Plan Commission Agenda and Materials

Plan Commission Meeting Agenda June 23, 2026 6:30 pm – Village Hall Court Room 3930 N. Murray Ave., Shorewood, WI 53211 Join Zoom Meeting https://zoom.us/j/91233798409?pwd=Vb12tzpM7k8ZQitA8rRakBdFfgH9Ct.1 Or call in (audio only) +1 312-626-6799 Meeting ID: 912 3379 8409 Passcode: 679849 Community members that desire to provide public comment should plan to attend the meeting or submit their comments to bgriepentrog@shorewoodwi.gov through 3:00 pm the day prior to the meeting. Comments received prior to the deadline will be shared with the Plan Commission. Comments after that deadline will need to be shared verbally within the meeting during available public comment periods. 1. Call to order. 2. Approval of February 24, 2026 Plan Commission meeting minutes. 3. Introduction to a possible ordinance amendment related to vision setbacks as defined in 535-10. 4. Discussion related to Wisconsin Act 173 “Truth in Planning.” 5. Update on housing opportunities initiative. 6. Future agenda items. 7. Adjournment. Dated at Shorewood, Wisconsin, this 18th day of June, 2026 Village of Shorewood Toya Harrell, Village Clerk Should you have any questions or comments regarding any item on this agenda, please contact Bart Griepentrog, Planning Director, Planning & Development Department, at (414) 847-2640. Upon reasonable notice, efforts will be made to accommodate the needs of all people. It is possible that members of and possibly a quorum of members of other governmental bodies of the municipality may be in attendance at the above stated meeting to gather information; no action will be taken by any governmental body at the above stated meeting other than the governmental body specifically referred to above in this notice. 1 Plan Commission Meeting Minutes February 24, 2026 3930 N. Murray Avenue, Village of Shorewood, WI 53211 DRAFT 1. Call to order. The meeting was called to order at 6:42 p.m. Present: President Ann McKaig, Trustee Matt McGovern, Commissioners Kate Flynn Post (virtually), Michael Kloehn, Josh Pollack, Therese Klein Absent: Commissioner Dan Wycklendt Others present: Planning Director Bart Griepentrog, Planning Administrative Clerk Crystal Kopydlowski 2. Approval of January 27, 2026 Plan Commission meeting minutes. Mr. Kloehn motioned to approve the minutes as presented, seconded by Mr. Pollack. Vote to approve, 6-0. 3. Further discussion and possible recommendation of an ordinance to eliminate the prohibition of bedrooms in basements within Chapter 326 Housing and Property Standards of the Village Code. Director Griepentrog stated that the prohibition of bedrooms in basements is unique to the Village’s code and that no other similar code language was found in other surrounding community’s codes. He stated that safety and life issues would be covered by fire and building code/regulations and not the zoning code. The draft ordinance is to remove this prohibition. Public comment was opened and 6:44 p.m. With no comments the public comment was closed at 6:44 p.m. Mr. Pollack moved to recommend Ordinance 3080: An ordinance to eliminate the prohibition of bedrooms in basements within Chapter 326 Housing and Property Standards of the Village Code, as drafted. Second by Trustee McGovern. Vote 6-0. 4. Further discussion and possible recommendation of an ordinance to modify the definition of household within Chapter 535 Zoning and to create consistency of its use throughout the Village Code. Director Griepentrog stated there are two issues at hand. The first is number of unrelated adults that are allowed to live together in a dwelling unit. The current code allows three unrelated adults to reside in a dwelling unit, and the recommendation is to increase that to four unrelated adults. The second is removing all references of “family” in the village code and replacing that with “household”. Public comment was opened and 6:47 p.m. With no comments the public comment was closed at 6:47 p.m. PC Meeting 02-24-2026 2 Mr. Kloehn asked for clarification on the revisions to “multi-unit” “multi-family” and “single- family” language in the ordinance. Director Griepentrog stated this was done to remove the word “family” from the code. Mr. Kloehn stated this was housekeeping related to family versus household. Director Griepentrog stated yes. Ms. Klein moved to recommend Ordinance 3081: An ordinance to modify the definition of household within Chapter 535 Zoning and to create consistency of its use throughout the Village Code, as drafted. Second by Mr. Kloehn. Vote 6-0. 5. Further discussion and possible recommendation of an ordinance to permit accessory dwelling units within R-1 through R-6 residential zoning districts of Chapter 535 Zoning of the Village Code. Director Gripentrog explained this is the more detailed update. This was discussed over numerous meetings in 2025, and a public survey was completed also. During the last Plan Commission meeting regulations were discussed pertaining to accessory dwelling units. Based on those discussions, the regulations included in the ordinance were provided in the meeting materials as reference. Public comment was opened and 6:50 p.m. Jorden Haas, 4124 N. Prospect Avenue, stated that he moved to Shorewood from Seattle, WA a few years ago and that his parents live in eastern Washington state and cannot afford a second house in Wisconsin. He said an ADU would be wonderful to have for them to stay longer than weekend. He loves that Shorewood does have generally less on-street parking and that it would be great to have parking required for an ADU but that is not a game changer, With no further comments, public comment was closed at 6:51 p.m. Trustee McGovern moved to recommend Ordinance 3082: An ordinance to permit accessory dwelling units within R-1 through R-6 residential zoning districts of Chapter 535 Zoning of the Village Code, as drafted. Second by Ms. Klein. Trustee McGovern said he is excited about this and that it is a great step for Shorewood and gives more options to families. Vote 6-0. 6. Discussion and consideration of 2025 Plan Commission Annual Report and Future Initiatives. President McKaig asked Mr. Pollack to summarize the further initiatives he submitted for inclusion in the report and for the Commission to decide on advancing the initiative to the Village Manager for consideration. Mr. Pollack suggested the following: • A five-year comprehensive plan review to assess progress on implementation. President McKaig stated this would likely happen naturally without making it an initiative but including it communicates to the Village Board that it is a priority. All commissioners agreed with this suggestion. PC Meeting 02-24-2026 3 • A zoning review for housing capacity throughout the village and adding density with possible upzoning in specific areas. Director Griepentrog stated that this would fall under the current housing opportunity initiative and the Village Board has already allowed work on that. This could be discussed at any time, along with duplexes, without having it reassigned. Director Griepentrog offered to work with Mr. Pollack on more specifics. • Decision criteria for zoning petitions – Mr. Pollack said that since the commercial zoning update, they have received some zoning petitions and wanted to look at creating standards for more clarity. All commissioners agreed with this suggestion. Director Griepentrog added that his understanding was to take the first three housing initiatives (bedrooms in basements, household definition, accessory dwelling units) to the Village Board first. After the Village Board would act on the first three, he would bring duplexes and any other additional opportunities back to the Plan Commission for direction. Director Griepentrog asked if the commission wanted to keep the two previously identified initiatives (home occupation and updating notice requirements) in addition to the two new suggestions. President McKaig stated she was interested in keeping them on the report and that there did not appear to be a strong will to remove them. Mr. Pollack moved to approve the Plan Commission’s 2025 Annual Report and Future Initiatives, as discussed. Second by Mr. Kloehn. Trustee McGovern asked about the initiative regarding zoning petitions and questioned whether the zoning changes/exemptions they have seen are standard for a village the size of Shorewood. Director Griepentrog said it is a standard process and that he feels the commission has seen a lower number of petitions than he would have anticipated for the scale of change adopted in 2023. He said this is a sign of a good redraft and that zoning petitions are to be expected but that the Village is doing well. He will reference the village attorney regarding additional criteria and will continue to research this. Vote 6-0. 7. Future agenda items. Director Griepentrog explained that the Conservation Committee has been working on a draft to update the natural landscape regulations and within those regulations the village’s vision setback area has been discussed. The vision setback is within the zoning code and before the Village Board can adopt any change in the zoning chapter a recommendation from the Plan Commission is required. This draft language would be ready in March or at the next meeting for introduction. 8. Adjournment. President McKaig moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:06 p.m. Second by Mr. Pollack. Vote to adjourn 6-0. Recorded by, PC Meeting 02-24-2026 4 Crystal Kopydlowski Planning & Development Administrative Clerk Report to Plan Commission June 23, 2026 Prepared by: Bart Griepentrog, AICP, Planning & Development Director 3. Introduction to a possible ordinance amendment related to vision setbacks as defined in 535-10. Overview The Village’s current Vision Setback Area requirements are defined within 535-10D of the Zoning Chapter. Based on years of implementation, primarily with respect to fences, monument signs and special privilege permits, these regulations are believed to be out of context with Shorewood’s built environment. The Village’s recently adopted Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan (2025) has recommendations to “Review and consider updates to the Village’s “vision triangle” regulations around alley entrances and exits, and driveway approaches to enhance pedestrian safety and make it less likely that pedestrians and other sidewalk users will be struck by vehicles.” Updates to this code section were identified as a short-term implementation task, and since the regulations are located within the Zoning Chapter, a recommendation from the Plan Commission is required per 535-64. Discussion The current regulations, see below, indicate that Vision Setback Areas shall only be established at the intersection of public streets without traffic controls (stop lights or stop/yield signs). This excepts nearly all intersections in the village and has limited the usefulness of implementation. Additionally, defining the dimensions of the setback area from the center line of streets can be less useful than defining the area from the curb, driveway, sidewalk or alley where the vision is more critical. VISION SETBACK An unoccupied triangular space at the street corner of a corner lot as established hereinafter in this chapter. 535-10 Height and yard modifications. D. Vision setback area. (1) Except for intersections controlled by stop lights, stop signs or yield signs, vision setback lines at intersections of public streets shall be established by a straight line connecting two points which are on the center lines of and 50 feet from the intersection point of the two center lines of intersecting streets. (2) In the vision setback area, no structure of any kind shall be permitted which exceeds a height of three feet above the elevation of the center of the intersection, except necessary highway and traffic signs, public utility lines and open fences through which there is clear vision, nor shall any fence or plant material be permitted which obscures safe vision of the approaches of the intersection. The proposed update, see below, would expand the Vision Setback Area to include the intersections of all streets, alleys and driveways, and would define those areas based on the location of the curb, sidewalk, driveway or alley. VISION SETBACK An unoccupied triangular space at the intersection of a street, alley or driveway as established hereinafter in this chapter. 535-10 Height and yard modifications. D. Vision setback. A triangular area shall be maintained clear of obstructions at the intersection of streets, alleys and driveways. Unless excepted, no building or structure of any kind shall be allowed between a height of three to ten feet above the surface of the roadway, nor shall any plant material be allowed which obscures safe vision of the intersection. Streetlights, traffic signs, and utility poles shall be excepted, and fencing may only be permitted if not more than 50% opaque. Vision triangles shall be measured as follows: (1) A vision triangle at the intersection of generally perpendicular streets shall be measured along the face of the curb to a distance of 25 feet from the intersection of the extended curb lines along both roadways. A vision triangle at the intersection of generally non-perpendicular streets shall be determined by the Village Engineer on a case-by-case basis. (2) A vision triangle at the intersection of driveways and alleys shall be measured along the edge of the driveway or public alley and the back edge of the intersecting sidewalk to a distance of 10 feet along both sides of the alley and the sidewalk. If updated, existing obstructions would become non-conforming and could remain in place until removed or replaced. The regulations would primarily be used when reviewing new applications for fences, signs or requests for special privileges or upon enforcement of newly planted landscaping, such as hedges. The Village’s contracted Engineer (Strand Associates) reviewed the proposed changes and provided some clarifying language, which has been included in the current proposal. The Parks and Public Spaces Committee, which includes the Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety subcommittee, was provided an overview and copy of the proposed changes in January 2026. No comments have been received to date. They will be kept informed of any discussion/recommendation of the Plan Commission, prior to consideration of the Village Board. Next Steps The process for Changes and Amendments to the Zoning Chapter are outlined in Article XI. Of note, this article details that “Whenever the public necessity, convenience, general welfare or good zoning practice requires, the Village Board of Trustees may, by ordinance, change the district boundaries or amend, change or supplement the regulations established by this chapter or amendments thereto”. Such changes may be initiated by the Village Board or Plan Commission, or by property owners through a petition. The article also states that petitions shall be referred to the Plan Commission for review and recommendation, prior to consideration after a public hearing by the Village Board. The Plan Commission’s recommendation “shall be made at a meeting subsequent to the meeting at which the petition is first submitted.” As a result, this item is being introduced for discussion only at the June 23, 2026 Plan Commission meeting. A formal recommendation would be sought at a future meeting upon which adoption could be considered after holding a public hearing in front of the Village Board. Materials Enclosed • Current and Proposed Vision Setback Area regulations • Vision Triangle Illustration Current: VISION SETBACK An unoccupied triangular space at the street corner of a corner lot as established hereinafter in this chapter. 535-10 Height and yard modifications. D. Vision setback area. (1) Except for intersections controlled by stop lights, stop signs or yield signs, vision setback lines at intersections of public streets shall be established by a straight line connecting two points which are on the center lines of and 50 feet from the intersection point of the two center lines of intersecting streets. (2) In the vision setback area, no structure of any kind shall be permitted which exceeds a height of three feet above the elevation of the center of the intersection, except necessary highway and traffic signs, public utility lines and open fences through which there is clear vision, nor shall any fence or plant material be permitted which obscures safe vision of the approaches of the intersection. Proposed: VISION SETBACK An unoccupied triangular space at the intersection of a street, alley or driveway as established hereinafter in this chapter. 535-10 Height and yard modifications. D. Vision setback. A triangular area shall be maintained clear of obstructions at the intersection of streets, alleys and driveways. Unless excepted, no building or structure of any kind shall be allowed between a height of three to ten feet above the surface of the roadway, nor shall any plant material be allowed which obscures safe vision of the intersection. Streetlights, traffic signs, and utility poles shall be excepted, and fencing may only be permitted if not more than 50% opaque. Vision triangles shall be measured as follows: (1) A vision triangle at the intersection of generally perpendicular streets shall be measured along the face of the curb to a distance of 25 feet from the intersection of the extended curb lines along both roadways. A vision triangle at the intersection of generally non- perpendicular streets shall be determined by the Village Engineer on a case-by-case basis. (2) A vision triangle at the intersection of driveways and alleys shall be measured along the edge of the driveway or public alley and the back edge of the intersecting sidewalk to a distance of 10 feet along both sides of the alley and the sidewalk. ALLEY STREET STREET LOT LINE LOT LINE ACCESSORY BUILDING PRINCIPAL BUILDING DRIVEWAY Figure 535-10-1: Vision Triangle (not to scale) SIDEWALK SIDEWALK 25 ft. 25 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. Report to Plan Commission June 23, 2026 Prepared by: Bart Griepentrog, AICP, Planning & Development Director 4. Discussion related to Wisconsin Act 173 “Truth in Planning.” Overview On April 2, 2026, the State of Wisconsin enacted 2025 Wisconsin Act 173, also known as “Truth in Planning” legislation. In general, the Act requires that municipal comprehensive plans and zoning regulations be better aligned and provide more predictable opportunities for housing growth. The Act does not become effective until January 1, 2028, so municipalities have time to review and update their comprehensive plans and zoning standards as necessary. Here’s a summary of the four parts of the Act as provided by the Wisconsin League of Municipalities, along with local thoughts/perspective. Part 1 The first part of Act 173 amends comprehensive planning statutes. Comprehensive plans are outward looking 20-year plans prepared by municipalities and updated every ten years since the law first took effect in 2010. For this law, the relevant section of the nine elements is land use, including the land use map. Act 173 requires that minimum and maximum densities are identified in the land use map for each area defined as future use residential for each five-year period over the 20-year planning cycle. The net densities are defined in residential units per acre, removing considerations for wetlands, floodplains, and government-owned lands. These net densities are considered a regulation, not a plan. As with current law, there is a consistency requirement, meaning that land use regulations may not be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan. This law amended this provision to state that the land use map is included in the consistency requirement, but additional land uses are allowed for designated future use areas. If the municipality enacts or amends any land use ordinance or adds land by annexation or incorporation intended for residential use, the municipality must add densities for that land to its comprehensive plan and ensure the densities are in their ordinances. If the municipality receives a request for a rezone of a parcel identified as future use residential and does not have densities defined in their comprehensive plan, the municipality has 180 days to amend their plan. Certain statutory procedures do not apply. Shorewood’s Comprehensive Plan 2040 was adopted on April 19, 2021, and was most recently amended on February 2, 2023 as part of the Commercial Zoning Update. The Land Use element includes maximum densities (up to) for our Lower, Medium and Higher Density Residential land use categories (see page 172), but it does not include minimums. Five-year population projections through 2040 are identified within the Issues and Opportunities Chapter on page 27. These figures will need to be created, confirmed or updated. Part 2 The second part of Act 173 addresses rezoning requests of identified future use residential areas. This legislation requires that certain rezoning requests are granted within 90 days if the request aligns with the comp plan and statutory requirements are met. A developer may grant a 90-day extension. If a rezoning request is for an area identified in the comprehensive plan for future use residential and the densities of the rezoning proposal match the plan, a request is granted if: • the area is contiguous to existing development; and • the local government does not meet existing housing demand or forecasted housing demand within the next five years, as identified in the housing element of the comprehensive plan. While granting the rezoning request is assumed under those conditions, municipalities may reject the request if they demonstrate at least one of the following: • the proposal would result in a shortage in or overburdening of public facilities; or • the proposal could create a significant threat to public health or safety. The developer requesting the rezoning may state their preference for a zoning classification in local ordinances that meet their plan (e.g., R1, R2, etc.). This request for the specific zoning classification is granted if the rezoning request is approved under the conditions above and if the zoning classification allows for the type and density of development listed in the municipality’s comprehensive plan for that area. For municipalities having trouble attracting developers, they may issue a request for proposals (RFP) for residential development for an area that has or will have water and sewer services. If no person responds to the RFP, the rezoning process laid out above is suspended for a year. A response to the RFP may include a developer submitting in writing why the RFP is economically infeasible. Shorewood’s Comprehensive Plan identifies appropriate zoning districts for each land use category (page 172). Of note, the lower density land use category includes the Village’s R-1 through R-6 districts, of which only R-6 currently allows duplexes. The confirmed or updated densities within all land use categories will need to be reviewed against the allowances of existing zoning districts to ensure that rezoning requests align with desired development patterns. Part 3 The third part of Act 173 addresses long-standing misinterpretations of TIF limitations. Under current law, newly platted residential development is restricted to only 35% of mixed-use TIFs and not allowed at all in blight, rehabilitation and conservation, or industrial TIFs. This is a significant restriction on promoting housing in TIF. Originally, this restriction was meant to limit TIF leading to urban sprawl with greenfield development. However, DOR has interpreted this provision to be any new plat, not just land that was previously unplatted. This interpretation does not just stop farm field development, it also stops infill development. Act 173 creates a statutory definition of “newly platted residential development,” with the definition reading: “residential development on a parcel that has not previously been the site of permanent structures other than structures used solely for agricultural purposes.” This means that unless the property either previously had no structures (e.g., forest, farm field, vacant never developed land) or the only permanent structures on the site were solely agricultural, any TIF type can now promote housing development and mixed use TIDs can allow residential development outside the 35% restriction. Part 4 The fourth and final part of Act 173 improves municipalities’ ability to be proactive in housing. Under current law, municipalities may, by resolution of the local governing body, extend a TID that is set to close for one year and use that increment to promote housing. 75% of the funds generated must benefit affordable housing, while 25% can be utilized to improve the city or village’s existing housing stock. This legislation will increase that one-year allowable extension to two years, allowing the generation of more funding. It is worth reiterating the points above, the new definition of newly platted residential development and the TIF change, have a delayed effective date and will only go into effect on January 1, 2028. Current law and interpretations will continue to apply in the interim. In 2021 Shorewood extended TID 1 for one year for purposes of affordable housing and is nearing action to provide that funding to a developer to build a 19-unit rent-restricted apartment building. TID 3 is expected to close in 2027, TID 4 is expected to close in 2028, and TID 5 is expected to close in 2027. Discussions regarding the extension of these TIDs will take place within a year of closure. Discussion/Next Steps Shorewood will need to confirm and/or update some elements of its Comprehensive Plan prior to 2028 to comply with this Act. A public participation plan will need to be developed to gather public input on any proposed amendments. These discussions could also take place alongside the Plan Commission’s Five-Year Comprehensive Plan Review initiative, which was favorably received on June 1, 2026 by the Village Board. Materials Enclosed • 2025 Wisconsin Act 173 • Five-Year Comprehensive Plan Review Initiative Form Date of enactment: April 2, 2026 2025 Assembly Bill 453 Date of publication*: April 3, 2026 2025 WISCONSIN ACT 173 AN A CT to repeal 66.1001 (3m); to renumber 66.1001 (1) (am); to renumber and amend 66.1001 (2) (h), 66.1001 (3), 66.10016 (3) and 66.10016 (4); to amend 59.69 (3) (a), 62.23 (3) (b), 66.1001 (2m) (title), 66.1001 (2m) (a), 66.1002 (2) (intro.) and 66.1105 (6) (g) 1. (intro.); to repeal and recreate 66.1001 (3) (title); to create 66.1001 (1) (am) 2., 66.1001 (2) (h) 4., 66.1001 (3) (b), 66.1001 (3) (c), 66.10016 (3) (b), 66.10016 (4) (b), 66.10016 (5) and 66.1105 (2) (cs) of the statutes; relating to: required approvals of rezoning requests related to res- idential development, applications for certain approvals related to residential housing development, contents of and consistency of local ordinances with local comprehensive plans, certain tax incremental district project costs re- lated to residential development, and tax incremental district lifespan extension. The people of the state of Wisconsin, represented in sen- ate and assembly, do enact as follows: SECTION 1. 59.69 (3) (a) of the statutes is amended to read: 59.69 (3) (a) The county zoning agency may direct the preparation of a county development plan or parts of the plan for the physical development of the unincorpo- rated territory within the county and areas within incor- porated jurisdictions whose governing bodies by resolu- tion agree to having their areas included in the county’s development plan. The plan may be adopted in whole or in part and may be amended by the board and endorsed by the governing bodies of incorporated jurisdictions in- cluded in the plan. The county development plan, in whole or in part, in its original form or as amended, is hereafter referred to as the development plan. To the ex- tent that the development plan applies to unincorporated areas of a county with the population described in s. 60.23 (34), it applies only to those unincorporated areas that are subject to county zoning. Beginning on Janu- ary 1, 2010, or, if the county is exempt under s. 66.1001 (3m), the date under s. 66.1001 (3m) (b), if the county engages in any program or action described in s. 66.1001 (3), the development plan shall contain at least all of the elements specified in s. 66.1001 (2). SECTION 2. 62.23 (3) (b) of the statutes is amended to read: 62.23 (3) (b) The commission may adopt the master plan as a whole by a single resolution, or, as the work of making the whole master plan progresses, may from time to time by resolution adopt a part or parts of a mas- ter plan. Beginning on January 1, 2010, or, if the city is exempt under s. 66.1001 (3m), the date under s. 66.1001 (3m) (b), if the city engages in any program or action de- scribed in s. 66.1001 (3), the master plan shall contain at least all of the elements specified in s. 66.1001 (2). The adoption of the plan or any part, amendment, or addi- tion, shall be by resolution carried by the affirmative votes of not less than a majority of all the members of the city plan commission. The resolution shall refer ex- pressly to the elements under s. 66.1001 and other mat- ters intended by the commission to form the whole or * Section 991.11, WISCONSIN STATUTES: Effective date of acts. “Every act and every portion of an act enacted by the legislature over the gov- ernor's partial veto which does not expressly prescribe the time when it takes effect shall take effect on the day after its date of publication.” 2025 Wisconsin Act 173 - 2 - 2025 Assembly Bill 453 any part of the plan, and the action taken shall be recorded on the adopted plan or part of the plan by the identifying signature of the secretary of the commis- sion, and a copy of the plan or part of the plan shall be certified to the common council, and also to the com- manding officer, or the officer’s designee, of any mili- tary base or installation, with at least 200 assigned mili- tary personnel or that contains at least 2,000 acres, that is located in or near the city. The purpose and effect of the adoption and certifying of the master plan or part of the plan shall be solely to aid the city plan commission and the council in the performance of their duties. SECTION 3L . 66.1001 (1) (am) of the statutes is renumbered 66.1001 (1) (am) 1. SECTION 3n. 66.1001 (1) (am) 2. of the statutes is created to read: 66.1001 (1) (am) 2. This paragraph applies only to towns and counties. SECTION 4. 66.1001 (2) (h) of the statutes is renum- bered 66.1001 (2) (h) (intro.) and amended to read: 66.1001 (2) (h) Land-use element. (intro.) A com- pilation of objectives, policies, goals, maps, and pro- grams to guide the future development and redevelop- ment of public and private property. In this paragraph, determinations of the net density of lands shall exclude only those portions of the lands that are wetlands, that are included in a 100-year floodplain, or that are owned by the federal government, a local governmental unit, as defined in s. 20.931 (1) (a), or a state agency, as defined in s. 20.931 (1) (c), and are not intended for redevelop- ment. The element shall contain do all of the following: 1. Contain a listing of the amount, type, intensity, and net density of existing uses of land in the local gov- ernmental unit, such as agricultural, residential, com- mercial, industrial, and other public and private uses. The element shall analyze 2. Analyze trends in the supply, demand, and price of land, opportunities for redevelopment, and existing and potential land-use conflicts. The element shall contain 3. Contain projections, based on the background in- formation specified in par. (a), for 20 years, in 5-year in- crements, of future residential, agricultural, commer- cial, and industrial land uses including the assumptions of net densities or other spatial assumptions upon which the projections are based. The element shall also include 5. Include a series of maps that shows current land uses and future land uses that indicate productive agri- cultural soils, natural limitations for building site devel- opment, floodplains, wetlands and other environmen- tally sensitive lands, the boundaries of areas to which services of public utilities and community facilities, as those terms are used in par. (d), will be provided in the future, consistent with the timetable described in par. (d), and the general location of future land uses by net density or other classifications. SECTION 5. 66.1001 (2) (h) 4. of the statutes is cre- ated to read: 66.1001 (2) (h) 4. For 20 years, in 5-year incre- ments, identify the areas in which residential land use is projected and, for each of these areas and increments, specify the minimum and maximum net density of resi- dences, expressed in residential units per acre, that will be authorized. This subdivision does not apply to a town or county. SECTION 6. 66.1001 (2m) (title) of the statutes is amended to read: 66.1001 (2m) (title) E FFECT OF ENACTMENT OF A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, CONSISTENCY REQUIREMENTS. SECTION 7 . 66.1001 (2m) (a) of the statutes is amended to read: 66.1001 (2m) (a) The Notwithstanding sub. (2) (h) 4., the enactment of a comprehensive plan by ordinance does not make the comprehensive plan by itself a regulation. SECTION 8. 66.1001 (3) (title) of the statutes is re- pealed and recreated to read: 66.1001 (3) (title) CONSISTENCY REQUIREMENTS. SECTION 9. 66.1001 (3) of the statutes is renum- bered 66.1001 (3) (a), and 66.1001 (3) (a) (intro.), as renumbered, is amended to read: 66.1001 (3) (a) (intro.) Except as provided in sub. (3m), beginning Beginning on January 1, 2010 the ef- fective date of this paragraph .... [LRB inserts date], if a local governmental unit enacts or amends any of the fol- lowing ordinances, the ordinance shall be consistent with that local governmental unit’s comprehensive plan: SECTION 10. 66.1001 (3) (b) of the statutes is cre- ated to read: 66.1001 (3) (b) 1. An ordinance enacted or amended under par. (a) is consistent with the compre- hensive plan if the ordinance permits a land use that is expressly identified for the land affected by the ordi- nance enacted or amended under par. (a) in the adopted land use map contained in the comprehensive plan. 2. An ordinance under par. (a) is not inconsistent with the comprehensive plan solely because it permits additional land uses beyond those identified in the plan. 3. With regard to the comprehensive plan, in deter- mining consistency under par. (a), only the adopted land use map and the corresponding land use category de- scriptions in the comprehensive plan may be considered. 4. Subdivisions 1. to 3. do not apply to a town or county. SECTION 11. 66.1001 (3) (c) of the statutes is cre- ated to read: 2025 Wisconsin Act 173 - 3 - 2025 Assembly Bill 453 66.1001 (3) (c) 1. Beginning on the effective date of this subdivision .... [LRB inserts date], if a political sub- division enacts or amends any of the ordinances under par. (a) or adds lands by annexation or consolidation in- tended for residential development, the political subdi- vision shall do all of the following: a. Ensure that the comprehensive plan of the politi- cal subdivision includes the material required under sub. (2) (h) 4. b. Ensure that the residential net density standards specified under sub. (2) (h) 4. are incorporated into the ordinance. 2. If a person submits to a political subdivision an application for a permit, as defined in s. 66.10016 (1) (a), or a request for a change to an existing zoning classi- fication, and the submission or request is related to a res- idential housing development, as defined in s. 66.10016 (1) (c), and the comprehensive plan of the political sub- division does not include the material required under sub. (2) (h) 4., the political subdivision shall amend its comprehensive plan to include the material required un- der sub. (2) (h) 4. within 180 days of receiving the application. 3. Subsection (4) does not apply to the amendment of a comprehensive plan under this paragraph. 4. This paragraph does not apply to a town or county. SECTION 12 . 66.1001 (3m) of the statutes is repealed. SECTION 13. 66.10016 (3) of the statutes is renum- bered 66.10016 (3) (a) and amended to read: 66.10016 (3) (a) If a person submits a complete ap- plication for a permit related to a residential housing de- velopment meeting all existing requirements that must be satisfied to obtain the permit at the time the applica- tion is filed, the political subdivision shall grant the ap- plication. An application is deemed complete under this subsection paragraph if it complies with form and con- tent requirements. As part of an application, the appli- cant shall certify that the lands subject to the application are not located within a farmland preservation zoning district, not subject to a farmland preservation agree- ment, and not located within an agricultural enterprise area. An applicant that provides a false certification un- der this paragraph is liable for any costs incurred by the political subdivision to reverse or remedy the rezoning and is not entitled to recover any costs under sub. (4) (a) or (b). An application is filed under this subsection paragraph on the date that the political subdivision re- ceives the application. SECTION 14. 66.10016 (3) (b) of the statutes is cre- ated to read: 66.10016 (3) (b) 1. Notwithstanding s. 66.1001 (2m) (a), and except as provided in subds. 4. and 5., sub. (5), and s. 66.1001 (3) (c) 2., if a person submits a re- quest for a change to a zoning classification of land that is required to proceed with a residential housing devel- opment and all of the following are satisfied, the politi- cal subdivision shall grant the request within 90 days: a. The proposed change is for an area identified in the political subdivision’s comprehensive plan as pro- jected for residential land use under s. 66.1001 (2) (h) 4. b. The proposed change is for an area that is adja- cent to or in close proximity to existing development such that the area may be reasonably served by existing infrastructure and public services. c. Either the proposed minimum and maximum net density of residences in the residential housing develop- ment falls within the minimum and maximum net den- sity for the area specified under s. 66.1001 (2) (h) 4. for the current 5-year increment or the comprehensive plan does not include the material required under s. 66.1001 (2) (h) 4. and the political subdivision has not complied with s. 66.1001 (3) (c) 2. d. Current housing supply in the political subdivi- sion does not meet existing housing demand or fore- casted housing demand within the next 5 years, as pro- vided in the comprehensive plan. e. The requester certifies in writing that the pro- posed change is for an area that is not located within a farmland preservation zoning district or agricultural en- terprise area or subject to a farmland preservation agree- ment. A requester that provides a false certification un- der this subd. 1. e. is liable for any costs incurred by the political subdivision to reverse or remedy the rezoning and is not entitled to recover any costs under sub. (4) (a) or (b). 2. In a request under subd. 1., the requester may specify its preferences regarding any of the following: a. The zoning classification provided in the political subdivision’s zoning ordinance into which the land should be reclassified. b. Building setback requirements. c. Lot width or frontage requirements. d. Lot size requirements. e. Building size or bulk requirements. 3. If a request is granted by action of subd. 1., the re- quester specified a zoning classification under subd. 2. a., and the zoning classification allows the net density of residences in the proposed residential housing develop- ment, the land subject to the request is reclassified into that classification. 4. a. Subdivision 1. does not apply to a request that does not identify the proposed minimum and maximum net density of residences in the residential housing development. b. A request for a change to a zoning classification 2025 Wisconsin Act 173 - 4 - 2025 Assembly Bill 453 of land that satisfies the requirements of subd. 1. may be denied by the political subdivision if the political subdi- vision demonstrates that the denial is necessary to pre- vent a shortage in, or the overburdening of, public facil- ities located in the political subdivision or to address a significant threat to the public health or safety. c. This paragraph does not apply to lands within a farmland preservation zoning district, lands subject to a farmland preservation agreement, or lands within an agricultural enterprise area, as certified by the requester under subd. 1. e. d. This paragraph does not apply to lands within the extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction of a city or village, as described under s. 62.23 (7a). e. This paragraph does not apply to a town or county. 5. The 90-day limit for granting a request under subd. 1. shall be extended by the political subdivision at the request of the person requesting a change to a zoning classification of land. SECTION 15. 66.10016 (4) of the statutes is renum- bered 66.10016 (4) (a) and amended to read: 66.10016 (4) (a) A person aggrieved by a political subdivision’s failure to approve an application under sub. (3) (a) or a request under sub. (3) (b) may seek relief through an action for mandamus as provided in ch. 783. If the court finds that the political subdivision improp- erly failed to approve the application under sub. (3) (a) or the request under sub. (3) (b), the court shall issue a writ of mandamus ordering the political subdivision to approve the application or request. For purposes of any mandamus claim filed under this subsection, substantial damages or injury shall be assumed. SECTION 16. 66.10016 (4) (b) of the statutes is cre- ated to read: 66.10016 (4) (b) In an action for mandamus under par. (a) based upon a political subdivision’s failure to approve a request under sub. (3) (b), the petitioner may recover court costs and reasonable attorney fees attribut- able to the failure to approve the request within the time frame provided in sub. (3) (b) 1. or 5. of submission of the request. SECTION 17. 66.10016 (5) of the statutes is created to read: 66.10016 (5) In this subsection “qualifying residen- tial development” means a residential development that is reasonably expected to receive sewerage and sanitary water services from a public utility and that is not rea- sonably believed to be environmentally contaminated. If a political subdivision issues a request for proposals for a qualifying residential development that specifies minimum and maximum net density of residences in the development that are within the densities specified for the area in the political subdivision’s comprehensive plan, and no person responds to the request by the date provided in the request for submissions, sub. (3) (b) does not apply in that political subdivision for one year after the last date on which responses were to be accepted. A response under this subsection includes a response that does not include a qualifying residential development proposal if the response is from a person with the capa- bility to construct a qualifying residential development in the requesting political subdivision and the response explains with specificity the person’s economic reasons for not submitting a proposal. This subsection does not apply to a town or county. SECTION 18. 66.1002 (2) (intro.) of the statutes is amended to read: 66.1002 (2) MORATORIUM ALLOWED. (intro.) Sub- ject to the limitations and requirements specified in this section, a municipality may enact a development mora- torium ordinance if the municipality has enacted a com- prehensive plan, is in the process of preparing its com- prehensive plan, or is in the process of preparing a sig- nificant amendment to its comprehensive plan in re- sponse to a substantial change in conditions in the mu- nicipality, or is exempt from the requirement as de- scribed in s. 66.1001 (3m), and if at least one of the fol- lowing applies: SECTION 19. 66.1105 (2) (cs) of the statutes is cre- ated to read: 66.1105 (2) (cs) “Newly platted residential develop- ment” means residential development on a parcel that has not previously been the site of permanent structures other than structures used solely for agricultural purposes. SECTION 20 . 66.1105 (6) (g) 1. (intro.) of the statutes is amended to read: 66.1105 (6) (g) 1. (intro.) After the date on which a tax incremental district created by a city pays off the ag- gregate of all of its project costs, and notwithstanding the time at which such a district would otherwise be re- quired to terminate under sub. (7), a city may extend the life of the district for one year up to 2 years if the city does all of the following: SECTION 21. Initial applicability. (1) This act first applies to an application for a per- mit, as defined in s. 66.10016 (1) (a), or a request for re- zoning made on the effective date of this subsection. SECTION 22. Effective date. (1) This act takes effect on January 1, 2028. 2027 VILLAGE OF SHOREWOOD INITIATIVE FORM Summary: This form is used for departments, volunteer committees and officials to propose significant initiatives such as service changes, programs, studies, capital items and other requests to be considered for the annual vision planning and prioritization process. The goal of this form is to help staff, committees and officials identify the resources, steps and time involved in executing an initiative. It allows a formalized process for the Village to recognize proposed initiatives and request the Village Board to consider an initiative before investing more resources. Name: Date: Department / Committee: Initiative: Description and Goal: Include a short summary of the initiative and the goal/desired outcome. Time Sensitivity: Identify any time constraints or deadlines associated with the initiative. Estimated Staff Time Needed to Execute: Include estimated hours and staff/persons involved. Bart Griepentrog, AICP, CNU-A February 26, 2026 Plan Commission Five-Year Comprehensive Plan Review Assess progress on Plan implementation. What has changed since 2021? What obstacles have emerged? The Planning and Development Director would be required to perform this review. Approximately 80 hours would be anticipated. The Implementation Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan notes that “A five year review will be considered to update baseline data, describe the degree of success towards achieving Plan goals and identify obstacles against Plan goals and objectives.” The Plan was adopted on April 19, 2021, so the five year review would be scheduled for 2026. 2027 Estimated Costs: Materials, contractual services, equipment, etc. Indicate annual vs. one-time. Implementation Steps for Execution: Include approvals, collaboration with other groups, etc. No costs beyond staff time are projected. 1. Review plan base line data, goals and objectives. 2. Write a report to update baseline data and identify the progress of implementation. 3. Present report to Plan Commission. 4. Provide report to Village Board.