Portage Planning Commission Public Hearing on Residential Zoning Ordinance - March 19, 2026

The Portage Planning Commission held a public hearing on Thursday, March 19, 2026, to consider Ordinance Amendment 25/263, which proposes a new Chapter 44 (Residential Unified Development Ordinance) and amendments to Chapters 42, 45, and 6 of the City Code. The meeting began at 4:00 PM. The commission voted to continue the hearing to April 16, 2026, after hearing extensive public testimony and staff presentations.

Consent Calendar

• Commissioner Copeland was excused from the meeting by a motion (seconded, all in favor).
• The minutes from the March 5, 2026 meeting were approved with an amendment adding a concern about infrastructure impacts from future multi-family development, as requested by Commissioner Felt.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Mary Vilipolski (8836 East Shore Drive) expressed support for the unified development ordinance but argued the draft does not align with the Master Plan. She noted that the Master Plan defines single-family residential as primarily detached homes with limited duplexes, while the proposed RN conservation district allows townhouses, triplexes, and quadplexes, which she said belong in mixed residential zones. She also questioned the density-neutrality of multiplexes and requested that the Austin Landing area be zoned RE (Residential Estate) instead of RN.
• Carol Newkirk (5113 Midfield Drive) opposed required sidewalks and narrower streets, citing maintenance burdens for seniors and safety concerns in winter conditions. She also expressed skepticism about affordable housing, equating it with low-income housing, and questioned the need for extensive zoning overhaul.
• Leonard Bennett (9044 East Shore Drive) argued that the proposed RN zone allows developers to maximize density, and that the distinction between RE and RN is arbitrary. He noted that the City Mayor and Council previously agreed not to change Austin Landing zoning, but the draft plan now changes it to RN. He requested the commission rezone Austin Landing back to RE.
• John Taylor (2522 East Shore Drive) agreed with previous speakers, criticized the impetus for the changes as based on unlikely state legislation, and argued that workforce housing should be addressed by raising wages, not subsidizing development. He suggested that density should be based on transit and existing mixed-use areas.
• Vanessa Messenger (9220 East Shore Drive) urged the commission to maintain RE zoning for Austin Lake areas to protect public safety. She cited dangerous traffic increases (300-400% more vehicle trips) on narrow East Shore Drive and increased crash risks for children and trail users.
• Jeff Messenger (9220 East Shore Drive) echoed concerns about designated wetlands and environmental damage to Austin Lake (toxic algae, stormwater runoff). He questioned the need for development given potential future autonomous vehicle trends reducing commutes.
• Ken Norris (9246 East Shore Drive) asked for a comparison of current vs. proposed single-family to multi-family split (e.g., 70/30 vs. existing 95/5). He also asked about traffic impact limits and the number of units planned for the Austin Lake corridor, noting no maximum limit was provided.
• Barbara Crone (Crockett Street) shared negative experiences with duplexes in her neighborhood, citing traffic and renter turnover.
• Dawn Bach (1026 269 Shrer Lane) urged the commission to rezone city parks and preserves as protected land (not residential) to prevent future development or sale.
• Dave Savoy (3520 East Shore Drive) raised safety concerns about infrastructure and traffic, citing over 630 housing units in development across Portage, a 151-unit apartment complex proposed at Center and Portage, and a speed survey showing average 29 mph (25 mph limit) with a maximum of 66 mph on East Shore Drive.
• Rick Vilipolski (8836 East Shore Drive) argued that the RN conservation area north of East Shore Drive would allow quadplexes and townhouses, creating similar congestion and safety issues as the original Austin Landing plan, and that the zoning change destroys the integrity of existing investments.
• Gail Tinker Steamsma (9542 East Shore Drive) described increased traffic on East Shore Drive due to construction on Sprinkle Road, with speeding issues and no stop signs.
• Richard Nellums (9240 East Shore Drive, read by another) requested that the area south of Zilman Road around Austin Lake be zoned RE to protect the watershed and Austin Lake's ecology, citing the 2023 Park Master Plan's concerns about eutrophication and the presence of state-listed eastern box turtles.
• Mark Alexander (2630 East Shore Drive, read by another) put the commission, City Council, and developers on alert that changing the Master Plan zoning for Austin Landing to RN would result in increased traffic, crashes, and deaths; he requested adherence to the August 15, 2024 Master Plan.
• Keith Newberry (8970 East Shore Drive) requested that the neighborhood remain single-family homes only, and many audience members stood in support.
• Mary Bounces (3612 years drive, likely a realtor) stated that most homebuyers want single-family homes, not multiplexes, and warned that Portage should not ruin its reputation by mixing housing types.
• Tim Shuffers (9140 East Shore) questioned the conservation label for duplexes and quads, argued that the Austin Lake area is a high-value tax base, and opposed building smaller homes that would depress property values.

Discussion Items

• Staff Presentation: Chief Development Officer Pete Dame and City Planner Eric Felt provided an overview of the proposed Residential Unified Development Ordinance (Module 1). Key elements include:
  • Consolidating four single-family districts (R1A, R1B, R1C, R1D) into two: RN (Residential Neighborhood) and RE (Residential Estate).
  • RN district allows conventional development (single-family homes with up to 30% duplexes) and conservation development (on parcels ≥5 acres, 65% single-family, 35% mix of duplexes, townhouses, triplexes, quadplexes) in exchange for 20% open space.
  • RM (Residential Mixed) district consolidates RM1 and RM2, permitting cottage courts, townhouses, multiplexes (3-6 units), and multi-unit buildings (7+ units) with screening and open space requirements.
  • Minimum lot sizes reduced (e.g., single-family from 7,800 sq ft to 7,000 sq ft in RN conventional; 5,000 sq ft in RN conservation).
  • New private street standards require public-equivalent design; narrower streets allowed.
  • Duplexes not permitted on lakefront lots.
• Commissioner Questions:
  • Commissioner asked about one-on-one meetings with staff (one took place with a property owner on H4 Drive).
  • Commissioner asked for definition of "large lot" (80 ft width or more for 40 ft/3-story height) and definition of neighborhood boundary (plat or site condo boundary).
  • Commissioner asked about maintenance of open space (property owner or homeowners association).
• Staff Responses:
  • Eric Felt explained that the RN conservation development is designed to balance housing density with open space preservation, and that the 30% limit on duplexes in conventional developments is new (existing code allows only single-family).
  • Regarding the specific Austin Landing property (125 acres, 29 acres wetlands), Pete Dame noted that wetlands can count toward only 20% of the required open space, and that the developer would not be able to achieve the original 625 units; the actual maximum number is unknown until a plan is submitted.
  • Traffic impact studies are not required for citywide zoning changes but would be triggered at the site-specific development stage.

Key Outcomes

• The public hearing was continued to April 16, 2026 by a unanimous vote (motion made and seconded, all in favor).
• Staff will compile all public comments and questions, and will provide answers at the April 16 meeting.
• The commission may consider changes to the draft zoning map or ordinance before the next hearing, but significant changes would require a new public hearing.
• The next regular meeting is scheduled for April 2, 2026 (no substantive agenda items noted).