Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use.development.residential topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Plan Commission reviews concept for 'The Glen of Pewaukee' next to Springdale Road

3205791 · April 17, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

On April 17, 2025, the Pewaukee Plan Commission reviewed a conceptual plan for "The Glen of Pewaukee," a mixed residential development at W220 N2475 Springdale Road proposing 48 single-family lots and 90 condominium units; commissioners raised traffic, connectivity and density concerns and staff outlined the rezoning and permit steps required.

The Pewaukee Plan Commission on April 17, 2025 heard a conceptual presentation for "The Glen of Pewaukee," a mixed residential project proposed at W220 N2475 Springdale Road that would include 48 single-family lots and 90 condominium dwelling units, and received feedback from commissioners and nearby residents.

City staff opened the item noting the site’s current zoning and that the proposal is consistent with the city’s future land use designation of medium-density residential; no master plan amendment would be required, but the applicant would need a rezoning, certified survey map, conditional-use planned unit development (PUD) and site and building plans for the condominium portion, followed by preliminary and final plats for the single-family lots.

Developer John Whelan, identified in the meeting as chairman of Corazon Development (the agenda listed Cornerstone Development as the requester), described the project layout and amenities, saying the condominiums would sit in buildings of 18 four-family structures and nine two-family structures with two-car attached garages and that the development would include a clubhouse and pool. "We like to build a clubhouse and have our models go up first ... somewhere in the 3,000 to 3,500 square foot range," Whelan said. He told the commission the developer expects condominium prices "somewhere above $600,000 per home" and later suggested "probably 650,000, I would suggest" as an illustrative value.

Whelan and Joe Horndorf, identified as the company president, and Josh of Trio Engineering said the condo buildings would be arranged to preserve a compatible edge against the existing single-family neighborhood to the west, include a paved trail through the site and offer maintenance of exterior elements (snow removal, lawn care) through homeowners’ association arrangements. The applicant indicated the condominium zoning would be pursued under a multifamily district and that the PUD request would seek reduced street-yard and rear-yard setbacks (presented at about 24.5 feet versus the typical 35-foot standard).

Commissioners and residents focused on traffic, connectivity and density. Several commissioners said Springdale Road is congested and asked for a traffic study; one commissioner said county control of the intersection and bridge over I-94 affects timing for any widening. Commissioners also discussed whether streets in the development should be public or private; the applicants said they expect to dedicate streets as public rights-of-way. Neighbors and commissioners proposed limiting cut-through traffic by configuring cul-de-sacs and trail connections, and recommended further study of access points, including potential connection at Briarwood and the possibility of an entrance at Mayrose Boulevard.

City staff answered technical questions about snow storage and utilities: staff said most snow storage is expected to remain in the right of way and that an existing sewer alignment shown on maps dates to prior development plans; a southern adjoining parcel shown on the presentation was described as wetland and environmental corridor.

Staff outlined the next steps if the applicant decides to proceed: the developer should submit detailed plan commission–level plans and the applications required for rezoning and the PUD, which would trigger public hearings at future Plan Commission meetings where residents may comment. No formal approvals or votes were taken at the April 17 conceptual review.

The presentation closed with the applicant offering to bring commissioners on tours of comparable developments and reiterating an intent to work with the city on detailed plans. Further submittals and formal public hearings were described as the next actions required for the project to advance.