Laserfiche WebLink
CASSCLBERRY CITY COMMISSION <br />Minutes of June 28, 2021 — Workshop <br />Page 2 of 4 <br />4. DISCUSSION ITEMS <br />A. Presentation: Accessory Structure Regulations and Locations <br />Staff Presentation: Community Development Director Chris Bowley gave a presentation on accessory <br />structures which included the following components: <br />- Code definitions <br />- Current standards <br />- Units less than 160 square feet <br />- Units 160-500 square feet <br />- Other structure types <br />- Fitting on a lot & number of units <br />- Discussion items <br />- Questions <br />Discussion: A lengthy discussion ensued regarding potential updates to the City's regulation of <br />accessory structures which included: the need for adding and clarifying definitions; whether pools, <br />ponds, and pergolas should be considered accessory structures; concerns about pending legislation <br />regarding home occupations and potential impact if passed; current lot size requirements for placement <br />of accessory structures and whether there have been past issues relating to placement; comparison with <br />other cities as to definitions, standards and regulations; private property rights vs. impact on surrounding <br />properties; boat docks being addressed in proposed waterways ordinance; whether connection of <br />plumbing and/or power to accessory structures should be a determining factor in approval or need for <br />conditional use application; required setbacks; aesthetics, screening/buffering and curb appeal; possible <br />solutions for avoiding interference with line of sight for surrounding property owners; exclusion of pools, <br />ponds, pergolas, etc. from restrictions on allowed number of accessory structures on a parcel; storage <br />shed vs. workshop; potential code compliance issues; regulation and permitting of placement of conex <br />boxes/shipping/moving containers, pods, dumpsters, and other similar temporary structures; potential <br />size, height restrictions, orientation and other requirements for accessory structures and under what <br />circumstances would permitting be required; inspection of tie -downs on sheds; concerns about wording <br />ordinance to avoid confusion; the need to review the City's other code sections to address references to <br />accessory structures and snake any other necessary amendments; and impervious surface ration (ISR) <br />requirements. <br />Mr. Bowley explained that the City's Code currently allows two (2) 500 square foot accessory structures, <br />but structures over 500 square feet would require a conditional use and that conceivably, two (2) 500 -foot <br />structures could be installed for a total of 1000 square feet without a conditional use. However, in a past <br />proposed ordinance there were criteria for a limit of two (2) up to 120 square feet per storage unit or shed <br />for a total of 240 square feet, and anything beyond that would require conditional use approval. The <br />structures would still need to meet certain criteria such as screening, orientation and height and would <br />still require inspection by the Building Official for store-bought and standard sized structures using <br />specifications provided by the manufacturer, and tie -downs would be addressed by those specs and <br />standards. The Commission as a whole expressed concern that two five hundred square foot structures <br />installed without a requirement to go through a conditional use process was excessive. <br />