Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES JANUARY 18, 2005 PRESENT: Bryan Bain, David Borsuk, Shirley Mattox, Kathleen Propp, Cathy Scherer, Jeff Thorkildsen, John Weinsheim and W. Lee Bettes, Chairman EXCUSED: Jon Dell’Antonia, Steve Gehling, Don Simons STAFF: Kristi Bales, Principal Planner, Darryn Burich, Director of Planning Services, Jackson Kinney, Director of Community Development, and Vickie Rand, Recording Secretary The meeting was called to order at 4:00 p.m. by Chairman Bettes. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. The minutes of the January 4, 2005 meeting were approved as mailed. (Thorkildsen/Bain) Unanimous. I: CONSENT AGENDA A: EXTRATERRITORIAL 2 LOT LAND DIVISION/CERTIFIED SURVEY MAP AT 1167 COUNTY ROAD “I” IN THE TOWN OF NEKIMI – Andrew Geurts, petitioner, Thomas and Jillene Hoheiser, owner The petitioners are requesting approval of an extraterritorial 2-lot land division/certified survey map at 1167 County Road “I” in the Town of Nekimi. The purpose of the land division is to separate the lot with two houses and outbuildings from the outlot and transfer ownership of the new lot (Lot 1) to the petitioner. The property owners will retain the outlot and also own the adjacent 20 acre parcel to the west. Mrs. Scherer questioned why one lot was designated as an outlot. Mr. Burich explained outlots are usually created for storm drainage or easements designating the parcel as unbuildable. He stated this would allow the lot to remain open for an indefinite time frame. He also noted the parcel would need to come before the Plan Commission for approval to change the status from an outlot to a lot. He stated in this case an outlot was desired because of a financial transaction issue, but doesn’t change the land use pattern. B: EXTRATERRITORIAL LAND DIVISION ALONG PIP LANE EXTENDED, IN THE TOWN OF OSHKOSH – Omnni Associates, petitioner, Grundy Enterprises, owner Approval is being requested of a two-lot extraterritorial land division/certified survey map for property located along the north end of Pip Lane in the Town of Oshkosh. The land division is requested from a 7.3-acre base parcel of land. Mr. Weinsheim questioned the size of the base parcel as it was referred to as a 7.3 acre base parcel of land and a base parcel of 29.54 acres of land in the Staff Report. Mr. Burich stated technically it is a 29.54 acre base parcel, however under Winnebago County regulations there is a current CSM in place and they are allowed to create a certified survey map for a portion of that property. Mr. Weinsheim questioned if a 3rd lot would be created. Mr. Burich stated it would remain part of the CSM and a 3rd lot wouldn’t be created. Plan Commission Minutes -2-January 18, 2005 Motion by Thorkildsen for approval of Consent Agenda Item “A” for an extraterritorial 2-lot land division/certified survey map at 1167 County Road “I” in the Town of Nekimi. Seconded by Weinsheim. Motion carried 8-0. Motion by Borsuk for approval of Consent Agenda Item “B” for an extraterritorial 2-lot land division/certified survey map for property located along the north end of Pip Lane in the Town of Oshkosh. Seconded by Bain. Motion carried 8-0. II: RECOMMEND CHANGES TO THE WINNEBAGO COUNTY’S AIRPORT ZONING DISTRICT AREA OVERLAY BOUNDARIES OR PROVISIONS OF THE AIR-1 ZONE RESIDENTIAL USE PROVISIONS – Department of Community Development The Winnebago County Zoning Ordinance currently contains provisions relating to the Wittman Field Airport. The Ordinance establishes a mapped Airport Overlay Zoning District with a stated purpose of “maintaining the best interests of the operations of Wittman Field as well as encouraging the development of compatible land uses on on private property within the area.” The Airport Zoning District is segregated into three different zones: a) General Overlay Zone (Air-1) b) Aerial Approach Zone (Air-2) c) Height Limitation Zones Each of these zones has various provisions that regulate use, height, bulk, density, etc. The zoning applies to both lands within the City of Oshkosh as well as in the unincorporated town areas. Mrs. Scherer questioned if the airport overlay was considered when assigning residential designations. Jackson Kinney, Director of Community Development, 215 Church Avenue, stated they have recognized changes needed from the Comprehensive Plan adopted in 1993. He stated staff has looked at what makes sense for the area along with considering the airport needs by designating substantial industrial and public institutional land use areas to protect the airport and are asking for minor refinements of the map. Mr. Kinney pointed out the 88.8 acres on the south side of 20th Avenue that was initially designated for use in the South West Industrial Park, however, as Carl Traeger Elementary and Middle School and the YMCA have been constructed in the area it makes more sense to develop the South West Industrial Park south of the YMCA property. Mr. Kinney stated that the City has had discussions with owners of the Beck property for the last 10-12 years and recently a local developer has been interested in developing residential lots on a portion of the Beck property if the City would purchase the remainder of the Beck property for the South West Industrial Park. He stated the City has agreed with this proposal with the provision the developer would be able to develop the land using urban densities. He stated this seems to be a good fit for land use in this area and with these minor changes to the Air-1 Zone Map further development would be able to proceed. Plan Commission Minutes -3-January 18, 2005 Mrs. Scherer questioned the concerns of the County that even though they had the ability to alter the Air-1 Zone map, if the Bureau of Aeronautics opposed those revisions it could have a negative effect on consideration of funding requests. Mr. Kinney stated they have discussed those concerns with the County Planning and Zoning Committee and no information has been brought forward indicating that any refinements would threaten airport funding. Mr. Weinsheim questioned if the City has had discussions with the Bureau of Aeronautics. Mr. Kinney stated the City has had discussions with the County Planning and Zoning and they seemed to be sympathetic to the changes that were needed. Mr. Kinney stated they were to meet with the Aviation Committee the first week of January at which a representative of the Bureau of Aeronautics would be at that meeting. Mr. Borsuk questioned if time was of the essence for these changes to the Air-1 Zone Map. Mr. Kinney stated the agreement for the Beck property is good until late February, although that could be extended. Mr. Kinney also pointed out the County’s concern with the City coming back with more requests for changes to the Air-1 zone map as the city develops into those areas, therefore the City took another look at the Comprehensive Plan and the land use maps and recognized other areas that may need to considered for changes to the Air-1 Zone Map, so they wouldn’t need to be asking for changes more than once. He stated they also decided to bring these concerns to the Plan Commission so all areas could be considered by the County and the Bureau of Aeronautics at that time with a recommendation from the Plan Commission. Mr. Borsuk questioned if all of these proposed areas for change should be put into a residential zoning district vs. an industrial zoning district. Mr. Kinney stated these properties are designated to be put in a residential district because the land is not needed for industrial use. The issue for residential land use use is to develop these areas at urban densities vs. residential densities in the Air-1 Zone that can be developed at a minimum of 5-acre lots. He stated in reference to whether they should be residential or industrial he pointed out that the City doesn’t need the area along 20th Avenue for expansion of the industrial park, especially with the location of the YMCA and Carl Traeger Elementary and Middle School. Discussion followed regarding the other acreage areas where the boundaries or the provisions of the Air-1 General Overlay Zone are requested to be amended. Mrs. Propp questioned the 150.2 acres located between Co. Rd. N. and Nekimi Ave. Mr. Kinney stated they are recommending to rezone that acreage from residential to industrial. Mrs. Propp questioned if the City really needs each of the acreage areas highlighted in the Staff Report for residential development. Mr. Kinney stated that the City has taken a close look at each of these areas where the growth of the city would look at this land for residential development, otherwise leaving them in the Air-1 zone wouldn’t be a problem. He stated the City is looking for the best way to deal with these areas without future developers continually asking for rezoning. He stated the Comprehensive Plan gives a broad land use plan and also noted there is a significant amount of land available for industrial use for years to come, therefore these areas will most likely be used for residential development. Plan Commission Minutes -4-January 18, 2005 Mr. Weinsheim questioned how these changes might affect the encroachment on the airport property from a safety issue for future uses of the airport giving air cargo as one example. Mr. Kinney stated these requests are minor changes that shouldn’t undermine the use of the airport. He stated the land use designations around the airport should actually protect the airport and ensure a viable facility. He stated the City wouldn’t recommend anything that would harm the airport. Ms. Mattox questioned who is responsible for determining the Air-1 zoning district. Mr. Kinney stated the district was determined in response to the NR150 Study of the mid ‘80’s. Ms. Mattox stated the Air-1 zone appears to be at the outermost perimeter of the airport and the Beck property wouldn’t be affected, as it wasn’t very close to the Air-2 Zoning District. Mr. Kinney stated the City was asking the Plan Commission to consider either recommendation to change either the uses or standards of the Air-1 Zoning District for development to be required to occur at urban densities. He stated all other air district provisions would still apply such as height restrictions and the provision of avigation easements. Mrs. Scherer questioned if the Plan Commission was to pick only one recommendation or agree with both recommendations. Mr. Kinney stated at this time the City is looking for a recommendation to take to the County, and this wasn’t an issue that was going to the Common Council at this time. Mrs. Propp questioned the process as to what would happen if the County did not agree with either of these recommendations. Mr. Kinney stated if there continued to be a conflict further discussion would be needed with the County, the State Bureau of Aeronautics, the Aviation Committee, and the County Planning and Zoning Committee so they can act on a recommendation that will go to the County Board. Mr. Burich stated the County could also use a combination of both recommendations. He stated basically they are asking the Plan Commission to allow the land to be developed at residential densities. Mr. Borsuk questioned what avigation easements were. Mr. Kinney stated avigation easements were used for the airports comfort level, for adjacent property owners to recognize the existence of the airport and the potential impact it has on the area. Mrs. Propp asked for clarification on the recommendation of the 150.2 acres, and was still concerned with the 142 acres as it encroaches into Air-1 zoning. Chairman Bettes stated the 150.2 acres would be removed from the request. Mrs. Propp stated she still has some concerns with the 142 acres but is willing to support a recommendation at this time. Mr. Weinsheim noted the 10 & 20 year Land Use Maps in the update to the Comprehensive Plan and questioned when those would need to be changed. Mr. Burich stated the maps could be amended at any time. Plan Commission Minutes -5-January 18, 2005 Mr. Weinsheim stated he still was concerned with the funding issue from the Bureau of Aeronautics and was looking for some assurance there would not be any further encroachments of the airport property before he could support either recommendation. Mr. Borsuk stated he could support all the land use revisions except the 88.8 acres along 20th Avenue as he felt it should continue to be designated for industrial use, therefore, he will not support the recommendation at this time. Mr. Bain stated he liked the second recommendation as it could address the issues without designating the zoning, which could be worked out over time. He stated it appeared to be smart planning and the City needs to move forward. Motion by Bain to recommend that Winnebago County amend the provisions of the Air-1 General Overlay Zone to permit City of Oshkosh residential densities per the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations for areas within the Air-1 Zone that are within the City of Oshkosh municipal boundaries. Seconded by Thorkildsen. Mrs. Scherer questioned if the Plan Commission would rather recommend both options to make it more palatable for the County to work with the Bureau of Aeronautics. Mr. Weinsheim questioned if the recommendation included taking the 150.2 acres off the map. Mr. Bain stated the motion he made is basically to allow the City to have a conversation with the County and to amend the provisions of the Air-1 General Overlay zone. Mrs. Propp questioned if Mr. Bain’s motion would tie the hands of the County. Chairman Bettes stated Mr. Bain’s recommendation was one of the two options recommended by the City and would tie the hands of the County. Motion denied 4-4. Motion by Propp to offer both recommendations to the County: that Winnebago County amend the boundaries of the Air-1 General Overlay Zone to eliminate the district from areas where the City of Oshkosh is recommending residential land uses in the Comprehensive Plan; or recommend that Winnebago County amend the provisions of the Air-1 General Overlay Zone to permit City of Oshkosh residential densities per the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations for areas within the Air-1 Zone that are within the City of Oshkosh municipal boundaries. Seconded by Scherer. Mr. Borsuk stated he would be voting against this recommendation because he feels the 88.8-acre area included should be designated for industrial use and doesn’t think having this area for residential development is good overall planning. Mr. Bain stated he will vote in favor of this motion, however, he feels the second recommendation gives more flexibility. Plan Commission Minutes -6-January 18, 2005 Mr. Thorkildsen stated he will vote in favor of the motion but feels the Plan Commission is not giving the County enough direction. Ms. Mattox questioned if the 88.8 acres was originally slated for industrial use. Mr. Kinney stated it was designated for industrial use in the 1993 Comprehensive Plan. He stated after the expansion of the South West Industrial Park and the update to the Comprehensive Plan the City felt it is more appropriate to have that area designated for residential use. Ms. Mattox stated she can understand the change in the zoning designation due to the development of the “YMCA” and Carl Traeger Elementary and Middle School in the area and the need to encourage as much use as possible from people in the area. Mr. Kinney agreed with Ms. Mattox, however, he also stated that Mr. Bain’s recommendation would give the County more of an opportunity to look at the provisions. He stated the current motion is also good in that it gives them both options and they can also see from the Staff Report that the City encourages the County to look at the provisions of the Air-1 General Overlay Zone. Mr. Weinsheim stated he still had concerns about the flexibility of the recommendation for both the City and the County and the elimination of parcels from this proposal. Mr. Kinney assured him that the City recognizes the flexibility of land uses at this time and pointed out the opportunities the recommendation would give the County. Mr. Weinsheim stated he would support the motion. Motion carried 7-1. Nay: Borsuk. III: RECOMMENDED DRAFT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE – Department of Community Development The City is undertaking an update to its 1993 Comprehensive Plan in order to bring the plan into compliance with the State’s Comprehensive Planning Legislation that was signed into law in 1999. Commonly referred to as the “Smart Growth Law”, this legislation established basic requirements for nine elements of a comprehensive plan. These nine elements include Issues & Opportunities, Transportation, Land Use, Housing, Economic Development, Utilities and Community Facilities, Intergovernmental, Agricultural, Natural & Cultural Resources, and Implementation. Kristi Bales, Principal Planner, 215 Church Avenue, stated a public hearing is required for recommendation of the Draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update. Chairman Bettes officially opened the public hearing portion for the Draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update. Ms. Bales proceeded with a PowerPoint presentation, reviewing the nine elements of the plan, the adoption process, and the progress to date, which included a “short list” of 13 implementation actions, which was a product of the Plan Commission. Ms. Bales reviewed the meetings that have been held by various committees over 2 ½ years to update the Comprehensive Plan, and the elements reviewed by the Plan Commission in 2004. Plan Commission Minutes -7-January 18, 2005 Ms. Bales explained the Implementation Element and stated 131 actions, that were a result of the various committees, had been narrowed down by the Plan Commission to 13 actions of highest priority with the other actions still recognized in the plan. She reviewed the list of 13 actions, the results of the 2002 survey and the progress to-date. Ms. Bales stated there would be a workshop held with the Plan Commission and Common Council after the January 25 Council meeting followed by a news release that would be published 30 days before a Public Hearing could be held at the Common Council Meeting. She stated 2 public hearings would be held, after which time the Comprehensive Plan Update would need to be adopted by Ordinance by the Common Council. Chairman Bettes asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to comment on the Update to the Comprehensive Plan. There being no comments from the audience Chairman Bettes closed the Public Hearing portion of the meeting. Mrs. Propp stated she had given Ms. Bales rewording for the vision statements. Ms. Bales stated she has received a cleaner read from Mrs. Propp that did not change the content of the vision statements and will make the revisions before a copy is sent to the Common Council. Chairman Bettes stated he had also reviewed the revised vision statements and found no change in content. Mr. Bain noted that the slide for the draft plan didn’t list all the jurisdictions that would receive the Comprehensive Plan as listed on page 200, and he wanted to be sure they all would receive the Update of the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Bales verified the list on page 200 would be used. Motion by Propp to recommend the Recommended Draft of the Comprehensive Plan be adopted by the Plan Commission. Seconded by Scherer. Motion carried 8-0. Chairman Bettes stated he would like the Recommended Draft of the Comprehensive Plan sent to the Common Council as soon as possible for their review. OTHER BUSINESS Chairman Bettes asked Ms. Bales to join the Plan Commission for discussion of the Workshop to be held on January 25, 2005. Mr. Bain stated he understood Kristi Bales would be doing a PowerPoint presentation. Chairman Bettes stated he would like to see more detail in the PowerPoint presentation in regard to the 13 action items. He stated he wanted the Council to understand that they have gone through a systematic thorough review process of 131 action items and are focusing on the 13 items they have narrowed down from that list. He stated he would like it noted that the focus has been done by the staff and the Plan Commission. Ms. Bales stated she would be sending out copies of the updated plan later this week. Chairman Bettes encouraged full attendance of the Plan Commission at the workshop. Mr. Bain commended Kristi Bales for a great job done on the Update to the Comprehensive Plan. Plan Commission Minutes -8-January 18, 2005 Discussion continued regarding the changes that would be made to the Comprehensive Plan and the maps included within the plan. Mr. Burich stated the maps were a general guideline. Chairman Bettes stated that the Comprehensive Plan was actually a living document that could be amended at any time. Mr. Thorkildsen questioned if changes to the plan in the future would be required to come before the Plan Commission for review. Ms. Bales stated any changes would be required to go before the Plan Commission and Common Council for approval. Mr. Thorkildsen questioned how often changes could be taken to the Common Council. Mr. Borsuk suggested changes be considered as part of the annual review process. Chairman Bettes stated they would get something in writing as to the timing of the annual review and any amendments for the Comprehensive Plan to be taken to Council. Ms. Mattox stated this has been a 2 ½ year project and when she was thinking of a staff person coordinating the project, she thought they better be good, because this was important. She stated Ms. Bales has exceeded her expectations as she has worked with many committees and worked through many discussions to achieve this update, and deserves a round of applause. Mr. Borsuk also commented on the urban vs. rural development regarding the size of city lots. He questioned if the Plan Commission has fully dealt with the size of lots so people are not forced out of the city if they want larger lots. He questioned if there was any place in the city for different or larger sized lots. Mr. Borsuk also stated he would like to know if there has been any progress with the school district regarding discussions of land use issues. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 5:23 p.m. (Weinsheim /Propp). Unanimous. Respectfully submitted, DARRYN L. BURICH Planning Services Director DLB/vlr