Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 PRESENT: Lee Bettes, David Borsuk, Steve Gehling, Don Krueger, Achim Reschenberg, Jim Smith, and John Ruppenthal EXCUSED: Lurton Blassingame, Melanie Bloechl, Donald Pressley and Scott Saunders STAFF: John Bluemke, Principal Planner; and Vickie Rand, Recording Secretary The meeting was called to order by Chairman Ruppenthal. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. The minutes of March 7, 2000 were approved as mailed. ITEM I: CONSENT AGENDA A: Land Division 3 Stoney Beach Road Reinhard Roehlig, petitioner for Duckies LLC, owner, requests the Plan Commission review and approve a four lot land division for property located at 3 Stoney Beach Road. The area is characterized by residential land uses and is zoned C-1 Neighborhood Commercial. B: Land Division Intersection N. Westhaven Drive & Westowne Avenue Kent Kowalik, petitioner and owner, requests the Plan Commission review and approve a land division for property located at the intersection of N. Westhaven Drive and Westowne Avenue. The area is characterized by commercial land uses as well as vacant land which is zoned C-2 PD General Commercial District with a Planned Development Overlay. There was no discussion on the Consent Agenda. Motion by Krueger for approval of the Consent Agenda as proposed. Seconded by Bettes. Motion carried 7-0. II: J MOORE ANNEXATION 3484 STATE ROAD 110 Martha Moore, ETAL, owners and petitioners, request the Plan Commission review and approve the J Moore Annexation generally located at 3484 State Road 110. Temporary and permanent zoning of C-2 General Commercial District has been requested. The general area surrounding the proposed annexation is characterized by residential, commercial, and recreational land uses. The annexation totals 96.26+ acres and a house and accessory buildings occupy the land. Plan Commission Minutes Page 2 March 21, 2000 Mr. Bluemke introduced this item and explained there would be no future access from State Road 110, but the property will be served by a frontage road system that will extend from Ryf Road to Westwind Road. He also noted temporary and permanent zoning of C-2, General Commercial District has been requested for the area. Mr. Smith asked if the annexation would create an island. Mr. Bluemke used the map as displayed to point out how the property ties to the City. Mr. Gehling asked if a new legal description was the only reason the annexation was back for review. Mr. Bluemke stated the annexation is the same as the Moore Annexation the Plan Commission approved in November, 1999, however, he stated it never went before the Common Council for approval because of the City Attorney’s concerns over the legal description, therefore, a new annexation petition and legal description have been prepared and need the Plan Commission and Common Council’s approval. Motion by Smith for approval of the J. Moore Annexation with temporary and permanent zoning of C-2 General Commercial District. Seconded by Borsuk. Motion carried 7-0. III: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT – NEW CHURCH SOUTH OF RYF ROAD, EAST OF WIOUWASH RECREATIONAL TRAIL AND WEST OF EDGEWOOD ROAD Community Church, owners and petitioners, request the Plan Commission review and approve a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow for a new church on property that is south of Ryf Road, east of the WIOWASH Recreational Trail, and west of Edgewood Road. The property is currently vacant and zoned R-1 Single Family Residence District with a Planned Development District Overlay. There is a small industrial property to the east of the subject site. Mr. Bluemke stated the Plan Commission had approved a Conditional Use Permit in May of 1998 to allow Community Church to construct a new church on this site, and all conditions made at that time have been met. He stated the City has also obtained an easement along the east side of the subject property which will provide pedestrian and emergency vehicle access to the proposed subdivision to the south of the church. Mr. Bluemke stated the church didn’t take out a building permit within a year of the May, 1998 approval of the CUP, therefore needed to bring it back at this time for approval. He also stated because of the Planned Development Overlay, if the CUP is approved, the church would be required to submit a detailed development plan for review by the Plan Commission and Common Council. Motion by Bettes for approval of the Conditional Use Permit for the new church and found it to be consistent with Standards set forth is Section 30-11 (D) of the Zoning Ordinance. Seconded by Krueger. Motion carried 7-0. IV: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW Community First Credit Union, petitioner, requests the Plan Commission review and approve a conditional use permit/development plan for property located at the intersection of N. Westhaven Drive and Westowne Avenue. The land use pattern in the area is commercial in character, and the subject site is zoned C-2PD General Commercial with a Planned Development Overlay. Plan Commission Minutes Page 3 March 21, 2000 Mr. Bluemke stated the Traffic Review Board has approved a variance to allow the egress from the parking lot to be 120 feet from N. Westhaven Drive. He stated the petitioner is requesting a modification to the sign standards imposed on the development by the Zoning Ordinance, to allow for the placement of a 200 square foot off premise sign on the credit union property. He noted the sign would serve as an identification sign for the shopping center that is being planned for the property on the south side of Westowne Avenue. Mr. Gehling asked if a condition for landscaping or lighting should be included in the recommendations. Mr. Bluemke stated the provisions for landscaping and lighting are part of the Zoning Ordinance they will need to comply with. Mr. Krueger asked what the anticipated traffic count was for the area with the development of the mall. Mr. Bluemke stated the City Transit Department hasn’t done a study to-date, and the amount of traffic would depend on the type of tenants located in the mall. Mr. Bluemke stated the Traffic Advisory Board had approved an egress only drive off of N. Westhaven Drive, which shouldn’t make parking stack up on the road. Motion by Smith for approval of the Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan for Community First Credit Union with the following conditions: 1) The off premise sign be limited to 200 square feet as defined in the Zoning Ordinance. 2) Elevations of the off premise sign be submitted to the City as part of the Conditional Use Permit/Development Plan Review for the proposed shopping center south of Westowne Avenue. Seconded by Reschenberg. Motion carried 6-1. Nay: Krueger . V: REZONING 902 TAFT AVENUE Harbor Lights LLP, petitioners for Lakeside Marina, owners, request the Plan Commission review and approve a rezoning from C-1 Neighborhood Business District to C-1 PD Neighborhood Business District with a Planned Development Overlay. The subject property is located at 902 Taft Avenue. The land use pattern in the area is a mixture of commercial and residential uses. Mr. Bluemke introduced the item to the Plan Commission stating the proposed plan was for a condominium development. He stated rezoning the property to include a planned development overlay would require the developer to bring the project back to the Plan Commission for approval. He also noted it would be an overall improvement to the area. Renny Ohlsson, 944 Pierce, stated he was concerned about the street repairs as Pierce Avenue was already in need of repair and also questioned how the flood plain restrictions would affect the development. Plan Commission Minutes Page 4 March 21, 2000 Chairman Ruppenthal asked if Mr. Ohlsson would be satisfied if he knew the street would be improved with the development. Mr. Ohlsson stated he was concerned with who would be paying for the street improvements. Mr. Bluemke stated the property owners are assessed for the street repairs, and also stated the developer could build in a flood plain as long as flood proofing measures were taken during construction. Chairman Ruppenthal stated this development plan would come back before the Plan Commission for review and the adjacent property owners would receive a meeting notice, and that the only issue today was for rezoning. Chris Percival, 934 Pierce Avenue , stated he was also concerned with improvements to Pierce Avenue, and asked what the zone change would mean for the area. Chairman Ruppenthal explained that having a planned development overlay added to the zoning classification would allow the Plan Commission to review details of the plan and give the neighbors a chance to comment on the project. Chairman Ruppenthal stated they will get meeting notices when the project comes before the Plan Commission. Mr. Gehling asked what kind of density was being planned for the project. Mr. Bluemke stated 37 two bedroom units were being planned, and the proposal at this time didn’t max out the density. Mr. Borsuk asked if this was a year ‘round project. Mr. Bluemke stated the developer was proposing owner occupied condominiums. Mr. Borsuk stated he would want to know if the school district could support the development. Mr. Gehling asked if the driveways would be private. Mr. Bluemke stated they would be private drives. Judy Ohlsson, 944 Pierce, asked if the rezoning meant that the developer could pack as many people as he wants into the development. Mr. Bluemke stated that the current C-1 zoning allows the developer to construct condo’s on the property at this time, however with the rezoning to include a planned development overlay the staff and commission would be able to control the density. Mr. Bettes asked if the developer was present to explain his intentions for developing the property. Gary Laeyendecker, Harbor Lights Development, stated they intended to do the redevelopment in three phases. He explained the units and their size, and what each phase of the development would include. He explained each phase would have an entrance on either Adams, Taft, or Pierce, not allowing a large traffic increase on any one street. He stated the condo’s would sell for an average of $170,000 – $200,000 each. He stated he wanted to enhance the area, and beautification of the site was important to the development. Chairman Ruppenthal asked why he was requesting a planned development overlay for the property. Mr. Laeyendecker stated he may not be able to comply with all the setback requirements, therefore he was requesting a planned development overlay to reach a compromise with the City. Mr. Bettes stated he felt this was an appropriate use of a planned development overlay being applied to an area. Mr. Smith asked if the City would be loosing a marina, or if they planned to relocate. Mr. Laeyendecker stated the development project would take place over a three to four year period and at this time the marina hadn’t decided if or where it would relocate to. Plan Commission Minutes Page 5 March 21, 2000 Motion by Krueger for approval of the rezoning from C-1 Neighborhood Business District to C-1 PD Neighborhood Business District with a Planned Development Overlay. Seconded by Borsuk. Motion carried 7-0. VI: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW T-3 Group, LTD, petitioner, for Bradley Operating Limited Partnership, owner, requests the Plan Commission review and approve a conditional use permit/development plan for property located on Murdock Avenue east of 1800 Jackson Street (Taco Bell). The land use pattern in the area is commercial in character, and the subject site is zoned C-2PD General Commercial with a Planned Development Overlay. Mr. Bluemke stated a 7,000 square foot auto parts store is proposed for the property, and meets all of the setback requirements, however a development plan review is required because of the planned development overlay assigned to the area in 1991. Brian Fisher, representing T-3 Group, stated he was available to answer any questions the Commission may have. Chairman Ruppenthal asked Mr. Fisher if he had any problems with the condition for no ground signs allowed on the property. Mr. Fisher stated he had no problem with that condition. Mr. Borsuk asked what the distance was from the corner of Murdock to the first ingress point. Mr. Bluemke stated it was approximately 60 feet. Mr. Borsuk asked if there would be any problem moving the ingress to the north or the east. Mr. Fisher stated there would be no problems moving the ingress as long as it didn’t effect the number of parking stalls available. Mr. Borsuk stated that might be best since it appeared there was a limited amount of space for vehicles at the entrance and a stacking problem may occur. Discussion followed regarding the location of the entrance, signage, and the effect on parking stalls. The nature of the business was also discussed with the effects on the entrance and parking stalls if the business was sold to a new type of tenant. The consensus of the Commission was to move the entrance to the north. Mr. Reschenberg also suggested increases the width of the driveway. Mr. Fisher stated he felt it would be detrimental to his business to have an entrance at the north of the property. He stated the customers would need to drive to the back of the property to get into the parking lot and drive around to the front for entry to the store. He also stated that if they moved the building to accommodate the rear entrance of the parking lot the back side of the building would be facing Murdock Street. Mr. Borsuk pointed out that an auto parts store transient type of business such as the neighboring Taco Bell property, and a similar situation worked for them. Discussion followed regarding the remaining property for sale surrounding the subject site and the landscaping in the area. Plan Commission Minutes Page 6 March 21, 2000 Motion by Smith for approval of the conditional use permit/development plan for an auto parts store with the following conditions: 1.No ground signs are allowed on the subject property. 2.The access to the site be restricted to the north with a 5 foot side yard setback to extend the length of the driveway for a maximum of 50 feet. Seconded by Krueger. Motion carried 7-0. NEW BUSINESS I. SIGNS Mr. Gehling stated he had been traveling through Ohio recently and noticed a trend for the usage of ground signage and noted how attractive it was. He questioned if it would be something for Oshkosh to consider. Mr. Bluemke stated they could but it would take a significant change to the zoning ordinance. Chairman Ruppenthal suggested Mr. Kinney send for sign ordinances from those areas in Ohio where Mr. Gehling had traveled. Mr. Gehling stated he had noticed the attractive ground signs in Akron, Canton, and Cayahoga Falls, Ohio, and had also noticed a trend in Neenah, Wisconsin. Mr. Borsuk asked if there were any provisions to govern sign such as found at Racette Ford where there is a pylon sign for identification of the company with three or four additional signs from venders for tires, etc., attached to the pylon. Mr. Bluemke stated the ordinance for signage is based on the size of the property and does not limit the number of signs. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned. Respectfully submitted, JOHN C. BLUEMKE Principal Planner JCB/vlr