The URL can be used to link to this page

S-1052 - 09/09/2003 - VARIATION - Ordinancesz ORDINANCE 2003- ZO -V -S -1052 AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A VARIATION FROM THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13- 6B -3F(2) OF TITLE 13 ( "ZONING REGULATIONS") OF THE VILLAGE CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK RELATIVE TO SIDE YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS (Trilla - 59 Baybrook Lane, Oak Brook, IL 60523 / P.I.N. 06 -28- 402 -004) WHEREAS, the Village of Oak Brook has heretofore adopted an ordinance setting forth the Zoning Regulations for the Village of Oak Brook in Title 13 of the Village Code; and WHEREAS, Section 13 -14 -6 of the Village Code sets forth the authority and standards of the granting of variations to the Zoning Regulations; WHEREAS, Michael and Tracy Trilla ( "Petitioners ") are the owners of certain property legally described as follows: LOT 118 IN GINGER CREEK, BEING A SUBDIVISION OF PARTS OF SECTIONS 27 AND 28, TOWNSHIP 39 NORTH, RANGE 11, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED DECEMBER 30, 1960 AS DOCUMENT 992057, IN DUPAGE COUNTY, ILLINOIS. P I.N. 06 -28- 402 -004 commonly known as 59 Baybrook Lane, Oak Brook, Illinois ( "Subject Property "); and WHEREAS, the Subject Property is located within the R -2 Single - Family Detached Residence District, the regulations of which require a side yard setback of not less than forty feet (40') in depth along Oak Brook Hills Road, and a west side yard setback of not less than eighteen feet (18') in depth; and WHEREAS, the Petitioners have submitted a petition for variation to reduce the required side yard setback along Oak Brook Hills Road by 7.3 feet and to reduce the required west side yard setback by 1.5 feet for the purpose of constructing a new single- family dwelling on the Subject Property; and WHEREAS, on August 5, 2003, the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Oak Brook conducted a public hearing at the Oak Brook Village Hall, 1200 Oak Brook Road, Oak Ordinance 2003- ZO -V -S- 1052 Granting Variation from Sec 13- 6B -3F(2) Page 2 of 3 (Trilla) Brook, Illinois in connection with the aforesaid petition, after due notice and appropriate legal notice was given; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of Appeals specifically considered the standards set forth in Section 13 -14 -6 (D) of the Village Code and made the following findings of fact: • that the Petitioners have satisfied the standards required by the Zoning Ordinance; • that the Petitioners have demonstrated unique circumstances in that the existing home presently encroaches into the two side yards; • that the hardship of the Petitioners was not of their making; • that the proposed new home will enhance the value of surrounding properties; and • that the requested encroachments for the new home will be less than the existing encroachments; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of Appeals recommended approval of the requested variations; WHEREAS, the Village President and Board of Trustees concur with the findings and recommendations made by the Zoning Board of Appeals; WHEREAS, all applicable requirements of Section 13 -14 -6 of the Village Code relating the the granting of variations to the Zoning Regulations have been met. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the President and Board of Trustees of the Village of Oak Brook, DuPage and Cook Counties, Illinois as follows: SECTION 1. That the recitals hereto are incorporated as part of this ordinance. SECTION 2. That a variation to Section 13- 6B -3F(2) of the Zoning Regulations of the Oak Brook Code is hereby granted to permit the construction of a new single - family dwelling and allow a side yard setback of approximately thirty -two feet eight inches (32' 8 ") along Oak Brook Hills Road and a west side yard setback of approximately sixteen and one half feet (16 1 /2'), subject to the condition that the new construction shall be in substantial conformance with the plans prepared by Athene Design and Devolpment most recently revised on 3/29/03 and entered into evidence for consideration by the Zoning Board of Appeals. SECTION 3. That this Ordinance is limited and restricted to the property commonly H • 1 I Ordinance 2003- ZO -V -S -1052 Granting Variation from Sec 13-6B-3F(2) Page 3 of 3 (Trilla) known as 59 Baybrook Lane, Oak Brook, Illinois, P.I.N. 06 -28- 402 -004. SECTION 4. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with this ordinance are hereby amended to the extent of the conflict. SECTION 5. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect after passage and publication according to law. Approved this 9th day of September, 2003. Passed this 9th day of September, 2003. Ayes: Trustees Craig, Korin, Miologos and Yusuf Nays: None Absent: Trustees Aktipis and Caleel a� None ?�4 r � a Village Clerk H Wary Ann \VOB Ordinances\Variation - 59 Baybrook Lane wpd 7. C. Discussion ensued relative to clause 7 and the concern that the requirements specified become burdensome to residents. Lexi Payovich, Chairman of the Plan Commission explained the rationale the Plan Commission used to include the requirements. Motion by Trustee Miologos, seconded by Trustee Craig, that the Board of Trustees concur with the recommendations of the Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals to approve the text amendments to the Zoning Ordinance deleting clause # 7 stating "Any lot, which has been granted a variation after the adoption of the amendments which increase the maximum height of single-family homes which seeks approval of a variation to reduce any required yard should be limited to the current maximum structure height of 30 feet. Any request to increase the structure height will require the approval of a variation by the Village," and authorize the Village Attorney to draft the necessary ordinance for final consideration at the September 23, 2003 meeting of the Board of Trustees. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried. President Quinlan commended Lexi Payovich, Chairman of the Plan Commission and Champ Davis, Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals for their efforts and those of their boards in this process. 8. ACTIVE AGENDA(Items for Final Action): ACTIVE AGENDA A. CONFIRMATION OF APPOINTMENTS: None CNFRM APPTS B. ORDINANCES &RESOLUTIONS: GRD/RES 5 1) RDINANCE 2003-ZO-V-S-1052 "AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A GRD 03 Zo-V-S-1052 -VAR -SEC 13-6B- VARIATION FROM THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13-6B-3F(2) 3F(2) -ZNGREG- OF TITLE 13 "ZONING REGULATIONS") OF THE VILLAGE SIDE YARD SETBK CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK RELATIVE TO SIDE YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS -TRILLA — 59 BAYBROOK LANE" At the last Village Board meeting, the Board accepted the positive recommendation made by the Zoning Board of Appeals with reference to this variation and directed the Village Attorney to prepare the ordinance implementing same. This would allow the construction of a new single-family dwelling at 59 Baybrook Lane with a side yard setback of thirty two feet eight inches (32'8") along Oak Brook Hills �- Road and the west side yard setback of sixteen feet six inches (16'6"). VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Minutes Page 8 of 12 September 9, 2003 • i s. B. 1> Motion by Trustee Miologos, seconded by Trustee Craig , that the Village Board pass, and the President approve, Ordinance 2003-ZO-V- 5-1052, as submitted herewith, authorizing the variation for the Trilla property at 59 Baybrook Lane. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 4 -Trustees Craig, Korin,Miologos and Yusuf. Nays: 0 -None. Absent: 2 - Trustees Aktipis and Caleel. Motion carried. C. AWARD OF CONTRACTS: AWARD CT 1) BANKING SERVICES— 1 YEAR EXTENSION EXT SERVICS XT As a result of a competitive request for proposal process, in 1999 American National Bank was awarded a contract for all Village banking services with the exception of third party safekeeping of Village investments, which was awarded to Oak Brook Bank. The services provided by American National Bank include all checking accounts, credit card processing, "sweep" accounts, and various on-line banking functions. For the Village Board's information, all banking services relating to the Police and Firefighters' Pension Funds are handled by the respective pension fund board. Subsequent to the awarding of the initial contract, American National Bank was acquired by Bank One. Staff has been very satisfied with the level of service provided by both banks during the first four years of the relationship. The initial agreement was for three years, with the Village holding the sole option of two additional years subject to satisfactory fee negotiations. Last year at this time staff recommended approval of only the first additional year since although Bank One agreed to hold the pricing at the 1999 rate there was a change in the officer assigned to our account and staff wanted to be assured that the level of service would continue to meet our expectations. Once again Bank One has agreed to hold the fees at the 1999 rate and we have continued to be satisfied with the level of service on our account. Thus, staff is recommending approval of the second option year. At the expiration of this agreement it will have been five years since the last time we solicited competitive proposals for this service. Thus, it is staff intent to issue an RFP for banking service at this time next year. Motion by Trustee Yusuf, seconded by Trustee Korin, that the Village Board approve a one-year extension of the banking services agreement with Bank One through September 30, 2004. ROLL CALL VOTE: VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Minutes Page 9 of 12 September 9, 2003 6. 5. E. 1) Motion by Trustee Miologos, seconded by Trustee Korin, to authorize staff to prepare specifications and obtain competitive bids for the replacement of the old Butler School boiler. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 6 - Trustees Aktipis, Caleel, Craig, Korin, Miologos and Yusuf. Nays: 0 -None. Absent:0 -None. Motion carried. 7. BOARD & COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS: BD/COMM RECOM s A. RILLA — 59 BAYBROOK LANE — VARIATION — TITLE 13 OF THE TRILLA-59 BAYBRK VILLAGE CODE — ZONING ORDINANCE — CHAPTER 13-6B-3F(2 -VAR-SIDE YD SE L SETBACK SIDE YARD SETBACK TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE Zoning Board of Appeals Recommendation: Variation - The Zoning Board of Appeals by a vote of 5 to 0, recommended approval of the request from Mike and Tracy Trilla, the owners of the property at 59 Baybrook Lane for variations to the two side yards to permit the construction of a new home on the property. The specific variations include an approximate 7.3 feet encroachment into the 40-foot side yard setback (along Oak Brook Hills Road) and an approximate 1.5 feet encroachment into the 18-foot west side yard setback(including roof overhang). The existing home now encroaches into both side yards; 9.8 feet along Oak Brook Hills Road and approximately 6 feet into the west side yard. These encroachments include the four-foot roof overhang. In making this recommendation, the Zoning Board made the following findings: • The petitioner has satisfied the standards required by the Zoning Ordinance; • The petitioner has demonstrated unique circumstance in that the existing home presently encroaches into the two side yards; • The hardship of the petitioner was not of their making; • The proposed new home will enhance the value of surrounding properties; and • The requested encroachments for the new home will be less than the existing encroachments. Motion by Trustee Aktipis, seconded by Trustee Caleel, to concur with the recommendation of the Zoning Board of Appeals and authorize the Village Attorney to draft the necessary ordinance for final consideration at the Village Board meeting of September 9, 2003. VOICE VOTE: Motion carried. VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Minutes Page 4 of 16 August 26, 2003 TRILLA VARIATION— SIDE YARD SETBACKS INDEX PAGE CONTENTS 10 Memorandum from Director of Community Development Kallien to President Quinlan and Village Board dated August 21, 2003 9 Recommendation Letter from Acting Zoning Board of Appeals Chairman to President Quinlan and Village Board dated August 20, 2003 8-8b Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes dated August 5, 2003 7-7a Staff Report from Director of Community Development Kallien to Zoning Board of Appeals dated July 28, 2003 6 Certificate of Publication dated July 18, 2003 5 Resident Letter dated July 16, 2003 4 Board of Trustees Referral Meeting Minutes dated July 22, 2003 (Not Included) 3 Referral Memo to Board of Trustees from Director of Community Development 2 Front and Rear Yards, Zoning Ordinance, Section 13-6C-3-F (1) and (3) 1-1a Variations, Zoning Ordinance, Section 13-14-6 ******************* A Application/Petition -Variation B Surrounding Property Owners List C Fee/Receipt D Subject Property Verification E Background Letter/Letter of Explanation F Applicant's Response to Standards for Variation G Existing Plat of Survey Showing Side Yards Encroachments (Included — Not Attached) H Proposed Site Plan Showing Reduced Side Yards Encroachments (Included — Not Attached) I Exterior Elevation Plan (Included — Not Attached) J First Floor Plan (Included — Not Attached) K Second Floor Plan (Included — Not Attached) G� o F op�. • o VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Village Board Transmittal Memorandum C�CouNSV �v DATE: August 21, 2003 SUBJECT: Trilla—59 Baybrook Lane—Variation FROM: Robert Kallien,Director of Community Development RECOMMENDATION: If it is your wish to move toward approval of this request, it would be appropriate to pass a motion concurring with the recommendation of the Zoning Board of Appeals and authorizing the Village Attorney to draft the necessary ordinance for final consideration at your September 9, 2003 meeting. Zoning Board of Appeals Recommendation Variation - The Zoning Board of Appeals by a vote of 5 to 0, recommended approval of the request from Mike and Tracy Trilla, the owners of the property at 59 Baybrook Lane for variations to the two side yards to permit the construction of a new home on the property. The specific variations include an approximate 7.3 feet encroachment into the 40-foot side yard setback (along Oak Brook Hills Road) and an approximate 1.5 feet encroachment into the 18-foot west side yard setback (including roof overhang). The existing home now encroaches into both side yards; 9.8 feet along Oak Brook Hills Road and approximately 6 feet into the west side yard. These encroachments include the four-foot roof overhang. In making this recommendation,the Zoning Board made the following findings: • The petitioner has satisfied the standards required by the Zoning Ordinance; • The petitioner has demonstrated unique circumstance in that the existing home presently encroaches into the two side yards; • The hardship of the petitioner was not of their making; • The proposed new home will enhance the value of surrounding properties; and • The requested encroachments for the new home will be less than the existing encroachments. BOT-Trilla-59 Baybrook-VAR.doc /� Gt OF 0.44, P d `' 90 o a f e � O _y G O CauNtI , August 20, 2003 Village of Village President Quinlan and Board of Trustees Oak Brook Village of Oak Brook 1200 Oak Brook Road 1200 Oak Brook Road Oak Brook,IL 60523-2255 Oak Brook, IL 60523 Website www.oak-brook.org SUBJECT: Trilla—59 Baybrook Lane—Variation Administration 630.990.3000 FAX 630.990.0876 Dear President Quinlan and Board of Trustees: Community At its meeting on August 5, 2003, the Zoning Board of Appeals reviewed a Development request from Michael and Tracy Trilla, the owners of the lot at 59 Baybrook Lane 630.990.3045 q FAX 630.990.3985 seeking approval of two variations in order to construct a new home. The specific variations include an approximate 7.3 feet encroachment into the 40-foot side Engineering yard setback (along a street) and an approximate 1.5 feet encroachment into the Department 18-foot west side yard setback (including roof overhang). 630.990.3010 FAX 630.990.3985 The existing home on the lot now encroaches into both side yards; 9.8 feet along Fire Department Oak Brook Hills Road and approximately 6 feet into the west side yard. These 630.990.3040 FAX 630.990.2392 encroachments include the four-foot roof overhang. Police Department No one spoke in opposition to the request, however, Mr. George Kluetsch, Vice 630.990.2358 President of the Ginger Creek Homeowners Association spoke in support of the FAX 630.990.7484 request. Public Works Department By a vote of 5 to 0, the Zoning Board of Appeals recommended approval of the 630.990.3044 requested variations based on the following findings: FAX 630.472.0223 • The petitioner has satisfied standards required by the Zoning Ordinance; Oak Brook . The petitioner has demonstrated unique circumstance in that the existing home Public Library p q g presently encroaches into the two side yards; 600 Oak Brook Road • The hardship of the petitioner was not of their making; Oak Brook,IL 60523-2200 • The proposed new home will enhance the value of surrounding properties; and 630.990.2222 FAX 630.990.4509 • The requested encroachments for the new home will be less than the existing encroachments. Oak Brook Sports Core Very truly yours, Bath&Tennis Club 700 Oak Brook Road Oak Brook,IL 60523-4600 630.990.3020 FAX 630.990.1002 eorge eller Golf Club 2606 York Road Acting Chairman Oak Brook,IL 60523-4602 Zoning Board of Appeals 630.990.3032 FAX 630.990.0245 1. The proposed use is consistent with the recently adopted special use for"parks and open field recreational activities" in the ORA-1 District. 2. The McDonald's Corporation as owngis of the property have approved the project through a license agreement between them and 'the Hawk's Soccer Club. 3. The use of the Autumn Oaks property for recreational purposes is consistent with the surrounding land uses including being located adjacent to existing recreational uses operated by the Oak Brook District. 4. The proposal to construct soccer fields and related improvements will provide for the public benefit and convenience of the community and its residents, 5. The proposal to provide on-site parking, trash/sanitation facilities, installation of temporary barriers and limiting the hours of operation will protect the public health, safety and welfare of the community and those utilizing the facilities. 6. The temporary nature of the improvements will not negatively impact the value of adjacent property. 7. No lighting or amplification is allowed. 8. Final Engineering approval. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 4- Ascher, Sanford, Shah, and Mueller Nays: 0- Abstain: 1 - Young Absent: 2- Zaheer and Davis Motion Carried. Ill. TR/LLA — 3 HAMPTON DRIVE— VARIATION— FRONT YARD SETBACK Acting Chairman Mueller swore in all parties testifying. Christine Potts, J. B. Architecture Group reviewed the background of the proposal. Originally, the project started out as a remodel of the residence. They are investing so much into the project that they have decided it would be much more worth their while to demolish the existing home and replace it with a new structure. The existing home is a legal nonconforming structure that is extremely outdated, located in a gorgeous neighborhood and they enjoy living there. Rather than doing a remodel that would hamper the integrity of the aesthetics to the architecture, they have decided to put up a new residence that would fit in better with the subdivision and in doing so they are requesting a variation. Ms. Potts said that as the schematics submitted indicate, the need for a reduction in the sideyard requirements is requested based upon the response to the standards,which are on page F of the case file and as follows: 1-a. The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations governing the district in which it is located. Designing the proposed residence to current zoning regulations will greatly detract form the resale value due to the current home location, which limits the front fagade width. 1-b. The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes 5 August 5, 2003 ZBA-MTG.2003-AUG r1ZC_L It is not a typical condition that 95existing residence has an existin ext or side and encroachment. tYP 9 Y Nor is it typical that the existing home's overhangs are nonconforming with the current code compliance's. Therefore, since these unique circumstances are existing, the owners feel they have a special circumstance with which they are trying to work within. • 1-c. The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The proposed variance will not alter the character, but will preserve the character. The variance will keep the placements of the new foundation wall in the existing format; thus not conforming to the established setback which is not currently established. Also the new design will be updated to current subdivision aesthetics rather than the dated residence which currently occupies the lot. 2-a. The particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical conditions of the specific property involved would bring a particular hardship upon the owner as distinguished from mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulation were to be carried out. The owner has resided in the home for years now. They have invested time and funds in landscaping. They have enjoyed the current placement of the home and have gained an accustomed appreciation for the lot. The variance, if granted, would merely allow the owner to keep current building placement rather than to relocate a new home back from the corner further in toward the lot. If anything a variance would keep the surroundings, shape and topographical conditions closer to what they are now. The new residence would blend onto the lot much easier. 2-b. The condition upon which the petition for variation is based would not be applicable generally to the other property within the same zoning classification. This variance is truly a unique circumstance. First, it is a corner lot and has a marked private drive denoting the sideyard a corner sideyard. Also, the reason to rebuild rather than remodel the existing home (which would not force back the wall in question) would greatly enhance the neighborhood value. The present home is severely outdated in style and in need of major remodeling. 2-c. The granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located. Absolutely no change to the community is what they perceive in asking for the variance. They would like to keep the new residence precisely where the current residence is, thus unaffecting any surroundings. 2-d. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property of substantially increase the danger of fire, or otherwise endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Since they propose to keep the current house placement, no endangerment will arise. If anything, since they are proposing to hold the new foundation wall where the existing one is and the new overhangs are two feet, six inches less than on the present home, they are adding to the adequacy of the light supply. 2-e. That the purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon the desire to make more money out of the property. The purpose of the variance is to be allowed to construct a home with a more proportionately aesthetic front facade, not to increase the size of the home. 2-f. That the alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property. The applicant, who is currently residing at the address, is rebuilding their dream home solely for the purpose that they would like to stay in the neighborhood they have grown to love. They simply would like to keep current zoning conditions but improve on the aesthetic quality of their home, not to sell, but to enjoy what they currently have even more. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes August 5, 2003 6 ZBA-MTG.2003-AUG �) •�/i.. She said that it was her ersorl�l o P inion that the scale and P P ro ortion�f the residence necessitates P the client's request for the additional building width; anything less would be in conflict with the desired aesthetic value of the residence. As the residence is currently located on the lot, there is a current nonconforming sideyard. Not only is the current foundation wall encroaching the sideyard setbacks, but the current four-foot overhang encroaches into the existirg sideyard. They are proposing to keep the existing foundation wall location, with the new foundation wall, so the building will stay in the same place, yet they are going to update the look of the home and in doing so will no longer have a four foot overhang, there will be an 18" overhang, which will minimize the current sideyard encroachment. With those elements as well the much needed remodeling to the front fagade, overall granting the variance would definitely be in great favor to the community, neighbors as well as the client. George Kluetsch, Vice President and Architectural Chairman of the Ginger Creek Homeowners Association, said that he has reviewed all the proposed plans for the new residence, and they have no objection to the variance. In fact, they believe the new home will enhance the neighborhood and are totally, in favor of what they have proposed. No one in the audience spoke in opposition to the request. Member Ascher asked if they were aware that the present building was nonconforming. Ms. Potts said that when they started the project, the current setback situation was not an issue, because they had intended to do an extensive remodel. The remodel became so extensive that it was more efficient and cost effective for the Trilla's to scrap the idea of a remodel and to actually tear down the house, because they had planned to put that much money back into the home. At that point, they reviewed what would be better for the client as far as where they would get the most for their money. When you are putting that much money into a remodel, it is sometimes better to retook the project and determined if it is better to put up a new residence. In this particular situation the Trilla's have gone out of their way to hide the garage doors in such a way that there was going to be a porte- cochere area, which you have to drive under to get to the back garages. In doing so it really decreases the size of the home you could have because it takes up so much space on the lot to do something like that. They would have been harming themselves by doing something so wonderful. The Trilla's thought that since they have this current condition and the proposed structure would not cause any further encroachment than it does right now, they have not moved into working drawings because they want to see that this is more doable and want the Village's blessings before they proceed into working drawings. At this point there are a lot of schematics and design work, and have not started working drawings because they would like to proceed in an organized fashion. Member Young questioned whether any work had been started on the property. Ms. Potts responded that nothing has been done and added that the house is in great condition, but it is very outdated. It is probably the most outdated home in the area. In doing this remodel, they will go in the opposite direction and will have one of the nicest front and side elevations in the subdivision. The porte- cochere area can only excite the neighbors because there is nothing worse than having the front doors glaring as they are right now. It will look good not only from the front but also the side since it is a corner lot. Director of Community Development Kallien said that recently the house at 3 Hampton had improvements made prior to approval by the Village. This is not the case with this request. The petitioners are being upfront and have not made any alterations to the structure. The existing house was built many years ago and encroaches in both the west setback as well as the setback along Oak Brook Hills Road. The proposal this evening is really to come closer into compliance than what the existing home is and that should be given some merit. Member Sanford said that it should be noted to the Village Board that the proposal has the support of the homeowners association. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes August 5, 2003 ZBA-MTG.2003-AUG 1 y 6 Acting Chairman Mueller said tha the standards have been addressed !Pdare set forth in the file. Member Sanford moved, seconded by Member Young, that the petitioner has satisfied the standards required by Ordinance to recommend approval of the variation as requested. As part of the testimony, the petitioner testified that the circumstances are unique, the hardsUp was not of their making, will enhance surrounding property values and the encroachment created by the existing house, will be less of an encroachment and will add to the adequacy of light supply. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ayes: 5- Ascher, Sanford, Shah, Young and Mueller Nays: 0 - Absent: 2- Zaheer and Davis Motion Carried. V. WARNER — 26 BAYBROOK LANE VILLAGE CODE — CHAPTER 13-3-6B — ACCESSORY USES— CHAIN-LINK FENCE REGULATIONS Acting Chairman Mueller swore in all parties testifying. Scott Wehrs, represented the petitioner, Ty Warner to request a variance to Section 13-3-4 to install driveway gates on private property with less than one acre of land. The property is located on 26 Baybrook Lane. The gates that they would like to install would provide physical security to the property as well as a measure of safety for the property owner. The design of the gates is to be as unobtrusive as possible. Mr. Wehrs addressed the standards, which are on page F of the case file. 1-b. The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances. There are unique circumstances affecting this owner. The owner is frequently out of town on extended business trips for lengthy periods of time. The owner is single, and no one occupies the residence during these extended trips. There are maintenance and cleaning people at the residence only on an infrequent basis. This owner is also a person of celebrity status. There are articles and websites dedicated to him personally, as well as his company. Collectors seek his signature on his product because his signature can substantially increase an items value. Also, his well-known support of various charities has given him celebrity status. He therefore has good reason to have security and safety concerns. There have been a number of occasions in the past where trespassers have gained access to this property and have attempted to look in the windows. The residence has a security system with both motion sensors and window break sensors, both of which have been triggered in the past by trespassers, causing alarms to be registered with the monitoring company and the police department, The security system does not monitor any activity in the driveway or exterior premises. Therefore, the installation of gates would help limit the frequency of such alarms and offer the owner added security. 1-c. The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The installation of the driveway gates will not impact the essential character of the neighborhood, inasmuch as the gates will be barely visible from the street and adjacent properties. The gates and associated controllers will be installed to be shielded as much as possible from view by existing and new landscaping. In addition, the gates are painted a dark green to further blend into the landscaping. The framework of the gates is as minimalistic as possible. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes August 5, 2003 8 C�. ZBA-MTG.2003-AUG �_L� U• VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK Zoning Board of Appeals STAFF REPORT DATE: July 28, 2003 FILE NOS: 2002-022-VAR DESCRIPTION: Variations to both the side yard along Oak Brook Hills Road and to the interior side yard to accommodate the construction of a new single-family dwelling. PETITIONER: Michael and Tracy Trilla 59 Baybrook Lane Oak Brook, IL 60523 LOCATION: Southeast corner of Baybrook Lane and Oak Brook Hills Road, in the Ginger Creek Subdivision ADDRESS: 59 Baybrook Lane ACREAGE: 34,075 square feet EXISTING ZONING/USE: R-2 Single-Family Detached Residence District. The lot is improved with a single-family home. ZONING/USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY: North: R-2, Single-Family Detached Residence District, single-family homes. South: R-1, Single-Family Detached Residence District, single-family homes. East: R-2, Single-Family Detached Residence District, single-family homes. West: Same. DISCUSSION: Michael and Tracy Trilla have submitted a petition seeking approval of two variations in order to construct a new home. In particular, the encroachment into the 40-foot side yard setback (along a street) would be 7.3 feet and 1.5 feet into the 18-foot west side yard setback (including roof overhang). The existing home would be demolished and replaced with a new single-family home. STAFF REPORT-VARIATION TRILLA-59 BAYBROOK LANE CASE No. 2003-022-VAR The existing home on the lot now encroaches into both side yards; 9.8 feet along Oak Brook Hills Road and approximately 6 feet into the west side yard. These encroachments include the roof overhang. Please see the materials provided by the petitioners in the case file for a more detailed description of this request. RESPONSIBILITIES OF HEARING BODIES: Zoning Board of Appeals has the responsibility to hold the required public hearing on the variation request and make a recommendation. Please include in your consideration, your findings with respect to the standards specified in the Zoning Ordinance for a variation. The materials submitted by the applicant specifically address these standards. CONCLUSION: Based on the information provided by Staff, if it is the opinion of the Zoning Board of Appeals that the applicant has satisfied the applicable Ordinance requirements and factors for a variation, a recommendation would be in order to approve this request. The following conditions might be appropriate for inclusion in a recommendation: 1. The development shall be in substantial conformance with the plans as submitted. 2. Also, the Zoning Board of Appeals is authorized to recommend additional conditions as they see fit. Respectfully Submitted, Robert L. Kallien Jr., AjV Director of Community Development 2 CERTIFICATE OF PUBLICATION Paddock Publications, Inc. Daily Herald Corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Illinois, DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that it is the publisher of the DAILY HERALD. That said DAILY HERALD is a secular newspaper and has been circulated daily in the Village(s) of Addison, Bloomingdale, Carol Stream, Glendale Heights, Glen Ellyn, Itasca, Keeneyville, Lisle, Lombard, Medinah, Naperville, Oak Brook, Oakbrook Terrace, Roselle, Villa Park, Warrenville, Wayne, West Chicago, Wheaton, Winfield, Wood Dale County(ies) of DuPage and State of Illinois, continuously for more than one year prior to the date of the first publication of the notice hereinafter referred to and is of general circulation throughout said Village(s), County(ies) and State. I further certify that the DAILY HERALD is a newspaper as defined in "an Act to revise the law in relation to notices" as amended in 1992 Illinois Compiled Statutes, Chapter 715, Act 5, Section 1 and 5. That a notice of which the annexed printed slip is a true copy, was published July 18, 2003 in said DAILY HERALD. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, the said PADDOCK PUBLICATIONS, Inc., has caused this certificate to be signed by, this authorized agent, at Arlington Heights, Illinois. Public Hearing jt NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing before the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Oak Brook, DuPageand Cook Counties,I I..nois,wilt be held on August 5, j 2003-at 7:30 p.m.ih the Oak Brook Village Hall,1200 Oak th Brook Road,OakBraok,Ill inois60523 for the purpose ofcan- le sidering the application ofM-chaelandT racyTrillo,59'Boy urtle�l3 Sation1;I f hO ndnceodh L nddeTi 3 "oteZgOrian + PADDOCK PUBLICATIONS, INC. •e Village of Oak Brook,Illinois,Ordinance G-60 as amended. -3 The property Brook,may nols 60523,with described ae BaYbroas DAILY HERALD NEWSPAPERS '3'. Lane,.Oak Brty m ylnois 60eraily Yhe legal d C, 5 description as� n follows: Lot 11 In Ginger.Creek,beingasubdWision of partsof sections 27 and28,TOW nship 39 North,Range 11,East of the - Third Principal Meridian,According to the Plat thereof re- corded Decerp r 30r 1960 as Document 992057,in DuPage County,Illinois:Permanent Index Number:06-28-402.004 The petitioner is seeking approval of a variation to Section 13.66-3F-2 the required side Yard setback and to the re 1- quired side Yard abutting a Street to permit the:construction of a new residence on the Property. BY / All persons desiring to be heard will be afforded an oppor- .. tunny to doso and may.submit their statements orally or in A writing or both.The hearing may be recessed to another Autho` d Agent date if notice of time and place thereof.is publicly announced at the hearing or Is given by newspaper publication not less than'five(5)days prior to the date of the.recessed•hear- ing. In accord with the provisions of'the American with Diso- bilities Act,anY individual who is in need of a reasonable ac- commodation in order to.participate in or.benefit from at- tendance this public meeting should contact Richard Boehm,the Village's ADA Coordinator,at 630-990-3000 as Control # T3080999 soon as possible before the meeting date. The petitioner's application is on file with the Village Clerk and with the Director of Community I Development. Persons wishing to examine the petition documents may ar- range to do so with the Director.of Community Develop ment,Robert Kallien,Village of Oak Brook,1200 Oak Brook Road,Oak Brook,I L 60523,telephone 630.990.3045. Linda Gonnel to Village Clerk Published at the direction of the Corporate Authorities and the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Oak:Brook, uPage and Cook Counties,Illinois. Published in the Daily Herald July 18,2003.(3061,133)S �PGE OF 0.4,e /\ o O 'e A O 4J G O'% A \\cFOOUNiV •� ? , Village of Oak Brook July 16,2003 1200 Oak Brook Road Oak Brook,IL 60523-2255 Website Dear Resident: vv w.oak-brook.org Administration The Zoning Board of Appeals and the Village Board will be considering a Variation at the 630.990.3000 meetings as scheduled on the reverse side of this notice. FAX 630.990.0876 The application has been filed by: Michael and Tracy Trilla Community 59 Baybrook Lane Development Oak Brook,IL 60523 630.990.3045 FAX 630.990.3985 The property in question is located at: 59 Baybrook Lane Engineering Department Relationship of applicant to property: Owner 630.990.3010 FAX 630.990.3985 Subdivision: Ginger Creek Fire Department Also shown on the reverse side of this notice is a map*of the area to assist you in determining 630.990.3040 FAX 630.990.2392 your relationship to the property in question. Police Department The request that has been made is as follows: 030.990 2358 FAX 630.990.7484 The petitioner is seeking approval of a variation to the required side yard setback and the side yard setback abutting a street to permit the construction of Public Works a new residence on the property. The current legal nonconforming structure Department will be demolished,if approval is granted. 630.990.3044 FAX 630.472.0223 If you desire more detailed information, please contact the Community Development Oak Brook Department at 630-990-3045 to review the file on this application. I look forward to your Public Library attendance at the public meetings. 600 Oak Brook Road Sincerely, Oak Brook, IL 60523-2200 630.990.2222 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FAX 630.990.4509 Oak Brook Sports Core w Bath&Tennis Club Robert L. Kallien,Jr 700 Oak Brook Road Director Oak Brook,IL 60523-4600 630.990.3020 FAX 630.990.1002 RLK/gp Golf Club 2606 York Road Oak Brook,IL 60523-4602 630.990.3032 FAX 630.990.0245 Trilla-59 Baybrook-VAR.res Itr.doc A In accord with the provisions of the American with Disabilities Act, any individual who is in need of a reasonable accommodation in order to participate in or benefit from attendance at the public meeting should contact Richard Boehm, the Village's ADA Coordinator, at 630-990-3000 as soon as possible before the meeting date. All meetings are held in the Samuel E. Dean Board Room of the Oak Brook Village Hall, 1200 Oak Brook Road, (31st Street),Oak Brook, Illinois. Zoning Board Of Appeals................................................. 7:30 P.M., Tuesday, August 5,2003 Board Of Trustees Meeting..........................................7:30 P.M.,Tuesday,August 26,2003** ** Tentative 222 28ob 1707 / G Z►I 1 8 4 12 t0 9 G 2609 _ 6 o cool 2905 % G/ 10 8 y Z 19 17 IS 11 9 7 3 1 0 2901 ��. 3003 Gas 8 G 6 12 y` 7 6 22 r ' ., 3121 1O a J 11 14 0 2 3 73i ¢ 30 !2 w 14 IZ 2O '17 16 JC Z1 A{ $ G D6, 3 31 ,29 27 25 23 34 32 3o uA 1 c K 4 36 12 4 37 33 31 $ r1E y --- � er�rud!fTlo 8 6 4 42 W 1 e / a 6�.=- /, 4 to NF 7'E w�G Y 2710 b 431 9 44 43 ar�rioe 12 12 - c 2800 14 IG 46 45' ( 14 411 41 o 4s _ o P17 2805 74 So • 49 = 2809 ' G4 G1�,j L sa 52 51 � \O 1813 7a 73 71 �'z 2824�2b O 2$IS go j 7S 69 L7 / GS G3 G1 VO �``$J�� g 2820 2904 0— 84 8z 7 OG V �-1-0or 2900 2403 2906 `P O =914 r c ! 87 85 83 81 ---- 2910 I 129 t�— � ' 29t0� W 2925 2914 1 2915 _29K i 1 2917 .. I / ' ' W 3001 y 2.924 I 3000 2921 2913 ? 3000 Boos 30 /3006 G I 3005 03 I3oo1 3ooc ,> 30°9 9008 9010 I cols J oii 1 I i I Soto So21 2 2810 2712 27p0 I u 2lDI OAK BROOK ROAD 3 jZO4 °° M� _ I *Note: The map provided is only an approximation of the area in question and is intended to be used only as a visual aid to determine your relationship to the property. Trilla-59 Baybrook-VAR.res Itr.doc r P�0 OF OAK • • � X90 VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK AO Village Board Transmittal Memorandum e co ,� , UN? DATE: July 15, 2003 SUBJECT: Referral—Trilla-59 Baybrook Lane Variations—Section 13-6B-3F-2 to Permit the Construction of a New Home FROM: Robert Kallien, Director of Community Development /�v We have received an application from Michael and Tracy Trilla, requesting approval of two variations (both side yards) to permit the construction of a new home at 59 Baybrook Lane. Please refer this request to the Zoning Board of Appeals for public hearing on August 5, 2003. rlk BOT-Referral-Trilla-VAR-2003.doc //�/ 13-6B-1: PERMITTED USES: Permitted uses shall be those as in the Rl Single-Family Detached Residence District. (Ord. G-60, 3-22-1966) 13-6B-2: SPECIAL USES: Special uses shall be those as in the Rl Single-Family Detached Residence District. (Ord. G-608, 3-10-1998) 13-6B-3: LOT AREA REQUIREMENTS: A. Lot Area: No less than one acre, except as otherwise required in this Title for a specific use. B. Lot Width: Not less than one hundred fifty feet(150')within the buildable area. C. Floor Area Ratio: Not to exceed 0.4 for nonresidential use. D. Structure Height: 1. Residential Uses: Not more than thirty feet(30') and not more than two and one-half(2 1/2) stories, except that structure height may be increased to not more than forty feet (40') and not more than two and one-half(2 1/2) stories provided that: a. Lot area is not less than one acre; b. The roof slope of the portion of the structure having structure height in excess of thirty feet(30') is a minimum of five inches (5") of vertical rise for every twelve inches (12") of horizontal run or steeper; c. The portion of the structure having structure height in excess of thirty feet(30') is located not closer to any interior side lot line than the side yard required pursuant to subsection F of this Section plus one and one-half feet(1 1/2') for each one foot(1') of structure height over thirty feet (30'); d. In order to evaluate compliance with the increased height provision, a dimensioned front elevation plan shall be drawn and submitted by an architect. The front evaluation plan shall show the ordinance setbacks and heights permitted and indicate setbacks and heights proposed; and e. A document is recorded with the DuPage County Recorder indicating that this J. extraordinary structure height provision has been applied. 2. Institutional And Other Nonresidential Uses: Not more than forty five feet(45'). E. Ground Floor Area Per Dwelling: 1. One Story Without Basement: Not less than one thousand eight hundred (1,800) square feet. 2. One Story With Basement: Not less than one thousand six hundred (1,600) square feet. 3. Dwellings Having More Than One Story: Not less than one thousand two hundred fifty (1,250) square feet. F. Yards: Except as required under permitted accessory uses and structures in subsections 13-6A-1B and D of this Chapter, yards shall be provided as follows: 1. Front: Not less than forty feet (40') in depth. 2. Side: Not less than eighteen feet(18') in depth, except: a) a side yard abutting a street shall q3�0 not be less than forty feet(40') in depth; and b) for nonresidential uses each side yard abutting a street shall be not less than fifty feet (50') in depth and each interior side yard shall be not less than thirty feet (30') in depth and increased by not less than two feet(2) for each one foot(1') of structure height over thirty feet(30'). 3. Rear: Not less than sixty feet(60') in depth. (Ord. G-60, 3-22-1966; Ord. G-328, 8-24-1982; Ord. G-616, 8-11-1998) i I 13-14-5 • 13-14-6 on notice to the officer from whom the appeal is taken, and on due cause being shown. C. Processing: 1. An appeal shall be filed with the Village Clerk. The Village Clerk shall forward the appeal to the Zoning Board of Appeals for processing in accordance with the Illinois Compiled Statutes. 2. The Zoning Board of Appeals shall fix a reasonable time for the hearing of the appeal and give due notice thereof to parties and shall decide the appeal within reasonable time. The Board may reverse or affirm, wholly or partly, or may modify the order, requirement or decision or determination as in its opinion ought to be made on the premises and to that end has all the powers of the official from whom the appeal is taken. D. Decisions: All decisions, after hearing of the Zoning Board of Appeals on appeals from an administrative order, requirement, decision or determination of the Director of Community Development or other authorized official of the Village, shall, in all instances, be final administrative determinations and shall be subject to judicial review only in accordance with applicable statutes of the State. (Ord. G-60, 3-22-1966) 13-14-6: VARIATIONS: VARIATIONS A. u ority: The Board of Trustees shall decide all applications for variations of the provisions of this Title after a public hearing held before the Zoning Board of Appeals on such notice as shall be required by the Illinois Compiled Statutes. The Zoning Board of Appeals shall hold public hearings upon all applications for variations and shall report its recommendations to the Board of Trustees as to whether a requested variation would be in harmony with its general purpose and intent, and shall recommend a variation only where it shall have made findings of fact specifying the reason or reasons for recommending the variations. Such findings shall be based upon the standards prescribed in subsection D of this Section. No variation shall be granted by the Board of Trustees without such findings of fact. In the case of a variation where the Zoning Board of Appeals fails to recommend the variation, it can only be adopted by ordinance with the favorable vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the Trustees. Village of Oak Brook �p 13-14-6 • • 13-14-6 B. Initiation: An application for a variation shall be in triplicate and may be made by any governmental office, department, board, bureau or commission, or by any person having a freehold interest, a possessory interest entitled to exclusive possession, a contractual interest which may become a freehold interest, or any exclusive possessory interest applicable to the land, or land and improvements described in the application for a variation. C. Processing: An application for a variation shall be filed with the Village Clerk who shall forward one copy of such application to the Zoning Board of Appeals for processing in accordance with applicable statutes of the State and one copy to the Board of Trustees. D. Standards: 1. The Zoning Board of Appeals shall not recommend a variation of the provisions of this Title as authorized in this Section unless it shall have made findings of fact based upon the evidence presented to it on the following specific issues that: a. The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations governing the district in which it is located. b. The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances. c. The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. 2. For the purpose of supplementing the above standards, the Zoning Board of Appeals, in making the determination whether there are practical difficulties or particular hardships, shall also take into consideration the extent to which the following facts, favorable to the applicant, have been established by the evidence that: a. The particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of the specific property involved would bring a particular hardship upon the owner as distinguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulation were to be carried out. b. The condition upon which the petition for variation is based would not be applicable generally to the other property within the same zoning classification. Village of Oak Brook s 13-14-6 • 13-14-7 c. The granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located. d. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the danger of fire, or otherwise endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. e. That the purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a desire to make more money out of the property. f. That the alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property. 3. The Zoning Board of Appeals may recommend and the Board of Trustees may require such conditions and restrictions upon the premises benefitted by a variation as may be necessary to comply with the standards set forth in this Section to reduce or minimize the injurious effect of such variation upon other property in the neighborhood, and to implement the general purpose and intent of this Title. E. Unauthorized Variations: The variation procedure shall in no case be used to accomplish a result which could otherwise be achieved by a rezoning of the property involved, such as, but not limited to, establishment or expansion of a use not permitted in a residence district; authorizing the construction of residences in other than residence districts; nor authorizing other than single-family detached residences in the R1, R2, R3 and R4 Districts. F. Reapplications: Any person having been denied a variation to the provisions of this Title respecting a specific parcel of property may not reapply for a like variation on said real property until the period of one year has elapsed since the denial of the application for variation by the Village President and Board of Trustees. (Ord. G-60, 3-22-1966; Ord. G-137, 9-14-1971) 13-14-7: PLAN COMMISSION JURISDICTION`: The Plan Commis- sion of the Village, which has been duly established with 1. See Title 2, Chapter 1 of this Code for the Planning Commission. Village of Oak Brook * s OF Oq� VILLAGE of OAK BROOK 200 OAK BROOK`ROAD OAK BROOK,_IL .60523 °9�eR0 OK�� 630=990-3045 PETITION APPLICATION for PUBLIC HEARING ZONING ORDINANCE: ❑ APPEAL ($300) ,VARIATION ($750) ❑ AMENDMENT ($750) ❑ SPECIAL USE ($750) STORMWATER ORDINANCE: ❑ SPECIAL USE ($675) APPLICANT TO COMPLETE :NOTE: ALL APPLICATIONS ARETO BE,RECEIVED BY,THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND AFTER AWNITIAL REVIEW.WILL.BE FILED WITH THE VILLAGE CLERK. LOCATION OF ,mil SUBJECT PROPERTI� Cl r� PERMANENT PARCEL NO*. - - L07 NO. SUBDIVISION LEGAL ADDRESS*,� ... ZONING DISTRICT Zol�l>. ORDINANCE SECTION 3— — — AC71ON REQUESTED &t ,( � / PROPERTY INTEREST OF APPLICANT: OWNER_ CONTRACT PURCHASER AGENT OVVNER(S) OF RECORD f'I I PHONE( �D� AD DRESS .—) U7 �L 7 CITY LILL he )e STATE:/- ZI 3 BENEFICIARY(IES)OF TRb PHONE ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP NAME OF APPLICANT(and Billing Information) -� ADDRESS C CITY �C) STATEN ZIf2�� __ I (we)certify that all of the a ove statements and the statements contained in any papers or plan submitted herewith are true to the best of my (our)knowledge and belief. In addition to the above fees, applicant agrees to reimburse the Village for publicati ,costs within 30 days of billing. 7 Signatureof Applicant........................................................................._............._Date............................... ................_......._`.' J...... to a oY plicant Date DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE—FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Date Filed Fee Paid$ Receipt No 'g/Ss/a- Received By '� "/ � "Lprvv>E(C_ Board of Trustees(Referral) ! 03 Notice Published �� Newspaper Daily Herald Adj.'Property Owners!Notified PUBLIC HEARING DATES: Plan Commission A/ 1A Zoning Board of Appeals Board of Trustees 8///d-(o/0 3 Board of Trustees 1/f/c (Approval of Ordinance) SIGNED-VILLAGE CLERK o. w _ Date 6C-403 APP-RESIDENTIAL VARIATION 5-2003 5 .l"r4—1ft;—la5 1L :3$ PM 6F0F®E-6F6 P. 02 NAMES OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS Following are the names and addresses of all surrounding property owners from the property in question for a distance of approximately 250 feet in all directions. The number of feet occupied by all public roads, streets,alleys, and public ways have been excluded in computing the 250-foot requirement. Said names are as recorded In the office of the County Recorder of Deeds(or the Registrar of Titles of the County)and as they appear from the authentic tax records of this County within 30 days of the filing of this application. Provide a mailing label for each Property Owner listed. Note: The people on this list will be notified by mail with the information about your request and the meeting schedule, NAME OF PROPERTY OWNER ADDREss OF PROPERTY AI)DRESs G? 0 5. I I Ak f�7 LA kt? -� l hai--)k� kA Den (Attach additional sheets if necessary) `See Item#2.3 of Submittal Documents Guideline APP-RESIDENTIAL VARIATION 5.2003 & 6 t7 IdMICHAEL F. TRILLA �2-7060-2710 ^1468 _ ! TRACY A. TRILLA rJ� b 59 BAYBROOK I.N. (/ r OAK BROOK, IL 6 23 20C 5 Pa T % �� t t The A der Of I P f � Dollars t CITIBANK, F.S.B. �I 1900 SPRING ROAD t OAK BROOK,IL 606 1: 2 7 10 7080 1 :02105633 z a✓ _ CHECK S CHECKS $ CASH INV 7f DATE i NUMBER NAME G.L.ACCOUNT p DESCRIPTION VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK INVALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE P ' •` �, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT B 15 512 1200 OAK BROOK ROAD OAK BROOK, ILLINOIS u PHONE: (630)990-3045 7 RETAIN THIS RECEIPT FOR YOUR RECORDS • -ro nc :nr rc rt �� 9< 0< 04 0 900000000009 P. 02 Subject Property Verification (Complete a-separate form for each FIN.) I i. Permanent Index Number(P.I.N. from Real Estate Tax Bill): 2, Common Address: i-� �itCir -�- I ..- 3. Type the Complete Legal Description Below. (Attach q separate page if longer than the area provided) LOT 118 IN GINGER CREEK, BEING A SUBDIVISION OF PARTS OF -=IONS 27 AND 28, TOWNSHIP 39 NORTH, RANGE 11, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL =DIAN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED DECaflM 30, 1960 AS DGCU= 992057, IN DUPAGE COUNTY, ILLINOIS. The Permanent index Number,.Co.mmon Address and Legal information provided has been verified as follows: DuPage County Records/Research Room: (630-682-7398) Contact Person: IZ-AO14 Date called:- DuPage County Recorder's Office: (630-682-7200) Contact Person: Date caned: -- DuPage County Clerk's Office-Revenue Department: (630-530-3376) Contact Person: _--' �M 6 Date called: 7—&-1'7-2:t I verify that h Info rti on provided above Is accurate. Printed Name. `` nat e Date: _ " I--�� Relationship to Applioant: � I — APPRESI UMn ION 3.2003 7 b4 T `6. JB ARCHITECTURE GROUP, INC. 1754 N.WASHINGTON 5T. NAPERVILLE. ILLINOIS 60563 630/505-9528 • FAx:630/505-8980 E-MAIL:JBARCHCAMERJTECH.NET Sideyard Variance Information For Trills Residence 59 Baybrook Lane Oakbrook,Illinois As the schematics indicate,the need for a reduction in sideyard requirements is requested for several reasons: 1. The buildable width of this corner lot,once the 40'-0" corner and the 18'-0" interior sideyards are deducted,presents difficulties in trying to achieve a desired front facade design which is proportionally scaled to the size and quality of the residence. 2. Due to the size of the residence,there is a proportional need for the width proposed. Narrower room sizes in a residence of this size will compromise and adversely affect livability and future marketability. 3. Redesigning the residence to adhere to such sideyard requirements would require greater depth of the structure,requiring additional building height due to increasing roof depth, which cannot be done without further compromising the integrity of the design. 4. Granting such sideyard variance as requested with not adversely affect the surrounding properties. Similar encroachments already exist on this property. The existing residence currently encroaches the sideyard requirements on both sides. In fact, in relation to the existing foundation and eave overhang encroachments, we are proposing less area of encroachment on both sides due to the reduction of proposed building footprint and eave overhang. The neighborhood streetscape will remain similar; in fact,more desirable and more in keeping with what other current projects are doing in this neighborhood. It is my professional opinion that the scale and proportion of this residence necessitates our client's request for the additional building width; anything less would be in conflict with the desired aesthetic v ue of the residence. - �p 4 01.011817, �Of � ,k I ATHAN A. AIA Jonathan A. Bieritz, RITZ President A ORA, IL i JB Architecture Group Inc. '14 G,, '••,,,,,,R � et jB ARCHITECTURE GROUP, :INC. 1754 N.WASHINGTON 5T. NAPI.RVILLC. ILUNOIs 60563 630/505-9528 - IAx:630/505-8980 E-MAIL)BARCH @AMERITECH.NET Sideyard Variance Information For Trilla Residence 59 Baybrook Lane Oakbrook,Illinois As the schematics indicate,the need for a reduction in sideyard requirements is requested based in the following answers below. The following addresses Section(D) standards: (1)(a) "The property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations governing the district in which it is located:"Designing the proposed residence to current zoning regulations will greatly detract from the resale value due to the current home location which limits front facade width. (1)(b) "The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances:" It is not a typical condition that an existing residence has an existing exterior sideyard encroachment. Nor is it typical that the existing home's overhangs are not conforming with the current code compliances. Therefore, since these unique circumstances are existing, the owners feel they have a special circumstance with which they are trying to work within. (1)(c)"The variation, if granted,will not alter the essential character of the locality:"The proposed variance will not alter the character but will preserve the character. The variance will keep the placements of the new foundation wall in the existing format;thus, not conforming to the established setback which is not currently established. Also the new design will be updated to current subdivision aesthetics rather than the dated residence which currently occupies the lot. (2)(a) "The particular physical surrounding, shape, or topographical conditions of the specific property involved would bring a particular hardship upon the owner as distinguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulations were to be carried out:"The owner has resided in this home for years now. They have invested time and funds in landscaping. They have enjoyed the current placement of the home and have gained an accustomed appreciation.for the lot. The variance, if granted, would merely allow the owner to keep CURRENT building placement rather than to relocate a new home back from the corner further in toward the lot. If anything a variance would keep the surroundings, shape, and topographical conditions closer to they are now. The new residence would blend onto the lot much easier. (2)(b) "The condition upon which the petition for variation is based would not be applicable generally to the other property within the same zoning classification:" This variance is truly a unique circumstance. First, it is a corner lot and has a marked private drive denoting the sideyard a comer sideyard. Also, the reason to rebuild rather than remodel the existing home (which.would not force back the wall in question) would greatly enhance the neighborhood value. The present home is severely outdated in style and in need of major remodeling. (2)(c) "The granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located:"Absolutely no change to the community is what we are perceiving in asking for the variance. We would like to keep the new residence precisely where the current residence is, thus unaffecting any surroundings. (2)(d) "The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the danger of fire, or otherwise endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood:" Since we propose to keep the current house placement, no endangerment will arise. If anything, since we are proposing to hold the new foundation wall where the existing one is and the new overhangs are two feet, six inches less than on the present home, we are adding to the adequacy of the light supply. (2)(e) "That the purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a desire to make more money out of the property:" The purpose of the variance is to be allowed to construct a home with a more proportionately aesthetic front fagade, not to increase the size of the home. (2)(f) "That the alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property:" The client who is currently residing at the address is rebuilding their dream home solely for the purpose that they would like to stay in the neighborhood that they have grown to love. They simply would like to keep current zoning conditions but improve on the aesthetic quality of their home—not to sell —but to enjoy what they currently have even more. It is my professional opinion that the scale and proportion of this residence necessitates our client's request for the additional building width; anything less would be in conflict With the desired aesthetic value of the residence. _ - OF ILA ti %�Q'oai 011817• 01�� Jonathan A. Bieritz, .= JONATHAN A. 10 President BIERITZ *0 AURORA, IL.:0 JB Architecture Group Inc. 94`6G',•'•.,••••••.� �•� ■ ■ es"® a n "l® Survey"ing fi 108 Lee Lane Bolingbrook M 60440 ]PH (630) 759-0205 FAX (630) 759-9291 PLAT OF SURVEY LOT 118 IN GINGER CREEK, BEING A 5UBDIVISIQV OF PARTS OF SECTICKS 27 AND 28, TOWNSHIP 39 NORTH, RANGE 11, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THERFxi RECORDED DECOTER 30, 1960 AS Dom' 992057, IN DUP COUNTY, ILZ.INOIS. AW I ` 8 t �t ,q. 1� N . r i R esi 108 Lee Lane Bolingbrook IL 60440 PH (630) 759-0205 rx (630) 759-9291 FLAT OF SURVEY LOT 118 IN GINGER CREzK, BEING A SUBDIVISICU OF PARTS OF SBCTICKS 27 AND 28, TOWNSHIP 39 NORTH, RANGE 11, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE PLATT RECORDED D BER 30, 1960 AS DOCUmAT 992057, IN Df= COUNTY, ILLINOIS. i>/A--fry. ' J-- r i -7,�i Asa, -ro o r^' � I a• nn81 ' , C� �O �� I X121• G .� � r,, sue, `� �• .• 1 ----_-__ k. x Lij p• :'.� � ;' 1. " ,: � :,y �^' „+," 'r t. f , L 1 1 t h - i r ti FY i i i r y ATIMM DESIGN&DEVELOPMUNT . 6,NDFJ1ai1+V�011h! FALMSFACHWN N6.Fl310e'. ilFF�E/FJIK367. �ar1: MMt MDl1RE eF7.61E.77{IF MTE_IEMBIENB SoYE A Cove (e-1) li 2Ac� i I Li k, i I�X 12¢ L-j` �+ — — 1s !W l - 1 (L�cic �ode fm- I 32 � ., I t. ! Y •I t Y sly t q3 X!S - 1 F C6u TL--T rr " I y7_xz� N witI i I fis I I�� r/, '�t, r .. . . �;•� P., � -i 1.1 Y 1�" i 1. , - h,l-'V+ _ -r -.i-. ... - __ _.-_._ —' –'- 002 C'L/ktil . 14 Coo t� 4' : .. r S pct-4Ce -UtTe TRILLA RESIDENCE _... _.. ATI I NE .OPMEN'I' � ''•':' DF$I(1N 8c DEVET SMB FI.GLE lAl(r Ulilx FI1lM IfFACM GARDE, Yl OFFICE F FAX 581]98.5461 cm�:l el�ere@'WIMOW:.na1 MOBILE 651596-TlOB ..�I1 9 •1��0 j;-' 17 0�•.3�._SUIE I ` I r wA 1 ,, is ;• 2CoX +361 i. SIT7F (. h � _... :,.. � � •p ELI , V , hJ I } �{I' '3' J ICY Wit i y I d; 1• + i , - ' r. , 1. � ! � , ' _ ,� r1 l . 1 r i' �. !j I f r � Y I 7 f .:,c7 :-/•4= { Y i. - : I TRILLA RESIDENCE WIL - — •X11 c. _ — -- ATII147Nb D)VSI c,N�vz Dr4,VRWPMHNT './MLAGLF LAKE DRM PALMWF HpNtp:Nb FL3 11` OFFICE/FM581.799.5291 a m:'.1'n;nenr fiAaNOUA�,�ne1��, M�m W;W6.17UP • ��LLL M1F.i�rrFMSwNS�g'S-_:�'"�oS•�L.Y—"y_•Etr�t-3_scnl 1