ITEM07 C15-2026-0005 DENIED APPEAL DS — original pdf

Backup

CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet ITEM07 DATE: Monday March 9, 2026 CASE NUMBER: C15-2026-0005 ___-____Thomas Ates (D1) ___N____Bianca A Medina-Leal (D2) ___N____Jessica Cohen (D3) ___N____Yung-ju Kim (D4) ___-____Melissa Hawthorne (D5) ___A____Haseeb Abdullah (D6) ABSTAINED ___Y____Sameer S Birring (D7) ___Y____Margaret Shahrestani (D8) ___Y____Brian Poteet (D9) ___N____Michael Von Ohlen (D10) ___N____Jeffery L Bowen (M) ___A____Corry L Archer-mcclellan (Alternate) (M) ABSTAINED ___-____Suzanne Valentine (Alternate) (M) ___-____VACANT (Alternate) (M) APPELLANT: Peter Journeay-Kaler OWNER: JBD CR HOLDING LLC – Leonid Murashkovskiy ADDRESS: 205 34TH ST VARIANCE REQUESTED: The appellant has filed an appeal challenging determinations by City staff in connection with approval of a building permit (Permit No. 2025-140201 PR) and related construction plans for proposed development of a three-unit residential use at 205 East 34th Street, Austin, TX 78705. The appeal alleges that City staff’s decision to approve the permit and related construction plans failed to comply with: (1) applicable zoning regulations, including requirements of the North University Neighborhood Conservation-Neighborhood Plan (NCCD-NP) Combining District (Ordinance No. 040826-58) and/or City Code Chapter 25-2, related to maximum allowable Floor-Area Ratio (FAR); (2) requirements of the International Residential Code (IRC) related to bedroom count, occupancy classification, visitability, and stair tread depth requirements; (3) International Fire Code (IFC) requirements related to minimum required access for fire apparatus; and (4) City Code Section 25-1-82 related to completeness requirements for development applications. BOARD’S DECISION: The public hearing was closed by Chair Jessica Cohen, Maggie Shahrestani’s motion to uphold staff’s decision and appeal denied; Board member Brian Poteet second on 3-5-2 votes (Chair Jessica Cohen, Board members Bianca Medina-Leal, Yung-ju Kim, Michael Von Ohlen, Jeffery Bowen nay; Board Members Corry Archer-Mcclellan, Haseeb Abdullah abstained); UPHOLD STAFF’S DECISION AND APPEAL DENIED. 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 for