Developer’s 30‑home plan near Brier Crest sent to plan commission after trustees question density, water and park access

Joe Lenya, who presented a tentative site plan for a proposed 30‑lot subdivision adjacent to Brier Crest, told the Long Grove Board of Trustees that the plan keeps wetlands and the village’s 100‑foot scenic corridor intact and would average roughly three‑quarters of an acre per lot. "I've reduced it to 30 lots," Lenya said during his presentation and added, "I'm actually going to live in the subdivision."

Lenya said he met with Fire Chief Paul Sora about a secondary emergency access and a park/putting‑green behind the new firehouse that would connect to walking trails. "We agreed to partner together to build a park and a putting green type area behind the new Firehouse," Lenya said, and noted the developer would locate detention and wetland preservation areas on the remaining land.

Trustees pressed for details on home sizes, setbacks and street design. Lenya described home models ranging from about 4,500 square feet on up—saying many houses would be 4,000–5,000+ square feet and that elevations would place most garage doors to the side so no more than one garage door faces the street. He said approximate spacing between homes would be about 60 feet in places.

Water service was a decisive dependency for the project timetable. Lenya and staff described a planning estimate that would place zoning and approvals on a roughly six‑month track, with infrastructure work in early–mid 2025 and residential construction in late spring or summer 2025, but emphasized that delivery of public water (Lake Michigan water) or other public system connections could affect sequencing. "If we don't get water we can still start infrastructure but we have to leave the tap where it's going to be to tap into," Lenya said.

Trustees also sought clarity on public access and ownership of the proposed park. Lenya said the park feature would be on the fire‑station parcel, with ownership likely conveyed to Vernon Township and that the HOA would contribute to upkeep; a crosswalk grant was cited as improving pedestrian access from the new subdivision into downtown. Several trustees flagged that the distinction between a private HOA amenity and a public park must be resolved through covenant language and intergovernmental agreements.

Trustees expressed differing policy views on density. One trustee said 30 lots on the parcel "is too dense" and signaled resistance to approving the plan as proposed. Other trustees suggested alternative configurations—clustered housing, a mix of larger lots and some townhome options in other village areas—or limiting building size by lot as part of PUD conditions.

After discussion, Trustee O'Reilly moved and Trustee O'Conor seconded a motion to refer the proposal to the Plan Commission for review; the motion carried on a voice vote. The motion was procedural—the Plan Commission will examine site engineering, wetland buffers, access, parking, public safety implications and any covenant or intergovernmental agreements needed to govern ownership and maintenance of park assets.

Next steps noted in the meeting: staff will accept formal application materials for a PUD/subdivision, conduct a staff review, and forward the matter to the Plan Commission; trustees said they expect plan‑commission review and typical village timelines for zoning approvals to guide subsequent decisions.