HomeMy WebLinkAboutZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - 07/05/2007 - DOCKET 07-2 1810 BALTIMORE DRIVE RECEIVEP
ELK GROVE VILLAGE JUL 0 9 2007
Zoning Board of Appeals VILLhUC l ltHA J urrICE
Meeting Minutes
July 5, 2007
Present: P. Kaplan, Chairman
J. Oliveto
J. Franke
J. Walz
G. Schumm
J. Meister, Sr.
Absent: D. Childress
L. Michalski
T. Rodgers
Staff: J. Herren, Plan Reviewer
Zoning Variation—Docket# 07-2— 1810 Baltimore Drive
Chairman Kaplan called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm and read the legal notice. The
petitioner, Mr. Tony Pikulski was sworn in and asked to present his case.
Mr. Pikulski explained that he wants to construct new fence fifteen feet(15')beyond a
line extended from the nearest front corner of the principal building located on the
adjacent single-family lot. Mr. Pikulski stated there are many other fences throughout the
village that are not in compliance with the zoning ordinance. He also indicated that the
amount and speed of the traffic moving on the street in front of his house is a major
concern because he has small children. He stated that he is restricted to the backyard for
recreation and would like the fence where he has petitioned in order to give him a
"bigger"backyard for his kids to play in so they don't have to use the front yard for
recreation.
Chairman Kaplan explained why other fences are located where they are on other lots and
opened for questions to the counsel.
Mr. Meister asked how long the Pikulski family has lived at the residence. The resident
replied that he closed on the house on April 23rd of this year.
Mr. Pikulski presented a letter from the neighbor on the adjacent single-family lot.
Chairman Kaplan read the letter. The letter stated the neighbor does not have a problem
with the fence and the location of where it is proposed.
Mr. Pikulski spoke about the type of fence material he is going to use. He described the
fence as four feet (4')tall with black aluminum pickets. It is mostly open and easy to see
through.
Mr. Walz stated that he liked the proposed location of the fence and that Mr. Pikulski did
not want to put the fence all the way to the sidewalk. He explained the fence would be a
barrier to keep Mr. Pikulski's kids safe.
Mr. Oliveto questioned Mr. Pikulski's request to change the variation from twelve feet
(12') to fifteen feet (15'). Mr. Pikulski apologized for the change, and said if he could
not get the fifteen feet then he would gladly accept what he first asked for, twelve feet
(12').
Mr. Franke clarified the distance requested was for fifteen feet(15') from a line extended
from the nearest corner of the adjacent residence. Mr. Franke agreed the proposed fence
type would not block the view of the adjacent neighbor when they are backing out of
their driveway.
A motion was made by Mr. Oliveto, which was seconded by Mr. Schumm. Upon voting
(AYES —Kaplan, Franke, Walz, Oliveto, Schumm, NAYES —Meister, Sr.,ABSENT
—Childress, Michalski, Rodgers) the motion passed to allow the fence to be
constructed fifteen feet (15') from a line extended from the nearest front corner of
the principal building located on an adjacent single-family residential lot. Mr.
Kaplan advised the petitioner to contact the Village Clerk to find out when the case
would be considered by the Village Board. The meeting adjourned 7:27 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Justin Herren
Plan Reviewer, Community Development
C: Chainnan and Members Zoning Boards of Appeals, Mayor and Board of
Trustees, Village Clerk, Village Attorney, Village Manager, Deputy Village
Manager, Assistant Village Manager, Director of the Engineering and Community
Development, Director of Public Works, Fire Chief, Deputy Fire Chief(2),
Assistant Fire Chief, Chairman and Members of Plan Commission