HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARD OF APPEALS
"
~
City of Oshkosh
Dept. of Community Development
PIanning Services Division
215 Church Ave., PO Box I 130
Oshkosh, WI 54903-)]30
(920) 236-5059 (920) 236-5053 FAX
http://www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us
Jackson R. Kinney
Director
Dept. of Community DeveIopment
OJHKOJH
Darryn Burich
Director
PIanning Services Division
April 26, 2006
US Properties Group
Nancy Saylor
310 Hamilton Road
Gahanna OH 43219
Re: 2035 & 2041 South Koeller Street, Oshkosh WI
Dear Ms. Saylor:
On April 26, 2006 the Board of Appeals approved your request for a 0' side yard setbacks for. parking
and structures on-site with the following condition:
I. Approval by the Department of Community Development of a cross access agreement between all
lots in the CSM.
The decision of the Board was filed in the Planning Services Division Office of the Department of
Community Development on April 27, 2006. Per Section 30-6(C)(3) and (4) of the City of Oshkosh
Zoning Ordinance, your variance will expire on October 26, 2006 unless you have started construction
for the activity allowed by the variance. If you fail to begin construction 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 pel1llits may be applied for ITom the Inspection Services Division in Room 205 at the Oshkosh
City Hall between 7:30 - 8:30 AM and 12:30 - I :30 PM, Monday thru Friday, or call (920) 236-5050 for
an appointment. Please bring all required building plans and infol1llation necessary for review when
obtaining your building pel1llit.
If you have any questions, feel ITee to call me at (920) 236-5059.
-T;J 'BZ-
David Buck
Associate Planner
DB/pal
BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA
April 26, 2006
Page 2
V.
2035-2185 S. KOELLER STREET
Nancy Saylor representing US Properties Group - applicants and owners, request variances for 0' side
yard setbacks for parking and structures on-site. Section 30-25(B)(2)(b) of the City of Oshkosh
Zoning Ordinance: General Commercial District requires a 10' side yard setback.
VI.
NORTHWEST CORNER OF CONGRESS AVENUE AND ELMWOOD AVENUE
Aaron Sherer representing the Paine Art Center and Gardens - applicants and owners, request
variances for 7' front yard setback on Congress Ave. and Elrnwood Ave. for the installation of a 6'
high solid fence and various plantings. Section 30-35(E)(2) of the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance:
Additional Standards and Exceptions prohibits fences and hedgeS greater than 4' high and greater than
50% solid in the ftont yard setback.
OTHER BUSINESS
Discussion of BOA procedures
ADJOURNMENT
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL THE PLANNING SERVICES DIVISION AT
(920) 236-5059, BETWEEN 8 AM-4:30 PM, MONDAYTHRU FRIDAY
,,'
Board of Appeals Minutes
-5-
April 26, 2006
John Reinders, Owner and Applicant, 448 Church Ave.
Mr. Reinders stated in the late 1800s this was one of the only lots available to build upon. The
two lots east of the property were being developed at the time and the houses were built on the
lot lines; no setbacks. Mr. Reinders also stated they had to give 12 ft. of property to the property
next door; building the house so it would face Church St. also made it more difficult to fit on that
property.
Ms. Hentz asked if they were in agreement with the condition that staff suggested. Mr. Reinders
stated he was fine with it.
Mr. Lang asked if the garage was located on his property. Mr. Reinders stated yes that was on
his property and the tenants of one of the two units used it.
Mr. Lang stated he is going to offer an amendment of: the rebuild pavement is identical in area to
the footprint of the current driveway.
Motion by Mr. Lang for approval of a variance to reconstruct an uncovered parking
area that will have a 6" side yard setback and not be screened with the following
conditions:
í'
a)
Screening, at least 5' tall and 100% solid, is established to the south of the
parking area.
b)
The reconstruction of the driveway be exactly correspond to the footprint of
the current driveway.
Seconded by Carpenter. Motion carried 5-0.
Finding of Facts:
Mr. Carpenter stated it is a unique situation. Ms. Hentz added there is no
adverse impact on neighboring property, it will probably enhance them.
Mr. Lang stated there would not be any added parking load to the street
parking and it is updating the existing situation.
Ms. Hentz stated for the record that she thought Mr. Lang's additional condition was very wise.
v.
2035 - 2185 SOUTH KOELLER STREET
Nancy Saylor representing US Properties Group - applicants and owriers, request variances for 0'
side yard setbacks for parking and structures on-site. Section 30-25(B)(2)(b) of the City of
Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance: General Commercial District requires a 10' side yard setback.
Mr. Buck introduced the item and passed around color pictures. Mr. Buck stated it is currently
developed with a commercial center containing 3 large retail structures including such users as
lC. Penney, Miles Kimball, Rogan's Shoes, and numerous smaller retail operations. The center
used to contain Piggly Wiggly (closed) and Wal-Mart (moved to N. Washburn Street). It is
important to note that lC. Penney and Miles Kimball are under separate ownership on separate
parcels.
Board of Appeals Minutes
-6-
April 26, 2006
Nancy Saylor, US Properties, 310 Hamilton Rd, Gahanna Ohio 43219
Ms. Saylor stated they have had a lot of difficulty filling their occupancy in this area. They share
the same concerns about the lack of landscaping and its current condition as a big asphalt-
parking field. However, they are in a position where they need to balance the cost of doing that
work and how it would impact ofloss of parking. The National Retailers key component to
where they select to go is how much parking they have available. Ms. Saylor stated the split of
lot 2 ITom the rest of the property is their first step in redeveloping the land. To add additional
landscaping along the entryway at this stage will cost around $30,000.00-$40,000.00 and will
limit them on redeveloping the area with outlots in the future.
..."
Mr. Lang asked if the old Piggly Wiggly store is the only thing that is going to be on lot 2. Ms.
Saylor stated that is correct, they have a party that is interested in that parcel. Mr. Lang again
asked if the whole parcel is going to be divided into 4 parcels. Ms. Saylor stated when creating
that lot they are creating the others also.
Mr. Lang asked roughly how many square feet are currently occupied verses how many are
vacant in the whole complex. Ms. Saylor replied that about 70% are vacant.
Mr. Cornell asked if the maintenance of the parking lot is shared with the cross parking
agreement. Ms. Saylor replied yes it is. Their ultimate goal is to eventually improve everything.
Mr. Carpenter asked staff if this was approved at what point do they start talking about when
they come back for the landscaping. Mr. Buck stated when they came back to redevelop the site
and start pulling up the pavement to repave the area, they would have to meet the current
regulations.
""*"
Mr. Cornell asked staff what the procedure would be if they were to grant the variance for the 0
foot setback. Mr. Buck stated it all depends on how they redevelop it. If they develop it within
the C-2 and Hwy 41 regulations, they would retain the side yard setback variance and not
provide the setback in the parking lot. If they reconstruct the parking lot and can not follow the
C-2 and Hwy 41 regulations with the proposed variance, then they would have to come back to
this body or go to the Council to do a rezone to a district that has different regulations or planned
development.
Motion by Mr. Penney for approval of a variance for 0' side yard setbacks for
parking and structures on-site with the following condition:
a)
Approval by the Department of Community Development of a cross access
agreement between all lots in the CSM.
Seconded by Cornell.
Ms. Hentz stated for the record that she feels it's high time something gets done with this
property, anything that they can do ITom a positive standpoint to move that forward she is proud
to be part of
Mr. Lang stated he is disappointed that he didn't see the minutes from the Plan Commission
meeting earlier, and is somewhat reluctant to vote on this item as it may have given him a
different view of what is happening.
""*"
Board of Appeals Minutes
-7-
April 26, 2006
Motion carried 4-1, Nay Mr. Lang.
Finding of Facts:
Mr. Penney stated anything to help develop what has certainly become an
eyesore and a blight to the City of Oshkosh in that part of town, they have
a duty to do what they can to start the process in revitalizing that part of
the city. Ms. Hentz stated she feels it is a reasonable request and there is
no adverse impact on the neighboring property.
The minority states allowing 0 ft. setbacks is not the proper thing to do. In his opinion, this
development has far bigger problems than 0 ft. setbacks and it is not going to correct the
problems.
Ms. Hentz states the owners of the property feel that this will help to facilitate them to be able to
sell and/or appropriately market this property.
VI.
NORTHWEST CORNER OF CONGRESS AVENUE AND ELMWOOD AVENUE
Aaron Sherer representing the Paine Art and Garden Center - applicants and owners, request
variances for 7' front yard setback on Congress Ave. and a 3' setback on Elmwood Ave. for the
installation of a 6' high solid fence and various plantings. Section 30-35(E)(2) of the City of
Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance: Additional Standards and Exceptions prohibits fences and hedges
greater than 4' high and greater than 50% solid in the ITont yard setback.
Mr. Buck introduced the item and passed around color pictures. Mr. Buck commented that the
applicant has stated the Paine has suffered ITom persistent vandalism. Apparently, the vandals
have used the unsecured hedgerow to gain access to the formal gardens.
Paul Mankini, Neighbor, 1408 Elmwood Ave.
Mr. Mankini stated that he has spoken to the other neighbors and this is something that needs to
be done, it will make it look a lot better and be a lot safer.
Aaron Sherer, Applicant/Paine Art Center and Arboretum, 1214 New York Ave.
Mr. Sherer stated he walks to work and approaches ITom that corner and he always thinks that
corner doesn't look as good as it could; it's not attractive and it isn't in the condition that they
would like to present to the neighbors and community. One can not have a very enjoyable
experience in the garden due to the street noise from the intersection, it is very high maintenance,
security is bad and it doesn't look good.
Mr. Cornell asked ifthe variance is granted what will happen to the hedgerow. Mr, Sherer stated
that the hedgerow would be removed.
Mr. Penney asked why are they proposing a 6 ft. fence and not a 4 ft. fence. Mr. Sherer replied
as a visual factor a 4 ft. fence will allow one to see the cars going by while in the garden
STAFF REPORT
ITEM V
BOARD OF APPEALS
APRIL 26, 2006
ITEM V: 2035-2185 S. KOELLER STREET
GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
Nancy Saylor representing US Properties Group - applicants and owners, request
variances for 0' side yard setbacks for parking and structures on-site. Section 30-
25(B)(2)(b) of the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance: General Commercial District
requires a 10' side yard setback.
The subject 23.81 acre property is zoned C-2 General Commercial District and is
generally located at the northwest corner of S. Koeller Street and STH 44/W South Park
Ave and bounded by Highway 41 to the west and West 20th Street to the north. It is
currently developed with a commercial center containing 3 large retail structures
including such users as J.C. Penney, Miles Kimball, Rogan's Shoes, and numerous
smaller retail operations. The center used to contain Piggly Wiggly (closed), Wal-Mart
(moved to N. Washburn Street). It is important to note that J.C. Penney and Miles
Kimball are under separate ownership on separate parcels.
ANALYSIS
In reviewing a variance request, the following questions should be addressed:
When considering an area variance, the qnestion of whether nnnecessary hardship
or practical difficnlty exists is best explained as "whether compliance with
the strict letter of the restrictions governing area, set hacks, frontage,
height, hnlk or density would nnreasonably prevent the owner from using
the property for a permitted purpose or would render conformity with snch
restrictions unnecessarily burdensome."
Are there any nnnsnal or unique physical limitations of the property, which create a
hardship?
Will granting of a variance resnlt in harm to the puhlic interest?
The applicant is requesting setback variances ITom the Zoning Code to allow a land
division of the existing two lots into four as depicted on the attached preliminary CSM.
In this way the petitioner hopes to revitalize the commercial center by allowing the
individual lots to be sold for separate ownership. The land division will not change the
existing land use pattern other than to establish lot lines down existing parking areas and
along a common building line. For this, variances ITom the required 10 foot side yard
setback are required. Parking does not appear to be an issue other than for Lot 3 which is
required to have 413 spaces and after the land division will have 163 spaces or a loss on
the lot of 250 spaces. To address this, a condition is recommended to require cross
access and cross parking between the parcels thereby allowing the parcel with
nonconfol1lling parking to utilize those of adjacent parcels.
When originally developed, the commercial center was developed as two individual
parcels, one for the Wal-Mart and the other for the strip center. The site was also
developed prior to the Highway 41 Overlay regulations and was maximized in relation to
physical improvements. This is not unusual but does create a unique limitation on the
property owners as far as redevelopment and infill. The petitioners have indicated that
the current business preference at this site is for individual and separate tax parcel
STAFF REPORT
ITEM V
-2-
BOARD OF APPEALS
APRIL 26, 2006
ownership rather than leasing, which can be witnessed in the division ofthe Miles
Kimball and JC Penny buildings, done through a Planned Development.
The petitioner has indicated that they are having considerable difficulty finding tenants
on the property and the inability to market individual business lots makes the filling or
the redevelopment of the site unnecessarily burdensome. The petitioner also states that
they currently have a buyer for one of the proposed lots. Staffbelieves that this
commercial center is an important part of the highway 41 corridor and agrees that the
filling of spaces at this location has been problematic.
In regard to adverse affect on adj acent properties or harm to the public interest, staff feels
that there would be no change in impact of what is currently there other than the
increased possibility of filled vacancies. Furthel1llore, staff believes that the fol1ll of
ownership is unrelated to the lot lines as the site is currently fully developed, has been
operating at a varying capacity for a substantial amount oftime and is bounded by
roadways on all sides.
The certified survey map/land division for these parcels was brought before the Plan
Commission on April 18, 2005 and was approved with several conditions, one being the
approval of the side yard setback variances by the Board of Zoning Appeals. It is
important to state that considerable discussion took place at the Plan Commission
regarding the zoning ofthe site and the lack of greenspace within the parking lot area.
Staff does share the concern ofthe Plan Commission and believes that additional
greenspace could be created in the parking lot even though parking stalls are at a
premium. However, the only truly consequential lot line shift/setback variance issue on
the existing developed parking lot is that of the lot line shift between lots 4 and 2, where
the lot line is moved to a discernable location at the entrance lane.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the variance request for 0' side yard setbacks for parking
and structures on-site, as submitted on the preliminary CSM with the following
condition:
(a) Approval by the Department of Community Development of a cross access
agreement between all lots in the CSM.
Please Type or Print in BLACK INK
~
QfH~
"'"""'"
Retnrn to: Department of
Commnnity Development
215 Chnrch Ave.
P.O. Box 1130
Oshkosh, WI 54903-1130
CITY OF OSHKOSH
APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE
Please write legibly with black ink and also submit a complete reproducible site Dlan (maximnm size 11" x 17"). (A
complete site plan includes, but is not limited to, all structures, lot lines and streets with distances to each.) There is a
$125.00 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: Aviation Plaza - 2035 Koeller Street & 2041 Koeller Street OshKosh, WI 54902
Petitioner: US Properties GrOUD - N ancv SavIor
Home Phone: 614.563.2100
Petitioner's Address: 310 Hamilt~,..d. ...,G...." aha.n.n.,t::....,.,.OhiO. 43219
Signature Required: b ,. ',J. 9,
Owner (if not petitioner): -same as Petitioner-
Work Phone: 614.472.2944
Date: ADrii 6, 2006
Home Phone:
Owner's Address:
Work Phone:
Signature Required:
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:
The proposed plan is to utilize as much existing infrastructure and follow current Property boundarv lines to create new
lot splits for additional tenants/buyers. the intent is to revitalize this center and make it more appealing to retail users in
this market and locale. Variances are requested to fulfill new tenant/buvers requirement agreements for occupancv in
this Plaza.
2.
Describe how the variance would not have an adverse effect on surrounding properties:
There would not be adverse affects on adjacent properties because most of the existing boundary CSM is being utilized
with buildings in its current form.
(Continued on Reverse Side)
~1}
3. Describe the special conditions that apply to your lot or structure that donot apply to surrounding lots or
structures:
The reason and delineation of the proposed CSM Jot split was to open UP room for future retailers. In one instance a
zero lot building setback line is requested not only by the owners, but by the buyers as well. Their intent is to facilitate
the existing structure and yet have their own separate tax parcel. Adjacent owners are bound bv an REA (Reciprocal
Easement Agreement) that provides specific covenants to all retailers apartied to this site agreement.
4. Describe the hardship that would result if your variance were not granted:
Difficulty resulted in finding a tenant for a derIDed building size, zoning and use for the right price in a less than desirable
location. The hardship at hand would be to refit and find a specific tenant in the newlv defined lot split. that has taken
some time to locate. There are obvious time and cost ramifications associated with revisions to the CSM for lot splits and
occupancy issues. We greatly appreciate your considerations in this matter and hope this Plaza grows to be very thriving
in your community.
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY - ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WITH MAILING ADDRESSES
DAYTON HUDSON CORP
PO BOX 9456
MINNEAPOLIS MN 55440.9456
OCONNOR OIL CORP
PO BOX 968
FOND DU LAC WI 54936-0968
CDJ JOHNSON FAMILY LTD
5324 N 134TH AVE
OMAHANE 68164-6326
M & E RENTALS LLC
2536 PLOVER RD
PLOVER WI 54467-3913
JAMES/MARCIE MCDEVITT
3810 30TH AVE
KENOSHA WI 53144-1958
AVIATION RESTAURANT CORP
2100 S KOELLER ST
OSHKOSH WI 54902-9202
WINNEBAGO COUNTY
PO BOX 2808
OSHKOSH WI 54'JO:J.2808
PUGET OF TEXAS INC
PO BOX 3487
LACEY W A 98509-3487
MARLIN OSHKOSH LLC
2350 E MASON ST
GREEN BAY WI 54302-3747
ALDI INC
PO BOX 267
OAK CREEK WI 53154-0267
PRELIMINARY CERTIFIED SURVEY MAP
FOR REVIEW
4/5/06
CERTIFIED SURVEY MAP Volume Page
LOT 1 OF CSM #2147 AND PART OF TIIE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF TIIE .
NORTHWEST QUAR1ER (NW/NW) AND.PART OFTIIE SOUTHWESTQUARTEROF
THE NORTHWEST QUAR1ER (SW!NW) OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 18 NORTH,
RANGE 16 EAST, CITY OF OSHKOSH, WINNEBAGO COUNTY, WISCONSIN.
3/4' IRON BAR
DOT MONUMENT
N 1/4 CORNER
34-18-16
---4-s
"
:...
~
~
[g
"
:...
~
~
[g
«¡rñ
~ ~
w ~
:..1:,
~~
b Q
0"
,,-
200
I
SCALE' 1"=200'
Poge I of 2
WITT
g
~
~
"
DISCLAIMER
Aviation Plaza
2035/2041 S. Koeller St.
This map is neither a legally recorded map nor
a snmy and it is not intended to be used as one.
This drawing is a eompilation of records, data
and info'mation loeated in vadons dty. eonnty
and state offices and otbee sou'ces affecting
the am sbown and it is to be nsod fo' 'efereoee
pu'poses only. The City ofOshkosb is not re-
sponsibie for any inaccurades heeein contained.
If dimepencies are found, please contact the
City of Oshkosh.
City of Oshkosh Wisconsin
Community Development
OJHKOJH
N
A
1" = 500'
Created by - pi
4/07/06
C-2
...
DISCLAIMER
Aviation Plaza
2035/2041 S. Koeller St.
This map is neithor a legally recorded map oor
a ,",vey and it is not Intended to he used asone.
This drawing is a compilation ofmords, data
and information located in various city, county
and state offices and othor sourees affecting
the area shown and it is to be used for reforenee
porposes only. The City of Oshkosh Is not re-
sponsible for any In ",curacies herein contaloed.
If dlscrepencies are fonnd, please contact the
City of Oshkosh.
City of Oshkosh Wisconsin
Community Development
OJHKOJH
ON THE WATER
1000
,
0
1000 Feet
,
Created by - pI
C-
N
A
04/07/06