HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Zoning Appeals (minutes) - 07/15/1992 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES PAGE -3- JULY 15, 1992
Dale L. Ferguson, 556 Oak Street, expressed concern as to the
exit /entrance driveway on Grove Street and inquired if there was a
possibility of closing that exit /entrance.
Motion by McDonald to approve the variance request upon the
following conditions:
1) That approximately 6 internal parking places be converted to
planting islands.
2) That smaller trees be placed along Oak Street and the existing
trees removed. The intent is to place trees which will not
grow as tall as the power lines to avoid tree removal in the
future.
3) That new lighting be placed along the perimeter of the parking
lot, directed to shine on the lot only, and not on adjacent
properties.
4) That the proposed driveway access on Grove Street be
eliminated.
5) That a Conditional Use Permit be obtained for parking lot
additions prior to construction.
6) That a landscape plan be reviewed and approved by the
Department of Community Development staff, and that the
landscaping be in place prior to the use of the proposed
parking spaces as indicated on the site plan submitted.
Seconded by Krueger. Motion carried 4 -1 (AYE: Herricks, McDonald,
Roehlig, Schorse; NAY: Krueger).
As to the Findings of Fact, Mr. McDonald stated we maintained the
setbacks of the original parking lot so there is continuity; we
improved the aesthetics of the original lot; and we buffered as
much as possible the impact on neighboring properties. There are
no alternatives present.
ITEM II. 70 EAST WAUKAU AVENUE - Dr. M.A. Rouf, owner.
The applicant is requesting a variance to construct two (2) decks
in a rear yard setback area; one (1) deck proposed for attachment
to the existing dock and having a 0 ft. rear yard setback and one
(1) deck attached to the dwelling with a 20± rear yard setback;
whereas Section 30- 15(B)(1)(d) Standards of the R -1 Single Family
Residence District of the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance requires
a 25 ft. minimum rear yard setback for a principal structure which
includes attached decks.
Dr. Rouf gave a brief history of the site in question. He stated
his hardship is that his children and pets could easily fall
between the gap of the dock and existing structure.
Mr. Krueger inquired if the deck would exceed 12 inches in height
and Dr. Rouf indicated that it would not.
Mr. Herricks inquired if Dr. Rouf had obtained a permit for the
dock.
Mr. Roskom indicated that the dock is under the Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) jurisdiction and that Dr. Rouf was in
compliance with their regulations.
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES PAGE -4- JULY 15, 1992
Vice Chairperson McDonald inquired if the dock would require
handrails.
Mr. Roskom stated that he was not aware of any standards requiring
handrails.
It was Mr. Roehlig's feeling that the hardship of Dr. Rouf was
self - created, as the house was custom built with the land available
at the time. He also felt, on the other hand, that considering the
characteristics of the surrounding properties, their fancy
stairways could also be considered decks and that Dr. Rouf's
request would fit into the character of the whole area.
Mr. McDonald noted that the lot was unique in that it is only 90
ft. deep.
Mr. Krueger stated the request would make the back yard more user
friendly.
Mr. McDonald added that it would also enhance safety in the area.
Motion by Schorse to approve the variance as requested upon the
following conditions:
1) That the deck height not exceed 12m above the highest existing
grade of the rear (shore) yard.
2) That the deck not be covered or enclosed.
Seconded by Herricks. Motion carried 5 -0.
Regarding the Findings of Fact, Mr. Schorse stated that the size of
the lot creates a hardship as he can't extend towards the back
because of the lagoon bordering it there, and it doesn't look like
this request would have any negative impact on the neighborhood.
Mr. McDonald added that the size of the lot in conjunction with the
need for substantial rip rapping, strengthens the question by
maximizing the useable space and the deck will help do that. Mr.
Herricks added he received an additional hardship when he tried to
put a sea wall in there sometime within the last year so that he
would have gained several feet there and he may have been able to
get into the setback at least from the deck and the house. That
may have been a hardship created by the DER not issuing a permit
for a sea wall. Mr. Herricks further stated that in addition to
that, the decking will greatly enhance the overall neighborhood.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Bruce A. Rosko
Principal Planner