Plan Commission Meeting Minutes – March 17, 2016

A meeting of the City of Kaukauna Plan Commission was called to order at 4:00 p.m. on Thursday, March 17, 2016, by Chairman Rosin.

Members Present: Feldt, McGinnis, Oldenburg, Penterman (joined meeting at 3:40 p.m.), Rosin, Sundelius,

Vander Sanden.

Also Present: Planning Director Jakel, Interested Citizens.

Absent and Excused: Schoenike.

1. Absent and Excused. A motion to excuse the absent Commission member was made by McGinnis, seconded by Feldt. All members voted aye. Motion carried.

1. Minutes. A motion to approve the minutes of the February 18, 2016, meeting was made by Feldt, seconded by Sundelius. All members voted aye. Motion carried.

1. Public Hearing on Special Exception Request for Two Cell Towers on Wisconsin Avenue. Chairman Rosin declared the Public Hearing open at 4:01 p.m. and asked if anyone present wanted to comment on the matter. Dave Roloff of 209 West Morningside Drive posed a number of questions to the Commission relative to co-location options and service coverage, future trail compatibility and health and safety concerns read from a statement he had prepared. Bob DeBruin of 122 DeForest expressed his concerns regarding the impact the towers could have on future development and property values in the downtown. He explained some existing public sites should be considered for the towers. Jim Wyman representing applicant Cellcom explained that the reality of the wireless environment generates a high demand for service and Cellcom opted for two smaller towers to better fit the aesthetics of the downtown. A lack of service results in the loss of business and revenues. He further explained that the federal government prohibits municipalities from restricting cell tower placement due to health concerns and the state now further limits the restrictions city’s can place. Chairman Rosin declared the Public Hearing closed at 4:22 p.m.

1. Special Exception Use for Two Cell Towers at 201 West Wisconsin Avenue. Chairman Rosin explained that there is an increase in the demand for cell service due to the new library, Hydro Park, Grand Kakalin, middle school and city hall. The cell tower recently constructed near the pool is owned by Outagamie County and functions primarily for emergency services. Mr. VanderSanden asked if the applicant had an alternate plan in case the request is denied. Mr. Wyman explained that they did not and noted that digital technology uses a very short signal and is based on proximity to users for better signal strength. Mr. Jakel explained that the applicant has been working for staff for several months and had explored other locations that ultimately would not work. He also agreed with the comments made unfortunately, if the application is denied for this location, the applicant would be permitted, by state law, to place the towers anywhere they wished. While some other communities no longer go through the public hearing and notice procedure due to the law, the special exception process does allow for the placement of safeguards and conditions. Mr. Jakel explained that while he does appreciate Cellcom’s cooperation in the process, he suggested those opposed to the law contact their State legislatures and voice their concerns. Mr. Sundelius asked if the towers would impact parking on the site creating a non-conforming situation. Mr. Wyman explained that there are five or six stalls available although there has been no parking allocated for the building in the past. Mr. Sundelius explained that the restriction on municipalities was snuck into the 2013 state budget because cell companies were tired of dealing with plan commissions and councils and suggested that we do something as a municipality to protest the loss of local control. He explained that he is more opposed to the legislation than the towers themselves. Mr. Feldt asked if there is a minimum distance required between towers. Mr. Wyman explained that there was not, however, engineering standards require a certain distance. Chairman Rosin explained that there are more and more unfunded state and federal mandates that place restrictions on municipalities without any assistance to fund the programs. Mr. Feldt agreed with the comments but noted that some of the restrictions are inevitable with the increased demand for technology. A motion to recommend approval to the Council of the Special Exception in accordance with state statues was made by Feldt, seconded by Penterman. Upon roll call, six aye (Feldt, McGinnis, Oldenburg, Penterman, Rosin, Sundelius), one nay (VanderSanden). Motion carried. A motion to direct staff to draft a letter to state legislatures regarding issues with local control relative to cell tower siting was made by Sundelius, seconded by VanderSanden. Upon roll call, all members voted aye. Motion carried. Mr. Wyman asked the Commission what the City would have the cell companies do if there were no state regulations. Mr. Jakel suggested more research on alternate locations – even if they are more expensive options. Mr. Jakel explained that he understood that this might be the best option for this situation however the legislation took away the public’s right to comment and give feedback. Mr. Wyman explained that they try not to take advantage of the leverage cell companies have against municipalities. Mr. Sundelius explained that if a city wanted to have poor cell service, that should be up to them and they should have the right to dictate their level of service.
   

1. Dedication of Bicentennial Court. Mr. Sundelius explained that the dedication re-establishes public right of way to access properties on Bicentennial Court which were affected by the plat changes needed to accommodate the new municipal building and changes to the road. A motion to recommend to the Council approval of the dedication of Bicentennial Court as presented was made by Feldt, seconded by Oldenburg. All members voted aye.
   

1. Potential Annexation of Property Along Peters Road. Mr. Jakel explained that the property in question is currently located in the Town of Buchanan and is being considered for the development of a single family home. There are existing special assessments in place on the property for the provision of water, sewer main and road improvements that would come due at the time the property is annexed. Mr. Jakel explained that there is no formal petition yet as the applicants are looking for some options to reduce the overall cost of the special assessment. Mr. Sundelius explained the process for levying special assessments and noted that there are other properties within the City that have been assessed for two services even if they only use one. He explained that this is a unique situation and suggested splitting off 60 feet of frontage so the entire special assessment doesn’t come due until the second set is hooked up. Chairman Rosin asked how the remainder of the City’s investment gets recouped. Mr. Sundelius explained that it may never. Mr. Sundelius clarified that if the applicants break out 60 feet of frontage, they will incur the special assessment for the 60 feet. If they opt to bring in the entire parcel, they could possibly receive a break on the cost of the second service – which is consistent with previous policies. He further explained that the charge can be paid over a period of eight to ten years. Chairman Rosin explained that the City has previous instances where parcels are carved out for annexations that ultimately create issues with emergency services, snow plowing and garbage service and we try to limit them as best we can. Mr. Jakel explained that he will meet with the applicants to determine the area they plan to annex.
   

There being no further business to be brought before the Commission, a motion to adjourn the meeting at 5:20 p.m. was made by Feldt, seconded by Sundelius. All members voted aye. Motion carried.

Julianne Schroeder, Executive Secretary