12” Mulch Sock Site Specific Project Notes: 5’ Chain Link Fence Per COA regulations Full CRZ 20” Cedar Elm 1 0' - 0 " 5' - 0" 20' - 0" New Grass Area New Grass Area Stainless Steel Collection Bin 1. 2. Due to the IC limitations of this property the entire project is being constructed over existing impervious coverage. The new pool is being constructed to ensure that it does not replace any existing pool water area with new IC or pool coping. Slope Map + Analysis Symbol Slope Area IC Allowance IC Allowed Actual IC White 0-15% 37,424.5 7,484.9 12,751.96 Light Gray 15-25% 4,107.0 Dark Gray 25-35% 977.0 Black 35%+ 1046.0 20% 20% 10% 0 821.4 97.7 0 870 0 24 Totals 8,404 P U E 5 ' - 0 " S e t b a c k 2 0 ' - 0 " 5' - 0" PUE 20” Cedar Elm 5' - 0 " 10' - 0" Lower Paver Patio " 0 ' - 0 2 Existing Pool Existing Conc. Patio 26” Live Oak 13' - 0" 6' - 6" r e v a P r e w o L o i t a P Wood Deck with Cabana Below (conc. Slab) IC Schedule Area Name Existing IC Proposed IC Driveway Rock Wall 7,002 393 7,002 403.5 House Slab 4,615.5 4,615.5 Conc. Patio 2,079 Pool Coping Cabana Slab Walkway 86 244 259 533 73 741 259 Total IC 14,678.5 13,647 5' - 0" PUE Tree Legend 1) - 20” Cedar Elm 2) - 26” Live Oak 3) - 19” Two Trunk Live Oak 10' - 0" Setback Existing House y a w k l a W g n i t s i x E Conc. Wall Conc. Wall Existing Driveway Conc. Wall Conc. Wall Building Information Area Name Existing Proposed 1st Floor Conditioned 2nd Floor Conditioned Covered Parking Covered Patio Cabana 3,321 1,909 532 640.5 244 3,321 1,909 532 1,381.5 741 6 ' - 0 " 2 10' - 0" Setback Two Trunk Live Oak - 19" Electrical Meter 4' - 9 " 6 " - 9 ' " 0 - ' 9 1 Mulch the Full CRZ Area not in the existing pool deck 1 3 ' - 0 " 6 ' - 6 " 26' - 0" Negative Edge Pool Water Existing Pool Coping Existing Pool Water Conc. Patio Building Slab Covered Patio DN 26” …
Exhibit 4 ITEM05/150-APPEAL1 ITEM05/151-APPEAL1 ITEM05/152-APPEAL1 ITEM05/153-APPEAL1 ITEM05/154-APPEAL1 ITEM05/155-APPEAL1 ITEM05/156-APPEAL1 ITEM05/157-APPEAL1 ITEM05/158-APPEAL1 ITEM05/159-APPEAL1 ITEM05/160-APPEAL1 ITEM05/161-APPEAL1 ITEM05/162-APPEAL1 ITEM05/163-APPEAL1 City of Austin Development Services Department P.O. Box 1088, Austin, Texas 78767 VESTED RIGHTS DETERMINATION Findings This determination is made under City Code 25-1-541 in response to a claim that the project identified below is vested to earlier regulations and entitled to be reviewed under those regulations. The determination may be reconsidered once at the request of the applicant. Project Name: Pool/Cabana Reconstruction Address: 6708 Bridge Hill Cove Case No. VR-2024-0037000 Date of Application: 6/4/2024 Date of Determination: 6/12/2024 nation: 6/12/2024 Signature: ____________________________________________________________ Date: _______________ _______________________________ 6/12/2024 See “Grounds for Determination” (reverse) for a summary of the most common grounds for approval or denial. Additional grounds may also apply. Determination” (reverse) for a summ (X) DENIED Primary Grounds: PROJECT COMPLETE Findings: The project initiated with the submittal of the Bridge Hill Subdivision plat for this lot, was completed with the construction of the residence authorized by building permit 1987- 010020-BP and accessory swimming pool authorized by building permit 1989-006985-BP. The proposed application is redevelopment of existing permitting and unpermitted improvements and is considered a new project. ITEM05/164-APPEAL1 ITEM05/165-APPEAL1 City of Austin Development Services Department P.O. Box 1088, Austin, Texas 78767 FINDINGS ON RECONSIDERATION OF VESTED RIGHTS DETERMINATION N/A Project Name: 6708 Bridge Hill Cove Address: BP (Building Permit) No. 2023-129658 Case No.: June 4, 2024 Application Date: Determination Date: July 19, 2024 Determination by: Brent Lloyd DSD Development Officer (X) APPROVED Vesting Date: N/A Findings & Conclusions: 1. On June 4, 2024, applicant submitted a petition for vested rights claiming that proposed development under the above-referenced building permit was entitled to review under regulations in effect on the date the 1981 plat application was filed, as modified by the Planning Commission’s subsequent conditions of approval. 2. On June 12, 2024, DSD denied the vested rights claim on the grounds that: “The project initiated with the submittal of the Bridge Hill Subdivision plat for this lot, was completed with the construction of the residence authorized by building permit 1987-010020-BP and accessory swimming pool authorized by building permit 1989- 006985-BP. The proposed application is redevelopment of existing permitting and unpermitted improvements and is considered a new project.” 3. Upon receiving DSD’s determination, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration challenging the determination and requesting approval of a “limited redevelopment” exception pursuant to a 1995 administrative policy …
ITEM05/182-APPEAL1 PER CITY ORDINANCE: All individuals scheduling or accepting a meeting invitation with a City Official are requested to provide responses to the questions at the following link: DSD Visitor Log. Please note that all information provided is subject to public disclosure via DSD’s open data portal. For more information please visit: City of Austin Ordinance 2016-0922-005 | City Clerk’s website | City Clerk’s FAQ’s From: Leitch, Steve <Steve.Leitch@austintexas.gov> Sent: Monday, August 12, 2024 12:42 PM To: Ramirez, Elaine <Elaine.Ramirez@austintexas.gov> Subject: c15-2024-0025 Good afternoon, Mrs. Ramirez, I would like to ask for a postponement of this case. In recognition of the fact that a second appeal has been filed, which will not be heard until next month’s Board of Adjustment meeting, I believe that it would be most efficient to hear both appeals simultaneously at the September meeting. Thank you for your consideration and please do not hesitate to reach out if you have any questions. Steve Leitch Division Manager, Expedited Plan Review City of Austin Development Services Department 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Rd., Austin, TX 78752 Office: 512-978-1676 ITEM05/183-APPEAL1 Schedule a virtual or in-person appointment for your development and permitting questions. Please contact my direct supervisor with any kudos or concerns at Brenda.DeLaGarza@austintexas.gov. PER CITY ORDINANCE: All individuals scheduling or accepting a meeting invitation with a City Official are requested to provide responses to the questions at the following link: DSD Visitor Log. Please note that all information provided is subject to public disclosure via DSD’s open data portal. For more information please visit: City of Austin Ordinance 2016-0922-005 | City Clerk’s website | City Clerk’s FAQ’s ITEM05/184-APPEAL1 ITEM05/185-APPEAL1 Written comments must be submitted before or at a public hearing. Your comments should include board or commission, or Council; Case Number; and the contact person listed received will become part of the public record of this case. the scheduled to the contact person listed on the notice. All comments the name of the date of the public hearing; the on the notice Case Number: ClS-2024-0025 Contact: Elaine Ramirez, 512-974-22 Public Hearine: Board of Adiustment, 02 Your Name (please print) tp -=fo '3 -ts<z-n>&t � t..t... CJ. ,A..-IS!'TI,..\ th: am in favor object �-"{} • Z::>--v--f Date PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION and/or their agent(s) are expected to attend a public Although applicants hearing, you are not required have the opportunity to speak FOR or AGAINST the proposed development environm ental organization affecting …
BOA INTERPRETATION APPEAL COVERSHEET RE-NOTIFICATION CASE: C15-2024-0025 BOA DATE: September 9, 2024 ADDRESS: 6708 Bridge Hill Cv COUNCIL DISTRICT: 10 OWNER: Christi S. May APPELLANT: Warren Konkel APPELLANT’S AGENT: Nicholl Wade ZONING: SF-3 / LA LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 5 BRIDGE HILL SUBD APPEAL REQUEST: an appeal challenging staff decision regarding impervious cover approved with building permit 2023-129658BP & 2023-129659BP. SUMMARY: any proposed development must comply with the provisions of the LDC ISSUES: errors on permit application, does not remedy unpermitted construction from 2014 and 2021, vastly exceeds the “grandfathered original construction” IC allowance of 11,408 sq. ft. ZONING LAND USES Site North South East West SF-2 / LA SF-2 / LA SF-2 / LA SF-2 LA Single-Family Single-Family Single-Family Single-Family Lake Austin NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS: Austin Independent School District BRNA ASSOCIATION INC. City of Rollingwood Friends of Austin Neighborhoods Glenlake Neighborhood Association Save Our Springs Alliance TNR BCP – Travis County Natural Resources The Creek at Riverbend Neighborhood Association ITEM05/1-APPEAL2 ITEM05/2-APPEAL2 ITEM05/3-APPEAL2 ITEM05/4-APPEAL2 ITEM05/5-APPEAL2 ITEM05/6-APPEAL2 ITEM05/7-APPEAL2 ITEM05/8-APPEAL2 ITEM05/9-APPEAL2 ITEM05/10-APPEAL2 ITEM05/11-APPEAL2 ITEM05/12-APPEAL2 ITEM05/13-APPEAL2 ITEM05/14-APPEAL2 ITEM05/15-APPEAL2 ITEM05/16-APPEAL2 ITEM05/17-APPEAL2 ITEM05/18-APPEAL2 ITEM05/19-APPEAL2 ITEM05/20-APPEAL2 ITEM05/21-APPEAL2 ITEM05/22-APPEAL2 ITEM05/23-APPEAL2 ITEM05/24-APPEAL2 ITEM05/25-APPEAL2 ITEM05/26-APPEAL2 ITEM05/27-APPEAL2 ITEM05/28-APPEAL2 ITEM05/29-APPEAL2 ITEM05/30-APPEAL2 ITEM05/31-APPEAL2
BOA Monthly Report July 2024-June 2025 August 12, 2024 Granted Postponed 1. 25-2-899 (Fences as Accessory Uses) to increase the height from eight (8) feet to twelve (12) feet 2. Appeal-Appellant challenges issuance of Building Permit 2023-12958 BP on the grounds that the City 0 2 incorrectly approved impervious cover (IC) 0 4 5 2 0 1 8 (Added Aug12# 2024) Withdrawn 0 Denied Discussion Items Aug 2024 Interpretations 1 new inquiries The deposition of the case items: Granted Postponed Withdrawn Denied Discussion Items Board members absent: Brian Poteet, Marcel-Gutierrez-Garza, Yung-ju Kim, Janel Venzant, Micheal Von Ohlen and 1 vacant position (alternate) July 8, 2024 Granted 1. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to: decrease the minimum street side yard setback and decrease the minimum rear yard setback 2. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the two minimum interior side yards setback and 25-2-551 (Lake Austin (LA) District Regulations) (B) (1) (a) from shoreline setback requirements to decrease and 25-2-551 (Lake Austin (LA) District Regulations) (C) (3) (a) increase the maximum impervious cover on a slope 3. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from lot width requirements to decrease the front lot width 4. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to: decrease the minimum front yard setback and decrease the minimum interior side yard setback and decrease the minimum street side yard setback 5. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum rear yard setback and 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from building coverage requirements to increase and 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from impervious coverage requirements to increase and 25-2-963 (Modification and Maintenance of Non-complying Structures) (F) (2) to increase the additional length of the front wall and 25-2-963 (Modification and Maintenance of Non-complying Structures) (F) (2) to increase the additional length of the side wall Postponed 5 0 1 Withdrawn 0 Denied 1. 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum front yard setback and 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum interior side yard setback and 25-2-551 (Lake Austin (LA) District Regulations) (B) (1) (b) from shoreline setback requirements to decrease Discussion Items July 2024 Interpretations 0 new inquiries The deposition of the case items: Granted Postponed Withdrawn Denied Discussion Items Board members absent: Maggie Shahrestani and 1 vacant position (alternate) (Added july8# 2024) 5 0 0 1 4 4
BYLAWS OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ARTICLE 1. NAME. The name of the board is the Board of Adjustment. ARTICLE 2. PURPOSE AND DUTIES. (A) The purpose of the Board of Adjustment is to: 1. 2. 3. 4. Hear and decide a request for a variance from the requirements of Chapter 25-2 (Zoning), except as otherwise provided by the Code; Hear and decide an appeal of an administration action under Chapter 25-2 (Zoning); Hear and decide on a request for a variance from the requirements of airport zoning regulations under Section 241.034, Local Government Code; and Perform other duties prescribed by ordinance or state law. ARTICLE 3. MEMBERSHIP. (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) The Board of Adjustment is composed of eleven members appointed by the city council. The council may appoint any number of alternate members to serve in the absence of a regular member. A member that was appointed to the Board of Adjustment may be removed by the council for cause on a written charge after a public hearing. Board members serve for a term of two years beginning March 1st on the year of appointment. A vacancy on the Board of Adjustment shall be filled for the unexpired term. An individual board member may not act in an official capacity except through the action of the board. A regular board member who is absent for three consecutive regular meetings or one-third of all regular meetings in a "rolling" twelve month timeframe automatically vacates the member's position subject to the holdover provisions in Section 2-1-27 of the City Code. This does not apply to an absence due to illness or injury of the board member, an illness or injury of a board member's immediate family member, active military service or the birth or adoption of the board member's child for 90 days after the event. The board member must notify the staff liaison of the reason for the absence not later than the date of the next regular meeting of the board. Failure to notify the liaison before the next regular meeting of the board will result in an unexcused absence. At each meeting, each board member shall sign an attendance sheet which indicates that the member does not have a conflict of interest with any item on that agenda, or identifies each agenda item on which the member has a conflict of interest. Failure to sign …
BOA fees are as follows (effective October 1, 2023): There is a reduced Residential Homestead Fee if the Liaison can verify in the Appraisal District’s website that it is the Homestead of the Homeowner listed on both the application & Appraisal District website. The reduced Residential Homestead fee does not apply to Commercial OR Sign variances, Interpretation or Appeal requests. Additional AE fee of $262 + AE Fee, will apply to all Variances and Special Exceptions other than Parking Variances only. Commercial and Residential (not homestead) Variance base fee $3,455.00 Basic Notification Fee $ 261.90 4% Tech Surcharge Fee $ 148.68 AE fee + $ 262.00 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ TOTAL fee $4,127.58 Special Exceptions Commercial & Residential (not homestead) Variance base fee $3,455.00 Basic Notification Fee $ 261.90 4% Tech Surcharge Fee $ 148.68 AE fee + $ 262.00 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ TOTAL fee $4,127.58 Residential (homestead) Variance base fee $ 500.00 Basic Notification Fee $ 261.90 4% Tech Surcharge Fee $ 30.48 AE fee + $ 262.00 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ TOTAL fee $1,054.38 Special Exceptions Residential (homestead) Variance base fee $ 500.00 Basic Notification Fee $ 261.90 4% Tech Surcharge Fee $ 30.48 AE fee + $ 262.00 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ TOTAL fee $1,054.38 Zoning Interpretations & Appeals Commercial and Residential Variance base fee $2,552.00 Basic Notification Fee $ 261.90 4% Tech Surcharge Fee $ 112.56 AE fee + $ 262.00 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ TOTAL fee $3,188.46 Commercial Sign variances Variance base fee $3,455.00 Basic Notification Fee $ 261.90 4% Tech Surcharge Fee $ 148.68 AE fee + $ 262.00 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ TOTAL fee $4,127.58
A COMMUNITY GUIDE TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: Practical Tips for Zoning Variances, Special Exceptions and Administrative Appeals Approved by the Board of Adjustment, on April 13, 2015, and prepared in collaboration with the City Law Department and Development Services Department. Chair Vice Chair Boardmembers: Don Leighton-Burwell, Melissa Hawthorne, Brooke Bailey Jessica Cohen Ada Corral William Hodge Rahm McDDaniel Darryl Pruett Veronica Rivera Yasmine Smith Michael Von Ohlen Legal Advisors: Lee Simmons Steven Maddoux Staff Support: Elaine Ramirez Diana Ramirez - Common examples of hardship include restraints, unusually if they are wants to preserve topographical lot shapes. Trees may constitute required them. lots with steep slopes, small lot area, or irregular or if an applicant to be preserved a hardship, - Personal troubles hardship. focus primarily circumstances, with neighbors, An applicant cannot be the sole basis for finding a but should may mention on characteristics such factors, itself. such as financial of the property or difficulties A hardship cannot be self-created. - An applicant based on conditions for a permit or site plan cannot claim a hardship for creating. that he or she is responsible - For example, if a structure is designed in a manner that fails to comply with regulations, hardship. Or, if a landowner pieces, hardship. the structure's subdivides he or she can't rely on their irregular shape to prove a a lot into irregular non-compliance isn't a A hardship where it's located. must be unique to the property, not general to the area - If steep slopes then neither hardship by itself. or small lots are common to a particular condition is sufficiently unique to constitute area, a - If a lot is entitled automatically relaxes small lots, then of a hardship. evidence the understanding area, development regulations. certain lot amnesty," under city code to "small which regulations for development be relied on as lot size alone should not with was approved of minimum lot Small lot amnesty that, with the exception would meet other site development - The City's example, regulations alone cannot be the hardship. cannot request a height variance and For an applicant BOA Community Guidebook -10 variance, different "hardship." the criteria kinds of situation exception and don't necessarily can be tailored require to address of for a special a showing In 2011, the City of Austin adopted a special exception designed periods required summarize followed to address of time …
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT RULES OF PROCEDURE Approved by the Board of Adjustment on February 11, 2019 ARTICLE I. GENERAL PROVISIONS (A) Legal Authority & Jurisdiction. (1) The Board of Adjustment (“BOA” or “Board”) is a sovereign board established by the City Council pursuant to Subchapter A of Chapter 211 of the Texas Local Government Code (“Chapter 211”). The BOA derives its authority from state law, as well as City Code § 2-1-111 (Board of Adjustment) and Chapter 25-2 (Zoning). (2) As stated in Chapter 211 and the City Code, the BOA’s primary functions are to hear and decide: Requests for variances from site development regulations adopted under Chapter 25-2, Subchapter C (Use and Development Regulations) and from certain sign regulations under Chapter 25-10 (Sign Regulations); Requests for special exceptions from site development regulations, where expressly authorized by Code; and (c) Appeals of administrative decisions made in the enforcement and administration of City zoning regulations and decisions made in the enforcement of Chapter 211. (B) Rules of Procedure. (1) These Rules of Procedure (“Rules”) establish standards, guidelines, and requirements for: (a) the conduct of public hearings and the resolution of cases before the BOA; (b) applications for variances or administrative appeals; and processing of applications for variances and administrative appeals filed with the Development Services Department; and notification to the BOA of the filing of an application for a variance and administrative appeals. (a) (b) (c) (d) BOA Rules of Procedure – Page 1 of 16 (2) In the event of a conflict with City Code, Chapter 211 or other applicable law, the Code, Chapter 211 or other law supersedes these Rules. (3) Applicants should familiarize themselves with these Rules before filing an application or presenting a case to the BOA for decision. For more detailed information regarding Board and the rules for variances, special exceptions, and appeals, see the Board of Adjustment Community Guidebook, at: https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Planning/Applicati ons_Forms/Board_of_Adjustment_Guidebook__July_2015_.pdf ARTICLE II. REQUIREMENTS FOR REQUESTING BOARD ACTION (A) Complete Application Required. All requests to the BOA shall be filed on an application form provided by the staff liaison. The staff liaison shall determine if an application is complete before accepting it for filing. (B) Timing of Submittal & Other Application Requirements. (1) Variances & Special Exceptions. (a) Except as provided in Paragraph (B)(1)(b), below, an application for a variance or special exception may be filed at any time provided that the Development Services …
Case Number: 2024-000021 BA D-10/1 6708 Bridge Hill Cove A History of Unpermitted Work and Permit Anomalies Appealed Permits: BP-2023-129658 and BP-2023-129659 August 12, 2024 Presenter: Warren Konkel ITEM05/1-PRESENTATION-APPELLANT D-10/2 Original Construction in 1989 1989 Original house and driveway completed (BP-8717316) June 29, 1989 Original survey performed by Michael McMinn. He still has his field notes. July 11, 2024 McMinn performs an IC Study based on his original survey and determines: Total IC at that time was 10,803 sqft. ITEM05/2-PRESENTATION-APPELLANT D-10/3 Pool Addition in 1990 Original swimming pool and patio finished construction in March 1990 (BP-8912843). July 11, 2024 McMinn used historical photos and documents to estimate that the pool deck added 605 sqft. Total IC is now 11,408 sqft. ITEM05/3-PRESENTATION-APPELLANT D-10/4 Annexation and Ordinances Changes Annexation (2000): ● City Ordinance: 001214-34 ● Exception for Existing IC: LDC § 25-2-532 Lake Austin Overlay District Ordinance (2014): ● Ordinance: 20140626-114 ● Effective Date: July 7, 2014 ● IC Requirement: Must comply with LDC § 25-2-551 Total IC at Time of Annexation: 11,408 sqft ITEM05/4-PRESENTATION-APPELLANT Unpermitted Expansions (2014) In October 2014, there were unpermitted expansions to the driveway, front walkway, and pool patio. According to a 2021 survey, this increased impervious coverage by 3,457 sqft. Total IC is now 14,865 IC. D-10/5 Oct 2013 Oct 2014 Aug 2015 ITEM05/5-PRESENTATION-APPELLANT D-10/6 Unauthorized Construction (2021) In March 2021, an application was submitted for addition of front porch and master closet expansion. (PR-2021-050731) This permit was not approved, yet the additions were constructed, adding an estimated 240 sqft. PR-2021-050731 Total IC is now 15,105 IC. Before After After ITEM05/6-PRESENTATION-APPELLANT Pool House and Cabana Application Errors (2023) In June 2023, an application containing numerous errors was submitted to replace the pool and back patio with a 707 sqft pool house and covered terrace. (PR-2023-069215) D-10/7 ITEM05/7-PRESENTATION-APPELLANT Wood Deck Reclassified as “Existing Conc Patio” Here are the unapproved 2021 PR and the 2023 PR side-by-side: 2021 2023 D-10/8 The 359 sqft of “Uncovered wood decks” is no longer present on the 2023 application. Instead this is represented as “Existing Conc Patio”. The McMinn survey shows that the original construction was a “wood deck” and only counts 50% towards IC. ITEM05/8-PRESENTATION-APPELLANT Unapproved Additions Not Included D-10/9 The 2023 PR does NOT include the unpermitted 2021 front additions: This addition should be considered “new construction” and included on this permit. It still has not been inspected. ITEM05/9-PRESENTATION-APPELLANT Non-Existant “Lower …
TO: FROM: Jessica Cohen, Chair Board of Adjustment Members Brent D. Lloyd Development Officer Development Services Department DATE: August 7, 2024 SUBJECT: Case No. C15-2024-0025 | 6708 Bridge Hill Cove The matter before the Board is an appeal of an administrative decision by the Development Services Department (“DSD”) to approve a building permit for residential development 6708 Bridge Hill Cove. The issues in the appeal concern the amount of impervious cover (“IC”) approved for the project in relation to applicable zoning regulations. To assist the Board in understanding the issues, this report is laid out as follows: (1) General background, including DSD’s decision approving the permit under appeal and the development history of the subject property, at pp. 1-2; (2) Procedural requirements for the appeal, at pp. 2-3; and (3) DSD’s recommended action on the appeal, at p. 3. 1. Background — Decision on Appeal On March 24, 2024, DSD approved a building permit (BP No. 2023-129658) for construction of a two-story addition and related improvements to the existing residential structure at 6708 Bridge Hill Cove. After the permit was approved, the Appellant (Mr. Warren Konkel) identified errors in the review process related to the calculation of impervious cover. In particular, Mr. Konkel correctly pointed out that some of the impervious cover shown as “existing” on the approved building plans was associated with development that had never received permits from the City. After reviewing Mr. Konkel’s concerns, DSD determined that the proposed plans submitted on behalf of the landowner, Ms. Christy May, incorrectly denoted unpermitted development as “existing” and that review staff had failed to catch the error. Consistent with LDC Sec. 25-11-66 (Errors in Permit Support Documents), DSD placed an administrative hold on the permit halting further inspections pending resolution of the impervious cover issues. ITEM05/1-STAFF REPORT While the hold remained in place, DSD reviewed the site’s development history using available plans, aerial photography, and an IC analysis provided by the applicant (see Attachment A) to determine the amount of impervious cover associated with the original construction permitted in 1987 and 1989. Based on that review, DSD determined that approximately 12,811 square feet of impervious cover was associated with the original development and that an additional 1,000 square feet is permissible based on an established policy allowing limited modifications to projects initiated before currently applicable regulations took effect.1 (See Attachment B.) On June 21, 2024, DSD lifted the administrative …
Presenter and property owner: Christi Lane My dogs, Sophie and Pickles, playing in the exact location of the latest vehicle impact. 2104 Westover Rd Austin, Texas 78703 A little about me: A native Texan, I first moved to Austin in the 90s to attend the University of Texas at Austin. I own 2 businesses. One, Reform Pilates, is a local business established in 2006. I am back at UT studying genetics with the desire to be a part of scientific research. I have lived in my home for about 15 years. I have loved watching Austin grow with the exception of the detriment to my property. I have taken this fall semester off to handle this important issue. I am asking for your help with a hardship variance for my safety and protection of my property. ITEM02/1-PRESENTATION Background: In the 1969 plans for Loop 1 (Mopac), 3 streets were considered Type E Separations for the area: Hancock Dr, W. 45th Street, and my street, Westover Rd. Other intersections were classified as redirects. ITEM02/2-PRESENTATION My home, built in 1952, is unique in that the property was bisected diagonally leaving the remaining property downhill and exposed to the direction of traffic from the southbound Westover Rd exit ramp. No other property in the area with equivalent downtown traffic has this juxtaposition. ITEM02/3-PRESENTATION 185m 183m The problem Another feature of the property is the change in altitude relative to traffic flow. The photo shows readings taken with an altimeter at selected levels of the southbound Westover Rd exit ramp. The difference in grade from the ramp to my property is 13 feet with my home being the lower altitude. . 172m ITEM02/4-PRESENTATION The problem: Hazardous airborne debris, often with the velocity of highway traffic. When I leave my house, I shut the doors to all rooms containing north (backyard) facing windows and I block access to the doggie- door. This gives me some mild reassurance that my dogs will be safe when a window breaks. I have experienced a total of 5 breaks located at the back of the house from airborne debris since I have lived in my home. I have also had punctured siding, though I consider this less threatening. I don’t use my backyard when I have an inadequate fence because I fear injury. ITEM02/5-PRESENTATION June 12, 2024 After the wreck that took the fence down on April 18, 2024, …
4812 Palisade Drive Austin, TX 78731 Board of Adjustment C15-2024-0026 Ryan Scurlock & Sarah Crawford (homeowners) ITEM03/1-PRESENTATION Plot Plan ITEM03/2-PRESENTATION Existing Conditions ITEM03/3-PRESENTATION Variance Summary: We’d like to install a pool without having to make drastic changes to the original home ITEM03/4-PRESENTATION Zoning History • Zoning on property had been incorrect for many years per city property profile ITEM03/5-PRESENTATION Existing Impervious Coverage Map • Original home is existing non-compliant with respect to LA impervious coverage %’s ITEM03/6-PRESENTATION Case Study of Recent Pool Project in Community • We researched the details of our neighbor’s pool project at 4601 Palisade Dr (permitted 2022) to understand the details of their permitting • It quickly became clear they were able to permit without variance due to their lot size being 47% larger than ours (13,325 SF vs 9,039 SF) ITEM03/7-PRESENTATION Hardship (Lot Size) • Our property is one of the smallest lots in the Cliff Over Lake Austin subdivision (9,039 SF) ITEM03/8-PRESENTATION Surrounding Structure ITEM03/9-PRESENTATION
Architectural vision : Peterson residence Presentation for Austin Board of Adjustment ITEM04/1-PRESENTATION Presentation agenda : Today, I’m excited to take you through our project in detail, we will begin by discussing the project objectives, next, we will dive into the proposed design concept. Finally, we will show how our design thoughtfully aligns with the Bouldin neighborhood. ITEM04/2-PRESENTATION Project overview Currently the house stands at 1626 sqf with a lot size of 2,265 sqf. The existing layout includes two bedrooms , 2.5 bathrooms and a cover carport but lacks a main common area. Our plan is to preserve the original design and layout of the house while embracing the unique challenges it presents. Our goal is to create an outdoor space that accommodates the needs of a growing family, while ensuring that the home’s character and charm remains intact. ITEM04/3-PRESENTATION Project objective ● Making the house suitable for a military family of three that is moving back from abroad , ensuring enough space and comfort for everyone. ● Ensuring enough outdoor space for gathering or entertainment. ● Gaining an extra covered parking. ● Add attractive design elements, combining a classic and modern styles for a beautiful appearance. ITEM04/4-PRESENTATION Deck design Our outdoor deck design concept aims to create a modern and functional space that serves as a space for family and friend gathering, as well as a connection space for greeting neighbors. ITEM04/5-PRESENTATION Deck design ITEM04/6-PRESENTATION Project variant for second story deck: Second story deck with staircase leading to downstairs size of the deck is 350 square- foot in total including stairs. Addition to extend beyond the front 15 foot front building set back. ITEM04/7-PRESENTATION Deck Variant The current residence occupies 1,626 square feet of a 2,265 square-foot lot, leaving minimal space for outdoor gatherings or events. The purpose of this construction project is to accommodate a retiring military family of three relocating from out of country who require additional outdoor space for family activities. Due to the limited lot size, we have explored various options but have not identified any viable alternatives for creating a more functional outdoor area. Our primary goal is to enhance the outdoor space to better support the homeowner's needs for family gatherings and outdoor activities. Having families outside in their yards encourages safety and togetherness of the community. ITEM04/8-PRESENTATION Today we shared our vision for the transformation of the Peterson residence. We are excited about …
