ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 2013/06/24 MinutesThe City of Lake Forest
Zoning Board of Appeals
Proceedings of the June 24, 2013 Meeting
A regular meeting of the Lake Forest Zoning Board of Appeals was held on
Monday, June 24, 2013 at 6:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 220 E.
Deerpath, Lake Forest, Illinois.
Zoning Board of Appeals members present: Chairman Robert Franksen and
Board members Lloyd Culbertson, Richard Christoff, Stewart Dixon, Jay Kennedy
and Richard Plonsker
Zoning Board of Appeals members absent: Sam Ciccarelli
Staff present: Megan Neuman, Planner and Catherine Czerniak, Director of
Community Development
1. Introduction of Board members and staff, overview of meeting procedures
Chairman Franksen reviewed the role of the Zoning Board of Appeals and asked
members of the Board and staff to introduce themselves.
2. Approval of the minutes of the April 2, 2013 and May 28 , 2013 meetings of
the Zoning Board of Appeals.
The minutes of the April 2, 2013 meeting were approved as submitted.
The minutes of the May 28, 2013 were approved as submitted.
NEW PETITIONS – REQUESTS FOR VARIANCES
3. Consideration of a request for a variance to allow the front porch of a
proposed single family residence to be constructed within the front yard
setback at 104 Washington Circle.
Owner and Developer: David Lidstrom, Victoria Development
Chairman Franksen asked the Board to declare any conflicts of interest or Ex
Parte contacts. Hearing none, he swore in all those intending to speak on this
petition.
Mr. Lidstrom introduced the petition explaining that he recently received
approval from the Building Review Board for demolition of the existing house
and approval of the design of a new house on property located at 104
Washington Circle. He explained that to be compatible with the streetscape,
he would like to move the house forward locating the front porch partially in
the front yard zoning setback. He noted the setbacks of the other homes on
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes
June 24, 2013 Page 2
the street and pointed out that the existing house is setback a significant
distance behind the other homes creating a gap in the streetscape. He
noted that many houses in the neighborhood have porches that encroach
into the front yard setback. He requested approval of a front yard variance.
Ms. Neuman confirmed that earlier this month the Building Review Board
reviewed and recommended approval of this project. She stated that to
allow the new home to fit in well with the streetscape, the Building Review
Board supported the concept of a front yard variance for a portion of the
open front porch. She confirmed that the request would locate the porch
closer to the street than is permitted by the Code. She pointed out that the
portion of the house encroaching into the setback is a one story, open porch
consistent with the character of other houses on the street. She noted that
findings in support of the variance are included in the staff report.
In response to questions from Board member Culbertson, Mr. Lidstrom
confirmed that a detached garage is proposed in the southwest corner or the
property. He stated that few records are available on the existing house but
guessed that it was constructed in the 1920’s.
In response to questions from Board member Dixon, Mr. Lidstrom confirmed
that the driveway will remain in its current location. He noted that today,
there is not much to the driveway noting that it is gravel.
In response to questions from Chairman Franksen, Ms. Neuman confirmed that
the detached garage conforms to the required zoning setbacks.
Chairman Franksen invited public testimony, hearing none; he invited final
comments from the petitioner and staff. Hearing none, he commented that
he lives near this neighborhood and confirmed that many homes encroach
into the front yard setbacks. He noted that in this case, only the open front
porch will be located in the setback. He stated that in his view, the proposed
new house will be an improvement in the neighborhood. He invited final
questions or a motion from the Board.
Board member Culbertson made a motion to recommend approval of a front
yard variance to allow the one story, open porch to encroach into the front
yard setback up to 10’, retaining a setback of at least 30’. He stated that the
motion is supported by the findings as presented in the staff report.
The motion was seconded by Board member Christoff and was unanimously
approved by the Board in a vote of 7 to 0.
4. Consideration of a request for a variance from the corner side yard
setback requirement to allow construction of a connection between the
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes
June 24, 2013 Page 3
garage and house at 885 Maplewood Road.
Owners: Troy and Michele Ihlandfelt
Representative: Bob Ruggles, architect
Chairman Franksen asked the Board to declare any conflicts of interest or Ex
Parte contacts.
Board member Dixon stated that he is acquainted with the architect, but that
he would be able to rule on the petition objectively.
Chairman Franksen added that he too knows Mr. Ruggles but will be able to
rule on the petition objectively. He swore in all those intending to speak on
this petition.
XXX
Mr. Ruggles, introduced the petition explaining that the owners with to provide a
link between house and garage for protection from the weather. He noted that
the garage was constructed in 2003 by another owner at the time along with
other alterations to the house. He explained that the cobble driveway must be
hand shoveled in the winter and noted the grade change between the front
door and the garage. He stated that walking on the driveway in the winter is
dangerous and explained that is why the owner want to construct a covered
connection to the garage. He reviewed the site plan showing the existing
location of the house, garage, driveway, surrounding walls and setbacks. He
noted the area of the proposed connection. He pointed out today, the house is
substantially non-conforming with the zoning setbacks. He noted however that
the proposed work does not result in any further encroachment and
commented that the design respects the historic character of the house. He
described the proposed connection noting the flat roof and use of timbers and
brick. He noted that the trellis, built in 2003, would be continued as part of this
project. He reviewed the elevations. He explained that the existing wall will be
lowered to make the connection more transparent and to align the top of the
wall with the windows of the house. He provided a section through the property
and pointed out the grade change from the house to the garage. He stated
that the proposed connection will be unheated, uninsulated space. He
commented that the connection is a light touch and respectful of the historic
architecture, minimial foot print possible.
Ms. Neuman noted that the property is unique has several challenges, request is
unikque, Breezeway addition, only a small portion of the request is within the
setback area. The larger addition will be reviewwe by the HPC later this week.
Unique site, existing garageden walls, the siting of the house, the walls
surrounding the property,k historic natures of the house, create a visually
unobstrucive connection. In fill within existing brick walls.
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes
June 24, 2013 Page 4
Chairman Franksen invited public testimony, hearing none; he invited final
comments from the petitioner and staff. Hearing none, he invited final questions
or a motion from the Board.
Chairman Franksen, will this imedpe historic nature of thhe proepryt, , will not see
this.
In response to questions from Board member Culbertson Dison
breezeway, covvreed, unheated. Sliding glass doors will allow ventialyion in the
summer, doors to present snow in the passage way, driver is safety on the
driveway.
Culbertson, breezeway foot print same efoorpting as previous zoning variance,.
Megan, variance for detached garage and garden wall, foot prin go the
current proposal, infilling along the curved wall that exists today.
Ms. Neuman noted that a letter from a neighbor in support of the project was
received and was provided to the Board.
Board member Culbertson complimented the petitioner for an excellent
presentation. He stated that the project is well considered and subtle and will
not obstruct the existing residence.
Christoff, increases safety level.
Board member Dixon stated that the design of the connection honors the
integrity of the original architect’s design.
Board member Kennedy pointed out that the existing garage extends beyond
the connection, further into the setback, greage extetnds beyond, no issue.
Board member Plonkser observed that care has been taken in design the
connection to maintain the integrity of the existing structures. He added that
the proposed connection will address safety issues.
Chairman Franksen summarized noting that the variance that is requested is
small and has no impact on the neighboring properties.
Board member Christoff made a motion to recommend approval of a He
stated that the recommendation is supported by the findings as presented in
the staff report for this petition.
The motion was seconded by Board member Dixon.
OTHER ITEMS
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes
June 24, 2013 Page 5
5. Opportunity for the public to address the Zoning Board of Appeals on matters
not on the agenda.
There was no other public testimony presented to the Board.
6. Additional information from staff.
There was no additional information presented by City staff.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:24 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Catherine J. Czerniak
Director of Community Development