Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES February 7, 2012 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; 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 January 17, 2012 were approved as presented. (Nollenberger/Cummings) I. ZONE CHANGES FROM C-2PD GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITH PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY TO R-3PD MULTIPLE DWELLING DISTRICT WITH PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY AND R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT AND R-3PD MULTIPLE DWELLING DISTRICT WITH PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF STEARNS DRIVE AND COUNTY TRUNK HIGHWAY “T” (LAKE VIEW PARK ESTATES SUBDIVISION) Multiple zone changes are being requested for portions of a previously preliminary platted area of land (attached Resolution 07-343) encompassing 178 acres located at the northeast corner of Stearns Drive and County Trunk Highway “T”. The requested zone changes include: (1)Rezoning a 3.84 acre parcel from C-2PD General Commercial District with Planned Development Overlay to the R-3PD Multiple Dwelling District with Planned Development Overlay; (2)Rezoning 11.24 acres of land from C-2PD General Commercial District with Planned Development Overlay to the R-3PD Multiple Dwelling District with Planned Development Overlay; (3)Rezoning 0.2 acres of land from C-2PD General Commercial District with Planned Development Overlay to the R-1 Single Family Residence District; and (4)Rezoning 4.31 acres of land from R-3PD Multiple Dwelling District with Planned Development Overlay to the R-1 Single Family Residence District. Mr. Bowen arrived at 4:02 pm. Mr. Buck presented the item and reviewed the preliminary plat previously approved. He displayed the four areas of the property requested to be rezoned and reviewed the acreage for each zoning classification as it currently exists and as proposed. He explained that the market research study completed determined that residential uses had a large market however commercial uses did not which initiated the zone change request. He also reviewed the phase plan for platting and stated that each phase would require Plan Commission and Common Council approval at the time of development. He also noted that the plat is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 1 February 7, 2012 John Maas, JMM Consulting, LLC, 840 Challenger Drive, Green Bay, stated that he was representing the owner for this request and was present to answer any questions Commission members may have regarding the proposal. Ms. Lohry asked for clarification of the location of the site and if there were any commercial uses in the area. Mr. Maas explained the location of the property and stated that there were not any commercial uses currently in the area. Motion by Vajgrt to approve the multiple zone changes for property located at the northeast corner of Stearns Drive and County Road “T” (Lake View Park Estates Subdivision) Seconded by Bowen. Motion carried 9-0. II. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL AND REZONING FROM R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT AND R-4 MULTIPLE DWELLING DISTRICT TO R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT WITH PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AT 112 VIOLA AVENUE (OAKLAWN ELEMENTARY) The applicant is requesting three actions within this petition: A.Rezoning from R-1 & R-4 to R-1 Planned Development; B.Conditional Use Permit to allow a public elementary school use in a R-1 District; and C.Planned Development approval for the redevelopment of the existing school site and the construction of a new school. Mr. Buck presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the current land uses and zoning classifications in said area. He also reviewed the history of the school site and reviewed the site plan and reduced setbacks for the building and parking lot. He explained that the base standard modifications were necessary due to the size and irregular shape of the existing lot. He also reviewed the drive accesses for the site and explained that a traffic impact analysis was not necessary according to the Transportation Director as the area streets could accommodate the traffic from the development. He noted that the bike racks appeared to be insufficient and staff was requesting they be increased. Landscaping plans were not formally designed as yet however the layout and quantity is acceptable and exceeds code requirements with a base standard modification being requested to omit one landscape island in the parking lot. He also reviewed the mechanical equipment placement and screening and stated that the stormwater management was proposed to be an underground detention system which will require approval by the Department of Public Works. He also discussed the lighting plans for the development and although signage plans had not yet been submitted, staff was recommending allowing signage permitted for a C-1 zoning district. Mr. Buck also reviewed the building elevations and stated that the development was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He reviewed the conditions recommended for this request. Mr. Thoms questioned if there was public sidewalk on Viola Avenue adjacent to the school and if drop off areas would be on both Viola Avenue and West Linwood Avenue. Mr. Buck responded affirmatively. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 2 February 7, 2012 Mr. Thoms also inquired if the signage for the school had a necessity to be larger than what was allowed in a residential district. Mr. Buck explained the restrictive regulations for signage in a residential neighborhood compared to the 10% of wall area allowed by C-1 standards. He also stated that the school would not necessarily require that much area for signage however the base standard modification for it would allow adequate room for appropriate identification signage. Mr. Thoms also questioned if the mechanical equipment placement would meet the proposed new ordinance for mechanical screening which is on the agenda today for action. He also inquired how the underground stormwater detention system works. Mr. Buck replied that the mechanical equipment placement and screening met the new ordinance requirements. Steve Gohde, Assistant Director of Public Works, explained that several other developments have utilized such systems and they possess a hollow spot where water can drain into which is then released from that area. Mr. Thoms inquired if it would be sufficient for this development. Mr. Gohde responded affirmatively. Mr. McHugh questioned why the Plan Commission was voting on this request tonight as he was not aware that the School Board had approved of the site. Mr. Buck responded that the City was requested to review this site and design. Mr. Burich added that the petitioner had submitted the application for rezoning and conditional use permit/planned development approval for this site. Mr. McHugh commented that the new school had not yet been approved by the electorate. Mr. Burich indicated that the request is not unlike other requests where financing for a project has not yet been secured and the Plan Commission’s role is simply to review land use and site issues outside of the referendum. Ms. Lohry inquired why the landscaping island was being eliminated. Mr. Buck responded that the island was being eliminated due to the fact that 45 stalls will be required for staff parking and the island would only leave room for 44. This base standard modification was acceptable to staff because of the heavy landscaping along the street and perimeter of the site. Ms. Propp questioned if the area for the multi-family use across Viola Avenue was zoned C-2PD. Mr. Buck responded affirmatively. Ms. Propp also inquired how staff determined that the number of bicycle racks was insufficient. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 3 February 7, 2012 Mr. Buck indicated other school facilities were reviewed and it was noted that additional racks had to be added to these sites to accommodate the number of bicycles and the City would prefer to have adequate capacity built into the initial site design. Mr. Bowen questioned how the transformer would be screened. Mr. Buck responded that it will be enclosed but he did not have the details of the materials to be used. Ms. Lohry inquired about the contractor’s yard to the west of the site and what is planned for that area. Mr. Burich replied that the contractor’s yard was a legal nonconforming use as the property is zoned R-4 Multiple Dwelling District with the land further west on Jackson Street zoned commercial. The school could expand to the west at some point in the future if necessary. Ms. Propp commented that she felt the architect and school board did an excellent job with the design of the site. Motion by Vajgrt to approve the conditional use permit/planned development and rezoning from R-1 and R-4 to R-1PD Single Family Residence District with planned development overlay for development of a new elementary school at 112 Viola Avenue with the following conditions: 1)Base standard modifications for the front and side setbacks as proposed. 2)Base standard modification to allow three driveways, as proposed. 3)Bicycle parking is established at a capacity no less than 150 bicycles. 4)Sidewalk easement is provided along West Linwood Avenue. 5)Base standard modification to remove the northern parking row mid-aisle landscape island. 6)Base standard modification to allow unlit wall signage equaling up to 10% of any wall area. Seconded by Cummings. Motion carried 9-0. III. PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 30, SECTION 30-35 (I)(5) MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SCREENS The Department of Community Development requests review and approval of an amendment to the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance repealing and recreating Section 30-35 (I)(5) Mechanical Equipment Screens, which is a portion of Article XI: Additional Standards and Exceptions. This item was laid over from the Plan Commission meeting of January 17, 2012 in order to address the following questions and concerns generated during the Plan Commissions discussion: 1.Address telecommunications equipment in relation to the screening exemption. 2.Address screening for industrial uses adjacent to residential uses 3.Reference the Nonconformity Ordinance to address situations where zoning is changed after mechanical equipment is installed 4.Clarify design standards for building mounted equipment __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 4 February 7, 2012 Mr. Buck presented the item and stated that changes have been made to the draft ordinance that bold addresses the items above. Deletions are in strikethrough and additions are in . He reviewed that language changes requested at the last meeting and stated that the item could be pulled if Commission members were not comfortable with moving forward with it at this time. Mr. Thoms inquired if commercial buildings with residential units on the upper floor would be allowed to install window air conditioning units in the residential areas. Mr. Buck responded negatively. Mr. McHugh questioned what type of feedback the City has received on these issues. Mr. Burich indicated that he presented the ordinance amendment to the Inspections Advisory Committee and it was developed with the input from the developer’s who serve on this committee. Mr. Buck added that the current ordinance was too restrictive and unclear. The amended ordinance clarified the issues with specific language and set some parameters and the City has not received any negative feedback on the matter. Mr. McHugh then questioned if there were any areas in disagreement. Mr. Burich responded that the ordinance works pretty well as laid out and it will be re-evaluated in a few years. It will be brought back to Plan Commission for revisions if complaints are received. Mr. Thoms inquired if there was no intent to grandfather issues. Mr. Buck responded negatively and stated that nonconforming issues could remain unless cumulative additions exceed 50% of the floor area or original building. Developers would be encouraged to comply with the new ordinance regulations when replacing mechanical equipment, but unless the 50% threshold is exceeded, it would not be required. Developers would also have the option to apply for a variance from the Board of Appeals. Motion by Vajgrt to approve the text amendment to Zoning Ordinance Chapter 30, Section 30- 35 (I)(5) Mechanical Equipment Screens. Seconded by Propp. Motion carried 9-0. PLANNING DIRECTOR’S REPORT Mr. Burich reported that the zone change request for the residential properties on Grand Street was denied by the Common Council. Staff will be holding an open house next Wednesday to discuss this issue with the property owners in this block to determine their long range intentions for the land. A workshop will be held at the following Plan Commission meeting with a zoning proposal to be presented at the first meeting in March. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 4:50 pm. (Vajgrt/Propp) Respectfully submitted, Darryn Burich Director of Planning Services __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 5 February 7, 2012