Loading...
PCM19661101CITY PLAN COMIIISSION CITY OF MUSKEGO MINUTES OF MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 1 , 7966 CITY HALL MAYOR GOTTFRIED CALLED THE MEETING TO ORDER AT 0:04 P. M. PRESENT: MAYOR JEROME GOTTFRIED, CHAIRNAN, WILLIAM F. CHASE, SECRETARY, WILLARD BERTRAM, CHARLES BUEHLER, ALD. S. ROBERT LENTINI AND ED RAIMANN. PLAN CONSULTANT RUSSELL KNETZGER AND BUILDING INSPECTOR LEE WERE ALSO PRESENT. ABSENT: ROBERT GUMIENY flINUTES: PLANNER KNETZGER CORRECTED THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING, OCTOBER 10, 1966, ON PAGE 11 UNDER INDUSTRIAL PARK TO READ IN THE LAST PORTION OF THE SENTENCE THAT A JOINT COMMISSION BY THE; LAST WEEK IN NOVEMBER OR THE FIRST WEEK IN DE CEMBER. I1 REPORT FROM THE TWO SHOULD BE READY FOR PRESENTATION TO THE I/ .' - .~ .~ THE MINUTES AS CORRECTED WERE APPROVED. . -. CARL POSBRIG - THE COMNISSION REVIEWED THE CERTIFIED SURVEY MAP DRAFTED BY SURVEYOR LLOYD DANCEY FOR THIS 2.5 ACRE LAND COMMISSION THAT THE COMMON COUNCIL HAD ADOPTED RESOLUTION DIVISION IN THE ma OF SECTION 29. IT WAS NOTED BY THE #208 AT THEIR MEETING OCTOBER 25TH GRANTING THE VARIANCE TO MAKE THIS PROPOSED PARCEL A LEGAL LOT. THE FOLLOWING COMNUNICATION DATED OCTOBER 31, 1966, DIRECTED TO. .THE PLAN COMMISSION FROM CITY ENGINEER FRANK RUEKERT WAS READ BY THE RECORDING SECRETARY: I1 GENTLEMEN: WE HAVE REVIEWED SUBJECT CERTIFIED SURVEY MAP AND NOT HAVING SEEN THE PRELIMINARY, HAVE CONTACTED MAYOR GOTTFRIED WHO HAS EXPLAINED THE DETAILS. AS WE UNDERSTAND IT, THE REASON FOR THE ODD SHAPED LOT WAS BECAUSE OF THE FUTURE EXTENSIONS OF HENNEBERRY DRIVE, WHICH IS TO RUN FROM RACINE AYE. IN A REVERSE CURVE AND TERMI- NATE AT PARKER DR. THEREFORE, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE WEST HENNEBERRY DR. A 60' STRIP IS TO BE DEDICATED THRU THE 0.5 LINE OF THE 2 ACRE PARCEL WILL BE THE EAST LINE OF FUTURE ACRE PARCEL WHICH IS A TRIANGLE. WE SUGGEST ALL THIS BE SHOWN" ON THE CERTIFIED SURVEY MAP AND THE ROAD BE DEFINITELY EXCEPTED FROM THE DESCRIPTION. ALSO WHEN HENNEBERRY DRIVE IS EXTENDED THRU THE POSBRIG LANDS AND LOTS ARE MADE AVAILABLE, WE FEEL AT THIS TINE A RESERVE FOR THE STREET SHOULD BE MADE FOR THE FULL EXTENT OF HIS PROPERTY WITH AN AGREEMENT THAT THE ROAD COSTS WILL BE PAID FOR OR BE ASSESSABLE TO THE LOTS ABUTTING OR ANY FEASIBLE SOLUTION FOR PAYMENT. WITHOUT MORE PAGE 2 - PLAN COMM. NOVEMBER 1, 1966 DETAILS IT APPEARS THAT A BETTER SHAPED LOT COULD BE ACHIEVED a BY SQUARING IF OFF WITH PARKER RD., HOWEVER, THIS WOULD INVOLVE IN THE DESCRIPTION IN SURVEYOR'S CERTIFI. CATE, THE DISTANT J. LANG PROPERTY. I1 DUE SOUTH 1325. o FEET" SHOULD BE CHANGED TO 1335. o FEET ACCORDING TO DISTANCES SURVEYED. THE OWNER'S CERTIFICATE SHOULD INCLUDE BOTH OWNERS AND THERE IS A FRAGMENT OF LAND IN THE 0.50 ACRE PARCEL LEFT WIVES, IF ANY. OVER AFTER THE EXCEPTION OF THE STREET, THIS SHOULD BE ALSO DEEDED TO THE CITY. IF OUR INTERPRETATION OF THE FOREGOING IS CORRECT, WE FEEL THAT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE OWNER THIS SHOULD BE DRAWN OM A LARGER SCALE, BETTER YET, HAVE THE CENTERLINE RUN OUT FROM RACINE AVE. TO PARKER RD. AND DEFINITELY ESTABLISH ITS LOCATION. IN THIS WAY THE OWNER WILL BEA.8.SVRED OF THE BEST LAYOUT FOR FUTURE SUBDIVIDING. ANY COSTS NOT ATTRIBUTAL TO POSBRIG COULD BE HELD BY THE CITY UNTIL IT IS ASSESSABLE. WE ARE ENCLOSZNG A COPY OF A PORTION OF THE 5' CONTOUE MAP SHOWING THE LAYOUT AS WE UNDERSTAND IT AND TO ILLUSTRATE THE SHAPE OFPARCELS THAT POSSIBLY COULD BE ACHIEVED. YOURS VERY TRULY, II /s/ F. J. RUEKERT AFTER DISCUSSION, MR. CHASE MOVED THAT THE CONMISSION REFER THIS LETTER FROM RUEKERT & MIELKE TO I%. POSBRIG so THAT MAP THE POINTS INDICATED IN THE LETTER. MR. BUEHLER SECONDED HIS SURVEYOR CAN PROPERLY DRAFT INTO THE CERTIFIED SURVEY THE MOTION AVD THE MOTION CARRIED. SCHAUMBERG - SCHOLBE - THE CERTIFIED SURVEY MAP FOR THIS 120,000 SQ. FT. PARCEL IN THE JW+, SEC. 30 (HAROLD SCHOLBE PROPERTY) HAD BEEN APPROVED AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING SUBJECT TO RECEIPT OF A SATISFACTORY ENGINEER'S REPORT. THE REPORT RECEITED FROH CITY ENGINEER FRANK RUEKERT RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE CERTIFIED SURVEY MAP AND SAME WAS SIGNED BY THE COMMISSIOM OFFICIALS AND RECORDED WITH THE REGISTER OF DEEDS AS OF Nov. 4, 1966. HATTIE STEFAflIAK PROPERTY - I~R. & MRS. LEONARD STEFANIAK AND LARRY STEFANIAK APPEARED CONCERNING THIS REQUEST FOR A 30,000 HATTIE STEFANIAK FARM. BEEN PREPARED BY SURVEYOR CLAUDE JOHNSON INDICATING A 30,000 SQ. FT. LOT WITH A SEWER EASEMENT ON A 30,000 SQ. FT. LOT TO THE IMMEDIATE SOUTH. IT WAS NOTED BY THE COMMISSION THAT THE RECEATT HABERMEYER DIVISION WAS SHOWN INCORRECTLY ON THE PRELI- MINARY PLAT, MR. JOHNSON TO BE so NOTIFIED (NOTIFIED 71-4-66). SQ. FT. PARCEL IN THE OF SEC. 21 TO BE DIVIDED FROM THE THE COMMISSION REVIEWED THE PRELIMINARY PLAT WHICH HAD PAGE 3 - PLAN COMM. j?OVEMBER 1, 1966 THERE WAS DISCUSSION OF THE NUMBER OF ACCESSES ALLOWED THE STEFANIAK FARM. MRS. STEFANIAK ADVISED THAT SHE HAD CONTACTED THE HIWAY DEPT. AND THEY HAD ADVISED HER THAT THERE THE HOMESTEAD AND THIS PROPOSED PARCEL. THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION THAT THE STEFANIAKS OBTAIN A DRIVEWAY EASEMENT FROM THE HOMESTEAD TO USE THIS DRIVEWAY, HOWEVER, THE COMMISSION FELT THAT IT WOULD BE THE STEFANIAK'S PREROGATIVE TO DO THIS WERE THREE ALLOWED INCLUDING THE PRESENT ONE USED JOINTLY BY AS THEY WISH. I~R. CHASE REQUESTED THAT THE HIWAY DEPT. BE CONTACTED TO DETERMINE IF THE THREE ACCESSES ALLOWED EXCLUDED THE HABERMEYER ACCESS AND THE PROPOSED PARKWAY ACCESS, (LETTER TO HIWAY DEPT. 11-4-66). THE COMMISSION REQUESTED THAT PRIVATE SEWAGE EASE- MENT FORMS BE FORWARDED TO THE STEFANIAKS, SAME FORWARDED 11 -4-66. MR. BUEHLER MOVED TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AS SUBMITTED. MR. CHASE SECONDED THE KOTION AND THE MOTION CARRIED. HILLENDALE R.EDl?PELOPMEI/T - MRS. SYLVESTER KSOBIECH AND MRS. KATHERINE HALBRUCKER APPEARED BEFORE THE COMMISSION SEEKING APPROVAL OF PROPERTY DIVISION IN THE lvE$ OF SEC. 70. THE COMMISSION REVIEWED A PRELIMINARY PLAT OF THE LANDS INVOLVED AND MR. TOM PETERSON FROH WAUKESHA LAND SURVEYS APPEARED TO DISCUSS SAME WITH THE COMMISSION. I~Rs. KSOBIECH WAS SPOKESMAN FOR THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND ADVISED THAT THEY INTENDED TO EXCHANGE LAND IN ORDER TO GET BUILDABLE LOTS, IT IS THEIR INTENTION TO BUILD A ROAD THROUGH THE AREA UP TO THE EVERETT DREWS PROPERTY. MRS. DREWS INTENDS TO CONNECT THIS PROPOSED ROAD WITH A PROPOSED ROAD THROUGH HER PROPERTY ULTIMATELY CONNECTING TO AN EXISTING ROAD AT THE NORTH OF HER PROPERTY (PASADENA). THE PROPOSED ROAD IN AGREEMENT ACCORDING TO MRS. KSOBIECH. WOULD GO ACROSS A NUMBER OF PROPERTIES, ALL PROPERTY OWNERS MAYOR GOTTFRIED POINTED OUT THAT THE REQUIREMENT FOR PARCELS IN THIS AREA IS 80,000 SQ. FT. OR TWO ACRES AND THE COMMISSION NOTED THAT THE PARCELS WERE NOT OF THIS REQUIRED SIZE. PLANNER KNETZGER SUGGESTED THAT IF A SATISFACTORY LAND DEVELOPMENT COULD BE CREATED THE COMMON COUNCIL COULD GRANT THE VARIANCES. MR. RAIMANN MOVED TO REFER THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THIS HILLENDALE REDEVELOPMENT TO PLANNER KNETZGER IN ORDEE THAT HE CAN WORK WITH THE WAUKESHA LAND SURVEYS IN CREATING A SATISFACTORY PLAN, MR. BERTRAM SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION CARRIED. PAGE 4 - PLAN COMM. NOVENBER 1, 1966 JAMES HERNKE - As MR. HERNKE WAS UNABLE TO BE PRESENT TO DISCUSS HIS REQUEST FOR EXPANSION OF CONDITIONAL USE, MR. LENTINI NOVED TO DEFER n~~~~~ ON THIS REQUEST UNTIL THE NEXT NEETING. MR. BUEHLER SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE KOTION CARRIED JEROME DRUGS - MAYOR GOTTFRIED RELINQUISHED THE CHAIR TO MR. CHASE DURING THE DISCUSSION OF THE PROPOSED NEW DRUG STORE. MR. JOHN JAHNKE, PLAN CONSULTANT, APPEARED TO REPORT ON THE PROPOSED BUILDING AND SITE PLAN FOR JERONE DRUGS, PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ON HIWAY 24. HE REVIEWED AND ELABORATED ON THE FOLLOWING REPORT: 11 TO: CITY PLAN COMMISSION, MUSKEGO, WIS. RE: PROPOSED BUILDING & SITE PLAN FOR JEROME DRUOS, S. T.H. 24 THE PROPOSED SITE FOR JERO~E DRUGS' NEW BUILDING IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF S.T.H. 24 ABOUT 842.5 FEET EAST OF THE CENTER LINE OF V. LANNON DRIVE AND SHOWS A BVILDING MEASURING I1 APPROXIMATELY 60' X 116' (6,960 SQ. FT. ) SITUATED ON A SITE CONTAINING 25,950 SQUARE FEET OF AREA (150 FEET OF FRONTAGE AND 173 FEET OF DEPTH). THE LAND IS ZONED 8-4 HIGHWAY BUSINESS DISTRICT AND WOULD aE ANALYZED IN THIS ZONING DISTRICT SINCE THE SITE DOES NOT CONTAIN ENOUGH SQUARE FOOTAGE TO MEET THE MINIKUK OF 200,000 SQUARE FEET FOR THE PLANNED CONMERCIAL OVERLAY DISTRICT. CBITERIA 1. MINIMUM LAND AREA 2. MINIMUM AVERAGE WIDTH 3. IYINIIIUM SETBACK 4. FLOOR AREA RATIO 5. MINIMUM OFFSET; (A) ONE SIDE (E) ALL OTHER SIDES 6. OFF-STREET PARKING ZONING ORDINANCE PROVIDED IN REQUIREMENT SITE PLAN 30,000 SQ. FT. (MAY 25,950 SQ. FT. BE REDUCED 1/2 IF SERVED BY MUN. SEWER) ?so FEET 30 FEET (40 PLUS 20.5 DIVIDED BY 2) 3 0% 10 FEET 1s FEET 1 SPACE/I~O SQ. FT. P.F.A. OR 44 SPACES 150 FEET 25 FEET 28.7% (INCLUDES LOADING DOCK) PLANTING AREA & 5 16 (REAR) AND 85 (WEST SIDE) 18 PAGE 5 - PLAN COMM. NOVEMBER 1, 1966 MISCELLANEOUS COMMENTS 1. FRONT SETBACK: THE FRONT SETBACK SHOULD BE INCREASED TO 30 FEET IF MY INTERPRETATION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE IS CORRECT. 2. EAST OFFSET: THE EAST OFFSET SHOULD BE INCREASED TO 10 FEET UNLESS A RECORDED DEED RESTRICTION CAN BE OBTAINED FROOM THE PROPERTY OWNER TO THE EAST STIPULATING THAT NO BUILDING I1 SHALL BE ERECTED ON SAID PROPERTY SO AS TO REDUCE THE COMBINED OFFSET IN SUCH CASE TO A DISTANCE LESS THAN THAT RESULTING FROM THE NORMAL APPLICATION OF THE MINIMUM OFFSET REQUIREYIETfTS TO BOTH PROPERTIES EXCEPT AS PERMITTED UNDER PARAGRAPH 3 (5.02(3)3) 3. YORTH OFFSET: THE NORTH OFFSET WOULD BE REDUCED TO 11 FEET (BELOW THE REQUIRED 15 FEET) IF THE FRONT SETBACK IS IN- CREASED BY 5 FEET. THIS IS MEASURED TO THE TRUCK DOCK WHICH COULD POSSIBLY BE RELOCATED ALONG THE SIDE OF BUILDING. IN THIS CASE THE NORTH OFFSET WOULD BE INCREASED TO 21 FEET AND 4. OFF-STREET PARKING: No CREDIT HAS BEEN GIVEN FOR THE ABOVE. THEREBY CONFORM. PARKING SHOWN IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING SINCE THE MANEUVERING AREA LIES WITHIN THE FUTURE WIDENED RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR STATE TRUNK HIGHWAY "24". THIS PARKING SHOULD BE ELIMINATED AND REPLACED WITH LANDSCAPING. OFF-STREET PARKING SHOULD BE INCREASED BY 26 SPACES TO CONFORM TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT. IT WOULD APPAR- FOR A 60 FEET PARKING EASEMENT ON THE PROPERTY ADJACENT TO AND WEST OF THE MASONRY BUILDINQ AT S74 W16985. THIS IS A ENTLY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL LAND. SOME CREDIT COULD BE GIVEN NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT SO THAT FULL CREDIT COULD NOT BE GIVEN FOR ALL POSSIBLE PARKING WITHIN THIS 60 FEET BY 173 FEET AREA. THIS STRIP WOULD ALSO HAVE TO BE IMPROVED OR SURETY PROVIDED 5. ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL: THE PROPOSED BUILDING SHOWS A ACCENT BLOCKS ON THE OTHER SIDES. BASED ON PREVIOUS ACTIONS BY THE MUSKEGO PLAN COMMISSION, THE PERMANENTLY EXPOSED WALLS COMMON WALLS IN THE FUTURE - (A&P BUILDING). IN THIS CASE, THE NORTH, SOUTH AND EAST WALLS WOULD HAVE A VENEER WHILE THE WEST WALL COULD BE CONCRETE BLOCK BASED ON PLANS TO MAKE THIS A COMMON WALL IN THE FUTURE. PAINTING THIS EXPOSED BLOCK WOULD TO GUARANTEE IMPROVEMENT BEFORE ANY CREDIT COULD BE GIVEN. STONE VENEER ON THE FRONT BUT INDICATES CONCRETE BLOCK WITH SHOULD ALL BE VENEERED EXCEPT FOR THE ONES WHICH MIGHT BECOME TEND TO MAKE IT ATTRACTIVE UNTIL THE ADJACENT BUILDING IS CONSTRUCTED. 6. HIGHWAY ACCESS: ALTHOUGH TWO HIGHWAY ACCESS POINTS ARE SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN FOR JEROME DRUGS, THE NEED FOR ONE OF BUILDING HAS BEEN REMOVED. CONSEQUENTLY, ONLY ONE HIGHWAY THESE WOULD NOT EXIST AFTER THE PARKING IN FRONT OF THE ACCESS POINT TO THE PARKING AREA APPEARS NECESSARY. PAGE 6 - PLAN COMM. NOVEMBER 1 , 1966 7. E ING AN UILDING ELEVATION: THESE SHOULD BE BASED O!:;E %:RE GRA:E~FOR s. T.H. "24", BUT IT MIGHT BE FEASIBLE TO DRAIN TO THE NORTH FOLLOWING THE NATURAL DRAIN- AGE PATTERN. ADDITIONAL GRADES FOR THE SITE, THE FUTURE HIGH- WAY, AND THE ADJACENT LANDS SHOULD BE PROVIDED TO AID IN A FINAL DETERMINATION. 0. LANDSCAPING: LANDSCAPING AREAS AND PLANTING PLANS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED. coNcLusIoI~: BEFORE FINAL DECISIONS CAN BE MADE BY THE CITY OF MUSKEGO PLAN COMMISSION. THE COMMENTS GIVEN ABOVE SHOULD SERVE AS A GUIDE MANY CHANGES IN THE SITE PLAN AS SUBMITTED APPEAR NECESSARY BOTH TO THESE REVISIONS AND TO THE FIXAL ANALYSIS. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, /s/ JOHN V. JAHNKE" MR. CHASE Q5ESTIONED IF I~R. JAHNKE HAD GIVEN CONSIDE RATION TO THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE PROPOSED DRUG STORE AND PARKLAND PLAZA. MR. JAHNKE ANSWERED THAT IT WAS DIFFICULT TO ANALYZE BECAUSE OF THE ASPECTS INVOLVED, HOWEVER IN HALES CORNERS WHERE BUSINESSES WERE ADJACENT IT WAS FOUND MORE COMPATIBLE IF THEY WERE CONNECTED CITING ALSO A SAFETY FACTOR OF GOING FROM ONE TO THE OTHER WITHIN THE CENTER RATHER THAN FROM THE HIGHWAY. THERE WAS CONSIDERABLE DISCUSSION AS TO THE PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENTS AND IT WAS MR. JAHNKE'S OPINION THAT IT WOULD NOT HAYOR GOTTFRIED SUBMITTED THE: PERCOLATION TESTS WHICH BE DIFFICULT TO OBTAIN THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. INDICATED SATISFACTORY PERCOLATION IN FRONT AND EAST OF THE FOUNDATION. MAYOR GOTTFRIED ADVISED THAT IT WAS HIS INTENTION TO HAVE THE ARCHITECT PREPARE A MORE COMPLXTE SITE PLAN SHOWING THE ENTIRE AREA. MR. BUEHLER MOVED TO DEFER ACTION ON THE SITE PLAN PENDING SUBMITTAL OF A NEW SITE PLAN. MR. LENTINI SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION CARRIED. PARKLAND PLAZA - NESSRS. JOHN & DAVE COUTURE APPEARED RELATIVE TO SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED PARKLAND PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER. MR. JOHN JAHNKE, PLAN CONSULTANT, REVIEWED AND ELABORATED ON THE FOLLONIh'G REPORT: "TO: CITY PLAN COMMISSION, I~USKEGO, VIS. 0 RE: PHASE I OF THE SITE PLAN FOR PARKLAND PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF S.T.H. "24" AND W. LANNON DRIVE, CITY OF MUSKEGO. PAGE 7 - PLAN COMM. NOTEMBER 1, 1966 INTRODUCTION: THE CITY OF MUSKEGO HAS REQUESTED THAT OUR FIRM ANALYZE PHASE I OF THE PARKLAND PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER PREPARED BY THE SHEPHARD ASSOCIATES AND RECEIVED BY THE CITY OF MUSKEGO ON THIS PROJECT, I HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH MAYOR JEROME GOTTFRIED, JOHN AND DAVE COUTURE, WILLIAM NELSON AND RUSSELL KNETZGER, AND WILLIAM REINHARDT OF THE STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION. As PLAN COMMISSION ON OCTOBER 18, 1966. TO OBTAIN A BACKGROUND ALL OF YOU KNOW, THE HISTORY OF THIS SHOPPING CENTER HAS BEEN LONG AND INVOLVED, AND PROBABLY KN.OWN BETTER BY MEMBERS OF THE PLAN COMMISSION THAN BY MYSELF. CONSEQUENTLY, I WILL MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO EXTENSIVELY REVIEW THE HISTORY OF THIS PROJECT, BUT WILL MAKE ONLY A FEW COMMENTS TO FORM THE FRAMEWORK FOR MY ANALYSIS. AN ECONOMIC ANALYSIS WAS MADE BY NELSON &: ASSOCIATES IN THE PAST SUBSTANTIATING THE MARKET FOR THE PBOPOSED SHOPPING CSNTER. IF ANYTHING, TIIE MARKET HAS EXPANDED SINCE TEIS STUDY, STRUCTION IS THE A&P BUILDING WITH ANOTHER THE PROPOSED JEROME DRUGS. ALTHOUGH THESE BUILDINGS ARE SIGNIFICANT, THEY PROBABLY STILL NEEDED TO MEET CONSUMER DEMANDS. THE ABILITY TO OBTAIN FINANCING AND THE INCREASED INTEREST RATES WILL AFFECT THE ECO- NOMIC FEASIBILITY OF THE CENTER, BUT THIS IS PRIMARILY A CONCERN FOR THE DEVELOPERS. BUT DEVELOPXENT HAS ALSO OG-CURRED. ONE EXAHPLE OF NEW CON- DO NOT ALTER THE FACT THAT A NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER IS PREVIOUS SITE PLANS HAVE BEEN PREPARED BY NELSON &: Assoc. AND BY THE SHEPHAR~ ASSOCIATES DATING BACK AT LEAST TO FEB., 1965. A SITE PLAN PREPARED BY THE SHEPHARD ASSOCIATES AND RE- CEIVED BY THE CITY ON APRIL 19, 1966, WAS APPROVED BY THE PLAN COMMISSION. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON TOPOGRAPHY, GRADE, DRAINAGE, ETC. WAS REQUESTED BY THE CITY. SINCE THAT TIME REVISIONS HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE PLAN BASED ON DEMANDS BY THE TENANTS AND BECAUSE THE OPTIONS WERE NOT EXERCISED ON THE FORMER BAMMEL AND KELLNER PARCELS (PROPOSED SITE OF JEROME DRUGS). THESE TWO PARCELS WERE ESSENTIAL TO THE LAYOUT APPROVED ON APRIL 19, 1966, SINCE PARKING AND ACCESS WERE SHOWN IN THIS AREA. IN THE REVISED LAYOUT, PARKLAND PLAZA, INC., HAS ATTEMPTED TO RETAIN THE PIN-WHEEL" RELATIONSHIP OF THE THREE BUILDINGS RAMMEL AND KELLNER PARCELS WERE NO LONGER A PART OF THE SHOPPING CENTER SITE. THIS REVISED LAYOUT IS THE MATTER BEING CONSIDERED It WITH A RE-ORIENTATION MADE TO CONPENSATE FOR THE FACT THAT THE IN THIS REPORT. JR. RUSSELL KNETZGER 'S PLANNER'S SUGGESTIONS" FORMS A GUIDE 'I FOR THE FOLLOWING COXIENTS. I. CLOSENESS OF TURNING MOVEMENTS FROM THE PARKING INTO THE HIGHWAY. MR. WILLIAM REINHARDT, STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSIONER, STATED THAT THIS COULD BE A PROBLEM, BUT BELIEVED IT COULD BE RESOLVED BY ALLOWING ONLY A RIGHT TURN INTO THE PARKING IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING CLOSEST TO S.T.H. "24", PROVIDING ANGLE PAGE 8 - PLAN COMM. NOVEMBER 1, 1966 PARKING TO ENCOURAGE ONE-WAY FLOW TO THE EAST^ AND BY DESIGNING THE TURN INTO THIS PARKING AREA SO THAT IT WOULD DISCOURAGE ANY ATTEMPT TO USE THIS AS AN EXIT, SINCE THE DEVELOPERS HAVE AGREED TO THIS, THE STATE HIGHWAY GOMHISSION HAS NO OBJECTION. I WOULD TEND TO AGREE WITH THEM IF A SATISFACTORY EXITT.ZAN BE PROVIDED FOR THESE CARS. 2. THE REPLACEMENT OF THE MALL WITH A TRAFFIC CIRCLE: ALTHOUGH THIS IS DESIRABLE FOR TRAFFIC CIRCULATION, IT IS NOT AN ASSET TO SHOPPER CIRCULATION, A PRIME CONSIDERATION IN A SHOPPING CENTER. THIS AREA SHOULD BE RETAINED AS A PEDESTRIAN MALL, BUT THE DEVELOPERS SHOULD APPRECIATE THE TRAFFIC CIRCULA- TION PROBLEMS THIS WILL CREATE. 3. THE PLACEMENT OF SOME OF THE PARKING ON THE PROPERTY u: THE ZONING ORDINANCE DOES NOT PERMIT THIS. IT REQUIRES A SCREENING 4 FEET IN HEIGHT ALONG THE SIDE ABUTTING OR FRONT IN^ ON A RESIDENCE DISTRICT AND REQUIRES THAT DRIVES AND PARKED THE SITE PLAN DOES NOT MEET THIS REQUIREMENT ALONG LANNON DRIVE. ALSO, THE ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIRES THAT NO VEHICLE SHALL BE IS NOT MET ALONG S.T.H. 24 . IT WILL BE DIFFICULT FOR THE CARS BE AT LEAST 10 FEET AWAY FROM ANY RESIDENTIAL LOT LINE. PARKED CLOSER THAN 10 FE,ZIT TIO THE EXISTING STREET LINE AND THIS PROPOSED LAYOUT TO MEET ALL OF THESE REQUIREMENTS, BUT I BELIEVE THESE RESTRICTIONS SHOULD BE MET SINCE THEY ARE REASON- ABLE AND DESIRABLE. THESE AREAS PROVIDE THE DESIRED STRIPS FOR LANDSCAPING AND BUFFERING. 4. THE 60' PARKING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES: THIS 60 FEET IS A NON-EXCLUSIVE PERPETUAL USE EASEMENT TO BOTH OF PARKLAND PLAZA, INC. CONSEQUENTLY, AT LEAST 50 FEET EAST FOR PARKING, ACCESS, AND LOADING PURPOSES ONLY, THIS WOULD PROPERTIES OF A PARKING LOT WHICH SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING CLOSEST TO THE STREET SHALL BE USED REQUrRE THE REMOVAL OF THE CANOPY, WALK, AND PLANTING AREA SHOWN FOR THIS SIDE OF THE BUILDING. 5. THE RELATIONSHIP OF DRAINAGE BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS 4 ~~ TE STEM: THIS CANNOT BE ANALYZED BASED ON THE INFORPIATION PROVIDED. ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING DATA SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN THE FUTURE TO INDICATE HOW THE DRAINAGE PROBLEM WILL BE HANDLED. 6. a: THE PREVIOUS SITE PLAN IS DEFINITELY SUPERIOR TO THE ONE NOW BEING PRESENTED, HOWEVER, THE FACT THAT THE RAMMEL AND KELLNER PROPERTIES HAVE NOT BEEN ACQUIRED MAKES THE PREVIOUS SITE PLAN UNREALISTIC SINCE THEY WERE ESSENTIAL PROPERTIES TO THAT DESIGN. 7. CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO SOILS IN THE AREA WITH 3: THE :OIL MAPS PREPARED BY THE CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT INDICATE THAT THE SOILS HAVE FAIR TO POOR BEARING CAPACITY AND ARE SUB- JECT TO SWELLING WHEN WET, PERIODIC HIGH WATER TABLE, EXCESSIVE COMPRESSIBILITY, ETC. SINCE NO BORING DATA HAS BEEN ~RESEN~E,D, PAGE 9 - PLAN COMM. NOVEMBER 1, 1966 IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DETERMINE THE ABILITY TO CONSTRUCT THE PROPOSED BUILDINGS. THIS INFORMATION SHOULD BE REQUIRED OF THE DEVELOPERS AS MORE DETAILED ANALYSES ARE MADE BY THE CITY. PROVISION OF ADEQUATE DRAINAGE TO MUSKEGO LAKE MAY IMPROVE THIS SITUATION. 8. CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE DETERMINATION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION HAS APPROVED THE RELOCATED ACCESS POINTS TO HIGHWAY 24: MR. WILLIAM REINHARDT, STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSIONER, STATED THAT THE RELOCATED ACCESS FOLLOWING CONCLUSIONS. THE ACCESS TO THE PARKING IN FRONT OF EXIT AS PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED. THE COMMON ACCESS FOR THE POINTS HAD BEEN DISCUSSED WITH THE DEVELOPERS RESULTING IN THE THE FIRST BUILDING SHOULD BE REDESIGNED TO PREVENT USE AS AN SHOPPING CENTER AND SERVICE STATION WAS ACCEPTABLE, BUT THE ENTRY INTO THE SHOPPING CENTER FROM THE SERVICE STATION SHOULD BE REDESIGNED TO PREVENT THE REVERSE FLOW OF TRAFFIC. HE APPARENTLY HAS DEFINITE DESIGNS WHICH HE WOULD REQUIRE AND WHICH COULD BE AVAILABLE TO THE CITY FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES. TKE DEVELOPERS HAVE AGREED WITH THE SUGGESTIONS OF THE STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION STAFF. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: 1. WHETHER END PLANTINGS, AS SHOWN, OR PLANTINGS BETWEEN ABUTTING STALLS SHOULD BE REQUIRED IS A DETERMINATION FOR THE CITY TO MAKE. USE OF PLANTINGS BETWEEN STALLS WILL PROBABLY ACCEPTABLE DESIGN AND IS APPARENTLY FAVORED BY THE CITY OF ZI'USKEGO. THERE ARE BENEFITS AND DRAWBACKS TO BOTH METHODS, BUT I WON'T ATTEMPT TO DISCUSS THIS AT THIS TIME. RESULT IN THE LOSS OF SOME PARKING SPACES, BUT THIS IS AN 2. THE "PIN-WHEEL RELATIONSHIP OF THE BUILDINGS APPEARS 11 MORE SUITED TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE PLAN THAN IT DOES TO THE PRESENT ONE. Loss OF THE RAMMEL AND KELLNER PROPERTIES DESIGN THAT DID NOT EXIST IN THE PREVIOUS ONE. BASED ON THE CREATE TRAFFIC CIRCULATION AND VISIBILITY PROBLEMS IN THE PRESENT FACT THAT THIS CENTER HAS OBTAINED CERTAIN ESSENTIAL LEASES BASED ON THE PRESENT DESIGN, IT MIGHT BE DIFFICULT TO MAKE REVISIONS NOW AND EXPECT DEVELOPMENT IN THE NEAR FUTURE. HOW- EVER, I BELIEVE IT ESSENTIAL THAT THE DEVELOPERS WEIGH THE POSSIBLE DRAWBACKS OF THE PRESENT DESIGN COMPARED TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE PLAN, AND DECIDE WHETHER THEY HAVE THE BEST SOLUTION FOR THE TENANTS OF-THE C~ENTER AND FOR THE DESIRED SHOPPERS. SOIL BORINGS MIGHT. GOVERN WHERE BUILDINGS CAN BE CONSTRUCTED, so THEY SHOULD BE OBTAINED. IF THE CITY REQUIRES THE OFFSETS FROM STREETS AND RESIDENTIAL LOT LINES AND THE CREATION OF A PEDESTRIAN MALL RATHER THAN THE TRAFFIC CIRCLE BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS, THE DEVELOPERS MAY HAVE TO MAKE SOME CHANGES IN THE SITE PLAN. PAGE 10 - PLAN COMM. NOVEMBER 1 , 1966 3. THE DESIGN DOES NOT ADEQUATELY SHOW HOW LOADING AND DETAILS ARE DEVELOPED BASED ON TENANTS' NEEDS, THE BUILDING UNLOADING WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED FOR EACH BUILDING. AS THESE ORIENTATION MAY NOT BE AS ATTRACTIVE AS IT IS NOW WHEN OVER- HANGS, WALKS, AND PLANTINGS HAVE TO BE REMOVED DUE TO LOADING AND UNLOADING NEEDS. 4. THE PROPOSED JEROME DRUGS' BUILDING WILL DEFINITELY HAVE AN AESTHETIC EFFECT ON THE PARKLAND PLAZA BUILDINGS AND OVERALL SITE DEVELOPMENT. EFFORTS HAVE TO BE MADE TO BLEND THE TWO PROBLEMS COMMON TO BOTH. COORDINATION OF THE TWO PROJECTS IS A HUSTI' IF THE END RESULT IS TO BE ACCEPTABLE TO BOTH PARTIES AND BENEFICIAL TO THE CITY. FROM AN AESTHETIC STANDPOINT AS WELL AS FROM THE ENGINEERING II 5. PROVISION FOR ONLY TWO BUILDINGS RATHER THAN THREE PLACED IN A MODIFIED V ORIENTATION TO EACH OTHER WITH A PEDESTRIAN HALL BETWEEN THEM MIGHT BE A REASONABLE REDESIGN MIGHT HAVE TEN DIFFERENT SOLUTIONS TO THE BEST LAYOUT, SO I 11 11 FOR THE CENTER. HOWEVER, IT IS ALSO WELL KNOWTHAT TEN PLANNERS DO NOT WANT TO STRESS IT. ALSO, I HAVE NOT BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT UNTIL JUST RECENTLY, SO I AM NOT AS FAMILIAR WITH ALL OF THE LAYOUTS AND NEGOTIATIONS WITH TENANTS THAT HAS OCCURRED IN THE LAST TWO YEARS. IF PROPER CONTROLS ARE CIAL TO THE CITY. EXERCISED ON THE LAYOUT AS SUBMITTED, IT SHOULD PROVE BENEFI- 6. SOME CHANGES ARE NECESSARY IN THE DESIGN TO CONFORM TO ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS AS PREVIOUSLY NOTED IN THIS REPORT, THE DESIGN SHOULD BE RESUBMITTED WITH THESE REVISIONS BEFORE FINAL ACTION IS TAKEN. IF THESE REQUIREMENTS CANNOT BE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS COULD PROBABLY BE MADE, BUT THESE CAN BE DISCUSSED AT THE PLAN COMHISSION MEETING ON THIS HATTER. MET, A REDESIGN MAY BE NECESSARY. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, /s/ JOHN W. JAHNKE" MR. DAVE COUTURE REVIEWED THE TWO SITE PLANS AND THE TRAFFIC FLOW AS THEY VISUALIZE IT. FOLLOWING DISCUSSION, THE FOLLOWING MOTION RESULTED: ALD. LENTINI MOVED TO ACCEPT THE SITE PLAN AS SUBMITTED WITH THE CONDITION THAT IT MEETS PROPER ZONING REQUIREMENTS. MR. BERTRAM SECONDED THE MOTION. MR. CHASE MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE: 1. THAT THE PEDESTRIAN MALL BE RETAINED WITHIN THE SITE. 2. THAT THE SITE PLAN BE REVISED TO PROVIDE THE SCREENING AS 3. THAT THE PARKING BE REVISED so PARKING WILL BE NO CLOSER INDICATED IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE. THAN 10' TO THE PROPOSED STREET LINES AS SPECIFIED IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE. 4. THAT SOME RESOLUTION BE SUBMITTED SHOWING THE 60' PARKING 5. THAT THE INFORHATION RELATING TO TOPOGRAPHY, GRADE, DRAIN- AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES. PAGE 11 - PLAN COMM. NOVEMBER 1, 1 966 AGE, ETC., AS PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED BE SUBMITTED. CARRIED. THE MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED. BIG ~SKEGO LAKE STUDY COMMITTEE - REPORT NO. 1 - THE FOLLOWING REPORT DATED OCTOBER 1966 RECEIVED FROM THE BIG MUSKEGO LAKE STUDY COMMITTEE WAS REVIEWED BY THE COMMISSION: '%RT I. BACKGROUND - IT IS NOT IMPORTANT TO THIS REPORT TO REVIEW THE UNUSUAL HISTORY OF BIG MUSKEGO LAKE AND ITS ENVIRONS, AS IT HAS BEEN WELL DOCUMENTED BY OTHERS AND IS WELL KNOWN BY THE CITIZENS OF I~USKEGO. FORTHOSE INTERESTED IN THE HISTORICAL ASPECTS OF THIS NATURAL RESOURCE, PLEASE BE REFERRED TO LAKE USE REPORT No. 3 OF THE WISCONSIN CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT AND A copy OF THE 196s I.V.L.A. STATE CONVENTION PROGRAM, BOTH OF WHICH ARE ENCLOSED. THE CITIZENS OF MUSKEGO NOW RECOGNIZE THAT THE NATURAL WATERS IN AND AROUND MUSKEGO ARE A PRICELESS RESOURCE WHICH PLACE THE CITY IN AN EXCLUSIVE CATEGORY COMPARED TO METROPOLITAN MILWAUKEE AND ITS SURROUNDING AREA. THESE WATERS, BOTH SURFACE AND UNDERGROUND, ARE ALREADY PROVIDING ECONOMIC BENEFITS, BEAUTYJ RECREATION, AND, ABOVE ALL, A POTENTIAL USAGE WHICH, WITH CARE- FUL PLANNING, WILL EXTEND EVEN GIFATER BENEFITS TO THE COMPIUNITY. CAREFUL PLANNING IS EMPHASIZED BY RECOGNITION OF POPULATION INCREASE FORECASTS WHICH DEMAND PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF MUSKEGO'S WATERS TO MINIKIZE POLLUTION, EXPLOITATIOU, AND WASTEFUL USE. CHANGING INTERESTS IN WATER VALUES HAVE TAKEN PLACE IN MUSKEGO OVER THE YEARS, STARTING WITH (1 ) THE INDIAN AND HIS BASIC NEEDS FOR FOOD; (2) THE AGRICULTURIST AND HIS DESIRE TO MARKET PRODUCE TO METROPOLITAN AREAS; (3) THE SPORTSMAN AND HIS DESIRE FOR OUTDOOR RECREATION; (4) THE CITY OF MUSKEGO, WHICH NOW HOLDS THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR FUTURE INTERESTS IN VIEW OF URBANIZATION. IN APRIL OF 1964 CONSERVATION INTERESTS WERE DEMONSTRATED BY THE FORMATION OF A GROUP OF RESPONSIBLE CONSERVATIONISTS WHO SELECTED BIG MUSKEGO LAKE AS ITS NUMBER ONE PROJECT. THE GROUP WAS NAMED OPERATION COMEBACK" AND HAS BEEN CARRYING ON AN AMBITIOUS CAMPAIGN TO GENERATE INTEREST IN RESTORING BIG MUSKEGO LAKE TO ITS ORIGINAL IMPORTANCE AS AN OUTDOOR RECREA- TION ASSET. OPERATION COMEBACK AND ITS AFFILIATION WITH THE IZAAK VALTOY LEAGUE OF AMERICA BROUGHT SIGNIFICANCE TO THE OF I. W. L. A. TO MUSKEGO, WHERE THE PROGRAM WAS REVEALED AND DISCUSSED IN DETAIL. WISCONSIN CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT OFFI- CIALS PRESENT AT THE CONVENTION RECOGNIZED THE IMPORTANCE OF A SURVEY OF THE BIG MUSKEGO LAKE BASIN. THE Id. C. D. TEAM BEGAN ITS WORK IN JULY, 1965, AND SUBMITTED THE ENCLOSED REPORT IN HAARCH, 1966. It BIG JfUSKEGO LAKE PROJECT BY BRINGING THE 1965 STATE CONVENTION THE PROJECT, AND A TEAM OF SPECIALISTS WAS APPOINTED TO CONDUCT PAGE 12 - PLAN COMM. JOVEMBER 1, 1966 CITY OF MUSKEGO OFFICIALS ALSO RECOGNIZED THE IMPORTANCE OF THE PROJECT AND RESPONDED WITH MAYOR GOTTFRIED APPOINTING A SEVEN MAN COMMITTEE TO JOIN WITH THE CONSERVATION INTERESTS (OPERATION COMEBACK) AND THE W. C. D. TO STUDY BIG MUSKEGO LAKE IN TERMS OF PLANNING ITS ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT. PART II. ACTIVITY REPORT - THE BIG MUSKEGO LAKE STUDY COMMITTEE, IN CO-OPERATION WITH OPERATION COMEBACK REPRESENTATIVES, BEGAN ITS ACTIVITY WITH MONTHLY MEETINGS, THE MEETINGS WERE HELD TO. ESTABLISH COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES, INCLUDING GOALS AND OBJECTIVES. THE COMMITTEE RECOGNIZED THAT ITS RESPONSIBILITIES ARE TO THE CITIZENS OF MUSKEGO AND THE CITY'S DuLr ELECTED OFFICERS, THE CITY COUNCIL. THE COMMITTEE'S GOALS AND OBJEC- 1. STUDY BIG I~USKEGO LAKE TO FACTUALLY ESTABLISH ITS TIVES ARE.' CURRENT PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS. 2. STUDY BIG MUSKEGO LAKE TO ISOLATE AND DEFINE ITS PROBLEMS, ASSETS OR VALUES, AND AVENUES FOR IMPROVEMENT. 3. RECOMMEND TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL A PLAN OF ACTION WHICH WILL ENABLE THE CrTr OF I~USKEGO TO BIG MUSKEGO LAKE RESOURCE. CARRY OUT ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT AND GAIN MAXIMUM VALUE OF THE e 4. ADVISE AND RECOMMEND POTENTIAL SOURCES OF FUNDING (STATE AND FEDERAL) FOR CARRYING OUT THE PROGRAM AND HOW FUNDING MAY BE OBTAINED. ITS ASSIGNMENT REPRESENTED, AS WELL AS ITS IMPORlXNCEo THE COMMITTEE APPOINTEES AND ITS OPERATION COMEBACK ASSISTANTS RECOGNIZED THEIR PERSONAL QUALIFICATIONS TO KNOWLEDGEABLY CARRY OUT SUCH AN ASSIGNMENT DID NOT MATCH THE TECHNICAL NEEDS OF THE THE COMMITTEE AS A WHOLE FIRST REALIZED THE IMMENSE TASK PROJECT. IT IS AT THIS POINT THAT THE COMMITTEE DECIDED TO PLACE GREAT EMPHASIS ON THE STUDY WHICH THE WISCONSIN CONSERVA- TION DEPARTMENT WAS CONDUCTING ON BIG MUSKEGO LAKE. COMMITTEE OF MR. DONALD WIESELMANN. AND DISCUSS THE W. C. D. LAKE USE REPORT No. 3 CONCERNING BIG MUSKEGO LAKE. IT WAS CONCLUDED AT THIS MEETING THAT THE W. C. a. UNBIASED REVIEW OF ~~USKEGO'S LARGEST NATURAL RESOURCE, AND COMPLETELY SATISFIED ITEMS 1 AND 2 OF THE COMMITTEE'S GOALS CONTACT WITH THE ki. c. D. WAS MAINTAINED THROUGH THE EFFORFS ON APRIL 27, 1966, A COMMITTEE MEETING WAS HELD TO REVIEW REPORT REPRESENTED A HIGHLY PROFESSIONAL, SCIENTIFIC, AND AND OBJECTIVES. FURTHER COMMITTEE MEETINGS WERE HELD TO DISCUSS POTENTIAL METHODS FOR USING THE w. c. De REPORT AS THE BASIS FOR PREPARATION OF A FORJYAL PROPOSAL DESIGNED TO ESTABLISH A @ DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PROVIDE A MEANS TO JUSTIFY REQUZSTS FOR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO THE STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS. I PAGE 13 - PLAN COMM. NOVEMBER 1 , 1966 HERE AGAIN THE COWHITTEE RECOGNIZED ITS INCAPABILITIES IN THE AREAS OF PROFESSIONAL PLANNING, PROPOSAL PREPARATION, AND THE ESSENTIAL TECHNIQUES REQUIRED FOR DETERMINING SOURCES OF FUNDING. MAYOR GOTTFRIED SUGGESTED THAT THE COMMITTEE CONTACT MAX ANDERSON ASSOCIATES FOR A PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION AS TO THE FEASIBILITY OF CARRYING OUT ITEHS 3 AND 4 OF THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES. MR. MAX ANDERSON MET WITH THE COMMITTEE ON TWO DATES IN JULY AND AUGUST, 1966. AT THE FIRST HEETING GENERAL PROJECT FEASIBILITY WAS DISCUSSED ACCORDING TO THE ITEMS LISTED IN THE ATTACHED OUTLINE. MR. ANDERSON REVIEWED THE OUTLINE AND OFFERED GENERAL COMMENTS AS TO WHETHER THE PROJECT SHOWED REAL DEVELOPMENT POSSIaILITES AND THE POSSIBLE AVENUES WHICH COULD BE PURSUED TO QUALIFY FOR FEDERAL ASSISTANCE, I~R. ANDERSON’S MAJOR POINTS WERE: 1. GREAT CONCERN FOR THE SIZE OF THE PROJECT. 2. NEED FOR AN OVER-ALL PLAN DESIGNED TO QUALIFY THE 3. ESTIMATED PROJECT SOUNDNESS AND ELIGIBILITY FOR 4. EHPHASIZED NEED FOR BALANCED PUBLIC AND PRIVATE USE THE COMMITTEE REQUESTED MR. MAX ANDERSON TO STUDY THE PROJECT FOR FEDERAL FUNDS. FEDERAL ASSISTANCE TO BE HIGH. TO YIELD ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT. PROJECT FURTHER AND RETURN F.OR A SECOND MEETING TO DISCUSS A PLAN OF ACTION MORE SPECIFICALLY AND WITHIN BOUNDS AS ESTAB- LISHED BY THE COMMITTEE. IT WAS DECIDED TO CONCENTRATE PLAIVNING ON THE NORTHERNMOST SECTION OF BIG MUSKEGO LAKE INCLUDING A PORTION OF BASS BAY. A SECOND MEETING WAS HELD WITH MR. MAX ANDERSON, WHO WAS IN DREDGING OF LAKES. MR. ANDERSON SHOWED LAYOUTS OF SIMILAR LAKE WINNEBAGO AND THE CASTEL ROCK FLOWAGE. BOTH PLANS EMPHA- SIZED PUBLIC AND PRIVATE USAGE, IN REGARD TO THE BIG MUSKEGO PROJECT, MR. ANDERSON EXPRESSED A HIGH DEGREE OF INTEREST IN TO MILWAUKEE. GENERAL DISCUSSION CENTERED UPON POTENTIAL ACCOMPANIED BY A REPRESENTATIVE OF AN ENGINEERING FIRM EXPERIENCED LAKE DEVELOPMENT PLANS HIS FIRM IS CURRENTLY SUPERVISING ON THE CHALLENGE OF SUCH A PROJECT WHICH IS IN CLOSE PROXIMITY UNIQUE FEATURES OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, CONSISTING OF: 1. PUBLIC PARK SITE, ACCESS TO BIG MUSKEGO LAKE, 18 HOLE GOLF COURSE, HORSEBACK RIDING TRAILS, AND DREDGING OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE LAKE, INCLUDING AN INCREASED NUMBER OF ACCESS CHANNELS. 2. PRIVATE HOMESITES DESIGNED TO ABUTT PUBLIC FACILITIES 3. ITEMS 1 AND 2 TO BE DESIGNED AS AN INTERTWINING PUBLIC- OF ITEM 1, INCLUDING LAKE ACCESS WHEREVER POSSIBLE. PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT IN ORDER TO GAIN MAXIMUM QUALIFICATION FOR PAGE 14 - PLAN COMM. NOVEMBER 1, 1966 MR. IYAX ANDERSON WAS REQUESTED BY THE COMMITTEE TO SUBMIT A LETTER PROPOSAL TO ESTABLISH COST FOR PREPARING INITIAL PLANS AND ESTABLISHING PROJECT FEASIBILITY AND COST. SEE ATTACHED LETTER. THIS REPRESENTS BIG MUSKEGO LAKE STUDY COMMITTEE ACTIVITY TO DATE. Pmx III. RECOMMENDATIONS - BASED UPON THE PRECEEDING ACTIVITY REPORT, THE BIG ZUSKEGO LAKE STUDY COMMITTEE WISHES TO RECOM- PIEND: 1. RECOGNITION BY THE PLANNING COXMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE MAJOR CONTRIBUTIONS MADE BY THE WISCONSIN CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT AND OPERATION COMEBACK TO THE BIG MUSKECO LAKE PROJECT. 2. THE APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE ALLOCATION OF CITY OF MUSKEGO FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $5, oo~.oo TO HIRE THE SERVICES OF A PLANNING CONSUL- TANT. 3. THE ACCEPTANCE AND APPROVAL OF MAX ANDERSON ASSOCIATES' TIME AND MATERIALS PROPOSAL DATED SEPTEMBER 1, 1966, AND INCLU- DING ITEMS 1 AND 2 IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1,200.00. A $500.00 RETAINER FEE SHALL BE ISSUED FIRST. AT OR PRIOR TO THE CONCLUSION OF ITEMS 1 AND 2, THE PLANNER SHALL SUBMIT LISTED IN ITEM 3 (PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATES). UPON REVIEW PLANNER, FUNDS FOR ITEM 3 WOULD BE ALLOCATED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL. THREE QUOTATIONS PREPARED TO COMPLETE THE STATEMENT OF WORK OF THE THREE QUOTATIONS, INCLUDING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE 4. UPOX CONCLUSION OF PLANNING ACTIVITY LISTED IN ITEMS 1, 2, AND 3, THE PLANNER SHALL BE REQUESTED TO SUPPLY THE NECESSARY FORMAL PROPOSAL AND ASSISTANCE TO ESTABLISH AND SEEK STATE AND FEDERAL FUNDS. IN CONCLUSION, THE BIG MUSKEGO STUDY COMMITTEE OFFERS ITS CONTINUING SERVICE TO THE CITY COUNCIL IN WHATEVER ASSIGNMENTS IT DESIGNATES. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, /s/ JOHN JIEINHARDT, CHAIRMAN WILLIAM SPONHOLTZ ROY HENRICHS, SR. ROBERT W. UNGER D. WIESELMANN ALTON BOLDT F. W. GULTCH" ! AFTER DISCUSSION, MR. CHASE MOVED TO RETAIN THE FIRM OF MAX ANDERSON & Assoc. TO DO THE PRELIMINARY STUDY ON THE BIG MUSKEGO LAKE, AMOUNT FOR STUDY NOT TO EXCEED $1200.00~. PLANNER KNETZGER SUGGESTED THAT MORE THOUGHT BE GIVEN ~ MR. RAIMANN SECONDED THE MOTION. I TO THE DETAILS WHICH THE STUDY WOULD ENTAIL. I I MR. CHASE WITHDREW HIS MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF HIS PAGE 15 - PLAN COMM. NOVEMBER 1 1966 0 SECOND^ h. RAIMANN. THE COMMITTEE, APPEAR AT THE NEXT PLAN COMMISSION MEETING, MR. RAIMANN MOVED THAT I~R. JOHN MEINHARDT~ CHAIRMAN OF NOVEMBER ?STH, TO GIVE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. MR. BERTRAM SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION CARRIED. ADJOURNIfENT - MR. BUEHLER MOVED FOR ADJOURNME~T~ ALD. LENTINI SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 12:OS P. M. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED~ BARBARA J. SANDS RECORDING SECRETARY 11-8-66 REPORT TO PLAN CONflISSION r RECORDS @ RE: JAMES HERNKE, JIM'S AUTO SERVICE, S73 MI6680 JANESVILLE RD. DECEMBER 3. 1957 - TOWN BOARD MINUTES - HEARING - HELD AT MUSKEGO CITY HALL AT 7:30 P. M. CHAIRMAN GOTTFRIED CONVENED THE BOARD AT 7:30, DELBERT CUHR AND JEROME GOTTFRIED BEING PRESENT, PATRICK WHITE ABSENT. WAS TO HEAR THE PLEA OF DELBERT GUHR FOR A CONDITIONAL USE STATUS FOR THE FOLLOWING: THE SF TWO ACRES OF A 7.153 ACRE PLAT OF LAND IN THE E+, ifW+ OF SECTION 10. THERE BEING NO OBJECTIONS THE HEARING WAS DECLARED ]fR. GOTTFRIED EXPLAINED THAT THE PURPOSE OF THE HEARING ADJOURNED AT 7:40 P. M. ECEMBER 3. 1957 - TOWN BOARD MINUTES - REGULAR MEETING - !RESENT: CHAIRMAN GOTTFRIED, DELBERT GUHR AND PATRICK FJHITE. PATRICK VHITE MOVED THAT THE REQUEST OF DELBERT GUHR FOR CONDITIONAL USE STATUS BE GRANTED, CHAIRPIAN GOTTFRIED SECONDED AND THE MOTION CARRIED. JANUARY 27. 1964 - JAMES HERNKE PETITIONED FOR EXPANSION OF CONDITIONAL USE FOR THE PURPOSE OF REMODELING IN ACCORDANCE a WITH SEC. 0.14 C. FE BR UA R Y 2 k. 196k - PLAN COMM. J~INUTES - PUBLIC HEARING - HELD FEB. 24,- 1964, a:oo P. M. , TO CONSIDER THE PETITION OF JAMES D. HERNKE FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE FOLL.OWINC - SHALL COND. USE GRANT EXPANSION BE APPROVED FOR THE PURPOSE OF REMO- DELING IN ACCORDANCE WITH SEC. 0.14C IN THE NW+, SEC. IO. CHASE, BUDISH, KNETZGER AND LEE. THE CLERK READ THE PETITION PRESENT WERE GOTTFRIED, BOSTATER, BUERLER, MACHK~VICH, AND PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING SAME. THE BOARD ATTEMPTED TO FIND GRANT OF ORIGINAL COND. USE STATUS GRANT ONLY TO FIND THAT IT WAS NOT CLEARLY DEFINED - THE REASON BEING - A QUESTION AROSE AS TO THE POSSIBLE VIOLATION OF JUNKED CARS PRESENTLY BEING STORED ON PROPERTY. THE CHAIRMAN FELT THAT THIS WAS A ZONING VIOLATION AND SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED A QUESTIOM OF WHETHER AN EXPANSION SHOULD BE GRANTED. AT THIS POINT THE PLANNER EXPLAINED THAT JUNKED CARS WHICH HAY HAVE BEEN dS A RESULT OF AN ACCUMULATION OF YEARSJ PERHAPS EVEN PRIOR TO ORIGINAL GRANT, COULD NOT HAVE BEEN CONTROLLED UP UNTIL THIS POINT, PROVIDING, HOWEVER THEY HAD NOT BECOME UNSIGHTLY, BUT NOW COULD BE CONTROLLED OR ELIMINATED AS PART OF CONDITIONS SET FORTH WITHIN GRANT - IF BOARD so DESIRES. EXAMPLE - IF THERE ARE PRESENTLY PARKED 4 JUNKED CARS - THE EXPANSION COULD BE GRANTED CONDITIONED UPON 0 THE FACT THAT THESE CARS BE REMOVED WITHIN AN X NUMBER OF PAGE 2 - JAMES HERNKE NOVEMBER 9, 1966 MONTHS, ETC. . HR. CLAUDE MILLER STATED THAT HE WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF HR, HERNKE STATED THAT ALL HE INTENDS TO DO IS REMOVE A AN EXPANSION AS FAR AS THE BUILDING ISCONCERNED. PARTITION USING SPACE FOR EXPANSION - SAID USE BEING ADDITIONAL STALL. THERE WAS NO ONE IN OPPOSITION TO THE ABOVE REQUEST AND THE MEETING WAS DECLARED ADJOURNED AT 8:lO P. M. FEBRUARY 2h. 196k - PLAN COMM. MINUTES - REGULAR MEETING (EXCERPT) PRESENT: GOTTFRIED, BOSTATER, BUEHLER, MACHKOVICH AND CHASE, BUDISH, KNETZGER AND LEE. REGARDING PETITION FOR EXP. OF COND. USE STATUS GRANT OF JAMES D. HERNKE, SAID PETITIONER OFFERED THE FOLLOWING INFOR- MATION - ADDITION WILL BE 7' x 14' THUS EXPANDING PRESENT IN- SIDE SINGLE CAR SPALL. QUESTION AROSE AS TO STORAGE OF JUNKED CARS. MR. HERNKE SAID THAT !fR. GUHR, PREVIOUS OWNER, HAD JUNKED CARS STORED THERE BEFORE AND AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE AGR.EED TO MOVE THOSE THAT BELONGED TO HIM, BUT HAD NOT. HE HIMSELF USES THOSE THAT HE OWNS FOR PARTS. STRIPPING OF EACH DUE TO LACK OF STORAGE, ACCORDING TO HERNKE. MR. HERNKE CAR FOR USABLE PARTS PRIOR TO JUNKING WOULD NOT BE FEASIBLE OFFERED TO PLANT SOME TREES, POSSIBLY POPLARS, THUS SCREENING AREA OFF AND AFTER SOME DISCUSSION REGARDING LEGALITY OF SUCH STORAGE THE FOLLOWING NOTION WAS MADE BY MR. CHASE, AS SECONDED GRANTED TO JAITES HERNKE FOR PURPOSE OF REMODELIYG IN ACCORDANCE WITH SEC. 0.14 C ON PT OF THE NW$ - SEC. 70, CONDITIONED UPON GRANT. MOTION CARRIED. BY MR. BUEHLER, THAT THE EXPANSION OF A COND. USE STATUS BE REMOVAL OF SAID JUNKED VEHICLES WITHIN ONE YEAR FROM DATE OF APRIL 28. 196h - BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES - EXCEfiPT hESEI?T: .- RADTKE, LETTO, FONAAS & SMET MR. JAMES HERNKE OF s73 Wl6600 JANESVILLE RD., MUSKEGO 1 , MIS. , REQUESTED 5' OFFSET FROM WEST LOT LINE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENLARGING PRESENT REPAIR GARAGE LOCATED IN B-4 ZONING. I~R. FONAAS REVIEWED MINUTES OF THE PLAN COXKISSION COVERING THE THE BOARD THAT I~R. HERNKE'S ACCUMULATION OF JUNKED CARS AND GRANT OF EXP. OF COND. USE. IT WAS THE UNANIMOUS OPINION OF OTHER MATERIAL HAS AN ADVERSE AFFECT ON THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY VALUES AS WELL AS GENERAL APPEARANCE FROM THE VIEW- POINT OF POTENTIAL TOWN DEVELOPMENT. MR. RADTKE, AFTER RELINQUISHING CHAIRMANSHIP TO MR. LETTO, MADE THE FOLLOWING THE TIME THE BUILDING PERMIT IS ISSUED HR. IYERNKE HAS STOPPED ,e ON PREMISzs. MOTION SECONDED BY MR. FONAAS AND MOTION PASSED MOTION - THAT THIS APPEAL FOR VARIANCE BE GRANTED, IF, PRIOR TO JUNKING CARS AND HAS REMOVED ALL JUNKED CARS PXESENTLY STORED UNANIMOUSLY. PAGE 3 - JAMES HERNKE IVOVEMBER 9, 1966 APRIL 29. 1961, - COMMUNICATION DIRECTED TO JAMES HERNKE FROK THE BOARD OF APPEALS DEAR MR. HERNKE: THE BOARD OF APPEALS WISHES TO ADVISE YOU THAT YOUR APPEAL FOR VARIANCE AS PRESENTED TO OUR MEETING ON APF~IL 28TH HAS B%EN GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. THAT PRIOR TO THE TIME A BUILDING PERMIT IS ISSUED FOR THE PROPOSED ADDITION YOU SHALL CEASE JUNKING CARS AND ALSO REMOVE ALL JUNKED CARS WHICH ARE PRESENTLY STORED ON THE PREMISES. /s/ GEORGE ki. LETTO SECRETARY YOURS VERY TRULY, AUGUST 27. l96l1 - COURT SUMMONS WAS ISSUED TO JAMES HERNKE BY GERALD P. LEE FOR VIOLATION OF SEC. 3.02 - BUILDING WITHOUT A PERMIT. A> ABOVE SUMMONS DEFENDANT ENTERED PLEA OF GUILTY. h. HERNKE STATED THEY PURCHASED BUILDING IN JULY, 1963, AND DID INHERIT SOME JUNKED CARS FROM PREVIOUS OWNER, MR. GUHR. STATED IT IS NOT FINAN- CIALLY FEASIaLE TO HIRE HELP TO CLEAN UP YARD AND IS UNABLE TO DO IT HIMSELF AS HE WORKS 12 TO 14 HOURS PER DAY IN SHOP. MRS. HERNKE STATED THEY DID DO SOME IMPROVING TO THE FRONT, SUCH AS PLANTING TREES, CLEANING YARD, ETC. DIRECTIVE OF BD. OF APPEALS WAS READ BY JUDGE, CASE BEING CONFIRMED BY CHAIRMAN RADTKE. FOLLOWING DISCUSSION OF TIME ALLOWED BY COURT TO REMOVE JUNKED CARS, MRS. HERNKE SUGGESTED COURT ESTABLISH SAME. INSP. LEE STATED THAT DEFENDANT WOULD BE PERMITTED TO STRIP USABLE PARTS, STORE IN CONCEALED AREA & JUNK BALANCE, HAULING SAME AWAY. JUDGEMENT - GUILTY - JUNKED CARS & DEBRIS SHALL BE RE- VOVED - 45 DAYS. OCTOBER 13. 1964 - COURT SUMMONS WAS ISSUED TO JAMES HERNKE BY OFFICER VM. E. BOHLMAN FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT - FAILURE TO COMPLETE ABOVE. OCTOBER IL, 196L - RECORD FROM COURT DOCKET #I62 JUDGE BERGEN GRANTED HR. HERNKE 60 DAYS TO COMPLETE JUDGEMENT - GUILTY - FINED $29.00 CLEAN-UP JOB. PAGE 4 - JAMES HERNKE i?OVEMBER 9, 1966 . 1965 - PLAN COMM. MINUTES - REGULAR IEETING (EXCERPT) SUILDING INSPECTOR LEE REPORTED THAT JAMES HERNKE HAS BEEN MAKING AN EFFORT TO CLEAR UP HIS PROPERTY. FURTHER ACTION WAS DEFERRED FOR TWO WEEKS. MAY 18. 1965 - PLAN COMMISSION PIINUTES - REGULAR P~EETING (EXCERPT) THE AREA CLEARED UP IN A SHORT TIME. MR. CHASE SUGGESTED THAT IT BE PUT ON THE AGENDA FOR, THE NEXT MEETING, JUNE 1 , 1965. JUNE 1, 1965 - PLAN COMM. MINUTES - REGULAR I~EETING (EXCERPT) STATUS AT HIS AUTO REPAIR BUSINESS, S73 &'I6680 W. JANESVILLE RD. IN SECTION 10. THE RECORDING SECRETARY READ THE MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC HEARING AND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF FEB. 24, USE. IT WAS NOTED THAT ONE OF THE CONDITIONS SET FORTH WAS BUILDING INSPECTOR LEE REPORTED THAT JAMES HERNKE WILL HAVE I%. JAMES HERNKE APPEARED IN REGARD TO HIS CONDITIONAL USE 1964, AS REGARDED MR. HERNKE'S PETITION FOR EXP. OF CONDITIONAL THAT CERTAIN JUNKED CARS WERE TO RE REMOVED WITHIN ONE YEAR FilOM DATE OF GRANT. !fR. HERNKE REPORTED THAT HE HAD PLANTED POPLAR TREES AROUND THE BACK BUT THEY WERE STILL TOO SMALL TO PROVIDE AMPLE SCREENING; AND THAT FOUR OF THE TREES HE HAD PLANTED HAD DIED BECAUSE OF THE SEVERE WINTER. THE COMMISS,ION VIEWED FAVORABLY THAT HE HAD REDUCED THE NUMBER CF JUNKED CARS FROM 15 TO 4 IN THE PAST YEAR AND HAD ATTEMPTED TO COMPLY WITH THE CONDITIONS AS CONCERNED SCREENING. HE ADVISED THE COMMISSION THAT THE JUNKED CARS WERE USED FOR STORAGE FOR SPARE PARTS. IfR. HERNKE COMMENTED THAT IT WAS DIFFICULT TO RUN A BUSINESS AND DO LANDSCAPING AT THE SAME TIME AND THAT HE WAS NOT IN A POSITION FINANCIALLY TO HIRE A LANDSCAPER. PLANNER KNETZGER RECOMMENDE.D THAT Ih. HERNKE BE GIVEN AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME TO REMOVE THE JUNKED VEHICLES AS THE AREA WHERE THEY ARE NOW STORED MIGHT NOT BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE FUmE DEVELOPMENT NEAE THE AREA. MR. CHASE MOVED, AS SECONJED BY MR. BUEHLER, THAT THE CONDITIONAL USE GRANT OF JAMES HERNKE FOR AN AUTO AND TRUCK REPAIR SHOP ON STH 24 IN SECTION 10 BE MODIFIED so THAT THE TIME LIMIT ORIGINALLY SET FOR REMOVAL OF ALL JUNKED VEHICLES BE EXTENDEDa SAID TIME LIMIT FOR COMPLETE REMOVAL TO BECOME ONE YEAR FROM THIS DATE, DURING WHICH PERIOD NO MORE THAN 4 SUCH VEHICLES SHALL a~ KEPT ON THE PREMISES. MOTION CARRIED. L e SEPTEMBER 6. ,1966 - THE COMMISSION RECEIVED A PETITION FOR EXPANSION OF CONDITIONAL USE SUBMITTED BY JAMES HERNKE TO CONSTRUCT A POLE TYPE SHED, THUS REQUEST FOR PAST RECORDS. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, B. SANDS RECORDING SECRETARY W100 57742 RAClNE AVENUE * MUSKEGO. WlSCONSlN PHONE 679-1700 TO: MAXOR GOTTFEIED~ PLAN COKKISSION HENBZR~ FROM: GERALD P, LEE, BUILDING INSPECTOR . AND PAAN COHSULXAUT RUSSELL KNETZGER THIS LETTER IS BEING MUITPEN I? REGARD TO P088IBLE ZoMIfW CHANGES IN S~CTIOH' ;0.'01 (7) B (PAGE 65) OF TEE ZONINQ URDIUANCE: - '>~ " " - - 2. OUARTERS XOR HOUSEHOLD OR FARK EKPLOXEESJ PROVIDED T-T SUCH QUARTERS SHALL BE OCCUPIED ONLX BX INDI*. PIDUALS ENLOXED FULL PIKE ON THE PREHISES AND THEIR FAKILIES. x. 3. GUEST ROUBBS. ON LOTS OF AT LEAST 120,000 SQUARE FEETJ PROVIDED SUCH STRUCTURE SHALL NOT BE RENTED. LEASEDJ OR USED FOR CONTINUOUS OR PERHANENT EABI' TATION. si,, ?,,>,. ..'3 u I 8UGGESf SITHER OF THE FOLL.' OWING GURGES SO THAT PROPER ENFORCEKENT IU THE SPIBIT ARD IITEBT OF THE ZONING ORDP #ANCE CAN BEST BE SERVEDI I, (1 (A) THAT THESE ACCESSORX USES BE PERHITTED ONLY WITH ~ - APPROVAL OF PEE PLAN COHKISSIOM FOLLOUING THE CRIP'BRIA QF LOCArIOl#, ..SIZEJ XONIIOG DIBTRICT, ETC. OR ,iB) THAT TRESE ACCESSORY USES BE PlACED A8 A CONDITIONAL - - 'USE, ,l ,I THIS =QUEST IS BA8BD ON XEE FdCCT TEAT TEERE EXISTS A PRO+ BLEW IN THE LOCATION AND THE SIZE OF SUCR STRUCTURE WEICH COULD BE DEfRZKEBTAb TO THE SURROUNDING AREA. IT IS PRE- SUXED PEAT THAT BUILDING INSPECTOR COULD BRING EACE APPLI- CATION TO THE PLAN COKXISSION FOR ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL BUT AGAIN THE ZONING ORDINANCE DOES NOT INDICATE TEAT THIS BE DONE, ONLY IU THE CASE OF UNDE8IRABLE STBUCTORES. NOVEMBER 75, 1966 CITY PLAN COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING - RICHARD MAURICE (LAKESIDE TOOL dc MACH. CO. ) MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC HEARING HELD FOR RICHARD MAURICE NOVENBER 15, 1966, CITY HALL TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITION: SHALL THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LAND BE GRANTED AN EXPANSION OF CONDITIONAL USE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SEC. 6.03 (2)(~)(4) FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING A GARAGE: THE NIJ 150' OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PREKISES: THAT PART OF THE SIJ) OF SEC. 9, AND T5N R2OE, TOWN OF MUS- IN THE CENTER LINE OF HIGHWAY 214.50' K OF AND 503.83 ' N 9'30' E FROK THE SE CORNER OF SAID QUARTER SECTION, CON- TINUING THENCE N 8'30' E ALONG CENTER LINE OF SAID HIGHWAY, 396.0' TO A POINT, THENCE N 86'30' kl 148.0' TO THE CENTER KEG~, BOUNDED AS FOLLOWS TO WIT: COHKENCING AT A POINT LINE OF CREEK, THENCE s ALONG CENTER LINE OF SAID CREEK 394.0' KORE OR LESS TO A POINT, THENCE s 86O30' E 57.0' TO THE PLACE OF COKKENCEKENT, THE EASTERLY 33.0' BEING VSED FOR HIGHWAY PURPOSES, ALSO KNOWN AS LAKESIDE TOOL AND MACHINE, K180 s7767 RACINE AVENUE. PRESENT: MAYOR GOTTFRIED, WILLARD BERTRAM, CHARLES BUEHLER, WILLIAK F. CHASE, ALII. S. ROBERT LENTINI AND ED RAIKANN. PLANNER WK. NELSON AND BUILDING INSPECTOR LEE WERE ALSO PRESENT. HAYOR GOTTFRIED DECLARED THE HEARING OPEN AT 7:4O P. M. THE RECORDING SECRETARY READ THE NOTICE OF HEARING AND THE PETITION SUBKITTED BY MR. MAURICE. THE COXKISSION REVIEWED THE EXHIBITS SUBKITTED WITH THE PETITION. MR. MAURICE ADVISED THE COKKISSION THAT IT WAS HIS INTENTION TO BUILD THE GARAGE BETWEEN HIS HOUSE AND THE BUILDING HOUSING HIS BUSINESS AND THE GARAGE WOULD BE USED FOR HIS PERSONAL AUTOKOBILES, THAT THE GARAGE WOULD BE 18' X 20' OR POSSIBLY SKALLER, THAT THE GARAGE COULD BE BUILT EITHER USING THE EXISTING WALLS OF THE BUSINESS BUILDING OR AS A SPARATE STRUCTURE DEPENDING ON THE WISHES OF THE COKKISSIOM. BUILDING INSPECTOR LEE ADVISED THAT THE LEACH BED WAS NOT IN THE AREA OF THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, THAT THIS ADDITION WOULD FALL UNDER CONDITIONAL USE EVEN THOUGH IT WOULD BE USED FOR PERSONAL AUTONOBILES AND THAT THE ENTIRE AREA WAS LISTED ON THE TAX ROLL AS ONE PIECE OF PROPERTY. PAGE 2 - PUBL IC HEARING NOVENBER 15, 1966 MAYOR GOTTFRIED REFERRED TO THE FOLLOWING LETTER DATED NOVEMBER 1 I, 1966, WHICH HAD BEEN DIRECTED TO MR. MAURICE FROM BUILDING INSPECTOR LEE: 11 DEAR HR. HAURICE: AN INSPECTION OF YOUR PORPERTY ON IfOVEMBER 9TR REVEALED THAT THERE ARE SOME CONDITIONS WHICH ARE NOT BEING CONPLIED WITH IN ACCORDANCE TO THE CONDITIONS AS SET FORTH BY THE PLAN COMMISSION ON THE 15TH OF FEBRUARY, 1966. ITEM 7 STATES, PARKING NOT TO EXCEED 10 CARS AT ANY I: GIVEN TIME AND THA; NO TRUCKS BE CONSIDERED AS A PART OF THESE 10 VEHICLES. ITEM 0 STATES; PROVISIONS BE MADE TO CHAIN OFF THE ENTRANCE SO THAT THEllLOT WOULD NOT BE USABLE DURING OTHER THAN BUSINESS HOURS. ITEM 9 STATES, SEEDING, PLANTING AND NECESSARY GRAVELING THE SLOPE ON THE NORTH LOT LINE SHOULD BE SEEDED OR AND DUST CONTROL BE COMPLETED BEFORE THE USE OF THE LOT. 1: MAINTAINED SO THAT THERE IS NO SLIPPAGE OF MATERIAL, OR CARS WERE PARKED 10' FROM THE BANK, THE LOT IS SUCH THAT THEY EROSION. THE INSPECTION ALSO REVEALED THAT, ALTHOUGH THE COULD BE PARKED UP TO THE BANK. THERE sHouLn BE 10' VACANT AREA BEFORE THE BANK FOR THE RENOVAL OF SNOW IN THE WINTER TIHE FAILURE TO CONPLY TO THE CONDITIONS SET FORTH HOLD YOUR CONDITIONAL USE OR ANY EXPANSION OF THE CONDITIONAL USE IN JEOPARDY'. KNOWING THAT YOU WILL COEPLY TO THE WISHES OF THE PLAN COMMISSION, I RENAIN YOURS VERY TRULY, ll /s/ GERALD P. LEE BUILDING INSPECTOR LEE ELABORATED ON ITEMS 7, 8 & 9 AND ADVISED THE CONMISSION THAT OTHER CONDITIONS OF THE GRANT HAD BEEN COMPLIED WITH. ITEM 7 - BUILDING INSPECTOR LEE REPORTED THAT 14 VEHICLES MERE PARKED IN THE LOT, ALSO A TRUCK. MR. MAURICE EXPLAINED THAT THERE HAD BEEN A CHZNGE IN THE NUPIBER OF EMPLOYEES ON THE MORNING SHIFT, THUS THE EXTRA CARS, AND THAT ONE OF HIS FULL TIME ENPLOYEES USED A TRUCK AS HIS TRANSPQRATION, RATHER THAN AN AUTOMOBILE. ITEM 0 - MR. HAURICE ADVISED THAT THE CHAIN POSTS HAD BEEN INSTALLED. ITEH 9 - BUILDING INSPECTOR LEE ADVISED THAT THERE DID NOT IT DURING EXTREMELY DRY UEATHER. IT WAS HIS OPINION THAT APPEAR TO BE A DUST PROBLEN ALTHOUGH HE HAD NOT LOOKED AT THIS WOULD NOT PRESENT A PROBLEM AS IT COULD BE TREATED FOR DUST CORTROL IF NECESSARY. PAGE 3 - PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 16, 1966 0 MR. MAURICE ADVISED THAT THE LOT HAD BEEN SEEDED UITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE NORTH BANK, THAT HE PLANS TO RESEED IN THE SPRING, AND THAT EVERGREEN TREES HAVE BEEN PLANTED. HRS. ARNOLD BASELER, JR., Id181 ST770 VALLEY DRIVE, REPORTED THAT THERE WERE 16 VEHICLES PARKED IN THE LOT, TEAT THERE AND REMINDED THE COKKISSION THAT SHE HAD OBJECTED TO THE WAS EROSION - DURIRRO A RAIN MUD SLIDES RAN INTO HER YARD - PLANTING OF POPLAR TREES AT A PREVIOUS HEARING BECAUSE OF AN ALLERGY TO SAME SUFFERED BY HER SON. ACCORDING TO MRS. BASELER, THERE ARE 40 TO 50 POPLAR TREES PLANTED IN THE LOT. MRS. MERLE HAMPE, Id181 S7802 VALLEY DRIVE, OBJECTED TO DUST FROM THE LOT AND REPORTED THAT A RED TRUCK HAD BEEN PARKED IN THE LOT DAYS, NIGHTS AND WEEKENDS. AS THERE UERE NO FURTHER COMMENTS, THE HEARING UAS DECLARED ADJOURNED AT 7:58 P. H. RESPECTFULLY SUEKITTED, BARBARA J. SANDS 11 -1 8-66