THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN Resolution to Schedule Planning Commission Meetings at Austin City Hall WHEREAS, the Planning Commission is established by Charter. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission receives authority and direction from State Law, City Charter, City Code and Planning Commission Rules of Procedure. WHEREAS, the City Charter establishes the membership of the commission to include the City Manager, the Chair of the Board of Adjustment, the Director of Public Works and the President of the Board of Trustees of the Austin Independent School District all serving as ex officio members. WHEREAS, in a memorandum dated October 19, 2021, the City of Austin Department Directors of Development Services and Housing and Planning notified chairs of land use boards and commissions that board and commission meetings would be relocated to the Permitting and Development Center (PDC) in February 2022. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, upon hearing concerns from the public and the other sovereign commissions of the City staff’s decision to move meetings from City Hall, took action by affirmative vote as provided by City code. WHEREAS, Planning Commission concurs with the concerns of Zoning and Platting Commission and the Zoning Board of Adjustment as documented in their resolutions on this matter. WHEREAS, on November 9, 2021, Planning Commission unanimously adopted amended Rules of Procedure to include the meeting place of Austin City Hall for all its regular meetings. WHEREAS, per City Code, adoption of the Planning Commission’s meeting schedule rests solely with the Planning Commission. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission unanimously approved its 2022 schedule identifying Austin City Hall as its meeting location, which was subsequently posted to the public on-line. WHEREAS, in accordance with City Code, on November 10, 2021, the approved 2022 meeting schedule was provided to the Office of the City Clerk. WHEREAS, on November 10, 2021, the Planning Commission Chair received an email from the City Clerk in response to the Planning Commission’s approved 2022 schedule that they would only book Planning Commission meetings at Austin City Hall through February 2022 and declining to book meetings for the remainder of 2022. WHEREAS, City code does not provide the Office of the City Clerk the right to deny the Planning Commission’s schedule submittal. WHEREAS, on November 9, 2021, the Planning Commission unanimously approved a recommendation to Council to change Planning Commission Bylaws to include Austin City Hall as the Planning Commission’s meeting location. WHEREAS, the change …
From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments: Hall, Stephanie Boards and Commissions Rodriguez, Joseph 2022 Regular Meeting Schedule Wednesday, October 6, 2021 6:03:17 PM Reservation Form.docx Dear Liaisons, That time of year has come upon us once again - it’s time to approve annual schedules! Although there is still some uncertainty in how meetings will look next year, each board or commission should approve their regular meeting schedule as they “normally” would. Please make sure your board or commission approves their 2022 regular meeting schedule in October or early November. Once approved, please send the approved schedule over to me (and Cc: Joseph) to review. We must receive the approved schedule by November 30th to maintain the Board’s place in the scheduling queue. The schedules should be approved as if meetings will be occurring in person. Adjustments will be made should anything change. Is your Board or Commission wanting to change the regular date/time of their meetings? Keep in mind any potential changes may cause rippling scheduling conflicts. Most boards and commissions have established dates and times to maintain a decent rotation and room availability. We will likely not be able to accommodate any changes in the schedule for City Hall rooms. Additionally, we are currently ONLY able to utilize Chambers or the Boards and Commissions Room for meetings at City Hall due to occupancy limits in place to accommodate social distancing. There is no telling when or how that will change, so I’m including a list of alternate contacts for other meeting locations below. Does your Board/Commission normally meet in City Hall? In addition to the approved schedule, complete and send the attached room request form. Typically reservation requests for City Hall should be sent to the reservation desk, but please send the annual requests to Joseph or I so they can be reviewed first. Other things to keep in mind: Please have the schedule discussion and approval on your B/C agenda as soon as possible. Schedules must be APPROVED by the Board or Commission to be added to the scheduling queue. Do not send us any draft calendars. We will not begin booking rooms until Council and Council Committees have approved their schedules and booked the necessary rooms. City Hall is at capacity – priority is given to meetings that have historically met in a specific room during a specific date/time. However your approved schedules must be submitted on …
Dear Commissioners, I am reaching out to you regarding Item A.1, which is the City Staff’s proposal to move future Board of Adjustment, Planning Commission and Zoning and Platting Commission Meetings to a new location in far North Austin. In regards to this item, please know that I am not speaking on the behalf of the Southeast Combined Neighborhood Plan Contact Team, but this item is on our next meeting's agenda, which is scheduled for December 13, 2021. It is listed on the SCNPCT Agenda as a "Discussion and Possible Action" item. The SCNPCT membership was alerted on this issue during our last meeting, but it was too late for us to formally consider and respond (vote) to any concerns we may have. I must say that we were extremely surprised to know this was even being considered. Our Contact Team represents residents from the City of Austin and Del Valle. As a D2 resident, I would fully support any efforts to ensure the Board of Adjustment, Planning Commission and Zoning and Platting Commission meetings stay centrally located at City Hall. Moving the meetings would add an undue burden to the residents in far SE Austin and Travis County. As you are aware, our population is very diverse and mostly representative of low-income and people of color, plus there would be challenges in having access to public transportation in order to make meetings on time or even return home safely, if there is any public transportation available when the meetings run extremely late. I do not think the Equity Office was consulted on the impact this move would have for vulnerable populations? The City Hall location is central and the logically best location for all residents when it comes to equal access for all residents. Additionally, because City Hall is centrally located, the surrounding residents and businesses would be best equally served, including equally disadvantaged. If the meetings are moved far North, those living and/or working in South Austin, particularly SE Austin, will be at a much greater disadvantage to publicly engage in BOA, PC and ZAP hearings. This could have an adverse impact on our community when equal access to community engagement is not afforded to the residents of the City of Austin and Travis County. With all the growth in our area, specifically in Southeast Austin, it will make it harder if not impossible for our community to …
Zucker Report Full Report www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Development_Services/ZuckerFinalReport/ZuckerFinalRep ort.pdf XVI. Boards and Commissions http://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Development_Services/ZuckerFinalReport/Zuck erFinalReport_16_BoardsCommissions.pdf
AGENDA MEETING MINUTES October 11, 2021 The Board of Adjustment meeting convened on Monday, October 11, 2021. 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. Jessica Cohen (Chair) called the Board Meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. Board Members in Attendance (in person): Jessica Cohen (Chair), Barbara Mcarthur, Darryl Pruett, Richard Smith, Nicholl Wade, Kelly Blume (Alternate) Board Members in Attendance (virtually via teleconference): N/A Board Members Absent: Thomas Ates, Brooke Bailey, Rahm McDaniel, Melissa Hawthorne (Vice Chair), Agustina Rodriguez, Michael Von Ohlen, Carrie Waller (Alternate) City Staff in Attendance: Elaine Ramirez (Board Liaison), Erika Lopez (Board Attorney) City Staff -: Diana Ramirez (Board Secretary) 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 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.NONE A. DISCUSSION AND REQUESTED ACTION ITEM Staff requests approval September 13, 2021 draft minutes A-1 On-Line Link: Item A-1 A-1/1 Board Member Richard Smith motions to approve the minutes for September 13, 2021, Board member Barbara Mcarthur seconds on a 6-0 vote; APPROVED MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 13, 2021. B. DISCUSSION AND REQUESTED ACTION ITEM B-1 Staff and Applicant requests for postponement and withdraw of items posted on this Agenda Requesting postponements by applicant for Items C-1, F-1 and D-1 Board member Darryl Pruett motions to postpone Items C-1, F-1 to November 8, 2021 and D-1 to April 11, 2022, Board member Richard Smith seconds on a 6-0 vote; APPROVED POSTPONED ITEMS C-1, F-1 TO NOVEMBER 8, 2021 AND D-1 TO APRIL 11, 2022 AS REQESTED BY APPLCIANTS. Due to not enough Board Members present at the meeting Items E-1, E-2, E-3, E-4, F-2 and F-3 will be postponed to November 8, 2021. Madam Chair Jessica Cohen motions to Postpone Items E-1, E-2, E-3, E-4, F-2, and F-3 to November …
CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet C-1 DATE: October 11, 2021 CASE NUMBER: C16-2021-0011 _______Thomas Ates _______Brooke Bailey _______Jessica Cohen _______Melissa Hawthorne _______Barbara Mcarthur _______Rahm McDaniel _______Darryl Pruett _______Agustina Rodriguez _______Richard Smith _______Michael Von Ohlen _______Nicholl Wade _______Kelly Blume (Alternate) _______Carrie Waller (Alternate) _______Vacant (Alternate) APPLICANT: Renee Bornn OWNER: Villas Rio, LP ADDRESS: 2111 RIO GRANDE ST VARIANCE REQUESTED: 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: (F) to allow one (1) wall signs above the second floor (maximum allowed) to the a) eight floor (requested) (H) to allow for the one (1) sign(s) to all be illuminated in order to provide signage b) 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 may not be illuminated or contain electronic images or moving parts. C-1/1 BOARD’S DECISION: Oct 11, 2021 BOA MEETING POSTPONED TO NOVEMBER 8, 2021 BY BOARD MEMBERS (AS REQUESTED BY APPLICANT) FINDING: 1. The variance is necessary because strict enforcement of the Article prohibits and reasonable opportunity to provide adequate signs on the site, considering the unique features of a site such as its dimensions, landscape, or topography, because: OR, 2. The granting of this variance will not have a substantially adverse impact upon neighboring properties, because: OR, 3. The granting of this variance will not substantially conflict with the stated purposes of this sign ordinance, because: AND, 4. Granting a variance would not provide the applicant with a special privilege not enjoyed by others similarly situated or potentially similarly situated, because: ______________________________ Elaine Ramirez Executive Liaison Jessica Cohen Madam Chair ____________________________ forC-1/2 October 5, 2021 Renee Bornn, Building Image Group 2111 Rio Grande St Bldg Flr8 Austin TX, 78705 Property Description: LT 1-3 OLT 23-1/2 DIV D HORSTS LOUIS SUBD Re: C16-2021-0011 Dear Renee, Austin Energy (AE) has reviewed your application for the above referenced property, requesting that the Board of Adjustment consider a variance(s) …
D-1/1 October 26, 2021 Ian Ellis 1003 Kinney Ave Austin TX, 78704 Re: C15-2021-0100 Dear Ian, Property Description: S 1/2 OF LOT 1-2 BLK 1 BARTON SPRINGS PARK Austin Energy (AE) has reviewed your application for the above referenced property, requesting that the Board of Adjustment consider a variance(s) from § 25-2-943 - SUBSTANDARD LOT (B) (2) to allow for the development of a single-family home on a 5,464 square-foot lot. 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 Austin Energy Public Involvement | Real Estate Services 2500 Montopolis Drive Austin, TX 78741 (512) 322-6881 D-1/2 N O T R A B D R O FF O P S LIN S C O M B JU LIET Y E N KIN TR E A D W ELL K E R R JULIET L E H T E SIE S JE E HIN P E S O J R A M A L LA M A R S Q U A R E GIB S O N H T 8 D E X T E R M A R G A R ET R E N R A G D Y W E R D R O F X O A S H B Y ! ! ± SUBJECT TRACT PENDING CASE ! ! ! ! ZONING BOUNDARY NOTIFICATIONS CASE#: LOCATION: C15-2021-0100 1003 KINNEY AVENUE This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. It does not represent an on-the-ground survey and represents only the approximate relative location of property boundaries. 1 " = 292 ' This product has been produced by CTM for the sole purpose of geographic reference. No warranty is made by the City of Austin regarding specific accuracy or completeness. D-1/3 D-1/4 D-1/5 D-1/6 D-1/7 D-1/8 D-1/9 D-1/10 D-1/11 D-1/12 D-1/13 D-1/14 D-1/15 D-1/16 D-1/17 D-1/18 D-1/19 D-1/20 D-1/21 …
PRESENTING TO BOA: PROJECT DEVELOPER TEAM- IAN M. ELLIS, AIA, NCARB, RID PRINCIPAL ARCHICTECT- SARAH JOHNSON, AIA, RID KINNEY AVE BOA Variance Package Case Number 2021-000085 BA October 21, 2021 D-1/1-PRESENTATION VARIANCE REQUEST D-1/2-PRESENTATION SECTION B.2. A MINIMUM LOT SIZE 5,750 SQ FT - EXISTING 5,464 SF VARIANCE REQUESTED 2 STORY RESIDENCE PROPOSED FFE = 533.16' 2 STORY A.A.G = 531.72' RESIDENCE DS R E T N A L P L E E T S 5' - 5 1/2" 1' - 0" 5' - 0" 1' - 0" 7' x 3' 6" PAVERS WITH 2" SPACING SETBACKS & HEIGHT* *** TOTALS AND PERCENTAGES LISTED APPLY TO OUR EXISTING SUBSTANDARD LOT AREA MAXIMUM HEIGHT MINIMUM SETBACKS FRONT YARD INTERIOR SIDE YARD REAR YARD 35’ 25’ 5’ 10’ ZONING SUBSTANDARD LOT- § 25-2-943 B.2 SECTION B.2. B MINIMUM LOT WIDTH 50 FT - EXISTING 61’-7” COMPLIANT RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS - SF-3-NP SIDE - 15’ ABOVE GRADE AT 45º REAR - 15’ ABOVE GRADE AT 45º SETBACK PLANES COMPLIANT COMPLIANT SIDE WALL ARTICULATION MAX 36’ LENGTH COMPLIANT BUILDABLE AREA 5,464 SF IMPERVIOUS COVER - 45% FAR (ZONING 25-2 § 2.1) 2,297 SF (> 2300 SF) ** CALCULATION BASED ON GREATER OF .4:1 OR 2,300 SF TOTAL LOT AREA 1ST FLOOR CONDITIONED 1,014 SF 2ND FLOOR CONDITIONED 1,262 SF GARAGE 221 SF ( EXEMPT -200 SF) PORCH 105 SF ( EXEMPT) 2,394 SF (43.8%) COMPLIANT COMPLIANT TOTAL 2,297 SF COMPLIANT M P 1 0 : 7 5 : 2 1 1 2 0 2 / 0 1 / 9 : d e t n i r P CRZ 1/2 CRZ 1/4 CRZ COA REQUIRED PARKING X X X X X X DS X ' 8 6 . 7 8 E " 8 4 8 2 ° 8 5 S ' X I E N L Y T R E P O R P X K C A B T E S D R A Y R O R E T N I I ' 5 E O DS E E O X X X CL X E O SETBACK 5’ 5' - 0" 7' - 2 1/2" E O E O PROPOSED NEW AC PAD PROPOSED NEW POOL PAD NEW FRENCH DRAIN PROPOSED WOOD FENCE LINE OF UNDERGROUND PIPED DOWNSPOUT CONNECTION TO DAYLIGHT PROPOSED NEW ELECTRIC METER PROPOSED NEW BUILDING FOOTPRINT EXISTING WOOD FENCE TO BE REMOVED PROPOSED WOOD FENCE E O 531.90 E …
CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet F-1 CASE NUMBER: C15-2021-0056 DATE: Monday October 11, 2021 _______Thomas Ates _______Brooke Bailey _______Jessica Cohen _______Melissa Hawthorne _______Barbara Mcarthur _______Rahm McDaniel _______Darryl Pruett _______Agustina Rodriguez _______Richard Smith _______Michael Von Ohlen _______Nicholl Wade _______Kelly Blume (Alternate) _______Carrie Waller (Alternate) _______Vacant (Alternate) APPLICANT: Andrea Hamilton OWNER: Chase & Andrea Hamilton ADDRESS: 3006 GLENVIEW AVE VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2-515 (Rear Yard of a Through Lot) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum rear yard setback from 25 feet (required) to 5 feet (requested) in order to erect a detached garage/office in an “SF-3-NP”, Single-Family Residence-Neighborhood Plan zoning district. (Windsor Road Neighborhood Plan) Note: Per LDC for a Through Lot, a rear yard must comply with the minimum requirements applicable to a front yard. BOARD’S DECISION: BOA JULY 12, 2021 POSTPONED TO AUG 9, 2021 AE DENIAL; Aug 9, 2021 The public hearing was closed by Chair Jessica Cohen, Board Member Melissa Hawthorne motions to Postpone to October 11, 2021; Board Member Rahm McDaniel seconds on a 9-1 vote (Board Member Brooke Bailey nay); POSTPONED TO October 11, 2021; Oct 11, 2021-POSTPONED TO NOVEMBER 8, 2021 BY BOARD MEMBERS (Due to not enough Board Members present at the meeting) E-1/1 FINDING: 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 forE-1/2 BOA GENERAL REVIEW COVERSHEET RE-NOTIFICATION CASE: C15-2021-0056 BOA DATE: November 8th, 2021 ADDRESS: 3006 Glenview Ave OWNER: Chase & Andrea Hamilton COUNCIL DISTRICT: 10 AGENT: N/A ZONING: SF-3-NP (Windsor Road NP) LEGAL DESCRIPTION: N 55 FT OF LOT 3 BLK 7 BRYKERWOODS B VARIANCE REQUEST: a) decrease the minimum rear yard setback from 25 feet to 5 feet & b) decrease minimum distance from principal structure from 10 feet to 5 feet. SUMMARY: erect a detached garage/office ISSUES: lot has …
E-1/43 E-1/44 E-1/45 E-1/46 E-1/47 E-1/48 E-1/49 E-1/50 E-1/51 E-1/52 E-1/53 E-1/54 E-1/55 E-1/56 Ramirez, Elaine From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Importance: High Friday, July 09, 2021 5:40 PM Ramirez, Elaine; Ramirez, Diana C15-2021-0056 3006 Glenview Avenue Agenda Item D-2 3006 Glenview 7-12-21 BOA case.pdf *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Good afternoon Elaine and Diana, Please be sure that the Board of Adjustment members get the following position statement and attachment before the Monday, July 12, 2021 hearing. By the way, the Bryker Woods Neighborhood Association did not receive notification of this variance hearing from the City, rather we received it second hand from another neighborhood association. Thank you, Joyce Basciano Bryker Woods Neighborhood Association Dear Chair Cohen and Members of the Board of Adjustment, Re: C15‐2021‐0056 3006 Glenview Avenue Agenda Item D‐2 The Bryker Woods Neighborhood Association (BWNA) Board of Directors considered this variance request. In the case of through lots we are guided by the precedent set by the Board of Adjustment on Monday, September 8, 2014 in Case Number C15‐2014‐0115 (see attachment). That case involved another through lot on Glenview Avenue that backed up to Jefferson St. (3200 Glenview, cited in the backup for 3006 Glenview). The 2014 BOA Decision granted a variance decreasing the 25 ft setback to 10 ft from the property line, not 5 ft. A 10 ft rear lot setback is still reasonable for through lots on Glenview Avenue and is in keeping with the historic character of Jefferson St. Accordingly, we support a decrease of the 25 ft setback to 10 ft but oppose a decrease of the setback to 5 ft. Thank you for your service to the community, Joyce Basciano, for the Bryker Woods Neighborhood Association 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. 1 E-1/57 E-1/58 E-1/59 From: To: Subject: Date: Kathryn Timmerman Ramirez, Elaine C15-2021-0056 Thursday, July 29, 2021 3:31:40 PM *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** C15-2021-0056 Elaine, I live at 2908 Glenview Avenue, Austin, Texas 78703 and I writing you in support of the variance from the Land Development Code requested by Andrea Hamilton. Thank you, Kathryn Timmerman 512-825-8375 CAUTION: This email was received at the City of Austin, from an …
Additional Variance Request: LDC 25-2 Subchapter F 3.3.2.A.1 allowing for a 450sf FAR exemption less than 10 feet from primary residence 3006 Glenview Avenue Variance Request (LDC 25-2-515 Re: Rear Yard of a Through Lot) E-1/1-PRESENTATION History & Background Details The current home was constructed in 2015 with surface parking in the rear. The subject property is located on Glenview Avenue in Brykerwoods. This street is unusual, in that homes on the east side of the street have curb cuts and driveway access from the front of the homes, while all homes on the west side of the street do not. Homes have historically treated Jefferson Avenue as an alley and all off-street parking for these homes on the west side of Glenview access their parking via rear entry. E-1/2-PRESENTATION A side-by-side comparison of the previous and current survey shows that a non-complaint garage structure was removed in order to make room for two off-street parking spaces as required by city code. E-1/3-PRESENTATION Following the July BOA meeting, adjustments were made to the proposed garage structure which would require partial demolition of the existing parking pad. The result places the garage 5’ farther from Jefferson Ave. E-1/4-PRESENTATION E-1/5-PRESENTATION In response to the changes made to the site plan, the Bryker Woods Neighborhood Association has withdrawn it’s opposition to the variance request. E-1/6-PRESENTATION Aerial views by Google Maps show driveways along Jefferson Avenue with varying distances from the ROW. Some have been updated and some have not (photos to follow). Most range from 19’ to 23’ from the asphalt. *Plot plan revisions for 3006 Glenview Avenue place the proposed garage at 21’8” from asphalt at Jefferson Ave, consistent with others along the corridor. E-1/7-PRESENTATION E-1/8-PRESENTATION E-1/9-PRESENTATION A variance was granted for a neighbor’s property at 3200 Glenview Avenue in 2014 and a garage and studio apartment were built. E-1/10-PRESENTATION Revised Proposed Garage and Home Office E-1/11-PRESENTATION
CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet F-2 DATE: Monday October 11, 2021 CASE NUMBER: C15-2021-0062 _______Thomas Ates _______Brooke Bailey _______Jessica Cohen _______Melissa Hawthorne _______Barbara Mcarthur _______Rahm McDaniel _______Darryl Pruett _______Agustina Rodriguez _______Richard Smith _______Michael Von Ohlen _______Nicholl Wade _______Kelly Blume (Alternate) _______Carrie Waller (Alternate) _______Vacant (Alternate) APPLICANT: David Cancialosi OWNER: Christen Steen ADDRESS: 3401 RIVERCREST DR VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2-551 (Lake Austin District Regulations) (C) (3) (a) increase the maximum impervious cover on a slope with a gradient of 15 percent or less from 35 percent (allowed) to 48 percent (requested), (53% existing) (b) increase the maximum impervious cover on a slope with a gradient of 15 percent and not more than 25 percent from 10 percent (allowed) to 49 percent (requested), (54.25% existing) (c) increase the maximum impervious cover on a slope with a gradient of more than 25 percent and not more than 35 percent from 5 percent (allowed) to 18 percent (requested), (4.41% existing) (d) increase maximum impervious cover on a slope gradient greater than 35 percent to 3 percent (requested), (0.83% existing) in order to erect a Single-Family + associated improvements in a “LA”, Lake Austin zoning district. Note: This section of the Land Development Code applies to lots that are included in a subdivision plat recorded before April 22, 1982 or a tract that is not required to be platted. For the above address the Subdivision Plat was recorded on January 4, 1965 E-2/1 The overall change in IC is from 21.51% to a proposed 20.89% IC, or 8,084 SF IC to 7,883 SF IC, when calculated on a gross lot area basis. BOARD’S DECISION: BOA JULY 12, 2021 POSTPONED TO AUGUST 9, 2021; Aug 9, 2021 The public hearing was closed by Chair Jessica Cohen, Board Member Melissa Hawthorne motions to Postpone to October 11, 2021; Board Member Brooke Bailey seconds on a 10-0 vote; POSTPONED TO October 11, 2021; Oct 11, 2021-POSTPONED TO NOVEMBER 8, 2021 BY BOARD MEMBERS (Due to not enough Board Members present at the meeting) FINDING: 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 …
- i Z 5 L E E R i i i Q v > 9 L e C f i J a ; i E-2/57 Written comments must be submitted to the contact person listed on the notice before 9 a.m. the day of the public hearing to be added to the Late Back-up and viewed by the Board the night of the meeting. Your comments should include the name of the board or commission, or Council; the scheduled date of the public hearing; the Case Number; and the contact person listed on the notice. All comments received will become part of the public record of this case. Case Number: C15-2021-0062 Contact: Elaine Ramirez; elaine.ramirez@austintexas.gov Public Hearing: Board of Adjustment; July 12th, 2021 Your Name (please print) I am in favor I object Your address(es) affected by this application Signature Date Daytime Telephone: Comments: PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Although applicants and/or their agent(s) are expected to attend a public hearing, you are not required to attend. However, if you do attend, you have the opportunity to speak FOR or AGAINST the proposed development or change. You may also contact a neighborhood or environmental organization in an application affecting your neighborhood. that has expressed an interest During a public hearing, the board or commission may postpone or continue an application’s hearing to a later date, or recommend approval or denial of the application. If the board or commission announces a specific date and time for a postponement or continuation that is not later than 60 days from the announcement, no further notice is required. A board or commission’s decision may be appealed by a person with standing to appeal, or an interested party that is identified as a person who can appeal the decision. The body holding a public hearing on an appeal will determine whether a person has standing to appeal the decision. An interested party is defined as a person who is the applicant or record owner of the subject property, or who communicates an interest to a board or commission by: delivering a written statement to the board or commission before or during the public hearing that generally identifies the issues of concern (it may be delivered to the contact person listed on a notice); or appearing and speaking for the record at the public hearing; and: occupies a primary residence that is within 500 feet of the subject …
PERMIT PARTNERS, LLC 300 E. Highland Mall Blvd Ste. 207 Austin, Texas 78752 David C. Cancialosi September 1, 2021 City of Austin 301 W. 2nd St. Austin, Texas 78701 City of Austin Board of Adjustment RE: Variance request for site at 3401 Rivercrest Dr. to amend impervious cover – Amended cover letter for October meeting Dear Board of Adjustment Commissioners, Per your request please find a bullet point list containing reasonable use, hardship, adverse impact and other related information. • The site is ~37,000 lot built atop a hill as part of the platted Rivercrest Section 2 subdivision approved in mid- 1960’s. It is comprised of two lots which combined and individually do not meet LA lot size requirements. • The individual platted lots were legally compliant with “A” zoning in mid-1960’s; however, are sub-standard to LA zoning requirements: Individual nor combined, they do not have minimum 1 ac in size and doe not have 100’ along a public right-of-way as required by LA zoning performance standards. • The site was originally zoned “A” when COA asserted control over this area. In 1984, COA changed zoning to LA, which changed “A” zoned, legally compliant lots along the lake to a legal non-compliant lot (re: size) and associated structures (re: IC). • Owner wishes to exercise reasonable use as intended by both the original plat and zoning change approval asserted by local jurisdictions to allow single-family house and associated accessory improvements. • Current home is in need of repair and updating. Main concern is structural integrity of retaining walls surrounding hillside. Please see attached drainage letter per your request at August hearing. Rerouting the retaining walls and placement of new walls is necessary. • This request is to amend impervious coverage calculations to 1) meet the actual LA code requirements and 2) correct erroneous permit issuance and inspection passage occurring in 2006. • • When COA forced LA zoning on this property it made site immediately non-compliant with respect, mostly, to impervious coverage. It was unbuildable by any reasonable standards. The subsequent 2006 permit approval exacerbated this issue. In 2006 COA approved extensive plans for new construction via permit #2006-002550, albeit erroneously. This approval was issued accordingly to SF-2 zoning standards. SF-2 zoning allows one to count the gross lot area of the entire ~37,000 SF lot (which approved 16% IC of gross lot area coverage per said application); however, LA …
CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet F-3 DATE: Monday October 11, 2021 CASE NUMBER: C15-2021-0085 _______Thomas Ates _______Brooke Bailey _______Jessica Cohen _______Melissa Hawthorne _______Barbara Mcarthur _______Rahm McDaniel _______Darryl Pruett _______Agustina Rodriguez _______Richard Smith _______Michael Von Ohlen _______Nicholl Wade _______Kelly Blume (Alternate) _______Carrie Waller (Alternate) _______Vacant (Alternate) APPLICANT: David Cancialosi OWNER: Estates at Lake Austin, LP ADDRESS: 1717 CHANNEL RD VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2-551 (Lake Austin District Regulations) (B) (1) (a) from shoreline setback requirements to reduce the shoreline setback from 75 feet (required) to 25 feet (requested) along a man-made inlet in order to erect a Single-Family + associated improvements in a “LA”, Lake Austin zoning district. BOARD’S DECISION: BOA MEETING SEPT 13, 2021 The public hearing was closed by Chair Jessica Cohen, Board Member Michael Von Ohlen motions to Postpone to October 11, 2021; Board Member Rahm McDaniel seconds on a 11-0 vote; POSTPONED TO OCTOBER 11, 2021; Oct 11, 2021-POSTPONED TO NOVEMBER 8, 2021 BY BOARD MEMBERS (Due to not enough Board Members present at the meeting) FINDING: 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: E-3/1 (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 forE-3/2 CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet D-2 DATE: Monday September 13, 2021 CASE NUMBER: C15-2021-0085 ___-____Thomas Ates OUT ___-____Brooke Bailey OUT ___Y____Jessica Cohen ___Y____Melissa Hawthorne ___Y____Barbara Mcarthur ___Y____Rahm McDaniel ___Y____Darryl Pruett ___Y____Agustina Rodriguez ___Y____Richard Smith ___Y____Michael Von Ohlen ___Y____Nicholl Wade ___Y____Kelly Blume (Alternate) ___Y____Carrie Waller (Alternate) ___-____Vacant (Alternate) APPLICANT: David Cancialosi OWNER: Estates at Lake Austin, LP ADDRESS: 1717 CHANNEL RD VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2-551 (Lake Austin District Regulations) (B) (1) (a) from shoreline setback requirements to reduce the shoreline setback from 75 feet (required) to 25 feet (requested) along a man-made inlet in order to erect a Single-Family + associated …
1717 CHANNEL ROAD AUSTIN, TX 78746 Case # 2021-000072 BA E-3/1-PRESENTATION VARIANCE REQUEST I. Seeking BOA Variance to reduce shoreline setback: • LDC 25-2-551(B)(1)(a) to reduce shoreline setback from 75’ to 25’ along a man-made slough that abuts the property via cut in boat slip. • Lake Austin shoreline setback is 75’ per staff’s current interpretation of where a shoreline setback is measured from as it relates to man made sloughs or inlets. • My client is seeking a 25’ Lake Austin shoreline setback from the slough. • The man-made slough has a cut-in slip created sometime between1955 and 1968 per City of Austin zoning profile aerials. • There does not appear to be any natural causation of the inlet. It appears wholly man made using various historical aerials and physical inspections. E-3/2-PRESENTATION AERIAL E-3/3-PRESENTATION MAP AERIAL E-3/4-PRESENTATION CHANNEL RD + ENTRANCE TO SITE Easement to 1717 E-3/5-PRESENTATION VARIOUS INLET ANGLES E-3/6-PRESENTATION VARIOUS INLET AND CHANNEL ANGLES E-3/7-PRESENTATION VARIOUS PROPERTY ANGLES FROM INLET E-3/8-PRESENTATION VARIOUS PROPERTY ANGLES AROUND INLET E-3/9-PRESENTATION EASEMENT THAT SPLITS PROPERTY E-3/10-PRESENTATION CHANNEL TO / FROM LAGOON – LAKE AUSTIN E-3/11-PRESENTATION REASONABLE USE The zoning regulations applicable to the property do not allow for a reasonable use because: • The zoning regulations combined with unique hardships prevent a reasonable use of this site as prescribed by the applicable zoning district. • The existing 1.72-acre tract is vacant and zoned Lake Austin, LA, as part of the City-wide effort to apply LA zoning to lake properties in 1984. The site was annexed June 15, 1968, and zoned “A” zoning which is the equivalent of today’s SF-2 zoning. The site does not front the main body of Lake Austin. It is only accessible to the water via a small inlet that connects to a lagoon. From that lagoon a straight line was dredged to the site. On the other side of the lagoon, it connects to the main body of Lake Austin via separate canal (from the lagoon). That canal travels under a bridge (Channel Road), then it connects to the main body. (please see aerial maps for quick reference). We believe the cut-in slip was created during the same time period as the actual inlet because the 1955 – 1968 aerials reflect the inlet being dredged from the lagoon during this time and not in any aerials before 1955. It shows the inlet in the same location between …
