Committee meetings this week will feature a mixture of new and old business. Some items referred back from council last week will be back at the respective committees, while other items which have been discussed before, like a plan to revamp some public works services, will see action taken this week.
Council Recap
Last Wednesday, the council approved a new set of policies to allow for accessory dwelling units in the city. This change will permit opportunities for affordable and flexible housing options the city does not currently have. You can read more about ADUs in my previous blog post on the topic.
The other noteworthy item that garnered some debate before ultimately being approved, authorized the city attorney to negotiate with lessees of city-owned property, to put a clause into renewed leases that does not allow for the posting of political signs. I wrote about this proposal in last week's council notes.
Municipal Services
Monday 4:30 p.m. - This week's municipal services meeting features a packed agenda.
The first item up is a discussion about a street reconstruction project on Alvin St. from Wisconsin Ave. to Marquette St. Normally these projects garner little interest. In fact, this one was previously approved by the municipal services committee with little discussion. However, at council Wednesday, Alderman Nate Wolff moved to amend this item to restrict parking on the entire block of Alvin St. from Wisconsin Ave. to Brewster St. It was then quickly referred back to committee by Alderman Bill Siebers who represents that district.
This is the block that has the Planned Parenthood clinic on it and it often features both pro-life and pro-choice protesters parked on the street while they walk the sidewalk at the corner of Wisconsin Ave. There are rare police calls about the protestors but I don't believe any citations have been issued there. In checking with our traffic division, there are also no notable issues with traffic or accidents at the intersection due to the vehicles parked on that block of Alvin St.
I don't know if any committee members will make a motion to amend this item as Alderman Wolff attempted to do at council. I would vote against any amendment to restrict that parking for several reasons. It would simply shift the protester's vehicles to the residential neighborhood north of the clinic and negatively impact the residential portion of that block. I also don't think this is really about a parking problem at all, rather an issue with the protestors, their vehicles and the signs they display. Absent of any reason related to parking, or traffic concerns, I don't think changing the parking to affect the protestors is a wise move on the part of the city.
While we will move to hold this item for the July 26th meeting, I wanted to mention that we will also revisit a recommendation from staff to ban shipping containers and pole buildings as accessory buildings in the city. This was initially recommended for approval by this committee 4-1. I also voted to approve this initially. But prior to council and some additional research, I asked to have this item referred back to committee for further discussion. I think using shipping containers as storage sheds is not a look consistent with the character of the neighborhoods in our city and I support the staff recommendation to ban the use of them.
However, pole buildings do provide a less expensive alternative to a stick built shed or garage. While generally covered with metal roofs and siding, they are still a more attractive option. We don't prohibit metal roofs on houses in the city, so I don't think allowing pole buildings as accessory buildings like sheds is unreasonable. This could also lead into discussion about the size of accessory buildings, which was something that was also discussed in relation to this agenda item.
Another item referred back from Wednesday is a clarification of what types of electrical work homeowners are allowed to do without needing to hire an electrician. I believe this staff recommendation is related to safety concerns. Alderman Shultz referred this back with concerns about whether this could prohibit certain types of solar energy installations by homeowners.
Perhaps the biggest item on the agenda is the plan to modify several operations performed by the department of public works. This is an item that has come before this and the utilities committee as an informational item twice already. Following each meeting, the public works department has offered modifications to the plan based on committee and citizen input. I've written pretty extensively about this in previous blog posts. We will now be asked to recommend this item for approval to the full council. The part of this that has generated the most concern is a plan to reduce bulky overflow collection to two items every other week and only from April - November. While it is a reduction from the bulky overflow collection we receive now, it is still very comparable to any other community around the area. That change also allows DPW to absorb sidewalk snow removal work previously contracted out, and to change our leaf collection to a more environmentally-friendly practice of using large vacuums to suck up leaves.
For anyone with concerns or comments about this plan, I still welcome them. My contact information is at the bottom of this post.
For anyone with concerns or comments about this plan, I still welcome them. My contact information is at the bottom of this post.
The last item from the municipal services committee agenda I think is worth highlighting is a request from Creative Downtown Appleton Inc. to install a parklet in place of two parking stall on State St., just north of College Ave. for the months of August - September. As CDA notes in the application, there is a lack of open sitting space on the west end of downtown. CDA will cover the cost of lost parking revenue for those spots, as well as cover the costs of the parklet, including setup and maintenance.
Finance Committee
Monday 5:30 p.m. - The finance committee meeting this week brings some rare good news about the financial picture for the city. Following the 2020 audit, the city has a $5 million fund balance. Per council policy, 75% of that or $3,840,000 immediately goes to pay off debt or offset borrowing. The remaining $1,275,000 is subject to recommendations from staff, to the finance committee and ultimately the Common Council. Payback from open TIFs, COVID relief funds, grants and lower than expected healthcare costs led to the excess balance.
Below is a list of recommendations from the staff to the finance committee on how to utilize the funds.
I am interested in hearing the case for each of these projects. The one I would highlight here is one I detailed when it came to finance a few weeks ago. It's a branding project for the city. This is something I worked on while I worked for the city and strongly believe is important. Branding for municipalities is as important as it is for businesses. We compete for businesses and people with other communities just like businesses do. Branding helps set the city apart. A branding project has two main parts. A study which is the work to determine what the new brand will be and implementation, which is the process to incorporate the new brand and logo throughout the city.
The study is the key and from research I had done previously and which the memo about branding to finance shows, the cost for the study portion of the project can be between $50,000-$100,000. The staff budgeted for the low end of that at $50,000 with $450,000 budgeted for implementation. I worry that $50,000 may not yield the most qualified firms, both locally and nationally that can do branding. I will suggest to the finance committee that we take some money from the implementation for the project, to add more to the study portion of the project.
Utilities Committee
Tuesday 5 p.m. - The main item on the agenda for the committee this week is approval of the proposed public works plan I wrote about above for the municipal services committee. Stormwater falls under the jurisdiction of the utilities committee and part of the plan relates to stormwater and phosphorus runoff.
Library Board
Wednesday 1 p.m. - The board will take up updates to its financial policy and operating budget.
City Plan Commission
Wednesday 3:30 p.m. - The commission will take up a couple of special use permits for alcohol sales for a business and the annexation of 1.6 acres of land into the city to allow for the development of three single family parcels.
Community & Economic Development Committee
Wednesday 4:30 p.m. - The lone item for the committee this week is a request to amend a development agreement with the owners of the Zuelke building downtown. A long-planned renovation of the building is moving forward. It will feature retail space on the first floor and residential on the 2nd-12th floors.
Safety and Licensing Committee
Wednesday 5:30 p.m. - The agenda for the committee features a host of liquor license applications and temporary premise applications for several downtown bars to use outdoor spaces for Mile of Music in August.
HR/IT Committee
Wednesday 6:30 p.m. - The committee will be asked to approve a table of organization change for the health department. This includes changing the nursing supervisor position to a deputy director position which will bring it in line with other departments.
It will also look to amend the pay plan for election workers and approve changes to a series of different policies.
Get In Touch
I am always available to answer questions at district15@appleton.org or (920) 419-1360. As always, agendas can be found on the agenda and meetings page of the city website. Meetings can be viewed live on the website or watched at a later date. Meetings are also open for anyone to attend in person and all meetings take place in the Common Council chambers on the 6th floor of City Hall, unless otherwise noted.
If the concern with the ADUs is their appearance, I think it should be possible to construct some set of acceptable appearance standards. This would preserve the character of the neighborhoods without outright banning different structural designs. That would be my vote.
ReplyDeleteShipping containers can be clad with any number of other siding materials to change their appearance. While this adds cost, some people may want to pay that premium. One advantage of shipping containers is they can be relocated using standard equipment and are strong enough for this to be done without needing to add a lot of extra internal structure. I think if someone wanted that advantage and was willing to add cladding to meet whatever appearance requirements are agreed upon, they shouldn't be outright banned from using a shipping container.
Similarly with post-frame construction, the construction method used does not mean it has to look like a "pole barn". Post-frame is just a structural design, and it can have a number of benefits: reduced framing factor for decreased thermal bridging is one. Once the post-framed structure is up, it can be clad with any number of siding materials to fit in with the appearance standards.
Paul, thanks for sharing those thoughts. It's an interesting point you bring up about "dressing up" a shipping container. As the discussion centers around appearance and fit for the neighborhoods, I would be more willing to consider them if we create restrictions around them that ensure they fit the character of the city. We will be looking at this issue again at the committee level next week and I appreciate that feedback. I will look into what those options might be as I am hopeful we can find some compromise that will allow options while still conforming with our neighborhoods.
Delete