Plan Commission Meeting — Minutes

MINUTES PLAN COMMISSION TOWN OF SCOTT BROWN COUNTY, WISCONSIN January 15, 2026 at 5 p.m. 1. Call to order/Roll Call. Meeting was called to order by Cari Langenberg at 5:08 p.m. Attendees: Chair Cari Langenberg, Erin Lemoine, Steve Janquart, and Cindy Ducat. Excused: Al Herrman, Mike Van Lanen, and Paul Vanden Plas. Staff: Economic Development Coordinator/Planner Dave Cerny, Clerk/Treasurer Jaime Fuge, Town Supervisors Norman Strebel and Kurt Baenen. Also present: Rachel & Nick Vogel (for Agenda Item #3), Rob Wurm property owner, and Surveyor Jim Sehloff (for Agenda Item #4) There was also 7 members of the public. The meeting was posted on Wednesday, January 14, 2026 at the front door of the Town Hall and on the website. 2. Approve Plan Commission Minutes of December 3, 2025 Meeting. MOTION: Lemoine/Janquart approve the minutes of December 3, 2025 Plan Commission Meeting. All in favor. Motion Carried. 3. Request for a Home Business Permit at 2946 Bay Settlement Road, Parcel #SC-22-1713). Rachel Vogel, applicant. Cerny recapped his staff report, which stated: From Staff Report: The applicant / property owner is applying for a Home Business Permit in order to have a sewing and alterations business in their home. The following is an excerpt from the Town’s Zoning Ordinance defining the Home Business requirements. HOME BUSINESS — A business conducted on the same lot as, and in conjunction with, a residence. A home business is a use that does not meet the criteria for home occupation and is not located within a commercial or industrial zoning district. A home business may be located in the residence, garage or accessory building. Such use must receive a permit, which shall be reviewed annually by the Town's Plan Commission, for it to continue to be considered a legal home business. Such review and permit shall follow those standards established for a mixed-use site. [Amended 10-15-2009] ~ Below are 2 additional definitions from the Zoning Ordinance which are related to the Home Business definition. They are included for clarification but do not meet the definition of the applicants request. HOME OCCUPATION — Any occupation or profession carried on by a member of the immediate family residing on the premises, in connection with which there is used no sign or display that will indicate from the exterior that the building is being utilized in whole or in part for any purpose other than that of a dwelling; there is no commodity sold upon the premises; no person is employed other than a member of the immediate family residing on the premises; and no mechanical or electrical equipment is used except such as is permissible for purely domestic or household purposes. A professional person may use his residence for infrequent consultation, emergency treatment, or performance of religious rites, but not the general practice o f his profession. No accessory building shall be used for such home occupation. MIXED-USE SITE — A site where a locally grown small business which, being in its infancy, needs incubation in order to aid in its success, is located. The business may be conducted on the same lot as, and in conjunctio n with, a residence or existing structure. A mixed-use site has a use that could meet the definition of home occupation or a home -based business and is not located within a commercial or industrial zoning district. The mixed use may be located on residential or agriculturally zoned properties. A mixed use may be located in the residence, garage, a farm building, or accessory building. Such use must receive a permit, which shall be reviewed annually, the first month of each year, by the Town’s Plan Commission. [Added 10-15-2009] Cerny recommended approval of the application. Janquart asked several questions regarding the proposed home occupation, which were addressed by Cerny. Langenberg asked about Vogel’s areas of specialty. Vogel explained that she is a seamstress who previously worked at Hancock Fabrics and currently performs extensive home sewing. She stated that her work includes sewing from patterns as well as creating items from scratch, including quilting, décor items, formal wear, curtains, and alterations. Langenberg expressed support for the proposed business and encouraged Vogel to contact the Clerk. Janquart asked about signage requirements and inquired about the anticipated level of business activity, noting the importance of minimizing impacts to the surrounding area. Vogel responded that she was unsure how busy the business would be but stated that it would allow her to remain at home while supporting her family. She noted that all clients would be scheduled by appointment, which would help prevent parking concerns. Cerny noted that the application is reviewed annually. Langenberg noted that the property is located on a corner of the stub road. Mr. Vogel asked about the renewal process. Cerny explained that there is no renewal fee and that the application is reviewed annually, which allows the Town to revoke approval if issues arise. Motion by Janquart, Seconded by Lemoine, to approve the Home Business Application for Rachel Vogel, 2946 Bay Settlement Road, for an in-home sewing and alteration business. Yes-4, No-0. All in favor. Motion Carried. Langenberg said this request does not need to go to the Town Board. 4. Review/Take Action on a request for an ‘in-concept’ review of a 4 lot Certified Survey Map (CSM) and proposed road at 4138 Fischer Road (Parcel #SC-313). Robert Wurm, applicant. Cerny recapped the staff report, which stated: From Staff Report: The property under consideration is zoned A-1 Agriculture and consists of approximately 30 acres. As pictured in the attached area map it consists of multiple buildings, with some forested land, fallow land, crop land, and corrals for horse pasturing. This parcel’s land use and zoning match surrounding properties. This is the same parcel previously considered by the Plan Commission with the request for duplex status. The Applicant has requested an ‘in -concept’ review to determine if development in this location would be acceptable to the Town, and if the concept should be further developed. The surveyor has provided an in-concept drawing of the proposal, illustrating a new road running south off of Fischer Road (CTH K). The four parcels illustrated each meet the size requirements for lots in the A-1 Agriculture Zoning District. If the Plan Commission is willing to consider this conce pt additional details would need to be presented with a formal request. Additional details would include (but not be limited to): 1) A wetland delineation. 2) Soil borings to determine suitability for on-site septic systems. 3) Determination for springs, drainage locations, and bedrock stability due to the escarpment. 4) An Archeological Inventory. 5) A County Road Access permit to allow connection to Fischer Road (CTH K). 6) Detailed plans and bond for the proposed road. 7) Covenants and Deed Restrictions that building sites w ill be closer than 200’ from the centerline of STH 57 and not exceed an elevation of approximately 705’ due to the DOTs Scenic Easement Restrictions. 8) Any other details determined to be necessary for the Plan Commission’s detailed review. Cerny explained that the purpose of the agenda request was to determine whether the proposed Certified Survey Map (CSM) would be supported by the Plan Commission prior to the applicant incurring the expense of completing the full application process. He noted that approval at this stage would not guarantee final approval by the Plan Commission or Town Board, but it would provide the applicant with some level of assurance that the Plan Commission would generally support the proposal. Langenberg stated that if the property were located in a historic area, the process would be halted, and noted this was something the applicant should consider. Langenberg asked about septic feasibility and whether the rock ledge would be an issue. Wurm stated that a preliminary review had been conducted and the results were favorable. He added that no wetlands were identified, although a spring review would still be required. Janquart asked whether the property currently had septic or sewer service. Cerny responded that it did not. Cerny stated that he reviewed the Town’s zoning map and explained that areas shown in green are zoned agricultural. He noted that the proposed development is allowed under the zoning ordinance and that builders are permitted to build in rocky areas. He added that similar construction has occurred in other locations. Cerny further noted that the proposed CSM is located in an area where the Town does not anticipate future growth and where extension of municipal water and sewer services is not feasible. He explained that areas shown in yellow on the zoning map are also unlikely to receive sewer and water extensions due to practicality concerns. Ducat asked about soil testing. Wurm stated that soil testing was completed and approved for a mound system and that a private well would be permitted on the property. Langenberg asked about the southern boundary of the property. Cerny responded and noted that a white line shown on the map in the packet was unintentional. Langenberg asked who would be responsible for construction of the road. Cerny stated that the property owner would pay for the road construction. Ducat asked who would maintain the road, and Cerny replied that it would become a Town road and therefore be maintained by the Town. Langenberg asked about the size of the proposed lots. Cerny stated that the average lot size would be approximately 1.6 acres. Cerny was asked whether Engineer Brosteau had reviewed the proposal and responded that he had not. Langenberg asked whether there was anything in the zoning ordinance that would prevent the proposal. Cerny responded that there was not. Cerny noted that the Town generally discourages cul-de-sacs due to snow plowing concerns. Wurm stated that the proposed lots would not impact any wetland areas. Janquart asked whether the road could be extended in the future. Cerny responded that any extension would likely need to loop back and potentially connect to South K, but reiterated that extending sewer and water to the area is not feasible, making road extension unlikely. Langenberg asked if there were any additional questions. Lemoine asked for clarification on what an approval or denial at this meeting would represent. Cerny stated that the action would indicate whether the Plan Commission supports the concept of a four-lot subdivision, provided that all applicable criteria are met. He added that additional review and questions would occur during Brown County and engineering review. Lemoine asked whether there were additional factors the Commission should consider when voting. Cerny referenced the comprehensive plan, noting that it discourages cul-de-sacs, dead-end roads, and development on the escarpment, and encourages preservation of the escarpment and development in areas served by water and sewer. Lemoine asked when the proposal would go before the Town Board. Cerny stated it would be presented as a discussion item and cautioned that Plan Commission support does not guarantee Board approval. He recommended forwarding the proposal to the Board and suggested including language in the motion stipulating that Board approval would be required. Lemoine stated that Board review was important so the applicant could determine whether the proposal would likely be approved before spending significant funds. She expressed concern about the property’s proximity to the escarpment. Janquart asked how close the proposed CSM was to the escarpment. Ducat asked whether the applicant knew how deep the rock was on the property. Wurm stated that he did not. Langenberg asked about potential wildlife concerns. Cerny noted that the escarpment area includes dwarf iris and rusty-patched bumblebee habitat, but stated that any environmental concerns would be reviewed by Brown County. Motion Lemoine/Ducat to deny a request for an ‘in-concept’ review of a 4 lot Certified Survey Map (CSM) and proposed road at 4138 Fischer Road (Parcel #SC-313). Robert Wurm, applicant based on protecting the escarpment. Vote Yes-3, No-1. Motion carried. 5. Communications. Cerny stated that Fredrick Sheppard had a request on record from 2001 regarding a multi-family development. He noted that the request was tabled by the Plan Commission at that time pending additional information. Cerny added that the zoning ordinance has since been rewritten and that the current Plan Commission is different from the commission in place in 2001. He summarized a recent conversation with Sheppard, during which Sheppard indicated he may bring the request back to the Plan Commission in the spring. Cerny stated that Bay-Lakes will begin work on the comprehensive plan in February. Langenberg welcomed Cindy Ducat to the Plan Commission and asked her to introduce herself. Ducat stated that she has lived in the Town of Scott for 35 years and owns a 17.5-acre parcel on the Town of Scott/Green Bay border. She stated that she is interested in becoming more involved in the community and contributing in a meaningful way. 6. Schedule next meeting. The next meeting is to be on February 19, 2026 at 5 p.m. Janquart said he will not be there. 7. Adjourn. MOTION Janquart, seconded by Lemoine to adjourn. Vote: Aye-4. No-0.Motion Carried. Meeting Adjourned at 6 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jaime Fuge, Clerk/Treasurer, Town of Scott Jaime M. Fuge