6 30 26 Minutes only

Village of Holmen Planning Commission Minutes June 30, 2026 Village President Barlow called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:00 pm on Tuesday, June 30, 2026. Present were Commission Members Barlow, Kulcinski, Anderson, Appold, Kertis, Baird, and Reitzel; along with advisory members Administrator Heinig and Engineer Dahl. Kieth Brown, Tim Van Eijl, Tom Campbell, Tara Campbell, Mike Campbell, and Jeff Moorehouse were also in attendance. Public Hearings: Petition for Rezoning from (B-2) General Business District to (PUD) Planned Unit Development, to include corresponding SPAR (Site Plan Architectural Review) for Prestige Heights Apartments on the southwest intersection of Spakenburg Road and Staphorst Lane Motion by Anderson, seconded by Appold to open the Public Hearing. Carried 7-0. Administrator Heinig stated the proposal is to create PUD zoning district for 3-multifamily buildings. He stated that he received no communications either for or against the proposal prior to tonight’s hearing. No comments were made from the public during the Hearing. Motion by Appold, seconded by Kulcinski to close the Public Hearing. Carried 7-0. Approval of the April 28, 2026 minutes: Motion by Kertis, seconded by Reitzel to approve the minutes of the April 28, 2026 Meeting. Carried 7-0. Public Comment: None Agenda Items: Petition for Rezoning from (B-2) General Business District to (PUD) Planned Unit Development, to include corresponding SPAR (Site Plan Architectural Review) for Prestige Heights Apartments on the southwest intersection of Spakenburg Road and Staphorst Lane Motion by Kulcinski, seconded by Reitzel to recommend approval of Petition for Rezoning from (B-2) General Business District to (PUD) Planned Unit Development, to include corresponding SPAR (Site Plan Architectural Review) for Prestige Heights Apartments on the southwest intersection of Spakenburg Road and Staphorst Lane… Administrator Heinig stated the consideration is for 3-multifamily buildings to be constructed on the site at the corner of Staphorst Road and Spakenburg Road. A PUD creates specific zoning requirements for the proposed site improvements. The proposal locates the 3 buildings (38 residential units per structure, with a mix of one and two room units) around the perimeter of the parcel with parking and access in the middle. The proposed materials include a red brick masonry component, LP Smartside materials in blue, light blue, gray and black metal trim colors. The masonry components comprise 50% of the building exterior. The site will have a ground monument sign located on the northeast corner of the parcel. The garbage enclosure uses the same siding components used on the buildings. Signage is shown on the building in the meeting materials, but will need confirmation to determine if they intend to sign all of the buildings. The proposal provides 35 underground parking stalls per structure, and there is a total compliant number of stalls on the site in whole. The site stormwater is handled and treated on-site and overtops to the large Village stormwater pond to the west of the parcel. There will be a CSM to combine the 2 parcels to accommodate the finished site. He stated the landscape plan is well done with the bulk of the landscaping located around the buildings, and added that deciduous trees form around the perimeter of the combined parcels. The site’s parking lot pole lighting is down directed and SPAR compliant, but they didn’t specify the building mounted lighting. Lastly, he stated that the proposed use is a reduction of intensity compared to a B-2 use and that the Comp Plan allows for mixed uses in this area, thus the rezoning and proposal is Comp Plan compliant. Member Kulcinski asked if there were a specific designation for the residency such as 50+. Administrator Heinig stated there was not. Member Barlow asked if there was an owner’s representative present to answer the building signage question. The building signage is still undetermined. Member Kertis asked where is the nearest park to the site. Administrator Heinig stated that McGilvray park is located on Rotterdam Avenue just to the west of the site. Additionally, the larger Seven Bridges Park is located approximately 1 mile to the north and will be connected via multi use paths and sidewalks, with the traffic signals coming to Hwy. 35 in 2028. Motion by Reitzel, seconded by Kulcinski to amend the motion to recommend approval of the Petition for Rezoning from (B-2) General Business District to (PUD) Planned Unit Development, to include corresponding SPAR (Site Plan Architectural Review) for Prestige Heights Apartments on the southwest intersection of Spakenburg Road and Staphorst Lane to include administrative review and approval of the building signage and lighting. Carried 7-0. Amended Motion by Kulcinski, seconded by Reitzel to recommend approval of Petition for Rezoning from (B-2) General Business District to (PUD) Planned Unit Development, to include corresponding SPAR (Site Plan Architectural Review) for Prestige Heights Apartments on the southwest intersection of Spakenburg Road and Staphorst Lane. Finding that the petition has met the SPAR Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan Requirements for building design, building colors and materials, the overall landscaping plan, the overall stormwater plan, and the overall site requirements; with administrative review and approval of the final building signage and lighting. Carried 7-0. Possible action and recommendation on Annexation Petition from Mark Hein for 45.67 acres from the Town of Holland. Administrator Heinig stated the property is located south of Old Highway 93 and west of USH 53. The owner would like to annex his property for future development possibilities. Administrator Heinig stated the petition includes the adjoining USH 53 Right-of-Way and he fully recommends approval of the annexation petition, which has been found to be in the public interest by the State of Wisconsin, and is consistent with the Comp Plan and Holland Boundary Agreement. Motion by Kulcinski, seconded by Appold to recommend approval of the annexation petition from Mark Hein for 45.67 acres from the Town of Holland. Carried 7-0. Possible action and recommendation on Annexation Petition from Joshua and Lyndsey Neumann for 40 acres from the Town of Onalaska Administrator Heinig stated the 40-acre parcel for consideration is owned by the Neumann’s who also own the parcels to the west which were previously annexed for a residential subdivision. The Neumann’s are proposing to build their own home on this parcel and the parcel and they wish to do so in the Village of Holmen. Administrator Heinig stated he fully recommends approval of the annexation, which has been found to be in the public interest by the State of Wisconsin, and is consistent with the Comp Plan and Town of Onalaska Boundary Agreement. Motion by Kulcinski, seconded by Reitzel to recommend approval of the annexation petition from Joshua and Lyndsey Neumann for 40 acres from the Town of Onalaska. Carried 7-0. Possible action and recommendation on Annexation Petition from Timothy & Kimberly McGinnis for 32.44 acres from the Town of Holland Administrator Heinig stated the parcel is located east of Bluffview Court. The owner would like to construct a home on the parcel and they wish to do so in the Village of Holmen. He stated the parcel has limited development options due to the overall terrain, overhead electric easements, and access limitations. Access to the site will be permitted through an existing easement and will be connected via future development activity. The owner is aware of the limitations and has a suitable site for the home. Administrator Heinig stated he fully recommends approval of the annexation, which has been found to be in the public interest by the State of Wisconsin, and is consistent with the Comp Plan and Town of Holland Boundary Agreement. Motion by Kertis, seconded by Reitzel to recommend approval of the annexation petition from Timothy & Kimberly McGinnis for 32.44 acres from the Town of Holland. Carried 7- 0. Possible action on SPAR (Site Plan Architectural Review) Petition from Midwest Designs for a new Four-Unit Commercial Tenant Building on West Gaarder Road, South of Mc Donald’s Motion by Kulcinski, seconded by Anderson to recommend approval of the SPAR (Site Plan Architectural Review) Petition from Midwest Designs for a new Four-Unit Commercial Tenant Building on West Gaarder Road, South of McDonald’s… Administrator Heinig stated this proposal is a commercial structure on West Gaarder Road; west of Holmen Drive; south of McDonalds. He stated that the materials submitted for tonight’s review do not meet the required masonry percentage. To comply to the SPAR ordinance, it has been decided that the black siding components shown in the submitted drawings will be replaced with black brick components on the building. He pointed out that the specific layout of the building is being worked on as the tenant’s needs are finalized. Thus, building entrances and drive through locations will likely change for the final plan, and thus, the final exterior design will too. The ground monument sign to be located on the southeast corner of the parcel and the on-building signage will require administrative approvals once the tenant preferences are determined. The ground monument sign will require landscaping surrounding it. The dumpster enclosure uses the same materials as the building, but is located over the sanitary sewer interceptor’s easement. The location of the enclosure isn’t ideal, but is the only location on the site that works. The sewer easement needs to be acknowledged with the understanding that if the sewer needs to be worked on the dumpster enclosure will need to be relocated/reconstructed by the owner to accommodate. The parking is adequate for the zoned use and building square footage ratios. The landscaping plan is well done, with the only addition needed around the ground monument sign. The site-lighting and building mounted lighting is downward directed and SPAR compliant. Member Kertis asked if the drive thru location would conflict with the fire exits and access to/from the rear of the building. Administrator Heinig stated there was a walk-out area provided between the building and drive thru lane. He also pointed out that a bypass lane is provided around the building to improve flow around the the drive thru. Member Reitzel asked about drive thru order locations and signage for. Administrator Heinig stated that this isn’t yet known as the tenants will determine their final needs and he would review once submitted. Motion by Reitzel, seconded by Kulcinski to amend the motion to approve the SPAR (Site Plan Architectural Review) Petition from Midwest Designs for a new Four-Unit Commercial Tenant Building on West Gaarder Road, South of Mc Donald’s to include administrative review and approval of the aesthetic revisions to the building’s entrances and drive through, the replacement of the black siding components with brick components, architectural layouts upon final tenant agreements and needs, the necessary sewer easement for the trash enclosure, the finalized sign plans on the building, and the required landscaping around the ground monument sign. Carried 7-0. Amended Motion by Kulcinski, seconded by Anderson to recommend approval of the SPAR (Site Plan Architectural Review) Petition from Midwest Designs for a new Four-Unit Commercial Tenant Building on West Gaarder Road, South of Mc Donald’s. Finding that the petition has met the SPAR Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan Requirements for building design, building colors and materials, the overall landscaping plan, the overall stormwater plan, on-site lighting plans, and the overall site requirements; with administrative review and approval of the aesthetic revisions to the building’s entrances and drive through, the replacement of the black siding components with brick components, architectural layouts upon final tenant agreements, the necessary sewer easement for the trash enclosure, finalized sign plans on the building, and the required landscaping around the ground monument sign. Carried 7-0. Updates and other informational items from and before the Planning Commission: Member Baird asked what impacts the La Crosse County data center moratorium has on the Village. Administrator Heinig stated the County moratorium applies only to the unincorporated areas of the County. The moratorium doesn’t affect local controls and the Village is able to make its own determinations on any proposals that may come forward. Administrator Heinig stated there are potential items for the July agenda. Adjourn: Motion by Appold, seconded by Kulcinski to adjourn at 6:55 pm. Carried 7-0. Minutes prepared by Chris Dahl, Village Engineer.