PLAN COMMISSION
June 4, 2009
Members present: Knudson, Burchill, Olson, Selissen, Vance and Casanova
Others present:
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Knudson.
A motion was made by Casanova, seconded by Olson to approve
the meeting minutes of May 21, 2009. Motion carried.
Public hearing and consideration of a request for amendment to the conditional use permit for The Lighthouse at Hudson Pier planned residential development to reduce the rear yard setback from 35 feet to 25 feet for the one-family residential lots, lots 1-11, 13-16 of the plat of The Lighthouse at Hudson Pier; lots 17-27 of the plat of The Lighthouse at Hudson Pier First Addition; lots 28-48 and 56-91 of the plat of The Lighthouse at Hudson Pier Second Addition; and lots 1 and 2, CSM, Vol.19, Pg.4991, City of Hudson, St. Croix County, Wisconsin – Coachlight Trail Homeowner’s Association. The public hearing for the conditional use permit amendment was called to order by Chairman Knudson at 7:02 p.m. Knudson asked that persons in the audience that desired to comment please come to the lectern and provide their name and address before presenting their comments.
Kyle Wolf,
Mike Dockendorf,
Page 2, Plan Commission
June 4, 2009
Knudson asked which lots were owned by
Bill Heller, 72 Brighton Path commented that he is not opposed to the request to reduce the setback to 25 feet as there is adequate green space between the one- and the two-family homes which are located on abutting lots.
Knudson asked if the townhomes are located to the north. Heller answered yes.
Mort Rykiss, president of the Lighthouse Carriage Homes Homeowner’s Association (which is the abutting townhomes) commented that they had no objection to the request.
Gordon Conard, 36 Eagle's Nest Circle commented that he is a member of the Board of Appeals and that the board was empathetic with the Wolf’s application for a variance and that the reduced setback would not be problematic in their specific instance, but the application did not meet the standards for approval and that the board suggested that they apply for an amendment to the conditional use permit.
No other comments were received. A motion was made by Burchill, seconded by Casanova to close the public hearing. Motion carried. 7:11 p.m.
Darnold recommended approval of the amendment to the
conditional use permit for the Lighthouse at Hudson Pier planned residential
development to reduce the required rear yard from 35 feet to 25 feet for open
decks only, because otherwise the residences could be extended to the 25 foot
setback and again not provide for a deck.
Darnold added that many of the lots abut open space,
Knudson asked Darnold to show which lots have the rear yard / side yard circumstance and where the house adjacent to the multiple family building is at. Darnold noted those locations. Knudson added that this development is one of several planned residential developments in the city and that a characteristic of the planned residential developments is that it provides for flexibility. One concern Knudson offered was that the setback be restricted to open decks only, so that developers would not continue to construct to the setback line and not accommodate future deck projects.
Darnold commented that in this development he is not concerned about reducing the setback, but that this type of request should be considered on a case by case basis.
Knudson asked if the standard should be different for corner lots. Darnold responded he felt comfortable with approving the request for all lots.
Page 3, Plan Commission
June 4, 2009
Motion by Casanova, seconded by Burchill to recommend
approval of the requested amendment to the conditional use permit to reduce the
minimum rear yard setback from 35 feet to 25 feet for the one-family lots in
The Lighthouse at Hudson Pier subdivision with the condition the reduced
setback will apply only to open decks. Motion carried.
Request by the
Lighthouse Carriage Homes Homeowner’s Association to have
Darnold explained that the city approved Brighton Path as a private street and that the street width is not the only issue to be considered. The entire area of the townhomes along Brighton Path would have been different, if a public street would have been approved from the beginning; including dedication of the right-of-way, required setbacks of buildings and the standards upon which utilities are installed. The developer benefitted from the private street because more density could be gained, Darnold opined. Darnold recommended that the city not take over Brighton Path as a public street.
Kevin Vance asked if sidewalks would be required if it is converted to a public street. Darnold commented that if it would have been a public street initially sidewalks would, most likely, have been required.
Knudson agreed with the staff recommendation to deny the request noting that this is not exclusively a street width issue and entails, as Darnold explained, issues such as design standards.
Darnold noted that with some structures within 24 or 25 feet of the curb line of Brighton Path that snow plowing would be an issue as a car parked in front of the structure would be only a short distance from the curb and the city plows would possibly push snow into the parked cars.
Knudson noted the private drive allows greater density because a right-of-way is not required and reduced setbacks may be allowed, this allows the cost of the home to be reduced but that the private street maintenance cost is assumed by the future owners. It would be unfair to the rest of the taxpayers to pay for the private street maintenance, Knudson added.
Heller asked if the city may be able to assist the homeowner’s association (HOA) in allowing the association to piggy-back on city contracts to have street maintenance work done, such as crack-filling and seal coating. Knudson and Darnold commented that may not be an issue but would need to be reviewed with the Public Works Committee and Common Council. Selissen commented that the HOA can contact the successful contractor after the city has awarded the bid and negotiate directly with the contractor.
A motion was made by Vance, seconded by Selissen to deny the
request to have Brighton Path within The Lighthouse at Hudson Pier planned
residential development become a public street.
Motion carried.
Page 4, Plan Commission
June 4, 2009
Request by T V &
H Properties LLC to extend the date of completion for Heritage Boulevard street
and utility improvements from June 15 to August 15, 2009 and extend the date of
the completion of Market Green improvements from July 1, 2009 to July 1, 2010. Darnold recommended approval of the request
for extension of the
- If no construction is commenced by July 1, 2009 that the city may initiate drawdown of the letter of credit,
-
The final lift of paving of
Darnold added that the
In regard to Market Green, Darnold commented, if the Heritage Boulevard and Heirloom project is completed by August 15 as proposed by T V & H Properties that will give T V & H one to two months to complete the project; however, the city must be able to draw on the letter of credit by August 1 to assure the project can be completed.
Burchill noted that the developer agreed to July 1, 2009 for
the completion of the
Hackworthy clarified that only the Market Green project is proposed to be extended into 2010.
Knudson stated that the city did not stipulate the July 1, 2009 completion date as that date was set by the developer. There were a number of concerns expressed by the residents in the area that various private amenities of Heritage Greens had not been completed by BrightKEYS and the city will not interject itself in those issues Knudson stated. However, the public improvements and commons areas were issues that the city was assured would be completed in 2009; and the city holds a letter of credit to assure those improvements are completed. The issue is that the city must draw on the letter of credit early enough to have the project(s) completed this year.
Darnold commented the letter of credit extends through September, 2009, but that the bank can notify the city that the letter of credit will not be extended beyond that date, if that notification is given to the
Page 5, Plan Commission
June 4, 2009
city and the project has not satisfactorily progressed, the
city will need to draw on the letter of credit.
If the city is not given the notice that the letter of credit will not
be extended, then the letter of credit is automatically extended for one
year. Darnold agreed with Hackworthy
that it is not the intention of the developer to delay the project until 2010,
but that he is trying to protect the city’s interest in getting the project
completed in 2009 as Heritage Cottages is depending on the completion of the
project this year. Darnold further added
that this project has had very good weather to advance construction, yet they
have pulled the contractor off the job.
He also added that by recommending an extension to August 15, 2009 with
the conditions mentioned he also is acknowledging the benefit of coordination
of the
Knudson asked Darnold about the request to extend the completion of Market Green. Darnold expressed that in his opinion if Heritage Boulevard and Heirloom are completed, as proposed by August 15th that T V & H can finish the Market Green improvements by mid- to late-September at the latest. Again the issue is the city’s need to draw on the letter of credit in sufficient time such as September 1 to proceed with the work if there is not progress shown.
Hackworthy reviewed the proposed improvements in Market Green including sidewalks, exercise stations, patio in the center, benches, flagpoles and directional pylon signs. Vance noted this is more oriented to passive recreation. Darnold stated yes that it would serve as an area for residents of the nearby neighborhoods to stop to recreate while visiting the proposed commercial area.
Knudson commented that the Council felt strongly that the ‘greens’ areas be completed this year and may be inclined to hold the developer to the Harvest Green and other common areas in the commercial area to complete the improvements in 2009 and not to extend the completion date until 2010.
Darnold reiterated his recommendation. Burchill questioned what may constitute progress in the project. Knudson noted it is clear there is no work going on now. Darnold suggested that a letter from the contractor defining a new construction schedule.
Casanova noted he is comfortable with an extension so long as the city retains the ability to draw on the letter of credit.
Knudson inquired about the
Burchill expressed concern that the city should not get involved in the day to day construction issues and that the development agreement specified June 15 and it is only two weeks away and the city has the ability to draw on the letter of credit after that date.
Knudson noted that he understands the reason that the Heritage Boulevard, Heirloom and Market Green projects are proposed to be tied together to obtain a better finished project and extending the Heritage Boulevard completion date seemed to be reasonable.
Page 6, Plan Commission
June 4, 2009
Burchill stated the extension requests may be a tough sell to the Common Council.
Hackworthy stated they felt that it had been communicated to the city engineer and inspector that the project would be delayed. Darnold reminded Hackworthy that T V & H was advised that an extension must be requested and not to assume an extension would be granted.
Hackworthy commented that it is their intention to start the
project by late June or early July; and if the storm water utility work is not
completed by 7/1/09, the letter of credit can be pulled. Hackworthy reiterated that the reason for the
extension of
Selissen stated that he is obligated by contracts to complete projects on time and noted that he is not in favor of granting extensions for the completion dates for either Heritage Boulevard or Market Green projects. Olson stated it would not be her preference to extend the date of completion for Heritage Boulevard as no compelling reason for extending the completion date has been presented.
Hackworthy commented that if the Heirloom project plans are soon approved by the city that the Heirloom project can begin soon, and the infrastructure in Heritage Greens will be complete.
Vance commented that it would be good to get the Heirloom project completed this summer also.
Darnold reviewed the request for approval of the Heritage Market preliminary plat and the construction of Heirloom.
Olson reiterated her opinion that the project should be completed in the next 30 days.
Motion by Vance, seconded by Casanova to recommend approval of the extension of the date of completion for the Heritage Boulevard improvements from June 15, 2009 to August 15, 2009 with the condition that the public utilities be completed by July 15, 2009 or the city can draw on the letter of credit to complete the project in 2009 and that the proposed Heirloom project be completed by August 15, 2009. Motion carried, 3 – 2, Selissen and Olson voting no. The Market Green extension request was reviewed. A motion was made by Burchill, seconded by Olson to recommend an extension of the date of the completion of the Market Green improvements from 7/1/09 to 8/15/09. The motion was amended after discussion to establish the date of completion to 9/15/09. Motion carried, 4 – 1, Selissen voting no.
A discussion pursued about requiring the paving of
Preliminary plat, Heritage Market, 2 multiple family lots and 6 outlots, Heritage Greens planned residential development – T V & H Properties LLC. Darnold reviewed the proposed preliminary plat of Heritage Market noting lots 1 and 2 are proposed for the future development of senior and disability housing. The outlots will be further subdivided in the future according to the Heritage Greens planned
Page 7, Plan Commission
June 4, 2009
residential development plan as amended in 2008, except for the outlots 1, 3 and 5 which will be the open space / commons areas known as Harvest Green , Harmony Green and Market
Green respectfully.
Darnold recommended approval of the Heritage Market preliminary plat
with the condition that the city staff including the city engineer, public
works director, waste water treatment facility director and water utility
director approve the plans and specifications for the Heritage Market Addition
/ Heirloom (Avenue, as shown on the preliminary plat) project.
Knudson also recommended approval.
Motion by Burchill, seconded by Olson to approve the preliminary plat of Heritage Market with the condition that the city engineer, public works director, waste water treatment plant director and water utility director approve the plans and specifications for the Heritage Market Addition / Heirloom (Avenue) project street and utilities plans. Motion carried. Darnold noted that a preliminary plat is approval by the plan commission and this matter is not presented to the Common Council for approval. The final plat will need to be approved by both the plan commission and Common Council.
Other matters for discussion purposes only or placement on future agendas. Darnold noted that he had not received responses with the proposed summer schedule from all of the plan commission members and asked that everyone please check their calendars. Darnold noted that the next meeting of the plan commission is scheduled for Thursday, June 25.
A motion was made by Olson, seconded by Burchill to adjourn. Motion carried. 8:55 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dennis Darnold, Secretary