PLAN COMMISSION

February 8, 2007

                                                                                                           

Members present:  Breault, Koch, Yoerg, Mailloux, Gilbert, Caruso and Bieraugel

 

Others present:  Steve Apfelbacher, Brian Reilly, Scot O’Malley, Lee Wyland, Cathy Munkittrick, Betty Caruso, Marc Putman, Renata Coty, Judy Olson, Al Keller, Ed Dulak, John Erickson, Pat Smith, Paul Gavic, Jay Griggs, David Robson, John Mingo, Bob Treise, Dennis Kroll, Dennis Darnold and others.

 

The meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m.

 

The meeting minutes of 2-1-07 were not ready for consideration.

 

Certified survey map (CSM), 2.18 acre commercial lot, east of Carmichael Road and south of Stageline Road – Ban Tara, LLC.  Darnold reviewed the general location and noted that part of this area was placed in on outlot until it could be determined how the property would relate to lot 1 of the Ban Tara commercial plat.  This CSM is comprised of an outlot and lot 1.  Darnold noted that city staff has reviewed the proposed CSM and recommends one minor amendment.  Darnold stated that a water main and hydrant has been installed along the east lot line and placed at the very westerly edge of the easement area and that an additional 10 foot easement is necessary for the improvements to be located within the easement.  Darnold suggested that by providing an additional 10 feet of utility easement west of the existing easement the issue will be addressed. 

 

Motion by Caruso, seconded by Yoerg to approve and recommend approval to the Common Council of the proposed certified survey map with the CSM as proposed by Ban Tara, LLC to be amended to include an additional 10 foot utility easement along the east lot line for a distance of 80 feet south of the right of way of Stageline Road.  Motion carried.  

 

Certified survey map (CSM), creating two zero-lot line lots in a R-2, Two-Family Residential District, 2229 and 2231 Namekagon Street – Richard and Kathy Haydysch.  Darnold noted that this subdivision is similar to others that have occurred in the neighborhood where existing two-family residences are subdivided so that each unit may be individually owned.  The Haydyschs live in one of the two existing units.  The proposed CSM provides a notation that the lots will be subject to cross easements to permit access to repair and maintain private sanitary sewer and water services.  A copy of a party wall agreement also has been forwarded to the Haydysches regarding elements that the city requires addressing cross easements and repair and maintenance considerations.  Darnold recommended that a party wall agreement should be required as part of the CSM approval.

 

 

 

Page 2, Plan Commission

February 8, 2007

                                                                                                           

Motion by Caruso, seconded by Gilbert to approve and recommend approval to the Common Council of the certified survey map proposed by Richard and Kathy Haydysch to create two, zero-lot line lots at 2229 and 2231 Namekagon Street with the condition that the Haydyschs submit a party wall agreement to the city for review by the city attorney and the agreement be recorded at the St. Croix County Register of Deeds.  Motion carried.

 

Continued review of guidelines, standards, regulations and policies and analysis / architectural review of projects in the downtown business area – Community Development Director and Putman Planning and Design:

 

            Tax Increment Financing (TIF) – Steve Apfelbacher and Brian Reilly, Ehlers Associates.  Steve Apfelbacher and Brian Reilly, Ehlers Associates reviewed the tax increment financing law in Wisconsin noting that the three base criteria for establishing a district is redevelopment of blighted areas, industrial use or mixed use.  The increments created by development pay for the designated district expenses which may be public or private uses.  Public uses may include streetscape, parking and utility improvements.  Darnold noted that one use of the funds may be the relocation of power lines underground and to assist property owners to pay for the change in location of the electrical connections.  Apfelbacher noted that incentives to developers, such as grants or loans or aid with site clearance or clean up, should be listed in the TIF plan and notice.  A city may charge administrative fees to cover legal and general administrative costs, which may generally range from 5 to 10% of project costs.  Copies of the information presented by Ehlers are attached.

 

Apfelbacher commented that a community development agency or redevelopment authority may be created to provide the administrative mechanism to overlook the TIF related projects.  

 

Breault asked about changes to the tax district, can areas be added.  Reilly explained that a city may amend the tax increment district boundaries up to four times.

 

Koch expressed concern about the subjective nature of the “but for” test or other considerations. 

 

Apfelbacher noted that a city can require a developer to provide a pro-forma so the city may evaluate the economic feasibility of a project and the ability of a developer to carry through with a proposed project.

 

Gilbert noted that use of funds should be reasonably restricted.  Caruso voiced support of the use of funds to assist property owners and businesses to improve buildings. 

 

 

 

Page 3, Plan Commission

February 8, 2007

                                                                                                           

Breault asked about the concept of “pay as you go.”   Apfelbacher explained this is an alternative to the city issuing bonds to pay for improvements.  In this instance the risk would be shifted to the developer as the developer would take out the loan; and the city, through agreement, would repay part or all of the loan obligation as the increment revenue becomes available.

 

John Mingo asked if all of the area in the tax increment district would need to be under a provision of “pay as you go.”  Apfelbacher replied no.

 

Jay Griggs asked about the provision of residential use in a tax increment district.  Reilly stated a specific density is required.  It was agreed that Apfelbacher would provide additional information regarding the residential requirements / restrictions.

 

Apfelbacher and Reilly noted that because the city is at 12% of the current assessed valuation it may be difficult to create a tax increment district in downtown Hudson in 2008.

 

Breault asked Apfelbacher to provide additional information regarding the guidelines for residential uses in a tax increment district, developer pro-forma, and the potential for creating a district in 2007 or 2008 including terminating the existing district.

 

Development guidelines and zoning code amendments – downtown development.  Darnold reported that the amendments to the development guidelines and zoning code are not ready at this time.  Marc Putman, Putman Planning and Design reviewed the River City Center site and alternatives for development including design / development considerations such as surface parking, streetscaping, massing of building(s), street connections, building height and themes.  Putman reviewed a concept plan that provided a street between two buildings on the River City Center site taking into consideration provision of off-street parking and access to Second Street.  Putman explained that through this concept the efficiency of on-grade parking is lost.

 

Putman noted that in response to a letter forwarded by Bob Triese, property owner on Buckeye Street, he has reviewed how a building may be designed to incorporate collar retail at the ground level to provide a more attractive environment along Buckeye Street.

 

Yoerg asked Putman about the proposal of the roundabout at Second Street and Buckeye Street / Coulee Rd. intersection.  Putman reviewed the safety and efficiency considerations of a roundabout, but noted that is a concept and analysis would need to be completed as this is a context / sensitive design consideration.

 

 

 

 

Page 4, Plan Commission

February 8, 2007

                                                                                                           

Judy Olson noted that due to the proximity of the downtown area that the city will strongly consider limiting development so that it is not detrimental to the river.

 

Darnold noted the next meeting is Thursday, February 22nd, 7:00 p.m.

 

Moved by Yoerg, seconded by Mailloux to adjourn.  Motion carried.  8:55 p.m.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Dennis Darnold, Secretary