Board of Zoning Appeals and City of Madison Plan Commission - Regular Meeting

All right, we'll call to order the uh special meeting for the plan commission dated February 17, 2026. Uh Amy, you want to do roll call? Yes, sure thing. Uh Patrick Teon here. Joel Storm here. Josh Wilbur here. Jerry Rston here. Van Croftton here. Mike Armstrong here. Carl England here. Rick Ferris here. Zack Laughlin here. All right. The first thing that we have on our agenda is the rules and procedures for the hearing. Um with the uh does anyone have any questions on the board about the rules and procedures that uh for the for hearings?

Yeah. Yes. Yes. I move that we adopt the recommended rules and procedures as outlined in our uh folders. Do we have a second? I'll take it. All right. Amy, roll. Okay. Sure. I think Patrick Kavanagh, yes. Joel Storm, yes. Josh Wilbur, yes. Jerry Rston, yes. Van Crafton, yes. Mike Armstrong, yes. Carl England, yes. Rick Ferris, yes. Zack Laughlin, yes. All right. The second thing is the uh proposed amendments that uh have been provided to the 1230 2025 adoption draft.

So, yep. I've got a short kind of presentation to go through um with you guys to walk through some of those, but Tony is going to lead us off.

Um just for everyone, this is sort of the process that we're going to go through tonight. Uh the agenda is in front of you. Um and we'll move through that fairly quickly, we hope. Uh, next slide. So, this process started uh roughly 18 months ago uh with a committee and the city and the plan commission hired Taylor Seafford Williams to uh work through with the committee uh the recommendations you see tonight. Uh there was at least eight uh working committee sessions. Those sessions all were publicly uh notified and were open to the public. Um since December uh we have met um our consultants and the city staff uh have met with PC members uh city councilors staff and taken the public comments that we received at those hearings and open houses uh to heart. Uh and you'll see tonight as we go forward, we've generated a number of amendments uh to the December draft that we think fulfill a lot of the concerns that were echoed by all of those folks. This UDO is a great opportunity for the city of Madison. It removes and reduces barriers for development. It allows for increased workforce development, increased tax revenue, will allow for housing and commercial development without as many hassles and gray areas that we've had before. It will create new tools for development, the PUD model, for example, planned unit developments. It also streamlines processes without impacting quality the review process and reducing many meetings and time for developers who want to invest in Madison. And it also brings us in alignment with many of the state statutes that our current zoning and planning documents did not address.

So, we're really excited tonight to finally be at this opportunity for we hope the plan commission to make a favorable recommendation to the city council. Thank you. So I'll I will take it from there then um as we start to work walk through some things. So um first of all I kind of always like to cover what's next like what's going to happen after tonight. So today is a hearing on the UDO and the map. Uh you all will be making a recommendation to council. Council takes that final action just like a reasonzoning would happen. Um that same process. But I also like to point out that it doesn't end there. So it doesn't mean we adopt it and we move on. Um this is something that again every community should do especially after they start to look at a new ordinance. Um you should be doing assessments. So we always say after 6 months of a brand new ordinance you should look at it and make any of those little tweaks. Um but then really after 12 months and annually thereafter you should be assessing what needs to be just tweaked within the ordinance. Every year July 1st we have new state statutes that come in effect. We need to make sure those ordinances are fresh and current so that again I always like to do it in the second half of the year so that those are in effect that you really can make sure that you're not getting behind on some of those state statutes as well. So it should be something annually you guys should expect from your staff or from um plan commission to bring forth to council. Um so why is this needed as well? Uh, and Tony covered part of this and we've covered this in the uh, training session we did back in I think it was November too, but your zoning uh, originally 81. It was updated in 2016 and then you've had other minor changes or amendments to that. Your subdivision regulations were in 97 with updates as well. Um, but really right now, I know we've previously discussed there's a lot of holes in your current ordinance. It requires a lot of gray interpretation. That's not great. We want black and white when it comes to zoning so

everything's treated equally and fair. Um there are a lot of missing lane uses as an example today. Uh that things that just are very hard to classify based on your current list of uses that are very detailed. Um also lacking key uh regulation or direction on some things like sign ordinances setbacks are not always defined. Um confusing, hard to find and then that state statute as I mentioned. um some of just the more recent ones in the last five years. Manufactured home regulations and um again on off on versus off sign uh permiss signs as well as another example. So these are really intended to be clear and consistent for everyone. So it has predictability in there that it's equally applying application across the board to everyone. Um modernizing it too for best practices are currently in uses that didn't exist previously. Um, and then just making it a lot easier to find things into is the goal. So, I'm going to cover a couple things. Um, with this, we also have the converted land use map and I or our zoning map, excuse me. I like to call it a converted because we're not reszoning, right? We are we are just taking our old districts and making them into our new districts. Um, so I'll go through this because this is one thing that was asked at the public meeting. I want to make sure we can clarify for folks. Um, so the existing map will be converted. Um, you currently have an a district that will still be remain agricultural district. You currently have a residential agriculture RA that's going to remain. You also have a hillside that's remaining and an open space. Those still are remaining. So, if any of those were zoned that, they're still zoned that today. Um, on the the residential, uh, we are going to just kind of update some of the names of these. So, your R4 becomes an R1. um it's getting away from zoning names that are based on densities when that's not really always the exact density. Uh your R8 becomes an R2 and then the R32 becomes an R3. The other difference is we've consolidated some districts. So your current residential or your

manufactured home district that becomes part of your R3 as a special exception. So, um, again, combining those districts, we've also combined two other districts with your HDR district. So, you had a a pro district as it is called and also a specialty district. Um, they weren't really serving a lot of different purposes. So, those got combined into the HDR district. Uh, you have a riverfront. We have not tried to touch that one as little as possible. Uh, local business is still there, general business, your CBD district is still there. And then we do have a new one, aviation business. So the only things that are that are showing up is this are the parcels owned by the airport. Um and that's to help with some of the regulations. We get FAA and other things conflicting with local regulations. So that helps to um allow them to do what they need to do. And then your two industrial districts are still there just with new names. Um and then we do have a PUB district. Um we've kind of revamped that to make it more usable for you guys. That should be used sparingly. not all the time as we've kind of talked through during some of those training that training session. Um, but it does allow for that creative different district that just doesn't fit any of your current uh districts. Um, so I was going to flip through. I flipped too fast for you guys. uh flip through on um the the left side you'll see that's the existing the legacy districts and then on the right is the the proposed was just going to point out anything that has uh again been converted to a different district that uh you can see that red circle there that is your airport uh business district or aviation business district and then that little circle up in the middle that was your manufactured home park district that got combined with your R3 so again not resoning just kind of converting everybody and then I've got to zoom into the downtown area that those uh you can see on the left that's that specialty district that got combined with the HDR district and then

the pro district the professional office district got combined as well with HDR and then those uh the manufacturer home park district got combined with the R3 district. So again we're not reszoning or anything of that nature. We're just converting those to be the the districts within the new ordinance. Uh there are also three overlays in there. I just want to point out your flood hazard overlay that already exists basically today. Um whether you adopt that or not, it still is in existence. It just helps to create a red flag for folks who are going to develop. We'd rather them know that at the beginning than at the end. Um we have the historic district overlay that already exists whether you adopt this or not. Again, it just helps to be a kind of a an extra layer of notice to folks um if it shows up as an overlay on our zoning. And then our airport protection overlay. Um again this is really largely based on FAA. So it really deals with noise sensitive areas. Um and it deals with height regulations. So uh again FAA is going to control those uh largely whether you adopt an overlay or not. But that helps to again make sure we don't run into issues. We want to catch things before versus after they're built and we have more issues. Um so I did throw in it's hard to see it's a big blob here. In the middle of that is the hospital because they have a helport. So, this is just a height height um zone that basically we need to be paying attention to heights within that area. We don't want helicopters having issues. Um and then this little uh you can kind of see on the right hand side the the airport properties a little bit better. Um the one on the left is the um height zone. Again, air airplanes need their approaches. We need to keep that clear. And then the other one in on the right hand side is just that noise area. So, doesn't mean you can't build in the noise area. just means that um and that will basically make you record something with the deed saying I know I'm next to an airport. It could be loud. Um so again, those are more just FYI, making sure people are aware of those things. Touch real quickly on the organization um because I don't want to I know we've

gone into this in previous meetings, so I don't want to spend too much time on this, but want to make sure everybody is on the same page that we're taking our zoning and our subdivision control regulations and combining them into one document, unified development ordinance or UDO. Um we have eight chapters. So the first is our general provisions. The second covers all of our zoning districts and those like setbacks, building height, uh lot size, all of those regulations. The third talks about additional standards for specific uses. So we have a list list of specific uses um such as accessory dwelling units or adult businesses that have additional standards that apply regardless of the district. The fourth are all of our site standards. So things like parking and buffer yards and signs are all in that chapter. Fifth deals with non-conforming. So that just means if if something was legal today and it is not allowed by the new ordinance, how do we treat that? Uh we allow it to continue until it's either discontinued or the structure is no longer there. So it outlines all of those so you don't have to interpret that. Uh chapter six deals with subdivisions. So it's any type of dividing of a partial into more than one parcel. Um and then seven deals with all of our procedures. There's flowcharts in there and everything is kind of step-by-step outlined. So hopefully it's much easier to understand and very clear. Uh and then the eighth chapter is just all of our definitions. So I'm going to at least run through um the previous updates. So these were things we had published a um the end of November a public review draft. After that we had a public meeting got all sorts of input. Um folks gave us thoughts and ideas. public did a lot of a number of I think you all I see familiar faces definitely attended that meeting um had some good conversations plane commission had you know given comments council might have given comments um so these are I'm going to run through the updates that were included in the adoption draft the 1230 2025 so these are already included in the draft you all have but want to

highlight those in case someone didn't want to go page by page and you know kind of really identify what those are so these are the major updates there were definitely um you formatting type things or if there was spelling or a cross reference that was off. Those things were updated. But the main things there were four within the districts, two within the youth standard chapter, two in the site standards chapter, two in the subdivisions, two in the procedures, and one in the definitions. One general update I'll kind of cover. Um so I will kind of run through these. You do have them in your packet just at least listed if you need notes or follow along. But within um chapter 2, so in the A district, we had a good comment on um we had 10% impervious coverage and on smaller partials that could be an issue. So that was a good comment we got from the public meeting. Um so basically we left it at 10% impervious coverage for parcels 5 acres or larger and 40% for those less. So if you have an acre parcel um or two acre parcel, you can reasonably build on that. We did um bring some consistency to the minimum living areas within for houses um within all of your districts in. So some of them had minimum living areas, some did not. So we just went ahead and brought that 950 square ft per uh unit for single and two family dwellings and 600 square feet for all multif family and brought that across all districts that had housing within them. We did adjust the side and rear yard setbacks. This was another again public comment that was a good one. um that when you looked at the RA and HDR and you looked at um the A district for example, uh we were allowing smaller setbacks within AG than we were at RA. So that was a good good comment. So we went on the sideyard setback for accessories to 5T instead of 10 and the rear yard for 10 ft um instead of 20 for primary structure and again five for an accessory within the RA. And then on the um HDR, we added an exception that um we

have some great historic buildings we want to keep. Um so again, I think BZA a couple months ago had an application for a house built, I believe it was in 1818 and they were expanding. The new expansion was conforming. We want to keep those types of things. Um but also HDR has some historic patterns that we need to account for. So this is just allowing those sideyard setbacks if they can't comply to look at the three parcels on either side and use the average of those. So again, keeping that kind of building footprint and and the building pattern. Um the last one within this chapter was permitted land use table. So we got lots of comments at the public meeting on this one and I think those were great comments. Um we did combine a couple of items or update some names. So, we combined uh preschool and daycare into one, campground and campsite into one. Um and then pain management clinic and medical offices. Um we just kind of changed the names on those. Didn't change where they were permitted, just the names. Um we did add restaurant and serviceoriented retail as special exceptions in the um riverfront district um to accommodate the existing uses. Uh there is a note there for the amendment within the open space because we I wanted to make sure people didn't get those two confused here. Um and then added indoor gun ranges permitted in local business prohibited um chemical processing in the flood plane overlay. And then probably one of the biggest comments I at least feel like I heard at the public meeting was um the need to add data centers as a Pacific use in our table versus lumping it under industrial. So, we added that as a specific use um in in the use table. It's a special it was listed as a special exception then in your both your industrial districts um and prohibited within the historic district. And then also loft dwelling uh I think there was getting some confusion on the fact that you can have more than one use and in the in historic district. So people were

saying oh can are we not allowing dwellings above you know above the stores. So we just added a use called loft dwelling. Gave it a definition. So it was very clear that you can have those lofts. We want those to happen on you know main street in that area. And then also um corrected there was a good comment too of warehousing distribution and bulk um indoor storage was accidentally listed in LB instead of uh your local businesses instead of general business. That was just a good catch. So we shifted that over. Um second half these edits send and use standards. uh the best standards which is the battery energy storage systems. It's the big battery you know everybody kind of talks about. Um we did update that to reflect the county standards which included standards for the liability insurance um environmental pollution insurance prohibited locations and setbacks. So that was a I feel like that data centers and solar were the very big comments we got. So we mirrored the counties on that. We also did the same thing on solar. So we mirrored the counties on that and those items there um were the ones that reflected we we pulled those over as well. Um so looking at the insurance requirements, locations, setbacks, screening um all of those items we kind of pulled over as well mirroring the counties. Then the site standards, we did update some of the parking standards. Um again, these are all things that are already included in that 1230 25 draft that you guys had, that adoption draft. Um we updated the parking stall size to reflect kind of more modern sizes. Uh we increase the uh parking area for that must be landscaped to 8%. And then minimum u parking is one per dwelling for CBD as well. And then the second thing in that chapter was looking at some of those structure standards for fences and pools. Um during that public process it was pointed out that HDR we want to make sure that they can put a fence on their front setback line right uh because they can put a structure there. So we we specified that if they have a zero foot

setback you can put your fence on the property line and then also increase that to 4T. Again that was really about HDR comments to make sure those historic fences that are there today could be replaced. Um it's currently 3 ft in your current ordinance. So we just made that to 4 feet. Um, and then updated some of the side and rear yard setbacks for pools if they put up a screen or a fence within subdivisions. One other comment was, and this really applies to your buffer area, that if you have a rule subdivision that's on septic, um, we really probably don't need sidewalks inside of that subdivision. Um, and the county probably doesn't want to maintain those sidewalks. So, we're not requiring those sidewalks within those within subdivisions that are served by septic. And then also this is helping to align with some of the county's subdivision standards as well that if we're going to have a subdivision in the buffer area, we want to make sure we're not um kind of doing we call them piano keys sometimes or curb cuts, right? We don't want to curb cut every uh every lot coming onto our county road. We want to make them have an access point. So, we're going to limit that to um if it's a minor residential that they have uh two driveways so we can again start to make sure we're not stripping out those uh county roads and that aligns better with the county's subdivision rags too. Um within our procedures, we did update some building permit timelines to to try to get construction to start within 6 months and needing to complete those building permits within eight months and that can still be extended for six months as needed. So, it still allows for two um well, yeah, two years. And then non-residential permits um not requiring a fence, a permit for a fence, walls, or retaining walls for just residential since you guys do not currently. And then finally, because of all of those changes, we added a few new definitions to make sure that um things like data center, lost uh dwelling, housekeeping unit, and pain management clinic had specific definitions in there as well. So, these things were again all included in that draft. That's the

adoption draft that was posted at the end of December. Um, are there questions on those first? I wanted to make sure we at least covered those if you've, you know, come along here with us that it was clear what kind of the big changes were. Okay. Um, within that, again, um, we have a couple of proposed amendments, too. So, we have this 1230 2025 adoption draft, and we've still gotten comments since then. Um, we've gotten comments submitted. There are there is one in your packet. Uh I think it's under your third tab I believe that was submitted prior. So I made sure you guys have copies of that. I know it was sent out digitally but hard copies are nice. Also um again we've I think had a couple of delays. Snow was our last delay here. Um and so it's given us the opportunity of getting other comments. I know that I've been able to meet with um a couple of you all um from either plane commission or council to go through thoughts and ideas um or comments that you guys have had or have received too. So based on that um I do have four proposed amendments to go through with you guys that you may consider for um inclusion in in the resolution. Um the first is just to clarify the rear setback in the riverfront district. done. I'm going to go through each one of these individually just so you thoroughly understand it. Um the second was to update the uses in the open space district. The third was to um look at our parking and setbacks and buffer yards, so encroachment of parking. And then fourth is just usually a catch-all of any miscellaneous typos or cross references. I know there were a few cross references that didn't automatically update when the PDF saved again. Um so those are just some more administrative type things. There were also two comments that um probably we did receive too that we haven't addressed that I was going to at least give some basis for so you guys have an understanding of that. We did get comments on the minimum number of parking spaces for multif family and also multifamily as a permitted um use within the business district. So I'll kind of touch on those two really

quickly too. In terms of the minimum parking spaces, uh the proposed UDO, the 1230 25 draft, um currently has one and a half spaces for multifamily except within the downtown and riverfront districts. It's one space per unit. Uh within the riverfront district you've already adopted, it's one space per unit. Um we've we've included the the CBD in there, too. Um so, a lot of communities are going to this currently right now. Uh the trend in the last 5 to eight years is definitely within especially downtown areas to either eliminate all parking standards or to reduce those by at least 50%. Um currently within the downtown district what we're looking at is those uses the really the ones we're requiring parking for um all those other uses are exempt except for our multif family and our overnight accommodations. within multif family category in the CBD in particular, we're exempting if you have one to five units on a parcel on a single parcel. So that's really aiming for those lofts, right? If you're going to put one or two lofts above the coffee shop or something, we don't want to we want to encourage those to be filled and to be renovated. So those do not have to require they are exempt from the parking requirements. When we look at 5 to 10, um that's when we're requiring 50% of the parking. and then more than 10, we are requiring the one space per dwelling. Um, and so when we start to look through those, uh, just through some examples up there in Indiana in particular, um, Jeffersonville, I believe it was in 2023, they adopted an amendment to do a 50% reduction with in their downtown, and they do have some maximums on that, too. other communities like South Bend, Columbus, Greenberg. I know I know India's different animal than than Madison by all means, but threw it in there as an example of a large city though they've eliminated parking st uh requirements within downtown area. And then New Albany is one that in recent

couple years they have a minimum and a maximum different kind of route to go to um citywide. So it's a minimum of one a maximum of 1.9 per dwelling unit. Also, one thing to point out if anybody is following um all of the legislative session going on. Um first house bill on the on the list here is you know 101 and it is a housing bill that really is proposing statewide maximum of one space per dwelling unit for all multif family. So it has now passed out of the house and it is going to the senate but I don't I did not check it today so I don't know where they went with that today but um so there is there's a lot of basis and this is definitely the trend in terms of um urban downtown areas not maybe county or rural areas but and then the second one there is the multif family permitted by right and business districts um again usually I think it's pretty good practice a lot of times it helps to cut down some of those daily daily trips um By integrating these uses, it can really look into high density housing. Again, we're we're not talking single family houses in the commercial area. It's your higher density. Um they can provide better access and walkability in areas possibly. Um and really it's about helping to support the housing supply and development that the whole state is in need of in the Midwest needs more housing. Um and again that House Bill 101 that we just kind of talked about that is the proposal in that currently still is to allow multif family dwellings by right in all commercial districts. So helping to again we we kind of knew some of those trends were coming um and they're still kind of being reflected within those those bills. Then the four amendments and you guys in your packets have sheets of those and I've highlighted the actual changes in there for you guys too. Um again these came from meeting with a number of you guys and also just kind of looking through again comments that we've received. Uh the first amendment was to clarify the setback in in riverfront. And I like to use the word clarify

because um currently in your riverfront all other uses uh your rear yard your rear setback is 5T or 10 ft if it's adjacent to single or two family. We had that accounted for through a buffer yard standard but it was a good comment just to say let's just make it clear as day. Right. So, it's just taking what the current riverfront has and just going ahead and putting it directly in this table versus having it in a buffer. So, that's amendment number one, page 29. Um, amendment number two is on page 43 and 44. So, the first this was a comment that I think we got um a number of folks commenting on during the the public session or um through you all as well. Um, looking at general retail in the open space. So that was added and kind of looking to to subtract or delete that as a permitted use in open space. So kind of zoomed in on that one since it's hard to read that. Um so that is kind of a strike through there. And then the second part of that is we also talked about restaurants and retail retail oriented serviceoriented retail. I can't talk today. Um, so the purpose of adding those in to begin with was to account for you have two restaurants down there and you've also got like kayak rentals or other things that could be beneficial to that, you know, the the area. Um, so this was a good good comment we were able to work with saying that they're only going to be permitted if it's a maximum of 1500 square ft of total floor area within that in a closed building. So that allows your two restaurants to be legally conforming, but it's really going to limit things from moving forward. So, I think that was a good kind of middle ground. Again, the goal was trying not to make those uses down there non-conforming because it's going to really limit them to being able to do any updates in the future. So, that's amendment number two. Three was looking at parking encroachment within your buffer yards or setbacks. So, um we looked at saying that parking spaces, they may encroach

into your setbacks but still have to be at least 5 feet from the property line. Um, so that amendment ended up on three pages, page 20, 108, and 119, just because again, you've got to kind of chase it through the whole ordinance. So, um, those pages are in there for you guys to look at. And then the last, uh, or this is the second part of that page, sorry, 108. This is where it ends up on a table just again specifying the encroachment can happen. And then it also shows up on page 119 um where we talk about our buffer yard uses and which what's allowed and not allowed within that buffer yard use. So we just switch that to um being permitted. And then the final one is any minor typos, formatting, cross references that didn't automatically update. Um nothing that changes content, but just again minor things. Um so those are the four proposed amendments that uh you guys can consider. and just wanted to make sure everybody was aware of those too. So that if that was one of your comments, hopefully you can say yay or nay then um to those as you you talk through comments. So Josh, I'll turn it back over to you for any questions and then public comment.

All right. Any questions from the the board so far? All right. Um there should be a public signin list up back there, Tony.

Yeah. And while he's grabbing that, Josh, do you I'll just read through some of the rules just so everybody else is aware of those just to make sure um everybody knows what those were since they didn't get read out loud. But um the meeting conduct is just that every person appearing before the plan commission shall be orderly and you know at the direction of the president. Uh discoura discourage be nice, be courteous to um others. Uh be respectful of others basically. Um and the president can terminate any repetitive or irrelevant presentation. um any person party representative may appear to give testimony. Um and the PC the plane commission has the right to give follow up on questions on that and that anybody who is talking please sign in. Um

well I don't think there was a sign. Okay. She must have so it's all grabbed that. That's okay. It's all right.

Um we wanted you to sign in but um we need you then to state your name and address so we can get that for the record. Um and then also having a maximum of three minutes to speak um and that unused time can't be allocated to somebody else. And then comments uh will be taken in the order that you guys um sign up or raise your hand here. And all exhibits during that public comment time um do become part of the record, part of our property. So we will record those. If you have written comments, I can record those in the record as well. Um and any written comments submitted to the PC um will be entered into the record as well. And then any proposed amendments um need to be done in writing so that we can actually know what we're adopting um is the goal here too. So we aren't guessing at what we're adopting.

Thank you. Um at this point we have uh received some comments that that are in record, right? So everyone on the board has received those. We received one written comment regarding comments on the UDO that's in your binders. And then we received a not directly related to the UDO. Joe, you want to Yeah, it was just a

It was a um a letter submitted by Mr. Our um written to myself and another attorney for the city of Madison challenging um the mayor's um the mayor properly appointing uh Carl Eaggan as a as a member. um we've taken a look at this and we don't agree with it but still kind of taking a look at it but we're going to submit that as part of the record because he asked us to do so. Yes. Thank you. All right. With that uh we will go to uh public comments and Tony is passing around a sign. Oh, he's passing. Okay. We'll just wait for official sign in. expect people to sign it and then we'll go from there. I would say

Tony once somebody signs in I think they can come up and speak if you whoever was first on that list. I've got my loud enough but not obnoxious. And if you could still just state your name and address for us, ma'am.

Yeah. Jan Vru 701 East 2nd Street. Um I just had a question because it's a little confusing. Um the riverfront district the first set of uh permitted and allowed uses was quite extensive. Can you just clarify what you took out of permitted um and allowed uses in riverfront district because it looked to us like we were ex Well maybe was I'm starting to get confused. Um, we were trying to keep as much open space as possible from open space all the way around and it looked like the new permitted and allowed uses was kind of making that and I know when we talked earlier um, you were in the process of revising that, but I'm not sure that I really understand what got taken out. Not so much what's in, but what did we take out that we were very much concerned about being in there?

Good question. And Josh, it's up to you if you want me to take notes and we can address them all kind of as one then in case there's multiple comments. But let's just address it as we get it if you can. Like I'd rather you address that.

Um, so I'm actually going to even pull it up. So within the current open space, things like parks and your current ordinance are not permitted uses. um which seems counterintuitive, you know, in terms of what should be permitted within the open space district. So, yes, that was updated and I'm scrolling to that page right now for you. Um standards. There we go. Um so, the few updates that we just did, it would take general retail out and not allow that in the open space district. So, that's gone. Um within serviceoriented retail, so that's like kayak rentals or something. it's a service, you know, that somebody's going to provide for you, bike rentals, something like that. It can't be larger than 1500 square feet. Um, and also the same for restaurants, only allowing them 1500 square ft. And that basically is about the size of your restaurants down there. Um, trying to make sure that that's very limited is the idea there. Um, and I'm going to pull this over to the screen, too. Uh you can't really see that because it's very small. But within open space, let me trying to see if I can see that far away. Uh within our open space district here, th the rest of those uses um again were updated really to trying to make sure it was still relevant within um the current current context. So a tourism is a permitted use, a farmers market as accessory or a hobby farm. Again, those are really natural kind of uses. um roadside stand would be a special exception or crop uh production and wildlife reserve. Then you get into some of those like campgrounds is a special exception. Um looking at your again this general retail, this is what was just struck and taken out. Um oh, that was your timer, but you're not on anymore. Um and then um we also look at uh let's see, we're making sure I'm following the right column here for you. There we go.

Sorry, I looked away and I got off. Um and then our golf course or some of those. So up up on the hilltop, your golf course cemeteries, those are zoned open space today. So we need to account for those items or those uses. Um you do have some professional offices in there as well as again that restaurant and serviceoriented retail. That's what was modified to say only a max of 1500 square feet. So it really is going to be pretty small in there. um those rule event venues, that's again trying to do some of that outdoor type of um a lot of times it's wedding space or something of that nature. Uh when we look at the the tier one battery storage, that's just what you would do for like your own personal generator or your you if you have an electric car you plug in, that's the level of what that is. It's nothing more out more than that. Um and then same thing for solar. It's just your on top of your house or if somebody wants to put one, you know, again, it's just the accessory. It's not the big solar that we others are looking at. And same thing for wind. You could put your own little um, you know, wind turbine. Usually those are just a couple feet tall on top of your house or something of that nature. So again, we're still trying to limit those those uses. And then we still do allow for emergency uh response facilities. We allow for the cemeteries since that is zoned that. And um if we scroll down some of these other institutional government office, library, cultural center is a special exception. A park uh we won't allow those. And religious activity is a special exception. School that is a permitted use and that's a state statute change last year. Schools are permitted use in every district now. So we don't have control over that one anymore. Um state statutes told us that answer. Um so we can't don't have choice on that one. uh utility facilities and cell towers. Those are basically special exceptions. Again, we want to really limit that, but there could be a specific, you know, need for that. So,

hopefully that answers your question. Thank you. All right. Is who's next? Tony. Come on up, Warren.

Yes. Warren Oxer, 3611 West Ohio Riverview Road. First, I want to thank you for redoing your ordinances and commend especially the technical group the time and the energy they put into this. Overall on your ordinances, I think you have a very good product. I have been involved in the counties and some of the suggestions changes that have been made recently have brought some improvements and so forth. There are a couple areas that I want to address. When you look at zoning, I think there's two areas you're wanting. You're wanting to be able to encourage responsible growth. That's one of the main areas. But when you're encouraging that responsible growth, you also want to have an eye towards that's done responsibly and you have a certain duty to manage growth and protect existing property owners as well that the growth is going to have an impact on those properties. And I think overall you've done a good job of that in your zoning ordinances other than a couple of key areas I want to touch on. One is you currently are making multifamily dwellings and I'm mainly concerned in the category when it's over 10 dwellings. You have that listed as a permitted use in your general business, your central business district and the riverfront district. I believe in each of those districts that multif family dwellings of over 10 units that size range should be a special exception. There are way too many differences. There may be locations within those districts that they fit well. The surrounding properties match up. There's other areas that they do not fit. They could have a very negative impact. Also, it could have impacts depending on the type of housing, whether it's going to be market rate or if it's going to be subsidized housing as far as what locations and how you would want that to fit in. then tied in with that same area

as far as if you had those special exceptions at the same time you could review what the available parking is and so forth for those areas. I understand in your central business districts and commercial areas where you're converting existing buildings, especially in your downtown area, you're converting something to apartments. I can understand being lenient on those uh above 10 only requiring one parking unit because we want to see those existing buildings converted to dwellings for space. But on the other hand, I believe you need to have some consideration that when it is going to be new construction for more than 10 multif family dwellings that that parking needs to be more in the neighborhood of the 1.5 spaces on the site that you're requiring for all the other locations, especially in your downtown central business district, the trend is golf carts. And so where is the spill over parking going to go? People are going to tend to want to park the golf cart close where they can keep an eye on it and then they're going to have a vehicle on top of that and you're going to be eating up existing spaces out on parking street so forth or parking lots. And you also when you allow new construction to come in and use up parking area as such,

you're limiting what you can do with some of your existing buildings. Someone for example wants to come in. I have three minutes for you. Thank Thank you. Yeah. Thank you Tony. Who's who's next? It's all signed up. Uh yes, sir.

My glasses back on. Um, does the uh planning commission members have any questions or any discussion based on what you've heard from public and from Amy? All right. Uh, hearing none. Um, and just so you guys know, um, uh, go I'll ask for a motion, but it's a recommendation. just so it's a motion to recommend one way or the other how you're wanting to and make sure that you put in there the draft of the Madison UDO and official zoning map and then you'll have to include if you want to any of the amendments. So you can say I want to include all the amendments in it or just some of the amendments. It's up to you whoever is making the motion but I just want to make sure

resolutions in the fourth tab of your packets just so you are aware. And I also put those up on the screen so you could have them in front of you easily. A a motion on this. I would move to provide a favorable recommendation on resolution 2026-PC-1 that also includes all of the uh I believe four amendments that were proposed um this evening. Okay. I'll second motion. All right. So we have a we have a motion. And we have a second by Carl. Amy, you want to do roll call?

Of course. She got here. All right. Patrick, yes. Joel Storm, yes. Josh Wilbur, yes. Jerry Roston, yes. Uh, Van Crafton, yes. Mike Armstrong, yes. Carl England, yes. Rick Ferris, yes. Zack Laughlin, yes. All right. So, that carried seven or unanimous. Unanimous. All right. With that, our special meeting has no more items on it. So, I'll I will entertain a German. I'll make a motion. We I second that. All in favor say I. Thank you guys. What's up,

Tone? Tony, are these yours?

Okay, I want I want to leave them. I thought they might be Thank you. I will take this. So your You'll get back each month. We'll take the other like

we're still Have a good month. You will have to talk to me for that. I don't don't know much about that. That one above my pay, right?

See this gentleman right here? I don't get them lost. Yes. Can he pass? There's no exact same way. All right. Thank you.

But you certainly have. I'm gonna look into it a little bit further. I'll probably Yep. I understand. All right. Thanks a lot. Appreciate.

Okay. lock.

How are you doing? I'm doing fine. You all right? Good to see you.

Yes.

Oh my gosh. See you guys.