Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transit Oriented Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council narrows proposed TOD bans, keeps auto rental allowed as council approves revised transit‑oriented development rules
Summary
The Common Council approved a substitute to the Transit-Oriented Development overlay code that removes auto-rental from a list of prohibited principal uses while continuing to prohibit car washes, auto sales and stand-alone parking; a proposed carve‑out to make 3–4 unit buildings conditional in University Hill Farms failed by roll call.
The Madison Common Council on Dec. 9 adopted a substitute to Legistar 90,552 that revises the Transit‑Oriented Development (TOD) overlay rules to allow auto-rental as an allowed use while maintaining prohibitions on car washes, auto sales and stand‑alone parking.
Zoning administrator Katie Bannon told the council staff worked with the city attorney to align the proposed auto‑rental definition with state statute; the 30‑day standard is intended to match how Wisconsin defines auto rental. During public comment Midwestern Wheels president Bill Walshleger urged changes, arguing the draft definition would prevent rental companies from selling retired fleet vehicles at the same location; staff and the zoning administrator said state licensing makes a local carve‑out for on‑site auto sales difficult and that most rental companies sell fleet vehicles through dealers or wholesale channels.
Several registrants and council members framed the policy as a balance between encouraging transit‑friendly, walkable land uses and preserving choices for businesses. Nicholas Davies, Benjamin Noffke and Ed Niles supported limiting auto‑oriented uses along TOD corridors and praised added housing options such as 3‑ and 4‑unit buildings, while cautioning about unintended restrictions.
Ald. Tishler offered an amendment that would have made 3‑ and 4‑unit buildings conditional within the University Hill Farms National Historic District to protect the district’s character; the amendment failed on a roll call (18 no, 1 aye, 1 abstain). The substitute ordinance itself passed with 17 ayes and 3 no votes.
The substitute includes standards intended to concentrate pedestrian‑oriented activities along rapid transit corridors and reserve limited land for higher‑density housing where appropriate. Staff noted enforcement and definitions will continue to be administered by the zoning office and that the code may be revisited if issues arise in practice.
Councilmembers who opposed the carve‑out said a separate conditional‑use requirement for one historic area would unfairly single out a single district and could make housing development more difficult. Supporters of the TOD changes said the substitute preserves pathways for both housing and occasional car access (through auto‑rental) without making auto sales or other auto‑centric uses dominant in high‑transit corridors.
