P&Z: Plainfield Township Garage Addition Approved Despite Staff Denial Recommendation

Will County Planning and Zoning Commission | October 6, 2026

Article Summary: The Will County Board Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday, Oct. 6, 2026, granted a side yard setback variance for a 182-square-foot garage addition built without a permit on Von Esch Road, rejecting a staff recommendation of denial after the homeowner apologized on the record and explained he built the addition to store a late relative’s belongings.

Von Esch Road Garage Variance Key Points:

• The commission approved a variance cutting the required northern side yard setback in the R-3 district from 10 feet to 1.3 feet in case ZC-26-048 (V-26-150).
• Land use staff recommended denial, finding the hardship self-created because the addition was built without a building permit.
• Staff told the commission that if the variance were denied, the applicant would have to remove the addition.
• No neighbors objected, and no notified agency submitted comments.

WILL COUNTY — The Will County Board Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday, Oct. 6, 2026, voted to allow a garage addition at 2508 Von Esch Road to stand just 1.3 feet from a neighboring property line, overruling its own staff, who had recommended the request be denied.

The variance, filed as case ZC-26-048 and variance V-26-150, reduces the R-3 single-family residential district’s required 10-foot side yard setback on the northern side of the property to 1.3 feet. Owner Victor Olivo sought the relief so the county’s zoning department could sign off on a pending after-the-fact building permit for a 182-square-foot addition he built onto a detached garage without first obtaining a permit.

Planner Jesus Briseno, who prepared the Sept. 25, 2026, staff report, told the commission the property was placed in violation in June 2026 under case 26LU00397 and that Olivo applied for an after-the-fact building permit, No. 2601858, on June 3, 2026. The encroachment surfaced only when staff reviewed the plat of survey submitted with that permit application.

“As staff reviewed the plat of survey submitted as part of the building permit, it was discovered that the addition was built 1.3 feet away from the northern side property line,” Briseno said.

Staff Recommended Denial

The staff report concluded that the owner’s plight was not due to unique circumstances, calling it “the applicant’s personal desire to build a garage addition encroaching into the R-3 zoning district side yard setback without approval of a building permit.” On the question of whether the hardship was created by a person with an interest in the property, the report was blunt: “Staff finds that the alleged hardship is self-created.”

Staff also raised a maintenance concern. A chain-link fence runs along the northern property line, and the report found that the addition’s proximity to that fence “may make it difficult to mow the narrow strip between the two, creating potential for excessive vegetation growth in that area.”

Asked by a commissioner whether upkeep between the structures would be difficult if the addition remained, Briseno agreed, and added the practical consequence of a no vote: “I will note that if the variance is denied the applicant will have to remove that addition.”

Asked how close the structure to the north sits to its own line, Briseno said that parcel received an administrative adjustment to five feet from the property line, which he dated to 2003.

Owner’s Testimony Shifted the Outcome

Olivo, who told the commission he was “not a good speaker,” opened by apologizing.

“First of all, I want to apologize for building without a permit,” he said. “I didn’t know the rules.”

He said he and his wife bought the house in September 2022 — a date confirmed by the recorded deed cited in the staff report — and that the side lot sat unused for two years. After his father-in-law died in 2024, he said, he and his wife cleared out his in-laws’ apartment and put belongings “that has a lot of sentimental value” into a storage unit at $175 a month. When the storage operator notified him the rate was going to $200, he said, “I couldn’t get in my pocket no more,” and he and his wife used savings to build the addition instead. His mother-in-law now lives with the family, and her belongings are in the addition.

“I know acting of, you know, goodwill, I built that place not knowing that I had to get all this, you know, permits and variances and all that stuff,” Olivo said. He told the commission the space holds only family belongings, not a finished room: “A lot of people do addition to the garage, do like a man cave and, you know, bars and all this. I just — all her stuff is there.”

He also accepted the commission’s authority plainly. “If you guys had to take it down, I mean, it is what it is,” Olivo said. “The law is the law and rules are rules.”

Olivo said he would maintain the strip between the addition and the fence if the variance were granted, and described a disagreement with a neighbor over concrete work and over a vinyl fence he said he installed because of a neighborhood dog, saying the metal fence on the line belongs to the neighbor. No objectors appeared, and Briseno confirmed he had received no correspondence from neighbors.

A commissioner then moved for approval, saying, “given no objection from the public and a sincere apology from the applicant, I move for approval of a variance for side-yard setback northern side from 10 ft to 1.3 ft.” The motion drew two seconds, and the chair announced the variance passed on the roll call.

Background

The 0.465-acre parcel has 133 feet of lot frontage and is lot 234 in the Crystal Lawns Addition Unit No. 4 subdivision, platted in 1966. Staff deemed it a conforming R-3 parcel. With the addition included, total accessory building area on the site is 1,454 square feet, below the 1,500-square-foot maximum the R-3 district permits.

Staff found the variance would not alter the locality’s essential character, noting the parcel immediately north received an administrative adjustment in 2003 under case AV03-10 reducing its side yard setback from 10 feet to five feet, and that GIS aerials show several other accessory structures in the area that appear to encroach into R-3 side yards. Staff also found the purpose was not exclusively to make more money, as the space is for personal storage.

The property sits in the Joliet Facility Planning Area and the DuPage River Watershed, with no flood hazard or wetland areas identified. Soils are entirely Elliott silt loam, 2 to 4 percent slopes. The Will-South Cook Soil and Water Conservation District found the activity would have “little to no effect on the existing land” in Natural Resource Information Report #5898, dated June 5, 2026. The Will County Health Department, Plainfield Fire District, Plainfield Township Road District and Plainfield Township submitted no comments.

The variance does not by itself legalize the structure. The staff report notes the after-the-fact building permit will not be issued until the county’s zoning, building and engineering departments all sign off. The parcel lies in County Board District 7.