MINUTES OF THE
TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 2007
Mayor Bolender called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The following Commissioners were present at roll call: Commissioner Dickmann, Commissioner St. John, Commissioner Siira, Commissioner Kopplin, Mayor Bolender, Commissioner Grabowski, Commissioner Correll and Commissioner Nowak. Also present were Douglas Seymour Director of Community Development, Jeff Fortin, Planner, City Administrator Patrick DeGrave, City Attorney Larry Haskin and Assistant Fire Chief George Krudop.
Commissioner Grabowski moved to approve the minutes of the regular Plan Commission meeting of March 13, 2007 and the special meeting of March 20, 2007. Commissioner Dickmann seconds. Roll call, all voted aye. The minutes were approved as submitted.
Report on Significant Common Council Actions
Mr. Fortin updated the Commissioners on the actions that were taken at the March 20, 2007 Common Council meeting. There were no comments or concerns from the Commissioners.
Public Hearing – Tax Incremental District #7 Project Plan
Mr. Doug Seymour explained the Commission was being asked to adopt Resolution 2007-01, designating the proposed boundaries for and adopting the project plan for Tax Incremental Financing District No. 7.
Mr. Seymour explained TIF No. 7 began as a developer funded TIF for Liberty Property Trust. TIF No. 7 at this time is vastly different. It is no longer a developer funded TIF for Liberty Property Trust. It has evolved into something that staff perceives to have a lot more benefit to the City of Oak Creek and allows the City to be in the position to do a lot more things. There are some off-site issues with respect to the Liberty Property Trust proposal centering on the intersection with Wheaton Way in the City of Franklin which led staff to examine the viability of a larger TIF district to implement some of the recommendations of the 27th Street Corridor Plan. The Plan recommends several public improvements along the corridor which involves the infrastructure, the streets them selves, sidewalks, street lights and things of that nature as well as some of the aesthetics such as streetscaping. The Plan also recognizes that TIF is a very important tool for the implementation of the Plan. Staff has formed a working group that includes several department heads, financial and legal council and they have met weekly for several months working on the project plan and crafting the plan to put the City in the best position possible to be able to respond to economic opportunities that are presenting themselves and will present themselves in the corridor.
The boundaries of the initial TIF mainly centered on the 38 acres owned by Liberty Property Trust in the Southbranch Industrial Park. The boundaries of TIF No. 7 today are from Drexel Avenue on the north all the way south to Milwaukee County/Racine County line, 27th Street on the west, and I-94 on the east. There are some large residential areas within the boundaries are excluded from the TIF. The properties of Oak Shores and Tanglewood may also be removed from the TIF district. Currently we are working with them to create a land division which will allow the TIF to remain contiguous as part of the statutory requirements and leave as much of the existing value outside of the TIF.
The TIF was expanded to implement the 27th Street Corridor Plan including the streetscape improvements. It made more sense to create a large TIF instead of having several smaller individual smaller project specific TIFs along the corridor. The TIF will also ensure that Oak Creek is not at a competitive disadvantage when proposals come forward. The goals of the TIF are to serve as a financial vehicle for some much needed public improvements within the 27th Street Corridor. It will also allow for some other infrastructure proposals such as the City’s portion of the proposed interchanges at Drexel Avenue and a connector road with Elm Road. It also addresses some infrastructure issues that will be created as far new development with Drexel Avenue and Puetz Road. The TIF has the revenue potential and the capacity to fund the public improvements and implement the 27th Street Corridor Plan without traditional public financing.
The City has sufficient room within the 12% TIF limit to create a TIF district. Oak Creek has always used TIFs in the past in a very responsible manner. Two of the City’s TIF districts have been paid off over the past year. The City has hired Gruen and Gruen to ensure that any proposals are carefully scrutinized and only projects that make economic sense will move forward.
Franklin has two TIF districts currently in place, one for $14 million dollars around Northwestern Mutual and one for $25 million dollars around Wheaton Franciscan. There is $5 million dollars in that project plan for Wheaton Franciscan to set aside for development incentives and cash grants.
Some of the potential public improvements would include the 27th Street reconstruction and streetscaping and the potential interchange and Drexel Avenue and the local street connections at Elm Road and the reconstruction of Drexel Avenue and Puetz Road and any other public improvements that are within the district like the sanitary/storm sewer and water mains which are typically within the public domain.
The approval of the project plan does not mean that the City must complete all of the projects detailed in the plan. The City’s share of the Drexel Avenue interchange is in the plan but the City is not obligated to do the interchange. The City is not under any obligation to spend the money.
Public Hearing
Mr. Arden Degner, 8540 S. Pennsylvania Avenue, stated this was an ambitious approach and questioned how much has been put into the plan for streetscaping and what the streetscaping plan was. He was afraid this was going to become another speedway like Hwy 100 unless it was made pedestrian friendly with sidewalks. Mr. Seymour commented with respect to making the street as pedestrian friendly as possible with a six lane highway 27th Street would become an example for the rest of the region as being a very economically diverse and very high value street and at the same time not letting the market dictate the development pattern. The roughly $3 million dollars a mile that the City will spend on the reconstruction of 27th Street will allow both Oak Creek and Franklin to put in the type of amenities like real sidewalks and bikeways and landscaping that will make 27th Street more user friendly.
Mayor Bolender commented the idea was to have the traffic pattern in such a fashion that people can look around and take their wallets out and spend money and not go through at 70 mph. You want people to come, look and stop. The sidewalk issue is very well taken in this area.
Mr. Degner stated $79 million dollars was a lot of money to invest in unknown developments. Essentially if we take a look at developments that the City is getting they are warehouses as compared to Delphi and the others. He feels the whole TIF district should be pointed towards a commercial rather than warehouse businesses and fast food places. Mr. Seymour explained the City would not be the warehouse district or the used car lot for Franklin. The TIF will allow the City to attract some of the high value investments in the region.
Charles Defoor, 10900 S. 27th Street, questioned if there were any drawings to look at of the six lane proposal. Mr. Seymour explained the TIF plan was not centered around a project to widen 27th Street. Likely 27th Street would be widened at some point in the future. The State is investigating that as we speak they are doing some preliminary investigations.
Mayor Bolender explained that 27th Street started with himself and some people from Franklin getting it off of the ground. He then brought it to the Common Council, the Mayor of Franklin and he then sat down and discussed what they should do with the main border between the two cities. They have TIFs put in place and if businesses come forward to them with a request they are all ready to go. Oak Creek is behind the eight ball because we don’t have anything setup. If a developer was ready to move forward with a village concept we would not be able to help them for seven or eight months.
Mr. Russell Billmyer, 4433 W. Tesch Avenue, Greenfield, questioned how the TIF district would affect him as a 27th Street landowner versus no TIF district. Mr. Seymour explained if you were a landowner within the TIF district you would see absolutely no difference. You will pay the same amount of taxes at the time to the same person. The difference would be from the value increase that is generated from this due to development. New growth and value and the taxes generated from that new growth go to pay off some of the infrastructure that was used or developed to facilitate the growth. The value of the property is not frozen but the State of Wisconsin is going to use the number that was in place as of January 1, 2007. Anything above and beyond that would go directly back to the City to pay off the TIF district. Mr. Billmyer questioned if residential building in the area would be happening. Mr. Seymour explained there was a certain percentage of residential allowed within the TIF district. There was no prohibition on residential. Mr. Billmyer questioned how it was determined what areas could or couldn’t be residential. Mr. Seymour stated it would be based on comprehensive plans and zoning.
Mr. Al Ellingson, 8170 S. 20th Street, stated at this point and time if he understood correctly he liked the TIF. It was the first thing that he has seen that brings the whole area together. He did question the reasoning behind stopping the TIF at Drexel. Mr. Seymour explained the area north of Drexel was ready for development. Given what they expect to be a world class development across from Northwestern Mutual the City would need to become involved in some fashion in order to make that happen. They anticipate once they have received a proposal to do that they would begin the discussions on what level the City involvement would be appropriate.
Mr. Bill Sleeth, Judith Place, questioned how far the TIF would go back by Reinhart. Mr. Seymour stated it would not go straight through into Judith Place.
Mr. Jeff Racine, 3011 Woodward Drive, Franklin, questioned if out of the $30 million dollars for the Liberty Property Trust does all that tax money stay in the TIF and not towards a new high school or anything else for the school district. Mr. Seymour explained the taxes paid are essentially frozen as of January 1, 2007 and that would be the amount each of the taxing jurisdictions would get. The amount paid as of that date, anything above and beyond that goes directly back into the TIF.
Mr. Mark VerHalen, 1200 E. Ryan Road, commented TIFs years ago were primarily to develop lands which could not develop through private means. While certain areas of the large area on the map do fall under those criteria it is his feeling that a lot of the areas right adjacent to 27th Street would probably be developed privately without the use of TIFs. This is a bold move by the City and he agrees with it in concept however he questions if the City would consider emanate domain to get existing landowners off of their property for redevelopment. Mr. Seymour explained emanate domain is a tool that if available to Wisconsin municipalities under certain circumstances and the City of Oak Creek has the ability to do emanate domain whether there is a TIF in place or not. Mr. VerHalen commented the City would never say if they were going to use emanate domain but it has been used in other states when redevelopment is being considered for a certain area to get the existing property owners to move. He also stated that getting developers from other parts of the country that people aren’t familiar with may have ramifications. He would trust the Commission and the Council to do background checks on any developer that comes into the City.
Mayor Bolender replied he does not like the word emanate domain because he feels if people own property it should not be taken away for the benefit of a select few. The company they are going to hire, Gruen and Gruen, basically was in place as a safety latch. There is interest out of Chicago, Florida and California for developers that who are seeing for the first time, two of the largest and fastest cities growing in the State of Wisconsin working together to develop a corridor of land.
Ms. Mary Lavin, 10126 Judith Place, commented she could understand why the City would want control over how 27th Street is developed but that was why they had a Plan Commission. She did not see why they needed to offer a TIF. The area would develop with or without a TIF. She expressed concern for greenspace and park space. Mr. Seymour responded they have seen what happens if they let the market dictate development. 27th Street would develop with or without a TIF but you may get a truck parking lot, mini-warehouses, used/new car lot and distribution. It can develop; there is no question about it. Part of the value that the Plan Commission and Common Council can add towards the development process is to put out the carrot for people to do the types of things the City is looking for. There is nothing specific in terms of park land or open space as part of this TIF but it does allow the City in working with the developer is to add some of the amenities, which there is no way a developer who is going to develop a new car lot would offer an area for open space.
Mayor Bolender added the fifth and sixth districts are where development is going at this time. As the development moves and fills the area park space would be set aside. Ms. Lavin was not in any hurry for the development to come.
The public hearing was closed after the Mayor called three times for anyone wishing to comment.
Project Plan – Tax Incremental Financing District No. 7
Commissioner Dickmann questioned if Tanglewood was worked out, how that would change the face value of the TIF. Mr. Seymour stated it would decrease the value by about $50 million dollars. It would still work with or without them. Without them in the picture it allows the City a little bit more flexibility for the City to pursue additional opportunities.
Commissioner Grabowski asked for clarification on the statement “the City reserves the right to increase the cost to reflect inflationary increases beyond what is anticipated over a five year period and other uncontrollable circumstances between 2007 and the time of construction.” Mr. Paul Thompson explained one of the controlling factors in creating a tax increment district is the activities of the joint revue board which is made up of representatives of the County, the vocational district, the school district, and the City. Those four members elect a public member for a five member joint revue board. One of the problems with the project plan is they have put in project costs. Mr. Thompson made a correction to an earlier statement from the public hearing. Nowhere does $79 million dollars appear in the project plan. On page 8 they list $41 million dollars worth of project costs. The project costs that they have listed may not get done for a number of years. What they have in the project plan as the project cost may be more than what was listed and they would like the flexibility for the City to fund the greater number without having to go back to the joint review board for additional costs because of inflation. It would be a protective devise so the City would not have to go back to the joint review board for additional funds.
Commissioner Grabowski questioned when the school district would see the additional growth revenue. Mr. Seymour explained the school district and any other taxing jurisdiction would see the full value of the development within the district when the district closes. There is a complicated formula that is used for school district funding. Dr. Larsen has a good handle on that formula and she serves on the joint review board on behalf of the school district and she will calculate the impacts on the school district in her ultimate decision on whether or not to approve the project plan for this TIF.
Commissioner Grabowski questioned what the percentage would be just based on opinion to look at being devoted to commercial versus residential and condos. Mr. Seymour stated it would be difficult to say, as a percentage of new development he did not believe it could exceed 35 percent of newly platted residential. Commissioner Grabowski questioned if Colonial Woods would come in and there was other developers that wanted to do condominium development would we tell them we have too much of a percentage of this therefore we are not going to be looking at any more condos. Mr. Seymour stated there was not a hard and fast percentage from that perspective. It would be driven by the City’s Comprehensive Plan, by zoning and by decisions of the Common Council.
City Attorney Larry Haskin stated the TIF district does not change how the land can be used except for the 35 percent restriction. The land uses are what they are according to the zoning map. The only way they are going to get changed is if there is a proposal that comes before the Common Council to rezone property. At that point it would be handled just like any other rezoning request. The TIF district does not effect how the land gets used except to the extent of the 35 percent limit.
Commissioner Nowak questioned how long Mr. Seymour had been working on TIF No. 7. Mr. Seymour stated since Liberty Property Trust came in around May of last year and more diligently since October.
Mayor Bolender stated they have retired two TIFs early within the last three years the rest of the TIFs have come around and have caught up. The City is in better financial and TIF shape than just about any other City. The Council is very thrifty when it comes to spending money.
Commissioner Kopplin pointed out there was an area of the TIF that would extend on the east side of the freeway that would be included. Mr. Seymour explained you could not expend funds on projects which are outside of the borders of the TIF district. It allows for the final design of the Drexel Avenue interchange work to be done if it is allowed to move forward. Commissioner Kopplin questioned another TIF would include the north side of the interchange. Mr. Seymour explained it would be a potentially difficult situation dealing with potentially two different TIFs. To avoid that scenario the TIF group discussed the most likely manner. The City’s portion of those costs could be crafted in some fashion with the State to apply only to the work that is being done within the TIF district. Commissioner Kopplin also questioned if the $18 million dollars for streetscape was from Drexel all the way down or from Rawson. Mr. Seymour explained they were showing as a total project cost for 27th Street to be approximately $3 million dollars a mile. Commissioner Kopplin questioned if other communities that would be benefiting from the interchange be contributing to those costs. Mr. Seymour stated they were meeting with Franklin but they were not under any obligation to fund a dime of the interchange. To their credit they have recognized that if it is good for the region and Oak Creek and Franklin they will step up to the plate to the extent that they benefit from that project.
Mayor Bolender stated he pushed the Mayor and the Alderman of Franklin at their meeting. They have stated they will be contributing. We are not buying anything for Franklin ever; they need to be in the boat.
Commissioner Kopplin questioned if sanitary sewers and water mains would be in place before developers came forward. Commissioner St. John explained south of Drexel the main grid was already in. The new lands would hopefully be the developer funded.
Commissioner Siira questioned if any proposal regardless of Gruen and Gruen’s analysis go forward to the Common Council or would they have the power to say it will not work. Mr. Seymour stated that was absolutely the case. It is the preference of the Council that the projects be developer funded but it does allow for the rare circumstance where a more traditional TIF structure might make sense for a project. Commissioner Siira questioned if they were merely making a recommendation to the Council, do they have the ability to essentially send somebody back to the drawing board. Mr. Seymour explained ultimately it would be the Common Council upon review of their analysis.
Commissioner Kopplin questioned if the CDA had the power to use eminent domain and borrow money if they so choose. Attorney Haskin stated they could only do that with the authority of the Council.
Commissioner Dickmann moved that the Plan Commission adopt Resolution 2007-01, designating the proposed boundaries for and adopting the project plan for Tax Incremental Financing (TIF) District No. 7.
Commissioner Correll seconds. Roll call, all voted aye. The motion to approve carries.
Sign Appeal Hearing – Trattoria diCarlo
Mr. Fortin explained to the Commission the applicant was requesting a variance from Section 17.0706(i)(1), which States that shopping centers and multi-tenant buildings may provide one ground or pole sign. If granted, the variance would allow the multi-tenant property at 8469 S. Howell Avenue to have two (2) ground signs.
Mr. Fortin swore in Mr. Dino Rizzatono, Stelling and Associates, and explained the background for the variance request. When they were in front of the Plan Commission a year ago with the site plan there was concern regarding wall signs on the S. Howell façade and it was mentioned that a second monument sign would be preferred over wall signs.
Commissioner Correll was not able to find in past meeting notes. Commissioner St. John remembered the discussion distinctly. There were two areas there that looked like a light marble that looked like they were set up to be signs and the question was if that architecture was approved they did not want signs in that spot because it was incompatible with the architecture. It was not a sign issue it was an architecture issue and they assured the Commission there was no signs going in those slots. Commissioner Correll recalled the discussion about no signs in the slots but did not recall the direction that a monument sign would be allowed. Commissioner St. John stated it was never discussed. Mr. Fortin stated in reviewing the minutes it was discussed that one option would be do allow the two monument signs as an option to not have any signs on the building. Commissioner St. John stated it was clear that the architectural review was contingent upon no signs in those large areas.
Commissioner St. John expressed concern for setting a precedent with multi-tenant multiple monument signs. If this was about who had the best Italian food on the south side of Milwaukee he would get two monument signs but it is not. We would be setting a precedent.
Commissioner Siira questioned if the proposed sign was exactly the same as the existing in terms of dimensions. Mr. Rizzitano stated they were the same and the idea was to replicate the other side of the building. Commissioner Siira commented if they approved the sign for the vision center and later the restaurant expanded into that area they would have approved a second monument sign for the site. He did like the symmetrical look of both signs but was concerned about the precedent that would be set.
Commissioner Grabowski agreed with Commissioner Siira’s comments. Her largest concern was similar to Commissioner St. John’s concern with the precedent.
Mr. Rizzitano expressed concern over the placement of a larger monument sign with both logos on it and where it would look appropriate. If he was not allowed to put signs on the two larger areas where would the Commission suggest he put signs on the facility? Commission St. John questioned if there were large evergreens in front of the building. Mr. Rizzitano stated there were currently some pines in front of the building and they are proposed to be removed and replaced with new landscaping. Commissioner St. John stated the placement would be their recommendation because they were entitled to a monument sign that meets the code but he felt it should be near the parking. Mayor Bolender felt it should be near the entrance road. Commissioner St. John stated maybe it should be in the parking lot rather than in front of the building. Mr. Rizzitano was not sure there was room to the south of the drive for a monument sign. Commissioner St. John felt they should move the monument sign to a location that would allow them to leave the mature trees on the site.
Commissioner Correll commented he did not see how they could go with two signs. Mr. Rizzitano requested some type of documentation he could take back to the owner showing that they are not allowed to put signs on the larger areas of the building. Mayor Bolender directed him to the ordinance. Commissioner Correll thought it was some comments from the Commission as far as what they would like to see but it was not put into the approval. Commissioner St. John thought that it was part of the approval.
Commissioner Dickmann questioned if they did not approve the additional monument sign were the pine trees still going to be cut down. Mr. Rizzitano felt they did want to eliminate the pine trees for more visibility of the building.
Mr. Fortin explained what the Plan Commission did when this was approved in March of 2006 was add a condition that any proposed sign would need to come back to the Plan Commission. They did not prohibit them from placing them on that area but the Plan Commission wanted to see any signs that were proposed to go on the building so they could see what it was going to look like from Howell Avenue.
Commissioner Correll commented they were not prohibited but the Commission would have to approve what the signs looked like. Commissioner St. John commented given the discussion that was had those spots are going to be tough to sell.
Commissioner Dickmann agreed with the rest of the Commissioners and did not like to see the precedent of having two monument signs.
Mayor Bolender stated if two monument signs were put up the building would start to look trashy and it was such a nice building. It has class and character and it did not make sense to him to have two monument signs.
Commissioner Grabowski moved to close the public hearing. Mayor Bolender stated Commissioner Grabowski could not close the public hearing on the Mayor could close the hearing.
Commissioner Dickmann stated the problem that would now exist would be the vision center would need to be advertised but he did not think it would have the same effect on traffic on Howell Avenue.
Mayor Bolender felt the entire building should be for diCarlo’s only. To have an eye glass place is not very helpful and diCarlo’s is going to need the space eventually.
Mayor Bolender closed the public hearing.
Sign Appeal – Trattoria diCarlo
8649 S. Howell Avenue
Tax Key No.: 828-9029
Commissioner Siira moved to deny the sign appeal request by Trattoria diCarlo.
Commissioner Grabowski seconds. Roll call, all voted aye. The motion to deny carries.
Sign Appeal Hearing – Classic Lanes
Mr. Fortin explained to the Commission Classic Lanes was requesting a variance to allow for the placement of a single 20-foot high pole sign at a setback of five (5) feet from S. Howell Avenue right-of-way to replace two signs existing on the property at 7501 S. Howell Avenue; the Classic Lanes pole sign and the American Veterans Bingo monument sign. The applicant is also requesting a special exception from the recently enacted six month moratorium on electronic messageboard signs to allow them to place an electronic messageboard panel on the new sign.
Mr. Fortin swore in Mr. Al Passehl, Classic Lanes and Mr. John Claymore, Michaels Signs.
Mayor Bolender stated there would be no exception to the moratorium on the messageboard. Mr. Fortin stated the Plan Commission does have the authority to grant an exception if they so choose.
Mr. Claymore stated they are trying to redo the image of Classic Lanes and to accomplish an update of the facility they thought they would make a couple concessions. The existing sign is 166 square feet and they also have the bingo monument sign which is another 72 square feet for a total of 266 square feet on the property. They have tried to design something within the code and within the ordinance. The pylon sign ordinance would allow a 25 foot high sign and a 100 square foot face. To clean up the site they have combined the AmVets and the Classic Lanes together. The existing Classic Lanes sign does not conform to the setback requirements that the code currently has. The reason they would like to utilize the existing structure is primarily from a cost standpoint. Mr. Passehl commented the existing sign has been in place for about 26 years. They took over Classic Lanes about four and half years ago and they have totally redone the inside and have redone the parking lot. At this point they are trying to get the signs cleaned up make it look nicer. The reason for the digital sign is for the advertising for weddings and for the bingo.
Commissioner Correll commented other than the setback and the moratorium everything else would be in compliance. Mr. Fortin stated everything about the sign is conforming with the exception of the setback and the ground clearance which requires twelve feet from the bottom of structure to the ground. The intent of that was to allow for car clearance if there was a pole sign in a parking lot. For an issue like this where it is in a grass area the ground clearance is not so much of an issue. It is something that is being worked on in the redraft of the sign ordinance.
Commissioner St. John questioned if you could go 20 feet high on a monument sign at this time. Mr. Fortin explained it was not a monument sign but a pole sign. Commissioner St. John questioned if a pole sign was allowed. Mr. Fortin stated a pole sign was allowed in the B-4 district.
Commissioner Correll compared this sign to the one in front of the strip mall on Howell where the alternative was to leave two very unattractive old signs or one newer sign that has the ability for proper ID. I think this is one of the times where a variance should be considered because what is left is a much better look for the City.
Mayor Bolender stated if they would get rid of the monument bingo sign and just have one sign it would make it look much nicer.
Commissioner Correll commented he understood the moratorium but questioned they have been allowing up to this point businesses with these types of signs. He did caution if they considered that messageboard that the applicant understood they are looking at putting a length of use into some of the signs going forward.
Commissioner St. John clarified they are looking at putting restrictions on the messageboard; the size of letters, the speed at which you can go through, minimum stay on times and if permission was given for this and there was not compliance then they would be looking at a short period of time. Commissioner Correll stated compliance issues that you would have a period of time to come into compliance with. So of the bells and whistles and things may or may not fit the new standards.
Commissioner St. John commented this morning the Guarantee Bank sign caught his eye as it is raining nickels. Mr. Fortin stated apparently they just discovered they have the ability to do the animation and Mr. Wagner will be sending them a letter explaining that animation is prohibited by the Code.
Commissioner Correll agreed with Commissioner St. John but felt they needed to understand that there was going to be some compliance restrictions on the whole graphic piece regardless of the moratorium. Mr. Claymore requested some direction as to what the restrictions actually were going to be. Commissioner St. John commented if they knew what it was the moratorium would be over. Mr. Fortin explained with the newer boards they should be okay they may just have to reprogram the letter heights to meet the posted speed limits. Commissioner Correll commented with a new digital sign they should be able to comply with any changes in the Code.
Mayor Bolender stated they should address the height off of the ground. He felt the old height requirement should be cast to the wind. The sign is not in the middle of the parking lot.
Commissioner St. John questioned if they would be going with the red or the blue sign color. Mr. Passehl stated they would be looking at using the burgundy because it matches the décor of the building better than the blue. Commissioner St. John questioned if they would think about getting rid of the bingo on the AmVets sign. Mr. Passehl stated that was what actually drew the people in for the AmVets.
Commissioner Grabowski was not favorable to the overall height of the sign. It was too in your face as you drive by. She did not agree that it needed to be that high from a marketability standpoint. Mr. Passehl explained part of their problem was if you were coming from the north you come over a hill and you will not actually see the sign until they are on top of it because of the hill. Mayor Bolender explained the ordinance would allow them to go up to twenty-five feet.
Commissioner Nowak questioned if they would be able to reprogram the sign. Mr. Claymore stated they would absolutely be able to reprogram the sign. Commissioner Nowak felt a new sign was long overdue and he was glad to see the new sign.
Commissioner Siira questioned if they would be required to have a property address on the sign. Mr. Fortin stated they would like to see just a street number on the sign. Mayor Bolender questioned where the Fire Department would like to see the numbers. Assistant Fire Chief George Krudop did not have a preference but would like them in an area that is easily seen. It would work nice on the column that was closer to the street below the reader board.
Commissioner Siira questioned if they would be willing to assure the Commission that there would landscape at the base of the sign. Mr. Passehl stated landscaping was one of the things they were hoping to do with the sign and the south end of the property.
Commissioner Dickmann questioned if there was another reason for not relocating the sign besides losing parking spaces and the cost of moving the two posts. Mr. Passehl stated cost was definitely a factor as the cost of the sign would go up about 10-15% and visibility was also an issue.
Commissioner Correll felt the honest answer was it is out on the street and you can leave it there rather than move it in without changing the sign. Mr. Passehl commented if for some reason they couldn’t get what they needed here they would leave it there. Commissioner Correll stated visibility was obviously a very large issue for the business.
Mayor Bolender commented they should put it in the parking lot and see how many cars could run into it.
Commissioner Grabowski questioned when the six month moratorium would expire in regards to the electronic reader boards. Mr. Fortin stated it would be expiring September 6, 2007 or when the sign ordinance is revised and approved. She also expressed concern for setting a precedent and going back against the wishes of the Council on the moratorium. Mr. Passehl commented they have a reader board at this time and are just trying to replace one reader board with an updated more modern reader board.
Commissioner Kopplin commented losing a space for parking should not be an issue because during the summer months they have the selling of flowers and other things that take up some of the parking spaces. Her concern is addressed to Grabowski because they have built into the ordinance an exception so if they thought there was a legitimate reason to do grant one they could. She has been into the building and has seen the upgrades inside and likes the new sign and feels it is worth looking at granting the waiver they are asking for.
Mayor Bolender stated the simplest thing would be to install the reader board and not turn it on until the moratorium has expired. Commissioner Correll asked for interpretation of the Council’s actions. He thought they said that during the six months they would have the ability to approve an electronic sign they would just have to look at. It is not that they can’t have a sign for six months. Mr. Fortin explained it was a moratorium on staff approving and if someone wants a waiver it is up to the Commission to look at on all of the merits and decide if it should be allowed or not.
Commissioner Nowak commented there is really no nonconformance because once the sign issue is addressed and identified they can adjust to the new ordinance. Mr. Fortin stated that was correct unless for some reason the Council would say they didn’t want electronic messageboards.
Commissioner St. John questioned if Classic Lanes would agree as a condition that the day the ordinance was published they would operate in conformance with the new ordinance or shut down the reader board sign would the Commission be willing to give them a waiver at this time. Mayor Bolender stated he did not have a problem with that.
Commissioner Grabowski liked the Mayor’s idea of putting up the reader board but not turning it on until the ordinance was approved.
Mayor Bolender favored using the reader board and the applicant coming into compliance within 24 hours once the ordinance was changed.
Commissioner Kopplin questioned if the 24 hours would be sufficient time to reprogram the board. Mr. Claymore stated it was enough time.
Mayor Bolender closed the public hearing.
Sign Appeal – Classic Lanes
7501 S. Howell Avenue
Tax Key No.: 782-9036
Ms. Marge Knudson, 7518 S. Howell Avenue, expressed concern for the flashing signs on Howell Avenue. Mayor Bolender explained that was the reasoning behind the moratorium was to take a look at the sign ordinance and set some standards for the reader boards. The City would like to allow reader boards to its businesses but does not like all the graphics and some signs are hard to read.
Commissioner Siira moved that the Plan Commission approve the sign appeal for Classic Lanes 7501 S. Howell Avenue subject to the following conditions:
Commissioner Correll seconds.
Roll call, Dickmann; aye, St. John; nay, Siira; aye, Kopplin; aye, Bolender; aye, Grabowski; aye, Correll; aye, Nowak; aye. Motion to approve carries.
Sign Appeal Hearing – Oak Creek Self Storage
Mr. Fortin explained to the Commission Oak Creek Self Storage was requesting a sign variance to allow them to add a changeable copy panel on top of their existing ground sign. The variance request would allow the overall height of the sign to be 9’9”. The City’s Sign Ordinance allows for ground signs to be a maximum of eight feet in height. The applicant is also requesting a special exception from the recently enacted six month moratorium on electronic messageboard signs to allow them to place a changeable copy sign panel on the new sign.
Mr. Fortin swore in Mr. Bruce Moore, So-Lite Sign Co., and Mr. Jerry Ignasiak, Oak Creek Self Storage.
Mayor Bolender questioned why they needed the additional height. Mr. Ignasiak explained he was requesting an additional panel on his current sign because of the enforcement of the temporary sign ordinance. He was also trying to comply with the ordinances without having to redesign the entire sign base.
Commissioner Grabowski questioned if he was going to cut the sign down from the bottom to shift everything down. Mr. Ignasiak stated that was not the case he was requesting a variance for the addition of the changeable copy portion of the sign. Commissioner Grabowski questioned if the backboard was going to be lit up. Mr. Ignasiak stated it goes on and off on a timer right now.
Commissioner St. John questioned if they had a conditional use for trailer rental. Mr. Fortin was not sure but would look into the conditional use. Mr. Ignasiak was sure it was in the original conditional use permit from twenty years ago. Mr. Fortin will confirm that is the case.
Commissioner St. John questioned if the moratorium applied to this sign. Mr. Fortin explained it does apply to this sign because it applies to the changeable copy signs and messageboards. Commissioner Grabowski did not believe that was the intent of the moratorium. Mr. Fortin explained that is what was brought before the Commission and passed by the Common Council.
Commissioner St. John stated the Commission should remember the size implications with the Kohl’s Department Store. If you start allowing these signs to start going higher they are going to continue to go higher.
Mayor Bolender stated Kohl’s has got the same thing. You have an eight foot sign and we give you the addition 1 ½ feet and everybody else wants the additional height. It is written in the ordinances and those are the laws of the land. He could not back this variance because someone else will come along at the next meeting asking for the same thing.
Mr. Ignasiak questioned if the sign fit within the existing sign frame and maintained the eight feet in height would the Commission approve that. Several members of the Commission stated they would approve that with out a problem. Mayor Bolender commented he has the maximum allowable space and he wants to tack on another piece. Mr. Fortin stated with the square footage they are under what the code allows. The variance is just for the height not the size of the sign.
Commissioner Correll questioned what the existing total square footage was at this time. Mr. Fortin stated it was 62 square feet as the current sign exists with the addition it would be 76 square feet. Commissioner Correll commented it wasn’t the same as people who were looking for above and more signage. They could put 100 square feet at 8 feet high, a bigger sign without the added height. He stated the Commission should be careful that they are not boxing themselves in and not consider any change to the sign.
Commissioner Dickmann did not feel they were giving that impression. The Mayor said if they stay under the eight feet. There is still a requirement if he wants to put the changeable copy even within the eight feet that the Commission would have to approve.
Commissioner Grabowski questioned if the there was any consideration that the applicant would look at placing the interchangeable within the size that he currently has for a sign. Mr. Ignasiak stated he has not discussed that option with Mr. Moore and is not sure what the cost would be involved in a sign of that type. Commissioner Grabowski questioned if Mr. Ignasiak would consider moving towards that direction at this time. Mr. Fortin stated if they were going to do it with in the current sign they would not need approval of the sign just the approval of the waiver for the changeable copy sign.
Mr. Ignasiak questioned if the sign at the new shopping center on Howell Avenue wasn’t above the eight feet height limit. Mr. Fortin stated the sign was granted a height variance to eleven or twelve feet. Mr. Ignasiak was just asking the question and if a variance was granted once why couldn’t it be granted for him.
Alderman Tom Michalski, 8720 S. 13th Street, commented he did not see a need to go above the eight feet in height and did not want to see a precedent being set. On the other hand if he can’t go up he questioned if there was a way he could go to the sides of the sign. Mr. Moore stated you could possible lower the existing sign. Mr. Ignasiak said there were other possibilities but it would also be a larger expense. Mayor Bolender said they could not sacrifice the rules to save him money.
Mayor Bolender called three times and then closed the public hearing.
Sign Appeal – Oak Creek Self Storage
611 W. Puetz Road
Tax Key No.: 858-9006
Commissioner St. John moved that the Plan Commission deny the request for a variance in height for the sign for Oak Creek Self Storage at 611 W. Puetz Road.
Commissioner Dickmann seconds. Roll call, Dickmann; aye, St. John; aye, Siira; aye, Kopplin; aye, Bolender; aye, Grabowski; nay, Correll; nay, Nowak; aye. The motion to deny carries.
Plan Review – H.C. Brill Company - Freezer Addition
7350 S. 10th Street
Tax Key No.: 764-9026
Mr. Fortin explained to the Commission the applicant was requesting approval of a 12,461 square foot freezer addition onto their existing facility at 7350 S. 10th Street. The addition will be onto the south end of the existing building. The proposal is to have the exterior finished with white metal panels similar to what is found on the east end of the building. The applicant has indicated that they would like the Plan Commission to approve the all metal wall which would require a ¾ vote of the Plan Commissioners present.
Mr. Eric Neumann, MSI General, explained the rational for the submittal with the metal panels. The change to the impervious surface for the addition is about 4500 square feet of additional impervious surface. Part of the submittal and part of the work they are doing is contingent upon receiving a mitigation agreement from the DNR. There is a finger of wetland that is coming into the building that they should be getting mitigation from the DNR on in the next few weeks. H.C. Brill will be closing a plant in Illinois this year and moving facilities up to this location. That is the reason behind the request for the change in materials on the west elevation and the paving requirements or grass requirements not to be subject of the conditional approval. Mr. Neumann showed plans for the future development in general terms for the site. The west wall of the addition will be covered by a new proposed manufacturing building or warehouse. For that reason and the fact the cooler panel is a no-fastner panel it is somewhat of a decorative panel they are asking for that not to be a condition.
Mayor Bolender questioned how many jobs would be coming with the new expansion. Mr. Mike Laasch, H.C. Brill, stated there would be roughly 100 to 200 jobs with the full site build out. Mayor Bolender questioned how definite was the full site build out within the next two years. Mr. Laasch stated he could not commit to it happening within the next two years but when they made the request to the DNR for the wetland fill if they would have gone for only the tenth of an acre that they needed for the freezer addition the procedure would have been much simpler. The felt they were being straight forward with the DNR when they told them they had the second expansion plans in play and would like the full wetlands fill of approximately ¼ of an acre. Mayor Bolender stated what they were requesting from the Plan Commission was not having to brick up the freezer so it looks cute from the road. Mr. Neumann stated that was essentially correct. In front of the existing building there is an elevated berm between the driveways that acts as a screen a large part of the loading dock and the freezer wall. He also stated the existing pole barn would be demolished as part of the future expansion plans. Mayor Bolender stated if they bring the City of Oak Creek 150 or 200 more jobs and he can look at that freezer wall for about four or five years. If we have to brick it up so we feel good about ourselves and we look at the 200 jobs I think we are looking in the wrong direction. This is a company that wants to bring some work here for the people of Oak Creek or whoever it is, that is the message that we should send.
Commissioner Grabowski questioned if the City was to require them to have the existing gravel parking area as asphalt would that change the calculations dramatically for the impervious surface water runoff. Commissioner St. John stated if they picked it up as impervious; which they should have, it would not change anything. Mayor Bolender stated the idea was the jobs versus the…Commissioner Grabowski understood but would not base her opinion on that fact. We welcome that jobs come here but we have rules for reasons and in order to go outside of that we need to find valid reasons other than that. She also questioned if the City’s position was that it should be paved could they give a reason why it should be paved. Commissioner St. John stated it was the City’s position that any used storage, driven on lands shall be paved. Gravel is a nuisance to the neighbors with the dust and that is the position that they have always taken. Commissioner Grabowski questioned if it was an option to install grass in that area or would it be too costly. Mr. Neumann clarified the apron for both of the driveways was concrete and then and area around the building was currently paved. Mr. Neumann stated it was currently used by some of the inbound trucks because they come around the building to approach the current loading docks. Commissioner Grabowski questioned if there were ever complaints from the surrounding businesses because of the dust. Commissioner St. John commented it was not being used at this time but when the freezer is added it will be more convenient to use.
Assistant Fire Chief George Krudop questioned how the trucks were going to be coming into the loading docks and how they were going to leave. Mr. Laasch explained they would be coming in on the existing H.C. Brill property. A.C. Krudop questioned if they were going to come in on one and leave through the other. Mr. Neumann stated they have not directed the truck traffic through one driveway or the other. A.C. Krudop asked if they would go on the record stating they will not be exiting south of the south building. Mr. Laasch asked for consideration that inbound traffic be allowed to use the south driveway and then if they have gravel they will trap it back in the paved area as it works its way out of the tires. They are going to have a higher truck load and he did not want to bottle everything up going in an out of one driveway.
Commissioner St. John stated he understood they were new jobs but he would feel more comfortable not saying they don’t have to do the brick and the pavement but saying you have to do the brick and you have to do the pavement but because of the circumstances of the potential addition you have three years to do it or some other time frame. That way they would be compelled if they don’t do the expansion they are compelled to pave and brick. Mayor Bolender felt that would be fair and questioned what their time frame for the expansion was. Mr. Laasch stated the current estimate was three to four years. Mayor Bolender stated they could give them four years and they either have the addition or they have it bricked up.
Commissioner Kopplin commented they talked about business and bringing in new business, this company has been in the City for at least fifty years. She took a drive on 10th Street and there are several businesses with gravel in the back of their business. She would like to give them a reasonable time. She would be comfortable with five to six years because of the kind of operation that they have.
Commissioner Nowak commented he also drove by the building this afternoon and he had a hard time finding any areas that were gravel. He did not see any activity with dust on the gravel.
Commissioner Grabowski felt it was important to keep a business that has been around for close to fifty years. Mr. Laasch clarified they have been in the industrial park thirty years since the park was built. Commissioner Grabowski expressed concern for the future and allowing them to keep the gravel area; she would support the direction of five years to get the work done.
Commissioner St. John questioned if the DNR allowed them to go out five years. Mr. Laasch stated there was a five year limit on the wetland delineation. Commissioner St. John questioned if they were going to give them a waiver for construction that was going to occur five years out. Mr. Laasch stated the DNR was working with them because they were straight forward with them. Commissioner St. John questioned what they told the DNR for when they would start construction. Mr. Laasch told then they would have a firm plan in three or four years. Commissioner St. John suggested they require three or four year’s compliance.
Commissioner St. John moved that the Plan Commission approve the plans as submitted with the following conditions:
Commissioner Nowak seconds.
Roll call, all voted aye. The motion to approve carries.
Conditional Use – Sancha Landscaping and Four Star Celebrity Limousine Service
904 E. Rawson Avenue
Tax Key No.: 732-9990-001
Mr. Fortin explained to the Commission Sancha Landscaping was requesting a conditional use permit to allow for outdoor storage of landscaping materials and business related vehicles along with outdoor storage of limousines for the limousine service business located on the property at 904 E. Rawson Avenue.
Mayor Bolender questioned if the applicant has met with staff. Mr. Abulughod Limo stated he applied in 2004 for the permit and submitted all the papers and maps. The first map submitted was not the way they wanted and he submitted another one with a professional office. The day he submitted the last paper he had the City Inspector come out and show him any violations and he fixed them and the Fire Department people come every month and inspect. He stated they asked him if he was done and he submitted a check for $800 and the check was cashed. He understood the last map that he submitted was the last map that was needed and they asked him if he was done. After a month the check was cashed which meant he was good and he had the permit. Mr. Fortin explained to get a conditional use permit you would need to come before the Plan Commission and there was additional information requested by the Department of Community Development that was never received. The issue kind of fell by the wayside until the other issue of the landscaping business came up.
Mayor Bolender questioned what business he was running that would fit the zoning. Mr. Fortin stated the only thing that fits the zoning would be the office portion of the limousine service. The outdoor storage of limousines and the landscaping contractor yard also do not fit the zoning, which is why they are requesting the rezoning. These are things that were put in without approvals by the City.
Mayor Bolender questioned if the Fire Department had been inspecting his business with the outdoor storage of vehicles in the improper place. A.C. Krudop explained they have been inspecting the actual structure and access.
Mr. Abulughod explained they have joined the Chamber and have landscaped. Mayor Bolender commented to be zoned M-1 they have to have a minimum of one acre and they don’t have the minimum.
Commissioner St. John questioned if limo was allowed in B-4. Mr. Fortin explained you could have an office for a limousine service but the limousines could not be stored outside in the B-4. Commissioner St. John questioned what the original request in 2004 was for. Mr. Fortin stated it was for a conditional use for the outside storage but he should have been requesting a conditional use and a rezone to M-1.
Mayor Bolender did not understand how he has been running a business at this location for four years. Commissioner Kopplin explained the history of the site. This business should not have been allowed to operate on this site. It was brought to the attention of someone who should have done something about it but nothing was done for quite some time until Mr. Wagner got out there. They have a very nice sign for the business that should not be on the site either. The landscaping is in the back there because they had fire wood by the restaurant and were told to move it away from the restaurant.
Commissioner Grabowski understood there was a conditional use on the property. Mr. Fortin stated there was never a conditional use on the property. They had applied for a conditional use but it was never approved. Commissioner Grabowski questioned how we went from an existing zoning of B-4 to manufacturing because you have to have a public hearing. Mr. Fortin explained they did not go from B-4 to M-1 that is what they are asking for at this time.
Commissioner St. John questioned who owned the parcel and how many tenants were on the property. Ms. Lintzeris stated there were two separate properties. On the 904 W. Rawson parcel it is Mr. Abulughod with the limo and Mr. Sancha who is asking for a conditional use for the landscaping.
Mayor Bolender stated it could not go to M-1 because it was too small so that eliminates that. Ms. Lintzeris explained she spoke with Peter and he said there are times that they do make exceptions. Mr. Fortin explained the process for that would be to get denied by the Plan Commission and Council who make their decision based on what the code says. Then you would have to go to the Board of Zoning Appeals and appeal the decision of the Council to not rezone the parcel. You would need to bring them all of your information and they would decide whether or not they felt there was a need. Ms. Sancha stated then basically she would have to be denied first. Commissioner St. John commented if this was denied because the Plan Commission or the Council doesn’t think the use is a fit they can’t appeal it. They can only appeal because of size. Commissioner Grabowski commented you would not give them that recommendation if they couldn’t go that route. Mr. Fortin explained if the Plan Commission and Common Council said we don’t want to rezone this to M-1 not because it doesn’t meet the requirements but because we don’t want an M-1 parcel and these uses at this location. Commissioner Grabowski questioned if they could stay in B-4 for a conditional use with limousines. Mr. Fortin stated they would not be able to unless the limousines were in garages. Mr. Abulughod stated he has been there since 2004 and has established his business here from Milwaukee. He was under the impression that he was approved in 2004. The cars are on the paved area and are not stored in the back. Because it was ugly in the back they put the crushed gravel in the back to make it nice. The vehicles they have are $200,000 vehicles and are nice looking. No one has told him that he could not have the cars.
Commissioner Grabowski expressed concern for the limousines have been there since 2004 and now because of the conditional use for the landscaping his business is being looked at. Mr. Abulughod was shocked and surprised that he did not have a permit. He will move if he is not in a good condition to do what he is doing. Commissioner Grabowski commented they need to be more proactive rather than reactive and she is suggesting going over each individual item. How does a limousine service run for three years with nothing said? Mayor Bolender commented because somebody broke the law you don’t change the law you change the condition. He is illegal and that cannot be commercial property. That should have been caught by Planning.
Commissioner Correll questioned how he could be open today. Ms. Lintzeris stated he has been there for four years. Mayor Bolender questioned where the zoning cop was.
Ms. Lintzeris stated he paid the fee and was told as long as he was on the pavement. Mr. Fortin stated he did not know where that came from but it did not come from the Planning Department that you were okay. Ms. Lintzeris stated again that he has been there for four years and Mr. Wagner said the conditional use process for Mr. Sancha would not affect the limousine service because his permit has been in. Mr. Fortin commented there may have been some confusion on Mr. Wagner’s part as well but looking in the file it was found that additional information was requested of the applicant that was never received.
Commissioner Grabowski commented that was irrelevant because there should not be limousines sitting out there and they are a service to the community and the surrounding community. She expressed concern for the Fire Department saying the limousines should have been parked on pavement. Mayor Bolender stated the Fire Department is in no way a body that influences permits. A.C. Krudop commented what he remembered was actually the used car lot that needed to use pavement for parking. Soon after that the limousine service showed up in the businesses and started moving through the process. Commissioner Grabowski expressed surprise that the business wasn’t checked.
Commissioner Kopplin questioned if Mr. Sancha with the landscaping also ran the restaurant. Mr. Sancha confirmed that was the case. Commissioner Kopplin commented because he runs the restaurant is why he started to assume he could put his property back there. Ms. Lintzeris told him once he put his things there he would have to come through the City. Commissioner Kopplin questioned if Ms. Lintzeris was the owner of both properties. She confirmed that was the case. Mr. Sancha explained when Peter came to him the issue was storing material at the restaurant. The material was there by mistake. The other issue was the firewood. Mayor Bolender questioned when Mr. Wagner came from the City did he say it was okay to have the firewood and the salt at the restaurant. Mr. Sancha stated no, he was told to remove the wood and the salt from behind the restaurant which was moved. Commissioner St. John commented it was moved behind the limo service.
Commissioner Grabowski questioned if he had a permit issued from the City for the limousine service. Mr. Abulughod replied they come and inspect from day one. Commissioner St. John commented the Fire Department checks the building not the use. Mayor Bolender stated the Fire Department does not enforce codes. Mr. Abulughod commented he did not receive a piece of paper from the City. The only thing he had was his taxes. He was not sure he knew exactly what was required in Oak Creek because he was coming from Milwaukee and he knew that Milwaukee required a piece of paper to hang in the office.
Mayor Bolender explained the offices for the limousine service fit in the zoning just not the storage of the limousines. Commissioner St. John again stated the limousines could be on the site if they were in a garage. Mayor Bolender questioned who told him he could have limousines in this area. Mr. Abulughod stated the two inspectors who came to his site. Mr. Fortin explained the building inspectors would have visited the site. Commissioner St. John commented the inspectors would not be concerned with the parking of the cars.
Ms. Lintzeris questioned what the steps would be if they can’t rezone. She did not want to lose the tenants. Mayor Bolender stated they could not get it rezoned from B-4 to M-1. Commissioner St. John clarified if the Council would reject the rezone because the parcel was not big enough they can go to the Board of Appeals and appeal the decision. If they get rejected because landscaping and limousines are not an appropriate use then they can’t appeal that decision.
Mayor Bolender questioned where a limousine business would fit in a B-4 zoning. Commissioner St. John commented it does fit if there is a garage for the limousines.
Commissioner Correll commented without a garage the limousine business should be shut down.
Mayor Bolender stated the landscaping business could not be run out of a restaurant and can’t be run out of a limousine service. You can’t run a landscaping business on B-4 zoning. Ms. Lazrious questioned if the restaurant property was zoned M-1. Mr. Fortin clarified the restaurant was zoned B-4.
Commissioner St. John commented he had a hard time with a landscaping business and storage being next to or behind a restaurant. Ms. Lazrious commented that KEI was next to them. Commissioner St. John stated they were one lot removed. Ms. Lazrious stated he was not behind the restaurant he was one lot.
Mayor Bolender felt the matter should be referred to legal council because they were all illegal with the B-4 zoning. Commissioner St. John felt the landscaping was on weaker ground than the limo. Ms. Lintzeris commented she told Mr. Sancha if he did not get approval he would have to move but Mr. Abulughod has been there for four years. Mayor Bolender commented it does not make it any less of a mistake. Ms. Lintzeris commented Mr. Abulughod should not be punished because he did not do anything purposely. Everybody can make mistakes. Commissioner St. John stated he should not be rewarded for it either.
Commissioner Correll questioned how they got the sign for the limo. Mr. Abulughod explained the sign was actually there but it was empty. Commissioner Correll questioned what protocol they should have followed to have the sign. Mr. Fortin explained with a sign if they are just changing the face he believed he did not need a permit.
Mr. Abulughod stated at the last meeting of the Chamber Mayor Bolender stated he would help all businesses within Oak Creek and he would be happy if he would be shown the letter that states he was missing something that the Planning Department did not receive. He will come back and do what he needs to do. Mayor Bolender stated he will help business but they will run by the letter of the law.
Mayor Bolender stated this was going to go to the City Attorney and they could make heads or tails of this. Commissioner Dickmann questioned if they were allowed to keep operating in the mean time. Mr. Fortin stated technically they should not be allowed to operate.
Commissioner St. John questioned if under any condition a landscape operation should be allowed next door to a restaurant. Maybe a recommendation should be made to the Council that it not be rezoned for the landscaping. Commissioner Grabowski felt it should be sent to the City Attorney to look at the whole thing.
Mayor Bolender stated they were going to send it to the City Attorney but in fairness and to show the City motto of fair play the limousine service can operate as they have been only for the time it takes to get a legal decision. The landscaping business needs to be moved because it is operating next to a restaurant and the whole Commission has a problem with that. The land is not zoned for landscaping at all but it could fit the limousine service with some changes. The landscaping needs to be moved within 10 days. Mr. Sancha requested three months to move the landscaping equipment and supplies. Mayor Bolender compromised and allowed Mr. Sancha three weeks, fifteen working days to remove the landscaping business from the site.
Commissioner Dickmann moved to adjourn. Commissioner Correll seconds. Roll call, all voted aye. The meeting adjourned at 10:42 p.m.