Monona planning commission approves Galloway Companies’ West Broadway mixed‑use plan

The Monona Planning Commission approved a general development plan from Galloway Companies on a vote during the meeting, advancing a two‑phase, mixed‑use redevelopment of the site between 5600 Gisholt Drive and 1709 West Broadway.

Steve, a representative of Galloway Companies, told the commission the plan centers on four buildings around a central park and will be built in two phases. “Phase 1 is the two buildings that are directly in front of you to the east of the park. That’s about 357 units,” he said, adding that the full project proposes 669 units across roughly 12.5 acres and that the park will expand to about 1.5 acres.

Why it matters: the plan would add high‑density housing and retail to West Broadway, realign WPS Drive to improve traffic flow, and create a publicly dedicated park area. Staff said the site sits in a community design district and redevelopment area that will also require consistency review by the CDA and city council if the project proceeds.

Key provisions and conditions

- Units and phasing: The applicant described Phase 1 as two buildings totaling about 357 units (64 studios, 195 one‑bedrooms and 98 two‑bedrooms were cited in earlier materials) and said they intend to market a portion of units toward older residents by designing some units for accessibility rather than segregating senior housing in a single building. The applicant said an ideal schedule would begin construction this summer and deliver the first phase in 2028.

- Parking and multimodal features: The developer reported 454 covered stalls and 166 private surface stalls, with a total of roughly 890 covered parking stalls proposed overall and 208 surface stalls across phases. The plan includes 10 EV stalls to be built immediately and about 46 additional EV‑ready stalls (56 total EV capable), 202 secured indoor bicycle stalls, and proposed cross‑parking arrangements between commercial and residential uses to meet code.

- Park and dedications: The applicant said the project enlarges the park to about 1.5 acres and that park design work is under way with the city’s parks staff. The developer and staff told commissioners their intent is to have the parkland and the public road dedications recorded early in the process; the applicant said it will not pull building permits until the park and road dedications (and related CSM recording) are in place.

- Traffic and TIA: A traffic‑impact analysis was submitted to Dane County. The developer said county feedback did not support a proposed right‑in/right‑out access and that the final constructed plan will likely remove that access and retain the roundabout. Staff and commissioners made final TIA approval by the county and other approving authorities a condition of the GDP approval.

What commissioners asked and required

Commissioners pressed on public safety and service impacts, including EMS, police and fire needs tied to new units, and asked whether impact fees or TIF funding would be considered to address service costs. Staff said impact analyses are a standard tool and that finance or TIF discussions would be handled at subsequent stages (CDA and city council review). Commissioners also sought clarity about landscaping, building materials and façade color choices; the applicant agreed to revisit color and material accents, particularly to break up a large white facade and reconsider a green siding accent on one building.

Public and stakeholder comments

An online representative from WPS (Andrew McGrady) said the school supports the revised traffic alignment because it improves site access for school traffic. Staff noted the CDA is aware of the proposal and that TIF assistance discussions are ongoing.

Vote and next steps

Commissioner Chris moved to approve the GDP with staff‑written findings and specified conditions; Commissioner Rob seconded. The commission approved the motion by voice vote. The approval is conditioned on final TIA approval and any required approvals by other jurisdictions, completion of required dedications and the recorded CSM; the Phase 1 PIP will return to the commission for precise implementation review (applicant anticipates returning in about four weeks). The CSM and right‑of‑way dedication will also go to public works for review.

The planning commission’s action advances the project to the next procedural steps (PIP and CSM) but leaves several details—final traffic approvals, specific park design and some material choices—to later review.