Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Zoning Appeals (variance) - 04/16/2010 O City of Oshkosh Darryn Burich Dept. of Community Development Director Planning Services Division Planning Services Division 215 Church Ave., PO Box 1130 ..,a Oshkosh, WI 54903 -1130 (920) 236 -5059 (920) 236 -5053 FAX http: / /www. ci. ohkosh. wi. us April 16, 2010 FILED Mr. Gary Dietenberger BOARD of APPEALS Ms. Anne Sanfelippo APR 152010 1225 Jefferson St. Oshkosh, WI 54901 OSHKOSH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Re: 1225 Jefferson St. To Whom It May Concern: On April 14, 2010, the City of Oshkosh Board of Appeals approved a variance to permit a 6' high solid wood fence with a 0' front yard setback. The decision of the Board was filed in the Planning Services Division Office of the Department of Community Development on April 15, 2010. Per Section 30- 6(C)(3) and (4) of the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance, your variance will expire on October 15, 2010, 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 thru 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 -5059. Respectfully, Todd M. - Muehrer Associate Planner /Zoning Administrator TMM/dff CC: Inspection Services Division, City Hall BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES April 14, 2010 PRESENT: Dan Carpenter, Robert Cornell, Jane Cryan, Dennis Penney, Mark Nielsen (late), Ed Wilusz, Cheryl Hentz EXCUSED: None STAFF: Todd Muehrer, Associate Planner /Zoning Administrator; John Zarate, Building Inspector; Deborah Foland, Recording Secretary Chairperson Cornell called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. The minutes of March 10, 2010 were approved as presented. Carpenter/Hentz 4 -0 -1. (Abstained- Hentz. Not present for March meeting.) ITEM I: 1308 W. NEW YORK AVENUE Del Tritt- applicant, Ridgeview Investments LLC- owner, request variances to permit a single family residence to exceed the maximum driveway width and to establish a 24' x 30' uncovered off - street parking in the front yard. Additionally, a variance is requested to permit a patio within the required side yard setback. Section 30 -36 (B)(1)(c) of the Oshkosh Municipal Code: Off - Street Parking Facilities requires the maximum driveway width to not exceed 12' where no garage exists, Section 30 -36 (D)(2)(a): Off - Street Parking Facilities requires open parking areas to provide a front yard setback no less than the setback of the front facade of the principal structure, and Section 30 -35 (B)(2)(d) of the Oshkosh Municipal Code: Additional Standards requires a 2' side yard setback for uncovered patios. Mr. Muehrer presented the item and distributed photos of the subject site. He commented that the owner purchased the property in 2009 and is in the process of extensively remodeling the interior of the structure and is proposing various site improvements to the exterior that require variances. The proposed paved off - street parking area would be located in the same place where an existing gravel parking area is currently on site and the proposed patio would intrude 2' into the required side yard setback. A justifiable hardship is present in this case as the parcel's unique configuration, principal structure placement, and limited rear and side yard areas preclude feasible placement alternatives for improvements within setbacks. The applicant is also proposing a 24 1.f. of 6' solid board fencing along the north lot line to screen the proposed patio from the property to the north. Mr. Penney questioned what the dimensions would be for the patio area. Del Tritt, 6228 County Road N, Pickett, petitioner for the request, responded that he had revised his plan to exclude the addition of the patio area and was proposing to place a concrete area for storage of garbage cans and a step for the back porch in that location instead. The proposed fencing would remain. Mr. Wilusz inquired how many curb cuts existed on the subject site. Mr. Tritt replied that there was only one curb cut. Board of Appeals Minutes 1 April 14, 2010 Ms. Cryan questioned why the parking area could not be located on the east side of the parcel. Mr. Tritt explained that if the parking area was relocated to the east side, it would create a situation that would require stacked parking of vehicles in the driveway. This would result in vehicles having to back out onto W. New York Avenue on a frequent basis creating an unsafe situation. Mr. Penney asked if the gravel area would be paved with concrete. Mr. Tritt responded that the paving would be constructed with an asphalt surface. Mr. Cornell inquired if there would be plantings around the foundation. Mr. Tritt replied that there were some existing plantings on site but they would be enhanced. Roger Rose, 1302 W. New York Avenue, questioned the reasoning for the installation of the fencing. Mr. Tritt responded that the fence was for the purpose of screening the driveway to the garage and the garbage receptacles and that there would be no fencing located on the east side of the property adjacent to Mr. Rose's property. Mr. Rose then questioned if the fencing would be 24' long and 6' high. Mr. Tritt replied that was his initial proposal but it could be reduced to 16' as that would be more practical. Mr. Muehrer stated that the fence was not an issue at this hearing as it was allowed by city ordinance and no variance was necessary for the placement of the fencing. Mr. Rose commented that he would be in favor of the driveway area being constructed with concrete instead of asphalt. Ms. Hentz questioned why Mr. Rose was objecting to the asphalt paving. Mr. Rose responded that he felt it was easier to shovel concrete than asphalt. Ms. Hentz stated that a motion would be required to change the proposed fence from 24' to 16'. Mr. Muehrer commented that no action would be required regarding the fencing as it is not an issue with the variance request. Mr. Wilusz questioned if the board was required to deny the portion of the request regarding the patio as the petitioner was withdrawing that aspect of the variance request. Mr. Muehrer replied that the minutes would reflect that the request for the placement of the patio has been withdrawn so no action would be required when a motion was made for the variance request. Mr. Penney inquired if the term "paving" meant it was required to be constructed of cement. Mr. Muehrer responded that the zoning ordinance recognized both concrete and asphalt as an acceptable paving material. Board of Appeals Minutes 2 April 14, 2010 Motion by Hentz to approve the request for a variance to permit a single family residence to exceed the maximum driveway width and to establish a 24' x 30' uncovered off - street parking in the front yard. Seconded by Carpenter. Motion carried 5-0. Finding of Facts: The parcel is a unique lot. No adverse impact. Safer for the public. ITEM II: 207 S. SAWYER STREET David Schettle, owner, is requesting a variance to the City of Oshkosh Building Code. Per Oshkosh Building Code Section 7 -33, persons may file an appeal to the Board of Zoning Appeals as provided in the City Zoning Ordinance, Section 30- 6(B)(2)(a) if an equivalent degree of health, safety and welfare is proposed. All appeals shall be accompanied by supporting data. This appeal is to allow for a modification and an expansion of an existing stairway without providing the required headroom of 76" at the intermediate landing. Comm 21.04(2)(d) requires that a minimum headroom of 76" (6' -4 ") be maintained for the entire stairway. The headroom also is required to be provided for the minimum width of the stairway which is 3'. John Zarate presented the item and stated that the City of Oshkosh adopts the State of Wisconsin Uniform Dwelling Code to apply to alterations and additions to one and two family homes in existence prior to the effective date of this code. The variance is required for the construction of a new stairway to the second floor for which a building permit was issued on February 19, 2010. Mr. Zarate reviewed the details of the staff report and commented that there was conflict in whether the stairway was reconstructed within the same stairwell opening and that the owner did not want to conform to the current building standards as it would require significant structural modifications to the roof and use up too much space on the first floor. Jeff Schettle, 3251 Old Orchard Lane, distributed enlarged building plans and photos of himself standing on the stairways of both the old and newly constructed stairway. He also explained the differences between the layout and height of both stairways and stated that he felt that the stairway was reconstructed within the same stairwell opening therefore it should be allowed as it would fall under a portion of municipal code which provides for reconstruction of stairways in existence prior to June 1, 1980 providing they are rebuilt within the same stairwell opening. He further explained that the landing had been lowered to increase the amount of headroom and the outside of the stairway on the second landing was the only area that may be an issue with a lack of headroom. Ms. Hentz commented that it appeared there was a difference in opinion between the inspector and the petitioner as to whether the stairway was reconstructed in the same opening. There was further discussion on if the stairway had been rebuilt within the same stairwell opening and the modifications made constructing the new stairway as compared to the layout of the original one. It was determined that the newly constructed stairs were less steep and the second landing was relocated however the difference in opinion still remained whether the new stairway was constructed in the same opening. Mr. Wilusz asked for clarification of the building drawings submitted. Board of Appeals Minutes 3 April 14, 2010 Mr. Schettle further explained the construction drawings and the amount of headroom provided both on the steps and landings. He commented that part of the stairway was code compliant other than 18 inches on the top landing and 9 inches on the lower landing with the deficit being on the outside of the stairway, not on the inside where the handrail is located. Mr. Carpenter questioned if the petitioner felt that changing the stairway to meet code requirements was creating a hardship. Mr. Schettle responded that to remedy the situation would involve a lot of time and work to gain the few inches that are necessary to make the stairway code compliant. It is a very old home and the work to increase this small amount of headroom would be significant. Mr. Wilusz asked for clarification of the variance request standards for building code variances in regard to "providing an equivalent degree of health, safety and welfare ". Mr. Zarate replied that the variance could be granted if the board felt that the situation would provide an equivalent degree of safety as it would if the stairway met code requirements. From the perspective of the Inspections Department, they cannot approve work that it not code compliant, and the decision would have to be determined by the board members. Mr. Penney questioned why the variance was not applied for until after the work had been completed. Mr. Schettle responded that they had obtained a building permit but the problems arose with the addition to the house and once he was made aware that a variance may be possible to obtain, he decided to pursue it. He further stated that they could have sold the house in its original state, but the reconstruction of the stairway was an improvement to the present condition that existed and major structural changes would be required to make the stairway code compliant. Mr. Penney commented that expense to the petitioner could not be considered when granting a variance. Discussion continued on whether the stairway was reconstructed within the same stairwell opening, if the exception to the code for stairways rebuilt in the same opening would apply, and if the plans submitted for the building permit were accurate or modified when constructed. The petitioner contended that the plans were not altered after the issuance of the permit and the dormer over the top had not yet been completed. The inspector claimed that the stairway headroom plans were not provided at the time the permit was issued. Further discussion on which parts of the stairway were not code compliant and the number of inches necessary to meet code, the age of the home, and the complications involved to make the stairway compliant without the granting of a variance. It was concluded that although complicated and costly, the stairway could feasibly be constructed to meet current code standards. There was also discussion on the fact that staff was correctly performing their duties by denying approval of the plans for lack of code compliancy however it appeared that the reconstructed stairway was safer than the condition that existed prior. There was not consensus on whether the stairway was reconstructed in the same opening although there was understanding that remodeling in a 110 year old home was complicated and some board members felt that even though the stairway did not meet current code requirements, it was safer than the conditions that existed prior to the reconstruction. Motion by Hentz to approve the request for a variance to permit a modification and an expansion of an existing stairway without providing the required headroom of 76" at the intermediate landing. Seconded by Penney. Motion carried 3 -2. Ayes- Carpenter /Penney /Hentz. Nays - Cornell /Wilusz. Board of Appeals Minutes 4 April 14, 2010 Finding of Facts: It is a unique situation. The age of the home. Condition of stairway safer than what previously existed Ms. Hentz excused herself from the meeting at 4:20 pm. ITEM III: 1225 JEFFERSON STREET Gary Dietenberger & Anne Sanfelippo-applicant/owner, request a variance to permit a 6' high solid wood fence with a 0' front yard setback. Section 30 -35 (E)(3) of the Oshkosh Municipal Code: Additional Standards and Exceptions requires fences 6' high to be erected on those parts of a lot that area as far back or farther back from a front property line than the principal structure. Mr. Muehrer presented the item and distributed photos of the subject site. He explained that the petitioner was requesting the fence for privacy and safety purposes and that the property was unique in that it fronts two road right -of -ways and therefore possesses two front yards by zoning ordinance definition. He also explained that it would have no adverse effect on surrounding properties because there are no driveways fronting the east side of Harrison Street so the fence would not create any sight or safety issues for vehicular or pedestrian traffic and Jefferson Street is a one -way street with adequate distance between the intersection and the proposed fencing. He further stated that the property is unique and a justifiable hardship exists with the current parcel configuration. Mr. Cornell stated that the map showing the location of the fence was difficult to read and asked the petitioner to clarify its location. Ms. Sanfelippo explained that the fence would be going from the right corner of the garage back and Mr. Dietenberger displayed the location on the site plan. Mr. Penney asked if the house faced Jefferson Street. Ms. Sanfelippo responded affirmatively. Motion by Wilusz to approve the request for a variance to permit a 6' high solid wood fence with a 0' front yard setback Seconded by Carpenter. Motion carried 5 -0. Finding of Facts: No safety issues. The parcel is a unique lot. Ms. Hentz returned to the meeting at 4:30 pm. Board of Appeals Minutes 5 April 14, 2010 ITEM IV: 3110 KNAPP STREET Steve Taylor, EAA- applicant, Winnebago County - owner, request a variance to permit a proposed garage and concrete slab with a 20' front yard setback. Section 30 -30 (B)(1) of the Oshkosh Municipal Code: M -3 General Industrial District requires a 30' minimum front yard setback. Mr. Muehrer presented the item and stated that he was not able to obtain photos of the subject site prior to today's meeting. He explained that the variance was being requested because W. Waukau Avenue has restricted access east of Knapp Street and the proposed new structures would be too close to the existing air traffic control tower if built at the required 30' front yard setback. The variance, if granted, would not have an adverse effect on surrounding properties as they are all owned by Winnebago County and developed in conjunction with the airport facilities. He further stated that a justifiable hardship existed as the proposed structures could not be adequately accessed due to the location of the air traffic control tower. He also noted that while the zoning ordinance may technically define the area in question as a front yard, the practical use of the area is side yard in nature. Steve Taylor, 3000 Poberezny Road, petitioner for the request, stated that he was present for any questions regarding this request. There was no discussion on this item. Motion by Hentz to approve the request for a variance to permit a proposed garage and concrete slab with a 20' front yard setback. Seconded by Penney. Motion carried 5-0. Finding of Facts: It is a unique situation. A hardship would be created if variance denied. No adverse impact on adjacent properties. DISCUSSION OF BOA PROCEDURES Ms. Hentz stated that at January's meeting, there was discussion on issues that can or cannot be discussed under this portion of the agenda. Mr. Muehrer reviewed the matter with the City Attorney Lynn Lorenson who informed the board that matters that are not specifically noted on the agenda cannot be randomly discussed. Ms. Hentz contacted the State Attorney General's office regarding the matter who felt we were being overly cautious. She was informed that particular properties could not be discussed without notice however city codes or other general conversation should be allowed. Board members briefly discussed the process of requesting specific items to be placed on the agenda for conversation and other details regarding disclosure matters. Mr. Muehrer stated that Attorney Lorenson was not able to be present today as she had other obligations at this time but he would let her know about the discussion and see if she could make arrangements to attend a future meeting. He inquired about the name of the individual at the Attorney General's office who provided Ms. Hentz with this advice. Ms. Hentz replied that the party's last name was Olsen and that his assistant's name was Amanda. Board of Appeals Minutes 6 April 14, 2010 It was decided to place this item back on the agenda for May for clarification if the City Attorney could be present for discussion of the matter. Ms. Hentz stated that the wording on this portion of the agenda stating "Discussion of BOA Procedures" was not entirely accurate and she would like to further discuss the matter when the Procedures and Regulations for the Board of Appeals are reviewed in June. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 4:50 p.m. (Wilusz/Hentz). Respectfully submi ed, Todd ehrer Associate Planner /Zoning Administrator Board of Appeals Minutes 7 April 14, 2010 STAFF REPORT BOARD OF APPEALS APRIL 14, 2010 ITEM III: 1225 JEFFERSON STREET GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND Gary Dietenberger & Anne Sanfelippo- applicant/owner, request a variance to permit a 6' high solid wood fence with a 0' front yard setback. Section 30 -35 (E)(3) of the Oshkosh Municipal Code: Additional Standards and Exceptions requires fences 6' high to be erected on those parts of a lot that area as far back or farther back from a front property line than the principal structure. The subject property is located mid -block on the west side of Jefferson Street. The parcel is irregular in shape, .08 acres in size and split zoned between R -2 Two Family Residence District (east) and C -3 Central Commercial District (west —see attached zoning map). Adjacent land uses include single family residential to the north, east, and west while a two family residential dwelling is located to the south. The general area is composed predominately of low density residential land uses. 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, set backs, 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 burdensome." 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 a variance to construct a 6' high solid wood fence in the front yard setback area for privacy and safety purposes (see attached site plan). The property is unique because it fronts two road right -of -ways (i.e. Harrison Street and Jefferson Street) and therefore possesses two front yards by zoning ordinance definition. According to the petitioner's site plan, the proposed 6' solid wood fence would commence at the rear of the principal structure, run approximately 55 1.f. to the west along the south lot line, continue northerly along the entire west lot line, extend approximately 50 1.f. to the east along the north lot line, and terminate along the side of the principal structure. The variance would not have an adverse effect on surrounding properties because there are no driveways fronting the east side of Harrison Street so the fencing would not create any sight or safety issues for vehicular and pedestrian traffic utilizing the right -of -way. Likewise, the petitioner feels no traffic issues will be present as Jefferson Street is a one- way street going south and adequate distance (more than 120') is present between the intersection and the proposed fencing. STAFF REPORT BOARD OF APPEALS ITEM III -2- APRIL 14, 2010 The special condition that is applicable to the subject lot is it features two front yard areas by zoning ordinance definition, which limits the placement of 6' high solid privacy fence. A hardship would be created if the request was denied because the property owner would be unable to construct the fence in its proposed location. The petitioner states the fence is necessary to block traffic noise and to provide adequate safety and privacy for the subject parcel. As previously stated the property is unique and justifiable hardship exists with the current parcel configuration. Specifically, although the zoning ordinance defines the subject area abutting Harrison Street as a front yard, the practical use of the area is clearly rear yard in nature. Requiring the property owner to comply with the 25' setback requirement would be unnecessarily burdensome in this particular case. The variance will not be detrimental to adjacent properties or contrary to the public interest if granted. RECOMMENDATION Based on the information provided within this report, staff recommends approval of the variance as requested. Adtac}onoolto]�[�&t/l4/lU l225J�ff�zoo��� „, , i,,,,t,,.- . . / , , 4 i . ,,,:,.,_. -. !t,-„, . ,--.... i att,,,,,,,,...A. . ; ,, :___,__,_, , 1 ,, ; 4;1 k,,,, , ,- , - , ,A,,,,,_„, ..,,... , , 4 . ,... , „,., 1 , ,,,..„ .,,,t,„,„,--„,...., ... ,..„ ,„ ,,....,z47_,...:...:: ill - -,,* --..„ „... - ir, s „ : , ... 0' ., ' ' ; Apo/ 1. 1 ..,,,,,,, 1 i ” Ito ADVL - - ' t..--q _ j 0 ,W i',,,l.', . . .... —=----- '. 1E11 %.1-4--N----, --- ',.., A , .... :. , . ,_ ... , -'''''''' ' - . . 7 '‘i ::_.'-t-.----'..,--,-,,,,,f&tr! ----:'-'-------=--' .' --- 1-2-- --..;-:;' -,,,- ; ,7 1 74 ;,:*".' 1 [?'-'..1.7' , -, -,7..,".',.:::-...--,,,,,-,,,,,... — , ,..,.,%, View o Li 4-,.. ' ':':,,,-",‘,,t ..i'llrqs. ' ' *' -'4 ';''''' ''''' --7:-' - .--;;"" e .i'mnift, ' ' :I'Vg: 1;:.171-4-'F-'''. - / _�~—=_~~~~~ MAR 31 2010 �/��/t�o m�` cot - - - looking - vrco --- -- - - ---� ' Attachment to BOA Packet 04/14/10 t �� ��9 z q y t ,,- f :: ! ' , 1225 Jefferson Stree `.. 1" ii i P •- `fr �.- r i i .;.. a • t �/ 3 r o I 4 i rP � xe Y x -, �h 3r. ' p a l` @ r A` ri ' r z .� ¢ . +ab v1:4 f 1- 6s= .r ..+ . 30�� �� * ' r � , s - 77r , x4 ,e ra/ a, r x i °� "" i• k r , c} a� , � i. YC k y L `"..01)*::,,:: diL a'#'S; ''!4. f' �St ......t-r, Fy � to .0 r { y t '� r3` Yi`1�t'�' r ,." + f . . , - t om ,, a `s • ,7 Sax . , I, .. e �P x , . t. w �� j . `:k'* t ',,.s .R- �, �'t i , ,s ' ��ff r ' . re f ` ' , ` iw ]..e: � . � !°JX "`. i '=:igt h+ eY 't'", t ,.:. bje �. p I: ti v -.5 r � ] . .,F'1G i �t 3A View o f s uct property looking north . •,' ` 1 Y ...,, ,.., 4,„,.,,::., , ,rk , ,;, . , i ,„ Ak Ir t v, : . " , :,,c. , :: , , , I�� � p- ,I. d t I , r , ,4 f' �� F L . n '"w�i v r ,, .. { A. 1 a , L, -.,„...„..17...-,...z...,.",,_.il _ ,..,„...,,„...„..,....;„... _ .. r...._ J ' i ` ...,, t v+} r � y k" K � � "r . a?L C _ , Y f f''... j .,. r+,ka 1 ' , ;; � � a 'Ik�a-� 't a , y r,.r 0 �'{' ' ' � { `�,� -y"' ma y . x k x F .. ti .'p 3 n fit >._ View from sub property looking south 4 Please Type or Print in BLACK INK e Return to: Department of Community Development QlFlH 215 Church Ave. P.O. Box 1130 Oshkosh, WI 54903 -1130 CITY OF OSHKOSH APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE Please submit a complete reproducible site plan (maximum size 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. o� Address of Parcel Affected: AA.5 9, /'&)r) „3-. 1 X T r 1 t�, t Lkf'?/ �./ b Home Phone: Qat) 479- 9- 0 /1/ qii Petitioner's Address: /A 9J Y q._..... ¢.0(5t k1 a Work Phone• 7'/Z� 1 - 73/ LV �p I j ' Signature Require, _ � i - �iv. 't� 4 L ,...� I ate: -3 /6 • Owner (if not petitioner): Home Phone: Owner's Address: Work Phone: Signature Required: Date: In order to be granted a variance, each applicant must be able to prove that an unnecessary hardship would be created if the variance is not granted. The burden of proving an unnecessary hardship rests upon the applicant. The attached sheet provides information on what constitutes a hardship. (Attach additional sheets, if necessary, to provide the information requested. Additional information may be requested as needed.) 1. Explain your proposed plans and why you are requesting a variance: WQ- afQ. eFlaanni R - I - 6 bt n\ a l o -)- Ii3o rT 4nCQ Ln b U 6(_ a..r a- l km) ar Ooci d and C u s thrrr\ 6r . l m . Q c1 off. a Y ° . fi- -Q n Y`.P Ua � � C� t�ic� run ai m -U10 hct ck (wa Lds ' mix (-vow ,D 4c an uo, 1 4 J • r , r lb-- \YXS • I ItI..: ...Co.a i , . ,rc�lm as ' .. n LQ 1 h� h or lLss maw ir1 fail ll .i, an t r+ ` 1 ,p 1.o - ` I ►- i al-- LQ l s�- � .fi cam -� -�- �n� 01- �,� , ii ti ! '��r •. �r�, . ,,,,to, �ki �enQa ,3 run along tu Y `, & ��`1 Ir1 cL s bC I.o U rC , and bonneci A Dr\ a- 1 r4 (. D tAiljt CV\ (j Vie. r alTh . 4\f) r, ' 11 2. Describe how the variance would not have an adverse effect on surrounding prpla erti : lurQ col no c nvw s tr) via&- rrion . ' r• L a 0.311 furntr Q Iry ,, r •N a\ ,. r i son , o r\cQ 161, M T - D Crai coe iA -661(11- I -s ( Lp 0- h Or> OS t..4 Is ivuye r\ - 4 am rraoJ c -12J) xnD- -t . 3. Describe the special conditions that apply to your lot or structure that do not apply to surrounding lots or structures: AS r S I o ctre ()wire ( o Q5 ©r\ o (,ps -I �S1 c .P r .3Q r n - `l5 Loco._h on rr 4. Describe the hardship that would result if your ariance were not grant • d • vt M l C-Q . A • t 1, ! I a' 'r\d M1�X lll. U) Qt\Q -I �� coo do �rt n _ u - ha_ck . c�;rc Jo1cc �'1�'( occ ( (rLc� t �!� l l `- to I " Q� v C T QS �Y� Mold r\ S� D�c- t_tic L+Q.�'C S cs Aarri Sf. . i 0 3 u_k_c c� - Py\cnd - �-�n 5e� tat kkcQ -4 gyp( { cwc& r■cr, afe 6 1 11, I " i * , - LLB' j 5 . ' � w Y , 1 a Y £ L Iv _ 1_ , ,....,;..,,.,g4.*„...„„, .s..,.., , .._,,4,,,,,..;:_,_...,:, ,.:,. ., - ..,„..„..i.„...,,_,„ ,4,......,,;...,,„:,,,I,.:::,...,,,„_.:777,..1.7„..__, ,. 4 --:-"- ' 1,21-1 - 'k-'T r 's�' r 7 £te � � r ' . ' ' ' ':. 3 ' ' '' s ' 5 p „ gy p"' # , S 7 Y .max z � ` � �� �,� -� � § ' z � � _ a � � _ . 4 te r � -�� s- �` � q �. 2 DISCLAIM This map is neit a le recor used as on map nor a survey and it is not intende to be e. N This drawingisa compilation of records, date 1225 Jefferson Street // and information located in various city, county sod 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 discrepencies are found, please contact the Cit o f Oshkosh. Scale: 1 tot Created by tmm 3/17/10 6 .. s soufc : a f is BOA FISCHER SCOTT A /DARCY A YOUNG JAMIE E 1225 JEFFERSON ST 1230 JEFFERSON ST 1229 JEFFERSON ST 04 -14 -10 OSHKOSH WI 54901 3836 OSHKOSH WI 54901 3835 RENDL MICHAEL J HINTZE NEIL A DIETENBERGER GARY 1216 N MAIN ST 1226 JEFFERSON ST SANFELIPPO ANNE OSHKOSH WI 54901 OSHKOSH WI 54901 3836 1225 JEFFERSON ST OSHKOSH WI 54901 3835 SCHUESSLER ROY L /MICHELE K KDC PROPERTIES LLC KILLILEA TIMOTHY R 1220 JEFFERSON ST 1212 N MAIN ST 1219 JEFFERSON ST OSHKOSH WI 54901 3836 OSHKOSH WI 54901 3842 OSHKOSH WI 54901 3835 CITY OF OSHKOSH GALLIGAN DANIEL J /RHONDA PO BOX 1130 1222 N MAIN ST OSHKOSH WI 54903 1130 OSHKOSH WI 54901 3842 RE VACANT LOT HARRISON ST 8 1 63.0' M �. _•______ 1 NESE 00.0' C � � C y iiir/ t. ■ l C1! 0 33.0' 130.9' Cfl i N r >, 4: 4_17.1___ ] N / - Nom„ =,a _ CV ; r % 42.0 ` 33.0' r r 1 60.0' r — ' I lb w u { 62.7'. 75.0' ' ;/ 33.0' -" Byt T o V J O ; N in N V �Q r nn • V • 33.0 (n C0 �.,. ° r-- 2 N N Kn . -4 i i T' • Q s 4 4.4' ' 45.0' 45.0 , i 0' M r I - � I I S DISCLAIMER # This map is neither a legally recorded map nor 1225 JEFFERSON ST a survey and it is not intended to be used as one. This drawing is a compilation of records, data N OfHKOTH and information located in various city, county and state offices and other sources affecting ON THE WATER the area shown and it is to be used for reference C City of Oshkosh purposes a only, The City of Oshkosh is not re- Scale. 1 " - _ 5 0' Department of sponsible for any inaccuracies s herein in coo ntained. If discrepencies are found, please contact the Community Development City of Oshkosh. Created by - dff 03/29/10 9 a► I I 1 : � V AVE. ¢ R ■� r s I 1■IIPII01I_ ! :1te �� .:,CI .. .' - ° a 1 ►� I �i ' u . i �j .— . ` - 1� : rV j' �/! I !�rI!.11111l11111 �— 1010 -- r ■ 1010 -. 1�I '� .rII111�1!111111111 !'' ,1 -�I [/ Ip .0 C ■ ■' J■' - ii r — — —ti - • loom L' 1' ► I'; 1 - -■ . -� 1� ■ . ■ ■. -- - ■_■ ■- ,d L�aL3W i L r wj r ; 1111' ^ = r, 1 =;:1 7 = i w !L?1I ' p . I ♦ ■ — L ■ r— �■— — ■ ^■ ,-- -- -- — ,. 1010 �l� �. w �r a 1 . � ! I ! i ! tl� r :t t 1 10 � l� _ l _ ■ IIL ■ = . ■ - Aw - .. i� ■ ■ w� ' 1.���' ii ': ' = ■�. �' ,r 1010 I j � • - 1► �I � �� _ r ,, ►1 w1 a■1 `� — -- w- -- ■— ■■ ■1111 - ■� — , :.!' r tW no == ■ ■._, ! �= = =� = ■lam■ == =j = -. - - C� CC C..■ II 10 101010 ••• - c-1_ .,- aa 1010.�.� — — 1010 — ■ ■ ,,II,, II — ra a-r■ ■■. ■—� �J ■.— u s 7 rrR r -- 1 _ -- ■--� WWY L1w M- -,� -.. Sri �- ■. tip' rVADA '�� �■ � - /� : .9� = rtlRa =111 Iifsf ■G ►1 111_ ■ _ —a : — _I �11111h1 _ r. _ !_ 1010 -•• 1010 -- _ !_� .F -1 111 n1 1010 1010 1010 -- — -- -■ /� IJ7,� ■� ~ : , • -- ■- •■. E . _ —� 1010 1010 -- .. — -- - /1 ■■ - -- - - 1010 E• L C� 11 _ 1111 11 11C _ — 1010 1010 — - ■-u■ --- -r.. —'� — 1010 1010 t- 1010 1010 -- - ■-- .r .. 1010 �� -� �- /1■ 11- 11- Iril -- — �— - -. -- -- ■11■1■ -- -- _ —� —w 1010 1010 - 1 ■11— / /' — -- -- �_ ■ — ■ r��r• r.A 1010 wr- — • — 11111 ■� -+t1. �' _ - - -_ - 1010 ■. 1111• - 9 ■� .� L� �- i a.w , ww ww 111�� ■1 -1�- -111 _ __ _ o 1010 aL. _ �J —y 10.10 ■ _ w ■1010_ a.— — C■- �_- —o — 1010 -- E - w - - - a • - _ CJI 1010 -, r 11111 - - - - w M . : -- -■ -- -- ■-- 'u �� �� 1010 ■_nt'lll� Y �!— a► —. a —rir `� ■ —'l.. 1010 w— • —w ..� — — —�■ Ir... —... • Ill�i��� i ,� tam i� —, 1�— ..r..r - ,.�- .., —� �. r�rr• ■ om —. a i_ - �A wm 1010 —1— — _ — • -1 —. — w M. i3 �...�� •� — — - — r..— —�+ 1 s� �� —n �.2 ■ ' Z . E -- r ■- �■ — - - ■ -u.� c -,w w � '.► r� 1 1010 —w■—■ r■.rr_ w 1C:1 /� ��il 11 IIi�III . ►� �+ 11 Ili.! 1111 Il�il 1110 IIYii LEI■i Jul .Gii ��uL 11 11 °I I!� 11 111111 r!!� Spi l�111 ■ - • = �i II 11111 ' 11111 X11 I �e ?C;C� 11■ • 1.: I���� ._Illll���— 10.10 S • "allllilii1111 :.,- - ? V - - �� ► \ pt iii ■■ � .■ �- orr. ^, .l =0 p �FAB ■ [ ! ■i PP .n r ia� �■■ 1010 �� 11 Ril IIIIN S�tr e���l��an_ :tee a s. i.►i., .,cal► ..- ._ - = 1 :n1= :111 -� SUBJECT -■ ; - . -- u . 1 11 111 1 _ r� ' AVE. �Illlli: L " l :.1 - ,_ —.. 11 !1_L�, - _ C r .:� ...� =11 SITE 1■ �- �� uNL.C:�iaall�lr= - _ -- 11.- 1010.. IM _ _ = ■ = 9 11111111 ' u ` - -- -- �•- IIIIIIIR!l1111111" _ - _ _� _ n ■ - -- -- 1010 •■ . 1010_-_ - l�� _ =1010 — . - - - -�- �� 111111i1ir�11111111� a = 2 1�IL U.�W' q ) - -- �- -■■ fiYiii■ -1-•- •■��++ '�' W .�W ■- — 1 - =— -- —°■ — ■— �� —� W . 1111111111/ ��: =� ■'ilia IIIIIL' =� — I � ■ r , - I __ -- �. - — -- —^ m- — r ._, � ► _ - - �— 1010 �an1�a1� C� 1010 �WV • ERT r�1n1111 „ •a : • - -- -- I 1010 ■ ,1..E1■ uh, iII 111 Ui - IIJl.�J.: - ! ...��. ii/ 1■■1 __ � —,— --' . '■ —F� ■1— ■U �� / 111 !LS C 11: u' 'JG�1i '� ■111 C C 1 h.. � �� ! TRL. OH ��'11111Nf"I.Ili■ ■ HN -. • ■� T u r•a_� _.. _I d /Illllfl, �W nom �� . - `� — -- CIS , 10— — —... �— a -r,� as =-rn _w v� .. - �— -- 1010 \/ - -� - - r - 2 a- _ w- .— .— �� 10 10 �' s� C— �., —� �� —, tea- .1 - H - = t ��' " 1�i �'� raw 11 �I�I�� 11111 C �IW11 Gill..' �.U�1._ w r d �:- _ . - - -■ uw � •�1- .0 ■, ■1010 ■- 1 � 1 ■— — inr —� � 111= I N C H 11. "' - I I IIIIIl ■•:- - �� - ■ 11111 — i .+r. — ° - i ■— — c 10 �— - .: c .. •_11L ■II _.' 1010 —r_I -- •■u■ •■AM . as 11111 ■— ra- _ -- �-- -- ■ — -- .� C_ `n �z -- 1 ��1�P 1 11 — 111 ■ — r_ -- 1010 -- ■ _ ■- �"- `r -- 10.10 �-- -- a -a- .u7 -- a n ■ . �1 1 _ ._„ 1 .,.� .-.. �- - �. .1= :: IL':: ;Cii 5-111 r i iI1 IIII11iii 1.1 • 11 11 31 iii 4L .��r,1 : ■1 1111 • 1� 111 /A 1111111: me �' -' ■� 911 _■ �/1 1 1111 11� "I 111 11111 �I■ 1111 1111 IIr r: Illll.11 - ■■- 1010-- -- - -- -- -- i - ■ -� 1010 1010 1010 1010 - 1':1'LESII. aar■. -� .. 2;1— -- 1010 1010 1010 10 -- -- -- - I1= '- JI /111111 =_ -= ' . _ i — —= 1 — 54 -- • -- A11���- a -� -- -- i' 1 _ _ ■11111. ;_ _ 1010 1010 —. G r� aal - a— • 1010 • 1010 -- frL 11111- ,_ - � -_ -__ 1010 is .rr ma.r �j , L -�• -.. w . ! .. 1010 —.w �� . t/ . a — 1010 -- �� ���� ii - —_.■ ■. .■ — . C1■1� o / 1� r ' —� 1010 1010 - - I ' 1~ -ft -- • !■I: �I :�R. �� - _ 11 10 1010 �� ; RT, �� -- (T - ..�� —� ■ u ::i ■IIIIIIIIIIIII 1 111. C , ■ . >.c!' ' �l GiN:' �■�I �. IJ�I 5-l/ �►�' ■■■ . 1 lo w ow r —� �.G �� �• f - a i1111111111L r�` r� - "� ' (,f -L , -11� -1 Lr 11/ 11111 DISCLAIMER This map Is neither a legally recorded map nor 1225 JEFFERSON ST a survey and It Is not Intended to be used as one. This drawing is a compilation of records, data N O- l HKOlH and Information located In various city, county and state offices and other sources affecting °N TME W ATOi the area shown and It Is to be used for reference City of Oshkosh purposes only. The City of Oshkosh Is not re- SCa�e. 1 1 II — 1 1 000 sponsible for any Inaccuracies herein contained. De p artment of If discrepancies are found, please contact the City of Oshkosh. Community Development Created by - dff 03/29/10 10