Loading...
1997-07-15 - Zoning Board of Appeals - Minutes OOD ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS VILLAGE OF BUFFALO GROVE, ILLINOIS TUESDAY, JULY 15 , 1997 I . CALL TO ORDER Chairman Richard Heinrich called the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting to order at 7 : 40 P . M . on Tuesday, July 15 , 1997 in the Council Chambers of the Village Hall , 50 Raupp Boulevard. II . ROLL CALL Commissioners Present : J . Paul , B . Entman, L . Windecker, H . Hefler, S . Sandler and R . Heinrich L . Arbus arrived at 8 : 15 P . M . Commissioners Absent : None Bldg . Dept . Liaison : Edward Schar, Interim Director Of Building & Zoning Village Attorney : William Raysa III . APPROVAL OF MINTUES June 17 , 1997 - Com . Paul made a motion to approve . Com. Windecker seconded the motion . Correction : Item A. Mr . Ira Kaufman is an attorney . Roll Call Vote : AYE - Paul , Windecker, Sandler and Heinrich NAY - None ABSTAIN - Entman and Hefler Motion Passed - 4 to 0 , 2 abstentions . Minutes of June 17 , 1997 were approved . IV. BUSINESS A. 300 Raupp Boulevard, Don and Carol Schenk Zoning Ordinance , Section 17 . 32 . 020 Permit deck that together with other structures exceeds 20% rear yard coverage limitation Don and Carol Schenk were sworn in . Notice of the public hearing was published in the Buffalo Grove Herald on June 27 , 1997 . j " WillnE0 Mr . and Mrs . Schenk have requested a variance to permit the construction of a deck that with the garage (488 sq . ft . ) , shed ( 85 sq . ft . ) and swimming pool (452 sq . ft . ) would be a total of 796 sq . ft . over the permitted 709 sq . ft . Mr . Schenk said he designed the deck to make the yard more usable and increase the value of the home and property. When he came in for a permit for the deck he was informed that there are no permits for the shed and pool . They would be willing to remove the storage shed . Mrs . Schenk explained that the grass between the house will not grow and they often get water in the basement so the deck will help solve these problems . Comments from Commissioners : Com . Paul : The deck will enhance the property. There is a hardship because grass will not grow. He has no problem with the variance if neighbors do not object . There were no neighbors present . Com. Windecker, Com . Entman had no questions and no objections . Com. Sandler had no objections , but he asked if the deck will be level with the top of the swimming pool? Mr . Schenk said the yard slopes and the pool is cut into the ground . There is a handrail around the pool and there will be a fence all the way around the deck . Com . Windecker made the following motion : I move we grant the variance requested by Don and Carol Schenk, 300 Raupp Boulevard, for variance of Zoning Ordinance , Section 17 . 32 . 020 , pertaining to Location of Accessory Buildings and Structures , for the purpose of constructing a deck that together with existing structures would exceed the 20o rear yard coverage limitation, with the ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 15 , 1997 - PAGE TWO /1'11\1 PROM stipulation that the existing shed be removed, would reduce the figure from 796 to 711 square feet over the allowable 709 square feet . The Village Engineer' s Review, dated July 15, 1997 states: The proposed addition need not affect the existing drainage in the area. . . . no alteration within five (5) feet of the property line or the existing swale is permitted. " The petitioner having exhibited hardship and unique circumstances, the proposed deck will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare. Deck to be constructed pursuant to plans and specifications submitted to and approved by the Village. Com. Paul seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: AYE - Entman, Sandler, Hefler, Paul, Windecker and Heinrich NAY - None Motion Passed - 6 to 0 . Findings of Fact Attached. Permit may be issued in 15 days - July 31, 1997 . B. 770 Essington Lane, Brian and Deborah O'Mara Fence Code, Section 15 .20 . 040 - 6 ' wood fence Brian and Deborah O'Mara were sworn in. Notice of the public hearing was published in the Buffalo Grove Herald on Jun 27, 1997 . Mr. and Mrs. O'Mara have requested a variance that would permit construction of a six foot (6 ' ) wood fence around the rear yard. Mr. O'Mara summarized the reasons for the request : 1 . Privacy - They have a deck on the side of the house and the yard next door is graded higher so the neighbors can easily look into the yard. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 15, 1997 - PAGE THREE 2 . The rear yard abuts the Willow Grove School and the fence will lessen the noise from baseball games and children playing on the jungle gym. 3 . A six foot (6 ' ) fence all the way around the yard will be more aesthetically pleasing than just along one side and the rear lot line. Ch. Heinrich asked if the O'Maras have informed their neighbors of their intentions? Mr. O'Mara said the property 760 Essington Lane is in trust and is rented out . He has not talked to them nor has he talked to the neighbor at 790 Essington. He has told the people across the street the reason for the sign in front . They understand the need for privacy. Ch. Heinrich read a letter from Ms. Karen Loska, 790 Essington Lane, "objecting to the construction of the fence at 6 ' . At that height, it will become the dominant feature in the neighborhood backyards, and detract from the general look. It would also block views of the park and neighbors' yards which I employ as an additional security measure. " She would not object to a 4-5 ' fence. Ch. Heinrich informed Mr. O'Mara that the school is in the Residential Zoning District and only five foot fences are permitted. He asked what type of fence did they plan to construct? Mr. O'Mara said it would be a shadow box fence. The neighbor has a row of five foot (5 ' ) bushes. Comments from Commissioners: Com. Hefler: Lives in the neighborhood, next to the park and no fences are not permitted. He was not sure that a six foot (6 ' ) fence would solve the noise problem. Privacy is not a hardship of a unique situation. He would not support the variance. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 15, 1997 - PAGE FOUR AMMO Mrs. O'Mara commented that the major reason for asking for the variance is because of the turn over of people at the rental property. Some of the people have been very disturbing. The present tenants have a large dog and he barks every time they go outside on the deck. They plan to stay in Buffalo Grove. Com. Sandler said he would not support the variance. Other people that border the park have chain link fences and the area is open so a high wood fence is like a barricade. Com. Entman agreed with the previous comments . Com. Paul said a six foot (6 ' ) fence along the rear lot might help some but he was against six foot (6 ' ) a fence between houses. Com. Windecker said that a five foot (5 ' ) fence would have to be maintained between the houses. The dog will see them on the deck anyway. There are no six foot (6 ' ) fences in the area. There is an existing four foot (4 ' ) chain link fence so a five foot (5 ' ) solid fence would give them an additional foot . Ch. Heinrich commented that the rental property could be sold at any time and added that a six foot (6 ' ) fence is not warranted. A six foot (6 ' ) fence would not solve the noise situation any more than a five foot wood (5) fence. A solid wood will help some. Ch. Heinrich told Mr. and Mrs. O'Mara that they can withdraw their petition or the Board can take a vote which will probably be denied, but they do have the option of appealing to the Village Board. Mr. and Mrs. O'Mara asked for a vote. Com. Sandler made the following motion: I move we grant the petition of Brian and Deborah O'Mara for variance of Fence Code, ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS `-/ JULY 15, 1997 - PAGE FIVE EDODO gEir u � Section 15 .20 . 040, for the purpose of constructing a six foot (6 ' ) wood fence pursuant to the plat of survey submitted with the application. Said fence will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare. Com. Windecker seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: AYE - None NAY - Paul, Windecker, Entman, Hefler, Sandler and Heinrich Motion DENIED - 6 to 0 . Findings of Fact Attached. Ch. Heinrich informed Mr. and Mrs. O'Mara that they can submit an application for a five foot (5 ' ) at any time. If they choose to appeal, a letter must be submitted to Mr. Edard Schar within fifteen (15) days. C. 1120 Lake Cook Road, Hamilton Partners Recommendation for Variance of Sign Code, Section 14 .20 . 020 - Office and Research Districts Relocation of the J. C. Penney Ground Sign Mr. John Johnson, C. Johnson Sign Company, 9615 W. Waveland Avenue, Franklin Park, IL 60131 (677-2092) representative of Hamilton Partners, 1130 Lake Cook Road, Buffalo Grove, IL was sworn in. Notice of the public hearing was published in the Buffalo Grove Herald on June 27, 1997 . Mr. Johnson explained the reason for requesting the variance is so the the sign can be moved forty feet (40 ' ) to the south end of the building so that it can be seen better from the parking lot . It will not be seen from Lake Cook Road. The sign will be repainted to read "J.C. Penney-Catalog Customer Service Center. " The sign requires a variance because only one (1) ground sign is permitted in Office and Research Zoning districts. The Appearance Commission reviewed the sign on July 10, 1997 and recommended a variance be granted. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 15, 1997 - PAGE SIX Ch. Heinrich and the Commissioners had no problem with the variance. Com. Entman revealed that he is a tenant in the Hamil- ton Partner' s building but this will not influence his decision. Com. Entman made the following motion: I move we grant the request of Hamilton Partners, Inc. 1130 W. Lake Cook Road, Buffalo Grove, IL for variance of Sign Code, Section 14 .20 . 020 pertaining to Office and Research Districts, for the purpose of relocating the J. C. Penney ground sign at 1120 W. Lake Cook Road. Sign is recommended pursuant to Sign Code, Section 14 .44 . 010, Subsection "B" Com. Sandler seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: AYE - Paul, Windecker, Entman, Hefler, Sandler, Heinrich NAY - None ABSTAIN - Arbus (arrived during dicussion) Motion Passed - 6 to 0, 1 abstention. Findings of Fact Attached. Item will be on the August 4, 1997 Village Board Agenda. D. 1010 Johnson Drive, Hamilton Partners Sign Code, Section 14 .36 . 010 - "For Lease" Sign Mr. Bruce Bingham had called to say he would be late and asked for the hearing to be postponed until he arrived. E. 951 Hollystone, Ken and Stephanie Dunlavy Zoning Ordinance, Section 17.40 . 020 Porch - 3 ' 8" into Side Yard Setback Ken and Stephanie Dunlavy were sworn in. Notice of the public hearing was published in the Buffalo Grove Herald on June 27, 1997. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 15, 1997 - PAGE SEVEN &IDIDErgIF Mr. Dunlavy summarized their reasons for requesting a variance of the Zoning Ordinance that would permit them to extend their porch around into the required side yard setback: 1 . They have a large family and they like spend a lot of time on the deck, but it is not big enough to accommodate all their family and friends. 2 . The porch will increase their living space and it will be used from April through November. 3 . The porch will increase the value of the property and will aesthetically benefit the neighborhood. They have informed all their neighbors and there were no objections. The neighbors also use the porch. Comments from Commissioner: Ch. Heinrich disclosed that he is a personal friend of the Dunlavys, but this will not affect his decision. Com. Hefler said the porch will beautify the home. Com. Sandler said the house looks great and the addition will be attractive. Com. Entman, Com. Arbus, Com. Windecker had no comments or objections. Com. Paul made the following motion: I move we grant the variance requested by Ken and Stephanie Dunlavy, 951 Hollystone Lane, for variance of Zoning Ordinance, Section 17.40 . 020 pertaining to Area, Height Bulk and Placement Regulations for the purpose of constructing a porch that would encroach a distance of three feet, eight inches (3 ' 8") into the required thirty foot (30 ' ) corner side yard setback. Unique circumstances having been demonstrated, the proposed construction will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 15, 1997 - PAGE EIGHT AP) 9E61E1 The Village Engineer' s Review, dated July 15, 1997, states : "The proposed addition need not affect the existing drainage in the area. " Com. Windecker seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: AYE - Entman, Sandler, Hefler, Paul, Windecker, Arbus and Heinrich NAY - None Motion Passed - 7 to 0 . Findings of Fact Attached. Permit may be issued in 15 days - July 31, 1997 . E. 1010 Johnson Drive, Hamilton Partners Recommendation for Variance of Sign Code, Section 14 .36 . 010 - For Lease Sign Mr. Bruce Bingham, Hamilton Partners, 300 Park Boulevard Itasca, IL 60143-2636 (630-250-9700) and Mr. John John- son, C. Johnson Signs, 9615 W. Waveland Ave. , Franklin Park, IL 60131 (678-2092) were sworn in. Notice of the public hearing was published in the Buffalo Grove Herald on July 27, 1997 . Mr. Bingham requested a variance of Sign Code, Section 14 .36 . 010 for the purpose of installing a "For Lease" ground sign at 1010 Johnson Drive, the former Toshiba building. Mr. Bingham expressed disapproval of the Sign Code restrictions regarding "For Lease" signs . He said the most effective way to advertise commercial property is by the use of signs describing the nature and character- istics of that property. There is no multiple listing service that provides information for commercial property. They have advertised in newspapers and magazines and have tried other promotional opportunities but they have found that signs are the most effective because they are attached to the property. People can see the information and relate it to the building. Executives, looking for real estate, drive through areas that are appealing to them and in proximity to their homes in search of property that is available. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 15, 1997 - PAGE NINE TriTRIVIHT: 11-1--Aii [fa The standard size of this type of sign in the indus- trial area is 4 'x 8 ' = 32 square feet . A residential sign of four square feet (4 sf) is not appropriate for this 131, 000 square foot building, twenty-eight feet (28 ' ) in height, located within an industrial park. A double-faced 4 'x 8 ' sign is in the proper proportion to the building and will accomplish their purpose. The Appearance Commission reviewed the sign on July 10, 1997 and recommended the variance be granted with the stipulation that the sign be permitted for a period of one (1) year and that it be removed within thirty (30) days after the building is 80% occupied. Mr. Bingham had agreed with this condition. Ch. Heinrich asked how much space is available in the Chevy Chase Business Park and how many signs they now have? Mr. Bingham described the current vacancies not includ- ing the CDW building which is west of this property. There are three (3) other existing signs but they are not obtrusive in relation to the size of the business • park. They do not anticipate needing a sign for the CDW property because they still have a six (6) year lease. He would like to have the Sign Code changed because the process is burdensome. Ch. Heinrich asked if they anticipate similar requests? Mr. Bingham said they do and they will follow the necessary procedures. Comments from Commissioners: Com. Paul had no questions or objections. Com. Windecker - No questions or objections. Com. Arbus - No questions or objections. Com. Entman - No questions or objections. (Disclosed that he works in a Hamilton Partner' s building. ) Com. Sandler - No objections, but asked if such signs are effective when they cannot be seen from the major road? ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 15, 1997 - PAGE TEN I 5 '0 FEr:,i' ri... gLr a VEIL Mr. Bingham responded these are not billboard signs and they are not meant to entice tenants. The signs are site specific and they are large enough to be seen from Lake Cook Road. People will drive in to look at the property and call if they are interested. Com. Hefler had no questions or objections. He made the following motion: I move we recommend to the Village Board that the request being made by Hamilton Partners for variance of Sign Code, Section 14 .36 . 010, pertaining to Real Estate Signs, for the purpose of installing a "For Lease" sign at 1010 Johnson Drive in the Chevy Chase Business Park, with the stipulation that the posts will be four feet (4 ' ) off the ground and the total height will be twelve feet (12 ' ) . Sign is recommended for a period of one (1) year and that it will be removed thirty (30) days after the building is 80a occupied. Sign is recommended pursuant to Sign Code, Section 14 .44 . 010, Sub-section B. Com. Windecker seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: AYE - Paul, Entman, Windecker, Arbus, Sandler, Hefler and Heinrich NAY - None Motion Passed - 7 to 0 . Findings of Fact Attached. Item will be on the August 4, 1997 Village Board Agenda. Mr. Bingham asked if the Zoning Board would consider a modification to the Sign Code that would permit larger temporary leasing signs without the current procedure. Ch. Heinrich responded that the Trustees would not not be in favor of such action. The Hamilton Partners signs are in good taste and well kept, but this is not always the case, so variances will continue to be required. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 15, 1997 - PAGE ELEVEN 1 Wrifirlf7F;) 8 riii[1.4 ° jpvco V. ANNOUNCEMENTS Minutes of May 20, 1997 - Motion to approve was made by Com. Paul and seconded by Com. Windecker. Roll Call Vote: AYE - Paul, Windecker, Arbus, Sandler and Heinrich NAY - None ABSTAIN - Entman and Hefler Motion Passed - 5 to 0, 2 abstentions. VI . ADJOURNMENT Com. Sandler made a motion to adjourn. Com. Windecker seconded the motion. Voice Vote: AYE Unanimously Ch. Heinrich adjourned the meeting at 8 :50 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ,,g - OcX-i<z— Shirley Bates Recording Secretary sb ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 15, 1997 - PAGE TWELVE