Board of Adjustment Regular Meeting of the Board of Adjustment - Hybrid meeting: Some board members may be participating by videoconference-http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch-atxn-live
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING MINUTES MONDAY, September 9, 2024 The BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT convened in a Regular meeting on Monday, September 9, 2024, at 301 West 2nd Street in Austin, Texas. Chair Jessica Cohen called the Board of Adjustment Meeting to order at 5:45 PM. Board Members/Commissioners in Attendance in-Person: Jessica Cohen-Chair, Melissa Hawthorne-Vice Chair, Janel Venzant, Michael Von Ohlen, Suzanne Valentine (Alternate) Board Members/Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Thomas Ates, Yung-ju Kim, Brian Poteet, Maggie Shahrestani Board Member/Commissioners absent: Jeffery Bowen, Bianca A. Medina-Leal, Marcel Gutierrez-Garza (resigned) PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first (4) four speakers signed up/register prior (no later than noon the day before the meeting) to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. None APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Board of Adjustment Regular meeting on August 12, 2024. On-Line Link: Draft Minutes for August 12, 2024 The minutes from the meeting August 12, 2024, were approved on Vice Chair’s Melissa Hawthorne motion, Board member Michael Von Ohlen second on a 9-0 vote. PUBLIC HEARINGS Discussion and action on the following cases. Previous Postponed cases: 2. C15-2024-0024 Christi Lane 2104 Westover Road On-Line Link: ITEM02 ADV PACKET PART1, PART2; PRESENTATION The applicant is requesting the following variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2-899 (Fences as Accessory Uses) to increase the height from eight (8) feet (maximum allowed) to twelve (12) feet (requested), in order to erect a fence on the east property line in a “SF-3-NP”, Single-Family-Neighborhood Plan zoning district (West Austin Neighborhood Group). Note: The Land Development Code 25-2-899 Fences as Accessory Uses (A) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, a fence: (1) is permitted as an accessory use in any zoning district; and (2) must comply with the requirements of this section. (B) In this section: (1) an ornamental fence is a fence with an open design that has a ratio of solid material to open space of not more than one to four; and (2) a solid fence is a fence other than an ornamental fence. (C) The height restrictions of this section do not apply to an ornamental fence. (D) Except as otherwise provided in this section, a solid fence constructed along a property line may not exceed a height of six feet measured from the natural grade up. (E) If …
BOA INTERPRETATION APPEAL COVERSHEET RE-CONSIDERATION ITEM02/1- APPEAL1 CASE: C15-2024-0025 BOA DATE: October 14th, 2024 ADDRESS: 6708 Bridge Hill Cv COUNCIL DISTRICT: 10 OWNER: Christi S. May APPELLANT: Warren Konkel APPELLANT’S AGENT: Nicholl Wade ZONING: SF-3 / LA LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 5 BRIDGE HILL SUBD APPEAL REQUEST: an appeal challenging staff decision regarding impervious cover approved with building permit 2023-129658BP & 2023-129659BP. SUMMARY: any proposed development must comply with the provisions of the LDC ISSUES: errors on permit application, does not remedy unpermitted construction from 2014 and 2021, vastly exceeds the “grandfathered original construction” IC allowance of 11,408 sq. ft. ZONING LAND USES Site North South East West SF-2 / LA SF-2 / LA SF-2 / LA SF-2 LA Single-Family Single-Family Single-Family Single-Family Lake Austin NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS: Austin Independent School District BRNA ASSOCIATION INC. City of Rollingwood Friends of Austin Neighborhoods Glenlake Neighborhood Association Save Our Springs Alliance TNR BCP – Travis County Natural Resources The Creek at Riverbend Neighborhood Association ITEM02/2- APPEAL1 CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Interpretation Appeal 1 and Appeal 2 Decision Sheet ITEM05 DATE: September 9, 2024 CASE NUMBER: C15-2024-0025 ___Y____Thomas Ates (D1) ___-____Bianca A Medina-Leal (D2) OUT ___Y____Jessica Cohen (D3) ___Y____Yung-ju Kim (D4) ___Y____Melissa Hawthorne (D5) ___-____Jeffery Bowen (D6) OUT ___Y____Janel Venzant (D7) ___N____Margaret Shahrestani (D8) ___Y____Brian Poteet (D9) ___Y____Michael Von Ohlen (D10) ___-____Marcel Gutierrez-Garza (M) RESIGNED ___-____VACANT (Alternate) (M) ___Y____Suzanne Valentine (Alternate) (M) ___-____VACANT (Alternate) (M) APPELLANT’S AGENT: Nicholl Wade APPELLANT: Warren Konkel OWNER: Christy May ADDRESS: 6708 BRIDGE HILL CV SUMMARY OF APPEAL: Appellant challenges issuance of Building Permit 2023-12958 BP on the grounds that the City incorrectly approved impervious cover (IC) of approximately 12,811 square feet, which exceeds IC limitations applicable within the Lake Austin (LA) zoning district. BOARD’S DECISION: Aug 12, 2024 - POSTPONED TO September 9, 2024, DUE TO NOT HAVING ENOUGH BOARD MEMBERS FOR VOTING PURPOSES; September 9, 2024 The public hearing was closed by Madam Chair Jessica Cohen, Board member Michael Von Ohlen’s motion to deny the appeal request and uphold staff’s decision; Board member Brian Poteet second on 8-1 votes (Board member Maggie Shahrestani nay); APPEAL REQUEST DENIED AND UPHELD STAFF’S DECISION. RENOTIFICATION-SUMMARY OF APPEAL: Appellant challenges issuance of: Building Permit 2023-129658 BP and ITEM02/3- APPEAL1 Building Permit 2023-129659BP on the grounds that the City of Austin incorrectly approved impervious cover (IC) of approximately 12,811 square feet, which exceeds IC limitations applicable within the Lake Austin (LA) …
ITEM02/131- APPEAL1 ITEM02/132- APPEAL1 ITEM02/133- APPEAL1 ITEM02/134- APPEAL1 ITEM02/136- APPEAL1 ITEM02/140- APPEAL1 ITEM02/141- APPEAL1 ITEM02/142- APPEAL1 ITEM02/143- APPEAL1 ITEM02/144- APPEAL1 ITEM02/145- APPEAL1 ITEM02/146- APPEAL1 ITEM02/147- APPEAL1 ITEM02/148- APPEAL1 City of Austin Development Services Department P.O. Box 1088, Austin, Texas 78767 VESTED RIGHTS DETERMINATION Findings This determination is made under City Code 25-1-541 in response to a claim that the project identified below is vested to earlier regulations and entitled to be reviewed under those regulations. The determination may be reconsidered once at the request of the applicant. Project Name: Pool/Cabana Reconstruction Address: 6708 Bridge Hill Cove Case No. VR-2024-0037000 Date of Application: 6/4/2024 nation: 6/12/2024 Date of Determination: 6/12/2024 Signature: ____________________________________________________________ Date: _______________ _______________________________ 6/12/2024 See Grounds for Determination (reverse) for a summary of the most common grounds for approval or denial. Additional grounds may also apply. Determination (reverse) for a summ (X) DENIED (X) DENIED (X) DENIED Primary Grounds: PROJECT COMPLETE Primary Grounds: PROJECT COMPLETE Findings: The project initiated with the submittal of the Bridge Hill Subdivision plat for this lot, Findings: The project initiated with the submittal of the Bridge Hill Subdivision plat for this lot, was completed with the construction of the residence authorized by building permit 1987- was completed with the construction of the residence authorized by building permit 1987- 010020-BP and accessory swimming pool authorized by building permit 1989-006985-BP. The 010020-BP and accessory swimming pool authorized by building permit 1989-006985-BP. The proposed application is redevelopment of existing permitting and unpermitted improvements proposed application is redevelopment of existing permitting and unpermitted improvements and is considered a new project. and is considered a new project. ITEM02/149- APPEAL1 City of Austin Development Services Department P.O. Box 1088, Austin, Texas 78767 FINDINGS ON RECONSIDERATION OF VESTED RIGHTS DETERMINATION N/A Project Name: 6708 Bridge Hill Cove Address: BP (Building Permit) No. 2023-129658 Case No.: Application Date: June 4, 2024 Determination Date: July 19, 2024 Determination by: Brent Lloyd DSD Development Officer (X) APPROVED Vesting Date: N/A Findings & Conclusions: 1. On June 4, 2024, applicant submitted a petition for vested rights claiming that proposed development under the above-referenced building permit was entitled to review under regulations in effect on the date the 1981 plat application was filed, as modified by the Planning Commission’s subsequent conditions of approval. 2. On June 12, 2024, DSD denied the vested rights claim on the grounds that: “The project initiated with the submittal of the …
BOA INTERPRETATION APPEAL COVERSHEET RE-CONSIDERATION ITEM02/1-APPEAL2 CASE: C15-2024-0025 BOA DATE: October 14th, 2024 ADDRESS: 6708 Bridge Hill Cv COUNCIL DISTRICT: OWNER: Christi S. May APPELLANT: Warren Konkel APPELLANT’S AGENT: Nicholl Wade ZONING: SF-3 / LA LEGAL DESCRIPTION: APPEAL REQUEST: an appeal challenging staff decision regarding impervious cover approved with building permit 2023-129658BP & 2023-129659BP. SUMMARY: any proposed development must comply with the provisions of the LDC ISSUES: errors on permit application, does not remedy unpermitted construction from 2014 and 2021, vastly exceeds the “grandfathered original construction” IC allowance of 11,408 sq. ft. ZONING LAND USES Site North South East West SF-2 / LA SF-2 / LA SF-2 / LA SF-2 LA Single-Family Single-Family Single-Family Single-Family Lake Austin NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS: Austin Independent School District BRNA ASSOCIATION INC. City of Rollingwood Friends of Austin Neighborhoods Glenlake Neighborhood Association Save Our Springs Alliance TNR BCP – Travis County Natural Resources The Creek at Riverbend Neighborhood Association ITEM02/2-APPEAL2 ITEM02/3-APPEAL2 Diana Ramirez for ITEM02/4-APPEAL2 ITEM02/5-APPEAL2 ITEM02/6-APPEAL2 ITEM02/7-APPEAL2 ITEM02/9-APPEAL2 ITEM02/10-APPEAL2 ITEM02/11-APPEAL2 ITEM02/12-APPEAL2 ITEM02/13-APPEAL2 ITEM02/14-APPEAL2 ITEM02/15-APPEAL2 ITEM02/16-APPEAL2 ITEM02/17-APPEAL2 ITEM02/18-APPEAL2 ITEM02/19-APPEAL2 ITEM02/20-APPEAL2 ITEM02/21-APPEAL2 ITEM02/22-APPEAL2 ITEM02/23-APPEAL2 ITEM02/24-APPEAL2 ITEM02/25-APPEAL2 ITEM02/26-APPEAL2 ITEM02/27-APPEAL2 ITEM02/28-APPEAL2 ITEM02/29-APPEAL2 ITEM02/30-APPEAL2 ITEM02/31-APPEAL2 ITEM02/32-APPEAL2 ITEM02/33-APPEAL2 ITEM02/34-APPEAL2 ITEM02/35-APPEAL2 ITEM02/36-APPEAL2 ITEM02/37-APPEAL2 ITEM02/38-APPEAL2 ITEM02/39-APPEAL2 2 L A E P P A / - 0 4 2 0 M E T I ITEM02/41-APPEAL2 2 L A E P P A / - 2 4 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 3 4 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 4 4 2 0 M E T I ITEM02/45-APPEAL2 ITEM02/46-APPEAL2 ITEM02/47-APPEAL2 ITEM02/48-APPEAL2 ITEM02/49-APPEAL2 ITEM02/50-APPEAL2 2 L A E P P A / - 1 5 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 2 5 2 0 M E T I ITEM02/57-APPEAL2 ITEM02/53-APPEAL2 ITEM02/54-APPEAL2
2 L A E P P A / - 6 5 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 7 5 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 8 5 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 9 5 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 0 6 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 1 6 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 2 6 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 3 6 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 4 6 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 5 6 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 6 6 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 7 6 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 8 6 2 0 M E T I ITEM02/69-APPEAL2 ITEM02/70-APPEAL2 ITEM02/71-APPEAL2 ITEM02/72-APPEAL2 ITEM02/73-APPEAL2 ITEM02/74-APPEAL2 ITEM02/75-APPEAL2 ITEM02/76-APPEAL2 ITEM02/77-APPEAL2 ITEM02/78-APPEAL2 ITEM02/79-APPEAL2 ITEM02/80-APPEAL2 ITEM02/81-APPEAL2 ITEM02/82-APPEAL2 ITEM02/83-APPEAL2 ITEM02/84-APPEAL2 ITEM02/85-APPEAL2 ITEM02/86-APPEAL2 ITEM02/87-APPEAL2 ITEM02/88-APPEAL2 ITEM02/89-APPEAL2 ITEM02/90-APPEAL2 ITEM02/91-APPEAL2 ITEM02/92-APPEAL2 ITEM02/93-APPEAL2 ITEM02/94-APPEAL2 ITEM02/95-APPEAL2 ITEM02/96-APPEAL2 2 L A E P P A / - 7 9 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 8 9 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 9 9 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 0 0 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 1 0 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 2 0 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 3 0 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 4 0 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 5 …
2 L A E P P A / - 1 1 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 2 1 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 3 1 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 4 1 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 5 1 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 6 1 1 2 0 M E T I ITEM02/117-APPEAL2 ITEM02/118-APPEAL2 ITEM02/119-APPEAL2 ITEM02/120-APPEAL2 ITEM02/121-APPEAL2 ITEM02/122-APPEAL2 ITEM02/123-APPEAL2 ITEM02/124-APPEAL2 2 L A E P P A / - 5 2 1 2 0 M E T I ITEM02/126-APPEAL2 2 L A E P P A / - 7 2 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 8 2 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 9 2 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 0 3 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 1 3 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 2 3 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 3 3 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 4 3 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 5 3 1 2 0 M E T I
2 L A E P P A / - 6 3 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 7 3 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 8 3 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 9 3 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 0 4 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 1 4 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 2 4 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 3 4 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 4 4 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 5 4 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 6 4 1 2 0 M E T I ITEM02/147-APPEAL2 ITEM02/148-APPEAL2 2 L A E P P A / - 9 4 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 0 5 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 1 5 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 2 5 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 3 5 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 4 5 1 2 0 M E T I 2 L A E P P A / - 5 5 1 2 0 M E T I ITEM02/156-APPEAL2 ITEM02/157-APPEAL2 ITEM02/158-APPEAL2 ITEM02/159-APPEAL2 ITEM02/160-APPEAL2 ITEM02/161-APPEAL2 ITEM02/162-APPEAL2 ITEM02/163-APPEAL2 ITEM02/164-APPEAL2 ITEM02/165-APPEAL2
CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet ITEM04 DATE: Monday September 9, 2024 CASE NUMBER: C15-2024-0028 ___Y____Thomas Ates (D1) ___-____Bianca A Medina-Leal (D2) OUT ___Y____Jessica Cohen (D3) ___Y____Yung-ju Kim (D4) ___Y____Melissa Hawthorne (D5) ___-____Jeffery Bowen (D6) OUT ___Y____Janel Venzant (D7) ___Y____Margaret Shahrestani (D8) ___Y____Brian Poteet (D9) ___Y____Michael Von Ohlen (D10) ___-____Marcel Gutierrez-Garza (M) RESIGNED ___-____VACANT (Alternate) (M) ___Y____Suzanne Valentine (Alternate) (M) ___-____VACANT (Alternate) (M) APPLICANT: Haim Joseph Mahlof - Green Bay Remodeling Inc. OWNER: Wendy Jo Peterson ADDRESS: 1406 3rd ST VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting the following variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2-779 (Small Lot Single-Family Residential Use) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum front yard setback from 15 feet (required) to 5 feet (requested) in order to attach a second story deck in a “SF-4A-NP”, Single-Family - Neighborhood Plan zoning district (Bouldin Creek Neighborhood Plan). BOARD’S DECISION: September 9, 2024 The public hearing was closed by Madam Chair Jessica Cohen, Board member Michael Von Ohlen’s motion to postpone to October 14, 2024; Vice Chair Melissa Hawthorne second on 9-0 votes; POSTPONED TO OCTOBER 14, 2024. FINDING: 1. The Zoning regulations applicable to the property do not allow for a reasonable use because: 2. (a) The hardship for which the variance is requested is unique to the property in that: (b) The hardship is not general to the area in which the property is located because: ITEM03/1 3. The variance will not alter the character of the area adjacent to the property, will not impair the use of adjacent conforming property, and will not impair the purpose of the regulations of the zoning district in which the property is located because: Elaine Ramirez Executive Liaison Jessica Cohen Chair forITEM03/2 09/30/24 RE: NOTICE OF INTENT TO POSTPONE BOA MEETING 10/14 Green Bay Remodeling, Inc. Good afternoon, This is a formal notice to request to postpone our meeting to address the BOA members on 10/14, due to Bouldin Creek HOA scheduling their meeting of approval for our variance on 10/14. We wish to postpone the meeting to the following date of 11/14/24. If you have any questions regarding this, please contact us at our office | Green Bay Remodeling Inc https://www.greenbayremodeling.com/ 3724 Executive Center Drive, #120, Austin, TX 78731 ITEM03/3 VARIANCE REQUEST: decrease the minimum front yard setback from 15 feet (required) to 5 feet (requested). BOA GENERAL REVIEW COVERSHEET CASE: C15-2024-0028 BOA DATE: September 9, …
BOA GENERAL REVIEW COVERSHEET CASE: C15-2024-0031 BOA DATE: October 14th, 2024 ADDRESS: 2615 ½ Hillview Rd OWNER: Laura Steinbach COUNCIL DISTRICT: 10 AGENT: Ron Thrower ZONING: SF-3-NP (WANG) LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 2 BLK A SANCTUARY SUBD THE VARIANCE REQUEST: 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations): o Height Requirements to increase the height from 35 feet (maximum allowed) to 50 feet (requested) o Setback Requirements to decrease the minimum front yard setback from 25 feet (required) to 15 feet (requested) o Setback Requirements to decrease the minimum rear yard setback from 10 feet (required) to 5 feet (requested) o Building Coverage to increase from 40 percent (maximum allowed) to 60% (requested) Impervious Coverage to increase from 45 percent (maximum allowed) to 60 percent (requested) o 25-2-832 (Private Schools) (1) a site must be located on a street that has a paved width of at least 40 feet (required) to 30 feet (requested) from the site to where it connects with another street that has a paved width of at least 40 feet (required) to 30 feet (requested) SUMMARY: erect school buildings and structured sub-grade parking facilities ISSUES: accessibility for the dyslexic students in Austin ZONING Site North South East West SF-3-NP SF-3-NP; PUD SF-3-NP; PUD PUD SF-3-NP LAND USES Private School for dyslexic students Single-Family Single-Family Single-Family Single-Family NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS: Austin Independent School District Austin Neighborhoods Council Central West Austin Neighborhood Plan Contact Team Friends of Austin Neighborhoods Preservation Austin Save Barton Creek Association TNR BCP – Travis County Natural Resources West Austin Neighborhood Group ITEM04/1 September 30, 2024 Victoria Haase 2615 1/2 Hillview Rd Austin TX, 78703 Re: C15-2024-0031 Property Description: LOT 2 BLK A SANCTUARY SUBD THE Dear Victoria, Austin Energy (AE) has reviewed your application for the above referenced property, requesting that the Board of Adjustment consider a variance request from LDC Section 25-2- 491, 25-2-492 for front yard, height, rear yard, max. building coverage, max. impervious coverage, and 25-2-832 at 2615 ½ Hillview Road. Austin Energy does not oppose the request, provided that any proposed or existing improvements follow Austin Energy’s Clearance & Safety Criteria, the National Electric Safety Code, and OSHA requirements. Any removal or relocation of existing facilities will be at the owner’s/applicant’s expense. Please use this link to be advised of our clearance and safety requirements which are additional conditions of the above review action: https://library.municode.com/tx/austin/codes/utilities_criteria_manual?nodeId=S1AUENDECR_1 .10.0CLSARE If you require further information or have any questions …
BOA GENERAL REVIEW COVERSHEET CASE: C15-2024-0034 BOA DATE: October 14th, 2024 ADDRESS: 705 Brownlee Cir OWNER: Brad Hoskins COUNCIL DISTRICT: 9 AGENT: Robert Allison ZONING: MF-3-NP (Old West Austin) LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 32 PARK VIEW VARIANCE REQUEST: Land Development Code, Section, 25-2-773 (Duplex, Two-Unit, and Three-Unit Residential Uses) (B) (7) Impervious Coverage to increase from 45 percent (maximum allowed) to 65 percent (requested) (E) (4) F.A.R to increase from 40% (required) to 50% (requested) o o SUMMARY: remodel existing residence ISSUES: zoning change the owner’s received against the preferences of the neighborhood ZONING LAND USES MF-3-NP Site North SF-3-NP South CS-MU-V-CO-NP East MF-4-NP West MF-4-NP Multi-Family Single-Family General Commercial Services-Mixed Use Multi-Family Multi-Family NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS: Austin Independent School District Austin Neighborhoods Council Friends of Austin Neighborhoods Homeless Neighborhood Association Old West Austin Neighborhood Association Old West Austin Neighborhood Plan Contact Team Preservation Austin Save Barton Creek Association Shoal Creek Conservancy ITEM06/1 September 30, 2024 David Webber 705 Brownlee Cir Austin TX, 78703 Re: C15-2024-0034 Dear David, Property Description: LOT 32 PARK VIEW Austin Energy (AE) has reviewed your application for the above referenced property, requesting that the Board of Adjustment consider a variance request from LDC Section 25-2-733(B)(7) & 25-2-733(E)(4)(b) at 705 Brownlee Circle. Austin Energy does not oppose the request, provided that any proposed or existing improvements follow Austin Energy’s Clearance & Safety Criteria, the National Electric Safety Code, and OSHA requirements. Any removal or relocation of existing facilities will be at the owner’s/applicant’s expense. Please use this link to be advised of our clearance and safety requirements which are additional conditions of the above review action: https://library.municode.com/tx/austin/codes/utilities_criteria_manual?nodeId=S1AUENDECR_1 .10.0CLSARE If you require further information or have any questions regarding the above comments, please contact our office. Thank you for contacting Austin Energy. Rosemary Avila, Planning Officer Infrastructure Support Services | Austin Energy 4815 Mueller Blvd Austin, TX 78723 (512) 972-8488 Rosemary.avilla@austinenergy.com ITEM06/2 ITEM06/3 ITEM06/4 ITEM06/5 ITEM06/6 ITEM06/7 ORDINANCE NO. 20230209-062 AN 035) NANCE 1EZON-NG AND CHANGING THE ZONING MAP FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 705 BROWNLEE CIRCLE IN THE OLD WEST AUSTIN NE G BOR_-OOD PLAN AREA FlON FAIV_-Y RESIDENCE- NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN (SF-3-NP) COMB NING D STR CT TO MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE kED-UlV DENSI-Y-NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN (MF-3-NP) CONBIN-NG D-STR CT. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN: PART 1. The zoning map established by Section 25-2-191 of the City Code is amended to change the base …
BOA Monthly Report July 2024-June 2025 1. 25-2-899 (Fences as Accessory Uses) to increase the height 2. 25-2-551(Lake Austin (LA) District Regulations) (C)(3) from setback requirements to: increase the maximum impervious cover on a slope 1. 25-2-779 (Small Lot Single-Family Residential Use) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum front yard setback September 9, 2024 Granted 2 Postponed 1 Withdrawn 0 Denied 1 1. Appeal-Appellant challenges issuance of Building Permit 2023-129658 BP and Building Permit 2023- 129659BP on the grounds that the City of Austin incorrectly approved impervious cover (IC) 5 7 3 0 2 13 (Added Sept9# 2024) Discussion Items Sept 2024 Interpretations 0 new inquiries The deposition of the case items: Granted Postponed Withdrawn Denied Discussion Items Board members absent: Jeffery Bowen, Bianca A. Medina-Leal, Marcel Gutierrez-Garza (resigned) and 2 vacant positions (alternate) August 12, 2024 Granted Postponed 1. 25-2-899 (Fences as Accessory Uses) to increase the height from eight (8) feet to twelve (12) feet 2. Appeal-Appellant challenges issuance of Building Permit 2023-12958 BP on the grounds that the City 0 2 incorrectly approved impervious cover (IC) 0 Withdrawn 0 Denied Discussion Items Aug 2024 Interpretations 1 new inquiries The deposition of the case items: 4 (Added Aug12# 2024) 5 5 2 0 1 8 Granted Postponed Withdrawn Denied Discussion Items Board members absent: Brian Poteet, Marcel-Gutierrez-Garza, Yung-ju Kim, Janel Venzant, Micheal Von Ohlen and 1 vacant position (alternate) July 8, 2024 Granted 1. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to: decrease the minimum street side yard setback and decrease the minimum rear yard setback 2. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the two minimum interior side yards setback and 25-2-551 (Lake Austin (LA) District Regulations) (B) (1) (a) from shoreline setback requirements to decrease and 25-2-551 (Lake Austin (LA) District Regulations) (C) (3) (a) increase the maximum impervious cover on a slope 3. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from lot width requirements to decrease the front lot width 4. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to: decrease the minimum front yard setback and decrease the minimum interior side yard setback and decrease the minimum street side yard setback 5. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum rear yard setback and 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from building coverage requirements to increase and 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from impervious coverage requirements to increase and 25-2-963 (Modification and Maintenance of Non-complying …
BYLAWS OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ARTICLE 1. NAME. The name of the board is the Board of Adjustment. ARTICLE 2. PURPOSE AND DUTIES. (A) The purpose of the Board of Adjustment is to: 1. 2. 3. 4. Hear and decide a request for a variance from the requirements of Chapter 25-2 (Zoning), except as otherwise provided by the Code; Hear and decide an appeal of an administration action under Chapter 25-2 (Zoning); Hear and decide on a request for a variance from the requirements of airport zoning regulations under Section 241.034, Local Government Code; and Perform other duties prescribed by ordinance or state law. ARTICLE 3. MEMBERSHIP. (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) The Board of Adjustment is composed of eleven members appointed by the city council. The council may appoint any number of alternate members to serve in the absence of a regular member. A member that was appointed to the Board of Adjustment may be removed by the council for cause on a written charge after a public hearing. Board members serve for a term of two years beginning March 1st on the year of appointment. A vacancy on the Board of Adjustment shall be filled for the unexpired term. An individual board member may not act in an official capacity except through the action of the board. A regular board member who is absent for three consecutive regular meetings or one-third of all regular meetings in a "rolling" twelve month timeframe automatically vacates the member's position subject to the holdover provisions in Section 2-1-27 of the City Code. This does not apply to an absence due to illness or injury of the board member, an illness or injury of a board member's immediate family member, active military service or the birth or adoption of the board member's child for 90 days after the event. The board member must notify the staff liaison of the reason for the absence not later than the date of the next regular meeting of the board. Failure to notify the liaison before the next regular meeting of the board will result in an unexcused absence. At each meeting, each board member shall sign an attendance sheet which indicates that the member does not have a conflict of interest with any item on that agenda, or identifies each agenda item on which the member has a conflict of interest. Failure to sign …
BOA fees are as follows (effective October 1, 2023): There is a reduced Residential Homestead Fee if the Liaison can verify in the Appraisal District’s website that it is the Homestead of the Homeowner listed on both the application & Appraisal District website. The reduced Residential Homestead fee does not apply to Commercial OR Sign variances, Interpretation or Appeal requests. Additional AE fee of $262 + AE Fee, will apply to all Variances and Special Exceptions other than Parking Variances only. Commercial and Residential (not homestead) Variance base fee $3,455.00 Basic Notification Fee $ 261.90 4% Tech Surcharge Fee $ 148.68 AE fee + $ 262.00 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ TOTAL fee $4,127.58 Special Exceptions Commercial & Residential (not homestead) Variance base fee $3,455.00 Basic Notification Fee $ 261.90 4% Tech Surcharge Fee $ 148.68 AE fee + $ 262.00 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ TOTAL fee $4,127.58 Residential (homestead) Variance base fee $ 500.00 Basic Notification Fee $ 261.90 4% Tech Surcharge Fee $ 30.48 AE fee + $ 262.00 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ TOTAL fee $1,054.38 Special Exceptions Residential (homestead) Variance base fee $ 500.00 Basic Notification Fee $ 261.90 4% Tech Surcharge Fee $ 30.48 AE fee + $ 262.00 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ TOTAL fee $1,054.38 Zoning Interpretations & Appeals Commercial and Residential Variance base fee $2,552.00 Basic Notification Fee $ 261.90 4% Tech Surcharge Fee $ 112.56 AE fee + $ 262.00 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ TOTAL fee $3,188.46 Commercial Sign variances Variance base fee $3,455.00 Basic Notification Fee $ 261.90 4% Tech Surcharge Fee $ 148.68 AE fee + $ 262.00 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ TOTAL fee $4,127.58
A COMMUNITY GUIDE TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: Practical Tips for Zoning Variances, Special Exceptions and Administrative Appeals Approved by the Board of Adjustment, on April 13, 2015, and prepared in collaboration with the City Law Department and Development Services Department. Chair Vice Chair Boardmembers: Don Leighton-Burwell, Melissa Hawthorne, Brooke Bailey Jessica Cohen Ada Corral William Hodge Rahm McDDaniel Darryl Pruett Veronica Rivera Yasmine Smith Michael Von Ohlen Legal Advisors: Lee Simmons Steven Maddoux Staff Support: Elaine Ramirez Diana Ramirez - Common examples of hardship include restraints, unusually if they are wants to preserve topographical lot shapes. Trees may constitute required them. lots with steep slopes, small lot area, or irregular or if an applicant to be preserved a hardship, - Personal troubles hardship. focus primarily circumstances, with neighbors, An applicant cannot be the sole basis for finding a but should may mention on characteristics such factors, itself. such as financial of the property or difficulties A hardship cannot be self-created. - An applicant based on conditions for a permit or site plan cannot claim a hardship for creating. that he or she is responsible - For example, if a structure is designed in a manner that fails to comply with regulations, hardship. Or, if a landowner pieces, hardship. the structure's subdivides he or she can't rely on their irregular shape to prove a a lot into irregular non-compliance isn't a A hardship where it's located. must be unique to the property, not general to the area - If steep slopes then neither hardship by itself. or small lots are common to a particular condition is sufficiently unique to constitute area, a - If a lot is entitled automatically relaxes small lots, then of a hardship. evidence the understanding area, development regulations. certain lot amnesty," under city code to "small which regulations for development be relied on as lot size alone should not with was approved of minimum lot Small lot amnesty that, with the exception would meet other site development - The City's example, regulations alone cannot be the hardship. cannot request a height variance and For an applicant BOA Community Guidebook -10 variance, different "hardship." the criteria kinds of situation exception and don't necessarily can be tailored require to address of for a special a showing In 2011, the City of Austin adopted a special exception designed periods required summarize followed to address of time …
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT RULES OF PROCEDURE Approved by the Board of Adjustment on February 11, 2019 ARTICLE I. GENERAL PROVISIONS (A) Legal Authority & Jurisdiction. (1) The Board of Adjustment (“BOA” or “Board”) is a sovereign board established by the City Council pursuant to Subchapter A of Chapter 211 of the Texas Local Government Code (“Chapter 211”). The BOA derives its authority from state law, as well as City Code § 2-1-111 (Board of Adjustment) and Chapter 25-2 (Zoning). (2) As stated in Chapter 211 and the City Code, the BOA’s primary functions are to hear and decide: Requests for variances from site development regulations adopted under Chapter 25-2, Subchapter C (Use and Development Regulations) and from certain sign regulations under Chapter 25-10 (Sign Regulations); Requests for special exceptions from site development regulations, where expressly authorized by Code; and (c) Appeals of administrative decisions made in the enforcement and administration of City zoning regulations and decisions made in the enforcement of Chapter 211. (B) Rules of Procedure. (1) These Rules of Procedure (“Rules”) establish standards, guidelines, and requirements for: (a) the conduct of public hearings and the resolution of cases before the BOA; (b) applications for variances or administrative appeals; and processing of applications for variances and administrative appeals filed with the Development Services Department; and notification to the BOA of the filing of an application for a variance and administrative appeals. (a) (b) (c) (d) BOA Rules of Procedure – Page 1 of 16 (2) In the event of a conflict with City Code, Chapter 211 or other applicable law, the Code, Chapter 211 or other law supersedes these Rules. (3) Applicants should familiarize themselves with these Rules before filing an application or presenting a case to the BOA for decision. For more detailed information regarding Board and the rules for variances, special exceptions, and appeals, see the Board of Adjustment Community Guidebook, at: https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Planning/Applicati ons_Forms/Board_of_Adjustment_Guidebook__July_2015_.pdf ARTICLE II. REQUIREMENTS FOR REQUESTING BOARD ACTION (A) Complete Application Required. All requests to the BOA shall be filed on an application form provided by the staff liaison. The staff liaison shall determine if an application is complete before accepting it for filing. (B) Timing of Submittal & Other Application Requirements. (1) Variances & Special Exceptions. (a) Except as provided in Paragraph (B)(1)(b), below, an application for a variance or special exception may be filed at any time provided that the Development Services …
A COMMUNITY GUIDE TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: Practical Tips for Zoning Variances, Special Exceptions and Administrative Appeals Approved by the Board of Adjustment, on April 13, 2015, and prepared in collaboration with the City Law Department and Development Services Department. Chair Vice Chair Boardmembers: Don Leighton-Burwell, Melissa Hawthorne, Brooke Bailey Jessica Cohen Ada Corral William Hodge Rahm McDDaniel Darryl Pruett Veronica Rivera Yasmine Smith Michael Von Ohlen Legal Advisors: Lee Simmons Steven Maddoux Staff Support: Elaine Ramirez Diana Ramirez - Common examples of hardship include restraints, unusually if they are wants to preserve topographical lot shapes. Trees may constitute required them. lots with steep slopes, small lot area, or irregular or if an applicant to be preserved a hardship, - Personal troubles hardship. focus primarily circumstances, with neighbors, An applicant cannot be the sole basis for finding a but should may mention on characteristics such factors, itself. such as financial of the property or difficulties A hardship cannot be self-created. - An applicant based on conditions for a permit or site plan cannot claim a hardship for creating. that he or she is responsible - For example, if a structure is designed in a manner that fails to comply with regulations, hardship. Or, if a landowner pieces, hardship. the structure's subdivides he or she can't rely on their irregular shape to prove a a lot into irregular non-compliance isn't a A hardship where it's located. must be unique to the property, not general to the area - If steep slopes then neither hardship by itself. or small lots are common to a particular condition is sufficiently unique to constitute area, a - If a lot is entitled automatically relaxes small lots, then of a hardship. evidence the understanding area, development regulations. certain lot amnesty," under city code to "small which regulations for development be relied on as lot size alone should not with was approved of minimum lot Small lot amnesty that, with the exception would meet other site development - The City's example, regulations alone cannot be the hardship. cannot request a height variance and For an applicant BOA Community Guidebook -10 variance, different "hardship." the criteria kinds of situation exception and don't necessarily can be tailored require to address of for a special a showing In 2011, the City of Austin adopted a special exception designed periods required summarize followed to address of time …
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT RULES OF PROCEDURE Approved by the Board of Adjustment on February 11, 2019 ARTICLE I. GENERAL PROVISIONS (A) Legal Authority & Jurisdiction. (1) The Board of Adjustment (“BOA” or “Board”) is a sovereign board established by the City Council pursuant to Subchapter A of Chapter 211 of the Texas Local Government Code (“Chapter 211”). The BOA derives its authority from state law, as well as City Code § 2-1-111 (Board of Adjustment) and Chapter 25-2 (Zoning). (2) As stated in Chapter 211 and the City Code, the BOA’s primary functions are to hear and decide: Requests for variances from site development regulations adopted under Chapter 25-2, Subchapter C (Use and Development Regulations) and from certain sign regulations under Chapter 25-10 (Sign Regulations); Requests for special exceptions from site development regulations, where expressly authorized by Code; and (c) Appeals of administrative decisions made in the enforcement and administration of City zoning regulations and decisions made in the enforcement of Chapter 211. (B) Rules of Procedure. (1) These Rules of Procedure (“Rules”) establish standards, guidelines, and requirements for: (a) the conduct of public hearings and the resolution of cases before the BOA; (b) applications for variances or administrative appeals; and processing of applications for variances and administrative appeals filed with the Development Services Department; and notification to the BOA of the filing of an application for a variance and administrative appeals. (a) (b) (c) (d) BOA Rules of Procedure – Page 1 of 16 (2) In the event of a conflict with City Code, Chapter 211 or other applicable law, the Code, Chapter 211 or other law supersedes these Rules. (3) Applicants should familiarize themselves with these Rules before filing an application or presenting a case to the BOA for decision. For more detailed information regarding Board and the rules for variances, special exceptions, and appeals, see the Board of Adjustment Community Guidebook, at: https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Planning/Applicati ons_Forms/Board_of_Adjustment_Guidebook__July_2015_.pdf ARTICLE II. REQUIREMENTS FOR REQUESTING BOARD ACTION (A) Complete Application Required. All requests to the BOA shall be filed on an application form provided by the staff liaison. The staff liaison shall determine if an application is complete before accepting it for filing. (B) Timing of Submittal & Other Application Requirements. (1) Variances & Special Exceptions. (a) Except as provided in Paragraph (B)(1)(b), below, an application for a variance or special exception may be filed at any time provided that the Development Services …
BOA MEETING DATES FOR 2025 301 W 2ND STREET, AUSTIN TEXAS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS-ROOM 1001 2ND MONDAY OF THE MONTH January 13, 2025 February 10, 2025 March 10, 2025 April 11, 2025 May 12, 2025 June 9, 2025 July 14, 2025 August 11, 2025 September 8, 2025 October 13, 2025 November 10, 2025 December 8, 2025
Case No. 24-000021 BA Motion to Reconsider C15-2024-0025 Property Address: 6708 Bridge Hill Cove Appealed Permits: BP-2023-129658 and BP-2023-129659 Presented By: Nicholl Wade, on behalf of Appellant ITEM02/1-PRESENTATION/APPELLANT Pending Questions from September Hearing Plat Date Were the Administrative Rules for Vested Rights posted on the City’s website? Application of LDC § 25-2-963(C) Reactivation of 2023-129658 BP prior to a vested rights determination ITEM02/2-PRESENTATION/APPELLANT 6708 Bridge Hill Cove Plate Date o Plate Date = June 29, 1982 o Different LA Zoning regulations apply if a property was platted after April 22, 1982 o Here, the stricter provisions apply o The application was executed April 30, 1982 ITEM02/3-PRESENTATION/APPELLANT DSD Did Not Post the Administrative Rules on the City’s Website § 25-1-545 - ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES (A) The director may adopt guidelines to assist in reviewing applications under Section 25-1-533 (Vested Rights Petition Required), Section 25-1-544 (Project Consent Agreements), and Section 25-1-553 (Managed Growth Agreements). (C) Guidelines adopted under this section shall be posted on the department's website and made available to the public, but need not be adopted by administrative rule under Section 1-2 (Adoption of Rules). ITEM02/4-PRESENTATION/APPELLANT Land Development Code § 25-2-963(C) o Noncomplying structure limitations on development o 2023 permits based on a plan review that had incorrect information on IC o No penalties associated with unpermitted construction in 2021, which added IC o No penalties associated with submitting a false plan review application o The Approved Plan adds a foundation for the Pool House and IC ITEM02/5-PRESENTATION/APPELLANT Land Development Code § 25-2-963(C) “(A)(2) Replacement or alteration of an original foundation may not change the finished floor elevation by more than one foot vertically, in either direction.” “(C) Except as provided in Subsections (E) and (F), a person may not modify or maintain a noncomplying structure in a manner that increases the degree to which the structure violates a requirement that caused the structure to be noncomplying.” The Approved Plan is adding foundation and increasing IC. ITEM02/6-PRESENTATION/APPELLANT Land Development Code § 25-2-963(C) “The Building Official has determined will necessitate removal of existing unpermitted impervious cover prior to final inspection.” DSD Findings on Reconsideration for Vested Rights at 6708 Bridge Hill Cove. No checks and balances in place to ensure compliance, i.e., where is the IC decreasing and what are the compliance mechanisms? BOA Findings: “An appeal of use provisions could clearly permit a use which is in …
6708 Bridge Hill CV ITEM02/1-PRESENTATION/OWNER 6708 BRIDGE HILL CV • • The Development Officer and the Building Official have both confirmed the original single family principal and accessory structures completed in 1989 with a Certificate of Occupancy were not subject to “LA” zoning requirements because the plat was initiated before annexation. The only impervious cover added by me as current owner of 6708 Bridge Hill Drive is the 290 sq. ft. front entry/master closet addition in 2022. ITEM02/2-PRESENTATION/OWNER 6708 BRIDGE HILL CV • Neither the City, nor Appellant, nor me, as owner of 6708 Bridge Hill Drive, know exactly how much impervious cover was developed at the time of the Certificate of Occupancy. Official records were not kept at that time and Appellant relies on a survey done before pool and patio construction were added and before the C of O, leading to speculation and assumptions based upon what can be seen from old aerial photography. ITEM02/3-PRESENTATION/OWNER 6708 BRIDGE HILL CV • The Building Official has made no error in interpreting the applicable zoning requirements: what was there in 1989 is in 1984 on the grandfathered (as well as what was built Appellant’s lot). The Building Official has gathered the best available information as to how much impervious cover was on the site after the Certificate of Occupancy was issued and has stated that is allowed upon completion of the remodel project. A development plan has been presented that fulfills the stated maximum allowed Impervious Cover determined by the Building Official. is the maximum amount that ITEM02/4-PRESENTATION/OWNER 6708 BRIDGE HILL CV • • As the owner I accept that I must account for improvements made by my predecessors and limit the impervious cover on my lot based on what the Building Official has determined was grandfathered in 1989. This will likely require removing some or all of the circle drive added by my predecessor. The Building Official has determined from all the available surveys and aerial photography that 12,811 sq. ft. of impervious cover was the minimum amount developed at the Certificate of it was less, but Occupancy in 1989. Appellant speculates that concedes his argument is based upon assumptions of how much decking was added after the McMinn survey was completed and before the Certificate of Occupancy was issued. the time of ITEM02/5-PRESENTATION/OWNER 6708 BRIDGE HILL CV • The Holt Carson survey of 2021 shows there was 14,860 sq. …
Call to Action: Improve Learning Environment & Grow Knowledge! Rezoning Case – C14-2024-0051 Process: • • Neighborhood Meetings • • Board of Adjustment Case (this case) Conditional Use Permit – SP-2024-0379D • Rawson Saunders School for Dyslexics – C15-2024-0031 • City of Austin – Board of Adjustments – October 14, 2024 ITEM04/1-PRESENTATION • Rawson Saunders School for Dyslexics – C15-2024-0031 • City of Austin – Board of Adjustments – October 14, 2024 ITEM04/2-PRESENTATION Laura Rawson Saunders School for Dyslexics – C15-2024-0031 City of Austin – Board of Adjustments – October 14, 2024 ITEM04/3-PRESENTATION CONSTRAINTS Rawson Saunders School for Dyslexics – C15-2024-0031 City of Austin – Board of Adjustments – October 14, 2024 ITEM04/4-PRESENTATION REQUESTED RELIEF: IMPERVIOUS COVER (45% TO 60%) Rawson Saunders School for Dyslexics – C15-2024-0031 City of Austin – Board of Adjustments – October 14, 2024 ITEM04/5-PRESENTATION REQUESTED RELIEF: BUILDING COVER (40% TO 60%) Rawson Saunders School for Dyslexics – C15-2024-0031 City of Austin – Board of Adjustments – October 14, 2024 ITEM04/6-PRESENTATION REQUESTED RELIEF: SETBACKS Rawson Saunders School for Dyslexics – C15-2024-0031 City of Austin – Board of Adjustments – October 14, 2024 ITEM04/7-PRESENTATION REQUESTED RELIEF: HEIGHT Rawson Saunders School for Dyslexics – C15-2024-0031 City of Austin – Board of Adjustments – October 14, 2024 ITEM04/8-PRESENTATION Variance to 25-2-832 – Private Schools & pavement width Rawson Saunders School for Dyslexics – C15-2024-0031 City of Austin – Board of Adjustments – October 14, 2024 ITEM04/9-PRESENTATION ITEM04/10-PRESENTATION
3201 E SH-71 SVRD BOA - C15-2024-0032 Michele Rogerson Lynch Metcalfe Wolff Stuart & Williams ITEM05/1-PRESENTATION 25-2-814 – Service Station Use Must be screened from the street by a building or landscape buffer that includes shade tree. Compliant with buffer May not have more than 16 fuel dispensers Compliant with only 12 May not have more than eight vehicle queue lanes Proposing 12 ITEM05/2-PRESENTATION Transportation Criteria Manual Figure 9-10 Identifies outdated options for double stacking canopies and pumps More car conflicts vs pulling straight Not able to double stack due to site through constraints Intended for safe circulation and queuing with distance measurements Project compliant despite double stacking graphic example ITEM05/3-PRESENTATION TCM Figure 9-10 Purple = queue lanes ITEM05/4-PRESENTATION Purple = Queue lanes ITEM05/5-PRESENTATION Site Layout ITEM05/6-PRESENTATION ITEM05/7-PRESENTATION ITEM05/8-PRESENTATION ITEM05/9-PRESENTATION ITEM05/10-PRESENTATION ITEM05/11-PRESENTATION ITEM05/12-PRESENTATION ITEM05/13-PRESENTATION Hwy. 71 and Royster 10 pumps; 10 queue lanes ITEM05/14-PRESENTATION Summary Reasonable Use times Hardship and AE easement Area Character Outdated regulations Newer designs are more safe Newer designs allow for better air quality – less wait Limitations due to throat length, stormwater pond Not negatively altered by proposing safer design Site Plan in review with City BOA previously discussed revising criteria with CodeNext ITEM05/15-PRESENTATION
705 BROWNLEE CIRCLE VARIANCE REQUEST: IMPERVIOUS COVER & FAR Friday, September 20, 2024 BRWN 705 Brownlee Circle Austin, Texas 78703 COVER SHEET 1 ITEM6/1-PRESENTATION Friday, September 20, 2024 BRWN 705 Brownlee Circle Austin, Texas 78703 LOCATION MAP & SURVEY 2 ITEM6/2-PRESENTATION Required Findings Reasonable Use: Hardship: Area Character: The zoning regulations applicable to the property do not allow for a reasonable use because: The zoning regulations do permit a reasonable use via MF-3 Zoning, a zoning that the clients received via a many months-long arduous re-zoning process, against the preferences of the neighborhood, to accommodate what the newly enacted HOME ordinance now nearly fully accommodates. The owners, with the anticipated support of the neighborhood, wish to adhere to SF-3 use that reflects the lower impact build that was always their intent. The intended use's zoning does not allow for a reasonable use because: A: Impervious Cover: The impervious cover limit of the desired SF-3 use (.45) provides inadequate hardscape needed for one of the residents, confined to a wheelchair, to access the majority of the site. Note: The owners are committed to the use of pervious concrete for the driveway and parking areas which will lessen the impact of the variance request. B: Square Footage: The overall design of the home does comply with the gross square footage permissible under the new HOME ordinance, however, the FAR of the primary unit exceeds the single-unit limit due to the square footage required for a van-accessible 2-car garage, an elevator and associated landings on multiple floors. A) The hardship for which the variance is requested is unique to the property in that: The clients are required to have a zoning they don't prefer, and that the neighborhood doesn't want, in order to comply with the basic accessibility clearances needed to accommodate the multi-generational home, with a unit for live-in medical help, that was always the intent and that is now accommodated by the new HOME ordinance. B) the hardships is not general to the area in which the property is located because: The only area on the site that accommodates the garage, its access, turning radii, the elevator, stair, and the required landings and their clearances, is behind the existing structure which necessitates more driveway coverage to access. The variance will not alter the character of the area adjacent to the property, will not impair the use of adjacent conforming property, and …
TO: FROM: Jessica Cohen, Chair Board of Adjustment Members Brent D. Lloyd Development Officer Development Services Department DATE: August 7, 2024 SUBJECT: Case No. C15-2024-0025 | 6708 Bridge Hill Cove The matter before the Board is an appeal of an administrative decision by the Development Services Department (“DSD”) to approve a building permit for residential development 6708 Bridge Hill Cove. The issues in the appeal concern the amount of impervious cover (“IC”) approved for the project in relation to applicable zoning regulations. To assist the Board in understanding the issues, this report is laid out as follows: (1) General background, including DSD’s decision approving the permit under appeal and the development history of the subject property, at pp. 1-2; (2) Procedural requirements for the appeal, at pp. 2-3; and (3) DSD’s recommended action on the appeal, at p. 3. 1. Background — Decision on Appeal On March 24, 2024, DSD approved a building permit (BP No. 2023-129658) for construction of a two-story addition and related improvements to the existing residential structure at 6708 Bridge Hill Cove. After the permit was approved, the Appellant (Mr. Warren Konkel) identified errors in the review process related to the calculation of impervious cover. In particular, Mr. Konkel correctly pointed out that some of the impervious cover shown as “existing” on the approved building plans was associated with development that had never received permits from the City. After reviewing Mr. Konkel’s concerns, DSD determined that the proposed plans submitted on behalf of the landowner, Ms. Christy May, incorrectly denoted unpermitted development as “existing” and that review staff had failed to catch the error. Consistent with LDC Sec. 25-11-66 (Errors in Permit Support Documents), DSD placed an administrative hold on the permit halting further inspections pending resolution of the impervious cover issues. ITEM02/1-PRESENTATION While the hold remained in place, DSD reviewed the site’s development history using available plans, aerial photography, and an IC analysis provided by the applicant (see Attachment A) to determine the amount of impervious cover associated with the original construction permitted in 1987 and 1989. Based on that review, DSD determined that approximately 12,811 square feet of impervious cover was associated with the original development and that an additional 1,000 square feet is permissible based on an established policy allowing limited modifications to projects initiated before currently applicable regulations took effect.1 (See Attachment B.) On June 21, 2024, DSD lifted the administrative hold …
REGULAR MEETING of the BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT October 14, 2024 AT 5:30PM Austin City Hall, Council Chambers, Room 1001 301 West 2nd Street, Austin, Texas 78701 Some members of the BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT may be participating by videoconference. The meeting may be viewed online at: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch-atxn-live Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely via telephone. Speakers may only register to speak on an item once either in-person or remotely and will be allowed up to three minutes to provide their comments. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required email for elaine.ramirez@austintexas.gov or call 512-974-2202. remote participation by telephone. To remotely, register speak to ___ Bianca A Medina-Leal ___ Brian Poteet ___ Margaret Shahrestani ___ Janel Venzant ___ Michael Von Ohlen ___ Suzanne Valentine (Alternate) CURRENT BOARD MEMBERS: ___Jessica Cohen (Chair) ___Melissa Hawthorne (Vice-Chair)) ___Thomas Ates ___Jeffery Bowen ___Marcel Gutierrez-Garza ___Yung-ju Kim The Board of Adjustment may go into closed session to receive advice from legal counsel regarding any item on this agenda (Private consultation with legal counsel – Section 551.071 of the Texas Government Code). AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first (4) four speakers signed up/register prior (no later than noon the day before the meeting) to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. Approve the minutes of the Board of Adjustment Regular meeting on September 9, 2024. On-Line Link: Draft Minutes for September 9, 2024 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. PUBLIC HEARINGS Discussion and action on the following cases. Reconsideration Appeal case: 2. C15-2024-0025 Appellant’s Agent: Nicholl Wade - Appellant: Warren Konkel Owner: Christy May 6708 Bridge Hill Cove Building Permit 2023-129658 BP On-Line Link: ITEM02 ADV PACKET APPEAL1 PART1, PART2, PART3 and APPEAL2 PART 1, PART2, PART3, PART4 PRESENTATION by appellant; PRESENTATION by owner; PRESENTATION by staff Summary of Appeal: Appellant challenges issuance of: and on the grounds that the City of Austin incorrectly approved impervious cover (IC) of approximately 12,811 square feet, which exceeds IC limitations applicable within the Lake Austin (LA) zoning district. Building Permit 2023-129659BP Previous Postponed cases: 3. C15-2024-0028 Peterson 1406 S 3rd Street Haim Joseph Mahlof (Green Bay Remodeling, Inc.) for Wendy Jo On-Line Link: ITEM03 ADV PACKET; NO PRESENTATION The applicant is requesting the following variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2-779 (Small Lot …
BOA MEETING DATES FOR 2025 301 W 2ND STREET, AUSTIN TEXAS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS-ROOM 1001 2ND MONDAY OF THE MONTH January 13, 2025 February 10, 2025 March 10, 2025 April 14, 2025 May 12, 2025 June 9, 2025 July 14, 2025 August 11, 2025 September 8, 2025 October 13, 2025 November 10, 2025 December 8, 2025
ITEM04/1-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/2-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/3-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/4-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/5-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION From: To: Subject: Date: Ramirez, Elaine Rawson application Monday, October 7, 2024 9:49:39 PM [You don't often get email from jdpaustin@me.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] External Email - Exercise Caution I am a member of the Hillview Green Lane HOA. I object to the application and its change from the current school use, which actually is a non conforming use under their current zoning. We don’t want more commercial traffic in our neighborhood. The dense commercial zoning in such close proximity to Casis Elementary School would present more traffic problems and dangers to the young children and the drivers on an already congested 2 lane Exposition Boulevard as well as nearby residential streets. My regards, John D. Pieratt John D. Pieratt, Attorney P O Box 50390 Austin, Texas 78703 John D. Pieratt, Attorney P O Box 50390 Austin, Texas 78703 CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at "cybersecurity@austintexas.gov". ITEM04/6-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/7-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/8-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/9-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/10-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/11-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/12-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/13-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/14-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/15-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/16-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/17-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/18-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/19-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/20-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/21-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/22-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/23-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION ITEM04/24-LATE BACKUP OPPOSITION
ITEM04/1-LATE BACKUP-IN SUPPORT Organized 1973 OFFICERS Holly Reed President Cathy Kyle Past President Secretary George Edwards Treasurer BOARD MEMBERS Mary Arnold Joyce Basciano Joseph Bennett David Bolduc Sarah Cain Michael Cannatti Heidi Gibbons Craig Lill Blake Tollett WEST AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP October 7, 2024 Board of Adjustment, City of Austin Elaine Ramirez, Liaison RE: C15-2024-0031 Members of the Board: West Austin Neighborhood Group (WANG) conditionally supports the above referenced variance request filed by the Austin Area School for Dyslexics, Inc (Rawson Saunders) (R/S) with the following understandings and stipulations. In the spring of this year R/S and their contiguous neighbor Tarrytown Christian Church filed to rezone their entire tract of land from the SF-3-NP zoning district to the GO-MU-NP zoning district. WANG, recognizing overwhelming close by neighbor opposition to the rezoning request, asked R/S to explore the variance process in order to achieve their vision for the school. Over the decades, WANG has worked with several churches along Exposition Boulevard to allow for expansions of their campuses, all within the SF-3 zoning district: • C-15-2003-065 the Episcopal Church of the Good Shepherd, a variance was granted to allow maximum impervious coverage requirements to go from 45% to 70%, maximum building coverage requirements to go from 40% to 50%, and a decrease of setback requirements for a through street. • C15-2006-059 the Westminster Presbyterian Church, a variance was granted to allow maximum impervious coverage requirements to go from 45% to 64% (existing) in order for the church to either replace or renovate buildings on the campus. • Tarrytown United Methodist Church- In 2010-2011, the close by neighbors, WANG and TUMC all worked in harmony to allow the church to reasonably expand their campus through the purchase of a residential home fronting on Exposition Boulevard and placing that property under their Religious Use umbrella without changing either the property’s underlying zoning district of SF-3- NP or changing the expanded campus’s Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation, Central West Austin Neighborhood Plan (CWANP). In addition, in 2009 WANG worked closely with the Girls School of Austin to achieve a harmonious Conditional Use Permit in order for them to expand their campus. As for the application for variance under discussion, WANG recognizes the relevant hardships cited and can support the majority of, as amended, requests as follows: • On the request to increase the site development regulation maximum height requirement of 35 feet to …
ITEM06/1-LTR FROM OWNER the existing duplex as a third unit on the site. We are not real estate developers, nor builders, nor home designers. We are a family trying to build an accessible home for our multigenerational blended family. My son Peter has multiple disabilities, uses a wheelchair at all times, and requires round the clock medical supervision. Maintaining the existing duplex as separate residences for caregivers for Peter and other family members provides an affordable option to these important members of Team Peter to live on site in an increasingly expensive city. Providing affordable housing options for caregivers is the best way that we have to continue to have the high quality care for Peter that he deserves, especially as he has aged out of the public school system. Keeping the family in Central Austin, close to transit and other services is also an important part of keeping him engaged and integrated in our community. We met with that committee three times from July to the following January in an attempt to determine HOW to build our addition and fell into a gaping hole in the Austin Land Development Code - that is, there was no way to have a third unit on a site that was zoned as SF. The committee and neighbors opposed upzoning to MF and wished for us to find a way to build using SF zoning but ultimately, after a LONG discussion at the January Planning Commission meeting in 2023, the property was rezoned to allow for the third unit. Members of the Planning commission, staff and even the ex-officio member of the Board of Adjustment considered other SF codes and variance, but in the end, the ONLY way to accomplish this and even though it makes building much more difficult, was to upzone the property to MF. Since that time, Austin’s land development code has caught up to fill in that gap with the passage of the HOME ordinances. Once the amendments were ratified, we researched their provisions and it seems once again that our project is a perfect fit. Even though it is a more restrictive code, it is much more in keeping with our project, and they are simpler for our family. Webber Studios has designed a beautiful renovation to the property that allows Peter to access the entire property and respects our neighbors wishes to not have a multifamily commercial …
From: Hi Donna, Subject: Date: Re: Feedback from some of your neighbors. (705 Brownlee - BoA hearing 10/14) Thursday, October 10, 2024 5:23:30 PM Thank you for reaching out while David is out of pocket. I’m going to go ahead and copy Elaine Ramirez, the Board of Adjustment’s staff liaison on this message so that she has it and can add it to the backup information about the request that the Board gets on Monday. Thank you, Elaine, for adding it to our packet. I’ll copy the neighborhood concerns here so they are easy to follow: 1) Guarantee there would only be three units. Yes, this is the addition made possible by HOME, our renovation/addition adds one more unit to the existing duplex for a total of 3 separate units. 1) Cap total height under 35 including mechanical space Yes, this is the limit for single-family use, our renovation/addition does not exceed 35 feet. 2) Dust Screen for neighbors -- 8 Ft - as they are lower in elevation to the south. I’m not sure if you mean a dust screen during construction which I would assume is normal, or a fence, but yes, we are happy to build an 8 ft fence on the shared property lines. 3) Two code legal parking spaces located in the front yard (where you show them on the site plan) with sufficient landscape screening in the front yard to screen the view of the parking spots from the street. Yes, we absolutely will include landscape screening at the street. I am a plant/tree lady and I am looking forward to getting to the landscaping part of this project. Bring on the native and drought tolerant trees and shrubs! Our intent in seeking these variances to the more restrictive single-family use for our renovation/addition has always been to minimize the impact to the neighborhood that a commercial process would require. We are happy that the HOME ordinances now make that possible if we are granted these two variances. I am sure that the Board of Adjustment will be receptive to the neighborhood’s support so that our family can move forward with permitting. As always, feel free to contact me with questions about the project. Best, Melissa Skidmore and Brad Hoskins ITEM06/1-LTR to OWANA fr owner On Oct 10, 2024, at 12:02 PM, donna osborn <dkonelm1@gmail.com> wrote: Good Morning Melissa, I sent this request to …
CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Interpretation Appeal 1 and Appeal 2 Decision Sheet ITEM02 DATE: October 14, 2024 CASE NUMBER: C15-2024-0025 ___Y____Thomas Ates (D1) ___Y____Bianca A Medina-Leal (D2) ___Y____Jessica Cohen (D3) ___Y____Yung-ju Kim (D4) ___Y____Melissa Hawthorne (D5) ___Y____Jeffery Bowen (D6) ___Y____Janel Venzant (D7) ___Y____Margaret Shahrestani (D8) ___Y____Brian Poteet (D9) ___Y____Michael Von Ohlen (D10) _______Marcel Gutierrez-Garza (M) _______VACANT (Alternate) (M) _______Suzanne Valentine (Alternate) (M) _______VACANT (Alternate) (M) APPELLANT’S AGENT: Nicholl Wade APPELLANT: Warren Konkel OWNER: Christy May ADDRESS: 6708 BRIDGE HILL CV SUMMARY OF APPEAL: Appellant challenges issuance of Building Permit 2023-12958 BP on the grounds that the City incorrectly approved impervious cover (IC) of approximately 12,811 square feet, which exceeds IC limitations applicable within the Lake Austin (LA) zoning district. BOARD’S DECISION: Aug 12, 2024 - POSTPONED TO September 9, 2024, DUE TO NOT HAVING ENOUGH BOARD MEMBERS FOR VOTING PURPOSES; September 9, 2024 The public hearing was closed by Madam Chair Jessica Cohen, Board member Michael Von Ohlen’s motion to deny the appeal request and uphold staff’s decision; Board member Brian Poteet second on 8-1 votes (Board member Maggie Shahrestani nay); APPEAL REQUEST DENIED AND UPHELD STAFF’S DECISION. October 14, 2024 - Reconsideration request: Board member Michael Von Ohlen’s motion to deny reconsideration request; Vice Chair Melissa Hawthorne second on 10-0 votes; reconsideration request DENIED. Building Permit 2023-129658 BP RENOTIFICATION-SUMMARY OF APPEAL: Appellant challenges issuance of: and on the grounds that the City of Austin incorrectly approved impervious cover (IC) of approximately 12,811 square feet, which exceeds IC limitations applicable within the Lake Austin (LA) zoning district. Building Permit 2023-129659BP FINDING: 1. There is a reasonable doubt of difference of interpretation as to the specific intent of the regulations or map in that: 2. An appeal of use provisions could clearly permit a use which is in character with the uses enumerated for the various zones and with the objectives of the zone in question because: 3. The interpretation will not grant a special privilege to one property inconsistent with other properties or uses similarly situated in that: Elaine Ramirez Executive Liaison Jessica Cohen Chair Diana Ramirez for
CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet ITEM03 DATE: Monday October 14, 2024 CASE NUMBER: C15-2024-0028 _______Thomas Ates (D1) _______Bianca A Medina-Leal (D2) _______Jessica Cohen (D3) _______Yung-ju Kim (D4) _______Melissa Hawthorne (D5) _______Jeffery Bowen (D6) _______Janel Venzant (D7) _______Margaret Shahrestani (D8) _______Brian Poteet (D9) _______Michael Von Ohlen (D10) _______Marcel Gutierrez-Garza (M) _______VACANT (Alternate) (M) _______Suzanne Valentine (Alternate) (M) _______VACANT (Alternate) (M) APPLICANT: Haim Joseph Mahlof - Green Bay Remodeling Inc. OWNER: Wendy Jo Peterson ADDRESS: 1406 3rd ST VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting the following variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2-779 (Small Lot Single-Family Residential Use) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum front yard setback from 15 feet (required) to 5 feet (requested) in order to attach a second story deck in a “SF-4A-NP”, Single-Family - Neighborhood Plan zoning district (Bouldin Creek Neighborhood Plan). BOARD’S DECISION: September 9, 2024 The public hearing was closed by Madam Chair Jessica Cohen, Board member Michael Von Ohlen’s motion to postpone to October 14, 2024; Vice Chair Melissa Hawthorne second on 9-0 votes; POSTPONED TO OCTOBER 14, 2024. OCTOBER 14, 2024 POSTPONED TO November 14, 2024, BY APPLICANT FINDING: 1. The Zoning regulations applicable to the property do not allow for a reasonable use because: 2. (a) The hardship for which the variance is requested is unique to the property in that: (b) The hardship is not general to the area in which the property is located because: 3. The variance will not alter the character of the area adjacent to the property, will not impair the use of adjacent conforming property, and will not impair the purpose of the regulations of the zoning district in which the property is located because: Elaine Ramirez Executive Liaison Jessica Cohen Chair
CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet ITEM04 DATE: Monday October 14, 2024 CASE NUMBER: C15-2024-0031 _______Thomas Ates (D1) _______Bianca A Medina-Leal (D2) _______Jessica Cohen (D3) _______Yung-ju Kim (D4) _______Melissa Hawthorne (D5) _______Jeffery Bowen (D6) _______Janel Venzant (D7) _______Margaret Shahrestani (D8) _______Brian Poteet (D9) _______Michael Von Ohlen (D10) _______Marcel Gutierrez-Garza (M) _______VACANT (Alternate) (M) _______Suzanne Valentine (Alternate) (M) _______VACANT (Alternate) (M) APPLICANT: Victoria Haase OWNER: Austin Area School for Dyslexics, Inc. ADDRESS: 2615 ½ HILLVIEW RD VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section: 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations): Height Requirements to increase the height from 35 feet (maximum allowed) to 50 o feet (requested) o (required) to 15 feet (requested) o (required) to 5 feet (requested) o (requested) o percent (requested) Setback Requirements to decrease the minimum front yard setback from 25 feet Setback Requirements to decrease the minimum rear yard setback from 10 feet Building Coverage to increase from 40 percent (maximum allowed) to 60% Impervious Coverage to increase from 45 percent (maximum allowed) to 60 25-2-832 (Private Schools) (1) a site must be located on a street that has a paved width of at least 40 feet (required) to 30 feet (requested) from the site to where it connects with another street that has a paved width of at least 40 feet (required) to 30 feet (requested) in order to erect school buildings and structured sub-grade parking facilities in a “SF-3- NP”, Single-Family-Neighborhood Plan zoning district (West Austin Neighborhood Group). BOARD’S DECISION: POSTPONED TO November 14, 2024, BY APPLICANT FINDING: 1. The Zoning regulations applicable to the property do not allow for a reasonable use because: 2. (a) The hardship for which the variance is requested is unique to the property in that: (b) The hardship is not general to the area in which the property is located because: 3. The variance will not alter the character of the area adjacent to the property, will not impair the use of adjacent conforming property, and will not impair the purpose of the regulations of the zoning district in which the property is located because: Elaine Ramirez Executive Liaison Jessica Cohen Madam Chair for
CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet ITEM05 DATE: Monday October 14, 2024 CASE NUMBER: C15-2024-0032 ___Y____Thomas Ates (D1) ___Y____Bianca A Medina-Leal (D2) ___Y____Jessica Cohen (D3) ___Y____Yung-ju Kim (D4) ___Y____Melissa Hawthorne (D5) ___Y____Jeffery Bowen (D6) ___Y____Janel Venzant (D7) ___Y____Margaret Shahrestani (D8) ___Y____Brian Poteet (D9) ___Y____Michael Von Ohlen (D10) _______Marcel Gutierrez-Garza (M) _______VACANT (Alternate) (M) _______Suzanne Valentine (Alternate) (M) _______VACANT (Alternate) (M) APPLICANT: Michele Rogerson Lynch OWNER: Sunoco – Vincent Record ADDRESS: 3201 SH 71 SVRD WB VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2-814 (Service Station Use) (3) to increase the queue lanes from 8 (required) to 12 (requested) in order to erect a 7-Eleven Service Station in a “GR-CO” Community Commercial zoning district. BOARD’S DECISION: The public hearing was closed by Madam Chair Jessica Cohen, Madam Chair Jessica Cohen’s motion to approve; Board member Michael Von Ohlen second on 10-0 votes; GRANTED. FINDING: 1. The Zoning regulations applicable to the property do not allow for a reasonable use because: modern service station designs utilize the racetrack/single pump layout for maximum vehicle/pedestrian safely and accessibility, both the Transportation Criteria Manual and Code Section 25-2-814 are outdated and should be updated to be more in line with safer on site maneuvering and to be in line with Austin’s Environmental goals to be carbon free by 2050. 2. (a) The hardship for which the variance is requested is unique to the property in that: the size and configuration of the property does not allow for adequate room to design the proposed service station with the City of Austin’s accepted double stack design while maintaining the adequate maneuvering and queuing space required for service stations by the Transportation Criteria Manual, specifically the throat length of the driveway on Eva Street as well as the required detention limit shifting the development in the northern portion of the site, the southern portion of the site is constrained by Austin Energy easement that cannot be encroached upon. (b) The hardship is not general to the area in which the property is located because: the race track/single fueling pump configuration is considered standard prototypical among most major fueling stations today and is the preferred product for vehicle accessibility and pedestrian safety. 3. The variance will not alter the character of the area adjacent to the property, will not impair the use of adjacent conforming property, and will not impair …
CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet ITEM06 DATE: Monday October 14, 2024 CASE NUMBER: C15-2024-0034 ___Y____Thomas Ates (D1) ___Y____Bianca A Medina-Leal (D2) ___Y____Jessica Cohen (D3) ___Y____Yung-ju Kim (D4) ___Y____Melissa Hawthorne (D5) ___Y____Jeffery Bowen (D6) ___Y____Janel Venzant (D7) ___Y____Margaret Shahrestani (D8) ___Y____Brian Poteet (D9) ___Y____Michael Von Ohlen (D10) _______Marcel Gutierrez-Garza (M) _______VACANT (Alternate) (M) _______Suzanne Valentine (Alternate) (M) _______VACANT (Alternate) (M) APPLICANT: Robert Allison OWNER: Brad Hoskins ADDRESS: 705 BROWNLEE CIR VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section, 25-2- 773 (Duplex, Two-Unit, and Three-Unit Residential Uses): (B) (7) Impervious Coverage to increase from 45 percent (maximum allowed) to 65 o percent (requested) (E) (4) F.A.R to increase from 40% (required) to 50% (requested) o in order to remodel a residence in a “MF-3-NP”, Multi-Family-Neighborhood Plan zoning district (West Austin Neighborhood Group). 25-2-773 - DUPLEX, TWO-UNIT, AND THREE-UNIT RESIDENTIAL USES. (A) To the extent of conflict, this section supersedes the base zoning district regulations. (B) For a duplex, two-unit, and three-unit residential use: (1) minimum lot area is 5,750 square feet; (2) minimum front yard setback is 15 feet; (3) minimum rear yard setback is: (a) the base zoning district minimum rear yard setback; or (b) five feet when the lot is adjacent to: (i) an alley; or (ii) another lot with a use that is permitted in a multifamily base zoning district or less restrictive base zoning district; (4) minimum street-side yard setback for a lot located on a corner and: (a) on a Level 1 street is the greater of five feet from the property line or 10 feet from curb, or in the absence of curbs, from the edge of the pavement; or (b) on a Level 2, Level 3, or Level 4 street is 10 feet from the property line; (5) minimum number of street-facing entrances is one; (6) maximum building coverage is 40 percent; and (7) maximum impervious cover is 45 percent. (E) This subsection applies to the area established in Subsection 1.2.1 of Chapter 252, Subchapter F (Residential Design and Compatibility Standards). (1) In this subsection, (a) EXISTING DWELLING UNIT means a dwelling unit that is: (i) legally permitted and occupied before December 7, 2023; or (ii) described in an application for a residential permit that was submitted on or before December 7, 2023. (b) GROSS FLOOR AREA means the total enclosed area of all floors in …
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING MINUTES MONDAY, October 14, 2024 The BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT convened in a Regular meeting on Monday, October 14, 2024, at 301 West 2nd Street in Austin, Texas. Chair Jessica Cohen called the Board of Adjustment Meeting to order at 5:35 PM. Board Members/Commissioners in Attendance in-Person: Jessica Cohen-Chair, Melissa Hawthorne-Vice Chair, Michael Von Ohlen Board Members/Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Thomas Ates, Jeffery Bowen, Bianca A. Medina-Leal, Yung-ju Kim, Brian Poteet, Maggie Shahrestani, Janel Venzant PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first (4) four speakers signed up/register prior (no later than noon the day before the meeting) to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. None APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Board of Adjustment Regular meeting on September 9, 2024. On-Line Link: Draft Minutes for September 9, 2024 The minutes from the meeting September 9, 2024, were approved on Vice Chair’s Melissa Hawthorne motion, Board member Michael Von Ohlen second on a 9-1-0 vote (Board member Jeffrey Bowen abstained). PUBLIC HEARINGS Discussion and action on the following cases. Postponement requests to November 14, 2024: Item 3 by applicant, Item 4 by applicant and Item 6 by neighborhood association (OWANA) Board member Michael Von Ohlen’s motion to approve postponement requests for Items 3, 4 and 6 to November 14, 2024; Vice Chair Melissa Hawthorne second on 10-0 votes; Item 6 Owner opposes to the postponement request by OWANA and requests open for discussion; substitute motion, Board member Michael Von Ohlen motion to approve postponement requests for Items 3 and 4 only to November 14, 2024, and Item 6 open for discussion; Vice-Chair Melissa Hawthorne second on 9-1 vote (Chair Jessica Cohen nay). Reconsideration Appeal case: 2. C15-2024-0025 Appellant’s Agent: Nicholl Wade - Appellant: Warren Konkel Owner: Christy May 6708 Bridge Hill Cove Building Permit 2023-129658 BP On-Line Link: ITEM02 ADV PACKET APPEAL1 PART1, PART2, PART3 and APPEAL2 PART 1, PART2, PART3, PART4 PRESENTATION by appellant; PRESENTATION by owner; PRESENTATION by staff Summary of Appeal: Appellant challenges issuance of: and on the grounds that the City of Austin incorrectly approved impervious cover (IC) of approximately 12,811 square feet, which exceeds IC limitations applicable within the Lake Austin (LA) zoning district. Reconsideration request: Board member Michael Von Ohlen’s motion to deny reconsideration request; Vice Chair Melissa Hawthorne second …
