Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - 10/09/2003 - ZBA MINUTES - 03-7 - 570 RUTGERS ELK GROVE VILLAGE Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes October 9, 2003 Present: P. Kaplan, Chairman J. Oliveto R. Penley G. Schumm J. Walz J. Franke Staff: V. Zaric, Plan Reviewer, Community Development Zoning Variation — Docket#03-7— 570 Rutgers Ln. Chairman Kaplan called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. and read the legal notice. The petitioner, Anthony Sullivan, was sworn in and asked to present his • case. He explained that they moved in the house 19 years ago-and there was no fence at his corner lot at that time. They experienced many problems with the cars crossing their front yard and with children crossing the yard on their way to the bus stop. Soon after they moved in they had to put a split rail fence at the corner of Jersey and Rutgers and at the back of the house, which was legal at that time. They also planted bushes behind the fence. Since the original split rail fence deteriorated over the years, the petitioners want to replace it with a picket fence. The bushes would stay but would be cut to the fence height. Mr. Kaplan asked if the petitioner asked his neighbors regarding this matter. The petitioner answered that he asked the neighbors and they did not have any objections. Mr. Penley asked how high the bushes are, which are behind the fence. The petitioner answered that they are approximately 5 feet high but would be cut to be even with the proposed 4-foot fence. Mr. Schumm asked how long the proposed fence would be. The petitioner answered that the fence at the corner of Jersey and Rutgers would be 12 feet long on each side and the fence at the back of the house would be 48 feet long • along Jersey Lane and 12 feet along the property line. Mr. Schumm also asked the petitioner what is his hardship. a � I a The petitioner answered that he wants to prevent children and cars from crossing his yard. Mr. Oliveto said that there is no need for a 4-foot high fence in order to prevent cars and children from crossing the yard. He also noted that granting this variance would make other people living on the corner lots to ask for the same variance. The petitioner answered that he saw many houses on the corner lots with the fences at the corners. Mr. Franke noted that a 4-foot picket fence would create an obstruction by looking at it from the street. No landscaping in the back yard would be seen. The current fence gives more light look to the area then the proposed picket fence. Mr. Kaplan asked if the audience had any questions. Mr. Dedominico from 578 Rutgers Lane said that he does not like fences in the front yards. He lives across the street from the petitioner. He sees fences being use for posting different signs on them. Mr. Walz expressed his concern that the fence would obstruct sight line at the corner. • The petitioner answered that the bushes are there already and that the fence would not change the sight line. A motion was made by Mr. Schumm not to grant the variation. The motion was seconded by Mr. Franke. The motion was passed by a vote of 4 to 1. The petitioner was directed by Mr. Kaplan to contact the Village Clerk to confirm which Village Board meeting they should attend for final approval. The meeting was adjourned at 7:20 P.M. ,Respectfully submitted, llerccq -&-cc Verica Zaric Plan Reviewer, 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 l9kinager, Administrative Intern, Director of Engineering and Community De "ment, Director of Public Works, Fire Chief, Deputy Fire Chief(2), Assistants, a Chief, Chairman and Members of Plan Commission 3D�J� lam''