Correction: 7 'cottages' planned on Seaside Avenue site
UPDATE: Another 8-30g affordable housing proposal, seeking to turn single-family lots into a multi-family parcel, is coming before the Planning and Zoning Board (P&Z), this time at a Feb. 2 public hearing, which will take place at 7:30 p.m. at City Hall.
Eugenia Debowski of Acworth, Georgia, owns two adjacent lots with existing single-family homes on Seaside Avenue, just north of Meadowside Road. The properties are zoned R-12.5, requiring lot sizes to be at least 12,500 square feet for one single-family home.
The 0.46-acre property at 214 Seaside Avenue has a 2,100 square foot home constructed in 1947, while the 0.72-acre lot at 224 Seaside Avenue has an 1,800 square foot home constructed in 1900.
While an earlier article stated the proposal calls for building seven duplexes, Jeffrey Gordon of Codespoti & Associates said that is incorrect.
Gordon said that while a city legal notice suggested there were seven duplexes, there are no duplexes proposed.
“Only seven new small single family detached cottages to go along with two existing homes,” Gordon said. “The density is similar to surrounding homes and is half the density of the recently approved Meadowside project.”
The project requires a special permit and coastal management site plan review, and a site plan review. Jeffrey Gordon, landscape architect, site planner, and president of Codespoti & Associates, is scheduled to make the presentation on behalf of Debowski.
The project is being proposed under the state’s affordable housing statute, commonly referred to by the statute number of 8-30g, which overrides local zoning regulations. Should the P&Z deny the project, it would have to prove the project poses a hazard to public health, safety or welfare, a threat that outweighs the need for affordable housing.
Based on the required 30% minimum of affordable units, three units would be designed for rent or sale to people who meet the income guidelines specified by the law.
Similar projects have been strongly criticized by residents at public hearings, who raise concerns about the density and traffic created by multi-family projects in single-family zones. The P&Z has denied similar projects, due to density concerns, only to see the Land Use Litigation Docket of the state Superior Court overturn the denial because the board did not present evidence to the court of a threat to public health, safety or welfare.