_08032026-217

1 MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MONDAY , AUGUST 3 , 202 6 6 : 3 0 p.m. Chairman Gregorek called the meeting to order at 6: 3 0 p.m . The following Board Members were present at roll call: Member s Jakubczyk , Henne , Wagner , Yerkey , and Garcia - Dwyer . Also present: Secretary Lipp and Planner Nic D’Amato . Approval of Minutes - January 5, 202 6 Member Henne m oved to approve the minutes of the January 5 , 202 6 , meeting . Member Wagner seconded. On roll call, all voted aye , except Members Wagner, and Garcia - Dwyer who abstained. C ASE 2 6 - 00 3 DSJ GENERAL CONTRACTING LLC DONNIE SIMS 10001 S. 13 TH ST. TK#: 926 - 0043 - 000 Chairman Gregorek called the hearing to order at 6:15 p.m. Member Lipp read the public hearing notice into the record. The Board heard sworn testimony from Planner Nic D’Amato, who provided a summary of the variance requests. The first request is for a side yard variance from the required 30 feet to 10 feet; the second request is for a 65 % garage façade to front façade, which exceeds the allowed 50% maximum. Planner D’Amato explained that the lot itself is legal non - conforming because the existing dimensions do not meet current Code. Chairman Gregorek asked for clarification of where on the lot the proposed house could be built. Planner D’Amato provided an illustration. The Board heard sworn testimony from appellant Donnie Sims , N85W16110 Appleton Ave. Unit 307, Menomonee Falls, WI . Mr. Sims acknowledged that he could adjust the percentage of garage façade to front façade by reducing the garage size to a single car garage. Chairman Gregorek asked the applicant a variety of questions regarding the purchase of the lot. Chairman Gregorek also noted it appeared there were trees that would need to be removed in order to build. Mr. Sims explained he would have to replace the tree s per the formula prescribed by Code. Planner D’Amato noted the proposed replacement trees were indicated on the plans. 2 Member Henne asked the applicant to clarify if he could indeed adjust the garage façade percentage to meet Code. Mr. Sims replied that he could; his p reference would be to construct a single tandem garage. Mr. Sims admitted he was aware of the dimensions of the lot, but unaware of the Zoning Code restrictions for the additional setbacks required on a corner lot. Mr. Sims stated the size of the house in relation to the garage is negotiable, however, he is tr ying to gain the maximum width possible on the lot. Mr. Sims s aid he is only able to build a two - story home on the property; there is not enough width for a ranch - style home. Member Yerkey asked how this lot historically came to be. Planner D’Amato explained the lot was a remnant parcel, not an outlot. The remnants were scatterd throughout the development and largely absorbed by the adjoining single - family homes, but somehow, this lot never was. Planner D’Amato stated although the lot is legal non - conforming, it is still buildable as long as the bulk and dimensional standards are met. The reason for the variance request is because required setbacks cannot be met in this case. Mr. Sims stated if he is allowed to build, the property will be sold to a homeowner – it will not be a rental property. The Board heard sworn testimony from Melissa Willms, 1434 W. Lois Ln, Oak Creek. Ms. Willms expressed concerned about site lane obstructions. Ms. Willms explained it happens with 9973 S. 13 th St., the property to the north. The concern is that landscaping, fences, garbage carts, may obstruct the view of traffic on 13 th St. Mr. Sims explained that the driveway will be on Lois Ln., not on 13 th St. Ms. Willms also expressed the view of another neighbor who feels the proposed home does not fit with the character of the existing neighborhood: Ms. Willms stated that was not her concern, her only concern was site lines to 13 th St. Member Lipp read the Letter of Denial into the record. Member Wagner asked Planner D’Amato about the vision triangle and whether it was taken into consideration while reviewing the proposed new home construction. Planner D’Amato illustrated the vision triangle for the Board and confirmed that it had been cons idered if the setback variance were granted. Member Henne questioned if the address of the proposed home would be changed to Lois Ln. from 13 th St. Planner D’Amato replied that it likely would. Chairman Gregorek closed the public hearing at 7: 45 p.m . 3 Deliberation and Findings of Fact Case 2 6 - 00 3 The Board discussed the case and the criteria for each of the “Findings of Fact” for a variance from Sec. 17.0301(a) as follows: a. Preservation of Intent The proposed construction preserves the purpose and intent of C ode S ection 17.0301(a) . Granting the variances does not create a permitted use that is otherwise not permitted in the Rs - 2 zoning district. The requested reduced side yard setback would be generally consistent with the setback that would be permitted if the lot in question were an interior lot. b. Exceptional Circumstances: This is a legal non - conforming lot that has narrower dimensional constraints of width and size. Therefore, not granting the variance would make it impossible to build, as the permitted buildable area is only 10 feet wide c. E conomic Hardship and Self - Imposed Hardship not Grounds for Variance: The board finds that the hardship Is not economic in nature but results from the unique dimensions of the property. The current property owner did not create the present situation. d. Preservation of Property Rights: Granting the variance is necessary to preserve the owner’s property rights to construct a single - family home. The permitted buildable width of 10 feet effectively prevents the property owner from that right. e. Absence of Detriment : Granting this variance would not cause detriment to the adjacent property owners as this use is consistent with the land use of neighboring properties. There is no detriment to the general public that would result from granting this variance. Member Wagner moved that the Board grant a variance from Oak Creek Municipal Code Section 17.0301(a) which states the minimum setback for street facing side yards in the Rs - 2 Zoning District is 30 feet. Member Henne seconded. On roll call: all voted aye. Motion carried . The Applicant is permitted to construct a single - family home on the property located at 10001 S. 13 th St. with a 10 - foot street facing side yard setback. The Board discussed the case and the criteria for each of the “Findings of Fact” for a variance from Sec. 17.0 4 0 3 ( e ) (2)g.2 as follows: a. Preservation of Intent : Granting the variance would not preserve the intent of the front façade Code Section 17.0403(e)(2)g. 2, as it would increase the percentage of the front façade to a majority, making it the primary feature of the home. b. Exceptional Circumstances: There are no exceptional circumstances, as the property owner can conform with the standards set forth by the Code. c. Economic Hardship and Self - Imposed Hardship not Grounds for Variance: The hardship is economic and self - imposed in nature, as the property owner can conform with Code standards by reducing the size of the proposed garage. d. Preservation of Property Rights: The Appellant ’s right to construct a home with an attached garage on the property is preserved . 4 e. Absence of Detriment: Granting this variance would not cause detriment to the adjacent property owners as this use is consistent with the land use of neighboring properties. There is no detriment to the general public that would result from granting this variance. Action Case 2 6 - 00 3 Member Jakubczyk moved that the Board deny a variance from Oak Creek Municipal Code sectio n 17.0403(e)(2)g.2, garage in line, which states if the attached garage is set in line with the front façade of the home, exclusive of porches, bay windows, or other minor projections, it shall not exceed 50% of the façade's total width. Member Yerkey seconded. On roll call: all voted aye. Motion carried. The applicant is not permitted to construct an attached garage which makes up greater than 50% of the front façade of the home. Chairman Gregorek adjourned the meeting at 8 : 26 p.m .