They approved conditional use permit by 4-2 vote
By Kellen Olshefski
Correspondent
The City of Elkhorn Common Council voted 4-2 in favor of approving a conditional use permit for the proposed New Beginnings domestic violence shelter during a special meeting Monday night.
The motion to approve – with two conditions regarding parking and the shared use of the driveway with a neighboring property owner – was made by Alderman Tim Shiroda and supported by Frank Boggs, Ron Dunwiddie and Scott McClory while Karel Young and Tom Myrin voted in opposition.
The two conditions approved include that New Beginnings maintain the 27 parking stalls shown on the site plan provided by New Beginnings, and that the organization submit written documentation that it has the rights to use and maintain the shared driveway with the neighbor to the south and not extend that driveway into the neighboring property without the owner’s permission.
Last August, the council voted 4-2 to deny the permit request for the proposed shelter, a decision that was vacated by Walworth County Circuit Court Judge Daniel Johnson in April and remanded back to the council for reconsideration.
Shiroda began Monday’s discussion by noting that on page 2 of the CUP application, the fourth line was blank even though it had reportedly been delivered to Zoning Administrator Bonnie Schaefer by attorney Ward Phillips.
Another note by Shiroda was that there are single-family houses on three sides of the property despite claims that it’s surrounded by commercial and institutional uses.
Because of the adjacent single-family residences, Shiroda also voiced opposition to plans to install spotlights outside of the building.
Referring to the Wisconsin Administrative Code and the Wisconsin Constitution, Myrin said under state legislation, shelter facilities are not included under the definition of multi-family housing and that, as such, a yes vote would be in violation of state legislation.
Young said while she’s not opposed to the shelter, she is opposed to the location, as neighbors and citizens in her district have expressed concerns over safety, parking, garbage disposal and other items.
McClory, who voted in favor of the shelter in August, said he maintains his previous stance, noting the CUP meets many of the 15 requirements for approval set forth by city ordinance. He also said the requirements not met could be addressed by changes to the comprehensive plan, ordinances or other legislation the council could craft to create an opportunity for the shelter.
McClory also cited the support of Walworth County Sheriff Kurt Picknell, City of Elkhorn Police Department Chief Joel Christensen and Penny Vogt of the Wisconsin Department of Corrections.
“That, to me, is significant evidence, and that’s what guides my decision,” McClory said.
Boggs, who also voted in favor previously, said he, too, believes the shelter fits the requirements outlined in the ordinance, and while it might not be a perfect fit, the miniscule differences don’t sway his decision.
Boggs noted in the many years it was a doctors office, the shared use of the driveway wasn’t a concern.
According to Boggs, the council doesn’t need to deny the CUP over the word shelter, and while the public has cited safety concerns, New Beginnings has a safety plan created by a professional firm and that there is a police department across the street and a sheriff’s department nearby.
Dunwiddie said he is still bothered by the fact that the plan commission voted at a meeting when a member was missing, resulting in a 3-3 vote that was passed to the council.
“It should not have come here without having a decision from the full body of the planning commission,” Dunwiddie said.
While he originally voted in opposition, Dunwiddie said after doing more research and reviewing the CUP permit again, he would agree with McClory that while there are certain things that aren’t a perfect fit, those items can be addressed through other means.
Shiroda made a motion to approve the conditional use permit with the two conditions, noting if the two conditions are met, he can “get behind” the proposed project.
Following some short discussion on how the permit fits the 15 criteria set forth by ordinances and backed by information in the record, the council voted 4-2 in favor of approving it.
