Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Accessory Structures topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board recommends loosening some corner-lot limits for accessory structures, requires screening

Planning and Advisory Board · November 21, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Planning and Advisory Board recommended code changes to allow certain accessory structures closer to secondary streets on corner lots, with added screening (fencing or landscaping) to protect neighbors’ privacy; the motion passed after public comment.

The Planning and Advisory Board considered draft amendments to accessory-structure rules for corner lots that would let certain sheds, gazebos and similar structures be sited differently than under current code while retaining setback and structural requirements.

Staff said the revisions are mainly housekeeping to reduce repeated Board of Adjustment (BOA) variance requests and to provide clearer rules for corner-lot situations. The draft includes diagrams and language clarifying where accessory structures may be placed relative to the primary and secondary street. Staff also emphasized that enclosed accessory structures have setback requirements that vary by size (examples cited in the discussion included 5-foot and 10-foot offsets depending on square footage) and that prefabricated sheds commonly include certification stickers used as part of permitting review.

Residents raised privacy concerns about a shed or structure placed near a neighbor’s front yard; one resident suggested the board require a fence or landscape screening in those cases. Diane Douglas, speaking as a homeowner, said a well-made shed can be an improvement and can help homeowners organize small yards. A board member proposed adding mandatory screening consistent with other parts of the code; that motion was seconded. During roll call multiple members answered "Aye" and the chair announced the motion carried.

Staff noted temporary accessory structures and permit requirements during the discussion; some numeric specifics in the transcript (for example a spoken reference to "15 feet, square feet or less, which is 3 by 5") were unclear in places and will be clarified in the final draft and engineering/permit language before council review.

The board recommended forwarding the accessory-structure amendments with added screening language to the city council for adoption.