Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building Regulations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Contractor and builder urge Lago Vista to review build‑line and 15‑foot height rules
Summary
Two public commenters told the Lago Vista Board of Adjustment that current interpretations of build‑line and height rules are blocking backyard pools and new homes; a contractor said the rule cost his firm 'probably close to $400,000' in recent lost projects. The board advised using the variance and development‑services process and took no formal action due to lack of quorum.
At a meeting of the Lago Vista Board of Adjustment, two public commenters urged the board to review how the city’s build‑line, floodplain and height rules are being interpreted, saying the current practice is preventing backyard pools and making new houses impractical to build.
Kai Nivey, a pool contractor who spoke during the public‑comment period, described working with the Acostas to pursue a backyard pool and said the family’s project was previously turned down because a floodplain "encroached" the work area. Nivey said a later change to the floodplain allowed a renewed application, but that the firm had to scale the pool design back about 35% to meet local rules. "I have lost probably close to 400,000 worth of projects because of this rule," Nivey said, arguing that the city’s interpretation of the build line and related setbacks is constraining both homeowners and pool builders.
Another commenter, who identified himself as the builder for Randy Stewart and his wife, said the Stewarts bought a lot at the corner of Coolidge (address given in comment as 2007 Coolidge) and paid about $55,000 for it. The builder said the owners have spent additional funds on surveys and house plans and were told the home "can be no higher than 15 feet" on that lot. The speaker said lowering a roof pitch from a 10 to an 8 still produced a 25‑foot structure and called the 15‑foot cap infeasible for a 2,500‑square‑foot house. He said the owners were "about 75,000 into it" and asked the board to clarify the source and application of the 15‑foot limit.
The presiding officer replied that development services staff can provide a site‑specific assessment and guide applicants through the variance or special‑exception process if a property’s circumstances warrant relief. The chair also noted that concerns raised in public comment are taken "to heart" and can be considered during code‑review conversations with planning and zoning and with the city council.
No formal motions, votes or changes to policy were made at the meeting. The chair said there was not a quorum to proceed with other agenda items and suggested adjourning the Board of Adjustment meeting after the public comments concluded.
The comments raise two discrete issues residents and builders asked the city to address: how the build‑line and floodplain adjustments are being applied to pool permits, and whether the 15‑foot height limit (as applied to the highest point of a lot) is producing unintended hardship for new home construction. The board directed speakers to development services and did not set a timeline for review or a formal referral to staff during the meeting.
