PCM19660719CITY PLAX COMMISSION CITY OF MUSKEG0 e MINUTES OF MEETING HELD JULY 1 9, 1966
CITY HALL
NAYOR GOTTFRIED CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER AT 8:57 P. M.
PRE:ENT: MAYOR JERONE GOTTFRIED, CHAIRMAN, WILLIAN CHASE,
SEC Y, WILLARD BERTRAM, S. ROBERT LENTINI, CHARLES BUEHLER
AND ED RAIMANN. RUSSELL KNETZGER, CONSULTANT, WAS ALSO
PRESENT.
ABSENT: CLARENCE DAHLEN AND BUILDING INSPECTOR LEE
MINUTES: THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS NEETING, JULY 5, 1966,
WERE APPROVED AS HAILED.
UNDER CHECKERWAY CHARTER COACH Bus LINES, ~RD PARAGRAPH,
PAGE 2, OF THE PREVIOUS KINUTES, PLANNER KNETZGER QUESTIONED
IF THE COMMISSION WAS AMENDING THE CONDITIONS SET FORTH
STATEMENT, IT WAS THE COMMISSION'S OPINION THAT PARKING
PROBLEM. IT WAS THE COMMISSION'S OPINION THAT THIS WAS
WHEN THE ORIGINAL CONDITIONAL USE WAS GRANTED BECAUSE OF THE
ll
CLOSER THAN 20' TO THE LOT LINE DID NOT ACTUALLY CREATE A II
a NOT AMENDING THE CONDITIONS.
WALTER HEINRICK - MR. HEINRICH DID NOT APPEAR IN REGARD TO
HIS LAND DIVISION REQUEST IN SECTION 27.
d
,FRANX AGENTEN - MR. FRANK AGENTEN, S72 Wl2487 TESS CORNERS DR., APPEARED WITH SURVEYOR TOM INMAN AND PRESENTED A
CERTIFIED SURVEY OF A TWO PARCEL LAND DIVISION IN SECTION 1. MR. AGENTEN ADVISED THAT HE WAS ONLY INTERESTED IN
SELLING 1/2 ACRE (PARCEL A) AND THE ADJACENT 1/2 ACRE (PARCEL B)
ON PARCEL A.
AGENTEN ADVISED THAT IT WAS HIS INTENTION TO RELOCATE THE
CREEK TO FOLLOW THE LOT LINE. AFTER DISCUSSION OF A PROPOSED
WOULD BE USED FOR A SEWAGE SYSTEM TO SERVICE THE BUILDINGS
THERE WAS DISCUSSION OF THE PATH OF THE CREEK AND MR.
STORM SEWE.Q. FOR THIS AREA AND THE NECESSITY FOR AN EASEMENT
FOR MAINTAINING THE CREEK, THE FOLLOWING MOTION RESULTED: MR. BERTRAM MOVED TO GIVE TENTATIVE APPROVAL TO THE
DIVISION OF LAND AS SUBMITTED BY MR. AGENTEN SUBJECT TO RE-
CEIPT OF THE FOLLOWING:
1. TWO SEPARATE EASZMENTS:
A. ONE ALONG THE REAR LOT LINE FOR 15 INCH CONCRETE
TILE FOR STOilM SEWER
B. ONE FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE RELOCATED CREEK
THE LOT LINES
2. TOPOGRAPHIC DATA OF HOW THE SWAIL WILL BE TAKEN
THROUGH, THE ANGLE OF THE CULVERT, AND Hot/ THY
TWO LOTS WILL BE GRADED.
BETWEEN
PAGE 2
JULY 19, 1966
3. SHOW A LOT LINE BETWEEN THE TWO LOTS ON THE CERTIFIED
SURVEY MAP.
4. USE THE WORD DEDICATE" INSTEAD OF RESERVE" ON THE /I I/
CERTIFIED SURVEY MAP FOR ROAD PURPOSES.
5. CHANGE THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION - DESCRIBING LOT
BOUNDARIES INSTEAD OF ROAD BOUNDARIES,
6. PRESENT A COMPLETED PRIVATE SEWAGE EASEMENT FORM
FOR PARCEL A.
MR. CHASE SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION CARRIED.
e
HEGERTY'S MOBILE STATIOAr - MR. DON MEYER, REAL ESTATE REPRESEN-
TATIVE, I~OBILE OIL Go., APPEARED REQUESTING PERMISSION TO
PORCELAINIZE HEGEaTY'S MOBILE STATION ON THE CORNER OF HIWAY
24 AND LANNON DR. (SEE MINUTES OF JUNE 7, 1966)
MR. MEYER POINTED OUT THAT THE IYOBILE Go. DOES NOT OWN
THIS BUILDING AND THEY ARE COMMITTED IN THZ LEASE TO PORCE-
LAINIZE THE EXTERIOR WALLS. HE STATED THAT THE PORCELAIN
aE EASIER TO MAINTAIN THAN ALUMINUM OR ROUGH SIDING. HE ALSO
WOULD MAKE A BETTER APPEARING BUILDING THAN BRICK AND WOULD
POINTED OUT THAT THE LIFE OF THIS BUILDING IS 10 TO 12 MORE
YEARS AT WHICH TIME IT WILL UNDOUBTEDLY BE REPLACED BY A MORE
MODERN STRUCTURE.
MR. LENTINI MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST OF THE MOBILE
OIL CO. TO PORCELAINIZE THE EXTERIOR WALLS OF HEGERTY'S MOBILE STATION AT THE CORNER OF LANNON DR. & HIWAY 24. MR. BUEHLER SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION CARRIED. PLANNER KNETZGER ADVISED THAT HE WAS AGAINST APPROVING
WAS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE CITY^ THAT WE WERE NOT ASKING ANY
MORE EXPENSE IF ROUGH CEDAR OR ALUMINUM WERE USED. MR. BUEHLER
THE PORCELAINIZING OF THIS BUILDING AS HE FELT THE MATERIAL
POINTED OUT THAT CEDAR WOULD BE UNSIGHTLY ON A STATION AS IT
STAINED AND DID NOT HOLD ITS COLOR.
<)- - A PUBLIC HEARING
WAS HELD PRIOR TO THIS RECULAR PLAN COMMISSION MEETING UPON
PETITION FROM HALES CORNERS SAND & GRAVEL Co. FOR A CONDITIONAL
USE GRANT FOR AN EXTRACTIVE OPERATION ON THE BLUHM PROPERTY
LOCATED ON I~CSHANE ROAD IN SECTION 12.
FROM PLANNER KNETZGER, THE FOLLOWING MOTION RESULTED:
HALES CORNERS SAND & GRAVEL'S REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE
GRANT FOR EXTRACTIVE OPERATIONS ON THE BLUHM PROPERTY IN SECTION
AFTER CONSIDERABLE THOUGHT AND DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION
MR. BUEHLER MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE COMMON COUNCIL THAT
12 BE DENIED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
PAGE 3 JULY 19, 1966
1. THAT THE EXTRACTIVE OPERATION WOULD REMOVE THE REMAINING
BUILDABLE BLUHM LAND FOR FUTURE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT.
2. THE PROPOSED MILWAUKEE-WAUKESHA BY-PASS ROUTE PLUS THE
RELOCATION OF DURHAM RD. WOULD REQUIRE A CONSIDERABLE PORTION
OF THE WZST SIDE OF THE PROPOSED AREA.
3. IN VIEW OF THE POSSIBLE DAMAGE TO MCSHANE RD., WHICH IS
THE ONLY ACCESS TO THIS PROPERTY, WHICH WAS RECENTLY REBUILT
AT CONSIDERABLE CITY EXPENSE.
4. THE DEGREE AND EFFECT OF DUST AND NOISE AS A RESULT OF THE
PROPOSED OPERATION.
5, THE COMMISSION FELT THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS VERY NEARLY
AT THE 30 FAMILY LIMIT AS ,,SET FORTH IN SECTION 6.07 (8) 4. 2.
OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE: THAT THERE BE NO MORE THAN 30
FAMILIES RESIDING 6JITHIN HALF MILE RADIUS OF THE CENTER OF
THE PROPOSED SITE.
MR. LENTINI SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION CARRIED.
HALES CORNERS SAND & GRAVEL FOR RENEWAL OF CONDITIONAL USE
FOR EXTRACTIVE OPERATIONS IN SECTION 12 ON MCSHANE ROAD.
BEEN SUBMITTED AND IT WAS THE COMMISSION'S DECISION THAT
THE COMMISSION REVIEWED THE RESTORATION PLAN WHICH HAD
CERTAIN FACTORS BE CLARIFIED BEFORE TAKING ACTION, THUS THE
FOLLOWING MOTION: MR. CHASE MOVED TO DEFER ACTION PENDING RECEIPT FROM
HALES CORNERS SAND & GRAVEL OF A JJEW RESTORATION PLAN
SHOWING ELEVATION AT FINAL RESTORATION WITH 5' CONTOUR LINES,
MAINTAINING FAIRLY LEVEL LAND APPROXIMATELY 300' TO MCSHANE ROAD AND RECEIPT OF RENEWED $30,000 RESTORATION BOND. i%. BUEHLER SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION CARRIED.
?EXAGO. INC. - A PUBLIC HEARING WAS HELD PRIOR TO THIS
REQUESTING CONDITIONAL USE FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN AUTOMOBILE
REGULAR PLAN COMMISSION MEETING UPON PETITION OF TEXACO, INC.,
SERVICE STATION AT THE CORNER OF HIWAY 24 AND TESS CORNERS DR. IN SECTION 2. MR. CHASE MOVED TO ACCEPT THE CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST
OF TEXACO, INC., AS PRESENTED SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED
BY THE PLANNER AND ENGINEER. MR. BERTRAM SECONDED THE MOTION. MR. CHASE WITHDREW THIS MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF HIS SECOND MR. BERTRAM. PLANNER KNETZGER RECOMMENDED THAT ACTION BE DEFERRED
PENDING RECEIPT OF MARKET ANALYSIS FIGURES (HOW MANY STATIONS
SUCH AS SITE PLAN AND OPERATION.
IN THE AREA, ETC. AND AGREEMENTS ON THE OUTSTANDING POINTS
PAGE 4
JULY 19, 1966
IYR. CHASE MOVED TO DEFER ACTION AND REFER TO THE PLANNER
FOR DRAFTING OF THE CONDITIONAL USE AGREEMENT. MR. BERTRAM
SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION CARRIED.
JAMES HERNKE - As PETITION FOR EXPANSION OF CONDITIONAL USE
SERVICE, s73 V16680 JANESVILLE RD., HAD NOT BEEN SUBMITTED,
ACTION WAS DEFERRED.
FOR THE PURPOSE OF ERECTING A POLE TYPE SHED AT JIM'S AUTO
OELBERT GUHR - As PLANS HAD NOT BEEN SUBMITTED REGARDING
THIS REQUEST TO ERECT A SECOND GARAGE STRUCTURE AT S73 Wl6650
JANESVILLE RD. , ACTION WAS DEFERRED.
GRAVEL, INC. (ASPHALT PLANT) - THE RECORDING SECRETARY READ
THE FOL~OWING COMMWNICATION FROM MAYOR GOTTFRIED DATED JULY 14, 1966:
GENTLEPIEN: THE COMMON COUNCIL WISHES TO ADVISE YOU THAT RESOLUTION
#?YO HAS BEEN REFERRED BACK TO YOUR BODY SO THAT YOU MIGHT
DETERMINE THE FEASIBILITY OF RELOCATING THE ASPHALT PLANT.
COPIES OF RESOLUTION #I69 AND RESOLUTION #169 As AMENDED
@ AND RESOLUTION #170 ARE ATTACHED FOR YOUR REVIEW.
/S/ JEROME J. GOTTFRIED, MAYOR
RESOLUTION #I69 - TO GRAVEL, INC.
WHEREAS, GRA
APPROVAL OF AN EXTRACTIVE OPERATIOfl PERIfIT
VEL, INC., HAS APPLIED FOR A RENEWAL OF~S
EXTRACTIVE PERMIT FOR THE YEAR 1966-67, AND
IN THE AMOUNT OF $40,000.00 HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE PLAN
COMMISSION, AND WHERZAS, THE PLAN COMMISSION HAS RECOMMENDED THAT AN
EXTRACTIVE PERMIT BE GRANTED TO GRAVEL, INC., TERM TO EXPIRE JUNE 19, 1967, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE COHHON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MUSKEGO DOES HEREBY GRANT TO GRAVEL, INC., AN EXTRAC-
WHEREAS, A REVISED RESTORATION PLAN AND PERFORMANCE BOND
TIVE PERMIT, TERM TO EXPIRE JUNE 19, 1967.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE ATTACHED RESTORATION PLAN,
AS SUBMITTED BY GRAVEL, INC., IS HEREBY APPROVED.
BESOLUTION #I69 AS AMENDED - APPROVAL OF AN EXTRACTIVE OPERATION PERMIT TO GRAVEL. IIJC. VHEREAS, GRAVEL, INC., HAS APPLIED FOR A RENEWAL OF ITS
EXTRACTIVE PERKIT FOR THE YEAR 1966-67, AND VHEREAS, A REVISED RESTORATION PLAN AND PERFORMANCE BOND
IN THE AMOUNT OF $40,000.00 HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE PLAN COMMISSION, AND
TRACTIVE PERMIT BE GRANTED TO GRAVEL, INC., TERM TO EXPIRE
WHEREAS, THE PLAN COMMISSION HAS RECOMMENDED THAT AN EX-
PAGE 5 JULY 19, 1966
JUNE 19, 1967, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF I~USKEGO DOES HEREBY GEANT AN EXTRACTIVE PERMIT TO GRAVEL, INC. , UPON RECEIPT OF A BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $40,000.00 AND
THE RESTORATION PLAN EXECUTED EFFECTIVE JULY 30, 1966.
AS SUBMITTED BY GRAVEL, INC., IS HEREBY APPROVED.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE ATTACHED RESTORATION PLAN,
RESOLUTION #I70 - DENYING THE REQUEST OF GRAVEL, INC. , TO OPERATE AN ASPHALT PLANT
WHEREAS, GRAVEL, INC., HAS PETITIONED THE CITY FOR AN ACCESSORY USE PERMIT FOR THE OPERATION OF AN ASPHALT PLANT ON
LANDS OWNED BY GRAVEL, INC. , FOR THE YEAR 1966-67, AND WHEREAS, THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION HAS RECOMMENDED THAT
THE ACCESSORY USE PERMIT BY GRAVEL, INC., BE DENIED FOR THE
1. THE ACCESSORY USE OPERATION IS IN VIOLATION OF SEC.
4.05 1-A - ANY ACC@SSORY USE OR STRUCTURE SHALL CONFORM TO
FOLLOWING REASONS:
Il
THE APPLICABLE REGULATIONS OF THE DISTRICT IN WHIG5 IT IS
LOCATED EXCEPT AS SPECIF5CALLY OTHERWISE PROVIDED. , AND
BE PERMITTED THAT BY REASON OF NOISE, DUST, ODOR, APPEARANCE,
OR OTHER OBJECTIONABLE FACTOR CREATES A NUISANCE OR SUBSTANTIAL
2. SEC. 4.05 1-B - NO ACCESSORY USE OR STRUCTURE SHALL
ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE PROPERTY VALUE OR REASONABLE ENJOYMENT
OF THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. I1
3. THE ORIGINAL PERMIT WAS GRANTED SEVEN YEARS AGO AND
WAS ISSUED ON THE PETITIONERS REQUEST THAT THIS PLANT WAS
PORTABLE AND WOULD BE TEMPORARY IN NATURE. 4. THIS PLANT BE PERMITTEDTO OPERATE AT THIS TEMPORARY
LOCATION UNTIL DECEMBER 31, 1966, WITH THE CONDITION THAT THIS
PLANT BE RELOCATED IN AN INDUSTRIAL AREA. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF HUSKEGO DOES HEREBY CONCUR IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM
THE MUSKEGO PLAN COMMISSION RELATING TO THE ACCESSORY USE PERMIT
FOR GRAVEL, INC., AS SET FORTH IN THEIR MINUTES OF THE MEETING
HELD JUNE 21 , 1966, """"""-""""
THAT PORTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL MI.VUTES OF MEETING
JULY 14, 1966, REFERRING TO RESOLUTION #I70 WERE READ AND
REVIEWED.
MR. BUEHLER EXPRESSED THE OPINION THAT IT WAS NOT THE PLAN COMMISSION'S RESPONSIBILITY TO RELOCATE THE ASPHALT
PLANT, HOWEVER, PIAYOR GOTTFRIED POINTED OUT THAT THE PLAN
COMMISSION MUST ANSWER THE COMMON COUNCIL. THERE WAS SOME
DISCUSSION OF A MODERN ASPHALT PLANT ON MORGAN STREET, IN MILWAUKEE, WHICH WAS REPORTEDLY CLEAN AND ODOR FREE. 0 MR. CHASE MOVED TO INVITE MR. WALTER SCHULTZ TO MEET
WITH THE PLAN COMMISSION AT THEIR NEXT MEETING, AUGUST 2NDJ
7:30 P. If. , TO DISCUSS WHAT COULD BE DONE WITH REGARD TO THE
OPERATION OF AN ASPHALT PLANT IN ANOTHER LOCATION. LENTINI SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION CARRIED WITH I~R. BUEHLER CASTING THE ONLY DISSENTING VOTE.
PAGE 6
JULY 19, 1966
JUBDIPISION CONTROL ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS - I~AYOR GOTTFRIED
SUGGESTED THAT ACTION BE DEFERRED ON THESE AMENDMENTS BECAUSE
OF THE LATE HOUR. MR. CHASE MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE COMMON COUNCIL THAT
THEY TAKE IMMEDIATE STEPS TO ADOPT THAT PORTION OF THE AMEND-
MENTS TO THE SUBDIVISION CONTROL ORDINANCE IN SECTION PIII A.
2. AS RECOMMENDED IN THE PLANN ER'S REPORT OF JUNE 7, 1966. THE MOTION LOST FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
RECORDING CONDITIONAL USE GRANTS - THE FOLLOWING COMMUNICATION
DATED JULY 6, 1966, FROM ATTORNEY HIPPENMEYER WAS READ BY THE
RECORDING SECRETARY:
DEAR FAYOR GOTTFRIED:
THE RECORDING OF CONKTIONAL GRANTS WITH THE REGISTER OF DEEDS, IT IS OCIR OPINION THAT AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING
ORDINANCE IS NOT REQUIRED AND THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION
IN REPLY TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 29, 1966, RELATIVE TO
CAN ESTABLISH THIS AS A MATTER OF POLICY BY A MERE MOTION
OR RESOLUTION. I HAVE PREPARED A PROPOSED RESOLUTION TO BE CONSIDERED
BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WHICH IS ENCLOSED.
/s/ R. S. HIPPENMEYER
RESOLUTION WHEREAS, THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS DECIDED THAT IT IS
IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY OF fiUSKEGO TO FlECORD WITH THE REGISTER OF DEEDS FOR WAUKESHA COUNTY ALL CONDITIONAL USE
GRANTS HEREAFTER GRANTED BY THE PLANNING COHMISSION; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLPED, THAT A GRANT OF A CONDITIONAL
USE, GRANTED AFTER THIS DATE, SHALL NOT BECOME EFFECTIVE OR
BE VALID UNTIL AN OFFICIAL RECORD OF APPROVAL HAS BEEN FILED
WITH THE REGISTER OF DEEDS FOR WAUKESHA COUNTY ON FORMS TO
BE FURNISHED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MUSKEGO; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE COST OF RECORDING SAID
OFFICIAL RECORD OF APPROVAL SHALL BE BORNE BY AND BE AT THE
EXPENSE OF THE PETITIONER APPLYING FOR SAID CONDITIONAL USE
GRANT. THIS REsoLU~IoN PASSED THIS DAY OF 9 1966,
BY A VOTE OF - IN FAVOR AND OPPOSED.
MR. CHASE MOVED FOR ADOPTION OF THE ABOVE RESOLUTION. I~R. RAIMANN SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION CARRIED.
JOHAT VICTOR REZONIIVG (FORREST PERKINSL - PLANNER XNETZGER
REVIEWED MAJOR POINTS OF HIS REPORT DATED JULY 15, 1966,
REGARDING REZONING THE JOHN TICTOR PROPERTY IN SECTION 4
AND SAME WAS DISCUSSED BY THE COMMISSION. THIS REPORT HAD
BEEN MAILED TO THE MEMBERS PRIOR TO THE MEETING.
PAGE 7 JULY 19, 1966
PLANNER KNETZGER SUBXITTED TO THE COMEISSION A IlEPORT .1) ESTIMATING WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE PRICE OF LOTS IN THE MUSKEGO AREA FOR REVIEW.
ADJOURh’MENT - h. LENTINI MOVED FOR ADJOURNMENT, MR. BUEHLER
SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 1l:Ss P.M.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
BARBARA J. SdNDS RECORDING SECRETARY
7-22-66
Plan Commission
City of Muskego
W180 S7732 Racine Avenue
Muskego, Wisconsin
Re: Re-Zoning to B-2 Business, John Victor Property, Section 4
Gentlemen:
Pursuant to the request of Mayor Jerome Gottfried, we have reviewed
the above matter, presently being considered for public hearing.
As shown on the attached map, the proposed re-zoning consists of
changing 10 acres of residential zoning to the B-2 Business District.
and modifying the existing 6.5 acre B-1 Zone to B-2.
The petitioner, Forrest Perkins, orginally asked the City to consider
B-1 Zoning for the triangular corner at Martin Drive and College Avenue
to permit an automobile service station, with about one third of the re-
maihing Victor property proposed for Multiple Family residential zoning.
The remaining two thirds of the property was not involved.
We had recommended that B-1 business zoning should be granted on
the corner triangle west of Martin Drive relocated along Topaz Drive
extended to College Avenue, as well as 200 feet deep on the east side
of Martin Drive relocated, and we further recommended that the Multiple
zoning request be denied, at this time though the property should be
reconsidered for such zoning as part of the two-family study pending
before the Commission.
*
The Commission offered instead commercial zoning for the entire 10 acre
Victor ownership. The Commission's principal justification seemed to be
'Thereis business use north and west, and the property has good potential
for business development. " Other than the service station, neither the
petitioner ncr the owner indicated any actual business interest.
LAND PLANNING DEVELOPMENT.DESlGN
PRIVATE and MUNICIPAL
e ..
Page 11
Since the Commission is in effect amending rather substantially the
comprehensive plan it adopted on June 24 I 1963, we would urge that
the Commission review its previous guidelines for business zoning
beiore it takes final action on this matter.
These guidelines are contained on pages 105 to 109 of the General
Plat? report. It will be noted that page 109 contains a very careful estimate
of what shares of consumer purchasing potential (shown on the table
of page 108) can realistically be assigned to business centers to be
built in the City. From a high of 90% in convenience goods to a low of
15% in secondary shoppers goods, an overall average of 60% is targeted.
We feel, for a suburban area, this is an optomistically fair target.
As a result of that analysis, page 109 shows 15 acres in community shopping
and 26 acres in neighborhood shopping as the supportable area that could
be zoned for retail commercial use. Due to certain existing business land
use situations, one of which is just west of the Victor site, it was necessary
to place somewhat more retail-type commercial zoning on the district map
than was projected in the General Plan.
By referring back to these guidelines, it can be seen that the proper ap-
proach to commercial zoning is: "Given the number of acres that can be
supported, where are the most suitable locations in the community for that
amount of commercial facilities? " Under this approach the City zoning process
will necessarily have to pass up many "good business locations" because
there is always more commercial land available than can ever be utilized.
For example, all of STH 24 has "business potential" but there is not a realistic
expectation of ever developing all of such a huge frontage with business.
Nor would such "strip commercial" development be wise in any case.
It is the City's responsibility then, on the basis of the best interests of
city land use as a whole, to decide just which select properties, out of
all the potential business properties in the City, should actually be zoned
for business use.
If time and the course of events should show that the City could have made
better choices, re-zoning can occur. However, there is the responsibility
as part of the new proposal for business use, for the City to decide what
corresponding amount of commercial zoning should be removed so that
A an overzoning in the commercial category does not occur.
a It is on this basis that we make the following recommendation: Since there
already is somewhat more retail commercial zoning than was targeted by the General
Plan, do not consider the entire Victor property for commercial zoning with-
out removing a corresponding amount of such zoning already in force.
City of Muskego
July 15, 1966
Page 111
Due to the rising terrain of the east two thirds of the Victor property
(rises from elevation 805 to 830 or 25 feet in only 550 feet) we cannot
recommend this property as better for commercial development than
other zcxd areas ~ especially the 6 5 acres abutting on the west. We
would continue to recommend the approximately 1.75 acres in the
narrow top of the triangle for B-1 Zoning,with 1 acre eventually
going to the businesses southwest of Martin Drive when the road is
relccated as shown, and the 75 acres east of the proposed relocation
in recognition of the difficult land use situation of a small parcel
with major roads on three sides.
Respectfully submitted,
NELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC.
RK/mvb
.
i
I ..
r .. .- ... " ..,,._ . .. 1
1
A
C, 5
0 R
0 rp i P P
.. VIW
WU Y
-24
00 00
w 0-2 OW 00
Pr 00 00 00
bii .-
P M
N
I-tb
0 OH
P B
Y
Nd 0