[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6316902,"mediaKeyId","2375205-c83ee8ecb4ecb53d2e059683f5acbf90","parentId",2375205,"title","Board approves narrow setback relief for egress window at 1195 Bond Street with safety condition","audioSeconds",1256,"startMs",4454000,"endMs",5710000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2375205-c83ee8ecb4ecb53d2e059683f5acbf90&start=4454&end=5710","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2375205-c83ee8ecb4ecb53d2e059683f5acbf90/thumbnail_4454000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6316902/Green-Bay/Brown-County/Wisconsin/Board-approves-narrow-setback-relief-for-egress-window-at-1195-Bond-Street-with-safety-condition","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6316902-1a24ede4b7242b46b8dd1571324ef23a/orig.mp4?Expires=1771093894&Signature=hQ5ZcVVfpU-GyeS-B1piWwltkyn6qciRWSu12t-B5B1OsVYO9E2WQJUpL9AE11SReCC0bWBaZ8i6pMyrektzaqRzXjnb0GxYhuyJvQBHO~fwSYYTRDL8BGncQpv8Gh7i9vnjVOUOR7RwJ-HDmf1lqBarP3Mfx~soBQ5tDDgsLXTuoGPQZRzGWJnd4WaAA9JbdoWF9Zu7h14yETtqTW7vmWdgB-396nxjvi3If0FLOKtK4KzJh4cgAqrjTC4~uMBOwkH8E7tueK9o0~ozSRbC-v622OzIjDczLxM~4Y1F4DUW9jqI4sWxNuesS9Rr1L61Wp51p7g6JGdxb7Cn-CgxaQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Green Bay, WI","date","2025-02-22T12:44:21.52Z","article","The Zoning and Planning Board of Appeals on Feb. 17 approved a narrow setback variance to allow an egress window and well at 1195 Bond Street so the basement can be used as bedrooms, with a condition requiring safety covering or screening for the well.

Staff explained that the property is a 1\u00012-story (one-and-a-half-story) house, which calls for an eight-foot side-yard setback; permitted obstructions such as egress wells are allowed up to half the applicable setback. Because the house and lot dimensions place the structure closer to the lot line, staff said the board must decide whether to allow ingress/egress relief to a proposed opening that would leave the well about 2.25 feet from the property line (the applicant sought a 9-inch relief once measured against narrow-lot rules).

The petitioner, who identified himself as Cody Kamees of 1195 Bond Street (agenda listed Melissa Adams as applicant/property owner), said the family plans to convert basement space into bedrooms so the home can accommodate a larger household. He said the windows are for emergency escape only, and that they would install covers or other safety measures and could run a fence extension if required.

Board members discussing the request said the relief sought was modest (about nine inches of additional encroachment under the narrow-lot calculation) and emphasized safety and suitability for habitation. Several members cited that the lot qualifies as a narrow lot under the code, which reduces the side-yard standard, and that the building already sits closer to the property line than the current code distance. Members noted that the project preserves property rights and addresses housing/occupancy needs while posing little expected detriment to neighbors.

A motion to approve the variance passed on a voice vote with the condition that the egress well have protective covering or screening to prevent accidental falls. The board directed staff to include wording of the safety covering in the permit and to record the condition in the minutes.

The applicant was reminded that the approval is limited to the egress window/well as described and that all building and safety permits still must be obtained through city inspection before occupancy changes take effect.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Board of Appeals 2-17-2025","oneSentenceSummary","The board approved a small setback variance to allow an egress window and well at 1195 Bond Street so the basement can be used for sleeping rooms, adding a condition requiring protective covering or screening for safety.","taxTitle","Green Bay, Brown County, Wisconsin","taxId",2853,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6316907,"Board denies encroachment request for 16x16 addition in Bay Highlands",2002,2502000,4504000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2375205-c83ee8ecb4ecb53d2e059683f5acbf90&start=2502&end=4504","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2375205-c83ee8ecb4ecb53d2e059683f5acbf90/thumbnail_2502000.jpg","/articles/6316907/Green-Bay/Brown-County/Wisconsin/Board-denies-encroachment-request-for-16x16-addition-in-Bay-Highlands","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6316907-5aa142d84b51811f3da4f1404a984dcb/orig.mp4?Expires=1771093894&Signature=g6i5aTARd9uXK7wrf0p0ntGiIDaM7Buh2KcZCBYhD68FU5oNAOeLrPzcUvFHWpzPWq4g5uSO5p71Rhd1DG~rdDd-TQspUIJxxCOaiC6gKGPH8qjGpIElxKN96GtdqDazsSL~bSV9dGP0dkccwdEgAy7Of1zwlIUuY37DBI~nx-5~tc7y1IppaWUJyKcmxuADMrOjre-pcUT0jT2o4cX4vc4xNcyKeYWkmiNskm0sZTLUuhEqRJuHaW2REH0TWWHEuFxLBEUZramE56lqhjOZHkJlw6S9cH0KQgkxOvsk1gSvjaQyRRMMzCtlw327CKOpYr6EmCXF18vlZC5s3r5-Ag__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Zoning and Planning Board of Appeals voted Feb. 17 to deny an applicant's request to place a 16-by-16-foot addition within the eight-foot side-yard setback for a two-story primary building in the Bay Highlands area.

Staff told the board the property is in an R-1 low-density base zone and that the code requires an eight-foot side-yard setback for a two-story primary building; the proposed addition would sit approximately two feet from the property line. The lot is part of a planned development originally recorded in the 1970s; although the development has private covenants and an HOA, the board's jurisdiction is the city's underlying R-1 zoning.

Applicant John (last name recorded in the agenda as Bershac) said he purchased the property in January 2023 and seeks the three-season room to create privacy and usable backyard living area. He provided an approval letter from the Bay Highlands Property Owners Association architectural committee and said the architect and contractor recommended the proposed placement for roofline/flow considerations.

Neighbors and HOA representatives (Amy Robinson and an email from David Blackman, HOA president) said the condo association and architectural committee approve the design; Robinson told the board the area comprises oddly shaped lots and the addition would mainly be garage-to-garage adjacency rather than living-space proximity.

In deliberations several board members said they sympathized with the applicant's desire for privacy and that the site is unusually sited on the lot, but that the variance test requires findings on intent, exceptional circumstances, hardship and non-detriment. Some members noted practical alternatives: siting the addition elsewhere on the lot to meet the eight-foot setback or reducing the depth (for example to about 12 by 16 feet) so the addition could meet permitted setbacks for a single-story addition. Several members also raised concerns about setting a precedent that would encourage construction that bypasses code requirements.

A board member moved to deny the request for lack of exceptional circumstances and necessity; the motion was seconded and carried on a voice vote. The applicant was told the board's action was final at the meeting and staff advised about options for redesign and reapplication.

The board then moved on to other agenda items.","The Green Bay Zoning and Planning Board of Appeals denied a request to site a 16-by-16-foot three-season room within the required side-yard setback in the Bay Highlands neighborhood, finding alternatives exist and the applicant did not meet variance standards.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6316912,"Green Bay Zoning Board denies variance request for driveway at 3633 Arcadia Lough Drive",1736,74000,1810000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2375205-c83ee8ecb4ecb53d2e059683f5acbf90&start=74&end=1810","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2375205-c83ee8ecb4ecb53d2e059683f5acbf90/thumbnail_74000.jpg","/articles/6316912/Green-Bay/Brown-County/Wisconsin/Green-Bay-Zoning-Board-denies-variance-request-for-driveway-at-3633-Arcadia-Lough-Drive","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6316912-f0ac5351604c335d85cb45eab688e5b4/orig.mp4?Expires=1771093894&Signature=X4zd2BMNhmRbqaIMOlFx3G0T0wsg-6FsBh~mP1pUGQ8Tw~rGs--ok1lwsEvACHHY~ySePkcVou2enkqtNroSbYUrSRGEo7jhbBo8AmB7srcmqo8TLCw~GmfMFXF0k3unZCO-hSy1bTObQ0AJk53naGdDtYLuJ~PtpqjTLDhG0xw2~NW70bC5OGLNMEWoF-b38EUGXjZqjBiRjqKmNv3zXXGR1dNfhUBvxQu-WLLOkJ3J2zrWkQUPKgFHS5bnB4ZHqccxa1jz0O7dh-4jdTZ7wHhzAr8KvYdV2XTwzyBJ9SM39LP53aO8KF0VLbdf9z~GBT0JhovvqCH5EMrrkqTitQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Zoning and Planning Board of Appeals of Green Bay on Feb. 17 denied a variance request from the owner of 3633 Arcadia Lough Drive to keep an expanded front-yard driveway that exceeds city driveway standards.

The board said the applicant did not demonstrate the exceptional circumstances necessary to grant a variance from chapter 40 (driveway standards cited in the staff packet). The board's motion to deny passed on a voice vote.

City planning staff told the board the property was built in 2021 with an approved site plan showing a typical driveway to the three-stall garage. A widened area was installed after construction and appears in a Google Street View image captured in October 2022. A complaint about the unpermitted work was filed Dec. 13, 2023, and the property sold in October 2023, staff said.

Applicant Jeremy (surname reported in the agenda as Doty; he identified himself as Dody at the hearing), who said he purchased the house Dec. 24, 2023, told the board the driveway expansion and a polymer deck were done by the previous owner and that he inherited the works when he bought the home. He said he has paid inspection/processing fees and a contractor to modify the deck and installed a sidewalk at his own expense. He told the board removal of the poured concrete would be a further financial hardship.

Supporters who spoke said the widened apron created no traffic or safety problems, that the feature is minimally intrusive to neighbors, and that removing it would leave unsightly scars and be costly for the new owner. Staff and multiple board members emphasized the code requirement that driveway parking area must lead directly to a garage door opening with the specified width and depth and noted the expansion functions as driveway space contrary to the code citation included in the staff report.

In deliberations several members said they sympathized with the applicant's financial situation but concluded the variance standards require more than an economic hardship and typically focus on physical or property-specific constraints. Board members referenced concern about opening a path to developers or sellers evading permits by selling properties after unpermitted work, and several members noted past cases in which owners were required to remove unpermitted concrete.

After hearing public comment and discussion, a board member moved to deny the variance (finding failure at least on the exceptional-circumstances criterion); the motion was seconded and carried on a voice vote. The board advised the applicant that civil remedies between buyer and seller are a private matter and that circuit court review is an available appeal route for landowners dissatisfied with board rulings.

The board moved to the next agenda item following the vote.","The Green Bay Zoning and Planning Board of Appeals denied a variance request from the owner of 3633 Arcadia Lough Drive to formalize an expanded front-yard driveway installed after the home's original construction, concluding the application did not meet the board's standards for exceptional circumstances.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Board approves narrow setback relief for egress window at 1195 Bond Street with safety condition

Board denies encroachment request for 16x16 addition in Bay Highlands

Green Bay Zoning Board denies variance request for driveway at 3633 Arcadia Lough Drive