Zoning Board of Appeals
Regular MeetingArlington Heights, IL · August 11, 2025
Minutes
APPROVED
ZONING BOARD
REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF A MEETING
BEFORE THE VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
OF APPEALS
RE: 1015 NORTH FORREST AVENUE - ZBA #25-023
REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS had before the Village of
Arlington Heights Zoning Board of Appeals taken at the Arlington Heights
Village Hall, 33 South Arlington Heights Road, 1st Floor, Buechner Room,
Arlington Heights, Illinois on the 11th day of August, 2025 at the hour of
7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
BENJAMIN JAFFE, Chairperson
TOM DRAKE
JEFFREY LANAGHAN
FRANK PORTERA
ALSO PRESENT:
DAN OSOBA, Planner I
DARKO BOJIN, Assistant Planner
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
APPROVED
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: All right, so I'd like to call to order the Zoning Board of
Appeals meeting for Monday, August 11th, 2025 and do roll call.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Portera.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Here.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Selbka.
(No response.)
MR. OSOBA: Mr. O'Connor.
(No response.)
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Lanaghan.
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Siavelis.
(No response.)
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Drake.
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: Here.
MR. OSOBA: Chair Jaffe.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Here.
Here for the Zoning meeting?
AUDIENCE MEMBER: No, Committee of the Whole.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Second floor?
MR. OSOBA: Third floor.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Third floor.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Thanks.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: All right, let's proceed with the Pledge of Allegiance.
Everyone face the flag in the rear of the room.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: All right, next we need to approve the minutes from last
month's meeting.
Has everyone had an opportunity to review the minutes and did they find
any errors?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: I was not there, I'll abstain.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Got it.
All right, nothing being called out, is there a motion to approve the minutes?
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Second.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: All in favor?
(Chorus of ayes.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, next, I'm going to go over the hearing procedures
for the audience.
So, first, quorum in voting. If less than six members are present, option the
petitioners to continue meeting. It takes four affirmative votes to approve a variance regardless of
the number of Board members in attendance. If denied a petitioner cannot reapply for a whole
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
APPROVED 3
year. So, folks, tonight you've got to go four for four; otherwise, you can petition for a
continuance.
The variation hardship. So, the forms that you all filled out have been
submitted in packets to this Board that has reviewed them. But you're effectively asking for an
exception, so we want to understand your logic and reasoning and justification. So, you're going
to have to explain four elements necessary for this Board to be able to grant that variation:
1. That the proposed use will not alter the essential character of the locality and be
compatible with the existing uses and zoning of nearby property;
2. That the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances which may include the length
of time the subject property has been vacant as zoned;
3. That the proposed variation is in harmony with the spirit and intent of this Chapter; and
4. That the variation requested is the minimum variation necessary to allow reasonable use
of the property.
A variation shall be permitted only if the evidence, in the judgment of the
Board of Appeals, sustains each of the four conditions enumerated. So, again, we've read them,
but our expectation is that you walk us through your logic and reasoning and justification.
The Chairperson will open the agenda item and provide introductory
remarks; it then will be followed by a Staff presentation which is a brief overview of the project
and the variance request. The applicant will then have the opportunity to present its case in favor
of zoning relief by way of documents or testimony. The applicants and any witnesses testifying
must be sworn under oath and must state and spell their respective names for the record.
Public comment. Members of the public may speak on the application.
Speakers must be sworn under oath and state and spell their name clearly. Anyone who has
formally registered in advance of the hearing as an objector shall be permitted to speak first.
We do not have any formal objectors tonight?
MR. OSOBA: No.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, so then I'll just skip to the end. Public comment,
you can all see on the agenda there is public comment. So, if you speak on petitions, we ask that
you speak to that petition. If you have general commentary about the Village or anything else for
that matter, there is a separate time in the agenda at the end of the meeting for you to do that.
Once the applicant has made their closing statement, they can present any
follow-up testimony or evidence. The Board will then deliberate and make a motion to close
public testimony. We will deliberate and vote on the matter. All ZBA final decisions must be in
writing. If the agenda packet does not include a draft final order that is acceptable to the ZBA, the
substantive motion should be to direct Staff to prepare an appropriate final order for approval at a
subsequent meeting.
With that, we'll proceed directly to new business, which is Agenda Item A.
1015 North Forrest Avenue, ZBA Case #25-023.
Is the Petitioner present?
MR. PEART: All right, good morning, everyone.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: State your name and address for the record.
MR. PEART: Yes. Jordan Peart, 1015 North Forrest Avenue.
(Witness sworn.)
MR. OSOBA: The subject property, 1015 North Forrest Avenue, is zoned R-3
Residential Single-Family District. The Petitioner is proposing to allow a gravel driveway to the
rear of the home. A new home is currently under construction on the site and the gravel drive will
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
APPROVED 4
connect the rear garage and provide required access to North Forrest Avenue. Driveways are
required to be constructed of asphalt or concrete. Green infrastructure applications may be
utilized in lieu of concrete or asphalt surfaces but are subject to Village Engineer approval.
Therefore, the Petitioner is requesting the following variation:
• A variation from Chapter 28, Section 10.2-11(1)(a) to allow gravel driveway surface where
concrete or asphalt is required.
MR. PEART: So, we are here today to really ask for a variance to offer a more
environmentally friendly and backyard friendly approach to connecting the detached and attached
part of our garages. So, given our rear detached garage is going to see very limited vehicle use,
it's really primarily going to be used for access for a golf cart and some outdoor equipment. So,
there will be no daily parking or pass through traffic in that rear backyard.
We feel a full asphalt or concrete solution would be unnecessary from an
impervious surface perspective. It will kind of disrupt our backyard and the green space that
we're hoping for. There's potential increase for water runoff. So, really, our proposed option, I
know we submitted a variance to have gravel, that was just because we knew there was code to
have either asphalt or concrete.
We do have two solutions. Our main one, which is preferred, is to keep that
area between the two garages as grass. So, this provides required access while still maintaining
green space and maximizing infiltration, water absorption. We've also spoken to our neighbor
who has kindly joined us as well, and he's in support of the variance and would be open to the
green area as well.
So, that is our --
(Audience member spoke out.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Sir, you're out of order. We'll wait, thank you.
MR. PEART: Okay, so if the Board feels that a permanent surface is necessary,
we are prepared to work with the Village and the engineer. I know they mentioned in the notes a
green infrastructure surface, so we would definitely like to work with you if our first approach or
preferred option is not doable. You know, in all cases, you know, we're really trying to seek
balance between the functional requirement of having that detached garage and access, you
know, the Village's stormwater objectives, and also just preserve the character of our backyard.
So, thank you.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: So, on the green, what's the term?
MR. PEART: Green infrastructure.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: I know Dan, you and I exchanged notes about this. So,
sir, you said one of your options would be just leaving it as grass?
MR. PEART: Correct, no connection point between the attached garage and the
detached.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: So, if they were to apply for this, Engineering would still
have some discretion over what they would approve? It could be grass, it could be permeable
pavers, it could be a number of different materials, correct?
MR. OSOBA: Green infrastructure would require some level of service. Just
having grass surface would be a separate variation request to a separate section because
access is required to all driveways, or all garages, excuse me, and that driveway surface has to
be a type of green infrastructure application, concrete or asphalt. That green infrastructure is
relatively open but that can be up to the interpretation of the Village engineer in terms of what
type it is. But it would not be, under the current variation request, just grass. It would have to be
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
APPROVED 5
a separate request.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: So, you don't want to do asphalt or concrete. If gravel
and grass doesn't work, what else are you open to?
MR. PEART: So, we're open to either, ideally the grass, if that's a no go, we're
open to whatever the engineer's comments around green infrastructure, whether that's geo-
textiles, permeable pavers or whatnot, whatever would work. That was the first time I'm hearing
that term.
So, we've come up with a solution. We just are trying to avoid having, you
know, impervious, solid asphalt or concrete driveway just because there's not going to be traffic,
we think it's disrupting our backyard, right? So, we're not intending to send cars back there to and
from. So, really a golf cart which, you know, I don't think maybe an asphalt or concrete makes
sense.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Other questions?
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: So, the obvious one to me is then do you need to
keep that rear garage? You said you're putting a golf cart back there. It seems like you're
building a brand new house, correct?
MR. PEART: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: You probably tore down the other one.
MR. PEART: Correct.
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: But you left this one back there which requires
some sort of access up to the front?
MR. PEART: Yes, we thought it was a unique feature when we won the home and
we thought, you know, it's a nice additional square footage. We heard about the previous owners
and how they utilized it. We thought it was a cool feature, somewhat rare and wanted to maintain
that. We did find that it was approved by the Village. Obviously, it's somewhat, I don't know if out
of code is the right terminology, but it's larger than usual, but yes, we bought the property with the
intent to keep it and would like to.
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: Okay, that makes sense. I'm not sure I completely
buy that the asphalt, gravel, whatever, you know, to me those are both going to be visually
disruptive to your backyard if you're trying to keep it green. I don't think Engineering is going to
approve, and I couldn't support just a grass because of, again, that would be a completely
different variance. I think doing some sort of green infrastructure, be it in pervious pavers, I'm
sure there are some various things that the engineer could work with you on. I know I've seen
some where, you know, grass grows up through it. It doesn't look so much, but you can --
MR. PEART: Yes, I've seen these plastic like grid systems.
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: Yes.
MR. PEART: You can even fill it in with gravel, and that's what, I want to make sure
it was clear, it would be, you know, if green wasn't approved, it would be decorative gravel, like
crushed blue. Something nice. We just don't want this heavy concrete surface that's connecting
the two.
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: Yes.
MR. PEART: So, we want a low profile to kind of blend in with the surrounding area
--
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: Got you.
MR. PEART: -- and if we had to go through a separate variance process, I know
we submitted for the gravel, but we'd be open to doing that as well.
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
APPROVED 6
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: Yes, okay.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: So, Dan, if the Petitioner is willing to submit the
application for the green infrastructure request, is that still a request for a variance or is that just
part of his normal process for having that material installed?
MR. OSOBA: That would be part of the normal permit process, so he would be
submitting a building permit showing the specifications for the green infrastructure and the Village
engineer would review that. Based on the review that the Engineering Department did for this
application, they would be open to green infrastructure options rather than gravel, but it would still
certainly have to be something that would be reviewed by the Village engineer. If he chose to do
a green infrastructure option, a variance would not be required because it's allowed by code if the
Village engineer approves it.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: So, based on everything you're hearing --
MR. PEART: Yes, I'm getting whispers from my wife.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Are you willing to go the route of submitting a request
with the Village for a green infrastructure project?
MR. PEART: Yes, if that was our only option. That was definitely something we'd
want to work with the Village to accomplish, if we're ruling out gravel all together and trying to
avoid the asphalt and concrete, yes.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: So, from the order of -- or I'm sorry, did you want to say
something?
MRS. PEART: He's my husband.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, I'm sorry, we have a process here.
MRS. PEART: Sorry, thank you. My name is Tori, Jordan's wife. Thank you all for
listening to us.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Please state your name and address for the record.
MRS. PEART: Tori Peart, 1015 North Forrest Avenue. So, just to clarify, you're
saying we cannot do the gravel driveway even if we have the infrastructure material below the
gravel driveway that essentially is what the engineer said?
MR. PEART: Because we've seen the green infrastructure, whether it's the grid
system, and then you fill it in with gravel to make it be green. So, that's where we just want to be
clear.
MRS. PEART: We just want to understand what our options are before we're
promising we want to go the green route.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: I think what we're saying, and we haven't gotten to
deliberation yet, but if you're kind of sensing the line of questioning, Engineering is saying code is
asphalt or concrete.
MR. PEART: Yes.
MRS. PEART: Right.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: You didn't want to do asphalt or concrete, so you're
requesting gravel. Engineering is not supportive of gravel. My sense from the Board, myself
included, is given those comments and given this is brand new construction, we're not seeing the
hardship so we would not support your request for gravel. Where we're going here is we're trying
to strike a deal where if a green infrastructure project is something that you would be amenable
to, it sounds like the Engineering Department is also willing to entertain that.
MRS. PEART: Right.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: So, you can, now what the actual materials are and what
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
APPROVED 7
it looks like, I don't think we can confirm or guarantee what they would look like, but --
MRS. PEART: Right, right.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: -- all we can confirm or guarantee is if it's not going to be
asphalt or concrete, it's not going to be gravel.
MRS. PEART: Right.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: So, it's going to be something and it can't be grass.
MRS. PEART: Right. So, your second part of that was do we need to move
forward to get, or how do we proceed in the event it's none of those three things?
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: So, if you're saying that you're open to doing the request
for the green infrastructure project, that would not require a variance. So, I think there was
somebody in the audience who might want to speak, so I would permit public comment. But at
that point, I think we'd just --
MR. OSOBA: Withdraw it.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Yes, because we're not approving or denying because
they're no longer requesting a variance.
MR. OSOBA: We could either approve or we could withdraw the application and
not move forward with the variance if you were going to go through the green infrastructure route.
The other alternative and maybe a more flexible alternative would be to continue it to the next
meeting, and then if we decide to go to the green infrastructure route and you submit plans to the
Village engineer to get the rubber stamp of yes, this is good to go, then we can say that the
application is withdrawn and not needed to be continued to the engineer.
Does that make sense?
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: So, we would approve in that scenario an extension?
MR. OSOBA: You would continue it to the next meeting.
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: A continuance.
MR. OSOBA: And if it's required, if, you know, the green infrastructure option is not
something the Village engineer, or you're working with continuously, it's not something that's
working out, then you can come back and particularly request the gravel again unless that's not
something that you want to do all together and you may withdraw your application then. So, it's
ultimately kind of what you want to do now.
MR. PEART: Okay.
MRS. PEART: Thank you.
MR. PEART: Yes, we'd like to pursue the green infrastructure and just work with
the Village or the engineer to come up with a solution that works for both parties.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: So, then we would withdraw.
MR. OSOBA: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Right? So, just because I know there was somebody
here who did want to speak.
MR. PEART: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: So, why don't you have a seat?
MR. PEART: Okay.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: And then we'll hear public comment, and then as part of
our deliberation, we can agree to just dismiss it, correct?
MR. OSOBA: Correct. A variation wouldn't be required based on the Petitioner's
testimony of what they would like to pursue.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, so you can have a seat. The gentleman, I'll ask if
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
APPROVED 8
he wants to speak, and you will then have the opportunity to rebut anything he says, and then
we'll move on.
MR. PEART: Okay, sounds good. Thank you.
MRS. PEART: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Sir, did you want to speak?
MR. STEVENS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, you've got to come up to the front.
MR. STEVENS: No problem. Hello, gentlemen and ladies.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Please state your name.
MR. STEVENS: My name is Leroy Stevens. I live at 1011 North Forrest. I'm the
guy to the south of the project here. My north property line abuts their south property line.
The garage we're talking about is probably 25 feet wide by maybe 50 feet
deep. It's two stories. On the bottom, you can park four cars. On top, you've got equal amount
with a staircase up there. The former owners were in the construction business. They had a
couple of vans; they had a couple of other things. That's then, this is now.
Whatever use they want to put it to doesn't really bother me. I'm not so
much concerned whether it's asphalt, concrete or gravel as I am the elevation, and this has
nothing to do with this hearing today. It really has nothing with elevations. That's going to be the
Engineering Department.
I think if they want to do what they want to do, they have to get this Board to
grant their variance so that they don't have to have concrete or asphalt. Then I think the ball
would shift to Engineering to come up with what would be an appropriate material to put in there
other than concrete or asphalt. I think that's how it works. So, if they wanted to explore other
green ways, I think they and the Board would probably be better off just continuing it for a week or
two or four so they could huddle with Engineering and see what Engineering would go with.
So, I'm not against gravel, but I think there's probably better ways. Again,
whatever it is, it's got to be the right way. They can't shift their water to my lot and I don't think
that's what they're trying to do. Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Did you want to respond to that? You don't have to. If
you'd like to, you can. If you don't want to, you don't have to.
MR. PEART: No, I just want to say thank you to Mr. Stevens.
MR. STEVENS: No problem.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: All right, so is there anybody else who would like to
comment on this petition?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, we'll close it down for deliberation.
So, it sounds like where we left things and based on the input from the
Petitioner, they want to go the route of submitting the request for the green infrastructure project
which would not require a variance. So, we could effectively offer them the opportunity to
withdraw or dismiss the request for variance.
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: I think I heard from Dan that continuance might be
the most flexible for them so they could chat with Engineering, and if they come up with a solution
in the next month, great. If they don't, come back here or whatever or, you know, they could
withdraw at that point in time.
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
APPROVED 9
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: I thought I heard the Petitioner say that they wanted to go
with the --
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: Which is fine. I'm happy to withdraw and not
worry about it anymore. That's fine, too.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: So, I know we're closed for deliberation, but just to make
sure the Board heard you correctly, if you could come back up? Are you going with option one or
option two? Option one being you submit the request, you don't request a continuance, you
withdraw the variance and you're basically free to go, or you're saying for option two, you'd like to
request a continuance so you can have those discussions and come back before this Board at a
future date which, Dan, do we know at this point when that would be?
MR. OSOBA: September 8th.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, to explore the green infrastructure options, that's
option two.
MR. OSOBA: Well, option two would be to explore further variances if needed. If
green infrastructure applications were submitted to the Village engineer and not amenable and
that's not something that would work, then you could submit your variance again to the Board to
do a different surface that does not comply with code such as gravel or other surfaces that may
not need Engineering stamps.
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: For my own clarification, if they withdraw, they're
not subject to the one-year penalty. They could apply for a different variance or the same
variance later?
MR. OSOBA: That is correct, yes.
MR. PEART: So, it sounds like withdrawing and then just working with the Village
engineer to explore a green solution is the route we'd like to go. Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: You're welcome. So, thank you, everybody, for that
clarification. So, that being said --
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: Do we need a vote or anything for them to
withdraw?
MR. OSOBA: It would be a vote to dismiss the variance request as it's not needed.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Before I ask if there's a motion, does anybody else have
any comments they want to make and put on the record?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, is there a motion to dismiss the request for the
variance?
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: I move that we allow the Petitioner to just dismiss or
remove this petition.
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: Second.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Portera.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Lanaghan.
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Drake.
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Chair Jaffe.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Yes.
MR. PEART: Thank you.
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
APPROVED 10
MRS. PEART: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Have a good night.
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: Best of luck.
(Whereupon, the public hearing on the above-mentioned
petition was adjourned at 7:23 p.m.)
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
APPROVED 11
ZONING BOARD
REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF A MEETING
BEFORE THE VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
OF APPEALS
RE: 401 NORTH PINE AVENUE - ZBA #25-024
REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS had before the Village of
Arlington Heights Zoning Board of Appeals taken at the Arlington Heights
Village Hall, 33 South Arlington Heights Road, 1st Floor, Buechner Room,
Arlington Heights, Illinois on the 11th day of August, 2025 at the hour of
7:23 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
BENJAMIN JAFFE, Chairperson
TOM DRAKE
JEFFREY LANAGHAN
FRANK PORTERA
ALSO PRESENT:
DAN OSOBA, Planner I
DARKO BOJIN, Assistant Planner
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, Agenda Item B. 401 North Pine Avenue, ZBA
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
APPROVED 12
Petition #25-024.
MR. PURDOM: Hello.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Hello. State your name and address for the record.
MR. PURDOM: I'm Kevin Purdom with 401 North Pine Avenue.
(Witness sworn.)
MR. OSOBA: The property at 401 North Pine Avenue is zoned R-3 Residential
Single-Family District. The Petitioner is proposing to construct a second-story addition in the rear
of the existing single-family dwelling along with a deck and a pergola located in the side and rear
yard. The existing home is set back 4.06 feet from the interior side yard where a minimum side
setback is 6.6 feet. The Petitioner is proposing to maintain this nonconforming setback for the
second-story addition. The proposed deck is also encroaching into the required 6.6-foot side
setback and maintaining that same nonconforming setback as the existing home and building
addition at 4.06 feet. The pergola, which is considered an accessory structure, may only be
located in the rear of the property and is partially proposed within the side yard.
Therefore, the Petitioner is requesting the following variations:
• A 2.54-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-3.3(b) to allow a second-story addition
with a side yard setback of 4.06 feet instead of the required 6.6-foot minimum, and an
additional two feet for the eave;
• A 2.54-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 6.6-5.1 to allow a deck to encroach in the
required side yard with a side setback of 4.06 feet instead of the required 6.6-foot
minimum; and
• A variation from Chapter 28, Section 6.5-2 to allow a portion of a pergola in the side yard
where accessory structures are only permitted in the rear yard.
MR. PURDOM: All right, so my clients just bought the house five months ago and
they're looking to do some work before they move in. It's just the husband and wife who live
there. They really love the character of the house and were deciding to do a dormer addition to
the back of the house, adding a new deck where the patio is, and then a pergola that comes out
to protect the window and the door.
All we're asking for is to build in line with the existing house both the deck,
the pergola, and the second story where it goes into the existing nonconforming setback. All
other codes are met. We think that it's, we actually tried pushing it in to three feet for where it
would be on the side and it completely kills the deck. It looks a little weird. You have all that
wasted space before the landscaping that's right on the side.
It just actually makes more sense to do it in line. It looks better and I think
it's a reasonable ask, and I believe that's it.
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: You said the existing deck is on top of an existing
patio; is that correct?
MR. PURDOM: There's an existing patio that's going to be removed.
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: So, it's staying on the same spot, that you're not
enlarging it?
MR. PURDOM: Right, but since it's a patio, it can be in that side setback, but --
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: Got you.
MR. PURDOM: -- the deck or the pergola cannot be.
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: Got you, okay.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Do you know the approximate age of the house?
MR. PURDOM: Pre-50's I believe. So, it's an older house with a lot of character
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
APPROVED 13
and they wanted to preserve that.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Do you know if the property owners talked to any of the
neighbors about the project? And, if so --
MR. PURDOM: They haven't heard anything. Since they just moved in, they aren't
living in it full time yet. They're still moving back and forth. But they haven't heard anything
negative or positive. They've seen a bunch of people look at the sign. but no one has come out
to say anything.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Tom or Frank?
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: You confirm the two existing non-conforming, I
guess characteristics of the house, that those variances are existing non-conforming; is that right?
MR. PURDOM: Yes. Actually, all three are. It's the deck, the pergola, and the
second story which goes to the existing building line.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: And it's on a corner lot, too.
MR. PURDOM: Yes, correct.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: That's all I have.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Jeff, anything else?
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: No. You know, we've seen similar stuff. I mean,
you've got to stay more or less on top of the existing structure, so that makes all the sense in the
world. I was asking about the deck just to make sure that it was on top of an existing type of
structure so there's no other impact to what would have been there. It's already been there;
they're just upgrading it basically.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: All right, thank you, Kevin.
Is there anybody in the audience who wishes to comment?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, we'll close it down for Board deliberation.
Jeff, did you want to start?
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: Yes, happy to. You know, corner side lots or
corner lots always seem to be the ones we see the most of. They have the strangest setbacks
and side yard configurations, and a lot of people consider them front yards or what have you. So,
they're keeping it very much in line with what the original house was and what the original intent
was. I love to see older houses get redone, so I think I'm definitely in favor of this one.
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: Yes, they satisfy all the requirements as far as I'm
concerned. There was no push-back from the three Staff departments. So, I know where that
property is, I think it's going to be a nice use, what they're trying to do.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Yes, I agree. Nothing further for me.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: Move to approve the variances as submitted.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Second.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Portera.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Lanaghan.
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Drake.
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Chair Jaffe.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Yes.
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
APPROVED 14
Congratulations.
MR. PURDOM: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Have a good night.
MR. PURDOM: Thank you.
(Whereupon, the public hearing on the above-mentioned
petition was adjourned at 7:29 p.m.)
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
APPROVED 15
ZONING BOARD
REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF A MEETING
BEFORE THE VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
OF APPEALS
RE: 604 WEST TECHY ROAD - ZBA #25-026
REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS had before the Village of
Arlington Heights Zoning Board of Appeals taken at the Arlington Heights
Village Hall, 33 South Arlington Heights Road, 1st Floor, Buechner Room,
Arlington Heights, Illinois on the 11th day of August, 2025 at the hour of
7:29 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
BENJAMIN JAFFE, Chairperson
TOM DRAKE
JEFFREY LANAGHAN
FRANK PORTERA
ALSO PRESENT:
DAN OSOBA, Planner I
DARKO BOJIN, Assistant Planner
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
APPROVED 16
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, next, Agenda Item C. 604 West Techy Road, ZBA
Petition #25-026.
Hello.
MR. PADMANABHA: Hello, good evening, members of the Board. My name is
Prakash Padmanabha. I'm the resident of 604 West Techy Road; I'm the owner of 604 West
Techy Road.
Should I talk about the project?
(Witness sworn.)
MR. BOJIN: The property is zoned R-3 Residential Single-Family District, and the
Petitioner is proposing to install a pergola in the side yard. Code prohibits accessory structures
such as pergolas to be built in the side yard. Therefore, the Petitioner is requesting the following
variation:
• A variation from Chapter 28, Section 6.5-2 to allow a pergola in the side yard where
accessory structures are only permitted in the rear yard.
Thank you.
MR. PADMANABHA: All right, I'm here today to respectfully request a variation to
install the pergola. This house was built probably in the 80's. It's a corner lot. As you can see,
the entrance of the house is facing the Techy Road, and I do have a garage next to the house.
So, the way they created and built the patio back in those days, it kind of, it's in the side yard, it's
the corner of the side yard and the backyard.
I do have an existing patio there. I do have an outdoor couch there, so
whenever it rains, I line up my three kids to move the sofas, like the cushions of the couches
inside. So, I want to install a pergola just to, you know, protect the couch from the rain and the
sun. So, that's my request, sir.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: I drove by your property, so that would be within the
fenced area of your backyard?
MR. PADMANABHA: Within the fenced area, within the patio, right, the existing
patio.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, any questions?
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: Just one for Staff, just for my own clarification.
James Court would be their front yard; is that correct?
MR. BOJIN: Yes, that is correct.
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: Okay, yes, got you.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Have you talked to any of your neighbors about the
project?
MR. PADMANABHA: Yes, we did. No, no concerns.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, any other questions for the Petitioner?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: All right, thank you.
You can have a seat. I don't think there's anybody else here who wants to
comment, so we'll close it down for deliberation.
Yes, after I read the paperwork, I wanted to see for myself so I actually took
a ride by today and that was probably the only question I was going to have is, you know,
confirming that it's within the fenced area of the backyard which I couldn't see that being a
concern to anybody within the locality. Given it's not, and having to move various stuff in and out
of the house every time it rains, I think this is a reasonable request.
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
APPROVED 17
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Agree.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: I move that we approve this petition as presented.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Second.
MR. BOJIN: Mr. Portera.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Yes.
MR. BOJIN: Mr. Lanaghan.
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: Yes.
MR. BOJIN: Mr. Drake.
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: Yes.
MR. BOJIN: Chair Jaffe.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Yes.
Congratulations.
MR. PADMANABHA: Awesome. Thank you so much.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: You're welcome.
Do we have other business?
MR. OSOBA: Just a brief announcement. The Zoning Board of Appeals
application form, the actual application form has been updated. It's going to be on the Village
website within the next week. I'll also make a copy of it to everybody just so you have an updated
application form. It just clarified a couple of things and just from a procedural perspective of what
we expect of submittals so that we have a better idea of how many petitions we'll get next year.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, that's cool.
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: I like that idea.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Yes.
MR. PADMANABHA: Are we through?
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: Yes, you are. Thank you so much. Good luck.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Thank you.
All right, was that the only other item of other business?
MR. OSOBA: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Public comment?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Is there a motion to adjourn?
COMMISSIONER LANAGHAN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: Second.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: All in favor?
(Chorus of ayes.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: We're adjourned.
(Whereupon, the public hearing on the above-mentioned
petition was adjourned at 7:33 p.m.)
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
APPROVED 18
STATE OF ILLINOIS )
) SS.
COUNTY OF KANE )
I, RON LeGRAND, SR., depose and say that
I am a digital court reporter doing business in the State of
Illinois; that I reported verbatim the foregoing proceedings and
that the foregoing is a true and correct transcript to the best of
my knowledge and ability.
______________________________
RON LeGRAND, SR.
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO
BEFORE ME THIS DAY OF
, A.D. 2025.
______________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Agenda
AGENDA
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Buechner Room, 1st Floor
Arlington Heights Village Hall, 33 S. Arlington Heights Rd.
Arlington Heights IL 60005
August 11, 2025
7:00 PM
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Minutes 7/14/25
B. Findings 7/14/25 - 919 S. Vail Ave.
C. Findings 7/14/25 - 819 N. Highland Ave.
D. Findings 7/14/25 - 1319 N. Salem Blvd.
E. Findings 7/14/25 - 106 S. Windsor Dr.
F. Findings 7/14/25 - 513 N. Douglas Ave.
IV. OLD BUSINESS
V. NEW BUSINESS
A. 1015 N. Forrest Ave. - ZBA25-023
B. 401 N. Pine Ave. - ZBA25-024
C. 604 W. Techy Rd. - ZBA25-026
VI. OTHER BUSINESS
VII. PUBLIC COMMENT
Anyone wishing to speak on a subject not on the Agenda may speak at this time. Please limit
your comments to three minutes.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Persons with disabilities requiring auxiliary aids or services, such as an American Sign
Language interpreter or written materials in accessible formats, should contact the Health &
Human Services Department, at 33 S. Arlington Heights Road, Arlington Heights, IL 60005,
healthmail@vah.com or 847/368-5760.
Packet
AGENDA
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Buechner Room, 1st Floor
Arlington Heights Village Hall, 33 S. Arlington Heights Rd.
Arlington Heights IL 60005
August 11, 2025
7:00 PM
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Minutes 7/14/25
B. Findings 7/14/25 - 919 S. Vail Ave.
C. Findings 7/14/25 - 819 N. Highland Ave.
D. Findings 7/14/25 - 1319 N. Salem Blvd.
E. Findings 7/14/25 - 106 S. Windsor Dr.
F. Findings 7/14/25 - 513 N. Douglas Ave.
IV. OLD BUSINESS
V. NEW BUSINESS
A. 1015 N. Forrest Ave. - ZBA25-023
B. 401 N. Pine Ave. - ZBA25-024
C. 604 W. Techy Rd. - ZBA25-026
VI. OTHER BUSINESS
VII. PUBLIC COMMENT
Anyone wishing to speak on a subject not on the Agenda may speak at this time. Please limit
your comments to three minutes.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Persons with disabilities requiring auxiliary aids or services, such as an American Sign
Language interpreter or written materials in accessible formats, should contact the Health &
Human Services Department, at 33 S. Arlington Heights Road, Arlington Heights, IL 60005,
healthmail@vah.com or 847/368-5760.
Page 1 of 67
Page 2 of 67
DRAFT
ZONING BOARD
REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF A MEETING
BEFORE THE VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
OF APPEALS
RE: 919 SOUTH VAIL AVENUE - ZBA #25-012
REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS had before the Village of
Arlington Heights Zoning Board of Appeals taken at the Arlington Heights
Village Hall, 33 South Arlington Heights Road, 1st Floor, Buechner Room,
Arlington Heights, Illinois on the 14th day of July, 2025 at the hour of
7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
BENJAMIN JAFFE, Chairperson
TOM DRAKE
PETER SIAVELIS
MICHAEL O'CONNOR
FRANK PORTERA
JOSEPH SELBKA
ALSO PRESENT:
DEREK MACH, Development Planner
DARKO BOJIN, Assistant Planner
DAN OSOBA, Planner
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 3 of 67
DRAFT
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: All right, we're going to call this month's Zoning
Board of Appeal's meeting to order.
Let's start with roll call, please.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Portera.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Here.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Selbka.
COMMISSIONER SELBKA: Here.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. O'Connor.
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: Here.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Lanaghan.
(No response.)
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Siavelis.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Yes, here.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Drake.
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: Here.
MR. OSOBA: Chairman Jaffe.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Yes.
Okay, now we'll proceed to the Pledge of Allegiance. If you'd all
stand and face the flag in the corner of the room?
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, next, we need to approve the minutes of the
June 9th meeting.
Has everyone had an opportunity to review those minutes? And if so,
are they complete and accurate, or are any changes needed?
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: I was, I'm going to abstain because I was not
here at last month's meeting. So, this is an abstention.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay.
All right, is there a motion?
COM0MISSIONER SELBKA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Seconded?
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: Second.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: All in favor?
(Chorus of ayes.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, hearing procedures. So, for the audience,
we're going to just quickly go over the order of operations and how these meetings are
run.
First, from a quorum, if less than six members are present, petitioners
have the option to continue the meeting as it takes four affirmative votes to approve a
variance regardless of the number of Board members in attendance. If denied, a
petitioner cannot reapply for a whole year. So, tonight, we have six Board members with
us, so you'll need to go four of six to secure approval for your variance.
The hardship, so the document you completed that was submitted in
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 4 of 67
your packet we've all had a chance to review, but we expect you to explain the four
elements necessary for this Board to establish in order to be able to grant a variation.
Those four elements are:
1. That the proposed use will not alter the essential character of the locality and will be
compatible with existing uses and zoning of nearby property;
2. That the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances which may include the
length of time the subject property has been vacant as zoned;
3. That the proposed variation is in harmony with the spirit and intent of this Chapter;
and finally,
4. That the variation requested is the minimum variation necessary to allow
reasonable use of the property.
A variation shall be permitted only if the evidence, in the judgment of
the Board of Appeals, sustains each of the four conditions enumerated. So, again, we look
to you, the petitioner, to explain all four of those. When you come to the stand, explain
your reasoning, your logic, your justification, and we'll have some questions for you.
Sequence of events. I will open each agenda item and if there's any
introductory remarks. We will swear in the petitioner. We'll need your name, address, and
affirm that you'll be telling the truth. Staff presentation will give a brief overview of the
project and the variance request. You, the applicant, will then present your case in favor
of zoning relief by way of documents or testimony. As I said, the applicant's hand and any
witnesses testifying must be sworn under oath, and must state and spell their respective
names for the record.
Public comment. Members of the public may speak on the
application. Speakers must be sworn under oath, and state and spell their name clearly.
There are no formal objectors, correct?
MR. OSOBA: There are none.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Do I have to read those sections or just go to the
public comment?
MR. OSOBA: You don't have to.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, so since there are no formal objectors this
evening, regarding public comment, any person who is not formally registered as an
objector may speak at the hearing but must limit their comments to three minutes. The
Chair may, in his or her discretion, alter the maximum time provided to public commenters
provided the maximum time is applied to all speakers.
Public comment is specific to the individual variances. You'll see
there is an agenda item for public comment at the end if you want to ask about the Bears,
taxes or anything else, but if you come to the stand, please limit your comments just to the
variances being requested.
The applicant will then make a closing statement and present any
follow-up testimony or evidence. The applicant will rest their case. The Board will then
make a motion to deliberate and close public testimony. We will deliberate and vote on
the matter.
All ZBA final decisions must be in writing. If the agenda packet does
not include a final draft order that is acceptable to the ZBA, the substantive motion should
be to direct Staff to prepare an appropriate final order for approval at a subsequent
meeting.
With that, we can move to new business, which is our first petition,
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 5 of 67
Petition A, 919 South Vail Avenue, ZBA #25-012.
Dan, do you want to start with the Staff presentation, or will Derek?
MR. MACH: The Petitioner is proposing to construct an addition to the
existing single-story home. The Petitioner did receive approval for a similar project on
October 16, 2023 with variations from the Zoning Board. However, that approval did
expire. The Petitioner is returning this evening with a slightly modified footprint and the
elimination of two of the four variances that were approved back in 2023.
This evening, they're proposing an expansion to the garage in order
to create a two-car front load garage. The expansion for the garage is encroaching into
the required side yard setback along the north property line. In addition, the two air
conditioning units are encroaching into the required side yard setback along the south
property line.
Therefore, they're requesting:
• A four-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-3.3b to allow an addition with
a side yard setback of three feet instead of the required seven feet, and an
additional one foot for the eave; as well as
• A variance from Chapter 28, Section 6.6-5 to allow two air conditioning units in
the required side yard setback along the south property line.
Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Thank you.
Hi.
MR. FLUBACKER: How are you doing tonight?
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Good. Can you state your name?
MR. FLUBACKER: Bob Flubacker with Robert Flubacker Architects.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: And address?
MR. FLUBACKER: 1895 Rohlwing Road, Rolling Meadows, Illinois.
(Witness sworn.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: And then will you also be speaking?
MS. FEATHERSTONE: Sure. Sherry Featherstone, 919 South Vail,
Arlington Heights.
(Witness sworn.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay.
MR. FLUBACKER: So, as Derek mentioned, we had applied for a zoning
variation or a set of zoning variations back in December of '23. Due to pricing issues and
just delays in being able to get the project to a scope that worked, time has elapsed on
that zoning variation which, by the way, since I'm first up and I'm going to leave, I'd like to
put in the public comments that these variations should be good for two years, not one.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Bob, what's the basis for that? What do you
want to see it doubled for?
MR. FLUBACKER: The time that it takes from getting the application
approved, getting the construction documents put together, going through the bid process,
getting the permit, it's not uncommon that that takes longer than a year, but just, you know
--
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: No, that's fair enough. That's why I wanted it
in the record, so the basis for the request.
MR. FLUBACKER: Sure.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: And just one other thing, how many variances
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 6 of 67
have you sought and received from the Village over the years would you say
approximately? And that colors your experience and impacts your view of what you just
asked about.
MR. FLUBACKER: I'd say somewhere between 30 and 40 probably.
So, the additional project that got approved a year and a half ago had
four variations. Two of them had to do with the size of the project, with lot coverage and
FAR. Those have been eliminated because we have downsized the project. The two
variations remain; one is for rebuilding the garage basically to the same north wall as the
existing garage, just reconfiguring slightly.
Then, the second one is for air conditioning units being on the side of
the project rather than in the rear because we still plan on doing that other addition as a
later phase and would like the variation for the air conditioners at this time. One thing we
can do to kind of accommodate the neighbors in the meantime is we can put the
connections on that south wall but actually move the equipment around to the back wall
until that addition does happen.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: So, elaborate a little bit further on the last
point you made.
MR. FLUBACKER: So, the air conditioning units as proposed are on the
southeast corner of the existing home.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Right.
MR. FLUBACKER: The addition that was planned went parallel to that wall
into the backyard, that's why we needed the air conditioning unit at that location. What I'm
suggesting is we can put the electrical and refrigerant piping connection on that south wall.
The connections to the units are flexible so we can put the equipment around the corner
in the back of the home today, and then when the addition happens, just pick up and move
the equipment to the south side of the existing house when that addition happens.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: So, the second unit is needed because the
addition won't be hooked up to the primary residence's main --
MR. FLUBACKER: We'll have both units immediately. The addition would
not add another air conditioning unit. So, the future addition wouldn't, this addition
proposed would add another air conditioning unit to have two total.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: One existing right now?
MR. FLUBACKER: Right.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: And then another one.
MR. FLUBACKER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Okay, so Bob, on the drawings that were
submitted to us, right, we're showing on the screen?
MR. FLUBACKER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: It's slightly different than what you talked
about just now. What is shown on the screen is post second addition, right?
MR. FLUBACKER: Right.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: The future addition you're contemplating.
MR. FLUBACKER: Right, right.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: So, the paperwork you've submitted doesn't
reflect what you've talked about as a --
MR. FLUBACKER: I'm just offering that --
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: -- compromise? Okay.
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 7 of 67
MR. FLUBACKER: I'm just offering that as something we can do in the
meantime. I'd like the paperwork to stay the way it's presented and have the variation for
the AC units immediately.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Okay, so that's where I was going to go next.
MR. FLUBACKER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: What are you particularly asking us about or
for from a variation standpoint?
MR. FLUBACKER: What's in the paperwork.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Okay, got you.
MR. FLUBACKER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Okay, and then just do me a favor, tell me
what is the distance from the southern edge of those two units to the southern property
line?
MR. FLUBACKER: Well, the setback line, which you can see is just above
the two AC units, is seven feet.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Okay.
MR. FLUBACKER: So, assuming they're two to two-and-a-half-feet wide,
you know, puts it to four-and-a-half feet roughly.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Okay, how many folks live in this home?
MS. FEATHERSTONE: Me.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Just you live in this house?
MS. FEATHERSTONE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Okay. All right, how long have you lived in
the neighborhood or in Arlington Heights?
MS. FEATHERSTONE: Oh, my, 1990-ish --
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Okay, 35 years and counting.
MS. FEATHERSTONE: -- somewhere in there, yes.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Okay, and have you talked to your
neighbors?
MS. FEATHERSTONE: They're all fine with it.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Okay, nobody voiced any opposition to you?
MS. FEATHERSTONE: No.
MR. FLUBACKER: And then specific to the neighbor to the south.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: That's where I'm going with this.
MS. FEATHERSTONE: Yes, the neighbor to the south was fine.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: The adjoining neighbor to the south would be
impacted theoretically by those two units.
MS. FEATHERSTONE: And they're fine. Where they sit, they sit on, I think
on their side of the house it's a chimney. It's where those units would be aligned to at their
house, so there is no visual.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: No visual impact?
MS. FEATHERSTONE: No.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Okay, I don't have anything else.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Anybody else?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: All right, you can take a seat and we'll see if
there's any public comment.
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 8 of 67
MS. FEATHERSTONE: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Is there anybody present who wishes to comment
on this petition?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, we'll close it down for Board deliberation.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Sure, I'll start. I think this is a reasonable
request. I understand why Bob offered up the compromise that he did, but I don't think it's
necessary. Frankly, I think four-and-a-half to five feet from the property line is sufficient
here. I do like the fact that the owner clarified what structure it is basically opposed or
corresponds on the neighbor's side being a chimney there, and we have no neighborhood
opposition.
So, I'm in support of the petition and the variances sought as drafted
and presented in the papers, not necessarily the compromise offered that Bob made.
Although I do appreciate that, I don't think we need to get to that.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Any other comments, thoughts?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: I'll move as stated.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Second.
MR. MACH: Mr. Siavelis.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Yes.
MR. MACH: Mr. Drake.
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: Yes.
MR. MACH: Mr. O'Connor.
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: Yes.
MR. MACH: Mr. Portera.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Yes.
MR. MACH: Mr. Selbka.
COMMISSIONER SELBKA: Yes.
MR. MACH: Chairman Jaffe.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Yes.
Your variances have been approved. Thank you.
MS. FEATHERSTONE: Thank you.
MR. FLUBACKER: Thank you very much.
(Whereupon, the public hearing on the above-
mentioned petition was adjourned at 7:13 p.m.)
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 9 of 67
ZONING BOARD
REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF A MEETING
BEFORE THE VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
OF APPEALS
RE: 819 NORTH HIGHLAND AVENUE - ZBA #25-018
REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS had before the Village of
Arlington Heights Zoning Board of Appeals taken at the Arlington Heights
Village Hall, 33 South Arlington Heights Road, 1st Floor, Buechner Room,
Arlington Heights, Illinois on the 14th day of July, 2025 at the hour of
7:13 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
BENJAMIN JAFFE, Chairperson
TOM DRAKE
PETER SIAVELIS
MICHAEL O'CONNOR
FRANK PORTERA
JOSEPH SELBKA
ALSO PRESENT:
DEREK MACH, Development Planner
DARKO BOJIN, Assistant Planner
DAN OSOBA, Planner
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 10 of 67
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, next up, Agenda Item B, 819 North
Highland Avenue, ZBA #25-018.
How are you?
MR. COCHRAN: Hi, guys. Jim Cochran, JRC Design Build.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Address?
MR. COCHRAN: 1275 East Davis, Arlington Heights, Illinois.
MS. LALL: Regina Lall, 819 North Highland Avenue. I'm the owner.
(Witnesses sworn.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, Staff report?
MR. OSOBA: The property is zoned R-3 Residential Single-Family Zone
District. The Petitioner is proposing to construct a new 247 square-foot addition and
interior remodel to connect the existing home to the detached garage that's existing on the
north of the property. The existing garage is connected to the home with a covered
breezeway and is located 4.72 feet from the north property line. Attaching the detached
garage to the home would require compliance with the side yard setbacks of the R-3
District which would equal 10 percent of the lot width, or 7.5 feet on this lot.
Therefore, the Petitioner is requesting the following variation:
• A 2.78-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-3.3b to allow a side setback
of 4.72 feet from the newly attached garage where 7.5 feet is required.
MR. COCHRAN: That is correct. Yes, so that's an existing attached garage
with the roof line. Basically, what we're doing is filling it in between so that she can have
her modern kitchen attached to the garage. We originally proposed to her to put the
addition on the back of the home, but then there was no way to get from the garage to the
house without going outside. Again, there is also a basement stairway in the back of the
house that we would have had to have gotten ridden of that they want to keep. That was
one of the reasons we ask for the variance.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Tom?
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: Hello, I have a few questions. You've heard
some of these already. How long in the home?
MS. LALL: 10 years.
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: 10 years, all right. How many folks live in the
house?
MS. LALL: Six.
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: Six. How many drivers do you have?
MS. LALL: Two right now.
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: Okay, what about the neighbors? Did you
physically talk to the neighbors?
MS. LALL: Yes, they're all happy about it.
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: No feedback? No negativity?
MS. LALL: Only positivity.
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: Everybody's on board?
MS. LALL: Yes.
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: All right, that's it.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Any other questions from the Board?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, you may have a seat.
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 11 of 67
MS. LALL: Thanks.
MR. COCHRAN: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: You're welcome.
Is there anybody present who wishes to comment on this petition?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, none being heard, we'll close it down.
Tom?
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: Yes, I think this is pretty straight-forward. It's an
existing non-conforming. None of the three Staff Departments had any opposition. No
neighbor opposition that we heard. I think it's a good use of the space, it will give them
more living space. It's a nice design and I think they satisfied all four points of the criteria
we're looking for. So, I'm in favor of approval.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Yes, I agree with you, Tom. Frankly, what
are you supposed to do with the gap or the breezeway between there? I mean, it's a
logical spot for, you know, expansion, utilization of space, especially in the context of
having six folks living in this house. So, I mean, this is entirely reasonable, and there's a
number of houses -- oops, sorry, apologies, houses in the Village that have that sort of
configuration with the garage and like a breezeway between there, and of those, a number
of them have had this type of addition or adder to it. So, I think this is entirely reasonable.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: I just think it's an increase also in safety and
security, having to walk in and out of, you know, one garage and the house and back and
forth. I'm in support.
Is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: Move to approve as presented.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Second.
MR. OSOBA: Commissioner Selbka.
COMMISSIONER SELBKA: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Portera.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. O'Connor.
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Drake.
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Siavelis.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Chair Jaffe.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Yes.
Congratulations.
MR. COCHRAN: Thank you, gentlemen.
MS. LALL: Thank you.
(Whereupon, the public hearing on the above-
mentioned petition was adjourned at 7:17 p.m.)
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 12 of 67
ZONING BOARD
REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF A MEETING
BEFORE THE VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
OF APPEALS
RE: 1319 NORTH SALEM BOULEVARD - ZBA #25-020
REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS had before the Village of
Arlington Heights Zoning Board of Appeals taken at the Arlington Heights
Village Hall, 33 South Arlington Heights Road, 1st Floor, Buechner Room,
Arlington Heights, Illinois on the 14th day of July, 2025 at the hour of
7:17 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
BENJAMIN JAFFE, Chairperson
TOM DRAKE
PETER SIAVELIS
MICHAEL O'CONNOR
FRANK PORTERA
JOSEPH SELBKA
ALSO PRESENT:
DEREK MACH, Development Planner
DARKO BOJIN, Assistant Planner
DAN OSOBA, Planner
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 13 of 67
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, Agenda Item C, 1319 North Salem
Boulevard, ZBA #25-020.
Good evening.
MR. MILEWSKI: Hi.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: What's your name?
MR. MILEWSKI: I'm Tom Milewski, owner of 1319 North Salem Boulevard.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay.
MRS. MILEWSKI: I'm Michelle Milewski, same address, owner.
(Witnesses sworn.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Staff report?
MR. BOJIN: The property is zoned R-3 Residential Single-Family. The
Petitioner is proposing to construct a front yard porch that is 36 feet and one-half inch
wide, and 6.5 feet deep. The addition would have a front yard setback of 34.26 feet where
39.23 feet is required.
Therefore, the Petitioner is requesting the following variation:
• A 4.97-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-1.3a to allow an addition with
a front yard setback of 34.26 feet instead of the required 39.23 feet, and an
additional one foot for the eave.
Thank you.
MR. MILEWSKI: So, again, thank you today. So, basically, we're asking to
build a front porch of the house. We have an existing portico where we'd just like to
extend on both sides of a new roof, or I guess it would be a new ceiling for that portico.
So, it really isn't a, you know, it's really an extension of an existing structure of the element
of the house. So, I would also like to include that four houses down has the exact same
architectural style as well as the same design front porch, so it fits with the neighborhood
property and aesthetics.
Generally speaking, we have four kids. We'd like to, they play
basketball, we'd like to be sitting outside on our porch.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Joe?
COMMISSIONER SELBKA: Have you spoken to your neighbors about
this?
MR. MILEWSKI: Yes, all approved.
COMMISSIONER SELBKA: And you have four kids. How long have you
lived in the house?
MR. MILEWSKI: Nine years.
COMMISSIONER SELBKA: Those are the only questions I have.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Any questions from the Board?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, you may have a seat.
MR. MILEWSKI: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Is there anybody present who wishes to speak on
this petition?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, close it down for deliberation.
Joe?
COMMISSIONER SELBKA: I'm in favor of the variance. I think it's a
reasonable request. It's a nice design. I don't see any reason to say no.
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 14 of 67
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Any other thoughts, comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: I would agree, this is pretty reasonable and
straightforward. So, no concerns.
Is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER SELBKA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Second.
MR. BOJIN: Mr. Siavelis.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Yes.
MR. BOJIN: Mr. Drake.
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: Yes.
MR. BOJIN: Mr. O'Connor.
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: Yes.
MR. BOJIN: Mr. Portera.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Yes.
MR. BOJIN: Mr. Selbka.
COMMISSIONER SELBKA: Yes.
MR. BOJIN: Chair Jaffe.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Yes.
Congratulations.
MR. MILEWSKI: Thank you.
MRS. MILEWSKI: Thank you.
(Whereupon, the public hearing on the above-
mentioned petition was adjourned at 7:20 p.m.)
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 15 of 67
ZONING BOARD
REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF A MEETING
BEFORE THE VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
OF APPEALS
RE: 106 SOUTH WINDSOR DRIVE - ZBA #25-021
REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS had before the Village of
Arlington Heights Zoning Board of Appeals taken at the Arlington Heights
Village Hall, 33 South Arlington Heights Road, 1st Floor, Buechner Room,
Arlington Heights, Illinois on the 14th day of July, 2025 at the hour of
7:20 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
BENJAMIN JAFFE, Chairperson
TOM DRAKE
PETER SIAVELIS
MICHAEL O'CONNOR
FRANK PORTERA
JOSEPH SELBKA
ALSO PRESENT:
DEREK MACH, Development Planner
DARKO BOJIN, Assistant Planner
DAN OSOBA, Planner
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 16 of 67
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, Agenda Item D, 106 South Windsor Drive,
ZBA #25-021.
Hi.
MR. FREUDENBERGER: Hi.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Would you state you name?
MR. FREUDENBERGER: Scott Freudenberger, 106 South Windsor.
MRS. FREUDENBERGER: Deborah Freudenberger with the same
address.
(Witnesses sworn.)
MR. OSOBA: The property is zoned R-3 Residential Single-Family District.
The Petitioner has constructed a 160 square-foot shed in the rear of the property located
1.29 feet from the north side property line. A building permit was obtained for the
construction of the shed; however, it was constructed at a distance of 1.29 feet from the
property line instead of the required three feet as shown on the approved permit. The
shed is compliant with height, size, and rear setback requirements, but is encroaching
within the three-foot side yard setback required for accessory structures.
Therefore, the Petitioner is requesting the following variation:
• A 1.71-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 6.5-2 to allow a shed to be
located 1.29 feet from the side property line where three feet is required.
MR. FREUDENBERGER: Thank you. So, yes, we wanted to build this
shed. We have a 1,500 square-foot home. There's four of us, my wife and two kids. We
have very limited storage in the home, no basement. So, we built the shed, or we were
replacing the existing shed, there was already a shed there in the exact same location.
Our landscaper contractor came in and, as Dan said, you know, got the, you know,
approval but, much to our now realization, he had, you know, put it 1.29 instead of the
three. It was in the exact same location, so we didn't realize that there was any issue until
the final inspection.
But we've lived here for 19 years. The existing shed was, we've
never had an issue with any of the neighbors. No issue related to compatibility, you know.
It meets the height and size requirements today. No issue with the utility easement on the
back end.
We did talk to our neighbor who is on the north end there. We got a
letter, which I can share with you guys, of support, that they were totally good and said
they thought it looked great, much better than the existing one.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Can you just give one copy?
MR. OSOBA: I have it.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Oh, you already have it?
MR. OSOBA: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay, yes, you can just pass it on.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Once you give it to us, we can't return it.
MR. FREUDENBERGER: Oh, yes.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Is it okay?
MR. FREUDENBERGER: Yes. There should be one for each of you guys.
So, I have an extra one.
So, the neighbor supported the variance. You know, any of the work
we've done in 19 years, we've always pulled a permit until this circumstance was one that
we thought we had followed the permit process. So, you know, the shed is built. The
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 17 of 67
issue of moving that, Tuff Shed who is the manufacturer said if the shed is moved, it would
void the warranty on it. It would potentially cause issues with the shed and the, what do
you call it, the building structure, it would jeopardize the integrity of the building structure.
So, the shed has been completed. Actually, the electrical is already
done and the city has already reviewed the electrical and approved it. So, we're here
obviously requesting a variance approval.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: The shed that was originally there, was that
there before you moved there?
MR. FREUDENBERGER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Okay, and you just, they unfortunately put it
on the exact same spot as the old shed was?
MR. FREUDENBERGER: Yes, that's right.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Okay, I think they've answered all my
questions that I had. So, I really don't have any other questions for you guys.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: More of a question to Staff. So, the sequence of
events in the permit process, would there be an on-site inspection before the final shed is
completed? Like should the Village have caught this before they went to the final
inspection and saw that it was in the exact same place that it was before and where it
shouldn't have been?
MR. OSOBA: It's my understanding that the Building Department does one
inspection for sheds. I don't believe that they have pre or initial inspections. It's certainly
something we can look into, but from my understanding, they only do the one final
inspection based on the permit.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: What kind of base is there?
MR. FREUDENBERGER: It's a cement, I believe.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: It's cement, it's not on gravel or anything?
MR. FREUDENBERGER: No, cement.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Was that the pre-existing slab that was from
the prior shed?
MR. FREUDENBERGER: Yes. Yes.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Any other questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: You may have a seat.
MR. FREUDENBERGER: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Anybody present who wishes to discuss this?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Okay. All right, so we'll close it down.
Do you want to take this up, Frank?
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Yes. I think this is a reasonable request. It's
unfortunate how this played out. The homeowners did the right thing by pulling the permit.
I will take their word that they, you know, pulled the permit properly and I'm sure it's in the
record, but it's kind of a human error here.
It seems that it's going to do more harm than good forcing the
homeowners to move this, voiding the warranty and kind of neutralizing, you know, the
structure of the shed and the concrete slab and all that. We have a neighbor letter here
that is in favor and no neighbors here to object or a formally dispute the petition, so I'm in
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 18 of 67
favor.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Yes, I agree with you, Frank, on those points.
Then just for one item of clarification, that neighbor who submitted the letter of support,
Christine Ray, she's just not a neighbor, she's the direct neighbor or the adjacent neighbor.
So, if there is an issue, if she flagged an issue or voiced opposition, I think this would look
a little differently, but --
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: -- since they have written support from your
adjacent neighbor, I think that's important. Frankly, the other point about that, that slab
being the original slab and they just tore down the old shed and put the new shed on top, I
can see how that error happens. It's not necessarily excusable but it's explainable. So,
I'm in support for those reasons.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: I move to approve the variance as
presented.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: I'll second.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Selbka.
COMMISSIONER SELBKA: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Portera.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. O'Connor.
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Drake.
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Siavelis.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Chair Jaffe.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Yes0
Congratulations.
MRS. FREUDENBERGER: Thank you.
MR. FREUDENBERGER: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: You're welcome.
(Whereupon, the public hearing on the above-
mentioned petition was adjourned at 7:27 p.m.)
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 19 of 67
ZONING BOARD
REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF A MEETING
BEFORE THE VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
OF APPEALS
RE: 513 NORTH DOUGLAS AVENUE - ZBA #25-022
REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS had before the Village of
Arlington Heights Zoning Board of Appeals taken at the Arlington Heights
Village Hall, 33 South Arlington Heights Road, 1st Floor, Buechner Room,
Arlington Heights, Illinois on the 14th day of July, 2025 at the hour of
7:27 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
BENJAMIN JAFFE, Chairperson
TOM DRAKE
PETER SIAVELIS
MICHAEL O'CONNOR
FRANK PORTERA
JOSEPH SELBKA
ALSO PRESENT:
DEREK MACH, Development Planner
DARKO BOJIN, Assistant Planner
DAN OSOBA, Planner
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 20 of 67
18
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: All right, next on the agenda, Item E, 513 North
Douglas Avenue, ZBA #25-022.
MR. GINNODO: I've got to sign in first.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: No worries.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: First time here in front of this Board?
MR. GINNODO: I'm late, sorry.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Well, while Keith is doing that, why don't we just
do the Staff report?
MR. OSOBA: Sure.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Thank you.
MR. OSOBA: The property is zoned R-3 Residential Single-Family District.
The Petitioner is proposing to construct a covered front porch within the front yard of the
property. The front porch is proposed to match the existing 4.63-foot north side setback
which is an existing non-conforming condition. The minimum side setback for this property
is 5.6 feet. Additionally, the front porch encroaches eight feet into the required front yard
setback of 30 feet. These proposed improvements to the front yard exceed the maximum
impervious surface coverage for the front yard specifically by 87.09 square feet.
Therefore, the Petitioner is requesting the following variations:
• An eight-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-3.3(a) to permit a front
porch to be located 22 feet from the front property line where a front yard
setback of 30 feet is required;
• A 0.97-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-3.3(b) to permit a front porch
to be located 4.63 feet from the side or north property line where a side yard
setback of 5.6 feet is required; and
• An 87.09 square-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-3.5(b)(2) to permit
a front yard impervious surface coverage of 927.15 square feet where 840.06
square feet is required.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Could you state your name and address for the
record?
MR. GINNODO: Keith Ginnodo, Kingsley-Ginnodo Architects, 314 North
Pine, Arlington Heights.
(Witness sworn.)
MR. GINNODO: The owner is not here; she's on vacation with her two
children. The whole impetus of the front porch project is a dream that has been in the
family for a while. She just wants to sit on the swing in the front porch with her kids and
hang out in the front yard. That's basically what the project is all about, and the
beautification of other aspects of the front of the house.
So, the front porch does project in front of the house by eight feet,
three feet more than, you know, the normal five by 10 that's permitted. It also extends to
the north edge of the building to align with the face of the house. It's not uncommon in the
neighborhood to have a front porch that's usable besides just the stoop over the front door.
I discussed the purpose of the porch, so that she and her two children can swing on the
porch and play on the porch and all that kind of stuff.
The property has no public sidewalk that runs along the front of it, so
the lawn looks really long and lovely actually, but the thing is they feel a little bit pushed
back on the site. To the north of them, their front porch will align with the garage of the
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 21 of 67
19
adjacent property, and to the south of them, there is a big hedge that runs between the
two properties. So, they feel like they're kind of set back and they want to be part of the
neighborhood and build community. So, that's the source of that.
The 88 square feet of impervious surface coverage in the front yard
will be approximately 190 square feet over the whole property. So, they'll still have almost
200 square feet of impervious if you include the entire property in that calculation, realizing
that the front yard does have its restriction. Without that sidewalk which would be about
280 square feet, there's kind of a grass offset there and I don't think there's ever going to
be a sidewalk that gets built there because it doesn't continue further south.
The reason that square footage is what it is, the two young daughters
will soon be driving. I mean, right now they're 11 and nine, but she's planning on living in
the house for as long as she needs to until the kids matriculate college probably. So, they
have widened the driveway for the one-car garage so they can get two cars to navigate
side by side. That's really the largest part of it.
So, I think in the end what they're asking for is beneficial. It's in
keeping with the neighborhood, and it kind of, hopefully it fosters community as well.
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: Okay, is the size of the porch, is this the
absolute minimum size you can go? I know not the absolute minimum, but you know what
I'm actually trying to get --
MR. GINNODO: Not the absolute, yes. So, when you get a three-person,
when you get three seats on a swing, it gets to be about six feet wide, and then you've got
to be able to swing in it. It's between the column and the wall. We don't want a knuckle
scrape and any of that kind of stuff.
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: Sure.
MR. GINNODO: So, it's a reasonable minimum to accomplish that.
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: Okay, and I saw the letters of support. So,
the person directly to the north was one of those supporters?
MR. GINNODO: Yes, and directly to the south, and directly across the
street.
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: Yes, when you go through that
neighborhood, there are quite a few porches.
MR. GINNODO: Yes.
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: Some even kind of closed off --
MR. GINNODO: Yes, some of the older ones especially, yes.
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: Yes.
MR. GINNODO: Yes.
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: Okay, and you mentioned something about
expanding the driveway in the future? Is that --
MR. GINNODO: No, not in the future. There will be future drivers.
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: Yes.
MR. GINNODO: Right now, it's a one-car garage. They can kind of stick
their car in front of it. We've tried to kind of keep the position of the garage as you can see
on part of the driveway. It's just a matter of like making it work instead of being, again two
cars scraping against each other.
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: Yes, okay. No, I just want to make sure
since the impervious surface is already an issue in the front.
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 22 of 67
20
MR. GINNODO: Yes, exactly.
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: I got you, okay.
MR. GINNODO: Yes.
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: Okay, yes, I think you answered most of my
questions.
Any other questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: All right, thank you. You can have a seat.
I'll ask, I think I know what the answer is, is there anybody present to
comment on this petition?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: All right, Mike, let's close it down.
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: Yes. I think I got most of the questions
answered that I was looking to get answered here. I think, you know, there was concern
about the impervious surface. There is no sidewalk in this area. The whole lot is in
conformance. Again, there is a front yard rule, but also when you do drive by and you go
down the block, it is set back pretty far. So, I think it fit in pretty well in the neighborhood
which I was a little concerned with just reading it, but I have no concerns. I'm in support of
it.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Agreed.
Is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: Motion to approve as written.
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: Second.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Selbka.
COMMISSIONER SELBKA: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Portera.
COMMISSIONER PORTERA: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. O'Connor.
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Drake.
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Mr. Siavelis.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Yes.
MR. OSOBA: Chair Jaffe.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Yes.
Congratulations.
MR. GINNODO: Thank you very much.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Do we have other business?
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Actually, I think there is. Just one quick. Bob
Flubacker's comment was actually well taken I think and well based. What's the --
MR. MACH: It is on the list, a short list of code amendments, yes, that I
think Staff is going to propose. We seen that variance approximately once a year it
seems.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: You've seen which variance? You see that
issue we're talking about?
MR. MACH: Yes, where projects return because the existing variance has
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 23 of 67
21
then expired.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Right, and you can't, the Village can't renew
those variances like, you know, automatically, correct? That has to come back in front of
the Board?
MR. MACH: Correct, and it currently states one year. The proposal is two
years.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Right, the code says one year.
MR. MACH: Correct.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Yes.
MR. MACH: Yes, no, it is on our list.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: But is there any correlation between the period in
which a permit is valid and the period in which a petitioner could re-petition? So, if one
moves from one year to two years, does that mean that a petitioner being denied, does
that change that calculation or is that still one year?
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: No, I would say that's a different calculation
because it's a different result, right? One comes off a denial, the other one comes off a
grant or approval, right? Is that, under Bob's -- so does that make sense, Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Yes, sorry.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Okay, so the --
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: I'm not used to hearing that term, sorry if I was
delayed in responding.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: You're thrown by Mr. Chairman, right?
So, Bob's, the way I interpret Bob's proposal, Derek, is two years
from the date of either approval by this Board or the grant of the permit, right? Because
those are two different dates, right? The grant of the permit is something, well, I guess
you send out, the Village sends out after a vote like this, so Bob Flubacker's client received
approval of the variance, I assume that the Village sends out some sort of formal
communication to them that says, you know, congratulations, your petition has been
granted, the following variances are okay, right? Does the two-year clock start running
from that date or today's date?
MR. MACH: Today's date, the date of the hearing.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Okay, so even still, I mean, how, typically,
how fast does the Village send out the confirmatory letter?
MR. MACH: We send the findings and the approved minutes after the next
hearing date; however, the Petitioner can go apply for the permit tomorrow. You know,
sometimes they're in for permitting it already, we wouldn't sign off on zoning if a variance
was necessary, but yes, he can proceed to permit.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Okay, so there is a situation in the current
framework where there's 11 months, right, where essentially, you've received the
correspondence and the clock has been ticking on you for one month already, so you have
11 months to get your act together. You have to break ground then, is that what it is, or
what's --
MR. MACH: Once the permit is issued.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Okay.
MR. MACH: There are situations where someone is in for permit and Staff
will approve the permit tomorrow if the variance was granted.
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 24 of 67
22
COMMISSIONER SELBKA: But there's other situations where we have a
lot of comments associated with the permit, and that's where the delays
are --
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: And that's probably, Joe, Bob's commentary.
COMMISSIONER SELBKA: Right.
COMMISSIONER SIAVELIS: Maybe on projects where financing isn't
secure or there is some concern, or if it's a larger residential project or dealing with --
COMMISSIONER DRAKE: When are those code changes likely to be
looked at and potentially approved? Is there a timetable on that?
MR. OSOBA: I think we're aiming for the end of the year, but that's very
tentative at this point. There's a lot of kind of discussion and we want to make sure there's
no unintended consequences. A lot of the discussion tonight is useful, but I think we're
wanting to make sure that we're not making changes to code and then having to remake
changes to the code. So, we want to get it right the first time, but I think the tentative
timeline is the end of the year.
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: Have you looked at what other Villages do?
MR. OSOBA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: Have you seen a year or two years?
MR. OSOBA: It varies mostly, yes.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: All right, any other business? Is there anybody
present who wishes to make public comment?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: Is there a motion for adjournment?
COMMISSIONER SELBKA: Motion to adjourn.
COMMISSIONER O'CONNOR: I second that.
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: All in favor?
(Chorus of ayes.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRPERSON JAFFE: We're adjourned.
(Whereupon, the public hearing on the above-
mentioned petition was adjourned at 7:40 p.m.)
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 25 of 67
23
STATE OF ILLINOIS )
) SS.
COUNTY OF KANE )
I, RON LeGRAND, SR., depose and say that
I am a digital court reporter doing business in the State of
Illinois; that I reported verbatim the foregoing proceedings and
that the foregoing is a true and correct transcript to the best of
my knowledge and ability.
______________________________
RON LeGRAND, SR.
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO
BEFORE ME THIS DAY OF
, A.D. 2025.
________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
LeGRAND REPORTING & TRANSCRIBING SERVICES
(630) 894-9389
Page 26 of 67
VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, ILLINOIS
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
PUBLIC HEARING
JULY 14, 2025
FINDINGS OF FACT, DECISION AND ORDER
Agenda Item: 919 S. Vail Ave. – Featherstone Residence
Applicant: Robert Flubacker
Zoning Relief Requested:
• A 4.0-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-3.3b (Required Minimum Yards) to allow an addition
with a side yard setback of 3.0 feet instead of the required 7.0 feet and an additional 1.0 feet for the
eave.
• A variance from Chapter 28, Section 6.6-5 (Permitted Obstructions) to allow two air conditioning
units in the required side yard setback along the south property line.
Date of Publication: 6/28/25
Manner of Publication: Daily Herald
Zoning Board of Appeals (“ZBA”) Members Present:
Drake, Portera, Selbka, Jaffe, Siavelis, O’Connor
Having heard and considered the testimony and evidence at the public hearing of July 14, 2025, the ZBA makes the
following findings of fact:
The subject site is zoned R-3, One Family Dwelling District. The property has a total land area of 9,244 square feet
and the proposed residence with the addition will be approximately 2,400 square feet. The petitioner is proposing to
construct an addition to the existing single story home which includes an expansion to the garage in order to create a
two car front load garage. The expansion for the garage is encroaching into the required side yard setback along the
north property line. In addition, the two air conditioning units are encroaching into the required side yard setback
along the south property line.
For Variation Requests:
(Pursuant to Chapter 6, Article II, Section 6-202(e)(2)(c), in consideration of the standards of practical difficulties or
particular hardship, the ZBA shall require evidence of the below.)
The ZBA finds that evidence of the following was presented at the public hearing (check all that apply with an
“X”):
Page 1 of 2
Page 27 of 67
_X_ The proposed use will not alter the essential character of the locality and will be compatible with existing
uses and zoning of nearby property; and
_X_ The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances, which may include the length of time the subject
property has been vacant as zoned; and
_X__ The proposed variation is in harmony with the spirit and intent of this Chapter; and
_X__ The variance requested is the minimum variance necessary to allow reasonable use of the property.
Does the ZBA Find in Favor of the Applicant for Relief Requested?
Relief Granted (if any):
• A 4.0-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-3.3b (Required Minimum Yards) to allow an addition
with a side yard setback of 3.0 feet instead of the required 7.0 feet and an additional 1.0 feet for the
eave.
• A variance from Chapter 28, Section 6.6-5 (Permitted Obstructions) to allow two air conditioning units
in the required side yard setback along the south property line.
Reason for Determination:
The Zoning Board commented that the petitioner received zoning variations for the project in December of 2023. The
variances have expired since the project did not commence.
Based on the information contained in the application and the testimony and evidence presented at the public
hearing, the ZBA voted on the approval of these findings of fact, decision and order and the requested application
resulting in the following vote:
6 ayes 0 nays 1 absent 0 abstain
Date: July 14, 2025
Benjamin Jaffe, Chair
Zoning Board of Appeals
Village of Arlington Heights
Pursuant to Chapter 6, Article II, Section 6-202(e)(3), in exercising the enumerated powers of the Zoning
Board of Appeals, the ZBA may reverse, affirm, or modify the order, requirement, decision, or determination
appealed form and to that end shall have all the powers of the Administrative Officer from whom the appeal
is taken.
Page 2 of 2
Page 28 of 67
VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, ILLINOIS
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
PUBLIC HEARING
JULY 14, 2025
FINDINGS OF FACT, DECISION AND ORDER
Agenda Item: 819 N. Highland Ave. – Lall Residence
Applicant: Kevin Purdom / JRC Design Build
Zoning Relief Requested:
• A 2.78-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-3.3(b) to allow a side setback of 4.72-feet from the
newly attached garage where 7.5 feet is required.
Date of Publication: 6/28/25
Manner of Publication: Daily Herald
Zoning Board of Appeals (“ZBA”) Members Present:
Drake, Portera, Selbka, Jaffe, Siavelis, O’Connor
Having heard and considered the testimony and evidence at the public hearing of July 14, 2025, the ZBA makes the
following findings of fact:
The petitioner is proposing to construct a new 247 square-foot addition and interior remodel to connect the existing
home to the detached garaged on the north of the property. The existing detached garage is connected to the home
with a covered breezeway and is located 4.72-feet from the north side property line. Attaching the detached garage
to the home with the proposed building addition will require compliance with the side yard setbacks of the R-3
District, which equals 10-percent of the lot width or 7.5-feet on this lot.
For Variation Requests:
(Pursuant to Chapter 6, Article II, Section 6-202(e)(2)(c), in consideration of the standards of practical difficulties or
particular hardship, the ZBA shall require evidence of the below.)
The ZBA finds that evidence of the following was presented at the public hearing (check all that apply with an
“X”):
_X_ The proposed use will not alter the essential character of the locality and will be compatible with existing
uses and zoning of nearby property; and
_X_ The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances, which may include the length of time the subject
property has been vacant as zoned; and
Page 1 of 2
Page 29 of 67
_X_ The proposed variation is in harmony with the spirit and intent of this Chapter; and
_X_ The variance requested is the minimum variance necessary to allow reasonable use of the property.
Does the ZBA Find in Favor of the Applicant for Relief Requested?
Relief Granted (if any):
• A 2.78-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-3.3(b) to allow a side setback of 4.72-feet from the
newly attached garage where 7.5 feet is required.
Reason for Determination:
The Petitioner testified as to the hardship, existing conditions of the subject property, and similar improvements in the
surrounding neighborhood. The Zoning Board commented that the variance is minimal, a good use of the space, and
a logical location for an expansion to increase safety and security between the two structures.
Based on the information contained in the application and the testimony and evidence presented at the public
hearing, the ZBA voted on the approval of these findings of fact, decision and order and the requested application
resulting in the following vote:
6 ayes 0 nays 1 absent 0 abstain
Date: July 14, 2025
Benjamin Jaffe, Chair
Zoning Board of Appeals
Village of Arlington Heights
Pursuant to Chapter 6, Article II, Section 6-202(e)(3), in exercising the enumerated powers of the Zoning
Board of Appeals, the ZBA may reverse, affirm, or modify the order, requirement, decision, or determination
appealed form and to that end shall have all the powers of the Administrative Officer from whom the appeal
is taken.
Page 2 of 2
Page 30 of 67
VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, ILLINOIS
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
PUBLIC HEARING
JULY 14, 2025
FINDINGS OF FACT, DECISION AND ORDER
Agenda Item: Milewski Residence – 1319 N. Salem Blvd.
Applicant: Kevin Erdmann / Erdmann Construction
Zoning Relief Requested:
• A 4.97-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-1.3.a. (Required Minimum Yards) to allow an
addition (porch) with a front yard setback of 34.26 feet instead of the required 39.23 feet and an
additional 1.0 foot for the eave.
Date of Publication: 6/28/25
Manner of Publication: Daily Herald
Zoning Board of Appeals (“ZBA”) Members Present:
Drake, Portera, Selbka, Jaffe, Siavelis, O’Connor
Having heard and considered the testimony and evidence at the public hearing of July 14, 2025, the ZBA makes the
following findings of fact:
The property is zoned R-3 and has a total land area of 15,008 square feet. The petitioner is proposing to construct a
front yard porch that is 36 feet and one-half inch wide, and 6.5 feet deep. This addition would have a front yard
setback of 34.26 feet where 39.23 feet is required.
For Variation Requests:
(Pursuant to Chapter 6, Article II, Section 6-202(e)(2)(c), in consideration of the standards of practical difficulties or
particular hardship, the ZBA shall require evidence of the below.)
The ZBA finds that evidence of the following was presented at the public hearing (check all that apply with an
“X”):
_X_ The proposed use will not alter the essential character of the locality and will be compatible with existing
uses and zoning of nearby property; and
_X_ The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances, which may include the length of time the subject
property has been vacant as zoned; and
_X_ The proposed variation is in harmony with the spirit and intent of this Chapter; and
Page 1 of 2
Page 31 of 67
_X_ The variance requested is the minimum variance necessary to allow reasonable use of the property.
Does the ZBA Find in Favor of the Applicant for Relief Requested?
Relief Granted (if any):
• A 4.97-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-1.3.a. (Required Minimum Yards) to allow an
addition (porch) with a front yard setback of 34.26 feet instead of the required 39.23 feet and an
additional 1.0 foot for the eave.
Reason for Determination:
The petitioner testified that the current configuration of the porch made it difficult to use. The Zoning Board
commented that the variance is consistent with the character of the neighborhood and would help with the enjoyment
of the property.
Based on the information contained in the application and the testimony and evidence presented at the public
hearing, the ZBA voted on the approval of these findings of fact, decision and order and the requested application
resulting in the following vote:
6 ayes 0 nays 1 absent 0 abstain
Date: July 14, 2025
Benjamin Jaffe, Chair
Zoning Board of Appeals
Village of Arlington Heights
Pursuant to Chapter 6, Article II, Section 6-202(e)(3), in exercising the enumerated powers of the Zoning
Board of Appeals, the ZBA may reverse, affirm, or modify the order, requirement, decision, or determination
appealed form and to that end shall have all the powers of the Administrative Officer from whom the appeal
is taken.
Page 2 of 2
Page 32 of 67
VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, ILLINOIS
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
PUBLIC HEARING
JULY 14, 2025
FINDINGS OF FACT, DECISION AND ORDER
Agenda Item: 106 S. Windsor Dr. - Freudenberger Residence
Applicant: Scott Freudenberger
Zoning Relief Requested:
• A 1.71 foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 6.5-2 to allow a shed side to be located 1.29 feet from
the side property line where 3 feet is required.
Date of Publication: 6/28/25
Manner of Publication: Daily Herald
Zoning Board of Appeals (“ZBA”) Members Present:
Drake, Portera, Selbka, Jaffe, Siavelis, O’Connor
Having heard and considered the testimony and evidence at the public hearing of July 14, 2025, the ZBA makes the
following findings of fact:
The petitioner has constructed a 160 square-foot shed in the rear of the property 1.29-feet from the north side
property line. A building permit was obtained for the construction of the shed; however, it was constructed a distance
of 1.29-feet from the property line instead of the required 3-feet as shown on the approved permit. The shed is
compliant with height, size, and rear setback requirements, but is encroaching within the required 3-foot side yard
setback for accessory structures.
For Variation Requests:
(Pursuant to Chapter 6, Article II, Section 6-202(e)(2)(c), in consideration of the standards of practical difficulties or
particular hardship, the ZBA shall require evidence of the below.)
The ZBA finds that evidence of the following was presented at the public hearing (check all that apply with an
“X”):
_X_ The proposed use will not alter the essential character of the locality and will be compatible with existing
uses and zoning of nearby property; and
_X_ The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances, which may include the length of time the subject
property has been vacant as zoned; and
_X_ The proposed variation is in harmony with the spirit and intent of this Chapter; and
Page 1 of 2
Page 33 of 67
_X_ The variance requested is the minimum variance necessary to allow reasonable use of the property.
Does the ZBA Find in Favor of the Applicant for Relief Requested?
Relief Granted (if any):
• A 1.71 foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 6.5-2 to allow a shed side to be located 1.29 feet from
the side property line where 3 feet is required.
Reason for Determination:
The Petitioner testified as to the hardship, existing shed location, minimal impact on surrounding properties, and that
the neighbor adjacent to the shed has no concerns with the shed placement or design. The Zoning Board
commented that the request is reasonable and minimal to permit the shed location, and that the closest neighbor
does not have any opposition to the request.
Based on the information contained in the application and the testimony and evidence presented at the public
hearing, the ZBA voted on the approval of these findings of fact, decision and order and the requested application
resulting in the following vote:
6 ayes 0 nays 1 absent 0 abstain
Date: July 14, 2025
Benjamin Jaffe, Chair
Zoning Board of Appeals
Village of Arlington Heights
Pursuant to Chapter 6, Article II, Section 6-202(e)(3), in exercising the enumerated powers of the Zoning
Board of Appeals, the ZBA may reverse, affirm, or modify the order, requirement, decision, or determination
appealed form and to that end shall have all the powers of the Administrative Officer from whom the appeal
is taken.
Page 2 of 2
Page 34 of 67
VILLAGE OF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, ILLINOIS
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
PUBLIC HEARING
JULY 14, 2025
FINDINGS OF FACT, DECISION AND ORDER
Agenda Item: 513 N. Douglas Ave – Organ Residence
Applicant: Keith Ginnodo / Kingsley-Ginnodo Architects
Zoning Relief Requested:
• An 8.0-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-3.3(a) to permit a front porch to be located 22 feet
from the front property line where a front yard setback of 30 feet is required.
• A 0.97-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-3.3(b) to permit a front porch to be located 4.63
feet from the side (north) property line where a side yard setback of 5.6 feet is required.
• An 87.09 square-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-3.5(b)(2) to permit a front yard
impervious surface coverage of 927.15 square-feet where 840.06 square-feet is required.
Date of Publication: 6/28/25
Manner of Publication: Daily Herald
Zoning Board of Appeals (“ZBA”) Members Present:
Drake, Portera, Selbka, Jaffe, Siavelis, O’Connor
Having heard and considered the testimony and evidence at the public hearing of July 14, 2025, the ZBA makes the
following findings of fact:
The petitioner is proposing to construct a covered front porch within the front yard of the property. The front porch is
proposed to match the 4.63-foot north side setback of the existing home, which is an existing non-conforming
condition. The minimum side setback for this property is 5.6-feet. Additionally, the porch encroaches 8-feet into the
required front yard setback of 30-feet. These proposed improvements to the front yard exceed the maximum
impervious surface coverage for the front yard specifically by 87.09 square-feet.
For Variation Requests:
(Pursuant to Chapter 6, Article II, Section 6-202(e)(2)(c), in consideration of the standards of practical difficulties or
particular hardship, the ZBA shall require evidence of the below.)
The ZBA finds that evidence of the following was presented at the public hearing (check all that apply with an
“X”):
Page 1 of 2
Page 35 of 67
_X_ The proposed use will not alter the essential character of the locality and will be compatible with existing
uses and zoning of nearby property; and
_X_ The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances, which may include the length of time the subject
property has been vacant as zoned; and
_X_ The proposed variation is in harmony with the spirit and intent of this Chapter; and
_X_ The variance requested is the minimum variance necessary to allow reasonable use of the property.
Does the ZBA Find in Favor of the Applicant for Relief Requested?
Relief Granted (if any):
• An 8.0-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-3.3(a) to permit a front porch to be located 22 feet
from the front property line where a front yard setback of 30 feet is required.
• A 0.97-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-3.3(b) to permit a front porch to be located 4.63
feet from the side (north) property line where a side yard setback of 5.6 feet is required.
• An 87.09 square-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-3.5(b)(2) to permit a front yard
impervious surface coverage of 927.15 square-feet where 840.06 square-feet is required.
Reason for Determination:
The Petitioner testified as to the hardship, existing site conditions, and consistency with other similar projects in the
surrounding neighborhood. The Zoning Board commented that the variance is minimal, will fit in well with the
surrounding neighborhood, and does not have any neighborhood opposition.
Based on the information contained in the application and the testimony and evidence presented at the public
hearing, the ZBA voted on the approval of these findings of fact, decision and order and the requested application
resulting in the following vote:
6 ayes 0 nays 1 absent 0 abstain
Date: July 14, 2025
Benjamin Jaffe, Chair
Zoning Board of Appeals
Village of Arlington Heights
Pursuant to Chapter 6, Article II, Section 6-202(e)(3), in exercising the enumerated powers of the Zoning
Board of Appeals, the ZBA may reverse, affirm, or modify the order, requirement, decision, or determination
appealed form and to that end shall have all the powers of the Administrative Officer from whom the appeal
is taken.
Page 2 of 2
Page 36 of 67
Zoning Board of Appeals
8/11/2025
Item: 1015 N. Forrest Ave. - ZBA25-023
Department: Planning & Community Development
Item Description:
REQUEST
• A variation from Chapter 28, Section 10.2-11(1)(a) (Parking – In Yards)
to allow gravel driveway surface where concrete or asphalt is required.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Exhibits_1015 N Forrest Ave
Page 37 of 67
Petition – ZBA#25-023
PIN: 03-28-102-008
ARLINGTON HEIGHTS ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Staff Analysis
Prepared By: Dan Osoba, Planner
Hearing Date: August 11, 2025
Date Prepared: August 6, 2025
Project Title: Peart Residence
Address: 1015 N. Forrest Ave.
Background Information
Petition Number: ZBA #25-023
Petitioner: Jordan & Victoria Peart
Address: 1015 N. Forrest Ave.
Arlington Heights IL 60004
Existing Zoning: R-3 – Residential Single-Family District
Requested Action/Background Information
The Petitioner is proposing to allow a gravel driveway to the rear of the home, which extends from an attached
garage to the existing detached garage structure at the rear of the property. A new home is currently under
construction on the site and the gravel drive would connect the rear garage and provide required access to the N.
Forrest Avenue right-of-way. Driveways are required to be constructed of concrete or asphalt. Green infrastructure
applications may be utilized in lieu of concrete or asphalt surfaces subject to Village Engineer approval. Therefore,
the Petitioner is requesting the following variation:
• A variation from Chapter 28, Section 10.2-11(1)(a) (Parking – In Yards) to allow gravel driveway surface
where concrete or asphalt is required.
Variation Review Standards
In its consideration of the standards of practical difficulties or particular hardships, the Zoning Board of Appeals shall
require evidence that (1) the proposed use will not alter the essential character of the locality and will be compatible
with existing uses and zoning of nearby property; and (2) the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances, which
may include the length of time the subject property has been vacant as zoned; and (3) the proposed variation is in
harmony with the spirit and intent of this Chapter; and (4) the variance requested is the minimum variance necessary
to allow reasonable use of the property. A variation shall be permitted only if the evidence, in the judgment of the
Board of Appeals, sustains each of the four conditions enumerated.
Page 38 of 67
Petition – ZBA#25-023
PIN: 03-28-102-008
Map of General Vicinity
Items required to be Submitted 15 Days Prior to Public Hearing
Item Provided Dated Remarks
1. Notification Affidavit 7/24/25
2. List of Property Owners Within 250 feet of Subject Property 7/24/25
3. Letter that was Mailed 7/21/25
4. Photographs of Sign on Property 7/24/25
Page 39 of 67
Petition – ZBA#25-023
PIN: 03-28-102-008
Photographs of Existing Structure
Page 40 of 67
Village of Arlington Heights
To: Jordan & Victoria Peart
From: Dan Osoba
Department: Department of Planning and Community Development
File Number: ZBA 25-023
Project: 1015 N. Forrest Avenue
Date: August 6, 2025
ZONING COMMENTS:
For your use and consideration, review the zoning review comments below regarding the
variance to Chapter 28, Section 10.2-11.1.a to permit a gravel driveway in the rear yard to
connect the existing attached one-car garage to the detached garage in the rear yard. If you
have any questions, please contact dosoba@vah.com:
Planning and Community Development
1. No comments.
Building and Life Safety
1. No comments.
Engineering
1. The Public Works & Engineering Division is NOT IN FAVOR of the requested variance
to Chapter 28, Section 10.2-11.1(a) to permit a gravel driveway in the rear yard.
Although the new single-family home has two sump pump discharge locations, the
driveway to the garage is not impacted by the location of the sumps. Staff would be
in favor of a green infrastructure application as a substitution to the hard surface
required by code.
Page 41 of 67
CERTIFICATE OF PUBLICATION
Paddock Publications, Inc.
Northwest Suburbs
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 Northwest Suburbs DAILY HERALD. That said Northwest Suburbs
DAILY HERALD is a secular newspaper, published in Arlington Heights,
Cook County, State of Illinois, and has been in general circulation daily
throughout Cook County, continuously for more than 50 weeks prior to the first
Publication of the attached notice, and a newspaper as defined by 715 ILCS 5/5.
I further certify that the Northwest Suburbs 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 07/26/2025
in said Northwest Suburbs DAILY HERALD. This notice was also placed on
a statewide public notice website as required by 5 ILCS 5/2.1.
BY ______________________________________________
Designee of the Publisher of the Daily Herald
Control # 299139
Page 42 of 67
Page 43 of 67
1015 N. Forrest – Variance Request Statement
We are requesting a zoning variance to allow the use of a decorative gravel driveway in lieu of a continuous
asphalt or concrete surface connecting our existing one-car attached garage to an existing detached garage at
the rear of the property.
Unique Circumstances
The property has a unique layout due to the existing detached garage located at the rear of the lot. While
zoning code requires a hard-surface (concrete or asphalt) driveway for access, enforcing this creates an
unnecessary burden. A solid surface connection between the attached and detached garages would
unnecessarily disrupt the rear yard, especially given our minimal use of the driveway. These circumstances are
specific to our property and not commonly found on neighboring lots.
Additionally, the property has a high water table, which increases discharge from our two sump pumps. As
indicated in our civil engineering plans, these pumps discharge toward the rear of the property due to the
absence of a stormwater line at the street. A properly graded gravel driveway supports natural water infiltration,
reducing runoff and minimizing the risk of standing water.
Minimum Variation Necessary
This request represents the minimum variation required to make reasonable use of the property. We are not
eliminating access or adding any new driveway paths—we are simply seeking to use a more permeable,
environmentally responsible material.
Harmony with the Intent of the Zoning Code
The proposed gravel driveway supports the spirit and intent of the zoning ordinance by minimizing impervious
surface area, reducing environmental impact, and preserving the rear yard’s green space and character. The
driveway will be located out of public view and will not disrupt the streetscape or neighborhood character.
A continuous paved driveway between the two garages would divide the lot both visually and physically,
compromising the open backyard that is integral to the home’s overall design. In contrast, a gravel driveway is
more compatible with the landscaped character of the yard and preserves its natural aesthetic.
Environmental & Functional Justi cation
There is no practical need for continuous vehicle circulation between the two garages. The rear garage is not
used as a drive-through or for routine access from the main driveway, just an occasional use. A gravel surface
provides sufficient access for occasional use while supporting the site's drainage needs and avoiding
unnecessary environmental disruption.
Conclusion
We respectfully request approval of this variance to use a decorative gravel driveway, which provides a
functional, environmentally sensitive, and aesthetically appropriate solution tailored to the unique conditions of
our property.
Page 44 of 67
fi
4,060 SQ. FT.
(DRIVEWAY, INCL.
WALK TO REAR YARD)
170 SQ. FT.
(PAVER WALK)
53 SQ. FT.
(A/C PAD)
851 SQ. FT.
370 SQ. FT.
992 SQ. FT.
(PAVER STEPPERS)
576 SQ. FT.
c 2024 Copyright JMB Architects, Ltd. All rights reserved.
DATE: John Michael Belcher A.L.A. N.C.A.R.B.
PERMIT: These drawings, specifications, floorplans, and elevations (collectively,
"Architectural Plans") are the confidential and proprietary property of JMB
SEAL DATE: REVISION: REVISION: DRAWN BY: 180 W. Park Suite #10 Architects, Ltd. ("JMB") and may not be disclosed to anyone not directly involved
in the project that is the subject of these Architectural Plans or reproduced by
COPYRIGHT, 2024 BY
Elmhurst, Illinois 60126
PROJECT NO.: CHECKED BY:
any means without the prior written permission of JMB. You may not prepare
EXPIRES DATE:
SHEET: JM B derivative works based on these Architectural Plans. These Architectural Plans
were prepared for use on the specific site and at the issue date set forth herein
and are not suitable for use on a different site or at a later date. Your use of
these plans constitutes your acceptance of these terms and you agree to pay all
damages and enforcement costs of JMB
T1-1 JMB ARCHITECTS LTD. ARCHITECTS, LTD.
E-Mail: jmbarch@JMBArchitect.com Phone: 630.279.8228 Web: JMBArchitect.com
Page 45 of 67
Zoning Board of Appeals
8/11/2025
Item: 401 N. Pine Ave. - ZBA25-024
Department: Planning & Community Development
Item Description:
REQUEST
• A 2.54-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-3.3(b) (Required
Minimum Yards) to allow a second story addition with a side yard setback of
4.06-feet instead of the required 6.6-foot minimum and an additional 2-feet
for the eave.
• A 2.54-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 6.6-5.1 (Table of
Permitted Obstructions) to allow a deck to encroach in the required side
yard with a side setback of 4.06-feet instead of the required 6.6-foot
minimum.
• A variation from Chapter 28, Section 6.5-2 (Accessory Structures) to
allow a portion of a pergola in the side yard where accessory structures are
only permitted in the rear yard.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Exhibits_401 N Pine Ave
Page 46 of 67
Petition – ZBA#25-024
PIN: 03-29-313-004
ARLINGTON HEIGHTS ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Staff Analysis
Prepared By: Dan Osoba, Planner
Hearing Date: August 11, 2025
Date Prepared: August 6, 2025
Project Title: Colletti Residence
Address: 401 N. Pine Ave.
Background Information
Petition Number: ZBA #25-024
Petitioner: Kevin Purdom – JRC Design Build
Address: 1275 E. Davis St.
Arlington Heights IL 60005
Existing Zoning: R-3 – Residential Single-Family District
Requested Action/Background Information
The Petitioner is proposing to construct a second-story addition in the rear of the existing single-family dwelling along
with a deck and pergola located in the side and rear yard. The existing home is setback 4.06-feet from the interior
side yard where a minimum side yard setback of 6.6-feet is required. The Petitioner is proposing to maintain this non-
conforming setback for the second-story addition. The proposed deck is also encroaching into the required 6.6-foot
setback and maintaining the same non-conforming setback as the existing home and building addition at 4.06-feet.
The pergola, which is considered an accessory structure, may only be located in the rear of the property and is
partially proposed within the required side yard. Therefore, the Petitioner is requesting the following variations:
• A 2.54-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-3.3(b) (Required Minimum Yards) to allow a second
story addition with a side yard setback of 4.06-feet instead of the required 6.6-foot minimum and an
additional 2-feet for the eave.
• A 2.54-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 6.6-5.1 (Table of Permitted Obstructions) to allow a deck
to encroach in the required side yard with a side setback of 4.06-feet instead of the required 6.6-foot
minimum.
• A variation from Chapter 28, Section 6.5-2 (Accessory Structures) to allow a portion of a pergola in
the side yard where accessory structures are only permitted in the rear yard.
Variation Review Standards
In its consideration of the standards of practical difficulties or particular hardships, the Zoning Board of Appeals shall
require evidence that (1) the proposed use will not alter the essential character of the locality and will be compatible
with existing uses and zoning of nearby property; and (2) the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances, which
may include the length of time the subject property has been vacant as zoned; and (3) the proposed variation is in
harmony with the spirit and intent of this Chapter; and (4) the variance requested is the minimum variance necessary
to allow reasonable use of the property. A variation shall be permitted only if the evidence, in the judgment of the
Board of Appeals, sustains each of the four conditions enumerated.
Page 47 of 67
Petition – ZBA#25-024
PIN: 03-29-313-004
Map of General Vicinity
Items required to be Submitted 15 Days Prior to Public Hearing
Item Provided Dated Remarks
1. Notification Affidavit ✓ 7/22/25
2. List of Property Owners Within 250 feet of Subject Property ✓ 7/22/25
3. Letter that was Mailed ✓ 7/22/25
4. Photographs of Sign on Property ✓ 7/22/25
Page 48 of 67
Petition – ZBA#25-024
PIN: 03-29-313-004
Photographs of Existing Structure
Page 49 of 67
Village of Arlington Heights
To: Kevin Purdom
From: Dan Osoba
Department: Department of Planning and Community Development
File Number: ZBA 25-024
Project: 401 N. Pine Avenue
Date: August 6, 2025
ZONING COMMENTS:
For your use and consideration, review the zoning review comments below regarding the
following variances:
• A 2.54-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 5.1-3.3(b) (Required Minimum Yards)
to allow a second story addition with a side yard setback of 4.06-feet instead of the
required 6.6-foot minimum and an additional 2-feet for the eave.
• A 2.54-foot variation from Chapter 28, Section 6.6-5.1 (Table of Permitted
Obstructions) to allow a deck to encroach in the required side yard with a side setback
of 4.06-feet instead of the required 6.6-foot minimum.
• A variation from Chapter 28, Section 6.5-2 (Accessory Structures) to allow a portion
of a pergola in the side yard where accessory structures are only permitted in the rear
yard.
If you have any questions, please contact dosoba@vah.com:
Planning and Community Development
1. The proposed addition appears to fit with the character of the existing house and
neighborhood. However, a complete Design Commission application is required to be
submitted for review.
Building and Life Safety
1. No comments.
Engineering
1. The Public Works & Engineering Division have no objections to the requested
variance.
Page 50 of 67
CERTIFICATE OF PUBLICATION
Paddock Publications, Inc.
Northwest Suburbs
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 Northwest Suburbs DAILY HERALD. That said Northwest Suburbs
DAILY HERALD is a secular newspaper, published in Arlington Heights,
Cook County, State of Illinois, and has been in general circulation daily
throughout Cook County, continuously for more than 50 weeks prior to the first
Publication of the attached notice, and a newspaper as defined by 715 ILCS 5/5.
I further certify that the Northwest Suburbs 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 07/26/2025
in said Northwest Suburbs DAILY HERALD. This notice was also placed on
a statewide public notice website as required by 5 ILCS 5/2.1.
BY ______________________________________________
Designee of the Publisher of the Daily Herald
Control # 299140
Page 51 of 67
PETITION
The following petition form shall be used when submitting a petition for a variation from Chapter 28 of the
Arlington Heights Municipal Code. This must be submitted with a fully executed application to the Zoning
Board of Appeals. Please refer to Section 12 of Chapter 28 if the Arlington Heights Municipal Code for
information regarding the criteria by which the Zoning Board of Appeals will evaluate variation requests.
(Attached to this application packet.)
PETITION
NOW COMES the Petitioner Kevin Purdom (JRC Design Build)
being the owner of the property commonly know as: 401 N Pine Ave
5.1-3.3(b); 6.6-5.1; 6.5-2
and appeals to the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Arlington Heights for a Variation from Section
Chapter 28, of the Arlington Heights Municipal Code, in order to:
Build a second story addition, deck and
pergola that encroach into the existing nonconfomring sideyard setback
I hereby state that the proposed use will not alter the essential character of the locality and will be compatible with
existing uses and zoning of nearby property if the variation(s) were granted (please explain):
All other code and zoning
requirements will be met
I hereby state that the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances, which may include the length of time the
subject property has been vacant as zoned (please explain): Existing house is nonconforming so to
extend the existing walls higher and build in line with the existing;we will need variance.
I hereby state that the proposed variation is in harmony with the spirit and intent of this Chapter (please explain):
The design of the house and deck are cohesive with the rest of the neighborhood and
we are not encroaching further into the sideyard than the existing house.
I hereby state that the variance requested is the minimum variance necessary to allow reasonable use of the property
(please explain):
We tried to build the deck within the setback but it restricted the use and size.
Building in line with the building looks better and functions better. We
are not asking for any further extension. Any work on the second floor would require a variance because of the existing non-conformance.
Signed: Date: 07/22/2025
Petitioner
5
Page 52 of 67
Page 53 of 67
PROJECT DATA
PROJECT LOCATION: 401 N PINE AVE SHEET INDEX - ARCHITECTURAL ADDITION TO THE COLLETTI RESIDENCE
ZONING DISTRICT: R-3 A0 COVER SHEET 1- 06/09/2025
A1 EXISTING DRAWINGS 1- 06/09/2025
LOT AREA: 8,712 SF A2 FOUNDATION & BASEMENT PLANS 1- 06/09/2025 SITE PLAN NOTES 66.00
PIN: 03-29-313-004-0000 A3 FIRST FLOOR PLAN 1- 06/09/2025 1. INFORMATION ON THIS DRAWING IS ACCUMULATED FROM EXISTING 6'-7" 34'-5" 25'-0"
A4 SECOND FLOOR PLAN 1- 06/09/2025 DOCUMENTATION AND MUST BE CONFIRMED BY THE CONTRACTOR
AND COORDINATED WITH THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO
MAX LOT COVERAGE:(35%) 3,049 SF A5 ROOF PLAN & STAIR DETAILS 1- 06/09/2025 CONSTRUCTION. ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN IN FOR SCHEMATIC
A6 ELEVATIONS 1- 06/09/2025 PURPOSES ONLY. SEE SITE ENGINEERING PLAN AND LANDSCAPE
PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE: 2,302 SF 13'-2"
PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
A7 STRUCTURAL DETAILS 1- 06/09/2025 EX EX CONC DRIVE
2. VERIFY LOCATIONS OF ALL UTILITIES AND OTHER BUILDING
DETACHED 695 SF
SERVICES PRIOR TO EXCAVATION.
MAX FAR: 3,920 SF A8 SPECIFICATIONS 1- 06/09/2025 3. PROVIDE REQUIRED WORK TO ACCOMMODATE EXISTING UTILITIES
GARAGE
400 SF 1275 E. DAVIS, ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, IL 60005
(45%) MEP1 FIRST & SECOND FLOOR MEP PLANS 1- 06/09/2025 OR OTHER BUILDING SERVICES.
4. PROTECT EXISTING LANDSCAPING DURING CONSTRUCTION, TO PHONE: (847)255-2322
2,863 SF EMAIL: KEVINJCDB@GMAIL.COM
GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE.
PROPOSED FAR: 5. PROVIDE TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION/SECURITY FENCING AROUND C 2025 COPYRIGHT. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
X X
ALL OPEN EXCAVATIONS; HEIGHT AS REQ'D BY LOCAL CODES.
MAX IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE 4,356 SF PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK 6. VERIFY LOCATIONS OF ALL MATERIAL STOCKPILES AND DUMPSTERS
WITH OWNER.
X
(50%) EX WALK
OPTION 1: DESIGN BUILD A REVISED 1ST FLOOR, RELOCATING THE POWDER 7. CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO
COMMENCING WITH THE WORK. ANY DISCREPANCIES IN FIELD 301 SF
MAX FRONT YARD 1,650 SF 504 SF ROOM AND REMOVING ALL OF THE WALLS TO THE 3 BACK ROOMS. PATCH IN CONDITIONS ARE TO BE REPORTED TO THE ARCHITECT BEFORE
X
IMPERVIOUS (50%) ALLOWED PROPOSED HARDWOOD TO MATCH EXISTING. ADD A KITCHEN REMODEL PROCEEDING.
OPTION 2: DESIGN BUILD A 2ND FLOOR ADDITION OVER THE REAR OF THE HOME
8. PLEASE NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY IF THERE ARE ANY
DISCREPANCIES IN THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS.
X
ADDITION TO THE
PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS 9. STATE LAW: BEFORE DIGGING, CALL JULIE (811 OR 1-800-892-0123)
COVERAGE: 3,608 SF AND REWORK FLOOR PLAN TO INCLUDE 4-BEDROOMS, 2-BATHS AND A LAUNDRY FOR LOCATION OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UTILITIES AT WORK SITE. 48 EX PATIO
X
COLLETTI RESIDENCE
ROOM. HOUR NOTICE IS REQUIRED. 210 SF
10. THE HOUSE SHALL PASS A BLOWER DOOR TEST AND A COPY OF X
MAX BUILDING HEIGHT: 25'-0" THE RESULTS SHALL BE PROVIDED TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT NEW
OPTION 3: DESIGN BUILD A NEW 2-CAR GARAGE + DRIVE ADDITIONAL 3 OR 4 CAR. PRIOR TO SCHEDULING THE FINAL INSPECTIONS.
COMPOSITE
DECK/STAIRS
395 SF X 401 N PINE AVENUE
11. CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS AND REFUSE CONTAINMENT SHALL BE
PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT: EX TO REMAIN
132.00
OPTION 4: DESIGN BUILD A REVISED HEATING SYSTEM FROM THE EXISTING REQUIRED FOR ALL JOB SITES. CONTAINMENT SHALL OCCUR ON EX WALK 122 SF ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, IL 60004
THE PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THE PERMIT & SHALL BE PERGOLA, TBD
LOCATION AREAS: BOILER AND ADD AC. WITHIN A DUMPSTER, STRUCTURE, OR CONTAINER THAT CAN BE
ST JAMES STREET
COVERED TO PREVENT WINDBLOWN DEBRIS. ALL SUCH DATE
BASEMENT 1,300 SF
FIRST FLOOR 1,505 SF OPTION 5: RESIDE AND REROOF THE EXISTING HOME. WITH JAMES HARDIE DUMPSTERS, STRUCTURES, OR CONTAINERS SHALL BE COVERED
AT ALL TIMES WHEN NO WORK IS BEING PERFORMED ON THE 1- 06/09/2025
SECOND FLOOR 1,358 SF SIDING AND GAF PREMIUM ROOFING. PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THE PERMIT.
GARAGE 400 SF 12. ALL DISTURBED PARKWAY LAWN AREAS WILL BE RESTORED WITH
OPTION 6: REPAINT THE ENTIRE HOME. NEW SOD ON 6" OF TOPSOIL. ALL SOD SHALL BE WATERED AS REQ'D ISSUE DATE
TO SUSTAIN GROWTH.
TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE: 2,863 SF 13. ALL PARKWAY TREES SHALL HAVE A SNOW FENCE THAT EXTENDS
1- 06/09/2025 1 - BID
TO THE DRIP LINE. NO TRAFFIC SHALL GO OVER THE ROOT SYSTEM.
14. SURFACE DRAINAGE TO BE DIVERTED FROM STRUCTURE SO AS EXISTING 2 STORY
DESIGN CRITERIA NOT TO CREATE A HAZARD ON THIS OR ADJACENT PROPERTY. FRAME HOUSE
GRADE FROM FOUNDATION TO DROP A MINIMUM OF 6" IN 10'-0". 1,507 SF FOOTPRINT
PROVIDE SWALES OR DRAINS TO ENSURE DRAINAGE FROM
FLOOR STRUCTURE AND ADJACENT PROPERTY.
SLEEPING ROOMS 40# LL - 10# DL
ABBREVIATIONS 15. TOILET FACILITIES SHALL BE PROVIDED AT ALL JOB SITES PER
ILLINOIS PLUMBING CODE. THIS WILL BE A CONDITION OF THE
OTHER ROOMS 40# LL - 10# DL PERMIT.
VEH. GARAGES 50# LL - 10# DL A.B. ANCHOR BOLT L. LINEN 16. PROVIDE AND MAINTAIN A 5'-0" HIGH FENCE ALONG THE FULL
ABV ABOVE LAM. LAMINATE LENGTH OF INTERIOR SIDE YARDS UNTIL EXTERIOR CONSTRUCTION
A.C. AIR CONDITIONING LAV. LAVATORY IS COMPLETE.
WALL 60# PLF OR ACTUAL LOAD ACOUS. ACOUSTIC LL LIVE LOAD 17. PROVIDE AND MAINTAIN A 5'-0" HIGH CONSTRUCTION FENCE DURING
20 PSF WIND 0'-20' HEIGHT ADJ. ADJUSTABLE LP LOW POINT NON-WORKING HOURS THAT WILL ENCLOSE ALL OPEN EX WALK/
25 PSF WIND 21'-29' HEIGHT A.F.F. ABOVE FINISH FLOOR MAX. MAXIMUM EXCAVATIONS UNTIL FOUNDATION IS BACK-FILLED & FIRST FLOOR STAIRS
10'-0"
100 SF
ALUM. ALUMINUM MC MEDICINE CABINET DECK IS COMPLETED.
30 PSF WIND 30' HEIGHT AND ALT. ALTERNATE MECH MECHANICAL 18. ERECT PROTECTIVE SNOWFENCE PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION
ABOVE A.P. ACCESS PANEL MED MEDIUM ACTIVITY. DO NOT STORE ANY EQUIPMENT OR MATERIALS WITHIN
APPROX. APPROXIMATE MIN MINIMUM THE PROTECTION AREA. REMOVE THE PROTECTIVE SNOW FENCE
ARCH. ARCHITECTURAL MISC MISCELLANEOUS ONLY AFTER CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE.
CEILING @ AT ML MICROLAM 19. ALL TREES ARE TO BE PROTECTED DURING CONSTRUCTION WITH
UNHAB W/O STOR 10# LL - 10# DL BD BOARD MO MASONRY OPENING FENCING FOR EVERY 1" OF TREE DIAMETER. MAINTAIN 1'-0"
UNHAB LIM STOR 20# LL - 10# DL BI BUILT-IN MRBL MARBLE DISTANCE AWAY FOR FENCING.
BLDG BUILDING MTL METAL 20. MAINTAIN EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTERNS. ANY DRAINAGE ISSUES
HAB W/ FIX STAIR 30# LL - 10# DL BOT. BOTTOM MW MICROWAVE THAT MAY ARISE FROM THE CONSTRUCTION ASSOCIATED WITH THIS
B/ BOTTOM OF NIC NOT IN CONTRACT PERMIT WILL BE ADRESSED BY THE PERMITTEE.
WIND SPEED 115 MPH BRG. BEARING NO NUMBER 21. RESTORE PARKWAY AND PAVEMENT TO PRE-CONSTRUCTION
3 SECOND GUST BRG. PL. BEARING PLATE NOM NOMINAL CONDITIONS.
& 89 NOMINAL
B.U.R.
CRPT
BUILT UP ROOFING
CARPET
NTS
O
NOT TO SCALE
OVEN N PINE AVE
CABT
C.I.
CABINET
CAST IRON
OA
OC
OVERALL
ON CENTER
ENERGY CODE COMPLIANCE NOTES
ROOF 30# LL (SNOW) - 10# DL (ALL
C.J. CEILING JOISTS OPP OPPOSITE
SLOPES) C.J.T. CONSTRUCTION JOINTS OPT. OPTIONAL 1. ENERGY CODE COMPLIANCE DESIGN BY PRESCRIPTIVE MEANS.
CL CENTERLINE PERF. PERFORATED CLIMATE ZONE : 5
CATHEDRAL 30# LL - 15# DL (ALL SLOPES) CLG. CEILING PL POINT LOAD MAX. GLAZING U-FACTOR: 0.30
CL.
C.M.U.
CLOSET
CONCRETE MASONRY
P LAM
PLYWD
PLASTIC LAMINATE
PLYWOOD
ACTUAL U-FACTOR:
MIN. SKYLIGHT U-FACTOR: 0.55
1 SITE PLAN - PROPOSED N
EXT DECK 40# LL - 10# DL ACTUAL SKYLIGHT U-FACTOR:
C. O
UNIT
CASED OPENING
PSF POUNDS PER SQUARE
FOOT SHGC : N R A0 1/16" = 1'-0"
COL. COLUMN PSI POUNDS PER SQUARE MIN. CEILING R-VALUE: 49
EXT BALCONY 40# LL - 10# DL CONC. CONCRETE INCH ACTUAL CEILING R-VALUE: 49
CONST. CONSTRUCTION PVC POLYVINYLCHLORIDE MIN. FRAME WALL R-VALUE: 30 OR 20 + 5 OR 13+10
STAIRS 40# LL + 300# CONT. CONTINUOUS QT QUARRY TILE ACTUAL WALL R-VALUE: 30 (CLOSED CELL FOAM INSULATION)
C.T. CERAMIC TILE R RADIUS MIN. FLOOR R-VALUE: 30
CONCENTRATED LOAD C.W. COLD WATER RD ROOF DRAIN ACTUAL FLOOR R-VALUE: IMPERVIOUS SF
DEMO. DEMOLITION R&S ROD AND SHELF MIN. BASEMENT R-VALUE: 15 OR 19
GUARD & HANDRAILS 200# LL AT ANY DIRECTION DIA. DIAMETER REC RECESSED ACTUAL BASEMENT R-VALUE:
GC TO PROVIDE PERMANENT CERTIFICATE TO BE POSTED ADJACENT WALKS/DRIVEWAY 1,096 SF
DIAG. DIAGONAL REF REFRIGERATOR
APPLIED AT THE TOP DIM.
DISP.
DIMENSION
DISPOSAL
REG
REINF
REGULAR
REINFORCE
TO ELECTRICAL PANEL INDICATING INSULATION AND ENERGY VALUES
FOR BUILDING INSULATION, FENESTRATION AND DUCT SYSTEMS. PATIO/DECK/STAIRS 605 SF
ON
FROST DEPTH 42" (3'-6") DIV. DIVISION RM ROOM SPRAY FOAM BOX SILLS AND SILL PLATES, AND ADD R-15 HIGH
HOUSE
T I
DL DEAD LOAD RO ROUGH OPENING DENSITY FRICTION FIT BATT INSULATION. 1,507 SF
C
RU
DN. DOWN RR ROOF RAFTERS
STRUCTURAL FRAMING LUMBER DWGS. DRAWINGS SECT SECTION 2. ALL PENETRATIONS THROUGH THERMAL ENVELOPE SHALL BE GARAGE 400 SF
BASE VALUE (USE NO MULTIPLIERS AGAINST BASE VALUE)
GRADE #2 SPECIES SPF DOMESTIC OR CANADIAN BASE Fb 875
D.S.
D.W.
DOWNSPOUT
DISHWASHER
SHLV
SHT
SHELVES
SHEET
ADEQUATELY SEALED BY CAULK, GASKET, WEATHERSTRIPPING OR
OTHER BARRIER MEANS PER 2021 IECC REQUIREMENTS. PORCHES 0 SF
S T
EA. EACH SHWR SHOWER ALL WINDOWS AND EXTERIOR DOOR JAMBS ARE TO BE SEALED WITH
N
CO
LOW-EXPANSION FOAM. SHED 0 SF
EX. EXISTING SHTG SHEATHING
SPECIFY MANUFACTURER AND NAME OF SPECIFIC BEAM EIFS EXTERIOR INSULATION SIM SIMILAR ALL BOTTOM PLATES ON EXTERIOR WALLS SHALL BE GLUED TO
PRODUCT WITH THE CURRENT SIZE, Fb, AND E VALUES PER
MANUFACTURER EQ
FINISH SYSTEM
EQUAL
SL
SPEC
SLIDING
SPECIFICATION
SUB-FLOOR.
TOTAL 3,608 SF
O R
EXP. EXPANSION SQ SQUARE 3. ALL FIREPLACES SHALL HAVE GASKETED DOORS & OUTSIDE
F
MANUFACTURER - TRUS-JOIST
ELEC.
ELEV.
ELECTRICAL
ELEVATION
SF
SS
SQUARE FOOT
SANITARY SUMP
COMBUSTION AIR.
O T
PRODUCT - LVL HEADERS & BEAMS MICRO-LAM EQUIP.
EQUIV.
EQUIPMENT
EQUIVALENT
STD
STL
STANDARD
STEEL 4. ALL RECESSED LIGHTING IN THERMAL ENVELOPE SHALL BE SEALED N
E.W EACH WAY STOR STORAGE TO PREVENT AIR LEAKAGE. ALL RECESSED DOWNLIGHTING TO BE
APPLICABLE CODES - ARLINGTON HEIGHTS F FURNACE STRUCT STRUCTURE IC-RATED. SITE SETBACKS (R-3)
FD FLOOR DRAIN SUSP SUSPENDED
FE FIRE EXTINGUISHER T&B TOP AND BOTTOM 5. PROVIDE PROGRAMMABLE THERMOSTATS FOR EACH ZONE WITH THESE DRAWINGS ARE NOT APPROVED OR
REQUIRED PROPOSED
FF FINISH FLOOR T/ TOP OF SETBACK AND MANUAL OVERRIDE. STAMPED FOR CONSTRUCTION AND ARE FOR
FIN. FINISH TEL TELEPHONE CONCEPT/DESIGN/BIDDING PURPOSES ONLY.
ALL WORK PERFORMED AND MATERIALS USED SHALL COMPLY FRONTYARD 25'-0" EX TO REMAIN
DIMENSIONS, HEIGHTS, FINISHES, AND UTILITY
FIXT FIXTURE T&G TONGUE AND 6. ALL DUCTWORK SHALL BE ADEQUATELY SEALED. ALL SUPPLY
WITH THE FOLLOWING: FLR FLOOR GROOVE DUCTWORK IN UNCONDITIONED ATTIC TO HAVE R-8 INSULATION. LOCATIONS TO BE VERFIED.
INTERIOR SIDEYARD 10% LOT WIDTH 6'-0" EX TO REMAIN
FLSHG FLASHING THK THICK ALL OTHER DUCTWORK TO HAVE R-6 INSULATION. HVAC CONTRACTOR
FDN
FO
FOUNDATION
FACE OF
TJI
TOP
TRUST JOIST
TOP OF PLATE
SHALL PROVIDE EITHER POST-CONSTRUCTION OR ROUGH-IN TEST OF
TOTAL AIR LEAKAGE FOR DUCT SYSTEMS. INTERIOR SIDEYARD 10% LOT WIDTH 6'-0" EX TO REMAIN SITE PLAN LEGEND
BUILDING CODE 2018 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE FS FOOTING SUMP TV TELEVISION
WITH AMENDMENTS REARYARD 30'-0" EX TO REMAIN
FTG FOOTING TYP TYPICAL 7. ALL MECHANICAL SYSTEM PIPING CAPABLE OF CARRYING FLUIDS PROPERTY LINE
MECHANICAL CODE 2018 INTERNATIONAL MECHANICAL CODE FURN FURNACE UC UNDER COUNTER ABOVE 105 DEG F OR BELOW 55 DEG F SHALL BE INSULATED TO A SHEET TITLE
GA GAUGE UON UNLESS OTHERWISE MINIMUM OF R-3. ALL HOT WATER LINES TO HAVE R-3 PIPE HEIGHT - MEAN MAX 25'-0" EX TO REMAIN
ELECTRICAL CODE 2017 NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE GALV GALVANIZED NOTED
SETBACK LINE
COVER SHEET
INSULATION & MANUAL SWITCH FOR RECIRC. PUMP.
WITH AMENDMENTS GFI GROUND FAULT VCT VINYL COMPOSITION EASEMENT LINE
PLUMBING CODE 2014 ILLINOIS PLUMBING CODE WITH INTERRUPT TILE 8. ALL ACCESS HATCHES/DOORS TO UNCONDITIONED SPACE SHALL BE
AMENDMENTS GLU-LAM GLUE LAMINATED VERT VERTICAL INSULATED & WEATHERSTRIPPED.
ENERGY CODE 2021 ILLINOIS ENERGY CONSERVATION
BEAM VIF VERIFY IN FIELD TABLE R301.2(1) CLIMATIC AND E ELECTRIC SERVICE
SHEET NUMBER
GYP. GYPSUM W/ WITH 9. 100% OF ALL LIGHTING TO HAVE HIGH-EFFICACY BULBS.
CODE WITH STATE AMENDMENTS HD HEAD WC WATER CLOSET GEOGRAPHIC DESIGN CRITERIA G GAS SERVICE
HDR HEADER WIC WALK IN CLOSET 10. FURNACE: +90% AFUE STORM SEWER
HT HEIGHT WD WOOD WATER HEATER: +95% AFUE
-ALL APPLICABLE LOCAL AND STATE CODES, ORDINANCES, AND HM HOLLOW METAL WDO WINDOW A/C: 13+ SEER GROUND WIND DESIGN SEISMIC SUBJECT TO DAMANGE WINTER ICE FLOOD AIR MEAN
HAZARDS FREEZING ANNUAL SANITARY SEWER
REGULATIONS. DESIGN DESIGN BARRIER
A0
HORZ HORIZONTAL WH WATER HEATER SHGC: 0.27 OR BTR SNOW
CATEGORY
FROM
TEMP UNDER INDEX TEMP
LOAD CHAPTER
-MANUFACTURERS' SPECIFICATIONS AND TRADE ASSOCIATIONS HP HIGH POINT W/O WITHOUT SPEED
(MPH)
TOPO
EFFECTS
SPECIAL
WIND
WIND-
BORNE
WTHRING FROST
LINE
TERMITE LAYMENT
REQ. VILLAGE W WATER SERVICE
HTG HEATING WP WATERPROOF 11. WINDOWS, SKYLIGHTS AND SLIDING GLASS DOORS SHALL HAVE AN
RECOMMENDATIONS. HVAC HEATING VENTILATE WT WEIGHT
REGION DEBRIS DEPTH CODE
AIR INFILTRATION RATE NO MORE THAN 0.3 CFM PER SF, AND ZONE
X FENCE
-ACCEPTED ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES. AIR CONDITIONING WWF WELDED SWINGING DOORS NO MORE THAN 0.5 CFM PER SF. MOD NOV
INT. INTERIOR WIRE FABRIC 25 115 NO NO NO b SEVERE 42" -TO- -4 YES 6 2000 2000 47.6
HEAVY
Page 54 of 67
1275 E. DAVIS, ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, IL 60005
PHONE: (847)255-2322
EMAIL: KEVINJCDB@GMAIL.COM
C 2025 COPYRIGHT. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
1 WEST ELEVATION - EXISTING FRONT
A1 1/8" = 1'-0"
ADDITION TO THE
COLLETTI RESIDENCE
401 N PINE AVENUE
ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, IL 60004
DATE
1- 06/09/2025
ISSUE DATE
1- 06/09/2025 1 - BID
EX ELEC PANEL
2 EAST ELEVATION - EXISTING REAR
A1 1/8" = 1'-0"
PLAT OF SURVEY
NTS
ON
3 SOUTH ELEVATION - EXISTING SIDE T I
C
A1
RU
1/8" = 1'-0"
S T
N
CO
O R
F
O T
N
THESE DRAWINGS ARE NOT APPROVED OR
STAMPED FOR CONSTRUCTION AND ARE FOR
CONCEPT/DESIGN/BIDDING PURPOSES ONLY.
DIMENSIONS, HEIGHTS, FINISHES, AND UTILITY
LOCATIONS TO BE VERFIED.
SHEET TITLE
EXISTING DRAWINGS
SHEET NUMBER
4 NORTH ELEVATION - EXISTING SIDE A1
A1 1/8" = 1'-0"
Page 55 of 67
3 / A6
1275 E. DAVIS, ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, IL 60005
PHONE: (847)255-2322
EMAIL: KEVINJCDB@GMAIL.COM
C 2025 COPYRIGHT. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
1'-1" PT PERGOLA, TBD PT WOOD FRAMING
TYP.
8.0:12
2X6 ROOF RAFTERS @ 16" OC
SPF#2 OR BETTER
2'-7"
3'-4"
ADDITION TO THE
2'-7" DS DS
COLLETTI RESIDENCE
+/- 4.5:12 4.5:12
2'-7"
401 N PINE AVENUE
2X10 ROOF RAFTERS SPF #2 OR BETTER
@ 16" OC R-49 FOAM INSULATION TYP.
ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, IL 60004
1'-8" 2X8 CEILING JOISTS @ 16" OC MATCH EX OVERHANG, VIF
DS
DATE
2'-0"
TYP. ROOF CONSTRUCTION AT ATTIC (R-49)
1- 06/09/2025
25 YR ARCHITECTURAL GRADE ASPHALT SHINGLES
RENDERING FOR DESIGN CONCEPT ONLY - SEE DETAILED DRAWINGS OR SHOPS DRAWINGS FOR EXACT FINISHES, COLORS, MATERIALS, ETC. CLASS 'C' OR BETTER
15 # ROOFING FELT
ISSUE DATE
2X12 RIDGE BEAM
ICE AND WATER SHIELD AT EAVES,
CONTINUOUS ALUM GUTTER, MATCH EX
RAKES, RIDGES, AND VALLEYS, EXTEND 24" MIN INTO
HEATED SPACE 1- 06/09/2025 1 - BID
5/8" OSB ROOF SHEATHING
2X12 WOOD RAFTERS @ 16" OC
INSULATION IN DEPTH TO ACHEIVE MIN, R-49
5/8" GYP BD
CONTINUOUS RIDGE VENTS
2X10 ROOF RAFTERS SPF #2 OR BETTER
EY
LL
VA
2 / A6
12
+/- 3.2:12
2X
@ 16" OC R-49 FOAM INSULATION TYP.
4 / A6
2X8 CEILING JOISTS @ 16" OC
+/- EX 8.0:12 VIF
OF
RO
R
VE
AYO
L
+/- EX 8.0:12 VIF
+/- EX 8.0:12 VIF
EX 8.0:12 +/-, VIF EX 8.0:12 +/-, VIF
ON
T I
C
T RU
N S
CO
O R
F
O T
N
THESE DRAWINGS ARE NOT APPROVED OR
1 / A6 STAMPED FOR CONSTRUCTION AND ARE FOR
CONCEPT/DESIGN/BIDDING PURPOSES ONLY.
NOTE: DIMENSIONS, HEIGHTS, FINISHES, AND UTILITY
ALL DOWNSPOUTS TO DRAIN AWAY LOCATIONS TO BE VERFIED.
FROM HOUSE AND TOWARDS FRONT
OR BACK OF LOT TO AVOID DRAINAGE
ISSUES WITH NEIGHBORING LOTS
SHEET TITLE
ROOF PLAN & STAIR DETAILS
R905.1.2 ICE BARRIERS
SHEET NUMBER
IN AREAS WHERE THERE HAS BEEN A HISTORY OF ICE FORMING ALONG THE EAVES CAUSING S BACKUP OF WATER
AS DESIGNATED IN TABLE R301.2(1). AN ICE BARRIER SHALL BE INSTALLED FOR ASPHALT SHINGLES, METAL ROOF
SHINGLES, MINERAL-SURFACED ROLL ROOFING, SLATE AND SLATE-TYPE SHINGLE, WOOD SHINGLES AND WOOD
SHAKES. THE ICE BARRIER SHALL CONSIST OF NOT FEWE THAN TWO LAYERS OF UNDERLAYMENT CEMENTED
TOGTHER, OR A SELF-ADHERING POLYMER-MODIFIED BITUMEN SHEET SHALL BE USED IN PLACE OF NORMAL
1 ROOF PLAN N
UNDERLAYMENT AND EXTEND FROM THE LOWEST EDGES OF ALL ROOF SURFACES TO A POINT NOT LESS THAN 24
INCHES (610 MM) INSIDE THE EXTERIOR WALL LINE OF THE BUIDLING. ON ROOF SLOPES WITH SLOPE EQUAL TO OR
GREATER THAN 8 UNITS VERTICAL IN 12 UNITS HORIZONTAL. THE ICE BARRIER SHALL ALSO BE APPLIED NOT LESS
A5 1/4" = 1'-0"
A5
THAN 36 INCHES MEASURED ALONG THE ROOF SLOPE FROM THE EAVE EDGE OF THE BUILDING.
Page 56 of 67
36X36 F/T 36X36 F/T
EX
1275 E. DAVIS, ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, IL 60005
PHONE: (847)255-2322
EMAIL: KEVINJCDB@GMAIL.COM
C 2025 COPYRIGHT. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
6-0/6-8
ADDITION TO THE
EX EX EX EX EX EX
EX COLLETTI RESIDENCE
EX EX
401 N PINE AVENUE
ARLINGTON HEIGHTS, IL 60004
EX
EX DATE
1- 06/09/2025
ISSUE DATE
1- 06/09/2025 1 - BID
1 WEST ELEVATION - PROPOSED FRONT 2 NORTH ELEVATION - PROPOSED SIDE
A6 1/4" = 1'-0" A6 1/4" = 1'-0"
4.5:
12
8.0:12
12
4.5:
3.2:12
48x36
+/- 7'-11"
EX 8.0:12
27x48 27x48 27x48
EX EX
8.0:12
3-0/6-8
+/- 9'-1" VARIES
66x42 PT
EX EX
32x57
EX
EX
ON
6-0/6-8
T I
C
+/- 3'-6" VARIED
EX EX
T RU
N S
CO
O R
F
3 EAST ELEVATION - PROPOSED REAR 4 SOUTH ELEVATION - PROPOSED SIDE O T
A6 1/4" = 1'-0" A6 1/4" = 1'-0" N
THESE DRAWINGS ARE NOT APPROVED OR
STAMPED FOR CONSTRUCTION AND ARE FOR
CONCEPT/DESIGN/BIDDING PURPOSES ONLY.
ELEVATION MATERIALS WINDOW NOTES: DIMENSIONS, HEIGHTS, FINISHES, AND UTILITY
LOCATIONS TO BE VERFIED.
1. WINDOW SIZES : ROUGH OPENING TO BE VERIFIED IN FIELD W/ CHOSEN WINDOW MANUF. &
CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION
LOCATION HATCH PATTERN DESCRIPTION MANUF. LOCATION HATCH PATTERN DESCRIPTION MANUF. 2. GLASS SIZES TO BE FOLLOWED AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE PER DIFFERENT MANUF.
3. BEDROOM WINDOWS TO HAVE EGRESS HARDWARE & FOLLOW EGRESS REQUIREMENTS AS
SIDING (1) HORIZ LAP SIDING MATCH EX TRIM AND FASCIA TRIM MATCH EX LABELED ON ELEVATIONS.
SHEET TITLE
4. WINDOWS IN WHICH THE BOTTOM EDGE OF THE WINDOW IS LESS THAN 18" ABOVE THE TOP OF
THE FLOOR ARE REQUIRED TO BE TEMPERED. ELEVATIONS
BRICK 5. FIELD VERIFY EMERGENCY ESCAPE & RESCUE OPENINGS IN SLEEPING ROOMS
SIDING (2) EX TO REMAIN SOFFIT AND FASCIA ALUMINUM - VENTED MATCH EX EGRESS WINDOW REQUIREMENTS
PROVIDE A NET CLEAR OPENING OF 5.7 SF OR GREATER, ACHIEVED BY SIMPLY OPENING THE
WINDOW
ROOFING (1) ASPHALT SHINGLES MATCH EX COLUMNS WHITE MATCH EX PROVIDE A NET CLEAR OPENING OF 5.0 SF OR GREATER FOR GRADE LEVEL WINDOWS. SHEET NUMBER
A MINIMUM CLEAR WIDTH OF 20"
A MINUMUM CLEAR HEIGHT OF 24"
MATCH EX GUTTERS, DOWNSPOUTS ALUMINUM MATCH EX A SILL HEIGHT OF LESS THAN 44" AFF
DOORS STYLE TBD
6. ALL NEW WINDOWS TO HAVE A MAX. U-FACTOR OF 0.30
7. ALL BATHROOM GLASS AND GLASS IN AREAS OF HAZARD SHALL BE SAFETY GLAZING,
WINDOWS VINYL (INTERIOR - EXTERIOR -) MATCH EX
8.
PERMANENTLY ETCHED, AND THE ETCHING SHALL BE VISIBLE AFTER INSTALLATION TO VERIFY
COMPLIANCE. SECTION: IRC R308.4
E = EGRESS T= TEMPERED AFETY GLASS
A6
F= FROSTED PRIVACY GLASS EX = EXISTING WINDOW TO REMAIN
Page 57 of 67
Zoning Board of Appeals
8/11/2025
Item: 604 W. Techy Rd. - ZBA25-026
Department: Planning & Community Development
Item Description:
REQUEST
• A variation from Chapter 28, Section 6.5-2 (Accessory Structures) to
allow a pergola in the side yard where accessory structures are only
permitted in the rear yard.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Exhibits_604 W Techny Rd
Page 58 of 67
Petition – ZBA#25-026
PIN: 03-18-207-012
ARLINGTON HEIGHTS ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Staff Analysis
Prepared By: Darko Bojin, Assistant Planner
Hearing Date: August 11, 2025
Date Prepared: August 6, 2025
Project Title: Padmanabha Residence
Address: 604 W. Techny Rd.
Background Information
Petition Number: ZBA #25-026
Petitioner: Prakash Padmanabha
Address: 604 W. Techny Rd.
Arlington Heights IL 60004
Existing Zoning: R-3 – Residential Single-Family District
Requested Action/Background Information
The property is zoned R-3 and has a total land area of approximately 10,730 square feet. The petitioner is proposing
to install a pergola in the side yard. Code prohibits accessory structures to be built in the side yard. Therefore, the
petitioner is requesting the following variation:
• A variation from Chapter 28, Section 6.5-2 (Accessory Structures) to allow a pergola in the side yard
where accessory structures are only permitted in the rear yard.
Variation Review Standards
In its consideration of the standards of practical difficulties or particular hardships, the Zoning Board of Appeals shall
require evidence that (1) the proposed use will not alter the essential character of the locality and will be compatible
with existing uses and zoning of nearby property; and (2) the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances, which
may include the length of time the subject property has been vacant as zoned; and (3) the proposed variation is in
harmony with the spirit and intent of this Chapter; and (4) the variance requested is the minimum variance necessary
to allow reasonable use of the property. A variation shall be permitted only if the evidence, in the judgment of the
Board of Appeals, sustains each of the four conditions enumerated.
Page 59 of 67
Petition – ZBA#25-026
PIN: 03-18-207-012
Map of General Vicinity
Items required to be Submitted 15 Days Prior to Public Hearing
Item Provided Dated Remarks
1. Notification Affidavit 7/25/25
2. List of Property Owners Within 250 feet of Subject Property 7/25/25
3. Letter that was Mailed 7/25/25
4. Photographs of Sign on Property 7/25/25
Page 60 of 67
Petition – ZBA#25-026
PIN: 03-18-207-012
Photographs of Existing Structure
Page 61 of 67
Village of Arlington Heights
To: Prakash Padmanabha
From: Darko Bojin
Department: Department of Planning and Community Development
File Number: ZBA 25-026
Project: 604 W. Techny Road
Date: August 6, 2025
ZONING COMMENTS:
For your use and consideration, review the zoning review comments below regarding the
following variances:
• A variation from Chapter 28, Section 6.5-2 (Accessory Structures) to allow a pergola
in the side yard where accessory structures are only permitted in the rear yard.
If you have any questions, please contact dbojin@vah.com:
Planning and Community Development
1. No Comments.
Building and Life Safety
1. Approved with note: 1. The means and methods of anchoring to the ground should be
clearly specified in the manufacturer’s specifications. If such details are not provided,
a concrete footing will be required.
Engineering
1. The Engineering Division has no objection to the requested variation from Chapter
28, Section 6.5-2 (Accessory Structures) to allow a pergola in the side yard where
accessory structures are only permitted in the rear yard.
Page 62 of 67
CERTIFICATE OF PUBLICATION
Paddock Publications, Inc.
Northwest Suburbs
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 Northwest Suburbs DAILY HERALD. That said Northwest Suburbs
DAILY HERALD is a secular newspaper, published in Arlington Heights,
Cook County, State of Illinois, and has been in general circulation daily
throughout Cook County, continuously for more than 50 weeks prior to the first
Publication of the attached notice, and a newspaper as defined by 715 ILCS 5/5.
I further certify that the Northwest Suburbs 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 07/26/2025
in said Northwest Suburbs DAILY HERALD. This notice was also placed on
a statewide public notice website as required by 5 ILCS 5/2.1.
BY ______________________________________________
Designee of the Publisher of the Daily Herald
Control # 299141
Page 63 of 67
Page 64 of 67
Page 65 of 67
Construction Plan for 10x12 Louvered Pergola Installation on Existing Paver Patio
Project Overview
● Pergola Type: Free-standing louvered pergola (pre-manufactured kit from Amazon)
● Dimensions: 10 feet (width) x 12 feet (length)
● Height: ~8-9 feet (as per manufacturer specifications)
● Foundation: Existing paver patio
● Attachment Type: Surface-mount post bases anchored to pavers (with optional concrete
footings underneath for stability)
Materials Required
Item Quantity
Louvered Pergola Kit (from Amazon) 1 (10x12 size)
Simpson Strong-Tie or similar post bases 4 (if not included)
Concrete (optional, for footing anchors under 4 footing areas
pavers)
Anchoring bolts / concrete anchors As needed
Tools (drill, level, wrench, hammer drill) -
Steps to Install Pergola
Step 1: Planning & Layout
1. Measure and mark 10 ft by 12 ft area on pavers.
2. Use stakes and string or chalk to outline the pergola.
3. Ensure the outline is square using the 3-4-5 rule or a carpenter’s square.
Step 2: Prepare Anchor Points
1. Mark post locations at each of the 4 corners.
2. Option 1 (Recommended): Remove pavers at post locations and dig 12-18" deep holes.
○ Fill holes with concrete to create a stable base.
○ Install post base anchors into wet concrete or use wedge anchors afterward.
3. Option 2: Directly attach post bases (supplied with the pergola or purchased separately)
to pavers using masonry anchors, per manufacturer recommendations.
Step 3: Assemble Pergola Kit
1. Follow the manufacturer's step-by-step assembly guide included with the pergola kit.
Page 66 of 67
2. Typically, this involves assembling the frame first, securing posts to post bases, and then
assembling and attaching the louvered roof.
3. Use a spirit level to ensure all components are plumb and square.
4. Tighten all fasteners securely.
Step 4: Secure Pergola to Patio
1. Using the provided or recommended anchors, secure the base plates of the pergola to
the patio surface or concrete footings.
2. Verify that the pergola is stable before proceeding.
Step 5: Finishing
1. Check louver operation to ensure smooth opening and closing.
2. Apply any touch-up paint or protective coating if recommended by the manufacturer.
3. Install any additional features provided in the kit, such as drainage systems or side
screens.
Optional Add-ons (if not included)
● Retractable canopy or side screens
● LED string lights
● Planter boxes at corners
● Integrated gutter for rain (if available)
Estimated Time & Cost
● Time: 1-2 weekends (DIY with 2 people)
● DIY Cost Range: $1,200 - $2,000 (depending on pergola model and shipping)
Safety Tips
● Wear gloves and eye protection.
● Have a friend help with lifting heavy components.
● Follow all manufacturer safety instructions.
● If unsure about anchoring, consult a local contractor for stability and safety.
Page 67 of 67