Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-Request for Variance-Denied e"o. ',' ~{i;,;;:;",., . '^v'~"-!"." ....t..;.,:. " . '~ 1~ s' Jackson R. Kinney Director. Dept. of Community Development ON lHE WATER City of Oshkosh Dept. of Community Development Planning Services Division 215 Church Ave., PO Box 1130 Oshkosh, WI 54903-1130 (920) 236-5059 (920) 236-5053 FAX http://www.cLoshkosh.wLus Darryn Burich Director Planning Services Division . OJHKOJH December 5, 2006 Mr. Richard Naslund 729 N. Washburn St. Oshkosh, WI 54904 2~~~ 'SI.illlW Re:~"""""~~",,,,Ym~:*l~._. Dear Mr. Naslund: On November 22, 2006 the City of Oshkosh Board of Appeals denied your variance request to permit the relocation ofa structure with a 6-foot front yard setback at the above referenced location. The decision of the Board was filed in the Planning Office of the Department of Community Development . on November 24,2006. Section 30-6(C)(1) and (2) of the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance allows the same variance request to be heard 3 times in any 12-month period. If this is the first or second time you have requested this variance within 12 months, you may re-apply if you wish. If your variance request has been denied 3 times within a 12-month period, but you feel there has been a change in the circumstances affecting your request, you may submit a request for an additional hearing stating the changes which have occurred. The Board will review this request, and if three Board members feel there is sufficient change in circumstances to warrant an additional hearing, then you may re-submit your variance request through.the normal procedure. You may call me at (920) 236-5057 if you have any questions. Sincerely, _-.------..---....... ~I ---... // /"" ~ ..-:::,;:.~. . .,;:;:~:;:., / V". /z:::....~ ../., ...................-...... .... . I "". ~/ /" ~~. ~-_....-...._-.-_... Todd Muehrer ./ Associate Planner/Zoning Administrator TM/dff cc: Inspection Services Division, CityHall OJHKOJH City of Oshkosh Planning Services Division 215 Church Ave., PO Box 1130 Oshkosh, WI 54903-1130 (920) 236-5059 (920) 236.5053 FAX http://www.cLoshkosh.wi.us Jackson R. Kinney Director Dept. of Community Development Darryn Burich Director Planning Services Division BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA NOVEMBER 22, 2006 3:30 PM To Whom It May Concern: Please note the City of Oshkosh Board of Appeals will meet on WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 2006 at 3:30 PM in Room 404 at the Oshkosh City Hall to consider the following agenda. ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 8, 2006 MINUTES . I. 3285 SOUTH WASHBURN STREET Reinhold Sign Service-applicant, Bergstrom Automotive-owner, request a variance to install a 152.5 square ft. per side (305 square ft. total) electronic message center sign. Section 30-37 (F)(2)(f) of the Oshkosh Municipal Code: Message center signs in any Commercial or Industrial Districts (within the USH 41 Corridor Overlay District) cannot exceed one hundred (100) square ft. of area on one side nor two hundred (200) square ft. for all sides for anyone premises. II. 3650 JACKSON STREET Reinhold Sign Service-applicant, Bergstrom Automotive-owner, request a variance to install a 66.5 square ft. per side (133 square ft. total) message center sign. Section 30-37 (F)(2)(f) ofthe Oshkosh Municipal Code: Message center signs in any Commercial or Industrial Districts shall not exceed fifty (50) square ft. on one side or one hundred (100) square ft. on all sides. III. 66 EAST W AUKAU A VENUE Andrew Smith, Stuart's Landscaping-applicant, Barbara & Timothy Mulloy-owners, request a variance to permit the development of an attached patio that will have a 10 foot rear yard setback. Section 30-17 (B)(3)(d) of the Oshkosh Municipal Code: R-1 Single Family Residence District requires a 25-foot rear yard setback. 'Z~7~~';N9I~!l!~!!2\~!t;~!1!~~S!c~l1g Richard Naslund-applicant, Richard & Virginia Naslund Joint Revocable Living Trust-owners, request a variance to permit the relocation of a structure with a 6 foot front yard setback on North Washburn Street. Section 30-98 (B)(2)(c) of the Oshkosh Municipal Code: C-2 ETZ General Commercial Extraterritorial District requires a 25' front yard setback and Section 30-104: Extraterritorial Highway 41 Corridor Overlay District requires a 50' building setback from the right-of-way. OTHER BUSINESS Discussion of BOA procedures ADJOURNMENT IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL THE PLANNING SERVICES DNISION AT (920) 236-5059, BETWEEN 8 AM - 4:30 PM, MONDAY THRU FRIDAY ,f , ) '.j BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES NOVEMBER 22, 2006 PRESENT: Robert Cornell, Cheryl Hentz, Larry Lang, Dan Carpenter, Moss Ruedinger EXCUSED: Edward Wilusz, Dennis Penney STAFF: David Buck, Principal Planner; Jeffrey Nau, Associate Planner; Todd Muehrer, Associate Planner/Zoning Administrator; Deborah Foland, Recording Secretary; David Patek, Director of Public Works The meeting was called to order at 3 :30 pm by Chairperson Hentz. Rbll call was taken and a quorum declared present. Mr. Cornell made a motion that the minutes of November 8, 2006 be tabled until names could be added to determine who cast the aye and nay votes. Ms. Hentz seconded. Motion carried 5-0. They will be presented again at the next meeting for approval. I. 3285 SOUTH WASHBURN STREET Reinhold Sign Service-applicant, Bergstrom Automotive-owner, request a variance to install a 152.5 square ft. per side (305 square ft. total) electronic message center sign. Section 30-37 (F)(2)(f) of the Oshkosh Municipal Code: Message center signs in any Commercial or Industrial Districts (within the USH 41 Corridor Overlay District) cannot exceed one hundred (100) square ft. of area on one side nor two hundred (200) square ft. for all sides for anyone premises. Mr. Muehrer presented the item and distributed photos of the subject site for review. Robert Ott, Reinhold Sign Service, 2070 Holmgren Way, Green Bay, representing Bergstrom Automotive, stated that Wisconsin Public Service Corp. approached the owner in regards to changing the sign in an effort to reduce energy consumption. Ms. Hentz inquired as to when the original sign was installed and why the owner was changing to a different manufacturer? Mr. Ott replied that he did not have a specific date the original sign was installed, but the change in manufacturer was due to technology differences. Mr. Muehrer responded that he believes the original sign was approved as part of a planned development in 1995. Mr. Buck added that since the original sign, although larger than code allows, was approved as part of a planned development, the owner could replace it with another noncompliant sign of the same size. The variance request is necessary because they want to now replace the existing approved sign with an even larger one. Mr. Cornell inquired as to why an even larger sign was necessary? Mr. Carpenter asked if a sign was available that would comply dimensionally with the code? Board of Appeals Minutes November 22, 2006 Mr. Ott responded that although a smaller sign was available, Bergstrom's wanted a sign that would accommodate larger letters that would increase the viewing distance of the sign. Mr. Lang inquired as to the cost differential between the two signs? Mr. Ott replied he did not have those figures available. A discussion ensued regarding the differences between the existing and proposed signs. Motion by Lang to approve the request fora variance to permit a 152.5 square ft. per side (305 square ft. total) electronic message center sign. Seconded by Cornell. Motion deniedO-5. Ayes-none. Nays-Carpenter/Cornell/Lang/Ruedinger/Hentz II. 3650 JACKSON STREET Reinhold Sign Service-applicant, Bergstrom Automotive-owner, request a variance to install a 66.5 square ft. per side(133 square ft. total) message center sign. Section 30-37 (F)(2)(f) of the Oshkosh Municipal Code: Message center signs in any Commercial or Industrial Districts shall not exceed fifty (50)square ft. on one side or one hundred (100) square ft. on all sides. Mr. Muehrer presented the item and distributed photos of the subject site for review. Ms. Hentz inquired if this sign was also allowed as part of a planned development? Mr. Buck responded that it was not the same situation as the first item, however, he did not know how the existing sign was approved. Under the circumstances, if the existing sign would be removed and a new one installed, it would have to meet coqe. If the same box structure would be used with new electronics installed, the work could be qualified as maintenance, in which case the sign would have to be allowed to remain. Ms. Hentz a~ked if the sign could be gutted and the electronics in it replaced? Mr. Ott replied that was not possible. Mr. Lang inquired how many manufacturers make these signs? Mt. Ott responded that he did not know how many there were, but they are all pretty similar in sizes. A brief discussion followed by the board members regarding the various sizes of electronic signs. Motion by Cornell to approve the request for a variance to permit a 66.5 square ft. per side (133 square fl. total) message center sign. ' Seconded by Lang. Motion denied 0-5. Ayes-none. Nays-Carpenter/Cornell/Lang/Ruedinger/Hentz III. 66 EASTWAUKAU A VENUE Andrew Smith, Stuart's Landscaping-applicant, Barbara & Timothy Mulloy-owners, request a variance to permit the development of an attached patio that will have a 10 foot rear yard setback. Section 30-17 (B)(3)(d) of the Oshkosh Municipal Code: R-l Single Family Residence District requires a 25-foot rear yard setback. Board of Appeals Minutes 2 November 22, 2006 '. \ J Mr. Nau presented the item and distributed photos of the subject site for review. He also shared an e- mail he received from M. A. Roufwho resides at 70 E. Waukau Avenue. Mr. Roufhad no objection to the patio, but he was concerned with the removal of two mature trees on the site. Mr. Nau stated that he discussed this matter with the owners and they do not wish to save the trees as they are walnut trees and are extremely messy. The owners stated that they did intend to plant new trees after the patio was constructed. Mr. Nau also stated that the board might wish to place a condition on the variance, if granted, that the deck could not be covered or enclosed. This could result in making the patio into potential living space in the future. Mr. Carpenter inquired ifthe walnut trees could be saved? Andrew Smith, Stuart's Landscaping, 2957 Brooks Road, Oshkosh, stated that the trees would have to be removed as the patio could not be safely constructed with the trees in place. Timothy Mulloy, 66 E. Waukau Avenue, commented that they have no intention of enclosing the patio area in the future. He also commented that his neighbors have nonconforming decks on their properties. Mr. Lang inquired if any neighbors in either direction have had a variance granted for this same purpose? Mr. Nau responded that one of the neighbors has a legal nonconforming deck on his property and another neighbor had a variance granted to allow his deck to be constructed. Mr. Nau pointed out on the photos he distributed the aforementioned decks. Mr. Lang asked where the cut offwas along the shore that the owner had title to with his land? Mr. Buck responded that the high water mark was the determining factor. Mr. Smith commented that the patio would be located above the high water mark. Mr. Cornell inquired if the replacement of the walnut trees should be added as an additional condition? Mr. Buck responded that the board could add another condition if they felt it was necessary. Mr. Lang commented that a condition is usually applied to a variance when landscaping issues are involved. Ms. Hentz and Mr. Cornell agreed. Motion by Lang to approve the request to permit the development of an attached patio that will have a J O-foot rear yard setback with the following conditions: J) The deck could not be covered or enclosed. 2) Similar or suitable landscaping to be installed upon completion of the deck. Seconded by Carpenter. Motion carried 5-0. Ayes-Carpenter/Ruedinger/Cornell/Lang/Hentz. Nays-none. Finding of Facts: Special nature of the property. No adverse impact on neighborhood. No safety hazard. No harm to general public. Board of Appeals Minutes 3 November 22, 2006 IV. 725 NORTH WASHBURN STREET Richard Naslund-applicant, Richard & Virginia Naslund Joint Revocable Living Trust-owners, request a variance to permit the relocation of a structure with a 6 foot front yard setback on North Washburn Street. Section 30-98 (B)(2)(c) of the Oshkosh Municipal Code: C-2 ETZ General Commercial Extraterritorial District requires a 25' front yard setback and Section 30-104: Extraterritorial Highway 41 Corridor Overlay District requires a 50' building setback from the right-of-way. Mr. Buck presented the item and distributed photos of the subject site. Mr. Buck noted that altho'ugh the applicant had submitted copies of minutes from the Town of Algoma Plan Commission, Town Board Meeting, and the Winnebago County Board of Adjustment in regards to this issue, their decision on the matter was not necessary for approval. The Board of Appeals for the City of Oshkosh governs the . variance in this matter. Richard Naslund, 729 N. Washburn Street, presented a large aerial photo of the site displaying the buildings and many trees on the property. He also distributed photos of neighboring properties owned - by Pommerening Chevrolet and Bergstrom Automotive to display the cars parked in the right-of-way as well as a retention pond. He stated that he was not aware that the other boards that previously reviewed this variance did not have jurisdiction in this area. He commerited that he felt that the City would not want to lose a 150-year-old landmark and the taxes that go along with the property. He further stated that the house couldn't be moved to another area on the site due to the location of the creek and the , flood plain and flood way. Mr. Lang quesJioned if the house could not be moved across the creek? Mr. Naslund responded that it would not be possible and would disturb the flavor of the entire site. Eric Naslund, Richard's son, commented that the house was old and unique and he felt it was important to preserve something from the past. A brief discussion followed regarding other locations on the site where the house could potentially be relocated. Due to the fact that the Wisconsin Department of Transportation would be acquiring part of this property that is within the right-of-way of the-Highway 41 expansion, Mr. Lang asked for clarification of this process. DavidPatek, Director'ofPublic Works, stated that the usual DOT process would be to purchase the home and land required for the highway expansion and any necessary easements and provide relocation costs to the owner. Most lots do not usually have more than one home on the site. Mr. Lang asked if the DOT would move the house for the owner? Mr. Patek replied that the DOT could purchase the home and then sell it back to the owner if they desired to move the structure elsewhere. Mr. Lang asked if sidewalks were to be installed in this area? Mr. Patek responded yes. Mr. Lang commented that the variance, if granted, would place the house only six feet from the sidewalk. .Mr. Carpenter commented that other variances of a similar nature have been denied for safety reasons. Mr. Cornell also commented that it would be a traffic hazard so close to the right-of-way and Board of Appeals Minutes 4 November 22, 2006 l that if the DOT would be compensating the owner for the home he could not understand the reason to allow it to remain there. Mr. Lang stated that he did not see any indication that this home is on the historic register and if it is so unique, it could be moved to another location to preserve it. Mr. Lang further stated that allowing this variance would set a precedence for future variances. The relocation of the home is no different than allowing a new structure to be built in the right-of-way. Ms. Hentz commented that she would support the variance as it appears that it would be difficult to move the home to a different location on the property and that the confusion surrounding who governs this area in relation to granting a variance has made for a difficult situation for the owner. Motion by Carpenter to approve the variance to permit the relocation of a structure with a 6-foot front yard setback. Seconded by Cornell. Motion denied 1-4. Ayes-Hentz. Nays-Lang/Carpenter/Cornell/Ruedinger OTHER BUSINESS-DISCUSSION OF PROCEDURES Mr. Lang requested that the pages be numbered in future staff reports for easier reference. The Board briefly discussed the issue of changing the meetings for 2007 to once a month rather than twice a month. It was decided that the Board of Appeals meetings would now be held once per month on the second Wednesday of each month. The Board members concurred that a cap of five items should be placed on the meetings. rfmore than five items should be submitted for review, the remaining items would be heard at a special meeting held on the fourth Wednesday of the month. This procedure change will be reviewed in nine months to evaluate its impact. Motion by Lang to approve the change in meeting schedule. Seconded by Carpenter. Motion carried 5-0. Ayes-Carpenter/Cornell/Lang/Ruedinger/Hentz. Nays-none. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:17 pm. Respectfully submitted, Todd M uehrer Associate Planner/Zoning Administrator Board of Appeals Minutes 5 November 22, 2006 ffi .. STAFF REPORT BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2006 ITEM IV: 725 NORTH WASHBURN STREET GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND Richard Naslund-applicant, Richard & Virginia Naslund Joint Revocable Living Trust- owners, request a variance to permit the relocation of a structure with a 6 foot front yard setback on North Washburn Street. Section 30-98 (B)(2)(c) of the Oshkosh Municipal Code: C-2 ETZ General Commercial Extraterritorial District requires a 25' front yard setback and Section 30-104: Extraterritorial Highway 41 Corridor Overlay District requires a 50' building setback from the right-of-way. The subject 3.5-acre property has 235 feet of frontage on North Washburn Street and currently has between 635-645 feet of lot depth. The parcel is located in the Town of Algoma but falls within the Extraterritorial Zoning area for which the City of Oshkosh is responsible. It is zoned C-2 ETZ General Commercial Extraterritorial District and is also located in the Extraterritorial Highway 41 Corridor Overlay District. The property is bisected by Sawyer Creek and contains 6 individual buildings. The subject building is used as a consignment shop and is located between the creek and N. Washburn Street with all other buildings used for residential and residential accessory purposes located to the west of the creek. Surrounding properties to the northwest and west are used for residential purposes, to the east is US Highway 41, and lands to the south are commercial. Zoning for the property and all lands fronting North Washburn Street is either C-2 General Commercial or C-2 ETZ General Commercial Extraterritorial, all of which have the Highway 41 Corridor Overlay upon them. The land use in the general vicinity can be characterized as a commercial corridor with abutting low-density residential to its west. ANAL YSIS In reviewing a variance request, the following questions should be addressed: When considering an area variance, the question of whether unnecessary hardship or practical difficulty exists is best explained as "whether compliance with the strict letter of the restrictions governing area, set backs, frontage, height, bulk or density would unreasonably prevent the owner from using the property for a permitted purpose or would render conformity with such restrictions unnecessarily burdensome." Are there any unusual or unique physical limitations of the property, which create a hardship? Will granting of a variance result in harm to the public interest? The applicant is requesting a variance to relocate a former farm house that has been converted to a commercial building to a location with a 6 foot front yard/N Washburn Street setback, intruding 44 feet into the required 50 foot Highway 41 ETZ Overlay District setback and 19 feet into the required 25 foot C-2 ETZ District setback. The request is being proposed in advance of the planned Wisconsin Dept. of Transportation (DOT) widening of the North Washburn Street right-of-way that is anticipated to extend 30 to 45 feet into the subject property basically cutting across the subject structure with the new property/R-O- W line. \ '. STAFF REPORT . ITEM IV -2- BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2006 It is contended that there is an unnecessary hardship/practical difficulty in using the subject lot as the DOT will be acquiring a portion of the property where the structure is currently located. Also, because of the inclusion of the floodplain on the site, the applicant believes that there is no reasonable use of the property if the requested variance were not granted. Staff is aware of the DOT intentions to acquire a portion of the applicant's lot and understands that they are currently at the appraisal stage. The DOT . preliminarv plans (dated 02/07/06) depict the new right-of-way line as well as fill being added going through the subject structure and to the north. It is anticipated that the subject structure will have to be removed from the site and the DOT has established a preliminary allocation for acquisition. DOT staff has indicated that if the variance is granted, the owner should be made responsible for grading between the house and sidewalk and the State be void of future claims from construction by his choice of building location. Staff is in disagreement with the statement that this situation will create a condition of no reasonable use of the property. The property is extremely deep and currently contains five other buildings and substantial uses not affected by DOT actions. Additional support that the DOT action does not take away all use of the property include the recompense that will be provided to the owner due to acquisition and the physical ability to relocate the structure to a number of code compliant locations to the west, either in or out of the floodplain. The applicant states that the property itself has unique and peculiar circumstances making it a hardship onto itself. The first is the proximity of Sawyer Creek and associated floodplain. As mentioned, the creek intersects the site and a large amount of the property is located within the floodplain. This is not an uncommon or unique situation for parcels within the City of Oshkosh, whether located adjacent/near lakes, rivers or streams. Many properties, including the lots adjacent to the north and the south are in the floodplain. Additionally, the proposed area for' relocation of the building remains within the floodplain area even though there are areas on the property to the west that are completely outside. The second item claimed to make this property unique is the statement that the subject structure is historic in nature. Staff acknowledges that the structure is old but does not agree that it is historic as the structure itself appears to have been severely altered throughout its lifespan in such a manner as to remove most, if not all, of the historic significance. Additionally, the use of the home as a historic element to the site is also in question, as it has been converted to a retail use. In regard to harm to the public interest, the applicant asserts that there would be no harm, as the move would not change anything for surrounding owners. Staff disagrees with the applicant in that the proposed setback from the new right-of-way is significant in nature as it will permit a structure to be extremely close to the right-of-way only 6 feet from the sidewalk and would impact not only surrounding properties but also impact the impression and "feel" of the 41 commercial corridor itself. Once the building is moved from its current location, it is considered to be removed and the relocation is fundamentally considered placement of a new structure. The proposed location will be a massive divergence from the required 50-foot building setback established throughout the Oshkosh frontage road system and would definitely appear to be encroaching into the roadway area and out of place. The granting of this variance request could be basis for multiple other front yard variance requests of a lesser or similar degree within the corridor. STAFF REPORT ITEM IV -3- BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2006 In summary, staff believes that the subject property will continue to provide the majority of its current uses if the variance is not granted, albeit that the consignment store use will have to be relocated or lost. Staff also strongly contends that the need for a dimensional variance is solely self-created and personal based on the applicants desire to retain all of the multiple uses currently on-site and to construct a building and reestablish a desirable use within the required front yard setback area. It is felt that the reduced building setback would affect the surrounding property as well as the community at large through its impact on the 41 corridor not only now but also if and when the title of the property is transferred. Finally, staff would like to attempt to clarify an item included in the application material. It is stated that the Town of Algoma unanimously approved a 5-foot setback from the proposed right-of-way. After doing some research, staff has determined that the request for a setback was made to the Town of Algoma Plan Commission on March 8, 2006 where it received a unanimous recommendation for denial, it was then brought before the Town Board on March 15, 2006 where is was unanimously approved. Additionally, city staff found that the Winnebago County Board of Adjustment heard a variance request as well on April 6, 2006 where a variance to allow a 15 foot street yard setback was granted on a 4-1 count with the condition that the City of Oshkosh approve it under it's Extraterritorial Zoning jurisdiction. Staff is unsure why this item was brought before so many other groups, as the City of Oshkosh Board of Zoning Appeals is the governing body with jurisdiction over front yard setback variances. The County does maintain Shore1and zoning, which has setbacks of 75 feet from the ordinary high water mark of navigable waterways (such as the creek), however it does not regulate other city or extraterritorial setback regulations. Additionally, staff is confused to what was requested, as the invalid county variance does not match the current request. With all this being said, staff would like to stress the point that the variances heard by other bodies are irrelevant. It is the Oshkosh Board of Zoning Appeals that must determine if a hardship exists on the property and what relief, if any, should be granted. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the variance request. ~~ Please Tvne or Print in BLACK INK ~ 0IH<0fH 1:1" T"E WAttA Return to: Department of Community Development 215 Church Ave. P.O. Box 1130 Osbkosh, VVI54903-1130 CITY OF OSHKOSH APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE Please submit a complete reproducible site plan (maximum size 11" x 17"). (A complete site plan includes, but is not limited to, all stnictures, lot lines and streets with distances to each.) Please refer to the fee schedule for appropriate fee. FEE IS NON~REFUNDABLE.The fee is payable to the City ofOshko~h and due at the time the application is submitted. Address of Parcel Affected: 725 N.. Washburn street Richard C. Naslund, Trustee of the Richard C. and Petitioner: Virginia E.o Naslund Joint Revocable Home Phone: 231-7383 Living Trust dated 11-30-1990. Petitioner's Address: 729 N.o Washburn st. Work Phone: 233 -0 1 22 Signature Required: ;1f;r6ftkI!a&c<; fS~-&;~ /1 /:z.j dt> . .' . / I Owner (if not petitioner): SArnfE. 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 unnecessaIy hardship w~uJd b'e created if the variance is not granted. The burden of proving an unnecessary hardship rests upon the appli~t. The, attached sheet provides information on what constitutes a hardship. (Attach additional sheets, if necessary. to provide th~ information requested. Additional information may be requested as needed.) , 1. Explain your proposed plans and why you are requesting a variance: Move existing house out of new R.O.W. See site plan by Rick Schroeder, Architect ," . . ..f ~ ~~' ~ ", .' 2. Describe bow the variance would not h~ve an adverse effect on surrounding properties: The house move would change nothing for surrounding properties. Neighbors approved the move at the 3/15/06 Town of Alcioma meeting, where the Variance Request was approved 5-0,~or a five foot setback from the proposed North Washburn street Right Of Way. 3. Describe the special conditions that apply to your lot or structure that do not apply to surrounding lots or structures: The house happens to be in the way of the new pro~osed Washburn Street. The widening of Washburn street and the proximity to Sawyer Creek make'.~: for the special condition and hardship. 4. Describe the hardship that would result if your variance were not granted: By reason of special a..tid unusual circumstances, causing undue. , . I. I and unnecessary hardship, this property meets all the guidelines for granting variances.. . . An owner would h~ve no feasible use of the property ot~erwis~~ A landmark would be gone.. The hardship is unique and peculiar to this property. ; . BOA 725 N WASHBURN ST 11-22-06 PRATSCH/JOHN F 2111 LINWAY CT OSHKOSH WI 54904 NASLUND/RICHARD C TRUSTE 729 WASHBURN ST OSHKOSH WI 54904 POMMERENING/ARTHUR E 237 N WASHBURN ST OSHKOSH WI 54904 KIENAST/LUVERN G 765 N WASHBURN ST OSHKOSH WI 54904 " -t-------~"'"..:~"""'" 9 -------------- ----- - !L _______ ~ r I - _. I h - + ------- ' ~~ ~ n - - - - t ~-- ~ I ,"''''''l> .~.ol I " ------r I I \ (11 , I ~ \ '. " ' I ~ ~ I It i I I I I / ~ 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ i~ ~ Q ~ ~i ~~ i~ 0 n d~; I --------~ / - -.- -1- - I I - - - - - - - - -1- - I I I ~ 3 I ~ I i , ~ ~ B . I~ ( ~ " ,.,...;; (t ~ ~ lJ) S w. lJ) ~ o ~ Il.. o [ " u. m 0 J: - III ~ p;~~::: Ii >-' ' 10 a ~ ~ 0 Cl ffi ~ 5 ~ ~ Pi z ~~ iiI :ij e ~ o in ~ 0:: z o 5 o ...J W a:: o z C5 ...J ~ z. ~ :3: t Ul o ~ :t ~ z ~ ~ ~ o z ~ U ~ w +; I- ~ s: ! U : ~ 1 1t0i 1. e ~ It ::> s i:( lii ~ I -~. ~w~ W 2 eU: w u: ~ o LL ~ ~0i J: ~ U : ~ +! U ~ i2 ~ ;;, 7' JULY 12; 2005 05-212 ABO RESOLUTION (APPROVED 7-0 LOST LAID OVER WITHDRAWN PURPOSE: GRANT CONDrTlONAL USE PERMrTS; APPROVE FINAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT: (A) S. WASHBURN STREET, SOUTH OF 1931.1951 S. WASHBURN STREET (B) 2100 S. KOELLER STREET .,~5,~~~t\.'SB.~~~EE~ (A) DIANE GREDE, PETITIONER (8) OLS=~~ER .p,erjs1row, AAo. PLAN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATI0,N: AD found consistent with Standards set forth in Section 30-11 (D) of the Zoning Ordinance andapprove,cLw/conditionsasnoted' INITIATED BY: BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of O$hkosh that conditional use permits are hereby granted for the following properties under Section 30-11 of the Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance, and that said permits are Qranted with conditions, if any, as noted for each respective property. ~nd the Planned DiS:-uict Overlay and final development plans, per the attached exhibits, are hereby approved. A) S. Washburn Street, South of 1931.1951 S. Washburn Street; Diane Grede, petitioner A conditional use permit for construction of a veterinary clinic for small animals, per the attached "Exhibit A", with the following conditions: 1) 2) 3) A grading and drainage plan be submitted to, and approved by, the Department of Public \lVorks. '0 The site' plan be redrawn to show future cross access to development area to the south. toinclud9.cpprossaccess agreement . Boarding is limited to" pets undergoing surgical medical procedures,' health emergencies and sickness, or under quarantine for rabies observation. 8) 2100 S. Koeller Street; Olsen Brothers LLP, petitioner '. . A conditional use pennit to operate an unattended fueling station on the south end G>f 2100 S. Koeller Street, per the attached "Exhibit 8", with the condition that.a landscaos plan to screen the control panel housing be submitted to and approved' by the Department of Community Development ;, i , '~. JU~ Y 12, 2005 05-212 RESOLUTION CONTD , ~ t' tJev~o~ ~.a~~llm~~~e~ttD~~mlJtti~.eliOwner A conditional use permit for a planned development for an auto sales and service dealership, per the attached -Exhibit D., with the foRewing conditions: . - 1) The fence. identified encompassing the rear storage area be moved to the inside edge. of the landscape area with the final location approved by the Department of Community Development 2) The minimum setback of the front detention areas is 5 feet 3) The east edge of the east detention areas along Washburn Street be enhanced to include architectural treabnents such as a masonry waif and fence with final architectural details approved by the . Department of Community Development 4) Landscape islands, minimum 6 feet in width. be added to the ends of the parking! display aisles in the east display area 5) The landscape island closest to the principal structure be widened to a minimum of 6 feet. in width. \.6 ;:;;:;, IJf!:Dtoiifixte~., ~ I;ttitfgq 7f' rtross aln'enance' emerit1:>e re ana awroved by the Department Df Community Development for the common landscape area along the north property line. ; 8) Landscape plan be updated for the berm along the west property line. with final approval by the Department of Community Development. .. ' ", .. .' , . ;,.j '1 -'-=-t L1: LIV ~ ) 12 I 9-.- j ~ ~. l!l ~ . ~ ~ ... ~"'IIl~~r-~~ g..g~.",~&j~~:::~~~~< ::= 12;:!gi~q:2g~:g~~~S!z:z:z lJJ <~:!;:r:;Gl~L1)!q:.:e II 'll'f"- II n It ~~;~~~~;:""~;~~~~ a a:;~qt-....Ia::Q..zwQ,. o o o o " o o Q Q o o " '" ~ ~ u ~ >- o ~ '" w -' !i 2:; ~ \,1.13: ... 0 N~ !J ~co ~~ . 0 gg ;;1-:c. oh::i:l:2\:;~~ ~ c!i ...." ...." t,NWv_ ~OU1~lIloc(::!p~O<l'~ q- .... 0 :;n:!f!!1::i:!N:l!;:m~t;i:1iizzz Ln ::I: W<rJ:!;:r~C'l~IIl!q:.~II"lr"'''1l11 ~ ii:: t;t;~,::~,;-;:~" ;, >-~~1:l:1il:l aE:~~4t-..la::a..%l.IJo.. * ,<( l- t/) * ~ o o + Ln N Ln <( ~ ~ ~ .V) ~ .... , *...- q- ., -" >- :J: 0 III >- ::J ~ Z <( ..J a.. lTl] I~f.i Jd I~; /J,4' '"lm gr 111 -" .j r~~ ~ I ~_ i~ ~ I 01 I - 0 3 H, ~ ~ I ffi " ~ == >= I- Z ::J o (J , , (2 (3 ('i ~J g ; ~ . I ::' ~ ~ ~ ~ o e N " ;::I ~ o ~ z ~ I- " (J .. W !l! ""J ~ o z c:: '" a.. '" .........,..,. ..A/~ 00 QQ "- '" /., ,It::> '" , e' ~ / S , , -I o N \"-- ..0 ld / ,I ! I NOV-10-2006 FRI 01:03 PM TOWN OF ALGOMA .. FAX NO. 9202358787 ') . P. 02 TOWN OF ALGOMA WINNEBAGO COUNTY, WISCONSIN MINUTES FOR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING March 8. 2006 CALL TO ORDE~ The Meeting wascaUed to order by Chairman Nelson a~ 6:00P .M. ROLL CALL Dewey E. Nelson' Jeanne Shiras Robert Nadolske - Excused Dan Mingus Mark Green Patrick Rocole Ron Aubrey - Excused MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINg Motion made by Green to approve the previous meeting minutes. Seconded by Shiras. Carried 5-0. CHAIR REPORT ON TOWN BOARD ACTION Chairman Nelson stated that the Town Board approved Warren Utecht to be the Site Plan Ordinance Facilitator. The Town Board also approved the Site Plan Ordinance. The Schmidt Bros. Construction variance request for Rosewood was tumed down due to no representation at the meeting. WATER ADVISORY COM1\tITTEJl1 MEETING REPORT Shiras stated that they are finishing up Phase II. It was stated that the water is pumped into the water tower at 56 degrees. The temperature kept in the Tower is 36 degrees. As of FebruaryJ there are 408 connections to the water. REPORT FROM T~ PARKS COMMITTEE No Meeting. PUBLIC FORUM Mark Thompson 3375 Sheppard Drive - wanted to remind the Commission that Rosewood is to be used in the future as a collector road. This would be in regard to Item # 1 on the Agenda. Mark Green - Mr. Green infonned the Commission that he is resigning his position. He submitted his resignation to the Clerk. He stated that there will be three Town Board members on the commission in April and our Ordinance does not allow it. Jeanne Shiras - asked the Commission if the Town Board took any action on the Oakwood Road project. She was infonned that the Town Board approved the Design Contract with Strand and Associates. Proceedings of the Town of Algoma Planning Commission Meeting , March 81 2006 1 Received Time Nov. 10. 1:53PM NOV-10-2006 FRI 01:03 PM TOWN OF ALGOMA FAX NO. 9202358787 P. 03 ---" .....-.... "---~' Richard Spanbauer - wanted to infonn the Commission that the current ordinance allows one board member to be on the Planning Commission. There is no problem currently with having two representatives; however, this is on the agenda for the Town Board Meeting to be discussed. AGENDA 1. SCHMIDT BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION REOUESTING A VARIANCE ON ROSEWOOD LANE PERTAINING TO A DRlVEW A Y ENTRANCE. Ed Schmidt from Schmidt Brothers was present and stated that the temporary euI- de-sac is not there and he did not know the reason why the driveway could not go onto Rosewood. Discussion ensued. He was informed by the Commission that Rosewood is to be used as a collector street for Leonard's Point Roa.d. It was further stated that the plat states clearly that no driveway entrances were allowed onto Rosewood. The Commission asked Mr. Schmidt why he wanted this driveway onto R.osewood. He simply stated it was the design of the house, to make it look better; however, it would be no problem to redesign the home on this comer lot. No action taken. 2. REOUEST FOR A V ARIANCEFOR RICHARD NASLUND REGARDING THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 725 N. WASHBURN STREET. Discussion ensued. The commission didn't understand the request and there were many different opinions among the Commission.. Motion made by Rocole to deny the variance. Seconded by Shiras. Carried 5-0. Note: The Town Hall Office will be contacting Mr. Naslund to attend the Town Board Meeting to be held 011 03-15-06, for this item is on the agenda. 3. CREATE ORDINANCE MANDATING WATER AND SEWER REQUIREMENTS TO ALL NEW DEVELOPMENTS. Kevin Mra.z, Director of the Sanitary District, was present for discussion. Mr. Mraz gave some points to the Commission to consider. One being defining a subdivision or defming the areas that would. be mandated. Mr. Mraz used the Wyldewood Subdivision as an example. He would like to try to prevent the digging of more wells and having contamination problems. Discussion ensued. Rocole asked how many new wells have been installed since the water has become available to the Town. Mr. Mraz stated around 10. Rocole asked Mr. Mraz if a contractor would get any type of discount if he chose to install water to all the lots in a subdivision at once. Mr. Mraz stated it would for the "contractor cost". Discussion ensued. Mingus stated that the water system was a "voluntary" system and he felt creating an ordinance would take that choice away fi:om residents. Discussion ensued. Mingus and Rocole felt that there should not be an ordinance created for mandating water and sewer requirements for new developments. Further discussion ensued. Motion made by Rocole to deny creating all ordinance mandating water and sewer requirements to all new developments. Seconded by Mingus. Carried 3-2 with Green and Shiras voting No. Proceedings afthe Town of Algama Planning Commission Meeting March 8,2006 2 Received Time Nov. 10. 1:53PM NOV-10-2006 FRI 01: 03 PM TOWN OF ALGOMA" , . FAX NO. 9202358787 P. 04 ......-...'. ..-.-." ..,---- '---.-' AD.JOURNMENT Motion made by Roco]e to adjourn. Seconded by Mingus. Meeting adjourned at 6:40P,M, Respectfully Submitted~ Susan M. Mi11er~ Clerk Town of AIgoma Proceedings ofihe Town of Algoma Planning Commission Meeting March 8, 2006 3 Received Time Nov. 10. 1:53PM I _. .~. ~, , . , , DRAFT TOWN OF ALGOMA WINNEBAGO COUNTY, WISCONSIN AGENDA FOR REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING March 15, 2006 6:00PM Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call Public Forum Supervisor's Statements Correspondence Old Business Attorney's Report Road Supervisor's Report Fire Department Report The Board may Discuss and Act on the Following: 1. Treasurer's Report 2. Approve Minutes of Previous Meeting 3. Approve Board of Audit Statement for February Disbursements 4. Authorize Strand and Associates to apply to Wisconsin Department ofNamral Resources for an Urban Non-point Source Planning Grant on behalf of the 'f,own mM~~. . 5. Extending the contract for OCAI~. __ ,,__ , ___,_~~~ .. , 6~ PropOsaY for equipment upgfade for Channel 19 :from Jeff Boyce. ' . 7. Discuss the possibility -of creating a five (5) person cable access channel. ' ..., . co!!unittee. -- .. -,- - -- -- "_' - _,_ .._ 8. Appoint new employee for Public Access Channel 9. Cleaning out of the west side of Honey creek. 10. Transportation Enhancement Grant for possible bike lanes on the Oakwood Road Project. 11. Request for a variance for Richard Naslund regarding property loc'~ted a~.,725 N. Washburn Street. , . . 12. Proper display of house numbers for Emergency Services to identifycorrect addresses. . ' 13. Carl Traeger Middle School elp Mark A> Klein, fireworks permit (06/02/06).. 14. Discuss findings from Atty. Wertsch and Chairman Spanbauer on J;legotiatio~ regarding easements for Butte des Morts II subdivision. ,. .: 15. Training expenses for Board of Review members. .:, ..' :'.. 16. Removal of Oak trees in the right-of-way on Oakwood Road byth~ Samtary, ,,' District. ,.' , 17. Ordinance regarding having one or two board members on the PHmnirig Commission. 18. Set date for Roads Tour of the Town. ADJOURNMENT e ., e back up for Jeff Boyce when he is unavailable. .This position will pay $10.00 for every time the employee comes to the Town Hall to do the programming. Motion made by Blake to appoint Jeff Boyce as the Cable Access Cp,annel employee. Seconded by Czajkowski. Carried 5-0. Motion made by Blake to move agenda item #11 forward for discussion. Seconded by Spanbauer. Carried 5-0. 11. REOUEST FOR V ARlANCEFOR RICHARD NASLUND REGARDING PROPERTY LOCATED AT 725.. N. WASHBURN STREET. Richard Naslund presented his request to the board to move the home on the existing lot located at 725 N. Washburn Street. In moving the home to make room for the new roadway, the house would still need a variance for the setback from the roadway. Naslund stated that he has been speaking with Bob Braun from Winnebago County Zoning. Naslund stated that Braun informed him to submit bis request to the Town Board because of the expansion of the roadway. Discussion ensued. Naslund informed the board that this roadway has changed four times in his lifetime. Further discussion ensued. Motion made by Spanbauer to grant the variance. Seconded by Green. Carried 5-0~ Motion made by Mingus to move agenda item #13 forward for discussion. Seconded by Spanbauer. Carried 5-0. 13.. CARL TRAEGER MIDDLE SCHOOL C/O MARK A. KLEIN~. .-, fmEWORKSPERMIT(06-02-06l. ...,. '. Discussion ensued as to the amount of insurance coverage required. Motion made by Blake to approve Fireworks Permit. Seconded by Czajkowski. Carried '5:0. Due to the photo presentation for both items listed below. Motion made by Spanbauer to move item #16 forward. Seconded by Czajkowski. Carried $-0. ' , 9. CLEANING OUT OF THE WEST SIDE OF HONEYCREEIC, . Photos were shown of the problems with water flow throughout H~ney Cr~k. Discussion ensued. Motion made by Czajkowski to solicit bids from JaM. Walsh or any other source as to the cost of cleaning out Honeycreek. Second~ by , Mingus. It should be noted if the County Highway Department is to :p~ utiliz~d, they do not bid. Carried. 5-0. ' . . " 16. REMVOAL OF OAK TREES IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY ON OAKWOOD ROAD BY THE SANITARY DISTRICT. .: . , Kevin Mraz from the Sanitary District was present to answer any queStionS from the board. Discussion ensued as to how many of the three trees sboWn in a, photo needed to be taken down. Discussion ensued as to possibly splitting cost of the removal of the trees. Motion made by Czajkowski to share the net cost of removing the trees from the right-of-way with the Sanitary District. Seconded by Blake. Carried 5-0. Proceedings of Town of Algoma Regular Town Board Meeting March 15. 2006 5 : __., f \~ to. 010 Winnebago County Board of Adjustment DELIBERATIVE April 6, 2006 7:30 A.M. Orin King Administrative Building 2nd Floor Conference Room Oshkosh, WI Present: Arden Schroeder, Andrew Welsch, Dan Mingus, Carrita Williams, Karen Fredrick - court reporter, and Cary Rowe - Assistant Zoning Administrator. Greg Kargus Absent: Decisions were made on .the following: 1. Richard Naslund Town of Algoma variance. The meeting was called to order by Arden Schroeder, Chairman at 7:30 A.M. Motion by A. Welsch to approve the minutes of February 9,2006 and March 24, 2006. Second, G. Kargus. Motion carried 5-0. FIRST to be decided was the variance request of Richard Naslund to be allowed to relocate a building out of a proposed right-of-way, which will not meet the required 30-ft street yard setback from the new right-of-way line. Motion by A. Schroeder to approve a 15-ft street yard setback for an existing building. Second, D. Mingus. Motion by A. Schroeder to amend motion to include condition as follows: "Approval of this variance is subject to approval by the City of Oshkosh under the city's extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction". Second, D. Mingus. Motion to include condition carried 4-1. Findings for approval: 1. EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES: The limited buildable area is bordered by a floodway zone to the west and south on the subject property and a property line to the north. The structure would have to be located in the f100dway to meet the required street yard setback. 2. PRESERVATION OF PROPERTY RIGHTS: The property owner cannot re- orientate the existing house in a manner that would meet the required street yard setback without a variance. The ordinance requirements are unnecessarily burdensome unless a variance is granted. 3. ABSENCE OF DETRIMENT: Approval of this variance would have no negative impact on surrounding properties since the right-of-way expansion is impacting other structure~ along the frontage road in a similar fashion. Based on the above findings, it is the opinion of the Board that all criteria of Section 17.32(7)(a), (b), and (c) have been met. ADVISORY CONDITION: 1. Approval of this variance is subject to approval by the City of Oshkosh under the city's extraterritorial zoning jurisdiction. VOTE ON THE MOTION A.Schroeder aye; A. Welsch aye; G. Kargus aye; D. Mingus aye; C. Williams nay. Motion carried 4-1 to approve a 15-ft setback from the proposed road right-of-way. Meeting adjourned at 7:55 A.M. Respectfully submitted, Cary A. Rowe Recording Secretary CAR Ft ==--)J IDGE T ::::::--.... RD. HECKER CT, PRARIE W01 P DR. ~ =^ CT h COLLE" ~z I- ~L CT. 0.. CT. ~ ll.. YORKTON L. ;N'OO9-= OJ II J LB::.' (GULi I ; k - \J CT. WESTMOOR RD, K CR.EST HAVENVlLOOQ. DR:')":=: . ,. ..... - //E. h::I">D OAKPARK DR. This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and it is not intended to be used as one. This drawing is a compilation of records, data and information located in various city, county and state offices and other sources affecting the area shown and it is to be used for reference purposes only. The City of Oshkosh is not reo sponsible for any inaccuracies herein contained. If discrepencies are found, please contact the City of Oshkosh. ~ ELDON DR, ORD, DANBE CT. WOOD RD, R t1RD, ~llg J- ~ o ~ ~ ::.:: ex: = 52 i'L i- RAD /, --== ~ PHE SAN CT. A,ST ~QWI CT, 2900 - ESTEAI DR. . - . Created by - dff ....' .fc ...._;.. .. ...., ~. REPPc:: ~E:' ~~'\n .~ it Z I CATHFIl/INE V' ~ ~"v:"v-<{}-o.<-. ~~' - G'~ v, .~ t z 'r. a: <( ~~ - . <(:r: :::; x 8:1 W.BrCT. 3:r: ~ ~ ~ ~/ WILLCMI~! ~- ~ ~. ..~..", ~-J~'.o c:::rrr=, f j' BEND a: I~ 1I.... OJ IVr(eG VE Il~ ~ I \ L~ OJ I L-.., I"Tl 0 .. !::/" i----' ~ S~ ll" c7i r t;:; D CTl1 I'1'LMOR~VE ~:wrJ) T - 7 ~ 11- ~o,... ? I 3 r- 0 r'" = BUCHA bJl.~~ '" ~ "I'Llt. Rlf:t r~ 0 g ;:::= = I ARTHU~~ '(;., C-~ C-~ IrEl.. ~ ~ &-1 D _ '!2 UREN,.,. r~ ~'f>.'(;. AVE ~ '0-<.,0 ROB I I -AI TYLER VE, ~ -.tI~ C_7pn..!: ~ SUBJECT = = COOLlD AVE fIi! ~ r' R-1'~. ~ ~ p::. SITE ADAMS VE, ti - ~ ~ ~-- II II II PIERCE VE, ! PAT~T ~ . -3Pl ) ~ Z .. 1 4 TAFT AVE ODD r- c=J- u ~ ~ D_ ~ -: . ~g!l~ ~ == DR. .L~ ~IDE elzOJ Cl ex: _ ,,-~ _ ill to::.:: ~ w _ l,'Ial:: .,.. ::.:: u:: w $: rJ) > LL - , ,- CT..... is ~ ~ <3:? ~ g rt::; 1 iJS' Ir}o- - ~ ~ C-2PD~ 0 $: i1i [J~ rJ) > LOI'> fi\J<:i :i PO r~ E R-3B. ~TONE "\~ =:;l~::K L K J BRO~ W CT rJ) AVE, SOUTHLAND A, Z D R-3 IEW t;; ~F' G-'& ~ [5 ~ NO~~ ~_ ~ AVE. $: t;; ~ DNA ~ I' "'fW ~ 'R-3i'JJ "'~ .\..l'r-t.1'"" 1iJ" ^ 0 ~ w ~ BLAKE CT, ci'ii ~" 'Uc. MEADOW ROOK 'f!lf ilIf.rf..~NTE R.* R-3 ~ ~ AVE., ~ R- _ ~ :R:I~ Rlt C-~ ~ft ~ r' r , WITZEL AVE, ; Ft-YJ~ 1 J ~ ~ ~r ), r C~ -:.12 ~ W, 2ND ~ t;; I' ~ ;:>WH, T. ~ ... t;; ~... ~ ~ w, ffi rY 4 R !. (,A,TY CT. C:: GRf ELAND CT. C) 1l! ~ ~ ~ W, 4TH ;:5::?1::' Z - w GOL~N~E, -~ .... ~ ~ ell I ciJ =AV ~ '" ;;;: u ,... rJ) BISMARC~ IWE.. el ~ ABBEY g: AVE.: :r: ~ U::J ~ r-;;jl81 to KINCAID >- 2.' w ~ lliJ ! AVE.~ '-~ex: i pI R-, 11 \ ~~ c:~ ~t;;~~ ~ :~ ~ I- I- lli -.r- ~ ~ ~ r- It:LZI.!:iJ ~ ~ <( rJ) rJ) ~U ,...: 500 2400 ~ 230 ffi 2 01 ~lOr.-1 ~111500 1400 ~ 1300 12;~ ciJ 1100 g 1:0 kADIA lnrnl~ -0.1 "\[\ ~ .~#t;; Inl ~ ~DGE W'10THIllC \AiiE.\ is Ii.. gf _ '"'" ~ 1(' II ~J~~I w flAVEl! I nr ..., ~ ) ONEIDA ST. ~ ~ t;; rJ) rJ) W Z Cl w 0:: <( Z ex: ex: :;:) w z <( :r: 0 $: rJ) u ~ W ...J Z <( a: 1 ..--: R~ ~ rJ) !2 Cl a: z o l- ex: <( III I- . rJ) I- o (J) ;;~ ,v'" AVE. - W,5 C-1 PD ell! 2800 2700 2600 .....1:~...... ~llll ~ ""I 'I 'J"ttJ DISCLAIMER 725 N WASHBURN ST OJHKOJH ON THE WATER Scale: 1" = 1500' City of Oshkosh Department of Community Development 11/03/06