HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/24/2014 P&Z Minutes 22-14 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
CASE NO.PZ-22-14 Hearing Date: July 24, 2014
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 18 N. Wille Street
PETITIONER: Eleni Hatzis
PUBLICATION DATE: July 91h,2014
PIN NUMBER: 03-34-330-014-0000
REQUESTS: 1)Variations- Front and Interior Side Yard Setbacks
2)Conditional Use-Unenclosed Front Porch
MEMBERS PRESENT: Agostino Filippone
Sharon Otteman
Thomas Fitzgerald
William Beattie
Jeanne Kueter
Norbert Mizwicki
Joseph Donnelly, Chairman
MEMBERS ABSENT: Keith Youngquist
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Consuelo Andrade, Senior Planner
Brian Simmons, Deputy Director of Community Development
INTERESTED PARTIES: Nick and Eleni Hatzis
Chairman Donnelly called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm. Commissioner Beattie made a motion,
seconded by Commissioner Fitzgerald to approve the minutes of the June 26th, 2014 Planning and Zoning
Commission Meeting; the minutes were approved 6-0 with one Commissioner abstaining. After hearing
one additional case Chairman Donnelly introduced Case PZ-22-14 18 N. Wille Street.
Ms. Andrade stated the Petitioner for Pz-22-14 is seeking Conditional Use approval to construct an
unenclosed porch in the required front yard and Variations to the front yard and interior side yard
setbacks for the property located at 18 N. Wille Street.
Ms. Andrade stated the subject property is located on the west side of Wille Street and contains a one and
half(1 '/2) story single family residence with related improvements, including a detached garage. The
existing front yard setback measures thirty feet (301). She further explained the interior side yard setback
along the south property line is nonconforming and measures four and eight tenths foot (4.8') when a
minimum of five feet(5') is required.
Ms. Andrade stated that the Petitioner intends to construct a second floor cantilever building addition in
the front and a two-story building addition in the rear.
Ms. Andrade further explained that the second floor cantilever building addition would be setback
twenty-eight feet (28') from the front property line when a minimum of thirty feet (30') is required. The
Planning and Zoning Commission-July 24th, 2014 PZ-22-14
Joseph Donnelly, Chair
two story addition in the rear would setback four and two tenths(4.2') from the south property line when
a minimum of five feet (5') is required. Variation approval is required for the proposed front and interior
side yard setback.
Ms. Andrade stated the proposed front porch along the front would be setback twenty five feet (25')
which requires a Conditional Use approval.
Ms. Andrade further explained the front and rear elevations indicate the building materials would include
hardy board siding and thin stone. The building height would be twenty-five and one half feet(25.5'), as
measured to the mid-point of the roof.
Ms. Andrade stated the side elevations indicate the two story building addition would include an attached
two-car garage and second porch area in the rear of the home.
Ms. Andrade showed a table comparing the existing and proposed improvements to the RA Single Family
Residence District's bulk requirements, she further explained that with the exception of the front and
interior side yard setbacks,the proposed building additions would comply with the RA bulk requirements.
Ms.Andrade summarized the standards for approving a Conditional Use as the following:
• The Conditional Use will not have detrimental impact on the public health, safety, morals,
comfort of general welfare;
• The porch as designed is unenclosed and does not encroach more than five (5) feet into the
required front yard;
• The building materials stay consistent with the remainder of the structure.
Ms. Andrade further stated that Staff reviewed the Petitioner's plans and found that the proposed porch
complies with the standards summarized in the Village Code. She also stated the porch would not
adversely affect the character of the surrounding neighborhood, utilities,or public streets.
Ms. Andrade stated that Conditional Uses for porches have been approved for four properties located
within a quarter mile of the Subject Property;therefore, Staff is supportive of the Petitioner's Conditional
Use request.
Ms.Andrade summarized the standards for a Variation as the following:
• A hardship due to the physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of a specific
property not generally applicable to other properties in the same zoning district and not created
by any person presently having interest in the property;
• Lack of desire to increase financial gain; and
• Protection of the public welfare, other property,and neighborhood character.
Ms. Andrade stated per the Petitioner, the Variation to the front yard setback is required in order to
construct the second floor cantilever building addition which will make the master bedroom suite usable.
Ms. Andrade stated the Petitioner did explore alternative options with the architect but found that the
other options would be impractical from a cost and structural perspective.
Ms. Andrade further stated that the Variation to the side yard setback is necessary in order to be in-line
with the existing building,which does not run exactly parallel to the property line.
Planning and Zoning Commission-July 24th, 2014 PZ-22-14
Joseph Donnelly, Chair
Ms. Andrade stated Staff feels the Variation requests fail to meet the standards for a Variation because
there are no hardships as defined by the Zoning Ordinance. She further explained the Petitioner's desire to
have a larger master bedroom and have the two-story building addition in the rear that is aligned with the
existing building do not constitute hardships. The proposed improvements would create a new
nonconformity in the front yard and increase the extent of the existing nonconforming setback along the
south line of the property.
Ms. Andrade stated Staff feels the building additions can be redesigned to comply with the required thirty
foot(30')front yard and five foot(5')interior side yard setbacks.
Ms. Andrade stated based on Staff's review of the request Staff recommends that the Planning and
Zoning Commission approve the following motion:
"To approve an conditional use for an unenclosed porch to encroach into the required front yard resulting
in a twenty-five (25) foot front yard setback as shown in the attached plans dated June 26, 2014 for the
property located at 18 N. Wille Street, Case No. PZ-22-14, subject to the following conditions:
1. Obtaining a building permit from the Community Development Department; and
2. The porch remaining unenclosed."
Ms. Andrade stated; however, the Variation requests do not meet the standards listed in the Zoning Code
and recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission deny the following motions:
"To approve:
• A Variation to allow a twenty-eight foot(28')front yard setback; and
• A Variation to allow a four and two tenths foot (4.2') interior side yard setback along the south
property line, as shown in the plans dated June 26, 2014 for the property located at 18 N. Wille
Street."
Ms. Andrade stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission is final for this case.
Chairman Donnelly asked if there were any questions for Staff.
Commissioner Beattie asked if the four and two tenths foot(4.2') is the narrowest nonconforming part of
the interior side yard setback.
Ms. Andrade stated that was correct and that was located at the southwest corner of the property.
Chairman Donnelly asked how far the neighbor's garage is from the proposed addition.
Ms. Andrade stated that there should be about six feet(6')between the structures.
Chairman Donnelly stated other houses on the block look like they have legal nonconformities, and are
built closer to the street.
Chairman Donnelly swore in Eleni Hatzis 18 N. Wille Street Mount Prospect, Illinois.
Ms. Hatzis explained that she is the owner of the property, and lives in the home with her husband and
three children. She stated the home is very narrow and wants to make the house as livable as possible
without having to move or completely tear down the home.
Planning and Zoning Commission-July 24th, 2014 PZ-22-14
Joseph Donnelly, Chair
Ms. Hatzis stated that they are trying to stay within code but also maximize their living space as well
which is difficult because of how to the home is built on the narrow lot.
Chairman Donnelly asked the Petitioner if she worked with the architect to come up with alternative
options.
Ms. Hatzis stated that she had and decided this was the best option for her family.
Chairman Donnelly asked why they need to build out the two feet(21) in the front.
Ms. Hatzis explained that if they don't move forward the two feet (2') their master bedroom would
become small and tight. She further explained their concern if they pushed the rear addition another two
feet (2') like Staff had suggested. She stated their architect believed it wasn't a good long term solution
because it would cost a lot more money to structurally secure the added square footage.
Ms. Hatzis further explained she doesn't plan on moving and would like to raise her family in the home.
Chairman Donnelly asked if the neighbors know and are in support of the project.
Ms. Hatzis explained that they have showed the plans to the surrounding neighbors and all of them
seemed to be in support of the project.
Chairman Donnelly asked if they spoke to the neighbor whose garage is the closest to the Petitioner's
property line.
Ms. Hatzis stated the man is elderly and she spoke to his daughter and explained what the project
entailed; she further stated that she didn't seemed concerned about the improvements.
Commissioner Mizwicki asked the Petitioner what they would do for a patio.
Ms. Hatzis stated that her main concern is getting the house fixed and more usable space. She explained
that she understood the patio area may have to be smaller due to lot coverage; and would deal with that
when the time comes.
Chairman Donnelly asked if there were anyone else there to address the board regarding this case.
Hearing none, he closed the public hearing portion of the case and brought the discussion back to the
board.
Hearing no further discussion from the board, Commissioner Beattie made a motion seconded by
Commissioner Fitzgerald to approve the following motion:
"To approve an conditional use for an unenclosed porch to encroach into the required front yard resulting
in a twenty-five (25) foot front yard setback as shown in the attached plans dated June 26, 2014 for the
property located at 18 N. Wille Street, Case No. PZ-22-14, subject to the following conditions:
1. Obtaining a building permit from the Community Development Department; and
2. The porch remaining unenclosed."
UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Otteman, Fitzgerald, Beattie, Kueter,Mizwicki,Filippone, Donnelly
NAYS:NONE
Planning and Zoning Commission-July 24th, 2014 PZ-22-14
Joseph Donnelly, Chair
Chairman Donnelly stated the vote was approved 7-0 and is Planning and Zoning Commission final.
Commissioner Beattie made a motion seconded by Commissioner Fitzgerald to approve the following
motion:
"To approve:
• A Variation to allow a twenty-eight foot(28')front yard setback; and
• A Variation to allow a four and two tenths foot (4.2') interior side yard setback along the south
property line,as shown in the attached plans dated June 26,2014 for the property located at 18 N.
Wille Street."
UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Otteman, Fitzgerald, Beattie, Kueter,Mizwicki,Filippone,Donnelly
NAYS:NONE
The motion was approved 7-0 and is Planning and Zoning Commission final.
Chairman Donnelly asked if there were any citizens to be heard; hearing none Commissioner Beattie
made a motion seconded by Commissioner Otteman and the meeting was adjourned at 8:16 pm.
Jenna Moder,Administrative Assistant
Community Development Department
Planning and Zoning Commission-July 24t', 2014 PZ-22-14
Joseph Donnelly, Chair