Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutesPLAN COMMISSION MINUTES February 16, 2010 PRESENT: Ed Bowen, Jeffrey Thorns, Thomas Fojtik, John Hinz, Dennis McHugh, Kathleen Propp, Kent Monte, Donna Lohry, Karl Nollenberger EXCUSED: David Borsuk, Robert Vajgrt STAFF: Darryn Burich, Director of Planning Services; David Buck, Principal Planner; David Patek, Director of Public Works; Steven Gohde, Assistant Director of Public Works; Jeffrey Nau, Associate Planner; Deborah Foland, Recording Secretary Chairperson Fojtik called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. The minutes of February 2, 2010 were approved as presented. (Hinz/Propp) L CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PUBLIC UTILITY STRUCTURE/POWER PLANT AT 755 DEMPSEY TRAIL The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to construct and operate a renewable energy plant at 755 Dempsey Trail. Mr. Buck presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area, the current land uses in the area and the site plan for the proposed power plant. He also reviewed the parking, access drives, and elevations for the subject site as well as the recommended landscaping to be placed on the southern side of the proposed structure as the recommended condition. Mr. Monte questioned if the lot line of the current parcel was to be moved to the south to accommodate this development, how the setbacks will be affected. Mr. Buck responded that the lot line reconfiguration should not create a conflict as there were no required setbacks in an M -2 industrial zoning district. Mr. McHugh arrived at 4:10 pm. Ms. Lohry inquired where the sludge for the facility would be obtained, how many trucks were anticipated to be accessing the site on a regular basis, and if the facility would be creating fowl odors. Mr. Buck replied that the organic waste would be obtained by UW- Oshkosh to fuel the plant but he was not aware of the exact source nor did he have information on the number of trucks accessing the site but the applicant indicated approximately one a day. In reference to the odors that may be generated from the plant, the City has general code to regulate nuisances such as fowl odors however the plant was proposing to utilize a filtering system that would mitigate the creation of offensive smells. He also commented that the City sewage plant is located across the street from the site. Ms. Lohry commented that the proposed structure is not very conducive with the commercial area on Witzel Avenue as far as aesthetics. Mr. McHugh agreed. Plan Commission Minutes February 16, 2010 Mr. Buck responded that the structure is an industrial building and was appropriate for the proposed use and is located in an M -2 industrial zoned area. Mr. McHugh questioned if the grass and gravel areas were to remain on the site and how that compares to the code requirements. Mr. Buck replied that the conditions recommended the graveled areas on the site be restored to vegetative ground cover after the development is constructed and access drives are required to be hard surface, by ordinance. Mr. McHugh also inquired if the City should retain this property for the possibility of future expansion of the sewage treatment plant. Mr. Buck responded that the City does not currently own the property where the development is being proposed. Mr. McHugh suggested the City acquire the site. David Patek, Director of Public Works, stated the current treatment plant site has possibilities for expansion and that the City has retained the property previously used to house the animal shelter on Dempsey Trail. He further commented that the treatment plant was expanded in the 1990's and had sufficient capacity to operate for at least 20 years. Discussions have taken place regarding plans to use additional lands, but without knowing what treatment processes will be available in the future, no plans for expansion are eminent at this time. Mr. McHugh commented that since there is not much available property in the area if expansion was necessary, he felt it was unacceptable to not acquire this property for possible future city use. Mr. Thorns questioned if there was a reason this project has to be located at the site proposed. Mr. Buck responded that it was being located next to the University's facility building, met zoning and is a compatible use. Mr. Thorns then questioned why staff was recommending landscape screening on only the south side of the structure and not the other facades. Mr. Buck replied that the proposed structure is located in an M -2 industrial zoned area, which does not require landscaping however the south side was proposed for screening as it faces Witzel Avenue which has become more of a commercial area. All other sides of the proposed structure are adjacent to other industrial uses. Tom Sonnleitner, representing the University, 800 Algoma Boulevard, stated that both the University and the City can be at the forefront of a movement that will eventually sweep across the country. These types of power plants are already utilized in both Europe and Asia. The plant will take dry organic material for fermentation which will be composted inside the building on a weekly basis. There will only be a few trucks accessing the site per week and the operation will be enclosed in the structure. It will establish a living, learning facility of renewable energy infrastructure. He further stated that the reason this site was chosen was because of its close proximity to the campus and the property was already owned by the University. Students and faculty will be running the facility and he Plan Commission Minutes February 16, 2010 felt this development was important to both the campus and the community. It will be the first installation of this type of facility in the United States. He also commented that the facility would not be processing sludge but would be dealing with dry product only and that concerns voiced regarding foul odors should not be an issue as any odors would be contained within the facility as no operations would be functioning outside the structure. The aesthetics of the structure would be made as pleasing as possible and considering the property separation between this site and the site located on Witzel Avenue, which may be sold to another entity, will be shielded from view from Witzel Avenue. They will make every effort to screen the development from this corridor and the electricity generated will be sold to the grid and the heat piped to various buildings. The development will be paid for over time and the University is receiving grants from the government for approximately $700,000 for this facility. Mr. Hinz inquired if the yard waste to be used for the facility would be picked up from the City's drop - off site, if companies and individuals would be bringing in waste from other areas, or if obtaining it from the City's site would be more economically feasible. Mr. Sonnleitner responded that they are in the process of working with the City on some type of agreement to obtain the waste material from the City. However, in winter months it may be necessary to also have arrangements to obtain waste material from farmers to keep the plant operational. He further commented that the site was not large enough to handle drop offs from outside individuals and other sources. Mr. McHugh questioned if there would be a limit on drop offs accepted at the site and if it would be limited to city residents only or if residents from the surrounding townships would be utilizing the site as well. Mr. Sonnleitner reiterated that the site would not be accepting drop offs from individuals but will be obtaining yard waste from the City's service garage and that they were still in the process of working out the contract with the City. Mr. McHugh commented that there are already issues with the odor coming from the current drop off site by the City garage and questioned how far we should go with this type of activity in this area. Mr. Thoms inquired if the proposed plant had some type of features that would prevent odors. Ryan Novak, Project Manager for Bioferm Energy Systems, 617 N. Segoe Road, Madison, explained the process of the bio filters used in this system which cleanse odors from the materials to virtually eliminate any smells from the operation. He further commented that the landscaping around the facility would screen its visibility from Witzel Avenue and that the access drives would be paved. Ms. Lohry questioned if there was still an odor present, how would it be eliminated. Mr. Novak further explained the functions of the bio filters and how they handle the odors and also commented on the restrictions of the DNR that also must be followed for the development of this type of facility. Ms. Propp inquired if this was the first plant of this type in Wisconsin. Plan Commission Minutes February 16, 2010 Mr. Novak responded that it was the first plant in the United States although there are approximately 30 of these types of power plants already operating in Europe. Mr. Sonnleitner added that he has visited several of the sites personally. Mr. Buck asked if it was determined at a later date that the facility was omitting an offensive odor, could the filters be modified and the situation be improved. Mr. Novak responded affirmatively. Michael Lizotte, Sustainability Director for the University, stated that odors from the current city garage facility are creating issues and the movement of the material from this site to the energy plant should help to reduce the odors and actually be an improvement to the present situation. Mr. McHugh commented that he felt that disturbing the piles of compost will cause more issues with odors from the site. Mr. Lizotte stated that they would be changing out the compost on a weekly basis and hope to move the yard waste before it starts to create odors and that this proposal is part of a solution to the present issues. Ms. Propp stated that she felt this was an exciting concept and was utilizing proven technology and she was in favor of the proposal. Mr. Bowen commented that he did not have an issue with the aesthetics of the structure as it is a functional use in an M -2 area and it does not necessarily have to be attractive. Mr. Thorns agreed and stated that the project itself should be applauded. These facilities have already been operational in Europe and this facility will be utilized for both teaching as well as a functional use in the community. Ms. Lohry commented that she supports the efforts and goals of the University but does not approve of the site's location. She felt it was located too close to residential properties. Mr. Monte questioned what impact this would have since the Comprehensive Plan recommends commercial use for this area. Mr. Buck replied that as this was an industrial zone, which allows commercial uses. Though the use is not distinctly commercial, it is not typical heavy industry as there is no outdoor storage, heavy traffic, etc. so was felt not to be in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Monte then questioned the adjustment to the southern lot line and how it would impact the commercial use on the lot located on Witzel Avenue. Mr. Buck responded that it should not negatively impact this property as it would still be large enough to be a developable commercial lot and the landscape buffering would shield the view of the industrial site to the north. Mr. Fojtik commented that based on the current zoning, this was an appropriate use in this area. He further commented that there were both pubic and private owned lands surrounding this site and the Plan Commission Minutes February 16, 2010 parcels have evolved into various uses that are both commercial and industrial in nature and he felt that the proposed power plant fits at this location. Mr. Hinz stated that he applauded the University for this development as it helps the City with a functional use for yard waste and is the first facility of this type in the country. He felt that not only would it serve a functional use but would attract people to the city to view the facility. Mr. McHugh commented that there was money appropriated in the budget to move the Street Department facilities to another location which would leave the facility with no immediate source for material for this project. He further commented that it should be located somewhere else that would be away from a main drag such as Witzel Avenue as it has the potential to impact the neighborhood with noise, odors, and traffic problems. Motion by Nollenberger to approve the conditional use permit for a public utility structure /power plant at 755 Dempsey Trail as requested with the following conditions: 1. Southern lot line is adjusted as depicted. 2. Landscaping incorporate screening to the south, as approved by the Department of Community Development. 3. Gravel areas of development area are restored to vegetative ground cover. 4. No outdoor storage of material, machinery or equipment. Seconded by Bowen. Motion carried 7 -2. Ayes- Bowen /Thoms/Fojtik /Hinz /Propp/Monte/ Nollenberger. Nays McHugh /Lohry. II. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PUBLIC UTILITY STRUCTURE (MELVIN AVENUE WATERSHED PUMP STATION) LOCATED IN MENOMINEE PARK EAST OF E. MELVIN AVENUE The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to construct and operate a utility structure (storm water pump station) in Menominee Park, east of E. Melvin Avenue. Mr. Nau presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area, the current land uses in said area, and the history of the flooding issues experienced in this neighborhood. He further stated that East Melvin Avenue is scheduled for reconstruction in 2010 and the City contracted with AECOM for recommendations to reduce the flooding issues, which resulted in an option for a dry detention pond and pump station or just a larger pump station. Both the Common Council and neighbors supported the plan for a pump station only. Mr. Nau reviewed maps of the proposed pump station as well as parking and access to the site, elevations for the structure, and conditions recommended by staff He also summarized correspondence from David Borsuk who could not be present for the Plan Commission meeting today, but wanted his views shared with the other commission members. He felt that the pump station was good politics but bad planning and that the City needed to take steps to protect the ground water in the community. He also felt that the detention basin was a more environmentally friendly practice to deal with the flooding issues and the City is under permit requirements to reduce total suspended solids by 2013. He was asking for a negative recommendation on this proposal as it is contrary to the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Nau also summarized correspondence from Justin Mitchell, 652 Monroe Street, who opposes the pump station as it has not included a water quality element, the project is not included in the City of Oshkosh's Parks Plan or Comprehensive Plan, cost estimates do not account for the increase in energy use, project details have not been distributed to all stakeholders including site design, noise levels, and environmental impacts. Plan Commission Minutes February 16, 2010 He recommended the City complete a full cost analysis, the roof be plant- based, the area be extensively landscaped, and energy efficiency standards be met. Mr. Nau further commented that the Department of Public Works was attempting to address flooding issues in the city, as directed. Mr. McHugh suggested that toilets or other park type use be installed at the site and questioned how the zoning ordinance would address this issue. Mr. Nau responded that the addition of toilets at the site would be considered an accessory use to the park use. Mr. McHugh then questioned if the paving of Melvin Avenue was due to the installation of the pump station or if it was because the road was scheduled to be reconstructed regardless. Steve Gohde, Assistant Director of Public Works, replied that the neighborhood had petitioned the City to have the street reconstructed. The pump station was researched after that in an attempt to keep the street dry. Mr. McHugh then asked the age of Melvin Avenue. Mr. Gohde responded that he did not have that information on hand but the street was near the end of its time as demonstrated by paser rating and it required reconstruction. Ms. Lohry inquired if it was possible to construct the pump station structure underground. Mr. Gohde replied that the structure was already going 20 feet below grade and that the mechanicals needed to be above ground to be protected from the elements and be able to be maintained. Ms. Lohry then inquired if the water would be discharged below the water level of the lake. Mr. Gohde responded affirmatively. Mr. Thorns stated that he understood the issue of the water in the neighborhood cannot be handled by the current system in place but asked for further explanation of the pump station and how it would reduce the flooding issues. Mr. Gohde gave a detailed description of how the pump station would function. Mr. Thorns asked if this system would address stormwater quantity issues only. Mr. Gohde responded that the dry detention basin would have addressed more of the solids however the pump station will prevent some of the solids from going into Lake Winnebago. Mr. Thorns stated that some of the solids will find a way into the lake now, but questioned if a filter could be placed in the system after the fact if necessary. Mr. Gohde commented that the city will get some reduction from this proposed system but cannot slow down the system too much or it will not reduce the flooding issues it is trying to address. He further explained the pump station functions. Ms. Propp questioned how this fit into the stormwater management plan on the east side of the city. Plan Commission Minutes February 16, 2010 Mr. Gohde stated that he did not have any maps available to view the entire stormwater plan for the city and that the city has approximately 120 separate basins. He further stated that this proposed pump station was meant to address the Melvin Avenue watershed. Ms. Propp then questioned if Public Works has been able to analyze other watersheds on the east side of the city and if these other watersheds would require pump stations. Mr. Gohde explained that the design goal is to keep streets dry in a ten year storm event and they do not want to build anymore pump station in the city if they can help it. Ms. Propp commented that it appeared that this pump station was precipitated by the desire to have the street rebuilt and questioned what the impact would be if this project was delayed until next year. Mr. Gohde responded that the impact would be that this basin would continue to flood and it would have no impact on other basins in the city. There are no overall stormwater detention basins for the city's east side and each basin has to be dealt with on its own. Ms. Propp then questioned if the potential of a green roof mentioned in the staff report would be realized. Mr. Gohde stated that it was accounted for in the bid documents but it would depend on which alternatives were selected when it went before the Common Council for review. Ms. Propp inquired if there were any other slides depicting the location of the proposed pump station that would better define its precise location. She also asked if the culvert would be placed underground. Mr. Gohde replied that the pump station was essentially adjacent to the ball diamond and the slide currently displayed was accurate. He further stated that the culvert would be located underground. Ms. Propp questioned how the parking of boat trailers would be affected and how much traffic there would be for maintenance to the pump station. Mr. Gohde responded that they would need access 1 -2 times a year for cleaning and monthly maintenance would need to be performed however the site should still be able to be used the same as it is today. Ms. Propp then inquired about the impact to the pedestrian trail. Mr. Gohde replied that it would be minimal. Ms. Lohry asked if the pump station could be moved south to not be in view of homes near the park, north of the school. Mr. Gohde responded that they had already adjusted the plans to move it further south than Melvin Avenue and to move it farther south again would require taking out more trees and landscaping from the park and will place it in view of more homes as it is currently located in front of the school property. Plan Commission Minutes February 16, 2010 Mr. Thorns questioned if the DNR approved the plans to discharge the stormwater into the lake and inquired about the references made in Mr. Mitchell's correspondence regarding the "disturbed water system" in Miller's Bay. Mr. Gohde replied that the current stormwater runoff goes into the lake but the City is currently working with the DNR on the Chapter 30 process for this installation. He further explained the permitting process with the DNR. Mr. Bowen inquired about how the capacity of the current system compared to the pump station system. Mr. Gohde responded that the pump station system had a much larger capacity. Mr. McHugh asked if the pedestrian trail was going to be used by vehicles, what type of vehicles would be accessing the trail. Mr. Gohde replied that either vacuum or pickup trucks would be accessing the trail and it would be for maintenance purposes only so the use would be minimal. Mr. McHugh stated that he understood that the pump station would have the capacity to handle 8 1, 000 gallons per minute and questioned if this would be sufficient to alleviate the flooding issues and what area would be covered by this. Mr. Gohde responded that they anticipated it would be sufficient to handle regular flooding issues and proceeded to explain the boundaries of the Melvin Avenue watershed. Mr. McHugh commented that he felt if the pump station could be moved to the south as discussed, it should be done. Mr. Gohde stated that it could result in the loss of more established trees and may significantly increase costs. Mr. Hinz commented that if the culverts could not handle the runoff as they currently exist, the most optimal plan for water removal should be utilized. Mr. Gohde stated that the two alternatives were a pump station with a detention basin or a larger pump station only. In the event that water is coming in faster, the pump station will perform better to remove it from the streets. Mr. Hinz questioned if there were any anticipated problems with the pump station alternative. Mr. Gohde responded that maintenance must be done to the system on a regular basis and that the pumps had a cycle for servicing. He gave further explanation on how the pumps maintenance cycle operates. Mr. Hinz then questioned if the pump station would always be on -line and if it had a backup generator to ensure the system would always be operational. Mr. Gohde responded affirmatively. Plan Commission Minutes February 16, 2010 Mr. McHugh commented that the lagoon at South Park was an asset to the park and questioned why a detention basin could not be constructed in Menominee Park to deal with the flooding issues. Mr. Gohde replied that even with a detention pond in the park, the pump station would still be necessary to empty the pond. Ms. Propp inquired how many of the water basins in the city have been reviewed. Mr. Gohde responded that he did not have exact figures on how many have been reviewed thus far, but they were attempting to deal with the worst basins first. Joanne Pollock, 1105 Baldwin Avenue, stated that they have lived in their home for 37 years and also own the property at 1005 Hazel Street. She felt that it was good news that the city is dealing with the flooding issue and that they had attended the neighborhood meeting held recently regarding the alternatives. She further stated that when they had purchased their property many years ago, they were told that no structure would ever be built in the park area and she disagreed with the fact that the pump station could not be moved farther south of its proposed location. She felt that it would be better for the citizens living on Hazel Street to have it relocated to the south as it would be less visible. Roland Woodruff, 1117 Baldwin Avenue, stated that he also was in support of moving the pump station further south. Helen Herlache, 1029 Hazel Street, also agreed with the other neighbor's statements regarding relocating the pump station. She commented that the berms in that location were not practical anyway and that they create drainage problems as they cause water to run back into the park. Ms. Propp stated that she felt the pump station will have a huge impact on the park and at a huge cost as well and she was mostly concerned that it does not fit into an overall stormwater management plan for the city. It appears that it is more related to the street reconstruction for Melvin Avenue and there are too many negative components to the plan. She further stated that this could lead to more pump stations being installed in the park in the future and she felt a full stormwater management plan should be addressed prior to moving forward with this installation. Ms. Lohry commented that she could live with the installation of the pump station in the park if it could be moved farther south and possibly enhanced with some trees surrounding the structure. Mr. Thorns stated that the city does not have overall plans for all stormwater management at this time but the flooding issues need to be dealt with. It seems that no one wants it on their property but to locate it in the park may be more acceptable if moved further south as suggested. This is just one of many issues that need to be dealt with as far as flooding problems in the city. He further commented that he felt it was a good idea to add toilets as well to service this area of the park. Mr. Bowen commented that we need to look at the issue of the green roof as not a potential but as a condition of approval instead. A dry detention pond would have better regulated the suspended solids which are not being addressed with the current plans submitted. He further stated that this was more of an engineering issue than planning, but if it is possible to outfit the facility to filter solids; this should also be added as a condition. Mr. Gohde stated that a filter could be retrofitted at a later date when technology is improved and cost effective measures become available. Plan Commission Minutes February 16, 2010 Mr. Buck commented that the retrofitting of the filter could be done at a later date and it would not necessarily be required to be added as a condition of approval. Mr. Thorns inquired if this pump station was contrary to the Comprehensive Plan as Mr. Borsuk implied. Mr. Buck responded that it was not contrary to the Comprehensive Plan as the plan states that both quantity and quality need to be dealt with. Mr. Gohde added that quality cannot be dealt with at every location and at every basin. Mr. Fojtik stated that there are areas on the west side with flooding issues but there is more open space to deal with the situation and on the east side of the city there is no room for this. Given that we are dealing with an existing neighborhood and the concerns for flooding are real, we have to make the best of a bad situation. Mr. McHugh stated that there have been complaints in the past that Menominee Park is being ruined because the view is not as good as it used to be however the addition of structures is inevitable. Other than installing the pump station the only other alternative is to do nothing and buying homes to be demolished to build a pond is worse than putting a structure in the park. He did not feel there was any other hope to resolve this situation. Mr. Thorns felt that conditions should be added to require the inclusion of a green roof and to examine the feasibility of moving the structure to the south closer to the tree line. Mr. Hinz stated that the neighbors want the street issues addressed and it seems that the only options here are to do something or to do nothing and from a planning perspective, the city needs to do something about the flooding situation. After hearing all sides of the matter, it appears that there will be some solids reduction with the proposed pump station. He proceeded to further discuss how it compared to the directives in the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Lohry inquired if it was feasible to move the pump station further south as discussed. Mr. Gohde replied that it was feasible however it would be more costly as there would be additional piping at a cost of $600 -$800 per foot, the pump station will have to be dug deeper, the structure will have to be larger, and the pumps themselves may have to be larger. Mr. Hinz stated that based on the discussion of where it should be located, he estimated that the additional cost for piping alone would be around $140,000. Mr. McHugh suggested that Mr. Gohde calculate the total additional costs and provide the Common Council with an estimate for their consideration. Ms. Propp stated that she felt the project should be delayed for one year to give staff time to look into an overall stormwater management plan for the east side. Motion by Thoms to approve the conditional use permit for a public utility structure in Menominee Park east of E. Melvin Avenue as requested with the following conditions: Plan Commission Minutes 10 February 16, 2010 1. The Department of Public Works shall provide a landscape plan showing substantial building perimeter landscaping to be approved by the Department of Community Development. 2. The Department of Public Works shall investigate the feasibility of relocating the pump station south along the walk /trail west of the tree line. 3. The inclusion of a park related amenity to the structure, such as restrooms. 4. Installation of a green (vegetative) roof to mitigate the additional impervious area of the building structure. Seconded by Monte. Motion carried 8 -1. Ayes- Bowen/ Thoms/Fojtik/Hinz/McHugh/Monte/ Lohry/Nollenberger. Nays- Propp. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 5:55 pm. (Monte/Propp) Respectfully submitted, David Buck Principal Planner Plan Commission Minutes 11 February 16, 2010