Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Vacant Buildings Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Madison board backs ordinance to register and abate vacant, abandoned structures
Summary
The board recommended a city ordinance that would require registration, minimum property standards and a process for remediation or city-conducted repairs for vacant or abandoned buildings; staff said the registry is removable once owners comply.
The Board of Public Works and Safety on March 17 voted to recommend that the Common Council begin the ordinance process for a “Registration and Abatement of Vacant and Abandoned Structures” ordinance designed to address chronic vacant and deteriorated buildings in Madison.
City planning staff and code enforcement presented the proposal and told the board the city has managed about 1,175 nuisance and unsafe-structure cases over the past three years. “Making the heart of your town more beautiful will positively impact every other facet of your community,” a presenter said, summarizing the ordinance’s purpose.
Under the draft, a building would be considered vacant if it is not occupied for at least 90 days and abandoned if it has not been used for its intended purpose for at least six months and meets qualifying conditions. The ordinance would require owners to register vacant/abandoned properties, secure them within 30 days (boarding or locks acceptable as temporary measures), and submit a plan that must be enacted within 60 days. If owners fail to comply, the city may perform required repairs and assess penalties; the presenter said property owners may be removed from the registry after complying with standards.
The ordinance cross-references existing nuisance and unsafe-structure rules and would be enforced by the Office of Building, Planning and Design, with appeals heard by the Board of Public Works and Safety. Staff said some properties, such as those recently damaged by fire, would have limited exemptions (presenter referenced a post-fire grace period).
Board members asked enforcement and timing questions; staff said the provisions are intended to create earlier dialogue with owners and to prevent long-term deterioration that burdens neighborhoods and city personnel. The presentation included a map listing roughly 81 candidate properties in the city, with staff estimating 57 that would qualify under the draft ordinance; many are concentrated downtown.
After discussion and public comment—residents urged the board to ensure enforcement is effective and to require higher-quality repairs—members voted to approve the resolution recommending the ordinance proceed to the City Council. The board noted that any city-paid remediation costing more than $10,000 would return to the board for public approval, consistent with the city’s unsafe-structure law.
