Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes__________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 1 March 17, 2015 PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES March 17, 2015 PRESENT: David Borsuk, Ed Bowen, Thomas Fojtik, John Hinz, Steve Cummings, Kathleen Propp, Gary Gray, Robert Vajgrt, Karl Nollenberger EXCUSED: Jeffrey Thoms, Donna Lohry STAFF: David Buck, Principal Planner; Jeffrey Nau, Associate Planner; Steve Gohde, Assistant Director of Public Works; Allen Davis, Director of Community Development; Darlene Brandt, Grants Coordinator; 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 March 3, 2015 were approved as presented. (Hinz/Gray) I. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT/CONDITIONAL USE AMENDMENT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 495 PEARL AVENUE (MORGAN CROSSING APARTMENTS) IN THE MARION ROAD/PEARL AVENUE REDEVELOPMENT AREA The applicant is requesting a Planned Development (PD) and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) amendments to Resolution 04-429 which allowed construction of two 4-story apartment buildings and other site improvements at 495 Pearl Avenue in the Marion Road/Pearl Avenue Redevelopment Area. The requested amendment is to allow a two-lot land division to split the existing parcel (Parcel G). Proposed Lot 1 will contain the existing 51 unit apartment building and site improvements and Lot 2 will contain the undeveloped portion of the property. No other amendments to the approved development plan or conditional use have been requested. Mr. Bowen and Mr. Borsuk arrived at 4:02 pm. Mr. Nau presented the item and reviewed the background history of the subject site and reviewed the layout of Parcels F through I. He reviewed an aerial view of the subject site and also reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the zoning classifications and land use in this area. He stated that the petitioner was requesting to divide Parcel G into two lots which is necessary in order for the property to be refinanced as Phase II of the site was never developed due to the downturn in the economy. He reviewed the original planned development and the two amendments that were approved since that time. Phase I of the development was constructed in 2008 and he reviewed the map depicting the area proposed to be divided into its own parcel. He also discussed the necessary 0 foot side yard setback which would require a base standard modification and the cross access and pavement maintenance agreements that were recommended as a condition of approval. He explained that the petitioner would be required to submit a formal certified survey map before the division of the land takes place, but if the Planned Development Amendment is approved; the certified survey map can be reviewed and approved administratively. A storm water maintenance agreement was also requested to be drafted by the Department of Public Works between the two properties and this was also recommended as a condition of approval for this request. If approved, possible financing could be secured and construction on the phase II portion of the subject site could occur within as little as 24-36 months. Mr. Nau also reviewed the conditions recommended for this request. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 2 March 17, 2015 Ms. Propp questioned if the storm water management system currently in place for the developed portion of the site was located underground. Steve Gohde, Assistant Director of Public Works, discussed the existing storm system and stated that with new development on the site, storm water quality may be necessary. Ms. Propp questioned if the development may require additional storm water facilities to be developed. Mr. Gohde responded that the developer may have to perform water quality treatment as the storm water basin on site flows into the storm water system. Mr. Gray inquired what the difference was between the map on page 8 and a certified survey map. Mr. Nau replied that the map on page 8 of the submittal was a conceptual plan and that a certified survey map would have staked guidelines representing each lot. Mr. Gray then inquired if the certified survey map was approved, would the Plan Commission have the ability to review the proposed new apartment building. Mr. Nau indicated that the second apartment building was approved previously in 2004 and amended in 2006 but the same plan and conditions will still apply therefore the Plan Commission would not be reviewing it again unless the developer was requesting to make significant changes to the approved planned development. Mr. Gray questioned why the Plan Commission was not reviewing a certified survey map rather than the conceptual map submitted. Mr. Nau replied that the petitioner was seeking conceptual approval of the request prior to paying a land surveyor to draw up the official certified survey map. Mr. Gray then questioned if there was a time limit on this amendment to the planned development as he thought there was a 12 month period that construction was required to begin after approval. Mr. Buck responded that an approved planned development is permanent and that a conditional use permit had a 12 month limit on it before it expires. He also stated that the petitioner would have to have the planned development amendment approved before the certified survey map was produced. J. Peter Jungbacker, 300 N. Main Street, stated that he was the petitioner for this request and was available to answer any questions although he felt that staff explained the request sufficiently. Mr. Gray inquired if some consideration was given to putting in a road either private or public behind the lot. Darlene Brandt, Grants Coordinator, responded that it was a concept of the redevelopment plans for the area but has not been discussed at this time. Motion by Vajgrt to approve the planned development/conditional use amendment for property located at 495 Pearl Avenue in the Marion Road/Pearl Avenue Redevelopment area with the following conditions: __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 3 March 17, 2015 1. Base Standard Modification to allow a zero-foot side yard setback for the existing off-street parking area. 2. Cross access and pavement maintenance agreement to be drafted, reviewed and approved by the Department of Community Development and recorded at the Winnebago County Register of Deeds. 3. Storm Water Maintenance Agreement to be drafted, reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works and recorded at the Winnebago County Register of Deeds. 4. The original conditions of approval required in Council Resolutions 04-429 and 06-313C remain in full force. Seconded by Nollenberger. Motion carried 9-0. II. REVIEW AND ACCEPTANCE OF 2015-2019 CONSOLIDATED PLAN AND 2015 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM Staff requests review and acceptance of the 2015-2019 Consolidated Plan and 2015 Annual Action Plan for the Community Development Block Grant Program. The purpose of this review is for the Plan Commission to make a determination of consistency for the proposed programs and activities in the 2015-2019 Consolidated Plan and 2015 Annual Action Plan with the City’s 2005-2025 Comprehensive Plan, official maps, or other planned activities. Mr. Cummings left at 4:02 pm. Ms. Brandt presented the item and explained the reason for the preparation of the Consolidated Plan for the Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) that outlines the goals of the City of Oshkosh’s program which is funded by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Projects funded by this program must meet one of three national objectives which are to benefit low and moderate income (LMI) persons, prevention or elimination of slum or blight, and urgent need. Projects also need to identify needs of LMI areas and households, establishing priorities, and setting measurable goals. She discussed the geographic priorities within LMI census tracts and displayed maps depicting the housing structures built within census tracts, LMI census block groups, and areas containing a neighborhood association. She discussed the various areas that would qualify as geographic priorities and priority housing needs by household type. She also discussed factors that affect older homes and reviewed the primary planned uses of funds such as owner occupied and rental housing rehabilitation, lead paint abatement, targeted neighborhood improvement and stabilization, removal of blight, redevelopment, first time homebuyers’ assistance, and public service programs and projects. Mr. Fojtik opened the public hearing. Mr. Borsuk stated that he understood that there were targeted areas but was questioning if any consideration was given to scattered site housing. Ms. Brandt responded that the City considers various areas but the homes that receive assistance have to meet the guidelines and property owners must meet the LMI income limits. She further explained the collaboration between other agencies such as Habitat for Humanity, NeighborWorks, and Advocap. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 4 March 17, 2015 Mr. Buck added that funds are starting to be utilized in areas with neighborhood plans in place but HUD guidelines limit where the funds provided can be spent. Ms. Brandt added that income limits are a qualifying factor for work and can be performed for LMI individuals or households that may not necessarily be in a LMI area. Mr. Gray commented that federal regulations are very confusing and hard to deal with and questioned if on page 16 of the plan, table 5, the median income is the same as area median income. Ms. Brandt responded affirmatively. Mr. Gray then commented on table 10 and questioned out of classifications, what are definite and if they consider the size of households. Ms. Brandt indicated that HUD populated the plan with pre-set data and she did not know how small or large households were determined. Ms. Brandt then moved on to the 2015 Proposed Action Plan which the City was allocated $725,849 for this program year’s funding. The CDBG funds are broken down into four major categories which are central city development and community facilities, housing and neighborhood development, public services, and administration and planning. She discussed the use of last year’s funds for slum and blight removal and reviewed photos of three homes that were demolished. She also discussed housing and neighborhood development and reviewed photos of rehabilitated homes. She discussed neighborhood development and reviewed photos of the William Waters Plaza improvements that were completed last year and reviewed a table of the 19 homes that were rehabilitated with program funds. She also reviewed public services that are funded and reviewed the agencies that were recipients of assistance through CDBG funding. She discussed administration and planning expenses which include the City and the Fair Housing of Wisconsin agency. After Plan Commission review, the plan will be reviewed by the Common Council and submitted to HUD by April 8th. Mr. Gray commented that category #2, the housing and neighborhood development, was getting more benefit than the other categories as he felt the grant money should be used for LMI purposes. He questioned if the Fair Housing Center received funding through both the public services category as well as the administrative and planning category. Ms. Brandt responded negatively and stated that the Fair Housing of Wisconsin agency is not eligible for public service funding and receives funding under the administration and planning category. Mr. Gray stated that the public service breakout of funding should be put on the City’s website. Ms. Brandt indicated that the City and Public Service Consortium will not be ranking and funding these sources until after all the applications have been received. Mr. Nollenberger questioned if these plans were consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as that was the Plan Commission’s responsibility in this matter. Mr. Buck responded affirmatively and stated that this is taken into account when the plan is prepared and it is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, especially the housing element. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 5 March 17, 2015 Allen Davis, Director of Community Development, stated that five years ago when he first arrived in Oshkosh, the City receive around one million dollars per year and that we do not receive the allocation we used to get from HUD to fund these projects. As there was no one present from the public to comment, the public hearing was closed. Motion by Vajgrt to approve the acceptance of 2015-2019 Consolidated Plan and 2015 Annual Action Plan for the Community Development Block Grant Program. Seconded by Borsuk. Motion carried 8-0. PLANNING DIRECTOR’S REPORT Mr. Buck reported that the items reviewed by the Plan Commission for the month of February were all approved by the Common Council as presented. Mr. Buck stated that the Zoning Ordinance update is still underway and they are wrapping up the next three sections of the performance standards and other sections of the code. He further stated that we expect to set up another stakeholders meeting within the next few weeks and hopefully hold another workshop with the Plan Commission after. He reviewed the last elements to be completed which would include the zoning map. Mr. Gray questioned if the Plan Commission would be receiving the next three sections in the next Commission’s packet. Mr. Buck responded that it may not be that soon as they are still being drafted. Performance standards are very large so it may come as a separate item. He discussed some of the other sections and their complexity. Mr. Gray commented that he would like to receive this information early as he would need several days to review it thoroughly. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 4:43 pm. (Vajgrt/Bowen) Respectfully submitted, David L. Buck Principal Planner