Zoning Board of Appeals

Village of Lombard Village Hall 255 East Wilson Ave. Lombard, IL 60148 villageoflombard.org Minutes Wednesday, February 22, 2023 7:00 PM Village Hall Board Room Zoning Board of Appeals John DeFalco, Chairperson Mary Newman, Raymond Bartels, Keith Tap, Michelle Johnson, Brian Conway and Zach Meadows Staff Liaison: Jennifer Ganser Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes February 22, 2023 Call to Order Chairperson DeFalco called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Pledge of Allegiance Chairperson DeFalco led the Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call of Members Present 7 - John DeFalco, Mary Newman, Raymond Bartels, Keith Tap, Michelle Johnson, Zach Meadows, and Brian Conway Also present: Jennifer Ganser, AICP Assistant Director of Community Development, Anna Papke, AICP Senior Planner of Community Development. Public Hearings 230051 ZBA 23-01: 327 S. Lombard Avenue The petitioner requests that the Village grant a variation from Section 155.407(H) of the Lombard Code of Ordinances to allow for forty-five percent (45%) of the lot area to be preserved in open space, where a minimum of fifty percent (50%) lot area preserved in open space is required in the R2 Single-Family Residence District. (DISTRICT #5) Jennifer Ganser, Assistant Director, and Anna Papke, Senior Planner were sworn in by Chairperson DeFalco to offer testimony. Mr. Subach said he is the attorney for the petitioner. He said the petitioner and his wife are longtime residents of Lombard. They installed the paver patio for their children so they could play outside and be seen while playing outside. Mrs. Kula owns Prairie Honey Floral Studio on Main Street. He said they are seeking a variance for reduced open space. The patio was installed in March 2021. The contractor said a permit was not needed. Mr. Subach said a mistake was made by not obtaining a permit. If the variance is not approved the patio will need to be removed. Mr. Subach referenced the standards of variance. He said the hardship is that if not granted the patio will need to be removed and there will be a loss of expenses. He said there is a detached garage and two porches. He said it’s not an issue with impervious surface. The driveway is very long and setback far away. If the garage was further up there could be additional open space behind the garage. He said there is not a financial gain, just a financial cost to Village of Lombard Page 1 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes February 22, 2023 be removed. He said this was not directly caused by the petitioner, it was caused by their contractor who said permits were not required. He said no harm has been caused since the patio was installed for the two years. The property has two private storm sewer inlets and the patio is pitched towards the inlets. He said the petitioner has no objection in obtaining the engineering review in the conditions. He said this is an upgrade to the property and is not visible from the front yard. Lastly, he said this has no impact to light or air on the property. Mr. Kula said we made a mistake and trusted a recommendation and the contractor. He noted his wife’s business obtained permits for her business buildout. He said his wife’s business donates flowers for the Lilac Princess program, the high school prom, and the historical society. He said the patio was installed for additional space for their children. He said they asked the contractor if permits were needed and were told no. They learned later that summer a permit was required. He said no neighbors complained about water or flooding. He said it was raining all day and there is no water in their yard. They have not had problems with snow melting. He noted the petition of support from neighbors. Mr. Subach said the property owners looked at cutting down the driveway for additional open space or removing the porches. Nothing would work except to ask for the variance. They have no issues with the conditions in the staff report if approved. He noted that variances were granted in the past and asked for a recommendation of approval. Chairperson DeFalco asked if anyone from the public had any questions or comments. Hearing none, he asked for the staff report. Ms. Ganser presented the staff report, which was entered into the record in its entirety. The subject property is developed with a single-family home. The property owner installed a four hundred and seventy-seven (477) square foot brick paver patio in their rear yard in 2021 without a permit. As a result, the property exceeds the maximum lot coverage of 50%. Fifty percent of a lot in the R2 district can be covered and the other 50% needs to remain open. She referred to the open space calculation in the staff report on page 3. To be granted a variation, petitioners must show that they have affirmed each of the standards for variations. Staff offered commentary in the staff report on the standards. A hardship was not made by the petitioner. Staff finds that there are no conditions related to the property that prevent compliance with the established regulations. The property does not have physical Village of Lombard Page 2 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes February 22, 2023 surroundings, shape, or topographical features that differ substantially from other lots in the neighborhood. The conditions of a detached garage and longer driveway are also not unique to the neighborhood or the Village. As noted, a permit was not applied for which would have given staff the opportunity the review and alert the homeowner and contractor about lot coverage. Staff was notified of the patio without a permit by a service request to Code Enforcement. Neighbors may be concerned about flooding and how the additional lot coverage could impact neighborhood flooding. The property does have separated sewers; however, they lead into a combined sewer area. She noted that lot coverage is a planning Code. It doesn’t matter if the coverage is permeable pavers or concrete, it is considered coverage either way. The Private Engineering Division of Community Development reviewed the petition. Should the petition be approved by the Village Board, they added a comment on an engineering analysis of the existing storm sewer pipe. Ms. Ganser referenced that other lot coverage variances were approved by the Village Board. However, in many of these cases the lot coverage was decreasing or remaining the same. Staff has generally not supported relief for lot coverage either through a variance or in a discussion with a property owner. As a result, many property owners do not apply for variances and instead meet Code. The petitioner submitted a petition signed by four (4) neighbors in support of the variance. The petition is attached. A neighbor submitted a letter expressing concerns on the variance. The letter is attached. Staff recommends denial. Chairperson DeFalco opened the meeting up for discussion among the ZBA members. Mr. Bartels asked about the storm sewers in the neighbor letter and Ms. Ganser said they were reviewed by the engineering division. Mr. Conway asked if the Village received any flooding calls today and Ms. Ganser said not that she is aware of. Ms. Johnson asked about neighborhood flooding. Ms. Ganser said Village of Lombard Page 3 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes February 22, 2023 those go to the engineering division, not planning, and she is unaware of neighborhood flooding issues. Mr. Meadows asked what the definition of open space. Ms. Papke read from the Zoning Code “Open space is that portion of a lot or property maintained as lawn, garden, field, woods, wetland, or other natural landscape area and is free of buildings, structures and impervious surfaces.” Mr. Meadows referenced the purpose statement in 155.407. Mr. Tap asked the petitioner if there were any standing water issues prior to patio. Mr. Kula said no. He said the sewers were added prior to his purchase of the home. Chairman DeFalco asked about the driveway portion that is closest to the grass area by the deck. Mr. Kula said they considered removing a strip, but the driveway is narrow. Mr. Kula noted it does open to the south, however, there would be a driveway, then mulch or grass, and then the patio. Chairman DeFalco said in other cases the petitioners removed coverage to get closer to the 50%. He referenced a past case on Wilson. Mr. Kula said it’s a 2-car garage and they need to fit both cars in the garage. Chairman DeFalco asked about the area south of garage and the area by the deck stairs. Mr. Kula said that could be considered. Mr. Bartels said the deck is raised. He asked if that matters for open space. Ms. Ganser said it does not. Ms. Johnson asked if a balcony would be considered coverage and Ms. Ganser said yes. Ms. Johnson noted the patio was constructed around the sewer. Mr. Kula said they needed to work with the sewer and installed the patio around that. Mr. Conway asked if legal action was taken against the contractor. Mr. Subach said not yet. He said the contractor was made aware of the issue. Mr. Kula said the contractor did try to apply for a permit. Mr. Kula said they are unsure of all damages and unsure on legal action. Chairman DeFalco asked if the attorney looked into the contractor. Mr. Subach said no. Mr. Meadows asked what material is the patio and if it is stone. Ms. Village of Lombard Page 4 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes February 22, 2023 Kula said it’s a natural stone. Mr. Meadows asked if they consider the patio landscaping and asked if they consider it decorative. The Kula’s responded yes to both. Chairman DeFalco asked if a patio is a structure and Mr. Meadows said he thinks its landscaping and decorative materials. Ms. Ganser read the definition of structure from the Zoning Ordinance and noted that staff considers it a structure. “Structure is anything which is constructed or erected which requires permanent location on the ground or attachment to something having permanent location on the ground.” Chairperson DeFalco summarized the petition and asked for a motion. Mr. Tap made a motion to recommend denial of the petition. Ms. Newman seconded the motion. The Zoning Board of Appeals voted 3-4 that the Village Board deny the petition associated with ZBA 23-01. The motion failed as it did not have four votes. Aye 3- Keith Tap, Mary Newman and John DeFalco Nay 4- Michelle Johnson, Raymond Bartels, Zach Meadows, and Brian Conway Mr. Conway made a motion to recommend approval of the petition. Mr. Bartels seconded the motion. Mr. Meadows said if the lot was 5’ wider the open space would be more than 50%. He said this is reasonable use of the owner’s property. He said the petitioner did not adequately discuss the narrowness of the lot. Mr. Conway made a motion to recommend approval of the petition. Mr. Bartels seconded the motion. The Zoning Board of Appeals voted 4-3 that the Village Board approve the petition associated with ZBA 23-01, subject to the following four (4) conditions: 1. The addition shall be constructed in substantial conformance to the plans submitted by the petitioners as noted in this IDRC report. 2. The petitioner shall apply for and receive a building permit. 3. The petitioner shall satisfactorily address all comments noted within the Inter-Departmental Review Committee Report including: a. the submittal of the engineering analysis to the Village ninety (90) days after Village Board approval, and b. the completion of any potential improvements within ninety (90) days of the report submitted date. c. In the event the aforementioned engineering analysis and/or potential Village of Lombard Page 5 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes February 22, 2023 improvements is not completed in the timeframe approve, the patio shall be removed and the zoning relief shall be null and void. 4. The variance is for the current patio only and shall not be used for purposes such as a home addition or additional structures. Aye: 4- Raymond Bartels, Michelle Johnson, Zach Meadows, and Brian Conway Nay: 3- John DeFalco, Mary Newman, and Keith Tap 230052 ZBA 23-02: 1161 S Finley Road The petitioner requests that the Village approve the following variations on the subject property located within the R5 General Residence District: 1. A variation from Section 155.410(E) of Village Code to allow a lot width of 50 feet for an existing lot of record, where a minimum lot width of 60 feet is required; 2. A variation from Section 155.410(F)(2)(b) to allow a corner side yard setback of 14 feet, where a corner side yard of 20 feet is required; 3. A variation from Section 155.410(F)(2)(d) to allow a rear yard setback of 25 feet where a rear yard of 30 feet is required; 4. A variation from Section 155.410(H) to allow a floor area ratio (FAR) of more than 0.5 FAR; and 5. A variation from Section 155.212 to allow decks that are more than three feet about the average level of the adjoining ground to encroach into the required front and rear yard setbacks. (DISTRICT #2) Thomas Budzik, petitioner, and Anna Papke, Senior Planner, and Jennifer Ganser, Assistant Director, were sworn in by Chairperson DeFalco to offer testimony. Mr. Budzik presented the petition. He said he is the architect for the project, and the prospective buyer is present in the audience. The prospective buyer proposes to build a two-family dwelling on the subject property. The two-family dwelling would require five variances in order to be built as proposed. Mr. Budzik summarized the five variances: · The required minimum lot width is 60 feet, but the property is only 50 feet wide. Mr. Budzik said the lot was platted prior adoption of the modern zoning ordinance with lot width requirements. · Corner side yard and rear yard setback reductions. Mr. Budzik said the required setbacks do not allow for a functional layout of the first floor. The corner side yard setback reduction would allow for more main floor area, including a projection of the living Village of Lombard Page 6 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes February 22, 2023 space. He noted the garage portion of the building will maintain a 20-foot setback from the corner side yard property line so that a car can park on the driveway without overhanging into the right-of-way. The rear yard setback reduction will allow for more width in the entire building. Mr. Budzik noted the second floor of the building does not follow the first-floor footprint exactly. The second floor is stepped in to create a building that is more dynamic and has architectural features that match the single-family homes to the east on Ann Street. Mr. Budzik said the corner side yard setback plus the narrowness of the lot reduces the buildable area as compared to other properties in the R5 District. He said the property is adjacent to other apartments in the R5 district, and does not abut single-family homes. He said the reduced setbacks would not have impacts on the neighbors, as the property abuts a parking lot to the rear. · Variance to allow FAR greater than 0.5. Mr. Budzik referred to the discussion of FAR in the staff report, and said he agreed with staff’s opinion that FAR should not apply to the proposed development. · Decks located more than three feet above the level of the adjacent ground, and projecting into the front and rear setbacks. Mr. Budzik said this variance was requested because of the unique topographical features on the property. The property slopes down from south to north, with the decks located toward the north (lower) portion of the property. Chairperson DeFalco asked if anyone from the public had any questions or comments. Mike Stern was sworn in. Mr. Stern lives on Ann Street. He had been concerned about possible parking on Ann Street, but had reviewed the site plan thought the parking situation would be okay. He said the apartment buildings to the north of the subject property have flooded in heavy rains. He asked if the proposed development would impact drainage. He said neighborhood drainage has improved in recent years, but water does sit in the area. He asked what the property values will be and how big each unit would be. He said most of the houses on his block are 2,500 to 3,000 square feet. He said there is not a lot of yard space on the proposed site plan for the two-family dwelling. He discussed past parking concerns on Ann Street. He said his concerns are mainly on flooding and water drainage. Chairperson DeFalco asked if anyone from the public had any Village of Lombard Page 7 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes February 22, 2023 questions or comments. Hearing none, he asked for the staff report. Ms. Papke presented the staff report, which was entered into the record in its entirety. The subject property is a vacant 50-foot wide lot with a considerable grade change. The petitioner proposes to build a two-family dwelling on the property, which is a permitted use in the underlying R5 District. The petitioner is requesting five variances to allow the development as proposed. The first variance is a lot width variance. The R5 District requires lots to be a minimum of 60 feet wide. The subject property is 50 feet wide. The subject property is a lot of record platted in 1930 when the property was in unincorporated DuPage County. There is no opportunity for the petitioner to widen the property to meet minimum lot width standards. The substandard lot width is an existing condition that would impact any potential development proposed for the property. Staff supports the requested variation, and notes that similar variances for lot width have been approved for existing lots not meeting current standards. The petitioner is also requesting two setback variances: a reduction in the corner side yard setback from 20 feet to 14.5 feet, and a reduction in the rear yard setback from 30 feet to 25 feet. Staff finds that both setback variances are the result of the narrowness of the property, which has impacted the layout of the building. Staff notes that the portion of the building where the garage doors take access is 20 feet from the corner side yard property line, which will provide adequate space for a car to park on the driveway without overhanging into the right-of-way. Staff supports these variances. The petitioner is also requesting a variance to allow a floor area ratio (FAR) greater than the maximum 0.5 FAR permitted in the R5 District. The FAR of the proposed two-family dwelling is 0.78, which includes living space in the basement/cellar. In consideration of the request, staff notes that the Village Code does not have a FAR requirement in the R0 through R4 Districts or in the Business Districts. FAR is applied in the R5 and R6 Districts, as well as the Office and Industrial Districts as an added level of control on the intensity of the large developments commonly located in those districts. Most development in the R5 District consists of large apartment complexes that have a lot of ancillary uses in addition to dwelling units. The proposed two-family dwelling is atypical for the R5 District. Most two-family dwellings in the Village are located in the R3 and R4 Districts, which do not have Village of Lombard Page 8 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes February 22, 2023 maximum floor area ratio requirements. Staff believes it is unreasonable to apply a FAR requirement to the proposed two-family development when most two-family dwellings in the Village would not be subject to such a requirement. Staff considers the proposed two-family dwelling to be a reasonable amount of development on the subject property. With the exception of the two setback and the lot width variances, the development meets bulk requirements of the underlying zoning district. Staff supports this variance. The petitioner requests a variance to allow for decks that are more than three feet above average level of the adjoining ground to encroach into the front and rear yards. The proposed two-family dwelling contains two decks. The decks are level with the first floor of the house, which is approximately two feet higher than grade at the front entrance to the dwelling units. Due to a significant grade change on the property, however, the decks are between five and eight feet above the level of the adjoining ground measured under the decks. Staff recognizes a hardship based on the unique topography of the property, and supports this request. In summary, staff recommends approval of the petition subject to the conditions in the staff report. Chairperson DeFalco opened the meeting up for discussion among the ZBA members. Mr. Tap said the staff report mentions the Comprehensive Plan and infill development. He asked what is meant by infill development. Ms. Papke said infill development is development or redevelopment on small lots within the Village in areas that are already mostly built-out. Chairperson DeFalco asked if the petitioner had considered constructing a single-family home instead of a two-family dwelling. Mr. Budzik said it was discussed. However, it is not financially feasible. He also said the prospective purchaser did not need a large single-family home, but did want to build a two-family dwelling. Chairperson DeFalco said one of the standards for variations in the Village Code was that the variance request not be based primarily on financial gain. He said building two dwelling units instead of one dwelling unit could be considered financial gain. Mr. Budzik said financial gain is not the sole reason for the proposed development. There are many reasons someone might choose to build a duplex. Mr. Village of Lombard Page 9 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes February 22, 2023 Budzik said that a two-family dwelling is allowed in the R5 District by right, and the petitioner is trying to make the development more economical. Chairperson DeFalco said the lot is geographically challenged. He asked about egress from the north side of the building. Mr. Budzik said there are basement egress windows on the north side of the building. Otherwise, residents will use the decks or front doors for ingress/egress, which is required by the building code. Chairperson DeFalco said he has concerns about a small child and the railing height of the decks, because the decks would be elevated off the ground. He asked about railings. Mr. Budzik said deck railings are required to be a minimum of 36 inches high, but they would likely install railings 42 inches high. He noted it is not uncommon for buildings to have second-floor balconies with similar or worse conditions. He said that is why the stairs are exiting to the south, where the elevation change is less severe. Mr. Conway mentioned the residents concerned about flooding. Did Engineering or Public Works review the petition? Ms. Papke said both departments reviewed the petition and would review the project again during the permit submittal phase if the variances are approved. All stormwater codes will be met. The proposed development provides the required minimum open space. She said Public Works reviewed the driveway connections to Ann Street. The petitioner had originally proposed one wider driveway to serve both garages, but had revised the plans to show two narrower driveways based on Public Works’ requirements. Mr. Meadows confirmed the property has been vacant since 1978. Ms. Papke said this is correct. Chairperson DeFalco noted the drainage concerns and said the Village has occasionally bought vacant properties to use for stormwater detention. He asked if Public Works had considered purchasing the subject property for this purpose. Ms. Papke said Public Works had reviewed the petition and had not mentioned any interest in purchasing the property. Mr. Budzik noted there were Engineering comments in the staff report. He said water falling on the area covered by the proposed building will be collected and directed to stormwater pipes. The drainage in the Village of Lombard Page 10 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes February 22, 2023 immediate area will be improved. Chairperson DeFalco asked about drain pipes. Mr. Budzik said the water in the downspouts will be collected and go through a bmp [best management practice improvement] and then into storm sewers. The sump pump will also discharge into the sewers. He said the driveways are to the south of the building Mr. Bartels asked if there would be surge impacts from the proposed development on the Village stormwater system. Mr. Budzik said the development will meet the Village stormwater requirements. Mr. Meadows said the elevation lines on the plat of survey show the south boundary of the subject property is higher than the grade of the apartment buildings to the north. He said the proposed development could improve drainage by collecting water currently running off from the subject property and directing it into the Village stormwater system. Mr. Tap said the proposed building reminds him of the newer houses on Grove Street and Park Avenue. Chairperson DeFalco summarized the petition and asked for a motion from the Board. Mr. Tap made a motion to recommend approval of the petition. Mr. Meadows seconded the motion. The Zoning Board of Appeals voted 6-1 that the Village Board approve the petition associated with ZBA 23-02, subject to the following five (5) conditions: 1. The project shall be constructed in substantial conformance to the plans submitted by the petitioners as noted in this IDRC report; 2. Any future repairs, reconstruction, or modifications to the structure shall be constructed in substantial conformance to the plans submitted by the petitioners as noted in this IDRC report; 3. The petitioner shall apply for and receive a building permit for the proposed development; 4. The petitioner shall satisfactorily address all comments noted within the Inter-Departmental Review Committee Report; and 5. This approval shall be subject to the construction commencement time provisions as set forth within Sections 155.103(C)(10) and (F)(11). The motion carried by the following vote: Village of Lombard Page 11 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes February 22, 2023 Aye: 6- Mary Newman, Raymond Bartels, Keith Tap, Michelle Johnson, Zach Meadows, and Brian Conway Nay: 1- John DeFalco Business Meeting Approval of Minutes A motion was made by Mr. Bartels and seconded by Ms. Newman, the minutes for the August 24, 2022 meeting were approved. The motion passed by a unanimous vote. Planner's Report Ms. Ganser said there will be a meeting on March 22, 2023 with one petition. Unfinished Business There was no unfinished business New Business Chairman DeFalco reminded the ZBA that the DuPage County Statement of Economic Interest forms will be released soon. Mr. Bartels asked if staff could provide training to the ZBA on variance related topics. Ms. Ganser said staff can look into this and provide additional materials Adjournment A motion was made by Ms. Newman, seconded by Mr. Conway to adjourn the meeting at 8:21 p.m. The motion passed by a unanimous vote. _________________________________________________ John DeFalco, Chairperson Zoning Board of Appeals _________________________________________________ Jennifer Ganser, Assistant Director of Community Development Zoning Board of Appeals Village of Lombard Page 12 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes February 22, 2023 Village of Lombard Page 13