Loading...
Plan Commission Minutes 20260203UNAPPROVED CITY OF MUSKEGO PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES 02/03/2026 6:00 PM Muskego City Hall, W182 S8200 Racine Avenue CALL TO ORDER Alderman Hammel called the meeting to order at 6:01 PM. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Those present recited the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL USKEGO 'vAilull Present:, Alderman Hammel, Alderman Madden and Commissioners Bartlett, Cieslak, Graf and Planner Trzebiatowski. Absent: Mayor Petfalski and Commissioners Buckmaster and Kubacki. STATEMENT OF PUBLIC NOTICE The meeting was noticed in accordance with the open meeting laws. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Approval of the Minutes from the December 2, 2025 meeting. Alderman Madden made a motion to approve the December 2, 2025 meeting minutes. Commissioner Bartlett seconded. Motion to approve passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING Public Hearing for a Conditional Use Grant in accordance with the Muskego Zoning Ordinance for the purpose of allowing a guest house located at W207 S8686 Hillendale Drive / Tax Key No. 2227.990. Alderman Hammel opened the Public Hearing at 6:02 PM. Marie Diekfuss, W207 S8602 Hillendale Dr., the main concern is the shared pond and questions the unknown number of guests on the pond for boating and fishing as they hold liability insurance with increased activity with an AirBnb type situation. Maranda Baseler, W207 S8580 Hillendale Dr., her objection is not based on assumptions but enforceability and that the Conditional Use be evaluated on the entire property and not just a single guesthouse. There is already a fully remodeled primary residence and there was a large pole building approved with significant open indoor space, sports courts and public -style restrooms was approved by the city. The guesthouse is addition to these buildings. The new guesthouse has over 6 bedrooms, an owners suite and large gathering areas. Collectively this is a large increase in capacity and use intensity beyond the norm for an accessory building in an agricultural district. Muskego Code says that it should be subordinate to the residence and must never be rented. The design scale raises reasonable questions whether the accessory building is subordinate and then enables uses that the city would have difficulty monitoring once constructed. Conditional use decisions should be reviewed for what the structure enables, not just it is called. Once approved and built enforcement becomes compliant driven forcing neighbors to monitor activity rather than the city. This is not how conditional use oversight is intended. This property is adjacent to shared natural features. They increase occupancy and number of visitors, liability exposure, safety risks and the likelihood of unauthorized use of our shared water resources. These impacts are predictable, not speculative. Agriculture zoning exists to limit the intensity and preserve rural character. Approving a guesthouse of this scale along with the other large accessory buildings sets a precedence inconsistent with the intent of the district and difficult to reverse. There are also a few questions including, can the owners clarify the maximum number of overnight occupants the guest house is designed to accommodate and how that number compares to the primary residence and also the purpose of the owner's suite in a guest house. They would also like to know how the city will determine whether the accessory structure is subordinate when it is exceeds the size and bedroom count of the primary home. Additionally, if future use exceeds what is typical for residential guest housing, what specific enforcement will the city rely on and how would those be monitored without ongoing complaints from neighbors. Is the plan commission reviewing this proposal independently or with all of the development and occupancy on the property. In closing, they are being told this is for family use, but conditional use decisions are not just based on stated intent but whether the design and scale of the proposed building enables uses that are compatible with the zoning and enforceable by the city over time. Her concern is not only who uses the building today, but whether the city can confidently ensure that the use remains consistent with accessory residential standards over the life of the structure. James Baseler, W207 S8580 Hillendale Dr., has some questions, can the committee define how the city should distinguish the structure from being an event or a community building, what is the maximum number of people, any features like large open spaces, seating capacity and amenities that would encourage group events, how many vehicles do you anticipate on the property during peak use, has a traffic analysis been conducted, how would emergency vehicles access the buildings, how will the city distinguish private guests from public community use after approval, if neighbors see large frequent gatherings — how does the city plan to enforce, and what prevents similar structures from being requested by others. Public Hearing closed at 6:12 PM. Public Hearing for a Conditional Use Grant in accordance with the Muskego Zoning Ordinance for the purpose of allowing a guest house located at W208 S8861 Hillendale Drive / Tax Key No. 2233.996. Alderman Hammel opened the Public Hearing at 6:12 PM. No residents commented. Public Hearing closed at 6:13 PM. NEW BUSINESS FOR CONSIDERATION RESOLUTION PC 001-2026 Approval of a Building, Site and Operation Plan and Conditional Use Grant for Richard and Julie Parfrey located at W207 S8686 Hillendale Drive / Tax Key No. 2227.990. Planner Trzebiatowski explained that guest houses do not have to be the existing home. There are guest houses located all over the City and most times, people don't even know they exist. Normally these are on larger properties. So the new home will be the primary residence will be owner occupied and the guest house will be the house that exists on the lot today. The code does not require that a guest house be smaller than the primary house. There is a minimum size for a guest house, but in both cases tonight the guest house will be the new house and all houses will meet the code as far as size. There is no maximum size for a guest house. There are three buildings including the existing house, the new house that will become the primary residence and the outbuilding. As for the use, the lot is almost 14 acres in size so three structures and the proposed home, which will be the primary home, will be almost double the existing house that will be the guest house. The petitioner is proposing to color -coordinate the houses with possible renovations to the existing home. This is not required by ordinance. Guest houses are not allowed to be rented or leased. This will be formalized in a document and recorded with Waukesha County. This is there is a real estate restriction tied to the property. The guest house cannot be used as an Airbnb. As part of the Resolution the guest house cannot be used for any business use or storage or any income generating use. The ordinance does not limit the number of bedrooms, bathrooms or square footage except the minimum size requirement. Plan Commission cannot make any decisions based on speculation. As far as liability questions, this would be outside of City functions and those with concerns should discuss this with their insurance. As for the number of vehicles, as long as they are on an improved hard surface they are fine. There was no traffic study completed for a single-family house. Commissioner Graf asked why there was a public hearing if this went through the full review. Planner Trzebiatowski said that any time there is something considered a Conditional Use, there is a public hearing. Commissioner Graf made a motion to approve Resolution PC 001-2026. Alderman Madden seconded. Motion to approve Resolution PC 001-2026 passed unanimously. RESOLUTION PC 002-2026 Approval of a Building, Site and Operation Plan and Conditional Use Grant for Manuel Rojo located at W208 S8861 Hillendale Drive / Tax Key No. 2233.996. Planner Trzebiatowski discussed the project. There is a farm home with several accessory structures. The new house will be the primary residence and the existing house would become the guest house. The same requirements from the last one also apply here. The new house will be almost triple the existing house and the lot size is almost double what is required. The petitioners are planning on undertaking some renovations on the existing house. The building cannot be used for any rental or business uses. A Conditional Use Grant document will be recorded. Commissioner Bartlett stated that typically there are shared driveways and this proposal shows a second driveway. Could you explain the regulations for the second driveway. Planner Trzebiatowski said that on a city road, the city does not restrict access. There is nothing in the Ordinance to prevent multiple driveways. If the Plan Commission is concerned about a second driveway, they could amend the Resolution. Commissioner Bartlett made a motion to approve Resolution PC 002-2026. Alderman Madden seconded. Motion to approve Resolution PC 002-2026 passed unanimously. RESOLUTION PC 003-2026 Approval of a Building, Site and Operation Plan for Inpro located on a vacant parcel at the northwest corner of Mercury Drive and Saturn Drive / Tax Key No. 2228.999.003. Planner Trzebiatowski provided an overview of the Inpro project. In the industrial park, Inpro is looking to build a new 30,000 sq. ft. building to expand their operations with similar uses as the building to the east. There will be office space and then a larger warehouse structure with truck docks. The building will be operating Monday thru Friday 24-hours per day. The use is allowed in the business park. The building will be precast masonry panels with different shades of grey with blue stripes. There are canopy features over the doors. The southern side of the building will have seven truck docks with six sunken. The overhead doors are a grey color that appears to match the color of the wall. While parked a truck will extend into the right-of-way but not past the drive aisle. The western -most truck dock is located in the western stall with some landscaping. Staff is recommending additional landscaping. There are 30 parking stalls on site and it appears as though there is sufficient parking, but if needed they can use another shared lot across the street. Parking does meet all the parking setbacks. Curb and gutter is shown on the site with two areas without curbing for snowplowing. Staff did think adding a low -profile curb in those areas to complete the curbing may be nice but it is not in the Resolution unless the Plan Commission wants to add it. Regarding the mechanicals on site there are units on the roof with screening on three of the sides, but we want to be sure that the units are not visible from any sides so adding screening to the last side will likely be needed. Formal landscaping review will happen with permits. Commissioner Bartlett likes the building and didn't see the additional screening in the Resolution. Planner Trzebiatowski noted that adding screening to the fourth side could specifically be added as there is a standard note that mechanicals must be screened on all four sides. Commissioner Graf made a motion to approve Resolution PC 003-2026. Commissioner Bartlett seconded. Commissioner Bartlett made a motion to add screening to all four sides of the rooftop mechanicals. Commissioner Graf seconded. Motion to amend Resolution PC 003-2026 passed unanimously. Motion to approve Amended Resolution PC 003-2026 passed unanimously. RESOLUTION PC 004-2026 Approval of a Building, Site and Operation Plan Amendment for the Shell Convenience Store and Car Wash located at S76 W17871 & S76 W17857 Janesville Road / Tax Key Nos. 2196.975 & 2196.973. Planner Trzebiatowski explained that the petitioner is going through a rebranding to a Shell logo. Typically, if this is just the canopy staff completes a review, but this petition is for the buildings. There will be a banding with Shell colors on the store building to match the canopies and then on the car wash building where the old awning was located will be the same banding to tie the buildings together. The sides of the building where there are three red stripes will not have the same banding, but the red stripes will be painted to match the same red color on the banding. The stripes on the sides and rear of the building must be painted within six months as stated in the Resolution. Commissioner Graf asked if this will be everything on the site. Planner Trzebiatowski explained that it will be the two canopies that are already completed and now the two buildings. Commissioner Cieslak asked if the coping on the top of the car wash building will be painted like the other building. Planner Trzebiatowski noted that on the convenience store building the fagade will be wrapped on the east side, the front and then the section on the west sides. The addition portions of the garage will not have the wrapping. Commissioner Cieslak asked about the size of the signage on the drawings. Planner Trzebiatowski said that the drawings are the best we could get from the applicant, but the size of the signage will be reviewed separately to ensure the 5% limit is upheld. Commissioner Bartlett just wanted to bring up the ice machine in front of the building that does not match the building color. Commissioner Bartlett just wanted to reiterate the importance of consistency to the Plan Commission. Planner Trzebiatowski noted that he remembers years ago prior to the enforcement of matching colors with this machine that there was something in an old approval that allowed this to stay. Commissioner Bartlett made a motion to approve Resolution PC 004-2026. Commissioner Graf seconded. Commissioner Cieslak made a motion that the coping on the top of the car wash building be painted to match the white coping on the convenience store while painting the lower two red stripes the red shade to match the metal banding. Alderman Madden seconded. Motion to amend Resolution PC 004-2026 passed unanimously. Motion to approve Amended Resolution PC 004-2026 passed unanimously. MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS Planner Trzebiatowski mentioned that the draft of the 2035 Comprehensive Plan the March meeting may be moved to March 11th. We may try and have the normal Plan Commission meeting for all other items depending on what is submitted. Next Wednesday there will be an open house for the 2035 Comprehensive Plan for anyone to come in and discuss the draft plan with staff. ADJOURNMENT Alderman Madden made a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Graf seconded. Motion to adjourn passed unanimously. Respectfully Submitted, Aaron Fahl, AICP Planner