Loading...
CCR1974181RESOLUTION # 181 MODIFYING THE APPLICATION OF LOUIS ROZMAN TO REZONE CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND IN SEC. 10 BE IT RESOLVED that the petition submitted by Louis Rozman, dated May 20, 1974, to rezone 6.872 acres from RS2 to B4 is hereby modified to rezone the following described property from RS2 to B4: "All that part of the S.E. 1/4 of the N.W. 1/4 of Section 10, T. 5N., R. 20 E., in the City of Muskego, Waukesha County, Wisconsin bounded and described as follows: Commencing at the North 1/4 Section comer of said Section 10; thence South 1211.07 feet along the 114 Section line of said Section line to a point in the center line of the public highway known as County Trunk "A"; thence South 48' 01' 46" W., along said highway center line 29.95 feet to an angle point; thence South 56O07' 29" West continuing along said highway center line 766.12 feet to a point being the point of beginning of the land to be described: highway 01" E. , 324.70 thence South 56O07' 29" West continuing along said centerline 388.48 feet to a point; thence S. 00°34' 406.13 feet to a point; thence N. 88O32' 24" E., feet to a point; thence N. 00034' 01" W., 614.40 feet to the centerline of said highway and the point of beginning. EXCEPTING THEREFROM the northerly 33 feet for public street purposes. Containing 3.5 acres. I1 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Common Council of the City of Muskego does hereby approve of the modified application for the proposed rezoning and does direct the City Attorney to draft the necessary implementing ordinance. DATED THIS /3& DAY OF &-X , 1974. h n d& Ald. Rdymond A. Wallner ATTEST: a City Clerk .u, i August 14, 1974 I, Bette J. Bowyer, City Clerk of the City of Muskego do hereby certify that on August 14, 1974, the Mayor of the City of Muslcego submitted to this office his intention to veto Resolution #181-74 which was adopted by the Common Council on August 13, 1974. /) 7 829 /.d% Bette J. Bowyer, &ty Clerk August 23, 1974 a HONORABLE ALDERMEN - CITY OF MUSKEG0 Gentlemen: On August 13, 1974, your Honorable Body adopted Reso- lution #181-74. This resolution modified the original request of Louis Rozman to rezone a certain parcel of land in Section 10 from RS2 to B4. You will recall that the parcel involved is part of a six acre tract presently owned by Mr. Richard Wanasek and flanked on the east by Ludwig's Subdivision and on the south and west by the approved Parkland Subdivision. Since the rezoning generated a considerable amount of discussion I will not go into a detailed evaluation of the proposed rezoning other than to remind you that (1) the City's comprehensive plan has never envisioned commercial development on the south side of Highway 24 in that area, (2) the three acre parcel, if rezoned to business, would be somewhat of an island nearly surrounded by residences and therefore, in my opinion, that action could be considered spot zoning, (3) the very nature of Highway 24 and the present traffic which exceeds 8,000 cars per day should indicate that strip com- mercial development on Highway 24 could render the highway almost useless of its intended purpose to more people through the City, and (4) the proposed zoning of B4 permits a wide range of businesses orientated to highway routes which are logically related and dependent upon highway traffic, for example, transportation terminals, drive-ins, hotels, motels and as conditional grants, general warehousing, lumber yards, sales and service establishments for automobiles, including body repair shops and used car lots. In addition, the B4 zoning permits the use for the common retail functions. What this means is that in the event the intention of the original use of the property (hardware store) would be aband- oned or not successful, any one of the above enumerated uses could be substituted. e It is my opinion that the above is sufficient reasons to question the validity of your decision to approve the rezoning request, however, the City also has received a of the parcel and the west side of the parcel opposing the rezoning and as you know, the City's zoning ordinance, Section 3.06 (g) states, a petition from all residents of the property on the east side Page 2 August 23, 1974 "Protest: In case of protest against a change duly signed and acknowledged by the owners of 20% or more either of the area of land included in such proposed change, or by the owners of 20% or more of the land immediately adjacent and extending 100 feet therefrom or by the owners of 20% or more of the land directly opposite thereto extending 100 feet from the street frontage of such opposite land, an amendment shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of 314 of the members of the Council" This means that the proposed zoning, to become.law, requires the affirmative vote of six members of the Council. As you know, the resolution was adopted by the Council on a vote of 5 - 2. Therefore, it seems to me, rather useless and a waste of money to direct the City Attorney to develop an ordinance for consideration by the Council which has little, if any, possibility of passage. It is for the above reasons that I have chosen to veto your actions on Resolution 11181-74 and I respectfully request that you uphold that veto. Sincerely yours,