Agenda - Planning Commission - 05/06/2010

Home

garages should not face the street, that homes oriented to interiorcaurts should be illegal, and thatgated communities were unacceptable. The board would then politely explain that the placement ofpark- ing, thborientation of unit entrances, and the issue of gates were not relevant to the hearing. The only issue before the board was the request to eliminate the side-yard requirement. Most neighbors would ac- knowledge it was impossible to build town houses with side yards between units. In theory, the planned development review process offered more oversight and protection for the larger projects. Butwith- outany gufdelinesspecific to town houses, neither the staff nor the developer's team knew just how far a particular project could or should be pushed. It was clear that a town house ordinance would give planned development review a fegto stand on, a baseline from which further negotiations could proceed.. And it could streamline the development process for smaller projects, which couldbe approved as-of-right. After almost a year of intense study, experimentation, listening, meeting with key aldermen and concerned neighbor- hoodgroups, wrangling with home build- ersassociations, and compromise, the Chicago Townhouse Ordinance was ap- proved by the zoning committee and the city council Following is an explanation of its interesting features, and a critique of the ordinance.from the luxurious perspec- tive that time and distance provide. A REVIEW OF THE x998 CHICAGO TOWNHOUSE ORDINANCE Parking and Driveways The trouble with modern town houses (and other residential forms) is that cars have taken over. Builders, neighbors, and elected officials are convinced that at leasttwo parking spaces pertown house are needed even in neighborhoods with excellent access to buses and trains. When zo-foot-wide town houses provide two spaces in an attached garage, not much room is left on the ground Floor. One fa- cade ofthe structure at ground level is typi- calfytaken up with a row oftwo-car garage doors. The opposite side has the entries, stairs up to the main floor ofthe unit, and a small room in front ofthe garage that is usually isolated from the nest ofthe home. Whatthe town house ordinance ac- complished was to relegate the row~of 54 garage doors to the interior ofthe lot. No longer could developers use the public sidewalk as a driveway or parking space. The new ordinance required that parking be accessed from an alley oran interior drive. The streetscape was given back to the pedestrian. In the unusual cases where the site did no[ have an alley and could not accommodate an interior driveway, town houses could have garage doors facing the street but were required tohave a zo-foot setback so that a car parked in front ofthe garage did not obstructthe sidewalk. Building Spacing One ofthe most pressing problems the town house ordinance addressed was the tendency of some developers to c2m town houses in rows so closely spaced that they violated many people's sense of privacy. It's one thing to have one's bed- rdomwindows along the side property line separated six to to feet from the bedroom windows in the building next door-city dwellers are used to that. Single-family houses and Flats often have this condi- tion-But their front and rear rooms have an open street or backyard to look out on. When a new town house development's living rooms, entries, and other main liv- ingspaces are only iz to i5 feet from the next row's, it shocks the sensibilities. Even high-rise dwellers in the densest neighbor- hoods usually have at least one wall of ZONINGPRACTICE z.ao AMERICAN PLW NING ASSOCIATION (Page 4