HomeMy WebLinkAboutZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - 06/03/2004 - ZBA MINUTES - 04-5 -1050 CONRAD CT. 7/
•
ELK GROVE VILLAGE
Zoning Board of Appeals
Meeting Minutes
June 3, 2004
Present: P. Kaplan, Chairman
D. Childress
A. Kreutzer
J. Oliveto
R. Penley
T. Rogers
J. Walz
G. Schumm
Staff. S. Trudan, Asst. Dir., Community Development
Zoning Variation — Docket# 04-5— 1050 Conrad Court
Chairman Kaplan called the meeting to order at 7.•00 P.M. and read the legal
notice. The petitioners, Mr. & Ms. Torelli were asked to present their case.
• Ms. Torelli explained that they wanted to replace an existing, legal non-
conforming fence with the new fence and that they obtained a permit from the
Village to do so. She added that the Building Inspector failed to make the
scheduled inspection, showed up two days late, approved the fence location in
the early afternoon, and finally called two hours later to tell her the fence had to
be moved.
Chairman Kaplan asked if the original fence was in a state of disrepair and Ms.
Torelli stated that it was. Chairman Kaplan then stated that he received two
letters from neighbors supporting the variation request. Ms. Torelli presented
four more letters from neighbors supporting her request.
Mr. Oliveto asked what kind of fence was previously constructed, if the neighbor
behind them objected to the new fence, and why they needed the new fence in
the same place. Ms. Torelli stated that the old fence was a wood privacy fence
and that the neighbors had no problem with the new fence. She also explained
that due to the location of the patio door and windows on the house there would
be no more privacy or security if the new fence could not remain.
Mr. Walz asked if a professional contractor constructed the fence. Ms. Torelli
said family and friends constructed the fence. Mr. Walz stated that he spoke to
the neighbor located directly behind the Torellis who told him that they had no
•
1'
problem with the fence and that it provided privacy for them as well as the
Torellis.
Mr. Schumm asked what the hardship was in this case and Ms. Torelli explained
that the shape of the house and the locations of the doors and windows
necessitated the fence as proposed to provide privacy and security.
Mr. Trudan explained that this situation was unique due to the existing structures
and fence being legal non-conforming.
A motion was made by Mr. Rogers, which was seconded by Mr. Oliveto. The
motion passed by unanimous vote. 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 at 7:22 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
- teven J rudan
Assistant Director, Community Development
C: Chairman and Members Zoning Board of Appeals, Mayor and Board of
Trustees, 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
•