HomeMy WebLinkAboutZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - 08/09/2007 - DOCKET 07-4/102 BUCKINGHAM/WEISS ELK GROVE VILLAGE
Zoning Board of Appeals
Meeting Minutes
August 9, 2007
Present: P. Kaplan, Chairman
T. Rodgers
L. Michalski
G. Schumm
J. Meister, Sr.
D. Childress
J. Walz
Absent: J. Oliveto
Staff. J. Herren, Plan Reviewer
Zoning Variation—.Docket# 07-4—102 Buckingham Court
Chairman Kaplan called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm and read the legal notice. The
petitioner, Mr. and Mrs. Jeffery R. Weiss was sworn in and asked to present their case.
Mrs. Weiss explained she wants to replace an existing fence that is located twenty-three
feet(23') beyond a line extended from the nearest front corner of the principal building
located on the adjacent single-family lot. Mrs. Weiss stated the reason for the
replacement of the fence was that the original fence was built ten years ago and is in very
poor condition. The petitioner indicated that the fence was not built correctly in the
beginning and the posts that support the fence are loose in the ground. She also
indicated they have a dog and need a barrier to keep the dog in their yard. She stated if
she were to put the fence at the location permitted in the ordinance, it would not enclose
their exterior door from the garage into the rear yard,therefore, losing security and the
function of the doors allowing egress into the rear yard.
Chairman Kaplan asked the petitioners the age o('lh.e fence. The petitioner replied that
the fence was installed when the house was first constricted ten (10) years ago.
Chairman Kaplan opened the meeting to questions from the board.
Mr. Meister asked where the new fence was to be located. The petitioner stated the new
fence would be located in the exact same location as the old fence. Mr. Meister then
asked if the petitioner has had any complaints about the old fence and its location. Mrs.
Weiss responded that she has heard of no complaints from surrounding neighbors.
Mr. Schumm asked Mr. Weiss about the type of fence. Mr. Weiss replied the fence
would be six feet (6') tall with dog-ears on the top and a staggered shadow box
construction. Mr. Schumm asked the petitioners if they had spoken to the neighbor
directly behind them. Mr. and Mrs. Weiss said they had not seen their neighbor in quite
some time and had not spoken with her. Mr. Schumm asked the petitioners to identify
their hardship. Mrs. Weiss replied that if she were to put the Knee at the location
described in the ordinance, that it would not enclose their exterior door from the garage
into the rear yard, therefore, losing security and the function of the doors allowing egress
into the rear yard.
Mr. Michalski confirmed that the new fence type would be of wood material.
Mr. Walz asked Mr. Weiss when the new fence would be constructed. Mr. Weiss stated
the new fence would be constructed as soon as they get the permission to do so.
Mr. Rodgers questioned Mr. and Mrs. Weiss about how far away their deck was from the
fence. Mrs. Weiss responded that the deck was about twelve feet (12') from their fence.
Mr. Rodgers then asked to clarify the type fence. Mr. Weiss said the fence would be six
feet (6') tall, board on board shadow box construction with a dog-ear detail on the top of
the fence.
Mr. Childress stated the fence does not pose a great hazard for the neighbor behind them
because they have a U-shaped driveway and do not have to back out of the driveway
giving them a better view when they are pulling out of the driveway.
Chairman Kaplan asked if there was anyone in the general public who would like to
speak on this matter. A friend of the neighbor, Terry Maioriello, said she was here to
represent her friend because she was severely handicapped and could not make it to the
hearing. She stated that her friend did not have a problem with the new fence as long as
it was to be constructed in the same location as the current fence.
Chairman Kaplan entertained motion. A motion was made by Mr. Rodgers, which was
seconded by Mr. Childress. Upon voting(AYES—Kaplan, Michalski, Schumm,
Meister, Sr., Rodgers, Walz, and Childress ABSENT—Oliveto) the motion passed to
allow the fence to be constructed twenty-three feet(23') 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 7:14 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
..tet/'✓�_,_.r-
GJustin Herren
Plan Reviewer, Community Development
C: Chairman 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 flan Commission