Oswego Village Board OKs 326-unit subdivision south of Wolf’s Crossing Road in split ballot as neighbors again voice concerns

OSWEGO - Despite concerns voiced by neighbors, the Village Board has approved preliminary plans for a new residential subdivision along the south side of Wolf’s Crossing Road, west of Douglas Road.

As proposed by M/I Homes, the Piper Glen subdivision will include 326 single family homes on a 126 acre parcel just east of the Southbury subdivision.

During a meeting Tuesday, April 5, the Village Board approved ordinances annexing the project site into the village, rezoning the land from R-1 to R-2 (single-family residential), and granted developer M/I Homes preliminary approval for the subdivision, subject to engineering review.

All of the ordinances were passed in two, 4-1 votes with board member Kit Kuhrt voting no and board member Brian Thomas abstaining from the vote.

Before the votes, three neighbors spoke about their concerns with the development during the public forum, specifically how it will affect Southbury subdivision’s existing traffic and stormwater drainage issues.

Gerald Struve raised concerns about water retention on the proposed Piper Glen site. He told board members the problem has been so persistent that the residents in his neighborhood have taken to calling it “Lake Southbury.”

Daniel Bergan, a Southbury resident who spoke at length on the subdivision proposal during a March 21 board meeting, said he has been in discussion with the village and developers about how the stormwater retention will be managed on the Piper Glen site, but is still against the development as proposed.

Bergan asked that there be an additional landscape space added between the Southbury and the proposed subdivision.

Dan Fograse, president of the Seasons at Southbury townhome development, spoke on the maintenance of his neighborhood and concerns about the impact the Piper Glen will have on flooding problems in his neighborhood.

Before the board’s first vote, to enter into an annexation agreement with M/I Homes, Kuhrt made a motion to table the annexation agreement to allow more time for the village attorney to research options for prohibiting developers from switching from owner-occupied to rental dwellings.

Kuhrt made a similar suggestion at the March 21 meeting, but was advised by Village Attorney Karl Ottosen that it would likely not be enforceable. Kuhrt’s motion was seconded by Brian Thomas, but was shot down on the floor in a 2-4 vote.