Another one bites the dust

Mayor Jeff Speaker is standing by while another Brookfield historical landmark is razed.

From the May 11th Plan Commission minutes: (This is long, but it’s all there.)

5. Stonewood Village Revised Plan and Method of Operation

The next item on the agenda was the request of 4 S, LLC, 418 E. Wisconsin Ave., Oconomowoc, WI 53066 represented by Mike Losik of Losik Engineering & Design Group, for revised plan and method of operation for the construction of a 4,482 square foot building, site improvements and future development phasing located at 17700 W. Capitol Drive.

Mr. Jason Williams, Neighborhood Planner, presented the following staff report: 1. The 8.05 acre site is zoned B-1 Local Business District and Modified Suburban Overlay Ordinance #1693. The subject site is located at the northwest corner of Capitol Drive and Beaufort Drive.

2. The applicant is requesting approval of a revised plan and method to construct a 4,482 retail store, make site improvements and create a phased master development plan for the overall property. Retail is a permitted use within the B-1 Local Business District.

3. Site Data:
Current Proposal
Lot Area: 350,658 (8.05 Ac.)
Buildings (existing): 34,949 sq. ft.
Building (demolished): -1,594 sq. ft.
Building (proposed): 4,482 sq. ft.
Building Total: 37,837 sq. ft.
Floor Area Ratio (max): 30.0%
Floor Area Ratio (prop): 10.8%
Parking (required w/new bldg): 190
Parking (existing): 205
Parking (proposed): 230
Parking Surplus: 40
Master Site Plan Proposal
Lot Area: 350,658 (8.05 Ac.)
Buildings (existing): 34,949 sq. ft.
Building (demolished): -1,594 sq. ft.
Building (proposed): 4,482 sq. ft.
Building Sub-Total: 37,837 sq. ft.
Buildings (future prop): 48,361 sq. ft.
Building Total (overall): 86,198 sq. ft.
Floor Area Ratio (max): 30.0%
Floor Area Ratio (prop): 29.06%
Landscape Surface Ratio (min): 30.0%
Landscape Surface Ratio (prop): 42.2%
Parking (required): 431
Parking (existing): 205
Parking (proposed): 230
Parking Deficit: 201

4. Site Design
The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing farm house located along Capitol Drive and construct a new two-story retail building within the Stonewood Village complex.

Additionally, the applicant is reconfiguring the parking lots to provide more convenient parking and access to tenant space and create a more organized parking pattern throughout the site. As the site is developed today, the property owner exceeds parking requirements and will continue to do so with the addition of the 4,482 square foot building. However, at full build-out of the proposed master site plan the property will not provide enough parking stalls. The applicant is proposing approximately 230 parking stalls for the entire development; the minimum required number of stalls per the proposed additional building square footage would be 431 parking stalls, a deficit of 201 stalls.

Code grants authority to the Plan Commission to allow a reduction in the required parking ratio if the applicant provides a parking analysis that supports such reduction. The applicant will need to submit a parking analysis to support this reduction in parking ratio and revise the site plan to show a full parking calculation table that breaks down required parking and proposed parking for each individual land use allowed per code.

Per the Site Development Standards for Non-Residential Uses, all boundaries or edges of parking lots should be curbed to protect landscaped areas from vehicle damage. The property owner should revise the proposed site plan to show curbing and incorporate phased curbing improvements into the master site plan.

The applicant will be updating landscaping by installing street yard landscaping along Capitol Drive and Beaufort Drive.

Per Chapter 17.52.020 (b), a reduced offset for pavement or buildings is allowed if the property owner installs a 10-foot wide landscape buffer consisting of a combination of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs installed and maintained to a minimum height of 12 feet. The western leg of the property line that is adjacent to the residential condominium development will need to comply with this code provision. The current landscape plan shows trees and shrubs ranging in height from 3 feet to 9 feet in height.

5. Architecture
There are 9 existing buildings, including the original farmhouse, located within the Stonewood Village development, all of which represent turn-of-the-century “farm style” architecture. The original intent of this development was to create a series of buildings that were inspired by and matched the architecture of the existing farm house and its accessory buildings.

The existing farmhouse is designated as “Local Outstanding” in the Brookfield Historic Inventory Update December 2008. The ranking of “Local Outstanding” signifies the ability or likelihood of a historic building to obtain nomination to the National Register of Historic Places. In the Historic Inventory conducted in 1993 the farmhouse was listed as “Local Notable” which indicates a less significant ability to obtain nomination. Therefore from 1993 to 2008, there has been a greater degree of historical significance placed on this farmhouse.

The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing farmhouse and construct a new two-story retail building in a different location of the site. The architecture of this new building creates a unifying appearance with the existing buildings of the site. The owner’s vision for Stonewood Village includes future buildings to match this architectural style. Tonight’s approval is for the single proposed building; all future proposed buildings and uses will come back before Plan Commission and Common Council for approval.

Materials being proposed include face brick, wood fascia and posts, cement board and vision glass.

Mr. Williams said staff recommends approval of the revised plan and method subject to the following:
1. Statements of Operation dated April 6, 2009 by Michael Schutte.
2. Site Plan dated March 31, 2009 by Losik Engineering and Design Group revised to show parking calculations and meter and transformer locations and subject to final staff approval.
3. Master Site Plan dated March 31, 2009 Losik Engineering and Design Group subject to final staff approval and incorporated into a development agreement.
4. Building elevations by SLMaher Architectural Group dated October 31, 2008 revised to show HVAC location and screening, and subject to final staff approval.
5. Landscape Plan dated December 8, 2008 by Garland Alliance Landscape Architects, subject to staff approval. Landscape plans to be secured with the posting of a Letter of Credit (using City forms available from the Community Development Dept.) equal to $83,193.75 ($2,550 per 1,000 sq. ft. street yard) for installation, $16,115.00 for 4 years of maintenance* ($440 per 1,000 sq. ft. street yard) and a temporary 4-year easement* for street yard maintenance (using City forms available from the Community Development Dept.) all deposited with the Community Development Dept. prior to issuance of a building permit (9,463.75 sq. ft. street yard). (* = 3 years after expiration of installation Letter of Credit). Installation Letter of Credit released only after letter of compliance (as-built) of installation is filed with the Community Development Dept. and approved.
6. Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control Plan dated March 31, 2009 by Losik Engineering and Design Group,
subject to technical corrections and final approval of the City of Brookfield Engineering Division prior to the issuance of building permits. The developer of the project will be required to submit Items A, B, and C below before the issuance of a building permit:
A. A copy of the approved Grading and Drainage Plan, as approved by the City of Brookfield Engineering
B. The bid from a contractor reflecting the cost of executing the work required on the Grading and Drainage Plan.
C. A letter-of-credit in compliance with the City letter-of-credit format deposited with the Department of Community Development. The monetary amount of the letter-of-credit shall be equal to 110% of the
submitted bid. (City form available from the Department of Community Development)
D. A recertification “as-built” survey must be performed by a licensed, professional engineer or surveyor
indicating that all elements of the approved Grading and Drainage Plan have been completed within tolerances as approved by Staff per the approved plan. The recertification documents must be wet stamped and signed by the professional.
E. The letter-of-credit will be released by the Department of Inspection Services after the recertification documents are submitted to the city of Brookfield Engineering Division and approved.
7. Installation of fire protection measures as required by the Fire Department prior to issuance of a building permit. Fire lanes shall be provided prior to the placement of combustible materials at the building site, or the construction of any portion of a building or facility above the footing and foundation
8. Payment of applicable fees to the Community Development Department prior to issuance of a building permit.
• Wetland Fee: $40.34
• Bikeway Fee: $192.53
9. Signage approval separately by Plan Review Board.
10. Plan and method of operation approval expires on May 11, 2010 unless a building permit is obtained prior thereto.
11. Once a building and erosion control permit is issued by Inspection Services, the owner shall receive an occupancy permit by eighteen (18) months for one (1) building or the owner of the property may be subject to the penalty provisions of the Zoning Code, Section 17.100.130 or the owner shall remove construction equipment and debris from the site, fine grade and seed the site , and stabilize surface water drainage leaving the site to City Engineering Department specifications per an approved grading plan by eighteen (18) months or the owner of the property may be subject to the penalty provisions of the Zoning Code – Section 17.100.130. The above shall be included in the project’s Development Agreement (if required) (Ordinance #2134-08) or a completion schedule.
12. Submittal of a Development Agreement that incorporates master site plan phasing, architectural compatibility, utility issues and other site development issues for approval by Plan Commission and Common Council prior to issuance of building perm and resolve the following matters as part of the impending Development Agreement before a building permit will be issued:
a. The parking supply requirement ratio for the center should be 4/1,000 sq. ft. GLA as the center is a
“specialty shopping center” per City code or as established by the Plan Commission on May 11, 2009 per acceptance of a parking analysis dated May 7, 2009. Attach analysis as exhibit to Development Agreement.
b. The design of the decorative island in the front drive needs to be approved by the Fire Department to be assured that emergency vehicles can pass through safely and operationally.
c. The water system including upgrades and decision on ownership needs to be resolved.
d. New or remodeled buildings that will be located closer than 40 feet to another building or structure must be fire suppressed, with such suppression supplied by a sufficient water pressure and volume.
e. The trip generation provided suggests that a TIA may be needed. Discuss with City Engineering if the existing TIA for the area can be refined for this need. A cost allocation for street/signal improvements is to be established by the Board of Public Works for this commercial property along with other benefitting property owners in the area. Contribution by Stonewood to be________________. (as established.)”

Mr. Josh Pudelko, Losik Engineering, and Mr. Sean Maher, SLM Architecture, were present to answer questions.

Mayor Speaker asked if they would be adding fire suppression measures to the new building(s). Mr. Pudelko and Mr. Maher said they would. There are several issues with the water supply at the Stonewood Village complex.

Commissioner Wahlgren asked if fire suppression would be required by code. Mayor Speaker said maybe not but adding new buildings among existing buildings might be prudent. Fire Marshall Dennis Hibbard said that constructing new buildings in the Stonewood Village center would place them closer to existing buildings and fire suppression could offset any added risk. Fire Marshall Hibbard said there is precedent for requiring sprinkling in other developments. Mayor Speaker noted that including fire suppression in new construction would cost less than retrofitting.

Commissioner Wahlgren asked if public water would be installed into the shopping center. Mr. Jeff Chase said the site is served by public water, but the existing water mains are private. The issue is the reliability and integrity of those water mains. There is a history of problems with water on this site. Mr. Chase added that the developer and the City have not ironed out the scope of ownership as of yet. Mr. Ertl said those details would be included in the Development Agreement.

Mr. Maher said the first proposal to the Plan Commission was for one building, and the Plan Commission asked them to come back with a master plan for Stonewood Village. He noted that the planned buildings for the east and west sides of the complex would be moved forward towards Capitol Drive, with parking in the rear. The road that will connect the east and west sides will have a round-about feature in the middle to help break up the building mass and promote a village concept.

The historical building on the site will either be moved or razed. The developer is talking with the Elmbrook Historical Society to see if moving the building is a viable project. If the building is razed, they hope to be able to re-use materials from the building.

Mayor Speaker asked if the same type of siding will be used on other new construction as on the first building proposed. Mr. Maher said right now there is an eclectic blend of building materials on the various buildings. New buildings will have the same type of cement board. If renovation of existing buildings becomes necessary, they will use the newer materials.

Commissioner Wahlgren asked what Phase I would include.

Mr. Pudelko said Phase I would include reconstruction of select sidewalks and walkways within the existing village, installation of the new through-drive and parking linking the existing east and west parking lots through the front of the site, and construction of one new building. They have proposed, as part of Phase I, reconstruction of the existing sanitary sewer to accommodate the new building.

Commissioner Wahlgren asked if re-construction of the water main and sanitary sewer at this point would be sized to accommodate all future development.

Mr. Chase said the phasing of utility installation proposed by the applicant is significant, and the Engineering Department supports full build-out of services on this site. There will have to be discussions between the applicant and the City regarding this issue. Mr. Pudelko said they have tried to phase utility installation so the center can stay active at all times and won’t have to be shut down while water and sewer are being installed. Mr. Chase noted the development needs to meet current standards and they will work with the
applicant on the utility issue.

The applicant distributed a shared parking analysis prepared for the Stonewood Village area by Losik Engineering (available in the City Clerk’s Office). This analysis “builds upon the assumption that different land uses have different peak periods of operation, so spaces can be shared between the different land uses during different peak periods. This allows for the project as a whole to provide fewer spaces than would be required if
the project land uses were treated separately with individual parking demands.” The shared parking analysis presented concludes that the share parking concept will work for this site.

Commissioner Wahlgren said the parking analysis will have to be re-visited with future phases as additional structures with different uses are constructed.

Commissioner Donze agreed, and said she is overall willing to accept the analysis for now, but if there are deviations, the analysis will have to be revised. She asked if the proposed traffic patterns are workable for emergency vehicles. Fire Marshall Hibbard said the proposed improvements will help.

• Commissioner Wahlgren moved to approve the revised plan and method subject to the conditions listed above, stipulating that the Fire Department requirements have to be satisfied and the utility issues resolved. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Wartman and passed unanimously.

Notice that not one of the plan commissioners’ questions had to do with the historical value of the building being razed. Not even Mayor Jeff Speaker.

The original development managed to respect the building. What happened? Capitol Heights. When the current owner saw how much Vince Kuttemperoor got away with on that project, he vowed to develop his parcel across the street to a similar density.

The Council will vote on this tomorrow night. Of course, it will pass. Still, it might be a good idea to contact your alderman if you are opposed to the plan.

Bye, bye Brookfield. It’s been good to know ya.


  1. That would be the old Beringer farmhouse, if I read the 1940’s plat-map correctly.