HomeMy WebLinkAbout36. 21-616DECEMBER 14, 2021 21-616 RESOLUTION
(CARRIED___7-0____LOST_______LAID OVER_______WITHDRAWN_______)
PURPOSE: APPROVE GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SPECIFIC
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR A NEW MIDDLE SCHOOL
DEVELOPMENT AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF JACKSON
STREET AND WEST NEVADA AVENUE
INITIATED BY: OSHKOSH AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT
PLAN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Approved w/conditions
WHEREAS, the Plan Commission finds that the General Development Plan and
Specific Implementation Plan to allow for a new middle school development at the
southeast corner of Jackson Street and West Nevada Avenue, is consistent with the
criteria established in Section 30-387 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 to allow for
a new middle school development at the southeast corner of Jackson Street and West
Nevada Avenue, per the attached, is hereby approved with the following conditions:
1. BSM to allow 66% impervious surface ratio, where code allows a maximum of
60%.
2. A Certified Survey Map (CSM) shall be reviewed and approved by the
Department of Community Development.
3. BSM to allow building height of 48’ (60’ including mezzanine features), where
code allows a maximum building height of 45’.
4. BSM to allow reduced street side setback (Jackson St.) to 18.75’, where code
requires a 25’ setback.
5. BSM to allow reduced street side setback (Kentucky St.) to 16.5’, where code
requires a 25’ setback.
6. BSM to allow reduced street frontage landscaping (Nevada St.) to 285.5 points,
where code requires 393 points.
7. BSM to allow reduced street frontage landscaping (Kentucky St.) to 811 points
DECEMBER 14, 2021 21-616 RESOLUTION
CONT’D
including 120 medium tree points, where code requires 1,083 points including
541.5 medium tree points.
8. BSM to allow reduced street frontage landscaping (Jackson St. – south section) to
61.5 points including 61.5 medium tree points, where code requires 393 points
including 196.5 medium tree points.
9. BSM to allow reduced street frontage medium tree landscaping (Jackson St. – north
section) to 66 medium tree points, where code requires 155.7 medium tree points.
10. BSM to allow reduced yard landscaping points to 1,355.3, where code requires
2,340-yard landscaping points.
11. BSM to allow reduced street side setback for monument sign to 19’, where code
requires a 25’ setback.
12. BSM to allow Electronic Message Board sign to be placed 64 ft. from the
residentially-zoned parcel, where code requires a 100 ft. separation from
residentially-zoned parcels.
13. BSM to allow a refuse enclosure to be located between a building and the public
street.
14. A minimum of 40 evergreen tree landscaping points shall be provided in front of
the dumpster enclosure.
15. Final landscaping plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of
Community Development.
16. BSM to allow 0 fc lighting level for drive area along Jackson St., where code
requires a minimum 0.4 fc for drive areas.
17. Rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened per commercial building design
standards.
City Hall, 215 Church Avenue P.O. Box 1130 Oshkosh, WI 54903-1130 920.236.5000 http://www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Common Council
FROM: Mark Lyons, Planning Services Manager
DATE: December 9, 2021
RE: Approve General Development Plan and Specific Implementation Plan for a New
Middle School Development at the Southeast Corner of Jackson Street and West
Nevada Avenue
BACKGROUND
The applicant requests approval of General Development Plan and Specific Implementation
Plan to allow for a new middle school development. The subject area consists of two existing
properties owned and utilized by the School District along with five residential or vacant
properties totaling 7.66 acres in size with frontage on Jackson Street, West Nevada Avenue, and
Kentucky Street. The subject area is currently used for school sports facilities, parking, and
single-family residences. The surrounding area consists primarily of residential uses along with
the existing Merrill School site to the east. The 2040 Comprehensive Land Use Plan recommends
Park and Light Density Residential use for the subject area.
ANALYSIS
The applicant is proposing to combine the subject parcels for the development of a new Merrill
Middle School, combining the existing Merrill Middle School and Webster-Stanley Middle
School. This site was chosen for the new middle school through a referendum that was passed
in November 2020.
A Plan Commission workshop was held on September 21, 2021, with Plan Commission voicing
support for the proposed plans. A neighborhood meeting was held at the existing Merrill Middle
School on September 9, 2021, with neighbors voicing concerns related to pick-up and drop-off
of students, bicycle access/racks, location of the loading area along Jackson Street, and the
appearance of the site as it relates to the surrounding neighborhood.
The applicant is requesting BSMs related to impervious surface ratio, building height, street-
side setbacks, and street frontage landscaping requirements as well as placement of the EMC
sign. To offset these requested code exceptions, the applicant has exceeded building foundation,
paved area, and bufferyard landscaping point requirements and provided enhanced building
façade materials. Staff is comfortable that the applicant has adequately offset the requested
BSMs and the overall site is compatible with the surrounding area.
City Hall, 215 Church Avenue P.O. Box 1130 Oshkosh, WI 54903-1130 920.236.5000 http://www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us
FISCAL IMPACT
Approval of this project would not result in an increase in the assessed property value as the
property is exempt. The applicant is anticipating spending approximately $53.2 million on the
project.
RECOMMENDATION
The Plan Commission recommended approval of the General Development Plan and Specific
Implementation Plan with conditions on November 16, 2021. Please see the attached staff report
and meeting minutes for more information.
Respectfully Submitted, Approved:
Mark Lyons Mark A. Rohloff
Planning Services Manager City Manager
ITEM: ZONE CHANGE FROM INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT (I) & SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL – 9 DISTRICT (SR-9) TO INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT WITH A
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (I-PD) AND APPROVAL OF A
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SPECIFIC IMPLEMENTATION
PLAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT SOUTHEAST CORNER OF JACKSON
STREET & W NEVADA AVENUE
Plan Commission meeting of November 16, 2021.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: Nate Considine, Bray Architects
Property Owner: Oshkosh Area School District
Action(s) Requested:
The applicant requests a zone change from the existing Institutional District (I) and Single Family
Residential – 9 District (SR-9) to Institutional District with a Planned Development Overlay (I-
PD). The applicant also requests approval of General Development Plan and Specific
Implementation Plan to allow for a new middle school development.
Applicable Ordinance Provisions:
The Zoning Ordinance does not establish criteria relative to the appropriateness of changing the
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 Background Information:
The subject area consists of two existing properties owned and utilized by the School District
along with 5 residential or vacant properties, totaling 7.66 acres in size, with frontage on Jackson
Street, W Nevada Avenue, and Kentucky Street. The subject area is currently used for school
sports facilities and parking as well as single-family residences. The surrounding area consists
primarily of residential uses along with the existing Merrill School site to the east. The 2040
Comprehensive Land Use Plans recommends Park and Light Density Residential use for the
subject area.
Subject Site
Existing Land Use Zoning
Athletic fields, parking, vacant, & residential SR-9 & I
Recognized Neighborhood Organizations
Historic Jackson
ITEM III: Rezone, GDP & SIP SE Corner W Nevada Ave. & Jackson St. 2
Adjacent Land Use and Zoning
Existing Uses Zoning
North Residential SR-9
South Residential SR-9
East School SR-9 & I
West Residential SR-9
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Recommendation Land Use
2040 Comprehensive Land Use Recommendation Park and Light Density Residential
ANALYSIS
Zone Change
The applicant is requesting a zone change to add a Planned Development Overlay for the subject
parcels that are currently zoned Institutional (I) as well a zone change for 5 existing residential
properties from Single Family Residential – 9 (SR-9) to Institutional District with a Planned
Development Overlay (I-PD). This request is intended to provide consistent (I-PD) zoning for the
subject parcels, which will allow the lots to be combined. The Planned Development Overlay will
allow for flexibility from zoning ordinance requirements, which are needed to accommodate the
proposed site development and the unique shape of the proposed lot. Staff is supportive of the
proposed rezoning as it will help to accommodate the development of the site and allow for
further review of the proposed development as it relates to surrounding residential uses.
Use
The applicant is proposing to combine the subject parcels for the development of a new Merrill
Middle School, combining the existing Merrill Middle School and Webster-Stanley Middle
ITEM III: Rezone, GDP & SIP SE Corner W Nevada Ave. & Jackson St. 3
School. This site was chosen for the new middle school through a referendum that was passed in
November 2020. Elementary and Middle Schools are considered Indoor Institutional land use
and are a conditional use in the Institutional District.
A Plan Commission workshop was held on September 21, 2021, with Plan Commission voicing
support for the proposed plans. A neighborhood meeting was held at the existing Merrill Middle
School on September 9, 2021, with neighbors voicing concerns related to pick up/drop off of
students, bicycle access/racks, location of the loading area along Jackson St., and appearance of
the site as it relates to the surrounding neighborhood.
Site Design/Access
The proposed development will have four driveway accesses off of Kentucky Street to two
parking areas (main parking area and ADA/guest parking area) and one access off of Jackson
Street to a loading area to be used for deliveries only. The loading area will be surrounded by 4’
tall steel ornamental fencing to deter pedestrian and vehicle access to the area.
The Department of Public Works has noted that the changes to the public right-of-way will need
to be discussed in detail and the City will need to determine if the work along Kentucky Street is
going to be approved. They have also noted that the public sidewalks need to be placed at the
right-of-way line. The City Transportation Department has noted that a traffic impact analysist
(TIA) has been reviewed and supported by the Traffic and Parking Advisory Board. Plans
include flipping the one-way pairs of Kentucky St. and Central St., which has also been reviewed
and approved by the Board, and the reversal of one-way traffic flow for these streets was
approved by Common Council on November 9, 2021.
ITEM III: Rezone, GDP & SIP SE Corner W Nevada Ave. & Jackson St. 4
Required Provided
Parking Spaces Minimum: 38 147
Bicycle Spaces 4 116
Impervious Surface Maximum: 60% of lot 66% of lot
Building Height Maximum: 45 ft. 60 ft.
The provided parking is significantly exceeding the code minimum of 1 space per two employees,
as the applicant has noted that the school will have approximately 75 employees. The applicant
has provided a total of 116 bicycle parking spaces for use by students and staff.
The total impervious surface area for the site is over the maximum of 60% for the Institutional
District. According to the applicant, the increased impervious surface area is necessary to
provide the needed building and parking areas on the site without further increasing the building
height. Staff is supportive of the proposed BSM for the increased impervious surface area as it is
necessary for site functionality. Staff feels that increased impervious surface is an appropriate
alternative to increased building height, as it is more compatible with the surrounding residential
neighborhood.
The proposed building height will exceed the maximum height by 3’ to accommodate a three-
story height and by 15’ to accommodate mezzanine features. According to the applicant, a 45’ tall
building (maximum height) is not achievable for a three-story building due to current HVAC,
structural, and architectural design requirements. Staff is supportive of the BSM for increased
height as it is necessary to accommodate the needed floor area.
The site plan includes a masonry dumpster enclosure at the northwest portion of the site, located
between the building and Jackson Street public right-of-way. The dumpster enclosure must be 6’
tall and masonry must match the principal building. Staff feels that the proposed location is
appropriate as it will be placed along the proposed loading area, which will be the most
functional location for the site. Staff is recommending a condition that a minimum of 40
evergreen tree landscaping points be provided in front of the dumpster enclosure to “break up”
the view of the enclosure from the street.
Minimum Provided
Front Setback (W
Nevada Ave.) 30 ft. 38 ft. (building)
Street Side Setback
(Jackson St.) 25 ft. 18.75 ft. (pavement)
Street Side Setback
(Kentucky St.) 25 ft. 16.5 ft. (pavement)
Side Setback (west) 7.5 ft. 26 ft. (pavement)
Side Setback
(southwest) 7.5 ft. 51 ft. (pavement)
Rear Setback (south) 25 ft. 75.66 ft. (pavement)
ITEM III: Rezone, GDP & SIP SE Corner W Nevada Ave. & Jackson St. 5
The applicant is meeting applicable setbacks for the Institutional district, with the exception street
side setbacks for parking/drive areas along Jackson St. and Kentucky St. According to the
applicant, the reduced street side setbacks are needed to accommodate floor area and parking
needs without forcing the building more toward the middle of the site, resulting in a need for
additional building height. Staff is supportive of the reduced pavement setbacks for the drive
areas as it is needed to accommodate access to needed parking and loading areas.
Storm Water Management/Utilities
Storm water management plans have been provided and are being reviewed by the Department
of Public Works. Finalized storm water management plans will need to be submitted and
approved as part of the Site Plan Review processes.
Landscaping
ITEM III: Rezone, GDP & SIP SE Corner W Nevada Ave. & Jackson St. 6
Points Required Points Provided
Building Foundation 940 970.1
Paved Area 780 (234 tall trees, 312 shrubs) 814.8 (650 tall trees, 314.8 shrubs)
Street Frontage (W
Nevada Ave.) 393 (196.5 medium trees) 285.5 (209.5 medium trees)
Street Frontage
(Jackson St. – north) 311.4 (155.7 medium trees) 594 (66 medium trees)
Street Frontage
(Jackson St. – south) 393 (196.5 medium trees) 61.5 (61.5 medium trees)
Street Frontage
(Kentucky St.) 1083 (541.5 medium trees) 811 (120 medium trees)
Yards 2,340 1,355.3
Bufferyard (south) 297 315
Bufferyard (west – by
basin) 162 165
Bufferyard (west – by
parking) 1080 1089
Bufferyard (west – for
residential lot) 298 396
Total 7,137.4 5,887.1
Building Foundation
The building foundation point requirement of 40 building foundation landscaping points per 100
linear feet of building foundation is being met for the site.
Paved Area
The paved area requirement of 50 landscaping points per 10 parking stalls or 10,000 sq. ft. of
paved area is being met. The code further specifies 30% of all points will be devoted to medium
or tall trees and 40% will be devoted to shrubs, which is also being met. The landscaping plan is
also providing a deciduous/shade tree at the ends of all parking rows as required by code, except
for a tree missing at the northwest corner of the main (south) parking area. This can be addressed
during the Site Plan Review process.
Street Frontage
Code requires 100 points per 100 feet of street frontage. The landscaping ordinance also specifies
that 50% of the required points must be devoted to medium trees. The applicant is requesting
BSMs for reduced street frontage landscaping along the Jackson Street and Kentucky Street
frontages. According to the applicant, the need for an underground stormwater detention tank
system and a bio basin limit the available area to provide plantings along these street frontages.
ITEM III: Rezone, GDP & SIP SE Corner W Nevada Ave. & Jackson St. 7
Staff is supportive of the requested BSM as limited available area exists for street frontage
landscaping and the applicant has provided additional building foundation and paved area
landscaping to offset the reduced street frontage landscaping.
Yards
Code requires 20 landscaping points per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area. The applicant has not
included yard landscaping in the point total calculations. Due to the uniquely large floor area of
the proposed school (117,000 sq. ft.) and limited available yard area, staff is recommending that
the yard landscaping requirement be waived. Also, open lawn space may be more advantageous
for a school setting than additional plantings. The combined total of all other landscaping
categories (building foundation, paved areas, street frontages, bufferyards) exceeds the minimum
requirement by over 1,000 total points. This serves to offset the reduced yard landscaping points.
Bufferyards
A 0.2 opacity bufferyard is required for property lines bordering Single Family Residential – 9
zoning districts. The 0.2 opacity bufferyard requirement is being met with a minimum 10’
bufferyard width along with 6’ solid fencing on all 3 sides of the residential lot. The bufferyard is
being met along 4 other property lines abutting SR-9 zoning by providing a 15’ wide bufferyard
and a minimum of 198 landscaping points per 100 feet.
Signage
Proposed signage for the site includes a 6’ 10” tall, approximately 40 sq. ft. monument sign
including an electronic message center along the Kentucky Street frontage. The sign complies
with the maximum ground sign area for the Institutional district of 1 sq. ft. of sign area per linear
of street frontage, as well as the maximum EMC sign area of 100 sq. ft. for the site. A BSM is
required for the sign placement as it is within the Kentucky Street front setback area and will be
located approximately 64 feet from the residential properties to the east, where EMCs are not
permitted within 100’ of a residentially zoned parcel. Staff is supportive of the reduced setback to
approximately 19’ as it will match the setback of the drive aisle immediately to the south of the
sign. Staff is also supportive of the reduced separation from the residential properties as the EMC
will be relatively small in size and not face toward the neighboring residential properties to the
east. Also, due to the site constraints, it does not appear feasible to move the sign further to the
interior of the site.
ITEM III: Rezone, GDP & SIP SE Corner W Nevada Ave. & Jackson St. 8
Site Lighting
A photometric plan has been provided by the applicant. The provided plan is within the
maximum 0.5-footcandle lighting level allowed at the property lines. The minimum lighting level
of the 0.4-footcandle is being met for all parking and drive areas, except for the loading area at the
northwest corner of the site. Staff is supportive of a BSM to allow the decreased lighting level as
that area will be utilized for loading only and will not be utilized for parking. Proposed light
fixture heights do not exceed the maximum height of 20’ and will be full cut-off fixtures.
Building Facades
Building Materials
ITEM III: Rezone, GDP & SIP SE Corner W Nevada Ave. & Jackson St. 9
The City’s Exterior Design Standards do not apply to Institutional land uses. However, the
exterior design may be reviewed as part of the Planned Development review process. The
petitioner has provided elevations for the building as well as a material list and material
breakdown for the building for each building facade. The specific elevations breakdown is as
follows:
North: Class I – 82% Class III – 18%
South: Class I – 78% Class III – 22%
East: Class I – 78% Class III – 22%
West: Class I – 85% Class III – 15%
The proposed building elevations consist of a combination of stone, brick, glass, and metal panels.
When compared to the Class I material allotment that would be required under commercial
standards, the proposed elevations significantly exceed the minimum of 50% Class I materials for
all facades. Staff feels that the proposed elevations provide an attractive appearance for the
building and the significant proportion of Class I materials serves to offset requested BSMs. Staff
is recommending a condition that all roof-top mechanical equipment be screened from view per
commercial building design standards.
Overall Site
The applicant is requesting BSMs related to impervious surface ratio, building height, street-side
setbacks, and street frontage landscaping requirements as well as placement of the EMC sign. To
offset these requested code exceptions, the applicant has exceeded building foundation, paved
area, and bufferyard landscaping point requirements as well as provided enhanced building
façade materials. Staff is comfortable that the applicant has adequately offset the requested BSMs
and the overall site is compatible with the surrounding area.
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.)
(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.
ITEM III: Rezone, GDP & SIP SE Corner W Nevada Ave. & Jackson St. 10
(e) The proposed Planned Development project will incorporate appropriate and adequate
buffers and transitions between areas of different land use and development
densities/intensities.
(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 relates to and more than compensate for any requested
exceptions/base standard modifications variation of any standard or regulation of this
Chapter.
Staff recommends approval of the rezone, General Development Plan, and Specific
Implementation Plan and the findings listed above with the proposed following conditions:
1. BSM to allow 66% impervious surface ratio, where code allows a maximum of 60%.
2. A Certified Survey Map (CSM) shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of
Community Development.
3. BSM to allow building height of 48’ (60’ including mezzanine features), where code allows
a maximum building height of 45’.
4. BSM to allow reduced street side setback (Jackson St.) to 18.75’, where code requires a 25’
setback.
5. BSM to allow reduced street side setback (Kentucky St.) to 16.5’, where code requires a 25’
setback.
6. BSM to allow reduced street frontage landscaping (Nevada St.) to 285.5 points, where code
requires 393 points.
7. BSM to allow reduced street frontage landscaping (Kentucky St.) to 811 points including
120 medium tree points, where code requires 1,083 points including 541.5 medium tree
points.
8. BSM to allow reduced street frontage landscaping (Jackson St. – south section) to 61.5
points including 61.5 medium tree points, where code requires 393 points including 196.5
medium tree points.
9. BSM to allow reduced street frontage medium tree landscaping (Jackson St. – north
section) to 66 medium tree points, where code requires 155.7 medium tree points.
10. BSM to allow reduced yard landscaping points to 1,355.3, where code requires 2,340-yard
landscaping points.
11. BSM to allow reduced street side setback for monument sign to 19’, where code requires a
25’ setback.
12. BSM to allow Electronic Message Board sign to be placed 64 ft. from the residentially-
zoned parcel, where code requires a 100 ft. separation from residentially-zoned parcels.
13. BSM to allow a refuse enclosure to be located between a building and the public street.
14. A minimum of 40 evergreen tree landscaping points shall be provided in front of the
dumpster enclosure.
ITEM III: Rezone, GDP & SIP SE Corner W Nevada Ave. & Jackson St. 11
15. Final landscaping plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Community
Development.
16. BSM to allow 0 fc lighting level for drive area along Jackson St., where code requires a
minimum 0.4 fc for drive areas.
17. Rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened per commercial building design
standards.
The Plan Commission approved of the rezone, general development plan, and specific
implementation plan on November 16, 2021. The following is their discussion on the item.
Site Inspections Report: Mr. Hinz, Ms. Davey, Ms. Propp, Council Member Ford, Ms.
Scheuermann, and Mr. Perry all reported visiting the site.
Staff report accepted as part of the record.
The applicant requests a zone change from the existing Institutional District (I) and Single Family
Residential – 9 District (SR-9) to Institutional District with a Planned Development Overlay (I-
PD). The applicant also requests approval of General Development Plan and Specific
Implementation Plan to allow for a new middle school development.
Mr. Slusarek 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 a zone change to add a
Planned Development Overlay for the subject parcels that are currently zoned Institutional (I) as
well a zone change for 5 existing residential properties from Single Family Residential – 9 (SR-9)
to Institutional District with a Planned Development Overlay (I-PD). This request is intended to
provide consistent (I-PD) zoning for the subject parcels, which will allow the lots to be combined.
The Planned Development Overlay will allow for flexibility from zoning ordinance requirements,
which are needed to accommodate the proposed site development and the unique shape of the
proposed lot. Staff is supportive of the proposed rezoning as it will help to accommodate the
development of the site and allow for further review of the proposed development as it relates to
surrounding residential uses. The applicant is proposing to combine the subject parcels for the
development of a new Merrill Middle School, combining the existing Merrill Middle School and
Webster-Stanley Middle School. This site was chosen for the new middle school through a
referendum that was passed in November 2020. Elementary and Middle Schools are considered
Indoor Institutional land use and are a conditional use in the Institutional District.
A Plan Commission workshop was held on September 21, 2021, with Plan Commission voicing
support for the proposed plans. A neighborhood meeting was held at the existing Merrill Middle
School on September 9, 2021, with neighbors voicing concerns related to pick up/drop off of
students, bicycle access/racks, location of the loading area along Jackson St., and appearance of
the site as it relates to the surrounding neighborhood.
The proposed development will have four driveway accesses off of Kentucky Street to two
parking areas (main parking area and ADA/guest parking area) and one access off of Jackson
ITEM III: Rezone, GDP & SIP SE Corner W Nevada Ave. & Jackson St. 12
Street to a loading area to be used for deliveries only. The loading area will be surrounded by 4’
tall steel ornamental fencing to deter pedestrian and vehicle access to the area.
The Department of Public Works has noted that the changes to the public right-of-way will need
to be discussed in detail and the City will need to determine if the work along Kentucky Street is
going to be approved. They have also noted that the public sidewalks need to be placed at the
right-of-way line. The City Transportation Department has noted that a traffic impact analysist
(TIA) has been reviewed and supported by the Traffic and Parking Advisory Board. Plans
include flipping the one-way pairs of Kentucky St. and Central St., which has also been reviewed
and approved by the Board, and the reversal of one-way traffic flow for these streets was
approved by Common Council on November 9, 2021.
The applicant is meeting applicable setbacks for the Institutional district, with the exception street
side setbacks for parking/drive areas along Jackson St. and Kentucky St. According to the
applicant, the reduced street side setbacks are needed to accommodate floor area and parking
needs without forcing the building more toward the middle of the site, resulting in a need for
additional building height. Staff is supportive of the reduced pavement setbacks for the drive
areas as it is needed to accommodate access to needed parking and loading areas. Staff
recommends approval with the findings and conditions as listed in the staff report.
Mr. Hinz opened up technical questions to staff.
Ms. Davey asked where the reduced lighting is.
Mr. Slusarek said it is off of Jackson St and the northern portion of that loading area.
Ms. Scheuermann asked why reduced lighting is allowed in a loading zone.
Mr. Lyons said that it's really the layout of the area. They went from 2 access points to a single
access point. They have to have some backup room to get back out onto the street. Allows you to
enter and exit in a forward motion. It was looked at as the limited capacity and limited use. Plan
Commission could require them to up it to code minimum.
Mr. Mitchell said that it sometimes pains him when they start a topic and they add the
commentary in a way can be interpreted as they are only looking at this small portion of what the
plan may be for. All of the sites in particular plan for the other site where the school currently sits
and he knows that's not on the discussion. If they get too far along this development and the
school district comes back and says, well, you approved all of that. And now we don't have
enough space. And so this is our only alternative options for the other plot of land which includes
potentially demolishing historically significant building. If they do move forward on this
particular proposal today that Plan Commission needs to have some sort of come together or
some sort of session where they see the full picture of what they're looking at, what they've
considered what's been offered to them regarding open space, parks, space, that sort of thing.
ITEM III: Rezone, GDP & SIP SE Corner W Nevada Ave. & Jackson St. 13
Mr. Lyons said that he appreciates the comments. Plan Commission does have a definitive role in
this and as staff evaluated this. The other side, whether it is green space, or looks at potential
housing from, from our perspective doesn't change the fact of what we're evaluating on this site is
if this is an appropriate development for this site. I appreciate the comments and the feedbacks
and understanding what they may do. They'll decide in the future, but from our perspective, the
land use, and the decision made for this site are separate from that.
Mr. Mitchell said when we transitioned from the golf course if we would have said, you know,
we're not going to look at a full picture of it all and we're just going look at the gas station they
want there. So, we're only going to look at that at that gas station, and not see how it flows with
the potential other future developments. Not look how it impacts anything else we would not
have been doing our job, nor would of the department and we didn't, we were pretty
comprehensive on that. There was a full plan.
Nate Considine, Bray Architects, said that it was very apparent in the neighborhood meeting that
the existing neighbors, whether immediately adjacent to our site, or across the street from our site
were respected a visibility perspective whether that's light levels, aesthetics, fencing. They had
some input that we wanted to honor. Not lighting the corner was intentional. Most deliveries
would happen when it is light outside. For the exiting Merrill sight, if you look back on
referendum documents that area has been shown as a green space and the school district could
still see it that way. Its future is still to be determined and Plan Commission will be a part of the
plan.
Mr. Hinz asked for any public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any
statements.
Donald Kalmerton, 1310 Jackson St said he is one of the residential properties that will be
surrounded by the new facility. To begin with, I would like to commend Justin Mitchell's
comment about not going forward with this until you have all of the information. I personally
have attended meetings and have not yet received any straight answers to my questions. I do not
know that anyone fully understands what's involved here other than perhaps a few people at the
school district, the neighborhood to the best of my knowledge. And all of the people that I chat
with are not happy with things the way that they are. None of the property owners that are
directly, by they proposed construction site are happy with the design or how it's laid out. The
variance that the school district has asked for the building, as is designed really shouldn't be
approved if you're trying to put in a building of this size into a residential area, it should be able
to conform and blend in with the neighborhood. It doesn't. It's going to be a sore thumb. I
strongly urged the planning commission to reject this application until a complete full plan of
what is going to happen with the property is put before the planning commission and the
citizens. I'd like to see that setbacks, even increased from 10 to 10 feet per story of construction.
Um, based on the foot traffic and vehicle traffic on Jackson Street that this will affect and probably
increase the way the current design is and I believe it will not function as you have it designed. I
have asked for somebody to talk with about this and as of now, I still don't know who to talk to
about this matter.
ITEM III: Rezone, GDP & SIP SE Corner W Nevada Ave. & Jackson St. 14
Mr. Mitchell asked if the meetings that Donald attended were public official meetings that the
school district had set up.
Mr. Kalmerton said that they were neighborhood meetings by the neighborhood associations and
a meeting set up by the school board. The other thing I'm highly critical of the school district.
They notify some people of the meetings and not everyone.
Mr. Lyons said the meeting that took place at Merrill, the city did the notice to make sure we
could identify as many people as possible. In this instance, staff went much larger than normal. It
was also sent to the neighbored organizations to help distribute.
Mr. Mitchell said that the school board meeting in particular is something that could be valuable
in the report when there’s a section on a community meeting and the general sentiment if it was
positive. It would be helpful to receive better records. This allows us to make an informed
decision on what issues were raised and how they are being addressed and what’s the rationale
for not addressing them.
Mr. Lyons said that Mr. Slusarek did reference it in his comments.
Mr. Mitchell said that it ends up being a one or two sentence comment as opposed to actually
seeing records similar to previous discussion about what we’re actually seeing and what the
issues that were raised and what was the conversation that was had. It seems there are
opportunities where we could be getting more information.
Mr. Kalmerton said the response by the staff who prepared the notes for the meeting today are
very short on the accuracy of how the local residents feel towards this project. You're looking at a
project, which encompasses 2 parcels of property in excess of 154 Million dollars the facts, which
the school district have referenced as justification for their actions have not been demonstrated to
my understanding to be accurate look at the traffic patterns and the traffic counts. They referred
to a traffic study. There was according to the traffic engineer who attended the meeting on Merrill
Avenue. There was no study. He merely took the traffic engineer merely took the national
averages and put it into his report for supplying to the school district. I think that's totally
inaccurate. The lighting of the loading zone is inaccurate based on the heavy traffic on the Jackson
side of the street. I believe it's justifiable to reduce the lighting on the rest of the building. Having
said that I still go back to a building up this size in this area, which is residential should mean be
set back at least 10 feet from the property lines for 10 feet for each story of construction. I have
not been able to find anybody to honestly talk to after the last meeting on Merrill school. I was
very disappointed about the meeting at Merrill school, because the members of the city staff
members of the engineering staff members of the school district, all wore face mask and did not
take their face masks off to speak. Their speech was muffled on the microphone. Sometimes you
could understand it sometimes you couldn't. And there was no directory who was at the meeting,
who put on the meeting and who you could contact. I spent 3 days trying to run down the people
who were there to make comments or send letters to and I'm sorry but I just couldn't find
anybody who could confirm anything this is my attitude on how this has been put forward so far.
There are more shadows than facts here and I firmly believe that the zoning board did that, and
ITEM III: Rezone, GDP & SIP SE Corner W Nevada Ave. & Jackson St. 15
the planning commission here should not approve this. There's nothing here in front of you,
which benefits the school district or benefits the city might in the future but there's nothing there.
Now, I believe right now, because of the cost and everything else involved, it will actually do
more harm to distribute than benefit. And I, and again, I am more than willing to talk or sit down
and explain anything to anybody.
Mr. Considine said thank you to all for attending and for the comments that have been voiced.
Any questions regarding the referendum as mentioned at the neighborhood meeting can be
directed to Dr. David Gundlach, the deputy superintendent of the school districted. He has
fielded multiple phone calls and emails. I would encourage any conversation to continue to Dr.
Gundlach at the school district. The school district has the best interest in the public, and the
community, as it regards to that site and we'll look for further community and engagement and
involvement as it relates to the existing building and what that site will do.
James Fochs, Oshkosh Area School District, said that an exhaustive traffic study was performed,
um, as is necessary for a facility of this size. Moreover, a secondary traffic study was done to try
to verify or validate a couple of additional unforeseen traffic patterns by the request of the traffic
commission, so there were several meetings with regard to vehicle traffic, drop off with regard to
this facility. So again, I do appreciate the concern of the community and the planning
commission.
Mr. Mitchell said you noted that there were additional meetings and studies and I know that the
report indicates that the traffic and parking advisory board discussed traffic analysis. Are those
available anywhere. Something that I didn't see it on your website and I certainly don't have that.
Is that something that is made available to the public.
Mr. Considine say that when we went through the traffic advisory board, that report was made
available during that process. I would assume that you would be able to grab it from the cities
meeting minutes.
Mr. Lyons said he will get those from traffic advisory board.
Mr. Mitchell said that he feels like those sorts of things are a part of land uses and how it impacts
traffic patterns and whatnot. We often talk about restricting entrance and exit and whatnot and
that that would be another great thing to have included as we review this. It's a big decision.
Mr. Lyons said from a timing standpoint, the reason that went before this is they did wanted
council to weigh in on the flipping of the 1 way paired before site design got all the the way to the
point for documents being ready for plan commission. So the TIA along with 1 way pairs
preceded this part of the project. If council wasn't willing to approve that element of it, it
would've substantially impacted the entire design so that's why that element went through its
approving body, through the traffic advisory board and then ultimately council prior to the land
use and site plan.
ITEM III: Rezone, GDP & SIP SE Corner W Nevada Ave. & Jackson St. 16
Mr. Mitchell asked if Mr. Fochs understands that by moving forward on the proposal today in no
way indicates or suggest the support for any sort of idea on the other land and that what we do
today, doesn't give a go ahead or has no impact on any other lot that's not under consideration
today and therefore it won't later come back and say, well, because you supported this, therefore,
we have to have that additional space as blank. That this is a standalone thing.
Mr. Fochs said that this is being treated as a completely separate project apart from this building.
This building is a standalone project as was pointed out. So we are looking strictly at this facility.
The existing parcel that you're referring to that is the existing Merrill middle and elementary
school will be evaluated again on a month by month basis. Ultimately, a design standard will be
determined in the future a date to which I do not have at this point again, because it is a constant
evaluation as to what that will look like. But that will be a freestanding project a couple of years
from now.
There were no other public comments on this item.
There were no public comments on this item.
Mr. Hinz closed public comments and asked if the applicant wanted to make any closing
statements.
There were no closing statements from the applicant.
Motion by Propp to adopt the findings and recommendation as stated in the staff report.
Seconded by Perry.
Mr. Hinz asked if there was any discussion on the motion.
Mr. Mitchell said that I really appreciate the design that they put forth. I think this is a great
project and I think it's a great location. I have one kind of real hold up in that we as a body have
looked at other developments and there was two neighbors that made concerns and we said no
because they couldn't address those concerns. I don't know what the neighbors’ concerns are here
because we don't have any information on that. I would love to see this body say that bring this
back in two weeks, provide us the information so we can see what the neighbors’ concerns are
and what's been done to address them.
Council Member Ford said that this is a hard one because some of the public comments and
public outreach would have been done by the school district as opposed to the city. What is the
outreach that has been done on this.
Mr. Lyons said that the school district did a number of meetings prior to the referendum. I don't
have specific dates or meeting notes from those during the planning process. The city was
involved with helping them notice a neighborhood meeting and we sent representatives to the
meeting at the existing middle school. There was a number of neighbors with comments made
ITEM III: Rezone, GDP & SIP SE Corner W Nevada Ave. & Jackson St. 17
directly about the referendum not wanting the school. Outside of those comments, the questions
were about pick up and drop off and how that was going to take place. There were comments
about the design of the building, some neighbors thought it was a good looking building and
some didn’t.
Council Member Ford asked if there would be a need for another vote on this referendum or
anything involved with this new school.
Mr. Lyons said to the best of his knowledge the referendum was passed and approved for
construction for this school as well as the school at the other site and no additional referendum
would be required.
Ms. Davey said that we're sacrificing a lot of the landscaping points, and I understand why that's
helpful not to have that around a school, but I don't want to see this become a trend. We have
those landscaping points on there for a reason and it's a significant amount of points between the
two buildings. When there are more parking spaces built, we are encouraging people to drive
more. We are not encouraging people to use alternative transportation. I think that we need to
really aware of how many parking places we build. Why don't we put some of that money into
encouraging people to walk, bike or take buses. We need to be working as a community on
encouraging more not car transportation and I don't see that we're doing that. I'd like to see the
studies, I guess, to show how that's going to work. If this building had more of a rectangular
footprint it could then have setbacks that were greater because there'd be more space available
and I think that sometimes we tend to see just from our own viewpoint and kind of forget the
overall view.
Council Member Ford said that one of the conditions we are placing on this is that the final
landscaping plan has to be reviewed and approved by the department community development
and related to that within the report, discusses the need to change some of the screens and some
of the buffer landscaping. So, presumably those recommendations that are in the report will be
covered by that condition.
Mr. Lyons said that is correct and the conditions are there to address the non-additional yard
landscaping. That is the one that one truly deficient. If you take the yard landscaping out of the
equation, they meet most of them, or we'll have to address those other elements that aren't being
met outside of a little bit of foundation. We are recommending that there are some base standard
modifications really specific to the yard where we reduce it with just the volume of this building
and the site and the way it lays out staff feels that it's appropriate with the higher architectural
elements to off some of that with landscaping. 6000 landscaping points is a lot of landscaping
points for a site.
Council Member Ford asked if there was any way to take away a couple of those parking spots to
help get closer to the required impervious surface. It could go a long way to alleviate some
concerns.
ITEM III: Rezone, GDP & SIP SE Corner W Nevada Ave. & Jackson St. 18
Mr. Lyons said there are PTA and parent associations that say they want enough event parking
and they want more parking. So when they come to watch their kids’ basketball game and
whatnot, and then we have some of the city codes and our desire to look at sustainable practices
that really butt heads and just trying to evaluate what is the best use in each situation. There's a
lot more bump out to get cars out of travel lanes to help facilitate some of that waiting area for
child pick up. It was significantly discussed as making sure we don't repeat the issues that
Traeger had.
Mr. Perry said as a property owner in an adjacent area next to the school, I think that the parking
lot is probably not big enough on a Monday through Friday during school hours and after school
hours. I can't even park within 300 feet of my property because of the street parking by all the
staff employees and others. So I have no problem with the parking whatsoever. I also want to
remind this board that we're not here to discuss the merits of what the school district did, or
didn't do to get to this point. There was a referendum past. We're here to discuss the project that
is in front of us right now and I think we've spent far too much time discussing what could, or
couldn't have been, or what did, or didn't do we have a project in front of us and this is our duty
right here.
Ms. Scheuermann said there were suggestions made during workshop and if they had taken them
into consideration.
Mr. Lyons said they did not.
Ms. Scheuermann asked if the plan will come back to the board.
Mr. Lyons said that unless it gets tabled or council refers it back to the Plan Commission, it would
not come back to the board.
Ms. Scheuermann asked what the harm would be to table this for two weeks.
Mr. Lyons said that zone change takes two readings in front of council, the 1st, which would be
November 23rd. The 2nd would be December 14th. For statutory requirements delaying just the
plain development portion of it. Now, the zone change portion of it would need to get done
today, but ultimately we could move the zone change portion of it forward separate from the
plan development. In the final decision. Date would all still end up in December 14th.
Ms. Propp said that she recognizes this building is an intrusion into the neighborhood but that
the current Merrill building is three stories. Delaying will not help any and we will not come up
with any different conclusion.
Mr. Mitchell made a motion to amend proceed with only the zone change.
Seconded by Davey.
Motion to amend lost 3-4.
ITEM III: Rezone, GDP & SIP SE Corner W Nevada Ave. & Jackson St. 19
Original Motion carried 7-0.
Specific Implementation Plan Submittal
City of Oshkosh
New Middle School
October 18, 2021
To whom it may concern:
The submittal being filed today is to revitalize the “Jackson Field” site between
Jackson Street and Kentucky Street, as well as between Nevada Avenue and New York
Avenue, to be a New Middle School for Oshkosh Area School District. This site has been known
to be the future home of a New Middle School for OASD since referendum talks began prior to
2020.
In November of 2020, over 60% of the community voted “Yes” to a larger referendum to
build a New Middle School, a New Elementary School, and District-Wide Upgrades throughout
Oshkosh Area School District. Specific to the New Middle School project, this project will unify
two student populations. One being the current Merrill Middle School and the other being the
current Webster-Stanley Middle School. An obvious theme to this project was unification as
OASD has two study bodies, two staffs, and two school communities merging and unifying as
one on the North side of Oshkosh.
The building is largely two stories tall, with the “Core-Academic” classrooms such as
Math, Science, History, English, being a three-story tall building. The building is nestled nicely
into a prominent neighborhood on the North side of Oshkosh, paying homage to the historical
Oshkosh, yet paving the future for young Oshkosh students. The building has many elective
courses built into this new facility, plenty of space for Core Learning, and yet a very prominent
community focused design. This building will invite members of the community to come in to
use a ~1,000 SF Community Room outfitted for small meetings, a Community Classroom, a
Three-Station Gymnasium with a public walking track, along with a shared public/class
focused Fitness Room and Multi-Purpose Room used for exercise classes, etc.
It is worth noting that in looking at the design of this site, it was very important to
Oshkosh Area School District principals and administration that from a safety lense, that the
guest entry from 8:00AM – 3:00PM be located on Kentucky Street. Putting that access off of
Kentucky Street stuck out to be a safety concern for dropping and picking up kids as well as
guest access during the day. As a full building and site design, and working with a site that
has three front yards, it was determined that a single point of access should be considered off
of Kentucky Street and directly lined up with Congress Avenue. Another site access point
would be for the guest loop along Kentucky Street to allow for ADA and guest parking, that
would enter North of Custer Avenue, and expel back onto Kentucky directly lined up with
Custer Avenue.
In going through the design with the City of Oshkosh, we acknowledged for a building
of this size, we were likely to run into areas where the Planned Development process would
be necessary. The following areas are areas that the design does not comply with the zoning
standards set forth by the City of Oshkosh:
1- This building is only permitted to be 45’-0” tall. The building is 48’-0” tall.
2- The setback along Jackson St and Kentucky St is 30’-0”. We have a drive lane and
dumpster enclosure within the setback along Jackson St. We also have a drive
lane, and an electronic message board within the setback along Kentucky St.
3- The maximum impervious surface percentage per ordinance is listed at 60%. The
current design puts the current impervious surface at 66%.
4- Per local ordinances, we are supposed to supply 1 foot candle of lighting at all
paved drives. In the Northwest corner of the site, the drive area used for large
vehicles to back up does have the called for lighting levels.
To offset these items, the design of this facility and site has included above and beyond
the minimum for landscape requirements. This is especially true along Kentucky St and
Jackson St where the design gets into those setbacks. The drive lane within the setback along
Kentucky St is designed as such to maximize the amount of ADA parking stalls closest to the
guest entry during a typical school day. Lastly the lack of lighting in the Northwest corner of
the site is intentional to treat the entire northern portion of the building the same
architecturally and to the neighboring community. Since the access point from Jackson Street
is for deliveries only, lighting the Northwest corner of the site would largely be unused by
deliveries as deliveries are largely between 6:00AM and 5:00PM.
Lastly, the existing Merrill School site is still part of a phased discussion to happen
later on down the road. Whether that building remains and is sold or torn down to offer green
space adjacent to this site, is still to be determined. It is also worth noting that the sequencing
of the referendum has the new building fully functional for one full year while the current
Merrill operates as a stand-alone Elementary School until the New Elementary School (part of
the referendum) is built.
On behalf of Oshkosh Area School District, we thank you for your time and willingness to work
together to build a successful project in Oshkosh.
Nate Considine, AIA, NCARB
Delivery Team Leader | Architect
Bray Architects
REZONE/GDP/SIP
MERRILL MIDDLE SCHOOL
PC: 11-16-2021
PEPPLER PROPERTIES LLC
PO BOX 3301
OSHKOSH, WI 54903
PINE APARTMENTS IV LLC
3389 COUNTY ROAD A
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
JASON R MENTZEL
113 W NEW YORK AVE
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
STEVEN G/DIANE LEACH
121 W NEW YORK AVE
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
NICHOLAS L TRAVIS
1156 MERRILL ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
STACY A DEATON
203 W NEW YORK AVE
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
PAUL E NICKOLAI
209 W NEW YORK AVE
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
JASON M/ERIKA LLOYD
213 W NEW YORK AVE
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
HARTMAN FAMILY IRREV TRUST
219 W NEW YORK AVE
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
JOSHUA/JACQUELINE N LONG
450 LEMONGRASS WAY
KAUKAUNA, WI 54130
PETER J/MARLO W VANDOREN
1261 JACKSON ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
SARA L VANBOOGARD
1267 JACKSON ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
ANDREW C SMITH LIVING TRUST
1271 JACKSON ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
JUAN F/KATHY D GUZMAN
1301 JACKSON ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
JESSICA GREENING
1307 JACKSON ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
JEFF/JOSEPHINE R REDEMANN
1317 JACKSON ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
KA CHANG YANG/DAO CHANG
1403 JACKSON ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
CARTER L BOHN
1407 JACKSON ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
GORDON J OLSON ETAL
1413 JACKSON ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
BARBER ENTERPRISES INC
480 N PIONEER RD
FOND DU LAC, WI 54937
MARY T MELCHIOR
1421 JACKSON ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
ROBERT W/BROOKE KNOLL
N3111 SLEEPY HOLLOW RD
FALL RIVER, WI 53932
SYDNEY M GRAY
302 W NEW YORK AVE
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
STEVEN J BRUSS
1219 KENTUCKY ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
LOWELL H/IVA KALMERTON REV
TRUST
1310 JACKSON ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
ROBERT C FERNAU
1264 JACKSON ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
JOSEPH J KRAUS JR
1252 JACKSON ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
MICHAEL J ROSENBERG
1244 JACKSON ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
CHRISTOPHER/SUSAN BILLSTROM
1240 JACKSON ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
JNL INVESTMENTS LLC
W6079 RYFORD ST
MENASHA, WI 54952
MARY CHRISTINE LEBELLE
1232 JACKSON ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
HILDEBRAND HOUSING COMPANY
LLC
W4461 DRUMLIN DR
CAMPBELLSPORT, WI 53010
JEFFREY A KASTEN
1218 JACKSON ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
GREGORY C/MARY BETH BOSSERT
32 W NEW YORK AVE
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
JOHN P/SHARON C JONES
1222 CENTRAL ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
ANN M SCHOEN
33 W TENNESSEE AVE
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
OSHKOSH AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT
PO BOX 3048
OSHKOSH, WI 54903
SHANE G/SUSAN K LUFT
133 W CUSTER AVE
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
INGRID F TSCHECH
127 W CUSTER AVE
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
WESLEY J/JAMES/PENNY KOTTKE
117 W CUSTER AVE
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
BERHOLTZ RENTAL PROPERTIES
LLC
1804 N OAKWOOD RD
OSHKOSH, WI 54904
ROBERT P FELDNER
1329 CENTRAL ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
TRAVIS N JAGODZINSKI
1323 CENTRAL ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
NICK L PAULOS
739 JEFFERSON ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
AMY J IMMEL
207 W NEVADA AVE
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
MARK W/LINDA NOTZKE
217 W NEVADA AVE
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
JACOB M/SAMANTHA A PAMPERIN
1416 KENTUCKY ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
KIRBY L KNOBLOCH
1330 CENTRAL ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
GRANT DAVIS/NICOLE M BOEHLER
1326 CENTRAL ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
PETER H/JESSICA L ZABORSKI
1320 CENTRAL ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
MARTIN HOLDINGS LLC
325 WILSON ST
AMHERST, WI 54406
ROBERT J/THERESA J RUBIN
283 CURRANT CT
OMRO, WI 54963
LORI A MADES
30 W TENNESSEE AVE
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
JUNE D ZUEHLKE LIFE ESTATE
208 W NEVADA AVE
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
CYNTHIA L WEBB
222 W NEVADA AVE
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
JEFFREY L HEALEY
310 W NEVADA AVE
OSHKOSH, WI 54902
JUDITH M ZIEBELL
304 W NEVADA AVE
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
ANTHONY E/COURTNEY E FOSTER
JR
1500 JACKSON ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
SHIRLEY BRABENDER MATTOX
1313 JACKSON ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
CARLEEN CHRISTIANSON
1231 JACKSON ST
OSHKOSH, WI 54901
NATE CONSIDINE, BRAY
ARCHITECTS
829 S 1ST ST
MILWAUKEE, WI 53204
JIM FOCHS
1404 S MAIN S
OSHKOSH, WI 54902
East Hall JACKSON STJACKSON STW NEW YORK AVW NEW YORK AV CENTRAL STCENTRAL STKENTUCKY STKENTUCKY STW CUSTER AVW CUSTER AV
TITAN CTTITAN CTSSAARRAATTOOGGAA AAVV
ANNEX AVANNEX AV
MERRILL STMERRILL STW NEVADA AVW NEVADA AV
CONGRESS AVCONGRESS AV
W TENNESSEE AVW TENNESSEE AVBBUURRDDIICCKKSSTT
CENTRAL STCENTRAL STW NEVADA AVW NEVADA AV
C:\Users\Public\Desktop\2020 Plan Commission Site Plan Map Template.mxd User: hannahs
Prepared by: City of Oshkosh, WI
Printing Date: 11/2/2021
1 in = 200 ft1 in = 0.04 mi¯MERRILL MIDDLE SCHOOLMERRILL MIDDLE SCHOOL
City of Oshkosh maps and data are intended to be used for general identification purposes only, andthe City of Oshkosh assumes no liability for the accuracy of the information. Those using theinformation are responsible for verifying accuracy. For full disclaimer please go towww.ci.oshkosh.wi.us/GISdisclaimer
SR-9
I
TR-10
SR-5
UMU
UI
I-PDSR-5
TR-10-PD
SMU
I
I
TR-10-UTO
UMU
SR-5-UTO
SMU-PD
UMU-PD
I-PD
MR-20
NMU
MR-12
TR-10PDUTO
NMU
MR-20-UTO
MR-12
IMR-20-UTOI-PD-UTO
East Hall N MAIN STN MAIN STJACKSON STJACKSON STWISCONSIN STWISCONSIN STHARRISON STHARRISON STW NEW YORK AVW NEW YORK AV
W MURDOCK AVW MURDOCK AV E MURDOCK AVE MURDOCK AV
E NEW YORK AVE NEW YORK AV
SCOTT AVSCOTT AVLLIIBBEERRTTYYSSTTONTARIO STONTARIO STWESTERN STWESTERN STEASTMAN STEASTMAN STHOBBS AVHOBBS AV
CHERRY STCHERRY STW BENT AVW BENT AV JEFFERSON STJEFFERSON STBURDICK STBURDICK STCENTRAL STCENTRAL STMT VERNON STMT VERNON STW MELVIN AVW MELVIN AVKENTUCKY STKENTUCKY STE MELVIN AVE MELVIN AV
BALDWIN AVBALDWIN AV
E CUSTER AVE CUSTER AV
STERLING AVSTERLING AV
ANNEX AVANNEX AV
VINE AVVINE AV
W CUSTER AVW CUSTER AV ASHLAND STASHLAND STMERRILL STMERRILL STTITAN CTTITAN CTW NEVADA AVW NEVADA AV
SARATOGA AVSARATOGA AV
PROSPECT AVPROSPECT AV
E NEVADA AVE NEVADA AV
VILAS AVVILAS AV
W TENNESSEE AVW TENNESSEE AV
W BENT AVW BENT AV
CCEENNTTRRAALLSSTTKENTUCKY STKENTUCKY STCENTRAL STCENTRAL STMT VERNON STMT VERNON STW NEVADA AVW NEVADA AV
C:\Users\Public\Desktop\2020 Plan Commission Site Plan Map Template.mxd User: hannahs
Prepared by: City of Oshkosh, WI
Printing Date: 11/2/2021
1 in = 500 ft1 in = 0.09 mi¯MERRILL MIDDLE SCHOOLMERRILL MIDDLE SCHOOL
City of Oshkosh maps and data are intended to be used for general identification purposes only, andthe City of Oshkosh assumes no liability for the accuracy of the information. Those using theinformation are responsible for verifying accuracy. For full disclaimer please go towww.ci.oshkosh.wi.us/GISdisclaimer
C:\Users\Public\Desktop\2020 Plan Commission Site Plan Map Template.mxd User: hannahs
Prepared by: City of Oshkosh, WI
Printing Date: 11/2/2021
1 in = 200 ft1 in = 0.04 mi¯MERRILL MIDDLE SCHOOLMERRILL MIDDLE SCHOOL
City of Oshkosh maps and data are intended to be used for general identification purposes only, andthe City of Oshkosh assumes no liability for the accuracy of the information. Those using theinformation are responsible for verifying accuracy. For full disclaimer please go towww.ci.oshkosh.wi.us/GISdisclaimer