HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/26/2006 P&Z minutes 02-06
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
CASE NO. PZ-02-06
Hearing Date: January 26, 2006
PETITIONER:
Village of Mount Prospect
PUBLICATION DATE:
January 11,2006
REQUEST:
Text Amendment regarding Circular Drives
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Chair Arlene Juracek
Joseph Donnelly
Leo Floros
Marlys Haaland
Richard Rogers
Keith Youngquist
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Ronald Roberts
ST AFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Judith Connolly, AICP, Senior Planner
Ellen Divita, Deputy Director, Community Development
Jason Zawila, Long Range Planner
INTERESTED PARTIES:
Chairperson Arlene Juracek called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Joseph Donnelly moved to approve the
minutes of the December, 2005 meeting and Keith Youngquist seconded the motion. The motion was approved
5-0 and Leo Floros abstained from the vote. After hearing two previous cases, Chairperson Juracek introduced
Case No. PZ-02-06, text amendments to the Village Code regarding circular driveways. She said that the Village
Board's decision was final for the request.
Jason Zawila, Long Range Planner, summarized the case. He stated that the Village has received an increased
number of requests for circular driveways in the past several years. The majority of these requests have been in
conjunction with residential tear down and top-off projects that are occurring throughout town. The Village's
current regulations require that property owners obtain a conditional use permit prior to constructing a circular
driveway. He said historically, the requests that were approved by the Village have been primarily for properties
where there was a safety issue the circular driveway resolved.
Mr. Zawila said the Planning & Zoning Commission discussed circular driveways at their August meeting. He
stated the Commission found that: circular drives should continue to be a Conditional Use, lot width should be
considered when approving the request, landscaping in the front yard should be required; and circular driveways
should be constructed of decorative materials. He further stated that the Commission also raised the issue of
whether to restrict overnight parking or the number of vehicles parked on the circular drives, but there were
concerns on how these regulations could be practically enforced.
Mr. Zawila stated this issue was then discussed at the Committee of the Whole (COW) Meeting on September
27th. He said Staff prepared exhibits that depicted circular driveways on various lot widths. The exhibits were
intended to illustrate the impact of circular driveways and to help identify situations where a circular driveway
would and would not be appropriate. He said the objective was to ascertain whether new standards for approving
circular driveways should be used when reviewing requests.
Arlene Juracek, Acting Chair
Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting January 26, 2006
PZ-02-06
Page 2
Mr. Zawila further stated that the Village Board asked Staff to revise the scenarios that were presented to include:
1) circular drives with a 12 foot width, instead of 9 feet; 2) turning radii that met industry standards; and 3)
visualizations with vehicle placement. The consensus from the September COW Meeting was that circular
driveways requests: I) should not be required to provide landscaping, or 2) should not be constructed of
decorative materials, 3) but should continue to be a Conditional Use that would require Village Board approval.
Mr. Zawila said at the December 9th COW meeting, Staff presented the Village Board with new scenarios that
illustrated when circular driveways could be feasible and practical in residential zoning districts. He stated these
illustrations demonstrated that if the front and side yard lot coverage ratio were increased to 50%, circular
driveways could be constructed on lots that are 75 feet wide or greater. These driveways could be 12 feet wide
and would meet the industry minimum standards for typical vehicle turning radii. He said although circular
driveways with reduced widths could fit on smaller lots, they would create the potential for numerous curb cuts
along local roadways and would leave little room for additional improvements on these properties.
Mr. Zawila stated that the scenarios did not take into consideration service walks, front steps, or entryways that
can add to the lot coverage in the front and exterior yards. He said Staff originally suggested that a 50% front and
exterior side yard coverage ratio would provide sufficient flexibility for property owners to appropriately locate
these improvements. Staff conducted further analysis to identify the minimum lot width for a circular/dual
frontage driveway to comply with both the minimum bulk regulations for interior lots in RX, Rl, RA, and R2
zoning districts and the minimum industry standards for vehicle turning radii. He stated that the findings of this
analysis determined that the existing front and exterior side yard maximum coverage ratios currently in the zoning
code appear adequate for circular/dual frontage driveways and do not create conditions that completely limit the
construction of circular/dual frontage driveways. The front and exterior side yard maximum coverage ratios do
not have to be increased to 50% as recommended by Staff at earlier Planning and Zoning and Committee of the
Whole meetings.
Mr. Zawila stated that the consensus from December 9th COW Meeting was that Staff should further research the
impact of the proposed limitation on corner lots, provide real-world examples of pictures to the Village Board for
illustrative purposes, and Staff should make available illustrations for homeowners to consider when they
undertake such a project. Mr. Zawila provided the Commission with photographs of circular and dual frontage
drives currently in the Village
Mr. Zawila stated that the proposed text amendment would affect several sections of the Village Code:
· Section 14.803 - Conditional Uses (R-X Single Family Residence District)
· Section 14.903 - Conditional Uses (R-l Single Family Residence District)
· Section 14.1003 - Conditional Uses (R-A Single Family Residence District)
· Section 14.1103 - Conditional Uses (R-2 Attached-Single Family Residence District)
· Section 14.2215 - Driveways (Off Street Parking and Loading)
He said the Village Code already has provisions that would permit the construction of circular or dual frontage
driveways by Conditional Use in section 14.2215: DRIVEWAYS. He said Staff is recommending additional
standards for applicants to follow when applying for circular/dual frontage driveways in the Village. He stated
that the standards would require a minimum turning radius and width for the circular portion of the driveway.
The minimum turning radius of 15 feet and a width of 12 feet for the circular portion of the driveway are based on
the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials minimum turning path for passenger
cars.
Mr. Zawila stated that the standards would also require a minimum lot width for a circular/dual frontage drive.
The minimum lot width of 75 feet was determined by Staff as a width that would be adequate for the placement of
Arlene Juracek, Acting Chair
Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting January 26, 2006
PZ-02-06
Page 3
a circular/dual frontage drive and minimize the frequency of curb cuts that could occur in residential districts
throughout the Village.
Mr. Zawila said as requested by the Village Board, the text amendment will provide illustrations depicting
minimum industry and Village standards for homeowners to consider when they undertake such a project on
interior and corner lots.
Mr. Zawila further stated that in order to establish standards for approving circular and dual frontage driveways,
Staff recommends Section 14.803 - Conditional Uses (R-X Single Family Residence District), Section 14.903 _
Conditional Uses (R-l Single Family Residence District), Section 14.1003 - Conditional Uses (R-A Single
Family Residence District), and Section 14.11 03 - Conditional Uses (R-2 Single Family Residence District) be
amended to include:
"Circular or dual frontage driveways that meet the minimum requirement set forth in
subsection 14.2215.A.l of this chapter."
Mr. Zawila also stated that Section 14.2215 - Driveways would be changed to the following:
14.2215: DRIVEWAYS
A. Residential: Residential driveways in the R-X, R-A, R-l, R-2 districts shall conform to the
following requirements:
I. Number: Only one driveway may be permitted per lot, with a maximum of one curb cut to the
street pavement. Except that Circular/Dual Frontage Driveways or Circular/Dual Frontage
(Corner Lot) Driveways with two curb cuts to the street pavement, as depicted on Figures 2 and 3
respectively, as well as other alternative designs for similar types of driveways may be permitted,
but only by conditional use and in compliance with the following minimum requirements:
a. Minimum Turning Radius: The circular portion of the driveway shall have a
minimum turning radius of 15 feet (15 ');
b. Width: The circular portion of the driveway shall have a minimum width of 12 feet
(12');
c. Lot Width: Circular/Dual Frontage Driveways or Circular/Dual Frontage (Corner Lot)
Driveways with two curb cuts to the street pavement, as well as other alternative
designs for similar types of driveways shall be allowed only on lots 75 feet (75') or
greater in width.
Mr. Zawila summarized, stating that the proposal to amend the Village's residential driveway regulations would
be applicable to the RX, Rl, RA and R2 residential zoning districts in the community on lots 75 feet or greater,
which is approximately 25% of the lots in these districts. He said that previously it has been Staff policy to
support requests for circular driveways when the subject property fronts on an arterial street and/or the traffic
volume is such that a circular driveway is necessary to resolve a safety conflict. He stated that the proposed
changes would allow a circular or dual frontage driveways providing it meets the existing bulk regulations of the
zoning code, the minimum requirements established by this text amendment, and the standards for conditional use
listed in Section l4.203.F.8.
Mr. Zawila said the proposed text amendments meet the standards contained in Section l4.203.D.8.b of the
Zoning Ordinance. Based on these findings, Staff recommends that the Planning & Zoning Commission make a
Arlene Juracek, Acting Chair
Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting January 26, 2006
PZ-02-06
Page 4
recommendation to the Village Board to approve the text amendments as presented for case PZ-02-06. He stated
that the Village Board's decision is final for this case.
Keith Youngquist asked for clarification that the Village Board is not requiring landscaping or the use of
decorative materials with the amended text. Mr. Zawila stated this is correct.
Joseph Donnelly asked for clarification on how the measurement for lot width is taken for a corner lot. Mr.
Zawila stated the measurements were taken at the front of the house and that the text amendment does not change
the bulk regulations regarding lot coverage. Mr. Donnelly also asked if this text amendment addressed the
possibility of a property having both a circular drive and a separate drive to the garage. Mr. Zawila stated that this
text amendment, as written, would only allow one type of driveway or the other.
Chairperson Juracek asked if other sections of the Zoning Ordinance still specify the 50% lot coverage limitation.
Mr. Zawila stated the lot coverage requirements will remain unchanged in the Code, and that lot coverage is
specified for each district as noted in the Zoning Ordinance.
Joseph Donnelly asked if all of the examples presented to them would meet the Village Code with the new text
amendment. Mr. Zawila stated that all of the examples would comply with the amended text. Chairperson
Juracek said the exhibits provided to the Commission do provide dimensions and appear to meet the regulations
as stated in the amended text.
Richard Rogers asked if Conditional Use approval would still be required for Circular Driveway; Staff replied
yes. Chairperson Juracek noted that the proposed text amendment would reduce the number of cases heard for
circular drives by establishing minimum lot width requirements.
Joseph Donnelly said that this text amendment will not eliminate the smaller lots with a safety concern from
requesting a Conditional Use. Chairperson Juracek stated the text amendment will provide guidelines for the
Commission when evaluating these cases.
Marlys Haaland thanked Staff for a comprehensive presentation.
Chairperson Juracek asked if there were any further questions or if anyone wished to address the Commission.
Hearing none, the Public Hearing was closed at 9:00 p.m.
Richard Rogers made a motion to approve the proposed text amendments as presented, Case No. PZ-02-06; Keith
Youngquist seconded the motion.
UPON ROLL CALL:
AYES: Donnelly, Floros, Haaland, Rogers, Youngquist, and Juracek
NAYS: None
Motion was approved 6-0. The case will go to Village Board for their consideration
Richard Rogers made a motion to adjourn at 9:04 p.m., sec nded by Joseph Donnelly. The motion was approved
by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned.
lit H:\PLAN\Planning & Zoning COMM\P&Z Z006\Minutes\PZ-02-06 Circular Drive Text Amendment.doc