E-1 C15-2022-0042 DENIED DS — original pdf

Backup

CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet E-1 CASE NUMBER: C15-2022-0042 DATE: May 9, 2022 ___Y____Thomas Ates ___-____Brooke Bailey OUT ___Y____Jessica Cohen ___Y____Melissa Hawthorne ___Y____Barbara Mcarthur ___-____Rahm McDaniel OUT ___Y____Darryl Pruett ___Y____Agustina Rodriguez ___-____Richard Smith OUT ___Y____Michael Von Ohlen ___-____Nicholl Wade OUT ___Y____Kelly Blume (Alternate) ___Y____Carrie Waller (Alternate) ___Y____Marcel Gutierrez-Garza (Alternate) APPLICANT: Felicia Foster OWNER: Valentin Bohorov ADDRESS: 2212 TRAILSIDE DR VARIANCE REQUESTED: The appellant has filed an appeal challenging staff’s interpretation of Chapter 25-2, Subchapter F (Residential Design and Compatibility Standards) of the Land Development Code in connection with disapproval of a permit application for construction of a single-family home at the above-referenced address. The primary basis of the appeal is calculation of gross floor area for a “habitable attic” under the Land Development Code, in particular, requirements in Section 3.3 of Subchapter F. The appellant contends that staff incorrectly applies provisions related to the calculation of ceiling height for exempt space as applied to a two-story residence in an “SF-3”, Single-Family zoning district. Note: Subchapter F: Residential Design and Compatibility Standards, Article 3 Definitions and Measurement, 3.3 Gross Floor Area, 3.3.3 Porches, basements, and attics that meet the following requirements shall be excluded from the calculation of gross floor area: (C) A habitable portion of an attic if: 1. 2. 3. 4. The roof above it is not a flat or mansard roof and has a slope of 3 to 12 or greater; It is fully contained within the roof structure; It has only one floor; It does not extend beyond the footprint of the floors below: Fifty percent or more of the area has a ceiling height of seven feet or less. It is the highest habitable portion of the building, or a section of the building, and adds 5. no additional mass to the structure; and 6. BOARD’S DECISION: BOA MEETING MAY 9, 2022. The public hearing was closed by Madam Chair Jessica Cohen, Board Member Michael Von Ohlen motions to deny the appeal request and uphold City staff’s interpretation; Board Member Melissa Hawthorne seconds on a 10-0 vote; APPEAL DENIED AND UPHOLD CITY STAFF’S INTERPRETATION. 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 Madam Chair Diana Ramirez for