Loading...
1995-01-17 - Zoning Board of Appeals - Minutes ZONING BOARD Of APPEALS VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE . ILLINOIS TUESDAY . JANUARY 17 . 1995 I . CALL TO ORDER Chairman Richard Heinrich called the Zoning Board of Appeals Pudic Hearing to order at 7 : 35 P . M . on Tuesday . January 17 . 1995 at the Village Hail . 50 Raupp Boulevard . II . ROLL CALL Commissioners Present : J . Paul , L . Windecker , L . Arbus . H . Hefier and R . Heinrich . QUORUM Commissioners Absent : M . Kearns and B . Entman Bldg . Dept . Liaison : Edward Schar . Deputy Building Commissioner Village Attorney : Richard Skelton Village Board Liaison : John Marienthal . Trustee III . APPROVAL OF MINUTES December 20 . 1994 - Motion to Table was made by Com . Paul . Seconded by Com . Windecker Voice Vote - AYE Unanimously Minutes of December 20 . 1995 were approved as submitted . IV . BUSINESS A . 2910 Sandalwood Road . Gary and Sheri Weisbaum Zoning Ordinance . Section 17 . 40 . 020 - Addition Mr . Gary Weisbaum was sworn in and the public hearing notice was read . Mr . Weisbaum summarized the reasons for requesting a variance for the purpose of constructing an addition that would encroach into the rear and side yard setbacks : 1 . The children are growing , so the family needs more living space and storage space . The addition witn a basement will permit enlargement of the family room . kitchen and laundry room . 2 . They do not want to leave the neighborhood . 3 . Purchasing a new house in Buffalo Grove would be too costly . The plans have been shown to all the neighbors and there were no objections . The siding and roof of the addition will match the existing structure . The roof lines on the north side have been redesigned to conform with the existing roof . The Village Engineer ' s Review . dated January 5 . 1995 . states : ' The proposed addition wi. ii not affect the existing drainage pattern . ' Architectural plans have been submitted to the Building Department and a set was presented to the ZBA for review . The Commissioners had no questions or objections . No comments from the audience . Com. Windecker made the following motion: I move we grant the request of Gary and Sheri Weisbaum , 2910 Sandalwood Road . 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 three feet ( 3 ` ) into the required forty foot (40 ' ) rear yard setback : and two ana seventy-five hundredths feet ( 2 . 75 ' ) into the required side yard setback . as indicated on the survey that was submitted with the application. Unique circumstances having been demonstrated . the proposed construction will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood . Construction materials are to match the existing structure in like kind and quality . The addition is to be constructed pursuant to plans submitted to and approved by the Village : and subject to the Village Engineer ' s Review . . Com. Hefler seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote : AYE - Paul . Arbus , Windecker . Hefier and Heinrich NAY - None Motion Passed - 5 to O . Findings of Fact Attached . Permit may be issued in 15 days - February 2 . 1995 . Items B and C are similar and were discussed together . Com. Hefier disclosed that he has done sign work for Town and Country Homes . He recused himself from the discussion and vote . B. Lot 8 at Mirielie . Phase 2 . Town and Country Homes C . Lot 9 at Mirielie . Phase 2 . Town and Country Homes Zoning Ordinance . Section 17 . 40 . 020 - Rear Yard Setbacks Mr . James E. Truesdell . AICP . Director of Forward Planning Town and Country Homes . i603 i6th Street . Oakbrook . IL 60521 ( 617-5577 ) was sworn in and the public hearing notices were read . Mr . Truesdell summarized his letter . dated December 15 . 1994 . requesting variances of ten feet ( 10 ' ) into the required forty foot ( 40 ' ) rear yard setback for Mirielie Lots 8 and 9 . ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS January 17 , 1995 - Page Two When the Plan Commission and Village Board approved Mirielie Unit Two for single family homes . the original site plan indicated that the street was to connect with Prairie Road . but the County would not allow access at this point , resulting in the cul-de-sac which has caused a depth problem because Lots 8 and Lot 9 are i15 ' deep instead of the required 125 ' and none of the Town and Country homes will fit on them with- out a variance into the required forty lot ( 40 ' ) rear yard setback . With the variance of ten feet ( 10 ' ) , four (4) of the ten ( 10) Town and Country models wiii fit on the lots and only model #5 , which is fifty-five feet (55 ' ) in depth . would require the full ten foot ( 10 ' ) variance . The the other three (3 ) designs vary in depth from forty-nine feet (49 ' ) to fifty- two and one half feet ( 52-1 /2 ' ) . These houses range in size from 2 . 638 square feet to 2 . 990 square feet and with options they range in price from $200 . 000 to S300 . 000 . The property to the rear of Lots 8 and 9 is located in unincorporated Lake County. The property directly across Prairie Road . west of Lot 9 . is also unincorporated at this time . and it is surrounded by the Carlyle subdivision. Without the variance . it would be necessary to select smaller houses that would fit on the lots , but they would not meet the market prices in this area. These houses would also be smaller than the surrounding houses and would . therefore . be out of character in the Mirielie subdivision. it would be very difficult to design a new house to fit on just these two ( 2) lots and they would probably be very difficult to market . None of the Mirieile lots are under contract . Mr . George Sperber . 22539 North Prairie . Prairie View . IL . owner of the property directly south of Lot 8 . was present . After being sworn in. Mr . Sperber said he objected to the proposed variance because it would reduce the size of the rear yard and permit the house to be closer to the rear lot line . Mr . Sperber has a gravel drive-way that runs along the side lot line of his house abutting the rear lot line of Lot 8 . Ch. Heinrich commented that the proposed thirty foot ( 30 ' ) rear yard setback is not unusually small for Buffalo Grove . The distance between Mr . Sperber ' s house and the largest proposed house would be approximately eighty feet ( 80 ' ) . He told Mr . Truesdell that one of the conditions of the variance would be that all prospective purchasers of Lot 8 are to be informed of the variance and that it would have to be recorded as part of the piat . Mr.. Truesdell affirmed this requirement . Mr . Sperber questioned the location of the utilities and he asked if the existing trees along the lot line would be kept? He inquired who would be responsible for maintenance of this area? ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS January 17 1995 - Page Three Mr . Truesdell said there is a five foot ( 5 ' ) utility easement . They plan to work with Mr . Ray Rigsby and they will save as many trees along the perimeter as possible . Mr . Sperber expressed concern about the safety of children playing in the rear yarn without a fence because they could run out into the driveway and into his yard . He does not want kids in his yard and said ne would put up a barbed wire fence if he has to . Comments from Commissioners : Com. Paul was not as much concerned about the rear yard set- back or the aesthetics of the house , as he was about the fact that the gravel driveway is right along the property line making liability a very valid concern for Mr . Sperber . He proposed a condition of the variance would be that Town and Country provide a fence along the rear lot line . Mr . Truesdell had no objection to this suggestion and added that a fence along Prairie Road is also going to be required . Com. Windecker agreed that a fence was part of the solution. but the line-of-sight would have to be considered . Mr . Schar added that Lot 8 would be considered a corner lot and the setback from Prairie Road would have to be met . Com. Arbus expressed concern for future neighbors on Lot 7 and Lot 6 . With the side of Lot 8 left wide open. the fence could fall over . He also thought that the fence for Lot 8 should be extended past the building line . This would require publication and notification of surrounding property owners . Ch. Heinrich envisioned a fence along Lots 6 . 7 and 8 as a wall between Buffalo Grove and Prairie View . Lots 6 and 7 are large enough and no require no variances . A fence would be needed along the driveway portion of Lot 8 and possibly Lot 9 (across the cui-de-sac) , but he would not consider a fence along Lots 6 and 7 . After considerable debate . Mr . Skelton said that normally any requirements . such as fencing along Lots 6 . 7 and 8 . that affect the developer would be the responsibility of the Plan Commission . similar to what is considered for impact fees . Any condition placed on property should be related to the variance being sought . He agreed with Ch. Heinrich that if fencing is required . it should be limited to Lots 8 and 9 . The Plan Commission could have required a buffer around the whole area , but the Zoning Board should only place conditions on a variance that relate to the property involved . ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS January 17 . 1995 - Page Four Com . Windecker agreed that a condition of the variance should include fences on Lots 8 and 9 . but not Lots 6 and 7 . Ch. Heinrich asked Mr . Truesdell to have as many trees saved on Lot 8 as possible . Mr . Truesdell said he could have the Town and Country Land- scape Architect evaluate the trees and he agreed to save the ones that border Lots b . 7 and 8 . if possible . Com. Arbus said he would vote '"no on the variance without a fence on all three lots and suggested that the matter be Tabled until the February public hearing . After considering the option of an appeal to the Village Board . Mr . Truesdell chose to return in February. He agreed to have the trees evaluated and meet with Mr . Rigsby to determine if any of the trees can be saved . He will also propose some type of five foot ( 5 ' ) fence for Lots 8 and 9 . The variances are necessary but he wants to satisfy all of the Zoning Board ' s concerns . Mr . Sperber cautioned Mr . Truesdell about not disturbing any of the trees on his property. Com. Windecker made a motion to Table until the February meeting . Com. Arbus seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote : AYE - Paul . Windecker . Arbus . Heinrich NAY - None (Com. Hefier did not vote . ) Motion to Table passed - 4 to O . Ch. Heinrich asked that the proposed fences be submitted to the Village Engineer for a line-of-sight review. V . ANNOUNCEMENTS Because of scheduling conflicts . the February 21 , 1995 Zoning Board meeting will be held at the Youth Center . 50-1 /2 Raupp Boulevard . VI . ADJOURNMENT Com. Windecker made a motion to adjourn. Com. Paul seconded the motion. Voice Vote - AYE Unanimously. Ch. Heinrich adjourned the meeting at 8 : 34 P. M. Respectfully submitted . f >JAX-- Shirley Bates Recording Secretary ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS January 17 . 1995 - Page Five