Orland Park board approves masonry variance so homeowners can rebuild on existing foundation

Orland Park trustees voted to approve a variance allowing a reconstructed single‑family home at 14725 Holly Court to be built with less brick than the land development code requires, the board decided at its May 19 meeting.

The variance approved by the board applies to the village’s masonry requirement for residential facades; the planning commission had earlier approved a separate setback variance to reduce a required side yard from 8 feet to 6.7 feet.

Why it matters: The decision lets the homeowners rebuild on the existing foundation in a manner similar to the home that stood on the lot before it burned, rather than requiring a redesign to meet current brick‑and‑masonry façade rules. The question raised broader policy issues about neighborhood character, safety and whether one exception becomes a precedent for future rebuilds.

Staff member "Eric," speaking for development services, told trustees the petitioner sought two variances to rebuild on the existing foundation: one was the side‑yard setback, which the planning commission had approved, and the second was to waive the code requirement that face brick or stone cover not less than 50% of exterior walls and 90% of each first‑floor elevation for a residential dwelling unit. Eric said the proposed replacement house would closely match the home as it had existed since 1968 and showed plans that left most walls in siding with brick concentrated in the garage and lower‑level window areas.

Village counsel told trustees that whether allowing this variance would set a binding precedent depends on the particular facts of future requests. Trustee Catzineas asked counsel whether an approval here would create a precedent; counsel replied that precedent is a function of the specific circumstances in future cases rather than an automatic rule.

Heather Glockler, an attorney with Castle Law representing the petitioner, told the board the planning and zoning commission had approved the requests and that the homeowners had “lost everything that night” in the February 2024 fire. Glockler asked the board for support so the family could rebuild and “put their lives back together.”

Staff recommended upholding the code requirement — which would require redesign and likely amendments to the existing foundation — while the planning commission had recommended approval of the masonry variance so the house could be rebuilt as it had been. Trustees heard that three other lots in the broader neighborhood had been demolished and rebuilt without meeting the brick requirement, but staff said those were new houses built with different intentions than this case, which involved rebuilding after a fire. An engineer had determined the existing foundation could support a new structure.

After discussion, a trustee moved to approve the planning commission’s recommendation for case no. 2025‑0187 (the residence at 14725 Holly Court). The motion carried; the board recorded a roll call in which all members present voted in favor.

Discussion vs. formal action: Trustees’ remarks and staff explanations were clearly separated from the formal action. The planning commission’s prior approval of the setback was informational; the board’s action specifically addressed the masonry/brick façade variance. The vote adopted the planning commission recommendation as the board’s decision.

Clarifying details: the setback variance already approved by the planning commission reduced the side yard from 8 feet to 6.7 feet. The masonry requirement in the land development code was described in the hearing as face brick or stone on not less than 50% of exterior walls and 90% of each first‑floor elevation. The damaged house dated to 1968 and was demolished to the foundation after a February 2024 fire; an engineer deemed the foundation reusable.

What’s next: The board approved the variance and instructed staff to finalize the ordinance and record the action, clearing the way for the homeowners to proceed with reconstruction under the approved plan.