Christensen said the topography of ….

Christensen said the topography of the area makes a 20 foot wide area impractical noting that it is a higher elevation than Cedar Street by between 5 and 6 feet and in order to install a driveway it would require lowering the ground level and having cut-back banks extending beyond the driveway.

“Twenty feet is an impractical width,” Christensen said.

Christensen noted that if the couple wanted to have the width be 70 feet, there would be no objection to subdividing the parcel because it also met the 10,000 square foot minimum lot size required for residential construction.

Commission member Greg Knight said he felt a 20 foot lot would become a headache for ingress and egress as well as garbage trucks and snow removal. Commission member Dave Zimmerman however compared it to an alley which typically is 16 feet wide with a 12 foot surfaced area.

Christensen noted that the typical road frontage in newer areas of the city is 125 feet wide.

“There is a reason we have it 70 feet,” said mayor Mike Wellner noting it was to avoid issues with snow removal and getting in and out. “I see longterm problems,” Knight said. Commission member Luke Dixon, who works in real estate, said he would see a lot of challenges with developing that lot. “I think it is a tough sale,” he said, noting the development costs such as the property owner cost of running utilities from Cedar Street to a building site or needing to get an easement from a property owner on Gibson Street to cross their property with utilities. “I think it is unrealistic,” Dixon said.

“I echo that sentiment. I don’t see this as a viable option,” Knight said.

Commission members then considered if they compromised to allow the request with a wider frontage of 30 to 35 feet. Christensen noted that the maximum driveway apron allowed in the city is 24 feet wide and said that would be plenty to get two cars side by side. “I am not saying it is a good idea or a bad idea,” he said.

Commission member Peggy Kraschnewski questioned the impact on fire protection and being able to access the lot with emergency vehicles. “I don’t think [Fire Chief] Mike Filas would be very happy to drive his ladder truck back there,” Christensen said.

Commission members continued discussing options for making it work until Knight questioned if it was their role to come up with solutions for the property owners. “Is that our job?” he asked.

He said he felt it was up to the property owners making the request to work with their own expert to come up with options that meet the code and then see if the city agrees or disagrees with it.

Wellner noted the property owner always has the option of taking their request to the zoning board of appeals if they disagree with the planning commission’s decision. “I could see a number of different options on what to do with that long, narrow property,” Knight said, adding he didn’t think it us up to the planning commission to come up with options.

Commission members voted to deny the conditional use permit as presented. This leaves the door open for the homeowners to come back with other options in the future.

In other business, commission members gave their final local approval for the Simek Addition at the south end of Pep’s Drive. This is land the city had originally purchased for potential industrial park development south of CTH O but is looking now to develop as a 30-lot single family home subdivision. City coordinator Joe Harris noted the city has already received interest from a number of prospective buyers looking at purchasing the lots. Any purchase would have the stipulation that the buyer would have to start construction within 18 months of the purchase. With the local approval, the plat goes to the Wisconsin Department of Administration for final approval.