Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Plan Commission Minutes 1 May 16, 2006 PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 16, 2006 PRESENT: David Borsuk, Steven Gehling, Shirley Mattox, Kathleen Propp, Cathy Scherer, Jeff Thorkildsen, John Weinsheim, and Chairman Jon Dell’Antonia EXCUSED: Thomas Fojtik STAFF: Darryn Burich, Director of Planning Services, David Buck, Zoning Administrator/Associate Planner; and Vickie Rand, Recording Secretary Chairman Dell’Antonia called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. The meeting minutes of May 2, 2006 were approved as mailed. (Scherer/Propp) Unanimous. ITEM I: CONSENT AGENDA A: ACCESS CONTROL VARIANCE FOR A 45 FOOT WIDE DRIVEWAY ALONG THE 500 BLOCK OF S. KOELLER ST. – Gries Architectural Group, Inc., petitioner, River Valley One LLC, owner The petitioner/owner request approval of a 45 foot wide driveway opening whereas the code allows a maximum 30 foot wide driveway. Mr. Borsuk questioned the type of divider used between lanes. Mr. Buck stated it would be a 4’ wide physical structure, further enhanced with painted lane/divider markers and directional arrows. Mrs. Scherer questioned if the petitioner was included in the collaborative effort for the driveway design. Mr. Buck stated only the Planning Dept., the Transportation Dept., and the Engineering Dept. were involved in the collaborated effort for the design of the driveway. Mrs. Scherer questioned if the Access Control Variance was for only one entrance, and how they arrived at the widths for the entrance. Mr. Buck stated the request was for one entrance and explained that the entrance portion of the driveway was wider than the exit lanes to accommodate larger vehicles. He also explained how the design of the exit lanes would help alleviate stacking for vehicles turning left and allow vehicles turning right a more timely exit. Chairman Dell’Antonia questioned why the design didn’t include 2 entrance lanes as well as 2 exit lanes. Mr. Buck stated having two entrance lanes wouldn’t be more effective, but prove to be confusing. confusing. Andy Dumke, 2030 Menominee Drive, stated he was in agreement with the conditions as outlined in the Staff Report. He stated he originally requested two access points but is pleased with one entrance as designed by City staff. Heidi Supple, 4716 Baymont Lane, stated she was in agreement with staff on the design of the driveway. Plan Commission Minutes 2 May 16, 2006 B: DEDICATE AND VACATE A PORTION OF MARION ROAD IN THE MARION ROAD/PEARL AVENUE REDEVELOPMENT AREA – Department of Community Development, petitioner/owner The Department of Community Development requests dedication of a portion of constructed Marion Road as right-of-way and vacation of a portion of existing Marion Road right-of-way. Motion by Scherer for approval of the Consent Agenda subject to conditions for Item “A” as follows: ITEM “A” 1. The driveway is designed and constructed to contain one 14' ingress-only lane, one 4' wide mountable lane divider, and two 11' egress-only lanes. 2. Drive lanes and lane divider are visually marked to define lane widths and contain painted directional arrows. 3. A 15’ vision clearance triangle is maintained on each side of the driveway entrance with a maximum height of 30” for any object, including landscaping. Seconded by Mattox. Motion carried 8-0. II: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE ADDITION OF A PROPANE GAS DISPENSER AT 3700 JACKSON STREET – Rajan Chopra, petitioner, Oshkosh Pantry 41 LLC, owner The petitioner/owner request approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the expansion of an existing service station by adding a propane gas dispenser. Ms. Mattox questioned the height of the tank. Mr. Buck stated he didn’t have that information at this time. Ms. Mattox also questioned if staff has a preferred location in mind for the gas dispenser. Mr. Buck stated they would like to see the tank located as far away from the residential property as possible, but remain in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Borsuk questioned how much of the landscaping shown on the site plan was proposed and how much already exists. Mr. Buck stated approximately 50% of the landscaping shown on the site plan exists. Mr. Borsuk questioned if there were also other structures existing in the area proposed for the propane gas dispenser. Mr. Buck noted picnic tables were currently located in that area. Ms. Mattox questioned if the proposed site was in front of the picnic tables. Mr. Buck noted the picnic tables would be removed and the propane gas dispenser is proposed to be located in that area on a concrete slab. Plan Commission Minutes 3 May 16, 2006 Mrs. Propp asked for clarification that staff agreed with the proposal, just not the location of the dispenser, and questioned if it wouldn’t be best to have an agreement on the location of the propane gas dispenser before giving approval. Mr. Buck replied that staff was in agreement with the addition of the propane gas dispenser, however, more review was needed for placement of the dispenser on the property. He added that there are plenty of alternative locations available to be in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance. Mrs. Scherer questioned if it was usual to have a site with 83% of impervious surface. Mr. Buck stated that it was unusual. Mr. Burich noted that variances have been previously granted for setbacks on this site. Mrs. Propp agreed that the location for the tank should be moved and noted the site was tight. She also questioned if all the parking spaces were needed. Mr. Buck stated he believed 19 parking stalls are provided, and 15 stalls are required. Discussion continued regarding the location for the propane gas dispenser on the site with consideration given to the adjacent residential and industrial districts, the setbacks, the building code regarding locating the dispenser near the building and the noise, odor and light associated with the location of the dispenser. Mrs. Scherer stated she saw no problem with the addition of the propane gas dispenser on the site as long as it is located in compliance with the building code and Zoning Ordinance. Motion by Scherer for approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the expansion of an existing service station by adding a propane gas dispenser at 3700 Jackson Street subject to the following conditions: 1. Placement of dispenser and bulk tank meet the setback regulations of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The bulk tank is screened from view through the use of fencing, vegetation or other barrier. 3. A solid fence, a minimum of 6’ tall, is placed to the inside of the landscaped buffer on the east property line. 4. 4. Site lighting meets the regulations of the Zoning Ordinance, Section 30-35 (K), noise meets the regulations of the Health Code, Section 15-18 and odor meets the regulations of the Morals & Conduct Code, Section 17-33. Seconded by Thorkildsen. Motion carried 8-0 Plan Commission Minutes 4 May 16, 2006 III: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN AUTOMOBILE SERVICE FACILITY AND ACCESS CONTROL VARIANCE FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT 2450 S. WASHBURN STREET (KWIK TRIP) – Convenience Store Investments, petitioner, SSS Acquisitions Inc. /KIN, LLC /601 Oregon St., LLC, owners The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to operate an automobile service facility (fuel and oil sales) on three properties generally located at 2450 S. Washburn Street (former Wisconsin Farms property). Mr. Borsuk questioned if the landscape plan meets the Highway 41 Corridor requirements. Mr. Burich stated it would be required to meet the Highway 41 Corridor standards. Mr. Weinsheim questioned if the first driveway from STH 91 would be restricted for car use only. Mr. Burich stated it was not restricted, as the other driveways are in sight for use by larger vehicles. Mrs. Propp questioned if the east elevation facing Highway 41 meets the Highway 41 Corridor requirements, as she felt it needs some architectural improvements. Mr. Burich stated the east elevation meets the Highway 41 Corridor requirements, and also noted the Zoning Ordinance doesn’t include enough details at this time for more exterior improvements, although it is something the staff is working on. He also noted this location isn’t as highly visible from Highway 41 as most locations along the corridor due to the elevation of the site. Ms. Mattox questioned if there were different models of Kwik Trip buildings, as it seemed Oshkosh was getting the economy model compared to the new Kwik Trip in the Appleton area. Mr. Burich stated the new Kwik Trip building in the Town of Grand Chute is quite nice, however, this does meet ordinance standards. He also mentioned there might be some cost issues involved in this site. Chairman Dell’Antonia questioned why the proposal for this driveway was smaller than the driveway for the Koeller Street, Golden Corral location. Mr. Burich stated staff reacts to each request separately, and this was as close to their request as they felt feasible. Mr. Buck added that there is also more than one driveway at this site. Mrs. Scherer questioned if one shared access is all that is allowed according to the Access Control Ordinance. Mr. Burich replied that according to the Access Control Ordinance, two driveways are allowed on this site and the developers are requesting an additional driveway. Mrs. Scherer questioned why two driveways wouldn’t be adequate. She questioned the need for the southernmost driveway, the closest driveway to STH 44, and discussed the traffic concerns of the Wisconsin Department of Transportation with the location of the northernmost driveway. Mr. Weinsheim questioned if there was signage to direct trucks to enter driveways further north on Washburn Street. Mr. Burich stated in discussions he has recently had with the Department of Public Works it was considered to close the median near the southernmost driveway to only allow right hand in and right hand out traffic. Plan Commission Minutes 5 May 16, 2006 Hans Zietlow, Director of Real Estate for Kwik Trip, 1626 Oak Street, LaCrosse, stated he would start by answering previous questions members of the Plan Commission have brought up. Mr. Zietlow replied to Ms. Mattox’s question stating they were able to construct a more expensive store in the Town of Grand Chute because they didn’t have the stormwater requirements there as they have in Oshkosh, however he noted the building proposed for Oshkosh would be constructed with masonry. Mr. Zietlow replied to Mr. Weinsheim’s questioned stating signage is proposed to direct truck traffic to the 3rd driveway. In reply to the Access Control Ordinance, Mr. Zietlow stated it is required to have separation between driveways of at least 125’, but the northernmost driveway is quite close to the driveway at 2326 S. Washburn, and revisions may need to be made in that regard. He also noted the southernmost driveway is a work in progress at this point and they would be in agreement with closing the median to allow only a right in and right out traffic pattern. Mr. Zietlow stated Kwik Trip was in agreement with all other conditions as noted in the Staff Report, and noted the Access Control Variance request was to be able to construct a third driveway. Ms. Mattox questioned if enough parking spaces were available as she only counted 24 and believed 32 were required. Mr. Burich stated the parking would be required to be code compliant. Mr. Zietlow stated they wouldn’t have any problem providing the required number of parking stalls. Ms. Mattox also questioned the amount of greenspace on the site. Mr. Zietlow stated the site would have 33% of greenspace. Mr. Burich stated the required amount of greenspace for this site is 15% and they are in excess. Mrs. Scherer again questioned if the southernmost access was absolutely necessary. Mr. Zietlow stated they felt it was necessary to alleviate congestion near the gas pumps, as vehicles need room to maneuver into position. Mr. Zietlow also submitted the original Certified Survey Map to the recording secretary at this time (on file in the Division of Planning Services). Motion by Propp for approval of a conditional use permit to operate an automobile service facility on three properties generally located at 2450 S. Washburn Street and an access control variance for an additional driveway and for a driveway that exceeds more than the maximum width for a Class II driveway of 30 feet, as found consistent with Section 30-11 (D) of the Zoning Ordinance, subject to the following conditions: 1) Properties be combined into a single parcel. 2) Access control variance for the southern most driveway is approved at 36 feet with an ingress lane width of 12 feet, and egress lanes of 10 feet. The ingress and egress lanes are to be separated with a 4 foot divider/rumble strip with final design of strip to be determined by the Department of Community Development. Lanes are to be marked with arrows. Driveways to have the maximum flare width allowed by Ordinance. Plan Commission Minutes 6 May 16, 2006 3) Northernmost driveway location shall be compliant with Access Control Ordinance separation requirements. 4) If operational issues develop with the southernmost driveway, an agreement or waiver of assessment shall be provided by the developer for work associated with altering the median on S. Washburn Street. Seconded by Weinsheim. Motion carried 8-0. IV: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANT FACILITY AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF WITZEL AVENUE AND NORTH SAWYER STREET (TACO JOHN’S) – Richard Fisher, applicant, Daun Bock, LLC, owner The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to establish a drive-thru restaurant on the subject properties. Mr. Weinsheim questioned where the speaker was located for the drive-thru service, and if the developers have taken into consideration the adjacent residential property when planning for lighting on the site. Mr. Burich stated the developer was in the audience and would be able to address those questions. Mr. Weinsheim also questioned where the dumpster was located as it appeared quite close to the residential property on the NW side of the site, and if there are building code requirements that would apply. Rick Fisher, 642 Thelosen Drive, Kimberly, in response to Mr. Weinsheim’s questions stated the drive-thru speaker is on the west side of the building. In regard to the dumpster, Mr. Fisher stated there are no building codes that apply to dumpster enclosures because there is no roof on the enclosure. Mr. Fisher stated the dumpster would be located on the NW lot line along the fencing, away from other structures, and also noted the other structure on the lot would be constructed with fire wall rated materials as required. Mr. Weinsheim stated he was concerned with locating the dumpster close to residential properties because of the odors. Mr. Fisher stated the dumpster is required to be covered. He also stated this location was chosen for the dumpster to be able to share it with any business that may develop on the north end of the site. Mr. Fisher stated they basically didn’t have any issues with the conditions as recommended in the Staff Report, except for condition number one where they didn’t want to have to combine the properties into a single parcel but would agree to a cross access agreement. Mr. Burich stated the setbacks might be an issue if the parcels aren’t combined. He stated he will do further review of the site, but according to the current site plan the parcels would need to be combined. He also noted the interior traffic circulation pattern with curbing will have to be considered when reviewing the site plan for separate parcels. Ms. Mattox questioned what materials would be used for the dumpster enclosure. Mr. Fisher stated a board on board style of enclosure would be used. Plan Commission Minutes 7 May 16, 2006 Jerry Daun, 1104 Grove Street, stated the concerns with condition number one were that they are not sure of the future use at this time, and they have been contacted to sell that parcel. Mr. Burich stated that upon further consideration, they could eliminate that condition. Mrs. Scherer questioned the setback requirements of a commercial property adjacent to a residential property. Mr. Burich replied that a transitional yard requirement of 25’ was required on the north side of the site, adjacent to the residential use. Motion by Thorkildsen for approval of a conditional use permit to establish a drive-thru restaurant at the NW corner of Witzel Avenue and N. Sawyer Street found to be consistent with Section 30-11 (D) of the Zoning Ordinance subject to the following conditions: 1. The dumpster location be adjusted to preserve the mature ash tree along the west property line. 2. All driveway openings be eliminated along N. Sawyer Street with the exception of the proposed main access. 3. The parking lot perimeter and internal landscape island be enclosed by a 6” concrete curb. 4. The asphalt terrace along N. Sawyer Street be removed and replaced with greenspace. 5. The main driveway access be adjusted to reduce the conflict with the City’s traffic pole or the pole is to be relocated at the developer/owner expense per the Transportation Department. 6. Measures be taken to prohibit vehicle ingress/egress to Faust Avenue. If operational problems occur with this driveway access, the curb cut is to be eliminated at the developer/owner expense. 7. The undeveloped portion of the site is to be re-seeded and put in greenspace until development occurs. Ms. Mattox requested Mr. Burich to locate the adjacent residential property. Mr. Burich pointed out the residential property on the map displayed in the PowerPoint presentation. He located the proposed site for the dumpster in relationship to the residential properties. Mr. Weinsheim stated he thinks this location is great for this development, however, he is still unhappy with the location of the dumpster, although he has noticed the neighbor has been notified of the meeting, therefore given the opportunity to voice his comments and concerns. He stated he is pleased to see there is a fence between the land uses. Seconded by Borsuk. Motion carried 8-0 V: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A 17 BEDROOM ADDITION TO A COMMUNITY BASED RESIDENTIAL FACILITY AT 711 BAY SHORE DRIVE (LAKESHORE MANOR) -CRL, LLC, petitioner, Health Care Reit, Inc., owner The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit for a 17 bedroom (24 bed) addition to an existing 20 bedroom (30 bed) community based residential facility (CBRF) known as Lakeshore Manor located at 711 Bay Shore Drive. Plan Commission Minutes 8 May 16, 2006 Ms. Mattox stated it appears the structures are only setback 25’ from the river, and questioned why the 65’ or 75’ setback didn’t apply in this area. Mr. Burich stated the Shoreland Zoning requirements didn’t apply here because of how long the parcel has been in the City. Ms. Mattox questioned if the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) didn’t have a problem with the setbacks. Mr. Burich replied they were not required to review the proposal. Ms. Mattox stated she had attended the open house and it was a first class facility. Mr. Gehling mentioned the floodplain issues associated with the property at 905 Bay Shore Drive and questioned if there was any concern with this property. Mr. Burich stated that he didn’t think the floodplain was an issue for the development. Motion by Weinsheim for approval of a conditional use permit for a 17 bedroom (24 bed) addition to an existing 20 bedroom (30 bed) community based residential facility (CBRF) known as Lakeshore Manor located located at 711 Bay Shore Drive found to be consistent with Section 30-11 (D) of the Zoning Ordinance subject to the following conditions: 1) CBRF use for elderly and dementia patients. 2) Driveway entrance to Bay Shore Drive be reconfigured to allow two-way traffic. 3) The site shall not sheet drain to the public street. A site grading and drainage plan shall be approved by the Department of Public Works. 4) A five foot sidewalk easement be provided along Bay Shore Drive and the sidewalk constructed per the Department of Public Works. Seconded by Gehling. Motion carried 8-0. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 5:13 p.m. (Thorkildsen/Borsuk). Unanimous. Respectfully submitted, DARRYN L. BURICH Director of Planning Services DLB/vlr