Hartford rezoning approved for self-storage project

Renderings of the self-storage buildings planned for 525 Kettle Moraine Drive in Hartford.

 

HARTFORD — Two actions were taken by the Common Council this week to help clear the way for a new self-storage business, planned for 525 Kettle Moraine Drive.

The council held public hearings for and then approved changing the future land use and the zoning of the property during its regular meeting Tuesday night; City Planner Justin Drew said changing the future land use had to be addressed first, because the zoning of a property could not be changed to something that does not align with the future use designations.

“It is currently shown for high-density residential development, and while that would be an appropriate use, it’s not something they (property owner Chris Goeman) is interested in,” Drew said.

Goeman, who owns Goeman’s Rapid Mart-Car Wash immediately south of 525 Kettle Moraine Drive, plans to develop the adjacent property as a self-storage business. According to a submission from Keller Incorporated, a planning and architecture firm connected to the self-storage project, Goeman plans to develop four boat, RV and self-storage buildings ranging from 10,000 to 12,000 square feet each on the 2.4-acre lot.

Submission documents to the city stated the project would begin this year with two of those buildings, if everything goes according to plan, with the third and fourth to be constructed at a later date based on market demand. The future land use and zoning changes were to designate the property manufacturing and warehousing, so such a self-storage building could be allowed there.

No members of the public spoke during either of the hearings, either for or against the changes. The Common Council discussed the matter briefly, and passed both items unanimously.

“I think it’s an appropriate use of the property at this point,” Alderman Joe Kohler said.

During the discussion, there were inquiries about the appearance of the buildings planned, and whether some form of screening would be required, as no details were presented on that. There is a residential area across the street from the location.

“Given its proximity to the residential area, we would want some form of masonry on that side, the visible side, as well as some landscaping,” Drew said.

Drew said the developers had not submitted a site plan for the project as of the meeting Tuesday. His understanding was they intended to complete it and submit after the Common Council had addressed the zoning.

As the developers’ documents stated they plan to begin work on the site this year, the site plan will likely be submitted soon.