This is the Monday, April 13th, 2026 meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals for the City of Waukeshaw.

And we are ready to have a call to order.

Kevin Riley present.

Eric Dunn's present.

Tim Reddick present.

Do you guys have your mics on?

I do not.

Tim Reddick present.

Eric Dunn's present.

Okay.

Do we have any public comment not concerning the uh appeal that's on the record for today?

Seeing none, we can move on to the approval of minutes for February 16th.

Proof.

We have a first.

Do we have a second?

Second.

First by Tim Reddick, second by Eric.

Kevin Riley votes aye.

Eric Dunn says aye.

Tim Reddick votes aye.

The minutes are approved.

On to new business.

All right.

So we have an appeal from Wisconsin Historic or Wisconsin Housing Preservation Corporation to allow solar panels on in the what is defined by the code as the side yard of their property.

So this is 801 North East Avenue.

It's at the intersection of it's on East Avenue at the intersection of East and South Street, just kind of on the eastern edge of downtown.

This is the East Terrace Apartments.

So basically the full property is either the apartments or the parking.

So the primary array will be on the on the top of the building.

As you can see, that's all these blue blue lines here in this overhead.

And then the secondary one will be in the parking lot to the south of the building in two separate uh two separate sections, which will also be utilized to shade the parking spaces in the parking lot.

So here are the here's a view of the parking lot from the entrance, and then also uh from the other side.

Uh as you can see the building to the south is I believe that's uh Catholic Charities.

It's a the uh uh single story uh commercial building with uh very limited uh uh visibility in terms of windows uh on that side.

Uh the uh arrays again that'll be two sections, uh one over the uh row of parking uh immediately adjacent to East Avenue, and then the other one over uh the two rows in the center of the parking lot, and uh they'll be uh they'll have they'll be arranged as as a carport with uh um supports in between the parking spaces.

Uh this is the larger of the two arrays, so the it'll be uh 40 49 feet wide by I believe it was 60 feet long, um, and then at least 14 feet uh clearance above the uh parking spaces uh with metal supports and then uh concrete base that'll extend on our ground and it'll be angled so that the uh so the rear side is a little higher than the than the front, and then this is the other uh the smaller section, uh which will be about 22 feet wide, and it again that'll extend over a single parking space, and again it'll have the 14-foot clearance.

Um be uh mounted on metal brackets uh which will then be mounted into concrete bases in the ground.

And uh this is the uh the code's definition uh from the code's definitions for a street yard and a rear yard.

Uh the street yard is the is the entire uh space in front of the front, uh closer to the uh front of the building, and then on a uh a double frontage lot, uh both sides are considered to be street yards.

So the on this right side here you can see uh the street yard is both the yard in front of the building and behind uh when it faces the street.

The side yard is obviously the sections that are not street yards.

So for this building, uh the street yard uh is both the orange here adjacent to East Avenue and then uh adjacent to Pleasant Street, and then the side yard is this portion uh on either side, uh including the parking lot to the south, and there is not there is not a rear yard.

So the code requires any accessory structure to be uh in a rear yard only, not in a street yard or side yard.

There really isn't a space on this property uh for an accessory structure.

Um the uh again, this is the where the array will be located.

It'll be uh minimum of five feet uh set back from the property of the south, 40 feet from uh East Avenue, 30 feet from the property boundary, roughly uh in those two sections in the parking lot, and here's the other the other street yard uh facing uh Pleasant Street.

So the applicants have have argued that basically every other property uh in the area has has a rear yard uh where they can locate accessory structures, but theirs does not have any space that would that would meet this code requirement.

Uh so this is the uh the regulation that they're requesting a variance from, which uh states that accessory uses and detached accessory structures shall be permitted in the rear yard only, not in a street yard or side yard.

Is that your full report term?

Yep.

Uh I have uh one question.

Do we have any specific regulations concerning solar panels?

Or the only reason the solar panels are coming up is because they need to be mounted on an accessory structure.

Right, yeah.

We don't uh the current code does not have any anything specific to solar panels.

So there are this general regulation applies to any accessory structure at all, but uh there aren't anything any regulations that are specific to solar panels.

And my second question would be if this property were to have a uh what would be designated a rear yard, would these structures then be compliant or still need an appeal?

Um they would be yeah, they would be permitted in the rear yard.

Uh they would have to go to the plan commission, and and if this is approved, uh if you approve a variance, they will still have to go to the plan commission for the site plan and architecture review.

But um, assuming that you know the plan commission approved it, they would they would be permitted.

Do we have any other questions for Charlie before we move on?

Yeah, um this may be a question that's just based off of not knowing with it being commercial real estate and apartment building and everything.

Do they not get an exception because of that because it's not residential and it's not you know considered having a real yard?

Does that matter?

Uh not as far as this uh regulation is worded.

There are some that apply only to uh some of the specific requirements uh for accessory structures apply only to residential, but this one is just general to any any property in any yard.

So just to be sure, we're just talking about the carport ones, the one on the roof that's approved no matter what, basically.

Yep, that's from yeah, they could they wouldn't even need to get plan commissioner feel for that.

Actually, you know, I apologize.

I do have one more question.

Um, with the solar panels and everything, is this uh typical solar panel where like the community around it would also be able to tap into the excess energy?

I guess you'd have to the applicant uh has some representatives here, so they might be able to answer that for you.

Okay.

Um other questions or discussion before you move on to the to the applicants?

Would the applicants like to go up and uh explain their position?

Yeah, I think if you just want to say that on behalf of you lawyer.

Sure.

Oh my name is Darius.

I'm the one that you bought.

Or you could go up to the podium either way.

Sure.

Good.

There we go.

Hello, my name is Darius.

I'm the one that uh applied for the variance.

Um I'm the pre-construction project manager for this project.

Um for introductions.

This is uh Mark, he's a representative of WHPC, the owner's group, and then Andrew, who is the developer for the project.

And I'm sorry, what was your last name again?

My last name?

Darius White.

Thank you.

Uh and briefly make a case for why we should uh accept your appeal.

Yeah, so I mean listed out in the um in the variance responses because this uh property is a double frontage lot and it's not allowed to have a rear yard rear yard.

Um an accessory structure structure should be allowed because they're not able to follow code compliance in that respect.

All other than that, the carport is following all municipal code.

Um and it's an opportunity to both provide a shaded structure for the apartment, um, parking as well as being able to continue to make improvements to the both the community but also the property itself.

Uh WHPC, they've said that they've put in lots of money into the property and they continue to make try to make improvements where they can.

So exterior improvements like this uh will be great for the uh tenants of the property.

So you want to ask your question about the yeah, again, same question as before.

Will this provide like extra like will we energies basically be tapping into the solar panels to use the excess energy?

Yeah, so the the way the system is designed, any power that can be consumed on site will be consumed first.

But yeah, in the event, right, it's uh sunny day like this morning, and the building's load is lower than what the solar arrays producing.

Any excess will go back to the local grid uh and feed you know the next closest user, whether that's a home or the Catholic uh building south of there.

You have any other questions for the applicants?

Um have you have you asked the neighbors if they're okay with this?

Uh no, we did not do any canvassing and um I like solar panels for my own home, but and the newer ones don't reflect much, but some do.

Is any and any calculations of whether it's gonna reflect into any neighbors' homes or anything like that?

No, due to the height of the carport, any surrounding homes shouldn't have any effect on it.

Okay.

This one uh to I know we we typically speak in angles and get it, but they're at a seven-degree pitch, so the only windows that would have really a visual potential for getting any glare reflection would be from the apartment complex itself.

Because the surrounding homes are a max of two stories, right?

Okay, and we do send out uh letters to all the neighbors so that they would have gotten that.

So we haven't received any response, no, no pushback.

Perfect.

Um, for the owners group, is there anything you'd like to add on this project?

No, we appreciate your time.

Mark Vandenbrooky, uh, vice president of construction for WHPC Wisconsin Housing Preservation Corps.

Um as Darius was saying, you know, our goal is to keep investing into this property, keep making it a nice safe home for all of our tenants.

There's a hundred and three units there.

Wow.

And um obviously it's one of the largest, if not the largest, in WalkaShow.

So we want to treat it with respect and keep um uh keep investing into this community.

Good deal.

Not seeing any other questions or comments, uh, we can go to deliberation.

Yeah.

I see it as a good thing, especially with the excess energy being I see it as a good thing, especially with the excess energy being utilized by the community around with no pushback from the community after receiving letters.

I don't see why not.

I I would be in I would be in agreement it from from my understanding.

The only reason it wouldn't be granted is because it's they don't have a year rear yard.

And uh I actually have several friends in that building, and I know they do a great job keeping people in the community and service that are either high risk or uh it's it's a it's a great facility.

My only concern is the structures would uh not be used for their intended use.

I know there's a lot of homeless in that area who might decide to camp out in that area, and I should have asked that question while we were still talking to the applicants.

But that's my only concern.

May I bring it back to the applicants?

Uh there are a lot of homeless in that area, and I know for a fact that the homeless attempt to uh gain entrance to that lobby itself.

Uh do you have any plans in place if people decide to start camping out underneath there?

Uh we we've actually just upgraded our security system, our camera system, about $50,000 or so.

Um we've also changed management companies at the site level to really have um additional presence as well.

But yes, the Catholic charities obviously is right next door, and uh so we try to work with them as well as a neighbor.

It's my understanding that this is the structure is also a carport, right?

So there will still be parking underneath and everything, correct?

So during the winter months, no one I don't think will be trying to camp underneath there because it's open on both sides, so they're still gonna have to deal with the elements severely.

Okay, yeah.

Yeah, I don't have any questions.

Fine.

Okay, so I guess we can take it back to deliberation.

Um I would I'm in general agreement with the granting the appeal on the grounds that it doesn't uh have a uh designated rear yard and it would comply if it did.

Correct.

I agree with that.

Won't affect any neighborhoods like we need to I think it's a nut plus for the community as well.

I agree.

And I would encourage to stay on top of that homeless situation because they will try to camp underneath there.

Most definitely.

All right.

I think uh we're ready for deliberation unless there's anything else we need to go through, Charlie.

You want to go through the findings of facts?

Sure.

All right.

Uh so this is the appeal of Wisconsin Housing Preservation Corp for uh dimensional variants from section 22.581B of the zoning code.

Uh if granted, the variants will allow for construction of a carport mounted solar array in the side yard parking lot at 801 Northeast Avenue when detached accessory structures shall be permitted in the rear yard, not in a street yard or side yard.

Uh and finding one is that there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the property in question or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties or classes of uses in the same zoning district.

Tim Reddick affirm.

Kevin Riley affirm.

Eric Dunst affirm.

All right, so that's 3-0.

Uh finding two that such variants is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights associated or possessed by other properties in the same zoning district and in the same vicinity.

Tim Reddick affirm.

Kevin Riley affirm.

Eric Dunst to firm.

All right, that's also 3-0.

Uh that a variance is not being requested solely on the basis of economic gain or loss, and that self-imposed hardships are not being considered as grounds for granting of a variance.

Tim Reddick affirm.

Kevin Riley affirm.

Eric Dunst firm.

All right.

3-0.

And four that the authorizing of such variants will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and will not materially impair the purpose and intent of the zoning code or public interest.

Tim Redika firm.

Kevin Riley affirmed.

Eric Dunstaffirm.

All right, that's also those are all three zero then.

So seeing we have a uh unanimous affirmation of all four uh aspects of the appeal, uh we can move on to a motion to uh grant the appeal.

Tim Reddick motion to grant appeal.

Second.

We have a first and a second.

Any discussion?

And we can take a vote.

Tim Reddick vote yay.

Kevin Riley, yes.

Eric Dunst, yes.

The appeal has been granted.

Do we have any other uh business to attend to, Charlie?

Then our meeting is adjourned.

Perfect.

Thank you.