HomeMy WebLinkAboutPacket - 01/26/2010 - Community Development Committee COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING
AGENDA
January 26, 2010
7:00 P.M.
Alderman's Conference Room
TOPICS OF DISCUSSION:
1. Public Input (3 minute limitation)
2. Revised Goals for 2010
3. Discussion on the creation of historic neighborhoods
4. Discussion on recreational vehicle and trailer regulations
5. Other Business
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
GOALS FOR 2010
The following are some suggested goals for the Community Development Committee to work on
in 2010:
1. Provide Feedback on Development Proposals As Needed(Ongoing). As conceptual
development plans are brought to the City, the Committee should continue to provide
feedback to developers.
2. Discuss Code Compliance Activities/Process (October-November). Staff will provide an
update on code compliance activities and revisit the process utilized.
3. Zoning Various Text Amendments As Needed(Ongoing) Staff will scan the zoning
ordinance and look for areas of the ordinance that require amendment and/or updating.
4. Discussion on Rental Properties (January-February) Discussion about how to improve
control and regulation of residential rental properties as-related to public safety and
property maintenance considerations.
5. Establish Criteria for Drive-thru Facilities (July-August) Discussion on what design
criteria should be applied to drive-thru facilities.
6. Review recreational vehicle definition/ordinance (January February) Review, discussion
and update of current recreational vehicle regulations including definition of
recreational vehicle.
7. Review Administrative Adiudication Ordinance Discussion and review of current
administrative adjudication procedures and update as necessary for home-rule status.
8. Historic District U date/Certi ied Local Government Update of Landmark Commission
direction on pursuit of establishing an historic district, as well as becoming a Certified
Local Government.
9. Discussion on Main Street Revitalization Invite business owners to a committee meeting
for the purpose of discussion short-term revitalization strategies for Main Street.
10. Ordinance on Residential Animal Processin Contact health department about
residential `food processing"and develop standards to limit impact to neighboring
properties.
11. Discussion on Residential Electric Service Line Location Discussion about the location
of electrical service lines so as not to inhibit homeowners from pool, shed and other
accessory structure placement on the lot.
12. Discussion on Incentives for small/medium-sized Businesses Discussion about creating
an economic incentive program for small/medium-sized businesses which provide some
benefit to the City.
13. Discussion on Residential Setbacks for Garages Discussion regarding potential
minimum building setback requirements for residential garages so as to provide
adequate space for multi and tandem vehicle parking.
COMMITTEE SUPPLEMENT
TO: Community Development Committee
FROM: Douglas Martin, Deputy City Administrator
FOR: January 26, 2010 Community Development Committee Meeting
RE: Historic Neighborhoods
Last year the Community Development Committee discussed the creation of an historic district
in the Main Street and Waukegan Road area. Subsequently, a public hearing for the proposed
district was held before the City Council (September 28, 2009 CC minutes attached). At the
following Landmark Commission meeting several additional concerns about the district were
expressed(October 6, 2009 LC minutes attached).
The Landmark Commission had additional discussions regarding the creation of an historic
district but also discussed a different approach to the establishment of an actual historic district
(December 1, 2009 LC minutes attached). The discussion centered on creating historic
neighborhoods, more specifically for Green Street, Main Street and Riverside Drive and adjacent
neighborhoods. The historic neighborhoods concept as proposed would not create a legalized
historic district but would allow homeowners and/or business owners to voluntarily landmark
their homes or businesses with the hope that as people start to do this others will follow suit. The
other thought the Landmark Commission had was to display historic signage identifying these
neighborhoods by their original identity. Green Street would be known as Centerville, Main
Street as Gagetown and Riverside Drive as Water Street.
By doing these subtle things no one is forced into doing something they don't want to do; people
actually interested in landmarking their homes or businesses can still do so; the "historic"area is
not limited to only residential and simply Main Street and Waukegan Road; and by displaying
signage these neighborhoods would assume their historic identities in a non-aggressive manner
with the hope of further educating residents and business owners. Many of these goals address
ideas expressed by the residents in the Main Street/Waukegan Road neighborhoods at the
community meetings, such as: not limiting the geographic area of the district, including
residential as well as commercial and using a voluntary as opposed to mandatory approach to
designating historic structures.
A couple members of the Landmark Commission will be in attendance at the Community
Development Committee meeting to address any questions or comments that the Commission
may have.
REGULAR MEETING
SEPTEMBER 28, 2009
Mayor Low called the regularly scheduled September 28, 2009 meeting of the McHenry
City Council to order at 7:30 p.m. In attendance were the following Aldermen: Santi, Glab,
Schaefer, Murgatroyd, Wimmer, Peterson, Condon. Absent: None. Also in attendance were:
City Administrator Maxeiner, City Clerk Jones, City Attorney McArdle, Deputy City Administrator
Martin, Assistant City Administrator Hobson, Police Chief Brogan, Director Construction
Neighborhood Services Schwalenberg, Public Works Director Schmitt, Finance Director Black,
City Engineer Cieslica.
PUBLIC HEARING:CREATION OF WAUKEGAN-MAIN HISTORIC DISTRICT
Mayor Low called a Public Hearing to order at 7:32 p.m. regarding the creation of the
Waukegan-Main Historic District.
Deputy City Administrator Martin stated the purpose of the public hearing is to provide
an opportunity for public input regarding the creation of the proposed District. Certified notices
of the Public Hearing were sent to all property owners within the proposed District. Abutting
property owners were also notified via regular mail of the Public Hearing. Notice was published
in the Northwest Herald.
Deputy City Administrator Martin noted several verbal comments have been received in
the Office of the City Clerk. Written correspondence was received from Ron Bykowski who
owns several parcels within the proposed District. He is requesting the properties from 3810 to
3822 Waukegan Road be excluded from the District as he plans to redevelop this property in
the future. Additionally, Nancy Vazanno who owns the vacant parcel directly west of Landmark
School has requested the portion of her property which extends down to Waukegan Road be
excluded from the District.
Deputy City Administrator Martin stated at the conclusion of the Public Hearing, the
Council may choose to:
• Designate the landmark or preservation district by ordinance;
• Refer the report and recommendation back to the Landmark Commission with
suggestions for revisions; or
• Deny the landmark designation.
Deputy City Administrator Martin noted if Council denies the creation of the District, no
nomination for landmark designation of the same site, structure or district shall be made within
90 days of the denial.
Mayor Low invited questions and comments from the audience.
Richard Smith of 3704 Main Street addressed Council noting his residence was
constructed in the 1900's by his wife's family. He inquired why the apartment building and AI'N
Page 2
September 28,2009
Ann's building are not included within the District. Mr. Smith requested that his home be
excluded from the District.
Scott Schultz of 3619 Main Street addressed Council stating he likes the idea of
establishing an historic district. He noted, however, he has issues with how this historic district
is set up. He stated the biggest issue is the fact that no buildings within the business district
have been incorporated into the District. He opined some vital pieces to McHenry's history are
not being included in the District. Mr. Schultz further stated there are many issues which need
to be addressed if this is to be done properly. Mr. Schultz inquired how building a house on a
vacant lot would be affected if the vacant land is located within the District.
Matthew Olk of 3701 Main Street addressed Council and inquired if other communities
with established historic districts have been asked the pros and cons regarding this issue. He
also inquired how the parameters of the District were established.
Jason Golnick of 3608 John Street addressed Council and stated he built the house on
John Street for his parents. He stated he has had experience dealing with building in historic
districts. He noted there has been some difficulty with regard to obtaining building department
approvals when an historic district has been involved.
Marion Metz of 3813 Waukegan Road addressed Council stating he fundamentally
resents having to ask an agency for permission to do something to his own home. He noted
good people take care of their homes.
Julie Pieruccini of 3811 Waukegan Road addressed Council stating her home needs
renovation. She noted there are rentals across the street from her home. Everyone on her side
of the street takes care of their homes.
Dennis Young of 3803 Main Street addressed Council stating he ran into difficulty with
homeowner's insurance this past summer because his house is plaqued. He inquired what sort
of difficulty would be encountered once his property is located within the historic district.
Jason Golnick of 3803 Main Street addressed Council again noting a lot of people will
have difficulty selling their property if their homes are included in the historic district. He stated
as a contractor he has discovered many people do not want to pay additional costs which could
be associated with being included in a District. This would cause a burden on included
homeowners.
Gerhard Rosenberg of 3716 Waukegan addressed Council stating some misinformation
about the historic district has been spread throughout the community. He stated houses can be
built that are similar to those already existing in the area.
Deputy City Administrator Martin responded to some of the comments/questions as
follows:
Page 3
September 28,2009
• Five years ago the City attempted to establish an historic district which included a fairly
large area and incorporated commercial properties within its boundaries. The proposed
district before Council for consideration this evening was deliberately made smaller in
order to be more manageable;
• In order for the District to be successful, it must be properly administered;
• The school buildings have not been included as the schools are part of a separate taxing
body and not subject to City building regulations;
• Packets were not sent to every property within and/or abutting the District due to the
cost of producing and mailing them;
• The Landmark Commission has done extensive research and communicated with other
communities regarding their established historic districts;
• Research conducted by the City has indicated there would be no immediate increase in
taxes as a consequence of the District being implemented;
• Simply put, a building at least 50 years old would qualify to be considered of historic
value.
City Administrator Maxeiner stated all information received this evening will be
summarized for the Landmark Commission who will then make a recommendation to City
Council regarding the possible establishment of the historic district.
Matthew Olk of 3701 Main Street stated he would like more in-depth answers to his
questions. He suggested the Landmark Commission along with City Council be made available
to respond to residents/property owner's questions.
David Gelwicks of 3817 Waukegan addressed Council stating he has concerns with his
home becoming part of a small exclusive group that is managed by government control.
Mayor Low suggested that any further questions be directed to Deputy City
Administrator Martin as he is the Staff liaison with the Landmark Commission. She noted the
Landmark Commission meets on the first Tuesday of the month at 7 p.m. in the Municipal
Center.
Joseph Aguilar of 3715 Waukegan addressed Council asking if the intent of the City is to
have an historic district in which everyone would participate and that all properties would be
"cleaned up".
Laurie Marshall of 3806 Main addressed Council inquiring why the City states they
cannot afford to send out informational pamphlets.
Matthew Old inquired if there would be another meeting which would afford the public
to comment and ask questions about the District. City Attorney McArdle stated there would be
a public Council meeting at which the audience would have an opportunity to state their
opinion.
Page 4
September 28,2009
Terri Golnick, of 3608 John Street addressed Council about her concerns about traffic
due to the implementation of the historic district.
Dee Ann Warner of 3701 Main Street addressed Council and asked what her Alderman,
Vic Santi, felt about the proposed District.
Motion by Wimmer, seconded by Schaefer,to close the Public Hearing at 8:16 p.m.
Voting Aye: Santi,Glab,Schaefer, Murgatroyd,Wimmer, Peterson,Condon.
Voting Nay: None.
Absent: None.
Motion carried.
PUBLIC INPUT SESSION
There was no one who signed in to speak during the Ten Minutes of Public Input
provided by Council.
CONSENT AGENDA
Motion by Wimmer,seconded by Santi,to approve the Consent Agenda as presented:
A. Donation of surplus computer equipment to IDOT for distribution to various municipal police departments in the state
of Illinois;
B. Request for waiver of temporary sign permit fee—McHenry Township Fire Protection District;
C. Special use/picnic permits;
D. City Council Minutes:
September 14,2009 regularly scheduled meeting,
E. List of Bills:
ADAMS STEEL SERVICE INC 450.00
AFTERMATH INC 95.00
ANDERSON, LORI 155.00
AT&T 126.39
AT&T LONG DISTANCE 66.21
AUTO TECH CENTERS INC 204.50
BATTERIES PLUS 220.93
BENTZ, DONALD J 102.00
BIRK, ADRIANA 16.00
CHICAGO INTERNATIONAL TR 207.83
CONSERV FS 3,080.93
CONSTELLATION NEWENERGY 38,363.80
CRESCENT ELECTRIC SUPPLY 537.84
CURRAN CONTRACTING COMPA 7,309.29
CUTTING EDGE COMMUNICATI 92.50
D'S MARINE SERVICE INC 108.88
DOCUMENT IMAGING DIMENSI 248.75
DORAN, ROBERT A 330.00
DREISILKER ELECTRIC MOTO 108.33
DURA WAX COMPANY INC, TH 57.50
EAST JORDAN IRON WORKS 4,875.00
ED'S RENTAL & SALES INC 45.90
ELGIN BABE RUTH 7,500.00
FISCHER BROS FRESH 2,009.38
FLESCH COMPANY INC, GORD 764.61
FOWLER, JEFF R 138.00
FOXCROFT MEADOWS INC 88.40
GANDOR, MARK 88.40
GAVULA, LUANN 171.00
The City of McHenry Landmark Commission Meeting Minutes
October 6, 2009
The meeting was called to order at 7:34 pm by Pat Wirtz at the McHenry City Hall
It was noted that the November P meeting will be held in the council chambers at city hall at 7:30 pm.
Members present: Pat Wirtz, Dawn Johnson, Marya Dixon, Marie Wilt, Gerhard Rosenberg, Kaaren
Gies, and Holly Wood, James Johnson came in at 9:00.
Members absent: Rob Dickman, Pat Shafer, Lauren Adams, Ron Glosson
City Staff: Doug Martin
There was general discussion regarding the historic district, by the public that attended the meeting.
Questions were taken by Doug Martin, and it was noted that a larger meeting would be taking place at
our November meeting. Pat Wirtz opened the meeting up to the public that were here to question the
commission on the implementation of the historic district.
Approximately 20 citizens attended this meeting to voice their concerns about being the "guinea pig"
for the city's proposed historic district. They were concerned because the alderman for their district
doesn't seem to be showing interest in their concerns on this subject.
Some people suggested that the district be voluntary on a tiered program (i.e.: gold, bronze and silver)
where there are more stringent requirements for gold, lesser for bronze and even lesser for silver. Perks
were suggested such as programs that give incentives to local businesses if they give breaks to citizens
within the historic district. Some members suggested that the commission just plaque the homes in the
area and leave them alone.
Bring residents that currently live in historic districts, to discuss the pros and cons by people that are
living within a district. Bring in realtors and/or developers to discuss the potential difficulties of
working within a historic district.
September Meeting Minutes: Kaaren Gies moved to approve the minutes; Marie Wilt seconded no
discussion and the motion carried.
Treasurer's Report: Dawn Johnson moved, Gerhard Rosenburg seconded no discussion and the
motion carried
Expenses: Minuteman Press $31.06 for printing of thank you cards for the people that had booths for
the Day at Petersen Farm. Gerhard Rosenburg moved to approve the expense; Holly Wood seconded
no discussion and the motion carried.
FaVade Grant: 3622 Elm St, retail and office building is approximately 65 years old the improvement
is about$10,000.00. Dawn Johnson moved to give $2000.00 towards the improvements; Marya Dixon
seconded no further discussion and the motion carried
1
Petersen Farm Update: The basement has been cleared out, seems to have a problem with the water
table. Multiple holes have been dug; some have water and some don't.
Tractor Show: it seemed to be successful for the FISH food pantry, it was also noted that screws were
used to mount various posters to the barn walls.
Budget for 2010: The commission suggested that the same line items that are in the 2009 budget be
the same for 2010.
Annual Report: Commission members will take home the report, review and make suggestions for the
December 2009 meeting.
Newsletter: James Johnson will gather all items and submit them to city staff. It was noted that the
trolley ride for Christmas no commission members will be available to attend. Doug Martin will let
Bill Hobson know so he can contact the Business Association and alert them to this issue.
2010 Calendar of Events: Tabled until December meeting
2010 A Day at the Petersen Farm: The Home front During WWII—some discussion was done,but
this will be tabled until the December meeting. It was suggested that the media department at the high
school be asked to do a video for this project.
Inventory/Appraisal for the Petersen Farm items: Kaaren Gies wondered where the inventory of the
farm items was. Dawn Johnson had a copy from 2003 a copy will be forwarded to Doug Martin for
distribution.
Riverwalk update: Slowdown due to the economy, a plaque for historic distinction of the hospital
location and the Dobyn's House will be done. Marie Wilt updated the commission on the status of the
Riverwalk.
Holly Wood moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:30 pm; Gerhard Rosenburg seconded no discussion and
the motion carried.
2
City of McHenry Landmark Commission
December 1, 2009 Meeting—Minutes
The meeting was called to order at 7:03 pm by Pat Wirtz at the McHenry City Hall
Members present: Pat Wirtz,Ron Glosson,Kaaren Gies,Pat Schafer,Marya Dixon,Gerhard Rosenberg,
Marie Wilt and student Lauren Adams.
Members absent: James Johnson and Holly Wood.
City Staff. Doug Martin
Guest: Michelle Peterson
November Minutes: Ron Glosson motioned to approve the November mintues and Pat Schafer seconded.
Motion carried.
Treasurer's Report: No activity.
Fagade Grant: No changes. So far a$2000.00 grant approved at the Oct. 6,2009 meeting has not been
deducted from this account.
Expenses: Kaaren Gies motioned to renew the Landmark's membership in the Illinois Assoc.of Historic
Preservation Commissions in the amount of$50.00. Marya Dixon seconded. Motion carried.
Demolitons: None requested
LMC membership: Dawn Johnson and Rob Dickman resigned. Pat Wirtz will check with the Mayor as to
Michelle Peterson being approved to replace one of these openings. Marie Wilt will contact Gloria Mack
as to her interest in the commission. Pat Wirtz stated that he is considering resigning after June 2010.
Historic District: After giving thought as to the city council pursuing a vote on a historic district,a suggestion
of proposing a Historic Neighbor by issuing individual Certificate of Appropriation,may be a better approach.
This way the home owner would be the one to activate the beginnings of establishing a neighbor of historic homes.
The commission discussed the steps to promote this approach and work with Catherine O'Connor.
McHenry has other areas that have structures,commercial and residential that can be recognized as historic.
Signs such as Gage Town,Centerville,and Water St.can be place to point out the location of these historic areas.
Newspaper articles and information about this project should be made available to the public. Doug will take these
ideas to the Community Development committee.
Doug Martin brought up again the importance of applying for CLG(Certified Local Government). This would be
of value in seeking grants and other valuable opportunities.
Petersen Farm: The basement in the house is still a work in progress. Kaaren Gies asked about the removal of the
freezers in the room between the kitchen and garage. She will look into a Com Ed program. The city needs to give
their approval. A question of what is happening to the windows in the horse barn lead to no answer. Ron Glosson
offered to cut down the garden for the winter. Michelle Peterson has been approached to head the Peterson Farm
Foundation.
Annual Report: James Johnson and Pat Wirtz worked on the LMC annual report which has to be submitted
to the city. Kaaren Gies motion to accept the report. Gerhard Rosenberg seconded. Motion carried.
2010 LMC Calendar: The members reviewed the calendar. The date for"A Day at Petersen Farm" is June 27.
The theme will be the"The Homefront"(WW II era).Ideas are needed to get a start. Rockford,I1.has an event
every year about this theme and several members have attended and may have sources to investigate.
Reenactors such as FDR and Eleanor were mentioned.
Adding plants and trees to the Petersen Farm was suggested to be on the calendar.
The Wooden Quilt Design on the big barn has not gotten positive feedback and Marie Wilt would like to see
a more appropriate design pertaining to the character and history of the farm. She showed a oak leaf
design which relates to the Savannah Oak area on the farm. Doug Martin will work with Marie on this task.
Ron Glosson will speak with Nancy Fike about ideas for May's National Preservation Month.
Adjourment: Ron Glosson motioned to adjourn at 9:42 pm,Lauren Adams seconded. Motion carried.
COMMITTEE SUPPLEMENT
TO: Community Development Committee
FROM: Douglas Martin, Deputy City Administrator
FOR: January 26, 2010 Community Development Committee Meeting
RE: Regulations for Recreational Vehicles and Trailers
Staff has been reevaluating the definition and regulations for the placement and storage of
recreational vehicles based on the difficulties experienced by the Construction and
Neighborhood Services Department in enforcing the current regulations. Below is the current
definition of recreational vehicle and attached to this supplement are the regulations associated
with recreational vehicles.
p. 501 of the zoning ordinance
Recreational Vehicle: A vehicular type unit primarily designed as temporary living quarters in
conjunction with recreation, camping, or travel use which either has its own motive power or is
mounted on or drawn by another vehicle, including travel trailers,fifth wheel travel trailers,
camping trailers, truck campers, boats on or off trailer, motor homes, or any other vehicle with
state R.V., R.T., or T.A. license plates (existing definition).
Regarding the definition of what constitutes a recreational vehicle the current definition states
that a recreational vehicle is"A vehicular type unit primarily designed as temporary living
quarters....". This is the first point of conflict defining a recreational vehicle as something
primarily designed as temporary living quarters. This significantly limits the scope of what
constitutes a recreational vehicle and would not include: jet skis, wave runners, ATVs, boats w/o
a temporary living quarters, etc.
Following is a proposed revised definition for recreational vehicle:
Recreational Vehicle: Any vehicle or boat designed or used primarily for recreational purposes
and not used as a commercial vehicle, including but not limited to the following:
boat/watercraft-motorized or non-motorized, camper trailer, all terrain vehicle (ATV), motorized
trailer, off-the-road vehicle, racing car or cycle, recreational vehicle trailer, truck camper or
snowmobile (proposed definition).
The existing definition for trailer has also posed a problem and has become difficult to enforce.
Staff has come up with a revised definition for trailer. Currently the zoning ordinance definition
for this term is listed below. Again the same problem exists with referencing living and sleeping.
In addition, in accordance with the zoning ordinance currently recreational vehicles and trailers
are one in the same. As previously stated staff has included recreational vehicle trailer in the
revised definition for recreational vehicle but has also expanded the definition of trailer.
p. 511 of the zoning ordinance
Trailer: Any portable structure or vehicle designed for highway travel and used on a short-term
or interim basis for living, sleeping, or commercial purposes (existing definition).
Below is staff s suggested revised definition for trailer.
Trailer: A portable structure supported by one or more wheels without its own motive power
which is towed or hauled and designed or used for carrying or transporting motorcycles,
recreational vehicles as defined herein or other cargo and that is eligible to be licensed or
registered and insured for highway use. This definition does not include flat-bed trucks, dump
trucks or stake-bed trucks (proposed definition).
With regards to the current regulations a limit of one recreational vehicle per dwelling unit is
established. In addition, the regulations provide a hierarchy of choices indicating how a
recreational vehicle may be stored. Code officers for the city have been having a difficult time
enforcing these standards because of the options provided. For example, someone may call in
and state that their neighbor has a recreational vehicle on the driveway and says this is illegal
because the zoning ordinance states that if there is a garage on-site the recreational vehicle must
be stored in the garage. The person with the recreational vehicle can state that while they do
have a garage it is unavailable because they store their car or other items in it which make it
impossible to put the recreational vehicle inside.
Some subdivisions do have more restrictive covenants than what is permitted by the zoning
ordinance and may require recreational vehicles to be stored in a garage. This is regulated by the
covenants not the zoning ordinance. As a result of these difficulties in interpreting the provisions
in the zoning ordinance staff has tried to come up with alternative language that is clearer than
the existing language. In addition to these definitions staff is proposing the following revised
regulations for recreational vehicles and trailers.
• Only one recreational vehicle or trailer shall be permitted in the required front yard or
required corner side yard as defined herein;
• Trailers must be properly licensed;
• Additional recreational vehicles and trailers shall be maintained, kept, stored and/or
parked on an approved solid parking surface no less than the minimum dimensions of the
vehicle or trailer being parked thereon but in no case shall the parking surface be less
than 9'X 18', said parking surface shall be designed and constructed so as not to allow
grass or other vegetation to grow within, on or above the solid parking surface which
may consist of brick, asphalt, concrete or paver brick.
These provisions are proposed to replace the existing location provisions. In the near future staff
would also like to bring forward regulations for commercial vehicles, which are closely related
to recreational vehicles.
�xj`>�3!► c� �r,nii►ti arjinQf)ce— f_2q a lei�o'��
No off-street parking for any non-single-family residential use is permitted within any required
yard abutting property in an RS District. No parking for any non-residential use is permitted
within any required yard abutting property in any Residential District.
8. PARKING OF RECREATIONAL VEHICLES
A. In Residential Districts
A single recreational vehicle as defined herein per dwelling unit may be parked or stored in a
Residential District provided that:
1. it is at no time occupied for living or sleeping purposes except as may be allowed
by the City Council on a temporary basis
2. it is not connected to natural gas, water, or sanitary sewer service
3. it is stored in its collapsed position if it is a vehicle of the collapsible type not stored
in a garage
4. it is parked or stored in a location determined by the following:
a. The vehicle shall be parked in a garage, carport, or covered parking space,
where one is available on the premises large enough to accommodate the
vehicle
b. otherwise, the vehicle shall be parked in the driveway to the rear of the
actual building line of the principal building that is opposite the street to which
the driveway has access where this is possible to do
c. otherwise,the vehicle shall be parked in the driveway ahead of said building
line but not encroaching upon any public sidewalk
d. otherwise, where the dwelling unit does not have its own driveway, the
vehicle shall be parked in an open off-street parking space.
B. In Other Districts
There shall be no restrictions on parking of recreational vehicles in non-residential districts,
other than those concerning outdoor storage.
-169-