MINUTES OF THE

OAK CREEK PLAN COMMISSION MEETING

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2006

Mayor Bolender called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.  The following Commissioners were present at roll call: Commissioner Dickmann, Commissioner Johnston, Commissioner Sokol, Commissioner Siira, Commissioner Kopplin, Mayor Bolender, and Commissioner Peterson.  Commissioners Grabowski and Correll were excused.  Also present were Doug Seymour, Director of Community Development, Jeff Fortin, Planner, and Assistant Fire Chief George Krudop.

Commissioner Siira moved to approve the minutes of the special meeting September 5, 2006 and the regular meeting of September 12, 2006 Plan Commission meeting. Commissioner Kopplin seconds.  Roll call, all voted aye.  Minutes were approved as submitted.

Report on Significant Common Council Actions

Mr. Jeff Fortin, Planner updated the Commissioners on the actions that were taken at the September 19, 2006, Common Council meeting.  There were no comments or concerns from the Commissioners.

Rezone – Charles Rusiecki
2234 & 2298 E. Elm Road
Tax Key No.:  958-9987 & 958-9988

Mr. Fortin explained to the Commission the applicant was requesting the City rezone the front approximately 260 feet of each property from Rs-3, Single Family Residential to A-1, Limited Agricultural with the exception of the front portion.  The parcel is currently being farmed and the applicant would like the entire parcel zoned A-1 so he can construct a new farm structure towards the front of the property. 

The applicant combined the properties into one to accommodate this rezoning as the eastern parcel would not have met the area and lot requirements of the A-1, Limited Agricultural District, which requires a minimum lot area of 5 acres and a minimum lot width of 150 feet.  Now that the parcels have been combined the lot has 222.23 of lot width and 6.6 acres, exceeding the required minimums.

Mr. Fortin read the following letter into the record:

To:  Mayor Bolender, Alderwomen Grabowski and the Oak Creek Common Council
RE:  Rezoning of property owned by Charles Rusiecki 2234 & 2298 E. Elm Road, R3 to A-1

To all it concerns w/ respect,

I Tammy Haapakoski of 1930 E. Elm Rd. was not notified and could not attend tonights meting of the above mentioned rezoning of properties.  I have the following I would like to add to the legal minutes.  I won and operate my farm at 1930 E. Elm Road and know my property rights of being zoned A-1.

My concerns to are as follows. 

#1 There are 2 parcels of land on his property.  One with the house and the remaining with a new pole barn and horses.  You (The City) allowed him to build a large pole barn and yet the City Ordinances stats you cannot build a pole barn without a existing or new home built first.  You (the City) allowed Mr. Rusiecki to build a pole barn on this parcel without a house on there.  His parcels need to first be combined and fee’s paid accordingly.

The City with held this ordinance w/a property owner on Drexel Avenue (or Puetz) just west of the freeway on the north side of the road a few years ago. 

You (the City) did not let him build that barn before his house.  Yet, you let Mr. Rusiecki do so.  *His parcels must be combined. 

#2 He is boarding a number of horses there to the public.  If you allow him to rezone to a-1 he will have a unlimited amount of horses there. 

#3 Mr. Rusiecki and his boarders ride up and down public streets, public (north shore) bike paths and trespass on surrounding private property w/out permission.  They do not clean up the horse crap either.

#4 Last but most importantly Mr. Rusiecki needs to go through the same format as you put Mr. Kotecki through.  He is my neighbor to the west of me that has tried for 2 years to get his rezoned.  The last I heard is that Mr. Kotecki needed his farmed for 3 more consecutive years before being considered for re-zoning and fee’s paid accordingly.

If Mr. Rusiecki is rezoned he should be rezoned Equestrian and pay taxes accordingly.  Like you made the owners on 10th Avenue do a few years ago.

Please consider Mr. Kotecki’s same issue as a guideline for Mr. Rusiecki’s request as well as my concerns.

Respectfully,
Tammy Haapakoski
10930 E. Elm Road

Mr. Fortin assured the Commission the applicant had combined the two parcels by deed with the County.  The majority of the letter is irrelevant and as far as complaints about the horses he was not aware of any issues with the horses.  Mr. Seymour commented the Planning Department could investigate the assertions made in the letter and provide a full report to the Council as part of the public hearing.  Given the lack of time to research he could not comment further at this point.

Mayor Bolender commented equestrians have the right to be on the roads and as long as safety standards are maintained they could not be stopped from going on the road. 

Commissioner Kopplin questioned if it did not need to be done also through the City.  Mr. Fortin explained they went through the Assessor’s Office and then through the County.

Commissioner Dickmann questioned if the property was being used for agricultural purposes.  Mr. Rusiecki, 2298 E. Elm Road, does not board horses but does let friends keep horses on the property.  They do ride on the roads and the bike path in order to get to the conservancy trails in Caledonia.  He has permission from Julie Schneider of the Milwaukee County Parks System to ride the trails.  He did build a pole barn several years ago on the A-1 zoning and he did receive a permit for the building.

Commissioner Peterson expressed concern for receiving money for the friend’s horses currently on the property.  Mr. Seymour did not believe it was a problem.  If it is Equestrian Residential or Agricultural zoning he believed you could have a certain number of horses per acres.  He did not believe there was a prohibition against boarding.  He would look at the ordinance but he believed it was specific as to the number not who owns the horses. 

Commissioner Sokol questioned the number of horses Mr. Rusiecki intended to board.  Mr. Rusiecki did not where she got that information. 

Commissioner Sokol moved that the Plan Commission recommend to the Common Council that the portion of the properties at 2234 & 2298 E. Elm Road be rezoned from Rs-3, Single Family Residential to A-1, Limited Agricultural after a public hearing.

Commissioner Dickmann seconds. 

Roll call, Dickmann; aye, Johnston; aye, Sokol; aye, Siira; aye, Kopplin; nay, Bolender; aye, Peterson; aye.  Motion carries. 

Plan Review – Gables of Oak Creek Maintenance and Storage Building
7730 & 7780 S. Howell Avenue
Tax Key No.:  781-9011 & 781-9016

Mr. Fortin explained to the Commission the applicant was requesting approval of a 24’ X 40” (96- square feet) maintenance and storage building for the Gables of Oak Creek apartment complex.  The building will be placed near the center of the complex and will not be visible from any adjacent properties or from S. Howell Avenue.  The building will feature light grey siding and asphalt shingles to match the architectural materials and colors found throughout the complex. 

Planning staff researched the history of the E. Drexel Avenue access and found that the access drive was a temporary drive that the Fire Department required to be open throughout the construction of the complex.  Once the construction was complete, they were not required to keep the Drexel Avenue access, so they abandoned it.

Mr. Philip Clark, Best Built Garage, spoke with Assistant Fire Chief George Krudop and commented there would be something worked out between the Fire Department and Management of the Gables for the access.  A.C. Krudop commented if management was agreeable to the situation the Fire Department would have no objection with the building.  He would like a letter from them and an approved road to be installed within a reasonable time frame.

Commissioner Kopplin commented the Gables abandoned that section of road and she believed that road was to connect to E. Sandra Lane.  Mr. Fortin explained records show the access was only required until the project was completed.  He is not sure why the official map was not required to be completed. 

Commissioner Dickmann questioned whether the Gables owned the land right off of Drexel Avenue where the road would need to be.  Mr. Clark assured the Commission the land was owned by the Gables.

Mayor Bolender questioned if the garage would match the rest of the buildings.  Mr. Clark stated the garage would have gray vinyl siding like the apartments.  Mayor Bolender understood they did not want windows because of theft but the building looks terrible without any windows.  Mr. Clark explained the inside would be lined with shelves and windows would take away from the functionality of the building.  Mayor Bolender suggested blanking out the windows on the inside and would like at least one on the rear and two on the sides. 

Mayor Bolender questioned why the road did not go in years ago and who was watching to make sure things get done.  Mr. Seymour explained 1996 the Common Council passed a resolution releasing the Pines (the Gables) from all terms, requirements, and supplemental agreement as it relates to the Gables apartment complex.  This did include the requirement for a paved secondary access with a break away chain. 

Commissioner Sokol questioned the number of residents in the Gables.  Mr. Mathis stated there were 232 units.  Commissioner Sokol questioned if they all used the same entrance.  Mr. Mathis stated that was the case.  Commissioner Sokol questioned what would be done if there was a fire and the access point was blocked.  Mr. Mathis stated there was just the main entrance at this point.  The fire lane is maintained except in the winter and the curb is not cut.  A.C. Krudop stated the fire access could work but it would need to be identified. 

Commissioner Kopplin questioned if the buildings were sprinkled.  A.C. Krudop stated they were sprinkled to the least amount allowed by the State. 

Commissioner Dickmann moved that the Plan Commission approve the site and building plans for the maintenance and storage building at the Gables of Oak Creek apartment complex subject to all building and fire codes being met and a meeting with the Oak Creek Fire Department and that the Gables be held and the management of the Gables mark the access temporarily before November 1, 2006 and the road be further improved before July 1, 2007. 

Commissioner Sokol requested that there be five windows on the building.

Commissioner Sokol seconds. 

First concurs. 

Roll call, all voted aye.  Motion carries.

Plan Review – Oak Creek Fitness/Krimpelbein Chiropractic Building Addition
1900 W. Ryan Road
Tax Key No.:  877-9012

Mr. Fortin explained to the Commission the applicant was requesting approval of a vestibule addition on to the north elevation of the existing Oak Creek Fitness building at 1900 W. Ryan Road.  The addition will essentially bump out the existing building and the windows and doors will remain in the same configuration. 

Commissioner Siira questioned if it would be visible from Hwy 100.  Mr. Fortin stated it was in the back of the building.

Commissioner Siira moved that the Plan Commission approves the site and building plans for the building entrance addition to the property at 1900 W. Ryan Road, subject to all building and fire codes being met.

Commissioner Sokol seconds.  Roll call, all voted aye.  Motion carries.

Plan Review – Multi-tenant Addition to Pick n’ Save
2320 W. Ryan Road
Tax Key No.:  878-9994-002

Mr. Fortin explained to the Commission the applicant was requesting approval of a 11,200 square foot multi-tenant retail addition to the western end of the Pick n’ Save.  The addition will have space for five retail tenants, though the exact number of tenants may change depending on each tenant’s space requirements.  The building will be constructed of brick and split-face block to match the existing Pick n’ Save building. 

Commissioner Siira questioned if there would be anticipated truck traffic behind the multi-tenant building between the parking areas.  Mr. Eihab Atout stated there would be delivery trucks in that area.  Commissioner Siira commented they would need additional handicapped accessible parking for the addition and that they would need to screen to rooftop mechanicals.

Commissioner Johnston questioned the possibility of pushing the building back and doing some landscaping in front of the building or perhaps a plaza area for a patio area if needed.  Mr. Atout explained they did work with staff to push the building back and add some landscaping.  The building cannot be pushed back any further because of visibility issues with Ryan Road.  Commissioner Johnston was looking for more than five feet to make the area a place for people to mill around.  Mr. Seymour commented it may increase the salability of the tenant space if they were looking for a restaurant and would have an area for outdoor seating.  Having outdoor seating next to your main traffic aisle is probably not conducive to a good dining experience.  You may want to consider providing at least some area that could be used for outdoor seating in the summer months.

Commissioner Peterson questioned how deliveries would be handled.  Mr. Atout stated they would most likely just back the trucks up to the building in the back. 

Mr. Jeff Racine, 3011 W. Woodward Drive, Franklin, stated it would not matter how far back the addition would be pushed back because the TCF Bank would be obstructing the view from Ryan Road.  He also questioned if the traffic patterns would be affected from the addition.  Mayor Bolender stated the entrances and exits were sufficient to handle all of the additional traffic.

Commissioner Peterson moved that the Plan Commission approve the site, building, landscaping and sign program plans for the multi-tenant retail center at 2320 W. Ryan Road, subject to the following conditions:

  1. That all building and fire codes are met.
  2. That the final landscaping plans are approved by the City Forester and Community Development Department prior to the issuance of building permits.
  3. That the final site grading, drainage and stormwater management plans are approved by the Engineering Department prior to the issuance of building permits.
  4. That the final utility plans are approved by the Water and Sewer Utility prior to the issuance of building permits. 
  5. All rooftop mechanicals must be screened.
  6. All building materials must match the colors found on the Pick n’ Save building.
  7. That all signs on this building shall meet the following criteria:
    1. Individual tenants are permitted one (1) wall sign to exceed 50 square feet in area.
    2. All wall signs must be channel letters
    3. All wall signs shall have red faces and black returns.
    4. All wall signs must be placed within the EIFS band area.
    5. Sign letters shall not exceed 30 inches in height.  There shall be a minimum of 6 inches of clearance above and below each sign on the EIFS band area.
    6. Internal window signs shall cover no more than 25 percent of an individual tenant’s window and door area.
    7. Any deviations from the above restrictions shall require Plan Commission review and approval.

Commissioner Siira seconds.  Roll call, all voted aye.  Motion carries.

Plan Commission Discussion – I-94 & Drexel Avenue Planning Study
Vicinity of West Drexel Avenue and Interstate 94

Mr. Fortin explained to the Commission what they were trying to do with this meeting was to answer any questions about existing and the adopted future land use land, existing zoning in the area and some of the conflicts that the Commission may see with potential land use zoning and traffic if the current zoning stays in place.  There may also be some discussion of some alternative land use and zoning scenarios for the area. 

Commissioner Kopplin questioned if the Plan Commission report was available for the public.  Mr. Fortin stated it was distributed only to the Plan Commission but a public notice was sent out attempting to outline what was trying to be done with the study and what the intent of the meeting was.

Mr. Seymour explained this was a continuation of something the Commission was briefed on at a previous meeting.  A moratorium was put in place by the Common Council in the area surrounding the potential interchange of I-94 with Drexel Avenue.  If the interchange would go in there will be impacts on the land use that is identified by the adopted Comprehensive Plan.  There will be impacts based on the zoning that is currently in place on those properties.  The Plan Commission is charged with the task of reviewing the current land use and the existing zoning on those properties to see if those would be consistent with the changes that might be brought upon the City with a potential interchange in that location.  It is not a discussion of if the interchange is going in because that is not something that is within the City’s control.  This meeting will consider the impacts upon land use if the interchange goes in.

Commissioner Sokol questioned if there was to be an interchange would it look like the Ryan or Rawson intersections.  Mr. Seymour explained that would not necessarily be true.  The State has offered three different alternatives for the interchange which greatly reduce the real estate that is need for the interchange. 

Mr. Lars Karlson, 7828 S. 13th Street requested to see a copy of the proposal for the interchange.  Mr. Seymour explained copies would be made available but any interest in the process should be added to a mailing list for the State. 

Mr. David Donovan, 1801 W. Drexel Avenue, commented the State has stated they want nothing to do with this project and that it is what the cities of Franklin and Oak Creek want.  Mr. Seymour explained the State and the Federal government have the final decision.  The City of Oak Creek cannot say build it and the State and the Federal government will follow through.  Oak Creek is just one player in the process.  They do not control what happens, they do have input but they are not the approving authority for the interchange. 

Mr. Steve Spidell, 7909 S. 13th Street, questioned what the City wanted to see in the area as far as land use.  Mayor Bolender commented if the State of Wisconsin was going to put in an interchange the idea for the area would be to put office buildings in that area.  Mr. Spidell questioned if the homes across the street would have a chance to rezone and sell out.  Mayor Bolender explained that was what was being discussed at this time.  What would be appropriate at an on and off ramp.  Mr. Spidell stated houses would not be appropriate with a ramp.

Ms. Kay Haishuk, 1015 Wake Forest Court, questioned how the off ramp would benefit the City.  People could get off on 27th Street or Puetz.  She also requested buffers if this did happen.  She commented the corner was zoned residential and questioned if the State would have to buy the property before they could do the work.  Mr. Seymour stated they may need to buy a portion of the property to for the interchange.  Ms. Haishuk questioned who would be selling the property.  Mayor Bolender explained the State would buy the property for the on and off ramp.  Ms. Haishuk commented there were plenty of office spaces available and who would want to rent an office in that area.  Mayor Bolender explained place where there were on and off ramps would be a desirable location for an office building.  Ms. Haishuk questioned if there were other options for the area besides the interchange.  Mr. Seymour explained the Plan Commission was not discussing whether or not to have the interchange but the option with respect to land use whether to leave it the same and let someone put in a single family subdivision.

Ms. Pat Simandl, 8100 S. 20th Street, questioned what was going to happen with Drexel and 20th Street.  Mayor Bolender did not believe there would be to much of an impact on 20th Street but that Drexel would need to be rebuilt because it floods out.  There are no plans to do any great modifications on 20th Street.

Mr. Don Johnson, 8216 S. Wynona Drive, expressed concern for allowing the new subdivision on Wynona and the church that was just put up.  Mayor Bolender commented the church was notified before they started their project that something could possibly be happening with the freeway and perhaps they should move the church and they did not want to move the church.  He also stated he did not feel the subdivision was a good idea.  Mr. Seymour commented if the Commission chose to do nothing there would be nothing the City could do to prevent another subdivision from going up on that property.  The property is zoned for that purpose. 

Ms. Suzanne Stewart, 8173 S. Wynona Drive, commented she was one of the residents that built in the new subdivision.  She expressed concern for the development of an interchange because when they built they thought nothing else could be built around them because there was not enough room to build anything else.  There is not enough room to build a buffer because it would be right up against there homes.  Mayor Bolender commented there was nothing stopping the State from putting up panels to stop the noise.  Mr. Seymour commented when this subdivision was created there was significant concern regarding freeway noise and the impact on the lots.  There was so much concern that on the face of the plat the City and the State required a notation stating the lots would be impacted by freeway noise.  The State of Wisconsin in their approval of the lots will not put up noise barriers because this is a new subdivision unless additional lanes are added to the freeway. 

Commissioner Kopplin commented the State no longer pays for barrier walls to be installed the City now pays full cost.

Mr. Dennis Cieslak, 7781 S. 13th Street, commented the exchange would be put in his backyard if it were to be moved to protect the church.  The interchange would not even be considered if both cities were not requesting the interchange.  Mayor Bolender explained if the interchange was to go near his home they would have it buffered to help with the noise. 

Commissioner Kopplin commented she represented the area on the east side of 13th Street and the north side of Drexel and now to the freeway on Drexel.  The church has no concerns with the freeway and feels it would be great to allow more people belong to their church.  The people on 13th Street have been fighting this for so long perhaps 15 to 20 years.  If the scissors ramp was to be used it would take less of the land on all areas and would be less impact for the area.  Nobody wants the Rs-3 zoning in that area but she feels it is essential to keep the residential in there and let the people who live there make the choice of when they sell.  Commissioner Kopplin also commented that the City of Oak Creek along with Franklin did decide that they would like to have the interchange in and they did vote to take a look at it.  The State has said that unless Washington agrees they do not put in interchanges anymore.  So there is a possibility it will not go in.  Nobody has agreed to anything at this point. 

Commissioner Johnston explained that of the three proposals that the State has none of them affect the church building.  The single point interchange affects the least amount of land but is also the most expensive interchange to go in.  The interchange has been looked at by SEWRPC in their 2035 plan and that study will be coming out soon. 

Mr. Spidell commented the value of land near a freeway interchange sky rockets and if people are not happy they would be able to sell and move to Florida. 

Commissioner Dickmann questioned if they just couldn’t put the properties in a sort of holding pattern with A-1 zoning to protect from the Rs-3.  Mr. Seymour explained you can do that and the City has the ability to rezone after a public hearing but the one thing the City has to recognize is that somebody owns the property and has the expectation that they are going to be able to do something with that property.  For the City to knowingly go in and rezone to a property which in the long term is not the highest and best use may not be fair to the property owner.  The City certainly has the ability to work with the neighborhood and the property owners to get an appropriate zoning in place but did not view A-1 as the ultimate solution.

Mr. Fortin commented that the first meeting in October would need to be rescheduled to October 11 due to budget hearings.

Commissioner Peterson moved to adjourn.  Dickmann seconds.  Roll call, all voted aye.  The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m.