MAY 28, 2013, 7:00 P.M.,



1.   Roll Call

PRESENT:   Hanna, Heying, McLaughlin, Mead, Pnacek, Senesac,  Stewart, Tanzini and Young

ABSENT:      None

OTHERS PRESENT:   Brad Kaye, Director of Planning and Community Development, Cindy Winland, Consulting Planner, Debbie Marquardt, Technical Secretary and eleven (11) others.


2.   Approval of Minutes

Moved by Heying and seconded by Hanna to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of May 14, 2013.  Motion passed unanimously.

3.   Public Hearings


a.    Site Plan No. 315 – initiated by MLR Engineering on behalf of Schauman Development for site plan review and approval for a multi-family development with seven buildings and 35 units, located at 3535 East Ashman Street. 


Ms. Winland stated that this is a multi-family development, which consists of 35 units and zoned multiple-family.  There are three different kinds of townhouse units.  They all have garages in the front and a second story in the back. 


The developer has agreed to provide access to the Brittany Manor property to the east at such time as it further develops. 


One written comment on the application was received from Mr. Johnson.  He requested that sidewalks not be extended along the north side of Ashman Street.


Parking is all contained in the garage and driveways of the units.  The Fire Department has reviewed this plan and has no problem with access.  There is no additional screening required and there will be no dumpster on the property. 


Mr. Mead asked about the driveway and it appears there are two existing driveways currently into the property.  Both driveways will be removed and a new one will be located approximately in the center of where the drives are now.


Mr. McLaughlin asked about the setbacks on the east side of the property.  The required setback is 25 feet.

Ms. Hanna asked about the residential property buffer.  The plan shows there will be 30 feet of vegetation remaining on the north side and 50 feet of vegetation remaining on the west side.  These exceed the zoning requirements.


Mike Rybiki, MLR Engineering clarified that there will be patios on the back of the townhouses and some shrubbery between them for privacy.  There are single family neighbors to the north and west.  The side yard setback requirements are 25 feet and the setbacks will exceed that.  With the existing and proposed plants and trees on the property there will be a total of 235 trees and shrubs. 


Drainage along the west side of the property exists today.  They have storm sewer along the easterly property line and along the back on the t-drive on Michelle Lane.  They will follow city requirements. 


The detention basis and depth will be in accordance with city standards. It is not expected to be any deeper than 2 feet. 


Bill Johnson, 3545 East Ashman Street.  He is very disappointed in the proposed plan.  He feels he has been lied to and the Planning Commission approved no sidewalks on the north side of East Ashman Street and the owner has placed some beautiful sidewalks to go from his development.  The water retention is now a big hole and the bottom two feet is a clay slug.  There is no fence around the property and it is over ten feet deep.  The storm system there keeps the water level down below two feet but it is not protected on the east side.  There should be a fence with that deep of hole.  The one land owner is renting and if he moves one foot to the left he will go down 10 feet. 


It is city policy to require sidewalks on city streets.  It was clarified that the Planning Commission and City Council waived the requirement to extend the sidewalk along Ashman Street on the previous project as there had been an objection to the sidewalk.  The city did not prohibit it from being put in.   The developer chose to put the sidewalk in now to provide access to this new development and worked with the City Engineering Department to obtain approvals for this.


Ron Schauman, Schauman Development.  He was told by the Engineering Department that he would have to put sidewalk in.  The landscaping is getting close but mother nature is slowing them down. 


Public hearing closed.


Mr. McLaughlin likes the site plan and the accommodations made for the neighboring residential properties.  The developer has done everything that was asked of him.


Mr. Senesac stated that they receive their packet several days before the meeting to studying and come up with questions.  When they receive an incomplete plan, or when new information is presented at the public meeting, he feels deprived of adequate time to prepare.  There was no time to consider things.  He is for taking additional time to consider the new information before rendering a decision. 


Mr. Pnacek stated that it is a very thorough site plan and there were changes since they received their packet.  He is for voting tonight.


Mr. Stewart agrees and they did a great job with the site plan.


Mr. Young asked about the traffic island and wondered if the entrance is wider and he thinks it is a good solution.


Mr. Heying voted against the rezoning.  They are now in a position that multi-family housing is permitted by right.  When he looks at the existing project, it is in the middle of completion.  They have done a good job in meeting half way.  He can vote tonight.


Ms. Hanna isn’t ready to vote tonight.  There are more questions. She doesn’t’ think screening is adequate.


Mr. Mead isn’t ready to vote tonight, feeling that additional time is necessary.  Commissioners agreed that since some members had concerns with the changes and new information provided, the matter would be reviewed for decision purposes at the next meeting.


b.    Site Plan No. 319 – initiated by Edmund London and Associates for site plan review and approval for a 26,536 square foot addition to Independence Village, located at 2325 Rockwell Drive.


Mr. Kaye presented the site plan, which is on approximately 9.29 acres.  They have 74 beds and will be adding 40 beds.  Additional parking to meet zoning ordinance standards is provided.  Since the packets were prepared, a site lighting plan has been submitted.  The plan complies with city standards for illumination levels but the proposed light fixtures do not comply with the full cut-off shielding standards of the zoning ordinance. 


Mr. Stewart mentioned that there are five handicap spots.  Mr. Kaye stated that this meets our zoning ordinance standards.  Should additional spaces be required by the Building Code, this adjustment would be made by building and planning staff at a later time.


Ms. Hanna asked about removing asphalt and providing two access driveways.  Mr. Kaye clarified that the connecting drive between Stratford Village and Independence Village was being removed and replaced due to its condition.


Ralph Stoy, Unified Property Group.  Linda Stowell, Site Manager. They will provide adequate screening.  They will also change the light fixture to shoe box lights.  Mr. Senesac is sensitive to handicap parking spaces.  The ordinance states that you need a minimum of handicap parking spaces.  He would like to know if they thought of putting more handicap spots reflecting friends and family. 


Linda Stowell, Executive Director Independence Village.  Right now they have four handicap spaces in the front and they never have more than one car in those four places.  Everybody respects the purpose of these spots and they just sit open.


Terry Clark, Architect from Edmund London.  They will do the shoe box lighting fixtures.  They were matching the fixtures currently on site but they will change them to comply with ordinance standards.  The two detention ponds have been added to satisfy new stormwater requirements and to address existing drainage concerns on the site.  The turnaround wass designed after discussions with the fire department.


The one pond will be three or four feet deep and the one to the back will be six feet deep.  The bottom corner will have nobody walking by it.  The other one is built up.  The slope is one on six in compliance with city standards, it is very gradual.  OHM designed it to a hundred year storm.  They did discuss it with the city engineering department. 


Mr. Heying asked if they are going to repave the entire area.  They will only repave the part that construction would tear up.  There are a few areas showing stress and they talked about doing those.


            Public hearing closed.


Ms. Hanna appreciates the fact that they are making provisions for the aging community.  The need is definitely there. 


Ralph Stoy stated that the need is changing and they can have the residents stay.  They are trying to begin construction in August and complete in the spring of next year. 


4.   Old Business




5.   Public Comments





6.   New Business




7.   Communications


Commissioners received a copy of Planning & Zoning News.


8.   Report of the Chairperson


The nominating committee for officers has met.  They will report back with their nominations at the first meeting of the new term, being the July 9th meeting.


9.   Report of the Planning Director




10. Items for Next Agenda – June 11, 2013


Ms. Hanna has a problem with screening and asked if we could look into that.  Mr Kaye clarified that we must remember that when a site plan meets the ordinance standards, the city is to approve the site plan.  At that time, it is not discretionary, as it would be for a conditional use.  That said, the ordinance standards themselves can be looked at if the Commission so wishes.


11. Adjourn 


Motion by Senesac, seconded by Hanna to adjourn at 8:30 pm.


Respectfully submitted,





C. Bradley Kaye, AICP, CFM

Director of Planning and Community Development