Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes__________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 1 September 15, 2015 PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES September 15, 2015 PRESENT: David Borsuk, Jeffrey Thoms, Thomas Fojtik, John Hinz, Steve Cummings, Kathleen Propp, Gary Gray, Karl Nollenberger EXCUSED: Ed Bowen, Donna Lohry, Robert Vajgrt STAFF: David Buck, Principal Planner; Steve Gohde, Assistant Director of Public Works; Raymond Maurer, Director of Parks Department; Jim Collins, Transportation Director; 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 4, 2015 were approved as presented. (Hinz/Cummings) I. GRANT PRIVATE UTILITY EASEMENT AT 200 NORTH CAMPBELL ROAD (CITY OF OSHKOSH SENIORS CENTER) Wisconsin Public Service Corporation is requesting the granting of a private utility easement from the City of Oshkosh at the Oshkosh Seniors Center, 200 North Campbell Road. Mr. Buck presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the land use and zoning classifications in this area. He explained the reason for the easement request and reviewed the site plan depicting the easement area. He also reviewed the condition recommended for this request requiring that the proposed easement be subordinate to all easements from vacated right-of-way or other existing easements. Mr. Fojtik questioned if there was a precedent for this type of condition on an easement request. Mr. Buck responded that it was common practice in cases where existing city easements are overlapping and located in the same area. Motion by Nollenberger to approve granting a private utility easement at 200 North Campbell Road with the following condition: 1. Final easement document shall include wording that the proposed easement will be subordinate to all easements from vacated right-of-way or other existing easements. Seconded by Borsuk. Motion carried 8-0. II. ARCHITECTURAL BUILDING PLAN REVIEW FOR A PUBLIC RESTROOM AND PARK SHELTER FACILITY LOCATED WITHIN SOUTH PARK (1300 GEORGIA STREET) The applicant is requesting an architectural building plan review for construction of a public restroom facility and park shelter in South Park. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 2 September 15, 2015 Mr. Buck presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the land use and zoning classifications in this area. He discussed previously approved shelter/restroom facilities in other park areas and reviewed the site plan for this request which includes both the restroom facility and an option for an additional covered area for picnic tables. He also reviewed the floor plans for the facility and the building elevations which are similar to previously approved structures of this nature and stated that the Parks Board approved the design of this facility and the cost for construction of the restroom portion was included in the 2015 Capital Improvement Program. Mr. Thoms inquired if the Commission was approving the shelter facility and the alternative addition for the outside area. Mr. Buck responded affirmatively and stated that the restroom facility would be constructed first. Mr. Gray commented that the building materials appeared to be different than the past restroom/shelter facilities. Ray Maurer, Director of Parks Department, indicated that the structure was similar to the other facilities constructed however they were utilizing field stone on part of the elevations to match other features in South Park. Mr. Gray questioned if there are any other sitting areas in the park similar to the alternative outdoor area. Mr. Maurer responded that there are two indoor shelters located south of the restroom facility and another one near the Ohio Street and South Park Avenue intersection which all have picnic tables that can be used inside the shelter or moved to the outdoors. Mr. Gray then questioned if the Parks Department has considered selling concessions at the park. Mr. Maurer replied that the City sells concessions at Pollock Pool and Menominee Park however the shelters in South Park are for rental use and this park is not heavily used and selling concessions on site would probably not be cost effective. Mr. Thoms inquired if the alternative outdoor addition costs were included in the 2015 Capital Improvement Program. Mr. Maurer responded that the 2015 budget will cover the costs of the restroom construction only and they currently were holding fund raising functions to obtain the additional money to cover the expense of the alternative outdoor seating area. Motion by Nollenberger to approve an architectural building plan review for a public restroom and park shelter facility located within South Park at 1300 Georgia Street. Seconded by Cummings. Ms. Propp commented that she thought it was great that they added the stone features to the elevations of the facility. Mr. Hinz stated that he was pleased to see the restroom facility being replaced as the existing one is in poor condition. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 3 September 15, 2015 Motion carried 8-0. III. DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW AND PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE CREATION OF A FIFTEEN LOT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF RYF ROAD AND EDGEWOOD ROAD The applicant is requesting the approval of a development plan for a single family residential Planned Development and a fifteen lot land division/preliminary plat. Mr. Buck presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the land use and zoning classifications in this area. He discussed the history of the subdivision development known as Northshore Preserve of which the original preliminary plat was approved in 1998 with portions having final platting and approved in 2001 and 2004. He discussed the original layout of the subdivision and reviewed the site plan for the preliminary plat for this request which is creating slightly smaller lots than the original development. He stated that the proposed plat and planned development were for 15 residential lots instead of the original 12 lots and that it is considered a low density development. He discussed the White Clover Court cul-de-sac that would be created with this revised proposal and the reasoning to not have it as a through street to Ryf Road. He discussed the utilities service for this subdivision and the storm water management plans which were utilizing the existing facilities that were developed when the original subdivision was created. He also discussed the parkland dedication required which staff was recommending the fee-in-lieu of land dedication as there was no acceptable park area within the development plan as well as the street lighting and terrace trees plans which were not submitted at this time. He further stated that the petitioner was not requesting any base standard modifications and the proposal was consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and that all lots within the development meet the City’s minimum lot dimension requirements. He also reviewed the conditions recommended for this request. Mr. Borsuk questioned if the White Clover Court paving and all utilities would be part of the developer’s agreement. Mr. Buck responded affirmatively and stated that Edgewood Road was already developed and the developer could put in the necessary utilities to service this area or it could be included in a future Capital Improvement Program. He further stated that the developer’s agreement is usually drawn up after approval of the preliminary plat. Mr. Thoms inquired why the lots on the north end of the preliminary plat were not considered for the parkland dedication. Mr. Buck indicated that these two lots were comprised of a very small area for park purposes and the fee-in-lieu of parkland dedication was more desirable in this case as it would provide funding for future parkland acquisition or development. He also noted that there were open spaces and trails included in the original plat as well as a trail easement area designated extending from the cul-de-sac to Ryf Road. Mr. Thoms then inquired if the existing detention basins would be adequate to handle the storm water runoff from the proposed additional lots within this plat. Mr. Buck responded affirmatively. Mr. Gray questioned if the new structures will be the same as the ones previously approved. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 4 September 15, 2015 Mr. Buck responded that the structures’ design was not approved previously and the private covenants for the subdivision are up to the developer to address. Luann Ziebell, 3880 Shorebird Court, stated she was representing residents in this subdivision who thought that the proposed lots were too small and that smaller lots would result in smaller homes and questioned what the minimum lot square footage was to meet the City’s code requirements. Mr. Buck replied that the minimum lot size for the City’s R-1 Zoning District was 800 square feet. Ms. Ziebell stated that the developer had covenants in the original development to require minimum home sizes of 1700 square feet and voiced her concern about the size of the proposed lots not being large enough to accommodate homes that would fit on them. Dave Omachinski, 1605 Maricopa Drive, stated he was a partner in the Northshore Real Estate Development and appreciated the ambiance of the neighborhood. He discussed the proposed lots which will be at least 120 feet deep and 78 feet wide which would be adequate area for a 1600 square foot home with a garage. He further discussed that the developer cared about the value of the lots in this subdivision as they still owned about 15 lots which are for sale and they have a vested interest in this development. He felt the lot sizes would work well as proposed. Mr. Thoms questioned how big these proposed lots were in comparison to the previous development. Mr. Omachinski responded that the lot sizes vary greatly and that the lots in the front of the subdivision were approximately 11-12,000 square feet and these proposed lots were about 10,000 square feet. Mr. Thoms then questioned if the homes in this subdivision would be two-story structures. Mr. Omachinski indicated that they have not yet decided what covenants would be in place at this time but he felt the homes would be in the 1,500 to 1,600 square foot range. He discussed the current market for residential properties and stated that smaller homes with more amenities were more popular and the homes in this subdivision may be slightly smaller than the original homes but the value will be the equivalent. Motion by Borsuk to approve a planned development and preliminary plat for the creation of a fifteen lot single-family residential subdivision at the southeast corner of Ryf Road and Edgewood Road with the following conditions: 1) The proposed right-of-way receives name approval by emergency service providers prior to submission of the final plat. 2) Fee-in-lieu of parkland dedication is utilized. 3) Street lighting plan and terrace trees plan is submitted and approved by the city prior to final plat submission. 4) Approval of the development plan is provided requiring no further review or approval of building plans by the Plan Commission. Seconded by Thoms. Motion carried 8-0. IV. PUBLIC HEARING: 2016 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 5 September 15, 2015 Staff requests review and acceptance of the 2016 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The purpose of this review is for the Plan Commission to make a determination of consistency of the proposed programs and activities in the 2016 CIP with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, official maps, or other planned activities. Mr. Buck stated that Planning Services staff has reviewed all of the projects in the document and did not find any projects that would be in conflict with the City’s Comprehensive Plan or other planned activities and was recommending acceptance of the 2016 CIP as presented. He briefly reviewed the major sections of the CIP and distributed maps depicting most of the City’s major improvement projects included in this document. The public hearing was opened at 4:35 pm. Mr. Thoms stated that approving this document without discussing costs would be ignoring the Common Council’s budget expense restraints and although it may not be in conflict with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, he felt it would be in conflict with what the Common Council policy regarding spending restraints. Mr. Buck responded that the Plan Commission’s responsibility was to determine if the projects within the CIP are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as far as the projects proposed and the costs of these projects should not be considered as that portion of the CIP would be reviewed by other City entities and the Common Council. Mr. Nollenberger stated that the projects were not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and that the Plan Commission was not endorsing the costs relating to these projects. Mr. Thoms stated that he felt there was a financial component to the Comprehensive Plan that should be considered. Steve Gohde, Assistant Director of Public Works, commented that the costs of the projects proposed in this document have been balanced out to meet the Capital Improvement Program’s total. Ms. Propp questioned if the principal street projects are selected by the utility infrastructure. Mr. Gohde responded that the utilities are one of the factors considered as well as maintenance to some of the streets that are being selected due to their poor condition. He further explained the connectivity involved with street and utility projects which he described as a three-dimensional puzzle. He continued to discuss the underground utilities that need to be in place and explained the factors involved with Bowen Street, Mill Street and other areas represented on the map and the reason for their selection in this year’s program. Mr. Borsuk stated that he felt the overall document was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and questioned the large expense for the Little Oshkosh portion of Menominee Park as to whether this was for deferred maintenance or expansion of this facility. Mr. Maurer indicated that there were issues with Little Oshkosh due to the wear of the facility and the materials used to construct it, which was wood. He further explained the safety issues and __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 6 September 15, 2015 maintenance concerns and that the Parks Department was working with the Southwest Rotary on developing funding raising opportunities which would cover the majority of the costs. Mr. Borsuk commented about the amount of funding allocated to the gas remediation for Quarry Park and if it would be more cost effective to just excavate the sites. Mr. Gohde responded that the costs to excavate these two former quarries would be exorbitant and explained that they were once privately owned quarries and explained the complications due to this factor. Mr. Borsuk then commented about the funding allocated for HVAC improvements and if this was an ongoing program. Mr. Gohde responded affirmatively. Mr. Borsuk stated that he felt the City should be considering paying out some more of these expenses from general cash flow rather than continuing borrowing. Mr. Thoms responded that he serves on the Long Range Finance Committee which is looking into those options now but has not yet come up with a plan on how to finance it. Mr. Borsuk commented that he felt the borrowing issues need to be brought to some type of resolution. Mr. Cummings stated that they are looking into some options to reduce this such as leasing and discussed other ways the City could attempt to reduce costs. Mr. Thoms added that the Long Range Finance Committee was continuing to review options. Mr. Borsuk discussed water infiltration costs and questioned what the City was doing about illegal hookups to address these issues. Mr. Gohde responded that the City is currently addressing it with the street reconstruction process and explained that current state budgets have made the option of addressing illegal hookups by tying it to the sale of homes an illegal process and that the City would have to pursue these matters in another fashion. Mr. Gray inquired if the CIP project scoring process was useful and if the department heads had an impact on it. Mr. Gohde replied that it was providing interesting insights and discussed the process and how projects were scored and confirmed that department heads did have an impact on the decision making process. Mr. Gray questioned what dates the public hearing notice was published and what class of notice was used. Mr. Buck responded that he was not aware of how the public hearing was noticed and this forum served as a public meeting and in addition it would be proceeding to the Common Council at a later date which is also a public hearing. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 7 September 15, 2015 Mr. Gray inquired when the five-year CIP would be available to the public as it was not currently posted on the City’s website. Mr. Gohde responded that the document is not posted to the website until after the final draft is approved. Mr. Gray commented that he felt this was a bad mistake as people could not provide comments on it when it was not available to view in advance of its approval. Mr. Borsuk noted that there was no one from the public present to comment on the item and he felt it should be posted on the website as soon as it was available as the newspaper was no longer a reliable source for public notices and the City should look into other avenues to inform the community on its plans for future municipal improvements and projects. Mr. Fojtik commented that public input on these matters was welcome however it could also invite unproductive comments and it should be limited to infrastructure and those types of discussion. The public hearing was closed at 4:55 pm. Motion by Borsuk to accept the 2016 Capital Improvement Program with a finding that listed projects are not in conflict with the City of Oshkosh’s Comprehensive Plan. Seconded by Nollenberger. Mr. Gray commented that he was frustrated with this process as the Commission is recommending approval of spending a lot of money with this document. Mr. Fojtik stated that so many of the proposed projects are in need of being completed specifically the infrastructure improvements proposed. Mr. Thoms commented that it is a five-year plan and that it is not discussed as much in detail as it was in the past and it may not be necessary as nothing that he could see was outside of the ordinary municipal functions for our community. Mr. Borsuk commented that the purpose was to determine its consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Cummings discussed how the process is a rolling plan that is subject to change and that to review the entire five-year expenditures was not practical as projects may change before the future years arrive. Mr. Gray commented that more staff should attend the meeting to address questions for their department’s expenditures. Board discussion continued as to the review options for future CIP requests and how asking questions and reviewing specific projects should be part of the Plan Commission’s realm of review rather than just determining its consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Commission members discussed how the process could be changed and that not enough discussion took place on expenditures and that the public is not adequately informed of the public hearing and the decisions being made relating to this item. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 8 September 15, 2015 Mr. Cummings stated that historically the public has not attended the Common Council meeting for discussion on general matters and that the street reconstruction projects seem to be the biggest item that causes concern. Mr. Gohde explained that the City Manager is the first review of the proposed CIP and the public hearing used to be held prior to its presentation to the Plan Commission however this was discontinued due to the confusion it caused related to street reconstruction projects as some were included in the initial draft but were removed at a later date when the final document was approved. The public hearing is now scheduled to be held near the end of October when projects are more certain, which is four weeks prior to its presentation to the Common Council for final approval. Mr. Cummings further discussed the CIP process and how it functions to provide a better understanding of the entire process. Motion carried 8-0. OTHER BUSINESS Board and Commission Recruitment-Public Service Announcement Mr. Buck discussed that Media Services was doing a presentation for board and commission recruitment and were looking for a spokesperson from the Plan Commission to do some public service announcements in an effort to encourage more public involvement. Mr. Cummings added that all the chairpersons from the existing boards and commissions met recently and discussed their various functions which resulted in the public service announcements which he felt would be very beneficial. Mr. Gray questioned if the City was looking to get new people involved with these committees or just explain what their function was. Mr. Fojtik stated that the City wants more people to serve on boards and commissions and explaining what their various functions were was a good way for outreach and recruitment. Mr. Hinz suggested that an easy marketing tool would be at the State of the City as it is well attended and also covered by news media. Mr. Buck stated that if anyone is willing to volunteer to do a public service announcement, to let either he or Mr. Burich know so arrangements can be made. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 5:08 pm. (Nollenberger/ Borsuk) Respectfully submitted, David Buck Principal Planner