Will County Gazette

Village of Homer Glen Plan Commission met April 18.

Here are the minutes provided by the commission:

1. Call to Order

The Meeting was called to Order at 7:03 PM

2. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Commissioner Foley.

3. Roll Call

Members present: Commissioner Foley, Commissioner Bugos-Komperda, Vice-Chair McGary and Chairman Hand. Also present were Planner Udarbe and Plan Commission Secretary Pesavento.

Not present: Commissioner Stanly and Commissioner Bradarich.

4. Minutes.

a) April 4, 2024

A motion was made to approve the minutes from April 4, 2024 by Commissioner Foley, seconded by Commissioner Bugos-Komperda. All in favor, zero (0) opposed. The motion carried.

5. Public Comment. None.

The Plan Commission Secretary swore in all wishing to speak. Chairman Hand provided a statement as to the order and operation of business for the Plan Commission process.

6. New Business and Possible Action.

a) Case No. HG-2408, 12824 W Pheasant Ct, Homer Glen, Illinois (Public Meeting): Consideration of a request for approval of a fence along a rear property line abutting a commercial district at a height not to exceed eight (8) feet above grade for certain real property located in the R-4 Single-Family Residential District at 12824 W Pheasant Ct, Homer Glen, Illinois.

Assistant Planer Udarbe presented the facts of this case. This is a consideration of a request for approval of a fence along a rear property line abutting a commercial district at a height not to exceed eight (8) feet above grade for certain real property located in the R-4 Single-Family Residential District at 12824 W. Pheasant Court, Homer Glen, Illinois [HG-2408]. The applicant, Dapo Oladeji, owns the subject property located at 12824 W. Pheasant Court in the Oak Valley Unit 2 Subdivision and is proposing to install an eight (8) foot privacy fence along the rear property line which abuts a commercial property and is just north of 159th Street. Per the regulations of our fence code, where a side or rear lot line abuts a commercial or industrial district, fences may be erected to a height not to exceed eight (8) feet above grade, provided that the plan to erect the fence is reviewed and approved by the Plan Commission without a public hearing prior to erection. The applicant is seeking approval from the Plan Commission. It's just a public meeting in order to install an eight (8) foot privacy fence along the rear property line of the subject property. Similarly, in 2019, the previous Director of Planning and Zoning Gadde took through the property directly to the west of the subject property at 12834 W. Pheasant Court for a minor variance at Plan Commission for an eight (8) foot fence. They are proposing the same style as their neighbor. Per Village code, this type of fencing request only requires Plan Commission approval at a public meeting, so it doesn't technically require a variance. This is just a public meeting. There's no public hearing. There was no noticing. We don't have to open and close a public meeting. The plan that you see before you just will need to be approved by the Plan Commission and then they can get their permits. It doesn't have to go to board either. That is just the motion here. Let me know if you have any questions. That concludes my presentation.

The petitioner did not have anything to add.

Chairman Hand said, I just had one question. Does the lot line actually jog back there? Planner Udarbe said, it does. On Geographic Information System (GIS), at this range that I took it, you can't see it, but it does jog like that. There is like a dip in there. Chairman Hand asked, and that is like an original plat or is that due to the widening of the road? Planner Udarbe said, that is a good question. I'm sorry, I do not know that. Chairman Hand asked, so the fence will follow that? Planner Udarbe said, yes. The fence has to follow that.

Chairman Hand asked for a motion. Commissioner Foley made a motion to recommend approval of a fence along a rear property line abutting a commercial district at a height not to exceed eight (8) feet above grade for certain real property located in the R-4 Single-Family Residential District at 12824 W Pheasant Ct, Homer Glen, Illinois (Public Meeting). The motion was seconded by Vice-Chair McGary. A roll call vote was taken with Commissioners Bugos-Komperda, Foley, Vice- Chair McGary and Chairman Hand voting in favor four (4) to zero (0). The motion passed unanimously.

b) Case No. HG-2406-V, 12034 Winchester Rd, Homer Glen, Illinois (Public Hearing): Consideration of a request for approval of [1] a Variance to increase the maximum permitted height of a fence located in a corner side yard from four (4) feet to six (6) feet, and [2] a Variance to permit a solid fence in a corner side yard where fences are required to be fifty (50) percent open in design for certain real property located in the R-5 Single-Family Residential District at 12034 Winchester Rd, Orland Park, Illinois (within Homer Glen Corporate limits).

Assistant Planer Udarbe presented the facts of this case. This is a consideration of a request for approval of [1] a variance to increase the maximum permitted height of a fence located in a corner side yard from four (4) feet to six (6) feet, and [2] a variance to permit a solid fence in a corner side yard where fences are required to be fifty (50) percent open in design for certain real property located in the R-5 Single Family Residential District at 12034 Winchester Road, Orland Park, Illinois within Homer Glen Corporate Limits. [HG-2406-V]. I noticed that I accidentally put public meeting by that zoning request, but this is a public hearing. I just want to clarify that. The applicant, Peter Adamski, owns the subject property at 12034 Winchester Road in the Lancaster Square Unit 3 Subdivision and is proposing to install a six (6) foot privacy fence to enclose the subject property's rail yard and a portion of that corner side yard. Per the regulations of our fence code, fences in corner side yards are not permitted to be over four (4) feet in height or more than fifty (50) percent open in design when the corner side yard abuts a front yard. The applicant is seeking a variance to allow a six (6) foot privacy (solid) fence in the corner side yard.

We have not received any public comment on this case. I do have one letter that their neighbors submitted that I'll read into the record during public comment.

So, conformance with zoning regulations for corner side yard fencing, this whole thing is just an excerpt of our code. An open fence or wall along any lot line forming a part of the corner side yard is permitted at a height not to exceed four (4) feet above grade and shall not exceed fifty (50) percent open in design. A solid fence or wall is permitted to a height not to exceed six (6) feet above grade when said corner side yard abuts a rear yard or another corner side yard of an adjacent property and that the fence does not extend beyond the front building elevation of the principal structure. If the corner side yard abuts a front yard of another lot, this fence line shall not be located closer to the street than the front yard established for the abutting lot. The applicant is requesting a variance to install the six (6) foot privacy (solid) fencing in the corner side yard that abuts the front yard and because they are locating this fence beyond the established front yard of the abutting lot. As far as findings, the subject property being a corner lot has an exposed rear yard which reduces privacy. The property owner desires a fence to secure the yard, utilize more of the property and gain privacy for future pool plans. The fencing will not alter the essential character of the locality. The proposed fence will align with the neighbor's fence to the north and it is not proposed to extend all the way to the corner side property line to the sidewalk. There are many other properties in the subdivision that have fencing. That concludes my presentation.

A motion was made to open the public hearing by Vice-Chair McGary, seconded by Commissioner Bugos-Komperda all in favor, zero (0) opposed. Motion carried.

The petitioner said, thank you for your time and thank you for hearing us out. As Taylor stated, that pretty much covered a lot of the stuff. I just kind of wanted to bring a personal aspect of it. We do just want to get a little variance done and come out of that building line a little bit because it will give us a little extra space on the inside and it doesn't really take too much away on the outside. We did speak with a lot of our neighbors and it's not blocking any line of sight of anybody coming around the corner, which is a rounded corner. It is a kind of a unique situation that we're in, but it's mainly for our kids. Like Taylor stated, we are planning on doing a pool and more stuff in the yard for the kids and just that little bit of space does allow us to play around more with a pool and other stuff for the kids. That's mainly the reason that we're asking for the variance

Planner Udarbe said, if you're finished, I'll read this letter into the record for public comment. It says, pertaining to the current matter before you for the case of Peter Adamski, Case HG-2406- V. Mr. Adamski is wishing to erect a privacy fence along his property, located at 12034 Winchester Road. This property sits on a cul-de-sac. It can be described as being a corner lot. This lot is very unique. You may travel the sidewalk in front of the home and see all four (4) sides of the home from the sidewalk. It also allows any person looking to view the entire contents of the backyard. There's essentially no privacy whatsoever to the lot. Most homes in the area are afforded some type of privacy to their rear yards, either by the home itself, some sort of shrubbery or large privacy fences. Mr. Adamski's lot has no type of structures to afford any type of privacy. Mr. Adamski has been residing in his home for the past few years. He, his wife and children are what I consider to be good neighbors. They have plans to build a pool soon. Most pool owners deserve additional privacy. Said fence would provide such privacy and protect neighborhood children from entering a pool. I am Mr. Adamski's neighbor to the north. I would suffer the most loss of view from his proposed fence. I am willing to make that sacrifice for his family's ability to enjoy some privacy. Thank you for your consideration. Signed Mr. Christian Priesmeyer at 12018 Winchester Road, Homer Glen, Illinois. April 18th, 2024.

A motion was made to close the public hearing by Commissioner Bugos-Komperda, seconded by Vice-Chair McGary all in favor, zero (0) opposed. Motion carried.

Chairman Hand asked for a motion. Vice-Chair McGary made a motion to recommend approval of [1] a Variance to increase the maximum permitted height of a fence located in a corner side yard from four (4) feet to six (6) feet, and [2] a Variance to permit a solid fence in a corner side yard where fences are required to be fifty (50) percent open in design for certain real property located in the R-5 Single-Family Residential District at 12034 Winchester Rd, Orland Park, Illinois (within Homer Glen Corporate limits). [HG-2406-V] The motion was seconded by Commissioner Foley. A roll call vote was taken with Commissioners Foley, Bugos-Komperda, Vice-Chair McGary and Chairman Hand voting in favor four (4) to zero (0). The motion passed unanimously and will go before the Village Board on May 8, 2024.

Chairman Hand asked for a motion. Vice-Chair McGary made a motion to adopt staff's findings as the findings of the Plan Commission. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Bugos- Komperda. A roll call vote was taken with Commissioners Foley, Bugos-Komperda, Vice-Chair McGary and Chairman Hand voting in favor four (4) to zero (0). The motion passed unanimously and will go before the Village Board on May 8, 2024.

7. Old Business

8. Reports of Plan Commissioners and Staff

Planner Udarbe said, we have a few variances for the May 16th meeting. We have another lot in the Hidden Cove Subdivision. It looks like they're requesting a front yard setback reduction. It's like the same thing with conservation easements and everything. Then we also have a weird one. It's a variance request for a shed side setback reduction for a shed that was built without a permit. It's located only around twenty (20) inches from the side property line. Commissioner Bugos-Komperda asked it is the one next to the farm, right? Planner Udarbe said, no. They had to move that. Did they not move that? Commissioner Bugos-Komperda said, they didn't. Planner Udarbe said, I went out there, but I will follow up that. This one is on Cedar Road. He built a shed without a permit, but he was going off of his fence line, which is eight (8) feet into his neighbor's property. When he came in for permits, he first was like, it's set back far enough, but it's not. He shouldn't have done work without a permit. So, that's a weird one. Commissioner Bugos-Komperda asked, it is eight (8) feet on their property? Planner Udarbe said, yes. They don't know who established that fence line first, but staff does not support this one. Since I've been here, we've only ever seen that fireplace one without a permit, but it's a different board now so it'll be interesting how that goes. Otherwise, I have nothing else. Our May 2nd meeting is canceled.

9. Adjournment

A motion was made to adjourn by Commissioner Bugos-Komperda, seconded by Commissioner Foley. All in favor, zero (0) opposed and the meeting was adjourned at 7:24 PM.

http://www.homerglenil.org/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/_04182024-2715