October 5, 2009        PLAN COMMISSION                     6:00 p.m.

Mike Weinkauf called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. with Commissioners Paul Beere, Jim Joseph, Maureen Eckert, Mark Tamblyn, Tom Rowntree and Chris Johnson present.

Also present:  Jon Schattner, Zoning Administrator, and Betty Novy, Planning Secretary.

Chris Birkett, Public Works Supervisor, and Village Trustee Chris Bennett were present in the audience.

Pledge of Allegiance.

Joseph moved, second by Johnson to approve the September 8, 2009 minutes as printed.  Motion carried.

Extraterritorial Plat Review:  Certified Survey Map dividing 4.62 acres from root parcels 006-03-20-07-017-000 and 006-03-20-021-000 in the Town of Dover

Property Address:  27531 Rowntree Road

Applicant/ Owner:  Charles Rowntree Trustee, Rowntree Trust

Commissioner Rowntree recused himself from action on this item as he is related to the applicant.

Schattner reported on review of the Certified Survey Map.  The Village’s land use plan does not extend over the subject area, but the proposed land division is consistent with zoning and density requirements in adjacent areas of the Village of Rochester.   Schattner recommended approval.   Beere moved, 2^nd by Eckert to recommend extraterritorial approval of   the land division.    Votes were:  Weinkauf:  Aye;  Beere:  Aye;  Joseph:  Aye;  Eckert:  Aye;  Tamblyn,  Aye;  Rowntree:  Recused;  Johnson:  Aye.  Motion passed.

Discussion regarding possible creation of a storm-water utility district

Weinkauf reported on meeting with representatives of Racine County, the Norway-Dover Drainage District, and other municipalities to discuss proposed annexation and special assessments by the Norway-Dover Drainage District.  During one of these meetings, he became aware that the Town of Raymond has a storm-water utility district.  He also became aware that municipalities that have storm-water utility districts in place can negotiate with drainage districts regarding assessments, rather than have districts individually assess parcels within their municipality.

For reference, Plan Commissioners were provided a copy of Raymond’s storm-water utility district ordinance.  It was noted there are different ways to create storm-water utility districts- one overlays an entire municipality and another creates separate districts for areas tributary to different waterways.   In Raymond, 95% of their parcels are included in one district.  All of those parcels ultimately drain to the Root River.

Weinkauf reported multiple problems with drainage throughout the Village.  The Village recently authorized an engineering study to recommend a repair or replacement strategy for the Ag School drain tile that runs just west of the original village limits.  Problems with this tile are affecting numerous properties and road right of ways, including County Highway D.  There are also problems with a drain tile system that runs through the Rookery Landing subdivision.  Additionally, surface drainage problems exist on Seidel Drive and near Upland Drive.  Weinkauf thought a storm-water utility district that overlays the entire Village would be helpful to address these problems and help prepare for future development.

Novy reported the process begins with an engineering study to determine which properties are to be included in a district, what work is going to be accomplished by the district, and what benefits the proposed work will produce.  Once that is determined, projects and project costs can be spread out over a variable number of years.  From that point, the municipality must decide how costs will be assessed.  Some approach this by assessing one flat charge based on the amount of impervious surface on each parcel.  Others approach this by assessing a base administrative fee to each parcel, and then layering an additional amount based on its impervious surface.

Birkett reported numerous drainage complaints throughout the Village during recent heavy rain and flooding events and on recent efforts to map existing drain tile systems throughout the Village.  He thought a drainage district would be a good way to proactively address drainage before more development occurs.   He also suggested a prioritization system where problems areas are addressed first.

Weinkauf commented another benefit of a local storm-water utility district/ commission would be that local members could interact more proactively with residents than the Racine County Drainage Board has in the past.  He indicated drainage district board members do not feel any obligation to educate residents on benefits received from work the district performs on drainage ways.  Weinkauf thought residents would prefer to interact with a local commission when they have questions.

Commissioners indicated the negative they see with creating a district are initial engineering costs.  Novy reported on an email received from the engineering firm the Town of Raymond used to create their storm-water utility district.  They offered to answer any questions the Commission might have in regards to establishing a district and explain the process Raymond followed to establish their district.  Consensus of the Commission was to invite an individual from this firm to a future meeting to discuss the process.

Introduction of Village of Rochester Ordinance No. 2009-5 creating an M-4 “Quarrying District” and special conditional use provisions applicable to quarrying operations

Novy reported this ordinance will be put to a public hearing at the November Village Board meeting and is being distributed in advance so that Plan Commissions have a chance to review the ordinance and formulate recommendations for the Board at the November Plan Commission meeting.   Schattner explained the ordinance was drafted in coordination with the Village Attorney to combine past Racine County conditional use provisions with the previous Town’s gravel pit permit process.  Johnson questioned setbacks in regards to existing operations.  Schattner indicated a provision exists that allows mining and restoration to a lot line if adjoining properties are owned by the same party.  If a situation exists where this is not practical, variance procedures are always available.   Tamblyn questioned fee amounts in the ordinance.  It was noted that fees cannot be in excess of the administration costs associated with the permit.  The fee schedule was just adopted this year and is comparable to what other municipalities charge for this type of permit.    Plan Commissioners were directed to perform further review of the ordinance and present any other concerns or suggestions at the November meeting.

Joseph moved, 2^nd by Johnson to adjourn at 6:53 p.m.  Motion carried.

Respectfully submitted,

Betty J. Novy, CMC

Clerk-Treasurer