AGENDA MEMO
CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: May 3, 2010
Issue
Statement
PZC
2010-05: 1418 Greenbriar Lane: Petitioner
seeks a variation to reduce the interior side yard setback for a parking pad
from 5 feet to 3.5 feet, and for the parking pad to encroach 1.5 feet into a
drainage and utility easement.
Discussion/Overview
At their respective
meetings, both the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Municipal Services
Committee recommended denial of the variation petition. The required public hearing was held by the
Commission on April 7, 2010.
Therefore,
a draft ordinance has not been prepared.
Since
the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial of the petition, a
favorable vote of 2/3 of the City Council is required for the variation petition
to be approved, per Section 5A-2-2-3(F)(2) of the City Code. If the City Council decides to grant the
variation, staff will prepare an ordinance to be presented to the City Council
at its next meeting.
The
full agenda memo follows as “Additional Information.”
Decision Mode
The Planning/Zoning Commission considered
this item at its meeting on April 21, 2010.
The Municipal Services Committee
considered this item at its meeting on April 26, 2010.
The City Council will consider this item
at its meeting on May 3, 2010.
Additional Information
Issue
Statement
PZC
2010-05: 1418 Greenbriar Lane: Petitioner
seeks a variation to reduce the interior side yard setback for a parking pad
from 5 feet to 3.5 feet, and for the parking pad to encroach 1.5 feet into a
drainage and utility easement.
Applicable
Regulations: Zoning Ordinance,
Section 5A-5-11(A)(5):
Recreational Vehicle Regulations.
Zoning
Ordinance, Section 5A-11-3(A)(4): Driveway Requirements, Minimum Distance From
Property Line.
General
Information
Petitioner/
Property
Owner: Elena Flisk
Property
Location:
PIN: 09-33-203-002
Existing Zoning: R-2 Single-Family Residence
Existing Land Use: Single-family detached home
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use
(surrounding the Darien Towne Centre shopping center):
North: R-2 Single-Family Residence – single-family
detached homes.
South: R-2 Single-Family Residence –
single-family detached homes.
East: R-2 Single-Family Residence – single-family
detached homes.
West: R-2 Single-Family Residence – single-family
detached homes.
Comprehensive
Plan Update: Low Density Residential
Size of Property: 10,050 square feet
Floodplain: None.
Natural Features: None.
Transportation: Property has frontage on
Documents
Submitted
This report is based on the following
information submitted to the Community Development Department by the
petitioner:
1. Plat
of Survey, 1 sheet, prepared by Joseph M. De Craene, dated March 23, 2005.
Planning
Overview/ Discussion
The subject property is located on the
north side of
The petitioner proposes to widen an existing
parking pad to accommodate a recreational vehicle. The parking pad is located within the
interior side yard.
In 2009, the petitioner secured a
building permit to construct a parking pad adjacent to the garage to
accommodate the petitioner’s recreational vehicle. The parking pad, as shown on the permit,
complied with City Code. The petitioner
sought this permit in order to comply with the City Code dealing with the outdoor
parking/storage of recreational vehicles.
The petitioner had been sent a code violation letter after the City
received a complaint.
Please note, regarding a permit submittal
for a parking pad, staff reviews only the plat of survey. Staff does not review the architectural
details of the home to determine roof over hangs, etc., nor does staff
determine whether the recreational vehicle, in this case, can fit onto the
proposed parking pad. The homeowner is
responsible for determining whether the parking pad can accommodate the
proposed use.
After the parking pad was constructed, it
was noted that the recreational vehicle did not fit onto the parking pad, a
portion of the vehicle was not sitting on a hard surface as required. The roof overhang prevents the recreational
vehicle from being located closer to the house wall. After the petitioner was notified to bring
the matter into compliance, the petitioner choose to widen the parking
pad. However, there is not enough room
to widen the parking pad and also comply with the required setback per City
Code. Therefore, a variation is required
to widen the parking pad.
The petitioner proposes an 11-foot wide
parking pad. The plat of survey shows
14.26 feet between the house foundation and the side lot line (east side of
property). There is a 5-foot wide
easement along the east lot line.
Currently, a portion of the recreational
vehicle extends past the front of the house toward the street. The petitioner has indicated the parking pad
will be extended toward the rear yard so that the vehicle can be moved so it
will not extend past the front of the house, to comply with City Code.
The following is the City Code section
dealing with recreational vehicles and the minimum distance required from a
side lot line for a parking pad:
5A-5-11: RECREATIONAL VEHICLE REGULATIONS:
The storage and parking of boats, boat
trailers, mobile homes, travel trailers, campers, off road vehicles, personal
watercraft and other recreational vehicles as defined by the
(A) Storage
And Parking Of Recreational Vehicles: One recreational vehicle, or one boat on
a trailer, or one trailer with up to two (2) personal recreational vehicles, or
one trailer may be stored outside an enclosed structure within a rear or
interior side yard only, subject to the following:
1. Recreational vehicles may be parked
within a front or corner side yard, on a driveway, under the following
conditions:
(a) For loading, unloading, cleaning and
related activities for a period not exceeding three (3) consecutive days.
(b) For temporary occupancy by guests as
permitted by this section.
2. The recreational vehicle
shall not be used or occupied for living, housekeeping,
or business purposes, except for use by temporary guests not to exceed a period
of fourteen (14) consecutive days and for not more than two (2) occurrences in
a calendar year.
3. The recreational vehicle shall not exceed thirty five feet
(35') in length and eight feet (8') in width except that boats shall not exceed
twenty five feet (25') in length and ten feet (10') in height, exclusive of
antennas, masts, or other accessories.
4. All such recreational equipment must
be kept in good repair and carry a current year's license and/or registration.
5. All recreational vehicles, boats or personal recreational
vehicles on a trailer, or trailers shall be parked or stored on an asphalt,
concrete or other hard surface material which meets the setback requirement for
driveways set forth in subsection 5A-11-3(A)4
of this title. (Ord. 0-38-08, 10-6-2008)
5A-11-3(A)(4): DRIVEWAY REQUIREMENTS, Minimum
Distance From Property Line:
4. Minimum Distance From
Property Line: The minimum distance of any driveway used for a single-family attached or detached dwelling
shall be five feet (5') from any property line and cannot be located in a
platted easement. For other uses (permitted or requiring special use approval)
in the residential districts, the separation between the property line and the driveway
shall be a minimum of twenty feet (20'). Residential driveways nonconforming to
the setback requirements as of the date of this title may be continued until
such time as the principal structure is completely reconstructed, subject to a
site inspection by city staff to assess site drainage conditions prior to the
issuance of a permit. Joint driveways may occur in the required yard without
regard to the side lot line or rear lot line at the point of combination of the
parcels. (Ord. 0-38-08, 10-6-2008)
The petitioner does have the option to park/store the recreational
vehicle within the rear yard, on a hard surface. The petitioner should explain alternatives considered
for parking/storing their recreational vehicle on the property, such as a hard
surface within the rear yard.
It is the parking pad distance from the lot line that is the subject of
the variation petition, not necessarily the recreational vehicle.
The variation request must address the following criteria
for approval:
1. Whether the general character of the property
will be adversely altered.
2. Whether the overall
value of the property will be improved and there will not be any potential
adverse effects on the neighboring properties.
3. Whether the alleged
need for the variation has been
created by any person presently having a
proprietary interest in the premises.
4. Whether the proposed
variation will impair an adequate supply of light and air in adjacent property,
substantially increase congestion in the public streets, increase the danger of
fire or endanger the public safety.
5. Whether the proposed
variation will adversely alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
Staff Findings/Recommendations
There are not any homes within this
neighborhood which have parking pads or driveways within an interior side yard. Within this neighborhood, there is not an
established development pattern with driveways within or through side yards. Staff finds the proposed variation will adversely
alter the character of the property and of the neighborhood. Therefore, staff recommends the Commission
make the following recommendation to deny the variation petition:
Based upon the submitted petition and the
information presented, the request associated with PZC 20010-05 IS NOT IN CONFORMANCE
with the standards of the Darien
City Code and, therefore, I move the Planning and Zoning Commission RECOMMEND
DENIAL of the petition as presented.
Planning and Zoning
Commission Review – April 21, 2010
The
Planning and Zoning Commission considered this matter at their meeting on April
21, 2010. The following members were
absent: Beverly Meyer – Chairperson,
Robert Erickson, Donald Hickok, Gloria Jiskra, Ronald Kiefer, John Lind,
Raymond Mielkus, Kenneth Ritzert, and Michael Griffith – Senior Planner and
Members
absent: Susan Vonder Heide.
Michael
Griffith, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff agenda memo. He described the requested variation
petition. He noted the existing parking
pad located on the side of the garage is permitted as constructed, but the
petitioner proposes to widen it to fit their recreational vehicle onto the
parking pad to comply with the City Code regarding the parking and storage of
recreational vehicles.
Brian
Flisk, the petitioner, was present. He
stated staff’s criteria for granting a variation and their conclusions are in
accurate. He stated there are homes in
Darien with parking pads on the side, that all neighborhoods in Darien are part
of Darien; that the City changed the
Code to require RVs to be parked on the side, so how can the City deny the
variation when he is trying to comply, that he does not want to park his RV on
the side but it is the City requiring it to be parked on the side; that 18 inches of concrete does not alter the
value of the property and questioned what study the staff used to state that
the character will be impacted; that 18
inches of concrete has nothing to do with air and light and does not affect the
street; that 18 inches of concrete has
nothing to do with the character of the property. He stated his neighbor is not unhappy about
the concrete, he does not like the RV.
Chairperson
Meyer asked Mr. Flisk if he had photos of properties within his immediate neighborhood
with side yard parking pads.
Mr.
Flisk stated no, that all neighborhoods in
Commissioner
Erickson asked for the length of the RV.
Mr.
Flisk stated it is 26 feet long.
Commissioner
Mielkus asked about the size of the existing parking pad and the size of the
patio located behind the home, asking if the RV could be parked partially on
the patio to the back of the house.
Mr.
Flisk stated the patio is raised, it is not at the same level as the parking
pad, and parking the RV on the patio would block a door. He stated the roof overhang prevents the RV
from fitting onto the concrete pad, if the roof overhang is removed, there
would not be a need for the variation.
Commissioner
Jiskra asked for the width of the RV.
Mr.
Flisk stated it is 8 feet wide, the bumpers are a little wider.
Commissioner
Lind asked if the RV fits onto the existing parking pad.
Mr.
Flisk stated the roof overhang causes an obstruction.
Chairperson
Meyer asked staff if the RV blocked air and light.
Mr.
Griffith stated staff does not think the RV parked in the side yard blocks the
air and light onto the adjacent property, no more than the petitioner’s house does.
Vern Wojak stated the RV should be moved all the way
into the back yard. He stated it is a
big RV. He stated the concrete pad is not
the issue, it is the big RV.
Michael
Boyle,
Frank Brodzinski,
Betty
Chaggaris,
Lucille Piotrowski,
Mr.
Griffith stated in 2008 the City Council amended the City Code to require RVs
to be parked in a side or rear yard, and staff began enforcing this in 2009 at
the direction of the City Council. He
stated prior to 2008, a resident could park their RV anywhere on their
property. He stated staff received a
complaint regarding the petitioner’s RV, staff sent a notice, the petitioner
then secured a permit to construct the parking pad which was shown to comply
with City Code. He stated the petitioner
had not been fined and that staff has been working with the petitioner to address
the issue with the RV.
Dave Hickey,
Doreen Snyder stated
if the RV does not fit on the parking pad, it is a bad precedent to set. She stated it would be better if the RV fit
on the pad.
Gerry Boyle, 1414 Greenbriar, stated she feels her
home has been taken away, she lives in a trailer park.
Commissioner
Ritzert pointed out the 3-day provision in the code. He stated the variation should be denied, and
the code dealing with RVs should be revisited.
Chairperson
Meyer stated the 3-day provision relates to allowing the RV to be on the
driveway for maintenance.
Commissioner
Hickok stated the Commission knew this type of issue would arise when the
amendment was discussed.
Without
further discussion, Commissioner Erickson made a motion to recommend denial of the petition, stating
concerns raised by residents, seconded by Commissioner Hickok.
Upon a roll call vote, THE MOTION CARRIED by a vote of
8-0.
(Commissioner Vonder Heide was absent.)
Municipal Services
Committee Review – April 26, 2010
The
Municipal Services Committee considered this matter at its meeting on April 26,
2010. The following members were
present: Alderman Joseph Marchese –
Chairman, Alderman
The
petitioner was not present.
Michael
Griffith, Senior Planner, briefly reviewed the staff agenda memo. He summarized the regulations dealing with
recreational vehicles under the Zoning Ordinance, included in the memo. He described the petition before the
Committee, noted the public hearing and the Planning and Zoning Commission’s
recommendation to deny the petition.
Mr.
Griffith noted that the recreational vehicle in the side yard is not the issue,
but that it does not fit on the existing parking pad as constructed. He stated the pad complies with the Code as
constructed. He stated that the
petitioner proposes to widen the pad to accommodate the recreational vehicle.
Alderman
Galan stated this is a tough situation.
He stated the petitioner is trying to comply, and he understands the
concerns raised by the neighbors. He
stated the resident obtained a permit for the parking pad, then the finds out
the RV does not fit onto the pad.
Michael
Boyle, 1414 Greenbriar, provided photos of the property. He stated the RV on the side does not look
good. He stated the RV may be in his
neighbor’s side yard, but it is in his front yard. He stated the RV is not in the side
yard. He stated the RV is in front of
everything. He stated the permit for the
parking pad should not have been issued.
He stated the RV reduces property values.
Alderman
Galan stated residents complained when RVs were on driveways, so the City
amended the Code. He stated residents
are now complaining that RVs are in side yards.
Alderman
Galan noted that the petitioner, at the public hearing, indicated he could
alter the roof overhang and then the RV would fit onto the parking pad.
Chairman
Marchese stated the City spent several months considering regulations for
RVs. He stated the City took action
because residents were not happy to see RVs on driveways.
Alderman
Schauer asked the residents at the meeting for a show of hands who were opposed
to the variation. (The room was approximately
half full of residents, nearly all present rose their hands.)
Without
further discussion, Alderman Galan made a motion to recommend denial of the petition, citing the setback
requested was too close to the neighbor’s property.
Upon a voice vote, THE MOTION CARRIED by a vote of 3-0