Plan Commission approves Heyday Phase 2 after residents raise traffic, pond and tree‑removal concerns

Oak Creek’s Plan Commission approved site and architectural plans for Heyday of Oak Creek Phase 2 on April 14, clearing the way for the developer to proceed toward building permits subject to several conditions and further staff review.

Planning staff said Phase 2 covers just over 18 acres, will include 13 attached residential buildings with a total of 77 units (mix of single‑story and two‑story buildings), private roads, 34 guest parking spaces, five‑foot sidewalks, an accessory maintenance garage and a stormwater detention facility. The presentation noted a southwest wetland area that the project will not encroach on, and staff reminded the commission that earlier approvals — amendment to the comprehensive plan, rezoning to RD‑1, an amended PUD and a certified survey map — already were approved by the Common Council in March.

The applicant and developer representatives described building sizes (approximately 1,200 to 1,746 square feet), exterior materials (vinyl siding with stone bases and masonry accents on the two‑story units), privacy fencing between patios, and a buffer planting plan with trees expected to grow up to 20–60 feet tall along the northern boundary.

Several residents spoke during public comment. Adam King, who gave his Oak Creek address on the record, said he opposed the planned private road connection to West Pewds because the intersection would be across the street from his home and could increase traffic and sight‑line problems. "I always did not want that road there because I live directly on the other side of the street there," King said; he asked whether a traffic circle or signal could be an alternative. Staff and engineering replied that a traffic impact analysis (TIA) had been completed and that the proposed alignment reflects engineering recommendations; the developer said he would work with residents and the HOA on additional landscaping and was willing to plant trees on the project side if the HOA approved it.

Commissioners pressed on stormwater design. One commissioner noted that some plan sheets label the feature as a "constructed wetland" while others label it a "stormwater pond." Engineering said the feature is the project's detention facility, that stormwater review is underway, and that required safety shelves will be included. Commissioners expressed concern about the pond and its proximity to some buildings and neighbor properties and recommended either fencing or heavy landscaping designed to limit access, especially for children. The applicant said they would work with staff on final plans and could add fencing or thorny shrubs where appropriate.

Other technical points discussed included a land swap the developer previously proposed in lieu of some tree‑preservation requirements (the plan anticipates removal of roughly 85 trees with mitigation via conveyance), public utility easements (Phase 2 has public utilities but private roads) and a condition requiring a development agreement between the city and the applicant.

The commission approved the site and architectural plans with multiple conditions, including recording the certified survey map with the county before building permits, executing a development agreement addressing land conveyances and tree preservation, submittal of revised plans (mechanical screening, landscaping updates following coordination with the relevant watershed/sewer authority), and final stormwater approval from engineering. The motion passed on roll call.

Next steps: the developer must record the CSM, sign a development agreement and secure building permits after required plan revisions and engineering approvals.