Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutesBoard of Appeals Minutes 1 March 9, 2016 BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES March 9, 2016 PRESENT: Dan Carpenter, Robert Cornell, Tom Willadsen, Robert Krasniewski, Dennis Penney, Reginald Parson EXCUSED: Kathryn Larson STAFF: Jeffrey Nau, Associate Planner; Katie Breselow, 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 November 11, 2015 were approved as presented. (Willadsen/Krasniewski) ITEM I: 1000 CUMBERLAND TRAIL Chet Wesenberg Architect, LLC-applicant, Cumberland Court Housing Commission Inc-owner, requests the following variance to permit a multiple family dwelling in the rear yard setback: Description Code Reference Required Proposed Rear Yard Setback 30-20(B)(5)(d) 25’ 23.6’ Mr. Nau presented the item via PowerPoint presentation. He stated that the subject 5.168 acre (approx. 225,106 sq. ft.) property is zoned R-3 Multiple Dwelling District. Under its current configuration, the single parcel is an apartment complex developed in 1972 containing nine eight-unit apartment buildings (consisting of two building types) totaling 72 units, office/storage building, four off-street parking areas, playground and multiple walkways connecting the buildings. The parcel abuts multi-family, commercial, single-family uses, and the newly constructed city storm water detention basin. The Plan Commission approved a request for a land division to split the current single parcel into two separate parcels with the condition that a variance is granted to allow a reduced rear yard setback for building #1130- 1144. The land division is being proposed to facilitate renovations utilizing tax credits which will occur in two phases. Once renovations are completed, the tax credit investors’ obligation will expire in 15 years at which time the Oshkosh Housing Authority intends to recombine the two parcels into one eliminating the need for the variance. Considering the existing layout of the structures has been established for decades and no alterations will occur, staff is recommending approval of the variance with the condition that the two proposed lots be deed restricted together to ensure the continued functionality of the complex until the parcels are able to be recombined into one lot. Susan van Houwelingen, 151 Kuettel Court, Neenah, Executive Director of the Oshkosh Housing Authority, stated that this was a very timely process. The Housing Authority applied twice previously to WHEDA for tax credit financial assistance to be denied. They then submitted two separate applications dividing the parcel in half which would provide adequate funding to complete the renovations. WHEDA approved it then in two phases, she went on to describe the housing structures on the property and the scoring requirements to receive WHEDA’s financial assistance. Mr. Willadsen asked what WHEDA stood for. Ms. van Houwelingen replied it stood for “Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority”. They are the allocator of Wisconsin loan taxing house credits. Mr. Willadsen asked if WHEDA is asking for two phases. Ms. van Houwelingen replied that the Housing Authority had applied in two phases because it was denied when submitted as one phase. Board of Appeals Minutes 2 March 9, 2016 Corey Wallace, 105 Wyldeberry Lane, Oshkosh, representing Chet Wesenberg Architect, LLC, stated that he would support the variance because it has no real world consequences. Nothing is changing and both lots act as one, theoretically. Ms. van Houwelingen then stated that the buildings are aged and aesthetically unattractive and due to the development of the detention basin will now be more visible from the frontage road. There will be a community center in the future to help the families living there be self sufficient; along with new driveways, sidewalks, and landscaping. Letters were sent out in January to the neighbors requesting a response if there were any concerns and no replies were received regarding this project. Mr. Carpenter asked if it was safe to assume that the development of the detention basin to the east gives more visibility of the property. Ms. van Houwelingen responded affirmatively. Mr. Krasniewski had a question directed to staff: from the map, the center of the parking lot in Lot 1 was once a city street and does that constitute a sideyard situation? When it was built it was built correctly as a sideyard. Mr. Nau stated that he is unsure if the vacation of the court was vacated prior to the development but his impression was that was the circumstance. Motion by Penney to approve the variance to permit a multiple family dwelling in the rear yard setback with the following conditions: 1. The owner shall record a deed restriction tying the two proposed parcels together with the Winnebago County Register of Deeds until such time the parcels are able to be recombined into one tax parcel. Motion seconded by Willadsen. Mr. Willadsen replied that it is only a setback line, not a building that is being relocated. Mr. Carpenter stated that often they are dealing with what is safe, and this is just a technicality. Mr. Krasniewski stated that the building placement was legal when constructed, because they were both sideyards at that time. Mr. Carpenter stated that the improvements will have a positive impact on the surrounding area. Motion carried 5-0. Findings of facts: Technicality and the improvements will greatly enhance the neighborhood, Certainly no harm to the public. There are certain unique physical limitations due to the fact that it was at one time, a legal setback. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 3:50 p.m. (Carpenter/Willadsen). Respectfully submitted, Jeffrey Nau Associate Planner