Loading...
PCM19660816CITY PLAN COIUfISSsION CITY OF MUSKEG0 I~AYOR ~OTTFRIED CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER AT 8:05 PIZESENT: XAYOR JE-~OME GOTTF~IED, CHAIRMAN, KILLARD BERTRAM, CHARLES BUEHLER, ALDERMAN S. ROBERT LENTINI AND ED RAIMANN. RUSSELL KNETZGER, CONSULTANT, AND BUILDING INSPECTOR LEE WER.~ ALSO PRESENT. ABSENT: WILLIAM F. CHASE, SEC'Y, AND CLARENCE DAHLEN IfIjJUTES: THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS M.EETING, AUGUST 2, 1966, AND THE SPECIAL MEETING OF SAME DATE WERE APPROVED AS F~AILED. THERE WAS SOUE DISCUSSION OF THE LAST PARAGRAPH, FAGE 3, UNDER GRAVEL, INC. CRONIAr SOD FAR![ - h. JOSEPH CRONIN, sl03 W13991 LOOMIS DR. , FOR IRRIGATION PURPOSES ON HIS FARM IN SECTION 36 AJJD SUB- MITTED A PLOT PLAN FOR THE COMMISSION'S REVIEW. APPEARED RELATIVE TO HIS REQUEST FOR APDROVAL OF A RESERVOIR CRONIN lDVISED THE COMMISSION THAT THIS POND IS LOCATED ON THE iv% CORNER OF HIS Fd3M ON THE WZST SIDE OF THE CREEK, THAT THE POND IS APPROXIMATELY 30' FROM THE CREEK AND IS NOT CONNECTED IN ANY WAY TO THE CREEK, AND THAT UPON COMPLETION THE POND WILL BE APPROXIXATELY 15' DEEP. THE RESERVOIR WILL COLLECT THE OVERFLOW OF WATER FROM HIS FARM IN THE SPRING AND THEN BE USED FOR IRRIGATION DURING THE DRY SEASON. I%. CRONIN ADVISED THAT HE VOULD DRILL A WELL IF NECESSARY TO FILL THE RESERVOIi3 BUT BELIEVES THE DRAINAGE WATER WILL BE SUFFICIE?IT. .ME STATED THAT HE HAD BUILT A DIKE AROUND HIS FARM TO ELIMINATE FLOODING OF HIS LAND WHEN THE CREEK OVERFLOWS. HE MENTIONED HIS INTENTION TO SOMEDAY STRAIGHTEN THE PATH OF THE CiZEEK ACROSS HIS PROPERTY. !l~?-. LENTINI MOVED TO APPROVE JOSEPH CRONIN'S REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A 360' x 170' RESERVOIR FOR IRRIGATION PUR- POSES IN ACCORDANCE WITH SE~, 5.07 (1 3) AND SEC~ 9.17 D. 2. OF THE PIUSKEGO ZONING ORDINANCE. HR. RAIMANN SECONDED THE HOTION AND THE MOTION CARRIED. ROBERT hENTLAIiD - IYR. SC I~Rs. VENTLAND, NEW BERLIN, AND EILEEN REED, RHINIELANDER, CO-OWNER OF PROPERTY IN THE SE+ OF SEC. 5, APPEARED RELATIVE TO REQUEST FOR LAND DIVISION AND PRESENTED A PRELIMINARY PLAT SHOWING FUTURE ROAD GOCATIONS AS REQUESTED AT q-bhL THE PREVIOUS PLAN COMMISSION MEETING.(SEE MINUTES OF 0-2-66)& THE COMMISSIOIV REVIEWED AND DISCUSSED THIS PLAT AND A CUL DE SAC ROAD CANNOT BE LONGER THAN SoO', THE CUL DE SACS ON THIS PLAT EXCEEDING THIS LENGTH. HE ALSO IN- PAGE 2 AUGUST 16, 1966 a DICATED HOW ADDITIONAL LOTS COULD BE CREATED. IT WAS THE COMMISSION'S DECISION THAT PLANNSR KNETZGER CONTACT THE WENTLAND'S SURVEYOR, CLAUDE JOHNSON, AND CONCUR TO RESOLVE THESE PROBLEMS. FRED PETERS - 1.M. FRED PETERS, W194 S9734 RACINE AvE., APPEARED SEEKING APPROVAL OF DIVISION OF HER LAND IN SECTION 29 AND PRESENTED A CERTIFIED SURVEY DRAFTED BY SURVEYOR LLOYD DANCEY. IT WAS NOTED BY THE COMMISSION THAT A PRELIMINARY PLAT AND QUARTER SECTION MAP HAD NOT BEEN SUBMITTED, THAT THE NEW LOCATION OF HIWAY Y WAS NOT SHOWN ON THE SURVEY, AND THAT THE AVERAGE WIDTH REQUIRED IN THIS R-1 DISTRICT IS 200' NECESSI- TATING A!J INCREASE IN PARCEL WIDTH. IT WAS THE COMMISSION'S DECISION THAT A LETTER BE DIRECTED TO SURVEYOR DANCEY INDICAYING THESE DESCREPENCIES. RUSSELL GOXLDNE& - DONALD GOELDNER, W199 S8340 Moons ROAD, SON, APPEARED RELATIVE TO THIS REQUEST FOR A SWIMMING POND TO BE CREATED BY WIDENING A DRAINAGE DITCH ON THEIR PROPERTY IN THE sw$ OF SEC. 17. PfAYOR GOTTFRIED ADVISED THAT HE HAD TALKED TO COUNTY SANITARIAN RIPLEY AND IT WAS THE SANITARUN'S OPINION THAT A POND CREATED FROM A DRAINAGE DITCH WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE THAN SWIMMING; HOWEVER, AMONG OTHER THINGS TO BE CONSIDERED, THE DRAINAGE DITCH COULD CARRY UNDESIRABLE NUTRIENTS WHICH COULD CAUSE RASHES, ETC., AND THEREBY CREATE AN UNHEALTHFUL CONDITION. PLANNER KNETZGER SUGGESTED THAT THE POND AND DRAINAGE DITCH NOT BE CONNECTED, THAT THE POND BE FILLED BY WELL OR SPRING AS MENTIONED AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING. MR. RAIMANN MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST OF RUSSELL GOELDNER FOR SWIMMING POND WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE POND THE DITCH DOES NOT ENTER THE POND. MR. BUEHLER SECONDED THE DOES NOT CONNECT WITH THE DRAINAGE DITCH SO THAT WATER FROM MOTION AND THE MOTION CARRIED. JEXACO. IIK'. - MESSRS. D. If. KRESSE AND LEO CONCOTELLI, REPRESENTATIVES OF TEXACO, INC., APPEARED TO DISCUSS THE SITE STATION ON THE CORNER OF HIWAY 24 AND TESS CORNERS DRIVE. A RECOMMENDATION SUBMITTED BY PLANNER LNETZGER, DATED AUGUST 0, 1966, WAS REVIEWED AND DISCUSSED. OPENING OF 25: AS INDICATED IN THE RECOMMENDATION, WOULD BE AND OPERATIONAL PLANS FOR THE PROPOSED AUTOMOBILE SERVICE TEXACO REPRESENTATIVES WERE CONCERNED THAT A DRIVEWAY TOO NARROW; THEY WERE NOT RECEPTIVE TO THE MULLION TYPE WINDOW TREATMENT NOR A UNIFORM OVERHANG. THERE WAS ALSO DISCUSSION OF LANDSCAPING, SIGNS AEJD LIGHTING. HAYOR GOTTFRIED QUESTIONED THE EXPECTET, VALUE OF THE COMPLETED BUILDING AND MR. KRESSE ANSWERED ABOUT $20,000 PAGE 3 AUGUST 16, 1966 INCLUDTNG THE-EQUIPMENT' i i, PLANNER KNETZGER HAD INDICATED SOME CHANGES ON-THE SET OF "~ExAcO PLANS W~ICH BELONG TO THE -CITY PLAN COMXIS~ION: THESE PLANS WERE LOAN ED TO TEXACO IN. ORDER THAT THEIR ENGI- NEERS COULD REVIEW THETI, SAME TO BE RETURNED TO THE COMMISSION. GLASS WINDOW WILL BE ACCEPTABLE, AND THAT THE OVERHANG (6" ON THE REAR AND 3 o ACROSS THE FRONT) WILL BE ACCEPTABLE# IPR. MR. BUEHLER MOVED THAT WHEN THE CONDITIONAL USE Is DRAWN up A MULLION TYPE WINDOW WILL NOT BE REQUIRED, A STOCK PLATE- I, I1 LENTINI SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION CARRIED. ji~. RAIMANN CALLED FOR RECESS AT 9:45 P. If. AND THE MEETING RECONVENED AT 9:49 P. !f. .~ FIRS. -VATTIE STEFANIAK - PLANNER KNETZGER REVIEWED HIS RECON- MENDATION, DATED 8-2-66, TO DENY THE REQUEST OF HATTIE STEFA- NIAK TO REZONE A PORTION OF HER PROPERTY FROM RS-1 TO RS-2 IN SEC. 21. IN ANSWER TO A QUESTION FROM ALDKRMAN LENTINI, BUILDING INSPECTOR LEE EXPLAINED THAT AS A RESULT OF THE STEFANIAK LAND DIVISION FOR THE DONALD HABERMEYERS, THE HABERMEYERS DESIRED TO BUILD A 1400 SQ. FT. HOME, THEY APPEALED TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS FOR THIS VARIANCE WHICH WAS DENIED AND THE 1400 SQ. FT. HOME WAS REDESIGNED AND PLANS FOR A 1600 SQ. FOLLOWING DISCUSSION, MR. ~UEHLER MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE CONMON COUNCIL TO DENY THE REQUEST OF HATTIE STEFANIAK REASONS AS INDICATED IN THE PLANNER'S RECOMMENDATION: 1. THE RE-ZONING COULD NOT BE ACCOMPLISHED WITHOUT EXTENSIVE RE-ZONING OF THAT ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD TO KEEP SOME HopIE- _sURMITm. . . - .~ TO REZONE LAND IN SEC. 21 FROM &-I TO 8s-2 FOR THE FOLLOWING SEMBLANCE OF ORDER IN THE PATTERN OF CHANGE FROM ZONES OF HIGHER DENSITY TO ZONES OF LOWER DENSITY. 2. NO REASONS HAVE BEEN OFFERED BY THE PETITIONER, OTHER THAN THE 8-1 CONFLICT, AS TO WHY THE CITY SHOULD RE-ZONE THAT NEIGHBORHOOD TO A HIGHER DENSITY (50% HIGHER) AND A SMALLER HOME SIZE. ORDINANCE'S OWN DEFINITION. THIS DISTRICT IS INTENDED TO BROVIDE FOR INDIYIDUAL OR SMALL GROUPS OF RETAIL OR CUSTOMER SERVICE ESTABLISHMENTS SERVING PRIMARILY THE CONVENIENCE OF A LOCAL NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THE CHARACTER, APPEARANCE, AND OPERATION OF WHICH ARE COMPATIBLE WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE 3. THE a-1 REASON FOR RE-ZONING IS. INVALID BY THE ZONING I1 SURROUNDING AREA. AN RS-2 DISTRICT WOULD NOT FIND THE B-1 I1 BUSINESS ZONE ANY MORE COMPATIBLE THAN AN 8s-1 IF THE PETITIONgR WERE RIGHT THAT INCOMPATIBILITY EXISTS--IN WHICH CASE THE CHANGE WOULD BE TO REMOVE THE B-1, NOT TO CHANGE THE RESI- DENTIAL ZONE, IT Is NOT PROPER TO USE A 2.5 ACRE B-1 ZONE RESIDENTIAL USE. CHANGE TWO THIRDS OF A 130 ACRE AREA TO ANOTHER DENSITY OF DESIGNED TO SERVE A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD AS AN EXCUSE TO PAGE 4 AUGUST 16, 1966 PIR. BERTRAM SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION CARRIED WITH "a ALDERMAN LENTINI CASTING THE ONLY DISSENTING VOTE, HALES COfiTERS SAjD & GRAVEL - TIIE COMMISSION REVIEWED THE NEW RESTORATION PLAN SUBMITTED BY HALES CORNERS SAND & GRAVEL, 5' CONTOUR LINES AND FAIRLY LEVEL LAND APPROXIMATELY 300' TO NOTING THAT THE PLAN SHOWED ELEVATION AT FINAL RESTORATION WITH MCSHANE ROAD AS REQUESTED AT THE PLAN COMMISSION TfEETING OF JULY 19, 1966. THE COPTMISSION ALSO NOTED THAT THE $30,000 RESTORATION BOND HAD BEEN RENEWED, COPY OF THE RECEIPTED BILL RECEIVED BY THE CITY. !f~, RAIMANN MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE COMMON COUNCIL THAT THE CONDITIONAL USE GRANT FOR OPERATION OF A GRAVEL PIT IN SECTION 12 FOR HALES CORNERS SAND & GRAVEL BE RENEWED FOR ONE YEAR. !IR. BUEHLER SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION CARRIED e JOSEPH J. DO.nI-OVAJI - THE COMMISSION RECEIVED A PETITION SUB- MITTED BY DR. JOSEPH J. DONOVAN, s73 Id19347 LOCHCREST BLVD,, - REQUESTING A CONDITIONAL USE GRANT TO PERMIT AN ANIMAL HOS- PITAL AT ill79 ST664 RACINE AVE. THIS REQUEST FOR TUESDAYJ S0,PTEMBER 20TH AT 7:3O P. !f. MR. I%. LENTINI MOVED TO SCHEDULE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR BERTRAM SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION CARRIED. COHIfUMICATIOlCi' - THE FOLLOWING COMMUNICATION DATED AUGUST 0, 1966, FROM ATTORNEY WM. F. REILLY, WAS READ BY THE RECORDING SECRETARY: II DEAR MAYOR GOTTFRIED: FIND ENCLOSED AN AMENDNENT TO ORDINANCE 16, SECTION 3. 07J SUB-SECTION (1 ) PER YOUR REQUEST OF JULY 28, 1966. IN ESSENCE, THIS AMENDMENT NOW REQUIRES ONLY TWO PUBLICATIONS IN TWO CONSECUTIVE WEEKS, THE LAST PUBLICATION BEING AT LEAST 1 WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING. SINCERELY, /s/ VM. F. REILLY" MAYOR GOTTFRIED ADVISED-THAT THE STATE LAW HAD BEEN AMENDED AS TO PUBLICATION REQUIREMENTS ANI, THAT THIS AMEND- MENT WOULD REDUCE THE TIME INVOLVED FOR SCHEDULING THE CITY'S PUBLIC HEARINGS, FROM 3 PUBLICATIONS TO 2 PUBLICATIONS AND FINAL PUBLICATION ONE WEEK PRIOR TO THE HEARING INSTEAD OF THE PRESENTLY REQUIRED 10 DAYS. I%. LENTINI ii'OVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE COMMON COUNCIL THAT AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE iVo. 16, SEC. 1 3.07 (1 ) BE ADOPTED. PAGE 5 AUGUST 16, 1966 SUBDIVISIOIV CONTROL ORDINANCE APIENDUEIJTS - PLANNER KNETZGER AND THE COMMISSION MEMBERS DISCUSSED AND REVIEWED THE AMEND- MENTS TO THE SUBDIVISION CONTROL ORDINANCE. A.lLLW&Y~~NT - h. BERTRAM MOVED FOR ADJOURNMENT, PIR. LENTINI SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 11:40 p. N. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, BARBARA J. SANDS RECORDING SECRETARY DATED THIS I~TH DAY OF AUG. 1966 . .~ ,. , f k' .. HIPPENMEYER. REILLY. FRITZ 6 ARENZ LAW OFFICES OF 720 CLINTON STREET WAUKESHA,WISCONSIN 89187 August 8, 1966 Honorable Jerome 3. Gottfried Mayor, City of Muskego P.O. BOX 34 Muskego, Wisconsin Dear Mayor Gottfried: Find enclosed an amendment to Ordinance 16. . ~~~~~ ~~ ~~ Section 3.07, sub-section (1) per your request 'of July 28, 1966. In essence, this amendment now requires only two publications in two consecutive weeks, the last publication being at least hearing. Sincerely, HIPPENMEYER, FU3I.LLY William F. Reilly 1 week prior to the & ARENZ WFR/sw Enc. REC'D ,I ATTEST : ORDINANCE NO. 80 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 16 ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING A PREVIOUSLY EXISTING ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF MUSKEGO, WAUKESHA COUNTY, WISCONSIN AND AMENDING THE SAME". The Mayor and Comon Council of the City of Muskego, Waukesha County, Wisconsin, do ordain as follows: Section 1. Section 3.07 of the ordinance adopting a previously existing zoning ordinance is hereby amended to read as follows: 3.07 (1) Notice: Notice of the proposed change and hearing thereon shall be given by publication in the official paper once a week for two consecutive weeks the- last of which shall be at least one week before requesting changes in the zoning district the hearing, and in the cases of petitions classification of any property, granting of conditional uses, or of planned developments under 6.02, the City Clerk shall mail notice of the public hearing to the owners of all lands within 300 feet of any part of the land included in such proposed change or con- ditional use at least 10 days before such public hearing. The failure of such notice to reach any property owner, provided such failure be not intentional, shall not invalidate ditional use of planned development. Such any amending ordinance, or grant of con- mailed notice shall not be required where the Common Council determines that the change is would involve excessive administrative effort of such comprehensive nature that such notice notification of affected property owners. At and expense and is not necessary for reasonable least 10 days prior written notice of changes in the district plan shall also be given to the within 1000 feet of the land to be affected by Clerk of any municipality whose boundaries are the proposed change. Failure to give such notice shall not invalidate any such change. Section 2: All ordinances in conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed and this ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and publication. Passed and adopted this day of , 1966. Mayor Bette J. Bowyer Clerk