Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 PRESENT:Lurton Blassingame, Melanie Bloechl, Steven Gehling, Achim Reschenberg, John Ruppenthal, Fred Timmerman, David Borsuk, and Donald Krueger, Vice Chairman EXCUSED:Lee Bettes, and Donald Pressley STAFF:Darryn Burich, Principal Planner, Jackson Kinney, Director of Community Development, and Vickie Rand, Recording Secretary OTHERS PRESENT: Susan Kepplinger, Principal Planner, and David Patek, Director of Public Works The meeting was called to order by Vice Chairman Krueger. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. The Meeting Minutes of August 21, 2001 were approved as mailed. (Timmerman/Bloechl. Unanimous.) I:CONSENT AGENDA A:Land Division/Approval of Certified Survey Map: 420 S. Koeller Street Anchor Bank, petitioner and owner, requests the Plan Commission review and approve a land division at 420 S. Koeller Street. The parcel is currently split zoned with the majority of the west side of the parcel in C-2 General Commercial District and the back 328 feet of the parcel zoned R-2 Two Family Residence District. The parcel also lies within the Highway 41 Corridor Overlay District. B:Privilege in Street for a Permanent Monitoring Well: Broad Street Natural Resource Technology, petitioner, requests the Plan Commission review and approve a Privilege In Street to allow placement of two permanent monitoring wells in the Broad Street right of way near the Fox River. C:Extraterritorial Land Division/Approval of Certified Survey Map: Sherman Road and County Trunk Highway A Lawrence Kriescher, petitioner for Pine Investments, owner, requests that the Plan Commission review and approve an extraterritorial land division at the intersection of Sherman Road and County Trunk Highway A in the Town of Oshkosh. Plan Commission Minutes Page 2September 4, 2001 Mr. Blassingame questioned the driveway situation of lots 1 and 3. Mr. Burich stated the Certified Survey Map (CSM) didn’t show that clearly, therefore he was recommending the conditions as noted in the Staff Report. Mrs. Bloechl questioned where the access was for Lot 2. Mr. Burich stated the access would be off of Lilac Street. Vice Chairman Krueger asked for Item B to be voted on separately. Motion by Blassingame for approval of Consent Agenda Items A & C with the following conditions for Item A: 1.Driveway access to Lot 1 be limited to a shared access driveway between Lots 1 and 2. Cross access agreement to be approved by the Department of Community Development and filed with the Register of Deeds. 2.CSM be resubmitted showing the location of the existing driveway and parking areas and setbacks to adjacent property lines. If a substandard setback situation is present, Board of Appeals variances will be required before the City approves the CSM. Seconded by Timmerman. Motion carried 6-0. Motion by Timmerman for approval of Consent Agenda Item B with the following conditions: 1)The monitoring well be installed in a manner that is approved by the Department of Public Works so that it is flush with the sidewalk. 2)The monitoring well be properly abandoned and removed in accordance with City standards and under the direction of the Department of Public Works. 3)That any problem which may arise as a result of the placement of the monitoring well be the responsibility of the petitioner to correct in coordination with the Department of Public Works. 4)That all appropriate permits be obtained prior to the start of construction/placement of the monitoring well. 5)That the monitoring well be modified or removed immediately upon the request of the City. 6)The petitioner/owner secures and submits to the City Clerk a separate insurance policy which names the City as an additional insured with a minimum coverage of $200,000 per person and $500,000 in general aggregate. 7)It is the responsibility of the petitioner/owner to file in a timely manner a new insurance certificate with the City Clerk upon expiration of an existing certificate. Failure to do so will result in the revocation of the privilege in the street upon ten (10) days’ notice. 8)The petitioner/owner execute a hold harmless agreement with the City. Seconded by Bloechl. Motion carried 5-0-1. Krueger voting Present. Plan Commission Minutes Page 3September 4, 2001 Commissioner’s Borsuk, and Gehling arrived at this time. TH II:AUTHORIZATION TO ACQUIRE EASEMENTS – OAKWOOD ROAD BETWEEN 9 AVENUE AND VILLAGE LANE City of Oshkosh Department of Public Works, petitioner, requests Plan Commission review and approval of the acquisition of numerous temporary construction and permanent limited easements needed to complete construction of sidewalks as part of the reconstruction of Oakwood Road between th 9 Avenue and Village Lane. Mr. Burich introduced the item and indicated that a meeting would be held on Monday, September 24 at 5 p.m. where the affected property owners could ask questions regarding their individual easements. John Hazer, 1101 S. Oakwood Road, questioned if he could have the proposed easement along the front of his property adjusted because of the trees on the property. Susan Kepplinger, Principal Planner, stated those kind of questions will be dealt with at the meeting on September 24, when there will be the appropriaterepresentatives on hand to make adjustments or give explanations of the project. Mr. Hazer questioned what was happening with Pheasant Creek, the footbridge to Carl Traeger School, and Westhaven Drive; from 9th Avenue to Witzel Avenue. Mr. Kinney stated the developers need to bring forward a Final Plat for Pheasant Creek Drive before work proceeds in that area. He also stated there are 2 easements on Ruschfield Drive and Sawyer Creek that will be utilized to provide pedestrian access to Carl Traeger School. He stated funds were being recommended in the 2002 Capital Improvements Program for footbridges and pathways. Mr. Kinney invited Mr. Patek to respond to questions regarding Westhaven Drive. Mr. Patek stated they were trying to complete Westhaven Drive from 9th Avenue to Witzel Avenue this year, and stated it would definitely be completed in 2002. Mr. Hazer questioned if the City has been in touch with the School Board regarding the pedestrian access project. Mr. Kinney stated they have been in touch with the Finance Director for the Oshkosh School District regarding participating in the costs of the project. Mr. Patek also noted that the footbridge was currently in the 2003 budget, however, they were trying to move it into the 2002 budget. Mr. Hazer questioned if the City map had been updated to show the low wetlands north of the maintenance shed at Westhaven Golf Course from Sawyer Creek to Oakwood Road. Mr. Kinney stated he would check into the mapping of the wetland area to ensure the appropriate maps were up to date. Ann Hazer, 1101 S. Oakwood Road, stated if the footbridges and sidewalks are not completed by the first day of the 2002/2003 school year, which is August 25th, the children will need to be bussed. Plan Commission MinutesPage 4September 4, 2001 Mrs. Hazer stated she was concerned the wetlands in the area had been mislabeled and more fill than needed would be brought in. She stated she has had previous conversations with Mr. Bluemke, and has spoken with the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) who stated they would follow up with a letter to the Department of Community Development. Mr. Kinney stated he would discuss this matter further with the DNR and the Department of Transportation (DOT). Carol Deising, 1125 S. Oakwood Road, asked who would be paying for a retaining wall. Mr. Patek stated it would be paid for as part of the construction project. Mr. Blassingame questioned if there were any plans to widen Oakwood Road. Mr. Patek stated the road would be 48 feet wide to match the width of the road in front of the hospital south to Village Lane. He noted 5’ sidewalks would be installed. He stated the right-of-way would be 66’ wide, and that the easements were not for additional right-of-way, but needed for storm sewer inlets, storm drainage and the construction of rip rap and long term maintenance of the bridge. Motion by Blassingame for approval of the acquisition of numerous temporary construction and permanent limited easements needed to complete construction of sidewalks as part of the reconstruction of Oakwood Road between 9th Avenue and Village Lane. Seconded by Timmerman. Motion carried 7-0-1. Gehling voting present. III:AUTHORIZATION TO ACQUIRE EASEMENTS AND PROPERTY – ALGOMA BOULEVARD BETWEEN MURDOCK AVENUE AND CONGRESS AVENUE The City of Oshkosh Department of Public Works, petitioner, requests Plan Commission review and approval of acquisition of real estate interests needed to permit reconstruction of Algoma Boulevard between Murdock and Congress Avenues. These real estate interests include temporary easements; permanent limited easements, purchase of portions of land from two properties and the purchase of one entire property. Mr. Burich introduced the item stating a meeting would be held on Wednesday, September 19 at 5 p.m. for the property owners to have their questions answered by the appropriate representatives. Jeff Wilderman, 1710 Algoma Boulevard, asked how they have gotten to this point where new sidewalks as of 1996 are going to be torn out. Mr. Patek stated the road was 46’ wide from curb to curb, and the DOT requested the road to be 52’ wide. He stated the Common Council was able to reduce the request to the minimum allowed which would match Jackson Street, which was the least width acceptable by the DOT to receive federal funding. Mr. Patek stated the DOT was not assessing the City, therefore the City could not assess the property owners for sidewalks. He also stated the City does not charge property owners for sidewalk reconstruction when the sidewalks are in good repair. Milo Miller, 1703 Algoma Blvd., questioned why Algoma Boulevard was going to be reconstructed at this time, since they were told there wasn’t anything else planned when they had sidewalks replaced in 1996. Plan Commission Minutes Page 5September 4, 2001 Mr. Patek stated as of May of ’98 there were no further plans for Algoma Blvd., however, by the end of ’98 the DOT created a new plan per the City of Oshkosh’s request, and started to put together budget figures for the future. Mr. Patek explained the difference between the sidewalk project of ’96 and the reconstruction of roadway by the DOT in 2002. He stated the DOT needs permission to go onto private property, therefore the request is being brought forward to acquire easements and property, without having to go through eminent domain or a condemnation process. Mr. Miller asked what would be done on the west side of Algoma Blvd., where no right-of-way was available to be taken. Vice Chairman Krueger stated those type of questions would be answered at the September 19th meeting. Karen Rees, 1709 Algoma Blvd., questioned how old a house needed to be before it was included in the Historic District, who decides what houses are in and which are out, and stated that changes can’t be made to a person’s house without their permission. Ms. Kepplinger explained that Federal Law requires properties on the National Register of Historic Places, where federal money is to be used, to go through a special process to offset any negative impact that may result from the construction, therefore, meetings have been held over the last 6-8 months with them, the DOT, the Federal Highway Administration, and the City of Oshkosh as required by Federal Law. Barb Wilderman, 1710 Algoma Blvd., questioned what effect this meeting with the Historic District property owners would have on the easements needed by property owners outside of the Historic District. She referred to a petition that went around. Ms. Kepplinger stated the petition was sent around by the Historic District property owners regarding placing utility easements underground. Ms. Kepplinger stated the property owners not in the Historic District wouldn’t have the same opportunities for underground utility easements because they wouldn’t be covered in the project costs outside of the Historic District. Mrs. Wilderman also questioned why the entire corner lot on Algoma was purchased by the City when only 35’ would be used. Ms. Kepplinger explained the entire property needed to be purchased in that case because the remainder of the property not needed for the project would be unusable, therefore the City was required to purchase the entire lot. Mr. Patek stated the DOT took traffic counts to determine the reconstruction needs, as in this case an extra right hand turn lane was planned for, therefore not only 1724 Algoma Blvd. needed to be purchased, but a portion of her property was needed as well, to taper the lane. Mary Hildebrandt, 102 W. 11th Avenue, questioned if this entire project was a State project, and why such a large turn lane was needed. Vice Chairman Krueger confirmed it was State project, and stated the DOT determined the need for a turn lane through traffic count studies they have done. Ted Leyhe, 1540 Algoma Blvd., questioned if the sidewalks could remain at 4.5 feet, and questioned the design of the sidewalk around trees. Vice Chairman Krueger stated those questions should be discussed at the September 19th meeting. Plan Commission Minutes Page 6September 4, 2001 Motion by Bloechl for approval of acquisition of real estate interests needed to permit reconstruction of Algoma Boulevard between Murdock and Congress Avenues to include temporary easements; permanent limited easements, purchase of portions of land from two properties and the purchase of one entire property. Seconded by Reschenberg. Mr. Blassingame questioned who owned the property at 1724 Algoma Avenue. Mr. Burich noted Mary Hildebrandt owned the property. Motion carried 8-0. IV:ACQUISITION/DISPOSITION OF PROPERTY; LAND DIVISION; AND GRANTING OF EASEMENTS, 234 NORTH CAMPBELL ROAD AND ADJACENT LOT City Administration requests Plan Commission review and approval of several items relating to development of a walkway that will provide for easier pedestrian access between the Senior Center at 200 N. Campbell Road and the recently completed Senior Center Annex at 234 N. Campbell Road. Map 1 attached to this Report shows the general location of the walkway that would be constructed from the parking area at the City’s boat launch facility (which abuts the Senior Center) across a portion of an apartment complex driveway and green space to the Senior Center Annex parking lot. Mr. Kinney stated the proposal wouldn’t alter the existing land use, but allow for construction of a safer walkway between the boat landing facility and the annex parking lot for staff and senior citizens using the facilities. Motion by Timmerman for approval of the acquisition and disposition of property, the associated land division, and the provision of permanent easements as reflected on Map 1. Seconded by Reschenberg. Motion carried 8-0. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 4:58 p.m. Respectfully submitted, DARRYN BURICH Principal Planner DB/vlr