PLAN COMMISSION

January 5, 2006

                                                                                               

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

 

Others present:  Tom Springer, Dennis Kroll, David Trechter, Jim Janke, Gordon Conard and Denny Darnold

 

The meeting was called to order by Chairman Breault at 7:00 p.m.

 

Moved by Koch, seconded by Yoerg to approve the 12/8/05 meeting minutes.

Motion carried.

 

Certified survey map (CSM), three residential lots, south of Gilbert Road and west of White Oak Drive, SW1/4, SW1/4, Town of Hudson, (extraterritorial subdivision review) – David Hallstrom.  Darnold noted the general location and that there is an existing residence on proposed lot 1, thus resulting in two (2) new development parcels.

Much of lot 3 is encumbered by slopes greater than 20%, with the northerly 100+ feet running the width of the lot being less than 20%.  The owner can request a special exception permit from the county for development on slopes greater than 20%.

 

Moved by Bieraugel, seconded by Gilbert to approve the Hallstrom certified survey map and recommend approval to the Common Council.  Motion carried.

 

Final development plans, STS office building, 717 Second Street – STS Properties / Tom Springer.  Darnold discussed changes in the plans since the concept plan review in early December and city staff concerns about the proposed sanitary sewer and water services.  Another issue is the installation of the stormwater sewer main through the Nor-Lake property to Elm Street.  Darnold explained that both utility installation projects may require that the streets are disrupted for construction and may require a detour of traffic on Second Street.  Darnold stated the staff wants to determine the costs of repairing the streets and provision for adequate sureties.  Yoerg asked who would be responsible for the costs of the street repairs and detours as may be deemed necessary.  Darnold noted the developer would be responsible.

 

Breault asked about the height of the building.  Kroll responded that the west side of the building will be 36 feet in height and the east side from the sidewalk elevation, 28 feet in height.  Darnold noted that the maximum height allowed is 45 feet.

 

Breault asked about the width of the driveway.  Darnold noted that it is 16 feet wide for a distance of about 60 feet in the area south of the building and 20 feet wide at the bottom and top of the paved areas.

 

Yoerg asked about the disability parking area as that was a point of concern expressed at the concept review.  Darnold stated the trash receptacle issue was new and that the staff is working with Kroll to revise the plan.  The requirement for disability parking is one space

 

Page 2, Plan Commission

January 5, 2006

 

 

for this particular development.  Kroll noted that the second space would be used for the proposed third floor residence.

 

Yoerg asked if the city was giving an exception to the project for the width of the driveway.  Darnold explained that the street can be used for the fire access lane and that the driveway, because of slope, will not be used to park emergency vehicles.

 

Kroll reviewed the site plan and explained that the storm water management system will be a combination of rain gardens and the traditional storm water system that will discharge to Elm Street in case of overflow.  Breault asked about the status of the stormwater utility easement with Nor-Lake.  Kroll noted that is being worked on.  Darnold stated the easement should be in place prior to review by the Common Council.  Kroll commented that the project will not be able to move ahead without the easement.  The plan commission agreed that the easement should be addressed prior to the Common Council review.

 

Caruso questioned why the plans had not been modified to show a provision for access through the Kroll property.  Caruso stated that he had specifically asked for the access issue to be shown on the final plans.  Kroll commented that an access easement is informally in place with Nor-Lake and that access is planned.  Caruso questioned why an access easement cannot be put into place for the benefit of all parties. 

 

Bieraugel questioned if the city could require Mr. Kroll to provide access for the STS property.  Kroll noted that he and Mr. Springer have an informal agreement to be able to access each other’s property. 

 

Caruso noted he is requesting an easement and asked for some commitment by Kroll and Springer.  Kroll asked if this was a requirement or a request.  Caruso stated request.

 

Darnold commented that the plan commission could ask the city attorney if they could require an access through another property.

 

Moved by Bieraugel, seconded by Koch to recommend approval of the final development plans for the STS Office facility at 717 Second Street with the requirement for provision of an easement over the Nor-Lake property for storm water utility and to include the provision that STS / Springer will provide future access to the west.  Motion carried.

 

The following discussion was held after the motion.  The initial motion was amended to include the westerly access issue.  Koch agreed to the amended motion by Bieraugel.

 

 

Page 3, Plan Commission

January 5, 2006

 

 

Caruso stated he was disappointed that the access has not been provided for as it was discussed at the concept review.  Kroll stated he was not aware of the request.  Kroll stated that the current status is that there is an informal agreement based on the property developing.  Yoerg commented that it is in the best interest of all parties if the access is provided.

 

Caruso noted that he likes the proposal for development of the Kroll property and wants to see both developed and that access from the STS to Kroll property should not be an issue.  Caruso noted that traffic and access on Second Street may become a problem in the future.

 

Motion by Bieraugel, seconded by Koch to amend the initial motion to include a provision for access to the STS / Springer property along the west side of the property.  Motion carried to amend the initial motion. 

 

Kroll noted that the informal agreements between Nor-Lake, Springer and himself will address the traffic issues in case of a traffic blockage on Second Street and construction traffic. 

 

Kroll expressed concern about the requirement of a one-way driveway from Second Street to First Street that would place twice as much traffic onto his property.  Darnold explained that the plan commission is not requiring a one-way driveway.  Breault asked Tom Springer if he was okay with the future access provision.  Springer responded yes.

 

Kroll presented the landscape plans noting use of overstory tree types that exist on surrounding Kroll and Nor-Lake properties.  Kroll noted that the soils are well suited for the proposed white pines.

 

Hudson comprehensive plan resident and business surveys – UW-River Falls / Survey Research Center, David Trechter.  Darnold referred to the draft surveys and explained that there will be one resident survey conducted and three business surveys conducted – one for the downtown commercial area, one for the Hill commercial area and one for the industrial areas.  Darnold explained that the questions were initially selected by himself for submittal to the Survey Research Center (SRC).  The SRC staff made modifications and then met with Mayor Breault and Darnold to discuss and amend the questions in both surveys.  Darnold introduced David Trechter and Jim Janke. 

 

Trechter reviewed the process of how the surveys would be distributed and evaluated and approximate timetable being three months.  Trechter stated the survey would be statistically valid if they received approximately 350 responses of the 1750 proposed to be mailed to the households within Hudson.  Trechter reviewed the follow-up procedure

 

Page 4, Plan Commission

January 5, 2006

 

 

used to contact households if the survey responses were not received in the requested time period.

 

Yoerg asked if a question regarding if the public would like to see an impact fee required of new developments for public school facilities should be added.  Darnold noted that impact fees to pay for costs of public school development are not permitted by statute in Wisconsin.  There was a discussion of if the sample of 1,750 households should be carried out or if all of the households within the city of Hudson should be sent surveys.  Trechter noted that the proposal of services for conducting the survey was based on the sample of 1,750 households.  If all the households were sent surveys, the cost would need to be increased.

 

A question was raised about the schools.  Darnold commented that he would be meeting with the school administration and would review the surveys with them for their comment.

 

Moved by Yoerg, seconded by Caruso to recommend to the Common Council that the city send surveys to all the households listed on the city of Hudson residential water utility billing records and for the Survey Research Center to revise the cost estimate for the public opinion survey to be sent to the residential households.  Motion carried.

 

Other business for discussion purposes only or placement on future agendas.  Darnold noted the next scheduled meeting is set for Thursday, January 26th and that the first meeting in February may need to be rescheduled. 

 

Moved by Yoerg, seconded by Gilbert to adjourn.  Motion carried.  8:03 p.m.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Dennis Darnold, Secretary