Wisconsin Statutes

Wis. Stat. § 236.45 (2026)

Local subdivision regulation

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

236.45236.45 Local subdivision regulation.

236.45(1)(1) Declaration of legislative intent. The purpose of this section is to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of the community and the regulations authorized to be made are designed to further the orderly layout and use of land; to secure safety from fire, panic, and other dangers; to provide adequate light and air, including access to sunlight for solar collectors and to wind for wind energy systems; to facilitate adequate provision for transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, playgrounds, and other public requirements; and to facilitate the further resubdivision of larger tracts into smaller parcels of land. The regulations provided for by this section shall be made with reasonable consideration, among other things, of the character of the municipality, town, or county with a view of conserving the value of the buildings placed upon land, providing the best possible environment for human habitation, and for encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the municipality, town, or county.

236.45(2)(2) Delegation of power.

236.45(2)(ac)(ac) To accomplish the purposes listed in sub. (1), any municipality, town or county that has established a planning agency may enact ordinances governing the subdivision or other division of land that are more restrictive than the provisions of this chapter, except that no ordinance may modify in a more restrictive way time limits, deadlines, notice requirements, or other provisions of this chapter that provide protections for a subdivider.

236.45(2)(am)(am) Ordinances under par. (ac) may include provisions regulating divisions of land into parcels larger than 1 1/2 acres or divisions of land into less than 5 parcels, and, except as provided in s. 59.69 (4) (intro.) and subject to s. 66.1002, may prohibit the division of land in areas where such prohibition will carry out the purposes of this section. Such ordinances shall make applicable to such divisions all of the provisions of this chapter, or may provide other surveying, monumenting, mapping and approving requirements for such division. The governing body of the municipality, town, or county shall require that a plat of such division be recorded with the register of deeds and stored electronically. “COUNTY PLAT,” “MUNICIPAL PLAT,” or “TOWN PLAT” shall be printed on the map in prominent letters with the location of the land by government lot, recorded private claim, quarter-quarter section, section, township, range, and county noted. When so recorded, the lots included in the plat shall be described by reference to “COUNTY PLAT,” “MUNICIPAL PLAT,” or “TOWN PLAT,” the name of the plat and the lot and block in the plat, for all purposes, including those of assessment, taxation, devise, descent, and conveyance as defined in s. 706.01 (4). Such ordinance, insofar as it may apply to divisions of less than 5 parcels, shall not apply to:

236.45(2)(am)1.1. Transfers of interests in land by will or pursuant to court order;

236.45(2)(am)2.2. Leases for a term not to exceed 10 years, mortgages or easements;

236.45(2)(am)3.3. The sale or exchange of parcels of land between owners of adjoining property if additional lots are not thereby created and the lots resulting are not reduced below the minimum sizes required by this chapter or other applicable laws or ordinances;

236.45(2)(am)4.4. Such other divisions exempted by such ordinances.

236.45(2)(b)(b) This section and any ordinance adopted pursuant thereto shall be liberally construed in favor of the municipality, town or county and shall not be deemed a limitation or repeal of any requirement or power granted or appearing in this chapter or elsewhere, relating to the subdivision of lands.

236.45(3)(3) Areas in which subdivision ordinances apply.

236.45(3)(a)(a) An ordinance adopted hereunder by a municipality may regulate the division or subdivision of land within the extraterritorial plat approval jurisdiction of the municipality as well as land within the corporate limits of the municipality if it has the right to approve or object to plats within that area under s. 236.10 (1) (b) 2. and (2).

236.45(3)(b)(b) Notwithstanding par. (a) and subs. (1) and (2), a municipality may not deny approval of a plat or certified survey map under this section or s. 236.10 or 236.13 on the basis of the proposed use of land within the extraterritorial plat approval jurisdiction of the municipality, unless the denial is based on a plan or regulations, or amendments thereto, adopted by the governing body of the municipality under s. 62.23 (7a) (c).

236.45(4)(4) Procedure. Before adoption of a subdivision ordinance or any amendments thereto the governing body shall receive the recommendation of its planning agency and shall hold a public hearing thereon. Notice of the hearing shall be given by publication of a class 2 notice, under ch. 985. Any ordinance adopted shall be published in form suitable for public distribution.

236.45(5)(5) Regulation of federal surplus land. With respect to any surplus lands in excess of 500 acres in area, except the Bong air base in Kenosha County, sold in this state by the federal government for private development, the department, in accordance with the procedure specified in ch. 227, may regulate the subdivision or other division of such federal surplus land in any of the ways and with the same powers authorized hereunder for municipalities, towns or counties. Before promulgating such rules, the department shall first receive the recommendations of any committee appointed for that purpose by the governor.

236.45(6)(6) Requirements for approval conditions.

236.45(6)(ac)(ac) In this subsection, “improvement of land for public parks” means grading, landscaping, installation of utilities, construction of sidewalks, installation of playground equipment, and construction or installation of restroom facilities on land intended for public park purposes.

236.45(6)(am)(am) Notwithstanding subs. (1) and (2) (ac), a municipality, town, or county may not, as a condition of approval under this chapter, impose any fees or other charges to fund the acquisition or improvement of land, infrastructure, or other real or personal property, except that a municipality or town may impose a fee or other charge to fund the acquisition or initial improvement of land for public parks if the fee or other charge is imposed under a subdivision ordinance enacted or amended in accordance with the procedures under s. 66.0617 (3) to (5) and meets the requirements under s. 66.0617 (6) to (10).

236.45(6)(b)(b) Any land dedication, easement, or other public improvement or fee for the acquisition or initial improvement of land for a public park that is required by a municipality, town, or county as a condition of approval under this chapter must bear a rational relationship to a need for the land dedication, easement, or other public improvement or parkland acquisition or initial improvement fee resulting from the subdivision or other division of land and must be proportional to the need.

236.45(6)(c)(c) If a subdivision ordinance of a municipality, town, or county requires, as a condition of approval under this chapter, that a subdivider dedicate land for a public park, the municipality, town, or county may offer the subdivider the option of either dedicating land consistent with the municipality’s, town’s, or county’s park plan and comprehensive plan or paying a fee or other charge under par. (am) in lieu of the dedication. If the subdivider elects to pay a fee or other charge under this paragraph, the fee or other charge is payable by the landowner to the municipality, town, or county upon the issuance of a building permit by the municipality, town, or county. If the subdivider elects to dedicate land under this paragraph, unless the municipality, town, or county agrees otherwise, the subdivider only may dedicate land that is consistent with the municipality’s, town’s, or county’s park plan and comprehensive plan.

236.45 HistoryHistory: 1979 c. 221, 248, 355; 1981 c. 354; 1983 a. 189 s. 329 (26); 2001 a. 16; 2005 a. 477; 2007 a. 44; 2009 a. 376, 399; 2015 a. 48, 391; 2017 a. 243; 2025 a. 68, 234.

236.45 AnnotationThis section authorizes towns to regulate minimum lot size. Town of Sun Prairie v. Storms, 110 Wis. 2d 58, 327 N.W.2d 642 (1983).

236.45 AnnotationThe assessment of school and park land dedication fees as a condition for rezoning and issuance of a building permit was authorized. Black v. City of Waukesha, 125 Wis. 2d 254, 371 N.W.2d 389 (Ct. App. 1985).

236.45 AnnotationThis section does not prevent municipalities from adopting and enforcing more than one ordinance that relates to subdivisions. Manthe v. Town Board, 204 Wis. 2d 546, 555 N.W.2d 167 (Ct. App. 1996), 95-1312.

236.45 AnnotationA city may not condition extraterritorial plat approval on annexation. Hoepker v. City of Madison Plan Commission, 209 Wis. 2d 633, 563 N.W.2d 145 (1997), 95-2013.

236.45 AnnotationIt was not a violation of this section, s. 61.34, or the public purpose doctrine for a municipality to assume the dual role of subdivider of property it owned and reviewer of the plat under this chapter. Town of Beloit v. County of Rock, 2001 WI App 256, 249 Wis. 2d 88, 637 N.W.2d 71, 00-1231.

236.45 AnnotationAffirmed on other grounds. 2003 WI 8, 259 Wis. 2d 37, 657 N.W.2d 344, 00-1231.

236.45 AnnotationA municipality has the authority under sub. (2) to impose a temporary town-wide prohibition on land division while developing a comprehensive plan under s. 66.1001. Wisconsin Realtors Ass’n v. Town of West Point, 2008 WI App 40, 309 Wis. 2d 199, 747 N.W.2d 681, 06-2761.

236.45 AnnotationA city may not use its extraterritorial plat approval authority to impose land use regulation that should have been done in cooperation with neighboring towns through extraterritorial zoning. Although purporting to be a density standard, the city’s 35-acre density restriction was a use prohibition, the very essence of zoning. Lake Delavan Property Co. v. City of Delavan, 2014 WI App 35, 353 Wis. 2d 173, 844 N.W.2d 632, 13-1202.

236.45 AnnotationAlthough they often work together, zoning and subdivision regulations provide separate and distinct means of regulating the development of land. There are areas of overlap between the two powers, but there are also key differences. Subdivision control is concerned with the initial division of undeveloped land, while zoning more specifically regulates the further use of this land. State ex rel. Anderson v. Town of Newbold, 2021 WI 6, 395 Wis. 2d 351, 954 N.W.2d 323, 18-0547.

236.45 AnnotationIn this case, the town’s ordinance set minimum lot frontage requirements for each lake within its borders. Pursuant to the Zwiefelhofer, 2012 WI 7, factors, the town’s ordinance was not a zoning ordinance. It did not concern land use, and it did not separate compatible and incompatible land uses, which is a key purpose of a zoning ordinance. Because it was not a zoning ordinance, the restrictions on town enactment of zoning ordinances set by s. 59.692 did not apply, and the ordinance was a permissible exercise of the town’s subdivision authority pursuant to this section. State ex rel. Anderson v. Town of Newbold, 2021 WI 6, 395 Wis. 2d 351, 954 N.W.2d 323, 18-0547.

236.45 AnnotationA subdivision plat prepared in compliance with a local ordinance enacted under the authority of this section is not required by statutes to be submitted for state level review unless such land division results in a “subdivision,” as defined in s. 236.02 (8) [now s. 236.02 (12)]. 59 Atty. Gen. 262.

236.45 AnnotationIf subdivision regulations, adopted under this section, conflict, a plat must comply with the most restrictive requirement. 61 Atty. Gen. 289.

236.45 AnnotationDiscussing the application of municipal and county subdivision control ordinances within the municipality’s extraterritorial plat approval jurisdiction. 66 Atty. Gen. 103.

236.45 AnnotationA county’s minimum lot size zoning ordinance applies to parcels created by a court through division in a partition or probate action, even if such division would be exempted from a municipality’s subdivision authority under sub. (2) (am) 1. A county can enact a subdivision ordinance requiring prior review of sales or exchanges of parcels between adjoining landowners in order to determine whether the division would comply with minimum lot size requirements. OAG 1-14.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 37 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1965–2026 · leading case: Wood v. City of Madison, 2003 WI 24 (Wis. 2003).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Wood v. City of Madison, 2003 WI 24 (Wis. 2003). · cites it 82× “In Wis. Stat. § 236.45 , the legislature has permitted municipalities, towns, and counties, if they have established planning agencies, to legislate more intensively in the field of subdivision control than provided for the state at large by allowing them to adopt ordinances…”

Rice v. City of Oshkosh, 435 N.W.2d 252 (Wis. 1989). · cites it 36× “We conclude the City is not authorized to set the requirements for public improvements in this case.”

Hoepker v. City of Madison Plan Comm'n, 563 N.W.2d 145 (Wis. 1997). · cites it 23× “First, does the City have authority under Wis. Stat. § 236.45 to condition approval of the Hoepkers' preliminary plat on a requirement that they agree to annexation? Second, does the requirement that the Hoepkers reconfigure their plat to provide an open space corridor…”

Lake Delavan Prop. Co. v. City of Delavan, 2014 WI App 35 (Wis. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 15× “We agree with the circuit court that the City's denial of the proposed plat was on the basis of the proposed use of the land and was therefore prohibited by Wis. Stat. § 236.45 (3)(b) (2011-12). 1 The City's ordinance purports to be a permissible land division restriction on…”

Gordie Boucher Lincoln-Mercury Madison, Inc. v. City of Madison Plan Comm'n, 503 N.W.2d 265 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 16× “The City of Madison Common Council has enacted a subdivision ordinance under sec. 236.45, Stats. Madison, Wis., Gen. Ordinances § 16.”

Herman v. Cnty. of Walworth, 2005 WI App 185 (Wis. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 12× “The Town frames the appellate issue as follows: Did the County Zoning Authority err by granting the Gramses' permits where the applicants proposed to divide one lakefront lot into two parcels for condominium development and the proposal complied with the County shoreline zoning…”

Wisconsin Realtors Ass'n v. Town of West Point, 2008 WI App 40 (Wis. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 55× “In deciding that motion, the circuit court adoptéd the Town's view that the prohibition ordinance was authorized by Wis. Stat. § 236.45 (2). The court, therefore, granted summary judgment in favor of the Town.”

FAS, LLC v. Town of Bass Lake, 2007 WI 73 (Wis. 2007). · cites it 4× “05(4), "all land divisions in shoreland areas which create 3 or more parcels or building sites of 5 acres each or less within a 5-year period" must be reviewed by the county pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 236.45 . And in addition, the Sawyer County Zoning Committee Subdivision Control…”

Jordan v. Vill. of Menomonee Falls, 137 N.W.2d 442 (Wis. 1965). · cites it 8× “Upon careful analysis of sec. 236.45, Stats., we conclude that it does authorize the land-dedication requirement of the instant ordinance.”

Lake City Corp. v. City of Mequon, 558 N.W.2d 100 (Wis. 1997). · cites it 4× “236, or through the enactment of zoning ordinances by the applicable zoning authority.”

Town of Sun Prairie v. Storms, 327 N.W.2d 642 (Wis. 1983). · cites it 5× “2d 808 (1959), and held that a town ordinance which regulates lot size is a zoning ordinance and not a subdivision platting ordinance under sec. 236.45, Stats. The court of appeals affirmed, also relying on Albert Realty to find that the ordinance constitutes zoning.”

New Richmond News v. City of New Richmond, 2015 WI 106 (Wis. 2015). · cites it 3× “§ 236.45 nor Wis. Stat. § 61.34 provide the Town the authority to enact a moratorium on land division.”

Show all 37 citing cases →

— Wis. Stat. § 236.45(1) — 12 cases

Wood v. City of Madison, 2003 WI 24 (Wis. 2003). “In Wis. Stat. § 236.45 , the legislature has permitted municipalities, towns, and counties, if they have established planning agencies, to legislate more intensively in the field of subdivision control than provided for the state at large by allowing them to adopt ordinances…”

Hoepker v. City of Madison Plan Comm'n, 563 N.W.2d 145 (Wis. 1997). “First, does the City have authority under Wis. Stat. § 236.45 to condition approval of the Hoepkers' preliminary plat on a requirement that they agree to annexation? Second, does the requirement that the Hoepkers reconfigure their plat to provide an open space corridor…”

Rice v. City of Oshkosh, 435 N.W.2d 252 (Wis. 1989). “We conclude the City is not authorized to set the requirements for public improvements in this case.”

Gordie Boucher Lincoln-Mercury Madison, Inc. v. City of Madison Plan Comm'n, 503 N.W.2d 265 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993). “The City of Madison Common Council has enacted a subdivision ordinance under sec. 236.45, Stats. Madison, Wis., Gen. Ordinances § 16.”

Wisconsin Realtors Ass'n v. Town of West Point, 2008 WI App 40 (Wis. Ct. App. 2008). “In deciding that motion, the circuit court adoptéd the Town's view that the prohibition ordinance was authorized by Wis. Stat. § 236.45 (2). The court, therefore, granted summary judgment in favor of the Town.”

— Wis. Stat. § 236.45(2) — 7 cases

Rice v. City of Oshkosh, 435 N.W.2d 252 (Wis. 1989). “We conclude the City is not authorized to set the requirements for public improvements in this case.”

Busse v. City of Madison, 503 N.W.2d 340 (Wis. Ct. App. 1993).

Michael Anderson v. Town of Newbold, 2019 WI App 59 (Wis. Ct. App. 2019).

— Wis. Stat. § 236.45(2)(a) — 8 cases

Rice v. City of Oshkosh, 435 N.W.2d 252 (Wis. 1989). “We conclude the City is not authorized to set the requirements for public improvements in this case.”

Herman v. Cnty. of Walworth, 2005 WI App 185 (Wis. Ct. App. 2005). “The Town frames the appellate issue as follows: Did the County Zoning Authority err by granting the Gramses' permits where the applicants proposed to divide one lakefront lot into two parcels for condominium development and the proposal complied with the County shoreline zoning…”

Manthe v. Town Bd., 555 N.W.2d 167 (Wis. Ct. App. 1996).

— Wis. Stat. § 236.45(2)(ac) — 5 cases

Michael Anderson v. Town of Newbold, 2021 WI 6 (Wis. 2021).

Stephan B. Nordstrom v. Steven G. Kane, 2021 WI App 71 (Wis. Ct. App. 2021).

Jeffrey Kuczmarski v. Erin Kuczmarski (Wis. Ct. App. 2023).

Wisconsin Realtors Ass'n, Inc. v. Polk Cnty. (Wis. Ct. App. 2026).

— Wis. Stat. § 236.45(2)(am) — 3 cases

Michael Anderson v. Town of Newbold, 2021 WI 6 (Wis. 2021).

Wisconsin Realtors Ass'n, Inc. v. Polk Cnty. (Wis. Ct. App. 2026).

Michael Anderson v. Town of Newbold, 2021 WI 6 (Wis. 2021).

— Wis. Stat. § 236.45(2)(b) — 9 cases

Rice v. City of Oshkosh, 435 N.W.2d 252 (Wis. 1989). “We conclude the City is not authorized to set the requirements for public improvements in this case.”

Michael Anderson v. Town of Newbold, 2019 WI App 59 (Wis. Ct. App. 2019).

Michael Anderson v. Town of Newbold, 2021 WI 6 (Wis. 2021).

— Wis. Stat. § 236.45(3) — 5 cases

Rice v. City of Oshkosh, 435 N.W.2d 252 (Wis. 1989). “We conclude the City is not authorized to set the requirements for public improvements in this case.”

KW HOLDINGS, LLC v. Town of Windsor, 2003 WI App 9 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002).

Town of Delton v. Liston, 2007 WI App 120 (Wis. Ct. App. 2007).

— Wis. Stat. § 236.45(3)(b) — 1 case

Lake Delavan Prop. Co. v. City of Delavan, 2014 WI App 35 (Wis. Ct. App. 2014). “We agree with the circuit court that the City's denial of the proposed plat was on the basis of the proposed use of the land and was therefore prohibited by Wis. Stat. § 236.45 (3)(b) (2011-12). 1 The City's ordinance purports to be a permissible land division restriction on…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.