Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Appeals (6/14/2000) City of Oshkosh Dept.of Community Development 215 Church Ave.,PO Box 1130 Jackson R.Kinney Oshkosh,WI 54903-1130 Director C IN (920)236-5059 (920)236-5053 FAX ON THE WATER June 15, 2000 Ray Fores 912 Lark Street Oshkosh, Wisconsin 54901 RE: 912 Lark Street Dear Mr. Fores: On June 14, 2000 the City of Oshkosh Board of Appeals approved your variance to allow for a 20' x 14' or 280 square foot utility shed in the rear yard. The decision of the Board was filed in the Planning Services Division Office of the Department of Community Development on June 15, 2000. Per Section 30-6(C)(3) and(4) of the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance, your variance will expire on December 14,2000 unless you have obtained a permit for the activity allowed by the variance. If you fail to get a permit by this date, you must reapply for a variance if you intend to go ahead with the activity allowed by the variance. Please be advised that any person or persons aggrieved by any decision of the Board of Appeals may commence action in Circuit Court within thirty (30)days after the filing of the decision. Permits may be issued on approval of the Board,but you should be aware that further action could take place until as much as 30 days after the date of the decision. Building permits may be applied for from the Inspection Services Division in Room 205 at the Oshkosh City Hall between 7:30 - 8:30 AM and 12:30 - 1:30 PM, Monday thru Friday, or call (920)236-5050 for an appointment. Please bring all required building plans and information necessary for review when obtaining your building permit. If you have any questions, feel free to call me at(920) 236-5059.iSin ely, J C. BLUEMKE Principal Planner JCB/vlr frec: Inspection Services Division BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES JUNE 14, 2000 PRESENT: Fred Dahl, Cheryl Hentz, Randy Husman, John Schorse, and Don Krueger, Chairman STAFF: John Bluemke, Principal Planner; and Vickie Rand, Recording Secretary Mr. Schorse, Chairman Pro Temp called the meeting to order. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. The minutes of May 24, 2000 were approved as mailed (Dahl/Hentz) unanimous. I: 912 LARK STREET Ray Fores, applicant and owner, requests a variance to allow a 20' by 14' or 280 square foot utility shed in the rear yard setback whereas Section 30-17 (B) (4) (e) (iii) allows for utility sheds up to 100 square feet in size. Ray Fores, 912 Lark Street, stated he had looked into fixing up the existing shed, and upon checking on the assessed value of the garage, he found out it had none. He explained that since the code states that you can't spend more than 50%of the assessed value he got a wrecking permit to take the shed down. Mr. Fores next step was to obtain a permit to put up a new storage shed and he was told by the Inspection Services Division that it wasn't possible to get a permit to construct a new storage shed of that size since it was basically considered a garage without having a driveway leading to it. He stated if he would have known that, he would have found some way to restore the existing shed. Don Krueger arrived at this time. Mr. Fores continued to explain that the proposed storage shed would be more conforming than adding onto the existing garage. He also stated that the building plans now call for a door on the side of the shed, which would make it more difficult to park a vehicle inside. He stated he needs the extra storage space for lawn and garden equipment and for storage of his equipment for his woodworking hobby. He stated he has built a new house on the property and the proposed shed would be constructed to match. Chairman Pro Temp Schorse questioned how the request had changed from the last meeting. Mr. Fores stated the only change was in the location of the door. He stated he doesn't need another driveway for the shed, and doesn't want to take down an existing tree to add onto the existing garage. Mr. Dahl questioned if could have left the old building up. Mr. Bluemke stated he could have left the old building up, however it was non-conforming and had no assessed value, therefore he couldn't spend 50% of-0- to fix up the garage. Mr. Bluemke stated it was quite an unsightly building, and Mr. Fores passed around pictures which showed the condition of the building. He also passed around pictures of the existing garage and the tree that would need to be taken down to construct an addition. He also explained how the new location for the proposed garage would sit at a higher grade, making a much more sound structure for storing equipment. Mr. Dahl questioned if he was basically replacing a non-conforming structure with a conforming structure of the same size. Mr. Fores stated that was correct, and added he wasn't asking for anything more than he already once had. Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes Page 2 June 14, 2000 Mr. Husman questioned if he would need a variance if he put in a driveway. Mr. Bluemke stated he would not need a variance if a driveway were installed. Discussion continued regarding the ability to put in a driveway with the condition of the lot. Mr. Fores stated he had started to bring in fill to bring the site proposed for the new shed up to grade, but discontinued that effort when he found out he couldn't construct the shed. Mr. Bluemke also stated he had received a phone call from 917 Dove Street stating he had no opposition to Mr. Fores request. Motion by Hentz for approval of a 20' x 14' or 280 square foot utility shed in the rear yard. Seconded by Husman. Motion carried 4-0 -1. Krueger voting present. Finding of the Fact: Mrs. Hentz stated there would be no adverse impact on the surrounding property owners. Mr. Schorse stated Mr. Fores was replacing an existing building. II: 14 BOWEN STREET Mark Radl, applicant and owner, requests a variance to allow a 22' by 14' or 308 square foot utility shed in the rear yard setback whereas Section 30-17 (B) (4) (e) (iii) allows for utility sheds up to 100 square feet in size. Mr. Bluemke introduced the item stating it was laid over from the last meeting, and a change was made increasing the size of the shed from 20' x 12' or 240 square feet to 22' x 14' or 308 square feet. Mark Radl, 14 Bowen Street, stated the Staff Report states he has the alternative to put an addition behind the existing garage, when in fact it is not possible because of an office located in that area. He also stated it would be extremely difficult to add onto the side of the garage because it was designed with a solid beam and not on trusses. Mr. Radl stated his house was the first one constructed on the block in the 1960's, and by today's standards would never be approved. He stated the extra property recently purchased from the DNR would provide the space needed in the rear of the structure to construct a workspace and storage for an antique car and tools, without needing to secure off site storage. He stated the house only has a crawl space for storage, and he wanted another building besides the current garage to accommodate those needs. He stated how he felt this would add to the resale value of the property, and how without being able to construct this building he would have spent$7,500 on green space. He stated a 100 square foot utility shed wouldn't accommodate his needs, and noted how installing a driveway would be less attractive to the neighborhood, as more concrete would be laid in the front yard. He stated he believes the City's Ordinances go a little too far when a variance is needed not to install a driveway. He stated he had no say as to where the existing dwelling was constructed, and that he was looking for improved quality of life, and believed not having to install a driveway would be more appealing to the neighborhood. Mr. Krueger asked how Mr. Radl would get a car into the garage. Mr. Radl stated the neighbor would let him drive the car on his property to get to the rear yard. Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes Page 3 June 14, 2000 Mr. Schorse asked Mr. Radl if anything was there now. Mr. Radl stated nothing was there now, with the exception of the overhang from the neighbor's garage that extends over the property line. He continued by passing around pictures showing the landscaping in the area. He also noted how the run-off would need to be re-routed to stay off of the neighbor's property; however, he noted the adjacent property owners are all aware of his plans and have no opposition to it. Mrs. Hentz asked if the neighbors were aware of the changes in the plan. Mr. Bluemke stated meeting • notices had been sent out to the adjacent property owners, and in return a letter had been received from Duke Schneider, and Norm Mueller stating their objection to the variance unless it is 5' from the property line. Mr. Krueger stated he was having difficulty finding a hardship in this case. Mr. Bluemke stated Mr. Radl has already taken out a permit since the structure would be within compliance as long as a driveway were installed. Mr. Krueger asked about the use a future owner of the property would have for the structure, as the size depicts a garage use. Motion by Krueger to allow a 22' x 14' or 308 square foot utility shed in the rear yard. Seconded by Hentz. Motion denied 0-5. Mr. Radl asked if could receive a copy of the letter sent to the Planning Services Division by Norman Mueller and Duke Schneider. III: LOT 56 "SECOND ADDITION TO THE MEADOWS ON SAWYER CREEK" Garry Decker, owner, requests a variance to allow construction of a house with a 49' shoreland setback from the ordinary high water mark of Sawyer Creek whereas Section 17-20 (2)(a)(i) of the Winnebago County Zoning Ordinance requires a 75' shoreland setback from the ordinary high water mark. Garry Decker, 1113 Oregon Street, handed out a site plan of a 100-year flood limit for lots 56 & 57. Mr. Decker stated he wasn't aware of a 75' setback from the ordinary high water mark until an offer was made to purchase the lot. He stated he tried to maintain 100' of buildable land per lot when the subdivision was laid out. He stated he was in compliance with the 100-year flood plain map. Mr. Decker stated it was impossible to be aware of every law and he felt the six agencies involved in approving the subdivision should make him aware of such details, whereby the situation could have been corrected in the early stages of the division. He felt the hardship is having a lot with only 18.5' of buildable space, which he is not entirely responsible for. He stated the lot is useless without obtaining a variance from the creek, and it would not only affect putting up a structure but the ability to construct a patio or deck onto the structure as well. Mr. Bluemke stated that only unattached structures would be in compliance with the City Zoning Ordinance. Discussion continued regarding the design of the house proposed for the lot, the easement between lots 55 & 56 for pedestrian traffic to the school, and who was responsible for notifying the developer. Mr. Bluemke stated it was the developer's responsibility, however, all entity's involved should try to make the developer aware of any special conditions pertaining to the area. He stated he had been out to the property with the DNR and a 5' variance was the most lenient they could be in this situation. Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes Page 4 June 14, 2000 k Motion by Krueger for approval of the variance to allow construction of a house with a 54' shoreland setback from the ordinary high water mark of Sawyer Creek with a 20' front yard setback. Seconded by Dahl. Motion carried 5-0. Finding of the Fact: Mr. Krueger stated they were allowing a lot to be built on with a minimum of encroachment into the setbacks. Mr. Schorse stated that the easements can't be encroached upon, and Mr. Husman stated the creek plays a major factor on the amount of buildable land. Mr. Schorse had to leave at this time. IV: 2 W. LINWOOD AVENUE Charles and Laura LeRoy, owners, request a variance to allow construction of a solid 4' high fence in the front yard of their property; whereas Section 30-35 (E)(2) of the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance requires that fences located within 15' of the front lot line be less than 4' in height and less than 50% solid. Laura LeRoy, 2 W. Linwood Avenue, stated she is requesting a solid fence because of the snow that continuously drifts on the sidewalk. She stated there is a lot of traffic from school children on the sidewalk, and it is hard to keep the sidewalk clean. She also stated she would like to change her variance request to locate the fence within 20 feet of the front lot line. Mr. Dahl stated that a solid fence would make the snow drift even more, Chairman Krueger agreed. Mr. Bluemke questioned if there was a fence on the west side of the property. Mrs. LeRoy stated there wasn't a fence on the west side, however, there was a row of trees on the rear lot line. Discussion followed regarding whether there was a hardship concerning the solid fence and if safety was considered an issue. Charles LeRoy, 2 W. Linwood Avenue, questioned how long of an angle should be made for a fence if it were 20' off the front lot line. Mr. Bluemke stated he should consider putting the fence 20' x 20' back. Discussion continued regarding the safest way to install the fence. Motion by Husman for approval of the variance to allow construction of a solid 4' high fence in the front yard of their property with the condition they allow for a 20' site triangle. Seconded by Hentz. Motion carried 4-0. Finding of the Fact: Chairman Krueger stated allowing a 20' x 20' site triangle makes the area much safer with the installation of a solid fence. V: 2804 RUSCHFIELD DRIVE Richard & Lauri Webster, owners, request a variance to allow construction of a deck with a 17' rear yard setback; whereas Section 30-17 (B)(3)(d) of the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance requires a rear yard setback of 25'. Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes Page 5 June 14, 2000 Rick Webster, 2804 Ruschfield Drive, stated he purchased the house in October of 1999, and the deck was in disrepair at that time. He stated the deck is located next to a concrete slab, which they want to build over. He also noted a dryer vent is located at the point where they would be able to comply with the 25' setback. Mr. Webster stated the house is slanted at the most reasonable location for a deck, which is also the best location for supervising the children, therefore he is requesting the 17' variance to be able to build over the concrete slab. Mr. Webster stated the deck would add value to their home, and he didn't have any problem meeting the condition that the deck would never be enclosed. He also noted every other house in the neighborhood has enough room in their back yard to construct a deck and comply with the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance except his. Mr. Krueger asked how high off the ground the deck would be built. Mr. Webster stated it would be 18" high. Mr. Webster stated he also had a statement from his neighbors (on file in the Department of Community Development) stating they had no opposition to Mr. Webster's plans. He passed around pictures of the site for the Boards review. Mr. Husman stated the size of the lot and the placement of the house creates a hardship that was not self- created. Motion by Husman for approval of the variance to allow construction of a deck with a 17' rear yard setback with the condition that the deck would never be enclosed. Seconded by Dahl. Motion carried 4-0. Finding of the Fact: Mr. Husman stated the construction of the deck would not have any adverse impact on the neighborhood, and the placement of the house on the lot created a hardship. VI: 658 BOWEN STREET Nick Paulos, owner, requests a variance to allow construction of a 4' by 12' entrance platform in the front yard whereas Section 30-35 (B)(2) of the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance allows for a 4' by 6' entrance platform in the front yard. Nick Paulos, 658 Bowen Street, passed around pictures of the proposed entrance platform and explained how it would fit onto the house. Chairman Krueger asked if removal of the sidewalk leading to the street would be a problem. Mr. Paulos stated he had planned to remove the sidewalk without having it listed as a condition of receiving a variance. Frank Hoffman, 661 Bowen Street, stated Mr. Paulos has done quality work in the past to his home and felt the proposed deck will blend well into the neighborhood. Jim Fitzhenry, 651 Evans Street, asked for clarification of the request. Mr. Bluemke stated the owner is requesting to construct a 4 ' x 12' entrance platform in the front yard; whereas the City Zoning Ordinance allows for a 4' x 6' entrance platform in the front yard. Mr. Bluemke stated this design will allow for a safer environment for the entrance to the owners dwelling, and be a positive improvement to the area. I Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes Page 6 June 14, 2000 Motion by Husman for approval of the variance to allow construction of a 4' x 12' entrance platform in the front yard with the condition the sidewalk leading to the street be removed. Seconded by Hentz, motion carried 4-0. Finding of the Fact: Mrs. Hentz stated it appears to be an improvement to the overall appearance of the property. Mr. Dahl stated the request was for the minimum encroachment into the setback. VII: 21 W NEW YORK AVENUE Rick Schroeder, applicant, requests a variance to allow construction of a handicapped parking space with a 0' setback; whereas Section 30-35 (B)(1)(c) of the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance requires a transition yard setback of 19' 3". Rick Schroeder, 581 N. Main Street, used the map as displayed to point out the location of two handicapped apartments included in the development, and how the location of the handicapped parking space would make the accessibility to the handicapped apartments much easier. Chairman Krueger questioned if anyone from the property at 1146 Central Street had corresponded with the staff or applicant regarding this request. Mr. Bluemke stated no correspondence has been received. Motion by Dahl for approval of a variance to allow construction of a handicapped parking space with a 0' setback. Seconded by Husman. Motion carried 4-0. Finding of the Fact: Mr. Dahl stated it appeared to be an improvement to the property with the least amount of negative impact on the neighborhood. OTHER BUSINESS I. BOARD OF APPEALS MEMBERS APPOINTED Mr. Bluemke stated two new members to the Board of Appeals have been appointed on June 13, 2000. He also noted a new Vice Chairman will need to be elected at the next meeting. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned.2Res ully submitted, J C. BLUEMKE Principal Planner JCB/vlr STAFF REPORT BOARD OF APPEALS -. JUNE 14,2000 ITEM I: 912 LARK STREET- Ray Fores,Owner GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND Ray Fores, owner, requests a variance to allow a 20' by 14' or 280 square foot utility shed in the rear yard setback whereas Section 30-17 (B) (4) (e) (iii) allows for utility sheds up to 100 square feet in size. The general area is characterized by residential land uses,and the subject property is zoned R-1 Single Family Residence District. This item was laid over by a 3-1 vote at the May 24, 2000 Board of Appeals meeting. ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION In reviewing a variance request,the following questions should be addressed: Is there an unusual or unique characteristic about the subject property which creates a hardship? Is the hardship self-created? Is the variance being requested the least possible needed to remove any hardship? Will granting of the variance have a considerable adverse impact on the neighboring properties? The applicant has indicated that it is his desire to replace a storage building that was on the property prior to him building his new home. The storage building was a nonconforming structure that had little or no assessed value. A building permit could not be issued for the structure and the applicant decided to remove the old storage structure. The applicant is now requesting a variance to allow construction of a 280 square foot utility shed in his rear yard. There is nothing unusual or unique about the property, which creates a hardship. Additionally,the owner does have alternatives to either construct a 100 square foot utility shed without needing a variance,or add onto the existing garage to provide additional storage. The request appears to be based upon the owners desire to have a larger utility shed than allowed by the Ordinance rather than a hardship. Based on this information, staff recommends denial of the variance. }'lease Type or print in BLACK INK Return to: Department of Community Development 215 Church Ave., PO Box 1130 '¢ CITY OF OSHKOSH Oshkosh, WI 54902-1130 APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE Please write legibly with black ink and also submit a complete reproducible(maximum size 11"x 17")site plan.(A complete site plan includes,but is not limited to,all structures, lot lines and streets with distances to each.) There is a$25.00 fee for each variance application. The fee is payable to the City of Oshkosh and due at the time the application is submitted. Address of Parcel Affected: Z. /'). Owner(if not petitioner): t; , Home Phone: 2..35 8 q I Owner's Addressl .SI). N. LA&\( `�i' Work Phone: Signature: k ' C i — LG.4_, Date: 1)1 P -/ yi 2C c= Applicant org nt f different from owner): Home Phone: Applicant's Address: Work Phone: Signature: Date: In order to be granted a variance,each applicant must be able to prove that an unnecessary hardship would be created if the variance is not granted. The burden of proving an unnecessary hardship rests upon the applicant. The attached sheet provides information on what constitutes a hardship. (Attach additional sheets,if necessary,to provide the information requested. Additional information may be requested as needed.) 1. Explain your proposed plans and why you are requesting a variance:_ L ;�._v ��11,t= TL' r��?n�.ac.c .T, 0►Lr,G �^ f— , __j t4 (tihA S e AL /� kL T . C�-t B L�lv- ccJ S �l i\ (�L�'al�C �lil.,il' I^v C_ �' O7.`C C�r4�1 �JJ i i� �c-T% C �6. L7t�� C LJG�:�! ' �i:�l% V •f-1-/A-7- C .7-a2 _ / _S 1-4--10 JN1trz,1 Ta��rY;" !t.?. UK/ t N c::t.. ' PaF.AN Lr—F0a. 0141. P11-1>G- 2. LAG.2. Describe how the variance would not have an adverse effect on surrounding properties: R R S ru -tc EEt-o(ZE_ 3. Describe the special conditions that apply to your lot or structure that do not apply to surrounding lots or structures: 4. Describe the hardship that would result if your variance were not granted: /)r'1 cam,? L,L*LI 7. ) 0, t,J� 't (See Reverse Side) list au adjacent property owners anon tneir mailing aaaresses, including condominium owners wan an interest in common areas: au :: being defined as properties which physically abut,are contiguous to,and are directly across a public street or alley from the property identified above). This information must be supplied by the applicant. (Instructions are given below) C 1) L`k ,Sr-‘ 1-IALLA 9) Cit) - k ; ILS-c"Jlo-co-co 2) b&-cLk --r ffl'A L_4 P.4.2,--r- 10) `12.0 AL )-( Sr /L -03iq-oc-•cc ?) /' o l+tZ, G -0Qt.,-._/M c c.L-t 6 11) ail L�ouE Sr /cam -e3cic..-oo -eo 4) •cNt-,r-c, ) &c:1-7- R/-It�.L 12) ci 13 nc: 5— 1(1 -O2)C7--co-cO 5) FEucL=2 , f No IL 13) 913 tc�Y S— L. -e3k)-,co -c6 P L i C t-'rt�l W tkt_- ) ED LA)A-12.* 14) cj ll 4r1(L S; /C.- 0318_cc-vo 7) /'JE ik; LL- )'j c~- 15) civb J. 1.r�\ �T• JC:, -0 ?C-co -co 3) `7(�.4eh,' .� ham,;`-'CJ 16) �ic1) i.). 1-- --.- )4...)-63 4 -moo-cc S -Ott., N o-r" I N ttser-c-N`y r INSTRUCTIONS (NOTE: The Assessor's personnel will assist you in compiling the appropriate ownership and address information) STEP#1: Take this application to the City Assessor's office,Room 302 of City Hall. STEP#2: Locate the appropriate plat map. STEP#3: Locate your lot on the plat map. STEP#4: Using the example below as a guide,locate the properties to be notified. STEP#5: Write down each lot's individual tax number. STEP#6: Have the Assessor's personnel locate the appropriate computerized assessment role. STEP#7: Locate on the assessment role the tax parcel number. STEP#8: Record the owner and mailing address for each lot in the appropriate location on this application. — l 1 t I t l_- W Is TH AWE, t o r n Z LEGEND i Z Z ' r^, _71Prt.IcaxT•s z • , SITE J W ; TH ;VE. PROPERTIES TO =BE NOTIFIED EXAMPLE#1 /CORNER LOT EXAMPLE#2 L W 5C11T1r PARK — ( IllitilVi Ill 1 r 1 W 12TH £ £/E: , , _ W 11TH AVE. .I 1-- —7 1 I 1 1 • I3 t Oil io ! !ii11fl1i - R: 11��� Aillots "g i v EI! cX gg V ? lett,I1. d 1 l cn -.N. , tet\ WW N. I a v :( o tt i'" 4 1 ,__..:N. ,,,..:%... '.4 -.... .. tot11.41 WAr M 510 v i cn N 0 til 1a k � N N N 1 C - 0 1 N ~ Ch. "ti morn 4. N. ti .'/V n 1 Io . -17zI I el < / o • zg . L TYkM I.i Y Ally t f . K 4 a,* y K t ' 'k c 4,O., .. . I 'd b80S-9EZ-O26 luawaouoju3 apo3 • 1 I 1 I • ' 1 - . . i L :wry , 1µ-e' 1J yY $1•j--......4, � Subject Site $' ';"` I 4. S � N , � i -�_. r�ri;. tr ;.0,-, ;,..'44., I liiii• 1 c. 4r I •--i I ji N • • •ip. ..•.•••.•.•.'•••.••••• .•.•••••• 1 ••••••••••••••••••••••.•.•.•❖•.•❖............•.••• •• •❖••••••••❖• • •••••• ••••.•'•••••.•❖•••❖•••❖•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••••••• • ••• • ❖ • ❖ ••••: ••••••••• •••.:.: • I/ \ !�� It-/ - 1 �* J�u':RL�YyV(/t�� ICEPP 30 ` ubject Site S 'k '`�' _" 111= Lamoi ' `� 4 l I ' Or 15 IIInalma s),„ ED. = na ` � . .,. . , I •*MORES Ells .' I'll , k. i 1 m,D_Li `1 NO :°i ! IiiFI yE% j �� � �4"111 , ii, __ 71 ot =,,Y1, , nr. �, - �I , T�„ir,, _ 1111 1 1 1► '• ,: � i /� � .�� - =111:411 1�1 L'IL '� _ rile J 1111111\` N m§ u Mum iiiiiiii�. I-, j 11I II I I_ P1111%30\ 11; •BIN A ..•• �'�;'� '� —� r 7Ml�E`i (l I I 'Vl$ �I - 11 AVE. J1L LI P\ l r1 o - I J/0 -- - 1 ■ 111111 . OM -: /l!_ 1— 1� -_A1 _ // 51W �I1 MILS �� -E= ■ IBC1 go ;; - mI Eng !-1-1 =9; _1_1,W411 I//i//16 1111 g La TAFTAVE H 1 — .' H J — i =111111111 I uiin INN 0 j g ! 1 cloi IAim ii— -_-_-__11 .11 I MINION I . I 0,1„4. CO LLI' 1:111 I I---:t I I H I - U1111 'um iatA-.=.- g lir z LOMBARII • l _=go 2= } J cn al to 1 'L11111111 z 1�_ r I9r 4 to y 7 Q I Ill 1111 SOUTHLAND AVE. RH M -a - -71 i11 1111 , CC OM ■ 0 E rMI, 7. I _w • - YTQN CT. 1 riL MI __ _ �-- _ uu_ t° , ma � ONAL •VE. MI I �.� -- rafeMI • _ —i Ill (_ LW 001`J:-•-•WM. mu _-� ,,„T c / tcy i—I �� :1111111� III ",- _. F _1. / ; 11111= 1 = 1i1= IlE AVE UP ■ ' •f' I 1 I , . , ® Hl ITTI f-f TTL ITEI T71 f CZTi ; f 1 DISCLAIMER Birds Eye View N This imp is neither a legally recorded imp nor a survey and it is not intended to be used as one. 912 N. Lark St. 4iii; This drawing is a compilation of records,data and information located in various city,county City of Oshkosh Wisconsin and state offices and other sources affecting O.f HKOlH the area shown and it is to be used for reference Community Development purrs only. The City of Oshkosh is not re- sponsrble for any inaccuracies herein contained. 700 0 700 Feet ON THE WATER M If discrepencies are found,please contact the Ctraled by VR S�S�M City of Oshkosh , • i ��( \ I I 1 1 i j ` y I ! I I J^�o I 1 J woRe AVE II I—,--C , LW11i BUCHANAN AVE. I 1 BUCHANAN AVE � 1 I i ,� j — Subject Site i 11 � i 15 I--� I BLLNA AN AVE (�-L--- ; I I j '�-1 II 11 ; 1 I ` 1 I I I= 1 AR AVE { I i Ilk' { I 1 I { ARTHUR I 1=1 I 1 t 1 i \ I LR1 VANBURRNRMi 7 j VAl6lR1@� �_- 1 r; 1 1 I I I ! I , 1 i / W IY ---(---) TYLER AVE. ■. 1 1 1 I ---1 i 1 , .1 i _ l I COpUDOE AVE .I '� 1 1 i r-n- ILi H I f- 1 r 1 i i y ADMLS _ • PIERCE R1 "I. 1 1i I J , Am„„,„HHII \ � { I- I 1 1 11'I ,_„_r_____, , , „ , , , { I, 111111111111 RUSH AVE. _ C- 1 ,V 1-I I I1.1 I Il{ i I 11 DISCLAIMERi�g Zoning 1) ,N This map is neither a legally recorded map nor41 a survey and it is not intended to be used as one. 912 N.Lark S� This drawing is a compilation of records,data and information located in various city,county and state offices and other sources affecting City of Oshkosh Wisconsin' f HKOlH the area shown and it is to be used for reference purposes only. The Qty of Oshkosh is not re- Community Development sponsible for any inaccuracies herein contained. ON THE WATER If discrepancies are found,please contact the 0 500 Feet City of Oshkosh 5/8/00 cf City of Oshkosh Dept.of Community Development City Hall • 215 Church Ave.,PO Box 1130 Oshkosh,WI 54903 (920)236-5059 BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA JUNE 14,2000 3:30 PM To Whom It May Concern: PLEASE NOTE the City of Oshkosh Board,of Appeals will meet on WEDNESDAY, JUNE 14,2000 at 3:30 PM in Room 404 at the Oshkosh City Hall to consider the following agenda. ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MAY 24,2000 MEETING MINUTES I: 912 LARK STREET Ray Fores,applicant and owner,requests a variance to allow a 20' by 14' or 280 square foot utility shed in the rear yard setback whereas Section 30-17 (B) (4) (e) (iii) allows for utility sheds up to 100 square feet in size. II: 14 BOWEN STREET Mark Radl, owner, requests a variance to allow a 22' by 14' or 240 square foot utility shed in the rear yard setback whereas Section 30-17 (B) (4) (e) (iii) allows for utility sheds up to 100 square feet in _ size. III: LOT 56 "SECOND ADDITION TO THE MEADOWS ON SAWYER CREEK /42 2J Garry Decker, owner,requests a variance to allow construction of a house with a 49' shoreland i_/a1/46-74.6( setback from the ordinary high water mark of Sawyer Creek whereas Section 17-20 (2)(a)(i) of the c� Winnebago County Zoning Ordinance requires a 75' shoreland setback from the ordinary high water mark. IV: 2 W. LINWOOD AVENUE Ce4(240-A-6Q 6/ 1 / Charles and Laura LeRoy, owners,request a variance,to allow construction of a solid 4' high fence in the front yard of their property whereas Section 30-35 (E)(2)of the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance requires that fences located within 15' of the front lot,line be less than 4' in height and less than 50% solid. I IMP. Q,L çj 91 2 N Lark CUSTOM BUILT HOMES C{ 2274 WILLOW WAY DRIVE (N . OSHKOSH, WI 54904 N I co _ o � ,� } I Ln r go I MI ___It..—. cv 1 '6 Seg T, . g , l/ 4y I o IG'a'e°°GE ....• scu " Z1:1412.-1 z { m • Y 9' 1 ,:- 31 T 76 1 .. �s N '/307 .Sc?rr. I-= Z.Sa ...._.� t K fe.4n/CrF/lak•rS 1j3 ._ . ._ al ' t �� I+l w 7.1+ j .F•. . /T A City of Oshkosh oR 4a .� Community Developrnen C b • W . j . . ////4 / 1 /.//1 DISCIAIER h R A ZC--it [3 LD G / 20 co nr mob wimr.ryy.lo,.fr Alp.r • •..war.rr/b ir.M.4 w wad Ss es U , • ` D /T M / ni*miss i•essyliiso of rim*dam • •'//l/ /f1 / i / trw..I.WoaISwlewrw.wr7 niss (D.7$ Nies,.day. a.oar.+ores.1.w». '� 1 awe*b q:...Wail' Yin r+r.s �..... �' Y - • a dso7W.r..um Lnl Oar sister p• ally w orr 120 . 0 '' , CD - Scde: 1 in. = 20 ft. • I DIOS A.1..1I 1434.4 CV,1w. • x'/cxx — 5/12.1-;1-5 /iz'-, Ses• •r[ J Ovals"Sy .- `Lo___ - - _ oa F .ac.-•—