The City Plan Commission met 09/25/2024. As information items, they reviewed proposed changes and updates to the Municipal Code related to driveways, driveway extensions, parking pads, streets, sidewalks, and alcohol-related license, permits, and business regulations.
For the most part, the changes would rearrange where in the Municipal Code certain items are located and make sure the Municipal Code aligns with state statutes. They also would streamline the process for rezoning applications and future land use map amendments.
If implemented the changes would result in the Municipal Services Committee no longer having to hear variance requests related to driveways because those would now go before the Board of Zoning Appeals.
Although most of the changes did not increase regulations, in one area they substantially alter what it currently allowable. Right now, owners of property zoned as agricultural are allowed to build a single-family residential dwelling on that property. However, the proposed changes would remove the ability to build single-family homes on property zoned for agricultural use. This was ostensibly done because the city did not want to encourage the building of single-family dwellings on large lots and wanted to make sure they were built on smaller lots; however, there was minimal discussion about how these regulations would impact existing farmers or people who wanted to start a farm.
These proposed changes are expected to come back before the Plan Commission as action items at the 10/09/2024 Commission meeting.
I’ve prepared a transcript of the discussion for download:
RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAYS, DRIVEWAY EXTENSIONS, PARKING PADS AND OUTDOOR PARKING OF VEHICLES/TRAILERS ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY – City staff wanted to move this section of the Municipal Code from Chapter 19 to Chapter 23 because Chapter 23 was the city’s land-use regulation code and, per Principal Planner Don Harp, “[T]hings that occur on private property should all be under that one umbrella of chapter 23 for consistent administration of the zoning regulations in regards to permitting, review, and also the appeals process that occurs at time to time when someone can’t comply with the code. Those requests should be going to the Board of Appeals, rather than the municipal services committee.”
He told the committee they were not increasing regulations, but they were removing duplication of standards and eliminating inconsistencies. They were also trying to be more transparent on the permitting process related to driveway openings. [Readers may recall how confusing the process was and how many regulations were involved in getting a curb cut as illustrated by the variance request for a curb cut brought to the Board of Zoning Appeals back in June.]
The changes would also result in the illustrations and definition of terms being updated, again with the purpose of promoting clarity.
Finally, there are currently some administrative policies related to driveways on private property, but, with these changes, they would be able to eliminate one of those policies and roll it into the zoning code which will provide more transparency.
OFFICIAL MAP AMENDMENTS AND ZONING AMENDMENTS/PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES – These proposed changes would codify the process for a map amendment and explain who can initiate such requests.
The changes would also markedly streamline the process for approving a zoning amendment. Right now, the city holds a public hearing at the Plan Commission as well as a public hearing at the Common Council whenever a rezoning is proposed. The public notice requirements related to holding public hearings means that rezoning takes about 8 weeks. State statute, however, only requires one public hearing before the Common Council, so if they eliminate the public hearing before the Plan Commission, that process can be cut down to 6 weeks. Mayor Woodford noted that, although one public hearing would be eliminated, the city did provide public participation opportunities at Council and committee meetings for people wanting to speak on action items, so “while we’re streamlining and reducing the number of public hearings, we’re not changing the ability for members of the public to express their views on an action item such as this coming before the Council.”
Another proposed change was the number of aye votes needed to approve a zoning amendment. The city currently required 8 members of the Common Council to vote affirmatively to approve a zoning amendment; however Act 16 which was passed by the state in 2023 stated that it could be approved by “a simple majority of the quorum of the members elect”. Quorum for the Common Council is only 8 members, so, theoretically, if only 8 members of the Common Council were at a meeting they could vote on a zoning amendment and if only 5 of them voted in favor of it, it would be approved per state law.
The proposed changes would also clarify the standards that could be used to approve zoning amendments. Changes would need to align with the city’s Comprehensive Plan, or have some sort of study or data supporting such a change even if the proposal doesn’t align with the Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, an error within the zoning map could also prompt a zoning amendment.
The changes would also eliminate the terms “temporary” and “permanent” as they relate to zoning. Principal Planner Lindsey Smith pointed out that zoning is never permanent, and it can cause confusion to neighbors to hear that something is going to be assigned a single-family residential zoning but then a few years later it gets zoned for multi-family use. [Such confusion was one of the dynamics at play during the rezoning of a parcel of land near Midway and Plank Road earlier this year.]
Finally, the proposed changes would eliminated the building of single-family homes on land zoned for agricultural use. Principal Planner Smith said, “Within our agricultural zoning district though, we have a minimum lot size of 10 acres. So, with that, we’re actually permitting and encouraging people to build single family homes on 10 acre lots—10-acre size lots. So, with this proposed amendment, we are—this is eliminating single family homes within our agricultural zoning district. So, if someone wants to build a new single-family home, they will have to rezone to one of our residential zoning districts, which has a smaller minimum lot size. This hopefully will encourage smart growth principles and encourage those smaller lots, rather than having a 10-acre size lot within the city with a new single-family home.”
Mayor Woodford asked if those changes around single-family dwellings on agricultural land would apply to land where there were already improvements. Principal Planner Smith said, “[I]t would just be a non-conforming use in structures that exist. They can continue to live there, but there are some different standards on expanding if utilizing it for a single-family home.” [I would have appreciated a fuller discussion on what the “different standards” would be if someone wanted to expand on an existing single-family home. Additionally, what would happen if someone bought agricultural land with a home on it but the home was not in good condition? Would they be allowed to demolish it and build a new house? It sounds like potentially not.]
LICENSES, PERMITS AND BUSINESS REGULATIONS RELATING TO CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOL USES – These changes would remove the consumption of alcohol from a special use to a permitted use. This will eliminate the need to go through a special use permitting process if a business is looking to sell alcohol on site for consumption.
Under state statute, the city does not have a lot of discretion on special use permits which has caused some frustration for Council members who are asked to vote on things that they essentially need to approve unless they want to open the city up to legal repercussions. These changes would the process administrative and not require Council approval.
Principal Planner Smith noted that there is still a robust process for businesses to acquire a liquor license. They would just not need to get a special use permit on top of that.
Mayor Woodford stated, “For our for our Council colleagues, this is another example where we’ve been hearing you that it’s frustrating to have an item come before you for a vote, only to be told that if, if you vote against it without a sound basis for the denial, it’ll expose the city to potential litigation. We know you don’t like those items. We don’t like them either, so, and it’s and it’s also just a pain for the people who have to go through that process. So, I really appreciate that we’re bringing this one forward, and hope—hopefully the council also appreciates that we’re trying to clean up some of these kind of impossible approval processes.”
The items are expected to come back to the commission as action items for the 10/09/2024 meeting.
View full meeting details and video here: https://cityofappleton.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=1220798&GUID=EAFFF5DD-DCA9-45BC-B293-D9475718BE3D
4 thoughts on “City Plan Commission Reviews Proposed Code Amendments – Would Conform Code To State Statute, Streamline Processes, Allow Driveway Related Variance Requests To Be Heard By Board Of Zoning Appeals, Prevent Single-Family Homes From Being Built On Land Zoned For Agricultural Use”