Citizen Portal
Sign In

Franklin plan commission backs Costco rezoning, fuel station and site plan with conditions

6497201 · October 24, 2025

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Franklin City Plan Commission on Oct. 23 recommended rezoning and approved a conditional use, plan development overlay and site plan for a proposed Costco and fuel station at 2710 W. Drexel Ave., subject to conditions on parking, wetlands compensation and landscaping.

The Franklin City Plan Commission voted on Oct. 23 to recommend rezoning and to approve the related conditional use, plan development overlay (PDO) and site plan for a proposed Costco and fueling station at 2710 West Drexel Avenue (tax key 7869980003). The commission’s votes were unanimous among members present (5 ayes, 1 absent) on each action; the rezoning and the conditional‑use recommendation go next to the Common Council for final action.

The applications before the commission included (1) rezoning the development parcel from Business Park to BMU (Mixed Use) to permit retail use, (2) a conditional‑use permit to allow a fueling station with operating hours proposed at 6 a.m.–10 p.m., (3) a planned development overlay to modify multiple UDO standards (glazing, building orientation, signage, lighting, impervious coverage, parking and materials), and (4) a detailed site plan for the warehouse, fueling facility and parking layout.

Planning staff told commissioners the developer seeks roughly a 162,000–168,000 square‑foot warehouse building and an accompanying fueling facility on the northwest corner of Drexel Avenue and South 20th Street adjacent to Northwestern Mutual Way. The PDO asks for roughly a dozen waivers from BMU zoning standards including reduced glazing on some facades, alternative exterior cladding (concrete and metal panels in lieu of masonry), canopy signage for the fuel pumps, taller light poles, smaller landscape island sizes and an increase in parking beyond the UDO maximums. The applicant requested a parking baseline reflected in materials as either 875 stalls (or “35% whichever is larger” in one staff table) and in site materials as 868 stalls; staff and the applicant discussed that figure during the hearing.

Planning staff recommended approval with conditions. Key conditions recorded by the commission include: (a) requiring compensation for impacts to natural resources if the Army Corps of Engineers determines on‑site wetlands are federally regulated (the Army Corps jurisdictional determination remains pending), (b) requiring the applicant to submit a plant list and use primarily native species for landscape compensation, and (c) allowing the PDO to include an administrative waiver for the requested parking increase (the commission voted to include that waiver in the PDO). The site‑plan resolution that the commission approved includes a finding that the wetlands meet UDO requirements only if they are determined to be non‑federal.

Members of the public raised traffic and lighting concerns during the three public hearings. Pat Reedy, a nearby resident, asked whether a traffic‑impact analysis had considered cut‑through traffic into adjacent condominium streets; the applicant and the civil engineer said they completed a traffic impact analysis reviewed by Wisconsin DOT and county and city traffic consultants and told the commission their analysis projects about 75% of site trips arriving and departing on Drexel from the east, with low percentages projected to use neighborhood cut‑through streets. Brent Pitcher, the civil engineer for the project, explained at the hearing that stormwater basins are counted as impervious in the applicant’s impervious‑coverage request, which contributed to the 85% maximum the PDO asks to permit.

Neighbors also asked about light pole heights. The applicant explained the proposed taller poles (36.5 feet in materials) reduce the number of poles and produce more uniform parking‑lot lighting; they said fixture selection and aiming will be used to limit light spill beyond property lines and that canopy lighting at fuel pumps will be recessed. The applicant told the commission that EV charging is not proposed at opening, but that operators monitor regional EV adoption and may add chargers in the future.

Costco’s real estate director, Steve Cross, and engineering representatives from Grama answered technical questions at the podium. Planning staff repeatedly noted that some review items remain administrative (plant lists, lighting details) and that the PDO cannot itself override any federal or Army Corps jurisdictional requirements for wetlands.

Votes at the meeting record the commission’s recommendations and approvals: a motion recommending rezoning passed by roll call (5 ayes, 1 absent); a motion recommending conditional‑use approval for the fueling station with conditions passed by roll call (5 ayes, 1 absent); a motion creating the PDO with the added modification to waive the usual parking‑compensation requirement passed by roll call (5 ayes, 1 absent); and a site‑plan resolution approving the development passed with conditions that future plantings be native species and that wetlands be handled per UDO if deemed non‑federal (5 ayes, 1 absent).

What happens next: the rezoning and conditional‑use items will go to the Franklin Common Council for final action. Several technical items — the plant list, final lighting plan (foot‑candle diagrams), and the Army Corps jurisdictional determination — remain to be resolved by staff or by the applicant in future submittals.

"This application meets the ordinance standards as drafted," a planning staff member said during the presentation, adding that a number of the requested deviations are incorporated into the proposed PDO. Costco’s representative said the design choices—materials, orientation and lighting—reflect their operational model and efforts to work with staff on enhanced elevations. A nearby resident said she feared increased cut‑through traffic into Villa Drive and requested additional assurances about traffic management and neighborhood impacts.

The commission’s action advanced the project while leaving multiple technical reviews and the council vote as the next public steps.