info-title
info-description

Item B1

Staff requests approval of October 14, 2019 draft minutes

Item B2

Staff and Applicant requests for postponement and withdraw of items posted onthis Agenda

Item I5

C15-2019-0064April Clark for Dr. Samir Patel 1415 West 10th Street The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from the LDC Subchapter F: Residential Design and Compatibility Standards, Article 3, Section 3.3.3 (Gross Floor Area – Porch, Basement and Attic Exemptions) (B) (2) in order to receive the basement exemption on a sloped site the applicant proposes to change the location of measurement from the average elevation at the intersections of the minimum front yard setback line and the side property line to the intersection of the front building line and the side property lines (this will not be closer than the front setback line nor will the building exceed the maximum tent height limitations) in order to erect a Single-Family Residence with a Guest House in a “SF-3-NP”, Single-Family zoning district (Old West Austin Neighborhood Plan)

Item P1

C15-2019-0045 Colby Turner for Ryan Diepenbrock 504 Sunny Lane The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from: a) Section 25-2-492 (Site Development Regulations) (D) to increase the maximum allowable Impervious Cover from 45% (required) to 59.5% (requested) for retaining wall. b) Section 25-2-899 (Fences as Accessory Uses) (E) (1) from 6 feet to 7 ft. 2 in. at North end and portions of Southeast and Southwest sides of property lines in order to complete a Single-Family residence in a “SF-3-NCCD-NP”, Single-Family Residence zoning district. (South River City Combined Neighborhood Plan)

Item D

SIGNS PREVIOUS POSTPONEMENTS D-1 C16-2019-0004Will Marsh for USL2 Austin 901 East 6th Street LP 901 East 6th Street The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from Section 25-10-133 (University Neighborhood Overlay Zoning District Sign) (F) to allow for three electrical wall signs to be placed on the fifth floor of the building in order to provide signage for a Mixed Use building in a “TOD-CURE-CO-NP”, Transit Oriented District/Plaza Saltillo – Central Urban Redevelopment – Combined Overlay – Neighborhood Plan zoning district. (East Cesar Chavez) Note: The Land Development Code sign regulations state that no sign may be placed above the second floor of a building, except for a non-electric sign that is engraved, cut into the building, or otherwise inlaid to become part of the building.

Item I2

C15-2019-0060Terence Kearns 5112 Bluffside Drive The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from the LDC Section 25-2-899 (D) (Fences as Accessory Uses) to increase the height permitted from an average of 6 feet, maximum of 7 feet (allowed) to 8 feet (requested) in order to complete a fence in a “PUD”, zoning district. Note: The Land Development Code states that a solid fence constructed along a property line may not exceed an average height of 6 feet or a maximum height of 7 feet

Item I3

C15-2019-0061Jarred Corbell for PSW-Springdale, LLC 735 Springdale Road The applicant is requesting a variance(s) to increase the maximum allowable Compatibility Height requirements of Article 10, Compatibility Standards, Division 2 –Development Standards, Section 25-2-1063 (C)(2) (Height Limitations and Setbacks for Large Sites) from 40 feet (maximum allowed) to 48 feet (requested) in order to erect a 48 ft. foot Commercial Office use in a “CS-MU-CO-NP”, General Commercial Services –Mixed Use – Conditional Overlay –Neighborhood Plan zoning district. (Govalle Neighborhood Plan) Note: The Land Development Code Section 25-2-1063 (C) (2) allows a height limit of three stories or 40 feet, if the structure is more than 50 feet and not more than 100 feet from property (a) in an "SF-5" or more restrictive zoning district, or (b) on which a use permitted in an "SF-5" or more restrictive zoning district is located

Item P4

C15-2019-0054 David Cancialosi for Emerald Laguna Corporation (Paris Schindler) 1901 Westlake Drive The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from Section 25-2-551 (Lake Austin (LA) District Regulations) 1. (B) (1) to reduce the Shoreline Setback requirement from 75 feet (required) to 25 feet (requested) 2. (C) (3) (a) increase Impervious Cover from 35 percent, on a slope with a gradient of 15 percent or less (required) to 62% (requested); 75% (existing) 3. (C) (3) (b) increase Impervious Cover from 10 percent, on a slope with a gradient of 15 percent or less (required) to 67% (requested); 65% (existing) 4. (C) (3) (c) increase Impervious Cover from 5 percent, on a slope with a gradient of more than 25 percent and not more than 35 percent (required) to 35% (requested); 39% (existing) 5. (E) (2) to increase Impervious Cover to 8% for a driveway in order to erect a Single-Family Residential use in an “LA” zoning district. NOTE: (for item (E) (2) The Land Development Code states on a slope with a gradient of more than 35 percent, development is prohibited except for the construction of a fence, driveway, road or utility that cannot be reasonably placed elsewhere, or a non-mechanized pedestrian facility, such as a foot path, sidewalk, or stairs.

Item P5

C15-2019-0055 David Cancialosi for Mark Odom 2803 Edgewater Drive The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from Section 25-2-551 (Lake Austin (LA) District Regulations) 1. (C) (3) (c) increase Impervious Cover from 5 percent, on a slope with a gradient of more than 25 percent and not more than 35 percent (required) to 66% (requested); 0% (existing) 2. (E) (2) to increase Impervious Cover to 29% for a driveway in order to erect a Single-Family Residential use in an “LA” zoning district. NOTE: (for item (E) (2) The Land Development Code states on a slope with a gradient of more than 35 percent, development is prohibited except for the construction of a fence, driveway, road or utility that cannot be reasonably placed elsewhere, or a non-mechanized pedestrian facility, such as a foot path, sidewalk, or stairs.

Item P6

C15-2019-0056 Eric Scheibe for Jerad Kolarik 1400 West Oltorf Street The applicant is requesting a variance(s) from the maximum allowable Compatibility Height requirements of Article 10, Compatibility Standards, Division 2 –Development Standards: a. to decrease the minimum setback requirement from Section 25-2-1063 (B) (2) (Height Limitations and Setbacks from Large Sites) from 25 feet to 0 feet along the south property line Note: The Land Development Code states that a person may not construct a structure 25 feet or less from property on which a use permitted in an SF-5 or more restrictive zoning district is located. b. to increase the maximum compatibility height requirement of Section 25-2-1063 (C)(1) and (2) (Height Limitations and Setbacks for Large Sites) to 45 feet inheight in order to erect a 45 foot Office/Retail use in a “CS”, General CommercialServices zoning district. Note: The Land Development Code height limitations for a structure are: (1) two stories and 30 feet, if the structure is 50 feet or less from property: (a) in an SF-5 or more restrictive zoning district; or (b) on which a use permitted in an SF-5 or more restrictive zoning district is located; or (2) three stories and 40 feet, if the structure is more than 50 feet and not more than 100 feet from property; (a) in an SF-5 or more restrictive zoning district; or (b) on which a use permitted in an SF-5 or more restrictive zoning district is located.

Item S2

Discussion and possible action regarding Workgroups Update: TransportationCriteria/Code Recommendations Workgroup

Item S3

Discussion and possible action on cancellation of December BOA meeting due toroom scheduling conflicts.

Item S4

Staff Report Requested on HB 2497; Discussion and possible action. HB 2497 limits who can file administrative appeals of site-specific applications to the Board. In the past, any “aggrieved party” could appeal zoning-related determinations to the Board. As of September 1, the right to file administrative appeals is limited to landowners, a person within 200 feet of the property, applicants, officers, departments, boards, or bureaus that are affected by the decision. For non-site specific applications, the law remains the same: any person aggrieved by the decision, or any officer, department, board, or bureau affected by the decision may appeal.

Item S5

Discussion and possible action on the draft LDC; BOA LDC Workgroup Report(Workgroup Members: Leighton-Burwell, Bailey, Cohen, Hodge and Smith)

Item S6

Discussion and possible action on moving BOA meetings from Monday to Wednesday nights.

Items S7 & T

S-7 Announcements

T.ADJOURNMENT
Social Sharing



Share Video Link via Email