Transcript
Case # 631FSignificance & Compatibility
Review228 Castano
Presented By: Jason LutzCommunity Development Services Director
City Council MeetingAgenda Item # 5
July 25, 2016
CASE # 631F - SUMMARY The applicant is seeking to demolish
100% of the existing main structure inorder to construct a new single familyresidence with detached accessorystructure.
3
BACKGROUND
Zoned SF-A South side of Castano, between
Nacogdoches Rd. & Alamo Heights Blvd. Significance Review was approved by the
ARB on 12/02/14 and by Council on12/08/14.
4
5
LOT COVERAGE EXISTING PROPOSEDLot Area 7,514 7,514Main House Footprint 935 2,156Front Porch 108 124Side Porch 1Side Porch 2Rear PorchGarage Footprint 224Carport Footprint 216Shed(s) Footprint 75BreezewaysCovered Patio Structure 178Other Accessory StructuresLot Coverage / Lot Area 1,010 / 7,514 2,898 / 7,514Total Lot Coverage (Max 40%) 13% 38%
6
FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR) EXISTING PROPOSEDLot Area 7,514 7,514Main House 1st Floor 935 2,156Main House 2nd Floor 1,002Garage 1st Floor 224Garage 2nd Floor
Other Structures 216FAR / Lot Area 935 / 7,514 3,598 / 7,514
Total FAR (45% or max 50% with bonuses) 12% 47%
7
POLICY ANALYSIS
2% bonus added to the F.A.R. for a onestory accessory structure (garage).
27’-11 ¼” in height (max allowed 33’). Complies with all regulations concerning
setbacks, height, and loomingstandards.
8
POLICY ANALYSIS
Building Materials Stucco Stone Veneer Composition Shingle Roof
9
POLICY ANALYSIS Heritage Tree Removal (54 total inches)
(1) 26” Oak (1) 28” Oak
Other Tree Removal (38 total inches) (2) 17” Oak (3) 21” Oak
10
POLICY ANALYSIS Tree Mitigation (54 total inches)
(1) 26” Oak (1) 28” Oak
Fees In Lieu $4,000.00 Max $2,000 per tree
11
POLICY ANALYSIS The existing 935 sq. ft. home was built in
1910. (Significance Review) No evidence that
the home was: built by a noted architect belongs to a distinct architectural style or has any major historical significance
12
EXISTING SITE PLAN
13
EXISTING STRUCTURE
14
EXISTING STRUCTURE
15
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
16
FRONT ELEVATION
17
REAR ELEVATION
18
RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION
19
LEFT SIDE ELEVATION
20
STREETSCAPE
21
ARB RECOMMENDATION
ARB Review – June 21, 2016
No significance in existing structure
Replacement structure is compatible
Approved with recommendations
22
ARB RECOMMENDATIONS
Try to fit additional oak trees on the site instead of “Fees in lieu of mitigation”.
Two additional large trees (non-heritage) would need to be removed from the front yard.
23
ARB RECOMMENDATIONS
Red = Heritage Tree RemovalOrange = Other Oaks to be removed.
24
ARB RECOMMENDATIONS
25
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Postcards were mailed to property owners
within a 200-foot radius of the property,appropriate notice was posted on the Citywebsite and a sign was posted on theproperty
Responses received:
Support: (2)
Oppose: (1)
QUESTIONS?
top related