Agenda - Planning Commission - 11/12/2015

Home

City Planner Anderson discussed the City policy currently in place that addresses property line setbacks for principle and accessory structures. He explained that the City could revisit this regulation in order to determine if a portion of an accessory structure could be in front of the home, but not the entire accessory structure. Commissioner VanScoy believed that the current code was quite clear in that accessory structures were not to be located in front of the principle structure. Community Development Director Gladhill stated this was the case and staff was questioning if the Commission was willing to consider allowing a small portion to be in front. Ginger Millner, 16841 Wolverine Court NW, explained she was requesting the accessory structure size due to the fact she had a very small attached garage at the time. She explained that she and her husband enjoy woodworking and would be using the detached structure for a woodshop, in addition to providing parking spaces. Given the angle of her home on the lot and the large row of conifers on her property, she believed the proposed location for the accessory structure made the most sense. She indicated that if the garage were attached to her home, her property would have more pavement and fill. She then discussed the number of detached garages in her neighborhood. Allen Millner, 16841 Wolverine Court NW, commented that the proposed location of the detached garage would allow for access into and out of the structure from the existing driveway. Commissioner VanScoy asked how much of the detached structure would be in front of the current line of the house. Ms. Millner estimated a triangular shape that was approximately 15% of the structure would be in front of the line. Commissioner VanScoy questioned if the building could be moved straight back 10 feet in order for it to be in alignment with the home. Ms. Millner explained the City required there to be a minimum of 14 feet between structures and septic tanks. For this reason, the structure could not be pushed back 10 feet. Commissioner Brauer inquired if the building could be made smaller in order to meet the City's requirements. Ms. Millner stated the angle of the property line was causing concern with the placement of the building. She commented if the building was made smaller, she wouldn't have the same level of flexibility that she was seeking. She indicated that she could always attach the garage to the home, but believed the better option for her property was to build a detached structure, as this would save a large number of cedar trees on her lot. Planning Commission/October 15, 2015 Page 3 of 17