Board denies dock variance requests for 1750–1752 Channel Road after neighbors challenge dredge calculations

The Austin Board of Adjustment voted March 9 to deny variance requests for two docks at 1750 and 1752 Channel Road after neighbors said the applicants’ dredging calculations were inflated and the board concluded the situation represented routine maintenance rather than a unique hardship.

Neli (Nilu) Slayton, who spoke in opposition, told the board they had repeatedly flagged what she called “inadequate and unreliable calculations” supporting the applicants’ claim that more than 25 cubic yards of dredging was necessary. “They have had ample opportunity since August to address the issues that were raised in the letter I made to this board regarding their inadequate and unreliable calculations,” Slayton said during the public hearing, pressing that some survey evidence may have reflected unusually low lake levels and therefore overstated dredge needs.

Michelle Lynch, counsel for the applicants, asked the board for one more postponement to provide signed, sealed engineering findings and additional bathymetry. Lynch said her clients delayed because of weather and timing constraints and planned to return with finalized surveys on April 13. “We got delayed due in January due to the freeze…we weren’t able to make that deadline this time,” Lynch said.

Board members debated whether to deny postponement and hear both cases the same night. After discussion the board voted to hear the cases that evening. Once the hearings proceeded, several board members said the record and prior testimony indicated the problems were maintenance-related rather than a bona fide hardship required for a variance.

“Maintenance is not a bona fide hardship,” Board member Michael Von Olin said when moving to deny the variances. Von Olin and several colleagues said testimony in earlier hearings and on video characterized the issue as maintenance and that the bathymetry and sediment conditions described were typical of the area rather than a unique, property‑specific condition. The board adopted a motion to deny both variances; the Chair announced the motion to deny passed and that both variance requests were denied.

The denials close the files for the two Channel Road applicants for now. Applicants may return with revised applications or additional evidence; Lynch told the board she expects to bring signed engineering reports at the April meeting. The board’s decision leaves the existing docks in place until any further formal action or a new application is filed.