HomeMy WebLinkAbout29. 19-615 NOVEMBER 26, 2019 19-615 RESOLUTION
(CARRIED LOST LAID OVER WITHDRAWN )
PURPOSE: APPROVE SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR AN
ADAPTIVE REUSE OF A FORMER SCHOOL TO A SENIOR
LIVING APARTMENT; 619 MERRITT AVENUE
INITIATED BY: NORTHPOINTE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
PLAN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Approved w/conditions
WHEREAS, the Plan Commission finds that the General Development Plan and
Specific Implementation Plan for the proposed planned development for an adaptive
reuse of a former school to a senior living apartment at 619 Merritt Avenue, is consistent
with the criteria established in Section 30-387(6) of the Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of
Oshkosh that a General Development Plan and Specific Implementation Plan for the
planned development for an adaptive reuse of a former school to a senior living
apartment at 619 Merritt Avenue,per the attached,is hereby approved with the following
conditions:
1. A Base Standard Modification for the proposed multi-family use within
the Institutional Zone District;
2. A Certified Survey Map is required for reconfiguration of the proposed
parcels;
3. A Base Standard Modification for a zero (0) foot side (west) yard setback
for the former school building;
4. A Base Standard Modification for a three (3) foot street front yard setback
for proposed paved area along Boyd Street;
5. A Base Standard Modification for a 50% reduction in off-street parking
requirements (70 stalls to 35 stalls) for the proposed senior living adaptive
reuse;
6. A cross access/shared parking agreement between the church property
and proposed senior living adaptive reuse property;
7. Landscape plan shall include foundation planting calculations for the
proposed school/senior living redevelopment;
NOVEMBER 26, 2019 19-615 RESOLUTION
CONT'D
8. Landscaping is required for the new proposed garage on the church
property as approved by the Department of Community Development;
9. A Base Standard Modification to allow a maximum of 2.7 foot candle light
level at the property line near the building entrances along Boyd Street of
the and proposed senior living apartment building;
10. Lighting plan shall expand to include all of the church property to ensure
adequate lighting levels are provided to the proposed senior living
adaptive reuse property;
11. A masonry knee wall shall be added to the front and side facades of all
three proposed garages/storage structures using materials similar or
complimentary to the church and school building.
City
Gi
Oshkosh
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Common Council
FROM: Mark Lyons
Planning Services Manager
DATE: November 21, 2019
RE: Approve Specific Implementation Plan for an Adaptive Reuse of a Former School
to a Senior Living Apartment; 619 Merritt Avenue (Plan Commission
Recommends Approval)
BACKGROUND
The subject area is currently zoned Institutional District (I) and consists of two parcels
encompassing approximately 2.65 acres, bounded by three streets;Merritt Avenue to the
north, Boyd Street to the east and Monroe Street to the west. The main parcel contains an
active church with attached parsonage, a former parochial school and related accessory
structures. The smaller parcel located at the southwest corner of the subject site is a paved
undeveloped area that served as a playground for students attending the former school.
Overall, the site is covered by approximately 83.2% of impervious surfaces and 16.8%
greenspace. The applicant is proposing to split the western (church) half of the property from
the eastern (school) half. Also, the small undeveloped parcel will be combined with the
western half. The surrounding area consists predominantly of low density residential uses, an
apartment complex to the north and a few light commercial uses.
The owner/applicant has submitted a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) application to the city to
aid with financing of the project. If the request proceeds, the Plan Commission will review the
project plan followed by consideration by the Common Council.
ANALYSIS
The applicant is proposing an adaptive reuse of the former school building to senior living
apartments. Per the submitted narrative, 35 units are planned to be constructed within the
former school. Finding appropriate uses for buildings of this type can be challenging as they
outlive their original intended use. Multifamily uses are not permitted within Institutional Zone
Districts, therefore a Base Standard Modification (BSM) for the proposed use will be required.
The proposed reuse of the former school is appropriate and should not have not have
detrimental impact on the neighborhood. The applicant is also proposing to raze an existing
City Hall,215 Church Avenue P.O.Box 1 130 Oshkosh,WI 54903-1130 920 236 5000 http//www ci oshkosh wi us
garage/storage structure used jointly by the school and church. In its place, two garages will be
constructed to serve the residents of the senior living facility while a new garage will be
constructed on the church property for storage of lawn and other related equipment.
The proposed division essentially splits the parcel in half from north to south. The new
proposed lot line hugs the school building, providing a zero-foot side yard setback where 7.5
feet is required. Due to the existing building and off-street parking placement, the proposed lot
line is logical. Similarly, the new lot line is located within the existing parking area and drive
accesses. Part of the parking lot's reconstruction involves the removal and replacement of
asphalt along Boyd Street. Currently, the asphalt has a zero-foot setback where per code,
structures (including parking areas) may be placed no closer to the property line than the
principle structure. As proposed, the new asphalt is set at three feet, closer to the lot line than
the school building. Vehicular access to the church/school site is made via several driveways;
three along Monroe Street (two to the main parking area, one to the parsonage's garage), one
along Merritt Avenue accessing the interior parking area and two along Boyd Street for the main
parking lot. As part of the reconstruction of the parking lot for the school,the northern driveway
will be eliminated while the other will be relocated slightly to the north to better access the
parking area.
The submitted plans indicate removal of an existing 24-foot by 44-foot garage/storage building
south of the school building. A new 24-foot by 24-foot garage is being proposed to be
constructed on the church lot near the southeast corner. Two additional garages are proposed
for the school property, one 96-foot by 48-foot, 16-stall structure and a 120-foot by 24-foot, 10-
stall structure. Parking for the proposed school consists of nine surface stalls(with two handicap
stalls) plus the 26 previously mentioned garage stalls. Code requires a minimum of two spaces
per living unit totaling 70 stalls resulting in a shortage of 50%. Due to the makeup of the targeted
tenants, the tenants generally have fewer vehicles and the shortfall can be made up from
available parking on the church property which sees limited peak usage. The cross-
access/shared parking agreement condition previously mentioned satisfies this concern. Also,
public on-street parking is available on Boyd Street and Monroe Street in the form of ten and
nine angled stalls respectively. Parking for the newly configured church property consists of 65
surface stalls including eight handicap accessible. Based on the seating capacity of the church
(277 seats), 55 stalls are required.
Most of the existing school building's footprint will remain intact with exception of a proposed
606 square foot vestibule entrance and mechanical room area. The addition is located within a
courtyard-like area not visible from the street on the west side of the building. The applicant
states the existing boiler room and main stairway will be replaced with an ADA-compliant
elevator near the new entrance. The site plan includes a dumpster enclosure located south of
the school building. Its location is in a code-compliant location as it is located behind the
principal structure's front plane. To mitigate its impact, more intensive landscaping is indicated
on the landscape plan.
City Hall,215 Church Avenue P 0 Box 1 130 Oshkosh,WI 54903-1130 920 236 5000 http//www ci oshkosh wi us
When completed, there will be an overall reduction of impervious surfaces on both properties.
From 83.2% to 71.4%, a decrease of 13,532 square feet. The site still exceeds the 60% maximum
coverage allowed by code, however, the project does decrease the coverage significantly.
Finalized storm water management plans, landscaping and lighting plan will be review as part
of final Site Plan approval.
The applicant states that they are coordinating with the State of Wisconsin Historical Society
and will maintain the exterior finishes of the historic school building. Windows that have been
insulated and covered with plywood over the years will be restored to match current wood
windows. Any venting and other required exterior changes will be directed to the rear or west
side of the building, hidden from public view. All three proposed garages are similar in design
with vinyl siding and asphaltic shingles. The siding will match the color of the school building's
brick with a complimentary colored shingles. The materials do meet the minimum requirements
for exterior materials. Although not required by base code, staff feels the garages should include
additional architectural enhancements complementing the church's and school's historic
character. Staff suggests adding a masonry knee wall along the front and side facades of all
three proposed structures. The masonry material should match or mimic the look of the brick
of the school and church buildings. Staff feels this is not an unreasonable request due to the
proximity of the garages to the streets and considering the number of Base Standard
Modifications requested by the applicant.
FISCAL IMPACT
Approval of the Specific Implementation Plan (SIP) should not require expansion of any city
services as they are already provided to the area and will result in additional assessed
improvement value from the new development. The applicant has estimated an approximate
$10.3 million dollar total investment for the project.
RECOMMENDATION
The Plan Commission recommended approval of the General Development Plan and Specific
Implementation Plan with conditions and findings at its November 5, 2019 meeting.
Respectfully Submitted, Approved:
Mark Lyons Mark A. Rohloff
Planning Services Manager City Manager
City Hall,215 Church Avenue P.O.Box 1 130 Oshkosh,WI 54903-1130 920.236 5000 http//www ci oshkosh wi.us
ITEM: PUBLIC HEARING: ZONE CHANGE FROM INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT (I)
TO INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT WITH PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
OVERLAY(I-PD), GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SPECIFIC
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN APPROVAL FOR AN ADAPTIVE REUSE OF A
FORMER SCHOOL TO A SENIOR LIVING APARTMENT LOCATED 619
MERRITT AVENUE
Plan Commission meeting of November 5, 2019.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: Northpointe Development Corporation
Property Owner: St.Mary's Congregation&Most Blessed Sacrament Parish
Action(s)Requested:
The applicant requests a zone change from the existing Institutional District(I) to Institutional
District with a Planned Development Overlay(SMU-PD) and approval for a General
Development Plan and Specific Implementation Plan for an adaptive reuse of a former school
building to a senior living apartment.
Applicable Ordinance Provisions:
The Zoning Ordinance does not establish criteria relative to appropriateness of changing zoning
from one classification to another but relies on the Comprehensive Plan and good planning
principles.
Planned Development standards are found in Section 30-387 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Property Location and Type:
The subject area is currently zoned Institutional District(I) and consists of two parcels
encompassing approximately 2.65 acres,bounded by three streets;Merritt Avenue to the north,
Boyd Street to the east and Monroe Street to the west. The main parcel contains an active church
with attached parsonage, a former parochial school and related accessory structures. The smaller
parcel located at the southwest corner of the subject site is a paved undeveloped area that served
as a playground for students attending the former school. Overall,the site is covered by
approximately 83.2% of impervious surfaces and 16.8%greenspace. The applicant is proposing to
split the western (church)half of the property from the eastern (school)half. Also, the small
undeveloped parcel will be combined with the western half. The surrounding area consists
predominantly of low density residential uses, an apartment complex to the north and a few light
commercial uses. The 2040 Comprehensive Land Use Plan recommends Institutional use for the
subject site.
The owner/applicant has submitted a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) application to the city to aid
with financing of the project. If the request proceeds, the Plan Commission will review the
project plan followed by consideration by the Common Council.
Subject Site
Existing Land Use Zoning
Institutional(Church&Former School) Institutional(I)
Adjacent Land Use and Zoning
Existing Uses Zoning
Single-Family Residential—9 Y............... (SR-
North Multi-famil 9)
............ ................................... _................................ ............................................................................................................................................................................................
Single-Family Residential—9 (SR-
South Two-Family&Vacant/Undeveb9p 9)
................... .................................. .........................................................................................................................................................................................
Single-Family Residential—9 (SR-
East Single&Two-family Residential, Tavern 9)
........................................................................_Single.._................................ ............ ...........................................................
JSingle-Farnily Residential—9 (SR-
West Single &Two-family Residential 9)
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Recommendation Land Use
2040 Land Use Recommendation Institutional
ANALYSIS
Zone Change
The applicant is requesting to add a Planned Development(PD) Overlay over both parcels. Due
to the existing nonconforming conditions of the site and proposed redevelopment, the PD
Overlay can provide relief from base district standards. Staff realizes the uniqueness of the site
and redevelopment challenges and supports the addition of the PD Overlay.
Use
The applicant is proposing an adaptive reuse of the former school building to senior living
apartments. Per the submitted narrative,35 units are planned to be constructed within the former
school. Finding appropriate uses for buildings of this type can be challenging as they outlive
their original intended use. Multifamily uses are not permitted within Institutional Zone
Districts, therefore a Base Standard Modification(BSM) for the proposed use will be required.
Staff is of the opinion that this proposed reuse of the former school is appropriate and should not
have not have detrimental impact on the neighborhood.
The applicant is also proposing to raze an existing garage/storage structure used jointly by the
school and church. In its place, two garages will be constructed to serve the residents of the
senior living facility while a new garage will be constructed on the church property for storage of
lawn and other related equipment.
ITEM—Rezone,GDP,SIP 619 Merritt Ave. 2
Site Design/Access/Off-Street Parkin
The applicant is proposing to divide the parcel, separating the church structure from the school
building. The proposed division essentially splits the parcel in half from north to south. The new
proposed lot line hugs the school building,providing a zero-foot side yard setback where 7.5 feet
is required. Due to the existing building and off-street parking placement, the proposed lot line is
logical and staff is supportive of a BSM for the reduced setback.
Similarly,the new lot line is located within the existing parking area and drive accesses. Again,
due to the existing conditions, staff is supportive of a BSM for zero-foot setbacks for the paved
areas and recommends the creation of a cross-access and shared g agreement parking between bot
h
new lots.
Part of the parking lot's reconstruction involves the removal and replacement of asphalt along
Boyd Street. Currently, the asphalt has a zero-foot setback where per code, structures (including
parking areas)may be placed no closer to the property line than the principle structure. As
proposed,the new asphalt is set at three feet, closer to the lot line than the school building. Staff
is supportive of a BSM for the reduced setback as the existing condition is being improved and
I
enforcing current requirements causes reduction of parking stalls to the west.
Vehicular access to the church/school site is made via several driveways;three along Monroe
Street(two to the main parking area, one to the parsonage's garage), one along Merritt Avenue
accessing the interior parking area and two along Boyd Street for the main parking lot. As part of
the reconstruction of the parking lot for the school, the northern driveway will be eliminated
while the other will be relocated slightly to the north to better access the parking area.
The submitted plans indicate removal of an existing 24-foot by 44-foot garage/storage building
south of the school building. A new 24-foot by 24-foot garage is being proposed to be constructed
on the church lot near the southeast corner. Two additional garages are proposed for the school
property, one 96-foot by 48-foot, 16-stall structure and a 120-foot by 24-foot, 10-stall structure.
Parking for the proposed school consists of nine surface stalls (with two handicap stalls) plus the
26 previously mentioned garage stalls. Code requires a minimum of two spaces per living unit
totaling 70 stalls resulting in a shortage of 50%. Staff is supportive of a BSM for the reduced
parking as the makeup of the targeted tenants generally have fewer vehicles, and the shortfall can
be made up from available parking on the church property which sees limited peak usage. The
cross-access/shared parking agreement condition previously mentioned satisfies this concern.
Also,public on-street parking is available on Boyd Street and Monroe Street in the form of ten
and nine angled stalls respectively. The on-street parking should have ample capacity to service
visitors to apartment residents.
Parking for the newly configured church property consists of 65 surface stalls including eight
handicap accessible. Based on the seating capacity of the church (277 seats),55 stalls are required.
Although no pavement is proposed to be removed along Monroe Street, the stall will be restriped
to meet dimensional requirements for stall sizes and aisle widths.
ITEM—Rezone,GDP,SIP 619 Merritt Ave. 3
Most of the existing school building's footprint will remain intact with exception of a proposed
606 square foot vestibule entrance and mechanical room area. The addition is located within a
courtyard-like area not visible from the street on the west side of the building. The applicant
states the existing boiler room and main stairway will be replaced with an ADA-compliant
elevator near the new entrance. The boiler room was an add-on addition after construction of the
main building and is not an integral part of the architecture.
The site plan includes a dumpster enclosure located south of the school building. Its location is
only 9.5 feet from the right-of-way line,however it is in a code-compliant location as it is located
behind the principal structure's front plane. To mitigate its impact,more intensive landscaping is
indicated on the landscape plan. Details for the enclosure have not been provided. Design and
materials shall meet minimum code requirements and will be reviewed at Site Plan Review.
When completed,there will be an overall reduction of impervious surfaces on both properties. In
its current state, 95,836 square feet or 83.2%of the site is covered by impervious structures or
surfaces. As proposed, overall imperiousness drops to 82,304 square feet or 71.4%, a decrease of
13,532 square feet. The site still exceeds the 60%maximum coverage allowed by code,however,
the project does decrease the coverage significantly.
Storm Water Management[Utilities
Conceptual storm water management plans have been submitted. Initial comments from the
Department of Public Works state that with the proposed work exceeding 20,000 square feet,
water quality will be required along with other Chapter 14 storm water management
requirements. Finalized storm water management plans will be required as part of the Site Plan
Review process.
Landscaping
A landscaping plan has been provide and includes a variety of trees and shrubs. The plan
includes calculations for paved area, street frontage, yard and bufferyard landscape point
requirements. Absent from the calculations are building foundation points for the two garages on
the apartment property. The plans do show foundation plantings in what appears to be sufficient
quantities and the missing calculations may have been an oversight. Placement and the proposed
species to be provided appear to meet code. A finalized code compliant landscaping plan will be
required as part of the Site Plan Review Process.
Landscaping for the proposed 24-foot by 24-foot garage on the church property are not shown on
the landscape plan but is required. The final plan shall include calculations and planting
information for the structure.
Lighting
A lighting plan has been submitted for review. Wall sconces are proposed for pedestrian access
to the building along Boyd Street. Light levels exceed (2.7 fc) the 0.5 foot candle maximum at the
property line. Due to the close proximity of the building to the property line and keeping safety
in mind, staff recommends approval of a BSM for the increased illumination.
ITEM—Rezone,GDP,SIP 619 Merritt Ave. 4
Internal site illumination for the parking area mostly meets code with the exception along Boyd
Street when levels drop to 0.1 fc where 0.4 fc is required within parking areas. Staff has concerns
with the low light levels, especially for the safety for tenants accessing the dumpster enclosure at
night. Staff will require light levels to meet code during Site Plan Review.
Lighting data is absent from the church property. Staff has concerns with the light levels along
both sides of the proposed lot line and wants to ensure adequate lighting is available for residents
and vehicles. As a condition, staff recommends the lighting plan be expanded to include all of the
church property to allow for a more comprehensive review.
Sinae
Sign plans have not been submitted at this time. Signage will need to meet base code standards
and will be reviewed during the Site Plan Review process.
Building Facades
The applicant states that they are coordinating with the State of Wisconsin Historical Society and
will maintain the exterior finishes of the historic school building. Windows that have been
insulated and covered with plywood over the years will be restored to match current wood
windows. Any venting and other required exterior changes will be directed to the rear or west
side of the building,hidden from public view.
All three proposed garages are similar in design with vinyl siding and asphaltic shingles. The
siding will match the color of the school building's brick with a complimentary colored shingles.
The materials do meet the minimum requirements for exterior materials.
Although not required by base code,staff feels the garages should include additional
architectural enhancements complementing the church's and school's historic character. Staff
suggests adding a masonry knee wall along the front and side facades of all three proposed
structures. The masonry material should match or mimic the look of the brick of the school and
church buildings. Staff feels this is not an unreasonable request due to the proximity of the
garages to the streets and considering the number of Base Standard Modifications requested by
the applicant.
FINDINGS/RECOMMENDATION/CONDITIONS
In its review and recommendation to the Common Council on an application for a Planned
Development district, staff recommends the Plan Commission make the following findings based
on the criteria established by Chapter 30-387(C)(6):
(a) The proposed Planned Development project is consistent with the overall purpose and
intent of this Chapter.
(b) The proposed Planned Development project is consistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan and other area plans. (It is the responsibility of the City to determine
such consistency.)
ITEM—Rezone,GDP,SIP 619 Merritt Ave. 5
(c) The proposed Planned Development project would maintain the desired relationships
between land uses, land use densities and intensities, and land use impacts in the environs
of the subject site.
(d) Adequate public infrastructure is or will be available to accommodate the range of
uses being proposed for the Planned Development project,including but not limited to
public sewer and water and public roads.
(e) The proposed Planned Development project will incorporate appropriate and adequate
buffers and transitions between areas of different land uses and development
densities/intensities.
(f) The proposed Planned Development project design does not detract from areas of
natural beauty surrounding the site.
(g) The proposed architecture and character of the proposed Planned Development project
is compatible with adjacent/nearby development.
(h) The proposed Planned Development project will positively contribute to and not
detract from the physical appearance and functional arrangement of development in the
area.
(i) The proposed Planned Development project will produce significant benefits in terms
of environmental design and significant alternative approaches to addressing
development performance that relate to and more than compensate for any requested
exceptions/base standard modifications variation of any standard or regulation of this
Chapter.
(j) For Planned Development projects that are proposed to be developed in phases, the
applicant can provide a timeline for development and can demonstrate that the project
would be successful even if all phases were not or could not be completed.
Staff recommends approval of the rezone from Institutional (I) to Institutional with Planned
Development Overlay(I-PD), General Development Plan and Specific Implementation Plan with
the findings listed above and the proposed following conditions:
1. A Base Standard Modification for the proposed multi-family use within the Institutional
Zone District;
2. A Certified Survey Map is required for reconfiguration of the proposed parcels;
3. A Base Standard Modification for a zero (0) foot side(west)yard setback for the former
school building;
4. A Base Standard Modification for a three (3) foot street front yard setback for proposed
paved area along Boyd Street;
5. A Base Standard Modification for a 50%reduction in off-street parking requirements (70
stalls to 35 stalls)for the proposed senior living adaptive reuse;
6. A cross access/shared parking agreement between the church property and proposed
senior living adaptive reuse property;
7. Landscape plan shall include foundation planting calculations for the proposed
school/senior living redevelopment;
8. Landscaping is required for the new proposed garage on the church property as approved
by the Department of Community Development;
ITEM—Rezone,GDP,SIP 619 Merritt Ave. 6
9. A Base Standard Modification to allow a maximum of 2.7 foot candle light level at the
property line near the building entrances along Boyd Street of the and proposed senior
living apartment building;
10. Lighting plan shall expand to include all of the church property to ensure adequate
lighting levels are provided to the proposed senior living adaptive reuse property;
11. A masonry knee wall shall be added to the front and side facades of all three proposed
garages/storage structures using materials similar or complimentary to the church and
school building.
The Plan Commission approved of the rezone, General Development Plan and Specific
Implementation Plan as requested with findings and conditions noted. The following is the Plan
Commission's discussion on this item.
Site Inspections: Report:Ms. Palmeri,Ms. Propp and Mr. Mitchell reported visiting the site.
Staff report accepted as part of the record.
The applicant requests a zone change from the existing Institutional District(I) to Institutional
District with a Planned Development Overlay(SMU-PD) and approval for a General
Development Plan and Specific Implementation Plan for an adaptive reuse of a former school
building to a senior living apartment.
Mr. Nau presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding area as well as the land use
and zoning classifications in this area. The applicant is requesting to add a Planned Development
(PD) Overlay over both parcels due to the existing nonconforming conditions of the site and
proposed redevelopment. The applicant is proposing an adaptive reuse of the former school
building to senior living apartments. Per the submitted narrative, 35 units are planned to be
constructed within the former school. The applicant is also proposing to raze an existing
garage/storage structure used jointly by the school and church. In its place, two garages will be
constructed to serve the residents of the senior living facility while a new garage will be
constructed on the church property for storage of lawn and other related equipment. The
applicant is proposing to divide the parcel, separating the church structure from the school
building. The applicant states that they are coordinating with the State of Wisconsin Historical
Society and will maintain the exterior finishes of the historic school building. The applicant is
asking for multiple Base Standard Modifications. He said staff recommends approval of the
rezone from Institutional(I) to Institutional with Planned Development Overlay(I-PD), General
Development Plan and Specific Implementation Plan with the findings and conditions as stated in
the staff report.
Mr. Fojtik opened up technical questions to staff.
Mr.Hinz asked for Mr. Nau to go back to the elevations of the garage. He said staff is requesting
for the knee wall to be on the front and sides. He said there is not much room on the front to
make an impact due to the doors. He asked if staff would prefer the knee wall to be placed on the
sides and back.
ITEM—Rezone,GDP,SIP 619 Merritt Ave. 7
Mr. Lyons explained in staff's review, they thought it would be more of a consistent look to have
the knee wall wrapped around the building. He said the southern garage is heavily landscaped
from the south.
Mr.Hinz said there is going to be such a small area for the knee wall between the doors. He
suggested it may be overkill on the front.
Ms. Palemi said given that this is going to be senior housing, she asked if there were any
thoughts as to the dumpster or shoots to prevent tenants from having to go outdoors to dispose
of waste. She said the dumpster enclosure may be something that may be problematic. Ms.
Palmeri also questioned the accessibility of the site in terms of automated doors or other universal
design type features.
Mr. Lyons stated the applicant is available and can answer those questions.
Mr.Mitchell stated he knows Plan Commission does not necessary deal with traffic but is
concerned with it. He said there is an addition of about the 35-70 elderly people to the new
location besides the already 150-200 folks at Marion Manor. He said that is a good senior
population in the area. He said children and seniors generally seems to be slower but not always.
He stated the intersection of Merritt Avenue and Boyd Street and the intersection of Merritt
Avenue and Monroe Street are very difficult to see. He said the setbacks form Merritt Avenue
make it very difficult to see. He recommends improving the visibility.
Mr.Perry asked if this was a 55 and older facility and not an age in place facility.
Mr. Lyons responded he believes it is 55 and older but would need the applicant to confirm that.
Mr.Perry said his concern is the parking spaces. He said Gen Xers do not like giving up their
vehicles. He said couples moving into the apartment will be coming with two cars. He said baby
boomers have one car. He feels the thought process in reducing parking is somewhat flawed
based on the generational difference between the two. He asked if parking overnight is allowed
in the angle parking on the street.
Mr. Lyons replied that is street parking so it could not be counted towards the development. He
said the street parking would have to follow the city street parking regulations. He said this is
one of the reasons why staff is asking for an agreement for parking between the two parties. He
said this will ensure that overflow parking is available. He stated these are always tricky
situations every time they get into multi-family development in an urban setting. He said
parking always seems to be one of the largest considerations. He explained typically when it
comes to these types of developments, staff looks to the applicant to justify their parking needs.
He stated the applicant has developed similar sites and feels the parking is sufficient. He said
initially staff had the same concerns about the 1:1 parking ratio but at the same time the location
is in an urban setting and parking is an issue in urban settings. He noted it is hard to balance
parking vs the potential reuse of a building.
ITEM—Rezone,GDP,SIP 619 dYterritt Ave. 8
Mr. Perry stated if this was 65 and older/baby boomers, then the 1:1 ration would be pretty close.
He reiterated there could be Gen Xers and there is a difference between the two generations. He
said the two generations don't even like each other. He stated his concern is still the parking
because the parking agreement is only as good as the other property exists. He said if the church
is ever redeveloped, the extra parking could be eliminated. He said he is also concerned with the
2.7 candlelight at the entrances and was not sure if that was sufficient.
Mr. Lyons replied it is significantly more than what is required. He said the requirement is 0.4
candlelight and the proposed is about 7 times more then the required. He said in this case, the
light is also helping to light up the public right-of-way. He said if the property were adjacent to
another property, then staff would have great concerns.
Ms. Propp said she is interested in the traffic circulation on the property because it is not totally
clear to her. She asked who would be parking in the interior of the site by the Merritt Avenue
access drive.
Mr. Lyons replied that would be the church parking.
Ms. Propp said she would be concerned about parking creep and the church not having enough
parking spaces. Ms. Propp questioned if there was a sufficient amount of room to back out of the
stall in the interior parking area. She asked what was located at the south of the interior parking.
Mr. Nau replied the south is not an exit but a pedestrian path.
Ms. Propp asked what the gray area was in the interior parking area and asked about the parking
stalls to the north.
Mr. Nau replied the gray area is a drop-off area for the apartments. He said the parking stalls in
the interior belong to the church. Mr. Nau pointed out the proposed lot line.
Ms. Propp asked if the drop-off location was the main entrance.
Mr. Nau replied he believes so. He said the narrative states that the area will also be where the
elevator is located.
Ms. Propp said if a tenant is being dropped off, the driver would then have to go back onto
Merritt Avenue then to Boyd Street to park their vehicle on a surface parking area or park in the
garage.
Mr. Lyons commented he would assume like most multi-family units that each apartment would
be assigned their own parking stall or garage.
ITEM—Rezone,GDP,SIP 619 Merritt Ave. 9
Ms. Propp stated she supports this type of reuse because it makes sense. She said she is less
concerned with the parking for tenants because if they have two cars, they would choose to go
elsewhere.
Ms. Palmeri asked if there was enough room for parking in front of the garage and still allow
access to others.
Mr. Lyons replied there is not. He said it is 30 feet and 28 feet. He explained there needs to be a
minimum of 24 feet for two-way traffic and generally a parking stall is 20 feet. He said they
would need a minimum of 44 feet to have a parking stall in front of the garage.
Mr. Fojtik opened up the public hearing and asked if the applicant wanted to make any
statements.
Andy Dumke (applicant), 2062 Menominee Drive, explained the church wants to demolish the
building and they are trying to prevent that from happening. He said they are trying to solve two
issues which is to keep a historic building and to provide some affordable housing in the
community. He explained there are two stalls to the north of the circular drive that the church
will be giving them an easement to them. He said typically they try to do building shoots and
dumpsters but in this case they could not make it possible. He said that they usually place the
dumpster location further from the building but in this scenario, the location they chose is the
best place to put it due to the exit doors on Boyd Street. He explained as far as parking
requirements, they build a lot of senior housing in Wisconsin including the two in Oshkosh;
Rivers I and Rivers II. He said Rivers II has 32 parking stalls for 40 units. He said on any given
day, there are only one or two cars parked in the visitor parking area. He stated they feel very
comfortable with one car per unit and a couple extra for visitors.
Mr.Mitchell asked if this was going to be for 62 and older or 55 and older.
Mr. Dumke replied they do not get to set the age but it is 55 and older for independent living. He
said in his experience with similar projects, most people that are 55 are still working. He said
most of the tenants are 65 and older.
Mr. Mitchell asked if they are going to be accessible housing and inquired about the bedroom
sizes.
Mr. Dumke replied every unit is handicap accessible. He stated some units are fully handicap.
He said every unit can be accessed by a wheelchair. He said there will be 16 one bedroom units
and 19 two bedroom units.
Ms. Palmeri said she appreciates the fact that Mr.Dumke is decreasing the amount of impervious
surface. She said even though it is not meet the standard, it is still a substantial decrease.
Mr. Fojtik said he echoes what Ms. Palmeri said. He stated it takes courage to take on projects
like this because of some of the site restrictions. He thanked Mr.Dumke.
ITEM—Rezone,GDP,SIP 619 NlerrittAve. 10
Mr.Mitchell said it has been discussed for the last couple years on how the building could
transition into housing. He stated he is really excited to see it being done as well as Historic
Credit Tax application. He said lack of accessible housing is considered by Community
Development an assessment for the city for fair housing impairments as the number one barrier
to people accessing housing. He said it will be great to have more accessible housing and the
project will be an asset to the neighborhood.
Ms. Propp asked Mr. Dumke if he had any issues with the suggestion of the knee walls.
Mr. Dumke replied he does not have any issues with it and is good with all the suggestions.
Cheryl Jacklin,408 Monroe Street, said she owns the property(two lots) abutting the back of the
parking lot. She said the property was recently purchased. She stated some of the neighbors
could not make it to the meeting. She explained between her husband and her, they walked the
neighborhood and called neighbors to get feedback about the project. She said they are present to
represent the neighborhood. She asked if there was a representative from the church. She
explained they were planning on building their one level retirement home on the vacant lots. She
stated she installed a custom fence along the north of the lots and planted vines. She stated the
neighbors can see the shrine and really like that. She inquired about what is going to happen to
the priest house that has been vacant. She suggested relocating the garage because she does not
want to be looking at the back of a garage. She suggested moving the garage to the corner or
Boyd Street and Merritt Avenue. She handed out pictures of the garages that were built in the
back of Washington Street apartment house and explained they were modern and did not match.
She also handed out pictures of an article which she got off of the Northwestern and the Herald
relating the Smith School to the Cabrini School.
Jerry Jacklin,408 Monroe Street,inquired about how far the shed would be form the property
line.
Mr. Lyons answered the shed is 18 feet away from the property line.
Ms.Jacklin stated the two crosses have been removed. She said the storage could be closer to the
church. She said she paid to remove a telephone pole by her fence line to make it aesthetically
appealing. She said the whole neighborhood is on the upswing including the Howard and the
YMCA. She said Marion Manor is well kept up. She inquired if the apartments would be for low
income housing and had some concerns if it was. She said she hopes the applicant would add
landscaping so the area does not look Institutional. She said she also has lighting concerns and
concerns about the windows because she feels they should be restored. She stated the building
should be on the historical register. She said she does not want the garages to look like a storage
unit and that the windows should be restored on the building. She said she was told at the
beginning this was going to be high-end apartments. She said the garage will cut off airflow. She
stated during funeral, wedding or holidays, the church is packed full and there is a lot of
overflow. She said the parking and plan needs to be thought out more.
ITEM—Rezone,GDP,SIP 619 Merritt Ave. 11
Mr.Mitchell asked for confirmation that Ms.Jacklin stated that Marion Manor was well kept up.
Ms.Jacklin replied she did.
Mr.Mitchell said Marion Manor is also affordable housing. He explained with elderly housing, a
lot of the folks are receiving social security or minimum pensions. He stated it does not
necessarily connotate to a derogatory thing.
Ms.Jacklin stated she is concerned with the amount of senior living in the area because there are
so many on the north side. She said her neighborhood needs to be protected.
Mr.Jacklin stated he and the neighborhood likes the idea. He said he would prefer more be spent
on the project to make sure it is right the first time. He said they should try matching the storage
shed to the church as much as they can.
Ms.Jacklin questioned if there was going to be a senior smoking area.
Dennis Ruedinger, 1434 Hazel Street, said he is with the general contractor for this project. He
said he cannot speak for the church but knows the statue is very important to the church and it
will not be touched. He said as far as the rectory,he is not sure what their thoughts are on that.
There were no other public comments on this item.
Mr. Fojtik closed the public hearing and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing
statements.
Mr. Dumke stated they will be using historic tax credits and will be doing everything to the
historic standards which includes the windows. He said in his conversations, the shrine is
staying as well. He said putting an access off Merritt Avenue would not be realistic because there
is not much area for people to pull up in. He said it made the most sense to do the circle drive.
Ms.Jacklin asked about the trees and lighting.
Mr. Dumke replied the covered the lighting and trees in the lighting and landscaping plan. He
stated he is open to suggestions if Mr. and Ms.Jacklin have any. He told them to contact him.
Mr.Hinz inquired about the restoration of the crosses on top of the building.
Mr. Dumke replied he was not sure what the situation was with that.
Mr. Fojtik commented after 15 years of being on the committee, there has always been challenges
when it comes to multi-family development. He commended Mr.Dumke and all developers that
have to face the challenges when it comes to developing multi-family.
ITEM—Rezone,GDP,SIP 619 Merritt Ave. 12
Mr. Mitchell noted the property is still 14,000 square feet short for the impervious requirements.
He pointed out that the terrace on Boyd Street is extra wide and said it would be a great area to
plant terrace trees.
Mr. Lyons said they can work on it as staff and is glad that Mr. Mitchell pointed out it out.
Mr.Perry asked what the minimum setback was for the tow car garage to the property line.
Mr. Nau and Mr. Lyons both replied three feet.
Mr. Lyons explained that area is similar as if it were a residential use and discussed the setbacks.
He said staff originally had concerns about the garage but the garage is a residential garage and
should match the surrounding areas. He said it would be no different if it were a house with a
residential garage.
Motion by Propp to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report.
Conditions:
1. A Base Standard Modification for the proposed multi family use within the Institutional
Zone District,
2. A Certified Survey Map is required for reconfiguration of the proposed parcels;
3. A Base Standard Modification for a zero (0)foot side(west)yard setback for the former
school building;
4. A Base Standard Modification for a three(3)foot street front yard setback for proposed
paved area along Boyd Street;
5. A Base Standard Modification for a 50% reduction in off-street parking requirements (70
stalls to 35 stalls)for the proposed senior living adaptive reuse,
6. A cross accesslshared parking agreement between the church property and proposed senior
living adaptive reuse property;
7. Landscape plan shall include foundation planting calculations for the proposed
school/senior living redevelopment;
8. Landscaping is required for the new proposed garage on the church property as approved by
the Department of Community Development,
9. A Base Standard Modification to allow a maximum of 2.7 foot candle light level at the
property line near the building entrances along Boyd Street of the and proposed senior
living apartment building;
10. Lighting plan shall expand to include all of the church property to ensure adequate lighting
levels are provided to the proposed senior living adaptive reuse property;
11. A masonry knee wall shall be added to the front and side facades of all three proposed
garages/storage structures using materials similar or complimentary to the church and
school building.
Seconded by Mitchell.
ITEM—Rezone,GDP,SIP 619 Merritt Ave. 13
Mr. Fojtik asked if there was any discussion on the motion.
Mr. Perry asked if it was a lot with the same garage,if it would be allowed. He said because it is
on the church's lot,if Plan Commission could require landscaping behind it.
Mr. Lyons replied it would be allowed if it were its own lot. He said through the Planned
Development, they could request for additional landscaping. He explained if it were a residential
garage, staff would not be asking for any landscaping.
r.Per
ry rr asked if the city was willing to work with the applicant on adding landscaping to the
Y �' g pp g p g
back of the garage
Mr. Lyons said he would be willing to work with the applicant.
Mr. Dumke said he did not have any issues with landscaping back there and would be willing to
work with the city.
Motion carried 9-0.
ITEM—Rezone,GDP,SIP 619 Merritt Ave. 14
SUBMIT TO:
City C& City of Oshkosh Dept.of Community Development
215 Church Ave„P.O.Box 1130
of Planned Development Application Oshkosh,WI 54901
Oshkosh PHONE:(920)236-5059
For General Development Plan or Specific Implementation Plan
"*PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT USING BLACK INK""
APPLICANT INFORMATION } t
Petitioner: p ir 4 t i go' fQ V2. 0�e-\9 j v�1 t o c�r .� Date: Q
Petitioner's Address: +� � � � City: Oshkosh State: WI Zip: t
Telephone#: (10'fb) 71 ._\A�Email: �a c�Lt,�ateJQVe.k,p4::cntactpreference: ❑ Phone ID Er a"il
}
a
Status of Petitioner(Please Check): Owner Representative E Tenant Prospective Buyer
Petitioner's Signature (required): Date:
OWNER INFORMATION y
Owner(s): St Mary's Cong Most Blessed Sacrament Parish Date:
Owner(s) Address: 449 High St City: OshhkkQosh(�rr1 State: WI Zip: 54901
Telephone#: (q-zo. 231,9"192 Email:_mbs rV%e✓k:ong l�.Q�'�Contact preference: ❑ Phone XEmail
Ownership Status (Please Check): Individual ..I Trust 0 Partnership Corporation
Property Owner Consent:(required)
By signature hereon, I/We acknowledge that City officials and/or employees may,in the performance of their functions,enter
upon the property to inspect or gather other information necessary to process this application. I also understand that all
meeting dates are tentative and may be postponed by the Planning Services Division for incomplete submissions or other
administrative reasons.
Property Owner's Signature: ate: S:3 �
TYPE OF REQUEST:
' I General Development Plan (GDP) ❑ General Development Plan (GDP)Amendment
IM Specific Implementation Plan (SIP) ❑ Specific Implementation Plan (SIP) Amendment
SITE INFORMATION
Address/Location of Proposed Project: 619 Merritt Ave-School Property, 605 Merritt Ave- Church Property
Proposed Project Type: Church to remain. School property will be adaptive reuse to senior apartments.
Current Use of Property: Church with vacant school and parking Zoning: Institutional
Land Uses Surrounding Your Site: North: Residential
South: Residential
East: Residential
West: Residential
➢ it Is recommended that the applicant meet with Planning Services staff prior to submittal to discuss the proposal.
➢ Application fees are due at time of submittal.Make check payable to City of Oshkosh.
➢ Please refer to the fee schedule for appropriate fee. FEE IS NON-REFUNDABLE
For more information please visit the City's website at www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us/Community_Development/Planning.htm
RECEIVED
SEP 3 0201
Sign Staff Date Rec'd
❑ Proposed grading plan.
❑ Specific landscaping plan for the subject site,specifying the location,species, and installation size of
plantings. The landscaping plans shall include a table summarizing all proposed species.
❑ Architectural plans for any nonresidential buildings,multi-family structures, or building clusters, other than
conventional single-family or two-family homes on individual lots,in sufficient detail to indicate the floor
area, bulk,and visual character of such buildings.
❑ Engineering plans for all water and sewer systems,stormwater systems,roads, parking areas, and
walkways.
❑ Signage plan for the project, including all project identification signs,concepts for public fixtures and signs,
and group development signage themes that may or may not vary from City standards or common
practices.
❑ Specific written description of the proposed SIP including:
• Specific project themes and images.
• Specific mix of dwelling unit types and/or land uses.
• Specific residential densities and nonresidential intensities as described by dwelling units per acre,
and landscaping surface area ratio and/or other appropriate measures of density and intensity.
• Specific treatment of natural features,including parkland.
• Specific relationship to nearby properties and public streets.
• Statistical data on minimum lot sizes in the development,the precise areas of all development lots
and pads; density/intensity of various parts of the development; building coverage, and
landscaping surface area ratio of all land uses; proposed staging; and any other plans required by
Plan Commission.
• A statement of rationale as to why PD zoning is proposed.This statement shall list the standard
zoning requirements that,in the applicant's opinion,would inhibit the development project and the
opportunities for community betterment that are available through the proposed PD project.
• A complete list of zoning standards that would not be met by the proposed SIP and the locations)
in which such exceptions/base standard modifications would occur.
• Phasing schedule,if more than one development phase is intended.
❑ Agreements, bylaws, covenants, and other documents relative to the operational regulations of the
development and particularly providing for the permanent preservation and maintenance of common
open areas and amenities.
❑ A written description that demonstrates how the SIP is consistent with the approved GDP and any and all
differences between the requirements of the approved GDP and the proposed SIP.
I hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge all required application materials are included with this
application. 1 am aware that failure to submit the required completed application materials may result in denial or
delay of the application request.
Applicant's Signature (required): - Date: _
I
3
Page 9
SUBMIT TO:
I City of Oshkosh Application Dept.of Community Development
215 Church Ave.,P.O.Box 1130
city Oshkosh,Wisconsin 54903-1 130
of Zoning Map Amendment (Rezoning) PHONE:(920)236-5059
I
Oshkosh
"PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT USING BLACK INK**
APPLICANT INFORMATION
Petitioner: Datn
Petitioner's Address: r CiJI G Sfif �L I aU� /� �"t� ��//�-f,� '
+ City: ��v//tU� Slate. Zip:
�' �(^�b s•�
Telephone#: ,�,�:+') � �� Email:��� _ �,... �,;' ntact preference: ❑ Phone � Email
w �w4 041 114.•1.�7 1
Status of Petitioner(Please Check), C Owner Representative C Tenant )(Prospective Buyer
Petitioner's Signature(required): Date: �� y
OWNER INFORMATION +
Owner's) St Mary's Cong Most Blessed Sacrament Parish Date:
h
Owner 449 High St s)Address: City: Oshkosh State:Wl Zip: 54901
4 l c
Telephone#: I92�j 231 91&Z Email: Mb5 f YiOGtZihSe9"'�ontactt prreeference: ❑ Phone $rEmail
Ownership Status(Please Check): C Individual Trust C Partnership CCorporation
i
Property Owner Consent:(required)
By signature hereon,I/We acknowledge that City officials and/or employees may,in the performance of their functions,enter upon the
property to inspect or gather other information necessary to process this application. I also understand that all meeting dates are tentative
and may be postponed by the PI nin S ices Division for omplete submissions or other administrative reasons.
Property Owner's Signature:
ZONING AND PEVELOPMENT INFORMATION
Address/Location of Rezoning Request: 619 Merritt.Ave-School Property, 605 Merritt Ave- Church Property
Tax Parcel Number(s): 90404350000 & 90404320000
Rezone property from: Institutional to Institutional - Planned Development
Purpose for Rezoning: To allow adaptive reuse of the school to senior apartments and to allow
for base standard deviations due to dividing the school and church property into 2 se arate parcels via CSM,
Describe existing property development and land use: Church &vacant school
Describe proposed development and/or proposed land use:
Church to remain. School property will be adaptive reuse to senior apartments.
Proposed time schedule for development and/or use of the property:
Zoning Adjacent to the Site: North: SR-9
South: SR-9
East: SR-9
West: SR-9
Sign Staff Date Rec'd
Page 10
Cabrini Senior Apartments
619 Merritt Ave
Oshkosh,WI 54901
Proposed Proiect Scope:
• Split the existing church&school lot into west and east halves as per drawing lot lines.
• Remove and replace the existing parking lot on the southeast lot:
• Construction of(2)new garages and a dumpster enclosure on the east lot.4,608 sqft with 16
stalls&2,880 sqft with 10 stalls.
• Construction of(1) new garage on the west lot.576 sqft with 2 stalls.
• New lighting provided by wall sconces as per the photometric plan.
• Install Storm drains on east lot(if) per Civil engineer's drawings and tie into Boyd St,
• Landscaping to be installed along east lot garages facing the street for separation.
The property is currently occupied by the Most Blessed Sacrament Parish and the abandoned St. Frances
Cabrini Elementary School.These are both currently on the same parcel,our proposal is to split the
property(see drawings)then renovate the abandoned school into senior living with 35 units.With this
we would remove the existing garage that the church uses from the east lot and build them a new 2 stall
garage on the west lot. In addition,we plan to construction new single car garages for most units in the
proposed apartment building and provide a drop off area near ADA elevator access.A proposed flow
count is provided within plan set for proposal of connecting to the Boyd St sewer drain from the
increase in fixtures varying per unit but each including at minimum kitchen sink, dishwasher,clothes
washer, bathroom toilet,&bathroom sink.
In coordinating,with the historical preservation we will maintain a matching fagade.With their approval
we also propose removing the existing boiler room,an area filled with asbestos and was a later addition
not part of the original historical building,to make way for a drop off entrance to the ADA elevator.An
existing stairway will be replaced as the ADA elevator previously discussed with a vestibule enterance
and a side mechanical area.The new mechanical area (1 story high)will house internally the elevator
mechanical components and roof top condensing units to treat units.The existing school will maintain
all exterior finishes and windows will be replaced to match current wood windows(this includes most
existing windows as well as areas that have since been infilled with plywood and insulation).All venting
and exterior changes are to be directed in the rear/between lots.
195I Bowen Street, Oshkosh,WI 54901 ( 9'�Ci. :=�5 i P 0 2.3 1 1 `i F
info@rhdesignbuild,com rhdesignbuild.com
Page 11
All of these proposed changes are to make use of an abandoned building that will slowly degrade or be
torn down completely, removing a potential historical location.Our proposed changes not only makes
use of the building but improves its functionality and aesthetics with new windows in places that are
currently boarded up with plywood and reduces the overall impervious surfaces. In conjunction with
working with the church there shouldn't be any impact to parking and traffic flow thanks to the
maintained driveways between lots and the shared use agreement.
Site Details:
Parcel ID:0404350000
605 &619 Merritt Ave
Current Zoning: Institutional
Proposed Zoning: Institutional Planned Development(I-PD)for both new lots.
Primary Building:
Front Setback Requirements: 30'
Side Setbacks Requirements:7.5'
Rear Setbacks Requirements:25'
Accessory Building:
Front Setback Requirements: Even with Principal
Side Setbacks Requirements: 3'
Rear Setbacks Requirements:3'
Allowable impervious:60%
Existing impervious:+/-83.2%
Proposed impervious:+/-72.9%
Minimum Lot Area:7200 sgft
Actual Lot Area:115,230 sqft
1951 Bowen Street, Oshkosh, WI 54901 P .+, F
info@rhdesignbuild.com rhdesignbuild.corn
Page 12
i0o
4100000
ExCEL
ARCHITECTS=ENGINEERS•SURVEYORS
September 30, 2019
Project Narrative
Project: St Mary's Congregation Most Blessed Sacrament Parish Rezone Request
605 & 619 Merritt Avenue, 442 Monroe Street
Oshkosh, WI
St Mary's Congregation Most Blessed Sacrament Parish is requesting rezoning approval to
Institutional — Planned Development for the current parish property at 605 Merritt Avenue; the
property is currently zoned Institutional. The overall property is an existing development on the
northern end of the block bounded by Monroe Street, Merritt Avenue, and Boyd Street.
The existing site contains a church, school, and parking. Current parcel 9040435000 contains
the church and school at 605 & 619 Merritt Avenue and parcel 90404320000 contains a small
concrete playground area south of the church parking lot. A Certified Survey Map (CSM)will be
proposed to divide the current church and school properties into two (2) parcels. The small
concrete parcel will be added to the church parcel via the CSM. A GDP and SIP submittal is
being submitted concurrently to request base standard deviations that will result from division of
the land and conversion of the Cabrini School property at 619 Merritt Avenue into senior
apartments. The Church use will continue to exist on the resulting west parcel. A rezone to
Planned Development is required to allow for more flexible use of the property due to parcel
division.
All surrounding land uses are residential, and the proposed project will be compatible with the
surrounding Single Family Residential —9 (SR-9)zoning. The redeveloped school property will
fit with the character of the existing neighborhood and there will be no negative impact on
neighbors.
E N .�t1 OIlH15N07 NOSlON W
J V IM'HSONHSO•3nN3AV ill IN 6S9
IOOHJS IN12IM w o W -
�Ea e c NOIIIGG/Miming 43SOdOUd
3' qq I m � N
W
n _ a
0 �
2 z
z
0
R,•
� n
�ggqyN{
133b1s-GAOO
mg
---------------
s 8 \
6 I 7 lr'1',
zI
filli.
aF# .i u3.w] 1332i1S 3021NOW s
..J€= NoLonuiswJ HOd ION Y
] `HSOMSO•3nN3Adii[MW 619
Y
•�X 3�a3s: s IOOH:)S INIUBVJ
NOUKICIV'JNicnifl8 03SOdMId
y
za €sae= �aae .B
_ b
IR
Egb
awa a 4� oaa �g �a
1318is QA08
Li
�33
Bx
<
s � _
o-No vo- 5 A 58
qq$qqq �9 'v
6 d u §
pil
�� t`.., n• \ �'. •q Log: � �/ y ego b
Arco I W _ i°
zi
LL
v aw 3a o
�n x
oa
�a
_ a w=
�1 ei
g 1332US 30aNOW
�g
o b of p2i >y ho
a W a a y as x Z,
- aj
NoLonHiSNOJ NOjiON
IM'HSONHSO 3nN3Mii1RRi3W 6T9
JE
IOOH�S INIU13VJNOI1140tf Walina43SWObd
Z a
Q
ao 5-1
V
Z
Z i
y
v
3
A
�z •9 s — —.,—„—.,—„ tl�,3211Sg4J.09„—., //-- —„�,� �J ',...
R
`pI9y 8 ss 5
X � ggS
17 EA
o _
se _
t
— — — — — — 133?J1S 3023 — —
'sg
3:$ W ;gad 83Q `3Y6
nn
R' �C
Page 16
NISN03SIM'HSO)IHSO
ININOW a
JNIMIA NVIdWS
o
pill !
o
= Igp€
.r: rt Gog t3f ',
W
op8;
F3,
n
a
itse
,ui. a - 3 '3
hl
e? a�-a-3"j f
n U .._....5
S 3 1111111
33 3 83 Y8 8
c T .
8 HIM. .:
;,-S 3 �4� SS3 $fly 3 83 $
3 3 S
F^ -9-?E-��-�3$; $ 8 :lilt;,
8
my
my
S.�e
5 t �
HOMES8 ? $a$y 3 .-.83$..3 C
a
REZONE/GDP/SIP ALBERT MOUSTAKIS CHARLES E/SHARON L DURANT
600 BLK OF MERRITT AVE 2707 DEERSKIN PARK RD 426 BOYD ST
PC:11-05-19 OSHKOSH WI 54903 OSHKOSH WI 54901
CHARLOTTE EICHSTADT REV TRUST D&M RENTALS LLC DANIEL G/DAVID OROURKE TRUST
4356 JACKSON ST 55 KNAPP ST 683 N MAIN ST C
OSHKOSH WI 54901 OSHKOSH WI 54901 OSHKOSH WI 54901
DAVID H/YVETTE Y BRULEY EUGENE E/SHANAH A ZASTERA GERALD W/CHERYL M JACKLIN
418 BOYD ST 1882 CLAIRVILLE RD 408 MONROE ST
OSHKOSH WI 54901 EAGLE RIVER WI 54521 OSHKOSH WI 54901
GROH LAND COMPANY LLC HAROLD R/NANCY SALZER JENNIFER L MILLER
1402 JAMES RD 430 BOYD ST 415 BOYD ST
OSHKOSH WI 54901 OSHKOSH WI 54901 OSHKOSH WI 54901
KRISTI WEISS LINDA M MONROE MARIE MEIDL
450 BOYD ST 433 MONROE ST 451 MONROE ST
OSHKOSH WI 54901 OSHKOSH WI 54901 OSHKOSH WI 54903
MELISSA WARA MICHAEL R/DEBORAH L KREMER OSHKOSH HOUSING AUTHORITY
429 MONROE ST 445 MONROE ST PO BOX 397
OSHKOSH WI 54902 OSHKOSH WI 54901 OSHKOSH WI 54904
REDEVELOPMENT AUTH CITY OF OSHKOSH SCOTT A BREHMER SCOTT M ENGEL
PO BOX 1130 422 BOYD ST 910 COZY LN
OSHKOSH WI 54903 OSHKOSH WI 54901 OSHKOSH WI 54901
SHERRIE A GRUNWALD THOMAS L BARLOW CYNTHIA THORPE
438 BOYD ST 419 BOYD ST 1107 MERRITT AVE
OSHKOSH WI 54901 OSHKOSH WI 54904 OSHKOSH WI 54901
ST MARYS CONG ST MARYS CONG NORTHPOINTE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
230 442 MONROE ST 449 HIGH AVE 20 ST
SUITE
OSHKOSH WI 54901 OSHKOSH WI 54901 SUITEE
OSHKOSH WI 54902
Page 18
USE
SUBJECT _
UMU-
M
® •� i , •
• � � �®� Ifs ■ ��� ®I� � �1 - 1.
-- r
1 •
'S p,
I
� i•
fi�,• 4 j �.
k
—"1
s w ''; rKy
Xy
—77
Ct
NMI
'I"-%th
zJ�
t ANN* r.f
CEO
IL
ji-
SUBJECT
SITE
Ale
al
b-
la s
s.
n
�!fs Jr J')J I J J A\J � N tin=0.02mi
A 1in= 100ft
City of Oshkosh maps and data are intended to be used for general identification purposes only,and
the City of Oshkosh assumes no liability for the accuracy of the information. Those using the Printing Date:9/30/2019 information are responsible for verifying accuracy. For full disclaimer please go to
www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us/GlSdisclaimer Prepared by: City of Oshkosh,WI Oshkosh
J:\GIS\Planning\Plan Commission Site Plan Map Template\Plan Commission Site Plan Map Template.mxd User:minak