HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/28/2001 ZBA minutes 15-2001 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
CASE NO. ZBA-15-2001 Hearing Date: June 28, 2001
PETITIONER: Thomas & Lisa George
418 S. NaWaTa Ave.
PUBLICATION DATE: June 13, 2001 Journal/Topics
REQUEST: Variation to extend an unenclosed porch
MEMBERS PRESENT: Hal Ettinger
Leo Floros
Richard Rogers
Arlene Juracek, Chairperson
MEMBERS ABSENT: Merrill Cotten
Keith Youngquist
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner
Mike Blue, AICP, Community Development Deputy Director
INTERESTED PARTIES: Thomas & Lisa George
Chairperson Arlene Juracek called the meeting to order at 7:47 p.m. The minutes of the May 24, 2001 meeting were
approved 4-0. At 8:34 p.m., Ms. Juracek introduced Case No. ZBA-15-0I, a request for a Variation to allow
construction of an unenclosed porch.
Judy Connolly, Senior Planner, introduced the staff memorandum for the case. She reported that the subject property
is located on a comer tot on a single-family residential street and the home is currently set back 20.10 feet from Go
Wanda Ave., but there is a 9'x4' unenclosed porch/extended entryway that encroaches into the 20-foot side yard. The
applicant proposes to construct an unenclosed covered porch along GoWanda, which is an exterior side yard, although
it is used as a "front". Ms. Connolly clarified that, according to the Zoning Ordinance, the front of the lot is along
NaWaTa Avenue. In order to construct this porch, the petitioners are seeking a variation to permit a 13.10-foot
exterior yard because the proposed porch will encroach 7' into the required yard. She said the petitioners state in their
application that the porch would be used as a gathering place and not alter the character of the neighborhood.
Ms. Connolly explained that the proposed unenclosed porch is different from other porches that received variations to
be located in the exterior side yard because this porch extends farther into the side yard than the 15' setback previously
approved by the Zoning Board and the proposed porch would be the only modification to the house at this time. She
said staff reviewed the petitioner's plat of survey, site plan, elevations, and visited the site and found that the subject
parcel is a 7,257 square foot parcel that is relatively level, out of any flood zone and rectangular. The parcel is
developed with a single family home and an attached garage.
Ms. Connolly said that, in order to approve the requested variation, the request has to meet the standards for a
Variation as defined in the Zoning Ordinance. She said the reasons for the proposed variation cited in the petitioner's
application adthess aesthetics and how the porch would not have a negative impact on the neighborhood. The
proposed porch could enhance the character of the existing single-family residential area and would not have a
negative effect on the public welfare. Ms. Connolly did point out however, that no particular condition of the lot
justifies the proposed encroachment. Therefore, there is not sufficient justification for a Variation by the Zoning
Ordinance standards, and based on these findings, Staff recommends that the ZBA make a recommendation to the
Village Board to deny the proposed Variation to permit an unenclosed porch to encroach 7' into the required 20'
exterior side yard setback for the residence at 418 S. NaWaTa Avenue, Case No. ZBA~15-01. The Village Board's
decision is final for this case.
oning Board of Appeals ZBA- 15 -2001
Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 2
Ms. Connolly also informed the Board members that, in 1991, the petitioner received a variation for I6.5-foot exterior
side yard rather than the 20-feet required by the Zoning Ordinance. The petitioner had recently purchased this lot and
was building a new home. The Zoning Board granted the setback variation in addition to height (26'4" when 24'
max), and FAR (.367 FAR when .35 max) variations citing topography (this property has a lower grade) and
narrowness of the lot as reasons for approving the variations. The Zoning Ordinance has since changed and allows 28'
tall buildings, .5 FAR, and the property was rezoned in 1993 from R1 to IL&. The subject property is larger than the
minimum lot size required by the Zoning Ordinance and exceeds the minimum width required (code requires 50-feet
and the subject property measures 58' at the front setback). Therefore, the reasons for grant4ng the previous variations
are no longer applicable to the subject property.
Ms. Juracek asked Ms. Connolly if public notice had been given and Ms. Connolly said yes. Ms. Juracek called upon
the petitioners to address the Board.
Tom & Lisa George were sworn in and said they were doing extensive improvements to their home which would
include a new mol and shutters and repainting. They said they have a hardship issue as they have five children ages 6
to 14 and a small baclqfard. The children spend most of their playtime in the driveway, which leads to a high-traffic
street. Mr. & Mrs. George said the children would utilize the porch for much of the day, rather than the driveway.
They also said they want the porch as a sunshade for their kitchen, which is too bright and very warm due to its
southern exposure. Mr. George said the porch would be constructed of brick, redwood and cedar. Mrs. George
pointed out that the porch would be built over existing construction and only the stairs would encroach into the
setback. Mr. George identified several homes in the area with non-conforming setbacks.
Ms. Juracek said she thought the planned improvements would be in character with the existing neighborhood. She
also pointed out that a Conditional Use would limit the porch to remaining unenclosed in the future, whereas a
Variation, which was requested, does not set that limitation.
Ms. Cormolly said that limitation could be included as a condition to the Variation.
At 9:00, Chairperson Juracek closed the public hearing and asked for discussion from the Zoning Board members. As
there was no further discussion, Richard Rogers moved to make a recommendation to the Village Board to approve a
request for a Variation for Case No. ZBA-15-01, to allow conslruction of an unenclosed porch addition that would
encroach into the exterior side yard setback for the residence at 418 S. NaWaTa Ave, with the condition that the porch
always remain unenclosed and no other portion of the building extend into the sideyard setback. Leo Floros seconded
the motion.
UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Floros, Ettinger, Rogers, and Juracek
NAYS: None
Motion was approved 4-0.
At 10:10 p.m., after hearing another case, Richard Rogers made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Leo Floros. The
motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned.
Barbara Swiatek, Planning Secretary
Judy Connolly, Senior Planner