Loading...
Plan Commission Packet - 5/23/2016 CITY OF MUSKEGO PLAN COMMISSION AGENDA May 23, 2016 6:00 PM Muskego City Hall, W182 S8200 Racine Avenue CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL STATEMENT OF PUBLIC NOTICE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 3, 2016 MEETING OLD BUSINESS FOR CONSIDERATION RESOLUTION #PC 031-2016 - Approval of a Building, Site and Operation Plan for Ener- Con Companies for the Parkland Towne Center Development located in the NW 1/4 of Section 10 (Janesville Road / Tax Key No. 2198.984). MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS ADJOURNMENT NOTICE IT IS POSSIBLE THAT MEMBERS OF AND POSSIBLY A QUORUM OF MEMBERS OF OTHER GOVERNMENTAL BODIES OF THE MUNICIPALITY MAY BE IN ATTENDANCE AT THE ABOVE-STATED MEETING TO GATHER INFORMATION; NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN BY ANY GOVERNMENTAL BODY AT THE ABOVE-STATED MEETING OTHER THAN THE GOVERNMENTAL BODY SPECIFICALLY REFERRED TO ABOVE IN THIS NOTICE. ALSO, UPON REASONABLE NOTICE, EFFORTS WILL BE MADE TO ACCOMMODATE THE NEEDS OF DISABLED INDIVIDUALS THROUGH APPROPRIATE AIDS AND SERVICES. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR TO REQUEST THIS SERVICE, CONTACT MUSKEGO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, (262) 679-4136. Unapproved CITY OF MUSKEGO PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES May 3, 2016 6:00 PM Muskego City Hall, W182 S8200 Racine Avenue CALL TO ORDER Mayor Kathy Chiaverotti called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Those present recited the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Chiaverotti, Ald. Borgman, Commissioners Peardon, Fiedler, Jacques, Buckmaster and Bartlett (6:10 PM). Also present City Attorney Warchol, Director Muenkel and Recording Secretary McMullen. STATEMENT OF PUBLIC NOTICE Those present recited the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 6, 2016 MEETING Commissioner Jacques made a motion to approve the minutes of the April 6, 2016 meeting. Commissioner Fiedler seconded. Commissioner Fiedler noted his name should be changed from Commissioner Noah to Commissioner Fiedler. The minutes were approved unanimously. NEW BUSINESS FOR CONSIDERATION RESOLUTION #PC 028-2016 - Approval of a Preliminary Plat for the Edgewater Heights Subdivision located in the NW & NE 1/4 of Section 21 (Tax Key No. 2241.999). Commissioner Jacques made a motion to approve RESOLUTION #PC 028-2016 - Approval of a Preliminary Plat for the Edgewater Heights Subdivision located in the NW & NE 1/4 of Section 21 (Tax Key No. 2241.999). Commissioner Buckmaster seconded. Resolution #PC 028-2016 was approved unanimously. RESOLUTION #PC 029-2016 - Approval of a Mother-In-Law Unit for the Hartmann/Woppert property located in the NE 1/4 of Section 24 (Tax Key 2253.040 / W129 S8859 Boxhorn Reserve Drive). Commissioner Jacques made a motion to approve RESOLUTION #PC 029-2016 - Approval of a Mother-In-Law Unit for the Hartmann/Woppert property located in the NE 1/4 of Section 24 (Tax Key 2253.040 / W129 S8859 Boxhorn Reserve Drive). Commissioner Fiedler seconded. Plan Commission Minutes 2 May 3, 2016 Resolution #PC 029-2016 was approved unanimously. RESOLUTION #PC 030-2016 - Recommendation to Council to Amend the Zoning Map of the City of Muskego for Ener-Con Companies for Parkland Towne Center Development located in the NW 1/4 of Section 10 (Tax Key No. 2198.984 / Janesville Road) from B-4 Highway Business District to a PD-Planned Development for the Development known as Parkland Towne Center. Commissioner Fiedler made a motion to approve RESOLUTION #PC 030-2016 - Recommendation to Council to Amend the Zoning Map of the City of Muskego for Ener-Con Companies for Parkland Towne Center Development located in the NW 1/4 of Section 10 (Tax Key No. 2198.984 / Janesville Road) from B-4 Highway Business District to a PD-Planned Development for the Development known as Parkland Towne Center. Commissioner Buckmaster seconded. Resolution #PC 030-2016 was approved 5-1-1 with Ald. Borgman voting no and Mayor Chiaverotti abstaining. RESOLUTION #PC 031-2016 - Approval of a Building, Site and Operation Plan for Ener-con Companies for the Parkland Towne Center Development located in the NW 1/4 of Section 10 (Janesville Road / Tax Key No. 2198.984). Commissioner Bartlett made a motion to approve RESOLUTION #PC 031-2016 - Approval of a Building, Site and Operation Plan for Ener-con Companies for the Parkland Towne Center Development located in the NW 1/4 of Section 10 (Janesville Road / Tax Key No. 2198.984). Commissioner Fiedler seconded. Commissioner Fiedler made a motion to defer RESOLUTION #PC 031-2016 - Approval of a Building, Site and Operation Plan for Ener-con Companies for the Parkland Towne Center Development located in the NW 1/4 of Section 10 (Janesville Road / Tax Key No. 2198.984). Commissioner Buckmaster seconded. Resolution #PC 031-2016 was deferred 6-0-1 with Mayor Chiaverotti abstaining. RESOLUTION #PC 032-2016 - Approval of a Certified Survey Map for the Ener- Con Companies for the Parkland Towne Center Development located in the NW 1/4 of Section 10 (Janesville Road / Tax Key No. 2198.984). Commissioner Fiedler made a motion to approve RESOLUTION #PC 032-2016 - Approval of a Certified Survey Map for the Ener-Con Companies for the Parkland Towne Center Development located in the NW 1/4 of Section 10 (Janesville Road / Tax Key No. 2198.984). Commissioner Buckmaster seconded. Resolution #PC 032-2016 was approved 6-0-1 with Mayor Chiaverotti abstaining. RESOLUTION #PC 033-2016 - Approval of Commercial Signage for the Parkland Towne Center Development located in the NW 1/4 of Section 10 (Janesville Road / Tax Key No. 2198.984). Commissioner Buckmaster made a motion to approve RESOLUTION #PC 033-2016 - Approval of Commercial Signage for the Parkland Towne Center Development located in the NW 1/4 of Section 10 (Janesville Road / Tax Key No. 2198.984). Commissioner Jacques seconded. Plan Commission Minutes 3 May 3, 2016 Resolution #PC 033-2016 was approved 6-0-1 with Mayor Chiaverotti abstaining. MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Buckmaster made a motion to adjourn at 9:29 PM. Commissioner Fiedler seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Kellie McMullen, Recording Secretary City of Muskego Plan Commission Supplement PC 031-2016 For the meeting of: May 23, 2016 REQUEST: Building Site and Operation Plan – Parkland Towne Center Multi-family Buildings Tax Key No. 2198.984 NW ¼ of Section 10 PETITIONER: Ener-Con Companies INTRODUCED: May 3, 2016 LAST AGENDA: May 3, 2016 PREPARED BY: Jeff Muenkel, AICP BACKGROUND PC 031-2016 Plan Commission deferred action on the BSO at their Tuesday M ay 3rd meeting to allow the developer to come back with other possible options on the position of Apartment Building #3. The petitioner has provided Plan Commission with a new submittal as well as explaining their efforts over the past couple weeks. Please find the detail regarding the new submittal below in bold. PLAN CONSISTENCY PC 031-2016 Comprehensive Plan: The 2020 Plan depicts the areas for commercial use. The proposal is consistent with the Plan subject to a PD Planned Development rezoning. Zoning: The property is zoned B-4 Highway Business District. However, a PD Planned Development zoning is currently under consideration that would allow the uses as presented herein. The resolution would be subject to that rezoning occurring. Adopted 208 Sanitary Sewer Service Area: Public sanitary sewer serves this area. The proposal is consistent with the plan. Water Capacity Assessment District: The property is serviced with water. The proposal is consistent with the Plan. Stormwater Management Plan: On-site stormwater management is part of the Parkland Towne Center development and part of the proposal. All stormwater ponds would have to be approved and constructed prior to occupancy of the structures. The proposal is consistent with the Plan. DISCUSSION PC 031-2016 Ener Con has re-submitted an updated narrative, site plan(s), and landscape plans/perspectives for Plan Commission consideration. Plan Commission previously deferred the apartment BSO with direction for the developer to consider different options/efforts surrounding apartment building #3. Narrative Please review the new narrative Ener Con has submitted. In particular, the text highlighted in yellow discusses the efforts the developer has taken the past two weeks as well as outlines the options they have reviewed for movement of apartment building #3. The narrative describes how they have come to submit the new requested site plan and landscape plan described herein below. In all, the developers have noted that they have:  Had extensive conversations with the neighbors regarding screening, building locations, and purchasing.  Looked at options of changing the grade so the building height could change a bit.  Looked at options of shifting the building east closer to the condo buildings .  Looked at options of moving the building as proposed below . New Submittal Per the site plans attached, Ener Con requests approval of apartment #3 with a 40 foot setback of the west property line now compared to the 20-feet previously shown. The additional 20-feet allows more green space between the apartment and the single family parcels to the west whil e also allowing berming and more landscaping to be accomplished. Per the site plan, the building is approximately 97 feet from the southern single family home. The apartment has been moved a bit south to pull it further from the northern single family parcel as well. It should be pointed out that a new site plan is also attached that shows the floor elevations of the apartment buildings within the site plan. The developers wanted to point out that the buildings being proposed are not straight walls going 40+ feet up from the setbacks noted on all sides of the structure. In actuality, the first floor of the apartments will, for the most part, be about 13 feet high. The three stories of apartments are then inset in the first floor of the building by about 18 feet on each main side to allow for the patio areas for the units. The ends of the apartments would rise up to the 43’ but not to the full width shown in the main site plan. The new landscape plan shows that a wealth more landscaping is intended to be installed along all property lines abutting the single family uses to the west and the condo buildings to the east. The landscape plan along the single family parcels to the west of apartment building #3 shows that a three foot berm will first be created along with plantings ranging from six to eight feet throughout the berm. The developer has submitted a series of landscape renderings showing the heights of the existing and proposed landscaping along this west property line. The renderings show the landscaping as installed as well as anticipated heights in year five. Please also see the new pictures in the supplement showing what exists for landscaping today along the west and east borders of the Parkland property. Staff added approximate heights of these current trees for Plan Commission as well. Pictures are included showing the approximate location of the 40 foot setback as well along the west property line. Staff again has color coded the landscape plan herein to demonstrate the sequence of landscape installation for the apartment buildings and the overall initial construction of the Parkland Town Center (Orange – landscaping as part of initial construction of site grading and utilities for the overall Parkland Towne Center; blue - landscaping as part of occupancy of building #1; yellow- landscaping as part of occupancy of buildings #2 and #3). By a new amended resolution the sequence of landscape installation per the color coded plan herein would be approved if Plan Commission desires. Parking The developers were able to add a few more parking stalls to accommodate the apartment complexes with the new site plan. A total of fifty-two (52) outdoor parking stalls are now found compared to the forty (40) previously. These additional outdoor stalls brin g the parking count up to 2.3 parking stalls per unit (indoor/outdoor combined) for the development compared to the previous 2.17 a unit. Staff does have a note in the amended resolution before Plan Commission that the resolution is still subject to fire department approval of turning radiuses. There is a chance that the site plan and outdoor parking stall counts are minimally modified in front of the apartment building #3 to accommodate fire truck turning radius when going east to south along the apartmen t building frontage road. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the BSO now with the site plan showing apartment building #3 with a 40-foot setback off the west property line. Further that the newly updated landscape plan and Plan Commission sequencing of the landscaping is incorporated into the approval. Given that the Plan Commission has approved the rezoning for this parcel we have recognized that the mix of land uses, and the apartment sizes/densities, are appropriate for the area. The n ew setback, along with the associated berming, landscaping, and existing landscaping seem appropriate for the existing and future land uses in this area. Further, the proposed new site plan preserves more of a courtyard greenspace within the overall Parkl and Towne Center development than what would have occurred if the apartment #3 was moved and rotated to the southeast . The existing B-4 Highway Business zoning could allow a commercial building as close as 10 feet from the west lot line as well as more intense land uses. Having the apartment structure at 40 feet with associated screening and still being a residential use, seems appropriate. A suggested amended resolution is attached to the supplement for Plan Commission consideration that addresses the new site plan and landscape plan approval with the associated setback and parking changes. Staff supplement from original submittal for the May 3rd Plan Commission meeting: The submittal is included in the supplement consisting of a narrative, site plans, grading/utility plans, landscape plan, building elevations, floor plans, colored renderings, lighting and signage plans. As stated above, the petitioner requests approvals for the new multi-family buildings as part of the Parkland Towne Center Development. The multi-family development is to be named The View at Parkland. Each structure would consist of four stories and have thirty (30) units of 1 -2 bedroom apartments. The proposal is part of the Parkland Towne Center development which is currently under consideration for a PD Planned Development zoning by Plan Commission and Council as well. Overall, the developers are seeking approval for all three (3) multi-family buildings in the BSO at this time and it is the developer’s intent to build the structures in a sequence presented on the site from south to north (Building #1 thru Building #3). Per the developers bank commitment, a new building would not start construction until an ~85% occupancy rate of the building before. It is consistent that the developer submits an accompanying BSO Plan to Plan Commission during a rezoning submittal if it works in their timeline so Plan Commission can have the most relevant information in basing their decisions. Architecture The buildings are proposed to have four sided architecture and be fully clad in masonry products. The buildings are presented with the parking garage on the first floor and the living areas on the 2 nd thru 4th floors. Material changes and colors are shown from floor to floor for some added uniq ueness. The developers have shown in other submittals that the need for building on a slab is due to poor soil conditions. The structures are clad with the following: First Floor: Decorative block with a “red” color on the first three courses and a “buff/graham” color on the upper courses. Windows with galvanized sunshades would be found throughout the first floors as well to break up the façade and adapt it to the rest of the structure. Second-Third Floors: These floors are mainly clad with a Boston Brick and windows will have stone sills and lintels of a masonry grey color. Fourth Floor: The upper floor is proposed to be clad with a hardie lap siding in a “heather ed moss” color. Corners: Each corner of the structure will be cladded in a greyish fiber cement panel Other: Roofing coping will be an aluminum in a grey color. Outside decks are shown for each of the units and decks will be prominent on along the longer facades of the structure. The top floo r of the decks will be covered with aluminum coping roofs. The decks and sundeck on top of the first floor will have aluminum fencing with similar colors to the main structure. The Downtown Design Guide and the General Design Guide apply to this area. Overall, the General Design guide is met as the building is presented with four-sided architecture and has well over the 50% masonry requirement. The Downtown Design Guide intent looks to promote the same principles as the Redevelopment District #2, which staff noted below. The rest of the Downtown Design Guide simply promotes all the requirements that the city has already enforced as part of this project including 50% masonry, four -sided architecture, screening, and landscaping. A copy of the overall guide is in this supplement for Plan Commission reference. Overall, as presented in the rezoning Resolution #030 -2016 discussion, staff finds that the Downtown Design Guide principles and requirements are mainly met. It should be noted that these are simply guidelines and not a checklist that all have to apply for an approval. The adopted Redevelopment District #2 guide actually goes on to say that a project should be submitted that the developer can show is market driven as well. The Design Guide looks to promote the same characteristics as the Redevelopment Dis trict including, but not limited to, the following principles:  Enhance the image, profile, and use of downtown Muskego  Provide a new sense of place with a downtown identity  Demonstrate market driven principles that work within the economic landscape of Mu skego  Provide the downtown area, and indeed the entire community, with an identity that adequately reflects the local quality of life and the affluence of City households  Promote the following types of uses: Design Character  Traditional town center/modern ‘main-street’  Buildings squarely facing the street  Buildings closer to street, parking behind  Pedestrian scale – walkable, accented storefronts  Taller building profiles – downtown centerpoint and landmark  Variable roof-lines  Transitional massing blending with surrounding architecture  Sense of place/downtown identity Use Mix  Possible upper end condos (professionals & ‘empty nesters’)  Destination and convenience retail (no ‘big boxes’)  Smaller floor plate retail  Shared parking  Multiple purpose trips  Convenience Density  Possible Mid-Rise heights: Somewhat higher than City norm  Built in consumer market for downtown businesses  Greater TIF revenues  More efficient public services/utilities  Interconnected activity centers  Downtown anchor and landmark Site Plan The overall site consists of the Parkland Towne Center development that includes commercial entities on the south side along Janesville Road but also includes the three multifamily buildings to the north along Lannon Drive. All access points to the development will have upgraded intersections and streets as noted in the rezoning supplement under PC Res. #030-2016. The primary access points to the multifamily development will be two (2) access points off of Lannon Drive. A larger access point will occu r to the south of Building #1 and will facilitate more traffic for the commercial entities. A smaller access point will be found north of Building #2. The interior roads will be of appropriate width for two way access and for appropriate fire needs. The site plans shows curb and gutter on the entire site. A new recreation trail will exist on the west sides of Buildings #1 -2 along Lannon Drive that will connect down to the Janesville Road trail system. The rest of the site surrounding the multifamily stru ctures is small amounts of greenspace that will be consumed by landscaping as discussed further below. A clubhouse/pool is scheduled for the area east of the Building #2. That area is shown to be landscaped in the landscape plan but would be subject to a future BSO Plan once the developers are ready. Parking Parking for the multi-family buildings consists of fifty-two (52) indoor stalls each. There are also forty (40) outdoor stalls reserved for the multi-family structures with approximately 13 outdoor stalls reserved for each building. The code for multiple family is two (2) enclosed parking spaces per dwelling unit with additional visitor parking as well. The development is obviously unique to Muskego as there are no 30 unit structures of smaller apartment nature in the area. Muskego parking codes are subject to Plan Commission discretion and waiver. By unit count the development is showing 1.73 enclosed parking stalls per unit. When adding the 13 outdoor parking stalls dedicated to each building a total of 65 parking stalls are found which equates to 2.17 parking stalls per unit. The developers are showing that each building will have twenty-four (24) two-bedroom units and six (6) one-bedroom units. The developers have indicated that they are allocating one parking space per bedroom, however two (2) two-bedroom users will only get one inside space and could be assigned an outdoor space if necessary. The remainder of outdoor spaces would be solely for visitors. A market study was completed by the developers and is attached to the supplement for Plan Commission perusal. The market study was based on the development as presented to Plan Commission knowing the amount of parking and size/quality of each residential unit. Overall, the market study does sh ow an absorption rate of five (5) apartments per month with fairly high rents. The market study sees that the majority of the units will be rented to singles or empty nesters as they are absorbed. The developers have indicated to staff that based on their anticipated renters they believe that the amount of parking is sufficient. Ener Con has indicated that they have similar apartments in Greenfield under the same scenarios without issue. Outdoor parking stalls are shown as 9’x18’ in size. Traditionally we have approved stall sizes of 10’x20’ which is our code standard unless Plan Commission allows a waiver. As we have discussed over the last few BSO submittals this past year staff is OK with the 9x18 size. First, this is a compact development due to being in the heart of the downtown and along the county highway. Second, the common norm in the general area has settled in at 9’x18’ stalls in the southeastern WI area and we should be consistent for economic development reasons. Lastly, if Plan Commission recalls, the city is going thru a recodification of all city codes during 2016 and staff has the change to our parking stall code requirement to the 9’x18’. As we indicated in the past, Staff has had multiple conversations with a couple groups that look at zoning codes in relation to greenspace preservation and stormwater management reduction needs. The groups have pointed out numerous times that our larger parking stall code is a detriment to greenspace compared to other communities as well. Zoning/Comp Plan The building is presented under the requirements of a PD Planned Development zoning as part of the overall Parkland Towne Center development. Subject to that rezoning approval the buildings show the setbacks of 10 feet from the west property line for Buildings #1 and #2 and a setback of 20 feet from the west property line for Building #3. It should be noted that Building #3 is adjacent to single family home sites and the developers have this larger setback in order to install screening. As described in the rezoning supplement under PC Resolution #030-2016, the rezoning approval would allow the mix of uses and structure locations/sizes to exist as presented. The height of the structures are shown as 43’9” as measured by city code. An elevator shaft approaches 47’ but is allowed per code. The discussion surrounding the height is within the supplement for Resolution #030-2016 and would be allowed if the PD rezoning is approved as well. The Comprehensive Plan is met under a PD rezoning approval as well. Fire Department Approval The overall site plan for the Parkland Towne Center development has b een reviewed by the Fire Department for access and utility needs. The resolution is still subject to any possible changes to the site plan that may be required based upon the final Fire Department review. Dumpsters/Outdoor Storage All refuse will be contained inside the building. No outdoor storage of any kind is allowed for the building or tenants. Landscaping A full landscape plan is part of the submittal that shows how the landscaping will be accomplished for all three proposed multi-family buildings and their surroundings. The landscape plan has been reviewed by the City Forester and the resolution is subject to any changes by the City Forester at building permit time for each structure. In all, each building is surrounded with a wealth of foundation plantings as well as various trees surrounding the perimeters along the adjoining roadways. Since the multi-family buildings will be erected at different time’s staff has illustrated a separate color coded map herein to show Plan Commission what landscaping must be accomplished at which times during the developer’s construction process. Such a sequence should assure that the site has landscaping at all times and isn’t too desolate. Per the map herein, the color orange denotes what landscaping must take place when the utilities and road infrastructure is installed for the overall Parkland Towne Center development, the color blue denotes what landscaping would be associated with the occupancy of building #1, and the color yellow for what landscaping would need to be installed before occupancy of future buildings #2 and #3. Plan Commission will note that much of the landscaping will have to take place even with the initial construction of the overall Parkland Towne Center development which will include landscaping around the storm ponds, streets, and the northwest border (screening for adjoining residential homes). Additional landscaping would occur on the Park land Towne Center development for the individual commercial sites as well as the future clubhouse/pool that would need BSO approval in the future. Signage There is no wall signage proposed for the multi-family structures. Two locations are shown in the submittal for brick pillars to denote the entrances to the multi-family development. The brick pillars will denote signage as “The View at Parkland.” Miscellaneous wayfinding signage may be found in the future by doorways and parking lots and those would be subject to future permitting if needed. Lighting No lighting is part of the submittal for the actual multi-family sites. The developers will have lighting along the main road going thru the Parkland Towne Center development though as shown in a supp lemental drawing in the submittal. No pole lights are to be put along the frontage roads of the multi -family buildings. More than likely there will be wall pack lights required at entrances and the resolution is subject to review of the lighting details and assurance that any wall pack lights are zero degree cutoff fixtures. Staff has also included in the resolution that a max of 0.5 foot-candles can be found along any property lines per code. Further the resolution states that wall pack lights should be kept to entrances/exists solely. Given the layout of the buildings there should be very minimal locations for lights around the perimeter of any one structure. Sewer, Water, & Stormwater Stormwater management will be taken care for this site as part of the overall Parkland Towne Center development buildout. Municipal water and sewer services will be installed as well. Other The following are also part of the Plan Commission resolution: BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That all bollards must be painted to match the colors of the principal structure. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That any new handicap signs be incorporated into bored bollards. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That all roof top and ground mechanicals (including HVAC devices, electrical transformers, etc.) must be screened from view and/or incorporated into the design of the site/structure (screening, etc.) and shall be approved by the Planning Division before the issuance of building permits. STAFF RECOMMENDATION PC 031-2016 Approval of Resolution PC 031-2016 as the presented structures meet the objectives and concepts in the city’s redevelopment plan and design guides. Approval is subject to the PD - Planned Development rezoning being recommended by Planning Commission earlier in the meeting. If so, the resolution is also subject to the Council recommending approval of the rezoning. MUSK EG Othe City of Ar ea o f Inte restI0280560 Fee t Ag en da Item(s) Pr op er tie s Zon in g D istr ic ts Rig ht -o f-Way Hy dr og rap hy Supp lem ental MapRESOLUTION #PC 03 1-2016 En er -con C om pan iesS74 W 170 00 Ja nes v ille Ro ad J A N E S V I L L E L O O M I S R D RA CIN E AV DURHAM W O O D S CO LL EG E Pre p ar ed b y C ity o f Mu ske g o P la n n in g D e p ar tm e nt Da te : 4 /2 5/2 0 16 AMENDED RESOLUTION #P.C. 031-2016 APPROVAL OF A BUILDING SITE AND OPERATION PLAN FOR MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES FOR THE PARKLAND TOWNE CENTER DEVELOPMENT LOCATED IN THE NW ¼ OF SECTION 10 (JANESVILLE ROAD / TAX KEY NO. 2198.984) WHEREAS, Plans were submitted by Ener-con Companies for a Building, Site and Operation Plan for three (3) multi-family structures for the property located in the NW ¼ of Section 10 (Janesville Road / Tax Key No. 2198.984), and WHEREAS, The multi-family structures are part of the Parkland Towne Center development, and WHEREAS, The submittal includes narrative, site plans, grading/utility plans, landscape plan, building elevations, floor plans, colored renderings, lighting and signage plans, and WHEREAS, The petitioner requests approvals for three (3) new multi-family buildings as part of the Parkland Towne Center Development to be named The View at Parkland, and WHEREAS, The developers are seeking approval for all three (3) multi-family buildings in the BSO at this time and it is the developer’s intent to build the structures in a sequence presented on the site from south to north (Building #1 thru Building #3), and WHEREAS, Each structure is approximately 21,600 square feet and would consist of four stories and have thirty (30) units of 1-2 bedroom apartments, and WHEREAS, The property is zoned B-4 Highway Business District and a PD Planned Development zoning is currently under consideration that would allow the uses as presented herein, and WHEREAS, The 2020 Plan Depicts the area for commercial use and is consistent with the Plan subject to a PD Planned Development rezoning, and WHEREAS, The buildings are proposed to have four sided architecture and be fully clad in masonry products consisting of the following:  First Floor: Decorative block with a “red” color on the first three courses and a “buff/graham” color on the upper courses and windows with galvanized sunshades would be found throughout the first floors as well to break up the façade and adapt it to the res t of the structure,  Second-Third Floors: These floors are mainly clad with a Boston Brick and windows will have stone sills and lintels of a masonry grey color,  Fourth Floor: The upper floor is proposed to be clad with a hardie lap siding in a “heathered moss” color,  Corners: Each corner of the structure will be cladded in a greyish fiber cement panel,  Other: Roofing coping will be an aluminum in a grey color; outside decks are shown for each of the units and decks will be prominent on along the longer fa cades of the structure and the top floor of the decks will be covered with aluminum coping roofs; The decks and sundeck on top of the first floor will have aluminum fencing with similar colors to the main structure, and WHEREAS, The buildings are presented with the parking garage on the first floor and the living areas on the 2nd thru 4th floors and the developers have shown that the need for building on a slab is due to poor soil conditions, and WHEREAS, The Downtown Design Guide and the General Design Guide apply to this area, and WHEREAS, The overall site consists of the Parkland Towne Center development that includes commercial entities on the south side along Janesville Road but also includes the three multifamily buildings to the north along Lannon Drive, and WHEREAS, The primary access points to the multifamily development will be two (2) access points off of Lannon Drive with a larger access point to the south of Building #1 and a smaller access point will be found north of Building #2, and WHEREAS, A new recreation trail will exist on the west sides of Buildings #1-2 along Lannon Drive that will connect down to the Janesville Road trail system, and WHEREAS, Parking for the multi-family buildings consists of fifty-two (52) indoor stalls each and there are forty (40) fifty-two (52) outdoor stalls reserved for the multi-family structures, and WHEREAS, The code for multiple family is two (2) enclosed parking spaces per dwelling unit with additional visitor parking and this code is subject to Plan Commission discretion, and WHEREAS, By unit count the development is showing 1.73 enclosed parking stalls per unit and when adding the 13 17 outdoor parking stalls dedicated to each building a total of 65 69 parking stalls are found which equates to 2.17 approximately 2.3 parking stalls per unit, and WHEREAS, Outdoor parking stalls are shown as 9’x18’ in size, and WHEREAS, The overall site plan for the Parkland Towne Center development has been reviewed by the Fire Depart for access and utility needs, and WHEREAS, All refuse will be contained inside the building and no outdoor storage is requested, and WHEREAS, A full landscape plan is part of the submittal that shows how the landscaping will be accomplished for all three proposed multi-family buildings and their surroundings, and WHEREAS, Since the multi-family buildings will be erected at different development time’s staff has illustrated a separate color coded map on what landscaping must be accomplished at which times during the developer’s construction process, and WHEREAS, Two locations are shown in the submittal for brick pillars to denote the entrances to the multi - family development, and WHEREAS, No lighting is part of the submittal for the actual multi-family sites, and WHEREAS, The developers will have lighting along the main road going thru the Parkland Towne Center development, and WHEREAS, Stormwater management will be taken care for this site as part of the overall Parkland Towne Center development buildout, and WHEREAS, The site is served by municipal water and sanitary sewer services. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, That the Plan Commission approves of a Building, Site, and Operation Plan for multifamily buildings for Ener-Con Companies for the property located in the NW ¼ of Section 10 (Janesville Road / Tax Key No. 2198.984). BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Plan Commission approval reflects the site plan for apartment building #3 having a 40-foot setback from the west property line and the associated landscape plan showing screening along the west property line for the single family parcels as well as the east property lines for the condo parcels. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Plan Commission approval reflects that the landscaping be installed per the sequencing outlined by the Plan Commission supplement consisting of:  Foundation plantings for Apartment building #1 at the time of occupancy of said building.  Foundation plantings for Apartment buildings #2 and #3 at the time of occupancy of said buildings.  All other landscaping, per the developer submitted plan, to be installed at the time of the overall utility and grading improvements as part of the overall Parkland Towne Center development (including the landscape berming and screening to occur along the northwest and eastern property lines abutting existing residential parcels). BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Plan Commission approval reflects that the site plan and outdoor parking stall count may change minimally due to fire department turning radius needs in front of apartment building #3. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That this resolution is subject to the rezoning being approved by the Common Council as part of Council Ordinance #1406. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the 9’x18’ parking stalls are allowed as part of this approval. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the landscape plan is subject to City Forester approval before building permit issuance. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the landscaping installation schedule shall follow the staff landscape map as presented in the PC 031-2016 supplement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That all monument and wall signage will need separate permits from the City when desired. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, Any future building lighting for entrance/exists will require to be wall pack lights and zero degree cutoff. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That a max of 0.5 foot-candles can be found along any property lines per code for any future lighting. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That wall pack lights should be kept to entrances/exists solely. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, The site plan is subject to Fire Department approvals at the time of building permits and possible changes to the site plan may be required based upon the final Fire Department review. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That all bollards must be painted to match the colors of the principal structure. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That any new handicap signs be incorporated into bored bollards. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That all roof top and ground mechanicals (including HVAC devices, electrical transformers, etc.) must be screened from view and/or incorporated into the design of the site/structure (screening, etc.) and shall be approved by the Planning Division before the issuance of building permits. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That failure to comply with the approval contained in this resolution shall result in the imposition of fines of $100 per day, the initiation of legal action, or both. Plan Commission City of Muskego Adopted: Defeated: Deferred: May 3, 2016 Introduced: May 3, 2016 ATTEST: Kellie McMullen, Recording Secretary RREEAALL EESSTTAATTEE:: DDEEVVEELLOOPPEERRSS BBUUIILLDDEERRSS PPRROOPPEERRTTYY MMAANNAAGGEEMMEENNTT SSAALLEESS 8575 W. Forest Home Ave., Suite 160 Greenfield, WI 53228 Office (414) 425-4939 Fax: (414) 425-4946 www.ener-con.com BSO Application Parkland Towne Center Tax Key Numbers: 2198-984 Applicant Info: Ener-Con Companies Inc. c/o Parkland Towne Center, LLC 8575 W Forest Home Ave. Suite 160 Greenfield, WI 53228 kpokwinski@ener-con.com Phone: (414) 425-4939 Fax: (414) 425-4946 Owner: Muskego Adventures, Inc. An Illinois Corporation Consulting Firms: The Sigma Group 1300 West Canal Street Milwaukee, WI 53233 Paul Meier Architecture (414) 581-0003 Giles Engineering Associates Inc. N8W22350 Johnson Dr. Suite A1 Waukesha, Wi 53186 Gestra Engineering Inc. 191 W. Edgerton Ave. Milwaukee, WI 53207 Zoning District: PD, Planned Development Parcel Area: Parcel A: 5.884 Acres Parcel B: 2.937 Acres Parcel C: 1.26 Acres Parcel D: .679 Acres Project Description: We propose to develop the vacant property located at S74W17000 Janesville Road in Muskego formerly known as Parkland Mall. This vacant land located along the gateway of Muskego is an ideal location for a Towne Center. The parcel will include four commercial buildings (30,000 sf, 12,000 sf, 7,500 sf and a 4,000 sf) with various retail users. In addition, the proposed plan will include three 30 unit apartment buildings. Each building will be four stories with grade level parking. This 10.76 acre piece of land is considered to be a prime location for redevelopment in the City of Muskego. Given its central location, this site plays a crucial role in the future of the City of Muskego and is the perfect location for a Towne Center. The development will consist of (3) 30 unit high end apartment buildings along with 23,500 square feet of retail/office space and a 30,000 square foot grocer as the anchor tenant. The development is going to give a new image and walkability to the City of Muskego. The mixed use is going to be beneficial to both current and future residents. With the retail/office and grocery store, this site has the potential to create a one-stop convenience to all Muskego Residents. The current condition of the land is a low vacant lot. The ground is littered with old rubble, foundation, and waste from the demolished Parkland mall. Test digging was completed and uncovered a myriad of debris underneath the lot surface. The lot was then used as a tree farm generating approximately $38.00 per year in real estate tax. The city’s tax revenue will greatly increase due to consumer’s attraction to the retail development as well as the 90 upscale apartments added to the tax base and increase value and walkability to the surrounding properties. This development will create and retain local jobs. It is estimated that the additional 53,500 square feet of retail space has the potential to create over 100 local job opportunities. The 30 unit residential buildings will be constructed of the highest quality materials consisting of decorative block, brick, Hardie plank siding, and fiber cement paneling. Each apartment building foot print will be approximately 21,600 square feet with grade level parking and three additional floors of residential units. The retail section of the development is to be determined. However, a proposed grocer will anchor this development operating 7am to 9pm daily. A traffic analysis has been completed by Traffic Analysis and Design Inc. finding that traffic on Janesville west of Lannon Drive will increase at a rate of 1.7% and traffic east of Lannon drive will increase by 2.3% resulting in an average increase in traffic of 2%. The traffic generation is relatively small compared to the overall improvements and benefits to the city and its residents. Revised Site Plan Includes: Building # 3 will now have a 40 foot setback from the property line which will create almost 100 feet between the building and the neighboring house as well as almost 70 feet corner to corner from the second neighboring house. We added a berm between our development and the single family homes with additional screening by using evergreens and possible shade trees. We also will intend screen the northern corner of the property between the existing condos and the proposed grocer when the BSO for that parcel is presented at a later date. This new layout created changes in grading, pond location, & storm water management. All which will be reviewed by City Engineers. Buildings #1 and #2 have been moved further apart to create a 40 feet setback between buildings which will allow for more landscape and green space between the buildings on Lannon and visually separate one building from the other. We are working on additional berms to north of building #3 to screen more of the apartment building and make the building look shorter provided that the new drainage plan will allow. Included in the landscaping plans are images of the proposed landscaping after the first year and at the end of five years with and without the existing trees. Options that didn’t work & Ener-Con’s Efforts: We looked into the option of building up the grade of the northwestern corner of the site and constructing building #3 into the added grade to create a shorter looking building, however, due to the already severe grades directing drainage to our retention pond, it would not be possible to build the grades to our desired height. This led us to the option of berms mentioned above, with screening from the neighbors and swales to direct drainage to our retention pond. It was a way to make the building appear smaller while still keeping the urban flat roof design. We attempted to negotiate the purchase of the 3 single family homes along Lannon that are zoned for future commercial; one owner was very reasonable FMV plus a little more; the other two were still greatly above FMV and adding on 20%-25%. They may still be open to future negotiations but even with the prices being slightly above FMV, the prices are not feasible for the development at this time. By moving the building 40’ we had addressed what appeared to be the largest of the concerns. The first home has their lot and our 40’ setback giving the greenspace between their home and the building about 100’ plus the landscaping berm we are designing and there taller tree’s along the lot line, the building will not be very visible if at all when they look out there windows. The owner does not reside at this property and it is rented. We have spoken with the owner and it appears that the landscaping is not a huge concern for them. The middle homeowner had expressed that the building was directly behind their home. The building has been moved and is no longer behind that home, behind their home there will be landscaping and greenspace. I asked them what type of barrier they would like to see and they said the arborvitaes didn’t bother them and were acceptable, we have switched to evergreens as several PC members did not like arborvitaes. Evergreens will fill in and grow taller. The condo owners to the east of the property on the new site plan have the pond in front of their units. If we turned building #3 and relocated it would be closer the east condo owners. The location change would affect more owners than the two single family homes on Lannon. It would also block any views those owners had of any greenspace or the pond. From what a few condo owners have said they would prefer the pond in front of their condominiums, the new pond location is directly in front of the neighboring condominiums that are located closest to our lot line. Overall Thoughts: The revised location and the 40’ setback is in an area that seems to be fair to all surrounding neighbors. No one neighbor has the building extremely close to their home. While the height of the residential homes is quite a bit less than the buildings; the new setbacks, existing tree heights and landscape barriers designed make the building appear smaller than it is. In addition the master plan allocates the single family homes as future commercial. This location seems like the best location to affect the least amount of neighbors. We have spent hours talking to neighbors and trying to find the best solutions. While some had great ideas the economics and feasibility of their suggestions is just not possible. I know we will never be able to satisfy everyone, but I do believe that over the last few weeks we have made some greatly favorable progress. I know we will still have several people who show up at the meeting in opposition, some of which don’t even live nearby but rather are opposed to development in general. We truly appreciate all the time and efforts the City Staff, CDA, Plan Commission & Common Council have invested in reviewing our proposals offering suggestions and providing feedback over the last year and hope this revised plan will be an equal compromise that will now develop into a wonderful new landmark in the City of Muskego.    h    h 40’ 25’28’ 38’  34’ Stakes showing proposed ~40’  setback  Stake showing ~15’setback (B‐4 Zoning is 10’allowance) 45’ 45’ ~13.5’peak of buildi 50’ ng  40’ 44’ ~19’peak of building   RREEAALL EESSTTAATTEE:: DDEEVVEELLOOPPEERRSS BBUUIILLDDEERRSS PPRROOPPEERRTTYY MMAANNAAGGEEMMEENNTT SSAALLEESS 8575 W. Forest Home Ave., Suite 160 Greenfield, WI 53228 Office (414) 425-4939 Fax: (414) 425-4946 www.ener-con.com BSO Application Parkland Towne Center Tax Key Numbers: 2198-984 Applicant Info: Ener-Con Companies Inc. c/o Parkland Towne Center, LLC 8575 W Forest Home Ave. Suite 160 Greenfield, WI 53228 kpokwinski@ener-con.com Phone: (414) 425-4939 Fax: (414) 425-4946 Owner: Muskego Adventures, Inc. An Illinois Corporation Consulting Firms: The Sigma Group 1300 West Canal Street Milwaukee, WI 53233 Paul Meier Architecture (414) 581-0003 Giles Engineering Associates Inc. N8W22350 Johnson Dr. Suite A1 Waukesha, Wi 53186 Gestra Engineering Inc. 191 W. Edgerton Ave. Milwaukee, WI 53207 Zoning District: PD, Planned Development Parcel Area: Parcel A: 5.884 Acres Parcel B: 2.937 Acres Parcel C: 1.26 Acres Parcel D: .679 Acres Project Description: We propose to develop the vacant property located at S74W17000 Janesville Road in Muskego formerly known as Parkland Mall. This vacant land located along the gateway of Muskego is an ideal location for a town center. The parcel will include four commercial buildings (30,000 sf, 12,000 sf, 7,500 sf and a 4,000 sf) with various retail users. In addition, the proposed plan will include three 30 unit apartment buildings. Each building will be four stories with grade level parking. This 10.76 acre piece of land is considered to be a prime location for redevelopment in the City of Muskego. Given its central location, this site plays a crucial role in the future of the City of Muskego and is the perfect location for a Towne Center. High end apartment buildings along with 23,500 square feet of retail/office space and a 30,000 square foot grocer as the anchor tenant will create a new image and walkability to the City of Muskego. The mixed use is going to be beneficial to both current and future residents. With the retail/office and grocery store, this site has the potential to create a one-stop convenience to all Muskego Residents. The current condition of the land is a low vacant lot. The ground is littered with old rubble, foundation, and waste from the demolished Parkland mall. Test digging was completed and uncovered a myriad of debris underneath the lot surface. The lot was then used as a tree farm generating approximately $38.00 per year in real estate tax. The city’s tax revenue will greatly increase due to consumer’s attraction to the retail development as well as the 90 upscale apartments added to the tax base and increase value and walkability to the surrounding properties. This development will create and retain local jobs. It is estimated that the additional 53,500 square feet of retail space has the potential to create over 100 local job opportunities. The 30 unit residential buildings will be constructed of the highest quality materials consisting of decorative block, brick, Hardie plank siding, and fiber cement paneling. Each apartment building foot print will be approximately 21,600 square feet with grade level parking and three additional floors of residential units. The retail section of the development is to be determined. However, a proposed grocer will anchor this development operating 7am to 9pm daily. A traffic analysis has been completed by Traffic Analysis and Design Inc. finding that traffic on Janesville west of Lannon Drive will increase at a rate of 1.7% and traffic east of Lannon drive will increase by 2.3% resulting in an average increase in traffic of 2%. The traffic generation is relatively small compared to the overall improvements and benefits to the city and its residents. T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T W W W TT E E E E W W W W W SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N W G G W E T T T T T T T T E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E T T T T T T T T G SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N W W E G SA N G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G ST ST ST ST ST ST ST X CTV T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T 12" C M P INV : 8 0 5 . 4 5 12" C M P INV : 8 0 4 . 9 0 12" C M P INV : 8 0 4 . 8 8 12" C M P INV : 8 0 4 . 7 9 48" C C P INV : 7 9 7 . 2 2 FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFO 60" C C P INV : 7 9 6 . 3 7 "V" C H A N N E L : 796 . 5 5 SA N MH 1 SA N MH 3 SA N MH 4 SA N MH 5 SA N MH 6 SA N MH 7 SA N MH 8 SA N MH 9 ST M MH 1 ST M MH 2 ST M MH 3 ST M MH 4 ST M MH 5 ST M MH 6 ST M MH 7 ST M MH 8 ST M MH 9 ST M MH 1 0 ST M CB 1 ST M CB 2 ST M CB 3 ST M CB 4 ST M CB 6 ST M CB 1 0 ST M CB 9 ST M CB 8 ST M CB 1 1 ST M CB 1 3 ST M CB 1 2 ST M CB 1 5 ST M CB 1 6 22 11 8 17 20 19 9 9 1212 12 10 10 12 20 14 33 11 9 FU T U R E PO O L 14 2 8 3 9 9 PO S S I B L E F U T U R E AC C E S S D R I V E GRAPHIC SCALE 00 50' 100' JANESVILLE RD LA N N O N D R . www.thesigmagroup.com 1300 West Canal Street Milwaukee, WI 53233 Phone: 414-643-4200 Fax: 414-643-4210 G R O UPSingle Source. Sound Solutions. PROPOSED FUTURE GROCERY (30,000 SF) FFE = 810.00 B PROPOSED FUTURE COMMERCIAL (12,000 SF) FFE: 811.80 C PROPOSED FUTURE COMMERCIAL (4,000 SF) FFE = 811.80 PROPOSED FUTURE COMMERCIAL (7,500 SF) FFE = 808.87 A PROPOSED BUILDING 21,600 SF FFE = 809.00 3 PROPOSED BUILDING 21,600 SF FFE = 809.00 2 PROPOSED BUILDING 21,600 SF FFE = 809.00 1 D 414–425–3134 (AT THE CORNER OF LANNON DRIVE & JANESVILLE ROAD, MUSKEGO, WI) BRAND NEW APARTMENT HOMES OCCUPANCY 2017 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION STARTING JUNE 2016 WWW.FORESTGREENREALTY .COM Offered By: EXTERIOR •SECURED ACCESS ENTRY •I NDOOR PARKING •LARGE TERRACE 2ND FLOOR UNITS •LARGE BALCONIES 3RD AND 4TH FLOOR UNITS INTERIOR •SPACIOUS OPEN CONCEPT FLOOR PLAN •9 FT CEILINGS •I MPRESSIVE GOURMET STYLE KITCHEN •STAGGERED MAPLE CABINETRY •CROWN MOLDING •PANTRY •CUSTOM GRANITE OR QUARTZ COUNTERTOPS •CURVED COUNTER-HEIGHT ISLAND •UPGRADED STAINLESS STEEL APPLIANCE PACKAGE •GENEROUSLY SIZED BEDROOM SUITES •LARGE WALK-IN CLOSETS •PRIVATE FULL BATHS •TALL HEIGHT VANITY CABINETS •MASTER BATH OVERSIZED TILED SHOWER W/SEAT AND DUAL SINKS •I N-UNIT LAUNDRY WITH FULL SIZE FRONT LOAD WASHER AND DRYER •POWDER BATH •PRIVATE STORAGE UNITS Note: square footage of units are approximate and may be subject to change RESORT STYLE AMENITIES •CLUBHOUSE •FITNESS CENTER •HEATED OUTDOOR POOL 1 BEDROOM 975 SQ. FT. INTERIOR UNITS: 104, 204, 304 2 BEDROOM 1,405 SQ. FT. I NTERIOR UNITS: 103, 105, 107 203, 205, 207 303, 305, 207 1 BEDROOM + DEN 1,150 SQ. FT. INTERIOR UNITS: 106, 206, 306 2 BEDROOM 1,435 SQ. FT. END UNITS: 101, 102, 109 201, 202, 209 301, 302, 309 2 BEDROOM + DEN 1530 SQ. FT. I NTERIOR UNITS: 108, 208, 308, 2 BEDROOM + DEN 1530 SQ. FT. END UNITS: 110, 210, 310 High Quality Construction Another Quality Development By Over 30 years in business www.ener-con.com PET FRIENDLY 1 DOG UP TO 40 POUNDS AND 1 CAT OR 2 DOGS WITH A COMBINED WEIGHT OF 50 POUNDS WITH ADDITIONAL SECURITY DEPOSIT BREED RESTRICTIONS APPLY *CONVENIENTLY LOCATED IN THE HEART OF MUSKEGO *WALKABILITY TO RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS AND RESTAURANTS *NEAR LITTLE MUSKEGO LAKE N LITTLE MUSKEGO LAKE Rent Unit Direction Bedrooms Brm / Brm / Den Sq Ft* Bath Total Sq Ft* $1,905 101 North West 2 13x17 / 10x12 2.5 1,435 $1,905 102 North East 2 13x17 / 10x12 2.5 1,435 $1,855 103 West 2 12x17 / 10x12 2.5 1,405 $1,310 104 East 1 12x6 1.5 975 $1,855 105 West 2 12x17 / 10x12 2.5 1,405 $1,535 106 East 1+D 11x16 / 11x10 1.5 1,150 $1,855 107 West 2 12x17 / 10x12 2.5 1,405 $2,015 108 East 2+D 13x7/10x12/8x12 2.5 1,530 $1,905 109 South West 2 13x17 / 10x12 2.5 1,435 $2,025 110 South East 2+D 13x17 / 10x12/8x12 2.5 1,530 $1,890 201 North West 2 13x17 / 10x12 2.5 1,435 $1,890 202 North East 2 13x17 / 10x12 2.5 1,435 $1,840 203 West 2 12x17 / 10x12 2.5 1,405 $1,300 204 East 1 12x6 1.5 975 $1,840 205 West 2 12x17 / 10x12 2.5 1,405 $1,520 206 East 1+D 11x16 / 11x10 1.5 1,150 $1,840 207 West 2 12x17 / 10x12 2.5 1,405 $2,000 208 East 2+D 13x17/10x12/8x12 2.5 1,530 $1,890 209 South West 2 13x17 / 10x12 2.5 1,435 $2,010 210 South East 2+D 13x17 / 10x12/8x12 2.5 1,530 $1,895 301 North West 2 13x17 / 10x12 2.5 1,435 $1,895 302 North East 2 13x17 / 10x12 2.5 1,435 $1,845 303 West 2 12x17 / 10x12 2.5 1,405 $1,305 304 East 1 12x6 1.5 975 $1,845 305 West 2 12x17 / 10x12 2.5 1,405 $1,525 306 East 1+D 11x16 / 11x10 1.5 1,150 $1,845 307 West 2 12x17 / 10x12 2.5 1,405 $2,005 308 East 2+D 13x17/10x12/8x12 2.5 1,530 $1,895 309 South West 2 13x17 / 10x12 2.5 1,435 $2,015 310 South East 2+D 13x17 / 10x12/8x12 2.5 1,530 *Apx. Square Footage The View at Towne Center Ask About Our Rent Special! Coming Early 2017 At the corner of Lannon Drive and Janesville Road 8575 W. Forest Home Ave Suite 140 Greenfield, WI 53228 www.forestgreenrealty.com Office: 414.425.3134 Fax: 414.425.4946 ParklandTowneCenter Brick:Boston 2 ndand3 rdfloorofelevation FiberCementPanel:#713CS(orsimilarcolor) Cornerpillarsofelevation HardiePlankLapSiding:HeatheredMoss(orsimilarcolor) 4 thfloorofelevation DecorativeBlock:Redhueatthelower3courses,buff/grahamatuppercourses Gradelevelofelevation Note:colorsmayrenderdifferentlyonprintasopposedtophysicalsamples P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/ L P/ L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/LP/LP/LP/LP/LP/LP/LP/LP/LP/LP/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L PROPOSED FUTURE GROCERY (30,000 SF) FFE = 809.00 PROPOSED FUTURE COMMERCIAL (12,000 SF) FFE: 811.80 PROPOSED FUTURE COMMERCIAL (4,000 SF) FFE = 811.80 PROPOSED FUTURE COMMERCIAL (7,500 SF) FFE = 808.87 22 11 8 17 20 19 9 9 1212 12 10 10 12 20 14 33 11 9 PO O L 14 2 8 3 9 9 PROPOSED BUILDING 21,600 SF FFE = 809.00 P / L P/L P/ L P/LP/L P/L P/L P/L P / L T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T W W W W TT E E E E W W W W W SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N W G G W E T T T T T T T T E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E T T T T T T T T G SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA S A N S A N W W E G SA N G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G X CTV T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T 12" C M P INV : 8 0 5 . 4 5 12" C M P INV : 8 0 4 . 9 0 12" C M P INV : 8 0 4 . 8 8 12" C M P INV : 8 0 4 . 7 9 48" C C P INV : 7 9 7 . 2 2 FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFO 60" C C P INV : 7 9 6 . 3 7 "V" C H A N N E L : 796 . 5 5 SA N MH 1 SA N MH 3 SA N MH 4 SA N MH 5 SA N MH 6 SA N MH 7 SA N MH 8 SA N MH 9 ST M MH 1 ST M MH 2 ST M MH 3 ST M MH 4 ST M MH 5 ST M MH 6 ST M MH 7 ST M MH 8 ST M MH 9 ST M MH 1 0 P/ L P/ L P/LP/L P/L P/L OV E R A L L G R A D I N G P L A N DRAWING NO. DRAWN BY: DATE: PROJECT NO: CHECKED BY: APPROVED BY: NO. REVISION DATE BY SHEET NO.: PA R K L A N D T O W N E C E N T E R MU S K E G O , W I S C O N S I N 15577 GRADING.dwg www.thesigmagroup.com 1300 West Canal Street Milwaukee, WI 53233 Phone: 414-643-4200 Fax: 414-643-4210 TH E G R O UPSingle Source. Sound Solutions. CJS 11-24-15 15577 JBL JBL Fi l e : I : \ E N E R C O N \ 1 5 5 7 7 _ N e w P a r k l a n d M a l l \ 0 6 0 C A D \ C - C i v i l \ 5 0 0 P r o d u c t i o n - C i v i l P l a n s \ 5 0 5 - G r a d i n g P l a n \ 1 5 5 7 7 G R A D I N G . d w g C 200 GENERAL NOTES: 1. THE UNDERGROUND UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING IS BASED ON FIELD LOCATIONS AND/OR RECORDS FURNISHED BY MUNICIPALITIES AND UTILITY COMPANIES. THE LOCATION AND ACCURACY OF WHICH CANNOT BE GUARANTEED. THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL UNDERGROUND UTILITY INSTALLATIONS WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA THAT ARE NOT SHOWN. 2. VERIFY ACTUAL LOCATIONS AND INVERTS IN THE FIELD. ANY POTENTIAL ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR DISCREPANCIES SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH CONSTRUCTION. 3. WORK TO BE COMPLETED IS INDICATED IN BOLD TYPE LINES AND EXISTING CONDITIONS ARE INDICATED BY LIGHT TYPE LINES. 4. ELECTRONIC CIVIL FILES ARE AVAILABLE UPON WRITTEN REQUEST. DO NOT USE ELECTRONIC CIVIL FILES TO LAYOUT FOUNDATIONS, COLUMN LINES, LIGHT POLES, OR OTHER NON CIVIL SITE WORK. REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR DIMENSIONS OF BUILDING AND ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES. 5. DIMENSIONS ARE FROM FACE OF CURB OR EDGE OF PAVEMENT. 6. WORK WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO DRIVEWAY OPENINGS, SIDEWALK AND RAMPS, PAVING, AND CURB AND GUTTER SHALL BE COMPLETED PER MUNICIPAL AND/OR COUNTY REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS. 7. EARTHWORK SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. 5 5 EXISTING CONTOUR PROPOSED CONTOUR LEGEND: PROPOSED CURB & GUTTER SPOT GRADE T/C: TOP OF CURB GRADE FL: FLOW LINE CURB GRADE PROPOSED ASPHALT SPOT GRADE100.00 100.50 T/C 100.00 FL GRAPHIC SCALE 00 50' 100' THE UNDERGROUND UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THIS MAP IS BASED ON FIELD MARKINGS AND INFORMATION FURNISHED BY UTILITY COMPANIES AND THE LOCAL MUNICIPALITY. WHILE THIS INFORMATION IS BELIEVED TO BE RELIABLE, ITS ACCURACY AND COMPLETENESS CANNOT BE GUARANTEED. PRELIMINARY A C401 CURB & GUTTER (ACCEPT) A C401 CURB & GUTTER (REJECT) B C4015" THICK CONCRETE WALK C C401 ASPHALT SURFACE (HEAVY DUTY ) PROPOSED STORM INLET PROPOSED STORM MANHOLE PROPOSED SANITARY MANHOLE C C402 A C402 B C402 JANESVILLE RD LA N N O N D R . STORM WATER BASIN HWL=805.54 NWL=800 STORM WATER BASIN B C403 E C403 REINFORCED TURF MATTING C C403 30' WATER UTILITY EASEMENT 30' WATER UTILITY EASEMENT 30' UTILITY EASEMENT 30' WATER UTILITY EASEMENT 40' UTILITY EASEMENT A C403 REPLACE EXISTING PATH AS NECESSARY OVERLAND FLOW PATH PROPOSED FUTURE PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED FUTURE PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED FUTURE PROPERTY LINE REINFORCED TURF MATTING C C403 REPLACE MANHOLE COVER WITH TEMPORARY GRATE. REFER TO STORM STRUCTURE TABLE ON SHEET C402. REPLACE MANHOLE COVER WITH TEMPORARY GRATE. REFER TO STORM STRUCTURE TABLE ON SHEET C402. P/L P/L P/L P/L P/ L P/ L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/LP/LP/LP/LP/LP/LP/LP/LP/LP/LP/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L P/L PROPOSED FUTURE GROCERY (30,000 SF) FFE = 809.00 PROPOSED FUTURE COMMERCIAL (12,000 SF) FFE: 811.80 PROPOSED FUTURE COMMERCIAL (4,000 SF) FFE = 811.80 PROPOSED FUTURE COMMERCIAL (7,500 SF) FFE = 808.87 PO O L 9 PROPOSED BUILDING 21,600 SF FFE = 809.00 P / L P/L P/ L P/LP/L P/L P/L P/L P / L T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T W W W W TT E E E E W W W W W SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N W G G W E T T T T T T T T E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E T T T T T T T T G SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA S A N S A N ST ST W W E G SA N G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G ST ST ST ST ST ST ST S T ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST ST STSTSTSTSTSTST ST ST X CTV T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T 12" C M P INV : 8 0 5 . 4 5 12" C M P INV : 8 0 4 . 9 0 12" C M P INV : 8 0 4 . 8 8 12" C M P INV : 8 0 4 . 7 9 48" C C P INV : 7 9 7 . 2 2 FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFO 60" C C P INV : 7 9 6 . 3 7 "V" C H A N N E L : 796 . 5 5 SA N MH 1 SA N MH 3 SA N MH 4 SA N MH 5 SA N MH 6 SA N MH 7 SA N MH 8 SA N MH 9 ST M MH 1 ST M MH 2 ST M MH 3 ST M MH 4 ST M MH 5 ST M MH 6 ST M MH 7 ST M MH 8 ST M MH 9 ST M MH 1 0 P/ L P/ L P/LP/L P/L P/L >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > EXISTING STORM TO BE REUSED > > > W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N SANSANSAN SA N SA N SA N SA N SA N W W SANSANSANSAN > > EXISTING STORM TO BE REUSED 10 . 0 ' > 12 5 ° ' 84° ' UT I L I T Y P L A N DRAWING NO. DRAWN BY: DATE: PROJECT NO: CHECKED BY: APPROVED BY: NO. REVISION DATE BY SHEET NO.: PA R K L A N D T O W N E C E N T E R MU S K E G O , W I S C O N S I N 15577 UTILITY.dwg www.thesigmagroup.com 1300 West Canal Street Milwaukee, WI 53233 Phone: 414-643-4200 Fax: 414-643-4210 TH E G R O UPSingle Source. Sound Solutions. TPM 12-4-15 15577 JBL JBL GENERAL NOTES: 1. THE UNDERGROUND UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING IS BASED ON FIELD LOCATIONS AND/OR RECORDS FURNISHED BY MUNICIPALITIES AND UTILITY COMPANIES. THE LOCATION AND ACCURACY OF WHICH CANNOT BE GUARANTEED. THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL UNDERGROUND UTILITY INSTALLATIONS WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA THAT ARE NOT SHOWN. 2. VERIFY ACTUAL LOCATIONS AND INVERTS IN THE FIELD. ANY POTENTIAL ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR DISCREPANCIES SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH CONSTRUCTION. 3. WORK TO BE COMPLETED IS INDICATED IN BOLD TYPE LINES AND EXISTING CONDITIONS ARE INDICATED BY LIGHT TYPE LINES. 4. ELECTRONIC CIVIL FILES ARE AVAILABLE UPON WRITTEN REQUEST. DO NOT USE ELECTRONIC CIVIL FILES TO LAYOUT FOUNDATIONS, COLUMN LINES, LIGHT POLES, OR OTHER NON CIVIL SITE WORK. REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR DIMENSIONS OF BUILDING AND ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES. 5. ALL UTILITIES WITHIN 5 FEET OF PAVED AREAS SHALL REQUIRE GRANULAR BACKFILL. SLURRY BACKFILL IS REQUIRED FOR ALL WORK IN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. 6. PRIVATE STORM INLETS IN PAVEMENT SHALL REQUIRE DRAIN TILE STUBS OF 10 FEET IN TWO DIRECTIONS FOR SUBDRAINAGE. RIM GRADE FOR STORM INLETS IN CURB AND GUTTER ARE FLOW LINE GRADES. 7. WORK IN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY SHALL FOLLOW MATERIAL AND INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS PER MUNICIPAL AND/OR COUNTY. 8. PRIVATE STORM SEWER 12-INCH DIAMETER OR LARGER SHALL BE HDPE. BELOW 12-INCH DIAMETER SHALL BE PVC SDR-35 ASTM D3034. PRIVATE WATER MAIN SHALL BE CLASS 150 DR 18 PVC CONFORMING TO AWWA C-900. PRIVATE SANITARY SEWER SHALL BE PVC SDR-35 ASTM D3034. 9. COORDINATE FINAL LOCATION AND DESIGN OF PRIVATE UTILITY SERVICES (ELECTRIC, GAS, PHONE, CABLE) WITH UTILITY COMPANIES. 10. FOR PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER PLAN AND PROFILE DESIGN REFER TO SHEET C301 AND C302. 11. FOR PUBLIC WATER PLAN AND PROFILE DESIGN REFER TO SHEET C303 - C305. W SAN > E T G PROPOSED WATER MAIN PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER PROPOSED STORM SEWER PROPOSED ELECTRICAL SERVICE PROPOSED TELEPHONE SERVICE PROPOSED GAS SERVICE Fi l e : I : \ E N E R C O N \ 1 5 5 7 7 _ N e w P a r k l a n d M a l l \ 0 6 0 C A D \ C - C i v i l \ 5 0 0 P r o d u c t i o n - C i v i l P l a n s \ 5 0 6 - U t i l i t y P l a n \ 1 5 5 7 7 U T I L I T Y . d w g LEGEND: C 300 GRAPHIC SCALE 00 50' 100' THE UNDERGROUND UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THIS MAP IS BASED ON FIELD MARKINGS AND INFORMATION FURNISHED BY UTILITY COMPANIES AND THE LOCAL MUNICIPALITY. WHILE THIS INFORMATION IS BELIEVED TO BE RELIABLE, ITS ACCURACY AND COMPLETENESS CANNOT BE GUARANTEED. PRELIMINARY ST EXISTING STORM SEWER PROPOSED STORM INLET PROPOSED STORM MANHOLE PROPOSED SANITARY MANHOLE C C402 A C402 B C402 PROPOSED WATER VALVE PROPOSED WATER HYDRANT UTILITY CROSSING 8" WATER INV: 798.28 6" SAN. INV: 800.81 UTILITY CROSSING 8" WATER INV: 798.27 8" SAN. INV: 800.24 UTILITY CROSSING 8" WATER INV: 798.65 15" STM. INV: 801.77 UTILITY CROSSING 8" WATER INV: 798.50 30" STM. INV: 800.41 UTILITY CROSSING 6" SAN INV: 800.75 15" STM. INV: 801.76 UTILITY CROSSING 12" WATER INV: 800.43 8" SAN. INV: 797.72 UTILITY CROSSING 8" WATER INV: 798.14 EX. 24" STM. INV: 800.89 UTILITY CROSSING 8" SAN INV:799.43 18" STM. INV: 803.55 UTILITY CROSSING 8" SAN INV: 798.52 12" STM. INV: 804.47 UTILITY CROSSING 8" SAN INV: 797.72 12" WATER INV: 800.43 40' UTILITY EASEMENT 30' WATER UTILITY EASEMENT 30' WATER UTILITY EASEMENT 30' WATER UTILITY EASEMENT 30' WATER UTILITY EASEMENT D C402 JANESVILLE RD LA N N O N D R . COORDINATE WORK WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY WITH THE PUBLIC ROAD IMPROVEMENTS . COORDINATE WORK WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY WITH THE PUBLIC ROAD IMPROVEMENTS . COORDINATE WORK WITHIN THE R.O.W WITH THE PUBLIC ROAD IMPROVEMENTS . UTILITY CROSSING 8" WATER INV: 797.78 24" STM. INV: 800.11 City of Muskego DOWNTOWN DESIGN GUIDE Prepared by: City of Muskego Planning Department, Community Development Authority, & The City of Muskego Plan Commission Amended on January 16, 2007 City of Muskego Downtown Design Guide ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Honorable Mayor John R. Johnson Common Council Council President Nancy Salentine, District 4 Alderman Tracy Snead, District 1 Alderman Chris Buckmaster, District 2 Alderman Neil Borgman, District 3 Alderman Bob Melcher, District 5 Alderman Tina Schaefer, District 6 Alderman Eileen Madden, District 7 Plan Commission Mayor John R. Johnson Alderman Chris Buckmaster Mr. Jerald Hulbert Mr. Michael Michalski Ms. Neome Schaumberg Mr. Russ Stinebaugh Mr. James Burke Planning Department Staff Jeff Muenkel AICP, Planning Director Adam Trzebiatowski, Associate Planner Tom Zagar, City Forester John Wisniewski, GIS Coordinator Sean Meehan, Planning/GIS Intern Matt Kulinski, Conservation Technician Kellie Renk, Secretary City of Muskego Downtown Design Guide RESOLUTION #P.C. 007-2007 APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO ALL CITY OF MUSKEGO DESIGN GUIDES TO BRING THEM INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CHAPTER 17 ZONING CODE REVISIONS AND CURRENT CITY POLICIES WHEREAS, The City of Muskego maintains seven (7) Design Guides in order to serve as a reference in guiding and reviewing future development for citizens, developers, and commissioners, and WHEREAS, There is a General Design Guide that applies to the entire City along with six (6) other area specific Design Guides that are unique to the character of each said area, and WHEREAS, The six (6) area specific Design Guides are as follows: Business Park, Downtown, Durham Hill, Historic Crossroads, Moorland Corridor South, and Racine Avenue Gateway, and WHEREAS, Said guides sets the minimum design standard for building, site, and operation plans that are to be submitted to the City for more complete and accurate Planning Staff and Plan Commission review, and WHEREAS, Said guides are prepared under the authority of Section 62.23 of the Wisconsin State Statutes and Chapter 17 of the City of Muskego Zoning Ordinance being deemed necessary to promote the public health, safety, morals and welfare of the City of Muskego, and WHEREAS, The guides require various updates due to policy changes and/or references to the new zoning code as per PC Resolution #004-2007. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, That the Plan Commission recommends approval of the proposed amendments to the seven (7) City of Muskego Design Guides. Plan Commission City of Muskego Adopted: January 16, 2007 Defeated: Deferred: Introduced: January 16, 2007 ATTEST: Kellie Renk, Recording Secretary City of Muskego Downtown Design Guide CITY OF MUSKEGO DOWNTOWN DESIGN GUIDE SECTION 1 - PREAMBLE 1.01 Authority 1 1.02 Purpose 1 1.03 Scope 1 1.04 Citation of Guide 1 SECTION 2 – GEOGRAPHIC AREA 2.01 Downtown 2 A. Area 2 B. Intent 2 SECTION 3 – DESIGN STANDARDS 3.01 General Requirements 3 A. Applicability 3 B. Buildings 3 C. Colors 3 D. Parking Areas 3 E. Landscaping 4 F. Signage 4 G. Lighting 4 H. Cross Access 4 I. Corporate Identity 4 SECTION 4 - ILLUSTRATIONS 4.01 Appropriate Development 5 SECTION 5 - COMPLIANCE 5.01 In Perpetuity 5 APPENDIX I Area Map 6 APPENDIX II Illustrations of Appropriate Designs 7 – 9 City of Muskego Downtown Design Guide 1 DOWNTOWN DESIGN GUIDE CITY OF MUSKEGO SECTION 1 PREAMBLE 1.01 AUTHORITY The Downtown Design Guide (Guide) is prepared by the Planning Department for adoption by the Plan Commission of the City of Muskego, and for transmittal to the Common Council of the City of Muskego, pursuant to Section 62.23 of the Wisconsin Statutes and Chapter 17of the City of Muskego Zoning Ordinance, and The City of Muskego Comprehensive Land Use Plan, deeming it necessary to promote the public health, safety, morals and welfare. 1.02 PURPOSE The general purpose of this Guide is to aide the Planning Staff and Plan Commission in the planning, design and re-design of the built environment of the Downtown area so as to enhance and unify its visual character while avoiding monotony and repetition. These standards will also assist in fostering sound, functional, attractive and quality development. The provisions hereof shall be liberally construed in favor of the City and shall be considered as minimum requirements for the Downtown area. 1.03 SCOPE It is not the intent of this Guide to repeal, abrogate, annul, impair or interfere with any existing easements, covenants, or agreements between parties or with the rules, regulations, or permits previously adopted or issued pursuant to laws: provided, however, that where this Guide in any way imposes greater standards than are required by other rules, regulations or permits or by easements, covenants or agreements, the provisions of this Guide shall be the guide. 1.04 CITATION OF GUIDE This Guide shall be cited as follows, e.g.: Downtown Design Guide, Section 1.04. City of Muskego Downtown Design Guide 2 SECTION 2 GEOGRAPHIC AREA 2.01 DOWNTOWN A. Area. The downtown areas shall be defined as those lands adjacent to Janesville Road, on the north and south sides, extending from Bay Lane on the east to Pioneer Drive on the west. The downtown area shall extend the depth of the parcels (See Map in Appendix 1.). B. Intent. This area is identified as offering a wide range of commercial activities and services in Muskego. It is the goal of this document to maintain the viability and improve and unify the visual aspects of the downtown area. The Downtown Design Guide Area falls within the adopted Redevelopment District #2 boundary area. The purpose of the Redevelopment Plan is to revitalize a declining urban area, spur reinvestment in the community, and to transform it into a better place to live, work and play. The Design Guide looks to promote the same characteristics as the Redevelopment District including, but not limited to, the following principles: • Enhance the image, profile, and use of downtown Muskego • Provide a new sense of place with a downtown identity • Demonstrate market driven principles that work within the economic landscape of Muskego • Provide the downtown area, and indeed the entire community, with an identity that adequately reflects the local quality of life and the affluence of City households • Promote the following types of uses: Design Character ¾ Traditional town center/modern ‘main-street’ ¾ Buildings squarely facing the street ¾ Buildings closer to street, parking behind ¾ Pedestrian scale – walkable, accented storefronts ¾ Taller building profiles – downtown centerpoint and landmark ¾ Variable roof-lines ¾ Transitional massing blending with surrounding architecture ¾ Sense of place/downtown identity Use Mix ¾ Possible upper end condos (professionals & ‘empty nesters’) ¾ Destination and convenience retail (no ‘big boxes’) ¾ Smaller floor plate retail ¾ Shared parking ¾ Multiple purpose trips ¾ Convenience Density ¾ Possible Mid-Rise heights: Somewhat higher than City norm ¾ Built in consumer market for downtown businesses ¾ Greater TIF revenues ¾ More efficient public services/utilities ¾ Interconnected activity centers ¾ Downtown anchor and landmark City of Muskego Downtown Design Guide 3 SECTION 3 DESIGN STANDARDS 3.01 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS A. Applicability. To advance the ideals as stated above, the following design standards are implemented in the defined area of the downtown. These standards shall apply to all development and re-development of business and multi-family properties within its boundaries. B. Buildings 1. Buildings shall be constructed to be harmonious with their natural and built surroundings while avoiding repetition and monotony. Building designs shall utilize materials which reflect a residential character. Brick exterior treatment is required. Materials such as decorative masonry and/or natural materials (i.e. stone work) must comprise up to 50% of the buildings exterior treatment; an exterior synthetic plaster system may be used as an accent material. The coloring of all brick, decorative masonry or stone shall be expressed as integral to the product and not painted on the surface of said product. Four-sided architecture will be mandatory within the Downtown District. 2. Upon a minimum of five affirmative votes of the Plan Commission members, designs which present variations on the standards expressed in Section 3.01.A.(1) may be permitted if it is found that: a. The proposed design sets an exceptional standard whose design, quality, longevity, durability and value will equal or exceed that which this document endeavors to promote b. The proposed design will not create substantial detriment to adjacent properties c. The proposed design will not establish an undesirable precedent. 3. A quality design which maximizes the value of the proposed project, while protecting or enhancing neighboring values is required. Four sided architecture which utilizes similar building materials and design for all sides of a proposed structure is required. New and innovative styles of architecture are encouraged and each design will be reviewed upon it’s own merit and how it fits in with the surrounding uses and structures. 4. Roof top mechanical installations shall be appropriately screened so as to block the view from adjacent streets and properties. Such screening shall match or compliment the overall theme of the building. 5. Outdoor storage of materials and commercial vehicles shall be strictly prohibited. Storage of vehicles or materials/supplies must be screened from surrounding view whenever possible. C. Colors utilized in the project design shall be non-florescent. Earth tones such as grays, greens, browns, burgundies, and tans are required. However, all proposed color schemes shall be reviewed on their individual merit based upon building design, building materials, longevity of the color choice(s) (fad/non-fad), statement in relation to overall theme, character and color of adjacent structures, mass/size of the proposed and adjacent structure(s), unity with existing structures on the project site. D. Parking areas shall be designed to avoid a "sea of asphalt" syndrome. The parking field in which the main activities of parking and travel are conducted shall have tree plantings at the minimum rate of one (1) tree for every ten (10) parking spaces. The perimeter of the parking field City of Muskego Downtown Design Guide 4 shall provide for a lawn area in which trees and shrubs will be planted so as to allow ample snow storage capacity yet avoid damage to plantings from same. Perimeter plantings shall be at the rate of a minimum of one tree and/or shrubbery grouping for every 50 lineal feet. E. Landscaping 1. Landscaping shall be designed to compliment the built and natural environment of the subject project and adjacent sites. Existing tree lines should be preserved. If removal of existing tree lines is required due to its undesirable nature, new plantings that result in no less of a screening effect shall be required when adjacent to residential uses. 2. Minimum specifications for landscaping are as follows: 2.5 inch minimum diameter measured six (6) inches above grade for deciduous trees; Six (6) foot minimum height for coniferous trees; 24 inch minimum height for shrubs; yard areas shall be sodded. 3. In addition to the guidelines expressed for parking areas in Section 3.01.C above, plantings shall be required around the foundation of buildings. The Plan Commission shall review the placement, numbers and sizes to determine appropriateness. 4. Final landscaping approvals are under the City Forester and other details as per the City Forester may be necessary. F. Signage 1. Signage shall be designed in unity with the building design through the use of the same or similar materials and colors. Ground or monument signs shall be strongly encouraged. Neon tubed accent lighting shall be strongly discouraged unless the same serves to accent an architectural feature of the building it is mounted on. 2. The base of all signs shall be landscaped with plantings. The landscaped area shall at a minimum equal the square footage of the sign face (per the Zoning Ordinance). 3. All other aspects of signage shall be in keeping with the requirements of the Sign Ordinance of the City of Muskego. G. Lighting shall be down cast, cutoff, sodium fixtures not exceeding 15 feet in height (including the light pole base and/or pedestal). Lighting shall be positioned so as not to cause glare on adjacent properties and streets (Maximum of 0.5 foot-candles at lot lines). At a minimum, site lighting marking the entrance to businesses and multi-family developments shall match or compliment that which may be chosen by the City as standard decorative street lighting. Bollards for pole lighting shall not exceed 6 inches above grade. H. Cross access to and between neighboring properties shall be implemented wherever possible. The goal in this requirement is to remove as much incidental, site to site traffic from Janesville Road thus reducing the possibility of traffic conflicts and accidents. Cross access drives may be either the interconnection of parking lots or the construction of a separate drive. In either case, the minimum drive isle width should be no less than 24 feet. When considering provision for cross access, the Plan Commission may allow decreased side and rear yard offsets for parking and drive areas but only if such decreases are a result of the provision of cross access. I. Corporate identity shall not be prohibited yet the Plan Commission shall not recognize same as the driving factor in the design of the facility. Corporate identity shall be apparent yet reserved in its display. The driving factor in the design of any facility shall be the criteria as expressed in this document. City of Muskego Downtown Design Guide 5 SECTION 4 ILLUSTRATIONS 4.01 APPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT In Appendix 2 of this document is a group of photographs which the Plan Commission of the City of Muskego have found to illustrate good and appropriate design, applicable to the downtown area. Appendix 2 is available in the Planning Office for public viewing. Copies of the Downtown Design Guide are also available in the Planning Office and online at http://www.gomuskego.com/planning. SECTION 5 COMPLIANCE 5.01 IN PERPETUITY Per the City of Muskego Zoning Ordinance, Compliance in Perpetuity is required in that "Any Building, Site and Operational Plan granted through the authority of this Section shall be perpetually binding upon the development to the extent that: all buildings and structures shall be maintained in a tasteful, safe and appropriate manner; all landscaping shall be periodically groomed and/or replaced when necessary; all drive, parking and pedestrian areas shall be kept in a safe and passable condition. All repairs and maintenance shall be executed in a timely manner". City of Muskego Downtown Design Guide 6 APPENDIX I City of Muskego Downtown Design Guide 7 APPENDIX II Example of Appropriate Material Types and Usage Example of Four-Sided Architecture Example of Four-Sided Architecture & Screening of Outdoor Storage City of Muskego Downtown Design Guide 8 Corporate Identity is Apparent but not a Driving Design Factor Pedestrian Friendly Design & Common Area Parking Lot Placement Behind the Building, Landscaping Treatments, and Pedestrian Access City of Muskego Downtown Design Guide 9 Upgraded Building Materials Upgraded Architectural Features & Accents