Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - 09/11/2008 - ZBA DOCKET 08-9/420 FRANKLIN LANE ELK GROVE VILLAGE Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes September 11, 2008 Present: P. Kaplan, Chairman I J. Oliveto D. Childress G. Schumm J. Meister, Sr. Absent: L. Dohrer L. Michalski T. Rodgers J. Walz Staff: J. Herren, Plan Reviewer Zoning Variation —Docket# 08-9— Franklin Lane Mr. Kaplan called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm and read the legal notice. The petitioner, Mrs. Su Lee was sworn in and asked to present her case.. Mrs. Lee explained she wants to construct a fence that is located approximately 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. Lee stated that her property is located on the corner of Franklin Lane and Gibson Drive. She further described Gibson Drive as being busy because it is a main connecting street for the neighborhood, and Franklin Lane was not as busy due that the majority of the traffic is homeowners and people that live on the street. The petitioner said there is no fence presently on the side of the property where she is requesting a variance. Mrs. Lee explained that her 5-year-old son enjoys playing in the backyard. She said the fence would give them safety from the traffic on Gibson Drive and some privacy so they can conduct their activities in the backyard without the neighbors looking on.-The petitioner stated the majority of their yard is located in the front half of the property, and having the fence at the proposed location would give them i a bigger backyard to enjoy. Mr. Kaplan opened the meeting to questions from the board. I Mr. Oliveto said he had visited the residence and had spoke to Mrs. Lee's husband, Philip. Mr. Oliveto asked Philip if the neighbor located behind them had any issues with the location of the fence. Mr. Oliveto further explained that Philip presented to the neighbor in great detail where the fence was going to be and the neighbor was going to write a letter stating that they were acceptable of the location. I The petitioner gave the neighbor's letter to Mr. Kaplan. I Mr. Kaplan read the letter to the board members and the general public. The letter stated i the neighbors were accepting of the proposed fence location and had no problems with the granting of the variation. Mr. Oliveto asked Mrs. Lee if their next-door neighbor located on Franklin Lane had any problems with the proposed fence location. The petitioner told Mr. Oliveto that their relationship with that particular neighbor is not good, and they really do not communicate so Mrs. Lee had no knowledge of their concerns. Mr. Oliveto confirmed that the fence would be six feet (6') in height, and asked the petitioner if they had decided on the style of the fencing. Mrs. Lee replied that they had not decided on the exact style. She said the fence would definitely be six feet (6') in height and a design that would cost effective and provide privacy. Mr. Meister asked about the fence location and whether the fence would be placed outside of the pine trees and encompass all of the landscaping. The petitioner replied that the fence would be placed in between the arborvitaes and the pine trees. Mrs. Lee further explained the pine trees would be on the outside of the fenced in portion, and the arborvitaes would then be located on the inside of the fence. Mr. Meister commented that the petitioner has not proved a hardship to grant this variance. Mr. Childress confirmed the pines trees will be located outside the proposed fence and the fence should not block any sightlines when pulling in and out of their driveway for the neighbor located behind the petitioner. Mr. Schumm commented that the fence location would make the backyard more usable because the fence location would increase the size of the backyard and probably add value to the property. Mr. Kaplan asked Mrs. Lee if she had ever considered moving the fence in, starting the fence at the rear corner of the house, and placing in line with the Gibson side of the house. Mr. Kaplan further explained that this location would still require a variance because it would still be located beyond a line extended from the nearest front corner of the principal building located on the adjacent single-family lot. I The petitioner did consider this location when she met with the Department of Engineering and Community Development, but since it would still require a variance, and _ she wanted the fence to be incorporated into the existing landscaping she would like for it to be placed in the location specified in the petition. Mr. Kaplan confirmed that the arborvitaes would be located on the inside of the fence. I Mr. Kaplan entertained a motion. A motion to grant the construction of a new fence 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 was made by Mr. Schumm, and seconded by Mr. Oliveto. Upon voting (AYES —Oliveto, Childress, Kaplan, Schumm, and Meister) the motion to grant the variance passed unanimously. Mr. Kaplan advised the petitioner, Mrs. Lee, to be present at the next Village-Board-meeting for the-final decision of his zoning variation. The meeting adjourned 7:27 P.M. i Respectfully submitted, Justin Herren Plan Reviewer, Community Development