The Village of Lake Bluff Joint Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals voted unanimously July 16 to recommend a change to the municipal code and to grant a variance allowing a larger detached garage at 206 East Prospect Avenue. The commission recommended the village board approve an ordinance amending Section 10-5-9 of the municipal code to permit 2.5-foot setbacks for accessory structures on smaller lots, and separately approved the petitioner’s minor variation request.

The recommendation matters because the text amendment, if approved by the village board, would change setback rules for small lots (discussed in the hearing as lots of about 6,250 square feet or less) and could affect how accessory structures are sited across older parts of Lake Bluff. The PCZBA, acting as the decision-making body on the variance, approved the requested relief for the specific property while recommending the text change to the village board for adoption.

Graham Hallen, the property owner and applicant, told the commission his family moved into the house just over five years ago and that the existing detached garage is 18 by 18 feet with a door about 5½ feet tall, too small for their vehicles. Hallen said the project would remove the current garage and pad, reduce impervious surface by about 150 square feet, and construct a new 24-by-24-foot detached garage with an attached 8-by-12-foot storage area. Hallen said he had discussed the plan with all adjoining neighbors and described them as supportive.

Commission members discussed two separate issues: a text amendment to allow accessory structures to be sited within 2.5 feet of a lot line on very small lots, and a variance specific to Hallen’s property to permit an increase in floor-area-related limits. Members noted changes to the proposal during review: the applicant reduced the proposed garage height from 20 feet to 17 feet, which a member said brought the structure into compliance with height limits for detached accessory buildings. Members also cited the applicant’s calculations showing a requested floor-area ratio (FAR) of 2,889 square feet—about 16.5% above the code allowance of 2,480 square feet—and that the house’s existing condition and the accessory layout meant the net additional bulk in practical terms was much smaller.

Member Russell (Plan Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals) said the project’s net effect included “150 square feet less impervious,” a positive outcome for stormwater management, and noted that a portion of the requested area was an attached storage element. Member Miller and others raised concern about setting precedent if the code were revised, with Member Miller saying he was “sitting on the fence” over whether the variance was appropriate as precedent. Several members nevertheless supported the variance for this application, describing the practical constraints of older lots and the relatively small net gain in buildable area once existing conditions were considered.

There was no public comment at the hearing. After discussion, the commission moved first to recommend the text amendment; the motion to recommend adoption of an ordinance amending Section 10-5-9 of the municipal code passed by voice vote with all members recorded as “Aye.” The commission then approved the requested variance—authorizing construction of the 24-by-24-foot garage with the attached storage—by a unanimous recorded vote. Commission staff stated the text amendment still requires village board action while the variance granted is the PCZBA’s formal action.

Next steps: the recommended text amendment will go to the Village Board for its consideration; the applicant may proceed under the PCZBA-approved variance and with building permits as applicable. The PCZBA record and the application materials will be part of the village board’s review of the proposed municipal code change.