Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Middle Housing Appeal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission to review administrative appeal of a three‑unit middle‑housing approval on a nonconforming lot
Summary
Staff presented an appeal of an administrative determination for a proposed three‑unit structure at 1411 Moses Avenue, noting the lot is nonconforming (about 3,425 sq ft and ~30 ft wide), that site plans conflict with the recorded plat, and raising privacy and 'slot‑house' design concerns; staff shared a mitigation option the applicant declined.
Samuel (staff) presented an appeal of an administrative determination for a proposed three‑unit middle‑housing structure at 1411 Moses Avenue in the Mechanicsville neighborhood. The parcel is 3,425 sq ft with a platted width of about 30 feet and carries an HP overlay; staff said the lot is nonconforming under current RN2 minimums and that the applicant relied on older provisions because the application was submitted prior to recent code amendments.
Staff described site‑plan discrepancies with the recorded plat that require revision, noted the building’s access pattern (two units accessed from the side and one from the front) and called the configuration a "slot house" (a configuration staff and the code source Opticos advise avoiding for middle housing). Staff proposed a mitigation — relocating a side entrance to the rear porch and reducing side‑facing doors — but told commissioners the applicant declined to make those changes.
Commissioners asked whether slot houses are expressly forbidden; staff said slot houses are not identified as an allowed middle‑housing type and that best practice is to avoid them. Staff also explained that some nonconforming lots created long ago may be treated as lots of record, but current code changes limit new allowances for nonconforming lots.
The planning commission will evaluate the appeal, including whether the proposal meets the middle‑housing standard in article 4.6 and whether the proposal would be injurious to the surrounding neighborhood.
