PLAN COMMISSION

March 25, 2010                                                                                                                                 

 

Members present:  Knudson, Burchill, Yoerg, Olson, Selissen, Vance and Casanova

 

Others present:  Pam Brokaw, Gordon Conard, Mary Yacoub, Caio Cella, John Duffy, Nick Hackworthy, Valerie and Bill Badlo, John Engle, Cary Krusemark, Denny Darnold and others

 

The meeting was called to order by Chairman Knudson at 7:00 p.m.

 

A motion was made by Burchill, seconded by Selissen to approve the March 4, 2010 meeting minutes.  Motion carried.

 

Public hearing for conditional use permit for a seasonal / temporary garden center, Plaza 94 south parking lot (north of Coulee Road and east of 18th Street) – Linder’s Greenhouse, Inc. / Caio Cella.  Knudson reviewed the public hearing notice.  No comments were received.  A motion was made by Yoerg, seconded by Burchill to close the public hearing.  Motion carried.  7:03 p.m.

 

Public hearing for a conditional use permit for two, three-story multiple family residential structures in the Heritage Greens planned residential development on part of Outlot 4 (also referred to as P5), east of Linden (private street)  and south of Ivy Green (private street) – Duffy Development.  Knudson reviewed the public hearing notice.  Darnold suggested that the applicant Duffy Development  represented by John Duffy be given approximately five minutes to review their development proposal.

 

John Duffy, representing Duffy Development commented that his company has been developing commercial and residential properties since 1986.  Duffy Development owns and manages multiple family projects in suburbs of the Twin Cities and in Superior, Wisconsin.  Duffy Development has properties located in Woodbury, Minnesota and has an “A” rating with the Woodbury Police Department.  Their company requires strict criteria for residency and has a good reputation for property management and maintenance.  The proposed development site in Heritage Greens is 3.3 acres with access from Hanley Road.  Duffy conducted a market study of the need for family housing, and the study indicated there is a need for affordable family housing in Hudson. 

 

Duffy noted that the Heritage Greens development allows two-story structures on Outlot  4.  He commented that a three-story structure would fit better.  Duffy added that with a three-story structure the site and buildings can be designed to provide for more green space, a playground area, more room inside the building.  Duffy noted that the buildings will have neutral colors of brick and vinyl or steel siding.  The structures would have similar architecture to existing buildings In Heritage Greens.  Duffy reiterated that Duffy Development will be the owner and property manager.

 

Gordon Conard, 36 Eagle’s Nest Circle noted that he resides in the Red Cedar Canyon planned residential development.  He expressed that the density of development and the buildings being proposed to be three-stories were concerns.   Conard noted that existing buildings to the north are single-story buildings.  He also commented that one-family residences exist within a short distance from the proposed development site.  In the instance of this type of allowance by conditional use permit, it is not reviewable in the future.

 

 

Page 2, Plan Commission

March 25, 2010                                                                                                                                 

 

 

Valerie Badlo, 100 East Canyon Drive commented that the consideration of the requested conditional use permit must be considered with both the Heritage Greens and Red Cedar Canyon neighborhoods in mind.  She commented that both neighborhoods worked with the city and developer in 2008 and for the city not to provide ample opportunity to comment on this proposal was obscene and did not reflect the fiduciary responsibility of the city.  Badlo noted that this project should not be approved to make up for BrightKEYS failings in the past.  She commented that from where she resides, property is adjacent to the Heritage Greens development, that this project will be visible.  She added approval of this proposal would be gross negligence by the city.   Badlo expressed that she should have been made aware of the project.  The development and approval process is slowly gnawing away a little bit at a time, Badlo expressed.  She stated that she is not against the senior, disability or low-income populations.  The provision of jobs and transportation to get to the jobs is important considerations.  Badlo opined that multiple-family housing would best be located near I-94 so it could be efficiently served by public transportation.  Badlo cautioned the plan commission to take their time with their consideration of this request and to delay the vote until the residents of the Heritage Greens and Red Cedar Canyon neighborhoods would have more time to learn about the proposed project.

 

John Engle, 104 East Canyon Drive commented that the residents that expressed opposition to the changes in the Heritage Greens development would fight tooth and nail in opposition to this proposal.  He noted that he does not want this project to move ahead.  He commented that the city had approved a two-story senior development on this location, and this is a change of the agreed upon plans.  Engle commented that there is no “A” by any community in regard to multiple family residential developments, and the rental properties have typically been problematic for communities, particularly in regard to a community like Hudson that has an undermanned police department.  He encouraged the plan commission to vote down the proposal this evening.

 

Nick Hackworthy, Anchor Realty representing the owner of the Heritage Market properties noted that BrightKEYS has no involvement in this project.  He commented that there was about $1.5 million of improvements to Heritage Boulevard, the south entrance and the sport court (Heritage Greens).  Hackworthy commented that the bank project has unfortunately not moved ahead as indicated by Royal Credit Union.  The area noted as P5 in the 2008 Heritage Greens amendments established a maximum density of 80 units – family and 100 units – elderly with the buildings to be two-stories, except for allowance to three-stories if approved through a conditional use permit.

 

Hackworthy commented that with the state of the economy that there were no conventional deals taking place in developments.   He noted that the income range for the residents may be as high as $58,000 dependent on family size and are oriented toward residents that have incomes up to 50 to 60% of the county median income.  Rents generally would be $800 to $900 per month, Hackworthy noted.  WHEDA (Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Agency) would be the funding source for this proposed project.

 

Hackworthy addressed the issue of the view of the building from the Red Cedar Canyon residential properties noting ASI has proposed a three-story senior housing project and that Heritage Greens will require conformance with the architectural standards of the development.  Hackworthy added that crime is not exclusive to multiple-family developments and that residents must provide information to

 

Page 3, Plan Commission

March 25, 2010                                                                                                                                 

 

 

determine that they can afford to pay their monthly rent obligations.  The residents will work at local businesses and contribute to the local economy, Hackworthy noted.

 

Hackworthy expressed that the proposal aligns with the parameters of the Heritage Greens planned residential development amendment approved in 2008.  Hackworthy noted that the project may be in risk of not being funded if not approved by the city this evening as the application for funding is due next week.

 

Knudson noted that he had received e-mail messages from residents of the Red Cedar Canyon and Heritage Greens neighborhoods and that there were two e-mails from Darla Klementz and Matt Campana to the plan commission, that copies of the messages were provided tonight  and all the correspondence expressed opposition to the proposed project.

 

Cary Krusemark, 47 Promenade noted that he moved to the Heritage Greens neighborhood in October, 2008.  Krusemark commented that he felt that this proposal changed what was agreed upon in 2008 and asked that the neighborhood be given additional opportunity to review the proposal before a decision is made.

 

Valerie Badlo added that the original plans did not consider a three-story building and that the developer makes it sound as if this should not be a concern for residents that live nearby.  There has been so much change in the plans since the original plan was adopted in 2003 and that the recent plan submittals continue to change the overall plan.

 

A motion was made by Burchill, seconded by Yoerg to close the public hearing.  Motion carried.  (7:47 p.m.).

 

Conditional use permit for temporary seasonal / garden center, Plaza 94 south parking lot – Linder’s Greenhouse, Inc. / Caio Cella.  Yoerg asked about the two issues that were raised by Darnold – potential conflict with Farmer’s Market and the water supply.  Darnold responded that the property owner Kraus Anderson did provide a letter of support for the project.  Knudson noted that issue is for Kraus Anderson to address in working with Linder’s and the Farmer’s Market.  Caio Cella noted that he has been working with the coffee shop located in the parking lot to purchase water from them and has also visited with the city of Hudson to see if water may be obtained from a fire hydrant.

 

A motion was made by Burchill, seconded by Casanova to recommend approval of a conditional use permit for a temporary / seasonal garden center to Linder’s Greenhouse, Inc. / Caio Cella to be located in the south parking lot of Plaza 94 as designated in the application and with the following conditions:

-          Limited to a period of March 15 to July 20

-          A one year review is required (March 2011)

-          The provision of water must be addressed either with the coffee shop at the parking lot or approved by the water utility.

Motion carried.

 

Page 4, Plan Commission

March 25, 2010                                                                                                                                 

 

 

Conditional use permit for two, three-story multiple family (apartment) residential structures, part of Outlot 4, Heritage Market, Heritage Greens planned residential development – Duffy Development Company.  Knudson commented that the original plan had proposed four-story multiple family buildings in the south part of Heritage Greens; and with the amendment in 2008, it was established that two-story buildings would be allowed with up to three-story buildings through the approval of a conditional use permit.  Knudson noted that the 2008 amendment was a give and take consideration with compromise between the developer’s desires and concerns of nearby residents.  The allowance for density was 80 units in a designated 3 acre area.  The proposal includes underground parking and proof of parking to maximize the green area.

 

Duffy commented that households that are within the 50% of the county median income do have cars and are not totally dependent on public transportation.  Rents for the units will range from $700 to $900 per month.  Duffy noted that the competition for development funding support through WHEDA is very competitive.

 

Knudson commented that the purpose of the hearing tonight was not to argue the merits of the project being oriented toward low-income housing.  He noted that he favored the two-story building concept.  The project has continued to be developed and perhaps if the standards were not set so high the amount of development may be greater.  Knudson stated that you cannot blame the state of the economy on TV&H.

 

Darnold noted that he is not opposed to the three-story buildings being proposed.  By going to a three-story building more green space and landscaping can be provided. 

 

Yoerg noted that he is concerned about the visibility of the structure and views from the surrounding residential areas. Yoerg commented that he is in favor of a two-story structure.

 

Casanova noted that he has mixed feelings whether the project should be two- or three-stories in height.  He noted that a three-story structure may be just as appealing as a two-story building, and the proposal does include underground parking. 

 

Burchill noted that he is concerned that comment has been made that links affordable housing to crime or being a bad neighbor.  He asked Duffy if Duffy felt the three-story buildings were a better proposal and why.  Duffy answered that he felt the three-story proposal fit better with the neighborhood, providing more green space, a playground area. 

 

Duffy added that the WHEDA financing is necessary to make the project succeed.   Duffy suggested that the building may be built to create a berm near the building to help screen the building. 

 

Burchill noted that in previous reviews there were sightlines that were looked at and the elevation of the existing buildings and proposed building also were reviewed.

 

Hackworthy commented that the roof lines and proof of parking are considerations the developer may be able to address as well as the appearance of the building and provide for more green space.

 

Page 5, Plan Commission

March 25, 2010                                                                                                                                 

 

 

Yoerg commented that it appeared the overall building height is approximately 43 feet.  Darnold commented that there was no maximum height, but rather two-stories are allowed and three-stories are allowed by conditional use permit.

 

Selissen noted that he is reluctant to approve the proposed three-story buildings.  He commented that he was not comfortable changing from an allowed two-story facility to the three-story consideration.   Selissen noted that two-story structures may result in fewer units.

 

Olson commented that she favored the two-story building, but recognized that it is tough for developers to implement projects in the present economic climate.  Olson inquired when the application for housing assistance to WHEDA is due.  Hackworthy commented the applications were originally due in March, but extended to April 2 and now to April 9.

 

Knudson commented that the three-story proposal would provide more green space.  Knudson commented that if the project were to get the rents that are indicated it must be subsidized.  Knudson noted that a greater amount of investment could be off-set by higher rents.

 

Darnold commented that the plan commission should not feel compelled to make a decision because the application is due April 9 and that they should take what time is necessary for them to make a decision.

 

Hackworthy noted that the project will be similar in height to the three-story elderly housing project proposed by Accessible Space Inc.

 

Duffy noted that the project can be proposed as a two-story project and that he was unaware that there would be this much opposition expressed.  Duffy commented that a market study has been done which addresses the need for affordable housing and that he has several letters of support from community organizations such as the Chamber of Commerce, Rotary Club, etc.

 

Pam Brokaw, Alderperson for this neighborhood commented that it was agreed to have two-story buildings in this area, and the city should honor that commitment.  She did note that she felt there is a need for this type of housing.

 

A motion was made by Yoerg, seconded by Olson to postpone consideration of the conditional use permit application by Duffy Development.  Motion carried.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Page 6, Plan Commission

March 25, 2010                                                                                                                                 

 

 

Renewal of conditional use permit (CUP) for an outdoor seasonal sales area and garden center at The

Home Depot, 2330 Crest View Drive.  Darnold reviewed the CUP conditions and that the permit was initially approved in 2002 and renewed in 2004 and 2007.  Motion by Burchill, seconded by Selissen to recommend approval of the renewal of the conditional use permit with the following conditions:

-          Limited from April 1 to July 15

-          Allow up to an 8’ chain link fence and 20’x40’ greenhouse

-          Total area limited to 64’ x 120’ (7,680 sq. ft.)

-          Renewal required in three years (2013)

Motion carried.

 

Rezoning of 911 Fourth Street (Municipal Building / parking lot) from R-1, One-Family Residential District to OFC, Office District and amend city of Hudson comprehensive plan – Common Council.  Darnold explained that the Common Council placed the municipal building at 911 Fourth Street on sale and that it desires to have the property classified as OFC – Office District as that best extends the current use of the property.  A motion was made by Casanova, seconded by Selissen to recommend approval of the rezoning of the property at 911 Fourth Street from R-1, One-Family Residential District to OFC, Office District.  Motion carried.

 

Amend OFC, Office District to allow other commercial uses through approval of a conditional use permit – Community Development Director.  Darnold stated that during the process of consideration of the sale of the municipal building at 911 Fourth Street and how the property may be reused it was discussed how the permitted uses allowed in the Office District may be expanded to allow limited commercial uses such as a coffee shop or book store to serve the ancillary uses of the office building.  Darnold commented that he discussed those matters with the city attorney and the recommendation from the city attorney and the community development director is to amend the text section of the zoning ordinance to allow restaurants and cafes and retail shopping upon approval of a conditional use permit, but limited to no more than 15% of the total floor area of the building, but not allow drive-up service.

 

Chairman Knudson recused himself for discussion or consideration of the matter.  Burchill assumed temporary chair of the commission for this matter.

 

A motion was made by Casanova, seconded by Burchill to recommend to the Common Council an amendment to the uses permitted in the OFC – Office District per the recommendation of the city attorney and community development director.  Motion carried.

 

Review future land use designations/recommend zoning: a) Bieneman Farm LLC (southeast quadrant of Hanley Road/STH 35), b) Gaffer Properties LLC (north side Coulee Road, east of Second Street) and c) Tim/Betty Caruso (27 Coulee Road).  Darnold commented that there are three parcels that he had requested reconsideration of since the comprehensive plan was adopted last December including the Bieneman Farm, LLC parcel near the Hanley Road / STH 35 interchange and two properties north of Coulee Road and east of Second Street.  Darnold commented that the Bieneman Farm, LLC, 3+ acre parcel had been zoned General Business District but designated as industrial in the comprehensive plan because the larger parcel located to the east of the parcel in the city had been designated as industrial 

Page 7, Plan Commission

March 25, 2010                                                                                                                                 

 

 

in the city comprehensive plan since 1993.  At the Common Council meeting to adopt the plan, there was discussion whether to establish the designations as commercial for both parcels.

 

Amendments to Municipal code Chapter 202 Signs (sign ordinance) – referred from Common Council.  Due to the length of the meeting this item was postponed until the next meeting or if that agenda had several items of consideration to schedule a special meeting.

 

Other business for information purposes only or for upcoming agenda.  The next scheduled meeting is Thursday, April 8, 7:00 p.m.  The second meeting in April will be Thursday, April 22.  Chairman Knudson asked if the plan commission may be agreeable to meeting on Thursday, May 13, instead of May 6.  Darnold will send out a memo requesting if May 13 or alternative dates are available for commissioners to meet.

 

Motion by Yoerg, seconded by Casanova to adjourn.  Motion carried.  9:00 p.m.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Dennis Darnold