HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutesPLAN COMMISSION MINUTES
July 5, 2011
PRESENT: David Borsuk, Ed Bowen, Jeffrey Thorns, Thomas Fojtik, John Hinz, Steve Cummings,
Kathleen Propp, Dennis McHugh, Robert Vajgrt, Karl Nollenberger
EXCUSED: Donna Lohry
STAFF: Darryn Burich, Director of Planning Services; David Buck, Principal Planner; Chris
Strong, Director of Transportation; Steve Gohde, Assistant Director of Public Works;
Deborah Foland, Recording Secretary
Chairperson Fojtik called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared
present.
The minutes of June 21, 2011 were approved as presented. (Vajgrt/Nollenberger)
L SITE & BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL FOR A PUBLIC RESTROOM & SHELTER
FACILITY LOCATED IN MENOMINEE PARK ON PRATT TRAIL
The applicant is requesting approval of a site and building plan to construct a public restroom facility
and shelter in Menominee Park along Pratt Trail.
Mr. Bowen arrived at 4:02 pm.
Mr. Burich presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the renderings of
the proposed structure and the elevations.
There was no discussion on this item.
Motion by Thoms to approve the site and building plans for a public restroom and shelter
facility in Menominee Park as requested.
Seconded by Nollenberger. Motion carried 9 -0.
II. PARTIAL RIGHT- OF-WAY VACATION OF RATH LANE FROM OMRO ROAD
(STH 21) TO 147 FEET NORTH OF OMRO ROAD
The applicant requests the vacation of Rath Lane from Omro Road (STH 21) to 147 feet north of Omro
Road.
Mr. Burich presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area and noted that there was an
error in the staff report referring to 1625 Rath Lane and the correct address should be 1424 Rath Lane.
He commented that the connection to Omro Road from Rath Lane was no longer necessary and
reviewed the conditions recommended for this request. He also discussed access issues for
surrounding properties created by the vacation of this area and how reconfiguration of the existing lots
or cross access agreements would be necessary to remedy the situation.
Mr. Thorns questioned if Rath Lane still has access to Omro Road.
Plan Commission Minutes
July 5, 2011
Steve Gohde, Assistant Director of Public Works, replied that access to Omro Road was discontinued
previously during the reconstruction of USH 41 and it will be permanent with the construction of the
new overpass in the near future.
Mr. Thorns also questioned if this vacation would create problems for Fire Department access in this
area.
Mr. Burich responded negatively as there would still be access to this area from the east.
Motion by Nollenberger to approve the partial right -of -way vacation of Rath Lane from Omro
Road (STH 21) to 147 feet north of Omro Road as requested with the following conditions:
1. Utility and access easement is placed on the entire vacation area for any existing utilities.
2. Correct the substandard right -of -way access for 1424 Rath Lane via Certified Survey Map
or Subdivision Variance granted by the Plan Commission.
3. Cross- access easement is created for the 1900 Omro Road property to utilize 1424 Rath
Lane for street access.
Seconded by Vajgrt. Motion carried 9 -0.
III. REVIEW OF A CONDITIONAL USE/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR A LIMITED
VENUE FESTIVAL SITE LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF RIPPLE
ROAD AND S. WASHBURN STREET
City administration is requesting review of a Conditional Use/Planned Development granted on July
26, 2005 for a limited venue festival site (Ford Festival Park) located in the City of Oshkosh and Town
of Nekimi with ingress /egress, parking and camping uses located within the City portion of the site.
This item has been laid over from the June 21, 2011 Plan Commission meeting in part to determine the
effectiveness of some of the new safety measures being implemented at the site in cooperation with the
local law enforcement and event organizers. Since that layover, Country USA has held their event.
Mr. Burich presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area and discussed some of the
enhanced safety measures implemented at this year's event. He stated that staff was proposing to add
more conditions to the CUP/PD to provide the Police Department with more ability to have input for
the operation of the festival. He reviewed the original site plan for the festival grounds and reviewed
the recommended conditions for this request which were intended to help to increase safety at the site
and were the same conditions imposed by the Town of Nekimi and Winnebago County.
Scott Greuel, Chief of Police, discussed this year's event and stated that the increase lighting on
Washburn Street, the additional police presence, and the reduced speed limit all helped in the effort to
make the situation safer for event attendees. He also commented that they have made
recommendations for improvements for future events at the site.
Officer Harris, Oshkosh Police Department, stated that he worked at the event this year and felt that
the increased pedestrian officer patrols were effective and helped to keep pedestrians off the roadway
and the reduced speed limits were also effective. He discussed the environmental conditions due to the
excess rain that week and stated that officers escorted shuttle buses to the grounds. He felt that
additional lighting to the south of the site on Waukau Avenue would be beneficial and reflective
material on clothing or other items would assist in making pedestrians more visible.
Plan Commission Minutes
July 5, 2011
Mr. Thorns inquired when the reduced speed limits went into effect during the event.
Officer Harris responded that the reduced limits were in effect on Tuesday morning and revised signs
were placed over the existing ones. He felt that different colored signs may be more effective or
flashing signs could be used.
Mr. Thorns questioned how many pedestrians were utilizing the area that Officer Harris felt required
additional lighting.
Officer Harris replied that several hundred pedestrians passed through it.
Mr. Thorns stated that a separation of pedestrians from traffic was necessary and questioned if a side
path for this use would be effective.
Chief Greuel replied that any type of separation would be helpful and improving the infrastructure of
the roadway would be the best solution. He reviewed some of the barrier options available and stated
that some of them would not be cost effective and some are movable objects which could create other
hazards. A pathway for pedestrians would be more effective and enhanced lighting would be the most
beneficial improvement.
Mr. Thorns questioned the number of pedestrians using Ripple Avenue.
Officer Harris estimated 1000 or more pedestrians utilized this street although most event attendees
exited on Washburn Street some exited from supplemental gates on Ripple Avenue. This area was not
in the City's jurisdiction.
Mr. Hinz inquired if the majority of foot traffic exiting on Washburn Street headed to the north.
Officer Harris responded that most of them do however some travel south to parking lots located off of
Fisk Avenue.
Mr. Hinz questioned if traffic was directed in a one -way pattern when the event concludes and if the
reduced speeds created more pedestrians crossing the road.
Officer Harris replied that vehicles traveling north out of the grounds have one lane of traffic and
vehicles traveling south have two lanes and the reduced speeds did not appear to increase incidents of
pedestrians crossing the road.
Mr. Hinz discussed the use of buses or shuttles on Washburn Street, if reflective wrist bands were
useful, or any temporary flashing hardware that could be installed on the speed limit signs to draw
attention to them.
Chief Greuel stated that digital display boards were utilized however they interfered with traffic on
USH 41 and he felt that notifying the public to be more aware of the visibility issues would be
beneficial. The use of reflective items would be helpful but the increased lighting discussed was the
most important factor.
Mr. McHugh inquired where the speed limit reduction was located.
Plan Commission Minutes
July 5, 2011
Chief Greuel responded that it was reduced the entire length of Washburn Street from State Road 44 to
26 and increasing the amount of signage would help as well as pre - advertising that speed limits would
be reduced in the area.
Mr. McHugh also questioned if standard signs were used and if auxiliary police were utilized.
Chief Greuel responded affirmatively and stated that the current signs were changed but we could use
more and auxiliary police were utilized during the event.
Mr. McHugh commented that there appeared to be a lack of willingness to install street lights out there
and felt that the city should find funding to do it.
Mr. Borsuk questioned the effectiveness of the reflective wrist bands and if the fencing along USH 41
is high enough to deter pedestrians from attempting to cross the highway.
Chief Greuel replied that the reflective bands were very effective as well as other reflective items but
increased lighting was still necessary in the area. Fencing limitations may have certain requirements
along USH 41 and he did not know how high it would have to be to deter someone from this action.
Mr. Borsuk voiced his concern regarding the protection of the navigable stream on the site and
questioned if there was an erosion control plan in place.
Mr. Gohde explained that an erosion control plan was not necessary under this circumstance and
conditions were different this year than others due to the weather conditions.
Mr. Thorns questioned why street lights could not be installed and only utilized on a temporary basis.
Chris Strong, Director of Transportation, explained that the temporary use was not allowed due to
Wisconsin Public Service Corporation's policy and an alternative method was available where the City
would handle more of the responsibility and the costs would be higher to install, but could be used on a
temporary basis. Lighting placed 300 feet apart should be adequate to address the issue.
Mr. Thorns then questioned how to get the Town of Nekimi to install lighting as well.
Mr. Burich responded that the City does not have control of the right -of -way in the Town.
Mr. Thorns suggested that side paths should be constructed until the road reconstruction takes place
and questioned if there would be issues with the right -of -way.
Mr. Gohde replied that there is a reasonable distance off the right -of -way but could not be definite
about whether there was room for the suggested side path and it may not be wide enough to handle the
amount of pedestrians utilizing it.
Mr. Burich added that the side path was related to the city internally and whether there was funding for
it which is currently being explored.
Mr. Thorns stated that it would be a temporary fix until the road was reconstructed and questioned how
the City would address it.
Plan Commission Minutes
July 5, 2011
Mr. Burich responded that the funding would have to be budgeted in the Capital Improvement Program
(CIP) and the City was considering its options.
Mr. Cummings commented that the city has limited resources and the suggestions for improvements
all have price tags for which there is no money in the budget to cover. He further commented that
once the improvements are made, there is no guarantee that the event will remain in the city.
Mr. McHugh discussed the road surfaces installed at OshVegas Palms Resort adjacent to this site and
the muddy conditions that existed this year on the festival grounds. He felt we have to lean on the
promoters or come up with some funding to prevent the event from moving to another location as
changes need to be made.
Mr. Borsuk commented that the conditional use permit was in place until 2016 however the property
owner has the ability to withdraw the use of the site if a better offer comes along.
Mr. Hinz questioned if the promoter felt the wrist bands were effective.
Dan Liebhauser, promoter for the event, replied that this was difficult to ascertain as the weather made
things unusually difficult this year but the number of bands sold exceeded their expectations. The
amount of rain made the parking situation problematic and they were considering adding a reflective
coating to the wrist bands which he felt were successful and will use that program again for future
events. He further stated that they were in line with the Oshkosh Police Department and understood
the safety concerns on Washburn Street. It was additional costs for them but it all made sense as each
element helped this year and other businesses could help cover the costs but the expense was worth it
to have event attendees safe. He suggested that distribution of information regarding some of the
safety measures could be helpful and use of their website and mailings could address some of the
issues. Public service announcements may also be helpful.
Mr. Hinz commented that there was some backlash regarding the wrist band fees and suggested that
the fee could be added to the ticket price.
Mr. Liebhauser replied that they were not selling the wrist bands for profit but to attempt to deter
pedestrians from parking elsewhere and walking down the road to the festival grounds and he was not
sure at this time how it will be administered next year.
Mr. Hinz discussed the conditional use permits granted to OshVegas and the Par 3 Golf Course and if
it had a detrimental effect on the event.
Mr. Liebhauser responded that the satellite parking lots are going to operate however he felt they
should be sharing in the costs for the safety enhancements.
Ms. Propp questioned if the promoter had reviewed the conditions recommended for this request and if
he found them satisfactory.
Mr. Liebhauser replied that he was agreeable to the recommended conditions but stated that he was not
sure why the City was requesting that he post a bond for the event as there have never been any issues
with his cooperation with the City, Town, or Winnebago County. He added that it can be worked out.
Marty Schibbelhut, owner of OshVegas Palms Resort, 3911 S. Washburn Street, stated that he does not
want to see Country USA relocate as it is great for Oshkosh and the Highway 41 corridor but he felt
Plan Commission Minutes
July 5, 2011
that the promoters do not want to work with businesses around the event site. He believed that twin
layers of fencing along the road could be used to separate the pedestrians from the traffic however the
promoters do not want to pay the costs for this installation. He added that he was required to install
hard surface roadways in his campground although the festival site has yet to be required to make that
improvement on their grounds and he believed that the promoters dictate to the City how things get
handled for the event. He worked with the Oshkosh Police Department who he felt did a great job but
felt it was unfair that there was no washing stations on the festival grounds and event attendees used
his facilities instead. He further stated that the wrist band program utilized this year was just a money
making play on the part of the promoters.
Ms. Propp questioned if the conditions recommended for this request were similar to the Town and
Winnebago County's conditions, will the government entities work together on this effort and
suggested a joint meeting should be held.
Mr. Burich responded that the Oshkosh Police Department, Winnebago County Sheriff's Department,
and the State Patrol already hold meetings on the matter to discuss issues.
Mr. Cummings inquired if condition #3 requiring the annual preparation plans be reviewed and
approved no later than March 15 should include a required date for the plans to be submitted.
Mr. Burich replied that the condition could be amended to include a submittal deadline if Commission
members felt it necessary.
Chief Greuel added that they will be contacting Mr. Liebhauser by September or October regarding the
review of an operational safety plan for 2012 and he felt the condition was adequate as written.
Mr. Borsuk suggested that the Commission could conduct another review after the season is complete
for 2011 or review the request again in 6 -9 months. He felt it may be wise to lay the item over until
that time.
Mr. Thorns stated that once the request has been approved, it will not be reviewed again for another
five years and Rock USA was still an upcoming event. He felt that plans for improvements could be
addressed in the Capital Improvement Program regardless of the fact that there is no guarantee that the
event would remain in Oshkosh after the CUP expires. He also commented that the EAA grounds are
not all paved and that steps were taken this year to improve the situation however he would rather see a
review process for this event.
Mr. Fojtik questioned if a review could be become an annual process for this request.
Mr. Burich responded that the conditions recommended for this request address the safety concerns
raised and provides the Police Department with the necessary authority to review the annual plan for
the event and they are most aware of what needs to be addressed. He added that the discussion
regarding the construction of side paths or installation of lighting in this area is a City issue that is not
part of this request.
Mr. Thorns inquired if the Plan Commission could make a recommendation to the Common Council
for CIP funds to be allocated for improvements in this area.
Mr. Burich replied that improvements to the Washburn Street area infrastructure is outside the
boundaries of the CUP/PD request and was a budget related matter for the City.
Plan Commission Minutes
July 5, 2011
Mr. Steve Cummings commented that with limited funding for the City, projects must be prioritized.
Mr. Burich stated that he felt it was appropriate to rely on the Police Department to ascertain whether
the approval of an annual plan was effective.
Mr. Hinz commented that he understood the concerns regarding holding off on the approval of this
request however the Police Department was working with the promoter and area businesses on the
matter and condition #8 provides the City with the ability to re- review the request as needed so he did
not feel an annual review would be required.
Mr. Burich added that we will not know the effectiveness of an annual plan until next year and if
weaknesses are discovered, requirements could be adjusted on an annual basis to address issues. The
CUP expires in 2016 and there were other options to be explored relating to improvements in that time.
Motion by Thoms to approve the renewal of the conditional use permit /planned development
for a limited venue festival site located at the southwest corner of Ripple Road and S.
Washburn Street with the following conditions:
1) Annual preparation of a "Traffic, Pedestrian Safety, Security, and Lighting Plan
submittal of said plans to Oshkosh Chief of Police, and approval of said plans
annually by the Police Department with said plans being subject to reasonable
conditions of approval by the Police Department.
a. Said plans shall at the option of the Police Department require improved
shuttle access points and staging areas.
2) Annual preparation of a "Health Plan" and submittal to the City Health Division for
review and approval. The Health Plan shall be similar in nature to the "Traffic,
Pedestrian Safety, Security, and Lighting Plan". The Health Plan shall be submitted
annually to the City Health Division with said plans being subject to reasonable
conditions of approval by the Health Division.
3) All plans shall be submitted sufficiently in advance so as to allow the respective
agency to complete their review and approval no later than March 15 of each year.
4) The event organizer shall post a bond in an amount deemed sufficient by City staff to
insure compliance with the plans or enter into separate agreement with the City to
compensate for public costs incurred.
S) Event grounds, including parking and camping areas, shall be monitored for effuse,
and appropriate means of continual collection of refuse shall be noted in the Health
Plan. The method and frequency of refuse disposal shall also be noted
6) All mud and debris tracked from the subject property to City right -of -ways shall be
removed within 24 hours of the end of the daily event. Failure to remove debris may
result in the City performing the work and charging those costs back to the event
organizer, property owner or both.
7) The approach /apron to the facility within the right -of -way is paved by 2012 no later
than May 30th. Plans and specifications, as well as the extent of the paving, shall be
approved by the Department of Public Works.
8) The City will re- review the terms and conditions of the CUP as needed to insure
public safety.
Plan Commission Minutes
July 5, 2011
Seconded by Vajgrt. Motion carried 9 -0.
IV. DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW FOR THE CREATION OF A MULTIPLE FAMILY
HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE 1800 BLOCK OF
NORTH MAIN STREET AND THE 700 BLOCK OF VIOLA AVENUE
The applicant is requesting approval of a development plan for a multiple family dwelling
development that includes:
• Two commercial lots for future development
• Community Center
• Four 8 -unit buildings (32 units)
• Three 6 -unit buildings (18 Units)
• One 5 -unit building (5 units)
• Internal roadway /walkway system and off - street parking facilities
• Two stormwater management facilities and open spaces
Mr. Buck presented the item and reviewed the site, surrounding area, zoning and current land uses in
said area. He also reviewed the site plan for the development and discussed the various features of the
proposal. A neighborhood meeting was held at which time no objections were heard and he read an
email submitted by Mr. Dillman who attended the meeting and supported the project but felt that
fencing should be required to be placed around the detention areas for the safety of children. He also
discussed the traffic flow through the development, the layout of the buildings, and the base standard
modifications being requested. He commented that condition #213 regarding the reduced north
transitional yard setback was in error and could be removed. He also discussed the landscaping,
pedestrian walks, access drives, parking, signage, fencing, and stormwater detention for the
development. Building elevations and the community center features were reviewed as well as the
conditions recommended for this request.
Mr. Nollenberger questioned how the community center would be handled on a long term basis and if
it would operate similar to a condo association where residents pay a fee to support its use.
Mr. Borsuk questioned how many of the dwellings would have a percentage at below limit rent, what
type of fencing was being proposed, and his concern with traffic impacts onto Murdock Avenue.
Mr. Thorns inquired if the streets within the development were private, if standard curb and gutters
would be installed and if pedestrian walks would be created throughout the development, if lighting
plans were submitted, and if standard street lighting should be required on the main accesses through
the development.
Mr. Vajgrt questioned if lighting was required in the parking areas and externally on the garages.
Mr. Buck responded that curb and gutter would be installed in parts of the development but it was not
indicated in all areas and pedestrian walks were placed throughout the development. Lighting plans
had not yet been submitted but would be required to meet code requirements at the time of site plan
review and building permit issuance as light levels were dictated by these requirements. Standard
street lighting could be added to the main accesses if Commission members felt it was necessary.
Ms. Propp inquired if public sidewalks existed on Viola Avenue and North Main Street around the
development.
Plan Commission Minutes
July 5, 2011
Mr. Buck responded affirmatively.
Mr. Cummings questioned if some of the units were planned to be low limit rentals with no age
restrictions which would most likely result in more families occupying these units, has anyone
contacted the school district about the system's ability to accommodate the increased number of
students in this area.
Mr. Burich replied that the school district has indicated in the past that they have the capacity to handle
additional students in the system although some may have to be shifted to different districts.
Mr. Cummings then questioned if some dialogue should be held with the school board regarding this
development.
Mr. Burich responded that the only thing that could be done is deny the development due to these
concerns although they have attended planning meetings in the past and the ability to accommodate
additional students has never been an issue.
Commission members further discussed lighting requirements for the development and what would be
appropriate and the City's code requirements regarding light levels in residential areas.
Mr. Borsuk then inquired if the school district was included in this review process.
Mr. Buck responded that the school district was notified of both the neighborhood meeting and the
Plan Commission meeting and has not contacted the City with any concerns or comments.
Harold Peerenboom, 37 Viola Avenue, questioned the placement of the vinyl fencing along the
residential homes on Viola Avenue and how far back from the lot will it be set as the existing chain
link fence goes all the way out to the sidewalk and is a visibility issue when backing out of his
driveway. He also questioned if the fence could be placed on the lot line or if a setback was required.
Mr. Buck responded that code requirements regulate that the first 25 feet of fencing from the sidewalk
could be no higher than three feet and 50% open and that after the initial 25 feet, it could be six foot
tall and solid. Visibility should not be an issue for the fencing and it could be placed on the lot line as
there are no setback requirements for fencing.
Mr. Borsuk voiced his concerns with access onto Murdock Avenue as the Murdock Avenue access
near Jackson Street can be problematic. He felt a requirement for right - in/right -out may be appropriate
for this access.
Mr. Strong replied that the north/south access onto Murdock Avenue from the Pick and Save site is
shown on the high crash list however an additional north/south access on the east side was not as big of
a concern as that access drive was an indirect access and would not be intensely used. The access
drive on North Main Street would be a more direct route and more predominantly used.
Mr. Thorns questioned why the Murdock Avenue access was indicated on the site plan as a fire lane.
Mr. Buck responded that this access would provide emergency services to this side of the buildings
and to eliminate the access to Murdock Avenue completely would be harmful to the bank at this
Plan Commission Minutes
July 5, 2011
location and from a planning standpoint, the additional access will reduce exits on other accesses to the
site.
Cal Schultz, Keystone, explained that the lighting plans were intended to create a residential feel for
the development and exterior lighting would be installed at the front and back doors and the lighting
plans would comply with code requirements.
Mr. Thorns commented that he was concerned if the lighting would be adequate for the safety of the
children living at the development.
Mr. Schultz stated that the intention was to convert the development over to condominiums in the
future and the community center would become part of the condo association at that time however in
its initial stages, it would be rental property. There would be income restrictions on all two bedroom
units which were calculated to be for moderate income families. He also discussed the various rental
amounts planned for the units.
Mr. Bowen left the meeting at 5:45 pm.
Ms. Propp voiced her concern with the amount of usable green space for children on the site and if it
would be adequate.
Mr. Schultz replied that they were low density apartments by the square foot calculations and the
intention in the layout of the green space areas were to have the children play in the designated
playground area by the community center.
Mr. Borsuk inquired since the development was required to have access to Main Street, will it be
appropriately lighted for through traffic.
Mr. Schultz responded that the development was meant to be residential in nature and they were not
wishing to encourage traffic to use this access to get to the shopping center to the west.
Motion by Vajgrt to approve the development plan for the creation of a multiple family housing
development on property located at the 1800 block of N. Main Street and the 700 block of Viola
Avenue as requested with the following conditions which includes the removal of the condition
related to the reduced north transitional yard setback for the building:
1) Certified Survey Map or other land division instrument is used to reconfigure the property
lines as presented on the site plan.
2) Base standard modification to setbacks, as depicted on the site plan:
a. Reduced Main Street front yard setback for signage from 25 feet to I5 feet.
b. Reduced Viola Avenue front yard setback for buildings from 25 feet to 19 feet.
c. Reduced Viola Avenue front yard setback for signage from 25 feet to 10 feet.
d. Reduced rear yard setback for drives from 25 feet to 6 feet 6 inches and 10 feet.
e. Reduce the rear yard setback for community center from 25 feet to 11 feet 6 inches.
3) Access Control variance to allow a three lane entrance (36 foot wide at the property line 146
foot wide at the curb) off North Main Street.
4) Cross access agreements with the Fair Acres Shopping Center to the west and the
Associated Bank to the south are provided.
5) Cross Parking Agreement with the Fair Acres Shopping Center to the west is provided.
Plan Commission Minutes 10 July 5, 2011
6) No signage beyond house numbers is allowed on the individual residential buildings and
area dedicated for signage on the community center is limited to no greater than 10% of
any fa(ade.
7) Detention basins are designed without riprap above the water line and native plants be
planted on the side slopes of the basin and emergent plants on the safety shelf.
Seconded by Thoms.
Mr. Borsuk commented that he felt that subsidized housing was perceived to be more concentrated on
the northeast side of the city and accesses crossing major streets should be more carefully considered.
Motion carried 9 -0.
V. DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A RESTAURANT,
COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND COMMERCIAL STRIP CENTER AT 1200 SOUTH
KOELLER STREET
The petitioner requests approval of a Development Plan for the development of a restaurant,
commercial building and commercial strip center at 1200 South Koeller Street.
Mr. Buck presented the item and reviewed the site, surrounding area, zoning in said area, and the
proposed site plan. He stated that the development was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and
discussed details of the proposal such as parking, pedestrian walks, stormwater detention, signage,
access drives, and the base standard modifications being requested. He discussed the option of
removing some of the parking stalls to meet code requirements without having to have a base standard
modification granted. Lighting plans have not yet been submitted for this development and building
elevations were reviewed. No design for the strip center has been submitted at this time and landscape
plans were reviewed which appear to be deficit from code requirements. Conditions recommended for
this request was also reviewed.
Mr. Borsuk questioned why staff was not recommending the removal of the parking from both the
front and back of the development rather than allowing the base standard modification. He also felt
that a stormwater analysis should be addressed.
Mr. Buck responded that staff was not supportive of the reduced rear transitional yard setback adjacent
to the residential properties although the setbacks on the frontage road are consistent with other
existing buildings in the area therefore that setback would not be detrimental. All the requested
setbacks were included to allow the Plan Commission to recommend what they felt was appropriate for
the development.
Mr. Burich added that the ANR pipeline that extends through this site also dictates the placement of
buildings that can be located in the front portion of the parcel.
Mr. Cummings questioned what the width of the proposed landscaping was on Koeller Street.
Mr. Buck replied that the proposed landscaping was eight feet wide next to the retail building and
reduced down to zero to the north.
Mr. Cummings commented that the Vision Study recently completed indicated that citizens desired to
see more landscaping in the community.
Plan Commission Minutes 11
July 5, 2011
Mr. Burich responded that the Commission could require additional landscaping on the site if they felt
it was appropriate. Considering the current condition of the site and the landscaping proposed for the
new development, staff felt the slightly reduced plans were an adequate trade -off
Ms. Propp inquired if condition #lA and 1D for reduced setbacks for parking were both removed, if
landscaping could be added in these areas instead.
Mr. Buck responded affirmatively.
Mr. Thorns questioned if the buildings could be moved back if the front row of parking was removed.
Andy Dumke, 2030 Menominee Drive, the developer for this request, replied that the Olive Garden has
national development standards for their establishments that require parking all around the structure
and to move the building back further would place it behind other buildings on Koeller Street.
Mr. Thorns then questioned what style was planned for the strip center structure as renderings were not
submitted at this time and if this would have to come back to the Plan Commission in the future for
approval of the final plans for this portion of the development.
Mr. Burich replied that the conditions address this issue as building elevations and a master wall sign
plan would both require approval prior to construction and would have to be consistent with the rest of
the development and meet the Highway 41 corridor overlay standards. If plans were revised to not
meet approval, it would have to come back through the process for approval of an amendment by Plan
Commission and Common Council.
Mr. Dumke commented that the two portions of the development on Koeller Street were ready to
proceed now but the strip center is not rented at this time so building elevations and signage was not
available to be submitted.
Ms. Propp asked to clarify that the developer would have an issue with the removal of condition #IA
to allow a reduced front yard setback for parking but would not have a problem with the removal of
condition #1D to allow a reduced rear transitional yard setback for parking.
Mr. Dumke responded that the Olive Garden would object to the removal of the front row of parking
and national chain developments are in high demand and the restaurant will locate elsewhere if plans
are not satisfactory.
Mr. Cummings stated that it appeared that the City has standards however there are exceptions to said
standards.
Mr. Dumke replied that neighboring properties are already established within the setback areas along
Koeller Street.
Mr. Vajgrt commented that there is currently very little landscaping on Koeller Street and the City
could lose a good development by requiring landscaping and the loss of parking on the front of the site.
Mr. Dumke stated that the redevelopment of a site is often more difficult than developing vacant land
as you have to deal with the pre- existing conditions and area of the site.
Plan Commission Minutes 12
July 5, 2011
Mr. Burich questioned if it would be agreeable to add a few landscape features in the front with only
the loss of a few parking stalls.
Mr. Dumke felt that would be acceptable.
Marge Bolding, 1138 Evans Street, stated that the detention pond on the site plan is not in the same
location as it was on the site plan that was mailed out with the meeting notice.
Mr. Buck responded that the public notices were sent out with the original site plan and the site plan
was revised at the last minute with the pond being relocated to a different area.
Ms. Bolding inquired if the detention pond would have fencing surrounding it.
Mr. Buck replied that typically they are not fenced in but a safety shelf is on the edge which is
shallower and it gradually gets deeper.
Mr. Borsuk stated that he was concerned with stormwater issues not being addressed as this is a large
site with existing flooding issues in the area.
Mr. Gohde discussed the requirements for quantity and quality of stormwater management and
pollution control requirements regarding impervious surfaces and the separate entities that deal with
these issues. He stated that he discussed the situation with Mr. Dumke and agreed on a reasonable
compromise.
There was brief discussion on the redevelopment of previously occupied sites and how the City
regulates stormwater requirements of said sites compared to new developments.
Mr. Thorns questioned why the same condition was not included for this site as the previous request
regarding the detention basin design.
Mr. Buck responded that it was not included as the detention basin would be screened completely by
landscaping. It could be added if the Commission felt it was necessary.
Mr. Borsuk commented that as far as the parking in front of the Olive Garden on Koeller Street, it does
not matter what is to the north or south of it as the Vision Study reflected that citizens desire to have
more landscaping in their community. At the time of the redevelopment of a site, these issues should
be addressed and the parking stalls should be eliminated in front of the structure and replaced with
landscaping. He also commented that he was frustrated with the way the City handles stormwater
issues as he felt both the release and cleanliness should be addressed regardless of whether it is a newly
developed site or a redevelopment. He would like to remove the parking both in front of the proposed
restaurant and in the rear of the development.
Mr. Thorns stated that he shared Mr. Borsuk's concerns with the stormwater issues but felt it was
adequate of the developer was willing to address the issue by including the detention basin on the site.
He felt that if the parking was to be removed in front of the restaurant due to setback requirements, the
other retail building should be removed as well. As proposed, the development is even with existing
site lines and the removal of the parking stalls in front of the restaurant will prevent the development
from proceeding and he felt it fit into the site appropriately.
Plan Commission Minutes 13
July 5, 2011
Mr. Vajgrt questioned if the Commission members desired to add the condition related to the detention
basin design with native plants as discussed previously.
Board members unanimously decided to add condition #9 for the natural design of the detention basin
Motion by Thoms to approve the development plan for the development of a restaurant,
commercial building and commercial strip center at 1200 South Koeller Street as requested
with the following conditions which includes the removal of the condition related to the
reduced rear transitional yard setback for parking:
1) Base standard modification to setbacks:
a. Reduced front yard setback for parking from 25 feet to 0 -8 feet.
b. Reduced front yard setback for signage from 25 feet to 10 -14 feet.
c. Reduced front yard setback for building from 50 feet to 8 foot.
d. Reduced rear transitional yard setback for dumpsters from 25 feet to 20 feet.
e. Reduce the north side yard setback for paving from I5 feet to 0 feet.
2) Approve access control variances:
a. Permit two driveway accesses to the property.
b. Reduce the lateral clearance requirement from 75 feet to 45 feet.
3) Establish a walk directly from the freestanding retail structure entrance to the public sidewalk
and remove the pedestrian walk connection to the property to the east.
4) Provide proof of cross- access agreements between the subject property and the properties
adjacent to the north and the south.
5) Base standard modification to reduce the required landscaping, as approved by the
Department of Community Development.
6) Stormwater management, grading and erosion control plans be submitted to and approved by
the Department of Public Works.
7) Final approval of building elevations for the strip center structure.
8) Approval of a master wall sign plan for strip center with the intent that signage styles be
uniform on the structure.
9) Detention basin is designed without riprap above the water line and native plants be planted on
the side slopes of the basin and emergent plants on the safety shelf.
Seconded by Nollenberger.
Motion by Borsuk to amend the conditions to remove condition #IA allowing a reduced front
yard setback for parking.
Seconded by Thoms.
Ms. Propp commented that we need to encourage redevelopment of this site and will support the
original motion but would not support the amendment.
Mr. Nollenberger and Mr. Thoms agreed.
Mr. Cummings stated that a decision was being made for the positioning of the Olive Garden structure
in relation to the positioning of the Starbuck's location and he did not feel it was wise to make such a
decision as what is there right now may not continue to exist in the future.
Mr. Vajgrt commented that Starbuck's was not the only site as there were other structures positioned in
the same location on Koeller Street.
Plan Commission Minutes 14
July 5, 2011
Motion on the amendment denied 3 -6 (Ayes- Borsuk/Cummings/McHugh. Nays -Thoms /Fojtik/
Hinz 1Propp1Vajgrt 1Nollenberger)
Motion carried 7 -2. ( Ayes -Thoms /Fojtik/ Hinz / Propp /McHughIVajgrt/Nollenberger. Nays -
Borsuk /Cummings.)
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 7:02 pm. (Vajgrt/Propp)
Respectfully submitted,
Darryn Burich
Director of Planning Services
Plan Commission Minutes 15
July 5, 2011