Altoona City Council Meeting – June 25, 2026

The Altoona Common Council met on Thursday, June 25, 2026, at 5:00 PM in Council Chambers at City Hall. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance, roll call, and approval of the June 11, 2026 minutes. Department heads provided reports, and a lengthy discussion was held on the strategic development of city-owned lots adjacent to the old landfill in Windsor Forest. The meeting adjourned at 7:30 PM.

Consent Calendar

• The consent agenda was approved unanimously, including:
  • Approval of refuse hauler licenses.
  • Resolution 6A-26 regarding the submission of the City’s Compliance Maintenance Annual Report (CMAR) for the wastewater collection system to the Wisconsin DNR.
  • Approval of Brian Coley as the new Agent for Kwik Trip, Inc., Store #828.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Brandon Cedar Blade (551 Saxon Road) questioned the need for development, expressing appreciation for the current wooded green space and asking, "Why do we need to do anything with it?"
• A senior resident from 901 Woodland Court (Windsor Forest) expressed desire for single-level homes suitable for seniors, voiced concerns about potential landfill gas and safety issues (a heavy cover on a sewer outfall repeatedly popping off), and urged caution about building near the landfill.

Discussion Items

• Introduction to Windsor Forest Parcels: City Administrator Mike Golot described the city-owned lots on the west end of Saxonwood adjacent to the decommissioned landfill (capped in 1984, formerly a municipal dump). The property is unzoned and has existing water/sewer infrastructure along the east boundary. Staff presented four conceptual development options, all assuming market-rate construction initially, with further discussion on affordability.
• Development Options Presented:
  • Single-family: 7 lots (60x120 ft), $130,000 infrastructure, estimated $2.94M valuation ($420,000 per home). Suitable for traditional market-rate homes.
  • Cottage Court: 16 units with shared common space and parking; $263,000 infrastructure; $3.52M valuation ($220,000 per unit). Requires HOA. Council questioned demand without garages in Wisconsin.
  • Twin Homes: 9 units (45x120 ft each), $130,000 infrastructure; $3.15M valuation ($350,000 each). Similar to existing development on Cole Drive.
  • Condominiums: 10 units (based on Tom Toy model), $144,000 infrastructure; $3M valuation ($300,000 each). Requires HOA.
• Affordability Discussion: Staff noted that to achieve affordability, the city could discount land/infrastructure, impose deed restrictions (e.g., 1% annual appreciation cap for 31 years), or create a land trust. However, these methods are complex and may limit buyer interest. Council debated whether to pursue affordable housing on this small number of lots or to sell lots at market price to recover costs and let the market provide naturally affordable smaller homes.
• Council Positions:
  • Councilperson Stuber expressed concern about spending city resources on affordable housing that only yields a handful of units; suggested building market-rate homes to free up move-up inventory.
  • Councilperson Lima favored selling lots to end‑users rather than builders, with covenants to ensure affordable design (smaller footprint, one‑car garage) and prevent speculative resale.
  • Councilperson Rowe supported single-family homes due to neighborhood fit, but acknowledged a market for downsizing seniors.
  • Councilperson Thielen proposed auctioning lots individually to multiple builders for variety.
• Landfill Concerns: Councilperson Zilmer raised liability issues and questioned whether building on the site is safe given unknown waste and potential methane migration. Staff responded that monitoring wells show no hits and gradient flows away from the site, but acknowledged disclosure and monitoring are necessary.
• Additional Considerations: Staff noted the landfill parcel could be used as a park or recreational amenity, but development on the capped landfill would need DNR approval.

Key Outcomes

• No formal vote was taken. Council directed staff to refine development options, focusing on designs between cottage court and single-family (e.g., small single-family homes with one‑car garages).
• Staff will return with revised layouts and cost estimates, considering selling lots individually to end‑users to preserve affordability and control.
• The discussion will continue at a subsequent council meeting.