HomeMy Public PortalAbout1995-04-18 ZBA minutesPLAINFIELD ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS.
DATE: Apri 118, 1995
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
Chairman Sobkoviak
R. Smolich L. Kachel
R.Schinderle W. Schempf
W. Manning A. Anderson
AT: Plainfield Library
ALSO PRESENT:
P. j. Waldock, Village Planner
J. L. Durbin, Planner
S. Hart Secretary
Chairman Sobkoviak called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Sobkoviak led the pledge
to the flag, roll call was taken. The minutes of April 4, 1995 were accepted as amended.
OLD BUSINESS: CASE NO. 478-030295.V and 479-030295.V PLAINFIELD DEVELOPMENT
Planner Durbin summarized his report as follows, the applicants are seeking a variance in the corner
side yard setback requirements for two properties in Spring Hill Estates. Lots 15 and 16 are located
along the east side of the development. The lots are separated by a dedicated right-of--way. The
setback requirements are as follows:
Front yard: 30 ft.
Interior side yard: Minimum seven (7) feet, and there shall also be maintained twenty (20) feet
of open space or side yard between adjoining buildings measured from the
nearest vertical supporting structure or member of each building. (Based on
the location of the adjacent structures, seven (7) ft. is the required setback
for both lot 15 and 16).
Corner side yard: 30 ft.
Rear yard: 25% of the lot depth which need not exceed 30 ft. in this case.
The proposed construction complies with all required yard setbacks except the third garage stall
intrudes into the corner side yard requirement. Variance approvals are warranted when the
following three conditions are found to exist:
1. The site must be found to be unique to the extent that the ordinance could nit anticipate
conditions applicable.
2. It must be found that if the variance is not granted there would be no reasonable value or use
of the property. The property would not be buildable or not buildable to the extent that is
customarily regarded as reasonable.
3. It must be found that due to the unique conditions of the site, meeting the standards of the
ordinance cause undue hardship upon the owner in achieving a reasonable use of the property.
Planner Durbin stated that the adjacent landowner letters were delivered.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Apri 118, 1995
Page 2
The Findings of the Planner were as follows:
1. The front yard of the subject sites, is the yard fronting on Hawthorne Circle, the corner side yard
is the yard fronting on the unnamed dedicated right-of-way, and the rear yard is the yard furthest
from Hawthorne Circle. As such, the only yard setback requirement variance necessary for the
proposed structure is for the corner side yard setback.
2. The required setbacks do not create an undue hardship as the site is buildable with a two car
garage, the variance is requested only to allow for the construction of a three car garage. This
case does not meet the three criteria outlined which would warrant approval of the variance.
3. While it may be some period of time before the unnamed road is constructed, the road would
be a desirable connection to the east.
4. Upon construction of the unnamed road, granting of the variance would result in negative
impacts, particularly the close proximity of the drive to the intersection.
Staff recommended denial of the Variance request for both subject cases, 478-030295.V and 479-
030295.V.
R. Smolich felt that the variance should be approved, for various reasons, he felt it would not be
harmful to the Village. He also doubted the street would be built in the future.
After further discussion, R. Schinderle made a motion to deny the Variance requested, for
863 Hawthorne, Case No. 878-030295.V and 873 Hawthorne, Case No. 479-030295.V, according
to the findings of Staff. Seconded by W. Manning. Vote by roll call, R. Smolich. no; L. Kachel, yes;
W. Schempf, yes; R. Schinderle, yes; W. Manning, yes; A. Anderson, yes; Chairman Sobkoviak,
yes. Motion carried 6 yes 1 no.
ADJOURN: 7:30
S ah ron Hart, Secretary