Planning and Zoning Commission

Regular Meeting

Palatine, IL · May 26, 2026

Minutes

PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY 26, 2026 AT 7:00 PM VILLAGE HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBERS 200 E. WOOD STREET PALATINE, IL 60067-5339 (847) 359-9050 www.palatine.il.us MINUTES REGULAR MEETING 7:00 PM I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Wood Called the Meeting to Order at 7:05PM II. ROLL CALL PRESENT Planning & Zoning Commissioner Jan Wood, Planning & Zoning : Commissioner Cindy Roth Wurster, Planning & Zoning Commissioner Tim Schubert, Planning & Zoning Commissioner Kevin Cavanaugh, Planning & Zoning Commissioner Stephen Fedota, Planning & Zoning Commissioner Eric Friedman, Planning & Zoning Commissioner Patrick Noonan, Planning & Zoning Commissioner Rodney Bettenhausen, Planning & Zoning Commissioner Robert Kolososki ABSENT : ARRIVED : III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. 5-12-2026 PZC Draft Minutes Commissioner Bettenhausen moved to approve the minutes of May 12th, 2026 - Commissioner Kolososki seconded the motion. Motion approved by Voice Vote RESULT: APPROVED BY VOICE VOTE MOVER: Bettenhausen SECONDER: Kolososki VILLAGE OF PALATINE Page 1 of 12 Minutes May 26, 2026 AYES: Jan Wood, Cindy Roth Wurster, Tim Schubert, Kevin Cavanaugh, Stephen Fedota, Eric Friedman, Patrick Noonan, Rodney Bettenhausen, Robert Kolososki NAYES: None IV. PUBLIC HEARING A. 649 W. Revere Lane 1. Special use to permit a rear yard setback of 34 feet, instead of the minimum required setback of 40 feet in the R-2 zoning district. SU-000261-2026 – 649 W Revere Ln Notice was published in the Journal & Topics on May 7th, 2026 and mailed to the owners of the surrounding properties. Petitioner's Exhibits: 1. Special Use Application 2. Proof of Ownership 3. Plat of Survey 4. Site Plan 5. Elevations 6. Public Notice Background: Mr. Auer provides background and states the petitioner is requesting a Special Use to allow a 275 square foot sunroom addition to the rear of the principal structure. The request includes relief for a rear yard setback of 34 feet instead of the minimum required 40 feet in the R-2 Single Family zoning district. Sworn in petitioner: Dhaval Parekh – 649 W Revere Ln Mr. Parekh states he is proposing to construct a three-season sunroom addition at the rear of the home for recreational purposes. He explains the addition would extend approximately six feet from the rear of the house, resulting in the requested setback relief. He states the proposed sunroom was designed with assistance from TimberBuilt Sunroom Company, who also prepared the submitted plans. The structure would be built on piers and measure approximately 13’ x 16’, with a width of approximately 17 feet east-to-west. VILLAGE OF PALATINE Page 2 of 12 Minutes May 26, 2026 Commissioner Cavanaugh asks whether the petitioner has spoken with neighboring property owners. Mr. Parekh states he has spoken with the surrounding neighbors and there were no objections or concerns expressed. Chairperson Wood references the site plan and notes there do not appear to be any line-of-sight concerns related to the proposed addition. Commissioner Roth-Wurster asks whether the property has experienced any drainage or water issues, noting the structure would be built on piers. Mr. Parekh states there have been no water issues on the property. He notes the property has good elevation and explains the proposed sunroom would include gutters directing water toward the side of the house. Mr. Auer provides additional information regarding setback standards within the R-2 zoning district and identifies several nearby properties that previously received zoning relief for reduced rear yard setbacks. He states the proposed addition does not exceed the bulk, lot coverage, or height standards of the R-2 district. He reviews the surrounding area and notes that some nearby properties were developed under prior regulations, resulting in existing setbacks that do not meet current standards. Commissioner Schubert asks whether the 28-foot setback at 639 W. Revere Lane is due to the angle of the lot. Mr. Auer confirms that the lot configuration contributes to the reduced setback. He reiterates that the proposed addition at 649 W. Revere Lane would maintain a 34-foot setback from the rear lot line. Staff Recommendation: The Petitioner is proposing to construct a "three seasons" room to the rear of the principal structure. The proposal does not conflict with area and bulk standards of the R-2 Single Family Zoning District. Staff identified a number of properties in the surrounding area that were granted setbacks below the minimum required 40 feet. Staff has determined that the proposal is consistent with the character and qualities of surrounding properties. Therefore, Staff recommends approval of the proposed Special Use, subject to the following conditions: 1. The Special Use shall substantially conform to the plans prepared by Dhaval Parekh, dated 04/09/2026, except as such plans may be changed to conform to Village Codes and Ordinances. There were no further questions. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Noonan Made a motion to approve subject staff’s conditions; seconded by Commissioner Cavanaugh DISCUSSION: VILLAGE OF PALATINE Page 3 of 12 Minutes May 26, 2026 Commissioner Kolososki states the addition fits the site nicely, works well within the yard space, and has a low roof pitch. He states the additional space would be beneficial for the family and is in favor of the request. Commissioner Friedman states the proposal is a one-story addition and does not create the full vertical bulk of a larger structure. Although the setback reduction is notable, he feels the footprint and open design prevent it from appearing overly bulky or heavy. Chairperson Wood states the request is reasonable and appropriately sized. She notes the addition does not extend across the entire rear of the home and states a three-season room is a desirable feature. She further states the proposal does not create any concerns related to public health, safety, welfare, or injury to neighboring properties and finds the standards have been met. Chairperson Wood summarized that this request has met the standards and was unanimously approved by a vote of 9-0. This item will tentatively go to Village Council on Monday June 15th, 2026. RESULT: APPROVED BY ROLL CALL MOVER: Noonan SECONDER: Cavanaugh AYES: Jan Wood, Cindy Roth Wurster, Tim Schubert, Kevin Cavanaugh, Stephen Fedota, Eric Friedman, Patrick Noonan, Rodney Bettenhausen, Robert Kolososki NAYES: None B. 100 E. Wood Street 1. Special use to permit a fence in side yard abutting a street, where the side lot line of the side yard abutting a street abuts the side lot line of a front yard of an adjacent lot. 2. Variation to not include landscaping between a fence in a side yard abutting a street, and the abutting street. SU-000262-2026 – 100 E Wood Street Notice was published in the Journal & Topics on May 7th, 2026 and mailed to the owners of the surrounding properties. Petitioner's Exhibits: 1. Application 2. Proof of Ownership VILLAGE OF PALATINE Page 4 of 12 Minutes May 26, 2026 3. Plat of Survey 4. Site Plan 5. Fence Elevation 6. Public Notice Background: Mr. Auer provides background and states the petitioner is requesting a Special Use to allow a 4-foot tall fence in the side yard abutting a street, along with a variation to waive the landscaping requirement. Sworn in petitioner: Brandon Naser, Owner – 100 E Wood St Mr. Naser states he and his family moved to Palatine in 2024 and describes the neighborhood as very friendly and active with dog walkers. He states they recently welcomed both a new puppy and a new daughter and have experienced situations where dogs on loose leashes have entered their yard. He also notes that delivery drivers occasionally leave packages at the rear door because the backyard is open and accessible. He states the proposed fence would help minimize conflicts between passing dogs and his puppy, provide additional safety and privacy for his family, and help keep wildlife out of the yard. Mr. Naser notes that he revised the original proposal to reduce the overall length of the fence. He states there is existing garden landscaping, shrubs, and flowers along the side of the home and explains the fence would primarily enclose the rear grassy area for family use and recreation. Mr. Auer states revisions were made to the plan to reduce the width of the proposed fence line. He notes there were no changes to the location or fence style and states the fence would remain the same distance from the lot line and continue to meet the criteria for Special Use review. Mr. Auer identifies the proposed fence location on the submitted site plan. Commissioner Cavanaugh asks whether the petitioner intends to fully enclose the backyard area. Mr. Naser states they are still deciding whether the rear yard would be fully enclosed. He explains they are considering either continuing the wood fence, replacing the existing partial fence entirely, installing a smaller decorative fence, or utilizing additional vegetation. Commissioner Fedota asks whether the fence could be aligned farther back toward the house and driveway rather than remaining close to the sidewalk. Mr. Naser states that option was initially considered; however, he notes the sidewalk partially encroaches onto the property and he does not want to lose additional usable yard area. He states the proposed fence would be approximately one foot from the sidewalk. VILLAGE OF PALATINE Page 5 of 12 Minutes May 26, 2026 Chairperson Wood asks for clarification regarding the Benton Street side setback and how close the fence would be to the sidewalk. Mr. Auer explains the sidewalk encroaches approximately 2.5 feet into the property in that location. He states the proposed fence would be set back approximately 6 inches from the sidewalk, resulting in an overall setback of approximately 3 feet from the property line. Commissioner Bettenhausen asks why the sidewalk encroaches into the property. Mr. Auer states the condition is the result of older lot configurations and historic sidewalk construction and describes it as a unique site condition. Commissioner Kolososki asks what impact there would be if the fence were moved an additional foot away from the sidewalk to provide more separation. Commissioner Fedota asks why the fence cannot align directly with the side of the house. Mr. Naser states he is attempting to remain consistent with other properties in the neighborhood and identifies nearby properties on Benton, Elmwood, and Forest that have similar fence-to-sidewalk conditions. He states many of those fences are located approximately 6 inches to 1 foot from the sidewalk. He further explains the Village landscaping requirement would require vegetation at least 36 inches high between the fence and sidewalk, which he believes could create additional line-of- sight concerns. He states he is attempting to find a reasonable compromise and notes that if the fence must be moved farther inward, they would comply. Mr. Auer provides additional staff analysis regarding the request. He states the proposal consists of a 4-foot tall open-style fence along Benton Street, where the side yard abuts the front yard of an adjacent property, thereby requiring Special Use approval. He presents the fence elevation and revised site plan with the reduced fence width. Mr. Auer states staff reviewed nearby properties with similar configurations and identified varying setbacks and fence styles throughout the area. He notes that most approved fences in similar locations are set back a greater distance from sidewalks to minimize the potential for damage to persons or property. Commissioner Cavanaugh asks whether the comparable properties reviewed by staff also involved sidewalks encroaching into private property. Mr. Auer states that most of the surveyed properties did not involve that condition. Commissioner Roth-Wurster references another fence approval on Benton Street involving a historic home and asks whether that request also required relief. Mr. Auer confirms that it did. Staff Recommendation: The Petitioner is requesting approval of a Special Use application to allow for a 4-foot tall open-style fence in a side yard abutting N. Benton Street, with a proposed 3-foot VILLAGE OF PALATINE Page 6 of 12 Minutes May 26, 2026 setback from the Benton Street property line. Staff evaluated corner-yard fences (abutting a front yard) located in the surrounding area. Among them, the fences have some variation in design (setbacks and fence height). Setback less than one foot from the sidewalk, the proposed fence is generally inconsistent with the fence setbacks in the surrounding area. To minimize damage to persons or property, the majority of approved fences are set back at a reasonable distance from the sidewalk. Staff believes that the proposed setback of 6" is inconsistent with the majority of observed fences. Staff is recommending that the setback between the fence and sidewalk be increased (corresponding with condition #2). Therefore, Staff is recommending action at the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Commission. If the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of the project, Staff recommends the following conditions be included: • 1. The Special Use shall substantially conform to the plans prepared by Brandon Naser, dated 04/30/2026, except as such plans may be changed to conform to Village Codes and Ordinances. • 2. The setback for the proposed open-style fence shall be increased from the property line, with the site plan revised in a manner acceptable to the Director of Planning and Zoning. • 3. The fence gate will open only to the inside of the residence. : Commissioner Cavanaugh asks whether the petitioner would be agreeable to approval of the request if the Commission required the fence to be moved back approximately two feet or another acceptable distance, rather than aligned directly with the house. Mr. Naser states he would not want to proceed with the project if the fence had to align fully with the house, as it would eliminate approximately eight feet or more of usable yard space. Commissioner Roth-Wurster asks Mr. Auer whether the prior Benton Street fence approval also included a landscaping variation. Mr. Auer states he is unsure, noting that prior approvals varied by application. Commissioner Cavanaugh notes the Benton Street property includes vegetation on the inside of the fence but not on the sidewalk side. Commissioner Noonan requests clarification regarding Condition #2 of the staff recommendation and asks whether the final setback determination would be resolved between the petitioner and the Director of Planning and Zoning. VILLAGE OF PALATINE Page 7 of 12 Minutes May 26, 2026 Commissioner Friedman states the recommendation can be modified by the Commission and discusses possible revisions to the recommended conditions. Commissioner Cavanaugh asks whether a revised setback requirement of two feet would become part of the recommendation forwarded to the Village Council. Mr. Auer confirms that it would. Commissioner Fedota asks whether changing the setback requirement would alter the nature of the petitioner’s original request. Commissioner Friedman explains that staff recommendation conditions may be modified by the Commission as part of the motion. Commissioner Schubert states the record should clarify that any revised setback would be measured relative to the sidewalk rather than strictly from the property line. Mr. Auer states the condition can be revised to specify the exact setback distance from the sidewalk or lot line. Commissioner Cavanaugh asks whether a setback of two to three feet from the sidewalk would be acceptable to the petitioner. Mr. Naser states he would need to better visualize the revised layout before committing to a specific distance. Commissioner Cavanaugh states the Commission is attempting to balance the petitioner’s needs with neighborhood consistency and overall safety considerations. Mr. Auer states staff believes a minimum setback of approximately one foot from the sidewalk would be more consistent with surrounding properties and neighborhood character. There were no further questions. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Cavanaugh Made a motion to approve subject staff’s conditions; seconded by Commissioner Noonan DISCUSSION: Commissioner Cavanaugh proposes modifying Condition #2 to require the proposed open-style fence to be set back between one and three feet from the sidewalk, with the final site plan to be reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning and Zoning. Commissioner Fedota requests clarification regarding how the revised setback would be measured, noting the sidewalk alignment shifts along Benton Street. Mr. Auer states the revised condition would establish a minimum required setback distance from the sidewalk. VILLAGE OF PALATINE Page 8 of 12 Minutes May 26, 2026 Commissioner Cavanaugh states the petitioner appears mindful of project costs and notes that staff identified several comparable fence conditions within the surrounding neighborhood. He states the proposal is generally consistent with the character of the area and does not present safety concerns. He further states the request represents a reasonable investment in the petitioner’s family and property. Commissioner Roth-Wurster states corner lot fences require careful review and consideration. She states the proposal addresses health, safety, and welfare standards and notes she likes the proposed fence style. She adds that moving the fence slightly farther from the sidewalk would improve comfort and visibility for pedestrians and dog walkers while still allowing the petitioner substantial use of the yard. Commissioner Friedman addresses the request to waive the landscaping requirement and states that, due to the visibility and safety considerations associated with the location, approving the variation to remove landscaping meets the minimum standards. He states the open-style fence already addresses the primary safety concerns. Chairperson Wood states the lots in the area are smaller and the property is located on a busy corner. She states she understands the petitioner’s desire for additional privacy and safety and notes the proposed fence is not a solid board-on-board design. She describes the request as reasonable and states the modified recommendation appropriately balances the petitioner’s needs with public safety considerations related to the sidewalk area. Chairman Wood summarized that this request has met the standards and was unanimously approved by a vote of 9-0. This item will tentatively go to Village Council on Monday June 15th, 2026. RESULT: APPROVED AS AMENDED TO MODIFY CONDITION #2 TO REQUIRE THE SETBACK FOR THE PROPOSED OPEN STYLE FENCE BE INCREASED TO A MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN ONE AND THREE FEET FROM THE SIDEWALK, SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING MOVER: CAVANAUGH SECONDER: NOONAN AYES: Jan Wood, Cindy Roth Wurster, Tim Schubert, Kevin Cavanaugh, Stephen Fedota, Eric Friedman, Patrick Noonan, Rodney Bettenhausen, Robert Kolososki NAYES: None V. PUBLIC COMMENT VILLAGE OF PALATINE Page 9 of 12 Minutes May 26, 2026 Joseph McArthur – Lot 20, Highland Meadows Subdivision – Ward 1 – 6006 Highland Drive, Palatine (Rolling Meadows address) Chairwoman Wood confirms the property referenced by Mr. McArthur is located in Rolling Meadows. Mr. McArthur states his comments are not related to a property currently before the Commission. He references prior testimony provided under oath at a Village Council meeting regarding property located at 951 S. Benton Street and states he previously questioned ownership of an easement on the property. He states he appealed the meeting minutes and submitted materials to the Public Access Counselor for review. Mr. McArthur states he believes the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (MWRD) owns the easement in question and references a court judgment which, according to him, created a permanent flood control easement owned by MWRD. He further discusses what he describes as easement encroachments affecting the property. Mr. McArthur states the Village of Palatine entered into an intergovernmental agreement with the Park District and Cook County in 2006 related to the Euclid bike path. He states the easement holder is MWRD and alleges the bike path encroaches upon his property without authorization or compensation. He references provisions of the agreement regarding termination by competent authority and states he considers himself a competent authority regarding the matter. Chairperson Wood asks when the events referenced took place. Mr. McArthur states the matter is ongoing. He further alleges the Village is not complying with court-ordered drainage obligations and references stormwater outfalls, EPA reports, and alleged violations of the Clean Water Act. He states he has participated in onsite meetings with Village and MWRD officials regarding the matter. Mr. McArthur further alleges the Village expanded right-of-way areas without due process or compensation and states the bike path was installed without proper authorization. He also references alleged dumping activities on property associated with Harper College and states portions of the property are subject to permanent MWRD easements. He states he has provided supporting documentation to the Village and notes the matter has been ongoing for approximately two years. Mr. Auer interrupts and states the matters being discussed are outside the jurisdiction of the Planning and Zoning Commission and offers to meet with Mr. McArthur following the meeting. Commissioner Friedman asks Mr. McArthur to clarify the address involved and confirms the jurisdiction is within Palatine. Chairperson Wood states she understands Mr. McArthur wishes to place the comments on the public record; however, the issues raised are outside the authority and jurisdiction of the Planning and Zoning Commission. She advises him to continue working directly with Village staff regarding the matter. VILLAGE OF PALATINE Page 10 of 12 Minutes May 26, 2026 Mr. McArthur states he intends to continue appearing before the Commission until the matter is resolved. He states he wants his land restored and the wetlands returned to their prior condition. He continues discussing MWRD easements and related documentation. Chairperson Wood reiterates that the Commission’s authority is limited to zoning matters such as Special Uses and variations. Mr. McArthur continues discussing alleged dumping activities and the bike path installation on the property without compensation. Chairperson Wood states the Commission does not have the background, authority, or jurisdiction to address the matter and again advises Mr. McArthur to continue working with staff. She acknowledges his desire to have the matter reflected in the public record. Commissioner Friedman reiterates that the Planning and Zoning Commission does not have jurisdiction over the matter and asks when the bike path was installed. Mr. McArthur states the bike path was installed on August 15, 2006. Mr. McArthur states he intends to run for Mayor of Rolling Meadows and hopes to resolve the issue. He states he has learned a great deal through the process and reiterates concerns regarding flooding and placement of the bike path. Mr. McArthur concludes by stating, “Teamwork makes the dream work.” VI. COMMUNICATIONS COMMUNICATIONS BY MR. AUER: • FPD-000258-2026 - 4-20 SLADE STREET CROSSING WAS APPROVED AT VILLAGE COUNCIL • SU-000228 & SU-000227-2025 - 560 & 630 S HICKS ROAD WAS APPROVED AT VILLAGE COUNCIL • A MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR JUNE 9TH, 2026. THERE WILL BE 3 ITEMS ON THE AGENDA VII. ADJOURNMENT APPROVED TO ADJOURN - 8:30PM RESULT: APPROVED TO ADJOURN BY VOICE VOTE MOVER: FEDOTA SECONDER: NOONAN VILLAGE OF PALATINE Page 11 of 12 Minutes May 26, 2026 AYES: Jan Wood, Cindy Roth Wurster, Tim Schubert, Kevin Cavanaugh, Stephen Fedota, Eric Friedman, Patrick Noonan, Rodney Bettenhausen, Robert Kolososki NAYES: None VILLAGE OF PALATINE Page 12 of 12

Agenda

Packet

PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY 26, 2026 AT 7:00 PM VILLAGE HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBERS 200 E. WOOD STREET PALATINE, IL 60067-5339 (847) 359-9050 www.palatine.il.us AGENDA REGULAR MEETING 7:00 PM I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. 5-12-2026 PZC Draft Minutes IV. PUBLIC HEARING A. 649 W. Revere Lane 1. Special use to permit a rear yard setback of 34 feet, instead of the minimum required setback of 40 feet in the R-2 zoning district. B. 100 E. Wood Street 1. Special use to permit a fence in side yard abutting a street, where the side lot line of the side yard abutting a street abuts the side lot line of a front yard of an adjacent lot. 2. Variation to not include landscaping between a fence in a side yard abutting a street, and the abutting street. V. PUBLIC COMMENT VI. COMMUNICATIONS VII. ADJOURNMENT VILLAGE OF PALATINE Page 1 of 1 Page 1 of 43 Page 2 of 43 Page 3 of 43 Page 4 of 43 Page 5 of 43 Page 6 of 43 Page 7 of 43 Page 8 of 43 Page 9 of 43 Page 10 of 43 Page 11 of 43 Page 12 of 43 Page 13 of 43 Page 14 of 43 Page 15 of 43 IV.A 649 W. Revere Lane STAFF REPORT: TO: Palatine Planning and Zoning Commission Jan Wood, Chair FROM: R. Auer PETITIONER: Dhaval Parekh, Property Owner PLAN NUMBER: SU-000261-2026 BACKGROUND: The Petitioner is requesting to construct a rear addition to the principal structure on the subject property. Therefore, the petitioner is requesting: Special use to permit a rear setback of 34 feet, instead of the minimum required rear yard setback of 40 feet in the “R-2” zoning distric, pursuant to Section 10.06(c)(12) of the zoning ordinance. KEY ISSUES: • The Subject Property is zoned R-2, Single-Family and is within the Plum Grove Hills Unit 3 Subdivision. The property is approximately 9,120 square feet and consists of a single-family residence. • The Petitioner is proposing to construct a “three seasons” room on the rear side of the principal structure. The addition will encroach upon the 40-foot minimum required rear-yard setback for principal buildings in the R-2 Zoning District. Setback reductions are contemplated as a Special Use in the zoning district. • The proposal complies with the height, building, and lot coverage maximums, within the R-2 Single Family Zoning District. • The majority of the surrounding area is also zoned R-2, Single Family Zoning District. Surrounding character / area qualities: • Upon review of the surrounding area, Staff identified a number of properties within the area, which possess a non-compliant rear yard setback, below 40’ from the rear lot line. Each property identified is located in the Plum Grove Hills Page 16 of 43 Subdivision. One property received zoning relief. o Identified properties and the respective rear yard setbacks are listed below: ▪ 833 S. Elm – 39’ ▪ 838 S. Elm – 29’ (received relief for setback reduction, #O-173-07) ▪ 853 S. Valley Lane – 36’ ▪ 639 Revere Lane – 28’ • Staff identified a few properties with a rear setback between 35–40 feet. These setbacks were likely approved administratively. The R-2 district rear setback minimums in the 1976 Zoning ordinance(subdivision platted in 1977) did not differ from the existing R-2 district requirements. • The former zoning ordinance — active at the time of development — contemplated portions of the principal building as a permitted obstruction in the rear yard. This provision allowed for the principal building to encroach upon the minimum 40’ setback. The ordinance contemplated portions of the principal building in the required rear yard, located no closer than 25 feet from the rear lot line. STANDARDS FOR SPECIAL USE: Since this Petition is not for a use publicly operated or traditionally affected with the public interest, those standards under Section 14.05 D (2) and (3) are applicable. Specifically, the Petitioners must show that the Special Use, if granted, is so designed, located, and proposed to be operated that the public health, safety, and welfare will be protected and will not cause substantial injury to the value of other property in the neighborhood in which it is located. The Petitioners have attempted to address the required standards. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Petitioner is proposing to construct a "three seasons" room to the rear of the principal structure. The proposal does not conflict with area and bulk standards of the R-2 Single Family Zoning District. Staff identified a number of properties in the surrounding area that were granted setbacks below the minimum required 40 feet. Staff has determined that the proposal is consistent with the character and qualities of surrounding properties. Therefore, Staff recommends approval of the proposed Special Use, subject to the following conditions: 1. The Special Use shall substantially conform to the plans prepared by Dhaval Parekh, dated 04/09/2026, except as such plans may be changed to conform to Village Codes and Ordinances. Page 17 of 43 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Special Use Application 2. Aerial Map 3. Plat of Survey 4. Site Plan 5. Elevations 6. Public Notice Page 18 of 43 SPECIAL USE APPLICATION Department of Planning & Zoning 200 E. Wood Street  Palatine, IL  60067-5339 Telephone: (847) 359-9047  Fax (847) 963-6247 Petitioner Name Business Name (if applicable) Parekh, Dhaval Subject Property Address 649 W. REVERE Lane Palatine, IL 60067 Please provide a description of your proposed request: Construction of a 16'x17'x16' unconditioned sunroom on a concrete pier foundation located off the South/West corner of the property located at 649 West Revere Lane. We are requesting a 5.5ft encroachment into the 40ft rear setback. Petitioner Justification Special Uses shall not be granted except on findings based upon the evidence in each specific case. Please address the following standards as these will be used in considering the specific relief you are seeking. That use deemed necessary for the public convenience at that location. Explain: Construction of the addition in this location will provide a usable space in the backyard with protection from the elements. The addition will match the existing color scheme of the home resulting in the appearance of the addition always being here. The use is designed, located, and proposed to be operated that the public health, safety, welfare will be protected. Explain: Construction of the addition with the 5.5ft encroachment into the rear yard setback will still have the entire addition located inside of the lot lines, resulting in no effects to the public health, safety or welfare. The use will not cause substantial injury to nearby property values. Explain: Construction of the addition with the 5.5ft encroachment into the rear yard setback is an improvement from the existing paver system installed, resulting in no injury to nearby property values. Page 19 of 43 In order to supplement the above standards, the Planning and Zoning Commission may also consider the following: With respect to front yard fencing and fencing in a rear yard/side yard abutting a street, the following additional standards must be met: a. Will meet the following aesthetic criteria: i. Will not destroy existing vistas in the area; ii. Will enhance the appearance of the homes and the streets in the area; and iii. Will not detract from the overall appearance of the community; or b. The fencing is found to be necessary to protect private property or the safety of the inhabitants of the property. Not Applicable. Page 2 of 2 Page 20 of 43 649 W. Revere Lane 0 100 200 Print Date: 5/11/2026 Notes ft Disclaimer: The GIS Consortium and MGP Inc. are not liable for any use, misuse, modification or disclosure of any map provided under applicable law. This map is for general information purposes only. Although the information is believed to be generally accurate, errors may exist and the user should independently confirm for accuracy. The map does not constitute a regulatory determination and is not a base for engineering design. A Registered Land Surveyor should be consulted to determine precise location boundaries on the ground. Page 21 of 43 Page 22 of 43 Page 23 of 43 NOTES: IRC. 2021 NEC. 2020 NOTES: ROOM IS AN UNCONDITIONED SPACE ASSUMED WIND LOAD = 115 MPH ULTIMATE ASSUMED SNOW LOAD = 30 PSF EXISTING CHIMNEY ASSUMED SOIL BEARING PRESSURE EXISTING ROOF = 3000 PSF ALL FASTENERS & CONNECTORS TO BE HOT DIPPED GALVANIZED PROJECT: PAREKH EXISTING EXISTING WINDOW WINDOW DATE: 4-9-2026 PAGE #: 1 REVISION: A MTL. ROOF TO DRAWING SCALE: 1/4" = 1'0" WALL MTL. ROOF FLASHING TO WALL DRAWN BY: TH FLASHING 12 EXISTING 3 BRICK Front Elevation 5" ALUM. GUTTER & 2X3" DOWN SPOUT ALMOND / ALMOND VINYL SINGLE SLIDE ALMOND / ALMOND VINYL SINGLE SLIDE ALMOND / ALMOND VINYL SINGLE SLIDE ALMOND / ALMOND VINYL SINGLE SLIDE Dhaval Parekh 649 West Revere Ln. ALMOND / ALMOND VINYL ALMOND / ALMOND VINYL ALMOND / ALMOND VINYL ALMOND / ALMOND VINYL EXISTING SINGLE SLIDE SINGLE SLIDE SINGLE SLIDE SINGLE SLIDE LOW-E ARGON LOW-E ARGON LOW-E ARGON LOW-E ARGON DOOR HEIGHT @ WALLS A & C CUSTOMER 7'-11 1/4" Palatine, IL. 60067 LP TRIM LP TRIM 1X4 LP TRIM NEW 40" X 40" COMPOSITE LANDING VINYL SIDING 1'-11 3/4" GRADE 15" RND. CONC PIER 8" RND. 15" RND. 42" BELOW CONC PIER 18" RND. 15" RND. CONC PIER FIN. GRADE 42" BELOW 15" RND. CONC PIER CONC PIER 42" BELOW FIN. GRADE CONC PIER 42" BELOW 42" BELOW FIN. GRADE 42" BELOW FIN. GRADE FIN. GRADE FIN. GRADE ARCHITECT SEAL Front Elevation SCALE 1/4" = 1' - 0" Page 24 of 43 NOTES: PROJECT: PAREKH DATE: 4-9-2026 PAGE #: 2 CONTINUOUS RIDGE VENT REVISION: A DRAWING SCALE: 1/4" = 1'0" 235# ASPHALT SINGLES EXISTING TO MATCH EXISTING 5" ALUM. GUTTER & 2X3" DOWN SPOUT DRAWN BY: TH HOUSE Left Elevation Dhaval Parekh ALMOND / ALMOND VINYL ALMOND / ALMOND VINYL ALMOND / ALMOND VINYL SINGLE SLIDE SINGLE SLIDE SINGLE SLIDE LOW-E ARGON LOW-E ARGON LOW-E ARGON HEIGHT @ WALLS A & C CAULK 649 West Revere Ln. CONNECTION 7'-11 1/4" LP TRIM CUSTOMER Palatine, IL. 60067 LP TRIM 1X4 LP TRIM VINYL SIDING 1'-11 3/4" GRADE 15" RND. 15" RND. 18" RND. CONC PIER CONC PIER CONC PIER 42" BELOW 42" BELOW 42" BELOW FIN. GRADE FIN. GRADE FIN. GRADE ARCHITECT SEAL Left Elevation SCALE 1/4" = 1' - 0" Page 25 of 43 NOTES: PROJECT: PAREKH DATE: 4-9-2026 PAGE #: 3 CONTINUOUS RIDGE VENT REVISION: A DRAWING SCALE: 1/4" = 1'0" 235# ASPHALT SINGLES 5" ALUM. GUTTER & TO MATCH EXISTING 2X3" DOWN SPOUT EXISTING HOUSE DRAWN BY: TH Right Elevation Dhaval Parekh ALMOND / ALMOND VINYL ALMOND / ALMOND VINYL ALMOND / ALMOND VINYL SINGLE SLIDE LOW-E ARGON SINGLE SLIDE LOW-E ARGON PATIO DOOR LOW-E ARGON HEIGHT @ WALLS A & C TEMPERED TEMPERED TEMPERED CAULK CONNECTION 7'-11 1/4" 649 West Revere Ln. LP TRIM CUSTOMER Palatine, IL. 60067 LP TRIM 1X4 LP TRIM NEW 40" X 40" COMPOSITE 1X4 LP TRIM LANDING 1'-4" LP TRIM VINYL SIDING GRADE 15" RND. CONC PIER 42" BELOW 8" RND. 18" RND. CONC PIER CONC PIER 15" RND. FIN. GRADE CONC PIER 42" BELOW 42" BELOW 8" RND. 42" BELOW FIN. GRADE FIN. GRADE CONC PIER FIN. GRADE 42" BELOW FIN. GRADE ARCHITECT SEAL Right Elevation SCALE 1/4" = 1' - 0" Page 26 of 43 NOTES: NO BASEMENT EXITS OR ESCAPE WINDOWS WILL BE REMOVED OR BLOCKED BY THIS ADDITION ASSUMED SOIL BEARING PRESSURE = 3000 PSF HOUSE BASEMENT EXISTING HOUSE FOUNDATION . 11 1/4"REF. DIM. " SQ START FROM CORNER 12 PROJECT: PAREKH . 1'-2" "S . OF HOUSE FOUNDATION "S 9'-4 1/2" Q Q 12 12 17'-7 1/2" DATE: 4-9-2026 (2 LANDSCAPE FABRIC 3' -3 OVER ROOM FOOTPRINT 7'-11 3/4" 1/ PAGE #: 4 8'-3 5/8" 16 ") (2) 2X10 AC2 RE 7'-11 3/4" (2) 2X10 AC2 F. 2x8 AC2 FL. JSTS REVISION: A @ 16" O.C. SOLID BLOCKING @ MIDSPAN JOIST TO SET ON GALV. HANGERS DRAWING SCALE: 1/4" = 1'0" DRAWN BY: TH 15'-11 1/2" 15'-11 1/2" D D D "A" WALL "C" WALL N N N "R "R "R D 18 18 18 N 15'-8 3/4" R Foundation Plan 8" 2x8 AC2 FL. JSTS 2'-4 3/4" Dhaval Parekh @ 16" O.C. SOLID BLOCKING @ MIDSPAN (2) 2X10 AC2 649 West Revere Ln. JOIST TO SET ON GALV. HANGERS (2) 2X10 AC2 (2) 2X10 AC2 D DROP BEAM N R 8" 3'-11 7/8" CUSTOMER ND ND N D ND ND Palatine, IL. 60067 "R "R "R "R "R 15 15 18 15 15 (2) 2X10 AC2 (2) 2X10 AC2 (2) 2X10 AC2 (2) 2X10 AC2 4'-0 1/8" 8'-3" 12'-5 7/8" 16'-5 1/2" 16'-11" "B" WALL ARCHITECT SEAL Foundation Plan SCALE 1/4" = 1' - 0" Page 27 of 43 NOTES: IRC. 2021 NOTES: ASSUMED WIND LOAD REMOVE EXISTING BAY = 115 MPH ULTIMATE WINDOW AND INSTALL 10' (4) PANEL 250 SERIES DOOR CENTERED IN OPENING ASSUMED SNOW LOAD VERIFY EXISTING EXISTING HOUSE WALL FRAMING HOUSE (2) 1 3/4" X 11 7/8" LVL EXISTING DOOR = 30 PSF ALL FASTENERS & CONNECTORS TO BE HOT DIPPED GALVANIZED (2) 2x12 CONTINUOUS HEADER (2) 2x12 CONTINUOUS HEADER 7" 2X4 AC2 STUDS 7" 2X4 AC2 STUDS 3'-10 1/2" PROJECT: PAREKH 4'-7" DATE: 4-9-2026 EXISTING PAVERS "A" WALL TO REMAIN PAGE #: 5 (2) 1 3/4" X 11 7/8" LVL RIDGE BM. REVISION: A 6 1/2" 6 1/2" DRAWING SCALE: 1/4" = 1'0" "C" WALL DOUBLE RAFTERS DRAWN BY: TH 16'-0" 16'-0" FOR FUTURE SWING CONFIRM LOCATION AND 4'-7" 6'-0" DIMENSIONS WITH HOME STEP DOWN OWNNER 7" First Floor Plan Dhaval Parekh 3'-4" (2) 2x12 CONTINUOUS HEADER (2) 2x12 CONTINUOUS HEADER 649 West Revere Ln. 6 1/2" 2 X 6 SPF RAFTERS 2 X 6 SPF RAFTERS 6 1/2" @ 16" O.C. @ 16" O.C. NEW 40" X 40" 3'-10 1/2" COMPOSITE LANDING 4'-7" CUSTOMER 7" 7" Palatine, IL. 60067 3'-7 1/8" 3'-7 1/8" 3'-7 1/8" 3'-7 1/8" 6" 6 1/2" 6 1/2" 6 1/2" 6" LINE OF ROOF OVERHANG 17'-0" "B" WALL ARCHITECT SEAL First Floor Plan SCALE 1/4" = 1' - 0" Page 28 of 43 NOTES: NEC. 2020 ROOM CIRCUIT IS AFCI / GFCI PROTECTED ALL RECEPTACLE ARE TYPE WR / TR EXISTING EMT CONDUIT SWITCH AND OUTLET HOUSE EXISTING DOOR 3 ELEVATED OUTLET ELECTRICAL SYMBOL LIST CONFIRM LOCATION PROJECT: PAREKH WITH HOMEOWNER 20A DISCONNECT CEILING SURFACE LIGHT DATE: 4-9-2026 PAGE #: 6 "A" WALL WALL MOUNTED FIXTURE SPOTLIGHT REVISION: A TRACK LIGHT ASSEMBLY DRAWING SCALE: 1/4" = 1'0" "C" WALL SWITCH DRAWN BY: TH THREE-WAY SWITCH 3 STEP DOWN 7" DIMMER SWITCH DM Dhaval Parekh Electric Plan SINGLE RECEPTACLE OUTLET DUPLEX RECEPTACLE OUTLET NOTE: FAN BOX TO BE QUADRUPLEX FAN RATED RECEPTACLE OUTLET 649 West Revere Ln. DUPLEX RECEPTABLE OUTLET-SPLIT WIRED 3 DEDICATED 240 V / 20A OUTLET CUSTOMER WEATHERPROOF DUPLEX Palatine, IL. 60067 WR / TR OUTLET GROUND FAULT TR/WR GFI PROTECTED RECEPTACLE FLOOR DUPLEX RECEPTACLE OUTLET "B" WALL ARCHITECT SEAL Electric Plan SCALE 1/4" = 1' - 0" Page 29 of 43 ROOF CONSTRUCTION: 235# ASPHALT SHINGLES (TO MATCH HOUSE) ICE & WATER SHIELD OVER ENTIRE ROOF DECK 1/2" OSB SHEATHING CONTINUOUS 2 X 6 SPF RAFTERS RIDGE VENT @ 16" OC W/ STRONG DRIVE 6" TRUSS NOTES: SIMPSON LSTA-12 SCREWS ANCHORED TO A TIE APPLIED OVER HEADER BEAM TOP OF RAFTER PAIRS 12 3 PRO-VENT BETWEEN EAVE DETAIL: RAFTERS 1" AIR SPACE 5" ALUM. GUTTER w/ 2x3" DOWNSPOUT R-19 INSULATION ALUM. FASCIA & VENTED SOFFIT A 2x6 SPF SUB FASCIA (2) 1 3/4" x 11 7/8" LVL 1 1/2" 11 1/4" B B C 1'-0" DRAWN BY: TH DRAWING SCALE: 7/16" = 1'0" REVISION: A PAGE #: 7 DATE: 4-9-2026 PROJECT: PAREKH 3/4" (2)-2X12 CONT. CEILING: C HEADER ALONG T&G PINE A&C WALLS PARALLEL TO BEAM BEAM WRAP: SELECT PINE WALL CONSTRUCTION: VINYL SIDING INTERIOR TRIM: 95 1/4" PRIMED PINE LP TEC TRIM CEDAR TEXTURE 68" R.O. INTERIOR WALL SPACE: DRYWALL (PRIMED) TYPAR WRAP OR EQUAL HEIGHT OF WALLS A&C HOUSE WALL: DRYWALL (PRIMED) 1/2" OSB SHEATHING 2 x 4 STUDS @ 16" OC CUSTOMER Typical Wall Section SOLID KNEE WALLS SHOULDER CUT 6X6 Dhaval Parekh TREATED POST W/ 1/2"X10" CARRIAGE BOLT THROUGH BEAMS 6X6 TREATED POST W/ SIMPSON 13 3/4" 649 West Revere Ln. 3/4" T&G OSB R-19 INSULATION PLYWOOD ON EXISTING ABE66Z MTL. BASE BETWEEN JOISTS 2x10 SPF JOISTS @ 16" OC w/ 1/2"X7" REDHEAD ANCHOR Room Addition Palatine, IL. 60067 1'-4" AC2 PLYWOOD AND FURRING FOR LANDSCAPE FABRIC INSULATION GRADE OVER ROOM FOOTPRINT 3'- 6" 15" RND. CONC. PIER 15" RND. CONC. PIER 18" RND. CONC. PIER 42" BELOW FIN. GRADE 42" BELOW FIN. GRADE 42" BELOW FIN. GRADE ARCHITECT SEAL Page 30 of 43 NOTES: 235# ASPHALT SHINGLES PRO-VENT BETWEEN (TO MATCH HOUSE) RAFTERS 1" AIR SPACE ON ICE & WATER SHIELD R-19 FACED BATT STEP FLASHING ALONG 1/2" OSB SHEATHING INSULATION HOUSE WALL EXISTING 2 X 6 SPF RAFTERS @ 16" O.C. BRICK FACADE HOUSE WALL 1'-0" PROJECT: PAREKH ALUMINUM SOFFIT AND FASCIA CEILING: BLOCK SOLID DATE: 4-9-2026 LVL RIDGE BEAM BELOW BEAM T&G PINE TO DOOR HEADER PARALLEL TO (2) - 1 3/4" X 11 7/8" w/ (2) 2x4 SPF PAGE #: 8 RIDGE BEAM REVISION: A CEILING: HOUSE WALL: T&G PINE PARALLEL TO RIDGE DRYWALL (PRIMED) EXISTING DRAWING SCALE: 3/4" = 1'0" BEAM WRAP: 2X4 AC2 STUDS HOUSE DRAWN BY: TH House Connection SELECT PINE Dhaval Parekh INTERIOR TRIM: PRIMED PINE EXISTING (1) 2X4 SPF BRICK FACADE TOP PLATE SECTION A-A 649 West Revere Ln. GABLE EAVE Detail CUSTOMER (2) 2X12 CONTINUOUS Palatine, IL. 60067 HEADER A&C WALL (2) H2.5 AZ SIMPSON CONNECTORS EACH SIDE FROM HEADER TO HOUSE TOP PLATES HOUSE WALL 6 1/2" 3 1/2" 1X6 TRIM STARTER BLOCK SOLID MULLION BELOW HEADERS 3 3/4" TO EXISTING FOUNDATION 3" HOUSE WALL: 3 1/2" w/ (2) 2x4 SPF 1X8 TRIM DRYWALL (PRIMED) EXISTING BRICK FACADE SECTION B-B SECTION C-C ARCHITECT SEAL House Connection Detail - Room Addition SCALE 3/4" = 1' - 0" Page 31 of 43 Page 32 of 43 PUBLIC NOTICE A Public Hearing will be held before the Village of Palatine Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday, May 26, 2026 at 7 PM, in the Village Council Chambers in Palatine Village Hall, 200 E. Wood Street, relative to a request for the following: • Special use to permit a rear yard setback of 34 feet, instead of the minimum required setback of 40 feet in the R-2 zoning district. The property is commonly known as 649 W. Revere Lane. The Petitioner is requesting a Special Use be granted to allow 275 square-foot “sun room” addition to the rear of the principal structure. The above petition has been filed by Dhaval Parekh, Owner, and is available for examination in the office of the Village Clerk, 200 E. Wood Street. FILE #: SU-000261-2026 VILLAGE OF PALATINE Jan Wood, Chair Palatine Planning and Zoning Commission DATED: This 7th day of May 2026 RA Page 33 of 43 IV.B 100 E. Wood Street STAFF REPORT: TO: Palatine Planning and Zoning Commission Jan Wood, Chair FROM: R. Auer PETITIONER: Brandon Naser, Owner PLAN NUMBER: SU-000262-2026 BACKGROUND: The Petitioner is requesting approval of a Special Use application to allow for a 4-foot tall open-style fence in a side yard abutting a street (N. Benton Street), with a proposed 3-foot setback from the Benton Street property line. Therefore, the Petitioner is requesting: • Special use to permit a fence in side yard abutting a street, where the side lot line of the side yard abutting a street abuts the side lot line of a front yard of an adjacent lot. • Variation to not include landscaping between a fence in a side yard abutting a street, and the abutting street. KEY ISSUES: • The Subject Property is zoned R-2, Single-Family, and is within the Jarczyk's Subdivision. The property is approximately 7,675 square feet and consists of a single-family residence and detached garage. • The Petitioner is proposing to construct a 4-foot-tall aluminum open-style fence in the side yard along Benton Street. The fence abuts the side lot line of the front yard at 149 N. Benton Street. o The proposed fence will be set back approximately 3’ from the lot line abutting N. Benton Street. o Public sidewalk is located on the subject property, abutting the subject lot line. Therefore, the public sidewalk possesses 2.5’ of the immediate side yard depth. The fence is proposed to be setback 6" from Page 34 of 43 the edge of the sidewalk (nearest to the residence). • The proposed fence will be used to enclose the yard for pets and children. • The zoning ordinance contemplates fences in a side yard, abutting a street, and abutting the side lot line of a front yard as a Special Use. • The petitioner is requesting approval of a variation to waive landscaping requirements. Fence standards require landscaping(minimum 36 inches in height) for fences in a side yard abutting a street. Surrounding character / area qualities: • To determine the proposal's compatibility with the surrounding area, Staff evaluated corner-yard fences located nearby. As the proposed fence is in proximity to a public walk, Staff recorded the distance between the fences and the abutting sidewalk. • The lots and sidewalks were part of early development in Palatine, and, as a result, vary in distance. Landscaping varies among the properties; some fences are not paired with required landscaping. • Fence designs (for fences in a corner side yard abutting a street) consisted of the following: Address Fence height Setback Distance from Sidewalk 157 E. Wood St 4’ aluminum 5 feet (#O-009- >5' decorative, open 22) 55 E. Wood 4’ picket 4 feet >4' Street 138 N. Hale St 4’ picket 2 feet (#O-041- >3' 13) 125 E. Colfax St 4’ aluminum >1’ foot, existing >1' decorative, open non-conforming 203 N. Benton 4’ aluminum 1 foot (#O-031- Less than 1' decorative, open 28) 133 N. Hale St 4’ picket 5 feet >5' STANDARDS FOR SPECIAL USE: Since this Petition is not for a use publicly operated or traditionally affected with the public interest, those standards under Section 14.05 D (2) and (3) are applicable. Specifically, the Petitioners must show that the Page 35 of 43 Special Use, if granted, is so designed, located, and proposed to be operated that the public health, safety, and welfare will be protected and will not cause substantial injury to the value of other property in the neighborhood in which it is located. The Petitioners have attempted to address the required standards. STANDARDS FOR A VARIATION: Standards for a Variation are found in Section 14.03 D (1) and (2) of the Zoning Code. Specifically, the Petitioners must show that the property in question cannot yield a reasonable return if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations governing the district in which it is located; that the plight of the owner is due to unique circumstances; and that the variation, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The Petition for Variation is attached, and the Petitioners have attempted to address the required standards. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Petitioner is requesting approval of a Special Use application to allow for a 4-foot tall open-style fence in a side yard abutting N. Benton Street, with a proposed 3-foot setback from the Benton Street property line. Staff evaluated corner-yard fences (abutting a front yard) located in the surrounding area. Among them, the fences have some variation in design (setbacks and fence height). Setback less than one foot from the sidewalk, the proposed fence is generally inconsistent with the fence setbacks in the surrounding area. To minimize damage to persons or property, the majority of approved fences are set back at a reasonable distance from the sidewalk. Staff believes that the proposed setback of 6" is inconsistent with the majority of observed fences. Staff is recommending that the setback between the fence and sidewalk be increased (corresponding with condition #2). Therefore, Staff is recommending action at the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Commission. If the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of the project, Staff recommends the following conditions be included: 1. The Special Use shall substantially conform to the plans prepared by Brandon Naser, dated 04/30/2026, except as such plans may be changed to conform to Village Codes and Ordinances. 2. The setback for the proposed open-style fence shall be increased from the property line, with the site plan revised in a manner acceptable to the Director of Planning and Zoning. 3. The fence gate will open only to the inside of the residence. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Aerial Map 2. Plat of Survey 3. Site Plan With Fence Elevation 4. Fence Elevation Page 36 of 43 5. Public Notice Page 37 of 43 100 E. Wood St 0 100 200 Print Date: 5/4/2026 Notes ft Disclaimer: The GIS Consortium and MGP Inc. are not liable for any use, misuse, modification or disclosure of any map provided under applicable law. This map is for general information purposes only. Although the information is believed to be generally accurate, errors may exist and the user should independently confirm for accuracy. The map does not constitute a regulatory determination and is not a base for engineering design. A Registered Land Surveyor should be consulted to determine precise location boundaries on the ground. Page 38 of 43 Page 39 of 43 Page 40 of 43 Page 41 of 43 Page 42 of 43 PUBLIC NOTICE A Public Hearing will be held before the Village of Palatine Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday, May 26, 2026 at 7 PM, in the Village Council Chambers in Palatine Village Hall, 200 E. Wood Street, relative to a request for the following: • Special use to permit a fence in side yard abutting a street, where the side lot line of the side yard abutting a street abuts the side lot line of a front yard of an adjacent lot. • Variation to not include landscaping between a fence in a side yard abutting a street, and the abutting street. The property is commonly known as 100 E. Wood Street. The Petitioner is requesting approval of a Special Use application to allow for a 4-foot tall open-style fence in a side yard abutting N. Benton Street, with a proposed 3-foot setback from the Benton Street property line. The above petition has been filed by Brandon Naser, owner, and is available for examination in the office of the Village Clerk, 200 E. Wood Street. FILE #: SU-000262-2026 VILLAGE OF PALATINE Jan Wood, Chair Palatine Planning and Zoning Commission DATED: This 7th day of May 2026 RA Page 43 of 43