Design Review Committee approves detached garage at 729 Johnson Ave., allows 7/12 roof pitch

The Design Review Committee on March 27 approved a proposal by Gary Giddey to build a 20-by-30-foot detached garage behind his home at 729 Johnson Avenue, voting 5-2 to accept staff recommendations but to remove a staff condition that would have lowered the roof pitch from 7/12 to 6/12.

The committee's vote follows a detailed staff report and public comment that centered on the garage's roof pitch, side-yard setback and potential impact on a neighboring property. Emily (staff member, Community and Economic Development) told the committee the building would be 600 square feet with fiber-cement lap siding, 1-over-1 windows, a steel roll-up garage door and architectural shingles, and that the applicant had revised plans the prior day to show an interior side-yard setback of 4 feet (the code minimum is 3 feet) after originally showing 11 feet.

The staff recommendation approved the accessory building subject to three conditions: lower the roof pitch to 6/12 or match the principal house if lower; provide 4-to-6-inch corner boards and trim and an 8-to-10-inch frieze board at gable ends; and add two evenly spaced windows on the front (street-facing) elevation. Emily told the committee she found the design compatible with the principal house and the South Lake Morton historic district but recommended the adjustments to improve compatibility.

Owner Gary Giddey and contractor Michael Carter answered committee questions and said the 7/12 pitch is needed to provide attic storage space; they said a 600-square-foot accessory limit imposed by a recent ordinance changed what they could build and that the extra pitch provides usable storage. Giddey said the proposed garage would be accessed from the alley, that gutters and a routed outlet would direct runoff into his front yard, and that mature trees currently obscure much of the structure from Johnson Avenue.

A nearby neighbor (Bill Henson, by email) raised concerns about potential runoff onto his property, the simplicity of the building's design and possible removal of a large tree; Emily said tree removal and drainage mitigation fall outside the committee's purview but noted the applicant proposed gutters and surface drainage measures.

Committee members debated the visual difference between a 6/12 and 7/12 pitch (several members said the elevation difference would be modest for a 20-foot-wide truss) and raised notice and process concerns after revised plans were uploaded two days before the meeting. Andy Snyder, a public speaker, endorsed the applicant's workmanship and character.

Motion and vote: Committee member Michael Porter moved to approve staff recommendations but strike the first condition about lowering the roof pitch; the motion was seconded (second not specified on the record). In a roll call, Bruce Anderson voted no; Jason Hill, Ricardo Jimenez, Natalie Oldenkamp, Chris Olsen and Michael Porter voted yes; Melinda Renker voted no. The motion passed 5-2.

The committee recorded the approval with the following requirements to be approved by staff before permitting: (1) provide corner boards and trim (4'6 inches) and 8'10-inch frieze boards at gable ends; and (2) add two evenly spaced windows on the front elevation (to mirror the rear elevation windows). The removed condition (lowering the roof pitch) will not be enforced by the committee; the applicant remains responsible for meeting the land development code height limit (12.5 feet for accessory structures) at permitting.

The committee discussion also highlighted process issues: members asked staff to require clearer versioning when applicants upload revised plans close to meetings and to consider posting revisions earlier to give neighbors more time to review them.

No further formal conditions were added regarding tree removal or stormwater; Emily noted those items are addressed through permitting and other city processes, not the design review approval.

Ending: With the design review approval complete, staff will finalize the permit review pending submittal of the revised drawings showing required trim and window details and confirmation that the building meets code height and setback requirements.