After a month of debate and student protest, a controversial four-story apartment complex proposed for Madison’s historic Mifflin Street faces yet another obstacle after the City Council Tuesday delayed its vote on the building until at least mid-March.

The council voted to refer the plan to its March 15 meeting to allow Mifflin neighborhood students more time to meet with city officials and building developers so that further accommodations to soothe student concerns can be reached.

The proposal has been passed back and forth between the city’s Plan Commission and Urban Design Commission, with each group requiring the developer to make a number of amendments to its original design proposed in December.

Indy Stluka, co-creator of the Save Mifflin student activist group opposed to the plan, recommended the council delay voting on the proposal as it currently stands.

“I don’t want to keep tripping over the same issues again after hammering them out last night at the Plan Commission,” Stluka said. “I just want a referral.”

Stluka said Save Mifflin would be hard at work from now until March to meet with building developer Patrick McCaughey and Ald. Mike Verveer, District 4, to bring about additional amendments to the long list of existing ones.

Among the changes that Save Mifflin continues to pursue are limiting the building to three stories, creating tougher legislation to keep developers connected and responsible to neighborhood groups and a request for West Mifflin to be considered for historic preservation.

Verveer made a motion to refer the proposal in response to Stluka’s recommendation, saying the current proposal is still incomplete.

“I am not comfortable on voting for this tonight as this is a contentious highly debated application,” Verveer said. “Pat McCaughey applied for this in December, but it’s not unreasonable for him to wait till March.

Ald. Judy Compton, District 16, opposed the referral and said committee members should not make special rules for students involved in Save Mifflin. The students have repeatedly been told they joined the fight against the building too late into the game.

“Alder Verveer’s district has demanded more of him than any of our districts, but one thing I’ve had a problem with is babying people who propose themselves as adults,” Compton said. “You are adults; you missed this one. Don’t miss the next one.”

The Council also referred a bill aimed at modifying regulations for re-renting apartment properties to the city Housing Committee.

The ordinance’s lead sponsor, Ald. Bridget Maniaci, District 2, said the bill would provide renewal notices to tenants by Nov. 15 and give them 15 days to act on those notices.

Maniaci said the bill would return for Common Council vote after the current version has been further discussed.

Verveer said although the legislation is not required to go back to the Housing Committee – different versions of it have been reviewed in the committee three times – the Council’s will was to refer it. He said it is a newly re-rewritten proposal that is highly contentious.

Verveer said Maniaci suddenly decided Tuesday afternoon not to ask the Council for approval. He said the decision could have been because Maniaci may have thought the bill didn’t have the votes because members of the Common Council just received the newest version of the bill Friday.