Shorewood council tables subdivision code change after heated debate over required water hook-ups

Shorewood’s City Council on April 28 tabled a proposed update to the city’s Subdivision Ordinance after extended debate over a new requirement that would force subdivisions to connect to municipal water and, in some cases, extend water mains to the next property line.

The proposed ordinance, introduced by Planning Director Mark Griffiths and consultant Rita Trapp of HKGi, would reorganize the subdivision code and add a provision that subdivisions be considered premature unless municipal water and sewer are extended and connected. Proponents said the change prevents new development from relying on private wells and protects public safety and the city’s water enterprise; opponents warned it would saddle homeowners with steep, potentially crippling costs.

Supporters pointed to long-term infrastructure and public-safety concerns. Planning Director Griffiths told the Council staff recommended the change as part of aligning code with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and to avoid scattered, premature development served by private wells. City Engineer Budde and Public Works Director Morreim said extending mains to serve new lots is standard practice and helps ensure hydrants and consistent water quality.

Opponents, including residents and some councilmembers, said the rule could make small infill splits infeasible. Developer representative Mike Sherritt told the Council that estimates for installing a six-inch water main to the property line ran “between one hundred thirty and one hundred fifty thousand dollars,” which he said could amount to roughly half a lot’s value and would prevent modest two-lot splits in Shorewood’s older, low-density neighborhoods. Resident Duane Laurila told the Council forcing hookups would place an “undue burden” on older residents and property owners who have relied on wells.

Council debate focused on two core tensions: (1) equity and hardship for individual homeowners who face large up-front costs, and (2) long-range planning and legal exposure if state legislation reduces local zoning controls. Planning Director Griffiths and City Administrator Nevinski said several bills being considered at the State level could curtail a city’s ability to control density; staff argued that, without local rules, more dense development could occur on wells, leaving neighborhoods without hydrants or adequate municipal water infrastructure.

Several councilmembers suggested compromise paths: using the variance process in narrow hardship cases, carving the water language out for later discussion, or phasing policy changes. City Attorney Shepherd cautioned that the subdivision variance standard under state law focuses on land-use hardship, not necessarily financial hardship, and that piecemeal changes could trigger additional public-notice requirements.

After multiple motions and attempts to amend the draft, the Council voted 3–2 to table Ordinance 617 until a future publicly noticed work session focused on a broader water plan (Mayor Labadie, Councilmembers Gorham and Maddy in favor; Councilmembers Sanschagrin and DiGruttolo opposed). The motion directs staff to return with a work-session schedule and additional analysis on policy, costs, and options for addressing equity and hardship.

What’s next: staff will schedule a work session to review the city’s larger water planning options, provide financial and engineering scenarios, and identify outreach steps. The ordinance remains on hold; until it is reintroduced and adopted, current subdivision rules apply.