not have concerns with the proposed setback as the approved SIP for the
site included a BSM to allow a 5’ side yard setback for the parking lot and drive-thru.
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 15 January 4, 2022
Staff recommends approval of the Specific Implementation Plan amendment as proposed with the
findings listed above and the following conditions:
1. Denial of BSM to allow proposed cabinet signs.
2. BSM to allow a second drive thru sign, where code allows a maximum of one daily notice
sign.
3. A minimum of 20 landscaping points shall be provided around the pre-menu and menu
boards signs.
4. Except as specifically modified by this Specific Implementation Plan Amendment, the
terms and conditions of the original Specific Implementation Plan dated October 13, 2020
(Resolution 20-425) remains in full force and effect.
Ms. Propp opened up technical questions to staff.
Mr. Kiefer asked for clarification on the cabinet signage.
Mr. Lyons said that when the corporate business park district regulations were written, in keeping
with some of the downtown areas of the city we had done and having a higher standard of sign
type we had recommended that we do not allow cabinet signs within the district. So, cabinet signs
are those box-like signs where they have a thickness all the internal components are inside of it and
felt at that time, when corporate business park was established that we didn't want that sign type.
We wanted to promote higher quality, other types of signage. So this is the 1st request to come
directly to planning kitchen of this nature. After our project was approved for having a cabinet
sign staff just felt there's enough other sign type options out there and that it necessarily wasn't
worth issuing a base standard for that.
Council Member Ford thanked city staff for including pictures of alternative signs that Starbucks
uses elsewhere. He asked if this is approved as written, the next step would be for the developer or
the end user to come up with a sign that meets code.
Mr. Lyons said that if this went through council next week and was approved as written they
would have to then propose how alternatives code compliance, sign type instead of the cabinet
siren sign.
Ms. Scheuermann asked if the applicant has known about these other options and if they want to
stick with their original plan.
Mr. Lyons said that there was a discussion the week previously about the code sign requirements
and what we have seen in other locations, we have not heard back that they wanted to differ from
their submitted plan and moved forward.
Ms. Propp asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any
statements.
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 16 January 4, 2022
Karissa Akey, TLC Sign, said that if this doesn’t get approved then Starbucks will look at other
options. This is the brand standard and they haven’t done any other reverse channel letter sets for
their logo signs, they wanted to see if the city would approve these just because it is the logo that is
known so well and will help draw more people in. We know this section of the code doesn’t allow
cabinet signs, but this sign is very high quality. It is thin, only three inches which is the same as the
sets that are flush mounted to the wall that have already been approved.
Ms. Davey asked why the sign is so large at 71 inches.
Ms. Akey said that it is Starbucks brand standard and it’s relative to the elevation.
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 Coulibaly to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report.
Seconded by Scheuermann.
Mr. Mitchell said that if it makes sense to have a second sign board in the drive-through to make
the lines more efficient, that maybe it is something we look at to include in our language to future
developers of this type of facility.
Mr. Lyons said that is a great point and something they want to bring back to the Plan Commission
for a workshop. We are seeing more of these requests. It is something we plan on bringing forward
to talk about a code update.
Mr. Perry said that in support of staff recommendations the cabinet sign would be not appropriate
based on what we're trying to do with the entire development. He is supporting anything to
increase the efficiency of this particular business and the drive through and I even greatly
appreciate the fact that landscaping points were applied to it.
Mr. Kiefer said asked if the logo sign is mounted to the building.
Mr. Lyons said they are mounted to the building.
Mr. Kiefer said that the other Oshkosh Starbucks signage does protrude three-four inches from the
building. Is it correct that we are avoiding that type of signage.
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 17 January 4, 2022
Mr. Lyons said that in this specific district yes. Elsewhere in the city cabinet signs are permitted.
The downtown district and corporate business park are only two that presently don't allow them.
Mr. Kiefer asked how that is different than the lettering protruding.
Mr. Lyons said we do allow channel letters. The decision at that time was really based on
aesthetics and the opinion that these cabinet signs are not aesthetics as visually appealing. There
was a preference when we did the zoning district to have that type of signage. Cabinet signs are a
viable sign type, but this district was to go to the channel letter style.
Ms. Propp said that this signage is in the ordinance. We decided that this was going to be a good
idea in that district. We have someone that doesn’t want to comply with that and we’re saying
“maybe you could”. So if we think we made a good decision in the 1st place, we should support
that decision and not allow this type of sign.
Motion carried 9-0.
PLANNING DIRECTOR’S REPORT
Mr. Lyons asked the group if they wanted to stay virtual or go back to in-person starting February
1st. City Hall is requiring masks until the end of January.
Ms. Propp asked Council Member Ford how the in-person council meetings are working out.
Council Member Ford said that Council and the Committee on Aging have been meeting in person
and they are working just fine.
Ms. Scheuermann said she would prefer to stat virtual for the next 30 days due to the recent uptick
in COVID cases. Engagement has been just fine with the virtual meetings.
Mr. Mitchell said he is fine with either option.
Ms. Davey said she would prefer to stay virtual.
Ms. Propp said she would prefer to stay virtual for the next 30 days.
Mr. Kiefer said he is fine with either option.
Mr. Coulibaly said he would be fine with either option.
Mr. Perry said he is fine with either option but would like to honor those who want to stay virtual.
Mr. Marshall said he’s fine with either option.
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 18 January 4, 2022
Mr. Lyons said we will plan on staying virtual and bring this item back Februarys 1st and go on a
month by month basis.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 6:00 pm.
(Kiefer/Scheuermann)
Respectfully Submitted,
Mark Lyons
Planning Services Manager