Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning board approves 6-foot privacy fence at 1569 Forest despite neighbor objections
Summary
The Zoning Board approved a variance allowing a 6-foot cedar fence to intrude into the front-yard setback at 1569 Forest Avenue to screen light and noise from a neighboring pool house, after neighbor concerns about parcel adjacency and precedent.
The Highland Park Zoning Board of Appeals on Aug. 6 granted Variance No. 2026-00074, permitting a 6-foot cedar privacy fence to extend into the 40-foot front-yard setback along the northern property line of 1569 Forest Avenue. The board’s action followed a staff presentation, questions from multiple members, testimony from the applicant’s representative, and public comment raising legal and streetscape concerns.
Patrick, the city presenter, described the request as relief to exceed the allowable 4-foot front-yard fence height by 2 feet for a 6-foot tall fence along a narrow segment of the front yard. Claire Kettlekamp, the applicant’s landscape architect representing William Silverstein, said the fence — installed behind existing arborvitae and a 4-foot metal pool enclosure — is intended to screen light and mitigate noise from a neighboring pool house. Kettlekamp argued the fence is consistent with the neighborhood character and would not be visible from the street.
Neighbor Eva Soutos, who lives at 1559 Forest, questioned whether the applicant directly abuts the pavilion parcel and urged the board not to conflate inconvenience with a legal hardship. “There’s this distinction between hardship and inconvenience,” Soutos said, and asked the board to check parcel records and proximity before acting. The chair apologized to speakers after noting staff had initially provided the wrong set of standards for review and said the owner does, in fact, own the adjacent lot.
Board discussion weighed neighborhood character, precedent and practical visibility. Several members noted heavy screening and mature hedges would largely block the fence from view and that the request addressed a specific adjacency to an active pool pavilion. Member Zareczynski and Member Weisberg voiced support; a few members said they were “on the fence” but ultimately concluded the fence standards were met in this situation.
Member Zareczynski moved to approve the variance as drafted; Member Weisberg seconded. The board conducted a roll-call vote with ayes recorded from members present and approved Variance 2026-00074. The applicant may proceed subject to any building and zoning permit requirements.
