What Local Historic District DOES NOT do: · Does not regulate paint colors · Does not require repairs or renovations to be made · Does not increase taxes beyond normal increases for the City or County · Does not prevent additions · Does not prevent non-contributing homes from being demolished · Does not require use of historic materials or historic building methods · Does not require that you open you home to the public · Does not restrict routine maintenance of properties
What Local Historic District DOES do: · Recognizes that Oakhurst has a distinctive historic character important to the overall character of the City of Decatur · Encourages creative and compatible development with historic areas · Requires that a Certificate of Appropriateness be obtained for exterior changes to contributing properties, demolition of buildings, and new construction. · Applies only to major renovations to the exterior of your home. Interior renovations are not restricted.

Tuesday, October 9, 2007

What does the majority report from the infill task force say?

Drawings that reflect what could be built under the majority infill report. Note that with a sloping lot the maximum height could reach 40-42'. That is much taller than what is allowed under the current zoning.


ante gamisou said...

The current height is the mean grade to the ridge (top of roof) at the front of the house, which can yield up to 40ft+ as well. My monster house on Fayetteville is only 25ft from grade to ridge. This is accomplished with a low sloped roof and slab on grade construction. I think a decent 2 story house can be done with less than 40ft, but we can't penalize people with extreme sloped lots at the front creating a 2 story walkout basement. The minority report would limit many houses from adding a second story which is no better than allowing too much. I like some of the ideas of both reports, but they are both flawed as well. I think we need a simplified solution and surveying half your street to prove the sideyard averages and somehow we'd survey the center of all these adjacent roof forms to prove the height. It sounds good in theory, but very impractical implement.

Anonymous said...

Actually the in-fill recommendation could be as high as 45 feet. It allows for 2 feet over the existing stucture's threshold. I have a neighbor that has an existing theshold 10 off the ground. 10+2+33=45.

Your 40+ would equate to 45+ with the in-fill task force recommendation. I assume you are messuring from the lowest point of the grade. If the lowest point is 40+ then the mean is 35 then the opposit side of the house would be 5 feet higher than the mean side. That would be a 10 foot slope from one side of the yard to the other. 10 slope + 2 feet of crawl space and flooring + 33 feet = 45 feet.

ante gamisou said...

Actually this is where you may get really shocked as I agree with you. I've been able to design houses here on steep sloping sites that have full walk out basements in the front and are under 35ft from basement floor to the ridge. That is the most extreme lot configuration and I've shown we can make 35ft work as a total and still not penalize someone for their lot configuration. I want to see these houses get shorter too!

ante gamisou said...

I forgot to mention that this is a 2 story house with a basement under 35ft. This includes 10ft ceiling @ 1st and 9ft ceiling @ 2nd. 9ft in basement.

Anonymous said...

I am SHOCKED and OUTRAGED at this. I just recieved a notice on my mailbox that these unelected, unaccountable people want to restrict my property??????

NO WAY!!!!!

Anonymous said...

I am shocked and outraged that the money from developers to pay for that highgloss notice doesn't disturb more of you. An elected group has to approve it after 2 public hearings.

facts only please said...


What "highgloss" notice are you referencing?

Only individual homeowners in the district are funding the opposition campaign and not developers. I am sick of the allegations stating otherwise. Please learn the facts before continuing to spread mistruths.