Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-Building (shed) CITY OF OSHKOSH N°_ 26365 PERMIT - APPLICATION AND RECORD TYPE: BLDG HTG ❑ ELEC ❑ PLBG ❑ S IGN ❑ ZONING FLOOD PLAIN HEIGHT ADDRESS /O S .-- ���t/ 51477 PLAN NO. OWNER ( Ar� DESI N G� G ERj� USE /NATURE OF WORK__ __S t' X Z 4 _ .4‘........4 BUILDING CONTRACTOR 0107 W— Size O C k / Sq. Ft. q ! G # Rooms ( # Stories ( Height Foundation A. Class of Const. O Occupancy Permit HEATING CONTRACTOR Heat ❑ A/C ❑ Vent ❑ Fuel /System Heat Loss BTU'S ELECTRIC CONTRACTOR Electric Serv. New ❑ Change ❑ Temp ❑ Type Volts Amps Fixtures Switches Receptacles Circuits PLUMBING CONTRACTOR BT WH Disp WSoft CBasin Lay _ Sh DW DF San. Sewer ____WC FDr SP Ur Storm Sewer Sink LTub Eject SS Water Other FEES: Valuation $ _ . o c7 Permit Fee Paid $ /6 • D d / Park Dedication $ ISSUED BY Ye �ti./ .0.,cL... Date // 7F/ Final /O. P. In the performance of this work I agree to perform all work pursuant to rules governing the described construction. SIGNATUR ■∎i i/. //I/ . _ A: , i ' A, ER ' DATE ADDRESS TELEPHONE # R 8/89 ZONING /LAND USE COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST JOB LOCATION: orb c / ZONING: PROPERTY OWNER /CONTRACTOR: _1 C�' /sd� 1� CONSTRUCTION DATA: - NEW CON RUCTI{N A ION ALTEReION PARKING LOT TYPE OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION: (i.e. fence, pool, sign, deck, etc.) i COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST (Check only those applicable) COMPLIES DEFICIENT DEFICIENCY /COMMENTS Use Lot Width Lot Area Floodplain Front Yard Side Street (front yard) Rear Yard Side Yard (R) Side Yard (L) Parking Spaces Building Area • Lot Area Per Family Corner Lot Landscaping Transitional Yard Off-Street Loading • Vision Clearance Height REVIEW AUTHORITY: The Director of Community Development, or designee, must approve all plans, except the following: (1) Alterations or work when the use is conforming and when no change in use is proposed. (2) Maintenance items, e.g. siding, windows, etc., when the use is conforming and when no change is proposed. Instances where work complies with the above criteria, the permit can be reviewed by the Building Inspector without referral to the Director of Community Development, or designee. APPROVED DENIED Plan Commission Action Required Variance(s) Required . REVIEWED BY: DATE: • --- I' I I I , I I al • i T I !!! ! !! ! III 11-/ --- .�. - _ ME _ - 111 _I■■1■II R 1 ■ ■N I■■i ■1111■I : l t �'i� NMI � , _ - .._ _ __ i■■■l►■■i■IIII■ ■■r ' ' - , . . 1 i i simmoramounion . . • i, a 1 _ � ■■!- ■i'■II ■■■® . ■■r m■ilii®■■om■ 1 I ! ! , • ■■ lII11 ■■ ! , . . • ■■ '' II11 ■■ i 1 i 1 ' ' I■■ ■ I I B EN ' • 1 11 1111111111111111 1 1 ! 1 11I1■ � + - ■ i 1■■■■■■■ ; OH 1 ■■a■I■■■■ ■■ In 1 • i . - ■ ■ 1■■■■■■■ ! 11111 — -- ' ` ■ 1 ill■■■■■■■ I r ■ j �=� ' a • 1■■ a • i 1 MI i i - -- 1111111111111113. G I . . i _ ; ; i ! I 1 111 i 11111111111= NU : . 2 .._. _____ ; ■ mi11111111 , , , . , __,__ __ , ,__ ... -. _ L , -,-4 -,--• . , , , I -' - -- r .. L , ' ! ; + r -- i s oul 3 _4 A... .._ i. i • _ _ , i : .1 1 I , 1 i . 1 � 1 ! 1 4- 1 __ ___ ___ . 4___ 1 1 - i 1 i 1! I .1 1 1 ��! 1 i I . :. Sc 4_ I ! ' .. I ■■ ■s� 111 ■■■ _- 1 , __, ________ ________ ..___ __ J _ 1_ it. :. :,_ 0 _ I _i _ __,,,, i_ :1 L ,T i 1 11=11111 - 1 _ vv■ ■ • 4 _l_ I ' ' 111111.1111.1111.1111111111111 I 1 1 1 _ 111.1111111111111111MNIMMII - _t_ --I REIHIMPIMEMINIMIMEM - 1 ‘ C‘ ISIEUrilliErapari ,:„....2 io - ▪ -1-- - - -'I- - 1 ! P Biamom i _i____ i __H il -- 1 , , . _..._ , l num I , v, i i. .__I . 1 , x, i i __, -4 c — - 1111111111111 a _________ _ 4 _ ■ ■ ■t� ■ ■■ ■ _l_ lU$UR.1_0 ' ' 1 'D a Z . -1--- 1 1111111111111111111111___,_0 1111 Al 2 ; 3 , . , . 1 _ � .....---1 r 1 ....,„ , , ._ , I i + 4 ` - - I to ct¢ Z ' i i 1 , E. :, �- ,- :x, _ ;11 - i i - {► ! ' 4 I i i r i i 1 t t I mo. _ . r . . , - - i I . - i • STAFF REPORT BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS NOVEMBER 20, 1991 ITEM III. 805 RANDALL PLACE - Jon and Nancy Ludwig, owners GENERAL DESCRIPTION /BACKGROUND Applicants are requesting a variance to construct a utility storage building with a 12 foot front yard setback; whereas Section 30- 15(b)(2) R -1 Single Family Residential of the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance requires a 25' front yard setback for accessory structures when attached to or less than 5 feet from a principal structure. The surrounding land use pattern can be characterized by a single family dwelling use with a C -3 Commercial Zoning district to the north, south, and east and an R -5 Multiple Dwelling district to the west. On November 6, 1991, this item was before the Board of Zoning Appeals for review. However, the item was laid over in that the applicants, or their representative, was not present to answer questions and the Board felt it was necessary to have someone present to answer any questions they may have. ANALYSIS /RECOMMENDATION FOR FINDINGS OF FACT In reviewing a variance request, the following question should be addressed. Is there an unusual or unique characteristic about the subject property which creates a hardship? Is the hardship self- created? Is the variance being requested the least possible to remove any hardship? Will granting of the variance have a considerable adverse impact on the neighboring properties? The lot in question is a small double frontage lot which contains a single family dwelling without an accessory structure present. The lot size is approximately 44x75 for 3300 sq. ft. of area. It appears that it would be extremely difficult to place an accessory structure on the lot in question without a variance due to the lack of available land area for this purpose. The lots on either side of the lot in question contain garages which do not meet current -day setback standards. The area proposed for structural placement is in the only area available for this purpose on this lot. The proposed structure is 8x12 for 96 sq. ft. and is the minimum size needed for the applicant's purpose of storage of residentially associated equipment and material. The proposed setbacks are also the minimum setbacks required to be permitted to place the proposed 8x12 storage structure on the lot in question. STAPP REPORT PAGE TWO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS NOVEMBER 20, 1991 Approval of this variance would not appear to have an adverse effect on the neighborhood. Based on this information, Staff recommends approval of the variance as requested. •