1 27 26 Minutes only

Village of Holmen Planning Commission Minutes January 27, 2026 Village President Barlow called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:00 pm on Tuesday, January 27, 2026. Present were Commission Members Barlow, Kulcinski, Anderson, Appold, Kertis, and Baird; along with advisory members Administrator Heinig and Engineer Dahl. Member Anderson was excused. Travis Key as well as an architect from Dollar General were also in attendance. Public Hearings: None Approval of the November 18, 2025 minutes: Motion by Kertis, seconded by Kulcinski to approve the minutes of the November 18, 2025 Meeting. Carried 5-0. Public Comment: None Agenda Items: Possible action on SPAR (Site Plan Architectural Review) Petition for a new Dollar General Store located on Spakenburg Road (approximately .07 miles West of Staphorst Lane). Administrator Heinig stated that this is in the same location as was previously approved by the planning commission during the October meeting. He stated they are still planning to subdivide the parcel. The reason for the reconsideration tonight is that they discovered a scenic easement along the DOT ROW did not allow for the planned improvement. He stated that the proposed changes were significant enough to warrant a reconsideration. The store has now been rotated on the parcel with the storefront facing the entrance on Spakenburg Road. The resulting store is now a more traditional layout. He pointed out the dumpster location on the northeast corner of the parcel and stated it is currently proposed as wood which is not SPAR compliant, thus it will need to match the masonry components of the building, and must be resubmitted. Signage includes a ground monument that is located near the entrance on the southeast corner of the parcel and meets the SPAR requirements. There is also a front facing wall sign above the building’s entrance, which meets requirements. No signage is permitted in the rear of the building (facing Hwy. 35) because they are currently treating the rear of the building as a “non-street facing façade,” in that they have removed the roofline parapet (exposing the roof) and have altered the rear aesthetics, creating less decorative enhancements than a street facing façade would have (no lighting either). The SPAR Board discussed their openness to accepting this proposal since the submission does not have rear wall signage facing Hwy. 35 (they save money this way, but agreed that if they wanted rear signage facing Hwy. 35, they’d need to change the rear face of the building to look more like the front—a second street facing f açade). The rest of the building facades are done very well, with a mix of masonry brick (light grey and dark grey) with stone accents, with each (front, sides and rear faces) meeting the minimum masonry requirements. The building is very well designed overall and with the acceptance of the “rear facing façade” as a non-street face, there are no issues with the design of the building. The building’s front and sides include wall sconce lighting that will highlight the structure and the site in whole (there is no lighting on the rear). The proposed lighting is SPAR compliant and down directed with lighting on poles along the perimeter of the parking lot as well. They have placed the required landscaping along the street frontage and along the building. The landscaping is heavily weighted to the “rear” of the building as well. In total, the landscaping design concept is SPAR compliant and works very well. He pointed out that the entrance has a 1 entrance lane and 2 exit lanes. There is ample parking for the business use and proper access to the delivery and dumpster lane. Stormwater ponding existing on the east side of the lot and is sufficient for the development, with most all stormwater utilities on site directed to this location. The design of the entrance and sidewalk details will require modification to meet the Village Specifications (they currently are not acceptable). There are also issues with the drainage inlet being located in the entrance that will need to be addressed (this requires modification as well). He pointed out that the prior approval was contingent upon them providing utility connections for the lot created to the west of this parcel (the current submission does not show this requirement and that still must be met). Thus, these three utility/site design/access design issues must be addressed, as well as the modification to the dumpster enclosure, as conditions for approval, otherwise, this is a very well-done submission and will be an outstanding investment in our community. Motion by Kulcinski, seconded by Appold to approve the SPAR (Site Plan Architectural Review) Petition for a new Dollar General Store located on Spakenburg Road (approximately .07 miles West of Staphorst Lane) finding that the Petition has met the SPAR Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan Requirements for building design, building materials proposed, the overall landscaping plan, the overall stormwater plan and the overall lighting requirements contingent upon administrative approval of the required masonry components on the dumpster enclosure (must have the same decorative masonry as the building), a utility connection is provided to the subdivided parcel, modification to the inlet and/or driveway location to avoid each other, and providing a driveway entrance to meet Village requirements, including sidewalk. Motion Carried 5-0. Presentation from the La Crosse Area Planning Committee (MPO), on a new Safe Streets for All Plan Travis Key with the La Crosse County Planning Committee gave a presentation on the ongoing work the La Crosse Area Planning Committee is doing throughout the La Crosse metropolitan planning area. He highlighted the recent Safe Streets for All project stating the projects goals, outreach efforts, data gathered, collaboration, and end objectives. Updates and other informational items from and before the Planning Commission: Administrator Heinig stated there is a needed update to the La Crosse County Hazard Mitigation Plan scheduled for the February meeting. Adjourn: Motion by Kulcinski, seconded by Appold to adjourn at 6:38 pm. Carried 5-0. Minutes prepared by Chris Dahl, Village Engineer.