07/14/2020Case 20-024-V 942 Hollywood Ave Standard Variation
July 14, 2020
Page 1
DES PLAINES PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING
JULY 14, 2020
MINUTES
The Des Plaines Planning and Zoning Board Meeting held its regularly-scheduled meeting on Tuesday,
July 14, 2020, at 7:00 p.m. in Room 102 of the Des Plaines Civic Center.
ZONING BOARD
Chairman Szabo called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. and read this evening’s cases. Roll call was
established.
PRESENT: Bader, Hofherr, Saletnik, Szabo
ABSENT: Catalano, Fowler, Veremis
ALSO PRESENT: Patrick Ainsworth, Coord., Devel. Mgr./Community & Economic Development
Jonathan Stytz, Planner/Community & Economic Development
Wendy Bednarz/Recording Secretary
A quorum was present.
Member Catalano arrived at 7:05 p.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT
There was no Public Comment.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion was made by Board Member Hofherr, seconded by Board Member Saletnik, to approve the
minutes of June 23, 2020.
AYES: Bader, Hofherr, Saletnik, Szabo
NAYES: None
***MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY***
Case 20-024-V 942 Hollywood Ave Standard Variation
July 14, 2020
Page 2
NEW BUSINESS
1. Address: 942 Hollywood Avenue Case Number: 20-024-V
The petitioner is requesting a Standard Variation under Section 12-7-2(J) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning
Ordinance, as amended, to allow a second story addition on a portion of a single-family residence that is
located 2.75-feet from the west property line where a minimum of five feet is required in the R-1 zoning
district, and approval of any other such variations, waivers, and zoning relief as may be necessary.
PIN: 09-17-301-021-0000
Petitioner: Ronald J. Lanam, 942 Hollywood Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60016
Owner: Ronald J. Lanam, 942 Hollywood Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60016
Chairman Szabo swore in Ronald J. Lanam, 942 Hollywood Avenue, Des Plaines, IL. The Petitioner
purchased the home in January for himself and his parents. The Petitioner went over the current condition
and the proposed plans for the home, which include adding a second floor but not increasing the homes
footprint. The Petitioner stated that the home has an addition which was built four years ago, the addition
is three feet from the property line, a variation was not required at that time, but permits were issued.
Chairman Szabo asked if the Board has any questions.
Member Saletnik asked for clarification of the footprint of the property, the Petitioner stated that the
footprint will match the current structure of the property.
Chairman Szabo asked if the petitioner reviewed and accepted the three conditions of approval. The
three conditions of approval were reviewed and the Petitioner stated he accepted those terms.
Member Catalano asked for clarification regarding windows on the western wall, the Petitioner stated
that no windows would be installed.
Chairman Szabo asked that the Staff Report be entered into record, Planner Stytz provided a summary
of the following report:
Issue: The petitioner is requesting a Standard Variation under Section 12-7-2(J) of the 1998 Des Plaines
Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to allow for a second story addition onto a portion of an existing single-
family residence that is located 2.75-feet from the property line where a minimum of 5-feet is required
in the R-1 zoning district.
Analysis:
Address: 942 Hollywood Avenue
Owner: Ronald J. Lanam, 942 Hollywood Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60016
Petitioner: Ronald J. Lanam, 942 Hollywood Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60016
Case Number: 20-024-V
PIN: 09-17-301-021-0000
Ward: #3, Alderman Denise Rodd
Case 20-024-V 942 Hollywood Ave Standard Variation
July 14, 2020
Page 3
Existing Zoning: R-1, Single Family Residential District
Existing Land Use: Single Family Residence
Surrounding Zoning: North: R-1, Single Family Residential District
South: R-1, Single Family Residential District
East: R-1, Single-Family Residential District
West: R-1, Single Family Residential District
Surrounding Land Use:
North: Single Family Residence
South: Single Family Residence
East: Single Family Residence
West: Single Family Residence
Street Classification: Hollywood Avenue is classified as a local street.
Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Single-Family Residential.
Project Description: The petitioner, Ronald J. Lanam, is requesting a Standard Variation to allow for a
second story addition onto a portion of an existing single-family residence that is located 2.75-feet from
the property line where a minimum of 5-feet is required in the R-1 zoning district at 942 Hollywood
Avenue. This 7,057-square foot, 50-foot wide property contains a one and one half-story residence with
a deck, private front walk, and 450-square foot detached garage accessed from the street as shown on
the Plat of Survey (Attachment 3). The existing residence’s setback from the west property line varies from
2.75-feet at the front of the residence to 3.27-feet at the rear of the residence. The new second story
addition is proposed for the south portion or front of the existing residence. Since the addition is proposed
to match the existing setback of the first floor, staff notified the petitioner that a standard variation would
be necessary.
The petitioner is requesting the 717-square foot second story addition to address structural concerns with
the original construction of the house and to remodel the existing upper story to create a full second floor
for the use of three bedrooms and a bathroom. The footprint of the second story will match the footprint
of the first story and the height of the roof will be increased to accommodate the additional square
footage. The proposed addition would match the design and materials of the existing residence as shown
in the Floor Plans & Elevations (Attachment 5). The petitioner aspires to construct the proposed 26.95-
foot wide by 26.60-foot deep addition directly on top and flush with the existing first level of the residence
without any changes to the building footprint as shown in the Site Plan (Attachment 4). The petitioner
does intend to remodel the interior of the first level of the existing residence. However, the building
footprint will remain the same.
The petitioner’s request to add a second story addition that will be located less than five-feet from the
side property line for single-family residences in Des Plaines constitutes the need for a standard variation
to Section 12-7-2(J) of the 1998 Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance.
Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan
Case 20-024-V 942 Hollywood Ave Standard Variation
July 14, 2020
Page 4
The proposed project, including the proposed the site improvements, address various goals and objectives
of the 2019 Comprehensive Plan including the following aspects:
• Future Land Use Plan:
o The property is marked for the Single Family Residential land use. The Future Land Use
Plan strives to create a well-balanced development area with a healthy mixture of
commercial and residential uses. The petitioner strives to make structural
improvements to the property to address structural concerns that were present when
the home was originally constructed.
While the aforementioned aspects represent a small portion of the goals and strategies of the
Comprehensive Plan, there is a large emphasis on encouraging reinvestment in residential properties in
order to enhance the residential corridors throughout Des Plaines and to increase the quality of life for
residents.
Variation Findings: Variation requests are subject to the standards set forth in Section 12-3-6(H) of the
1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended.
1. Hardship: No variation shall be granted pursuant to this subsection H unless the applicant shall
establish that carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of this title would create a particular
hardship or a practical difficulty.
Comment: The existing residence was constructed less than 5-feet from the side property line and
setting the second story addition 5-feet away from the property line would affect the building
envelope and create structural concerns. Requiring the petitioner to position the proposed
second story addition could create a financial and physical hardship for the petitioner.
2. Unique Physical Condition: The subject lot is exceptional as compared to other lots subject to
the same provision by reason of a unique physical condition, including presence of an existing
use, structure, or sign, whether conforming or nonconforming; irregular or substandard shape
or size; exceptional topographical features; or other extraordinary physical conditions peculiar
to and inherent in the subject lot that amount to more than a mere inconvenience to the owner
and that relate to or arise out of the lot rather than the personal situation of the current owner
of the lot.
Comment: The unique size and shape of this property create a particular hardship for the
petitioner. The property width is 50-feet and is narrower than many of the lots surrounding it.
The existing one and one half-story portion of the house already contains a partial dwelling space
and the petitioner is addressing the existing structural concerns to adequately support this space.
3. Not Self-Created: The aforesaid unique physical condition is not the result of any action or
inaction of the owner or its predecessors in title and existed at the time of the enactment of the
provisions from which a variance is sought or was created by natural forces or was the result of
governmental action, other than the adoption of this title.
Comment: The size and shape of the property have not changed due to any action of the
petitioner. The unique physical constraints of the property are unavoidable because the property
is land-locked.
Case 20-024-V 942 Hollywood Ave Standard Variation
July 14, 2020
Page 5
4. Denied Substantial Rights: The carrying out of the strict letter of the provision from which a
variance is sought would deprive the owner of the subject lot of substantial rights commonly
enjoyed by owners of other lots subject to the same provision.
Comment: Carrying out of the strict letter of the Zoning Ordinance would not allow the petitioner
to address the existing structural issues and improve the structural integrity of the existing one
and one half-story portion of the house. The petitioner strives to make the structure safe for its
inhabits and to remodel the residence as a whole to make necessary improvements. In this case,
the required 5-foot setback on the property for a principle structure in conformance to the Zoning
Ordinance denies the owner substantial rights commonly enjoyed by owners of surrounding lots
under the same provision.
5. Not Merely Special Privilege: The alleged hardship or difficulty is neither merely the inability of
the owner or occupant to enjoy some special privilege or additional right not available to
owners or occupants of other lots subject to the same provision, nor merely the inability of the
owner to make more money from the use of the subject lot.
Comment: The approval of this variation would not provide the petitioner with any special
privilege or additional right not available to owners or occupants of surrounding lots under the
same provision. The proposal would allow the petitioner to make improvements to an existing
property and address the structural integrity of the residence as a whole.
6. Title And Plan Purposes: The variation would not result in a use or development of the subject
lot that would be not in harmony with the general and specific purposes for which this title and
the provision from which a variation is sought were enacted or the general purpose and intent
of the comprehensive plan.
Comment: The approval of this variation would result in the construction of an addition to an
existing residence that would be in harmony with the general and specific purposes of this title
and meet all other zoning regulations. It would also encourage reinvestment and retention of
single-family neighborhoods, which the Comprehensive Plan strives to accomplish.
7. No Other Remedy: There is no means other than the requested variation by which the alleged
hardship or difficulty can be avoided or remedied to a degree sufficient to permit a reasonable
use of the subject lot.
Comment: There is no means other than the requested variation that the alleged hardship or
difficulty can be avoided given the current physical orientation of the property. The location of
the existing residence does not conform to the required setback regulations and prevents the
petitioner from conforming to all regulations for accessory structures in the Zoning Ordinance.
8. Minimum Required: The requested variation is the minimum measure of relief necessary to
alleviate the alleged hardship or difficulty presented by the strict application of this title.
Comment: The approval of this variation would be the minimum measure of relief for the
petitioner to overcome the existing physical hardship on the property, address current structural
issues, and make necessary improvements to the property.
Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested variations based on review of the
information presented by the applicant and the standards and conditions met by Section 12-3-6(H)
(Findings of Fact for Variations) as outlined within the City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended,
with the following conditions:
Case 20-024-V 942 Hollywood Ave Standard Variation
July 14, 2020
Page 6
1. That no portion of the second floor is located any closer than 2.75-feet from the side property
line.
2. The west wall of the addition is less than 3-feet from the lot line. Pursuant to 2015 International
Residential Code, Table R302.1(1) Exterior Walls, any new portions of this wall will be required
to be fire-rated. Additionally, new wall openings less than 3-feet from the lot line are not
allowed. These details will be required at time of permit.
3. That the petitioner submits a structural report stating that the existing foundation wall is
structurally adequate to support additional loads imposed by the second addition. This report
will be required during the building permit review process.
Planning and Zoning Board Procedure: Under Section 12-3-6(F) of the Zoning Ordinance (Standard
Variations), the Planning and Zoning Board has the authority to approve, approve subject to conditions,
or deny the above-mentioned variance for a second story addition onto an existing residence at 942
Hollywood Avenue that does not meet the minimum side yard setbacks required for a principle structure.
Chairman Szabo asked if there was anyone from the public that wanted to comment on the case; there
were no comments.
Coordinator Ainsworth stated that this is a Standard Variation and the Planning & Zoning Board has the
final authority to approve the variation.
A motion was made by Board Member Hofherr seconded by Board Member Catalano to approve as
presented.
AYES: Bader, Catalano, Hofherr, Saletnik, Szabo
NAYES: None
***MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY ***
Case 20-024-V 942 Hollywood Ave Standard Variation
July 14, 2020
Page 7
ADJOURNMENT
The next meeting is scheduled for July 28, 2020.
Chairman Szabo adjourned the meeting by voice vote at 7:15 p.m.
Sincerely,
Wendy Bednarz, Recording Secretary
cc: City Officials, Aldermen, Zoning Board of Appeals, Petitioners