In a Friday, September 24th online article from the Journal & Topics, Falling Trees Could Lead To Lawsuit, we read --
Wrong.
If our faithful PRU readers have been paying attention, then you know at last night's City Council COW, staff proposed a housekeeping ordinance change action item for approval -- Parking of Commercial Vehicles in Residential Areas (.pdf). The memo states --
Additional language in the City staff memo suggests the weight and size of commercial vehicles that qualify for a waiver from the parking restrictions, specifically --
Setting aside for a moment the questionable wisdom of essentially removing a land use ordinance from the zoning code, we're wondering why the newly proposed language seems to have expanded the size for which a commercial vehicle may qualify for a waiver. The existing zoning code ordinance (.pdf), section 12, 11-A-3 states --
The Journal & Topics article goes on to report --
The PRU Crew can't say for certain if Mr. Bernick is correct in his assessment of favoritism. But we sure do wonder what the hell is going on over at 505 Butler Place these days.
"Neighborhood dissatisfaction with the falling of two trees on Bonita Drive in Park Ridge is manifesting itself in other ways and could lead to a lawsuit against the city.Of course, now the City will enforce the zoning code ordinance and put an end to this illegal activity. Right?
Police received an anonymous complaint about a B class truck parked in a driveway on Greenwood Avenue.
The truck belongs to the parents of the family on Bonita where the two trees were recently removed, explained Police Chief Frank Kaminski.
“The man parks his truck on his driveway a couple days a week,” Kaminski confirmed. “According to the zoning ordinance, that’s illegal."
Wrong.
If our faithful PRU readers have been paying attention, then you know at last night's City Council COW, staff proposed a housekeeping ordinance change action item for approval -- Parking of Commercial Vehicles in Residential Areas (.pdf). The memo states --
"The City Attorney has recommended moving the attached language from the Zoning Ordinance to the Municipal Code. Paragraph 13-10-11 B has been added to the Municipal Code to address off-street parking. This change will result in a violation being fined a $50 fine, not $250 as outlined in the Zoning Ordinance."Please note -- "from the Zoning Ordinance to the Municipal Code."
Additional language in the City staff memo suggests the weight and size of commercial vehicles that qualify for a waiver from the parking restrictions, specifically --
c. Exceeds twenty (20) feet in length, eight (8) feet (6) six inches in height or seven (7) feet six (6) inches in width, or has more than four (4) wheels.We again remind our faithful PRU readers of the memo language -- "from the Zoning Ordinance to the Municipal Code."
Setting aside for a moment the questionable wisdom of essentially removing a land use ordinance from the zoning code, we're wondering why the newly proposed language seems to have expanded the size for which a commercial vehicle may qualify for a waiver. The existing zoning code ordinance (.pdf), section 12, 11-A-3 states --
"A. No truck of eight-thousand (8,000) pounds GVW or less (i.e., Class B license) shall be permitted to park in the front or corner side yard of any residential lot, if the truck:It appears the more restrictive zoning code language, governing the size of commercial vehicles, is being eased in the proposed language for addition to the municipal code.
3. Exceeds twenty (20) feet in length, eight (8) feet in height or seven (7) feet in width, or has more than four (4) wheels."
The Journal & Topics article goes on to report --
"...resident Tom Bernick says the trucks don’t qualify for a waiver.It took three years for someone to alert the proper authorities? The PRU Crew is pretty confident the commercial vehicle parking problem wasn't viewed as much of a problem until neighbors in the area got the idea that for some people no doesn't mean no, especially when it comes to buying and removing City property -- which is precisely what we feel occurred in the continuing saga of the Meatgate trees.
He said three vehicles, two cargo vans and a straight truck, are being parked at the address.
He claims one of the vans has a gross vehicle weight of 10,000 pounds, the other is 8,900. “The straight truck is 14,500 pounds,” he said.
Bernick said the family has parked the trucks for about three years and said he has also seen the resident allegedly dumping food waste products down the storm drain. “We’re going to sue the city for not enforcing its ordinance,” he said. Referring back to the tree decision, he added, “It’s the same favoritism that’s going on."
The PRU Crew can't say for certain if Mr. Bernick is correct in his assessment of favoritism. But we sure do wonder what the hell is going on over at 505 Butler Place these days.
Anyone know a municipal attorney willing to issue a cease and desist order on bullshit from City staff?
Anyone know a zoning attorney willing to submit a map amendment to the zoning code designating City Hall a No Bullshit zone?
12 comments:
"designating City Hall a No Bullshit zone"
Hear hear!
I am more concerned about what the resident in the article said he saw is being dumped into the storm drain. Gross!
I read that article last week and thought to myself, oh geeze, what wrath did these people bring down on themselves when pissing off the neighbors. I must say now though that the city certainly has equal part in the bringing of that wrath.
And if what I think I read this post is suggesting then I would say that the timing of a memo requesting a change "from" the zoning ordinance most definatly is questionable to say the least.
Who are these people and why do they hae the city bending over backwards (or frontwards) for them?
At this point it's not the trees or the trucks that have people upset. It's the fenagling by the owners to get around the laws and the city refusing to enforce the laws.
If we can't trust the city to enforce simple laws like the ones for trees and trucks what else can't we trust them on?
This, and by "this" I mean selective enforcement, has been going on for years. People can elect people to create laws all they want. In Park Ridge if staff doesn't like the law they just don't enforce it unless they are forced to. It’s called passive aggressive behavior and it is the standard operating procedure at City Hall.
How sad is it when the very people who's charge it is to be the peacekeepers by simple enforcement of code and or law, are the very ones who are perpetuating the hatred and anger among neighbors.
And for what? The greater good? The City's best interest? Or is it egos, self interest, and power plays?
Sickening!!!!! What the "f" kind of town has this become?
Wouldn't it make sense to have the language in the traffic section where it can be enforced by the PD as opposed to the zoning code which is not usually enforced by the PD? Just asking.
Anon@9:43 --
Yours isn't an illogical question.
Do you view parking of overweight commercial vehicles on residential private driveways to be a traffic violation or land use violation or both?
I guess I would see it as a traffic/parking issue more than a land use issue -- not to say that you couldn't address it in zoning -- however, enforcement and remedies will come faster through the police department enforcing the laws as opposed to an inspector in City Hall addressing it.
9:43, Says who?
Common sense?
I'm thinking that it's faster to call police/non emergency to have someone on patrol come out and issue a ticket as opposed to someone in City Hall. But my impression is just an assumption, I could be wrong.
No..Not common sense, NON-SENSE.
Post a Comment