Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 12/17/1980 ~ .W" BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1980 3:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Oliver LaLond, George Last, J.e. Batzner, Ann Hintz, and Norman Miller STAFF PRESENT: Phil Rosenquist, Associate Planner Nancy J. Pickard, Recording Secretary The board members met at 232 E. Parkway at 3:00 p.m. on December 17th to review the area firsthand. The meeting was called to order at 3:30 P.M. and the roll call was taken. There was a quorum of five members present. The minutes of the meeting of December 3, 1980 were approved. I. Appeal of Russ Young, Inc, agent for Luvern Kienast, owner of Z32 I:~~. (R-2 Zone) proposes to build a duplex on this ~~r~-whereas a 45' wide lot is required for a duplex. Mr. Rosenquist explained that the parking on the revised plot plan shows the parking too close to the west property line. The normal setback from a side property line would be 7 1/2' for an R-2zone. However, because this lot is only 40' wide,' this setback can be reduced to 10% of the lot width, or 4'. Therefore, the parking stalls should be moved at least 4' from the west property line. This should not create a problem with the parking or manuevering. He also stated that if Mr. Young preferred, he could also move the duplex within 4' of the west property line. Mr. LaLond asked if there was any correspondence from Mrs. Hobbs, the owner of the property to the east of Mr. Kienast's property. Mr. Young said that he has not heard from her. He stated that the letter he had sent the board members releas~ng any claim to a joint driveway was from the property owner to the west. He had mistakenly taken it to be a release from Mrs. Nettie Hobbs, the owner of Lot 23. / However, he stated that there would be no problem with Mrs. Hobbs using part of his driveway, whether or not she has a recorded easement against his property. Mr. Last asked what Mr. Young felt the taxes would be on this piece of property if this duplex were built. Mr. Young said that he would guess that they would be about $800 to $900. They would be only about $40 or $50 on the vacant parcel. He also stated that if he cannot put a duplex on this property, he will not purchase it, because he does not feel a single family home would be very desirable in this older neighborhood. -1- '.. V' Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes December 17, 1980 Meeting Page Two Mrs. Hintz asked if a single family home would require a variance in order to be built on this lot. Mr. Rosenquist said that it would not, since it is a lot of record at the time of the passage of the Ordinance. Mrs. Hintz asked if the large tree would have to be taken down for the parking stalls. Mr. Young said that the tree will remain. Mrs. Hintz asked if Mr. Young would be bound by exactly what is on this plat plan, if this variance is apprbved. Especially, since he has the option of moving the home closer to the west property line. Mr. Rosenquist said that he can move the home within the legal limits. Mr. Young said that he would rather have more than la' on the driveway side, because there would be more room for snow. He stated that he could move the home 6' from the west side property line, leaving 12' on the east side, as this would center the home nicely. Mrs. Hintz moved that the variance request be approved. Mr. Last second the motion. , Mr. LaLond moved that an amendment be added to the motion requiring that the home be moved 6' from the west property line, and that the owner of 232 E. Parkway be required to graDt the owner of adjacent Lot 23 the right to use jointly the driveway to be located on the east side of the property, and that this agreement be recorded on the Deed to 232 E. Parkway. Mr. Last seconded the amendment to the motion. Mr. Miller stated that the board members should also consider snow removal. Mr. Last said that the snow would probably be put on the rear of the lot. The roll call was taken and the amendment to the motion was approved 4-1. The original motion was denied 3(yes) ... 2Cno). The appeal was denied. Mr. Young stated that he did not understand why this request was denied. Mr. Batzner said that this is a 40' wide lot for a duplex~ Mr. Miller explained that there is a rule that the board does not have to give a reason for their vote. Mr. Batzner said that because this was discussed at length and had been before the board at their last meeting, he felt an explanation should be given. He said that he did not feel a 40' wide lot should be used for a duplex. -2- ~ ,.. ,'~ Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes December 17, 1980 Meeting Page Three OLD BUSINESS Mr. Miller stated that additional shrubs had been planted along the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh parking lot located on Elmwood and Vine Streets. Mrs. Hintz stated that Mr. Balliett from the University had been surprised at the Board meeting on May 21, 1980, when he was informed that there were neighbors who were not satisfied with the landscaping they had done around this parking lot. They had provided a wider area of green space, thinking that this would please the neighbors more than shrubbery. Mr. Miller stated that the University had agreed to provide shrubs along both the Elmwood and Vine property lines. However, they have made some vast improvements on this property, and he stated that he now felt they had met their obligations. Mr. Rosenquist stated that he had spoken with the City Attorney about the definition of a front yard, with regard to parking in the front yard. The Attorney is of the opinion that a person could blacktop their entire front yard, as long as the' parking stalls themselves are not located within the 25' setback area. The Planning staff is considering the possibility of changing the wording of the ordinance. Mr. LaLond said that he felt the wording should be changed so that parking cannot be allowed in the front yard. Mr. Miller said that Ripon is in the process of making a study of their Zoning Board. Appleton is receiving a lot of complaints from the citizens and Council on parking in the front yard and flashing signs. Mr. Rosenquist stated that Rick Mattheis, Housing Inspector? has issued two more tickets for parking in the front yard, and has spoken to the owner, James Bilderback, of 1916 Crane. The owner has said that he will discontinue parking in the front yard setback. However, if this continues, it will be referred to the City Attorney's Office. The meeting was adjourned at 4:04 p.m. ReSP~l~/d' _ PHIL ROS (QUIST, /' / Associa e p}1nner njp -3_