By Kevin Boneske
Staff Writer
ASHWAUBENON – When the Resch Expo is completed, the Green Bay Packers don’t want people on the second floor spying on practices at Clarke Hinkle Field.
But what’s proposed to prevent that from happening – a screen wall accessory structure – was recommended for denial Tuesday, May 5, by Ashwaubenon’s Site Plan Review Committee and the Plan Commission.
Zeise Construction, which applied for the site plan on behalf of the Packers, requested allowing an additional 14-foot high opaque metal screen wall accessory structure with concealed fasteners above the existing chain-link fence for a total of 22 feet in height along the north side of Hinkle Field.
Community Development Director Aaron Schuette said the green screen wall would be along Armed Forces Drive and extend from the Don Hutson Center west along Hinkle Field to the corner of the existing fencing at South Oneida Street.
Schuette said the wall would allow the Packers to “continue to hold closed practices without prying eyes looking at the field and watching the practices from the deck area of the Resch Expo.”
He said the material used for the wall would be similar to green steel found at Lambeau Field.
On the side of the wall toward the field, Schuette said there would be a platform area for team videographers to record practices.
“It is considered an accessory structure to the Hutson Center,” he said.
Trustee Gary Paul said he didn’t like the proposed screen wall at all.
“I don’t know why we need a solid wall with that height, just because (of) watching people practice football,” he said.
Craig Cornell of Zeise Construction said the Packers are “very concerned, as all NFL teams are, for the cheating that occurs that New England has been caught at doing often.”
“I guess, if everybody was honest, we wouldn’t have this problem,” he said.
Paul said he understands the problem with cheating in the NFL, but he didn’t like how the proposed wall looks and how it would spoil how a new expo center would look in the area.
Schuette said the possibility exists in the future for the wall to be used for some sort of artwork, etc., but that’s not being planned immediately.
When Cornell was asked about whether a temporary wall could be put in place instead of the one proposed, he said “structurally that would be challenging for the height required.”
“It would be much easier to put blinds on the structure across the road and darken the windows so that they could not see out of it,” he said in reference to the Resch Expo.
Cornell said the Packers would be agreeable to artwork added to a wall screen in the future.
“Maybe the village would like to see some sort of imagery on that structure that would be pleasing that they would be open to that type of discussion,” he said.
Village President Mary Kardoskee, who cast the lone committee vote against recommending the screen wall be denied, said she understands why the Packers need the wall.
“It’s a huge thing in the NFL for teams that send people and try to steal all this stuff that’s going on,” she said.
Though majorities on both the committee and commission recommended against the wall, Schuette said it will be up to the village board at its May 26 meeting to decide whether to approve it.