The development covers 0.621 acres of land and is owned by MPH Capital Management. Though site plans have been approved, a building permit has not been approved by City Council as of press time. The development has been in talks since 1985, when its plat was approved by the city.
The overview
On March 24, the developers requested a vested rights petition. Their project was determined to have those vested rights, meaning that they could develop their property under rights granted to them by Rollingwood city code when their plat was first approved in 1985. Following some revisions based on city ordinances, the project was approved, according to documents provided to City Council by K Friese + Associates.
“This is a project that the city believes is vested to the 1985 code that was in place at the time,” City Administrator Ashley Wayman said. “There are certain things that do and don’t vest, and that has been applied to this property. Building height is an example.”
According to the current Rollingwood city code, a building within 300 feet of a residential district cannot exceed 30 feet in height. However, the 1985 city code, applied to this project, states that the building height cannot exceed 35 feet—giving developers 5 feet more headroom than they would have had without their vested rights.
Council member Sara Hutson emphasized that the additional 5 feet of height allowed for the project is not a special exception being made by City Council but rather an allowance made due to the property’s rights, which are vested to the 1985 city code.
“I want to make sure that we’re all clear that the height of the building is 35 feet. Because I don’t like the idea of us saying, well, it’s close, 5 feet here or there, no big deal,” Hutson said. “I want to make clear that it is meeting the requirements because I don’t want anybody to think that we’re letting people slide on what the rules are.”
What else?
The property in question backs up to two residential properties. Once the building permit process begins, neighbors would be notified of the upcoming development, Wayman said. As those permits have not yet been approved, notice is not yet required by the city.
