Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Guest Quarters Sups topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission questions several guest‑quarters proposals, saying some submissions contain full dwelling elements
Summary
Staff told the commission that at least two guest‑quarters/secondary living-unit proposals included kitchens and other features that would make them separate dwelling units, and commissioners asked applicants to revise plans before the next hearing.
The commission reviewed multiple specific-use permit requests for guest quarters and secondary living units and repeatedly told applicants that submitted plans contained features — notably food-preparation areas — that would constitute a second dwelling unit on a single-family lot under current code.
Staff said the application for 802 Jackson Street (Z2025-033) proposed an 800-square-foot footprint that “contains all elements of a dwelling unit,” including two bedrooms, two baths and a kitchen; staff recommended denial in its current form because only one dwelling unit is allowed per lot in the single-family district, and guest quarters are expected to lack full food-preparation facilities. A commissioner said he was “not a big fan” of what appeared to be “a complete second home on a small lot.” Staff advised the applicant to remove the food-preparation area if the owner wanted the structure to qualify as a guest quarter rather than a second dwelling unit.
A separate guest‑quarters request at 340 Evans Road (Z2025-041) sought a two‑story secondary living unit totaling 1,561 square feet with two living areas, two food‑preparation areas and two bathrooms; staff told the commission the submittal “contains all elements of a dwelling unit and doesn't currently meet the guest quarters requirements.” Commissioners suggested reducing the size, eliminating kitchens, and matching exterior materials to the primary residence if the applicant wants an approvable guest‑quarters SUP.
For a different accessory‑structure item (Z2025-031, 2317 Saddlebrook Lane), applicants asked for a 48‑square‑foot variance over the maximum accessory building area; staff noted the property already has three accessory structures and described the proposed new building as a garden shed and non‑commercial use. Commissioners generally indicated those parcels with larger lots and multiple accessory buildings are not atypical in that subdivision, and the case will return on July 15.
No final approvals were recorded for the guest‑quarters requests; staff and commissioners asked applicants to revise plans and return with updated materials at the July 15 meeting.
