PCM19660503CITY PLAN COMMISSION a CITY OF MUSKEGO
MINUTES OF MEETING HELD MAY 3, 1966 CITY HALL
MAYOR GOTTFRIED ANNOUNCED THAT MR. CLARENCE DAHLBN, PRESIDENT
OF THE PARK & RECREATION BOARD, WAS AUTOMATICALLY APPOINTED PLAN COMMISSION MEMBER IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE STATUTES 62.23
(D) REPLACING MR. CLARENCE WALRATH WHOSE TERH HAD RECENTLY
EXPIRED.
MdYOR GOTTFRIED CdLLED THE MEETING TO ORDER AT 8:Os p. Me
pMsEf?Z: MdYOR JEROME GOTTFRIED; CHAIRMAN, WILLIAM CHASE, SEC'Y,
WILLARD BERTRAM, CHARLES BUEHLER, CLdRENCE DAHLEN, sb ROBERT LENTINI AND ED RdINANN. ALSO PRESENT WERE GERALD LEE, BUILDING
INSPECTOR, AND RUSSELL KNETZGER, CONSULTANT.
MINUTES: THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING, APRIL 19, 1966,
WERE APPROVED dS IfdILED.
BERNARD C. - MR. LINDNER, W136 S6468 SHERWOOD COURT,
dPPEdRED SEEKING APPROVAL TO DIVIDE A 5.97 dCRE PARCEL FROM
23.01 ACRES IN THE OF SECTION 3. MR. LINDNER SUBHITTED A
PRELININdRY PLOT PLdN, A SKETCH COVERING THE ORIGINAL 23.01
ACRES AND ZONING MAPS FOR THE COMMISSION'S REVIEW.
COLLEGE AvE., 418.48' FRONTAGE, AND THAT A 60' ROAD RESERVATION
THE COMMISSION NOTED THdT THE PROPOSED PARCEL ABUTTED
HAD BEEN INDICATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPOSED PARCEL. MAYOR GOTTFRIED MOVED THdT MR. LINDNER'S REQUEST FOR LAND
DIVISION BE APPROVED. MR. LENTINI SECONDED THE MOTION. THE COMMISSION REVIEWED AND STUDIED THE QUARTER-SECTION
MdP AND THE TOPOGRAPHY MAP. MR. CHASE SUGGESTED THAT THIS BE
REFERRED TO THE PLANNER FOR RECOMMENDATION FOR AN OVERALL PLdN
OF THE AREd SO THAT LOTS COULD BE CREATED IN CONFORMITY AND
ASSIMILd TED INTO BLOCKS. THE COMMISSION DISCUSSED WHERE d ROdD MIGHT BE CREdTED
ALSO TdKING INTO CONSIDERdTION THE dDJdCENT LINDEMdNN PROPERTY
AND RECENT LAND DIVISION OF GLENDON HILL. PLANNER KNETZGER
RECOMMENDED THdT THE ROdD RESERVATION WOULD BE MORE FEASIBLE
FOR THE AREA IF IT WERE ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PARCEL INSTEdD
OF ON THE WEST dS SHOWN. MR. CHdSE HOPED TO DEFER ACTION ON THE LINDNER REQUEST
FOR LARD DIVISION UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING dND THAT HR. LINDNER
BE CONTACTED TO DETERMINE IF HE HAS ANY DEFINITE PLANS FOR THE
ENTIRE AREA OWNED BY HIM AND IF SO SUGGEST THAT HE SUBMIT A
PRELIMINARY SKETCH OF HIS PROPERTY. MR. BERTRAM SECONDED THE
MOTION dND THE MOTION CARRIED.
PLdNNER KNETZGER ADVISED THAT HE WILL CONTACT MR. LINDNER
TO DETERMINE IF A ROAD RESERVATION WHICH WOULD NOT SHOW d
SPECIFIC AREA COULD BE OBTAINED.
AVE COU - MR. COUTURE APPEARED SEEKING APPROVAL FOR A
:EMPORAR?%N TO BE LOCATED IN FRONT OF THE DEVELOPMENT
CORP. OF AMERICA REAL ESTATE OFFICE, S74 W17076 JANESVILLE RD.,
AND SUBMITTED A SKETCH OF THE PROPOSED SIGN AND A PLOT PLAN OF
THE LOT. MR. COUTURE ADVISED THE COMMISSION THAT THE SIGN WOULD BE
8' x 7 6 IN SIZE AND LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 8' IN SETBACK FROM HIWAY 24 R. O.W. AND 45' FROM THE WEST BOUNDARY OF THIS LOT
~~~~ - I 11
(LOT SIZE 150 ' X 220'). AND TEMPORARY DUE TO ANTICIPATION OF
MOVING THE BUILDING WITHIN A YEAR. MR. LENTINI QUESTIONED IF THE SIGN WOULD OBSTRUCT THE VIEW
FROM THE DRIVEWAY ON THE ADJACENT PROPERTY AND MR. COUTURE ASSURED
THE COMMISSION THAT IT WOULD NOT. MR. BUEELER QUESTIONED IF HE INTENDED TO ILLUMINATE THE
SIGN AND MR. COUTURE ANSWERED THAT HE HAD NOT ANTICIPATED ANY
ILLUMINATION BUT THAT PERHAPS THEY WOULD USE A SINGLE FLOOD LIGHT.
MR. CHASE MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR A SIGN AS SUB-
MITTED FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR. MR. BUEHLER SECONDED THE HOTION
AND THE MOTION CARRIED.
OTTO KURTL - MR. OTTO KURTH, vi47 S7174 DURHAM DR., AND MR.
ARNOLD MAYER, REALTOR, APPEARED RELATIVE TO A RECENT 2 ACRE LAND
DIVISION REQUEST OF MR. KURTH'S PROPERTY IN SECTION 11. MR. KURTH ADVISED TEE COMMISSION THAT IT WAS HIS INTENTION
TO SELL 34+ ACRES OF HIS PROPERTY ON THE EAST SIDE OF DURHAM DRIVE TO MR. MAYER BUT THAT HE INTENDED TO KEEP 2 ACRES AND THE
BUILDINGS ON THE EAST SIDE OF DURHAK DRIVE AND 30 ACRES ON THE
WEST SIDE OF DURHAH DRIVE. HE ADVISED THE COMMISSION THAT MR. HARVIN NELSON WHO HAD APPEARED AT THE PLAN COMKISSION MEETING A
FOR A 2 ACRE LAND DIVISION WOULD NOW DEAL WITH MR. MAYER. MR.
KURTH ALSO ADVISED THAT IF THE PARK dc RECREATION BOARD WERE
PURPOSES, MR. MAYER WOULD BE INTERESTED IN SELLING.
BEFORE THE COMMISSION HAD BEEN REVIEWED AND THAT MR. MAYER IS
APRIL 4, 1966, WITH MR. KURTH IN CONNECTION WITH THE REQUEST
INTERESTED IN PURCHASING A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY FOR PARK
MR. BUEHLER MOVED TO ADVISE MR. KURTH THAT HIS APPEARANCE
REQUESTED TO BRING IN A PRELIKINARY PLOT INDICATING THE BOUNDA-
RIES OF THE PROPERTY HE IS PURCHASING. MR. DAHLEN SECONDED THE
MOTION AND THE MOTION CARRIED. THE COMMISSION REVIEWED SECTION VI€€ C. OF THE SUBDIVISION CONTROL ORDINANCE AND MAYOR GOTTFRIED ADVISED THAT HE WOULD
CONTACT ATTORNEY HIPPENMEYER REGARDING LOT FEES.
CORRESPONDENCE - THE RECORDING SECRETARY READ THE FOLLOWING LETTER
DATED APRIL 15, 1966, FROM CITY ATTORNEY HIPPENMEYER REGARDING
ILLEGAL DIVISION OF LAND:
(3)
e DEAR MAYOR GOTTFRIED:
THIS IS IN REPLY TO YOUR INQUIRY OF APRIL 12, 1966, AS TO WHAT
EITHER YOUR ORDINANCE OR STATE STATUTE, DIVIDE THEIR PROPERTY. THE ANSWERS, OF COURSE, ARE IN THE PENALTIES AS PROVIDED BY THE
LEGAL ACTION CAN BE TAKEN AGAINST PERSONS WHO, CONTRARY TO
STATUTES OR ORDINANCE.
THE :PENALTIES AND REHEDIES UNDER THE STATE STATUTES ARE COVERED
BY VIS. STATUTES 236.30, 236.31, 236.32 AND 236.335 AND PROVIDE
AS FOLLOWS:
236.30 FORFEITURE FOR IHPROPER RECORDING: ANY PERSON CAUSING HIS
FINAL PLAT TO BE RECORDED WITHOUT SUBMITTING SUCH PLAT FOR APPRO-'
VAL AS HERIN REQUIRED, OR WHO SHALL FAIL TO PRESENT THE SAKE
FOR RECORD WITHIN THE TIHE PRESCRIBED AFTER APPROVALJ SHALL FOR-
FEIT NOT LESS THAN $100, NOR HORE THAN $1,000 TO EACH MUNICIPA-
LITY, TOWN OR COUNTY WHEREIN SUCH FINAL PLAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN
SUBHITTED.
236.31 UES AND REMEDIES FOR TRANSFER OF LOTS WITHOUT RE-
-ED FLAT. (1 ) ANY SUBDIVIDER OR HIS AGENT WHO OFFERS OR CON-
236.02 (8) OR LOT ORPARCEL WHICH LIES IN A SUBDIVISION AS DE-
TRACTS TO CONVEY, OR CONVEYS, ANY SUBDIVISION AS DEFINED IN S.
@ FINED IN s. 236.02 (8) KNOWING THAT THE FINAL PLAT THEREOF HAs
NOT BEEN RECORDED HAY BE FINED NOT HORE THAN $500 OR IMPRISONED
NOT MORE THAN 6 HONTHS OR BOTH; EXCEPT WHERE THE PRELIMINARY OR
FINAL PLAT OF THE SUBDIVISION HAS BEEN FILED FOR APPROVAL
WITH THE TOWN OR HUNICIPALITY IN WHICH THE SUBDIVISION LIES,
AN OFFER OR CONTRACT TO CONVEY HAY BE HADE IF THAT OFFER OR
CONTRACT STATES ON ITS FACE THAT IT IS CONTINGENT UPON APPROVAL
OF THE FINAL PLAT AND SHALL BE VOID IF SUCH PLAT IS NOT APPROVED.
(2) ANY HUNICIPALITY, TOWN, COUNTY OR STATE AGENCY WITH SUB-
DIVISION REVIEW AUTHORITY MAY INSTITUTE INJUNCTION OR OTHER
APPROPRIATE ACTION OR PROCEEDING TO ENJOIN A VIOLATION OF ANY
PROVISION OF THIS CHAPER, ORDINANCE OR RULE ADOPTED PURSUANT
TO THIS CHAPTER. ANY SUCH HUNICIPALITY, TOWN OR COUNTY HAY
IHPOSE A FORFEITURE FOR VIOLATION OF ANY SUCH ORDINANCE, AND ORDER
AN ASSESSOR'S PLAT TO BE HADE UNDER S. 70.27 AT THE EXPENSE OF
THE SUBDIVIDER. OR HIS AGENT WHEN A SUBDIVISION IS CREATED UNDER
S. 236.02 (8 (B) BY SUCCESSIVE DIVISIONS. (3) ANY CONVEYANCE OR
CONTRACT TO CONVEY HADE BY THE SUBDIVIDER OR HIS AGENT CONTRARY
TO THIS SECTION OR INV0LVING.A PLAT WHICH WAS NOT ENTITLED TO
BE RECORDED UNDER s. 236.25 (2) SHALL BE VOIDABLE AT THE OPTION
OF THE PURCHASER OR PERSON CONTRACTING TO PURCHASE, HIS HEIRS,
PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OR TRUSTEE IN INSOLVENCY OR BANKRUPTCY
WITHIN ONE YEAR AFTER THE EXECUTION OF THE DOCUHENT OR CONTRACT
BUT SUCH DOCUHENT OR CONTRACT SHALL BE BINDING ON THE VENDOR,
HIS ASSIGNEE, HEIR OR DEVISEE.
236.32 FOR DIST- OR NOT PLACING NONU- ANY OF
THE FOLLOWING NAY BE FINED NOT NORE THAN $250 OR IMPRISONED NOT
MORE THAN ONE YEAR IN COUNTY JAIL:
(1) ANY OWNER, SURVEYOR OR SUBDIVIDER WHO FAILS TO PLACE
(2) ANY PERSON WHO KNOWINGLY RENOVES OR DISTURBS ANY SUCH
MONUKgNTS AS PRESCRIBED IN THIS CHAPTER WHEN SUBDIVIDING LAND.
KONUNENT WITHOUT THE PERHISSION OF THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE
NUNICIPALITY OR COUNTY IN WHICH TEE SUBDIVISION IS LOCATED OR
FAILS, TO REPORT'SUCH DISTURBANCE OR REMOVAL TO IT.
(3) FAILS TO REPLACE PROPERLY ANY PIONUHENTS WHICH HAVE BEEN
REKOVED OR DISTURBED WHEN ORDERED TO DO SO BY THE GOVERNING BODY
OF THE MUNICIPALITY OR COUNTY IN WHICH TEE SUBDIVISION IS LOCATED.
236.335 SU-G: FORFEIT. NO LOT OR PARCEL IN
A RECORDED PLAT SHALL BE DIVIDED, OR THEREAFTER USED IF SO DI-
VIDED, FOR PURPOSES OF SALE OR BUILDING DEVELOPKENT rF THE P.E-
SULTING LOTS OR PARCELS DO NOT CONFORM TO THIS CHltPTER OR ANY
APPLICABLE ORDINANCE OF THE APPROVING AUTHORITY OR TEE HULES
OF THE STATE BOARD OF HEALTH UNDER 5. 236.13. ANY PERSON NAKING
OR CAUSING SUCH A DIVISION TO BE HADE SHALL FORFEIT NOT LESS
THAN $100 NOR MORE THAN $500 TO THE APPROVING AUTHORITY, OR TO
TEE STATE IF THERE IS A VIOLATION OF THIS CEAPTER OR SAID RULES
OF THE STATE BOARD OF HEALTH.
PROVISION:
SECTION XIV. PENALTIES AND ANY PERSON, FIRK OR CORPOR-
ATION WHO FAILS TO COHPLY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE
SHALL, UPON CONVICTION THEREOF, FORFEIT NOT LESS THAN $25.00
NOR NORE THAN $200.00 AND THE COSTS OF PROSECUTION FOR EACH
VIOLATION, AND IN DEFAULT OF PAYNENT OF SUCH FORFEITURE AND COSTS
SHALL BE INPRISONED IN THE COUNTY JAIL UNTIL PAYNENT THEREOF,
BUT NOT EXCEEDING 30 DAYS. EACH DAY A VIOLATION EXISTS OR CON-
TINUES SHALL CONSTITUTE A SEPARATE OFFENSE. IN ADDITION, THE
REKEDIES PROVIDED BY SECTION 236, b/ISCONSIN STATUTES, SHALL BE
AVAILABLE TO THE CITY.
(NOTE) ALSO SEE SECTION IV.A. (1) AND (2).
I BELIEVE THE REAL QUESTION IS, HOW IS THE PROBLEM AVOIDED IN
THE FIRST PLACE RATHER THAN HOW SHOULD DHE OFFENDERS BE PUNISHED
AFTER THE VIOLATIONS HAVE OCCURRED. THIS, OF COURSE, IS A PUB-
LIC RELATIONS AND EDUCATIONAL JOB THAT COULD BE DONE BY NOTICES,
NEWSPAPER ARTICLES AND ADVERTISEHENTS AND CONFERENCES WITH THE
PERSONS HOST LIKELY TO SUBDIVIDE THEIR LAND. e SINCERELY,
/s/ RICHARD S. HIPPENKEYER
THERE WAS SONE DISCUSSION OF LETTERS BEING DIRECTED TO SUR- @ VEYORS AND LAND OWNERS ADVISING THEW THAT DIVISIONS NUST BE PRO-
CESSED THROUGH THE PLAN CONMISSION. IT WAS THE CONNISSION'S
DECISION THAT THIS INFORWATION BE INCLUDED IN THE NEXT CITY
NEWSLETTER TO THE CITIZENS.
JOHN SCHAEF 9 THE RECORDING SECRETARY READ THE FOLLOWING
CONNUNICATI%S REGARDING MR. SCHAEFER'S REQUEST FOR APPROVAL
OF A RESERVOIR AND DRAINAGE CHANNEL IN SECTIONS 13 k 14;
FROM PUBLIC SERVICE CONNISSION - DATED APRIL 22, 1966 GENTLEPIEN:
A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CONSERVATION DEPARTNENT INSPECTED THE JOHN SCHAEFER PROPERTY ON MUSKEGO LAKE IN SECTION 13, T5N, R20E, VAUKESHA COUNTY.
DITCH WHICH CONNECTED TO AN EXISTING DITCH ON HIS PROPERTY. THE
HAS A 1.5 INCH CULVERT UNDERNEATH. APPARENTLY MOST OF THE WATER
THAT FLOWS IN THIS DITCH NUST PASS TRROUGH THE CULVERT. AT THE
INCHES IN DEPTH AND THE WATER AT THE DAN WHICH HOLDS LAKE MUSKEGO
WASABOUT 4 INCHES ABOVE THE CREST OF THE DAN. APPARENTLY DURING
ON APRIL 15, 1966, AN ENGINEER FRON THIS DEPARTKENT AND
IT WAS FOUND THAT MR. SCHAEFER HAD CONSTRUCTED A POND AND
OLD EXISTING DITCH IS GENERALLY OBSTRUCTED BY A BUILDING WHICH
TINE OF INSPECTION, THE WATER DEPTH IN THE CULVERT WAS ABOUT 5
THE SUHMER XONTHS, TIIE WATER IS BELOW THE CREST OF THE DAN AND
WOULD, THEREFORE, BE BELOW THE INVERT OF THE CULVERT UNDER THE
BUILDING.
ON THIS BASIS, IT WOULD APPEAR THAT UNDER THE PRESENT
CIRCUMSTANCES MR. SCHAEFER COULD NOT PUNP WATER FROEI MUSKEGO LAKE FROM THE EAST SIDE OF THE BUILDING PREVIOUSLY NENTIONED
MR. SCHAEFER'S PROPOSAL TO PLACE TWO WATER CONTROL STRUCTURES:
DVRING THE SUHNER EVEN IF IT WAS HIS INTENTION. HOWEYER, IT IS
ONE BEING ON THE EXISTING DITCH AND ONE ON THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED
DITCH ADJACENT TO THEIR CONNECTION SO AS TO PROVIDE HIM WITH
CONTROL OF THE WATER. HE STATED THAT IT IS HIS INTENTION TO
DIVERT WATER WHICH IS PUMPED FROM HIS DRAIN TILE INTO HIS POND
WHICH WILL ACT AS A RESERVOIR FROM WHICH HE CAN PUMP DURING TIMES
WHEN HE NEEDS WATER FOR HIS FIELDS. HE DOES NOT INTEND TO TAKE
ANY WATER FROM MUSKEGO LAKE. IT IS OUR OPINION THAT THE PURPOSE OF THE NEW CANNELLING
AND DITCH IS AN AGRICULTURAL USE AND AS SUCH, IT IS EXENPTED
UNDER SECTION 30.19 (1 (Dl, STATUTES. WE BELIEVE THAT IF MR.
STATED AND ON THE BASIS OF WHAT WAS FOUND TO PRESENTLY EXIST,
SCHAEFER PLACES THE CONTROL STRUCTURES AND OPERATES THEM AS
NO WATER WILL BE DIVERTED FROM MUSKEGO LAKE. ON THE BASIS OF
THESE FACTS, MR. SCHAEFER APPARENTLY WILL NOT BE IN VIOLATION
OF EITHER SECTION 30. qa OR SECTION 30.19, WISCONSIN STATDICGS. ENCLOSED IS A copy OF THE STA'TUTES.
/s/ R. E. PURUCKER, CHIEF ENGINEER
I
(6)
FROM CONSERVATION DEPT. - DATED APRIL 26, 1966 DEAR MAYOR GOTTFRIED: WE HAVE JUST RECEIVED A CARBON COPY OF THE PUBLIC SERYICE
COHHISSION'S LETTER TO YOU DATED APRIL 22, 1966, ON THE HATTER OF
JOHN SCHAEFER'S PROPOSED DRAINAGE CHANNEL AND RESERVOIR IN SECS. 14 OR 13, TSN, R20E, ~AUKESHA COUNTY.
ON THIS HATTER. WE WERE AWARE THAT THE PUBLIC SERVICE CONHISSION YOUR APRIL 12, 1966, LETTER ASKS FOR A STUDY BY THIS OFFICE
PROMISED MR'. BREES AN INSPECTION OF THE PROJECT ON MARCH 29 AND
HOPED THAT WE COULD GET SUFFICIENT INFORHATION FROH THAT OFFICE. WE NOTE THE PUBLIC SERVICE CONHISSION INSPECTION FINDS THE WORKS
WILL NOT TAKE MUSKEGO LAKE WATER TO LOWER THAT LAKE'S LEVEL. THIS CONCLUSION ANSWERS HUCH OF THE CONCERN RAISED IN YOUR LETTER.
GOHHISSION LETTER TO ENABLE us TO EITHER APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE
PUBLIC SERVICE COHHISSION'S OPINIONS ON THE NONAPPLICABILITY
BY copy OF THIS LETTER, I AK INSTRUCTING OUR BIOLOGICAL
EARLY DATE AND REPORT ITS FINDINGS TO HE. WHEN I HAVE THAT
THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST IN THIS VITAL HATTER.
WE DO NOT FIND SUFFICIENT INFORMATION IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE
OF THE PROPOSAL NOR ARE WE ABLE TO AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THE
OF SECTIONS 30.16 OR 30.19, VIS. STATUTES.
ENGINEERING SECTION TO HAKE AN INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION AT AN
REPORT AT HAND, I WILL ADVISE YOU FVRTHER.
/s/ L. P. VOIGT, CONSERVATION DIRECTOR
IT WAS THE COHHISSION'S DECISION THAT HR. SCEAEFER BE ADVISED
THAT THE COMHISSION WILL NOT ACT ON THIS REQVEST UNTIL AFTER
RECEIPT OF THE REPORT FROM THE CONSERVATION DEPT.
PLANNER'S
-TION DESIU - PLANNER KNETZGER PRESENTED AN INTER-
HAD BEEN TERPIED A HAZARDOUS CORNER FOR TRAFFIC AT PREVIOUS PLAN CONHISSION HEBTINGS AND BROUGHT TO THE COXHISSION'S ATTENTION
BY TEE RECENT REZONING REQUEST OF FORREST PERKINS FOR THAT AREA. THE DESIGN SHOWED A CHANELIZED Y AND WOULD NOT PERHIT LEFT
HAND TURNS FROH COLLEGE AVE. TO MARTIN DR. AT THE INTERSECTION.
THAT HE WOULD DISCUSS THIS WITH THE COUNTY HIWAY COHHISSION.
SECTION DESIGN STUDY OF MARTIN DRIVE AND COLLEGE AVENUE WHICH
I1 II
THE COHNISSION REVIEWED THE DESIGN AND MAYOR GOTTFRIED ADVISED
FALTER C. GEIBEA - RELATIVE TO LAND DIVISION REQUEST OF? MR. GEIBEL IN SECTION 0 AND PROBLEH OF ESTABLISHING A ROAD TO
SERVICE THE PROPOSED LOTS, PLANNER KNETZGER RECOHHENDED A
PROPOSED ROAD TREATHENT - CONNECTING THE FOOT OF LOCHCREST BLVD. TO SHORE LANE BY RUNNING WEST TO SHORE LANE AND THEN
CUTTING SOUTH ACROSS THE SO' LOT OWNED BY ESTATE CLUB, INC. HE ALSO RECOHHENDED THAT THIS R. O.W. BE SO'. THE COPIHISSION
SECTION 6.
REVIEWED THE QUARTER-SECTION HAP AND THE TOPOGRAPHY HAP OF
(7)
GEIBELS'S APPARENT INABILITY TO OBTAIN THE TWO LOTS NEEDED
AFTER CONSIDERABLE DISCUSSION OF THIS PROBLEN AND MR.
FOR THE PROPOSED ROdD, IT WAS THE CONNISSION'S DECISION THAT MAYOR GOTTFRIED DIRECT d LETTER TO MR. GEIBEL dDVISING BIN THAT
BEFORE THE CITY COULD TdKE ANY ACTION RELATIVE TO THE R.0.W.
IN THE AREA, MR. GEIBEL WILL HAVE TO NdKE ADDITIONdL EFFORTS
TO CONTACT THE OWNERS OF THE LOTS IN QUESTION AND BE dBLE TO
GIVE TANGIBLE EVIDENCE TO THE CONMISSION THAT THEY HdVE BEEN
CONTACTED.
JExACo. & - PLANNER KNETZGER PRESENTED A COPY OF d LETTER
DATED MdRCH 11, 1966, DIRECTED TO TEXACO, INC., FROM THE DISTRICT
ACCESSES ON HIWdY 24 HAD XOT BEEN APPROVED. (THIS IN CONNECTION
WITH A RECENT CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR A SERVICE STATION
CHIEF OF RIGHT OF WAY ADVISING THEN THAT THEIR REQUEST FOR
ON THE CORNER OF TESS CORNERS DR. AND HIWAY 24, SAME DENIED)
1 - PLANNER KNETZGER
SUGGESTED THAT THE SIGN CODE AND SIGN CONTROL ORDINANCE BE RE-
VIEWED dND AMENDED. HE SUGGESTED THAT A COMMITTEE OF THREE BE
dSSIGNED TO REVIEW IT, ONE OF THE CONNITTEE TO BE THE BUILDING
INSPECTOR.
PROCEDURES SHOULD BE STdRTED. MR. CHASE NOVED THdT CHdIRNAN GOTTFRIED CONTACT THE FIRM
OF MAX ANDERSON TO NEET JOINTLY WITH THE CONNON COUNCIL dND
THE PLAN CONMISSION TO DISCUSS THE URBAN RENEWAL PROGRdN AND
APPLICATION PROCEDURE. FMR. RAINANN SECONDED THE NOTION AND
THE NOTION CdRRIEDa
PLANNER RNETZEER REQUESTED THE RECORDING SECRETARY TO ORDER
COPIES OF THE BOOKLET '%Re PLANNING CONHISSIONER" FOR THE
MEMBERS IT WAS THE COMMISSION'S DECISION THAT A LETTER BE DIRECTED
TO CLARENCE WALRATH THANKING HIN FOR PAST SERVICES AND WISHING
HIM A SPEEDY RECOVERY.
PLdNNER KNETZGER RETURNED THE NASTER ZONING NAP TO THE
CITY HALL ALONG WITH COPIES OF THE ANENDED ZONING NdP SHOWING
TWO AMENDNENTS - TECHNICON ~DIO GORP. IN SEC. 7 REZONED TO OIP
AND VALLEY DRIVE REZONED TO RS-3.
ABJQURNMENT - MR. ~IMANN NOVED FOR ADJOURNNENT, MR. BERTRdN
SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MEETING WAS dDJOURNED AT 70t.52 P.
RECORDING SECRETARY
5-6-66
Hon. Jerome J. G
City of Muskego
Box 34
Mukkeqo, Wisconsi'n
ott fr i ed, Mayor
Ceer Mayor Gott Fr i ed:
RE; It legal Division of Land
division as deficed in s. 73E..CZ'?.Cj e' I-: or sercel
whi:h Ites .n a subdivision as o~;rncd 13 3. 236.32 (?I
knowin,? that the f ina I plat thereaf has ret been rec'srdec
nav be fined not more than $5'00 ar irrpr i smed not more
than 6 months or both: except. whsre the oreiiminary or
final pl.at OF tRe subdivi3ion has been filed far spprovai
with the town or municipal~tv in whish +he subdivision
I i es, ar; of fer or con tract to convey may be made i'f that
offer or contract states on its face that it is contingent
upon approve I of the f inai p!st an2 sha I I be void if such
p!at is not aopro.,ed.
..
.
.I
..
i
"(2) Avy municipalitv, tcwn, cbuntv sr st3tr aq~ncy
uith subdivision review duthorit'f mav-(institute ln~unction
or other approprlate act ion CP proceedin? to ec-oin a
vin!aticr of any prqvision,jc'c,, thi,:,s eh.aoter, crdinance or -k
rule adopted pursua~t t3 th 5 cb'cotsr. A.p.y .such. muni-
I cipal itv, town or county maw hpo.se 9 for.fS;itgLF F.Qr .
violation of any such crdlnan'te, an.d ;jr-?g;.~ar):~~.ss~r's
olat to be made-under"s'. 7P.27' at th&g~@,~s&=~~a.,.,
suhd i v i der..pi-.,~i.b..3qent when) a?' subd I v 1,s I cn I s created
~nder 5. 2363(93-+8) (b) by g,uccess~ve di,visions.
Li
..
I ,. ..
! "(3) Anv conveyance or c3ntract to convey made by the
subdi.dider or his almt contrarpto this section or in-
volvin3 a plat which was not entitled to be recorded
under s. 235.25 (2) sba!I be vcirhhle at the ;:>tion cc
the purchaser or persc.: ccntr?ctin? to acrchas~, hi 5
heirs, pfrscnai representa7ive or trustee in ~nsulvencv
or bankruptcy within one year aftSr the execution of
the document or cogtract: but such document or contract
sha!l be binding on the vendGr,, his assiqnee, heir or
dev i see."
Any bi the io1 lovi~nq may Ee%ti5rre ihK-07-
"236.32 Penalty f';r distarbinc cr notpiacinr; monuments.
.-
I
I i\
!
(2).
3
OrwrLrarrr: