Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developers present revised Jada Estates concept; trustees press on density, access and connectivity
Summary
Developers showed a revised concept for the Jada Estates duplex development (about 56 units) and said they added public streets and pulled some homes away from Douglas Road; trustees and residents raised concerns about density (units/acre), lack of secondary emergency access, private HOA roads, and connections for pedestrians and bikes.
Developers presented a revised concept plan for "Jada Estates," proposing roughly 56 duplex units on a parcel near Douglas Road with about two acres reserved for a future roundabout and right‑of‑way. The village staff said the Planning & Zoning Commission previously denied the plan 8–0, and the applicant said the updated layout reduces private streets, adds a public entrance and increases open space.
"We hear you," consultant David Dorgan said in an apology for not bringing an earlier iteration back to the Planning & Zoning Commission; he said the applicants revised the plan in response to staff and commission concerns. The applicant's principal said the product targets "empty nesters" and that many units will offer a first‑floor bedroom option, estimating unit sizes around 1,800 to 2,000 square feet and price points in the upper $400,000s.
Trustees and residents pressed the applicants on several points: whether the density aligns with the existing comprehensive plan (trustees noted adjacent comp‑plan designations at 2–3 units per acre versus the project’s 6–7), the need for a secondary/emergency access, the preference that roads become public rather than HOA private streets, and better bike/pedestrian connections to downtown. Staff said they expect applicants to present a revised plan to the Planning & Zoning Commission at a May 8 public hearing and that village engineers will discuss integrating detention with the Wolf's Crossing road project.
The board did not vote on the concept plan at the meeting; staff requested the applicants incorporate board feedback and submit updates to the Planning & Zoning Commission. Developers indicated willingness to adjust street layouts, explore a joint detention solution and dedicate land for the roundabout; they did not commit to donation versus purchase of the right‑of‑way.
Next steps: applicant to revise plans for the May 8 planning‑commission public hearing; staff to meet with engineering on detention and right‑of‑way coordination prior to that hearing.
