Editor’s note: A story in last week’s Whitewater Register about the extensive zoning rewrite review incorrectly stated it was passed May 6 on a 5-2 vote. The final vote was May 20 and the ordinance passed unanimously.
The story that follows is designed to further clarify two separate zoning issues that were acted on by city officials at both Common Council meetings in May.
By Dave Fidlin
Correspondent
Whitewater city officials last week took final action on two separate zoning-related issues – one that will impact the entire community and another that will tweak requirements within a condominium subdivision.
The Common Council on May 20 gave a rubber stamp of approval to the city’s zoning rewrite document, which touches on requirements for properties zoned for residential, business and institutional use.
The zoning rewrite was approved, on a unanimous vote, during a second and final reading. The motion came after nearly two years of discussion, review, scrutiny and debate.
“This was a case study in how sausage gets made,” Council President Patrick Singer commented after the vote was taken. “It was a very long process, but a very public and engaging process.”
The zoning rewrite was designed to remove outdated practices and clarify new city standards that have since been put in place. Along the way, officials held a series of hearings, and the public expressed concerns on a myriad of topics, including parking.
In a separate, but related motion, the council on May 20 also approved on a 5-2 vote a proposal to create a so-called residential overlay district within the city’s Waters Edge South subdivision.
Waters Edge South, located along Waters Edge Drive, is dotted by an assortment of condominiums. Each complex has between two and four units.
“Adopting the district reduces the number of permitted unrelated individuals in a non-family household to two,” City Manager Cameron Clapper said.
Council members Stephanie Abbott and Sarah Bregant were dissenters of the overlay district within Waters Edge.
“I don’t really feel I need to waste my breath on this, because it’s going to pass anyway, but I want to reiterate that the use of this is… probably not in the city’s best interest,” Abbott said.
