Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLetter-Board of Appeals (variance approved) ONllIE WATESl City of Oshkosh Dept. of Community Development Planning Services Division 2J5 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 ~ OJHKO./H Darryn Burich Director Planning Services Division June 14,2007 Mr. Charles Showers 619 W. 19th Avenue Oshkosh, WI 54902 Re: 601 W. 6th Avenue Dear Mr. Showers: On June 13, 2007 the Board of Appeals approved a variance to allow the development ofa new single-story office building with off-street parking as well as an attached storage/garage facility. The decision of the Board was filed in the Planning Services Division Office of the Department of Community Development on June 13, 2007. Per Section 30-6(C)(3) and (4) of the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance, your variance will expire on December 13, 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 through 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. Res~ TodYM~~er Associate Planner/Zoning Administrator TM/kj g CC. Inspections Services Division, City Hall ON THE WATER City of Oshkosh Planning Services Division 215 Church Ave., PO Box 1130 Oshkosh,VVI54903-1130 (920) 236-5059 (920) 236-5053 FAX http://www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us Jackson R. Kinney Director Dept. of Community Development o ~ OJHKOfH Darryn Burich Director Planning Services Division BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA June 13, 2007 3:30 PM To Whom It May Concern: Please note the City of Oshkosh Board of Appeals ':"ill meet on WEDNESDAY, JUNE 13,2007 at 3:30 PM in Room 404 at the Oshkosh City Hall to consider the following agenda. ROLL CALL OTHER BUSINESS Board Reorganization Discussion of BOA procedures APPROV AL OF MAY 9, 2007 MINUTES I. 3139 CUTTER COURT Sandra Nabbefeld-applicant/owner, requests variances to permit the creation of a new unscreened off street parking area located in the front/side street yard. Section 30-36 C(5)(a)(ii) of the Oshkosh Municipal Code: Off-Street Parking and Loading Facilities states in addition to the driveway parking area, one uncovered parking space is permitted alongside an attached garage when such space is not located between the building and the street. Additionally, Section 30-35(1)(1) of the Oshkosh Municipal Code: Additional Standards and Exceptions requires any off-street parking area to provide a minimum 5' green area in the front yard setback for screening purposes and Section 30-35 (E)(2) states fences and hedges less than 4' high may be located within the required front yard, except fences that are more than 50% solid shall not be permitted within 15' of a front lot line. II. 1506 SPRUCE STREET Matthew S. Pemble-applicant/owner, requests a variance to permit the creation of a detached garage with a 0.5'side yard setback. Section 30-19 (B)(4)(b)(v) of the Oshkosh Municipal Code: R-2 Two Family Residence District requires a 2.5' side yard setback. 'llr=--' {)O-rW:--6* AVEN HE ,~",,":11" ~..".......,_.......,......._...,....-......._.,-.-_.._._,.._---- .....- It should be noted this is the second hearing for this application. The original hearing occurred on May 9, 2007 and was denied 0-5. Charles Showers-applicant has altered his proposal and is requesting the second hearing. Charles Showers-applicant, Kelly J. Burnett-owner, request the following variances to permit the creation of a new single-story office building with off-street parking: Required (Section 30-35 (B)(l)(c)) I) 25' transitional yard setback (north) II) 19'3" transitional yard setback (west) III) 19'3" transitional yard setback (south) Proposed 14' transitional yard setback 4' 1 0" transitional yard setback 10' transitional yard setback Required (Section 30-36 C(3)(e)) IV) 18' parking space depth Proposed 16' parking space depth 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 ST AFF REPORT BOARD OF APPEALS JUNE 13, 2007 ITEM III: 601 W. 6TH AVENUE GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND It should be noted this is the second hearing for this application. The original hearing occurred on May 9, 2007 and was denied 0-5. Charles Showers-applicant has altered his proposal and is requesting the second hearing. Charles Showers-applicant, Kelly J. Burnett-owner, request the following variances to permit the creation of a new single-story office building with off-street parking: Required (Section 30-35 (B)(I)(c)) I) 25' transitional yard setback (north) II) 19'3" transitional yard setback (west) III) 19'3" transitional yard setback (south) Proposed 14' transitional yard setback 4' 10" transitional yard setback 1 0' transitional yard setback Required (Section 30-36 C(3)( e)) IV) 18' parking space depth Proposed 16' parking space depth The subject 0.14 acre (approx. 6,155 sq. ft.) property is zoned C-3 Central Commercial District and is located on the southwest corner at the intersection of W. 6th Avenue and Ohio Street. The lot is rectangular in shape (approximately 68'x 99') and the general area can be characterized as mixed commercial-residential. ANALYSIS 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, setbacks, 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 bu rdensome." 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 variances from the Zoning Ordinance to allow the development of a new single-story office building with off-street parking as well as an attached storage/garage facility. The petitioner is a prospective buyer of the subject property and has included the granting of these variances as a "condition of sale". The applicant's proposed plans are to raze the existing buildings located at 601 W. 6th Avenue because of their dilapidated condition. According to City Records, the existing two-story, 2,000 sq. ft. principal structure was built in 1894 and the existing utility shed (176 sq. ft.) and detached garage (484 sq. ft.) were constructed in 1950. According to the applicant, the variance requests will not have an adverse effect on surrounding properties because the existing build and garages are in very poor condition. The existing garages and principal structure are located up to the property's lot lines. Conversely, the proposed garage and principal structure will be setback farther away from the lot line. The applicant is also proposing a new maintenance free fence (details such as materials and design have not been submitted) along the entire west and south lot 1 STAFF REPORT ITEM III . '. ; '~: .,2- , o' BOARD OF APPEALS . JUNE 13, 2007 lines to enhance surrounding properties and mitigate the visual impact of the commercial structure on abutting residential properties. In the applicant's opinion, the special conditions related to the subject lot that do not apply to surrounding lots are the conflicting R-2 and C-3 dis~icts. The applicant believes hardships will be imposed if the variances are not granted because the existing building will n~ed to be razed eventually due to the major structural problems. The proposed new single-story building would be setback 14' from the north lot line, 10' from the south lot line, 0' from the east lot line, and feature ~pproximatelyl,584 sq. ft. of office space with an additional 780 sq. ft. of attached garage/storage area. Vehicular access to the property would occur off of W. 6th Avenue. A four stall off street parking area is proposed to the west of the office building, which would be setback 14' from the north lot line and 4.8' from the west property line. A large asphalt driveway/platform area would be used to access the garage and storage facility. The applicant is also proposing a new fence along the south and west property lines to mitigate the visual impact of the commercial use on the abutting residential properties. A 19'3"open space/side yard area is proposed in the southwest portion of the property as well. Under normal C-3 Central Commercial District circumstances, the subject lot would not have any front, rear, or side yard setback standards to comply with. However, the code makes an exception for properties that share front yard block frontage with a residential district and thus requires a 25' minimum. This provision only applies to the subject property's front yard (north) along W. 6th Avenue. The property's front yard (east) along Ohio Street is 0' due to the rest of the block frontage being in the C-3 District also. The remaining side yard (west) and rear yard (south) setbacks are transitional yard requirements due to the abutting residential uses. Since the original hearing for this item, the applicant has made substantial revisions to the proposal that have effectively addressed most of the concerns staff and the board raised. Foremost, the proposed 14' north property line setback(for parking and the building) will create a more uniform sightline with existing development along the block frontage. Likewise, the proposed setback will allow motorists to have a more clear view at the intersection of W. 6th Avenue and Ohio Street. Staff also believes the current proposal maximizes other open space areas on-site that will assist with aesthetics as well as storm water drainage and snow storage when needed. Essentially, the applicant has minimized the intrusion into the setbacks and still allowed for a functional site layout for business purposes. Staff also does not object to the request for a reduction in stall depth from 18' to 16' because the side yard (west) will allow parked vehicles to utilize a 2' overhang if necessary that will not interfere or affect the abutting property. Staff still has reservations about the proposal's architectural design since the applicant has not submitted any building elevations. This portion of the project will be particularly important since the subject property is a highly visible comer lot with 90' frontage alon* a north-south collector street (i.e. Ohio Street). The existing building fronts W. 6 A venue and provides minimal architectural substance along Ohio Street. As such, staff strongly suggests the applicant place its architectural emphasis on front yard/side street elevations to enhance the appearance of the development. 2 ST AFF REPORT ITEM III -3- BOARD OF APPEALS JUNE 13, 2007 RECOMMENDATION Based on the information provided within this report, staff recommends approval of the variances requested. 3 ;'"" Plens:t: Tvpe 0)' Print in BLACIC INIC ~ 07i~Kb7T~ Ol/l11EW"ll:1l Re.turn to: Department of COl1llllunity Development 215 Church Ave.. .P.O. Bux 1130 Oshkosh, W[ 54903-11.30 Cl'TY OF OSHKOSH APYLICATION :FOR VAIUANCE Please submit a 'complete l'elJJ'oCtncible site l)lan (mnxim Ull1 si:,u:. 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 oi'ParceJ A.Hected: ~O/ it) ~ t:.a ,.41-'(. C:~ Petitioner: (~);t1 r Ie s C:;);()tLJt::_ iZ S Home Phone.: d33'- or) / .3 Petitioner's Address: [(:)/9 /1...). / 9.;HJ /9-1)(,. Qs;&kL'2Sd-\Vol'lc Phone: c?? I /.p - q J ,3!! Sigllntur~H.equirec1: C~/.4~;- Dnte: 5~.A3 -07 ~ Owner (il' not petitioner): -K....I~t ~:A/~ Home Phone: O'il'ner's Address: 6"'0l4\o. ;\)~y~ ~" D~ Vi'orkl)hone: Signature l~equired: '7 ~#s:J- --~ .... Date: S /:f) Lfj/ t:J 7 In order to be grante.d a variance, each applicnnt must be able to prove tbat an unnecessary hardship would be created if the variance is not granted, The bmden ofpl'Oving an unnecessary hardship rests upon the applicant. The Elltached sheet provides information on what constitutes a hnrclship. (Attach additional sheets, if necessary, to provide the information requested. Additional information may be requested as needed.) 1, Explain your proposed plans nncl '\\'l1y you Hre requesting a variance: Our proposed plans are to raze the existing buildings located at 601 W. 6th Ave. Oshkosh. We are requesting the variances because of the existing buildings structural problems. The existing buildings structures are in very poor condition and are beyond repairing or replacing. A new office building is being proposed that will meet all city codes and standards. SUBMI".ED BY APPLICANT 5 /\01 5)P~ 2. Describe hovv the vuriance woulc1not have an adverse elIect on sllrrollnding properties: The variances will not have any adverse effect to the surrounding properties because the existing structures are in very poor condition and are beyond repairing. The existing structures are located on the front and back properties lot lines. The proposed new office building will enhance and ilnprove the surrounding properties and be taken off of the properties lot lines to improved the existing conditions. A new maintenance free fence will also be installed along the south & west lot lines to further enhance the surrounding properties. 3. Describe the special conditions that apply to your lot or structure that do not apply to surrollnding lots or structures: The surrounding lots are of mixed zoning, from C-3 Central Commercial District to R-2 Two Family Residential District. The pro.perties existing structures and lo.t and including the surrounding structures and lo.ts do. not meet any of today' s new standards and ~xisting co.des. Any of the existing structures and lots in the surro.unding areas which need to. be razed or renovated will need variances. Our propose"d plan has kept the variances to the very minimum and have. improved the existing conditio.ns. 4. Describe the hardship that would result if your vnriance were not granted: Our first proposal was denied because of some co.ncerns the board members had. Since then we have worked with the city planners and addressed the boards reco.mmendatio.ns. We have taken the structure and Inoved it off o.f 6th Ave. so there is adequate visibility. There were also. concerns regarding the lack of grass areas and to.o much asphalt. We have taken cut all of the excess asphalt and replaced it with grass areas. The lo.t now consists of34% grass areas. We have worked hard to keep all of the variances to a minimUlTI. The hardship is the existing structures have major structural problelns. If the variances were not granted, sooner or later the buildings will need to be razed. SUBMIITED BY APPLICANT 6 -5 ~ Ohl~t ... "" 1 () 0' II eW & I !;,nce Ma.irrteVlCJ.i1Ce r~ee pJ -2tt' 210 ~ (\/ eW o{f)~ e. Bu.;/din;1 . . G a.."" d.}l e.. -f5 30' 51-0 Va;1E2; . bro} b 8. Lf I t, -1-11)/1/; SUBMllTED BY APPLICANT [< >-w T VARIANCES FOR OFFICE BUILDING 601 W. 6TH AVE. OSHKOSH SOUTH-19'-3" TO 10' NEW BUILDING NORTH-25' TO 14' NEW BUILDING NORTH-25' TO 14' PARKING WEST-19'-3" TO 4.8' PARKING STALL DEPTH 18' TO 16' PARKING SUBMI1TED BY APPLICANT 8 75.45' 50.2' 50.0' ._-_._-........_-----_._.~ IS map IS nel er a e map nor a survey and it is not intended to be used as One. This drawing is a compilation of records,data and infonnation located in various city, county and state offices and other sourres 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 discrepencies are found. please contact the City of Oshkosh. Created by - kjg 0) 126.92' 37.5' 50.0' ...... (]) ~ ...... CJ) o ..c o 50.0' 50.0' . 50.0' 50.0' 50.03' ~ r--- en 0) 0) 50.01' b <.0 o 00 b <.0 o 00 49.99' -~-:-- 50.0' co o ""'" 601 W 6th Ave Scale: 1 "= '60 10 b o 0) b o 0) N A OS/29/2007 Source: City of Oshkosh GIS BOA 601 W 6th AVE 06/13/2007 DECKER MR/MRS GARRY H 1113 OREGON ST OSHKOSH WI 54902 6481 DECKER GARRY H 1113 OREGON ST OSHKOSH WI 54902 6481 600/616 Ohio St LEMBERGER JOHN J 904 BAUMAN ST OSHKOSH WI 54902 3427 518 Ohio St. KAUFMANN RICHARD L 610 W 6TH AVE OSHKOSH WI 54902 5845 TRITT LEE J 270 SUNNYBROOK DR OSHKOSH WI 54904 600 W 6th Ave PHILLIPS/P PHILLI~S LORETTA M 609 W 6TH AVE OSHKOSH WI 54902 5844 BURNETT KELLY J 524 W NEW YORK AVE OSHKOSH WI 54901 DETTLAFF THOMAS V 608 W 7TH AVE OSHKOSH WI 54902 5836 SPARR INVESTMENTS LLC 103 HIGH AVE OSHKOSH WI 54901 4808 602 W 7th Ave CHARLES SHOWERS 619 W 19TH AVE OSHKOSH WI 54902 KELLY BURNETT 524 W NEW YORK AVE OSHKOSH WI 54901 601 W 6th Ave 9 515 ~ .1' ~ ~ ~ ~ ...W 651 .. -. -W-;--- us map IS Del er a ega Y fetOr e map nor a survey Bnd it is not intended to be used as one. This drawing is II 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 re~ sponsible for any inaccurades herein contained. I r discrepencies aTe found, please contact the City of Oshkosh. 601 W 6th Ave N A Created by - kjg Scale: 1 "= '150 OS/29/2007 Source:. City of Oshkosh GIS 11 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 re- sponsible for any Inaccuracies herein contained. If dlscrepencies are found, please contact the City of Oshkosh. Created by - kjg 601 W 6th Ave ~ OJHKOfH DISCLAIMER ON THE WATER Scale: 1" - 60' City of Oshkosh Department of Community Development 04/20/07 12 14 .. '-..i",;."""~t","'.i,,''',i?,,'v;';',';' Findings of Facts: Removal of the old age will eliminate any safety issues. No adverse efl to the neighborhood. Position ouse would make it difficult to vperties of 1215 and 1221 W Bent Motion by Ms. to approve the request for the creation of a detached gar yard setback with the fo ing conditions: a, Gutters are to be installed to pre Ave. Motion carried 5-0. Ayes-Cornell/N' son/Penney/Carpenter/Hen , Nayes-None, Seconded by Cornell. I III. 601 W 6th Ave i I It should be noted this is the second hearing for this application. : The original hearing occurred on May 9, 2007 and was denied 0-5. Charles Showers-applicant has altered hIs proposal and is requesting the second hearing. I I Charles Showers-applicant, Kelly J. Burnett-owner, requesti the following variances to permit the creation of a new single-story office building with off-street parking: Required (Section 30-35 (B)(1)(c)) I) 25' transitional yard setback (north) II) ] 9'3" transitional yard setback (west) III) ] 9'3" transitional yard setback (south) Proposed 14' transitional yard setback 4' 1 0" transitional yard setback ] 0' transitional yard setback Required (Section 30-36 C(3)(e)) IV) 18' parking space depth Proposed 16' parking space depth The subject 0.14 acre (approx. 6,155 sq. ft.) property is zoned C-3 Central Commercial District and is located on the southwest corner at the intersection of W. 6th Avenue and Ohio Street. The lot is rectangular in shape (approximately 68'x 90') and the general area can be characterized as mixed com merci al- resi dential. Mr. Muehrer presented the item. Mr. Charles Showers, 619 W. 19th Ave., applicant said the previous drawing for the building was torn up. He had met with Todd Muehrer and David Buck, Planners with the City of Oshkosh and together they had created something even better than what had been previously proposed. All the asphalt that was not going to be used for driveway/parking was eliminated and turned into grass. He feels they addressed all the concerns that the board had. Mr. Carpenter asked if Mr. Showers was now the owner. Mr. Showers said his son Mark, is actually the owner. Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes 9 June 13,2007 Mr. Muehrer asked if Kelly Burnett was still the owner. M r. Showers said, no, they closed on the property the previous Friday because they were concerned that Mr. Burnett would decide to increase the price. Mr. Penney asked what is the existing property's use. Mr. Showers said it is an old building, Someone used to live upstairs but there was no business downstairs due to the lack of plumbing on the fitst floor. A renovator did take a look at the building but he said it could not be saved. A meeting with an architect is scheduled for next week to create the actual plans. Mr. Nielsen reviewed the old design versus the new design. He commented that moving the garage to the backside improved the view by adding more green space. The office space is now 66' x 24', making it longer than the previously submitted plan of26' x 52' and the garage was 26'x32' but is now 26'x 30'. It fits into the area well. The Ohio Street area needs revitalization and this would be a good kick-start. It is laid out very well. Mr. Cornell commented that the area is definitely improved with the added green space on all four corners. It is always better to be able to get away from asphalt. Mr. Carpenter agreed that the result is greatly improved. He was pleased that Mr. Showers worked with City staff to create something that could be recommended to them. He asked staff if there was a reason why one side has 4'8" setback and Ohio Street has none. Mr. Muehrer said there is 1;10 setback requirement on Ohio St. , Mr. Carpenter said he is always concerned about blind corners. Mr. Muehrer explained that the corner is a controlled intersection so there is not a problem with vision for drivers. If it were not a controlled intersection there would be an issue. M r. Carpenter commented that he could see that it is better to have grass on other sides than on Ohio St. .,. Mr. Muehrer said reducing the number of variance requests was a major concern. Since there is no setback requirement on the Ohio Street si~ it was decided to move the building closest to Ohio St. so that more green space could be on the west side of the building. ... Mr. Nielsen asked if Mr. Showers was only planning 6n one door. Mr. Showers said there will only be one door for business traffic but there will be a second door coming out of the office in the back. Mr. Penney asked if there would be an entry on Ohio St. Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes 10 June] 3, 2007 I Mr. Showers said no. He commented further that there will be construction to widen Ohio St and the sidewalk size will be reduced. Sixth St will also be under construction up to 30 feet from the corner. We know we will be in a bad spot because of the construction but we want that corner. Ms. Hentz said she will support the request and thanked the applicant for his persistence to get the project approved and for working closely with city staff. Ms. Hentz thanked staff as well for putting in the time with the applicant necessary to have a positive result. Often, people are turned down by the board and leave disgruntled and don't pursue solving the issues as Mr. Showers did. Mr. Showers said he was very impressed with Todd Muehrer and David Buck for their hard work and commented on how they had worked through their lunch hour. He extended a personal thanks to them. Mr. Penney moved to approve the request as presented. Seconded by Mr. Carpenter. Motion approved 5-0. Ayes-Cornell/Nielson/Penney/Carpenter/Hentz. Nays-None. Findings of Fact: Removing dangerous 'building. There will be increased tax base. With no plumbing the building is useless. No adverse effect to the area. The least number a/variances were used to accomplish the goal. OTHER :BUSINESS --, As a fo up to the meeting, Ms. Hentz asked that when there is a second or third review of an it at the previous submissions a results be included in the staff report so that the history of the request can b viewed along with the new submission. es and Regulations for the Board of Appeals" Appeals (BZA). Zoning Appeals. Ms. Hentz said she also had se It both ways and it is listed as BZA meeting on agenda posted downstairs by the elevator. She has experie people getting the Board of Appeals confused with the rd of Review. She agreed o Board of Zoning Appeals would be less confusing to the general pu 'c. ed if the change needed to be made in the form of a motion or could just be by gener Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes I I June 13,2007 .......................................................................'..................