Merry Street / Apex Proposed Development Update

Note: I made a critical typo when this was first posted. 222 Merry Street could have five stories and 60 units by right. The two Winnebago Street parcels could have two three-unit buildings. Text below has been corrected.

On November 11, the MNA and SASY Preservation & Development Committees met together along with another 30 area residents to hear Apex’ proposal for development on four lots that border Winnebago St, Merry St and the Yahara. There was a subsequent news story written about it and much online discussion. Several Merry Street residents also attended the Downtown Alder Meet & Greet last week Monday. where we got to discuss it together further.

There’s a lot of uncertainty and some fear surrounding this proposal, so I did some research and would like to lay out some facts.

Apex proposes demolition of the 22-unit building at 222 Merry Street and the two houses (currently rentals) along Winnebago. They would like to build a six-story building in a roughly U-shape, with the interior courtyard facing the river. The building would include 162 market-rate apartments (studios and one-bedrooms with a few two-bedrooms), 180 parking stalls underneath (access via Merry St) and a coffee shop or other retail on the corner of Winnebago and Merry Sts.

Let’s take a look at the site, go over the current zoning and spell out what the developer could build without zoning changes.

222 and 230 Merry Street are TR-U2 zoning (Traditional Residential - Urban 2 District) and are within the Transit Overlay District. By right, Apex could build up to five stories and 60 units at 222 Merry St.

1626 and 1628 Winnebago St are TR-C4 (Traditional Residential - Consistent 4 District). Each lot could have a building with up to three units.

The Comprehensive Plan lays out land use. The Zoning Code is built off of that and specifies requirements and restrictions. Local zoning can be changed, but that change must still be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In turn, the Comprehensive Plan can be changed, but that is a significant ordeal outside of the periodic review and update schedule. It is also regulated by state statute, which requires a high level of public engagement and a lot of staff time.

In order for Apex to build what they want, they would need to combine all four lots, requiring a certified survey map. But as we’ve seen the four lots are not the same land use nor the same zoning. That would require amending the Comprehensive Plan outside of the normal schedule which the city is not keen to do.

Other challenges

Did you know the Yahara Parkway is considered a landmark? Thus, the Landmarks Commission would need to review any proposal to determine whether or not it would be so “visually intrusive” that it negatively impacts the historic character and integrity of the landmark. I get the jist of what this means when the landmark is an actual building, but am still learning how it would be applied to the Parkway.

I want to make it clear that at this stage of the process, I am neither for nor against this proposal. I’m following the process of having our neighborhood associations review it and supporting the city’s review. While I want to see more housing density in District 6, I’m also quite aware and sensitive to the fact that this proposal would remove 26 units of NOAH (naturally-occuring affordable housing). And while I support the developer’s right to build what they have the right to build, I also support neighbors’ right to consistency and predictability in area zoning as well as having a voice in the process.

More to come. As always, I welcome your questions and comments at district6@cityofmadison.com.