Plan Commission - Regular Meeting

Kelly, how we doing? Do we have to like hit record? Yep, that. Recording in progress. Welcome to the village of cottage Grove plan commission on Wednesday, June 10th, 2026. This is a hybrid meeting occurring both in person at village hall and that hybrid, um, via zoom that zoom link is at the top of our agenda. And then you can also watch either now or later, um, on our YouTube channel. It is six 30. So I'll call the meeting to order. We have a quorum and the agenda was properly posted. So we'll stand for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. All right. This is the public appearances, public's opportunity to speak. So we welcome your comments. We ask that you state your name, your address, and then limit your comments to no more than three minutes. We do have two public hearings tonight, one for the Bryn Mawr Presbyterian Church zoning map and the second for the request from Newman Homes. So if you have comments for either of those, you can wait until those public hearings, and then we'd invite you to come up and speak during that time. Um, if there are any other comments about agenda items or other things, uh, we'd welcome you to take, we can take those comments at this point in time. So we'll start with anyone in the room that would like to give comments other than the two public hearings. we'll move to anyone on zoom who would like to give public comments you can put your cursor over the react button and use the raise hand feature so we can unmute you seeing no one for public comment during this portion we're going to move on to discuss and consider the minutes from the plan commission meeting on may 13 2026 those meeting minutes are linked in the agenda motion to approve is presented right there's a motion by alex and a second by john is there any other discussion on the meeting minutes as presented all those in favor aye opposed abstain motion carries all right so we're going to move on to a presentation you all are in in for a treat tonight, a presentation by Monona Grove High School student Ellie Meng regarding her Girl Scout Gold Award project related to bird safety. So Ellie, if you want to come up, I'll introduce you. So Ellie is a sophomore, now going to be a junior, given that it's the first day of summer. where her studies have been focused on math and science primarily. She's lived in Cottage Grove for 16 years and has been active in Girl Scouts for coming up on almost 11 years. She's currently working on her Girl Scout Gold Award. So it's the highest award that any Girl Scout can achieve, which requires a minimum, and she'll probably go over this, of 80 hours of work. Today's presentation is in the hopes of making a village ordinance for bird-safe glass upon creation of buildings 10,000 square feet or more. And she will present her question to us at the end of her presentation. And so following graduation, she plans to pursue her bachelor's of science degree at UW-Whitewater in hopes to get her doctorate of veterinary medicine at UW-Madison. So welcome, Ellie. We look forward to your presentation.

Thank you. As you know, I am Ellie Meng and I am here in the hopes of making a village ordinance to help protect these birds from these devastating window collisions. Some of you may not know that Wisconsin has over 400 different types of bird species with 243 of those being documented nesting species. Part of the reason Wisconsin has so many different birds is because of the diverse habitat, which encourages all this bird life, along with other animals. Some of these birds include the cardinals, robins, blue jays, goldfinches, and woodpeckers, which are all also high risk for window collisions. Window collisions are especially prominent in the migration period. One website that really helps track these migration traffic, I guess, is the BirdCast. BirdCast is actually a website you can look up on your own time. And it will show you the flow of bird movement. The lighter colors, so the yellows and whites, are heavier bird movement, which you can see, especially in Wisconsin, we have a lot of bird traffic during the migration period. Two reasons that bird collisions occur is due to transparency and reflection. Transparency is when there are windows on both sides of the building that you can see through. We call this a pass-through effect. It's when birds try to fly through the windows, which doesn't work very well. another one the reflection is when the windows are almost like mirrors and obviously the birds can see their own reflection this picture for reflection was taken at the Dane County Humane Society before they put up treatment on these windows as you can see it was very reflective basically a mirror I don't even know why they called it a window at this point thankfully now it is treated but that was 15 minutes away from us and it was a major problem Low-rise buildings in residential areas also account for a high number of collisions, surprisingly, because most people would believe it is the higher skyscrapers that cause these collisions, which, again, is not true. Residential areas account for just under half of these collisions, while low-rise buildings account for just over half of these collisions per year. Light pollution can also be a factor in these collisions, again during the migration period when the bird traffic is really high. Shielded, fully shielded lights or even turned off lights at night are the best to prevent these bird collisions due to how light will draw birds down. However, this is not the only solution and even if lights are turned off, it should always be paired with some other treatment on these windows. Windows are actually the second highest killer of birds, the first being outdoor cats actually. But some things that people have been doing, specifically Save Our Songbirds and the Southern Wisconsin Bird Alliance, is habitat restoration, planting more native gardens, and reducing pesticide use. And again, while these do help the birds, they don't target the root cause, which is the window collisions. A quick side note here is the material threat factor. It's a scale that the American Bird Conservancy uses to determine how effective window treatment is. It's on a scale of one to 100 with closer to one, so the lower number, means the treatment is more effective, so it's more bird safe. How they do this is they have this dark enclosed tunnel. They'll send a bird down the tunnel. There'll be two windows at the end, one with a treatment, one without a treatment. There are nets in front of the window, so no birds are being hit. But if the birds are consistently flying at the treated window, then we know it's not very safe. Some common treatments are dots, paracord, and tempera paint, with the main one being dots. Bird dots can be placed during the construction period on buildings. This is called fritted glass, where the dots are actually baked or etched into the glass. Or they can be placed afterwards once a window has been deemed to be a problematic window, meaning it is not bird safe. There are many different organizations that produce these dots, one of them being Feather Friendly, and these dots come on a roll. But again, dots can come in the fritted glass, which prevents any of this from ever needing to happen. So with all this in mind, I'd like to ask the commission to consider making village ordinance revolving around these bird safe glass treatments. Bird collisions are a clear and very undeniable problem in Cottage Grove along with throughout Wisconsin and many other areas in the Midwest. We already have framework from the Madison ordinance and Middleton ordinance. So I would ask you to consider taking the next steps to make this a possibility. Thank you.

So I will open it up to questions from the commission members for Ellie. And I see that Jared's online. So if you can raise your hand or you can just probably interrupt us if you have questions too.

So for the locations that have implemented an ordinance like this, what have they seen in terms of reductions on the bird impacts?

So the ordinance definitely helps reduce these bird collisions. In Madison, I know that in the UW campus, the buildings that have the bird treated glass definitely have a lower bird collision rate with, I think it dropped by over 50%.

Heidi, do you have a question?

I wanted to thank you for your presentation. I think it covered a lot of things and left us with some action steps and it's good to know that Middleton and Madison already have ordinances like that that we could model after if we choose to go that route. It kind of reminds me a little bit of the dark sky like you talked about because we do already have dark sky requirements like for the lighting that has to go down. So definitely building on that to be less impactful on the wildlife and so humans and nature can coexist better. So then I guess that transitions my question over to Tyler, Erin, Rick maybe. If you have other communities that you've worked with that have this kind of ordinance, I guess that we'd probably want to look into what might best fit Cottage Grove.

So I don't have any other communities that I work with that have an ordinance like this. So I know Madison's ordinance actually was challenged in court, and it was found to be upheld because developers were saying it was... a building requirements and we have to conform with the commercial code. So the court said that the Madison zoning ordinance was allowed. In other communities I've seen it done through like the TIF process where if it's like a commercial development they provide more TIF incentive to ensure that bird safe glass is installed. So a couple different ways that I've seen communities do it.

I've actually not worked with any communities that have done that, but obviously it seems like there's some in the area that have. But yeah, so I don't have the experience to speak to that.

On the flip side, have you had private developers that have proposed this voluntarily without? No.

No, this is actually learned a lot here at this presentation. So no, haven't seen that.

And Aaron, have you heard anything about conferences or anything along those lines?

Not specifically as far as ordinances with the windows and the glazing like what Madison has, but depending on the will of the Planning Commission, we can look into it more.

I think where you're going is thank you for the presentation. Awesome, by the way. When we apply rules and statutes, it's the enforcement piece. That's always the tough one. And then is it a burden to a developer versus nice to have and are we creating costs for down the road? Is this type of glass tied into LEED certification or other certifications that, to your point, where the builder voluntarily goes this way, and if it's in LEED and there's different levels of energy efficiency, because I think even the glazing of the glass, from an energy perspective, we do have requirements already on our ratings of walls and we do stuff there. If it's rolled into there and a developer opts for their structure to be LEED certified, that could certainly be a way to help incentivize developers to do it. Hey, you're gonna get a certification, we got these other pieces in here. Yeah, we gotta figure out what's the right way to put burden on the developers without putting burden on developers, so yeah, this is good.

What would the commission like to do as next steps?

I guess I see that we had kind of Madison's framework. If we want to see some other examples of how it's utilized, through incentive or through zoning ordinance. I don't know if there's a... Central place where we can like come back and have discussion about other examples and how we might be able to implement You know the American Planning Association might have some Articles at least or something about it examples

I think from a process perspective, there's really no discuss, consider, anything, step in here from an agenda perspective. So the future agenda, jump down to there, future agenda items, if staff can bring back to the table reading points or talking points for us, that would be awesome. And then we could probably put on a proper agenda item for direction of creation.

Does that sound good? Do you have any questions for us? Thank you for coming. And you don't have to stay for the rest of this. Everyone else in the room has to stay, and Ellie is excused. All right, we are going to move on to item number seven. So it's 6.45 and I'll open the public hearing for input regarding requests from Bryn Mawr Presbyterian Church for approval of a zoning map amendment to rezone a parcel from planned industrial to SR4 single family residential. And there's two attachments in the agenda. and I will turn it over to Aaron to kind of give us a overview of this during the public hearing and then allow for any other comment either from Bryn Mawr and then from public comment as well.

Sure, so you'll recall last month we had a CSM currently that church and they also own the house immediately north of the church those two buildings are currently on six different parcels they're looking to combine those into two so one for the home and one for the church we couldn't we had to prove that conditionally last time because one of those six parcels is currently zoned planned industrial because it kind of came from the part of the business park when that was developed. You can't combine parcels that are in two different districts into one district. You have to rezone them into one district first. So this was their request to do that to get the one kind of oddball parcel there zoned to SR4 so they can move forward with combining those parcels.

We do have two wish to speak forums who do not want to speak tonight and then two that do want to speak. So Randy Aguilera, 308 Tanglewood Court in the Village is a resident and is opposed to the rezoning of the property. And then Laura Michalowski is 312 Tanglewood Court, is a Village resident and also does not agree with the changing of the parcel. So that leaves me to the two wish to speak forums. So first up is Penny. Just state your name, address, and then try and limit your comments to three minutes.

Okay, my name is Penny Aguilera. I live at 308 Tanglewood Court. Our backyard is the backyard of Bryn Mawr Church. Our lot line completely borders the church lot and community garden, and we are a stone's throw away from the wooded parcel in question. I would like to go on record as opposed to rezoning the property for housing or development of any kind. From our perspective, this land is already very much inhabited. For the last 26 years, we have witnessed an abundance of wildlife using this space every single day. Deer, fox, possum, raccoons, many grown hogs recently, all come down what we call the hill into our yard and the church open space. We hear owls at night, and we know of several hawk families that nest there as well. On Sunday, we had a turkey come down the hill for the first time into our yard, so that was really cool. This is not just a parcel of land, it is an active, vibrant natural habitat. And living here, we experience the joy of that every day. Respectfully, the property owners do not live adjacent to this property, and the long-term impact of this decision will not affect them in the same way it affects those who do live there. I also serve on the Parks and Rec Committee for the village, so I have a soft spot for parks and green space, natural habitat, And these, as we all know, are very vital for our community. The property in question is a wonderful natural habitat. Now, I fully understand that this is not designated parkland, and it is privately owned. It's not owned by the village. However, the village does control the fate of this property. And if you vote to rezone this parcel, you are casting your vote to destroy a really wonderful natural habitat. And once it's gone, it's gone forever. So I ask that you vote no for the rezoning. Thank you.

Hi, Jay.

GOOD EVENING, FOLKS. OUR LOT IS ALSO CONNECTED TO OUR LOT IS ALSO CONNECTED TO THE BRINMAR PROPERTY BUT ON THE THE BRINMAR PROPERTY BUT ON THE WESTERN NORTHERN NORTHWESTERN We are one of many families that built our home there in 1997 as part of this Tanglewood subdivision. What drew us to build and move to our land was the incredible bank of pine trees that lined the perimeter of the church property. The green space behind the pine trees, the wooded hillside behind that, and the quiet neighborhood vibe that came with land that had previously served as a pasture for a local farmer. That's where our house is. Over the almost 30 years, we have enjoyed and appreciated our relationship with Bryn Mawr Church. In the 2000s, our daughters, Brownie and Girl Scout troops, along with many other community organizations, regularly utilized the church space, and the property as an ideal gathering place for their Girl Scout troop. This was in addition to the additional nights of programming and utilization that the church provided internally, for its congregation members. It was quite common to see the parking lot full, mostly on Sundays and on weekdays for worship. During the time he served as pastor at Bryn Mawr Church, I got the opportunity to meet Pastor John and talk with him quite a bit. He would consistently walk the perimeter of the church. He would pray. He would contemplate life. He would talk to community members as he walked around He was a tremendous asset to our community. He served countless hours on the park and rec as a volunteer umpire. He was a tremendous asset to our community and I appreciate his time at the church. The church, to my knowledge, still serves as the only food pantry in our community and regularly conducts blood drives to support the Red Cross. I bring all these thoughts into this perspective to you as I am sad to see and understand the financial challenges that face the congregation. I recognize and see that on any given Sunday, it is not uncommon to see only 10 or 12 cars in the parking lot. It's a big difference from where it was about 20, 25 years ago. That makes me sad. I know that we had so many folks and families connected to Sunday. and throughout the week to the church itself. As a result, I do worry about what will become of the land and the property that we are here to discuss. As a resident that would be directly affected by any development to its current use, I would encourage you to use the input you receive to create a well thought out plan, not driven by financial consideration, but one that takes into account the best interest of the community as a whole. It includes the quiet and connected nature of the Tanglewood community and the residents to the Bryn Mawr property. I would be disappointed and discouraged to see a large three-story apartment complex or an expansion of one of our industrial sites to the other side or on the other side of the big hill expand onto the land. Fun fact, Bryn Mawr in Welsh means big hill. The wooded hillside currently serves as a relevant natural sound barrier and buffer from the industrial section to the residential neighborhood that I live in. in addition the large green space now utilizes and is utilized by numerous community gardeners serves as a natural surface for rain and storm water management if this were to be taken away i'm also concerned on how the effect would be on the ability of the storm water to drain located which is in my backyard it does get quite full of water and if we had additional impervious land not there i do worry about what would happen to any runoff that would happen if that green space was eliminated Finally, I'm not here to say yes or no to what you are going to decide. I just ask that you be planful. In 1896, Bryn Mawr was established. It had 10 charter members. In 1948, the cornerstone for the Bryn Mawr current church was put in place, and the first worship was held in 1949. In 2029, Bryn Mawr will celebrate 80 years at their current location. Bryn Mawr Church is one of only three faith communities in a village of 10,000 people. My hope is truly that Bryn Mawr continues to be around for many years, as I genuinely want to see the church survive, grow, and serve and contribute to the Cottage Grove community as it has since 1986. Thank you for my consideration of my thoughts.

Is there anyone else in the room that would like to give public comments on this public hearing? Is there anyone online? It's 6.54, so I'll close the public hearing portion and move on to number eight, which is discuss and consider the request. And open it up to commission members for discussion. Go ahead, Alex.

Sure, is Bryn Mawr, are they here? Is the representative here? I guess, oh, whoever the question's for. I mean, it could be either or. What I'm seeing and maybe is there's six parcels. There's already residents in one of those parcels. And that's going to stay a parcel. And then there's this hodgepodge of parcels that's going to be combined with the building church structure.

Some of them would go at the church. Some of them would go at the house. The area where the community garden is would become part of the house parcel.

Okay. So SR4 is single family.

Right.

Is there a path to build multi-occupancy buildings on an SR4?

Not on an SR4. It would have to get rezoned or... And then...

I'm seeing consolidation of lots from a flow perspective. Multi breaks up, lots of parcels. Let's combine things. It's going to change things. The church, I'm guessing, is not property taxed now. They're exempt.

The church is not, I believe. But the residence would be. I believe the house is.

The house should be, would be, whatever, right? Unless it's somehow an associated business. So that would grow that tax if that...

Yeah, I'm not exactly sure which ones are tax exempt. It may increase it a little bit.

So I guess my thought is I'm seeing consolidation of lots. Others are seeing development. What am I missing? That there's people are thinking there's development. The documents we have are just consolidation of lots.

Yeah, I mean, that's all that's happening now. What the church would do with that parcel in the future, we don't know. I mean, they could come back and seek rezoning, but if they did, then we would have to notify the neighbors again, and they would have to show us what they're doing, and we may or may not approve it, right?

Right.

So the comprehensive plan also shows that a single family right now, so that would have to change as well in preparation of that.

Yeah, that's a plan. Yeah. Okay.

All right.

That's all right.

So Aaron, just kind of following that. So SR4 would be single family or duplex by right? Just single family. Just single family by right. And so it wouldn't need a site plan?

If they tore down the house that's there and built one new single family home, that would not need site plan approval.

Right. So anything that turns into SR4 and is a single family is built. then it wouldn't, yeah, just by right, no site plan. Are we able to defer it until there is a plan? There's no way that we can require a site plan for SR4 or we could require a site plan in order to rezone it?

The parcels where the house is, it's already SR4. So that's not what they're requesting to change right now. It's the corner down by the industrial park.

Yeah, the lot two that's highlighted in the packet.

Yeah, south of the parking lot.

And so that's the one that they're requesting. And so is there an opportunity to, if you come back with a site plan on how you're going to build it? I mean, because it is adjacent to plant industrial, so it has to meet buffer requirements or something? Or how does...

Yeah, I mean, right now it couldn't be developed because it's not fronting a street. It's just kind of a leftover piece that I don't know exactly what the history was, if they came to the church and asked if you wanted it or how that worked at the time. Yeah, so even though it's zoned industrial now, it couldn't be developed because it's not fronting a public street. So adding it on to the church building property would just kind of make sense.

could they like have some kind of easement to use the church driveway or that they'd have to ask us about that or not? I know it doesn't have frontage, but they could access through the church. I guess maybe it would be, can ask if they have.

Not per the ordinance. Not per ordinance, okay.

All right, thank you.

I guess given the information that we have today, I mean, the request is really to combine the parcels and then to rezone to single family residential. But we have no other information on what may or may not happen in this area at this time. And like we said, notification would go back out if there was something that were to come onto the table, which we don't have right now.

Which may or may not happen in the current state of the parcels now.

And then given that there isn't a fronting road to that, there wouldn't be developments that could happen by rights?

If it stayed as it is. If it's getting combined with the church parcel.

In the future, down the road, right?

Yeah, it would either... I mean, if they got rid of the church, they could build a house on that too, I suppose, but that seems kind of silly to do. It would be probably an expansion of the church or something. The church would become something else. But it couldn't just be anything else. It couldn't turn into multifamily or something. It would have to be something that fits within the SR4, which would be either single family or some kind of institutional use like it is now.

Other comments, questions?

And that could happen now, too. It just, this other parcel would remain its own thing.

I guess we didn't have, Bryn Mawr didn't present anything, so if there's anything they wanted to add to the conversation, I would be.

Yeah, I'd invite comments if there is anything to add. You can come up either sit or stand. Am I one of the microphones?

You got to get the right button. Just the thought here is we didn't even plan on this rezoning. We did do a CSM to take the many lots that are there and to break it into two, one with the church and the property that would go along with the church, and the other one took part of the property, one of the out lots that's there now, and combine it with the residential lot that's already there. If we don't do that, we are going to be in the process of trying to sell that house And this is the time that we can incorporate the land behind it into something that can be used. After, if we didn't do this CSM, which was here a month ago, then that would landlock that land back there and we wouldn't be able to ever do anything with it. Our intent is not to do anything with those lots that are associated with a church. It's not, was not our idea to come in for a rezoning for an SR four. It was a requirement as it turned out that we had to do that because those existing parcels actually won't individually won't exist after the CSM is registered. and you can't have two different zonings on the same property. So we felt the best way, since everything around it, including the church itself, sits on an SR-4, that that would be the route to go. That way the whole property would be zoned that way. Any questions?

No, thank you. I think that helps clarify intent. Thank you. So thank you. And obviously we heard from, you know, a residence adjacent to the property too. And so appreciate those comments and take those into consideration.

So Aaron, I just want to make sure that, so if we go back to the CSM from last time, we see lot two that has the church and the parking lot on it, and then the most southern lot that actually says lot two on it. So that is the one that was planned industrial that has to be SR4 to be combined with the lot that the church is on. And that's the only piece that we're considering tonight. That's helpful, thank you.

Other comments from commission members? Otherwise, this is a discuss and consider and entertain a motion.

I'll make a motion to recommend approval of the request from Pridmar Presbyterian Church for approval of the zoning map amendment to rezone the parcel number listed in agenda number eight from plan PI, which is plan industrial, to SR4, single family residential.

There's a motion by Alex, a second by John. Any other discussion on this agenda item? All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Aye. Abstain? Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. I, in my intro, missed this public hearing as well. So then we move on to open at 7.05, a public hearing to provide input regarding requests from Little Genius Bilingual Learning Center for approval of a conditional use permit to operate a group daycare of nine plus students at 400 Progress Drive. There's a variety of attachments in the agenda related to this item. Turn it over to staff and then anyone from Little Genius that may be here, and then open it up to public comment as well for this public hearing.

Yeah, we do have Genesis Villalobos will be one of the owner-operators of the Little Genius business, and then Ken Yan is their real estate broker, and his family will be purchasing the building. They're in the process of doing that. Basically, this is the building that Creative Kids Daycare is in right now. Creative Kids is closing actually at the end of this week. So they would be looking to basically move into that building and continue with the same function. But because it's a separate business, they need their own conditional use permit.

Good evening. My name is Genesis Villalobos. I am the owner of Little Genius Bilingual Learning Center. Little Genius is a licensed bilingual child care program currently operating in Madison, Wisconsin, serving children from six weeks to 12 years old. We currently serve 35 families who trust us with the care and education of their children. We would like to operate a licensed bilingual child care program at the proposed location. The center would have a capacity of 70 to 80 kids and would operate Monday through Friday from 7 AM to 5.30 PM, offering bilingual education in Spanish and English and services. Our goal is to provide a quality childcare for families in the community.

Thank you for your time.

Is there anyone in the room that would like to give public comment during this public hearing? Is there anyone on Zoom that would like to give comments? All right, 7.07, so I'll close this public hearing, and we'll move on to item 10, discuss and consider the request, and open it up to plan commission members for questions or comments.

I have a question for you. So I'm actually, I would be practically a neighbor for your business if this were to be approved.

I live right in that cul-de-sac there, and the

The property has some repair issues, I suppose I would say. There's some issues with it, and I wonder if you guys have any plans for what you would do to improve the property if this was approved.

So Kentian, my family's the one that's potentially buying the property. We have talked to some of our insurance providers. We are getting insurance quotes right now for the property, and they're giving us any lists. And we will, with Little Genius, we'll address the list that they provide. I know, I was on the roof a little bit. There was a lot of pine needles in the gutters. I get it. And so, yeah, I mean, our main goal is to help them get the building first, get secure the building to get in and operate, and then we can address issues as they come up. Or, you know, whatever the insurance companies provide as a checklist, as a requirement, post-closing, or however that is set up, we can tackle those issues as well.

Thanks for that. I'm also concerned about the property value for the neighbors in that area. For example, that retaining wall that goes down Donkel Court, it's failed I think three times in the last several years, which is very unsightly. Personally, I think it's a safety issue for the children there if that continues to happen. I have a little bit of concern of, hey, we'll fix it after we get approval. but I do understand the position you're in where it's hard to say exactly what you would need to do absent findings from an insurance company. But I appreciate the response. Thank you.

Questions from other commission members?

I guess I'd just add that we've had some child care facilities close in the area, and so I think that there's a need for families in our community to have a place, especially one offering bilingual. I'm not sure that we have that currently. So I think that that would be a great addition to services provided in our community and in a location that people are familiar that there's a daycare there. So I think that that should help bring potential clients in.

Staff recommendation was that the commissioner approves the CUP as presented. If there are no other comments, entertain a motion on this one.

I'd like a motion to recommend approval for the request from Little Genius Bilingual Learning Center for approval of a conditionally used permit to operate a group daycare of nine plus students that land at 400 Progress Drive.

Second. Motion by Alex, second by Kim. Any other discussion on this? All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Abstain? Abstain? Motion carries. We will move on. Thank you for coming. To number 11, which is discuss and consider request from Dunrovin Ridge LLC for approval of the Kennedy Hill second edition final plats, which is located within the village's extraterritorial jurisdiction. the few documents in the agenda.

So this is the second addition to Kennedy Hills. It's in the town of Cottage Grove, but within our mile and a half jurisdiction. We're not looking at zoning. We don't have zoning authority, just the land division authority. This is, as I said, the second edition, so the last of three phases from a preliminary plat that was approved several years ago. So we'd recommend approval of the final plat. This will also go before the town and Dane County.

Comments or questions from the commission?

I guess I just find it interesting that the town will be connecting roads, um, from existing subdivisions into new ones and how important that is to make that access throughout a neighborhood. Um, how it benefits people that already live there to have another access out and, uh, new people moving in. Um, so I just find that, um, an interesting observation.

I guess I'd second that. When we had discussion from the Newman, which is actually on our agenda tonight, we had quite a bit of residents that came forward concerned about kind of traffic. And I know that there was a comment about potentially closing a road, a town road, so that there wouldn't be access. But just kind of mirroring your comments there.

But I would make a motion to approve the request from Dunroven Ridge LLC for approval of the Kennedy Hills second edition final plat as presented. Second.

Motion by Heidi, second by Alex. Any other discussion on this agenda item? All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Abstain? Motion carries. Item number 12, we are 7-13. We're going to open up a public hearing to provide input regarding requests from Newman Homes for the approval of the preliminary plat for Juniper Fields, a proposed 108-acre, 226-unit single-family residential subdivision. Along with the approval of the zoning map amendment to rezone single-family residential parcels to sr6 Single-family residential and future parkland and stormwater retention areas to the park and open space plan Quite a few documents that the Commission reviewed linked in the agenda on this one Yeah, we do have Mike Hawkins here he's the engineer who designed the neighborhood Also Brian from

Newman Homes as well. You guys are welcome to come up here if you want to say anything.

And then we will open it up to public comments both in person and online after a little bit of a presentation on this item.

Good evening. As I mentioned, I'm Brian Lindgren with Newman Developments. So just a point of clarification, there is, or at least was, a Newman Homes. It's just not us. So we're Newman Developments, and we build homes under the Harbor Homes brand. no we're excited about the development we've been here to discuss it's uh you know on various occasions um i thought we had a very productive neighborhood meeting we've got good feedback from the from the various neighbors involved we are a single family for sale home builder so that's what we've proposed here you know a preliminary plan in zoning consistent with the surrounding areas we know there's you know after the public hearing assuming there's an opportunity to discuss some of the conditions and things just clarifications you know, for the commission. We're happy to do that. But otherwise, you know, we look forward to your feedback and excited about the opportunity.

So given that we're in this public hearing and open it up to any anyone in the room that like to give public comment on this. Or anyone on Zoom. All right, 7-16. So I'll close this public hearing. We'll move on to discuss and consider the request. So open it up to commission members for, go ahead, Alex. We don't even get the whole sentence out. So why don't you come on back up. You can have a seat if you'd like.

Before we go to Alex, do we want to go through the staff reports? Sure.

Can we do that first? Okay. Let's go through the staff report and the conditions and have a discussion about that and then open it up.

So as Brian said, there's actually two items on the agenda, one being the preliminary plat, the second one being the rezoning. This was the annexation petition would bring us in as RH rural holding, so the zoning would bring it into the final use, the SR6 single family residential. So we do have a few recommended conditions related to the zoning. The first one being just the zoning doesn't take effect until the final plat is approved. To the extent that the final plat may include some minor tweaks and variations from the approved preliminary plan, the zoning districts would follow the final parcel boundaries.

we would be applying park and open space zoning to all lots one through seven which would include the future park and uh all stormwater management parcels aaron could we ask a quick question about that one um just uh outlot six on our preliminary plat is the one that we talked about for our community amenity and pool so just want to be sure that that designation doesn't prohibit it from private ownership

No, it doesn't.

Okay, so the homeowner association will have a fractional interest in that lot. Yeah, yeah. And we can still build them the pool. Yeah, yes. We make promises and I want to keep them.

And then the remaining, obviously single family lots would be SR6 along with out lots eight through 11, which I think are like remnants that'll become parcels in the future when the batting in property and some of the adjacent property. become part of the neighborhood. Um, as far as the plant, we have a few conditions on that as well. Um, first one being just a few technical items in the labeling. We want to see the total area of the plat final street names. Some of them are just lettered, um, uh, with the zoning on the parcels that are adjacent to the plat. And then we ask for approximate depth to groundwater on the plat as well. Preliminary plat should be sent to, I guess I said Dane County in the memo, but really any objecting authority that would be applicable. I don't know if you're going to have any neighborhood covenants or anything like that.

We'll provide a draft. Yeah, we would just want to see a draft of those.

Same if there's any kind of property owner association or anything like that. Just look for continued coordination with Public Works and the Village Engineer right away on pavement width on Matt Pass. Again, naming the streets, not just the letters, and we'll just want to review those to make sure they're not too similar to existing streets in the area, just for wayfinding for emergency services primarily. Talking about this with Ty and Josh at Strand, I think we'd kind of like to see Street C extend straight over to the property boundary instead of kind of jogging up to Street M. kind of as it's drawn, Street M goes into an existing kind of residential parcel that probably wouldn't redevelop ever, whereas the Ag land to the south could, so if the street extends, we'd probably want it into that area.

There was some rationale behind that alignment, just that I think we sent over, had a chance to send over, and we would like to discuss at least, you know, there's a town road that aligns with Street M that someday may, you know, seek to connect, as well as that's the low point where storm water flows from the east, as far as collecting it and funneling it through our development.

Yeah, and Aaron, they actually just sent over a response detailing that about the... the stormwater and then i followed up with our stormwater engineer who reviewed it and and it actually does make sense the way that the overland flow routes being on a street um so i obviously it would be for circulation and for um you know, flow of traffic. It might be a little nicer to have it lined up, but from a stormwater perspective, I do kind of now see where they're coming from, but we can obviously continue that discussion. But since we had talked that they had sent that over and we kind of followed up on that. So that was hot off the press today.

Yeah. I think we're just looking for the opportunity to work that out with you. Yeah, for sure. And just not have it a hard has to go straight. Nope.

Nope. For sure.

So good. Fair enough. Um, Coming south from the park, there's a little 20-something foot wide access point. Not a requirement, but it might be nice if that continued to the south side of the block to the south edge of the plat, so that could continue further south to give people kind of an off-street route into the park.

Probably modify just a couple of lot widths in order to accommodate that.

Yeah, it looked like you had a little bit of extra space to work with there. Curb radii at intersections with mat pass not to exceed 25 feet. The others not to exceed 20, 15 feet preferred. That was something we recently added to our subdivision ordinance. We just want to make sure there's emergency access through all of those 20 foot entrances into the park.

When you say that we're envisioning like a 10 foot path, some type weather.

Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. So that ambulances or anybody else.

Yeah, exactly.

Not fire trucks.

Um, let's see, uh, continue to coordinate with the village regarding the grading of the park. We've had some discussions with Steve on your team on that and that's kind of ongoing.

Yeah.

Yeah. Um, I think we're making progress on that. And then, uh, Plot approval shall take effect upon completion of annexation into the village. I know you guys sent it to the state promptly, and I think they had a little bit of an issue with some employee turnover or something like that, so they're just starting to look at it now. But hopefully we'll get our letter from them. We can get the annexation approved at the board, and then this would take effect after that. Ty, if there's anything you want to...

Yeah, you already kind of talked about a few things. Talked about map pass having a little bit wider right-of-way given the pavement width would be a collector as shown now. So to give ourselves a little bit more room in the terraces, either giving a little bit more right-of-way, but then also 40 foot is the maximum with the pavement for a collector. We had that on there. Talked a little bit about the parks. I mean, we had put that we'd want you to just continue to work with the parks director, with Sean, and the parks committee. I know there's a desire to have some more street frontage, if not, then to have a little bit better access by vehicles into the park. So I know that those discussions, like Erin mentioned, are ongoing. Let's see, as far as utilities, just relocating the lift station to be a little bit closer to Meyer Road for a future interceptor coming up from the south whenever that lift station does come offline. You already kind of responded and that seemed acceptable, so that was something we would like to see. The lift station, the force main location wasn't shown on this, so just kind of looking at where that should go, ideally it would go to like North Lawn because it wouldn't have to be pumped again. We wouldn't want ideally to have sewage pumped from a lift station and then have to be pumped again. And North Lawn also happens to be the closest. We agree and plan that accordingly. Okay. I figured. I mean, it just logically makes the most sense, right? Let's see. Talked about parks. Some stormwater grading things. We talked about Street M and kind of how that works with the stormwater, you know, but still open to discuss that. but it makes sense with the overland flow routes. Speaking of overland flow routes, there's a couple off-site drainage basins that come through here. Notably, there's like 100 acres on the southwest side, and kind of just, discussing how that's gonna get through the backs of those lots along the south side of the plat, how much usable lot spaces are gonna be after you grade a ditch in there. Does that ditch have the capacity to take the overland flows? At the northeast, I think there's two watersheds that you're kind of crossing one into the other. And that was something that we try to avoid. So might need to look at some different stormwater management or some different drainage between those two watersheds, or those, yeah, those two watersheds at the northeast. And then the only other thing, The overland flow route coming to the east off of Street D, kind of the same way you guys wanted to extend Street M, might maybe make sense to extend Street D. That way you have the overland flow coming through the street rather than between lots. you know, it's better to have the flood come on the street than in between people's houses. So that's maybe something to look at. I, you know, don't know on all that feasibility, you know, but that was something that we noticed.

Um, and I think we're fine with that. It was more of a grade change. And if, if we're not being held the meeting grade at the property line and we can accommodate, take the flows, I think.

Yeah. That's something we can definitely look at it as you, you know, work out the grades a little more. Um, Other than that, there were just some minor comments on the plat, drafting and appearance things, and that was kind of what we had as far as a letter. Yeah, I guess if we've got anything else we want to talk about or if any, I'll turn it back over to you, Cindy, I guess.

Alex, what do you got for us?

Where to begin? OK. So there's a lot of names going around. So last meeting, we had Lindstrom with the annexation. The application is with their name on it for one of the agenda items. If I said agenda item 14, agenda item 13 is Newman Homes, but is now Newman Development. Can you walk me through all the names just so I understand?

So Lindstrom Acres is the current owner that they're purchasing the land from. But because they don't own it yet, Lindstrom had to be the one who requested the annexation. So that's why their name is on that. Newman Homes is the developer. Juniper Fields is the current name for the subdivision. For a few weeks there, it was something else.

Newman Developments will be the developer. Newman Homes is just not us. It ended up there. It happens. It happens wherever we go.

We are not affiliated with Newman Homes in any way, shape, or form.

Kosh Valley was the name we gave it. It didn't resonate well, so it's gone. Juniper Fields is a Better received. Okay. So we're going to run with that one.

Okay. That clears the, okay, thanks. I got confused in the one drawing for the lot layout, but then I straightened myself out. There's that one piece that's in the town for Mayor Road. I think it's still in there. So I'll jump to that question, which is a new one. So lots 227 to 233, which is future N, what is happening with those in the meantime?

In the meantime, it's an existing homestead, so they'll be living there. We have an arrangement. Oh, that's actually, okay.

Yeah, it's a different parcel.

Well, but they're in your zone line. I'm looking at one of the drawings. And so 227 to 233 is... in your development zone. It's what's getting annexed. It's not part of the part. So they are going to get parceled, but they'll just be landlocked. And can we do that? Or is it just going to be part of the outlot right now? It's going to be an outlot, and we would come back

Those are part of the parcel that we are annexing. It'll come in with the initial plat as an outlot, and that was referenced in one of the conditions. Right. So it'll stay as rural holding until such future time as the rest. Okay.

All right. I got an easy one here. Are they going to be gas homes?

Natural gas? Yeah. Yes. Yeah, we'll work with Alliant.

Is that what we want to do? Carbon stuff? I don't know. Are we still doing gas? I don't know. Maybe that's something for the board. I don't know.

So you can have a gas furnace and a gas water heater?

Yeah. Don't we want to move things? I don't know. Isn't there sustainability something or another? Just asking. It's for you guys to talk later.

Right. I don't know.

I'll throw that to you guys later. That's fine. Yeah. But it's 200,000 houses, right? I mean, look, I don't know what the number was. I forget. But it's a lot, right? And I know sustainability is a thing. Yeah. I don't know. Alliant Energy may want to know it's extra electrics if that's a thing.

Right, I don't think that, in sustainability committee a long time ago I think we talked about incentives for people to like just this was an idea that people would like an incentive to have an electric furnace or something but I'm not sure if they've come far enough to have an electric furnace like required in Wisconsin with our temperatures like I don't think a heat pump It's strong enough for our winters yet.

He put them back up. OK. That's for you guys.

I think that was a conversation back in the committee a while ago.

Yeah. OK. Erin, thank you for covering the annexation not approved yet in your notes. And that's a condition. So I had a question on that. So there we go. OK. Outlot seven.

OK. Outlot four is my example.

Oops, outlet four has, looks like it has two paths in, one from the northeast and one from the southwest-ish. So outlet, so those are basically maintenance paths. So outlet seven, how does the, that'll, I guess, be dedicated to the village. How do we maintain outlet seven? Or can we, or I guess the question would be, can we add some, a path into outlet seven? It's the one all the way up north.

I think we actually had a comment on that, about putting an out lot between lots 116 and 117, and that might serve that purpose. I don't know if that's kind of where, but that would kind of lead to out lot seven. That was a comment I didn't specifically talk about, but that was one of the things in the letter, if that would kind of satisfy.

Did you put it into the recommendations part, or just in your narrative? That was in the- Can we condition that? I don't think we can, but we need to maintain it. Yeah, I think so. I wouldn't accept it for the building when it gets to them.

20 foot access area. I think it's fair. Sure. Okay.

All right, all right. Check that one off, annexation that one off. okay i think you touched on m as well so m street m which is that little nugget that goes to the east it felt like you know there's this long path down future j with no other nugget to go to the east so it felt like granted those are future outlets right so they may may put a nugget in may not put a nugget in but i think I like how you thought about M. It does point to something way out there. I was kind of looking at how you said that and I followed through with that. I don't know that there's anything else between, I'm just going to throw two numbers out, between 258 and 257. I don't know if there's anything that it could connect to. I think you mentioned maybe it was Street D taking that all the way to the end or something because then we could connect to that lot. I don't know what lines up.

but i think that's you did the good homework it sounds like for m maybe there's some way to connect to that next east it sounds like yeah street d to the east makes sense yeah yeah it's close enough to the low point and we're going to be well below the property line there's a lot more grade change between this low point so i don't think we'll have any issue extending that and taking care of the stormwater similar fashion so okay so that that was that i guess the other note

Oh, I circled these. Sorry. Mayor, not Mayor Rose. I circled it, but that's not right. So right now, Street D and Street L are going to be dead ends, like dead ends. There's no cul-de-sac. There's no nothing. So from an emergency services turning radius, I think the future J is helpful to see that. There's an idea. There's a future. There's no timeline which makes it difficult. but there's a path. I don't see a path for L to help with emergency services there. So like all the other little roads, you got the bulbs, cul-de-sacs on there, whatever they're technically called, but there's nothing on L. And so that, I think, goes right to the airport. So there's no... There's no plan, I think, of doing anything up there. So I think that has to be addressed from an emergency services perspective. That's way too long of a street without a way to flip a truck around.

We had some concepts that did this. A cul-de-sac or a larger hammerhead or something.

I'm thinking in addressing Tyler's comments about the two different drainage basins. if we're okay to work out staff that emergency service issue and the drainage together.

Make sure there's adequate turnaround.

Yeah, whether that's like a hammerhead or a bulb or something, I think that's a really good comment. I guess with the airport comment, I don't know if that was ever, you know, There was a reason why it was to be extended in the future or not, but even in the interim, like you said, you gotta have something until any future development goes forward.

D is really long as well. And although there's a future plan, I think it's helpful to see it, there's zero timeline as far as I'm, I don't know. You mean to connect to J? To connect to J. So at this meeting, at this time, whether or not there's conversation, And so I think we need turnaround, even if it's gonna absorb some of the lots and then those get, when it connects, that all gets demoed out and it's, more buildings, and then that's great, but those two roads are gonna have, they're just too long.

Yeah, that's probably a detail we would see with the final plan.

Yeah, just to mention it, this will be phased development, so we'll bring it in in stages. So each time we end a phase with a stub street, we typically work with staff to somehow provide a temporary turnaround situation instead of just a dead end. And then we pull that out as we extend it. So we'll continue to do that as we go from phase to phase and work with the engineers to get something that works for everybody.

Can you just remind us of what your phasing looks like for this?

Yeah. think it is different than what's in the packet because i think we switched one one change from what's in the packet phases one and two uh are more or less gonna flip-flop uh reason being is the ongoing conversations about the park really getting through some of the questions as to what that looks like how it's graded access is going to take a little bit more time so we flipped that to phase two coming off of East School Road and Molly Lane are where the utility connections exist today. So that's where we'll start there. Stormwater facilities are located in Outlot 7 and we'll extend that south to Meyer Road will be part of the first phase.

So it'll be a temporary road between the end of the Meyer Road bulb up into the new lots in phase one. So there will be a connection from Meyer Road into phase one. Which is a discussion.

Which is consistent with the discussion we had with the neighbors.

Can I share, Kelly? I've got the zone map so that way people can see what you guys are talking about.

Yeah, that'd be helpful to follow up.

Let me try again. Okay, I got a hit request.

And from a neighborhood perspective too, I think it's helpful to know what roads go in and how many access points there are.

Is this the new one or the old one?

That's the new one.

Okay, yep, this is the one you just sent over today? Yep. Okay, so now you got something to talk off of at least.

So the the lots that are shown bounded by phase one would be completely finished and saleable and then where the phase four is, you know, Meyer Rd. There'd be a connection off the end of the bulb up into the lots that are being sold. So there is connectivity. There and then school and Molly. So there'll be three ways into phase one.

So that gets me in the Meyer Rd. So that. is continuous right now to the bulb, whatever the wrong word is for it, and then you're gonna connect to it. That road, in all fairness, I haven't driven the road, but I Google Earthed it, so Google doesn't lie. It looks like, and I'm not the engineer, so forgive me, it looks like an improved driveway, right? It is not a road. So you're gonna have to, improve that road within the phase four three to meet village standards and then so that's that's the thing that's okay you're confirming that that's fine okay which is i figured but i just hear it okay um and then with every development always comes our famous uh traffic study so You improve it to the end of phase three. This is super helpful. Actually, you have this up there, because we can all see it. Except for the people that need to see it, their backs to it. That's true. So it'll be improved up to the end of phase three, then it turns into improved driveway to the town, Cottage Grove Road. At that point at Cottage Grove Road, it's 55 miles an hour. So have we done, and this comes up, and I know we talked about it before, the traffic study. So some people are gonna go west and get collected on N and go to the highway, get into Madison, or they're gonna go south to Cottage Grove Road and then down to 12 and 18 or whatever it is. And so that's... How is Meyer Road going to handle that traffic as a town road?

I think it was a three-part traffic study, right? There's three points.

The traffic impact analysis was one of the conditions recommended, so we'll engage in the traffic engineers, and there were several intersections that needed to be studied, and that was one of them.

But I think you're asking about the road itself, the quality of the road handling the traffic and the development, as well as the intersection.

So the study comes in and says life is great, which would be awesome. Generally, everything can be improved. Let's just throw that out there. So if it comes in that Meijer, is recommended or required, you know, improvement in the town side of it. What is, what happens to that? And of course, I don't wanna get into the, they're not gonna put a gate up, right? They'll put Jersey barriers instead. But that won't happen. So what happens there with this road? Because we're gonna have to get out of that, right?

so there's nothing the village can do as far as like improvements to the town portion of it um so you know i'm not a traffic expert engineer i mean maybe they use school road to access main street but um we we don't have the authority to do anything on that town road right so if the town You know, we could potentially come to some sort of agreement with the town on improvements, but they'd have to be willing to listen, right? You know, potentially, I don't know if the intersection at Beebe, if that's in the village.

I think we ended John, it's not Johnson Health.

The Northwest Wildwood Clinic owns out to the east, up to Meyer Road.

yeah all those trees so my road potentially is is it well sorry it's in the town just say yeah okay probably so if it's in the town if that intersection's in the town um you know maybe the county would be looking at that as far as like intersection improvements but that's not

The trouble is it impacts us.

This is the rub with all of these.

We had the same problems with connections into other jurisdictions. This is a much bigger development than some of the things we've seen before, so it's less volume challenges. So I think the traffic study really comes into play.

If traffic impact analysis will tell us what improvements are warranted where and if, if it warrants improvements at BB, we would work with the County Highway Department on that. They could grant permission to work within their right of way. If there's a segment that's in the town, we would have to engage the town to improve anything there.

So not knowing this stuff yet, how does that impact us from building something that there could be a problem? And so we could be moving forward with something that could be a problem without all the information. Once we get the information, it certainly makes the decision tree a lot easier. So it's not like, I'm not freaked out, but I'm like, from a process perspective, we're missing a key piece of information that could help, especially with phasing. So if... I like that phase one is up the door, so this is less of a problem, right? So things got moved already that help us in our decision, but without this piece.

So typically how we would handle this is through the development agreement. So like the traffic study impose that as a requirement and require them to make the improvements recommended for their like portion or like their contribution. So the development agreement could specifically state like traffic impact analysis, you make the improvements necessary as a result of your development. Not to say like if there are intersection improvements needed, like let's say at School Road, we can't say 100% of that is on them, that it's their proportionate share. But we could, whatever is sort of direct nexus to what their development is, that's where we can impose improvement requirements.

So theoretically, if the improvement requirement to School Road comes in at a trillion dollars, which it won't, but it's some exorbitant, it becomes a burden, there's a threshold where it's a burden to the village, and we don't know that now. Wouldn't it be better, I mean, we could still sort of like, hey, this looks great, we put this in the comp plan, it looks awesome, and then once we figure out a better way that that's not a burden, it gets approved, or like, does it feel like from a, Help me get through the chicken and the egg or the cart and the horse.

There's really great flow charts on how development works in the village that we talked about last fall that shows the steps that have to be taken in order to get the answers. And when there are the developer agreement comes about and you can't, the developer doesn't want to make those improvements, then the whole thing doesn't happen. There's a whole negotiation process that has to go through with the agreement that the board has to sign off on as well.

I think it comes through the agreement basically to say when the traffic impact analysis would tell us when there's going to be a tipping point. So when we get to that tipping point, that's the phase where we have the improvements made and that we just lay that out in the development agreement to say when the, if the traffic impact analysis says an improvement is warranted when it gets to that, basically that point or that phase, that's when that improvement would be made and we'd be working with Strand to tell us basically what has to happen.

think that's a nice way of putting it because when even when i look at it and i'm like 208 homes all coming in at once and they're all going to be going to work at the same time i'm going to work and so that just automatically makes me think that there's going to be 400 cars at that intersection at that same time um and that's just i think human nature like we all think that way when that's really there's going to be a whole process that happens in order to even get this entire subdivision built out and it's going to be over time And then we are constantly evaluating our intersections throughout the village. And when those tipping points do happen, that's when the village board and plan and public works are going to come together and say, now's the time where we have to start making decisions. And if we know this ahead of time, we can put it in capital improvement lists and work from there. It also, I mean, this is very similar amount, like kind of comparable to kind of the West Lawn subdivision that we already have. This isn't any enormous developments that we're putting in that's the biggest that's ever been seen in Cottage Grove.

Right, and kind of a couple things to piggyback on, you know, the traffic effect analysis will tell us where, not just how many, but where the distribution of trips would go. So how many people, you know, should go west and how many people would go south based on their location and The other thing you compared West Lawn, the nice thing about this one is they do have three roads that connect in to the village network. Well, one goes to a county road, but you've got, actually no, you have four. You have School, you have Molly, and you have North Lawn that are village streets today. you'd be able to see it on the traffic study, but where the people, based on where they live, where they would go. And you do have a signal at school right now as well, which is a benefit to handle more traffic.

And I think those other intersections have been on our radar too for improvements that would happen in the future. And then we also, we can update those traffic studies too, right? When we can finally get a good picture of human behavior and what is actually, what these people are doing and where they're going and how the roads are functioning. But we do know that, because we've talked quite a bit about those roads and what the capacity is of those roads, and we're kind of nowhere near capacity. But it'll be good information to have to make future decisions.

Can I add something about my road?

Sure, if you want to come up to a microphone if you have information about the road. Okay.

I just wanted to say that I think I've heard that Meyer Road would be the designated construction entrance, and if the traffic analysis is not going to take that into account, there could be some dangerous situations at Meyer Road and BB with truck traffic. So I just wanted to mention that as part of the traffic study. Go ahead, Alex.

Thanks. No, that's all very helpful. So this is, again, from a process perspective. And that's what I'm looking at, just to make sure. And you're right. We talked about this. I just want to make sure we're following. Because we don't even have the annexations that are complete. So that became a condition. So this is a preliminary plat. This is not, if the annexation was done, this is not approval to break ground. We still have, to your point, from a process perspective, there's toll gates. for that, so that's what we're looking at? That's what we're looking at. That's our challenge, right?

Or, yeah. Yeah, that's generally correct. The one caveat I would add is just if the preliminary plat, The final plat is substantially similar to the preliminary plat. There's sort of this presumption of approval. But yes, generally that's right.

And it is typical to have conditions, and it's in that time that we resolve those conditions so that it can be in substantial conformance and clean. Okay. All right.

Last, well, for now anyway, last random question. So have you connected with the town on that Meyer Road? So these streets are going to get dedicated to the village. We'll be responsible for street sweeping. We have a street sweep. We still have a street sweep. Not leaf collection. We're going to get a leaf truck. Yeah, we are. Snow removal. So Meyer, in the town, I mean, this is a main, this is going to be, you know, once phase three and four is done. Has there been conversations with the town about maintenance around that road or how that's going to work? Not yet.

It's just a little premature until we know more about how this is going to progress forward, but... That'll be something that we have to engage in with the village as far as what happens south of the development.

What's the town? That's what I'm saying. Have you talked to the town at all around maintenance of that?

The representative in the room.

Okay.

That's it for now. Thank you.

All right.

Any other comments from other commission members? I'm just kidding, Alex. I think it's great. Or online. Otherwise, we do have number 13 and number 14 here.

I guess I want to loop in something quick from the park conversation. In some areas of the village, so we have connectivity to parks. We have, like you have the little area where the bike multi-use path will then cut into the park on the eastern side and the north and the south. some areas of the village we do have bike path multi-use path instead of sidewalk and so I guess I would say that we should probably work through that if that's not in the notes also with the parks committee and which of those like make sense because the village removes snow from those so However, we can make a loop, so we'll keep that on our radar with the Parks Committee also.

Yep, and we'll have a nice plan to present shortly. Okay, great. And that is in it.

Perfect. Yeah, because I'm sure you're going to have lots of people taking their bikes to the pool.

We'll have access from all four sides. Great.

Number 13 and 14.

I would make a motion to recommend approval of the request from Newman Development for approval of a preliminary plat for Juniper Fields, proposed 108 or 226 unit single family residential subdivision with conditions as outlined in the staff memos. Second.

Motion by Heidi, second by Kim. There were a few other things that we talked about tonight, and are those captured then in the motion? Just wanted to make sure.

Are there any specific you would like to add? I think we had the, I mean, the traffic studies in there, the access to the northernmost outlot is in there. Was there something else that we talked about that we wanted as a condition that

The extension of D, if that's not specifically in there, that would be the one that comes to my mind.

Okay.

I just wanted to make a point, too, that this updated phasing would be good to have incorporated for accuracy's sake because that's much more relevant to what we were discussing than the one that's in the agenda right now.

Yep, so with the phasing as presented at the meeting.

All right. As long as we've got it all incorporated into.

The feedback then telling my emotion makes sense. OK, perfect thank you. You can go to the tape if you need.

Alright, there's motion in second. All those in favor I opposed. Abstain motion carries number 14.

I would recommend approval of a zoning map amendment to rezone single-family residential parcels in the Juniper Fields preliminary plat to SR6. There are conditions for this item? Yes. Yes, with conditions.

Is there a second? Second. Motion by Heidi, second by Kim. Any other discussion on the zoning? All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? Abstain? Motion carries. Thanks for coming.

Thank you.

Number 15, discuss and consider moving the July meeting date to July 15th. 2026? 2026? 2026.

I'm out of town, but you guys... are fine without me. I'll submit my notes.

We're removing it because of me. Is that OK?

I think, Cindy, didn't we want it to be 7 because of the library meeting her? Is that?

Oh, no.

We did have that discussion, didn't we? Yeah, and we're going to start at 7 o'clock.

What's the 8th? Oh, no. Yeah, what's the 8th that we can't do that? I forget.

Me. Oh, that's fine. Yeah, it's a me problem. I'm out of town. The Fish concert is also that night if you wanted to go to the Fish concert. That sounds fun. Which I'm not going. I'm doing nerdy science stuff. So yeah, we'll move it. I guess I'll make the motion to move the July meeting date to July 15, 2026 at 7 PM. Second. Motion by Kel Nelson, second by Alex. Opposed in favor? Aye. Opposed? Abstain. Motion carries. Future agenda items. Maybe we'll have the bird window info.

Or bird stuff. Probably won't see Newman that quickly with the final plot. That would be a pretty quick turnaround. We're going to have a public hearing for the data center moratorium.

Do we still need that, Dane County?

Yes, we do. That only covers unincorporated towns. The county does.

Yeah. OK. Fair. Probably other stuff, but that's what I know for sure.

All right. Number 17. Make a motion to adjourn. Second. Heidi, Alex, non-debatable. All those in favor? Aye. We're adjourned. Thank you.

Recording stopped.