Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-7511 Staff AnalysisOctober 30, 2003 ITEM NO.: 16 FILE NO.: Z-7511 NAME: Felton Accessory Dwelling — Conditional Use Permit LOCATION: 5324 Sherwood Road OWNER/APPLICANT: Josephine and Daniel Felton PROPOSAL: A conditional use permit is requested to allow for construction of an accessory dwelling on this R-2 zoned property. SITE LOCATION: The site is located on the north side of Sherwood Road, between Link and Wildwood. 2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD: The property is located in a residential neighborhood comprised solely of large single family residences on R-2 zoned lots. Many of the properties have similar accessory buildings and several have accessory dwellings or guest homes. The proposed use is compatible with uses in the area. All owners of property located within 200 feet of the site, all residents within 300 feet who could be identified and the Hillcrest and Prospect Terrace Neighborhood Associations were notified of this request. 3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING: The site has a concrete paved driveway deep enough for 2 vehicles. Two parking spaces are required; 1 each for the accessory dwelling and the principal dwelling. 4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS: None required. 5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS: No Comments. 6. UTILITY, FIRE DEPT. AND CATA COMMENTS: Wastewater: Sewer available, not adversely affected. October 30, 2003 ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont.) FILE NO.: Z-7511 Entergy: No Comments received. CenterPoint Energy: No Comments received. Southwestern Bell: Approved as submitted. Water: There is an existing 3 -inch water main in the 4 -foot wide easement to the rear that will be abandoned in the near future. No objection. Fire Department: Approved as submitted. County Planning: No Comments. CATH: No Comments. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (OCTOBER 9, 2003) The applicants, Josephine and Daniel Felton, were present. Staff presented the item and noted the applicants had submitted additional information on the proposed accessory dwelling. It was noted that the building will be one-story in height and will be designed in keeping with the traditional Tudor style of the house. The applicants stated the accessory dwelling would occupy 80%, 440 square feet, of the 551 square foot accessory structure. The applicant stated no separate meters are requested for the utilities serving the structure. Staff noted the existing building had a side yard setback of .8 feet and the applicants were asking to maintain that setback. The applicants responded that the eastern portion of the building was on a slab and they wished to use that existing slab. The applicant stated there was a large tree directly adjacent to the west side of the accessory building and moving the structure away from the side property line would cause the tree to have to be removed. Staff noted that the abutting property owner had called and expressed concerns about the proximity of the accessory building to the common lot line. The committee advised the applicants to meet with their neighbor and forwarded the item to the full Commission. STAFF ANALYSIS: The R-2 zoned property located at 5324 Sherwood Road is occupied by a two- story, stucco, brick and frame, single-family residence and a dilapidated, 431.3 square foot accessory building. The accessory building was originally constructed as a "servants quarters" and storage building and has some plumbing and electrical service. The residential portion of the accessory building ►J October 30, 2003 ITEM NO.: 16 (Cont. FILE NO.: Z-7511 has not been occupied for many years. The applicants propose to remove the dilapidated accessory building and replace it with a new, 551 square foot structure. The new structure will maintain the existing footprint on the south, east and west sides but will be extended 2 feet to the north. By maintaining the existing footprint, the structure will have a side yard setback on the east side of 0.8 feet. The new structure will be one story in height, with attic storage, and will be designed in keeping with the traditional Tudor style of the house. Approximately 80% or 440 square feet of the structure will be used as a guesthouse for occasional out of town guests and family members. Since the guesthouse will contain a kitchenette, it is classified as an accessory dwelling. No separate utilities are requested for the accessory dwelling. The accessory building will occupy 44% of the required rear yard; exceeding the allowable 30% coverage limit (375 square feet) established by the Code. Staff is supportive of the request. The proposed use is not out of character with similar uses in the neighborhood. Other than for the 2 foot extension on the rear, the proposed building will maintain the same side yard setback as the existing accessory structure. Although the proposed structure exceeds the allowable 30% coverage, as does the existing structure, it again is not out of character with development in the neighborhood. Replacing this dilapidated building with a new structure should, in fact, be a benefit to the area. The 1926 Bill of Assurance appears to still be in effect and includes the following statements: (a) all plots in said addition shall be limited to single family residences (b) no more than one residence shall be erected on any plot in said addition STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the requested C.U.P. subject to compliance with the following conditions: 1. The structure is to be designed in a style compatible with the traditional Tudor style of the house. 2. There are to be no separate utilities. 3. The eave of the structure is not to extend into the 0.8 foot side yard setback on the east side. 4. If the pitch of the roof of the structure slopes to the east, guttering must be installed to prevent water run-off onto the adjacent property. 3 October 30, 2003 ITEM NO.: 16 FILE NO.: Z-7511 5. Use of the accessory dwelling is to be limited to guests and family members; at no time is the structure to be rented out. Staff recommends approval of the variances to allow the reduced side yard setback of 0.8 feet and the rear yard coverage of 44%. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (OCTOBER 30, 2003) The applicants were present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval subject to compliance with the conditions outlined in the staff recommendation above. There was no further discussion. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff. The vote was 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. 4