C-2 C16-2021-0003 PP DS FEB 8 — original pdf

Backup

CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet C-2 CASE NUMBER: C16-2021-0003 DATE: January 11, 2021 _______Brooke Bailey OUT _______Jessica Cohen _______Ada Corral _______Melissa Hawthorne ____-___VACANT _______Don Leighton-Burwell _______Rahm McDaniel _______Darryl Pruett _______Veronica Rivera OUT _______Yasmine Smith _______Michael Von Ohlen _______Kelly Blume (Alternate) ___-____Vacant (Alternate) _______Donny Hamilton (Alternate) NOT AVAIL APPLICANT: Michael Gaudini OWNER: Timothy Finley ADDRESS: 2552 GUADALUPE ST VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting a sign variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-10-133 (University Neighborhood Overlay Zoning District Signs), requesting a total of 12 signs on the property: a) (F) to allow three (3) wall signs above the second floor, one on each the northern, southern and eastern sides. b) (G) (1) one projecting sign for each building façade (allowed) to two (2) projecting signs (requested) on the eastern side c) (H) to allow for all twelve (12) signs, nine (9) on the northern, one (1)on the southern, one (1) on the eastern and one (1) on the western sides, to all be illuminated in order to provide signage for the Moxy Hotel in a “CS-CO-NP”, General Commercial Services- Conditional Overlay Combining District– Neighborhood Plan zoning district. (West University Neighborhood Plan) Note: The Land Development Code sign regulations 25-10-133 University Neighborhood Overlay Zoning Districts Signs (F) No signs may be placed above the second floor of a building, except for a non-electric sign that is engraved, cut into the building surface, or otherwise inlaid to become part of the building.(G) A wall sign is permitted if the sign complies with this subsection. (1) One projecting sign for each building façade is permitted (H) A sign may not be illuminated or contain electronic images or moving parts. BOARD’S DECISION: Jan 11, 2021 POSTPONED TO FEBRUARY 8, 2021 (Board member Melissa Hawthorne abstaining) FINDING: 1. The variance is necessary because strict enforcement of the Article prohibits and reasonable opportunity to provide adequate signs on the site, considering the unique features of a site such as its dimensions, landscape, or topography, because: OR, 2. The granting of this variance will not have a substantially adverse impact upon neighboring properties, because: OR, 3. The granting of this variance will not substantially conflict with the stated purposes of this sign ordinance, because: AND, 4. Granting a variance would not provide the applicant with a special privilege not enjoyed by others similarly situated or potentially similarly situated, because: ______________________________ ____________________________ Elaine Ramirez Executive Liaison Don Leighton-Burwell Chairman Diana Ramirez for