CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet D-1 DATE: Monday November 8, 2021 CASE NUMBER: C15-2021-0100 ___Y___Thomas Ates ___Y___Brooke Bailey ___Y___Jessica Cohen ___Y___Melissa Hawthorne ___Y___Barbara Mcarthur ___Y___Rahm McDaniel ___Y___Darryl Pruett ___-____Agustina Rodriguez (abstained) ___Y___Richard Smith ___-____Michael Von Ohlen (out) ___-____Nicholl Wade (out) ___Y___Kelly Blume (Alternate) ___-____Carrie Waller (Alternate) (abstained) _______Vacant (Alternate) OWNER/APPLICANT: Ian Ellis ADDRESS: 1003 KINNEY AVE VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from the Land Development Code: Section 25-2-943 (B) (2) (a) (Substandard Lot) to decrease the minimum Lot Size requirements from 5,750 square feet (required) to 5,464 square feet (requested), (TCAD records show 5,740 sq. ft.) in order to erect a Single-Family residence with a Pool in a “SF-3”, Single-Family zoning district. Note: 25-2-943 SUBSTANDARD LOT (B) A substandard lot may be used for a single-family residential use if the use is permitted in the zoning district in which the lot is located and the lot complies with the requirements of this subsection. (2) A substandard lot recorded in the county real property records after March 14, 1946 must: (a) have an area of not less than 5,750 square feet. BOARD’S DECISION: BOA MEETING NOV 8, 2021 The public hearing was closed by Madam Chair Jessica Cohen, Board Member Melissa Hawthorne motions to Postpone to December 13, 2021; Board Member Darryl Pruett seconds on a 9-0-2 vote (Board members Agustina Rodriguez and Carrie Waller Abstained); POSTPONED TO DECEMBER 13, 2021. FINDING: E-2/1 1. The Zoning regulations applicable to the property do not allow for a reasonable use because: 2. (a) The hardship for which the variance is requested is unique to the property in that: (b) The hardship is not general to the area in which the property is located because: 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: ______________________________ Elaine Ramirez Executive Liaison ____________________________ Jessica Cohen Madam Chair E-2/2 ADVANCED PACKET TABLE OF CONTENTS: 1. EXISTING VACANT SUBSTANDARD LOT DEFINITION 2. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 3. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT RENDER 4. NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION CORRESPONDENCE 5. 1003 KINNEY AVE LOT HISTORY 6. COA CORRESPONDENCE DURING EXPEDITED REVIEW 7. COA CORRESPONDENCE POST EXPEDITED REVIEW 8. COA CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING ZONING INFORMATION 9. COA CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING ALLEY ACCESS 10. SUPPLEMENT INFORMATION PG 2 PG …
E-2/52 E-2/53 E-2/54 E-2/55 E-2/56 E-2/57 E-2/58 E-2/59 E-2/60 E-2/61 From: To: Subject: Date: Mark Hoelscher Ramirez, Elaine Board of Adjustment: Case number C15-2021-0100 Monday, November 01, 2021 11:04:37 AM *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Elaine- I'm emailing you back regarding the request for rezoning on Kinney Ave. My Name: C. Mark Hoelscher Address: 1108 Kinney Ave, Austin 78704 Phone Number: 512.975.9117 Case C15-2021-0100 Comments: In our opinion, please allow for the rezoning of the subject property at 1003 Kinney Ave. The use of the property for an SF-3 single family with pool should be allowed, it is within the former use of the property. As a favor, could an amendment be added to the allowed SF-3 rezoning to prevent the future addition of an ABU on the lot. Thank you to you and your department for reaching out to us as neighbors and "stakeholders." Best regards, Mark Hoelscher CAUTION: This email was received at the City of Austin, from an EXTERNAL source. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious and/or phishing email, please forward this email to cybersecurity@austintexas.gov. E-2/62 Austin Stowell Ramirez, Elaine From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: 2021-000085 BA - Notice of Support SUPPORT Monday, November 08, 2021 6:33:40 AM *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** My name is Austin Stowell. I Ama Zilker neighbor live at 904 Ethel St and am writing a letter of support in favor of Case # 2021-000085 BA for the property located at 1003 Kinney. The design is far superior than the ubiquitous Hardie plan structures in the neighborhood being erected by many spec builders and will help contribute, not detract to the neighborhood character. The existing structure is in poor condition. All buildings have a natural life.. The IRS limits the functional life of a building to 27.5 years. This particular structure is in disrepair and not economically feasible to be repaired. Every property owner deserves the right to replace their existing home. In this case, the zoning does not allow for reasonable use of the land. I think the Board is justified in approving the request because reasonable use is currently excluded. The property is unique to the area. I am aware of only 3 lots in Zilker that are less than 5750 square feet that are not exempted from variance by the age of the plat. …
BOA Monthly Report July 2021-June 2022 November 8, 2021 5 Granted 1. 25-2-515 (Rear Yard of a Through Lot) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum rear yard setback and Subchapter F Residential Design and Compatibility Standards, Article 3, 3.3.2 (A) (1) (Gross Floor Area) for a detached parking area to decrease the minimum distance requirement from the principal structure 2. 25-2-551 (Lake Austin District Regulations) (C) (3) a) increase the maximum impervious cover on a slope b) increase the maximum impervious cover on a slope c) increase the maximum impervious cover on a slope and d) increase maximum impervious cover on a slope 3. 25-2-551 (Lake Austin District Regulations) (B) (1) (a) from shoreline setback requirements to reduce the shoreline setback 4. 25-2-1176 (Site Development Regulations for Docks, Marinas, and Other Lakefront Uses) (A) (1) to increase the dock length 5. 25-2-899 (Fences as Accessory Uses) (D) & (E) to increase the fence height and Article 10, Compatibility Standards, Division 2 –Development Standards, Section 25-2-1063 (Height Limitations and Setbacks for Large Sites) (C) (2) to increase height limit and Article 10, Compatibility Standards, Division 2 –Development Standards, Section 25-2-1063 (Height Limitations and Setbacks for Large Sites) (C) (3) to increase allowed height 3 Postponed 1. 25-10-133 (University Neighborhood Overlay Zoning District Signs), requesting a total of 1 sign(s) on the property: a)(F) to allow one (1) wall signs above the second floor and b) (H) to allow for the one (1) sign(s) to all be illuminated 2. 25-2-943 (B) (2) (a) (Substandard Lot) to decrease the minimum Lot Size requirements 3 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) to decrease the minimum Lot Size requirements and 25-2-947 (Nonconforming Use Regulation Groups) (B) (2) to increase the improvement value Denied 0 Withdrawn 1 1. 25-2-1063 (Height Limitations and Setbacks for Large Sites) a) (C) (1) (a) increase height limit and b) (C) (2) (a) increase height limit and c) (C) (3) increase height limit Discussion Items 8 items Oct 2021. Interpretations 0 new inquiries The deposition of the case items: (Added Nov 8, 2021 #’s) 17 A. Granted 28 B. Postponed 6 C. Withdrawn 2 D. Denied E. Discussion Items 22 F-1/1 October 11, 2021 Due to not enough Board Members present at the meeting, all items were postponed to Nov 8, 2021 or as requested by applicant. Granted 0 9 Postponed 1) 25-10-133 (University Neighborhood Overlay Zoning District Signs), requesting a total …
Proposed changes to Board of adjustment Rules of Procedure ARTICLE I. GENERAL PROVISIONS Add "(C) MEETINGS 1. The regular meetings of the Board of Adjustment shall be held at 5:30PM on the second Monday of each month at Austin City Hall. 2. Any matters postponed at the request of the Board of Adjustment will be placed at the beginning of the agenda at the Board’s next meeting. 3. Any matters postponed at the request of the applicant will be placed on the agenda at the Board’s next meeting after matters categorized by Article I (C)2 4. At 10:00 PM, the Board may, in its discretion, extend the meeting if necessary." F-2/1
December 6, 2021 Stuart Sampley 2000 Peach Tree St Austin TX, 78704 Re: C15-2021-0057 Property Description: LOT 16 PECAN ORCHARD Dear Stuart, Austin Energy (AE) has reviewed your application for the above referenced property, requesting that the Board of Adjustment consider a variance(s) from LDC, Section 25-2-899 (D) (Fences as Accessory Uses) to exceed the average fence height along Bluebonnet St and Peach Tree Street. 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 Public Involvement | Real Estate Services 2500 Montopolis Drive Austin, TX 78741 (512) 322-6881
We are seeking a variance from Section 25-2-899(D) (Fences as Accessory Uses) to exceed the average height of six (6) feet or a maximum of seven (7) feet for a solid fence construction along the property line in order to maintain a seven (7) foot tall masonry, wood & steel fence along Bluebonnet & Peach Tree Streets. REASONABLE USE The zoning regulations applicable to the property do not allow for a reasonable use because: ADJOING PROPERTY IS THE RIGHT-OF-WAY (NO CONSENT), TOPOGRPAHY OF PROPERTY RANGES 2FT. COMMERICAL PROPERTY ACROSS BLUEBONNET. FENCE DOES NOT EXCEED 7FT AT ANY POINT. HARDSHIP The hardship for which the variance is requested is unique to the property in that: ADJOING PROPERTY IS THE RIGHT-OF-WAY (NO CONSENT), TOPOGRAPHY OF PROPERTY RANGES 2FT. COMMERICAL PROPERTY ACROSS BLUEBONNET. FENCE DOES NOT EXCEED 7FT AT ANY POINT. The hardship is not general to the area in which the property is located because: ADJOINING PROPERTY IS THE RIGHT-OF-WAY (NO CONSENT), TOPOGRAPHY OF PROPERTY RANGES 2FT. COMMERICAL PROPERTY ACROSS BLUEBONNET. FENCE DOES NOT EXCEED 7FT AT ANY POINT. 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: SIMILAR TYPE FENCING EXISTS ON PROPERTIES ALONG BLUEBONNET STREET. ADJOING PROPERTY IS THE RIGHT-OF-WAY (NO CONSENT), TOPOGRPAHY OF PROPERTY RANGES 2FT. COMMERICAL PROPERTY ACROSS BLUEBONNET. FENCE DOES NOT EXCEED 7FT AT ANY POINT. D-1/1-PRESENTATION § 25-2-899 FENCES AS ACCESSORY USES. (A) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, a fence: (B) is permitted as an accessory use in any zoning district; and (1) (2) must comply with the requirements of this section. In this section: (1) (2) The height restrictions of this section do not apply to an ornamental fence. an ornamental fence is a fence with an open design that has a ratio of solid material to open space of not more than one to four; and a solid fence is a fence other than an ornamental fence. (C) (D) Except as otherwise provided in this section, a solid fence constructed along a property line may not exceed an average height of six feet or a maximum height of seven feet. (E) A solid fence along a property line may be constructed to a maximum height of …
December 6, 2021 Michael Gaudini 403 E Koenig Ln Austin TX, 78751 Re: C15-2021-0101 Property Description: ABS 789 SUR 57 WALLACE J P ACR 7.202 Dear Michael, Austin Energy (AE) has reviewed your application for the above referenced property, requesting that the Board of Adjustment consider a variance(s) from Section 25-2-1063 to increase building height limit. 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 Public Involvement | Real Estate Services 2500 Montopolis Drive Austin, TX 78741 (512) 322-6881
Koenig Lane Compatibility Variance Request 1 D-2/1-PRESENTATION Koenig Lane City policies establish a clear vision for the site as an appropriate location for directing new growth and obtaining affordable housing and quality parkland. 2 D-2/2-PRESENTATION Koenig Lane City policies establish a clear vision for the site as an appropriate location for directing new growth and obtaining affordable housing and quality parkland. However, the site faces unique constraints that meaningfully impact its ability to achieve this reasonable use, impacting the site from all sides. 3 D-2/3-PRESENTATION Koenig Lane City policies establish a clear vision for the site as an appropriate location for directing new growth and obtaining affordable housing and quality parkland. However, the site faces unique constraints that meaningfully impact its ability to achieve this reasonable use, impacting the site from all sides. The requested compatibility variance addresses this issue – and is supported by the North Loop Neighborhood Association and the Parks & Recreation Department. 4 D-2/4-PRESENTATION 403 E. Koenig – located within the North Loop Neighborhood D-2/5-PRESENTATION The site is within an Imagine Austin Center. D-2/6-PRESENTATION The site is surrounded on three sides by the Transit Priority Network. D-2/7-PRESENTATION The site is along the Red Line Parkway, a future Tier 1 Urban Trail. D-2/8-PRESENTATION Constraints: Over 16% Constraint Site Area Impacted Geographic Proximity to Railroad Crossing (East) and Avenue F/Koenig Lane Intersection (West) Site Layout Impact Public Utility Easement and Electrical and Telecoms Easement (East) On-Site Protected Trees Water Line (North) Power Line (South) Site Shape (East) 1.04% 7.53% 2.41% 5.54% Site Layout Impact 9 D-2/9-PRESENTATION Constraints: Over 31% Constraint Site Area Impacted Geographic Proximity to Railroad Crossing (East) and Avenue F/Koenig Lane Intersection (West) Site Layout Impact Public Utility Easement and Electrical and Telecoms Easement (East) On-Site Protected Trees Water Line (North) Power Line (South) Site Shape (East) Key Consideration: Ensuring Quality Parkland 1.04% 7.53% 2.41% 5.54% 15% Site Layout Impact 10 D-2/10-PRESENTATION For Illustrative Purposes Only Without Requested Variance 11 D-2/11-PRESENTATION Imagine Austin For Illustrative Purposes Only With Requested Variance 12 D-2/12-PRESENTATION Without Requested Variance: • Does Not Fully Meet City Vision • Does Not Address Hardship • Divided Parkland • Less Affordability With Requested Variance: • Implements City Vision • Addresses Hardship • Larger, Consolidated Parkland • Maximizes Affordability 13 D-2/13-PRESENTATION Context: Vertical Mixed-Use Project VERTICAL MIXED-USE 10% AFFORDABLE UNITS 40-YEAR AFFORDABILITY Affordable Units – With Variance: Affordable Units – Without Variance: Affordable Unit Loss …
December 6, 2021 Katherine Loayza 3201 Westlake Dr Austin TX, 78746 Re: C15-2021-0102 Property Description: LOT 80&81 LAKE SHORE ADDN ABS 772 SUR 1 THOMAS D ACR 1.967 Dear Katherine, Austin Energy (AE) has reviewed your application for the above referenced property, requesting that the Board of Adjustment consider a variance from LDC, Section 25-2-551 to reduce the shoreline setback from 75 feet to 25 feet along a man-made slough. 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 II Public Involvement | Real Estate Services 2500 Montopolis Drive Austin, TX 78741 (512) 322-6881
LAKE AUSTIN OVERLAY (LA) 75’ Shoreline Setback Variance Extension Address: 3201 Westlake Dr., Austin 78731 Case Number: C15-2021-0102 Applicant: Pam Madere D-3/1-PRESENTATION AERIAL VIEW 3201 Westlake Drive, Austin 78746 Case Number: C15-2021-0102 AUSTIN | DALLAS | FORT WORTH | HOUSTON | SAN ANGELO | SAN ANTONIO | TEXARKANA D-3/2-PRESENTATION Previous 2018 BOA Decision – Granted a 25’ Shoreline Setback from the Man-Made Slough D-3/3-PRESENTATION Areas of No Development D-3/4-PRESENTATION AERIAL of 25’ Shoreline Setback from Man-Made Slough AUSTIN | DALLAS | FORT WORTH | HOUSTON | SAN ANGELO | SAN ANTONIO | TEXARKANA D-3/5-PRESENTATION CURRENT SURVEY D-3/6-PRESENTATION
Owner and development team is seeking a variance request to allow for a new construction build on a substandard lot located at 1003 Kinney Ave. Austin, TX 78704. Current lot size is 5,461 SF and minimum allowable site to build on per current SF-3 zoning is 5,750 SF. The hardship is the original full lot size of 10,928 SF when split into halves of 5,461 SF for our lot, and 5,468 for the adjacent ½ lot, does not meet the minimum site area required by current SF-3 Zoning. This hardship would not be able to be overcome without the approval of the BOA in our variance request. Without the variance request this lot would remain vacant as we have confirmed through our research and the option of obtaining a portion of the adjacent city owned alley was rejected by the COA. Original plat and our most current site plat are from 1896. However, our lot was split into two separate tax parcels with no updated plat in 1947. The deeds in our following presentation packet document this transfer of ownership from legal lot to substandard lot status with no plat update. This was also confirmed through the Travis County Tax Accessor’s Office. The Tax Parcel map and deed documents indicate this split. In addition to the conflicting lot history that split the lots without updating the plat, there was construction allowed on the adjacent 1/2 lot last approved by the COA in 2007. This new construction had a previous residence which was demolished with no variance required to build new on the lot. Subsequent building permit was obtained for 2007 and was confirmed with our COA contact Eric Thomas. In seeking our variance, we have researched two avenues in how to be able to build on our lot. One being the recommended avenue of seeking a 1995 plat exemption to apply for legal lot status and therefore not require a variance, and second requesting a variance through the BOA. There was a previous land status determination that was approved on our lot through the 1995 Rule Platting Exception that was granted on February 25, 2019 and included in our Advanced packet. We presented this information to our permit reviewers/supervisors for an E-2/1-PRESENTATION avenue forward to build on our site, however the city of Austin planning department would not allow us to build on our lot with only that as documentation …
§ 2-1-111 - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. (A) The Board of Adjustment is established as provided in Local Government Code Chapter 211 (Municipal Zoning Authority). (B) The board shall be composed of 11 members. (C) Each board member shall be appointed to serve a two-year term. (D) The council may appoint alternate board members to serve in the absence of regular members. An alternate member shall be appointed to serve a two-year term. (E) A regular or alternate board member may be removed by council for cause on a written charge after a public hearing. (F) The board shall: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (1) (2) board. 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 administrative action under Chapter 25-2 (Zoning); hear and decide a request for a variance from the requirements of airport zoning regulations under Section 241.034, Local Government Code; hear and decide a request for a special exception under Chapter 25-2 (Zoning); and perform other duties prescribed by ordinance or state law. (G) The board shall hold meetings at the call of the chairperson and at other times as requested by the (H) The chairperson, or the acting chairperson in the absence of the chairperson, may administer oaths and compel the attendance of witnesses. (I) Each case before the board must be heard by at least 75 percent of the board members. (J) The concurring vote of 75 percent of the board members is necessary to: reverse an order, requirement, decision, or determination of an administrative official; decide in favor of an applicant on a matter on which the board is required to pass under Chapter 25-2 (Zoning); or (3) authorize a variation from the terms of Chapter 25-2 (Zoning). (K) The board shall prepare minutes of its proceedings. The minutes shall include the vote of each member on each item before the board and shall state if a member is absent or fails to vote on an item. Source: Ord. 20071129-011; Ord. 20080110-048; Ord. 20080618-030; Ord. 20110526-098;Ord. No. 20141211-204, Pt. 14, 7-1-15. F-6/1 ARTICLE 3. - PROCEDURES FOR APPEALS Division 1. - Reserved.[2] Footnotes: --- (2) --- §§ 2-5-41—2-5-45. - RESERVED. Division 2. - Appeals. § 2-5-61 - GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR APPEALS. Editor's note— Ord. No. 20170518-014 >, Pt. 4, effective May 29, 2017, repealed §§ …
AGENDA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT December 13, 2021at 5:30PM Austin City Hall, Council Chambers, Room 1001 301 West 2nd Street, Austin, Texas 78701 Some members of the Board of Adjustment may be participating by videoconference. The meeting may be viewed online at: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch-atxn-live ___Agustina Rodriguez ___Richard Smith ___Michael Von Ohlen ___Nicholl Wade ___Kelly Blume (Alternate) ___Carrie Waller (Alternate) ___Vacant (Alternate) ___Thomas Ates ___Brooke Bailey ___Jessica Cohen (Chair) ___Melissa Hawthorne (Vice Chair) ___Barbara Mcarthur ___Rahm McDaniel ___Darryl Pruett EXECUTIVE SESSION (No public discussion) The Board of Adjustment will announce it will go into Executive Session, if necessary, pursuant to Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code, to receive advice from Legal Counsel on matters specifically listed on this agenda. The Board of Adjustment may also announce it will go into Executive Session, if necessary, to receive advice from Legal Counsel regarding any other item on this agenda. Private Consultation with Attorney – Section 551.071 CALL TO ORDER CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first (4) four speakers who register to speak no later than noon the day before the meeting will be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. A. DISCUSSION AND REQUESTED ACTION ITEM Staff requests approval November 8, 2021 draft minutes A-1 On-Line Link: Item A-1 B. C. D. DISCUSSION AND REQUESTED ACTION ITEM B-1 Staff and Applicant requests for postponement and withdraw of items posted on this Agenda SIGNS PREVIOUS POSTPONEMENTS C-1 C16-2021-0011 Renee Bornn for Villas Rio, LP 2111 Rio Grande Street On-Line Link: Item C-1; NO PRESENTATION The applicant is requesting a sign variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-10-133 (University Neighborhood Overlay Zoning District Signs), requesting a total of 1 sign(s) on the property: a) (F) to allow one (1) wall signs above the second floor (maximum allowed) to the eight floor (requested) b) (H) to allow for the one (1) sign(s) to all be illuminated in order to provide signage for the Villas on Rio Grande in a “GO-MU, LO-NP, MF-4-NP”, General Office-Mixed Use, Limited Office, Multi-Family– Neighborhood Plan zoning district. (West University Neighborhood Plan) Note: The Land Development Code sign regulations 25-10-133 University Neighborhood Overlay Zoning Districts Signs (F) No signs may be placed above the second floor of a building, except for a non- electric sign that is engraved, cut into the building surface, or otherwise inlaid to become part of the building. (H) A sign …
From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments: Renee Bornn Ramirez, Elaine Ramirez, Diana RE: [EXT] REMINDER: Mon. Dec. 13, 2021 BOA PRESENTATION deadline Thursday, December 02, 2021 9:35:13 AM image004.png image005.png *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Morning ladies, I still have not heard back from the new owners so I would like to postpone our meeting on the agenda until next month please: C16-2021-0011 / 2111 Rio Grande St Please note our office will be closed the following days: Closed Dec. 24th-January 2nd Renée Bornn Senior Account Executive www.buildingimagegroup.com Building Image Group, Inc. 1200 E. Third St. Studio One Austin, TX 78702 t: 512.494.1466 d:512.592.4716 f: 512.494.1403 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email, including any attachments, contains information which may be confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by "reply to sender only" message and destroy all electronic and hard copies of the communication, including attachments. From: Ramirez, Elaine <Elaine.Ramirez@austintexas.gov> Sent: Thursday, December 2, 2021 7:48 AM Cc: Ramirez, Diana <Diana.Ramirez@austintexas.gov> Subject: [EXT] REMINDER: Mon. Dec. 13, 2021 BOA PRESENTATION deadline Importance: High Attention: This is an external email. Please note if this warning is present on an email from a @buildingimagegroup.com email it is likely a phishing impersonation attempt. Please block and mark as junk. Good morning Applicants on the Mon. December 13th, 2021 BOA mtg. Agenda, C-1/1-LATE BACKUP Please read this entire e-mail The deadline to submit the Presentation (must be submitted in PDF format or PowerPoint) is Monday, December 6th, before 3p.m. Presentation: If you would like the Board to follow along with you as you are giving your presentation (You will have 5 minutes to hone in on the main aspects of the case as you are presenting the case to the Board), you will need to have your Presentation completed and sent to me in PDF format or PowerPoint to give to our City Technician as well as our BOA Board will have access to view this the week prior to the meeting (DO NOT send in a drop box as our systems do not support drop box). The Deadline for this is Monday, December 6th, before …
D-1/1-LATE BACKUP From: To: Subject: Date: Kurt Schultz Ramirez, Elaine Public hearing LD Code Variance. Case# C15-2021-0057 (2000 Peach Tree) Wednesday, December 08, 2021 3:57:57 PM *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Dear Ms Ramirez, Referring to Case Number C15-2021-0057 The applicant is requesting a variance from Land Development Code, Section 25-2-899 (D) Fences as accessory uses). I received a notice in the mail because I live within 500 feet I have lived in and owned my house since 1995 and am against granting this variance for several reasons. First and foremost is that we reported this deviation from code well before the fence was finished. When the pre-framing was started, it was obvious that the fence was going to be too high. It was reported to 311, who then referred me to Residential Review where I reported it again. I was then referred to Code Compliance where I reported it again. I was then referred to Code Violation where I reported it again and had several conversations with the inspector during the time the fence was under construction. At least four (4) Notices of Violation were sent, along with a requirement allowing 30 days to comply (with accompanying fines mentioned The other reasons have to do partly with the aesthetics of the neighborhood. Granting a variance like this will only encourage others to request variances which will further erode the character of the neighborhood. These types of fences result in what looks like "Compounds" that discourage the neighborliness of the neighborhood and make it feel more like a separated "Gated" community. These kinds of additions also drive up property values which, because taxes are based on "market value", results in higher taxes for everyone in the neighborhood. The fence is also built on a berm, so the effective height is well over seven (7) feet. The new owners also contend that there is a business across the street on the Bluebonnet side which justifies their request, but that business has been there for many, many years and the previous owner of the property had only a much shorter chain link fence which encompassed only half of his lot The new owners also think that because there are a few other out of compliance fences in the neighborhood, that in itself should justify allowing a variance. I disagree and think that those fences should also be made to come …
D-1/1-LATE BACKUP From: To: Subject: Date: Abbey Seidensticker Ramirez, Elaine Case Number C15-2021-0057; Variance Request Hearing 12/13/21 Monday, December 06, 2021 1:48:33 PM *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Case Number: C15-2021-0057 Abbey Seidensticker 1602 Bluebonnet Ln, Austin, Texas 78704 512-529-4074 I am in favor of granting the variance. Comments: I am the next door neighbor to Mr. & Mrs. Burkhart and our property shares a fence line with their property. We believe the variance request should be granted Bluebonnet Lane is a busy street, not only for vehicular traffic, but also bicycles and pedestrians. It is a popular route to get to large events such as ACL Festival, Trail of Lights, Blues on the Green, and many others. Our properties are also across the street from businesses such as Bluebonnet Food Mart and Thoroughbread, further increasing the amount of activity around our homes. Tall fences are the norm along this street to ensure privacy and increase security. The fence at 2000 Peach Tree Street is very attractive and in similar taste as many other fences along Bluebonnet. Please let me know if you need any additional information in order to have my comments submitted to the Board of Adjustment. Thank you, Abbey Seidensticker CAUTION: This email was received at the City of Austin, from an EXTERNAL source. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious and/or phishing email, please forward this email to cybersecurity@austintexas.gov. D-1/2-LATE BACKUP From: To: Subject: Date: Cindy Cross Ramirez, Elaine Case # C15-2021-0057 Variance Friday, December 10, 2021 3:23:24 PM *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Cindy Cross 2001 Peach Tree Street Austin, TX 78704 I live across the street from the Burkharts. I am strongly in favor of granting the variance, for the following reasons: 1) Aesthetically the fence and landscaping are gorgeous! A+ on the whole project. The fence fits wonderfully into the Peach Tree neighborhood as well as this section of Bluebonnet. It actually improves the cohesiveness of the neighborhood. 2) Directly across the street from the Burkharts’ home is a commercial section. Michael A Laundry, Bluebonnet Market, Thoroughbread, as well as Zilker Properties are there. Modelo and Budweiser routinely park their 18 wheeler trucks and cabs in front of their home, as the beer companies seem to deliver around 7:30 in the morning. I’m sure the fence provides some relief …
From: To: Subject: Date: TONY ALONZI Ramirez, Elaine C15-2021-0101 Sunday, December 05, 2021 12:21:56 PM *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** CAUTION: This email was received at the City of Austin, from an EXTERNAL source. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious and/or phishing email, please forward this email to cybersecurity@austintexas.gov. Sent from my iPhone D-2/1-LATE BACKUP From: To: Subject: Date: Zach Reich Ramirez, Elaine C15-2021-0101 - Variance I OPPOSE (Both A and B) Monday, December 06, 2021 9:28:36 AM *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** I am completely opposed to this variance for this property. This is the property listed in the case number I put in the subject line. This change will dramatically raise the heights of this development and I think will be a big detractor in the neighborhood. Higher buildings mean more people which means more traffic and more potential parking spaces getting taken not to mention the size will be over bearing. 40 feet is already high enough but the fact they want to raise it to 60 feet is not acceptable in my opinion. I am completely opposed to this variance and I will be returning the form to the city and I will also make my best efforts to attend the variance hearings. In a nutshell I oppose this variance request. If you have any additional follow-up questions please feel free to contact me. Elaine, Regards, Zach R. CAUTION: This email was received at the City of Austin, from an EXTERNAL source. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious and/or phishing email, please forward this email to cybersecurity@austintexas.gov. D-2/2-LATE BACKUP D-2/3-LATE BACKUP From: To: Subject: Date: Amelia Hinds Ramirez, Elaine BOA12/13 Comments for Koenig SECO ventures height variance Monday, December 13, 2021 8:12:46 AM *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Hello Ms. Ramirez, Please include this written comment opposing the height variance for Koenig Hangar/Tx Gas Service on Koenig/Ave F. This variance would be extremely out of place, and create a huge increase in an already congested area surrounded by single family homes. The traffic light at this corner is already a dangerous mess. The property is surrounded by single family homes that have been there since the 50s. I have been here since the 80s, and have relied on …
From: To: Subject: Date: Patrick Goetz Ramirez, Elaine Case #C15-2021-0101 Tuesday, December 07, 2021 10:06:31 AM *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Hi - I'm writing to state that I SUPPORT the requested variance. The LDC Section 25-2-1063 is one of the primary reasons Austin has the among the highest housing costs in the nation. In the absence of a new, more inclusive LDC, we have to do the best that we can. Thank you. CAUTION: This email was received at the City of Austin, from an EXTERNAL source. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious and/or phishing email, please forward this email to cybersecurity@austintexas.gov. D-2/1-LATE BACKUP D-2/2-LATE BACKUP From: To: Subject: Date: Brian Poteet Ramirez, Elaine In support of C15-2021-0101 Friday, December 10, 2021 3:07:10 PM *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Hi Elaine, I can't attend the meeting next week, but I would like to voice my support for the variance request for the property at 403/201 East Koenig Ln and 5613 Avenue F. Here are a few reasons I think the variance should be approved: The city is behind on its housing goals (both affordable and market rate), and building higher on this lot will get us close to meeting those goals. The property is serviced by two high frequency bus lines. Building more housing on this lot will help the city meet its mode shift goals outlined in the ASMP. The North Loop Neighborhood Association unanimously voted in support of the variance. Personally I don't think this should matter given how unrepresentative the association is of the neighborhood, but I guess that probably matters to some of the commissioners. Compatibility requirements have a huge impact on this site, and it would be a real shame if we let those requirements get in the way of a better project for everyone. Best regards, Brian Poteet North Loop Homeowner CAUTION: This email was received at the City of Austin, from an EXTERNAL source. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious and/or phishing email, please forward this email to cybersecurity@austintexas.gov. D-2/3-LATE BACKUP From: To: Subject: Date: Shannon May Ramirez, Elaine Hangar project at Koenig & F Sunday, December 12, 2021 9:58:46 PM *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Case # C15-2021-0101 - 403/201 Ms. Ramirez, I’m …
Zilker Neighborhood Association __________________________________________________________________ Zoning Committee zilkerneighborhood@gmail.com Austin, TX 78704 December 5, 2021 Re: 1003 Kinney, lot-size variance, Case C15-2021-0100 December 13 Agenda item E2 To: Board of Adjustment c/o Elaine Ramirez, Development Review Dept., City of Austin via email Elaine.Ramirez@austintexas.gov Chair and Board Members: Thank you for allowing the zoning committee of the Zilker Neighborhood Association (ZNA) to review the variance request for 1003 Kinney (to decrease the minimum lot size from 5750 to 5464 square feet) and to share our recommendations with the applicants. City of Austin Supervisor Eric Thomas has now dated the parcel to September 1947, confirming that the minimum lot requirement of 5750 sf applies. His email of November 17 appears on page 9 of this letter. It eliminates the applicants’ argument that “At one time previously, it was likely this lot was larger, and would have met the minimum 5750sqft area for SF-3 and to not be considered a substandard lot.” Documents submitted by the applicants show that the alley has existed in its current configuration since 1896, and the dimensions of the parcel have always been approx. 62 ft × 88 ft—beginning in 1947, through 1962 when a house was built under the previous code, through March of this year when the applicants demolished the house, and up until today. That takes us back to the demolition question raised by ZNA at the hearing on November 8. The ZNA zoning committee believes that the “non-complying structure” regulations apply in this case (see 25-2-963 and 964, on page 7). This code allows an owner to rebuild or maintain an existing structure that does not comply with current code, as long as 50% of the supporting structure is preserved. Clearly, the zoning regulations allowed reasonable use before the house was demolished. ZNA is aware of two similar variance requests, at 1107 Kinney and 1516 Kinney, where lots were scraped without regard to 25-2-963. Both variances were denied for lack of a qualifying hardship. At 1003 Kinney, we now know that the entire structure was demolished sometime this year, and it was the applicants’ responsibility to verify before demolition that new construction would be 1 E-2/1-LATE BACKUP allowed. Evidence submitted by the applicants confirms that they were aware of the substandard lot size as early as January 2021, before they purchased the property. (A chronology appears on page 6.) Their survey in February 2021 …
