A meeting of the City of Kaukauna Plan Commission was called to order at 4:00 p.m. on Thursday, October 3, 2019, by Chairman Penterman.
Members Present: Coenen, Feldt, Penterman, Schoenike, Sundelius, Thiele.
Also Present: Planning Director Jakel, Principal Planner Brunette.
Absent and Excused: Moore, Oldenburg.
- Excuse the Absent. A motion to excuse the absent Commission members was made by Coenen, seconded by Thiele. All members voted aye. Motion carried.
Minutes. A motion to approve the minutes of the September 5, 2019, meeting was made by Sundelius, seconded by Schoenike. All members voted aye. Motion carried.
Public Hearing Amending TID #6 Project Plan. Chairman Penterman declared the public hearing open at 4:05 p.m. and asked three times if anyone present would like to speak in favor of or in opposition to the proposed amendment to the TID #6 project plan. No one appeared. Chairman Penterman declared the public hearing closed at 4:06 p.m.
Resolution Amending TID #6 Project Plan. Ms. Brunette explained that the amendment would follow the legal process to designate TID #6 as a donor TID to TID’s #4 and #5. Ms. Brunette explained that the amendment is in the best interest of the community as well as all other taxing districts and no new project expenditures are expected as a result of the amendment. The amendment is being done in conjunction with an extension to the life of TID’s #4 and #5 which is reviewed by the Joint Review Board. A motion to approve the Plan Commission resolution amending the project plan for TID #6 was made by Schoenike, seconded by Sundelius. All members voted aye. Motion carried.
Recommendation to Council – TID #6 Project Plan Amendment. A motion to recommend to the Council approval of the resolution amending the project plan for TID #6 was made by Coenen, seconded by Thiele. All members voted aye. Motion carried.
- Easement for Apple Creek Tributary at Commerce Crossing. Mr. Jakel explained that the potential relocation of the Apple Creek tributary splits lots north of Commerce Crossing into one-third sections. Property south of the split is not accessible or ready for development – requiring a bridge or the extension of Evergreen Drive. Mr. Jakel explained that the owner of the property is looking to move the creek along the west lot line to connect up with the existing tributary and fill in the remainder of the creek. The drainage board has given tentative approval – the Army Corps and WNDR still need to give their approval. Mr. Jakel explained that opening up the property north of Commerce Crossing for development would be beneficial and would have minimal impact on municipally owned property. Mr. Jakel suggested a 75′ setback similar to other lots which would benefit the adjoining property owner. Mr. Jakel explained that as a result of the benefit, the City should receive compensation and suggested that annexing the property to the north would be beneficial. Mr. Neumeier received a request from the developers to modify the 75′ setback from the top of the bank instead of the high water mark to accommodate equipment and maintenance. If the 75′ is needed, an additional 20′ of property may be impacted, however, it would still be within the wetland. Mr. Jakel explained that he suspects that most of the north lot is wetland that may possibly be mitigated. Davel Engineering has provided a proposal for wetland delineation for the entire lot versus just the creek. Mr. Sundelius asked if it was possible to move the drainage ditch further to the north to lessen the impact on City property. Mr. Jakel explained that developers could take advantage of the existing wetland features on both properties and wetlands to the north would require setbacks as well. Mr. Sundelius asked if the City was allowed to pursue annexations. Mr. Jakel explained that there is no written contract pursuing the annexation and the developers brought up annexation as they will require sewer and water, however, it is not a leverage point. Mr. Coenen asked if the developer would have to pay to have a survey completed. Mr. Jakel explained that a buyer would have to assume the potential risk or ask for a survey at the time of purchase. Chairman Penterman explained that a completed survey would make the property more marketable. Mr. Schoenike agreed that we should take care of the survey now. Ms. Thiele asked if moving the creek would change the outcome of the survey. Mr. Jakel explained that it would not effect the wetland delineation. A motion to recommend to the Council authorizing staff to enter into an agreement with Davel Engineering for the delineation of wetland at Commerce Crossing was made by Schoenike, 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 4:25 p.m. was made by Schoenike, seconded by Feldt. All members voted aye. Motion carried.
Community Development Coordinator