Loading...
Plan Commission Minutes 02062024 ApprovedAPPROVED CITY OF MUSKEGO PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES 02/06/2024 6:00 PM Muskego City Hall, W182 S8200 Racine Avenue CALL TO ORDER Mayor Petfalski called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Those present recited the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL ue C4 of SKEGO Present: Mayor Petfalski, Alderman Kubacki, Commissioners Buckmaster, Graf, and Oliver and Planner Trzebiatowski. Absent: Commissioners Gazzana and Bartlett. STATEMENT OF PUBLIC NOTICE The meeting was noticed in accordance with the open meeting laws. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Approval of the minutes of the November 7, 2023 meeting. Alderman Kubacki made a motion to approve the November 7, 2023 minutes. Commissioner Oliver seconded. Motion to approve passed unanimously. CONSENT BUSINESS RESOLUTION PC 002-2024 Approval of a Three (3) Lot Certified Survey Map for Cody & Alexandria Yaeger located south of Henneberry Drive west of Hillendale Drive / Tax Key No. 2236.997.001. RESOLUTION PC 004-2024 Approval of a One (1) Lot Certified Survey Map for Daniel Guhr located at the southwest corner of Parker Drive and Racine Avenue / Tax Key No. 2275.999.006. RESOLUTION PC 005-2024 Approval of a four -lot Certified Survey Map for James Baseler located on vacant farmland along Henneberry Drive / Tax Key No. 2239.997. RESOLUTION PC 006-2024 Approval of a second four -lot Certified Survey Map for James Baseler located on vacant farmland along Henneberry Drive / Tax Key No. 2239.997. RESOLUTION PC 007-2024 Approval of a two -lot Certified Survey Map for James Baseler located on vacant farmland along Henneberry Drive / Tax Key No. 2239.997. Alderman Kubacki made a motion to approve the Consent Business engross. Commissioner Graf seconded. Motion to approve passed unanimously. OLD BUSINESS FOR CONSIDERATION RESOLUTION PC 033-2023 Approval of a Rustic Structure designation for Bryon Hrin located at S99 W20523 Parker Drive / Tax Key No. 2280.999.021. Planner Trzebiatowski provided an update as far as what has happened since the last Plan Commission meeting. The last request included buildings 4, 5, 6 and 7 would be removed. The large barn structure (#3) would granted rustic structure status and then outbuildings 1 and 2 would be kept as buildings `by right' with an additional 13,000 square feet of lot area that would be combined by the petitioner. Discussion points included combining an additional lot to the petitioners, timing of when the buildings would need to come down, talk of a 5-year sunset. There has been nothing new proposed since the last meeting. The petitioner is here with his attorney to continue discussion. Attorney James Hammes spoke as he is working with the petitioner. In his opinion all of the buildings apply with the Rustic Structure provision. The application is for everything but the petitioner is willing to remove buildings 4, 5, 6 and 7 in order to move this petition along. The Resolution as provided allows the designation, but the resolution doesn't take in to account the period of time that the other buildings would be removed. The proposal is that after the sale of Lot 4, that would commence the removal of buildings 4, 5, 6 and 7. Also the sunset provision of five years. They are asking for Resolution as written which includes the Rustic Structure, but also add the offer to remove the buildings. Planner Trzebiatowski noted that there is a draft resolution that considers the latest offer by the petitioner including the removal of the buildings. Alderman Kubacki said the biggest decision is whether this qualifies as a rustic structure. Our definition of a rustic structure is a building that is distinctly set apart and unique from other structures and buildings due to its construction technique, materials, age, local historic significance, design or other characteristics. Is this barn unique and one -of -a kind in Muskego? There are numerous barns of similar age. What makes this particular structure unique, a one -of -a kind? Attorney Hammes noted his opinion is that the code is in the disjunctive with the use of the word or. Also, there is no definition of historic significance, which is not defined. Alderman Kubacki said that unique is easy to define. Attorney Hammes noted again that the code is in the disjunctive. Alderman Kubacki noted that is his interpretation, but he disagrees. The petitioner noted for uniqueness, that nobody builds two -foot walls out of fieldstone, nobody uses trees and splits them in half where there is whitewash over the bark which is unique. The shape of gable roof and what they were built out of, rough cut lumber is unique unless special order. Alderman Kubacki said he is unaware of other barns in Muskego constructed in the same manner. The petitioner said if you build a new barn it wouldn't be built like that. Alderman Kubacki said that it is unique to todays building standards but was it unique at the time it was built along with other barns. Commissioner Graf appreciates the response as an alternative proposal from where this started. He thinks it comes back to the heart of what the overall plan was with the whole subdivision. He knew that he had to sell this idea and he put the buildings at risk when he made the decision. So as a Board, they need to make a decision whether historical significance is sufficient to make a stand on these structures. The Plan Commission needs to have firm ground relative to how this has been decided in the past on the square footage on a property and how decisions like this will be made in the future, as this is still an exception. Mayor Petfalski added that they need reasonable conditions to the request and what is appropriate. He is looking for consistency and reasonable in the future. Commissioner Graf asked if there has been anything similar in the past. Planner Trzebiatowski said that there has been rustic structures in the past but they have been for a single building and not this large. Commissioner Graf asked about if this impacted the two -percent rule. Planner Trzebiatowski noted that yes, but not to this extent. Alderman Kubacki asked if this is considered a rustic structure, how does that affect the other buildings. So, buildings 1 and 2 because the additional land he could keep those buildings. Planner Trzebiatowski said that if he was building new and attaching the land, he would be able to keep buildings 1 and 2 and that would be the maximum. The rustic structure exempts it from the size limit so it doesn't apply to the two -percent. Mayor Petfalski said they are talking about conditions on for the possibility of allowing the barn. The conditions may be that all the other buildings have to be removed and can keep the barn. The conditions may be he has to add a lot in order to keep the barn. The Plan Commission has options related to put reasonable conditions on the Conditional Use. Attorney Hammes said that reasonable conditions that are related to this request. Mayor Petfalski added that for this Conditional Use it is going outside of the accessory structure percentage. Attorney Hammes noted that his concern is that what is really being talked about is density, too much square footage of accessory structure for this lot, too much density. Mayor Petfalski added that in the overall view, it is part of the Conditional Use request. Attorney Hammes said that there is nothing articulated in the code related to the rustic structure establishing a relationship with the rustic structure designation and density of buildings on a lot. Mayor Petfalski said that with conditional uses there can be reasonable expectations. Alderman Kubacki said the density is the biggest issue and this proposal is the same as what was discussed three months ago. His position remains the same. Either all the buildings are removed except the barn can stay or one of the contiguous lots must be withdrawn from the market and attached to this property to have sufficient acreage for all the outbuildings. Mayor Petfalski asked that the fact that he is close to that number, as long as the adjacent lot is unsold and vacant and he keeps it, then when he sells the lot the buildings must be removed. Planner Trzebiatowski explained the most recent proposal and explained that as lots sell, City staff would calculate the two percent and the petitioner would need to remove accessory structures to stay within the two percent with a five-year sunset. Then looking forward building three would be allowed to remain. Commissioner Buckmaster said he has been quite clear and all of the buildings would need to be removed, being buildings 4, 5, 6 and 7. Willing to move forward with Alderman Kubacki's suggested plan. Otherwise he is not in favor of this. Attorney Hammes noted that there was an acknowledgment that the barn is a rustic building, but the Plan Commission is not willing to grant that unless another building is taken down. Mayor Petfalski noted that the Plan Commission is discussing conditions to approve the Conditional Use. Attorney Hammes then said that if the barn is a rustic building, then the Plan Commission has to make that finding. But if the Plan Commission wants to say it is a rustic building, but we are going to grant the Conditional Use subject to these other conditions then they can do that and see if it stands the test of time. Mayor Petfalski added that the Plan Commission can come to a conclusion whichever pace or path they take to get there. Commissioner Graf supports the past recommendation. Mayor Petfalski reiterated that he has 5 years to take down buildings 4, 5, 6 and 7 as the adjoining lots are sold that the square footage would be calculated. Planner Trzebiatowski confirmed that after a lot is sold, staff would calculate the allowable square footage allowed, which would determine which of the buildings would need to be removed. Commissioner Graf isn't particular on which buildings come down in which order, but just that they all are removed. Alderman Kubacki asked that if all the lots are sold that there would only be one building left. Planner Trzebiatowski explained the current discussion would include after all the lots are sold that buildings 1 and 2 would stay and would be allowed by right and building 3 would remain with a rustic structure designation. Mayor Petfalski asked if the Plan Commission has any leeway on density. Planner Trzebiatowski noted that by right, no. Rustic structure allows that but if rustic structure is not granted then the limit is two percent. Commissioner Buckmaster asked what the enforcement would be. Planner Trzebiatowski said it would be citations. Alderman Kubacki said this does not solve the problem. Density is the problem. When all the lots are sold all the extra buildings are gone except buildings 1, 2 and 3. Attorney Hammes said that buildings 1 and 2 entitled by right. Alderman Kubacki said they are from the standpoint of density of the parcel. Attorney Hammes said that a rustic structure has nothing to do with density on the lot. Alderman Kubacki said that at the end of the process buildings 1, 2 and 3 would stay. He said he is not comfortable with this. Commissioner Buckmaster and Graf agreed. Alderman Kubacki made a motion to deny Resolution PC 033-2023. Commissioner Graf seconded. Upon a roll call vote: Commissioner Graf, no, still on the owners shoulders to expand his property to include building 3. Commissioner Oliver, no, the property needs to fit all Ordinances with the structures and densities as noted. Alderman Kubacki, no, does not believe the barn qualifies for a rustic structure. Commissioner Buckmaster, no, does not believe density requirements are being met adequately per the CUG and the barn does not meet the requirements for a rustic structure. Mayor Petfalski, yes. Motion to deny Resolution PC 033-2023 is approved 4-1. Commissioner Buckmaster made a proposal to bring Resolution PC 033-2023 back to the table. Seconded by Alderman Kubacki. The motion was to deny and four members voted no, but this was in error. The motion is to deny the request for a rustic structure. Upon a roll call vote: Commissioner Graf, yes, based on previous statements. Commissioner Oliver, yes, based on previous statements. Alderman Kubacki, yes, based on previous statements. Commissioner Buckmaster, yes, based on previous statements. Mayor Petfalski, no. Motion to deny Resolution PC 033-2023 is approved 4-1. NEW BUSINESS FOR CONSIDERATION RESOLUTION PC 001-2024 Approval of a Building, Site and Operation Plan for Mander Collision and Glass located at S106 W16197 Loomis Road / Tax Key No. 2293.996.001. Planner Trzebiatowski provided an explanation of the project. Mander Collision took over the facility fairly recently and they are looking to add parking. Staff does not find any issues. One note is the curbing and when a commercial site is in a more developed area curbing is required and in this area there is no curbing and since this site is not curbed staff is not suggesting curbing. During a site visit it was noted that there are three shipping crates on -site and via discussion with the petitioner they are needed for storing materials. A solution proposed is to expand the fenced area with a taller white vinyl fencing with a new gate. Staff suggests that they replace the shorter wood fence with matching the same fencing to be a uniform appearance. Commissioner Graf made a motion to approve Resolution PC 001-2024. Commissioner Buckmaster seconded. Motion to approve Resolution PC 001-2024 passed unanimously. RESOLUTION PC 003-2024 Approval of a Preliminary Plat for Golf View Estates subdivision located along the north side of Ryan Drive / Tax Key Nos. 2255.979.002 and 2255.998.001. Planner Trzebiatowski explained the new proposal being a conservation subdivision with preserving open space and smaller lots. This proposal received approval from the Plan Commission and Common Council for conservation planned development zoning back in October 2022. The approval was contingent on plat approval. The yield plans shows 15 lots with up to four bonus lots. The request is for 19 lots with more than 50% open space being preserved. The most important note is that they own land from Boxhorn Drive on the north to Ryan Drive on the south and they are willing to make a public trail that extends the entire length. The feature would be built to City standards at the expense of the developer. Alderman Kubacki made a motion to approve Resolution PC 003-2024. Commissioner Buckmaster seconded. Motion to approve Resolution PC 003-2024 passed unanimously. MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Buckmaster made a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Oliver seconded. Motion to adjourn passed unanimously. Respectfully Submitted, Aaron Fahl, AICP Planner