Changes to residential zoning under review

By Dave Fidlin

Correspondent

Changes to zoning requirements for residential housing near the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater campus could be on the horizon, but city officials are asking for a panel’s input before any decisions are made.

At a Common Council meeting Dec. 1, council member Christopher Grady proposed making changes to houses falling under the technical zoning designation of a residential increased occupancy overlay district.

In its current iteration, the overlay district allows up to three unrelated persons to live in a room. An additional one to two unrelated persons could live in a home within the district, so long as the property owner obtains a conditional-use permit and seeks an exception.

Grady proposed adding language to the ordinance in an effort to ensure renters have quality living arrangements. His proposal called on property owners to ensure there is a minimum of 75 square feet of common living space for each unrelated resident living in a home.

“There’s been questions in the ordinance of how much living space is needed,” Grady said. “This is an attempt to define living space when bedrooms are added.”

But several of Grady’s elected colleagues questioned the validity of the ordinance from a practical standpoint.

Council member Stephanie Abbott, who was especially vocal in her concerns, pointed out the proposed 75-square-foot provision nearly matches the city’s minimum 80-foot threshold for a bedroom.

“We’d basically be requiring a second bedroom’s worth of space for every person; that’s a lot of space,” Abbott said. “I promise you my apartment does not have this much common space, and I don’t feel like I don’t have enough space to live.”

Council member Ken Kidd said he believed there was a more simple solution to the issue.

“I’m not usually the guy to espouse Libertarian views, but I think this is a case where the market controls this,” Kidd said.

After debating the issue, the council agreed to kick the proposed ordinance tweak back to the Plan and Architectural Review Commission for further review and recommendation.

Comments are closed.