E-2 C15-2022-0011 ADV PACKET PART1 — original pdf

Backup

CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet F-5 DATE: Monday March14, 2022 CASE NUMBER: C15-2022-0011 _______Thomas Ates _______Brooke Bailey _______Jessica Cohen _______Melissa Hawthorne _______Barbara Mcarthur _______Rahm McDaniel _______Darryl Pruett _______Agustina Rodriguez _______Richard Smith _______Michael Von Ohlen _______Nicholl Wade _______Kelly Blume (Alternate) _______Carrie Waller (Alternate) _______Marcel Gutierrez-Garza (Alternate) APPLICANT: Jonathan Kaplan OWNER: David Scott Kosch ADDRESS: 2715 LONG BOW TRL increase the maximum impervious cover on a slope with a gradient of 15 percent and not increase the maximum impervious cover on a slope with a gradient of 15 percent or less 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 40 percent (requested) (b) more than 25 percent from 10 percent (allowed) to 40 percent (requested) (c) percent and not more than 35 percent from 5 percent (allowed) to 40 percent (requested) (d) percent (requested), in order to complete a Single-Family residence in a “LA”, Lake Austin zoning district. increase the maximum impervious cover on a slope with a gradient of more than 25 increase the maximum impervious cover on a slope gradient greater than 35 percent to 40 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 November 17, 1969 (E) This subsection specifies additional development standards based on slope gradient in a Lake Austin (LA) district. (2) On a slope with a gradient of more than 35 percent, development is prohibited except for the construction of a fence, driveway, road or utility that cannot be E-2/1reasonably placed elsewhere, or a non-mechanized pedestrian facility, such as a foot path, sidewalk, or stairs. BOARD’S DECISION: The public hearing was closed by Madam Chair Jessica Cohen, Board Member Michael Von Ohlen motions to postpone to March 14, 2022; Board Member Melissa Hawthorne seconds on a 11-0 vote; POSTPONED TO MARCH 14, 2022; March 14, 2022 POSTPONED TO APRIL 11, 2022 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 E-2/2Thursday, March 24, 2022 To: Board of Adjustments City of Austin 301 W 2nd St, Austin, TX 78701 Reference: - Supplemental Letter - 2715 Long Bow Trail - Case # C15-2022-0011 I am writing to provide you the additional information as requested from the Board of Adjustments from our meeting on February 14, 2022. I have attached a copy of the supporting documents for the comments below and answers the questions and concerns you had during the hearing. Zoning Regulations: The primary basis of our request is that the property has been illegally zoned for both LA (Lake Austin) zoning and the Lake Austin overlay as both regulations require a min. of 1 acre lot size per the City of Austin development regulations as shown below. The illegal application of the LA regulations on this lot makes it non-developable for reasonable use. The LA regulations are also shown as the strictest zoning regulations as specified in 25-2-33 (b). 1. Per 25-2-492 site development regulations the LA zoned lot must be a minimum of 43,560 SF in size (1 acre), and the lot in question is only 8,822.11 sf (.20 acres). In addition, all LA zones lots are governed by 25-2-551 (C)-3 Impervious coverage restrictions based on a slope analysis of the property. 2. Per 25-2-53 of the Land Development Code - Lake Austin residence (LA) district is the designation for a low density single-family residential use on a lot that is a minimum of one acre and that is located 1,000 feet or less, measured horizontally, from the 492.8-foot topographic contour line on either side of Lake Austin. 3. The City of Austin zoning guide published September of 2016 in chapter II states the following. a. The City of Austin has established twelve Zoning Principles as a guide to preserve the compatibility of land uses. City Staff, stakeholders and property owners should use the following principles to evaluate all zoning requests. i. Zoning should be consistent with the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) or adopted neighborhood plan. ii. Zoning should satisfy a public need and not constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner; the 1. This item is not applicable to our case request should not result in spot zoning. 1. Within Apache Shores POA there is less than 5% of the overall community that has any form of zoning regulation. The current overlay unreasonably restricts the lots development capabilities. iii. Granting a request for zoning should result in an equal treatment of similarly situated properties. 1. Within Apache Shores POA there is less than 5% of the overall community that has any form of zoning regulation. The current overlay unreasonably restricts the lots development capabilities. Lots as close as 100’ away have no zoning regulations 2. iv. Granting the zoning should not in any way set an undesirable precedent for other properties in the neighborhood or within other areas of the city. 1. This is a lot specific request on a non-conforming lot and should not result in any negative precedent. v. Zoning should allow for a reasonable use of the property. 1. The current zoning does not allow for any reasonable use of the property. vi. Zoning changes should promote compatibility with adjacent and nearby uses and should not result in detrimental impacts to the neighborhood character. 1. The request that we are asking for does not put the development capabilities of these properties above or beyond the adjacent properties. vii. Zoning should promote a transition between adjacent and nearby zoning districts, land uses, and development intensities. E-2/31. The request does not change the land use or density of the area. viii. Zoning should promote the policy of locating retail and more intensive zoning near the intersections of arterial roadways or at the intersections of arterials and major collectors. 1. This section is not applicable to our request. ix. The request should serve to protect and preserve places and areas of historical and cultural significance. • Zoning should promote clearly identified community goals such as creating employment opportunities or providing for affordable housing. 1. The request for Impervious Coverage is being done to be able to develop single family homes that are desperately needed in the greater Austin area. x. A change in conditions has occurred within the area indicating that there is a basis for changing the originally established zoning and/or development restrictions for the property. 1. Prior to 2014 this property did not have any zoning regulations. This zoning overlay was added to the property making the lots non-developable. xi. The rezoning should be consistent with the policies adopted by the City Council or Planning Commission/Zoning and Platting Commission. 1. The City of Austin has been diligent in allowing for additional development of living units as it is necessary for not only future growth but also the people that are currently here. 4. With the information provided above it is easy to see that the zoning regulations that are being placed on this property are being illegally applied. If the City of Austin development code is the regulation that all construction and development within the city is governed by the continued application of this zoning would be removed as it does not meet the minimum standard. Apache Shores HOA Regulations: The following regulations are required by the deed restrictions within the community. These regulations were adopted on November 19th 1969 and recorded with Travis County document # 23- 2467 1. Paragraph #3 states that no residence shall have less than 650 sf of living space on the ground or first floor exclusive of porch area. Neighboring Properties: It has come into question about the size of the proposed homes in comparison to the adjacent homes. We have gone through the Travis County property records and have identified the following. 1. Based on the map attached to this report there are 9 houses within a 1,000-foot radius of this lot that are within the size range or the proposed projects. If you take the average size of all the houses shown on the map you will get an average size of 2,443 SF. 2. On this map you will also see that there are 11 vacant lots on the same road (Long Bow Trail) that will be developed and these lots are not within the COA LA zoning regulations so they will most likely be constructed the same size or larger of our proposed structure. Opposition: When doing the research on the properties and the surrounding area we compared it to the information provided by Craig Lesley of 2710 Long Bow Trail and Karl Van Nostrand of 2706 Long Bow Trail we identified some false and misleading information that they provided as described below. I want to point out that I don’t oppose legitimate opposition but when the opposing party’s provide false and misleading information it is now fair as we are Heald under Oath and it appears that they are now. 3. When doing this map, I have identified that the house owned by Craig Lesley who opposed this project and stated in his testimony the following. a. b. “The size of the houses planned in the variance we are seeking seem excessive to him and more modest footprint is better for the environment, better for the natural aesthetics and for the community as a hole” “no other houses the size that we are talking about putting there around there” you can see by the map that I provided this is a false statement and even his own house is the size we are requesting. i. Response: In fact, his own home that is directly across the street is 2,408 SF based on TCAD and 2,461 sf based on the building permit application he provided at the time of construction. c. “My wife and I built years ago under the same requirements” i. Response: Although his plans do show net site area calculations his permit was approved on 2- 5-2014 but the COA LA ordinance was not approved until June 26, 2014 so I am not sure why E-2/4they designed in that manner. d. “that’s why they had to build further up because there are a lot of nice oak trees” i. Response: The reason that the houses are being put up on the hill is to leave room in the best location for the septic field on the lower portion of the property. Response to BOA members: During the hearing there were several very legitimate concerns raised by the board members and I have noted the questions and answers below. 1. Creative Design: The design of the structure is utilizing 3 story vertical design and that is the tallest that residential construction allows. The location of the house was determined by the location of the protected size tree’s on the property and the best operating location of the septic system. 2. Septic System: Since the last meeting we had the septic permit for the property has already been approved by Austin Water for the septic’s for both houses. The location of the septic systems is located at the front of the property to allow for the best peculation rate and long term functionality of the system. 3. Use of Piers: The use of piers for a foundation system does not change the impervious coverage calculations with the City of Austin. This is a method to reduce the impervious coverage calculations on projects in the past and the development department has rejected it every time. 4. Cut in steep part of lot: The question was raised as to why the houses were placed into he steepest part of the properties. This was done as that is the portion of the lot that has the lowest peculation rate so the added impervious coverage will have the smallest impact in those locations. 5. Protected Tree’s: There were several questions about the trees and the health of them in their current state. Due to this question, I had a certified Arborist do a Tree Risk Report for all the protected sized tree’s on the property. I have attached those reports to this report for your review. The main item is the heritage tree on the front of the right lot (2715) and that tree is unfortunately not in the greatest condition due to its age and according to the COA regulations for tree’s it is eligible for removal since more than 50% of the tree needs to be removed but we have no plans on removing it and are trying to save it. You can also see that we are not encroaching in the ¼ CRZ of any tree’s and will utilize a low impact foundation design commonly accepted when having to develop within the ½ CRZ. 6. Drinking Water Protection: The protection of the drinking water was a concern among the BOA. I have spoken with two different Civil Engineers and they both agree that they can do a site design that will be able to capture any runoff and additional water flows created by the proposed development. This item can be a condition of approval for the development permit and the engineer can provide the calculation numbers to prove their design much like they do on any commercial project. 7. House Design: I provided an updated site plan for both properties showing the site layout and the actual impervious coverage needed to be able to build the house. Conclusion: As you can see based on the information provided in this report and the prior documentation that was provided there should be no reason that these lots are not allowed to be developed allowing the construction of the proposed houses that conform to the community sizes while being able to provide proof that there is no adverse impact on Lake Austin due to engineered site design. Regards, Jonathan Kaplan Managing Member Urban Building Services of Texas LLC 512-768-2789 ext. 501 E-2/5S 75° 04' 26" 61.55' E " 0 - 5' S 89° 52' 22" 60.11' E " 0 - ' 5 5' - 0" 5' - 0" 5' - 0" 5' - 0" " 0 1 - ' 2 5 T2 10' - 1 1/2" 1/2 CRZ T25 1 " 0 ' - 4 1 / 2 1 / 2 C R Z T24 10' - 6" 1/2 CRZ E " 0 0 ' 0 0 ° 0 N ' . 8 9 9 4 1 2717 Long Bow 2500 SF IC E " 4 3 ' 0 1 ° 0 N ' . 7 4 1 6 1 2715 Long Bow 2500 SF IC W " 0 3 ' 2 0 ° 0 S ' . 9 8 9 4 1 T6 1 7 ' 4 1 / 2 " - 1 / 2 C R Z " 0 - ' 5 1 " 0 - ' 5 2 N 89° 57' 30" 60.00' W 2717 - Slope Analysis - Net Site Area Material: Range Material: Area 0.00% to 15.00% 748 SF x 35% = 261.8 15.00% to 25.00% 25.00% to 35.00% 2,333 SF 1,705 SF x 10% = 233.3 x 05% = 85.25 35.00% to 4,459.59% 5,255 SF 0 x 40% = 299.2 x 40% = 933.2 x 40% = 682 x 12% = 630.6 Allowed IC = 580.35 SF Proposed IC = 2,545 SF 2715 - Slope Analysis - Net Site Area Material: Range Material: Area 0.00% to 15.00% 2,545 SF x 35% = 890.75 15.00% to 25.00% 25.00% to 35.00% 35.00% to 4459.59% 1,567 SF 1,002 SF 4,958 SF x 10% = 156.7 x 05% = 50.1 0 x 40% = 1,018 x 40% = 626.8 x 40% = 400.8 x 10% = 495.8 Allowed IC = 1,097.55 SF Proposed IC = 2,541.4 SF T13 " 6 - 0' 1 Z R C 2 / 1 " 0 - ' 5 2 S 82° 24' 24" E 32.85' " 0 - ' 0 1 S 89° 57' 30" 27.41' E 1 Site 1" = 10'-0" Certification # 44-752 Office: 512-596-HOME (4663) Mobile: 512-920-3439 Email: jon@urbandesignsllc.com WWW.URBANDESIGNSLLC.COM The drawings, specifications, ideas , designs, and arrangements presented herein are and shall remain the property of Urban Designs. No part thereof shall be copied, disclosed to others or used in connection with any work or project other than the specific project for which they were prepared and developed without the written consent of Urban Designs. Visual contact with these drawings shall constitute conclusive evidence of acceptance of these restrictions. n i t s u A , l i a r T w o B g n o L 7 1 7 2 + 5 1 7 2 l t n e m p o e v e D e g a l l i V t r A CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS l s i s y a n A e t i S N O I T A M R O F N I T C E J O R P DRAWING TITLE: Unnamed 22" X 34" SCALE: 1" = 10'-0" 11" X 17" SCALE: HALF SCALE ISSUES DATE: DRAWN BY: Author SHEET NUMBER: 3/24/2022 6:34:42 PM 103 E-2/6Legend Streets Jurisdiction FULL PURPOSE LIMITED PURPOSE OTHER CITY LIMITS OTHER CITIES ETJ TCAD Parcels Lot Line EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION 2 MILE ETJ AGRICULTURAL AGREEMENT 0.2 0 0.08 0.2 Miles NAD_1983_StatePlane_Texas_Central_FIPS_4203_Feet Date Printed: This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. It does not represent an on-the-ground survey. This product has been produced by the City of Austin for the sole purpose of geographic reference. No warranty is made by the City of Austin regarding specific accuracy or completeness. 1: 4,800 Notes E-2/7February 24, 2022 Mr. Jon Kaplan C.P.B.D. - 44-752 ICC Combination Inspector - 9061592 Urban Building Services of Texas LLC 214 Sailors Run Lakeway, TX 78734 Re: Lot 876 2715 Longbow Trail Austin, TX 78734 Dear Mr. Kaplan, This letter is in response to your request for a Tree Protection Plan for Lot 876 on Longbow Trail, TX 78734. I visited the site on February 22, 2022. I met with you to review the design plans and develop a tree condition report. My report is attached. Please feel free to contact me regarding specification details or with any other questions. Respectfully, Scott E. George Austin Beautiful Trees - President American Society of Consulting Arborists – Registered Consulting Arborist # 752 International Society of Arboriculture Certified Arborist TX #3996-A Risk Assessment Qualified Arborist Oak Wilt Risk Assessment Qualified Arborist Wildfire Risk Assessment Qualified Arborist Tree Condition Report for Lot 876, 2715 Long Bow Trail, Austin, TX 78734 Page 1 E-2/8Tree Condition Report - Lot 876 February 24, 2022 Prepared for: Property Address: 2715 Long Bow Trail Austin, Texas 78734 Jon Kaplan Tree: Live oak (Quercus fusiformis) Location: northeast side of lot Tree Tag Number: T2 DBH: 20.25” I measured the tree at four feet six inches from the high side of the grade. I did not observe obvious defects in the tree and consider the tree in good condition. Tree: Live oak (Quercus fusiformis) Location: Southeast side of lot Tree Tag Number: T6 DBH: 23.5”/22.5” twin trunked and combined measurement of 34.75” The tree is designated as a “Heritage” tree by the City of Austin (see Appendix A, Photo 1). Heritage trees are a group of protected trees measuring 24” and larger. I observed multiple obvious defects in the tree and determined that the subject tree was in “Fair” condition. The eastern (or right side) leader of the tree has a significant column of dead wood protruding from the living leader (see Appendix A, Photo 2). This old column of dead wood was “Imminent” for failure. I observed another large column of dead wood that emerged from the upper canopy of the left trunk. This upper leader with the dead column of wood was also “imminent” for failure (see Appendix A, Photo 3). I also observed numerous large scaffold branches with significant decay pockets in both the defects I observed were trunks (see Appendix A, Photos 4 and 5). Most of “Probable” for failure within an eighteen-month time frame. The mitigation option with the lowest residual risk is removal of the large columns of It is my opinion that the scaffold branches with the most significant decay dead wood. pockets also need to be partially removed back to healthier sections of wood. I estimated that this could require pruning approximately fifty percent of the existing tree canopy and perhaps more. This would require a permit from the City of Austin and would exceed industry and municipal standards for pruning in a single year. Tree health Tree Condition Report for Lot 876, 2715 Long Bow Trail, Austin, TX 78734 Page 2 E-2/9could be compromised by the scope of pruning required to reduce the likelihood of large branch failures. I observed that the remaining surveyed trees on Lot 876 were not of protected size. Please feel to contact me with questions regarding this report. Respectfully, Scott E. George Austin Beautiful Trees - President American Society of Consulting Arborists – Registered Consulting Arborist # 752 International Society of Arboriculture Certified Arborist TX #3996-A Risk Assessment Qualified Arborist Oak Wilt Risk Assessment Qualified Arborist Wildfire Risk Assessment Qualified ArboristMember Tree Condition Report for Lot 876, 2715 Long Bow Trail, Austin, TX 78734 Page 3 E-2/10Appendix A - Photos Photo 1 - Live oak (Quercus fusiformis) Location: Southeast side of lot Tree Tag Number: T6 DBH: 23.5”/22.5” twin trunked and combined measurement of 34.75” Note: General overview picture Tree Condition Report for Lot 876, 2715 Long Bow Trail, Austin, TX 78734 Page 4 E-2/11Appendix A - Photos Photo 2 - Live oak (Quercus fusiformis) Location: Southeast side of lot Tree Tag Number: T6 DBH: 23.5”/22.5” twin trunked and combined measurement of 34.75” Note: The eastern (or right side) leader of the tree has a significant column of dead wood protruding from the living leader. This old column of dead wood was “Imminent” for failure. Tree Condition Report for Lot 876, 2715 Long Bow Trail, Austin, TX 78734 Page 5 E-2/12Appendix A - Photos Photo 3 - Live oak (Quercus fusiformis) Location: Southeast side of lot Tree Tag Number: T6 DBH: 23.5”/22.5” twin trunked and combined measurement of 34.75” Note: Another large column of dead wood that emerged from the upper canopy of the left trunk. This upper leader with the dead column of wood was also “imminent” for failure. Tree Condition Report for Lot 876, 2715 Long Bow Trail, Austin, TX 78734 Page 6 E-2/13Appendix A - Photos Photo 4 and 5 - Live oak (Quercus fusiformis) Location: Southeast side of lot Tree Tag Number: T6 DBH: 23.5”/22.5” twin trunked and combined measurement of 34.75” Note: Numerous large scaffold branches with significant decay pockets in both trunks. Most of the defects I observed were “Probable” for failure within an eighteen-month time frame. Tree Condition Report for Lot 876, 2715 Long Bow Trail, Austin, TX 78734 Page 7 E-2/14Appendix B - Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 1. Loss or alteration of any part of this report invalidates the entire report. 2. The report and the opinions expressed herein represent the professional opinion of the author. The fee generated from this report is not contingent upon any prior or future outcome or subsequent event. Any future work done by this author related to this tree or other trees of the client shall be billed separately from this work. 3. Possession of therefore, does not this report or a copy, imply the right of publication or use for any purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed, without the prior, expressed written or verbal consent of the author. 4. The author does not have any financial or business associations with any commercial arborist. Any future work done by a commercial arborist shall be performed via a separate contract between the client and the arborist. 5. Care has been taken to obtain information from reliable sources. The author cannot guarantee accuracy nor be responsible for the information provided by others. 6. Unless otherwise specified, the information contained in this report covers only those items that were examined and reflects the condition of those items at the time of inspection. The inspection is limited as stated in the text of this report. There is no warranty or guarantee that problems or deficiencies of the tree in question will not arise in the future. 7. The author and Austin Beautiful Trees cannot guarantee the health or safety of any tree, regardless of any examination given or care treatments recommended and/or employed. Even with the best of care, trees sometimes die and/or branches fail. Therefore, the author and Austin Beautiful Trees make no such guarantees and are at no fault if such occurs. 8. The author shall not be required to give testimony or attend court by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services as described in a subsequent contract for services. Tree Condition Report for Lot 876, 2715 Long Bow Trail, Austin, TX 78734 Page 8 E-2/15Appendix C - Certificate of Performance ● I, Scott George, certify that: ● I have personally inspected the subject trees of this report and I have stated my findings accurately; ● That the analysis, opinions, and conclusion stated herein are my own; ● That my analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed and this report has been prepared according to commonly accepted arboricultural practices and standards; ● That no one provided significant professional assistance to the author, unless specified herein; ● That my compensation is not dependent upon the reporting of a predetermined conclusion or opinion that favors my cause, my client, or any other party; ● I have no current or prospective interest in the tree or the property that is interest or bias with this report and have no personal the subject of respect to the party(ies) involved. further certify that I Consulting Arborists (ASCA) and the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA). I am a member in good standing of the American Society of Scott E. George February 24, 2022 Tree Condition Report for Lot 876, 2715 Long Bow Trail, Austin, TX 78734 Page 9 E-2/16February 24, 2022 Mr. Jon Kaplan C.P.B.D. - 44-752 ICC Combination Inspector - 9061592 Urban Building Services of Texas LLC 214 Sailors Run Lakeway, TX 78734 Re: Lot 877 2717 Long Bow Trail Austin, TX 78734 Dear Mr. Kaplan, This letter is in response to your request for a Tree Protection Plan for Lot 877 on Longbow Trail, TX 78734. I visited the site on February 22, 2022. I met with you to review the design plans and develop a tree condition report. My report is attached. Please feel free to contact me regarding specification details or with any other questions. Respectfully, Scott E. George Austin Beautiful Trees - President American Society of Consulting Arborists – Registered Consulting Arborist # 752 International Society of Arboriculture Certified Arborist TX #3996-A Risk Assessment Qualified Arborist Oak Wilt Risk Assessment Qualified Arborist Wildfire Risk Assessment Qualified Arborist Tree Condition Report for Lot 877, 2717 Long Bow Trail, Austin, TX 78734 Page 1 E-2/17Tree Condition Report - Lot 877 February 24, 2022 Prepared for: Property Address: 2717 Long Bow Trail Austin, Texas 78734 Jon Kaplan Tree: Live oak (Quercus fusiformis) Location: southwest side of lot closest to Long Bow Trail Tree Tag Number: T13 DBH: 21” Tree: Live oak (Quercus fusiformis) Location: east side of lot Tree Tag Number: T23 DBH: 14” I did not observe obvious defects in the tree and consider the tree in good condition. Live oak number T23 is indicated as a single twin trunked tree, and the survey shows that each trunk measured 15.” When I reviewed live oak number T23, I did not observe that the trees shared any common tissue, included bark, or juncture above grade. I performed minor excavation to the area between the trees, and still did not observe any common tissue (see Appendix A, Photos 1, 2, and 3). I measured each of these individual trees as 14” dbh and as such, they are not of protected size. Tree: Live oak (Quercus fusiformis) Location: east side of lot Tree Tag Number: T24 DBH: 21” I observed a decay column in the trunk and basal area of the tree and a fungal fruiting body ordinarily associated with heartwood decay (see Appendix A, Photo 4). The tree has numerous long branches and poor form. The overall condition of this tree is fair to poor. Tree: Live oak (Quercus fusiformis) Location: northeast side of lot Tree Tag Number: T25 DBH: 20.75” measured from the high side of grade surrounding the tree Tree Condition Report for Lot 877, 2717 Long Bow Trail, Austin, TX 78734 Page 2 E-2/18I observed several co-dominant branch junctures in this tree, and in general, the tree had fair form (see Appendix A, Photos 5 and 6). While I observed several leaning and over-extended branches, the canopy appeared to be evenly distributed (see Appendix A, Photo 7). The overall condition of the tree was good. Proper pruning can begin to correct form issues and should be within the protection limits of no more than 25% removed in a calendar year. I observed that the remaining surveyed trees on Lot 877 were not of protected size. Please feel to contact me with questions regarding this report. Respectfully, Scott E. George Austin Beautiful Trees - President American Society of Consulting Arborists – Registered Consulting Arborist # 752 International Society of Arboriculture Certified Arborist TX #3996-A Risk Assessment Qualified Arborist Oak Wilt Risk Assessment Qualified Arborist Wildfire Risk Assessment Qualified ArboristMember Tree Condition Report for Lot 877, 2717 Long Bow Trail, Austin, TX 78734 Page 3 E-2/19Appendix A - Photos Photos 1-3 - Live oak (Quercus fusiformis) Location: east side of lot Tree Tag Number: T23 DBH: 14” Note: Live oak number T23 is indicated as a single twin trunked tree, and the survey shows that each trunk measured 15.” When I reviewed live oak number T23, I did not observe that the trees shared any common tissue, included bark, or juncture above I performed minor excavation to the area between the trees, and still did not grade. observe any common tissue. I measured each of these individual trees as 14” dbh and as such, they are not of protected size. Tree Condition Report for Lot 877, 2717 Long Bow Trail, Austin, TX 78734 Page 4 E-2/20Appendix A - Photos Photo 4 - Live oak (Quercus fusiformis) Location: east side of lot Tree Tag Number: T24 DBH: 21” Note: Decay column in the trunk and basal area of the tree and a fungal fruiting body ordinarily associated with heartwood decay. The tree has numerous long branches and poor form. The overall condition of this tree is fair to poor. Tree Condition Report for Lot 877, 2717 Long Bow Trail, Austin, TX 78734 Page 5 E-2/21Appendix A - Photos Photos 5-6 - Live oak (Quercus fusiformis) Location: northeast side of lot Tree Tag Number: T25 DBH: 20.75” measured from the high side of grade surrounding the tree Note: I observed several co-dominant branch junctures in this tree, and in general, the tree had fair form. Tree Condition Report for Lot 877, 2717 Long Bow Trail, Austin, TX 78734 Page 6 E-2/22Appendix A - Photos Photo 7 - Live oak (Quercus fusiformis) Location: northeast side of lot Tree Tag Number: T25 DBH: 20.75” measured from the high side of grade surrounding the tree Note: While I observed several leaning and over-extended branches, the canopy appeared to be evenly distributed. The overall condition of the tree was good. Proper pruning can begin to correct form issues and should be within the protection limits of no more than 25% removed in a calendar year. Tree Condition Report for Lot 877, 2717 Long Bow Trail, Austin, TX 78734 Page 7 E-2/23Appendix B - Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 1. Loss or alteration of any part of this report invalidates the entire report. 2. The report and the opinions expressed herein represent the professional opinion of the author. The fee generated from this report is not contingent upon any prior or future outcome or subsequent event. Any future work done by this author related to this tree or other trees of the client shall be billed separately from this work. 3. Possession of therefore, does not this report or a copy, imply the right of publication or use for any purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed, without the prior, expressed written or verbal consent of the author. 4. The author does not have any financial or business associations with any commercial arborist. Any future work done by a commercial arborist shall be performed via a separate contract between the client and the arborist. 5. Care has been taken to obtain information from reliable sources. The author cannot guarantee accuracy nor be responsible for the information provided by others. 6. Unless otherwise specified, the information contained in this report covers only those items that were examined and reflects the condition of those items at the time of inspection. The inspection is limited as stated in the text of this report. There is no warranty or guarantee that problems or deficiencies of the tree in question will not arise in the future. 7. The author and Austin Beautiful Trees cannot guarantee the health or safety of any tree, regardless of any examination given or care treatments recommended trees sometimes die and/or and/or employed. Even with the best of care, branches fail. Therefore, the author and Austin Beautiful Trees make no such guarantees and are at no fault if such occurs. 8. The author shall not be required to give testimony or attend court by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services as described in a subsequent contract for services. Tree Condition Report for Lot 877, 2717 Long Bow Trail, Austin, TX 78734 Page 8 E-2/24Appendix C - Certificate of Performance ● I, Scott George, certify that: ● I have personally inspected the subject trees of this report and I have stated my findings accurately; ● That the analysis, opinions, and conclusion stated herein are my own; ● That my analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed and this report has been prepared according to commonly accepted arboricultural practices and standards; ● That no one provided significant professional assistance to the author, unless specified herein; ● That my compensation is not dependent upon the reporting of a predetermined conclusion or opinion that favors my cause, my client, or any other party; ● I have no current or prospective interest in the tree or the property that is interest or bias with this report and have no personal the subject of respect to the party(ies) involved. further certify that I Consulting Arborists (ASCA) and the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA). I am a member in good standing of the American Society of Scott E. George February 24, 2022 Tree Condition Report for Lot 877, 2717 Long Bow Trail, Austin, TX 78734 Page 9 E-2/25E-2/26E-2/27E-2/28E-2/29E-2/30E-2/31E-2/32CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet E-4 DATE: Monday February 14, 2022 CASE NUMBER: C15-2022-0011 ___Y____Thomas Ates ___Y____Brooke Bailey ___Y____Jessica Cohen ___Y____Melissa Hawthorne ___Y____Barbara Mcarthur ___-____Rahm McDaniel OUT ___Y____Darryl Pruett ___Y____Agustina Rodriguez ___Y____Richard Smith ___Y____Michael Von Ohlen ___-____Nicholl Wade OUT ___Y____Kelly Blume (Alternate) ___Y____Carrie Waller (Alternate) ___-____Marcel Gutierrez-Garza (Alternate) APPLICANT: Jonathan Kaplan OWNER: David Scott Kosch ADDRESS: 2715 LONG BOW TRL increase the maximum impervious cover on a slope with a gradient of 15 VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2-551 (Lake Austin District Regulations) (C) (3) (a) increase the maximum impervious cover on a slope with a gradient of 15 percent or less from 35 percent (allowed) to 40 percent (requested) (b) percent and not more than 25 percent from 10 percent (allowed) to 40 percent (requested) (c) than 25 percent and not more than 35 percent from 5 percent (allowed) to 40 percent (requested) (d) 35 percent to 40 percent (requested), in order to complete a Single-Family residence in a “LA”, Lake Austin zoning district. increase the maximum impervious cover on a slope gradient greater than increase the maximum impervious cover on a slope with a gradient of more 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 November 17, 1969 E-2/33(E) This subsection specifies additional development standards based on slope gradient in a Lake Austin (LA) district. (2) On a slope with a gradient of more than 35 percent, development is prohibited except for the construction of a fence, driveway, road or utility that cannot be reasonably placed elsewhere, or a non- mechanized pedestrian facility, such as a foot path, sidewalk, or stairs. BOARD’S DECISION: The public hearing was closed by Madam Chair Jessica Cohen, Board Member Michael Von Ohlen motions to postpone to March 14, 2022; Board Member Melissa Hawthorne seconds on a 11-0 vote; POSTPONED TO MARCH 14, 2022. 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 forE-2/34From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments: Importance: Jon Kaplan Ramirez, Elaine Ramirez, Diana; Re: REMINDER: Mar. 14, 2022 Advanced Packet deadline Thursday, February 24, 2022 7:04:54 PM 1.png 2.png High *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Good Evening Elaine, We are doing our best to get all the necessary information for our case but due to all of the pushback and questions that we got from the BOA and the two people contesting it. We request that we can push our hearing the the April hearing date to be able to provide the additional information that the board has requested. Regards Jon Kaplan C.P.B.D. - 44-752 ICC Combination Inspector - 9061592 Urban Building Services of Texas LLC www.ubstx. P: (512) 768-2789 EXT: 501 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this email message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information and may be legally protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or their agent, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply email and then delete this message and any attachments. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, copying, or storage of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited. ---- On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 12:00:08 -0600 Ramirez, Elaine <Elaine.Ramirez@austintexas.gov> wrote ---- Good afternoon Applicants on the Mon. March 14th, 2022 BOA mtg. Agenda, Please read this entire e-mail E-2/35​ ​