Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES April 2,2019 PRESENT: Steve Cummings, Thomas Fojtik, Michael Ford, Derek Groth, Thomas Perry, Kathleen Propp EXCUSED: Ed Bowen,John Hinz,John Kiefer, Andrew Mott, Robert Vajgrt STAFF: Darryn Burich, Planning Director;Justin Gierach,Engineering Division Manager/City Engineer;Mark Lyons, Principal Planner;Mina Kuss, Recording Secretary Chairperson Fojtik called the meeting to order at 4:00 pm. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. The minutes of March 19, 2019 were approved as presented. (Propp/Cummings) I. ZONE CHANGE FROM SUBURBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT (SMU) TO MULTI- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 12 (MR-12) AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A GROUP DEVELOPMENT FOR MULTI-FAMILY USE AT THE 1400 BLOCK OF OSBORN AVENUE Site Inspections: Report: Ms. Propp reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The applicant is requesting a zone change and a group development Conditional Use Permit to establish a multi-family development at the 1400 block of Osborn 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 gave a brief overview of the previous meeting in regard to this property. The petitioner is now proposing to construct five 2.5 story 12-unit apartment buildings. The development would include both surface and garage parking. The revised site layout includes several modifications from the original plan. The applicant is proposing approximately 200%the required setback for the pavement and over a 500%increase in the required setback to the building. These increased setbacks should aid in mitigating the proposed building's height and the grade change between properties. The applicant has also removed the access drive located at the northeast corner of site that provided direct access to Mason Street due to concerns from the neighbors. The applicant is now proposing a second access point along Osborn Avenue. The applicant is still proposing a pedestrian connection in that area. The development meets the City's requirements for parking. Finalized storm water management plans will be required as part of the Site Plan Review process. All required landscaping for building foundation, paved areas, street frontage, yard and bufferyard are being met or exceeding Plan Commission Minutes 1 April 2,2019 requirements. Final code compliant lighting plan will be required as part of Site Plan Review. The applicant has provided concept building elevations. The buildings are similar to those the applicant has constructed along Ripple Avenue. The structures are clad in a mixture of brick, veneer, glass and dutchlap siding. The proposed elevations meet the exterior design standards requirements for multi-family uses. Finalized building elevations will be reviewed and approved as part of the Site Plan Review process. Mr. Fojtik opened technical questions to staff. Mr. Propp inquired about the CUP process because it looks similar to the GDP process. Mr. Lyons stated the request is only for a rezone and a CUP. Ms. Propp asked if the proposed development would come back to Plan Commission for a GDP. Mr. Lyons replied it would not because it is not a Planned Development. He explained that it is only a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for more than three buildings. Mr. Burich added it is a group development and goes through the Conditional Use process. Mr. Lyons explained the Conditional Use Permit is triggered due to the number of buildings and not the use. He said the use is permitted under the MR-12 zoning district. Mr. Burich explained Planned Developments are typically for sites that need Base Standard Modifications or are unique sites to develop. Mr. Lyons pointed out there are no Base Standard Modifications or variances needed to accommodate this development because it meets the requirements of the base zoning district. Mr. Fojtik asked what types of developments would be allowed if the zoning stayed as SMU. Mr. Lyons listed a few examples such as gas stations, convenience stores,retail related and light industrial. Mr. Fojtik asked if there were any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Mr. Lyons commented there have been numerous correspondences throughout this process with the applicant and neighbors. He said all the correspondences were included as part of the staff report. John Maas (applicant), 840 Challenger Drive of Green Bay, wanted to comment on some of the environmental items he found from his review. He said the site has been idle since about 1987. He said the staff report states multi-family use is the highest and best use for the property. He said the site is not the best to develop because of the buried construction rubble, fill and petroleum Plan Commission Minutes 2 April 2,2019 contamination. He feels if the site hasn't developed in the past 36 years, it won't be developed for another 36 or more years. He stated the development would be an asset to the community. Joe Ferlo, 1230 Devonshire Drive, said he is the northwest neighbor. He said they would prefer to have trees/vacant lot behind their house. He said the first plan was better but the third plan was perfect. He thanked the developers for being very cooperative and for working with the neighbors. He said he has been caring for the northwest corner of the property. He stated there have not been any drainage issues. He said about half a dozen mature trees will remain which he is happy with. He thanked staff for listening to his concerns especially about installing a fence. He said his main concern is related to the fence because it will be the feature of the backyard. He said he would be willing to give up the arborvitae for a nicer fence. He said the northwest corner grading would create a berm if the grading stayed as is on both sides. He requested the fence be on the east side of the waterline easement with no arborvitae. He said he hopes to stay in good communication with the applicant throughout the process. He inquired about the type of fence and said he would prefer a privacy fence that is wood. He thank Plan Commission and Council for visiting his property and understanding his concerns. He reiterated that the developer has gone over and beyond and he prefers this use over other permitted SMU uses. He said he is grateful for this process and that the developer has been very generous. Cindy Smith, 1345 Kensington Avenue, said she would like the northwest fence to match the rest of the fencing on the north side. She hopes that Mr. Ferlo is happy too because his property is just as important as the rest of the neighbors. She asked if the proposed berm is the same berm that was presented at the last meeting. Mr. Maas replied the area of the berm is the same but the height has been lowered. He said it was 9-11 feet high and now the highest point is 6-8 feet. Ms. Smith said she doesn't mind the big berm or the height but questioned if the rain water would go into her backyard. Mr. Lyons pointed out the berm is still about 20 feet off the property line. He explained the applicant still has to provide and submit a code compliant drainage plan to the Department of Public Works prior to construction. Ms. Smith asked if there would be tiles installed if needed. Mr. Lyons replied he is not sure and reiterated that the drainage plan would have to meet all city standards before the project can move forward. Ms. Smith mentioned she does not have drainage issues with normal rainfall. Mr. Fojtik closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing statements. Plan Commission Minutes 3 April 2,2019 Sarah Hillenbrand (applicant), 3120 Gateway Road of Brookfield, said she appreciates the comments from the Ferlos. She pointed out the true property line of the lot they are under contract for. She explained the Ferlos are currently using the proposed development's land as their backyard which they will still permit. She stated it is still their property and they would be responsible for maintaining it as well as installing the landscaping. She wants to work with the neighbors but feels it is a little overreaching for non-owners of the property to dictate the specifics of the landscaping. She requested leaving the landscaping up to the developer and the staff to finalize. Motion by Propp to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report. Seconded by Cummings. Mr. Fojtik asked if there was any discussion about the motion. Mr. Cummings asked if the school district has been involved in the discussions. Mr. Lyons replied they have been notified and made aware of the plans. Mr. Perry said he is sensitive when it comes to abutting properties especially for residential. He feels the applicant and the city has gone over and beyond to make this development work. He said he has not seen this kind of effort during his time on the board. He said the multi-family is an appropriate use for the property. He said he will be voting for this because the efforts are extra ordinary from all involved. Ms. Propp agrees that the apartment complex is the best use. She said she spent 30 minutes visiting the Ferlo's property and understood their concerns. She is grateful to the developer for allowing the Ferlos to keep using the northwest corner though they don't have to. She appreciates the developer's efforts. She would like to amend condition#4 and#5 based on the developer's request. Motion by Propp to amend condition #4 and#5 to state:Applicant shall provide either a continuous evergreen bufferyard along the entire length of the water easement or construct a 6'solid fence along the entire length of the water easement. Final conditions to state: 1. Lighting plan must be modified to meet City lighting code requirements. 2. 2,700 sq.ft. of recreation open space shall be provided to fulfil the outdoor recreational space requirements. 3. Minimum 4 space "inverted-U"bike rack shall be added. 4. Applicant shall provide either a continuous evergreen bufferyard along the entire length of the water easement or construct a 6'solid fence along the entire length of the water easement.6. Plan Commission Minutes 4 April 2,2019 5. Final landscaping and landscaping berm plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Community Development. Seconded by Cummings. Motion carried 6-0. Motion to approve carried 6-0. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT Sawdust District Update Mr. Burich reported on the Sawdust District. He said there was a lot of discussion about the Sawdust District during The State of the City. He said over the course of the year, they have been working with stake holders and a working group. He said they are at a point where they are writing up a plan for the Sawdust District. He said they are moving forward with the implementation based on what was written in the Imagine Oshkosh plan. He said the uses will vary but the zoning should be the same throughout the district. He said the main difference is what the developments will look like site and architecturally in various parts of the district. He explained they are starting to write up the standards for each section of the Sawdust District and that is why it is taking so long. He said they are also working with Houseal on a revisualization of the original Sawdust District visualization. He explained everything would be in draft form and follow the process of going through Plan Commission. He said he was not sure about the completion time but is hoping it will be soon. Mr. Propp questioned what an opportunity zone is and how it would be overlaid. Mr. Burich replied the opportunity zone exist from 91h Avenue and to the south. He said it is an investment tool and helps to protect capital gains over the years. He said there is a lot of interest in the opportunity zones and building in it. Mr. Cummings said from observation,he believes the Pioneer is down. Mr. Burich commented it is an up and coming area. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 4:36 pm. (Cummings/Propp) Respectfully submitted, Darryn Burich Director of Planning Services Plan Commission Minutes 5 April 2,2019