ITEM02 C15-2024-0004 DENIED DS — original pdf

Backup

CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet ITEM02 DATE: Monday March 11, 2024 CASE NUMBER: C15-2024-0004 ___Y___Thomas Ates (D1) ___-___VACANT (D2) ___Y___Jessica Cohen (D3) ___Y___Yung-ju Kim (D4) ___Y___Melissa Hawthorne (D5) ___Y___Jeffery Bowen (D6) ___Y___Janel Venzant (D7) ___Y___Margaret Shahrestani (D8) ___Y___Brian Poteet (D9) ___Y___Michael Von Ohlen (D10) ___Y___Marcel Gutierrez-Garza (M) ___-___Kelly Blume (Alternate) (M) ___-___Suzanne Valentine (Alternate) (M) ___-___VACANT (Alternate) (M) APPLICANT: Leah Peraldo OWNER: Paige Mycoskie ADDRESS: 3200 STRATFORD HILLS LN VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting the following variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2-899 (Fences as Accessory Uses) (F) (1) to increase the height permitted from six (6) feet (required) to twelve (12) feet (requested), in order to erect a fence on west property line in an “PUD”, Planned Unit Development zoning district. Note: The Land Development Code 25-2-899 Fences as Accessory Uses (F) a solid fence along a property line may be constructed to a maximum height of eight feet if each owner of property that adjoins a section of the fence that exceeds a height of six feet files written consent to the construction of the fence with the building official; and (1) there is a change in grade of at least two feet within 50 feet of the boundary between adjoining properties; or (2) a structure, including a telephone junction box, exists that is reasonably likely to enable a child to climb over a six foot fence and gain access to a hazardous situation, including a swimming pool. BOARD’S DECISION: The public hearing was closed by Madam Chair Jessica Cohen, Vice-Chair Melissa Hawthorne’s motion to deny; Board member Jeffery Bowen second no vote was taken; a substitute motion by Chair Jessica Cohen to Approve, Chair Jessica Cohen withdraws her substitute motion; original motion to Deny by Vice Chair Melissa Hawthorne, Board member Jeffery Bowen second on 10-0 votes; DENIED. 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 for