Urban Design Commission

Meeting Summaries

  • 2025-03-03: Developments at 3361-3375 East Washington Avenue and 501 E Washington Avenue were presented. Commissioners voiced concerns over the designs, particularly regarding the transition from commercial to residential areas and the impact on the surrounding historic district. The commission requested further consideration of landscaping, accessibility, and the overall aesthetic of the buildings.

  • 2025-02-19: A new office-warehouse building was proposed for 5001 Femrite Drive, with the commission expressing concerns over the design’s lack of texture and harmony with the surrounding area. The commission also reviewed plans for a 7 Brew coffee shop on Lien Road, where they raised issues regarding the drive-through design, accessibility, and the overall aesthetic. The commission ultimately approved the initial design for both projects but requested further revisions.

Meeting Details

March 3, 2025

by Tori Cooper

Urban Design Commission met Monday night to discuss two new proposals with developers, both located on East Washington Avenue. Before getting into the thick of things, the Commission moved one item to their consent agenda for unanimous approval:

  • Legistar 87165: Comprehensive Design Review for Signage in an Urban Design District (UDD) for a property located at 849 E Washington Avenue and 10 S Paterson Street in District 6.

3361-3375 East Washington Avenue

Matthew Tills, with the proposal’s developer JSD, reviewed their plans for the corner of North Fair Oaks Avenue and East Washington Avenue. The proposal is to develop a new mixed-use building in Urban Design District 5, located in District 12 Legistar 87242. The  property is currently broken up into seven parcels, made up of two single-family homes and a small strip mall–which JSD proposes replacing with a single mixed-use building. After meeting with neighbors, JSD has included a parking lot in their plans. The lot would allow for entry and exit from both directions on Fair Oaks, but would only allow for right-hand entry from and right-hand exit onto East Wash in order to comply with current traffic flow. The lot is also being designed to accommodate the proposed commercial space. The plan includes a courtyard over parts of the parking area, which provides additional green space to tenants—plus private entry patios with some green space in front of each ground-level unit to indicate private use. Tills later mentioned the possibility of including railing on patios to further indicate the spaces as private to tenants and discourage loitering from members of the public who may be waiting for a bus. This would be in addition to the developers incorporating as much greenery to the landscape as possible, including a significant number of shrubbery, plants, and trees.

(image)

Commissioner Klehr, who was the most vocal about accessibility and planning for the project,  noted she can “appreciate [the] sophistication and color” the developer is proposing; however, she brought up concerns over the transition from a commercial to residential area. She then questioned  why JSD is not stepping down with this development similar to their previous work with the Rise Development. While Tills did not provide a direct answer, hethe did reassure the Commission JSD would be willing to step the building down if it would be critical to the project’s approval. While Klehr agreed the mixed-use space was in accordance with the North East Plan, she expressed hopes for more commercial space in order to make the area more walkable for residents. Klehr additionally requested further consideration on JSD’s part of how the color scheme would impact lighting in the area–specifically how the colors would either absorb or throw light that hits the building and impact the transition into a residential area from a high-traffic area.

(image)

Commissioner Klehr also referenced the space at the intersection of Fair Oaks and East Wash that would be used by pedestrians utilizing the nearby BRT stop. Klehr requested consideration for more maneuverability, as she expects higher traffic on that corner for public transportation users. Tills was amenable to the change, stating the nearby BRT stop was critical in JSD’s plans and how it is “symbiotic for urban transport.” This later brought into question how the parking area would accommodate pedestrians using it as a shortcut between the two streets. In response to further questioning by Commissioner Klehr, Tills confirmed that City Traffic has been involved with the project as part of a meeting held with neighbors at the end of January. Tills said they are still working on the exact parking layout, but want it to be safe for pedestrian use while maximizing usability for the commercial spaces which will make up the lower level of the project. Alder Rummel chimed in to question additional parking in the area, namely street parking availability. Tills informed the Commission there is not immediate street parking next to the development site, but there is available street parking further south on Fair Oaks.

Before bringing the discussion to a close, Commissioners Graham and Mbilinyi advocated for additional public and private spaces on the exterior of the building. Commissioner Mbilinyi asked for further consideration of an expanded patio area, while Commissioner Graham draw specific attention to the plan’s inclusion of patios with step downs on the East Wash side, but not the Fair Oaks facing portion of the building. Tills confirmed Commissioner Graham’s suspicion the site’s topography was a factor; however, Tills noted JSD was working with civil engineering to explore the possibility of either individual or shared patio steps to allow for private or semi-private entry on the Fair Oaks side.

501 E Washington Avenue

Another development proposal was presented for a parcel located between East Washington Avenue, South Blair Street, and South Franklin Street. Steven Rosemitch, from JLA Architecture, presented the design plan for the new residential building, which is set to be located in Urban Design District 4, in District 6 Legistar 87243. Rosemitch specifically highlighted how JLA would be addressing specific aspects of the proposed development’s location and topography. For one, there is a considerable grade change on South Blair. Due to this, JLA has decided to adjust their plan to have the building’s lobby on South Franklin so as to promote accessibility and avoid  an  sending traffic onto East Wash. To aid in the curb appeal of the South Blair side, JLA included plinth in their design in addition to the strong masonry base, which will be used to add contrasting greenery to the area. Secondly, the building has been designed to frame the capital as you come up East Wash—promoting the view and staying compliant with City height ordinances while maximizing residential space in a high-housing-need area. Additionally, parking would be included under the building. Commissioner Bernau later questioned the exact location and if the windows seen on the lower level would look into a garage, to which Rosemitch clarified parking would be below the window line (seen in figure 3), underground.

(image)

While the Urban Design Commission is well aware of the current housing crisis Madison faces, commissioners were skeptical of the proposed design and how it fit into the area. Commissioner Bernau questioned Rosemitch on zoning requirements regarding transitioning down the South Franklin side of the building into a historic district. Rosemitch said he was not aware of any, with Staff member Jessica Vaughn clarifying the site is zoned as Urban Mixed Used (U-MX) and there are no requirements for zoning transitioning into the First Settlement area. This brought further scrutiny from the Commision, as several other members brought up design context in regard to the much smaller historic buildings and homes adjacent to the parcel. Commissioner Mbilinyi jumped in to draw attention to how overbearing the building schematics appear in comparison to others in the area, which was echoed by Alder Rummel who advocated for toning the building down. Commissioner Bernau additionally argued the need to consider the smaller structures in the First Settlement—impacting the Urban Design Commission’s judgement of scale and size of the proposal when thinking about how the development fits into this neighborhood, as those historic buildings are likely to remain for a considerable amount of time. Alder Rummel agreed, noting historic landmarks take legal precedence. Vaughn then reminded the Commission they will be both an approving and advisory body on this matter, with sensitivity of context as well as compatibility needing to be considered moving forward. Vaughn again referenced current zoning as U-MX, so the development will likely require conditional use approval from the Planning Commission with regard to context and sustained aesthetic desirability.

(image)

Multiple members of the commission also expressed interest in JLA offering a design that included two more modest buildings, rather than a large, single structure. Commissioner Klehr commented that although she agreed, she liked that the design “snaked around” to create a courtyard space. This led to Commissioner Mbilinyi noting how small the proposed courtyard appears, with Commissioner Bernau asking for clarification on the purpose of such a narrow courtyard on the interior of the design. Rosemitch informed the Commission the original design originally had the courtyard facing East Wash; however, JLA determined the back end of the building would make better use of the space. The updated design would allow for more facade space, as well as increased sunlight to otherwise interior units—ultimately aiding in breaking down massing of the building. Rosemitch also noted the original design included more balconies, but after a neighborhood meeting JLA reduced balcony sizes and recessed their settings to increase courtyard space.

(image)

All in all, while the Commission like certain aspects of the design, just about every compliment was followed with a “but.” Bernau commended the inclusion of plinths in the design,but stated this area is not well suited for lawn, pushing for JLA to consider perennial and shrubs instead. Commissioner Mbilinyi said vertical massing was appropriate, but was not pleased by the horizontal aspects. JLA boasted their color and material choice to help break elevations and create shadow lines—only for Alder Rummel to flatly state she does not think the material is appropriate for the area and the colors are too dark, but she did think the corner design was strong. Staff somewhat staved off further backhanding by jumping in to recognize the developer is tasked with bridging context between the East Wash developments and the First Settlement on South Franklin as they have two very different profiles and aesthetics. This was highlighted in the Staff Report, which noted the challenge of transitioning between two contrasting areas and drawing into question which design takes priority while establishing a way to make the designs coalesce. As a middle ground proposal, Staff suggested the development look like multiple buildings, similar to their previous Core Space Development between East Gorham Street, South Broom Street, and East Johnson Street.

Secretary’s Report

The Plan Commission recommended to approve an alternate resolution to the Lamphouse Ad Hoc Report. Attached to the approval was an appendix which included changes previously discussed by the Urban Design Committee–namely, outright protecting View 1, while protecting Views 2 and 3 as appropriate in conjunction with downtown heigh maps and zoning codes. Additionally the LEO development‘s preliminary plat on Madison’s East side was denied and  placed on file without prejudice. Lastly, the Plan Commission took the Urban Design Commission’s recommendation regarding Seven Brew Coffee development planned for East Washington Avenue, approving the proposal with the condition of adding additional pedestrian way-finding.

February 19, 2025

by Tori Cooper

The Urban Design Committee convened February 19th to unanimously pass the evening’s consent agenda and review two additional items: a new office-warehouse building proposal in District 16 and plans for the 7 Brew coffee application slated for District 3.

5001 Femrite Drive

A new building has been proposed on the corner of Femrite Drive and Dairy Drive on Madison’s east side, sitting in Urban Design District 1 of District 16 Legistar 86819. According to WYSER Engineering, the plan includes demolishing nearby buildings to make way for the office-warehouse combo–with City Staff Jessica Vaughn noting there is an application on file to demolish multiple single-family homes in order to make way for stormwater drainage and additional parking. WYSER’s building design includes pre-cast concrete, which is common for the area; however, they claim to be adding more color than similar buildings by using sections that have been painted blue. This would be in addition to two variations of gray with some nebulous white accents.

(image)

The commission immediately questioned WYSER’s design choices–most notably the lack of texture and shadows, in addition to the odd drops in sectioning that corresponded with the site’s topography. Commissioner Klehr asked the developer why the roofline contained step-ups, to which the developer responded by claiming WYSER aims to reduce the height from the blue to gray areas of the exterior in order to make shipping then installing the painted sections easier. Later, when Klehr asked about the lowest elevated corner, the developer stated the tiers were in leu of sloping to allow for rainwater runoff. The inconsistency somewhat annoyed Commissioner Klehr, with her going so far as to state her opinion that WYSER should be basing their design off of something in the area, such as the neighboring fire station; furthermore, she argued the design looked “sloppy” and “odd, rather than purposeful.”

Commissioner Asad’s statements echoed a similar sentiment, drawing attention the the “weird steps” in the plan. Asad asserted that a slope of roughly six to twelve inches did not necessitate such drastic designs for steps surrounding sections of the building. Overall, the commission believed WYSER should simply get rid of them. Commissioner Asad further inquired into WYSER’s design choices by questioning the texturing of the building. As it stands now, the developer has chosen to stick with a smooth concrete rather that something more substantial. While Commissioner Asad was pleased with the inclusion of the nebulous white coping, he found the smooth texture lacking in substance. Ultimately, Commissioner Asad believed the pre-cast could be more creative and bring some life to the area and encouraged the developer to be more creative with their design.

Alder Rummel’s input was simpler, although it echoed Commissioner Asad’s, with her requesting a rendering showing the surrounding buildings to establish context as well as giving input on the addition of canopies over the doors on the eastern side of the building. Commissioner Bernau spoke to a similar sentiment, pushing for changes in tecture in order to establish more of a base rather than having a tall concrete slabs emerging from the ground.

While Commissioner Graham offered some reprieve by noting WYSER’s plan aligns with the Urban Development District as far as the parking lot proposal, Commissioner Bernau was quick to jump in again and note it is not in an ideal location considering the cross section of the site’s location. Commissioner Bernau additionally urged WYSER to consider vision triangles with regard to the parking area–especially when considering the sidewalk crossing.

Commissioner Bernau further dug into WYSER’s landscaping plans. For one, the current proposal includes day lilied on the north side of the building in what will be a heavily shaded area. Being a sun-loving pant, these will need to be relocated in the plan. In addition to plant placement, Commissioner Bernau voiced disappointment in the density of the proposed plants. According to the Commissioner, although the shrubs are spread out the amount is fine; however, WYSER should be planting 75% more perennials to establish the parcel. Bernau also noted the omission of plants that will be used to fill the bio retentions, clarifying for the developer these will need to include a specific mix of native plants and cannot be filled with lawn. Lastly, WYSER’s proposal included a dyed brown mulch. Keeping consistent with eco-awareness, Commissioner Bernau advocated for the use of naturally colored wood mulch, rather than something with dyes that could wash out and be absorbed into the land. WYSER did mention they are working with the Forestry Department to better establish the landscape and plants.

(image)

Ultimately, the commission voted to have WYSER come back at a later date with a revised design based on their feedback from this evening’s meeting.

7 Brew Coffee

For their second major item of the night, the Commission reviewed design plans for the new two-story 7 Brew drive-through proposed for 3915 Lien Road in Urban Design District 5, located in District 3 Legistar 86494. While 7 Brew locations are typically a modular design, the developer drew attention the obstacles they have been facing with regard to the district’s building codes and claimed it compromised the overall design. While the coffee vendor would utilize a system where employees take orders on iPads directly from drive-through customers rather than speakers, the requirements for the second floor canopy has become a challenge. According to Staff Member Vaughn, ordinances require the second floor to provide at least 75% of the amount of space as the ground floor. Due to this, the developer has come up with a design that includes a shipping container, with a blue ribboning utilized to separate the lower section’s masonry look from the upper section’s metal composure. The shipping container would be further supported by three black beams that separate lanes one and two of the drive through and are designed to mount menus onto. Additionally, the container canopy is planned to have warmers to offer some reprieve for employees during the harsh Wisconsin winters–similar to what Madisonians have seen at both the east and west side Chick-fil-A locations and BRT stations.

(image)

Alder Rummel later questioned Staff regarding the drive through, wanting to know why 7 Brew must have such a large upper portion to the coffee shop, versus a smaller upstairs and a parapet over the drive through. Staff reiterated the 75% rule for a second floor to comply with district requirements and ordinances, indicating this is where the idea for the blue ribbon came from in order to help ease the transition from the lower imitation-masonry to the upper shipping container. Alder Rummel voiced her displeasure with the ordinance, with which City Staff Vaughn agreed as it had caused the developers to return to the drawing board sever times and start from scratch in order to remain compliant with district requirements.

Alder Rummel was not the only commissioner unimpressed with the design. At one point, Commissioner Brenau copmared it to a construction workshop, telling everyone to “just Google ‘elevated job trailer.’” Even Commissioner Asad stated “the concept is modern, but the application is brutalist.” The developer strongly disagreed, stating it would be considered monolithic as the have worked to establish rhythm in the design. Asad further argued his point before somewhat conceding by saying maybe it is a matter of opinion. All in all, Commissioner Asad though the design was a “cool concept that could really work,” but thought the rendering needed additional review for the application of materials. The development team eagerly attempted to gather more input from the Commissioner, but was met with Asad stating he was “not going to design it right now;” however, he did offer ideas such as a darker base, redesigning the blue ribbon, or doing something different with the black beams which currently blend in and get eaten by the shadows.

(image)

Commissioner Asad further clarified his concern was not necessarily about adding more material, but examining how the materials themselves are being applied within the design. Noting the rendering quality may be impacting his opinion, the Commissioner voiced the need for more texture or visual attachment to bring life to the design with additional details. Commissioner Asad additionally stated just because it is a more modern, modular design, does not mean windows are the best approach to add life to the building. Alder Rummel and Commissioner Klehr agreed, noting the building lacked harmony, with Klehr drawing attention to one of the renderings appearing to include three different window sizes: smaller square windows on the shipping container, narrow rectangular widow on the upper masonry section, and wider rectangular windows on the lower portion. The developer clarified this was an error in the rendering, as there should only be two window size–one rectangular size for the masonry section and one square size for the shipping container’s windows. The developer additionally clarified the windows planned for the masonry sections would be in-set to add depth to the design and noted the masonry sections are planned to be made up of imitation panels rather than actual brick.

The question of parking and accessibility was then brought up by multiple Commision members. The City requires the site to provide 3.75 parking spaces, which the developers fully provide by including three regular spaces and one ADA reserved stall. This is in additional to conversations with neighboring properties, who have tentatively agreed to share additional parking to serve as overflow for 7 Brew employees and customers. Commissioner Bernau then asked why the developers did not provide more green space by having the initial passthrough being as one or two lanes that open up to the full three, which paired well with Alder Rummel questioning why to second story was designed to be perpendicular to the lower portion. The developers and City Staff jointly clarified that City Engineering advised on three individual lanes to avoid delivery trucks form blocking customers’ access. As for the perpendicular design, Emergency Vehicles would not fit under the drive through canopy. This prompted the developers to come up with a design that would allow emergency vehicles to gain better, more immediate access to the front doors in case they needed to get inside the building. While 7 Brew will not be publicly accessible, there is still a need for access in case an employee gets hurt or has an emergency. It also allows better fire truck access in the event they need to respond to a call at the location.

(image)

This prompted Commissioner Graham to ask for the width of each of the lanes, which the developers provided as being 14.5” for Lane 1, 15” for Lane 2, and 16” for Lane 3. Lane three is intentionally wider to allow room for delivery trucks to maneuver through the curve without interfering with customers or potentially brushing up against the building. Commissioner Graham then redirected the conversation to accessibility by requesting clarification on the retention wall located along the East Washington Avenue side of the building. The developers stated the retention wall is roughly three feet high, and although there is an access ramp, pedestrians will still be directed around the neighboring gas station due to the slope of the site. The developers also noted an existing ditch and swale on the north side of the curb, which is due to the topography. City Staff noted that adding an additional pathway might be difficult due to the limited space, but suggested the possibility of opening the ramp up at an earlier point may aid in accessibility–especially when it comes to wheelchair users–and could help alleviate pressure the current design puts on pedestrians to walk across areas designated for cars.

Commissioner Bernau also pointed out the wave-type bike rack used in WYSER’s proposal is not on the City’s list of approved styles and instructed the developers to make sure they are using allowable equipment. Bernau, echoed by Commissioner Graham, further advocated an increase in pedestrian amenities. Alder Rummel questioned where the nearest BRT stop is located in relation to the site, with other members mentioning there is a stop just down the block in front of the east side Hyvee. This furthered the Commission’s commitment to pushing for increased pedestrian access, with Alder Rummel going so far as to suggest an outdoor patio that could be used both by pedestrians and as a make-shift break area for employees during the warmer months.

After extensive discussion, the Commission ultimately approved the initial design.

Secretary’s Report

It was noted that the Plan Commission will be the approving body on upcoming changes proposed for demolition permits submitted to the City of Madison. The move stems from the City’s desire to remove administrative tasks from the purview of various Commissions and Committees and instead relocate them to City Staff who are more familiar with the requirements and ordinances associated with applications.

The Secretary also noted the March 5th meeting is slated to be another light meeting, with only three items currently on the docket, the first of which is a comprehensive signage review for Baker’s Place. She mentioned that the area is “really starting to take shape” and personally thinks it looks “really good.” The remaining two items will be informational presentations, one for upcoming design plans at the corner of East Washington Avenue and South Franklin Street near their previously discussed Porchlight project, and the other pertaining to a five-unit, multi-family home being proposed for the corner of East Washington Avenue and North Fair Oaks.

Lastly, the Secretary reassured the Commissioners she is working diligently to fill a number of empty seats that remain on the committee with several promising prospects. At this point, the group is running on a skeleton crew, meaning if anyone were to lose connection during the meeting it is highly likely they would lose quorum and need to halt operations. This is problematic, as it impacts timing for not only Urban Planning’s approvals, but applicants’ abilities to move on to other committees’ approvals as well. As if on cue, Alder Rummel was needed elsewhere by the City and Commissione Asad’s presentation was put on hold for yet another week.