_09172026-82

Town of Verona Plan Commission Meeting Minutes September 17, 2026 6:30pm Town Hall Community Room 7559 County Highway PD, Verona WI Members Present: Mark Geller, Tom Mathies, Lori Lukens, Haley Saalsaa-Miller, Sarah Slack Staff: Sarah Gaskell, Administrator 1. Call to Order/Approval of Meeting Agenda – Geller called the meeting to order at 6:30 pm. Motion to approve the agenda by Mathies, second by Slack. Motion carried by voice vote. 2. Public Comment - none 3. Approval of Minutes from June 18th, 2026 Motion by Lukens, second by Mathies. Motion carried by voice vote. 4. Discussion and Possible Action: Land Use Application 2026-01 submitted by Michael Jensen for a CSM and rezone for parcel number 062/0608-263-8821-0 located at 2000 Range Trail Motion by Mathies to approve LUA 2026-01, second by Slack. Motion carried by voice vote. 5. Discussion and Possible Action: Land Use Application 2026-07 submitted by Doug Wipperfurth for a rezone of parcel number 062/0608-252-9686-0 located near 2165 Davis Hills Drive • Applicant Comment • Doug Wipperfurth, 2165 Davis Hills Drive; original neighborhood plan required reservation of this parcel for a future road connection; adjacent farmland is now City of Verona Industrial Parkland; wants to preserve the cul-de-sac; rezone would allow for split of parcel between neighbors • Commissioner Comments • Mathies: usually rezone and CSM are considered together in one application; rezone without a CSM could result in a buildable lot less than 2 acres in size; suggests conditional approval Motion by Mathies to approve LUA 2026-07 for a rezone condition upon recordation of CSM, second by Slack. Motion carried by voice vote. 6. Discussion and Possible Action: 2026-08 submitted by Carrisa Waldo for a CSM for parcel number 062/0608-252-9775-4 located near 2157 Davis Hills Drive • Applicant Comment • Carrisa Waldo-Aldun, W6832 Farmers Grove Road, Monticello; was able to purchase lot adjacent to her parents and would like to split it • Commissioner Comments • Mathies – Language needs to be added to the CSM to restrict access to Davis Hills Drive other than that as provided by the easement; Driveway access agreement language should be updated to reflect this change as well Motion by Mathies to approve LUA 2026-08 for a CSM condition upon requested changes to the CSM and draft driveway access easement agreement, second by Slack. Motion carried by voice vote. 7. Discussion and Possible Action: Land Use Application 2026-06 submitted by Kurt Wedig for a Concept Plan review for parcels 062/0608-322-8000-7 and 062/0608-322-8550-0, located on Riverside Road between Flint Lane and Sugar River Road • Public Comment • Andrea Rodrigues-Pavao, 1839 Flint Lane; Flint Lane is not safe and cannot handle additional traffic; repackaging the road as a private road does not address previous concerns; private roads not built to Town standards could become an eventual Town problem • Robert Blasdel, 7607 Riverside Road; Concept plan doesn’t show where the proposed trails will be; trees are currently being removed from the property for a road which doesn’t follow the town ordinance; screening of his property is not depicted on the concept plan; condo concept shows multiple buildings on one parcel – how is this allowed? • Shari Blasdel, 7607 Riverside Road; application states no access to Flint Road but access is shown; condo plat allows multiple buildings on one parcel – how is this possible? Private vs public interests in one development; loss of farmland is alarming • Dusty Poast, 1990 Hidden River Road; concept plan violates Town mandate and creates a permanent safety issue; private roads abandon public standards; impact to Flint Lane will break the road; • Applicant Comment • Kurt Wedig; first concept plan based on staff recommendation to create a cul- de-sac off of Flint Lane; who is expected to pay for the recommendation of the Public Works Committee to extend the cul de sac further to the south; the town has approved condominium developments in the past; currently it’s farmed and tree removal and property management is at the discretion of the owner; • Nathan Lockwood; the anticipated traffic count of 190 vehicle trips a day generated by this number of lots will not change the Level of Service at any intersection • Commissioner Comments • Slack: concerns about grade and Flint Lane access – was the vacation of Flint Lane discussed? Has the applicant discussed Flint Lane with the neighbors regarding replacing Flint Lane? • Geller: concerns that the recommendation by the Public Works Committee was ignored • Salsaa-Miller: what is the plan for the connection to the parcel to the south other than via Sugar River Road and proposed stub from the development? • Mathies: what are the engineering standards for the proposed intersection of the private road and Flint Lane? Can Riverside Road be used for access to the lots in the western portion of the property? Would the stormwater facilities be split between two HOA’s - one for the private portion and one for the public? Would there be one HOA or two? • Applicant responses: recommendation from Public Works not considered due to issue of who would pay for it; there will be only one HOA for the entire development; No action taken. 8. Other 9. Next Meeting: October 15, 2026 10. Adjourn – Motion by Mathies, second by Slack. Motion carried by voice vote. Meeting adjourned at 8:09 pm Submitted by Sarah Gaskell, Town Planner/Administrator