HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 1 May 16, 2017
PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES
May 16, 2017
PRESENT: John Hinz, Steve Cummings, Kathleen Propp, Robert Vajgrt, Karl Nollenberger
EXCUSED: David Borsuk, Ed Bowen, Jeffrey Thoms, Thomas Fojtik, John Kiefer
STAFF: Darryn Burich, Director of Planning Services; Brian Slusarek, Assistant Planner;
Jeffrey Nau, Associate Planner; Elizabeth Williams, Planner; Steve Gohde, Assistant
Director of Public Works; Deborah Foland, Recording Secretary
Vice-Chairperson Propp called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm. Roll call was taken and a quorum
declared present.
The minutes of May 2, 2017 were approved as presented. (Hinz/Nollenberger)
I. CENTRAL MIXED USE DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS VARIANCE REQUEST
FOR THE CLOSURE OF THREE WINDOWS ON THE FRONT ELEVATION OF
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 537 NORTH MAIN STREET
The applicant is requesting approval of a variance from the City’s Central Mixed Use Design
Standards to permit closure of three windows on the front elevation of the commercial building
located at 537 North Main Street.
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 discussed the history of the site and reviewed
photos of the structure and identified the windows proposed to be enclosed with wood. He
passed around a sample of the Brazilian wood proposed for the exterior and explained that the
petitioner desired to affix a wall sign and a projecting sign in the two areas that would have the
windows removed. He reviewed the designs for the signage and the renderings of the façade with
the sign installation. He stated that the Landmarks Commission reviewed the proposal and
recommended denial of the request as it may be detrimental to the historic district as a whole.
They did support the sign design however they recommended anchoring the projecting sign to the
masonry between the upper windows rather than the removal of windows to create an area for the
installation of the signage. Staff evaluated the request and felt that the applicant had other
alternatives for the sign placement and recommended denial of the variance request. He reviewed
the criteria the Commission needed to consider to grant a variance and the various criteria to
choose from for findings if the variance is granted.
Ms. Propp questioned if the building has historically always had this amount of glass located in
the front façade.
Mr. Slusarek responded that he reviewed photos of the site back to the 1970’s and the subject area
was all glass during that time.
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 2 May 16, 2017
Ms. Propp then questioned if the structure was listed on the national register as far as being
designated as a historic landmark.
Mr. Burich responded that the structure is considered a significant structure within the North Main
Street Historic District.
Mr. Cummings commented that the building has always had glass within this area of the structure
as far as his recollection.
Jay Karner stated that he and his wife Julie were the owners and described their business which is
to provide antique materials for restoration and that they have been in operation for 27 years. He
discussed the history of the structure which was the Gibson building in the past and that the
window area on the southern portion of the building was a garage door at one time and was
converted to windows in the 1970’s or 1980’s. He has owned the building for ten years and passed
out photos of the interior of the shop and discussed the issues with the building when it was
purchased. He discussed the terra cotta exterior material that the building was constructed of and
the damage that would be caused by the installation of signage to the exterior. He also distributed
photos depicting the damage to the terra cotta from previous exterior installations and discussed
the renovations that he has done to the structure to repair issues. He stated that he recently spent
$2200 to repair another window in the front façade that was recently broken. He discussed his
appreciation for the work of the Landmarks Commission and the rebuilding of the skylight in the
structure and distributed photos of the completed restoration. He stated that the cost to replace
the upper windows was $700 per window and that the Landmarks Commission stated that the
reason to install the wood panels instead of replacing the glass was to save money and that was
not the case. He has been planning for five years for the proposed signage and that it was
consistent with signage from the 1920’s and 1930’s. He felt that the installation of the signage on
the wood panels was the best option as when they move from this site, the new owner will be able
to remove the paneling and install the windows in place of their sign without any damage to the
structure itself. He felt that the Landmarks Commission did not spend enough time on the issue
and requested approval of the variance to allow him to put up the sign and display the image
representing their shop. He felt this form of installation was the best solution as it would not
damage the terra cotta exterior material of the building and the signage was consistent with the
style of the structure.
Ms. Propp asked to clarify that he did not want to penetrate the terra cotta exterior to install the
signage.
Mr. Karner responded that the Landmarks Commission’s recommendation was similar to saving
the frame of a valuable picture with the chance of risking damage to the picture itself.
Mr. Vajgrt requested to clarify if the wood panels would be installed along the entire top of the
front façade.
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 3 May 16, 2017
Mr. Karner displayed on the site plan the two locations where the wood panels would be located
and discussed the use of this particular wood, where it was obtained, and that the brown side of
the wood would be what would be visible from the exterior.
Mr. Nollenberger inquired if the owner had explored other alternatives for installation of the
signage.
Mr. Karner responded affirmatively and discussed how they need to open up the window area as
the layout of the front façade was set up for the purpose of a showroom for vehicles and for
security purposes. He stated that the upper band is meant for signage and that his desire to use
the wood panels has nothing to do with saving money but it is meant to preserve the terra cotta
exterior which comprises the entire front of the structure.
Mr. Vajgrt stated that he can understand his dilemma in regard to installing glass however he felt
that putting wood panels into two separate areas among the windows will not look appropriate.
Mr. Hinz discussed the desire to install lighted signs which have been an issue in the past however
the petitioner deals with historical structures and is not proposing to install inappropriate signage
and he may be correct that the building materials cannot support the sign installation in the terra
cotta exterior. These proposed wood panels can be removed in the future however it does seem to
be a bit of an issue to not be consistent.
Ms. Propp commented that the terra cotta exterior material causes a hardship for the sign
installation and she could support closing up the area over the front door for the purpose of the
sign installation and was in favor of approval of the variance request for this area only.
Mr. Nollenberger stated that he was initially not in support of the request but was reconsidering
after the owner’s presentation.
Ms. Propp questioned if the owner would agree with approval of the wood panel over the door for
the sign installation but not receiving approval for the variance to install the projecting sign on the
southern portion of the structure.
Mr. Karner discussed the installation of the projecting sign in the garage door area and the
mechanicals that are in place in that area to support such an installation. He continued discussion
regarding the historical significance of the building and distributed photos of the site from the era
when the Gibson store was still occupying the structure.
Mr. Vajgrt commented that the photo depicted a huge sign mounted on the building’s front façade.
Mr. Karner stated that this sign installation had caused the holes in the terra cotta that have since
been patched up which was the reason to not place the sign directly on the building again. He
further discussed the beauty of the structure and the need to preserve it. He further stated that he
wanted to put up the proper backing to support hanging the sign as it could be a safety issue to
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 4 May 16, 2017
pedestrians if not appropriately mounted and that the windows in that location are also a risk to
pedestrians.
Mr. Cummings stated that the Landmarks Commission had spent a considerable amount of time
on this issue and if we are really concerned about retaining our historical integrity, it should be
resolved with retaining the windows in their current locations. He felt that the variance should not
be granted as the building is located within a historical district.
Mr. Karner discussed the concerns with mounting the sign into the exterior building material as
winds could be an issue as far as safely securing it and the potential cracks it may create in the
terra cotta material as this was not a normal building material.
Motion by Hinz to approve a Central Mixed Use District design standards variance for the closure
of three windows on the front elevation of property located at 537 N. Main Street with the following
findings:
1. Due to special conditions of the building’s terra cotta construction, a literal enforcement of
the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance will result in unnecessary hardship.
Seconded by Nollenberger. Motion carried 3-2. (Ayes-Hinz/Propp/Nollenberger. Nays-Cummings/
Vajgrt.)
II. RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE CLOSURE
OF ONE WINDOW ON THE WEST (SIDE) ELEVATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT
1539 WEST BENT AVENUE
The applicant is requesting approval of a variance from the City’s Residential Design Standards to
permit the closure of one window on the west (side) elevation of a single family home located at
1539 W. Bent Avenue.
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 reviewed photos of the home and the window that was
previously removed without obtaining a building permit. He discussed the location of the
window that was removed and that the reason for it was to accommodate their plans to renovate
the home. The front room had minimal functional wall space due to the layout of the house and
the window was closed off prior to the adoption of the design standards ordinance. He reviewed
photos of the interior of the home and stated that it would not have a negative impact on the
structure’s architectural design or the curb appearance of the block. He stated that the
Commission could consider a hardship to the homeowner as the loss of living room functionality
is an issue and the removal of the window adds usable space to the home. He also discussed the
siding on the home surrounding this window and other modifications on the west façade that have
not been re-sided and that these modifications were started over three years ago. As this current
condition of the home has a blighting effect on the neighborhood, a condition has been added to
this request to have all siding restoration work completed by December 31, 2017. Staff was
recommending approval of the variance with the aforementioned condition.
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 5 May 16, 2017
Damaris Kese, 1539 W. Bent Avenue, stated that she did not know that they needed a building
permit to remove the window at the time it was done and that they were willing to comply with
the condition to finish the siding restoration if the variance was granted.
Motion by Nollenberger to approve a residential design standards variance for the closure of one
window on the west (side) elevation of property located at 1539 West Bent Avenue with the
following finding:
1. The standards do not apply to this particular project because the proposed window closure will
not adversely affect the structure’s architectural design, the neighborhood character, or curb
appearance of the block.
And the following condition:
1. All siding restoration work on the home shall be completed by December 31, 2017.
Seconded by Vajgrt. Motion carried 5-0.
III. GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL FOR A NEW PARKING LOT AT 220-
224 VIOLA AVENUE AND 227 WEST LINWOOD AVENUE (OAKLAWN
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL)
The applicant requests approval of a General Development Plan for the construction of a parking
lot at 220-224 Viola Avenue and 227 W. Linwood Avenue (Oaklawn Elementary School).
Ms. Williams presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the land
use and zoning classifications in this area. She stated that the staff report refers to the lots as three
parcels which is in error as the three parcels have been combined into one lot and is located
adjacent to Oaklawn Elementary School. The proposed use is consistent with the City’s
Comprehensive Plan and she reviewed the site plan for the parking lot which would create 50
additional parking stalls. The number of stalls would exceed the maximum permitted by the
Zoning Ordinance but is supported by staff as a base standard modification as it would alleviate
safety/traffic concerns with the on street parking which is due to the lack of adequate parking on
site. She discussed that the school hosts community events that adds to the parking demand and
that landscaping or fencing would be required along the west side to provide screening for the
residential uses. Landscaping plans will be required to meet code requirements at the time of the
specific implementation plan review and storm water management plans will require review and
approval by the Department of Public Works during the site plan review process. Lighting plans
were also discussed which will be required to be relocated and reduced in height to mitigate
potential impacts on the adjacent residential uses. The owner will also be required to combine this
parcel with the school site property. Ms. Williams also reviewed the conditions recommended for
this request.
Ms. Propp questioned if the extra area to the north of the proposed parking lot will be grass.
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 6 May 16, 2017
Ms. Williams responded that the school has plans for a future storage building north of the
parking lot which will need to be submitted with the specific implementation plan for review
however the remaining area is planned to be turf grass.
Motion by Vajgrt to approve a general development plan for a new parking lot for property located at
220-224 Viola Avenue and 227 W. Linwood Avenue (Oaklawn Elementary School) with the
following conditions:
1. Base standard modification from the Zoning Ordinance to allow the number of stalls as proposed,
where code requires a maximum of thirty-two (32) parking spaces.
2. A dense landscape buffer and/or a solid fence be installed along the west property line to screen the
parking lot from the adjacent residential uses.
3. Lighting fixtures must not exceed 20 feet and petitioner work with City staff on the placement of
light fixtures to mitigate potential impacts with adjacent residential uses.
4. Oshkosh Area School District will be required to combine the subject area with the adjacent school
site (112 Viola Avenue).
Seconded by Nollenberger. Motion carried 5-0.
IV. GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
APPROVAL FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF 50 W. 6TH AVENUE AND PARKING LOT
EAST OF 40 W. 6TH AVENUE (THE GRANARY)
The applicant requests approval of a General Development Plan and Specific Implementation Plan
for:
A. Redevelopment of “The Granary” building at 50 W. 6 th Avenue
B. Parking lot improvements located directly east of 40 W. 6th Avenue
Ms. Williams presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the land
use and zoning classifications in this area. She discussed the history of the structure and that the
Common Council approved a Landmark Designation for the site in 2015. The proposed use is
consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and she reviewed the site plan and discussed the
proposed use of the site. She also discussed the parking lot reconstruction to the east of the subject
site and the layout of the parking stalls as well as the improvements to W. 5th Avenue which will
create additional public parking stalls. She also reviewed the vacant site on Nebraska Street and
W. 6th Avenue which the owner has an option to purchase for the purpose of creating additional
parking. She discussed the pedestrian accesses, the Riverwalk connections, and the streetscaping
improvements included in the plans. Signage plans have not yet been submitted but will need to
meet code requirements and landscape plans are not required as the site is fully developed with
the existing structure however the installation of terrace trees and decorative landscaping is
planned for various areas of the site. Storm water management plans were discussed which will
require the approval by the Department of Public Works during the site plan review process. She
reviewed the building elevations which were also reviewed by the Landmarks Commission and
received a recommendation of approval. She discussed the modifications proposed to the
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 7 May 16, 2017
structure and discussed the handicapped ramp to be installed as well as new concrete steps and
outdoor patio area. She reviewed the location of the dumpster enclosure and the HVAC
mechanical equipment which will be required to be screened. She also discussed the solar panels
for rooftop installation which were also reviewed by the Landmarks Commission and received
approval with the recommendation that they utilize a metal roof system instead of asphalt
shingles. She also reviewed the conditions recommended for this request.
Ms. Propp questioned if the riverwalk would be located on the west side of the structure and
would essentially be sidewalk.
Ms. Williams responded affirmatively.
Ms. Propp then questioned the layout of the angle parking on W. 5th Avenue as boats from the
adjacent site are currently parked in this area.
Ms. Williams replied that the boats currently in that area will have to be relocated as they are in the
city right-of-way and the owner of the marina has been contacted regarding this matter.
Kurt Koeppler, 1726 Rivermill Road, stated that the developer was turning this site into something
nice and that he owns the property adjacent to it at 40 W. 6th Avenue. He further stated that he has
an area behind his building that is currently utilized for parking and questioned what it is going to
be when this development plan is implemented as it appears that this parking area will be
removed.
Ms. Williams responded that the area will remain the same other than there will be curbing added
to delineate the public right-of-way from the private parking lot.
Steve Gohde, Assistant Director of Public Works, added that the area behind the curb will be filled
with turf grass and the remaining area on private property would remain as it currently exists.
Mr. Koeppler commented that we were giving up parking to turn the spaces into a grassy area
without any easement agreement and he had a deed restriction on his property at the time of
purchase to allow 16 parking spaces. There will be 15 parking spaces in the adjacent lot and the
removal of the 3 parking stalls behind the building. He further stated that the angle parking
extended up to his area and then ceased and parking is critical in this area. They have a parking
easement on the east side of the building which has been reduced to six stalls and removing the
parking behind his building does not work for him. He passed out a rendering of the parking area
depicting his parking stalls and stated that he could grant an easement and have restricted parking
for his business which would only change the grass area behind his building. He stated that he
could not come to an agreement on an easement with the developer and he assumed that the
parking arrangements that currently exist would continue and the easement he had for the 16
parking stalls that he currently has is being reduced to 15 stalls. He did not understand the need to
create a grassy area behind his business as that was adding to the parking issue.
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 8 May 16, 2017
Ms. Propp inquired if he had spoken with the owner and architect regarding this matter and could
not come to an agreement on the issue.
Mr. Koeppler responded affirmatively and stated that the developer wanted to turn it into public
parking if he agreed to grant an easement and he wants it dedicated to his business. He wanted
the three stalls behind his business to be designated for his business only.
Chet Wesenberg, 240 Algoma Boulevard, architect for the project, stated that he would defer to city
staff on the parking issue.
Mr. Burich indicated that the parking stalls were never legally established and the parking stalls
behind his building are partially on city right-of-way and that the city cannot designate public
parking stalls for a specific use. He explained the easement granted for the proposed development
which would allow the angle parking on the south side of W. 5th Avenue to be located partially on
private property and partially within the city right-of-way but it is designated as public parking.
Mr. Gohde added that Mr. Koeppler’s parking behind his building is encroaching into the city
right-of-way for the three parking stalls and without an easement area, this portion of the parking
stalls have been closed off for parking purposes. He further explained that the city cannot
designate public right-of-way for private parking purposes.
Mr. Hinz questioned what the plans were for W. 5th Avenue as it is not a street that is currently
accessed.
Mr. Gohde stated that W. 5th Avenue is public right-of-way at this time and the proposed
improvements will improve navigation and aesthetics, make the area more usable and define the
right-of-way more clearly. Additional funding may be available for more improvements to this
area.
Mr. Hinz then questioned if W. 5th Avenue is involved with the development of the Morgan
District.
Mr. Gohde responded negatively and stated that W. 5th Avenue terminates at Nebraska Street and
the area is currently in disarray due to previous conditions.
Mr. Burich added that the vacation of the street was not feasible due to the location of businesses
in this area that require access and no public parking would be available if the street was vacated.
Mr. Gohde commented that there were also storm sewer facilities in this area for drainage and
possibly other utilities.
Mr. Koeppler stated that he was willing to grant an easement to the city for parking in the area
behind the building if the grass island in this area could be eliminated.
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 9 May 16, 2017
Mr. Burich explained the arrangement for an easement to be granted to the city to allow a portion
of the parking stalls behind the building to be located in the city right-of-way. This would add
parking behind 40 W. 6th Avenue instead of the grass area depicted on the site plan and would be
comparable to the easement arrangement already agreed upon between the city and the owner of
50 W. 6th Avenue. The site plan will be amended to reflect this change with the easement
agreement between Mr. Koeppler and the city.
Mr. Koeppler was agreeable to an easement arrangement between himself and the city to resolve
this issue.
Mr. Gohde indicated that the parking stalls are feasible in this area however the easement
discussions broke down with Mr. Koeppler which therefore changed the plans for this area.
Ms. Williams stated that a minor adjustment to condition #5 to change the wording from “an
easement” to “easements” and the removal of “as proposed” should address this change. The site
plan could be modified during the site plan review process for this development.
Mr. Burich reiterated the reason that an easement is necessary for the parking stalls on the south
side of W. 5th Avenue as they are partially extending into the public right-of-way.
Motion by Vajgrt to approve a general development plan and specific implementation plan approval
for redevelopment of property located at 50 W. 6th Avenue and parking lot east of 40 W. 6th Avenue
with the following revised conditions:
1. Access control variance to permit vehicles to back into W. 5th Avenue.
2. Encroachment agreement for the curbing improvements proposed within the right of way of W. 5th
Avenue.
3. Encroachment agreement for the placement of the handicap accessible ramp, concrete stairs, and
patio area proposed within the W. 6th Avenue and Nebraska Street right of ways.
4. A Development Agreement and Maintenance Agreement will be required for proposed
improvements.
5. Easements for proposed public parking along portions of W. 5th Avenue.
6. Variance from the sidewalk ordinance to permit the sidewalk to be located at the back of curb for a
portion of W. 6th Avenue rather than adjacent to the public right of way.
7. Base standard modification to permit the dumpster enclosure in the front yard, as proposed.
8. Existing HVAC units located along W. 5th Avenue be screened with materials similar to the
proposed refuse enclosure.
9. Final rooftop mechanical equipment and placement be reviewed and approved by the Department of
Community Development to ensure the intent of the mechanical screening ordinance is met.
Seconded by Nollenberger. Motion carried 5-0.
OTHER BUSINESS
__________________________________
Plan Commission Minutes 10 May 16, 2017
Mr. Nollenberger stated that he was retiring and that this would be his last Plan Commission
meeting and commended the members of the Commission and staff for their performance. He
commented that he enjoyed his experience serving on the Commission.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 5:32 pm. (Nollenberger/
Vajgrt)
Respectfully submitted,
Darryn Burich
Director of Planning Services