The Notes: Week of October 3 - October 7, 2022
It's October, folks! And this week is another Full Council Week in the city of Appleton. What would normally be a relatively quiet week is sure to be a bit of an exciting one in council chambers on the sixth floor of City Hall.
Before we get to the heart of the eminent excitement on Wednesday, we have one meeting on Monday, 10/03/2022 at 7pm: The Board of Zoning Appeals. As you already know if you're a regular reader of this blog, this board and their meetings are always of interest to me. The items that come before this board represent some of the "real meat" of living in our city and helping to maintain neighborhoods and properties in the city to established municipal code. During this meeting, board members will take up eight appeals for variances for six different properties! Here's a quick rundown of the requests:
- Pathways Church on Evergreen Drive would like to add some exterior lighting to their property without employing a "full cutoff" design. Full cutoff lighting is required to help to reduce light pollution from properties on their neighboring properties. Full cutoff lighting is more costly to the church... but a variance cannot be granted simply because following code would be costly to the property owner.
- A property owner on W Fourth Street would like to construct an accessory building in the property's front yard. Because this is on a corner lot (meaning there are essentially two front yards, one facing each street), this variance may be granted... depending on what alternatives are available which might conform with municipal code exist.
- The new owners of portions of the old Shopko building property on Northland Avenue would like two variances: 1) to create a drive-thru in the front yard of the property and 2) to maneuver vehicles in the front yard of the property. I am interested in seeing what is proposed here as this is such a unique property and needs to have new business(es) revitalize it.
- A property owner on E Haddonstone Drive would like to install a pool which would increase the coverage of their property's lot to 55%. Current municipal code allows a maximum of 40% lot coverage in the zoning district of that property.
- An owner of a property on E Heidemann Drive would like an 8-foot tall back yard fence where a maximum of 6-foot fence height is allowed by code.
- A front-yard 6-foot fence and no vision corner in said fencing is being requested by a property owner on Florida Avenue. The fence they currently have is out of compliance for these items (partially due to the fact that this corner lot has "two front yards") so they would like to keep the fence... but there are legal alternatives so I am interested to hear what the board members say about these variance requests.
I am open and interested in hearing this proposal as it asks Trout representatives specifically for an explanation of how their proposed relocation to this as yet undeveloped park land aligns with the city's goals and benefits the citizens of Appleton. After this presentation (and after what will undoubtedly be a lot of public comment before the presentation), the council will give an "up/down vote" on whether the city and the museum should move forward to the next step in the above process map. Let me know your thoughts on this! I'm interested in whether or not the case can be made that a museum relocation on this parkland will be a net benefit to all of Appleton, despite the fact that some park land will be lost.
- The driveway saga of the neighbors on a corner of Glendale Avenue and Douglas Street: The current owners of this property want a variance to expand their driveway concrete into the front yard of their property since they have five cars and currently not enough driveway on which to park them. Though I empathize with these property owners, we do have a city ordinance about not allowing folks to fill their street-facing yards with concrete for a reason.
- The non-action resolution "In Support of Election Officials": I detailed this last week and voted against it in committee as well. This resolution will not go anywhere in the real action of the support of election workers in the city and the city clerk's office. If an expression of unity from council members in this regard is needed, then it should include some action that proves that the unity is more than in just words!
- The denying of all current bids for the Appleton Public Library project: There's no doubt that the bids that did come in for this project make it impossible for the city to proceed with the project right now. The budget cannot be bent so far as to accept these too-expensive bids. But that leaves the city in an awkward position on this project. I will continue to advocate for a drastic paring back of the project in order for it to proceed.
It's important that you are all aware that there are currently enough members of this city council who want the project to proceed right now. They have the votes needed to allow the project to proceed despite it being over budget. So it's vital that those of us opposed to over-spending on this project remain vigilant in pressing the city and our partners in the project (the architects and our project manager, Boldt) to pare back so that a library that is both budget-reasonable and functional and valuable to the city is the end result. How do you feel about this project and the first attempt the city made at bid-seeking? Let me know!
Comments
Post a Comment
Thanks for your comment. Moderators will be reviewing before comments are publicly posted.