Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the New Construction Variance Denial topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ACC denies new-construction package at 13 Deer Run Lane citing multiple variances
Summary
The ACC voted to deny a new-construction application for 13 Deer Run Lane and related variance requests after committee members said the proposed plan required several significant exceptions, including height and lot-coverage variances that would affect neighbors.
The Sudden Valley Architectural Control Committee voted to deny a new-construction application for 13 Deer Run Lane and three related variance requests (items 14–16 on the agenda). Committee members said the submission required multiple variances — primarily for height and lot coverage — and that the cumulative set of exceptions exceeded what the committee was willing to approve for the lot.
Committee members who visited the lot described a “pizza-shaped” parcel with limited room for the proposed house and said the plan’s height and coverage would look over neighboring properties. Members emphasized public-facing concerns, such as sightlines and the proximity of the proposed structure to neighboring backyards and green space owned by Sudden Valley. One committee member said the design “doesn’t fit” and noted they saw neighbors using nearby green spaces, emphasizing potential privacy impacts.
Staff and committee members recommended design changes: lowering the house to meet the 20-foot height limit or otherwise reduce the requested height variance, adding windows on north elevations to reduce the appearance of a blank façade, and reconsidering retaining-wall and driveway designs. Committee members suggested the applicant could rework the design to reduce height and lot-coverage variances and to add windows to the north elevation so the house better fit the neighborhood character.
Motion and outcome: A motion to deny the new construction application and to deny the three associated variance requests carried. Committee members recorded the denials and asked the applicant to return with revised plans that reduced height or coverage or that pared back the number of variances requested.
Why it matters: The denial shows the ACC’s approach to cumulative variances: several small exceptions that together substantially change a project are less likely to be approved. Committee discussion prioritized neighbor impacts and the committee’s updated policies on measuring height and coverage.
What’s next: Staff suggested specific options (drop the building height to avoid a height variance and rework driveway/retaining walls) and encouraged re-submittal with revised drawings and clearer elevation details.
