Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 19, 2005 PRESENT: Lee Bettes, David Borsuk, Steven Gehling, Shirley Mattox, Kathleen Propp, Jeff Thorkildsen, and John Weinsheim EXCUSED: Thomas Fojtik, Cathy Scherer, Donald Simons, and Jon Dell’Antonia STAFF: Darryn Burich, Director of Planning Services; Susan Kepplinger, Principal Planner and Vickie Rand, Recording Secretary The meeting was called to order at 4:00 p.m. by Mr. Burich. Mr. Burich stated a Chairman Pro Tem would need to be nominated to run the meeting in the absence of the Chairman and Vice Chairman. A motion was made by Thorkildsen to nominate Lee Bettes as Chairman Pro Tem. Seconded by Borsuk. Unanimous. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. The meeting minutes of July 5, 2005 were approved as mailed. (Thorkildsen/Gehling) Unanimous. I: THREE LOT LAND DIVISION/CERTIFIED SURVEY MAP FOR PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTH OF WAUKAU AVENUE AND WEST OF WHITE TAIL LANE – Carow Land Surveying, petitioner, Hunters Ridge Apartments of Oshkosh and Hunters Ridge of Oshkosh LLC, owners Midwest Real Estate is currently developing approximately 75 acres of land on the City’s southwest side for a combination of multiple family condominiums and apartments. Several buildings have already been constructed and in order to continue development, additional street right-of-way and infrastructure needs to be developed, which requires approval of a land division that will create one additional lot (Lot 1) south of proposed Ruffed Grouse Way. Chairman Bettes questioned if the area was purely a wetland or if there was a navigable stream in the area. Mr. Burich stated it was a wetland area but did not appear to be a stream. Mr. Gehling questioned what the park fees were based on since the area is being developed with less density than allowed. Mr. Burich stated the full park fees would be collected at permit issuance. Motion by Weinsheim for approval of the proposed land division/certified survey map and for a variance to be granted to the Subdivision Regulations to allow collection of the park fees at the time of building permit issuance subject to the following condition: 1) A note be added to the face of the CSM requiring payment of full park fees at the time of building permit issuance. Seconded by Thorkildsen. Plan Commission Minutes -2-July 19, 2005 Ms. Mattox questioned what could be done with a wetland. Mr. Burich stated a wetland is not developable, and a special permit would be needed from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to put up a structure to cross the area. Ms. Mattox questioned if it could be a park. Mr. Borsuk stated the area couldn’t be developed. Mr. Burich stated the area would be limited to a boardwalk. Mr. Gehling questioned if lot 1 would be used for a detention area. Mr. Burich replied that the owner has been working with the Department of Public Works for a large detention area on lot 1. Ms. Mattox questioned if there was adequate room to maneuver in the lot. Mr. Burich explained that the development provides for good internal circulation and had been recently issued an access control variance for driveways. Motion carried 7-0. II: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AT 110 ALGOMA BOULEVARD – Lucinda Vette, petitioner, John Wallace III, owner Lucinda Vette, petitioner, and John Wallace III, owner requests the Plan Commission to review and approve a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow for a mixed use commercial /residential development at 110 Algoma Boulevard. The 3 story 7,300 square foot building is zoned C-3DO Central Commercial with a Downtown Overlay District that allows mixed-use structures through CUP. Mr. Burich explained that a CUP had previously been issued by the owner but had lapsed so a new CUP permit had to be granted. Mr. Thorkildsen questioned if anything has changed since the application was last submitted. Susan Kepplinger, Principal Planner, City of Oshkosh, 215 Church Street, stated the original proposal was submitted for 6 apartment units and this proposal includes 8 units. Mr. Weinsheim questioned if adequate parking would be available. Ms. Kepplinger stated she has been working with the Director of Transportation on a new approach for the tenants to obtain permits to park at night. She stated she doesn’t anticipate any problems with this approach; however, it still needs to go before the Parking Utility. Ms. Mattox questioned where the dumpsters would be located. Mr. Burich stated the dumpsters would be located behind the structure. Discussion followed on dumpsters exposed at this time and staff working on cleaning up the area. Pat Weston, 3267 Hickory Ridge Land, Green Bay, stated he was available to answer any questions the Plan Commission may have. Ms. Mattox questioned what kind of clientele they would be marketing to. Lucinda Vette, 716-A Oregon St., stated that 4 apartments would be receiving grant money therefore they would be income controlled apartments. Motion by Borsuk for approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow for a mixed-use commercial/residential development at 110 Algoma Boulevard found to be consistent with Standards set forth in Section 30-11 (D) of the Zoning Ordinance, subject to the following conditions: Plan Commission Minutes -3-July 19, 2005 1) Evidence of parking availability for residential units be submitted to the City by the Developer prior to occupancy permits being granted for the residential uses. 2) Dumpster area to be screened with screening materials to be approved by the Department of Community Development. Seconded by Weinsheim. Motion carried 7-0. III: LAND ACQUISITION AND LAND DISPOSITION – 171-175 S. WESTFIELD STREET – City Administration City Administration is requesting approval to acquire and then dispose of a vacant lot located at 171-175 S. Westfield Street. This proposal involves purchasing a vacant lot from the Winnebago County Housing Authority using the 2005 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) fund and transferring it to a private developer for construction of a duplex. The duplex project will contain four bedrooms in each unit. Mr. Borsuk questioned who would be acquiring the property. Ms. Kepplinger stated that the City and County have been working together to secure an owner, a manager, and a service provider for the property. She stated the County has sent out Requests for Proposals (RFP’s) and the City will work with the County to select appropriate staff. Ms. Mattox questioned if this was a County building. Mr. Kepplinger stated the County has no use for the property as is willing to sell. Chairman Bettes questioned if they were looking for a private owner or a government owner. Ms. Kepplinger replied they were looking for a private owner for the site. Fred Sperling, 290 S. Westfield Street, stated a number of years ago the subject property was taken from him through an action involving Mr. Franzen and Attorney Warren Kraft for a particular price. He also stated at that time a discrimination suit was filed against him during which time parts of the lot, not shown in this presentation, were sold. Mr. Sperling went on to say there are also covenants on this lot, and Mr. Franzen and Attorney Kraft stated the City didn’t need to pay attention to the covenants. He stated the land was taken from him by decree for $20,000 when it was worth $36,000 at that time. He stated an area on the west side of the lot was sold to the shopping center, therefore this site became smaller and smaller. He urged the Plan Commission to carefully consider who would be occupying this property. Mr. Sperling questioned if a duplex with 4 bedrooms on each side was an appropriate use for this area. He stated there is not one house on Westfield Street with more than 3 bedrooms, and density should be considered. He stated he agreed to a decree, therefore he wouldn’t be allowed to purchase the property and didn’t feel the public should be allowed to purchase the property either. He stated his neighbors have invested in homes in this area and fought to keep the R-2 Residential District. Mr. Gehling questioned why the City Administration was getting involved in the acquisition and disposition of the property, and why the County couldn’t handle this transaction on their own. Ms. Kepplinger stated the City is partnering with the County to make it affordable by using block grant money and will dispose of it as a grant to the select owner. Plan Commission Minutes -4-July 19, 2005 Mr. Borsuk questioned the density that involved 8 out of 12 people who needed to be relocated from the County Park View Health Center. Ms. Kepplinger stated there would be 3 permanent residents and 1 caregiver in each unit, similar to a 3 bedroom home density. Barbara Sales, 120 S. Westfield Street, stated there is already a lot of traffic in the area because of Franklin Elementary School, Tippler Middle School, and the High School, including a lot of children and pets. She questioned what this would do for the traffic situation, and she felt there would be to many vehicles added to an already congested area. Ken Stoffel, 220 Washington Avenue, Department of Human Services for Winnebago County, stated each unit of the duplex would have 4 bedrooms with one bedroom used for office space. He stated it would be possible to have 4 permanent residents at some time in the future; however, they weren’t planning for that at this time. He stated the types of people that would reside in this home would be disabled, cognitively disabled, or would have medical needs. He stated the age range was between 24 and 70. Mr. Stoffel stated there shouldn’t be a problem with parking as the residents wouldn’t be driving, only the staff, so there would be only 2 cars there. Mr. Gehling questioned what the maximum number of people living in this residence would be. Mr. Stoffel stated the maximum would be 4 people and 1 staff person in each unit. Ms. Mattox questioned what design would be used for the duplex. Mr. Stoffel stated they are soliciting bids at this time and planned to review them soon, and should know by December 1, 2005 what style of housing would be used. Ms. Mattox also questioned how many caregivers would be on site. Mr. Stoffel stated 2 caregivers would be on hand during the day to assist residents. He stated they would want to start utilizing the community for various activities. Ms. Mattox questioned if there would be parking for caregivers. Mr. Stoffel stated there would be 2 garages available for caregiver parking. Mr. Bettes questioned if 6 parking spaces were required. Discussion followed and Mr. Burich stated he would need to refer to the Zoning Ordinance regarding the requirements for duplexes. Mr. Borsuk questioned if any of the residents would have a criminal background, and if a condition should be added for no criminal felons to be located in this area. Mr. Stoffel stated he has not worked with anyone with a criminal background, they have been disabled, cognitively disabled or with medical needs. Mr. Borsuk stated he didn’t want to see any sex offenders located in this area. Ms. Kepplinger stated with the close proximity to schools, a sex offender wouldn’t be able to be located there and it shouldn’t warrant a concern. Mr. Weinsheim questioned the zoning guidelines for the number of individuals on one property. Mr. Burich stated the R-1 requirements are allowed in an R-2 Residence District, however, more than 8 residents would require a Conditional Use Permit. Ms. Mattox Mattox stated she was concerned with the legalities of this use. Chairman Bettes stated the Plan Commission needs to look at the use of the land not the legal concerns. Motion by Borsuk for approval to acquire and then dispose of a vacant lot located at 171-175 S. Westfield Street subject to the following condition: 1) The design of the project be approved by the Department of Community Development. Seconded by Gehling. Motion carried 7-0. Plan Commission Minutes -5-July 19, 2005 IV: PARTIAL RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION AND DISPOSITION OF VACATED RIGHT-OFWAY (BAUMAN STREET) – Gayhart and Rasmussen, petitioner The petitioners are proposing a partial right-of-way vacation involving the easterly 20 feet of Bauman Street between Buchanan Avenue on the north and Van Buren Avenue on the south. The purpose of the vacation is to create additional buildable area (extra depth) for several undeveloped properties located along the east side of Bauman Street with Fox River frontage that are impacted by the floodplain. One-half or the westerly 10 feet will be vacated to the City while the easterly 10 feet will be vacated to the adjacent property owners (i.e. Gayart/Rasmussen and others). Because the City does not need to retain the vacated 10-foot strip, it is proposed to dispose the 10-foot strip to the adjacent property owners. The effect of the vacation and disposition will be to add approximately 20 feet of depth to the subject properties. Bauman Street is an an 80-foot wide right-of-way which, because of its function as a local type street, is wider than needed and can be reduced to 60 feet as proposed without compromising its ability to accommodate existing or future traffic needs for the area or involve any hard surfaced road area. Mr. Gehling questioned if any money would be changing hands since this is City owned property. Mr. Burich stated these lands were originally platted for right-of-way purposes and since there is no longer a need by the City to retain the full width of the right-of-way it can be returned to private use as existed prior to platting. He also explained the City has not had to acquire any of the lands along Bauman Street that are proposed to be vacated and disposed so there is no need to recover any associated costs. Wayne Gayhart, 1920 Cliffview Court, stated this was a trapezoid type property that was difficult to build on because of the required setback from the river. He stated all other streets have a 60’ width and 4 lots have never never been developed. He also stated the original river line runs along the Bauman Street lot line. Mr. Gayhart stated 250’ of the property has been filled in. He stated he has worked with the DNR who has stated they couldn’t build on the property, however, his attorney has brought to light that it could be built on. Mr. Gayhart stated this would result in more property taxes collected by the City. Mrs. Propp questioned if this area was zoned commercial. Mr. Gayhart stated he planned on constructing a duplex on the property. Mr. Gehling stated this was a good use of the land as an 80’ wide street was too large for this area, although he stated if the City owns the property they should receive an equivocal market value for the land. He stated it would be reasonable to accept payment and get the money up front. Mr. Weinsheim stated that since the vacation and disposition would make the properties developable, the City would benefit from the increased property tax value similar to a TIF. Motion by Borsuk for approval of a partial right-of-way vacation and land disposition. Seconded by Gehling. Motion carried 7-0. V: ZONE CHANGE TO C-3PD, CENTRAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 545 HIGH AVENUE – HIWISCA, petitioner/owner The applicant is requesting to change the zoning of the property at 545 High Avenue from C-2 General Commercial District and R-5 Multiple Dwelling District to C-3PD Central Commercial District with a Planned Development Overlay. The subject property is commercially used and contains an older 21,000 square foot multi-tenant commercial building that is being rehabilitated after damage by fire. Plan Commission Minutes -6-July 19, 2005 Norse Krohn II, 8780 S.E. 141st Road, Summerfield, Florida, owner of 533 High Avenue which is a 4 plex, regularly rented to college students stated he would not have a problem with changing the zoning to C-2PD. He stated he believed this would require the developer to get approval from the City for any changes. Mr. Krohn stated he was opposed to a C-3 zoning, because with a C-2 zoning he wouldn’t have to worry about the land use. Mr. Krohn stated as he drove by the site he found it boarded up, and he would like to know of the developers plans for the site in a C-3PD that he couldn’t do in a C-2PD. He stated he has a retro property next door and is concerned about what will be developed on the subject site. Mrs. Propp stated a PD Designation would give the Plan Commission more control over the development of the site. Mr. Burich confirmed what Mrs. Propp had stated and added that any changes to the site would need to be reviewed through the Conditional Use Permit /Planned Development process. He stated the reason for the change to C-3 vs. C-2 was because this would be consistent with the zoning in the surrounding area. He stated parts of the site are currently non-conforming in a C-2 District. Mr. Borsuk questioned if parts of the site are currently non-conforming if it wouldn’t serve the City better at this time not make any zone changes to the site until the plans for the site are brought forward. He also questioned if the damage to the property was greater than 50 percent. Mr. Burich explained what changes to the site would require the City’s approval. Discussion followed regarding the dollar amount of damage to the property vs. the square footage of the property. Chairman Bettes questioned if a 15% green space was required. Mr. Burich stated the only request at this time is for a zone change. Chairman Bettes asked if a PD could be allowed when we don’t know what the benefits to the City would be. Mr. Gehling questioned why a request for a zone change has come forward forward since there is no driving need for improvements on the site. Mr. Burich stated the zoning would be in place to allow for future development without having to go through the zone change process when changes are proposed on site. Motion by Weinsheim to lay the item over until the developer could be present. Seconded by Propp. Motion carried 7-0. OTHER BUSINESS Discussion of Setting a Date for a Workshop in regards to Updating the Zoning Ordinance There was no discussion on this item in lieu of Chairman Dell’Antonia’s absence. Grading and Drainage Plans Mr. Borsuk stated it would be helpful to have a presentation of the ordinance requirements regarding stormwater regulations. He stated he would also like an overview regarding ponds, detention areas, and fountains. Mr. Burich stated he would find out when the Department of Public Works was available and schedule a workshop for a presentation. Highway 41 Corridor Overlay/Shoreline Development per the Comprehensive Plan Mr. Borsuk stated he would also like to look at revisions that might be necessary for the Zoning Ordinance in regards to the design standards of the Highway 41 Corridor Overlay. Plan Commission Minutes -7-July 19, 2005 Mr. Burich handed out an outline of the “Top 13” Implementation Actions of the Comprehensive Plan and explained where the staff was at with each one, and the progress being made on the revisions to the Zoning Ordinance. Chairman Bettes questioned if the revisions could be reviewed by the Plan Commission on an individual basis. Mr. Burich stated they would be brought forward on an individual basis and stated that revisions proposed for the parking and landscaping standards should be ready sometime this year for review. Mr. Borsuk stated an overview of the grading and drainage requirements and the shoreline development requirements would enable the Plan Commission to have a more intelligent discussion when such items are brought forward. Valuation of Goals of the Comprehensive Plan Chairman Bettes questioned if the City Council incorporate any of the 13 priority items in the process of developing goals for the City Manager. Ms. Mattox stated she didn’t think the “Top 13” Implementation Actions of the Comprehensive Plan were incorporated in his review. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 5:30 p.m. (Thorkildsen/Weinsheim). Unanimous. Respectfully submitted, DARRYN L. BURICH Planning Services Director DLB/vlr