Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

That's good. Okay, it is 6:30. We will call the meeting to order. Uh, roll call, please. Van Campen, uh, here. Yes. Schnelli here. Veo here. Meyer here. Smith here. Paula here. Nelson here. And Mosan is out tonight. Thank you. Move on to approval minutes of Janu February 5th, 2026. Do we have a motion to approve? So moved. We have a motion. We have a second. Second. We have a second to Matt. Matthew, is there any discussion? All in favor say I. I. Oppos. That motion carries.

Under public appearances, I suspect everybody here's for uh item that's on the agenda. So, we're going to forgo what's said here. So, we're going to move right on to unfinished business. None. New business. for discussion only. Conceptual presentation from Ridian Homes proposed new neighborhood development at on Netherwood Road Jenkins Connor property. Right. And these gentlemen brought their own presentation. So we're just going to get it switched over to that desk here and I'll let them introduce themselves and talk a little bit about

the project once it gets settled. PowerPoint. Yeah. Okay.

There we go.

All right. All right. Um, good evening everyone. I'll just I'll start off. Uh, my name is Matt Brink. I'm the uh, vice president of land development for Verdian Homes. Um, it's very nice to be in front of you guys again. I've seen some of you, some of you have seen for the first time. Um, really looking forward to presenting our concept uh, for tonight. Um, we obviously have Green View Preserve under development now. Um, just wanted to give a quick update as to where we're at on that development and then I'll kick it over to Brian. Uh, Green View is is is really doing well for us. We're um, through phase three now. We're bringing phase four before you guys. We have 96 lots in the ground and only nine of those have not been dug so far. So, we're seeing a very good momentum right now in the marketplace. Um, all all positive signs um looking forward right now and our phase 4 which will be coming forward this year is a very large phase. It's 55 lots. So again, a lot of momentum here in in Oregon and uh really looking forward to presenting this, see how this kind of ties in with what we're looking to do at Green View and get your feedback tonight. So again, thank you very much and I'll kick it over to Brian.

Sounds good. Well, Brian Mson with Vanderal and Associates. Uh thank you for the opportunity tonight to talk about uh some of the concept stages of the Jenkins Connor property. Um so kind of like uh we start with uh all of our projects. Uh, and some of this you might remember from the last time we were talking about Green View. Uh, so we'll go through quickly, but looking at a neighborhood as more than just a sum of parts. It's housing variety. It's ways to create opportunities for residents to find homes within the community regardless of where they are in their housing journey. Really trying to find ways to create community by creating diversity in that neighborhood so that you have options for people to find a variety of different housing types within the neighborhood. and really focused in on that as a way to create uh vibrancy through design. Uh both offering many different floor plans, elevations, configurations, price points, placements, and really see ways to create community through interaction of folks in different backgrounds uh and have diverse parks, open space opportunities, and really create a neighborhood intentionally through the design and construction of the project. Of course, underlaying all of that is sustainability. uh knowing that of course in this case uh we to our north we have uh very sensitive environmental facilities. Now this property is designed to really approach storm water very carefully. We're at the very early stages of it but taking that conscious step to make sure that it's done right. Um we know that this has some enclosed basins on it. We know that there's close sensitive areas. We want to make sure that all of that is embedded into the design of the concept right at the start and move forward from that as kind of a building block. But finally, as Matt mentioned, it's a process of experience. This isn't a theoretical exercise. Uh it's informed by many other neighborhoods, but also our knowledge of the market through the implementation of the Green View Preserve neighborhood, of course, which looks uh like this today.

Uh maybe not quite as sunny as these photos were, maybe a little bit more green, but we'll get there eventually. It's coming soon. But you can see really some of the buildout of this neighborhood and it's an important marker because it informs a lot of what we're going to be proposing within uh the Connor Jenkins property which then gets us of course to the project itself. Uh in addition to our guiding principles, we always do our homework. We start with what is the adopted plan for the site and what does the site tell us. Uh so in this case located in the northwest corner of the village within the comprehensive plan identified for uh planned neighborhood. Uh you can see here uh some of the environmental features to the north some of the new neighborhoods immediately adjacent to the south. You've got some of the rural subdivisions on either side. But then of course Netherwood road cutting across the frontage on the property. Looking a little bit closer at you can see here some of the other components that we're looking at. Of course the rotary trail. uh one on the north side of the property offering opportunities to create some connectivity uh into the ne into the adjoining neighborhoods but also the community through the development of this property. And then finally looking closer at the site itself. Um and you can see water is a very critical component. Um we know uh to our south there are enclosed basins. Uh to the west this eventually most of the water eventually will either drain to the west or some portions to the north. So, we want to make sure that we're acknowledging all of that as we design this site. It's a fairly flat site until you get right up to the northern edge of the property. It begins to fall away uh to the north and northeast. So then the concept uh what you see here is an initial look at a blend of different housing types within the neighborhood transitioning from the Netherwood frontage up to uh the houses that back uh to uh Swan Pond to the north or Lake Barney depending on which map you want to look at or or refer to

it. Um the green spaces you see here are largely uh the kind of placeholder components of looking at the storm water management. Uh we have been out on site uh just this last week into next week uh doing soil b soil borings to make sure we have a very strong understanding of the soil types on the site so that the storm water management is sized appropriately so that we can meet the infiltration requirements. We've had some conversations uh with carp with city staff uh really trying to understand uh how to approach this site uh in environmentally sensitive way and making sure that we have the facilities designed into the neighborhood to make sure we meet that. In addition, uh looking at how we're going to serve the site, uh we're anticipating a lift station in the northeast corner of the site, uh that will lift uh sewer back to Peterson Trail. Uh we're looking at potentially two water loop connections across Netherwood uh to the Highlands and Netherwood neighborhood to the south so that we have all the utilities necessary to serve this site. Uh but also looking at a complete street grid that goes throughout the site with walkable streets, sidewalks on both sides. looking at ways to route a trail corridor through uh from the existing park just to our south uh up to the Rotary Trail so there's an additional access point to the Rotary Trail rather than just kind of where we're today at the beginning and the western terminus. Uh so really excited about opening up another connection point uh to the community. Looking closely at kind of what that means. Uh again it's a unique site. While we don't have multif family there typo left in there, my apologies. We do see this as an opportunity to have um a full spectrum of housing from first-time home buyers, move up luxury estate buyers, active adult downsizing. So, a little bit broader range of housing is available on this property than when compared against Green View Preserve. But we want to preface that by stating like Green View Preserve, our focus is on giving people choices of housing and really trying to offer that full spectrum of housing within the

neighborhood. And again, as always with Vidian being the builder developer, they've got control over the architecture, the design of the site, the implementation of the site, some of the details of the engineering, all the way down to the key of the house uh is embedded in the design of this project. To describe what we're looking at from a single family standpoint, we've got 135 carriage lane access single family homes. Uh and that offers even within that category a wide range of floor plans and price points uh within those homes. So you'll find many different types of houses on uh the design of the project and really a comparable living space to what you see on the front loaded houses. Again, as we talked before, effectively what we've taken is the garage from the side, move it to the back. Yes, there is a differential in yard space, but with that comes a big differential in price point. And that's a really important piece because we do see the need to try to deliver attainable housing for the market uh without any subsidy. so that folks can get into that housing market or on the other side of the lens if they're looking to have a smaller yard possibly downsizing their opportunities for those houses within this neighborhood. The front-loaded conventional single family, we have 116 homes in that category. And again, much like the uh single family, the alley loaded single family home, there's a broad spectrum of housing types within that, including price points. We do recognize that on the north rim of this site, there's great opportunities for housing that's going to enjoy that permanent open space to the north. Uh we'll have access to the trail corridor there, but also the woodlands, the wetlands, and the views beyond, which are going to offer opportunities for some move up housing. But then as you transition to the south, closer to the alley loaded housing, we have a variety and transition in the front load as well. A nod to that is that really to create that synergy between the very different housing formats, we look at the architectural design of not just the alley homes and the single the

conventional homes as independent, but look at how they interact with each other. Looking at things to really design this in a way that focuses on the residents and the front doors. Things like recessing the garage from the front of the house, pulling in the porch to the front of the house. really trying to make sure that as you look down a street you're cognizant of the residents not just where they stores their cars and that's a really important architectural component. Uh and so uh with that of course we do have opportunities for parks and open space and recreation. As we said we're very excited about the connection opportunity for the Rotary Trail. We know we're going to have to have quite a bit of storm water management. And as we design this more, our goal would be to have an opportunity for a small uh tot lot centered in the middle of the project. Largely because immediately south of Netherwood, there already is a neighborhood park uh that will well that's well serves the surrounding area. And we'd want to see opportunities to bring open space that accent that rather than uh duplicate. Uh and of course as always we we will work closely with the village on what the design of that looks like. But for now at the concept stage our focus is making sure we have enough room for the storm water management and then trying to find room for some of the park components because as we said on a flat site uh given the enclosed basins around us, we want to make sure that that storm water management's done right uh up front and embedded into the design of this neighborhood. And so that's a very quick overview. Uh, and I'm sure there's questions along the way, but again, we're we're happy to be here tonight early in the process. Uh, we'll have quite a few additional conversations as we go forward and opportunities of course to enhance and refine this plan uh as we move forward, but welcome the conversation tonight.

Okay. Thank you. Anybody comments? Uh, you kind of covered the single family offerings. uh what do you have for you know duplex and multif family within this design?

Yeah, so at this point we we ran the concept without having uh the twin homes. So uh at Green View there's 28 um twin homes and they're they're moving pretty well, but this time just given where we're seeing the market going and and the demand for just the single family housing um we thought we'd take a chance and design this one without the twins. It's a little unique for Vidian, but just given what we're seeing in the marketplace, we we felt this would be a good project to to bring this forth and and get feedback on and and just see how this this is received. So, um yeah, just just really good momentum in the marketplace right now on the single family side. Are you uh again looking at five foot sideyard setbacks?

Yes. So what we'd be looking at is really taking the the framework from Green View Preserve uh and and using that similar approach through the plan unit development to create the framework for this project that well that will be on on the smaller lots or any lot is it any lot will have that. The way Green View Preserve is put together it's on any lot. Uh now what you'll find on some of the wider lots is sometimes that will not be utilized in all cases. So there there are opportunities where some of the larger lots have larger sideyards, but on many of the smaller lots, uh, yes, it would use the 5 foot sideyards. I I live real close to Greenville

and um I'll be very honest you, I'm not real happy, or I shouldn't say happy. I'm not impressed or I don't really particularly like the five foot. It's very crowd. I do walk through there quite a bit and look at the construction. So that in itself is for me I'd like us to be able to talk to you about that a little bit on any new development. I'm not saying 10 foot but I'm saying let's talk about it before we go proceeding. The other thing I have a concern about is that this is on the far west side of our northern edge. I realize that but we have some properties between there and the village limits as you're fully aware. You've got a a property that I understand is not they're not willing to sell right now. It's almost 200 acres. You also have an unsured subdivision that's d adjacent right directly to the east of of this proposed location. My concern with that is that somewhere along the line we're going to have to face the the situation or the issue whether or not they're going to annex to the village of Oregon. Mhm.

And at that time, whether it comes to the point where we actually make a move to require them to annex or they do it on on on their own fruition, there's some cost associated with that as far as their utilities out there. And I think we should be talking about that prior to annexing any property to the west because it's not a problem right now, but somewhere in the future and probably not that far from now, it's going to be a concern. And I think the village should be aware of that and should certainly look at that situation so that they're not facing some kind of issues maybe 10 years down the road. The most I won't be sitting here at that time. But it's a thing that we really should talk about because the village, you know, we don't need a village of Oregon and and and some property owners having some adversities going on.

So that's something we should consider. And Greg, Lauren, I I know that you and I spoke about that comment a couple days ago, too. So, we did talk a little bit about kind of what obviously there's a lot of unknowns at this point, but what potentially that phasing could look like or what that might look like to bring a unsuited subdivision into the village. Lauren, I don't know if you want to talk about just some of your initial thoughts with some of our consulting engineers about what that could look like and locations of development in the surrounding area.

Sure. So um with respect specifically to the utilities, village ordinances require a property to connect a property in the village to connect to sewer and water if such utilities are available to them. So, as far as I'm aware, we cannot require a an unseured subdivision to on their own dime extend village facilities into their subdivision and then connect. So really if those were ever to come in, it would be a village policy decision as to whether the village wanted to extend those utilities in and then at that point if there was some kind of agreement to be made with those property owners that you shall connect within 5 10 years. So, there's a lot of flexibility when it comes to the utility part of this um that uh that I don't think would lock in these property owners to sewer and water right away upon any kind of annexation.

But there will be a time when they have to when they do have to extend their services into their property. Correct. I'll be honest. if if they were to annex and and

well, I mean, it would be likely a conversation between the village and the neighbors. And my guess would be you'd start to see septic systems fail before you got to that point. And so that's typically how we how we see pushes from neighborhoods like this to come in is that wells start to fail, septic systems start to fail, and there is a desire for the neighbors to connect in. So something like this honestly it would be a discussion for whoever is sitting in you know the village board trustees chairs at that time but I think there would be quite a bit of time likely between now and when all the pieces fall into line to if you want to require these property owners to connect that it just there's a lot of steps between those.

Well, there is but what I'm saying is the village has to realize that this is going to h it will happen and you know you've got if you're going to develop first of all I I guess technically they're still in the town of Oregon.

Okay. Because of the property to the north. Okay. So because that is not I believe the property to the north is what owned by the state. Just north of that neighborhood is the Alpine Dairy property. And then to the north is Alpine Dairy. And then there's um just north of these properties is uh Department of Corrections and um the Fish and Wildlife, US Fish and Wildlife is the the 40 to the north of kind of the western side of the neighborhood. So, but yeah, those are all still town and then I think the next

40 to the north becomes Fitchburg. when I looked at that again. So, you're saying I maybe I missed that because I thought Alpine Dairy their western border ended at the what would be the eastern border of this property, not going north. They do. Yeah. If you can maybe point that out, Brian. So, this is the Alpine Dair property. These two parcels right here, they do come where we've got a road extended and this is Department of Corrections

and this is where the fish and wildlife starts to go to the west. So what I'm trying to say well not what I'm trying what I am saying then is that okay Alpine Dairy when Alpine Dairy wants to and someday it will annex now you created an island now you've created a property that how are you going to handle that I'm I know it's down the road and I don't believe in kicking the can down the road if you're going to do things let's look at it and see how it's going to affect us in the future because what we're opening up to future people. Is it possible situation? Let's talk about it.

Is there a way to solve it? Maybe, maybe not. Or do we just proceed and just ignore it till somebody else has to deal with it? And I don't believe in that. Okay, that's where I'm going with it. I I think to to Greg's point, maybe and I'm sorry, we'll get to your project. Uh well, you're right. I just think that um you know maybe it is something that is a policy that we start to look at because as as Oregon continues to grow we're going to run into this rural development intersection more and more. So um we're not going to solve it tonight but on your project

I'm sorry I I guess I I I just went the wrong direction. Oh, but it was it had to do with the project and it's and my my initial comment about lot sizes and and not necessarily lot size but set sideyard setbacks and things are certainly something I want to be involved with whatever else but but I have my own personal opinion. So and I if I could speak to that just briefly part of the reason why we utilize the lot sizes in the yards we do is part of that delivery of attainable housing. If you look at Green View Preserve and there's a perfect case right here. Uh if you compare the lots here on the north side of Netherwood, they're effectively alley access lots.

They have slightly larger sideyards, slightly wider lots. The average price of those houses $500,000. Compare that against the smaller lots in Graham in Green View Preserve with the smaller sideyards were able to deliver lots in the low fours. So it is it is a function of the implementation of the project. By having the more lots, having the more homes, we can spread that cost for the same length of road across additional houses and then incrementally bring the price point down on those houses. I understand it, but you're telling me those are affordable houses. I wish they were more affordable.

I'm just saying because I'll be honest with you, when you came to us with Green View, the price point was 329,000 and I don't think any of those lots have gone out there with the homes have gone for less than less than 400. That's not our for that's not my position to even call a question. That's your business. I have nothing to do with that. I get it. I It's market bearing. I get that. I just want to say that that I'll be honest. I walk here. I could I could mow their lawns with a with a with a kitchen shears. Yep. Well, as someone who lives on a 32 foot 114 year old lot, um there are choices certainly and I'd agree with you. There there are choices that the residents will make.

Okay. Uh, a lot of times what we found though is those choices are driven by price. I wish we could deliver them more attainably. Um, but the world we live in, unfortunately, uh, I've been at this long enough to know when when I started on projects, we used to talk about streets at $200 a linear foot. They're $1,000 a linear foot if you're if you're getting a price discount.

So, and that's just one price. Um, you know, would we prefer to be able to deliver them more attainably? Yes. It's really hard to do uh in today's market uh from cost of labor, cost of construct, everything across the board uh has continually gone up. U but what we can do again is look at the format, try to find a way to be as efficient as we can with the land we do develop while still giving people choices. The alley loaded lots are certainly not for everybody. Totally understand. But by offering choices within a neighborhood uh and trying to do that as efficiently as we can, we can spread that cost burden out and offer opportunities for folks to interface with a neighborhood and create a healthy neighborhood. The other thing about this is it's certainly not going to happen overnight. Uh you know, it's going to take multiple years to work our way through this. Okay.

Uh so there are going to be conversations that continue as you said the long-term extension of utilities. While we don't create any islands with the development of this site, we we recognize that it needs to fit into the context around us. That's why you see the connection to the east, the alpine, and also a future connection to the west as requested from staff. So that if the properties to the west of us develop, we've we've offered a dense network of street connections, utility extensions, and sidewalk connections. Okay. I'm still going to talk to you about sideyard.

Appreciate um as When you came through with the last project, I believe that you asked for some flexibilities from our standards for road widths for sidewalks. Don't believe sidewalks? No, we've got five foot sidewalks on both sides. Road widths. Would you be looking to do the same thing here on some of your on the roads or not?

Um, potentially. Again, we haven't gotten into the the the construction level details yet. Um, you know, we're very cognizant of of again cost. Uh, so and road width is a function of that, but at the same time, we're also cognizant of how roads get used. We want to make sure that the on street parking incidents. We know from looking at all of our neighborhoods. We do constant studies to look at the on street parking demand in our neighborhoods, but we know our residents have guests that come, Amazon comes, uh, pizzas come, and they park vehicles on the streets as well sometimes. Uh, so we want to make sure that those street designs are appropriate. based on the density next to it. So, as we look at this neighborhood, we'll get further into that dialogue to look at individual street segments based upon the houses that abut it and make sure that it's right sized for those houses.

The homes that are uh facing Netherwood, are they literally the fronts of the homes facing Netherwood? Yes. So, if I'm visiting Yep. what do I do?

Well, we've had some conversations with staff about that. So, we're proposing several things for that. first off is to increase the front yard setback and pull the houses a little bit further back an additional 20 ft potentially uh on that frontage. That gives us opportunities both for landscape and buffer transitions to the houses but also in talking with staff we'd like to explore the opportunity to institute a parking lane on that side of the house so that on the north side of Netherwood there would be on street parking. We would widen the street to incorporate that because we we recognize if the house is going to face the street, that's where guests are going to come. That's where Amazon's going to come. We don't want them parking in that drive aisle because as much as we'd like to stop Amazon from doing that, they do what they do. So, we are in conversation right now about what the cross-section of Netherwood would look like, but it would transition from what's a rural cross-section today to an urban cross-section, and we're looking at the potential for some on street parking for that. Um, to something Greg touched on, I I would um and and you discussed I the price point is something that is a concern.

I've got a son and daughter that are looking at that trying to get into a home thing. So, I'm I'm empathetic and it's personal for me. Um, so I would encourage you to explore duplexes, twin homes. you know, we're going through this later in this evening about edus. Is there anything that could be incorporated into your plan to make them a possibility um as part of a development? Um anything that you could incorporate to try to bring down some of those home costs? Um and and I get it, you know, it's a numbers game. I kept the five yard set back, five foot setback on the side. I get it. Um

um I don't like it either, but I get it. You know, it everything is just trying to get drilled down to get it into a what is considered an economic price point. So, um and I think that to that trying to do two duplexes, forplexes, something like that, roll houses as an option or an alternative um um where there's absolutely no sideyard. um just explore different modes of housing options to try to drive down some of the cost to under 400,000. So, um so that's one thing I had. Um could I know that it's conceptual? Um I'm confused. I'm not an engineer. Uh you said there's a lift station in the northeast part of the site.

Yep. Okay. Now, I'm confused because it seems like a really, you know, I don't get it. It's a It's a low area. It's a long way to go. It is. Um to speak to that. Um that is the low point in the site. Uh so we're able So in talking with with staff longterm, this is intended to be a temporary lift station. Got it.

Such that when Alpine Berry to the east develops and extends sewers in this direction, that lift station can be taken offline. So by having it in that northeast corner, that's the lowest point on the property. We can pick up all of the site and then bring it back to where there's currently syrup at Peterson Trail. That's the concept. There's a lot of studies that we're going to have to do to get to that concept to make sure that there's downstream capacity, that the grades work. Uh but that's kind of what we're looking at right now. That's why the lift station is located in that northeast corner. Yes, we'd love it if it was a little bit closer or shorter run to get to it for the first phases, but in this case, gravity wins. Uh, and so we've gota got to make sure we have the utility uh to do that.

Thank you for explaining it in simple terms so I can get it. Um, I think that's all I've got right now. Uh, you know, um, the homes facing the other is a concern. I'm glad that you're considering that. Um, again, encouraging you to explore different price points and options for homes. I remember the last time the village had significant flooding. A lot of the water came from the the wet area to the north through that space right to the area right there here. So I want to make sure that that's a thing. Yes.

And developing the property to the east would be the best way to take care of that probably. But the village that's a village thing more than this development. I don't think this development is not going to add to that, but they can't. Yeah, it's a a spot that I know has been it was basically a river through there for a long time.

Yeah. And the way the grades on this site are, you can't see it on the on the screens obviously, but this is quite a bit lower than even by the time you get to this first intersection. Uh so this site is high and dry of all of that component but it is a contribut contributes to the wershed and hence the long discussion about storm water management that we've been having and will continue to have to make sure that it's done in a way that uh appropriately treats it and infiltrates as much as we can. Um and I live in Green View Preserve and I have a 5yard setback and I appreciate that I don't have that all that grass to mow. It was a choice obviously, but

appreciate that you can't like, you know, the windows aren't lined up in houses. I can't see inside my neighbor's house or anything like that. So, it's a choice and it's a market driven decision. So, just a my perspective to consider. We'll agree to disagree. That's fine. Okay.

I just want to ask maybe Lauren even a question. We've talked about how they're going to have some of those higher watershed standards and some of the is are we designing to what we think the future standards are going to be as we're looking at this or so that's a really good question um and it's one that really all of Dayne County has been struggling with for at least since 2018 so seven years. um what we we're working with carp c to kind of figure out what the appropriate standards out out here would be. I think as a starting point where we've kind of landed is we are likely going to take the standards that the Highlands of Netherwood on that northern part had to meet with that enclosed depression and use those as kind of our base minimum case so that we make sure that we're not impacting, you know, kind of anything around that. Now, as they mentioned, um there are quite a few enclosed depressions in there and per Day Dane County ordinance, those do have to meet higher standards, particularly on the infiltration side than your typical um your typical storm water management plan. So, yeah, kind of a combination of those already codified requirements and then working off what past people in our seats uh put together for that Highlands neighborhood is how we're going to at least start approaching it.

And building off of that, a typical neighborhood that we've designed throughout Dane County has about 8% of the site in storm water management. This is currently designed at 12%. So, we're already trying to factor in um that need for an additional standard space to do it right. Uh, and we'll continue to work with staff to to work through that. I'm just looking um you have that property, the one property that's that you're encompassing on the north side of Netherwood. That would be in the village at that point. Isn't it across the street? Isn't it across the street within the village or no? No.

No. You can see here uh so on the western edge of the Highlands Netherwood this line right here is the current municipal bound. Got it. Okay. All right. I'm looking at Alex Hut. Sorry. And property owners. Okay. Thank you, Greg. I just had a couple other Sure. notes, other things you might be

wondering about or just catching up on some of our conversations. You know, obviously Verian's been meeting with, excuse me, with staff over the last couple of weeks and have this has already been revised number of different times based on comments about utilities or the road connections. Um, we did try to, um, in this latest concept, um, they've minimized the access points to Netherwood, not wanting to have more, um, entrances there than necessary. So, there's been some consolidation there. And across the street on Peterson, I don't know if you kind of talked through that, but um there's obviously a property right across the street on Netherwood um from Peterson Trail. And so if and when that property would be able to um change ownership, there might be an opportunity to expand that to a two-lane road and have that be another entrance to the neighborhood. Um they talked a little bit about um we've been talking about this what the new section of Netherwood Road could look like. Is this both sides north and south for this stretch would would likely be you know village control. Um and I know Laura and her team have been talking about what that would look like. um you know reducing the speed limit, things like that too. But just to remind you all in case you weren't aware um for properties that really front and access um Netherwood, Jefferson, and Lincoln Road, we do have a a plan in place that was put in um put together by Rooker Milky, our consulting engineers, that looks at developable acreage and has a dollar amount kind of based on frontage and developable acreage. Um, so it generates a fee that's required and it's a 50/50 split for kind of estimated road improvements on those three roads. So long story short, there's a fee collected anytime a development is done on any of those roads. So um phasing and timing and you know length of what gets improved when um is all obviously

details to cover later but that would be something with annexation that we would be collecting at that time would be improvements for um the cost of improvements or kind of a agreement for them to do part of a project um to improve Netherwood Road and allow you know the development to take place. Um, also we've talked about a traffic impact analysis or some kind of traffic study to make sure that um, you know, distances from other entrances and speed limit, other things like that would be adequate and appropriate. And um, talked about kind of what the bounds of that study would be. And then just also wanted to note, as Brian mentioned, there's a lot of land for storm water and and a small park area currently sketched in. you know, not really at this point delineated yet. How much is park? How much is storm water? But, um, as you might remember from like Green Preserve, there's there's quite a bit of park land dedicated. There's three parks within that neighborhood. So, whenever a developer can't uh chooses not to dedicate the acreage required for parkland, they would be paying a fee in lie of parkland dedication and that goes into something called a parkland acquisition fund. So that is placed in a pot of money um that can only be used to purchase new land for parks. It can't be used to maintain existing parks. Um so I'm not sure where that account sits today because we've had other other developers, not recently. Um but generally most folks are dedicating parkland within the neighborhood, but sometimes it does um happen that they they have that fee. So that's where that um that parkland kind of loss would would be going into that fee and and be put into that fund and that's what that can be used for. So

all right, I I'm still kind of struggling with this Netherwood thing to be honest. Um what is if you had the crystal ball staff, what would Netherwood look like as Oregon continues to develop? Can you relate it to something in the village that we would be able to reference to? Two lane, four lane, six lane divided.

So, probably the best analogy is a street that does not yet exist. Um, unfortunately, what we're likely looking at is a two-lane roadway with parking lanes on each side. uh curbon gutter of course, so an urban cross-section and then likely at this point a multi-use or bike path along that southern edge to link up with the path that's in the highlands and then a sidewalk along the northern edge. You give it some thought to y currently to do that. Well, it's yeah, there's some there might be some uh

yeah, right now across the face of the project, the rightway is at 80 ft. Um so, okay, there's sections when it goes back into the town where the southern edge section has not been dedicated to that standard, but that is what we're we're designing towards. Okay. Okay. So, I you know I' you've given us a conceptual idea. I'm not sure if we're in a position to I'm not in a position to say anything about Well, it's a concept for discussion. Um, so is there anything else anybody wants to say? I got a quick question for Brilliant since I've got their audience here. Green View uh preserve.

There's supposed to be a park in the first part of your development. The land's there. When are you going to do the park? So the one on on the east side main. Yes. That will be the south southeast part of your development. Yep. So we will be looking at that um as really this year to bring it up. Yep. I got neighbors asking questions. Are you talking about the one that backs up to Richard's Road? Yep. So some of that's already in there's the trail and the trees are there. Yeah. Well, what? No, there's no trees. I've got a map. Well, you're I'm sorry. Way to the east. Way to the east. Yes. That's That's partially You talking about the Okay. I'm talking right off of Richard's Road because Richard Richards Road tease into uh uh

Perry Parkway. Yep. So, the park to the east. That park that's right there that the trees that this lady across the street said was going to be there that says every time I see her, she's on me. The southern Yeah. Yeah. The Cuz when the day you guys went in and tore all those trees out that were back there that were no good, she was storming across the street. Yeah. trails in. Yep. Okay. So, that's going to be done something this year. Okay. Bye. So, I'm sorry you'd go off the As long as I had an audience. And then the playground I know we haven't accepted it um completely, but the the park that was in phase one that playground is in.

Yeah. Oh, yeah. I know. It was in the middle of nowhere for a while, but now it's it's a nice little playground. It really is. It's very nice. Now, we got some homes nearby. Okay. Anything else, folks? Thank you. Thank you guys. Thank you.

Okay, moving on to item 6B, review and possible approval of resolution 26-03, recommending urban service area amendment.

Okay. Well, Rich gets that back back up here on the screen. Um, so this obviously related to the the property we were just speaking about on the Jenkins Connor property that Verdian has under contract. So, um, they are not currently in the urban service area. So, if you haven't been through this process before, Karpsy, the Capital Area Regional Planning Commission, um, controls, um, where municipalities can serve, uh, development with public water and sewer. And there's a month probably a usually like a six to nine month process that's gone through with a lot of um maps that are created. We usually work with our planning consultants u vanal to create those maps and then um it's submitted the village is the applicant but it's kind of on behalf of the developer. The developer pays for all of the um staff consultant time review costs things like that. Um so the first step is planning commission and village board just adopting resolution to agree to um start working on that application. Again it's on the developers dime. Um in the past the most recent one we've done was a urban service area amendment for Autumn Ridge phase three. It also included at the time what was shown as phase four and five um kind of on the southern end of the Foxboro neighborhood. So we did that um the village did the the karpsy process, the urban service area amendment process alongside um preliminary plat final plat zoning approvals um annexation ordinance and agreement all that um negotiations. So sort of run alongside that. So by the time that Karpsy did their approvals um village approvals were were not too far behind. So, um I know there was a question just about kind of timing and is this jumping the gun or is this kind of typically how it's done and I'm just letting you know kind of in the past in my time here that's we've run these alongside our village approvals. It's up

to Karpsy if they decide it meets all the requirements for um you know protecting environmental corridors and ensuring we have the capacity within our wastewater treatment plant to handle the development. So that's kind of a third party review. This is again just saying you can move forward with preparing the application materials, meeting with carpy staff, etc. But all of our normal processes for plat review and zoning and neighborhood meetings and things like that will still be to come as well on our side. Okay.

So kind of dumbing it down for me. Um um we do this on behalf of of the developer and the developer has an accepted offer. I'm assuming loaded up with contingencies. You're you know done it before you're going to do that. Um um so is that right? Correct. We are saying we are basically consenting to potentially having our our village urban service area amended. the developer can't say, "Hey, I'm going to do this without the municipality's consent." So, um that's why we are the applicant. It's our urban service area um boundary that would be adjusted.

Well, your comments made were that typically it's done alongside or with more or less at the same time we go through the development process of the preliminary platin etc etc annexation etc.

So why are we doing this now? So this again typically it's about a six to ninemonth process from starting to create all of the maps and get all the information about the development and demand and things like that to the time that KA carpsy would potentially approve an urban service area amendment. Um so this is again just saying we're at least open to this you know concept. We're open to this development coming into the village. Obviously, there's still a lot of review annexation. The village holds all the cards there. So, if there's something that we want to request of the developer, you know, it's at the board's discretion whether they want to annex a property or not. So, that's kind of the ultimate card, especially with properties coming into the village. But, um, it's starting that process so that, you know, if it does take 9 months and it takes 9, 12 months, whatever, to go through all the village approvals, you know, that would kind of maybe all get wrapped up this winter. So that potentially development could start in the springtime. Um,

so you're saying we've just agreed to this this this this development. There's a lot of other approvals that are still to be What I'm trying to say is that I'm thinking we're being a little premature. That's again, that's just my view. I'm thinking why are we doing this? Because we haven't really gone down the road with this. We've had a conceptual view tonight for the first time. And now we're going to go proceed with getting urban service area. Yes, sir. Typically, we don't let you talk, but we're going to. That's okay. I know that. That's fine. If I can shed some light on. Uh, as Lee said, there's a couple key pieces to it. U first off is it is on Vidian's dime. Uh, they will be paying for all it cost to do that,

but it's one of many steps uh to go from where we are today as a concept plan. as you said to go to platting, zoning, annexation, urban service amendment is on par with those other steps. What we've tried to do is work with the village to bring it all together at one point so that all of the information is available for the community to review prior to finalizing the carp action and any of the other subsequent actions, but they all have to happen before any project moves forward. So, it all kind of is one chain of review uh with multiple steps. It's one of the steps that does tend to take the longest. Uh and so by starting on the process of drafting the application, getting authorization to then submit the application will come further down the line. Uh but it starts with drafting the information, working with carbc to develop the application, uh which I'm not involved with. Sonia and my office would be involved with on behalf of the village. Uh we keep those roles separate intentionally. Uh but that way the information is available so that if this project continues to move down the line uh through the many other steps they all start to fall in sequence but they're all knit back together in that if the project doesn't go forward there are opportunities where as the village could say okay the project didn't go forward we don't want the application for services to go forward. So there are a lot of gates along the way and quite a few meetings in the process. Uh but it all comes together in a kind of fairly complex timeline. Uh this being kind of that first gate for uh the urban service amendment piece. The other thing I was going to add is in my time here I've seen that the carpsy review process might uh request some significant changes to the plan and so it would be inefficient you know for

maybe the village to be led down the path of this is what this going to look like neighborhood etc to have approvals you know plat approval or something in place and then later at a later time Karpsy comes and says nope that's not going to work for us we're going to want to see a significant change here so by again kind having the review processes mirror each other. Um again, approvals are at the very very end. So there's still that, you know, you guys still hold a lot of um power and cards and a lot of influence over these decisions too. But um that any changes that are recommended whether it's from the village side or carpy can kind of be incorporated as the plan is getting you know to a more final um state throughout you know the months of of design and review.

Okay. My question is going to still stand. Have we ever done that have we ever had a conceptual plan in here and proceed immediately with carp request for carc approval? Has that ever been something we've done in the village? I I'm just trying to be consistent with what we do so that you know there's no we are consistent in the future. Yeah, I'd have to look back. It was probably 20 one when we did the urban service area amendment I believe with um Autumn Ridge. That was going to be my question that I was here so it would have been 22 or 20. It would have been 22 I think. Okay. Okay.

Um so yeah, we could see um if it was necessarily I don't know if it was on the same agenda. um it would have been probably shortly thereafter, but there may have been a couple of back and forths of a concept review, you know, a revised plan. Um so I could definitely try to get that information as far as the sequencing that we've done before. But again, once the concept was sort of more or less finalizedish, you know, with Autumn Ridge, we we're going through and I understand again I I want to make sure that that we don't lose the the comments I made at the beginning is that

let's pay attention to what's going to happen in the future out there with other properties that are out there and we seem to be just brushing over that. And I want to make sure we don't do that because it's going to come back. They always do. Yeah, we can certainly bring that discussion to a future meeting and you know if there's any other information you know if you want to see you know any changes maybe that Vidian might make to a concept plan or you know it's up to you all if you want to um you know wait on this resolution and I guess we just want to clarify what information or discussion you would like to have prior to adopting that so we can be prepared. You guys any people have any comments? Anybody?

What happens if we go through this and the project doesn't happen? So, as Brian mentioned, the village at any time can request that this application stop through the carpy process. So, it's not just a ball rolling down a hill, but we could just withdraw our application. All right. So, maybe I don't understand carpy complete. Well, I don't, but um I'm sorry. I'm just going to be truthful. The final approvals don't come until after we have a plat a final plat. So that's when the final final final approvals from carp C come through. Or is that true or not? Or is that

where I'm going with this is you keep on saying we got carp C 6 to 8 n months. This may not happen right away. This may not happen for two years. There's a lot of detail that is needed and I haven't been the one actually preparing all of the maps. I mean, Brian probably has more experience with that than I do, but there there's a lot of detail that's needed, right, as far as units and um yeah, storm water plan.

Yeah. What CARAC is going to be looking at are kind of three key components. Um the overall community systems, so capacity, making sure that there's downstream capacity for any proposed development. They're going to want to know what's being proposed for the development so that they can run those numbers roughly recognizing this is kind of a parallel course where it's being the the plan for the neighborhoods being reviewed by the village at the same time the plan for the extension for carp is being talked about. Uh and then the third piece is going to be the environmental components making sure that the storm management is done correctly that the buffers and all the requirements that they have for their environmental quarter review is being done correctly. Uh so there's kind of those three components go into what Karpsc is looking at before they are then approving an extension of urban services. Um it is a process we've done numerous times. Um Verona being most recent with the Ardan so the Ardan Glenn neighborhood Madison does them as well. Um one of the things that Karpc kind of works on a set schedule. Uh so their schedule isn't isn't monthly meetings there are quarterly uh inputs. So, it's kind of feeding into a timeline on their review time with a goal of again everything coming back together uh when it gets approved uh at the end.

So, Brian, how does the flex how does some of the things that we've talked about tonight asking you to take a look at your plan? How does that sort of influence the process that might potentially make changes conceptually that you go to carp with? Does that make sense?

Yeah. Um, so as as as Lee said, there's going to be some give and take. Karpc will look at the plan. We'll make recommendations. We think we've got a pretty good handle on what those recommendations are going to be already in the in the plan, but again, there could be others uh that we don't anticipate, but that's where that kind of parallel discussion starts to feed into each other so that we're getting input from the village and making changes. We're updating the final plan set to carp C uh so that if there's changes that you want to see in the middle of the stream that can then get forwarded over to the CARP C application for their CH review as well so that it all kind of comes back at the end. But uh yeah, their goal is is a little different lens than looking at the street network and the uses per se, but they're looking more at kind of that sewer capacity component uh and projection of future use uh for the sewer systems. And that's again what the urban service amendment is is focused on.

And and I'm sorry, go ahead. Uh I just, you know, for my clarification anyway. So the briding uh typically would sign a developers agreement and as part of that they would reimburse the village for all staff time spent on this. Is that correct? Yes. They've already um signed what's called a cost reimbursement agreement. So all the work that's been done up until this point with staff with their village attorney um their planning consultant has been or will be build to them. So this would just be a continuation of that. Um all this work would be under that existing cost reimbursement agreement. So there really isn't any there isn't a financial risk for the village to go ahead with this. Correct.

Okay. One question for Lauren and I I'm sure you looked at this already. You're coming up to Peterson Trail with the horse mane out of the U lift station. So the interceptor up there is big enough to handle this. Correct. So what we have right there right now in that area is an 8 in main which is our kind of standard residential main. Um, I think as Brian alluded to earlier, we don't have the answer to that, but they will be required to prove that it has the capacity before it is approved by us. So, that main comes down through I'm envisioning where it goes. It goes through Highlands. Correct. Yep.

And eventually down somewhere down towards Jefferson Street. Yeah. It goes through kind of the Oregon parks area. Yes. And then it goes south and comes into the intersection. So that wall was developed hopefully with some thought process that that we have future uh capacity because obviously how else you going to get it down there, right? So the interceptor was designed the interceptor along Jefferson Street CC. Oh, that would be Yes.

Yep. the to my knowledge and this predates me the Highlands main was not put into place with this concept in mind. So it's probably always assumed that like you've been talking it would develop from east to west but then also possibly the there would be a new interceptor run along Netherwood correct that they have looked at that and we've had those conversations in places to serve this development with an interceptor along Netherwood. it would get to 20 to 30 feet deep, which is just not something we would want to deal with and service. So,

that's why we we kind of went back and forth quite a bit with um the engineer on this. And we are not fans of any more lift stations than we have to have, but after looking at this, this was by far the the better technical choice if they can make it work with the capacity. the only way. Well, yes. You weren't going to do it with the with gravity flow out of that development and eventually you're talk if in fact Alpine comes in and that gets developed. Yes. Then you'll have an interceptor that goes to the north side. Exactly. What I'm saying is that if in fact there's some more development that occurs with uh Alpine I suspect you might have I don't know if your interceptor would go to the backside the north side of the property or would it come to the south side of the property along Netherwood?

It would go to the north. Oh, okay. So, yep. The big thing is you got to make darn sure that you have capacity down through uh Oregon parks. Yep. Correct. Okay. All right. So, doesn't seem like this is anything out of the ordinary, maybe an agenda sort of thing from one month to the next that has been done a couple of years ago. I think it's a little premature, but that's I'm just going to chime in. I'm sorry, but I'm going to chime in with that. I think it's premature, but you folks go ahead. I'll listen to the rest of the group and what you guys suggest.

One other consideration to to maybe take into account is that by going through this process now, it doesn't commit the village to anything. What it essentially does is get Karpsy, this third party, out of the way of the village having that control to kind of implement what it wants. This property isn't annexed and that's kind of the ultimate trump card here. So, you go through this process, the project doesn't work out. Now this is in the urban service area and provided future development is something that um that this commission and that the village board likes. Now you don't have to step through that carpsy hoop again.

That makes sense. Yeah. Was just um I will add I think if there was something that was down the road was significantly different maybe more dense um higher demand or some significantly different design than what was proposed when the urban service area was amended. Corpsy might I'm not sure because I've never been through that process. They might have some power to say, "Hey, wait a second. We want to look at this again and make sure this is still okay." But well, would they? I'm not sure. Yeah. Approval. So that be that'd be falling back on Lauren's problem. That'd be on your plate, right? Yes. But ultimately, it's in our best interest to make sure we're not creating problems for ourselves or neighbors either. And obviously, we're beholden to a lot of

our own requirements and county state requirements as well. doesn't seem to commit us to anything ultimately and I think uh getting Karpsy's input sooner rather than later has a lot of advantage in the whole process. That's where I was going with this because again this to me is maybe committing us to something but if it's not

right and there could be again changes that Karpsy suggests and getting those earlier in the process will help you know the plan that's being presented in front of the village um you know get revised sooner and you know be ultimately more accurate to maybe what um the final plan looks like. I will make a motion to approve resolution number 26-03 recommending urban service area amendment. Second. We have a motion with second. Any discussion? All in favor say I. I. Opposed. That passes. Thank you. Thanks for coming in.

Thanks. Move on then to 6C for discussion only. Continuing conversation regarding potential zoning text amendments, accessory building units, ADUs.

Okay, switching gears. Um, so this has been an ongoing discussion here at planning commission as you all know. Um, working on uh potential zoning text amendment to our zoning code for accessory dwelling units, aka tiny houses, granny flats, all of that. So, been working with Sonia on this. Um, we did have um some discussions with Larry Kipopaki, our village attorney, about um some of his recommendations about how to handle certain topics. So, I can talk through that. But the um the updated sections are highlighted in yellow. So, Rich, if you want to maybe just scroll down to the first one. Um owner occupancy. I know this is something that we talked about quite a bit at the last meeting. um you all not necessarily wanting to see these units um or these properties that have edus become something where both units are rented um sort of a duplex type situation and um as you all know with fair housing laws just federal housing laws if we're reviewing let's say a neighborhood for example the village cannot say we're only going to prove this is if these are going to be owner occupied homes or we're only going to prove these if these are going to be rented. It's a point of information that we can we can ask about and a developer can share, but we can't make decisions based on or say, you know, we're not going to approve your change unless you only do an owner occupied project or something like that. So, in a similar vein, Larry really cautioned us to um either remove language about owner occupancy or um what's kind of in that lower paragraph there, he said he would be open to exploring that if that's something that we wanted where on a case-byase basis uh there could be a restrictive covenant um between the property owner and so say the village um recorded and basically something that ties kind of like a conditional use permanent way. is tied to that property um and says, you know, for example, um this property needs to be your primary residence for at least

10, you know, just throwing out a number 10 months of the year. Um if a owner wants to agree to that, put that restriction on um I'm not sure, you know, maybe either the primary residence or the edu. Um we could do that. Again, at this point, I'm not anticipating this being a largecale effort. It's it's very expensive to build these at this point. Um, and so I can't anticipate a lot of people are going to say, "Wow, here's a way for me to rent my house and build this other unit and um, and have these both be rented." And I guess again, if they were both rented, is that something whether it's short-term or long-term, you know, we have a lot of duplexes and things like that within the village already, is that necessarily a bad thing? It's just maybe, again, maybe not how we're envisioning these being used. I don't think this is that would be a primary reason somebody would build one of these, but worth discussing. And I guess um I if you want to have me go through all of these and then just do questions or do you want to just take them one by one and discuss Greg?

Go ahead, Phil. Do you want me to just keep going through all the changes and then I don't know, Phil, what do you think about that? Um, you know, I was certainly was one that was concerned about the owner occupied issue, but I think uh at least this point is a good one. We're not going to get a flood in these. In fact, I think most of them are going to be somebody's going to build it for their parents or, you know, it's you're right, there's not going to be a flood. We're not going to deal with a lot of this. Yeah. And we can always change the ordinance later, right? True. Right. Very true.

Yeah. One thing Larry brought up is let's say now somebody wants to build this and have their, you know, parent live there or a adult child or something like that. Eventually the property is going to change hands, right? Somebody's going to there's going to be a listing for a home that has a ADU in the back and whether or not somebody might have, you know, family situation or something like that and say, "Oh, that would be a great, you know, fit for my family situation." or they might say, "Hey, here's an opportunity to buy a piece of property where I could rent, you know, maybe one or both of these units out." You know, that's a possibility, too, right? We we got to think about kind of the second generation turnover of some of these um properties. Again, I don't think we're going to see anytime soon a lot of these exist. Um and I guess just thinking about again, how is this really different? I mean, there's been a lot of communities that have gotten rid of like single family zoning, for example, and they allow in Minneapolis, for example, they allow duplexes and I think even triplexes on anywhere where single family homes kind of used to be restricted to. So, if there were some properties that had two dwelling units on them within a single family neighborhood, you know, and again, it's done at the scale that we've described. It's um, you know, I guess what would that look like? Is that something that we're comfortable with? At least I um you hit on something that uh um rang with me and that is the next generation and the generation after. Um, for that reason, I think that it is important for us to put a restriction for a homeowner to live in a primary residence because if I am a savvy person, I could buy one of these and all of a sudden instead of having one place to rent, I have two and I don't have to live there. So, I would prefer to have a primary residence with a secondary being able to be rented out. Mhm. And again,

we don't require that for a duplex, though, but a duplex is on a lot that's zoned for a duplex. Correct. And this way, people are kind of taking a single family neighborhood and creating duplexes through the back door. Correct. And that does worry me. There's also a fairly large nationwide trend. Institutional investors are buying smaller, more affordable single family homes permanently, making them into rentals. And it's, you know, it's taking a lot of the for sale inventory away from would be first-time buyers. And you know, this would be another back door for them to come in and create duplexes where they otherwise couldn't, right? They might be some of the only ones that have the resources to build something like that,

right? Then you would have a place for two people to live that's lower cost than people have now buying that house. But yeah,

I I struggle a little bit with having that owner occupancy requirement because I want to know I struggle with making people pay. I assume there's probably cost and fees and things to register this. There's probably village time to be able to keep track of it. I worry a little bit about those parts of it as well when especially if we're only expecting a few people to do it. And if all of a sudden you have two duplexes in a single family house because somebody does come in and buy it, but there is that other opportunity. I I don't I struggle a little bit with the owner occupancy part personally. So, if you have two two tenants living on this property and they're both good tenants and like good neighbors to everybody, do we care? Like, this is an enforcement thing, right? We're going to enforce it based on complaints, I think.

Yeah. Like, we're not driving around looking for people that are parked in front of the same house for 10 months a year. But, Right. Um, if we want to look at like short-term rentals as a village, these would fall under that same, you know, like the Airbnb type ordinance that I don't think we have right now, but if we develop that, that could apply to this as well,

right? Yeah. Larry mentioned we if we're going to kind of talk about short-term rentals, that would I think we kind of talked about this last time, that would apply to all properties within the village. There's nowhere and it wouldn't really stand up in court that ADUs are treated separately or differently for short-term rentals than any other property within the village. Um, as far as the owner occupancy, just to clarify to John and Scott, you were making these comments. Would you still be open to uh the property owner being able to live in either the smaller unit or the larger unit, but as long as they're living on either unit, whatever the majority of the year, 10 months of the year, 6 months of the year, it doesn't matter which dwelling unit they would be in, right? Like say you want to downsize, but hey, I'm going to rent out the house, the larger house, and I'm going to be in the backyard cottage. Is that something you're open to?

I I am. Um, and I I think that I have less of a concern if this is being rented out long-term lease aspect rather than short-term rentals. Um because if it is a two rental occupancy thing and it's an Airbnb for instance where you're renting it for a couple of days, a couple of weeks, you really don't have control over that much less the approval process than if you rent it out long term. So my mind goes to look, let's have somebody on site that lives there. You're an owner sort of occupied landlord. um you have better control over what's going on than you do if you allow it to be two rental units that you don't necessarily have control over as a village.

Okay. And keep going through the issues. One thing I was thinking is it might actually be helpful if we have Larry come to one of our planning commission meetings because he's he's very good and also just that way I don't have to keep playing monkey in the middle and I want to make sure that if there are other questions that I'm I'm one portraying them correctly but two he's getting us answers and it might be more efficient. So um we'll keep marching through some of the changes and that way I can kind of work with him on just being prepared to discuss. One comment I'm sorry interrupt. One comment I have about the 10-month period. You might have a situation where obviously some people they want to be there for six months or five months and 30 days so they can you know live in Florida for the other Yeah.

So I you know I I don't know where the 10th month came from.

Yeah. I think that was just example language for maybe a different community but yeah other places have done six months or where you um where's your residency place of res where you register to vote things like that. again enforcement gets a little cloudy. I think the process we've been kind of talking about is there'd be obviously there's a building permit but kind of a administrative like a zoning type permit to to get an ADU and that has some of these checks maybe potentially some architecture review things like that. So we would have all the edus kind of registered and so if there was some kind of agreement they needed to sign we'd probably have like a template that was created and then you know this is the requirement you need to live in one of the two dwelling units at least 6 months of the year whatever it is you know sign it gets recorded yeah there's some kind of fee associated with it I don't think it would be too ownorous uh maybe a couple I don't know a few hundred dollars maybe recorded at the county or something like that but cover some staff time but um that's maybe how that could work. So, but helpful comments. I think we we still have to kind of refine what that can look like. I know again the world of short-term rentals is changing rapidly at the state. There's a lot of um I just did a webinar this past week was about kind of all the different cases in Wisconsin, how they relate to planning and zoning, and I think twothirds of the cases were related to short-term rentals. So, there's a lot of case law that's getting created as we speak about dealing with these. So, uh, we're not the only community talking about it. Um, size. So, last time we talked about, we want to make sure we don't have, you know, a small ranch house with an equalized ADU in the back. So, um, one thing Sonia said she's seen, um, that 75% number in other communities. So, up to,200 ft², but never larger than 75% of the total square footage of the principal structure. I think one thing we talked about too was yeah again the 1,200 cap making sure that we don't have

hey you can build up to 75% of the structure but you have a McMansion and you've got a now 3,000 square foot edu in the back that's not what these are about. So 1,200 is that a number that's common throughout the other communities that have this or she said that's actually pretty high. Um it seems high to me it's high that you guys would be on the higher side as far as being county which isn't necessarily a bad thing. I mean, we're trying to build in some flexibility, but you said usually 8 to 800 to a,000 is more what's seen. Um, that seems more reasonable to me. I mean, a a standard oldfashioned two-bedroom apartment is 750 to 900 range. And are we trying to let people build entire, you know,

my first larger residences in the back? I mean my first house my first house my first house in Oregon was less than 12,200 square feet seems high threebedroom house you know so what if we cabin at a thousand assuming that there's some stere and the 75% of the main structure right it certainly would need some uh guidance that footprint is calculated does that include the garage and because people will play numbers games with you know you know, my house and my garage and my porch and I get 75% of all of that or do I get 75 living area? Living area.

You would have to be very specific about all that

game. Okay. Um, next section. Okay. So, the the design review. Um, we've kind of gone back and forth on this a little bit. So, um I think last time we talked about, okay, let's just have it be like an administrative staff review and you guys gave some direction that, oh, we're okay if it's just consistent with some of the design within the neighborhood and not necessarily on that site. Um Larry was actually kind of caution. He said, "I don't want to put staff in a position where you're making a subjective call." And then that is questioned or, you know, say I'm not in this role one day and somebody else is reviewing or I'm on leave for a couple months or something, somebody else is reviewing, they may have a different way that they kind of review that or their internal standards. And so again, just he's always thinking about trying to protect the village and trying to protect staff from somebody saying, "You're being inconsistent with your review or I think this is consistent, you didn't approve it," or whatever. So um we're this is kind of again we can talk about this if and when I can get Larry here but um so we wrote um best practices advise ADU design state administrative level just you know like signage and things like that but um that we can look into uh either removing design standards altogether we're kind of again leaving it up to just the market what people want to do just like they design their single family houses now however they might want to if they're not in an HOA um or um you know and and just keeping you know placement sized you know whatever I guess elements you guys care about making sure that that's included in the ordinance um so it's pretty cut and dry yep you meet all these requirements it's we could say you know maybe certain materials aren't allowed maybe metal siding or things like that

aren't allowed so it's very clear. Um, another thing Larry suggested is if you guys do want to see these and you really want to get into is this consistent with the neighborhood, we could bring it kind of back to our original idea conversation, we could bring it to planning commission. And again, I don't think we're going to get flooded with these, but it's another cost and review and time process for somebody to get through this. But, you know, that's I guess a decision you all want to make. Do you want to move to some more objective design standards that are really clear to administer or do you want to say it's going to be a policy decision, these are the things we're going to look at, but you're going to have to come to planning commission for basically like a site plan review for these opening that up for conversation.

I like the idea of, you know, the mechanics of it, the site plan coming here. I don't think it's going to extend our meetings to hours on end that there's going to be that many of them. You know, from a design standpoint, I I don't think we really need to get too deep in the weeds on what kind of sighting or what color they're doing or if they want to put an addition on the back of their house. We don't have control over any of that. If they want to build this, why does it have to be different? But how is this cited, you know, on your site with your house? How are you going to provide utilities to it? How are you going to provide for water and sewer and the basic sanitation are things that need to be scrutinized a little bit and I think having them bring that component of it here

you know. Yeah. So we can see how it how it fits the site and how it maybe affects the neighbors or you know drainage and you know things that that will affect the neighborhood and the immediate neighbors is is really what our our biggest concern should be. you know, the the people that are doing it on their site, they're building their own little thing or whatever, but how does it affect the people right next door who thought they lived in a single family neighborhood, now they've effectively have a duplex next door to them, you know?

Yeah, I think I hear you. I think it's just uh we need to be careful about again if there's something that's coming to planning commission if they are just sub, you know, objective, are you meeting this requirement? Are you connected to utilities? I guess why are they here? because if they meet all the requirements, they're going to get approved. Um, is it more just you want to know where these are, you know, being built? Are there other things like again site drainage or something like that that can we create some kind of standard so that again there's an assurance if somebody's going to put in all the time and money to design something, they want to know that, okay, there's a if I meet all these requirements, it, you know, it's going to get approved before I put in all that time and effort. The other thing I was going to say is the building permit process is often looking through, you know, some of that stuff about, you know, and we can maybe build that into the process too about, you know, you need to create a site plan and maybe it gets reviewed by public works and zoning as well as building, you know, before it gets to building inspection, but is it connected, you know, properly? Um, is it meeting setbacks? Those are things that, you know, the building inspectors are already checking for somebody building a shed or something. We do that on commercial sites and

yeah, you know, staff and building inspectors review that as well, but you know, plan commission reviews those cases and looks at those things. They're given a list. You know, you need to have all this counted for. They're going to ask, right? Yeah. But you Yeah. You guys aren't right now looking at individual single and two family dwelling units. Again, this is this is different kind of unique situation and and and the thing with doing it otherwise if you want to start build making standards we're going to sit here all night making new you know what about this what about that I there's just so much stuff you can write down and expect maybe maybe different so

right maybe you can rely on on on building inspector and I that's one of the thoughts I had but then now you're b you know burdening them down with some things that right maybe they're not they're code issues, maybe not so much, right? Circulation issues. I I'd prefer not to have a whole lot of language that says here's what you got to do. You know, all some of it, some guidance, but not overabundance of it, right? That's my only Yeah, I

I'm kind of going um I'm swinging the other side. and and the reason being um the intention of not coming to plan commission was part of the cost and the approval process and time. So I am of the mind I would rather have generic sort of encompassing language that said to match accessory building or or primary structure or whatever. um which is easy to just kind of go yeah you know ish you're good um all of those sorts of things that the building inspection I agree with you Elise I think that having that sort of process where it needs to go to the zoning administrator um the the building inspector so that there is some overlap and cross referencing between staff um is enough um instead of coming in here and making sometimes people really uncomfortable to have to go through that process.

Um I I'm more of the mind of keeping the the uh the guidelines generic and um letting staff just kind of roll with it. Maybe you're right. Maybe right because I guess I I guess maybe I was getting into the thought where we're going to get really detailed and maybe the generic stuff that would make what he's saying makes more sense and then you can be handled with staff and you can handle it with with uh your uh building inspectors and your and your mechanical inspectors. Can we just say that staff has the option to take it to planning?

That's true. Yeah, that was one thing Larry said is if it was kind of a, you know, I don't know, somebody wants to design ADU that looks like a spaceship or something in the back like I don't think this is appropriate, maybe if there is some push back from the property owner. Okay, you have the option to bring this to planning commission and and then we can do that site plan review for, you know, with you guys. I'll withdraw my concerns.

No, I think it's all all good conversation. This is guess we have to kind of think about do we want to just treat these kind of like we do any other accessory dwelling unit but you know there's Scott brought up there's other issues with you know sheds don't have utilities and things like that too or maybe a driveway and so I think this is going to be as we keep saying we can always revise as we go if we get these and are running into issues we realize we need to change the where we're going here with this is that we're going to at this point we're getting pretty close and and you really essentially want to have our our village attorney come in and and just review it with us basically.

Um yes. Yeah. Last change on page 20 of the packet was just this is minor but um just for fire safety we're going to recommend that there's a building separation of at least 10 ft between the principal structure and the ADU on the site so they're not um too close to each other. Um I'm sure fire department would be recommending that anyway. Um yeah I we'll check Larry's schedule. I think he said he is going to be on a trip um during our April planning commission meeting. So it might be May but that's okay. We've got other stuff to to cover, but I think that probably would be good, especially the owner occupancy thing. I just want to make sure I'm getting

correct and we can kind of talk about long-term rentals, short-term rentals. So, he's really good. He's he works for a lot of other communities, too. And so, he's he's very up to date on um you know, what's kind of currently going on. The only comment I would make on that 10-ft separation, which I'm in support of, is it should align with the zoning code that allows for cornises or eve overhangs to extend into that 10%. Yeah, it's just measured at the walls, not at the explaining that to people. So, any other, I guess, thoughts or changes or things you want to um get further information about related to this just for when we pick it up again? I think we're narrowing it down pretty good.

Yeah. Yeah. So hopefully wait maybe it's May we have Larry back here and then we'll get some direction from him. Hopefully we can kind of finalize some of these outstanding questions and then during the summer we can work on getting the public hearing scheduled once we actually get some language drafted. So thank you. Okay. Thank you. Anything else for new business? Nothing. Uh communication missed business. Status of public and private development projects.

All right. So, I've been trying to make a list here. Um, so I hit on everything because we've had a busy February. So, starting with some ongoing projects. Um, there are two wells still going. Um, well three and well six. Hopefully, this is the last time I have to mention at least one of them. Uh, well three is still scheduled for commissioning in March. I know that we got permanent power there today, so that's a huge step. Um, and everything looks like it's on schedule. Well, six also scheduled for commissioning in late March, early April. So, hoping to wrap that one up this month. Um, realistically knowing that it could go a little bit later, but we are very, very close. Wastewater treatment plant, that's going to continue uh to just go until mid 2027. So, on schedule, on budget, going pretty well. uh Richard's Road lift station that is now been pushed up from starting construction in the fall to likely sometime in midsummer we've been told by the contractor but they have not submitted any kind of schedule to us. So that uh that has not been approved at this time. That said, I wouldn't be surprised to see it starting earlier than expected. So, in new projects that you'll see this year, uh the senior center is starting next week. Uh they already have their portaotty, so I guess officially it's already started. Um they are the contractor for that, Portzson, is very excited to get going. So, should start to see a lot of activity out in that area really in the next couple of weeks. Um, Gary Dish Park, that bid was awarded to Speedway Sand and Gravel, and that will be starting in May. Uh, the Park Street, Waterman Street intersection right there by the Senior

Center. The reconstruction of that intersection, uh, also a Speedway sand and gravel project. Um, also awarded likely to start in May or June. The intersection here at Alpine and County Highway CC was awarded to Rock Road Companies. They're a a construction firm out of the south, I believe, Elorn or Bo area. Um, well known down there. They seem to be starting to kind of break into the market via US up here, but well respected where they do work. Um, that will be starting in May or June and run through the summer. East Lincoln Street, um East Lincoln Street between North Main Street and North Perry Parkway. That project, uh that reconstruction project is being managed by WISDOT. It is a full street reconstruction with utility replacement. Uh we don't have word yet on a construction schedule from them, but given the size and scope of it, I would anticipate that will likely be starting in May or June um and running through the summer. obviously uh quite a heavy school coordination component to that one. So that was written into the contract and we will be working with them closely to make sure we're phasing it in a way that works for the school district. Um one last project that is not being constructed this year. It is in design but um probably interesting to this group, the Bethl Green Acre Park Improvements Project. So, we did award a master planning and design um proposal to JT Engineering here in town. That was after a competitive RFP process. Um they had a really exciting uh really passionate proposal for this project. So, we're really excited about that one. Um, we're going to kick that off next week and then we're going to move straight into public outreach starting with some

targeted focus groups and then moving towards a broader effort to to get the neighborhood involved. Um, on the private side, Green View Preserve Phase 4 continues to be kind of the the first one out of the gate. The village engineer has approved those plans. They've now been sent off to the DNR for permitting and we expect that that will probably start here in the late spring, early summer. Um, the Highlands of Netherwood phases four and five, part of phase 4 and all of phase 5 still remain to be done. We have been in discussions with FDG, the developer out there. They are moving closer, I think, to having a plan to getting those wrapped up. So very likely um actually almost certainly in some way or another going to see the phase 4 part of that wrapped up this year and then phase five they're hoping to get it done this year. They're working very closely with LAR on that actually. Um but like I said nothing set in stone yet. So that's pretty much it.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you. uh upcoming uh plan commission meetings. I've note again April is going to be a week late and I'm curious about this the joint meeting with the village board back in for that's the May 7th that has to do with the uh old village hall.

Yes. So we've been working with um JSD professional services out of Verona to do some due diligence on village hall prior to doing an RFP to essentially sell the property. um we wanted to we figured that anybody who would want to get into that building probably wants to know what they're getting themselves into. So um they've been doing analysis of all of the you know mechanical systems that are there kind of the condition of those age of those and pictures. Uh last week I think the week prior they did a phase two environmental um so mold asbestous um some of those materials were tested. Um I think those we haven't gotten the results back from that. So, um, some work on that. And then they also part of their contract was doing some conceptual planning somewhat similar to what the downtown plan looked at, but kind of taking a step further if the village were to sell or redevelop village hall. What would that actually look like as far as um the parcel Village Hall is on? Also includes all of Triangle Park, all the parking, the alleyway. So, what piece of land are we actually talking about? how would that tie in with plans for maybe changes to Triangle Park and parking and circulation and so um I think some really interesting ideas but wanted to get figured it'd be most efficient to have that report presented to both you guys at U village board all at one time. It'll probably just be a

for discussion only at that point uh presentation and then let you all sit with it. But um kind of refining what do what do we actually mean by you know saving village hall? what does that entail? Are we open to kind of a range of possibilities or um I guess kind of what does that really mean? So, we'll we'll talk about that um in May. That's what we're aiming for. All right. Thank you. Uh again, the item C, the plan commission or the planning staff meeting agenda, which is February 11th, what we keep on referring to it that's in in past tense. Is it

So, I'm just including this was something Mike Grace did, but the planning staff meetings we have with developers. We had one this morning. Um, I'm including I don't usually know what's on those agendas until a couple days before, so I'm just including it as FYI. That's usually a preview of some projects that might be coming up. Really reveal what us for let us letting us look back and see what it was. Yep. If you had any questions about Okay. Thank you. Then we'll continue. If you don't want me to include them, I don't have to, but happy to continue to have them in the packet. And I'm waiting for this. Without objection, the meeting is adjourned.