Germantown committee backs preliminary Division Road design amid right‑of‑way and utilities questions

Germantown’s Public Works and Highway Committee voted unanimously to endorse staff’s preliminary design recommendations for Division Road, directing engineers to proceed with right‑of‑way and utility coordination and follow up reports to the committee.

The presentation by staff laid out a multi‑part plan for the road that includes acquiring inconsistent right‑of‑way segments, installing storm sewer from Lilac to the Jefferson Ditch to moderate a steep ditch, adding pedestrian crossings at Virginia, extending a walkway between Wendy and Dottie, correcting private driveway access near Donjes Bay Road, and testing speed‑notification signs at key locations.

Staff said right‑of‑way along parts of Division Road is mixed: in platted subdivisions the village has conventional dedicated right‑of‑way, while older parcels show ownership to the road centerline. Staff’s legal review indicated an existing prescriptive right‑of‑way could allow maintenance but not construction of new paths; where paths are proposed staff recommended acquiring formal right‑of‑way. Staff advised the village expects an appraisal of such prescriptive strips to be $0 in many cases but cautioned that property owners may obtain their own appraisals and that the appraisal process can add time and potential costs.

Committee members and staff discussed condemnation as a last resort; staff said the village prefers cooperative acquisition strategies but would evaluate condemnation only if necessary and after weighing benefits against costs and time.

On pedestrian safety, staff recommended two new crossings at Virginia to connect the west‑side path to the east side, noting the existing west‑side path currently ends at the intersection with no safe crossing. Trustees said a contiguous sidewalk between Wendy and Dottie is a top priority and that the committee would not support the project without that connection.

Stormwater work was proposed on the west side to move the path off the road and reduce an unrecoverable steep slope adjacent to the roadway; staff said the plan would include field inlets, a flared end section at an existing twin culvert, and a path‑adjacent railing in places where slopes are steep.

Staff warned that utility relocations are a major schedule risk: gas and electric distribution lines exist under or adjacent to proposed path locations, and coordination with utilities (We Energies and others) will determine whether relocations can be done concurrently with construction or will require separate work and additional time. Committee members said major utility relocations could push construction beyond this year.

Budget and phasing: staff said $300,000 is budgeted for design and $3,000,000 was budgeted for reconstruction; an earlier consultant estimate (Kapur) for pulverize‑and‑reconstruct work was roughly $2.3 million for the corridor. Staff said the project will be delivered in two phases (north and south of a central ditch) to align with other work such as a nearby lift‑station upgrade, and that construction could require two seasons depending on right‑of‑way and utility timelines.

Staff requested committee concurrence to proceed with right‑of‑way acquisition steps, utility coordination, and more detailed cost and schedule development. After discussion a committee member made a motion expressing support for the staff direction; the motion was seconded and passed unanimously.

What happens next: staff will return with updates after initial right‑of‑way outreach and utility coordination. Staff noted the possible need for appraisal work, potential times to resolve property owner appraisals (the state allows owners a period to obtain appraisals), and that these steps could extend the timeline into later this year or beyond depending on utility schedules and any contested appraisals.

Community input at the meeting included questions about parking at the Jefferson Creek fishing area, the location and dimensions of the proposed path, and requests that path buffers be maximized (several trustees urged a minimum buffer to separate pedestrians from 45 mph traffic). Staff said final cross sections will identify buffer widths where feasible and that 8‑foot multiuse path segments and 5‑foot sidewalks are proposed in different sections.