Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning & Zoning board recommends variance for front porch at 329 Park Avenue

Antioch Planning & Zoning Board · October 13, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Antioch Planning & Zoning Board voted unanimously to recommend a variance allowing a six‑foot front porch at 329 Park Avenue, citing the property’s existing nonconforming status; the recommendation will go to the village board for final approval.

The Antioch Planning & Zoning Board on Sept. 3 voted unanimously to recommend approval of a variance that would allow a six‑foot front porch at 329 Park Avenue, a single‑family house within an R‑3 zoning district.

The recommendation stems from a staff report and on‑site context showing the property and many nearby houses predate modern setback rules. Village planner Mark Janick said the R‑3 zoning requires 30‑foot front and side setbacks and that the existing house is already nonconforming; the proposed porch (about 6 feet deep, 23 feet long and roughly 10 feet tall) would increase that nonconformity. "The existing home is nonconforming as to the R‑3 zoning," Janick said, noting the porch design is similar to other porches in the neighborhood.

In his testimony, property owner Bill Schuett said the porch would "improve the look of the house" and provide a sheltered, functional area for him and his wife and to protect deliveries from the weather. "I have a stoop now that's 4 by 4 with a step, and that's 5 feet. So we're only going, like, a foot farther than what's already there," Schuett said, adding he intends the porch to extend six feet.

A nearby neighbor, Kevin Houser of 334 Park, spoke in support, calling the addition "a great addition to the street" and praising the applicant's upkeep of the home.

Commission members pressed for limits to prevent the porch from being enlarged beyond what was approved. A committee member asked what safeguards the board had "that we say yes, and then all of a sudden they come 12 feet off the house and they go the whole width of the home." Schuett said his intention is to go 6 feet, and staff said permit review and a condition in the ordinance would restrict the porch to the approved projection.

After discussion, a motion to recommend approval of PZB25‑10, with stipulations about the porch size, was made and seconded. The board carried the motion by roll call: Commissioners Sanfilippo, Parsonson, Mahesh, Madigan, Zachary Chumski, Turner and McCarty all voted yes. The commission’s action is a recommendation; the village board will make the final decision at a pending meeting where an ordinance will be presented.

The applicant was told to submit construction plans and apply for a permit after the village board acts. The commission noted staff will add the porch‑size limit to the ordinance language before it goes to the village board.

The meeting also included scheduling discussion for a potential special meeting tied to an expedited petition; staff asked commissioners to check availability for dates in October and suggested a 5 p.m. start window. The meeting adjourned following the vote.

(Reporting notes: quotes and attributions come from the hearing transcript. The parcel was identified in the meeting as 329 Park Avenue, Antioch, Illinois, tax parcel 02‑08‑306‑050.)