HomeMy WebLinkAbout23. 17-112 MARCH 14, 2017 17-112 RESOLUTION
CARRIED 7-0 LOST LAID OVER WITHDRAWN )
PURPOSE: APPROVE GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR A PROPOSED
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AT 900 NORTH KOELLER STREET
INITIATED BY: GENERAL CAPITAL ACQUISITIONS LLC
PLAN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Approved w/conditions
WHEREAS, the applicant proposes to redevelop the property at 900 North
Koeller Street in phases to include, but not limited to, conversion of the existing
building into a climate controlled self-storage facility, and creating three retail outlots
for future tenants; and
WHEREAS, the applicant requested a rezoning of the property at 900 North
Koeller Street to apply a Planned Development Overlay designation to permit the
redevelopment of said property; and
WHEREAS, the Plan Commission finds that the General Development Plan for
the proposed planned development of the property at 900 North Koeller Street is
consistent with the criteria established in Section 30-387(6) of the Oshkosh Zoning
Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of
Oshkosh that the General Development Plan for redevelopment of the property at 900
North Koeller Street, per the attached, is hereby approved and the following conditions
be addressed in the final planned development Site Implementation Plan:
1) Cross access agreements will be required between all four lots contained within
the development area to enable site access and internal circulation between
parcels.
2) Easternmost access driveway on Robin Avenue be reconstructed to meet code
requirements.
MARCH 14, 2017 17-112 RESOLUTION
CONTD
3) Access control ordinance variance to permit reduced lateral clearance for the
access driveways as proposed where the code requires 75 feet of lateral clearance
be provided.
4) Base standard modification to permit impervious surface ratio to exceed code
permitted 70% and final impervious surface ratios be provided at the time of
Specific Implementation Plan review.
5) Prior to building permit issuance the petitioner will be required to obtain
necessary DNR permits and meet City code requirements for development
within the floodplain and/or floodway.
6) Petitioner shall reduce stormwater peak flow to the maximum extent practical in
conjunction with the Department of Public Works during site plan review.
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Common Council
FROM: Darryn Burich
Director of Planning Services
DATE: February 23, 2017
RE: Approve General Development Plan for a Proposed Planned Development at 900
North Koeller Street (Plan Commission recommends approval)
BACKGROUND
The subject area consists of four parcels totaling approximately 10.76 acres, located at the
southeast corner of N. Koeller Street and Robin Avenue. The subject area currently contains a
vacant commercial building, approximately 104,000 square feet in size, associated surface
parking facilities and site signage. Prior land uses on the subject site included the former
K -Mart and Sears Grand retail establishments. The surrounding area consists of multiple -
family residential and institutional uses to the north, multiple -family residential to the east,
multiple -family residential and commercial to the south, and public right-of-way and
Interstate 41 to the west. The 10 and 20 Year Comprehensive Land Use Plans both recommend
commercial use for the subject area.
ANALYSIS
The petitioner is requesting approval of a General Development Plan to allow for
redevelopment of four parcels including an indoor self -storage facility (Lot 4), a multi -tenant
commercial use (Lot 1) and two single tenant commercial uses (Lot 2 and 3). Proposed Lot 4 is
intended to be developed in two phases with the first phase including demolition of one
structural bay on the south side of the vacant commercial structure to remove it from the
floodway and redevelopment of the commercial structure for an indoor, climate controlled
self -storage facility and service office. The second phase of proposed Lot 4 redevelopment will
include construction of two additional non -climate controlled self -storage structures on the
west side of proposed Lot 4 and two non -climate controlled self -storage structures on the
south side of Lot 4. Proposed Lot 1 would include construction of a 12,000 square foot multi -
tenant commercial structure with an end -cap restaurant and three additional commercial
tenants. Proposed Lot 2 would include construction of a 5,700 square foot stand-alone
commercial structure for a restaurant or commercial service use. Proposed Lot 3 would
include construction of a 3,100 square foot stand-alone commercial structure to accommodate
another restaurant and all proposed uses of Lot 1 through 3 are permitted within this zoning
district.
The development plan is designed to function as a single campus -like commercial
development with shared access driveways, internal drives aisles, storm water management
facilities and surface parking lots. Proposed vehicular access is provided by five shared access
driveways with two on N. Koeller Street, and three on Robin Avenue with one driveway
requiring an access control ordinance variance for reduced lateral clearance. Conceptual
surface parking lot areas contain the required landscape islands but appear to exceed the
maximum parking allowed by code and will be addressed when a Specific Implementation
Plan is supplied. The amount of impervious surface would be reduced, however, final
impervious surface ratios must be provided at the time of Specific Implementation Plan
approval along with pedestrian access to the development. Conceptual storm water
management plans depict a number of shared biofiltration ponds in the center of the
development and a storm water pond near the southern portion of Lot 4. The petitioner will
be required to obtain DNR permits and meet City code requirements for development within
the floodplain. The conceptual storm water management facilities appear to be deficient and
will be required to meet code requirements prior to submitting Specific Implementation Plans.
The Plan Commission had concerns with storm water management in this area due to the
location of the floodway and flood plain on the parcel, and recommended a condition to
address reducing the runoff from the property with approval of the Department of Public
Works. Conceptual utility layout plans raise concerns regarding water and sanitary sewer
service to Lot 2 and 3, and staff will be coordinating alternative options with the petitioner
prior to Specific Implementation Plans being submitted. Conceptual landscape plans depict a
landscape screen running north/south to buffer the indoor storage facility from the commercial
uses fronting N. Koeller Street which will also need to meet code requirements prior to Specific
Implementation Plans being submitted.
The existing pylon sign was proposed to be relocated to the southwest corner of proposed Lot
3 and be utilized as a multi -tenant development center sign and will require two base standard
modifications for the height at 60 feet tall and location. As the petitioner has now decided to
reconstruct the sign instead, the Plan Commission recommended removal of the base standard
modifications for the signage and recommended that the signage for the site be required to be
code compliant. Final sign specifications will be required to be submitted at the time of review
of the Specific Implementation Plan. Proposed plans also include individual pylon signs on
each of the four parcels; however, staff is recommending installation of code compliant
monument signage which will be incorporated with their Specific Implementation Plan
approval. The plans also proposes to add a 43 foot architectural tower sign on the west fagade
of the existing building on Lot 4 which would require a base standard modification for the
City Hall • 215 Church Avenue • P.O. Box 1130 • Oshkosh, WI 54903-1130
http://www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us
height as well as a second modification to permit more than one identification sign per lot.
The Plan Commission did not recommend a base standard modification for the proposed 43
foot tall tower sign or any signage other than what would be code compliant.
FISCAL IMPACT
As this a redevelopment of an existing city site, expansion of city services will not be required
to service this site as those services are already provided in the area. The proposed
redevelopment may involve infrastructure improvement in the form of extending utilities
which, in this case, would be borne by the developer of the subject property.
RECOMMENDATION
The Plan Commission recommended approval of a planned development for a General
Implementation Plan at its February 21, 2017 meeting.
Res ectfully Submitted,
Darryn Burich
Director of Planning Services
Approved:
Mark A. Rohloff
City Manager
City Hall • 215 Church Avenue • P.O. Box 1130 • Oshkosh, WI 54903-1130
http://www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us
15 V,
:�-
.� N
C 1 in = 0.04 mi
_ 1in=200ft
The City 'of Oshkosh creates and maintains GIS maps and data for its own use. They may show the
approtdmate relative location of property, boundaries and other feature from a variety of sources. Prinfing Date: 1/27/2017
These map(s)Idatasets are provided for Information purposes only and may not be sufficient or
appropriate for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. They are provided 'AS -IS° without Prepared by: City of Oshkosh, WI
warranties of any kind and the City of Oshkosh assumes no liability for use or misuse.
=Au.
JAGIS'PlanninglPlan Commission Site Plan Map TemplatelPlan Commission Site Plan Map Template.mxd User A6b
ITEM: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
APPROVAL FOR AN INDOOR STORAGE FACILITY, A MULTI -TENANT
COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE, AND TWO SINGLE -TENANT COMMERCIAL
STRUCTURES LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF N. KOELLER
STREET AND ROBIN AVENUE
Plan Commission meeting of February 21, 2017
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant: General Capital Acquisitions, LLC
Property Owner: 900 N. Koeller Street, LLC
Action(s) Requested:
The petitioner requests approval of a Planned Development to allow for redevelopment of four
parcels located at the southeast corner of N. Koeller Street and Robin Avenue. Staff is
recommending the following action associated with this request:
1. Planned Development approval of a General Implementation Plan for an indoor self -
storage facility (Lot 4), a multi -tenant commercial use (Lot 1) and two single tenant
commercial uses (Lot 2 and 3) of the proposed development area.
Applicable Ordinance Provisions:
Planned Development standards are found in Section 30-387 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Property Location and Type:
The subject area consists of four parcels totaling approximately 10.76 acres, located at the
southeast corner of N. Koeller Street and Robin Avenue. The subject area currently contains a
vacant commercial building, approximately 104,000 square feet in size, associated surface parking
facilities and site signage. Prior land uses on the subject site included the former K -Mart and
Sears Grand retail establishments. The surrounding area consists of multiple -family residential
and institutional uses to the north, multiple -family residential to the east, multiple -family
residential and commercial to the south, and public right-of-way and Interstate 41 to the west.
The 10 and 20 Year Comprehensive Land Use Plans both recommend commercial use for the
subject area.
Subject Site
Existing Land Use
Zoning
Vacant Commercial
SMU-PD
Adjacent Land Use and Zoning
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Recommendation Land Use
10 Year & 20 Year Land Use Recommendation Commercial
ANALYSIS
Use
Proposed Lot 4 of the development area is intended to be redeveloped in two phases. The first
phase would include demolition of one structural bay on the south side of the existing vacant
commercial structure. The proposed demolition is intended to remove the existing structure from
the floodway of adjacent Sawyer Creek. The petitioner is proposing to use the redeveloped
commercial structure for an indoor, climate controlled self -storage facility and service office. The
second phase of proposed Lot 4 redevelopment would include construction of two additional
non -climate controlled self -storage structures in the side yard (west side) of proposed Lot 4 and
two non -climate controlled self -storage structures in the rear yard (south side) of proposed Lot 4.
The proposed use requires a Conditional Use Permit within the Suburban Mixed Use District.
Proposed Lot 1 of the development area would include construction of a 12,000 square foot multi -
tenant commercial structure which would accommodate an end -cap restaurant with a drive-
through and three additional commercial tenants. Proposed Lot 2 would include construction of a
5,700 square foot stand-alone commercial structure intended for a casual restaurant or
commercial service use. Proposed Lot 3 would include construction of a 3,100 square foot stand-
alone commercial structure designed to accommodate a restaurant with a drive-through. The
proposed uses of Lot 1, 2 and 3 are all permitted by right within the Suburban Mixed Use District.
Site Design/Access
The proposed Development Plan is designed to function as a single campus -like commercial
development which would be redeveloped over time. The proposed Development Plan
conceptually depicts shared access driveways, internal drive aisles, storm water management
facilities and surface parking lots. Cross access agreements will be required between all four lots
contained within the development area to enable site access and internal circulation between
parcels.
Proposed vehicular access to the development area is provided by five shared access driveways
which is one less than what currently serves the development area. The two access driveways on
N. Koeller Street and two easternmost access driveways on Robin Avenue are proposed in their
existing locations. The westernmost access driveway proposed on Robin Avenue would be
relocated east of its existing location providing adequate separation from the N. Koeller Street
ITEM. PD 900 N. Koeller St 2
r
and Robin Avenue intersection. The Department of Public Works is recommending that the
easternmost access driveway on Robin Avenue be reconstructed to meet code requirements.
Furthermore, staff is recommending a variance from the access control ordinance to permit
reduced lateral clearance for the access driveways as proposed where the code requires 75 feet of
lateral clearance be provided. Staff is supportive of the lateral clearance variance request because
proposed plans improve the current on-site lateral clearance.
The proposed development area depicts conceptual surface parking lot areas associated with each
parcel which would be accessed from internal shared drive aisles. The conceptual plans identify
required landscape islands but appear to exceed the maximum parking allowed by code. Staff
may be open to recommending a base standard modification for additional on-site parking but
until Specific Implementation Plans have been supplied by the petitioner, staff is recommending
the development area not exceed maximum parking allowances.
The amount of impervious surface currently on the development area would be reduced in
conjunction with the proposed development; however, the SMU District permits up to 70% of
impervious surface lot coverage. Staff is supportive of a base standard modification to permit
additional impervious surface on site and final impervious surface ratios must be provided at the
time of Specific Implementation Plan approvals.
Staff feels the proposed site design and access is consistent with nearby commercial retail centers
along the Interstate 41 Corridor which have redeveloped over time in a similar manner. With
that being said, pedestrian access to the development area is not depicted on proposed plans and
will be required to meet code requirements and be reviewed at the time of Specific
Implementation Plan review.
Storm water Management/Utilities
Conceptual storm water management plans depict a number of shared biofiltration ponds
running north/south through the center of the development area and a storm water pond near the
southern portion of Lot 4 adjacent to Sawyer Creek. Preliminary comments from the Department
of Public Works recommend the petitioner work with the Department of Natural Resources and
City staff to ensure the proposed development plan meets code requirements based on portions
of the development area being located within the floodplain and floodway. Prior to building
permit issuance the petitioner will be required to obtain necessary DNR permits and meet City
code requirements for development within the floodplain and/or floodway.
Additionally, the Department of Public Works has commented that conceptual shared storm
water management facilities appear to be deficient. Staff is recommending that storm water
management plans meet the City's code requirements prior to submitting Specific
Implementation Plans for further review by the Plan Commission and Common Council.
Conceptual utility layout plans have been supplied and reviewed by the Department of Public
Works. Preliminary concerns were raised with the proposed water and sanitary sewer service to
proposed Lot 2 and 3. As proposed, water and sanitary sewer service to Lot 2 and 3 does not meet
the requirements.of the Wisconsin Public Service Commission. The petitioner could explore a
ITEM. PD 900 N. Koeller St
private main with a master meter to service proposed Lot 2 and 3 if the proposed lots were
developed in a condo arrangement. Staff has been coordinating with the petitioner and will
explore alternative options prior to Specific Implementation Plans being submitted'for additional
review by the Plan Commission and Common Council.
Landscaping
Conceptual landscape plans depict a landscape screen running north/south through the
development area to buffer the indoor self -storage facility from the commercial uses fronting N.
Koeller Street. Staff is recommending that landscaping for the proposed development area meet
code requirements which will need to be included for review prior to Specific Implementation
Plans being submitted for additional review by the Plan Commission and Common Council.
Signage
The petitioner has proposed to relocate the existing pylon sign to the southwest corner of
proposed Lot 3 and utilize it as a multi -tenant development center sign promoting the indoor self -
storage use as the primary development tenant with up to six additional sign panels for future
tenants located within the development area. Two base standard modifications will be required to
permit the multi -tenant development center sign for the height (approximately 60 feet tall) and
location (southwest corner of Lot 3), as proposed. Final sign specifications will be required to be
submitted and reviewed by the Plan Commission and Common Council at the time they review
the Specific Implementation Plan.
Proposed plans also indicate individual pylon signs promoting tenants on each of the four parcels
contained within the development area. Given the applicant has proposed to relocate the existing
pylon sign and use it as a multi -tenant development center sign, staff is recommending that the
petitioner install code compliant monument signage (size and setback) on proposed Lots 1, 2, and
3. Preliminary discussions with the applicant have occurred on this topic and they are prepared to
incorporate staff's recommendation with their Specific Implementation Plan approval request.
Finally, the petitioner has proposed the addition of a 43 foot architectural tower sign located on
the west fagade of the existing building on Lot 4. The architectural tower pylon sign and
monument sign located on Lot 4 would require two base standard modifications from the code.
The first base standard modification would be required to permit the 43 foot tall pylon sign as
proposed where the signage code permits a maximum height of 30 feet for pylon signage within
the SMU District. The second base standard modification would be to permit more than one
identification sign per lot. Staff is recommending a base standard modification to permit the 43
foot tall architectural tower sign, as proposed. However, staff is not supportive of the second base
standard modification sign to permit more than one standalone sign as proposed.
FINDINGS/RECOMMENDATION/CONDITIONS
In its review and recommendation to the Common Council on an application for a Planned
Development district, staff recommends the Plan Commission make the following findings based
on the criteria established by Chapter 30-387 (C)(6):
ITEM. PD 900 N. KoeUer St
(a) The proposed Planned Development project is consistent with the overall purpose and
intent of this Chapter.
(b) The proposed Planned Development project is consistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan and other area plans. (It is the responsibility of the City to determine
such consistency.)
(c) The proposed Planned Development project would maintain the desired relationships
between land uses, land use densities and intensities, and land use impacts in the environs
of the subject site.
(d) Adequate public infrastructure is or will be available to accommodate the range of
uses being proposed for the Planned Development project, including but not limited to
public sewer and water and public roads.
(e) The proposed Planned Development project will incorporate appropriate and adequate
buffers and transitions between areas of different land uses and development
densities/intensities.
(f) The proposed Planned Development project design does not detract from areas of
natural beauty surrounding the site.
(g) The proposed architecture and character of the proposed Planned Development project
is compatible with adjacent/nearby development.
(h) The proposed Planned Development project will positively contribute to and not
detract from the physical appearance and functional arrangement of development in the
area.
(i) The proposed Planned Development project will produce significant benefits in terms
of environmental design and significant alternative approaches to addressing
development performance that relate to and more than compensate for any requested
exceptions/base standard modifications variation of any standard or regulation of this
Chapter.
(j) For Planned Development projects that are proposed to be developed in phases, the
applicant can provide a timeline for development and can demonstrate that the project
would be successful even if all phases were not or could not be completed.
Staff recommends approval of the Planned Development for a General Implementation Plan and
the findings listed above and the proposed following conditions:
1. Cross access agreements will be required between all four lots contained within the
development area to enable site access and internal circulation between parcels.
2. Easternmost access driveway on Robin Avenue be reconstructed to meet code
requirements.
3. Access control ordinance variance to permit reduced lateral clearance for the access
driveways as proposed where the code requires 75 feet of lateral clearance be provided.
4. Base standard modification to permit:
ITEM. PD 900 N. Koeller St
a. Impervious surface ratio to exceed code permitted 70% and final impervious
surface ratios be provided at the time of Specific Implementation Plan review.
b. A multi -tenant development center sign height (approximately 60 feet tall) and
location (southwest corner of Lot 3), as proposed.
c. A 43 foot tall architectural tower sign on Lot 4, as proposed.
5. Petitioner install code compliant monument signage (size and setback) on proposed Lots
1, 2, and 3.
6. Prior to building permit issuance the petitioner will be required to obtain necessary DNR
permits and meet City code requirements for development within the floodplain and/or
floodway.
The Plan Commission approved of the Planned Development for a General Implementation Plan
as requested with revised conditions. The following is the Plan Commissions discussion on this
item.
Ms. Williams presented the item the reviewed the subject site again as well as the area of the
flood plain and floodway in this vicinity. She discussed the site plan, drive aisles, and storm
water management plans and the potential uses for Lots 1, 2, and 3. She also discussed the
redevelopment plans for Lot 4 for indoor climate controlled storage units and the addition of
other structures to the site for storage purposes. She reviewed accesses to the site for vehicles and
pedestrians and the cross access agreements that would be required between all four lots. She
also reviewed conceptual parking plans and stated that the site exceeded code requirements for
the number of parking stalls which will be addressed at the time of Specific Implementation Plan
approval. She reviewed the conceptual storm water management plans and displayed on the site
plan the locations depicted for detention ponds on the subject site and the utility service issues for
Lot 2 and 3 that could not be served as proposed but could be revised to address this issue. She
also discussed the landscaping plans which would be required to meet code standards as well as
the proposed signage. She explained that the existing sign on the site was proposed to be reused
however the petitioner has now indicated that they were going to relocate the existing sign on the
site and would like to also have pylon signs for each of the four lots. Staff was recommending the
use of code compliant monument signage instead of the pylon signs on Lots 1, 2, and 3. She
reviewed the building elevations and discussed the architectural tower sign on the structure that
would require a base standard modification for the height of 43 feet and further discussed the
monument signs as well as the possibility to utilize wall signage. These details would also have
to be submitted with the Specific Implementation Plan however the Commission is asked to
provide a recommendation for what they would find acceptable for signage for the site. She
reviewed fencing around the storage facility for screening purposes and further discussed that
this submittal was a General Development Plan only and reviewed the conditions recommended
for this request.
Mr. Burich explained the new terms that have been incorporated into the new Zoning Ordinance
and explained that the General Development Plan was similar to a preliminary plat in that the
petitioner is looking for how the City would feel about their proposed plans before the costs are
incurred to prepare detailed final plans. The petitioner will then come back to the Commission at
ITEM. PD 900 N. Koeller St
a later date with a Specific. Implementation Plan that would address the rest of the details of the
proposed development.
Ms. Propp commented that the petitioner is removing a bay to remove the existing structure from
the floodway and questioned why they were then proposing to construct new storage units in the
same area.
Ms. Williams indicated that the petitioner would need to obtain approvals from the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources, (DNR), for the construction of these storage units and will also
need to have the proper approvals for the removal of this area from the flood plain and permits
allowing them to build on this portion of the site.
Mr. Burich added that some portion of the site could be removed from the flood plain after the
land is surveyed and would be phased in over time after things get worked out related to these
details.
Mr. Borsuk stated that he was not comfortable with changing the flood plain as this is a process
that requires approval from the Corps of Engineers who makes this determination not just the
DNR. He also voiced his concerns on how you can have storm water treatment in a floodway as
this issue complicates the matter.
Mr. Gohde commented that it would depend on how the area gets mapped out and elevations as
you cannot have storm water management addressed by floodways and not addressing the storm
water generated from the site.
Mr. Borsuk reiterated that storm water management issues are a concern and need to be
addressed and he had concerns with changing the elevations.
Mr. Gohde responded that during the review of the General Development Plan is not the time to
address these concerns and that those issues should be addressed with the submittal of the
Specific Implementation Plan.
Mr. Cummings left at 4:50 pm.
Mr. Borsuk stated that he did not want to see new storage units constructed in the floodway or
floodplain and is uncomfortable with the development on this site.
Mr. Burich indicated that this construction would not take place if the floodway is an issue on the
site and appropriate permits would have to be approved.
Ms. Propp commented that she had concerns with the aesthetics of the out buildings for the other
storage units as they were located within the Highway 41 Corridor and although she would like
to see this site redeveloped, the smaller storage units to be constructed around the existing facility
were her concern.
ITEM: PD 900 N. Koeller St
Mr. Burich discussed the landscaping and fencing along the storage units that would provide
screening for this use from the roadway.
Ms. Williams added that the storage units facing Koeller Street will have end caps of brick or
stone veneer to improve the aesthetic qualities of the structure.
Mr. Thoms discussed the concept of not having as much parking within the Highway 41 Corridor
in front of the structures and that the buildings should be shifted closer to the road and have the
parking areas placed behind the structures. He further discussed that the General Development
Plan will come back to the Commission at a later time as a Specific Implementation Plan and that
with the Planned Development Overlay requirements could be placed on the request other than
just what meets code requirements. He felt the setback from the Highway 41 Corridor and the
amount of signage proposed for the site was a concern. He continued to discuss the size of the
proposed signs and the desire to have one monument sign for all four lots as well as the 60 foot
tall pylon sign and the architectural tower sign. He questioned why the architectural tower sign
needed to be 43 feet tall and that he does not like huge signs for developments. He continued to
discuss his concerns with the storm water management issues and that he felt they should be
required to control volume and quality despite what the City's ordinance provisions require. He
also discussed the storm water detention basin located within the floodway but felt that the
landscaping and fencing concerns could be addressed later when the Specific Implementation
Plan is submitted.
Mr. Burich indicated that the setback from Highway 41 has not been reviewed as with the new
Zoning Ordinance, there is no setback from Highway 41 any longer and discussed the previous
code requirements relating to this issue. He also addressed the issue of having less parking stalls
in front of the buildings and that proposal was not approved by the Plan Commission as a new
requirement in the new Ordinance. He further discussed the parking issue and that retailers
desire to have parking stalls in front of their facility. He discussed the tower sign requested
which is due to the placement of the structure so far off the road and discussed the height of the
proposed sign.
Ms. Williams further discussed the petitioner's desire to have a 60 foot pylon sign as it would
serve as a multi -tenant development center sign.
Mr. Burich added that staff was not recommending approval for pylon signs for each
development but for code compliant monument signage for Lots 1, 2, and 3 instead.
Mr. Kiefer questioned if the flood plain depicted on the map was the newer version.
Mr. Gohde responded that this was not the updated version of the Sawyer Creek flood plain and
discussed improvements made that have affected this issue and explained that the flood plain
and floodway could be dramatically reduced from what is currently depicted. The flood plain
has to be re -mapped.
ITEM. PD 900 N. Koeller St
Mr. Borsuk questioned why we would entertain the idea of the tower sign on the structure as he
did not feel it was necessary and would not support approval of it. He felt the pylon sign for the
development was adequate as well as the monument signs and discussed previous developers
and the base standard modifications requested for their sites as that was the standard for their
facilities. He felt designs and layouts could be adjusted to satisfy city requirements or desires and
that developers do not want to spend the money to modify their standard plans. He wanted to
see landscape plans on Koeller Street and the petitioner would need to address this with
reasonable standards as it is currently a sea of asphalt.
Mr. Bowen disagreed on the concept that retailers do not have standards for their developments
that they need to maintain and discussed the retail site selection and how this component is
relevant. He questioned the condition relating to the 60 foot tall pylon sign for the development
center and why this would be allowed by granting a base standard modification.
Ms. Williams responded that initially it was because they were going to reuse the existing pylon
sign on the site.
Mr. Bowen questioned if the existing sign was 60 feet tall.
Ms. Williams discussed the sign issue and stated that staff was comfortable with the original plan
to relocate the existing sign however it has changed to reconstructing a new sign now and
suggested that the Commission could change the condition to have the signage approval occur
during the Specific Implementation Plan process.
Mr. Bowen stated that he did not see why we would allow something in the General
Development Plan that the Commission was not going to allow when the Specific
Implementation Plan comes forward. He did not feel we should allow a 60 foot tall sign and that
the developer should have what agrees with the current Zoning Ordinance which is now limited
to 35 feet in height. They are no longer utilizing the existing sign and a new sign should meet the
new Zoning Ordinance requirements.
Mr. Burich explained that there was some confusion with the submittal as to the re -use of an
existing sign and any new sign for the site would be recommended at 35 feet in height.
Mr. Bowen stated that we need to look at the language in the conditions related to signage and
either revise it or strike it completely. The new sign should be required to meet zoning ordinance
standards.
Mr. Thoms discussed if this project did not appear to be redeveloping the parking,area and if they
are not reconstructing the parking lot, do they have to comply with current code requirements.
Mr. Burich stated that the parking area was going to be reconstructed and the plans reflect the
required landscape islands and green space that are part of the current zoning ordinance
requirements.
ITEM: PD 900 N. Koeller St
Mr. Thoms stated that if they have to comply with the current parking ordinance requirements,
that it should be included in the conditions of approval.
Mr. Burich explained that all of the parking area would be disturbed and that this aspect of the
development should be discussed at the Specific Implementation Plan level.
Mr. Borsuk reiterated that he still had concerns with the storm water infrastructure and
questioned if there would be a requirement for an operation and management audit.
Mr. Gohde stated that this was added to the last ordinance update and would be required to be.
certified and discussed further details of the DNk and City requirements related to this issue.
Mr. Borsuk then questioned if they would have to have O&M plans completed and checked to see
if it is operating as proposed.
Mr. Gohde discussed the schedule of checks that would have to be performed to satisfy the
requirements of the DNR.
Jared Schmidt stated that they would not have submitted plans without knowledge of the
limitations of the site and that they were aware that they cannot fill in an area within the
floodway. He further discussed the issue and stated that they would need to meet City
requirements as well as DNR and FEMA requirements and they believe that the development
plans would work even though it is a unique site.
Mr. Borsuk inquired if they were going to meet the release rates for the redeveloped site.
Mr. Schmidt responded that the release rates would be drastically reduced because of the nature
of the development and the increase of green space.
Mr. Borsuk commented that he did not feel that the mention of the 15% reduction on the site was
that drastic. He felt it may be necessary to add a condition regarding the reduction of the release
rates.
James Rabe, Director of Public Works, suggested that a condition could be added that would
include peak flow rates to be reduced to the maximum extent practical in conjunction with the
Department of Public Works during the site plan review. Peak flow release rates could not be
determined at this time.
Mr. Borsuk questioned how critical the tower sign was for the development.
Mr. Brown responded that he feels it is necessary and important to them as the building will get
lost as the site continues to develop.
Mr. Thoms inquired why the sign needed to be that tall as far as what is the function that would
require it for storage units.
ITEM. PD 900 N. Koeller St 10
Mr. Brown replied that they do not want people to miss it and it was an opportunity to advertise.
Mr. Thorns then inquired if he would be willing to bring the height of the sign down to meet
zoning ordinance requirements.
Mr. Brown responded affirmatively.
Mr. Thorns stated that there appeared to be some delineation between lots and questioned if that
was the intent as it would reduce his concerns about cross access parking.
Mr. Brown replied that it was the intent to delineate the uses between the lots and that they do
not have users lined up at this time as they need to address the floodway issues first. At this time
he was looking to get approval of the General Development Plan only to allow him to move
forward with staff on the preparation of Specific Implementation Plans.
Mr. Thorns continued to discuss his concerns with delineation of the sites and cross access issues.
Mr. Burich displayed on the site plan the areas of landscaping features between the sites that
would delineate each of the lots.
Mr. Thorns continued to discuss why he felt this was necessary to decrease issues with parking
concerns between the various potential users.
Ms. Propp questioned how high the main building elevation would be compared to the 43 foot
tower sign proposed on the structure.
Mr. Brown responded that the building would be 35 feet tall.
Ms. Williams added that this feature was discussed with the developer and the concern was if the
sign was constructed to meet code requirements, it would make the sign similar in height to the
building. Discussions with the developer were that they were adamant regarding the option of
utilizing the tower signs instead and their willingness to forego the monument sign for this site.
Mr. Borsuk commented that the plans depict wall signage as well and questioned why this type
of development as a storage facility would need both wall signage and a tower sign.
Mr. Brown responded that he felt the development needed to have both types of signs due to lack
of visibility.
Mr. Borsuk stated that he had conflicts with the proposed signage for the development and cross
parking.
Mr. Bowen left at 5:25 pm.
ITEM. PD 900 N. Koeller St 11
Ms. Propp stated that she would like to remove the base standard modification related to the 60
foot tall development center sign (4b) as she would prefer to have code compliant signage for the
site.
Mr. Borsuk commented that he would also like to remove the base standard modification for the
43 foot tall tower sign as well (4c) as it detracts from the development.
Mr. Thorns felt that signage should be code compliant for monument, pylon, and wall signage for
now and with the submittal of the final plans the issue can be addressed.
Mr. Rabe suggested language relating to the peak flow storm water reduction that could be
added as another condition of approval. He recommended reducing peak flow to maximum
extent practical in conjunction with the Department of Public Works during site plan review.
This will provide the flexibility to work with the developer on the site plan design to obtain
significant reductions on the site.
Board discussion continued on the storm water management concerns on water quality and
quantity issues.
Mr. Rabe stated that the peak flow cannot be addressed at this point of the development with any
more specific details.
Motion by Propp that the Plan Commission finds that the general development plan for a planned
development approval for an indoor storage facility, a multi -tenant commercial structure, and two
single -tenant commercial structures located on the southwest corner of N. Koeller Street and Robin
Avenue is consistent with the criteria established by Chapter 30-387 (C)(6) and recommends
approval of a planned development for a general development plan with the following revised
conditions:
1. Cross access agreements will be required between all four lots contained within the development
area to enable site access and internal circulation between parcels.
2. Easternmost access driveway on Robin Avenue be reconstructed to meet code requirements.
3. Access control ordinance variance to permit reduced lateral clearance for the access driveways as
proposed where the code requires 75 feet of lateral clearance be provided.
4. Base standard modification to permit:
a. Impervious surface ratio to exceed code permitted 70% and final impervious surface ratios
be provided at the time of Specific Implementation Plan review.
S. Prior to building permit issuance the petitioner will be required to obtain necessary DNR permits
and meet City code requirements for development within the floodplain and/or floodway.
6. Petitioner shall reduce peak flow to the maximum extent practical in conjunction with the
Department of Public Works during site plan review.
Seconded by Nollenberger. Motion carried 6-0.
ITEM: PD 900 N. Koeller St 12
SUBMIT TO:
Dept. of Community Development
City of Oshkosh Application 215 Church Ave., P.O. Box 1130
City
r Oshkosh, Wisconsin 54903-1130
Oshkosh 1�3 Planned Development Review PHONE: (920) 236-5059
❑ Conditional Use Permit Review
"PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT USING BLACK INK"
APPLICANT INFORMATION' INFOR(M/ATION'( r
Petitioner.lG1(�tpc�h Iyd/SI�Z►Sr��G 6 5[� rim✓tt�,�,h�g e�� �ji�lr�✓ate;(�
Petitioner's Address: 03U N LAm,1-4 M b i cr,, 0iy C • City: poA 1par a9T State: W i Zip: 5-3 y l
Telephone #: (� ]4j 27-6 "3S ? Fax: (1} l 21 " 37766 Other Contact # or Email: St G �� '� � ,�. v�'. i r}y�ti
el
Status of Petitioner (Please Check): Owner Representative Tenant ospecfiive Buyer
Petitioner's Signature (required):. Date:
OWNER INFORMATION
Owner(s): 90L �f!/';� LtUGI I �T L� !� L - Date: /
Owner(s) Address: ��J0 614(0 Sp'-d^e.� J City: 0AA-'K` r State: Zip: 549 iZ-
Telephone #: { ) Fax: { ) Other Contact # or Email:6dl ill t avlUCdeU ° ot�dtJ
.bry
Ownership Status (Please Check): individual Trusta_tnership Corporation
Property Owner Consent: (required)
By signature hereon, I/We acknowledge that City officials and/or employees may, in the performance of their functions, enter
upon the property to inspect or gather other information necessary to process this application. I also understand that all
meeting dates are tentative and may be postponed by the Planning Services Division for incomplete submissions or other
administrative reasons.
Property Owner's Signature Date:
SITE INFORMATION
Address/Location of Proposed Project; eo j 0'rA ILO -e / er' 51r -6Z f Parcel No,J 160 00700 i C,(
Proposed Project Type:nrr/)iM d �0_J_ m 9 0154n/,+-
fs4/1 /,'i- Mp
Current Use of Property: V'�f Loty i 41-04--/' W1-tf\t,, Zoning,6-Z "' )i -W
Land Uses Surrounding Site: North;
6- 2— cLoJ V -4- fitlmlc�flrGvtr(4�7
South: (,— 2- C- 3 ct v, d 'P- - i
East: K - 3
West: L - 2 -
"Please
"Please note that a meeting notice will be mailed to all abutting property owners regarding your request.
➢ Application fees are due at time of submittal. Make check payable to City of Oshkosh,
➢ Please refer to the fee schedule fo'r appropriate fee. PEE IS NON-REFUNDABLE
For more information please the City's website at www.ci.oshkosh.YA.us/Community_Development/Planning.htm
Staff Date Recd
7
Briefly explain how the proposed condiflonal use/development plan will not have a negative effect on the issues below.
I. Health, safety, and general welfare of occupants of surrounding lands.
e S5 /n k. S e U" a b�� !a �x �P e��o
d�'i rC I C, Ger _QY r U5 e-.,.
2. Pedestrian and vehicular circulation and safety.
Cq G �zJl
3. Noise, air, water, or other forms of environmental pollution. /
�ar 1/y7 •C 6i S Gi �`` C Gi h �% S �-t w r �� /i 1-e ole v
-� �• S � v rWfi ��(( G��u-Ca ••cc��r% S
4. The demand or and/ availability of public services and facilities.
j 4o't.z C. f I/ �
5. Character and future development of the area.
Arq� q ncl %Z e%�/ �i�s�4 �, �t ole v-t/o�vh c: -r f
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS - Must accompany the application to be complete.
➢ A NARRATIVE of the proposed conditional use/Development Plan including:
❑ Existing and proposed use of the property
❑ Identification of all structures (including paving, signage, etc.) on the property and discussion of their relation to the
project
❑ Projected number of. residents, employees, and/or daily customers
13Proposed amount of dwelling units, floor area, landscape area, and parking area expressed in square feet and
acreage to the nearest one-hundredth of an acre
❑ Effects on adjoining properties to include: noise, hours of operation, glare, odor, fumes, vibration, etc.
❑ Compatibility of the proposed use with adjacent and other properties in the area.
❑ Traffic generation (anticipated number of customers, deliveries, employee shift changes, etc.)
❑ Any other pertinent information to properly understand the intended use/pian and its relation to nearby properties and
the community as a whole
A complete SiTE PLAN and BUILDING ELEVATIONS must include:
❑ Two (2) full size (minimum 24" x 36") scaled and dimensioned prints of site plan and building elevations
❑ Two (2) 8'/2" x 11 (minimum) to 11"x 17" (maximum) reduction of the site plan and building elevations
❑ One compact disc or diskette with digital plans and drawings of the project in AutoCAD 2000 format with fonts and
plot style table file (if plans have been prepared digitally)
❑ Title block that provides all contact information for the petitioner and/or owner and contact information of petitioner's
engineers/surveyors/architects, or other design professionals used in the preparation of the plans
❑ The date of the original plan and revision dates, if applicable
❑ A north arrow and graphic scale.
❑ All property lines and existing and proposed right-of-way lines with dimensions clearly labeled
❑ All required setback and offset lines
❑ All existing and proposed buildings, structures, and paved areas, including building entrances, walks, drives, signs,
decks, patios, fences, walls, etc.
❑ Location of all outdoor storage and refuse disposal areas and the design and materials used for screening
❑ Location and dimension of all on-site parking (and off-site parking provisions if they are to be employed), including a
summary of the number of parking stalls provided per the requirements of Section 30-36 City of Oshkosh Zoning
Ordinance
❑ Location and dimension of all loading and service areas
❑ Location, height, design, Illumination power and orientation of all exterior lighting on the property including a
photometrics plan
❑ Location of all exterior mechanical equipment and utilities and elevations of proposed screening devices where
applicable (i.e. visible from a public street or residential use or district). Mechanical equipment includes, but is not
limited to; HVAC equipment, electrical transformers and boxes, exhaust flues, plumbing vents, gas regulators,
generators, etc.
Planned Development Review
NARRATIVE
Existing and proposed use of property
Existing is the vacated K -Mart mercantile building and pylon sign.
Proposed use is consistent with the existing commercial corridor and includes:
• Conversion of the K -Mart into a climate controlled self -storage facility with additional
new construction of non -climate controlled self -storage buildings. The converted
K -Mart will include a new fagade and enhanced architecture, new landscaping and
fencing that will conform to the City's requirements.
• Three retail/restaurant outlots, tenants to be determined.
Identification of all structures (including paving, signage, etc.) on the property and discussion
of their relation to the project
The existing K -Mart building will be converted into the new climate controlled self -storage
building. All existing site work will be completely removed and replaced perthe plans and
subsequent greater -details per City requirements.
We propose to re -use the existing pylon sign. This is important for marketing the self -storage.
Projected number of residents, employees, and/or daily customers
There will be no residents.
The storage operation functions with a minimal number of on-site employees and will have a
limited number of daily customers by the nature of its business.
The retail/restaurant tenants will have typical number of employees for such uses, tenants to
be determined. The square footage of retail/restaurant is substantial less than the former
K -Mart.
Proposed amount of dwelling units, floor area, landscape area, and parking area expressed in
square feet and acreage to the nearest on -hundredth of an acre
There will be no dwelling units.
The general development plan includes the following building areas and parking:
• NW strip retail: 12,000 sf —144 stalls
• Center West casual restaurant: 5,700 sf — 83 stalls
• SW fast food restaurant: 3,100 sf — 47 stalls
• Climate controlled self -storage: 92,020 sf
• Non -climate control 1 -self -storage : 7600 sf
• Non -climate control 2 self -storage: 8,400 sf
• Non -climate control 3 self -storage: 9,600 sf
• Non -climate control 4 self -storage: 6,250 sf
• Self -storage total parking: 54 stalls
Effects on adjoining properties to include• noise, hours of operation, glare, odor, fumes,
vibration, etc.
The Proposed use is consistent with the existing commercial corridor, and the effects on the
adjoining properties will be significantly less than the former K -Mart or another big box user.
Compatibility of proposed use with adjacent and other properties in the area
The existing, vacant big box retail building is the least compatible use to be adjacent to the
neighboring housing and light commercial uses. The proposed small -shop retail and restaurant
uses is the highest and best use of the frontage along Koeller Street and the low impact, low
traffic use of the former K -Mart building as a self -storage facility is much less of a nuisance to
the residential neighbors. The self -storage facility will have perimeter security fencing and
monitoring cameras which will reduce impact on police services. A drainage and landscaping
facility that runs north -and -south through the site creates a physical and visual buffer between
the highly visible retail/restaurant at the front of the site from the self -storage at the rear of the
site.
Traffic generation (anticipated number of customers, deliveries, employee shift changes, etc.)
Traffic generation will be reduced from the previous K -Mart (or another big box user) for
number of customers, deliveries and employee shift changes. There will be significantly fewer
parking spaces.
Any other pertinent information to properly understand the intended use/plan and its
relationship to nearby properties and the community as a whole
This proposal is for a Class A self -storage and retail/restaurant development.
10
xoi,Lonaj, SNI 2io3 sox A'WO M3IA3u ONV ONI1VW1183 HOA
AUVNmn3ud -
aw ac�e°mv�uwau a�'it� flY°iawvai�.w�' ��uwe'�'imi ��i wxn�urw�d®wurNi oim °m���to�0� ��a�uom ma��auswnwtw �.m'�'a'm'iwme az�
SD IIAiV2iQ aS3HS a'IVOS .LOx OQ
4
8
I
l
in
I
C9 i� O (,-),-,o
0 O O
CrD
10-
P I Q
-----
18'MISON N 009
�uewdolenepeu 3oRn0 8
96eJo}S-{I8S Ugo)14g0
yi ���x szsii
SNI `NJIS�a
�/11103dS�i3d
T
d
Cf)
u•w lawcm aumt •w
aw ac�e°mv�uwau a�'it� flY°iawvai�.w�' ��uwe'�'imi ��i wxn�urw�d®wurNi oim °m���to�0� ��a�uom ma��auswnwtw �.m'�'a'm'iwme az�
SD IIAiV2iQ aS3HS a'IVOS .LOx OQ
4
8
I
l
in
I
C9 i� O (,-),-,o
0 O O
CrD
10-
P I Q
-----
12
uoiz�nussuo� 2io3 sou AINO MMA311 ONV ONUMUS3 HOA
AHVNIV41138d -
13
Zoe" IM 11n VPO
is JgIMN N ooe
wewaoIeAePea 1013no 8
eBeio;S-ileS 4go)i4so
1911icclolbi ITA lNtltil MM 1-1
Y4W!1'.x QSiI
'ON] 'NJIS34mid
A/U1S3dS2J'3d
�oa!
F
�
g
8
13
ntoLLonussnioo a0a LON AINO M31A3H (INV ONJIM1183 HOA
- AdVNIWll3dd -
1'9YrD113LLDH✓3•l>!1®lBa1bW 3U ItMIWYtYOHOYJtlPN'134 if?l�LW 4YW Itl'L'LIInM 3LLNM1E3Y03✓71W 1W 30MWtlLLYtl3ll/MI BJIMbLp WNWkBY 3E9]i34. JQY @i813WLLY,]1a1W'190]etl'lUI4rt193AlYG AW WtlBHI&M1T!)raY 3LLPM
UM 1Y180i O19�9Y YHD 3+1 a11M1t503�IL'HdfgddJlON• 1161A 1'BI�®i3W 3l ANI1931!ffi!Y(ALLOtBHM1litl4YN LW NAW/d ®OYLN'Ol® 9Yn J'�iMD'JOI YMtl, Y]iNt-�'a�tlloY lb'9WRL�J>'a11�A3�LL�A40d LT.tl�.V!
soxiAvaa sssxs azvos zona oa
Mom Im VWXL?eo
]B �WII®oN N 000
�wawdoene
I pey 3011 0 v
e6aio3S-IIBS 4SoX480
19LHCC(PI0 IeA 5LI-ZNMJ,) 131
qt.�, �.,,Nj j
aril l
'�Nl `NJIS3a
EALL03JS213d
pit
�k
� Pig
�<
g
N
s
Cq
N
q-yy
uya`§f
-n
II
LML IWiD® iWOlal I'
1'9YrD113LLDH✓3•l>!1®lBa1bW 3U ItMIWYtYOHOYJtlPN'134 if?l�LW 4YW Itl'L'LIInM 3LLNM1E3Y03✓71W 1W 30MWtlLLYtl3ll/MI BJIMbLp WNWkBY 3E9]i34. JQY @i813WLLY,]1a1W'190]etl'lUI4rt193AlYG AW WtlBHI&M1T!)raY 3LLPM
UM 1Y180i O19�9Y YHD 3+1 a11M1t503�IL'HdfgddJlON• 1161A 1'BI�®i3W 3l ANI1931!ffi!Y(ALLOtBHM1litl4YN LW NAW/d ®OYLN'Ol® 9Yn J'�iMD'JOI YMtl, Y]iNt-�'a�tlloY lb'9WRL�J>'a11�A3�LL�A40d LT.tl�.V!
soxiAvaa sssxs azvos zona oa
M
It
Nyh
q-yy
uya`§f
-n
II
�Vuf�
II
II
I
ii
It t
a
II
/q
II
I I
i
:
�
@
��J4,
11
II
II
u
BM���r
II
Xf
ii
ii
4
I '�rJ"d
II
�i✓T�,I%
II
Y
- Ek r
ggj
�.
jl%iYi�u��
mill,
%rrf
II
II
cam;
vP'rrf
ii{Y
��
,110
n
v�y'%
n
n
RUT�y�+1Lr���J
II
I I
leu'✓ r1
I I
21,
✓! ���
I I
V I �
I I
ILD
Li
II
II
IT u.
0'.
n
u
m
II
n
.SPI'--
II
y
i �i,y ✓nj
✓� l;ii�
II
II
� �/s
II
II §
-
pp
II
II
II
II
�
-
QQQ��
q
II
II
II
II
-tl
pR�
3
e
3 3
@
d-------------
i
Hill B
08 9 as G G
11 xOl DrinisxOO 2I03 'LON1 AINO M31ABu ONV ONIlVWIISB uOd
- AdVNIWIIBud -
1'e.4dI34 i>LYBi»N3IMNNY 34 LM411YfY0N0 AHbetl 34 �3>73iJ W NYlNOI�Lub 3LLMMImMd 3ALW 1G39519tlIlYeBIb N) 831MO1W NMd9lZYY 34880 i1 LL90f dI �113ltlLLT 910f[N "19DJN)'lYNYfi K3MFG LW Nm4daM111Fil12p 3LL QtN
Opla1ffi!Ol¢33A1'118D 3491 N4m3W33JWeifINMAYlEdlellM ®R 33LLRPtII9JIRtl Ygll�eBlM1Y1nLMMAW NlnVdmlHl AW 01®LFAYitl®.bJ't�1fitO'13011Mp�aKNOffY-Buc33i YYOtl TM'M ll6VM»'>A tIDB>43WRF IL HId'h
s�xla�vzla asaxs aavos soxOa
-
10849 LN WHUBo
79 blleoN N 008
juewdolenePey 301in0 V
GB-ois-;IBS 480 480
IRLHOCIMM Ise asn-ZMrorCI iai
azz= i,u fll' c.0
m�..�v vuo1 'u ¢sii
'ONI 'NtJiS34
�]A LO3 m
A
o �drr
�
S
s
N
r4
r
w 3
�� ;In4aa1.
1'e.4dI34 i>LYBi»N3IMNNY 34 LM411YfY0N0 AHbetl 34 �3>73iJ W NYlNOI�Lub 3LLMMImMd 3ALW 1G39519tlIlYeBIb N) 831MO1W NMd9lZYY 34880 i1 LL90f dI �113ltlLLT 910f[N "19DJN)'lYNYfi K3MFG LW Nm4daM111Fil12p 3LL QtN
Opla1ffi!Ol¢33A1'118D 3491 N4m3W33JWeifINMAYlEdlellM ®R 33LLRPtII9JIRtl Ygll�eBlM1Y1nLMMAW NlnVdmlHl AW 01®LFAYitl®.bJ't�1fitO'13011Mp�aKNOffY-Buc33i YYOtl TM'M ll6VM»'>A tIDB>43WRF IL HId'h
s�xla�vzla asaxs aavos soxOa
-
It
g.
N
s
r
w 3
g
<
A
a
31
s
v
1
LO
gog
42
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0���
a
_ ..= -
zNt::
ease OOOOOOOOOO
NOIJ.3f1a'LsNo xo3 --- l AIM31A3a ONV DNIIVV41183 U0.4
AdVNIW113ad -
38� DptlJ 1�IMt»W 3LL lMUIIY1M tb TJRAtl34� 3HIlW lYLbllO'1811¢V/ 3LLINYi9TL 3tlUtl1G3CR,,,PW,m�„m�1tl AW 4RNRNOY �'tl i]U90'J �«$�1(131b1)Y A)mW'ND]t»'LM1Ort193A1M1W 1✓Z11 PHl@MI LPtI W 3LL RL'il
ar,s�eo, o,e r•,✓ev �n a�,raaa��xaaxw�m,wum�u aar„®,tau,rauneam,>bun„rrN,.mrd oau„amm+zn,m�i��ma��aw�®ua�m�wsa �u�,�,reu,m�,o�o ,rte
SONIMvacl as3HJ. a'Jvos J.oN Oa
zom IM W)fy@O
is LalleoN N 008
uewdoienePea joi1n0 B
eBe�o;S-lIBS 4BoN480
IHLI-ZLe IYi6) %e1 031H,00(010
z 1.n)e„ncn
V .M 2511
SNI'NJIS3a
3AL=dS213d old
R 9
8o
2
�.
38� DptlJ 1�IMt»W 3LL lMUIIY1M tb TJRAtl34� 3HIlW lYLbllO'1811¢V/ 3LLINYi9TL 3tlUtl1G3CR,,,PW,m�„m�1tl AW 4RNRNOY �'tl i]U90'J �«$�1(131b1)Y A)mW'ND]t»'LM1Ort193A1M1W 1✓Z11 PHl@MI LPtI W 3LL RL'il
ar,s�eo, o,e r•,✓ev �n a�,raaa��xaaxw�m,wum�u aar„®,tau,rauneam,>bun„rrN,.mrd oau„amm+zn,m�i��ma��aw�®ua�m�wsa �u�,�,reu,m�,o�o ,rte
SONIMvacl as3HJ. a'Jvos J.oN Oa
4
4
qq
q
j YN
G�"IZr�
I I
II
II
II
II
II
d b
'1/�
II
II
ii
II
II
II
�
II
II
II
ff1$)
II
r+
s
tttt
u
II
II
Elm
imm
II
II
II
II
IY Yy PYj
�I fy I�
��!
n
II
Ii
n
II
Ii
01f
II
II
J//
II
II
II
4P14
II
1J�gri'
��
�II
II
II
II �
II
II
t
I I
II
-155-uY1
II
IRE
,�
II
l�--
4 6,:
I
:
l
i �df•,f�
soy
i�
ti
I✓c,°.
II
§
II
I I
9
ILD
�$J
:I�fl,i/
II
rl r�✓
II
u
II
r
Omni
k�
II
k
I I
u
it
11
II
II
II
II
,g tt
II
II
�°�„ rr"A'
i i
u�•
n
�
II
II
n
II
3 3
II
II
II
11
II
II
II
II
PD/REZONE CHARLES A/MARILYN J PERRY 900 NORTH KOELLER LLC
900 N KOELLER ST LIVING TRUST 230 OHIO ST 200 -
PC: 02-21-17 1360 GREENWAY TER OSHKOSH WI 54902-5825
ELM GROVE WI 53122-1607
FATHER CARR'S PLACE 2 B LTD
1062 N KOELLER ST
OSHKOSH WI 54902-3245
GENERAL CAPITAL
ACQUISITIONS LLC
6938 N SANTA MONICA BLVD
FOX POINT WI 53217
HILL PROPERTIES LLC
923 S MAIN ST STE E
OSHKOSH WI 54902-6017
TOWN OF ALGOMA
15 N OAKWOOD RD
OSHKOSH WI 54904
VICTOR/ELIZABETH CORTEZ
350 N COUNTRY LN
FOND DU LAC WI 54935-9744
17
J:1GIS1PlanninglPlan Commission Site Plan Map TemplatelPlan Commission Site Plan Map Templale.mxd User. katieb
18
The City of Oshkosh creates and maintains GIS maps and data for its own use. They may show the
approximate relative location of property, boundaries and other feature from a variety of sources.
These map(s)/datasets are provided for information purposes only and may not be sufficient or
appropriate for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. They are provided "AS -IS" without
warranties of any kind and the City of Oshkosh assumes no liability for use or misuse.
J:1GIS\Planning\Plan Commission Site Plan Map TemplateRan Commission
N
lin=0.19 mi
1 in = 1,000 ft
Printing Date: 1/27/2017
Prepared by: City of Oshkosh, WI
e0l' 1111'1,
/ "" 1
iff}�
S�ii`•:
p�
Oshkosh
User. katieb
IE