Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Accessory Structures topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident Raises Zoning Concern: Converting Agricultural Lots to R‑1 Could Make Existing Outbuildings Nonconforming
Summary
A commenter urged the council to consider how a proposed minor plat and rezoning from Agriculture to R‑1 would change allowable outbuildings, saying two existing sheds on a lot could become noncompliant and arguing residents should be able to seek variances instead of rezoning.
Teresa Vollenweider told the council during public comment on Aug. 11 that a proposed minor plat and rezoning from Agricultural to R‑1 in an unplatted area would make existing accessory buildings unlawful under the city's Unified Development Ordinance (UDO).
Vollenweider said one affected lot already contains two detached accessory buildings — a garage and a shed — and that the city's UDO restricts R‑1 lots to one detached garage or storage building per one‑ or two‑family dwelling. She asked why property owners must pay for a minor plat and rezoning instead of seeking a variance when their proposed accessory building would otherwise be prohibited by the setback and lot coverage rules applicable after rezoning.
"When you go from Ag to R‑1 or to any residential, you're limited in those buildings," Vollenweider said. "So when you go from ag to R1...you're making it non lawful, non conforming, and not compliant with your UDO."
Outcome The remarks were part of public comment; council did not take immediate action on the matter at the Aug. 11 meeting. The commenter urged staff and council to consider whether variances or other less burdensome remedies would be more appropriate than rezoning in similar cases.
