Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes__________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 1 July 5, 2022 PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES July 5, 2022 PRESENT: Margy Davey, Michael Ford, Justin Mitchell, Thomas Perry, Kathleen Propp, John Kiefer EXCUSED: Phil Marshall, Meredith Scheuermann, Ed Bowen, Mamadou Coulibaly STAFF: Mark Lyons, Planning Services Manager; Kelly Nieforth, Community Development Director; Emily Tardiff, Grant Coordinator; Brian Slusarek, Planner; Jeff Nau, Associate Planner; Brandon Nielsen, Assistant Planner Chairperson Perry called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. The minutes of June 7, 2022 were approved as presented. (Davey/Kiefer) I. ACCEPT SIDEWALK AND ELECTRIC EASEMENT AT THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF HIGH AVENUE & VINE AVENUE (1020 VINE AVENUE), ACCEPT SIDEWALK AND ELECTRIC EASEMENT AT THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF HIGH AVENUE & VINE AVENUE (1010 WOODLAND AVENUE), ACCEPT SIDEWALK AND ELECTRIC EASEMENT AT THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF ALGOMA BOULEVARD & WISCONSIN STREET (625 ALGOMA BOULEVARD), ACCEPT A POND MAINTENANCE EASEMENT, 20-FOOT STORM SEWER EASEMENT AND 20-FOOT STORM SEWER & DRAINAGE EASEMENT AT 3855 S. WASHBURN STREET (CAMPING WORLD), ACCEPT A 50’ DRAINAGE EASEMENT AT THE WEST 3700 BLOCK OF S. WASHBURN STREET, STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATIONS FOR THE WIDENING AND EASTERLY EXTENSION OF E. 9TH AVENUE AND THE WIDENING OF S. MAIN STREET Site Inspections Report: No Commissioners reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The City of Oshkosh is requesting approval of three sidewalk easements, three electric easements, one pond maintenance easement, one drainage easement and one right-of-way dedication. Mr. Nau presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the land use and zoning classifications in this area. 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 2 July 5, 2022 Mr. Perry asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Mr. Perry closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing statements. There were no other public comments on this item. There were no closing statements from the applicant. Chairman Perry called for a voice vote. Motion carried 6-0. II. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A RESTAURANT LAND USE AT 1675 OREGON 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 approval for a restaurant land use at 1675 Oregon Street. 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 petitioner is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to establish a coffee shop within remaining lower level unit. The unit was previously occupied by a barber shop. According to the applicant, the current art studio and gallery business will continue to hold art classes in the mornings and afternoons, while the coffee shop will only be open from 7:00 am to 11:00 am. Initially the coffee shop will be solely operated by the owner/applicant. The existing land use and proposed use are compatible with each other and the surrounding land uses. The parking area on the lot has 10 stalls that can be used for customer parking. There is also street parking available on Oregon St. and W 17th Ave. Staff recommends approval with the findings and conditions as listed in the staff report. 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. Nilla (Dee) Oehlke, 500 S. Madison, Waupun said she is taking over the art studio portion of the building for a recently passed friend. The coffee shop is a way to service the area and incoming visitors to the neighborhood. She stated she has a background in consumer science and food, so a coffee shop was the most logical direction. She is looking forward to being in the Oshkosh area and contributing to the community. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 3 July 5, 2022 Tom Brown, 111 E Ripple Ave, says he is the fiancé of the recently passed Barb Schneider. Her dream was have the building as an art studio and gallery. The area of the coffee shop was a classroom for the students. He knows Dee well and knows she will do a great job. He hopes that the commission will approve this. Mr. Perry closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing statements. Ms. Oehlke said she agrees with Mr. Brown that it would’ve been Barb’s wishes to bring the neighborhood together with the art studio and coffee shop. She would appreciate the support on this project. Motion by Propp 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. Motion carried 6-0. III. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OUTDOOR COMMERCIAL ENTERTAINMENT AT 309 & 313 WASHINGTON AVE Site Inspections Report: Ms. Propp, Ms. Davey and Mr. Perry all reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The applicant is requesting Conditional Use Permit approval for Outdoor Commercial Entertainment at 309 and 313 Washington 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 applicant is proposing to combine the subject vacant lots with the Howard site through a CSM to allow for open green space for outdoor events held by the Howard. This is considered outdoor commercial entertainment under the zoning ordinance, which requires a Conditional Use Permit in the UMU district. The proposed outdoor entertainment area meets setback requirements for nonresidential uses in the UMU zoning district for principal structures and accessory structures, which is 0’ from front/side property line and 5’ from rear property line. The proposed area also meets the requirement that outdoor entertainment activity area not being located closer than 50 feet to a residentially-zoned property. The property will remain under the maximum impervious surface area of 85%. Code requires one parking space for every three persons at maximum capacity of the establishment for outdoor commercial entertainment uses. However, the property is exempt from __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 4 July 5, 2022 parking requirements as it is located with the Parking Requirement Exemption Overlay. The Howard has two existing parking areas with a total of 147 stalls, which will meet the parking needs for the site. According to the provided site plan, the area will be enclosed by a combination of 8’ cedar privacy fence and 8’ wrought iron fence and will also include a 16’ X 16’ wood gazebo within the enclosed area. The applicant anticipates a maximum of 250 guests for wedding ceremonies and cocktail receptions, with outdoor events ending before dark in most occasions. Staff recommends approval with the findings and conditions as listed in the staff report. Mr. Perry opened up technical questions to staff. Ms. Propp asked if an eight foot fence is higher than is normally allowed and where along the property line would the eight food cedar fence be. Mr. Lyons replied that the Urban Mixed Using zoning does allow the eight foot fence. The cedar portion is along the west property line. The applicant has been working with the two property lines to actually straighten it out. They are going through a certified survey map process to modify the property line to everyone’s benefit. Mr. Kiefer asked what type of neighbors are there. Mr. Lyons said they are rental properties. Mr. Perry asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Carol Velasco, 405 Washington St, said the Victorian property is on the corner is going to be a residential and the property on Broad St is going to be an Airbnb. The plan for this project is to utilize the space in the neighborhood and it make it cohesive with the Howard. It will complement the neighborhood. Currently there is not a venue to have outdoor space with the capacity of indoor space that the Howard has. There are three crabapple trees out front, six on the west side and five on the south side and four on the east side. They would be sodding as well. Mr. Perry closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing statements. There were no other public comments on this item. 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 Davey. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 5 July 5, 2022 Mr. Perry asked if there was any discussion on the motion. Ms. Davey asked if this is in addition to whatever is going on inside; 250 people inside and 250 people outside. Ms. Velasco said that the capacity of the venue is 250 total. They would expect a crowd that wanders between indoor and outdoor space. Motion carried 6-0. IV. PUBLIC HEARING: REVIEW 2022 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM Mr. Perry recused himself from this item. Staff report accepted as part of the record. Staff is requesting the Plan Commission to review and accept proposed projects/activities designed to meet one of the national objectives (listed below) of the CDBG program, and recommend Council authorize submittal of the 2022 CDBG Action Plan. - Benefit to low- and moderate-income (LMI) persons - Aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight, and - Meet a need having a particular urgency (i.e. flooding, tornado, etc.) The City prepares and submits an Annual Action Plan to the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to demonstrate how federal CDBG funds will be spent. The 2022 Program Year began May 1, 2022 and ends April 30, 2023. The 2022 allocation is estimated to be $812,322. As proposed, over 70% of the CDBG 2022 allocation (less planning and administration activities) will benefit low to moderate income (LMI) persons during the program year. Staff recommends approval with the findings and conditions as listed in the staff report. Mr. Mitchell opened up technical questions to staff. Mr. Mitchell asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Mr. Mitchell closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing statements. There were no other public comments on this item. 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 6 July 5, 2022 Seconded by Davey. Mr. Mitchell asked if there was any discussion on the motion. Mr. Mitchell said the staff report talks about evaluation and ongoing monitoring being an important part and asked for clarification on what that would look like. Mr. Lyons said there is the annual auditing that is done with HUD on the objectives and goals as well as the IDS reporting that staff does on the goals of the plan. Later this year there will be a CAPER annual performance report as measured against the goals and objectives are. Mr. Mitchell asked if all of the reviews and monitoring are done internally. Mr. Lyons said that is correct. HUD does not have specific requirements, but it is something they can consider doing externally if it’s deemed necessary. HUD puts the monitoring on the internal audits that are done and the CAPERs that are done. Mr. Mitchell asked if in six months a Plan Commission member had questions or would like a status update, does it not occur elsewhere. Mr. Lyons said it’s done through the CAPER process. They could do an overview meeting. Mr. Mitchell said on page 12 of the draft it talks about neighborhood outreach and asked what that would look like. Ms. Nieforth said they continue to work with the neighborhood associations. There are currently 21 neighborhood associations and they have alliance meetings that staff attend. They are looking at different opportunities to use CDBG funds and to see if there are any initiatives in the associations that make sense to include in next year’s goals and to see what the needs are. Mr. Mitchell asked if the neighborhoods were consulted in the drafting of this action plan. Ms. Nieforth said they did reach out with GO-HNI and other different organizations where they are looking to allocate funding. A survey was sent out and a public hearing was previously held. Mr. Mitchell said the draft notes all the neighborhood associations were engaged but maybe his association didn’t reach out to members. Ms. Nieforth said that they also work with the alliance group and there are representatives from different associations there. Mr. Mitchell said the housing authority meets periodically now and not monthly. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 7 July 5, 2022 Mr. Mitchell asked if an evaluation or scoring system is used when public service grant applications are submitted. Ms. Tardiff said there is no point system, its discussion based. Mr. Mitchell asked what happens to the applicants who are not supported. Ms. Tardiff said that there’s funding that supplemented. Usually no request goes un-granted entirely, but letters are sent out regardless. Ms. Nieforth said that’s a reason why the Community Foundation is involved because they look to connect them with private funds that may be able to help an organization. Motion carried 5-0. V. SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENT FOR REFUSE ENCLOSURE AT 240 W 9th AVENUE Site Inspections Report: Ms. Propp and Mr. Perry reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The petitioner requests approval of a Specific Implementation Plan (SIP) amendment to allow for relocation of a refuse enclosure. 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 only proposed change to the site is relocation of the dumpster enclosure from the approved location within an alcove at the northwest corner of the church building to the parking lot west of the building. The applicant is requesting Base Standard Modifications (BSM) for placement of the dumpster enclosure within 2’ setback from the side property line, where code requires a 7.5’ setback and closer to the street (Minnesota St.) than the principal structure, where code prohibits exterior trash storage or dumpsters from being located between a building and a public street. Staff is supportive of a setback reduction along the side property line, however staff is recommending a minimum 5’ setback to allow for installation of landscaping to buffer the refuse enclosure from the neighboring property. Staff is also supportive of a BSM for placement of the enclosure closer to the street (Minnesota St.) than the principal building as the site contains minimal areas that would meet the code requirement. The applicant has noted that the originally approved location within the alcove at the northwest corner of the building would result in nuisances related to the enclosure (odors, bees, etc.) near the building entrance. Staff recommends approval with the findings and conditions as listed in the staff report. Mr. Perry opened up technical questions to staff. Council Member Ford asked if they have seen the materials for the enclosure. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 8 July 5, 2022 Mr. Lyons said they have seen examples but not have not seen an in-person structure. It’s a tricky situation because the stone is great but understanding it’s not financially feasible for a nonprofit to do a full stone enclosure. This is a decent compromise and adding landscaping will soften it. Mr. Perry asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. There was no statement from the applicant. Mr. Perry closed public comments. 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 Kiefer. Mr. Perry asked if there was any discussion on the motion. Motion carried 6-0. VI. SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AT PROPERTIES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF SOUTH MAIN STREET Site Inspections Report: Ms. Davey, Ms. Propp and Mr. Mitchell all reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The applicant requests approval of Specific Implementation Plan for a mixed use development for properties generally located on the east side of S. Main St., along E 7th Ave, E 8th Ave, E 9th Ave, and Pioneer 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. The proposed use of the site was approved with the General Development Plan (3/22/22). The development will include three 5-story buildings and a private clubhouse. The two buildings with frontage along S. Main St. (Buildings A1, A2) will be mixed use buildings with first floor commercial space and multi-family units above. The eastern building (A3), with frontage along E 9th Ave., will be a multi-family building with potential for future commercial space. Commercial space shown on the plan includes ground floor retail space along S. Main St. as well as a two-story waterfront restaurant at the northeast corner of the site. Other amenities include a small outdoor amphitheater, potential skating rink, walking paths, pool, pickle ball court, and public dog park across E 9th Ave. The proposed site will have access from the end of E. 7th Avenue, S. Main St. (vacated E. 8th Ave.), and E. 9th Avenue. All three buildings will have both underground and surface parking. Below is a breakdown of the residential units, __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 9 July 5, 2022 commercial space, and parking, which includes 4 additional residential units, 575 sq. ft. of commercial area, and 45 parking spaces (includes 36 new on-street parking spaces to be created with additional right-of-way) as compared to the approved GDP. Staff recommends approval with the findings and conditions as listed in the staff report. Mr. Perry opened up technical questions to staff. Ms. Propp asked if staff has had a conversation about the email from Jim Larson regarding the parking lots. Mr. Lyons said given the nature of the parking lot this is a situation where it’s RMU versus CMU. A CMU zoned property on north Main would be able to go much closer to the property line. Mr. Larson had mentioned a 20 foot setback, but that does not exist within any of the zoning codes for adjacent parking lots. They have some concerns with individuals parking in their lot, but we can work with Mr. Larson on some additional signage to help differentiate the Mill on Main lot versus their private lot. The setback isn’t necessary in this case especially when it’s parking lot to parking lot. Ms. Propp said there was also some concerns about snow removal. Mr. Lyons said there is sufficient space on the north and east sides plus they could remove snow off site like they do with city lots. They will have to make sure they keep snow off neighboring properties as it is a requirement for all. Council Member Ford asked if there has been any discussion on revisiting the ordinances regarding roof signage. Mr. Lyons said at this point it’s not necessarily appropriate to do so. If Council wanted the Plan Commission to review it they could. This specific roof sign is unique and their incorporation of the Sawdust District is a huge factor in why this roof sign is not like others. When Caribou presented their roof sign it was technically a roof sign because it sat on the mansard roof but it did not extend past the peak of the roof line. This sign is the traditionally definition of what a roof sign is. Staff would not typically support this but given the unique nature and the incorporation of the Sawdust District which not only brings attention to the building but to the area as a whole. This roof sign can benefit the broad area and not just the development. Mr. Mitchell asked if the dog park is a generalized idea or if that’s actually planned. Mr. Lyons said the applicant intends to construct the dog park which is just over an acre in size. Mr. Mitchell asked if the dog park is private for the residents. Mr. Lyons said at this time they would like to keep it public. Ms. Davey asked why the code prohibits roof signs. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 10 July 5, 2022 Mr. Lyons said it’s an aesthetic choice. The community decided they did not like the appearance of roof signs. Ms. Davey said the image of the dog park looks like a tennis court. She asked what the base of the dog park is going to be. Mr. Lyons said it’s all grass except for the vestibule area. Ms. Davey asked what the purpose of the vestibule is. Mr. Lyons said it’s to help with tracking and prevent dogs from escaping. Mr. Perry asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Jake Bunz, 1818 Parmenter St, Middleton, said they are excited to bring the community into their site. Ms. Propp said she’s glad the dog park is an acre but she thinks that opening up the dog park to the public will make it so there will be too many dogs and it won’t be able to be controlled. Mr. Bunz said the dog park is intended for the public to use in addition to the 22000 sq. feet of building they will be adding. The residents have an uptick of dog ownership and it’s a great feature for them. Ms. Propp asked how many of the residents have dogs. Mr. Bunz said it used to be 15-20% and now it’s closer to 30-35%. Ms. Propp asked if the dog park is a way to keep dogs and their owners away from the railroad tracks. Mr. Bunz said the dog park is fenced and that should help. In their other properties they haven’t had any issues with dogs or residents with the railroad tracks but it’s something they can keep an eye on. Mr. Lyons said to the applicant that they will need to confirm what the balcony dimensions are and if they extend into the right-of-way. If they do, they would need an encroachment agreement. Mr. Kiefer asked to see where the dog park is. Mr. Slusarek said it’s across from the parking lot. Ms. Propp asked where the bike parking is located. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 11 July 5, 2022 Mr. Bunz said there is a lot of bike parking in the garages. There is also bike parking in the plazas on the interior of the sites and near the clubhouse. Cindy Kuettner, 600 S. Main, co-owns the building with Mr. Larson. They had some comments regarding the northwest parking lot. It butts against their private parking lot. There are 18-20 parking spots there for a 3000 sq. foot restaurant so they are concerned about overflow parking into their private lot. She says it would be an issue if they had to move their snow to a different area and the cost might not be good for them. Since the riverwalk has been put in, the fishermen did use that area for parking now are using their lot for parking. Mr. Lyons said that per code a 3000 sq. foot restaurant by code only requires 10 parking spots so 18 parking spots should be sufficient. For the fishermen parking, the very southeast corner of the lot is an increased trailhead parking for the public. Mr. Perry closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing statements. There were no other public comments on this item. 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. Mr. Perry asked if there was any discussion on the motion. Ms. Propp asked if it was a public parking lot on the southeast corner. Mr. Lyons said that it will be a split public and private parking. Ms. Propp said the co-owners of the 600 S Main St have a good point. Mr. Lyons said that early on in the project they noticed that there was going to be a need of additional public parking. Mr. Mitchell said he’s glad that the dog park space will be public. He then said that the city’s encourages native plantings whenever possible and there is an active group in the community that does native plantings. They could be a good resource to help with native plantings. Motion carried 6-0. VII. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONE CHANGE FROM SUBURBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT (SMU) TO SUBURBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT WITH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 12 July 5, 2022 OVERLAY (SMU-PD) FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 350-600 SOUTH KOELLER STREET Site Inspections Report: Mr. Mitchell, Ms. Propp and Mr. Perry all reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The Community Development Department requests approval of a zone change from Suburban Mixed Use District (SMU) to Suburban Mixed Use District with a Planned Development Overlay (SMU-PD) for properties located at 350-600 S. Koeller St. 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 City is requesting an area wide zone change of the 5 subject parcels from SMU to SMU-PD to accommodate future improvements to the area. The request is also intended to provide consistent zoning with the recently approved Panda Express site (580 S. Koeller St.) with the strip mall to the north to accommodate access to the Panda Express site as a common development. Staff recommends approval with the findings and conditions as listed in the staff report. 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. Mr. Perry closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing statements. There were no other public comments on this item. 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 Davey. Mr. Perry asked if there was any discussion on the motion. Motion carried 6-0. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 5:17 pm. (Davey/Propp) Respectfully Submitted, Mark Lyons Planning Services Manager