Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Oak Park zoning board denies variance for carport at 23011 Kenosha Avenue
Summary
The Oak Park zoning board voted to deny a request by residents at 23011 Kenosha Avenue to legalize an enclosed carport, citing zoning setbacks and permit discrepancies; the applicants were told to remove the structures or pursue a code-compliant alternative and to consult the building official.
The Oak Park zoning board voted to deny a variance request from residents of 23011 Kenosha Avenue that would have allowed two attached carport units to remain where current zoning requires larger side-yard setbacks.
During a public hearing, one of the applicants, who identified themselves verbally as "Knowsher," told the board the couple bought the home in 2007 and had repeatedly reported vandalism to police after neighbors damaged vehicles parked in the front driveway. "We have had problems with the neighbors next door vandalizing our cars when parked in the front of the driveway and have reported this to the police," the applicant said, describing photos submitted to staff and two carport units installed in 2022 and 2023.
Board members and staff questioned the applicants about materials used to shield vehicles, whether the first carport reduced vandalism and a discrepancy between the building permit on record and the structures now in place. Staff noted the permit record described a single 8-by-20-foot carport, while the applicants described two attached units totaling about 37 feet in length. The board's staff report and the mover's motion referenced the zoning requirement that the sum of both side yards be 14 feet with a minimum of 4 feet on any side in R-1 single-family districts; the applicants requested a waiver to allow a combined 6 feet with a 0-foot south-side setback.
An unidentified board member moved to deny the request (case 20-503), citing Article 2, Division 2, Article 214 of the zoning code; a second followed. Commissioner Steinberg said, "I agree with the motion to deny," and Vice Chair Brown, Chairperson Houston, Commissioner Seligson and Commissioner Clyde also registered affirmative votes. The motion to deny carried.
After announcing the decision, the board told the applicants the denial means they must remove the carports or construct a feature that meets setback requirements. A staff member urged the residents to consult the building official before taking action, saying the office will work with them "as long as you're moving towards compliance." The applicants asked how long they would have to remove the structures; staff said the timeline would be discussed with the building official and emphasized the office's willingness to help residents return to compliance.
The meeting closed with no further matters on the agenda and a motion to adjourn.
What the board decided and why: The board relied on the zoning ordinance's setback standards and the staff report (which referenced the permit on file) in voting to deny the variance. The denial does not change the underlying complaint about vandalism raised by the applicants; board members indicated that building or permitting action is not the venue to resolve neighbor disputes and emphasized pursuing compliance through the building office.
Next steps: The applicants were directed to contact the building official to discuss compliance options and timelines; the board said it would work with residents making good-faith efforts to remedy the situation.
