1992-11-17 - Zoning Board of Appeals - Minutes ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE , ILLINOIS
TUESDAY , NOVEMBER 17 , 1992
I . CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Richard Heinrich called the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting
to order at 8 : 05 P . M . on Tuesday , November 17 , 1992 at the Village
Hall , 50 Raupp Boulevard .
II . ROLL CALL
Commissioners Present : M . Kearns , J . Paul , B . Entman , L . Windecker
L . Arbus , H . Hefler and R . Heinrich . QUORUM .
Commissioners Absent : None
Bldg . Dept . Liaison : Edward Schar , Deputy Building Commissioner
Village Attorney : Thomas Dempsey
Village Board Liaison : Jeffrey Braiman , Trustee
III . APPROVAL OF MINUTES
October 20 , 1992 - Motion to approve as submitted was made by
Com . Arbus and seconded by Com . Windecker .
Roll Call Vote : AYE - B . Entman , L . Windecker ,
L . Arbus and R . Heinrich
NAY - None
ABSTAIN - M . Kearns , J . Paul and H . Hefler
Motion Passed - 4 to 0 , 3 abstentions
Minutes of October 20 , 1992 were approved and will be placed on file .
IV . OLD BUSINESS
A . 611 Lyon Court , Allan and Barbara Schwarz
Zoning Ordinance , Section 17 . 40 . 020
Construction of addition into rear yard setback
Tabled on October 20 , 1992 to permit the petitioners to discuss
the addition with an objecting neighbor , Mr . Robert Burke ,
1560 Brandywyn Lane . Reason for objection : aesthetics .
Motion to remove from Table was made by Com . Kearns and seconded
by Com . Windecker . Voice Vote - AYE Unanimously .
Mr . and Mrs . Schwarz were present . Mr . Schwarz said they have
discussed the addition with the Burkes and they have reached an
agreement . Mr . Burke signed a document stating they have no
objection to the proposed addition on the condition that the
Schwarz ' playset is moved from the southwest corner of the
building to the southeast side of the existing building .
Ch. Heinrich read the agreement , dated November 16 , 1992 and it
will be kept on file .
Com . Kearns asked if the motion should include the agreement to
relocate the playset . Ch. Heinrich said it could be a condition.
Mr . Joseph Stoll , 609 Lyon Court , was present . He lives in the
adjacent unit and stated he has no objection to the addition.
There were no comments from the audience .
Com . Windecker made the following motion:
I move we grant the request of Allan and Barbara Schwarz ,
611 Lyon Court , for variance of Zoning Ordinance ,
Section 17 . 40 . 020 , pertaining to Area , Height , Bulk and
Placement Regulations , for the purpose of constructing
an addition that would encroach a distance of 11 . 66 feet
into the required forty foot (40 ' ) rear yard setback , as
indicated on the plat of survey submitted with the
application.
Unique circumstances having been demonstrated , the
proposed construction will not alter the essential
character of the neighborhood and will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare .
Com. Kearns seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote : AYE - Kearns , Entman, Paul , Windecker ,
`./ Arbus and Heinrich
NAY - None
ABSTAIN - Hef 1 er
Motion Passed - 6 to 0 , 1 abstention ; Findings of Fact Attached .
Permit may be issued in 15 days , after December 3 , 1992 .
B. 1109 Devonshire Road , Satish and Smurti Sura
Fence Code , Section 15 . 20 . 040 - Residential Districts
Construction of eight foot (8 ' ) fence along IL Route 83 .
Item was Tabled on October 20 , 1992 to permit republication .
Petitioners were not present and the item was left on the Table
until the end of the meeting at which time motion to remove from
Table was made by Com . Arbus and seconded by Com . Windecker .
Voice Vote - AYE Unanimously .
Since the petitioners did not appear , Mr . Dempsey advised the
ZBA that the matter could be left to die or it could be Tabled
for another month. The decision was made to Table until
December .
Motion to Table until December 15 , 1992 was made by Com . Arbus
and seconded by Com . Windecker . Voice Vote - AYE Unanimously.
Mr . and Mrs . Sura will be informed by mail of the action taken
and the date of the meeting .
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
November 17 , 1992 - Page Two
gy4vc3T___
ftla
611 Lyon Court
Buffalo Grove II 60089 (708) 913- 8104
Barbara S . Schwarz
Allan B . Schwarz
Board of Zoning Appeals
Village of Buffalo Grove
50 Raupp Boulevard
Buffalo grove , I l 60089
Subject Application for permission to construct family room
addition at rear of , and as part of duplex residence
at 611 Lyon Court Buffalo Grove , Illinois, by
Barbara S . & Allan B. Schwarz REGARDING BEARING SET
FOR OCTOBER 20 , 1992 And any continuation or
adjournment thereof .
Ladies and Gentleman of the Board of Zoning Appeals .
At the October 20 , 1992 of the Board of Zoning Appeals Bob Burke
objected to the Zoning variance that would permit us to remodel
our home by the construction of an addition as described in
attached drawings prepared by Rudichf Pappageorge Architects dated
09- O4 - 199 . We have spoken to Nancy and Bob Burke and have agreed
to move a playset that is presently located at the south west of
the existing building we will move have the playset to the south
east side of the existing building , so the playset would not be
located at the proposed addition .
with the change of the location of the playset listed above ,
Nancy and Bob Burke of 1560 Brandywyne Buffalo Grove I1 will
withdraw their objection on the bases of the above agreement .
We the owners of property at the addresses following our names
doj by our signatures , waive any objection to the granting of
uch variance by the Board Of Zoning :
/ 1 / 7— ,�6 0 g eA.V/P VW kr Pv ry
Signatures of Owners : Date Signed Address of home Owned
C. 270 Thompson Boulevard, Scarsdale Development, Ltd. , Lot #4
Fence Code, Section 15.20.040 - Residential Districts
Construction of six foot (6') wood fence past building line
Item was Tabled on October 20, 1992 to permit republication.
Motion to remove from 'Table was made by Com. Arbus and seconded
by Com. Kearns. Voice Vote - AYE Unanimously.
The Public Hearing Notice was read. Scarsdale requested a
six foot (6') wood fence that would surround the yard and
extend past the building line along Buffalo Grove Road.
Mr. John Green, Systems Design Group, Ltd. , 5999 New Wilke Road,
Rolling Meadows, IL 60008 (708) 439-5800 was sworn in.
Ch. Heinrich asked Mr. Green why the fence will be beneficial .
Mr. Green responded that this unit is being constructed as a
model for Westchester II and the fence will reduce the amount
of noise from Buffalo Grove Road. Originally the only fence
requested was along Buffalo Grove Road and the ZBA Commissioners
rejected it because it would have been an isolated wall .
The proposed fence will surround the yard. There will be a bike
path along the rear lot line and the fence will provide privacy
for the future purchaser. Also, the property to the rear is now
unincorporated but it is zoned parks/open space on the Compre-
hensive Plan and the fence will provide privacy and security.
Ch. Heinrich observed that this will be the only fence on the
north side of Thompson Boulevard. The fences on the south side
are lined up with other rear yard fences and they are one foot
(1') from the sidewalk. He suggested this fence be set back
from Buffalo Grove Road because that would be consistent with
what the ZBA has been granting on corner lots. He proposed the
fence to be set back a distance of ten to twelve feet (10'- 12')
from the side of the house, making it approximately twenty feet
(20') from the sidewalk.
Mr. Green had no objection to Ch. Heinrich's proposal . He had
requested a six foot (6') wood fence on both sides as well as
the rear of the property. It would provide security for the
model.
The height of the fence was discussed. Mr. Green agreed to
reduce the height of the fence along the rear and east property
lines and taper it from six feet to five feet along the rear
lot line. He also agreed to move the front of the fence on the
west side back even with the wall of the front door. He would
prefer the height of the returning fence to be six feet (6').
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
November 17, 1992 - Page Three
Comments from Commissioners :
Com . Arbus : Said he would prefer to have the fence along
Buffalo Grove Road lined up with the fences on the other side of
the street . Barry Isaacson at 271 Thompson Boulevard was
granted a variance for a fence next to the sidewalk along
Buffalo Grove Road .
Com . Paul : Commented that if the fence is too close to the
sidewalk along Buffalo Grove Road , there could be a safety
problem because of the bike path . Pedestrians could be injured .
Thompson Boulevard is a wide street and it would separate the
two fences .
Mr . Green said the proposed sidewalk is also an eight foot (8 ' )
bike path and he agreed that there could be a safety problem .
He offered to cut the fence on an angle about 25 ' feet from
the rear lot line , but the Commissioners rejected the idea.
Com . Windecker said the fence would be detrimental to the
character of the neighborhood if it is moved away from the
building line . He agreed with Com . Arbus that the fence should
be closer to the sidewalk . It could be angled at the rear .
A poll was taken - 1 foot or 20 feet from the sidewalk?
Com. Hefler : The situation is unique because this is a side
yard and it would be bad precedence to approve a fence close
to the sidewalk - 20 feet .
•
Com. Entman: 20 feet - Supported Ch. Heinrich' s position.
Com. Kearns : 20 feet - Agreed with the reasons given.
Com . Paul : 20 feet - Because of the distance across Thompson.
Com . Windecker : 1 foot - Because it would be set back at least
31 ' from the front of the house , so no line-of-sight problem .
Com. Arbus : 1 foot - Agreed with Com. Windecker .
Poll was 5 -2 in favor of 20 feet from the sidewalk along BG Rd .
No comments from the audience .
Com . Entman made the following motion:
I move we grant the petition of Scarsdale Development , Ltd .
owner of the property located at 270 Thompson Boulevard ,
model on Lot #4 in Westchester II for variance of the
Fence Code , Section 15 . 20 . 040 , pertaining to Residential
Districts , for the purpose of constructing a six foot (6 ' )
wood fence that would extend past the building line along
Buffalo Grove Rd . , be granted as amended by the petitioner ,
subject to the following conditions :
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
November 17 , 1992 - Page Four
1 . Fence is to be located 11 . 37 feet past the
building line along Buffalo Grove Road .
2 . Fence to be constructed with materials in
accordance with plans submitted to and
approved by the Village pursuant to the
plat submitted with the application.
3 . Fence shall be aligned with the wall of
the front door of the house , extending
toward Buffalo Grove Road .
4 . Fence shall taper along the rear lot line
from 6 ' down to 5 ' within one 8 ' section.
Petitioner has demonstrated that the proposed variance
will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and
welfare .
Com. Paul seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote : AYE - Kearns , Entman , Hefler , Paul and Heinrich
NAY - Windecker and Arbus
Motion Passed - 5 to 2 . Findings of Fact Attached.
Permit may be issued in 15 days - after December 3 , 1992 .
V. NEW BUSINESS
A. 2910 Whispering Oaks Drive , David Olagunju
�./ Zoning Ordinance , Section 17 . 32 . 030 - Height Restrictions
Permit seventeen foot ( 17 ' ) gazebo to remain as constructed .
Mr . David Olagunju , 2910 Whispering Oaks Drive , was sworn in
and the Public Hearing Notice was read . Mr . Olagunju said
the gazebo was constructed in good faith by a contractor and
upon final inspection the height measured seventeen feet
( 17 ' ) which is two feet (2 ' ) higher than the Ordinance
permits . Procedure was discussed and Mr . Olagunju was advised
that the best option was to apply for a variance .
A law suit was filed against the contractor on Sept . 15 , 1992 .
Ch. Heinrich disclosed that the law firm of Kovitz , Shifrin &
Waitzman also represents him and his family , but this will not
influence his decision in this matter .
Mr . Olagunju said he has informed his neighbors of the situation
and there were no objectors present .
Mr . Schar said the height of the house is approximately 21 to 23
feet and verified the height of the gazebo was shown to be
thirteen feet ( 13 ' ) on the permit plans .
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
November 17 , 1992 - Page Five
Ch. Heinrich commented that the gazebo does not appear to be an
eyesore and the contractor is at fault .
Com. Windecker asked if the height is seventeen feet ( 17 ' ) with
or without the cupola , which is specified on the drawing .
Mr . Olagunju replied that the height includes the cupola which
would be about 1-1 /2 feet .
Com . Windecker stated that once again the problem is with the
contractor and the Village catches the error upon completion.
The petitioner is faced with a hardship and the ZBA is faced
with the problem of permitting something that is not correct .
It ' s time to draw the line and make the contractors do what
they are supposed to do .
Ch. Heinrich responded that this time Mr . Olagunju is taking
action against the contractor , making this case different .
Com . Paul commented that if a contractor is made to do some-
thing over , they do not do quality work and the petitioner
will suffer through no fault of his own. The fifteen feet ( 15 ' )
is an arbitrary number , the height limitation could be 17 ' 6" .
The gazebo is sitting in the middle of nowhere and he could
not have told if it is 15 ' - 16 ' or 18 ' by looking at it .
If it was next to the house , there would something to scale
it with . This is a very attractive gazebo and it would be
wrong to try to make the contractor change the height .
Com. Hefler questioned what hardship has been caused to require
a variance and what has the contractor said?
Mr . Olagunju responded that the contractor told him that the
gazebo would have to be reconstructed and that would require
additional payment . They have already spent a great deal of
money , including the retention of a lawyer , trying to get the
contractor to complete other work he was contracted to do .
The situation has caused his whole family emotional hardship.
When they moved here from Minnesota last year , this contractor
was recommended , but it has been a terrible experience .
Com. Hefler asked if the work has been done in a workmanlike
fashion?
Mr . Schar said the gazebo appears to have been well constructed .
Com. Hefler said the granting of the variance would not be
ratifying a contractor ' s misdemeanor , but his work has caused
a financial hardship . If the variance is not granted , the
Village could cite the petitioner and he did not cause the
problem .
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
November 17 , 1992 - Page Six
Mr . Dempsey reminded the ZBA that it does not have authority to
grant this variance . It will be a recommendation to the Village
Board based upon the findings that the plight of the owner is
due to unique circumstances and granting of the variance will
not alter the essential character of the neighborhood .
Com . Arbus said he did not see much difference between this
situation and the Bakrin' s fence at 200 Stanton Drive last
month where he was the only Commissioner who voted for it .
He is troubled by the role of the ZBA which seems to be to
pass over errors in construction that go against the Zoning
Ordinance . The criteria has been met by this petitioner and
he would vote in favor of the variance .
There were no questions or comments from the audience .
Com. Paul made the following motion:
I move we recommend to the Village Board of Trustees ,
that the request being made by David A. and Victoria
Olagunju , 2910 Whispering Oaks Drive , for variance
of Zoning Ordinance , Section 17 . 32 . 030 , pertaining to
Height Restrictions , for the purpose of permitting the
existing seventeen foot ( 17 ' ) high gazebo to remain
as constructed , be granted .
The petitioner has demonstrated unique circumstances
and the construction will not alter the essential
character of the neighborhood .
Com . Arbus seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote : AYE - Kearns , Entman, Hefler , Paul ,
Arbus and Heinrich
NAY - Windecker
Motion passed - 6 to 1 . Findings of Fact Attached .
An ordinance will be prepared and this item will be on
the December 7 , 1992 Village Board Agenda .
B. 529 White Pine Road , Robert and Shana Betz
Fence Code , Section 15 . 20 . 040 - Residential Districts
Six foot (6 ' ) wood privacy fence
Robert and Shana Betz , 529 White Pine Road , were sworn in and
the Public Hearing Notice was read . Mrs . Betz explained that
they had no knowledge of the Village Codes when they moved in .
They have been improving the property . They removed the
existing fence , which was six feet (6 ' ) and seven feet (7 ' ) in
height and began replacing it with a new six foot (6 ' ) wood
privacy fence . About 3/4 of the fence was completed when they
were informed by an inspector that it was too high. They need
the fence for the safety of their three (3) children who are all
under four (4) years of age . They plan to put a pool in the
yard someday .
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
November 17 , 1992 - Page Seven
Ch. Heinrich had no objections to the proposed fence because the
existing fences had been installed before the Fence Code went
into effect .
Comments from Commissioners :
Com . Arbus : No problem .
Com . Windecker : Questioned whether the fence on the west side
is on the neighbor ' s property?
Mr . Betz said they understand that part of the fence is not on
his property. There is a large sewer hole in the back yard and
the fence must line up with the sewer . He explained that he
used the same holes , set the posts in concrete and is putting up
the new fence in the same location , with the neighbor ' s consent .
Ch. Heinrich informed the Betz ' that the ZBA cannot grant a
variance for a fence that is not on their property.
Mr . Betz said they have discussed the situation with Mr . and
Mrs . Vince Konwent at 513 White Pine Road . It has been agreed
that the Konwents will also apply for a variance and the fence
will be given to them .
Com . Entman: Asked if a line-of-sight study was done with
regard to the driveway next to the fence on Hawthorne Road?
He drove into this driveway to turn around and was concerned
that the fence might interfere with a driver ' s vision of
pedestrian traffic .
Mrs . Betz said there is a large tree that would block the
view more than the fence .
Ch. Heinrich observed from the plat of survey that the fence
is not going beyond the building line on either side and the
house would effectively become the same barrier as the fence .
Mr . Schar said that typically the Village Engineer allows a
line-of-sight distance of ten feet ( 10 ' ) from the property line
for safely exiting a driveway. The plat shows over 25 . 73 feet .
Mr . Dempsey stated that the ZBA can only grant a variance for
the portion of the fence that is on the petitioner ' s property .
The neighbors must come in and also apply for a variance . The
ZBA can Table the request until both parties come in together or
a variance can be granted for the fence on the Betz ' property
so they can continue construction.
Mr . Betz said he would prefer to complete the fence and said he
would have to move it onto his property if the neighbors do not
agree to come in for a variance .
Another option would be to reduce the height of the fence to
five feet (5 ' ) and it would only require a permit .
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
November 17 , 1992 - Page Eight
The conclusion of the discussion that followed was to Table .
Motion to Table the Betz variance until December 15 , 1992 was
made by Com. Arbus and seconded by Com. Windecker .
Roll Call Vote : AYE - Kearns , Entman, Paul . Windecker ,
Arbus and Heinrich
NAY - Hefler
Motion to Table Passed - 6 to 1 . It will be Old Business - A.
C. 1318 Devonwood Court , Timothy T . and Lois J . Barcal
Zoning Ordinance , Section 17 . 40 . 020 - Construction of Addition
Timothy and Lois Barcal , 1318 Devonwood Court , were sworn in.
The Public Hearing Notice was read . Mr . Barcal summarized their
reasons for requesting a variance for the purpose of construct-
ing an addition that would encroach a distance of ten feet ( 10 ' )
into the required forty foot (40 ' ) rear yard setback :
1 . They have one small child and are expecting
a second child soon.
2 . They have a small family room and would like
to expand it .
Ch. Heinrich asked if there is a basement?
Mr . Barcal answer was that they have a partial basement ,
approximately 16 ' x 18 ' and it is not finished .
When asked if they have talked with their neighbors , the
response was "no . "
Several objecting neighbors were present :
1 . Mr . Steve Martell , 112 Thompson Boulevard , said
his lot is #52 directly to the rear of the subject
property . They just moved into the house in March.
He saw the plans and opposes the variance . He said
the proposed addition would be detrimental to the
quality of the neighborhood . The Barcal ' s house is
located at the end of a cul-de-sac and is near the
park . The area to the rear is very congested and
there is an existing 8 ' x 8 ' shed in the southeast
corner of the rear yard which adds to the congestion.
2 . Mrs . Kimberly Otte , 102 Thompson Boulevard , Lot #51 ,
adjacent to the Barcal ' s rear yard , also objected to
the proposed addition because it would add to the
congestion of the area and she objected to the deck
because it would be at eye level from her backyard .
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
November 17 , 1992 - Page Nine
Mrs . Barcal responded by saying they did not object when the
Otte ' s got a variance for a six foot (6 ' ) fence and they also
have a pool in their yard to which they have never objected .
The park is not relevant because it cannot be seen from their
back yard .
Mr . Christopher Belanger , 1325 Devonwood Court , Lot 49 , said the
Barcals are wonderful neighbors and he understands their family
is growing so they want more living space , but he is opposed to
the addition because it will cut off his open view of the area .
From his deck , he can see past two yards to the park and there
is a feeling of spaciousness . From his interpretation of the
plans , looking in the same direction, he would only see a wall .
Ch. Heinrich looked at the plans and observed that there are no
windows to break up the elevation from Mr . Belanger ' s yard .
It is an aluminum sided one and a half story addition.
Mr . Martell said he hoped the Barcals did not take this as
a personal attack . The neighbors just want to keep the campus-
like area unrestricted .
Ch. Heinrich asked if it wouldn' t be financially better to
finish the existing basement?
Mr . Barcal said the basement is carpeted and paneled , but it is
down six (6) stairs and is used as a playroom. The house is
just under 2 , 000 square feet . The existing family room is 12 . 5 '
x 18 ' and they want to expand it into a great room of 27 ' x 18 ' .
Mr . Terry Monson, 122 Thompson Boulevard , Lot 53 , said he was
the least affected of the three residences that abut the
petitioner ' s lot , and he just came to look at the plans .
Comments from Commissioners :
Com . Arbus : Said when people move into the Village , they expect
that the zoning ordinances will be maintained unless there are
reasons to grant a variance . One of the criteria for granting a
variance of the Zoning Ordinance is that the proposed variation
will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood .
When neighbors object , he advises them to be reasonable and to
try to work something out . Based on the number of neighbors who
have come to object , he would vote no on this petition.
Ch. Heinrich: Can sympathize with the petitioners ' desire to
expand their house , but 2 , 000 square feet is a good size house
and a 12 . 5 ' x 18 ' is a good sized family room. His family room
is smaller and they have raised 3 children, who are now
teenagers , with no problems . The Barcal ' s basement can be used
for recreation and because of the neighbors ' objections , he
could not grant the variance .
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
November 17 , 1992 - Page Ten
Com . Entman: Agreed with Com . Arbus ' comments and said the
Barcals are not being told they cannot improve their house . but
the extent is limited . The ZBA is sometimes faced with the
consideration of the stated criteria that the proposed variation
will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood .
However , neighbors are the best gauge of this and more neighbors
are here than usual . He also agreed with Ch. Heinrich that the
Barcals have living space that can be utilized and therefore , he
could not support the petition.
Mrs . Barcal remarked that if they should choose to construct an
addition within the ordinance , it would not change the view .
Ch. Heinrich affirmed this statement . They can construct any-
thing reasonable that falls within the ordinance . Reducing the
size would not substantially reduce the cost and it would be a
very expensive addition.
Com . Arbus made the following motion:
I move we grant the request of Timothy T. and
Lois J . Barcal , 1318 Devonwood Court , for variance
of the Zoning Ordinance , Section 17 . 40 . 020 , pertaining
to Area , Height , Bulk and Placement Regulations ,
for the purpose of constructing an addition that
would encroach a distance of ten feet ( 10 ' ) into the
required forty foot (40 ' ) rear yard setback .
Unique circumstances having been demonstrated , the
�./ proposed variation will not alter the essential
character of the neighborhood .
Com . Windecker seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote : AYE - None
NAY - Kearns , Entman, Hefler , Paul ,
Windecker , Arbus and Heinrich
Variance DENIED - 7 to 0 . Findings of Fact Attached .
Mr . and Mrs . Barcal were informed of their right to appeal
by means of a letter to the Zoning Director within 15 days .
D. 41 Carlyle Lane , William A. and Cynthia P. Tellone
Fence Code , Section 15 . 20 . 040 - Residential Districts
William Tellone , 41 Carlyle Lane , was sworn in. The Public
Hearing Notice was read . Mr . Tellone related the changes
that have been made to the previous request for a six foot (6 ' )
wood fence located no closer than thirteen feet from the side-
walk along Carlyle Lane . The height has been reduced to five
feet (5 ' ) . The fence would extend approximately 39 ' to 40 ' from
the front of the garage to a point no closer than fifteen feet
( 15 ' ) from the sidewalk . He submitted a new plat of survey .
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
November 17 , 1992 - Page Eleven
Mr . Tellone said he appreciated Com . Arbus ' comments about the
ZBA' s consideration of neighbor ' s concerns . When his neighbor ,
David Neurman at 43 Carlyle Lane , objected to the fence being
twenty feet (20 ' ) from the sidewalk along his rear lot line , it
was moved back five feet (5 ' ) to a distance of twenty-five feet
(25 ' ) . Mr . Neurman did not object to the six foot (8 ' ) height .
No other neighbors objected to the fence at all and several
attended the Village Board meeting with him when he appealed the
ZBA' s denial . The Board upheld the ZBA' s decision.
Ch. Heinrich observed from the plat of survey that the fence
would be constructed with two angles joining the segment that
is fifteen feet ( 15 ' ) from the sidewalk with the other two (2)
segments . He asked Mr . Tellone if he would consider arcing
the fence to give it a better appearance?
Mr . Tellone agreed he wants to keep away from sharp edges . He
said he drew the basic configuration of the fence to show his
intent . He has considered an octagon shape . The planted berm
and the existing trees will be outside of the proposed fence .
Comments from Commissioners :
Com . Paul : Said the property is nicely landscaped . The angles
could be softened to follow the sidewalk by adding another bend .
Com . Arbus : Tried to envision the fence and thought it would be
detrimental to the neighborhood . He thought that any fence
would change the area even if it was constructed on the building
line . He knows a fence is permitted , but had no suggestion.
Com . Windecker : Has no objection to the fence if the corners
are softened . The shrubs and trees will break it up.
Com . Entman: Asked if he would consider bringing the fence back
to twenty feet from the sidewalk all the way?
Mr . Tellone replied that such a fence would have to be the same
style and he would lose valuable yard space . He also wants the
angles to be softened .
Com . Hefler : Suggested constructing five (5) straight eight
foot (8 ' ) sections from the garage to the first point where the
fence would be fifteen feet ( 15 ' ) from the sidewalk , then curve
the sections back to an other straight forty foot (40 ' ) segment .
The survey is probably not to scale .
Mr . Tellone assured the Commissioners that he wants the fence to
be attractive . The fence will be constructed on site and he
would be responsible to see that it is constructed in accordance
with the advice of the ZBA.
After more discussion , Com . Hefler suggested that the variance
be granted with the condition that the configuration of the
fence be reviewed by the Building Department .
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
November 17 , 1992 - Page Twelve
Mr . Schar agreed this could be done and said a fence can be
curved by using more posts .
A poll was taken to determine if the Commissioners agreed that
a curved fence would be permitted no closer than fifteen feet
( 15 ' ) from the sidewalk?
Roll Call Vote : YES - Kearns , Hefler , Paul Windecker , Heinrich
NO - Entman
ABSTAIN - Arbus
Vote was 5 to 2 in favor of permitting a variance for the fence .
Com . Windecker made the following motion:
I move we grant the petition of William A. and
Cynthia P. Tellone , 41 Carlyle Lane , for variance
of the Fence Code , Section 15 . 20 . 040 , pertaining to
Residential Districts , for the purpose of constructing
a five foot (5 ' ) wood privacy fence .
Said fence is to be located no closer than fifteen
( 15 ' ) feet from the sidewalk along Carlyle Lane , with
the condition that the contour of the fence be softened
to the satisfaction of the Building Department .
The proposed fence will not alter the essential
character of the neighborhood and will not be
detrimental to the public health , safety and welfare .
Com. Hefler seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote : AYE - Kearns , Hefler , Paul ,
Windecker and Heinrich
NAY - Entman and Arbus
Motion Passed - 5 to 2 . Findings of Fact Attached .
Permit may be issued in 15 days , after December 3 , 1992 .
Mr . Tellone was advised to submit a new plat showing the curves .
E . Jewel /Osco - 79 Mc Henry Road
Sign Code , Section 14 . 20 . 030 - Business Districts
Sign Code , Section 14 . 20 . 090 - Wall Signs
Relocation of DRUG/FOOD letters over new entrance
Mr . Terry Doyle , Doyle Signs , Inc . , 232 Interstate Road ,
Addison, IL 60101 (708) 543-9490 represented American
Stores Properties , Inc . Mr . Doyle was sworn in and the
Public Hearing Notice was read .
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
November 17 , 1992 - Page Thirteen
Mr . Doyle explained that the store is being remodeled and
the south entrance was moved 28 feet farther south. The
Jewel /Osco Sign standard sign criteria requires that the
words DRUG/FOOD be located over the entrance doors .
The Appearance Commission reviewed the proposed sign on
November 12 , 1992 and recommended a variance be granted .
There were no questions or comments from the Commissioners
Com . Kearns made a motion to recommend approval of the
request made by American Stores Properties , Inc .
on behalf of Jewel /Osco , 79 Mc Henry Road , for variance
of the Sign Code , Section 14 . 20 . 030 , pertaining to Business
Districts ; and Sign Code , Section 14 . 20 . 090 , pertaining to
Wall Signs , for the purpose of relocating the existing
DRUG/FOOD letters over the new entrance at the south end
of the store located at The Grove Shopping Center ; as shown
on the drawing submitted with the application , pursuant to
Sign Code , Section 14 . 44 . 010 , Sub-section A.
Com. Windecker seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote : AYE - Kearns , Entman , Hefler , Paul ,
Windecker , Arbus and Heinrich
NAY - None
Motion Passed - 7 to 0 . Findings of Fact Attached .
An ordinance will be prepared and this item will be on
the December 7 , 1992 Village Board Agenda .
VI . ANNOUNCEMENTS
RE: Old Business - Item B. Mr . and Mrs . Sura , 1109 Devonshire Road ,
did not appear , so their petition was Tabled until December 15 , 1992 .
VII . ADJOURNMENT
Com . Windecker made a motion to adjourn.
Com . Arbus seconded the motion.
Ch. Heinrich adjourned the meeting at 10 : 15 P.M.
Respectfully submitted .
Shirley Bates
Recording Secretary
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
November 17 , 1992 - Page Fourteen