Agenda & Packet

There will be a regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals at Kenilworth Village Hall, 419 Richmond Road; Kenilworth, IL. The public may attend in person or by utilizing the following link: TEAMS MEETING LINK If you do not have access to a computer, you may attend via telephone: +1 872-242-8055 Meeting ID: 151 767 049# Zoning Board of Appeals Regular Meeting Monday, July 13, 2026 at 7:00 p.m. Kenilworth Village Hall, 419 Richmond Road I. Call to Order / Roll Call II. Approval of Minutes A. June 8, 2026 Meeting Minutes III. Public Hearing A. Continued Public Hearing to Consider a Variation at 167 Abingdon Avenue Pertaining to Maximum Building Size and Maximum Building Coverage Requirements IV. Other Business V. Business from the Public Rules for Public Comment may be viewed at https://www.vok.org/DocumentCenter/View/1423/Rules-for-Public-Comment VI. Adjourn Village of The Village of Kenilworth is subject to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Individuals with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting and who require certain accommodations in order to allow them to observe and/or participate in this meeting or who have questions regarding the accessibility of the meeting or the facilities are requested to contact the Village Manager at 847-251-1666 promptly to allow the Village to make reasonable accommodations for those persons. 1 VILLAGE OF 1 2 3 4 KENILWORTH, IL 5 6 7 Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting 8 9 Monday, June 8, 2026 10 Agenda Item I. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL 11 The meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Kenilworth in the Kenilworth Village Hall, 12 Kenilworth, Illinois was held at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, June 8, 2026. 13 Chair Murphy called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. 14 Attendance was as follows: 15 16 Zoning Board of Appeals Members Present: 17 Eamon Murphy Chair 18 Katherine Peterson Member 19 Jenelle Chalmers Member 20 Tim Quigley Member 21 Emily Tzur Member 22 Mark Hinkamp Member 23 Lori Roeser Member, Remote 24 25 Zoning Board of Appeals Member Absent: 26 None 27 28 A quorum was present. 29 30 Others Recorded as in Attendance: 31 Village Officials and Staff: 32 Heather McFarland Asst. to the Village Manager 33 Michael Blue Village Planner, Teska Associates 34 Andrew Dunham Village Planner, Teska Associates 35 Katarzyna Thake Village Manager, Remote 36 Greg Jones Village Attorney 37 38 Others in Attendance: 39 Charles Waddell Applicant 40 Keith Labutta Northworks Architects 41 42 Chair Murphy confirmed that Member Roeser met the electronic attendance criteria. No opposition was 43 shared. 44 45 Agenda Item II. APPROVAL OF THE MEETING MINUTES 46 The minutes of the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) meeting of April 13, 2026 were presented to 47 the members. Minor changes to the minutes were recommended to reflect Member Hinkamp’s 48 absence. 2 DRAFT Village of Kenilworth Zoning Board of Appeals 2 June 8, 2026 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Member Chalmers made a motion to approve the April 13, 2026, meeting minutes as amended. Member Quigley seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken as follows on the motion: Yea: Murphy, Roeser, Chalmers, Quigley, Tzur, Peterson, Hinkamp Nay: None Absent: None Abstain: None The motion was approved 7-0. Agenda Item III. PUBLIC HEARING Chair Murphy opened the public hearing and swore in the applicants. III.A Public Hearing to Consider Variations at 167 Abingdon Ave Avenue Pertaining to Maximum Building Size and Maximum Building Coverage Requirements Village Planner Andrew Dunham presented on the request. Mr. Dunham explained that the variance requests were for additional floor area and building coverage. The improvements, he further explained, were for a new sunroom, expanded detached garage, and reduced impervious surface. Owner, Charlie Waddell, shared that he and his wife have four kids and two big cars that do not fit into their garage. Project Architect Keith Labutta stated that the existing home is non-conforming, and they sought to keep the request modest. Member Chalmers asked how large the sunroom would be. Mr. Labutta responded that it would be 144 feet. Member Chalmers explained that she understood the hardship for the garage, but asked for additional information on the hardship for the sunroom. Mr. Waddell responded that his family is looking for a communal space where they can exist together while doing independent activities. The sunroom, he stated, provides that as it connects to their living room. Mr. Waddell acknowledged that it is not a hardship, but a reflection of his current family state. Member Quigley stated that the home was not built for today’s standards. Mr. Labutta explained that reconfiguring the rooms of the home was not practical given its structural configuration. Member Hinkamp stated that he did not seen the hardship, but he could get behind approving either the sunroom or the garage expansion. Chair Murphy shared that while the request is small, its existing non-conforming status was an issue. Chair Murphy suggested that the garage could reduce in size on each side. Member Roeser asked if they had considered repurposing other living spaces, such as the living room. Mr. Waddell responded that his family loved the beauty of the living room. Member Hinkamp questioned a past variation case for the property. Mr. Dunham stated that it was a denied request for floor area. 45 46 3 DRAFT Village of Kenilworth Zoning Board of Appeals 3 June 8, 2026 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Chair Murphy stated that both requests were reasonable, but they are collectively more than the ZBA typically reviews. Member Peterson shared that she did not see a hardship and felt more inclined to support approval for the garage. Members Tzur and Chalmers agreed. Member Quigley disagreed and voiced support for both requests in order for the owner to modernize their home. Member Roeser expressed difficulty in supporting the sunroom, however, she was sympathetic to the garage request. The applicant requested a brief break for a side-bar. Following the break, Mr. Labutta requested to continue the request to the ZBA’s July 13, 2026 meeting. Following a request by the applicant, the ZBA agreed to continue the request to the July 13, 2026 regularly scheduled ZBA meeting. Members requested that staff provide the minutes and drawings related to the 2004 ZBA case for the property in advance of the next meeting. Agenda Item IV. OTHER BUSINESS IV.A. ZBA General Training Session Village Attorney Greg Jones provided training to members of the ZBA related to their purview, public hearings, public comment, origin and application of zoning standards, and the Open Meetings Act. Agenda Item V. BUSINESS FROM THE PUBLIC None Agenda Item VI. ADJOURN Member Roeser made a motion to adjourn, and Member Hinkamp seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken as follows on the motion: Yea: Murphy, Roeser, Chalmers, Quigley, Tzur, Peterson, Hinkamp Nay: None Absent: None Abstain: None The motion was approved 7-0. The meeting concluded at 9:23 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Heather McFarland Asst. to the Village Manager 45 4 DRAFT Request for Commission Action Agenda Item: III.A. Staff Contact: Andrew Dunhan, ACIP, Teska Associates, Inc. Michael Blue, FAICP, Teska Associates, Inc. Subject: Continued Public Hearing to Consider a Variation at 167 Abingdon Avenue Pertaining to Maximum Building Size and Maximum Building Coverage Requirements Petitioner: Keith Labutta and Kiley Peart of Northworks Architects, on behalf of owner Charlie and Casey Waddell Location: 167 Abingdon Avenue Zoning: R-2 Single-Family Residential Purpose: Request variations to permit construction of a new addition and garage to encroach into the required rear yard. Applicable Regulations: §153.068 Minimum Size; Maximum Lot Coverage (A), (B) Introduction: The petitioner, Northworks Architects, is requesting variations to maximum building size and maximum building coverage requirements on behalf of the homeowner to permit construction of a 1 story addition to the principal structure and an expansion to the one-story two-car garage in the rear yard of the property. This property is situated on the north side of Abingdon Avenue between Sheridan Road and Warwick Lane. A portion of the existing rear yard patio would be removed as part of the scope of work; the proposed addition to the principal structure would be constructed on a portion of that existing patio’s area. The Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) heard this matter at the previous meeting on June 8, 2026, where the petitioners requested the case be continued to the July 13, 2026, meeting. Re-Cap of Previous ZBA Meeting: At the June 8, 2026, Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) Meeting, the petitioner presented a request for two (2) variations: floor area and building coverage. The ZBA noted that this is a request to modernize use of a historic home but expressed concerns about the existing size of the non- conforming structures on the site, and that the requested variation would further increase that nonconformity. The applicant explained that the current garage is not compatible with the geometry of modern family-style automobiles and that some expansion is needed to effectively accommodate two vehicles. Further, the applicant shared that the current garage needs repairs. The ZBA noted Considered By: Date: Zoning Board of Appeals Zoning Board of Appeals 07/13/26 06/08/26 Village of 5 that even a like-for-like replacement would require relief from the ZBA, but questioned whether a smaller expansion of the garage could achieve the same functionality. For the sunroom addition to the existing family room, the applicant explained that would allow for the entire family to enjoy the family room comfortably. The ZBA questioned whether this constitutes a zoning hardship and whether existing space in the home could be utilized to accommodate the applicant’s objectives. The ZBA noted that increasing the size (even a relatively small-scale increase) of the home’s nonconforming floor area required an additional level of scrutiny, given the large percentage that the home would be over the allowable square footage. The ZBA suggested that a reduction of the request be considered by the applicant, and that they provide further explanation of the relevant zoning hardship. Discussion: A 2-story brick home and detached 1-story garage are currently located on the 12,000 sq. ft. property. The current building size (floor area) of these structures is 4,938 sq. ft., higher than the maximum allowed floor area per the Zoning Code (4,080 sq. ft.) creating an existing nonconformity. Existing building coverage is 1,961 sq. ft., lower than the maximum allowed building coverage (1,720 sq. ft.), and therefore compliant with the Zoning Code.  Two 1-story additions are proposed as part of this request. o The first is an addition to the principal structure that consists of a 102 sq. ft. sunroom attached to the existing family room at the rear of the house. Note: the previous application sought an expansion of 144 sq. ft. o The second is an addition to the accessory structure (garage) would extend the structure to the south and west, widening and deepening the garage, increasing the garage’s square footage by 102 sq. ft. Note: the previous application sought an expansion of 155 sq. ft.  In total, these additions would increase building coverage by 213 sq. ft. and floor area by 204 sq. ft. Note that the discrepancy between building coverage and floor area is based on how building coverage is measured. Building coverage is calculated from the outside of the masonry wall at grade, whereas floor area is calculated from the outside of the framed wall.  Existing building coverage is compliant, and the proposed variation would increase building coverage beyond the maximum allowable by the Zoning Code by 184 sq. ft.  The existing home and garage exceed the Zoning Code’s maximum building size (floor area) requirements by 858 sq. ft., and the proposed variation would increase the nonconformity by 204 sq. ft., yielding a floor area that is 1,062 sq. ft. above the maximum building size.  The variation is requested to modernize an existing home by standardizing the size of the existing two-car garage and adding a sunroom.  As part of the scope of this work, a portion of the existing rear patio would be removed, resulting in a net reduction of 437 sq. ft. of impervious surfaces.  All other aspects of this proposed addition are compliant with the Zoning Code. 6 Permit History: The permit and zoning request history of 167 Abingdon Road is detailed in the table below. Year Type Purpose 2010 Building Roof Replacement, Permit #2010-116 2010 Building Soffit Replacement, Permit #2010-105 2007 Plumbing Sewer Repair, Permit #2007-188 2005 Fencing Reinstall Fence and Railing, P#10244 2005 Sprinkler Lawn Sprinkler, P#10224 2005 Building Exterior Lighting, P#10211 2004 Zoning Driveway, Patio, and Walkway Replacement, P#9968 2004 Building Interior Renovation, P#10174 2004 Zoning Variation Request, Bay Window, Garage Expansion, Porch Covering; Denied 1993 Building Repair Sidewalk, P#7544 1990 Building Driveway Apron, P#6949 1985 Plumbing Sewer Repair, Permit, P#6208 1929 Estimated Construction Date Requested Variation: Variation– Maximum Size; Maximum Lot Coverage Applicable Regulations: Section 153.068 (A) of the Zoning Ordinance Section 153.068 (B) of the Zoning Ordinance The petitioner requests a variation from Section 153.068(A) Maximum Building Size and Section 153.068(B) Maximum Building Coverage. The petitioner proposes an increase in the existing nonconforming building size (floor area) of 204 sq. ft. for an expansion of the family room and garage addition, totaling 5,142 sq. ft., 1,062 sq. ft. above the maximum allowable floor area. The proposed addition to the principal structure and garage will also increase the existing conforming building coverage by 213 sq. ft., totaling 2,904 sq. ft., 184 sq. ft. above the maximum allowable floor area, creating a nonconformity. As part of this project, 528 sq. ft. of impervious surface would be removed. Section 153.068 (A) of the Zoning Ordinance specifies the maximum floor area of a residential building to be calculated as follows: (Lot area X 0.24) + 1,200. No significant alteration has occurred since 2005, and therefore the property is not subject to lower floor area requirements. This lot measures 12,000 sq. ft., resulting in a maximum floor area of 4,080 sq. ft. The existing structures’ floor area measures 4,938 sq. ft., higher than the maximum allowed floor area; the proposed addition would increase floor area by 204 sq. ft., resulting in a proposed floor area of 5,142 sq. ft. (Tables on Next Page) 7 The following table illustrates the requested variation from the maximum building size: Lot Area Lot Area 12,000 sq. ft. Maximum Floor Area % Max Floor Area Maximum Floor Area (Lot area X 0.24) + 1,200 4,080 sq. ft 100% Existing Floor Area 4,938 sq. ft. 121% Variation % Max Floor Area Proposed Variation 204 sq. ft. 5% Proposed Floor Area 5,142 sq. ft. 126% Section 153.068 (B) of the Zoning Ordinance specifies the maximum building coverage of a residential building to be calculated as follows: (Lot area X 0.16) + 800. This lot measures 12,000 sq. ft., resulting in a maximum building coverage of 2,720 sq. ft. The existing structures’ building coverage measures 2,691 sq. ft., compliant with the Zoning Code; the proposed addition would increase building coverage by 213 sq. ft., resulting in a proposed building coverage of 2,904 sq. ft. The following table illustrates the requested variation from the maximum building coverage: Lot Area Lot Area 12,000 sq. ft. Maximum Building Coverage % Max Building Coverage Maximum Building Coverage (Lot area X 0.16) + 800 2,720 sq. ft. 100% Existing Building Coverage 2,691 sq. ft. 99% Variation % Max Building Coverage Proposed Variation 213 sq. ft. 7.8% Proposed Floor Area 2,904 sq. ft. 106.7% Example Motion for Consideration: I move to approve (with conditions) the request submitted by the petitioner, Keith Labutta and Kiley Peart of Northworks Architects, on behalf of owner Charlie and Casey Waddell, to permit construction of a rear addition to the principal structure of a single-family residence and addition to the detached garage that exceeds maximum floor area requirements by 1,062 sq. ft. and maximum building coverage by 184 sq. ft. at 167 Abingdon Avenue in accordance with the materials included in this packet. Attachments: 1. 167 Abingdon Avenue Zoning Board of Appeals Application, dated April 30, 2026 2. Narrative of zoning variation request provided by Northworks Architects, dated June 26, 2026 3. Revised Zoning Compliance Worksheet, received June 26, 2026 4. Copy of Plat of Survey, dated April 2, 2026 5. Revised Architectural Drawings provided by Northworks Architects, dated June 24, 2026 6. Section 153.224 (E), Standards for Variations 7. 2004 Variance Application - 167 Abingdon Avenue 8 1 Village of 419 Richmond Road Phone: 847-251-1666 Kenilworth, IL 60043 Fax: 847-251-3908 E-mail: info@vok.org Zoning Board of Appeals Application General Information Date: ________ Zoning Board of Appeals Jurisdiction • Zoning Variations • Special Uses • Text Amendments • Zoning Map Changes • Administrative Appeals Property Address Address of Property That is the Subject of this Application : ______________________________________________________ Attach Legal Description of Property that is the Subject of this Application. Zoning District:_________________________________________________________________________________________ Current Use____________________________________________________________________________________________ Applicant Information Applicant Name _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Address _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Email ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Telephone _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Owner of Property (if different than Applicant) Name _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Address _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Email ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Telephone _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 9 2 Primary Contact Person for Applicant Name _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Address ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Email ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Telephone _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Applicant’s and Primary Contact’s Relationship to Property: _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ownership Details Check appropriate category and attach proof of ownership and all relevant additional ownership information to this application. _____ Individual _____ Joint Tenants/Tenants in Common ____ Land Trust ____ Trust ____ Corporation _____Limited Liability Company ____Partnership If property is held in a trust, also include a certified copy of the trust agreement or a simple affidavit (under oath before a notary) as to who are the beneficiaries of the trust. Consultants (as applicable) List any additional consultants and their contact information on additional sheets of paper and attach. Architect Name ________________________________________________________________________________________ Company ________________________________________________________________________________________ Address ________________________________________________________________________________________ Phone _________________________________________________________________________________________ E-mail _______________________________________________________________________________________ Attorney Name ________________________________________________________________________________________ Company ________________________________________________________________________________________ Address ________________________________________________________________________________________ Phone _________________________________________________________________________________________ E-mail _______________________________________________________________________________________ 10 3 Requested Action Check all that apply and provide on this form or attach on separate sheets all information required by the Sections of the Zoning Ordinance listed below for the types of relief requested: ____ Zoning Variation(s) for _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ ____ Special Use for___________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ ____ Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment ____ Rezoning from _____to_____ - Zoning Map Amendment ____ Administrative Appeal ____ Other (describe): _______________________________________________________________________________ Filing Fees All Applications require payment of a non-refundable fee; in addition, applications for special uses, text amendments, and zoning map require additional funds that are held in escrow for recovery of actual costs pursuant to Sections 153.290 – 153.293 of the Zoning Ordinance. Please attach a check with your application and indicate below the amount of fee submitted: ________ $ 350.00 • Zoning Variations • Special Uses • Text Amendments • Zoning Map Changes • Air Conditioning • Fences • Administrative Appeals Kenilworth Code of Ethics On a Separate Sheet of Paper, list and attach the name, address and nature and extent of any current or potential interest that any village officer or employee may have in or with respect to the owner, the Applicant or the property. If none, Check here:_____ Repeat Application Has any other application for this property been submitted to the Village that seeks similar relief and has been denied within the last two years? _____Yes ____ No If yes, attach a statement of the ground Applicant believes justifies reconsideration. 11 4 Application/Owner Acknowledgments By execution of this application in the space provided below, the applicant and owner(s) do hereby certify, acknowledge, agree and affirm to the Village of Kenilworth that: 1. The Village and its representatives have the right, and are hereby granted permission and license, to enter upon property, and into any structures located therein, for the purposes of conducting any inspections that may be necessary in connection with this application. 2. I (We) have carefully read this application, the Kenilworth Zoning Ordinance and fully understand the terms and provisions of each. 3. I (We) waive any rights to exemption from disclosure under the Illinois Freedom of Information Act of any and all documents and information submitted in connection with this application. 4. I (We), in accordance with the requirements of the Kenilworth Zoning Ordinance agree to pay all applicable filing fees and be responsible for the payment of all reimbursable expenses associated with the processing of this application. 5. The Information contained in this application is true and correct. Applicant’s Signature(s) Signature: ________________________________________________________________________________________ Printed Name: _____________________________________________________________________________________ Date: _____________________________________________________________________ Signature: ________________________________________________________________________________________ Printed Name: _____________________________________________________________________________________ Date: _____________________________________________________________________ Signature: ________________________________________________________________________________________ Printed Name: _____________________________________________________________________________________ Date: _____________________________________________________________________ Signature: ________________________________________________________________________________________ Printed Name: _____________________________________________________________________________________ Date: _____________________________________________________________________ 12 5 Required Materials Submit a completed application with 9 copies of the following materials: ____ Drawings, if applicable, to Variance Application: 1. Existing Floor Plans - provide floor plans of all levels of the existing building 2. Demolition Floor Plans – provide floor plans of all levels of the existing building and indicate existing parts to be removed 3. Proposed Floor Plans - provide floor plans of proposed additions to the existing building 4. Existing Exterior Elevations – provide elevations of all existing exterior elevations that are to change 5. Proposed Exterior Elevations - provide elevations of all elevations that are altered ____ Plat of Survey & Parcel(s) Legal Description, no more than 5 years old ____ Title Policy or Deed. ____ Certified Copy of Trust Agreement, if applicable. ____ Simple Affidavit identifying Trust beneficiaries, if applicable. ____ Written Explanation of Request, on separate sheets of paper. Address the standards and requirements for the relief requested, and how they are satisfied by the request. ____Filing Fee - payable to the Village of Kenilworth. After this application and all necessary materials are submitted, the application will be put on the docket for a Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting. It is recommended that the application for any matter requiring public notice be submitted 45 days prior to the Zoning Meeting. The Village will provide Applicant with a notification packet containing a notice is to be delivered to all property owners living within 250 feet of property. The Zoning Board of Appeals meets once every other month. In general, applicants should expect a hearing within 60 days of submitting an application. Any party may appear at the hearing in person or by agent or attorney. The concurring vote of 4 members of the Zoning Board shall be necessary to grant a variation or to reserve any order, requirement, decision or determination of the Village, or to decide in favor of an applicant for relief. No order granting a variation shall be effective for a period longer than six months unless a building permit is obtained and the construction, alteration, or moving of the building covered by the order is started within such period. All Applicants are encouraged to read Sections 153.240 – 153.249 of the Village of Kenilworth Zoning Ordinance. Authorized Variations • To vary any of the requirements with respect to minimum sizes of lots, maximum height of buildings and other structures, maximum and minimum size of buildings, maximum lot coverage by structures and other impervious surfaces, and minimum depth and width of yards per Section 153.244. • To vary any of the regulations contained in Sections 153.075 – 153.086 (Supplemental Regulations Applicable to all Residential Districts). • To vary any of the regulations contained in Section 153.185 – 153.192 (Off-Street Automobile Parking Requirements). • To vary Sign Code regulations per Section 153.244 13 8 Standards for Special Uses For Special Use requests, please respond to the applicable standards listed below in the written explanation of the request. (G) Standards. No special use shall be recommended by the Board of Appeals or the Plan Commission, as the case may be, or authorized by the Board of Trustees unless the Board of Appeals or the Plan Commission, as the case may be, and the Board of Trustees shall have taken into consideration the following factors to the extent deemed relevant to the proposed special use and the principal structure and each accessory structure used for or associated with the proposed special use: (1) The necessity for the public convenience at the particular proposed location; (2) The effects of the proposed design, location and operation on the public health, safety and welfare; (3) Injury to the value of other property in the neighborhood in which it is proposed to be located; (4) Interference with the use and enjoyment of neighboring properties; (5) Compatibility with permitted uses in the district in which it is proposed to be located; (6) Increased traffic congestion on public ways or increased parking required on public ways; (7) Damage to or destruction of natural scenic or historic features of significance to the village or the immediate neighborhood; and (8) In the case of playground equipment, in addition to the foregoing applicable factors, its proximity to and effect on neighboring properties, its expected intensity of use, and the consistency of the equipment and its expected use with play equipment customarily associated with a residential use. 14 NORTHWORKS.COM 1 167 ABINGDON AVE. Village of Kenilworth Northworks Architects Zoning Board of Appeals 1512 N. Throop Street 419 Richmond Road Chicago, IL 60642 Kenilworth, IL 60043 June 26th, 2026 Re: Variation Application for 167 Abingdon Ave., Kenilworth, IL 60043 – Continuation Cover Letter Dear Village of Kenilworth Zoning Board of Appeals, Thank you for reviewing our case at the June 8th ZBA meeting and allowing us a continuation to revise the request in a way that is deemed acceptable by the Board. We have made considerable cuts, while still maintaining program viability, and are hopefully that these modifications are viewed favorably by all parties. Below is an outline of the adjustments that have been made. We strongly feel these adjustments are appropriate and resolve the practical difficulties of the site, while at the same time, asking for the minimal amount of relief. Garage Modifications In response to the initial feedback received regarding the size of the garage expansion, we have significantly reduced the footprint and reduced the overall ask from 155 SF to 102 SF. This is a reduction of 53 SF and approximately 34%. We removed 12” from the proposed width and 15” from the proposed depth. This is the maximum amount of square footage that can be removed from the proposed plan while still properly addressing and resolving the practical difficulties of the existing garage. As previously stated, the garage in its current state is not conducive to the standards of today’s vehicles and modern living. By today’s standards it is expected that a garage would be capable of housing two vehicles. The owners drive an Expedition and a Rivian. Both of which are well within the reasonable standards of a typical SUV. We have sized the garage to the minimum dimensions required to fit these two vehicles. Sunroom Modifications In similar fashion, we have made considerable cuts to the proposed sunroom addition. We have reduced the overall ask from 144 SF to 102 SF. This is a reduction of 42 SF and approximately 29%. This is the maximum square footage that can be added while still resolving the lay-out issues caused by the floor plan of this 100-year-old home. As with many historic homes of this design, the central stair greatly limits the ability to reconfigure the rooms in a meaningful or cost -effective manner. The modest ask of 102 SF for a sunroom addition resolves this issue and results in a proper family room suitable for a family of six. In summary, we have made a total FAR reduction of 95 SF. This brings the original request of 299 SF down to 204 SF. The requested overage is an additional 5% which results in a total FAR overage of 26%. On the building coverage front, we have reduced the overage ask from 9.9% down to 6.8% . We are asking for the minimum relief needed to resolve the practical difficulties created by this historic home and the standards to which it was built, which do not align with modern living and expectations. Lastly, this request is in keeping with similar variance requests that have previously been approved by the Board and we kindly ask for the same consideration. Thank you again for your time and we look forward to discussing at the July 13 th hearing. 15 NORTHWORKS.COM 1 167 ABINGDON AVE. Village of Kenilworth Northworks Architects Zoning Board of Appeals 1512 N. Throop Street 419 Richmond Road Chicago, IL 60642 Kenilworth, IL 60043 June 26th, 2026 Re: Responses to Standards for Variation Application for 167 Abingdon Ave., Kenilworth, IL 60043 Dear Village of Kenilworth Zoning Board of Appeals, The following are responses to the Standards for Variation 153.244 (E): 1. The Board shall not grant, and the Plan Commission, as applicable, shall not recommend approval of, a variation from any of the regulations of this chapter, as authorized by subsection 153.244 (D), unless it shall make a finding of fact, based upon the evidence presented to it in a particular case that: a. In the case of the property, the principal use… Please see Section 153.244 (E.1a) i. Response: Not applicable as this property is residential and not for business purposes. b. The plight of the owner is due to… Please see Section 153.244 (E.1b) i. Response: The unique circumstance of the property is the age of the existing structure s and the standards to which they were built. The current garage does not feasibly fit typical passenger vehicles of today’s standards. The garage cannot be expanded without increasing the allowable building coverage and FAR. Similarly, the lay-out of the existing 100-year old primary residence has small, compartmentalized rooms and small window openings which cannot be rectified without an increase in building coverage an d FAR. c. The variation, if granted, will not alter… Please see Section 153.244 (E.1c) i. Response: The design of the proposed sunroom addition and garage expansion are harmonious with the character of the neighborhood. The scale, proportion and details of the proposed design are aligned with the neighboring properties and are in keeping with the historic nature of the neighborhood. 2. For the purpose of supplementing the above standards, the Board or, as applicable, the Plan Commission, in making its determination whether the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances and whether the variation, if granted, may alter the essential character of the locality, shall take into consideration the following factors to the extent that are established by the evidence and deemed relevant by the Board or, as applicable, the Plan Commission: a. The particular physical surroundings… Please see Section 153.244 (E.2a) Response: The existing historic house was built to standards not consistent with the needs of modern living and modern amenities. If the regulations were strictly enforced the detached garage would remain unusable for its intended purpose and the homeowners would continue to be required to park their vehicles outside and unsecured. Similarly, if strictly enforced, the floor plan lay-out of the first floor and basement level would remain inefficient. 16 NORTHWORKS.COM 2 b. The conditions upon… Please see Section 153.244 (E.2b) Response: The request for variation is based solely on the specific conditions of 167 Abingdon Ave. c. The request for variation is not… Please see Section 153.244 (E.2c) Response: The owners would like to have more functional spaces that align with the standards of modern homes while maintaining the history and character of their 100 year-old home. This includes expanding the detached garage so that it can feasible fit vehicles of today’s standards and a proposed sunroom addition to improve the utility and functionality of the first floor and basement level lay-outs. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship… Please see Section 153.244 (E.2d) Response: The current hardship was not created by any person who has an interest in the property. e. The variation will not impair… Please see Section 153.244 (E.2e) Response: There are no additional variations that should be needed outside of the requested FAR and Building Coverage increases. 3. For the purposes of further supplementing the above standards and factors in connection with requests for variation from the requirements of Sect. 153.068, the Board, in making its determination, may also take into consideration the following factors, amon g other factors deemed relevant by the Board: a. The effects of the proposed construction… Please see Section 153.244 (E.3a) Response: The proposed modifications are in keeping with the character of the existing home and neighboring homes. b. The proximity of the proposed construction… Please see Section 153.244 (E.3b) Response: The proximity of the proposed expansion and addition are consistent with the neighboring homes and do not negatively impact them in any way . c. The relative proximity of the proposed construction… Please see Section 153.244 (E.3c) Response: The request for variation of the proposed sunroom and garage expansion is in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. No proposed work is encroaching into any setback, all is occurring within the allowable building area. d. The magnitude of the variation… Please see Section 153.244 (E.3d) Response: The variation request is for a 204 S.F. increase in FAR (5.0%) and a 184 S.F. increase in Building Coverage (6.8%) to be used towards expansion of the existing detached garage and sunroom addition on the primary residence. e. The need for other variations… Please see Section 153.244 (E.3e) Response: There are no other variations requested. f. The need for the variation to allow… Please see Section 153.244 (E.3f) Response: The request for variation is based on the owner’s desire to maintain the historical context of their home while updating it as needed to comply with the standards of modern living. Given the central stair location, it greatly limits the ability to reconfigure the rooms in a meaningful or cost-effective way. Relocating stairs is a considerable undertaking and not efficient or respective to the original architecture of 17 NORTHWORKS.COM 3 the home. g. The efficient and advantageous use… Please see Section 153.244 (E.3g) Response: The proposed additions make efficient use of the existing structures. The existing garage is being largely maintained and being increased as minimally as possible to make it a viable space for housing vehicles. We have reduced the width by 12” and the depth by 15” since the original request. Similarly, the sunroom addition adds as minimal space as possible while accomplishing the goal of modernizing and improving the functionality of the interior lay-out. We have reduced the width by 12” and the depth by 24” since the original request. h. The reasonableness of the variation… Please see Section 153.244 (E.3h) Response: The requested variation is reasonable and maintains the cohesively scaled and well-proportioned existing residence that fits seamlessly into the neighboring properties. Neither of the proposed modifications are visible from the street and do not negatively impact the neighborhood. In fact, the proposed sunroom actually enhances the rear façade by improving the rhythm and symmetry. 4. For the purposes of supplementing the above standards and factors in connection with requests for variations from the requirements of Sect. 153.067, the Board, in making its determination, may also take into consideration the following factors, among other factors deemed relevant by the Board, to the extent they are established by the evidence and deemed relevant by the Board: a. The height and location of existing and proposed structures… Please see Section 153.244 (E.4a) i. Response: The sunroom addition is single-story and lower in height than the 2.5 story primary residence. The detailing draws from the existing kitchen box bay, therefore complementing the historic structure. Similarly, the garage expansion maintains the same height and finish materials as the existing garage. b. The need to maintain the height of the proposed structure… Please see Section 153.244 (E.4b) i. Response: See above. The proposed addition and expansion are of appropriate scale. c. The need to maintain a particular height of a proposed addition… Please see Section 153.244 (E.4c) i. Response: See above. The proposed addition and expansion are of appropriate scale. 5. For the purposes of supplementing the above standards with regard to variations for signs, the Board or, as applicable, the Plan Commission, in making its determination, may also take into consideration the following factors to the extent they are established by the evidence and deemed relevant by the Board or, as applicable, the Plan Commission: a. In the case of a commercial message sign… Please see Section 153.244 (E.5a) i. Response: Not applicable as this property is residential and not for business purposes. b. The variation will not endanger the public safety… Please see Section 153.244 (E.5b) Response: There will be no additional curb cuts with the proposed construction, therefore the request for variation will not cause any sort of public endangerment or diminished property values. c. The variation would not result in a sign or master sign plan… Please see Section 18 NORTHWORKS.COM 4 153.244 (E.5c) Response: Not applicable as this property is residential and will not require signage . 19 Building | Planning Division 419 Richmond Rd. Kenilworth, IL 60043 E: community@vok.org P: 847-251-1666 x5253 ZONING COMPLIANCE WORKSHEET ඘ඉඏඍ 1 ඗ඎ 4 ZONING CALCULATION WORKSHEET 7/12/2023 Completion of this worksheet is required for any construction that alters building fl oor area or existing impervious surfaces on a lot. See Section 6 for defi nitions of building coverage, impervious surfaces, and fl oor area, as well as samples of required diagrams and calculations. Complete each Section of the worksheet based on the proposed scope of work: Section 1 Property Data - complete for all projects 2 Building Coverage - complete for changes to any roofed str ucture or impervious surfaces 3 Impervious Surfaces - complete for changes to any other imp ervious surfaces 4 Floor Area Calculations - complete for changes to any roofe d structure 5 Required Minimum Yards - complete appropriate section for n ew construction 6 Diagrams and Calculations - defi nitions and examples of di agrams and calculations required for all projects lot width lot length ච - =- - + + + = 2උ 3ඍ 3උ 2ඌ 3ඌ 3ඎ 2ඍ 3ඏ = = = = 3ඉ Impervious Surfaces: Maximum Allowed* 2ඊ Building Coverage: Total Existing + Proposed 2ඉ Building Coverage: Maximum Allowed 1ඊ Lot area* 1ඉ Project address 3ඊ Impervious Surfaces: Total Existing to remain + Proposed ඌඉගඍ: ඛගඍඍ඘ ඛඔ඗඘ඍ ජ඗ඖඍ? 1: Pක඗඘ඍකගඡ Dඉගඉ Y N 2: Bඝඑඔඌඑඖඏ C඗ඞඍකඉඏඍ 3: Iඕ඘ඍකඞඑ඗ඝඛ Sඝකඎඉඋඍඛ For lot area < 5,716 s.f. Maximum impervious allowed*: For lot area 5,716 - 19,999 s.f. For lot area 20,000+ s.f. Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft. 3ඉ: Enter the sum of 3උ and 3ඌ in line 3ඉ. If 3ඌ is a negative number, subtract it from 3උ.* 2ඉ: Complete the appropriate calculation for the lot area (1ඊ), and enter product in line 2ඉ 1ඊ: Using a current Plat of Survey, calculate the lot area in square feet. If the lot area is noted on the Plat, input that number in 1ඊ. * Lakefront Lot Area: extends to toe of the bluff (base of sea wall closest to the lake), or where bluff meets the beach if there is no sea wall. 3ඊ: Enter the sum of numbers 3ඍ-3ඏ in line 3ඊ. Submit diagrams with dimensions and square footage calculations per Section 6B. 2ඊ: Enter the sum of numbers 2උ-2ඍ in line 2ඊ. Submit diagrams with dimensions and square footage calculations per Section 6A. Total existing building coverage Total existing impervious surfaces Existing building coverage to be removed 2ඉ ඕඑඖඝඛ 2ඊ Existing impervious surfaces to be removed New building coverage to be added New impervious surfaces to be added Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft. ඔ඗ග ඉකඍඉ ච .25 = ඔ඗ග ඉකඍඉ x .3 (ඔ඗ග ඉකඍඉ x .16) + 800 ඔ඗ග ඉකඍඉ x .2 *For single family attached dwellings, the maximum impervious surface allowed is: 100 + (.35 x lot area) code §153.068(C) code §153.068(B) code §153.033 12,000 75' 160' 2,720 2,691 0 2,917 2,720 213 2,904 2,904* -184 2,733* 2,859 167 ABINGDON AVE. 2,422.50 527.5 91 *Assumes building coverage increase is approved REVISIONS FROM PREVIOUS REQUEST SHOWN IN RED 20 Building | Planning Division 419 Richmond Rd. Kenilworth, IL 60043 E: community@vok.org P: 847-251-1666 x5253 ZONING COMPLIANCE WORKSHEET ඘ඉඏඍ 2 ඗ඎ 4 ZONING CALCULATION WORKSHEET 7/12/2023 - - + 4උ 4ඌ 4ඍ 4ඎ = = 4ඊ Floor Area: Total Existing to remain + Proposed 4ඉ Floor Area: Maximum Allowed 4: Fඔ඗඗ක Aකඍඉ New building or substantial alteration built after 10/22/2005 Existing buildings built on or before 10/22/2005 Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft. 4ඉ: Complete the appropriate calculation for the building type and enter product in line 4ඉ 4ඊ: Enter the sum of 4උ through 4ඎ in line 4ඊ. Submit diagrams with dimensions and square footage calculations per Section 6C. Total existing fl oor area Subtract existing fl oor area to be removed Subtract Zoning Credit (see Section 5 for description of applicable areas). Add proposed new fl oor area Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft. (ඔ඗ග ඉකඍඉ x .21) + 1,200 (ඔ඗ග ඉකඍඉ x .24) + 1,200 ඘ක඗ඒඍඋග ඉඌඌකඍඛඛ §153.068(A) * Additional sections of village code regulate distance of new impervious surfaces to lot lines and/or the public right of way. Principal Building: distance to lot line Air conditioning units: distance to lot line Roof overhang Accessory Structure (includes detached garage) Other outdoor electrical equipment Other impervious surfaces* Front Side Side SideSide Side Side SideSide Rear Rear RearRear Distance to nearest lot line Distance to nearest lot line Height from grade Height Height Installed at grade? Installed at grade? Y N Y N Y N Y N Y N Screened from street view? Wall mounted? Screened from street view? ක඗඗ඎඍඌ ඛගකඝඋගඝකඍඛ ඉඔඔ ඗ගඐඍක ඍ඙ඝඑ඘ඕඍඖග + ඛඝකඎඉඋඍඛ Complete the appropriate information for the proposed scope of work. Submit with site plan or annotated survey showing dimensions to lot line. 5: Rඍ඙ඝඑකඍඌ Mඑඖඑඕඝඕ Yඉකඌඛ + Bඝඑඔඌඑඖඏ Hඍඑඏඐග §153.067 + §153.070 + 153.085* 4,080 0 0 4,938 204 5,142 EXISTING - NO CHANGE EXISTING - NO CHANGE EXISTING - NO CHANGE EXISTING - NO CHANGE 40'-0" - EXISTING 12'-5 1/2"' - EXISTING 69'-2 3/4" (W/ SUNROOM ADDITION) EXISTING - NO CHANGE 12'-4 1/2"' - EXISTING 4'-1 5/8"' - EXISTING 47'-8 1/2"' (W/ GARAGE EXPANSION) 5'-3 5/8"' - EXISTING 19'-5 5/8"' (W/ GARAGE EXPANSION) 21 EXISTING PROPOSED 167 ABINGDON AVE. EXISTING BUILDING COVERAGE THE EXISTING HOUSE IS CURRENTLY 29 SF UNDER THE ALLOWABLE BUILDING COVERAGE 22 EXISTING PROPOSED 167 ABINGDON AVE. PROPOSED BUILDING COVERAGE 270.00 17'-8" 6'-4" 3'-6" 19'-8" 22'-5" 3'-0" 19'-8" x 3'-0" - "E" 3'-6" x 22'-5" 23.60 SF 78.40 SF 17'-8" x 6'-4" 111.00 SF 2904.00 SF 184 SF OVER = 6.8% THE EXISTING HOUSE IS CURRENTLY 29 SF UNDER THE ALLOWABLE BUILDING COVERAGE. THE PROPOSED ADDITIONS ADD 213 SF WHICH RESULTS IN A 6.8% OVERAGE 23 EXISTING PROPOSED 167 ABINGDON AVE. EXISTING FAR THE EXISTING HOUSE IS 21% OVER THE ALLOWABLE F.A.R. 24 EXISTING PROPOSED 167 ABINGDON AVE. PROPOSED FAR THE EXISTING HOUSE IS 21% OVER THE ALLOWABLE F.A.R. THE REQUESTED 5% INCREASE RESULTS IN A TOTAL OVERAGE OF 26% 17'-0" 16'-0" 17'-0" x 6'-0" 19'-8" x 3'-0" - "E" 3'-6" x 22'-5" 102.00 SF 23.60 SF 78.40 SF 5,142 SF 204 SF = 5% 3'-6" 19'-8" 22'-5" 3'-0" 25 EXISTING STONE PATIO TO BE REMOVED (475.5 S.F.) EXISTING DRIVEWAY PORTION TO BE REMOVED (52 S.F.) NEW WALKWAY (59.5 S.F.) NEW DRIVEWAY EXTENTION (31.5 S.F.) 167 ABINGDON AVE. IMPERMEABLE CALCULATIONS EXISTING WALKWAY (81.5 S.F.) EXISTING WALKWAY (15 S.F.) EXISTING STAIRS (60 S.F.) EXISTING STAIRS (30 S.F.) EXISTING STAIRS (118 S.F.) EXISTING WALKWAY (310 S.F.) 26 27 SCOPE OF WORK ISSUED FOR ZBA - REVISED VARIATION REQUEST 2610 PROJECT TEAM MEMBERS OWNER ARCHITECT CHARLIE AND CASEY WADDELL 167 Abingdon Ave, Kenilworth, IL 60043 NORTHWORKS ARCHITECTS & PLANNERS 1512 N. Throop Street Chicago, Illinois 60642 APPLICABLE CODES BY JURISDICTION COVER SHEET EX1.0 EXISTING AND PROPOSED SITE PLANS EX1.1 EXISTING BASEMENT AND FIRST FLOOR PLANS EX1.2 EXISTING SECOND FLOOR AND THIRD FLOOR PLANS EX1.3 EXISTING GARAGE PLANS D1.0 DEMOLITION PLANS A1.0 PROPOSED PLANS EX2.1 EXISTING SOUTH AND EAST ELEVATIONS EX2.2 EXISTING NORTH AND WEST ELEVATIONS EX2.3 EXISTING GARAGE ELEVATIONS A2.1 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS DRAWING SHEET INDEX PROJECT DATA NUMBER OF STORIES NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS ZONING DISTRICT PARCEL NUMBER 2-1/2 1 R-2 05271120130000 AREA MAP 167 ABINGTON AVE 06/26/2026 ISSUED FOR ZBA - REVISED VARIATION REQUEST 1. SUNROOM ADDITION TO EXISTING LIVING ROOM AND RENOVATION OF EXISTING BASEMENT FITNESS ROOM 2. RENOVATION AND EXTENSION OF EXISTING GARAGE 1512 N. THROOP STREET CHICAGO, IL 60642 T: 312-440-9850 F: 312-440-9851 WADDELL RESIDENCE 167 Abingdon Ave, Kenilworth, IL 60043 JUNE 26, 2026 ZONING CODE BUILDING CODE ENERGY CODE MECHANICAL CODE ELECTRICAL CODE PLUMBING CODE FIRE PROTECTION CODE KENILWORTH ZONING CODE 2021 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE W/ KENILWOTH, IL MODIFICATION 2021 INTERNATIONAL ENERGY CONSERVATION CODE 2021 INTERNATION MECHANICAL CODE 2020 NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE STATE OF ILLINOIS PLUMBING CODE, 2014 OR CURRENT EDITION 2021 INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE AND NFPA 101 LIFE SAFETY CODE 28 UP UP UP UP EXISTING SITE PLAN 3/32" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING SIDEWALK EXISTING CURB AND ROADWAY EXISTING STONE PATIO EXISTING CONCRETE DRIVEWAY WITH 1' BRICK CURB EXISTING CITY TREES EXISTING TREE EXISTING FENCES TRUE NORTH PROJECT NORTH UP UP UP EXISTING HOUSE PROPOSED SITE PLAN 3/32" = 1'-0"2 EXISTING STONE WALKWAY EXISTING SIDEWALK EXISTING CURB AND ROADWAY EXISTING CONCRETE DRIVEWAY WITH 1' BRICK CURB EXISTING YARD AND LANDSCAPING EXISTING YARD AND LANDSCAPING EXISTING YARD AND LANDSCAPING EXISTING YARD AND LANDSCAPING EXISTING CITY TREES EXISTING FENCES TRUE NORTH PROJECT NORTH UP DW DW REF. PROPOSED ADDITION 18'-0" EXISTING HOUSE EXISTING STONE WALKWAY EXISTING YARD AND LANDSCAPING EXISTING YARD AND LANDSCAPING EXISTING STONE WALKWAY PROPOSED GARAGE EXPANSION STONE GARAGE ACCESS PATH 23'-2" 22'-5" 19'-8" 19'-5" 4'-1 5/8" 5'-3 5/8" 12'-5 1/2" 40'-0" 12'-4 1/2" 75'-2 3/4" 5'-3 5/8"22'-5" 4'-1 5/8" 40'-0" 12'-4 1/2" 75'-2 3/4" 6'-0" 14'-0 1/2" 69'-2 3/4" EXISTING TREE WALL LEGEND: EXISTING TO REMAIN NEW WALLS 47'-8 3/8"51'-2 3/8" 69'-2 3/4" EXISTING YARD AND LANDSCAPING EXISTING YARD AND LANDSCAPING 75'-2 3/4" Project No. Drawn By Checked By Discipline & Drawing Number Drawing Name Project ISSUED FOR OWNER REVIEW 2610 WADDELL RESIDENCE 167 ABINGDON AVE, KENILWORTH, IL 60043 RC KL/KP © 2026 Northworks Architects & Planners - All rights reserved. Any discrepancies shall be reported immediately to the Architect before proceeding. Only figured dimensions should be used. Contractors and fabricators to verify all dimensions on site prior to beginning Work. 04/08/2026 OWNER REVIEW ISSUED DATE ISSUED FORNO. PROFESSIONAL SEAL 05/01/2026 ZONING BOARD REVIEW 06/24/2026 ZONING BOARD REVIEW - REVISED SITE PLANS EX1.0 29 MEDIA ROOM EX-001 LAUNDRY EX-002 BATH #1 EX-003 EXERCISE ROOM EX-004 BIKE ROOM EX-006 CLOSET EX-005 TOOL ROOM EX-009 CRAFT ROOM EX-010 BASEMENT HALL EX-011 DINING ROOM EX-101 KITCHEN EX-102 POWDER EX-104 FAMILY ROOM EX-105 LIVING ROOM EX-106 FOYER EX-107 ENTRY EX-108 MUDROOM EX-103 HALL EX-109 EXISTING - FIRST FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING - BASEMENT PLAN SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"2 DW DW REF. WASHER WASHER DRYER DRYER PROJECT NORTH TRUE NORTH REF. REF. UP UP UP UP UP BASEMENT STORAGE EX-007 MECHANICAL ROOM EX-008 ELE. ELE. EX. HWH EX. BOILER EX. A/C EX. HWH WATER MTR PLUMBING STACK 17'-7 1/4" 14'-7" 18'-5 1/4" 16'-0" Project No. Drawn By Checked By Discipline & Drawing Number Drawing Name Project ISSUED FOR OWNER REVIEW 2610 WADDELL RESIDENCE 167 ABINGDON AVE, KENILWORTH, IL 60043 RC KL/KP © 2026 Northworks Architects & Planners - All rights reserved. Any discrepancies shall be reported immediately to the Architect before proceeding. Only figured dimensions should be used. Contractors and fabricators to verify all dimensions on site prior to beginning Work. 04/08/2026 OWNER REVIEW ISSUED DATE ISSUED FORNO. PROFESSIONAL SEAL 05/01/2026 ZONING BOARD REVIEW 06/24/2026 ZONING BOARD REVIEW - REVISED EXISTING PLANS - BASEMENT AND 1ST FLOOR EX1.1 30 UP EXISTING - SECOND FLOOR PLAN (NO PROPOSED WORK) SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"2 EXISTING - THIRD FLOOR PLAN (NO PROPOSED WORK) SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 MASTER BEDROOM EX-201 MASTER CLOSET EX-212 BEDROOM #3 EX-209 CLOSET EX-213 BATH #2 EX-210 BATH #3 EX-208 BEDROOM #2 EX-206 BEDROOM #1 EX-205 HER OFFICE EX-203 MASTER BATH EX-202 2ND FLOOR HALL EX-211 CLOSET EX-204 CLOSET EX-207 BEDROOM #5 EX-307 BEDROOM #4 EX-209 BATH #5 EX-302 HIS OFFICE EX-303 3RD FLOOR HALL EX-306 BATH #6 EX-305 ATTIC STORAGE EX-304 Project No. Drawn By Checked By Discipline & Drawing Number Drawing Name Project ISSUED FOR OWNER REVIEW 2610 WADDELL RESIDENCE 167 ABINGDON AVE, KENILWORTH, IL 60043 RC KL/KP © 2026 Northworks Architects & Planners - All rights reserved. Any discrepancies shall be reported immediately to the Architect before proceeding. Only figured dimensions should be used. Contractors and fabricators to verify all dimensions on site prior to beginning Work. 04/08/2026 OWNER REVIEW ISSUED DATE ISSUED FORNO. PROFESSIONAL SEAL 05/01/2026 ZONING BOARD REVIEW 06/24/2026 ZONING BOARD REVIEW - REVISED EXISTING PLANS - 2ND AND 3RD FLOOR EX1.2 31 EXISTING - GARAGE FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 PROJECT NORTH TRUE NORTH 18'-0" 21'-5" 19'-8" 19'-9" EXISTING - GARAGE ROOF PLAN SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"2 22'-8" 24'-5" EXISTING ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF SLOPE 8:12 SLOPE 8:12 EXISTING GARAGE WALL BELOW Project No. Drawn By Checked By Discipline & Drawing Number Drawing Name Project ISSUED FOR OWNER REVIEW 2610 WADDELL RESIDENCE 167 ABINGDON AVE, KENILWORTH, IL 60043 RC KL/KP © 2026 Northworks Architects & Planners - All rights reserved. Any discrepancies shall be reported immediately to the Architect before proceeding. Only figured dimensions should be used. Contractors and fabricators to verify all dimensions on site prior to beginning Work. 04/08/2026 OWNER REVIEW ISSUED DATE ISSUED FORNO. PROFESSIONAL SEAL 05/01/2026 ZONING BOARD REVIEW 06/24/2026 ZONING BOARD REVIEW - REVISED EXISTING PLANS - GARAGE EX1.3 32 UP UP UP UP UP FIRST FLOOR - DEMOLITION PLAN SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 BASEMENT - DEMOLITION PLAN SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"2 GARAGE - DEMOLITION PLAN SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"3 EXISTING WALLS TO BE DEMOLISHED EXISTING DOORS TO BE DEMOLISHED EXISTING AREAS TO REMAIN EXISTING AREAS TO REMAIN EXISTING AREAS TO REMAIN EXISTING AREAS TO REMAIN EXISTING WINDOWS TO BE DEMOLISHED EXISTING WALL TO BE DEMOLISHED 15'-6 3/4" DEMO EXISTING WEST AND SOUTH WALLS EXISTING BRICK WALL AND FOUNDATION TO REMAIN WALL LEGEND: EXISTING TO REMAIN DEMO WALLS NOT IN SCOPE - NO NEW WORK 17'-3" Project No. Drawn By Checked By Discipline & Drawing Number Drawing Name Project ISSUED FOR OWNER REVIEW 2610 WADDELL RESIDENCE 167 ABINGDON AVE, KENILWORTH, IL 60043 RC KL/KP © 2026 Northworks Architects & Planners - All rights reserved. Any discrepancies shall be reported immediately to the Architect before proceeding. Only figured dimensions should be used. Contractors and fabricators to verify all dimensions on site prior to beginning Work. 04/08/2026 OWNER REVIEW ISSUED DATE ISSUED FORNO. PROFESSIONAL SEAL 05/01/2026 ZONING BOARD REVIEW 06/24/2026 ZONING BOARD REVIEW - REVISED DEMOLITION FLOOR PLAN D1.0 33 DINING ROOM EX-101 KITCHEN EX-102 LIVING ROOM EX-106 ENTRY EX-108 MUDROOM EX-103 HALL EX-109 UP DW DW REF. PROJECT NORTH TRUE NORTH FOYER EX-107 PROPOSED - FIRST FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED - BASEMENT PLAN SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"2 POWDER EX-104 UP UP MEDIA ROOM EX-001 LAUNDRY EX-002 BATH #1 EX-003 FITNESS 004 TOOL ROOM EX-009 CRAFT ROOM EX-010 BASEMENT HALL EX-011 WASHER WASHER DRYER DRYER REF. REF. UP UP BASEMENT STORAGE EX-007 MECHANICAL ROOM EX-008 ELE. ELE. EX. HWH EX. BOILER EX. A/C EX. HWH WATER MTR PLUMBING STACK PROPOSED - GARAGE FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"3 FAMILY ROOM EX-105 UP 6'-4" 17'-0" 6'-0" SUNROOM AREA: ORIGINAL: 144 S.F. REVISED: 102 S.F. REDUCTION OF 42 S.F. (29% LESS) 18'-1 1/4" 17'-0" 8'-0" 6'-0" 23'-2" 22'-5" 3'-6" 3'-0" 5'-3" 10'-8" 6'-6" 2'-7 3/8" 1'-9 3/4" RIVIAN EXPEDITION 1'-6 1/2" 1'-11" 1'-6 1/2" 1'-11" GARAGE AREA: ORIGINAL: 155 S.F. REVISED: 102 S.F. REDUCTION OF 53 S.F. (34% LESS) REVISED FAR NUMBERS: ORIGINAL: 299 S.F. REVISED: 204 S.F. REDUCTION OF 95 S.F. (32% LESS) REVISED ASK WOULD BE: - A 5.0% FAR INCREASE (26% TOTAL OVERAGE) REVISED BUILDING COVERAGE NUMBERS: ORIGINAL: 270 S.F. OVERAGE REVISED: 183 S.F. OVERAGE REDUCTION OF 86 S.F. (32% LESS) REVISED ASK WOULD BE: - A 6.8% BUILDING COVERAGE OVERAGE AREA REMOVED FROM ORIGINAL REQUESTAREA REMOVED FROM ORIGINAL REQUEST 24'-2" 23'-8" 23'-2" 1'-0" 22'-5"1'-3" 2'-6" 2'-1"2'-4 1/4" 2'-6" 18'-0" 17'-8" WALL LEGEND: EXISTING TO REMAIN NEW WALLS NOT IN SCOPE - NO NEW WORK PROPOSED - GARAGE ROOF PLAN SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"4 25'-2" 24'-5" NEW ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF TO MATCH EXISTING METAL ROOFING TO MATCH EXISTING BOX BAY GARAGE WALLS BELOW SLOPE 8:12 SLOPE 8:12 NEW WALL WITH COMPOSITE SIDING/TRIM TO MATCH DETAILS OF EXISTING BOX BAY AT KITCHEN Project No. Drawn By Checked By Discipline & Drawing Number Drawing Name Project ISSUED FOR OWNER REVIEW 2610 WADDELL RESIDENCE 167 ABINGDON AVE, KENILWORTH, IL 60043 RC KL/KP © 2026 Northworks Architects & Planners - All rights reserved. Any discrepancies shall be reported immediately to the Architect before proceeding. Only figured dimensions should be used. Contractors and fabricators to verify all dimensions on site prior to beginning Work. 04/08/2026 OWNER REVIEW ISSUED DATE ISSUED FORNO. PROFESSIONAL SEAL 05/01/2026 ZONING BOARD REVIEW 06/24/2026 ZONING BOARD REVIEW - REVISED PROPOSED PLANS A1.0 34 + 0' - 0" FIRST FLOOR T.O. SHEATHING - 4' - 6" GRADE + 10' - 4" SECOND FLOOR T.O. SHEATHING + 19' - 8" THIRD FLOOR T.O. SHEATHING - 7' - 11" BASEMENT T.O. SLAB EXISTING - EAST ELEVATION (NO PROPOSED WORK) SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"2EXISTING - SOUTH ELEVATION (NO PROPOSED WORK) SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 8 12 8 12 BEVOLOFQ-18-HL BEVOLOFQ-18-HL EXISTING ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF EXISTING DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS (PAINTED WHITE) EXISTING STONE WINDOW SILLS EXISTING WOOD PANEL BUMP-OUT (PAINTED WHITE) EXISTING STONE STEPS EXISTING - SOUTH ELEVATION (IMAGE) SCALE: NTS3 Project No. Drawn By Checked By Discipline & Drawing Number Drawing Name Project ISSUED FOR OWNER REVIEW 2610 WADDELL RESIDENCE 167 ABINGDON AVE, KENILWORTH, IL 60043 RC KL/KP © 2026 Northworks Architects & Planners - All rights reserved. Any discrepancies shall be reported immediately to the Architect before proceeding. Only figured dimensions should be used. Contractors and fabricators to verify all dimensions on site prior to beginning Work. 04/08/2026 OWNER REVIEW ISSUED DATE ISSUED FORNO. PROFESSIONAL SEAL 05/01/2026 ZONING BOARD REVIEW 06/24/2026 ZONING BOARD REVIEW - REVISED EXISTING - SOUTH AND EAST ELEVATIONS EX2.1 35 EXISTING - WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"2EXISTING - NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 + 0' - 0" FIRST FLOOR T.O. SHEATHING - 4' - 6" GRADE + 10' - 4" SECOND FLOOR T.O. SHEATHING + 19' - 8" THIRD FLOOR T.O. SHEATHING - 7' - 11" BASEMENT T.O. SLAB 8 12 8 12 BEVOLOFQ-18-HL BEVOLOFQ-18-HL EXISTING ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF EXISTING DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS (PAINTED WHITE) EXISTING STONE WINDOW SILLS EXISTING WOOD PANEL BUMP-OUT (PAINTED WHITE) EXISTING STONE STEPS EXISTING - NORTH ELEVATION (IMAGE 2) SCALE: NTS4 EXISTING - NORTH ELEVATION (IMAGE 1) SCALE: NTS3 Project No. Drawn By Checked By Discipline & Drawing Number Drawing Name Project ISSUED FOR OWNER REVIEW 2610 WADDELL RESIDENCE 167 ABINGDON AVE, KENILWORTH, IL 60043 RC KL/KP © 2026 Northworks Architects & Planners - All rights reserved. Any discrepancies shall be reported immediately to the Architect before proceeding. Only figured dimensions should be used. Contractors and fabricators to verify all dimensions on site prior to beginning Work. 04/08/2026 OWNER REVIEW ISSUED DATE ISSUED FORNO. PROFESSIONAL SEAL 05/01/2026 ZONING BOARD REVIEW 06/24/2026 ZONING BOARD REVIEW - REVISED EXISTING - NORTH AND WEST ELEVATIONS EX2.2 36 SOUTH ELEVATIONA EAST ELEVATIONB NORTH ELEVATIONC WEST ELEVATIOND EXISTING - GARAGE ELEVATIONS SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 8 12 8 12 BEVOLOFQ-18-HL BEVOLOFQ-18-HL 20'-0" MAX. ALLOWABLE HEIGHT EXISTING ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF EXISTING - GARAGE SOUTH AND WEST ELEVATION (IMAGE) SCALE: NTS2 EXISTING WOOD PANEL BUMP-OUT (PAINTED WHITE) 19'-1 5/8" EXISTING GARAGE HEIGHT Project No. Drawn By Checked By Discipline & Drawing Number Drawing Name Project ISSUED FOR OWNER REVIEW 2610 WADDELL RESIDENCE 167 ABINGDON AVE, KENILWORTH, IL 60043 RC KL/KP © 2026 Northworks Architects & Planners - All rights reserved. Any discrepancies shall be reported immediately to the Architect before proceeding. Only figured dimensions should be used. Contractors and fabricators to verify all dimensions on site prior to beginning Work. 04/08/2026 OWNER REVIEW ISSUED DATE ISSUED FORNO. PROFESSIONAL SEAL 05/01/2026 ZONING BOARD REVIEW 06/24/2026 ZONING BOARD REVIEW - REVISED EXISTING - GARAGE ELEVATIONS EX2.3 37 PROPOSED - WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"2 8 12 PROPOSED - GARAGE ELEVATIONS SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"3 8 12 PROPOSED - NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 + 0' - 0" FIRST FLOOR T.O. SHEATHING - 4' - 6" GRADE + 10' - 4" SECOND FLOOR T.O. SHEATHING + 19' - 8" THIRD FLOOR T.O. SHEATHING - 7' - 11" BASEMENT T.O. SLAB 8 12 8 12 SOUTH ELEVATIONA EAST ELEVATIONB NORTH ELEVATIONC WEST ELEVATIOND BEVOLOFQ-18-HL BEVOLOFQ-18-HL 20'-0" MAX. ALLOWABLE HEIGHT BEVOLOFQ-18-HL BEVOLOFQ-18-HL 4 12 6'-4" 15'-4 1/4" 17'-8" METAL ROOFING TO MATCH EXISTING BOX BAY METAL ROOFING TO MATCH EXISTING BOX BAY DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS TO MATCH EXISTING COMPOSITE TRIM DETAILED TO MATCH EXISTING BOX BAY COMPOSITE TRIM DETAILED TO MATCH EXISTING BOX BAY BRICK BASEBRICK BASE METAL ROOFING TO MATCH EXISTING BOX BAY WHITE PAINTED CARRIAGE STYLE GARAGE DOOR WITH GLASS LITES DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS TO MATCH EXISTING ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF TO MATCH EXISTING BEVOLOFQ-18-HL 19'-3 5/8" TOTAL PROPOSED HEIGHT Project No. Drawn By Checked By Discipline & Drawing Number Drawing Name Project ISSUED FOR OWNER REVIEW 2610 WADDELL RESIDENCE 167 ABINGDON AVE, KENILWORTH, IL 60043 RC KL/KP © 2026 Northworks Architects & Planners - All rights reserved. Any discrepancies shall be reported immediately to the Architect before proceeding. Only figured dimensions should be used. Contractors and fabricators to verify all dimensions on site prior to beginning Work. 04/08/2026 OWNER REVIEW ISSUED DATE ISSUED FORNO. PROFESSIONAL SEAL 05/01/2026 ZONING BOARD REVIEW 06/24/2026 ZONING BOARD REVIEW - REVISED EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - PROPOSED SUNROOM ADDITION A2.0 38 6 Standards for Variations For Zoning Variations, please respond to the applicable standards listed below in the written explanation of the request. (1) The Board shall not grant a variance from any of the regulations of Chapter 153: Zoning, as authorized by Subsection 153.244(D), unless it shall make a finding of fact, based upon the evidence presented to it in a particular case, that: (a) In the case of property the principal use of which is for business purposes, the property in qu estion cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations applicable to the district in which it is located; (b) The plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances; and (c) The variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. (2) For the purposes of supplementing the above standards, the Board, in making its determination whether the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances and whether the variation, if granted, may alter the essential character of the locality, shall take into consideration the following factors to the extent they are established by the evidence and deemed relevant by the Board: (a) The particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical condition of the property in question would result in a practical difficulty or particular hardship upon the applicant for the variation, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulation were enforced; (b) The conditions upon which the application for variation is based would not be applicable generally to other property in the same district; (c) The request for the variation is not based exclusively upon the desire to make more money out of the property; (d) The alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property; (e) The variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties or substantially increase the runoff of storm water onto adjacent properties or public streets, or substantially increase congestion in the public streets or increase the danger of fire or otherwise endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. (3) For the purpose of further supplementing the above standards and factors in connection with requests for variations from the requirements of Section 153.068, the Board, in making its determination, may also take into consideration the following factors, among other factors deemed relevant by the Board, to the extent they are established by the evidence and deemed relevant by the Board: (a) The effects of the proposed construction on the overall appearance of the size and bulk of the existing structures on the property when viewed from streets abutting the property and from adjacent properties; (b) The proximity of the proposed construction to streets abutting the property and to adjacent properties; (c) The relative proximity of the proposed construction to streets abutting the property and to adjacent properties in comparison with the relative proximity of existing structures on other properties in the same vicinity; (d) The magnitude of the variation requested in absolute terms and in proportion to the floor area and/or impervious surfaces allowed if the strict letter of the regulation were enforced; 39 7 (e) The need for other variations in connection with the proposed construction and the nature and extent of those other variations; (f) The need for the variation to allow the owner or occupant of the property to make reasonable use of a structure, the design of which otherwise fails to conform to generally accepted or prevailing standards of the Village for the use and enjoyment of a structure as a residence for a family; (g) The efficient and advantageous use of existing structures and the degree to which the proposed construction makes efficient, economical, and advantageous use of existing and proposed floor area and impervious surfaces; and (h) The reasonableness of the variation requested in light of the purposes served by the proposed construction and the design problems of the existing structure intended to be alleviated by the proposed construction. (4) For purposes of supplementing the above standards and factors in connection with requests for variations from the requirements of Section 153.067, the Board, in making its determination, may also take into consideration the following factors, among other factors deemed relevant by the Board, to the extent they are established by the evidence and deemed relevant by the Board: (a) The height and location of existing and proposed structures on the property and adjacent properties; (b) The need to maintain the height of the proposed structure in relation to the height of an existing structure in order to enable the existing and proposed structures to present a pleasing appearance reflecting architectural integrity and harmony among separate structural elements; and (c) The need to maintain a particular height of a proposed addition to a structure in order to observe sound structural design and accommodate good building practices in the construction of the proposed addition. (5) For the purpose of supplementing the above standards with regard to variations for signs, the Board, in making its determination shall take into consideration the following factors to the extent they are established by the evidence and deemed relevant to the Board: a) In the case of a commercial message sign, strict application of the Kenilworth Sign Code would render the applicant unable to yield a reasonable return from its property. b) The variation will not endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood; c) The variation would not result in a sign or master sign plan as required by the Kenilworth Sign Code that: 1. Would not be in harmony with the general and specific purposes for which the Kenilworth Sign Code and the provisions from which a variation is sought were enacted; 2. Would be materially detrimental to the public welfare or materially injurious to the enjoyment, use, development, or value of adjacent property or improvements; 3. Would substantially increase congestion in the public streets due to parking or traffic; 4. Would create an unnecessary distraction to vehicle and pedestrian traffic; and 5. Would result in a sign that is not aesthetically consistent with the environment, or not proportional or architecturally compatible with existing land uses and buildings and with any adjacent residential neighborhood. 40 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE KENILWORTH ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS HELD IN THE VILLAGE HALL, 419 RICHMOND ROAD, KENILWORTH, ILLINOIS AT 7:30 P.M. MONDAY, AUGUST 2, 2004 PURSUANT TO WRITTEN NOTICE TO EACH MEMBER. DRAFT The meeting was called to order by Chairman Robert Cunningham and upon roll call the following persons were present: Present: Robert Cunningham Chairman Kathy Wilson Member Cary Johnson Member Clif Weaver Member Dr. James Pollock Member Frank Cavalier Member J. Jeffrey Geldermann Member Absent: none Others Village Max Slankard Village Manager Officials Present: Barbara Adams Village Legal Counsel Susan Criezis Building Department Coordinator Others Present: Healy Rice 934 Elmwood, Wilmette James McClamroch Jr. 551 Brier Street Kristin McClamroch 551 Brier Street Agnes Prindiville 519 Warwick Road James Prindiville 519 Warwick Road George Luscombe 527 Warwick Road Jo Ellen Luscombe 527 Warwick Road Sharon Busby 623 Abbotsford Road Mike Busby 623 Abbotsford Road Nigel Stroud 623 Abbotsford Road Bob Spindell 326 Essex Road Ed Twohey Burns & Beyerl Jennifer Knapp Burns & Beyerl Holly Wallace 167 Abingdon Avenue Steve Wallace 167 Abingdon Avenue Mike Hannafan 547 Roslyn Road Peter Dyson 547 Roslyn Road Bob Drew 163 Abingdon Avenue The Chairman swore in those in attendance, and announced the cases that were before the Board this evening. The first matter before the Board was an application by James and Kristin McClamroch Jr. for a variation to construct a two-story rear addition for the property located at 551 Brier Street, which will exceed the maximum allowable floor area by 187.18 square feet (6.9%). This matter was previously tabled by the Zoning Board. The Chairman asked Ms. Rice to address the Board regarding changes to the proposed addition since it was last tabled by the Board. Ms. Rice advised that since the matter was last tabled, the request has been reduced by 75.87 square feet by reducing the overall length of the building by 1.5 feet. Further, the mudroom was reconfigured to reduce the square footage by 21.68 square feet. She noted that 41 the roof peak has also been lowered by 2’4”. In total, the square footage change has been a reduction from 9.7% to 6.9%. The Chairman asked Ms. Rice what made the petitioner’s circumstances unique. Ms. Rice replied that there is no second bathroom on the second floor, and the bedrooms and closets are extremely small. The home also does not have a family room. She noted that while not every home has a family room, most do. The Chairman asked what is unique about this home that is not applicable to every other house in the neighborhood. Mr. McClamroch replied that the Zoning Board had approved a number of similar requests in the neighborhood. The Chairman replied that each case is different, and is evaluated based upon its unique circumstances. Mrs. McClamroch stated that none of the homes in the neighborhood originally had family rooms. The Chairman stated his concern regarding the number of variances that have been approved in that area, and the number of petitioners who feel as if that entitles them to a variance. He asked what made their situation unique. Ms. Rice replied that the family has needs, and they have scaled back their request to the minimum size that is feasible. Board Member Wilson asked if the new proposed stairway dictates a certain dimension. Ms. Rice replied that it does. Board Member Pollock commented that the petitioner has done what they felt the Board had wanted. Board Member Geldermann noted that the applicant was within three square feet of the maximum building coverage. Board Member Weaver indicated his concern about the justification for the variance as well. He felt that there were some definite problems that probably justified some expansion, but was not sure what the limit on that expansion should be. He indicated a concern about petitioners beginning the process with larger requests, and then reducing them over time, to the point where the Zoning Board feels worn down. He felt if tonight’s request was heard at the time of initial review, the nature of the discussion would probably be different. Board Member Cavalier responded that if that was the way the Board felt, then it should have killed the project at the last meeting. Ms. Rice advised that she would be happy to submit a furnishing plan, which might better demonstrate that the request is as minimal as the petitioner can make it. There being no further comments, Board Member Cavalier made a motion to approve the variance as requested. Board Member Johnson seconded the motion, and the following vote was taken: AYE: Cavalier, Johnson, Pollock, Wilson, Weaver, Geldermann and Cunningham NAY: none ABSENT: none Chairman Cunningham announced the motion carried 7 to 0, and the variance request was approved. The next matter before the Board was an application by Peter and Barbara Dyson for a variation from Article 6.6(c) of the Zoning Ordinance, in the Residential R-1 District, commonly known as 515 Roslyn Road. The Chairman explained that this is one of the more interesting requests that has come before the Board in quite some time. The requested variance relates to parking, and is subject to the same standards as any other variance request. He noted that the situation pertains to two contiguous residential lots that are held in common ownership. The petitioner wishes to construct a coach home on the adjacent lot, in which he then proposes to park vehicles that he owns. He asked Mr. Dyson if that was correct. Mr. Dyson replied that both parcels are owned by land trusts, with the same beneficiaries. Ms. Criezis noted that documentation submitted by the petitioner indicated that each parcel was owned by a separate trust number, with the same beneficiaries. The Chairman asked the Village Legal Counsel to explain the background on this petition. Ms. Adams explained that this matter had been presented to the Village staff for interpretation, given the unusual circumstances. She advised that the review had included the definition of lot, the number of principal structures, and whether this involved a single lot or not. She stated that the petitioner had considered four options. She noted that the petitioner could choose to proceed on the basis of both lots being a single lot. In that case, the petitioner could build an accessory structure, subject to a height limitation of 20 feet, and subject to siting it in the rear yard. Because of that, treating it in such a manner 42 would have required variances. Or, the petitioner could have approached the matter as two principal structures on a single lot, which would also have required a variance, one which would not have been appealing to the Village. Or, given that the two lots have historically been separate lots of record, the petitioner could treat the lots as two separate lots with two separate principal structures. If this approach was taken, it would require variance from the requirements of Article 6.6(c). Article 6.6(c) provides, in part, that “No such parking space may be rented to or set aside for use by any person not a resident on the premises, except that space for not more than one vehicle in a private garage may be rented or set aside for use by any person not a resident of the premises.” She noted that it appears that Article 6.6(c) was intended to address issues relating to New Trier student parking. She advised that the petitioner has chosen to proceed with the latter option. The Chairman advised that this comes to the Board because the petitioner is not intending to reside on the lot to be developed, as he resides on the lot next door. Mr. Dyson advised that one of his children may reside in the new structure at some point, but that otherwise, it would not be rented out to anyone else. He stated that the structure was originally going to be a cottage for guests and have space for an art studio. Renting the home to others was not considered and will not be. Board Member Geldermann commented that this is not the issue, the issue is parking, and in his opinion, the Zoning Ordinance does not take into account a situation like this. The requirements of Article 6.6(c) are not based on ownership; it is based upon place of residence, which he felt was not correct. The Chairman advised that he felt the intent of this Article was to deal with the New Trier issue, and the language does focus on the term resident, and not owner. Board Member Weaver commented that the definition based upon residence is not unusual at all, and he was not familiar with any subdivision Ordinance in other communities that would allow a free standing garage on a lot without a principal structure. Board Member Geldermann replied that he felt the Article should be re-written. Board Member Weaver stated that the idea of free floating garages available for sale was a bad precedent. Ms. Criezis stated that the structure as proposed is a two bedroom, two bath principal structure. Board Member Weaver replied that, by his own admission, the petitioner will park cars there, and that he could sell the structure in the future. The Chairman returned discussion to the central issue, which is the parking of vehicles on a lot other than where you live. Board Member Pollock asked why the lots could not be merged. The Chairman replied that his understanding is that the petitioner would then be unable to construct the structure to the desired height. Board Member Johnson asked for clarification that this is a principal structure. The Chairman advised that it was, as it has its own separate lot of record. The Chairman advised that the problem he is having is determining what is unique about the situation. The petitioner owns both lots, and could do many different things. If there is not something that is unique that would allow the Zoning Board to act, then the proper body to consult would be the Board of Trustees to change the Zoning Ordinance. Board Member Geldermann felt that it was unique situation, given the common ownership of the adjoining lots and this particular parking issue, and the petitioner’s desire to not maximize the development of the lot. Mr. Dyson stated that he could build a much larger structure on the lot than what is proposed. He noted that his property had a landscape plan done by Jens Jensen, and that his home is a George Maher home, and expressed doubt that many persons would consider building such a small structure on a full lot. Board Member Weaver commented that if a variance were granted for a garage, then why couldn’t he also construct a garage and rent the spaces out. Board Member Geldermann replied that the issue in this case is the owner’s use of his own property, not the renting of spaces to others. Board Member Weaver commented that the petitioner is trying to build a coach home. He noted the petitioners statement regarding a “small residence”. He did not understand what was driving this issue, and asked the petitioner why he would not consolidate the lots and construct the coach home as an accessory structure. Mr. Dyson replied that the simple answer is that his home is forty-seven feet tall; the height limit for an accessory structure is twenty feet. He has struggled for how to create the second structure in such a way that it works aesthetically as it relates to his house, and to design and construct it 43 in such a way that it looks good for the neighborhood. He advised that he and his architects looked at many height options, and the need for proper proportions dictates the need for a structure taller than twenty feet. The Chairman replied he thought the explanation was wonderful, but wasn’t sure it was on point. He was concerned that approval of the request would create a fairly major change in the use of a residential lot. He expressed concern regarding setting a precedent where others could purchase residential lots and use them as garages. Board Member Geldermann responded that he would not grant a variance in such a situation, noting that in this case we are dealing with an adjoining property owner. The Chairman asked what was unique about this request. Board Member Geldermann reiterated that the Board has never seen a request such as this before, which makes it unique, and that this is a unique set of circumstances. Board Member Wilson agreed that she could not imagine others in town facing this issue. Mr. Mike Hannafan, 547 Roslyn Road, commented that he has reviewed the plans, and the coach house looks great, and if the Dyson’s were to live there forever, it would be great. However, he expressed his concern that the structure is essentially a garage with a residence as an after-thought, which could be sold off. He thinks it would look beautiful, but is concerned with the precedent. Board Member Cavalier stated that anybody could come in to the Village and submit this structure plan for a building permit, and it would be summarily granted. On that basis, he questioned why the Zoning Board is in turmoil on this request. Board Member Weaver expressed his concern regarding the renting of parking spaces. Board Member Geldermann stated that is not the issue. Village Legal Counsel Adams advised that the key to this issue could be the conditions of approval imposed by the Board. Board Member Geldermann replied that he felt the variance, if granted, should be limited to the current property owner. Board Member Pollock suggested that any new owner of the structure would likely convert the garage space to a different use, not keep the garage spaces. Board Member Johnson agreed, advising that he felt a new owner would buy it, convert it, do an addition, and it would be a house like any other. The Chairman asked if there was any additional public comment. Ms. Agnes Prindiville, 519 Warwick Road, asked if the lots were combined, could Mr. Dyson build this. The Chairman replied that he could not without a variance. She replied that she was not so much in favor of this. Mr. George Luscombe, 527 Warwick, stated that it this request were not conditioned on Mr. Dyson’s ownership, he would be much more concerned. He further added that he felt it important that, if approved, sufficient conditions be imposed regarding the adjacent common ownership and other unique elements to preclude this from being precedental in other situations. Board Member Johnson asked the question what is a resident? The Chairman replied that there is significant legal precedent regarding definition of resident, and advised that it relates to who resides on a parcel, not who owns it. He further noted that, under tax law, you can only have one place of residence. The Chairman further commented that he felt conditions could be created for approval that would be tightly defined and time limited. Board Member Weaver replied that may be so, but he did not feel such language could be drafted tonight. The Chairman advised that that proper course of action may be to have Mr. Dyson’s representatives and the Village Legal Counsel draft language regarding conditions of approval, and return it to the Zoning Board for consideration. He agreed that he too was concerned about drafting language this evening. Ms. Adams clarified that she would envision the factors including the Dyson’s continuing beneficial ownership of both lots; that the Dyson’s be required to reside in one or the other of the structures; and that the vehicles garaged in the new structure be only those under the beneficial ownership of the Dyson's. Board Member Weaver made a motion to direct Village Legal Counsel to prepare written conditions of approval embodying the concepts just annunciated, to meet with Mr. Dyson to achieve mutual agreement, and return this matter to the Zoning Board for final consideration at its next meeting. Board Member Geldermann seconded the motion, and the following vote was taken: AYE: Weaver, Geldermann, Cavalier, Johnson, Pollock, Wilson and Cunningham NAY: none ABSENT: none 44 Chairman Cunningham announced the motion carried 7 to 0, and the variance request was tabled. The next matter before the Board was an application by Michael and Sharon Busby for a variation to construct a one story rear addition which will have a side yard setback 5.69 feet less than the required 10 foot setback and a roof overhang which will project more than 12” into the side yard setback in the Residential R-1 District, commonly known as 623 Abbotsford Road. Mr. Nigel Stroud presented the request of the petitioners. The petitioners are proposing to enlarge the existing kitchen with an eating area. The addition would be a one-story addition to the rear of the existing kitchen. The home, constructed in the 1890’s, is currently non-conforming with respect to the sideyard setback on the north side of the lot. The petitioner proposes to extend the depth of the home, observing the existing wall line, which is 4.31 feet off of the lot line. If the variation were not granted, the new kitchen area would have to be offset by 5.69 feet, which would create essentially two separated rooms which would not function properly. Mr. Busby added that they have spoken to their neighbor to the north, who is supportive of their request. The Chairman advised that it seemed to him to be a unique circumstance, and one which the Zoning Board has seen before. Board Member Geldermann added that it is only a one-story rear addition, which will minimize its impact. Board Member Weaver made a motion to approve the variance as requested. Board Member Cavalier seconded the motion, and the following vote was taken: AYE: Weaver, Cavalier, Geldermann, Pollock, Wilson and Cunningham NAY: Johnson ABSENT: none Chairman Cunningham announced the motion carried 6 to 1, and the variance request was approved. The next matter before the Board was an application by Scott and Holly Wallace for a variation to construct a detached garage addition, a roofed front entry and rear bay window addition which will exceed the maximum floor area by 1,069.48 square feet, the maximum lot coverage by 181.69 square feet, and will have a front yard setback 3.5 feet less than the required 40 foot setback in the Residential R- 2 District, commonly known as 167 Abingdon Avenue. Mr. Ed Twohey of Burns & Beyerl presented the petitioner’s request. Mr. Twohey commented that they are seeking three minor variances. He first reviewed the request for covering the front porch. The existing house has a concrete stoop. They are proposing to cover the entry to reduce exposure to the elements, which equates to 60.72 square feet of floor area. He noted that the front of the home is located at the front setback, and the proposed stoop would project 3.5 feet into the required front yard. Mr. Twohey noted the many other covered front porches along the street. The Chairman noted that the Board’s criteria includes an evaluation of uniqueness of circumstance and hardship. In total, the proposed floor area of the home, if this variance were granted, would be 26% over the Village’s limit. He advised that the Board members are familiar with the requested variance, and asked that Mr. Twohey address the uniqueness issue. Mr. Twohey replied that two of the proposed additions to floor area (front porch and bay window) only propose to cover already existing surface. He also referenced the petitioner’s desire for a covered entry. The Chairman replied that the Board has considered and rejected other such requests for covered porches, even those as small as three feet. Mr. Scott Wallace addressed the Board. He stated that what makes their situation unique is that the home is an existing non-conformity for floor area, so any alteration to the footprint requires a variance. They do not have a covered front entry, while almost every other home on the block does have one. The proposed bay window addition does not touch the ground, and does not result in the creation of space that one could even stand on. Lastly, the current two car garage is so tight that they cannot open and close car doors without dinging the other vehicle. Mrs. Wallace also advised that the covered front porch is not projecting out to cover the steps. 45 The Chairman replied that while everything sounds very nice, the Board is limited in their scope. The fact that the home is currently over does not give the Board a new baseline figure to work from. He did not know how to find anything unique about this request. Board Member Geldermann noted that he was not concerned with the bay window request, and noted the investment the petitioner is making in remodeling the home. Board Member Cavalier stated that it was hard to see the hardship of a petitioner with a 5,000 square foot home. While the garage may be small, many in the community park in garages just as small. Mr. Wallace commented that he felt the zoning rules were arcane, and noted that no one can live under any of the spaces proposed for creation. The Chairman indicated that he had not yet heard anything unique about the plight of the owner. Board Member Pollock noted the concerns in the community regarding tear downs, and the petitioner is spending a lot of money to update an older home. He felt it made no sense to reject these proposed additions. The Chairman asked the opinion of Board members on the different elements. Board Member Geldermann replied that he is in favor of the garage and bay window, but not the covered porch. The Chairman asked for discussion on the kitchen bay window. Board Members Geldermann and Wilson felt the proposed bay, at the back of the home, was invisible and minimal, and they were supportive. Board Member Cavalier failed to see the merit. Board Member Weaver could not see the justification for any of the requested variances. Board Member Johnson advised that he was not supportive of the porch or bay request, but he felt that the garage request was reasonable. Concluding the discussion, the Chairman called for a vote on each element. Board Member Geldermann made a motion to approve the variances requested that related to the kitchen bay window addition. Board Member Wilson seconded the motion, and the following vote was taken: AYE: Geldermann, Wilson and Pollock NAY: Johnson, Cavalier, Weaver and Cunningham ABSENT: none Chairman Cunningham announced the motion failed 3 to 4, and the variances requested were denied. Board Member Weaver made a motion to deny the requested variances relating to the covered front entry, inclusive of front yard setback, floor area and lot coverage. Board Member Cavalier seconded the motion, and the following vote was taken: AYE: Weaver, Cavalier, Geldermann, Wilson, Johnson and Cunningham NAY: Pollock ABSENT: none Chairman Cunningham announced the motion carried 6 to 1, and the variances requested were denied. Next, Board Member Geldermann made a motion to approve the variance request relating to the replacement and expansion of the detached garage. Board Member Johnson seconded the motion, and the following vote was taken: AYE: Geldermann, Johnson and Pollock NAY: Weaver, Cavalier, Wilson and Cunningham ABSENT: none Chairman Cunningham announced the motion failed to carry 3 to 4, and the variances requested were denied. There being no business, Board Member Weaver made a motion for adjournment, which was seconded by Board Member Pollock and unanimously approved. 46 _______________________________________________ Max Slankard, Secretary 47 i I NOTICE OF A SPECIAL MEETING Notice is hereby given of a meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals of the Village of Kenilworth to be held at 7: 30 P.M., Monday, August 2, 2004 at the Village Hall, 419 Richmond Road, Kenilworth. The agenda for the meeting is as follows: I. Call to Order and Roll Call II. Approval of Minutes of the July 1, 2004 Meeting III. Public Hearings Regarding the following cases: A. James and Kristin McClamroch, Jr. have made application for a variation to construct a two story rear addition which will exceed the maximum allowable floor area by 187. 18 square feet ( 6. 9%) in the Residential R-4 District, commonly known as 551 Brier Street, Kenilworth, Illinois. qq,. 09egoU tB. Peter and Barbara Dyson made application for a variation from Article 6. 6( c): No such parking space may be rented to or set aside for use by any person not a resident on the premises, except that space for not more than one vehicle in a private garage may be rented or set aside for use by any person not a resident ofthepremises, in the Residential R-1 District, commonly known as 515 Roslyn Road, Kenilworth, Illinois. C. Michael and Sharon Busby have made application for a variation to construct a one story rear addition which will have a side yard setback 5. 69 feet less than the required 10 foot setback( 56%) and a roof overhang which will project more than 12" into the side yard setback in the Residential R- 1 District, commonly known as 623 Abbotsford Road, Kenilworth, Illinois. M- nUW D. Scott and Holly Wallace have made application for a detached garage addition, a roofed front entry and rear bay window addition which will exceed the maximum floor area by 1, 069. 48 square feet( 26. 2%), the maximum lot coverage by 181. 69 square feet( 6. 6%) and will have a front yard setback 3. 5 feet less than the required 40 foot setback( 8. 75%) in the Residential R-2 District, commonly known as 167 Abingdon Avenue, Kenilworth, Illinois. The Village of Kenilworth is subject to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Individuals with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting and who require certain accommodations in order to allow them to observe and/ or participate in this meeting or who have questions regarding the accessibility of the meeting or the facilities are requested to contact Max Slankard at 847- 251- 1666 promptly to allow the Village to make reasonable accommodations for those persons. 48 RE: 167 ABINGDON July 9, 2004 KENILWORTH, ILLINOIS PAGE 1 ZONING REVIEW PROJECT NO. 2004-20 SUMMARY 1. Zoning District: R- 2 2. 5. 1 / Occupancy: Single- family dwelling 3. 5. 2 / Lot Area: Minimum Allowed 12, 000 SF Existing Area 12, 002. 25 SF 4. 5. 3 / Maximum Height Maximum Allowed 35 Feet or 2 1/ 2 Stories for House 20 FT or 1 1/ 2 Stories at Garage Existing 42 FT Proposed No Change 5. 5. 4 / Maximum Size; Maximum Lot Coverage: a) Maximum Floor Area: Maximum Allowed 4, 080. 54 SF Existing 4, 893. 39 SF Proposed 5, 150.02 SF b) Maximum Building Coverage: Maximum Allowed 2, 720. 36 SF Existing 2, 645. 42 SF Proposed 2, 902. 05 SF c) Other Impervious Surfaces: Maximum Allowed 4, 646. 08 SF Existing 2, 388 SF Proposed 2, 388 SF 49 RE: 167 ABINGDON July 9, 2004 KENILWORTH, ILLINOIS PAGE 2 ZONING REVIEW PROJECT NO. 2004-20 6. 5. 5 / Minimum Size of Principal Building: Minimum Required 2,000 SF Existing 4, 514.74 SF Proposed 4, 591. 02 SF 7. 5. 6 / Minimum Yard Requirements: a) Front Yard: Minimum Required 40 FT Existing 40'- 4" Proposed 36'- 6" b) Side Yard: Minimum Required 8 FT Existing 11'- 10" and 12'- 1" Proposed No Change c) Rear Yard: Minimum Required 32 FT Existing 74'- 10" Proposed 73'- 2" 8. Conclusions: The proposed plans and calculations as submitted by the applicant DOES NOT COMPLY with the Zoning Ordinances of the Village of Kenilworth. a. The total proposed Floor Area of 5, 150. 02 SF exceeds the maximum allowable area of 4, 080. 54 SF by 1, 069.48 SF or 26. 2%. Note that existing area is already non- compliant. b. The proposed Building Coverage of 2, 902. 05 SF exceeds the maximum allowable area of 2, 720. 36 SF by 181. 69 SF or 6. 6%. C. The proposed Front Yard Setback of 36'- 6" does not meet the minimum required setback of 40 feet. File; 2004- 20 50 a7 .9,, VILLAGE OF KENILWORTH ZONING COMPLIANCE WORKSHEET Lot Coverage, Floor Area and Impervious Surface Calculations Completion of these forms is required to allow Village staff to confirm compliance with zoning ordinance requirements for Lot Coverage, Floor Area, Impervious Surface, Yard Setback, and Building Height limitations. This worksheet is required for new buildings, additions, garages and porches. The attached forms incorporate three main components: Section One- Lot Coverage Calculations Section Two- Floor Area Calculations Section Three- Impervious Surfaces Calculations Section Four- Height, Yard Setbacks, Overhangs, Air Conditioning Equipment SECTION ONE— LOT COVERAGE CALCULATIONS Step 1: Lot Area Using a recent Plat of Survey, calculate the area of the lot in square feet. Lot Area= 122 001 •2S Sr Step 2: Maximum Building Coverage Allowed Based on the Lot Area, select the appropriate formula to determine Maximum Building Coverage allowed. For Lot Area 5, 715 sq. ft. or less: maximum allowed=. 30 x Lot Area= For Lot Area 5, 716 sq. ft. to 19, 999 sq. ft.: max. allowed=(. 16 x Lot Area)+ 800= 211 24•2>io SF For Lot Area 20, 000 sq. ft. or more: maximum allowed= . 20 x Lot Area Maximum Building Coverage Allowed= 21120.•bti SFA) Maximum Building Coverage allowed for the lot is reduced by the area of impervious surfaces that exceeds 25% of the Lot Area. (see Section Three, Step 1 & 4) Step 3: Existing Building Coverage Using a Plat of Survey, calculate the area covered by existing buildings, enclosed or roofed porches, balconies and carports. Use the attached worksheets to determine the areas. Existing Building Coverage= 2 r104 S •g2SP Step 4: Proposed Building Coverage Using Site Plan or Floor Plans, calculate the area of proposed new buildings, additions to existing buildings, enclosed or roofed porches, balconies, and carports. Deduct any existing area to be removed. Use the attached worksheets to determine the areas. Proposed Building Covera Step 5: Total Existing& Proposed Building Coverage Add the Existing Building Coverage and the Proposed Building Coverage. 5e 6 ,0 s Total Existing& Proposed Building Covera e= 2/gJS I. 5 IF THE TOTAL EXISTING& PROPOSED BUILDING COVERAGE EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM 6 BUILDING COVERAGE ALLOWED, A ZONING VARIANCE WOULD BE REQUIRED. SF t 51 SECTION ONE — LOT COVERAGE WORKSHEET Building Coverage includes, but is not limited to: All buildings on the lot which are structures that have walls and/ or a roof, such as a principal building and accessory buildings— detached garage, shed, gazebo Area measured to exterior walls at the foundation or near the ground, without regard to overhangingeaves Includes chimneys and bays Includes roofed elements such as porches, open entries and carports Includes second floor projections and balconies Lot Coverage Worksheet is also used for Existing& Proposed First Floor Areas Sketch or Block Diagram of Existing & Proposed Building Coverage: 75'. CO' i LINEoF I 7 E EXISTING- I PIzoPoSED I I I I I I i I 3I I I 15tro mp P 4 I 11 SCAPE D I i aao 9Cy f i I F CISLIn16;-; I o• 4 I i c iatMPt ____ Ik3 i walk 1 walk 4 walk 2 I I I I AC rp. e NIXN 52 Existing Building Coverage PIECE NO. DIMENSIONS AREA CIO W TOTA 2 y S Proposed Building Coverage PIECE NO. DIMENSIONS AREA 11) it 2b1— ol X 25 2 . a 53 SECTION TWO— FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS Step 1: Maximum Floor Area Allowed Based on the Lot Area, use the following formula to determine the Maximum Floor Area allowed. Maximum Allowed= 24 x Lot Area)+ 1, 200=' 7tV$ o .r74 SF Also, the Maximum Floor Area allowed for all properties cannot exceed . 45 X Lot Area, ro. c} oj. of SF Maximum Floor Area Allowed = 4 t O$ O.=, } SF Step 2: Existing Floor Area Using a Plat of Survey or existing Floor Plans, calculate the area of the First Floor& Second Floor of existing buildings, enclosed or roofed porches, balconies and carports. Use the attached worksheets to determine the areas. Existing First Floor Area= 2. to 4S A 2 SF Existing Second Floor Area— 2. SF Total Existing Floor Area= ? M I • SF Step3: Proposed Floor Area Using the proposed Site Plan and Floor Plans, calculate the area of the First Floor& Second Floor of the proposed buildings, enclosed or roofed porches, balconies and carports. Deduct any existing areas to be removed. Use the attached worksheets to determine the areas. Proposed First Floor Area= 2 i(.• e Proposed Second Floor Area= o C. 41AfJb 1=, Total Proposed Floor Area Step 4: Total Existing& Proposed Floor Area Add the Existing Floor Area and the Proposed Floor Area. 4— Total Existing& Proposed Floor Area= r 2 Sir IF THE TOTAL EXISTING& PROPOSED FLOOR AREA EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA ALLOWED, A ZONING VARIANCE WOULD BE REQUIRED. 54 TOTAL SECTION TWO— FLOOR AREA WORKSHEET First Floor Area: Use the Lot Coverage Worksheet for Existing& Proposed First Floor Areas Second Floor Area includes, but is not limited to: Second Floor areas of all principal buildings on the lot, other than half stories above the first story Area measured to exterior face of exterior walls, without deduction for hallways, stairwells, shafts, atria and similar spaces Area includes that portion of any half story that constitutes the second story of a building( other than an accessory structure) in which the vertical distance from the finished floor of such second story to the bottom edge of the roof rafters, dormer rafters or ceilingjoists above such finished floor equals or exceeds 5 feet Includes chimneys and bays Includes enclosed or covered porches, decks and balconies Basement Floor Area includes: Portion of the basement of any building that is designed and constructed primarily for, or is used primarily for, the storage or parking of automobiles Sketch or Block Diagram of Existing & Proposed Second Floor Area: 55 Existing Second Floor Area PIECE NO. DIMENSIONS AREA N o G* A1j6t 7v TI, dotL v co • ? titi 7. 5 7 TOTAL Proposed Second Floor Area PIECE NO. DIMENSIONS AREA 1 o CIk40N Es, - ro -t, 001Z Pa2 A . TOTAL 56 SECTION THREE— IMPERVIOUS SURFACES CALCULATIONS Step 1: Maximum Impervious Surfaces Allowed Based on the Lot Area, use the following formula to determine the Impervious Surfaces Allowed. Impervious Surfaces Allowed= 25 x LotArea= O O, Cj(o If the Total Existing& Proposed Building Coverage( B) is less than the Maximum Building Coverage Allowed( A), the remaining available Building Coverage area is added to the Impervious Surfaces Allowed above. Maximum Bldg. Coverage Allowed( A)- Total Existing& Proposed Bldg. Coverage( B) from Section One, Step 2) from Section One, Step 5) 2- 12o. 3loSF 081. So5F D 9,CQ,+o 1-. 05"-Add the Impervious Surfaces Allowed and the Building Coverage difference listed above to determine the Total Maximum Impervious Surfaces Allowed. Total Maximum Impervious Surfaces Allowed= 00 . b 5F Step 2: Existing Impervious Surfaces Using a Plat of Survey or field measurements, calculate the area covered by existing Impervious Surfaces other than buildings on the lot. Use the attached worksheets to determine the areas. Existing Impervious SurteStep 3: Proposed Impervious Surfaces Using the proposed Site Plan, calculate the area covered by proposed Impervious Surfaces. Deduct any existing area to be removed. Use the attached worksheets to determine the areas. Proposed Impervious Surfaces= NO 6-jjtd.1Er- Step 4: Total Existing& Proposed Impervious Surfaces Add the Existing Impervious Surfaces and the Proposed Impervious Surfaces, Total Existing& Proposed Impervious Surface = 2 i(o IF THE TOTAL EXISTING& PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS SURFACES EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS SURFACES ALLOWED, A ZONING VARIANCE WOULD BE REQURED. 57 SECTION THREE - IMPERVIOUS SURFACES CALCULATIONS Impervious Surfaces includes, but is not limited to: Any improvements on a lot, not including buildings, that prohibit or substantially retard the drainage of storm water directly into the soil below Includes driveways, sidewalks, open steps, open entry platforms, patios, terraces, paving stones, decks, swimming pools, tennis courts, pergolas, trellises, arbors and similar structures Area measured in square feet of ground coverage Sketch or Block Diagram of Existing & Proposed Impervious Surfaces N o Grkt Nb q L 2 G i z 58 Existing Impervious Surfaces PIECE NO. DIMENSIONS AREA N O C* A-N6,rZ T-b TOTAL Proposed Impervious Surfaces PIECE NO. DIMENSIONS AREA TOTAL 59 SECTION FOUR— BUILDING HEIGHT, YARD SETBACKS, OVERHANGS, and AIR CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT Zoning District Indicate the Zoning District in which the property is located: Height Existing Height: Indicate the vertical distance of the highest existing roof surface, EXIS`CIN fr' as measured from the curb level Proposed Height: Indicate the vertical distance of the highest new roof surface, as measured from the curb level NO 6" Ma 6;,: Setbacks Indicate the minimum horizontal distance between the property line and the nearest projection of the Existing Building: I tl Front Yard SideYard, left side W— to~ Side Yard, right side W— I" Rear Yard jTd Indicate the minimum horizontal distance between the property line and the nearest projection of the Proposed Building or Addition: Front Yard 34t— It p, SideYard, left side I Side Yard, right side 12 Rear Yard Roof Overhang Indicate the maximum dimension of horizontal projection of the roof soffit, eaves, and gutter from the face of the building: r 1 Does any soffit, eave, or gutter project more than 12" into any required yard? r10 Air Conditioning Equipment and Appurtenances Indicate on the drawings the location of air conditioning equipment and other appertenances, condensers, emergency generators, or other similar equipment located outside of the building). Indicate the minimum horizontal distance from the equipmnent to either side lot line: S I I— D 60 PK 0 4 tl G a e 61 Jul , 12 04 11 : 36a Burns & Beyerl 312) 663- 8552 p . 2 APPLICATION FOR VARIATION — KENILWORI' H ZONING BOARD OF APPL/ BLS 0%vncr Information: vy Property Address: II SC t rDN AAINU Home and Woi- k Telephone; Number: C;, Fax and L- mail: ?{` J Ai-ehitect Information: Name, Address, Telephone, Fax &. E- mail: tea U WN AVZ44 ! T T 1a 2_ (( o3• C2 to` 7 ' G1 T W o Grn CJ 1- atw10VId • C-- Wj Attoi- ney Information: Name,, Address, Tclephone, Fax & E- mail: Uatc. Property Acquired by Owvncr: Explanation of Variation Requested:_ f< tfach separate sheet if nece5 ary) Owner' s Signature: 62 Jul 12 04 11 : 36a Burns & Beyerl 312) 663- 9552 p. 3 Burns + Beyerl ARCHITECTS www. bbal. com Ri R r 1U10 SOUTH WABASH. CHICAGO. ILLINOIS 60605 312. 663. 0222 PHONE 312. 663. 9552 FAX July 12, 2004 Building Dep: u- nlcnt village 01 Kenilworth 411) Richmond Road Kenilworth. 11. 60043 De,u' Sir or (Madam: The variation reque< trrl include; a 11: 1111C bay addition, a porch eoverine to an ex slip, cimclele stoup and a caragc rcnov ition. The existing 1- loor area of the 110LISe excccds the allowable fluor area. Thr bay addition at the rear of the house Will increase the FAR by 15. 56 Square feet. At the fiont fa4.adc•., the variation for the purch covering include; a decl-(:(I5C ill the front yard setback to ') 6'- 6" and an increase to FAR and buildinL cu\ Crage. The garage renovatiim results in an increase to building coverage and FAR. Sincerely. Ldward Twohey. A IA cc: I\ 7r. & Mr1 . Scott & Hully Wallace 1' alleii Abiugurr' 111i11- npi4 V211p' 1- UVU2- DS) 09 Ld R 1 nl' I I 63 Jul . 12 04 11 : 37a Burns & Beyerl t3123663- 9552 P . 6 Burns + Beyerl ARCHITECTS ww. steal ccc, A k Aolt 1010 SOUTH WABASH. CHICAGO. ILLINOIS 60605 312. 663. 0272 PHONE 312. 663. 9552 FAX July 12, 2004 Building Deparunent Village Of Kenilworth 419 Richmond Road Kenilworth. IL 60043 Dear Sir or Mariam: The residence at 167 Abingdon is an existing masonry single lamily hvmc. The Variance that we are requesting for this property is to increase the existing building coverage and floor area, as well as dec-case the allowable front ward setback. The Owner' s wish to save the current residence and make improvements to it, rather Than building a new structure which conforms to all current zoning codes, results in a hardship in order to modify the structure. The proposed plan is as follows: 1. Kitchen bay: The rear bay adds 15. 56 square feet of floor area and will conform to the allowable building coverage. It is unseen from the street facade and maintains the required tear yard setback. The bay will 110LISC a tvinduw seat, which will allow For additional scaling at the [ able. 2. Front Portico: The proposed covering at the front entry will add 60. 72 square feet of floor area. In addition to the bay area, the proposed building coverage would also exceed allowable by 1. 34 square feet. The existing house has a concrete stoop with a decorative door surround, which is already allotted for in the impervious surface calculations. The design intent Of this eoveilng 1s to replicate the existim_ surround at the protective covering. Many other residences on lhis street also have this kind of porch covering. 3. Garage Renovation: The current garage, 19'- 6., x 19'- 6,,, is extremely light for two cats and leaves no room for storage of any kind. The garacc renovation at the rear of the property, which adds I41 . 42 syuarC legit, Will create a functional garage and storage space. The proposed renovation makes liule impact on the so-eet facade. The proposed variations is a hardship Ibr the hollowing reasons: I. The hardship has not been created by any puisurt presently Itirvius all inlelesl in d, e pluperty. 2. It will not alter the essential character of the locality. 3. It will be in keeping with the design aesthetic of the existing house. 4. It will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties or Substantially increase the run0lf of stormwater onto adjacent properties or public streets, or substantially increase congestion in the public streets or increase the danger of fireire or otherwise endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. 5. The proposed changes are not based exclusively on the desire to make more money out of the property. Sincere Edward Towhey, AIA wallact Ahmgdn::: 20114. 0, 42 P2004- 00U2- D53d36, doc 64