PLAN COMMISSION

November 12, 2009

                                                                                                                                                               

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

 

Others present:  Valerie and Bill Badlo, Gordon Conard, Daryl Standafer, Pat Bakke, Jay Griggs, Mike Darrow, Denny Darnold and others

 

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

 

Consideration of the November 5, 2009 meeting minutes.  Olson inquired about the decision of the plan commission for the recommended designations along the Carmichael Road corridor, specifically about the northeast quadrant of I-94 and Carmichael Road. Knudson indicated that the plan commission reviewed it and proposed a change for the future land use map. Darnold reviewed the proposed future land use map and that the northeast quadrant had been designated as general commercial since 1993.  It was explained the plan commission retained the area as general commercial that has been designated as such since 1993 and extended the general commercial and office designations north to Deer Haven Drive.  Knudson commented that issue could be discussed after the public hearing if desired.

 

A motion was made by Yoerg and seconded by Selissen to approve the meeting minutes of November 5, 2009.  Motion carried.

 

Public hearing, draft City of Hudson Comprehensive Plan Update 2009 (draft – 10-30-09).  Knudson called to order the public hearing and reviewed the public hearing notice and invited public comment in regard to the draft of the Comprehensive Plan Update 2009.  Knudson invited public comment.

 

Gordon Conard, 36 Eagle’s Nest Circle, Hudson.  Conard offered congratulation to the plan commission, SEH and the community development director in their efforts in updating the city’s comprehensive plan; and he noted that he has attended many of the meetings and reviewed prior plan drafts.  In regard to the land use element, Conard commented that this section has improved greatly as it has evolved.  The maps and planning district concepts are well done.  The transportation section is good.  Conard asked about the issue of reopening the former Exit 2 as it is not addressed in the plan.  If the matter is dead, then it is not an issue.  Conard commented that the transportation section concludes in noting that this element is to be a working document, and Conard expressed that the city should incorporate action items in the implementation section.

 

Conard further commented that in the implementation element the city should prioritize action items in regard to public facilities particularly the need for improved police department facilities.

 

Pat Casanova, 739 11th Street, Hudson.  Casanova stated that the residential properties in the general area north of the intersection of Vine Street and Eleventh Street have evolved over a period of time to include some multiple family residential developments.  Casanova asked that the plan commission consider designating the Bakke and Casanova properties to include the possibility of multiple-family residential development in the future.  Casanova indicated that there are no specific developments proposed at this time. Casanova also suggested that the plan commission take a look at other areas around downtown that may transition, in the future, to uses other than one-family residential, such as the block where Bethel Lutheran Church is located.  Casanova urged the plan commission to consider adopting land use designations that would allow more flexibility of different types of land uses.

 

 

Page 2, Plan Commission

November 12, 2009

                                                                                                                                                               

 

Valerie Badlo, 100 E. Canyon Drive, Hudson.  Badlo commented that she was concerned upon reviewing the plan commission meeting of October 22 in that it appeared some decisions particularly in regard to commercial development were being rushed.  She encouraged the plan commission to review closer the cultural and natural resources and the community values of the community in making decisions.  Badlo asked the city to recognize and protect the key attributes of why people reside in the city of Hudson.  Badlo indicated the city is beautiful and the community’s natural resources, heritage and values are key assets.  Badlo expressed that she sees the intent to protect those resources in the city’s philosophy, but not in the plan.  She noted the city has missed the boat in making the community a destination place and more emphasis on promoting the downtown area.  She further expressed concern about the amount of commercial and industrial areas proposed by the city of Hudson. 

 

Badlo questioned if the city, based on accepted standards, does not have enough recreational lands available for its residents.  Darnold commented that the park board is in the process of adopting a revised park plan and he cautioned measuring a park / recreation system only by suggested standards.  Badlo asked if the park plan was on the web.   Darnold answered no, but could provide a copy.

 

Badlo questioned the city’s philosophy of promoting new development versus the promotion of infilling of current vacant or undeveloped sites, as there is a lot of proposed new development sites proposed by the plan.  She commented that the city of Hudson is not a destination community and additional commercial development is questionable.  Darnold responded the plan projects areas of growth for a twenty year period and thus looks at areas outside the city of Hudson and that the city may need to annex land to address some development, also the city controls annexation and can review requests based on the individual merits of those proposed developments.  Darnold commented that it cannot be assumed that the city is proposing immediate growth into areas outside of the city.  Badlo responded that if that is the city policy it should be stated as such.  Badlo commented that the existence of vacant buildings is not attractive for the city of Hudson and the policy of growth outside of the city is not a good economic policy.

 

Daryl Standafer, 602 Helen Street, North Hudson.  Standafer noted that he is a St. Croix County Board of Supervisor and is chairperson of the county finance committee.  He commented that the county owns 80 acres of property at the intersection of Carmichael Road and Vine Street and the county is very interested in the city’s plan for future development of their land.  Standafer noted that it is the county’s position that more commercial and industrial land is necessary within the county.  More specifically the land around the county government center, in part and with authorization of the county, has been used for trails and burning pits and that the county has no interest in using the county land as a park.  If there is interest of the city to develop part of the county land as a park the county is willing to discuss that consideration if the land would be purchased by the city, Standafer added.  Standafer noted that there is sufficient land to expand the county government center and there exists additional land that the county has no desire to use as an expansion of the government center.  The northwest quadrant is not envisioned to be used by the county and may become city park land if the city desires.  But the southeast quadrant is different and the county’s consultant suggests that it should be zoned to

 

Page 3, Plan Commission,

November 12, 2009                                                                                                                        

 

 

commercial use to allow the possibility of professional office space including law or title companies.  Standafer appealed to the plan commission that the county property not be froze out of the possibility

 that the property can be used a something other than public if that is deemed the highest and best use of the property.  The property at this time has not been programmed for use; again Standafer appealed to the plan commission to not lock the county out of options for future use of the property other than public.

 

Bill Badlo, 100 East Canyon Drive.  Badlo expressed he supported the long term view of the community, but expressed concern that the city needs to emphasize the aesthetics of the commercial areas and that empty buildings do not add to the aesthetics of the community.  Specifically he questioned the city’s designation of part of the Stageline Road area as commercial or multiple family residential between the hospital and Red Cedar Canyon to stay as it exists, one-family residential.

 

Jay Griggs, representing Ron and Mark Gagnon.  Griggs noted that the Gagnons support the designation of their property along Walnut and First Streets as downtown commercial.  Griggs noted that the Gagnons also own property along and on both sides of Carmichael Road.  He expressed that the city has in the past designated the property as residential.  He noted that it was the Gagnons desire to have it designated general commercial.  Darnold indicated that the plan commission has designated it as mixed-use commercial and multiple-family residential.  Griggs opined that he does not see that area developing as one-family residential.

 

Knudson asked if anyone else would like to comment on the draft comprehensive plan.  No other comments were received.   Knudson noted there will be discussion by the plan commission members and added that there may be opportunity for the public to comment.

 

A motion was made by Casanova, seconded by Yoerg to close the public hearing.  Motion carried. 7:42 p.m.  

 

Mike Darrow, SEH, comprehensive plan consulting project manager commented that he took notes during the public comment period and responded that the implementation section for public facilities and transportation will be reviewed and fine tuned.  In regard to comments presented by Pat Casanova, Darrow urged the plan commission to not get too detailed in the map and concentrate on the policies within each planning district and that future decisions will be based on the policies that guide the general development of each planning district.  In regard to comments presented by Valerie Badlo, Darrow commented that Hudson is a unique community and is a place of destination and has an existing downtown area that is thriving along with other strong commercial areas.  This is not common for many communities the size of Hudson, Darrow opined. Darrow added that technology and sustainability are issues that will be addressed in new or redeveloped commercial areas.

 

Darrow commented in response to the comments received from Daryl Standafer that the city will be conducting a corridor study of Carmichael Road and that will be done in cooperation with the towns and county and the Wisconsin Department of Transportation.

 

 

Page 4, Plan Commission

November 12, 2009                                                                                                                        

 

 

As to the comments from Bill Badlo, Darrow commented that the city has created the eight planning districts to be able to look at those areas In a perspective that is unique to that specific district.

Casanova asked if the St. Croix County Government Center property should remain designated as public or some other consideration.

 

Knudson responded that the plan is a dynamic document and will be subject to change in the future.  The city’s effort is the try to provide consistency with the plan designations and zoning.  Future considerations may require an amendment to the comprehensive plan and the zoning map and that process will allow the city to review the particular issue at that time.  In regard to the county property the land was annexed for public use.  Knudson commented that in the near future the city will conduct public hearings in regard to the rezoning of properties to provide the consistency between the comprehensive plan and zoning designations.

 

Knudson expressed that residents need to advise visitors to take Exit 1 to truly experience the Hudson community and that cannot be achieved by passing through the community on I-94. Knudson added that city has looked at has reviewed redevelopment along Coulee Road and Crest View Drive and in the downtown commercial district.  Knudson reviewed the land use designations for the Carmichael Road area north of I-94 and general annexation statutory requirements.

 

Knudson referred to park development over the past 16 years including Weitkamp Park in the southeast part of the city.  Knudson noted that the park system serves not only the city, as the hub of the community, other residents of the area.  Knudson noted that the city is doing as best it can under the financial limits of the city to expand the park system.

 

Knudson reviewed the plan commission’s considerations of area outside of the corporate limits of the city of Hudson including the Carmichael Road corridor north of I-94 and the area south of River Crest School in the town of Troy.  Other areas reviewed were the commercial areas in the town of Hudson near Exit 4 and the USH12. 

 

Knudson noted that the downtown commercial district, just off I-94, is successful and measure of that success is the issue of parking, which also a matter that is under review

 

Knudson commented that one comment received was in regard to Stageline Road.  He noted that roadway was expanded to address future traffic capacity, but the area in the town may not develop further for several years.

 

Standafer commented that county has been approached by several parties to buy land, that the county property is not intended to be sold in a piecemeal manner and it is important for the county to be able to predict what land uses may be allowed to dispose of the property if the county chooses to do so.

 

Olson commented that the plan’s recommendations in regard to the downtown commercial area are good and that it is important to continue to have a strong and vital downtown.  The downtown is an important asset to the community and she expressed appreciation to the businesses in the downtown.

 

Page 5, Plan Commission

November 12, 2009                                                                                                                        

 

 

Olson added that the city must support and continued development of Industrial business is critical to the overall economic climate of the city and provides jobs, perhaps not for everyone, but for many in the Hudson area.

 

Olson expressed concern on the issue of commercial development in the northeast quadrant of I-94 and Carmichael Road in that it is a heavily trafficked area and safety is an issue.  She commented that it is difficult to cross over Carmichael Road under existing traffic conditions.  Olson urged the plan commission to be smart in consideration of the overall development of the Carmichael Road corridor north of I-94 and what the capacity for development may be in that area.  Olson expressed disappointment that additional general commercial designations were added to that corridor.  She noted that the city should be cautious in developing “big box” commercial development in that area.  She concluded noting that is not the best way for the community to move forward.

 

Knudson noted that the plan is a draft and subject to change.

 

Yoerg commented that the recommendation of the plan commission continues the 1993 plan and extends the general commercial area as far north as the north end of the golf course.  Yoerg commented that it is not the intent of the plan commission to create additional traffic concerns.  Yoerg noted that Darnold’s review took into consideration adjacent properties.  

 

Casanova commented that the area had been residential and the homes had been removed to accommodate commercial development.

 

Selissen noted that in the consideration of future annexation(s) of that area the city and WisDOT will require traffic analysis to be completed and the WisDOT will dictate limits on traffic and the impact on the interchange.  He felt that type of commercial development that will be located in that area will be limited, based on projected traffic generation.

 

Vance indicated that plan commission has agreed to try to complete a corridor analysis next year to review the issues, including traffic, for Carmichael Road area.  Vance opined that the investment of commercial development will assist to pay for the improvements needed to address the traffic issues.

 

Yoerg commented that area is not likely to be redeveloped for residential use.

 

Knudson asked if there was a better site for commercial development than the northeast quadrant of I-94 and Carmichael Road.  Knudson noted that the Carmichael Road corridor should be developed in an orderly fashion to allow the development of the associated transportation improvements.  Knudson added that WisDOT has taken the position that the frontage road on the north side of the interstate and east of Carmichael Road will be required to be changed so that it does not exit across from Coulee Road if the area is developed for commercial development.  Access from Coulee Road to Vine Street also would be limited to 3 or 4 intersections.

 

Knudson reviewed the plan commission’s recommendation for the northeast quadrant of I-94 and Carmichael Road continuing the area as designated general commercial since 1993 and extending the

Page 6, Plan Commission

November 12, 2009

 

                                                                                                                               

general commercial designation (1/8 mile east of Carmichael Road) north to Deer Haven Road.  Vance commented that part of that area has steep slopes and not all of the area can be developed.

 

Darrow emphasized that the city will develop more detailed policies and development guidelines as the corridor study is completed and the study will take into account issues such as land use and transportation within the context of the neighborhood(s) within that defined corridor.

 

Vance asked about changes to the draft plan.  Can the plan commission approve the plan and recommend approval to the Common Council subject to some minor changes.  Darnold stated that is up to the plan commission.  Darnold noted there are some changes that need to be made, but do not effect policy considerations.  Vance stated that his concerns would not change policy either and noted that he was okay with forwarding the plan to the Council with minor changes to be made.

 

Vance commented that the city will in future years be reviewing the corridor studies and also the extraterritorial areas.  Knudson responded that the plan commission has expressed interest in conducting the Carmichael Road corridor study in 2010, but the reality is that the city has a very limited budget in 2010 and it will be seen if the city can do that study next year (2010).  Those studies can be conducted with or without a consultant assisting the city.

 

Knudson noted the goal or mandate was to adopt the plan by the end of the year, but the plan commission could probably meet once more before the scheduled Council hearing, proposed for December 21st.

 

Yoerg mentioned that the plan commission is at a crossroads in deciding if additional work needs to be done on the plan.

 

Natural and Cultural Resources Element.  Darnold commented that he felt the plan was weak in this particular section and that Mike Darrow had checked with the Dept. of Administration (WisDOA) to determine if the park and outdoor recreation plan may substitute for this element.  It was WisDOA opinion the park and outdoor recreation plan would serve as the element addressing natural and cultural resources.  Darnold opined he felt the element should be more extensive and the draft plan is based on the 1993 plan and discussions during the past year.  Darnold further opined that the proposed element could be enhanced by discussing community history.  Darnold referred to proposed policies and the attached maps which are an extraction from the county’s natural resource conditions report (2008).

 

Yoerg suggested an amendment to two of the proposed policies:

-          Change to encourage and promote community recycling programs (add to promote)

-          Promote and preserve the historic values … (add and preserve)

 

Darnold reiterated to add more information in regard to the history of Hudson.

 

A motion was made by Olson, seconded by Yoerg to approve the Natural and Cultural Resources Element with the changes proposed by Yoerg and the inclusion of more information in regard to the history of Hudson.  Motion carried.

Page 7, Plan Commission

November 12, 2009                                                                                                                        

 

 

Plan Commission Resolution 2-09, adoption of the comprehensive plan.  Knudson noted that there has been some discussion during the meeting as to whether there is a need to further discuss the draft plan prior to adoption.

 

Darnold advised the plan commission members that adoption requires a majority vote of the whole commission (4 votes).

 

Olson asked when the hearing by the Common Council is scheduled.  Darnold stated he is proposing Monday, December 21st if the Council will be meeting that evening, if not, the hearing will need to be moved to January.

 

Olson asked if the plan commission can get copies of the revised draft prior to the Council meeting.  Knudson responded yes and that if plan commission members have further concerns or recommendations that those concerns or recommendations will be passed on to the Common Council, or if there is a need for a special meeting to discuss the plan that can be arranged.

 

A motion was made by Yoerg, seconded by Casanova to approve Resolution 2-09, Approval of the City of Hudson Comprehensive Plan.  Motion carried by roll call vote, 6-0, Burchill was absent.

 

Other business for discussion purposes only or placement on future agendas.  Olson asked if there would be another plan commission meeting prior to the holidays.  Darnold commented that at this time the plan commission may be able to wait to after the holidays to meet.  Yoerg noted that one issue is downtown parking.

 

A motion was made by Selissen, seconded by Yoerg to adjourn.  Motion carried.  8:49 p.m.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Dennis Darnold, Secretary