July 6, 2021 Scott Jacobs 2003 Arpdale St Austin TX, 78704 Re: C15-2021-0067 Property Description: W 55FT OF LOT 16 BLK 8 RABB INWOOD HILLS Dear Scott, Austin Energy (AE) has reviewed your application for the above referenced property, requesting that the Board of Adjustment consider a variance(s) from Land Development Code Section 25-2- 492 (Site Development Regulations) to decrease to minimum lot size from 5,750 square feet to 5,500 square feet in the SF 3 zone. Austin Energy does not oppose the request, provided any proposed and existing improvements follow Austin Energy’s clearance criteria requirements, the National Electric Safely Code, and OSHA. Any removal or relocation of existing electric 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. Joseph Beeler, Planner I Austin Energy Public Involvement | Real Estate Services 2500 Montopolis Drive Austin, TX 78741 (512) 322-6602
Ramirez, Elaine From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Scott Jacobs Tuesday, July 06, 2021 12:56 PM Ramirez, Elaine Lorraine Atherton Re: BOA Application Ok, given that, will you please postpone my hearing until next month? I will need to submit a different advanced packet. On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 10:50 AM Ramirez, Elaine <Elaine.Ramirez@austintexas.gov> wrote: Unfortunately Scott we cannot rescind your Advanced Packet, it has already been uploaded to the BCIC. The only other option you have is to request a Postponement to the Aug. 9, 2021 BOA mtg. that will give you time to submit an updated Advanced Packet with only information that you would like the Board to view. Respectfully, Elaine Ramirez Planner Senior / Board of Adjustment Liaison City of Austin Development Services Department 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Dr, Austin, Texas 78752 Office: 512-974-2202 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 1 D-5/1-LATE BACKUP -----Original Message----- From: Scott Jacobs [mailto:sj Sent: Monday, July 05, 2021 3:24 PM To: Ramirez, Elaine <Elaine.Ramirez@austintexas.gov> Cc: Lorraine Atherton Subject: BOA Application *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Am I allowed to rescind my advanced packet? I accidentally submitted information that isn’t relevant to my application. 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. Hi Elaine, Thank you, Scott Scott Jacobs 214-908-0770 -- Scott Jacobs (214) 908 0770 2 D-5/2-LATE BACKUP Lorraine L. Atherton __________________________________________________________________ 2009 Arpdale Austin, TX 78704 July 7, 2021 Board of Adjustment City of Austin Re: Variance request C15-2021-0067, 2003 Arpdale Dear Chair and Board Members, As a nearby homeowner and resident on Arpdale since 1983, I am an interested party in the case at 2003 Arpdale, D-5 on your July 12 agenda. This property has a long history of work without permits, beginning with remodeling of the house and expansion of the detached garage in the mid-1980s, and of code complaints. Because the work took place …
July 6, 2021 John Hussey 1411 Gaston Ave Austin TX, 78703 Re: C15-2021-0068 Property Description: LOT 5 *& W 10 FT OF LOT 6 BLK 28 PEMBERTON HEIGHTS SEC 8 Dear John, Austin Energy (AE) has reviewed your application for the above referenced property, requesting that the Board of Adjustment consider a variance(s) from Land Development Code section 25-2- F-1, to increase the allowable FAR by 753 square feet in the SF-3-NP zone. Austin Energy does not oppose the request, provided any proposed and existing improvements follow Austin Energy’s clearance criteria requirements, the National Electric Safety Code, and OSHA. Any removal or relocation of existing electric 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. Joseph Beeler, Planner I Austin Energy Public Involvement | Real Estate Services 2500 Montopolis Drive Austin, TX 78741 (512) 322-6602
Ramirez, Elaine From: Sent: To: Subject: Dear Ms. Ramirez: John Volz < Friday, July 09, 2021 3:29 PM Ramirez, Elaine Case #C15-2021-0068 *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Please find attached below my objection to the referenced case and a satellite view of the property illustrating how overbuilt the property is already. The existing structure on the property exceeds the FAR for SF-3 due to a previous variance and appears to greatly exceed the mandated impervious cover requirements. Increasing the FAR and impervious cover further will aggravate drainage problems in the neighborhood and will set a bad precedent for the neigborhood. I strongly object to any increase in FAR and impervious ground cover. Sincerely, 1 D-6/1-LATE BACKUP 3 D-6/2-LATE BACKUP 4 D-6/3-LATE BACKUP D-6/4-LATE BACKUP
July 9, 2021 Jeannine Clark Frank Clark 904 Avondale Rd Austin TX, 78704 Property Description: LOT A HARDY NORMAN ADDN Re: C15-2021-0070 Dear Jeannine Clark, Austin Energy (AE) has reviewed your application for the above referenced property, requesting that the Board of Adjustment consider a variance(s) from Land Development Code Section 25-2- 513G (front yard setback) & 25-2-947 (Small Lot Amnesty) in order to reduce the setback from 25’ to 17’. Austin Energy does not oppose the request, provided that any proposed existing and proposed improvements follow Austin Energy’s clearance criteria requirements, the National Electric Safety Code, and OSHA. Any removal or relocation of existing electric 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. Joseph Beeler, Planner I Austin Energy Public Involvement | Real Estate Services 2500 Montopolis Drive Austin, TX 78741 (512) 322-6602
June 30, 2021 Susan Hays 902 Herndon Ln Austin TX, 78704 Property Description: LOT 11 BLK B LA PERLA Re: C15-2021-0071 Dear Susan, Austin Energy (AE) has reviewed your application for the above referenced property, requesting that the Board of Adjustment consider a variance(s) from the following sections of the Land Development Code: A. Section 25-2-492(D) to decrease the minimum rear setback from 10 feet (required) to 5 feet, and; B. Section 25-2-774(C) to decrease the minimum distance between main and secondary structure from 10’ to 8’. Austin Energy does not oppose the requested variances, provided any proposed and existing improvements are in compliance with the AE clearance criteria requirements, the National Electric Safety Code, and OSHA. Any removal or relocation of existing electric facilities will be at owners/applicant’s expense. The applicant is advised that no encroachments (eaves, roof, overhangs, etc) of any part of the structure can be within the 5’ PUE along the rear property line. Eaves may encroach into the building setback, per city code, but eaves cannot encroach into easements. 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_1.10.0CL SARE If you require further information or have any questions regarding the above comments, please contact our office. Thank you. Joseph Beeler, Austin Energy Public Involvement | Real Estate Services 2500 Montopolis Drive Austin, TX 78741 512-322-6602
PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION J l applicants and/or you are not required their agent(s) to attend. Although hearing. have the opportunity development environmental application affecting or change. You may also contact organization that are ewected However, your neighborhood. has expressed to attend if you do attend, a public you to speak FOR or ;).GAINST the proposed a neighborhood or an interest in an the board or commissio During a public hearing, continue or denial specific than 60 days from the announcement, an application's of the application. or to a later date, or recommend approval If the board or pommission a or continuation date and time for a postponement n may postpone no furtherlnotice is required. that is not later announces hearing comments must be submitted to the contact Written before 9 a.m. the day of the public viewed by the Board the night of the meeting. the name of the board or commission, public All comments the Case Number; and the contact received become part of the public or Council; hearing; hearing ,vill person listed on the notice and to be added to the Late Back-up include Your comments should the scheduled person date of the on the notice. listed record of this case. Case Number: ClS-2021-0071 Contact: Public Ramirez; Board of Adjustment; Elaine Hearin£: Julv 12th• 2021 elaine.ramirez@aus6ntexas.gov A board or commission's standing can appeal will determine the decision. whether decision or an interested may be appealed party that is identified The body holding a pu@lic hearing has standing to appeal, to appeal a person by a person on an appeal the decision. as a person who with a person or who communicates who is the applicant an interest or record to a An interested party is defined as owner of the subject property, board or commission by: • delivering a written the public during concern {it may be delivered notice); or • appearing and: and speaking hearing statement to the board or commission before or identifies the issues of on a that generally to the contact person listed for the record atthe public hearing; •occupies property •is the record a primary or proposed that is within development; 500 feet of the subject \ 1 within 500 ffe�t of the subject residence property or proposed owner of property development; or •is an officer of an environmental or neighbo«iood organiz has an interest subject th in or whose declared boundaries are …
July 6, 2021 Will Sheddan 2806 Brinwood Ave Austin TX, 78704 Re: C15-2021-0072 Property Description: LOT 16 BLK 10 BRINWOOD SEC 3 Dear Will, 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 lots) to decrease the minimum lot size requirement from 5750 square feet to 4986 square feet. Austin Energy does not oppose the request, provided any proposed and existing improvements follow Austin Energy’s clearance criteria requirements, the National Electric Safely Code, and OSHA. Any removal or relocation of existing electric 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. Joseph Beeler, Planner II Austin Energy Public Involvement | Real Estate Services 2500 Montopolis Drive Austin, TX 78741 (512) 322-6602
Ramirez, Elaine From: Sent: To: Subject: Ashley Parsons Monday, July 05, 2021 2:48 PM Ramirez, Elaine C15-2021-0072 - Object *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Good Afternoon Elaine, I am writing in regards to case number C15-2021-0072. I am a resident within 500 feet of this property and would like to object to the proposal. This property has been up for sale for some time. The applicant knows what they are buying and should not be asking for variances from code. The applicant does not have to move forward with purchasing this property if they cannot work within the means of existing structures and code. The applicant can also renovate the existing structure which is grandfathered in. The applicant does not have to build a completely brand new structure on this property. I do not see any hardship for this applicant. I object to this variance proposal. If you have any questions please let me know. Sincerely, Ashley Parsons 2702 Stacy Lane, Bldg 1 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 D-9/1-LATE BACKUP D-9/2-LATE BACKUP Ramirez, Elaine From: Sent: To: Subject: sean murray Sunday, July 11, 2021 11:52 PM Ramirez, Elaine case# C15-2021-0072 *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** I just want to object to the variance request. kind regards, Sean Murray 200Lightsey 1 D-9/3-LATE BACKUP D-9/4-LATE BACKUP
Re: Case# C15-2021-0036 6141 Jumano Ln To: The Board of Adjustments, City of Austin, My name is Ted Harbourt. My wife Anita Harbourt and I live at 7101 Quimper ln. We have lived at this address for 23 yrs. We had our house built and raised our family here. Our house faces Quimper and is on the corner of Quimper and Jumano. Our back fence is adjacent to the side yard of 6141 Jumano ln. On Nov 6th 2020, the resident at 6141 Jumano had a new fence addition added along our back fence line. We would like to express our opposition to the addition of this fence for the following reasons. The new fence extension at 8ft is taller than our existing fence and creates an offensive look from our back yard with two fences back to back of different height. The new extension is not fluid and continuous, there is a 4ft break in the fence that is filled with a cloth tarp to cover the gap. This is not in compliance with the HOA and has not been approved. She has only lived in the neighborhood for 1 ½ yrs and our existing backyard fence has been sufficient for 21 ½ yrs before she lived here. The elevation of our properties was very clear when she purchased her property. She was fully aware of the fence lines when she bought her property. We were not listed as one of the residences within line of sight and did not give our consent to have this built along our established fence line. Had we been consulted, we may have been able to come to an agreement to improve the height of the existing fence and avoid the physical issues and aesthetic concerns. The addition of a second fence along our back property line has created a space between the two fences that is now filling with debris and is inaccessible to maintain. And we cannot simply remove our fence as hers is not fluid and continuous. In the process of installing the additional partition along our back fence, our fence posts have been destabilized and now disconnected from the rest of the neighborhood fence structure. On the Day the fence was constructed all three adjacent property owners called 311 as none of us were contacted nor did any of us give consent for our property to be removed or …
Ramirez, Elaine From: Sent: To: Subject: Past Chair Sunday, July 11, 2021 7:51 PM Ramirez, Elaine E-3 C15-2021-0048. 8300 N IH35 and 600 E Powell, The Hedge > *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Hi Elaine - Could you pass this on? Thanks! ============= Chair, Vice Chair, Boardmembers - The applicant told you last month that they had not yet talked to the community about transportation features that could realistically reduce demand for parking spaces. Fortunately, we've done quite a bit of work on the issue of connecting our residents in the interstate apartments and motels, so we do have some information: PROJECT FEASIBILITY I'm not positive this is the most current number, but the sidewalk cost I have from the city is $24 per square foot. For a 10-foot-side sidewalk, roughly 300 feet, the city cost would be $72,000. The applicant's proposed $25,000 "contribution" amounts to asking the city to reduce their parking requirement AND to spend $47,000 on their internal sidewalk. A stronger proposal would simply be that the applicant construct the ADA-accessible route to city urban trail standards. If they can do it cheaper, Yay for them. In order to construct the trail, there would need to be site plan adjustments for both the 8300 N IH 35 property and the 600 E Powell Ln property. I don't believe that you can approve a variance for 600 E Powell under the current case. The applicant's proposal is not clear in how the process would be connected to assure that if they get the parking variance, the route to E Powell would for sure be constructed. The applicant is also asking to use 600 E Powell Ln for two years as temporary parking. It is not clear what that means, or what drives the two year time frame. One of the conditions of the current site plan for that property is that there not be vehicle access to E Powell Ln. If there were to be vehicle access from 600 E Powell to Powell Ln, the trips per day for the apartment use would likely trigger a neighborhood traffic analysis. Based on the NTA for the other affordable apartments on E Powell, they would be required to pay for the impact. CRIME SAFETY We had a small mobility justice grant from the city equity office this spring which included community workers interviewing residents of our interstate apartments …
Annual Internal Review This report covers the time period of 7/1/2018 to 6/30/2019 ____Board of Adjustment____ (Official Name of Board or Commission) The Board/Commission mission statement (per the City Code) is: Mission Statement The Board of Adjustment mission is defined by Article 2-1-111 Board of Adjustment and the Board of Adjustment Bylaws which state: The purpose of the Board of Adjustment is to: (1) Hear and decide requests for a variance from the requirements of Chapter 25-2 (Zoning), except as otherwise provided by the Code; and, (2) Hear and decide a request for a special exception under Chapter 25-2 (Zoning); and, (3) Hear and decide an appeal of an administrative action under Chapter 25-2 (Zoning); and, (4) Hear and decide on a request for a variance from the requirements of airport zoning regulations under Section 241.034, Local Government Code; and, (5) Perform other duties prescribed by ordinance, such as to hear and decide requests for a variance from the requirements of Chapter 25-10 (Sign Regulations); and, (6) Perform other duties prescribed by state law. F-2/1 Annual Review and Work Plan Year7/1/2020 – 6/30/2021 Page # 1. Describe the board’s actions supporting their mission during the previous calendar year. Address all elements of the board’s mission statement as provided in the relevant sections of the City Code. Board Actions The following actions of the Board were taken during the period between July 1, 2020 and June 30, 2021 in support of the Board’s mission. A. Meetings: Twelve (12) meetings were scheduled for the Board of Adjustment during the reporting period. January 2021 all cases were postponed to February 2021 due to technical issues with videoconferencing. April 2021 meeting was cancelled due to technical difficulties with the notification database. May 2021 all cases were postponed to June 2021 due to lack of board members. 1. The Board of Adjustment met eleven (11) times in support of the purposes and duties noted above. One scheduled meeting was cancelled; All meetings were held via Tele- Conference, due to COVID-19. 2. The Board of Adjustment did not cancel any special called meetings and/or workshops 3. The Board of Adjustment heard zero (0) cases related to airport zoning regulations. 4. At the May 2021 meeting, the Chair resigned and a new Chair was elected. 5. Workgroups were formed to address BOA concerns regarding BOA fees for lower income residents; for Transportation Criteria/Code Recommendations; for recurring Regular …
Ramirez, Elaine From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Monday, July 12, 2021 1:30 PM Ramirez, Elaine Jennifer Hanlen 3401 Rivercrest Dr. - Postponement *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Hi Elaine, David is involved in some type of family emergency and will not be able to attend the hearing this evening. We will need to postpone the case until the August agenda. Please confirm receipt of this email. We apologize for any inconvenience. 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
Ramirez, Elaine From: Sent: To: Subject: Will Sheddan Monday, July 12, 2021 4:43 PM Ramirez, Elaine Please withdraw *** External Email ‐ Exercise Caution *** Hello Elaine thanks for the car please withdraw C15‐2021‐0072 / 2806 Brinwood Ave From this evenings meeting Appreciate all your help along the way! Thank You, Will Sheddan President NWS Construction 512‐919‐6155 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 Ramirez, Elaine From: Sent: To: Subject: Jason Callahan Monday, July 12, 2021 3:40 PM Ramirez, Elaine oppose variances in item D-9 C15-2021-0072 on BOA agenda today *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Hi Elaine, Please register and share my opposition to all variances requested in item D-9 C15-2021-0072 (Will Sheddan for James Rothfelder, 2806 Brinwood Avenue) on the BOA agenda today. Thanks, Jason Callahan 2612 Stacy Ln Austin, TX 78704 512-699-9627 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
CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet C-1 DATE: July 12, 2021 CASE NUMBER: C16-2021-0010 ___Y___Thomas Ates ___Y___Brooke Bailey ___Y___Jessica Cohen ___-____Melissa Hawthorne (ABSTAINED) ___Y___Barbara Mcarthur ___-____Rahm McDaniel (OUT) ___-____Darryl Pruett (ABSTAINED) ___Y___Agustina Rodriguez ___-____Richard Smith (OUT) ___Y___Michael Von Ohlen ___Y___Nicholl Wade ___Y___Kelly Blume (Alternate) ___Y___Carrie Waller (Alternate) ___-____Vacant (Alternate) APPLICANT: Leah Bojo OWNER: AISD ADDRESS: 2309 PANTHER TRL VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting a sign variance(s) from the 1993 Land Development Code, Sign Regulations, Section 13-2-862 (G) (Signs Authorized in all Districts) from a) sign area 32 square feet (maximum allowed) to 260 square feet (requested) b) 6 feet height above grade (maximum allowed) to 33 feet (requested) in a “SF-3”, Single- Family zoning district. Note: The Interlocal Agreement between the City of Austin and the Austin Independent School District, as amended, states that the City of Austin’s ordinance and rules as they existed on January 1, 1994 shall apply throughout the term of the Interlocal Agreement. Section 13-2-862 (Signs Authorized in all Districts) (G) Information signs. These include bulletin boards, changeable copy directories, or signs relating solely to public, religious, or charitable institutions, intended for use by the institution on which the sign is located. A maximum of one information sign shall be allowed per institution. Maximum sign area of an information sign is 32 square feet; and maximum height is six feet above grade. BOARD’S DECISION: BOA JULY 12, 2021 The public hearing was closed by Chair Jessica Cohen, Board Member Michael Von Ohlen motions to Grant; Board Member Carrie Waller seconds on a 9-0-2 vote (Board members Melissa Hawthorne and Darryl Pruett abstains); GRANTED. FINDING: OR, OR, AND, 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: the façade of the new building is raised and on a hill that a 32 SF sign is not readable at any reasonable distance from the building 2. The granting of this variance will not have a substantially adverse impact upon neighboring properties, because: the public educational facility use at the Property demands adequate signage for the frequent visitors it will receive. 3. The granting of this variance will not substantially conflict with the stated purposes of this sign ordinance, because: the first purpose of the sign ordinance is …
CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet D-1 DATE: Monday July 12, 2021 CASE NUMBER: C15-2020-0038 _______Thomas Ates _______Brooke Bailey _______Jessica Cohen _______Melissa Hawthorne _______Barbara Mcarthur _______Rahm McDaniel (OUT) _______Darryl Pruett _______Agustina Rodriguez _______Richard Smith (OUT) _______Michael Von Ohlen _______Nicholl Wade _______Kelly Blume (Alternate) _______Carrie Waller (Alternate) _______Vacant (Alternate) APPLICANT: Jim Wittliff OWNER: Braden Crockett ADDRESS: 1409 POSSUM TROT VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) from setback requirements to decrease the minimum rear yard setback from 10 feet (required) to 5 feet (requested) in order to maintain an existing Duplex in a SF-3-NP”, Single-Family Residence – Neighborhood Plan zoning district (West Austin Neighborhood Plan). BOARD’S DECISION: July 12, 2021 POSTPONED TO JAN 10, 2022 -AE DENIAL 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 Diana Ramirez for ____________________________ Jessica Cohen Chair
CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet D-10 DATE: Monday July 12, 2021 CASE NUMBER: C15-2021-0074 ___Y____Thomas Ates ___Y____Brooke Bailey ___Y____Jessica Cohen ___Y____Melissa Hawthorne ___Y____Barbara Mcarthur ___-____Rahm McDaniel (OUT) ___Y____Darryl Pruett ___Y____Agustina Rodriguez ___-____Richard Smith (OUT) ___Y____Michael Von Ohlen ___Y____Nicholl Wade ___Y____Kelly Blume (Alternate) ___Y____Carrie Waller (Alternate) ___-____Vacant (Alternate) OWNER/APPLICANT: Sean O’Brien ADDRESS: 5607 HIGHLAND CREST DR VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2-773 (Duplex Residential Use) (B) (5) (b) from two stories (maximum allowed) to three stories (requested) in order to erect a Duplex Residential use in an “SF-3”, Single-Family Residence zoning district. BOARD’S DECISION: BOA JULY 12, 2021 The public hearing was closed by Chair Jessica Cohen, Board Member Michael Von Ohlen motions to Postpone to August 9, 2021; Board Member Carrie Waller seconds on a 11-0 vote; POSTPONED TO AUGUST 9, 2021. 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 Diana Ramirez for ____________________________ Jessica Cohen Chair
CITY OF AUSTIN Board of Adjustment Decision Sheet D-11 DATE: Monday July 12, 2021 CASE NUMBER: C15-2021-0075 ___Y___Thomas Ates ___Y___Brooke Bailey ___Y___Jessica Cohen ___Y___Melissa Hawthorne ___Y___Barbara Mcarthur ___-____Rahm McDaniel (OUT) ___Y___Darryl Pruett ___Y___Agustina Rodriguez ___-____Richard Smith (OUT) ___Y___Michael Von Ohlen ___Y___Nicholl Wade ___Y___Kelly Blume (Alternate) ___Y___Carrie Waller (Alternate) ___-____Vacant (Alternate) APPLICANT: Tere O’Connell OWNER: Chris Oakland ADDRESS: 813 PARK BLVD Unit 2 VARIANCE REQUESTED: The applicant is requesting variance(s) from the Land Development Code, Section 25-2-774 (Two-Family Residential Use) (C) (5) from 1,100 total square feet (maximum allowed) to 1,150 square feet (requested) and (a) (b) from 550 square feet on the second story (maximum allowed), to 575 square feet (requested) in order to remodel an existing historic detached Accessory Structure in an “SF-3- CO-NP”, Single- Family Residence-Combined Overlay-Neighborhood Plan zoning district. (Hancock Neighborhood Plan) Note: Per LDC 25-2-774 (Two-Family Residential Use) (C) The second dwelling unit (5) may not exceed (a) 1,100 total square feet or a floor-to-area ratio of 0.15, whichever is smaller; and (b) 550 square feet on the second story, if any. BOARD’S DECISION: BOA JULY 12, 2021 The public hearing was closed by Chair Jessica Cohen, Board Member Carrie Waller motions to Grant; Board Member Melissa Hawthorne seconds on 11-0 vote; GRANTED. FINDING: 1. The Zoning regulations applicable to the property do not allow for a reasonable use because: the historic building floor areas exceed the allowable area for new construction by 25 SF per floor, the coverage is existing, unavoidable and very modest in size 2. (a) The hardship for which the variance is requested is unique to the property in that: removing 25 sq feet from each level of the 2 story garage is not possible or reasonable without inflicting damage on the historic integrity of the building, the residence and accompanying garage were built in 1929 for Austin mayor Tom Miller and was later owned and occupied by Emma Long, Austin’s first female councilwoman (b) The hardship is not general to the area in which the property is located because: the unique condition that qualifies this property as special exception is the building in question is historically and architecturally tied to the style and character of the historic house and significant to the history of Austin 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 …
