The Meeting of the Common Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday,
November 13, 2007. It was noted that the
meeting had been announced and a notice posted at City Hall.
Roll call was taken, with the following members present: Mayor Jim Bialecki, Ald. Kim Smith, Ald. Tim
Miller, Ald. Mike Giese, Ald. Jim Olson, Ald. Robert Muth, and Ald. Clarence
Stellner,
Also Present: City Clerk Cari
Burmaster, Finance Director Fred Buehler, City Engineer Jarrod Holter, Land Use
& Development Director Jason Gilman and City Attorney Sean O’Flaherty.
Item 2 - Pledge of Allegiance
The Pledge of Allegiance was declared.
Item 3 - Approval of minutes from previous meeting.
Motion by Ald. Mike Giese, second by Ald. Jim Olson, to approve the
minutes from the previous meeting as printed and on file in the City Clerk’s
Office. On voice vote, motion carried.
Item 4 - PUBLIC INPUT: (limited to 3 minutes/individual)
Mayor Bialecki called for anyone wishing to address the council.
Ann Brandau
Ann spoke to the Council regarding the Preliminary Plat
submitted by Dave Evenson. She expressed
concerns on the road design for egress in and out of the development. Her suggestion was to have the development
enter and exit off of
Item 5 - REPORT FROM THE MAYOR.
A. Resolution
No. 33-2007 – Resolution for Recycling Efficiency grant.
Resolution No. 33-2007
Resolution for Recycling Efficiency Grant
To: The Honorable Mayor and Council Members,
WHEREAS, the City of
WHEREAS, the City of Onalaska and other La Crosse County municipalities
may apply for a grant from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources for
entering into a cooperative recycling agreement with another municipality, and
WHEREAS, joint education efforts will decrease the overall cost of
sending brochures to all City residents, and
WHEREAS, a unified recycling message between the two municipalities
will eliminate some confusion from residents who move between municipalities
and gain recognition of recycling
educational brochures.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby
authorized to execute said agreements.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Planning Department is authorized
to effectuate said agreement.
Dated this 13th day of November, 2007.
CITY OF
BY: ____________________________
James Bialecki, Mayor
______________________________
Caroline Burmaster, City Clerk
Passed:
Approved:
Cooperative Agreement
Recycling Efficiency
In accordance with the Recycling Efficiency Grant qualifications, the
City of Onalaska and the surrounding neighboring communities of the City of La
Crosse, Town of Campbell, Town of Onalaska, Village of Holmen, Town of Shelby,
Town of Hamilton, Town of Farmington and Village of West Salem, Buffalo County
and other La Crosse County Responsible Units agree to work cooperatively to
educate residents on the components of their respective recycling programs.
The above stated municipalities agree to create a recycling newsletter
that can be used to unify recycling messages and give residents a better
understanding of their disposal options.
This agreement includes the shared responsibility for writing articles,
layout and design as well as printing coordination and costs.
The above stated municipalities agree to make the brochure consistent
in design with other
Such duties of this agreement will be carried out by each municipality
or county authorized representative in cooperation with the participating
municipalities.
Work in this project will be completed by April 1, 2008.
Agreed to on this date: November
13, 2007
Motion by Ald. Clarence Stellner, second by Ald. Kim Smith to approve Resolution 33-2007. On roll call vote: Ald. Robert Muth – aye; Ald. Tim Miller – aye; Ald. Jim Olson – aye; Ald. Mike Giese – aye; Ald. Clarence Stellner – aye; and Ald. Kim Smith – aye. Motion carries
RESOLUTION 34-2007
A
RESOLUTION TO RATIFY AND EXPAND THE CITY OF
ONALASKA
TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE
WHEREAS, THE City of
WHEREAS, the City of
WHEREAS, the City of
WHEREAS, the City of
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of
SECTION 1. The creation of the
Technology Committee by a motion of the City of
SECTION 2. The Technology
Committee shall consist of six (6) members (the “Committee Members”). The powers of the Technology Committee shall
be vested in, and exercised by, the Committee Members in office from time to
time. Committee Members shall receive no
compensation for their services but they may be reimbursed for expenses
actually and necessarily incurred in the performance of their duties if such expenses
are pre-approved by the Common Council.
SECTION 3. The Mayor of the City
of
SECTION 4. Committee Members shall
continue as members until his or her successor has been appointed and confirmed
unless such Committee Member vacates the position earlier because of removal,
resignation, incapacity or death. All
appointments or vacancies shall be confirmed by the Common Council.
SECTION 5. The Technology
Committee shall make recommendations regarding necessary purchases of equipment
or services and regarding the hiring of any information technology staff to the
City’s Finance and Personnel Committee.
All other recommendations by the Technology Committee shall be made
directly to the City Council.
SECTION 6. No Committee Member
shall acquire any direct or indirect interest in any project or in any property
included or planned to be included in any information technology project
entered into by the City of Onalaska, nor shall he have any direct or indirect
interest in any contract or proposed contract for insurance, materials or
services to be furnished or used in any such project. If any Committee Member of the Technology
Committee owns or controls a direct or indirect interest in any real property
included or planned to be included in any such project, he shall immediately
disclose the same in writing to the Technology Committee and such disclosure
shall be entered upon the minutes of the Technology Committee, and such
Committee Member shall not participate in any action by the Technology
Committee relating to such property.
Failure to so disclose such interest shall constitute misconduct in
office.
Dated this 13th day of November, 2007.
CITY
OF
By:_________________________________
James S. Bialecki, Mayor
By:_________________________________
Caroline Burmaster, Clerk
PASSED:
APPROVED:
PUBLISHED:
Motion by Ald. Muth, second by Ald. Olson, to approve Resolution No. 34-2007.
Under discussion, Ald. Smith asked, The way this is worded, I’m
interpreting it to be that the current five members of the Technology Committee
will continue until they are removed by the Mayor, the council, resign, become
incapacitated or die as opposed to most of our committees serve a term of
several years?”
Mayor Bialecki answered, “Yes, and I’ll clarify that – Technology is one
committee – there have never been any
set terms; however, appointments to that committee are ratified every year at
the annual reorganization meeting – that’s where a change could happen. Meaning realistically that they are there for
one term. Should they decide on or
before that time or the incumbent mayor or for that matter council will choose
at that time or they certainly could do that on an annual basis.”
Ald. Smith asked, “And then in follow up to that in Section 3, it states
that the five committee members will continue on but it doesn’t refer to the
sixth member then.”
Mayor Bialecki said, “I think it just makes it clear that we’re adding
one more position to make it six, meaning the five incumbents right now are
there until at least April of 2008.”
On roll call vote: Ald. Kim Smith
– aye, Ald. Tim Miller – aye, Ald. Clarence Stellner – aye, Ald. Jim Olson –
aye, Ald. Mike Giese – aye, Ald. Bob Muth – aye. Resolution passes.
Motion by Ald. Olson, second by Ald. Miller, to approve the appointment
of Jim Strack,
On voice vote, motion carried.
Fire Chief Don Dominick reported that the City of
Fire Chief Dominick said, “The reason for this request is the
subscription service that Code Red has for the phone numbers for our residents
that are directly attached to an enhanced 9-1-1 system – in other words any
phone currently that is picked up automatically goes to LaCrosse 9-1-1
Center. That is roughly 70% of our
residents will already be in there. The
allowance to have the logo placed on the website, will give all of the
residents of Onalaska the opportunity to go online, to click onto the Code Red
logo and they can put in their work numbers, cell numbers, spouses numbers,
etc. So it’s a way that we will update
and we’re looking at in the beginning probably every 2 weeks, we’ll be
forwarding the new residents that sign up down to the main database.
Motion by Ald. Smith, second by Ald. Miller, to approve authorization to
place the Code Red logo on the City of
Under discussion, Mayor Bialecki confirmed that it is the understanding
of Code Red that they at no time can ever use the City of
Ald. Muth questioned when Code Red would go into effect.
Fire Chief Dominick said, We’re hoping, and it moved ahead a little bit
with the concept of how this will work with the assistance of Joe Barstow, it
seems feasible that by Friday, the logo will be available for our residents to
utilize. And, again, we’re at about 70%
capacity, statistically. We should be
able to go online sometime the following week.
We’ll be working with the news media – let them know, and just so Common
Council does know, what we will be doing is placing a call list together, if
you will, for all the members of Common Council that any time a system is
utilized, you will be notified so if any of your constituents want to contact
about a particular question, you’ll know right up front – it will happen in
real time.”
On voice vote, motion carried.
Fire Chief Dominick explained that the procedure will be self-explanatory
to any of the residents that go on line.
After clicking on the Code Red logo, they will be allowed to fill in
their contact information. They do one
phone number at a time, so if they have any subsequent numbers, they would just
click and add the next one and it’s one that will walk all the way through.
Fire Chief Dominick said, “Again, that information will be available to
the Fire Department – we’ll be monitoring the program, making sure we don’t
have duplicates, and if by some reason we miss that we already have a
duplicate, rather than call the same number several times, Code Red’s database
will remove it from the system so each number will only be allowed to be
entered once for calling purposes.”
Ald. Smith suggested that if persons do not have access to online
services that they could access the Internet through the computers at the
library as there are many public access stations available and there is no fee
charged for this service.
Ald. Giese asked, “Chief the 70% figure you used, those numbers are going
to automatically be entered into the database so most resident will, by virtue
of having a phone number listed, have their listing posted within the Code Red
database.”
Fire Chief Dominick answered, “Whatever is currently available right to
9-1-1 Center will be, that’s correct. But what’s really happening is more and
more people are utilizing their cell phones rather than their home phones, and
that’s a bit more difficult to say that it’s dedicated to a specific
center. So if they want to do that, then
that cell phone that they enter would automatically go with being an Onalaska
resident, which would bring them up on the callers list.”
Motion by Ald. Miller, second by Ald. Stellner, to approve the procedure
for citizens to sign up for Code Red.
On voice vote, motion carried.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR APPROVAL
AND/OR POSSIBLE ACTION FROM THE FOLLOWING COMMITTEES/COMMISSIONS/BOARDS:
Item 6 – FINANCE COMMITTEE:
A. Vouchers.
Motion by Ald. Olson, second by Ald. Muth, to approve Vouchers No. 2341
through No. 2582, expended since the last Common Council meeting of October 9,
2007 in the amount of $1,585,524.34.
On voice vote, motion carried.
B. Cities and Villages Mutual Insurance Company
(CVMIC) two-year liability renewal package for 2009-2010.
Motion by Ald. Olson, second by Ald. Smith, upon recommendation of the
Finance and Personnel Committee to approve the Cities and Villages Mutual Insurance
Company (CVMIC) two-year liability renewal package for 2009-2010.
On voice vote, motion carried.
C. 2008 Information Technology (IT) on City Computer
Hardware and Software.
Motion by Ald. Olson, second by Ald. Miller, upon recommendation of the
Finance and Personnel Committee to deny the wavier request by Information
Management Services Inc. (IMS) regarding
the 2008 contract referencing bond requirement.
Mayor Bialecki asked, “Since we have a proposal approved, this waiver has
been denied, how much of a time frame now are we going to give the company to
get that before we have to go looking again?”
Fred answered, “The last Common Council meeting that we had, the Common
Council went on record to approve with the 2008 RFP proposal and award it to
Information Management Systems (IMS) and the RFP, as this council had
authorized, it stated that upon awarding the contract, the provider had 10 days
to provide the necessary documents as outlined in the RFP. In not doing so, an e-mail went out by myself
as well as it went back on stating that we needed to know their intent. The letter was received that they were not
going to provide the bond requirement and then at that point in time it went on
the Finance & Personnel agenda, and the Finance & Personnel Committee
decided not to allow a waiver, so we’re well past the 10 day referral issue.”
Mayor Bialecki said, “That’s with the ___ comment because that was part
of the RFP – to be in place upon approval within 10 days, and as far as I’m
concerned, we’ve been reneged on that. I
don’t know how the council feels, if this is the council’s action tonight to
give a date certain that that has to be in place or back to Technology to move
on and consider another outside provider or to entertain the idea of an insider
provider.”
Ald. Smith suggested, “I think at this point, we just need to refer back
to the Technology Committee for a recommendation.”
Mayor Bialecki questioned if members would like an amendment indicating a
time frame to have the date in place in order to avoid the necessity of the
committee being required to address this issue again next month.
Members agreed to set the date of November 23, 2007 as the required date
to have the bond in place.
Mayor Bialecki noted that if there is no bond in place by this date, the
committee would be authorized to move forward.
On voice vote, motion carried.
Item 7 – PERSONNEL COMMITTEE:
Motion by Ald. Olson, second by Ald. Smith, upon recommendation of the
Finance and Personnel Committee to approve the policy change for leave of
absence.
On voice vote, motion carried.
Motion by Ald. Olson, second by Ald. Smith, upon recommendation of the
Finance and Personnel Committee to approve the above three job descriptions of
Residential Building Inspector, Electrical Inspector, and Heating/Plumbing
Inspector.
Under discussion, Ald. Smith indicated that for clarity of understanding,
the job descriptions were approved as stated in the packet with the building inspector
being a Grade 17, the Electrical Inspector being a Grade 18, and the
Heating/Plumbing Inspector being a Grade 18, and asked if everyone was in
agreement.
On voice vote, motion carried.
C.Assistant Municipal Court Clerk.
Motion by Ald. Olson, second by Ald. Muth, upon recommendation of the
Finance and Personnel Committee to approve the salary for the Assistant
Municipal Court Clerk at $10.65 an hour.
On voice vote, motion carried.
Motion by Ald. Olson, second by Ald. Muth, upon recommendation of the
Finance and Personnel Committee to post and advertise for the Assistant Municipal
Court Clerk position.
On voice vote, motion carried.
D. Police Department Towing Policy.
Motion by Ald. Olson, second by Ald. Stellner, upon recommendation of the
Finance and Personnel Committee to approve the new Police Department Towing
Policy.
On voice vote, motion carried.
E. Non-Union Compensation.
This item was deferred at the meeting last evening for 30 days.
F. Compensation for Mayor.
This item was also addressed during the budget meeting last evening.
Item 8 - ADMINISTRATIVE
COMMITTEE:
Item A - Approval of Operator’s Licenses
Motion by Ald. Stellner, second by Ald. Smith, upon recommendation of the
Administrative Committee to approve the Operator’s Licenses.
On voice vote, motion carried.
Item 9 - BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS:
A. Update on vacuum leaf pick up throughout the
City.
Motion by Ald. Stellner, second by Ald. Miller, upon recommendation of
the Board of Public Works to authorize a one-week extension for the vacuum leaf
pick up throughout the City.
On voice vote, motion carried.
Motion by Ald. Stellner, second by Ald. Miller, upon recommendation of
the Board of Public Works to allow the City Engineer to proceed with leasing
space for cold storage in the old city shop located at
On voice vote, motion carried.
Motion by Ald. Stellner, second by Ald. Smith, upon recommendation of the
Board of Public Works to allow Jarrod to facilitate locations for sand and salt
pick up.
Jarrod explained that will be ¾ sand and ¼ salt mix rather than the
straight salt that has been utilized in the past. One distribution station is anticipated to be
placed at the Community Center and one at the old City Shop location.
On voice vote, motion carried.
Motion by Ald. Stellner, second by Ald. Miller, upon recommendation of
the Board of Public Works to approve the two-party agreement with Short Elliot
and Hendrickson (S E H) for engineering design services for
On voice vote, motion carried.
Motion by Ald. Stellner, second by Ald. Smith, upon recommendation of the
Board of Public Works to approve the local road improvement project grant
application.
On voice vote, motion carried.
Motion by Ald. Stellner, second by Ald. Miller, upon recommendation of
the Board of Public Works to approve the storm water management plan task order
04-07 with Strand Associates.
On voice vote, motion carried.
Motion by Ald. Stellner, second by Ald. Olson, upon recommendation of the
Board of Public Works to approve the
On voice vote, motion carried.
Motion by Ald. Stellner, second by Ald. Miller, upon recommendation of
the Board of Public Works to approve the retaining wall project at
On voice vote, motion carried.
Motion by Ald. Stellner, second by Ald. Smith, upon recommendation of the
Board of Public Works to approve the utility plan approval for Evenson plat
along
Under discussion, Mayor Bialecki questioned if this will be changed now
because of action taken earlier in this meeting.
Jarrod explained that the utility plans will stay as they presently are
because the water main will still need to be looped to
On voice vote, motion carried.
Item 10 - PLAN COMMISSION:
A. Preliminary Plat application
filed by David Evenson, 1025 Riders Club Road, Onalaska, for the property
located at South Kinney Coulee Road, East of Mary Drive (Parcel # 18-3405-002).
Motion by Ald. Giese, second by Ald. Stellner, upon recommendation of the
Plan Commission to approve with 28 conditions the preliminary plat application
filed by David Evenson,
Mayor Bialecki asked, “Jason, how thorough is everything at the Planning
Commission in considering our comprehensive plan and a lot of the other points
that were made.”
Jason answered, “Every time a plat comes in, we take a look at how it
conforms to the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
And in this particular instance, it is an unusual circumstance. It’s a 7-acre site with 20 lots proposed on
it. Literal enforcement of the city’s
comprehensive plan would still allow Mr. Evenson to put 20 lots on that site
but would indicate that he’d have to set aside 50 to 60% of the land in
conservancy. We have to look at the
bigger picture when we look at these plats, and in this case there’s a7-acre
park immediately to the east of this plat and there’s also a very extensive
LaCrosse River Conservancy area that is partially owned by the Mississippi
Valley Conservancy. Therefore, if somebody
would look at the entire Valley View Estates, Pralle Estates, and Pine View
estates in the context of its surroundings, if the entire thing was a 400-acre
farm, for instance, it certainly would meet the intent of the code in terms of
clustering homes on developable land and having some conservancy land around
it.
I think what’s problematic about enforcing the comprehensive plan on
every piece of developable land in the city is that we end up with a piece meal
of set aside land that doesn’t make sense.
And we always look for those opportunities to extend the city’s green
way system – to extend the open space systems where they make sense because
otherwise we end up with these outlots that are not managed well or they’re
taken over by a homeowners association, and the city gets complaints about the
management – who takes care of it, who mows the grass, who cuts the weeds, all
that stuff. So we have to look at the
bigger picture in each instance.
If we did a literal enforcement of the city’s comprehensive plan and
allowed Mr. Evenson to have his 20 lots, but he had to shrink them down to the
minimum size- 7200 square feet per lot, which is what’s afforded in the R-1
zoning district, I think there would be objections from the neighborhood
because one of the things we heard at the public hearing was that the people in
the neighborhood want some consistency in the lot and value of what is built in
that area. So compact clustered lots
might not meet some of the other requirements that the neighbors desire.
I do think Ms. Brandau made some good points, though, and certainly
preservation of vegetation is always something we look at. This was a pine plantation for the most part
– there was very few or any mature hardwoods on the site. And we always look for those types of
opportunities to preserve those, but the fact is the city does not have a tree
preservation ordinance or permit or requirements. So Mr. Evenson, or the previous owner, Mr.
Robinson, going in and having that completely clear cut was perfectly legal and
something he can do, and that occurred prior to the platting. If it wouldn’t have occurred prior to the
platting and there were mature hardwoods all over the site, we probably would
have said to Mr. Evenson, we want to see a better plan to try to preserve some
of these mature hardwoods – but most of it was just this pine plantation.
And then with regard to the road design, there are really three feasible
options – one is to bring a cul de sac bulb into the development to try to
preserve some of the grade, but there are trade offs to each option, and
certainly cul de sacs are not preferred where there is a loop possible just for
efficiency and delivering services. The
second option was the one Ms. Brandau pointed out, which is a loop that would
extend from
And then the other thing that would create is double frontage lots, which
is prohibited by the city’s subdivision code.
If you throw a loop in there, you’re going to have lots that will
probably front not only on the loop drive but on South Kinney Coulee Road or
back to South Kinney Coulee depending on how tight the loop is – I mean Mr.
Evenson can put a real tight loop in there and maybe avoid there, but double
frontage lots are a problem, and we try to avoid those where we can.
So that leaves the possibility of a loop from South Kinney onto Valley View
and what we suggested at the Plan Commission was that Mr. Evenson explore
retaining the 4 to 5 foot grade change from South Kinney up into the site so
that in effect, there is sort of a berm and a sound buffer that would
occur. And I have not heard back from
Mr. Evenson to see whether or not that’s feasible, but that’s something that
he’s required to work on by virtue of the Plan Commission’s
recommendation. I would say that if the
council does want to make sure that he preserves the vegetation on the south
side of the lot, I would not be opposed to the council mentioning that in these
minutes so that Mr. Evenson also knows that as he does his grading plan and
works through these grades, that he should save that vegetation to the greatest
extent possible.”
Ald. Stellner asked, “I was curious in the young lady’s statement there
about the noise from the interstate.
With those trees there, that does a good job of barricading that area as
far as noise goes. In the last year now
since they cut all those trees down over there, what was the noise level like
at that time?”
Ann Brandau said, “I was anticipating last summer that the noise level
would be substantially higher than it was.
My comparison is I used to live over on Flint Street, and when Highway
53 was developed over there, all of a sudden we had Highway 53 here and we had
homes down and we didn’t have any earthen berms in our particular area, and I
couldn’t hear myself – I was a quarter of a mile away from 53, but I couldn’t
hear myself in my own backyard because the noise was so loud from the elevated
highway. Over where we are because of
the earthen berm, the noise is a miniscule louder than it used to be, and I was
surprised.”
Ald. Stellner said, “What I’m getting at is if there’s houses in there,
the houses will be blocking that sound for you also.”
Ann answered, “That would be true for you if you lived over here maybe
and you’ve got all these houses blocking you, but if you live over here, we’ve
got the road bringing the noise right back to us.”
In response to a question from Ald. Stellner, Ann noted that they did not
hear that much noise with the earthen berm.
Ald. Stellner asked, “There was not any difference in noise?”
Ann said, “A little bit louder.”
Ald. Giese noted, “Jason and Jarrod, at the hearing, there was discussion
from the Planning Commission members about changing Condition 23, and the
wording that was suggested was to change it to read, “Recommend vegetation and
berm and/or elevation changes along Interstate 90 or within the development to
control noise to adjacent neighbors, and I was left with the expectation there
was going to be some dialogue or discussion on that point. Has that happened to this point?”
Jason answered that this has not occurred as he has not heard from Mr.
Evenson.
Ald. Giese asked, “Then the other observation is that, what is that
burden upon the developer? Does that
give city staff to exercise its professional judgment and if there’s not going
to be a significant mitigation of noise, to reject the plan?”
Jason answered, “Well, mitigation of noise is a pretty loose and grey
area. I mean our basic code requirement
for noise is 75 decibels measured at the residential property line, which I
don’t think the interstate is that high – most people would not want 75
decibels at the property line. And the
reason I know that is I’ve measured with a sound meter, with car repair
equipment, and I kind of have a feel for the hum of the interstate versus
wrenches and things that are being used in much closer quarters. So I think that the focus of the
recommendation here was that Mr. Evenson submits a plat that has to retain some
grade change between
Ald. Giese asked, “So the controlling, measurable element would be that
decibel limit, and as long as the condition was not in excess of 75 decibels,
then it wouldn’t be allowed to go through?”
Jason said, “Well that’s the basic minimum, but I think what Ms. Brandau
is pointing out is that this could create even more noise than what they’re
hearing today – it may not exceed the 75decibels, but is there a way that this
subdivision could be designed to mitigate any increase in noise? And our best recommendation from staff is
let’s have Mr. Evenson leave some elevation change in the middle of this plat –
4 feet or so – so that in fact the freeway is below the grade of the existing
homes.”
Mayor Bialecki suggested, “Maybe as a compromise to this, if, in fact,
this gets approved tonight, is that the site plan has to come in yet, and then
maybe between yourself and Jarrod, in that review, nothing happens until they
approve of that – if there still seems that there’s going to be negative issues
with noise barriers and vegetation and there’s disagreement, then if nothing
else, they’ll bring conditions back here and take a second look from a
legislative point of view. Does that
seem workable?”
Ald. Smith said, “Personally, I’m going to be voting no to this and the
primary reason is that the concerns that were brought up at the public hearing
have not been addressed at all, and I think that it’s in our best interest to
deny this or refer this back to the sub committee until our concerns have been
addressed rather than to rubber stamp it and then try to back track and achieve
a standard that already is lacking.”
In response to a question from Mayor Bialecki, Ald. Smith noted that the
developer has not taken the time to meet with the neighbors regarding this and
that was part of the issue with this item.
Ald. Miller is in agreement with Ald. Smith and said that he would be
voting no also on this item tonight.
Ald. Smith noted an issue with citizens as they did not even know what
the preliminary plat or the plan development was – they were working off hearsay
because the developer had not communicated with them.
Ald. Smith said, “But the developer needs to take the responsibility to
communicate with his neighbors, in my opinion, so I’m going to vote no.”
Motion by Ald. Giese, second by Ald. Stellner, to table for 30 days the
preliminary plat application filed by David Evenson, 1025 Riders Club Road,
Onalaska, for the property located at South Kinney Coulee Road, east of Mary
Drive, the objective being to facilitate discussion and communication and to
come up with a physical form to the development that’s meeting the
sensitivities of all the parties concerned.
On voice vote, motion carried.
B. Certified Survey Map submitted by Davy Engineering for Mike Tooke, 960
Oak Avenue North, Onalaska and LB White Company, W6636 LB White Road, Onalaska,
for a transfer of 1.85 acres from Mike Tooke to LB White Company and the
right-of-way for the proposed Abbey Road (Parcel # 18-4511-302).
Motion by Ald. Giese, second by Ald. Miller, upon recommendation of the
Plan Commission to approve with 8 conditions the certified survey map submitted
by Davy Engineering for Mike Tooke, 960 Oak Avenue North, Onalaska and LB White
Company, W6636 LB White Road, Onalaska, for a transfer of 1.85 acres from Mike
Tooke to LB White Company and the right-of-way for the proposed Abbey Road.
On voice vote, motion carried.
C. Consideration of proposed Planned Unit Development amendment by Bob
Wehrenberg, 2938 Wild Rose Lane, Onalaska, for the parcel at
Motion by Ald. Giese, second by Ald. Smith, upon recommendation of the
Plan Commission to approve the consideration of proposed Planned Unit
Development amendment by Bob Wherenberg,