Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/25/2004 P&Z minutes 11-04 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-ll-O4 Hearing Date: March 25, 2004 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1802 Buckthorn PETITIONER: Skalniak PUBLICATION DATE: March 10,2004 PIN#: 03-24-311-005 REQUEST: Variation for rear yard setback MEMBERS PRESENT: Arlene Juracek, Chair Leo Floros Richard Roger Matthew Sledz Keith Youngquist MEMBERS ABSENT: Merrill Cotten Joseph Donnelly ST AFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Jacobs, AICP, Deputy Director of Community Development Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner INTERESTED PARTIES: Architects Skalniak Chairperson Arlene Juracek called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Richard Rogers made a motion to approve the minutes of the February 26, 2004 meeting and Keith Youngquist seconded the motion. The minutes were approved 4-0, with one abstention by Matt Sledz. At 8:27, Ms. Juracek introduced Case No. PZ-I1-04, a request for a Variation for a rear yard setback. She noted that the request would be P&Z final. Judy Connolly, Senior Planner, presented the case. The Subject Property is located at the intersection of Rosetree Lane and Buckthorn Drive. The property is irregular in shape, zoned R1 Single Family Residence, and is bordered by the R1 District on all sides. The Petitioner would like to add onto the house. However, the southwest corner of the proposed addition to the rear of the home would encroach six feet into the required 25-foot rear yard setback. The Petitioner is seeking a Variation to permit the proposed 19-foot setback. The Petitioner stated in their application that the Variation is needed in order to maintain the character of the house and preserve the view from the existing family room windows. The Petitioner's floor plans indicate that the addition would create a master bedroom above the home's existing one-story portion and a Great Room on the main floor. The house currently is a tri-Ievel and extensive modifications would be required for the proposed addition to comply with the Village's zoning regulations. Also, shifting the addition north would significantly impact existing windows along the rear elevation of the house. The existing house and related improvements comply with current zoning regulations. However, the Petitioner is seeking relief from code requirements for the rear yard setback in order to build the proposed 19' x 28.37' addition. The standards for a Variation are listed in the Zoning Ordinance and relate to: a hardship due to t,he physical Planning & Zoning Commission Arlene Juracek, Chairperson PZ-Il-04 Page 2 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 an interest in the property; lack of desire to increase financial gain; and protection of the public welfare, other property, and neighborhood character. The Petitioner is proposing to increase the size of the house, resulting in a 19-foot setback for a portion of the rear yard. The Subject Property is irregularly shaped and the house is situated off-center on the Subject Property. The manner in which the house is located on the Subject Property, the lot's irregular shape, and the fact that the house is a multi-level structure, create challenges for locating an addition that would meet current zoning regulations. The Zoning Ordinance defines a hardship as "a practical difficulty in meeting the requirements of this chapter because of unusual surroundings or condition of the property involved, or by reason of exceptional narrowness, shallowness or shape of a zoning lot, or because of unique topography, underground conditions or other unusual circumstances". The Subject Property is irregularly shaped and the manner in which the house is situated on the lot are somewhat unique conditions generally not found among the majority of the houses in Mount Prospect. Although the Petitioner has the option of locating the addition further north along the rear elevation, this would require extensive modifications to the house and could possibly change the character of the structure. In the past, the Planning & Zoning Commission has granted Variations for similar requests because the Variation was minor, and only a small portion of the addition encroached into a required setback. The Petitioner's request is similar to other Variation requests approved by the P&Z because the amount of the encroachment is minor, the shape of the lot is irregular, and the style of the house and how it is situated on the Subject Property create difficulties in meeting code requirements. Based on this analysis, Staff recommends that the P&Z approve a Variation to allow a 19' x 28.37' addition to encroach 6-feet into the required 25' rear setback as shown on the site plan prepared by Feng-Mierzwinski Architects for the residence at 1802 Buckthorn Drive, Case No. PZ-1l-04. The P&Z Commission's decision is final for this case. Board members asked Ms. Connolly if any neighbors had voiced disapproval to this request but they had not. Board members were disappointed to see that the petitioner was not present to state their case. Mr. Rogers thought the addition could have been pushed further to the northeast and not encroached into the. setback. Ms. Connolly said staff had worked with the petitioner and they had reduced the size of the addition quite a bit and would affect the balance of the building to move the addition any further. The architects for 1802 Buckthorn did arrive at that time and were sworn in. The architect said they did attempt to encroach just 1-2 feet into the setback but this solution is much simpler in terms of framing, construction, interior plans, window configuration, etc. Ms. Connolly explained that in conversations with the owners they had already scaled back the family room addition to a bare minimum of 19' from the original 26' they had actually wanted. Mr. Youngquist said the site is the problem not the addition. Mr. Sledz agreed. Ms. Juracek closed the Public Hearing at 8:47. Richard Rogers made a motion to approve the request for a Variation to the rear yard setback. Matt Sledz seconded the motion. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Floros, Rogers, Sledz, Youngquist and Juracek NAYS: None Motion was approved 5-0. Planning & Zoning Commission Arlene Juracek, Chairperson PZ-l1-04 Page 3 At 8:50 p.m., Richard Rogers made motion to adjourn, seconded by Matt Sledz. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. Michael Jacobs AICP Deputy Director of Community Development H:\PLA."I\Planning & Zoning COMM'J'&Z 2004\Minules\PZ-11-04 ¡ 802 Buckthorn Skalniak Resid nce.doc ~ ' // / L. C~~1'¿1 II . / ICP, Senior Planner V