Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Multifamily Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Plan commission denies rezoning and master‑plan change for proposed 50‑unit multifamily at W240 N2687 Pewaukee Road
Summary
After a lengthy public hearing and neighborhood opposition focused on traffic and safety at the River Park/Watertown Plank Road intersection, the Plan Commission voted to deny the rezoning and the comprehensive master‑plan amendment for Belinski Homes’ proposed multifamily project; the site and building plans were not advanced.
The Plan Commission declined to recommend rezoning or a comprehensive master‑plan amendment for a proposed 50‑unit multifamily development at W240 N2687 Pewaukee Road submitted by Belinski Homes.
Nick summarized the project as a 50‑unit multifamily (RM‑2) plan with site plans meeting district standards but noted staff recommended a signage condition for later staff review. A public hearing drew prolonged comment from residents of nearby River Park Drive, Meadow Brook Village and other neighborhoods who said existing traffic on Watertown Plank Road/Highway 164 and River Park Drive is heavy, sometimes dangerous and would be worsened by concentrated flows from multifamily units. Speakers cited emergency access, left‑turn lane needs, spillover parking, and lack of green‑space for children as reasons to oppose higher density on the parcel. One resident said the neighborhood’s original design anticipated limited further density and warned the project would damage property values.
Belinski Homes’ representative, John Donovan, said the company would maintain and operate rentals and argued the proposal would generate less concentrated traffic than a gas station or car wash previously proposed for the same corner. He noted prior negotiations over detention ponds and easements and offered to pursue a traffic study.
Commissioners debated alternatives including lowering density, requiring public roads rather than private, and whether a traffic study or further negotiation with GE (to explore a Fatima Lane connection) should be required. After discussion the commission voted to deny the rezoning request and the associated comprehensive plan amendment; the site and building plan item was not advanced because the rezoning was denied.
The denials are recommendations to the Common Council; applicants may revise and refile. Commissioners said they remained open to other development types for the parcel that better address traffic circulation and access.
