Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - 10/21/2004 - 04-10/733 ARIZONA PASS ELK GROVE VILLAGE Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes October 21, 2004 Present: P. Kaplan, Chairman J. Franke T. Rodgers R. Penley J. Oliveto J. Walz G. Shumm D. Childress Staff. V. Zaric, Plan Reviewer, Community Development Zoning Variation — Docket#04-10— 733 Arizona Pass Chairman Kaplan called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. and read the legal notice. The petitioner, Savino Dargento was sworn in and asked to present the case. Mr. Dargento said that he met Mayor Johnson in 2002 at the event "Coffee with the Mayor"and talked to him about the retaining wall he was planning to build. The petitioner gave the Mayor a drawing of what he would like to do and the Mayor promised to submit it to the building department. In 2003 the petitioner applied for a permit to build a retaining wall. It was denied because the wall height was over 2 feet. After that, he hired a contractor to build 2 retaining walls, each 2 feet high. When the contractor began the work the petitioner was told that two walls would not look nice and the contractor advised him to build one wall. The petitioner pointed out to the contractor, Mr. Bo's, that the permit was needed, but the contractor said not to worry about the permit. In 2003 the petitioner applied for the zoning variation to build a fence on top of the retaining wall. The petitioner stated that he did not get any responses from the building department until January 2004. He did not respond immediately because he was not planning to build the fence soon. He had a meeting with the building department representatives in March 2004 at which time he was asked to bring the waivers from the utility companies for the easement encroachment along the east property line. Since it takes couple of weeks to get the letters from the utility companies he was frustrated and decided to build the fence without the necessary approvals. The petitioner said that he has an autistic child who likes to climb and that he needed the 6-foot high fence. Mr. Shumm asked why were there many car accidents at that corner. He also asked if it was because of the slope of the street. The petitioner did not point out any specific characteristics of the streets except the steep slope of Texas Street. Mr. Shumm also asked the petitioner if the neighbors had any objections. The petitioner said that the neighbors did not have any objections to the retaining wall and the fence. Mr. Shumm also asked if the Village asked him to remove any portions of the retaining wall or the fence at the time when he was in Court. The petitioner said that he was not asked to remove anything. He had to pay the fine only. Mr. Penley said he did not like the fact the structures were built without permits. The petitioner stated that he advised Mr Bo's company to obtain a permit from the Village, but was told not to worry about the permit. Mr. Walz asked if the petitioner informed the Mayor about the delay from the building department. The petitioner said he tried to keep good relations with the building department and did not want to blame the department to the Mayor. Mr. Oliveto asked Mrs. Zaric, the representative of the building department why the department did not response to the petitioner's permit applications. Mrs. Zaric said that the department responded in timely manner. The delay was made by the petitioner by not providing the requested information. She showed two drawings, which the petitioner submitted, and neither of them showed sufficient information for the permit approval. One drawing was a free hand drawing of the proposed retaining wall with no necessary dimensions shown. The other drawing, received from the petitioner showed the incorrect height of the existing retaining wall. The retaining wall height shown on drawing is 2'-8"and the actual dimension is 4 feet. Mrs. Zaric pointed out that the delay in processing the permit application was caused by the petitioner. The petitioner responded that the first drawing, which was shown by Mrs. Zaric, was a drawing he submitted to the Mayor, back in 2002. The second drawing showed the correct dimensions at the time when the measurements were taken but the ground settled over the time. Mr. Rogers asked if the petitioner was supplied with the pamphlets for a retaining wall and a fence by the building department. The petitioner said he was not supplied with the pamphlets and that he did not know that the fence could not be higher then 6 feet including the retaining wall. He also mentioned that his fence contractor contacted the building department about the fence height. Mr. Childress asked if the car accidents occur more at the certain time of year. The petitioner said that the accidents occur at different times of year. Mr. Kaplan asked the petitioner to identify the hardship. The petitioner said that his hardship is the corner lot at which many accidents have occurred. The hardship for the fence on top of the retaining wall is his autistic child who likes to climb. The chairman asked if the audience had any comments. Mr. Tim Tomaso said that he is the neighbor and he knows the child. He said that the child is very good climber. He pointed out that the wall and the fence look nice. Mrs. Carol Steffensen from 1582 Texas is the original homeowner and she testified that there were many car accidents at the petitioner's property. Her husband, Bob Steffensen confirmed that people drive fast and they do not stop at the stop sign. Ms. Christen Strek from 1715 W. Minor Street, Arlington Heights is the petitioner's child teacher. She confirmed that the child is very good climber. Mrs. Zaric asked to talk. She said that the existing chain link fence has loose posts at the back of the garage that have to be fixed. The retaining wall at the back of the garage is within the required 5 foot easement and within the required 6 foot rear yard set back for accessory structures. Mrs. Zaric also pointed out that the storm sewer manhole was blocked with two concrete blocks. The petitioner was directed to obtain a permit before any work on the outstanding issues begins. The petitioner was given until November 21, 2004 to fix all outstanding issues. Mrs. Penley asked if the mentioned issues related to the requested variation for the fence and the retaining wall. Mrs. Zaric said they were not related. Mr. Penley suggested that the members disregard the comments. A motion was made by Mr. Penley to grant the variation and seconded by Mr. Walz. The motion was passed by unanimous vote. The petitioner was directed by Mr. Kaplan to attend the next Village Board meeting for the final approval. The meeting was adjourned at 8:10 P.M. Respectfully submitted, 2�°i CEI �ar�c Verica Zaric Plan Reviewer, Community Development C: Chairman and Members Zoning Board of Appeals, Mayor and Board of Trustees, Village Attorney, 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