Plan Commission/Zoning Board of Appeals

James McDonald, Mayor Trustees: Allena Barbato Connie Olker, Clerk Scott Bartlett Christine McKinley, Treasurer Jake Cramond Glenn McCollum Jeff Nielsen Doug Savell VILLAGE OF LAKE VILLA PLAN COMMISSION/ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, July 14, 2026 Village Hall, 65 Cedar Avenue 6:30 P.M. 1. Call to Order and Roll Call 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Approval: Minutes of April 14, 2026 PC/ZBA Meeting 4. Public Hearing: Zoning Variation Request at 516 Arapaho Trail 5. Public Comment 6. Adjournment Individuals with disabilities who require certain accommodations in order to allow them to observe and/or participate in this meeting, or who have questions regarding the accessibility of the meeting or the facilities, are required to contact Village Hall at (847) 356-6100 promptly to allow the Village to make reasonable accommodations for those persons. 65 Cedar Avenue P.O. BOX 519 Lake Villa, Illinois 60046 (847) 356-6100 www.lake-villa.org  The Village of Lake Villa Plan Commission/Zoning Board of Appeals Special Meeting DRAFT Minutes of the April 14, 2026 Meeting Village Hall 65 Cedar Avenue, Lake Villa, IL 60046 1 2 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 3 4 A Special Meeting of the Plan Commission of the Village of Lake Villa was held on April 5 14, 2026, at the Village Hall, 65 Cedar Ave., and was called to order at 7:01 pm by 6 Chairman Kressner. 7 Present: Chairman Craig Kressner, Commissioners: Jerry Coia, Tracy Lucas, Steve Smart, Lee Filas, and Brian Hope Absent: Commissioner Amber Brunati Staff Present: Village Administrator Mike Strong; Village Planner Scott Goldstein, Village Attorney Rebecca Alexopoulos, Administrative Clerk Corey Westman, Management Intern Jonathan Durbin 8 9 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIENCE 10 11 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 12 13 Chairman Kressner asked for a motion to approve the March 5, 2026 Plan 14 Commission/Zoning Board of Appeals meeting minutes as presented. Commissioner 15 Lucas made a motion to approve the minutes as presented. The motion was seconded 16 by Commissioner Hope. The motion carried (6-0). 17 18 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Preliminary and Final Approval of a Conditional Use Permit 19 for a Residential Planned Development – Eagle Creek Townhomes 20 21 Chairman Kressner called to open a public hearing. A motion was made by 22 Commissioner Filas to open the public hearing. The motion was seconded by 23 Commissioner Hope. The motion carried (6-0) by roll call vote. 24 25 Village Attorney Alexopoulos swore those present in for testimony. 26 27 The Petitioner, Mr. Mudassir Junaid introduced the development team and reviewed a 28 presentation providing an overview of the residential development and project for Eagle 29 Creek Townhomes, a proposed eight-unit townhome development at the southeast 30 corner of Monaville Road and Cedar Lake Road. The presentation included information 31 and visuals relative to the location, density, elevations of the homes, stormwater 32 features, access routes, and other site features for the proposed development. 33 34 Village Planner Scott Goldstein reviewed the request and standards for the preliminary 35 and final approval that was sought by the Petitioner. Mr. Goldstein reviewed the 36 alignment with the Village’s Comprehensive Plan, and stated that no relief from the 37 zoning code, outside of rezoning to UR4 was being requested by the Petitioner. 38 39 Chairman Kressner opened questions to the board. 40  Minutes of the April 14, 2026 Plan Commission Special Meeting 41 Commissioner Filas inquired about the anticipated sales costs for the townhome units. 42 The Petitioner responded that they anticipated in the range of at least $500,000, and 43 that the units would be owner-occupied and not rentals. 44 45 Commissioner Coia asked about whether adequate parking has been provided for the 46 site. Village Planner Goldstein stated that 2.5 spaces are required per 3-bedroom unit, 47 and that parking relief was not necessary due to the overflow lot proposed and existing 48 four parking spaces per unit. 49 50 Commissioner Hope asked about the water utilities and who would maintain them. 51 Village Administrator Strong responded that the Village would be responsible for the 52 water main, but services to the units would be privately maintained. 53 54 Commissioner Lucas inquired about the sidewalk continuity around the site, especially 55 the south side of Cedar Lake Road. The Petitioner responded that due to the right-of- 56 way being owned and maintained by Lake County, the sidewalk along Cedar Lake Road 57 would terminate at the bridge over Eagle Creek and that they wouldn’t be able to extend 58 that south due to the creek. 59 60 Commissioner Filas asked about the unbuildable portion of the lot and what would be 61 occurring outside of the development area. The Petitioner responded that the area 62 around Eagle Creek would not be disturbed, and that all current trees and terrain south 63 of the retaining wall would be left alone. 64 65 Chairman Kressner opened up the public hearing to public testimony, which was 66 provided by various residents. Residents who spoke testified on the following: 67 68 • Public safety concerns, including the depth and condition of the detention pond, 69 potential erosion, and risks to children. 70 • Traffic and access issues, such as having only one way in and out, construction 71 traffic, and school bus circulation. 72 • Stormwater management concerns, including downstream impacts, setback 73 requirements, wetlands, and drainage systems proposed in the development. 74 • Questions regarding project compatibility, including whether the townhome 75 development’s design, density, and character fit with surrounding single-family 76 neighborhoods. 77 • Economic considerations, including housing prices, HOA responsibilities, 78 long-term maintenance (e.g., roofs), and effects on property values. 79 • Infrastructure and municipal service impacts, such as school capacity, roadway 80 conditions, and police presence or coverage levels. 81 • Environmental impacts, including noise, ecosystem disruption, runoff effects, and 82 high-tension power lines. 83 • Site design and layout concerns, including garages, trash storage, roundabout 84 navigation and safety, and safety/access points to the development site. 85 • Concerns about construction impacts, such as noise, traffic, and general 86 neighborhood disruption. 2  Minutes of the April 14, 2026 Plan Commission Special Meeting 87 • Concerns related to adjacent land uses, such as the proximity of the recently 88 approved self-storage facility and how water flow or drainage may be affected. 89 • Requests for screening or buffering, such as fencing, landscaping, and 90 separation from neighboring properties. 91 92 Chairman Kressner offered time to the Petitioner to respond to the questions and 93 comments raised by the public testimony. 94 95 Hearing no more public comment, Chairman Kressner asked if the Board was interested 96 in closing the public hearing and deliberating, or if additional information by the 97 Petitioner would be helpful for the Board to consider. Village Attorney Alexopolous 98 provided options for the Board to consider relative to closing the hearing, or continuing 99 the hearing if additional information by the Board was needed. 100 101 Commissioner Filas made a motion to close the public hearing. The motion was 102 seconded by Commissioner Smart. The motion received a split vote on roll call (Aye – 103 Commissioners Filas, Smart and Hope, Nay – Chairman Kressner, Commissioners Coia 104 and Lucas). Motion failed. 105 106 Chairman Kressner stated that he wanted to see additional information from the 107 Petitioner including the photometric plan, signage plan, and HOA covenants and 108 restrictions which were not submitted by the Petitioner. 109 110 Commissioner Hope made a motion to continue the public hearing to 6:30pm on June 4, 111 2026, pending receipt of the additionally requested materials. The motion was seconded 112 by Commissioner Lucas. The motion carried by a vote of 5-1 (Aye – Chairman 113 Kressner, Commissioners Coia, Smart, Lucas and Hope, Nay – Commissioner Filas) 114 115 5. PUBLIC COMMENT 116 117 None. 118 119 6. ADJOURNMENT 120 121 With there being no further business Chairman Kressner asked for a motion to adjourn. 122 Commissioner Hope made a motion to adjourn. The motion was seconded by 123 Commissioner Lucas. 124 125 The motion was carried (6-0) and the Plan Commission/Zoning Board of Appeals as 126 adjourned at 8:35 p.m. 127 128 129 Respectfully submitted, 130 Village Administrator Mike Strong 3 Zoning Variation Request – 516 Arapaho Trail (Cover Transmittal) DATE: July 6, 2026 TO: Chairman Craig Kressner and Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Mike Strong, Village Administrator Emma Swanson, AICP, Teska Associates, Inc. RE: Request for a Variation from the Rear Yard Setback in the R-2 District for 516 Arapaho Trail (the “Subject Property”) Property Owner Property Location Zoning District Korin Sweringen 516 Arapaho Trail, Residential - 2 516 Arapaho Trail, Lake Villa, IL 60046 R2 Lake Villa, IL 60046 Project Representatives: Larry Floria (LFC Consulting) Summary of Request: This is a request for approval of a Variation from the required rear yard setback of 50’ to allow the construction of an addition on the existing single-family home, which would be setback 23’ from the rear (east) property line. Approval of the Variation would enable the construction a new 19’x16’ one- story, enclosed 4-season room addition, which will be attached to the rear of the existing residence on the Subject Property. The Subject Property is in the Ishnala Estates subdivision, located on a curvilinear street (Arapaho Trail) on a block with similar size and shape lots. The Subject Property is a nonconforming lot of record as the existing residence encroaches into and does not comply with the required 50’ rear yard setback for the R2 zoning district. The existing residence on the Subject Property already extends into the rear yard with the southeastern-most corner of the residence being set back roughly 30’ from the rear property line. Given the angle of the house on the lot and the irregular shape of the lot, the proposed addition would only extend the home roughly an additional 7’ for a rear yard setback of 23’. Statements of Fact Relative to the Request Compliance/Non-Compliance with Key Code Requirements  The Subject Property is a nonconforming lot of record as the existing residence encroaches into and does not comply with the 50’ rear yard setback required by Section 10-3C-4, Table 5.2, of the Village’s Zoning Regulations.  The existing home sits roughly 30’ from the rear-yard property line.  The proposed addition would encroach by an additional 16’ into the existing nonconforming rear yard setback, leaving a rear yard setback of only 23’ to the rear property line at the southernmost closest point of the new addition and approximately 35’ to the rear property line at the northernmost closest point of the new addition. Physical, Natural or Practical Difficulties  The property was subdivided and the existing residential structure was constructed prior to the present-day setback requirements and other zoning regulations. 1  Zoning Variation Request – 516 Arapaho Trail Cover Transmittal  The shape of the Subject Property is somewhat irregular, with dimensions which are narrower at the front property line and wider at the rear property line, with an angular rear yard property line. Petition Evaluation As noted above, the property is in the R2 Residential Zoning District, which has a required rear-yard setback of 50’. The property is in the Ishnala Estates subdivision, located on a curvilinear street (Arapaho Trail) and has a lot size of. 15,875 square feet. The property is surrounded to the north, south, east, and west by lots of similar shape and size that are also zoned Residential (R2). The Final Plat for subdivision was approved on December 17, 1977. At the time of approval, the original subdivision was platted without bulk standards, except for the establishment of a 30’ front building line; no side yard or rear yard setback requirements were in place when the subdivision was created. According to the County Assessor’s data, the existing house on this property was built in 2003. Property Located at 516 Arapaho Trail 516 Arapaho Trail and Surrounding Properties in the Ishnala Estates Subdivision 2  Zoning Variation Request – 516 Arapaho Trail Cover Transmittal Proposed Site Plan with new rear addition The existing home is located roughly 30’ from the rear (east) property line at the closest point as measured from the southeastern wall/corner of the residence to the property line. The proposed addition is located on the northeast corner of the home. As depicted in the site plan, if approved, the house, with the addition, would sit 23’ from the rear-yard property line. With the exception of the rear yard setback, the property meets all other bulk standard requirements for the R2-Residential zoning district (See Table 1.) 3  Zoning Variation Request – 516 Arapaho Trail Cover Transmittal Table 1. Bulk Standards Table for 516 Arapaho Drive, Lake Villa, IL Current Zoning Proposed Zoning Variance or Zoning Regulations Requirement – R2 Requirement – R2 Relief Residential Residential Requested Use Single-Family Residential Single-Family Residential No Lot Size Minimum Area 10,000 ft2 15,746 ft2 No Lot Size Minimum Width 60' 130' No Minimum Front Yard Setback 30' 43-7” No Minimum Rear Yard Setback 50' 23’ Yes Total Side Yard Minimum Setback 20' 39’ No Minimum Setback N/A N/A N/A Abutting a Street Minimum Setback Abutting a N/A N/A N/A Residential or AG Zone Maximum Lot 60% 35% No Coverage Maximum Floor Area Ratio 40% 20% No Maximum Height of Principal Use 35’ 34'4" No Maximum Height of Accessory Use 15' N/A N/A 4  Zoning Variation Request – 516 Arapaho Trail Cover Transmittal Existing rear elevation (new addition to be located where existing patio and pergola are located currently) Existing rear elevation (new addition to be located where existing patio and pergola are located currently) 5  Zoning Variation Request – 516 Arapaho Trail Cover Transmittal Proposed rear & side elevations with the new addition Public Comment Standard public notice of this request was provided by the Village to surrounding property owners in accordance with the Village’s Zoning Code for notice requirements. Notice was also provided in the Daily Herald and the agenda was posted in accordance with the Open Meetings Act. As of the date of this memorandum, Village staff has not received any comments pertaining to this request. No physical correspondence has been received by Village Staff relative to the petition. Procedural Review for Variation Request Pursuant to Section 10-7-4 of the Village Code, a variation from the Zoning Code may be granted in accordance with the standards and procedures set forth in the Code. An application for variation 6  Zoning Variation Request – 516 Arapaho Trail Cover Transmittal must first be submitted to the Village, which will then be forwarded to the Zoning Board of Appeals for a required public hearing, after which the Board of Trustees will review such report or recommendation of the Board. During the Public Hearing, the Zoning Board of Appeals will hear the evidence presented by Village Staff, Applicant, and any individuals in the audience wishing to provide public comment, present evidence, and/or cross-examine witnesses relative to the proposed variation request. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Board shall, with the aid and advice of Village Staff, transmit its findings and recommendations as to whether a variation should be approved, approved subject to modifications, or not approved. Based on the information and analysis presented herein, the Zoning Board of Appeals may recommend approval to the Village Board of:  A rear yard Variation to allow for the construction of an addition to the single-family home no closer than 23’ to the rear (east) property line. All consistent with the site plan submitted to the Board. Recommendation by Village Staff Based on review and information submitted by the Petitioner, a site visit, and an analysis of the request based on applicable portions of the Zoning Code, Village Staff submits the following analysis relative to the standards and conditions imposed by Section 10-7-4 of the Village Code:  The existing residence does not conform to the current 50’ rear yard setback requirements. Therefore, the practical difficulty and hardship in conforming to the required setbacks is the result of changes to the applicable zoning regulations over time.  The variation and the resulting modifications on the Property will not impair light or ventilation to adjacent properties, endanger public safety, or diminish property values. The proposed addition is intended to upgrade the value of the Property. Should the Zoning Board of Appeals be inclined to recommend to the Board of Trustees the approval of the requested variation required for the Project, Village Staff recommends the following conditions be included as part of such recommendation of the Zoning Board of Appeals to the Village Board as outlined below:  Granting of variation does not authorize commencement of any work on the Property, except only after all permits, approvals, and other authorizations for such work have been properly applied for, paid for, and granted in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.  For the variations as being expressly recommended by the Zoning Board of Appeals, all Village Code requirements relative to building and construction, subdivisions, zoning, and all other applicable Ordinances and regulations of the Village shall continue to apply to the Property, and the development and use of the Property shall be in compliance with all laws and regulations of all other federal, state, and local governments and agencies having jurisdiction. 7  Zoning Variation Request – 516 Arapaho Trail Cover Transmittal Action Requested Village Staff requests that the Zoning Board of Appeals hold a public hearing to consider the Petitioner’s request for a rear-yard setback variation required for the proposed addition and recommend approval, approval with modifications, or disapproval to the Village Board of Trustees. Attachments Exhibit 1 – Areial Photograph Exhibit 2 – Zoning Map with Subject Property Outlined Exhibit 3 – Petitioner’s Application Packet and Submittals Exhibit 4 – Copy of Public Hearing Notice and Notification Area 8  EXHIBIT 1 - Aerial Photograph i Trl shon S ho rl S oni T ho S hosh sh o ni Tr l Ar ap ah oT rl Arap a ho Trl Sh os ho n i Tr l A r a p aho Trl 0.03 mi Tax Parcel Lines Tax Parcel Lake County, Illinois Map Printed on 7/6/2026 ¯ Information The selected feature may not occur anywhere in the current map extent. A Registered Land Surveyor should be consulted to determine the precise location of property boundaries Disclaimer: on the ground. This map does not constitute a regulatory determination and is not a base for engineering design. This map is intended to be viewed and printed in color.  EXHIBIT 2 - Zoning Map i Trl shon S ho rl S oni T ho S hosh sh o R2 - Residential ni Tr l Ar ap ah oT rl Arap a ho Trl Sh os ho n i Tr l SB - Suburban Business A r a p aho Trl 0.03 mi Tax Parcel Lines Tax Parcel Lake County, Illinois Map Printed on 7/6/2026 ¯ Information The selected feature may not occur anywhere in the current map extent. A Registered Land Surveyor should be consulted to determine the precise location of property boundaries Disclaimer: on the ground. This map does not constitute a regulatory determination and is not a base for engineering design. This map is intended to be viewed and printed in color.