Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Right Of Way Swale topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council reviews draft unified right‑of‑way (swale/driveway) ordinance amid concerns about permitting and homeowner impacts
Summary
Staff presented a draft ordinance to unify standards for swales, driveways and right‑of‑way plantings, proposing permitted plant lists, setbacks, root‑barrier requirements and prohibiting artificial turf and invasive species in flow lines. Council requested clearer language, landscape‑architect input, and more public education before returning the item for formal review.
Village staff presented a draft ordinance Feb. 2 to unify and replace two existing chapters of village code and to set clear standards for plantings, driveways and swale maintenance in the right‑of‑way.
Doug (staff presenter) said the draft aims to protect underground infrastructure, drainage and public safety while allowing some permitted landscaping "by permit with clear rules to protect drainage, utilities and visibility." The draft would allow trees on the top side of swales (the home side), permit select grasses, wildflowers and groundcover in swales outside the flow line, and prohibit artificial turf, invasive species, shrubs and hedges in the flow line.
Why it matters: Right‑of‑way plantings and driveway materials affect stormwater drainage, utility access and long‑term maintenance costs. Staff noted the village is investing heavily in aging underground infrastructure and argued a unified code will protect that investment.
Council concerns and clarifications requested: Members raised multiple issues about how the code would work in practice — including whether a 12‑foot minimum tree size is reasonable for residents, how to handle odd‑shaped lots or areas with limited swale footprint, what constitutes "minor" maintenance versus a permit‑triggering change, and whether the proposed approved plant list is too restrictive. Several council members asked for the village’s landscape consultant to review the plant list and recommended clarifying exception language and enforcement thresholds before returning the draft.
Public comment: Multiple residents urged clearer outreach and simpler language. One commenter, Marie Perry, said the draft as written would make it effectively impossible for residents to plan permitted plantings beyond sod because of onerous caveats and root‑barrier requirements. Another resident noted inconsistent current enforcement and urged staff to improve education and consistency before changing the code.
Next steps: Staff said the ordinance would also go to the Planning & Zoning board for review; council requested additional cleanup and at least one more workshop to resolve ambiguities before staff brings a final ordinance and education plan for adoption. No ordinance was adopted at the workshop.
