Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes__________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 1 July 19, 2022 PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES July 19, 2022 PRESENT: Margy Davey, Michael Ford, Justin Mitchell, Thomas Perry, Kathleen Propp, John Kiefer, Mamadou Coulibaly, Phil Marshall, Meredith Scheuermann, EXCUSED: Ed Bowen STAFF: Mark Lyons, Planning Services Manager; Kelly Nieforth, Community Development Director; Justin Gierach, Engineering Division Manager; Ray Maurer, Director of Parks; 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 July 5, 2022 were approved as presented. (Kiefer/Mitchell) I. GRANT ELECTRIC EASEMENT AT 1600 OSHKOSH AVENUE (LAKESHORE PARK) TO WISCONSIN PUBLIC SERVICE CORPORATION, GRANT ELECTRIC EASEMENT AT 520 SIEWERT TRAIL (MENOMINEE PARK) TO WISCONSIN PUBLIC SERVICE CORPORATION, GRANT ELECTRIC EASEMENT FOR EMERGENCY SIREN AT 1600 OSHKOSH AVENUE (LAKESHORE PARK) TO WISCONSIN PUBLIC SERVICE CORPORATION 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 electric easements. 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. 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. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 2 July 19, 2022 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. Motion carried 9-0. II. RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR A DECK ON THE FRONT FAÇADE AT 238 W 19TH AVENUE Site Inspections Report: Ms. Scheuermann reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The applicant is requesting approval of a variance from the City’s Residential Design Standards to allow for a deck on the front façade at 238 W 19th Avenue. 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 subject property is a residential lot located at 238 W 19th Avenue and is approximately 6,840 square feet in area. The property is a corner lot with 19th Avenue running along the south and Arizona Street to the east. The property contains a 1,355 square foot 1.5 story single-family residential structure that was built in 1890 according to the City of Oshkosh Assessor website. The home, detached garage, and driveway are positioned in such a way that this property essentially does not have a rear or interior side yard. The surrounding area consists of single-family uses with varying character and similar scale. The subject property and surrounding properties are zoned Single-family Residential-9 (SR-9). The applicant is proposing to construct a 12’ x 10’ deck with a new patio door on the façade of the home that faces Arizona Street. Complete work proposed includes a new patio door, deck, and necessary steps for ingress and egress. Applicable ordinance prohibits decks on street facing facades, therefore, Plan Commission review and a design standards variance are necessary for this project. Staff recommends approval with the findings and conditions as listed in the staff report. Mr. Perry opened up technical questions to staff. Mr. Mitchell asked if there are added on costs for a variance request. Mr. Lyons stated there are. Mr. Mitchell asked how many staff hours it takes to get to a variance request up to this point. Mr. Lyons said this variance request is straight forward which makes it easier. Total staff time is roughly 3-4 hours with the requirements and neighborhood notices. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 3 July 19, 2022 Mr. Perry asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Ann Stephenson, 238 W 19th Ave and William Stephenson, 1084 Home Ave, Menasha, said they were available for questions. Mr. Perry closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing statements. Motion by Propp to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report. Seconded by Coulibaly. Mr. Perry asked if there was any discussion on the motion. Mr. Mitchell recommended a proposal that allows staff to make administrative decisions based on reasonable perimeter and won’t need to go through this process and endure extra costs. Mr. Lyons said this is the second one they have done since 2017 code was adopted. There were other requests for this variance but they had room to accommodate it. There are at least two instances were there was just no room to accommodate it. Motion carried 9-0. III. LAND DISPOSITION OF VACANT PROPERTY, SOUTH OF 2100 BLOCK W 9TH AVENUE Site Inspections Report: No commissioners reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. Land disposition of approximate 9,800 square foot of a parcel of vacant land immediately south of 2125 W 9th 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 subject property is a vacant approximately 1.99 acre parcel, currently part of City-owned storm water easement area. The storm water easement/pond is surrounded by single family residential and commercial uses to the north, commercial uses to the east, and multi-family residential uses to the south and west. 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 July 19, 2022 Ms. Propp asked if this was being sold to Bozeman Capital Group and what lots it would be combined with. Mr. Lyons said that the potential developer is looking at acquiring all the remaining homes for a development site and this would be combined with those. It would be purchased from the city. Mr. Perry asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Peter Lang; The Morgan Partners, 601 Oregon St, said they currently have the three residential properties adjacent to this under contract. The plan is to combine them into a single commercial parcel. This would allow them to square off the parcel with the neighboring parcels. They do not have specific users in mind, but are marketing to commercial. They plan to go through a rezoning application when these are combined into a single parcel. 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. Mr. Lang asked for confirmation that they wouldn’t be eligible to purchase this parcel until they closed on the neighboring parcels. Mr. Lyons said that they are still working on the final terms on what the purchase agreement would look like but it will probably include something similar to that. Motion by Propp 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 9-0. IV. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONE CHANGE FROM SUBURBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT (SMU) TO SUBURBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT WITH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (SMU-PD) FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED WEST OF S WASHBURN STREET Site Inspections Report: No Commissioners 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) for two properties located on the west side of S Washburn St. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 5 July 19, 2022 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 both subject properties. This request is intended to provide consistent zoning with the Aquire Restoration contractor property (2625 S Washburn St.), which has frontage along S. Washburn Street. The applicant intends to expand the existing contractor site to include storage buildings to the west of the existing building and parking lot, which will be addressed under the following item. As planned, the site expansion will include additional storm water detention area extending into the subject vacant property to the west of the contractor site. The subject vacant lot will need to have consistent (SMU-PD) zoning with the contractor site to allow for the detention pond extending over the property line. Staff is supportive of the proposed rezone as it will assist proposed expansion of the contractor site. The proposed zoning (SMU-PD) will also be consistent with the neighboring sites to the south and east (Aquire Restoration and Outlet Mall). Also, the Planned Development Overlay will serve to accommodate future development of the subject sites as base standard modification(s) will likely be require due to the sites not having street frontage. 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. Jeff Edmunds, 2625 S Washburn St, said they purchased the parcel in question in 2019 prior to purchasing the property located at 2625 S Washburn St. They went through the rezone and planned overlay process in 2019 for them to occupy main building. At that point, they did convey the intention to build storage units however it wasn’t documented. The only reason the retention pond needs to cross the lot line is because there is a ditch. The water travels down the back of the property into the ditch. Future development includes more storage units but no one can see them from the road. 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 Coulibaly 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. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 6 July 19, 2022 Motion carried 9-0. V. SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENT FOR STORAGE BUILDINGS LOCATED AT 2625 S WASHBURN STREET Site Inspections Report: No Commissioners reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The petitioner requests an amendment to the Specific Implementation Plan approval for an addition of three storage buildings at 2625 S Washburn Street. 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 construct three storage buildings to the rear of the existing building and parking lot. According to the applicant, a portion of the units will be utilized for general storage by the applicant (Aquire Restoration) and the remainder of the units will be leased out for personal storage use by the general public. A base standard modification (BSM) is required for the site expansion as personal storage facility is not a permitted use in the Suburban Mixed Use District (SMU). The proposal was discussed at a Plan Commission workshop on February 1, 2022, with Plan Commission voicing support for the proposal and recommending the storage buildings match the main building in appearance and landscaping be planted in front of the buildings. Staff is supportive of a BSM to allow the storage buildings as they will be located to the rear of the site, with little visibility from the public right-of-way. Also, the storage buildings should not negatively affect neighboring properties as the area is adjacent to existing storage areas on the properties to the north and the rear undeveloped area of the Outlet Mall site to the south. Staff recommends approval with the findings and conditions as listed in the staff report. Mr. Perry opened up technical questions to staff. Mr. Mitchell asked to see a plan of the development that includes the full lot and asked about the lot’s impervious surface ratio. Mr. Slusarek said they are still under the 70% allowed for this lot. Mr. Mitchell asked if they are permitted to park and drive vehicles on the lawn. Mr. Lyons said it would not change the regulations for parking on grass. If this was an industrial zoned site that was being used for storage, industrial does not require curbing. In this instance it’s a bit of a difference between the fact that we have a commercial district and an industrial land use they do conflict a bit in that sense. If it was a traditional heavy industrial zoned property they would’ve been exempt anyways. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 7 July 19, 2022 Mr. Perry asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Mr. Edmunds conveyed that this is a secondary use of the property. The primary use is Aquire Restoration located on the street side. No one will be able to see the storage units from the road and they will make sure they look as nice as the main building does. Long term goals include acquiring the driveway next to Aquire Restorations and to build more storage units on the rear lot of this parcel. 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 Coulibaly. Mr. Perry asked if there was any discussion on the motion. Mr. Perry said even though he’s not a big fan of storage facilities and buildings, this property poses to be one of the most perfect places for the storage to be. The applicant has gone out of their way to hide and beautify the area so I think it’s an appropriate use for the property. Motion carried 9-0. VI. PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE CREATION OF AN 18-LOT (PLUS 2 OUTLOTS) SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION AT EAST END OF FARMINGTON AVENUE (FARMINGTON COTTAGES) Site Inspections Report: No Commissioners reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The applicant is requesting approval of a preliminary plat containing 18 single-family lots, 2 outlots, parkland dedication and street dedications identified as Farmington Cottages. Mr. Nau presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the land use and zoning classifications in this area. The Farmington Cottages preliminary plat utilizes the entire site’s 5.51 acres by subdividing the land into 18 single family lots and two outlots. Access to the lots will be provided by street right-of-way dedications with the extension of Farmington Avenue from the west to east. The street will then curve to the south with the proposed name, Pasture Way. Pasture Way will dead-end with a temporary cul-de-sac easement. By future phase or new subdivision, it is envisioned Pasture Way will continue south, curve to the west, eventually __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 8 July 19, 2022 connecting to Christian Drive. One lot (Lot 18) is disconnected from the new right-of-way and will front on Olson Avenue. The proposed street layout does not exactly match the 2014 official mapping action. The City, as this development progresses, will delete the current official mapping and re-officially map an extension of Pasture Way to connect with Christian Drive. This will ensure a future looped roadway can still be made. This is the first new residential subdivision plat in the City located in an SR-9 Zone District. The SR-9 District allows for smaller lot sizes and reduced principal structure setbacks as compared to plats located in more traditional SR-5 and SR-3 Districts (see Table 1). This allows for higher unit densities and smaller house sizes which, in theory, will reduce the cost of new home construction. Smaller lot sizes are reflected on the plat, with eight of the 18 lots having narrower widths and/or areas than what would have been permitted prior to the 2017 Zoning Ordinance rewrite. The shape of the parent lot does result in the creation of much deeper lots than what would be expected in a new SR-9 development. Staff recommends approval with the findings and conditions as listed in the staff report. Mr. Lyons added that this is a culmination of a lot of work with planning, parks and the developer to come up with an equitable solution of how sufficient parkland can be achieved in this area and still make a viable product for the developer. The solution that was worked out and taken to the Parks Board in June is that the developer is going to dedicate a portion of the property or what is shown in outlot 2. It may change slightly from what is shown in the staff report but roughly about 10-13,000 sq. feet will be dedicated. The city with the prior in-lieu of fee is going to purchase outlot 1 to achieve a slightly larger area with a total of about 20,000 sq. feet of parkland area which exceeds what is required by dedication. Staff worked with the developer to choose this southwest location with the anticipation that as the property to the south develops, they would potentially do a similar project with the parkland for that project flipped on the south side of these lots, getting about an acre park in this area. Mr. Perry opened up technical questions to staff. Ms. Propp said she was going to ask about the choice of outlots for dedication but wanted confirmation that eventually it will be both lots. Mr. Lyons said that is correct, outlot one will be purchased instead of dedicated. Council Member Ford asked if the school district didn’t respond at all. Mr. Nau said they have not responded and it’s typical with preliminary plats. They get involved during final plats. Ms. Scheuermann asked if the parkland would just be greenspace and not necessarily play areas. Mr. Lyons said what the park looks like will be determined in the future. Right now it’s just getting the land under city control and as money is available they will work on the actual park plan. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 9 July 19, 2022 Ms. Scheuermann asked is there timing or an expectation on what the park has to be done. Mr. Lyons said there is not because a lot of it comes down to funding. Ms. Scheuermann asked if there are instances where there is dedicated land that has not been developed into a typical park. Mr. Lyons said that there is undeveloped parkland that has been dedicated. Ms. Davey asked how the in-lieu of fee works in this project due to under dedication and if the city will buy the lot next door. Mr. Lyons said that is correct. They will be paying a fee in-lieu of what they are short in the dedication. Then there will have been a rough negotiation price of what the city will purchase the lot for. The other funding will come from other developers who had paid in-lieu of fees from different projects. Mr. Nau said they are around half of what is required for parkland dedication for a plat this size, which is 19,800 sq. feet. The fee the city will collect is roughly $3,600. Mr. Mitchell asked if there are sidewalks. Mr. Nau said sidewalks will be a requirement. Mr. Mitchell asked if it is known when it stopped being used for farmland. Mr. Nau said it doesn’t look like it’s been farmed for a long time. Mr. Mitchell asked if this includes the lot to the south. Mr. Nau said that is correct. Mr. Perry asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Tara Notzke, 600 Farmington Ave, said this is the third proposal she’s been to and this is the best one yet, so she is fully in support. 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. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 10 July 19, 2022 Motion by Coulibaly 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. Mr. Kiefer said that in the CIP there are many plans for many years in many parks that are being developed and many things have been developed and redone over the years so to have new developers with undeveloped parks isn’t unusual and it just takes a matter of time before those are carried forward. Mr. Mitchell said there is a multi-family development to the south; is there a park in proximity to that or at least access to this space with ease. Mr. Lyons said right now there is not an access way up there. The corp plan identified an area even farther north as the proposed location as for a large community park. It was determined that there was something needed for this large block. The same developer who is proposing this is interested in the property to the south, so it could be possible to create an easy way to get to the park. Motion carried 9-0. VII. PUBLIC HEARING: TEXT AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE Staff report accepted as part of the record. The City of Oshkosh Department of Community Development requests review and approval of amendments to the Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Lyons and 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 City of Oshkosh adopted a new zoning ordinance which went into effect on January 1, 2017. Since the adoption of the ordinance, staff has noticed a number of code sections that should be modified following further examination and discussion with the public and developers. Planning staff and Plan Commission held a workshop on these proposed amendments on April 19th, 2022 and the Commissioners were in support of these amendments. 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 for clarification on adaptive reuse. Mr. Lyons said there is a current situation that fits the adaptive reuse. There is a parcel that was originally build as a single family home. Years later it was converted into a law office and now the owner wants to bring it back to a single family home. The way the code is written, that would not __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 11 July 19, 2022 be possible without attempting rezone, comp plan amendment. The adaptive reuse allows a conditional use permit on that property to be brought back to its original intent. Mr. Nielsen said it’s available in other urban districts but not in the NMU and UMU. 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. Mr. Mitchell said he put together a list of native plantings that could be distributed. Motion carried 6-0. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 4:55 pm. (Davey/Kiefer) Respectfully Submitted, Mark Lyons Planning Services Manager