Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES October 18, 2011 PRESENT: Ed Bowen, Jeffrey Thoms, Thomas Fojtik, John Hinz, Steve Cummings, Kathleen Propp, Dennis McHugh, Donna Lohry, Robert Vajgrt, Karl Nollenberger EXCUSED: David Borsuk STAFF: Darryn Burich, Director of Planning Services; David Buck, Principal Planner; Jeffrey Nau, Associate Planner; Lynn Lorenson, City Attorney; Raymond Maurer, Director of Parks Department; 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 October 4, 2011 were approved as presented. (Nollenberger/Hinz) CONSENT AGENDA IA. GRANT ACCESS EASEMENT AT 1400 S. WESTHAVEN DRIVE The Department of Public Works is requesting the granting of an access easement to allow American Transmission Company (ATC), LLC access to their infrastructure located on the east side of the subject property. Mr. Nau presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area and explained the detention basin project and discussed the purpose of the proposed easement request. There was no discussion on this item. IB. EXTRATERRITORIAL TWO-LOT LAND DIVISION/CERTIFIED SURVEY MAP AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF W. RIPPLE AVENUE AND JAMES ROAD IN THE TOWN OF UTICA The owner is requesting a two-lot land division/certified survey map from one existing parcel containing a total of 11.194 acres. Sizes of the proposed lots are as follows: Lot 1 = 5.273 Acres Lot 2 = 33.587Acres Mr. Nau presented the item and explained the reason for the land division request and noted that it was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He also reviewed the site and surrounding area. Mr. Thoms questioned if Lot 1 will be utilized for agricultural use. Mr. Nau responded that the agricultural use would be managed on the proposed Lot 2. Motion by Vajgrt to approve the consent agenda as requested. Seconded by Cummings. Motion carried 9-0. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 1 October 18, 2011 II. PUBLIC HEARING ON TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT #25 CITY CENTER HOTEL REHABILITATION The UW Oshkosh Foundation and the owners of WHG Companies have entered into a partnership identified as Oshkosh Investors LLC and plan to collaborate in owning and managing the property currently known as City Center Hotel. Plan Commission is being asked to approve the project plan and boundaries for Tax Increment District #25 City Center Hotel Rehabilitation. As part of the TID creation process, a public hearing must be held before the Plan Commission where interested parties may express their views on the proposed TID. The partnership is proposing a $9.5 million redevelopment project and is requesting the City to create a tax increment financing district to provide a development assistance grant to help offset overall development costs. The amount of requested city TIF equity participation in the project is $2 million and is further requested as an up front development assistance grant (DAG). In addition to the DAG, public improvements involving construction of the riverwalk with boat docks and improving public access to the hotel from the skywalk and parking ramp are included as well as administrative costs to the City for implementing the project plan. Total anticipated TIF project costs are identified at $11,150,000 with TIF contributing $3,000,000. Mr. Burich presented the item and reviewed the site and proposed boundaries for TID #25 as well as the surrounding area, the land use in said area, the proposed improvements, and the project plan summary including various costs, financing, purpose and feasibility of the proposed TID. He also reviewed the findings to be affirmed by the Plan Commission when considering approval of a TID and described the definition of blight in various forms. Chairperson Fojtik opened the public hearing on TID #25 for comments. There was no one present to comment therefore the public hearing was closed. Ms. Propp questioned when the existing TID closed on this property. Mr. Burich responded that the previous TID closed in 2006 or 2007. Mr. Hinz inquired about the estimated fair market value decreasing from 1.9 million to 1 million by next year, if the parking ramp was included in the TIF district, and the impact on other businesses in the area since the last TIF was created. Mr. Burich replied that the drop in fair market value was anticipated due to its current condition and the potential for that condition to change as of January 1, of 2012. The parking ramp was not included as part of the TIF district however costs could be included in the surrounding area. As far as the impact on other businesses, since the bank took back possession of the property and sold it a few years ago, it has not been operating to full capacity creating a negative impact on the Convention Center and the downtown in general. There are currently significant costs associated with the renovation of the property. Mr. Cummings added that the hotel has been consistently mismanaged and not properly marketed for many years. Wendy Hielsberg of the Convention and Visitors Bureau stated that the hotel was a Radisson in 1991 and changed to the Park Plaza Hotel in 1999 at which time it lost its flag and removed the quality __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 2 October 18, 2011 standards it possessed when it was a Radisson establishment which was the beginning of the demise of the property. Mr. Cummings added that in 1987 or 1988, the hotel hired an out of state manager who had a lack of resources to properly manage the property. Mr. McHugh commented that the hotel owner used to provide $40,000 per year toward the maintenance of the Convention Center and questioned what component was in this plan to address this arrangement. Mr. Burich responded that this component was not part of the TID #25 project plan. Lynn Lorenson, City Attorney, added that the cost of the Convention Center will be dealt with through an operations agreement with the hotel owner at a later time and is not part of the approval of the TID plan. Mr. Thoms questioned if the TIF was based on incremental values, if the property value would go up before January, 2012, how it affects the project. He also inquired if the costs to improve the skywalk and parking ramp would be an amendment to the proposed TIF or if the funding would come out of the Capital Improvement Program. Mr. Burich replied that there is room to account for it in the Developers Assistance Grant and would like to have funds available to help offset the riverwalk expenses but would at least have enough to cover the developer’s improvement costs. The skywalk and parking ramp would be considered public access improvement costs which could be supported by the TIF or other funding sources. Ms. Lohry inquired if the building was structurally sound and if it required inspection prior to the approval of the TIF. Mr. Burich indicated that the interior and finishes require renovation however the foundation and building appear to be structurally sound. Building permits will be required to be issued when renovations commence but no initial inspection was necessary at this point as the city is well aware of its current condition. Mr. Fojtik questioned who determines what is considered the definitions of blight. Mr. Burich responded that it is determined by the community and varies from one community to another. There is not a set standard or format of blight conditions for all communities. Mr. Nollenberger inquired if a definition of blight has been set in Oshkosh in the past. Mr. Burich replied that the city has not adopted an official blight definition but has followed the general standards in the statute in determining blight. Mr. Cummings stated that he felt the property qualified as blighted as he had contacted the city twice in the past year regarding the condition of the property. Mr. Thoms questioned if state statutes include these types of indicators in their definitions of a blighted area. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 3 October 18, 2011 Mr. Nollenberger requested an opinion from the City Attorney on the matter. Ms. Lorenson explained that state statutes do not define specific tests for the definition of a blighted property but rather require the Commission to apply their experience and understanding to the terms used in the context of the community. To assure that the City was reasonably interpreting the definitions related to blight, the City looked at the past decisions related to blight within the City and to the application of these terms in other municipalities. Mr. McHugh commented that the 100 block of Main Street TIF that was created had to be absorbed by taxpayers due to the devaluation of the property and questioned what guarantees that this does not happen again with this proposed TIF. Mr. Burich responded that there could be a minimum assessment agreement included in the developer’s agreement for this proposal and that mechanism was not present in the 100 block TIF nor was there a provision to prevent the property owner from appealing the assessment. Mr. Thoms asked to clarify #4 in the affirmations of the Plan Commission regarding enhancing the value of all the real property in the district. Mr. Burich confirmed that the only parcel affected by this affirmation would be the hotel property so the value will increase. Motion by Nollenberger to approve the Tax Increment District #25 City Center Hotel Rehabilitation as requested . Seconded by Bowen. Ms. Propp commented that she felt this was one of the most important things done in many years and its impact was very relevant to the downtown area. Mr. Bowen stated that the Plan Commission’s responsibility was to consider what is presented is case in fact and that it meets the #6 criteria listed in the affirmations and past TIF projects should not be considered as part of this decision. Mr. Thoms commented that the property is a viable working hotel and the Convention Center is vital to the community and he felt that the definitions of a blighted property were adequately satisfied as the property was having a negative impact on the city. Mr. McHugh stated that the original intention of TIF districts was for infrastructure and the remodeling of the interior of the hotel was moving in the wrong direction. He felt that is was a two million dollar gift to the developers and should not be approved. Mr. Hinz commented that it was a tough balancing act and he was rather torn on a decision as the Plan Commission was to look at it from a planning perspective only. Mr. Thoms stated that TIF district’s were not for infrastructure only but were also utilized for business development. This project is an investment in the city as it is a partnership with the hotel and Convention Center and would assist in raising equity for the developer to secure financing which would help the project move forward. He considered the hotel and Convention Center a package that worked together. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 4 October 18, 2011 Mr. Cummings commented that the community at large was in favor of this project and he felt a proactive move was necessary in this case. Ms. Lohry stated that she was troubled by the fact that money could be found to support this project however funding was not available to maintain the swimming area at County Park. Mr. McHugh commented that millions of dollars were spent in the past for TIF projects that resulted in the creation of low income housing. Mr. Hinz inquired if the last TIF for the hotel area was considered successful. Mr. Burich indicated that it was successful at one time prior to the changes in ownership and subsequent lack of investment into the property. Motion carried 8-1. Ayes-Bowen/Thoms/Fojtik/Cummings/Propp/Lohry/Vajgrt/Nollenberger. Nays-Hinz. III. APPROVE THE CITY OF OSHKOSH COMPREHENSIVE OUTDOOR RECREATION PLAN (CORP) The applicant requests the Plan Commission provide a recommendation of approval for the Draft City of Oshkosh Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan to the Common Council. Raymond Maurer, Director of the Parks Department, presented the item and discussed the process of updating the Comprehensive Plan for the Parks Department which has not been done since 2003. He explained how needs assessments from the community were acquired and discussed the surveys received from citizens regarding the matter. The Parks Advisory Board reviewed the goals and objectives as well as the existing parks being surveyed and looking at future acquisitions for park areas in the community. The Parks Advisory Board has been reviewing this information on a monthly basis since February to complete the plan and they are recommending approval of it. The Sustainability Advisory Board has also reviewed it and he had incorporated their comments and he was seeking a positive recommendation from the Plan Commission before presenting this plan to the Common Council for approval. Mr. Fojtik commented that he liked the report and appreciated the detail contained in it and questioned how decisions are made on what is pursued first of the priorities listed in the plan. Mr. Maurer responded that the priorities were discussed with staff and citizens as well as the Parks Advisory Board and they concurred that deficiencies, ADA accessibility, and deferred maintenance items should be addressed first. Ms. Lohry stated that she also found the report very informative and appreciated the new sand at the Menominee Park beach and felt that the Parks Department was doing a great job. Mr. Thoms questioned how much was incorporated into this plan from the Oshkosh Vision Report. Mr. Maurer replied that he worked with a number of user groups in the creation of the plan and avoided projects in the Vision Report that were already included in other city plans. Preserving green space and open areas and connecting to bike and pedestrian areas were a few of the things incorporated that were derived from the Vision Report. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 5 October 18, 2011 Mr. Fojtik questioned if any consultation was done regarding incorporating stormwater plans in the park areas. Mr. Maurer responded that they were working on plans in conjunction with the stormwater study and South Park improvements were being delayed as stormwater issues existed in that area. Mr. Thoms commented that developments in the community should incorporate parks and neighborhood parks should incorporate stormwater detention areas as part of the park. Mr. Maurer stated that they are attempting to address these issues with any future developments for parks and are also taking into consideration water quality issues and shoreland restoration and are working with community groups on these matters. Mr. McHugh commented that parks are not evenly distributed throughout the city. Mr. Maurer indicated that they need to work closer with Planning staff to address deficiencies in park area in the city to provide neighborhood parks where needed and that parkland acquisition needs were addressed in the plan. Mr. McHugh commented that he felt that parks are not as necessary as in the past as citizens do not utilize them and this was a very aggressive and costly plan. He questioned if items were included in this year’s Capital Improvements Program. Mr. Maurer responded that some items were in the 2012 CIP which has not yet been approved by the Common Council. Mr. McHugh stated that the items should be prioritized in the plan. Mr. Bowen commented that this information was contained in the plan. Ms. Propp stated that for grant funding purposes, items need to be detailed in a comprehensive plan and some things may not happen, but it still needs to be incorporated in the plan. It is meant to be used as a guide for improvements and parks do not currently have the city priority that they should. She felt it was an aggressive approach and the shoreland plantings and stormwater features are important to the community. Mr. Thoms questioned the statement on page 62 of the plan regarding that all land must be free of detention facilities. Mr. Maurer responded that it referred to that land would not be counted toward Recreational and Parkland dedication if utilized for detention basin use. Ms. Lohry commented that she felt that water conservation was part of planning and that green space and trees were important to the community. Mr. McHugh stated that facilities in many parks have been removed. Mr. Maurer replied that the Parks Department is more involved with the planning aspects of the areas and the Recreation Department staffs the various facilities located in the parks. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 6 October 18, 2011 Mr. McHugh commented that the costs related to the plans in this report are in the millions and the city cannot afford to fund this plan. He felt the Commission should accept the plan but not endorse it. Mr. Vajgrt stated that he does not believe in putting off what needs attention today as it only increases costs to do it in the future. He felt the plan was worth it and that the city should maintain what we have. Motion by Bowen to approve the City of Oshkosh Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan as requested. Seconded by Cummings. Mr. Hinz noted that a number of the items in the plan relate to improvements for the ball fields in the parks and questioned if the school district contributes to these improvements as they utilize these facilities. Mr. Maurer responded that the Recreation Department facility maintains funds to help offset costs for these items and it is both a public and private partnership. Mr. Thoms inquired if all the funding for these improvements would therefore not be coming from the CIP. Mr. Maurer indicated that grant funding, and both public and private partnerships share in the costs for these improvements. Motion carried 9-0. PLANNING DIRECTOR’S REPORT There was no report for this meeting. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 5:22 pm. (Vajgrt/Hinz) Respectfully submitted, Darryn Burich Director of Planning Services __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 7 October 18, 2011