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?