Minutes; Evansville Planning Commission: May 1, 2006

Plan Commission
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, May 1, 2006, 6:00 P.M.
City Hall, 31 S. Madison Street, Evansville, WI

MINUTES

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

Approval of Agenda.
The agenda was approved as printed.

Approval of Minutes.
Motion by Hammann, seconded by Skinner, to waive the reading of the April 3, 2006, Minutes and approve them as printed. Motion passed.

Citizen Appearances Other Than Those Agenda Items Listed - none.

Unfinished Business.
Mr. Connors led the discussion regarding amending the Municipal Code relative to vehicular access restrictions in the B-1, B-2, B-3, B-4 and O-1 zoning districts. The packet contained two draft ordinances, one labeled option A and one labeled option B. Currently, the zoning code provides that in order to ensure minimum disruption to residential development, commercial development in these commercial zoning districts must have their vehicular access onto collector or arterial streets. However, the city has not enforced these provisions consistently. For example, the city allowed commercial development along Brown School Road, but Brown School Road is not a collector or arterial street. Option A would repeal these provisions and re-enact them in more noticeable sections for the B-3, B-4, and O-1 districts; B-1 and B-2 would be exempt. Option B would require that when reviewing a change in zoning to any of these commercial zoning districts, the Plan Commission and Common Council must consider whether there will be increased traffic on local roads and as a result adverse impact on existing residential development. Option B allows the city to review each situation on a case-by-case basis. Ald. Hammann and Braunschweig would be sponsors for Option B.

Mr. Schwecke led the discussion on the update on text amendments to the city’s floodplain regulations so as to be consistent with state and federal requirements. The Federal government and state changed their floodplain regulations. Thus, the city needs to change its regulations to conform to state and federal requirements. Ald. Hammann and Braunschweig would be sponsors.

Mr. Schwecke provided an update on 2005 Assembly Bill 299, which would have repealed a state requirement that county shoreland zoning regulations continue to apply to lands annexed in a city or village. The governor vetoed 2005 Assembly Bill 299. How it stands now is counties are required to adopt minimum standards for shoreland zoning, which would follow lands annexed in a city or village.

Mr. Schwecke led the discussion regarding (1) the adoption of an ordinance banning outdoor furnaces in the city and an ordinance regulating the operation of existing outdoor furnaces, and (2) the adoption of an ordinance that would allow outdoor furnaces throughout the city and regulate their placement, design, and operation. The Commission recommended that an ad hoc committee be set up to study the outdoor furnace issues.

New Business.
Motion by Hammann, seconded by Braunschweig, to set a public hearing regarding the creation of Tax Increment District No. 6 for 6:00 PM on Monday June 5, 2006. Motion passed.

Motion by Hammann, seconded by Sauer, to approve the proposed lot line adjustments for lots 35, 36, and 37 and Outlot 3 of Grand Orchard Estates as depicted on the final plat reviewed on this date (May 1, 2006). Motion passed.

Mr. Connors led the discussion regarding the release of a 60-foot easement along USH 14. When the developer John Morning filed two certified survey maps (CSMs) for his development along Brown School Road, the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) required him to show a 60-foot easement along USH 14. Since that time, the state has determined that WisDOT did not have the authority to require that stipulation of approval. Ron Combs, surveyor for John Morning, completed the necessary recording for the CSMs, and John Morning is asking the city to sign the affidavits of correction necessary to remove the 60-foot easement and related notations from the CSMs. The consensus of the Commission was the original 60-foot easement was a WisDOT error that needs to be corrected. In her discussion with WisDOT, Mayor Decker reported that WisDOT envisioned a four-lane highway in this area within the next 20 years. Ald. Hammann requested the City Engineer examine the right-of-way issues required for a divided four-lane highway in this section of HWY 14.

Motion by Hammann, seconded by Braunschweig, to authorize the City Administrator to sign the affidavit of correction for Certified Survey Map #1723826 and for Certified Survey Map #1626042 which removes the 60-foot easement along USH 14. Motion passed.

Bernardo Morice presented his conditional use application for indoor commercial entertainment center off of Brown School Road (Application #2006-12). The family entertainment center would consist of 14 lanes for bowling, 4 lanes for mini –bowling, bowling pro shop, arcade, pool tables, sports bar and grill, and party room. The subject property abuts the Town of Union on the north and east. Low-density residential is located to the north, commercial is to the south, and medium-density residential is located to the west.

Mr. Schwecke presented his report and recommended denying the conditional use in that the hours of operation and associated traffic is not appropriate for the site. If the Plan Commission chose to approve the application, he listed conditions of approval in his report.

Mayor Decker opened the public hearing at 7:00 PM. The following people appeared and spoke against the conditional use permit:

Kim Gruebling, 13396 W Forest Hollow, Town of Union
Bobbi Lezotte, 7536 N. Orchard View Dr., Town of Union
Eric Johnson, 13213 W. Northfield Crossing, Town of Union
Kathryn Rogers, 13349 W. Northfield Crossing, Town of Union
Scott Rogers, 13349 W. Northfield Crossing, Town of Union
Greg Ardisson, 217 N 6th Street, City of Evansville
Linda Church, 555 S. 5th, City of Evansville
Sarah Laufenberg, 7530 Hwy M, City of Evansville
John Witmore, 766A Brown School Road, Town of Union
Barb Jacobson, 55 N 6th Street, City of Evansville
Art Cresson, 13441 W. Northfield Crossing, Town of Union
Brenda Krugman, 13310 W. Northfield Crossing, Town of Union
Ty Krugman, 13310 W. Northfield Crossing, Town of Union
Joyce Parizo, 492 Badger Dr., City of Evansville

Mr. Gruebling submitted a petition with 60 signatures of residents who are against this conditional use permit. Craig Walmer from Evansville Bowl asked if a liquor license was available, and Mr. Connors reported one “Class B” liquor license is available. Mayor Decker read a letter from Terry Biddick, 13327 W. Northfield Crossing, Town of Union. Mr. Biddick is against this conditional use permit.

Mayor Decker closed the public hearing at 7:18 PM.

The Commission pondered how to attract new businesses, address the Town of Union residents’ concerns, and mitigate the exacerbated traffic problems in this area. The Commission liked the idea of a family entertainment center in Evansville but not in this location. The residents in this area have been supportive of all other businesses placed here, but not this one.

Bernardo Morice reported that a lot of people told him they like his family entertainment center. He stated there are not many places in Evansville for this type of business. Jim Grant and Wendy Smith from AMF Bowling Inc. stated this is a family entertainment center, and this type of business is growing rapidly across the nation. This is not a typical bowling alley and bar from the old days, but it is a place where your family can go and have fun. Most communities embrace this type of family entertainment center and are excited to have them in their communities.

Motion by Hammann, seconded by Braunschweig, to act on the application (not defer to a later date). Motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote.

Motion by Hammann, seconded by Braunschweig, to approve the application based on the findings as contained in the staff report and the conclusion that the public benefits of the proposed use outweigh any and all potential adverse impacts, if any. Motion failed unanimously on a roll call vote.

Mr. Schwecke led the discussion on the zoning code text amendment regarding placement of signage on canopies in the B-1, B-3, and B-4 districts as drafted in Ordinance #2006-8. Currently, signage can only be on the vertical flap. This ordinance would also allow signage on the sloping portion of the awning.

The Commission discussed how the purpose of the original language was to restrict unsightly signs on awnings, such as, signage on 100% of the awnings. They discussed anything less than 50% would restrict businesses.

Mayor Decker opened the public hearing at 7:46 PM, and no one appeared. Mayor Decker closed the public hearing at 7:47 PM.

Motion by Hammann, seconded by Braunschweig, to recommend to Council the adoption of Ordinance #2006-8 as drafted. Motion passed.

Ald. Hammann led the discussion on the location of sidewalk improvements along South Second Street between Lincoln Street and Fair Street. Ald. Hammann distributed Prioritization of Sidewalk Connections report from the Public Works Committee. It listed Fair St. and Second Street as the next project for sidewalk work. When Public Works prioritizes sidewalks, they consider safety, schools, parks, business districts, medical centers, collector streets, traffic levels, and infilling gaps in sidewalks. The Fair Street and Second Street projects would connect schools. He reported that the Public Works Committee wants to fill the gaps in the sidewalk on the west side of the street because that is where the kids walk.

Motion by Hammann, seconded by Braunschweig, to authorize the city to complete the sidewalk on South Second Street between Lincoln Street and Fair Street on the west side of the street rather than the east side. Motion passed.

Mr. Schwecke led the discussion regarding the annual review of proposed amendments to the city’s Smart Growth Comprehensive Plan and adopting appropriate requirements. The commissioners discussed whether they should table this resolution until they can merge the city’s plan with the Town of Union’s plan. Mr. Schwecke recommended the Commission add a “Whereas” clause stating, the city is working with the Town of Union to create an agreement. It is anticipated that following the conclusion of that agreement, there will be a city-sponsored amendment to coordinate the two agreements.

Motion by Hammann, seconded by Braunschweig, to approve Plan Commission Resolution 2006-2, adding a “Whereas” clause stating the city will work with the Town of Union to create an agreement to make their plans consistent once the township adopts their plan. It is anticipated that following the conclusion of that agreement, there will be a city-sponsored amendment to the city’s comprehensive plan to make it consistent with the agreement. Motion passed.

Preliminary Development Presentations.
Phil Maas and John Morning presented the idea of annexing Mr. Maas’ land and an amendment to the interim future land use map in the city’s Smart Growth Comprehensive Plan to mark Mr. Maas’ land for development (Mr. Maas’ land already is marked for development in the long-term future land use map in the plan). The Commission was concerned with how this annexation and a new subdivision would fit into the city’s growth goals. Mr. Connors reported that with development of the land that already has been annexed for approved subdivisions or potential future subdivisions, the city would meet its growth goals for the next 10 years. Mr. Connors reported that the Gildner property in the Town of Union already is marked for development in the interim future land use map. The commissioners noted that development of the Maas property is important to the city’s future transportation plan (because 6th Street and 7th Street need to cross his property if they are to intersect with CTH C), but they expressed concern about allowing another subdivision in the near future.

Report of the Evansville Redevelopment Authority
Mr. Connors reported the Redevelopment Authority is waiting to hear from property owners who want to add or remove their properties from Tax Incremental District (TID) No. 5. Only one property owner came forward to request that his parcel be added, and the Redevelopment Authority believes it would be prudent to wait until there are more parcels that need to be added or removed. Roger Berg, 75 Exchange St., reported that it is likely that there will be additional parcels the city will want to consider adding to TID No. 5 within the next six months.

Report of the Evansville Historic Preservation Commission – none.

Report of the Evansville Large-Scale Commercial Development Study Committee
Mr. Schwecke reported on presentation to Evansville Area Chamber of Commerce on April 20th and public listening session held on April 27th. The Committee will meet on May 11th to make changes to the draft recommendations and then present their recommendations to the Plan Commission in June.

City Planner’s Report.
Mr. Schwecke reported on Common Council actions relating to Plan Commission recommendations, proposal to adopt architectural design standards, fiscal impact analysis, traditional neighborhood development (TND) standards, proposed revisions to landscaping standards, and Ton Nonn - dba Badger Cycle. Mr. Connors was instructed to obtain information about the kind of fiscal impact analysis study is required by the City of Elkhorn for new residential development and whether the staff of that city thinks the study requirement produces useful information.

Additionally, he led a discussion regarding ex parte communication. Plan Commission and Common Council have different roles depending on different applications being considered. Plan Commission and Common Council make legislative or quasi-judicial decisions. A legislative decision is when a governing body adopts or revises an ordinance. As a member of a governing body for a legislative decision, members can express their opinions and thoughts outside of a public meeting. A quasi-judicial decision is when a governing body interprets and applies the ordinances to a particular fact situation, such as rezoning, site plan approval, conditional use permit, and variances. As a member of a governing body for a quasi-judicial decision, members are not allowed to talk to anyone about the application outside of a public meeting, which is called ex parte communication, lest it appear that the member has formed an opinion on the application before hearing the evidence and arguments for and against the application during the public meeting. If a commissioner finds himself or herself receiving ex parte communication from a citizen, the commissioner should encourage the citizen to express his or her views and provide his or her information at the public hearing, and the commissioner should avoid stating his or her opinions or thoughts about the application at that time.

Adjournment.
The Commission considered the date of their July meeting, which ordinarily would be on July 3rd, and decided to move the meeting to 6:00 PM on Thursday, June 29th.

Motion by Hammann, seconded Braunschweig, to adjourn, carried. The meeting adjourned at 9:06 PM.

Prepared by:
James A. Beilke
City Clerk/Treasurer

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