Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES March 18, 2008 PRESENT: David Borsuk, Meredith Scheuermann, Thomas Fojtik, Paul Esslinger, Kathleen Propp, Cathy Scherer, Chet Wesenberg, Shirley Mattox, Jon Dell’Antonia EXCUSED: Ed Bowen, Paul Lowry STAFF: Darryn Burich, Director of Planning Services; David Buck, Principal Planner; Jeff Nau, Associate Planner; Steve Gohde, Assistant Director of Public Works; Deborah Foland, Recording Secretary Chairperson Dell’Antonia called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. The minutes of March 4, 2008 were approved as presented. (Esslinger/Fojtik) I.A. OFFICIALLY MAP RIGHT-OF-WAY “PROGRESS DRIVE” Mr. Burich stated that this item was being withdrawn by staff. I.B. LAND DISPOSITION OF FORMER RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY SOUTH OF MARINE DRIVE IN THE TOWN OF OSHKOSH The City is requesting the disposition of approximately 31,993 square feet of vacant City-owned, former railroad right-of-way, to the Wisconsin Department of Transportation for highway construction. Mr. Nau presented the item and commented that the purchase price of $16,500 stated in the staff report was in error and the correct price was $16,750. Mr. Wesenberg questioned what would happen to the walking trail that is partially located on the site. Steve Gohde, Assistant Director of Public Works, replied that the trail currently crosses a portion of this site and then moves north adjacent to Marine Drive. It would remain on the property although it may be slightly reconfigured. I.C. EXTRATERRITORIAL LAND DIVISION/CERTIFIED SURVEY MAP AT 5123 STATE ROAD 91 IN THE TOWN OF UTICA This request is asking for approval of a two-lot land division to split off the former farmstead buildings from the base farmed parcel. Lot 1, containing the farmstead, is proposed to be 5.01 acres and Lot 2 would be 73.53 acres. The CSM also provides for a dedication of 45 feet of road right-of-way along State Road 91 and 33 feet of right- of-way along Knott Road. Mr. Dell’Antonia asked what the reason was for combining the two larger parcels into one. Mr. Nau responded that it appeared to be a clean-up type of land division as the lot containing the farmstead buildings was being separated from the remaining two farm parcels which were being combined into one. Mr. Wesenberg inquired why staff was requesting that wetlands, if any, were to be delineated on the certified survey map. Mr. Burich replied that staff was not requiring that it be delineated, but all natural features must be shown on the CSM. Plan Commission Minutes 1 March 18, 2008 Mr. Wesenberg commented that the owner would have to hire an engineer to complete this. Mr. Gohde responded that to just mark the CSM with the wetland features can be done with an informal process that would not require an engineer. I.D. TWO-LOT LAND DIVISION/CERTIFIED SURVEY MAP AT 1414 WEST SOUTH PARK AVENUE This request is to approve a two-lot land division of 113,400 square feet/2.6 acre parcel of land currently contained within one existing parcel. The proposed division is as follows: ? Lot 1 = 64,231 square feet/1.474 acres ? Lot 2 = 48,138 square feet/1.129 acres ? R-O-W Dedication = 1,032 square feet/0.024 acres Mr. Buck presented the item and commented that this was the same location as the conditional use permit request for the Renew fueling station that was approved at the last Plan Commission meeting and subsequently approved at the Common Council meeting of March 11th. Ms. Scheuermann asked why the conditional use permit was approved prior to the land division. Mr. Buck responded that he assumed that the owner did not wish to absorb the expense of the certified survey map if the use on the site was not approved. Ms. Mattox questioned if the right-of-way dedication on West South Park Avenue would require a change in the site plan. Mr. Buck replied that it would not effect the Renew station as that was taken into account when the site plan was prepared, however, it would effect the pizza parlor on West 20th Avenue although it was not anything significant. Mr. Fojtik asked if the owners of the two sites would be collaborating on storm water and drainage plans. Mr. Buck responded that they probably would. Mr. Burich added that easements may be required to work this issue out. Mr. Gohde added that cross drainage easements can be obtained if necessary. Motion by Borsuk to approve the consent agenda as requested with the following conditions applied to item I.C.: 1. Locate existing wetlands (if any) on the final Certified Survey Map, per the Department of Public Works. And the following conditions to be applied to item I.D.: 1. Add language on the face of the CSM that Lots 1 & 2 will comply with grading, drainage and stormwater management, as approved by the Department of Public Works. 2. Right-of-way dedication to provide 40 feet of width north of the south section line of Section 27- 18-16. Seconded by Scheuermann. Motion carried 9-0. Plan Commission Minutes 2 March 18, 2008 IIA/B.ZONE CHANGE FROM M-2 CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT TO C-3PD CENTRAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL FOR PHASED MULTIPLE FAMILY AND MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 851 SOUTH MAIN STREET IN THE SOUTH SHORE REDEVELOPMENT AREA The applicant is requesting a zone change to facilitate the redevelopment of the site in consistency with the Comprehensive and Redevelopment Plan for this area of the City. The conditional use permit/planned development approval request is for the construction of four 8-unit townhouse apartment buildings (Phase I) and renovation of the 4-story former Miles Kimball building as a mixed use (commercial/residential) development. Mr. Borsuk questioned if the change in zoning would affect the ability to improve the other industrial properties in the area by changing setback requirements. Mr. Buck responded that neighboring properties should not be affected by this action as the development area encompasses the entire block. Mr. Burich added it would not effect requirements relating to buffer yards as these regulations are for adjacent properties and these regulations would not effect sites across the street. Ms. Mattox asked if the C-3 zoning classification was more flexible than the downtown overlay district. Mr. Burich replied that is was and that the planned development overlay also provided more control. Ms. Mattox then asked who would be funding the underground utilities for this area. Mr. Burich responded that the City would be funding it, most likely through the capital improvement program at some point. Terraces would also be installed on Ninth Avenue. Ms. Mattox also asked if there would be no income restricted units in this development. Mr. Burich replied that there would not be any in the proposed townhouse development of Phase 1; however, there may be some in Phase 2 when the Miles Kimball building is renovated. Ms. Mattox then questioned if the Commission was approving both phases today. Mr. Burich responded yes. Ms. Mattox inquired about stormwater plans for the site. Mr. Burich replied that the site was previously almost 100% impervious surface and that the developer would be required to improve water quality standards on the site when they move forward with their stormwater plans. Ms. Scherer commented that she noticed that the elevations on the townhouses were very different from the old building and questioned how to evaluate this. Mr. Burich responded that it may be more financially feasible and that the developer tried to mimic the look of the front of the old building as much as possible and felt that the two developments could work well together. Mr. Wesenberg asked if there were design standards for this area, and if so, who was responsible to oversee this. Mr. Burich replied that the design standards were included in the request for proposals for the site. Mr. Wesenberg then questioned if there was something in the design standards that defined materials for the exterior of the project that the Commission should be considering, or if this was an issue that staff was responsible for monitoring. Plan Commission Minutes 3 March 18, 2008 Mr. Burich responded that the staff report has some references to the buildings exterior requirements per RFP guidelines and that the development is required to meet these standards. Redevelopment districts do not have specific design standards applied to the area and the standards are incorporated into the RFP when it is drafted for each site as developed. Ms. Scheuermann asked if the alley between the four buildings would be private and maintained by the developer and if it was wide enough by City standards. Mr. Burich replied that the alley would be private and maintained by the owner and that it was wide enough to accommodate fire trucks which would satisfy City requirements. Mr. Borsuk questioned if the Commission was responsible for approving that this development would be acceptable by Comprehensive Plan standards only or if they were to have a larger role in deciding what would be included in this project. Mr. Dell’Antonia stated that he was not sure how large of a role the Commission has in deciding on details but felt the Commission has some responsibility for the exterior looks of the development. He further commented that the Commission has requested changes to exterior materials in the past, and in some cases even made the changes additional conditions for approval of the project; however he did not believe it was necessary to get too involved in details. Mr. Burich commented that the Commission needs to determine if the development meets conditional use permit standards, if it is an appropriate urban design and follows good planning standards, as well as if it is consistent with what the City is attempting to achieve in this redevelopment area. This project will likely be the most difficult block to develop in this location. Mr. Dell’Antonia added that in the past, other projects following the first development in an area usually mimic the initial design. Brian Burns, 1750 Cliffview Drive, developer for the project, stated that the exterior of the townhouse structures would have fiber cement siding with some brick areas as well as stone block on the bottom four feet of the structure. The roofs would be sloped as they are less likely to leak than flat roofs and that he is trying to tie the two projects together as much as possible. Similar colors would be used on the townhouses to attempt to make it look consistent with the existing structure. Ms. Propp commented that elevations for the alley side of the development and floor plans for the townhouses were not included in their packets and although it was not required for approval, it would be interesting to see these plans. Mr. Burns replied that he did have a full set of plans with him today if the commission wished to review them further. Mr. Wesenberg questioned if the color of the townhouses would be consistent with the painted white brick of the Miles Kimball building remaining on site. Mr. Burns replied that the brick of the existing structure would be cleaned and should be consistent with the color of the townhouses. Mr. Wesenberg commented on the fence on the Phase 1 project and questioned why there was not fencing on the Phase 2 part of the development as it would help to screen the parking lot from view. Mr. Burns responded that he was still trying to get a handle on the Phase 2 part of the project and would discuss the fencing suggestion with his landscape architect. The lower fence surrounding the townhouses he felt was appropriate as it was private space for the occupants. Plan Commission Minutes 4 March 18, 2008 Mr. Wesenberg then asked if he was still undecided about Phase 2 of the development. Mr. Burns replied that he was and had intent to move forward with it, but was still in the process of checking prices and other details. Ms. Scherer asked about the quantity and location of trees to be planted on the site. Mr. Burns responded that he had not yet submitted formal landscape plans for the development, but he was planning on trees in the alley area as well as other locations and at this time he did not have an exact count as far as quantities. Ms. Scheuermann commented that once the developer’s agreement is signed, the party has one year to begin construction. Since both phases were being approved today, if the developer chooses to make alterations in the Phase 2 plans, does the item then come back to the Commission for approval a second time. Mr. Burich replied yes. Ms. Scheuermann then asked if the developer chose to not move forward with his plans on Phase 2, would other parties then be able to bid on the development of just this site. Mr. Burich responded yes. This lot could stand alone as a separate development if Mr. Burns could not follow through with the second phase of the project. Ms. Mattox asked if the developer had considered an arts community with studio apartments, etc. for Phase 2 of this development. Mr. Burns replied that he had looked at this concept, but it has not had great success in other areas. Often times the units are rented by individuals who do not actually live there and the concept is not as successful as it looks on paper. He said the decision to renovate the existing building has been a difficult one since it will be costly and it is not considered a historical site. Ms. Mattox asked why he decided on the use of fiber cement siding and EIFS for the structure. Mr. Burns responded that fiber cement siding looks better than vinyl siding, holds paint well and is much more durable. He further stated that vinyl siding was prohibited in the RFP for this development. The EIFS allows insulation to be installed and a drainage plane to help save the brick. The look is not as warm as brick, but the combination of the two materials looks well together. Ms. Mattox then asked if he had experimented with the concept of roof gardens. Mr. Burns replied no. This is an area in transition and he did not believe that the rent structure in Oshkosh would support this type of development. Ms. Mattox questioned where the garages would be located for the townhouses. Mr. Burich pointed out on the site plan the location. Mr. Burns displayed additional plans for the development and explained that he tried to make the units more unique to assist in selling them. He needs to generate interest in moving to this area of the city and felt that the townhouses had good density in comparison to the size of the development. Mr. Fojtik commented that he really liked the proposed project and felt it represented nice urban style living. Motion by Borsuk to approve the zone change from M-2 to C-3PD with planned development overlay for property located at 851 S. Main Street as requested. Seconded by Scheuermann. Motion carried 9-0. Plan Commission Minutes 5 March 18, 2008 Motion by Borsuk to approve the conditional use permit/development plan for a phased multiple family and mixed use development for property located at 851 S. Main Street as requested with the following conditions: 1. A landscape plan be approved prior to building permit issuance prior to each development phase. 2. All ground mounted and wall mechanical units be screened from public view. Seconded by Scheuermann. Motion carried 9-0. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 5:10 pm. (Esslinger/Scherer) Respectfully submitted, Darryn Burich Director of Planning Services Plan Commission Minutes 6 March 18, 2008