Monday, March 31, 2008
Don't Forget to Vote
As RAG would say, don't vote, don't bitch!....and I agree, although you can write in whoever or whatever you want if you don't like any of the candidates.
Saturday, March 22, 2008
Here We Go Again with Cul-de-sac Variance!
The Village once again will put forward another variance to the 800 foot cul-de-sac requirement to the Village Board. As I stated in a previous blog (click here), variances, in the Village's own words, are supposed to be one-time items.
These are questions that I had Jean Werbie read into the record during The Orchard cul-de-sac variance and related Temporary cul-de-sacs:Will the temporary cul-de-sacs face the same 800 feet from an arterial street (like The Orchard) restriction/ordinance as permanent cul-de-sacs? If so, will they have to gain variances for each one?
My main concern was more related to the fact that a subdivision could build 100 homes and be at full build, have three entrances with two in place and one that ends in a temporary cul-de-sac (for example, Tobin Creek but I see Cove will connect soon and I believe fourth entrance was nixed that was to connect to Southshore). The ordinance requires a minimum of three access points for safety, traffic etc., if greater than 80 homes. According to what was discussed, the above situation could be in place for 20 years or more. Does that make sense? I know that it is unlikely but look how long PTW has been that way. That's why I was looking for something more defined as far as a timeframe.
VILLAGE OF PLEASANT PRAIRIE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that there will be a PUBLIC HEARING before the VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES of the VILLAGE OF PLEASANT PRAIRIE, Kenosha County, Wisconsin, at the Village Municipal Building, 9915 39th Avenue on the 21st day of April, 2008 after 6:30 P.M. of said day, to consider the following:The Village of Pleasant Prairie will be conducting a Public Hearing for the request of Mark Eberle, P.E. of Nielsen, Madsen & Barber, S.C. agent for Louis and Krystyna Tricoli, owners for a variance from Section 395-60 C of the Land Division and Development Control Ordinance to allow for a cul-de-sac street to be greater than 800 feet from the nearest intersection for the proposed 20 single-family lot subdivision generally located south of 104th Street at 22nd Avenue to be known as Paradise Lake.The subject properties are located in a part of the Northeast One Quarter of U.S. Public Land Survey Section 25, Township 1 North, Range 22 East and in a part of the Northwest of U.S. Public Land Survey Section 30, Township 1 North, Range 23 East in the Village of Pleasant Prairie and further identified as Tax Parcel Numbers 92-4-122-251-0050, 93-4-123-302-0560 and a part of 93-4-123-302-0101.ALL PERSONS INTERESTED MAY BE HEARD AT SAID TIME AND PLACE. Formal petitions regarding this matter may be submitted at this meeting.Dated this 20th day of March 2008.Published April 7th, 2008.
These are questions that I had Jean Werbie read into the record during The Orchard cul-de-sac variance and related Temporary cul-de-sacs:Will the temporary cul-de-sacs face the same 800 feet from an arterial street (like The Orchard) restriction/ordinance as permanent cul-de-sacs? If so, will they have to gain variances for each one?
My main concern was more related to the fact that a subdivision could build 100 homes and be at full build, have three entrances with two in place and one that ends in a temporary cul-de-sac (for example, Tobin Creek but I see Cove will connect soon and I believe fourth entrance was nixed that was to connect to Southshore). The ordinance requires a minimum of three access points for safety, traffic etc., if greater than 80 homes. According to what was discussed, the above situation could be in place for 20 years or more. Does that make sense? I know that it is unlikely but look how long PTW has been that way. That's why I was looking for something more defined as far as a timeframe.
VILLAGE OF PLEASANT PRAIRIE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that there will be a PUBLIC HEARING before the VILLAGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES of the VILLAGE OF PLEASANT PRAIRIE, Kenosha County, Wisconsin, at the Village Municipal Building, 9915 39th Avenue on the 21st day of April, 2008 after 6:30 P.M. of said day, to consider the following:The Village of Pleasant Prairie will be conducting a Public Hearing for the request of Mark Eberle, P.E. of Nielsen, Madsen & Barber, S.C. agent for Louis and Krystyna Tricoli, owners for a variance from Section 395-60 C of the Land Division and Development Control Ordinance to allow for a cul-de-sac street to be greater than 800 feet from the nearest intersection for the proposed 20 single-family lot subdivision generally located south of 104th Street at 22nd Avenue to be known as Paradise Lake.The subject properties are located in a part of the Northeast One Quarter of U.S. Public Land Survey Section 25, Township 1 North, Range 22 East and in a part of the Northwest of U.S. Public Land Survey Section 30, Township 1 North, Range 23 East in the Village of Pleasant Prairie and further identified as Tax Parcel Numbers 92-4-122-251-0050, 93-4-123-302-0560 and a part of 93-4-123-302-0101.ALL PERSONS INTERESTED MAY BE HEARD AT SAID TIME AND PLACE. Formal petitions regarding this matter may be submitted at this meeting.Dated this 20th day of March 2008.Published April 7th, 2008.
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Abbott, Takeda to divide TAP drug seller
Check here. According to story, Abbott will "evenly divide the value" of the joint venture. Abbott will take over the TAP office building in a Lake Forest office park once the deal closes in 30 to 60 days.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Update--Catholic Bookstore Issue
From Kenosha News:
- Postponed a proposed zoning change that had angered the owner of the Holy Family Catholic Bookstore, 9249 Old Green Bay Road. The change would make property designations there match the village's comprehensive land use plan. But it also would decrease chances of selling the bookstore property, the owner has said. Village staff is to review the owner's concerns before bringing the matter back to the board. The village Plan Commission had approved the change, 5-2.
Not sure why the review because Village staff has already reviewed owner's concerns. That's why the redid the I1 designation to include more business types. I'm glad for the delay though and I still think Village should keep his B2 but restrict through non-conforming or something like that.
- Postponed a proposed zoning change that had angered the owner of the Holy Family Catholic Bookstore, 9249 Old Green Bay Road. The change would make property designations there match the village's comprehensive land use plan. But it also would decrease chances of selling the bookstore property, the owner has said. Village staff is to review the owner's concerns before bringing the matter back to the board. The village Plan Commission had approved the change, 5-2.
Not sure why the review because Village staff has already reviewed owner's concerns. That's why the redid the I1 designation to include more business types. I'm glad for the delay though and I still think Village should keep his B2 but restrict through non-conforming or something like that.
Monday, March 17, 2008
Anyone Tried Sam Adams Utopias Beer?
Truly the epitome of brewing's two thousand year evolution, Samuel Adams Utopias® offers a flavor not just unlike any other beer but unlike any other beverage in the world. Its warm, sweet flavor is richly highlighted with hints of vanilla, oak and caramel. With an alcohol content of 27% by volume, its complexity and sweet, malty flavor is reminiscent of a deep, rich vintage Port, fine Cognac or aged sherry while being surprisingly light on the palate. And like the world’s finest after-dinner drinks, Samuel Adams Utopias is not carbonated and should be served at room temperature.
In one of many examples where Samuel Adams Utopias pushed the boundaries of beer into the realm of other fine beverages, it received the highest recommendation (96-100 points) from the prestigious Wine Enthusiast Magazine (November, 2003 edition).
Due to legal restrictions, Samuel Adams Utopias is not offered in the states of Alabama, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, South Carolina, Washington, or West Virginia.
In one of many examples where Samuel Adams Utopias pushed the boundaries of beer into the realm of other fine beverages, it received the highest recommendation (96-100 points) from the prestigious Wine Enthusiast Magazine (November, 2003 edition).
Due to legal restrictions, Samuel Adams Utopias is not offered in the states of Alabama, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, South Carolina, Washington, or West Virginia.
Sunday, March 16, 2008
Anonymous Blogger
Friday, March 14, 2008
Property or Home Owner Association (POA/HOA) Meetings with Village
From January 7th, 2008 Village Board meeting. Comments from Trustee #3. Has there been any movement on this? I think this is definitely a great idea and much needed to enhance interactions between Village People and residential property owners. Just not sure of format as if more than one trustee present, I believe it would constitute an official quorum, but they have had special meetings like this in past with individual HOAs/POAs. I haven't heard any more about this at any of the Board meetings since this was first proposed.
"""Another idea I’d like to see, maybe discuss or brought up at the next Board meeting is maybe putting together, I don’t have specifics and my mind keeps changing on exactly how to do this, but I’d like to see some Village round tables set up with either here or contact the homeowners associations, go to them or invite them to come here, have meetings here or whatever need be. Have a series of topics. Per meeting you’d be able to say, one, if it’s with the associations that they could bring up their concerns, discuss them, address what they want to address. But if it’s a round table in general that’s not an association have several topics that are the topics of the evening or morning and discuss them, let them ask questions, comment, go through it thoroughly and then let them, the people that attend, submit ideas for what they want to see for topics for the next idea so it can cover what they want to hear. I think there would be something worthwhile discussing."""
"""Another idea I’d like to see, maybe discuss or brought up at the next Board meeting is maybe putting together, I don’t have specifics and my mind keeps changing on exactly how to do this, but I’d like to see some Village round tables set up with either here or contact the homeowners associations, go to them or invite them to come here, have meetings here or whatever need be. Have a series of topics. Per meeting you’d be able to say, one, if it’s with the associations that they could bring up their concerns, discuss them, address what they want to address. But if it’s a round table in general that’s not an association have several topics that are the topics of the evening or morning and discuss them, let them ask questions, comment, go through it thoroughly and then let them, the people that attend, submit ideas for what they want to see for topics for the next idea so it can cover what they want to hear. I think there would be something worthwhile discussing."""
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
David Rutter--Lake County News-Sun
AS I SEE IT Public utterings remain in orbit
March 8, 2008
You be the editor.
No, really.
You try it.
Let's see if it seems like a useful life's work to you.
You make the choices.
Let's say a mayor -- we'll call him Bonehead A -- utters something provocative, newsworthy, but arguably stupid. "Arguably" means it's true that he said it, but someone will want to argue about it. Count on the argument.
The first thing you learn in this job is that everyone wants to argue about everything, no matter how obvious the truth of it is.
And though you might do your utmost to understand why hizzoner is proposing something so assertively errant, he insists that's what he's saying, and he's sticking to it.
But that's not the end. Not hardly.
You know that once advisers around him hear what he's said, it's likely he'll come to whatever sense he has left and announce the next day that he never said it.
In the real world, you might call this a lie. In the realm of public policy, we call it "the being taken out of context" defense. It's the RU-486 pill of public discourse. It's meant to dislodge in the morning whatever was deposited during the previous evening.
So, Mister or Madame Editor, should you go ahead and tell the people who elected him what he's doing, just because someone once told you it's your job to do that? Or should you protect Bonehead A from his silly self?
And moreover, protect yourself from a liar-liar-pants-on-fire charge the next day?
I think it's generally more important to protect the citizenry from its zany elected officials than protect the officials from themselves, but that's just me. History suggests that's the wiser path to safeguard democracy, but public officials are not big on history. Or even democracy on most days.
As others have said, quoting an official with perfect accuracy can be the most effective punishment. But trust me, there's no need to trick or maneuver some public officials into making themselves look addlepated. They can do that on their own with no bidding. Mostly, you can't stop them. I've tried. They are a cussedly resilient lot.
You'll have just as much success lobbying an alcoholic to shun Michelob as you have telling a public official to settle down and think a little. Self-reflection is a rare trait.
But you'd be surprised how many people paid from public funds think it's somebody's full-time task to protect them from themselves. My job, I guess.
Yes, public officials get very agitated and dyspeptic when they are called to accounts. Or even quoted accurately.
Then there are quasi officials -- usually in the social service or sports arena -- who get upset when they are not saluted and rewarded for their good work, even when the question is not up for discussion at the moment. They are at the very epicenter of their universe and unlikely to move into a different orbit.
Apparently there is a deep craving for appreciation and public acclaim. It's the embodiment of Andy Warhol's prediction that the dawning Age of Aquarius would owe all of us 15 minutes of fame. But now it's 15 minutes of congratulations.
Maybe we're a society addicted to self-esteem strokes and, when they are late or unenthusiastically delivered, the anguish starts to bubble up. In the league of life, we now expect everyone to get a shiny first-place trophy.
This quest for fulfillment is a deity-bestowed right. Maybe protected in the 18th Amendment to the Constitution? I'm not positive on that one. Better look it up. Or we can just fight about it.
March 8, 2008
You be the editor.
No, really.
You try it.
Let's see if it seems like a useful life's work to you.
You make the choices.
Let's say a mayor -- we'll call him Bonehead A -- utters something provocative, newsworthy, but arguably stupid. "Arguably" means it's true that he said it, but someone will want to argue about it. Count on the argument.
The first thing you learn in this job is that everyone wants to argue about everything, no matter how obvious the truth of it is.
And though you might do your utmost to understand why hizzoner is proposing something so assertively errant, he insists that's what he's saying, and he's sticking to it.
But that's not the end. Not hardly.
You know that once advisers around him hear what he's said, it's likely he'll come to whatever sense he has left and announce the next day that he never said it.
In the real world, you might call this a lie. In the realm of public policy, we call it "the being taken out of context" defense. It's the RU-486 pill of public discourse. It's meant to dislodge in the morning whatever was deposited during the previous evening.
So, Mister or Madame Editor, should you go ahead and tell the people who elected him what he's doing, just because someone once told you it's your job to do that? Or should you protect Bonehead A from his silly self?
And moreover, protect yourself from a liar-liar-pants-on-fire charge the next day?
I think it's generally more important to protect the citizenry from its zany elected officials than protect the officials from themselves, but that's just me. History suggests that's the wiser path to safeguard democracy, but public officials are not big on history. Or even democracy on most days.
As others have said, quoting an official with perfect accuracy can be the most effective punishment. But trust me, there's no need to trick or maneuver some public officials into making themselves look addlepated. They can do that on their own with no bidding. Mostly, you can't stop them. I've tried. They are a cussedly resilient lot.
You'll have just as much success lobbying an alcoholic to shun Michelob as you have telling a public official to settle down and think a little. Self-reflection is a rare trait.
But you'd be surprised how many people paid from public funds think it's somebody's full-time task to protect them from themselves. My job, I guess.
Yes, public officials get very agitated and dyspeptic when they are called to accounts. Or even quoted accurately.
Then there are quasi officials -- usually in the social service or sports arena -- who get upset when they are not saluted and rewarded for their good work, even when the question is not up for discussion at the moment. They are at the very epicenter of their universe and unlikely to move into a different orbit.
Apparently there is a deep craving for appreciation and public acclaim. It's the embodiment of Andy Warhol's prediction that the dawning Age of Aquarius would owe all of us 15 minutes of fame. But now it's 15 minutes of congratulations.
Maybe we're a society addicted to self-esteem strokes and, when they are late or unenthusiastically delivered, the anguish starts to bubble up. In the league of life, we now expect everyone to get a shiny first-place trophy.
This quest for fulfillment is a deity-bestowed right. Maybe protected in the 18th Amendment to the Constitution? I'm not positive on that one. Better look it up. Or we can just fight about it.
New Social Sins Listed By The Vatican
Pollution is not just bad; it’s a sin, according to the Catholic Church.
The church has announced a new list of "social sins" to go along with the seven deadly sins that have been around for centuries. The new sins are a more modern concept of sinning created in the past 40 to 50 years. A Vatican official, who heads the office that issues decisions on matters of conscience, was asked by the Vatican newspaper what are the new sins. He cited creating poverty, excessive wealth, abusing drugs, polluting the environment, anonymous blogging and other social concerns. The church says that while sin used to concern the individual, today it has a social resonance due to globalization. Moral theologians stress that the Vatican official's comments broke no new ground on what constitutes a sin. Some catholic experts say the emphasis on the social sins could be a preview of issues Pope Benedict the Sixteenth will address during his visit to the united state next month.
The church has announced a new list of "social sins" to go along with the seven deadly sins that have been around for centuries. The new sins are a more modern concept of sinning created in the past 40 to 50 years. A Vatican official, who heads the office that issues decisions on matters of conscience, was asked by the Vatican newspaper what are the new sins. He cited creating poverty, excessive wealth, abusing drugs, polluting the environment, anonymous blogging and other social concerns. The church says that while sin used to concern the individual, today it has a social resonance due to globalization. Moral theologians stress that the Vatican official's comments broke no new ground on what constitutes a sin. Some catholic experts say the emphasis on the social sins could be a preview of issues Pope Benedict the Sixteenth will address during his visit to the united state next month.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Zoning change irks Catholic bookstore owner
From today's Kenosha News:
http://www.kenoshanews.com/article_comments/view_comments.php?articleNum=2668614
Pleasant Prairie move narrows future options for property
By Denise Lockwood PLEASANT PRAIRIE - The owner of a Catholic bookstore is upset because village officials want to change the zoning for his property. Wesley Ricchio, owner of Holy Family Catholic Bookstore, 9249 Old Green Bay Road, bought his property in 2002 in an area zoned to attract a variety of businesses. But in a 5-2 vote Monday, the Pleasant Prairie Plan Commission approved a proposal that would change Ricchio's zoning from one that allows a variety of businesses (B-2) to an institutional land use (I-1), which had recently been changed to also include religious book stores, medical clinics, banks, as well as institutional uses. John Braig and Donald L. Hackbarth cast the dissenting vote. If the Village Board approves the ordinance, it would bring the future use of the property in line with the village's comprehensive land use plan, which, per state law, has to be in place by 2010 and it would keep out any potential adult book stores.
But it would also restrict the types of businesses that could potentially move in if Ricchio were to sell. Even someone wanting to sell children's books need to get permission from the village to operate there. "The zoning change will have a negative impact on my property," he said. "The B-2 zoning offers more potential uses because it allows for more potential buyers." Some Plan Commission members had troubles with the decision, saying they "didn't feel right" about making the change, but staff lobbied for the change because the area would not be consistently zoned. Jan (sic) Werbie, the community development director for the village, said the property should have been included in an areawide rezoning, but it was an oversight that needed to be corrected. "We wanted to make sure that we were developing a certain type of character for this particular area of the community with respect to the other uses," she said. Werbie referred to the heavy residential area that surrounds the area, which did not want to see an adult bookstore going in, which would be an allowed use under the current zoning. She also told the Plan Commission that the land use plan changed because the village didn't want several large tracts of land serving as business districts that would be competing with one another. And that concerns Ricchio because the comprehensive land use plan in 2002 called for the area to be a business use." I understand their motive ... but my concern is that these land use plans keep changing," Ricchio said. "If they are so changeable, then what's to stop them from changing it nine years from now? "Ricchio lobbied to have the B-2 zoning when he purchased the property and even sunk $200,000 into the property between the land acquisition costs and updating the property at the request of village and state officials. Hackbarth asked if a business could move in that didn't fit the institutional use, if the zoning could be changed back to a business use. Werbie said staff would not recommend a zoning change. However, if a business similar to the Catholic bookstore would come forward, officials could evaluate that.
Your Comments
This proves it ... another GOOD reason for not living in PP.
hollydrMarch 11 - 02:04:01
Another example of Village is always right and you're wrong even when the Village changes their mind. Nobody has a backbone anymore and is willing to step out of their protective shell. Why not let him have his B2 with restrictions? Jean (not Jan) Werbie herself said that she can overrule and consider something else so why bother changing? I don't buy their reasoning. No exceptions? Anyone hear of a variance? The Village constantly allows variances from the procedures. This person followed the rules and then the Village changed them. This was the Village's mistake but they want a law abiding citizen who followed their rules to pay for it. Sound familiar? I'm sure this is a future lawsuit and you'll be seeing a lot more against the Village real soon.sov
http://www.kenoshanews.com/article_comments/view_comments.php?articleNum=2668614
Pleasant Prairie move narrows future options for property
By Denise Lockwood PLEASANT PRAIRIE - The owner of a Catholic bookstore is upset because village officials want to change the zoning for his property. Wesley Ricchio, owner of Holy Family Catholic Bookstore, 9249 Old Green Bay Road, bought his property in 2002 in an area zoned to attract a variety of businesses. But in a 5-2 vote Monday, the Pleasant Prairie Plan Commission approved a proposal that would change Ricchio's zoning from one that allows a variety of businesses (B-2) to an institutional land use (I-1), which had recently been changed to also include religious book stores, medical clinics, banks, as well as institutional uses. John Braig and Donald L. Hackbarth cast the dissenting vote. If the Village Board approves the ordinance, it would bring the future use of the property in line with the village's comprehensive land use plan, which, per state law, has to be in place by 2010 and it would keep out any potential adult book stores.
But it would also restrict the types of businesses that could potentially move in if Ricchio were to sell. Even someone wanting to sell children's books need to get permission from the village to operate there. "The zoning change will have a negative impact on my property," he said. "The B-2 zoning offers more potential uses because it allows for more potential buyers." Some Plan Commission members had troubles with the decision, saying they "didn't feel right" about making the change, but staff lobbied for the change because the area would not be consistently zoned. Jan (sic) Werbie, the community development director for the village, said the property should have been included in an areawide rezoning, but it was an oversight that needed to be corrected. "We wanted to make sure that we were developing a certain type of character for this particular area of the community with respect to the other uses," she said. Werbie referred to the heavy residential area that surrounds the area, which did not want to see an adult bookstore going in, which would be an allowed use under the current zoning. She also told the Plan Commission that the land use plan changed because the village didn't want several large tracts of land serving as business districts that would be competing with one another. And that concerns Ricchio because the comprehensive land use plan in 2002 called for the area to be a business use." I understand their motive ... but my concern is that these land use plans keep changing," Ricchio said. "If they are so changeable, then what's to stop them from changing it nine years from now? "Ricchio lobbied to have the B-2 zoning when he purchased the property and even sunk $200,000 into the property between the land acquisition costs and updating the property at the request of village and state officials. Hackbarth asked if a business could move in that didn't fit the institutional use, if the zoning could be changed back to a business use. Werbie said staff would not recommend a zoning change. However, if a business similar to the Catholic bookstore would come forward, officials could evaluate that.
Your Comments
This proves it ... another GOOD reason for not living in PP.
hollydrMarch 11 - 02:04:01
Another example of Village is always right and you're wrong even when the Village changes their mind. Nobody has a backbone anymore and is willing to step out of their protective shell. Why not let him have his B2 with restrictions? Jean (not Jan) Werbie herself said that she can overrule and consider something else so why bother changing? I don't buy their reasoning. No exceptions? Anyone hear of a variance? The Village constantly allows variances from the procedures. This person followed the rules and then the Village changed them. This was the Village's mistake but they want a law abiding citizen who followed their rules to pay for it. Sound familiar? I'm sure this is a future lawsuit and you'll be seeing a lot more against the Village real soon.sov
Friday, March 7, 2008
"More Permanent Temporary cul-de-sac"
This was the phrase used by Community Development Director Jean Werbie when describing a change to the ordinance related to Temporary cul-de-sacs. Should we change permanent cul-de-sacs to Temporarily Permanent cul-de-sacs? Too funny.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Sheridan Road Closed at 91st Street
In case you weren't aware, Sheridan Road is closed due to high water at 91st Street next to the Drive in. Not sure what County is doing about it. Illinois usually scraps up ice and piles dirt along road to stop flooding. There always seems to be water along Sheridan Road in that area year round. Not sure what the problem is but traffic diversion for such a main highly travelled stretch of road is not good.
FYI--Remember in one of my recent blogs where I stated what would happen if Hwy 165 was shutdown? Emergency traffic would have to go all the way to 91st or Russell Road to get to most homes in Carol Beach in a timely manner. Here's a situation where I hope nothing happens on Hwy 165.
FYI--Remember in one of my recent blogs where I stated what would happen if Hwy 165 was shutdown? Emergency traffic would have to go all the way to 91st or Russell Road to get to most homes in Carol Beach in a timely manner. Here's a situation where I hope nothing happens on Hwy 165.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)