Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Multifamily Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pre 3 presents Meadowlane concept for six 12‑unit buildings; commission gives early feedback
Summary
Pre 3 presented a concept plan Feb. 10 for six 12‑unit, two‑story buildings along Meadowlane; the Plan Commission offered early feedback on pedestrian connectivity, wetlands constraints and design details but took no formal action.
The Fort Atkinson Plan Commission heard a concept plan Feb. 10 from Pre 3 for a multifamily development along Meadowlane consisting of six buildings with 12 units each. Director Drager described the submission as an early concept that will require multiple future approvals, including a zoning map amendment and a certified survey map.
Representatives for Pre 3 introduced themselves for the record. "My name is Emily McFarland. I'm with Pre 3," one applicant said, and the applicant team discussed typical unit layouts, on‑site management and parking. The company described the product as low‑density, two‑story multifamily with single‑car attached garages and said typical parking works out to about three stalls per unit (garage plus a stall in front and a visitor stall).
The applicants said the project would be market rate but that they aim to keep rent roughly within a 30% rent‑to‑income target where possible. "For us, we're fully aware of the manufacturing growth in the County, and we want to be a part of that solution for where people live," an applicant said, and later added that the design is intended to be long‑term property the company manages.
Commissioners focused feedback on connectivity, wetlands and site details. Commissioner Ciccarelli and others asked whether future access or pedestrian connections to Commonwealth should be considered; staff said wetlands in the southern portion of the parcel may limit road extensions and that fire and technical reviews will be required during formal site‑plan review. Commissioners also suggested optional design elements such as secure bike parking, window placement on gables and pedestrian sidewalks connecting buildings.
Because the submission was a concept plan, the commission did not act; staff said they will continue to work with the applicant on subsequent, more detailed land‑use applications that would come before the commission and, as appropriate, the city council.
The applicant invited public feedback in this early phase and asked residents to submit comments to the developer or to staff as the project moves through formal review.
