|

VILLAGE OF PALOS PARK
MINUTES OF THE ZONING BOARD OF
APPEALS MEETING
HELD ON JULY 13TH, 2011
1. ROLL CALL: The meeting of Zoning Board of
Appeals of the Village of Palos Park, Cook County, Illinois was called
to order at 7:30 p.m. Answering to roll call was Steve Maier, Jerry
Dill, Jack Martin and Phyllis Adams. Chairman Lencioni, and Nancy Konior
were absent. Staff in attendance was Steve Manning, Community
Development Director and Kathie May, Deputy Clerk.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Steve Maier moved,
seconded by Jerry Dill, to approve the minutes of February 13th, 2011
meeting as presented
Upon roll call vote, the motion carried as follows
AYES: -4- Steve Maier, Jerry Dill, Phyllis Adams and Jack Martin
NAYS: -0-
ABSENT: -2- Nancy Konior and David Lencioni3. PUBLIC HEARING:
A. Mike
and Lora Salerno, 12018 S. Winslow Road
Two setback variances for a shed:
1. 5 foot variance to the required 15 foot
side setback
2. 33% variance or 10 foot setback between
house and garage
Discussion: Mr. and Mrs. Salerno presented their site plan. In July
1999, Mr. and Mrs. Salerno applied for a permit for brick pavers for
their driveway and stairs, a retention wall and foundation for a future
structure. They did not add the structure at that time because of
monetary reasons. The plan was to build it in the future. Their house is
on a hill and when they first moved in the basement didn’t have a sump
pump. They removed part of the hill behind the house and installed a
sewer system to take water away from house in their back yard and put in
a retaining wall. They had a Wayne Lody engineer the project. They had
to remove 28 truck loads of dirt because the entire back yard was a
hill. Mr. Salerno put together a packet with pictures and information.
They need a new shed because the existing shed rotted out. He described
that their driveway was long and on a hill. Mr. Salerno confirmed with
Steve Manning that Village code does not allow an accessory structure to
be located in the front of the house. In addition, they have a large
hickory tree on the west side of their property. They consulted with
Homer Tree Service who recommended that they build the retaining wall at
least 12 feet from the tree in order to preserve it. Mr. Salerno
presented pictures from all their neighbors showing that the structure
would not be a nuisance and also stated they were not against the
structure.
Steve Manning said that hardship has to meet
all three criteria site conditions, development design and community
impact. On site conditions he said they are very limited because of the
trees and the hill. As for the developmental design, the only place to
put the accessory structure because of the sewer system and retaining
walls. Jack Martin asked Steve Manning if the Village had any notes or
minutes from Mr. Salerno’s original permit application. Mr. Manning said
the 1999 permit didn’t have notes or minutes but it did not permit
construction of a new shed or garage. The 2004 permit application was
for a shed but was denied because it did not meet setbacks. Mr. Martin
inquired if he applied for a variance when he installed the foundation
for the structure. Mr. Salerno stated that he did apply for a variance
because at the time it was only a permit for a foundation and not for an
accessory structure. Mr. Martin asked if he could go any farther south
with the structure and was told no by Mr. Salerno because of the sewer
system. Mr. Manning said he had asked for Mr. Salerno to draw his storm
sewer on his survey. Mr. Manning said if the shed was turned 90 degrees
it would extend 11 feet into the back yard beyond the existing
foundation is and would not disrupt drainage or storm sewer and he would
meet all the setbacks. Mr. Manning said a slab only meets code setback
10’ from property line. Mr. Maier believed the initial plan was for the
building of a garage. Mr. Dill was concerned that there was no permit
issued before the structure was installed. Mr. Dill believed that the
homeowner’s initial plan was to build a garage. In 2004, Mr. Salerno
stated that he fell ill and could not proceed with the project. There
was discussion between Mr. Maier and the homeowner on whether the plat
of survey was accurate. Mr. Dill reminded Mr. Salerno that it is the
homeowner’s responsibility to apply for permits.
Mr. Dill
asked for a motion to grant to approve a 5 foot variance to the required
15 foot side setback for the residence at 12018 S. Winslow.
Upon
roll call vote, the motion carried as follows:
AYES: -4- Jerry Dill, Phyllis Adams Steve Maier and Jack Martin
NAYS: -0-
ABSENT: -2- Dave Lencioni and Nancy Konior
Mr.
Maier asked for a motion to grant to approve a .333 foot variance to the
required 10 foot setback for the residence at 12018 S. Winslow.
Upon roll call vote, the motion carried as follows:
AYES: -4- Steve Maier,Phyllis Adams, Jerry Dill and Jack Martin
NAYS: -0-
ABSENT: -2- Dave Lencioni and Nancy Konior
Jack Martin left meeting at 8:44pm
4.OLD
BUSINESS:
A.
Variance Application Form
Discussion:
Mr. Manning stated that the Village Council approved the code changes as
recommended by ZBA including variance conditions and hardship criteria.
The next step is to revise the application form. Mr. Manning distributed
a draft and asked for review and comment by August 1st. Mr. Maier asked
if the Village does need 20 copies for the packet. Mr. Manning stated
that 20 copies are necessary because they are needed for the Village
Council and ZBA members and for the file. Mr. Maier asked if when the
packet refers to certain code, that the staff could include a copy of
that code for reference.
5.NEW BUSINESS: NONE
6. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION: Mrs. Rogers stated that she finds it hard to
believe that residents move into Palos Park and don’t follow the rules
and do not bother to pull permits for work that is being done.
7. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, Steve Maier moved to
adjourn the meeting at 8:56 p.m. Upon voice vote the motion carried
unanimously.
Minutes respectfully submitted,
____________________________________
Kathie May
Deputy Clerk
|