Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES AUGUST 24, 2005 PRESENT: Robert Cornell, Dennis Penney, Moss Ruedinger, Edward Wilusz, and Larry Lang, Vice Chairman EXCUSED: Dan Carpenter and Cheryl Hentz, Chairman STAFF: Susan Kepplinger, Principal Planner, David Buck, Associate Planner and Patty LaCombe, Recording Secretary The meeting was called to order by Vice Chairman Lang. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. Motion by Cornell for approval of the July 27, 2005 minutes. Seconded by Penney. Unanimous. I: 2550 S. Washburn St. Jim LeFeber, Fox Cities Construction, owner, requests a variance to construct a dumpster enclosure with a 15’ rear yard setback whereas Section 30-34 (D) (4) (c) of the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance requires a 25’ rear yard setback in the Highway 41 Overlay District. Mr. Lang asked when the complex is to be constructed. Ms. Kepplinger stated it is currently under construction, however the lot itself and configuration is the result of relocation of Washburn St. and the reconfiguration of S. Washburn St. and HWY 44 intersection. The lot was owned by Chief Equipment and approximately 15-16 years ago S. Washburn St. was moved to the west of its original location for safety reasons and it became an orphan lot. Mr. Lang then asked if that is the lot where Chief Equipment used to park some of it’s Equipment. Ms. Kepplinger stated yes, that is the lot in question. Mr. Cornell asked if there is a reason that they are placing the structure on the lot the way it is. Jim LeFeber stated they placed the building that way is to maximize the lot itself for the drainage and parking that is needed for the business. There is a sewer and water line that is owned by the City of Oshkosh and it sits right out front of the building, which they were working around that also. By working around the sewer and water line, it just worked out that is how they could maximize the lot. When S. Washburn St. was relocated, they could have made the City of Oshkosh move the sewer and water; the city would have been liable to move it at their expense within 120 days. They are not imposing that on the city, they are trying to work around that, and that agreement is still in effect. Mr. Lang asked what is the current plan. Ms. Kepplinger stated in order to get the building permit, they had to show the dumpster where the zoning ordinance would permit. They don’t want the dumpster at it’s current location and would like to get a variance to move it to a better location. Jim LeFeber stated it wouldn’t be appealing to traffic coming over the overpass to see the dumpster right there, the only other place is in the corner by the park & ride, so it’s not real noticeable to the public. Mr. Lang questioned if they are proposing to add retail spaces onto the HWY 44 side. Jim LeFeber stated that’s where the permit allows the dumpster to be located, if the variance were passed they would like to put windows and canopies there rather than the dumpster. Ms. Kepplinger stated if the variance were approved there would be storefronts on the HWY 44 side of the building. Board of Appeals Minutes -2-August 24, 2005 Mr. Lang stated he is opposed to the idea as the building is under already construction without getting the variance approved. Jim LeFeber stated they are trying to meet all the zoning requirements and they did, they are trying to make it more appealing to the cars going over the overpass. Ms. Kepplinger stated they are trying to make the site work without forcing the City of Oshkosh to move the sewer and water and having the expense along with it. Jim LeFever stated they met all the zoning requirements to make this project work, all other projects they are told they need to screen the accessory structures, now they want to move the dumpster so it’s more appealing for the public. Mr. Cornell stated he understands what is being said and agrees with that, however the bigger issue is saving the city money. The board of appeals did not issue the building permit and are here to correct an error in no fault of the builder or no fault to the city. With the recommendation recommendation from staff including the landscaping to buffer the appearance, it’s more of an ideal situation under the circumstances. Jim LeFever showed the landscape plan to the board and stated if the variance got approved, the dumpster will be in an enclosed structure and there will be landscaping around that area. Motion by Mr. Cornell for approval of the variance to construct a dumpster enclosure with a 15’ rear yard with the following condition; 1. Installation of landscaping to buffer the appearance of the enclosure from Highway 41 subject to approval by staff. Seconded by Mr. Ruedinger, motion carried 4-1. Finding of Facts: Mr. Wilusz stated there is clearly a unique physical characteristic about this location and water/sewer easement running through the property. The hardship is being addressed as the City of Oshkosh’s hardship. II. 2045 W. 20th Ave. Jim LeFeber, Fox Cities Construction, applicant and Jay Manufacturing, owner, request a variance to construct an addition that will join two existing existing manufacturing buildings. The addition will have a + 17’4” side yard setback whereas Section 30-30 (B) (2) of the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance requires a 20’ side yard setback. The existing building on the west side of the site has a rear yard setback of + 23’ whereas Section 30-30 (B) (3) requires a 25’ rear yard setback. The proposed addition will be of steel and will not meet the requirements of 30-34 (D) (1) (f) which requires any additions in excess of fifty (50) percent of the existing floor area of the existing building constructed prior to the effective date of this Ordinance to comply with this Section. Mr. Ruedinger asked if the landscaping recommendation by staff is to be along 20th Ave. & Washburn St.. Ms. Kepplinger stated the landscaping would be right against the building, it would break up the building wall. Mr. Lang asked for clarification on whether the variance was for setbacks or for the types of materials for materials used in the construction of the new building. Ms. Kepplinger referred to Municipal Code 30-34 (D) (1) (f). Board of Appeals Minutes -3-August 24, 2005 Mr. LeFeber asked if the landscaping on the 20th St. side was for the addition itself. Ms. Kepplinger stated it was for the addition itself. Mr. Ruedinger asked if they currently have landscaping on that side. Mr. LeFeber stated there are a few trees and shrubs along the existing building. Mr. Penney asked when a variance is approved with conditions, what kind of follow up is being done to verify that the conditions are being met. Ms. Kepplinger stated the permit has not been issued at this time and he needs the variance to get the permit. When the permit is applied for a zoning review is done at that time the inspectors discover a variance has been granted and then the planning division staff makes sure the conditions of the variance request are met. Mr. Ruedinger questioned staff, in the Municipal Code 30-34 (D) (1) (f) it states 50% of existing building, if that means both buildings combined. Ms. Kepplinger replied, if the addition they are building was less than 50% of the square footage of the floor area of the existing buildings it wouldn’t need to meet the 41 overlay Mr. LeFeber stated the existing structure is two different metal buildings and the owner knows there are concessions to be made. Motion by Mr. Wilusz for approval of the variance to construct an addition that will join two existing manufacturing buildings with the following condition; 1. The addition be buffered on the east and north sides by a minimum 10’ wide landscaped area immediately abutting the building. Plant material in that area shall include but not be limited to evergreen trees. Landscape plan subject to final approval by staff. Seconded by Mr. Penney, motion carried 5-0. Finding of Facts: Mr. Wilusz stated it is a unique situation, no harm to the public interest and strict conformity without this given the unique situation would impose it would be unnecessarily burdensome to the owner. DISCUSSION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS PROCEDURES No discussion was held at this meeting. There being no no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 4:05 pm Cornell/Wilusz. Unanimous. Respectfully Submitted, David Buck Associate Planner DB/pal