Plan Commission - Regular Meeting

All right, master switch is on. Ted's good in the back. Good afternoon. You are at a planned commission of the city of Wasa. It is Tuesday, July 15, 2025. It is 5:00 pm. City hall council chambers. We have a quorum present. First item is approval of the meeting minutes of June 17th. Would I entertain a motion? I'll make a motion. Motion from Bulan. Second from Barnaman. Questions, comments? Motion. There you go. There you go. All those in favor accepting the minutes for June 17th signify by saying I.

I. Any opposed?

All right. A couple of public hearings today. First public hearing is item two on the agenda is discussion on reszoning 1427 Lake Street from SR5 single family residential. uh it's a five zoning district to a TRD12 town home residential zoning district and 116 or 16016007 and 1611 Chellis Street from SR2 single family residential two zoning district to TRD12 again for town home residentials uh zoning district for Wasau real estate inc. Anyone in the house today looking to speak to that? Yes, sir. Come on up. State your name and Mark Thompson with MTS 1699 Scoffield Avenue. We're representing Wasau Real Estate. Uh in this application, uh we submitted this application for an amendment uh back in late 2022. uh plan commission recommended approval and then ultimately it was uh rejected by the city council. Uh we're back with the same application. The submittable materials were exactly the same as the previous. Um we believe that the the application meets the uh land future land use plan and it it follows along with the city's housing goal is providing mixed housing in in neighborhoods. Uh the vast majority of the adjacent properties are in the SR5. Um the density for this project is 6.4 units per acre. So it's it's slightly

more than the adjacent properties, but uh it's certainly not up to the 12 per acre that is in the U townhouse townhouse district. Um the the previous application there was neighbors that were concerned about the height of the building that would block their view or the height of the building isn't any different than somebody coming in and building a two-story single family dwelling. Uh there's also some concerns about the density, but uh again, we're we're not that much more dense than what's allowable in the in the SR5s. Um, so we think it's a a reasonable project, a higher density um, residential adjacent to 17th Avenue, which is, you know, a fairly high traffic and not real well suited for lower density single families. Um, and be happy to answer any questions you may have.

Well, we'll we'll take questions on the second piece of this. So, we'll take that comment. Any other comment on on the 1427 Lake Street? I do.

Yes, sir. Ken Jensen, 1306 Lake Street. Uh maybe it's not addressed in this committee, but since that area has nothing but a U-turn to get out of there, I don't know where the parking or exits are going to be. But both of those streets in that area are very beat up. They haven't been maintained well in that area. And if we continue to add more and more traffic in that area, they'll become less maneuverable. And I just question uh has that been addressed or will be addressed or there is no outlet down there. It's all right back out to Chelis or any of those. So,

okay. with there. We'll we'll finish up the public hearing and there may be an opportunity to address that more specifically in a minute. Thank you, Mr. Jensen. Anyone else looking to would like to speak to that topic at 1427. Okay, seeing none, we will close the public hearing. Oh, yes, ma'am.

Are you one of the real estate representative? Okay. If we have some questions in the next portion, we'll we we'll open the floor for that. Um, so we close the public hearing and we'll we'll discuss possible action and I I'm going to surmise that everyone was on this on the plan commission when we did this last time. So dis item three is discussion and possible action on reszoning 427 uh 1427 Lake Street from SR5 to TRD12 for town home uh zoning and 16016007 and 1611 Chella Street from SR2 to TRD12. So, these are all in one, I guess, bunched together, one one continuous lot for Wasau Real Estate LLC. Would entertain a motion on that action for reasonzoning from Watson?

I'll second. Second from Bulan. Discussion. Do we want to recap so PE so we know? Yes. Alder Watson. Well, I mean, I think the question about the traffic is great. Um, and I know that would probably go to infrastructure or something too, but um, what's the plan for that?

So, just for a brief, um, good evening, Chair Denny and members of the plan commission. So, just for some brief, and I know you've seen this before, so I'm not going to go into a bunch of detail, but um, in the context for tonight, the focus of course is on the zoning map amendment. So, like Chair Denny said, so three of the parcels are SR2, one is SR5, and they would all be going to TRD12. So just just for consideration, just for the commission's consideration, so the existing zoning for both SR5 and SR2 is largely single family residential. That's there's a couple other permitted uses, but it's very much um single family. So moving it to DRT, TRD12 encompasses more of a multifamily use um portfolio. It's like duplexes, twin homes, town homes, multiplex, and apartment. one to four for most by right and then conditional use for five to eight. So just so we have that in our mind even though we have a conceptual plan that that's being proposed as proposed that would be a conditional use permit. So that would be a separate approval process once it's reszoned any of the permitted and conditional uses then that fall within that zoning district is what we'd be looking at for the district. So, in terms of access to the site, um, city planner L and I did walk the site. We looked out there kind of at the at, you know, what what the conditions look like. And this particular proposal is pro proposing access from that Lake Street lot. And when we were out there looking, that would does appear to work pretty well because it is a frontage road that's existing out or or kind of a quaz. I mean it's not a frontage road, but I mean it has the feel of a frontage road because there is an access from 17th. So that would end up being a continuation of that road and it actually would would it seems like be a pretty nice kind of contiguous

um point of access that would bring you to those lots. Um and that was one of the things that we looked at. So um but but in terms of land use, there is quite a bit of traffic noise from 17th Avenue when you're out there. Um so typically multifamily properties tend to be adjacent to more highintensity kinds of things like a larger corridor. So I think in that way there is consistency and would provide a buffer before you get to the single family zoning. um you know things that we look at there would be an increase in intensity and density but again this would be a probably a space where that would make sense and it would be something that would lend itself well to that site um and then to go into your single family parcels it seems like it would be a a nice use of the space. So, so in terms of access, it would depend on the proposal that's brought forward with the conditional use, but this concept has access from Lake Street. It's kind of like a road that would continue through that parcel and provide access to the project, which would be those SR2 lots.

So, the access then would continue. That wouldn't necessarily be Lake Street or would it? It would depend. I mean, it could be or it could be a private drive. I'm not sure. that would be kind of a public works or infrastructure and facilities um determination. Um but that's something we would look at with that conditional use is just the best way for that project to be accessed. Thank you, Alder Watson.

So, um you said that up to 5 to 8 units is what the the designation allows, right? Okay. Um but that wouldn't necessarily have to go up like is there a height um like um requirement or something for Yep. Yep. So the maximum height for the TRD12 let's see it would be let's see here it's 35 ft same as the single family single family. So that would be kind of your typical twostory height.

So even though we you could do 5 to8, it's not like you're going to get this huge apartment complex in there because you can only go up to like that level. Okay. Thanks. Thank you. Anyone else? So we have a motion and a second. And this would go to uh this would go to council at the next council meeting. Yep. August 12th. Okay. So, a motion to recommend approving reszoning at 1427 Lake Street from SR5 and the others from SR2 to TRD12. With a motion and a second, those in favor signify by saying I. I.

Any opposed? And that passes. So, then I'll move forward to the August 12th council meeting. Up next, we've got another public uh hearing. It's a discussion on reszoning 903 and 907 South 60th Avenue from medium industrial zoning to high or to heavy industrial zoning district for Wasau Warehousing LLC. Anyone in the house looking to speak to that tonight? Yes, sir. Come on up to the podium. I'm Wayne Peters. I'm the uh owner of the property. Um I live in Oaklair. Uh my address is 1077 Bittersweet in Oaklair. uh that map that you've got right there uh which you're showing in uh light gray right now. Uh actually my property isn't all of that just to to make sure it's correct. Um so that's it shows more than I'm asking to be reszoned. Uh there's a parcel A on the bottom west side of that that's I didn't think was included in the zoning application. And um when I purchased the property in 2015, I checked on the zoning and the zoning was heavy industrial and um so and it has uh was originally developed as a foundry uh Murray foundry and I um acquired the property in 2015 and and at that time it was in kind of a distressed

state and uh have been working on it uh for the last 10 years uh to get it in uh get it fixed up and uh back in service and leased and uh I was surprised when I got a letter stating that the zoning was non-conforming. Uh but then I looked at your new zoning code definitions and found that it had been zoned from heavy industrial to medium industrial. Uh which makes a difference uh as to what you can store outside. Uh my tenant uh has um shingles stored in an enclosed area outside and uh because they are defined as a wholesaler according to the your zoning definition then it uh creates the need to have heavy industrial rather than uh medium industrial and and and I'm applying for for heavy industrial because uh number one, that's the way the property was developed and that's what the way it's been used for not all of the uses, but um there have been heavy industrial uses in there for the majority of its lifetime. And uh number two, um that's what I thought it I I was unaware that it had been that you had reszoned the gone through a resoning and had reduced the the zoning on the property. Number three is that uh for your definitions of heavy industrial um i.e. being out of the public eye and um in a quiet you know uh location uh not highly visible from traffic

corridors and residential areas. This property uh fits about as ideally as you could find for heavy industrial use. And I would like to uh um that's those are the reasons that I believe we should amend the zoning to heavy industrial.

All right. Thank you, Wade. Anyone else looking to speak to that uh for the public hearing? 903907 South 60th Avenue. Last call on 90390760th Avenue. All right, we will close the public hearing and take up the discussion of that item. And the next item is discussion and possible action on the reszoning 903907 South 60th Avenue from medium uh industrial zoning to heavy industrial zoning for Wasau warehousing. And Brad, if you maybe give us a quick thumbnail of how that reszoning happened because I as I understand it was wasn't heavy and went back to medium.

Sure. Well, I guess just as a highle overview, I mean, we adopted a new zoning code in 2020. So, basically, every parcel in the city was reszoned. Um, you know, we had old zoning districts, we have new zoning districts. There were two previous uh manufacturing districts, but then we went to three like industrial districts. So, you know, there's not a one forone match like all of these went to this district. Some, you know, there was some placing of of um the current from the former zoning into the new zoning code. So, um again, that took place citywide that was adopted. Uh you know, new new maps, new text for the zoning code. So, that's Uh that's what happened in 2020. Um you know in some cases again there was there was assignment to different districts. Um you I can't say it was intentional that it was downzone but you know if it were to be that way. I guess the safety net that the city has is to that there is a public process for a reasonzoning that any property owner can come into the city and request the zoning change. And this is this is uh the process for doing that is holding a public hearing and having it approved by council. So um I guess that's sort of the history going back to 2020.

Okay. So let's I'll entertain a motion to reszone that property. Watson makes the motion. Second from Bornean also had a question. Question Watson. So, um, in your memo it says something about like density. Um, you're not like likely seeing density changes. Can you like explain that just a little for me? Like, so, um, you think it'll be a good transition. It won't like I guess I wondered what the density thing meant.

So, I think that part of the zoning map amendment analysis is just to look at density and intensity and the potential for changes. So, this is a developed site. So I mean a vacant site it's more you know important I think to look at density. This is a developed site. Um the actually the density is probably less for a higher intensity industrial because there's larger setback requirements. The concern with going to um heavy industrial is more the intensity of the uses that are allowable. Um the use they're proposing is outdoor storage. Kind of like a I think a lumber yard type use. Yeah. contractor outdoor storage. Um so but but what because it's a zoning map amendment, we just need to keep in mind that any of the uses then permitted under a heavy industrial zoning district would be allowed. Um but staff's analysis, I mean, it's still adjacent to other industrial uses. Um it's in an area where heavy industrial would be compatible. Um it's it's directly adjacent to another heavy industrial zoned property. So I mean we we don't have concerns with that change. Miss Watson.

Um I just know that um we're really environmentally conscious as a council and so having something go to where you maybe can make more of a pollution impact might not, you know, be very comfortable for people. So I was just curious how that might impact or influence people's decisions. Like but it seems like the infrastructure is there. That thing's not going anywhere. But redesigning or redesating it opens that door though potentially, right?

Yes. I mean that that is true. I mean heavy industrial becomes one of the permitted uses and there are I mean there is a greater likelihood of uses that would have you know higher higher impact in that way. So I think that is something um that is good to keep in mind. I mean our zoning code does have um guidelines and limitations around those things you know around um you know various kinds of emissions and lighting and I mean all the things that um could be impacted and then of course we also have I mean depending on the size of the lot we also have DNR requirements if you know associated with development but um but that is exactly I mean the type of thing that's taken into consideration just because there would be different uses allowed

and I wanted to thank you Brad too for the the editing of the zoning codes I think that was you were very forward forward looking as a community. So, thank you very much for doing that because you were ahead of a lot of other places. Thank you. So, Mr. Peters had a question on the the map. Are we comfortable with the way the map is is drawn for this?

I mean, according according to our GIS, I mean, it's all one big parcel. So I don't know if that's subdivided um if you know certain portions are leased but as from our records it's showing as one large parcel. Well, then I think you need to check the records. The lower end of that parcel there, if you can let's see if you can uh Okay, you see where your your your arrow is right now? That's parcel is owned by Brownfields, Inc. And uh that is not part part of my property. my property is the is the building above it and the land uh going to either side.

So the yellow parcel line that's below I think is showing a separation there. It's probably confusing because it's all the same color. Those two parcels are the same zoning district, but that yellow line that kind of jogs up and over. Yes. Yes. The the yellow line demises one property from the other. They're currently both zone medium industrial now. Correct. But the um but I just wanted to clarify that I don't think my zona application did not include the the parcel to the south. Correct. That's correct. This we're just looking at that property land boundary that yellow outline.

Right. Okay. They're all yellow outlines. the so the the one the one the arrow goes to that parcel and then the yellow border anything outside of that yellow border would not be included. So the lot to the south isn't part of this proposal.

Okay. Yes, that's all I I just wanted to make sure that we were um defining the same parcel. as to the question that you had uh in reading your zoning what I found is that they changed the zoning uh and so that the difference between medium and heavy isn't so much the use anymore. It's um largely whether you can have anything outside um such as you know outside storage of of in my case in this case uh building materials. Um but the uses actually if you read that through it they kind of changed the criteria from what used to be um to uh to a little different standard. All righty. Thank you. So, with a motion and a second on reszoning 903 907 South 60th Avenue. Are there any other comments, questions? All right. All those in favor of forwarding the reszoning recommendation signify by saying I. I.

Any opposed? Okay. And that too will go to the August 12th council meeting. Thank you. Item six is another public hearing. This is on discussion on reszoning 809 South 62nd Avenue from medium industrial to heavy industrial. Similar shift here uh for Brian Randall. Anyone looking to speak to that one? Yes, sir. I I can uh answer questions about the use of the property. Um, I represent Beacon Building Products. My name is Jed Walker. We're a potential tenant. So,

Okay. And we'll be we'll be taking a second uh piece to this hearing and if we have questions, we'll get we'll call you up. Anyone else publicly looking to come forward on this one? All right. Last call on on 809 South 67 2nd Avenue. All right. We'll close the public hearing on that reasonzoning and we'll go to item seven which is discussing and possible action by the commission uh the plan commission for reasonzoning 809 South 62nd Avenue from medium industrial zoning district to heavy industrial zoning district uh for Brian Randall. I would entertain a motion. Motion from Barnaman, second from Palkin. comments, questions. We've got our developer here. Looks pretty straightforward. Okay. All those in favor of passing on the reszoning recommendation on 809 South 67th a 62nd Avenue signified by saying I.

I. Any opposed? All right, that passes. Thank you, sir. Item eight, discussion, possible action on approving a conditional use permit for 2811 West Wasaw Avenue to allow construction of a multiplex 3 to four unit per building within the two flat residential 10 TF10 zoning district. Would entertain a motion for conditional use. I'll make the motion. Motion from Bulan, second from Barnaman. Comments, questions. Do we need to explain anything for the record?

We updated

uh Thank you, mayor. Uh we updated the staff report to show uh we didn't have any public comments during the um actual hearing, but there was a letter submitted after the meeting. Um we looked at that and checked its validity and we made recommendations in our report. We felt that the proposed four unit on the almost uh 3/4 acre lot was acceptable and we recommend approval. Okay. Thank you. Any further on that? All right, with a motion and a second. All those in favor of approving the conditional use permit for 2811 West Wasawa Avenue signify by saying I.

I. Any opposed? All right, that passes. Did I read that right? Are we on nine on approval conditional use of 508 East Wasau Avenue, other side of the river to allow construction of an off- streetet parking lot uh within the two flat residential-10 TF10 zoning district? Would entertain a motion

Bornean second with Watson. Discussion on that item. I think we've seen this one a few times. All those with a motion and a second app. Uh, all those in favor of approving a conditional use permit for 508 East Waso Avenue signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? All right, that passes. Item 10, discussion and possible action on vacating and discontinuing Pineriidge Boulevard from North 28th Avenue to West Hill Drive. Would entertain a motion. Motion from Watson, second from Warman.

And if I may, a couple items were forwarded from the INF committee. So there's two items in front of everyone. There's minutes and then another um supporting material presentation that came from the applicant. Okay, we see the petitions. Anyone everyone have an opportunity to review? See re ice here as well. Anyone have any comments, questions? All right, we have a motion and a second. And this will go this go to council at the next council meeting. Does it need to go back to I think it goes to council, right? Council, I think so. Yeah.

All right. So, with a motion and a second, uh, all those in favor of vacating and discontinuing Pyridge Boulevard from 28th A to West Hill Drive, signify by saying I. I. I. Any opposed? And that passes. Our next meeting date is August 19th. Same time, same place. Would entertain a motion to adjurnn. So moved. Watson. Horn. All those in favor? I. See you later.