Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes__________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 1 January 18, 2022 PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES January 18, 2022 PRESENT: Michael Ford, John Kiefer, Justin Mitchell, Meredith Scheuermann, Margy Davey, Kathleen Propp, Thomas Perry EXCUSED: Phillip Marshall, Mamadou Coulibaly, Brad Spanbauer STAFF: Kelly Nieforth, Community Development Director; Justin Gierach, Engineering Division Manager / City Engineer; Brian Slusarek, Planner; Jeffrey Nau, 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 January 4, 2022 were approved as presented. (Kiefer/Mitchell) I. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Mr. Lyons explained the Plan Commission needs to vote for officers. He called for nominations. Mr. Mitchell nominated Mr. Perry for Chair. Mr. Lyons called for other nominations. No commissioners made other nominations. Mr. Lyons made a final call for other nominations. No commissioners made other nominations. Declaration of Mr. Perry as Chair. Plan Commission members unanimously approved Mr. Perry as Chair, 7-0. Ms. Davey nominated Mr. Mitchell for Vice-Chair. Mr. Lyons called for other nominations. No commissioners made other nominations. Mr. Lyons made a final call for other nominations. No commissioners made other nominations. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 2 January 18, 2022 Declaration of Mr. Mitchell as Vice-Chair. Plan Commission members unanimously approved Mr. Mitchell as Vice-Chair, 7-0. II. RELEASE OF STORM SEWER EASEMENT INTERESTS LOCATED ON PARTS OF 1100 WITZEL AVENUE (LOURDES ACADEMY) Site Inspections Report: No visits were reported. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The City of Oshkosh is requesting the release of storm sewer easement interests located at three separate locations on the subject property. Mr. Nau presented the item. The subject site involves a 13 acre property which is the location of Lourdes Academy private school. The City was granted a storm sewer easement to construct facilities on Lourdes’ property along Josslyn Street in 2002. Although the facilities were constructed with the owner’s permission, the easement was not recorded with the Winnebago County Register of Deeds. The three easements are each ten feet wide, 15 feet deep and 150 square feet in area. They are all located adjacent to the public sidewalk along the west side of Josslyn Street. The purpose of the easement was to assist with storm water runoff from Lourdes’ property. The Department of Public Works has determined that the City no longer needs these facilities and is proposing to have the easement released. The existing utilities will be abandoned in-place, and the City will no longer be responsible for maintenance. Once the easement is released, Lourdes may continue to use, maintain or remove the utility at its discretion. The Department of Public Works is coordinating with the City Attorney’s office to prepare necessary documents to release the easements. Since the original easement document was not recorded, the intention is not to record this release. However, Lourdes does have option to record the release to avoid potential title questions and concerns. Mr. Perry asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Mr. Perry opened up technical questions to staff. Mr. Perry asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. There were no public comments on this item. Mr. Perry closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing statements. There were no closing statements from the applicant. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 3 January 18, 2022 Motion by Mitchell to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report. Seconded by Scheuermann. Motion carried 7-0. 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 2885 ALGOMA BOULEVARD Site Inspections Report: Mr. Perry and Ms. Propp reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The applicant requests a zone change from the existing Suburban Mixed Use District (SMU) to Suburban Mixed Use District with a Planned Development Overlay (SMU-PD). Mr. Slusarek presented the item. The subject area consists of a predominantly vacant lot, with an existing cell tower near the southwest corner of the lot. The site is approximately 2.4 acres in size and zoned Suburban Mixed Use District (SMU). The surrounding area consists of vacant/undeveloped land as well as industrial uses to the north and Lake View Cemetery to the east. The 2040 Comprehensive Land Use Plans recommends mixed use for the subject area. This request is intended to allow for a proposed light industrial/storage use as well as provide some flexibility to the zoning ordinance to accommodate the proposed development. The applicant has submitted preliminary plans for development of the property, which will be addressed as General Development Plan (GDP) review to follow. A Plan Commission workshop was held on December 7, 2021, with Plan Commission voicing support for the proposed rezone and land use. Staff recommends approval of the proposed rezone as it will assist redevelopment of the site and provide further review to mitigate potential impacts on neighboring properties. Kyle Frye, Architect representing CR Meyer, and Terry Abraham, 1720 River Mill Rd, made themselves available. Mr. Frye said the landscaping will be worked on and they will make sure to add points. He asked Plan Commission if they were able to discuss the SIP and what expectations they would have or if that would be an offline discussion. Mr. Lyons said that he could ask that of Plan Commission now or work it through with staff. Mr. Frye asked if the landscaping and the class 1 materials were the main focus so far. Mr. Lyons said that is correct. There were no public comments on this item. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 4 January 18, 2022 Mr. Perry closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing statements. There were no closing statements from the applicant. Motion by Propp to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report. Seconded by Mitchell. Ms. Propp stated that she hoped the landscaping element will be along the east elevation because it looks sparse. Mr. Frye said that is the plan and it will be handled by a separate organization, Martenson and Eisele. Motion carried 7-0. IV. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN INDOOR INSTITUTIONAL USE AT 818 WAUGOO AVENUE 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 (CUP) approval for an indoor institutional use at 818 Waugoo Avenue to allow the property to be used as a sober living home. Mr. Slusarek presented the item. The subject site is located on the north side of Waugoo Avenue, east of Bowen Street. The subject parcel is 5,000 sq. ft. in size and is developed with an existing single family home. The site is surrounded by a mix of single-family and two-family uses as well as Trinity Lutheran Church to the north. According to the applicant, the home would have six residents as well as a live-in house manager. The applicant also notes that the sober living home is intended to provide a safe environment for individuals in early recovery to transition into society and all residents are voluntary participants in the program. The applicant is not proposing any changes to the site, other than minor upgrades to the existing home. According the applicant, the home has six bedrooms, with one of the bedrooms being large enough for a second bed, to accommodate the proposed seven residents. The property has a shared driveway that includes sufficient parking for three vehicles. A neighborhood meeting was held on December 16, 2021. However, no neighbors attended the meeting. Staff is in support of the CUP for an institutional residential use as the proposed use of the property should not have negative impacts on the surrounding area and is compatible with neighboring single and two-family uses and the indoor institutional use (church) immediately to the north. The proposed seven residents will be relatively consistent with several two-family uses on the block, which allow for up to six unrelated adults. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 5 January 18, 2022 Existing parking on site (three spaces) meets the institutional residential parking requirement of one space per three expected patrons. Mr. Perry opened up technical questions to staff. Mr. Mitchell asked if Planning receives information regarding the timeframe in which notices for a neighborhood meeting are sent out and if there is a minimum timeframe. There were no notations about the neighborhood meeting. Mr. Slusarek said they want the notices sent out one to two weeks prior to the meeting to give the neighbors a chance to contact staff or to contact the applicant if they have questions or if it needs to be rescheduled. Mr. Mitchell asked if that information could be included in case of an instance where they only gave a two day notice yet the report said that they had a public meeting and people didn’t attend. Mr. Lyons said that they are required to send staff a notice or they do not consider it a valid meeting. The notice is recommended to go out two weeks prior. If someone did do a one or two day notice, we would tell Plan Commission because staff would have the same concerns. Ms. Scheuermann said she was surprised there was a meeting and nobody showed. Besides the timeframe, she asked how far out is recommended to send notices. Would it be two blocks, two houses or what does the noticing look like. She doesn’t want to approve this and someone says they didn’t know this was going to a close proximity to their house. Mr. Slusarek said that they provide the applicant with a mailing list of all properties within 300 feet of the property and they send the notices to those neighbors. Mr. Lyons said that for comparison, the formal notices for Plan Commission is within 100 feet of the property. When they do they neighborhood meeting, it is 3 times as far. Mr. Perry asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. There were no public comments on this item. Mr. Perry 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 Scheuermann. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 6 January 18, 2022 Mr. Perry said he is struggling with the use of the facility in the area and surprised there is no comment from the applicant or any of the neighbors. He would like to know where the funding comes from, because certain funding strings require state licensing as part of the home and if that has been completed or not. Mr. Slusarek said he reached out to the applicant about licensing and state licensing is not required for a sober living home. Motion carried 7-0. V. COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO LIGHT DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR PROPERTY LOCATED EAST OF THE EASTERN END OF FARMINGTON AVENUE Site Inspections Report: Ms. Propp reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The applicant is requesting an amendment to the Recommended Land Use Map in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Nau presented the item. The subject area is designated for general commercial use; the applicant is requesting a change to a light density residential land use designation. The petitioner is requesting a comprehensive land use map amendment of a vacant 5.55 acre lot east of the eastern end of Farmington Avenue, generally located west of Jackson Street and south of West Snell Road. The petitioner is proposing to subdivide the lot via subdivision plat. The proposed subdivision will be a higher density single family subdivision with smaller lots typically not found in new residential subdivisions. The proposed use is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the proposed density is not permitted in the SR-5 district. The lot will require a comprehensive land use map amendment and zone change to allow the proposed development. The surrounding area consists of single family residential uses to the north and west, vacant land to the east, single family to the west and an automobile service facility to the south. Staff feels that the proposed map amendment will be compatible with surrounding land uses and will be consistent with development patterns in the surrounding area. It will also correct the conflict between the current General Commercial use designation and Single Family Residential-5 zoning designation. If approved, it is anticipated the petitioner will request a zone change from SR-5 to SR-9 to allow the higher residential density, and proceed with the platting process. There has also been an increase in demand for single-family development in the area as there are few nearby options. Mr. Perry opened up technical questions to staff. Mr. Mitchell asked if this at one point had been farmland and if so, when that would have ended. He wants to know if that is the case if it gets added to the log in the maintenance of loss of farmland. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 7 January 18, 2022 Mr. Lyons said that this has been vacant land for quite a while but we can try to see when it was farmland. Mr. Mitchell said there was another proposal for this general region and one of the things they had brought up was the absence of an immediate neighborhood park. Across Jackson there is the county park but has there been any progress related to a park space that would serve an increase density in this area. Mr. Lyons said he wasn’t sure but he would follow up with Ray Maurer from the Parks Department. Ms. Davey said her question was similar to Mr. Mitchell’s about the parkland or recreation area for the 28 houses. She likes the smaller cottage idea for that particular area. She is questioning the pond; is that because it’s a low lying area and needs to be a pond or is there another reason that it has to be a pond and couldn’t be turned into green space. Mr. Lyons said they do have storm water requirements to meet. Ms. Davey asked if it could be a 27 house space with a park space. Mr. Lyons said there are parkland requirements for either dedication of space or payment in lieu of that. Once we get down the line towards some of those steps, today is really just about the comp plan, whether we should change it from commercial to low density residential. There is a lot of issues that need to be worked through before we move forward. Mr. Nau said he looked through older aerial images and it looks like the area ceased farming between 1991 and 1994 and that is about the same timeframe the subdivision to the west began development. Ms. Propp asked if the smaller width of the lot with the smaller homes would require a change in the zoning code. Mr. Lyons said they would need to rezone to SR-9 to meet code. Mr. Nau said the minimum lot size in SR-9 is 40 feet wide, 4,500 square feet in area, and it does allow a smaller side yard setbacks, 5 feet versus 7 and a half feet. Mr. Perry said he would like to know if this project is subject to future planning of sidewalks, since the neighborhood does not have them. Mr. Lyons said city code would require sidewalks. That's something we'll have to work through with the applicant because a lot of that area to the North, and to the West developed prior to it, being in the city, which is why it does not have, so it may be worth discussing that, especially with __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 8 January 18, 2022 engineering accounts, whether it makes sense to install them at this time, or prefer that to a later date, but it is something that needs to be discussed as the process would move forward. Mr. Perry asked if the extension of the road would require urban gutter. Mr. Lyons said that is correct, it would have to meet city code for the roadway. Mr. Perry said as the road is proposed currently, it would dead end and there would not be a way to get through to the adjacent lot. Would there be a required roundabout or something similar. Mr. Nau said there will be a temporary cul-de-sac installed until the time if it does expand to further to the south and connect with Christian. That will come with a regular planning process to ensure that easement is secured. Mr. Lyons said they would likely be looking to update the official mapping. If this plat moves forward, we would amend this official mapping to match up with the new road layout to reserve that property for future residential development. Mr. Gierach said that Farmington and Christiansen from Anderson west already have sidewalks. It’s anticipated this development would move forward as public right of way and would have public sidewalks. Mr. Nau said there is sidewalk on the north side of Farmington currently. Mr. Gierach said its both north and south side of Farmington and Christiansen. Mr. Perry asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Mitch Nordhal, 8701 County Rd M, Larsen, WI, said the intent for this is to get a small community subdivision in this area. The biggest zoning difference even at SR-9 with the proposed 60 foot lots is there something within the zoning restrictions between SR-5 and SR-9 that allows a house to be 2 and a half feet closer to the lot lines. It helps with the density. Looking at the financial numbers of this project and without the urban density that we are looking at, the affordability factor that we are trying to meet for this project is not feasible without that zoning change. There were no public comments on this item. Mr. Perry closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing statements. There were no closing statements from the applicant. Motion by Propp to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 9 January 18, 2022 Seconded by Mitchell. Mr. Mitchell said this is a great idea. There is a need for some middle ground newer owner occupied housing units. The one thing they would like to see in a future meeting or included with the information provided is where they are in parks developments. With maybe 100-150 single family homes in this couple block radius here, with another 150-200 rental units that are currently in existence it ends up being a high consolidation of residential properties void of the park space that one might expect from a neighborhood that has been planned out. Without seeing that it’s hard to really know how many more people are going to be in an area serving families that don’t have access to any sort of recreational space and that would be valuable to see in the future. Ms. Propp said she agrees with Mr. Mitchell. South of the Logan Drive area, they have almost no park space or open area. Also commendation to the developer and the city for doing this. This is a good location with a smaller lot type of development and it has been pointed out that the city needs these smaller more affordable homes. Motion carried 7-0. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 4:49 pm. (Kiefer/Scheuermann) Respectfully Submitted, Mark Lyons Planning Services Manager