June 22, 2000
Land Use Meeting
Planning Commission Members Present:
Dean Culbertson, Paul Tassoul, Randy Strey, Ken Zilisch, Steve Patterson,
Jim Ecker, and Shirley Solem
Stakeholder members present: Roger Weihing, Barry Witthuhn, Shirlee Schuette, Jason Weis,
and Stan Buman, Bill Leslie, John Julius.
Presenter:
Dave Muench, Outagamie County Community Resource Development Coordinator
Pat Caster from River City Realtors
talked about Conservation by Design. They
have been involved in the development and marketing of several conservation
subdivisions. A few of these are:
Ø
Valley Brooke Heights
Ø
Hanson Hollow
Ø
Meadow Ridges
Ø
Ridges of Dollar Creek
Lots that are in conservation
subdivisions are generally smaller than lots in conventional subdivisions. Even though this is the case, they are usually assessed at a
higher value. The conservation lots
usually sell for more on the market than conventional lots.
Something to consider in the
conservation subdivision is “Who is going to maintain the greenspace?”
Should the association own it and be responsible or should it be deeded
over to the Town and become the town’s responsibility?
Generally, lots that abut a public trail
sell faster and go for more than other lots in the subdivision.
They try to get narrower roads in
conservation subdivisions. Narrower
roads provide more greenspace and reduce paving costs, run-off, and pollution.
************************************************************************
David Eisele from Martinson &
Eisele discussed some of the Conservation subdivisions he has been involved
with including Mustang Acres, Mayflower Meadows, Apple Hill Farms, and Tamarack.
Conservation subdivisions should be a
social setting that creates community. Trails
help to create this setting. Trails
are thought to be safer than streets. Trails
and open space help foster a healthier lifestyle for young and old.
Open space is taxable which is a benefit
for the town.
It has been found that more erosion is
done with the two and five years storms than the hundred year floods. By having ponds in conservation subdivisions you help control
erosion. This is actually more
effective than the restrictions set by your county.
By having more greenspace and less
pavement you have less runoff. This
also provides a better cleansing mechanism.
With fewer roads less salt is used, less plowing is required, and you
have fewer chemicals from vehicles running off the roads.
As David Muench stated, conservation
subdivisions work both inside and outside sanitary districts.
The minimum lot size recommended for a mound system has been 25,000
square feet. They really prefer to
see a lot be at least ¾ of an acre. They
try to use the rule that wells not be closer
than 50 feet to the lot line. This
helps neighboring septic systems.
************************************************************************
K.C. Maurer from Century 21 Great
American
Consumers are looking for pride in home
ownership. They’re looking for
rural lots and are willing to spend a little more to get them.
They’re usually looking for a lot that falls in the range from 2/3 acre
to 2.5 acres. Buyers don’t want
all the responsibility of maintaining a larger lot; that’s the advantage of a
conservation subdivision (open space without the work).
Price increases significantly with
conservation subdivisions, yet demand is very high for them. The trails are no longer viewed as a negative.
People like the idea of walking on the trails instead of sidewalks.
It creates that friendly atmosphere.
There is usually an attempt to work tree
lines on raw land into the conservation subdivisions.
If the trees are not attractive then they may not be worked into the
subdivision.
Barry Witthuhn feels that Greenville
cannot afford the $80,000 that these lots may cost.
The average selling price for a lot in Greenville is $20,000
- $25,000.
Frequently, both spouses are working and
have less time to maintain property and are
willing to spend more on one of these lots.
Public Input
Eric Fowle from East Central Planning Commission stated
that it is important to provide a range of housing choices.
The work force is aging.
The pay is low for services providing positions.
The work force is currently short about 80,000 people.
In the future it is anticipated that it will be short 450,000 people.
At this point, Dave Muench handed out
index cards to the planning commission and stakeholder members.
He asked them to write the answer to two questions on them.
After the meeting he collected those cards.
He will be compiling the answers and sending a copy to the Town.
Some comments from the Planning
Commission members were:
- We must keep in mind affordability of lots and homes.
- Why can’t we have both traditional and conservation
subdivisions and let the buyer choose.
This should help meet the supply and demand.
Can we let supply and demand dictate how the development should
occur?
- It is possible that 50% open space is not workable in
smaller areas.
- Are conservation subdivisions a waste of land?
- Are lots in conservation subdivisions too expensive?
- Natural for rural development?
- Like to see them in rural areas.
- People are satisfied with smaller lots and community
open space.
- Conservation subdivisions will work inside or outside a
sanitary district.
- Conservation subdivisions don’t seem economically
viable
- We must be careful not to destroy land during
development
Future meetings will help Greenville
decide if they want to have a mix of traditional and conservation subdivisions.
There is usually a fear of new concepts,
but it’s important to try new concepts so you don’t lose people to other
areas that are trying the new types of developments.
Know the development around you.
Maintaining rural character is the
number one issue in Greenville and that’s why conservation subdivisions are
being looked into.
The next meeting will be on July 13,
2000.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:48 p.m.
Rene’ Frey, Deputy Clerk/Treasurer
|
