C-3 C16-2022-0002 GRANTED DS W CONDS — original pdf

Backup

CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet C-3 DATE: April 11, 2022 CASE NUMBER: C16-2022-0002 ___Y____Thomas Ates ___Y____Brooke Bailey ___Y____Jessica Cohen ___Y____Melissa Hawthorne ___-____Barbara Mcarthur (OUT) ___-____Rahm McDaniel (OUT) ___Y____Darryl Pruett ___Y____Agustina Rodriguez ___Y____Richard Smith ___Y____Michael Von Ohlen ___Y____Nicholl Wade ___Y____Kelly Blume (Alternate) ___-____Carrie Waller (Alternate) ___Y____Marcel Gutierrez-Garza (Alternate) APPLICANT: Clay Hardman OWNER: Campus Investors Austin, LP ADDRESS: 2323 SAN ANTONIO 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) (H) to allow for illumination of a blade sign in order to provide signage for The Castilian in a “CS-1-NP & CS-NP”, General Commercial Services - Neighborhood Plan zoning district. (West University Neighborhood Plan) Note: The Land Development Code sign regulations 25-10-133 University Neighborhood Overlay Zoning Districts Signs (H) states a sign may not be illuminated or contain electronic images or moving parts BOARD’S DECISION: March 14, 2022 APPLICANT NO SHOW -Board Member Brooke Bailey motions to postpone to April 11, 2022; Board Member Melissa Hawthorne seconds on a 10-0 vote; POSTPONED TO APRIL 11, 2022. April 11, 2022 The public hearing was closed by Madam Chair Jessica Cohen, Board Member Michael Von Ohlen motions to approve with conditions to dim the lights from 11PM to 7AM; Board Member Melissa Hawthorne seconds on a 11-0 vote; GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS TO DIM THE LIGHTS FROM 11PM TO 7AM. 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: applicant would like to add internal illumination to an existing blade sign that has been installed for years OR, 2. The granting of this variance will not have a substantially adverse impact upon neighboring properties, because: N/A OR, 3. The granting of this variance will not substantially conflict with the stated purposes of this sign ordinance, because: N/A 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: granting this variance should not be considered a special privilege as many of the neighbors have internally illuminated signage similar to what is being asked for. ______________________________ Elaine Ramirez Executive Liaison Jessica Cohen Madam Chair ____________________________ for