City of Highland Park Zoning Board of Appeals met October 5.
Here is the minutes provided by the Board:
I. Call to Order
At 7:30 pm Chair Henry called the meeting to order and asked Planner Burhop to call the roll.
Members Present: Chaplik, Cullather, Fettner, Henry, Muller, Putzel
Members Absent: Bina
Planner Burhop took the roll and declared a quorum present.
Staff Present: Burhop
Student Rep.: Gordon
Council Liaison: None
II. Approval of Minutes
Chair Henry entertained a motion to approve the minutes of the 8-3-17 meeting. Member Cullather so motioned, seconded by Member Putzel. Member Fettner and Vice Chair Chaplik abstained, as they were not present at that meeting. On a voice vote the Chair declared the motion carried unanimously.
Chair Henry entertained a motion to approve the minutes of the 8-17-17 meeting. Vice Chair Chaplik so motioned, seconded by Member Putzel. Chair Henry and Member Muller abstained, as they were not present at that meeting. On a voice vote, the Chair declared the motion carried unanimously.
Chair Henry entertained a motion to approve the minutes of the 9-7-17 meeting. Member Cullather so motioned, seconded by Member Putzel. Chair Henry and Members Muller and Fettner abstained, as they were not present at that meeting. On a voice vote the Chair declared the motion carried unanimously.
III. Publication Date for New Business: 9-20-17
IV. Business from the Public: None
V. Old Business:
1. #17-09-VAR-035
Property: 50 Roger Williams Ave.
Zoning District: R4
Appellant: Jeffrey Malk
Address: 1754 N. Honore St., Chicago, IL 60622
Planner Burhop made a presentation for the above item including project location, project background, photos, plat of survey, site plan, aerial photo, existing and proposed first floor plans, elevation plans, no negative neighbor comments and requested variations.
Member Muller asked if there were two rear yards.
Planner Burhop stated there was one.
Member Muller asked why there was a rear yard and side yard.
Planner Burhop stated the front yard was that adjacent to the R.O.W. and by definition the rear yard is opposite the front yard. He stated the two lots behind have different zoning issues. This lot is a regular interior lot. If this was a corner lot the request would not be before the Board. Planner Burhop stated the driveways to the lot-in-depths behind the subject property did not qualify as a street; it was not platted or dedicated right-of- way and the easement width was less than 25 feet.
Chair Henry asked about the ravine on the first slide.
Planner Burhop stated the project is not directly related to the steep slope zone but is indirectly related as the SSZ hems in where you can build on the property.
Mr. Jeffrey Malk, 50 Roger Williams, Highland Park, IL, Owner, mentioned the letters from the neighbors having no objections, he bought the home earlier in the year, it is a Grunsfeld home and he wants to do justice to the architecture, they have spent time trying to figure how to get what they wanted out of house, there are two major problems - if they expand it would require an entire reconfiguration, currently it is two bedrooms and they need a bigger master suite, it is non-intrusive, they looked at many iterations, if they do not have a master suite the resale value will not be what it should be, not planning to sell, they are maintaining the original intent of the architecture, they want to stay in conformance with what was intended by architect, has zero impact on neighbors, enough landscaping and trees that no one will see the expansion, it is a unique property which is why this variance is requested and much of the house is non-conforming.
Vice Chair Chaplik asked if one of the letters was from the house to the south.
Mr. Malk stated yes.
Chair Henry asked about the different iterations they looked at before deciding on this one.
Mr. Malk stated the whole intention was to enlarge the master suite. They looked at turning the master suite into two bedrooms and they would become the kids’ rooms. This was problematic as it takes away the view of the ravine from the master suite. The other iteration would place the master suite right on the house and people would be pulling right up the suite. They considered adding more rooms which became very expensive. It became just one suite they were going to renovate to an entire master suite. It was like doing two projects when they only needed to do one.
Chair Henry mentioned maintaining the architectural integrity of the house and he could fill in some of the spaces and do it by right.
Mr. Malk stated it would disrupt the architecture and the architect had a clear cut aesthetic vision.
Chair Henry entertained a motion to close the proofs. Member Fettner so motioned, seconded by Vice Chair Chaplik. On a voice vote, the Chair declared the motion carried unanimously.
The following discussion took place by the Board:
• Member Putzel stated it met most of the standards and understood the hardship as the steep slope limits the buildable area and did not allow many options. She respected that they want to maintain the integrity of the architecture and it will not impact the neighbors for 80 s.f.
• Member Fettner stated he had no issue with this and it meets the standards. The other properties are far away, it is a clear hardship and the ravine takes up a lot of the property. While a Grunsfeld home is not on a level with a Frank Lloyd Wright, it is an architecturally significant home, there is no other place for the addition and it is clear cut case for a variance. Also, they had no objections from the neighbors.
• Member Cullather stated the applicant had done a good job of explaining his case. He did not see a problem and thought they met all the standards for a variance and would support the request.
• Member Muller stated the house had a hardship in having no master bath, what they are asking for is minimal and it is the most logical place. He appreciated they went through the different options and would support the request.
• Vice Chair Chaplik stated he was challenged with finding the hardship in accordance with the standards. The steep slope impacts the decision and he now understood the hardship and would support the request.
• Chair Henry stated hardship is an elusive concept. The steep slope zone impacts on the ability to do anything on the property. People buy property knowingly which creates the difficulty with hardship. They are mindful they are maintaining the architectural integrity. He thought the application met the standards and would support the request.
Chair Henry entertained a motion to approve. Member Fetter motioned to direct staff to prepare findings of fact and order to approve the variance, seconded by Member Cullather.
Planner Burhop called the roll:
Ayes: Putzel, Cullather, Fettner, Muller, Chaplik, Henry
Nays: None
Chair Henry declared the Motion passed 6-0.
Chair Henry entertained a motion to approve the variance approval order. Member Muller so motioned, seconded by Member Fettner. On a voice vote, the Chair declared motion carried unanimously.
VI. New Business:
1. #17-10-VAR-037
Property: 41 Ridge Rd.
Zoning District: R6
Appellant: Oana Herghelegiu
Address: 2016 W. Greenleaf Ave., Chicago, IL 60645
Planner Burhop stated the applicant needed to complete notification, and this item will be continued to a future meeting.
The Chair stated this item is continued to the October 19, 2017 meeting.
2. #17-10-VAR-038
Property: 1911 Dale Ave.
Zoning District: R4
Appellant: David S. Pritzker and Rachel N. Pritzker
Address: 1911 Dale Ave., Highland Park, IL 60035
Planner Burhop made a presentation for the above item including project location, project background, photos, aerial photo, previous approvals, plat of survey, site plan, zoning analysis, existing and proposed garage layouts, existing and proposed west and north elevations, neighborhood FAR analysis, no forestry comments, no objections from neighbors (1919 Dale, 261 Laurel, 217 Laurel, 256 Laurel) and requested variation.
Vice Chair Chaplik asked if this view was the other house’s back yard.
Planner Burhop stated technically it is the side yard but it was once the front.
Member Putzel asked if there was an alley.
Planner Burhop stated it was on the other side of the neighbor’s house.
Chair Henry asked if the FAR was a function in part on the size of the parcel.
Planner Burhop stated it is currently.
Chair Henry asked if it were a 20,000 s.f. lot it might not exceed the FAR.
Planner Burhop stated he could check the numbers.
Mr. Cal Bernstein, 1473 Sherwood, Highland Park, IL, Attorney, made a presentation including the house was built in 1890, the applicant is sensitive to increasing the bulk in front, slope to mitigate the bulk, slight increase in size of garage, it is one and a half car garage, not functioning as two car garage and received support from Guggenheims.
Mr. Louis Banks, 942 Burton Terr., Glenview, IL, Architect, made a presentation including have garage function for a family of four, want a two car garage with extra storage, brick foundation wall impedes on the second space, it is currently a one car garage, want to make it functional, new garage door will be centered on mass, flat panel with windows.
Mr. Cal Bernstein stated regarding standards, they are looking to improve the house from 1890 to bring it up to modern day living with a two car garage, hardship is the house is from 1890 and it is the only place for the garage, alternate is to go north, physical surroundings are creating hardship, not detrimental to public welfare, will not impact neighbors and will not alter the character of the neighborhood.
Member Fettner stated if the property was confirming they would be eligible for the bonus and they would be allowed to do the extension.
Mr. Bernstein stated they would be allowed to have the additional 125 s.f.
Chair Henry entertained a motion to close the proofs. Member Fettner so motioned, seconded by Vice Chair Chaplik. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously.
The following discussion took place by the Board:
• Member Fettner stated he would support the request and it is a hardship not to have useable garage, it meets the standards and the neighbor does not object.
• Member Cullather agreed and the standards have been met, the hardship is with the ability to place a two car garage somewhere else on the property and the neighbors support it.
• Member Muller agreed and stated he knew the previous occupants and they had a hard time selling the house, the main issue was the garage which is not viable for a home this size, it meets the standards and he would support the request.
• Member Putzel agreed and appreciated they looked at other options, want to maintain the integrity of the retaining wall, protecting the trees and would support the request.
• Vice Chair Chaplik agreed it met the standards, did not have a problem with the hardship, a two car garage is a necessity, they are preserving an older home, and would support the request.
• Chair Henry agreed and stated it seems to be a hardship to have anything less than a two car garage, they are maintaining the integrity of the architecture, corner lots are a challenge, makes no sense to site it anywhere else, it meets the standards and he would support the request.
Chair Henry entertained a motion to direct staff to prepare findings of fact and an order approving the application as submitted. Member Fettner so motioned, seconded by Member Cullather.
Planner Burhop called the roll:
Ayes: Putzel, Cullather, Fettner, Muller, Chaplik, Henry
Nays: None
The Chair declared the Motion passed 6-0.
Chair Henry entertained a motion to approve the proposed order. Member Muller so motioned, seconded by Vice Chair Chaplik. On a voice vote, the Chair declared the motion carried unanimously.
VI. Staff Report: None
VII. Miscellaneous:
Signing of the Meeting Resolution for 2018 Calendar Year
Chair Henry stated there are two alternate schedules. One schedule provides for two meetings in April and one has a meeting on April 5th.
Vice Chair Chaplik and Members Muller and Fettner stated they would be gone the week of spring break.
Chair Henry there are two proposed resolutions, one with a meeting on April 5th and one without.
Planner Burhop stated if the Board wanted the schedule with spring break off he advised to approve the motion as presented and amend striking the April 5th date.
Chair Henry stated the resolution that was posted included the April 5th meeting.
Member Cullather motioned they adopt the resolution as presented, amended to exclude the April 5th meeting, seconded by Member Fettner. On a voice vote, the Chair declared the motion carried unanimously.
VIII. Adjournment
Chair Henry entertained a motioned to adjourn. Vice Chair Chaplik so motioned, seconded by Member Fettner. On a voice vote, the Chair declared the motion passed unanimously.
The Zoning Board of Appeals adjourned at 8:42 pm.
http://highlandparkil.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=12&ID=1920&Inline=True
Alerts Sign-up