Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PRESENT: Lee Bettes, Melanie Bloechl, Dave Borsuk, Steve Gehling, Don Krueger, Achim Reschenberg, James Smith, and John Ruppenthal; Chairman EXCUSED: Lurton Blassingame, and Don Pressley STAFF: Jackson Kinney; Director of Community Development, John Bluemke; Principal Planner, Susan Kepplinger; 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 the July 18, 2000 meeting were approved as mailed. I: T. VOGELIN ANNEXATION, 3395 OREGON STREET Thomas and Christine Vogelin, petitioners and owners, request the Plan Commission to review and approve the T. Vogelin Annexation generally located at 3395 Oregon Street. Temporary and permanent zoning of R-1 Single Family Residence District has been requested. Mr. Smith asked if the State of Wisconsin Department of Commerce has previously reviewed annexations. Mr. Bluemke stated they review all annexations, and he will note the findings in the Staff Report if he receives them in time for inclusion. Mr. Borsuk questioned if the surrounding properties were considered for annexation at this time. Mr. Bluemke stated he encourages the petitioners to contact the surrounding property owners regarding annexation, however, it appears the surrounding property owners weren’t interested at this time. Mrs. Bloechl asked if there was anyone present from the Town of Nekimi who wished to comment. No one came forward. Motion by Bloechl for approval of the T. Vogelin Annexation with temporary and permanent zoning of R-1 Single Family Residence District. Seconded by Krueger. Motion carried 8-0. II: PARTIAL STREET VACATION Mr. Jay Puestohl and Ms. Beth Hass have asked the City’s consideration in vacating a portion of thth Michigan Street between 18 Avenue and 19 Avenue. The neighborhood is residential in character and zoned R-1 Single Family Residence District. Plan Commission Minutes Page 2 August 1, 2000 Jay Puestohl, 1840 Simpson Street, stated the back yard of his property abuts the subject property, and stated Mr. Tyers was the other neighbor who abutted the subject property, and also had signed the petition not to have Michigan Street vacated. He noted he had talked with Mr. Tritt, the new owner of the property, regarding preserving the green space. He stated he had talked with City staff and understood the lot wasn’t big enough for a park, however, the neighborhood was still in favor of saving the green space. He thanked the Commission for the extra time to work out a solution to having Michigan Street vacated. th Beth Haas, 500 W. 19 Avenue, stated she was concerned about her house not being 25’ from the right- of-way once the street was constructed, and asked if she would need a variance. Mr. Bluemke stated she didn’t own the land at this time since the right-of-way was already dedicated, therefore her home was considered non-conforming. He stated this action wouldn’t have any affect on her status. Chairman Ruppenthal explained that if her house was destroyed she would need a variance if she wished to rebuild. Mr. Gehling asked if the land belonged to the City. Mr. Bluemke stated the right-of-way is dedicated for Michigan Street. Mr. Bettes asked what the Department of Public Works timetable was to extend Michigan Street. Mr. Bluemke stated the Public Works Department plans to grade/gravel and install utilities this year. Motion by Borsuk to approve the partial vacation of Michigan Street. Seconded by Bloechl. Motion denied 1-7. Nay: Bettes. III: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: CHURCH OFFICES AND CHURCH RELATED EDUCATION CLASSES; 615 EVANS STREET Calvary Chapel of Oshkosh, Inc., petitioner and owner, requests the Plan Commission review and approve a Conditional Use Permit for the expansion of church offices and educational classes into the structure at 615 Evans Street. The subject property is used for storage by St. Paul’s Church and is zoned R-2 Two Family Residence District. Mr. Smith asked why the properties would need to be combined. Mr. Bluemke explained the property was sold via a deed, and now the two parcels need to be combined to eliminate the non-conforming structures, which the staff has included as a condition of approval. Motion by Bloechl for approval of the Conditional Use Permit for 615 Evans Street by Calvary Chapel of Oshkosh, Inc. for the use of church offices and church education classes to be in compliance with the standards of Section 30-11 subject to the following condition: 1) The lots containing the buildings at 615 Evans Street and 820 and 824 Parkway be combined to create one property. Seconded by Krueger. Motion carried 8-0. Plan Commission Minutes Page 3 August 1, 2000 TH IV: REZONING – FORMER RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY BETWEEN 12 AVENUE AND W. SOUTH PARK AVENUE D&S Investment Properties, petitioner and owner, requests the Plan Commission review and approve the rezoning of two lots that were formerly part of the Wisconsin Central Railroad Right-of-way from R-2 Two Family Residence District to M-2 Central Industrial District. The lots proposed for rezoning th generally run between 12 Avenue and W. South Park Avenue. Dale Weitz, owner of Gartman Mechanical Services, stated he had understood the property would be zoned M-2 when he bought the railroad right-of-way from the City. He stated he had planned to construct a parking lot, and when he tried to obtain the appropriate permits was told he would need to rezone the area first. Therefore he was in front of the Plan Commission at the present time to accomplish a rezoning that he felt should have been taken care of at the time of purchase. Mr. Smith asked if the neighbors to the east had a chance to purchase the property. Mr. Bluemke stated they had the chance to purchase and weren’t interested. Mr. Smith stated in that case, this seemed to be the best use for the property. Mr. Gehling asked if there already was a parking lot available and if the setback requirements had been met. Mr. Bluemke stated there is parking next to South Park Avenue, and since the setback requirements are not able to be met because of the M-2 District abutting an R-2 District this case will also need to go before the Board of Appeals to obtain a variance. Mrs. Bloechl asked if this item could be placed on a fast track due to the misunderstanding of circumstances between the City and the applicant that have taken place. Mr. Bluemke stated the item is moving as fast as it can because of the necessary publications needed. Mr. Krueger asked if there were any easements on the site. Mr. Bluemke stated he thought there was an easement for a fiber optic line, however, a parking lot could typically be built over an easement. Motion by Borsuk for approval of the rezoning from R-2, Two Family Residence District to M-2, Central Industrial District. Seconded by Bloechl. Motion carried 7-0-1. Bettes voting present. V: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: AUTOMOBILE REPAIR SHOP 600 BLOCK N. MAIN STREET Paul Cook, petitioner for City of Oshkosh owner, requests the Plan Commission review and approve a Conditional Use Permit for an automobile repair facility located on the west side of the 600 Block of N. Main Street between 609 and 641 N. Main Street. The subject property is zoned C-3 Central Commercial District and is vacant. Bob Albright, representative for R.J. Albright, Inc., displayed maps of the elevations for the new J & R. Service facility. Mr. Smith asked if there was going to be a door on Main Street. Mr. Bluemke indicated there would not be a door on Main Street. Plan Commission Minutes Page 4 August 1, 2000 Mr. Borsuk questioned what material was going to be used on the rear of the building. Mr. Albright stated masonry will be used on the east and west sides, and on the south side masonry will be used 3’ 4” up and metal will be used on the rest. Mr. Borsuk asked if any consideration had been given to using all masonry on the parking lot side. Mr. Albright stated they had considered using more masonry, however, he stated they took into account how it would blend with the neighborhood, and the costs involved. Mr. Kinney stated staff had worked with the owner in the design and felt it would blend in quite well with the surroundings. Mr. Krueger asked what signage there would be for the business. Mr. Albright stated they had not discussed signage, and that the signage showed on the structure in the drawings was proposed but not confirmed. Mr. Kinney stated the signage was subject to review and approval by the Department of Community Development. Mr. Bluemke stated signage for the business would have to meet both the ordinance requirements and the architectural character of the area. Motion by Smith for approval of the Conditional Use Permit for the construction of an automobile repair facility to be in compliance with the standards of Section 30-11, with the following conditions: 1)The landscaping plan be approved by the Department of Community Development. 2)No vehicle parts or equipment used for repairs be stored outside the building. Seconded by Bloechl. Motion carried 7-0-1. Bettes voting present. VI: REZONING – MARION ROAD/PEARL AVENUE REDEVELOPMENT AREA The Department of Community Development requests the Plan Commission review and approve the rezoning of the Marion Road/Pearl Avenue Redevelopment Area from M-2 Central Industrial to C-3 PD Central Commercial Area District with a Planned Development Overlay. Mr. Borsuk questioned if the rezoning would have a negative effect on any of the existing industry in the area. Mr. Kinney stated he didn’t believe it would have a negative effect on any of the existing industry, and that he had not received any objection from the existing industry regarding the redevelopment project. Motion by Bloechl for approval of the rezoning from M-2 Central Industrial District to C-3 PD Center Commercial District with a Planned Development Overlay. Seconded by Smith. Motion carried 8-0. VII: REVIEW OF PROPOSED REVISION OF CITY LANDMARKS ORDINANCE Attached to this report is a copy of the proposed revision to the Landmarks Ordinance. The proposed Ordinance is different from the previously proposed Ordinance in that the review guidelines are contained in it and will not be adopted separately. The Landmarks Commission took this approach to address the opposition to the previous Ordinance caused by the uncertainty regarding specific types of alterations that would be covered. Plan Commission Minutes Page 5 August 1, 2000 Susan Kepplinger used the overhead projector to review the concerns of the property owners within the historical district. Ms. Kepplinger stated that over 400 letters had been sent to property owners in the historic districts, and from the responses she has received she has found that most people were unaware they were in a historic district, they were unaware of the tax credits they could receive, and they were unaware of the financial resources available to them, hence she felt it was an education for the residents involved. Mr. Borsuk questioned if a resident could have their property landmarked against their will. Ms. Kepplinger stated that it could happen. Mr. Bettes asked Ms. Kepplinger to review page 11 (b) of the ordinance regarding the delay period. Ms. Kepplinger stated she would review it with the City Attorney. Discussion continued regarding the purpose of the 60-day delay, who determines what appropriate alterations are, and the expense of a structure being historically correct. Mr. Smith stated he will support the ordinance because he feels there is a committee who is very concerned about the historic value of the City, and it also takes the approval of the Common Council to designate a landmark. Mr. Bettes also stated he was in support of the Historic Preservation Ordinance, even though he felt it was somewhat weak, but was needed to comply with the State Ordinance. Mr. Borsuk stated the staff made a very good presentation, however, he would only support the ordinance revisions if they could offer a totally voluntary situation to have your home landmarked. He did not agree with getting 51% of the district vote along with the Common Council approval to force a landmark designation. He stated he also did not agree with the only appeal being procedural, and believed every case should be looked at individually. Mr. Gehling questioned if once a property was landmarked, if the decision could be reversed. Ms. Kepplinger stated an individual couldn’t have a landmark designation removed. Mr. Gehling stated he was concerned about the communication between the buyer and seller to make sure the buyer was aware of the historical designation of the property. Discussion continued regarding the rights buyers have to look at the zoning of the property, the need for deed restrictions to be uniform and information to be available on permit packages. Mrs. Bloechl stated she also would not support the revision because of the involuntary manner in which a property could be landmarked. Mr. Borsuk suggested treating the landmark issue as a covenant, as it was difficult for citizens to be aware of all of the factors contained in a historical district. Mr. Gehling asked if the public would have time to comment on the issue when it goes before the Common Council. Ms. Kepplinger stated there would be a public hearing at the Common Council meeting. Plan Commission Minutes Page 6 August 1, 2000 Motion by Krueger for approval of the Landmarks Ordinance as proposed. Seconded by Bettes. Motion carried 6-2. Nays: Bloechl and Borsuk. OTHER BUSINESS PLAN COMMISSION CHAIRMAN AND VICE CHAIRMAN Chairman Ruppenthal informed the Commission he would be resigning from Chairman duties by September of 2000. He asked the Commission to take into consideration nominees for a Chairman and Vice Chairman to be accepted and elected at the second meeting in September. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned. Respectfully submitted, JOHN C. BLUEMKE Principal Planner JCB/vlr