Planning Commision - Regular Meeting

That was It is 6 pm. The March 2nd, 2026 session of the City of Oaklair Plan Commission is called to order. If anyone in our audience wants to speak tonight, please complete a public hearing contact form located on the back table and give it to one of our planners at the front table. I ask that everyone turn your cell phones off or to silent mode. I will call the attendance role. Commissioner Brewster

here. Commissioner Davis here. Commissioner Ericson here. Commissioner Hollesman here. Commissioner Lawson here. Commissioner Leonard here, Commissioner Reid here, Commissioner Zoy here,

and Commissioner Helguson, the chair, is here. We do have a quorum with all nine members present. I will read our standard introductory statement for how we conduct business at our meetings. During tonight's meeting, plan commission members will be participating in person to deliberate and take action on the agenda items before us. The plan commission attempts to conduct its public hearings in a relatively informal manner within the constraint that we must deal with the issues before us in an orderly and business-like fashion. We give the applicant an opportunity to speak first and then others are each permitted to speak either for or against the proposal. We we do request that everyone restrict their comments to the issues before us, avoid unnecessary repetition, and be prudent in the use of time. We want to be sure that we have adequate time to deal as carefully with the last items on the agenda as with the first. If you wish to view but not comment at tonight's meeting, it can be viewed through the live event link on the city's homepage under public notices and meetings. This meeting is being recorded at the same location. We will move on to agenda item three, uh the open public comment period. Agenda item three is the open public comment period for those agenda items that do not appear on tonight's agenda as a public hearing. Agenda item five is a public hearing and we will have a comment time as part of that item. Agenda items eight and nine are for discussion among commissioners only. Agenda item four are consent agenda. Agenda item six, expansion of the Mayo Clinic emergency department. and agenda item seven, the Plank Street Hill master park plan are open for public comment at this time. Is there anyone here wishing to give public

comment on agenda items four, six, or seven or any other comments not related to tonight's agenda? Anyone that would like to comment on agenda items 4, 6,7 or any other comments for the commission, please come forward. I see no one. Uh so we will close uh agenda item three and move on to our consent agenda which is agenda item four. Uh we do have nine sub items uh on our consent agenda. They are all described on the agenda. Uh so the public comment period for the consent agenda was offered during uh item three and has now expired. The entirety of the consent agenda will be acted upon by a single vote. Are there any commissioners that have questions, comments, or would like to see any of the nine sub items removed from the consent agenda and placed on the regular agenda? Anyone that would like to see any of those nine sub items moved to the regular agenda? Uh, seeing none, is there a motion to approve the consent agenda? So move.

I'll second that. We have a first uh we have a motion by Commissioner Brewster, a second by Commissioner Reid uh for the uh approval of the consent agenda. I will uh any further discussion on the consent agenda. Seeing none, I will call the vote. Commissioner Brewster, I. Commissioner Davis, I. Commissioner Ericson, I. Commissioner Hollesman. I, Commissioner Lawson, I. Commissioner Leonard, I. Commissioner Reid, I. Commissioner Zoy, I.

And the chair votes I. That consent agenda passes. Uh, nine yes, zero, no. We'll move on to the regular agenda. Uh, item number five, which is a public hearing on reszoning and the land development ordinance. Our presenter is Mr. Noel. Good evening, plan commission and chair. Uh this item is a public hearing related to an amendment to the land development ordinance and then also in title 10 which deals with uh vehicle weights. Uh this this item was prompted by an actual violation. Uh member of the public property owner uh received a violation and contacted some council members. Council members had some questions. uh staff was directed by the city manager to look into the ordinance um and possible um options to consider about the use. So, we'll get into it with the staff report. First of all, title 10 right here on your screen shows uh a definition. Well, first it goes through the purposes of why heavy vehicle parking is regulated um with the most serious sensitivity related to residential areas because these vehicles are large and they have some externalities that can impact residents. So, um the purposes one through four, you see that on your screen and then how it's defined is actually a vehicle that's related to commercial, industrial or a purposes. um that's over 6,000 pounds. So with researching that weight limit um basically it's a little antiquated. Most light duty vehicles as I have in this slide here by the Federal Highway Administration shows that the light duty category goes up to 10,000 pounds. And so that captures your DY trucks, your EV

trucks, some small vans and things like that that um depending on what type of vehicle it is. If you would actually uh choose to uh recommend approval, a simple change could be just adding or amending the 6,000 to 10,000 to be in alignment with that that rating. So, that seems reasonable. After uh staff's research, we worked with the neighborhood services as well that could allow some contractor vans and things like that that are smaller type, the Ford Transit Connect type vans to work with contractors to come and go and um homebased businesses related to just bringing their vehicle back and forth. Then, um, this was in your packet, but I had to learn kind of all the classes of of weights because the vehicle that was in violation was actually a semi-tra. And so, if you look at that, it's a class 8 by the the feds. And typically that whole combination of the the tractor and the trailer is pushing 8,000 lbs at the max. sometime. Usually the actual truck or the the tractor part is around 10,000 to 25,000. So that would still be medium duty uh to heavy duty. Um but obviously they're typically in combination with the trailer. So then you're pushing at maximum weight 80,000 lbs. Um so you can see the different classes and and really where it tips into that medium duty where you're starting to get into more commercial industrial type vehicles. um you know these these could look at like class seven garbage trucks, sewage trucks, tankers and things like that. So uh keep that in mind as we get into the actual use later. And then one one vehicle to pull out because it doesn't meet the definition back here uh because it's not related to commercial or industrial a purposes is

the resident or the RV the recreational vehicles. those are allowed even though that they're over 10,000 pounds to be parked because they're not for commercial purposes. So I call that one out uh which sort of defies the logic of the class one and two. So with that in mind that that is proposed I think staff feel this is reasonable to bring it up more to modern standards. Then um with the council member's questions related to the property owner in violation in a general residential district which is a single family property. Um you know these are really the classic reasons why we we ban these uses. Uh I checked Altuna bans these uses an accessory use to the principal structure of the of the dwelling where residents would live. Um in this case, you know, you you have a litany of different um problems that could occur related to smell, air pollution, noise, vibration with the the larger engines. Um, smells could also be that type. If it's a garbage truck, if it's a sewage truck, tanker truck, um, asphalt truck, any of those things that could if they actually start up operations early, you know, in the morning, you might be getting whiffs of asphalt, things like that. Uh, garbage. Uh, obviously, these vehicles are heavy. they could w wear the streets and uh driveway aprons more, create traffic congestions backing in and out of the actual uh local streets. The turning movements being large and longer, they're harder to screen. Uh again, property owners generally don't want to live next to these type of accessory uses and they can negatively affect um adjacent property owners and the in the actual neighborhood. They could also introduce industrial and commercial activities within that property, storing a product on site in a garage. Um, and also just if there's going to be kind of

do-it-yourself or repairs on the vehicles, large pneumatic tools and things like that that cause um noises. So, you can see that there's a a good list here of reasons why staff would recommend not looking at a conditional use permit option. Uh but we were directed to at least draft something for consideration and I have that here. So we just talked about the 10,000 pound um increase which is in that first uh B1. You can see that underline six struck out and then um an update to now we call it the land development ordinance. So we've got that added instead of the zoning code. And here would be an option. Um we want to get your direction tonight about this if such an accessory use of these heavy vehicles. So again over 10,000 if you agree with that uh for commercial purposes in the non sewer residential district, the general residential district or the neighborhood residential district um would be a conditional use permit. The reason why they're not in the other ones is a lot of them are commercial and industrial. So they'll already be a part of a fleet, things like that. That makes sense. MR and UR higher density type development that you'd have where the the lot's not going to be big enough. Uh in that case, you're gonna have apartment buildings and things like that. A lot of people in that particular in those zones. So, with that in mind, a conditional use permit, it would go before plan commission for your ultimate approval with a public hearing. Neighbors could be notified and such. So staff in neighborhood services and legal department spent quite a bit of time looking at the concerns that I just addressed with that list and I considerations about what you would you would have to make too as part of your review in a conditional use permit. And so again in order to approve a conditional use permit they have to meet the conditions and these would be it right here. So, they need to meet that

ordinance and a that I just talked about. Um, b that the conditional use permits required in those zones for only one vehicle. C that the lot has to be on a busier road like a that's usually built stronger uh defined by the comp comprehensive plan and larger to be able to have adequate room for screening for setback uh to store the vehicle. So, half acre in size. Again, typically you see these things more in rural areas where somebody might have a 5 acre plot and they can store their truck out there, right? So, in an urban area, um we have half acre. Uh so, again, you need a large lot to be able to get the conditional use permit. And that the driveway or the actual um area of where the vehicle will be parked would be set back behind at least at or behind the house and 10 feet away from a side or rear property line to give that opportunity for buffering and screening. and not allowed in the front yard or street side or corner lot of of the property. And then the driveway should be a hard surface. We don't want it on gravel. Um and should also count against the maximum lot coverage. And then these are the last conditions that the parking stall needs to be screened from all property views. Again, this is low density residential uh with dense landscaping screening gate and may include these different types of buffers which are called out in the land development ordinance and an 8 foot tall opaque fence or if you so judge with an enclosed building. So you can see how we've we've you know added quite a bit of of restrictions here to make this even possible. Then the concern about uh product storage is prohibited which bans the use of trailers. Trailers are considered temporary use anyways so they're not allowed but we re reiterate that. And then H

uh this is more legal ease language related back to general nuisance concerns about noise um air pollution and things like that that if it gets out of hand you could conceivably revoke the conditional use permit. And then the last one, uh, typically condition use permits run with the land. In this case, we'd have a sunset when the property would, uh, be sold. Uh, that way it doesn't continue with the land. So, these these are options. Again, staff does not recommend the condition use permit, but we were um uh um asked to look into this more. So, that is what's before you. Any questions of staff? I questions for Mr. Noel. I have a lot of them.

Yes. Uh so first of all, can a resident park a heavy vehicle in their park in their yard without any issues at this point? Their grass yard. Yeah. Say their driveway or any of that stuff. Is there an ordinance against that? Yeah. 6,000 lbs. Okay. So one one question I have on this is length has not been included on this. It's so uh I know being in the heavy and truck industry there's things I mean you have campers there are those those are not part of the

Yeah the length the length is a good question. We did look at that and some cities do um have a length, but with the RVs that kind of threw that out of whack. So, we chose not to actually put a length on it. Uh more just defining by how the federal government does the light duty, which is consistent with that class one and two right there. Okay. So, I know that's pretty vague and that's why I'm one, you know, the trucks that will would have that would have DOT numbers on them and they'd be part of that DOT. So, they would have those if they were over that 6,000 lbs. I'm just looking at this is it's very very vague, but yet very focused. I don't know if that makes sense, but

uh one, I don't think there should be a conditional use permit for it on the streets, first of all, but I think some of the wording and heavy vehicle would should include some type of length because you could have a 6,000 pound limousine that's 25 ft long parking on the street as well. So that's why I'm I don't know if there's a length included on that and and I don't know what the length is. Yeah, we've seen 22 feet, but that we thought that was a little short, so we chose not to put a length on it, but that's good feedback. Any further questions for Mr. Noel. Commissioner Ericson.

Um, two items. Cyber trucks can exceed that limit. Um, and I mean they're considered a light duty truck, I guess, but they would exceed that limit at And what about uh say 3/4 ton pickups that have uh well, they'd have six wheels. Um, dualies are often used to pull, you know, fifth wheels or RVs. and people um many people have RVs in travel trailers large enough that they would probably need something like that. Would that be prohibited because they would exceed that limit?

Yeah, that's a great question. And there's so many whatifs on this that I think what we were trying to do with staff is keep it related to what the original ordinance had with the 6,000 here and just bump that up to allow all light duty vehicles to be allowed and then draw the line there. We know in reality some of these vehicles slip by. Um, you we're we're not going to be out there measuring all of these weights and things like that, but generally, I mean, 6,000 pounds been on the books for since 1984, and there's plenty of vehicles that are not following that. So, I think what it does is it it g it opens up a lot more opportunity for vehicles. And once you get into the class 3 though, then you're really pushing into a different category of type of commercial type vehicles. A cyber truck is a that's more for a resident. Um I the doulies are something that um that type of vehicle um basically you you couldn't fit another vehicle and a DY in a two-car garage. They're too wide.

They would never they were you couldn't get two vehicles through the garage door um or even two single garage doors. Um, and so I think there's a higher risk that they'd be parked in the driveway and that sort of thing and wouldn't wouldn't, you know, wouldn't be in a in a garage. Not that, you know, threecar garages. Yeah, you could park a dulie in another vehicle in something like that. Not a problem. But there probably aren't too many threecar garages that you're going to find in in our in that type of residential area in, you know, CLA anyway. And many many of the doulies from my my limited research do cla do are class two. They do fit in under 10,000. There might be some that are over.

There's quite a few that are actually over that. I think quite a few. Yeah. So it's an imperfect science. Um but I understand that. I'm just pointing out maybe some areas where that might be subject to um a problem in the future. I I'm not opposed to Further questions? Commissioner Davis?

Yeah, thank you, Commissioner. Noel. Um, just a couple things. So, I mean, you know, we're talking about heavy vehicle parking, but we're referring to to light duty vehicle reference as far as weight. I mean, I own, you know, I I I own a trucking company here in Oaklair. Uh, our company founded in the city of Oaklair on Huitt Street. Um what started out as one dump truck in a trailer is now 139 units, right? Um we've got guys that take work trucks home that are well above beyond even the 10,000 lb mark and they're just single axle work trucks, you know, doulies, but they're single axle.

Um I think if you're going to look at verbiage for heavy duty vehicles, you should go with the heavy duty rating, which is 16,0001 pounds. And that's when you have a plate change with the DMV. you go to register your vehicle, that magic number, and and Josh can attest because he works in a dealership, that magic number is 16,0001 pounds. That's when you jump those plate classes. Um, and an an empty bobtail tractor is about 165, right? So, I mean, we own several units that would um just really contradict a lot of the information that is found in this illustration here. So, I mean, uh, the the weights uh is something that definitely needs to be discussed. £16,000. Um, as far as a conditional use permit, um, I I mean, we're we're talking about disenfranchising people. We're talking about, you know, let's remind ourselves that this country is built on people starting their own businesses, providing a service to the community that they live and work in and and and meeting the needs of their own family as well as the people they can find to hire them. Not everybody has opportunity to go out and buy a commercial lot to be able to store trucks and equipment and things like that. If this ordinance would have been acted upon back in 1995, um the company that we've had in business for 30 some years wouldn't exist, right? It just wouldn't have worked. Nobody could afford that back then. I I just really want to caution and and and say that we need to discuss this a little more. Um you know, whether or not it's too late or too little, I don't know. But, uh, so to not have a conditional use permit would would be a major hit on a lot of people that we serve. Um, another comment on the screening, you know, we've got, you know, some box trucks and things like that are on the light duty schedule. So, if that was the the schedule that we went with, um, you're still looking Josh 11 11 and 1/2 ft tall on some box trucks, 11 feet tall. So, you're looking at requiring people

putting up an 11 foot tall fence or shrubbery or whatever to to meet that screening requirement. You know, I think uh we need to definitely have some some sensible thought on the rules that are put in place to around that. Um I'm going to I'm going to keep going. Idling. Okay. A big truck, man, you got to fire it up and it's got to idle. Um if one of my guys doesn't idle his truck for at least 15 minutes in the morning, they're off the team. Nowadays with emissions, Josh, correct me if I'm wrong. Um, we don't get to control how long we idle. Okay. Um, Joe Blow comes back at the end of the day and his engine is hot. Um, the computer in his engine dictate dictates that that engine is going to idle itself up to about three grand and get even hotter to burn out the particulates that have built up in the filter. And you can thank the federal government for that, right? So to put an idling restriction um that that's another issue, right? Um, big trucks, uh, and light duty trucks, if they're air powered systems as far as brake and other components, um, they have to idle to dry the air out. They have to idle to warm them up. Um, they have to idle to build 120 pounds of air, which is required to run that vehicle regardless of the weight. If they have those systems, that's what's needed. The vehicle won't move until you hit that mark, right? So, I mean, you know, I I get there's a need to have an ordinance and I get somebody called and um lack of better words, you know, complained um about what was happening with their neighbor and and this kind of caused this conversation to start. But if if we've brought it to the surface, now is the time to look at it with a practical view. Um that's all I'll get off my soap box.

Commissioner Brewster. Thanks. Um, I just uh something that Commissioner Davis said like ties into what I was going to say. Um, I guess you know if if we went by the license plate switch where there's somebody like doing an official weight, uh, it might be easier because you know who drives by and decides what something weighs. You know what I mean? Um, and so to me that seems like like it's like does this does the the person writing the ticket have to prove that it's more than£10,000 or do you know what I'm saying with regards to that? And that just seems like a maybe an unnecessary friction point if we could figure out a way around it.

Um, that was just my that was my question. Any further questions for Mr. Noel? Uh, Commissioner Hollesman. So, kind of a couple observations here. So, this this is a proposal to have a conditional use permit if somebody wants to basically be able to park a truck in a residential. Correct. Over 10,000 pounds. Right now, it's 6,000. So, right. So, so this gives the opportunity for if a concerned neighbor decides to complain about it, it comes up as a conditional use permit,

ends up coming in front of the zoning commission. The person who is proposing to park their truck gets to have their say, the neighbor gets to have their say, and the zoning commission gets to weigh in on the city staff gets to weigh in, which brings into the ability to bring up the discussion about what type of truck and what all the requirements are and what's reasonable and what isn't. So, there's a mechanism in here in a conditional use permit that everybody everything can come out in the open and have an informed decision. Correct. It would draw that out. Correct. Yeah. Commissioner Davis,

and I agree that mechanis mechanism is there. However, we still have a baseline, right, of you need to meet these requirements. And I'm just saying if you don't um Johnny Walker down the block has this truck and and and he, you know, realizes that maybe he's not in compliance and he's got a path to get there. Um he looks at those requirements and says, "Well, there's no way I can do a 12-oot screen." Well, you know, I there's no way I can meet that idling requirement. What I'm saying is, uh, we need to be careful in how we set this baseline. So, yeah, I mean, hey, if we have a platform where we can have these conversations and as a commission come to an agreement on on what that would look like or unless our recommendation anyways, that'd be great. But I I I don't think we need to start with such heavy language is is my point.

Any other comments or questions for Mr. Noel? Commissioner Brewster. Um, yes. So, I guess actually this is more of a comment for discussion. So, I'll Okay. Uh, Commissioner Hollesman, did you still have a question? No. Okay. Microphone. Anyone else? Any questions for Mr. Noel? Okay. Thank you, Mr. Noel. Thanks. Uh, there is no applicant here tonight. So, at this point, uh, I would entertain a motion on this item. So, move Commissioner Brewster. Uh, and your motion is

to just bring this to the floor so we can discuss it. Okay. Point of order. Is this public hearing? It uh though this uh this is a hearing. It is a hearing. Yeah, it's a hearing. I was simply asking you to clarify that you're you're motioning to approve the staff's recommendation. No, I'm I'm I'm moving it uh into the discussion from introduction. Okay. Into discussion phase. From introduction phase. Okay. Uh I'm not sure how we make a second on that.

Hold the hearing first and then after the hearing. Okay. Okay. Okay. So, we do need a second. So, okay. Why don't we we're gonna we're going to hold on this. Uh because it is a hearing. I need to ask for public comment. Sure. Sorry, that was my mistake. So, this item is a public hearing. Uh is there anyone here wishing to give public comment on agenda item number five, the heavy vehicle use? Anyone looking for public comment here? Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing portion. And now I would entertain a motion. Motion by Commissioner Brewster.

I'll second. Second by Commissioner Ericson. Any discussion on the motion? Yep. Yep. Commissioner Brewster.

Yeah. So, um, as cognizant as I am about, um, you know, quality of life in in neighborhoods, um, I think there's also a place for neighborhoods to, um, have some say to decide that on their own, um, to to a degree. And you know, if if we have the um conditional use, you know, the the neighbors get to come in and and you know, talk about whether or not this this bothers them. I'm I'm quite familiar with the the situation that that led to this. And it wasn't even a neighbor that complained. Um as as far as the the person knows, was like a former disgruntled employee. Um, and so I guess like um I guess the the thing is is like you know there are things that bother me that don't bother other people. Um, if you're in a neighborhood where you know a lot of people have heavy trucks, I'm assuming it's probably not something that's going to bother the neighbors either. Um, I don't really know how to how to balance this necessarily, but I know if if somebody wanted to put in a a pickle ball court next to my house, I would be massively opposed to it because the the noise of that just this just grapes on me. But, um,

not not that I'm opposed to it like as a sport, uh, you know, but just the whatever. Anyway, um so I guess I'd like us to figure out some way that we could, you know, have conversations that that sort of like bring a bring a neighborhood together about something like this instead of just dictating what a neighborhood or what what somebody can do or or not do. And and I know that's kind of like the way we do things, but you know, I I've I've never been totally comfortable with it. So, I don't know what uh what what we could do in that in that realm or not, but just something that is on my mind.

Any further discussion on the motion at hand? Commissioner Ericson.

Oh, thank you, Chairman. Um, one of the things that does concern me that isn't necessarily likely to be a problem for the neighbors in a situation like this is the weight of the vehicles on residential streets that aren't really constructed to take that type of weight. And it will prematurely um wear those streets which will require uh more frequent uh reconstruction and that would be at expense at the expense of the of the neighbors that front that street. I mean, there would be an assessment on those properties and uh so you you would potentially at least um get some areas that would be impacted and it would become could potentially become a financial burden on on the property owners that front that street that needs to be reconstructed because of the the traffic by heavier vehicles. Um, that is one thing that does concern me a little bit about this. Um, um, and I don't know a way there. I don't feel there's there's a way in in a conditional use permit to address something like that because uh you know the that that's a a that's a burden that's on both the city and the property owners um that uh wouldn't necessarily be there if if those vehicles weren't. Now, one vehicle traveling up and down the street, say twice a day, let's say once in the morning and once in the evening. Uh maybe a couple more times than that. Um um depending on whether they have to go in and out of the residents at different

times of the day uh might not be a a big one, but if you had two or three on the same street, it could make a difference. Um, so and and I I do think limiting it to uh like collectors or or that sort of thing will could mitigate that. Um uh but then again then you're really you're further restricting the areas that that these vehicles could be kept at because the vast majority of residential areas in this community are not on collectors or or that type of of of street that's built to a heavier standard. So I don't know that's that concerns me a little bit.

Commissioner Reid. Um thank you Chair Helguson. Uh, I would just like to say that I'm in support of increasing the total weight limit, but I'm probably not in support of creating a CUP for this particular thing. Um, although I mean just say I appreciate the staff for putting together all of like the different things that we read over. It's they obviously put a lot of thought into this and I do worry that if we move forward with the CIP proc or CIP the CUP process, we'll be adjudicating what is and is not commercial activity. and you know it it just doesn't seem like it would be really clean for me. So So point of clarification, Mr. Noel, you're you're recommending a cup uh for in some cases.

Yeah. To consider the adverse impacts to neighbors. Okay. So the the motion at hand is to approve what your recommendations are. And our recommendations are to not do a conditional use permit, to not allow the accessory use, and to bump it up to 10,000 square or pounds. Oh, to not do a cup. Bump it up to 10,000 to not to not allow that as a accessory use over 10,000 pounds. Okay. So, Commissioner Reid, does that mean you're supporting the the the recommendation of staff?

Let me try to get this straight. So, I guess what I'm saying is I do not support uh like similar to what staff is saying, I I agree with them. I do not support the CUP. Um Okay. Even though they obviously put through a lot of work to to get it to us, so thank you for that, but no, I don't think that's okay. Uh Commissioner Davis,

um just uh thank you, Chair, Mr. Ericson, thank you for for your comments. Um, just kind of following up on that. Um, as far as is is how does the city address um that wear and tear and and possibly how do they have some controls in there? No different than what the city's about to do on Thursday and that's put road bands on, right? The city, any municipality, county, city, township, village, they have the authority by statute to limit seasonally um or throughout the year uh certain uses on their on their roads. the city could do things by posting six ton weight limits or whatever, right? Um which is which is what they're going to do on Thursday. So, you know, if there were collector streets or there were streets that were identified that haven't been constructed to standard or haven't been upgraded to what our current construction standard is, um those those could be dealt with uh in that manner during, you know, those seasonal times. Um you know, just furthering comment, there's already rules and restriction on storing materials at your property, at your place. Um, like you said, Mr. Ericson, I wouldn't see uh more than coming and going uh in the morning and in the evening. There'd be no purpose to come and go several times throughout the day. Um, you know, there is language in there. If we did do the CUP, there'd be language about not working on your vehicle and there is noise ordinance and this commission has reviewed um several uh applications of people working out of garages and shops and and that conversation's been continuing as far as, you know, limiting noise. And I and I think that's something we've all agreed on in the past. Um I just think uh you know I'm going to reiterate and I'll say it for the last time. Putting a restriction on somebody's mode of of transportation or or uh you know their occupation. I I just man it's disenfranchising. That's that's not doing anything but uh hurting hurting our community.

Any further comments on the motion at hand? Uh Commissioner Brewster. Thank you, Chair. Um, so I guess maybe this is a question for staff. Uh, what would be like if we did bump it up to 16,0001 to so it it's a different license plate? um you know, could you see that being would you would you see that being a major a major issue or is that like obviously way too much weight for residential roads or um you know because I could get a ticket saying like hey your car is you know over 10,000 pounds and you know there's no

Yeah, good good question. We'd have to talk to engineering about that. Um, I don't have an answer for you on that. I thought we we were just going with the light duty because more residents usually have those type vehicles at their house would allow for contractor vans and some things like that. But then you get into those other classes. But I do hear some people talking about 16,000. I think it's just depending on what kind of impacts that's going to mean to the residents that live next to that property owner that may want to do that. Again, these the primary land use in these areas are for residents. Keep that in mind. Any further questions or comments? Commissioner Lawson,

Mr. Noel, as you guys were working on this, sorry, did you check with other cities around uh be at Wasau Point? We didn't look at we Altuna is similar ours right now. Uh so they're they're consistent. Most cities are they very very restrictive for residential neighborhoods. Okay. It's an urban It's an urban area. Any further questions, comments? Commissioner Hollesman, I I think I would like a clarification. We, you know, we have this motion. Um, this is a motion to approve what are we approving the staff recommendation to not do a conditional use permit for this?

Is that correct? Yeah. I mean, it's just I just moved what was proposed into the discussion. So as of right now it is uh increase the weight limit to 10,000 and not have a conditional use. Right. Yeah. The recommendation statement is right there. Part of the staff recommendations not to have a cup. Correct. Yes. Okay. Any other comments? Yes. Commissioner Brewster.

Um I guess um I mean it's it's been this way for for quite a while. Um, if if there was was interest in in digging a little bit more into seeing if we can come up with something that would allow um, you know, uh, allow someone to I I don't even know, but it it seems like maybe with the exception of the one person that that sort of triggered this, it's not exactly super timesensitive. you know, and and maybe it would be worth, you know, tableabling until till next month and maybe some conversations can be had. Um, I'm not that's not a hill I'm going to die on, but if somebody wanted to to uh move to table, I would support that. Uh point of clarification. Can we do we have to take the vote or can we can we make a motion to table?

Yep. You could pass along your recommendation to council. It will go to council at their next meeting for a final decision. So they they could punt it back to the plan commission if they needed more research, but it will go to the city council for their public hearing. It's already been noticed that as such. So Okay. Um so we we can't table it. The council will I don't know. It's going to be at the council. This organ is making a recommendation. So you can recommend to council to table it to pick it up, but it does go forward council for council to make final decision.

Okay. But we have a motion on hand right now, a motion and a second to approve the staff's recommendation. Do we need to take a vote on that? And then after that, can it can anything be done to table to formally table or it's it's it's going to go to council? It's already public notice for city council. So if the motion fails, then you you'd make another motion.

Okay. Okay. So, uh, a yes vote is to support the staff's recommendation, which increases the size to 10,000, uh, and does not allow for a cup. Is that correct interpretation? A no vote means not to support the staff's recommendation. Any questions on how that works? I'm pretty good with Robert's rules and I think we can table it before we take this vote. I'm like 85% sure and I have a little Robert's rules book in my desk. Okay, Mr. Petri,

you are correct. So, yes, it's on the council agenda either way. However, what uh Mr. White was saying is they will take your recommendation, but they could say your recommendation is well, there's two council members here this evening, but more or less. So, they could take that recommendation or they could go their own route, but typically they follow your lead, just so you're aware. But you do have an active motion. You would need uh another motion to amend or postpone the ordinance in front of you this evening before we vote. That's correct. Is that what you're doing? I I would just Okay. Okay.

Yeah. Okay. I would like to move to postpone a vote on this until our April meeting. I'd like to second that motion, please. We have a motion and second to postpone till April. Uh okay. Uh um so but you said it's noticed for a public for to for the council meeting at their next meeting. So that will go to them regardless of what we do.

Yes, this recommendation will go to them regardless. It has to be they we noticed the public hearing. So it has to be heard, but typically the council follows this board's lead. And there's two council members on this board that go to council, just so you're aware. So the motion to postpone supersedes the original motion. in we're going to vote on the postponement first and then you go back to the original motion if well unless it unless the if we don't postpone unless the postponement happens then it's then the item's done. Okay. So we're going to vote on the postponement first. That's correct. If the postponement fails, we'll go back and vote on the original the original motion. That's correct.

Okay. Any clarifications needed, Commissioner Zo?

Yes, kind of. So from this tableing, it's because we feel I'm kind of confused on what we feel as a com commission what why we're tableabling it. So, is it because we want to see more heavy duty trucks on our streets and be able to park on the streets or because we want to have a different clarification of what can park in in our streets is I mean, I'll be honest with you, I don't want to box truck parked next door in my house by my house. And yes, I dabble in commercial truck issues and yeah, I'd love to see everyone have a commercial truck, but to the side of the point is that's what I'm trying to clarify is we're tableling because we want to reward it or if we want to allow conditional use permits for heavy duty vehicles to be parking on our streets. So, I mean, that's just what I'm kind of getting at before I have a vote here. Commissioner Brewster.

Um, my interest in postponing it is just to see if moving up the weight limit to 6,0001 for 16.

Yeah, that's what I mean. Six uh 16,000 if that's a viable solution to the like to having a a very definitive cut off point um instead of you know I can look at something I have no idea how much it weighs. I have no idea how much my car weighs. I'm sure somebody does. Um, but you know, if if uh you know, you're accused of violating this, is it then your responsibility to get your car weighed professionally or your vehicle weighed professionally and uh and you know, find out get a certification and say, "No, actually it isn't." Or is it the city's obligation if they're going to give you a ticket for this to prove that it's over? You know what I'm saying? And I just I just feel like maybe moving it up to that point where it's a totally different license plate and you know the DNR or not the DNR, the DMV like has sort of a definitive break on that might be a better option. I don't I don't know though. Um which is why I would not mind postponing it.

That's a pretty significant difference going from 10 to 16. That's true. Yeah. Commissioner Davis.

Uh my point to postpone, my reasoning for wanting to postpone is maybe give city staff or whomever an opportunity to review some of the ambiguous language um that is spelled out uh you know as far as to answer to Mr. Brewster, you know, how how do we decide what a vehicle weighs? Well, when the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration or Wisconsin DOT inspects you, um, or any, you know, police officer or sheriff's deputy, what have you, they they go by the registration weight of your vehicle, and that's what determines what your vehicle class is. It's not the actual weight. Um, it's the registration weight. And one of the things that this uh ordinance or or their uh u examples lack is is combination gross more vehicle weight, right? So yeah, I mean, hey, we're allowed to have a a 10,000lb truck, but what if I have a trailer that's rated at 14,000 pounds? I got a Minia X on that thing, and now I'm running a gross motor vehicle combination weight, which is language the DOT uses, of 26,0001 pounds. I can do wherever I want. So, we're going to tell somebody with a big truck they can't drive where they want to in town. However, u Johnny Walker down the street with a skidster and a one- ton pickup and a deck over trailer exceeds that weight and he can do whatever he wants. So, I just think that there's a lot of ambiguous language uh that needs to be cleared up and that would be my point of uh postponing this to give people an opportunity to revisit this.

Further discussion? Uh, Commissioner Zo. So, Commissioner Davis, I did have that concern with a combination weight of vehicle, but it does have in here a combination of vehicles designed or property. That's why I kind of page. Yeah, that's on the uh on there it has combination of vehicles. So, my So, a DY with a trailer would be over the I'm sorry is where I was hanging.

Yeah. No trailers. Um so, it's heading there. I think it's right. Yeah. G there. Oh, and in the federal highway, the reason why we chose that is because we'll have out of state licensed heavy vehicle trucks that might come in as well. So, it just goes across the whole state boundaries. So,

any further discussion, Commissioner Zo? Uh, so I know we talked about this a lot and uh I didn't expect we would be, but uh I mean one thing we could just change is license a licensed vehicle or combination vehicle of 10,000 pounds or less as an option. That way it kind of gives that that vehicle's licensed as that way and that way the license plate will show that as as a combination vehicle. So any commercial vehicles are going to usually tell you what their general ve their license vehicle weight is on it side of it. A 26 foot box truck is registered at 125999. So any human any person with a class D license can drive it. So that way you're you're categorizing the light duty vehicles in that category and you're not having to think of what it weighs cuz it's been registered with the DMV as that weight. So uh and there's license plates that show that. So I mean I don't know if we're trying to overthink it. I don't know. I mean, I'm just trying to move this along as in what what the expectations of the city are is to not have heavy duty vehicles parking in our residential streets. So, that's just one thought there. Uh, Commissioner Ericson,

I I think it'd be worth giving staff the opportunity to looking at the alternatives that the DM, you know, that licensed the what what they're licensed for versus what this general uh gross vehicle weight rating category is. Um, that because then that is reflected on the license plate regardless. So it it it it would be easier than for anyone to say, "Okay, that's good. That's not good." Um, and let's let's let staff come up with um recommendations based on that rather than the federal gross vehicle wave rating categories here.

Commissioner Zoid.

Yeah. I'm I'm fine with that if we want a table to have that rewarded as a license registered vehicle because like I said a 26 or 2599 registered vehicle of a box truck doesn't weigh 25,000 lb. It weighs just about 10,000 lb for a box truck. So if that person just owned it to drive to work every day and had a box truck, we could have that almost being in a truck that would be, you know, fall under this rule. So I think if they if the city staff wants to change it to licensed vehicles and go from there, we can look at it when next month, then I'm fine with a tableabling vote. So, a vote to postpone uh will negate the original motion. Uh so, point of clarification, if the postponement is voted down, can there be a friendly amendment tonight? Is that possible to make a friendly amendment to make a modification to the staff recommendations?

Motion on that. Okay. If if the postponement is voted to council, yeah,

from a from a process as this is an ordinance, you probably want to make a motion to amend and specify your amendment. Friendly motion friendly amendments are tend to be very simple adjustments. You're talking about changing points of the order. So you would want to make a formal amendment if if the post whoever wants to make amendment terms and then specify specifically what is any further discussion. I'm going to I'm going to support uh not postponing and then look for somebody possibly to make a friendly a uh amendment tonight. Uh just my opinion. So uh any further discussion otherwise we will vote on the postponement. So a yes vote is to postpone a no vote is not to postpone and we go back to the original motion with a possible friendly amendment to that. I'm going to call the vote. Uh Commissioner Davis

I. Commissioner Ericson. Hi, Commissioner Hollesman. Hi, Commissioner Lawson. Hi, Commissioner Leonard. I, Commissioner Reid, I, Commissioner Zoy, I, Commissioner Helgus, uh, Commissioner Brewster, I,

and the chair votes no. That motion passes 8 to one to postpone. We move on to item number six which is a public discussion uh for a site plan the Mayo Clinic Health System emergency medical uh department expansion.

Good evening uh plan commission chair. Uh tonight you're looking at a site plan for Mayo Clinic. The reason why it's before you this evening, uh this is a plan development overlay. Uh we did reszone a majority of properties in the city, but uh this does have a site plan overlay district that does require this commission to revote all site plans at the campus at Mayo Clinic. The applicants this evening is Wendell Architects and Associates. Um in your report this evening shows the uh emergency services expansion. Currently, they are in the bays of the ambulance services. If anyone's been to the ER recently, unfortunately, they're at max capacity. So, this addition is along Bellinger Street. Um, you can see the existing parking lot is there. They're going to take that out and then put in a 10,000 square footprint building. It's going to be ground floor and then two stories above. And this is potentially to be expanded in the future to even more go more vertical. The zoning of the property is urban commercial now, but as I mentioned, it has a plan development overlay. As you can see, they are going to retain some parking stalls. Most of those are for employees and ambulance parking. As you can see on the site plan uh in your packet this evening, the access is not changing the just expanding out the ER uh uh to the northeast of the existing. In your packet two is the landscape plan along with uh building elevations and this is what it's going to look like. It's going to blend in with the existing campus as they've done over the many years of expansions. In the narrative, it talks about the emergency department being at max capacity and that's why they converted the bays into emergency department. But this would

solve that issue going forward. Um the estimate time frame for the construction is starting this year hopefully in April and then being done by next May of next year. They are net loss of 10 parking stalls as I mentioned. Uh the parking will be limited along the front. The access is remaining the same. Um they do have the landscape plan as noted and the building elevations. The staff has no issues with any uh utilities or engineering and this site plan would be approved after the plan commission uh vote this evening. With that, I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Questions for Mr. Petri. Uh, Commissioner Brewster. Thank you, Chair. Um, it doesn't look like it to me. Um, but can you just confirm that uh traffic along Bellinger wouldn't be impacted during construction? It looks like they have enough uh enough. Yes, I believe that is correct. We did have a meeting with them. I believe the helicopter pad will be interrupted, but the applicant can speak more towards that. Okay. Okay. The commission would like a clarification on that, but I don't think the road will be impacted by the construction. Okay. Any further questions for Mr. Petri? Seeing none. Thank you, Mr. Petri.

Um, is the applicant here? Please come forward.

Uh, please state your name and address and spell your last name. I'm Stephanie Ramsey with Heirs Associates. Um, would you like to add anything to Mr. Petri's presentation? No, that's all. Okay. Any questions for Miss Ramsey? Commissioner Brewster. Thank you, Chair. Um, during during construction, where do you anticipate u the helicopter uh landing when necessary? We'll have to look at that a little bit more. Okay. I I'm here on behalf of Brian Lambert, who's the project manager on this one. Oh, okay. So, I'm just filling in for the night.

All right. Would you be able to confirm that um like traffic on Bellinger wouldn't be impacted by construction? I mean, other than like trucks coming in and out of the construction site. Yeah, we'll make sure it's not impacted significantly. Yes. Thank you. Any further questions for Miss Ramsey? Seeing none. Thank you, Miss Ramsey. Uh again, this item is a public discussion. So the public comment period for this item was offered during item three and is now expired. Uh I would entertain a motion on this item. So moved. We have second.

We have a motion by Commissioner Leonard, a second by Commissioner Brewster for approval. Any further discussion? Commissioner Brewster. Oh, I think he was up first. Go ahead. Go. Oh, go ahead. I

I I don't know if anyone has had any recent um exposure to the ER department, but I did on Wednesday night and and I can assure you, I mean, I was not familiar with it, but there are many exam areas in the emergency department that and there have been for many years apparently that are in the hallways and I was in one of those and it was okay. I I was not the type of case that they needed to put in an in an actual room. Um but I would imagine that over time that is the case. I also have a good friend who's uh a retired emergency room doctor at Mayo and he assured me also that that has been the case for many years at Mayo uh with the with the uh emergency rooms being in the hallway in many cases. Um and and it is not private. You've got a curtain and the curtains don't close exactly. you're in a gown, you know, you're asked to change and all that sort of thing. I was I I am not a very I I am I'm not a particularly modest person, so it doesn't really bo didn't really bother me a whole lot, but um I would I would imagine that there are people that would be bothered by that and and it it it surprised me a little bit and so therefore I will fully support this proposal.

Thank you, Commissioner Brewster. Thank you, Chair. I was also going to say, you know, especially with the, you know, the hospital closures in the area that we've been hit with recently, like this is this is needed and not only would I support it, I would uh thank Mayo for, you know, deciding to in invest in in very needed facilities in in the Oaklair area. So, I plan to vote yes for this. Any further comments on the motion? I will call the the vote. Uh, Commissioner Ericson, I. Commissioner Hollesman, I. Commissioner Lawson, I. Commissioner Leonard, I. Commissioner Reid, I. Commissioner Zoy, I.

Commissioner Brewster, I. And Commissioner Davis, abstain. And the chair votes I. This motion passes. Eight yes, one abstension. Uh, move on to item seven. Another public discussion on the Plank Street Hill Park master plan. Uh Mr. Newkerk.

Good evening, plan commission. Chair Helguson. Thank you. Um this item before you for your consideration is the Plank Hill master plan which has been in development since 2024 formally uh but many many years prior to that uh amongst the East Side Hill Neighborhood Association membership. Um, so this project has been a collaboration with the East Side Hill Neighborhood Association. Um, we've had multiple input sessions with the neighborhood. Um, we've also met with the Waterways and Parks Commission. Um, this plan basically analyzes ongoing use of the area known as Plank Hill and then provides recommendations for improvements based on uh, specific input from the neighborhood. Um the major components highlighted in that plan include improvements to the seven bump sledding hill area. Um a nature preservation area trail and neighborhood connection improvements within the area. Um a little bit of an update to a a city maintenance yard that is within the area of the plan. Um the potential addition of an overlook that would overlook the downtown valley. and then also um a vision of what the Harding Avenue streetscape could look like at the next opportunity for whenever Harding Avenue is addressed. Um there are also budget numbers provided for each of those project ideas as well as a recommended funding cycle for giving us ideas on how to help fund those various project components. Um as I mentioned, we we've taken this to the Waterways and Parks Commission. They voted to recommend adoption of this plan at their February 25th meeting. um with a vote of recommendation to adopt from this body, we will then take the plan to city council at the March 10th meeting for their formal vote of adoption. Um but to go through the specifics of the plan, the process of soliciting community input and to go into more details of the plan, we have Chris Celelesi from Heirs

Associates here and he is going to give you a brief presentation now. So here is Chris. You covered a lot of it.

All right. Is there I can just click to the next one. Right. Thank you all. I'll try to go through this pretty quick. It's pretty straightforward. Um back in 2024, like Patrick said, we started a master planning process. Um actually, let's go through agenda quick. I'm going to try to keep this quick. We'll go through the process. We went through feedback during that process, project goals that we set up during the process, sort of how they were set up. the final plan in graphics and then uh next steps which is really what Patrick covered. Um not sure why those showed up white. Something wrong with the PDF. Hopefully that's not an indication of future things. Just completely blurred out in here. Um the process we went through is the standard process we go through for our park master planning. First step is understand, then it's define, brainstorm, prototype test is after that and then it's implementation. That's the two that are missing. That first step understanding that's where we start to get into the communic community engagement try to also put boots on the ground understand what exists there today try to really come in with an open mind trying to understand and not form any preconceived notions. When we get into define that's where we start to set our goals and principles. Try to define the issues we're seeing and also define the opportunities we're seeing. Brainstorming is where we get to have fun. Put pen to paper. Draw concepts. throw out ideas. Um prototype and test is where we start to throw ideas out there and get feedback from either staff or the community in general. And then implement is where we put the report together and hopefully set the stage for implementation really is what it is. So during that initial understand phase um and throughout the process, we try to gain feedback um from the neighborhood and the community at large and then also waterways and parks um trying to get a diverse understanding of what the community and neighborhood really wanted to see. Um starting in 2024, we met with

the uh neighborhood association and did a workshop to try to understand what are some goals um for the project. Really precedent image studies um really trying to look at you know word smithing what do you guys want to see here as opportunities focus on the positive and not all the negative. After that we met with the neighborhood association again to review those goals that we initially set up try to word smmith those a bit more. Those lay the groundwork for what designers eyes like to to see on a plan. It gives words and and we can start to create a vision that then rem is reminiscent of what the community tried to tell us. Essentially October 17th we went to neighborhood associ association again trying to uh give them some some more tangible ideas to consider before we actually put real pen to paper to look at the plans. And then waterways and parks workshop is where we started get into plans more. And then most recently in 2026, we did a a another workshop with waterways and parks to understand a bit more about um what are some of the things that they would like to see and how can we modify the plan even more. This is some of the feedback boards that uh we got from some of those initial um workshops with the neighborhood association. You can see in the top left people were commenting on the plan where they see problems, where they see opportunities. There's obviously some housed unhoused in there um living in particular situations. There's there's great trail access though and there's conflicts. One of the big things we noticed there's conflicts between um maintenance vehicles um city maintenance vehicles that have to do operations on site and then some impromptu paths where there's conflicts between you know maybe heavy machinery and people wanting to go for a nature walk. So we tried to clean that up in the plan. Um this is some feedback from the most recent workshop. We did a little bit of dot voting on implementation strategy, funding strategy, where would you guys like to

see things moving forward? Big key takeaways um from all of that uh and some of the things that the city or not the city the the the neighborhood wanted to see. Um having nature in the heart of the city is special. They want to focus on passive recreation, not active recreation. So keep it natural, keep trails, keep it minimal, light footprint, meant to be, you know, part of nature or a respit from urban uh difficulty connect to downtown um and Hardy Nav. So if you think of if you look at a plan of plank hill, you can kind of see it looks really nice here, but also there's a bunch of topography that goes down that hillside. everyone living in the east hill which is on the right wanting to get walk downtown that is a big vertical barrier essentially to try to get access downtown via foot or bike so trying to make those connections as best as possible I can't remove a hillside in Oaklair Wisconsin but I can try to make it more accessible is a uh goal of the project height of plank hill is unique and should be improved embraced and the view of the city if anyone's been up there there's a great view of the city um improve access for all keep the sledding Cleanhill improve the lawn. The lawn is like non-existent. Sort of like Boyd Parks lawn when the ice is right out. It's hard as a rock and sand burrs everywhere. Uh make it safe for all people and improve access along Hardy Nav. If you ever walked along Hardy Nav, sidewalks right there. Feels like there's vehicles about clip the side of your face as you're walking right down the edge there. So, uh from those key takeaways, we always try to look at programming. This is an existing program versus um proposed program. Program just means, you know, what's sort of the kit of parts we have existing today and the kit of parts we want to um put into the park later. I'm not going to go through each one of those, but we did start to better

define some of these requirements for specific functional uses like the municipal yard in that area. What does that actually need from a dimensioning standpoint? What materials are stored there? Um what does circulation look like? What type of vehicles are probably going to be driving through there? how long are materials there? Those sort of things. Um, from all of that, we developed a series of five goals. I'm going to read through just the the bold sections. I'm not going to go into each one of those so I don't bore you guys. Um, but I can go in deeper if you guys need them. Protect and enhance the natural character of Plankill. Support everyday neighborhood focused recreation. Improve safety, access, and connections. Implement improvements in a flexible, phased, and fundable way. um build shared ownership through community partnership. Um one of the things that we kept hearing over and over is uh don't do too much. And we tried to replicate that. We made functional improvements, but don't do a bunch of trails everywhere. Don't do asphalt everywhere. Don't change it too much. But every the neighborhood did recognize there were improvements. There were a few improvements that could be benefit to the to the park. So the site plan itself, this is the the final product. Um red bean trail connections. We have different diameters of those trail connections for different levels of trails. There's the primary um trail connection that runs through the spine of the park that is basically existing today for the most part. We're just putting it down on paper to the west side of that where it starts to connect towards downtown. We are calling for another leg that is somewhat informal to be put in place. Do I have a laser pointer on this thing or can you can you go to the left side right here? There's an the trail. This

extension pretty much exists today via, you know, cow path. We're calling for it to be widened because it's a really good trail connection. Gets pedestrians away from the maintenance yard as quickly as possible. And then we're also ask adding for a separation of of the trail and vehicle circulation along this edge which does not exist today. People basically just walk down the maintenance yard drive access. So separating those two uses would be great. And then the other big change is the sledding hill is getting expanded a little bit. So right now the sledding hill exists on the far left side. We're saying add a two to five sledding hill. So you can get separated of uses. The reason we separate 2 to 5 and 5 to 12 is those are standard playground youth designs. Playgrounds are typically designed from 2 to 5 age range and then 5 to 12 age ranges. So the 2 to five will give smaller kids a little bit of separation from the crazy older kids who want to just send it down the hill. Um, in addition to that, improvements along Hardy Nav and then a pedestrian trail connection through Demler Park, which then connects a lot of the the the rest of the neighborhoods. Here, you can get me back to the right scale somehow. I just messed that up. You made that look easy. Here's a We did a few 3D renderings of what an overlook potentially could look like in that area with a projection coming off the hillside. um bringing you out towards um the edge and a view and a vista downtown and then this is a uh cross-section of Hardy Nav. There's quite a varying degree of rightaway to work with in there. Um the recommendation I would have is to work with the topography, to work with the existing there. See, there's missing text in there again. I'm not sure what happened. um to work with the rightway and to get

the separation from vehicles is to bring pedestrians up. So build a bit of a wall which will vary in height as you go down which exists today kind of get pedestrians up out away from vehicles which will then also give you a little bit of width to work with along plank plank hill. Uh next steps are going to be uh city council like Patrick said on you said March 10th right? All right, any questions? Questions from Mr. Celeleski. Uh, Commissioner Brewster, good job on the last name, by the way. I just I just wanted to let you know that in our copy, it does have the writing. Oh, it does. Yeah, it's you like like our

our electronic our electronic copy has it. So, we got it. Awesome. Any further questions for Mr. Celeleski? Commissioner Ericson, the the uh pedestrian way along Harding, um the that crosssection that you had previously looked uh similar to what is oh, it would be the Jefferson Street intersection with Harding Avenue that's built up like that. Would that extend then up the hill a bit more and maybe the the sidewalk moved a little bit towards the uh north? Would that be the idea or just continue with the sidewalk?

That's kind of because you you you you come down Harding Avenue and then it goes up and over and you have that concrete wall. Okay. To be able to get a concrete wall to provide separation um further to the east, you would almost have to move because the sidewalk is right on top of the of the highway of the road there. um you'd almost have to move that to the north a little bit. Is that correct? And would that give extra room for the for the right of way for the road?

So essentially, we were recommending that crosssection that's right at that intersection to extend up. So the you're building a wall the entire length up and eventually that wall dies in where you can then So the separation becomes more vertical than it does horizontal. Yeah. No, it also becomes horizontal because by going up, you think of the hillsides coming like this, right? By going up, you've got more flat area to work with. So, you can create an actual trail width. And we I don't know exactly how far we can move it, but I would recommend moving it even just a couple of feet further away from.

I mean, as a sidewalk goes, you know, if it wasn't right on top of the road, it's it's a little wider than the average sidewalk. It's it's not that it's not but it's right on top of the road. Yeah. But it's one of the main connections downtown from a foot traffic. I don't have anything wrong. Should probably be 10 feet minimum. Yeah, I don't have anything wrong with that. In fact, um in fact, and there's nothing doesn't happen very often, but very occasionally you do see someone on a on a bicycle uh going up generally up the road, not usually down.

And and I I've seen that a few times. I think that's that's and I'm an avid cyclist, but I would never do that. I would not do that even though there are two lanes. We did leave the gondola ride. I just would not do that. The recommendation list. Any further questions for Mr. Celelesi? Seeing none, thank you, sir. Thank you. Again, this this item is a public discussion and the time to comment was during agenda item three. So that has now expired. So I would entertain a motion from the commission. Commissioner Zoy. Well, I have a couple questions for the staff. Okay. Questions for staff.

So I don't know if you can answer this because you're not a city. Well Oh, yeah. Should I make my introduction? Yeah. Never mind. Yeah. So Pat and I kind of tagged So this is awesome and great. What is it going to cost to taxpayer per year? Um because we're not I last time I saw in the news, we're not rolling in the dough here for tax purposes. So, I'm kind of I'm just concerned on on what it's going to add to our Yep. our costs.

So, excellent question. Absolutely. Something we are constantly thinking about. Um I think u something to consider is that this document is just a vision of what could be. um doesn't necessarily mean it's exactly what will happen. Um things like operations and maintenance of what are being developed and planned are what we incorporate into that planning process once we actually get started um in the the info uh excuse me public info sessions that we had with the neighborhood association. One of the big things that we asked was how they felt that they could participate in making these things happen. And the East Side Hill Neighborhood Association is very active, Boyd Park and in other areas of their neighborhood. And um a lot of the neighborhood members felt that they could provide ongoing assistance with for example keeping sections of the trails within what's developed clear. And that is how we um we help maintain other areas of trail throughout town. Um the one of the things we did was actually remove any proposed timeline of phasing from each of the components to give flexibility. If the right opportunity came up and funding was secured either through grants or private donations, maybe a little bit of city assistance, we can make something happen. Um so removing the the proposed timeline of the different components of the project and when each would happen gives flexibility there and then the funding cycle timeline is something that can be done in an ongoing basis. Um another component of a document like this is we have to have it adopted in order for any of those projects to be eligible for DNR grant funding which is a big way that we help make improvements in our parks happen.

Uh, Commissioner. Yeah, I thank you. I was I I read the report and it was mostly, you know, donations and grant writing to get this. It was just after the fact of what is it sure going to add to the parks and recck

budget for for right now. I I would say that it's envisioned that it's primarily like community assistance with keeping trails cleaned. Um, there's really not a lot of work that goes into anything that's there right now. Um, I think maybe the biggest component of maintenance would be a potential outlook, but that's also, I think, the farthest away from happening. Um, that was discussed a little bit at the Waterways and Parks Commission meetings in January and February. Um, you know, the the design of something like that would basically account for the least necessary maintenance similar to like our our foot bridges and trails along the river as well. Um, so I think as far as the not including the overlook part of the the recommendations, I feel that the active neighborhood will help ensure that the the least amount of maintenance possible is is put on to us as city staff.

Further questions for Mr. Newkerk? Commissioner Ericson.

Um, I think I can add to that also. Um, I'm a resident of the neighborhood. In fact, I live right there on Hoover Avenue, right on the corner where you see that trail that on the right hand side that comes down into the neighborhood. That's my lot. Um, been lived there for 40 years. Um, very familiar, used this for the entire time we've been there. Um, and I think from the neighborhood standpoint, there's a couple of things. And if you're familiar with Boyd Park, the East Side Hill Neighborhood Association has been the mover and shaker with the development and improvement in Boyd Park. Um there have been many things that have been added to because you know through through grants and the city being able to do that, but an awful lot of that is maintained by the neighborhood association and there's a commitment to do that here also. And if any of you know Chad Rowenamp who's a neighborhood association president and he was the the president of the combined neighborhood associations now it's just recently stepped down from that. He's a mover and a shaker. He's an organizer of things like this par excellence and and if there's anybody that can do that it's Chad. Um, and from the neighborhood association and the neighborhood standpoint, this is not a a a big cost item until and unless you maybe get to the overlook. I mean, obviously that's that's a big cost item, but none of that's not ever going to be done without substantial grants and probably fundraising beyond the neighborhood because then it would become a facility that would be a draw from the entire city as well as probably the surrounding area because of what it would offer. But that's that's way down the pike. Um, and it's more aspirational than it is

something that's any anyone anticipates happening in the near future. But there are some things that really need improvement and there's basic things uh erosion. Um there's substantial erosion in the trail that comes down to Hoover Avenue and and and there's other erosion uh that it happens on Seven Bumps Hill and that sort of thing that will involve some earth moving and that that type of thing. um and and with some perhaps uh minor assistance from the city with some equipment at from time to time the neighborhood association feels that they can take care of that to a large extent. Um you know they're not going to be adding six inches of top soil to the play area so that that can be converted into a lawn. I mean that that would take an army of people doing that. So there is going to be equipment and and materials involved in something like that. But as a as a large activity uh and cost item that's that's on the smaller end of the scale. Um but important things are initially will be simply erosion control and invasive species control and that's something that the neighborhood association can do and is very good at.

Thank you. Any further questions? Could I add? Yes, please. Mr. Newer,

I would echo everything that was said about Mr. Roamp and and the East Side Hill Neighborhood Association. Um, another aspect of this is that any of the project recommendations in here will go through the normal CIP budget process that city council has authority over. um any kind of agreements that we might enter into with the neighborhood association for ongoing maintenance or assistance of whatever is created, anything like that would also go through city council. Whenever we enter into anou with an organization that goes before city council as well. So there will be multiple opportunities for ongoing discussion and and planning and thought um well before we ever get to the point of shovels actually hitting the ground or or work actually starting. So thank you. Further questions? Seeing none, thank you, Mr. Newkerk. Uh, I would entertain a motion on this item.

Motion to approve. Yes. Second. We have a motion to approve by Commissioner Ericson, a second by Commissioner Reid. Any further discussion on the Plank Hill master plan? I will call the vote. Commissioner Hollesman. I. Commissioner Lawson. I Commissioner Leonard I Commissioner Reid I Commissioner Zoy I the chair votes I commissioner Brewster I Commissioner Davis I Commissioner Ericson I

motion passes nine to zero and we move on to number agenda item eight the discussion item the 2025 development report Mr. Petri,

good evening. Uh, I didn't think it would be this late, so I'll make this more brief than usual, but it is probably one of the my favorite presentations that I give every e every year. Uh, 2025 was another great year. Um, we've had four years in a row with very high construction as you can see with dwelling units. We're doing very well. uh ever since 2020 2023 was very high as you can see on the screen and then going back to even 1990 so showing about 35 years of growth uh dwelling units have been steadily uh and this year is off to a great start as well. Single family was lagging behind. Uh this is an all in your report and we can stop at any time ask any questions. Single family is struggling. Uh the lot availability is controlled by usually four big developers and you usually got to build with them. Infill lots are usually not for sale. So it does make it a little tougher for you and I to buy a lot and build a single family house. This shows the growth within the last uh back to 1990 and 10-year uh segments does show that the single family is lagging behind and may not even hit the 2010 to 2019 numbers. The cost is number one factor probably and then availability of those lots is another factor. Uh this does not include the land cost, the landscaping, the driveways, improvements inside. This is just what the developer puts on the permit when they get it through uh the city. So we're at about, you know, 430,000 plus. Two units was steady. Uh did increase from last year in 2025. Uh that number is doing very well. This

is the most we'll ever see for twin homes and duplexes. Uh that is a very strong market and it is the reason being it's a little cheaper to build, but that number did come down. I did ask one of the larger developers in town why that was. He believed that there was some built on the fringe area of town that did lower that cost and now we're back down to the 2023 numbers roughly. Again, this is not what they're actually sold for. This is what the permit cost is that they put on multif family uh again in the high 300s. Uh that's 5 years running above you know 350 which is incredible. That number also dropped significantly in the number per unit cost. Uh we're below the 2023 numbers. Not 100% sure but the dwelling si the unit sizes has shrunk down. So keep that in mind. Uh that's the reason why this number is a little less per unit. And multifamily is blowing it out of the water. That is really where the market has shifted towards. Uh we're over 3,000 dwelling units uh this century or since 2020, which is impressive, more than any year 10 years prior. And then just a breakdown of of units. You can see across the board again that single family number is the only one concerning to staff and it's very challenging to get those lots available and for building on them. How's it broken down? So we had about 335 million in construction. Majority of that is in residential commercial. The breast would be in industrial and public which is the city, county, university, CBTC, school district and the state of Wisconsin. You see the number is uh very strong in the

residential particularly the multif family and the twin homes. So what does that all mean? Net new construction is a important number but also the total valuation. You can see they kind of go hand in hand. As the uh total valuation goes up or down, the net new construction, what is actually taxable uh goes up or down. But the last four years has been very strong in this community. And uh net new construction is usually in the top five in throughout the entire state of Wisconsin, which is very impressive. Madison, Milwaukee uh last year crushed it. um along with present prairie and then Oaklair was number four. And what does that all mean? The totally equalized value is over nine uh billion which is crazy to think about and that we believe that is number seven in the state based on our research. And then awesome some maps showing where the growth is occurring on all sectors. The only area that's kind of lagging behind is downtown. Uh downtown district includes Water Street and East Side Hill. Uh that is one of the only neighborhoods that is completely built out or uh besides tearing something down. And then you can see where uh commercial and industrial is being built mostly on the fringe areas or north side of town. But then we always like to show maps of this is not showing up as good as a packet did but you can see in the community where single family is being built and that's across everywhere not necessarily in downtown but everywhere else and then the two families built pretty much everywhere. The west side is very strong and then the southside is doing very well for a number of multifamily along with downtown. That's where downtown speds up. But um we share

this with not only city staff uh the county but also the school district which reviews all of this document as well. You can just see the growth is steadily across all sectors of the city. We're not controlled in one area. It's mostly where people own land and where lots are available and where the developments occurring. It follows the top five projects for 2025. City of Oaklair is number two, but the Paragon Apartments is under they're going to get occupancy for building one in April. Uh, but that's 45 million. PAS facility was about 16 and a half. Border States was an industrial project on the north side along with uh Perigo and then Mayo Clinic. And then this is the number that is very impressive. The last four years have been record years. Just so you're aware, in 2026, the last two months, so January and February, we're at a 100 million, which is unheard of. Uh, usually we were at like 25 million. So this year could be higher than last year. Keep that in mind. But with that, I'd be happy to answer questions. Uh like I said, we report this out and then we will present this at the school district along with anyone else and then we do have a mailing list as well that gets this entire documents.

Mr. Petri, how are we doing for workforce housing? Are we catching up or is there still a deficit? Great question. That's that's more difficult to track, but our vacancy rate is going up for multif family. uh workforce housing 60% to 100 20% CMI. We believe any new units coming online are falling in that and then hopefully the uh with the vacancy going up the rent level would prices would come down but sometimes it doesn't work that way as you probably know. Thank you. Questions for Mr. Petri.

Two questions Mr. Petri. Go ahead. Um, Orchard Hills, how do you see that affecting uh the single family residential?

That is one of the larger players. Uh, they did issue, I believe, six permits so far. Number one issue though is the utilities and they are actively working on that should speed up the single family because the first phase is all single family. Uh Creek Side is the subdivision to the northeast of there and that's all mostly twin homes and that should increase the numbers. Um Prairie West on the north side uh Worer Builders, not Orchard Hills Builders, that's C Wer. Uh they did uh they did submit like four permits recently. So those are mostly twin homes as well. So both subdivisions should be increasing the single family and twin homes. It just depends on if they have the clientele to sell them to. And

and then I'm going to ask a perennial question. Um, housing above the transit center. How is that progressing? I drive by it daily. I would say slow.

Yeah. I mean I mean if I I I I compare it to the uh progress on the university science building that is completely the exterior on that is basically completely done in probably a year's time. How long have we been sitting with the exterior of the uh that um you know what it's going on two and a half years maybe something like that. I mean just just curious. That's Thank you. Any further questions for Mr. Petri? Uh if not, we go to item number nine, future agenda items and announcements.

Yeah. The only announcement I have we have uh April 6th meeting and that will be the chairperson and the secretary's last meetings. So, we will recognize both of them if they could attend maybe hopefully uh and then we'll get new members appointed in a uh May. So, keep that in mind. Otherwise, we will have a meeting and it should be shorter than this one, but you never know. Okay. Thank you. We've completed our agenda. We're adjourned.