Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes__________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 1 March 15, 2022 PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES March 15, 2022 PRESENT: John Kiefer, Meredith Scheuermann, Margy Davey, Kathleen Propp, Thomas Perry, Phillip Marshall, Michael Ford, Ed Bowen EXCUSED: Mamadou Coulibaly, Justin Mitchell STAFF: Mark Lyons, Planning Services Manager; Justin Gierach, Engineering Division Manager / City Engineer; Brian Slusarek, Planner; Jeffrey Nau, Associate Planner Chairperson Perry called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. The minutes of February 15, 2022 were approved as presented. (Mitchell/Scheuermann) I. COMMERCIAL DESIGN STANDARDS VARIANCE FOR A BUILDING ADDITION WITH EXTERIOR MATERIALS NOT MATCHING THE EXISTING BUILDING AT 2251 OMRO ROAD Site Inspections Report: No commissioners reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The applicant is requesting approval of a variance from the City’s Commercial Design Standards to allow a building addition with exterior materials not matching or substantially similar to the design and materials of the existing building at 2251 Omro Rd. Mr. Slusarek presented the item. The applicant has proposed an 864 sq. ft. front (north) addition, facing Omro Road. As the addition will not exceed 50% of the floor area of the existing building, code requires the design and materials to match or be substantially similar to the existing building. As proposed, the addition will be primarily clad in Nichiha Fiber Cement Panels, with glazed CMU veneer along the base of the addition. The existing building is clad with wire cut masonry veneer with glazed veneer wainscot and accent banding. The applicant has noted that the existing wire cut masonry veneer cannot be matched because the current aggregate used in the process cannot be replicated to provide a seamless transition from the existing to the new portion of the façade. Because of this, the applicant decided to use a different material to create an additional element to the building and maintain the appearance and character of the original building. The application states that the proposed Nichiha Cement Panels were selected to create this new element while using a barrel vault structure from the existing drive-thru canopy and glazed masonry (CMU) wainscot from the existing façade to help unify the appearance. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 2 March 15, 2022 Staff evaluated the proposed plans and the impact on the design of building in regard to the purpose and intent of the commercial design standards. The standards relate to preserving the building’s architectural integrity and the potential impact on adjacent properties, and “curb appeal” of the block. In working with the applicant, staff considered:  Existing exterior materials and the appearance  Location of the site and character of the surrounding properties  Zoning and uses of the property and surrounding context Staff is of the opinion that the proposed exterior materials (Nichiha fiber cement with CMU veneer base) will not have a detrimental impact on the appearance of the building as the materials will be complementary to the existing building. Also, as the applicant has noted, matching the existing wire cut brick veneer is not feasible and alternative materials will provide a better overall building appearance. Staff recommends approval with the findings and conditions as listed in the staff report. Mr. Perry opened up technical questions to staff. Mr. Kiefer asked if the blue ribbon around the old and new buildings is the same. Mr. Slusarek said it will match in color. There were no public comments on this item. Mr. Perry closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing statements. Dean Schulz, Excel Engineering Inc, 100 Camelot Dr, Fond du Lac, stated that the intent is to have a high quality presentation. What is being presented should be an asset to the community. The base itself will be a glazed block which will match exactly to the existing. The trim around the building will match. Motion by Kiefer to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report. Seconded by Scheuermann. Motion carried 8-0. PLANNING DIRECTOR’S REPORT Mr. Lyons said he is looking for feedback from the Plan Commission. In the past when there are zoning code updates, they are brought them to Plan Commission as an agenda item. Currently, staff is in the process of preparing the next section. Would Plan Commission prefer doing a workshop to go through all the proposed updates a little more thoroughly before __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 3 March 15, 2022 bringing them as an actionable item, or is Plan Commission comfortable with staff providing the red line document going directly to agenda item and talking about it at that time. Ms. Davey asked if they were to workshop beforehand, would there be any changes that could be made. Mr. Lyons said yes. Ms. Davey said she would prefer a workshop. Ms. Propp said that if it’s straightforward she wouldn’t need a workshop but if there are grey areas she would like a workshop. Mr. Lyons said there is a mixture of some quick legal cleanup items, and then there are more contextual changes as the code evolves that may benefit discussion. Ms. Scheuermann asked how often does this happen. Mr. Lyons said once or twice a year we try to process code changes and it depends on what we have and what is imminent. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 4:11 pm. (Kiefer/Propp) Respectfully Submitted, Mark Lyons Planning Services Manager