Loading...
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 2017/02/27 MinutesThe City of Lake Forest Zoning Board of Appeals Proceedings of the February 27, 2017 Meeting A regular meeting of the Lake Forest Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Monday, February 27, 2017 at 6:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 220 E. Deerpath, Lake Forest, Illinois. Zoning Board of Appeals members present: Chairman Louis Pickus and Board members Michael Sieman, Mark Pasquesi, Lloyd Culbertson, Kevin Lewis and Nancy Novit Zoning Board of Appeals members absent: Board members Richard Plonsker Staff present: Michelle Friedrich, Planning Technician and Catherine Czerniak, Director of Community Development 1. Introduction of Board members and staff, overview of meeting procedures. Chairman Pickus reviewed the role of the Zoning Board of Appeals and asked members of the Board and staff to introduce themselves. 2. Consideration of the minutes from the January 23, 2017 meeting. The minutes of the January 23, 2017 meeting were approved as presented. 3. Consideration of a request for approval of a variance from the front yard setback requirements to allow expansion of a driveway at 555 Cherokee Road. Owners and Representatives: Trevor and Katherine Wood Chairman Pickus introduced the agenda item and asked the Board for any Ex Parte contacts or conflicts of interest. Hearing none, he invited a presentation from the petitioner and swore in all those intending to speak. Ms. Katherine Wood, property owner and Mr. Richard Wood, father of the property owners, introduced the petition. Ms. Wood explained that the driveway is too narrow for the two large SUVs that they currently own and explained the difficulty in getting three small children in and out of the vehicles. Mr. Wood noted that the home is situated on the corner close to the setback lines along Timber Lane and Cherokee Road. He described the overall property and the large trees on the south and east portions of the property. He noted that the lot is unique due to the combination of its location on a corner, the configuration of the lot and the siting of the house. He noted that several properties in the neighborhood Zoning Board of Appeals – Minutes February 27, 2017 Meeting Page 2 of 7 have driveways that are wider than the maximum width permitted by Code. He noted particular properties with more paving in the front yard setback than permitted by the Code. He noted that options were considered including relocating the driveway to Timber Lane, but noted that approach creates other issues including tree impacts and more pavement than would be necessary with the current proposal. Ms. Friedrich explained that a front yard setback variance is requested for an expanded driveway. She noted the residence was built in the mid 1960’s, just after the subdivision was platted. She explained that the house was built very close to the setback lines at Timber Lane and Cherokee Road, rather than centered on the property. She noted that the existing driveway is 16 feet, the maximum width, and the request is to widen the driveway to 24 feet close to the house tapering narrower as it extends north, toward Cherokee Road. She noted the petitioners explored the option of moving the driveway to Timber Lane, but that option created further issues. She explained that the driveway as proposed, meets the needs of the family and their modern vehicles. She explained that this proposal is generally consistent with other driveways in Whispering Oaks that were constructed prior to the adoption of the current Code provisions. She noted that findings in support of the request are offered in the staff report to allow expansion of the driveway up to 24 feet in width, within the front yard setback as reflected on the site plan submitted by the petitioner. In response to questions from Board member Lewis, Ms. Friedrich explained that the Code language relating to this petition was adopted about 20 years ago. In response to questions from Board member Culbertson, Mr. Wood confirmed that the entire driveway will be replaced with new pavement incorporating the additional width. In response to questions from Chairman Pickus, Mr. Wood confirmed that the driveway will be replaced with the same material as the existing driveway, asphalt. In response to questions from Chairman Pickus, Ms. Czerniak stated that a driveway must be a minimum of 20 feet from a corner based on the current Code. Hearing no further questions from the Board, Chairman Pickus invited public comment. Hearing none; he invited final questions or comments from the Board. Board member Lewis stated that the request is reasonable. In response to questions from Board member Pasquesi, Ms. Czerniak said that staff does not have the authority to administratively approve variances from specific requirement established by the Zoning Code. She noted however that the Code could be amended to allow wider driveways within the front yard setback. Zoning Board of Appeals – Minutes February 27, 2017 Meeting Page 3 of 7 In response to questions from Board member Pasquesi, Ms. Friedrich reviewed the timeline of this request noting that staff was prepared to schedule this petition for Board review last October, but a complete submittal was not received by the City until late January. In response to questions from the Board, Mr. Wood stated that the project was held off because the paving season ended and the petition was submitted in January with plans to do the project this spring. Board member Sieman stated his support for the petition. In response to questions from Board member Sieman, Mr. Wood confirmed that a buffer will remain between the driveway and the house. He stated that landscaping will be added as phase two of the project. Hearing no further comments from the Board, Chairman Pickus stated that he concurred with the other Board member’s comments and invited a motion. Board member Culbertson made a motion to recommend approval of the variance to the City Council to allow expansion of the driveway to up to 24 feet in width, within the front yard setback, and as shown on the site plan submitted to the Board. The motion was seconded by Board member Pasquesi and the motion passed 6-0. 4. Consideration of a request for approval of variances from the lot-in-depth setback requirements and accessory structure setback requirements for a replacement residence and detached garage at 135 E. Westminster. Owner: Painted Post, LLC (Michael Moore and Sarah Moore) Representative: Susan Rolander, architect Chairman Pickus introduced the agenda item and asked the Board for any Ex Parte contacts or conflicts of interest. Hearing none, Chairman Pickus invited a presentation from the petitioner and swore in all those intending to speak. Susan Rolander, architect, introduced herself, John Krupka, Mr. Moore’s son in law and the intended resident of the house, and Eric Goebeler, contractor for the project. She reviewed the history of the house and its association with the surrounding homes. She described the non-conforming homes in the neighborhood and specifically commented on the homes to the west and east. She noted that the front of the existing house is about four feet from the house to the east. She noted that this project initially was to be a remodel and an addition, but given the structural deficiencies that were found during the planning work, it made more sense to propose demolition and a replacement structure. She noted that the replacement structure is generally in the same place as the existing house. She noted that the house is pulled back from the north property line and extends further into the rear yard than the existing house. She Zoning Board of Appeals – Minutes February 27, 2017 Meeting Page 4 of 7 noted that she worked with the City arborist to make sure that the two important oak trees on the site are protected and preserved. She explained that the detached garage will be replaced and enlarged to the north and to the east, four feet in each direction. She described the landscape plan and the proposed hedge line along the east property line and noted the existing hedge on the west side and larger mature trees which will remain. She described the second floor space and explained it is proposed to minimize the lot coverage. She added that the second floor space is designed to minimize the height with a 1 ½ story configuration. She described the elevations of the proposed house noting small bump outs on various elevations. She noted that the detached garage is proposed at 24x24, which is the maximum size permitted. She explained that there is a nice transition from the western neighbor, with a two story home, to this 1 ½ story home, and to the east, with the single story residence. She noted that a one story element in the back of the residence is proposed. Ms. Friedrich noted that this petition will also be heard by the Building Review Board. She stated that due to the magnitude of the variances proposed, the petition is presented to the Zoning Board of Appeals first to determine whether the extent of encroachment is supported. She reviewed the history of the property and the zoning of the property. She noted the lot in depth nature of the property and, as a result, the 40 foot setbacks required from all property lines. She stated that applicable off the setbacks leaves only a very narrow buildable area on the property. She noted however that the property was subdivided in the 1920’s, so the property remains a legal, buildable lot today. She stated that any construction on the property requires multiple variances. She explained that the deficiencies in existing house drove the need for demolition and a replacement residence. She noted that the proposed residence is pulled back from the north property line to provide more room between the proposed residence and the neighbor to the north and east. She noted that at the rear of the residence, the proposed structure will expand further into the rear yard that the existing house, generally in the foot print of the existing patio and deck. She explained that the existing detached garage will be replaced as part of this petition and explained that the existing garage location was permitted through a variance from the accessory structure setbacks in 1992. She noted that the side yard and rear yard variances now requested for the replacement garage are consistent with the variances previously approved for the existing garage in 1992. She stated that one letter was received from a neighbor indicating support for the petition but with concerns about construction traffic and parking. She described the proposed location of the replacement residence: generally in the footprint of the existing cottage and no closer than 11 ½ feet to the north property line, no closer than 14 ½ feet to the west property line, no closer than 16 feet to the east property line and no closer than 51 ½ feet to the south property line. She noted that the detached garage is proposed no closer than 4 feet to the west property line and no closer than 5 ½ feet to the south property line. Zoning Board of Appeals – Minutes February 27, 2017 Meeting Page 5 of 7 In response to questions from Board member Pasquesi, Ms. Czerniak noted that historically, the three cottages were in a single ownership and later held in separate ownership. She noted that in recent years the cottages located to the north and east of the property in the current petition were acquired by a single owner and the two cottages were connected and today, together, are a single family home. In response to questions from Board member Lewis, Ms. Friedrich explained that the dimensions in the staff recommendation reflect the additional encroachment resulting from the 4” gutter. She added that the dimensions were rounded up to account for field adjustments that might be necessary during construction. Ms. Rolander agreed that the dimensions in the staff report are accurate. In response to Board member Novit, Ms. Rolander explained that the replacement house is not pushed back on the lot to preserve a rear yard and the trees. She reiterated that the proposed siting of the replacement house is further from the north property line than the existing house. Board member Novit commended the very clear presentation. She stated reservation about the proximity of the replacement house to the north property line. She acknowledged that right now the neighbors are good standing with each other, but in the future, it may be a hard situation. She stated that she lives in a tight neighborhood and commented that it can be a great thing when it works, but it can also be difficult. In response to Board member Novit, Ms. Rolander reiterated the importance of preserving the mature oak tree noting that the City arborist urged that encroachment toward the tree be minimized. In response to questions from Chairman Pickus, Ms. Friedrich noted that the City arborist looked at the oak trees near the driveway and east of the existing garage and recommended that special steps be taken during and after construction to preserve and protect them. She stated that the City arborist approved the removal of the pine trees near the existing garage. She stated that the petitioners were trying to find a balance in siting the new house, while preserving the trees that help to define the neighborhood character. In response to questions from Board member Culbertson, Ms. Friedrich stated that the given the proximity of the proposed replacement house to the property lines, the standard relating to the adequacy of light and air circulation to neighboring properties is appropriate for the Board to consider. She stated that the petitioner is trying to mitigate the impact of the new construction by proposing a 1 ½ story house, versus a two story home. She noted the two story home directly to the west. In response to questions from Board member Novit, Ms. Rolander stated that there is a 12 foot separation between the replacement house and the house to the east. She Zoning Board of Appeals – Minutes February 27, 2017 Meeting Page 6 of 7 stated that the tallest point of the house is in the center of the lot, away from the neighboring homes. She noted the lower roofline and dormers on the side elevations which reduce the impact on the neighboring properties. Hearing no further questions from the Board, Chairman Pickus invited public comment. Hearing none; he invited final questions or comments from the Board. In response to questions from Board member Novit, Mrs. Friedrich stated that City staff will work with the petitioner to minimize the impact of construction traffic on the neighborhood to the extent possible. Board member Novit stated support for the project but reiterated concern about the proximity to the neighboring home noting the situation may cause problems for future owners of the homes. She stated that the lot is challenging and the proposed project presents a good solution. Board member Lewis stated that he shares Board member Novit’s concern. He stated that the house should be moved back to on the lot to achieve a 12 foot setback on the north side. Board member Culbertson stated support for the project as presented. Chairman Pickus noted that the house at 145 E. Westminster appears to also encroach in the 12 foot setback. Board member Lewis stated consistency with the neighboring houses should be considered. He stated that he does not object in general to the variances asked for this project. Chairman Pickus observed that the petitioner is trying to redevelop a difficult property. He stated that given the uniqueness of this site, approval would not set a precedent for future decisions. Board member Culbertson noted that the replacement house is set back from the north property line further than the existing house. Board member Pasquesi stated that there a potential for impacts on light to the neighboring house due to the proposed height of the replacement house he noted however that the neighbor has not voiced a complaint. He noted that this is a very unique lot and the petitioner has worked hard to find a solution that is reasonable. Board member Culbertson acknowledged that the proposed replacement house is 1 ½ stories, taller than the existing house, but it is moved further to the south. He questioned whether the impact on light to the neighboring home would be any different from what exists today. Zoning Board of Appeals – Minutes February 27, 2017 Meeting Page 7 of 7 Chairman Pickus stated his agreement with Board members Culbertson and Pasquesi. Board member Sieman agreed that the proposed increase in height is a concern, but agreed that no objection to the height was raised by the neighbor. He noted that there is no front yard so maximizing the size of the rear yard is reasonable. Board member Culbertson made a motion to recommend approval of the variances to the City Council based on the findings detailed in the staff report. He stated that the variances will allow the replacement residence, at the point of furthest encroachment, to be located no closer than 11 ½ feet to the north property line, no closer than 14 ½ feet to the west property line, no closer than 16 feet to the east property line and no closer than 51 ½ feet to the south property line and the detached garage, at the point of furthest encroachment, to be located no closer than 4 feet to the west property line and no closer than 5 ½ feet to the south property line. Board member Pasquesi seconded the motion and it was approved by a vote of 6-0. 5. Public testimony on non-agenda items. No public testimony was presented to the Board on non-agenda items. 6. Additional information from staff. The meeting was adjourned at 7:39 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Michelle E. Friedrich Planning Technician