Covert, Krajewski, Martinez, Ozog, and Yoo
Tornatore
AYES:
ABSENT:
6.C.
ZONING-26-000007 – ORDINANCE – NGHC, Inc.: The Zoning Board of Appeals
recommended to deny the following zoning relief:
1. Conditional Use for a Planned Development for three (3) uses on the subject property:
a Group Home, a greenhouse with accessory retail/wholesale crop sales on the subject
property, and an Accessory Dwelling Unit.
2. Variation to increase the total area of permitted detached accessory buildings from
1,241 sq. ft to approximately 6,989 sq. ft. (3,850 sq. ft. ADU, 2,880 sq. ft. greenhouse,
and 259 sq. ft. existing shed).
3. Variation to exceed the maximum permissible area for detached accessory buildings in
the R-3 Single Family Residential District from 2,600 sq. ft. to approximately 6,989 sq.
ft.
4. Variation to allow the total area of detached accessory buildings (proposed accessory
dwelling unit, proposed greenhouse, and existing shed) to be larger than the principal
building (existing house is 4,745 sq. ft.).
5. Variation to allow an Accessory Dwelling Unit to be more than 1,000 sq. ft. in size
(approximately 3,850 sq. ft.).
6. Variation to allow an Accessory Dwelling Unit to be located in a new detached
accessory building.
7. Variation to increase the maximum number of permitted occupants on the
property—from five (5) occupants to 12 occupants total—allocated as eight (8) occupants
in the existing principal single-family /proposed group home and 4 occupants in the
accessory dwelling unit.
8. Variation to allow neither the legal or beneficial owner to be an occupant on the
property with an ADU.
9. Variation to allow the exterior of the converted dwelling to not retain the appearance
of an existing accessory building containing the accessory dwelling unit.
10. Variation to increase the height of a detached accessory building from permitted 24
feet to approximately 28 for the proposed greenhouse and 36 for the proposed accessory
dwelling unit. (Lisle/District 5) (Generally located southwest of Naper Boulevard and
Plank Road, on the south side of Plank Road)
ZBA VOTE (to Deny): 5 Ayes, 0 Nays, 0 Absent
Vice-Chair Yoo made a motion to remand the agenda item back to the ZBA. This case
had the same technical flaw of no opportunity for public comment at the recommendation
meeting.
Member Covert asked the question about a hardship not being presented in the case. Paul
Hoss explained. that the zoning code asks for the petitioner to present a hardship,
practical difficulty, or unique circumstance relative to the land and what use is being
proposed on the land.
The petitioner indicated they would prefer to have a new hearing. Vice-Chair Yoo
withdrew her motion to remand item back to ZBA for recommendation and made a
motion to remand it back to ZBA for a new public hearing.