[Minutes]

MINUTES SPRINGDALE JOINT PLAN COMMISSION AND TOWN BOARD MONDAY, February 24, 2025 AT 7:00 P.M. APPROVED MARCH 24 2025 1. Call to order and certification of compliance with open meetings law. Approval of the agenda. The meeting was called to order by Jester at 7:00 PM. Jester confirmed posting in accordance with the open meetings law. A quorum of members present at town hall: Jester, Carrico, Hanson, Aburomia and Altschul. Sullivan and Bunn not present. TB Chair Rosenbaum and TB Supervisors Hefty and Schwenn present. 2. Minutes from Feb 2025 • MOTION (Hanson/ Aburomia) to approve Minutes from Feb 2025 with a correction in the Conner Lot Line Adjustment that the land area is .09 ac. 5 ayes, 0 nays MOTION CARRIED. 3. K. Conner/ Gem View Lane/ Several actions related to the creation of 2 residential lots from a previously approved concept plan / a. Lot Line Adjustment, b. 66’ Frontage Exception, c. CSM Consistent with Concept Plan, d. Rezone for Residential Development. / Sec. 17 • MOTION 1 (Jester/ Altschul) recommend to the TB an exception to the 66’ frontage for lots 1 and 2 conditioned on the acceptance of the TB chair of a shared driveway agreement consistent with chapter 75 19 (8). The town finds that doing so would preserve ag land and is consistent with the goals of the town land use plan. 4-ayes, 1 – nay (Hanson) MOTION CARRIED. Background: The lot line adjustment mentioned on the agenda was recommended to the town board for approval and approved by the town board last month. Discussion: There was a lengthy discussion of the application of the land use plan and why in most cases in our township there is a density unit that stays with the land after a land division but why in some cases there is not. In this case we are looking at creating the last two lots from the Ginther/Conner concept plan. It was last revised in 2017. According to the concept plan this remaining part of the original field is still eligible to have its 2 divisions/ it can create two lots, each with a density unit and – what remains of the original farm field is a piece of land which has been separated from the density unit that originally ran with that land. This land was sold as a parcel over 80 ac (which doesn’t need a CSM nor constitute a land division – a concept plan was in place and density unit locations were noted with the sale of the land.) This land sale was noted in the dicussion of the 2017 revision of the concept plan and the PC noted on the revised concept plan that the remaining land after the final 2 lot creations would be restricted from any further division or development. PC discussed the exception to the 66’ frontage requirement was seen as consistent with the Dane County requirements for such an exception – it preserved ag land to do so, and the town chair noted that the application has their lawyer draft a joint driveway agreement that met the standards for the shared drive exception. Background: Link to chapter 75 19 (8) - describes the standards that need to be met to grant the 66’ frontage – “To promote the clustering of residential lots, preservation of farmland, and efficient use of land, the committee may approve exceptions to the frontage requirement of section 75.19(6)(b) where the committee finds that the exception protects the public health, safety, and welfare, but only in towns where the town board has previously voted to adopt policies to allow such exceptions. “ Additionally, one lot must have legal frontage and the rest of the must be contiguous to the first. The shared driveway agreement needs to name the town, and the town must adopt an ordinance allowing it. Springdale did so in 2022 - Ord 2022-12-2. The applicant submitted a shared driveway agreement drafted by her attorney to the town. • MOTION 2 (Jester/ Aburomia): recommend to the town board to approve the 4 lot csm that reflects the creation of two lots consistent with the concept plan on file from 2017. Additionally, this creates a CSM for lot 4 of 52.44 ac because it complies with the town land use plan requirements for a CSM for lots between 35-80 ac – this lot does not have any development area associated with it per the town concept plan. Additionally, lot 3 is consistent with the approved lot line adjustment. With the creation of these lots all of the divisions will be completed for the conner lands on Gem View per the town of Springdale land use plan and there are no additional density units associated with these lands. Also, per the town of Springdale land use plan and the concept plan - lot 4 will also need to be deed restricted to indicate that it is not eligible for any further division and is not eligible for any density units. 4 – ayes, 1 – nay (Hanson). MOTION CARRIED Background: Why do we need a CSM for the remnant land? - Unlike the County, the Town of Springdale requires a CSM for lots between 35 and 80 ac. So the remnant ag field will need to be LOT 4 P. 8 of the land use plan "Certified survey map (CSM). A map of land division, not a subdivision, prepared in accordance with Sec. 236.34, Wis. Stats. and in full compliance with the applicable provisions both of Chapter 75, Dane County Code and of Town of Springdale Land Division and Subdivision Code, except that a certified survey map shall not be required if all of the lots, parcels, or building sites created by a land division are more than 80 acres in area, however the land divider shall comply with Section 4 (F) of this Plan and Section 3.19(6) of the Town of Springdale Land Division and Subdivision Code. A certified survey map shall be required if any of the lots, parcels or building sites created by land division are 80 acres or less." P. 25 A certified survey map or plat shall be required if any of the lots, parcels, or building sites are 80 acres in area or less. Minutes from June 2017 when the concept plan was revised slightly and became the current concept plan that is in effect today. “KELLY CONNOR (GINTHER) REVISED CONCEPT PLAN/GEM VIEW LANE/SEC. 17 & 20: MOTION by Healy/Sullivan to approve the revised concept plan for lots 3, 4, and 5 of four acres each, with a shared driveway to lots 4 and 5, with access to the farın field to the North between the lots 3 and 4 and lots 3 and 5 from Gem View Lane, and with a note stipulating no further development or building of any kind on the farm field to the North. Discussion: This concept plan applies to half of an Option 1 concept plan approved by the Town on 9/26/2005. In addition to the three lots under discussion here, the Connor concept plan includes an additional lot to the East with a designated building envelope which has not been changed. None of the 4 lots are eligible for further division. It was generally agreed that the revised concept plan is consistent with the Plan - the three lots remain are rearranged and the large tract of agricultural land is not diminished. A site visit was conducted, Background: On the effective date of the Plan, Matt Ginther and Kelly Coonor Ginther owned approximately 190.715 contiguous acres. Since then, the southerly half of the property has been sold and retains 3 density units with building envelopes that have not been developed and a contiguous tract of farmland. The southerly half of the approved concept plan also contained a lot with the existing farmhouse which has been sold to a third party. Motion to approve the revised concept plan carried 6-0.” MOTION 3 (Jester/ Altschul) : to recommend to the TB a rezone from AT-35 to RR4 for lots 1 and 2 (4.02 ac each) and to RM 8 for Lot 3 of 11.45 ac. These lots are not eligible for further division. 4 – ayes, 1 – nay (Hanson). MOTION CARRIED. Background: These lots are being rezoned to reflect their intended use as residential and their size. Lot 3 should have already been zoned RM 8 but I think was overlooked because it was contiguous to a large ag tract by the same owner and we may have missed the existing CSM during the comprehensive rezone in 2019 – at any rate, we will correct it to the proper zoning. JOINT MEETING OF THE TB FOR THE PURPOSES OF REVIEWING AND ACTING ON AGENDA ITEM(S) ABOVE. Chair Rosenbaum called to order the TB portion of hte meeting at 7:52pm. Approval of Minutes from Feb 2025. • MOTION (Hefty/Schwenn) to approve the Town Board portion of Joint Minutes from Feb. With the correction of hte connect lot line adjustment acrage to .09. 3 – ayes, 0 nays. MOTION CARRIED. K. Conner/ Gem View Lane/ Several actions related to the creation of 2 residential lots from a previously approved concept plan / 66’ Frontage Exception, CSM Consistent with Concept Plan, Rezone for Residential Development. / Sec. 17 • MOTION 1 (Rosenbaum/Hefty) to approve the PC recommendation for an exception to the 66’ frontage for lots 1 and 2 conditioned on the acceptance of the TB chair of a shared driveway agreement consistent with chapter 75 19 (8). The town finds that doing so would preserve ag land and is consistent with the goals of the town land use plan. 3-ayes, 0-nays. MOTION CARRIED. • MOTION 2 (Rosenbaum/ Schwenn): to approve the PC recommendation that the 4 lot csm that reflects the creation of two lots consistent with the concept plan on file from 2017. Additionally, this creates a CSM for lot 4 of 52.44 ac because it complies with the town land use plan requirements for a CSM for lots between 35-80 ac – this lot does not have any development area associated with it per the town concept plan. Additionally, lot 3 is consistent with the approved lot line adjustment. With the creation of these lots all of the divisions will be completed for the conner lands on Gem View per the town of Springdale land use plan and there are no additional density units associated with these lands. Also, per the town of Springdale land use plan and the concept plan - lot 4 will also need to be deed restricted to indicate that it is not eligible for any further division and is not eligible for any density units. 3 – ayes, 0 – nays. MOTION CARRIED • MOTION 3 (Rosenbaum/Schwenn) : to approve a rezone from AT-35 to RR4 for lots 1 and 2 (4.02 ac each) and to RM 8 for Lot 3 of 11.45 ac. These lots are not eligible for further division. 3 – ayes, 0 – nays. MOTION CARRIED. • MOTION to adjourn at 7:58pm (Schwenn/ Hefty) 3-ayes, 0-nays. MOTION CARRIED. 5. PC Motion to Adjourn 7:59pm (Hanson/ Aburomia) 5 ayes, 0 – nays. Submitted by: PC Chair/ Admin, Amy Jester