Plan commission approves pre-petition conference for Sendex grocery expansion amid traffic and parking concerns

The Whitefish Bay Plan Commission voted Monday to approve a pre-petition conference that clears the way for a Planned Development District application to expand the Sendex grocery at 500 East Silver Spring Drive.

The action advances a preliminary concept that would replace the existing store with a two-story building, reconfigure parking and nearby streets, and add streetscape improvements; commissioners emphasized the vote authorizes further review and public hearings, not final zoning.

Kelsey, the village planner, told commissioners the pre-petition stage is a ‘‘smell test’’ to determine whether the concept can move forward and where significant changes would be needed, noting that a favorable recommendation would let the applicant file a full submittal with engineering, landscaping and architectural details. The applicant, Nick Baliseri, identified himself as “a third generation grocer” and said the family has operated the site since the late 1940s and wants to modernize the store while keeping it open during construction.

Architect Ryan Thomas outlined the proposal as a two-story, predominantly glass and brick building with roughly 36,000 square feet on the first floor and about 38,000 on the second, rooftop access for service, and a mix of customer-facing and production spaces upstairs. The team proposed streetscape work including curb replacements, pedestrian bump-outs, a narrower but managed travel way with a landscaped median, and a reconfigured parking layout that the project’s materials estimate at about 187 spaces total (119 on-site plus roughly 68 on adjacent streets).

Traffic consultant John Berts (TDY) said the project and reconfigured drives meet the warrants for signalization at the Silver Spring–Council intersection under DOT/county/municipal criteria and recommended coordinated signals. He also presented worst-case queueing estimates, noting peak hour back-ups could increase modestly in length but that signal timing and coordination can mitigate blocking of surrounding streets: “that intersection … does meet warrants for traffic signalation,” he said.

Village engineering and planning staff signaled general feasibility but flagged technical items for the formal submittal. Village engineer Mustafa Amir said engineering is “fine with it” from a technical standpoint but noted requirements for stormwater controls, easements for an existing water line, and ADA ramp work. Planning consultant Craig Hunner (Grafe) highlighted policy questions for the commission: high impervious coverage, whether on-street and off-site parking can be counted toward required parking, building placement relative to the Silver Spring Drive street edge, and specific architectural deviations the commission may or may not accept.

Residents who live on and around Bowmont Avenue and Bulmont raised multiple concerns during a lengthy public-comment period. Rhysa Gachok, speaking for Lacassa Condominium owners, said the association supports a new store but asked to be kept involved: “We support a new Sendex. We support a new store but also want to protect what makes this neighborhood highly desirable, pedestrian friendly, and unique,” she said. Neighbors questioned the plan to convert much of Bulmont to angled parking, warned that Bowmont is a short local street already used by parents and children, and asked how emergency vehicles and large delivery trucks will navigate the proposed layouts.

Several commissioners acknowledged the trade-offs between improving Silver Spring Drive for pedestrian safety and shifting traffic pressure onto short neighborhood streets. Commissioner comments repeatedly asked the applicant to explore a third access off Silver Spring to reduce Bowmont’s load, to further activate the lake-drive-facing façade for pedestrians, and to provide clearer loading-dock routing and construction-period parking solutions. The applicant said construction staging ideas under consideration include temporary valet, use of public lots and off-peak delivery scheduling; he estimated roughly 20–30 parking spaces might be usable during the most constrained construction phases.

Motion and next steps The commission’s vote approved the pre-petition conference recommendation, allowing the applicant to prepare and file a full PDD application that will be reviewed by the village board and then returned to the plan commission and the architectural review commission in August and later public hearings. The motion passed with verbal affirmations in the room; individual recorded tallies were not provided in the transcript.

What’s next If the plan commission’s recommendation stands, the applicant will submit full engineering, landscaping and architectural drawings for the village board and for public hearings (the village noted a tentative date of Aug. 18 for further review). Staff and consultants will require detailed stormwater, utility and parking-demand documentation as part of the formal submittal.