Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Accessory Structures topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors and commissioners split over two‑story accessory building at 820 North Price Road
Summary
A petitioner seeking a two‑story accessory structure with living space above a garage at 820 North Price Road drew several hours of public comment and detailed scrutiny from the Planning & Community Development Commission over privacy, scale and precedent; commission asked for more drawings and deferred action.
The Olivette Planning & Community Development Commission heard detailed public and applicant presentations on April 3 about proposed improvements to 820 North Price Road that include a two‑story accessory building with a garage, covered walkway and pool.
The petition drew several neighbors who said the detached building’s size and second‑floor living area would overwhelm the lot and intrude on adjacent backyards. "I do not think the Commission should allow two‑story accessory structures, especially structures that are this large," said Kate Pashawn Hellman, a nearby resident, citing Olivette community design guidelines and county assessor figures she said showed the accessory structure would exceed the main house in total square footage.
The petitioner, homeowner Ilya Adleman, told the commission the design was revised to respond to neighbors’ concerns and to comply with site‑coverage limits. "We are now under the total site coverage requirement," Adleman said, and he confirmed an engineer will submit a stormwater management plan after learning a change to the project triggered the city’s BMP requirement.
Architect Tom McGrath of Link Architecture explained structure heights and cross sections and said the accessory building would be set down from the primary house; he said the garage roof is roughly 4–6 inches lower than the house but the garage is set about 18 inches lower in grade, making the effective difference about 1 foot 10 inches.
Neighbors asked the commission to require design changes if the structure is approved: restricting windows that face the adjacent yard, reducing the massing or eliminating a second story for the accessory structure. "I do not think the Commission should approve accessory structures that are larger in total square footage than the primary residence," said Hellman, who presented assessor figures she said showed the accessory building would total about 1,850 square feet vs. a 1,544‑square‑foot primary house.
Commissioners and staff focused questions on precise height relationships, streetscape cross sections, tree protection and stormwater. Planning staff recommended additional scaled cross sections from property line to property line and a neighbor viewpoint cross section to clarify how the new upper level would appear from adjacent yards. Several commissioners said that while they appreciated the design, they were uneasy approving a two‑story accessory that could set a precedent without clearer measurements and privacy mitigation.
No formal action was taken. The commission asked the petitioner to provide clearer cross sections and neighbor‑view elevations, to consider window modifications to reduce direct sightlines into adjacent yards, and to supply the pending stormwater materials. Staff said the applicant had offered a 90‑day extension and the commission will consider the revised materials in a future meeting.
The discussion included public‑comment remarks about related neighborhood impacts: Christina Hansen and other North Price residents raised nighttime delivery noise at the nearby Aldi and concerns about parking‑garage light spill from new developments; trustees of nearby Stonley Towers and other neighbors urged designs that match neighborhood scale and character.
The commission’s review is continuing and the petitioner agreed to return with the additional technical plans staff requested.
