Decorah council rejects downtown elementary school site plan after hours of debate over safety, parking and process

The Decorah City Council voted down the Decorah Community School District’s site plan for a new downtown elementary school at 101 Claiborne Drive after an extended public hearing and lengthy council deliberations.

School officials and their consultants described a process following a nearly 67% bond approval and presented detailed design work, including sidewalks around the site, reconfigured storm sewer plans and two playground areas. Cindy, representing the district, said the plan “meets the needs of our teachers, staff, and meets what was promised in our school bond.” Patrick Albord of Confluence, the landscape architects and planners on the project, told the council the site includes widened sidewalks and a 14-foot path to move students safely from the southwest entrance and that proposed roundabout improvements at Hively/Claiborne should improve pedestrian access.

Opponents — including councilmembers who read email and public comment — raised repeated concerns about the site’s relationship to surrounding streets and downtown uses. Councilmember Emily said the primary entrance “is situated too close to the street resulting in poor visibility for pedestrians” and cited staggered driveways, parking that encroaches on city right-of-way and an incomplete stormwater maintenance plan as major safety and process deficiencies. Several councilmembers warned the current design adds a large number of parking spaces in an area that already has substantial parking and that some proposed stalls extend onto city right-of-way.

Staff and the Planning & Zoning Commission had recommended approval contingent on several technical items: a recorded easement for relocated storm sewer, conveyance or permission for parking that extends into right-of-way, sidewalk easements to allow public access, a detailed stormwater maintenance plan (including on-site detention and pipe conveyance details), and showing private fire hydrants/coordination with the State Fire Marshal and city standards. City staff emphasized that the stormwater plan needed to address discharge, grades and long-term maintenance.

After deliberation, a motion to approve the site plan with five contingencies failed on roll call (ayes: Chisel, Parker; noes: Zitter Gruen, Whittle, Neal, Missalinich, Olsen). City staff advised the district that it could (1) resubmit a substantially revised site plan, (2) re-present the same plan after January 1 when the council membership changes, or (3) ask a councilmember who voted no to move to reconsider at one of the next two meetings. The council also discussed the status of variances granted by the Board of Adjustment and the timeline for any potential legal challenge or reapplication. One council member noted that site-plan approval typically requires a building permit to be pulled within 180 days to remain valid; certain variances can remain valid for up to two years.

Councilmembers on both sides expressed eagerness to keep the project moving. Several said they were willing to meet quickly in a joint work session with district staff to try to resolve outstanding technical issues, while others said the current plan does not meet the city’s comprehensive-plan expectations for connectivity, walkability and public safety.

The vote leaves the school district to choose whether to revise the plan, pursue reconsideration, or refile at a later date. Either way, council members said they expect faster, more collaborative work if the plan is to return in a form likely to secure approval.