01/31/2012'__\
/� CITY OF
DES PLAINES ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
January 31, 2012
DES PLAINES MINUTES
ILLINOIS
The Des Plaines Zoning Board of Appeals Commission held its regularly scheduled meeting on Tuesday,
January 31, 2012, at 7:30 P. M., in Room 102, City Council Chambers, of the Des Plaines Civic Center.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
AYES: Catalano, Schell, Seegers, Saletruk, Porada, Szabo [7:39pm]
ABSENT: Hofherr
Also present was Senior Planner, Scott Mangum, Department of Community and Economic
Development
Chairman Seegers called the meeting to order at 7:33 P.M.
Chairman Seegers directed that the following two cases would be heard:
CaseNumber 11-071-V:
The petitioner is requesting variations to Sections 7.24D and 8.1-3 of the 1998 City of Des
Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to legalize the construction of a 183 square foot shed
with a 4.1 foot rear setback, instead of a maximum of 150 square feet and a minimum rear
setback of 5 -feet, and to allow three accessory structures, instead of a maximum of two.
Address: 2279 Westview Drive; Petitioner Sakib Spahic.
Case Number 11 -076 -CU:
The petitioner is requesting a Conditional Use Permit under Section 7.3-4-C of the 1998 City of
Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to establish a Child Care Center in the C-1 Zoning
District.
Address: 1666 Rand Road; Petitioner Laurie Gashkoff
Discussion of acceptance was had regarding the December 13, 2012, minutes.
Member Porada called to attention an apparent discrepancy on page 14 regarding which Board Member
moved on that issue and what the votes were. Member Szabo arrived at 7:39pm during discussion and
was informed about the potential error. After discussion, all members present confirmed that there was an
error on the 14ffi page of the December 13, 2012, minutes.
The consensus of the Board was to amend the December 13, 2012, minutes to read that Board Member
Szabo made a motion to approve the Conditional Use Permit and the motion was seconded by Catalano;
the Ayes were Catalano, Szabo, and Saletra, and the Nayes were Hofherr, Porada, Schell, and Seegers.
Accordingly, that motion Failed.
Case Number 11 -076 -CU (1666 Rand Road) was heard first
Case #11-071-V — 2279 Westview Drive
Case #11 -076 -CU — 1666 Rand Road
January 31, 2012
Page 2
Address: 1666 Rand Road
Case Number: 11 -076 -CU
The petitioner is requesting a Conditional Use Permit under Section 7.3-4-C of the 1998 Des Plaines
Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to establish a Child Care Center in the C-1 Zoning District.
PIN: 09-16-105-071-0000
Petitioner: Laurie Gashkoff, 8350 Greenwood, Niles, IL 60714
Owner(s): Refrigeration Service Engineers Society, 1666 Rand Road, Des Plaines, IL 60016
The following individuals were sworn in
Laurie Gashkoff: Petitioner and Owner of A Mother's Touch
Scott Hardek of Dykema Gossett: Attorney for Petitioner; Lisle, IL
Elizabeth Weesner: P.E. with Transportation Strategies, Ltd., Glen Ellyn, IL
Robert Ganofsky: President of RBG & Associates, Arlington Heights, IL
Mr. Hardek gave a description of the child care center and the programs it offers, and stated that the
facility would be open 5 days a week, closed on weekends. He stated that, although certified to accept
children as old as 12 years old, the center would accept those no older than 7 years old. He described to
the Board plans and studies already submitted such as survey, site plans, and transportation studies. Mr.
Hardek summarized each of the "Standards for Conditional Uses" set out in Zoning Code 3.4-5, as they
relate to the Conditional Use sought at 1666 Rand Road. He described that each of these standards were
met by the proposed conditional use sought.
Chairman Seegers asked for an explanation of the procedure whereby the children would be dropped off
at the site.
Mr. Ganofsky explained the traffic pattern to the Board, using a large diagram as a visual aid. He
described a pattern of controlled one-way traffic on the premises. He stated that the plans were designed
so that all of standing and stacking of vehicles would occur on the property and not on the main
roadways.
Chairman Seegers asked about the hours of operation.
Mr. Hardek stated that the hours of operation would be 6:30am until 6:OOpm.
Member Porada inquired about the ratio of minimum space requirements for the number of children.
Mr. Mangum related that the minimum standards were met in this case.
Member Porada asked about the maximum number of children permitted to be outdoors at one time, and
asked if the Petitioner was aware of such limitation.
Mr. Hardek responded that the Petitioner was aware of the limitation and would abide by it.
Member Porada asked if the Petitioner was agreeable with a stated end time for outdoor play time.
Mr. Hardek stated that the Petitioner was agreeable with ending outdoor playtime at 6pm.
Ms. Gashkoff spoke to the Board about the standard scheduling at her facilities, and that, based on the
strict schedules the teachers keep, there would be a limited number of children outdoors at specifically
scheduled times.
Case #11-071-V — 2279 Westview Drive
Case #11 -076 -CU — 1666 Rand Road
January 31, 2012
Page 3
Member Catalano requested that the traffic pattern be described in more detail.
Ms. Weesner described the traffic pattern using the diagram as a visual aid.
Chairman Seegers asked Mr. Mangum to read the applicable staff report into record, as follows:
Issue: The petitioner is requesting a Conditional Use Permit under Section 7.3-4-C of the 1998 Des
Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended, to establish a Child Care Center in the C-1 Zoning District.
Analysis:
Proposed Use Child Care Center
Petitioner Laurie Gashkoff, 8350 Greenwood, Niles, IL 60714
Owner Refrigeration Service Engineers Society, 1666 Rand Road, Des Plaines,
IL 60016
Plan of Operation Child Care Center to occupy 12,800 square foot building with a
maximum of 156 children and 21 staff members from 6:30am to 6pm.
Existing Use Office building
Surrounding Land Use North: Residential
East: Residential
South: Commercial
West: Commercial
Existing Zoning C-1, Neighborhood Shopping Commercial
Surrounding Zoning North: R-1, Single Family Residential
East: R-3, Townhouse Residential
South: C-3, General Commercial
West: C-3, General Commercial
Street Classification Rand Road is an arterial street according to the City's Comprehensive
Plan. Grove Avenue and Elk Boulevard are local streets.
Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan recommends Low Density Mixed -Use for the
site.
A Mother's Touch Creative Learning Center has requested a Conditional Use Permit to occupy a 12,800
square -foot commercial building within the C-1 Zoning District. The approximately 37,630 square foot
lot has of frontages on Grove Avenue (218 -feet), Rand Road (138 feet), and Elk Boulevard (213 feet).
Case #11-071-V — 2279 Westview Drive
Case #11 -076 -CU — 1666 Rand Road
January 31, 2012
Page 4
The proposed plan of operation would allow a total of 156 children and 21 employees. 10 classroom
areas totaling 7,057 square feet are proposed on the first floor, in addition to an indoor play area,
restrooms, and administrative offices. The basement level would house a kitchen, break room, laundry
room, mechanical room, and file storage area. Based on the parking requirements in the Zoning
Ordinance of 1 space per 15 children and one space per employee, 32 parking spaces are required, where
34 spaces are provided on site. Three outdoor play areas, totaling 2,925 square feet, are proposed along
the Elk Boulevard frontage. Additionally the applicant has indicated that they will use Sesquicentennial
Park, which is located approximately 600 feet north of the property, for outdoor play. The park does not
qualify for a reduction in the amount of outdoor play area because it is located further than 500 feet away
and does not have continuous sidewalk leading to it from the Child Care Center on the east side of Grove
Avenue.
The applicant proposes a circulation pattern where vehicles could enter or exit the site from either the
curb cut on Grove Avenue or the curb cut on Elk Boulevard where there is a traffic signal at the
intersection of Elk Boulevard and Rand Road. A one-way pick-up and drop-off area is proposed adjacent
to the building entrance within the parking lot. The site traffic impact analysis and parking study
concluded that the site generated traffic can be accommodated efficiently with no roadway improvements.
Additionally, the internal configuration of the facility should allow vehicles to circulate efficiently with
the proposed circulation and signage.
Conditional Use Findings: As required by Section 3.4-5 (Standards for Conditional Uses) of the Zoning
Ordinance, the proposed development is reviewed below:
A. The proposed Conditional Use is in fact a Conditional Use established within the specific Zoning
district involved:
Comment Child Care Centers are a Conditional Use in C-1, Neighborhood Shopping Commercial Zoning
District, as specified in Section 7.3-6-C of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, as amended.
B. The proposed Conditional Use is in accordance with the objectives of the City's Comprehensive
Plan:
Comment: The Child Care Center use generally complies with the 2007 Comprehensive Plan, which
recommends Low Density Mixed -Use for this site. A Child Care Center is a Conditional Use in the C-1
Zoning District.
C. The proposed Conditional Use is designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be
harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general
vicinity:
Comment: The proposed Child Care Center would be located within an existing structure. No significant
exterior alterations are proposed to the structure.
Case #11-071-V — 2279 Westview Drive
Case #11 -076 -CU — 1666 Rand Road
January 31, 2012
Page 5
D. The proposed Conditional Use is not hazardous or disturbing to existing neighboring uses:
Comment: None of the functions of the child care center are anticipated to be hazardous or disturbing to
the surrounding neighborhood.
E. The proposed Conditional Use is to be served adequately by essential public facilities and
services, such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal,
water and sewer, and schools; or, agencies responsible for establishing the Conditional Use shall
provide adequately any such services:
Comment: After reviewing the petitioner's plans, the proposed Conditional Use would be served
adequately by essential public facilities and it would not overburden existing public services.
F. The proposed Conditional Use does not create excessive additional requirements at public
expense for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic well-being of
the entire community:
Comment: The proposed Conditional Use would appear to have adequate public facilities; it would not
create a burden on public facilities nor would it be a detriment to the economic well being of the
community.
G. The proposed Conditional Use does not involve uses, activities, processes, materials,
equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the
general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke fumes, glare or odors:
Comment: The proposed Child Care Center is not anticipated to create an amount of additional traffic and
parking which cannot be accommodated by the existing street network according the traffic study
provided.
H. The proposed Conditional Use provides vehicular access to the property designed so that it does
not create an interference with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares:
Comment: The proposed project would utilize an existing curb cut on Grove Avenue for ingress and an
existing curb cut on Elk Boulevard for egress. The traffic study did not find any evidence for potential
interference with traffic patterns.
I. The proposed Conditional Use does not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of natural,
scenic, or historic features of major importance:
Comment: No exterior building alterations are proposed. The proposed plan would not add impervious
surface, nor cause the destruction, loss, or damage of any natural, scenic or historic features of major
importance.
Case #11-071-V — 2279 Westview Drive
Case #11 -076 -CU — 1666 Rand Road
January 31, 2012
Page 6
J. The proposed Conditional Use complies with all additional regulations in the Zoning Ordinance
specific to the Conditional Use requested:
Comment: The following regulations are specific to Child Care Centers
8.7 Child Care Centers.
8.7-1 Child care centers shall in no case may the lot size or required frontage be less than that required by
the zoning district in which the facility is to be located.
There are no frontage or minimum lot size requirements in the C-1 Zoning District.
8.7-2 Front, rear, and side yard setbacks shall be the same as for other uses permitted in the district.
Additionally, no equipment may be affixed to the land within such side yards.
The existing building and proposed play equipment shall comply with the C-1 setbacks.
8.7-3 There shall be a minimum of 35 square feet of indoor activity area per child within the structure.
Areas for administrative use, bathrooms, hallways, storage and kitchen areas, shall not be counted in
calculating this requirement.
The ten proposed classroom spaces, 7,057 square feet, provide for more than 35 square feet per child.
8.7-4 There shall be a minimum of 75 square feet of outdoor activity area per child that could be expected
to be outdoors at any one time. Such activity area or portions thereof shall be enclosed by a fence meeting
all the requirements of Title 6, Chapter 7 of the City Code. Up to twenty-five percent of this requirement
may be waived by the Zoning Board of Appeals upon a finding that:
A. A park or similar permanent open space, suitable for supervised outdoor play, is located within 500
feet of the proposed facility;
B. The park or similar permanent open space, suitable for supervised outdoor play, is one (1) acre (43,560
square feet) or larger; and
C. The park or similar permanent open space, suitable for supervised outdoor play, is accessible from the
proposed day care/child care facility location without crossing any street.
The existing fenced outdoor playground is 2,925 square feet, which would allow for 39 children to be
outdoors at one time. A total of up to 156 children are proposed in the existing and proposed facility. A
condition of approval limits the number of children that can be in the outdoor play area at any one time to
not more than one child per 75 square feet.
8.7-5 Hours of normal operation shall be limited to 6:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M.
Proposed hours of operation are 6:30 A.M. to 6:00 P.M.
Case #11-071-V — 2279 Westview Drive
Case #11 -076 -CU — 1666 Rand Road
January 31, 2012
Page 7
Recommendation: The Community Development Department recommends approval of the Conditional
Use Permit modification request for the establishment of a Child Care Center, based on review of the
information presented by the applicant and the findings made above, as specified in Section 3.4-5
(Standards for Conditional Uses) of the City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance, subject to the following
conditions of approval:
1. Prior to issuance of the Conditional Use Permit, a revised Site Plan with full pavement
marking shall be submitted that shifts the double -loaded parking aisle 4' to the west, widens
the driveway entrance on Elk Boulevard to 22', and extends the sidewalk on Grove Avenue
to the north property line to the satisfaction of the Directors of Community and Economic
Development and Public Works and Engineering.
2. Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall restripe the parking lot per the revised Site Plan, widen
the entrance on Elk Boulevard to 22', install a right turn only sign for inbound traffic at the
entrance on Elk Boulevard, and extend the sidewalk on Grove Avenue to the north property
line.
3. The outdoor play area shall be fenced and be limited to not more than one child per 75 square
feet of outdoor play area at any one time.
4. The outdoor play area shall not be in use prior to 9:OOam.
Zoning Board of Appeals Procedure: Under Section 3.4-4-C of the Zoning Ordinance (Conditional
Uses) the Zoning Board of Appeals has the authority to recommend that the City Council approve,
approve subject to conditions, or deny the above-mentioned Conditional Use Permit for the establishment
of a Child Care Center in the C-1 zoning district. The City Council has the final authority on the project.
Chairman Seegers asked if there were any other questions from the Board. There were none.
Chairman Seegers asked for comments from the audience.
Comment 1:
Ken Osterman, 307 Grove Ave.
Mr. Osterman was sworn in and spoke of 4 main concerns. First, he expressed his concern with the noise:
he lives in close proximity to the site and can clearly hear children at the nearby park. Second, he
expressed concern with the traffic: he stated that the area is currently congested and believes that it will
get worse. Further, Mr. Osterman expressed his belief that drivers will not obey the proposed traffic
pattern and cited a nearby stop sign that he felt was an example of a traffic control device nearby that was
not properly obeyed. Third, Mr. Osterman expressed concern with the potential installation of a sidewalk:
he objected to such an installation and questioned who would finance it. Finally, Mr. Osterman expressed
his concerns over staff parking, as he felt the lot was too small to accommodate the vehicles.
The audience expressed its general desire to see the drawings submitted by the Petitioner.
Chairman Seegers advised the audience that these plans can be viewed at City Hall, and that they could be
viewed immediately.
Mr. Ganofsky provided the large visual aid to the audience to review.
Member Porada asked Mr. Osterman about the nearby stop sign and inquired as to why a business should
be penalized for the public disobeying the device. Mr. Osterman clarified that this was a comparison.
Case #11-071-V — 2279 Westview Drive
Case #11 -076 -CU — 1666 Rand Road
January 31, 2012
Page 8
Member Porada asked Mr. Mangum to describe what establishments are permitted in the C-1 Zoning
District.
Mr. Mangum read the permitted uses as of right and with a conditional use permit from the Commercial
District Use Matrix Table in the City Code.
Mr. Osterman stated that his main concern was the traffic.
Member Saletnik suggested that Mr. Osterman look over the site plan.
Member Szabo stated that he was familiar with the area, and advised Mr. Osterman that he may wish to
speak to the Engineering Department about speed bumps or some other method to aid with congestion
and speeding in that area.
Ms. Weesner explained to the audience the traffic flow pattern again and used the large visual aid for
clarification. Ms. Weesner spoke of projected traffic volume.
Comment 2:
John Fiorio, 349 Elk Blvd.
Mr. Fiorio was sworn in and spoke of his concern with congestion and parking on the streets.
Ms. Weesner stated that there is a no parking sign on the site's side of the street.
Comment 3:
John Heyden, 323 Grove Ave.
Mr. Heyden was sworn in and inquired as to whether a left turn lane will be installed for eastbound traffic
on Rand Road to turn north on Elk Boulevard.
Ms. Weesner stated that studies have shown that installation of a left turn lane would be ineffective to
accommodate any extra traffic at that location.
Comment 4:
Evelyn Fiorio, 349 Elk Blvd.
Ms. Fiorio was sworn in and spoke of her concern with parking in the area, narrowness of streets, and
flooding concerns.
Ms. Weesner spoke to the audience and Board regarding traffic concerns. She stated that the evaluations
were conducted using worst case scenarios (ie. 100% enrollment, maximum amount of traffic).
Mr. Heyden asked where vendors would enter.
Ms. Gashkoff stated that there could be a small catering truck and other small delivery vans or UPS trucks
on the property.
Comment 5:
Greg Ross, 313 Grove Ave.
Mr. Ross was sworn in and expressed his concerns with the noise of the children outside, and objected to
installation of a sidewalk.
Ms. Gashkoff spoke of the scheduled outdoors time and the ways in which the center limits the number of
children outdoors at one time.
Member Szabo stated that installation of a sidewalk in front of homeowner's properties is not part of the
issue at hand, but rather an idea that may be considered in the future.
Mr. Heyden asked about the Petitioner's plans for purchasing a nearby home.
Ms. Gashkoff stated that home referred to is zoned R-1 and that it was not a present concern.
Case #11-071-V — 2279 Westview Drive
Case #11 -076 -CU — 1666 Rand Road
January 31, 2012
Page 9
Chairman Seegers asked if there were any more questions from the Board. There were none.
A motion was made by Board Member Saletnik, seconded by Board Member Catalano to
recommend aooroval of the Conditional Use Permit request for the establishment of a Child Care
Center in the C-1 Zoning District, subject to the four conditions stated in the staff report.
AYES: Saletnik, Szabo, Catalano, Porada, Schell, Seegers
NAYES: None
MOTION CARRIED
Case Number: 11-071—V
Address: 2279 Westview Drive
The petitioner is requesting variations to Sections 7.2-41) and 8.1-3 of the 1998 City of Des Plaines
Zoning Ordinance, as amended: to legalize the construction of a 183 square foot shed with a 4.1 foot rear
setback, instead of a maximum of 150 square feet and a minimum rear setback of 5 -feet, and to allow
three accessory structures, instead of a maximum of two.
PINs; 09-29-302-207-0000, 09-29-302-130-0000
Petitioner: Sakib Spahic, 2279 Westview Drive, Des Plaines, IL 60016
Owner(s): Sakib Spahic, 2279 Westview Drive, Des Plaines, IL 60016
The following individual was sworn in:
Sakib Spahic: Petitioner and Owner of 2279 Westview Dr.
Mr. Spahic described the work that was performed at his home, and stated that he was not aware that the
contractor did not secure a permit for the extension of Mr. Spahic's shed. Mr. Spahic spoke of other
improvements he made to his home such as cutting/planting trees and adding sod.
Chairman Seegers asked if Mr. Spahic secured a permit for the building of the shed.
Mr. Spahic confirmed that he did secure a permit for the initial installation, but, unbeknownst to him, a
permit was not secured for the extension of the shed. Mr. Spahic further stated that a permit was not
secured for the addition of a second pergola on his property.
Member Szabo asked Mr. Spahic if he intended to subdivide his property.
Mr. Spahic stated that he had no intention to subdivide.
Chairman Seegers asked Mr. Mangum to read the applicable staff report into record, as follows:
Issue: The petitioner is requesting variations to Sections 7.2-41) and 8.1-3 of the 1998 City of Des Plaines
Zoning Ordinance, as amended: to legalize the construction of a 183 square foot shed with a 4.1 foot rear
setback, instead of a maximum of 150 square feet and a minimum rear setback of 5 -feet, and to allow
three accessory structures, instead of a maximum of two.
Case #11-071-V — 2279 Westview Drive
Case #11 -076 -CU — 1666 Rand Road
January 31, 2012
Page 10
Analysis:
Address: 2279 Westview Drive
Existing Zoning: R-1, Single Family Residential District
Petitioner: Sakib Spahic, 2279 Westview Drive, Des Plaines, IL 60016
Owner(s): Sakib Spahic, 2279 Westview Drive, Des Plaines, IL 60016
In reviewing this variation request, staff has considered the following information:
In 2011, a Plat of Consolidation was approved by the City Council to combine two lots under common
ownership into Lot #1, approximately 100' wide by 186.97' deep (18,682 square feet or 0.43 acres). The
resulting lot at 2279 Westview Drive is conforming and exceeds both the minimum lot width (55' would
be required of a new subdivision), and lot size (6,875 square feet would be required of a new
subdivision). The property is improved with a two-story brick single-family residence with an attached
two -car garage, an in -ground swimming pool, a 183 square foot shed, and two roofed pergola -type
structures adjacent to the pool and patio areas.
Permits were received for an 8 -foot by 10 -foot shed (2009), which was later expanded to 8.23' by 22.25'
without a permit, an in -ground swimming pool (2009), and one 14' by 14' pergola -type structure (2009).
The applicant states that he was unaware that the contractor did not receive permits for the shed
expansion and second pergola -type structure. A diagram submitted by the applicant states that the
dimensions of the pergola posts are 14'-9" by 12' with the dimensions to the outermost point of the roof
are 16'-9" by 14'. The petitioner obtained a letter from ComEd to allow for the shed's encroachment into
the 10 -foot rear easement.
Three variations are requested: to allow an accessory structure, the shed, with a 4' 1" rear yard setback,
instead of not less than 5'; to allow an accessory structure, the shed, with a total area of 183 square feet,
instead of not greater than 150; and to allow three accessory structures, the shed, and two pergola -type
structures, instead of a maximum of two accessory structures.
Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the above -requested accessory structure location
variation for the shed, approval of the above -requested accessory structure size variation for the shed, and
denial of the above -requested variation for three instead of not more than two accessory structures based
on review of the information presented by the applicant and the standards and conditions imposed by
Section 3.6-8 (Findings of Fact for Variations) as outlined by the City of Des Plaines Zoning Ordinance.
The property substantially exceeds the minimum lot requirements and the property owner has ensured the
permanence of the oversized lot by completing the lot consolidation process. In addition, the applicant has
located the pool equipment inside the shed which both visually screens the equipment and reduces the
usable size of the storage shed. The setback variation from the rear property line is minor in that it
projects less than one foot into the required setback and the initial shed location passed building permit
inspection.
Case #11-071-V — 2279 Westview Drive
Case #11 -076 -CU — 1666 Rand Road
January 31, 2012
Page 11
However, staff does not believe that these circumstances create a hardship that justifies allowing three
accessory structures. Therefore, staff is recommending approval of two of the three requested variations,
subject to the following Condition of Approval:
1. Prior to issuance of a building permit to legalize the shed expansion, the petitioner shall remove
the unpermitted pergola -type structure to comply with the maximum number (two) of accessory
structures allowed by code.
Zoning Board of Appeals Procedure: The Zoning Board of Appeals has final authority for the rear -
yard setback variation request. Under Section 3.6-7 of the Zoning Ordinance (Major Variations) the
Zoning Board of Appeals has the authority to recommend that the City Council approve, approve subject
to conditions, or deny the above-mentioned variances for size and number of accessory structures in the
R-1 zoning district. The City Council has the final authority on the major variation requests.
Chairman Seegers asked if there were any questions from the Board.
Member Porada summarized the issues at hand and stated that he does not see the hardship in this case.
Chairman Seegers asked for comments from the audience.
Comment 1:
Jim Hardiman, 2268 Westview Dr.
Mr. Hardiman was sworn in and stated that all of the work performed by Mr. Spahic has been first-class
and has improved the area. Mr. Hardiman asked the Board to approve all of the requests made by Mr.
Spahic.
A motion was made by Board Member Board Member Szabo, seconded by Board Member
Catalano to approve a variation to Section 7.2-4D and 8.1-3 of the 1998 City of Des Plaines Zoning
Ordinance to allow an accessory structure, the shed, with a 4'1" rear yard setback, instead of not
less than 5 feet.
AYES: Szabo, Catalano, Saletnik, Schell, Seegers
NAYES: Porada
MOTION CARRIED
A motion was made by Board Member Board Member Szabo, seconded by Board Member
Catalano to recommend approval of a major variation to Section 8.1-3 of the 1998 City of Des
Plaines Zoning Ordinance to allow an accessory structure, the shed, with a total area of 183 square
feet, instead of not greater than 150 square feet.
AYES: Szabo, Catalano, Saletnik, Schell, Seegers
NAYES: Porada
MOTION CARRIED
Case #11-071-V — 2279 Westview Drive
Case #11 -076 -CU — 1666 Rand Road
January 31, 2012
Page 12
A motion was made by Board Member Board Member Szabo, seconded by Board Member
Catalano to recommend approval of a major variation to Section 8.1-3 of the 1998 City of Des
Plaines Zoning Ordinance to allow three accessory structures, the shed and two pergola -type
structures, instead of a maximum of two accessory structures.
AYES: Szabo, Catalano, Saletnik, Schell, Seegers
NAYES: Porada
MOTION CARRIED
The meeting was adjourned at 9:22 p.m. by unanimous voice vote.
Sincerely,
A.W. Seegers, Chairman
Des Plaines Zoning Board of Appeals
cc: City Officials
Aldermen
Zoning Board of Appeals