SUN PRAIRIE RISING

by Andy Schoenherr
Editor, Sun Prairie News

The proposed “Derby District” development has stalled after the Sun Prairie Plan Commission unanimously rejected the project’s concept plan at its Feb. 10 meeting, following more than an hour of public opposition from residents.

The 133-acre development, proposed by TWall Enterprises, would be located on the former QBE campus at the corner of Highway 19 and Grand Avenue/Highway C. The plan envisioned a large mixed-use neighborhood combining residential, retail, and commercial space.

Plans included several apartment buildings along with retail and commercial development along Highway 19 anchored by a major store, with restaurants, senior living facilities, and hotels also included.

Public comments during the meeting were overwhelmingly critical of the project. Many residents voiced concerns about increased traffic, pressure on nearby schools, and the impact the development could have on surrounding neighborhoods.

At this stage, the Plan Commission was reviewing only the project’s concept plan. If the project were to move forward, city planning staff would conduct a much more extensive review, including a traffic impact analysis and detailed civil engineering plans covering stormwater, utilities, streets, and other infrastructure.

Even so, the project’s progress appears to have stalled amid growing public pressure.

Some residents and members of the commission expressed frustration with how TWall engaged the community during the early stages of the project. An initial listening session was invitation-only and limited to residents within a 300-foot radius of the property.

Later meetings were open to the public but excluded elected officials. District 3 Alder Mike Jacobs and District 4 Alder Cassi Benedict attempted to attend a listening session on Oct. 7 but were turned away. Benedict has since resigned from the council for personal job-related reasons.

District 2 Alder Santiago Rosas, who serves on the Plan Commission, raised the issue, among others, during the meeting. “The one that concerned me the most – they had some listening sessions that covered the city ordinance of a 300-foot radius, which resulted in a limited amount of residents being invited,” Rosas said. “I had a problem with that. The District 4 alders were not invited to attend the listening session—this was a mistake.”

Cheryl Batterman, who is running for City Council to replace Benedict in District 4, also spoke against the proposal. She summarized residents’ concerns about housing density, wildlife impacts, traffic, limited employment uses, and potential use of tax increment financing (TIF).

“I’m speaking tonight to elevate these concerns,” Batterman said, “and ask you to vote no on this concept plan.” Her remarks were met with applause from those in attendance.

Other residents expressed frustration with ongoing revisions to the proposal. Terrence Wall, president and CEO of T. Wall Companies, has said the company is open to community feedback and willing to adjust the design as the planning process continues.

City staff emphasized that changes are common at the concept stage as developers incorporate feedback from residents and city officials.

Planning staff recommended conditional approval of the concept plan, noting that TWall had met the legal requirements necessary to move forward to the next stage of the development process. However, staff also noted that the proposal would require several changes to comply with city policies before advancing to a General Development Plan.

One example involved streets within the development. While an early proposal included a gated entrance along St. Albert the Great Drive—a feature some nearby residents supported as a way to control traffic—that idea has been dropped. However, TWall still proposes maintaining some internal streets as private roadways, which conflicts with current city policy.

Analiese Eicher, who represents the Dane County Board of Supervisors on the Plan Commission, said she supported additional housing and was open to changes to the city’s Comprehensive Plan. However, she questioned whether the developer had adequately responded to the city’s concerns.

Eicher also rejected comparisons to retail destinations like Hilldale in Madison or Greenway Station in Middleton.

“We’ve had a lot of success with them (planned developments) here,” Eicher said. “This specific change with the QBE property presented an incredible opportunity for change and planning , but it should be done by and with our community—not be put upon on the community by an outsider.”

Ultimately, the commission unanimously declined to endorse the concept plan.

While the vote is technically nonbinding, it makes it unlikely that the City Council or the Committee of the Whole would move forward with the proposal without significant changes.

TWall Enterprises has not yet brought the project before the Committee of the Whole or proposed a revised plan.

The site includes roughly 70 acres occupied by the former QBE office complex, along with another 63 acres of adjacent farmland that currently generates little tax revenue for the city. With Sun Prairie facing budget challenges and a looming referendum, losing a development of this scale could make it harder to expand the city’s tax base and fund services.

Commercial and retail businesses place little burden on local schools while creating jobs and economic activity. Compared with single-family housing—often preferred by nearby residents—the apartment buildings proposed for the Derby District would likely generate more tax revenue per acre while requiring less infrastructure investment from the city.

Higher-density development tends to reduce long-term public costs for roads, utilities, and other municipal services, while providing long-term environmental benefits by reducing urban sprawl.

Demand for housing remains strong across Dane County, and additional rental units would help moderate rising rents by increasing supply and competition in the market.

The property remains privately owned and is currently zoned Suburban Office, meaning the owner could potentially pursue additional office development with limited city approval. However, demand for office space has declined significantly in the post-pandemic era as remote work becomes more common—one of the factors that contributed to QBE’s departure.

City Planning Director Josh Clements noted that TWall still has the option to submit a revised concept plan, which is common for projects initially rejected by the Plan Commission.

For now, however, the debate highlights a broader challenge facing the city: balancing residents’ concerns with the need for continued development.

After public comments concluded, Mayor Steve Stocker emphasized that the city is not opposed to growth.

“I do not want what I have said—and possibly what will be said by this body—to be interpreted as ‘Sun Prairie is against development,’” Stocker said. “That is so far from the truth, and the proof is in how we have grown in the last few years.”

“But it has to be the right development,” he added. “It has to be something our people can wrap their arms around. That is not the case thus far with this concept plan.”

Alder Rosas echoed that sentiment. “As the mayor said, we’re not against development,” he said. “But we are on this one.”

The unanimous vote underscores a difficult reality for many growing communities: large developments rarely satisfy both developers and nearby residents. Whether driven by concerns about traffic, neighborhood character, or broader resistance to change, public meetings often amplify the voices of those most opposed to new projects.

The remaining question for Sun Prairie’s leaders is how they will navigate that tension in the future—whether by encouraging the kind of large-scale development that expands the tax base or by prioritizing the concerns of residents wary of the future change will bring.