Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Code Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Willard planning commission forwards zoning-code cleanup to city council, including ADU and height changes
Summary
The commission voted to send amendments to section 24.44.05 and related code sections to the city council after staff described the package as a "cleanup ordinance." Key changes include raising accessory structure height, clarifying ADU measurement and a 25% available-yard cap; staff will correct typographical errors before transmittal.
Willard City Planning Commission on Jan. 15 voted to forward a package of zoning-code amendments addressing area coverage, setbacks, accessory-structure heights and accessory dwelling unit (ADU) rules to the city council for consideration.
Jeremy, the city staff planner who summarized the proposal, called it “kind of that cleanup ordinance to kinda deal with some of the setbacks we’ve been working on since November,” and asked commissioners to flag anything they believed was missing before the city council review.
The draft amends section 24.44.05 of the Willard City zoning code and makes related edits to sections including 24.96.060, 24.24.003, 24.44.001 and 24.08.014. Commissioners and public commenters focused on three practical points: accessory-building height, how ADU square footage should be measured, and the draft’s 25% cap on ADU yard coverage.
Resident Rebecca Dilge, who addressed the commission during the public-hearing period, said she had read the draft and supported increasing the accessory height limit. “The heights requirements where you’re moving it from 20 to 25 seems makes sense because it appears that a lot of our neighbors have buildings that exceed that anyway,” she said.
Commission discussion clarified two technical items raised during review: the ADU square-footage line contains a typographical error that staff agreed to correct, and the intent for the ADU size reference was to measure total livable area (both floors summed), not per-floor area. Commissioners and staff also interpreted the “25% of available yard area” provision to mean 25% of the remaining open yard after subtracting the primary dwelling and accessory structures (rather than 25% of the entire lot), while noting an overall 25% lot-coverage cap elsewhere in the code remains applicable.
Members asked staff to ensure Old Town zoning text reads consistently (for both sides of certain streets) without triggering a full rezoning. Staff said they would produce clarified language and correct typographical issues before forwarding the draft.
A commissioner moved to send the amendment to the city council with typographical corrections; the motion was seconded and the chair called the motion “Aye” with no recorded opposition. The planning commission’s action is a recommendation; final adoption requires city-council consideration and any additional hearings or edits.
