ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 2012/06/25 MinutesThe City of Lake Forest
Zoning Board of Appeals
Proceedings of the June 25, 2012 Meeting
A regular meeting of the Lake Forest Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Monday, June 25,
2012, 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 Rosemary Kehr, and Board members:
Sam Ciccarelli, Stewart Dixon, Robert Franksen, Lloyd Culbertson and Jay Kennedy
Zoning Board of Appeals members absent: Board member Richard Christoff
Staff present: Megan C. O’Neill, Planner and Catherine J. Czerniak, Director of Community
Development
1. Introduction of Board members and staff, overview of meeting procedures
Chairman Kehr 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 May 29, 2012 regular meeting.
The minutes of the May 29, 2012 meeting were approved as submitted.
NEW PETITION
3. Consideration of a request for setback variances for additions to an existing structure at
567 Lexington Drive.
Owners: Timothy and Heather Richmond
Representative: John Richert, architect
Chairman Kehr asked the Board members for any conflicts of interest or Ex Parte contacts.
Hearing none, she invited a presentation from the petitioner.
Mr. Richert stated that additions to the home are proposed in three areas and reviewed each area.
He described the two-story addition noting that a porch and entrance to the home will be located
on the first floor and an expansion of the master bedroom is proposed on the second floor. He
noted that in the rear of the home, a two story element is also proposed. He pointed out the one
story addition on the south side of the house. He stated that the additions are intended to keep
the house compact and not impact the neighbors. He reviewed the setbacks of each of the
proposed additions. He stated that there is an odd zoning situation in this neighborhood noting
that the zoning district is intended for much larger lots and therefore, requires large setbacks. He
stated that the application of the R-5 zoning district setbacks to this property results in virtually
no buildable area. He stated that the setbacks for the front and rear yards are met, but variances
are requested for the side yards. He stated that no existing trees are being impacted and noted
that the additions do not exceed the outermost edge of the footprint of the existing house. He
stated that the additions will provide typical spaces desired by a homeowner. He noted that the
existing house is a two-story house with a mansard roof and provided an overlay showing the
existing house with the proposed roof alterations. He reviewed the criteria for variances stating
that the work proposed will bring the house closer to the character of the surrounding homes. He
noted that the conditions on which the request for variances are based, are unique, and create a
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes
June 25, 2012 Page 2
hardship. He reiterated that the design is sensitive to the neighbors by maintaining the existing
setback and minimizing the height. He asked for Board support of the variance.
Ms. O’Neill stated that this subdivision is a unique situation. She stated that the subdivision is
not consistent with the applied zoning district. She stated that the record of how the subdivision
and zoning were approved and applied is not clear. She stated however, that there is a consistent
development pattern in the area and that this house, with the proposed additions, is consistent
with that pattern. She stated that the variance process is the appropriate way to consider this
request given the unusual zoning applied to the property by the City many years ago. She noted
that the Building Review Board recently voted to approve the project. She recommended
approval noting that a review of the criteria for a variance is provided in the staff report.
In response to questions from Board member Culbertson, Mr. Richert described the existing
patio noting that some of it is unused. He pointed out the 50’ setback line in relation to the
house.
In response to questions from Board member Culbertson, Ms. O’Neill confirmed that an at-grade
patio and a seat wall can be constructed inside the 50’ setback area.
Chairman Kehr invited public comment. Hearing none, she invited final comments from the
petitioner. Hearing none, she asked for any further questions and comments from the Board.
Board member Culbertson noted that the Building Review Board has already reviewed and
approved this project. He added that the proposed additions do not encroach any further into the
required setbacks than the existing house. He also noted that no opposition was brought forward
by neighboring property owners.
Board member Ciccarelli commended the project stating that it will be an improvement to the
property.
Board member Frankson stated that the proposed additions are reasonable and do not change the
overall character of the home or the neighborhood.
Board member Kennedy stated that the project will enhance the property and the neighborhood.
He stated support for the variances as requested.
Hearing no final comments or questions, Chairman Kehr asked for a motion.
Board member Franksen made a motion to recommend approval of the variance as requested
based on the findings in the staff report.
The motion was seconded by Board member Dixon and was unanimously approved by the
members present.
OTHER ITEMS
4. Opportunity for the public to address the Zoning Board of Appeals on matters not on
the agenda.
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes
June 25, 2012 Page 3
There was no additional public comment presented to the Board.
5. Additional information from staff.
Ms. O’Neill confirmed that agenda items have been submitted for the July meeting and stated
that staff will poll the board members soon to verify that a quorum of the Board is available for
the July meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 6:46 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Catherine J. Czerniak
Director of Community Development