Full House For Lannon & County Line Housing Proposal. If They Don't Sell, They Rent.

Harter Lakeside Disposal Proposal Not Recommended To Change Zoning.

From agenda packet.

1/13/2025 Plan Commission meeting agenda packet here.

Recording here.

Min 11:10 meeting starts. Minutes. Approved.

Min 12:25 Text amendments changes. Various chapters with clarifications and other updates. Director Retzlaff runs through the various items. Amendment 4 adds a CUP condition to solar farm development which means it goes to the village board. Amendment 7 clarifies M-2 characteristics, as per the Harter application. Fences come up a lot. Adds buffers on corner lots for subdivision.

Attorney, Brian Randell, agent for Harter development proposal on Fond du Lac speaks at hearing on this matter. Suggests that the conditional use language should be added to the M-1 zoning.

Resident (author) thanks the planning department for adding the CUP language to the proposed language, and states that there is no need to update the M-1 zoning language per the previous speaker.

Commission approves as written.

Min 24:10 Harter Lakeside Disposal proposal for waste truck maintenance facility. Director runs through the presentation. Some additional information submitted regarding sound generated by this development.

Site plan has been reworked. No change to hours of operation. No change to number of trucks, dumpsters or other vehicles. Maintenance from 4pm to 11pm.

Applicant presentation: Attorney, Brian Randell, talks about the updated application. He describes the alterations to the site layout and states this will reduce any sound affecting the residential area to the west. Reviews the effects on the wetlands. Provides a line of site diagram. Moves on to comparing the topography of the waste management land versus the proposal for this one. He moves on to a sound study and claims that the sound is less than the sound of a blender or a noisy restaurant. He provides a video of a dumpster truck backing up and a decibel meter reading from 67-97 db at different distances. Currently, zoned M-1, a building, yard and storage is allowed. He then talks about the unclassified clause that the plan commission could invoke. Then he mentions three other properties to the east that he says are comparable, although they are more storage oriented without daily high traffic in and out. Suggests that option 2 is to rezone as M-2 so that they can function.

Hearing opens. Nothing has changed much from the previous presentation. This will add noise on top of the three other properties all ready there. Same number of trucks. 20 hours of beeping, 120 trucks, and 90 staff vehicles. The traffic still needs to go onto Fond du Lac, which has problems now. Nothing planned to improve Fond du Lac. Adding vehicle density could add spills into waterways. Keep the zoning as M-1.

Resident reminds the commission that several months ago a resident was in tears regarding the noise generated at Waste Management. What was the equipment used to generate the sound study. Reflection on the multiple conditions that can affect sound. Against changing zoning.

Resident discusses backup beeps at 11pm. Besides the boxes aren’t always tied down and make banging noise when traveling along road.

Resident across from the proposed area, says there is noise from the other locations mentioned in the presentation, even in the middle of the night. Should we look at peak noise level? Many residential properties nearby. Was watching from home and rushed over to say his piece.

Chair, Wolter, reads an email requesting denial from a resident nearby. Applicant can find another location better suited.

Hearing closes. Staff continues their presentation. Talks about 2050 plan, wetlands, utility easements, and how the property is not suitable for M-2. Once a property is zoned something, it is hard to undo. Compares Waste Management and this proposal as similar. Recommends a no vote on rezoning.

The formally close the hearing. The director goes on and asks what they want to do. They review the three options.

They vote to maintain previous meeting’s recommendation. Not to change the zoning to M-2.

Chair asks them to consider another location within Germantown.

Min 1:25:00 Two parcels adjacent in northeast quadrant want to transfer some acreage from one lot to another. Assistant planner, Jordan Yanke, reviews the proposal. The commission approves.

Min 1:28:35 Capstone Development on Holy Hill Road application for site plan and sign approval. Tenant, MGS, wishing to expand into other end of building. Because it was speculative, changes are needed for the actual use. Mr. Yanke presents the proposal. Passes.

Min 1:33:10 Homepath Development Proposal for Lannon & County Line Roads. 283 dwelling units, four types of homes, single, side-by-side and townhomes. Mr. Yanke presents the overview of the proposal. Staff suggests a Planned Development District would need to be created for the development. Applicant presents their slides.

Currently, building Heritage North off Division. They run through their history, other developments they have built and business divisions. The planner, from Illinois, reviews the plan as proposed. Talks about watersheds, detention areas, trees, bedrock,

(yeay)

and the types of plans they intend to build. The least dense are would be on the north, with the most dense right on County Line Road. Preserving tree stands is important.

Next the marketing lady talks about the square footage and costs of each type. The “R” word comes up - rental. She shows some photos of interior and exterior of the proposed buildings.

Director Retzlaff asks about a village entrance feature. There is a vague comment about a sign, or something.

David Baum goes through the social media posts that he has been monitoring. Subjects include: water and sewer - is there and will extend themselves. No TIFs. He mentions an entertainment district - erroneous interpretation of a sidebar discussion on Nextdoor, misconstrued. Neighborhood meetings - are open to holding one, they are on a timeline. They think that Tracy Cross confirms their approach. Director Retzlaff, says that this neighborhood is not at the top of the list for a neighborhood meeting, but because of this proposal it is now a priority. They will do a meeting if required.

Rental property - it is suited for rental. No % determined. They imply that Tracy Cross confirms rental. Dean Wolter clarifies that owner occupied is desired in this area. Is there a %? Yes, 0 per residents.

Director Retzlaff, says that objections are more to do with higher density rental. David Baum agrees. $2,200 a month rent.

David Baum says that the traffic study from previous proposal cites that these roads can handle twice as much traffic as this proposal implies. Further discussion confirms that they are different numbers of units and that what he states is inaccurate. An updated study is needed.

No section 8 housing proposed. Nor, next generation housing.

What is the % of homeownership versus rental? They don’t have an answer. Property management company handles the rentals. Rental will be mixed in, but not marketed that way. It’s not a build-to-rent community (BTR). Preference is to build for owners, however, if they don’t sell after 6 months they need to be able to rent.

What is the turnover of rental units? No answer. Marketing lady talks about vetting renters; married couples who often buy later. They don’t have an answer for turnover.

Tracy Cross comes up again.

Density, due to wetlands reduced acreage. Cites 2050 plan, and within the density levels allowed.

Schedule: phasing over several years. No actual answer. Depends on utilities, and other work. It’s early. Possibly three to five years.

School effect: 135 additional students based on the Tracy Cross information. They have not studied themselves.

School board president, Russ Ewert, says that if those numbers hold true the elementary school in the area is likely to handle that number of new students.

Commissioner Williams ran numbers based on current mortgages and states that the rent is about the same as it would cost as buying a property. Applicant has no comment.

Commissioner Josh Tarentino asks where else is this mix existing? Do not have any like this except in the planning stages. Further discussion on creating different internal neighborhoods.

Average price is $450k per the developer, but Trustee Baum says $400K. He likes the effect of the taxes. No TIFs make it more likeable.

Are they city streets? Main ones would be city streets.

Commissioner Bridget Henk comments on improving the circulation based on the current plan. Bedrock may affect the conceptual plan. They want to know if this may work before spending money on the project.

Chair Dean Wolter, will there be an HOA? Not sure yet, possibly a master agreement. Have you experience with something of this size? No, no concerns. Discussion about zoning, and need to create a planned development district because of antiquated zoning code. What locations are like this?

What about the existing properties along County Line Road? We sent them a letter. Those property owners were in the audience and said they have NOT received any letter.

If you pursue, what are the dates? No clear answer.

Director asks if they would be amenable to a restriction of the number of rentals? Maybe. Commissioner Shadid says that may not be an option that is allowed. Only in an HOA. Director will look into the rental restriction matter and bring information forward.

The meeting goes into public comment.

Min 2.39:00 Public comment. (The village board room was full.)

Resident finds a conflict on the plan with his property and their property lines. Asks for the site to be redrawn. Asks about water and sewer, he does not want to be forced onto water and sewer. Drainage of water, 32’ drop of water from one end to the other, asks for better plans regarding storm water runoff. Likes the rural setting, his lot would plunge him into a semi-urban setting.

Farm owner comes forward regarding how close all the development is to her property lines. The tree lines must be maintained. She also states that police would be able to ticket more speeders.

Resident to the west has questions, why are you on a tight timeline? One acre lots are desirable for families and to get away from city environment. What is happening with the trees, some are dead ashes, will you plant more? There are 24 houses along Lannon Road near here, do the traffic studies show how many accidents there really are?

Resident has not moved. Traffic - between Maple and Division there are ten traffic lights, this area there is one traffic light. Both are the same length. This will affect Lannon. Why did the application not have questions?

Resident says traffic is horrendous on County Line, this will add to the congestion. Against the rental properties. We understand that the property will be developed, should take into consideration everyone. Talk to the neighbors around. We hope you take the residents’ advice.

I don’t see any benefit to Germantown on the high density residential proposal. The water from removal of farm land will affect Menomonee Falls. We will be accountable for that.

Resident to north will be able to shake peoples’ hands. Never received a letter. The road on Lannon is like a cow path right now, this will add more wear and tear. Will there be a buffer? What about the police, fire and schools? Will we be forced onto water and sewer? No.

Live to the south on a well. Told that city water would never be available to our subdivision. The sewer and water is on the other side and won’t affect properties to the south. Will we be forced to be annexed into Germantown? No.

211 potential rental properties, inappropriate. All the runoff would go to the south. What is the definition of the pathway home? Considered as low income housing. Since they already rent around 600, this is ripe for more. It doesn’t add up.

To northwest of the property, density is high compared to surrounding neighborhood. Claims he could not subdivide his lot to make lots of money, why this? What is going to happen with water? Deals with flooding due to previous development in the area. Was told, due to federally protected wetlands, he cannot subdivide or develop. Traffic, used to be 35mph, wasn’t adhered to, now 45mph, not followed. Tons of traffic from the quarries. Public services don’t come this way much and this will add to the need for calls.

Rowhouses with detached garages… They are attached. Detention ponds will end up with cattails. This is not the best thing for this corner. Need more information on the square footage, they look small. Majority of water runoff will go through west. All the trucks take Lannon to avoid County Line Road.

Density plan does not match the area. 400-500 extra cars with this development. This will make Lannon Road worse. If the density were reduced it may be better. Disagree with the one acre lot statement.

Not in favor of high density lots. Thanks residents for coming to the meeting, is the trustee for the area. Neighborhood meetings should be held before these types of plans come forward. Density should be L. O. W. No rentals. Germantown should do its own study. The Tracy Cross study was encompassing six counties and is not exclusively Germantown. Water considerations are a concern. Involve everyone.

Separate matter: In the Holy Hill warehouse area, a landlord lets a motor bike club zoom around the area in between the empty warehouses. The village should contact them to stop this use. It is not part of the ruralness of the community.

Previous proposal for Lannon/County was brought forward under the 2020 comprehensive plan and it was rejected. Many comments. The comments from that hearing should have been considered in the adoption of the 2050 plan, but they weren’t. This is not the only neighborhood where meetings are supposed to have happened. They were all ignored. We want to retain our rural feel. Since this time, instead of purchasing the Grosenick property for over $1M could have conducted 10 neighborhood planning meeting at $100k apiece. The farmhouse is suffocating in the plan. There is nothing like this in the area, and there never will be. It’s like a wart on the face. Tracy Cross was resoundingly rejected. To Trustee Baum, the social media discussion about entertainment was not about this area. What about the neighbors? Strongly recommend more flagship, less density.

Need more information provided to the people in the area on this. This is to do with Economic Development and should be brought there.

The meeting ends.