Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout28164 / 76-120 May 6, 1976 f ., # 12 RESOLUTION 1JNANIMOUSLY APPROVED BX J�I�AN CUMMISSION 6-0 BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Cour�ca.l o� the City of Oshkosh that the Preliminary Plat of LINWOOD PLAT is hereby agproved�. (Subject to the modifications approved by the Plan Commission(approved grades and dr•ainage plan) A tract of land in the NEfSE, Sec. 11, T18N, RY6E, 12th Ward, City of Oshkosh, Winnebago County, Wisconsin, containing 4.224 acres and beinq described as follows: Commencing at the East 1�4 corner of said Sec. 11, thenc� West 629.77 feet; thence South 622.05 feet to the inter- section of the East line of VSisc�nsi.ri 1�venue c��ith the South line of West Smith Avenue and the point of beginning; running thence S$9° 44' 00" East, 275.00 feet along the South line of West Smith 1�venue; thence South 00° 22' 39" West, 668.33 feet to a point on the North line of West Linwood Avenue; thence Nortn II�° 58` 12" West, 275.2? feet along the North line of W�st Linw�od Avenue to its intersectian with the East line of Wisconsin Street; thence North 00' 24' 00" East, G69.47 f_eet alang the East line of Wisconsin Street to the point of b�ginning. - 14 - �-,�_._ ._ .; r,1T _ .: ;'L t i _. . . ..... .........._ -��.�.... _......�_o..+w,._r..w. '' � ,� ; ... — .... . .. . ___.. .�i Fl�aV:Y;'; "` • �� — �� � �- , + �� 'LC��-t�Z�, �� r s PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, APRIL 12, 1976 4:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Karen Fonstad, Warren Steinert, Kathleen Propp, Gary Goyke, Robert Fick. Lurton Blassingame, Jack Schneider, and Acting City Manager, David L. Wendtland. STAFF PRESENT . Roland Mi11er, Acting Director, Community Development Susan Sedlachek, Secretary I. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT A. The Department of Community Development requests the Plan Commission review the following proposed amendment to the City of Oshkosh Zoning Ordinance: INSERT: Section 30-3 Definitions. 30. "Hospital". The term "hospital" means any building structure, institution or place which is devoted primarily to the maintenance and operation of facilities for the diagnasis, treatment of and medical or surgical care for individuals suffering from illness, disease, injury or deformity and which makes available clinical laboratory service, diagnostic x-ray and treatment facilities for surgery or obstet'rical care and which is accredited as a hospital by the Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Hospitals. NOTE: If inserted, subsequent definitions will be renumbered. DELETE: Section 30-18 (b) (4) Special Permitted Uses "...,hospitals,..." Page 2 Plan Commission Minutes Monday, Apri1 12, 1976 INSERT USE Hospitals a SPECIFIC CONDITIONS Buildings may not occupy over 40 pe�cent of the lot. b. �u�ldings must be setback an additional one foot over the usual yard requirements for each one foot the building exceeds usual heigh� l�mits. c. Off-St�eet Park�ng: 1. One and one half (1.5) parking s�aces shall be provided for each hospital bed. 2. Where the proposed parking lot fronts on a street that constitutes the boundary line between hospital use and predominantly residential use (greater than 50 percent of the block frontage), the parking lot shall have a setback of not less than 15 feet. Otherwise a 5 foot setback shall be provided. 3. Where the proposed parking lot abuts property used for a residence a 3 foot side yard setback and rear yard setback shall be provided. DISTRICTS R-lA, R-1B, R-2, R-3, R-4 4. A suitable fence, wall or evergreen shrub border, at least five (5) feet high alon� all non-owned residential property shall be provided. 5. Proposed ingress and egress points shall be reviewed for ap�roval or denial by the Director of Pu'�lic Works to insure compliance with traffic eng�neering and safety standards. 6. The proposed parking lot sh�ll conform with all provisions of Section 30-20 fb) (5), (c) (2), (c) (3), (c) (4), and (c) (�6�. Page 3 Due to information received at the Workshop Session and Subsequent meefiings with the hospital representatives and citizens from the neighborhood, the Plan Commission may consider an ordinance amendment containin� the followin� provisions. USE SPECIFIC CONDITIQNS Hospitals a. Buildings may not occupy over 40 percent of the land included within the special use permit. b. Off-street Parking: 1. One parking space shall be provided for each hospital bed. 2. Where the proposed parking lot fronts on a street that constitutes the boundary line between hospital use and predominantly non-hospital owned residential use (greater than 50% of the block frontage), the parking lo�t shall have a setback of not less than 15 feet. This x�equired setback sha11 be landscaped with grass and other plantings and shall contain a 6 foot high chain-link fence of suitable gauge and evergreen shrubbery of 60°% opacity. The parking lot setback sha11 be 5 feet where the park�.ng 1ot fronts on a street which is not predominantly residential use as herein defined. Such 5 foot setback shall be landscaped with grass and other plantings. In the required setback areas, the existing deciduous and evergreen trees with a trunk diameter of 8 inches or more wi11 be retained. DISTRICTS R-lA, R-1B, R-2 , R-3 , R-4 3. Where the proposed parking lot abuts property used for a non-hospital owned residence, a 3 foot side yard setback and rear yard setback shall be provided. In such setback, a 6 foot chain link fence of suitable gauge and evergreen shrubbery of 600 opacity shall be provided. 4. Where evergreen shrubbery is required, it shall have a minimum height of four (4) feet at the time of planting and shall be located on the required setback line between the nearest property line and the required fence. Page 4 Plan Commission Minutes 5. The required chain link fence and evergreen shrubbery shall conform to Section 30-19 (e) (1) relating to vision clearance. 6. Proposed ingress and egress points shall be reviewed for approval or denial by the Director of Public Works to insure compliance with traffic engineering and safety standards. 7. The proposed parking lot shall conform with a11 provisions of Section 30-20 (b) (5), (c) (2), Cc) (3), Cc) (4), and (c) C6). Mr. Miller explained that meetings had been held with representa- tives of the neighborhood, represen�atives of the hospital and the Department of Community Developmen� to work on a proposed amendment. The first amendment in �he agenda is the original, proposed amendment and the second amendment distributed with the agenda is a copy of what was a result of ineetings the siaff had with the neighborhood and hosp�tal representatives. The Plan Commission may wish to entertain some of those recommendations in their consideration, he added. Mr. Hibbard Engler, Counsel for Mercy Medical Center, 302 North Main Street, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Engler stated that the definition of hospi�al remains the same - there was no change. Item (a) was changed to clarify what was meant by lot. Item (b) on the orig�nal amendment was eliminated - the basis for this was because Mercy Medical Center is the only hospital and if we had the setback requirements, there is no way a special use permit can be issued to the present buildings. Under off-street parking (c), a change was made to reduce the number of parking spaces from 1.5 to 1 for each hospital bed because, frankly, this is what parking would be available. Number (c) (2) was changed to a setbaek of 15 feet where over 1/2 of the block frontage is predominantly residential. He pointed out that the setback on Grove would be 15 feet, on Oak would be 5 feet, that also lying North of C�eveland would be 5 feet, and on Parkway would be 15 feet. He added that some of these changes are input from residents also. Item (2) also contains the requirement for a six foot high chain l�nk fence with evergreen shrubbery of 600 opacity and at the request of the neighbors, all �xist�ng deciduous trees with a trunk diameter of more than 8 inches will be x�efiained,zt�m; 3�S an additional requirement of a 3 foot side and rear yard 5etback. Item (4) requires evergreen shrubbery at a minimum of 4 feet in height at planting time be placed at the required setback line. Item C5) pertains to all ingress and egress points and vision cle�rance. Numb�r (6) is the old (5), unchanged, Item (7) is unchanged. He stated that he would submit to the Plan Commissipn, on behalf of the hospital, that they can comply with the provisions of the Special Use Permit and wi�l petition for it. Mr. �ick asked what �he one parking space was a compromise from? Mr. �ngler stated that it is a compromise to meet future conditions, condi�ions which exist, and those which we look to in the near future. Page 5 Plan Commission Minutes Monday, Apri1 12, 1976 Mr. Fick pointed out that deciduous trees and evergreen shrubbery are normally measured at a height of 3 feet above ground level. He' stated that there is some significant dzfference in trees. He stated he thought the City uses the 3 foot measurement and this should be ' included. Mr. Engler stated that he thought perhaps this would mean substantial trees would remain. Mrs. Fonstad asked if the 600 opacity would be the entire length except for vision clearance? Mr. Engler replied that �t would be, that is his understanding. Mrs. Marie Senn, 672 Grove Street, asked if the Maple trees on Cleveland would be cut down and evergreens and a fence put in which will be a catch-all for everything. She asked if the hospital will be keeping this clean? Mrs. Senn stated that she has two lots with a honeysuckle hedge that has been practically run over. She added that she has to cut the hedge on both sides and there is junk being tossed into here. Tf part of this will be paved what will happen to the corridor in between my property and the paved area? They will not take care of it. Mr. George Thomas, Mercy Medical Center, Manager of Plant and Facilities, appeared before ihe Commission and stated that the proposed ordinance changes have been worked out with all of the neighbors and Mr. Miller. Mr. Miller and about a half dozen neighbors came in again and we came up with this proposal which we feel is something we can �ive with. Mr. Thomas stated that the cyclone fencing wi11 cost them about $8-10,000 and about the same amounfi for hedging. He stated that he feels this is a lot more than you are asking of others in the City. Mr. Thomas stated that he would agree with some of the remarks because this w�ll be creating something that is dif�icult to maintain. We do feel we can live with it as it is written up. Mrs. Propp asked if they do plan on attempting to maintain �he fence and hedging? Mr. Thomas �eplied that he does feel they w�ll have a problem with a man going through 3 feet with a lawnmower - it wi�l probably be tall grass. Mrs. Doris Schultz, 655 Grove Street, appeared before the Commission speaking for some of the residents in the area of the hospital, and read a prepared statement (see attachment 1). M�s. Gre�chen F�ood, 1106 East Irving Avenue, stated that the provisions for �but��ng property owners are those included from their own pe�z�ion. Those wo�ds were taken from thei� own petition of provisions. Perhaps i� they are cancerned, the insertion o� the word "mainfienance" would �a�ve t�e problem. Mrs. Mary Hughes, ���� East Irving Avenue, stated that there is still a bus and a camper parked on the 1ot and is wondering why it has not been remov�d frpm the lofi? Mr. Rqbe�t $r�srnaster, 1015 East Irv�ng Avenue, stated that he is very impxessed wxth the p�ogress that has been made. Zt is very d�fPi�ult to spel� ��1 of fih�s out in the ordinance. He stated that he does not know why �h� poin� of maintenance is coming up - if the hospital spend� a�� �ha� mon�y and meets us that �ar, he does not see why we shou�d worry abput putting a rake in once �n awhile to help c1�an it, He added �ha� a lQt o� fihe debris comes from Longfellow Schoo�. Page 6 Plan Commission Minutes Monday, April 12, 1976 . As to the lighting issue - Mr. Thomas has given verbal assurance of meeting with Mr. F�ck and has said �hey w�l� try to do everything in the�r power to get Zighting that is acceptable. Mr. Brismaster concluded that he did not want the 3 foot issue between the �ence and lot �ine to dissuads �he Commiss�on. Mr. Schneider moved to approve the new proposed zoning ordinance amendment, seeonded by Blassingame. Mr. Fick moved to amend Sect�on (b) C2) paragraph 2 to add the wording, "...o� 8�' or more, 3�eet above ground line, wi�l be retained." Motion seconded by Ponstad. 'F�rs. Propp stated that she thought more trees would be preserved that way. M�. Fick agreed. Mr. A1 Hetzel, 1017 East Parkway, stated that the lights from the school yard shine right �n his room, pulling down the shade solves the whole thing. As far as lighting is concerned, he did nofi see where that would create any troub�e. He added that it is a good thing they did put in extra l�ghfis in �he school yard with what goes on there. Mrs. Gretchen Flood stated that there are very nice lights at the new Post Office, at Aoctors Court and Leeward and Windward Court and we thought perhaps we could go on record that these are desirable lights for a residential area. Mr. Schneider stated that he doesn't feel that this belongs in the Ordinance itself. That would have to be worked out with the hospital. We cannot tell them what kind of light to put in on private prope�ty - on City right-of-way we can. Mrs. Beatrice Wal�, 645 Grove Street, stated that her home faces the existing parking lot. There are 8 houses on this block who are bothered in summer by lights in this parking �ot. Mr. George Thomas, Mercy Medical Center, stated that he had their Public Informat�on Department take a survey of those 8 homes as to whether the �ights bothered them and only two of those surveyed were bothered by the lights - the other six stated that they felt a little more secure at night with the lights. If there is not a big cost difference in these lights, we will consider them. There is a limit to how far the neighbors can tell us to go with this. Mr. Thomas stated that he had talked with Mel Carpenter of the Public Service today and asked him to check into problems on Grove Street and types of lights. Mr. Wendtland pointed out that Section 30-20 (c) (6) does include the shielding of light. The amendm�nt to fihe mot�on carried, 8-0. Mr. Fick stated that he has problems with (b) (2) "This required setback shal� be landscaped with grass and other plantings and shall contain a 6 foot high chain-link fence of suitable gauge and evergreen shrubbery of 600 opacity." He stated that he thought we would have to add the word summer. Mr. Mi11er replied that this specified evergreen shrubbery. Mr. F ck stated �hat he could see shrubbery of 60o summer opacity. Mr. Miller stafied that this came from the proposed Zoning Ordinance of screening industrial areas. Mr. Fick asked the rest of Page 7 Plan Commission MinuteS Monday, April 12, �976 the Plan Commissioners if fihey felt the word evergreen should remain rather than jus� shrubbery? The commissioners agreed it should remain. Mr. Pick asked about �he wording suitable gau�e - in who's opinion? There are seven dif�erent gauges, he pointed out. You can get some cheap, dangerous �encing. We have found that we have to s�ick w�th galvanized steel. He asked where this wording came from? Mr. Miller replied that the wording came from the petition submit�ed from the neighborhood residents. Mr. Fick stated that the City specifies a gauge of fencing and that perhaps could be incorporated. Mrs. Fonstad stated tha� most of the Zoning Ordinance regu�ations state suitable gauge. Mr. Goyke s�ated that he fee�s the word su�table would be all right. As mentioned in here, the City w�ll be coming in and making inspection and this wi11 take care of i�. There are enough guidelines in here that will satisfy any questions I have. Mr. Fick asked which side of �he fence the evergreen shrubbery would be on? Mr. Miller re�lied that it would be on the outside of the fence on the property �ine. Mr. Fick stated that he has a real hang-up of putting anything in there that is going to be hard to maintain. Dr. Blassingame stated that the fence protects the shrubbery from snow removal. Mr. Fick stated that he feels this wi11 be a difficult thing to maintain. We are talking about se�ting a precedent and he thinks we should use extreme c�ution on the locatian and a 6 foot high fence of suitable gauge. Mr. Fick stated that he finds it entirely distasteful having a chain link fence in a residential area. T think you have to talk to someone wha has to maintain a chain link �ence and get their opinion o� this. You are going to have complaints to the Building Inspector on maintenance in six or seven years. Mr� Steinert asked Mr. Fick if he felt a regular fence without shxubbery would be easier to maintain? Mr. Fick replied that there would be a con�inual staining problem unless you let it go natural, and would be more expensive in the long run. Original motion to approve the amendment, carried, 7-1-0, with Fick abstaining. II. SPECIAL USE PERMIT A. Mercy Medical Center requests a special permit for parking on the property described as: All of Block 2 in Carl Hennig's Additio� in the Eleventh Ward, City of Oshkosh, except the following parcels of land: Lot 15, Lot 18, the North 42.4 feet of Lot l, and the West 36.4 feet of the North 42.4 feet of Lot 2. Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 13 and 14, the North 1/3 of Lot 10, the South 2/3 of Lot 9, and the North 60 feet of Lots 15, 16, and 17, all in Block 2 in Barber and Madison's Addition in the Eleventh Ward, City of Oshkash. Mercy Medical Center further requests that the special permit be applied to any of the property adjacent to the property described in paragraphs 1 and 2 whieh may be acquired by Mercy in the future for use as parking facilities. Page 8 Plan Commission Minutes Monday, April 12, 1976 Mr. Miller explained tha� there is land adjacent to the hospital where they want ta complete parking lo�s - the block between Cleveland and Irving and Grove and Oak. Item 1 deals with the specific lots and Item 2 would deal with any areas that the hospital would buy in the future to be used f4� parking adjacent to these areas. Mr. Engler stated that the hospital would like a correction in the description. We would like to add lots 15, 16, and 17 to that. We would ask you to delete the North 60' of Lots 15, 16, and 17 of the description because we have agreed to acquire Mr. Baur's property and have closed with Mr. Lewis. Mr. Engler stated that the second paragraph on future parking areas was put in as a practical matter as we acquire property for parking. If there is objection to granting this, it could be stricken and we could come back each time for a special use permit. Mr. Goyke stated that the only property ta be added is the Baur property on the corner of Cleveland and Oak. Mr. Goyke asked if this would affect proper�y value if a home in this area were to be sold to someone else. Mr. Engler replied that he did not know how it would affect the value unless it is purchased by Mercy Medical Center because it wouldn't come under the Special Use Permit. Mr. Goyke stated that he felt this might always be held over the head of the property. Mr. Engler not�d that this was added as only a matter of convenience for the hospital. Mr. Wendtland pointed out that the City has nofi done this in any other case. Mr. Goyke sta�ed thafi he would not object to the Baur property being added but to any other property being included. Mr. George Thomas stated that they had pu�chased some more property between the Zinth and Senn properties and if you �elt Y�u would like control on that, we have no strong teelings about having that property deleted from the permit you are considering. Mr. Goyke stated then, that the property between the Zinth and Senn properties would not be inc�uded and on the other block we would not be including Lots 15, 16, and 17. Mrs. Gretchen Flood expressed concern that blank permission not be given for property that is not owned yet. Mr. Engler stated that the special permit for the hospital perhaps should include the nursing school. He suggested that a new description should be submitted. Mrs. Fonstad stated that perhaps the property should be checked so as not to go over the 40% occupation of the lot by the bu�lding. Mr. Engler stated that, in the interest of accuracy, he would like to withdraw consideration of the special use permit tonite. A straw vote was taken at the suggestion those Commissioners in favor of the exclusion 2/3 of Lot 9 and excluding paragraph 3 of the of Mrs. Fonstad, as of 1/3 of Lot 10 and request. All were in to favor. Page 9 Plan Commission Minutes Monday, April 12, 1976 IT. B. Al Bleser requests a special permit for new and used automobile sales and service on the property he owns and described as follows: Lot 1, Block 1, Suhl's Addition, lOth Ward, City of Oshkosh (generally located at the southwest corner of North Main Street and New York Avenue). Mr. Miller explained that the property is located at the corner of New York Avenue and North Main Street and the petitioner is requesting a special use permit on this lot for automobile sales and service. He added that a car cleaning operation is there now. Mr. Al Bleser, 7 West New York Avenue, stated that he started his present business at this location in December of 1975 - Winnebago Car Cleaning. Mr. Bleser stated that he has a binding contract to purchase the property. Mr. Goyke asked if he is requesting the parking for the lot that is third from the corner and the business on the corner? Mr. Miller replied that the parking is allowed on a separate 1ot in commercial districts - this is C-3 - as specified in Section 30-20 (c) (1). The special permit is for Lot 1 only. Mr. Bleser has purchased Lot 3 to meet the special permit request. Mr. Miller added that the building contains approximately 1,440 square feet and, therefore, he would be required to provide 14.4 spaces plus one for each employee. Dr. Blassingame asked why a Special Use Permit is required? Mr. Miller replied that it is because this use is only allowed in this district by special permit. Mr. Miller added that this will limit the number of cars Mr. Bleser will be selling. His intention was not to have a full scale business. Lot 3 could not be used for used cars. Mr. Bleser agreed that there would not be cars parked on that lot for sale. There would only be cars for sale at the corner of New York and Main. Mr. Bleser added that he has marked 5 spaces but it will more than likely be 4 spaces - I understand that I cannot fill up the corner with cars because of setback requirements. Mrs. Fonstad asked if a car is in for recondi- tioning, could he park it on Lot 3? Mr. Miller replied that he could. Mr. Wendtland asked how many spaces had been computed? Mr. Miller replied �hat approximately 16 spaces would be required and provided. Mr. Goyke asked Mr. Bleser if he had talked to Lain's Barbershop about this? Mr. Bleser replied that Mr. Lain is in the hospital and he had not visited him, but had talked to others across the street about it. Mr. Miller pointed out to Mr. Bleser that he would have to meet the requirements referring to parking lots when it is installed. Dr. Blassingame asked if this is consistent with other lots on Main Street? Mr. Miller replied that he did not know the longevity of other used car lots on Main, but any put in after the 1965 Ordinance was adopted would require a special use permit. Dr. Blassingame stated that.if this were on the other side of the street, he would object to it. Mrs. Propp stated that she did not see where this is a very happy situation in terms of having to cross the tracks to get into the property, but as I understand the City Attorney's opinion, if the requirements are met, we must grant it. Mr. Schneider moved to approve the Special Use Permit, seconded by Dr. Blassingame. Motion carried 7-1, with Fick casting the no vote. Page 10 Plan Commission Minutes Monday, April 12, 1976 III. ZONING CHANGE A. Russell F. Williams, owner of the property described below requests a zoning change from M-3 Heavy Industrial District to R-4 Multiple Dwelling District. That part of Lot One Hundred Thirty-five C135) in Replat of Oakwood Beach Plat, Winnebago County, Wisconsin, in the Fifteenth Ward, City of Oshkosh described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the westerly line of Bowen Street with the Southerly line of Nicolet Avenue, said point being S89°20'W, 66.02 feet from the northwest corner of Lot 84, Third Addition to Nicolet Anchorage; thence SO°54' W along the westerly line of Bowen Street, 673.10 feet; thence N89°06'W, 130.00 feet; thence NO°54'E, 132.00 feet; thence N89°06'W, 471.14 feet; thence Nl°57'30" E, 764.32 feet; thence N42°31' E, 1.26 feet; thence S50°16'E, 369.72 feet; thence N89°24'E, 298.29 feet to the point of beginning containing 8.50 acres more or less. Mr. Russell Williams, 504 Algoma Boulevard, and Mr. Dale Rice and Mr. Dennis Nodahl of Rice and Orth in Appleton, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Williams explained that he owns the property across the street from this and is also building a new apartment unit across the street. Mr. Williams stated that Mr. Miller had been very helpful and had met many hours with him to make sure we were doing the right thing. He stated that the multiple family units proposed will be similar to those already across the street; a tennis court is proposed and a walkway to it with a planting area similar to that done at Huntington Downs when that was built next to the asphalt factory. Mr. Williams stated that they felt they should request R-4 zoning here and it could be very beautiful and that he will also be annexing land to the North that will all be residential. Mr. Williams stated that his neighbor to the South, Mr. Sundquist, said that he is all in favor of this and that I could so inform the Commission. He added that there is a laundry across Nicole-� Avenue. Next on the agenda is our p1at, and what we are proposing to do is zone this whole thing so we could move ahead with the plat. This has been revised about 10 times, trying to come up with the best land use. Mr. Rice stated that they did kick around many different layouts and schemes and land uses on this property and felt, in the final analysis, that this is the best layout that we could put to the land. The street layout has been revised many times. Mr. Rice added that he felt both the rezoning and the plat discussion should go together. He added that he felt this is a good use for this property particularly because of the apartment units and multiple family that is across the street as opposed to the use under the present zoning. Mr. Fick asked, if rezoned to R-4, how many units, based on the plat being permitted, could legally be allowed? Mr. Miller replied that the land could accommodate approximately 172 units as near as we could Page lI Plan Commission Minutes Monday, April 12, 1976 figure. This could vary a couple of units. Mr. Williams stated that what they intend to do is bui�d, perhaps, 4 unit townhouses. We don't know exactly what would be best �here. I think that, due to the fact that it is in this area, we are trying to resurrect something that is nice. We migh� have to build some szngle units. He stated that he does not see a reason why we cannot have 2,000 square feet per unit. We want it to be as flexible as possible so that it will be successful. We wi11 probably continue to own them as we have al� the others. Mr. Fick asked why they are requesting R-4 when a11 the other property is R-3 - and I should say it was developed rather handsomely considering what was there? Mr. Williams replied that we are considering the fact that we have the railroad in the back and have existing industrial to the South. Mr. Fick asked if R-3 wouldn't be acceptable? Mr. Williams replied that he would withdraw the request - they want R-4 zoning. He added that he thinks this is good land use and will certainly be a big improvement over what it is and we are right across the st�eet. Mr. Wendtland asked Mr. Williams what made him decide to come in with R-4 when you or�ginally planned this as industrial? Mr. Williams replied that after investigating it, they think this is a better use. Mr. Wendtland .asked if they did not see a conflict with the zoning to the North, South and West? Mr. Williams replied that he thinks Doctor's Park which is zoned industrial is a marvelous development and this is the same plan. Mr. Fick stated that what he is proposing is more or less what we have talked about in the planned unit development. He stated that he can see the particular advantages. My only concern is the density to the area. He added that he was also surprised to see the difference in the number of units. Dr. Blassingame stated that he would agree that what Mr. Williams has done up until now is very attractive, but�we have to give some consideration to the number of people in this area. Mr. Williams stated that there is a tremendous need for one bedroom units. He stated that they want to put in something that would be a really good use there - perhaps condominiums. There is a need for one bedroom units and so there wouldn't be a lot of people. He stated that they are concerned with the back area where they may put in a swimming pool with the tennis courts and may need to put in more bedrooms per unit. Mr. Goyke asked if the preliminary plat covers more than the rezoning request? Mr. Williams replied that it covers a little different area. We are trying to use the utilities that are already here. Mrs. Propp expressed concern with the density. She stated that she lives across from others like this and the streets are overloaded. Mr. Goyke asked Mr. Williams if they have a time sche�ule to meet on this? Mr. Williams replied that they do have someone ready to build and that he wants to do it right away. This is all one plat and the Building Inspector will not issue a permit for a building that is not on a street. Mr. Goyke stated that he wants to make sure that he has a clear picture of this. Page 12 Plan Commission Minutes Monday, Apri1 12, 1976 Mrs. Propp asked �f the street zs offset a ���tle from Leeward Court East? Mr. W��liams reg��ed that �t is somewhat. ' Mr. M�lla� sfiated thafi land cannot be sold that is not on a street - every new �o� crea�ed must front on a street. Mr. Rice stated that this �and is a1� M-3 zoning now. We would like to leave the M-3 zon��g on the Soufih end and rezone to R-4 on the North end. Mrs. Propp stated that she �s concerned that thi5 property be upgraded �n the b�st �ashion poss�ble. She asked what problems would result with rezon�ng the xest of the p��t M-�? Mr. Wi�liams replied that Mr. Vercau�eren of Oshkosh Zndustr�al Development had contacted him �egard�ng someane who des�res �ro�er�y w�th a railroad siding such as Kampo Warehouse. He added that they would be concerned as much as anybody on what goes in there. There are a lot of sma11 businesses that need this zoning and wan� to be closer to the City. Heavy industry can be attractive, he added. M�s. FonS�ad asked why, with a 100 foot depth, they cou�d npt move the street 15 �eet to the North and have 100 feet on each side? Mr. W��liams replied that they cou�d not move the street north because orie of the existing businesses needs that property if they are going to continue their operat�on. They do have the possibili�y of hav�ng a doctor's office on the 85 �oot 1ot. He stated that they are trying to locate the streets as close to being straight as poss�ble. Mr. FiGk moved to recommend approval of the zone change from M-3 Heavy Industrial to R�4 Multiple Dwelling. Motion seconded by Schneider. Mr. Walt Lindemann, 5255 Ivy Lane, appeared before the Commission and stated �hat he is in favor of Mr. Wi�liam's proposal. He sta�ed that he �e1t it would make for continui�y of appearance of the area and that Mr. W��1�am's record as a builder and developer in this community speaks for itsel� as to whether he would use th�s land to the best use under R-4. Mr. Lindemann stated that he only had an aesthetic interest in the property. Dr. Blassingame stated that he thinks it is very wrong to potentially put 55Q peop�e in this area. He added that he thinks it shows a lack of cont�nu�ty. He stated that he is not sure that you want to put that many people �n there with youngsters, the railroad, and industry to the North and South. In te�ms of current use and future use, I really don't feel R-4 zon�ng should be in there. Mrs. Propp agreed that she d�d not feel R-4 zoning should be �n there. Mr. Schneider stated that he felt thzs area is one that can use R-4. You have Bowen or Harrison Streets for traffic carriers. I don`t know anyplace in the City except maybe a�ong Koeller Rpad where this would be be�ter suited. He concluded that he th�nks this �s the ideal spot for R-4 zoning. Dr. Blassingame stated that if �his were the only R-4 density in there, he would agree. He just wondered how muc��.high densi�y an area like this can stand. Mrs. Propp stated that she �e1t there would be just too many peop�e in this area. Nicolet-Anchorage is a beautiful development and I don't want to detract �rom that. Mr. Williams xeplied that that isn't the �ntent�on. We have spen� over $2,000 to have this analyzed to see what cauld be done with it. We feel th�s �s the bes� land use for this. Mrs. Fonstad asked Mr. Williams why he is not also including the rest of the plat? Mr. Williams replied thafi he could see no reason � Page 13 Plan Commiss�an Minutes Monday, April �2, �976 for development of the other st�eet because of fih� cost. Mr. Wendt�and stated that he would question no� whether the zoning is R-3 or R-4 but whether any residential zoning should be across Bowen Street at all. It was recommended to be used for either commerc�al or indust�ial use and the request is now to put in a small intrusion of residential pro�erties into what zs pr�marily industr�a� or commercial. I don't ses R,3 0� R-4 as the issue, but whethe� it shou�d be residentzal at al�. Mr. Fick stated �hat he can read�ly see where this would be campatible with the use �o the East and Nor�h. I can see prob�ems with density. We do h�ve peop�e go�ng to ths North and �o the West of this area to work and z wou�d concur that improvement o� Bowen and the sidewalks in this are� should be done. He added that he could see where R-4 is easier to �ocate adaacen� to an M 2one than R-3. He added that he could support th� R-4 �oning �n all good conscience. Mr. Wendtland stated that all we wou�d be do�ng is trans�erring the problem. Motion carried, 4-3, w�th $lassingame, Propp and Wend�land vpting against the rezoning. IV, PREL�MINARY P�ATS A. ��choxage Fark Plat Russell F. Williams, owner af the property described as: That part of Lot 135 East of the Chicago and Northwestern Railroad right-oi-way, West of Bowen Street and South of Nicolet Avenue except the South 500 feet, Replat of Oakwood Beach Plat, 15th Ward, City oi Oshkosh. requests the Plan Commission to review the Preliminary Plat of Anchorage Park. Mr. Miller explained that the plat �ontains 20 lots with a gross area of approximately 9.91 acres proposed to be platted with a zoning of M- 3 and R-4 . Mr. Wi1li.ams explained that they came up with the plat due to the ex�.sting structures that are there. The lots are 130' x 108' and the reason we came around to Lo�t 20 with the plat is because of existing utilities. He added that these are larger lots than necessary. Mr. Rice added that the average 1ot size in residential is 14,000 square feet. Mr. Schneider suggested that the corners be curved on the elbow of Leeward Court West. Page 14 Plan Commission Minutes Monday, April �2, 1976 Mr. Schneider moved for approval of the preliminary plat s�bject to the submission af a drainage and grading plan to the Departmen� of Pub�ic Works and certi£�ed by the C�ty Engineer. Motion seconded by Fick. Mr. Fick asked why on�y a 6£oot easement on the rear lot line on the West was made. Aren't platting requirements 10 feet? Mr. Williams and Mr. Rice stated that they had no objection to fihe 10 foot easement. Mr. Williams stat�d that they would be wi���ng to put �he radius in the street and a�2 foot easement. Mr. Wendtland stated that, as shown, Lots 14�19 have access directly onto Bowen Str�et--do you have any ideas on how the access poin�s w�ll be located? M�. W�1liams stated.they would probably have 2 points of access. Mrs. Propp asked about the suggested lettering to the Plat that "Direct vehicular access to Bow�n Streefi from Lots 1, 16, 17, and 19 abutting sa�d road is prohib�ted." Mr. Schneider stated that he would not accept an amendment to his motion on the le�fiering addition to the plat. Mr. Schneider stated th�� you are talking about a plat and you are restricting the developer to where he can go onto the street. Every property owner has the r�ght to access to the street. If you don't approve o� the plat as �s, you s�ould vote against �t. Mr. Mil�er stated that he fe�t th�s definitely should be included pn the plat. Bowen Street carries heavy volumes and the more paints you have, the more con��ict you w�1� have. Mr. W����ams s�ated t�at one reason that he would be somewhat hesztant about agxeeing to fih�s is �f you have a street where cars enter it some��mes improves traff�c flow so you can push the snow where you ar� at a dead-end. He added that he wou�d prefer that the fewer the restrict�ons on the p1at, the better. He added that he had not seen that �est�iction be�ore. Mr. �chneider stated tha� you dq reduce the points of canf�ict, but not the number ot times of conflict. Motion carried, 7-0. B. �ifth Subdiv�sion of Lakev�ew Park Dr. Uouis Gxabe�, owner of the property described as: Part of Lot 31, B�ock 5, Lakeview Park AdditiQn, 13th Ward, City pf Oshkosh requests the Plan Commission to review the Preliminary Plat of the Fif�h Subdivision of Lakeview Park. Mr. Williams stated tha� he would be representing Dr. Graber on this plat and because of the lateness of the meeting, he could wa�t for the Commission's review of the plat until the next meeting. Page 15 Plan Commiss�on Minutes Monday, Apri1 12, 1976 C. Linwood Preliminary Plat James H. Zucker, owner of the property described as: A tract of �and in the NE/SE Section 11, T18N, R16E, 12th Ward, City of Oshkosh, Winnebago County, Wisconsin containing 4.224 acres and being described by: Commencing at the East 1/4 corner of said Section 11, thence West 629.77 feet; thence South 622.05 feet to the intersection of the East line of Wisconsin Avenue with the South line of West Smith Avenue and the point of beginn�ng; running thence S89°44'00" E, 275.00 feet along the South �ine of West Smith Avenue; thence S.00°22'39" W, 668.33 feet to a point on the North line of West Linwood Avenue; thence N89°58'12" W, 275.27 feet along the North line of West Linwood Avenue to its intersection with the East line of Wisconsin Street; thence N00°24'00" E, 669.47 feet along �he East line of Wisconsin Street to the point of beginning. requests the Plan Commission to review the PrEliminary Plat of Linwood. Mr. Miller explained that the land is zoned R-4 and there are 14 lots all exceeding the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Ordinanc�. The property is bounded by Wisconsin Avenue, Smith Avenue and an unimproved section of Linwood Avenue. Mr. Jim Zucker, Milwaukee, appeared before the Commission and explained that the bulk of the units to be four-plexes, possibly some duplexes and possibly some six units. Dr. Blassingame stated that there is the possibility of 50 units which could conta�n somewhere between 150 and 200 people. Mr. Zucker stated that he owns the apartments to the South of this and he could take a eheck of ifi, but we don't tend to get a lot of families in here. We are trying to be flexible on this. I would sEe this more as four families. The area is zoned now for 90 some units. This would cut it in half. Mrs. Propp asked if the apartments to the South are zoned R-4? Mr. Zucker replied that they are. There are two buildings with 20 units in each on the bloek between Viola and Linwood. No one appeared in objection. Motion by Schneider to approve �/ the plat subjec� to grading and drainage plans being certified by the V City Engineer, seconded by Fonstad. Motion carried, 6-0. Page 16 Plan Commission Minutes Monday, April 12, 1976 ADDENDUM 1. Lot Division Evergreen Manor, owner of the property described below, reques�s the Plan Commission to review a proposed lot division. The West 160 feet of the East 220 feet of Lot 3, lying Northerly of North Westfield Street, McMillen's Replat, 16th Ward, City of Oshkosh. Mr. Miller explained that ihe property is located along Westfield Street and the owner, Evergreen Manor,;.has already sold the parcel, not �knowing that it fell under restrictions of the Subdi�vision Ordinance . � that it be reviewed and approved through theilot division procedure'. , � , � � . Mr. Hibbard Engler appeared before the'Commission to answer any � questions. No one appeared in objection to the lot division. Mr. Steinert moved to approve the lot division, seconded by Schneider. Motion carried, 7-0. OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Goyke stated that he had received a number of phone calls from people in the area of Oshkosh Avenue and Sawyer Street stating that there were no "Walk" or "Don't Walk" signs at the intersection. He stated that there are a number of older people in this area and some youngsters and that this should be investigated. Respectfully submitted, ROLAND MILLER, Acting Director Department of Community Development sgs ATTACHMENT #1 April �2, 1976 From: Ne�.ghboring Residents of Mercy Pledical Center Re� Mercy Medical Center Parlcin� Lot.Ordinance P,equest: To: Citv of Oshkosh Plan Commission Dear Commissioners: You are aware of the req_uest by Plercy Medical Center for parking 1ot ordinance chan�es. In the past several weeks a number of the residential property owners surrounding the hospital have voiced concerns about what is and would be happenin� to the residential character of the neighbor- hood. Through the efforts of Mr. Roland Miller and the cooperation of Mercy I�Iedical Center, meetin�s have taken place so that all parties have had an opporfiunity to express their thoughts and feelings on the matter before you. We are pleased that through these meetings, agreement has been reached to the satisfaction of a17. parties involved. This, to us, is most gratifying. The amended ord�nance proposal that is being presented today for your consideration is endorsed by us and we encourage its adoption. G+le further wish to no�e that all matters pertain�.n� to this situation are most difficult to coi�trol by ordinance alone. Not all of our con- cerns could be spelled out in the proposal being presented. ule are counting on mutual trust and verbal assurances to continue in the fine spirit being demonstrated at this time. The most apparPnt concerns that remain are: 1. There is a difference in maintaining communication with a coi^poration, compared with an individual property owner in a residential neighborhood. Corporate positions can be filled by,different individuals, and as individuals come and �o, too often, verbal agreements can be for�otten. -2- 2. With the concentration of automobiles that these parking facilit�es will provide in a residential neighborhood, we wilx be 1iv�ng with much greater traffic on our streets than a home owner would prefer. Therefore, we would look to the hospital and the City of Oshkosh to cooperate in making the situation as inoffensive as possible. This wau�d include: a. Keeping the majority of the traftic away from the ad- joining reszdential property b_y having entrances and exits to parking lots on streets which are bordered on both sides by hospital owned property. Specifically, these would be Oak Street and Cleveland Avenue, thus avoiding entrances and exits on Grove Street. As vehic�es enter and exit from parking lots there is always the danger of not 5eeing children present who live across the stree�. b. Because there are t�mes when the majority of hospital emplay�es are coming to or leaving work, as well as shift changes during the day, and the hospital has no control over the driving habits of its employees: there�ore, we would apprciate having the hospital re^ quest that the Oshkosh Police Department have a patrol car present in the area at those times. 3. In the past and at present there are vehicles (a house trailer, bus, camper and the like) parked or stored for prolonged periods of time on hospital lots. These are an eyesore and we would like assurance �hat this practice would not continue. � -3- �+. Fr�quently, the procedure has been that sncw remov��l on the . parking lots be done between the hours of 11:OO.p.m, and 5:00 a.m. We do recognize that this is the most convenient time possible. We also make note that the noise from snow- removal equipment is considerable. 5. As an accomodation to the surrounding neighborhood we trust �hat Mercy Medical Center wi].1 fulfill the verbal agreement made by Mr. George Thomas on behc�l.f of the hospital to preserve the existing deciduous trees on hospital property to the great•. est extent possible. Whatever can be done to enhance and re- tain the beauty of the neighborhoad, whil.e providing the needed parking faca.iities will be gr.;eatly appreciated. [ve ex-�end our gra.titude to a17. c�ncPrned in bringing about an amiable resolution to the qu�stion befcre you. Air. Roland Miller, Acting Director of the Depar�ment of Comi�iunity Developemenfi, has been es�ecially helptul ;_n this entire process. Res;,�ctfitlly submitted, h� i,'-'�t.,� V� - Doris A. Schultz _�: �- ----------.__--____--___--_._�.�.._ __.v__,______ C�i.�'��.�.� ---__-�f.�% // _ � _..------------------ - ------- �.I� F.�/4 COR SFC lij / ----------- � 7.iL�:t,PiGE, � � �� sr_c rio N I� F- ,� w . � NE / SE :rEST Sti117H �v �UE I 4 F� ; - � ' �`�' _ - �'-- ,� � ���`�r�t+�y I � � ti; � Z n, r o � : � ;i?'.,_•� Y Z ' '_.�-: _ V Q �; :�=:� � � - = s,o' --- -- ---� �::�-�r:_.': LI!:tvDO -- --- 57 RE E T — �- ---- - - - ---� LOCATION �,�qp !`R. "rCOSSEL o6s_ 33' �-----__-- � \ , , � 8 � `t°�5�'O9 Sq. Ft. .f � d� � E > G E � i : _ ___�-,___ � 6fi.27' I � � > l0,1i9.21 � � S4• Ft- , ' 0 ti �` e a � n � 9 16,276. S8 Sq. Ft. .f 0 = O �53.27' -�--�_ 65.00 10,199.40 Sq. Ft. \ N N n ,� 'v n �, 0 r � 0 O O N _ p � '-�'". ,.—� _._...�,__...� �.�� ���� ������ � �� �<, ��''� �.�69c``� �k�� ���� � � -y-_ �i �1 r .� y . � ' . � � �' � g � p' � ; I k � ►- ' : � ; � , � X ; • � . � � � � • o� ' �� � :� N N � �N � �i.f' �tD �3i.so' L� �• ti ' z: : ; � w. . � 1 k } . � a' i � °- n k, k m I 4 " � -- f� o, cV ¢ r- w k �" 12,064.51 Sq. Ft, ti W � N y N / O� � - " �__ _- ' O. ¢ �31.SC' • f � I ¢ �. � i �y k Z'z - � - : -j. `'Y y h .J � N Q 3' �W ' -� _ .o 3 � : ,� t—: ::� m � W' � 12,065.17 Sq. Ft ' 3� 'o W . 6 O, �W� Q 'ol o ,ai w 0 0 .� � I 3 Ir 50' ' �a ° �� : " N � 1 � � � � � ,�� r�� V�'' �� � � � � ^ c� � � a� �� � � •� a� � � � � � v a � � o � �a � o 0 o � � � � �a O" •� � +> O � 4t r-i O .I� vi c�3 � r-f (� P� +� a 0 � � 0 H � O a--I � O � � � a� � � � a� .,-r � N cd U � �o '` �� ,� ti � rn � � ��r� �o �'�` ` � � � �t �.: � � � , c�