Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes__________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 1 October 18, 2022 PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES October 18, 2022 PRESENT: Mamadou Coulibaly, Margy Davey, Meredith Scheuermann, John Kiefer, Karl Loewenstein, Justin Mitchell, Thomas Perry, Kathleen Propp, Michael Ford EXCUSED: Ed Bowen STAFF: Mark Lyons, Planning Services Manager; Kelly Nieforth, Community Development Director; Justin Gierach, Engineering Division Manager; Brian Slusarek, Planner Chairperson Perry called the meeting to order at 5:00 pm. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. The minutes of September 20, 2022 were approved as presented. (Kiefer/Davey) I. PUBLIC HEARING: ZONE CHANGE FROM INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT (I) TO INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT WITH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (I-PD) AND APPROVAL OF A GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN & SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 375 N EAGLE STREET Site Inspections Report: Ms. Propp, Ms. Davey, Mr. Kiefer, Mr. Mitchell and Ms. Scheuermann reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The applicant requests a zone change from the existing Institutional District (I) to Institutional District with a Planned Development Overlay (I-PD). The applicant also requests approval of General Development Plan and Specific Implementation Plan for improvements to the West High School athletic field, at 375 N. Eagle 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 requesting a zone change to add a Planned Development Overlay for the subject property. This request is intended to provide some flexibility to the zoning ordinance to accommodate site improvements including new lighting for the athletic field. The applicant has submitted plans for the athletic facility upgrade, which will be addressed as General Development Plan (GDP) and Specific Implementation Plan (SIP) review to follow. Staff is supportive of the proposed rezone as it will assist in providing needed improvements for the site. The applicant is proposing to install synthetic turf on the existing sports field used for freshman/JV football games and JV/varsity soccer games, which is located inside the track used for middle and high school track meets. The project also includes new lighting for the field and a new press box. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 2 October 18, 2022 The proposed plans were discussed at a Plan Commission workshop on September 6, 2022, with Plan Commission voicing support. No changes are being proposed to the location of the sports field and the applicant has noted that seating capacity for the facility will not change. The submittal includes plans for the new press box, which will be 8’ deep, 33’ long, and have a 29’ setback from the N. Westfield St. right-of-way line, meeting the 25’ setback requirement. The press box will have on overall height of 30’, exceeding the maximum height for an accessory structure of 18’. Staff is supportive of a BSM to allow the increased height as it is needed to provide visibility of the field. Staff is recommending that street frontage landscaping be provided to offset the requested BSM. Staff recommends approval with the findings and conditions as stated in the staff report. Mr. Perry opened up technical questions to staff. Ms. Propp asked how many trees is equal to 250 landscaping points. Mr. Slusarek said it depends on the species – if they use tall deciduous trees, it would be about 5. If they use medium trees, it would be more. Ms. Propp asked if it would go along the entire length of the athletic field. Mr. Slusarek said it would be in the vicinity of the football field. They would help screen the new poles. Mr. Lyons said the number is consistent with the Oshkosh North request. Mr. Mitchell said the GDP requires a landscape plan and then the SIP process requires a formalized landscape plan. He said that he thought it wasn’t being required was because city staff decided to waive it. Mr. Lyons said per the applicability section of the landscape code, there is no required landscaping for this project. Nothing in the code triggers anything that says they must add landscaping. The planned development overlay gives staff the ability to waive filing requirements. It has always been the process for the city to waive filing requirements for things that have no applicability. We don’t make applicants provide a blank plan. Requiring a landscaping plan that shows no landscaping doesn’t provide any benefit and is an extra cost to the applicant. Mr. Mitchell asked if because the ordinance says they have to have a landscaping plan, but since this project doesn’t require landscaping, that’s why there isn’t one. Mr. Lyons confirmed that is correct. Mr. Perry asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 3 October 18, 2022 Jim Fochs, 375 N. Eagle St, said this is a similar concept the school district is bringing over from North High School that was just finished. They are having difficulty getting spring sports started, and with the development of Vel Phillips they have lost one athletic field. That is the driver behind going from natural turf to synthetic turf in this area and adding the lights to try and stretch out the evening and stack additional programs. Ms. Propp asked if the Plan Commission were to ask for more landscaping if that would be acceptable. Mr. Fochs said that in speaking with the athletic director with regards to the space along Westfield. That is the only green space they have to use for tents and staging for track and special events. Adding anything to that area will be a concern for them. Ms. Propp asked if the activities bump right up to the fence. Mr. Fochs said it depends on the size of the meet. It’s the only area that can be used as a flex space. They are willing to go with taller or medium sized trees and they are curious to see what the forestry department could come up with for terrace trees. 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 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. Mr. Mitchell said his main concern is the back of the shed being placed higher than the code requires. It’s not surprising that there are no neighbors in the meeting due to those residents being rentals and notices don’t go out to the tenants. The interest in this is trying to conceal that press box as much as possible. The space behind the press box would be a space to put in six evergreen trees which would be 240 points. A handful of trees could be planted and spaced out for tents and other events. The ideal landscaping points would be closer to 540 points which would be six shade trees and six arborvitae to help conceal the press box. Ms. Davey said that with the images provided by similar facilities and what they were able to do with their landscaping. It would be nice to see a row of trees along there but doesn’t know how it gets in the way of having tents. Mr. Loewenstein said that it’s difficult to put up tents underneath trees. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 4 October 18, 2022 Mr. Kiefer said it seems like there is adequate space between the fence and the terrace. Putting landscaping along that area would be a nice addition to the area. Council Member Ford invited the applicant to answer some more questions. Council Member Ford asked Mr. Fochs how he would feel about adding arborvitae behind the press box. Mr. Fochs said he understands the thought process and will check into that option. There is some electrical behind there so they will have to look at that. The concern would be with larger shade trees is a wide canopy next to the press box. Mr. Perry asked if the school district has any plans to use the space behind the press box for their mascot or another identifier. Mr. Fochs said there is not. Mr. Perry said that if they had, then the arborvitae would conceal it and it would be pointless. Ms. Scheuermann asked if they are going to use that space for advertisement. Mr. Fochs said it will look almost identical to Oshkosh North’s press box. It shouldn’t detract from the structure but will complete it. Mr. Loewenstein said that using the terrace is a good solution, but they are not sure what the city forester would do. Is there something that Plan Commission could require of the forester to do with the terrace. Mr. Slusarek said the city forester would be able to plant in the terrace depending on what was done on the private side. They would like to complement what will be there. Mr. Lyons said that through this planned development, the Plan Commission could not require the city forester to put in plantings, but they did agree there should be some. Mr. Mitchell asked if there is a way to quantify the 540 points, which equals x number of arborvitae and the remainder could be subtracted from what the forestry determines is possible along the terrace. Mr. Lyons said that if they leave the condition that final landscape plan approved by community development, it gives some flexibility. We need to have an enforceable condition, so leaving out any subjectivity. Ms. Propp asked what doubling the amount of landscaping would do. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 5 October 18, 2022 Mr. Lyons said that if six trees were done as tall evergreens, those are 40 points each which would equate to a dozen shade trees if those were the chosen species. Mr. Gierach said that in the 1960’s, the school district and the city were one entity. There are public storm sewers not in an easement on school district property outside of the right of way, behind where the press box is located. Adding significant amount of landscaping would not be beneficial to the utility long term. This doesn’t prohibit anything being planted, but could limit. Mr. Mitchell said that data should’ve been in the staff report and if it changes anything in their plan. Mr. Lyons said it doesn’t impact their current plan. Planting trees to the north and the south where there is more room would be a better option than behind the press box. Ms. Davey asked if there are no utilities between the storm sewer and the street. Mr. Lyons said there are no public utilities, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t any private utilities. He asked Mr. Mitchell if he was okay with the trees being to the north and the south of the press box. Mr. Mitchell said yes. Motion by made by Mitchell to amend the landscaping condition to include 540 landscaping points with six evergreen trees in proximity to the press box with subject to utility locations. Seconded by Davey. Mr. Perry asked if there was any discussion on the motion. Ms. Scheuermann asked Mr. Mitchell’s idea was to shade the press box and if that would even be accomplished with trees to the north and the south. Mr. Mitchell said that ideally the trees would have the press box shielded from all of the residents, but since that’s not possible, it could still benefit other residents. Motion to amend lost 4-5 (nay Kiefer, Propp, Scheuermann, Loewenstein, Perry) Motion carried 8-1 (Nay Mitchell) II. SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AT 2101 W 9TH AVENUE Site Inspections Report: Mr. Mitchell, Ms. Davey, Mr. Loewenstein, Mr. Kiefer and Ms. Scheuermann reported visiting the site. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 6 October 18, 2022 Staff report accepted as part of the record. The applicant requests approval of a Specific Implementation Plan for a commercial development at 2101 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 applicant is proposing development of a drive-thru restaurant/coffee shop (Scooter’s). The proposed development is a permitted use in the SMU district and is consistent with the approved GDP for a drive-thru commercial use on the subject site. This proposal was discussed at a Plan Commission workshop on July 19, 2022. Plan Commission voiced support for the concept plans and recommended that the drive-thru pick up window not be on the street side of the building and that cross access drives be provided to the neighboring properties if possible. Staff recommends approval with the findings and conditions as stated in the staff report. Mr. Perry opened up technical questions to staff. Mr. Kiefer asked where the dumpster is located and what materials are acceptable. Mr. Slusarek said it has to be wood or a material used on the exterior of the building. Mr. Lyons said they are looking for consistency with the design of the building. Mr. Mitchell asked if there was any concerns about a left turn from the southern entrance to the site. Mr. Lyons said it is just past the roundabout. 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 Ford 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 7 October 18, 2022 Motion carried 9-0. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 5:41 pm. (Kiefer/Propp) Respectfully Submitted, Mark Lyons Planning Services Manager