HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-294JULY 28, 2009 09 -251 09 -294 PENDING
JULY 14, 2009 RESOLUTION
CARRIED 7 -0 LOST LAID OVER WITHDRAWN )
AS AMENDED
PURPOSE: APPROVE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION
OF SINGLE FAMILY CONDOMINIUM UNITS AT 1958 OREGON
STREET
INITIATED BY: DEL TRITT CONSTRUCTION, PETITIONER
PLAN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Approved w /conditions
BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Oshkosh that a planned
development for construction of single family condominiums, a neighborhood gazebo,
common green areas, and associated amenities, per the attached, is hereby approved
with the following conditions:
1) Base standard modification to allow multiple single - family residential units on a
single parcel.
2) Private roadway is realigned to line up with West 20th Avenue intersection, as
approved by the City's Department of Transportation.
3) Paved surface pedestrian walk(s) of an appropriate width from the center of the
development connecting to Oregon Street is provided.
4) Base standard modification to allow a 15 foot setback from Oregon Street for the
development sign.
5) Landscape plan is reviewed for appropriateness and approved by the City's
Department of Community Development prior to building permit issuance.
6) Rain gardens /stormwater management system is reviewed and approved by the
City's Department of Public Works.
7) Traffic Signal Installed and Paid by Developer
Of HKOIH
ON THE WATER
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Common Council
FROM: Jackson Kinr y ��
Director of Co ity Development
DATE: July 9, 2009
RE: Approve Planned Development for the Creation of Eight Single - Family
Condominium Units at 1958 -2008 Oregon Street
BACKGROUND /SUBJECT PROPERTY
The area encompassed in the PD request is located on the east side of Oregon Street directly
across from the West 20th Avenue intersection and consists of two full parcels (1958 Oregon
Street & 2000 Oregon Street) and a portion of a third (2008 Oregon Street). The parcel at 1958
Oregon Street contains a two - family residence, 2000 Oregon is vacant and 2008 Oregon contains
a single- family home. The property at 2008 is proposed to be divided and the rear 193 feet be
combined with both 1958 Oregon Street and 2000 Oregon Street, thereby creating a single parcel
of approximately 1.5 acres
ANALYSIS
The proposed development includes eight single- family condominium structures, approximately
400 linear feet of private roadway, a community gazebo, multiple rain gardens and berm along
Oregon Street and is in conjunction with a rezoning request to add a Planned Development
Overlay District to the subject area. The condominiums are designed as single detached units
each with a two -stall garage and space for parking two vehicles within the driveway. The
structures will be single story with garages and entries in the front with a porch on the rear
fagade. Vehicular access will be provided by means of a private drive off Oregon Street that will
be aligned with West 20 Avenue at the intersection with pedestrian walks extending from the
center of the development connecting to Oregon Street. Signage is proposed at the west end of
the property parallel to Oregon Street at the West 20 Avenue intersection with stormwater
management proposed in the form of multiple rain gardens situated throughout the development
site. Landscaping plans have not yet been submitted, but will focus on providing screening and
privacy for the units.
FISCAL IMPACT
No additional services will be required to be provided or will services need to be extended to the
site, given the fact needed services are already available and being provided in the immediately
adjacent area.
Attached to this Memo is a communication from Transportation Director Chris Strong which
reviews traffic control issues pertaining to the location of the access drive for this development at
the intersection of W. 20` Avenue and Oregon Street.
RECOMMENDATION
The Plan Commission approved of this request at its June 16, 2009 meeting.
Approved,
�.- ?c
City Manager
V of Oshkosh - Transportation D
926 Dempsey
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Oshkosh, WI 54902 (920) 232 -5342 (92
MEMORANDUM
Mark Rohloff, City Manager
Christopher Strong, P.E., Director of Transportation
July 22, 2009
( 0
OlHKO1H
ON THE WATER
5343 fax
TRAFFIC CONTROL REQUIREMENTS FOR DRIVEWAY SERVING
PROPOSED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AT 1958 OREGON STREET
Per your request, I have reviewed the proposed single - family condominium unit development at
1958 -2008 Oregon Street to see its effects on the existing signalized intersection. Currently, a
traffic signal controls traffic approaching from the west, north and south. The development's
proposed access to the city street system is a driveway which would align with 20` Avenue. This
has raised a couple of questions: 1) what, if any, traffic control improvements are needed at this
intersection to accommodate this development, and 2) to what extent the developer should pay
for these improvements.
Traffic Impacts of Proposed Development
The Institute of Transportation Engineers' Trip Generation Manual provides estimates for the
number of trips that might be expected for various types of development. These estimates are
based on hundreds of empirical studies around the country. The manual estimates that a
condominium development of this size would generate on average 50 -55 trips per day, or perhaps
5 trips in a given peak hour period. By comparison, a 2006 traffic count showed 10,500 vehicles
per weekday entering the intersection of Oregon Street and 20` Avenue. The additional traffic
associated with this development is, therefore, comparatively minimal.
The proposed access to Oregon Street is a driveway, and not a public street. Therefore, traffic
leaving the development would be required by law to yield to other traffic flows, even without
the installation of a stop sign or adding traffic signal indications for traffic leaving the
development. It is also important to note that the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices,
which provides national standards for traffic signals, does not require that all approaches to a
signalized intersection be signalized. The language from the MUTCD is as follows:
"STOP signs shall not be used in conjunction with any traffic control signal operation,
except in either of the following cases:
City of Oshkosh — Department of Transportation
Traffic Control Requirements for Driveway Serving
Proposed Planned Development at 1958 Oregon Street
If the signal indication for an approach is a flashing red at all times; or
If a minor street or driveway is located within or adjacent to the area controlled by the
traffic control signal, but does not require separate traffic signal control because an
extremely low potential for conflict exists."
I believe this development's driveway falls within the range of "extremely low potential for
conflict ".
There is a similar example in the City at the intersection of Algoma Boulevard and Murdock
Avenue, another T- shaped intersection which has a proximate driveway. In this case, the
driveway has neither a stop sign nor a signal.
Cost of Intersection U porade
If it is decided that the driveway should be signalized, then the cost of this upgrade needs to be
determined, along with who should pay for it.
Our standard for pricing out the construction cost of signals has been to include materials,
equipment rental, and fees assessed by others (for example, boring costs). We do not include the
cost of labor or use of city equipment in the construction cost, as these are included in the city's
operations and capital budgets, respectively. Our Electric Division supervisor estimated the
materials cost of signalizing this driveway at approximately $3,300. The cost of materials to
signalize an entire intersection could be in the range of $40,000 to $60,000, so the marginal cost
to upgrade this intersection is relatively low.
The decision on who should pay for traffic signals is often a political one. If a signal is warranted
due to new development, many communities will seek to have the developer pay for some or all
of the costs of constructing the signal. The City has applied this practice previously. For example,
a new signal was installed on Koeller Street to accommodate the driveways to Target and
Fazoli's. The 1997 agreement approved by the Council established that the developer would pay
for half of the signal's capital cost, with the City paying for the balance of capital costs as well as
future operations and maintenance costs.
The case with the Oregon Street development differs from the Koeller Street development in a
couple of key ways. First, the Koeller Street development involved a new signal, which was
believed to be warranted based on the traffic generation of the new commercial development. In
the case of the proposed Oregon Street development, a signal has already been installed for
reasons unrelated to this particular development, and would continue to exist even if this
development did not occur. Second, the traffic impacts of the developments are far different.
Traffic counts conducted in 2006 showed some 4,500 vehicles per day using the driveways to
access that particular Koeller Street signal. As noted earlier, the traffic associated with the
Oregon Street development would be 1 -2 percent of that level. Therefore, I don't believe that the
signal agreement regarding the Target/Fazoli's signal is an appropriate model for this situation.
City of Oshkosh — Department of Transportation
Traffic Control Requirements for Driveway Serving
Proposed Planned Development at 1958 Oregon Street
Recommendation
In summary, based on the low traffic impact of this development, I do not believe it is necessary
from an engineering perspective to signalize the development's driveway onto Oregon Street.
The Common Council may elect to make signalizing the driveway a condition for the
development. The Common Council established a cost - sharing agreement for installation of the
signal at the Koeller Street driveways to Target/Fazoli's. I believe that the differences between
the Koeller Street signal and this present case are significant enough that the terms of the earlier
agreement should not be applied to this current case. Since there is no engineering or regulatory
need to signalize this approach, I recommend that no such condition be put on the developer.
City of Oshkosh — Department of Transportation
ITEM: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR THE CREATION OF EIGHT SINGLE -
FAMILY CONDOMINIUM UNITS AT 1958 -2008 OREGON STREET
Plan Commission meeting of June 16, 2009
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: Del Tritt
Owner: Del Tritt Construction LLC, William C Nolte and Richard /Jackie Spanbauer
Actions Requested:
Approval of a development plan for a development that includes eight single family condominium structures,
approximately 400 linear feet of private roadway, a community gazebo, multiple rain gardens and berm along
Oregon Street.
Applicable Ordinance Provisions:
The Zoning Ordinance establishes criteria and guidelines for the PD overlay district in Section 30 -33 (A)(1).
Property Location and Type:
The area encompassed in the PD request is located on the east side of Oregon Street directly across from the
West 20th Avenue intersection. The subject area consists of two full parcels (1958 Oregon Street & 2000
Oregon Street) and a portion of a third (2008 Oregon Street). The parcel at 1958 Oregon Street contains a two -
family residence, 2000 Oregon is vacant and 2008 Oregon contains a single - family home. The property at 2008
is proposed to be divided and the rear 193 feet be combined with both 1958 Oregon Street and 2000 Oregon
Street thereby creating a single parcel of approximately 1.5 acres
Subject Site
Existin Land Use.
Zonin
Sin le &Two Famil Residences
R -2
Adjacent Land Use and Zonin
E.kisting Uses -"
Zonin
North ._.........
_ Single - Family .... ........................... ................_. _._._._._._._............ ............................._. _._._......._
R 2 ................. ._._ ............... _ .... --_..... .._.__........_._....._... _._..
South
_Residences
Single- Family Residences
_..._._._..__.._... ---...----- ................. .........__._.._..----._._._._......_._....._...._....._
R -2 . .... ................. _ . _ ..-- ------ --- - _-------------
East
Single- Family_Residences
R 2 ..._.._.__........_...._._....._._.
West
Commercial (across Oregon)
C -2
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Recommendation
Land Use
10 Year Land Use Recommendation
Residential
20 Year Land Use Recommendation
Residential
ANALYSIS
The petitioner has a request, in a separate action, to rezone the proposed planned development area R -2 zoning
designation with a Planned Development Overlay District to create multiple single -unit condominium buildings
on a single property.
Design/Layout
The proposed plan includes development of eight single- family single -story condominium structures. Density is
comparable to that of a typical single family development at approximately 5.3 units per acre (one unit per 8,200
square feet), which is approximately 20% less dense than would be permitted for single - family homes within the
regular R -2 zoning designation (6 units per acre, one unit per 7,200 square feet). Green space constitutes 56%
of the site while impervious surfaces (roads, driveways & buildings) constitute approximately 44% of the total
land area.
The condominiums are designed as single -unit detached units, each with a two -stall garage and space for
parking two vehicles within the driveway. The driveways are proposed to have an approximate width of 20 feet
wide with access onto the private roadway. The structure placement is designed with shorter setbacks, most of
which meet district setback standards with the exception of the rear yard setback (east side) which is short of the
required 25 foot setback by three feet, thereby requiring a base standard modification to allow a 22 foot rear
setback. Staff is not in support of this setback base standard modification because the additional three feet of
setback can easily be attained by minimally modifying the location of structures on the site. The most obvious
avenue to achieve these three feet is to decrease the separation between units or setback between the west lot
line and Units 1 and 4. The development plan also includes a neighborhood gazebo and common green areas,
intended to help stormwater runoff and to add neighborhood feel.
Building Elevations
The single - family units are designed as single story structures. The home design places the garages and entries
in the front of the structure and includes a porch on the rear fagade. The application includes three different
models of homes ranging in size from 1,200 to 1,600 square feet. The petitioner states that the detail and style
of the units will create an aesthetically pleasing development offering an alternative to multiple family
condominium living.
Access
Vehicular access to the development will be provided by means of a 24 foot private drive that tapers to a 20 foot
private drive off Oregon Street. The proposed curb cut is offset to the north of the intersection of West 20`
Avenue approximately 50 feet. Staff is concerned with this offset as it creates an unsafe situation as turning
movements become convoluted. Additionally, concern was expressed that if a median is placed on Oregon
Street in the future, it would force a right -in right -out situation for vehicular movement into and out of the
development.
Internal pedestrian walks are not included within the design. Staff believes that walks, at least five foot wide
connecting to Oregon Street should be included within the site design, possibly along the side of the private
roadway to provide protected /safe pedestrian access to the public street. Safe appropriate pedestrian access is an
important part of any development design and is more evident by the narrow and curved 20 foot drive lane,
which has potential to foster pedestrian — vehicle conflict due to poor site lines, especially after landscape
installation.
Siege
A subdivision/development sign is proposed at the west end of the property parallel to Oregon Street at the West
20 Avenue intersection. Details of the sign are not included in the application packet but the site plan depicts
the sign to be setback approximately two feet from the property line. Zoning permits a subdivision or
development sign with a maximum area of 16 square feet but requires a 25 foot setback from the right -of -way
line so the placement as proposed will require a base standard modification. Staff believes that the two foot
setback is inappropriate in context with the setback of neighboring homes and recommends that the sign be
setback a minimum of 15 feet, which is consistent with the setback of the homes fronting Oregon Street.
Item -1958 -2008 Oregon St PD
Landscaping
A landscape plan has not been submitted with the proposal but the petitioner has indicated in their narrative that
landscaping will be an integral part of the project focused on providing screening and privacy for the individual
units. A "green wall" of vegetation and berm is also proposed to add privacy for the development from West
20 Street. Staff believes that the landscaping will be designed in an appropriate manner but suggests that a
landscape plan be reviewed and approved by the Department of Community Development prior to building
permit issuance.
Stormwater Detention
Stormwater management is proposed in the form of multiple rain gardens situated throughout the development
site. Formal erosion control, drainage and stormwater management plans must be approved by the Department
of Public Works and staff suggests that the rain gardens /stormwater management system be reviewed and
approved by the Department of Public Works as a condition of approval.
RECOMMENDATION /CONDITIONS
The Department of Community Development recommends approval of the Development Plan for the
condominium development with the following conditions:
1) Base standard modification to allow multiple single - family residential units on a single parcel.
2) Private roadway is realigned to line up with West 20 Avenue Intersection, as approved by the
City's Department of Transportation.
3) Pedestrian walk(s) connecting to Oregon Street is provided.
4) Base standard modification to allow a 15 foot setback from Oregon Street for the development sign.
5) Landscape plan is reviewed for appropriateness and approved by the City's Department of
Community Development prior to building permit issuance.
6) Rain gardens /stormwater management system is reviewed and approved by the City's Department
of Public Works.
The Plan Commission approved of the planned development with conditions. The following is the Plan
Commission's discussion on this item.
Mr. Buck presented the item and reviewed the site and surrounding sites and existing uses on these sites. He
explained that the zoning change would allow the petitioner to construct eight single- family condominiums on
the property and possibly nine if space allows. He reviewed the site plan which is based on the eight unit
concept and commented that the rear yard setback (east side) is short of the required 25 foot setback by three
feet. This would require a base standard modification however since the required setback could be met by
moving a few things on the site plan slightly, the base standard modification is not supported by staff. He
reviewed the private drive off of Oregon Street which could create conflicts at the intersection of W. 20
Avenue and Oregon Street therefore staff is suggesting that the private drive be realigned to lineup with West
20 Avenue intersection and either traffic lights be installed facing east to control traffic coming from the
development or a right -in /right -out only access by allowed for the private drive. He further commented that no
pedestrian access is included on the plans connecting to Oregon Street which staff is suggesting should be added
and the signage is being allowed a base standard modification to allow it to be a 15 foot setback from Oregon
Street which is comparable to the setbacks for most of the homes in this neighborhood.
Mr. Thoms questioned if the 25 setback for the rear yard needed to be addressed in the conditions.
Mr. Buck responded that since a base standard modification was not being granted for a reduced setback, it was
not necessary to add as a condition as the development would have to meet code requirements.
Mr. McHugh inquired how the intersection of 20 Avenue and Oregon Street will affect the site.
Item -1958 -2008 Oregon St PD
Mr. Buck responded that the City Department of Transportation is requesting that the private roadway be
realigned to line up with 20 Avenue so the site plan will have to be modified to accommodate this adjustment.
Mr. Bowen asked if the petitioner was considering adding an additional unit on the site, is he going to be
acquiring the remaining part of the parcel at 2008 Oregon Street to achieve this.
Mr. Buck replied that he would not be acquiring that home, but moving the private roadway over will give him
additional space to potentially include an additional unit on the site.
Mr. Bowen questioned if the addition of traffic signals facing the east on Oregon Street would need to be added
as a condition of approval.
Chris Strong, Director of Transportation, stated that since an existing signal is already at this intersection, the
City would add the necessary equipment to have signals facing east to control traffic from the private roadway.
Mr. Monte inquired who would bear the costs for the additional signal.
Mr. Strong responded that in this case he thought it should be a city expense as most of the infrastructure is
already in place.
Mr. Borsuk stated that at one time W. 20` Avenue was being considered to be officially mapped to extend
through to Main Street which never transpired. This concept was a good infill use of the undeveloped lot that
still remains there.
Mr. Monte questioned if these items could be voted on as one request.
Mr. Fojtik responded affirmatively.
Mr. Monte also questioned if the development would be constructed at grade as the lot presently seems slightly
lower than the property surrounding it.
Mr. Burich replied that a grading and drainage plan would be required to be approved by the Department of
Public Works.
Del Tritt, 6228 County Road N, Pickett, petitioner for the project, gave a brief history of the property and stated
that he has experience with infill projects as he has completed a number of them in the city in the past. He
further commented that 1958 Oregon is in desperate condition and needs to be demolished. He explained that
the grading and rain gardens system will be designed to accommodate any stormwater runoff and that he found
all the conditions on the request acceptable other than he would prefer not to install sidewalks in the
development as he did not see the need for them. He commented that there were numerous existing properties
in the city without sidewalks and distributed photos of some of the examples of which he was speaking.
Mr. Fojtik commented that he felt this was a very creative use for a difficult site to develop.
Ms. Propp asked if the petitioner had any issues with the relocation of the private road.
Mr. Tritt responded that if the City was willing to cover the costs of adding the traffic signal, revising the site
plan to realign the roadway with W. 20 Avenue was conceivable. He commented that he would still have some
curve to the road internally for privacy reasons.
Mr. Bowen again asked if the petitioner was considering also purchasing the home on the remaining portion of
the parcel at 2008 Oregon Street.
Item -1958 -2008 Oregon St PD
Mr. Tritt responded that the home was a separate entity from his development and he did not have intentions of
purchasing that portion of the parcel.
David Meisel, 178 W. 21 Avenue, stated that a wood fence exists along the rear line of his property and he was
concerned that the developer would be removing this fence.
Mr. Tritt responded that a wood board fence existed on both the south and east side of the site and he was
planning on continuing the wood board fence down the property line with comparable materials to match the
existing fence.
Mr. Meisel also voiced his concern with the stormwater runoff from the site as one of the rain gardens is to be
located directly behind his property and he had concerns if it would overflow onto his property in heavy rain.
Mr. Buck commented that the developer would have to have a grading and drainage plan approved for the
development by the Department of Public Works.
Mr. Gohde added that a site of one to three acres with less than 50% impervious surface would not be required
to install a formal detention area but would need to satisfy state requirements and submit a grading and drainage
plan for approval to ensure that stormwater runoff is leaving the site appropriately.
Mr. Tritt added that the rain gardens to be installed on the site have a stormwater outlet to prevent overflow.
Mr. Buck commented that it is the developer's responsibility to control stormwater runoff on his own property.
Mr. Gohde added that the developer also cannot block the natural flow of drainage from the site and needs to
control where the runoff is directed to which in this case would be to Oregon Street. He gave some further
explanation of requirements for stormwater drainage and grading of a newly developed site.
Mr. Monte questioned where the potential ninth unit would be located.
Mr. Tritt responded that he was not sure at this point if it would be feasible yet, but he was looking at placing it
on the north side of the drive as the private roadway would be moved to the south to line up with 20 Avenue.
Mr. Nollenberger commented that he could see the developer's point of view in regard to not installing
pedestrian walks within the development as it will serve very few people and it is not a commercial site.
Mr. Buck stated that without internal walks leading to the public sidewalks, it forces people to walk either on the
grass or in the roadway which could create a dangerous situation.
Mr. Thoms commented that it would be wiser to err on the side of safety and install the pedestrian walks.
Mr. Bowen was also in favor of the walks as the Comprehensive Plan recommends enhancing pedestrian
connectivity.
Mr. Borsuk commented that the pedestrian walkways would not have to be located along the private road but
could be an internal walkway through the development. He questioned if it would have to be five feet wide.
Mr. Buck responded that the five foot width would meet ADA requirements.
Mr. Monte stated that he did not support the pedestrian walks as the city does not have sidewalks installed on all
streets either.
Item -1958 -2008 Oregon St PD
Mr. Buck commented that staff reviews site plans for function over form and although there may be some older
areas of the city that do not have sidewalks installed currently, he does not anticipate any more streets being
developed without them.
Motion by Nollenberger to approve the zone change from R -2 to R -2PD and the planned development
for the creation of eight or nine single-family condominium units at 1958 -2008 Oregon Street as
requested with the following conditions for the zone change:
1) Land division /combination creating a single lot that matches zoning designation boundaries is
completed.
And the following conditions for the planned development revising condition 93 to only require
pedestrian walkways from the center of the development to Oregon Street:
1) Base standard modification to allow multiple single-family residential units on a single parcel.
2) Private roadway is realigned to line up with West 20 Avenue Intersection, as approved by the City's
Department of Transportation.
3) Asphalt surface pedestrian walk(s) of an appropriate width from the center of the development
connecting to Oregon Street is provided.
4) Base standard modification to allow a 15 foot setback from Oregon Street for the development sign.
5) Landscape plan is reviewed for appropriateness and approved by the City's Department of Community
Development prior to building permit issuance.
6) Rain gardens /stormwater management system is reviewed and approved by the City's Department of
Public Works.
Mr. Vajgrt commented that he felt that the type of surface for the pedestrian walks should be left up to the
developer.
Mr. Nollenberger agreed.
Mr. Thorns stated that he would not support this request if the pedestrian walks would not extend through the
entire development as it was not good planning.
Mr. Lowry commented that he did not see an issue with it not having walks throughout the development as long
as there was some walkway extending to Oregon Street.
Mr. Monte stated that he did not see the need for a walkway at the rear of the development either.
Mr. Nollenberger withdrew his previous motion with the amended condition regarding the walkway.
Motion by Nollenberger to remove condition 43 as originally stated.
Seconded by McHugh. Motion carried 9 -0.
Motion by Monte to amend condition 93 to be that a paved surface pedestrian walk(s) of an appropriate
width from the center of the development connecting to Oregon Street is provided.
Seconded by Borsuk.
Mr. Thorns stated that he felt that pedestrian walks should be part of any new development to ensure safe travel.
Mr. Borsuk agreed.
Mr. Monte commented that he did not see what an internal pedestrian walk accomplishes.
Item -1958 -2008 Oregon St PD
Mr. Burich stated that the intent of the condition was to provide a separate pedestrian way from the traffic lane
extending to the public sidewalk.
Mr. Monte commented that this would also add to the amount of impervious surface and decrease the amount of
greenspace on the site.
Motion carried 5 -4. Ayes- FojtikILowry/Propp /Monte /Nollenberger. Nays- Borsuk/Bowen/
Thoms /McHugh.
Motion by Thoms to approve the zone change from R -2 to R -2PD and the planned development for the
creation of eight or nine single-family condominium units at 1958 -2008 Oregon Street as requested with
the following conditions for the zone change:
1) Land division /combination creating a single lot that matches zoning designation boundaries is
completed.
And the following conditions for the planned development:
1) Base standard modification to allow multiple single-family residential units on a single parcel.
2) Private roadway is realigned to line up with West 20' Avenue Intersection, as approved by the City's
Department of Transportation.
3) A paved surface pedestrian walks) of an appropriate width from the center of the development
connecting to Oregon Street is provided.
4) Base standard modification to allow a 15 foot setback from Oregon Street for the development sign.
5) Landscape plan is reviewed for appropriateness and approved by the City's Department of Community
Development prior to building permit issuance.
6) Rain gardens /stormwater management system is reviewed and approved by the City's Department of
Public Works.
Seconded by Monte. Motion carried 9 -0.
Item - I958 -2008 Oregon St PD
City of Oshkosh Application
♦►► Planned Development Review
Of H ❑ Conditional Use Permit Review
ON THE WATER
* *PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT USING BLACK INK **
APPLICANT INFORMATION
SUBMIT TO:
Dept. of Community Developmer
215 Church Ave., P.O. Box 1130
Oshkosh, Wisconsin 54903 -1130
PHONE: (920) 236 -5059
Petitioner: T? e T'r t ++ + Date: S -o2b - 0 9
Petitioner's Address: 6 „? a CO R A Ill City: P t " Q_ k 2� State: Zip:.5
Telephone #: (qap) S P,9 - Fax: { ,) S }- 69 D Other Contact # or Email: c{-� -c._ &�;2 �r. rr�
779 —Coate'
Status of Petitioner (Please Check): ,'Owner ❑ Representative ❑ TTeenaannt_2 Prospective Buyer
"
Petitioner's Signature (required): x s �s� -��� Date:
OWNER INFORMATION
Owner(s): E2 t? ( — FM j� Co of ST r .%- 4 ' o K L LC Date:
Owner(s) Address: 66 F G Pei A) City: - State: W (Zip:
Telephone #: (Pb ) 5l D 9 Fax: (
Other Contact # or Email: t°_ e I/ �3 ? - G - o? P
Ownership Status (Please Check): ❑ Individual ❑ Trust ❑ Partnership ❑ Corporation
LLB
Property Owner Consent: (required)
By signature hereon, I/We acknowledge that City officials and/or employees may, in the performance of their functions, enter upon the
property to inspect or gather other information necessary to process this application. I also understand that all meeting dates are tentative
and may be postponed by the Planning Services Division for incomplete submissions or other administrative reasons.
Property Owner's Signature: �_4 2 _i —
Date: ✓ - 0 2 ,6 - 0 f
SITE INFORMATION
Address/Location of Proposed Project: 0?L 0 L � Parcel No. /i 0073oea
C ' / �a6&on
Proposed Project Type: f l o e /4- I R To o 00
Current Use of Property ? 6? $ r we vs T, a_ I CL n o[ yct_ «., /a n c� 4oning: ' 2-
Land Uses Surrounding Site: North: R eS r oQ �-►'� r a ,
South: PC e S t J Q T (
East: R_ e s i al e- P-4 t
West: G O !71 ✓Yl -e-f -C. (' Q- Q f 1~ a 2 s
* *Please note that a meeting notice will be mailed to all abutting property owners regarding your request.
➢ Application fees are due at time of submittal. Make check payable to City of Oshkosh.
➢ Please refer to the fee schedule for appropriate fee. FEE IS NON - REFUNDABLE
For more information please the City's website at www.ci. oshkosh. wi. us / Community _Development /Planning.htm
Staff 'L Date Rec'd L
7A
OWNER INFORMATION
Owner(s): CJ vvt M
j2O r-c-Q-1 " a P- o o
Owner(s) Address: '7 0 d' (1 t o lg City:
Telephone #: (% Y 6 — O o e R Fax:( ) Other Contact # or Email:
Ownership Status (Please Check): individual ❑ Trust ❑ Partnership ❑ Corporation
Date: 4 go - - 6 3
State: Zip: 5 q QO
Property Owner Consent: (required)
By signature hereon, I/We acknowledge that City officials and/or employees may, in the performance of their functions, enter upon the
property to inspect or gather other information necessary to process this application. I also understand that all meeting dates are tentative
and may be postponed by the Planning Services Division for incomplete submissions or other administrati ve reasons.
Property Owner's Signature: X �� � C - — n 04,�14 Date:
OWNER INFORMATION Ra. e-e-e- l - J y 0 la 70 op p
Owner(s):
&
Q 2
b a u- e ►—
Date: 5' -aB — 6 1
Owners) Address: 0 20 O
�' e 4 �.N
s
r 1
City: Q S h.�o SL
State: W i Zip: Sc' QD o2.
Telephone #: B.2 p) Ko2(o 3 O fT Fax: ( ) — — Other Contact # or Email:
Ownership Status (Please Check): 'Individual ❑ Trust ❑ Partnership ❑ Corporation
Property Owner Consent: (required)
By signature hereon, I/We acknowledge that City officials and/or employees may, in the performance of their functions, enter upon the
property to inspect or gather other information necessary to process this application. I also understand that all meeting dates are tentative
and may be postponed by the Planning Services Division for incomplete submissions or other administrative reasons.
Property Owner's Signature: X La m `1 hi'> Date: ,- -: )
-713
Briefly explain how the proposed conditional use/development plan will not have a negative effect on the issues below.
1. Health, safety, and general welfare of occupants of surrounding lands.
�t
2. Pedestrian and vehicular circulation and safety.
3. Noise, air, water, or other forms of environmental pollution. C "
- Lt. —z s C�.
4. The demand for and availability of public services and facilities.
5. Character and future development of the area.
SUBMITTAL REOUIREMENTS — Must accompany the application to be complete.
r�
( ➢� ANARRATIVE of the proposed conditional use/Development Plan including:
❑ Existing and proposed use of the property
❑ Identification of all structures (including paving, signage, etc.) on the property and discussion of their relation to the project
❑ Projected number of residents, employees, and/or daily customers
❑ Proposed amount of dwelling units, floor area, landscape area, and parking area expressed in square feet and acreage to the
nearest one - hundredth of an acre
❑ Effects on adjoining properties to include: noise, hours of operation, glare, odor, fumes, vibration, etc.
• Compatibility of the proposed use with adjacent and other properties in the area.
• Traffic generation (anticipated number of customers, deliveries, employee shift changes, etc.)
❑ Any other pertinent information to properly understand the intended use /plan and its relation to nearby properties and the
community as a whole
➢ A complete SITE PLAN and BUILDING ELEVATIONS must include:
Two (2) full size ( minim um 24" x 36 ") scaled and dimensioned prints of site plan and building elevations
Two (2) 8 '' /Z" x 11 (minimum) to 11" x 17" (maximum) reduction of the site plan and building elevations
❑ One compact disc or diskette with digital plans and drawings of the project in AutoCAD 2000 format with fonts and plot style
table file (if plans have been prepared digitally)
,,;d Title block that provides all contact information for the petitioner and/or owner and contact information of petitioner's
engineers /surveyors/architects, or other design professionals used in the preparation of the plans
'Or The date of the original plan and revision dates, if applicable
A north arrow and graphic scale.
All property lines and existing and proposed right -of -way lines with dimensions clearly labeled
❑ All required setback and offset lines .
All existing and proposed buildings, structures, and paved areas, including building entrances, walks, drives, signs, decks, patios,
fences, walls, etc.
,Z, Location of all outdoor storage and refuse disposal areas and the design and materials used for screening
Location and dimension of all on -site parking (and off -site parking provisions if they are to be employed), including a summary
of the number of parking stalls provided per the requirements of Section 30 -36 City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance
❑ Location and dimension of all loading and service areas
Location, height, design, illumination power and orientation of all exterior lighting on the property including a photometrics plan 9� Location of all exterior mechanical equipment and utilities and elevations of proposed screening devices where applicable (i.e.
visible from a public street or residential use or district). Mechanical equipment includes, but is not limited to; HVAC
equipment, electrical transformers and boxes, exhaust flues, plumbing vents, gas regulators, generators, etc.
-7G
Qel ri
Construction LLc
6228 County Road N, Pickett, WI 54964
Phone (920) 589 -4209
OREGON STREET PROJECT
The goal is to create an infill development, adding over a million dollars
in tax base in an area under utilized for years. The development would be a
condominium plat consisting of eight single family residences of 1200 to
1600 square feet.
Careful attention to detail and style will create an aesthetically pleasing
development of single family condo homes that will offer an alternativelo.
multi - family condo living.
Open front porches, shorter yard set backs, a neighborhood gazebo and
common green spaces designed and planned to help with storm water run off
will all add to a neighborhood feel.
Landscaping will be an integral part of the project, providing screening
and privacy for each of the units covered patios and color through out the
growing season. A green wall a top a berm at the entrance to the curved
private drive will add privacy and screening from 20 and Oregon Street
traffic.
Like structures will be individualized with color choices, windows and
roof treatments to avoid repetition.
In 2004 I developed the site on Knapp St. which is now "Foster Heights ".
I envision this project to be similar but on a smaller scale. Landscaping to be
completed as part of the development as a condo plat.
�7 �
gICS•,RS(Ofd wi onwsw •wa
y..r, NfSN■7SIA . R1Y■3NMIAl b
MPS IPA OItlYf]'133hiS NIWe153M pt 3 . i 1601tli4) l0 A1IA �..
w u.oVO.azw ,etx�r i NY7d J.M3jYdO73A3U d
"Oul 'elesg g uosue}ievy N „u al oK
MOO.V90 -7 H109 .LV7d OQMOO
®AONIir a�sin a. N.YN[[
E
IyErl�!l1f� E e Il�
r�,��8 E g ! !�� � !CCl
" EE�1I1 t ( C11I { i + � li � 1 CCB�E�8tCi8EEClrCFr
i K ! [' •.......0�•1O0E' }$ #ll si............11
9['011 3 6► ze.Off S
r�
b
V
j - - - - -- �s
[r[■ a e► zo.00 s
w
n
l it ,
-
h w
!I Z r t n 3
OWN
a A M � j
W s "gg
! i N i Nt y'c
M x
Lq
:
1 2
1 NNxiw N ,w pj/p [[ ■ .c l 10" N
10
'` g a ■■ t
11 - 1 1 f 1E■
ol
24 ■ x se
It
p__ � _ _ .,r,we a,a...... • � i� j y .none s .nfem s IFS;
R.
A 1
i r -----------------------------
♦♦ HI i
♦ U]I �
I
/
♦ 1 E- f
O
I t
1 I
r'
tJ
I
7:7=f N
36'-0"
L
Oi
PORCH
DINING
l l' X 14'4" ii LIVING ROOM
c LG. I I
16 15'6"
I ! 11' CLG.
— EATING BAR
k g� DW I TCHEN 1' 6' X 'I OW
I
FA TRY 0 o
r D "UN.
WJ VifORKBIaNGH � DN
OPTIONAL BASEMENT
STAIRS
GARAGE
20'4" X 24'
0
-r - -_
omd..= =ter...
MASTER
BEDROOM
15'4"X 12'
9' CLG.
iR roT BEDROOM?
1 V X 11'6"
9' C LG.
PORCH
REZONING /PD -CONDO DEVLPMT
1958 -2008 OREGON ST
PC: 06 -16 -09
OSHKOSH HOUSING AUTHORITY
PO BOX 397
OSHKOSH WI 54903 0397
RE 1953 OREGON ST
SIEGER HENRY O
2021 NEBRASKA ST
OSHKOSH WI 54902 7050
SPANBAUER RICHARD /JACKIE
2008 OREGON ST
OSHKOSH WI 54902 7057
MEISEL DAVID A _
178 W 21ST AVE
OSHKOSH WI 54902
OLESEN RONALD A
2014 OREGON ST
OSHKOSH WI 54902 7057
HILL SR ROGER D /KIM L
2009 NEBRASKA ST
OSHKOSH WI 54902 7050
NOLTE WILLIAM C
708 VIOLA AVE
OSHKOSH WI 54901 2255
RE VACANT LOT OREGON ST
CONVENIENCE STORE INVSTMTS
1626 OAK ST
LACROSSE WI 54603 2308
RE 2005 OREGON ST
ZARTER SHARON M
168 W 21ST AVE
OSHKOSH WI 54902
JACOBSON CHRISTIAN E
594 N OAKWOOD RD
OSHKOSH WI 54904 7808
RE 1954 OREGON ST
FAUST VIRGINIA
2015 NEBRASKA ST
OSHKOSH WI 54902 7050
BRADSHAW MARY J
2025 NEBRASKA ST
OSHKOSH WI 54902 7050
FOLLETT TIMOTHY J
172 W 21ST AVE
OSHKOSH WI 54902 7069
OLSON SCOTT J . POCH.OJKA MARK S
182 W 21ST AVE 188 W 21ST AVE
OSHKOSH WI 54902 7069 OSHKOSH WI 54902 7069
DEL TRITT CONSTRUCTION LLC
6228 CTY RD N
PICKETT WI 54964
11
1Z
' o p , - - -
1,
161
IRM rIv-
mm :I;,�I
Ir n AN III
ail
I � n
��:''_,;
,,� ME
V�.'o.
R ot
> s
irf
S
ro
Y Y k dF
X
It J
wd
gt x
i $ b ,✓ 9
r
t