ITEM03 C15-2026-0030 GRANTED DS — original pdf

Backup

CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet ITEM03 DATE: Monday October 12, 2026 CASE NUMBER: C15-2026-0030 ___Y_____Joseph El Habr (D1) ___Y_____Bianca A Medina-Leal (D2) ___Y_____Corry L Archer-McClellan (D3) ___Y_____Yung-ju Kim (D4) ___Y_____Melissa Hawthorne (D5) ___Y_____Haseeb Abdullah (D6) ___-_____VACANT (D7) ___Y_____Margaret Shahrestani-Vice Chair (D8) ___Y_____Brian Poteet (D9) ___Y_____Michael Von Ohlen (D10) ___Y_____Jeffery L Bowen-Chair (M) ___-_____VACANT (Alternate) (M) ___-_____Suzanne Valentine (Alternate) (M) ___-_____VACANT (Alternate) (M) OWNER/APPLICANT: Xiao Huang ADDRESS: 2805 SARATOGA DR VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) (D) from setback requirements for a front setback of 40 feet (required) to 7 feet (requested) in order to erect a four-foot high (4’) attached uncovered wood deck in front of an existing single-family residence in a “LA”, Lake Austin zoning district. BOARD’S DECISION: September 14, 2026 Vice Chair’s motion to postpone to October 12, 2026, Board member Melissa Hawthorne second on 7-0 votes; POSTPONED TO OCTOBER 12, 2026, NOT ENOUGH BOARD MEMBERS FOR VOTING PURPOSES. October 12, 2026 The public hearing was closed by Chair Jeffery Bowen, Board member Micheal Von Ohlen’s motion to approve, Board member Melissa Hawthorne second on 10-0 votes; GRANTED. FINDING: 1. The Zoning regulations applicable to the property do not allow for reasonable use because: the strict enforcement would prevent a safe and functional primary entrance to the existing home at 2805 Saratoga predates current setback requirements and its fixed location means any practical front entry would extend beyond the setback line. 2. (a) The hardship for which the variance is requested is unique to the property in that: was legally built in the 70s before current city of Austin setback requirements applied its fixed location on a corner lot creates a preexisting physical constraint that prevents the compliant and current entrance requirements, the hardship results from later zoning changes not from any action by the property owner. (b) The hardship is not general to the area in which the property is located because: it arises from the specific placement of the 50-year-old home on a corner lot where the existing structure conflicts with the current setback requirements on both street frontages because the home fixed location and elevated entry cannot comply with modern setbacks regardless of orientation, this site specific physical constraint not shared by neighboring properties. 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 requested variance is limited to modest entry port intended solely to provide safe access to an existing residence. Elaine Ramirez Executive Liaison Jeffery Bowen Chair for