Richmond Plan Commission approves final plat for Prairie Hill

by Greg Cryns

1.18.06

 

The Richmond Planning Committee met on Wednesday to discuss the final plat for the Prairie Hill subdivision. The Committee members in attendance were Debra Nelson, John Zabor and Peter Koenig. Village Administrator Tim Savage was also present as well as approximately 10 people who own homes near the new subdivision.

 <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

The committee voted 2-1 to recommend to the village board to approve the final plat. However, it took two hours of discussion to get to that point.

 

Attorney for the subdivision, Dan Curran, opened the discussion by saying he felt that the developer had fully complied with the requests of the committee.  Village Engineer, Tim Hartnett, said the paperwork needed some “housekeeping” but he felt the village board could approve the plat as presented “subject to performance” by the developer.

 

Nelson presented a number of issues she considers problematic in the development. “The preliminary platting was rejected at a previous committee meeting,” said Nelson, “and some issues remain unresolved.” Nelson, a biologist, expressed concern that the “natural resource protection plan” was not submitted and that the cutting down of many 200 year old oak trees on the property violated the village’s Comprehensive Plan. “We need the natural drainage preserved and I didn’t see that happening,” said Nelson. “We must consider the direct and cumulative impacts on the Nippersink watershed.” Nelson asked how many trees would actually be cut down. She was told that is impossible to determine but that as many trees as possible would be left standing..

 

Nelson believes that adherence to the Comprehensive Plan is very important to the village to control housing developments in Richmond. “To ignore the Comprehensive Plan sets a dangerous precedent,” said Nelson. “Houses should not be built next to a Grade A stream.”

 

Near the end of the meeting Nelson said to Curran, “We all have a responsibility to the people with whom we work. You have an obligation to your employer. My employer is the people who live in the village. I must ask myself if I have done my duty to have developments conform to the Comprehensive Plan.” Curran said that Prairie Hill was already approved by the village board. “The fact of the matter is that we have certain property rights,” said Curran.

 

Koenig pointed out that the Comprehensive Plan requires a developer to leave at least 70% of the trees in an established grove. Nelson suggested that the trees be counted to see if the development meets that requirement.

 

During the public comments resident Carol Letzer asked that the developer consider reducing the total number of home slightly to avoid cutting down the trees. She said some people in her development were concerned about flooding on their property caused by runoff from Prairie Hill.

 

 Resident Jerry McCoy said, “The developer will not give up a few lots just for more profit. This is personal to the folks who live next door. We are only talking about a few lots.”

 

Resident Cindy Skudrud said, “How are we being assured that proper mitigation is being done in the development?” Mitigation is defined as  “A process of minimizing or compensating for damages to natural habitats, caused by human developments. These activities are designed to decrease the degree of damage to an ecosystem. They may include restoration, enhancement, or creation. According to the Clean Water Act, mitigation is a sequential process that includes avoiding impacts, then minimizing impacts, and lastly, compensating for impacts.” Nelson pointed out there was no tree survey to back up mitigation.