Planning Commission tables Hilltop Grove PRD after split on tree protection, lot sizes and traffic conditions

A contentious hearing over the Hilltop Grove planned residential development ended Aug. 5 with the Menomonee Falls Planning Commission tabling both the PRD ordinance and the related preliminary plat after prolonged debate over tree protection, lot sizes and traffic conditions.

Planner Amy Bennett presented a PRD ordinance and preliminary plat for roughly 76 acres (net ~66 developable) proposing 132 single-family lots and staff recommended approval subject to 60 conditions. Developer Ben Lang (Viridian Homes) and urban designer Brian Munson described changes since concept review — increasing average lot size to just over 0.3 acres, preserving 16 acres of open space and refining lot fits — and presented market data showing a median lot size for new listings of 0.28 acres and a median list price of about $775,000.

Commissioners pressed the applicant on three contested items: (1) a village engineering condition for a bypass lane on Mill Road (condition 34) that engineers still recommended despite the developer’s traffic impact analysis saying it was not warranted; (2) a required turnaround at a Flora Road stub (condition 37) that would require tree removal; and (3) an east–west connection and future water-main redundancy (condition 38). The commission amended condition 37 in a 3–2 vote to require "no impact to existing trees." Trustee Paul Tada moved the change and it carried 3–2 on a roll call.

Lot-size arguments dominated discussion. The developer argued smaller lots are necessary to deliver attainable price points and cited market analysis; commissioners worried that many proposed lots were too small for the neighborhood context. During the meeting staff and the developer provided counts: staff reported "82 lots under 12,000 [sq ft]" and the developer confirmed "44 under 10,000 [sq ft]." Commissioners requested the applicant return with a clearer, data-backed rationale (color-coded maps, lot-by-lot tables, building-pad footprints and topography) and asked staff to include more explicit metrics (median vs. average, setbacks, and which lots back onto preserved open space).

After extensive back-and-forth, the commission voted to table the PRD and the preliminary plat to allow the applicant to provide the requested data and for staff and engineering to revise conditions. The developer said they would return prepared to respond to the commission’s questions.

Next steps: the applicant and village staff will produce a lot-by-lot table, clearer mapping of small-lot locations relative to open space and revised condition language for review at the next Planning Commission meeting.