ITEM02 C15-2024-0015 ADV PACKET JULY8 PART2 — original pdf

Backup

ITEM02/1PROPOSED INUNDATED AREA 2,206 SF +/- PROPOSED SHORELINE SETBACK AREA 3,943 SF +/- PROPOSED NET BUILDING AREA 9,375 SF +/- PROPOSED ZONING SETBACKS AREA 6,334 SF +/- 1 1 3 3 6 6 . . 1 1 8 8 ' ' 10' S I D E S E T B A C K 492.8' WOOD BULKHEAD S H O R E L I N E S E T B A C K 2 5 ' 173.8' 173.8' LAKE AUSTIN WOOD DECK STONE PATIO 4 9 2 . 8 ' R E T W A L L SHIN OAK 23" 1,662 SF MAPLE 32" 3,217 SF SHIN OAK 16" 2 . 8 ' 9 4 CONCEPTUAL/ PROPOSED 5,500 SF +/- HVAC (2 STORIES) EXISTING (SOLID) PROPOSED (DASHED) 1 1 1 1 5 5 0 0 . . 1 1 ' ' ELM 18" 10' S I D E S E T B A C K 7 6 ' F R O N T S E T B A C K 4 4 0 0 ' ' 2 0 ' 9 7 . 3 9 ' R E D U C E D F R O N T S E T B A C K 2 0 ' MAGNOLIA 30" 2,828 SF S E P T I C = 3 0 0 0 S F E D GE O F CO NCR E T E RO CK C L I FF D R I V E PROPOSED SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 0' 5' 10' 20' 40' LEGEND WATER SHORELINE SETBACK PROPERTY LINE SETBACK BUILDABLE AREA CRZ AND SEPTIC 21,858 2,206 6,184 13,468 4,714 21,858 2,206 6,184 7,761 5,707 26% 21,858 2,206 3,943 15,709 5,498 21,858 2,206 3,943 6,334 9,375 43% 0 0 (2,241) 2,241 784 0 0 (2,241) (1,427) 3,668 E D G E O F A S P H A L T TOTAL LOT less Inundated less shoreline setback NET SITE AREA (NSA) IC Allowed = 35% (all land is within 0-15% slope and is alloted 35% max IC) BUILDABLE AREA (SF) N SUMMER / WINTER SUN ANGLES TOTAL LOT less Inundated less shoreline setback less zoning setbacks BUILDABLE AREA As % of Lot 1 7 6 . 2 1 ' IMPERVIOUS COVER (SF) EXISTING PROPOSED CHANGE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION F F I L C K C O R 6 0 3 1 6 4 7 8 7 X T N I T S U A , D R F F I L C K C O R 6 0 3 1 ISSUE JOB #: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: EC CR IMPERVIOUS COVER PROPOSED SP1.08 ITEM02/2PROPOSED INUNDATED AREA 2,206 SF +/- PROPOSED SHORELINE SETBACK AREA 3,943 SF +/- PROPOSED NET BUILDING AREA 9,375 SF +/- PROPOSED ZONING SETBACKS AREA 6,334 SF +/- 1 1 3 3 6 6 . . 1 1 8 8 ' ' 10' S I D E S E T B A C K 492.8' WOOD BULKHEAD S H O R E L I N E S E T B A C K 2 5 ' 173.8' 173.8' LAKE AUSTIN WOOD DECK STONE PATIO 4 9 2 . 8 ' R E T W A L L SHIN OAK 23" 1,662 SF MAPLE 32" 3,217 SF SHIN OAK 16" 2 . 8 ' 9 4 CONCEPTUAL/ PROPOSED 5,500 SF +/- HVAC (2 STORIES) 1 1 1 1 5 5 0 0 . . 1 1 ' ' ELM 18" 10' S I D E S E T B A C K 7 6 ' F R O N T S E T B A C K 4 4 0 0 ' ' 2 0 ' 9 7 . 3 9 ' R E D U C E D F R O N T S E T B A C K 2 0 ' MAGNOLIA 30" 2,828 SF S E P T I C = 3 0 0 0 S F E D GE O F CO NCR E T E RO CK C L I FF D R I V E PROPOSED SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 0' 5' 10' 20' 40' LEGEND WATER SHORELINE SETBACK PROPERTY LINE SETBACK BUILDABLE AREA CRZ AND SEPTIC 21,858 2,206 6,184 13,468 4,714 21,858 2,206 6,184 7,761 5,707 26% 21,858 2,206 3,943 15,709 5,498 21,858 2,206 3,943 6,334 9,375 43% 0 0 (2,241) 2,241 784 0 0 (2,241) (1,427) 3,668 E D G E O F A S P H A L T TOTAL LOT less Inundated less shoreline setback NET SITE AREA (NSA) IC Allowed = 35% (all land is within 0-15% slope and is alloted 35% max IC) BUILDABLE AREA (SF) N SUMMER / WINTER SUN ANGLES TOTAL LOT less Inundated less shoreline setback less zoning setbacks BUILDABLE AREA As % of Lot 1 7 6 . 2 1 ' IMPERVIOUS COVER (SF) EXISTING PROPOSED CHANGE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION F F I L C K C O R 6 0 3 1 6 4 7 8 7 X T N I T S U A , D R F F I L C K C O R 6 0 3 1 ISSUE JOB #: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: EC CR IMPERVIOUS COVER PROPOSED SP1.08 ITEM02/33D VIEW FROM NORTHWEST SCALE: 3D VIEW FRON NORTHEAST SCALE: 3D VIEW FROM SOUTHWEST SCALE: 3D VIEW FROM SOUTHEAST SCALE: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION F F I L C K C O R 6 0 3 1 6 4 7 8 7 X T N I T S U A , D R F F I L C K C O R 6 0 3 1 ISSUE JOB #: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: EC CR 3D PERSPECTIVES SP1.10 ITEM02/4Sec. 211.008. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. (a) The governing body of a municipality may provide for the appointment of a board of adjustment. In the regulations adopted under this subchapter, the governing body may authorize the board of adjustment, in appropriate cases and subject to appropriate conditions and safeguards, to make special exceptions to the terms of the zoning ordinance that are consistent with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance and in accordance with any applicable rules contained in the ordinance. (b) A board of adjustment must consist of at least five members to be appointed for terms of two years. The governing body must provide the procedure for appointment. The governing body may authorize each member of the governing body, including the mayor, to appoint one member to the board. The appointing authority may remove a board member for cause, as found by the appointing authority, on a written charge after a public hearing. A vacancy on the board shall be filled for the unexpired term. (c) The governing body, by charter or ordinance, may provide for the appointment of alternate board members to serve in the absence of one or more regular members when requested to do so by the mayor or city manager. An alternate member serves for the same period as a regular member and is subject to removal in the same manner as a regular member. A vacancy among the alternate members is filled in the same manner as a vacancy among the regular members. (d) Each case before the board of adjustment must be heard by at least 75 percent of the members. (e) The board by majority vote shall adopt rules in accordance with any ordinance adopted under this subchapter and with the approval of the governing body. Meetings of the board are held at the call of the presiding officer and at other times as determined by the board. The presiding officer or acting presiding officer may administer oaths and compel the attendance ITEM02/5of witnesses. All meetings of the board shall be open to the public. (f) The board shall keep minutes of its proceedings that indicate the vote of each member on each question or the fact that a member is absent or fails to vote. The board shall keep records of its examinations and other official actions. The minutes and records shall be filed immediately in the board's office and are public records. (g) The governing body of a Type A general-law municipality by ordinance may grant the members of the governing body the authority to act as a board of adjustment under this chapter. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 126, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1993; Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 724, Sec. 1, eff. Aug. 28, 1995; Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 363, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1997. Amended by: Acts 2019, 86th Leg., R.S., Ch. 820 (H.B. 2497), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2019. Sec. 211.009. AUTHORITY OF BOARD. (a) The board of adjustment may: (1) hear and decide an appeal that alleges error in an order, requirement, decision, or determination made by an administrative official in the enforcement of this subchapter or an ordinance adopted under this subchapter; (2) hear and decide special exceptions to the terms of a zoning ordinance when the ordinance requires the board to do so; (3) authorize in specific cases a variance from the terms of a zoning ordinance if the variance is not contrary to the public interest and, due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in unnecessary ITEM02/6hardship, and so that the spirit of the ordinance is observed and substantial justice is done; and (4) hear and decide other matters authorized by an ordinance adopted under this subchapter. (b) In exercising its authority under Subsection (a)(1), the board may reverse or affirm, in whole or in part, or modify the administrative official's order, requirement, decision, or determination from which an appeal is taken and make the correct order, requirement, decision, or determination, and for that purpose the board has the same authority as the administrative official. hardship: (b-1) In exercising its authority under Subsection (a)(3), the board may consider the following as grounds to determine whether compliance with the ordinance as applied to a structure that is the subject of the appeal would result in unnecessary (1) the financial cost of compliance is greater than 50 percent of the appraised value of the structure as shown on the most recent appraisal roll certified to the assessor for the municipality under Section 26.01, Tax Code; (2) compliance would result in a loss to the lot on which the structure is located of at least 25 percent of the area on which development may physically occur; (3) compliance would result in the structure not being in compliance with a requirement of a municipal ordinance, building code, or other requirement; (4) compliance would result in the unreasonable encroachment on an adjacent property or easement; or (5) the municipality considers the structure to be a nonconforming structure. the board is necessary to: (c) The concurring vote of 75 percent of the members of (1) reverse an order, requirement, decision, or determination of an administrative official; ITEM02/7(2) decide in favor of an applicant on a matter on which the board is required to pass under a zoning ordinance; (3) authorize a variation from the terms of a zoning Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 126, Sec. 2, eff. Sept. 1, 1993; Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 724, Sec. 2, eff. Aug. 28, or ordinance. 1995. Amended by: Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., Ch. 318 (H.B. 1475), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2021. Sec. 211.010. APPEAL TO BOARD. (a) Except as provided by Subsection (e), any of the following persons may appeal to the board of adjustment a decision made by an administrative official that is not related to a specific application, address, or project: (1) (2) a person aggrieved by the decision; or any officer, department, board, or bureau of the municipality affected by the decision. (a-1) Except as provided by Subsection (e), any of the following persons may appeal to the board of adjustment a decision made by an administrative official that is related to a specific application, address, or project: a person who: (1) (A) filed the application that is the subject of the decision; (B) is the owner or representative of the owner of the property that is the subject of the decision; or (C) is aggrieved by the decision and is the owner of real property within 200 feet of the property that is the subject of the decision; or (2) any officer, department, board, or bureau of the municipality affected by the decision. ITEM02/8(b) The appellant must file with the board and the official from whom the appeal is taken a notice of appeal specifying the grounds for the appeal. The appeal must be filed not later than the 20th day after the date the decision is made. On receiving the notice, the official from whom the appeal is taken shall immediately transmit to the board all the papers constituting the record of the action that is appealed. (c) An appeal stays all proceedings in furtherance of the action that is appealed unless the official from whom the appeal is taken certifies in writing to the board facts supporting the official's opinion that a stay would cause imminent peril to life or property. In that case, the proceedings may be stayed only by a restraining order granted by the board or a court of record on application, after notice to the official, if due cause is shown. (d) The board shall set a reasonable time for the appeal hearing and shall give public notice of the hearing and due notice to the parties in interest. A party may appear at the appeal hearing in person or by agent or attorney. The board shall decide the appeal at the next meeting for which notice can be provided following the hearing and not later than the 60th day after the date the appeal is filed. (e) A member of the governing body of the municipality who serves on the board of adjustment under Section 211.008(g) may not bring an appeal under this section. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. Amended by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 363, Sec. 2, eff. Sept. 1, 1997. Amended by: Acts 2019, 86th Leg., R.S., Ch. 820 (H.B. 2497), Sec. 2, eff. September 1, 2019. ITEM02/9TITLE 25. - LAND DEVELOPMENT. CHAPTER 25-1. - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURES. ARTICLE 7. APPEALS, VARIANCES, SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS, AND ADJUSTMENTS. ARTICLE 7. APPEALS, VARIANCES, SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS, AND ADJUSTMENTS. Division 1. Appeals. § 25-1-181 STANDING TO APPEAL. (A) A person has standing to appeal a decision if: (1) the person is an interested party or has standing to appeal under applicable provisions of state law; and (2) a provision of this title or state law identifies the decision as one that may be appealed by that person. (B) A body holding a public hearing on an appeal shall determine whether a person has standing to appeal the decision. Source: Section 13-1-250; Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 030828-65; Ord. 031211-11; Ord. No. 20230831-141 , Pt. 15, 9-11- 23. § 25-1-182 INITIATING AN APPEAL. An interested party or a person who has standing to appeal under applicable provisions of state law may initiate an appeal by filing a notice of appeal with the responsible director or building official, as applicable, not later than: the 14th day after the date of the decision of a board or commission; or the 20th day after an administrative decision; or for an appeal authorized under state law, the date specified by state law. Source: Section 13-1-251(a); Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 031211-11; Ord. No. 20230831-141 , Pt. 16, 9-11-23. § 25-1-183 INFORMATION REQUIRED IN NOTICE OF APPEAL. The notice of appeal must be on a form prescribed by the responsible director or building official and must include: the name, address, and telephone number of the appellant; the name of the applicant, if the appellant is not the applicant; the decision being appealed; the date of the decision; a description of the appellant's status as an interested party; and the reasons the appellant believes the decision does not comply with the requirements of this title. Source: Section 13-1-251(a); Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 010329-18; Ord. 031211-11. Austin, Texas, Land Development Code (Supp. No. 164) Created: 2024-04-02 12:54:39 [EST] Page 1 of 9 (1) (2) (3) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) ITEM02/10§ 25-1-184 NOTICE TO APPLICANT CONCERNING INTERESTED PARTY. The responsible director shall notify an applicant in writing if there is an interested party to an administrative decision. Source: Section 13-1-251(b); Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 010329-18; Ord. 031211-11. § 25-1-185 NOTICE TO PRESIDING OFFICER AND APPLICANT. On receipt of a notice of appeal or an amendment of a notice, the responsible director or building official shall promptly notify the presiding officer of the body to which the appeal is made and, if the applicant is not the appellant, the applicant. Source: Section 3-1-253(a); Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 010329-18; Ord. 031211-11. § 25-1-186 MEETING TO RESOLVE ISSUES. If requested by an interested party, the responsible director shall schedule a meeting to discuss and attempt to resolve the issues raised by an appeal of an administrative decision. The responsible director shall notify all interested parties of a meeting scheduled under this section. All interested parties may attend the meeting. Source: Section 13-1-251(b); Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 010329-18; Ord. 031211-11. § 25-1-187 DEVELOPMENT NOT PERMITTED DURING APPEAL. (A) Development under a site plan may not occur during the time period during which an appeal of the site plan may be initiated. (B) An approved plan or permit is suspended on the timely filing of an appeal of the plan or permit. (C) Development affected by an appeal may not occur pending the final disposition of the appeal. Source: Section 13-1-252; Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 031211-11. A public hearing on an appeal shall be scheduled for the first available meeting for which notice of the § 25-1-188 SCHEDULING OF PUBLIC HEARING. hearing can be timely provided. Source: Section 13-1-253(b); Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 031211-11. § 25-1-189 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING. (A) (B) (C) The responsible director shall give notice under Section 25-1-132(B) (Notice of Public Hearing) of a public hearing on an appeal to the council. Except as provided in Subsection (C), the responsible director shall give notice under Section 25-1-132(A) (Notice of Public Hearing) of a public hearing on an appeal to a board or commission. The responsible director shall give notice under Chapter 25-12 (Technical Codes) and applicable state law of a public hearing on an appeal to a board or commission created by Chapter 25-12 (Technical Codes) or having jurisdiction over regulations contained in Chapter 25-12 (Technical Codes). Created: 2024-04-02 12:54:38 [EST] (Supp. No. 164) Page 2 of 9 ITEM02/11Source: Section 13-1-253(b); Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 010329-18; Ord. 031211-11. § 25-1-190 APPELLATE BURDEN. The appellant must establish that the decision being appealed is contrary to applicable law or regulations. Source: Section 13-1-254; Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 031211-11. § 25-1-191 CONDUCT OF PUBLIC HEARING. (A) Before opening a hearing, a body hearing an appeal shall decide preliminary issues raised by the parties, including whether to postpone or continue the hearing and whether the appellant has standing to appeal. (B) A public hearing on an appeal shall proceed in the following order: a report from City staff; a presentation by the appellant; comment by persons supporting the appeal; comment by persons opposing the appeal; and a rebuttal by the appellant. Source: Section 13-1-255; Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 031211-11. § 25-1-192 POWER TO ACT ON APPEAL. A body hearing an appeal may, in accordance with the requirements of this title, exercise the power of the official or body whose decision is appealed. A decision may be upheld, modified, or reversed. Source: Section 13-1-256; Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 031211-11. Division 2. Administrative Decisions. § 25-1-197 USE DETERMINATIONS. (A) (B) (C) This section applies to a formal determination by the director under Section 25-2-2 (Determination of Use Classification) regarding the appropriate classification of a land use that is not specifically classified under Chapter 25-2, Subchapter A (Zoning Uses). Except as otherwise provided by this section, a use determination may be requested at any time by filing an application on a form provided by the director and by paying a fee established by separate ordinance. In addition to any additional information required by the director, an application for a use determination must: state whether the determination is requested in connection with a specific project, and if so, reference the application number; if the determination is not related to a specific development application, state whether it is requested for a particular address; (Supp. No. 164) Page 3 of 9 Created: 2024-04-02 12:54:39 [EST] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (1) (2) ITEM02/12(3) (4) (1) (2) (4) (1) (2) (1) (2) (3) describe the land use(s) for which a determination is sought; and include any information that the applicant requests the director to consider in making the use determination, including but not limited to an explanation of the similarities, if any, of the use to other classified uses. (D) A use determination for a project that is subject to a pending development application is a "project use determination" and is subject to the requirements of this subsection. The director shall determine whether a site plan application requires a use determination under Section 25-2-2 (Determination of Use Classification) within the applicable review period required by Section 25-5-114 (Time Periods for Determination; Notice) or Section 25-5-143 (Director's Report). If the director determines that a use determination is required, the applicant must submit a request for a project use determination under Subsection (B) before the application expires. (3) Within 14 days after receiving a request for a project use determination, the director shall issue a determination under Subsection (F) of this section and provide notice of the determination under Section 25-1-133(B) (Notice of Applications and Administrative Decisions). Any person entitled to notice of a use determination under Section 25-1-133(B) (Notice of Applications and Administrative Decisions) may appeal the decision to the Board of Adjustment no later than 14 days after notice is provided. (E) A request for a use determination that is not associated with a pending development application is a "non- project use determination" and is subject to the requirements of this subsection. A non-project use determination may be requested by anyone, at any time, for a use that requires a determination under Section 25-2-2 (Use Determination). In addition to the requirements in Subsection (C) of this section, an application for a non-project use determination must include: any information requested by the director regarding the nature of the use for which a determination is requested, including the size, scale, or intensity of the use; and a specific address, if the applicant intends to rely on the determination in connection with a development application. (3) Within 14 days after receiving a request for a non-project use determination, the director shall provide notice of the determination: to the applicant and to registered environmental and neighborhood organizations, if the determination is not associated with a specific address; or to all parties entitled to notice under Section 25-1-133(A) (Notice of Applications and Administrative Decisions), if the determination is associated with a particular address. (4) Any person entitled to notice of a non-project use determination under this subsection may appeal the determination to the Board of Adjustment within 14 days. (F) The director may not make a decision on an application that is dependent upon a use determination: until after the period for appealing the use determination to the Board of Adjustment has run; if the use determination is appealed to the Board of Adjustment, until after the board has decided the appeal; or if a decision of the Board of Adjustment is appealed to district court, until after the district court has decided the appeal. (a) (b) (a) (b) (Supp. No. 164) Page 4 of 9 Created: 2024-04-02 12:54:39 [EST] ITEM02/13(1) (2) (3) (4) (1) (2) (1) (2) (G) Unless a use determination is reversed or modified by the Board of Adjustment, the director shall follow the determination in reviewing subsequent requests for a determination on the same or substantially similar land uses. (H) A use determination is not subject to further notification or appeal under this section if it has been considered by the Board of Adjustment in response to an appeal or notice of the determination was previously provided under this section and no appeal was filed. (I) A use determination issued by the director under this section must: include all information required under Section 25-1-133(C) (Notice of Applications and Administrative Decisions); state the director's determination regarding how the use is classified under existing use regulations; explain the factors considered by the director in making the determination under Section 25-2-2 (Determination of Use Classification), including the similarity of a use to other classified land uses; and describe any special characteristics of the use determination, including limitations on the size, scale, location or intensity, of the use. (J) A use determination issued under this section may not be used to render decisions interpreting site development regulations. Source: Ord. 20120426-122. Division 3. Variances and Special Exceptions. § 25-1-211 APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION. (A) A person may file an application for a variance or a special exception with: the building official for a variance or special exception granted by the Board of Adjustment; or the responsible director for a variance granted by the Land Use Commission or the council. (B) An application may include a request for: variances or special exceptions from regulations applicable to the same site; or similar variances or special exceptions on two or more adjacent parcels with similar characteristics. (C) The building official or responsible director may require that the applicant provide information that the building official or responsible director determines is necessary to evaluate the variance or special exception request. Source: Section 13-1-280; Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 010329-18; Ord. 010607-8; Ord. 031211-11; Ord. 20110526-098. § 25-1-212 REPORT. (A) (B) For an application for a variance or special exception requiring consideration by the Board of Adjustment, the building official shall prepare and file a report with the board not later than the 11th day before the public hearing. For an application for a variance requiring consideration by the Land Use Commission, the responsible director shall prepare and file a report with the Land Use Commission not later than the 11th day before the public hearing. Created: 2024-04-02 12:54:39 [EST] (Supp. No. 164) Page 5 of 9 ITEM02/14(C) (D) (A) (B) (C) The building official shall make a report described in this section available to the public when the report is filed with the Board of Adjustment or Land Use Commission. This subsection applies to an application for a zoning variance or special exception for property zoned as a family residence (SF-3) or more restrictive district. (1) The building official shall waive the application fee if the official determines that the variance or special exception is supported by the notice owners of 80 percent or more of the property located within 300 feet of the property for which the variance is sought. (2) An applicant who seeks a fee waiver must: (a) obtain the signature of each notice owner who supports the variance or special exception, on a form provided by the building official; and (b) submit the completed form to the building official. Source: Section 13-1-281 and 13-1-282; Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 010329-18; Ord. 010607-8; Ord. 031211-11; Ord. 20080110-106; Ord. 20110526-098. § 25-1-213 REVIEW BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD. This section applies to an application for a variance from the requirements of Chapter 25-8, Subchapter A (Water Quality). The Environmental Board shall consider an application for a variance and forward its recommendation to the Land Use Commission. The Land Use Commission shall consider the Environmental Board's recommendation before acting on a variance. Source: Section 13-1-283(b); Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 010607-8; Ord. 031211-11. § 25-1-214 PUBLIC HEARING AND NOTICE. (A) This subsection does not apply to a preliminary plan, plat, or subdivision construction plan. For all other development applications: (1) (2) (1) (2) The Board of Adjustment or Land Use Commission, as applicable, shall hold a public hearing on an application for a variance or special exception not later than the 45th day after the date the application is filed. The building official or responsible director, as applicable, shall give notice under Section 25-1-132(A) (Notice of Public Hearing) of a public hearing on an application for a variance or special exception, and, for a variance or special exception heard by the Board of Adjustment, by posting one or more signs. (B) For an application to replat without vacation of the preceding plat, the director shall give notice under Section 25-1-132(B) (Notice of Public Hearing) if: During the preceding five years any of the area to be platted was limited by an interim or permanent zoning classification to residential use for not more than two residential units per lot; or Any lot in the preceding plan was limited by deed restriction to residential use for not more than two residential units per lot. Source: Section 13-1-283(a); Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 010329-18; Ord. 010607-8; Ord. 031211-11; Ord. 20110526- 098; Ord. No. 20190822-117 , Pt. 14, 9-1-19. (Supp. No. 164) Page 6 of 9 Created: 2024-04-02 12:54:39 [EST] ITEM02/15§ 25-1-215 ACTION ON AN APPLICATION. (A) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, the Board of Adjustment or the Land Use Commission shall act on an application for a variance or special exception not later than the next meeting after the public hearing is closed. (B) The Board of Adjustment or the Land Use Commission may: approve an application for a variance; approve an application for a variance with modifications; or deny an application for a variance. (C) The Board of Adjustment or the Land Use Commission may require that a variance be: (1) (2) (3) (1) (2) (3) revocable; effective for a specified time period; or subject to one or more conditions. (D) The Board of Adjustment may act on a request for a special exception in the manner provided for variances under Subsections (B) and (C) of this section. Source: Section 13-1-284; Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 010607-8; Ord. 031211-11; Ord. 20110526-098. § 25-1-216 EFFECTIVE DATE OF VARIANCE OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION. (A) (B) Except as provided in Subsection (B), a decision on a variance or special exception is effective immediately. If a variance or special exception is appealable, a decision on the variance is effective: (1) except as provided in Subsection (B)(2), at the expiration of the time period during which an appeal may be filed; or (2) if a notice of appeal is filed, when a final decision on the appeal is made. Source: Section 13-1-285; Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 031211-11; Ord. 20110526-098. § 25-1-217 EXPIRATION OF VARIANCE OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION. (A) Except as provided in Subsection (B), a variance or special exception expires: (1) except as provided in Subsection (A)(2), one year after the effective date of the variance or special exception; or (2) on the date established as a condition of approval. (B) A variance or special exception expires on the date an approved plan or permit expires if: (1) an application for approval of a plan or permit is submitted before a variance or special exception expires under Subsection (A); or (2) the variance or special exception is granted in association with the approved plan or permit. Source: Section 13-1-286; Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 031211-11; Ord. 20110526-098. (Supp. No. 164) Page 7 of 9 Created: 2024-04-02 12:54:39 [EST] ITEM02/16§ 25-1-218 RESTRICTION ON SIMILAR APPLICATIONS. If an application for a variance or special exception is denied or if a variance or special exception is revoked, a person may not file an application for the same or a similar variance or special exception on the same or substantially the same site for a period of one year from the date of denial or revocation. Source: Section 13-1-287; Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 031211-11; Ord. 20110526-098. Division 4. Adjustments.1 § 25-1-251 APPLICATION FOR ADJUSTMENT. (A) An application for an adjustment under Chapter 25-8, Subchapter A (Water Quality) may be considered only in connection with the review of: a site plan; a subdivision; or (B) (C) (1) (2) (3) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) other specific development project or proposal. An applicant may file an application for an adjustment with the director. An application for an adjustment must be on a form prescribed by the director and must include: the names and addresses of the applicant and the owner; the address and legal description of the property; proof that the applicant is either the record owner or the record owner's agent; identification of the section of Chapter 25-8, Subchapter A (Water Quality) that, as applied to the development project or proposal, the applicant claims violates the United States Constitution, the Texas Constitution, or federal or state statute, and the provisions violated; a statement of the factual basis for applicant's claims; a legal brief supporting applicant's claims; and a description of the adjustment requested, and an explanation of how the adjustment is the minimum required to comply with the conflicting law and provides maximum protection of water quality. Source: Section 13-1-304; Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 031211-11; Ord. 20131017-046. § 25-1-252 CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION FOR ADJUSTMENT. This section prescribes the order of process for an application for adjustment. (1) The Law Department shall review an application for adjustment and advise the city manager. 1Ord. No. 20140612-084, Pt. 4, effective June 23, 2014 , repealed Division 4, §§ 25-1-231—25-1-234, which pertained to special exceptions. See References to Ordinances for complete derivation. Subsequently, Division 5 was renumbered as Division 4. (Supp. No. 164) Page 8 of 9 Created: 2024-04-02 12:54:39 [EST] ITEM02/17(2) (3) The city manager shall present the application and the city manager's recommendation to the council. The council shall determine whether application of the identified section of Chapter 25-8, Subchapter A (Water Quality) to the applicant's development project or proposal violates the United States Constitution, the Texas Constitution, or federal or state statute. An affirmative determination requires a three-quarters vote of the city council. If the council does not make an affirmative determination, the application is denied. (4) This subsection applies if the council makes an affirmative determination under Subsection (3). (a) (b) The Watershed Protection Department shall review the application and advise the city manager. The city manager shall present the application and the city manager's recommendation to the council at a public hearing. (c) After a public hearing, the city council shall: (i) determine the minimum adjustment required to comply with the conflicting law and provide maximum protection of water quality; and (ii) grant the adjustment. Source: Section 13-1-305; Ord. 990225-70; Ord. 010329-18; Ord. 031211-11; Ord. 20131017-046. (Supp. No. 164) Page 9 of 9 Created: 2024-04-02 12:54:39 [EST] ITEM02/18BOA GENERAL REVIEW COVERSHEET CASE: C15-2024-0015 BOA DATE: May 13th, 2024 ADDRESS: 1306 Rockcliff Rd OWNER: Chris & Shannon Renner COUNCIL DISTRICT: 8 AGENT: David Chace ZONING: LA LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 3 LAKECLIFF VARIANCE REQUEST: Section 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum front yard setback from 40 feet to 20 feet. Section 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum interior side yard setback (east side) from 10 feet to 5 feet. Section 25-2-551 (Lake Austin (LA) District Regulations) (B) (1) (b) from shoreline setback requirements to decrease from 25 feet to 0 feet. SUMMARY: demolish and erect a new 2 story Single-Family residence attached to existing legal non- complying Boat House. ISSUES: substandard lot size, tree CRZ and OSSF setback ZONING LAND USES Site LA North LA South LA LA East LA West Single-Family Lake Austin Single-Family Lake Austin Single-Family NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS: Austin Neighborhoods Council City of Rollingwood Friends of Austin Neighborhoods Neighborhood Empowerment Foundation Preservation Austin Save Our Springs Alliance TNR BCP Travis County Natural Resources ITEM02/19April 30, 2024 David Chace 710 Hawthorne Loop Driftwood, TX 78619 Property Description: LOT 3 LAKECLIFF Re: C15-2024-0015 Dear David, Austin Energy (AE) has reviewed your application for the above referenced property, requesting that the Board of Adjustment consider variance requests from LDC Sections 25-2-492 and 25-2- 551 at 1306 Rockcliff Road. Austin Energy does not oppose the request, provided that any proposed or existing improvements follow Austin Energy’s Clearance & Safety Criteria, the National Electric Safety Code, and OSHA requirements. Any removal or relocation of existing facilities will be at the owner’s/applicant’s expense. Please use this link to be advised of our clearance and safety requirements which are additional conditions of the above review action: https://library.municode.com/tx/austin/codes/utilities_criteria_manual?nodeId=S1AUENDECR_1 .10.0CLSARE If you require further information or have any questions regarding the above comments, please contact our office. Thank you for contacting Austin Energy. Cody Shook, Planner III Austin Energy Public Involvement | Real Estate Services 2500 Montopolis Drive Austin, TX 78741 (512) 322-6881 Cody.Shook@austinenergy.com ITEM02/20Board of Adjustment General/Parking Variance Application DevelopmentATX.com | Phone: 311 (or 512-974-2000 outside Austin) For submittal and fee information, see austintexas.gov/digitaldevelopment WARNING: Filing of this appeal stops all affected construction activity. This application is a fillable PDF that can be completed electronically. To ensure your information is saved, click here to Save the form to your computer, then open your copy and continue. The Tab key may be used to navigate to each field; Shift + Tab moves to the previous field. The Enter key activates links, emails, and buttons. Use the Up & Down Arrow keys to scroll through drop-down lists and check boxes, and hit Enter to make a selection. The application must be complete and accurate prior to submittal. If more space is required, please complete Section 6 as needed. All information is required (if applicable). For Office Use Only Case # C15-2024-0015 ROW # 13307011 Tax # 0131090101 Section 1: Applicant Statement Street Address: 1306 Rockcliff Road Subdivision Legal Description: Lakecliff Subdivision Vol. 75 page 126, Travis County, Texas Lot(s): 3 Outlot: _ Block(s): Division: Zoning District: Lake Austin Council District:8 I/We David Chace c/o Texas Excavation Solutions on behalf of myself/ourselves as authorized agent for Chris Renner affirm that on Month April , Day 1 , Year 2024 , hereby apply for a hearing before the Board of Adjustment for consideration to (select appropriate option below): Erect – demolish existing residence and replace with 2 story residence Type of Structure: 1958 legal non-compliant one-story single family residence, carport, storage City of Austin | Board of Adjustment General/Parking Variance Application 2/9/22 | Page 4 of 12 ITEM02/21Portion of the City of Austin Land Development Code applicant is seeking a variance from: (1) : 25-2-492(d): front 40' setback (required) partially reduced to 20' (proposed) (2) : 25-2-492(d): east side 10' setback (required) fully reduced to 5' (proposed) (3) : LDC 25-2-551(B)(1)(A) & (B): LA Shoreline reduction from 25' (required) partially reduced to 0' (proposed) for area of residence attached to existing legal non-compliant boat house Section 2: Variance Findings The Board must determine the existence of, sufficiency of, and weight of evidence supporting the findings described below. Therefore, you must complete each of the applicable Findings Statements as part of your application. Failure to do so may result in your application being rejected as incomplete. Please attach any additional supporting documents. NOTE: The Board cannot grant a variance that would provide the applicant with a special privilege not enjoyed by others similarly situated or potentially similarly situated. I contend that my entitlement to the requested variance is based on the following findings: Reasonable Use The zoning regulations applicable to the property do not allow for a reasonable use because: Original 1958 one-story residence constructed on .50 acre legally platted lot (1976 plat date) seeks to demolish existing residence and replace with two-story residence on same footprint with very minor exceptions allowing some small exterior architectural footprints to be updated. Existing structures experiencing significant structural issues via foundation, failing bulkhead, aged and weathered materials, and overall outdated building code compliance. Residence requires full remodel and replacement. The house partially encroaches into the front setback, partially into the eastern side setback, and partially into the rear shoreline setback as a result of a series of zoning codes placed on the property by the City of Austin. The existing legal non-compliant residence was annexed by COA in June 1968. Chapter 44 zoning was applied, then the property was regulated under newly applied Chapter 13-2 and Chapter 13-2A zoning regulations – all of which allowed 25’ front setback, 5’ side setback, and 10’ rear setback, in addition to gross lot area calculation for impervious cover (allowing 45% IC). Referenced zoning chapters allowed minimum lot sizes of 5,750 ft.². COA ultimately zoned property as “Lake Austin (LA)” in 1984 via Ordinance No. 840913-S, immediately defining the lot and existing improvements as legal non-compliant status. No further improvements could be administratively approved without variance(s) from what would eventually be codified in what has been the current Land Development Code for almost 40 years. The 1976 legally platted lot is .50 acres (~21,946 ft.² per TCAD), which, again, became legal non-compliant upon application of LA zoning regulations (substandard for LA zoning’s one (1) acre minimum lot size requirement). The residence is an unorthodox “Y” floorplan. It cannot comply with the applicable LA zoning regulations without minimal setback variance(s) due to pre-existing conditions combined with regulatory restrictions placed on property, which were enacted by the governing municipality over a series of zoning changes since the 1968 COA annexation. The request to partially reduce front setback, reduce eastern side yard setback, and partially reduce the shoreline setback is reasonable given: (1) the unique substandard lot size (3) age of improvements (2) irregular shaped pre-existing site improvements – “Y” residence, attached boat house, cut-in slip, etc City of Austin | Board of Adjustment General/Parking Variance Application 2/9/22 | Page 5 of 12 ITEM02/22(4) tree CRZ and OSSF setback / size requirements further limiting any reasonable build envelope within NSA. The issues found on 1306 Rockcliff are consistent with a substantial number of residential sites along Lake Austin; the proposed partial setback remedies are equally consistent and reasonable with the Board’s prior approvals for exact, if not very similar issues both in the immediate Rockcliff Road area as well as numerous substandard locations found along either bank of Lake Austin. If approved by the Board, the variances will: 1. Remove a large portion of rear HVAC area & attached carport from encroaching into the 25’ shoreline setback, 2. Remove portions of front façade and carport from encroachment into 40’ front setback, 3. Remove portions of house from east side yard setback encroachments. Opposite PL to remain 10’, 4. Remove need for any impervious cover variances or other code waivers via expanded net site area (NSA), 5. Result in a 2 story residence utilizing the same footprint as the original 1958 structure, save very minor adjustments to small portions of exterior articulation on front, side and rear façades. Hardship a) The hardship for which the variance is requested is unique to the property in that: The legally platted lot is .50 ac (21,946 SF) and does not comply with LA zoning regulations placed on it by the City of Austin. The existing 1958 era residence and associated improvements are bound by several restrictions and cannot be remodeled / replaced to contemporary standards due to several conditions beyond the owner’s control: 1. a 3,000 ft.² OSSF field requirement located in the only vacant portion of property, 2. Multiple protected trees surrounding the property in front and to rear / side of residence, 3. 4. 5. the 40’ front setback encroaching into substantial portion of front of house and front of attached carport, the 10’ side setback (east PL) creates slight encroachments due to exterior articulation, the rear 25’ shoreline setback follows the 492.8’ contour line into and around the cut-in slip located inside the attached boat house, causing the 25’ setback to reach into the right / rear portion of the residence and rear portion of the attached carport, 6. The grandfathered man-made slough and cut-in slip from the main body of Lake Austin provides access to the single story, attached boat house located in the right rear portion of the lot. This is original to the 1958 construction, 7. The 492.8’ contour line (aka “the shoreline) abuts portions of the attached residence’s rear façade. The unusual “Y” layout of the residence currently encroaches 17’ into the front setback creating a 23’ setback from the front property line. This has been in place since 1958. Portions of the structure partially encroach into the 10’ side yard setback near the carport but still maintain the 5’ setback that was allowed on such lots until 2014 LA code amendments. The residence is at or encroaching into the rear 25’ shoreline setback for a substantial portion of that setback along the residence’s rear facade. The property is obviously restricted to its current footprint on all sides given the aforementioned facts. City of Austin | Board of Adjustment General/Parking Variance Application 2/9/22 | Page 6 of 12 ITEM02/23The property has a rare but legal non-compliant boat house / boat garage attached to the residence. There is a man- made cut-in slip providing access from the main body of the lake, causing the 25’ shoreline setback measurement to drastically encroach into the pre-existing residence when measured from the required contour of 492.8’. The 492.8’ contour is actually inside the covered and enclosed boat house, so when measured from 492.8’, the 25’ setback encompasses a substantial amount of the 2,288 ft.² original existing HVAC + ~700 ft.² carport footprints. The retroactive application of newly created LA zoning regulations in 1984 via Ordinance No. 840913-S also replaced, among other regulations, gross lot area IC calculations as well as setback allowances found in “A / AA, First Height and Residential” zoning which was codified in zoning Chapters 13-1 & 13-2, but were eventually replaced with more restrictive LA zoning regulations, further limiting reasonable property rights to remodel by replacement a structure which would inevitably require substantial work and / or replacement, and has now come to the end of its natural 66 year lifespan. The LA zoning regulations were applied 20+ years after original construction. Replacement can only be performed via approval of the requested variances. There is no other remedy available to the property owner. The only way to avoid an impervious cover variance is to partially reduce the 25’ shoreline setback around the existing cut-in slip inside the boat house to 0’ at the 492.8’ contour line. This allows for a slightly expanded net site area (in this section only). Doing so removes the residence from its encroachment into the 25’ shoreline setback around the dock area. This additional net site area allows the LA zoning IC calculations to be complied with @ 35% in the 0-15 % slope category. This shoreline reduction request is equally crucial to the redevelopment of the site. The 21,946 ft.² substandard lot is restricted by the following setbacks as such: 1. ~7,000 ft.² SF front 40’ setback area; 2. ~2,340 ft.² combined 10’ side yard setback areas; 3. ~6,300 ft.² shoreline 25’ setback area; 4. These reduce the already substandard lot area to a ~25% build envelope not withstanding OSSF or CRZ’s; 5. When applying the 35% maximum IC allowance in the 0-15% slope, ~4,600 ft.² IC is allowed; 6. Expanding the net site area via the partial 25’ shoreline setback allows ~5,500 ft.² IC @ 35% max; 7. The new 2 story residence will comply with all applicable regulations. The property is further restricted by required OSSF field (3,000 ft.²) and several tree CRZ’s surrounding the front (30” Magnolia) and left side of the house (32” maple to the rear, along the shoreline area). Trees are to remain as-is. More Specifically, when applying current LA zoning regulations the actual net site area of the ~21,946 ft.² lot is roughly 13,300 ft.². The proposed variance (and slightly expanded net site area via the partial shoreline reduction variance) adds about 2,000 ft.² of net site area to create an NSA of ~15,000 ft.². This expanded NSA is already encompassed within the footprints of the existing boat house, the residence, and the attached carport. There is zero material negative impact to this partial shoreline setback reduction. No part of any existing footprint moves closer to the water than it’s existing, original 1958 footprint. Worth noting, the existing 25’ shoreline area will be reduced from ~6,300 ft.² to ~4,000 ft.² area, but again, the proposed reduced shoreline area is already covered by existing footprints. As such, the proposed two-story structure still maintains compliance with LA IC regulations and all other codes and conditions for permit approval. No portion of the replacement structure will be built beyond the 492.8’ contour line (a.k.a. the Shoreline) or over the water. Updated building code compliance and environmental protections will be instituted via best management practices consistent with contemporary residential construction methodologies and requirements. City of Austin | Board of Adjustment General/Parking Variance Application 2/9/22 | Page 7 of 12 ITEM02/24b) The hardship is not general to the area in which the property is located because: There is not a property with this exact set of circumstances within the area. Most lots have either been afforded variances to allow new or replacement construction, or properties exist as legal non-compliant properties that have yet to be redeveloped. City of Austin | Board of Adjustment General/Parking Variance Application 2/9/22 | Page 8 of 12 ITEM02/25Area Character 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: The requested variances for: 1. partial front setback reduction from 40’ to 20’, 2. eastern PL side yard setback reduction from 10’ to 5’, and 3. partial shoreline setback reduction from 25’ to 0’ around the inside of the boat house All will have zero adverse impact to adjacent properties. The proposed remodel and replacement of the single story 1958 residence to a new two-story residence will be located on the same footprint as evidenced by the exhibits, with some minor exterior façade adjustments to even out the architectural articulation of certain cut-ins around the front entrance as well as side yard and rear façade portions of the exterior. The adjacent residence is two-story with an enclosed 2 car garage. The area has a mix of 1 and 2 story homes along Rockcliff Road. Several homes on Rockcliff Road have received substantially similar variances for a myriad of similar hardships, yet are varied in size – some homes are much larger than the proposed two-story replacement home at the subject site. This includes many homes along Rockcliff as well as connecting streets such as Channel Lane where some homes are as large as 10,000+ ft.² and were, in fact, approved for a mixture of shoreline setback and IC variances by this Commission – many of which were represented by myself between the years 2008 - 2022. With the shoreline setback partial reduction, the amended net site area allows for compliance with LA IC regs in the 0-15% slope category allowing a maximum of 35% IC. This avoids any need for a variance to LA IC regulations. The lot is 100% in the 0-15% slope category and will be compliant with the 35% maximum IC allowance per LDC 25-2- 551. All height and other zoning & technical code requirements will be met, providing increased safety and environmental protections via contemporary best management practices. It is worth noting the applicant sought direction from COA staff re: specific code sections to request variance from in an attempt to avoid any confusion or conflicting interpretations between staff and the requested BOA approvals at time of any future permitting attempts. Staff pointed out the option to seek “height variances” for the front and side yard encroachments + “setback variance” for the shoreline encroachment, but equally pointed out that “setback variances” for all three (3) as proposed in this application would be: 1) consistent in terms of simplifying the request given the array of hardships associated with the redevelopment, and 2) either code citation (height vs. setback) arrives at the same result, i.e., partially amend the setback(s) and the prohibition to increased height of a non-complying wall is cured. Requesting a mix of increased height (of sections of non-complying walls) + a partial shoreline setback reduction seems more complex than requesting two (2) partial setback reductions + one (1) side yard setback since the proposed setback amendments remove all encroachments, nullifying any issue with increased height since those walls would then be “compliant” per the conditions of the requested BOA approval. Residential review staff agreed they would recognize the setback variance(s) and not require further variances or force the applicant to return to this Board for as long as the partial setback reductions are honored at permit review. If the Board prefers the applicant to amend this request to instead cite LDC 963(f)(1)(b) to address increasing the height of non-compliant walls for certain sections of the front and side building facades + maintain the partial 25’ shoreline setback reduction, these changes can be made and presented at subsequent BOA hearing. My hope is the Board agrees the most effective and simplistic manner to address the aforementioned hardships is via the proposed setback variances from sections LDC 25-2-492(d) and LDC 25-2-551(b)(1)(a) & (b). City of Austin | Board of Adjustment General/Parking Variance Application 2/9/22 | Page 9 of 12 ITEM02/26Parking (additional criteria for parking variances only) Request for a parking variance requires the Board to make additional findings. The Board may grant a variance to a regulation prescribed in the City of Austin Land Development Code Chapter 25-6, Appendix A with respect to the number of off-street parking spaces or loading facilities required if it makes findings of fact that the following additional circumstances also apply: 1. Neither present nor anticipated future traffic volumes generated by the use of the site or the uses of sites in the vicinity reasonably require strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specific regulation because: 2. The granting of this variance will not result in the parking or loading of vehicles on public streets in such a manner as to interfere with the free flow of traffic of the streets because: 3. The granting of this variance will not create a safety hazard or any other condition inconsistent with the objectives of this Ordinance because: 4. The variance will run with the use or uses to which it pertains and shall not run with the site because: City of Austin | Board of Adjustment General/Parking Variance Application 2/9/22 | Page 10 of 12 ITEM02/27Section 3: Applicant Certificate I affirm that my statements contained in the complete application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Applicant Signature: David Chace Date: April 1, 2024 Applicant Name (typed or printed): D a v i d C h a c e Applicant Mailing Address: 710 Hawthorne Loop City: Driftwood State: TX Zip: 7 8 6 1 9 Phone (will be public information): Email (optional – will be public information): Section 4: Owner Certificate I affirm that my statements contained in the complete application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Owner Signature: s e e s e p a r a t e s h e e t w i t h o w n e r s i g n a t u r e Date: Owner Name (typed or printed): Chris and Shannon Renner Owner Mailing Address: 1306 Rockcliff Road City: Austin State: TX Zip: 78746 Phone (will be public information): Email (optional – will be public information): Section 5: Agent Information Agent Name: David Chace c/o Texas Excavation Solutions Agent Mailing Address: 710 Hawthorne Loop City: Driftwood State: TX Zip: 78619 Phone (will be public information): Email (optional – will be public information): Section 6: Additional Space (if applicable) Please use the space below to provide additional information as needed. To ensure the information is referenced to the proper item, include the Section and Field names as well (continued on next page). City of Austin | Board of Adjustment General/Parking Variance Application 2/9/22 | Page 11 of 12 ITEM02/28ITEM02/29 City of Austin Board of Adjustments c/o Elaine Ramirez City of Austin Development Services Department Re: Requesting partial setback reduction to front 40’ setback, allow 5’ side yard setback regulated per LDC 25-2-492(d), and partial shoreline setback regulated per 25-2-551 at 1306 Rockcliff Road Board of Adjustment Members: The proposed project seeks a mixture of setback variances to accommodate replacement of a 1958 one-story residence located on lot 3 Lakecliff Subdivision. The property is currently regulated by Lake Austin zoning regulations applied by ordinance number 840913-S, adopted September 13, 1984. The currently required zoning setbacks are 40’ front setback, 10’ side yard setbacks, and a 25’ shoreline setback from the 492.8’ contour line in accordance with applicable Land Development Code Chapter 25 regulations. The house is legal non- compliant due to substantial encroachment into the front, side, and rear shoreline setbacks. The original 1958 one-story residence was built prior to the city’s 1968 annexation of the area. The city subsequently zoned the property “A / AA” First Height and Residential which allowed gross lot area calculation for impervious cover purposes, 25’ front setback, 5’ side yard setbacks, and 10’ rear setback from property line. The application of LA zoning by the city further restricted the legally platted .50 acre lot and associated improvements by increasing the zoning setbacks as well as reducing impervious cover allowances, increasing environmental regulations and a host of other regulations not in place at the time of pre-annexation construction. The current irregular shaped ~2,300 ft.² residential footprint is unusual in that it is not a typical layout found in most homes. The floorplan is a “Y” shape and is attached to a single-story, fully enclosed boat garage with cut- in slip taking access from a man-made slough. The home is oriented towards the right and rear of the lot towards the lake creating substantial encroachment into the 25’ shoreline setback near the cut-in slip area. The pre-existing legal noncompliant boat garage is grandfathered. The redevelopment of this project proposes to demolish 100% of the existing 1958 residential structure and replace it with a two-story contemporary residence on the same footprint as originally constructed in 1958 with some very minor exceptions to exterior architectural articulations found near the front entrance, side façade, and rear façade areas. The proposed two- story replacement requires three (3) separate setback variances to accommodate the most effective and streamlined approach allowing reasonable redevelopment on the legal non-compliant lot and its pre-annexation improvements. Staff from City of Austin Development Services Department confirmed that zoning setback reductions would effectively remove the encroachments and allow the replacement structure to increase the original height without issue. Thus we seek the following: 1. Portions of the front façade and carport encroach into the front setback at 23’ from front PL. The project proposes to partially reduce the 40’ Lake Austin front setback to 20’ front setback along the front façade and carport area of the residence. The remainder portion of 40’ setback is to be honored @ 40’. 2. The project proposes to maintain 5’ side yard setback on the right side of the property in accordance with the regulations found in zoning chapters 44, chapter 13, and even LDC Chapter 25 until that section was amended in 2014 to remove the 5’ side yard setback allowance afforded to countless properties platted prior to 1982. Per staff, any redevelopment of this site would require 10’ side yard setbacks. ITEM02/30 3. Because of the unique boathouse access and attachment to the existing residence, the 25’ shoreline setback encroaches into a substantial footprint of the existing ~2,300 ft.² floorplan. The project proposes to reduce the portion of the shoreline surrounding the cut-in slip area to 0’ setback for purposes of removing the HVAC portion of the residence and attached storage / carport (to be converted to enclosed garage) from encroaching into the shoreline setback. This allows the HVAC and related portions of the residence to be fully demolished and rebuilt to a two-story residence without issue per COA staff. Under this proposal, this reduced shoreline area expands the net site area calculation allowance required under current LA zoning code section. The net result on this 0–15% slope category, .50 acre lot (21,780 ft.²) is 100% compliance with the maximum 35% IC allowance and would allow ~5,500 ft.² IC on ~15,700 ft.² NSA. The following hardships are unique to the property and affect reasonable redevelopment: 1. The gross site area of the lot is 21,780 ft.² per TCAD vs. lot size of 43,560 ft.² for LA zoning; 2. The area within the existing 25 ‘shoreline is ~6,300, ft.²; 3. The area of the 40’ front setback is ~7,067 ft.²: 4. The area of the combined 10’ side yard setbacks is ~ 2,340 ft.²; 5. The net true buildable area is ~ 6,000 ft.², or ~25% of platted lot; (prior to OSSF, CRZ’s, etc) 6. Approximately 13,300 ft.² net site area remains per LA slope calculation methodology; 7. 0–15% slope category allows 35% maximum IC, or ~4,600 ft.²; 8. The site requires approximately 3,000 ft.² OSSF field; 9. The site is further encumbered by several protected tree CRZ’s; 10. The site is severely restricted given constraints beyond owner’s control. The project proposes to minimally amend Lake Austin zoning setback regulations in the following manner: 1. Partially reduce the 40’ front setback to 20’ setback along front façade of house and attached carport; 2. Reduce side yard setback from 10’ to 5’ along right side of property to remove encroachments of side building façade; (existing side yard encroachments are original to 1958 and only small portion of setback area near existing carport. Replacement two-story walls will adhere to 5’ setback) 3. Partially reduce the 25’ shoreline setback in and around legal noncompliant attached boathouse garage & cut-in slip area at the 492.8’ contour. No replacement structure will be closer than 1958 footprint and nothing will be built over the water / 492.8’ contour line. If approved by the Board, this allows 100% demolition of existing structure and replacement with two-story contemporary residence on same footprint as 1958 original construction with small exception that some architectural articulations will be filled in for purposes of practical construction and overall aesthetics. There is no other reasonable manner to redevelop the original 1958 structure given the aforementioned site constraints. The combination of setback reduction requests are the most reasonable and efficient manner to address redevelopment. The minimum setback reductions are being requested, while remaining portions of LA setbacks are to remain, ie, 40’ front, 10’ side, and portion of 25’ shoreline where no improvements exist or construction is proposed on the proeprty. All impervious cover, tree protection, septic, and related requirements will be met if this variance(s) is approved as presented. A current work order has been initiated with Austin energy to bury existing powerlines as part of new construction. ITEM02/31 These issues while unique to the particular lot given the floorplan, lot size, attached legal noncompliant boathouse among other factors are certainly not without precedent in the immediate Rockcliff Road / Channel Lane area as well as throughout the greater area encompassing a substantial number of properties along Lake Austin. In particular, 1230 Rockcliff Road (vacant lot) was approved for shoreline reduction in Dec. 2020 among numerous properties seeking an array of variances which have been approved along Rockcliff Road and the attached Channel Lane area towards Austin Country Club as far back as 2012 and beyond. Thus, the requested variances at 1306 Rockcliff Road would not be dissimilar to numerous approvals the board has made on similar properties. Ultimately, the requests are reasonably de minimis in nature given the regulatory constraints when compared with the pre-existing improvements on the substandard lot. If approved, there will be zero adverse impact on adjacent properties. All regulatory requirements will be met for the replacement two-story residence, resulting in stronger environmental protections, increased building code compliance, and overall best management practices applied to the redevelopment of the improvements which have reached the end of their 66 year natural life. The property owner has spoken with the president of Lake Cliff subdivision HOA and is prepared to meet or engage with any interested parties seeking further details on the proposed issues at hand. Please see attached exhibits such as pictures, site plans, and maps for quick reference. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, David Chace, agent for owner c/o Texas Excavation Solutions, LLC cc: Chris and Shannon Renner, property owner ITEM02/32ITEM02/33