PLAN COMMISSION

October 8, 2009

                                                                                                                                                               

Members present:  Knudson, Burchill, Yoerg, Vance and Casanova

 

Others present:  Michael Darrow, Glen Van Wormer, Jay Griggs, Liz Moline, Cristy Brusoe and Denny Darnold

 

The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Chairman Knudson.

 

A motion was made by Burchill, seconded by Casanova to approve the September 17, 2009 meeting minutes.  Motion carried.

 

Comprehensive Plan Update.  Knudson noted that the turn out at the open house was light.  Mike Darrow, SEH project manager stated that there have been a few comments received either at the open house or general contact through the web page in regard to the land use map and other comments were in regard to implementation strategies.  Darrow commented that updates to the plan will be made following tonight’s meeting and the open house will be scheduled in November.  Issues that the staff has incorporated into the plan include quality of life, preserving the architectural quality of downtown, growth management, transportation and sustainability.  Darnold commented that one issue that was brought forward to him at this open house was the location of school facilities.  Darnold noted that he had visited with a school official since the last plan commission meeting in regard to the school property on CTH UU.

 

Darnold noted that at the last plan commission meeting there was discussion in regard to corridor studies and transportation planning.  Darnold recommended that the city consider conducting in 2010 two studies including a corridor study for Carmichael Road area and an overall transportation study looking in more detail at a variety of transportation issues.  Also to prioritize the other four corridor study areas previously identified by the plan commission (downtown, Hanley Road, Coulee Road / 17th Street, and Crest View Drive) conducting two studies each year in 2011 and 2012.

 

Yoerg asked what would be the area of Carmichael Road included in the corridor study.  Darnold responded from Vine Street to south of the school.  Knudson noted north of Vine Street also should be included.  Yoerg also inquired whether an interstate crossing may be considered due to the congestion at Carmichael Road and Heggen Street /11th Street.  Darnold noted that could be looked at if it is established as a priority.

 

Glen Van Wormer stated that the transportation element that is included in the comprehensive plan update is meant to be a working plan.  He encouraged the plan commission to review the proposed transportation implementation plan and note how they relate to the corridor areas and issues such as a potential interstate crossing.  Van Wormer cautioned the plan commission that although some issues may be viewed as a higher priority, other issues should be addressed when the opportunity arises. He noted that he had prepared for the review and consideration of the plan commission a ranking sheet to assist in the discussion of transportation and corridor issues.

 

 

 

 

Page 2, Plan Commission

October 8, 2009                                                                                                                               

 

 

Van Wormer handed out a rating sheet that listed the following transportation and corridor issues:

                Carmichael Road / I-94 interchange area concepts – alternative concepts to the Exit 2 interchange

                Carmichael Road Corridor (County Building to Dog Track) – land use and transportation issues would be reviewed

                Carmichael Road signal system coordination – simulation study to analyze capacities and turning movements

                Additional connections across I-94 – potential crossings to provide alternative north –south traffic

                Crest View Drive corridor – land use and transportation study which may include crossing alternatives

                Downtown area traffic and parking – parking, street capacity, traffic light sequencing, traffic and pedestrian traffic conflicts to be addressed

                I-94 (WisDOT) – A study was proposed by WisDOT in 2009 from Hudson to eastern St. Croix County, but has grown to include a much larger area.  The city of Hudson should review with WisDOT local issues to determine if they may be addressed in continuing efforts to review / study the I-94 corridor

                Coulee Road and Ward Avenue – Corridor study to include land use and transportation issues, with some emphasis on how Ward Avenue may be more fully utilized

                Hanley Road – Corridor study addressing growth area with opportunity to provide access to STH 35

                Highway 12 / I-94 Interchange and Highway 35 connection – Related to WisDOT study with opportunities to enhance access from STH 35 to US12 intersections

                11th Street / Heggen Street – Review of intersection constraints and street capacities

                Hill / Industrial Park area street system (south of I-94 and west of Carmichael Road) – access issues to Carmichael Road and Crestview Drive

                Residential growth areas – relationship between city and towns and future connections

                Vine Street / County Trunk Highway UU- determine what is the role of Vine Street

 

Van Wormer noted that one issue for Carmichael Road, due to the number of other nearby intersections, is the sequence of traffic lights which could be reviewed through a simulation program including additional turn lanes from the side streets.

 

Van Wormer noted that a stop sign policy should be established or re-reviewed.

 

Yoerg asked how the roadways across I-94 are at capacity.  Van Wormer noted that one of the constraints for Carmichael Road is that there are a number of intersections within a short distance of the interchange and requires access to Carmichael Road.  He noted that level of service is reflective of the traffic volume and the time of delays.  How many times does a vehicle have to stop, Van Wormer asked?

 

Yoerg inquired about the timing of lights.  Van Wormer noted that at Carmichael Road the distance separating the intersections and the two way traffic and traffic coming off the side streets makes it more difficult to provide sequencing which will address all perspectives.  A simulation analysis will allow the city to review a variety of alternatives, Van Wormer noted.  In the downtown a concern is that the

 

Page 3, Plan Commission

October 13, 2009                                                                                                                             

 

 

signals are not coordinated, nor actuated (allows lights to stay on green longer due to the amount of traffic detected), Van Wormer explained.  Knudson noted that on the Hill (Exit 2) the priority is the interstate traffic and that traffic cannot be allowed to back up into the interstate lanes.  Van Wormer noted that the simulation analysis can include the interstate traffic and place a priority on that issue.

 

Yoerg asked about the abandonment of the rest stop / visitor center; does that offer the city any opportunity to make enhancements to the traffic system for Carmichael Road, Crest View Drive and Coulee Road.  Van Wormer answered yes as it could provide room for a touch down area for a bridge or the possibility of split interchange.  Van Wormer noted that it definitely provides more opportunities to the city.

 

Knudson commented that the state will not reopen the rest stop / visitor center and that the parcel is being viewed by WisDOT as excess property.  The city of Hudson has expressed interest in the property and discussions have taken place for the possible purchase of the property by the city.  Knudson further noted that he has had some discussions that potential bridge improvements at Heggen / 11th Street or a second bridge may be eligible for WisDOT funding.

 

Van Wormer noted that the installation of the former off-ramp at Dominion Drive would not likely occur until the city of Hudson exhausted other ways to create capacity or remove congestion from Exit 2.

 

Van Wormer commented that if a visitor center is to be reestablished it may be best to look at it at STH 12 area (Exit 4) and that the city ask that WisDOT review other capacity issues at Exit 2 at the same time.

 

Knudson asked the plan commission members to list their priority corridor or transportation issues.

 

Casanova listed as his priority the Carmichael Road corridor extending south to past Red Brick Road with ghost platting for the undeveloped areas and to gain cooperation from the town of Troy to not allow development in those areas.

 

Burchill noted that the I-94 crossing issue is significant, but should be proposed in the area between Exit 2 and 3 from Stageline Road to the north frontage road, such as an extension of O’Neil Road.  Another priority is the Carmichael Road corridor, Burchill added.

 

Vance expressed that his top priorities would be the Carmichael Road corridor and the Carmichael Road / I-94 Interchange concepts.  Other priorities listed by Vance included the US Highway 12 / STH 35 connection, the Heggen Street /11th Street intersection, Vine Street / CTH UU and Coulee Road and Ward Avenue.  Vance noted that roadways such as CTH UU need to be reviewed and planned for additional capacity as an east –west corridor and that Coulee Road / Ward Avenue will be an important area as the city reviews alternative methods to reduce the congestion at Carmichael Road.  Vance commented that the downtown area is of a lower priority in that it stands alone, whereas the Carmichael Road interchange and corridor traffic affects a much greater area.

 

 

 

Page 4, Plan Commission

October 8, 2009                                                                                                                               

 

 

Yoerg agreed with the comments made previously about Carmichael Road interchange and corridor; however, he cautioned the plan commission not to forget about downtown and some of the existing concerns particularly the conflict with vehicular and pedestrian traffic.  Yoerg encouraged the city to address the traffic issues downtown in the near future to protect the vibrancy of the downtown area.

 

Knudson asked for the plan commission to rank the projects.  Knudson noted that it appeared by the comments expressed by the plan commission that the Carmichael Road corridor is a high priority issue. He also noted that there was support mentioned for the I-94 crossing concepts, Crest View Drive corridor and downtown. 

 

Burchill noted he gave highest priority to Carmichael Road / I-94 interchange area concepts, Carmichael Road corridor and 11th Street / Heggen Street.  Yoerg commented that Hanley Road will be impacted by 11th Street / Heggen Street issues.  Burchill noted that issue was listed fourth in his priorities.

 

Van Wormer reminded the commissioners that each project / issue will have impact on other areas and projects.

 

Knudson reiterated that the following were projects that received a high priority rating:

                Carmichael Road / I-94 Interchange area concepts

                Carmichael Road corridor

                Hanley Road

                11th Street / Heggen Street

 

Vance voiced support for the Coulee Road / Ward Avenue area to be reviewed in light of Ward Avenue being extended to Carmichael Road and what impacts that may have on the land uses in that area.  The Highway 12 / I-94 Interchange and Highway 35 connection was also viewed as a high priority by Vance.  He noted this issue is important to future north – south traffic.  Vine Street / CTH UU also were noted by Vance as a priority issue because it is a significant east – west corridor.

 

Yoerg advocated the downtown issues as a high priority area.  If any projects or remedies to traffic issues can be addressed in a cost efficient manner that they should be considered sooner than later, Yoerg added.  Yoerg concurred with Carmichael Road, Hanley Road and 11th Street / Heggen Street as high priorities.

 

Casanova asked what the city can afford to do within the next three year period.  Casanova noted that the city needs to begin to address the Carmichael Road interchange area concerns in 2010, but not forget that the other projects should also be addressed within a three year period.

 

Yoerg noted that existing businesses need to be protected, particularly those in the downtown.  Casanova commented that the city has opportunities to enhance both pedestrian and vehicular traffic and need to address both.  A comment was made about Woodbury being well planned for vehicular traffic.  Knudson noted that the annexation laws in Wisconsin make it more difficult for the cities to control development near the existing borders and cannot expand on its own, but must gain

 

Page 5, Plan Commission

October 13, 2009                                                                                                                             

 

 

cooperation from the property owners.  Knudson cited the planning of Stageline Road into the town of Hudson as an example of the need to cooperate with the town and neighborhood to provide for roadways with sufficient capacity to address future traffic needs.

 

Knudson asked the plan commission members to choose from the projects that have been listed as high priority noting that the city cannot fund a number of projects in 2010.  Knudson noted that the city may be able to do one study, so we need to select the project with the highest priority.  Yoerg suggested that the plan commission select one project and the others will be placed on reserve to address at a later date as funds become available.

 

Vance asked about the scope of potential projects and if a corridor study and more detailed transportation study may be considered in 2010.  Darnold asked Van Wormer to review the difference between a corridor study and transportation plan.  Van Wormer suggested that the draft transportation plan is of sufficient detail to identify issues, and he suggested that the city should concentrate on addressing the corridor studies by priority.  Also, Van Wormer noted, the Carmichael Road corridor study would not only address the issues of Carmichael Road and the interchange, but also review any issues of how that roadway / interchange system affects other streets and intersections.

 

Knudson commented that the Carmichael Road corridor and the Carmichael Road / I-94 Interchange area concepts should be the top priority and addressed as one project.

 

Casanova stated that he felt the discussions with WisDOT need to continue and to make them a participant in the planning process.  Van Wormer noted that WisDOT may participate in origin and destination (O&D) studies and review of the interstate system to Exit 4 or further east.   Van Wormer commented that the WisDOT staff is very good to work with and the city should solicit their assistance and cooperation.

 

The plan commission selected Hanley Road and 11th Street / Heggen Street as the next priority area for study.

 

Darnold asked if Vine Street could be incorporated into the Carmichael Road area.  It was felt that the entire Vine Street corridor added too much.  Casanova stated that the area of Vine Street south of the County Government Center could be considered as part of Carmichael Road as it does impact the intersection of Vine Street and Carmichael Road.

 

Knudson suggested that downtown and Vine Street / CTH UU be combined as the third priority area.

Vance commented that development of the River City Center and areas to the north will drive when the city should look to further address the downtown issues.  Yoerg reiterated that he feels there are some ways to address the pedestrian and vehicle traffic issues downtown that would not be very expensive and that the city should make that investment in addressing those issues in the very near future rather than putting them off for two years or more.  Examples would be the modification of the signalization to incorporate an actuated system and the incorporation of left turn lanes to allow a better flow of traffic.

It was agreed that downtown and Vine Street / CTH UU be combined as the third priority area.

 

Page 6, Plan Commission

October 8, 2009                                                                                                                               

 

The corridor study areas by priority ranking, as recommended by the plan commission, are:

-          Carmichael Road corridor and Carmichael Road interchange area concepts

-          Hanley Road and 11th Street / Heggen Street

-          Downtown and Vine Street / CTH UU

 

Darrow commented that SEH staff would make the changes in the future land use map.  He invited additional comments from the commission.  The public hearing will be scheduled in November.

 

Darnold reviewed a list of areas in the city where the plan commission will need to address to assure consistency between the future land use map and the zoning code.  Darnold commented many of the properties on the list include city owned properties that will need to be re-zoned to Public District.  Other properties include the Hudson Golf Club, part of the dog track, St. Croix County Government Center, WisDOT Tourist Center, properties along Third Street adjacent to the downtown area, a single parcel in HazelCrest, Mimbach Quarry and part of the St. Croix Business Park.

 

Darnold commented that Jay Griggs is in attendance and may want to comment in regard to the Gagnon properties along Carmichael Road north of the dog track.  Also provided tonight is a copy of the parking study conducted in 2005 by the UW Extension / UW – River Falls Research Center.  Darnold also noted a draft copy of the implementation policies and the draft Parks and Open Space Plan have been provided.

Also a copy of the 10-8-09 draft of the comprehensive plan will be provided next week.

 

Knudson asked about the issue of the golf course.  Darnold noted that the issue is the comprehensive plan has it denoted as recreational commercial, but there is not a complimentary zoning for that designation and he questioned if the city wanted to designate the entire parcel as B-2, General Business District.  Casanova noted that part of the golf course property is restricted by private covenants to be used as open space only.  Another area that needs to be addressed is the Mimbach Quarry as it is currently designated on the future land use map as Park, but will be used for several years in the future for industrial and should be shown as such.  A similar situation is in the St. Croix Business Park which the current zoning is Agriculture Residential and should be amended to Industrial.

 

Knudson summarized the process for establishing the future land uses through the adoption, upon public hearing(s), of the comprehensive plan; then the city will need to modify the zoning of any parcels in the city that is not consistent with the comprehensive plan, but that will be after the comp plan is adopted and will take place in a separate set of public hearing considerations.

 

Casanova noted that the property owners along Carmichael Road and located in the town of Hudson have expressed interest in how the city may designate future land uses for their properties.  It was agreed to meet in two (2) weeks, October 22nd, to discuss this matter and areas within the city where there may be consistency issues.

 

Burchill asked about the golf course property.  Darnold noted that a zoning classification needs to be created to allow recreational commercial.  Darnold questioned if the city wanted to rezone the entire parcel, other than the clubhouse area, to commercial.  Knudson noted that when the city annexed the property that sewer capacity was not set aside for it to be converted to commercial use.

 

Page 7, Plan Commission

October 8, 2009                                                                                                                               

 

 

Yoerg asked about the Mimbach Quarry and if all of the area may be shown as industrial, because of the steep slope on the west side.  Casanova commented that it was his recollection that area would not be developed.  Darnold noted that the zoning for that that area is designated as conservancy.

 

Other business for discussion purposes only.  There was no other business for discussion.

 

A motion was made by Yoerg, seconded by Vance to adjourn.  Motion carried.  8:05 p.m.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Dennis D. Darnold, Secretary