The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPLAN COMMISSION - 03/20/2002 - FENCE REGS/TEXT AMENDMENT Elk Grove Village Plan Commission Minutes March 20, 2002 }ry p �r Present: J. Glass, Chairman P. Ayers MAY 0 2 2002 F. Geinosky VI((AGE C(ERK'S E.Hauser dff�CE D. Sokolowski T. Thompson Absent: C.Henrici J.Meyers D. Paliganoff Staff: A.Boffice,Dir. of Engineering&Community Development S.Trudan, Asst. Dir. of Community Development P.Vadopalas,Assistant to the Village Manager Present: N. Czarnik, Village Trustee P.Kaplan, ZBA Chairman Glass called the meeting to order at 8:00 p.m. Item 1: March 6 Meeting Minutes Commissioner Geinosky moved to approve the minutes of the March 6, 2002 meeting as written. Commissioner Hauser seconded the motion. Upon voting,(Glass,Ayers, Geinosky,Hauser, Sokolowski, Thompson,AYES, Henrici,Meyers,Paliganoff,Absent)the motion carried. Item 2: Text Amendment--Fence Regulations; Corner and Triple Frontage Lots PC Docket 02-2 Chairman Glass announced the Plan Commission would consider proposed text amendments related to fencing regulations for corner and double frontage lots. This matter had been discussed at a previous meeting and the hearing was continued to allow staff to change the text in response to concerns of the Commissioners expressed at the previous meeting. S. Trudan stated that staff worked on the proposed text to incorporate concerns expressed by the Commissioners at the prior meeting. Trudan referenced a March 15, 2002 memorandum(attached) and read the proposed text into the record. Commissioner Ayers questioned if the term"public road"referred to both major and interior residential roadways. Trudan responded that is correct. - 1 - Commissioner Hauser asked for clarification on how far fences would need to be set back from sidewalks. Chairman Glass stated that rear fences on double frontage lots could be located up to one-foot from the sidewalk, and a fence in the sideyard could be located up to three-feet from the sidewalk if the height of the fence does not exceed four-feet. Chairman Glass noted this would preserve more space for pedestrians to pass. Commissioner Geinosky questioned if the Zoning;Board of Appeals had denied any fence variation petitions that would be permitted under the proposed text amendment. P. Kaplan responded no, and noted that comer lot fencing petitions are among the more difficult issues to consider. Commissioner Hauser offered three examples of existing properties in the Village, and asked Mr. Boffice to describe where a fence would be permitted with the new regulations. Mr. Boffice explained each situation to Mr. Hauser. Commissioner Ayers stated the three reasons suggested for developing the text amendment: improved security,privacy,and increased use of yard space. Commissioner Ayers commented that the proposed regulations do provide more options for owners of comer lot properties,but at the expense of the neighborhood's appearance. He questioned if the new regulations would negatively impact the appearance and sense of neighborhood when these fences are constructed. Commissioner Hauser expressed his agreement with Commissioner Ayers'comments. He further noted that when he served on the ZBA, one of their concern:;was preserving the openness of residential neighborhoods, and fences permitted under the proposed regulations would intrude into residential neighborhoods. S. Trudan stated the proposed text was revised since the last meeting to compromise on the balance between neighborhood concerns and homeowners'concerns. The ability to construct a sideyard fence was preserved, but the height and setback from the sidewalk was regulated more to limit encroachment into the neighborhood. There being no further questions or comments,Chairman Glass asked for a motion. Commissioner Geinosky moved to recommend approval of the proposed text amendments as follows: Delete the entirety of Section 3-7:D.3 and replace with the following text: "No fence shall extend beyond the front:corner of the principal building located upon the same property, nearest to the side the fence is installed." Delete the entirety of Sections 7A-1:B.l.a and b and replace with the following text: "Section 7A-1:B.1. On double frontage lots where the rear yard abuts a public street,fences shall be permitted to be located on private property,no closer than one-foot(1')from the public sidewalk". Delete the entirety of Section 7A-1:B.3 and replace with the following text: "Section 7A-1B.3. Corner Lots: On corner lots,fences shall be permitted subject to the following conditions: (a) When not more than four feet(41)in height,fences may be located not closer than three-feet(3')to the side property line,between the front edge of the house and the rear property line. (b) Greater than four-feet(41) and not more than six-feet(6')in height fences may be located not closer than ten-feet(10')to the side property line between the front edge of - 2 - the house and the rear edge of the house,and not closer than three(Y)to the side property line between the rear edge of the house and the rear property line. (c) No fence shall be located beyond the front building setback line extended from an adjoining single-family residential property." Commissioner Thompson seconded the motion. Upon voting(Glass, Geinosky, Sokolowski,Thompson, AYES,Ayers, Hauser,NAPES,Henrici,Meyers, Paliganoff,Absent), the motion carried 4-2. Item 3: Adjournment Commissioner Geinosky moved to adjourn and Commissioner Sokolowski seconded the motion. Upon voting, (Glass,Ayers,Geinosky,Hauser, Sokolowski,Thompson,AYES,Henrici,Meyers, Paliganoff, Absent)the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m. Respfiully)sub�mitte�d'FJ , t7�vl Peter J.Vadop op as Assistant to the Village Manager C: Chairman and Members of the Plan Commission,Mayor and Board of Trustees,Village Clerk, Village Manager,Assistant Village Manager,Assistant to the Village Manager,Administrative Intern,Director of Engineering/Community Development,Director of Public Works,Fire Chief, Deputy Fire Chief(2), Assistant Fire Chief,Village Attorney. - 3 - MEMORANDUM Date: March 15, 2002 W Memo to: Alan J. Boffice, P.E. , DE/CD Memo from: ��./% ✓ 0 Steven J. dan, Asst. Dir. , CD Y SUBJECT: ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT CORNER LOT FENCE REGULATIONS The Department of Engineering and Community Development made a presentation to the Plan Commission at a public hearing on 2-6-02 :regarding the above referenced text amendment. As a result of those deliberations, several recommendations were made to amend our proposal. 1 Pursuant to those recommendations I would submit the following: Add the highlighted text to Section 3-7:B. so that it reads, in its entirety, as follows: "Front Yards For Corner And Double Frontage Lots: Corner lots and double frontage lots shall, on both of the adjacent streets, meet ' the front yard regulations of the district in which the are located, except for fences permitted by Subsection 7A 1B.3 of this code. Delete Section 3-7:D.3. in its entirety and replace it with the following language: No fence shall extend beyond the front corner of the principal building located upon the same property, nearest to the side the fence is installed. Delete Section 7A-1 :B. l.a. and b. in their entirety and replace them with the following language: Section 7A-1:B.1. On double frontage lots where the rear yard abuts a public street, fences shall be permitted to be located on private property, no closer that one-foot (11) ` from the public sidewalk. 0 Page 2 Delete Section 7A-1:B.3 in its entirety and replace it with the following language: Section 7A-1B. 3. Corner Lots: On corner lots fences shall be permitted subject to the following conditions: (a) When not more than four feet (4 ') in height, fences may be located not closer than three feet (31) to the side property line, between the front edge of the house and the rear property line. (b) Greater than four feet (4') and not more than six feet: (61) in., height fences may be located not closer than ten feet (101) to the side property line between the front edge of the house and the rear edge of the house, and not closer that three feet (31) to the side ,property line between the rear edge of the house and the rear property line. (c) No fence shall be located beyond the front building setback line extended from an adjoining single-family residential property. This proposed text addresses the concerns of the members of the Plan Commission. It also eliminates landscaping requirements which were previously incorporated in the fencing regulations, eliminates the distinction between open and closed fences, and eliminates differentiating between major and interior streets. The proposed text will be more restrictive by prohibiting fences located beyond the front building setback line extended from an adjoining single-family residential property. The above text follows the style of the current code language. SJT