Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:08]

FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE ON THE LINE WAITING, WE HAVE A FEW ITEMS OF BUSINESS TO TAKE CARE OF AND WE'LL START THE PUBLIC HEARINGS.

WE WILL TAKE ALL SPEAKERS FOR ALL CASES IN THE ORDER THAT THEY APPEAR ON OUR AGENDA BEFORE REVIEWING THE CASES AND, UM, HAVING THE PRESENTATIONS AND MAKING, UM, UM, DISCUSSING THEM AND MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS.

YOU MAY FIND THE AGENDA ON THE HISTORIC LANDMARK HOMEPAGE.

GO TO VIEW AGENDAS AND PULL UP THE AGENDA FOR THIS MEETING FOR JANUARY 25TH, 2021 STAFF.

IS THERE ANYONE SIGNED UP FOR CITIZENS COMMUNICATION, MADAM CHAIR, WE DO NOT HAVE ANYONE REGISTERED FOR CITIZENS COMMUNICATION.

OUR FIRST ITEM APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.

UM, WE ARE NOT GOING, WE ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE THE, UH, APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

THAT WILL BE PULLED FOR DISCUSSION COMMISSIONER HAIM.

SETH, WILL YOU TAKE ROLL? THAT'S A GOOD IDEA.

THANK YOU, JERRY MYERS.

I'M THE CHAIRMAN.

BEN-HAIM SET VICE CHAIR.

I'M HERE WITH FEATHERSTON.

MATTHEW, JACOB.

I SAW HIM.

KEVIN COOK.

NOT YET.

KELLY LIDL.

I'M HERE.

TREY MCWHORTER.

I SEE YOU ALEX.

ARE YOU HERE? BLAKE TELE WILL NOT BE WITH US THIS EVENING.

THAT'S VALANZUELA AND CAROLINE, RIGHT? OKAY.

THERE YOU ARE.

COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON AND COMMISSIONER POP-UPS CELIA, AND WE'RE EXPECTING COMMISSIONER COOK IN A MINUTE.

WE HAVE NO BRIEFINGS OR PRESENTATIONS TONIGHT.

EXCUSE ME, ELIZABETH.

WE PULLED THE MINUTES FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA.

DID YOU WANT TO DISCUSS THEM NOW OR COME UP WHEN THEY, UM, WHEN WE GO THROUGH THE ITEMS, LET'S DISCUSS THEM WHEN WE GET TO THE DISCUSSION ITEMS AS THE FIRST.

OKAY.

[Consent Agenda:B2, C1, C3, C6, C7, C9 - C11, C13, D1, D3, D5, D6, D8, D11, D12, D14, E1, F1 (Part 1 of 2)]

UNDER ITEM THREE, PUBLIC HEARINGS, LETTER A IS DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON APPLICATIONS FOR HISTORIC ZONING.

THE ONLY ITEM THAT WE HAVE ON OUR AGENDA TONIGHT IS HISTORIC ZONING CASE HDP 2020 ZERO FOUR NINE FOUR, THE KENNETH AND MILDRED THREADGILL HOUSE.

THIS WAS OFFERED FOR CONSENT, BUT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A SHORT PRESENTATION.

UH, WE HAVE INITIATED HISTORIC ZONING, BUT IT, UM, WE'LL HAVE A SHORT PRESENTATION AND THEN DECIDE WHETHER TO RECOMMEND HISTORIC ZONING UNDER ITEM B DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS B ONE, THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED POSTPONEMENT.

THE TWO IS THE OFFER FOR CONSENT APPROVAL.

AND FOR THOSE APPLICANTS AND AGENTS WHO ARE ON THE LINE, IF AN APPLICATION HAS BEEN OFFERED FOR CONSENT, PLEASE LOOK AT THE RECOMMENDATIONS UNDER THE COMMITTEE REVIEW AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.

IF AN ITEM HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR DEMOLITION, YOU WILL NEED TO PREPARE A CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE, WHICH CONTAINS A NARRATIVE HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY, PHOTOGRAPHS OF ALL, UH, ELEVATIONS AND A SKETCH PLAN ON YOUR BEAT TO ONE 21 LAUREL LANE AND ALBRIDGE PLACE IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

THE THREE 38 OH FIVE AVENUE H IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT APPROVAL WITH STAFF TO,

[00:05:02]

UM, APPROVE THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.

IF THE APPLICANT, UH, CONFORMS TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE AND STAFF, THOSE ARE THE ONLY ITEMS WE HAVE.

AND UNDER LETTER B UNDER C DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS WITHIN A NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT C ONE 1406 WEST 29TH STREET WAS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

BUT I WONDERED IF THERE WAS ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM.

UH, WE DO NOT HAVE ANYONE REGISTERED TO SPEAK ON ITEMS C1.

OKAY.

THEN THAT'S OFFERED FOR CONSENT BY ITEM C TO THE FIESTA GARDENS EQUITATION AT 2101, JESSE, UM, SEGOVIA STREET, THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED A POSTPONE C3 16, 15 WATERSTON AVENUE IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

UNLESS THERE'S A SPEAKER HERE TO ADDRESS THAT ITEM HEARING NONE.

WE GO ON TO C4 15, 17 MARIE LANE.

THIS IS A DISCUSSION ITEM.

IT IS NOT ON OUR DESK.

MADAM CHAIR.

YES.

THIS IS AN APPLICANT REQUESTED POSTPONEMENT.

UH, WE RECEIVED THE REQUEST AFTER THE AGENDA WAS POSTED FOR, UM, MURRAY LANE.

RIGHT? OKAY.

THEN THIS IS, THIS WILL, UM, BE CONSIDERED UNDER THE, UH, POSTPONEMENT AGENDA.

AND THAT'S AN APPLICANT RE REQUEST.

YES.

THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO TAKE SOME EXTRA TIME TO EVALUATE SOME ALTERNATIVES TO DEMOLITION.

OKAY, GOOD.

15, 10 PHARMA POLOMA PLAZA.

THIS IS A DISCUSSION ITEM.

C6 SEVEN 24 PATTERSON AVENUE.

OUR AGENDA SAYS IT'S IN THE OLD WEST AUSTIN, A HISTORIC DISTRICT, BUT IT'S IN THE WESTLINE HISTORIC DISTRICT.

IT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT ITEMS, SEEK SEVEN 32 OH SEVEN FUNSTON STREET IS OFFERED PER CONSENT.

UNLESS THERE'S SOMEONE HERE TO SPEAK ON THAT ITEM ITEM C EIGHT, 1504 WESTOVER STAFF HAS REQUESTED A POSTPONEMENT, UH, MADAM CHAIR.

UH, THIS IS ANOTHER ONE WHERE WE GOT INFORMATION AFTER THE AGENDA WAS POSTED.

UM, WE RECEIVED ENOUGH INFORMATION FROM THE OWNER, UM, WHICH IS NOW POSTED AND YELLS BACK UP TO PROCEED WITH THIS ITEM AS A DISCUSSION.

OKAY.

THIS'LL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM THEN ITEMS SEEING NINE 30, TWO OH FIVE FUNDS DONE IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT ITEM C 10 30 TO 12.

GLENVIEW IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

SEE, 11 TWENTY-FIVE TWENTY-FIVE HARTFORD ROAD IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

C 12 TO 23 EAST SIXTH STREET IS A DISCUSSION ITEM C 1316, 16 NORTHUMBERLAND ROAD IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

YES, JUST A QUICK QUESTION.

I MAY NOT WANT TO PULL IT, BUT, UM, THE PHOTOGRAPH SUGGESTS THAT DEMOLITION HAS ALREADY STARTED.

IS THAT CORRECT? I DON'T KNOW, STAMP, UH, COMMISSIONER, THIS ITEM WAS APPROVED FOR A PARTIAL DEMOLITION BACK IN 2020.

UM, SO THAT BEGAN AND, UH, IT LOOKS LIKE DURING THE COURSE OF THAT, UH, THE APPLICANT HAS, UH, ENCOUNTERED SOME PROBLEMS THAT, UH, TURNED OUT TO, UH, REQUIRE THEM TO ASK FOR A TOTAL DEMOLITION ON THE PROPERTY.

OKAY.

I APPRECIATE THE CLARIFICATION.

SHOULD WE PULL THIS ITEM FOR DISCUSSION? I'M GOING TO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE CASE.

I JUST WAS CONCERNED, SLIPPING UNDERNEATH THEM, GOING ON TO SECTION DEAN DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON APPLICATIONS FOR DEMOLITION OR RELOCATION.

1402 DRAKE AVENUE IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT CHAIR.

UM, I'D LIKE TO ASK IF PAULA KAUFMANN IS

[00:10:01]

ON THE LINE AND IF SO, SHE COULD CLARIFY WHICH OF THE CASES THAT SHE'S WANTING TO SPEAK ON.

OKAY.

MS. KAUFMAN, ARE YOU ON THE LINE TONIGHT? HOLOCAUST GOING ON TWO 56, 13 PATTON RANCH ROAD.

THIS ITEM, THE APPLICANT HAS ASKED FOR A POSTPONEMENT SEVEN OH SEVEN WEST MARY STREET IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

THE NEXT ITEM D FOUR IS SEVEN 11 WAS MARY.

IT'S BEEN APPROVED BY STAFF.

NO ACTION IS REQUIRED.

THE FIVE, FIVE 18 EAST 40TH STREET IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT ITEM D SIX, SEVEN OH TWO.

KEYS B STREET AS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

1601 BRECKINRIDGE STREET IS A DISCUSSION ITEM.

D EIGHT 34 OH TWO MOUNTAIN VANILLA DRIVE IS THE OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

UNLESS THERE'S SOMEONE TO SPEAK TO THE ITEM.

OKAY.

ITEM D NINE 28 OH THREE BONNIE ROAD.

THIS WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.

I BELIEVE THERE'S SOMEONE TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE.

ITEM D 10 1904 MOUNTAIN VIEW ROAD WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.

11 1609.

ALTAVISTA IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

D 12 3003 EAST 18TH STREET IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT ITEM D 13 2206 SOUTH THIRD STREET HAS BEEN APPROVED BY STAFF.

NO ACTION IS REQUIRED.

ITEM D 14, 1207.

TAYLOR STREET IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT OTHER THAN A DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT EVEN ONE 1801 GNOMES DRIVE, THE SEABORN SNEAD HOUSE IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT OR APPROVAL TO MAINTAIN THE HOUSE ON OUR AGENDA.

THERE ARE NO NEW UPDATES ITEM F DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON APPLICATIONS FOR TAX ABATEMENT FOR REBOOT ABILITATION OF THE PROPERTY AND A LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT AT THREE OH FIVE WEST 45TH STREET, THAT'S OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

AND WE HAVE UNDER THAT SECTION FOR COMMISSION AND STAFF ITEMS. THESE ARE NOT ON OUR CONSENT AGENDA.

WE'LL GET TO THOSE AT THE END OF THE, AT THE MEETING.

CAN STAFF READ BACK TO THE ITEMS OFFERED FOR CONSENT? CERTAINLY WE HAVE ITEMS. LET ME SEE.

LET ME GET TO THE FIRST ONE.

THE TWO.

YES, I APOLOGIZE.

I GOT MY PAGES OUT OF ORDER.

WE HAVE, UM, ITEM B TWO ITEM B3 ITEMS, C1 ITEMS, C3 ITEM C SIX C SEVEN C NINE, C 10, C 11, C 13 D ONE D THREE D FIVE D EIGHT, D 11, D 12, D 14.

AND THANK YOU.

DO I HEAR A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT BETH ELLEN SUELA MADE THE MOTION.

DO I HEAR A SECOND? OKAY.

UH, KELLY LIBERALS SECONDS, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE APPROVING

[00:15:01]

THE CONSENT AGENDA, PLEASE SAY AYE, OR RAISE YOUR HAND.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED THE ITEM, THE MOTION CARRIES COMMISSIONER COOK HAS JOINED US,

[Postponed Items: B1, C2, C4, C8, D2]

AND THEN WE HAD SEVERAL ITEMS ON THE POSTPONEMENT AGENDA STAFF.

DO YOU HAVE THOSE? YES.

JUST A MOMENT.

WE HAVE ITEM B ONE ITEM C TWO ITEMS, C FOUR, UH, WHICH I SHOULD NOTE ON ITEM C4.

WE DO HAVE THE APPLICANT AND MULTIPLE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ON THE LINE.

UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT ANYONE NECESSARILY WISHES TO SPEAK TO THIS POSTPONEMENT, BUT WE MAY WANT TO GIVE THEM THAT OPPORTUNITY.

UM, SHOULD WE PULL IT FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? I MEAN, FROM THE CONSENT POSTPONEMENT DON'T BELIEVE SO, BUT, UM, LET'S SEE.

AND JUST A MOMENT, IF ANYONE WANTS TO SPEAK ON THAT, IS THERE SOMEONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON 15, 17 MARIE LANEY? THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED A POSTPONEMENT.

WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF THE POSTPONEMENT.

WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS HAPPENING.

OKAY.

THANK YOU, MS. SENATE.

UH, WE'VE ALSO HAD A REQUEST FROM THE APPLICANT TO PULL ITEM B3 FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA, UH, BY THE COUNCIL.

OKAY.

THAT'S 38 OH FIVE AVENUE H THEY DON'T WANT TO GO ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

COMMISSIONER SET.

OKAY.

MADAM CHAIR, SINCE WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED THE CONSENT AGENDA, WHY DON'T WE FINISH THE POSTPONEMENT CONSENTS AND THEN WE'LL HAVE TO RESEND THAT MOTION IF THAT'S GOING TO BE THE CASE, MAYBE WE'LL FIGURE OUT A LITTLE BIT, BUT WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR, RIGHT.

UM, THAT'S A GOOD IDEA.

LET'S GO, LET'S CONTINUE THROUGH THE POSTPONEMENT AGENDA AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK TO THE CIN SENATE AGENDA AGAIN.

OKAY.

WHAT ELSE DO WE HAVE ON, UM, FOR POSTPONEMENTS? WE HAVE IDD TOO, AND I BELIEVE THAT MAY BE OUR LAST ONE.

THAT'S THE LAST ONE.

OKAY.

OKAY.

DO I HEAR A MOTION TO APPROVE THE POSTPONEMENT AGENDA? MADAM CHAIR, POSTPONEMENT AGENDA.

I HAVE A COUPLE OTHERS HERE.

OKAY.

LET ME GO BACK.

UM, THE FIRST ITEM I HAVE FOR POSTPONEMENT IS ITEM THE JACKSON, NO V KELLY, WHO HE HAS, THE APPLICANT REQUESTED THOSE FUNDS.

UM, THE NEXT ITEM IS C2.

I BELIEVE FIESTA GARDENS ON THE C4, 15, 17 MURRAY LANE.

THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED POSTPONEMENT EIGHT.

I'M SORRY.

OH, WE HAD CA UH, THE STAFF REQUESTED BILL'S FILE, BUT NOW WE HAVE, UH, WE ARE NOT PUTTING THAT ON THE AGENDA BECAUSE YOU HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO DISCUSS IT.

OKAY.

CHECKING ITEM TWO 56, 13 PATTON RANCH ROAD.

THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED A POSTPONEMENT.

OKAY.

THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE.

OKAY.

DO I HEAR A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT POSTPONEMENT, BUT THAT'S NOT MY AGENDA.

SO MOVED.

THAT WAS COMMISSIONER COOK SECOND BY COMMISSIONER, UH, MCWHORTER, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE POSTPONEMENT, PASSING THE POSTPONEMENT AGENDA.

RAISE YOUR HANDS.

ANY OPPOSED? NONE.

IT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

OKAY.

WELL

[Consent Agenda:B2, C1, C3, C6, C7, C9 - C11, C13, D1, D3, D5, D6, D8, D11, D12, D14, E1, F1 (Part 2 of 2)]

GO BACK TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.

AND APPARENTLY THE APPLICANT WANTED TO REMOVE THEIR APPLICATION B3 FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA.

UM, SO YES.

UM, CAN WE GET A CLARIFICATION FROM STAFF? IS, IS THE APPLICANT AWARE THAT THE CONSENT WAS

[00:20:01]

APPROVING WHAT THEY HAD APPLIED? THAT IF IT'S OFF THE AGENDA, ARE THEY OPPOSING THEIR OWN APPLICATION? THEY WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS A SPECIFIC ASPECT OF THAT APPLICATION AND HAVE JUST EMAILED US TO THAT EFFECT.

SO THEY WOULD JUST LIKE TO HAVE IT AS PART OF THAT.

SO THEY WOULD LIKE US TO DISCUSS IT AS A RESULT.

CORRECT? I AM NOT CERTAIN WHAT WE NEED TO DO SINCE WE HAVE ALREADY PASSED THAT MOTION.

WE NEED TO, WE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION TO VOID THE ORIGINAL MOTION, AND THEN WE NEED TO MAKE ANOTHER MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.

SANDS, THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION COMMISSIONER I'M SETH I'LL MOVE TO RESCIND THE PREVIOUS MOTION FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA OF APPROVAL.

IS THERE A SECOND COMMISSIONER? RIGHT.

SECOND, THE MOTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF RESENDING, THE ORIGINAL MOTION, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED IT'S UNANIMOUS.

WE HAVE NOW PRESENTED THE ORIGINAL MOTION AND YES, APPROVED.

I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE PREVIOUSLY LISTED CONSENT AGENDA, EXCEPT FOR THE REMOVAL OF ITEM IT'S B3.

IS THAT CORRECT? SO MY MOTION WOULD BE ALL OF THE PREVIOUS WILL BE INCLUDED EXCEPT FOR B3.

THAT'S CORRECT.

AND B3 WILL THEN BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.

OKAY.

UM, DO I HEAR A SECOND TO THAT MOTION SECOND BY COMMISSIONER VILLAINS.

SUELA ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE NEW CONSENT AGENDA.

PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED IT'S UNANIMOUS.

THE CONSENT AGENDA IS BATHS.

OKAY.

UM, COMMISSIONER COOK.

YOU MAY NOT REALIZE IT, BUT YOU'RE IN THE DARK.

YES.

I'M HAVING SOME COMPUTER ISSUES AND I'LL BE TRYING TO FIX IT FOR NOW.

CONSIDER ME A REMBRANDT PAINTING.

THAT'S EXCELLENT.

OKAY.

I MEAN, DO YOU MEAN JUST NOW OR ALWAYS? WELL, HE COULD BE A RENAISSANCE MAN OF THAT.

UM, LET'S

[1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES]

GO BACK NOW.

THE FIRST ITEM, UM, THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM DECEMBER 14, 20, 20, WE PULLED THAT.

YES.

COMMISSIONER VALANZUELA.

DO WE NEED TO, UM, APPROVE THE DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENTS? DID WE HAVE DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENTS? YES.

THERE, THERE ARE NO DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENTS, NO DISCUSSION.

OKAY.

UM, STAFF, WOULD YOU PLEASE, UM, DISCUSSED THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE LAST MEETING? YES, CERTAINLY AT THE LAST MEETING, UM, WE HAD TWO VOTES TAKEN FOR THE DELTA KAPPA GAMMA BUILDING.

UH, THE FIRST VOTE PASSED BY, UM, EIGHT WITH TWO ABSTENTIONS TO RECOMMEND HISTORIC ZONING AND TO FORWARD THAT RECOMMENDATION ONTO PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, THAT, UH, DID NOT HAVE THE SUPER MAJORITY THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED.

UM, EITHER PLANNING, COMMISSION OR HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION MUST PASS WITH THE SUPER MAJORITY FOR IT TO REACH COUNCIL OVER OWNER OBJECTION.

UM, UNFORTUNATELY WE HAVE AN, AN ERROR RELATIVE TO ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER THAT RENDERS THAT SECOND VOTE AND VALID ONLY THE FIRST VOTE STANDS.

SO WE HAD A VOTE OF EIGHT ZERO TWO, THEN IT WAS RETAKEN, UH, WITH A VOTE OF NINE ZERO ONE.

UM, BUT BECAUSE THERE WAS NO MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE ORIGINAL VOTE AND TO VOTE ON THAT MOTION TO RECONSIDER ONLY THE FIRST VOTE IS CONSIDERED VALID.

UM, SO THERE'S, THERE'S MULTIPLE, UM, TAKEAWAYS HERE THAT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THE COMMISSION IS AWARE OF.

UM, ONE IS, IS JUST THAT PROCEDURAL ASPECT TO THAT ANY TIME, UH, THAT WE HAVE EMOTION THAT FAILS OR EMOTION THAT FAILS TO REACH A SUPER MAJORITY.

AND THERE'S A DESIRE TO SEE IF ANYONE'S VOTE, CAN CHANGE.

WHAT WE NEED IS A MOTION TO RECONSIDER FROM THE SIDE THAT DID NOT PREVAIL IN THE VOTE.

THEN THERE NEEDS TO BE A VOTE ON THAT MOTION TO RECONSIDER, AND THAT HAS THE EFFECT OF WIPING AWAY THE INITIAL VOTE AND STARTING OVER, UM, DELIBERATION AND THE VOTE ON THAT CASE.

A NEW, UM,

[00:25:02]

I ALSO WANTED TO URGE THE COMMISSIONERS TO CONSIDER THAT THE ROLE OF THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION IS REALLY TO CONSIDER WHETHER A PROPERTY MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION.

UH, WE CERTAINLY HAD A VERY COMPELLING CASE FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THIS INSTANCE, UH, REGARDING THE HARDSHIP THAT LANDMARK DESIGNATION WOULD HAVE ON THEM.

UM, I WOULD ARGUE THAT THAT IS REALLY OUTSIDE THE PURVIEW OF THIS COMMISSION.

THAT'S SOMETHING FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER IF A CASE REACHES THEM.

UM, SO IT, YOU KNOW, IN, IN ANY, IN ANY CASE LIKE THIS, UM, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S A CHANCE, THIS IS A CLEAR CUT INSTANCE, A NATIONAL REGISTER LISTED PROPERTY.

IT REALLY IS ONE THAT SHOULD MAKE IT BEFORE COUNCIL.

AND UNFORTUNATELY AT THIS POINT IT MAY NOT.

SO, UM, I JUST WOULD URGE THE COMMISSIONERS TO REALLY CONSIDER IT IN THEIR INITIAL VOTES.

UM, LOOKING STRICTLY AT THE LANDMARK CRITERIA AND DETERMINING HOW THEY WILL VOTE ON A CASE.

UH, THE FINAL POINT THAT I WANTED TO MAKE IN THIS REGARD IS THAT IF THERE'S EVER A QUESTION ABOUT PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE AND FOLLOWING ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER, WE DO HAVE AN ATTORNEY ON CALL FOR THESE MEETINGS AND THAT RESPONSIBILITY RESTS ON STAFF AS WELL, IF THERE IS EVER, UM, SOMETHING THAT, THAT, UM, STAFF OR THE COMMISSION ARE UNSURE OF, WE SHOULD TABLE DISCUSSION OF THAT ITEM, GET THE ATTORNEY ON THE PHONE AND THEN CIRCLE BACK AND TAKE A VOTE.

UM, SO JUST, JUST TO SUMMARIZE THE DELTA KAPPA GAMMA CASE, WE'LL MOVE TO PLANNING COMMISSION TOMORROW WITHOUT A SUPER MAJORITY VOTE FROM THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.

UM, ELIZABETH, WOULD YOU PLEASE, UH, EXPLAIN WHAT STEVE'S TEDESCHI IS PRESENTING TO THE LAMB, TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THIS CASE? CERTAINLY IT'S STILL PROCEEDS TO PLANNING COMMISSION TOMORROW.

UM, IT PROCEEDS WITH A SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE FROM THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.

OKAY.

AND TODAY, WHEN, TODAY, WHEN WE, WHEN WE SPOKE EARLIER, THERE WAS, THERE WAS SOME, UM, THERE WAS SOME, IT WASN'T A DISAGREEMENT.

IT JUST, UH, AN ISSUE ABOUT WHAT CONSTITUTES THE SU SUPER MAJORITY.

IS IT THE CASE THAT WE NEED AT NINE VOTES? IT'S A SUPERMAN, IT'S NINE VOTES AS A SUPER MAJORITY OF THE BODY, NOT A SUPER MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERS PRESENT.

SO IT'S AN INCREDIBLY HIGH BAR SET BY STATE LAW.

OKAY.

AND COMMISSIONER HIMSELF.

YEAH.

UM, I'M I SHOULD'VE THOUGHT OF IT MYSELF.

I'M LOOKING BACK AT IT.

IT MAKES SENSE.

UM, IT NEVER OCCURRED TO ME THAT WE NEEDED TO RESEND OUR MOTION AND THAT, THAT IS A STANDARD IN ROBERT'S RULES THAT, THAT RECENSION CAN ONLY COME FROM SOMEBODY WHO VOTED WITH THE, UM, THE, THE OTHER SIDE.

SO ANYWAY, I, I THINK THE ONE THING I WOULD REQUEST THOUGH, IS THAT AS PART OF THE PRESENTATION, EVEN IF IT'S NOT REFLECTED IN THE MINUTES THAT, UH, MR AT LEAST COULD NARRATE THE SEQUENCE OF EVENTS THAT TOOK PLACE, THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.

SO WE WOULD BE PASSING ON OUR VOTE, BUT THEN, UH, HE COULD RELATE THAT THERE WAS A SUBSEQUENT FOLLOWUP BOAT.

IT TURNS OUT IT WAS NEGATED, BUT, UH, THAT, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE VOTE IF, IF WE HAD DONE IT.

RIGHT.

ABSOLUTELY.

AND STEVE FULLY INTENDS TO DO SO.

UM, STEVE, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANTED TO ADD ON THIS? NO, I THINK WE'VE GOT IT COVERED.

UH, AND THAT IS, THAT IS MY PLAN COMMISSIONER HIGH SAPP IS TO RELATE WHAT HAPPENED, UH, AND ALSO TO STRESS THAT BECAUSE THE SUPER MAJORITY WOULD BE REQUIRED AND EITHER THE LANDMARK COMMISSION OR THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, FOR IT TO GO ON TO THE COUNCIL AND THE COUNCIL WILL ALSO NEED A SUPER MAJORITY.

SO PLANNING ON, UH, MAKING THAT VERY CLEAR TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TOMORROW NIGHT, RIGHT.

BASED ON OUR VOTE.

IT'S NOT GOING, THEY'D HAVE TO DO THEIR, THEIR VOTE OR COUNCIL.

WON'T HEAR IT.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

OKAY.

WE DID ASK, UM, IF IT NEEDED TO BE RESCINDED AND, UM, WE WENT AHEAD AND TOOK THE VOTE, RIGHT.

AND THAT, AGAIN, THAT'S A, THAT'S A FAILING ON THAT, THAT FALLS ON STAFF SHOULDERS AS WELL.

WE SHOULD HAVE, UM, HIT THE PAUSE BUTTON SUGGESTED THAT YOU TABLE AND TAKING THAT TO THE ATTORNEY ON CALL.

SO I DO APOLOGIZE THAT WE DID NOT DO THAT GOING ON NOW TO THE PUBLIC HEARINGS SORT OF STUFF.

WE HAVE A ONE FIRST STEP AND ONLY

[00:30:01]

UP FOR A POSSIBLE ACTION ON HISTORIC LANDMARK CASES.

UH, WE HAVE THE KENNETH AND MILDRED THREADGILL HOUSE THAT WE RECEIVED A, UH, PRESENTATION ON IT AT OUR LAST MEETING, THAT STAFF IS GOING TO, UM, ADDRESS IT ONCE AGAIN FOR US TO REFRESH OUR MEMORIES.

BEFORE, BEFORE WE MOVE ON MADAM CHAIR, WE NEED TO TAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES I WANTED TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION BEFORE.

UM, SO THE COMMISSIONERS WOULD KNOW WHAT YOU WERE VOTING ON.

IT IS NOTED IN THE MINUTES THAT IT WAS A VOTE TAKEN WITHOUT A MOTION TO RECONSIDER.

SO YOU WOULD HAVE TO UNDERSTAND ENOUGH ABOUT ROBERT'S RULES TO REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT MEANS RELATIVE TO THE TWO VOTES AND ONLY THE FIRST ONE STANDING.

THANK YOU.

DO I HEAR A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS REVISED AND EXPLAINED TO US BY STAFF SOMEONE CAROLINE MAKES THE MOTION.

DO I HEAR A SECOND COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTONE SECONDS, THE MOTION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

ALL THOSE OPPOSED THE MOTION CARRIES THE MINUTES AS REVISED ARE APPROVED.

OKAY.

[3A.1. HDP-2020-0494 – Kenneth and Mildred Threadgill House – Offered for Consent Approval (Part 1 of 2)]

THANK YOU.

AND NEXT IN THE PUBLIC HEARINGS, A ONE THE THREAD HOUSE DISCUSSION ON THIS ONE, THERE ARE WE SUPPOSED TO BE TAKING PUBLIC TESTIMONY FIRST? YES, WE ARE.

THANK YOU.

I'M SORRY.

I GOT FRAZZLED HERE.

YOU WERE READY.

I'M I'M READY TO GO FOR THE CASES GUYS, BUT BECAUSE I CAN'T SEE THEM, SO THEY WEREN'T JUMPING UP AND DOWN ATTRACTING MY ATTENTION.

DO WE HAVE ANYONE TO SPEAK ON ITEM A ONE, THE KENNETH AND MOLDED THREADGILL HOUSE, EITHER IN SIGNED UP IN FAVOR OR AN OPPOSITION HEARING, THEN ANYONE LET'S SEE THAT WAS CONSENT.

UM, NOW WE HAVE B3 38 OH FIVE AVENUE AGE.

THE APPLICANTS PULLED THIS FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA, PLEASE.

UM, IF THE APPLICANT IS ON THE LINE, PLEASE GIVE YOUR, UM, PRESENTATION.

POLYETHER APOLOGIES FOR THE CONFUSION EARLIER.

UH, THE REASON WE JUST WANTED TO PULL THIS FROM CONSENT IS JUST TO HAVE ONE, UM, FINAL DISCUSSION AROUND, UM, THE HORIZONTAL SIDING POSSIBILITY UNDERNEATH THE GABLE AND ABOVE THE FREEZE BOARD.

UM, UH, FOUND SOME EXAMPLES THAT SHOWED, UM, VARIOUS MATERIALS, UM, ABOVE THE FREEZE BOARD.

AND, UM, THESE INCLUDE, YOU KNOW, ANYTHING FROM THIS, UM, BOARD AND BATTEN WITH ASPHALTIC OR STUCCO TYPE OF SIDING TO SHINGLE, TO WATERFALL.

AND I EVEN FOUND A HOUSE IN HYDE PARK THAT IS LOCATED ON AVENUE G AT 47 17, UM, WITH WATERFALL SIDING ON IT, ABOVE THE FRIEZE BOARD.

AND IT IS AN ALL BRICK HOME, JUST LIKE OUR HOME IS.

AND SO I'M JUST, UM, WONDERING IF THIS IS AT ALL A POSSIBILITY FOR US TO STILL CONSIDER.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

WE'RE UM, WE'RE TAKING THE PUBLIC HEARING UPFRONT AND WE WILL GET TO THAT CASE WHEN WE'RE FINISHED TAKING THE PUBLIC, UM, THE PRESENTATION FROM THE PUBLIC, ALL OF OUR SPEAKERS, THEN WE'LL TAKE UP THE CASES.

UM, AND I THINK THAT THIS WAS IN OUR PACKET IN OUR BACKUPS, THE EXAMPLES THAT YOU SHOWED, SO WE CAN CONSIDER THOSE EXAMPLES AS WELL.

OKAY.

OKAY.

OKAY.

OKAY.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE NEXT ON THIS ITEM? WE HAVE ERICA BONFONTI I, UM, I'M WE'RE THE OWNERS.

WE JUST, WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO SAY OTHER THAN THANKS FOR CONSIDERING.

OKAY.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THERE'S UH, JEFF ACTON, UH, I BELIEVE ANOTHER OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.

YEAH.

ONCE AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR TAKING US UP.

OKAY.

UM,

[00:35:01]

GOING ON TO ITEM C ONE, LET'S SEE.

THAT WAS CONSENT ITEM.

UM, NOPE, 15, 17 MURRAY LANE.

HAVE WE DECIDED THAT THAT WAS, THAT IT'S POSTPONED, THAT WENT ON THE POSTPONEMENT AGENDA.

WE DON'T NEED TO TAKE SPEAKERS FOR THAT CASE.

IS THAT CORRECT?

[3C.5. GF-20-180133 – 1510 Palma Plaza – Discussion Old West Austin Historic District Council District 9 (Part 1 of 2)]

THAT'S CORRECT.

I BELIEVE OUR NEXT ITEM IS C5.

15, 10 PALMA PLAZA.

MR. JOHN MEYER REGISTERING.

YES.

I'M HERE.

MR. MEYER.

YES.

YES.

GO RIGHT AHEAD.

MY NAME IS JOHN MEYER.

I AM THE OWNER OF 15, 10 PAMA PLAZA.

I HAVE OVER 25 YEARS EXPERIENCE AS A BUILDER GENERAL CONTRACTOR IN SEVERAL CITIES THROUGHOUT THE SOUTHWEST AND SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED SEVERAL PROJECTS LOCATED IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS.

15, 10 PALMER PLAZA IS A 1,976 SQUARE FOOT RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE, APPROXIMATELY 100 YEARS OLD.

IT WAS ORIGINALLY BUILT AS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, AND IT WAS MORPHED OVER THE YEARS INTO A TRIPLET, THE SMALL TRADITIONAL TWO BEDROOM, TWO BATH UNIT, AND TWO SMALL MAKESHIFT EFFICIENCY STUDIOS.

IT'S CURRENT CONDITION OF POOR STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY IS VISUALLY EVIDENT EVEN TO THE CASUAL OBSERVER.

UH, PLEASE GO TO PAGE THREE OF THE PRESENTATION UPON CLOSER OBSERVATION OBSERVATIONS NOTED BY LOC STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS.

IT WAS NOT BUILT WELL EVEN FOR ITS TIME.

THE WALLS ARE TWO BY FOUR CONSTRUCTION, WHICH WAS TYPICAL, BUT THE ROOF STRUCTURE IS ALSO MADE OF TWO BY FOUR JOYCE AND RAFTERS ON 24 INCH CENTERS.

SO THE ONE BY 12 FOUR RIDGE BEAM, ADDITIONALLY, THERE WAS NO PURLINS OR OTHER TYPICAL SUPPORT FRAMING USED IN THE ROOF STRUCTURE.

THIS IS RESULTED IN SAGGING AND AIDS AND SHIFTING AND OTHER MOVEMENT.

WHEN THE WALLS BELOW STARTED THE ROD OUT, THERE WAS NO BAKER VAPOR BARRIER APPLIED TO THE EXTERIOR WALLS PRIOR TO LAUGHING STUCCO.

AND THE WINDOWS AND DOOR OPENINGS WERE NOT PROPERLY WATERPROOF WITH EXTERIOR WALLS WERE BUILT AND WHO ARE NOT PANDORA HAVE NOT BEEN PROPERLY MAINTAINED OR SEALED OVER THE YEAR.

THE RESULT IS SUBSTANTIAL ROTTING AND DECAY FROM WATER PENETRATION AND CYCLICAL CONDENSATION.

THE DECAYING FRAMING MEMBERS OF THE EXTERIOR WALLS HAVE CONTRIBUTED SIGNIFICANTLY TO SAGGING.

AND AS A MOVEMENT MADE EVIDENT BY THE NUMEROUS VERTICAL HORIZONTAL DIAGONAL CRACKING STAIN ON THE EXTERIOR WALLS.

THE FOUR JOYS FOR TWO BITES PLACED ON FOUR BY FOUR AND FOUR BY SIX BEAMS, WHICH ARE SUPPORTED BY CEDAR STUMPS AND CME BLOCK BASED ON GRADES.

THESE ARE UNDERSIZED FOUNDATION MEMBERS.

THE RESULT OF THIS POORLY DESIGNED FOUNDATION IS, IS EXCESSIVE SLOPING COMPRESSION AND SETTLING.

THIS IS FURTHER EXACERBATED BY THE CONDITION OF THE WALLS AS NOTED PREVIOUSLY, AND VICE VERSA WAS WHERE THE ELECTRICAL AND PLUMBING SYSTEMS THEY ARE OUTDATED AND UNSAFE AND WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED ENTIRELY AS POOR EFFICIENCY.

THE DOORS AND WINDOWS ARE NOT ENERGY EFFICIENT WOULD NOT MEET CURRENT CODE AND NEED TO, WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED.

THIS BUILDING AS IT SITS RIGHT NOW IS POORLY BUILT AS EXCESSIVE DECAY AND ROT, AND IS UNSAFE TO TRY TO SOLVE IT TO ANY PORT.

PART OF IT WOULD REQUIRE BUILDING THAT PORTION OF THE BUILDING IN ITS ENTIRETY.

EVEN IF IT WERE ONLY ONE WALL, PLEASE GO TO PAGE FIVE ON TWO SEPARATE OCCASIONS ON MAY 5TH OH SIX AND 10, 1607.

THE CITY OF AUSTIN ISSUED A DEMOLITION PERMITS ON THIS PROPERTY.

PHOTOS OF THIS BUILDING CAN BE VIEWED ON PAGES SIX AND SEVEN.

IT IS OUR OPINION, THE SAFEST AND MOST WISE COURSE WOULD BE TO DEMO THIS HOUSE AND REPLACE IT WITH A DUDE LIKES WE ARE PRESENTING TONIGHT.

I NOW INVITE ALAN COX RAGE, ARCHITECTS TO SPEAK ABOUT THE DESIGN AND CHARACTER OF THE NEW DUPLEX WE PROPOSE OF, OF MR. MEYER.

UM, MR. MEYER, HAVE YOU EVER WRITTEN OR TESTIFIED ON BEHALF OF RETAINING HIS HISTORIC PROPERTY? UH, SORRY, I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION.

I WONDERED IF YOU HAD EVER WRITTEN OR TESTIFIED ON BEHALF OF SAVING A HISTORIC PROPERTY OR RETAINING A HISTORIC PROPERTY? UH, YES, I HAVE.

I HAVE WORKED TO RETAIN AND HAVE SUCCESSFULLY RETAINED, UH, SEVERAL HISTORIC PROPERTIES.

YES.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

NEXT SPEAKER.

HELLO.

UH, MY NAME IS ALAN KNOX AND I AM THE ARCHITECT OF 15, 10 PALMER PLAZA.

UH, YOU CAN PROBABLY SIT ON SLIDE EIGHT, UH, FOCUSING ON THE RENDERING FOR MY PRESENTATION SLIDES NINE THROUGH 15, OH, WERE INCLUDED IN CASE THERE WERE QUESTIONS AT THE END 15, 10 PALMER PLAZA IS A MULTI-FAMILY ZONE SITE

[00:40:01]

THAT IS A HIGHLY, HIGHLY RESTRICTED BASED ON CITY REQUIRED, ADJACENT COMPATIBILITY SETBACKS FROM SURROUNDING STRUCTURES.

AT THE SAME TIME, THE IMMEDIATE AREA VISIBLE FROM THE PROPERTY IS MADE UP OF A DIVERSE SCALE AND TYPOLOGY OF STRUCTURES, INCLUDING TWO AND THREE STORY MULTI-FAMILY BUILDINGS IN BOTH APARTMENT AND CONVERTED SINGLE-FAMILY STYLES, AS WELL AS ONE AND TWO STORIES, TWO AND A HALF STORY, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, THE EXISTING CITY SUB CHAPTER F AND OTHER LAND DEVELOPMENT FORWARDS MAKE THE ADDITION OF AN ADU AND RENOVATION OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE FINANCIALLY IMPRACTICAL.

OUR PROJECT IS DESIGNED TO FIT WITHIN THE DEVICE, DIVERSE MAKEUP OF THESE BUILDING TYPES.

IT IS A DUPLEX WITH A TRADITIONALLY STYLED CHARACTER WITH TWO FULL STORIES AND A THIRD LEVEL THAT SITS WITHIN THE PITCH OF WHAT WOULD BE THE ATTIC SPACE OF A TWO-STORY STRUCTURE.

THE TWO UNITS OF THE DEVELOPMENT ARE SHIFTED OUT OF PLANE WITH ONE ANOTHER, TO CREATE A STEP TO THE SIDE, SIMILAR TO THE OTHER HOUSES ON THE STREET AND A DETACHED CLIPS GAMBLE CARPORT THAT MAINTAINS THE CURRENT PARKING ACCESS ALONG THE EASTERN EDGE OF THE LOT IS SIMILAR, UH, IS A SIMILAR SMALL SCALE TO THE DETACHED STRUCTURE, LIKE THE PROPERTY TO THE EAST NEXT DOOR AT OUR INITIAL MEETING WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, WHICH WE BELIEVE WAS OVERALL POSITIVE IN NATURE WITH RESPECT TO THE DESIGN, UH, WE MADE ADJUSTMENTS TO THE CHARACTER OF THE FRONT FACADE TO INCORPORATE THE ARC'S COMMENTS, TO INCLUDE SOME ADDITIONAL CHARACTER, THE EXISTING STRUCTURE.

SO THE INCORPORATION OF THE ECLIPSE GERKIN STYLE LABELS AND DETAILING ACCENTS AT THE REQUEST OF THE OLD WEST AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WE SCHEDULED A PRESENTATION AND REVIEW WITH THEIR COMMITTEE.

PRIOR TO THAT MEETING, WE MADE EFFORTS TO FURTHER SEPARATE THE MASS OF THE TWO UNITS WITH A SINGLE LEVEL GARAGE SO THAT THE TWO SIDES READ MORE LIKE TWO SEPARATE SMALLER STRUCTURES INCREASING THE ACOUSTIC AND PERCEIVED PRIVACY BETWEEN THE TWO UNITS.

THE EXTERIOR MATERIAL WAS UPDATED.

THE CLAPBOARD SIDING BASED ON A GENERAL SURVEY OF THE STREET AND NEIGHBORHOOD OF BEING THE MOST PREVALENT MATERIAL WITH THE SURROUNDING HOMES IN THE AREA.

FOLLOWING THE PRESENTATION WITH ALANA, WE INCORPORATED THE REQUESTS FOR MORE DEPTH TO THE FRONT FACADE THROUGH INCORPORATING THE LARGER FRONT PORCH TO THE EAST UNIT.

THE EXTERIOR MATERIALS WERE DISCUSSED WITH REGARD TO STUCCO VERSUS CLAPBOARD SIDING.

AND OUR TEAM IS OPEN TO WHICHEVER MATERIAL THE COMMITTEE BELIEVES TO BE THE MOST APPROPRIATE.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

THE NEXT SPEAKER WILL BE JACK MEYER TO SPEAK ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY.

GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS JACK MEYER.

A PRINCIPLE OF THE OWNER, PLEASE TURN TO SLIDE 16 CODE DEFINES HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION AS THE PROPERTY HAS LONGSTANDING SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATIONS WITH PERSONS, GROUPS, INSTITUTIONS, BUSINESSES, OR EVENTS OF HISTORIC IMPORTANCE IMPORTANCE, WHICH CONTRIBUTED SIGNIFICANTLY TO THE HISTORY OF THE CITY, STATE OR NATION.

THE ORIGINAL OWNER HOWARD OSBORNE WORKED IN INSURANCE AND REAL ESTATE.

HE CO ON THE INFIELD INSURANCE AGENCY WITH MURRAY AND NILES GRANT, WHILE THE GRANTS WERE KNOWN FOR SOME OF THEIR DEVELOPMENTS, WE FOUND NO INDICATION THAT HOWARD WAS INVOLVED IN THAT PART OF THEIR BUSINESS.

PLEASE TURN TO SLIDE.

17.

HOWARD WAS THE DEVELOPER AND REAL ESTATE BROKER OF THE SMALL EAST AUSTIN UPLAND EDITION IN THE EARLY FORTIES.

UNFORTUNATELY, THIS IS WHERE MR. OSBORNE'S PAST TURNED INTO SOMETHING WE'D RATHER NOT CELEBRATE.

PLEASE TURN TO SLIDE 18 IN THE DEED RESTRICTIONS OF THE APPALLING CONDITION DEVELOPMENT THAT HOWARD DEVELOPED AND MARKETED.

IT STATES IN PARAGRAPH F NO PART OF THE PREMISES SHE'LL EVER BE OWNED, HELPFUL, HELD FOR RENTED TO OR OCCUPIED BY ANY PERSON OF AFRICAN DESCENT PROVIDED.

HOWEVER, THIS CLAUSE SHALL NOT PREVENT THE EMPLOYMENT OUTSIDE PERSONS AS DOMESTIC SERVANTS AND PROVIDING CUSTOMER ACCOMMODATIONS FOR THEM ONSET PREMISES.

CLEARLY, THIS IS NOT A POSITIVE CONTRIBUTION TO THE CITY, TO THE HISTORY OF THE CITY, STATE OR NATION.

PLEASE TURN TO SLIDE.

17 AUGUSTA OSBORN'S HISTORY WAS SIMILARLY INSIGNIFICANT AND UNSAVORY.

SHE WAS RELATED TO THE WRENCH, RENFRO DRUGSTORE FAMILY.

HOWEVER, SHE ONLY EVER MANAGED A CIRCULATING LIBRARY.

AND ONE OF THE AUSTIN DRUG STORES, IT WAS HER BROTHERS ELZA AND JOSEPH, THE GREW THE STORES INTO A MID-SIZE LOCAL DRUGSTORE CHAIN BEFORE SELLING THEM IN THE FORTIES.

THERE IS NO HISTORY OF AUGUSTA EVER MANAGING ANY OF THE STORES OR HAVING ANY OWNERSHIP STAKE IN THE STORES.

THIS DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTION TO HISTORY.

AUGUSTA WAS THE RESIDENT MANAGER AT THE AUSTIN COUNTRY CLUB FROM THE MID THIRTIES TO THE EARLY FORTIES IN HER ROLE AS MANAGER, SHE INVOLVED IN CONTROLLING MEMBERSHIP, CONDUCTING DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS AND HOSTING EVENTS FOR AUSTIN'S ELITE.

PLEASE TURN TO SLIDE 20.

THE AUSTIN COUNTRY CLUB WAS ESTABLISHED IN 1899 AT THE HANCOCK GOLF COURSE AND WAS A PRIVATE SEGREGATED FACILITY UNTIL IT MOVED IN 1951 AS THE MANAGER OF THE SEGREGATED AUSTIN COUNTRY CLUB.

DURING THIS TIME, ONE CAN BE CERTAIN THAT AUGUSTA WAS NOT OFFERING MEMBERSHIP, ALLOWING ENTRANCE OR INVITING TO PRIVATE PARTIES, ANY MEMBERS OF THE AFRICAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITY, WHILE I GUESS A SMALL ROLE IN THE RENFRO DRUGSTORES DID NOT CONTRIBUTE SIGNIFICANTLY TO

[00:45:01]

HISTORY.

IT'S CLEAR THAT ANY CONTRIBUTION SHE MAY HAVE HAD DURING HER TIME MANAGING A SEGREGATED COUNTRY CLUB SHOULD NOT BE REMEMBERED OR CELEBRATED IN ANY WAY.

WE CAN ALL AGREE THAT THE OSBORNE'S ACTIONS TO DENY FOR THE AFRICAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITY CONTRIBUTED ONLY NEGATIVELY TO THE HISTORY OF THE CITY, STATE, OR NATION.

THAT IS CERTAINLY NOT A HISTORY THAT SHOULD BE COMMEMORATED, ESPECIALLY NOT THROUGH THE DILAPIDATED AND MAKESHIFT.

TRIFLEX CURRENTLY LOCATED AT 15, 10 PALM PLAZA.

THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DEMOLISHED ALREADY.

INSTEAD, WE ALL PLAY A ROLE IN CREATING THE OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD SOMETHING BEAUTIFUL AND APPROPRIATE THAT WILL CONTRIBUTE GREATLY TO THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND MOVE AUSTIN'S HISTORY IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

ARE THERE ANY OF THE SPEAKERS ON THIS HEARING? NONE.

I WOULD JUST LIKE TO COMMENT THAT WELL, I AGREE, AND I'M SURE THAT, UM, THE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AGREE THAT THIS IS A DISGRACEFUL, UM, ELEMENT IN OUR PAST.

IT'S NOT EXCLUSIVE TO THIS PROPERTY, TO THE AUSTIN COUNTRY CLUB OR, UM, MOST CENTRAL CITY NEIGHBORHOODS, THE RESTRICTION, UM, ON THE BASIS OF RACE, THANKFULLY, WE'VE GONE PAST THAT, BUT IT'S DISINGENUOUS TO SUGGEST THAT THIS PROPERTY IS SOLELY ASSOCIATED WITH THAT KIND OF, UH, DISCRIMINATION.

CAN WE GO ONTO THE NEXT ITEM? UH, WE HAD,

[3C.8. HR-20-181181 – 1504 Westover Road – Staff-requested postponement Old West Austin Historic District Council District 10 (Part 1 of 2)]

I BELIEVE THAT CA 1504 WESTOVER ROAD STAFF, UM, HAS SAID THEY HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION.

SO CAN WE GO FOR, UH, DO WE HAVE A SPEAKER ON THAT? THE FIRST SPEAKER WE HAVE IS, UH, GAYDON.

OKAY.

BRICK WALL.

OKAY.

OKAY.

SO HE'S GO AHEAD.

YEAH.

YOU JUST GO AHEAD.

UM, I, I, UM, YES, WE'RE, WE'RE IN FAVOR OF THIS PICTURES AND EVERYBODY SAID IT LOOKS WONDERFUL.

SO THANK YOU.

OKAY.

UM, WAS THERE ANOTHER SPEAKER OR IS THAT IT? OKAY, SO YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF THIS APPLICATION TO ALLOW, UM, OKAY.

OUR NEXT, WE HAVE ANOTHER SPEAKER ON THAT ITEM.

WE HAVE SUZANNE MAURICE MARSOC LEAH.

OKAY.

IS, IS THAT GENTLEMEN HERE ON THE LINE? I THINK THEY BOTH SPOKE, UM, ELIZABETH TWO PEOPLES, BOTH THE OWNER, UM, IS THE APPLICANT FROM, UM, RENEWAL BY ANDERSON ON THE PHONE.

OKAY.

[3C.12. HR 20-113802 – 223 E. 6th Street – Discussion Sixth Street Historic District Council District 9 (Part 1 of 2)]

OUR NEXT ITEM, I BELIEVE IS C 12 AND WE HAVE, UM, CJ ON THE LINE.

YES.

PLEASE GO AHEAD AND START AND MAKE YOUR PRESENTATION.

OKAY, WELL, I'M SORRY ABOUT THIS, BUT WE GOT UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT WE NEEDED TO PRESENT THIS, BUT WE ALREADY WENT THROUGH THE PRESENTATION AND I HAVE JUDY ARCHITECTS WITH ME AND WE WERE READY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.

UH, SO IF YOU HAD ANY MORE QUESTIONS AT AN END, WHAT WE WENT THROUGH, UH, AND, UM, UH, ARCHITECT WITH YOU WHERE WE HAVE NOTHING ELSE TO ADD.

THANKS, DANNY.

IT MAY BE WORTH GIVING THE SAME PRESENTATION TO THE FULL COMMISSION SINCE NOT ALL OF THE COMMISSIONERS WOULD HAVE HEARD THAT PRIOR PRESENTATION, RIGHT.

HE MIGHT.

UM, SIR, YOU MIGHT CONSIDER THAT THE OTHER, UM, PERMISSION MEMBERS, OTHER THAN THOSE WHO WERE AT THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, UM, MIGHT WANT TO HEAR SOME OF THE ST LAMP POINTS OF YOUR, UM, OF YOUR REVISED, UM, PLANS FOR THIS BUILDING.

IF YOU COULD MAYBE JUST, UM, GO OVER SOME OF THE HIGH POINTS, HOW YOU'VE CHANGED PERHAPS EARLIER.

I WANT TO TURN THIS OVER TO THE ARCHITECT, UH, JUNIOR RANDALL.

YEAH.

SO WE ARE PROPOSING TO ADD A SECOND LEVEL ROOF DECK TO THE EXISTING ONCE THE REBUILDING, AS WELL AS IT AS A THIRD LEVEL, UM, ACCESSIBLE DECK AS WELL.

AND WE WERE STEERED TO REVIEW THE PRESERVATION BRIEF 14 DOCUMENT, I THINK WITH THE NATIONAL HISTORIC REGISTRY, UH, W WHAT'S INSPIRED OUR PROPOSAL.

AND SO WE, THIS WAS, WE WENT THROUGH TWO OR THREE REITERATION WITH THE BOARD

[00:50:01]

AND FINALLY CAME TO THE, UM, SOLUTION THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT TODAY, WHICH REALLY STEPS, EATS LEVEL BACK FROM THE STREET.

THIS IS A CORNER PROPERTY THAT FACES SIXTH STREET AND SAN JACINTO.

SO WE STEPPED BACK LEVEL TO BEYOND, UM, THE EXISTING BUILDINGS CARE OF IT ON SAN JACINTO.

AND WE W WE WENT WELL BEYOND THE FIFTH, THE 15 FOOT SETBACK ON SIXTH STREET.

OUR, OUR THIRD LEVEL SITS BACK 62 FEET, AND THE SECOND LEVEL IS 43 FEET.

SO IN ESSENCE, IT'S KIND OF A WEDDING CAKE THAT STEERS AWAY FROM SIXTH STREET.

SO WE'RE STEPPING THE STRUCTURE BACK TO WHERE THE VISIBILITY FROM THE STREET LEVEL, YOU CAN HARDLY SEE LEVEL THREE.

AND SO WE, THIS IS KIND OF WHERE WE LANDED.

WE GOT GOOD REVIEWS ON THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS MEETING.

AND SO WE REALLY HAVE MADE MODIFICATIONS BECAUSE WE DIDN'T WANT TO MOVE FORWARD UNTIL WE WENT THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

AND I THANK YOU FOR SPEAKING ON THIS.

UM, WE, UH, WE CAN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COMMISSION, THE, THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE THAT, UM, UH, ONE TO GIVE THE COMMISSION THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEE, UH, THE CHANGES TO THE PLANS.

YES.

COMMISSIONER HIMSELF.

YOU KNOW, I HAVE A QUESTION ARCHITECT WHO JUST SPOKE, UM, BECAUSE, UM, I'M HAVING SEEN THE INITIAL, UH, PLANS IN OUR PACKET.

I WASN'T AT THE REVIEW COMMISSION, BUT I SEE WHERE YOU WOUND UP.

AND I THINK THAT THE SCALE OF THE ADDITION IN PROPORTION TO THE EXISTING BUILDING IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT AND MUCH MORE APPROPRIATE.

SO, UM, WE'LL WAIT UNTIL THE FULL PRESENTATION I JUST WAS FOR YOUR PROCESS.

CAN YOU TELL ME, UH, SINCE WE DON'T REALLY HAVE ALL THE PLAN INFORMATION FOR FULL COMPARISON, ROUGHLY, WHAT WAS THE PERCENTAGE CHANGE WHEN IT CAME TO THE SPACE THAT YOU WERE HAVING TO, UM, ADJUST? WHAT, WHAT KIND OF ADJUSTMENTS DID YOU DO AND MAYBE ON A PERCENTAGE OR RELATIVE TO THE ORIGINAL PRESENTATION? SO I DON'T HAVE A PERCENTAGE, BUT WE WERE PROPOSING THE LEVEL THREE TO BE PULLED OUT TO THE SAME FACADE, PRESENCES LEVEL TWO.

SO THE SCALE, YOU KNOW, RELATIVE TO THE EXISTING HISTORIC STRUCTURE, WASN'T IN PROPORTION AND IT WAS NOT SUBORDINATE.

RIGHT? AND SO WE WENT THROUGH EXERCISES TO KIND OF, YOU KNOW, SCALE THAT BACK AND PAID A LOT OF ATTENTION TO THE HUMAN SCALE, LOOKING FROM THE SIDEWALKS AND THE STREETS AND ACROSS THE STREET TO REALLY TAKE THAT THIRD LEVEL AND STEP IT BACK EVEN MORE, YOU KNOW, WHAT I'M GETTING AT IS I KNOW YOU GAVE UP SOME SQUARE FOOTAGE.

I HAVE THE FEELING THAT THE EFFECT IS VERY DRAMATIC.

WHEREAS THE ACTUAL AMOUNT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE IS PROBABLY NOT VERY DRAMATIC IF YOU COULD QUANTIFY IT.

YEAH.

AGAIN, I DON'T HAVE A PERCENTAGE, BUT YES, THEY LIKE THE COVERED CONDITIONAL SPACE OF LEVEL THREE REDUCED DRAMATICALLY, PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, 40% OVERALL OVERALL PACKAGE.

IT MAY HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN, UH, A SMALLER PERCENTAGE.

OKAY.

YEAH.

YEAH.

WE TOOK THE VEIL IN A HANDHELD AND ON THAT SECOND FLOOR.

AND SO, SO WE WERE, WE WERE ABIDING BY THE 45 FOOT AND ALL THE SETBACKS ON SIXTH STREET.

AND YET WE WERE GETTING A LOT MORE FLOOR SPACE, YOU KNOW, FOR MY CLIENT, AS FAR AS LIKE, LIKE IMPROVING HIS PROPERTY.

YES.

THEY'RE GOING THROUGH THIS EXERCISE.

WE JUST KEPT PUSHING BACK AND PUSHING BACK AND PUSHING BACK TO GET IT APPROPRIATE FOR THE COMMITTEE.

RIGHT.

WHICH IS FINE.

WE'RE, WE'RE HAPPY WHERE WE ARE.

UM, BUT YET LEVEL THREE LEVEL THREE TOOK A HIT AS FAR AS THE AREA IS CONCERNED.

YEP.

YEAH.

THAT'S WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.

MOST OF IT.

OKAY.

WELL, I APPRECIATE THIS ANSWERING THAT QUESTION, BUT I THINK SOMETIMES WE GET PUSHBACK WHERE FOLKS AREN'T WILLING TO MAKE ANY COMPROMISE OR ADJUSTMENTS AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO COMPLETELY ABANDON THE PLAN.

I THINK YOU CAN BE VERY CREATIVE AND I, UM, WELL, WE'LL, WE'LL SAVE THAT FOR OUR CONVERSATION, BUT I APPRECIATE YOU ANSWERING MY QUESTION.

THANK YOU.

WE APPRECIATE IT TOO.

[3D.7. PR-20-183612 – 1601 Brackenridge Street – Discussion Council District 9 (Part 1 of 2)]

I THINK THE NEXT ITEM WE HAVE UP IS D SEVEN 1601 BRECKENRIDGE.

IS THAT CORRECT? DO WE HAVE ANYONE TO SPEAK TO THAT ITEM? THAT'S CORRECT.

AND OUR FIRST SPEAKER IS RIVER SHORE THIS IN FA DID YOU HAVE MORE TO SAY, OH, NO, I WASN'T SURE IF THERE WAS SOME

[00:55:01]

SORT OF CONCLUSION.

NO.

UM, WE JUST HEARD THE SPEAKERS, ALL OF THE FRONT END IN THIS VIRTUAL MEETING THAT WE'RE HAVING THESE DAYS.

AND THEN WE WILL, UH, DISCUSS THE, UM, APPLICATIONS AND MAKE A DECISION AFTER ALL THE SPEAKERS ARE HEARD.

SORRY.

IF I DIDN'T MAKE THAT CLEAR AT THE BEGINNING, DO WE NEED TO REMAIN ON THE LINE? YOU MAY REMAIN ON THE LINE OR NOT, BUT I MEAN, ARE WE GETTING A RESPONSE, I GUESS AFTER THIS MEETING REALLY WE'LL MAKE A RE WE WILL GIVE OUR, UM, MAKE OUR DECISION HERE AT THE MEETING LATER WHEN WE, UH, WHEN WE TAKE UP THE CASES, WE'RE JUST HEARING SPEAKERS AT THIS POINT.

I KNOW IT SEEMS ODD.

OUR SPEAKERS ARE SORT OF DISASSOCIATED FROM THEIR ACTUAL CASE, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S THE WAY WE'RE PROCEEDING, UM, WITH THE CITY REQUIREMENTS IN THAT SENTENCE.

YEAH.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

UM, NOW WAS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANTED TO SAY, OKAY, THEN WE'LL GO ON TO 1601 BRECKINRIDGE STREET AND THE FIRST SPEAKER, STATE YOUR NAME AND PRESENT YOUR CASE.

YEAH, MY NAME, MY NAME IS RIVER SHARP.

I AM THE OWNER OF 1601 BRACKENRIDGE.

I'M REQUESTING A DEMO PERMIT TO DEMO THE STRUCTURE.

UM, I HIRED A ENGINEER, GEORGE GONZALES TO DO A STRUCTURAL FOUNDATION AND ROUGH EVALUATION OF THE PROPERTY.

GEORGIA'S GOING TO BE SPEAKING TONIGHT.

SO, AND HE PROVIDED A REPORT TO THE COUNCIL.

SO I'D BE HAPPY TO LET GEORGE SPEAK NOW.

AND AS YOU ON THE LINE, UH, YES, I AM.

TO STATE YOUR NAME AGAIN AND GIVE YOUR CASE.

UH, YES, I'M THANKS VERY MUCH.

MY NAME IS GEORGE CONSOLER FROM A RESTAURANT, A PROFESSIONAL CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEER.

AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR SERVICE.

AND I ALSO JUST WANT TO MENTION THAT ON NOVEMBER, I VISITED A JOB SITE, TOOK A RECONNAISSANCE OF THE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF THE STRUCTURE.

AND THEN I CONCUR WITH THE BACKUP MATERIALS THAT THERE IS A CATASTROPHIC FAILURES OF INFORMATION AND THE SEXUAL THING.

AND IT IS, UH, UH, IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY, WE HAVE A TERM WOULD TERM, UH, WOULD, UH, , UH, PICKS UP SOME OF THESE ELEMENTS.

UH, IT WOULD BE BASICALLY WOULD HAVE TO BE REPLACED AND IT'S ENTIRETY.

SO THERE'S PORTIONS OF THE HOUSE THAT ARE, UH, SUFFERED SEVERE DEBT, FORMATION SETTLEMENT, AND BEING OUT OF PLUMBING, UH, WHERE THERE'S NO WAY IN THE WORLD TO, UH, NOT THAT THAT'S NOT FEASIBLE, UH, TO, UH, TO REPAIR OR REPLACE SOME OF THE SETTLEMENTS BY THE ENTIRE WALLS, SECTIONS AND FOUNDATIONS THAT NEED TO BE, UH, UH, REPLACEMENTS ENTIRETY.

SO IT'S, IN MY OPINION, THAT IT'S JUST NOT FEASIBLE TO, UH, I TO PRESERVE, UH, THE STRUCTURE OR, UH, TO, UH, TO, UH, UH, UH, FIX IT IN A, IN AN APPROPRIATE MANNER, ACCORDING TO THE STANDARDS SO THAT MY RECOMMENDATION IS JUST TO, UM, TO, UH, REPLACE THE STRUCTURE IN ITS ENTIRETY.

OKAY.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE ENGINEER OR THE APPLICANT? I BELIEVE THIS SCHOOL HAS BEEN USED AS A MONTESSORI OR THIS HOUSE HAS BEEN USED AS A MONTESSORI SCHOOL FOR MANY YEARS.

IS THAT CORRECT STAFF OR CAN THEY TEND THE APPLICANTS? TELL ME, UM, OKAY.

UM, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE TO SPEAK TO THIS APPLICATION? WE DO HAVE ONE SPEAKER REGISTERED IN THE OPPOSITION.

IF SHE HAS JOINED THE CALL, PAULA KAUFMANN, PAULA, PLEASE GIVE YOUR NAME AND STATE YOUR CASE.

OKAY.

THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA

[3D.9. PR-20-174961 – 2803 Bonnie Road – Offered for Consent Approval Council District 10 (Part 1 of 2)]

IS ITEM D NINE.

WE HAVE THREE SPEAKERS AND OPPOSITION.

FIRST WE HAVE MR. TIM VIC, IS THERE NO ONE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR? THERE IS NO ONE REGISTERED FROM THE APPLICANT'S TEAM.

OKAY.

THEN GO AHEAD.

UH,

[01:00:01]

I'M TIM DUDEK.

I LIVE, UH, ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE HOUSE IS GOING TO BE TORN.

IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE TORN DOWN.

UM, THE LETTER I GOT FROM THE CITY, HE SAID THE OWNER WAS IDENTIFIED THE OWNER, AND I LOOKED UP THE OWNER AND SHE IS ONE OF THE PRINCIPALS IN A RIVER CITY.

ROLL-OFF AND SHE'S ALSO COINCIDENTALLY, ONE OF THE PRINCIPALS IN, UH, UH, R J R UH, DEMOLITION.

SO IT LOOKS LIKE SHE GOES AND BUYS HOUSES TO TELL THE BALANCE.

SHE HAS NO REAL INTEREST IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

SHE'S NOT GOING TO LIVE THERE.

IT'S JUST GOING TO TEAR IT DOWN AND, YOU KNOW, SHE'S ALREADY SOLD IT TO AN ARCHITECT, UM, AND OUR DEVELOPER.

SO I GUESS MY LECTURE IS FIRST, IT'S A BEAUTIFUL HOUSE.

IT'S BEEN OCCUPIED.

IT'S 85, ALMOST 85 YEARS OLD.

SO I WOULD THINK THAT WOULD MAKE IT HISTORIC IF NOTHING ELSE, BECAUSE IT'S THE OLDEST HOUSES IN THE CITY MAYBE.

AND I DON'T KNOW.

IT'S JUST REALLY, IF IT'S, IF THE DESIGN IS, UH, SO I PUT THIS, BASICALLY, IT'S A TUTOR HOUSE AND I'VE BEEN, YOU KNOW, I'VE LIVED HERE FOR 35 YEARS AND I'VE BEEN ALL OVER TOWN.

SO LOOK, GET HOUSES AND DRIVE AROUND AND STUFF.

AND I'VE NEVER SEEN ANOTHER HOUSE QUITE LIKE THIS BEFORE.

SO IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S FAIRLY UNIQUE.

I WASN'T IN CHARGE OUT FOR 35 YEARS OR 30 YEARS.

I LIVE IN AUSTIN FOR THE FIRST FIVE YEARS.

AND IT SEEMS LIKE WE'VE HAD SOMETHING LIKE 40 OR 50 CHAIR DOWNS IN THIS, IN THIS AREA FOR THE PAST FIVE OR SIX OR SEVEN YEARS.

AND THIS IS BECOME A DISEASE.

IF THERE'S ANY HISTORICAL VALUE TO THIS, THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS THERE ISN'T MUCH, THERE'S NOT MUCH LEFT ANYMORE BECAUSE THE CC'S LETTING PEOPLE BUY PERMITS TO TEAR THINGS DOWN.

SO I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND, I GUESS THE PURPOSE OF THIS, IT SEEMS LIKE YOU PAY YOUR MONEY.

WE'RE SOME KIND OF FEEDBACK ON THE, UM, RECORDING HERE ON THE AUDIO STAFF.

IT'S, IT'S NOT THE, IT'S NOT THE SPEAKERS, UM, FELT HERE, BUT THERE WAS SOME FEEDBACK.

DID YOU WANT TO KEEP SENDING STUFF? YEAH.

I HAVE TO AUSTIN FOR 35 YEARS AND I'VE LIVED IN THIS IN TARRYTOWN FOR ABOUT 30 YEARS.

AND I'VE SEEN DAR DEMOLITION AND RIVER CITY ROLL LOSS HAVE ALMOST IN A SORT OF A MANNER OF SPEAKING.

I'VE TAKEN OVER THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

THERE PROBABLY BEEN SOMETHING LIKE 40 OR 50 TEAR DOWNS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS OR SO, MAYBE I'M EVERY DAY WHEN I WALK UP AND DOWN THE STREET AND DRIVE BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I SEE MORE SIGNS APPEARING.

IT APPEARS THAT THE LADY WHO'S LISTED AS THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY ON THE WAY TO THE CITY CENTERS, UM, IS ACTUALLY A PERSON WHO HAD LIVED IN THE HOUSE, HER JOB.

SHE WORKED FOR A COMPANY CALLED, UH, SHE'S A PRINCIPAL IN A COMPANY CALLED DA OUR DEMOLITION, AND ALSO A PRINCIPAL OF A COMPANY CALLED RIVER CITY ROJAS.

WHAT THEY DO IS THEY BUY HOUSES AND THEY TEAR THEM DOWN, BUT SHE HAS NO INTEREST IN NEIGHBORHOODS.

AND JUST NOVIN YEAH, SHE'S NOT GOING TO LIVE THERE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

SO SHE DOESN'T REALLY CARE.

AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, THE HOUSE IS ALMOST 85 YEARS OLD.

SO IT SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD HAVE HISTORIC VALUE JUST AS BEING ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE EARLY HOUSES OF THE CITY.

AND I GUESS I, I OBJECT TO IT BEING TORN DOWN BECAUSE I'VE NEVER SEEN IN IN THE YEARS I'VE BEEN IN AUSTIN.

I'VE NEVER SEEN ANOTHER HOUSE QUITE LIKE IT BEFORE, ANYWHERE IN TOWN.

SO IT'S KIND OF A UNIQUE EXAMPLE OF, OF TWO ROCKER TEXTURE, I THINK.

AND ALTHOUGH, I GUESS THE, THE, UH, YOUR PEOPLE'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO, IS TO GO AHEAD AND GIVE A PERMIT TO TEAR IT DOWN.

I GUESS I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND THE BENEFIT TO THE CITY OR THE BENEFITS TO THE RESIDENTS OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD TO TEAR DOWN A HOUSE.

I GOT TO BUILD SOME MODERN.

SO WHO KNOWS WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DELLS? DO YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING? SO I GUESS THAT'S, THAT'S MY, I GUESS I WOULD JUST, RIGHT.

I, I WOULD SAY SOMETIMES OUR HANDS ARE TIED TO BE CONSIDERED AN AUSTIN LANDMARK.

A HOUSE HAS TO MEET TWO CRITERIA AND SOMETIMES ARCHITECTURE

[01:05:01]

IS THAT SUFFICIENT.

IT HAS TO ALSO HAVE STRONG HISTORIC ASSOCIATIONS OR HIGH COMMUNITY VALUE, ARCHEOLOGY OR LANDSCAPE.

AND IT'S NOT THAT IT'S NOT THAT STAFF OR THE COMMISSION, UM, DESIRES THESE BUILDINGS TO BE TORN DOWN, BUT WE, WE DON'T HAVE OTHER OPTIONS IN MANY CASES.

SO MAYBE THAT WILL EXPLAIN PART OF IT.

UH, IS THERE ANOTHER PERSON HERE WHO WANTED TO SPEAK, OKAY, DO WE HAVE ANOTHER SPEAKER? YES.

FINDING REQUESTS LATE I TOO AM A NEIGHBOR, UM, AND WALK BY THIS BEAUTIFUL HOUSE EVERY DAY WITH MY DOGS.

IT'S A TERMING STORYBOOK COTTAGE THAT YOU MIGHT SEE IN, UH, A FAIRY TALE.

AND THE IDEA THAT WE WOULD LET A LUXURY HOME COMPANY LIKE NOW COME IN AND TEAR IT DOWN AND BUILD ONE OF THEIR WHITE BOXY STRUCTURES THAT LOOK SO OUT OF PLACE IN TARRYTOWN IS IN MY VIEW, A DISGRACEFUL, BECAUSE WHAT IT DOES IS CHANGES THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS SO DRAMATICALLY.

UM, I'VE LIVED IN TARRYTOWN FOR 30 YEARS, ALSO RAISED MY CHILDREN HERE.

AND ONE OF THE BENEFITS OF LIVING IN A NEIGHBORHOOD LIKE THIS IS TO SEE THE STRUCTURAL DIVERSITY, THE ARCHITECTURAL DIVERSITY, IT'S LIKE, UH, A CANVAS FROM THE PAST.

AND IF WE JUST, YOU KNOW, RIP DOWN THESE BEAUTIFUL HOMES AND REPLACE THEM WITH THESE WHITE BOXY STRUCTURES, THAT AT THE END OF THE DAY, PRETTY MUCH ALL LOOK THE SAME.

WE'LL HAVE NOT JUST TAKEN AWAY A HISTORIC STRUCTURE, BUT ALSO TAKEN AWAY A HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND COMING IN FROM, IN MY EARLY YEARS, I LIVED IN HOUSTON AND SAW THIS HAPPEN IN A LOVELY NEIGHBORHOOD CALLED WEST U.

AND IT SEEMS THAT THE, IN MY VIEW, AND I THANK YOU ALL ON THE COMMISSION FOR YOUR SERVICES, IT'S TRULY VALUABLE WORK, BUT I THINK IF WE'RE GOING TO ACTUALLY THINK ABOUT HISTORICAL PRESERVATION, IT MIGHT NEED TO BE BROADENED A BIT TO THINK ABOUT IT FROM A NEIGHBORHOOD PERSPECTIVE, AND TO CONTINUE TO DEMOLISH PERFECTLY BEAUTIFUL HOMES LIKE THIS ONE.

UM, IS IT IN MY VIEW TRULY TRAGIC, THIS IS A HOUSE THAT COULD EASILY BE RENOVATED ADDED ON TO, WITH, YOU KNOW, PROPER PERMITTING AND AUTHORITY FROM YOUR COMMISSION WITHOUT JUST, YOU KNOW, SWEEPING IT INTO THE DUSTBIN AND HOLLY IT OFF TO, UH, UM, YOU KNOW, SOME KIND OF LANDFILL, IT WOULD BE IN MY VIEW, MUCH MORE APPROPRIATE FOR THESE COMPANIES THAT TO FLIP THESE HOUSES AND MAKE A PROFIT TO SIMPLY ENLARGE THEM A LITTLE BIT AND, AND THEN SELL THEM.

BUT THIS HOUSE, IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK AT THE PICTURES JUST ON THE WEB, I THINK YOU CAN INSTANTLY SEE THAT THIS, THIS HOUSE PERMEATES TERM INTO THE WHOLE STREET.

AND IT'S IT, IN MY VIEW, IT'S, IT'S LIKE, UM, IT'S LIKE TAKING DOWN A PIECE OF ART.

WHY WOULD WE, WHY WOULD WE DO THAT IN OUR CITY TO REPLACE IT WITH A BIG WHITE BOX?