HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/21/2002 P&Z minutes 38-02MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
CASE NO. PZ-38~02
Hearing Date: November 21, 2002
PETITIONER:
Paul & Cathleen Gonley
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
702 Ironwood
PARCEL NUMBER:
03-26-310-021
PUBLICATION DATE:
November 6, 2002
REQUEST:
Variation to allow a structure in the 30-foot front yard setback
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Arlene Juracek, Chairperson
Merrill Cotten
Leo Floros
Matthew Sledz
Keith Youngquist
Richard Rogers
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Joseph Donnelly
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Judy Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner
Marisa Warneke, Neighborhood Planner
INTERESTED PARTIES:
Paul Gonley
Vice Chair Richard Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:37 p.m. Keith Youngquist made a motion to approve the
minutes of the October 24 meeting, seconded by Leo Floros. Vice Chair Rogers noted that the last vote for PZ-33-02
should be corrected to '5-1'. The October meeting minutes were approved as corrected 5-0. Vice Chair Richard
Rogers introduced Case No. PZ-38-02, a Variation request.
Judy Connolly, Senior Planner, reported that the subject property is located north of Kensington Road, between
Wheeling Road and Brentwood Lane. She said that it contains a single-family residence with related improvements.
The subject property is zoned RI single-family residence and is bordered by the R1 district. The lot has a regular
shape and the existing home is currently set back 31-feet from the front tot line.
Ms. Connolly said that the existing front stoop is permitted by code to be replaced in kind even though it does not
comply with current regulations. She said that the petitioner proposes to replace the existing service walk and add
another service walk in the former planting area adjacent to the house. The new service walk or structure, measures
eight-feet in width. It encroaches seven-feet in the front yard and creates a 23-foot setback. Ms. Connolly explained
that the petitioner's proposal requires a variation because the new structure exceeds the five-foot width permitted for
service walks in the front yard. She said that although the structure does not technically meet the definition ora porch
as listed in the zoning ordinance, that the structure takes on the characteristics ora porch due to its size and how it will
be used.
Ms. Connolly reviewed the standards for a variation listed in the Zoning Ordinance and said that the proposal would
not adversely affect the neighborhood character or other surrounding properties. She said that the petitioner's request
for an eight-foot wide structure in the front yard does not meet the standards for a hardship as defined by the Zoning
Ordinance. Also, the petitioner has the option of installing a five-foot wide service walk that would comply with
zoning code regulations and eliminate the need for a variation. In addition, the structure has the characteristics of a
porch and creates a 23-foot front setback.
lanning & Zoning Commission PZ-38-02
Arlene Juracek, Chairperson Page 2
Based on these findings, Ms. Connolly relayed staff's recommendation that the Planning & Zoning Commission deny
a variation to allow an eight-foot wide structure in the front yard setback and create a 23-foot setback for the residence
at 702 Ironwood Drive, Case No. PZ-38-02. The Planning & Zoning Commission's decision is final for this case.
The Planning & Zoning Commission asked for clarification on the proposed structure. Ms. Connolly said that one
service walk would be four-feet wide and at grade, but that the second service walk, which is closer to the house,
would be one step higher and measure four feet wide.
Paul Gonley, 702 Ironwood Drive, was sworn in. He said that they would be using brick pavers for the new service
walks and stoop. He said that the existing bay window precludes them from using the second tier of the service walk
because it juts out. Therefore the second tier would be used for potted plants and decorations. He said that the
planting bed created a seepage problem and that sometimes them was water in the basement as a result.
There was discussion regardiog a handrail requirement, the design of the stoop and service walks, and the petitioner
stating that the structures would be built according to Building Code regulations.
Mr. Rogers closed the public hearing at 7:50 pm.
The Planning & Zoning Commission discussed why the existing stoop could extend 8-feet into the setback, but that the
new service walk could not because the intensity of the non-conformity was increased. There was confirmation that a
variation was needed even though the second tier would be used as a planter.
Keith Youngquist moved to approve a variation to allow an eight-foot wide structure in the front yard setback and
create a 23-foot setback for the residence at 702 Ironwood Drive, Case No. PZ-37-02. Leo Floros seconded the
motion.
UPON ROLL CALL:
AYES: Cotten, Sledz, and Youngquist
NAYS: Floros, Rogers
ABSTAIN: Juracek
Motion was approved 3-2.
At 9:25 p.m., after hearing another case, Keith Youngquist moved to adjourn, seconded by Leo Floros. The motion
was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned.
Judy Connolly, Senior Planner
Marisa Warneke, Neighborhood Planner