Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - 11/08/2007 - DOCKET 07-8/1810 BALTIMORE/PIKULSKI ELK GROVE VILLAGE Zoning Board of Appeals RECEIVED Meeting Minutes NOV 0 9 2007 November 8, 2007 V1LL U 4 LW*5 urr1C Present: P. Kaplan, Chairman L. Michalski L. Dohrer G. Schumm J. Walz Absent: T. Rodgers J.Meister, Sr. J. Oliveto D. Childress Staff: J. Herren, Plan Reviewer Zoning Variation—Docket#07-8—1810 Baltimore Drive Mr. Kaplan called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm and read the legal notice along with a petition letter from the petitioner's surrounding neighbors. The petitioner, Mr. Anthony J. Pikulski was sworn in and asked to present his case. Mr. Pikulski stated he needs to keep the shed in its current location because of several reasons. The first reason is that his house located on a corner in the Stockbridge Subdivision and is small compared to his surrounding neighbors. Second, Mr. Pikulski stated future improvements include an in-ground pool and playground set for his children, all of which will be located in the rear yard. The petitioner indicated that his neighbor on the corner of Maine Drive and Baltimore Lane has a shed in the same vicinity as where his shed is now, and it too is highly visible. Mr. Pikulski presented four other neighboring sheds that appear to be in violation of the ordinance. He further stated that he would enclose the shed with bushes and landscaping to make the shed less visible from the road. Mi-. Pikulski said lie was open to reason with his surrounding neighbuts on the positioning and appearance of the shed, but his neighbors did not show up to the meeting to voice their opinions about his shed. They had me forward a letter expressing their negative opinions to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. Kaplan opened the meeting to questions from the board. Mr. Walz stated that Mr. Pikulski's house and lot have a nice appearance,but the shed in its current location looks out of place, and does not flow with the overall house layout. He added that it takes away from the exterior brick fireplace. Mr. Walz questioned the petitioner on why he did not place the shed on the west side of the house where it would be compliant with the village ordinance. Mr. Pikulski responded by saying that if the shed was located on the west side of the house it would block the sidewalk that connects the front of his house to his rear yard. Mr. Michalski had no questions for the petitioner. Mr. Schumm stated that in true fairness to each petitioner and their surrounding neighbors each zoning variance is examined and decided on individually which includes taking into consideration the specific situation of the petitioner and their residence. Mr. Schumm further stated that any ruling on other variances did not have any affect on the decision on the current case. Mr. Schumm concluded that the petitioner did not present a hardship because of the location of his shed and specific situation. Mr. Dohrer complemented the petitioner about his fence and landscaping. Mr. Dohrer went on to explain all the different locations the petitioner may put his shed since the in- ground pool and playground set are not presently located in the backyard. Mr. Kaplan spoke about the petitioner's earlier fence variance approval and how the petitioner has improved the appearance of the residence by adding in the landscaping around the fence. Mr. Kaplan also added that there are many different places the shed can be located within Mr. Pikulski's rear yard, and still be in compliance with the ordinance. Mr. Kaplan entertained a motion. A motion to deny the variation was made by Mr. Schumm, and seconded by Mr. Walz. Upon voting (AYES—Michalski,Dohrer, Kaplan, Schumm, and Walz) the motion to deny passed unanimously. Mr. Kaplan advised the petitioner to move the shed to a permitted location within his property and to be present at the next Village Board meeting for the final decision of his zoning variation. The meeting adjourned 7:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Justin 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 Plan Commission