Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Fees And UDO topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning panel backs amended fee schedule, lowers costs for residential applications

Madison City Planning Commission · March 9, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The commission voted to recommend a revised fee schedule to City Council that raises many application fees but adopts a two‑tier approach for use variances, development‑standards variances and special exceptions: $200 for residential/rural districts (A and RA) and $400 for other districts.

The Madison City Planning Commission voted to recommend that City Council adopt a revised fee schedule tied to the city's forthcoming Unified Development Ordinance. The recommendation includes a two‑tier fee for three application types aimed at reducing the cost burden on homeowners.

Planning staff presented a spreadsheet of estimated staff hours and a comparison of current and proposed fees, explaining that an upcoming state law (referred to in the meeting as House Bill 101) will require the city to set fees that cannot be changed for five years. Staff framed the goal as "trying to have the applicant covering as much of those costs as possible, not having the taxpayers covering of those reviews and those processes," and provided comparisons to neighboring jurisdictions to justify proposed rates.

Commissioners raised concerns that large fee increases would disproportionately affect homeowners seeking variances or special exceptions. Several commissioners favored lower residential fees. After discussion, the commission approved an amendment to set the fee for use variance, development‑standards variance and special exception at $200 for residential and rural zoning districts (A and RA) and $400 for all other districts.

A motion to provide a favorable recommendation to City Council on the amended fee schedule was made, seconded and approved by voice vote; commissioners present voiced assent. Staff noted the commission's role is advisory to council and that council will take the final action; the commission's recommendation will be transmitted with the staff packet and comparative materials.

Commissioners also asked staff to consider whether fee categories could be further refined by applicant type (homeowner vs. developer) but noted potential legal or administrative complications and requested follow‑up research if needed.