Plan Commission - Regular Meeting

all right it is six o'clock so i will call the wednesday may 27th 2026 meeting of the plan commission to order please rise for the pledge of allegiance i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice All right. Roll call. All members of the committee are present except for R.G. Keller who has an excused absence. So we do have a quorum. Next up is public comment. Is there anyone for public comment today? Come on up. And Lisa, I'm sure you know the drill.

Thank you. Thank you. Lisa South 434 Madison Street. I am here to just ask a few questions and give a little bit of input for the declaring the surplus land for the water utility. um so it looks like 1.7 acres is along delafield street so right to the south of us here and i don't know if you had a chance to take a look at it but it's such a quaint um the corner little piece of property it has um the field stone it has the little hut it even has a bird bath still out there and um it's just it used to have the dome and the t-shirt that i had here was Save the Dome. That was in 1986, but it was 86th and 86th. And so even back then, the Landmarks Commission was trying to preserve some of that site. Now, we are not against development of the property at all. We're just hoping that maybe something could go in there like a coffee shop or a restaurant or something that could keep... The history of that, with the beautiful property, still intact. We have the Blair House, then we would have that piece, and then across the street at 139, that's also on a local landmark. That's the Family Promise, used to be Image Keepers Building. So you have these historic properties in a row, and we really would like to see if you could put something in there that would fit in with the neighborhood. Also, we were wondering it was kind of hard the map that was attached to the agenda was quite blurry, but it looks like that the property Continues under our bridge our newer bridge, and so I'm wondering if you could address that if it could be Split off or whatever just to make sure that our bridge would never be in danger I'm sure you'll you'll take that into consideration and And then just last year in August, there was an amendment to F-15, which is the disposition of surplus property. And I just wanted to read that. And it says, it is the city's policy that surplus city property is disposed of in ways that ensure the city assets are not disposed of when they could be reused. Ensure the most efficient use of city assets, maximize financial return for the city, and prevent improper use or acquisition of the city property by city employees. And so... And then it goes on to say that, well it used to say that it had to go to all of the departments in the city and they had to say that they didn't need it. And it was switched in August to just say that just the head of that department is the one who says it. But I wonder, with all of that parking right there under the bridge, couldn't that be used by a department in the city? It certainly seems like it could be to me, so I don't know if that was asked. But from this point, it's the plan commission that would approve declaring it all as surplus, and then it goes to Common Council. So it's in your court as to how this surplus is declared. So I would just ask that you would take a look at that and please try to preserve our cute little area that we have down there. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone else for public comment? All right. Then moving right along, we have approval of minutes from our April 22nd meeting. Is there a motion? All right. Commissioner Francor? Yes. That's a motion. Thank you. Is there a second? Alderperson Moulton? Second. All right. Oh, yeah, we voice vote. So all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right. The ayes have it. The minutes have been approved. Thank you. Is there anything to be removed from our consent agenda? Nope. All right. Then we will move along and assume all of those items have been approved by unanimous consent. On to the public hearings. So we will start with, we'll do both public hearings and then we'll do the action on those. So Charlie, I'm going to let you take it away and we'll start with the 400 West Sunset Drive.

All right. So 400 West Sunset Drive, this is a conditional use permit application for Juanito Motor Auto Care. uh... former was sunset drive as you can see is uh... between west avenue and grand avenue on the north side of sunset it's just to the south of the mendiola park uh... parking lot uh... and uh... one important thing to notice uh... it's It's about 400 feet or 600 feet away from the closest residential use. One of the reasons that auto repair businesses are conditional use in the B3 district is B3 tends to be mixed with residential close by, so it could be a Depending on the location in some places. It could be a detrimental to those neighborhoods in this case the closest residential is on the other side of Sunset Drive, which is a very busy street or Grand Avenue and is quite a good distance away The property itself is located behind the B BAM Auto sales business at 408 West Sunset Drive, and it has access to sunset through that property and And the building is a single-story metal roof, metal-sided utilitarian building. The applicant, again, would like to use it for an auto care business. Here it is from the Mendiola parking lot. So you can see there is some visibility, but it's fairly limited. For the interior, they're proposing a small waiting area right at the entrance, and then the rest of it will be taken up by auto repair. They're showing space for... seven vehicles in the building. We'll have one to two employees working at any given time. And the applicants have noted that this, they'll have to be completely redoing the interior of the building. It had previously been an electrician's Business and some work had been done there without proper permits, so they'll have to be doing a pretty significant work on the interior So this is just a preliminary floor plan. They'll be they'll be submitting that to the building departments for final approval The proposed hours are 9 a.m.. To 7 p.m.. Up to 7 days a week with two employees They'll be doing all types of vehicle repair, but they don't do body work or painting and They've noted that all the work will will take place inside Typically with the doors closed so staff recommends approval of a conditional use permit for Juanito Auto Care with the number of conditions. First, that any vehicle stored outside must be licensed and applicable, and no vehicles may be stored for more than 20 days. That is sort of restating Code Section 12.07 , so that's a condition that applies to all auto repair businesses. At least two employee parking spaces and one customer space must be available at all times. No automobile sales are permitted on the property. and then uh... all other applicable permits including an occupancy permit must be approved and any required work must be completed for operations and started the property and uh... the occupancy permit will require a change of use analysis to be completed by a licensed design professional. The applicant does have an architect who's working on that analysis. And any signs must receive an applicable sign permit, the sign permit approval before they're installed, and fire department comments will be addressed. The fire department comments were sort of reiterating the same note about the change of use analysis.

Great, thank you. Is there anyone here from the public that wishes to speak on this item? All right, then the public hearing for 400 West Sunset is closed. Charlie, I will let you take it away again for 2100 Airport Road.

All right. This is another conditional use permit for Wisconsin Metal Parts, LLC. And they would like to occupy the building at 2100 Airport Road, which has been used as an office and warehouse facility. You can see that right here it is just to the south of Northview Road on Airport Road in the business park, just to the south of the Waukesha County Airport. And it backs up to the airport, the green space at the safety area at the south of the airport runway. So this is, again, the building has been used as an office and warehouse building. It's in the M3 Limited Business and Manufacturing District. M3 District, the purpose of the district states that it's there to provide an attractive and aesthetic grouping of limited light industrial uses, offices, corporate headquarters, and support facilities in a park-like setting. So warehouses, office uses, engineering businesses and similar uses are permitted, but manufacturing is generally a conditional use with the Planning Commission able to provide conditions to ensure that it does maintain that kind of the business park-like setting. As you can see the property has has a pretty significant landscaping along the front and it is set back a good way from the street and There's a small office area in the front and a large warehouse in the rear. So on the site plan that they provided, it's about 90,000 square feet of office space and then 3,000 square feet of, or 90,000 square feet of existing warehouse space and 3,000 square feet of office, which we believe will be generally the layout of the new business. And so they've also provided some interior photos of the warehouse space as well. And again, there's a pretty significant robust landscape screening along airport road. So staff feels that this will be the proposal for metal fabrication, stamping, painting and similar operations. interior to the building will be consistent with the M3 district provided that it is all interior and that any outside storage will be done in a way that is properly screened. The applicants do plan to bring an application back for site plan and architectural review for any outside screening if they do decide to do that. As you can see, there is an existing gravel parking area in the rear of the building, which has been kind of built and expanded without plan commission approval. And as you can see in this overhead, there's a semi-truck parked there. The applicant said that the current property owner the building believes that that was needed for Access to the that safety area at the south of the airport For the fire department and they have a plan from 1994 which shows that that area The fire department has has told us that they would not use that that lane to access the area. They wouldn't use a gravel drive and they don't need it for fire access. We did contact the airport. We left a message with the airport commissioner and didn't receive any kind of call back on that. So they haven't told us whether or not they need that area. So here it is from ground level. You can see it extends back from the building. Gravel drive would not be permitted in the M3 district. So if it is needed for airport access or if the applicant wants to use that either for outside storage or for another purpose, that would have to be paved and they would have to bring it back for plan commission approval before they can use it. If they don't want to use it, they could just convert that back to grass prior to occupying the building. So staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit for Wisconsin metal parts at 21 800 airport road with the conditions that they'll obtain an occupancy permit before any operations can begin and that since they're converting it from warehouse to. Manufacturing business, they'll need to also. Provide a change of use analysis can completed by licensed design professional. And if there are any alterations that are needed, they'll need to do those before they occupy the building. And they would either need to return that. Access drive to grass or pave it before they can apply for occupancy, and if they do decide to pave it, or if they do decide to have any outside storage that would also need to go through site plan and architecture review and fire department comments will need to be addressed for this as well.

Excellent, is there anyone here to speak on the 2100 Airport Rd item from the public? All right, then we will close the public hearing for 2100 Airport Road. Back to action on public hearings, the conditional use permit for 400 West Sunset Drive. Are there any comments or motions from the commission? Alderperson Molson.

Yeah, I think this is a great idea for an infill business in a relatively small location, so I would propose a motion to approve. The conditional use permit for 400 West Sunset as presented is subject to staff comments.

All right. Commissioner Francor?

Second.

Commissioner Walz?

My one concern with auto repair places is they very quickly become auto dealerships. But given that this is right behind an auto dealership, I don't think we'll have that here. Or it's already happening, so...

There you go. Any other comments or questions from the Commission? All right, then all those in favor of granting the conditional use permit for 400 West Sunset Drive, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right, that motion does pass. Moving along to 2100 Airport Road, are there any motions or comments from the Commission? Alderperson Wells.

I'll make a motion to approve with staff comments across to allow the conditional use permit with all staff comments. The one thing I was going to bring up was that have we checked with HAWS to see if they have any information about that gravel drive? I just noticed it backs up right to kind of they've got that outdoor area. I don't know what Haws would have that size driveway for, but perhaps they have some information on the history of what that was put in for.

We haven't commented. I don't know if the applicant is, or we haven't contacted them. I don't know if the applicant is here, but it did look like there might be some access from some of those surrounding properties, too.

Yeah, and I guess I wasn't sure. I couldn't think of any use that Haws would have for that driveway, but they might have some history for it.

Motion approved. Is there a second? Second. All right. From Commissioner Granger. Are there any additional comments or concerns from the commission? No. We have a motion and a second to grant the conditional use permit for 2100 Airport Road. All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed? All right. The ayes have it. Excellent. Alright, next up we have a final site plan and architectural review for 245 North Barstow St for Carroll University. Charlie, that's you as well.

Yep, alright. So this is the the main Carroll campus block between East East Ave and Barstow St running from College Ave up to the railroad tracks. So that includes most of the primary academic buildings on the campus. And 245 North Barstow is a small building at kind of the northwest corner of that block. So you can see it highlighted here along with some of the parking lot to the north of it. This is the existing building. It's a small white metal building. which Carol has stated was intended to be temporary but has been there for 30 plus years and is used for their physical therapy school. They would like to demolish that building. So you can see it from the inside of the campus. There's a large parking area behind it as well. And they would like to demolish the building and construct a new academic building for the business school, which will occupy both that space and then extend to the north almost up to where the railroad tracks and the trail is there. The building architecturally will be designed to sort of complement some of the existing academic buildings on the campus. You can see Old Main Hall, Rankin Hall, Voorhees Hall are the three or three of the four main historic buildings on the campus. And then Hostet Hall is a more recent construction, but all of them have sort of a similar style with the tan stone or brick siding and then red roofs. So the proposed new building will be a very similar style. And again, this is part of the College Avenue Historic District, so this did go to the Landmarks Commission for approval, and they approved both this design and a slightly different previous design. So this will be a three-story academic building, which will have a similar style to those existing campus buildings. It will be a primarily tan brick siding with some stone, tan stone complementary features, as well as red roof. but it'll also have some more modern design elements, such as a two-story glass wall at the A-term area, and then also the floor-to-ceiling windows on the third floor as well. So this is the view from Barstow Street facing out from the campus, and then this is sort of the interior, the inside of the campus, so which will, again, will continue the large glass wall at the A-term area. It'll have a similar vertical stone architectural feature, and then primarily the tan brick siding. There's also a large, it's one story, kind of a bump-out section of the building, which will have an auditorium-style classroom inside it that will have the the stone siding as well. They had provided some samples of that siding for their Landmark Commission approval, so you can see the brick on the right, the natural limestone, cast architectural stone for some accent features, as well as the red shingles. They've also provided some details of the interior. It'll be a total of 55,000 square foot building on three stories. Mostly classroom areas on the on the 1st floor with the large auditorium. Classroom with some, some. Offices on the 2nd floor, and then. The 3rd floor in the most recent submittal has has just shown a shell space. They had previously shown offices there, but. That'll be something for the college to decide how to use. But one thing to note is they will have an outdoor classroom in the kind of the southwest corner facing out towards Barstow and overlooking the football field there. They have also provided some renderings of the interior of the atrium area. on the first floor and then going up towards the second floor. And then one thing to note is what would be sort of the fourth floor of the building on the roof will be a rooftop mechanical area, and that will be fully screened by the sloped roof section. So that will not be visible at all from below. Going back to the site as you can see currently. There's a very large parking area behind behind the current 245 North Barstow building which has access from two access points on Barstow Street and another one on East Avenue and that really covers the vast majority of the north side of that that main campus block The proposal is to reduce that area quite a bit. It'll go from 303 stalls to down to just 100 parking stalls so they'll be adding quite a bit of green space behind the new building into the the interior of the campus area that it'll have the new parking area will be just one one-way access only from Barstow Street and in Drive into the parking area, but not out and then it'll be the one In entrance and exit on to East Avenue, which will be moved a little bit further south from the the Health Science Center for Student Health and Wellness I won't get quite to to an intersection directly with McCall Street there at East Avenue, but I We'll be a little closer to that. The Public Works Department likes driveway accesses, if possible, to be lining up with street intersections, so that won't get exactly to that, but it will be a little closer than it is now. The reason that they're able to expand the parking is because they've purchased two buildings here at 211 and 233 Maple Avenue, one of which was the former Fisher Creative Arts Center, and the other one is an empty, dilapidated manufacturing building. They have received approval in 2024 to demolish that building, and then they're gonna add quite a bit of parking there. That was originally a certified survey map to combine those two properties. was approved in 2024 but it was never recorded so that was also on the uh the agenda for to re-approve that on the consent agenda tonight and that'll go to the council at the next meeting as well um going back to the site plan they provided a landscape plan for for the green space both around the building and then for the interior area. So you can see they'll be adding a number of new shade trees into that green space as well as a large open lawn. They are providing some landscaping in the parking lot islands in the new parking area as well as foundation plantings around the building. So, here's a little close up on the, the green space in front of the building. As you can see, there's a small bioretention area. Along with those, those shade trees, the, some of the parking lot islands have trees on them, but some are shown without with just. Stone mulch so staff is recommending that that. Trees will be required to be added to those islands that don't have any currently. So, again, you can see the, the. Entrance from Barstow St with some, some foundation plantings and smaller trees around the building. And then another 1 of those parking lot islands, which does not have a tree currently on it. And staff would like to have some landscaping added to that. At the exit onto East Avenue, again, that'll be shifted slightly to the south, and the existing landscaping around that Health Sciences building will be retained. They'll be adding two dumpster enclosures to the northeast corner of the parking lot, as well as another bioretention. Basin for some stormwater management to the north side there too. The dumpster enclosures will be. A standard concrete masonry. Enclosures with the cedar gates on the front. Uh, that'll be moving the dumpsters from an existing location. In between 245 North Barstow and the band mail field house. So this is that that location, there's an existing generator. Which serves the mail field house building. And then they'll be adding a new generator to that location. to serve the new building as well as a transformer for that building. So here's the plan for that. The proposal is for just a chain link fence to screen that location and then the existing driveway there will be retained. That's a part of the requirement from WeEnergies for the transformer. They are planning to add some privacy slats to provide a little more screening there too. So staff recommends approval of final site plan and architecture review for the new academic building at 245 North Barstow Street with the conditions that the fencing for the generator enclosure will be a black coated chain link, which is a standard plan commission requirement. condition that the trees will be added to all the parking lot landscape islands to be approved by staff prior to the issuance of building permits and then engineering fire department and water utility comments.

Excellent. Thank you. Are there any motions or comments from the commission?

All right.

Thank you. Commissioner Frank Gore.

Are we ready for a motion? if you would like to make a motion. Okay, I'd be happy to do that. I would move then that we approve the final site plan and architectural review for 245 North Barstow Carroll University to approve the plans for the 55,000 square foot three-story business school building along the east side of Barstow Street located in the I-1 institutional district with all of the staff comments and the recommendation about the trees and the parking.

Thank you. I'll second. Commissioner Wells seconds. Are there any additional comments or questions?

I just want to say that's quite an upgrade and really looks nice, and yeah, happy to approve that. Thank you.

Alderperson Moulton?

Yeah, I'm very excited about this big change for Carroll. I think it'll be great, and the presentation was very thorough.

Yeah, I agree. I think that this is great. I did have one question, and that's just that I know that that section of Barstow is not in great shape in terms of the street itself. Do we know if they have any plans to kind of coordinate with us as the city? i don't know if they're going to be doing any sort of utility work but i imagine that based on the building that's there versus the building that's going in they might need to do that and so coordination with any reconstruction efforts from the city might be worthwhile not necessarily a requirement just maybe a good suggestion for them

Yeah, there are some engineering comments that are related to that, but I don't know that the engineering department is planning to repave Barstow or anything like that. There has been some talk about the possibility of. Carol of that section being vacated at some point in the future to add a sort of a pedestrian mall for Carol students, but that that's they're not ready to do that at this point, so.

Okay. Yeah, I just wanted to make sure because I know that that had come up as well with the potential to vacate that area.

Oh, yeah.

Do you want to come on up? Thank you.

Thank you.

I just wanted to make a couple of comments. The presentation is great. We appreciate your support. There's one area in regards to what you're asking about. On the 19th of this month, at the last minute, we received a comment asking us to put a sidewalk on the other side of Barstow Avenue, on the west side. That was like... SEVEN DAYS AGO. WE HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO STUDY IT OR ANYTHING ELSE. THERE ARE SOME MAJOR CONFLICTS WITH ELECTRICAL LINES, SOME UNDERGROUND SUITES. THE UNIVERSITY IS INTENT AND DOES DESIRE TO MAKE THAT, ASK THE CITY TO VACATE THAT STREET AND MAKE IT A PROMENADE AS WE MOVE FORWARD. SO THE ONLY THING WE'RE ASKING IS WE WANT TIME TO STUDY THAT AND BRING THAT BACK TO YOU, BUT WE ALSO KNOW IT HAS TO GO THROUGH A WHOLE PROCESS OF VACATING A STREET AND TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND ET CETERA. We're not prepared to do that this time, but we would like to sort of slide that request for an additional sidewalk. This project went through in 2024. The sidewalks all deemed acceptable and then suddenly just on the 19th of this month. The city added a comment that we needed to put another sidewalk in. That's a $50,000 expense to Carroll. We've already gone for our financing. I don't mean to be nice about this, but so it was a little bit of a shock. And, you know, we feel with not with the city, on what, five to six occasions. We've dealt in good faith, we've met everything else. That was just the one that came out of the blue to us and we were not prepared for nor did we add into our financing. So we would ask for some leniency on the idea and time to investigate Barstow. One of the things we've been working with the city is the idea of investigating all the underground utilities, finding out what shape they're in, doing the traffic analysis and going through the process to vacate the city. So that's the only condition in this that we would ask for leniency on. Okay.

Yeah, I was going to say, this wasn't going to hold me up from voting in favor. I just was kind of curious, and more than anything, I know that there was the intent.

But it's in the staff comments to put that sidewalk in, and we're like, hold on. We would like some leniency in that.

I'm comfortable with taking that sidewalk out of our motion.

If everybody else is, I am too, I'm not seeing it in the. It was there was an engineering, I think it's a response letter that was sent out. I don't know if it ended up getting out of this agenda. We, we just got it in the planning department this afternoon. We weren't positive that the city would have the authority to require that we had been talking to the engineering department. And they're, they're not sure how they want to go forward with it either. So.

Yeah, I'm not seeing in the project reviews.

I didn't see it either, so that's why I was asking.

I'm comfortable extending Carol that bit of leniency on the sidewalk.

Yeah, and if it works out, I like the promenade idea.

It is part of our master plan to do that, so I think we just need some time to study the undergrounds and the utilities that we would be taking possession of and be responsible for. There's a lot of research that needs to be done along with some of the analysis for traffic and all that. I appreciate it. Any questions?

Yeah, it sounds like yes.

What I was going to say is I would have the motion read just as it was proposed minus any requirement to address the sidewalk at this time.

Appreciate that I concur and I'd just like to thank Carol you guys get brought up a fair bit on the Pine Commission is really the gold standard of what we want to see built the city you guys consistently bring a very high quality product and some it really looks great and we appreciate you guys being a great partner and Thank you for this project.

Ditto. Any questions?

I would just like to clarify that that sidewalk was for the west side of Barstow. This building's being on the east side of Barstow. There is continuous sidewalk all along that east side of Barstow. So just so everyone's aware of that.

Yes. All right, any other questions or comments?

Yes Alderperson Manion has has Public Works or Planning Department looked at the ramifications of shifting so much parking into a different location particularly with the I guess change in potential pedestrian flow particularly crossing Grand Avenue there and

It's all university property. We've looked at their plans and we've already approved them putting the new large parking lot over there. We're assuming people are going to follow traffic ways and use the crosswalks. But we have, you know. That'd be a police issue, I guess. But so at this time, you know, they have the right to park on their property where they deem appropriate. Carol's comfortable with having him over there. I know they work closely with their students in public safety, so I would assume they would educate them and try to keep them in the proper lanes, whether pedestrian or vehicle.

I appreciate that, and I've heard that, and I'm certainly in favor of this project going forward. I spent four wonderful years of my life at Carroll as a student, but I'm also aware of some of the challenges with college. pedestrian flow on campus and i'm concerned you know we see it on east avenue we've seen it for years on east avenue it's been a a discussion point as long as i've lived here you know going back to my time as a student there and you know grand it is probably just as busy if not busier of a traffic street so i'm just i have some concerns there that i think we need to i guess be aware of or keep in mind as to what we do in the future to uh ensure safety because that's a big shift of parking that is more central to campus that's being moved to the edge of campus.

I know that we work with Charlie and his staff along with the Wauwatosa Railroad agreement that they were doing. So that parking lot has been designed around that railroad crossing and everything else. And with the, it's in the plan book for how they propose to make modifications to the sidewalks and everything else to make that connection to drive the students to the crosswalk.

And I believe that was part of the traffic study that was encompassing all of the changes that there.

Yeah, we did look at it. We would be concerned about our own students as well. So we clearly understand what you're saying.

Great. Any other comments? All right. There is a motion and a second. So all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed and abstaining?

Abstain.

Alright, let the record show that Commissioner Granger is abstaining. Otherwise that motion does pass. Thank you. Alright, next up we have a certified survey map for 1535 East Racine Ave. Doug, I believe that's you.

Thanks it is. okay so this is a certified survey map for like i said 1535 east or east racine avenue just east of roberta avenue you can see there on the photo here's roberta and racine the property in question it's a commercial property there's a building up at the front of the lot and a parking lot behind it Here's a little closer view. You can kind of see where it's located. What they would like to do is split this lot into two segments. So the northern portion where the commercial development is, it basically would follow the two adjacent property lines here, would be the commercial side. And then the vacant southern portion As what they'd like to split off if you recall at the end of 2024, the plan commission approved or recommend approval for plans for a duplex development here off of Jill's drive where garden Prairie, the private drive would extend across. There's already an easement for garden Prairie to go across this property. So the access to this rear parcel would be off of the garden Prairie easement. But there will be duplexes over here and farther to the south. And with this new southern parcel, it's envisioned and intended that that will be incorporated into that Hawks Landing development. And so we'll be seeing revised plans for that possibly later this year yet. So here's the certified survey map. It's currently a 0.94 acre parcel. Lot one at the south would be about 0.39 acres and then 0.55 acres for the existing commercial area to the north. And then here's just a picture showing how that's in is in relation to the Hawks landing development. So then the Gray here is where you can see the Garden Prairie drive will be extended. And then you can see some of the duplex building spread around that and then it just makes sense that maybe another duplex could go right here as part of that Hawks landing development. So that's the intention for that, and that would be on again that this is on the lot. One portion is what's highlighted here. So at this point, staff would recommend approval of the two lot certified survey map with all city department comments and concerns to be addressed.

Alderperson Molson.

I have not seen us approve a split in a lot into two when the second one doesn't have an access to a public road because we've seen many many developments all these great ideas and they don't all you know the financing doesn't go through or somebody changed their minds or you know i mean we approve lots of things that don't actually happen so i i was i don't i'm not understanding why we're approving this now i mean after they put in a road and they have access to the road wouldn't that be the time to do this

uh... well there's access to the garden prairie drive here to the south the easement is already in place that easement has been in place for fifteen twenty years when the garden prairie development happened that easement went across to the end of jill's drive i get the idea here and i think it's a good idea to make sense to use this parcel as a part of that

Duplex development. My question is, if that development doesn't happen, now we've got a parcel that doesn't have access to a road. It's got access to a planned road, which is a little different.

Sure. The owner of the Hawks Landing development is here who's proposing the certified survey map. Maybe he could shed some light onto his intentions. Okay.

That person's available?

Come on up, please. Thank you.

And will you please state your name for the record?

Eric Sandersi.

Thank you.

So Hawks Landon, I'm in working with, I've paid all the fees with building department for erosion control fence. I have financing, I'm just trying to get this in. So before all the sewer work and everything else, if I'm gonna add another parcel, so it's cost effective to put this in, otherwise I'm gonna be ripping up, put a road in. I don't want to put a sewer, water, all the infrastructure in.

To a parcel you don't own?

Well, I can't do anything with. I don't want to put it in the back of a lot that I can't build on. I don't want to rip up brand new asphalt.

Yeah, I don't want you to do that either.

And we're going to come back for approval for this to add this to Hawks Landing. But when I do the infrastructure, I can put the sewer and water and everything that's needed and pre-plan for the sidewalks that are already on the plans for Hawks Landing. Everything is, we pour six-inch sidewalks. Where the approach is going to be, we do some of the work ahead of time instead of tearing out existing work and ripping up asphalt to put a sewer and water in.

everything else and we're putting in what do you think you're going to start probably august or september in twenty twenty six so could we approve the conditional use permit uh... but with the condition that this project is started before the end of twenty twenty six and if not then we don't approve it i mean right now we're just doing the certified survey map so we always have a lot that doesn't

I mean, there is a deeded road. I mean, Garden Prairie is supposed to be keeping it up per their agreement, but I mean, it's not, you know, it's supposed to be a gravel road. I mean, whether it's the back of a commercial or here, it's still a taxable, I mean, it's gonna be worth more as a taxable parcel. I mean, the project's gonna happen, but I mean, from a...

I guess I'd see your concern if he was coming in for site plan architectural approval without a road there or without providing plans to build access, but really we're just splitting the property at this point.

It's not landlocked. I mean, it has access from that easement.

Does it have access from Jill's Drive as well?

Jill's Drive abuts to the edge of it.

So, I mean, if we were to take Garden Prairie completely out, it would still have access.

It touches on the corner.

Yeah, so I'm very comfortable splitting the property. It's like the first step. And then, yeah, it still needs to come back for site plan architectural approval. If we were to get a site plan that then didn't have access to a road or to a public access, then, yeah, that would be an issue. And we need to figure that out before you could go ahead. But just splitting the property doesn't seem like an issue. OK.

And I think right now what I'm hearing is that you want this approved right now, so you can put the utilities into all the estimates for the sewer in the water.

This is a small cost to add 1 to add some stuff off of it versus a major cost to do later. Any other questions anyone else.

I'm comfortable making motion to approve with staff comments. Thank you guys for your time.

Great. Is there a second? All right. Commissioner Granger, any other questions before we vote? All right. Then all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right. That motion does pass. Once it looks like it does, there we go. All right, next up we have the Minor Site Plan and Architectural Review for 1101 West St. Paul. Doug, it looks like that's also you.

Yes, thank you. So this is for 1101 West St. Paul, which is INEO. So we're all familiar with the building running along quite a long length of St. Paul here. In the middle of the building is where kind of their main entrance is. What they'd like to do is renovate that entrance. It's kind of hard to locate if you're just driving along St. Paul, especially when cars are parked along St. Paul. So I'd like to make a little more prominent entrance. Also bring out the glass curtain there out towards the street a little farther. Currently there's two doors that come in and then there's different levels inside where you kind of get to. and it's very confusing as to which direction you're supposed to be going so what they'd like to do is then they'll remodel the whole entryway make it more clear which there'll be only one entrance going in clear where you should be going to to the welcome center and where to check in as a guest that kind of thing so that's what they're proposing here's just a view kind of straight on what that looks like and then here's the elevation of what they're proposing Looking back at this, the current building itself, the entire building does not meet the 25-foot setback along St. Paul. It's about 15 feet setback, I believe, from the right-of-way. The right-of-way line kind of goes through the middle of the sidewalk out here. The current... Vestibule entrance feature you kind of see here is set back about 7 or 8 feet and so the new work when they renovate this will also be almost in the same footprint area. So it'll also be set back only 8 feet. So they did go to the board of zoning appeals and they received a dimensional variance to do the work as proposed here in the plans. So that part's been proved as there's no physical way possible to do any work in this area meeting the setback. So here's the proposal. So it'll be a big glass curtain wall. The one entrance will be at the right end where the curtain wall will be framed in a metal panel. And it'll rise up to the top here to about 22 feet high. And that's where the entrance is right under that highest point there. there's also a future signage band up in this area they don't have that quite worked out yet but they will be getting signed permits for that when they do come before they could put any signage up there on the building Here's just kind of the floor plan showing how they'll bump out that curtain wall a little farther. So when you come in the entrance, there's an opportunity for either one set of stairs or the ADA ramp to get down to the main level. Then it'll be clear which way you're going from once you're at that one spot. And here's just a rendering, kind of giving you a little 3D effect of how that'll look. You can see into the building through the glass curtain wall, obviously. They'll keep the three flag poles, just relocate them a little bit away from the doorway. And then that metal panel framing around the whole entryway. So overall, it looks like it'll be a lot more inviting, a lot higher up. So hopefully people will be able to find it a lot easier and just be a lot more welcoming coming into the property there. So at this time we would recommend approval of the plans to renovate the main vestibule with city comments and concerns to be addressed and the note that the sign permits will be required for any new signage.

Are there any comments or motions? Commissioner Granger.

I think it looks great. I'm really excited to see the face of this building renovated and have those upgrades. I also appreciate keeping the flagpoles and moving them so that they look good with the new design. Yeah. I move to approve the proposed minor site plan and architectural review for 1101 West St. Paul Avenue to remodel the main entrance. Great. Thank you. Is there a second? Alderperson Molson? I'll second.

All right. Any other comments? I think this also looks great. All those in favor of the minor site plan and architectural review for 1101 West St. Paul, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right, I do believe that motion has passed. Thank you very much. And then our almost final item, review impossible action to declare five city-owned properties as surplus land. Doug, you can take that away as well.

sure this is a consideration for declaration of surplus land and just to remind you the plant commission is a recommending body on this it will go to the common council for a decision as a standard practice for these types of things but there are currently five properties that the water utility owns which they are envisioning not having a need for in the very near future at 1430 southeast avenue 2320 sunset drive 3815 creekside 115 delafield street and then there's also a vacant parcel along center road that they will no longer have a need for um so they want to see if the city would determine these to be surplus While the water utility is kind of its own entity, the city owns the properties that these facilities are on. So here's a map just kind of showing there's some blue dots here for where each of these properties are located. Mostly they're all on the south side of the city. The northernmost one is the one right here on Delafield Street in the middle. There's Sunset Drive, East Avenue, Center Road, and then down on Creekside. So here's the property at 1430, Southeast Avenue. And that's a 1.7 acre parcel. You can see there's a water reservoir in the middle and then a support building as well on that site. Again, 1.7 acres. And if we go out towards Sunset Drive, just west of St. Paul or Genesee Road, depending on what side you're on, then the Fox Run area, another reservoir and support building, that's on about two acres. creekside property is on creekside drive down in the rivers crossing subdivision and this was a pump house for a well so you can see here they it's on a residential street and they designed it to look like a house up in the upper right hand corner here so kind of interesting it's a little bigger house than the other ones in the neighborhood but it worked fairly well for what they needed at that time now they don't need it anymore though and then on Delafield Street. So this is, here you can see City Hall and then the water utility offices. As you're aware, we approved plans about a year and a half ago for the new water utility headquarters over on Chapman Drive. THAT BUILDING IS NEARING COMPLETION. THEY HOPE TO BE MOVING IN THERE BY THE END OF THE YEAR. SO THEIR OFFICES AT THIS LOCATION NEXT TO CITY HALL WILL NO LONGER BE NEEDED. Lisa Salvo had spoken earlier, mentioned there's a bridge that kind of goes over the property, and yes, there is. You can see that right here, clearly where the boundary goes around that. So the parking ramp to the city hall connector is right at that location. So that's where the property 115 Delafield Street is located. And then the final property is out on Center Road. And again, that's about another two acre parcel and it's on the east side of center road south of the bypass and this is the corporate corporate center. So this is zoned M3 this parcel is the other ones are all zoned I-1 institutional. This one is zoned M3 with the rest of the industrial park has nothing that ever been proposed yet on that site. Water Chile just acquired it. So those are the 5 sites we did send notice out to all of the Department directors if they had any need for these properties and no one has expressed the desire to maintain or retain those properties. So, at this time, staff would recommend declaring the below 5 water utility sites as surplus. And again, on East Avenue, sunset, Creekside Della field, and then that vacant parcel on center road.

Okay, are there any motions or comments from the commissioners? Commissioner Francor?

Thank you, Mayor. I would move that the plan commission approve and recommend to the Common Council the declaration of surface land that the water utility has proposed, and that includes the listing that we received and all city department comments and concerns.

Okay, is there a second? Alderperson Wells? I'll second. Okay, any other comments? all right there is a motion to declare the listed properties from the water utility as surplus land please um all in favor say aye aye aye any opposed all right that motion does pass and that will go on to the full council for approval all right next up we have a director of community development report jennifer's not here but do you guys have anything for us

So, as you might remember, we had the Planning Commission recommended approval of the zoning code on April 1st at a special meeting, and it's been going through council reviews, and also the City Attorney's Office has been reviewing it and updating formatting, and they've also made some edits to clarify some of the language in it. We've had a couple of corrections to the zoning map. So we would like to bring that back to the Planning Commission. We were hoping to have that ready to do it at this meeting, but the City Attorney's Office is still finishing up some of their edits. So we're hoping to have one more last special meeting for the zoning code. ideally on Wednesday June 10th so we're just I guess looking for some input from all of you if that works if you would be willing to come in for for another special meeting or if that doesn't work if there's a time that does work better I will be out of town so I will also be out of town

I guess that's probably not going to work.

Maybe we can work together to find a different date so we can get that moving.

Yeah, we could also potentially wait until the June plan commission meeting. And that would just be on the July 7th council agenda for final approval.

All right. Sounds good. Anything else from anyone else? No? All right. Then absent any objections, we are adjourned. Thank you.

Thanks.