Posted: June 4, 2009

Worries about whether a proposed auto repair facility would pollute a city well and Little Muskego Lake caused the Muskego Plan Commission to defer action Tuesday on a conditional-use permit request for the shop.

The commission directed city staff to determine whether the proposed auto shop would be inside a wellhead protection district. Auto repair shops are not allowed in districts, which keep potentially harmful businesses away from wells. The matter could be considered at the next Plan Commission meeting July 7 or a special meeting may be called.

Keith Hammitt, owner of Firestone Muskego Tire and Auto, asked to buy 1.8 acres of city-owned vacant land in the W16600 block of Janesville Road for $100,000. He would like to build a facility for his auto repair business, which needs to move because of the widening of Janesville Road in 2011 or 2012. For 10 years, his facility has been at Bay Lane Drive and Janesville Road about a block away and across the street.

At the Plan Commission public hearing Tuesday on the conditional-use permit, the alderman representing the area and another alderman expressed worry about the wellhead zone and pollution of Little Muskego Lake from parking lot runoff at the proposed facility.

"I really do have concerns about the lake," said 3rd District Alderman Neil Borgman, whose district includes the site.

Runoff a concern for official

Although the proposed plans have a pond to catch rainwater and filter out contaminants, Borgman said he wished he had assurance that the oily fluids from cars would not simply form a slick on top of the pond and end up in the lake. The pond would eventually drain into the lake after going through wetlands and the city's stormwater detention pond.

But Plan Commission member and 7th District Alderman Noah Fiedler saw no particular danger from runoff.

"I don't think there was any showing that the parking lot discharge is any more or dirtier than any parking lot in the city," Fiedler said. No cars will be stored outside, he said.

Fiedler urged the commission to approve the permit contingent on the site being outside the wellhead protection district. He was the only member voting not to defer the matter.

"It's not like there is going to be belching oil and antifreeze on a regular basis," agreed commission member Mark Noah, who nevertheless voted with three other members to defer.

Site inside wellhead district?

For him, the critical point is whether the site is inside the wellhead protection district.

While current city maps show the site outside the protection district, in 2005, the city Community Development Authority deemed it to be inside. It sent out invitations to developers to come up with ideas for the site, noting that the site is within a wellhead protection district.

The city is revamping its wellhead protection zoning that currently leaves many wells unprotected. But two Plan Commission members felt the commission cannot ultimately deny the request if the site ends up inside a new protection district. The city, however, still owns the 1.8-acre site that Hammitt wants to buy.

The commissioners did not comment on other concerns brought up at the hearing that included the CDA is possibly selling the land for less than it is worth and that the proposed colored cement block construction allegedly does not fit with the 50 percent to 100 percent brick buildings in the area.