Upcoming question: How big can you build?

A dispute on the size of accessory buildings in Electric City will soon be on the front burner for city planners.

When the city’s comprehensive plan was passed, it limited the size of accessory buildings to 850 square feet.

At least two Electric City residents, Mike Dennis and Mark Payne, have appeared before the planning commission and city council on numerous occasions, asking for larger accessory buildings to be allowed in the city.

Upon their initial appearance before planners, the commission members seemed to OK buildings up to 30 feet high with no barrier to the size as long as it didn’t exceed 60 percent of the available building space on the lot.

Then Dennis and Payne went to the city council with what they thought was good news for them; they discovered that it wasn’t that simple.

Since that time, the council, and the city’s planner Vivian Ramsey, have asked the planning commission to show how any change in the code for steel buildings would comply with the comprehensive plan. The proposed change, the city argued, “would significantly change the vision of the city as written in the comprehensive plan.”

City officials have stated that the process of changing the portion of the comprehensive plan as it relates to “accessory buildings” could take the better part of a year and would have to go through a number of hurdles, including public hearings.

At one time it was estimated the cost could be as high as $8,000 to $10,000.

All they want to do, Dennis and Payne have stated, is to have buildings large enough to keep items they have invested in out of the weather and have a safe and dry place to work on them.

In their view, an accessory building of somewhere in the 1,600- to 1,700-square-foot size would be appropriate.

Mayor Jerry Sands did agree that the 850-square-foot size is probably too small. However, he argues that there needs to be a limit on the height, and that any such accessory building should have the same roofing and siding as the residence that is on the lot.

Both Dennis and Payne have indicated that this wouldn’t be a problem.

Their argument continues that nothing seems to be happening.

City officials have stated that the planning commission must present to the council a proposal that shows how any change affects the comprehensive plan, and so far they haven’t done so.

The planning commission meets again April 1.