It is 6:30 PM. I call to order
the meeting of
the Verona Plan Commission for
Monday, August 3rd.
We'll begin with a roll.
Commissioner Matt is absent.
Commissioner Wood here.
Commissioner Powers is
absent commissioner.
Mayor Diaz here.
Commissioner Swanson.
Present and Commissioner
Hankard here.
Hey, doesn't enough people for
quorum so we can proceed.
We'll move on to item three
for public comment. Before
we do, we do have two public
hearings on the
agenda.
One is regarding the
conditional use permit review
for a
fitness and entertainment
facility under item five. And
the other
one is for the zoning text
amendment to amend the.
Section regarding the
institutional uses to allow
places of worship
and additional zoning districts.
Districts. So if you're here
for one of those things,
the, the.
Places of worship and
additional zoning districts or
the fitness
and entertainment facility, we
ask that you comment
under those
items. If you're here for
anything else.
Now's the time to comment
under public comment. If you
want to.
How you doing my name's Tom
Fisher, the Fisher property.
We're just east of Costco on
highway. You know, I'm
not here pushing, pushing, but
since 2000.
23. We've been trying to get
this ball rolling. And
I just want to try to keep it
going if
we can. You guys.
That's why I'm here. And I
know you had study
after study and.
And I know it takes time, but
I guess I'm
just trying to say, Hey,
we're, we're ready to keep
a rolling. If you guys are up
for it.
So
just getting, get my name out
there again. That's all
not trying to be a pain, but
you know, you
know, you know what I mean? So
I think we
need housing and, you know, and.
We're ready to go. So, so if
we can maybe
try and get this through this
winter, if we can,
you guys, so.
All right. And that's about
it. Thank you.
Thank you. We are still in
public comment. So if
there's anyone who wants to
go next,
now will be the time to do so.
Seeing no one else approaching
the microphone. We'll move on
to item four, which is
approved limits from the July
6th, 2026
Plan Commission, meeting
questions, comment.
Comments corrections or
motions to approve.
Move to approve motion by
other Swanson. Is there a
second?
Seconded by Commissioner Wood.
Last chance for corrections.
See, no corrections, all those
in favor of approve the
minutes from the July 6th,
2026 Plan Commission meeting
say aye. Aye.
Aye. Aye. Oppose. No. And the
minutes are.
Approved we'll move on to item
five, which is regarding
the conditional use permit.
Review for a fitness
entertainment facility greater
than 10,000 square
feet and less than 49,999
square feet.
Located at 1162 Laser Street,
before we do the public
hearing, can we get a brief
overview, Mr. Zen?
Yes. Thank you. So for, for
this case, a legal
notice was published and then
in the July 16th and July 23rd
for honor, press.
Personal notice was sent to
properties within 250 feet.
An assign was posted in front
of the subject property.
Thank you with that, I will
move that. We open
the public hearing on
this topic.
Is there a second, second.
Seconded by other Swanson.
All those in favor of opening
the public hearing on
this topic, say hi.
Hi. Hi, oppose. No.
And we're in the public
hearing at 6:33 PM. So if
anyone wishes to comment on
the fitness and
entertainment facility
at 1162 Laser Street.
Now will be the time to do
so. Yes.
See, no one approaching the
microphone. I will move that.
We close the hearing on this
topic is.
There a second. Second by
Commissioner. Hankard.
All those in favor of closing
the public hearing on
this topic, say, aye. Aye. Aye.
Opposed now. And the public
hearing is closed at 6:33 PM.
Mr. Silverton, thank you.
The applicant is requesting a
conditional use permit to allow
it for an indoor fi indoor
fitness facility over 10,000
square feet.
And a portion of the existing
building located at 1162.
Laser Street.
The subject property is
located on the east side of
Liberty Business Park.
On the north side of Laser
Street surrounding uses include
a mix of light industrial and
service uses to the
north.
Vacant land to the west
and south.
And a potential proposed
distribution facility to
the east.
The applicant proposes
to operate.
An 11,922 square foot indoor
pickleball facility.
Within a 26,000 square
foot building.
Just Mara. If you could pull
up the presentation, I
don't know if it's.
It's showing up for everyone.
Thank you.
Other uses within the building
include children's play
space and
a light industrial business.
The businesses, sorry. The
business would have five
pickleball courts
available through reservations.
There will be between two to
four employees for cleaning.
Management and operations.
During typical operations, the
applicant expects between.
10 to 20 occupants at a time.
That relates to the five book
pickleball courts.
Courts the city recently
amended its zoning regulations
to reduce
parking requirements for
fitness and entertainment
uses. This has allowed
the.
Proposed business to meet
their parking requirements.
Staff is supportive of the
proposed request and
recommends the
Plan Commission.
Recommend approval with the
condition that the tenants
of 1162
Laser Street.
Enter into a, a shared parking
agreement, which is one
of the requirements.
For that use type.
49,999 square feet for
pickleball located at 1162
Laser Street
suites 1 0 4 through 1 0 8
with the following conditions.
The tenants of 1162 Laser
Street shall enter into a
shared parking agreement.
Motion by Commissioner Wood.
Is there a second?
Second seconded by
Alder Swanson.
A motion before the body
questions or comments on this
motion.
Seeing no further discussion.
All those in favor of
recommending to the
Common Council
to approve the conditional use
permit to allow an indoor
fitness facility greater than
10,000 square feet and
less than
49,009.
Hundred 99 square feet for
pickleball located at
1162 Laser
Street suites 1 0 4 through 1
0 8 with the conditions
specified in
the packet signified by
saying hi.
Hi oppose. No, that motion
passes. Now with that, we'll
move on to item six, which is
regarding the zoning
text amendment to amend section.
13 1, 1 0 5 peri institutional
uses to allow the place
of worship.
In addition, in additional
zoning districts can get
a brief
overview.
Before we get into the public
hearing. Mr. Severson. Sure.
Thank you. So this is a public
hearing again for
the zoning ordinance,
text amendment.
For text amendments
legal notice.
Has required to be published
and it was published in
the July 16th and July 23rd
Verona press.
Thank you with that, I will
move that. We open
the public hearing on this
topic. Is there a second?
Second by Commissioner Wood.
Motion or all those in favor
of open the public
hearing on this topic, say,
aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.
Oppose? No. The public hearing
is open at 6:39 PM. So
if anyone wishes to speak
regarding the zoning
text amendment,
regarding institutional uses
to allow place of worship
and additional
zoning districts.
Districts now would be the
time to do so.
Seeing no one approaching the
microphone. I will move that.
We close the public hearing on.
This topic, is there a second?
Second about Swanson.
All those in favor of closing
the public hearing on
this topic, say, aye. Aye.
Opposed? No.
And the public hearings close
at 6:39 PM. Mr. SSON.
Thank you. The current zoning
ordinance allows places
of worship
as a permitted use.
In rural and residential
zoning districts, but not
in commercial.
Or office districts.
Districts in order to allow
existing places of worship to
operate and expand in
commercial districts, such as
suburban commercial.
Central commercial
neighborhood, office and
suburban office.
Staff is recommending the
zoning use matrix, be
amended to
list places of worship.
As permitted use.
Thank you.
Questions or comments on
this one?
Or motions, I guess, for ready
to vote on Wisconsin,
I moved to recommend the
Common Council approve
the zoning
text amendment.
For section 13 dash one dash 1
0 5. SubD.
SubD use matrix to allow
places of worship.
Motion. My elder Swanson. Is
there a second?
Second by commissioner Hanker.
Motion before the bunny
questions or comments on
this motion.
I just wanna say, I think the
flexibility is good
for the city and I think it's
gonna be good
for.
The places of worship as well.
Seeing no further discussion.
All those in favor of
recommending to the common.
Council to approve the zoning
tax amendment to amend section
13 dash one dash 1 0 5. Peri.
PDI institutional usage to
allow place of worship.
In addition,
places of worship in
additional zoning districts
signify by saying,
aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Oppose. No.
Now that motion passes, that
we'll move on to item
seven, which is a discussion
and possible act regarding the
final plat review to create 80
lots and five outlets
located in.
The Ardent Glen subdivision
west of Shady Oak Lane, Mr.
Zen.
Thank you. The applicant has
submitted a final plat to
create 80 lots and five Outlaws.
Outlaws the applicant
previously received their
approval for a preliminary
plat. And after working with
staff has made the necessary
revisions to.
Comply with the city's
subdivision ordinance.
As the development of Ardent
Glen moves forward.
Additional final plats will be
required for land to the
north and land to the east.
Staff has no concerns and
recommends the Plan
Commission recommend
approval.
Thank you.
Any questions or comments from
the Plan Commission?
I guess I have one
question. Mm-hmm .
Has the park stuff been
sorted out.
It will be sorted out with
the next.
Development agreement. Okay.
Which is gonna be.
Said to be on next Monday's
council agenda.
Excellent. Thank you.
Other questions, comments
or motions?
Single family and twin home
parcels in five outlets.
Outlets motion by Commissioner
Wood. Is there a second?
Second, my Alder Swanson.
A motion before the body
questions or comments on this
motion.
Seeing no further discussion.
All those in favor of
recommending to the
Common Council
to approve the final plat for
the second addition to
Ardent Glen, to create 80
single family.
And twin homes, parcels, and
five outlets signified
by saying
hi.
Aye. Aye. Oppose. No.
Now, and that motion passes.
We'll move on to item
eight, which is a discussion
impossible action regarding
a certified
survey map to create two lots
located at 2000 Range
Trail.
In the town of Verona.
The applicant is requesting a
certified survey map to split.
One lot into two lots located
at 2000 Range Trail.
The existing lot is 32.2 acres
and is located in
the town of Verona.
Because the City of Verona has
a 1.5 mile extra-territorial
platinum authority.
Around the city, the CSM is
being reviewed by the
city's Plan Commission.
We will make a recommendation
to the city council.
The plat will also require
review by Dane County.
And I believe not necessarily
associated with this, but there
is a.
A zoning amendment request
that will go to Zane, to
Dane County.
The city's planning authority
allows the city to
consider land
divisions. However,
does not allow the city to
review zoning.
City staff has requested
additional right of way to be
dedicated.
For the Range Trail right
of way.
You'll. I don't know if it
probably doesn't show up
in, in this map.
Necessarily, but the right of
way to the F to
the north.
Is two
36 foot sections.
Sections and to the south,
it's currently only 33.
So the city of requested.
That additional right of way
to make the roadway.
Consistent to allow for
future.
Row construction.
For Range Trail.
And the city is requested that.
And the applicant has agreed to.
Make that modification, which
is listed as part of the
condition.
Oh, sorry.
So in summary staff is.
Recommending approval and has
no other issues.
Thank you for that update all
the response and then
myself. Thank you. So my, my
only question, I, again,
this is to.
Mr. Stevenson. You mentioned
that we don't have zoning
authority. We
don't need to.
Pin this action to the zoning
change coming through. Do
we, we can make this. We can
make the, the
CSM change without.
It being limited to, or
conditional upon the passage of
the zoning amendment.
You mean the, the
the cup rates plan amendment,
well, or sorry. No. So
you mentioned that it, it
says that.
In the packet, it mentions
that the zoning authority is
under Dane County.
Oh, yes. So we don't, we don't
need to wait
or say.
Our, our CSM.
Some, I, I see what you're
saying, right? The modification
doesn't depend on the Dane
County change. Does it?
The Dane County.
Change would need to
that zoning change through
Dane County.
Would need to happen if they
were to build.
Another home on the slot.
Okay. But we can.
Make the CSM change and it
doesn't really, there's no
reason to, to tack it to that.
Correct. Okay. Sounds good.
Then, then I think that this,
I, I got no problem with this
perfectly happy to
do it.
Okay. I got a question.
Could we make a condition on,
on Dane County? I
mean, I realize that for the
applicant may, I don't
know actually, but like maybe
there's no point in splitting
it.
If Dane County says no.
Or is this kind of, would that
be an overreach?
I know neither of us are
lawyers. Yeah.
My understanding.
Is we would, we would not be
able to do
that. Okay. Cause it's
essentially impacting.
Zoning. Got it. Okay. That
makes sense because
cuz potentially.
The lot split could happen.
And the zoning change.
Might not happen. Okay. But
the CSM could still move
forward. Theoretically.
Okay. They just wouldn't be
able to build a house
on the property.
Got it. Okay. Per, per dig
county zoning.
Okay.
And I guess my other follow-up
question, and maybe this
is a question for the
applicant. I don't know if
they're here, but do you know
what the applicant intends
to potentially split the lot
further in the future?
As of now they've indicated. No.
They are here tonight, though,
if you'd like to.
Call them up. I, I guess if
the applicant wants
to, there's no requirement, if
you don't feel like answering.
Hello, my name's.
Name's Michael Johnson and our
intention is to not split the
lot, but again, things change
throughout life.
So it down the road could be a.
Potential option. But at this
time, our attention is just
to build a single.
Family home on it.
Gotcha. Okay.
Thank you. I think that that
kind of clarifies.
You for me.
I guess to, to provide a, a
tiny bit of
history. this initial split
was rejected by the joint
city town.
Planning commission.
And I think partially over
concerns of.
I guess it being a, a, a
stealth town neighborhood.
I understand that, you know,
my understanding is that the
applicant's gonna build one
house and it's gonna live in
it. And it's not anything.
That's not what it's about.
I guess I would feel more
comfortable if there was
a deed restriction that the
lot couldn't be
further subdivided.
But we are, we are consulting
with our attorney and
we're not sure if we can ask
for that.
And, and I wouldn't
necessarily want to ask
for that.
If, if the applicant
wasn't willing.
If we didn't have the
legal authority.
prevent or stop or ameliorate,
subdivision and growth.
And keep a defined boundary
between us and say Paoli
or the town.
Or is it to allow for, I mean,
what, what
is the, does the city have a
stance? I have
a personal preference, which
is Range Trail.
Is a wonderful, wonderful bike
road. And to the degree
it can remain that. I think
that would be a
positive.
And, but what does the city
have any professor stance?
If you will.
For Mr. Sea. Yeah. I'm sorry.
Okay. Yeah. Yeah. I
would say.
The the city's stance is,
is probably.
Most defined by the
Comprehensive Plan,
which we're .
In the process of
almost done.
Re re approving.
And so previous
to, I think it's the current
Comprehensive Plan, which is
an effect.
Doesn't really have any
language, as it relates to
this section.
Of of town in terms of like
future growth strategies.
The
proposed draft.
Comprehensive Plan.
Does show that this area.
This area, meaning east of.
Range Trail could be
future residential. So to the
extent that the
Comprehensive Plan
shows something, it does show
that there's a potential for
future residential.
On this, on these lots. And so
that would, you
know, primarily be.
City, you know, a city.
Development that would be
within the jurisdiction of
the city.
Not necessarily.
A town development.
Well, thank you. That was a
good answer. That was
a very good answer. I
appreciate that.
I guess my, my, my, my
thoughts on this are,
you know, this is innocuous
and, and, and if there's
a, a threat of future,
subdivision, we can pick it up
at that time. And
the record of tonight's
conversation will stand
and we'll.
We can, we can lean on that.
It's cuz yeah, I would, I would.
Hope that, you know, two, two
houses in here is
almost a, a bull work against.
Larger development, which is
what I personally.
Second second by Commissioner
Hankard motion before the body.
I'm just gonna note, I'm gonna
abstain from this vote
and just, I guess see how the
meeting with the
attorney goes and the
council meeting.
Petition note.
Other questions or comments on
the motion.
See, no further discussion.
All those in favor of
recommending to the
Common Council
to approve the certified
survey map, to create two lots
from the existing one lot,
located at 2000 Range Trail
with the Condit.
Condition specified in the
packet signified by saying
aye. Aye.
Aye. Opposed? No.
And that motion passes three
to zero with myself abstaining.
With that we'll move on to
item nine, which is
a discussion possible as
regarding the initial review
for approximately
5,000 square feet of addition
located at two.
Zero one South Main Street,
Mr. Zer.
You excuse me.
The applicant is requesting an
initial review of a proposed.
Proposal to construct a 4,700
square foot addition.
At 2 0 1 South Main Street.
The subject property is
located in the central
commercial zoning
district and is surrounded by
a mix of commercial and
residential uses to the north.
And south primarily.
Residential uses to the east.
And grocery store to the west
across main street.
The addition is two stories
off the rear of the
existing church.
Additional parking, a new
covered drop off area.
And slightly modified traffic.
Circulation is proposed.
City staff had recommended
that the applicant consider.
Placing the addition on the
front of the church.
To better comply with the
zoning district regulations,
but because
of the existing and
proposed functions.
Functions of the church, the
applicant determined this
was not
feasible.
Feasible staff also
recommended modifications to
the internal vehicle.
Circulation, including
removing the one way drive
connecting the west and east
parking lots.
Lots. And just to help you
kind of visualize that.
Let me.
Print my pointer.
So this is
what we're calling the west
parking lot, which is the
existing parking lot.
And then this is the one way.
Connector and
we had our, the city's traffic
consultant with AECOM. Take
a look at this and.
While at might seem funny to.
Eliminate this, the idea was.
One, it provides it.
Doesn't provide like a
confusing one-way situation
where you got
P people potentially driving
down the wrong way of a
one-way.
And then secondly, this is
Railroad Street.
Which at this time, doesn't
have a huge amount of
traffic.
And one would argue that it's
maybe less busy than
some parking lots. And so you
could effectively.
Use that as, as
circulation through.
The east and west parking lot.
Per the city's sidewalk policy.
A sidewalk would be required
along Railroad Street frontage.
The details of the sidewalk
are still being
discussed between
the city.
And the applicant and staff
request the Plan
Commission provide
feedback.
Which will allow the applicant
to refine their plans.
Plans before submitting for
site plan approval.
And if you want, I also have.
The elevations
proposed elevations.
If you wanna reference those,
I can bring those up.
Thank you.
Feedback from the council or
from the Plan
Commission, Commissioner
Wood.
Has the, so since this is just
kind of feedback
has.
Fire police looked at this at
all, as far as
navigating through it.
Are there any concerns?
Concerns we , they haven't.
Haven't they haven't received.
Like all the, all the
engineering information.
I think in general.
The fire department,
emergency personnel.
Because of the location of
the parking.
Around the building Kim, most
likely get sufficient.
Access to it, but that's an
excellent point. And I
think it's something that is
gonna need, need to be
looked at.
Alder Lytle further once, once
their engineering drawings
get submitted.
One thing with
this addition is the
the addition itself is my
understanding would, would
have to
be.
Protected by
fire alarm. So that would be
one thing that gets.
Gets would be added to, to
the building.
But it wouldn't necessarily be.
A
continuous.
High occupancy use would be
used on the weekends primarily.
And then the addition would be
used primarily for.
Religious education, like on
the weekends and on
Wednesday, but
it would not be.
If you look through all the
drawings, it.
It is not going to be like a,
like a
daycare.
Or a, any kind of use like that.
Okay. I mean, the parking lot
feels like.
Really interesting kind of
feels like trying to fit a
square through a circle.
I would absolutely say yes,
remove the one way I
can see people going.
Both directions on that.
Absolutely. To the sidewalks,
anytime we're
doing major, something major
like that. I want to, I.
Wanna, I love seeing a
sidewalk go in, I guess,
is the building designs
itself. There's not a lot of
detail there to go off of per
se. So I
guess I would say.
If it matches or it's very
similar to the existing,
I don't have as many concerns,
but I'm definitely concerned
about emergency services.
Services navigating through
all this.
And the event that I
should happen.
Other feedback from the
Plan Commission.
All there, Swanson and myself.
Yeah. I mean, it looks
like a relatively
challenging site.
To develop because you don't
want to just.
I mean, as long as you're tied
to having the
church, which is entirely
reasonable stance to take.
You know, you sort of have to
make, do with
what you have. I think.
This looks like about the best
they can do with
what they have as far as.
Where the land actually can
go. I'm gonna echo what
Commissioner Wood said about
the, the one way, I think
just, just scrap it. Just use
Railroad Street.
Cuz also the concerns about
emergency access, but
otherwise, I
mean, I'm generally happy to
let people do what they
want with their land.
And I I'm happy to prove it.
Calling on myself. I share
concerns about the
one-way dish,
cuz I feel like those are
tricky and.
And could be dangerous. I
guess I have a question
for staff. Mm-hmm how much of
a change to
the, I know you said Railroad
Street is underutilized and
I agree with you, but.
It's also a very wonky street
with those condos there
and everything else. And so.
How much of an increased
impact is this likely to
have on Railroad Street?
If any, it
it, there wasn't a concern.
Okay.
Okay. I appreciate that. Cuz.
Obviously, this is city
government, so we can't
keep everyone
happy, but just trying to
address potential future
complaints from
the people from the
condo association.
I also wanted to add real quick.
Just a kind of side note from
what I've heard
from some people in the
community. I think the church
is a great part of our downtown.
I think that O obviously the
point of a church
isn't isn't commercial
activity, but I think that
sometimes people.
Look at our downtown it's it's
gotta, they think it's
all gotta be one kind of thing.
But I think that there's a lot
of value, even
just pragmatically O of, of
building that's activated
at different
times.
And I think if you've ever
been in one of
the coffee shops or Miller's
after church gets out.
It's definitely adding a lot
to our, to our downtown.
Obviously again, like I wanna
stress, I understand that's not
the point of a church, but I
think that.
You know, as we build up our
downtown, I think
as it improves and expands, I
think the church has
a really important.
Role to play. And I'm glad
that they're there.
Commissioner Hankard
so , I live right off the map
and I
walk between my house and
Miller's like every day-ish.
I know this site extremely
well and you're right. I
mean, they have what they have
and I don't think
it's actually as crazy as it,
as it may look
on a map. .
At all and they've yeah. I
mean, Railroad Street is
very quiet and you're right.
It's very walkable and I,
I, I don't see this.
Changing that anytime the
church is I've walked by and
the church is active or not,
it doesn't really.
Affect me. So it's not like
they blow the place
up or anything and, and yet
they do, like you
say,
people patronize the coffee
shop. I would say they'll park
lane.
Is not Railroad Street and
that is.
A busy little place and that
right area people trying
to park in there.
So to the degree that that
should be taken into
account by this. I think it
should be, I don't
know how, I don't know if you.
I'm not saying right in, right
out necessarily.
But that is a very busy little
area and, and
that's a good thing. You , you
can't have a
busy downtown without a busy
downtown. So.
And I agree with Tyler that
if, if they're gonna
match the existing
architecture, give or take,
then I, I
trust them to do it. Do it.
Well, they seem to be a really
good part of
the community as far as I
can tell.
Any other feedback?
Mr Severson. Is there anything
we missed or that you'd
like the Plan Commission
to address?
Sorry. No, I think that's.
That's that's all staff was
looking for. Thank
you. Excellent.
Well, I look, look forward to
hearing more details.
Details with that. We'll move
on to item 10, which
is reports and comments from
the planning department, 10, a
update on development projects.
Projects Mr. Silverton. Yeah.
Thank you.
So some, some news on SSM
they're, they're getting very
close to.
Completing
construction, at least to the
point where.
The city would be able to give
their approvals for
the building. They're not
gonna be actually opening.
There's still
a lot of.
Work, they need to do
internally to get it.
Up to the point where they can
start seeing patients
there.
But the
substantial construction that
the, the city is overseeing.
They're getting
very close to.
Completing that
and then regarding the
Comprehensive Plan, we were
hoping this
would be.
At this meeting,
unfortunately, just due to a
lot of
map changes and.
Last minute comments we got
from the public.
There's a few additional
changes that we're still
working on.
But that will be on
the September.
Agenda.
Okay. I will add one other
thing in our development
project updates, which is more
of a Plan Commission update
thing. Commissioner Taylor did
resign for the Plan Commission.
Because they had to move out
of the city of
Rona.
Rona. He was looking basically
for a home for his
growing young family and they
couldn't find anything
that suited
what they needed in Verona. So
he moved out and.
Resigned as was appropriate.
I thought it was great when he
was on the
Plan Commission and I wish him
luck. And I guess
this just shows a need for
more, more housing
in the area.
All right, unless there's
anything else from Steph.
All right.
We'll move on to item 11,
which is a adjournment,
a motion to Ajour will be in
order's removed.
Removed a motion by Swanson.
Is there a second?
Second second in my
Commissioner Wood. All those
in favor
of adjourn, say aye. Aye. Aye.
Opposed? No, and we
adjourned at 7:06 PM.
Thanks everyone.