Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/26/2001 ZBA minutes 18-2001 MINUTES OF Tlllg REGULAR MEETING OF THE MOUNT PROSPECT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CASE NO. ZBA-18-2001 Hearing Date: July 26, 2001 PETITIONERS: Jeff and Janet McMahon 125 Homer PUBLICATION DATE: July 11, 2001 Journal/Topics REQUEST: Variation to allow construction of a 5'4"x21'5" enclosed addition in the side setback MEMBERS PRESENT: .Hal Ettinger Men'ill Cotten Leo Floros Richard Rogers Keith Yonngquist Arlene Juracek, Chairperson MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner Mike Blue, AICP, Community Development Deputy Director INTERESTED PARTIES: Jeff and Janet McMahon Kevin Kopterski William Skwarski Chairperson Arlene Juracek called the meeting to order at 7:33 p.m. The minutes of the June 28, 2001 meeting were approved 4-0; Merrill Cotton and Keith Yonngqmst were not at the June meeting. At 7:47, Chairperson Arlene Juracek introduced Case No. ZBA-18-01, a request for a Variation to allow construction cfa 5'4"x21'5" enclosed addition in the side setback. Judy Connolly, Senior Planner, introduced the staff memorandum for the case. Ms. Connolly stated that the subject residence is on a comer lot on a single-family residential street. The applicant proposes to construct an addition along the north lot line (inter/or side yard). In order to comply with Zoning Code regulations, the interior side yard would have to be no less than 7.5-feet. The petitioner proposes a 5.67-foot setback and is seeking a Variation to expand the house 1.83- feet into the required setback. Ms. Connolly explained that the addition will be constructed from face brick and the floor plans show that the addition would increase the size of the existing kitchen. The petitioner states that he has explored other ways to expand the house to maximize the family's living space, but could nol arrive at a design that was practical and met Village code requirements. In addition, the petitioner states that the neighbors adjacent to the area do not object to the addition, that the addition would enhance the neighborhood, and that the addition would not adversely impact light or ventilation for the adjacent neighbors' property. Ms. Connolly said that staffreviewed the petitioner's plat of survey and site plan, visited the site, and found that the size, shape, and development of the subject property are typical of most residential properties in the Village, but the location of the house in relation to the lot is not typical of most homes with two exterior yards. The entrance to the house is located in the exterior side yard and measures 30-feet from Emmerson Lane while the Zoning Ordinance reqmres a 20-foot setback. She said that most homes are built up to or are closer to the minimum setback requirement. In this case, if the house was located 10-feet closer to Emmerson Lane the Variation would not be required and the petitioner could build the addition as proposed and comply with zoning setback regulations. Ms. Connolly said that, in order to approve a Variation, the request has to meet the standards listed in the Zoning Ordinance. The standards relate to the physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of a specific property not generally applicable to other properties in the same zoning district; lack of desire to increase financial gain; and protection of the public welfare, other property, and neighborhood character. Zoning Board of Appeals ZBA- 18-01 Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 2 Ms Connolly explained that, although the petitioner is creating his own hardship by expanding the house into the required setback, the location of the house is a unique physical condition of the subject property. In addition, the proposed structure would not be likely to have a negative effect on the character of the neighborhood or the public welfare. Ms. Connolly pointed out that the proposed variation would not have a detrimental effect on neighborhood character and the location of the house supports a finding of hardship, as required by the Variation standards listed in the Zoning Ordinance. Based on these findings, Staff recommends that the ZBA approve the proposed Variation to permit an enclosed structure to encroach I'10" (1.83') into the required 7.5-foot side yard setback for the residence at 125 Homer Lane, Case No. ZBA-18-01. The Zoning Board's decision is final for this case. Jeff & Janet McMahon were sworn in. Mr. McMahon explained that, since the children are growing, they require more · eating space and this proposed addition Was the only way to expand. Richard Rogers suggested they could put the addition to the east but Mr. McMahon said that would give them a very elongated kitchen and not a workable space. Hal Ettinger said he did not agree with that assessment and that the proposed addition would encroach into the north neighbor's space, leaving a 5-foot separation between houses. Mr. McMahon said that area was the neighbor's garage and just a blank wall. Kevin Kopterski of Schaumburg was sworn in and said that he was the architect for the project. He explained that an expansion to the east would leave only two feet space to walk through. He said the proposed addition would only encroach only 1.83' into the setback and would not have a negative effect on the neighbor's property or the neighborhood. Arlene Juracek said they had read the letters of support from the neighbors and asked if anyone in the audience wished to address the group. William Skwarski, 1414 E. Emmerson Lane, was sworn in and testified he was the neighbor to the east who would be affected by the addition. He said that he had been a carpenter for sixty years and that he and other neighbors were in favor of this addition. He said that the neighbors to the north had planned to attend the meeting tonight to lend their support to this case; but there had been an emergency in the area and they were unable to come to the meeting. At 7:58, Chairperson Juracek closed the public hearing and asked for discussion from the Zoning Board members. Mr. Ettinger said he was against the addition and that it was too close to the neighbor's house. Mr. Rogers reminded him that the neighbor to the east had testified in favor of the addition and that neighbors to the north and east submitted letters supporting the requested Variation. Ms. Juracek summed up the discussion, saying she thought this Variation, which would be a practical solution to the petitioner's need for more kitchen space, avoided changing the plumbing, had the neighbor's support, and was needed because the house was set 30-feet from the exterior lot line when code required a 20-foot setback. Leo Floros moved to approve the request for a Variation to allow construction of a 5'4"x21'5" enclosed addition in the side setback at 125 Homer Street, Case No. ZBA-18-01. Richard Rogers seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Cotton, Floros, Rogers, Youngquist and Juracek NAYS: Ettinger, Motion was approved 5-1. At 10:00 p.m., after the Zoning Board heard four more cases and tabled Case No. ZBA-21-01 to the August 23,0 meeting, Men'ill Cotten made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Hal Ettinger. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. (~_.~ {.f~ ~ Barbara Swiatek, Planning Secretary -- Kd3; Cg~o~f, ~nior Planner N~