Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout25. 19-289 MAY 14, 2019 19-289 RESOLUTION (CARRIED 7-0 LOST LAID OVER WITHDRAWN ) PURPOSE: APPROVE GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR MULTI-USE DEVELOPMENTS LOCATED AT MARION ROAD REDEVELOPMENT SITES H, I AND J INITIATED BY: MERGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Approved w/condition WHEREAS,the Plan Commission finds that the General Development Plan for the proposed planned development for multi-use developments located at Marion Road Redevelopment Sites H, I and J is consistent with the criteria established in Section 30- 387(6) of the Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Oshkosh that the General Development Plan for the planned development for multi-use developments located at Marion Road Redevelopment Sites H, I and J, per the attached, is hereby approved with the following condition: 1. No Base Standard Modifications shall be granted as part of the General Development Plan (GDP) approval. Rather approval, conditional approval, or denial of each BSM will be undertaken as Specific Implementation Plans for each project are brought forward for review in the future. TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Common Council FROM: Mark Lyons Principal Planner DATE: May 9, 2019 RE: Approve General Development Plan for Multi -Use Developments Located at Marion Road Redevelopment Sites H, I and J (Plan Commission Recommends Approval) BACKGROUND The subject area is currently a mix of Riverfront Mixed Use with a Planned Development Overlay and Riverfront Overlay (RMU-PD-RFO) and Urban Mixed Use with a Planned Development Overlay (UMU-PD). The three parcels encompass approximately 5.82 acres in total. The surrounding area consists of multi -family and commercial uses. The 2040 Comprehensive Land Use Plan recommends City Center use for the subject area. These parcels were previously acquired by the City of Oshkosh as part of the Marion Road and Pearl Avenue Redevelopment Project. The original redevelopment area was created as part of TID No. 13 in 1998. The parcels originally contained a mixture of industrial, commercial and residential buildings. The applicant/developer is requesting to move forward with a General Development Plan for a mixed-use development on the three redevelopment sites. ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing a three site mixed -used development in the Marion Road redevelopment area. The applicant's proposal includes a mixture of residential, commercial and office uses. The parcels are described as Parcels J, H and I as found in the Marion Road Pearl Avenue Redevelopment Plan. The applicant has identified several potential Base Standard Modifications (BSM) that will be required for the development. Each individual site will be required to obtain separate Specific Implementation Plan (SIP) approval to move forward. Site J is the primary focus of the development. It is located at the southwest corner of Jackson Street and Marion Road. The parcel is approximately 2.62 acres and is proposed to consist of three buildings and associated surface parking. Building 1 would be an approximate 110,000 City Half, 215 Church Avenue P.O. Box 1130 Oshkosh, WI 54903-1130 920.236.5000 http://www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us sq. ft. multi -use 5 -story building. The building is proposed to include 111 upper floor residential units with commercial and office space on the ground floor. The building is split in the middle to include a pedestrian walkway leading to Jackson Street. Building 2 would be an approximately 85,000 sq. ft. multi -use 5 -story building and consist of 9 residential units on the ground floor, 29 upper floor residential units and commercial space on the ground floor. Building 3 would be an approximate 7,600 sq. ft. 2 -story row home building consisting of 8 residential units. The applicant is proposing 62 on-site parking spaces as part of the Site J development. Site J will be accessed by a single driveway located near the northwest corner of the property along Marion Road. This location is required as a median exists within Marion Road. Site H is located at the southwest corner of Jackson Street and Pearl Avenue. The parcel is approximately 1.78 acres in size and presently consists of a parking lot and building pad. The site contained soil contamination and a parking lot cap was constructed in 2010 as part of the remediation plan. The applicant is proposing to make minor modifications to the existing parking lot and develop a 2 -story approximately 21,600 sq. ft. mixed use building. The building will include 14 upper floor residential units and approximately 10,800 sq. ft. of first floor commercial space. The proposed parking lot modifications would yield approximately 128 available parking spaces. Site H is accessed by two existing shared driveways. Site I is located on the north side of Marion Road approximately 315 feet west of Jackson Street. The parcel is approximately 1.41 acres in size and is presently vacant. The applicant is proposing to construct nine two-story town home units and a surface parking lot. The units are conceptually depicted as three 3 -unit buildings. Site I includes the construction of 91 on-site parking spaces. Final storm water management plans, lighting plans and signage and will be required as part of the SIP and Site Plan Review process. The applicant has provided detailed conceptual landscaping plans. The applicant has also identified several potential BSM's related to landscaping. Final building elevations including materials and a breakdown of each material will be reviewed during the SIP process and will need to be in compliance with the exterior design standards. Site J will also require a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for exterior design standards per the requirements of a Project Review within the Riverfront Overlay District. The applicant has identified several BSM's that will be required to construct the proposed development. As the project is still in the conceptual phase and plans may still be adjusted, staff is not recommending any BSM's be granted at this time but does want to discuss them as part of the official record. Approval, conditional approval or denial of each BSM will be undertaken as SIP's for each project as they are brought forward for review in the future. FISCAL IMPACT The proposed development overall is estimated to add about $26 million in improvement value. As part of a separate action, the developer is requesting creation of new Tax Incremental Finance District No. 36 to help make the development more economically feasible by improving the rate City Hall, 215 Church Avenue P.O. Box 1130 Oshkosh, WI 54903-1130 920.236.5000 http://www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us of return from about 3.55% to approximately 7.69%. As a center city site the development is already served by city services and no city service providers have expressed concerns with servicing the development. Any utility upgrades would addressed through development agreement. RECOMMENDATION The Plan Commission recommended approval of the General Development Plan with a condition at its May 7, 2019 meeting. Respectfully Submitted, dzA Mark Lyons Principal Planner Approved: Mark A. Rohloff City Manager City Hall, 215 Church Avenue P.O. Box 1 130 Oshkosh, WI 54903-1130 920.236.5000 http://www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us jIj I r'� rr, City of Oshkosh maps and data are intended to be used for general identification purposes only, and the City of Oshkosh assumes no liability for the accuracy of the information. Those using the information are responsible for verifying accuracy. For full disclaimer please go to www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us/GlSdisclaimer Site Plan Map Template'Plan Commission Site Plan Map Ternplate.wd 1 in=0.03 mi 1 in=150 ft Printing Date; 4/2/2019 Prepared by: City of Oshkosh, WI ITEM: GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL FOR MULTI -USE DEVELOPMENTS LOCATED AT MARION ROAD REDEVELOPMENT SITES H, I & J, GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS THE INTERSECTION OF MARION ROAD AND TACKSON STREET Plan Commission meeting of May 7, 2019. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicants; Dan Drendal — Slingshot Architecture Joy Hannemann — Merge Development Property Owner: Redevelopment Authority City of Oshkosh Action(s) Requested: The applicant requests approval of a General Development Plan to allow for multi -use developments located at redevelopment sites H, I & J, generally described as Marion Road and Jackson Street. Applicable Ordinance Provisions: Planned Development standards are found in Section 30-387 of the Zoning Ordinance. Property Location and Type: The subject area is currently a mix of Riverfront Mixed Use with a Planned Development Overlay and Riverfront Overlay (RMU-PD-RFO) and Urban Mixed Use with a Planned Development Overlay (UMU-PD). The three parcels encompass approximately 5.82 acres in total. Parcel J is a vacant lot approximately 2.63 acres and is located at the southwest corner of Jackson Street and Marion Road. Parcel I is a vacant lot approximately 1,41 acres and is located on the north side of Marion Road, approximately 315 feet west of Jackson Street. Parcel H contains a parking lot and graded building pad located at the southwest corner of Pearl Avenue and Jackson Street and is approximately 1.78 acres. The surrounding area consists of multi -family and commercial uses. The 2040 Comprehensive Land Use Plan recommends City Center use for the subject area. These parcels were previously acquired by the City of Oshkosh as part of the Marion Road and Pearl Avenue Redevelopment Project. The original redevelopment area was created as part TID No. 13 in 1998. The parcels originally contained a mixture of industrial, commercial and residential buildings. After being acquired by the City the structures were removed and site graded for development. Subject Site Existin Land Use . Zama Vacant lands and parking RMU-PD-RFO, UMU-PD Adiacent Land Use and ExistinUses Zoning North_ _Commercial / Institutional I -PD, UMU-PD, I -UTO ... South Mixed -Uses-._ _-_ _....-.- _ �............... —-..,... __.._................-.......--._.. /River RMU-PD-RFO ---- -- ---- -- ..-._--- ................ -- - ------..-._-.-...............-.-... East Commercial / Office / Jackson Street UMU-PD, UMU, CMU-RFO West Mixed -Uses RMU-PD-RFO, UMU-PD, I -PD Comprehensive P1 n Viand Use Recommendation an Use 2040 Land Use Recommendation Center City ANALYSIS Use/Site Design/Access The applicant is proposing a three site mixed used development in the Marion Road redevelopment area. The applicant proposal includes a mixture of residential, commercial and office uses. The parcels are described as Parcels J, H & I as found in the Marion Road Pearl Avenue Redevelopment Plan. The applicant has identified several potential Base Standard Modifications (BSM) that will be required for the development and those are further outlined following. Each individual site will be required to obtain independent Specific Implementation Plan approval to move forward. Site Site J is the primary focus of the development. It is located at the southwest corner of Jackson Street and Marion Road. The parcel is approximately 2.62 acres and is proposed to consist of three buildings and associated surface parking. Building 1 would be an approximate 110,000 sq. ft. multi -use 5 -story building. The building is proposed to include 111 upper floor residential units with commercial and office space on the ground floor. The building is split in the middle to include a pedestrian walkway leading to Jackson Street. Building 2 would be an approximately 85,000 sq. ft. multi -use 5 -story building and consist of 9 walkup residential units on ground floor, 29 upper floor residential units and commercial space on the ground floor. Building 3 would be an approximately 7,600 sq. ft. 2 -story row home building consisting of 8 residential units. The applicant is proposing 62 on-site parking spaces as part of the Site J development. Site J will be accessed by a single driveway located near the northwest corner of the property along Marion Road. This location is required as a median exists within Marion Road. The applicant is proposing 78% impervious surface, which falls below the code required 80% maximum. Site H Site H is located at the southwest corner of Jackson Street and Pearl Avenue. The parcel is approximately 1..78 acres in size and presently consists of a parking lot and building pad. The site contained soil contamination and a parking lot cap was constructed in 2010 as part of the remediation plan. The applicant is proposing to make minor modifications to the existing parking lot and develop a 2 -story approximately 21,600 sq. ft. mixed use building. The building will ITEM - GDP Merge include 14 upper floor residential units and approximately 10,800 sq. ft. of first floor commercial. The proposed parking lot modifications would yield approximately 128 available parking spaces. Site H is accessed by the 2 existing shared driveways. One driveway is located at the southeast corner and one located at the northwest corner of the site. The applicant is proposing 80% impervious surface, which falls below the code required 85% maximum. Site I Site I is located on the north side of Marion Road approximately 315 feet west of Jackson Street. The parcel is approximately 1.41 acres in size and is presently vacant. The applicant is proposing to construct nine two-story town home units and a surface parking lot. The units are conceptually depicted as three 3 -unit buildings. Site I includes the construction of 91 on-site parking spaces. The applicant is proposing 67% impervious surface, which falls below the code required 85% maximum. Storm Water Management/Utilities No storm water management plans have been submitted at this time. Storm water management plans will be required as part of the Specific Implementation Plan (SIP) and Site Plan Review process. Landscaping The applicant has provided detailed conceptual landscaping plans. They include a variety of trees, shrubs and bushes. Exact species have not been identified at this time and a full planting schedule will be required during the SIP process. The applicant has also identified several potential BSM's related to landscaping and those will be further discussed in a separate section. Final landscaping plan approval will take place as part of each SIP request. Site Building Foundation Per the applicant's site plan, a total of 1,660 foundation landscaping points are required per building. The provided plan indicates a total of 1,660 foundation landscaping points are being provided per building. The landscaping ordinance also specifies that 50% of the required points must be located along the primary building facade, or in this case the east fagade. All building foundation landscaping requirements are being meet. Paved Area Code requires 50 landscaping points per 10 parking stalls or 10,000 sq. ft. of paved area, equating to a required 119 paved area landscaping points. The applicant exceeds this requirement by providing a total of approximately 308 paved area landscaping points, The code further specifies 30% of all points will be devoted to medium or tall trees and 40% will be devoted to shrubs. Again, the applicant exceeds both requirements. Street Frontage Code requires 100 points per 100 feet of street frontage. The subject parcel has 800 feet of frontage along Marion Road and Jackson Street, equating to a required 800 landscaping points. The plan ITEM - GDP Merge provided indicates 110 points. A BSM will be required during the SIP and is further discussed below. Yards Code requires 20 landscaping points per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area. Per the provided plan, 4,048 yard landscaping points are required and the applicant is providing 1,700, A BSM will be required during the SIP process and is further discussed below. Site H Building Foundation Per the applicant's site plan, a total of 184 foundation landscaping points are required per building. The provided plan indicates a total of 184 foundation landscaping points are being provided. The landscaping ordinance also specifies that 50% of the required points must be located along the primary building fagade, or in this case the east facade. All building foundation landscaping requirements are being meet. Paved Area Code requires 40 landscaping points per 10 parking stalls or 10,000 sq. ft. of paved area, equating to a required 197 paved area landscaping points. The applicant meets this requirement by providing a total of approximately 197 paved area landscaping points. The code further specifles 30% of all points will be devoted to medium or tall trees and 40% will be devoted to shrubs. Again, the applicant exceeds both requirements. Street Frontage Code requires 60 points per 100 feet of street frontage. The subject parcel has 370 feet of frontage along Pearl Avenue and Jackson Street, equating to a required 222 landscaping points. The plan provided indicates 110 points. A BSM will be required during the SIP process and is further discussed below. Yards Code requires 10 landscaping points per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area. Per the provided plan, 216 yard landscaping points are required and the applicant is providing 216. All yard landscaping requirements are being meet. Site I Building Foundation. Per the applicant's site plan, a total of 240 foundation landscaping points are required per building. The provided plan indicates a total of 240 foundation landscaping points are being provided. The landscaping ordinance also specifies that 50% of the required points must be located along the primary building facade, or in this case the east facade. All building foundation landscaping requirements are being meet. Paved Area Code requires 40 landscaping points per 10 parking stalls or 10,000 sq. ft. of paved area, equating to a required 152 paved area landscaping points. The applicant meets this requirement by ITEM - GDP Merge providing a total of approximately 152 paved area landscaping points. The code further specifies 30% of all points will be devoted to medium or tall trees and 40% will be devoted to shrubs. Again, the applicant exceeds both requirements. Street Frontage Code requires 60 points per 100 feet of street frontage. The subject parcel has 320 feet of frontage along Marion Road, equating to a required 192 landscaping points. The plan provided indicates 0 points. A BSM will be required during the SIP process and is further discussed below. Yards Code requires 10 landscaping points per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area. Per the provided plan, 113 yard landscaping points are required and the applicant is providing 113. All yard landscaping requirements are being meet. Signage No signage plans have been provided at this time, Final signage approval will be required as part of the Specific Implementation Plan. Building Facades Conceptual building elevations have been included for Site J only. Final building elevations including materials and a breakdown of each material will be reviewed during the SIP process and will need to be in compliance with the exterior design standards. Site J will also require Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for exterior design standards per the requirements of a Project Review within the Riverfront Overlay District. Lighting No lightning plans have been provided at this time. Final lighting plan approval will be required as part of the Specific Implementation Plan. Anticipated Base Standard Modifications The applicant has identified several Base Standard Modifications that will be required to construct the proposed development. As the project is still in the conceptual phase and plans may still be adjusted, staff is not recommending any BSM's be granted at this time but does want to discuss them as part of the official record. Setback reduction The RMU zoning district for Site J requires a 10' street setback. The northeast corner of the Site J includes a radius corner, the radius corner results in the required setback having a greater impact than what would be traditionally found for a standard corner. The applicant is proposing to reduce the setback approximately 4 feet to establish a more traditional urban core development pattern with a street orientated building. This type of development pattern would be consistent with what is typically found in the Central Mixed Use District (CMU) zoning district. Staff is in support a BSM to reduce the required street setback as this unique development more closely resembles central city urban development and should be an asset to the area. The exact setback dimension will be required during the SIP process so the appropriate BSM can be granted. ITEM- GDP Merge S Ground Floor Area — Multiple Use Buildings Specific to Site J, Mixed Use Building within the Riverfront Overlay District are required to including 70% ground floor commercial with a maximum of 30% residential, The applicant's proposal includes 54.6% commercial and 45.4% residential. The applicant states they intend to provide a unique walk-up unit along the Fox River, which has necessitated the need for a BSM. Objective H1.2 of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan identifies the need to develop a variety of housing types to address unmet housing needs. Staff is in support of a BSM because the applicant is seeking to provide a housing type presently not available in the center city. The exact building configuration and associated use breakdown will be required during the SIP process so the appropriate BSM can be granted. Parkin Residential land uses require two parking spaces per dwelling unit up to 2 bedrooms and an additional 0.5 space per additional bedroom over two. The code further specifies parking for one or more uses shall provide a total number of parking spaces which shall not be less than the sum total of the separate parking needs. The proposed development would need to account for maximum parking of both the residential and commercial components. The applicant is proposing to provide 281 parking spaces or 1..15 per dwelling unit between all 3 sites. In the applicant's experience with development of similar scale and concept, the shared parking between commercial and residential at this rate is sufficient. The applicant identifies several factors that result in the lower parking demand than what is identified in the zoning ordinance, smaller size residential units including studio and micro typically have a lower parking demand, development is intended to be walkable and fit within the urban setting of downtown and the campus, the mixed use development style provides offsetting peak parking demands between the residential and commercial uses to more fully utilize parking over a 24 hour period. The development area is also located along the Cities public transit system. Two examples of similar parking strategies utilized by the developer can be found in the project narrative. The exact building configuration and associated parking layout will be required during the SIP process so the appropriate BSM can be granted. Landscaping The applicant is deficient in street frontage plantings for Site J, H and I. This is a result of a combination of utility easements and desired narrow building setbacks to create a more urban environment. As a result, the applicant is unable to meet the code requirements for street plantings. The applicant is proposing a private/public partnership to install additional street trees within the street terrace areas where possible. Staff has had preliminary discussion with the City Landscaping Operations Manager related to this proposal. After initial discussions it appears this is a viable solution to the applicant's street planting needs, but final details for exact planting locations within the terrace will need to be approved during the SIP process. Staff is in support of a BSM for street plantings and feels the proposed solution can accommodate both the aesthetic intent of the ordinance and the unique urban character of the proposed development. The applicant is also deficient in yard plantings for Site J. Site J is proposed as a higher density urban development similar to what is typically found the center city. The applicant is proposing ITEM - GDP Merge 6 to provide 1,700 of the Riverfront Mixed Use (RMU) District's required 4,048 yard landscaping points, I£ this project was being developed within the Central Mixed Use District (CMU) the applicant would be exempt for yard landscaping requirements. Staff is in support of a BSM for yard landscaping as the scale and density of this development more closely resembles that found in CMU. By providing 1,700 yard points the applicant is exceeding what would typically be required for this type of development. As this is still in the conceptual phase of development final landscaping plans and a planting schedule will be required during the SIP process so the appropriate BSM can be granted. The base standard modifications being discussed in this staff report are not being recommended for approval at this time. Rather approval, conditional approval, or denial of each BSM will be undertaken as Specific Implementation Plans for each project are brought forward for review in the future. Staff is identifying the treed for a BSM based upon this generalized review under the GDP. The GDP serves to identify any specific concerns that staff may have regarding a proposed BSM and whether staff is generally supportive or opposed to the particular BSM so that it may be accounted or addressed during future SIP review. FINDINGS/RECOMMENDATION/CONDITIONS In its review and recommendation to the Common Council on an application for a Planned Development district, staff recommends the Plan Commission make the following findings based on the criteria established by Chapter 30-387 (C)(6): (a) The proposed Planned Development project is consistent with the overall purpose and intent of this Chapter. (b) The proposed Planned Development project is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and other area plans. (It is the responsibility of the City to determine such consistency.) (c) The proposed Planned Development project would maintain the desired relationships between laird uses, land use densities and intensities, and land use impacts in the environs of the subject site. (d) Adequate public infrastructure is or will be available to accommodate the range of uses being proposed for the Planned Development project, including but not limited to public sewer and water and public roads. (e) The proposed Planned Development project will incorporate appropriate and adequate buffers and transitions between areas of different land uses and development densities/intensities. (f) The proposed Planned Development project design does not detract from areas of natural beauty surrounding the site. (g) The proposed architecture and character of the proposed Planned Development project is compatible with adjacent/nearby development. (h) The proposed Planned Development project will positively contribute to and not detract from the physical appearance and functional arrangement of development in the area. ITEM - GDP Merge 7 (i) The proposed Planned Development project will produce significant benefits in terms of environmental design and significant alternative approaches to addressing development performance that relate to and more than compensate for any requested exceptions/base standard modifications variation of any standard or regulation of this Chapter. (j) For Planned Development projects that are proposed to be developed in phases, the applicant can provide a timeline for development and can demonstrate that the project would be successful even if all phases were not or could not be completed. Staff recommends approval of the General Development Plan with the findings listed above and the proposed following condition: 1. No Base Standard Modifications shall be granted as part of the General Development Plan (GDP) approval. Rather approval, conditional approval, or denial of each BSM will be undertaken as Specific Implementation Plans for each project are brought forward for review in the future The Plan Commission approved of the General Development Plan as requested with findings and a condition noted. The following is the Plan Commission's discussion on this item. Site inspections Report: Mr. Bowen, Mr. Ford and Ms. Propp reported visiting the site. Staff report accepted as part of the record. The applicant requests approval of a General Development Plan to allow for multi -use developments located at redevelopment sites H, I & J, generally described as Marion Road and Jackson Street. Mr. Lyons presented the item, reviewed the site and surrounding area, land use and zoning classifications in this area. The applicant is proposing a three site mixed used development in the Marion Road redevelopment area. The applicant proposal includes a mixture of residential, commercial and office uses. The parcels are described as Parcels J, H and I as found in the Marion Road Pearl Avenue Redevelopment Plan. The applicant has identified several potential Base Standard Modifications (BSM) that will be required for the development. Each individual site will be required to obtain independent Specific Implementation Plan approval to move forward. Site J is approximately 2.62 acres and is proposed to consist of three buildings and associated surface parking. Site H is approximately 1.78 acres in size and is proposed to consist of parking lot and a 2 -story mixed use building. Site I is 1.41 acres in size and is proposed to consist of nine two-story town home units and a surface parking lot. Storm water management, Iandscaping, elevations, lighting and signage will be reviewed later as part of the SII' and Site Plan Review processes. Ms. Propp opened technical questions to staff. ITEM - GDP Merge Ms. Palmeri inquired about Site I and the nine walk-up residential units. She said there are references to walk -out and walk-up and would like to better understand each. She was unsure if there would be elevator access for the walk-up units. Mr. Lyons explained that for Site J, the first -floor units would walk -out from to patio towards the river. He said the first -floor units would have direct access to the river. Ms. Palmeri asked if it would be 0 depth. Mr. Lyons replied he would refer that question to the applicant. He said the intent is there would be direct access to the river. Ms. Palmeri questioned what walk-up meant for the upper floors and if it meant literally walking up to the unit with no elevator. Ms. Propp commented that the question should be saved for the applicant to answer. Ms. Palmeri questioned accessibility for Site H and I. Mr. Perry inquired about the existing property to the west. He asked about the building and the number of floors. Mr. Burich said he believes the Anthem property is four stories. Mr. Lyons brought up Google street view and said the building looked to be around four and a half stories tall. Mr. Perry asked if the mall across the street was torn down and rebuilt, if it would be allowed to be six stories. Mr. Lyons said he thinks what Mr. Perry is trying to reference is the CMU standards. He said that the standard only applies to adjoining buildings. He explained the height is in conformance with what the code allows. Mr. Perry confirmed the standards would not apply if there was a new development built across the street on Jackson. Mr. Lyons said the standards would not come into play. He said the new development would have to meet the standards for their zoning district. Ms. Propp inquired about the Oregon Street bridge. She said there was a lot of work put into the proposed reconstruction of the bridge which was pulled by the state. Mr. Lyons commented that they have delayed making the decision. ITEM - GDP Merge Mr. Burich added that they have not made a decision. Ms. Propp could not remember what bridge the city recommended. Mr. Hinz said they recommended the most expensive option which was the $36 million dollar drawbridge. Ms. Propp asked if the plan would accommodate the bridge reconstruction. Mr. Burich pointed out the large amount of dedicated right-of-way as part of this project for the reconstruction in case the bridge had to be realigned. Mr. Gierach confirmed the large area of right-of-way was dedicated because they were not sure how the bridge would be reconstructed. He believes the development has been made aware of the potential for bridges and reconfiguration. Ms. Propp asked if the proposed request would be started before the state is willing to fund the bridge. Mr. Gierach replied as far as he knows, the applicant would like to start on construction, likely before the state is willing to fund the bridge. Ms. Propp said she just wants to ensure that the developer understands and is made aware of potential changes to the bridge. Mr. Gierach confirmed the developer has been made aware of it. Mr. Lyons pointed out the large right-of-way again and said the hope is it would be enough to cover any potential change to the bridge. Ms. Propp said a previous concern was that the bridge would cut off the view for nearby buildings. Ms. Palmeri inquired about accessibility of the buildings. She asked if the apartments were a universal design in terms of handicap accessibility, wider hallways, wider doors, roll -in showers and so on. Mr. Lyons said he would defer that to the applicant, He explained this is only the concept plan / GDP approval and the details will be addressed during the SIP process. Ms. Palmeri said she presumes based on the number of people that the square footage would have been calculated in. Mr. Burich commented the applicant, at a minimum, would have to meet requirements for handicap and accessibility. ITEM - GDP Merge 10 Ms. Propp asked if there were any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any statements. Dan Drendal (applicant), 305 E. Court Avenue of Des Moines, said he is with Slingshot Architecture and working with Merge Urban Development, who is there client and partner. He said their process is to engage first to their stakeholders and asked for feedback. He appreciates staff's input in shaping the General Development Plan. He said anytime they go into a community they look for mixed-use, urban development and increasing the amount of people living downtown. He said they also look at public places on the site so people are encouraged to walk through the site, around the site and increase walkability in general. He believes they would be able to come up with some great urban streetscape solutions that work within the existing fabric. He addressed accessibility and elevator access and explained that all upper levels would have elevator access and meet code. He further explained any multifamily building over eight units needs to meet FHA. He said they also track and map all accessible routes in every unit and go beyond what is asked of building code reviews. Mr. Palmeri asked if there would be first floor bathrooms. Mr. Drendal replied they will and will ensure accessibility is covered throughout, He said they are definitely passionate about that and achieving it in the right way. He mentioned the bridge was brought up very early in the project by the city. He said one strategy that is really going to help with that is the pedestrian space / courtyard space in-between the buildings, on the interior of the site, which will lend flexibility. He explained some of the buildings are fronted to both positions to accommodate for any potential bridge reconstruction design. He stated this development team is investing in opportunity zones which means they will be invest in the area for at least 10 years. He reviewed some of the site strategies such as the kayak launch, landscaping, storm water management plans, street frontages and parking. He said they are always striving to prioritize a pedestrian bicycle focus and deprioritize the car. He said the tenants they are looking for are people who want to be a part of the urban city lifestyle. He said they will still provide enough parking spaces. He said usually the residential parking is less populated during the day which allows more parking for the commercial uses. He said they are very excited about the project. Ms. Propp asked what type of tenants are they proposing to market to. Mr. Drendal replied specifically for housing tenants, they see a wide range of users. He said there are usually a lot of younger professionals who really prioritize to live alone without roommates. He said there are also a lot of baby boomers. Ms. Propp asked if there are larger units as well. Mr. Drendal replied they do. He explained all the walk-up units will be sized well. He said at Site J, the units that look out to the river will be some of the larger units. iTER - GDP Merge Yl Ms. Propp asked if these were market rate. Mr. Drendal responded that they are. He said they do study it against mean incomes and are willing to bring that data back during the SIP process if requested. There were no other public comments on this item. Ms. Propp closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing statements. There were no closing statements from the applicant Motion by Vajgrt to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report. Conditions: 1. No Base Standard Modifications shall be granted as part of the General Development Plan (GDP) approval. Rather approval, conditional approval, or denial of each BSM will be undertaken as Specific Implementation Plans far each project are broaight forward for review in the fidure Seconded by Hinz. Ms. Propp asked if there was any discussion about the motion. Ms. Propp said this is a welcomed development in many ways. She said there has been no activity to that site for years. She said it is an interesting development and she appreciates the different styles of housing. She said she like that the parking is interior and not out on the street. Ms. Palmeri said she really appreciates the thought that went into making it open for the pedestrian walkway to increase walkability. Ms. Propp agrees. Motion carried 7-0. Mr. Bowen left at 6:02 pm. ITEM - GDP Merge 12 SUBMIT TO: City of Oshkosh Dept. of Community Development City 215 Church Ave., P.O. Box 1 130 of Planned Development Application Oshkosh, WI 54901 Oshkosh For General Development Plan or Specific Implementation Plan **PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT USING BLACK INK** APPLICANT INFORMATION Petitioner: Dan Drendal Petitioner's Address: 305 E Court Ave Telephone #: ( ) 515.243.0074 Fax: ( City: Des Moines Date: 2019.04.01 State: IA Zip: 50309 Other Contact # or Email: dan@slinshotarchitecture.com Status of Petitioner (Please Check): ❑ Owner X Representative ❑ Tenant. ❑ Prospective Buyer Digilalty signed by Dan Drendal Dan Drendal DN: -Dan Drendal, o, m,. amall=dang^slingsMlarthileclure.com, c=US 2019.04.01 Petitioner's Signature (required): Dala: 2019.04.0" 5:52.07-06'00' Date: OWNER INFORMATION Owner(s): Joy Hannemann Owner(s) Address: 604 Clay Street Telephone #: ( ) 715.450.6181 Fax: ( City: Cedar Falls Date: 2019.04.01 State: IA Zip: 50613 Other Contact # or Email: joy@mergeurbandevelopment.com _ Ownership Status (Please Check): ❑ Individual []Trust (Partnership []Corporation Property Owner Consent: (required) By signature hereon, I/We acknowledge that City officials and/or employees may, in the performance of their functions, enter upon the property to inspect or gather other information necessary to process this application. I also understand that all meeting dates are tentative and may be postponed by the Planning Services Division for incomplete submissions or other administrative reasons. Property Owner's Signature: Joy Hannemann Dqt ys9 Eby Joy Ham. DH. m=Joy Hanremam, o=l.krga DevebpneM ou. l=joy6M'o, 15,5M vebpmmycom c=05 Dale: 20t90l Ot 15.5]:44-0600' Date: 2019.04.01 TYPE OF REQUEST: Iii General Development Plan (GDP) ❑ General Development Plan (GDP) Amendment ❑ Specific Implementation Plan (SIP) ❑ Specific Implementation Plan (SIP) Amendment SITE INFORMATION Address/Location of Proposed Project: 0 Marion RD 54901-4719 Sites J, H, and Proposed Project Type: Mixed -Use Development Current Use of Property: Vacant / Redevelopment Zoning: RMu, PD,RFO, UMu Land Uses Surrounding Your Site: North: Commercial South: Fox River East: Office/Commercial West: Residential ➢ It is recommended that the applicant meet with Planning Services staff prior to submittal to discuss the proposal, ➢ Application fees are due at time of submittal. Make check payable to City of Oshkosh. y Please refer to the fee schedule for appropriate fee. FEE IS NON-REFUNDABLE For more information please visit the City's website at www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us/Community_Development/Planning.htm Staff Date Rec'd Page 9 Specific treatment and location of recreational and open space areas, including designation of any such areas to be classified as common open space. ❑ Proposed grading plan. ❑ Specific landscaping plan for the subject site, specifying the location, species, and installation size of plantings. The landscaping plans shall include a table summarizing all proposed species. ❑ Architectural plans for any nonresidential buildings, multi -family structures, or building clusters, other than conventional single-family or two-family homes on individual lots, in sufficient detail to indicate the floor area, bulk, and visual character of such buildings. ❑ Engineering plans for all water and sewer systems, stormwater systems, roads, parking areas, and walkways. ❑ Signage plan for the project, including all project identification signs, concepts for public fixtures and signs, and group development signage themes that may or may not vary from City standards or common practices. ❑ Specific written description of the proposed SIP including: • Specific project themes and images. • Specific mix of dwelling unit types and/or land uses. • Specific residential densities and nonresidential intensities as described by dwelling units per acre, and landscaping surface area ratio and/or other appropriate measures of density and intensity. • Specific treatment of natural features, including parkland. • Specific relationship to nearby properties and public streets. • Statistical data on minimum lot sizes in the development, the precise areas of all development lots and pads; density/intensity of various parts of the development; building coverage, and landscaping surface area ratio of all land uses; proposed staging; and any other plans required by Plan Commission. • A statement of rationale as to why PD zoning is proposed. This statement shall list the standard zoning requirements that, in the applicant's opinion, would inhibit the development project and the opportunities for community betterment that are available through the proposed PD project. • A complete list of zoning standards that would not be met by the proposed SIP and the location(s) in which such exceptions/base standard modifications would occur. • Phasing schedule, if more than one development phase is intended. ❑ Agreements, bylaws, covenants, and other documents relative to the operational regulations of the development and particularly providing for the permanent preservation and maintenance of common open areas and amenities. ❑ A written description that demonstrates how the SIP is consistent with the approved GDP and any and all differences between the requirements of the approved GDP and the proposed SIP. 1 hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge all required application materials are included with this application. I am aware that failure to submit the required completed application materials may result in denial or delay of the application request. MgR1111 signed by Dan DreMal DN: -Dan 2019.04.01 Dan D re n d a l.=US dan@sGn9sha�arGhiledure.com� Applicant's Signature (required): Date: 2019.N.01 15:53:11 Date: Page 10 0 N I I S H 0 T ARCHITECTURE Apr 1, 2019 City of Oshkosh Mark Lyons, Principal Planner/ Community Development 21S Church Avenue Oshkosh, WI 54903-1130 RE: Site H, I, and J Proposal Response to Conceptual Review Dear Mr. Lyons, On behalf of our development and design teams, thank you for the opportunity to present a conceptual proposal for sites H, I, and J. In response to feedback from staff, council, and community, we are submitting a revised concept along with additional clarifications. SITE NARRATIVE Brownfield site; currently a vacant lot, this area was once home to a concrete ready -mix industrial use. As a brownfield site, contaminated soils will be addressed and mitigated to preserve quality of life for future generations. Native plant material; the native Wisconsin plant palette is diverse and well-suited for the weather extremes of the region. Using native plant material will greatly reduce the need for irrigation beyond the establishment period. Native plant material will also have a greater initial success rate, reducing the resources needed for replacement of failed plantings. Locally sourced construction materials; decorative stone, Wisconsin Urban Wood, concrete pavers, and crushed granite walking surfaces are all local options that will be explored with the goal of using as much locally sourced construction materials as possible. Low impact design; stormwater infiltration will improve water quality design by reducing stormwater contaminates and suspended solids. Stormwater will be directed from impervious surfaces to pervious surfaces such as permeable pavers and depressed landscape areas like bioswales and biocells. Public greenspace; public and public/private shared greenspace will be weaved in and around the site to improve the quality of life for residents of this development as well as the greater community. Green streetscapes with quality street trees and native plantings will contribute to a quality walkable public streetscape; townhomes will front onto the public right-of-way with direct access to the streetscape from each unit, contributing to a welcoming streetscape environment. Public/private shared greenspace will run through the heart of the development, connecting pedestrians to the Fox River riverfront. Kayak launch and river access; connecting people with our waterbodies is an important environmental concept. Rivers connect people with other people as well as other rivers, lands, lakes, and oceans creating an infinite linkage to the world around us. It increases our awareness of the interconnected world we live in. Specifically, this development aims to create a public river access and kayak launch space that also includes an outdoor classroom that would be used by the University of Wisconsin - Oshkosh. SLINGSHOTARCHIT ECTURE.COM 305 EAST COURT AVE, DES MOINES, IA 50309 T 515-243-0074 Page 1 of 3 Page 11 0 N I I S H 0 T ARCHITECTURE REQUESTED LANDSCAPE CODE EXEMPTIONS Street frontage plantings; the combination of existing utility easements and desirable narrow building setbacks to create a more urban environment restrict the amount and type of street frontage plantings for sites "H", "I" and "J". As a result, ownership requests a public/private partnership in the public right-of-way on Pearl Street and Marion Road for sites "I" and "H" to meet the intent of the street frontage plantings. Site "I" plantings would be sufficient to satisfy the requirements. Site "H" would fall just short of the requirements because of the limited length of the Pearl Street frontage. Site H also fronts on Jackson Street which is scheduled for future improvements that have not been fully designed, making a potential public/private partnership in this right-of-way more difficult; consequently, no street frontage plantings are indicated along Jackson Street. Site J street frontage has similar issues of utility easements and narrow building setbacks. Two (2) shade trees are propose near the Fox River bridge for a total of 110 street frontage points. Yard plantings; Sites H and I are lower density sites than Site J and there will not be any issue meeting the yard planting requirements. Site J is proposed as a higher density urban development with up to S floors and over 200 dwelling units. Per yard planting requirements, 202,400 sf of gross floor area would require 4,048 points on an urban site with limited open space in which to absorb that number of plantings. Ownership requests an exemption to this requirement and proposes that Site J provide 1,700 points of yard landscaping. REQUESTED ZONING CODE EXEMPTIONS RMU requires a 10'-0" side and street setback. The corner of our northeast building is currently set 4.3' closer to the property line than the minimum 10'-0 setback. This will allow us to get a better corner presence and activation at the corner of Jackson and Marion, which will also have plantings to soften the edge from building, sidewalk, and street. According to Article III Section 30-79: Multiple Use Building, Riverfront Overlay is requiring ground floor area to consist of 30% residential and 70% commercial. We are currently S4.6% commercial and 4S.4% residential. Our intent is to provide a type of walk-up unit along the Fox River, which will create a unique living arrangement and views out to the riverfront. A similar strategy will be developed toward the north end of the walk-ups to provide a residential presence for tenants accessing from the various parking lots. The commercial will be located out toward Jackson and some inward through active pedestrian spaces between the buildings. DISTRICT PARKING STRATEGY Residential land use requires parking count to be at a minimum: Two spaces per dwelling unit containing zero, one or two bedrooms, plus 0. S space per additional bedroom over two bedrooms per unit. One guest parking space shall be provided for every three dwelling units. We are requesting to provide 1.1S parking spaces per dwelling unit in order to meet our parking strategy goal. Our intention is to provide parking within a district parking strategy through off-site parking facilities shared between sites H, I, and J. This strategy allows for effective sharing of the 281 provided parking stalls accounting for residential users and offsetting daytime commercial uses. In our experience with other developments of similar scale and concept, these rates are sufficient given several factors differing from the standards set by the zoning code: Page 2 of 3 Page 12 0 N I I S H 0 T ARCHITECTURE 1. Smaller scale residential units including studio and micro units driving more single occupant dwellings owning one car or less. 2. Development of a walkable, mixed-use, urban site within walking distance from campus and downtown facilitating a lifestyle that does not mandate car ownership. 3. Mixed-use development at this scale provides for offsetting time schedules to more fully utilize parking throughout a 24 hour period. In two of our example projects, these parking strategies are being put into practice successfully: 1. Northside Yard Development - Stevens Point, WI - Our approved site plan provides 13S spaces on site for 211 units (.64 spaces per unit) with the any additional parking usage being shared by the adjacent neighborhood in a district parking strategy. The project also contains 27,000 sf of commercial space. 2. Riverplace - Cedar Falls, IA - This mixed-use project is fully occupied through 3 of 4 phases of construction. The project is parked at approximately 1.7S spaces per unit (1 per studio, 2 per 1 bedroom and 2 per 2 bedroom) and in the first year of operation averages a peak utilization of on site parking at 60-6S%. The project also contains approximately 12,000 sf of retail/office currently constructed and occupied. 3. Additional examples are constructed without on site parking in Des Moines or Waterloo where the downtown does not require on site parking. Within these districts, there are some structured parking facilities that are shared within the district, so the example is successful but not a direct comparison to the conditions found in Oshkosh, WI. We are available to provide additional information as requested. Please do not hesitate to reach out with any questions. We are excited to bring this project to the community of Oshkosh! Sincerely, Dan Drendel, AIA Slingshot Architecture Page 3 of 3 Page 13 NIATERIALTO SHRUBS AND PERENNIALSY�NI IF— PROPOSED SHIPPING I DELIVERY LANE REQUESTED EXCEPTION TO BUILDING SETBACK; ENCROACHMENT OF+/ -4'-0" INTO REQUIRED 10SETBACK z I I I I z Y i F COMBINATION OF NARROWBUILDINGEASEMENT SETBACKS AND EXISTING UTILITY EASEMENT REST D PERE PLANT FUTERIE 1AC SHRUBS AND PEO WAY IMPROVE JACKSAR STREET RIGHTUNKNOWN WN AN IMPROVEREETTREE UNKNOWN AND MAKE STREET TREES DI FFIK LT TO PICE IN THE RI GUY OF I I I I I I I I 10'SETBAK I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I R BUILDING SUMMARY Building Gross SF: 109,515* Building II Gross SF: 54,945* Building III Gross SF: 7,640* *See Pro Forma, Project Data for additional information on dwelling units and uses. SITE 1 SUMMARY Zoning: RMU-PD-RFO Lot Area: 114,500 SF, 2.63 AC Pervious SF: 24,560 SF (22%) Permeable parking: 4,700 SF Greenspace: 20,160 SF Impervious SF: 59,640 SF (76%) Parking/drives: 15,910 SF Walks: 27,410 SF Buildings: 43,320 SF PARKING SUMMARY SITE 1 59 standard off-street 3 accessible off-street 62 TOTAL SPACES TBD BIKE SPACES WILL BE PROVIDED IN STRATEGIC LOCATIONS BASE ON THE REQUIRED BIKE PARKING COUNT OF 5%OF THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF VEHICULAR STALLS. LANDSCAPE NOTES • All plant material will be native plants or cultivars of native plants to Wisconsin. • Ground mechanical units, utilities, and other exterior appurtenances will be screened from the public right-of-way. LEGEND SHADE TREE TALL DECIDUOUS (55 Pts.) (33 Pts.) 00 MEDIUM DECIDUOUS (16.5 Pts.) 0 t k TALL EVERGREEN TREE (44 Pts.) t l SHRUBS &PERENNIALS t (1.1-5.5 Pts.) C [ UD ® y F— Luo O� Ua L1J r =_ Z C ^ {J I Q W LAYOUT PLAN SITE J L1.00 //7� SITE I TOTAL PLANTINGS REQUIRED: FfLDG TOTAL PLANTINGS REQUIRED: BLDG FOUNDATION: 600 LF PROPOSED OUNDATION: 460 LF PROPOSED (40 pts per 100 LF of BLDG Foundation) (40 pts per 100 LF of BLDG Foundation) REQUIRED: 240 Pts. REQUIRED: 184 Pts. PROPOSED: 240 Pts. (50%pts on main entrance side, 25%pt PROPOSED: 184 Pts. (50% pts on main entrance side, 25% pt side facing public street; no shade trees) side facing public street; no shade trees) PAVED AREA: 37,825 SF PROPOSED PAVED AREA: 49,160 SF PROPOSED (40 pts every 10,000 SF of pavement) (40 pts every 10,000 SF of pavement) REQUIRED: 152 Pts. REQUIRED: 197 Pts. PROPOSED: 152 Pts. PROPOSED: 197 Pts. (30%Tall Trees, 40% Shrubs, Interior (30% To// Trees, 40% Shrubs, Interior / Parking Landscaping) Parking Landscaping) (Islands Accomplished with one shade tree (Islands Accomplished with one shade tree per island and two shade trees per double per island and two shade trees per double row islands) row islands) TI STREET FRONTAGE: 320 LF PROPOSED STREET FRONTAGE: 370 LF PROPOSED (60 pts per 100 LF of street frontage) (60 pts per 100 LF of street frontage) REQUIRED: 192 Pts. REQUIRED: 222 Pts. PROPOSED: 209 Pts. PROPOSED: 176 Pts. (Pearl St. trees) (110 pts. shade trees, 99 pts. med.) (50% all pts devoted to medium trees) -SITE H (50% all pts devoted to medium trees) 128 YARDS: 11,250 BLDG GFA PROPOSED YARDS: 21,600 BLDG GFA PROPOSED (10 pts per 1,000 SF of GFA) REQUIRED: 113 Pts. (10 pts per 1,000 SF of GFA) REQUIRED: 216 Pts. yr° PROPOSED: 113 Pts. PROPOSED: 216 Pts. (Landscape placement away from other (Landscape placement away from other required landscaping. Intent is to provide required landscaping. Intent is to provide s� s .. Ls.O -S' Sao ..0' 36.0 shade, and screen min. 6' for detached shade, and screen min. 6' for detached exterior appurtenances) exterior appurtenances) BUFFER: NOT REQUIRED BUFFER: NOT REQUIRED ., 2 -STORY ) ; MIXED-USE - Per e 460 LF 4 P 90; ryP TO W NHOMES 13�w UNITS) P,r,,,I, r'. 200 �\\ TOWNHO ES(3 UNITS) Perimeter'. 200 LF / /O 10'SETBACK EXISTING UTILITY EASEMENT ALONG MARION STREET / FRO PLACE. EI GUY (8) TREES PR SO OSED N / / RIGHT -OF WA YASAPARTNERSHIP WITH CITY TO\ TOWNHOMES(3 UNITS) / C NTR IBUTETOSTREET FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS Perimeter'. 20OLF MARIpI BUILDING SUMMARY Rowhomes Gross SF: 11,250* 2 -story Mixed-use Gross SF: 21,600* *See Pro Forma, Project Data for additional information on dwelling units and uses. SITE I SUMMARY Zoning: UMU-PD Lot Area: 61,500 SF, 1.41 AC Pervious SF: 20,380 SF (33%) Permeable parking: 5,060 SF Greenspace: 15,320 SF Impervious SF: 41,120 SF (67%) Parking/drives: 32,765 SF Walks: 2,730 SF Buildings: 5,625 SF SITE H SUMMARY Zoning: UMU-PD Lot Area: 77,700 SF, 1.78 AC Pervious SF: 15,550 SF (20%) Greenspace: 15,550 SF Impervious SF: 62,150 SF (80%) Parking/drives: 47,070 SF Walks: 3,990 SF Buildings: 9,000 SF PARKING SUMMARY SITES I & H 211 standard off-street 219 TOTAL SPACES TBD BIKE SPACES WILL BE PROVIDED IN STRATEGIC LOCATIONS BASE ON THE REQUIRED BIKE PARKING COUNT OF 5%OF THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF VEHICULAR STALLS. LANDSCAPE NOTES • All plant material will be native plantsor cultivars of native plants to Wisconsin. • Ground mechanical units, utilities, and other exterior appurtenances will be screened from the public right-of-way. LEGEND SHADE TREE TALL DECIDUOUS (55 Pts.) (33 Pts.) O MEDIUM DECIDUOUS (16.5 Pts.) 0 TALL EVERGREEN TREE (44 Pts.) 5HR0&PERENNIALS ,IJ' (1.1-5.5 Pts.) /\ ®\\\ HOPE ® V Me Oz JW OE moil L_n H Z O LL W 0 �o LAYOUT PLAN SITES I & H L1.01 yo E - 0 0 0 0 `a o / / 4 / / a o Z�e L Oz O J W 3R Qf Mae g WL o CC WS Gp O �w E O7) 2~ U (n W r~ z U ^^ ll� Yl Q Page 16 C, O J J WQ �J U OON mQ w° Zz Q + a F � zLL W w- y N Q f w ii LL, - d' LL� Q O Za OLLI D V ° LL 3 Q o ~ U Y Zii ZN uj C OU LU C7 20 Q QO 27 CO QN Q U O. N 0. Z�e L Oz O J W 3R Qf Mae g WL o CC WS Gp O �w E O7) 2~ U (n W r~ z U ^^ ll� Yl Q Page 16 MARION ROAD/ JACKSON STREET PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION - Public courtyard space links rlverfront to current urban pedestrian pathways Pedestrian path proposed to link to the existing adjacent parking across the street ACTIVATED STREET SPACE - Ground floor uses will activate the Public realm and shape the walkablllty of the district - Patio spill out spaces from restaurants will provide opportunity for two public rlverfront experiences In the city RIVER VIEWS - All residential units will have access to a view of the water - Walk up residential units will shape and activate the rlverfront trail PROJECT NUMBERS Market 8,198 GSF Office 8,188 GSF Commercial 12,433 GSF RESIDENTIAL QUANTITIES Assumed equal mix Micro 400 sgft - 20% (+/ 40 units) Studio 500 sgft 20% (+/ 40 units) 1 Bed 650 sgft - 20% (+/ 40 units) 1 Bed 700 sgft - 20% (+/- 40 units) 2 Bed 900 sgft - 20% (+/- 40 units) 9 Walk -Up Units (Building 2) 8 Town Homes 217 Total Units ❑ RESIDENTIAL ❑ OFFICE 98 Units Co -working 1:1RETAIL Micro Retail + Fast Casual Food r' 7 BUILDING 3 7,640 GSF �l 8 Rowhomes 2 Story i BUILDIN 2 I 'I (70,125 GSF Residnjj�l� 20% Circulation) /6; 66 Unit 89 Units + 9 Walkups (7,3pl 98 Units 6,288 GSF Commercial (2 Sto BUIL 1 1,226 GSF Micro Retail (2) 1 5 GSF 2,035 GSF Roof Deck 7,897 GSF Residential - 20 % Circulation) / 630 Unit 111 Units 3,693 GSF Restaurant 1,226 GSF Micro Retail (2) 8,188 GSF Office (2 Story) 8,198 GSF Market 0NI-1SH0T ® MERGE ARCHITECTURE°peAHDEVEOPM a°°P N J DBOLTON & MENK Real People. Real Solutions. �� pEOESTR�gN 2018 42 OSHKOSH 2019.04.01 SITE PLAN PROJECT NUMBERS: 217 RESIDENTIAL UNITS -SITE J 9 TOWN HOME UNITS SITE 1 14 RESIDENTIAL UNITS -SITE H 1.15 PER DWELLING X 240 TOTAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS 276 STALLS REQUIRED 28,819 GSF COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/MARKET SITE J + 10,160 GSF COMMERCIAL SITE H / 300 SQFT = 130 STALLS REQUIRED 62 RESIDENTIAL PARKING STALLS 91 RESIDENTIAL PARKING STALLS 128 RESIDENTIAL PARKING STALLLS TOTAL PARKING STALLS = 281 PROVIDED REQUIRED VS PROVIDED 450 400 350 a J F300 a Q Z 250 Y a 200 150 100 50 281 PARKING STALLS REQUIRED PROVIDED CH.. 30 Zon: ng Ord n ante Arc c e V -]o nt Off S to Park ng Fac t - m 4O ARKING STALLS o m AVAILABLE: 0 0 0 62 ON SITE (SITE J) `�. a00000l � o o 2018 42 OSHKOSH \ TOWN HOMES \ (5,625 GSF RESIDENTIAL X 2 STORY - 20% CIRCULATION) / 1000 = 9 UNITS / / 91 PARKING AVAILABLE STALLS (SITE 1) _,,,��lillllll� 128 AVAILABLE PARKING STALLS (SITE H) � 111111 � IIIIIIIIIIII� 111111 � II�,� d 111111 2 STORY MIXED USE 21,600 GSF (10,800 GSF RESIDENTIAL - 20% CIRCULATION) / 630 = 14 UNITS 10,800 GSF COMMERCIAL <::�> / X,--� OREGON STREET BRIDGE �1 MFof I II I I I I { ONIISHOT OMERGE BOLTON ARCHITECTURE°aa^...-1 PM Ra�P &MENIC Real People. Real Solutions. N lfl 2018 42 OSHKOSH 2019.04.01 N% fir■ _ _ �y loll mail 2 L L rME, FI--- L L r.. 1" GDP 90 RIVERWAY LLC ANNEX 71 LLC MERGE 90 RIVERWAY DR 409 MASSACHUSETTS AVE 300 PC: 05-07-19 OSHKOSH WI 54901 INDIANAPOLIS IN 46204 ANTHEM LUXURY LIVING LLC 5160 EXPO DR MANITOWOC WI 54220 ST PETERS CONG 449 HIGH AVE OSHKOSH WI 54901 JOY HANNEMANN 604 CLAY ST CEDAR FALLS IA 50613 AURORA MEDICAL GROUP INC PO BOX 341880 MILWAUKEE WI 53234 CITY OF OSHKOSH PO BOX 1130 OSHKOSH WI 54903 THE RIVERS PHASE II OSHKOSH LLC DAN DRENDAL 230 OHIO ST 200 305 E COURT AVE OSHKOSH WI 54902 DES MOINES IA 50309 Page 22 SUBJECT SITE 0 1 . , ��:�1 __ -14 L.0. FoM7r�H,h" SUBJECT SITE n NEI Q City of Oshkosh maps and data are intended to be used for general identification purposes only, and the City of Oshkosh assumes no liability for the accuracy of the information. Those using the information are responsible for verifying accuracy. For full disclaimer please go to www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us/GlSdisclaimer N 1 in=0.03 mi 1in=140 ft Printing Date: 4/2/2019 Prepared by: City of Oshkosh, WI AW Oshkosh