Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Zoning Appeals (minutes) - 12/18/1991 F � BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINOTES DECEMBER 18, 1991 PRESENT: Jon Dellantonia, Anne Hintz, Don Krueger, Scott McDonald, John Schorse, Terry Slover STAFF: Bruce Roskom, Principal Planner; Susan K. Moore, Principal Planner, Patricia Marks, Recording Secretary Chairman Slover called the meeting to order at 3 : 30 P.M. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. A motion was made and seconded to approve the November 20, 1991 minutes as presented. Chairman Slover informed the applicants that 4 affirmative votes are required to approve a variance; less than 4 affirmative votes is a denial. He also explained the process for obtaining building permits, if the variance is approved, or the appeal process, if the variance is denied. I 913 NEBRASRA STREET - Grace Lutheran Church & School, owners; rry H. Decker, applicant The applicant is requesting a variance to construct a 6 ft. high fence with a 0 ' front yard setback on their lot along 9th Avenue; whereas Section 30-31 (E) (1) Fences and Hedges of the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance states that fences less than 4 ft. high may be located within the required front yard. Garry H. Decker, 1113 Oregon Street, stated he was appearing before the Board on behalf of the applicant, Grace Lutheran Church and School and specifically indicated the area in which the applicant was requesting the 6 ft. high fence. He noted the request was being made due to safety factors as the extra 2 ft. in height would reduce the likelihood of children climbing over the fence and balls going onto 9th Avenue. He also stated that the applicant obtained 14 signatures of the 16 adjoining neighbors on a petition (said petition not being made a part of these minutes) wherein they stated they were not opposed to the creation of this 6 ft. high fence. Mr. Decker indicated the applicant would have obtained the remaining 2 signatures of the adjoining property owners, but those property owners were not available at the time of the circulation of the petition. Mr. McDonald inquired if the proposed playground was going to be paved. Mr. Decker they were not planning on paving the playground. He noted that there presently was playground equipment on Lot 5. They previously had wood chips in there until approximately November, 1991, but had them removed due to a rotting condition. . , BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS PAGE -2- DECEMBER 18, 1991 It was a constant process of taking old rotted ones out and putting new ones in. He noted there is pea gravel in there at present as well as pea gravel in Lot 4. Mr. Dellantonia inquired if the fence that was taken down in Lots 4 & 5 and 14 & 15, was 6 ft. high and Mr. Decker indicated that was correct. Mr. Krueger inquired if there was any anticipated parking on the lots between the church and the gymnasium. Mr. Decker stated he did not anticipate any parking between the church and the gymnasium as the church sits further north and east of the Helm residence and the school would be east of the gymnasium, so that will not be paved for parking. The only : parking that they are considering is to the west of the gymnasium, off lOth Avenue. They are not in need of parking at the present time as there is a municipal parking lot south of : this site that they have access to. He noted there also was a present 50 ft. wide parking site available on the corner of 9th and Nebraska Street. Mr. Decker indicated the Church committee would like a 5± ft. buffer of green area between Lots 13 and 14. He further indicated Lots 3 and 13 presently have houses on them and the Church has been in contact with the present owners of Lot 13 and they have indicated that when they were ready to sell their property, they would give the Church the first opportunity to purchase same. Mr. McDonald inquired if a baseball diamond or organized play was anticipated for Lots 4 and 5, and Mr. Decker indicated the intent was just for organized play. Mr. Decker also noted when the new gymnasium is built, they will have an area 40 x 150 ft. which is sufficient for activities such as soccer, kickball, etc. Mr. McDonald inquired if it would be catastrophic if the fence would have a setback of approximately 15-20 ft. from 9th Avenue. Mr. Decker indicated that it would be catastrophic as they would be giving up valuable playground area. Presently they have 1500 sq. ft. of playground are on Lots 14 and 15, but after the new gymnasium is built, we will lose all of Lot 15. There would remain 6000 sq. ft. on Lot 14 and 7500 sq. ft. on Lot 4 which is a total of 13,500.00 sq. ft. , which is already 1500 sq. ft. less after the gymnasium is built than what we have at present. He did not feel that they are able to give up any more play area than what is proposed. McDonald inquired as to the intent for the area on Lot 15 between the gymnasium and the school. . r f � BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS PAGE -3- DECEMBER 18, 1991 Mr. Decker stated they were saving 60 ft. in that area. If the Church could afford it presently, they would be making the new building 50 ft. bigger. The intent is not to connect the buildings and to stay approximately 10 ft. away with the new building. The 50 ft. that is being saved is for a future ' cafeteria and commons. A breezeway is anticipated which will run from the new gymnasium to the existing school as they want to attach it inside so no one has to go outside and back into the gymnasium. Pamela Hergert, 317 W. 17th Avenue, stated she wished to point out that the space between the school and the new gymnasium is where they would like to put new equipment in. She further stated we want more than just a place to play, we want some place where we can put equipment in and we need the room to do that and they did not want to have to rip the equipment out and move it around once it was placed in this area. She also stated that she had been in contact with the surrounding property owners and they are in favor of the proposed fence. Discussion ensued as to the proposed playground and area intended for green space. It was noted that the appellant should maintain some setback for landscaping purposes. Mr. McDonald inquired if Sunday parking was intended on Lots 14 or 5 and Mr. Decker replied parking was not intended on those lots as it was not a mixed use. He indicated there is adequate parking in a parking lot across the street as well as on-street parking. (Mr. Dellantonia was excused from the meeting at this time leaving a 5-member Board. ) Motion by Krueger to approve the variance as requested with the following conditions: (1) A 5 ft. front yard setback from 9th Avenue be maintained; (2) No parking be allowed on Lots 4 and 5; (3) No parking allowed on Lot 14 during school hours; and (4) A landscape plan be submitted for review by Staff and that all : landscape work be done within one year from date of approval. Seconded by Hinz. Motion carried 4-1 (Aye: Hintz, Krueger, McDonald, Slover; Nay: Schorse) . ' As to the findings of fact, Mr. Krueger stated the Board tried to meet appellant's request and still maintain a setback on the . property. The hardship is that the appellant lacks a playground ' because of the building. Mr. Slover added as a safety factor for the children, a 6 ft. high fence would be much safer than a 4 ft. high fence which a small child could get over easily.