Plan Commission Meeting Minutes – May 3, 2018

Posted on May 3, 2018 by admin_post

A meeting of the City of Kaukauna Plan Commission was called to order at 4:00 p.m. on Thursday, May 3, 2018, by Chairman Penterman.

Members Present: Coonen, Feldt, McGinnis, Moore, Oldenberg, Penterman, Schoenike, Sundelius.

Also Present: Planning Director Jakel, City Attorney Davidson, Finance Director Van Rossum, Project Engineer Neumeier, Planning/Engineering Technician Holmes, Applicants, Interested Citizens, Media.

Minutes. A motion to approve the minutes of the March 22, 2018, meeting was made by Feldt, seconded by Coonen. All members voted aye. Motion carried.

Public Hearing for Creation of TIF District at Former St. Al’s Site. Chairman Penterman declared the public hearing open at 4:01 p.m. and asked three times if anyone present wanted to speak in favor of or in opposition to the creation of the TIF district. Bonnie Landreman of 2113 Welhouse Drive asked if taxes on properties within the district would increase as a result. Mr. Jakel explained taxes are paid as usual within the TIF boundary and go towards paying off the debt for public improvements. Once enough increment is accumulated to cover debt, the TIF is closed. There would be some ramification on public services including schools, roads, and emergency services to accommodate the additional 100+ residents anticipated for the development. Applicant Jon Verstegen of Total Project Management explained that TIF funding is being requested to accommodate building demolition and the public street. Pete Meulemans of 2608 Main Avenue asked about potential increases in traffic at Crooks and Ann Street and possible damage to existing streets as a result of construction. Mr. Jakel explained that an additional 120 cars per day at the intersection are expected as a result of the project however the increase is not any more significant than other types of residential development in the area. Traffic moving to the west or south is anticipated to take Ann Street to DeBruin Road to the roundabout. Mr. Jakel explained that there is internal concern regarding the effect heavy construction traffic will have on existing roads due to the age of the concrete. The Council may take that into consideration at such time that special assessments are discussed. Chairman Penterman declared the public hearing closed at 4:05 p.m.

Mr. Schoenike asked how the property currently being tax-exempt factors into the TIF creation. Mr. Jakel explained there are pros and cons – usually a property has value but because it is tax-exempt, its value is set at zero by the WDOR. As soon as the property is sold, the value will increase creating instant increment. Mr. Moore asked if plans were in place to repave the surrounding streets. Mr. Sundelius explained that there are no plans to repave the area within the next five-years. Mr. Jakel explained that this is a difficult TIF – state statutes require a “but-for” statement and a density of three units per acre to be TIF eligible.

Mr. Jakel presented five options to the Commission – 1.) A through public street where $750,000 in TIF financing would level the playing field for the developer based on costs for developing a green field and would include infrastructure and demolition. The estimated payback would be 7 to 8 years. $420,000 in TIF financing would have a 5 year payback. This may be the best option for the community long term. 2.) A private road with City participation in environmental remediation and demolition but no infrastructure. Staff has issues with garbage and snow services, emergency vehicle access, parking enforcement, maintenance access and easements and is not recommending this option. 3.) Tax-based financing for the project versus TIF financing. Residential TIF’s are difficult to administer as there is no job creation, no increment generation and an increased demand for services. For this reason, Outagamie County is hesitant to support the project as presented – a concern shared by all entities. Payback is estimated at 6 to 8 years. 4.) Any combination of the options above. 5.) Deny the project request.

Mr. Sundelius explained his opposition to the private road option and the lack of plans for sidewalks. While there are other similar developments in the City to what is being proposed, issues with maintenance and access will only increase. Mr. Feldt agreed and added that long term ramifications need to be considered. Regarding Option #1, Mr. Jakel explained that once staff have the numbers in front of them, a decision on the amount of financing required can be made. Mr. Sundelius explained that a 2/3 cost-share for the street should be figured into the numbers – with the City, not the TIF, financing 1/3 of the street cost. Mr. Verstegen explained that adjustments had already been made for the cost of the street and utilities. He is willing to commit to an increased timeline to generate increment more quickly. Mr. Jakel explained that if this was any other development, a private road would not even be considered. Mr. Verstegen explained that the location of the project does affect the fair market value estimated at $30,000 per lot maximum, while other locations would generate higher sale prices. He noted that this is not his preferred plan – it is an effort to maintain the development while still being acceptable to the neighbors. Mr. Sundelius suggesting working backwards to determine the financial participation request. Mr. Jakel agreed and explained that fair market value and additional costs will be considered as well. Mr. Sundelius suggested using a 6-year TIF payback to determine maximum incentive. Mr. Jan kel explained that staff will work to complete the project plan and return the item to Plan Commission and the Joint Review Board for approval.

Site Plan for Expansion to Lazy Dog Bar and Grill in Commerce Crossing. Mr. Jakel explained that the applicants intend to enclose the existing patio area and expand a new outdoor area – all with a façade treatment to match what is existing. Mr. Sundelius asked if the applicants are aware of the possible relocation of the road. Mr. Jakel explained that they were and are looking to increase the visibility of the facility. A motion to approve the site plan as presented was made by McGinnis, seconded by Coonen. All members voted aye. Motion carried.

Non-Conforming Use – West 10^th and Brill (Klister). Mr. Jakel explained that there are currently a shared driveway and several outbuildings on separate lots. The applicant is looking to sell the house and operate a business on the other lot. The property is currently non-conforming and the proposed use is not permissible under current zoning. The consensus of the Commission was to deny the proposed new use.

Driveway Easement at 1212 Oakridge Avenue. Mr. Jakel explained that the applicants were requesting an easement to allow them to keep their driveway in its current location. The property currently have three driveways and as the City is preparing to pave the street, the additional cost to the homeowner would not be typical. The applicant explained that the property was previously used as an assisted living facility and that the driveway was obviously permitted at one time. They are looking for an easement across the corner of the property to maintain the driveway in its current location. Mr. Sundelius explained that a portion of the existing driveway is located across municipal park property. Mr. Jakel explained that the looped driveway is not legal now and would be grandfathered in and that he had no issue with the easement to accommodate the driveway. Mr. Feldt asked what the alternative would be. Ms. Puffer explained that they received cost estimates of $9,000 to move the driveway. Mr. Puffer explained that they purchased the property with these conditions. Mr. Sundelius suggested a special assessment for the use of municipal property to the homeowners benefit. City Attorney Davidson explained that the title policy on the recent purchase may provide an additional resource. Ms. Puffer explained that she looked into it and since it was not public, the title company was not in error. Mr. Neumeier explained that a deed restriction was placed as part of the Horseshoe Park and Pond project and that hard surfaces must remain asphalt in perpetuity. Mr. Sundelius asked if adverse possession would be an issue in this case. Mr. Schoenike explained that it cannot be used for municipal property to private owners. Mr. Coonen asked for clarification on the special assessment. Mr. Sundelius explained that the rates are set by the Board of Public Works. A motion to recommend approval of the easement contingent on a review of terms and conditions by Attorney Davidson and that all restrictions currently in place remain was made by Feldt, seconded by Moore. Upon roll call – six aye (Coonen, Feldt, Moore, Oldenberg, Penterman, Schoenike; two nay (McGinnis, Sundelius). Motion carried.

CSM – Former Gustman Lot. Mr. Jakel explained that the property is currently owned by Randy Stadtmueller as part of the Grand Kakalin redevelopment project. The CSM would accommodate the sale of property for a hotel and condo development. A regional storm water detention pond would need to be created by the City on the property and the former dental office building will be acquired by the Bank of Kaukauna. Mr. Moore asked if the pond would be in addition to the one in place for Kwik Trip. Mr. Jakel explained that it would as the WDNR does not permit sharing ponds with gas stations. Mr. Neumeier explained that the current water main easement would need to be retained. A motion to recommend approval of the CSM to the Council was made by Schoenike, seconded by McGinnis. All members voted aye. Motion carried.

CSM – Commerce Crossing (Berkers). Mr. Jakel explained that the CSM would facilitate the sale of property at STH 55 and Arbor Way in Commerce Crossing to Dr. Berkers for a dental clinic and lease space. The site plan will come back to the Commission for review. A motion to recommend approval of the CSM to the Council was made by McGinnis, seconded by Oldenberg. All members voted aye. Motion carried.

Storm Water Utility Easement – St. Paul Elder Campus. Mr. Neumeier explained that the easement would facilitate moving storm water run-off from East 13^th Street to Horseshoe Pond between East 12^th and East 14^th. St. Paul administration is aware of the easement. Mr. Schoenike asked about a cost for the easement. Mr. Neumeier explained that there would be no cost. A motion to recommend approval of the easement to the Council was made by Feldt, seconded by Sundelius. All members voted aye. Motion carried.

There being no further business to be brought before the Commission, a motion to adjourn the meeting at 5:10 p.m. was made by McGinnis, seconded by Sundelius. All members voted aye. Motion carried.

Julianne Schroeder

Executive Secretary