Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes__________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 1 January 19, 2016 PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES January 19, 2016 PRESENT: Ed Bowen, Jeffrey Thoms, Thomas Fojtik, John Hinz, Kathleen Propp, Gary Gray, Donna Lohry, Robert Vajgrt EXCUSED: David Borsuk, Steve Cummings, Karl Nollenberger STAFF: Darryn Burich, Director of Planning Services; David Buck, Principal Planner; Jeffrey Nau, Associate Planner; Brian Slusarek, Planning Technician; 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 December 15, 2015 were approved as presented. (Vajgrt/Hinz) I. EXTRATERRITORIAL FOUR-LOT LAND DIVISION/CERTIFIED SURVEY MAP EAST OF VALLEY HEIGHTS ROAD IN THE TOWN OF OMRO The owner/petitioner is requesting a four-lot land division/certified survey map from two existing parcels containing a total of 16.94 acres. Sizes of the proposed lots are as follows: Lot 1 = 0.556 Acres Lot 2 = 15.138 Acres Lot 3 = 0.729 Acres Lot 4 = 0.520 Acres Ms. Propp arrived at 4:01 pm. Mr. Slusarek 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 purpose for the land division request which was to create three new smaller lots to be developed into single family residences. He also reviewed the certified survey map for this request which will not alter the existing land use patterns in the area and is configured with appropriate land area and street frontage. The Department of Public Works has reviewed this request and does not have any concerns with it. Mr. Thoms questioned if there were any wetlands located on the site. Mr. Slusarek responded that there was a non-navigable pond on the site however no other wetlands were present. Mr. Gray asked for clarification on the access to the lots and the lot sizes to be created. Mr. Nau reviewed the certified survey map and described the configuration of each lot and that all of the lots would possess adequate right-of-way frontage. Ms. Lohry arrived at 4:05 pm. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 2 January 19, 2016 Motion by Vajgrt to approve the extraterritorial four-lot land division/certified survey map for property located east of Valley Heights Road in the Town of Omro. Seconded by Bowen. Motion carried 8-0. II. EXTRATERRITORIAL THREE-LOT LAND DIVISION/CERTIFIED SURVEY MAP LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF W. 9TH AVENUE AND CLAIRVILLE ROAD IN THE TOWN OF ALGOMA The owner is requesting a three-lot land division/certified survey map from one existing parcel (Lot 1, CSM 6382) containing a total of 30.14 acres. Sizes of the proposed lots are as follows: Lot 1 = 10.14 Acres Lot 2 = 10.00 Acres Lot 3 = 10.00 Acres Mr. Nau 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 current zoning classification and that the property owner would be requesting a zone change through the Extraterritorial Zoning Committee due to the minimum lot size requirements in the current zoning district. He further explained that the property was located in the Town of Algoma in the Zone C City Expansion area which will be attached to the City in 2023. He discussed the size of the parcels once divided and also the access to street frontage for each lot. He reviewed the certified survey map and discussed the agricultural use of the site currently which will not change at this time. The owner’s intention is to eventually distribute the land to family members and he explained an access restriction that was placed along the W. 9th Avenue frontage of Lots 2 and 3 in error. Staff is recommending that the restriction be removed from Lot 3 but remain on Lot 2 at this time to prevent further curb openings on W. 9th Avenue as it is an arterial road and is not in the City’s best interest to remove until such a time that a development plan is proposed for the parcels. He further stated that the land division was consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan which recommends land use as residential and discussed the placement of homes on these parcels in a fashion that would not hamper development to the back portions of the property. The Department of Public Works has no concerns with the proposed land division and it meets the agricultural requirements and will not have a negative impact on the area. He also reviewed the conditions recommended for this request. Mr. Thoms questioned when the property would be annexed into the City. Mr. Nau responded that the boundary agreement between the City and Town would have the land attached to the City in 2023. Mr. Thoms stated that he had concerns with additional traffic on 9th Avenue due to the speed of traffic and no access restriction on Lot 3 and suggested that access for both Lots 1 and 2 could be obtained through Lot 3. He felt the access restriction on Lot 3 should remain with right-of-way access granted through the other two lots. Mr. Nau indicated that Lot 3 will meet the necessary requirements for access control as it met the distance requirements from other driveway accesses. Mr. Thoms discussed if a traffic study should be completed prior to any development occurring on these parcels or until 9th Avenue is improved as the traffic moves very fast in this area and he felt that keeping the existing access restriction on Lot 3 would be safer and it could be lifted at a later time. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 3 January 19, 2016 Mr. Burich stated that this issue has been discussed and the current driveway spacing had been reviewed and met the code requirements for access control. Steve Gohde, Assistant Director of Public Works, verified that based on the existing driveway accesses in this area, Lot 3 would meet the spacing code requirements to allow an access for this lot. Mr. Buck added that Lot 3 would only be allowed one single-family home and agricultural use at this time and concerns regarding the access to 9th Avenue could be addressed at a later date when development occurs on the site. Mr. Thoms commented that a traffic study could not be completed without development plans for the site. He had concerns about allowing an access to 9th Avenue that may become problematic later. Mr. Gohde explained that when the area is attached to the City, existing homes will be required to install laterals to attach to City sanitary services which could be difficult if the structures are built too far from the street and that W. 9th Avenue is planned to be a four lane road in the future when improved. Road improvements would not take place until the area is brought into the City. Mr. Gray inquired if the Plan Commission would be reviewing the zone change request for this property. Mr. Nau responded negatively and stated that the zone change request would be a decision made by the Extraterritorial Zoning Committee. Brian Pizon, 2590 Village Lane, stated that he was the property owner and had concerns with the access restriction on Lot 3 remaining as he felt the City was taking advantage of the surveyor’s mistake. His intention was to divide the land to leave to his heirs and an easement would have to be allowed for street access if this restriction remained in place which may cause issues with the future property owners and tillable land area. He explained that the land use was agricultural only at this time and the access to this parcel was through another property owner’s land and discussed the driveway accesses proposed and that he would like each parcel to have its own access to the street without going through one of the other parcels. Mr. Bowen commented that he had a hard time with the access restrictions being an error on the surveyor’s part and does not see any reason to place the access restriction on Lot 3 due to this issue. He did support the access restriction on Lot 2 as access could be obtained on Clairville Road and felt there would be limited exposure from the development of single-family homes on the site. He did not feel that a subdivision will develop in this area with uncontrolled traffic and did not want to burden the property owner with unnecessary access restrictions on Lot 3. Ms. Propp agreed with Mr. Bowen. Mr. Gray did not agree and did not see this restriction as an error and felt that the Commission should look at what may happen in many years to come and should have the possibilities under control. He felt the access restriction should be left in place on Lot 3 until developed and could be lifted at a later date. Mr. Thoms stated that he did not care if the access restriction was a result of an error on the surveyor’s part initially and that traffic could be slowed down when development occurs on the site or the road is __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 4 January 19, 2016 improved however the access restriction cannot be reversed in the future if approved to remove it now. He felt the need to understand the ramifications of this decision. Mr. Hinz commented that he could see both points of view however it seemed wrong to retain the access restriction if it was placed there erroneously. Motion by Hinz to remove condition #2 to retain the access restriction on proposed Lot 2. Seconded by Lohry. Ms. Propp stated that the removal of this condition would be doing something that should not be done at this time and would not support a motion to remove this condition. She felt that access should be allowed for Lot 3 and that at some point when the land was further developed, the owner would be required to come back to the Commission for approval of their development plans and the access restriction could be reviewed at that time. Mr. Nau added that if the access restriction was removed from Lot 2 as proposed and a driveway allowed at this location, Lot 3 would not have access to 9th Avenue due to spacing requirements and would have no other access points other than through one of the other lots. Mr. Gray inquired if the Commission would have the ability to place conditions on an extraterritorial development. Mr. Nau responded that if the area would be developed as a residential subdivision, it would have to come back to the Commission for review and approval however single-family homes would not come back for any further review. Ms. Lohry voiced her concerns with the surveyor’s past error not being corrected with the access restriction and felt that it should be corrected at this point. She felt it was a failure not to correct this at this point. Mr. Nau reiterated that if the access restriction is removed from Lot 2 and the property owner chooses to place a driveway leading on to 9th Avenue at this location, it could prevent Lot 3 from having an access drive to 9th Avenue and the property owner is in favor or retaining the access restriction on Lot 2 for this reason. Lot 2 also has access to Clairville Road for a driveway access. Mr. Hinz questioned if the owner found the access restriction remaining on Lot 2 to be acceptable. Mr. Pizon responded affirmatively. Motion by Hinz to remove condition #2 was withdrawn. Motion by Bowen to approve a extraterritorial three-lot land division/certified survey map for property located at the southeast corner of W. 9th Avenue and Clairville Road in the Town of Algoma with the following conditions: 1. Zone change for the subject site from A-2ETZ, General Agricultural Extraterritorial District to A-1ETZ, Light Agricultural Extraterritorial District be approved by the Oshkosh Common Council. 2. The access restriction on proposed Lot 2 shall remain until such time a development plan is submitted to the City where then the restriction will be reevaluated. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 5 January 19, 2016 Seconded by Vajgrt. Motion carried 8-0. III. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF A BREWERY AND TASTING ROOM AT 1009 SOUTH MAIN STREET (SOUTHWEST CORNER OF WEST 10TH AVENUE AND SOUTH MAIN STREET) The petitioner requests approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan to permit development of a brewery with accessory tasting room and beer garden. 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 site and the proposed layout of the development and reviewed the site plan for the interior of the building. He stated that this proposal was previously approved at a different location on Oregon Street and W. 7th Avenue. He also reviewed the layout of the establishment as it currently exists and the site plan for the proposed development. He stated that the brewery operation would be the main use of the site and discussed the hours of operation, number of employees, and anticipated number of customers per day. The proposed development should not have a negative impact on the neighboring properties and he reviewed the fencing, landscaping, and access points for the site. He also discussed the circulation on the site for truck access for deliveries and refuse collection and reviewed the specific areas to be landscaped and the screening for the development with the proposed fencing. He reviewed the base standard modifications for the site for setback requirements and the access control variance required to allow two driveways to accommodate truck circulation. He also discussed the removal of the on-street parking on West 10th Avenue to allow for trucks to maneuver which will require action by the Traffic Review Advisory Board and Common Council. He reviewed the proposed parking stalls to be created which is not necessary by code requirements but is being provided for customer and employee use. Storm water management for the development is not required as pervious surface is proposed to be increased and therefore collection and conveyance of surface run off is all that is required and will be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. He also reviewed photos of the site and discussed proposed modifications to the structure and stated that signage has not been submitted at this time but will be required to meet code standards. He also reviewed the conditions recommended for this request. Mr. Thoms questioned why the fencing was proposed to only be six feet in height as it was adjacent to residential properties and he felt a higher fence would be more suitable for screening purposes. He also noted that the condition referenced a solid wood fence and suggested that it could be vinyl instead as long as it was solid. Mr. Buck responded that if the fencing was constructed of vinyl or wood is irrelevant as long as it is solid and stated that the condition references 6 feet in height as that is all that is allowed by code requirements. The eight foot fence could be allowed but would require a base standard modification for the height. Mr. Thoms felt the higher fencing would better address blocking of lights and noise from the development with the close proximity of residential properties. Although signage for the site has not yet been submitted, he felt that the zoning district would allow for ground signage with a maximum height of 30 feet and that the planned development should not allow for a sign of this size at this location. He would rather restrict the ground signage size to a smaller scale. He had no concerns regarding wall signage. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 6 January 19, 2016 Mr. Buck stated that a limitation of ten feet had been applied to other developments in the past when larger signage did not seem appropriate in the area. Mr. Hinz questioned if that section of 10th Avenue was constructed appropriately to handle heavy truck traffic. Mr. Gohde replied that 10th Avenue was just repaved with concrete a few years ago and should not have any issues with the limited amount of truck traffic generated from this use. Mr. Hinz also questioned the presence of customers in the beer garden at times when truck traffic may be moving around the site and if there were any safety concerns with this aspect of the development. Mr. Buck responded that this would be a management issue. Mr. Gray inquired if lighting in the evening hours will be controlled as it is adjacent to residential properties. Mr. Buck indicated that the City has maximum levels of lighting allowed by code standards at the property lines to address these concerns. Mr. Gray then inquired if the refuse area would be enclosed. Mr. Buck responded affirmatively. Mr. Gray also inquired about the purpose of two different driveway sizes on the site. Mr. Buck replied that the driveway on 10th Avenue was a Class II driveway and sized appropriately for the ingress of truck traffic and that the driveway exiting the site going north on Main Street was a Class III driveway and sized to accommodate the trucks exiting the site in a forward motion. Mr. Gohde added that this aspect was thoroughly reviewed and that the wider driveway on Main Street allows for the maneuverability of the trucks to exit the site which is within a very limited area. Motion by Gray to approve a conditional use permit and planned development for establishment of a brewery and tasting room at 1009 South Main Street with the following conditions: 1) Base standard modification to allow a 14.72 foot West 10th Avenue front yard setback, a five foot west transitional side yard setback and a zero foot southern rear yard setback as proposed. 2) Access control variance to allow two curb-cut/driveways openings to the parcel as proposed. 3) On-street parking on West 10th Avenue is removed by action of the Traffic Review Board and Common Council. 4) Minimum of a six foot tall solid wood fence is placed along the western lot line, as proposed. Seconded by Vajgrt. Ms. Propp commented that the development would be a big improvement to the existing conditions on the site but that she did have concerns regarding noise from the beer garden as it was adjacent to residential properties. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 7 January 19, 2016 Mr. Buck stated that a condition could be added to this request to address these concerns but that the City did have a noise ordinance to address these types of issues. Mr. Thoms stated that he would like to modify condition #4 relating to the fence height along the western lot line to allow the fencing to be up to eight feet in height rather than six feet and add a condition to limit the free standing signage to be no larger than ten feet in height. Mr. Gray requested to amend his motion to include the modifications suggested for the fencing and signage size. Motion by Gray to approve a conditional use permit and planned development for establishment of a brewery and tasting room at 1009 South Main Street with the following conditions: 1) Base standard modification to allow a 14.72 foot West 10th Avenue front yard setback, a five foot west transitional side yard setback and a zero foot southern rear yard setback as proposed. 2) Access control variance to allow two curb-cut/driveways openings to the parcel as proposed. 3) On-street parking on West 10th Avenue is removed by action of the Traffic Review Board and Common Council. 4) Minimum of a six foot and up to eight foot tall solid wood or vinyl fence is placed along the western lot line. 5) Limit ground signs to monument style signs only no greater than ten feet. Seconded by Lohry. Motion carried 8-0 There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 5:02 pm. (Vajgrt/Hinz) Respectfully submitted, Darryn Burich Director of Planning Services