Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes__________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 1 April 19, 2022 PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES April 19, 2022 PRESENT: Margy Davey, Michael Ford, Ed Bowen, John Kiefer, Phil Marshall, Justin Mitchell, Thomas Perry, Kathleen Propp EXCUSED: Mamadou Coulibaly, Meredith Scheuermann STAFF: Mark Lyons, Planning Services Manager; Kelly Nieforth, Community Development Director; Justin Gierach, Engineering Division Manager / City Engineer; Brian Slusarek, Planner; Brandon Nielsen, 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 April 5, 2022 were approved as presented. (Davey/Propp) I. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONE CHANGE FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL - 5 DISTRICT (SR-5) TO URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT (UMU) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED 2854 FOND DU LAC ROAD Site Inspections Report: Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Bowen and Ms. Propp all reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The applicant requests a zone change from the existing Single Family Residential -5 District (SR-5) Urban Mixed Use District (UMU) for property located at 2854 Fond Du Lac 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 applicant is requesting this zone change to provide consistent zoning (UMU) with the property immediately to the north, Game Time Sports Bar (2836 Fond Du Lac Rd). The applicant has submitted preliminary plans for combination of the subject parcel with the property to the property to the north to allow for a parking lot addition for the sports bar. According to the applicant, the rezone and lot combination is needed to allow for additional parking spaces for bar staff and customers. Staff is supportive of the proposed rezone as it should serve to accommodate parking needs for the site. Specifically, there is no on-street parking available along Fond Du Lac Rd. and the additional parking stalls should provide the needed parking during peak times and prevent overflow parking on the nearby residential street (Gibson Ct.). The 2040 Comprehensive Land Use Plan has the property slated for light density residential. However, staff does not have concerns with proposed rezone to UMU as the Comprehensive Plan is not intended to parcel specific and the rezone is intended to allow for expansion of existing commercial use. A conditional use permit (CUP) will be required for the proposed parking lot addition as the total number of parking stalls will exceed the maximum allowed, based on the use of the building. Staff recommends approval with the findings and conditions as listed in the staff report. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 2 April 19, 2022 Mr. Perry opened up technical questions to staff. Mr. Bowen asked if the CUP would come back to Plan Commission. Mr. Lyons confirmed that it would. Mr. Mitchell asked if the Plan Commission would have authority to add or remove provisions. Mr. Lyons said that a rezone cannot be conditioned, any conditions would be a part of the CUP process. Mr. Perry asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Tom Castle, 4487 Plummers Point Rd, stated that this parking lot project is needed for safety. Currently staff and some customers park on Gibson Ct, so they have to walk along Fond du Lac Rd. It isn’t the safest option for them especially at night. They are trying to build a more conducive lot and business for their customers. There were no other 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 Propp. Mr. Perry asked if there was any discussion on the motion. Mr. Mitchell stated that the redevelopment of this is great and it’s a positive addition to the neighborhood. The surrounding neighborhoods have wonderful landscaping and they take pride in their yards. There is not any existing developments that are partitioned off by solid wood fencing except for that little quadrant of area and it detracts from the feel of south of town. There is precedent for there being wooded borders whether it be TJ’s Harbor, or industrial sites which are bordered by living fences. Hoping Mr. Castle will match the attractiveness of the bar with equally appealing landscaping. Motion carried 7-0. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 3 April 19, 2022 II. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONE CHANGE FROM SUBURBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT (SMU) TO SUBURBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT WITH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (SMU-PD) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON SOUTH SIDE OF W PACKER AVENUE – Laid over tentatively until 5/3 Plan Commission III. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A GROUP DEVELOPMENT AT 1775 MARICOPA DRIVE Site Inspections Report: Mr. Mitchell reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The applicant is requesting Conditional Use Permit approval for a group development at 1775 Maricopa Drive. Mr. Nielsen 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 approval of a conditional use permit to convert an existing pool/club house into a three bedroom apartment unit. The property would become a group development with the conversion of the clubhouse to an apartment building because it will then have three or more principal structures on the same lot, which code requires a Conditional Use Permit for. According to the applicant, the new apartment could house 1 to 3 tenants. The applicant notes that changes to the exterior would be minimal with only new residential style / egress windows being installed and matching wood siding where needed. To complete this conversion, the applicant is proposing the above noted exterior building changes, three additional parking spaces to the site, and the required interior reconstruction. According the applicant the apartment will have a full kitchen, living area, full bathroom with tub, and three bedrooms with closets. Additionally, this building will house a separate area for a community laundry room that will have a two hour fire rated wall between the two uses and its own private entrance. The proposed parking stall location can be seen on the site plan on page 3. As shown, evergreen trees will be planted on the west side of the new parking stalls to buffer them from the street and residential properties to the west. Staff is in support of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a group development at this property as it should not have negative impacts on the surrounding area and is compatible with neighboring properties, specifically the multi-family uses immediately to the north and south. The proposed additional residential unit will result in a density of 10.6 units per acre for the site, which is consistent with the 2040 comprehensive plan recommendation of medium and high density residential, and will be within the maximum density of 12 units per acre for the MR-12 zoning district. The proposed additional parking spaces would meet the parking requirement of 2 spaces per dwelling unit plus 0.5 space per additional bedroom over two bedrooms per unit. Staff recommends approval with the findings and conditions as listed in the staff report. Mr. Perry opened up technical questions to staff. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 4 April 19, 2022 Mr. Mitchell asked how long it has been since the pool was removed. Mr. Nielsen said it was sometime between 2020 and 2022. Mr. Mitchell said that sometimes in new developments for rentals there are green space requirements. He asked if this development preceded that in such that there wouldn’t have been any conditions that said in order to have that site be multi-family, they need to have recreational activities on site and now it seems they are getting rid of it. Mr. Lyons said that at the time of this development, it was not in the code. The way the current code reads, an addition of a third building would be a change of 25 sq. feet would have to be added since it’s based on per unit. The current green space they have is enough to cover that additional 25 sq. feet. Mr. Perry asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Ken Bowers, N4031 Liberty Lane, Freedom, WI, stated that the owner bought the property two years prior around the time his company Focus Property Management took over the property. At the time the building was vacant and not being used for anything. They will modernize the building to match the other buildings. The new apartment will be a three bedroom unit. Ms. Propp asked if they are expecting people who are related or not to live in this building. Mr. Bowers said they do get small families in the three bedroom units. Ms. Propp asked if because it’s a three bedroom unit that is why they have to have a group development. Mr. Lyons said it’s because there is now a third building that contains units. The code says that anytime you get to three primary structures it necessitates a need for a CUP for a group development. Ms. Propp asked if it was going to be subsidized housing or market rate. Mr. Bowers said market rate. Mr. Mitchell said there is a serious need in the city for handicap accessible housing. Single story units are a prime opportunity. He asked if this will be set up for someone to support those needs. Mr. Bowers said they have been working with McMahon and Associates but have not come up with a final layout yet. Mr. Mitchell said it would be great to hear what they did and how they were able to do it, or why they chose not to. It’s a major area that the city across the board could do much better. They could __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 5 April 19, 2022 provide an opportunity for them to learn what barriers the developers may come across to help meet the need. There were no other 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 Marshall. Mr. Perry asked if there was any discussion on the motion. Motion carried 7-0. IV. GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR A FENCE ADDITION AT 0 PLANEVIEW DRIVE Site Inspections Report: Ms. Propp reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The applicant requests approval of a General Development Plan and Specific Implementation Plan to allow a fencing addition at 0 Planeview Drive. Mr. Slusarek presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the land use and zoning classifications in this area. No changes are being proposed to the existing truck parking use. The current use is considered a freight terminal under the zoning ordinance, and is a legal nonconforming use as it is not permitted in the Suburban Mixed Use (SMU) district. The applicant has noted in the narrative that in the future they intend to add a building including a washout bay, maintenance shop, and offices to be used as the headquarters for Kela Transport. Plans have not been submitted for the future plans. The proposed fencing will extend 38’ on both the north and south sides of the entrance, with 10’ sections extending toward the road, and 48’ double sliding gate (24’ per gate section). The gate will be approximately 17’ from the front property line, with fencing sections extending toward the road to approximately 7’ from the front property line. Staff recommends approval with the findings and conditions as listed in the staff report. Mr. Perry opened up technical questions to staff. Ms. Davey asked if there is fencing around the other three sides of the property. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 6 April 19, 2022 Mr. Lyons said presently no there is not. They are looking to prevent access from the road into the site. Mr. Bowen asked if there are slats included in the chain link. Mr. Slusarek said it is entirely chain link. Mr. Perry said he noticed there is a key pad entry. He has a concern that the key pad entry will not allow a semi-truck enter without having to get out and block a portion of the road due to the length of the semis. Mr. Lyons said they will work with the applicant on how that would work. Mr. Perry asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Anes Kelecija, 0 Planeview Dr, said they are looking to secure the lot. There has been incidents where he has been doing maintenance on the trailer, and people will enter the lot. He is also concerned about securing their products. The cargo they transport is worth about $250,000. They hope to build a building there in the future that would include a truck wash, truck maintenance and offices for headquarters. Ms. Propp asked if Mr. Kelecija had an answer to the key pad concern. Mr. Kelecija said the original idea for a key pad was to be able to rent out spaces to other companies to have a secure entry. There is no issues getting rid of the key pad and giving drivers a clicker to open the gate so they would be able to open it before entering the lot. Ms. Davey asked how it is secured with only one side being fenced. Mr. Kelecija said the other three sides are not accessible by vehicle since there are bushes and other obstructions in the way. Ms. Davey asked if the only threat then would be by those with a vehicle. Mr. Kelacija said that because the pallets of product weight around 1000-2000 pounds, it would be impossible for someone to carry that on foot. There are plans for future fencing around those three sides once the lot is developed. Mr. Lyons said there are also ditches along the other sides to make it difficult for people to enter. Mr. Mitchell asked if they are going to remove any landscaping once the fence is installed. Mr. Kelecija said no, they are not removing any landscaping. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 7 April 19, 2022 There were no other 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 Ford to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report. Seconded by Davey. Mr. Perry asked if there was any discussion on the motion. Mr. Mitchell asked for clarification on the 30 landscaping points. Mr. Lyons said most of the shrubs in the ordinance are three to three and a half points for the six foot tall evergreen shrubs. They could do about ten shrubs or two trees. Mr. Mitchell asked if that was consistent with other developments along the frontage roads. Mr. Lyons said they looked at the linear footage of the fenced area that exceeds the four feet height and based that off of what the code would typically require. Motion carried 7-0. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 4:30 pm. (Davey/Propp) Respectfully Submitted, Mark Lyons Planning Services Manager