Agenda & Packet

There will be a special 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: 884 689 349# Zoning Board of Appeals Special Meeting Wednesday, January 21, 2026 at 5:00 p.m. Kenilworth Village Hall, 419 Richmond Road I. Call to Order / Roll Call II. Approval of Minutes A. November 10, 2025 Regular Meeting Minutes III. Public Hearing A. Public Hearing to Consider Variations at 429 Warwick Road Pertaining to: 1. Maximum Building Size (Floor Area) 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 Zoning Board of Appeals Special Meeting 7 Monday, November 10, 2025 8 9 Agenda Item I. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL 10 The meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Kenilworth in the Kenilworth Village Hall, 11 Kenilworth, Illinois was held at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, November 10, 2025. 12 Member Peterson made a motion for Janelle Chalmers to serve as Acting Chair. Member Hinkamp 13 seconded the motion. 14 Acting Chair Chalmers called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. 15 Attendance was as follows: 16 17 Zoning Board of Appeals Members Present: 18 Katherine Peterson Member 19 Eamon Murphy Member 20 Mark Hinkamp Member 21 Jenelle Chalmers Acting Chair 22 Tim Quigley Member 23 Emily Tzur Member 24 25 Zoning Board of Appeals Member Absent: 26 Lori Roeser Member 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 Carol Brobeck Village Planner, Teska Associates 34 Erin Monforti Village Attorney, Ancel Glink 35 Katarzyna Thake Village Manager, Remote 36 37 Others in Attendance: 38 Paige Richards 429 Warwick Rd 39 Quenby Erickson 429 Warwick Rd 40 Jim Janikowski 429 Warwick Rd 41 Jon Biasetti 315 Leicester Rd 42 Joan Callan 315 Leicester Rd 43 2 Village of Kenilworth Zoning Board of Appeals 2 November 10, 2025 2 Justin Libra 310 Raleigh 1 Eric Braun 78 Robsart 2 David Kurlander 310 Raleigh 3 Josh Braude 310 Raleigh 4 Jim Pollock 145 Woodstock Ave 5 Libby Graham 241 Melrose 6 7 Agenda Item II. APPROVAL OF THE OCTOBER 14, 2025 MEETING MINUTES 8 The minutes of the special Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) meeting of October 14, 2025 were presented 9 to the members. Member Murphy recommended minor changes to the minutes. 10 11 Member Peterson made a motion to approve the October 14, 2025, meeting minutes as 12 amended. Member Quigley seconded the motion. 13 14 A roll call vote was taken as follows on the motion: 15 Yea: Peterson, Murphy, Hinkamp, Chalmers, Tzur, Quigley 16 Nay: None 17 Absent: Roeser 18 Abstain: None 19 20 The motion was approved 6-0. 21 22 Agenda Item III. PUBLIC HEARING 23 Acting Chair Chalmers opened the public hearing and swore-in people wishing to speak regarding matters 24 on the agenda. 25 A. Public Hearing to Consider Variations at 78 Robsart Pertaining to: Impervious Surfaces 26 Coverage 27 28 Eric Braun, Chalet, presented the request. Mr. Braun explained that the project has been 29 completed, and it was only later that Mr. Braun learned a variation would be required for 30 the work. This was due to a miscommunication with Village staff. Village Planner Brobeck 31 clarified that the property was over their impervious surface maximum prior to applying for 32 a permit. After the project was completed, Ms. Brobeck noted that there was an additional 33 41 sq. ft. of impervious surface beyond what existed, which would require a variance. Both 34 Mr. Braun and Ms. Brobeck explained that the property is above its permitted maximum 35 due to an abnormally long driveway. 36 37 Member Peterson made a motion to approve the request submitted by the 38 petitioner, Eric Braun, to permit 3,352 sq. ft. of impervious surfaces, which exceeds 39 the maximum permitted of 2,904 sq. ft. by 448 sq. ft. at 78 Robsart Road in 40 accordance with the materials included in this packet. The variation requested by 41 the petitioner shall be granted conditioned upon the petitioner’s strict compliance 42 with the plans included within this packet. Any subsequent revisions to these plans 43 that affect the scope of the variation granted or that the Code Official determines to 44 be a material change will require the petitioner to resubmit an application for the 45 requested variation. Member Murphy seconded the request. 46 47 3 Village of Kenilworth Zoning Board of Appeals 3 November 10, 2025 3 A roll call vote was taken as follows on the motion: 1 Yea: Peterson, Murphy, Hinkamp, Chalmers, Tzur, Quigley 2 Nay: None 3 Absent: Roeser 4 Abstain: None 5 6 The motion was approved 6-0. 7 8 B. Public Hearing to Consider Variations at 310 Raleigh Pertaining to: Off-Street Parking 9 Space in the Front Yard 10 11 Josh Braude, attorney representing the property owner, presented the request. The 12 hardship, Mr. Braude explained, was based on the owners’ occupations as surgeons with a 13 young family, au pair, and nanny. The number of cars in the driveway paired with the 14 urgency for the owners to respond when on-call makes it difficult to quickly exit he further 15 explained. 16 17 Member Hinkamp asked what the gain would be for the family. Mr. Braude responded that 18 it would alleviate stress and reduce the need to shift cars around, saving time. Mr. Hinkamp 19 asked if the condition of the property was known at the time of purchase. Mr. Braude stated 20 that the family’s lives have changed since living in the home. 21 22 Member Quigley clarified that the request was for front yard parking. Ms. Brobeck 23 confirmed. 24 25 Justin Libra, landscape architect for the project, explained that the existing driveway is 12’ 26 wide and cannot accommodate two cars. 27 28 Neighbor, Jim Pollock, asked the ZBA if they wanted the community to resemble a parking 29 lot. Compounding matters, Mr. Pollock shared that the pool at 310 Raleigh is already 10’ 30 from his lot line. 31 32 Resident John Biasetti spoke at length in opposition to the request. Mr. Biasetti stated that 33 many residents have busy lives and young children, and that the applicant’s hardship has 34 been unsubstantiated. 35 36 Joan Callan stated that she believes the engineering plans show a discrepancy between the 37 wall and parking pad. 38 39 Mr. Libra stated that the driveway would be reduced to accommodate the parking pad and 40 that there would be planting beds to improve the appearance. 41 42 After brief discussion, Mr. Braude withdrew the request. 43 44 C. Public Hearing to Consider Variations at 429 Warwick Road Pertaining to: Front Yard and 45 Side Yard Setback (East and West) 46 47 Ms. Brobeck provided an overview of the request for side yard and front yard setbacks. 48 4 Village of Kenilworth Zoning Board of Appeals 4 November 10, 2025 4 Member Murphy noted that the front door of the home is proud of the setback. Owner, 1 Quinby Erickson, responded that they would correct any issues and that they are looking to 2 establish an appropriate footprint. 3 Member Hinkamp expressed concern that the plans did not have adequate detail for the 4 ZBA to act on the request. Member Murphy explained that the additional level of detail 5 would come later in the design process and that this type of request did not warrant more 6 information, such as floor plans. Member Hinkamp responded that his preference would be 7 for the plans to be tighter. 8 9 Neighbor Kevin Lakowski stated his support for the request. 10 11 Member Peterson asked for clarification that the setback would not apply if the new home 12 was torn down and rebuilt. Ms. Brobeck confirmed. 13 14 Member Quigley stated that the front door and chimney would need to be in compliance 15 and within the setback. 16 17 Member Quigley made a motion approve the request submitted by the petitioner, 18 Greenside Design Build LLC, on behalf of owner Chicago Title Land Trust Co., to 19 permit construction of a single-family residence which is 2 ft. closer to the west side 20 lot line than the minimum required setback of 10 ft., and a total side yard setback of 21 16 ft., which is 6 ft. 6 in less than required at 429 Warwick Road in accordance with 22 the materials included in this packet. The variation requested by the petitioner shall 23 be granted conditioned upon the petitioner’s strict compliance with the plans 24 included within this packet. Any subsequent revisions to these plans that affect the 25 scope of the variation granted or that the Code Official determines to be a material 26 change will require the petitioner to resubmit an application for the requested 27 variation. Member Hinkamp seconded the request. 28 29 A roll call vote was taken as follows on the motion: 30 Yea: Peterson, Murphy, Hinkamp, Chalmers, Tzur, Quigley 31 Nay: None 32 Absent: Roeser 33 Abstain: None 34 35 The motion was approved 6-0. 36 37 38 Member Quigley made a motion approve the request, with conditions, submitted 39 by the petitioner, Greenside Design Build LLC, on behalf of owner Chicago Title Land 40 Trust Co., to permit construction of a single-family residence which is 2 ft. closer to 41 the east side lot line than the minimum required setback of 10 ft., and a total side 42 yard setback of 16 ft., which is 6 ft. 6 in less than required at 429 Warwick Road in 43 accordance with the materials included in this packet and on the condition that the 44 chimney must adhere to the aforementioned setback. The variation requested by 45 the petitioner shall be granted conditioned upon the petitioner’s strict compliance 46 with the plans included within this packet. Any subsequent revisions to these plans 47 that affect the scope of the variation Page 56 of 60 granted or that the Code Official 48 5 Village of Kenilworth Zoning Board of Appeals 5 November 10, 2025 5 determines to be a material change will require the petitioner to resubmit an 1 application for the requested variation. Member Hinkamp seconded the request. 2 3 A roll call vote was taken as follows on the motion: 4 Yea: Peterson, Murphy, Hinkamp, Chalmers, Tzur, Quigley 5 Nay: None 6 Absent: Roeser 7 Abstain: None 8 9 The motion was approved 6-0. 10 11 Member Quigley made a motion approve the request submitted by the petitioner, 12 Greenside Design Build LLC, on behalf of owner Chicago Title Land Trust Co., to 13 permit construction of a single-family residence which is 12 ft. closer to the front lot 14 line than the minimum required setback of 60 ft. at 429 Warwick Road in 15 accordance with the materials included in this packet. The variation requested by 16 the petitioner shall be granted conditioned upon the petitioner’s strict compliance 17 with the plans included within this packet. Any subsequent revisions to these plans 18 that affect the scope of the variation granted or that the Code Official determines to 19 be a material change will require the petitioner to resubmit an application for the 20 requested variation. Member Hinkamp seconded the request. 21 22 A roll call vote was taken as follows on the motion: 23 Yea: Peterson, Murphy, Hinkamp, Chalmers, Tzur, Quigley 24 Nay: None 25 Absent: Roeser 26 Abstain: None 27 28 The motion was approved 6-0. 29 30 Agenda Item IV. OTHER BUSINESS 31 32 A. 2026 Regular Schedule 33 34 Member Hinkamp made a motion approve the 2026 Regular Schedule of the Zoning Board of 35 Appeals. Member Quigley seconded the request. 36 37 A roll call vote was taken as follows on the motion: 38 Yea: Peterson, Murphy, Hinkamp, Chalmers, Tzur, Quigley 39 Nay: None 40 Absent: Roeser 41 Abstain: None 42 43 The motion was approved 6-0. 44 45 Agenda Item V. BUSINESS FROM THE PUBLIC 46 None 47 48 6 Village of Kenilworth Zoning Board of Appeals 6 November 10, 2025 6 Agenda Item VI. ADJOURN 1 Member Hinkamp made a motion to adjourn, and Member Quigley seconded the motion. 2 3 A voice vote was taken as follows on the motion: 4 Yea: Peterson, Murphy, Hinkamp, Chalmers, Tzur, Quigley 5 Nay: None 6 Absent: Roeser 7 Abstain: None 8 9 The motion was approved 6-0. 10 11 The meeting concluded at 8:48 p.m. 12 13 Respectfully Submitted, 14 15 Heather McFarland 16 Asst. to the Village Manager 17 7 Request for Commission Action Agenda Item: III.A Staff Contact: Michael Blue, Teska Associates, Inc. Subject: Public Hearing to Consider a Variation at 429 Warwick Road Pertaining to Building Size Petitioner: Greenside Design Build, LLC, on behalf of owner Chicago Title Land Trust Co. Location: 429 Warwick Rd Zoning: R-1 Single-Family Residential Purpose: Consider variations to permit construction of a new single-family residence of greater than the allowed floor area. Applicable Regulations: §153.068(A) Building Size Introduction: The petitioner, Greenside Design Build LLC, is requesting a variation to floor area on behalf of the homeowner to permit construction of a new single-family residence at 429 Warwick Road. This property is mid-block on Warwick Road between Melrose Avenue and Kenilworth Avenue. The Building Review Commission approved a demolition permit for the existing structure, at least part of which was constructed in 1923. The Zoning Board of Appeals has heard this matter at previous meetings and granted Variations for front and side yard setbacks at the November 10, 2025, meeting. The current requested variation is to permit construction of a single-family residence at 429 Warwick Road of 4,350 square feet, which exceeds the maximum permitted building size of 3,956 sq. ft. by 394 sq. ft. Recap of October 14, 2025 and November 10, 2025, ZBA Meetings: At the October 14, 2025, Zoning Board of Appeals meeting, the petitioner presented a revised request for three (3) variations: floor area, side yard setback, and front yard setback. The Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) expressed concerns about the variation to the floor area maximum meeting the variation standards and asked the applicant to consider revisions to the side yard setbacks. Considered By: Date: Zoning Board of Appeals 01/21/26 11/10/25 10/14/25 09/08/25 Village of 8 Based on the Board’s feedback, the petitioner requested to continue the public hearing to allow for revisions to the proposed design. The ZBA voted to continue the public hearing to the November 10 th Zoning Board of Appeals regular meeting. At the November 10 th meeting the petitioner presented revised plans and a request for front and side yard variations. The Board approved variations for: 1. A front yard setback variation was approved as a 48 ft setback, which is 12 ft less than the required 60 ft setback; and 2. A side yard variation for the west and east side yard setbacks were for both side yards setbacks to be 8 ft, which is 2 ft less than the required 10 ft setback. The total side yard for the lot would be 16 ft, which is 6 ft 6 in less than the requirement. a. As a condition of the approval for the east setback, the chimney must adhere to the approved setback. Proposed Site Plan of New Residence (1/113/25) Background (previously included in the November 10th memo): Before the property became an independent single-family home, it historically served as an auxiliary property to 220 Melrose. The lot has a nonconforming lot width of 75 ft., 15 ft. less than the minimum required of 90 ft. The Lot Area is also nonconforming, measuring 13,125 sq. ft., which is 2,625 sq. ft. less than the minimum required for interior lots in the R-1 District of 15,750 sq. ft. 9 Nonconforming Lot Area and Lot Width in the R-1 Zoning District The R-1 Residence District is comprised of the land area first developed in what would later become the Village of Kenilworth. The 429 Warwick Road property is within this area, and was likely platted before the Village was incorporated, and certainly before the first Zoning Code was adopted in the Village. In review of properties within the R-1 District, a range of interior lot properties are found throughout the zoning district that are undersized for Lot Area and Lot Width for the R-1 District. The following table is a non-exhaustive list of the interior lot properties located throughout the R-1 District: Interior Lots Min. Lot Area % Compliance Min. Lot Width % Compliance R-1 District 15,750 sq. ft. 100% 90 ft. 100% North Side of Warwick Road between Melrose and Kenilworth Avenues 429 Warwick 13,125 sq. ft. 83% 75 ft. 83% 421 Warwick 16,450 sq. ft. 104% 94 ft. 104% South Side of Warwick Road between Melrose and Kenilworth Avenues 432 Warwick 19,300 sq. ft. 122% 100 ft. 105% 424 Warwick 19,300 sq. ft. 122% 100 ft. 105% 414 Warwick 19,300 sq. ft. 122% 100 ft. 105% Other Properties in the R-1 District 322 Warwick 13,510 sq. ft. 85% 70 ft. 77% 315 Warwick 13,125 sq. ft. 83% 75 ft. 83% 315 Leicester 14,000 sq. ft. 88% 80 ft. 88% 235 Raleigh 14,347 sq. ft. 91% 82 ft. 91% 321 Raleigh 13,125 sq. ft. 83% 75 ft. 83% 141 Kenilworth 15,430 sq. ft. 98% 85 ft. 94% 621 Warwick 13,125 sq. ft. 83% 75 ft. 83% 522 Essex 13,139 sq. ft. 83% 75 ft 83% 537 Abbotsford 14,000 sq. ft. 88% 80 ft. 88% 531 Abbotsford 12,250 sq. ft. 77% 70 ft. 77% 417 Abbotsford 10,500 sq. ft. 66% 60 ft. 66% 422 Abbotsford 13,125 sq. ft. 83% 75 ft. 83% 331 Cumnor 8,750 sq. ft. 55% 50 ft. 55% 327 Cumnor 8,750 sq. ft. 55% 50 ft. 55% 316 Cumnor 13,125 sq. ft. 83% 75 ft. 83% 325 Richmond 13,125 sq. ft. 83% 75 ft. 83% Permit History: The permit and zoning request history of 429 Warwick Road is detailed in the table below. Year Type Purpose 2025 Demo BRC Approved demolition permit 2018 Water New water service, Permit #2018-152 10 2013 Fence Cedar Fence, Permit #2013-75 1991 Fence New Brick & Wrought Iron Fence, Permit #7156 1990 Addition Crawlspace addition, Permit #6927 1986 Fence Construct replacement stockade fence, Permit #6242 1952 Building Interior Remodeling, Permit #3780 Requested Variation: Variation 1 – Maximum Building Size (Floor Area) Applicable Regulations: Section 153.068(A) of the Zoning Ordinance The petitioner requests a variation from the maximum permitted floor area of 3,956 sq. ft. by 394 sq. ft. to construct a 4,350 sq. ft. residence. This represents a request to exceed the maximum by 10%. Lot Area Lot Area 13,125 sq. ft. Floor Area Maximum Permitted Floor Area (Lot Area x .21) + 1,200 3,956 sq. ft. 100% Proposed Floor Area 4,350 sq ft. 110% (of allowed) Variation Proposed Floor Area Variation Requested 394 sq. ft. 10% variation Example Motion for Consideration: I move to approve (with conditions) the request submitted by the petitioner, Greenside Design Build LLC, on behalf of owner Chicago Title Land Trust Co., to permit construction of a single- family residence which exceeds the maximum permitted building size of 3,956 sq. ft. by 394 sq. ft. at 429 Warwick Road in accordance with the materials included in this packet. The variation requested by the petitioner shall be granted conditioned upon the petitioner’s strict compliance with the plans included within this packet. Any subsequent revisions to these plans that affect the scope of the variation granted or that the Code Official determines to be a material change will require the petitioner to resubmit an application for the requested variation. Attachments: 1. Site Plan, Architectural Plans, and Elevations prepared by Schwarz Lewis Design Group (provided January 13, 2026) 2. Narrative of zoning variation request provided by the property owner dated December 18, 2025. 3. Response to Variation Standards by Schwarz Lewis Design Group (provided January 13, 2026) 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 L E F T E L E V A T I O N R I G H T E L E V A T I O N 18 19 Page X Current Requested Variation (updated 1-14-26) Variation 1 - Maximum Building Size (floor area) Applicable Regulations: Section 153.068(A)(2a) of the Zoning Ordinance Lot Area Lot Area 13,125 sq. ft. % Max Floor Area Floor Area Maximum Permitted Floor Area 1,200 + (.21 x 13,125sf) 3,956 sq. ft. 100% Total Existing Floor Area of Current Home 3,175 sq. ft. 80.3% Total Proposed Floor Area 4,350 sq. ft. 110% Variation Total Proposed Floor Area in Excess of Code Maximum +394 sq. ft. 9% The petitioner requests a variation from the maximum building size (floor area), exceeding the permitted maximum of 3,956 sq. ft. by a total of 394 sq. ft. Utilizing Section 153.068(A)(1a) of the Zoning Ordinance: Lot Area Lot Area 13,125 sq. ft. % Max Floor Area Floor Area Maximum Permitted Floor Area 1,200 + (.24 x 13,125sf) 4,350 sq. ft. 100% Total Existing Floor Area of Current Home 3,175 sq. ft. 80.3% Total Proposed Floor Area 4,350 sq. ft. 100%  Compared to the initial proposal at the 9/8/25 hearing, the variation request has been reduced by 458 sq. ft. 20 December 18, 2025 VILLAGE OF KENILWORTH Zoning Board of Appeals Letter of Situation and Hardship: 429 Warwick Road Dear Chairman Murphy and the other members of the ZBA, Thank you again for the constructive and engaging discussion at the November 10 th ZBA meeting. We sincerely appreciate the relief granted with respect to the front and side yard variances. After the October ZBA meeting, we sharpened our pencils and again attempted to reduce the FAR of the proposed construction to the allowed 3,956 sq ft. We hadn’t made sufficient progress in time for the November meeting, so we withdrew our request to allow time for evaluating alternative options to build within the allowed FAR. To recap, our original design proposed back in September included a third car attached garage, and a covered porch/all-weather room. After the September meeting, we made the tough decision to sacrifice the third car garage (which subsequently eliminated our variance request for building coverage) and converted our covered porch/all-weather room to a pergola. We also reduced the size of a few other rooms throughout the house to reduce our FAR variance request from the original 850 sq ft to 395 sq ft. While reviewing our plans, we found it immensely difficult to determine where else to subtract yet another ~400 sq feet from the custom home that we are building for our needs, so we felt that an explanation of our thought process may help bring understanding to our dilemma. Essentially, the 395 sq ft that we are over in FAR is either the two-car garage or the space above the two-car garage. As you know, the Village code is favorable to detached garages as they are allowed to be built at two feet off the property line in the rear of the property with the space above the garage not being calculated in FAR. A detached garage, however, is less desirable for many reasons, including they are less convenient, pose safety concerns and future resale potential. Considering the premium price of North Shore real estate, families purchasing houses at these price points desire certain amenities, of which is an attached garage for many. To put this into context, we strongly considered purchasing a new construction (~ three years old) in Kenilworth during our housing search, but because of the detached two-car garage and very small master closets (smaller than the closets in our city condo), we passed on the property. That property eventually sold for more than one million dollars less than their original asking price. 21 During one of our ZBA meetings, a comment was made about the size of the planned primary closet being excessive and “essentially being the size of a bedroom” - this is in fact true. The closet was designed such that it could be converted to a fourth bedroom by future owners, if needed, as it is quite common for houses in East Kenilworth to have four or more bedrooms on the second floor. This “closet” is essentially the space above the garage – the increase to square footage that we are seeking. We desire to build our dream home with certain amenities, and after giving up a third car attached garage and the all-weather room, we are at a loss as to where additional reductions in FAR will come from without seriously sacrificing our overall intended design or creating new concerns/issues. Detailed below are options that have been considered to achieve the desired added square footage while being FAR compliant. Option 1: Detach the two-car garage and place it in the rear of the property: This consideration would allow us to increase the size of the garage to 550 sq ft (from 20’x21’ to 22’x25’) and create the guest suite above the garage without the square footage above the garage “counting against us”. While this option would eliminate our FAR variance request and at the same time, provide us with a generously sized guest suite above the garage, the suite would not be accessible for disabled persons and also physically separates our elderly/disabled family members from the main house. The Skokie Ditch also presents a structural/building challenge for this option too, not to mention that the depth of the yard is already reduced by the presence of the ditch, so a garage would need to be built even further forward. But probably the most important consideration with this option is that it wouldn’t be very neighborly of us to construct a 1 ½ story garage two feet from the property line in the yard as it would essentially block an adequate supply of sunlight and obstruct the rear yard view for our Melrose neighbors. (See Exhibit A, A1 and A2) Option 2: Redesign the house with the two-car garage facing the street: Although once a consideration, this option is no longer feasible. Considering the newly- constructed garage next door, another neighboring forward-facing garage would be unappealing and undesirable when viewed from the front of the house (street/sidewalk). As you know, it is not common in the neighborhood to have forward-facing garages built at the front of the house, and to have two such garages next door to one other on this already short block would further compromise the traditional look of the neighborhood and make this short block even more of an oddity. This aesthetic would alter the esseneal character of the locality and throw off the balance of the block. Although this option would also eliminate our FAR variance request by providing 484 sq ft of “bonus space” above the garage, it would now create a new balance/aesthetic issue. (See Exhibit B) 22 Finally, we’d like to call attention to the section of the code (§153.068A + §153.003) that would provide us with an additional 394 square feet – the smallest amount of additional square footage of the options presented, the least disruptive or objectionable of the options and coincidentally, almost the same amount of square footage that we are requesting. This section of the code allows for a more generous FAR calculation by increasing the multiplier from .21 to .24 for properties built on or before October 22, 2005, that will undergo an alteration of less than 50%. The current property, in its earliest form, was built over a century ago, but renovating less than 50% of this property isn’t feasible, nor possible, as it would not result in a house with a basement and a larger back yard. It would also leave four current non- conformities in-tact (both side yards are non-compliant, current building coverage is non- compliant as is the rear yard (back of the house to the rear property line). If it were possible to renovate, not only would we be allowed to build to 4,350 sq ft. (instead of 3,956 sq ft), we’d also leave four non-conformities in place – how is this more desirable than our proposal? Our current house design, with the garages tucked into the side of the house, brings harmony to the block while also being accessible to elderly/disabled family members by leaving the first- floor guest room intact. This clever design avoids the economically friendly (less-desirable) front-facing garage while also preserving the natural nature-scape of the creek in the rear of the property, not only for us, but for our neighbors too. Having considered alternative designs and reducing our original variance request by almost 500 sq ft, we feel that we have made good-faith efforts to fit within the rules, while at the same point, not wanting to create hardships for others and not significantly compromising on the overall design and layout that we desire. We are confident that our revised FAR variance request for 395 sq ft is very modest and remains within/true to the intent of the original code and is by no means excessive. In conclusion, our proposed construction design will not create hardships for our neighbors nor adversely alter the esseneal character of the locality. Quite the contrary, our design will dramaecally increase the character of the locality by providing balance and harmony to a short block. We respeclully request that our variance request for an addieonal 395 sq m be granted. Thank you in advance for your consideration. Sincerely, Dr. Quenby Erickson & Mr. Jim Janikowski 23 EXHIBIT A 24 EXHIBIT A1 25 EXHIBIT A2 26 EXHIBIT B 27 SCHWARZ LEWIS Design Group, Inc. 1550 Spring Road Suite 100 Oak Brook, Illinois 60523 630.537.1416 January 12, 2026 Village of Kenilworth, Illinois Zoning Board of Appeals RE: 429 Warwick Rd Kenilworth, IL – New Single-Family Residence Responses to Standards Dear 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 variance 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 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 nonconformity of the lot. In R1 zoning, the minimum lot size is 15,750 square feet and the minimum lot width is 90 feet. The subject lot exists as a nonconformity in both lot size and lot width at an area of 13,125 square feet and 75 feet of width. Subsequently, the applicable zoning restrictions result in a lower allowable floor area ratio. c. The variation, if granted, will not alter ... Please see Section 153.244 (E.1c) i. Response: The design of the proposed home is harmonious with the character of the neighborhood. The scale and proportion of the design aligns with the adjacent properties. 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 they 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) i. Response: If the strict letter of the regulation were enforced, the resulting home would appear diminutive in comparison with the adjacent properties. b. The conditions upon ... Please see Section 153.244 (E.2b) 28 SCHWARZ LEWIS Design Group, Inc. 1550 Spring Road Suite 100 Oak Brook, Illinois 60523 630.537.1416 i. Response: The request for variation is based solely upon the specific conditions of 429 Warwick Road and would not apply to other properties in the same district. The nonconformity resulting in a smaller lot size is uniquely related to the owner’s lot. c. The request for variation is not ... Please see Section 153.244 (E.2c) i. Response: The request for variation is based upon the owner's desire for a traditional family home with the conveniences of modern living. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship ... Please see Section 153.244 (E.2d) i. Response: The difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person having an interest in the property as the nonconformity exists. e. The variation will not impair ... Please see Section 153.244 (E.2e) i. Response: The request for variation will not increase congestion or cause any sort of public endangerment. Stormwater and drainage will be designed to the current codes. 3. For the purpose of further supplementing the above standards and factors in connection with requests for variations from the requirements of § 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 ... Please see Section 153.244 (E.3a) i. Response: The proposed home is in keeping with the character of the neighboring homes. The design’s scale and proportions are consistent with the lot size and are compatible with adjacent properties. b. The proximity of the proposed construction ... Please see Section 153.244 (E.3b) i. Response: The proximity of the proposed footprint location is consistent with the proposed single story garage addition of the west neighbor, 220 Melrose, as well as the existing home to the east, 421 Warwick Road. c. The relative proximity of the proposed construction ... Please see Section 153.244 (E.3c) i. Response: The request for variation of the proposed home is in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. The proposed interior yard setbacks are comparable to the neighboring properties existing conditions. d. The magnitude of the variation ... Please see Section 153.244 (E.3d) i. Response: The magnitude of the floor area variation request is directly related to the family's specific need for a modern home with accessibility and comfort. e. The need for other variations ... Please see Section 153.244 (E.3e) i. Response: No other variations are necessary to accommodate the requested variation. 29 SCHWARZ LEWIS Design Group, Inc. 1550 Spring Road Suite 100 Oak Brook, Illinois 60523 630.537.1416 f. The need for the variation to allow ... Please see Section 153.244 (E.3f) i. Response: The request for variation is based upon the owner's desire for a traditional family home with the conveniences of modern living. g. The efficient and advantageous use ... Please see Section 153.244 (E.3g) i. Response: Not applicable, the scope of work does not include existing structures. h. The reasonableness of the variation ... Please see Section 153.244 (E.3h) i. Response: Given the stateliness of the neighboring three story homes, the requested variations are reasonable and help achieve a cohesively scaled and proportioned residence that compliments the existing streetscape. 4. For the purposes of supplementing the above standards and factors in connection with requests for variations from the requirements of § 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 building height as designed is compliant with R1 zoning. b. The need to maintain the height of the proposed structure ... Please see Section 153.244 (E.4b) i. Response: Not applicable, the scope of work does not include existing structures. c. The need to maintain a particular height of a proposed addition ... Please see Section 153.244 (E.4c) i. Response: Not applicable, the scope of work does not include existing structures. 5. For the purpose of supplementing the above standards with regard to variations for signs, the Board or, as applicable, the Plan Commission, in making its determination or recommendation shall 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) i. Response: The request for variation will not cause any sort of public endangerment or diminished property values. 30 SCHWARZ LEWIS Design Group, Inc. 1550 Spring Road Suite 100 Oak Brook, Illinois 60523 630.537.1416 c. The variation would not result in a sign or master sign plan ... Please see Section 153.244 (E.5c) i. Response: Not applicable as this property is residential and will not require commercial signage. Sincerely, Schwarz Lewis Design Group, Inc. 31