CITY OF CEDARBURG. July 7, 2014

Transcription

1 CITY OF CEDARBURG PLN A regular meeting of the Plan Commission of the City of Cedarburg was held on Monday, at Cedarburg City Hall, W63 N645 Washington Avenue, second floor, Council Chambers. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Kip Kinzel. Roll Call: Present - Excused - Also Present - Mayor Kip Kinzel, Mark Burgoyne, Greg Zimmerschied, Heather Cain, Daniel von Bargen Council Member Patricia Thome, Mark Poellot Landmarks Commissioners Judy Jepson and Tomi Faye Forbes; City Planner Jon Censky; Assistant to the City Attorney Tim Schoonenberg; Economic Development Coordinator Mary Sheffield; Administrative Secretary Darla Drumel STATEMENT OF PUBLIC NOTICE Administrative Secretary Drumel confirmed that the agenda for the meeting had been posted and distributed in compliance with the Wisconsin Open Meetings Law. COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS Mayor Kinzel advised the audience that they may address the Plan Commission at this time or during discussion of an agenda item. No comments or suggestions were offered. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion was made by Commissioner Zimmerschied, seconded by Commissioner von Bargen to approve the minutes of June 2, 2014 with the following corrections: 1. Add Assistant to the in front of City Attorney Tim Schoonenberg under Roll Call. 2. Delete the sentence that begins on the bottom of page PLN that reads Commissioner Zimmerschied advised that the materials on the additions need to be an exact match to the existing building. The motion carried with Mayor Kinzel, Vice Chairperson Burgoyne, and Commissioners Zimmerschied, Cain and von Bargen voting in favor, and with Council Member Thome and Commissioner Poellot excused. REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR REMOVAL OF THE 1910 ADDITION, REPLACING IT WITH A NEW ADDITION, AND ARCHITECTURAL

2 PLN RESTORATION OF ORIGINAL BUILDING AT W63 N657 WASHINGTON AVENUE SETTLER S INN/JOAN AND TOM DORSEY Planner Censky explained that Mr. and Mrs. Dorsey are requesting a Certificate of Appropriateness to restore the original historic two-story Settler s Inn to its original look and to replace the 1910 bowling alley addition off the rear of the building with a new single-story addition. As part of this project the seven existing parking stalls along the south side of the building will be removed and four new stalls will be added to the west side of the building. These plans have been thoroughly reviewed by the Landmarks Commission who spent the better part of two meetings reviewing old photos and comparing them to the proposed plans to insure that the restoration will match the original design. Architecturally, the plan is to restore the front (east) façade back to its original look by adding a new store front window north of the doorway, eliminate one of the existing doorways and then shifting the remaining access door to a central location to more closely reflect historic photos. In addition, the second story window system will be restored to match the look of the past. The non-historic siding on all facades will be removed and if the original lap siding underneath is in good shape, it will either be restored or replaced as necessary to match the original. With respect to the single story addition, they have designed it to look different from the original building, as is typically encouraged to protect the integrity of the old historic building. The addition will have a flat roof and an access stairway heading up from the back parking lot. At the Landmarks Commission s encouragement, the architect is looking into potentially relocating the stairs to the northwest corner and therefore those stairs may be moved. A series of small windows with awnings are proposed along the south side and one on the west. While they will be adding a 4-stall parking lot in the rear of the building, this project will result in the removal of seven stalls along the south side. Since this building is located in the B-3 Central Business District, the Code is somewhat flexible in terms of parking requirements. More specifically, Section (h) Building Enlargement, In all districts, except for non-residential uses occupying buildings in the B-3 Central Business District, which building existed at the time of the adoption of this Chapter amendment, there shall be provided at the time any use or building is occupied, erected, enlarged, or increased, off-street parking spaces for all vehicles in accordance with the requirements of this Section. Enlargement of existing buildings which do not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the gross floor area of the existing building shall provide additional off-street parking to accommodate the enlargement area as required herein. Section (b)(3) Adjustments, Use of On-Street Parking of Visitors. Available nearby on-street parking may be counted toward visitor parking needs. This may only be allowed when on-street parking is permitted in a specified location, and then only when such parking spaces are within 250 of the entrance they are intended to serve. Accordingly, the Code does not require parking for the renovation of the historic Settler s Inn building but it does for the proposed addition. Planner Censky calculated

3 PLN that 12 additional parking stalls are required. The applicant is providing 4 parking stalls on-site and staff has verified that there are at least 8 street parking stalls within 250 for the main entrance to this facility. Landmarks Commission Action The owner hopes to remain open during this construction project and therefore they propose to building the addition first and then once that is completed they will focus their attention on renovation of the historic front of the building. However, the Landmarks Commission is worried that funds may run out before they get to the restoration of the historic front. Accordingly, the Commission recommended conditional approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness with the understanding that, before any construction takes place, the architect comes back to the Landmarks Commission with a cost estimate so the Commission has a good understanding how much of the project will ultimately cost and that the entire project will be completed. Commissioner Zimmerschied questioned whether the cost of a project is ever required for approvals. Vice Chairperson Burgoyne also questioned whether funding was under Landmarks purview. Planner Censky explained that the request for the information was basically an agreement between the Landmarks Commission and the petitioners. The Landmarks Commission was worried that unless there was some assurance the entire project will be completed, the City could lose the historic 1910 addition and just gain the single-story addition without any work being done on the more important part of the project. Architect Chuck Western noted that Mr. and Mrs. Dorsey wanted to be open regarding what was realistic for the architectural restoration of the front of the building. Vice Chairperson Burgoyne noted that generally the Plan Commission supports the decisions of the Landmarks Commission but questioned whether their agreement is a conditional issue. Commissioner Zimmerschied was cautious about setting a precedent. Assistant to the City Attorney Schoonenberg pointed out that any major changes to the proposal would have to return to the Landmarks Commission and Plan Commission for approval anyway. Vice Chairperson Burgoyne moved to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness with the conditions that the applicant provide a fire extinguishing system as per Fire Department standards, no grilling would be allowed on the upper level deck, that the applicant to return back to the Landmarks Commission before construction commencement, and with the hope that all of the project will be completed as presented. The motion was seconded by Mayor Kinzel. Continued Discussion: Architect Western reported that it is impossible to save the 1910 addition because of its unstable condition. After investigation, it was discovered that it would also be too costly to reuse the existing exterior brick on the new structure. The rock outcropping in the

4 PLN parking lot prohibits having a basement, so the new addition would need to be a little bit larger to accommodate the new kitchen and storage. He added that Tom and Joan Dorsey have made a strong commitment to work with the City on the best possible course of action. In response to questions from Commissioner Zimmerschied, Architect Western stated that the upper residential use did not require a second egress, but he felt better providing one in case of a fire. The stairs would be orientated to Cleveland Street so that they can be visually monitored. The stairs would also provide access to carry heating, air conditioning, and other mechanicals up to the flat roof of the addition. The railings on the flat roof would screen those mechanicals. The Landmarks Commission would be working with him on the railing system, but Plan Commissioner s suggestions to use a solid color instead of two different colors or laying the rails horizontally would be considered. Landmarks Commissioner Forbes advised that the Landmarks Commission was struggling with the weight of the steps. Commissioner Zimmerschied thought the project has a lot of merit, but would have looked for more detail in the proposal. Additional Vice Chairperson Burgoyne and Mayor Kinzel accepted a friendly amendment to authorize the Landmarks Commission to review and approve the exterior detail such as railings, materials and colors. Any significant changes to the proposal would be submitted both to the Landmarks Commission and the Plan Commission. Continued Discussion: Landmarks Commissioner Forbes confirmed that Architect Western had a very interactive working relationship with the Landmarks Commission on the Penzeys Spices project, which resulted with a very positive impact on the Historic District. Final Action as Amended: The motion carried with Mayor Kinzel, Vice Chairperson Burgoyne, and Commissioners Zimmerschied, Cain and von Bargen voting in favor, and with Council Member Thome and Commissioner Poellot excused. TWO-LOT LAND DIVISION APPROVAL FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT N46 W7355 MOLDENHAUER COURT KAREN AND TOM GANEY Planner Censky advised that Karen and Tom Ganey are requesting concept land division approval to split their 2.07 acre parcel into a 1.45 acre parcel and a 0.62 acre parcel. The division of this parcel was discussed years ago when the Cedar Point Subdivision was processed for approval and while the Ganeys had no desire to split their land at that time, they did not want to give up the future ability to divide. To ensure that possibility, the Plan Commission required access to be provided to the Ganey

5 PLN property and as a result, Moldenhauer Court was constructed to dead-end at the Ganey property line. A lot layout submitted at the time reveals that based on zoning Mr. and Mrs. Ganey could get four separate lots out of this site and with that layout it would have required the property owners to construct a full size cul-de-sac on their property. Since they have now decided to split only one lot from their parent parcel, a full cul-de-sac seems unwarranted. Instead, the future owner will be required to enter this new lot by extending their driveway from the Ganey s driveway where it enters this property from Moldenhauer Court. Tom Ganey first thanked the Commissioners for volunteering their time and expertise. He and his wife, Karen, had both served on a Commission and recognize how much it takes from one s personal life. Mr. Ganey stated that he did not intend to share a driveway. There was room enough at the dead end of Moldenhauer Court for each property to meet their 30-foot street frontage requirement and each would have their separate approach and drive. Commissioners concurred that shared access drives should be avoided whenever possible. A motion was made by Commissioner Zimmerschied, seconded by Vice Chairperson Burgoyne, to approve the proposed two-lot Certified Survey Map provided there is no shared access drive requiring an agreement or covenant, submittal and staff approval of the Certified Survey Map, the applicant working with our Engineering Department to access public utilities, and that impact fees due and payable at the time of building permit acquisition. The motion carried with Mayor Kinzel, Vice Chairperson Burgoyne, and Commissioners Zimmerschied, Cain and von Bargen voting in favor, and with Council Member Thome and Commissioner Poellot excused. REZONING REQUEST FOR PROPERTY ALONG BOBOLINK AVENUE FROM RS-2 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO RS-3 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ROBERT TILLMANN Planner Censky reported that Robert Tillmann is requesting rezoning recommendation from RS-2 Single Family Residential District with a 15,000 square foot minimum lot size requirement to Rs-3 Single Family with a 12,000 square foot minimum lot size for his 3.48 acre parcel located along the west side of Bobolink Avenue. This rezoning will allow the applicant to realize 10 Code-compliant lots with an outlot, where under the current RS-2 zoning, he could only get 8 lots with an outlot. A review of the file indicates that back in 2007 the Common Council undertook to change this property s zoning, and adjacent property owned by the applicant. They

6 PLN asked the Plan Commission to study whether or not the existing Rs-4 Single Family with a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet was appropriate for the area. Upon completing their study, the Plan Commission felt a zoning change was warranted and recommended that the RS-2 district with a minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet be applied. That recommendation was considered by the Common Council and ultimately approved, over the objections of the property owner. This project fronts an existing street that is half in the Village of Grafton and half in Cedarburg and each lot will have access to that street. Sewer and water utilities are located in Bobolink Avenue and are owned and maintained by the Village of Grafton. It is staffs understanding that the applicant has received approval from Grafton to connect to those utilities. The applicant will also to responsible for constructing a Stormwater Management Pond on Outlot 1. Planner Censky noted that the proposed RS-3 District is consistent with the Smart Growth Comprehensive Plan 2025 and therefore no change to that Plan is needed. Accordingly, since this proposal is consistent with the Master Plan and will expand the City s tax base, staff has no objection. Commissioner Zimmerschied advised that he had driven to the property and felt the smaller lot size was visually appropriate. It was noted that the proposed lot sizes would still be slightly larger than the existing lots in Grafton. Commissioner von Bargen moved to recommend rezoning the Tillmann property along the west side of Bobolink Avenue from RS-2 to RS-3. The motion was seconded by Vice Chairperson Burgoyne and carried with Mayor Kinzel, Vice Chairperson Burgoyne, and Commissioners Zimmerschied, Cain and von Bargen voting in favor, and with Council Member Thome and Commissioner Poellot excused. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COMMON COUNCIL REGARDING ANNEXATION, PERMANENT ZONING, AND LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR 5.07 ACRES LOCATED NORTH OF PRAIRIE VIEW SUBDIVISION MINAL AND MATTHEW HAHM Mr. and Mrs. Hahm petitioned to have their acre parcel located north and west of the Prairie View Subdivision annexed into the City so that public sanitary sewer and water service can be provided and that the City s public streets be extended into and through their property. This seems like a logical addition to the City as it is contiguous with our border to the west and to the north. That petition was accepted by the Common Council on June 9, 2014 and referred to this Commission for review and recommendation. Commissioners were reminded that last summer Mr. and Mrs. Hahm came before the Plan Commission for concept review of their proposed 11-lot subdivision. It was felt that this project reflected the existing development pattern in the area and that the proposed street pattern would fit already-platted streets in Towne Realty s Prairie View

7 PLN Subdivision. The proposed plan would create lots ranging between 13,000 square feet to 19,769 square feet in area. These lot sizes are consistent with the lot sizes in this area of the Prairie View Subdivision which are between 16,500 square feet and 19,400 square feet in size. Typically, the annexation ordinance will temporarily place the property in the RS-1 Single-Family Residential District. However, since the applicant s concept plan, which seemed acceptable to this Commission, is based on the RS-3 District, it is recommended that the RS-3 Single-Family Residential Zoning be applied as permanent zoning. In addition, since this property is currently in the Town, the Land Use Plan classifies it as Unsewered Low Density Residential, and therefore that classification will need to be changed to Medium-Low density Residential. A motion was made by Mayor Kinzel, seconded by Vice Chairperson Burgoyne, to recommend annexation and permanent RS-3 Single-Family Residential Zoning for the acre parcel located along the north property line of Prairie View Subdivision. The motion carried with Mayor Kinzel, Vice Chairperson Burgoyne, and Commissioners Zimmerschied, Cain and von Bargen voting in favor, and with Council Member Thome and Commissioner Poellot excused. Mayor Kinzel moved to recommend that the Land Use Plan designation for the Hahm parcel be changed from Unsewered Low Density Residential to Medium-Low Density Residential. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Zimmerschied and carried without a negative vote. CERTIFIED SURVEY MAP APPROVAL FOR READJUSTMENT OF PRIVATE PROPERTY LINES AND A PRIVATE ROAD EASEMENT ON MARGIE LANE STEVEN J. MICHALICA Commissioner Cain recused herself from the discussion in light of the location of her home and her husband s involvement in the matter. Planner Censky explained that over the past couple of years, City staff has been working with Attorney Steven Cain, who represents one of the owners that reside along Margie Lane, to clear up a problem they have regarding this private access road they all share. City files indicate that these properties were originally created along this private shared access roadway as they did not front a public street as is now required by Code. The lot layout, shared driveway easement, maintenance responsibilities and just about everything associated with this private roadway is a mess and now steps are being taken to clear up this problem. On behalf of the homeowners, Attorney Cain hired a surveyor to conduct a title search to establish ownership and also to create a certified survey map to provide a new lot layout that will better define property boundaries and legally show the specific location of the access roadway. In addition, Attorney Cain has also drafted an easement document to define maintenance responsibilities and clarify access rights which will

8 PLN then be recorded with the Certified Survey Map (CSM) in the Ozaukee County Register of Deeds Office. While no new lots are being created, this CSM will adjust property lines of lots within a recorded subdivision plat and therefore Plan Commission approval is required. Planner Censky also noted that there is a strip of property along the property line with Community United Methodist Church that will be included in the recorded CSM if it is resolved before the document is ready to be recorded; otherwise that strip of land will be attached to the adjacent property with the use of a quit claim or warranty deed. A motion was made by Vice Chairperson Burgoyne to approve the Certified Survey Map for Margie Lane, with the inclusion of the strip of property on the north property line if possible. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Zimmerschied. The motion carried with Mayor Kinzel, Vice Chairperson Burgoyne, and Commissioners Zimmerschied and von Bargen voting in favor, Council Member Thome and Commissioner Poellot excused, and Commissioner Cain abstaining. REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION ON RECREATIONAL VEHICLE ORDINANCE Planner Censky noted that City staff was asked to draft an ordinance to regulate the parking of recreational vehicles on residential properties throughout the City of Cedarburg. Over the past few months the City has received a number of complaints regarding large recreational vehicles stored on residential properties in a manner that seemed out of character with the surrounding neighborhood. Accordingly, the intent of the ordinance is to balance the desire of a private property owner to use their property as they wish, with the neighborhood s goal to maintain a nice visual setting. While this ordinance does not prohibit the parking of such vehicles altogether, it restricts the parking of those that exceed 35-feet in length to the summer months when in use and prohibits them during the winter months. During the period between April 15th and October 31st, one can park their unenclosed recreational vehicle, if it is in use and not just being stored, on a driveway or paved storage/parking space. Property owners are limited to no more than one recreational vehicle and such vehicle cannot extend over the public sidewalk or into the road right-of-way. The ordinance will provide some additional flexibility in that if a property owner can effectively screen their recreational vehicle from the street or adjacent properties, the Building Inspector is authorized to approve such storage. Gil Cervelli, W60 N751 Jefferson Avenue, expressed gratitude to the Mayor, former Council Member Chris Reimer, especially Council Member John Czarnecki and the Plan Commission for addressing his concern. He advised that his neighbor had stored a recreational vehicle for two months directly along the lot line in his front yard. Mr. Cervelli and his wife found the vehicle to be aesthetically unpleasing and sought remedy to have it moved. There was nothing in the City Codes to address the situation.

9 PLN Commissioner Zimmerschied felt the parking of recreational vehicles in front yards is an issue and someone must protect citizens from others who do not have the same respect. The draft may not be a 100% solution to the problem but it is better than nothing. Vice Chairperson Burgoyne thanked Mr. Cervelli for pointing out this glaring example. The proposed ordinance is not yet perfect and perhaps could be a little more restrictive, with respect for individual property rights. Mayor Kinzel noted that he is an advocate of property rights, but that this type of issue is difficult to legislate. Commissioners requested that the proposed ordinance be revised to be slightly more restrictive such as including the parking of empty trailers, that the parking should be closer to the resident than the neighboring property line, and any other improvements that might be pertinent. They would review the redraft at the August 2014 Plan Commission meeting. Planner Censky explained that the Plan Commission would make a recommendation to the Common Council, who would hold a public hearing before taking action. The public hearing might be scheduled for September, MAYOR S ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Kinzel did not have any announcements. ADJOURNMENT A motion was made by Mayor Kinzel to adjourn the meeting at 8:20 p.m. The motion was seconded by Vice Chairperson Burgoyne and carried without a negative vote. Darla Drumel, Administrative Secretary