Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Board of Appeals Minutes March 23, 2005 Page 1 BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES MARCH 23, 2005 PRESENT: Dan Carpenter, Robert Cornell, Cheryl Hentz, Meredith Scheuermann, Edward Wilusz EXCUSED: Larry Lang STAFF: Matt Tucker, Associate Planner; Patty LaCombe, Clerical Assistant; Darlene Brandt, Recording Secretary The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Hentz. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. A motion was made and seconded to approve the minutes of March 23, 2005 as distributed. Motion approved by voice vote. I. 651-653 N. MAIN STREET – Joe Leroy, petitioner/owner Mr. Tucker introduced the item and circulated photos of the site. The new signage, which is a new art deco type of signage, is proposed to be placed on top of the canopy. Mr. Tucker explained the Zoning Ordinance permits signage on the canopy itself, but only on a small percentage of the face of the canopy, which does not provide functional signage for the business. Mr. Tucker believed the sign would be of block type lettering that that will be backlit. It was noted the petitioner was not in attendance for this hearing. There was discussion on existing Ordinance requirements for canopies and awnings. Staff noted the City ordinance does not effectively relate to signage placed on canopies/awnings and but felt the proposed sign would fit in with the renovations proposed for the building. Motion by Carpenter to move approval of the placement of signage graphics on the top of a canopy as proposed with the condition that no projecting sign may be placed on the property. Seconded by Scheuermann. There was discussion on procedure for handling the vote, in regard to the staff recommended condition. It was clarified the motion includes the condition, as written in the staff report. Roll call was taken. Motion carried 5-0. Regarding the findings of fact, Mr. Wilusz felt the variance requested is consistent with the Ordinance; practical problem due to the type of construction. Ms. Hentz felt the Ordinance does not permit an effective placement of this new type of signage. The variance requested is the least needed to meet the applicants needs and there will not be any adverse impact. II. 527 E. PARKWAY AVENUE – Oshkosh Boys & Girls Club Mr. Tucker introduced the item and circulated photos of the site. The proposed project will expand the existing teen center, move the main entrance to the west and connect the two main buildings on the site via a common parking lot. Transitional yards are required due to the residential uses across the street. Mr. Tucker pointed out that the Boys & Girls Club owns all of the parcels on this block. With regard to the condition about combining the lots, Mr. Tucker noted staff is recommending a modification to condition No. 3 in the staff report, to include all of the parcels owned by the Boys & Girls Club on the campus be combined into one legal property. Board of Appeals Minutes March 23, 2005 Page 2 Mr. Kurt Koeppler, 1726 Rivermill Rd., Chief Volunteer Officer, and Mr. Mark Desogne, CEO of the Boys & Girls Club, appeared before the Board. Referring to a rendering of the proposed project, Mr. Koeppler felt the remodeling project would better serve the youth of Oshkosh. He explained this is a supervised, structured environment with about 2,700 members. The teen center provides services to keeping the kids off the street and teaching them job skills. Ms. Hentz inquired if they had objections to the conditions of approval as recommended by staff? Mr. Koeppler indicated there is not a problem with meeting conditions. Ms Hentz asked Mr. Koeppler to comment on the proposed accessory structure. Mr. Koeppler replied the new structure will be constructed for storage purposes and would be an improvement over the existing condition. The existing garage that will be placed is currently on the property line, and sheetdrains water onto the adjacent neighbor’s property. The new construction will provides setback and will effectively drain water off-site. Mrs. Scheuermann felt the petitioner has addressed issues that are necessary for the safety of everyone utilizing the facility. This is well thought out project. Motion by Scheuermann to move approval of a 2 ft. front yard setback and 8 ft. rear yard setback for an addition as proposed, with the following conditions: 1) Architectural enhancements and design of the building addition be reviewed and approved by the Department of Community Development before a building permit may be approved. 2) The accessory structure be constructed of a style and design similar to the adjacent facility buildings. 3) All parcels owned by the applicant/owner be combined into a single legal parcel. 4) A landscape plan be submitted to and approved by the Dept. of Community Development prior to issuance of a building permit. Landscape plan shall include intensified landscaping in the green space area between the parking lot and E. Parkway Avenue. Avenue. Regarding the findings of fact, Mrs. Scheuermann felt the Club has addressed issues that are necessary for the safety of everyone utilizing the facility. Ms. Hentz felt the proposed project will make for a nice development on the property and will have no adverse impact. Also, the neighbor will no longer have a water runoff problem. Mr. Carpenter noted the applicant has indicated a willingness to will work with staff in issues that may arise. III. 3100 WHITE TAIL LANE – William Mark, applicant; Hunter’s Ridge LLC, owner Mr. Tucker introduced the item. He explained the petitioner proposes to construct a gazebo/recreational structure within the common green space area of a new residential development. The structure is part of an overall landscape treatment and will have landscaping around it and accessed by a walking path. Mr. William Mark of Landmark Development, 100 N. Westhaven Dr., stated this part of the parcel is being developed as condos. They did a similar type of development in Sheboygan and it turned out very well. Apartments are also being proposed for the area. However, the gazebo will be for use of owners of the condos only. It will be visible from the street and will add to the overall development. Mr. Cornell asked if this would be in front of the condominiums and if this will be open to the general use of the participants for all to use? Board of Appeals Minutes March 23, 2005 Page 3 Mr. Mark stated the owners of the condominium development would only use it. Mr. Cornell asked if you are in an apartment, its hands off? Mr. Mark stated it was only for the condominiums and it would be 64 units, if they would add on to the condominium association, new condominiums would be given easements to that area. Mr. Mark provided further detail on the landscaping, stating there would be pathways, flower beds, decorative post lights. It will be somewhat lit up at night to so it won’t be a dark space out there at night. Mr. Cornell asked if this is the same thing that is on the corner of Hazel Street and E. Irving Avenue? Mr. Tucker replied yes, although the gazebo on Hazel Street and E. Irving Avenue is located in a different zoning classification. Motion by Cornell to approve a variance to place a residential accessory structure in a front yard area as requested. Seconded by Scheuermann. Motion carried 5-0. Regarding the findings of fact, Mr. Cornell felt the gazebo would be an improvement to the overall area, as well as an incentive to purchase property in this area. Ms. Hentz felt the Marks’ have developed a lot of attractive property in the City and are aware of landscaping requirements, and she feels comfortable that this proposal will meet those requirements. IV. W. 12TH AVENUE & S. SAWYER STREET – Wisconsin Public Service, owner/petitioner Mr. Tucker introduced the item and circulated photos of the site. The proposal will expand the area inside the fence to allow vehicles access to the equipment from inside of the fence. Mr. Brian Luchs from Wisconsin Public Service, 700 N. Adams St., Green Bay, stated they do not have a problem with the additional landscaping being recommended. The additional area will permit personnel to access equipment from inside the fence versus trying to access it from outside the fence. Mr. Carpenter stated he has had extensive connections with WPS. Also his father worked for WPS. However, he did not feel this would affect his decision on this issue. Motion by Carpenter to approve a variance for an 8 ft. high fence with a 16 ft. setback, as requested, with the following condition: 1) A landscape plan be submitted to and approved by the Dept. of Community Development prior to issuance of a fence permit. The landscaping plan is to identify existing landscaping and new landscaping necessary to establish 4-seasons screening on the east side of the site. Seconded by Cornell. Motion carried 5-0. Regarding the findings of fact, Mr. Carpenter felt the expansion would provide an improved work area. Ms. Hentz felt the petitioner is requesting the least possible variance to meet their needs. Other Business Mr. Cornell inquired about the status of Board member Don Pressley. Mr. Tucker advised that Mr. Pressley has resigned. Board of Appeals Minutes March 23, 2005 Page 4 There was discussion regarding a proposed amendment to the State Statutes in regard to quorum and voting. Mr. Tucker indicated he was not sure of the status on that proposed legislation. Ms. Hentz stated the Board meeting went very smoothly today based on how the Board should operate. Mrs. Scheuermann felt today’s meeting was very clean and smooth and preferred this way. Handling voting on items at previous meetings was very cumbersome. Ms Hentz and Mr. Cornell concurred. Mr. Carpenter stated he has been at Board’s meetings where voting was done the old way and the new way. He felt all Board members should be present to discuss this issue. He asked staff to check with other City Boards and Committees to see how they operate. Mr. Tucker encouraged board members to check the City’s website to review the minutes form other City boards/commissions. He also noted an item will be placed on the next agenda to discuss procedures and regulations. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approximately 4:15 pm Respectfully Submitted, MATT TUCKER Associate Planner MWT/pl