Okay, we'll call the Planning Commission meeting for Wednesday, April 1st, to order.

We'll start with a Pledge of Allegiance, please stand.

And to the Republic for which it stands under indivisible on justice for all.

Next item is roll call.

I'll just go through roll call.

We have uh Wells, Walner, Keller, Molson, Frank Core, and Riley.

Um Granger is not here, uh, but we do have a quorum.

Um next item is public comment.

Um if anyone wishes to provide public comment, please come up to the microphone, provide your comments.

And uh also it's a it's I would like you to give your address if you if you wish to um so we know where you what part of the city you're from good evening, uh Frank Palm 65 Chicago Avenue.

Um first of all, I'd like to uh comment that we had a uh open house for these particular zoning ordinances.

Uh input was taken by both uh Charlie and and Doug by me.

And I was hoping that they would uh kind of shore up and probably well define the different zoning areas that you're going to look at tonight.

Uh that was not done.

These uh zones right now are very vague.

And Frank, just so I'm clear, are you talking about a map or the language?

The map and the language for those zones.

Okay, but you want uh okay.

So I need it to be a little more precise and defined, is what I'm looking for.

Because in my particular house, my zone is an RN3.

R and three, I could have uh duplex or triplex, a quarter fourplex.

I could have a mobile home, or I could have an eight plex in the vacant lot next to my home.

So these need to be well more defined, that I don't get a mobile home next door to me in that case.

My second point is that on the maps themselves, an RN3, which if you look at the maps, are all low-level income homes, probably under 300,000 for sure, and they're all starter homes that are designated in the city.

And what you're doing here is forcing this area into a higher density area by putting apartments and by putting triplexes and fourplexes into these areas.

This is the only area you're targeting with those high density things.

Why can't I go to tall grass and put a four-plex out in tall grass?

I mean, what you're doing is uh basically segregating what's going on here in the city.

You need to take a little better look, you need to open it up.

I need to be able to put a multiplex home out in tall grass, just as I can in an RN3.

These are very, very zones that uh targeted certain people and certain incomes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Can you clearly state what we're commenting on?

It would well come on up.

We do have a microphone, so I I want to be able to if you're gonna respond.

I think you I don't think you all need it, but go ahead.

Uh it actually you are you are loud enough for all of us to hear, but it doesn't record that well if you aren't in front of the microphone.

Um so it's a zoning code update, and there are you have O1 through 12 along with the proposed zoning map and the um pre-adoption open house prochure brochure.

That's what we're gonna be discussing today.

That's what's on our agenda.

Would this be regarding the Mandel apartments?

Not no, not specifically.

Would the zoning affect it?

I would no.

From the community development director.

Well, and uh I'm not sure I have any comments if it doesn't affect that apartment building.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yep.

Anyone else wish to speak?

Lisa Salb 434 Madison Street, and it would be affected if you are changing it from 40 feet to allowed to be 60 feet with the new uh uh zoning section that you're going to be at the height of the building or correct.

Okay, all right.

So yes, it would be changed.

Just to clarify, they have an approved plan, so they have to build to the approved plan.

So there's no proposal here to change the approved plan.

The approved plans were extended for two years.

So there are approved plans.

There are approved plans.

There are approved plans and they have to build the approved plan.

They can't build something higher just because the zoning allows something higher now.

Okay.

Thank you for hearing me today.

Um it wasn't long ago that at the landmarks commission meeting, staff wanted to be able to pre-approve projects.

Staff said that it was to streamline to save time, and that staff already does it.

It was unanimously voted down, a big fat no.

That's why we're here, the landmarks commissioner said.

Now I'm seeing the same thing happening at Plan Commission with the same department of community development with the same people.

I thought that architect R.

G.

Keller nailed it when he brought this up at a previous meeting when this code was introduced.

He said, then why are we here?

I felt it was explained away with you'll still do what you're doing now.

Well, we are not fools on April Fool's Day, it will not be the same.

In the new zoning code under 22.11.02 under review and decision-making bodies under A number one administrator, it says community development director or their designee shall administer this chapter.

And then it lists A through L.

Next, under B, we see Board of Zoning Appeals, and then under C is listed Plan Commission, and it lists that you get to conduct studies, make recommendations of official mapping and mapping amendments, listen to temporary uses and conditional uses, and you get to hear applications that have been already filtered by the director of community development.

This is giving too much power to the community development director and its staff, I believe.

And we've seen it before with this department, for example, in lieu of public RFPs.

Now a broker can filter things, which it happens behind closed doors, and that determines what is officially presented.

Your team of the plan commission has a very important role deciding what is best for our city, and you do it in a public setting.

The issue here is transparency.

Besides that important issue, there are other concerns with this code draft.

For example, under parking, there can be, quote, exceptions, unquote, if something is quote, impractical, impractical, unjust, unfair, or unreasonable, unquote.

Ambiguous wording like this has no place in our code.

Who gets to determine if something is unjust or not?

Would that be the director?

There are things like this unbelievable heights that are being allowed.

60 feet, six stories in an RN residential neighborhood.

And yet this code is calling it a buffer and a transition between commercial and lower density neighborhoods.

Well, that's just plain ridiculous.

And there are some chart lines that are not completed and they still have hashtags.

Commissioner Frank Corps started to adjourn when it was she was interrupted and told by staff there might be a meeting next week.

We'll let you know.

Well, how about letting the public know?

Even the Freeman didn't mention it.

The people of Waukeshaw want to be informed and want to be given the opportunity to contact you with their concerns about the remaining development that is left.

We need to get this zoning code right for the future of our city.

Please don't vote tonight and don't assign staff to finish it off.

It's too important.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Okay.

Um at this point, uh, Charlie will do a presentation and then I'll come back to the Plan Commission.

All right.

So again, you are reviewing the revisions, the rewrite of the entire zoning code, which will propose to replace Chapter 22 and Chapter 27 of the existing code with the new proposed chapter 22.

So as you know, this is uh culmination of a very long process.

Uh the zoning code rewrite project started in uh January uh February of 2024.

Uh and then we had community engagement and current zoning analysis uh throughout the spring and summer of 2024, and uh a preliminary recommendations uh report was presented by the uh consultants at House Hill Levine uh in January of 2025.

Uh throughout 2025, uh the sections of the code were presented uh over the course of the year uh in different uh different portions, and then now we're at the uh the final uh draft, which is presented for your recommendation to the council.

Uh this is a culmination also of a longer process, which began uh in 2021 uh with the rewrite of the city's comprehensive plan.

So that process took from uh 2021 to 2023.

Uh the most significant uh outcome from the comprehensive plan was the new uh land use policy map, uh which was a pretty significant change from previous uh the previous land use policy map in that it uh defines land uses based on their form of the the buildings that are expected there as opposed to their density.

Uh so that requires uh pretty significant change to the zoning code to be uh consistent with this this policy as uh is required by state law.

Uh we've had uh quite a few um uh uh community engagement opportunities over the course of these projects, so starting with the comprehensive plan, uh the 2022 National Community Survey, which is uh the city participates in every two years.

Uh the one in 2022 included uh a number of zone of comprehensive plan related questions that was distributed to the city in both English and Spanish.

Uh there were uh a number of focus groups, uh both the virtual uh and in person uh for citywide, and then uh uh area specific uh focus groups as well as a plan commission focus group, which uh you can see in the photo there, and a number of other surveys that were that were conducted, and then multiple uh review sessions both by the planning commission and council.

Uh for the zoning code, uh we had a community open house at the kickoff uh to the project, as well as interviews with stakeholders uh throughout the city, including developers, um uh city board members, and uh various uh uh nonprofit leaders and other other uh people who had an interest in in zoning in the city.

Uh there was an also a survey published for the the zoning code uh in English and Spanish as well, and then six uh joint plan commission and council meetings uh throughout the project as well as another community open house at the conclusion, and we've had presentations to uh uh both the plan commission and council outside of those uh meetings as well.

So the uh just to recap the recommendations report uh it uh start had a significant uh um section of key themes uh which went through the the changes that we wanted to make with the zoning code, uh referenced all those back to the uh the comprehensive plan, uh the needs from the current code, and then also the uh the community engagement.

Uh it included a land use uh plan alignment analysis and then also a lot standards analysis, uh which uh analyzed what percentages uh or how many of the uh the existing lots uh in the city were non-conforming with the current code.

Umcluded an outline of the structure, which uh is not exactly what we ended up with, but is very close, and then comparative research to uh other communities throughout the state.

So here are the list of other uh other cities that uh were included in that comparison research to show uh ideas from uh basically the the what they uh what they have used for their zoning code uh to solve uh several different problems.

Uh so those are cities that have similar population and similar character to uh Waukesha throughout the state of Wisconsin.

Uh for the nonconformities analysis, that's the lot standard analysis.

Uh it it did uh note that there are quite a few lots throughout the city that are uh non-conforming in the current code.

So these are lots that don't meet the minimum standards for those lot sizes in the five districts that together make up the vast majority of the residential properties in the city.

That found 3,441 lots do not meet the minimum lot area, and 5,673 lots do not meet the minimum lot width.

So on the and then that column on the right is uh the total number of lots in each district.

So it's it's uh roughly a third of the city is non-conforming uh in at least in lot width.

Um and uh in the RM1 and RM3 districts, which uh to which together make up the uh most of the central core of the city, uh the the numbers are much higher.

Uh for RM1 uh it's uh 1,734 lots don't meet that minimum width, which is 83% of all the lots in the district, and then for RM3 uh 70 72% of lots don't meet that uh that minimum.

Um so just to recap some of the uh problems with the current code, the reasons why we're doing this.

Um the last major update to the code was in 2001.

That was before, of course, the uh uh the Great Lakes Water Agreement, before the surrounding communities incorporated.

Uh the city had very but very different uh development patterns and development needs at that time.

Um in addition to that, much of the city, uh including uh pretty much the entire central city, as you could see before, uh, is is nonconforming in one way or another, whether it's the lot width, lot area, um setbacks or or other nonconformities.

Um the commercial districts in the city also include exhaustive outdated lists of of the permitted and conditional uses.

Um just to give a couple examples.

Uh the there are still several districts which list videotape rental as a permitted use, um, and in our manufacturing districts, uh they um specifically they specify that uh macaroni, vermicelli, and noodles uh and spaghetti noodles are uh are permitted for manufacturing, whether other types of pasta are allowed is not uh is not clear.

Um the development standards are are really there aren't standards, most of it is uh left up to uh the plan commission, which has uh has uh to its credit been consistent about applying the uh uh design guidelines, uh but this does lead to uh a lot of unpredictability uh both for developers and for the public in terms of what is going to be approved.

Um the court or code organization is also very confusing and uh not very user-friendly.

Uh just to uh illustrate that, these are the 75 sections of the current code.

Um I've been a planner here for eight years, and I can tell you there are multiple sections with that I've only looked at once or twice at if that uh so the uh intention of the new code is to uh replace uh replace that those 75 sections with uh 12 uh consolidated sections uh which will uh uh be much more user-friendly and uh and much uh better organized.

Uh so just to start the general provisions, includes the purpose statements and uh standard legal language that's in every zoning code.

Um the district standards includes uh both the descriptions of of what the districts are intended for, and then also the dimensional standards for each district, uh things like setbacks and lot size requirements.

Uh use standards is uh uh table of permitted and conditional uses for uh every district, uh, as well as uh supplemental standards for uh for things that uh are additional requirements for specific types of uses, uh, and accessory uses and temporary uses are also in that section.

Uh development standards, design standards, uh parking and access standards and landscape and natural resource standards are uh sort of the meat of what the plan commission normally reviews.

Uh these those are the uh the objective design standards which are basically codifying what uh what you are intended to codify what uh you all have been reviewing for all of these years.

Subdivision standards are not included in this in this draft.

The subdivision standards will replace the current chapter 23.

So since we have that as a standalone chapter, that will that can be it can be its own thing separate from the code until we're ready to add a have a replacement section for that.

Then we have a rewritten non-conformities and definitions sections, which are updated to reflect the current code and the current needs.

And then the rear review and decision making procedures have been updated significantly as well.

It has a number of diagrams and tables to help help with understanding the code.

So including these two examples, one is from the design standards section, another from sign standards, and then also the list of permitted uses, which is in that use section.

Again, the decision review decision making procedures has been updated significantly and clarified basically to codify standards that are currently in use throughout the code, or in use in use by the city to make them more clear and more easy for developer or members of the public to look at and understand.

Each of the standards will have a flow chart to provide a uh guide for how the process will go, including uh this one for uh zoning code text amendments on the right side of the screen.

And then, of course, the uh the biggest change to the uh decision making procedures is to site plan and architecture review.

That's something that uh we've had pretty extensive uh discussion of.

Uh so the plan commission should be uh very familiar with it, but just to run through it uh one more time.

Uh there will be staff review for uh for some site plan and architecture review items in the new code, and uh the exceptions to those are for properties uh that are adjacent adjacent property impacts, which is any uh development that is adjacent to a property in a residential district uh where that uh develop development would not be permitted, uh, will always be reviewed by the plan commission.

Uh so that will be uh a very similar process to uh to the reviews that you you get similar you get currently, and then any property that needs a uh an exception to the design standards uh that are uh in those in those design standards chapter uh sections uh will also come to the plan commission for review.

Uh so just to give a few examples, um these uh two items were on the on the March uh Plan Commission agenda.

So this was a uh uh a storage shed for uh John's Rook beer on Arcadian Avenue, and then a new uh hangar at the airport.

Uh both of those were on the consent agenda, both were approved by the plan commission uh without any discussion at the beginning of the meeting.

Um so we feel that uh that it's appropriate.

Uh since since those are uh fairly uh items that that really wouldn't have a lot of design comments on uh on them, uh we feel that it's appropriate for those to be uh approved uh at a staff level, and and that will uh speed up the process quite a bit uh for these types of reviews.

Um to give a few examples of items that that will need to come to the plan commission.

Uh this is the store at right development that was proposed, uh, I believe it was brought in for a consultation in December.

Uh this is on Dolphin Drive and Quarrel Drive.

Uh this would need to be it would need to come to the Plan Commission for uh design standards exceptions since the uh the the street side uh would not meet the glazing requirements, and it also I believe would uh would need some exceptions to the material standards.

Uh so that would be reviewed by the plan commission.

Uh Prairie Song Courtyards, which you reviewed in February, uh January and February would need to come to the plan commission because it's part of a plan unit development, uh, because it's adjacent to residential where this type of development would not be permitted, and also uh for design standards exceptions.

Uh this is an example of a project uh this particular version would need to come to the plan commission uh but we could envision uh the code does permit residential development in uh some types of residential development specifically larger uh larger developments in the commercial districts and there are uh some cases where um uh uh development that is a high quality that meets all the standards uh that's in a commercial area but not adjacent to residential uh might uh be able to be permitted by staff um in those cases we found in the past we typically have not had uh a lot of uh public feedback or or negative reactions to those types of developments uh so we we would uh not expect that uh if if there is a high quality development in those areas in the future um another example of an of a larger scale development that uh that could be approved potentially uh without coming to the planning commission is the uh the GE experience center uh which was approved in I believe June of last year uh so this is a uh high quality development that that would meet all of the design standards has a large amount of glazing uh as well as uh high quality materials and uh architectural interest um and this is on an area that's nowhere near any residential use so that could potentially be approved by staff without coming to the plan commission in the future uh in these cases obviously we know the plan commission likes uh you know likes these uh examples as sort of a feel good uh story we do plan to uh report on you know on the developments that we have been approving and uh this would certainly be something that uh that would be a highlight of of those reports um the uh one significant change that we have since the previous drafts that were reviewed is we've added the uh uh the exception language which is something we've been discussing for the past uh uh several months uh at least um we've added it to all of the uh design standard sections these are uh the sections that authorize uh in the case where there is um where there is a a development that can't meet those design standards that would come to the plan commission uh so that was the language that uh was brought up before uh so that it's uh the plan commission may authorize a modification waiver reduction of the requirements of this section should it find uh that the nature of a proposed use development or redevelopment or the shape or size of a property uh makes strict compliance impractical unjust unfair or unreasonable uh such exceptions are shall be to the least extent necessary to address their cause and uh and approval of exceptions shall be consistent with all applicable review criteria in the the plan commission review section um so that we did have a question on who who's making this decision before the answer very clearly here is the plan commission is the board the body that that would be reviewing any exceptions to uh to the language in those design standards sections and uh the intention is for uh this section to provide you with some guidance for uh how you would be evaluating those those exceptions uh while still allowing uh flexibility for you to be able to uh take them all on a case by case basis um other significant changes uh is addition of language for uh plan unit development uh districts um to provide uh for um standards for for how to review those um the intention is for the since the code is a a lot more flexible than the current code the hope is that we won't need as many uh PUD reviews uh that more things will be able to be approved by right um in uh however uh in the in the cases where we will have PUDs we want to have uh some standards for basically what the city is getting out of it and what uh you know what the reason is that that we would want to be approving a PUD an exception to the language so there are a number of exceptions that are laid out uh in that section of the code um the ones on the left here uh are a development would need to be all of them uh each of those exceptions has uh has sort of a description which will allow the developers to uh to evaluate them and to uh provide uh to show you know this is how we're meeting the placemaking standard uh there's enough detail that they can they can provide that uh while also again allowing this is this is something that the plan commission and the council would be deciding on uh so

Um the ones on the left here uh are a development would need to be in all of them.

Uh each of those exceptions has uh has sort of a description which will allow the developers to uh to evaluate them and to uh provide uh to show you know this is how we're meeting the placemaking standard.

Uh there's enough detail that they can they can provide that uh while also again allowing this is this is something that the plan commission and the council would be deciding on.

Uh so it allows it allows you to have uh some flexibility to uh determine you know that we feel this this uh place this does not meet those standards, or we feel it does meet those standards.

Um so again, the left side uh every one of those is required, and then on the right side, uh development would have to meet at least one of them, and there is an option uh in cases where uh those those four standards are not uh appropriate for a developer to propose another standard uh of for those optional objectives, uh which would again be reviewed by the plan commission and council.

Um so other changes that we'd had some discussion uh earlier on in the process and then uh recently uh about uh changes to the uh standards for bed and breakfasts and short term rentals.

Uh that's something that we had determined that we wanted to combine those two uh those two uses uh since they are are very similar and uh they tend to be again just similar in nature.

Uh we had previously talked about uh adding some some standards for things like noise issues or other uh operational issues that might come up for uh for short-term rentals in particular.

Uh but uh as we went through and particularly in discussion with the uh the city attorney's office, um the uh understanding was that those those types of operational standards, if we want to have them in the code, they would really have to be part of a conditional use uh rather than a permitted use.

And we really didn't want to have uh short-term rentals as we didn't want the plan commission to have to review every single Airbnb in the city uh as a as a conditional use.

Um so they are permitted, and we really just have uh these standards that are uh that apply to the design or the the um the way a uh a short-term rental is structured as opposed to uh the operation of the use.

Um there are other parts of the code that that do provide there are nuisance sections and there are um property maintenance sections of the city code uh which do allow the city to have some enforcement ability uh in cases where there are complaints about noise and similar things.

Um we had some discussion at the last meeting uh about chain length fences specifically.

Um we had a question of why are chain link fences uh allowed in rear yards uh in some residential districts but not in all.

And that was something that uh we they should have been allowed in all districts.

The in all residential districts, uh the current code does allow them basically because uh the definition for a decorative fence is very vague, uh so they have been allowed for that reason, uh, but now they are specifically allowed, specifically in rear yards and residential districts.

Um other thing that I wanted to mention uh because it was brought up earlier.

Um the uh in the our residential neighborhood three uh and four district, uh there is an allowance for um for mobile home parks.

Uh that was in in the current code, there is one mobile home park district that applies to the one property where there is a mobile home park in the city.

Um we have it in the current in the proposed code in the RN3 and RN4 districts, uh, but we did add in uh after some discussion, uh we did add in a note that that would be limited to properties that are at least one acre in area.

Uh so that would apply to the existing mobile home park in the city.

Um it would the existing one would be uh permitted and would not be non-conforming, um, but any new mobile home parks would have to be on properties of at least one acre.

So I also wanted to go through since the other the other really significant change with this rewrite is the change to the way the residential districts are regulated or residential areas.

I wanted to go through that in some detail.

This is a sort of a repeat of presentation that we've given to the council and similar to one that we had given to the planning commission last year, too.

But I just wanted to run through it as well just to recap that and make sure you're all on a fully understanding that.

So as we had noted before, uh the plan commission or the the uh residential districts.

Currently we have nine districts in the city, which are uh differentiated mostly by density uh requirements, um, and uh that'll be reduced to four in the the proposed code.

Um the as you can see here, it's it's largely not entirely, but but uh for the most part uh the existing districts will be uh will become uh the new districts as uh residential, uh single family residential uh RS1 and RS2 will become RN, the RN1 district, uh RS3 single family residential, and then the two two family districts, RD1 and RD2, uh, will become the RN2 district.

Uh the RM1 district uh will along with uh portions of RD2 and RS3 and RM3 uh will all become part of the RN3 residential neighborhood district, and then the uh RM2, RM3, and the RS4 district uh will become the RN4 district.

And then we do have uh mixed-use commercial district uh for some properties, which will uh which will be added for uh some central city areas.

Um so I'm gonna get into those uh each of those districts, uh but also I wanted to note we do have the map of the whole zoning code.

Um the these maps that I have here are from a previous draft.

It really hasn't changed very much since these previous presentations, and we felt that this was uh the contrast was a little better, made it easier to see what parts of the city uh are gonna be going to become those new districts.

So this is the the residential neighborhood one, RN1.

Uh these are large lots, uh single family subdivisions all existing on the mostly on the west side of the city.

Um so a couple examples are the Maple Way subdivision, which is currently RS1, and then the uh tall grass subdivision.

So these ones will stay as uh single family uh only, but uh accessory dwelling units will be allowed in these districts as they will in all uh residential districts.

Uh so there will be some some flexibility for uh properties in these areas to uh to add additional dwelling units and to to use their their homes in a way that uh uh that they would like to.

Uh the residential neighborhood two district will encompass uh what's now this RS3 single family.

Uh so those are some of the newer subdivisions uh around the edges of the city that that have uh smaller lot sizes than those uh RS RM2 district uh areas, as well as some older uh neighborhoods, uh such as this one at uh in the Roberta and Tenney area, uh as well as uh smaller lot uh uh neighborhoods in the area to the north and west of uh Morland Boulevard along along Summit Avenue and Delfield Street, as you can see here.

Uh so to give a few examples, uh this is from the uh the river's crossing subdivision on the south side of the city, so that's a lot predominantly city uh single family uh area with smaller lots, as you can see.

Um some of the older uh ranch style uh neighborhoods with ranch style uh developments, as well as uh some other sing similar uh but you know not the same style uh types of housing in those neighborhoods, uh as well as some uh duplex uh areas that are uh kind of sprinkled throughout those districts, those will all become the uh residential neighborhood two.

And that that area which is uh itself probably the majority of the residential uh areas in the city will allow single family up to uh four family uh dwell or four unit uh dwellings uh in any of those neighborhoods.

Um the residential neighborhood three district uh is largely the current uh uh RM RM1, along with portions of our RS3 and again and RD2.

Uh that includes the the most of the designated uh historic areas in the city, as well as some older uh smaller lot, largely single-family uh neighborhoods uh and um again some smaller multifamily uh is or multi-unit uh developments are mixed throughout there, as well as some larger, this is uh uh four uh four-unit uh area in the uh currently in RM1, but this will be the RN3 uh residential neighborhood three district.

Um and then the RN4, uh residential neighborhood four is uh largely the uh RM3, those are the largest um areas in the city, uh or the largest uh the the portions of the city that do not have a uh cap on the number of units uh per property in the current code.

Uh so that includes uh some of the areas around the downtown downtown area.

Um as the current uh RM3 district does, it also does include some portions of uh one and two family uh dwellings in those areas as well.

Uh it also includes uh some areas throughout the uh the uh further um further removed from the downtown core, uh which are um uh uh larger multifamily complexes and then surrounding uh developments in those areas, as well as some areas that have a mix of different housing types.

Uh those ones throughout the uh the further removed portions of the city uh are mostly, if not all planned unit developments and will stay uh PUD continue to have the PUD overlay.

Uh so this is an example of uh one of those uh sections where there's a mix of of housing types.

Uh so this is uh at the uh intersection of Madison Street and Comanche Lane and just to the north.

All of the green dots on this aerial photo are uh are individual addresses.

So you can see there are a number of uh different types of uh housing in that area.

Um the another example is this is on Arlington Avenue, uh closer to the the central core of the city, uh where you can see there's uh mix of one and two-family uh dwellings as well as um larger uh multi-unit uh apartment uh complexes, and then uh this is at Buckley Street and East Avenue, uh where you can see a significantly larger uh condominium development uh which is again mixed with uh uh single family in that case.

Um lastly, the mixed-use commercial area uh is a designation for corridors of what have been designated as commercial uh for many many years, and generally include a mix of uh both commercial and residential, which has been non-conforming uh for a very long time and in most cases has stayed residential.

Uh so the example here is uh or the uh these as you can see here, this is uh main street going out from downtown uh towards and past Hartwell Avenue, as well as a section of uh East Broadway, uh portions of St.

Paul Avenue, Wisconsin Avenue, and then Grand Avenue going down towards Williams Street.

So you can see here, this is the example from uh from Main Street.

You can see commercial uh buildings mixed in with residential.

Uh this is uh further south on on Grand and Harrison, uh, where you have uh restauring and some commercial areas uh in what is uh largely um residential residential area.

So the uh next steps for the for this uh update uh if you were if you do vote to recommend approval uh of this uh update to the zoning code, uh it will go to the council for a public hearing, most likely on April 21st.

some commercial areas uh in what is uh largely um residential um residential area so the uh next steps for the for this uh update uh if you were if you do vote to recommend approval uh of this uh update to the zoning code uh it will go to the council for a public hearing most likely on april twenty first uh and then the council would vote uh for final approval at their meeting on May 5th the code will be uh the implementation of the new code will be delayed to allow um to allow for all of the uh processes and uh applications and and brochures that uh our department puts out to be updated um and then also for the city attorney's office to uh format it so that it can be put into the city's minicode um so that would be the expected implementation date would be uh september first um and we will have the subdivision standards uh section of the of the code for review most likely sometime in the summer of this year and if uh that process goes smoothly there is a possibility that it could be uh implemented at the same time as the rest of the code um but uh that could also again it is a it's a standalone section of the code so that could potentially wait longer as well uh and one thing to note is the the zoning code we expect to be a living document so we expect there to be uh more revisions to the code as we go forward uh both as we sort of dial in the the um design standards and the other standards of the code we expect things to to find things that uh we realize when we bring them into practice that they don't work as well as we thought they would and then we'll expect to bring them back for updates and then also as we go forward we would hope to continue updating the code as the city's needs change in the long term so staff recommends approval of the new zoning ordinance to replace chapter 22 and chapter 27 of the existing code in their entirety with the note that the city attorney's office will again review and updating the update the formatting prior to publication and again this is a recommendation that the planning commission will be making to the council.

Okay any questions of Charlie okay go ahead Charlie take the scenario where you this is approved and in place and you said it's a living document um a developer or a contractor or an architect or a citizen comes forward to the planning department and says we'd like to make modifications or we suggest this doesn't make sense or can you reconsider this going forward what is the process for that living document to be modified?

Because I would assume that there's going to be some challenges over time.

And don't know what those are obviously but uh be curious to see if you've kind of reviewed that scenario and what that means in your your scenario so for an individual uh any individual uh sort of a challenge or in a case where there's an individual um anything that doesn't work for a specific property or specific developer they would be able to bring that to the plan commission for an exception um and if we see a lot of the same exception that would be something that we would we would know that's a a section of the code that it would be appropriate to update um that would be there is a process that's laid out in the code that there's also a standard process in the city code for amending the the zoning code text um so if we if we do uh get to a point where we feel that there's a change that's appropriate to the code it would be very similar to to this process we would uh work on an update to the text and review it and then bring it to the plan commission for a recommendation and then it would go on to the council for for their approval with a public hearing with a public hearing and notices um class two notice I believe yeah so any amendment to the zoning code requires class two notice public hearing approval well the plan commission to review it and then adoption by the common council okay and just to add um those proposed amendments could come from the plan commission that could come from staff that could come from council members um that's usually how they come from either either of those three typically in the past um but so if the plan commission sees a constant trend that you want to jump on right away and change you'd have the opportunity to direct staff to do that or a conflict that just doesn't work any other questions of Charlie all right back to the plan commission you're you're you're complete right yep you're done all right so I I'll start because no one else is jumping in the code we have right now majority of it was up to date about 50 years ago it's no longer up to date um I've been uh following what other communities are doing with their codes and in urban areas that are um can't expand and don't have land that is readily developable developable are moving towards this type of uh uh code um it is different um than what

It's no longer up to date.

Um I've been uh following what other communities are doing with their codes and in urban areas that are um can't expand and don't have land that is readily developable, developable are moving towards this type of uh uh code.

Um it is different um than what has been um out there for a hundred years.

Um but uh I do um think that this is the way the city of Walkshaw has to go.

Um development within Walkshaw is much different than it was even 20 years ago.

Uh we did still had land uh on the west and the south that was developable for large sub for subdivisions that um uh actually I should say 25 years ago because we got to get um after 2008, nothing was being built really in large subdivisions.

Um but uh it was real easy to have subdivisions platted, be reviewed, be approved, um, and um, but now we're in a totally different type of situation where we have something else that uh is gonna uh come to the city um consistently, which is redevelopment.

Uh I I think one of the important things to add is is that the this has not been rushed.

Um the um community development and as well as the plan commission have been working on the code for more than two years.

Uh the comprehensive plan started in 2021, so it's about five years that we've pretty much been working on this.

Um the other thing that I think is important is I don't think you're gonna see changes um in regards to the housing shortage in Walkshaw, um, large changes in the next 10 years, even, but this is something that will address that to a certain extent.

You do have um uh you will see some accessory uh units being built.

Um once again, you won't see a lot of them because there has to be a way for those accessory units to fit on the property, and anyone who builds them better also be thinking about where the cars are gonna be parked at this point in time.

Um the removal of um about one-third of our entire lots from non-conforming is good.

I'm pretty sure my lot is non-conforming, um, as well as almost anyone who has um a downtown city uh residential lot.

Um the public policy forum recently published a study detailing the time communities took to get approval.

It was um Brookfield, Milwaukee, West Dallas, Walwatosa, Waukeshaw, and Oak Creek.

Um, and that was really surprising.

Um approval a lot of times takes about a year um for developments.

Um Walkshaw fared in in the study, we weren't at the back end or weren't and we weren't at the front end.

Um but West Dallas has already moved to this and they've just kind of started, I think.

Um, but they're actually reducing the amount of time it takes for developers to get approval.

And for me that's important because that's a you get more proposals for development when you have an ability to uh respond quickly to them because the first thing is is they're worried about um you know if if we can get this approved in three months, we know what our financing uh costs are.

If it's a year, we have no idea what our financing costs are.

So I think we'll end up getting uh more requests for development in Walkshaw if we go this route.

Um let's see.

Um the other thing that I'm also I I think that what will happen with this new code is um we are we've been operating as a plan commission, and I'm looking at you, Joan, um, with um kind of informal standards that we always try to get developers to agree to.

They're no longer being formal, in fact, they're even stepped up from what we did have.

So this is I think one of the big benefits of this code is is when developers come in, they're gonna look at our standards, the both the materials that they have to use as landscaping, um, and they will then with when they look through that, they'll have to decide if they want to develop in Walkshaw, and we don't have to browbeat them to try to get them to that point.

Um, because they will have if they want any type of um reductions, they're gonna have to come to the plan commission and convince the planning commission that those in that property that type of requirement just doesn't work for them.

So I think you're gonna end up with um better developments from the front end um with less potential for liability for the city as we proceed.

Um and I I think um the one the final thing I want to add, um it as you can see I I'm in favor of adopting the uh recommending approval of this um uh zoning code to the common council.

Um but um where was I going?

Uh I lost my train of thought, but uh I am in favor of it, and I guess I'm looking for comments from anyone else as to where you're at, or if you don't want to comment, you don't have to either, and we can proceed to motions.

But I think for the Plan Commission, um like to hear your comments.

Go ahead.

I've been really happy with this process.

I think the sections were laid out nicely and we've had a lot of meetings on this.

Um I imagine that we'll have a lot of uh agreement that this is a good document because we've been working on it so long.

So I'm I'm very much in favor of it, and I like the the direction that we're going to guide the city forward in the current environment.

Commissioner Keller.

I guess I look at this as more of a test.

And so you're going from same old samol to something different.

And I think until projects come through and they're tested against this code.

I'm not sure we fully know what we have.

Um obviously all the words sound right, the end result needs to be right, but I think the tests will really determine how it works, and that's from the planning department.

I suppose what happens at the plan commission.

But um every new thing needs to be kind of goes through a shakedown phase, and so despite the fact that consultants think that it's gonna be great, everybody thinks it's gonna be great.

I think the tests will come as projects come through.

Thank you.

Commissioner Frankfurt.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, I agree with what Commissioner Keller just said.

The most important part, or one of the most appealing parts, perhaps is the better word to me about this, is that the design standards and the things that we spend a lot of time uh reiterating here at the plan commission meetings are now codified, and they are in fact the code for the city.

So it makes everything clear, it makes everything um more efficient.

It gives us some flexibility when we don't uh particularly agree with the way that something is proposed, but we don't have to spend uh the precious time that we have together repeating every time about the fact that a um disposal area needs to have the same kind of brick and mortar that they develop in or the major building has, and that there are um ways that the utilities have to be sheltered on the roof, those are just givens now because it's expressed and it's defined.

So I appreciate that part of the code, and it's part that is particularly appealing to me.

Okay.

Commissioner Walner.

I just want to add, you know, I I know that a lot of time and effort has gone into writing this and revising it.

Um I trust the expertise of the staff.

I trust the expertise of this plan commission.

Um obviously I agree with Commissioner Frank Hoore and Commissioner Keller that I think things will come up that will we'll need to revise, we'll have to take a look at.

But in general, I think it everything that Mayor Riley said, it's it really it's gonna draw a lot of development to the city with the space that we have.

Commissioner Wells.

I think this code is a whole lot more accessible.

I think that Charlie, the slide you shared with our old zoning code and the numerous chapters.

Um I think one of the it's not necessarily the focus of this update, but the fact that we've got down to 12 sections that make sense and are comprehensive for what they cover, does a lot to inform the public as far as this is what we want, this is what's expected, these are requirements versus having various requirements scattered over many chapters that are disjointed.

Um I mean it's great for the developers to know what we want and what they can build, but I think it's also good for the public to have those rules clearly outlined and visible.

Um yeah, I'm I'm very happy with this.

I really appreciate staff over the last six months um kind of giving us the how would this work uh under a new zoning code as we've approved different apps.

I think that's helped us um gain some comfort with this, and then also know that uh you know it it uncovered some blind spots we had as far as the approval process.

I'm really happy with how we work that out to address potential concerns from residents.

Um I'm I'm very comfortable with it.

Of course, we have unknown unknowns, but I think we've done a very good job of nailing down the known unknowns here.

Okay.

Um just uh comment on the change potential if if issues arise and the code isn't working, the change isn't like just modifying an ordinance, um, but it uh it can be done.

Um it takes about three months if it's if there's from the standpoint from the time period of saying let's change the language to approval.

Um, and that requires both the plan commission and the um the public the public uh and the plan commission public is to comment on it, um and the plan commission makes a recommendation and the common council has to make an approval.

So I just want to make sure that you all understand and kind of already said this that it's it's not instantaneous where you can just adopt an ordinance.

Um it's a little more um rigorous, um, but changes and zoning codes are made.

Um we probably do it three times a year or so.

I mean, well, think of it this way when any time you rezone property, it's the same type of process.

So um, with that, I think I'll make my last motion as a plan commissioner, which is uh I move to approve the proposed new chapter 22 of this of city ordinances replacing the existing chapter 22 and chapter 27 in their entireties to go into effect on September 1st, 2026.

Um, because that will be taken care of through the common councils.

I think so.

I'll second.

Commissioner Wells seconds.

Any further discussion?

Okay, all in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstaining?

Okay, so that was unanimous.

Uh director of community development report.

I just want to thank the plan commission for all the hours of work that they put into this.

We appreciate that too.

Um, and also wanted to thank Mayor Riley for his steady and thoughtful leadership of the plan commission for all these years and how his um he approached whoever was appearing in this chamber, whether it was a property owner or developer or the staff, with a respectful and and fair and thoughtful manner.

And so we just wanted to thank him for his leadership and wish him the well on his next endeavor.

Thank you.

That's one of your shorter reports.

So you want me to keep going?

No, no, I don't.

I don't.

Uh, if there's no objections, we are adjourned.

Thank you, everyone.