Minutes: Evansville Planning Commission: January 3, 2006

Plan Commission
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, January 3, 2006, 6:00 P.M.
City Hall, 31 S. Madison Street, Evansville, WI

MINUTES

The meeting was called to order by Mayor Ringhand at 6:00 PM. Present were: Mayor Ringhand, Ald. Aikman, Ald. Hammann, Cheryl Dickert, Dave Sauer, and Jeff Vrstal. Gil Skinner was absent. Staff present: Tim Schwecke, City Planner; Bill Connors, City Administrator; and Jim Beilke, Clerk/Treasurer. Ald. Cothard, Juergens, and Sornson were present in the audience.

Approval of Agenda.
The Agenda was approved after deleting “(Move agenda item 7H to be the first item under new business)” in item 3 – Approval of agenda.

Approval of Minutes.
Motion by Aikman, seconded by Sauer, to waive the reading of the December 5, 2005, Minutes and approve them as printed.

Motion by Aikman, seconded by Hammann, to amend the minutes to incorporate into a statement that the City of Evansville, Town of Union, and Evansville School District will seek to cooperate regarding managing the impact of residential development on the school district and to consider contributing to a study projecting future enrollment and/or a study of the fiscal impact of residential development. Motion passed.

The original motion, as amended, passed.

Motion by Hammann, seconded by Aikman, to waive the reading of the December 15, 2005 Minutes and approve them as printed. Motion passed.

Citizen Appearances Other Than Those Agenda Items Listed. None.

Unfinished Business.
Motion by Hammann, seconded by Sauer, to remove from the table a motion to recommend to the Common Council approval of the final land division for City of Evansville and MJ Properties LLC (boundary line relocation) – Application 2005-25. This certified survey map takes 3 lots and combines them into two lots. The city will own lot 1 and MJ Properties will own lot 2. Motion passed.

The original motion passed.

New Business.
Motion by Hammann, seconded by Sauer, to recommend to Council the approval of an easement agreement between the City of Evansville and MJ Properties, LLC. Mr. Connors reported last month the City and MJ Properties released an easement established in favor of the City on parcel 6-27-165 (Dean Community Center parcel and adjacent parking lot parcel). Now, after the new boundary lines from previous motion, the City and MJ Properties are asking to enter into an agreement granting a new ingress-egress easement across the north part of the parking lot. Motion passed.

Mr. Schwecke made the initial presentation regarding Ordinance #2005-46, a zoning code text amendment relative to violations of sign regulations, which addresses removing signs illegally placed on public and private properties and illegal signs that are readily movable. Illegal signs shall be removed or conformed to code within two days of written receipt of warning. Dangerous signs shall be removed or conformed to code within five days.

The Plan Commission reviewed the following items: (1) the disposal of illegal signs within 24 hours, questioning if that was adequate time; (2) removal of illegal signs on private property, questioning if the city wants to be involved with private affairs; (3) “threat to public safety” of dangerous signs, questioning who defines the threat to public safety; (4) and under (d) Penalties in line 46, “any neighboring property owner,” questioning if the city wants to be involved with private affairs. Additionally, the Commission discussed the “may be” in line 45 regarding illegal signs “may be” disposed of within 24 hours or removal, and the consensus was it should change to “shall be.”

Mayor Ringhand opened the public hearing at 6:38 PM. Steve Hagen, 420 W. Main St., pointed out if a council member is the “any neighboring property owner” in line 46 of the proposed ordinance, that council member would have the advantage of the City Attorney representing them. Ald. Sornson, 249 Franklin St., stated only the city should enforce the ordinances, not citizens, in regards to the “any neighboring property owner” in line 46. Mayor Ringhand closed the public hearing at 6:40 PM.

Mr. Connors noted that the “any property owner” text is not new text being added by the proposed ordinance, but instead was part of the original sign regulations. The Plan Commission discussed how citizens usually bring violations to the attention of the city asking why things are being or not being done. If the Plan Commission takes out or leaves in the phrase “any neighboring property owner,” it would not change fact that when citizens believe the city is not enforcing its zoning code or sign regulations, this usually is brought to the attention of the Plan Commission. Mr. Schwecke reported that if the city fails to enforce its sign regulations, a citizen could sue the city for a “writ of mandamus” to force the city to enforce its sign regulations.

Motion by Hammann, seconded by Sauer, to recommend to Council the adoption of Ordinance #2005-46 as drafted.

Motion by Hammann, seconded by Vrstal, to amend line 27 by deleting the word “may” and replacing it with “shall” and deleting the “24” and replacing it with “72.” Motion passed.

Motion by Vrstal, seconded by Aikman, to amend line 46 on page one and line 1 on page 2 by deleting the words “or any neighboring property owner, who would be specifically damaged by such violation.” Motion passed.

The original motion, as amended, passed.

Mr. Schwecke made the initial presentation regarding Ordinance #2005-47, a zoning code text amendment relative to minimum building sizes for group developments in the B-4 District. In 2002, the City repealed all minimum building size requirements in the B-4 district except for buildings that are part of a group development, which was an oversight. This amendment would correct the oversight in the text.

Mayor Ringhand opened the public hearing at 6:38 PM. No one appeared. Mayor Ringhand closed the public hearing at 6:40 PM.

Motion by Hammann, seconded by Aikman, to recommend to Council the adoption of Ordinance #2005-47 as drafted. Motion passed.

Mr. Schwecke made the initial presentation regarding Ordinance #2005-48, a zoning code map amendment relative to rezoning territory from Central Business District (B-2) to Residential District Two (R-2). The applicant, Lolita Marten, has submitted an application to rezone the property located at 30 S. Madison St. Historically, the property has been a residence. Because it has been vacant for over a year, the first floor may be used for residential purposes only if at least 700 square feet of the first floor, facing the street, is used for commercial purposes. The property is classified as residential on the Interim Future Use map and Future Land Use map. The ordinance would change the zoning code for subject property to match the maps.

The Plan Commission questioned why this property was zoned B-2. Staff speculated that the original thought was this whole area would become commercial. Plan Commission noted that the whole block is zoned B-2. If this property is zoned R-2, the bufferyard requirements would only apply to new development.

Mayor Ringhand opened the public hearing at 7:02 PM. Ald. Sornson asked the Commission to rezone the adjacent property for the same reasons the Commission is considering rezoning the subject property. Mr. Schwecke stated that would delay the rezoning of the subject property, which is not consistent with the applicant’s plans. Ald. Cothard and Ron Arndt, 16 S. Madison St., requested that the Commission grant a conditional use permit instead of rezoning. Mr. Arndt also stated mixed use falls under B-2 zoning. Ald. Juergens noted mixed use would benefit the downtown. The applicant, Lolita Martin, stated mixed use would maintain the downtown area. Sandy Decker, 143 W. Main St., favors zoning the property residential, which would be consistent with the Smart Growth Plan. Mayor Ringhand closed the public hearing at 7:12 PM.

The Plan Commission noted the applicant wants to use the property as a duplex but it historically has been used as a single-family home, and asked if a conditional use permit was issued. Staff stated that neither single-family nor two-family dwellings are permitted or conditional uses in the B-2 district, so the past residential use was a legal nonconforming use, which lapsed when the building remained vacant for over a year. A conditional use permit cannot be issued for the duplex the applicant wants to create as long as the property remains zoned B-2. The consensus was that it is best for the city to zone some properties in this area to residential. Thus, the applicant could convert the vacant building into something productive.

Motion by Hammann, seconded by Sauer, to recommend to Council the adoption of Ordinance #2005-48 as drafted based on the findings as contained in the staff report and on the conclusion that the public benefits of the proposed zoning classification outweigh any and all potential adverse impacts, if any. Motion passed.

Mr. Schwecke made the initial presentation on Ordinance #2005-49, which would enact a moratorium on the installation of outdoor furnaces within the City of Evansville. The Plan Commission has been discussing the idea of regulating outdoor furnaces. Last month, they instructed staff to draft this moratorium as an interim step before the final decision on banning or regulating outdoor furnaces.

During the initial discussion by the Plan Commission, the consensus was to move into the public hearing, so that Ron Arndt could present information regarding outdoor furnaces. Mr. Arndt is the President of R.A. Heating and Air Conditioning, Inc. and has extensive knowledge on outdoor furnaces.

Mayor Ringhand opened the public hearing at 7:29 PM. Mr. Arndt stated the major problem with outdoor wood burning appliances is the lack of education and regulation. He stated that a certified outdoor wood-burning furnace produces fewer emissions than a conventional wood-burning stove. It produces less than half the emissions. The key is proper installation and operation of the outdoor wood-burning furnace. When outdoor wood-burning furnaces were first marketed to the public, some outdoor wood-burning manufacturers hastily produced poorly designed furnaces and had ineffective installation standards, which had a negative impact on the whole industry. Now, state and local governments across the nation are developing written standards to regulate emissions from outdoor wood burners. As a result of these two events, manufactures of outdoor wood-burning appliances have formed a group called Hearth, Patio and Barbecue Association (HPBA). HPBA is working with government entities to develop standards to regulate outdoor wood-burning appliances. Using his contacts with HPBA, Mr. Arndt is assisting Fort Atkinson, Deerfield, and Cambridge in wording their ordinances regulating outdoor wood-burning appliances. He is volunteering to help Evansville. Bill Alt, 216 W. Main St., is against outdoor wood-burning furnaces because the emissions are a public nuisance and a majority of the city lots are too small to accommodate outdoor furnaces. Steve Hagen, 420 W. Main St., asked the Commission to consider lots size in their regulations and involve the fire department in their discussions. Ald. Juergens asked the Commission to set up a time line of six months for their final decision. Mayor Ringhand closed the public hearing at 8:00 PM

The Plan Commission is currently in a fact finding stage, and the consensus was to enact a moratorium for one year or until they are ready to make a final decision on banning or regulating outdoor wood-burning furnaces.

Motion by Hammann, seconded by Sauer, to recommend to Council the adoption of Ordinance #2005-49 amending line 13 by inserting a comma after the word corn and line 14 by deleting the word “corn.” Motion passed.

Mr. Connors made the initial presentation on Ordinance #2005-50, a zoning code text amendment relative to minimum lot size in Residential District One (R-1) and Residential District Two (R-2). In the older part of the city, there are lots platted before January 1, 2001, that do not meet the minimum sizes in the R-1 district, which are 8,000 square feet for single-family dwellings and 10,000 square feet for two-family dwellings. This ordinance establishes minimum sizes for lots platted before January 1, 2001, and after December 31, 2000. If a lot is plotted before January 1, 2001, the minimum lot sizes are 6,000 square feet for single-family dwellings and 8,000 square feet for two-family dwellings, in both the R-1 and R-2 districts. Adoption of this ordinance would complete an objective in the Smart Growth Comprehensive Plan.

Mayor Ringhand opened the public hearing at 8:14 PM. No one appeared. Mayor Ringhand closed the public hearing at 8:15 PM

Motion by Hammann, seconded by Sauer, to recommend to Council the adoption of Ordinance #2005-50 as drafted. Motion passed.

Mr. Sauer made the initial presentation Ordinance #2005-53, which would amend Chapter 126 of the municipal code to add an article on wellhead protection. He stated the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) requires a protection plan for the city’s new well. Part of the protection plan requires the municipality to pass an ordinance that identifies the area of protection around new and existing wells. This ordinance is one of the requirements to get our new well approved.

Plan Commission noted this ordinance would give the city the power to protect our water supplies by restricting or prohibiting certain business activities and structures around our three wells. Plan Commission reviewed how this ordinance would affect future industrial uses, noting that only new development would be governed by this ordinance. The Plan Commission noted that current laws protect communities (and wells) from hazardous industrial chemicals. Existing businesses are required by law to have containment systems for industrial chemicals, which are costly. This ordinance provides local power to balance protecting the municipal water supply and supporting local businesses.

Mayor Ringhand commented that she was surprised that some of the uses listed as conditional uses within the projection zones are not instead listed as prohibited uses.

Mayor Ringhand opened the public hearing at 8:32 PM. Ms. Decker asked whether the protection zones extend outside the city limits, and staff responded the answer is “yes.” Ald. Hammann noted that to the extent the protection zones extend outside the city limits, they are within the city’s extraterritorial plat review jurisdiction. Ms. Decker asked if the city must offer the conditional uses listed in Section 12(2) rather than just prohibiting them. Staff reported the city could prohibit these conditional uses, but this ordinance is drafted to allow these as conditional uses for the Plan Commission to grant or deny. Mr. Sauer said this draft ordinance has been used for over five years, and there are some reasons for these uses to be listed as conditional uses. Ms. Decker questioned why any communities would allow some of these conditional uses. Mayor Ringhand closed the public hearing at 8:37 PM.

In the final discussion by Plan Commission, Ald. Hammann discussed adding bio-hazardous chemical to the conditional uses listed in Section 12(2) because they are more dangerous than some of the petroleum chemicals. The city would want to know what chemicals a bio-medical research company is using. Thus, the city could then make the appropriate decision with a bio-medical research company located within the protection zone. Ald. Aikman questioned the wording on page 6, line 1. Her concerns were the wording implies these conditional uses are allowed. The city has the right to deny these conditional uses, and realistically, would never allow these conditional uses. Staff reported that the assumption in the code is everything is permitted unless it is prohibited or requires a conditional use permit. Staff suggested amending the ordinance to read as, “The following conditional uses shall be allowed only after the issuance of conditional uses permit.” This wording would be consistent with current code. Staff noted that in Section 4, the groundwater technical review committee would provide objective and scientific technical review of request for conditional use applications and would maintain the city’s interest in protecting the groundwater. Plan Commission concluded that small quantities of hazardous chemicals may be acceptable in this area as opposed to large quantities. Staff recommended this ordinance should be placed in Chapter 130 of the Municipal Code (Zoning) rather than in Chapter 126 (Utilities).

Motion by Hammann, seconded by Sauer, to recommend to Council the adoption of Ordinance #2005-53, with the following amendments: (1) page 6, line 29, change the word “tat” to “that;” (2) page 7, lines 15 through 40, underscoring all of the lines; (3) page 6, line 15, add item “g. Bio-chemical research or manufacture facilities;” (4) page 6, line 1, replace all of the words with “These conditional uses are permitted in Zone 2 only after the issuance of a conditional use permit;” and (5) place the ordinance in a new subdivision in Chapter 130, Article VIII (instead of in a new Article III of Chapter 126). Motion passed.

Motion by Hammann, seconded by Sauer, to adopt Plan Commission Resolution #2006-1, which recommends that the City Council adopt an amendment of the Smart Growth Comprehensive Plan to change the classification of certain parcels from single-family residential to commercial on the Interim Future Land Use Map and the Future Land Use Map. Mr. Hammann reported this resolution corrects an oversight on the map because initially the Plan Commission identified this area as commercial, but inadvertently left these lots on the future land use map as residential, which is their current use. Motion passed.

Preliminary Development Presentations. None

City Planner’s Report.
Mr. Schwecke reported that he and the City Administrator met with Tom Nonn to discuss his violations of the sign regulations and zoning code. They listened to his concerns and advised him that he must comply with the city’s code and regulations.

At Mr. Hammann’s request, Mr. Connors distributed a report on the status of implementation of the Smart Growth Comprehensive Plan, focusing on the objectives with 2005 “milestone” dates. Ald. Hammann recommends the Plan Commission should review Smart Growth implementation periodically to keep it on track.

Report of the Evansville Redevelopment Authority.
Mr. Connors reported that the Redevelopment Authority reviewed its policy and application form and tentatively adopted some changes. For example, they might make forgivable loans or grants if certain conditions are met. They made changes to the policy and application form to calculate the tax increment that would be generated.

Report of the Evansville Historic Preservation Commission. None

Adjournment.
Motion by Aikman, seconded Sauer, to adjourn, carried. The meeting adjourned at 9:18 PM.


Prepared by:
James A. Beilke
City Clerk/Treasurer

The Minutes of the Plan Commission are not official until approved by Plan Commission.