Board of AdjustmentJuly 12, 2021

D-4 C15-2021-0062 PP DS TO 8-9-21 — original pdf

Backup
Thumbnail of the first page of the PDF
Page 1 of 2 pages

CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet D-4 DATE: Monday July 12, 2021 CASE NUMBER: C15-2021-0062 _______Thomas Ates _______Brooke Bailey _______Jessica Cohen _______Melissa Hawthorne _______Barbara Mcarthur _______Rahm McDaniel (OUT) _______Darryl Pruett _______Agustina Rodriguez _______Richard Smith (OUT) _______Michael Von Ohlen _______Nicholl Wade _______Kelly Blume (Alternate) _______Carrie Waller (Alternate) _______Vacant (Alternate) APPLICANT: David Cancialosi OWNER: Christen Steen ADDRESS: 3401 RIVERCREST DR increase the maximum impervious cover on a slope with a gradient of 15 percent or less increase the maximum impervious cover on a slope with a gradient of 15 percent and not VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2-551 (Lake Austin District Regulations) (C) (3) (a) from 35 percent (allowed) to 48 percent (requested), (53% existing) (b) more than 25 percent from 10 percent (allowed) to 49 percent (requested), (54.25% existing) (c) increase the maximum impervious cover on a slope with a gradient of more than 25 percent and not more than 35 percent from 5 percent (allowed) to 18 percent (requested), (4.41% existing) (d) percent (requested), (0.83% existing) in order to erect a Single-Family + associated improvements in a “LA”, Lake Austin zoning district. Note: This section of the Land Development Code applies to lots that are included in a subdivision plat recorded before April 22, 1982 or a tract that is not required to be platted. For the above address the Subdivision Plat was recorded on January 4, 1965 increase maximum impervious cover on a slope gradient greater than 35 percent to 3 The overall change in IC is from 21.51% to a proposed 20.89% IC, or 8,084 SF IC to 7,883 SF IC, when calculated on a gross lot area basis. BOARD’S DECISION: BOA JULY 12, 2021 POSTPONED TO AUGUST 9, 2021 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 Diana Ramirez for ____________________________ Jessica Cohen Chair