13.07.2015 Views

Variation to permit a fence setback 0 feet from ... - Village of Palatine

Variation to permit a fence setback 0 feet from ... - Village of Palatine

Variation to permit a fence setback 0 feet from ... - Village of Palatine

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

BOARD OF APPEALSVILLAGE OF PALATINE200 EAST WOOD STREETSeptember 14 2010PresidingPresentAbsentStaffChris KendallCindy Roth WursterJosh WheelerTed McGinnMohinderjit SainiMonica PasillasSusan TibbittsBill RobertsonJan WoodRebecca LeslieIROLL CALL AND APPROVAL OF MINUTESAt700pm roll was taken and a quorum was declared The minutes for the meeting <strong>of</strong> August 242010 were approved Staff was sworn inII 1064 134 S Brockway Street<strong>Variation</strong> <strong>to</strong> <strong>permit</strong> lot coverage <strong>of</strong> 50 instead <strong>of</strong> the maximum <strong>permit</strong>ted 45 pursuant <strong>to</strong> Section10 06 g 1 b <strong>of</strong> the <strong>Palatine</strong> Zoning OrdinancePetitioner s exhibits1 Petition for Special Use Transfer2 Real estate disclosure form3 Pro<strong>of</strong> <strong>of</strong> ownership4 Plat <strong>of</strong> survey5 Pho<strong>to</strong>s 3Notice was published in the Daily Herald on August 5 2010 and mailed <strong>to</strong> nearby property ownersMs Leslie gave the background <strong>to</strong> this request The Subject Property contains a single family home and islocated just south <strong>of</strong> down<strong>to</strong>wn <strong>Palatine</strong> The Petitioners installed additional paving in the rear and sideyard without a building <strong>permit</strong> A building <strong>permit</strong> was applied for postconstruction and Staff determinedthat the parcel had exceeded its maximum <strong>permit</strong>ted lot coverage Therefore the Petitioner is seeking a<strong>Variation</strong>ANALYSISThe Subject Property is zoned R2 Single Family ResidentialThe Petitioner poured an Lshaped asphalt patio <strong>of</strong> 385 square <strong>feet</strong> in the rear and side yard without abuilding <strong>permit</strong>A complaint was filed and the Petitioner got a new plat <strong>of</strong> survey drawn up which he used <strong>to</strong> apply forthe building <strong>permit</strong> The plat <strong>of</strong> survey submitted shows lot coverage <strong>of</strong> approximately 489 whereasthe maximum <strong>permit</strong>ted lot coverage in the R2 district is 45 Before the patio was constructed lotcoverage was 44 The building coverage conforms <strong>to</strong> Code at 22The Petitioner stated that grass would not grow in this area which is why they chose <strong>to</strong> put down thenew section <strong>of</strong> asphaltThe plat shows the patio encroaching in<strong>to</strong> the required 2 foot side yard <strong>setback</strong> for paving I advisedthe Petitioner <strong>of</strong> this a few weeks ago and he says he has cut it back <strong>to</strong> comply with the ordinance Iwill confirm this with a site visit prior <strong>to</strong> noticing

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!