Plan Commission - public_hearing

Yeah, he was on the board, didn't he? Ready? Ready. All right. Since it's black, let's call this joint public hearing to order. I'll start out with the purpose of this public hearing will be to receive public input on the following related amendments to the Chapter 13 construction site erosion and sediment control, post-construction stormwater management, and elicit Stormwater discharge ordinance as follows. The proposed amendments result in modifications to the ordinance text, which addresses section 13.21, basement wetness and flooding prevention standards. One, to avoid property and other damages from groundwater, all buildings for human occupation are required to comply with the basement wetness and flooding prevention standards. published by the Waukesha County Land Resources Division and included as Appendix D. So A, generally basement floors should be built at least 12 inches above the highest groundwater table elevation as documented in site-specific soil evaluations. So B, on slope sites, basements may be partially below the groundwater table on the upside of the property if an engineered drainage system can be designed to daylight the groundwater. The Village Board Planning Commission may take action on the amendments to the Chapter 13 construction site erosion and sediment control, post-construction stormwater management, and elicit stormwater discharge ordinance immediately following the public hearing or at a future meeting date. Roll call. Greg? Here.

Kelly's absent. Jamie? Yes, sir. Derek? Here. Tom? Here. Myself, Ben, and Olivia's here.

Joshua? Here. Corey? Here. Claire? Katie? Here. And myself?

Here. Very good. Moving on to item two of those planners' update. No update. That's nice of you.

For public hearing, do you have anything you want to add? Yeah, we can certainly, I think we'll add some.

I'm just going to, I sent a memo to Katie. It's all part of your packet. Circa 2005, the county adopted the basement wetness standards that you mentioned previously. Your building inspector has been enforcing those for a number of years now. Since we, Ben and I, have started with the village again at Cedar Corp, It's something we review on a regular basis. For example, I think we got one for Strickler's home today. We felt it was important to get it in the code, and it seemed to make sense because the county puts it within their post-construction stormwater management to include it in Chapter 13, which is construction site erosion control and post-construction stormwater management. So it makes all the sense in the world, and all we're doing is codifying something your building inspector's been enforcing for the last years. That's the abbreviated version.

Mostly we're just kind of just cleaning up some stuff that we've already been following with Waukesha County. In regards to this, we're just getting it onto our folks.

That is correct. Yeah, so that's the whole, the term is always a form A test or form A soil test. So it's an additional soil investigation that needs to occur in order to determine suitable or allowable depth for a basement. So you can only go as deep as the one for the separation. And so this requires a soil evaluation, which is literally, that's what it is. It's a form A, it was the reason they called it that is because of the first form they created. So they called it a form A and it's really just a synthesis of the soil report that Fairwell would- Yeah, it is basically the same thing.

The difference between a standard septic test and the Form A is the depth you need to go. On Form A, you have to go at least eight feet.

And that's because that's a typical basement depth. So septic, they're going to hit a limiting factor and say it's a mound or it's a conventional or it fails. But oftentimes, there's a band of soil that would prevent in-ground septic. But if you dig through that and if you envision a foundation going through that ribbon of poorly drained soils, you'll often hit underlying sand and gravel. And so the Form A allows folks to determine the true soil profile, and it's just looking at modeling in the soil for where there's interaction with groundwater. And this mostly affects residential and then businesses that may have a basement.

Yes.

Anything going into the ground, right. So a typical commercial is 500-grade. This is going to be an irrelevant... The other regulation that it puts in place is it creates requirements to maintain certain vertical and horizontal separation from internally drained areas, so kettles and areas that have been known to, the soil conditions might not be terrible, but because there's no outlet for water to go, there had been a lot of problems in, I think, like in the old, around, if you think about when these standards were adopted at Waukesha County, it was in 05, so think about what was occurring around that line of development in Muskego, New Berlin, a lot of lower-lying areas with a larger sort of kettle-like internal drainage areas of an entire neighborhood, 12 foot basements, and just running into issues all the time with sump pumps running constantly, areas of internal drainage. And so this just establishes setback standards. It allows the village some teeth to say, hey, we need to look at this grading plan you made to elevate the home, or address some other things with neighbors that share this kettle because you may be impacting them too by filling in your house side. It gives the engineer a little more opportunity to evaluate the development.

What's the subdivision in Maquanago? I think that was the impetus for this whole, the one that they had on the floor.

Yeah, I'm not going to come up with a name, but I think you are correct. It was over off the section road, I think. I believe that's correct. And we can... We'd be happy to provide, Waukesha County Land Refers Division has a ton of more information on the value of this stuff if you get asked questions. There's PowerPoints and a lot of those folks were having to fill in their, they were doing 12 foot basements for basketball courts and stuff that only money can buy. The reality is there was no sensible regulation to determine it. You know, the builder would dig, right? How'd they do it back in the day? You dig until you see groundwater, you go up a foot or two, and then you put the footing elevation there. And so this kind of helps them determine, even in a dry season, where there's water. My basement's filled, so.

All right, thank you, gentlemen.

Are there any public comments? Second call for public comments. Third and final call for public comments. All right, if there are no public comments, I will entertain a motion to adjourn this public hearing from the Planning Commission. So moved. Second. Motion to second. Any further discussion? All in favor? any other discussion all those in favor aye any opposed motion here

I do have that your plan commission.

I do have that your plan commission meeting starts immediately.

Right, I'm just waiting for you to come back and participate. You too, thanks. On that soil test, is there anything in the watershed audience where they have to do that?

So that could be within 23 minutes of the time.

between a couple of moorings and draw a profile. Point A to point B. There goes our house. There goes our house over on Mulberry.

Discussion and consideration.

We bought the land, we'd already done a per test, and then something went. And then we put everything into the building. And this one, if you guys can back up.

What's that? In many instances, they get enough data to begin with. They just don't report it.

And that's what I'm dealing with on the one that I just received. because somehow during scanning it got all schmucked up.

This is a concern of one of our neighbors. Go ahead. I'm glad we're close enough.

We're going to call the Planning Commission meeting to order. We'll start off with a roll call. Greg? Here. Kelly's absent. Jamie? Here. Myself. And Olivia, Derek, and Will. Yes, sir. Item two, consideration and approval of minutes. A and B, June 18th, 2026, joint public hearing for the land division ordinance amendments, and then the June 18th, 2026 planning meeting. I'll make a motion to dispense with the reading of both meetings. Second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Aye. Opposed?

We'll make a motion to approve the minutes as written.

Which?

Are we doing one at a time?

Yeah. This is the public hearing June 18th. The public hearing June 18th, yeah.

We have a motion for that. Second. Motion to second any further discussion. All in favor?

I'll make a motion to approve the minutes for the joint public hearing as written.

Second. You do those first. This is same day for planning commission meeting. This is planning commission meeting.

Planning commission meeting. Thanks. We have a motion, do we have a second? Second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. on the new business item a review discussion and possible action on amendments to the village of big bend chapter 13 post construction storm water management and elicit storm water discharge ordinance to meet the basement wetness standards of waukesha county i'll make a motion to recommend to the village board approval of the changes second Any further discussion? All in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Item 3B, review discussion and possible action under request by Mark Anderson, applicant for approval of site plan, plan of operation to allow the placement or reshipping containers of fireworks storage on the site located at building Located at building located at West 230 South 8855 Park Street. Tax key BBV 2105970. Applicant Mark Anderson, Catering Specialties Incorporated. The subject property is approximately 3.6 acres in size and is owned at I-1 Industrial District.

So, just kind of formally introduce Olivia Barone, who started this here a couple of months ago to be assisting the village. issuing permits, zoning administration, and planning related items. Just a little technical glitch, and I think we ran into this with our last planning commission that followed a public hearing. The applicants, I think some of them had intended to be here, but may think the meeting started at seven, usual meeting time, so.

Mark is here right now. I thought it was like really, really, really early.

Well, I guess my comment is that Todd Shield, the person that's putting the stuff on my property, I told him 7.

I was just explaining because when we normally meet at 7 and when we have hearings, that is at 6 and then the meetings follow the hearing and we're never sure how long that will take. And he literally stepped in as I was explaining that.

Okay, if you guys and ladies, if you feel that you want to talk and I can work there with it, I'll be more than happy to step in and help you guys move around as well.

You're the applicant here. The other guy is the guy that you're, I mean, you're the property owner. Yes, I am. So I was only suggesting to the commission, we'll continue, but... They're not here. I think they intended to be here, so if there are any questions, we may be able to reach them on the phone or just address it otherwise. I just wanted to point that out. So with that, I'll hand it over to Olivia who drafted these reports.

Okay, so I'll talk through the supplementation. So Mark Anderson operates a catering business on the subject property, and he's requesting to amend his existing site plan and plan of operations. to allow him to lease a portion of the outdoor storage area for placement of a 40 foot shipping container. The shipping container will be used by, like Mark mentioned, Todd Schill with Exciting Events to store fireworks that they will use offsite at their offsite events. The shipping container will be accessed no more than 24 times per year during normal business hours by a number of Exciting Events staff. and no other changes to the site plan or plan of operations are proposed. So I would like to note that there was a prior site plan approval for the catering business in 2013 that had the condition that all outdoor storage areas not related to the catering business be removed. However, staff also noticed that the use of an outdoor storage for a shipping container was approved in 2018, and that container is still on site. The area around the subject property contains industrial, business, and conservancy zoning. The site has adequate open space to accommodate the proposed shipping container and there's significant vegetative screening around the perimeter. The location where the container is proposed has also been cleaned up and there's gravel placed to accommodate. Exhibit B of the attached report has a draft site plan showing the proposed location of the storage container. This request requires planning commission approval only and will not go to the town board. There are applicable standards for approval noted in the staff report and there are also suggested conditions for approval in the staff report. Staff would like to amend those suggested conditions to include a condition stating All prior approval rules for the subject property remain in effect unless specifically modified herein. Also to amend Commission 2 to state that the applicant should update the site plan to show all authorized containers and amend Commission 4 to state that the issuance of any occupancy or use of the buildings or structures shall be subject to compliance with all applicable building and fire inspection requirements.

Just add the word structures in there in addition to buildings. Since it's a shipping container.

I was traveling with Mark. He showed me the area of where they're looking. And it's big enough down there. He's got the acreage down there and the area where he's looking. It's far enough away from everything. It's pretty isolated in the far southwest corner of the property and on the south line. So I'm... Personally, I'm not seeing any problem with what he's requesting. It isn't that they're operating any type of fireworks out of there. It's just for storage. No different for any other storage that we do have on properties at this time.

I don't see a problem except I think we're gonna run through a problem We really went through this thing with that fireworks company about storage containers.

But the big thing, Greg, with that is that this is an industrial zoned district, not a retail B4 district. That's the biggest difference is because it's in an industrial zoned area that allows a lot more flexibility than what the retail B4 and B3 zones too.

I'm with you on that. I'm just saying.

Was it the container or the fireworks guy and the brick-and-mortar issue with fireworks?

Just having storage units up there for, there's fireworks in there.

I believe when we read the ordinances for the storage units that the storage containers, if they're going to be beyond the 30 days, that they need to be treated as an accessory. Right, sure. That they need, not a concrete foundation, but they have to have a foundation that can't be set on the grass and then they have to apply to the requirements for accessor structure on the property and not just...

But I didn't think it was for the industrial zoning. That was the big thing. Was that in the building code?

It was pre-added.

I can look...

I only bring it up because the condition says you gotta comply with whatever other town standards and if there's a condition or if there's not because it's...

It's just a matter of if... If you're going to bring in a temporary for construction or for a residential area, it's 30 days and that can be extended.

And that was mostly for the residential areas for people getting these storage containers.

Correct. The intent was that if you're going to use a shipping container as an accessory building, then it should be treated as an accessory building. And, you know, whatever requirements for an accessory building, if it's going to build a shed the exact same size, that... That container should be treated as such so that you know if there's required screening if it's required, you know You know, so that's not we don't have big shipping company games on a container Yeah, I mean this is this is way back and you're not even gonna see it from the road It's just it's just that if we're gonna allow the shipping container that It would be, you know, I would say one of the conditions is that you get an accessory structure permit, the building inspector, fire inspector, and everybody make sure that that, any requirements for an accessory structure, that that will be built by you. In my concern, it would be because it's firework storage, that you have fire extinguishers, and there's enough clearance from that to any combustibles,

So right now the conditions, issues of occupancy or any use of the buildings or structures shall be subject to compliance with all applicable building and fire inspector requirements as applicable, including issues of required certificates of occupancy. Does that cover it?

Yeah, I just, I guess that would be the thing is that the building inspector requirement would be if the ordinance, I would have to define that, but that they would be required to get a permit from the accessibility department.

And you guys have the authority to say, we don't like how it looks, we want it painted, but if we're here and it's going to be screened and not bother anybody, I mean, that's certainly within your authority to say it should look nice. It is an industrial district, and so I think you want to be...

I understand that sugar containers are dirt cheap versus buying a shed. I understand that. It's just that it's installed and it's not sitting crooked underground. And that's a big property. I mean, it won't be seen. Correct.

I'll record it up because I...

But to your point, to your point, we may just think about the other place with the shipping containers.

But if that's totally a different animal here between, you know, the two different zonings, industrial or business, then that's a good point, I guess.

Are we aware of anything pretty looking? I've got 16, 14, I guess we speak. And so that's what I'm looking at.

Mark, is that your light pole that this container is next to, or is that WeEnergy's? WeEnergy's. I pay for that.

Okay.

Do you pay for it? Do they maintain it? If the light burns out, they'll come and do that for you? It may not hurt us to call to them. Just let them know what's going in there.

Where's shipping container? Is it?

Did you say Todd's coming?

He said he was.

I guess it's not even that important.

I just thought it was important for him to come in case you guys didn't know any questions at all of him coming in and out. In any residential business?

I don't want to talk unless I'm asked to. In any residential business or industrial district, the accessory buildings shall not be located behind the front line of the principal structure unless otherwise specifically approved by the Planning Commission. non-stores related accessory uses may be permitted or reduction offsets or feats.

Yeah, I had an email where it was 16.14g. 16.14g? That's the venue that we talked about with the fireworks thing. 16.14g. Signed in 7th July of 2023. I guess mine will only go to that.

that didn't get published yet, maybe?

Let me stand by a second.

Oh wait, I got another.

Let's see, this is 2014.

So while I'm looking at this, there were some other, I think, questions or discussions about on-site concerns about traffic on and off, 24 to 24 trips. It would be a separate company coming in and going in.

Yeah, it's a separate company.

But no concerns or concerns about? No. Okay. No.

Yeah, no more than three on the industrial island. No more than three, no longer than 53 feet. It has to be on a hard surface ground where you're parking. This one's 40 feet? Yeah, this one meets the requirements of our site. It's going to be your second on site? When you said three? Yeah, this is what I just emailed you, so it's three.

Do you have a maintenance number? 2023-07. I'll sell Fortitude to you. We'll get it. At least we can just scratch it and really learn this. It's just a standalone chain.

Yeah, I don't have that. Or I should say I can't find it.

Residential section. Okay, so 10 feet wide. So let's just go through it here. You can have more than three. They can't be longer than 10 feet wide, 53 feet long, and 14 feet tall. If you stay within those dimensions. A property that's owned or principally used for institutional, commercial, or industrial purposes more than 30 consecutive days, not more than 30 cumulative days, nor more than 30 cumulative days in any calendar year. So it's not... They're really proposing it as a permanent, not a...

Correct, and that's where I thought we had the discussion when we did this, that if they're going to keep it there more than the 30 days, then it has to be treated as an accessory structure, not a type of resource.

Which I don't think is a big deal if we're going to treat it as an accessory structure.

Correct. I guess that's the thing, is the fact that, okay, it's not permitted as an accessory structure. It's taxable.

So just to be clear, are you saying it needs to meet setbacks and height and allowable number of accessory buildings? I just want to be clear, because the building inspector is going to be like, well, what do you want me to do with this thing? What do you mean it needs to meet? The code for what? It's a shipping container. It's for storage. It's not going to be a habitable structure. I just want to be clear on what we're saying so that the applicant knows what standards need to be met when we say it needs to be... Olivia, how far off the property lines is the container of the survey stand here? Let's just check setbacks for I-1. They probably aren't real restricted. Five feet. Five feet? I don't assume that means a five foot. Yeah, I feel like five feet. Do we limit the number of accessory buildings in the I-1? Like I said, as long as it's permanent requirement for accessories.

No, I just want to get to the bottom of what you want, and I appreciate what you're saying. It kind of falls back to kind of what Bill and I were talking about with changing for 16. I haven't even gotten updated.

I appreciate it. You're aware of the ordinance that I forgot about and others weren't aware of. I just want to make sure we work through this so we're doing this correctly. Because it sounds like a pod is a portable... This isn't what we're intending to do. He's permanent in this thing. So I would argue a pod is a different use if you guys have provided for with stipulations that it gets removed.

There was a discussion of somebody's going to be getting a surplus inventory, they're going to bring in some pot, some portable containers for storage while they work through the inventory and it's there 30 days and I think that staff could approve an additional 30 days up to twice, something like that. I don't know if that was a residential, if that was the industrial, but then if they're going to put it on the property and use it as a permanent shed, then it should be treated as such and that's

regulated as such. All right. I bet you were getting it. But if it meets zoning, you believe that was the spirit of it. Correct. OK. And we can confirm it meets the zoning requirements if it was considered an accessory building. All right.

Mark. OK. I have a question based upon what was just said here now. My ultimate plan, I just want to bring this out right now, as long as we're talking about the amount of structures. Next year, my plan is to conceivably take down the front building that's in front of my property. And if that building comes down in the front of my property, I'd like to put up an overhang shed back in the area conceivably where the shipping container is going to be. Now, there could be easily... in a shipping container. I just want to make sure that my master plan that I am going to, if you guys, if you allow me to put the shipping container on right now, is that going to hinder me taking down a building and then putting up another shed at a later date? No.

You're not increasing your square footage, basically.

Okay, perfect. I'd rather ask now because if you grant me it and I put it on there and it's time to do something else, I don't want to shoot myself in the foot. I'll gladly come back when I get ready to do all this stuff. I just want to plan accordingly that I do this properly.

No, you're right. Like Tom says, you're not increasing your square footage. You're actually reducing it or keeping it the same or making it a little bit bigger if you have to, but whatever, you know. whatever you end up coming back with, that building's square footage gets deducted and you're starting over again.

Perfect. I just wanted to make sure. I don't know if you have a problem dealing with your reentered easement with buildings.

Yes. I hope you understand that. I'm going to go into it knowing that up front. So perfect, thank you, sorry. I just wanted to ask to make sure.

That's not a problem, Mark. Not a problem.

And I don't think it really matters to the Planning Commission to ask what's inside of that container as much as it would be to the fire. We're just worried about the container. We're not worried about what's inside. That would be more on the fire inspector or something. I just want to be transparent as well. That's good because you could have just did it and put anything in it. I don't want to do that.

I don't want to do that. To me, that's not right.

I don't think as far as we're concerned, actually.

I mean, it would be the traffic on and off. That would be something you'd be reviewing. And if you're not concerned about 24 trips per year, it seems like the fact that it's fireworks doesn't matter.

There's more traffic coming in and out of this property for a weekend event. You're never going to see the difference.

All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries.

Thank you. Thanks, Mark. Have a good one. Good to see you, Mark.

Thank you. Tell Todd he doesn't have to come.

I'm going to call him right now. Item 3C, review, discussion, and possible action under request by Fabiola Munoz, applicant for approval of a site plan, plan of operation to allow occupancy of a trucking company office and storage use within buildings A, C, and E of the multi-tenant industrial site containing five buildings located at West 224 South 8555, Industrial Drive, Tax Key, BBV, 2068-034001, applicant Fabiola Munoz, KSD Construction. The subject property is approximately two acres in size and is zoned I-1 Industrial District.

Okay, again, the applicant was intending to be here, but there's confusion over the start time. If there are any questions, I can follow up with them afterwards.

Before you start, and I don't know how much you guys have looked at both the reports, is there one you're more or less concerned about? Because we can take them out of order and give the person you're more concerned about more time to get here.

If not, we can just keep trucking here. This is pretty straightforward. We'll move forward. It's an Iowa district industrial park.

Sorry, I'll let Olivia go. I just want to ask the question in case it made more sense to reorder this. Sorry.

Okay. So yeah, property on the moon year list is requesting approval of a site plan and plan of operation for use of buildings on the subject property for operation of like a construction company. They do landscaping, paving, hauling, and snow removal. These are all permitted uses in the I-1 industrial district. The applicant began occupying the property in November 2025, and so they're seeking to basically formalize their site plan with plan commission approval. Use of the site is shared with the existing tenant, K2 Engineering. The Planning Commission reviewed and approved a site plan and plan of operation for that tenant in April of 2001. The site contains five buildings labeled on the site plan attached in the report as buildings A through E. The applicant is requesting approval of the use of buildings A and C, part of building E, and outdoor storage area. So as described in the site plan and stock report, building A is used for truck and equipment storage. Building C is used as a wash bay and for equipment storage. Building E is used as office space and is shared with K2 Engineering. The outdoor area around building A is used for truck and equipment storage. The outdoor area around building B is used for truck and equipment storage. They also have a storage of fuel tanks and trash containers in that area. Screening of outdoor storage areas is provided by the buildings, like a lot of the storage is kind of interior to the lot, and vegetation around the perimeter of the site. No other changes to the site are proposed. Sobchick, yeah, they bought that property. The application states there will be 19 full-time staff members present during the hours of 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. The application should verify if operations will be contained to only those business hours or if there will be some 24-hour services provided since there's no removal and things that might take place outside of that 8 to 5 timeframe. Staff noted in her report that existing parking onsite does not meet the code standard for industrial buildings if you were to apply the code standard as it's written. However, the zoning code does give the plantation authority to grant relief to the parking regulations for expansion of existing uses and changes in existing business and industrial uses.

Libby, are you concerned that there isn't ample parking given the additional, just the minor deviation?

No, I don't have any concern. Okay. Looking at the GIS site there is, Libby. They get a lot of . It's 25 parking spaces in the report.

Yeah, I mean, yeah, there's plenty. For what they're doing there, you're not going to have a rush of, yeah.

Yeah, there's not a lot of like visitors to the site. There is a, I think the front of the property for K2 Engineering, it looks like there's like customer parking there. It's just like a small parking lot. Yeah, there's five, six spots there. This request requires planning commission approval only and will not go to the town board. Applicable standards for approval are noted in the staff report. Suggested conditions for approval are also included and staff would like to amend these suggested conditions to include a condition stating that all prior approvals for the subject property remain in effect unless specifically modified during.

And that's really just to cover case two, because they must have some type of effective plan of op, and this would be proposing to amend their site plan of operation.

No, they've been there for a while. I remember seeing a ton of skid boarders there last year. I think it was fire inspection time or something.

Yeah, they were doing the fire inspection, like occupancy report, showed that they were there. So they were informed that they had to do the site planning for the operations.

And they've been very cooperative since they were informed.

Yeah, they seem like they keep their stuff back. They keep their stuff pretty down-to-earth.

No, the lady who I believe will be coming in has been very responsive. As soon as they found out they needed to get a client commission approval, they were on it.

Yeah, and I visited the site. It must be organized. They do keep that.

Or is there any other, I mean they're not here unfortunately, but any other information that you guys would want to see on a final site plan? Do we know if they do any, would they like salt storage or anything if they're doing snow removal? Any idea now?

I haven't seen them do any salt storage at all. In fact, next door we have that salt bin and they came last year and We rented the building out, so it's really not, but they went to the people that are there, you know, Barry that took over our company, and asked if they could rent our salt storage thing, because she's not using it for nothing but, you know, putting trucks in it. She didn't want to lose the space, so yeah, they don't have a salt thing.

Well, I think we can just make sure it's on there. Yeah, so I think that's...

No, I don't know. There's no such thing.

Pretty straightforward. I'll make a motion to approve the site plan for the operation for whatever his name is.

Yeah.

KSD construction. KSD construction.

for accepting the conditions as written.

Thank you.

All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. D, discussion and possible action on a request by Michael Wanowich, applicant for approval of a site plan plan of operations to allow a small inventory used Automobile dealership in addition to the existing car detailing business located at West 224, South 8424, Industrial Drive, tax key BBV 2068049. Am I in the front or the rear of the building?

They're on the eastern. The applicant has an existing site plan and kind of operations for a car detailing business on Unit 2 of the subject property. And he is requesting to amend the site plan to include small inventory used car sales. This would include the utilization of the eastern part of the parking area for the display of merchandise not to exceed five cars. The business will operate on a by-appointment basis, so there's not expected to be a significant increase in traffic to the site. The applicant is also proposing to add a door sign to Unit 2 of the subject property, which will require approval of a sign permit application not included in this approval. The subject property contains one building that's divided into two units. Unit one is not occupied by the applicant, is not subject to this request. No other changes to the site plan or plan of operations are proposed. This request requires plan commission approval only and will not go to the town board. Applicable standards for approval are noted in the staff report. Suggested commissions for approval are included in the staff report and staff would like to amend These suggested conditions to include a condition stating all prior approvals for the subject property remain in effect unless specifically modified herein.

Is that going to be serviced as well, or is that just going to be detailing in that part?

He already does detailing.

Yeah, that's already being done.

I mean, is it going to also be included with the machine? Auto repair? Yeah, I don't know.

Auto repair, just inspection . The detailing has been transitioned to a mobile business, which we've had a lot of requests for. So the detailing on site is not really done anymore. It's just more storage and equipment, and it's turning into more mobile. So the detailing at the location is just more storage

So all you really ask of course, is to sell five cars at a time?

Yes, living in my space, yes.

Ours is only across from Zip Law. Is that right in there?

So we already have a printer up front selling cars.

They're not asking for any repair business. No, it goes down to parking some cars outside. And occasional customer traffic, signing a contract, writing a contract.

So is there any sort of business for that area? Are we also doing the sign? No. No. No. This is a lot of work for the back. I don't want to help you. No, it's okay.

She said just for the door. Yeah, I would just put a decal for the door.

I thought it would be like a sign-off.

No, I'll sign on it like that.

No, whatever's already there. Right. We'll save it.

I'll make a motion to approve the operation modification with the conditions and add the added conditions.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Hi. Are you Julie? Yeah. Okay. So there's confusion about the meeting start time. So we already approved your site plan and plan of operations. But now that we have somebody here representing the applicant, does anybody have any questions?

Yeah, actually just one since it didn't come up in discussion in regards to your SALT. Where are you getting your SALT from? Are you going to be storing it on site?

Well, no. We store it at our snow sites, like Milwaukee Tools. There's one out in Menominee Falls.

So you won't have any salt on site here? Just probably like bags. No, no. I mean like you... Like salt check. Do you know how to store them? Yeah. It would be like what they do at Targus or something, where they have the blocks to run and they dump the salt in.

Yeah, no.

Okay. We're not worried about bags of salt. Is there going to be a big open mouth of salt? That was the only question I had.

All right, you were approved. Good luck. We'll follow up. The planner will follow up with you guys about just... just a few minor conditions, but you're approved. Sorry about the confusion. No, it's okay. With the time, but all good as well. I'm actually super nervous. Get to go home early, so. Just give Olivia a call tomorrow or next week, and she'll follow up and let you know next time.

And then how does it go with the certificate? Go with her?

Yeah, you'll be working with staff the rest of the way.

Okay, thanks guys. Thanks meeting you in person.

Yeah, nice meeting you too.

Unless folks have topics of interest that you guys want to drop back and I am noting that

Some ordinance cleanup, we'll certainly just scratch up our copy, but I'm not worried about that. I'm worried about the ones that we're not aware of, if they're floating loose.

And the thing is that I think what you'll have to do is kind of what we've been doing with all our other ordinances, because we've been updating that, gradually going through the entire book. Get a current copy of it, last time it was approved, and then get, contact Katie and have her send all the ordinances that were passed related to chapter 16. Since that time. Since that time. I've been going back, even though there's been some updates, but some of our ordinances haven't been updated since the 80s. I've been going back at least to 2005 and saying, what's there from chapter 16? But the zoning code has been updated a couple times. So find out the last approval of the ordinance That's been a little bit more consistent than some of the other ordinances. And have her send you everything that's been approved for chapter 16 to get incorporated. And then that would be your starting point.

Well, at least we can get you guys the binder of the ordinances and then work to get it published into cohesive. Right, right.

So, yeah. I mean, it's been so far it's been a... year and a half, two year project that we're just moving along.

I know she's got a bunch started and tagged and ready to roll.

Yeah, so yeah, get a hold of Katie and then if you guys could work on 16, because there may be some stuff in 16 that needs to be updated or stuff that has come from the state that we have to incorporate again. Can we work on that?

Perfect.

We'll do.

16 zoning, right?

Correct. There's going to be a lot. We redid the whole 16 for what? a year and a half.

I came in at the end of that.

Yeah, and from the last time it was approved to where it is today, there was some stuff, and Tom, you're the poster child bringing it out tonight. There has to be stuff that is not incorporated into there so we can at least update what we have online, update, and have everything updated. And if there's something that needs to be incorporated into there, we can at least do that.

Actually, we'll... We feel pretty good about the map, to be honest with you. I think there's three changes since the published map. One of them, Strickler's overlay.

Oh, I more meant like sort of those years, the prior... I mean, I know what we worked on in the last half a year would be more like the last five years if there's any concern.

All right. All right. No fire inspector report?

No fire inspector report. Everything for the first half is completed. Just a reminder that we are canceled for our fundraiser for this Saturday, just because they're predicting two to three inches of rain. So, yeah, we're not going to be scheduled. Come on. We're not going to be scheduled.

It'll be the mud pool.

The mud pool. Yeah, exactly. Exactly. So... Our next event will be in April of 2027. That'll be our fish fray. Actually, anything from Jason for Billy?

I haven't received nothing from Jason. I'm going to let him know about what's going on with the basement weapons stuff.

Well, we've been enforcing it, so it's not going to be anything new.

Yeah, as long as it got back naturally, right? Our engineers report will.

Well, Jamie said I had to make a report, so I don't know what the heck I'm going to say. I'm going to rant for a minute since I have a soapbox. We need to start keeping records. I'm tired of back-and-napkin sketches on these site plans and plan of operations. Jamie and Greg both know I'm a surveyor by trade. A lot of these properties, including two of them that we reviewed tonight, actually all three of them had recorded surveys. I can go blind reading those things real easy. I just think that once they're on a property, they can be saved. Katie can save them with a key number or with an address or whatever. I just think it's important that you guys know what the heck you're looking at.

Then maybe it's something that you and Katie could work in putting a policy and procedure together for it.

Well, your application does say... a scaled map prepared by a surveyor or engineer. I think it's very clear, but too many times, and I had the same discussion with the town of Dover last night when I was down there. We're approving things on a napkin sketch, and that's how you get in trouble.

I don't agree with what Will's saying. If they're doing site planning, they hire an architect, and you get all the good stuff to look at. But the reoccupancy, they bought the property, and so sometimes they have limited information. And absolutely, they have to provide it to us, but we can certainly do what we can to help them with what's in our files. Because a lot of times, the best information would be the last site plan approval. which has all the last tenants. And usually, it's over the course of time that information kind of gets lost. Well, that's why I got my laptop here.

When we were going through the properties, I brought up the GIS so I could see the sites and whatever else we were looking at.

If you manipulate that a little bit, you can print something that scales off the GIS, which is very good. It's a GIS tool.

the application or is it, and maybe what is the staff's responsibility to tell you, hey, we can't move forward.

Maybe one of the things, too, we do is that we've got a projector here, we've got a screen right behind us.

Well, I'd strongly recommend that, Jamie, for meetings that just, I think you're handicapping folks if they don't have, like, the information. Exactly. I just think if you guys can make that work with reasonable cost, that's, All we need is a laptop. I bet it's hard sometimes for you, if I'm, or Olivia is zipping through a million details about this and that and this and that, and you get maybe that much of an image to go off of, wouldn't you, don't you wish you had the picture? I have trouble following along without an image.

It's because you need glasses. I think we could. I agree. Even if whoever's going to be giving the reports and stuff like that, We've got the remote. We can just plug into your laptop right up to there and broadcast it.

So I think that will help some of it. But to Will's point, the ordinance is going to say you have to submit these things. At the end of the day, it's the applicant's responsibility to submit what we call complete information. Do we always need a plan of survey? No, but sometimes you do. You need accurate site plan information, though.

Do you need it accurate? You need accurate information. You need something more than a hand-drawn sketch that doesn't tell you where everything is.

Commission has to evaluate things, and sometimes it's not as important, but sometimes you've got to be able to count the parking stalls, you know?

The tools now are what you want.

all the problems because of the aerial. It helps see everything for sure.

All I'm saying is it's on them. We can always do a better job of gatekeeping a quality application.

I just think if we can get to our file history and if we can get a handle on our prior site, if we have it back there oh, welcome to the village, I'm glad, that's nice, congratulations on your new commercial building you bought. Here's the site plan that was approved last time. Then it's on them, it's always on them, but at least they have a, you know, why make them recreate it? Yeah. you guys get information on a building with a site with five buildings and outdoor storage here and there and they eventually did a decent job but I think you helped by finding surveys on some of those and so yeah I think staff can certainly staff can like staff can like discuss steps to get quality control that's what we're talking about and just put it more the problem is If an application comes in, and a fee comes in, and we've processed it, and then we've received the application to do what we do with it, because it's going to go to Planning Commission or whatever, we've taken an application. We've processed the fee, and so we now have statutory responsibility to act on a certain amount of time. It's better if we can not take

All right, your turn.

But trust me, trust me, you might have to listen to Will being cranky in the morning because some people are sitting in clear sight plans. Why didn't you sing to Will Cranky in the morning? As long as you know that when he gets to him, he'll really have some fun.

Anything else, Will?

No, I'm done, thank you. All right, thank you.

Any correspondence? I'll make a motion on that. Second. A motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor?