Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/13/1996 ZBA MinutesMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ZBA CASE NO. ZBA-II-CU-96 PETITIONER: SUBJECT PROPERTY: PUBLICATION DATE: REQUEST: MEMBERS PRESENT: ABSENT: Hearing Date: June 13, 1996 Robert Crouse 208 South Main Street May 29, 1996 (Journal) The petitioner is requesting Conditional Use approval for an "appointment only" automotive detailing business (Section 14.1904). The parking variation request was withdrawn at the hearing. Gilbert Basnik, Chairman Leo Floros Ronald Cassidy Robert Brettrager Elizabeth Luxem Jack Verhasselt Peter Lannon OBJECTORS/INTERESTED PARTIES: Phil Rominski, 210 South Main Street Robert Tomasello, 539 East Lincoln Denise Rominski, 210 South Main Street Priscilla Staniack, 8827 W. Grand Ave.,River Grove Chairman Basnik introduced case ZBA-II-CU-96, being a request for a conditional use to permit an appointment only automotive detailing business and parking variations to reduce parking spaces from six to two. (Section 14.1904 and 14.2224) The petitioner, Mr. Robert Crouse, introduced himself to the Zoning Board of Appeals and stated that he is proposing to operate an automotive detailing shop. The petitioner presented a revised site plan illustrating that he has reduced the number of service bays from two to one, reduced the number of employees from two to one and increased the number of parking spaces from two to three. As proposed in the revised plan, the petitioner stated that he no longer needed to request a parking variation. Mr. Michael Sims, Planner, summarized staff's report and opinion on the revised parking plan. He stated that the automotive detailing business use provides extensive revitalization of vehicle's ZBA-1 I -CU -96 Page 2 exterior and interior and includes extensive cleaning of an engine bay of a vehicle. The petitioner stated in his application that customers will bring their cars by appointment only. No work will be performed outside the building. Services will also be performed off-site at a customer's location. Access to the site is from Main Street and a 20 foot public alley at the rear of the property from Evergreen Avenue. Mr. Sims further reported the petitioner stated in his application that the detailing business is a quiet operation and that no odors or toxic materials will impact the surrounding properties. The hours of operation will be Tuesday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and Saturdays from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. The property is located within the B-5 Central Commercial District. The Village's Zoning District requires parking at a rate of 1/2 space per employee plus 2'/2 spaces per service bay. The petitioner's revised business plan now shows the site will have one service bay and one employee. The petitioner's revised parking plan provides three parking spaces along the north property line; meeting the Village's parking requirements. Chairman Basnik asked if the revised business and parking plan would meet the zoning requirements for parking. Mr. Sims confirmed that the parking requirements would be met and that no parking variation would be required. Chairman Basnik asked how the Village would enforce the parking requirements for this business. Mr. Daniel Ungerleider, Planning Coordinator, stated the petitioner must understand that if his business violates the plans as presented in such a way that additional parking would be required, the Village of Mount Prospect would revoke the conditional use approval. When questioned about overnight parking, the petitioner stated he would not permit overnight parking on the site for insurance reasons. Mr. Phil Rominski, 210 South Main Street, noted that parking lot stormwater drains onto the rear of his property. Staff noted the property at 210 South Main Street must receive normal amounts of stormwater from the petitioner's site and no more. Mr. Rominski added that the owners of 208 and 210 South Main Street will need to renew an egress/ingress easement agreement. 1 Mr. Robert Tomasello, 539 East Lincoln, stated he is the current owner of the subject site and that he is in favor of the approval of the conditional use. Ms. Priscilla Staniack, 8827 West Grand Avenue, River Grove, Illinois, stated she is a Realtor and has represented the subject site for the past two years. She stated the property has been very difficult to sell and believes that petitioner's conditional use application is appropriate for approval. Ms. Denise Rominski, 210 South Main Street, explained that the easement between 210 and 208 South Main provides ingress and egress for both properties and needs to be renewed in order for both properties to have proper access. She stated that her property owns the easement and that she is willing to enter into an agreement with Mr. Crouse. Mr. Crouse asked that four -angled parking spaces be permitted and grandfathered for the site. Mr. Sims stated that the angled parking design does not meet the driveway and stall requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Ungerleider added that a narrow driveway would also hamper its ZBA-1 I -CU -96 Page 3 use by emergency vehicles. Mr. Ungerleider further added that the existing non -conforming parking conditions cannot be "grandfathered" and shall be required to be corrected as a condition of the requested conditional use. Chairman Basnik summarized the requirements for approval of a conditional use as stated in the Zoning Ordinance and read into the record a letter recommending denial of the conditional use by John V. Hickey, representing the owner at 200 South Main Street. (A copy of Mr. Hickey's letter is attached.) Mrs. Luxem moved that the Zoning Board of Appeals approve the petitioner's requested conditional use upon the condition that the petitioner sign an easement agreement with the owner at 210 South Main Street. The motion was seconded by Mr. Verhasselt. Upon Roll Call: AYES: Brettrager, Luxem, Floros, Lannon, Verhasselt and Basnik NAYS: None The motion was approved by a vote of 6-0. Respectfully submitted, Michael E. Sims Planner y JOHN V. HICKS" Anomey at Law 1431 W. WARNER - CHICAGO, ILLINois 60613 - (312) 477-9325 June 7, 1996 'YZ Mt. Prospect Zoning Board of Appeals 100 South Emerson Mt. Prospect, IL 60056 Gentlemen, O �F�F-,r F.� n IJ Please be advised that I represent the beneficiary of Trust No. 86088 which owns the property located at 200 South Main, Mt. Prospect, IL. I am writing in response to a recent notice (Case No. ZBA1 1 -CU -96) requesting a zoning variance for 208 South Main Street to operate a car detailing operation. My client is vehemently opposed to the granting of such a variance. First of all, he does not feel that the area is conducive to such an operation. Secondly, he feels that the additional parking and vehicle traffic that such an operation would create would have an adverse affect on the value of his property as well as property in the surrounding area. If you feel that it is necessary for someone to appear at the June 13, 1996 hearing, please advise. Thank you for your cooperation. Yf Sincerely, John V. Hickey JVH/njc lc: Matthew J. Moran & Associates 555 Skokie Boulevard, Suite 525 Northbrook, IL 60062 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ZBA CASE NO. ZBA-I2-CU-96 PETITIONER: SUBJECT PROPERTY: PUBLICATION DATE: REQUEST: MEMBERS PRESENT: ABSENT: Hearing Date: June 13, 1996 Michael Schwarzbeck 10 South Elm Street May 29, 1996 (Journal) The petitioner is requesting a Conditional Use permit for an addition to an existing detached frame garage to accommodate three vehicles Gilbert Basnik, Chairman Leo Floros Ronald Cassidy Elizabeth Luxem Jack Verhasselt Robert Brettrager Peter Lannon OBJECTORS/INTERESTED PARTIES: Michael and Joan Schwarzbeck Chairman Basnik introduced case ZBA-I2-CU-96, being a request for a conditional use permit r to enlarge an existing two -car frame garage to accommodate an antique car at 10 South Elm Street. The petitioners, Michael and Joan Schwarzbeck, were sworn in. Mr. & Mrs. Schwarzbeck indicated that they proposed to enlarge the existing two -car frame garage to accommodate an antique car that Mr. Schwarzbeck has owned since the early 1970's. They own two other vehicles and, at the present time, are unable to garage all three. Mr. Schwarzbeck indicated that he drives the antique vehicle (1971 Camaro Sports Sedan) approximately twice a month on good weather days. The balance of the time the vehicle is stored in the garage where he can perform minor maintenance. Mr. Kenneth Fritz, Planner, said the petitioner, in seeking the conditional use to enlarge the existing frame garage, does not seek to widen the driveway or to enlarge the garage door to accommodate three cars abreast. The petitioner's intention is to maintain the driveway at its present size especially since the hard surfaced area for the lot is just under 50%. Any subsequent enlargement of the hard surfaced area including driveway width or additional accessory structures, would increase the hard surfaced area above the maximum 50% allowed in the R -A District. Staff also noted that the garage ZBA-I2-CU-96 Page 2 is set back approximately two feet from the north side yard and five feet from the rear property line. The existing garage is less than three feet from the side lot line and is therefore considered non -conforming. Section 14.402 permits the enlargement of "lawfully established non -conforming buildings" provided the enlargement does not create an additional nonconformity or increase the extent of the existing nonconformity." Therefore, no variation is required, but the property owner has been advised that, in the event of damage or destruction greater than 50% of the replacement value of the garage, any replacement structure should conform to all regulations of the zoning district. The Zoning Board discussed various issues regarding the request. There was a concern expressed by several members for the additional storage that the addition would permit in the enlarged garage. Chairman Basnik stated that he would prefer to see a separate door for a third vehicle and a widened driveway rather than provide an opportunity for additional storage or potential home occupation activities. However, it was pointed out by staff that should the garage driveway be widened, the lot coverage would be exceeded and then a variation would be necessary. The petitioner had earlier indicated that no additional height is proposed for the existing garage door, thereby prohibiting any large panel trucks or equipment usually associated with home occupations. Commissioner Cassidy asked whether both 50 foot lots, 17 and 18, were included in the request. Mr. Fritz stated that the home and all of the improvements including principal structure, garage, driveway and sidewalk areas were on Lot 18. Chairman Basnik closed the public hearing and asked for a motion to be considered on the request. Mr. Verhasselt made a motion that the Zoning Board of Appeals approve the petitioner's request, Case ZBA-I2-CU-96, in order to enlarge an existing detached two -car frame garage with an eight foot addition with a total of 730 square feet. The motion was seconded by Mr. Cassidy. Upon Roll Call: AYES: Brettrager, Cassidy, Luxem, Floros, Verhasselt and Basnik NAYS: None The motion was approved by a vote of 6-0. Respectfully submitted, Kenneth H. Fritz Planner