Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes__________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 1 October 17, 2017 PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES October 17, 2017 PRESENT: David Borsuk, Ed Bowen, Jeffrey Thoms, Thomas Fojtik, John Hinz, Steve Cummings, Kathleen Propp, John Kiefer, Robert Vajgrt, Michael Ford EXCUSED: none STAFF: Darryn Burich, Director of Planning Services; Brian Slusarek, Assistant Planner; Mark Lyons, Principal Planner; Jeffrey Nau, Associate Planner; Steven Wiley, Assistant Planner; Alexa Naudziunas, Assistant 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 October 3, 2017 were approved as presented. (Hinz/Vajgrt) I. RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE EXPANSION OF ONE WINDOW AT 35 CASTLE COURT The applicant is requesting approval of a variance from the City’s Residential Design Standards to permit the expansion of one window on the east side elevation of a single family home located at 35 Castle Court. Mr. Wiley presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as photos of the home as it currently exists and also depicting the area for the enlarged window. He stated that if the variance was granted. it would not adversely affect the structure’s architectural design. the neighborhood character or curb appearance of the block. Mr. Bowen arrived at 4:05 pm. Motion by Vajgrt to approve a residential design standards variance for the expansion of one window at 35 Castle Court with the following condition: 1. Window trim to match the color and appearance of existing windows on the home. And the following finding: 1. The variance will not be contrary to the public interest because the increase of window area will not adversely affect the structure’s architectural design. the neighborhood character. or curb appearance of the block. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 2 October 17, 2017 Seconded by Borsuk. Motion carried 9-0. It was requested to move Item V and VI up on the agenda for discussion. V. COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT FOR NINE PROPERTIES LOCATED FROM 1610 OSHKOSH AVENUE TO 1746 OSHKOSH AVENUE City staff is requesting an amendment to the Recommended 10 and 20-Year Land Use Maps in the Comprehensive Plan. The subject area is designated for residential land use designation; the applicant is requesting a change to a commercial land use designation. Mr. Lyons 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 use of the properties and the traffic volume on Oshkosh Avenue as it is an arterial corridor. He discussed the redevelopment opportunity for commercial use of the subject site and reviewed the concept plan for the potential development. He explained that the city is requesting to add two additional residential lots to the land use amendment request in an effort to not leave an island of residential use however the land use amendment would not affect the current use of the sites. Mr. Borsuk stated that he felt that the vision was small on this request and felt that we should look at a development gateway area overall rather than just the subject site proposed. He felt that the city should be looking at Oshkosh Avenue from Highway 41 to the bridge and either one or both sides of the street so the city could control the development of this entire area and have specific design standards imposed. Mr. Lyons responded that this request was submitted by the applicant and the Commission needed to make a determination if this was an appropriate land use for this portion of the area. Mr. Burich added that city staff would have to do additional land use research and analysis to determine appropriate uses and that this discussion was more relevant to the action item relating to the zone change than the land use amendment request. Mr. Ford questioned if the land use amendment would impact the property owner’s ability to sell their property due to its residential use for the two residential lots added to this request by city staff. Mr. Lyons responded negatively and stated that the zone change request did not include the two residential lots included in the land use amendment request. Mr. Borsuk stated that this was an opportunity to develop a vision plan from Highway 41 to the bridge and he felt that corridor plans should be developed. He discussed the properties in this area that could be redeveloped and that a corridor plan would ensure that developments along Oshkosh Avenue were consistent with what the City would like to see in a gateway area. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 3 October 17, 2017 Mr. Burich indicated that the Commission had two options one being to not move forward with this request and do a plan for the entire area first or respond to this request and move forward with it and develop a plan for the remaining area at a later date. Mr. Lyons added that this could be addressed in a corridor plan and design standards could be addressed separately from the land use amendment request that is the action item on today’s agenda. Mr. Burich commented that the zoning designation is the regulating plan for the area however the land use designation needs to be in place prior to zoning classifications being determined. Mr, Cummings stated that the City’s Redevelopment Authority has purchased a number of properties in this area recently and portions of Oshkosh Avenue near the river are commercial and the vicinity is not as residential as it once was in the past. Mr. Thoms questioned if there was any defined projects for this area. Steve Hoopman, 5105 I Ah Maytah Road responded that they were under contract to get the development project under way in January and that was the reason that they were moving forward with the request at this time. Timothy Smith, 1705 Oshkosh Avenue, stated that he was in favor of commercial uses however he moved to a residential area for the purpose of residing there and that he was frustrated with picking up trash on his property from neighboring sites and the amount of traffic in this area. He further discussed that they have children and that there was a daycare facility in this area as well and that more commercial uses will have a negative impact on the residential uses. He stated that hotels have a tendency to go downhill over time and discussed his concerns with sex offenders living there as it was an extended stay hotel. He felt the commercial uses would increase the traffic volume and will require the road to be expanded and questioned who would be paying for this as he just had an assessment for the reconstruction of Westfield Street. He felt that the commercial uses would have a negative impact on property values for the residential uses and they will not be able to sell their home with commercial uses in close proximity. He commented that he had given up a portion of his lot for the reconstruction on Westfield Street for right-of-way purposes and was not willing to give up any more land to provide additional right-of-way on Oshkosh Avenue. Mr. Thoms inquired if this could be addressed as part of the Comprehensive Plan update with map revisions and that changes in the mapping could be addressed and give Planning staff time to address this issue in the next few months. Mr. Burich responded that we could look at the whole corridor however it will take some time and that the Oshkosh Avenue corridor plan has been discussed to some degree and could be discussed with East Central Regional Planning but that this request is just a general plan at this point. He explained that there should be more information for Planning staff to develop a corridor plan. He stated that we may be able to address concerns with traffic and the roadway but the Comprehensive Plan update cannot address this issue in detail. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 4 October 17, 2017 Mr. Borsuk questioned if the land use amendment could address that no sex offenders would be allowed in this facility. Mr. Burich responded negatively but could consult with the attorney’s office and stated that the land use amendment and zone change was the only factors being considered today and the development plan would come back at a later date for consideration. Ms. Propp stated that she can support a land use amendment only to change this area to commercial however she was not happy with the concept plan that was submitted. She was willing to vote in favor of the land use amendment but will not support the subsequent action for a zone change at this time. Mr. Cummings commented that the Commission is not voting on the site plan at this point and it is a concept plan only. Mr. Burich added that future development plans are not yet fully developed and the petitioner submitted a conceptual site plan at this time which is not being approved with the land use amendment or zone change actions. Mr. Borsuk felt a corridor study should be completed first however the applicant seems prepared to move forward with development plans and questioned what the order of events was for the development of this area. Mr. Burich discussed the design standards that are incorporated into the Zoning Ordinance and that the city does not have higher standards in place for development in this area and cannot act on forming some this quickly. Mr. Borsuk discussed that any developments along this corridor should be of high quality and welcoming with appropriate design standards due to the fact that this is a gateway area into the city. Ms. Propp felt that acting on any development plans for this area was premature and should be done in conjunction with the potential Oshkosh Corporation plans. She stated that the item could wait until November or December until a final decision is made regarding the plans for the placement of Oshkosh Corporation’s headquarter in this vicinity, Mr. Bowen commented that the SMU-PD zoning classification will allow the ability to control development in this area and also gives us the latitude to ensure what we are looking at when formal plans are submitted. He felt that we could take action on both items now, and although he shares Ms, Propp’s concerns. he did not feel this would put us in a bad position in the future. Mr. Burich suggested that the Commission could vote on the land use amendment today and not act on the zone change request until a future meeting as the land use amendment takes longer to go through the necessary processes prior to it going to the Common Council. If the land use __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 5 October 17, 2017 amendment moves forward now, the zone change and general development and specific implementation plans could be acted upon in the future. The Commission could act on the land use amendment and either deny the zone change or lay over the zone change request at this time. Mr. Thoms commented that to wait until the other issues to the north of this site are settled is not a valid reason to hold up this development. If it makes sense to do this development in a gateway corridor there was no reason to not act on the request now and he felt that it makes sense for commercial development in this area with its close proximity to Highway 41. He felt that delaying the request to November will result in the development not moving forward as it will take months if not longer to develop a corridor plan for the entire area. He felt it makes sense to change the land use to commercial now. Mr. Burich commented that the zone change would not be acted on by the Common Council until the Comprehensive Plan is adopted and maps amended. Mr. Cummings discussed that the city has been criticized on the condition of its gateway corridors and the Commission has to look at what is appropriate for this area. He stated that Oshkosh Corporation and other facilities in this area could make for a great gateway corridor and he felt that it was critical that this development be something special. He discussed the potential of having a Fortune 500 company located in this area and its importance to the community and that we should not rush into making decisions on other developments in close proximity. Mr. Borsuk stated that he did not think that this request is unreasonable for this particular group of parcels and that the land use amendment should be acted on now. Motion by Borsuk to approve a Comprehensive Land Use Map amendment from residential to commercial for nine properties located from 1610 Oshkosh Avenue to 1746 Oshkosh Avenue. Seconded by Borsuk. Motion carried 9-0. VI. ZONE CHANGE FROM SR-2 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL-2 DISTRICT TO SMU- PD SUBURBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT WITH PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1634 THROUGH 1746 OSHKOSH AVENUE The applicant requests a zone change from the existing SR-2 Single Family Residential-2 District to SMU-PD Suburban Mixed-Use District with a Planned Development Overlay for seven properties located at 1634 thru 1746 Oshkosh Avenue. Mr. Lyons presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the land use and zoning classifications in this area. He reiterated that the area for the zone change request did not include the two residential properties to the east and discussed the current use of the parcels. He again reviewed the concept plan for the proposed development and stated that the only change is for the zoning designation and that the petitioner would have to come back to the Commission for approval of a general development and specific implementation plan at a later date. He indicated that the land use amendment would proceed to the Common Council in November and the zone change, if approved, would go to the Council for action in December and January at __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 6 October 17, 2017 which time the general development and specific implementation plan could move forward at the same time. This would result in not delaying the project from moving forward in a timely manner. Mr. Thoms questioned if there was anything that adversely affects the rental properties as a result of the zone change. Mr. Lyons responded that all the properties are owned by the same party so there would be no adverse affects from this action. Mr, Thoms then questioned if the zone change would negatively impact the owner’s ability to sell the property. Mr. Burich responded that the applicant and owners are both requesting the zone change. Mr. Thoms discussed that in the past the Commission has been apprehensive about imposing higher design standards on planned developments and questioned what steps will be taken to communicate this to the developer as his costs per structure may be higher than anticipated as it will be addressed as a gateway project. Mr. Burich discussed previously approved developments that the Commission had allowed base standard modifications for items such as setbacks in exchange for other features that the Commission desired to have. In this case, a Business Park, (BP) zoning designation may be more beneficial than the proposed SMU-PD classification as it would allow for additional standards under this designation. He further explained that if there were concerns about the quality of development in this area, that the BP PD zoning designation could be more restrictive. He indicated that uses are more restrictive and that gas stations are not an allowed use in this zoning district and the hotel use would require a conditional use permit. He stated that this zoning designation would require more negotiating to permit the developments to proceed and part of those negotiations could include elevated architectural standards. Mr. Thoms commented that the zoning classification was a SMU district to the west of this site and questioned if the potential site for Oshkosh Corporation would be zoned BP or SMU. Mr. Burich responded that the potential site for Oshkosh Corporation would be zoned BP. Mr. Borsuk inquired what the zoning designation was going to be to the west of Mary Jewel Park. Mr. Burich responded that it had a zoning designation of SMU-PD. Mr. Borsuk questioned if the entire corridor should all be changed to the BP zoning designation as it would then all be developed uniformly as far as development standards. Ms. Propp felt that acting on the zone change at this point was premature and she felt the item should be laid over and discussion should take place on if the BP zoning designation for the whole __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 7 October 17, 2017 area was appropriate. She reiterated that she did not support the concept plan submitted for the subject site. Mr. Cummings agreed that the zone change request should be laid over as this is our one chance to develop an outstanding gateway corridor and we should take advantage of the opportunity. Mr. Borsuk questioned how long it would take to have an adequate response to this issue. Mr. Burich responded that it could be scheduled for the November 21st meeting and should be a workshop item. Staff will have to look at how many parcels are proposed to have a zone change and it should be discussed as a workshop item first as he did not feel it would be appropriate to propose that broad of a zone change in that short of a time frame. Mr. Cummings left at 4:58pm. Barbara Mand, 1610 Oshkosh Avenue, stated that they were willing to go along with any proposed changes as they have issues with their water line and have been told that they need to have it replaced which is going to be very costly. She felt that any input from the Plan Commission would be greatly appreciated. Mr. Hoopman commented that it will be very difficult to proceed with his development with a three week delay in the zone change request. Mr. Burich discussed the process for a land use amendment and zone change and that approval of the general development and specific implementation plans could still be accomplished in December or January with final approvals being completed in January. Mr. Thoms questioned if there had been any discussions relating to design standards with the developer as we may be requiring more aesthetic enhancements for his proposed development. Mr. Hoopman discussed the quality of the proposed development and stated that he did not have the plans solidified for the retail structures fronting Oshkosh Avenue however the hotel and gas station were set at this time. Mr. Borsuk stated that time may be of the essence for the developer and discussed how this is the one opportunity to have quality development in this gateway corridor. Motion by Borsuk to lay over the zone change from SR-2 Single Family Residential-2 District to SMU-PD Suburban Mixed Use District with planned development overlay for property located at 1634 through 1746 Oshkosh Avenue for three meetings with a workshop to be held in two meetings to determine proposed zoning designations and design standards from Highway 41 to Mary Jewel Park. Seconded by Thoms. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 8 October 17, 2017 Ms. Propp questioned if a layover for three meetings was allowing for appropriate time to address this issue. Mr. Burich responded that staff will get as much done as possible in a short period of time. In two meetings we will hold a workshop to discuss the issue and in three meetings it will come forward as an action item for the zoning designation and for the general development and specific implementation plan if possible. Motion carried 9-0. II. ARCHITECTURAL BUILDING PLAN REVIEW FOR A PROPOSED SANITARY LIFT STATION AT 1507 N. EAGLE STREET (MARY JEWEL PARK) The applicant is requesting an architectural building plan review for construction of a sanitary lift station to be located at Mary Jewel Park, 1507 N. Eagle Street. Mr. Slusarek presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the site plan and discussed the features of the structure. He also reviewed the building elevations and renderings of the structure. Mr. Borsuk questioned what the design guidelines were for the structure. Steve Gohde, Assistant Director of Public Works, stated that the project was coordinated with the Parks Department and the structure was similar to other public structures constructed recently in other park areas. Mr. Borsuk commented that the item should be laid over as design standards for this corridor were just discussed as far as desiring higher quality and he felt that the previously approved facilities in the other parks were inadequate. He questioned how long the item could be laid over without taking action on it. Mr. Burich replied that he was not aware of a prescribed timeline for a layover for an architectural building review. Mr. Borsuk stated that he would like the structure to be re-designed. Mr. Thoms suggested that it could be laid over until the other items are addressed in relation to design standards for the corridor. Mr. Burich stated that the Commission needs to provide specifics for the layover as to what they desire to find the structure appropriate. Mr. Hinz questioned how far from home plate would the concrete be located as it would be an issue if baseballs would be striking the building during games. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 9 October 17, 2017 Mr. Gohde responded that the concrete area is located outside of the fencing for the baseball field. Ms. Propp commented that the bid opening for the construction project took place this morning and that the sanitary lift station is the main reason for the structure. Mr. Gohde discussed the sanitary sewer that had to be replaced in this area and the issues with the temporary repairs done and the risk to the homes in this vicinity if the lift station is not replaced. Mr. Bowen commented that the expenses for this structure were included in the Capital Improvement Program for this year. Mr. Borsuk commented that city staff was aware that the project was going out for bids and questioned why the item was first coming before the Commission for review today. He felt that the Parks Department and the Department of Public Works were both aware of the Commission’s issues with the design of the previous structures. Mr. Gohde stated that he was not aware that the Commission had issues with the design as it has been used a number of times in the past for park structures and he was not sure what caused the delay with getting the item on the agenda for review. Lucinda Porter, 81 Myrna Jane Drive, stated that the community needs the lift station for flooding purposes and questioned how fancy the structure needs to be as long as it looks like a park structure. She felt it was not in a highly visible area and was hoping that this item can be approved today to address the flooding issues. Ms. Propp commented that the building is setback from N. Eagle Street but should require more intensive landscaping on the east side to screen it from the neighboring properties. The structure is not as close to Oshkosh Avenue to affect the concerns relating to the gateway corridor. Mr. Thoms stated that if the property to the north is developed, would we want this type of structure there and discussed the elevation design standards in this area that was just discussed with future developments. He felt we should hold off on voting on this request until we know what direction we are moving in for this area. He felt that the structure needs to be more appealing that what was currently being presented. Mr. Borsuk felt that the request should be included in the workshop discussion and acted upon at the following meeting and that the Commission should not make any recommendation at this time. Mr. Kiefer discussed that the bathrooms were being included for trail users and this area is notoriously wet and questioned what the whole plan entails. He felt we should be looking at the total needs for this area such as parking facilities, the baseball field, and trail use. He felt all these aspects should be considered and planned out rather than just the construction of the lift station. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 10 October 17, 2017 Mr. Burich stated that the scope of the request was for an architectural review only and not a planned development and that the Parks Department could address other issues in the grand scheme of planning for the park area. He further stated that if the Commission was requesting to layover the item, they need to provide further guidance on what they want to see for the structure. Mr. Bowen suggested that more dormers and attractive and decorative CMU could be added as well as spandrel glass windows to improve its appearance. He did not feel that the building was that objectionable however he was not satisfied with the building constructed in Menominee Park. He felt that it was constructed with boring stock materials and the flat roof line could also be broken up with more decorative elements but he liked the detailing on the gable ends and the use of the Douglas fir columns. He felt that the Commission needs to determine what they want and how much the city wants to spend on its construction and budget matters need to be considered. He did not feel there was much more that could be done with this type of structure and the mixed use of it as a lift station and bathroom facility. Mr. Borsuk questioned if the Parks Board reviewed this item. Mr. Gohde responded affirmatively and stated that they also reviewed the location which was chosen to save the mature trees in the vicinity and the Parks Board was satisfied with the appearance of the structure as it matches the other structures in other park areas. Mr. Borsuk commented that he felt the structure was industrial and cheap looking and extending the roof line does not help to improve its appearance. Ms. Propp felt that more intensive landscaping around the structure would improve its appearance and various materials could be used. She would like to see it upgraded a bit however the lift station needs to be constructed. Mr. Thoms stated that other things could be done to make it more aesthetically pleasing. He felt that we cannot expect developers to do what is included as part of the Imagine Oshkosh plans if the city does not step up with the quality of city built structures. He felt that the city needs to meet these standards as well if we expect developers to follow these requirements. Mr. Hinz suggested that the ground wall could be a different color as it appears to be a wall of grey and that adding a few gables could also be an improvement. Mr. Ford commented that the Commission should not lose track that the structure serves as a bathroom and a lift station so it is designed to serve its purpose. Mr. Borsuk discussed the process of looking at the development of this area and questioned how long it will take for the item to come back for review. Paul Timm, AECOM, stated that the direction that he was provided was to hide the sanitary lift station within the structure and that most lift stations are enclosed by a block style building with a flat roof. In this case, he was asked to combine the mixed uses of a bathroom and shelter with this __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 11 October 17, 2017 facility and changes may be made however budget concerns must be considered. The bid opening was held this morning as the project was placed on the fast track due to the need for the replacement of the lift station. Mr. Borsuk commented that the Commission was not happy with the Boatworks structure and made this known to the city staff and Parks Department and suggested that the city should construct just the lift station and forgo the addition of the bathroom facilities. He stated that he did not understand how the Parks Department and the Department of Public Works did not hear the message last time that the Commission was not satisfied with this type of construction. He continued to discuss the high grade development that was expected for this corridor and that the same should be provided by the city. He felt that the city needs to re-design this facility. Mr. Thoms stated that we do not have design standards for this type of facility however it does not have to look like a lift station or bathroom. He further discussed the city garage facility that was improved after the Commission’s initial review and stated that we should have design standards for these types of facilities. He felt that making changes to the materials could improve the aesthetics. Mr. Borsuk suggested that the item be laid over for three meetings and in two meetings provide a rendering of what the facility will look like. Mr. Burich suggested that changes could be made and the item could be brought back to the next meeting for review. Mr. Gohde commented that the renderings provided are not accurate and the situation regarding the sanitary sewer repairs will not get corrected with the item being delayed. If the project has to be re-bid, it will have to be done soon or if there are no major changes, it could be worked out with the contractor that was already awarded the bid. Mr. Burich stated that if the request could be addressed by the November 7th meeting, we could hopefully keep the time frame intact and keep the project on schedule. Mr. Borsuk suggested that the Parks Department should be present for the next meeting. Motion by Borsuk to layover the architectural building plan for a proposed sanitary lift station at 1507 N. Eagle Street until the next meeting. Seconded by Vajgrt. Motion carried 9-0. III. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST TO ESTABLISH AN OUTDOOR STORAGE USE AT 1850 W. FERNAU AVENUE The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to establish an outdoor storage use on a previously developed lot. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 12 October 17, 2017 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 reviewed the existing conditions on the subject site and discussed the addition of the outdoor storage area and its placement on the site and its purpose. He reviewed the site plan and the conditions recommended for this request. Mr. Borsuk stated that adding storage for up to 50 spaces for vehicles should go back to the GOEDC committee that approved it as the use and intensity is different than what was originally approved. He also questioned if this use would comply with the SIC code. Mr. Lyons responded that GOEDC was aware of this use when the original variance was approved. Kimberly Land, representing GOEDC, stated that the use received a variance from the committee. Mr. Borsuk stated that he did not recall the outdoor storage use being part of the approval. Ms. Land responded that they approved a variance for the automobile use and that there would be vehicles stored behind a fenced area is the only difference but is still acceptable. Mr. Borsuk continued discussion on the SIC code and its related requirements regarding storm water management issues and pollution control. Mr. Thoms commented that the Commission has approved other storage facilities in the past without discussing these criteria. Mr. Borsuk reiterated that the use was not approved by GOEDC in the Industrial Park for this purpose in his opinion and continued to discuss pollution controls and plans that he felt should be in place to address these issues. Mr. Gohde indicated that facilities of this nature are regulated by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources who require the appropriate permits and plans to address these concerns. Mr. Borsuk requested to add a condition to the request to address that the site is in compliance with DNR regulations. Motion by Vajgrt to approve a conditional use permit to establish an outdoor storage use at 1850 W. Fernau Avenue with the following conditions: 1. The outdoor storage area must be completely enclosed by 8 foot tall solid (at least 90% opaque) fencing. 2. Vehicles and stored items may only be stored on the existing gravel area to the north of the building. Nothing may be stored in grassed or landscaped areas. 3. The existing gravel area may not be expanded. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 13 October 17, 2017 4. The facility be in compliance with all required Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources regulations. Seconded by Bowen. Motion carried 8-0-1. (Abstained-Thoms) IV. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR A FREIGHT TERMINAL DEVELOPMENT AT 3010 BRADLEY STREET The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for development of a semi freight terminal at 3010 Bradley Street for Karl’s Transport. Inc, 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 proposed use of the site, the hours of operation and the potential future expansion possibilities. He reviewed the site plan and discussed the setbacks, dolly pad, fencing, landscaping, and access to the site, parking, signage and lighting. He noted that the access will need to be slightly expanded to meet code requirements, that there was no designated employee parking as there will not be any employees on site, and signage plans will need to meet code requirements when submitted. The lighting plans need to be slightly revised and minimal landscaping is required. Storm water management plans have not yet been submitted but will be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. He also reviewed the conditions recommended for this request. Mr. Thoms questioned if the fencing around the site should be required to have screening and if there should be a condition addressing storm water management. Mr. Nau responded that this is an industrial use of a transit station within an industrially zoned district and as it is not a storage use, screening is not required. He further stated that storm water management plans will be reviewed during the site plan review process and the site will be required to meet code requirements and therefore an additional condition addressing this is not necessary. Mr. Burich added that this request is a conditional use permit and we cannot use this process to impose additional storm water management plans on the applicant other than what is required by code standards. Mr. Borsuk questioned what area of the site would be improved and whether it would be paved. Mr. Nau displayed on the site plan the area to be paved with asphalt or concrete and the location of the dolly pad. Mr. Thoms continued discussion on storm water management requirements for the site. Lucinda Porter, 81 Myrna Jane Drive, stated that she was on the cemetery board and that they had concerns with the conditions of the existing road and the impact the additional truck traffic would __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 14 October 17, 2017 have on it. She also discussed her concerns with the increase in traffic on Waukau Avenue due to this use. Jeff Rustick, Schuler & Associates, petitioner for this request, stated that they were working with the Department of Public Works on storm water management plans for the site and that an impervious pavement design was being developed. Mr. Borsuk questioned if the owner would have any issue with trucks only being allowed to be parked on paved surface areas. Mr. Rustick responded that this would not be an issue. Mr. Borsuk requested to add a condition to the request to address that the trucks would only be allowed on paved surfaces. Motion by Borsuk to approve a conditional use permit for a freight terminal development at 3010 Bradley Street with the following conditions: 1) Driveway entrance will be changed to a 40-foot/70-foot opening; 2) Photometric plan shall be revised to match the site/landscape plan. 3) Truck operation only allowed on paved surfaces. Seconded by Vajgrt. Mr. Kiefer inquired about the concerns regarding the traffic issues and the condition of the roadway. Mr. Burich responded that road reconstruction is under the direction of the Department of Public Works and that they determine conditions and the schedule for when a road is to be reconstructed. Mr. Hinz commented that he thought the zoning ordinance has regulations that address that vehicles could not be stored on unpaved surfaces so he did not feel the additional condition was necessary. Mr. Burich confirmed that this was correct. Motion carried 9-0. Mr. Bowen left at 6:10 pm. VII. APPROVAL OF RIVER EAST NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN Staff requests approval of the River East Neighborhood Plan, which focuses on the neighborhood bounded by Washington Avenue on the north, Bowen Street (west side) on the west, the Fox River on the south and Main Street on the west. Over the last few years the neighborhood has begun to __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 15 October 17, 2017 see signs of transition as long term residents move out and new homeowners move in. Recent efforts by residents, the River East Neighborhood Association, City of Oshkosh and partner organizations have centered on enhancing existing assets to provide stability and ensure the River East neighborhood continues to be one of choice in Oshkosh. The purpose of this review is for the Plan Commission to make a determination that the proposed goals and objectives within the River East Neighborhood Plan are consistent with the City’s 2005-2025 Comprehensive Plan, official maps, or other planning objectives of the City. Ms. Naudziunas presented the item and reviewed the map of the proposed neighborhood and discussed the purpose of the plan and the process of its development and reviewed the priority areas of the plan. Kathy Webb, 543 Otter Avenue, expressed her excitement over the adoption of the neighborhood plan and discussed the revitalization of their neighborhood and other aspects of the plan that would benefit the neighborhood and community as a whole. Mr. Fojtik and Mr. Kiefer both commented that it was an extremely well done plan and that they were pleased with the document. Motion by Vajgrt to approve the River East Neighborhood Plan with a finding that the identified goals and objectives are not in conflict with the City of Oshkosh’s Comprehensive Plan. Seconded by Borsuk. Motion carried 7-0-1. (Abstained-Fojtik) VIII. APPROVAL OF NEIGHBORHOOD STREETSCAPE VISION PLAN Staff requests approval of the Neighborhood Streetscape Vision Plan, which focuses on a target neighborhood bounded by Murdock Avenue on the north, Hazel Street on the west, George Washington Triangle to the south and Lake Winnebago on the east. Over the last couple years the neighborhood has begun to look towards implementing goals of the neighborhood plan. Recent efforts by residents, the Millers Bay Neighborhood Association, City of Oshkosh and partner organizations have centered on enhancing existing assets to provide stability and ensure the Millers Bay neighborhood continues to be one of choice in Oshkosh. The purpose of this review is for the Plan Commission to make a determination that the proposed recommendations within the Neighborhood Streetscape Vision Plan are consistent with the City’s 2005-2025 Comprehensive Plan, official maps, or other planning objectives of the City. Ms. Naudziunas presented the item and discussed the goals of the plan and the issues that it was meant to address. She also reviewed the objectives and the five priority areas and discussed the implementation of the plan. Jim Michelson, 1515 Northpoint Street, stated that he attended meetings on the streetscape plans and discussed the intersection improvements included in it as well as the traffic calming areas. He discussed the narrowing of streets and quoted regulations regarding bicycles and traffic and the amount of room allowed between bicycles and vehicles on the streets. He also discussed the pedestrian and bicycle needs being addressed within this plan. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 16 October 17, 2017 Ruth McGinley discussed her role in the neighborhood planning and leadership planning committee as well as the plan and how it meets the goals and objectives of the neighborhood plan and other city plans. Motion by Vajgrt to approve the Neighborhood Streetscape Vision Plan with a finding that the identified goals and objectives are not in conflict with the City of Oshkosh’s Comprehensive Plan, Seconded by Ford. Motion carried 7-0-1. (Abstained-Ford) IX. APPROVAL OF THE IMAGINE OSHKOSH PLAN-A MASTER PLAN FOR OUR CENTER CITY/CENTRAL CITY INVESTMENT STRATEGY Staff requests approval of the Imagine Oshkosh/Central City Investment Strategy (CCIS) plan which focuses on the broader area surrounding the “downtown” to also include the S, Main and Oregon Street corridors and South Shore areas. Imagine Oshkosh provides a policy guide and action framework to elevate Center City and provides recommendations, strategies, and policies to maintain and improve this critical area of the community. One of the major themes of the Plan is how to promote or catalyze investment within the Center City. The Plan was prepared by Houseal Lavigne Associates in cooperation with City Staff and an advisory committee as identified in the acknowledgments page after the title page. Staff is requesting the Plan Commission to review the Plan and make a determination that is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and further that the Comprehensive Plan be amended to include Imagine Oshkosh by reference. Mr. Burich presented the item and discussed the development of this plan and the processes that took place prior to drafting the document. John Houseal, Houseal Lavigne Associates, stated that the document has been in process for the last 18 months and discussed the many meetings, workshops, and the open house held in the creation and presentation of this document. He also discussed the outreach that was part of this project and reviewed the areas considered as part of this plan. He reviewed the broad area that this plan addresses and reviewed the functional areas and the character functionality of each area. He also discussed opportunity sites, key sites, critical mass priority areas, market analysis for employment, residential growth areas, downtown parking, pedestrian mobility, public transit, UW-O, arts and culture design guidelines, establishing a sense of place, street scaping, and implementation. Mr. Borsuk requested that Mr. Houseal discuss the decision tree process that a grocery store makes when deciding on a location for their facility. Mr. Houseal gave a brief presentation on the criteria for location of development and the key components for choosing a location of which one of the greatest is the sense of place. He continued discussion with the size of the City’s downtown area and the approaches into Oshkosh and the gateway corridors which are crucial. __________________________________ Plan Commission Minutes 17 October 17, 2017 Mr. Lyons stated that a corridor plan may be brought forward on November 21st and the W. 9th Avenue and W. South Park Avenue would be the first to be discussed. These plans were developed with a partnership between the City, the Chamber of Commerce and the Community Foundation. Motion by Vajgrt to approve the Imagine Oshkosh Plan-A Master Plan for Out Center City. Seconded by Ford. Motion carried 8-0. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 6:47 pm. (Vajgrt/Hinz) Respectfully submitted, Darryn Burich Director of Planning Services