Lazaro Aleman
ECB Publishing, Inc.
The Monticello Local Planning Agency (LPA) recently recommended for approval another house construction in Crooked Creek, while at the same time approving several house design styles for the subdivision.
The meeting, originally scheduled for Thursday, Feb. 6, had to be rescheduled because of severe weather.
The first item on the group's agenda on Monday evening, Feb. 10, was a design review for a single-family custom-built house on Laurel Court in the subdivision.
Immediately, the issue arose of the house's placement on the lot, as the site plan showed the house facing the corner of Laurel Court and Crooked Creek Lane. Per the city's recently adopted design standards, houses are required to face the street.
As LPA Chairman Rick Anderson put it, “the aesthetic standards are getting in the way of the review.”
Scott McPherson, who owns several lots on Crooked Creek and is building houses on them, pointed out both the logicalness of having the house face the corner and the fact that two other houses in the subdivision already faced the same corner.
The planners conceded both the logic of the placement and the fact of the other two corner-facing houses, all the while pointing out that the two cited houses predated the ordinance. But the fact remained that the new house plan went contrary to the ordinance, they said.
A question arose of whether the homeowner association's covenants or the city's ordinance took precedent, given that the latter was more restrictive.
The quandary was solved by City Attorney Bruce Leinback, if on a temporary basis.
“Your review tonight is the architectural design,” Leinback said. “The placement of the lot is not something that you look at in this agenda. Tonight is only to look at the architecture.”
Leinback, however, made it clear that the ordinance ultimately governed.
“The code now specifies the placement of houses on lot and it takes precedent over the homeowners' covenant,” he said.
Anderson asked where that left McPherson, in terms of resolving his dilemma?
“He may have to ask for a special exception,” Leinback said. “The ordinance is definitive in terms of placement. And there's no mechanism within our code to allow for grandfathering. It's also not within the authority of this board to address the issue.”
That said, the group proceeded to the design review of the particular house, which they quickly approved.
McPherson next submitted for the group's consideration a set of designs for wholesale pre-approval, so that he wouldn't have to return each time he was going to build a new house. The five design styles, which the LPA summarily approved, were the Lucerne, Hampton, Desiree, Magnolia and Loblolly.
Although employing similar elements, the designs contained enough variations to make them distinct. All typically employed Hardi siding or similar brands exteriors, and a format that consisted of horizontal, board and batten variations, with porches, columns and accent walls done in either brick or stone.
The idea behind the various styles, McPherson explained, was so that the neighborhood didn't look identical.
The LPA determined that the five architectural designs were a good fit for Crooked Creek without requiring further review. Should any of the styles be proposed for outside the subdivision, however, they would require review, the LPA determined.
In recent months, the Crooked Creek subdivision has experienced a mini boom of construction. To date, the development holds nearly 20 houses, far short of the 74 that were represented in the preliminary plat approved in 2006. But far better than the one or two house that for long solely existed on the 85-acre parcel.
In other action, the LPA approved a slight modification to the approval process for professional offices and “limited, residentially-compatible businesses” in the R-1 zoning district. The modification, however, applies specifically to a former fuel station building on the east side of North Jefferson Street just north of the post office.
Several years ago, the city created an overlay in a few residential areas north of the courthouse where it determined that certain types of low-impact businesses could locate, provided that the business went through the special exception process.
The problem with the subject building, City Clerk Anderson explained, is that it keeps changing hands, and each new lessee must then go through the special exception process and pay the $1,075 fee to occupy the building.
The site, Anderson said, made an ideal business incubator spot, but the fee was driving away potential tenants and their businesses.
“Since October, the property has been vacant,” Anderson said. “There have been many inquiries from potential renters for opening a variety of small businesses, but they have all been discouraged when learning of the required process, the fee and the length of time for approval.”
She said the solution, which Leinback had drafted, entailed adding a paragraph to the code that would make the special exception permanently part of the location, provided that the building's owner or the tenant certified to the city in writing that whatever the new business was, it was a permitted use under the code and would abide by the special exception restrictions.
LPA's approvals are only recommendations, subject to final approval by the Monticello City Council.