Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the ADU Accessory Structures topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planners favor tying garage and ADU heights to principal building; 12-inch offset recommended

Port Washington Planning Commission / Design Review discussion · June 18, 2026
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 commission discussed a draft rule making accessory or detached garages no higher than the principal building (instead of fixed feet), and commissioners generally supported a one-foot (12-inch) minimum visual offset so garages remain subordinate; consultants will add the language to the September draft.

Commissioners reviewed proposed dimensional language that would require accessory or detached garages to be no higher than the principal building rather than imposing fixed height numbers, and they generally favored that approach as flexible and consistent with recent ADU policy.

Under the draft approach, a garage's highest point must be lower than the highest point of the principal building. Commissioners said this avoids special exceptions while maintaining a clear visual hierarchy between house and accessory structure.

Commissioners also discussed a minimum offset to ensure the garage reads as subordinate; a one-foot (12-inch) offset was proposed and received general agreement.

"No less than 12 in because it's got to at least look significant that it's shorter," a commissioner said, explaining the visual rationale. Participants noted lot grade and setbacks can affect perceived height and that a single-inch specification may not be noticeable in all cases, but 12 inches would generally be visible.

The commission asked consultants to incorporate the accessory-structure rule and the suggested offset into the draft code; consultants said they would include these changes in the September revision for legal review and further consideration.

No formal vote was taken on the dimensional language at this meeting.