HomeMy WebLinkAboutZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - 08/22/2002 - 02-7/431 VERMONT DR ELK GROVE VILLAGE
Zoning Board of Appeals
Meeting Minutes
August 22, 2002
Present: P. Kaplan, Chairman
D. Childers
R. Penley
T. Rodgers
G. Schumm
Staff.- S. Trudan, Asst. Dir, Community Development
Zoning Variation— Dockekl#02-7-)431 Vermont Drive
Chairman Kaplan called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. and read the legal
notice. The petitioner, Mr. Lawrence Krivak was sworn in and asked to present
his case.
Mr. Krivak explained that he and his wife bought the house over the winter and
were planning on having children and buying a dog. He further explained that
they are concerned over all of the recent child abductions and felt that their
corner lot situation would make it easy for someone to lure a child into a car and
quickly drive off. Mr. Krivak additionally explained that they sought the variation
for the fence to provide privacy and security for the yard.
Mr. Schumm asked if the petitioner had discussed the situation with his
neighbors and asked Mr. Krivak to identify the hardship the ordinance imposes
upon him.
Mr. Krivak said he did not discuss the situation with his neighbor and added that
he felt that his lot had a unique shape that doesn't allow full use of his property.
He added that his rear yard area would be limited for future structures such as a
swing set due to the landscaping and other structures that exist on the property.
Mr. Childers asked how the proposed location would affect the homes in the area
with respect aesthetics and line of sight concerns. The petitioner stated that he
did not believe that it would have an adverse affect.
Mr. Rodgers inquired about the style of the fence and further verification of the
proposed location.
Mr. Gary Cooke of 445 Concord Lane stated that he has an issue with a fence
that would be in his front yard and added that he felt that it would de-value his
property. He also stated that the petitioner did not approach him to discuss this
matter.
Mr. Penley and Mr. Rodgers inquired about the differences between past and
present fence regulations that apply to corner lots.
Mr. Trudan explained the requirements of the previous fence regulations for
corner lots. He added that the current requirement to prevent fences that extend
beyond the front of a neighbor's home was something that was lacking in
previous regulations and that it was an integral and important part of the current
regulations.
Mr. Rodgers stated that he had a problem with the distance the petitioner's fence
would extend beyond the front of the neighbor's house.
A motion was made by Mr. Rodgers to deny the variation which was seconded
by Mr. Schumm. The motion to deny,the variation was passed by a 3 to 2 vote.
The petitioners were advised to contact the Village Clerk to find out when the
matter will be considered by the Mayor and Board of Trustees, and were directed
to attend the Village Board meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:02 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
T�L
Steven . rudan
Assistant Director, Community Development
C: Chairman and Members Zoning Board of Appeals, Mayor and Board of
Trustees, Village Clerk, Village Manager, Assistant Village Manager,
Assistant to the Village Manager, Administrative Intern, Director of
Engineering and Community Development, Director of Public Works, Fire
Chief, Deputy Fire Chief(2), Assistant Fire Chief, Chairman and Members
of Plan Commission