Plan Commission

P2510-01 / 501 PLYMOUTH LANE / Hussain Residence / Special Use to Raise Fowl Village of Schaumburg Plan Commission January 21, 2026 1 The hearing was called to order at 7:01 p.m. by Chairperson Rich Gerber. ROLL CALL Members Present: Chairperson Rich Gerber, Don Watson, Charles Nordstrom, Dale Litney, Steve Robles, Kenneth Ropiak, and Tanvi Vora Members Absent: Anil Barot, David Piecuch Staff Present: Ian Salzman, AICP, Associate Planner Monica Richart, AICP, Sustainability Planner A quorum was present. Sworn in for testimony: Ian Salzman, AICP, Associate Planner Kazim Hussain Chairperson Gerber introduced the case being presented P2510-01 / 501 PLYMOUTH LANE / Hussain Residence / Special Use to Raise Fowl. Chairperson Gerber asked the Recording Secretary if public notice was given regarding the case. Ms. Storm stated that Staff and the petitioner have given proper public hearing notification. Mr. Hussain stated that the Village of Schaumburg was established as an agricultural community. He shared that he has seen artwork around the Village showcasing agricultural practices, and this has been an opportunity for him to teach his children about the importance of agriculture. Mr. Hussain expressed his gratitude that the case was continued to the hearing on January 21, as he was unable to attend his previously scheduled hearing due to serious family issues. He shared that maintaining a stable and familiar setting for his family during this time of medical uncertainty has been especially meaningful. Mr. Hussain explained that the proposed coop is a minor accessory structure, non-commercial, and designed to be compatible with the existing residential use of the property. This coop will be well maintained and will be consistent with surrounding properties and applicable Village standards. He has spoken with his immediate neighbors, who expressed support and an interest in establishing their own chicken coops as well. He shared that these chickens will only be used for household food use, personal use, and will come from humanely kept chickens, as opposed to commercially kept chickens. The benefits of having chickens on the property include natural fertilizer for the family vegetable garden and fruit orchard. Mr. Hussain shared that he is very passionate about sustainable and regenerative landscapes. This chicken coop is intended to improve the overall landscape of the backyard. P2510-01 / 501 PLYMOUTH LANE / Hussain Residence / Special Use to Raise Fowl Village of Schaumburg Plan Commission January 21, 2026 2 Mr. Hussain addressed concerns over noise levels and maintenance. He shared that hens are quiet animals, and require routine, manageable care when properly maintained. He shared that 93% of U.S. cities allow backyard chickens, including Chicago. He shared that this shows how these uses can coexist successfully in residential neighborhoods. Approval of this request would allow his family to maintain a modest, accessory use that is compatible with the neighborhood and meaningful to the family. Mr. Salzman stated that the property at 501 Plymouth Ln. is in the R-6 residential zoning district. The lot size is 16,750 square feet, and the minimum lot size in this zone is 10,000 square feet. The lot is .38 acres in total. Mr. Salzman explained that every few weeks the Community Development Department receives requests for a special use to raise chickens. A majority of these requests are not supported during review due to lot size. It is very rare that these cases make it to Plan Commission. He explained that Mr. Hussain is requesting to keep six hens on the property. There will be two structures to maintain the hens. The first is a chicken coop, which will be located inside the existing shed on the property. Mr. Hussain is also proposing adding a chicken run on the southeast side of the shed, connected to the coop via programmable door. The existing shed received a permit in 1986. Mr. Salzman explained that there are three standards for special uses to raise chickens. First, is the special use must be necessary or desirable to provide a public service which is in the interest of public convenience and will contribute to the general welfare of the community. As Mr. Hussain explained, this use will be to provide eggs for his family and contribute to gardening tactics on the property. Second, the use cannot be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, or general welfare of others. Based on the proposed location, this use minimizes odor, visual disturbance, and noise. Mr. Salzman explained that staff included a condition upon approval that the petitioner be responsible for maintaining the coop in a sanitary way, and for the Community Development Health Division to conduct annual inspections of the property. The visual disturbance caused by the chicken run is minimized due to screening and the location on the property. The noise disturbance will be reduced by a staff condition that prohibits the petitioner from keeping roosters. The size of the lot will also minimize noise reaching other neighbors. Third, the proposed use will comply with regulations and conditions proposed by the Village Board, as well as staff conditions. Mr. Salzman shared images of the chicken shed in the backyard in relation to neighbors. From the western view, the view of the chicken run is obstructed by the shed itself. From the northeast view, there is landscaping that blocks the view of the chicken run. From the southeast view, the coop is at a distance from the neighboring house, with fruit trees planted along the property line that will grow and obstruct the view. From S. Braintree Drive, there is a considerable amount of screening that will obstruct the view. Mr. Salzman explained that the Village has only approved two special uses to raise chickens, the first in 1993 and the other in 2022. In the 1993 case (Z9311-02), the lot size was 20,300 square feet with approval for 20 chickens. In the 2022 case (P2207-02), the lot size was 26,900 square feet with approval to raise six chickens and one duck. Staff recommends approval of this special use due to the adequate size of the coop and chicken run to raise the chickens, size of the lot, and view obstructions and distance from neighbors. P2510-01 / 501 PLYMOUTH LANE / Hussain Residence / Special Use to Raise Fowl Village of Schaumburg Plan Commission January 21, 2026 3 Chairperson Gerber asked if there were any questions or comments from the public. Mr. Watson asked how many eggs six chickens would produce. Mr. Hussain stated that six chickens would produce four eggs per day in the summer. In the winter, it would be three or four eggs per day. Mr. Watson asked if there is any intention of selling the eggs. Mr. Hussain stated no, the eggs would not be sold, only given as occasional gifts to neighbors. Mr. Watson reaffirmed that the number of chickens allowed on the property be limited to six, with a replacement rate of one. Mr. Ropiak asked Mr. Salzman the reasons why other requests like this were denied. Mr. Salzman stated that in a majority of cases, requests are denied based on lot size. If the request is in a dense residential area, the existence of chickens may be more disruptive. Chairperson Gerber asked if there was a motion to close the hearing. A motion was made by Mr. Watson, seconded by Mr. Nordstrom to close the hearing. Chairperson Gerber stated they would close the hearing by voice acclamation MOTION CARRIED: Vote 7-0 with two members absent. A motion was made by Mr. Watson to recommend approval of a Special Use to Raise Fowl for the property 501 Plymouth Lane, Hussain Residence, case number P2510-01, seconded by Mr. Robles. MOTION CARRIED: Vote 7-0 with two members absent. A poll was taken: Mr. David Piecuch – Absent Mr. Charles Nordstrom – Yes Mr. Dale Litney – Yes Mr. Don Watson – Yes Mr. Steve Robles – Yes Mr. Kenneth Ropiak – Yes Mr. Anil Barot – Absent Ms. Tanvi Vora – Yes Mr. Rich Gerber – Yes The hearing was adjourned at 7:18 p.m. P2510-02 / 816 APPLE DRIVE / Elibal Residence / Special Use to Raise Fowl Village of Schaumburg Plan Commission January 21, 2026 1 The hearing was called to order at 7:20 p.m. by Chairperson Rich Gerber. ROLL CALL Members Present: Chairperson Rich Gerber, Don Watson, Charles Nordstrom, Dale Litney, Steve Robles, Kenneth Ropiak, and Tanvi Vora Members Absent: Anil Barot, David Piecuch Staff Present: Ian Salzman, AICP, Associate Planner Monica Richart, AICP, Sustainability Planner A quorum was present. Sworn in for testimony: Monica Richart, AICP, Sustainability Planner Levent Elibal, Petitioner, 816 Apple Dr. Nara Rodriguez, 812 Apple Dr. Jeff Loftus, 800 Apple Dr. Emily Wetherholt, 820 Apple Dr. Parth Joshi, Planning Manager Chairperson Gerber introduced the case being presented P2510-02 / 816 APPLE DRIVE / Elibal Residence / Special Use to Raise Fowl. Chairperson Gerber asked the Recording Secretary if public notice was given regarding the case. Ms. Storm stated that Staff and the petitioner have given proper public hearing notification. Mr. Elibal stated that he was unaware that he needed to apply for a special use permit to raise chickens. Once he was made aware, he submitted the application. He shared that he is allergic to cats and dogs, but wanted to give his children the chance to have pets. The family started with fish and birds, and those did not work out. Mr. Elibal stated that the family decided to adopt baby chicks from the Tractor Supply and research practices on how to raise them, and they are learning everyday. They have had the chickens for three years. He stated that there is a fence around the chickens in the backyard. He asked his neighbors if they were okay with him having chickens. He stated that the family takes care of the chickens as pets, and they keep the inside and the outside of the coop clean. He stated that he would not have gone through the process if it were not for his children. He is open to whatever is necessary to have the chickens. P2510-02 / 816 APPLE DRIVE / Elibal Residence / Special Use to Raise Fowl Village of Schaumburg Plan Commission January 21, 2026 2 Ms. Richart stated that the property located at 816 Apple Dr. is zoned as R-6C, a district which has smaller lot sizes than the R-6 district of the previous case (P2510-01). The applicant currently has 10 hens and two ducks. The ducks will be rehomed outside of the Village. This lot is 9,027 square feet, and the coop is located on the northwest edge of the property. Ms. Richart stated that staff review inquiries to keep chicken when they are received. In the year 2025, staff saw an increase in inquiries due to the price of eggs and the avian flu outbreak. One resident applied in 2025, however the application was subsequently withdrawn. Ms. Richart stated that staff primarily review lot size to maintain agricultural uses on larger lots, evaluate the effects on neighboring properties, and considering the character and aesthetics of the area. Staff is recommending denial of this petition, due to the following criteria. The primary issue is the size of the property. The lot is smaller than the previous three cases that were recommended for approval. This lot is nearly half the size of the previous applicant (P2510-01), and three times smaller than the approved use in the 2022 case (P2207-02). Ms. Richart stated that the coop at this location is located right on the property line, next to the property to the north. For accessory structures, the minimum requirement is for the structure to be at least five feet from the property line. The coop is currently not compliant by Village standards. The coop is located in the rear yard of the primary structure but is located next to the side yard of the adjacent property which places it closer to the neighboring house. Due to the close proximity to the neighboring house, there is not sufficient space to add vegetation as a buffer between the structure and the neighboring house. The materials of the coop are not consistent with the code, which encourage accessory structures to be built of similar materials to the principal structure and surrounding homes. The chicken run is currently built out of corrugated metal and chain link. This current structure has a more rural aesthetic which is inconsistent with the surrounding wood frame homes and suburban context. Chairperson Gerber asked if there were any questions or comments from the public. Nara Rodriguez, of 812 Apple Dr., stated that she believes the housing for the chickens is not appropriate, not large enough for the amount of chickens he has. Ms. Rodriguez stated that the chickens get out and fly over the fence and destroy her garden, even once they are fenced in. She also stated that over the summer, there was a foul smell coming from the property. She suggests a more suitable living structure for the chickens, by making the coop larger to accommodate the amount of birds on the property. Jeff Loftus, of 800 Apple Dr., stated that he has lived in Schaumburg since 1981. He stated that he had noticed a former neighbor keeping chickens without following the proper procedure. Mr. Loftus shared that, while he lives two houses away, he can hear the ducks. He asked what the recommended lot size is for raising chickens, and that he does not believe that there is uniformity in what gets approved versus what does not. He asked if having chickens on the property will bring in more wild animals looking for food. He also stated that he has seen many chickens along Bode Road. Emily Wetherholt, of 820 Apple Dr., stated that she was approached by the applicant and originally had no issues with the chickens, At the time, the chickens were originally next to the house on the property, but the coop has changed location and they are on her fence. She stated that they are now P2510-02 / 816 APPLE DRIVE / Elibal Residence / Special Use to Raise Fowl Village of Schaumburg Plan Commission January 21, 2026 3 a nuisance based on their current location. Ms. Wetherholt stated that the chickens have completely destroyed her garden by digging in the dirt, and now they poke their heads through the fence. She stated that when her children were younger, they were afraid of the chickens because they thought they would get bit by the chickens. She asked if the size of the lot is the only issue with the application. Ms. Richart responded by stating that the lack of buffer, location, and aesthetics of the coop are additional reasons for recommending denial. Ms. Wetherholt stated that where the chickens are currently housed, they are causing problems. Mr. Nordstrom stated that he finds the location of the coop along the fenceline an issue, as well as the appearance of the coop. He questioned if either of these issues could be remedied. Mr. Watson stated that he is concerned with the proximity and the building materials, as the materials are already out of code. He referenced that it is not currently in compliance with Village standards. He asked if there could be an instance where, if remedied, this lot could work. Ms. Richart stated that the Village prefers to keep this use on a larger lot site. If it were to remain on a property of this size, it would need to be located in the rear of the house, as far away from other properties as possible, constructed of materials similar to the building, and the number of chickens reduced. There would also need to be a vegetative buffer and to repair the fence and replace the chicken wire. Mr. Watson appreciated the suggestion from public comment to put the requirements for raising chickens more formally in the Village code. He asked the applicant if he would consider reducing the number of chickens in order to get approved. Mr. Elibal, the applicant, stated that he would change anything in order to become compliant and keep the chickens. Parth Joshi, Village of Schaumburg Planning Manager, stated that staff is primarily looking at lot sizes when approving requests. Evidence of the rigorous selection for approving properties for this special use is proven by the Village only approving two cases in the last 33 years. He stated that there a majority of the Village is R-6 or R-6 PUD zoning code, with lot sizes between 8,000 and 10,000 square feet. Once the commission begins approving chickens in lots of this size, it will create a dangerous precedent for future cases. Regarding the requirements, Mr. Joshi stated that this would stem from policy, which the board would have to look into. Mr. Robles shared the same concerns regarding the location of the enclosure and the roofing material. If there is an ability or a willingness to make modifications, he would encourage the applicant make revisions to his application and return with a revised plan. Mr. Robles stated that that would minimize impacts of this use on the neighbors. Chairperson Gerber asked if there was a motion to close the hearing. A motion was made by Mr. Ropiak, seconded by Mr. Nordstrom to close the hearing. Chairperson Gerber stated they would close the hearing by voice acclamation MOTION CARRIED: Vote 7-0 with two members absent. A motion was made by Mr. Watson to recommend approval of a Special Use to Raise Fowl for the property 816 Apple Drive, Elibal Residence, case number P2510-02, seconded by Mr. Ropiak.