HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes
PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 21, 2005 PRESENT: Lee Bettes, David Borsuk, Steven Gehling, Shirley Mattox, Kathleen Propp, Cathy Scherer, Jeff Thorkildsen, John Weinsheim and Jon Dell’Antonia
Chairman EXCUSED: Donald Simons STAFF: Darryn Burich, Director of Planning Services; and Vickie Rand, Recording Secretary Susan Kepplinger, Principal Planner, and Jackson Kinney, Director
of Community Development The meeting was called to order at 4:00 p.m. by Chairman Dell’Antonia. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. The meeting minutes of June 7, 2005
were approved as mailed. (Thorkildsen/Propp) Unanimous. I. CONSENT AGENDA A: EXTRATERRITORIAL THREE LOT LAND DIVISION/CERTIFIED SURVEY MAP FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SW CORNER OF RIPPLE
AVE AND KNAPP STREET IN THE TOWN OF NEKIMI – ANR Pipeline, petitioner, EAA, owner ANR Pipeline is requesting to acquire a small (less than one acre) portion of an existing 148 acre parcel
of land owned by the EAA for the purposes of placing a natural gas metering station on on the parcel. No other development appears to be proposed on the lots. B: ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY
FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY PURPOSES (EICHSTADT ROAD) – Department of Public Works, petitioner, Byron Leinweber, owner The Department of Public Works is requesting to acquire lands for right-of-way
purposes as identified on the attached Certified Survey Map. Public Works is requesting to acquire the land to resolve a stormwater drainage issue across the property. Acquisition will
allow for an eventual link to Fernau Avenue on the south as illustrated on a concept map from the North Industrial Park study. C: GRANT EASEMENT ON CITY PROPERTY AT 811 E. MURDOCK AVE
– Wisconsin Public Service (WPS), petitioner, City of Oshkosh, owner WPS is requesting the City to provide a 15’x15’ anchor easement on property located at 811 E. Murdock Avenue, which
is Fire Station 18. The easement is located along the northeast portion of the property along Murdock Avenue adjacent to the sidewalk. The easement is needed for anchor that guy wires
will be attached to support an electrical transformer structure. The Fire Department has reviewed the easement and does not foresee an issue with its provision, nor does it appear that
granting the easement will be detrimental to or change the character of the area. There was no discussion on the Consent Agenda. Motion by Bettes for approval of the Consent Agenda.
Seconded by Weinsheim. Motion carried 9-0.
Plan Commission Minutes -2-June 21, 2005 II: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW FOR A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AT 1856 OMRO ROAD – Kurt Kielisch, petitioner and owner Kurt
Kielisch, petitioner and owner, requests the Plan Commission to review and approve a conditional use permit/development plan review for a commercial development at 1856 Omro Road. The
subject property is 0.84 of an acre in size and is zoned C-2 PD General Commercial District with a Planned Development Overlay. There was no discussion on 1856 Omro Road. Motion by Thorkildsen
for approval of a conditional use permit /development plan review for a commercial development at 1856 Omro Road found to be in compliance with the standards of Section 30-11, and 30-33
of the Zoning Ordinance subject to the following conditions: 1) Updated landscaping plan with required screening must be submitted to the Department of Community Development for approval.
2) Site is limited to one pylon sign for the overall development. 3) Grading and drainage drainage plan submitted to the Department of Public Works. Seconded by Scherer. Motion carried
9-0. III: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW FOR A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AT 2300 WESTOWNE AVENUE – Westfront Properties LLC, petitioner and owner Westfront Properties, petitioner
and owner, requests the Plan Commission to review and approve a conditional use permit/development plan review for a commercial development at 2300 Westowne Avenue. The subject property
is zoned C-2/PD General Commercial District with a Planned Development Overlay. The request applies to the western portion of the 2.42-acre site. The Plan Commission and Common Council
approved the development on the eastern portion of the site in 2003. Ms. Mattox questioned what kind of business would be locating on the subject site. Mr. Burich replied that general
retail tenants would occupy the space. Ms. Mattox questioned how we could determine the number of parking spaces needed if we don’t know the use. Mr. Burich replied the most restrictive
use is used to determine the number of parking spaces. Ms. Mattox questioned the landscape plan for the site. Mr. Burich stated that no base standard modifications were being asked for,
therefore, no upgraded or enhanced landscape plan is being recommended. Mr. Thorkildsen questioned if one sign was being recommended for all uses on the site. Mr. Burich stated that
no plan for signage had been submitted, therefore staff was recommending for one pylon sign to serve the entire site. He stated if they bring a proposal forth that does not comply with
the ordinance standards, the request would need to come before the Plan Commission for approval. Mr. Bettes stated he is proud of the development in the Westowne area and he is happy
to see one access that will serve both buildings on this site. He stated the Plan Commission should insist on cross access agreements in the future where applicable, and that the ordinance
may need to be revised to include the appropriate requirements in that regard.
Plan Commission Minutes -3-June 21, 2005 Motion by Weinsheim for approval of the conditional use permit /development plan review for a commercial development at 2300 Westowne Avenue
to be found in compliance with the standards of Section 30-11, and 30-33 of the Zoning ordinance subject to the following conditions: 1. The east elevation to be improved in appearance
with modifications to be approved by the Department of Community Development. 2. Site is limited to one pylon sign for the overall development. 3. Sidewalk to be installed along the
Westowne Avenue frontage in accordance with the Department of Public Works Regulations. Seconded by Borsuk. Motion carried 9-0. IV: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
FOR A TRUCK STOP FACILITY WHICH INCLUDES USED VEHICLE AND PARTS SALES, VEHICLE REPAIR, VEHICLE WRECKING AND DISMANTLING, AND VEHICLE TOWING AND TEMPORARY VEHICLE STORAGE AT LOREN’S TRUCK
PLAZA, 1701 FOUNTAIN AVENUE -Lorenz Rangeloff, petitioner; Alois and Yvette Collins, owners Lorenz Rangeloff, petitioner, Alois and Yvette Collins, owners, request approval of a Conditional
Use Permit/Planned Development Review for property located at 1701 Fountain Avenue. The petitioner requests to expand the existing truck stop facility to allow for used vehicle and parts
sales, vehicle repair, vehicle wrecking and dismantling, and vehicle towing and temporary vehicle storage. The single-story structure on site contains approximately 8,800 square feet,
comprised of a restaurant, retail space, and auto repair facility. The proposal also calls for remodeling of the existing restaurant and a 10,500 sq. ft. building addition to allow for
expanded vehicle repairs, vehicle dismantling and parts storage. The proposal also identifies new open storage and parking areas on site. Mr. Burich introduced the item and stated that
a revised site plan had been submitted Monday, June 20, not giving him time for a review and analysis of the submittal. Mrs. Scherer asked what the architectural standards were for the
Highway 41 Corridor. Mr. Burich stated metal buildings are allowed, but masonry needs to be used on all sides. Mrs. Scherer noted that masonry wasn’t shown on any of the elevations.
Mr. Burich stated they would need to resubmit a site plan that would show compliance with all of the Ordinance Standards of the Highway 41 Corridor. Chairman Dell’Antonia stated there
was a condition included in the Staff Report in that regard. Mr. Bettes stated that the Comprehensive Plan identifies the area along the Highway 41 Corridor to be developed as a commercial
use, and questioned if this use wouldn’t be more of an industrial use. Mr. Burich stated this use was a blend of a commercial and industrial use because of the service that would be
provided. He stated this use would appear consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Borsuk questioned the reason for the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to be valid for a period of only
2 years. Mr. Burich stated this condition has been used in the past to allow a re-review to determine if additional conditions are required. Mr. Gehling questioned if the Planned Development
Overlay would be a new zoning designation or if it was already designated as such. Mr. Burich stated it already had the PD designation.
Plan Commission Minutes -4-June 21, 2005 Mr. Gehling questioned what Mr. Burich was looking for as far as the issues and concerns as previously outlined in the PowerPoint presentation.
Mr. Burich stated he would like to see a drawing and a narrative attached to the CUP application for the use of the site (i.e. the parking and storage area). Mr. Gehling questioned if
a narrative would be required for the “Best Management Practices for Dismantling of Vehicles for Parts Selling and Salvage.” Mr. Burich stated a narrative was required. Mrs. Scherer
questioned what the process was for the start up of the business. Mr. Burich stated the business has already been operating without approval, although no citations have been issued as
the City Administration was waiting on a ruling from the Plan Commission and the Common Council. Chairman Dell’Antonia questioned why citations haven’t been issued. Mr. Burich replied
Matt Tucker had been working on this item, and was dealing with the petitioner on violations of other properties owned by the petitioner. Attorney David Winkel, 36 Jewelers Park Drive,
Neenah, stated there was some misinformation that needed to be cleared up from Mr. Burich’s presentation. He stated there were no violations on the subject property. He also stated the
City had requested that no sales take place at this time because that would be considered an expansion of the prior use. Attorney Winkel stated the other uses proposed for this property
were historical to the site. Attorney Winkel noted the issues and concerns presented in the PowerPoint presentation, and stated a complete plan had been submitted to Mr. Tucker on April
22, 2005. He read pertinent parts of the plan that explained the need for such a large open storage area for vehicles as was also explained at the last meeting. He stated a smaller area
wouldn’t work, the area needs to be secure, and the fencing plan was included. Mr. Winkel passed around pictures of the steel painted corrugated fence used in the salvage yard in Neenah
that would be used to screen the storage area. He stated many of the trucks have values over $200,000. He also stated his client works on Oshkosh Trucks sent back from the war in Iraq
for repairs for which there are government regulations for them to be kept in a secured lot. He also stated the revised site plan submitted showed a striped pavement for the parking
area. Attorney Winkel also stated the City doesn’t need to be concerned about the property becoming another salvage yard since his client already has one in Neenah and is not looking
for another. He stated his client also is on the City’s rotation list for towing services and many vehicles need to be held for 90 days, dismantled after that time and the shell disposed
of. Attorney Winkel also stated they are asking to retain the easternmost driveway. He stated there is no plan from the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (DOT) for a flyover of
Snell Road to Fountain Avenue at this time, and until they know of a final decision in that regard they would like to to keep that driveway intact. He also stated they would like to
be able to park large vehicles in the front yard area along Green Valley Road as he has found no ordinance stating parking would not be allowed in that area, as it is a way of advertising
the fleet of towing vehicles. Attorney Winkel asked for the Plan Commission to consider his client not having to pave the open storage area. He stated because no water is allowed to
be displaced from the site the water would permeate gravel better than pavement. Attorney Winkel stated the pictures presented in the PowerPoint presentation of dumpsters and debris
are not located on the property that his client is proposing to purchase but are still owned by the Collins. He stated Mr. & Mrs. Collins have worked with the City and the tenants to
remove or clean up the debris. Chairman Dell’Antonia asked Attorney Winkel to point out the boundaries of the proposed truck plaza. Attorney Winkel used the map as displayed to point
out the area still owned by the Collins and the area his client is proposing to purchase.
Plan Commission Minutes -5-June 7, 2005 Attorney Winkel also asked for consideration of the CUP/PD being valid for more than 2 years. He stated this property needs to be redeveloped
and he believes his client has a good proposal for the site and intends for all other conditions to be met. He stated he understands the desire of the City to look over a development
of this nature for 2 years, but also questioned how you find someone with the financial security to redevelop the area within a limited time frame. Mrs. Propp stated that a Planned Development
Overlay requires a higher standard of development and she still has concerns about the standards not being met, and questioned if this development would be an improvement to the surrounding
neighborhood. Attorney Winkel stated they would be glad to provide more specific information as requested. Mr. Gehling questioned if the Planned Development (PD) overlay was on the whole
property or only a portion of the property. Mr. Burich stated the PD overlay covered the entire property. Discussion followed on the 2 parcels involved and the requirements of the Highway
41 Corridor. Attorney Winkel stated the only part of the Highway 41 Corridor requirements not met would be the use of masonry on the building and the Plan Commission has made exceptions
in the past. Mr. Bettes stated it appears that his client does not intend to meet the Highway 41 requirements. Attorney Winkel stated his client doesn’t have the funds to invest in masonry
enhancements on all sides of the building. He stated the building would be constructed of corrugated metal painted in slate gray on the top and blue on the bottom. He stated he could
come back with a colored rendering of the building. He stated the proposal does not meet all the Highway 41 Corridor Standards, however, it also doesn’t face Highway 41. Mrs. Scherer
questioned if there was any other conditions Attorney Winkel’s client didn’t want to comply with. Attorney Winkel stated it would be difficult for his client to meet all of the conditions
recommended in the Staff Report and he may have to give up the project. Mrs. Scherer stated she noticed vehicles stored on site for over 1 year in the pictures displayed in the PowerPoint
presentation. Attorney Winkel stated a fence would hide the storage of vehicles during the time it would take to make the repairs or screen those that are required to be kept for 90
days. He also discussed the vehicles (i.e. the boom truck) used for salvage operations that would be on site. He stated a salvage yard should not be a concern and the City can issue
citations if they feel it is warranted. He stated a perfect solution would be to construct the addition to be able to store abandoned vehicles inside until the time they can be dismantled
and disposed of. Mr. Borsuk noted the pictures of the fence that were distributed were those of the fence in the Town of Neenah and questioned if the same fencing materials would be
used in Oshkosh. Mr. Burich questioned Attorney Winkel if Winnebago County was taking any action to close the dismantling operation his client has in the Town of Neenah. Attorney Winkel
stated his client has 2 salvage yards, one in Oshkosh and one in the Town of Neenah. He stated Winnebago County issued a license for operation of the salvage yard by mistake as a CUP
was actually needed to operate the salvage yard in that location. Attorney Winkel stated the property has historically been a salvage operation for the last 35 years and the question
is whether a CUP needs to be issued for the use at this time. Mr. Gehling questioned if Attorney Winkel had the investment costs of this project. Attorney Winkel stated the cost to purchase
the property would be $325,000 and that another $150,000 would be needed to upgrade the property plus paving costs.
Plan Commission Minutes -6-June 21, 2005 Ms. Mattox questioned if this business would be just for trucks because she saw used cars stored on the site. Attorney Winkel stated the site
was historically used as a truck stop, and his client is proposing to sell used cars to make the project more viable. He stated the Collins sold cars on a very small scale as would his
client. Ms. Mattox pointed out that the same cars are seen in pictures taken this week as are in pictures taken in April. Attorney Winkel stated Mr. Tucker stated they couldn’t sell
used cars until they obtained approval of the CUP. Ms. Mattox also questioned if all the services were offered as indicated by the signage on the site. Attorney Winkel stated his client
has not put up any new signs and they would comply with the ordinance standards in regard to signage. Ms. Mattox asked what would be done with scrap iron. Attorney Winkel stated any
scrap iron would be stored inside once the addition was constructed along with parts for repairs. He stated they are waiting for approval at this time to begin working on the project.
Mr. Weinsheim stated he would like to be able to allow this project to move forward, however, more staff time is needed to review the recently submitted plans and do an analysis. He
stated the recommendation for the CUP/PD to be valid for 2 years wasn’t meant to shut the operation down, but to monitor the site. He stated he would like to see a rendering of the site
as it is a challenge to visualize the site at this time. He stated they could be allowed to come back to ensure the Plan Commission of a quality proposal. Mr. Borsuk stated the petitioner
was asked at the prior meeting what time frame was needed to be able to have adequate time to have the necessary plans, and he isn’t prepared. He stated he has enough information at
this time to make a decision based on whether this would be a good use for this property. Mr. Borsuk also noted that this property is located in a gateway to the City of Oshkosh and
he has some serious reservations as to whether this property would be maintained. Ms. Mattox stated the Comprehensive Plan calls for a commercial use of this property. She stated although
there no longer is access to Highway 41, there is a frontage road and the property should be reserved for a more fitting use. Mrs. Scherer stated she also has enough information to vote
on the proposal today. She stated she is frustrated to hear the petitioner does not plan to comply with the Highway 41 Corridor requirements, and even though they have made exceptions
before, they have been assured of a quality proposal. Mr. Bettes stated he wouldn’t support this proposal. He stated the standards of the Highway 41 Corridor Overlay are to protect all
business in the area. He stated the petitioner would need to comply with the ordinance. He stated Nolte’s was held accountable for a very high standard along Highway 76, and he doesn’t
feel this proposal would contribute positively to the Highway 41 corridor. Mr. Weinsheim stated for those reasons he has asked for a rendering to be submitted. He stated the property
needs to be developed and he doesn’t see a lot of opportunity for development in the next 15-20 years. Mr. Weinsheim stated the petitioner would need to comply with the ordinance standards
to promote further development in the area. He stated he would like to give the petitioner the benefit of the doubt, but he agrees with Mr. Bettes that the petitioner needs to be held
accountable to higher standards for the area, however, he is willing to give them one more opportunity to comply. Motion by Borsuk for approval of a Conditional Use Permit/Planned Development
review for a truck stop facility which includes used vehicle and parts sales, vehicle repair, vehicle wrecking and dismantling, and vehicle towing and temporary vehicle storage for the
property at 1701 Fountain Avenue subject to the following conditions:
Plan Commission Minutes -7-June 21, 2005 1) The CUP/PD be valid for a period of two years from its date of approval by the Common Council. 2) Base standard modifications be granted for:
a. A vehicle towing and associated storage use to be permitted at the site, b. An open storage area for the towing operation of the area be limited to the area identified as “new pavement”
on the attached site plan, c. A vehicle salvage, dismantling, and reduction use within the proposed building addition be permitted at the site; 3) Resubmittal of a site plan, drawn by
a registered architect or engineer, showing compliance with all conditions of approval before permits or approvals will be issued for a building addition, automobile dealers license,
or automobile salvage license showing the following detail: a. All off-street parking spaces be functional; b. The eastern driveway access point on Fountain Avenue be eliminated in accordance
with the requirements of the Department of Public Works and the site plan be updated to show traffic flow to and from the site through the western driveway access point; c. No towing-related
fleet vehicles be permitted to be parked in the front yard area of Green Valley Road; d. The open storage area for the towing operation of the area be limited to the area identified
as “new pavement” on the attached site plan; e. The Department of Community Development, prior to installation, shall approve the materials proposed for fencing the open storage area;
f. Open storage area must be paved in compliance with Section 30-36(C)(3)(a) before the towing /storage operation may commence; 4) Resubmittal of building elevations showing compliance
with Highway 41 corridor architectural standards. 5) A management plan for all wastes related to auto recycling and salvage operations be submitted to the Department of Community Development.
The management plan shall utilize the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources’ “Best Management Practices for Dismantling of Vehicles for Parts Selling and Salvage”. Seconded by Thorkildsen.
Motion denied 0-9. V: ZONE CHANGE TO M-1PD LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT WITH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW FOR A LIMITED VENUE FESTIVAL
SITE LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF RIPPLE ROAD AND S. WASHBURN STREET; ACCESS CONTROL VARIANCE FOR AN APPROXIMATE 100 FOOT WIDE DRIVEWAY –Dan Liebhauser, Country USA, petitioner,
Thomas Rusch, etal, owners Country USA is proposing to relocate from its current location at the County’s Sunnyview Park Grounds on the northeast side of the City to a new location on
the City’s southwest side at the southwest corner of Ripple Road and S. Washburn Street. The subject property is comprised of approximately 270 acres of land owned by multiple owners
and is located in both the City of Oshkosh and Town of Nekimi with the vast majority of the subject properties located within the Town.
Plan Commission Minutes -8-June 21, 2005 Mr. Burich introduced the item noting that next month Winnebago County will also be reviewing the proposal for a zone change and conditional
use permit (CUP). He also noted a letter was submitted from an adjacent resident regarding concerns he has with the festival location. Mrs. Propp questioned if there has been a request
for city services, or if a condition should be added for annexation. Mr. Burich stated there has been no request for city services as temporary services will be in place during the festival,
and an annexation cannot be conditioned for this item. Mr. Borsuk questioned if upon expiration of the CUP in 2016, would the property revert back to the original use. Mr. Burich stated
the property would revert back to the current use in 2016, and they would be required to renew the CUP in order to continue with the festival use. He also noted the proposed lease allows
Mr. Rusch and Mr. Gabert to pull out of the lease within two years for commercial development purposes. Mr. Gehling questioned if additional conditions were needed for the 75’ stream
buffer. Mr. Burich stated the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is reviewing that area at this time. Ms. Mattox referred to allowing 3 events per year at the site, with the duration
of each event limited to 7 days and questioned if more events would be allowed if one event would be less than 7 days. Mr. Burich stated no more than 3 events would be allowed, no matter
what the duration of the event. Leonard Leverence, 4004 County Road N, Oshkosh, stated he owns a resident approximately 1-1/2 miles to the west of the proposed site. He stated he is
concerned with the city development along the Highway 41 Corridor. He also noted that the lights from the Bergstrom property lights up a 3 mile radius by which he could read by. He urged
the Plan Commission to look closely at the lighting for the event, otherwise he stated he has no problem with the festival being located at the proposed site. Mr. Leverence also stated
he was concerned about the noise level in the area and suggested hours of operation for the festival to be held between 10 a.m. and 10 p.m. Mr. Leverence also stated when he built in
the area he purchased a copy of the Comprehensive Plan which listed the proposed area for residential use, and was concerned this festival would deter potential home owners. He also
questioned what type of vested interest the event had. Mr. Leverence stated he understood this was a multi-jurisdictional site and suggested putting the camping area closer to the highway
to help mitigate the noise concern, deter vandalism, and to also deter the use of his property for a restroom facility. Mr. Burich explained that no permanent improvements were proposed
for the City portion of the site, however, there may be some permanent type of improvements proposed for the portion of the site under Winnebago County’s jurisdiction. Robert Mazza,
1558 County Road I, also the owner of property adjacent to the site was concerned with the location of the the event because of the devaluation of his property as a result of the festival
site and the problem he would have getting in and out of his property during the event. He stated Ripple Avenue is not suitable for heavy traffic and doesn’t want to have to bear the
cost of street improvements. David Coen, 3954 W. Fisk Avenue, stated he is concerned with the impact this festival will have on the town. He stated he is happy to see the City didn’t
just rubber-stamp this event, as they already have an adult book store in the area to deal with. He also stated he is concerned about the wetlands in the area, the stream, and the use
of portable restroom facilities for 4 days. He also stated he was concerned about the lights from the carnival left on for 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. He stated he was also concerned
with trespassing and noise. He suggested a berm be installed for noise reduction and to control runoff.
Plan Commission Minutes -9-June 21, 2005 Dan Papenfuss, 7095 Country Club Road, stated he has relatives that live at 1970 Clay Road and thanked the City for providing information on
Country USA. He stated he would like a copy of the Conditional Use Permit and the minutes of the meeting. Chairman Dell’Antonia stated since this meeting is televised Mr. Papenfuss could
also request a copy of the tape from Channel 10. Mr. Papenfuss stated he would like a written copy of the minutes. Mr. Papenfuss stated he realizes the different jurisdictions in the
area, and will try and discuss only portions of the site under the City’s jurisdiction. Mr. Papenfuss asked for the “fairgrounds” to be moved away from the adjacent property owners,
and asked if the City would object to moving the stages and fairgrounds to the City portion of the property. Mr. Burich stated he couldn’t answer that question at this time without an
actual proposal. Mr. Papenfuss also stated he wanted to be guaranteed he would have access in and out of of 1970 Clay Road during the event. He also questioned if police and
fire services would be located on the site. Mr. Burich stated the developer could address those questions. Chairman Dell’Antonia stated that in the past Country USA has had a large force
of security, and police services on hand. Mr. Papenfuss also stated that there would be vehicle fluid leaks and questioned if the DNR was reviewing the area. Mr. Burich stated he didn’t
know of such a review being done by the DNR. Mr. Papenfuss stated he desired to see the proposed property as part of the City and questioned if there was a potential for annexation.
He asked to receive a copy of the guidelines for annexation. Chairman Dell’Antonia stated there are requirements for annexation, and the City could not initiate an annexation, the property
owners would need to initiate that request. Mr. Papenfuss questioned if Country USA could request an annexation. Mr. Burich replied that Country USA could not initiate an annexation
request of the site. Mr. Papenfuss questioned how much land would be included if an annexation would take place. Chairman Dell’Antonia stated only the property owners requesting to be
annexed could be included. Mr. Burich stated the City is not dealing with a proposal for annexation of the subject site at this time. Mr. Papenfuss questioned if any wells would be drilled,
and if so, to use caution so other wells in the area are not drained. Mr. Burich did not know of the well plans and added that wells could be used in the City under certain conditions.
Thomas Rusch, 3801 State Road 21, provided background information regarding the investment of land he has made in the area, in particular land north of Ripple Avenue that he purchased
27 years ago, noting the time frame for and the level of development of the area. He stated he believes the best use for this land would be for retail or commercial use, which he still
plans to develop in the future. Mr. Rusch passed around a copy of the lease he has made with Country USA regarding the removal of dilapidated buildings by September of 2005, and also
stated the new Veteran’s Museum, across Highway 41, has addressed any issues that have come up regarding the stream. Mrs. Scherer questioned if any signage was proposed for the event.
Mr. Rusch stated he only had an agreement to lease the land to Country USA and Mr. Liebhauser would be in charge of developing the entrance and any related signage. Mr. Borsuk questioned
Mr. Rusch if the usage of this property for this type of event would be detrimental to the value of his property. Mr. Rusch stated he didn’t feel it would be detrimental, and wouldn’t
have agreed to lease the land if he thought it would be.
Plan Commission Minutes -10-June 21, 2005 Mrs. Propp questioned if the developer was in the audience to speak to any of these issues. Mr. Burich invited Mr. Liebhauser to discuss the
proposal with the Plan Commission. Daniel Liebhauser, President of Country USA, Town of Clayton, stated he was available to answer any questions the Plan Commission may have. Mrs. Propp
questioned if Country USA had any intentions of drilling a well on property located in the City of Oshkosh. Mr. Liebhauser stated he had no intentions of drilling a well on property
located in the City, but they did plan to drill a well on property located within Winnebago County jurisdiction. Mrs. Propp questioned if Country USA would be making any permanent improvements
for lighting, etc. Mr. Liebhauser stated that, other than paving for the main entrance, no other permanent improvements would be made, and the site would be left in a park like setting.
Mrs. Propp questioned the 10 lane driveway proposed for the property from 2 lanes on the frontage road. Mr. Liebhauser stated the traffic from the frontage road would be funneled into
10 lanes on the site. Ms. Mattox noted the concerns raised about trespassers and questioned if a fence was proposed. Mr. Liebhauser stated the Town of Nekimi is also concerned about
this issue and they deserve protection. He stated there are only 3 routes into the grounds, and they have been working with the sheriff’s department to ensure the best protection for
the area. Ms. Mattox questioned if the same system of security would be used as is in place for the current site. Mr. Liebhauser stated they intend to increase the security, and they
have been involved with local law enforcement to ensure the best plan possible. Ms. Mattox questioned what the hours of operation would be. Mr. Liebhauser stated the gates open approximately
at noon, and the last show starts at 10:30. He stated the attendees leave the grounds between 12:30 and 1:00 a.m. He stated the average show last 1-1/2 hours. Mr. Gehling questioned
if he had any objections to the conditions as recommended in the Staff Report. Mr. Liebhauser stated there would be no problem meeting the recommended conditions. Mrs. Propp stated there
are a number of issues that are appropriate for the Town or County to take into consideration and she feels confident that the City has taken steps to eliminate any negative impact this
event may have on the surrounding area. She stated she understands the neighbors concerns and hopes they can be worked out to their satisfaction. Mr. Thorkildsen stated he appreciates
the effort of Country USA and the local leadership to retain County USA in the area. He stated this would have been a huge loss of what has the potential to become a bigger and better
venue, which should have a great economic impact on the area. He stated there is an out built into the lease and CUP, and he feels confident both the City and County can work out the
citizens concerns. He stated he has known Country USA to be a good community partner. Mr. Bettes stated he would be supportive of this proposal for the same reasons as Mr. Thorkildsen
has mentioned. He also stated the development of tourism in the area is a goal of the Comprehensive Plan, and he has heard that Country USA has worked positively and aggressively with
many local agencies regarding regulations that apply to this event. Mr. Borsuk stated he would also be supporting this proposal, and he asked that in the City’s further evaluation of
the event they discuss ways to eliminate the tracking of mud and debris off of the site.
Plan Commission Minutes -11-June 21, 2005 Motion by Bettes for approval of the zone change to M-1 PD, Light Industrial with a Planned Development Overlay, approval of an access control
variance to allow a driveway from Washburn Street to exceed 35 feet to be consistent with the submitted site plan with the final design of ingress/egress to be approved by the Department
of Community Development, and approval for a Conditional Use Permit /Planned Development review for a limited venue festival site found to be in compliance with Section 30-11 (D) of
the Zoning Ordinance and the request be approved subject to the following conditions: 1) Three events are allowed per calendar year not to exceed 7 days in duration for any one event.
2) The CUP/PD for use of the site for festival and concert events expires in 2016. 3) The CUP/PD will be reviewed two years after the initial use of the site by the Country USA event
to determine if any additional conditions are required consistent with Section 30-11(D) of the Zoning Zoning Ordinance regarding standards of issuance of Conditional Use Permits prior
to the third Country USA event being held. 4) A base standard modification is granted to allow a portion of the driveway to remain unpaved with final determination of the extent of paving
to be approved by the Department of Community Development. 5) A grading and drainage plan be approved by the Department of Public Works for any grading activities in the City portion
of the site. 6) A base standard modification be granted to allow unpaved parking in accordance with the submitted site plan. 7) Other than use of the site 7 days prior, and 7 days after
an event, no open storage of festival related items in the identified parking or camping areas. Seconded by Thorkildsen. Motion carried 9-0. VI: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW FOR THE STUDENT RECREATION AND WELLNESS CENTER ON THE UNIVERSITY OF OSHKOSH CAMPUS – University of Wisconsin -Oshkosh, petitioner/owner The University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh (UWO)
is requesting CUP/PD approval to construct a recreation and wellness center on campus at the southwest corner of Pearl Avenue and Osceola Street. The facility is to be dedicated to providing
recreational, intramural and wellness programs for the campus population. Mr. Thorkildsen questioned if the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) involvement was required for docking
issues. Mr. Burich stated they might be involved at some point. Mr. Gehling questioned condition number one as recommended in the Staff Report. He stated since this is in the campus
area, and no other neighbors are affected, for the safety of the students they could use more lighting. Mr. Burich stated the issue is with the potential glare for drivers along Pearl
Avenue. Mrs. Scherer questioned what the LAWCON Easement was. Susan Kepplinger, Principal Planner for the City of Oshkosh, 215 Church Avenue, stated when the City purchased the Deltox
property they received money from the DNR for permanent recreational use. She stated the property can be exchanged for another property, however, at this time the building is proposed
to be constructed over the area. She stated UW-Oshkosh needs to work with the DNR to resolve this issue. Ms. Kepplinger stated there was an issue with a LAWCON easement in relationship
to the relocation of the Wisconsin Street Bridge which was worked out easily. Chairman Dell’Antonia questioned if the DNR could kill the project. Mr. Burich stated the project would
need to be modified if the DNR had concerns that needed to be resolved.
Plan Commission Minutes -12-June 21, 2005 Mr. Bettes questioned what “Meadow Mix” was. Ms. Kepplinger stated “Meadow Mix” was 18” naturalized non-woody plants proposed along the river
edge. She stated this is hard to maintain because of the thistles, etc. that tend to grow in the mix. Mr. Bettes questioned if the university was currently using Meadow Mix by their
soccer fields. Ms. Kepplinger replied that Meadow Mix was not currently being used. She also stated that people want to be able to use the shoreline and the Meadow Mix would be in the
way. Mr. Weinsheim questioned if the path material would be the same as currently used. Mr. Burich stated it would be an asphalt path, the same material as on the existing path. Tom
Sonnleitner, Vice Chancellor for Administration, UW-Oshkosh, 800 Algoma Blvd., stated this proposal was the first big step of improvements for the University area and they have the approval
from the Building Commission and Board of Regents. Mr. Sonnleitner stated the Potter Lawson Firm was was the architect for the project and Ken Keely was in charge of the landscape design.
Mr. Sonnleitner stated the LAWCON Easement would be of more value to move it along the river. He also thanked the City and the current tenant, Russ Thill, of building 3 of the Deltox
Corporation for their cooperation. Mr. Sonnleitner asked if the Plan Commission would like a more detailed presentation from either the architect or the landscaper. Mrs. Propp stated
she would like to hear more about the landscaping. Ken Keely, President of Ken Keely Designs out of Madison, stated his goal was to have a LEED (leadership energy efficient design) Certified
landscape project. He stated his company is a leader in environmental designs. He stated in regard to development of the site, after the construction is completed, they are proposing
to incorporate native mixes with rain gardens, consisting of 18” to 24” high growth. He stated he has gotten approval from the Grounds Maintenance Department of the University for this
proposal as they would look at it as a prototype. Mr. Keely stated the purpose of the Meadow Mix’s use by the river and the WIOWASH Trail is for the roof water to infiltrate the Meadow
Mix before entering the river. He stated benches were proposed for the area along with dock access to the water level for rental of water sports equipment. He stated they have proposed
a timber sea wall with gravel pavers for infiltration to eliminate runoff. He also stated the WIOWASH Trail was realigned to meet the regulations for fire access. Mr. Keely stated in
regard to the LAWCON issue the easement exchange could be made with the top leg of the parcel for the center portion of the “U” shaped parcel. Mr. Sonnleitner made reference to the LEED
Certified landscaping approach stating that the goal of their strategic plan is to be energy efficient and allow the property to be treated in the best way possible. He stated the construction
of this building and using the Meadow Mix has given them the opportunity to use new techniques. He also stated that University staff would be maintaining the grounds. Mr. Borsuk asked
Mr. Sonnleitner if there were concerns, other than the Meadow Mix, with any of the conditions as recommended in the Staff Report. Mr. Sonnleitner stated there were no other concerns
with the recommendations. Mrs. Propp stated it was a good presentation and the Comprehensive Plan calls for the City to be environmentally sensitive to the design of the riverfront and
the University’s effort in their approach suggests that condition number 2 in the Staff Report be modified. Ms. Mattox questioned the added condition of a grading and drainage plan.
Mr. Morvec, Architect, Potter Lawson Architects, Madison, stated they are responding to comments made at this time, and as of this time, they are above the flood plain. Ms. Mattox also
questioned the lighting proposed for the site. Mr. Morvec stated that the standard for campus lighting is to focus on the ground.
Plan Commission Minutes -13-June 21, 2005 Mr. Morvec also referred to the mechanical penetration and screening plan stating that all of the mechanical equipment is inside the building,
not on the roof. Mr. Burich stated he was still concerned with the glare from the lights on the traveling public. Mr. Burich also questioned the time frame for construction of the dock.
Mr. Morvec stated the document is going out for bids in September and he was concerned about having all the details in place for quotes to come in. Mr. Burich asked to see more detailed
plans for the dock. Mr. Sonnleitner stated he would share them with the City as they develop. Mr. Borsuk stated the commitment the students have made to fund this facility is excellent
and will prove to be a great asset to the community, and unless other verbiage is needed, he would like to eliminate conditions #1, #2, and #6, as he doesn’t understand why the City
needs to have more information on the dock. Discussion followed regarding the environment and the proximity of the water. Mr. Bettes stated he has used the walkway by the University
every day for the last 15 years and has found diversity in the landscaping, and has always been able to use the paths, even when sidewalks were not available. He stated he would support
the elimination of conditions #1, #2, and #6. He also stated the University has always been good at submitting their Master Plan to the city for review. Motion by Propp for removal of
condition #2. Seconded by Scherer. Motion carried 9-0. Motion by Bettes for removal of condition #6. Seconded by Mattox. Motion carried 9-0. Motion by Gehling for the removal of condition
#1. Seconded by Borsuk. Mr. Burich stated that the lighting plan could be made subject to review and approval by the Transportation Director. Mrs. Propp questioned if there was glare
on other streets. Mr. Burich stated the lighting plan does not comply with the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Bettes questioned what effect the delay of the lighting plan would have on the project.
Mr. Sonnleitner stated the plan is scheduled to go out for bids in the fall and they need to have the full design in place or it could impede the productivity of the site. Mr. Bettes
questioned if the concern about the glare could be worked into the plan. Mr. Morvec stated an adequate amount of light was needed on the walkway and the road. Chairman Dell’Antonia questioned
if the relocation of the road would eliminate the lighting issue. Mr. Morvec stated the lighting had been designed in accordance with the relocation of Pearl Avenue as they do not want
to install lighting fixtures more than once. Mr. Gehling stated he was still having a problem with the glare issue since the campus surrounded the site. Mr. Weinsheim asked what the
risk factor would be. Mr. Burich stated the risk would be with the traveling public. Motion carried 7-2. Motion by Bettes for approval of a Conditional Use Permit /Planned Development
Review for the Student Recreation and Wellness Center on the University of Wisconsin Campus to be found consistent with the standards of Section 30-11 (D) of the Zoning Ordinance subject
to the following conditions: 1) Submission and approval of a final landscape plan by the Department of Community Development.
Plan Commission Minutes -14-June 21, 2005 2) Final approval of WIOUWASH Trail relocation by Department of Community Development. 3) Final approval of all mechanical penetration and screening
plan by Department of Community Development. 4) Submission and approval of a grading and drainage plan prior to building construction. 5) On street parking to be approved by the Traffic
Review Advisory Board. 6) A permit is required to be issued by the Department of Public Works for any work performed in the public right-of-way. 7) Provide easements for any location
where the proposed sidewalk or trail connections are out of the public right-of-way. Seconded by Gehling. Motion carried 9-0. VII: DESIGNATION OF BOUNDARIES, APPROVAL OF PROJECT PLAN
FOR MODIFICATION # 1 TO THE SOUTH SHORE REDEVELOPMENT AREA – Redevelopment Authority The Redevelopment Authority for the City of Oshkosh requests approval of Modification # 1 to the
South Shore Redevelopment Area Project Plan and to designate the boundaries of the modified district. The modification involves expanding the district’s boundaries to add thirty properties
to the existing district. The existing redevelopment district is generally located west of South Main Street, south of the Fox River to 9th Avenue, and east of Oregon Street and currently
encompasses approximately 47 acres. Mrs. Propp questioned if there was going to be a trail along the south shore of the river. Mr. Burich stated they were planning to incorporate a trail
and the next step was to secure funding for the trail. Mr. Gehling questioned if there was funding for homeowners for the rehabilitation of their homes in the area. Mr. Burich stated
that it was the department’s intent to create a rehabilitation program for that area. Chairman Dell’Antonia asked the reasoning for the inclusion of the Pioneer Inn property. Jackson
Kinney, Director of Community Development for the City of Oshkosh, 215 Church Street, stated the City is working with the property owners, Decade Properties, to assist or enhance the
public access of the site, and the area along Pioneer Drive. He stated Decade Properties are supportive of being included in this expansion. Todd Marquardt, 408 Michigan Street, asked
if funding would be available for the reconstruction of Michigan Street. Mr. Burich stated that it probably wouldn’t happen because the entire street was not included in the TID. Motion
by Scherer for approval of Modification #1 to the South Shore Redevelopment Area Project Plan and the designation of the modified boundaries for the district as proposed. Seconded by
Weinsheim. Motion carried 9-0. VIII: PUBLIC HEARING ON TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT #20 SOUTH SHORE REDEVELOPMENT AREA PROJECT PLAN – Department of Community Development The Department of
Community Development requests approval of Tax Increment District #20 South Shore Redevelopment Area Project Plan. The TID is being created for the purpose of blight elimination and
to promote redevelopment of underutilized and obsolete properties within an approximate 104 acre area of the Central City south of the Fox River generally between Ohio Street on the
west and Pioneer Drive on the east with the majority of the district north of 9th Avenue.
Plan Commission Minutes -15-June 21, 2005 Chairman Dell’Antonia questioned if the project plan consisted of projects the City would like to do or projects that have been approved. Mr.
Burich stated approval from the Plan Commission is needed to proceed with this activity, and the actual projects would need further review. Chairman Dell’Antonia opened the public hearing
portion of the meeting concerning this amendment. Kathy Gelhar, 437 W. 4th Avenue, questioned why 4th Avenue was included in the Plan, and questioned if removing that area from the plan
could reduce the debt. Mr. Burich explained that when the City is looking at the significant redevelopment of an area, they also look at the adjacent properties to enhance the redevelopment
area. Mrs. Gelhar stated they had started a rehab project on their property before they got the notice and they were afraid the City would be acquiring the property, but after discussions
with Susan Kepplinger they understand the project. Charlie Sullivan, 5962 Spruce Drive, Elkhorn, WI, stated Elkhorn has probably used more TID Districts than anyone else. He stated he
is one of the owners of the Pioneer Inn and questioned what funds were available for new sea walls, and how to apply for such funds. Mr. Burich stated funding may be available to improve
public access on the north side of the property, and that he should set up a meeting with staff to discuss this further. Chairman Dell’Antonia closed the public hearing portion of the
meeting concerning the amendment. Motion by Bettes for approval of the boundaries of TID #20 and the TID #20 Project Plan, and recommend approval of the TID boundaries and Project Plan
to the Common Council, seconded by Borsuk. Motion carried 9-0. Chairman Dell’Antonia stated he would like to discuss the new procedures brought up at the last meeting regarding “Other
Business” and how items could be added to this item. There was a consensus to discuss this at the next meeting and recommend a policy regarding having discussion items placed on the
agenda under other business. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 7:11 p.m. (Gehling/Scherer). Unanimous. Respectfully submitted, DARRYN L. BURICH
Planning Services Director DLB/vlr