McHenry Times

McHenry Times

Thursday, December 12, 2019

City of Crystal Lake Project Review for Planning and Zoning Commission will meet December 4

By Kristine Gonzales-Abella | Dec 2, 2019

Meeting 04

City of Crystal Lake Project Review for Planning and Zoning Commission will meet on Wednesday, Dec. 4.

Here is the agenda provided by the commission:

Requests: 1. Variation from Article 7 Nonconformities to allow the= reconstruction of a structure or portion of a structure which was destroyed/removed by more than 50%.

2. Variation from Article 7 Nonconformities to allow the increase in the nonconforming structure by increasing the volume of the area.

3. Variation from Article 7 Nonconformities to allow the reduction of the side yard setback from 4.9 feet to 0 feet.

Location: 1153 North Shore and 1151 North Shore

Acreage: Approximately 10,372 square feet (1153 North Shore)

Existing Zoning: R-2 Single Family

Surrounding Properties: North: R-2 Single Family

South: R-2 Single Family

East: R-2 Single Family

West: R-2 Single Family

Staff Contact: Elizabeth Maxwell (815.356.3615)

Background:

 The property is an existing single family home. A portion of the structure and patio, approximately 6.6 feet and 8.5 feet respectively, are on the neighboring property, which is covered by an easement.

 The petitioners received a permit for interior remodeling. Once they commenced the renovation, they found there was less of the structure they could save and it needed to be removed in order to properly fix the problems and bring the structure up to current codes.

 This removal, since it was nonconforming, could not be reconstructed without meeting current setbacks. The variation is to allow the reconstruction of the nonconforming portion back on the same footprint.

 As part of the renovations, the roof height was increased. The petitioners raised the finished floor height and increased the roof truss height to allow ceiling heights to remain consistent. This increase in height is considered an increase in volume. This is an increase in the nonconformity, which requires the variation.

 The petitioners have worked with the neighboring property owners to adjust the shared property line. They would be submitting a plat of subdivision in the future, which illustrates the amended lot line so the full residential structure is on the lot for 1153 North Shore. A portion of the deck that remains on 1151 North Shore would be removed. A maintenance easement would be drafted to allow for the property owners of 1153 North Shore to access the structure for maintenance through the 1151 North Shore property.

 A variation from the side yard setback is required since the new proposed property line would be at the edge of the residence. Although the structure is still non-conforming it would be more in compliance than the current 6.6-foot encroachment onto the neighbor’s lot.

Development Analysis:

General

 Zoning: The site is zoned R-2 Single Family. This property is used as a single-family home.

 Land Use: The land use map shows the area as Urban Residential. This land use designation is appropriate for this use.

Project Analysis:

SITE PLAN

 An approximately 6.6-foot portion of the existing residence and 8.5-foot portion of the existing patio are currently on the neighboring property to the south. Through the future plat of subdivision the lot line would trace around the outside of the structure then diagonally cut back to the existing property line. Any portion of the deck that is outside of the new 1153 North Shore lot line would be removed. The petitioner will present a plat of subdivision at a future meeting for review and approval.

 The petitioners did renovation work on the non-conforming portion of the structure. Due to the fact that this portion was nonconforming and it was removed by more than 50%, it requires the variation to be rebuilt and the volume increased, even though the underlying footprint was not changed.

Comprehensive Land Use Plan 2030 Vision Summary Review:

The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property as Urban Residential, which allows for existing and future single-family residential uses. The following goal is applicable to this request:

Land Use - Residential

Goal: Encourageadiversityofhighqualityhousinginappropriatelocationsthroughoutthe city that supports a variety of lifestyles and invigorates community character.

This can be accomplished with the following supporting action:

Supporting Action: Promote safe, clean and well-maintained housing by encouraging regular repair and maintenance of housing.

Housing – Single Family Housing

Goal: Promote strong neighborhoods by preserving their character and historical significance and ensuring that they are well serviced by a variety of community facilities and services.

This can be accomplished with the following supporting action:

Supporting Action: Preserve the unique character of existing neighborhoods.

Findings of Fact:

ZONING ORDINANCE VARIATION

The petitioner is requesting three variations:

 Variation from Article 7 Nonconformities to allow the reconstruction of a structure or portion of a structure which was destroyed/removed by more than 50%.

 Variation from Article 7 Nonconformities to allow the increase in the nonconforming structure by increasing the volume of the area.

 Variation from Article 7 Nonconformities to allow the reduction of the side yard setback from 4.9 feet to 0 feet

The Unified Development Ordinance lists specific standards for the review and approval of a variation. The granting of a variation rests upon the applicant proving practical difficulty or hardship caused by the Ordinance requirements as they relate to the property. To be considered a zoning hardship, the specific zoning requirements; setbacks, lot width and lot area must create a unique situation on this property. It is the responsibility of the petitioner to prove hardship at the Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing.

Standards

When evidence in a specific case shows conclusively that literal enforcement of any provision of this Ordinance would result in a practical difficulty or particular hardship because:

a. The plight of the property owner is due to unique circumstances, such as, unusual surroundings or conditions of the property involved, or by reason of exceptional narrowness, shallowness or shape of a zoning lot, or because of unique topography, or underground conditions.

Meets         Does not meet

b. Also, that the variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.

Meets Does not meet

For the purposes of supplementing the above standards, the Commission may take into consideration the extent to which the following facts favorable to the application have been established by the evidence presented at the public hearing:

a. That the conditions upon which the application for variation is based would not be applicable generally to other property within the same zoning classification;

Meets         Does not meet

b. That the alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person presently having interest in the property;

Meets         Does not meet

c. That the granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located; or Meets Does not meet

d. That the proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light or air to adjacent property, will not unreasonably diminish or impair the property values of adjacent property, will not unreasonably increase congestion in the public streets, substantially increase the danger of fire or otherwise endanger public safety.

Meets         Does not meet

Where the evidence is not found to justify such conditions, that fact shall be reported to the City Council with a recommendation that the variation be denied.

Recommended Conditions:

If a motion to recommend approval of the petitioner’s request is made, it should be with the following conditions:

1. Approved plans, reflecting staff and advisory board recommendations, as approved by the City Council:

A. Application (Matthias, received 09/20/19)

B. Plat of Survey (Schmitt Engineering, dated 05/02/09, received 09/20/19)

C. Architectural Plans (ALA Architects, dated 05/22/19, received 09/20/19)

D. Plat of Survey Exhibit (Matthias, undated, received 11-20-19)

2. The petitioner shall address all of the review comments and requirements of Community Development Department.

3. The petitioner shall provide a plat of subdivision, which meets all the requirements for a Final Plat of Subdivision in Article 5 of the UDO, to the City for signatures, and recorded. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City.

4. The remaining brick wall on the 260.5 square foot parcel shall be removed no later than July 1, 2020.

https://www.crystallake.org/home/showdocument?id=18282

Want to get notified whenever we write about City of Crystal Lake, IL ?

Sign-up Next time we write about City of Crystal Lake, IL, we'll email you a link to the story. You may edit your settings or unsubscribe at any time.

Organizations in this Story

City of Crystal Lake, IL