Plan Commission

Meeting Summaries

Housing Approvals

Table 1: Housing approvals by the Madison Plan Commission in 2025 calendar year.

	Housing Type
Date	Single-Family	Duplex/Triplex	Multi-Family	Total
2025-10-06	0	0	387	387
2025-09-15	0	0	76	76
2025-08-25	0	0	241	241
2025-08-11	0	0	73	73
2025-07-28	0	0	26	26
2025-07-07	394	154	290	838
2025-06-23	0	0	316	316
2025-06-09	0	0	302	302
2025-05-19	0	0	0	0
2025-05-12	0	0	21	21
2025-04-27	0	0	0	0
2025-04-07	0	0	0	0
2025-03-17	0	0	60	60
2025-03-03	0	0	0	0
2025-02-03	0	0	0	0
2025-01-20	0	0	0	0
2025-01-13	0	0	0	0
Total	394	154	1,792	2,340

Meeting Details

October 6, 2025

By Michael Zenz with the help of Claude AI

Official Agenda

Also live-tweeted on Bluesky by ZENZ

The Madison Plan Commission held a virtual meeting on October 6, 2025, approving several significant housing developments and advancing major “Housing Forward” zoning reforms proposed by the Mayor, while also controversially approving a drive-through coffee shop in a Transit-Oriented Development district.

Major Housing Approvals

Frances Street High-Rise Student Housing

Legistar 89452

The Commission approved a 16-story, 387-unit student apartment building at 305 N Frances Street. While the zone typically allows a maximum of 12 stories, the developer utilized a program that permits additional stories in exchange for building affordable units, with 10% of units receiving a 40% discount.

Notably, the building still meets height restrictions in the area because residential buildings tend to have lower per-story heights than commercial buildings, and the ordinances assume standard commercial story heights.

The project replaces the older Saxony building, which contains 230 units that are generally more affordable. Staff was uncertain whether there would be a net loss in total affordable beds, as the new building includes some very large units.

The Commission passed the conditional use and recommended certified survey map approval, with Commissioner Bhasin voting against the conditional use.

Raemisch Farm Final Plat

Legistar 89766

The Commission approved the final plat for the eastern portion of Raemisch Farm, which will contain the multifamily and commercial components. The developer indicated the single-family portion will be finalized in winter.

The preliminary plat was originally approved in 2022 but required resolution of airport building height restrictions. The 2022 approval was controversial, with the developer required to preserve woods adjacent to a school to the south and accept restrictions on building in the eastern portion for several years due to F-35 concerns.

Controversial Drive-Through Coffee Shop Approval

Legistar 89479

In a narrow 5-2 vote, the Commission approved a two-lane drive-through coffee shop in a Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) district at 53 West Towne Mall. This is similar to a similar project on Lien Rd that had a difficult review process, first going to the Urban Design Commission in February where its shipping container design was criticized. This design has been altered slightly as well but retained the same basic concept.

Design Concerns: The building only includes a second story because it’s required by zoning, with the applicant using it solely for mechanicals and storage. One public speaker questioned whether the developer was a registered company in Wisconsin, while Commissioner Guequierre wondered if there were too many coffee shops in the area.

TOD Standards Debate: Commissioner McCahill questioned how the project meets TOD requirements, such as no parking between the building and frontage street. Staff indicated all requirements were met, noting the presence of a pedestrian window and park bench.

Alder Field stated the standards were technically met so he would vote for it, but didn’t believe it truly meets the city’s vision for the area, suggesting potential ordinance tweaks.

Commissioner McCahill voted against, arguing the designated “main entrance” wasn’t truly an entrance. Commissioner Wasniewski also opposed, saying the project is inconsistent with city plans for the area, is entirely auto-oriented, and doesn’t allow customers to go inside.

Systemic Issues: Despite numerous complaints throughout the year from Plan Commission alders about auto-oriented developments in TODs, no substantial ordinance changes have been proposed to prevent such developments.

Housing Forward Zoning Reforms

The Commission advanced three major zoning text amendments proposed by the Mayor to facilitate housing development, with particular controversy around exemptions for an exclusive neighborhood.

Minimum Lot Size Reductions

Legistar 89916

The first proposal reduces minimum lot depth, width, and setback requirements in low-density residential areas to allow more divisions of very large lots. Staff indicated approximately 6,300 properties could be impacted by the changes, which could also affect the form of new developments.

Highlands Neighborhood Opposition: Residents from The Highlands neighborhood requested their special TR-R zone be excluded from the minimum lot area changes, arguing their zones have a special large-lot character and many properties recently signed 40-year private covenants restricting changes.

Staff responded that the changes are modest and maintain differences between zones, including large lot sizes in TR-R. Staff expressed intent to align special zones like TR-R and Planned Development with other city standards.

Commission Debate: Alder Guequierre, who represents the district, moved to eliminate TR-R from the setback changes, with Commissioner Heck seconding. Guequierre argued that lot shapes in the Highlands don’t lend themselves to splitting and the neighborhood has “unique historical value.”

Commissioner Wasniewski opposed the exemption, arguing no neighborhood should be exempt from change and that restrictions would reduce property rights. Alder Glenn also opposed, noting the city has grown by 100,000 people. Heck, despite seconding, said restricting the neighborhood from changes is “cringe.”

Guequierre was the only commissioner to vote for the amendment, which failed. The main motion including TR-R passed unanimously and was recommended to Common Council.

Height Transition Changes

Legistar 89917

Current Height Transition Proposed Height Transition

The second proposal modifies stepdown requirements to allow buildings to reach the maximum height allowed in adjacent districts before stepdown is applied. Currently, stepdown must begin below the maximum height allowed in adjacent districts.

The Commission unanimously recommended approval.

Duplex ADU Allowances

Legistar 89918

The third proposal allows duplex accessory dwelling units (ADUs) without counting their square footage toward the property’s accessory structure maximum.

The Commission unanimously recommended approval.

Conditional Use Process Improvements

Legistar 90056

The Commission unanimously recommended approval of minor changes to streamline the conditional use process, extending conditional use approval validity from 2 years to 3 years along with other developer-friendly modifications.

Future Planning Initiatives

Planning Director Meagan Tuttle announced that the Mayor intends to soon introduce changes to the TOD overlay to facilitate construction of “missing middle” (small-scale multifamily) housing.

New Sherman Middle School

On the consent agenda, the Commission approved conditional use approvals for replacement facilities for Sherman Middle School and Shabazz City High School.

Legistar 89232

The meeting highlighted ongoing tensions between neighborhood preservation and citywide housing needs, with the Commission ultimately rejecting attempts to exempt wealthy neighborhoods from modest zoning reforms while approving auto-oriented development that conflicts with stated TOD goals.

September 15, 2025

By Tori Cooper with the help of Claude AI

Official Minutes

Consent Agenda item passed: - Request for conditional use in the Parks and Recreation (PR) District for an outdoor eating area for a food and beverage establishment open after 9:00 p.m., and conditional use for amplified sound for an outdoor eating area at 5501 Schroeder Road in District 20 Legistar 89235.

Referred to October 6th Meeting to allow for review by the Urban Design Commission: - Request for conditional use in the Traditional Residential-Consistent 4 (TR-C4) District for a school, public or private, and for a building exceeding 10,000 square feet to allow construction of a new public school building to replace Sherman Middle School and Shabazz City High School at 1601 N Sherman Avenue/1610 Ruskin Street in District 12 Legistar 89232.

2025-2030 Park and Open Space Plan

Legistar 89620: Adopting the 2025-2030 Park and Open Space Plan as a Supplement to the City of Madison Comprehensive Plan (Citywide)

Lisa Laschinger, interim parks superintendent, presented the comprehensive plan highlighting Madison’s status as the fastest-growing city in Wisconsin’s fastest-growing county. The plan emphasizes the need for parks to meet the needs of aging generations by offering more community spaces.

Laschinger reviewed the Trust for Public Land survey, which examined state, county, city, and UW resources in comparison to green space offered through the parks system. Community engagement efforts were conducted in both English and Spanish to inform the proposal development. The community agreed that parks are integral to overall wellbeing in Madison, supporting the need for more skate parks, walking trails, bike paths, and dog runs.

Park use has returned to pre-pandemic levels for most activities and surpassed prior use rates in remaining areas. The committee recognized both the housing crisis and the need for park spaces around infill developments throughout Madison. Despite huge need and reliance on parks, Wisconsin invests less funding in these areas than neighboring states.

Madison Parks relies heavily on volunteers, who contributed almost $1.7 million through their time, effort, and donations in the previous fiscal year. The strategies outlined in the plan build off previously stated goals and are already being partially met through previous proposals.

Nicholas Davies spoke in opposition, concerned about bike parking. He observed over 15 cyclists at Monona Park over the weekend with nowhere to lock their bikes. Davies noted there’s a budget line item for vehicle parking but nothing specific for bike racks, despite Madison being a bike-friendly city. He urged the Plan Commission to consider minimum bike parking requirements for parks.

Commissioner Heck asked Laschinger to respond to Davies’s statement. Laschinger acknowledged that Davies was correct regarding zoning requirements for parks and recreation spaces. She explained that Madison Parks does consider cyclists; however, much less funding is needed for bike racks than parking spaces. Bike parking is currently included in the “furnishings” budget line but could be specifically added under “amenities” if necessary for approval.

City Staff Vaughn noted that comments regarding bicycle parking were forwarded to the zoning board for consideration.

Alder Guequierre drew attention to the East Towne and West Towne areas, which are being heavily developed but appear to lack green space. Laschinger confirmed these are two larger target areas Madison Parks hopes to address, recognizing the need for larger spaces given population growth and new residences.

Commissioner Wasniewski asked how the plans address inclusivity with older populations. Laschinger said this will be a focal point in the next five years, exploring amenities such as adult exercise features, walking paths, and pickleball.

Commissioner Solheim moved for an amendment to add bike parking to the budget, which was included in the item, ultimately leading to approval.

Black Hawk Middle School and Gompers Elementary School - 1402 Wyoming Way

Legistar 89234: Consideration of conditional use in the Suburban Residential-Consistent 1 (SR-C1) District for a school and for a building exceeding 10,000 square feet to allow construction of a new public school building to replace the existing school at 1402 Wyoming Way in District 18.

City Planner Ernest presented the project. Construction of the new school would begin in early 2026, with the existing building remaining until demolition in late 2027. The proposed building will be two levels and approximately 90,000 square feet. The new building will be more central to the site compared to the current building’s street-adjacent location. Additional access points will reduce traffic at the Comanche/Wyoming Way intersection.

Matt Hasse, part of the design team working with MMSD, reviewed traffic and pedestrian safety plans. The design aims to pull current traffic congestion internally to the site rather than continuing to jam up Comanche/Wyoming Way, offering relief to commuting residents and additional safety for students and staff.

Susan Bowersox for the design team reviewed floor plans, elevations, renderings, and building perspectives. The new building will be built into the hillside due to the site’s grading and topography.

Nicholas Davies spoke again, criticizing parent drop-off loops as having a poor track record. Davies argued this type of “child drive-through” creates a feedback loop that “induces demand and creates rather than alleviates congestion” as parents arrive earlier to get spots close to the building. He suggested closing off through traffic or making the area traffic-free to avoid bottleneck situations.

Alder Glenn asked for clarification on the loops and whether there would be designated spaces for parent drop-offs versus bus areas. Hasse explained three loops would break up congestion: Wheeler Road access for Gompers Elementary parents, the Monica Lane loop for Blackhawk, and the southern loop for buses. Glenn questioned whether straight-through options or making Wyoming Way a no-traffic zone during school hours might be better solutions.

Hasse assured the Commission they consulted with City Traffic Engineering early in the project. Due to site grading, there was more concern over pedestrian safety with hills in a straight-through design than with separating drop-off points into three loops. City Traffic Engineering preferred this option for alleviating traffic.

Commissioner Solheim questioned the grading, noting the renderings made the field appear flat. Hasse clarified the grading issue was with Wheeler Road—while the building site itself is flat, the road is not.

Commissioner Wasniewski asked about traffic projections. Hasse said they could accurately project bus volume, but vehicle traffic varies daily depending on weather, parent availability, and carpool fluctuation.

Alder Glenn asked about bike racks. Hasse confirmed there would be ample bike parking and connecting paths for cyclists and pedestrians to accommodate students, staff, and parents.

After extensive discussion about traffic and safety concerns, and despite Commissioner Wasniewski’s disapproval, the item was approved.

302 E Washington Avenue Development

Legistar 89434, Legistar 89375, Legistar 89273, Legistar 88957: Demolition permit, zoning change, conditional use for additional building height, and Certified Survey Map for an 11-story, 76-unit mixed-use building at 302-308 E Washington Avenue/15-27 N Butler Street in District 2.

City Planner Lisa Ernest noted this was the first demolition application since the code was amended earlier this year. The Landmarks Commission found historical value in the building but not substantial enough to prevent approval.

Several development team members presented design plans, building height specifications, and how they were utilizing zoning transitions affordable housing to add additional stories to sections of the building.

Lynn Bjorkman spoke in opposition, arguing the historical value of the building was not being given proper consideration. She referenced previous projects and a Capital Times article advocating for more documentation of landmarks and buildings lost to new developments. She argued there were insufficient building images documenting the building prior to potential demolition for future historians and architects.

Commissioner Heck was receptive to Bjorkman’s arguments and asked the development team if they would be open to documenting the building through photographs and redrawing building plans prior to demolition. While the team was open to photographs, Duane Johnson with the developer team was hesitant about documenting building plans. Johnson believed the Landmarks Commission already had substantial building plan documentation and was concerned about duplicating readily available resources.

Commissioner Heck clarified he didn’t intend to imply developers needed new plans—only to ensure documentation was on file for future reference. Johnson agreed that between photos they would take and plans on file with the City, they could bridge the gap to meet the documentation level Bjorkman argued for.

Both items passed with the condition of proper photographic documentation for future reference following demolition.

2025 Plan Commission Member Survey Results

Legistar 89885: Discussion of survey results.

Feedback indicated staff reports were generally favorable regarding background information. However, one comment observed that applicants provide extensive project details. The comment suggested that if the letter of intent provided necessary information, it could be cross-referenced in the Staff Report rather than repeated in findings, ultimately shortening project descriptions provided by staff.

Comments were made about how Staff Reports highlight conditions for approval. Traditionally, reports emphasize conditions they don’t think can be met or where the Plan Commission should spend additional time determining if conditions can be met. It was suggested the analysis include conditions that have been or could easily be met as a cross-reference for findings.

There was also a request regarding the time Staff Reports are released and when the Plan Commission is tasked with taking action on items. The City is looking into extending lead time and whether they have capacity to move up internal deadlines to provide information earlier. They explored moving meeting nights, but other days didn’t meet Plan Commission member constraints, so Mondays would remain the scheduled meeting day.

August 25, 2025

By Michael Zenz with the help of Claude AI

Official Minutes

Also live-tweeted on Bluesky by ZENZ

The Madison Plan Commission held a virtual meeting on August 25, 2025, revisiting the controversial tree protection ordinance and discussing significant changes to area planning policies that could affect future housing density.

Tree Protection Ordinance Approved

Legistar 89254

The Commission unanimously approved changes to the city’s tree protection ordinance, expanding protection zones from a uniform 5 feet to 1 foot per inch of tree trunk diameter. The city presented additional evidence of tree damage on job sites and encroachments on the current 5-foot protection zone to justify the changes.

Stakeholder Input: City forestry staff met with Smart Growth Madison, a developer advocacy group, to address concerns. Smart Growth continued to argue for deferral, particularly concerned that tree damage by contractors could result in permit revocation.

The Realtors Association requested clearer processes for handling violations, agreeing that continued violations should have consequences but arguing that minor infractions should have compliance pathways short of permit revocation. They also wanted clarification that the tree protection zone stops at private property lines.

Public Support: Several speakers supported the ordinance changes, arguing that residents have had to constantly fight to protect trees during construction, that current modest penalties don’t adequately protect trees, and that street trees are especially important when private trees are removed for density.

Implementation Details: Alder Guequierre explained that at the Finance Committee, sponsors emphasized implementing serious consequences for intentional tree destruction, noting that some bad actors currently agree to save street trees then simply pay damages after cutting them down.

The city indicated they hope to negotiate tree protection processes upfront, with any damages reviewed by Public Works if developers disagree with Forestry staff decisions.

Commissioner Solheim clarified the appeals process: violations that can’t be resolved between developers and Forestry could result in permit suspension, with appeals going to the next Public Works meeting.

Commissioner Field moved to pass the ordinance while requesting clarity that the protection zone applies only to public right-of-way and that negative consequences apply only to unauthorized damage. Commissioner Solheim also wanted clarity about the revocation process.

Area Planning Policy Changes

The Commission discussed significant proposed changes to area planning policies, including the controversial “escalator clause” that allows increased density in Low-Medium Residential (LMR) and Low Residential (LR) districts under certain conditions.

Escalator Clause Elimination:

Staff proposed eliminating the escalator clause for LMR districts, arguing it would increase transparency by having density determined solely by land use categories rather than subjective Plan Commission decisions. Staff previously attempted to eliminate this clause during interim updates but additional criteria were added instead.

The Old Sauk Road development utilized this escalator clause for increased density.

Staff Rationale: Staff argued they want to reserve Low-Medium Residential for “missing middle” housing rather than apartment buildings, while retaining the escalator clause for LR districts. They suggested some LMR areas might be reclassified as Medium Residential (MR) to accommodate density.

Commission Concerns: Commissioner Heck worried about losing the ability to approve more housing, noting recent projects like Old Sauk Road and Northport developments benefited from the escalator clause. Staff indicated the 5-year comprehensive plan updates could allow land use changes to increase density.

Commissioner Figueroa Cole expressed skepticism that eliminating the escalator clause would dramatically increase clarity while retaining it for LR districts, worrying it would reverse progress in finding appropriate density locations.

Alder Guequierre questioned whether areas like the recent Old Sauk Road development could ever be categorized as Medium Residential given community pushback, highlighting a key concern about the practical limitations of the staff approach.

Alternative Approaches: Commissioner Field suggested reducing escalator clause density allowances by half rather than eliminating them entirely. Commissioner Solheim wanted suggestions for increased density to be introduced earlier in area planning processes to avoid surprising the public.

Commercial/Employment District Restrictions: Staff also proposed specifying which General Commercial and Employment districts are inappropriate for residential use, potentially requiring land use category changes before allowing housing in such areas.

Limiting Residential in Commercial Districts

Alder Glenn emphasized the value of flexibility in examining area nuances, while Commissioner Solheim wanted the ability to alter future land use designations if residential becomes appropriate.

Staff’s goal is to bar certain commercial and employment areas from residential uses, arguing they aren’t suitable places for people to live.

Housing Approvals

The Commission approved two significant housing projects on the consent agenda:

Fair Oaks Avenue Mixed-Use Development

Legistar 88777

Conditional use approval for a five-story, 171-unit mixed-use building and 6-unit townhouse at 922-930 N Fair Oaks Avenue.