The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08/25/2005 P&Z minutes 34-05 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-34-05 Hearing Date: August 25, 2005 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 312 Hatlen Avenue PETITIONER Leslow Hakalo, KPOL, Inc. 312 Hatlen Ave, Mount Prospect, IL 60056 OWNER: Leslow Hakalo PUBLICATION DATE: August 10,2005 PIN #: 08-10-217-018-0000 REQUEST: Variation - Front Yard Setback MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Rogers, Acting Chair Joseph Donnelly Leo Floros Ronald Roberts Keith Youngquist MEMBERS ABSENT: ChairArlene Juracek Marlys Haaland STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner Jason Zawila, Long Range Planner Ellen Divita, Deputy Director, Community Development INTERESTED PARTIES : Artur Kaczmarek (4211 N. Keystone, Chicago, IL 60641) Acting Chair Richard Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Joseph Donnelly moved to approve the minutes of the July 28, 2005 meeting and Ronald Roberts seconded the motion. The motion was approved 3-0 with Leo Floros and Keith Youngquist abstaining from the vote. At 9:15 p.m. Mr. Rogers introduced Case No. PZ-34- 05, a request for a Variation for a Front Yard Setback at 312 Hatlen Avenue. He said that this case would be Planning & Zoning Commission final. Judy Connolly, Senior Planner, summarized the case. Ms. Connolly said that the Subject Property is located on the south side of Hatlen Avenue, between Busse Road and Michael Street, and contains a single-family residence with related improvements. The Subject Property is zoned R1 Single Family Residence and is bordered on all sides by the R1 District. The Subject Property has an irregular shape and there is a 5' storm water easement in a portion of the interior side yard. Ms. Connolly explained that the Petitioner’s exhibits illustrate the proposed improvements to the existing home, which include demolishing the existing detached garage, adding a second-story addition, modifying the first floor, and constructing an attached 2-car garage. She said that the front setback of the house complies with the required 30-foot setback, but a portion of the attached garage would encroach approximately 3'7" into the front yard. Richard Rogers, Acting Chair PZ-34-05 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting August 25, 2005 Page 2 Ms. Connolly said that in an effort to arrive at a design that meets Village regulations, the Petitioner's architect met with Village Staff several times prior to applying for a Variation. The initial designs called for the garage to encroach into the side yard. However, that design was abandoned when it was learned the garage would encroach into the side yard and storm water easement. The architect explored relocating the garage, 'pushing' it further back, but then the garage would still be in the side yard and close to the easement. The architect and Petitioner had concerns about providing sufficient access to the storm sewer, which is necessitating the need for the 5’ storm sewer easement, should the area need to be excavated. Therefore, the Petitioner is seeking a Variation to allow a portion of the attached garage to encroach into the front yard, instead of the side yard, to allow adequate access to the storm sewer. Ms. Connolly reported that the existing home complies with the Village’s zoning regulations, but the existing detached garage encroaches into the required 5' side yard setback. The Petitioner proposes to demolish the detached garage and replace it with an attached 2-car garage. The proposed garage requires relief from the R1 District’s bulk regulations for the front setback. However, the proposed addition to the house and site improvements meet the Village's zoning regulations. The proposed improvements would be constructed according to all applicable Village Codes. The project would meet all setback and lot coverage requirements. Ms. Connolly reported that the standards for a Variation are listed in the Zoning Ordinance. She summarized the standards and said that the Petitioner has explored different designs for the garage, but the triangular shape of the Subject Property and 5' storm water easement limits their options. The size of the proposed encroachment has been minimized from previous design proposals and the request meets the standards for a Variation because of unusual circumstances, specifically the triangular shape of the Subject Property and the 5' storm water easement in the side yard. Ms. Connolly said that the Petitioner’s request to construct an attached garage in a portion of the front yard meets the Variation standards because the triangular shape of the Subject Property and 5' storm water easement in the side yard creates a hardship, as defined by the Zoning Ordinance. Based on these findings, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission make a motion to approve a Variation to allow a portion of an attached garage to encroach into the front yard, as shown on Petitioner's Site Plan, for the residence at 312 Hatlen Ave., Case No. PZ- 34-05. She said that the Planning & Zoning Commission's decision is final for this case because the amount of the Variation is less than 25% of the zoning requirement for the setback. Leslow Hakalo, 312 Hatlen, Mount Prospect, IL, was sworn in. Mr. Hakalo asked his architect Artur Kaczmarek to explain the request. Mr. Kaczmarek, 4211 Keystone, Chicago, IL, was sworn in. Mr. Kaczmarek stated that the main objective of the project was to renovate the existing house and add a second story. After studying the site plan and existing conditions, he said that he noticed that there was a 5 foot storm water easement located at the side of the house that would make it difficult to build an attached two car garage. Therefore the Petitioner would like to build a garage that would encroach on the front yard setback and is asking for a Variation. Mr. Rogers said that the drawings submitted called for stucco for the addition and asked the architect to confirm that dryvit would not be used. Mr. Kaczmarek said that he spoke with Ms. Connolly about the building materials already and was informed that the Village’s Building Code does not allow for the use of dryvit. Mr. Rogers asked whether the existing trees would be affected by the construction. Mr. Kaczmarek said that no trees would be affected by the construction and that the driveway would be expanded to the maximum 20 feet allowed from its existing 15’ width and would leave the existing curb untouched. Mr. Rogers asked if anyone in the audience wanted to address the Commission. As there were no comments or questions, he closed the Public Hearing. ichard Rogers, Acting Chair PZ-34-05 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting August 25, 2005 Page 3 Joseph Donnelly made a motion to approve a Variation to allow a portion of an attached garage to encroach into the front yard, as shown on Petitioner's Site Plan, for the residence at 312 Hatlen Ave., Case No. PZ-34-05; Keith Youngquist seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Donnelly, Floros, Roberts, Youngquist, and Rogers NAYS: None Motion was approved 5-0. After hearing one more case, Joseph Donnelly made a motion to adjourn at 10:40 p.m., seconded by Ronald Roberts. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. __________________________________ Jason R. Zawila, Long Range Planner C:\Documents and Settings\kdewis\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK2\PZ-34-05 312 Hatlen VAR Front Yard1.doc