ITEM06 C15-2026-0009 GRANTED DS — original pdf

Backup

CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet ITEM06 DATE: Monday April 13, 2026 CASE NUMBER: C15-2026-0009 ___Y____Thomas Ates (D1) ___Y____Bianca A Medina-Leal (D2) ___Y____Jessica Cohen (D3) ___Y____Yung-ju Kim (D4) ___Y____Melissa Hawthorne (D5) ___Y____Haseeb Abdullah (D6) ___Y____Sameer S Birring (D7) ___Y____Margaret Shahrestani (D8) ___Y____Brian Poteet (D9) ___Y____Michael Von Ohlen (D10) ___Y____Jeffery L Bowen (M) ___-____Corry L Archer-mcclellan (Alternate) (M) ___-____Suzanne Valentine (Alternate) (M) ___-____VACANT (Alternate) (M) APPLICANT: Wylder Conoly OWNER: Mehtaab Brar (Brar Properties) ADDRESS: 9419 Parmer Lane VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting the following variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the interior side yard setback (southeastern property line) from twenty-five feet (25 ft) (required) to fifteen feet (15 ft) (requested) in order to erect a Tim Horton’s restaurant with drive- thru service in a “CH-CO”, Commercial Highway Services-Conditional Overlay zoning district. BOARD’S DECISION: The public hearing was closed by Chair Jessica Cohen, Board member Michael Von Ohlen’s motion to approve, Vice Chair Melissa Hawthorne second on 11-0 votes; GRANTED. FINDING: 1. The Zoning regulations applicable to the property do not allow for a reasonable use because: strict application of the 20-foot side setback requirement doesn’t allow for reasonable ability due to the cumulative effect of the property’s physical constraints. 2. (a) The hardship for which the variance is requested is unique to the property in that: the subject property’s constrained by on multiple sides by a steep 30% slope along the southwest boundary on existing detention and water quality pond occupying the frontage and an unusually narrow lot width of approx. 100 feet. (b) The hardship is not general to the area in which the property is located because: the adjacent nearby commercial developments possessed significantly greater lot widths and they do not have detention facilities occupying their developmental frontage and they’re not constrained by the 30% real slope. 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: the intent of commercial setback requirements is to provide adequate separation between structures and ensure safety and allow maintenance access and preserve orderly developed patterns with this design, this applicant will be able to provide that. Elaine Ramirez Executive Liaison Jessica Cohen Chair for