HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 1 September 2, 2014
PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES
September 2, 2014
PRESENT: David Borsuk, Ed Bowen, Jeffrey Thoms, Thomas Fojtik, John Hinz, Kathleen Propp,
Gary Gray, Donna Lohry, Robert Vajgrt, Karl Nollenberger
EXCUSED: Steve Cummings
STAFF: Darryn Burich, Director of Planning Services; David Buck, Principal Planner; Jeffrey
Nau, Associate 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 August 19, 2014 were approved as presented. (Vajgrt/Cummings)
I. TWO-LOT LAND DIVISION/CERTIFIED SURVEY MAP AT 520 N. KOELLER
STREET
This request is for a two-lot land division/certified survey map from one existing parcel containing a
total of 2.2605 acres (98,469 square feet). Sizes of the proposed lots are as follows:
Lot 1 = 1.1573 Acres, 50,413 square feet
Lot 2 = 1.1032 Acres, 48,056 square feet
Mr. Nau presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the zoning
classifications and land use in said area. He explained the reasoning for the land division request and
discussed the history of the previous site development. He reviewed the certified survey map, (CSM),
and discussed the cross access, storm water, and utility easements that were required for this land
division and added that an additional easement would also be necessary for a shared dumpster
enclosure. The Department of Public Works reviewed the CSM and requested that some utilities be
added that are currently not shown on the submitted CSM and those corrections have been addressed.
He reviewed the conditions recommended for this request and stated that condition #2 would need to
be revised to include the dumpster enclosure easement.
Mr. Borsuk questioned if Lot 1 had a vehicular access to Koeller Street to the south of the access point
depicted on the CSM.
Mr. Nau responded that the access in question is a pedestrian access and not a drive access.
Mr. Thoms commented that he thought that when the development on Lot 1 was approved there was
some restriction that the entrance on Taft Avenue would be closed and he questioned if that was done.
Steve Gohde, Assistant Director of Public Works, indicated that a few items from the last development
on Lot 1 were still not complete as yet such as the removal of the second access on Koeller Street and
some of the storm water issues. If the site plan does not utilize the access on Taft Avenue, it will be
required to be removed.
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 2 September 2, 2014
Mr. Burich added that staff can look into the previously approved development on Lot 1 to research
any access issues that may have been conditions of approval and it will be addressed at the site plan
review level.
Mr. Gray questioned if the two documents related to easements and cross access agreements would be
attached to the property deed.
Mr. Burich responded that these documents would be as they are recorded at the Winnebago County
Register of Deeds on the property.
Mr. Nau added that there would be four documents to be recorded in relation to this request.
Mr. Gray inquired if the Highway 41 Overlay would be enforced with this site.
Mr. Nau responded affirmatively and stated that it meets the Highway 41 Corridor standards.
Mr. Gray commented that it appeared that the lot sizes do not meet the minimum standards of the
Highway 41 Corridor requirements.
Mr. Borsuk questioned if this land division was in harmony with the Highway 41 Overlay.
Andy Dumke, 222 Ohio Street, stated that every parcel was the same size prior to the City extending
Lombard Avenue to Koeller Street however the City took some land from these parcels when the road
was put through and he thought there was some type of agreement waiving this requirement for these
parcels.
Motion by Nollenberger to approve the two-lot land division/certified survey map at 520 N.
Koeller Street with the following conditions:
1. Final C.S.M. shall show all existing improvements and utilities.
2. All required storm water, utility and cross-access and dumpster enclosure easements be
reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works and/or Department of Community
Development and recorded at the Winnebago County Register of Deeds.
Seconded by Propp.
Mr. Burich discussed the previous development plan approval and stated that a development pattern
has been created in this area and this land division would be consistent with that plan.
Mr. Thoms discussed the development plan approved for Lot 1 and the parcel lot lines that were
discussed at that time. He recalled that an exception was granted to have the building located closer to
the road than the Highway 41 Corridor usually allows and felt that a precedent has been set in the past
for this area.
Mr. Burich discussed the development pattern established in this area and the intent of the ordinance
which was to prevent micro-parcels from being created however this land division is consistent with
the previous discussion and development.
Mr. Borsuk inquired how staff goes about looking back at previous conditions and notes relating to
items approved in the past.
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 3 September 2, 2014
Mr. Burich responded that some information is obtainable from searching the computer data bases and
staff that worked on particular requests can be helpful but with the transition of staff over the years,
that is not always possible.
Mr. Bowen discussed the concept of the size limitations in the Highway 41 Corridor which was to
prevent the creation of micro-parcels however these have been more or less created in the
condominium plat type situations that have developed in this area. He felt the new zoning ordinance
re-write may address some of these concerns.
Mr. Gray commented that he would not support this request because it was not consistent with the
Highway 41 overlay lot size requirements.
Robert Vajgrt arrived at 4:17 pm.
Motion carried 8-0-1. (Ayes-Borsuk/Bowen/Thoms/Fojtik/Hinz/Propp/Lohry/Nollenberger.
Vajgrt abstained as he was not present for the discussion on this item.)
II. RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS VARIANCE REQUEST TO PERMIT A
SECOND STORY ADDITION TO THE ATTACHED GARAGE LOCATED AT 6
MYRNA JANE DRIVE
The applicant/owner requests approval of a variance from the City’s Residential Design Standards to
permit a second story addition to the attached garage of the residence, which will be taller than the
dominant/highest roof ridgeline of the existing structure at 6 Myrna Jane Drive.
Mr. Buck presented the item and reviewed photographs of the subject site as well as photographs of the
other homes within the block on Myrna Jane Drive. He discussed the storage space issues that initiated
this request as well as the previous submittal requesting the variance that was laid over at the July
meeting. He reviewed the original site plans submitted and the revised site plans that were being
presented at this meeting. The revised plans drop the height of the addition and he discussed the
dormer roof lines and the background of the variance request. He further discussed the variance
request and the guidelines that need to be considered for approval of a variance from the code. He
discussed the revised plans that are much more cohesive than the original plans and the roof lines are
more consistent with the existing structure. Staff supports the revised version of the site plan and there
has not been any concerns brought forward by the neighboring property owners. He also reviewed the
findings recommended for this request.
Mr. Thoms commented that he had concerns with the comment in the staff report that the standards do
not apply to this particular project as the addition has to be made of similar materials to the existing
structure as it could look very unusual if complimentary materials are not used.
Mr. Buck reviewed the standards that need to be considered when granting a variance from the design
standards and that the second story addition is the only thing being requested with the variance.
Mr. Thoms reiterated that his concerns were related to the statement under “Recommendations and
Findings” that the standards do not apply to the project.
Mr. Buck indicated that the variance request was for the height of the structure which is what the
recommendations and findings portion of the staff report address.
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 4 September 2, 2014
Mr. Thoms felt that the materials to be used should be included in the recommendations and findings
to ensure that the materials for the addition are cohesive with the rest of the structure.
Mr. Nollenberger felt that the wording in that sentence also includes “as proposed” which he felt
addressed Mr. Thoms concerns.
Mr. Buck stated that he worked with the property owners on this revised proposal and he did not feel
that the project will be a contrasting change to the existing structure.
Mr. Hinz questioned if the Commission would be setting precedence for the height of the dormer by
the approval of this request.
Mr. Buck responded that the proposal and intent of this will still meet with the design standard
guidelines and criteria.
Mr. Nollenberger suggested adding “second story height variance” is approved to the language under
recommendations and findings to resolve the concerns relating to the language.
Mr. Gray commented that he felt the second finding was subjective.
Mr. Buck responded that it was meant to be as it gives the Commission the authority to make the
necessary recommendation for approval of the variance request.
Mr. Gray discussed the site plans and photos submitted as he felt they were confusing.
Mr. Buck clarified which site plans were the original submittal and the revised site plans and addressed
any other questions Mr. Gray had regarding them.
Mr. Gray then questioned the list of property owners who were notified and how they were
determined.
Mr. Buck explained that adjacent and abutting property owners are notified of the variance request
which includes a map showing who received the notice and also includes a statement that this
information should be shared with other property owners that may not have received this notice.
Mr. Vajgrt commented that finding #2 addresses what the project can and cannot look like and he felt
that it was pretty clear as to what is acceptable as far as building materials and looking similar with the
existing structure so he did not see any need to adjust the wording of the findings.
Ms. Lohry commented that she was happy to see this issue coming to a close and was very pleased to
see staff working with residents to achieve a compromise.
Mr. Nollenberger agreed.
Further discussion continued on whether the language in the recommendations and findings should be
adjusted. It was determined that the language was satisfactory as presented.
Motion by Vajgrt to approve the residential design standards variance to permit a second story
addition to the attached garage located at 6 Myrna Jane Drive with the following conditions:
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 5 September 2, 2014
1. The proposed second story addition will not overpower the principal structure’s overall scale
and massing; and
2. The structure’s architectural design following the addition will not be in great contrast with the
nature of the neighborhood and will not detract from the character and appearance of the
neighborhood as a whole.
Seconded by Lohry. Motion carried 9-0.
III. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL FOR AN EXCEPTION TO THE
PROVISIONS OF THE DOWNTOWN OVERLAY DISTRICT AT 522-530 N. MAIN
STREET (MAINVIEW APARTMENTS)
The Oshkosh Housing Authority is requesting approval of a conditional use permit for an exception to
the building design standards of the Downtown Overlay District to install a awning/marquee with
signage on the Main Street facade of the building known as Mainview Apartments (formerly the Raulf
Hotel) at 522-530 North Main Street which do not meet the criteria listed in the Downtown Overlay
District.
Mr. Buck presented the item and discussed the history of the site and reviewed the site and surrounding
area as well as the zoning classifications and land use in said area. He explained that the Housing
Authority has been working with the Wisconsin Historical Society Historic Preservation Office
(SHPO) and the National Park Service (NPS) on both interior and exterior renovations to the structure.
He reviewed the site plans for the marquees/awnings and discussed the Downtown Overlay District’s
requirements which do not allow for the size of the marquees/awnings or the size of the lettering
proposed. He reviewed the purpose of the ordinance and the site plans for the marquees/awnings and
discussed the researched history of the site and reviewed photos of the development from previous
years. He felt that the proposed marquees/awnings were very similar to the ones on the original
structure and that it meets the purpose of the design standards. He also stated that the Landmarks
Commission reviewed this project in 2012 and endorsed it and he reviewed the condition
recommended for this request that the awnings/marquees with signage are deemed appropriate by
SHPO.
Mr. Thoms questioned what the reasoning was for the bump outs on the large marquee.
Mr. Buck stated that he assumed it was for more covered area for people entering and exiting the
building at the primary entrance.
Mr. Gray questioned if the marquee would be lighted.
Mr. Buck responded negatively.
Mr. Gray then questioned if there should be a second condition added to this request requiring federal
approval of the plans in addition to approval by SHPO.
Mr. Buck responded that SHPO and NPS work hand in hand and the approval by NPS could be added
however it should be covered by the state’s approval.
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 6 September 2, 2014
Dan Meissner, 1230 E. Calumet Street, Appleton, stated that he was the architect for the project and
present to answer any questions on the request and he was excited to see this come together as he felt
the marquees/awnings will create a nice street presence.
Mr. Fojtik commented that he felt that the effort to re-create the historical look of the structure was
very impressive and marvelously done.
Susan vanHouwelingen, Executive Director of the Oshkosh Housing Authority, 600 Merritt Avenue,
stated that she wished to clarify the awnings were not covered and that the purpose for the bump out
was for drainage not to provide an area for people to stand under.
Mr. Thoms inquired why the marquee/awning was protruding out further than necessary if there was
no reason other than architectural style.
Ms. vanHouwelingen replied that the purpose was for architectural style and to designate the entrance
to the building.
Discussion ensued regarding if there were issues with the awnings extending into the public right-of-
way and it was determined that any conflicts with this have been addressed and the project meets code
requirements.
Mr. Thoms asked to clarify that the height of the awnings/marquees and the size of the lettering were
the two items that required an exception to the Downtown Overlay District standards.
Mr. Buck verified this and stated that an encroachment agreement would be drawn up to address the
issue that it protrudes into the right-of-way.
Mr. Hinz questioned if the only portion of the awnings/marquees that will protrude into the right-of-
way was the large portion.
Mr. Meissner responded affirmatively.
Ms. Lohry questioned how far out this feature would protrude.
Mr. Meissner indicated that it was approximately two feet but this feature was part of the distinction of
the historical building.
Mr. Fojtik commented that the proposed marquees/awnings look very close to what was originally on
the building.
Motion by Vajgrt to approve a conditional use permit for an exception to the provisions of the
Downtown Overlay District for the installation of an awning/marquee with signage on the
Main Street façade with the following condition:
1. The awning/marquee with signage is deemed appropriate by the Wisconsin Historical Society
Historic Preservation Office (SHPO).
Seconded by Borsuk. Motion carried 9-0.
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 7 September 2, 2014
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 4:54 pm.
(Vajgrt/Nollenberger)
Respectfully submitted,
Darryn Burich
Director of Planning Services