Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Zoning Appeals (variance) - 12/05/2006 . ~ ~.A).'""" V 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.ci.oshkosh.wi.us Jackson R. Kinney Director Dept. of Community Development OJHKOfH ON THE WAltA Darryn Burich Director Planning Services Division December 5, 2006 Timothy & Barbara Mulloy 66 E. Waukau Av. Oshkosh, WI 54902 Re:'g6 E. waukatFAv;:~ " . . - .' .~~T j~f.' Dear Mr. & Mrs. Mulloy: On November 22, 2006 the Board of Appeals approved a variance to permit the development of an attached patio that will have a 1 O-footrear yard setback with the following conditions: (1) The deck could not be covered or enclosed. (2) Similar or suitable landscaping to be installed upon completion of the deck. The decision of the Board was filed in the Planning Services Division Office of the Department of Community Development on November 24, 2006. Per Section 30-6(C)(3)and (4) of the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance, your variance will expire on May 24, 2007 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 permits may be applied for from the Inspection Services Division in Room 205 at the Oshkosh City Hall between 7:30 - 8:30 AM and 12:30 - 1:30 PM, Monday thru Friday, or call (920) 236-5050 for an appointment. Please bring all required building plans and information necessary for review when obtaining your building permit. If you have any questions, feel free to call me at (920) 236-5057. Respectfully, ..__H_W--".-. .~...-,. ...-- --.....----- . ,~'/.., ~.........-~.-..~ , ..-7 " " // <----.- /.///......~:;>~~:...2:~:;:: ~~?,"."'./ / /Zy /' c:-~. __.--------.......................0-................... / . . '-...-------......... .... Todd(Muehrer Associate Plarmer/Zoning Administrator TMldff CC: Stuart's Landscaping ON THE WATER 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.ci.osh kosh. wLus Jackson R. Kinney Director Dept. of Community Development OfHKOfH Darryn Bnrich 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) 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. _!t:",,:,::l!~.~A'St WAUKAU AYI<.;~~ 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. 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. 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, MONDAY THRU FRIDAY ,. !'l~ i:.." .F, 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 Plarmer; 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. Roll 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 requestfor a variance to permit a 152.5 square ft. per side (305 square fl. total) electronic message center sign. Seconded by Cornell. Motion denied 0-5. 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 (1 00) square ft. on all sides. Mr. Muehrer presented the item and distributed photos of the subject site for review. Ms. Hentz inquired ifthis 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 main~enance, in which case the sign would have to be allowed to remain. Ms. Hentz asked 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 vaIious 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 EAST W AUKAU A VENUE Andrew Smith, StuaJi'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 YaJ'd 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 ~ . , t,~ 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 wasconcemed 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 if the 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 off was 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 ofthe 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 a-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 variarlce 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 although the applicant had submitted copies of minutes fromthe Town of Algoma Plan Commission, Town Board Meeting, and the \Vinnebago 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 commented 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 questioned 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 wi~1in the right-of-way of the Highway 41 expansion, Mr. Lang asked for clarification of this , process. David Patek, Director of Public 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 thesite. 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, 1006 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. If more 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 Muehrer Associate Planner/Zoning Administrator Board of Appeals Minutes 5 November 22, 2006 ~' STAFF REPORT BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2006 ITEM III: 66 EAST WAUKAU AVENUE GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND 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. The subject 0.2 acre property is zoned R-l Single-Family Residence District and is developed with a single-family house constructed in 1991. The rear of the property fronts a navigable channel that connects to Lake Winnebago. The shoreline is bordered by riprap and a dock. is located on the western side of the water frontage. The general area can be characterized as low-density residential. 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 setback variance from the requirements of the Zoning Code to allow the construction of an attached patio within the rear yard setback area. The plans also call for the replacement of a compliant wooden stoop leading from the master bedroom that is in disrepair. The new stoop would be replaced with brick pavers matching the proposed patio. A four-foot wide walkway will connect the stoop to the proposed patio. The main portion of the patio will be 15' x 20', and gets within ten feet of the rear property line (water's edge). A set of limestone stairs will lead from the patio to the existing dock. The applicant claims that without the variance, the rear yard would be more or less unusable, due to the house's location, which is located 25' to 30' from the water's edge. Due to the existing slope of the property towards the shoreline, the proposed patio will be two to three feet higher than the existing grade, supported by a retaining wall. A 20" seating wall situated around the perimeter of the patio will prevent accidental falls. Three comers of the patio will be accented with 36" tall pillars. The applicant also noted that the patio and seating wall would create a safe environment for back yard activities by reducing the danger of the existing slope and potential falls onto the riprap along the shore. STAFF REPORT ITEM III -2- BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 22, 2006 Staff agrees that there is uniqueness to the property. First of all, the lot of record is substandard in depth, averaging 86' to 91', leaving little room for attached accessory structures such a deck or patio. Second, the slope of the property can be viewed as hazardous. By constructing a level patio, the rear yard can be utilized safely for recreational purposes. Staff did inspect the property and does not feel this request would have an adverse affect to the surrounding area. To the east there do exist patios, decks and docks apparently, within rear yard setbacks, serving the same purposeas the applicants proposal. Staff did receive a phone call and e-mail from a neighbor with concerns about removal of the walnut trees. The neighbor stated that there is currently a lack of trees in the rear yards of all the adjoining properties and removal of the two mature walnuts would be a great loss. During staffs inspection of the property, communications with the property owner stated the reason for the removal of the walnut trees; the fruit of the walnut trees tend to be messy and could stain the new patio. As indicated on the submitted plan, the owner will replace the walnut trees with a maple tree and a lilac bush. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of a IS-foot rear yard setback variance to permit construction of a patio that will have a 10 foot rear yard setback as requested. Please Tvpe or Print in BLACK INK ~ OJHKOfH ON THEWll.fER Return to: Department of Community Development 215 Church Ave. P.O. Box 1130 Oshkosh, WI 54903-1130 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 structures, 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 of Oshkosh and due at the time the application is submitted. Address of Parcel Affected: (0<0 E: ~Ao'KA.o ~E.. I o~)(a5M1 v-ll , c::.~ll Petitioner: A.~~ ?M'~ A.. '510/4:rrS ~P~~Phone: ~20' ~OZ..ZO~'1 . Petitioner's Address: 2'~/ 8~c:Z)::7 ~ -OSLlk.~HI' ~L Work Phone: "f2a.. 23';- j/9b Signature Required: ~ ' ~/;;..,~-....- Date: II/zJ 0<0 Owner (if not petitioner): BaV-"AV""A .J-nM"~~ M.\l.\loy Home Phone: 1~o ~ E&E> -06 iff" Owner's Address: 1tU. Ii. Wa..u..~ Me. I ah.-kM.h. Work Phone: 'fltf.... 577 '" ~ -;,. 7 Signature Required: ~ jt, ~. Date: / 1- !-O(" 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: .&:)"Gf- ,krrA~I-Hc-v - Answers to Questions on Variance Application Form: 1.) Explain your proposed plans and why you are requesting a variance: The plan is to install a brick or stone patio, a paver stoop (off of the Bedroom), and a set of steps to access the existing dock. The proposed new patio and steps fall in the 25' setback area, but above the flood plain line. The stoop replaces an existing wood stoop that is in disrepair, which does not fall in the 25' set back. The Variance is requested to allow use of the rear property for dining, relaxing and entertaining. The steps are needed to allow safe access to the dock. Currently the grade change is steep enough to present a danger to elderly visitors. 2.) Describe how the Variance would not have an adverse effect on surrounding properties: The neighboring properties all have some sort of deck or patio in the rear of the house. Some of these decks, patios, and docks are closer to the shoreline (within the setback). Therefore the proposed patio would not break precedent. In addition the proposed patio will not block or interfere with the view of the neighbors. . 3.) Describe the special conditions that apply to your lot or structure that do not apply to surrounding lots or structures: The house at 66 E Waukau is set closer to the channel than some others on the street. The proximity ofthe home to the channel and the sloping grade does not allow for any level, usable space for entertaining, without building within the setback. If a wood deck was created at the same elevation as the small existing , deck, it would be more than 24" above grade in many places; therefore it would require a railing that would block the view of the water for the owners and for the neighbors to the west. 4.) Describe the hardship that would result if the variance were not granted: If the patio and steps are not allowed the current owner, and any future owners, would not have any space to set a table with chairs, grill, etc... In addition the steps create a safe transition from the rear door to the dock without having to take a large step down, and then walk downhill across grass/ stone. The patio and seating wall will create a safe environment for the owner's grandchildren. Currently the slope of the property creates a danger for young children, who may tumble onto the rip-rap along the shoreline. BOA 66 E WAUKAU AV 11-22-06 RINGWALA NIKUNJ/KIRTIDA 3100 OLD ORCHARD LN OSHKOSH WI 54902 7374 MOLLOY TIMOTHY C/BARBAR 66 E WAUKAO AVE OSHKOSH WI 54902 7253 KAEMPFFE KAREN J 3101 OLD ORCHARD LN OSHKOSH WI 54902 7384 ROOF MR/MR MOHAMMAD A 70 E WAOKAU AVE OSHKOSH WI 54902 7253 STUART'S LANDSCAPING ATTN ANDREW SMITH 2957 BROOKS RD OSHKOSH WI 54904 JI;s u.l C:! I "1;- ~ ~ --L -Z-; r_11' Ol-i e \:?i }' :~i -......I -1 ..y l 7 ~ - ~ ::J. ~ >$ Z -;1:~ ~~ _J <0- ,.c~ r! 0" o JI} ~ o 7: .1 --J '-' ./ " I I ' \ \ (; -::,t7 v~ ; 8;t ; ....J, UJ :z. ~ ~ .::J ~, ~i , w' ~i :p.; ::L v' ~' C0; '-...J '$ , ..:. ~ i' ~ ./ ') ] . :~ ~ w 1\ 7; ~ - ~ :5 ~ ~ "-.J~ C: ~ \. \ J ~ Z -:I: U a: .. lD :E ::>- z I..... " z \:) ~- .<. '"'=:-~ \l.l >. Q ~ ::;r- .... \(\ "" S! Ul Ol -::1" J\ \J .V"\ ,.. t: ll' ~.. ..l ~ 4.: I:::: ::>lii '^ s:e ;::) t ~ -<t 0: ~ Go ::J E Go .. ~ UJ ::t:''".:.. /' ~ F" l>.! "~ N -..Sl :t ~ Q ...::1 t;U C\ ~ .. ~ u ~ .. '-...J View looking west from east property line View looking east from west property line View of existing structures located east of subject property , ~ 'J. ~ OJHKOJH ON TtlE WATeR B.Z.A. Item III 66 E. Waukau Avenue , Construct Patio in Rear Yard Setback Area Aerial Flown: April, 2005 N A 11-22-2006 Scale: 1" = 60' City of Oshkosh Community Development Source: City of Oshkosh GIS 'J> \ \ \, \ \ 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 iocated 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 re- sponsible for any inaccuracies herein contained. If discrepencles are found, please contact the City of Oshkosh. 66 E WAUKAU AV DISCLAIMER OJHKO.fH ON THE WATER Scale: 1" = 200' City of Oshkosh Department of Community Development Created by - dff 11/06/06 ~ ~; (J) r- ECKARDT CT. 0:: <( 0 ;'2 (J) ::J lD 0.. (J) 0 lD ::;; ::s u ::J ::;; ::t: (J) <( M-3 \<.0." DREY LN." ~ ,,\,0 :-i.'~ \>' ci ,0:: w o ill ;i -' Z <( (:) ~, d o 0:: o Z <( ~ ~ M.fH AV W. WAUKAU AVE. AVE." 0:: o r- (J) ~ W. 33RD AVE. o w ::;; Y" W. 34TH AVE. M-3 10' ~~ g,.::5 .;p 0:: o -' w 5: W. 35TH AVE, <( ::;; ci 0:: Z <( ::;; t: ~ ~ o :x: <( o o w 0:: o ~ CITY LIMITS ~ \ ~ I W. RIPPLE AVE. 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. 66 E WAUKAU AV DISCLAIMER OJHKOfH ON THE WATER Scale: 1" = 1500' City of Oshkosh Department of Community Development Created by - dff 11/06/06