Committee forwards Clearwing replat and 23‑unit PUD to board after debate over green space

The Roscoe Committee of the Whole on April 1 voted to forward a replat and a 23‑unit plan unit development (PUD) for Lot A in the Clearwing (also referred to in the record as Clearway) subdivision to the Village Board for final action. The committee approved forwarding the PUD after discussion; the committee’s replat vote was split and will go to the board without a committee recommendation.

Jeff Lincolnheld, a civil engineer with Arc Design Resources who said he worked on the original Clearway plats, told the committee Lot A had been labeled as a community lot in early plats but that ownership and responsibilities for the lot later fragmented as the development sold to many individual owners. Lincolnheld said current ownership had consolidated the lot under a single owner (Josh Petrie) and that Mr. Petrie now seeks to redevelop the lot with six buildings and 23 individual townhome units designed as individual‑entry, single‑garage units.

Why it matters: The parcel sits inside an established subdivision. Committee members and some neighbors said they welcomed redevelopment of the currently overgrown lot but pushed the applicant and staff to preserve more on‑site green space or low‑impact recreation for children, arguing young families in the new units will need safe outdoor space within walking distance.

Key points from the discussion

- Project scope and history: Lincolnheld and the applicant said the lot has been an unbuilt, vegetated lot for many years; no homeowners’ association or community center was ever established despite prior plat language. The proposed PUD would add 23 units in six attached buildings with supplemental parking and shared green space.

- Park/green space concerns: Several trustees and residents asked whether the developer could set aside a larger contiguous green area for informal play (residents suggested soccer, Frisbee or picnic areas). The applicant said staff and the applicant had discussed green‑space options and that modest improvements (benches, a lawn area) could be accommodated without lowering the unit count; larger amenity changes could affect project economics and unit totals.

- Notices and ownership: Staff said the village sent more mail notices for this application than for prior items and that property owners in the area had not otherwise engaged heavily with the application. The applicant acknowledged the site had historically been “a weed patch” and said redevelopment would improve the area.

Committee action and next steps

The committee voted to send the replat to the Village Board (split roll call produced a motion to forward but no committee recommendation); the committee also voted to forward the PUD to the board after asking staff and the applicant to look for possible green‑space compromises before the board hearing. Both items will appear on the Village Board agenda for final consideration.

What was not decided

No final plat, building permits, or landscape maintenance agreements were approved at the committee level. If the Board approves the PUD and replat, the applicant will need to follow plan review, permitting, and any conditions imposed by the Board.

Ending: Staff and the applicant said they will continue to discuss minor design revisions and options for a modest on‑site green area; Village Board consideration is scheduled in the next board packet.