Palos Park officials weigh new rules for accessory structures, from play sets to pole barns

Palos Park planning commissioners and village staff discussed several proposed changes to the draft zoning code governing accessory structures, including dog runs, play equipment, pool houses, detached guest rooms and prefabricated metal "pole barn" buildings.

The discussion matters because the proposed rules would limit what residents may place in front, side and rear yards, could add new permitting requirements and aim to close perceived loopholes that allow accessory structures to be used as separate dwellings.

Consultant Larissa (presenting) read a list of topics the group had previously identified and began with accessory-structure questions. On dog runs she said the draft allows those structures in the rear yard and that the staff recommendation is to allow them in an interior side yard only if they are not placed inside the required setback. "This is building a dog run structure," Larissa said to distinguish a built structure from the ordinary presence of a pet in a yard. Several commissioners indicated they were comfortable with that approach.

Play structures and swings produced the most debate. A number of residents said front-yard playgrounds support neighborhood interaction. One resident said, "I met their kids and I met their family because their playground is in the front, and I think it was a really easy way to create community." Other commissioners raised aesthetics, public-safety and enforcement concerns, noting older, poorly maintained equipment can become an eyesore or a neighborhood nuisance. Commissioners and staff discussed possible objective criteria for limited front-yard allowance (for example: not within the required front setback; minimum distance from the lot line; or lot-size thresholds). Staff recommended a compromise: prohibit play equipment in the required front setback but allow it elsewhere in the front yard where the house is set sufficiently far back from the street. No formal motion was recorded; the discussion closed with the staff suggestion that the draft be revised to allow side- and rear-yard play equipment and to add objective criteria for any limited front-yard exceptions.

Speakers also asked whether pool houses may include showers. Larissa noted the draft definition of "pool house" already allows showers and bathrooms and there was no proposed change. The group discussed whether combined accessory structures (for example, a detached garage combined with a pool house or kitchenette) should be treated differently. Staff and commissioners expressed concern that combining bathroom and kitchen facilities into a single outbuilding could create an unintended accessory dwelling. "It could complicate some of these regulations," staff said, noting enforcement difficulties if a structure is later used as a residence.

Participants debated prefab metal "pole barns." Several speakers said metal-sided prefab buildings deteriorate and can become unattractive when not maintained; others said those buildings are common and useful, especially on larger lots or agricultural properties. Staff presented three approaches under consideration: (1) treat them as the draft does now (a general accessory structure subject to yard and height limits); (2) define "pole barn" and add specific controls on size, location and exterior materials; or (3) prohibit large prefab metal exteriors except for small accessory storage (staff had proposed limiting exterior metal siding to structures of 144 square feet or smaller). Several commissioners favored option (2) or a materials-based limit to prevent large metal buildings in visible locations.

The draft's accessory-office/studio/guest-room standard drew written opposition. One written commenter asked whether an accessory building with a sink and kitchenette could be used as a de facto dwelling and suggested removing the guest-room allowance. Staff explained the current draft limits such accessory uses to a half-bath and a kitchenette (no oven), and said the intent is to allow limited guest or studio use while avoiding creation of a separate dwelling unit. Commissioners flagged enforcement risk and asked staff to clarify language and add objective limits to prevent conversion to a full-time dwelling.

On chickens and beehives, staff said the draft largely retains current rules: up to five chickens, a minimum indoor coop space per bird and a prohibition on on-site slaughter. A resident comment called the limits burdensome; staff responded that the numeric limits mirror the existing code and are intended to avoid sanitation and noise problems.

What happens next: staff will draft clearer, objective standards for (a) where play equipment may be located; (b) whether and how combined accessory uses are allowed without creating a separate dwelling; and (c) tighter material and/or size limits on prefab metal buildings. The commission asked staff to return proposed language that would be administrable and enforceable.

The meeting continued to other sections of the draft code.