Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:03]

SINCE WE HAVE A QUORUM, UH, IF STAFF IS

[CALL TO ORDER]

READY AND THE COMMISSIONERS ARE SET, I'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL THE ROLL FIRST.

I WANT TO WELCOME THOSE OF YOU.

THE 50, SOME PEOPLE WHO ARE, UM, ONLINE, UH, WAITING TO SPEAK.

I WANT TO WELCOME YOU TO THE MEETING.

THIS IS THE MEETING OF THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION, MAY 24TH, 2021.

THIS IS OUR REGULAR SCHEDULED MEETING AND WE WILL BE TAKING UP HOW LONG WE'LL BE TAKING UP THE AGENDA IN JUST A SECOND.

BUT I WANT TO LET EVERYONE WHO IS ON THE LINE, KNOW THAT WE WILL BE LISTENING TO THE SPEAKERS ON ALL CASES AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PUBLIC HEARINGS.

UM, WE WON'T BE HEARING THEM WHEN THE CASES COME UP.

THIS IS A LITTLE BIT ODD, BUT THIS IS THE WAY, UM, THIS IS THE CITY PROTOCOL FOR A VIRTUAL MEETING.

OKAY.

I'LL CALL THE ROLL.

THEN I'M SET.

ANNISA CASTILLO WIT FEATHERSTON, UM, SAID THAT HE WOULD LIKELY BE ABSENT.

KEVIN COOK ARE A LAROCHE KELLY.

I'M HERE BLAKE TO LET THAT FELL ON.

SUELA BETH FELONS, WILLA RAISED HER HAND.

SHE'S HERE.

AND CAROLINE RIGHT HERE IS HERE.

WE HAVE A QUORUM.

WE'LL GO AHEAD AND START, UM, START THE MEETING, THE FIRST ITEM.

UM, DO WE HAVE ANYONE TO SPEAK FOR CITIZEN CITIZENS COMMUNICATIONS.

THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ANYONE TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM THAT IS NOT ON OUR AGENDA TONIGHT.

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

OKAY.

HEARING NONE.

WE'LL GO ON AND GO THROUGH THE AGENDA.

WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH FOR THOSE WHO ARE LISTENING AND WE WILL GO THROUGH THE AGENDA AND IDENTIFY

[Consent Agenda: 1, B3, B4, B8, B9, B10, C1, C2, C4, C5, D6, D7, D9, D10, D12, D14, E1]

WHICH CASES WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS TONIGHT, WHICH CASES ARE ON OUR CONSENT AGENDA, WHICH MEANS IF WE HAVE THEM ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AND THEY'RE NOT PULLED FOR DISCUSSION BY SOMEONE, EITHER A COMMISSION MEMBER OR SOMEONE IN THE AUDIENCE, THEN THEY WILL BE APPROVED WITH, WITH THE CONDITION THAT IF IT'S A DEMOLITION, A CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE IS REQUIRED CONSISTING OF A NARRATIVE HISTORY OF THE BUILDING OR PROPERTY, AND, UH, PHOTOGRAPHS OF ALL ELEVATIONS OF THE BUILDING FOR ARCHIVING AT THE AUSTIN HISTORY CENTER.

THERE ARE ALSO RECOMMENDATIONS THAT MAY COME WITH, UH, WITH, UH, CONSENT ITEMS. AND I URGE YOU TO TAKE NOTE OF THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS EITHER BY THE COMMITTEE, THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE STAFF OR BOTH.

SO ITEM NUMBER ONE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES, THIS WILL BE A CONSENT ITEM.

NUMBER TWO, PRESENTATIONS DISCUSSIONS AND POSSIBLE ACTION.

WE HAVE NO BRIEFINGS OR PRESENTATIONS TONIGHT, WHICH IS GOOD BECAUSE WE HAVE A LONG AGENDA.

THREE PUBLIC HEARINGS ON YOUR PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE A DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON APPLICATIONS FOR HISTORIC ZONING APPLICATIONS FOR HISTORIC DISTRICTS AND REQUESTS TO CONSIDER INITIATION OF HISTORIC ZONING ITEM, A ONE NINE OH FIVE EAST SECOND STREET.

THAT IS A DISCUSSION ITEM, A TWO 1304, BOB HARRISON.

THAT IS A DISCUSSION ITEM UNDER B DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS ITEM D ONE NINE OH SEVEN, NINE OH NINE AND NINE 11 CONGRESS AVENUE WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM NUMBER B2, 1501 NORTH ROAD.

THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED POSTPONEMENT TO THE JUNE 28 MEETING.

UM, SO THIS WILL BE ON THE POSTPONE LETTER AGENDA

[00:05:01]

ITEM B3 SIX 12 HIGHLAND IS, IS A CONSENT ITEM.

THE COMMITTEE OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REVIEWED THESE PLANS WITH THE APPLICANT AND THIS, THESE PLANS ARE REFLECTED IN THE AGENDA.

AND THIS IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT ITEM BEFORE 1100 EAST EIGHTH STREET, THE LINDEMANN HOUSE.

THIS IS A CONSENT ITEM.

ITEM B FIVE 24 OH SIX HARRIS BOULEVARD.

THIS IS A DISCUSSION ITEM.

THE SIX 1805 EAST THIRD STREET IS A DISCUSSION ITEM.

B SEVEN 4,006 AND A HALF AVENUE.

B IS A DISCUSSION ITEM E EIGHT 1113 IS NINTH STREET THAT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT BEING NINE, EIGHT, 10.

LYDIA STREET IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

TEN SIX, 11 WAS 22ND STREET IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT FOR A LIMITED NUMBER OF SIGNS.

THE SIGNS ARE OFFERED FOR CONSENT, EXCEPT FOR THE PICKUP SIGN OVER THE ENTRANCE ITEM B 11 IS, IS AN ADDENDUM TO THE, THIS SECTION OF THE AGENDA.

THIS IS THE STANLEY HOMESTEAD.

WE WILL SEE A PRESENTATION BY THE STAFF AND DISCUSS THIS ITEM UNDER SEA DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS WITHIN NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICTS C ONE NINE OH TWO, WILLOW STREET IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

TWO 32 OH FOUR.

BEVERLY ROAD IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

THREE 1805 WATERSTON AVENUE WAS OFFERED FOR CONSENT, BUT I BELIEVE THERE'S SOMEONE WHO IS HERE TO SPEAK TO THAT.

AND IF NOT, I WILL PULL THE ITEM FOR DISCUSSION C4.

1602 WESTOVER ROAD IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT ITEM C FIVE 25 18 HARRIS BOULEVARD IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

I DIDN'T SEE SIX 71 RAINY STREET.

THIS WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.

C7 2308.

WOODLAWN IS A DISCUSSION ITEM.

SEE, 1603 WAS SIXTH STREET.

UM, THE STAFF HAS REQUESTED THAT WE POSTPONE THIS TO, UH, JUNE 28TH.

IF THE, UM, IF THE APPLICANT IS ON THE LINE AND WISHES TO, UH, DISCUSS THIS ITEM, THIS WILL BE ON OUR DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT AGENDA.

IF THERE ISN'T APPLICANT NOW HE OR SHE MAY REQUEST, OKAY, COME BACK TO THAT ITEM.

C NINE 600 CONGRESS AVENUE.

THAT'S A DISCUSSION ITEM UNDER D DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON APPLICATIONS FOR DEMOLITION OR RELOCATION.

D ONE 47 14.

ROWENA IS A DISCUSSION ITEM.

THE TWO 2040 ISAS OR CHAVEZ IS A DISCUSSION ITEM D THREE 1807.

BRECKENRIDGE WAS OFFERED FOR CONSENT, BUT SOMEONE HAS PULLED THAT, UM, TO DISCUSS.

SO IT'LL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.

TWO, A ONE WEST 30TH STREET.

THE FIRE STATION IS A DISCUSSION ITEM, D FIVE THREE OH SEVEN EAST SECOND STREET.

AS A DISCUSSION ITEM.

THESE SIX 2100 CHICAGO WILL BE OFFERED, OFFERED ON CONSENT.

1709 WILLOW STREET.

THAT'S A CONSENT ITEM D NINE.

WE SKIPPED DA UH, THAT NUMBER WAS NOT USED.

THE NINE 28 OH SEVEN.

BONNIE ROAD IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

THE 10 1601 CANTERBURY STREET

[00:10:01]

IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

THE 1127 OH EIGHT SCENIC DRIVE WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM D 12 FIVE OH TWO EAST 42ND STREET IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

13, 1100 1109.

TRAVIS HEIGHTS BOULEVARD WAS OFFERED FOR CONSENT, BUT THAT HAS BEEN PULLED FOR DISCUSSION D 14, 1202 BETTAS STREET IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT UNDER ITEM E DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT E ONE.

THE SEABORN SNEAD HOUSE IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT TO REMAIN ON THE AGENDA.

ITEM OF DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON APPLICATIONS FOR TAX ABATEMENT.

WE HAVE NONE AND WE'LL GO ON TO COMMISSION AND STAFF ITEMS AT THE END OF THE AGENDA.

ARE THERE ANY CHANGES OR CORRECTIONS TO THE ITEMS THAT WE HAVE HERE AGAIN, FOR THOSE WHO ARE ON THE LINE, IF YOUR, IF YOUR ITEM WAS OFFERED FOR CONSENT AND WE APPROVE IT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, THEN YOU DO NOT HAVE TO STAY ON THE LINE.

THAT MEANS IT WAS THAT IT WAS APPROVED ON CONSENT.

AGAIN, IF THERE, IF THERE ARE RECOMMENDATIONS, PLEASE FOLLOW THE RECOMMENDATIONS.

IF IT IS REQUIRED FOR DEMOLITIONS TO, UM, PREPARE A CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE PRIOR TO ANY WORK BEING DONE, TO PHOTOGRAPH ALL FACADES AND WRITE A NARRATIVE HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY.

ANY QUESTIONS STAFF? OKAY.

DO I HEAR A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS READ? OKAY.

WAS THAT COMMISSIONER LAROCHE? YES.

OKAY.

DO I HEAR A SECOND, A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MCWHORTER, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE CONSENT AGENDA, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY RAISING YOUR HAND.

ANY OPPOSED IS UNANIMOUS.

THE CONSENT AGENDA PASSES.

WE HAD ONE

[Postponed Items: B2, C8]

ITEM POSTPONED, AN APPLICANT REQUESTED POSTPONEMENT.

THAT WAS, UH, ITEM BEACHY, 1501 NORTHWOOD ROGUE.

DO I HEAR A MOTION TO APPROVE THE POSTPONED AGENDA? WE'LL MOVE AGAIN.

OKAY.

COMMISSIONER LAROCHE.

IS THAT A SECOND COMMISSIONER? RIGHT.

OKAY.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF POSTPONING, THIS ITEM TO THE JUNE 28TH.

OKAY.

I'LL I'LL I'LL AGREE.

IT PASSES THAT ONE WILL BE POSTPONED.

NOW WE HAVE AN ITEM, UM, THAT SOMEBODY HELPED ME OUT ON THE ITEM WHERE WE HAD AN APPLICANT POSTPONEMENT.

THAT'S A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT D ONE, I BELIEVE.

UM, I'M SORRY.

C E C EIGHT.

OKAY.

1603 WEST SIXTH STREET.

THAT WAS THE STAFF, UH, ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.

YOU'RE FROM THE OWNER.

OKAY.

DO WE HAVE THE OWNER ON THE LINE OR 1603 WEST SIXTH STREET.

WE DO NOT HAVE ANYONE REGISTERED TO SPEAK FOR ITEM C S C H.

OKAY.

I'LL MOVE THE, WE POSTPONE THAT THEN TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO OUR JUNE 28TH MEETING.

DO I HEAR A SECOND, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER LAROCHE? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

ANY OPPOSED IT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY ITEM C EIGHT, 1603 WAS SIXTH STREET WILL BE POSTPONED TO THE JUNE 28TH MEETING.

THEN WE HAVE ITEM D ONE 47, 14 ROWENA.

I WANTED TO ASK THE PROPERTY OWNER IF HE OR SHE IS ON THE LINE, UH, IF YOU WANTED TO POSTPONE THAT ITEM, UM, WE THOUGHT THERE MAY BE A REQUEST TO POSTPONE IT.

CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT STAFF? CAN YOU HELP OUT? I DON'T KNOW WHO THE OWNER IS

[00:15:01]

PERHAPS CALLED THEIR NAME OWNER IS, UH, JOSH WILSON.

UH, WE'VE HAD SOME MORE RECENT EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE.

I BELIEVE THAT I, MR. WILSON WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE CASE HEARD TONIGHT.

HE WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THE OKAY, THEN THAT, THAT WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

OKAY.

SO GOING BACK, STARTING BACK WITH THE PUBLIC SHARINGS UNDER A ONE EIGHT

[3.A.1. GF-2021-050281 – 905 E. 2nd St. – Discussion Council District 3 (Part 1 of 2)]

ONE NINE OH FIVE EAST SECOND STREET, THIS IS A DISCUSSION ITEM.

OH, I'M SORRY.

WE NEED TO HAVE SPEAKERS.

DO WE HAVE ANYONE ON THE LINE APPLICANT? AND YOU WENT IN FAVOR AND YOU WANT TO POST SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? A ONE NINE OH FIVE EAST SECOND STREET FOR ITEM A ONE NINE OH FIVE EAST SECOND STREET.

WE HAVE BRIAN THOMPSON.

MR. THOMPSON, ARE YOU AVAILABLE? YES.

OKAY.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS? THANK YOU FOR YOUR THOUGHTS.

UM, I'M THE OWNER AND CAN YOUR RESIDENCE, SO THE PROPERTY CAN TALK TO THE SECOND I'M SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION.

SO THE HISTORIC ZONING INITIATED BY THE COMMISSION, BUT IN FAVOR OF THE COMMISSION'S ENDORSEMENT AND APPROVAL OF A VERSION OF OUR REVISED PLAN AND RELEASE FOR THE PARKING COMMISSION PERMIT AT THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, HEATING, STARTING LACK OF DETAILS, THE FRONT ELEVATION AND ABOVE PAINTED THE PLANS, REFLECT OUR INTENT TO PRESERVE THE STORE, FEATURES THE POSTS, THE BRACKETS RAILING, ET CETERA.

AND WE INTEND TO REPAIR THESE FEATURES WHERE NECESSARY AND REPLACE IN KIND THAT THEY CAN NOT BE REPLACED, UH, OR I'M SORRY IF THEY CANNOT BE REPAIRED.

UH, STAFF ALSO INDICATED THAT THE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING IS NOT COMPATIBLE, UM, WITH HISTORIC BUILDINGS THAT EMPHASIZE THE HIGHEST OF THE SECOND STORY, BUT WE'VE PROVIDED UPDATES, THE ORIGINAL PLAN, AND THE BACKUP IS A.ONE DOT THREE, THE OPTION ONE ELEVATION THAT ADDRESSES BOTH THE HISTORIC FOLK, VICTORIAN ELEMENTS IN THE SIDING.

WE FEEL LIKE THIS PLAN BETTER REFLECTS OUR ORIGINAL INTENT.

UM, WE ALSO RECEIVED FEEDBACK AT THE PREVIOUS COMMISSION MEETING AND THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING, UH, ABOUT THE, THE SECOND STORY WINDOW PLACEMENT, PARTICULARLY IN THE FRONT, UH, THE NUMBER AND THE PROPORTIONS.

UH, WE'VE ALSO, UH, SO WE'VE UPDATED OUR PLAN TO ALSO REFLECT THIS FEEDBACK.

AND I'VE INCLUDED A FURTHER REVISED ELEVATION IN THE BACK OF THE DATA.

ONE TO FOUR, WHICH IS OPTION TWO ELEVATION.

THIS IS OUR PREFERRED VINYL ELEVATION, AND WE WERE SEEKING OUR ENDORSEMENT OF THIS OPTION.

UH, WE'RE WE'RE ALSO FINE WITH OPTION ONE IF THE COMMISSION HAS TO FOR IT.

UM, I'D LIKE TO REITERATE THAT, THAT WE ORIGINALLY BEGAN OUR DESIGNED AS A SINGLE-STORY ADDITION TO THE BACK OF THE HOUSE, BUT SEVERAL CONSTRAINTS, INCLUDING THE SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE TO IMPERVIOUS COVER OR THE FOOTPRINT ITS PROXIMITY TO THE REAR ALLEY AND THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES ALONG WITH THE COST CAUSES THE TO CHANGE COURSE AND REDESIGNED TO THE TWO STORY PLAN.

WE'VE PUT FOUR, UM, WE'VE, WE'VE INCLUDED TWO PERSPECTIVE RENDERINGS, UH, EIGHT.ONE.ONE AND 801 DOT TWO IN THE BACKUP.

UH, IT'S OUR HOPE THAT THEY WILL COMMUNICATE, HELP COMMUNICATE THE MAP FORM OF THE SECOND STORY.

THE SECOND FOURTH EDITION IN RELATION TO THE ORIGINAL HOUSE AND THAT THE ADDITION WILL APPEAR SUBORDINATE TO THE, THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE.

UM, YOU KNOW, THESE RENDERINGS HAVE, HAVE THE SECOND STORY WINDOW PLACEMENTS FROM, FROM OPTION TWO.

SO, SO FORGIVE ME, YOU'LL HAVE TO USE YOUR IMAGINATION FROM THE OPTION TO PLACE IN THAT.

AND WE ONLY, ONLY GOT ONE, ONE RENDERING, UM, AND IT HAS THE ORIGINAL PLACEMENT.

UM, W WE WANT OUR HOUSE TO CONTINUE TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE FABRIC OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND WE FEEL LIKE THIS REVISED PLAN DOES SHOWCASE THE CHARACTER AND INTEGRITY OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE WHILE ALLOWING US TO BRING IT UP TO MODERN LIVING STANDARDS.

SO, UM, WE RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT THE COMMISSION MOVES TO ENDORSE OPTION TO, UH, ELEVATION AND OF OUR PLAN AND, AND RELEASE THE PARTIAL DEMOLITION PERMIT.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. THOMPSON.

UH, THE COMMISSION I'M SURE.

APPRECIATES YOUR EFFORT AND GIVING US THESE OPTIONS.

DO WE HAVE ANYONE ELSE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? WE ALSO HAVE LUCIANA CORWIN ON THE LINE.

IS THIS APPLICANT, UH, ON THE LINE HERE? ARE YOU IN FAVOR OR OPPOSED TO THE APPLICATION? WHO'S YOU GUYS ARE AN ARCHITECTURAL CONSULTANT.

OKAY.

IS SHE ON THE LINE? I'M

[00:20:01]

NOT SURE IF SHE'S, IF SHE'S ABLE TO MAKE IT.

OKAY.

OKAY.

UM, THEN IF THERE'S NO ONE ELSE TO SPEAK ON THE CASE, WE'LL GO ON TO THE NEXT SPEAKER.

OKAY.

THE NEXT ITEM UP FOR DISCUSSION IS EIGHT TWO

[3.A.2. HR-2021-044151 – 1304 Bob Harrison – Discussion Council District 1 (Part 1 of 2)]

1304, BOB HARRISON STREET IS, UH, DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ON THIS CASE? WE HAVE A MR. WILL FOX.

OKAY.

THE APPLICANT, MR. FOX, ARE YOU ON THE LINE? YES, I AM.

HOW ARE YOU GUYS? OKAY, WE'RE FINE.

I GET I'M SPEAKING FOR EVERYONE.

THIS IS THE COLLECTIVE FINE.

UM, GO AHEAD AND MAKE YOUR PRESENTATION PLEASE.

OKAY.

RIGHT.

YEAH.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS.

UM, BASED ON, UH, THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING THAT WE HAD EARLIER IN THE MONTH, MID MONTH, UM, WE'VE MADE SOME UPDATES TO THE DESIGN PER THE CONVERSATION, UH, WHICH WE HAVE, WE HOPE, UM, YOU KNOW, MEETS THE, MEETS YOUR APPROVAL.

UH, WE ARE IN FAVOR OF HISTORIC, UM, ZONING FOR THIS PROPERTY OR LANDMARK STATUS.

UM, IF YOU COULD GO TO THE, THE PRESENTATION THAT I THINK WAS SUBMITTED EARLIER THIS MORNING, UM, UH, IT'S THE BOB HARRISON HLC DESIGN REVISIONS, NOT PDF.

UM, I'LL GO THROUGH A FEW OF THE CHANGES WE'VE MADE BASED ON THE CONVERSATION.

UM, LIKE I MENTIONED BEFORE, YOU KNOW, BEFORE THE CLIENT, ERICA AND PATRICK RODMAN, WHO I BELIEVE WERE ON THE LINE, UH, WHEN WE STARTED THIS PROJECT AND THEY HIRED ME TO DO THE DESIGN, UM, THEY APPRECIATED THE HOUSE.

WE DID NOT, WE WERE NOT AWARE OF THE HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF IT.

UM, WE, YOU KNOW, THEIR INTENTIONS FROM THE BEGINNING HAVE BEEN TO PRESERVE AND REALLY RESPECT THE HOUSE JUST BECAUSE THEY APPRECIATED IT.

AND THEY KNEW THAT IT, UM, HAD BIG IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS IN TERMS OF ITS FABRIC.

UM, AND SO THAT WAS THEIR KIND OF MAIN INTENT.

AND SO WE DESIGNED THE ADDITION, UM, TO REALLY RESPECT THE MAIN HOUSE.

SO SOME OF THE CHANGES WE'VE MADE SINCE THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE IS WE'VE TAKEN, UM, THE COMMISSIONER'S RECOMMENDATION TO SWITCH THE REPLACEMENT WINDOWS ON THE FRONT, ON THE HISTORIC HOME, UH, TO A, TO OVER TO DOUBLE HUNG ONECLOUD WINDOW, UM, WHICH YOU CAN, IF YOU GO TO PAGE, UH, LET'S SEE, UM, YOU GO TO PAGE NUMBER SIX ON THE PDF, UH, SORT OF, UH, A RENDERING THAT SHOWS SOME OF THE CHANGES THAT WE'VE MADE.

UM, SO WE WERE REPLACING THOSE WITH THE TWO OVER TWO WINDOW, WHICH LOOKED MORE APPROPRIATE, UH, FOR THE PERIOD OF THE HOME.

UH, WE'VE REMOVED A PROPOSED GLASSDOOR AND SIDELIGHTS THAT WE HAD PROPOSED ON THE ORIGINAL PLANS.

AND WE WILL REPLACE THAT WITH A HISTORICALLY APPROPRIATE WOOD DOOR.

UH, WE WILL KEEP THE ORIGINAL SIZE AND DESIGN OF THE, OF THE PORCH WE HAD ORIGINALLY WANTED TO ENLARGE IT, BUT WE WILL KEEP IT AS IT'S AS IT IS NOW.

AND WE WILL REBUILD AND REPAIR AS NECESSARY.

WE'VE MOVED THE SKYLIGHT THAT WAS ON THE FRONT FACADE OF THE ROOF.

UM, AND WE MOVED THAT TO THE SIDE FACADE.

WE WILL KEEP, UM, THERE WAS A SMALLER CHIMNEY, A SECONDARY CHIMNEY.

WE WERE KEEPING THAT UNLESS IT WAS TO BE FOUND ON TO BE NON ORIGINAL, I WAS THINKING IT MAY BE A PLUMBING THAT, UM, AND THEN I'D LIKE TO PROPOSE, UM, A LOW-PROFILE METAL ROOF.

AND IF YOU GO TO PREVIOUS PAGE ON A PDF PAGE FIVE, I DID SOME RESEARCH SINCE THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING THAT WAS HELD TWO WEEKS AGO, AND I WALKED THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND TOOK PHOTOGRAPHS AND DOCUMENTED SOME OTHER ROOFS, UM, WITHIN, IN THE SAME FABRIC AND, UH, UH, SPECIFICALLY 12, 11 EAST 13TH STREET, WHICH IS JUST ONE BLOCK AWAY.

UM, IT SEEMS TO BE AT HOME THAT WAS BUILT IN A SIMILAR ERA AND THE ROOF THERE SEEMS TO BE APPROPRIATE AND 1208, BOB HARRISON ON THE BOTTOM RIGHT OF THE PAGE ALSO HAS A SOMEWHAT SIMILAR DESIGN TO OUR HOUSE.

AND IT HAS A, WHAT SEEMS TO BE A MOSTLY ORIGINAL, UH, SORT OF CORRUGATED, UH, WEATHERED CORRUGATED ROOF, THE OTHER OWN, UH, WHICH IS NOT DIRECTLY ADJACENCY THE HOUSE AT 1707 NEWTON STREET, WHICH WAS, UH, RECOMMENDED TO BE LOOKED AT BY THE COMMITTEE, UH, ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE.

UM, THAT ROOF ACTUALLY IS PROBABLY THE CLOSEST TO WHAT WE WOULD PROPOSE FOR THIS CURRENT DESIGN, UM, WHICH AGAIN, NOT THE EXACT TYPE OF BUILDING, BUT IT SEEMS FROM A VERY SIMILAR TIME PERIOD AND SEEMS TO BE VERY APPROPRIATE.

UM, AND I THINK THAT DOES IT MOSTLY FROM MY END, UH, THE OTHER P PAGES ON A PDF WERE STUDY MODELS SHOWING THAT KIND OF MAPPING THAT WE DISCUSSED, UH, DURING OUR LAST MEETING, JUST TO SHOW THAT THE MAIN HOUSE REMAINS KIND OF,

[00:25:01]

UM, SPECIAL AND, AND HAS ITS OWN CHARACTER.

AND THE REAR ADDITION IS MEANT TO BE SECONDARY TO THAT AND NOT SORT OF TAKE AWAY FROM, UM, THE CHARACTER OF THE ORIGINAL HOME.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM? WE HAVE A MISS ERICA BROSNAN.

MS. BROWSER, ARE YOU ON THE LINE? HI, YES, THIS IS ERICA BRADMAN.

UM, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT WE ARE IN FAVOR OF THAT PROPOSAL.

UM, MY HUSBAND, LIKE WILL SAID BEFORE, UM, WE, YOU KNOW, CAME INTO THIS RENOVATION FULLY WITH THE INTENTION OF MAINTAINING THIS HOUSE, KNOWING THAT, UM, THERE'S A LOT OF HOUSES ON THE EAST SIDE BEING TORN DOWN AND WE KNEW THE HOUSE WAS OLD, BUT WE DIDN'T KNOW THE HISTORY OF IT.

SO THAT'S BEEN A REALLY NEAT THING TO LEARN ABOUT.

UM, AND SO, UM, YEAH, WE ARE IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSAL AND WE'RE HAPPY TO, UM, MAKE THE CHANGES IF YOU GUYS DO DECIDE TO MAKE IT A LANDMARK HOME.

UM, WE WERE KIND OF PLANNING, I GUESS, WITH OUR DESIGN TO GIVE THE HOME KIND OF A, AN HONORARY LANDMARK STAMPS.

SO THE FACT THAT IT'S BEING CONSIDERED FOR A REAL ONE IS VERY COOL TO US.

UM, SO THANK YOU BY HONORARY.

DID YOU MEAN ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT SAY IN 1856, THE COMANCHE'S WENT TO THIS AREA, BUT NOTHING HISTORIC HAPPENED HERE.

OKAY.

UH, MAYBE SOME, YEAH, WE WOULD HAVE JUST MADE A LITTLE PAPER STAMP OR SOMETHING KNOWS YOU MAY GET THE REAL THING.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? WE DO NOT HAVE ANYONE ELSE REGISTERED.

OKAY.

MOVING AHEAD.

UM, WE GO ON TO

[3.B.1. C14H-1986-0015, C14H-2004-0008 – 907, 909, and 911 Congress Ave. –Discussion (postponed April 26, 2021) Grandberry Building and Mitchell-Robertson Building Congress Avenue National Register District Council District 9 (Part 1 of 2)]

ITEM BEING DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATES AS APPROPRIATE AS NINE OH SEVEN, NINE OH NINE AND NINE 11 CONGRESS AVENUE, A FREQUENT FLYER.

THERE WE HAVE A MISS LEAH BO JO.

HELLO COMMISSIONERS.

UH, THIS IS WITH JENNER GROUP HERE REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER, UM, IS MY APPLICATION IS MY PRESENTATION APP.

YES, GO AHEAD.

OKAY, GREAT.

THANKS.

THANK YOU.

SO I'M JOINED BY SEVERAL MEMBERS OF OUR CONSULTANT TEAM.

UM, ZACH ROBINSON FROM CARTER DESIGN, JERRY GARCIA FROM STRUCTURES ENGINEERING AND CHARLIE.

ALSO A VENDOR GROUP.

UM, WE'RE HERE AGAIN TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON THE PROGRESS WE'VE MADE SO FAR AND REQUEST DIRECTION FROM YOU.

AND WE'RE PLANNING TO BRING THE DEMOLITION PERMIT AND CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, WHICH TO YOU IN JUNE.

AND SO OUR PRIMARY OBJECTIVE HERE TONIGHT IS TO PROVIDE HER AN UPDATE ON THE ITEMS WE DISCUSSED WITH YOU LAST MONTH AND GET YOUR FEEDBACK AS TO WHETHER THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WE CAN PROVIDE ON JUNE 28.

ON NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, UM, TO GIVE A VERY QUICK REMINDER AS TO WHERE WE ARE, UH, THERE WAS A COMPLAINT FILED ON THE PROPERTY LAST FALL, AND WE HIT, WE HAD TO COME BEFORE THE BUILDING AND STANDARDS COMMISSION SEVERAL TIMES.

AND WE'VE BEEN WITH, I KNOW WE'VE BEEN IN FRONT OF YOU SEVERAL TIMES AS WELL, HOPING TO PROVIDE THE EVIDENCE.

YOU NEED TO FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH OUR PROPOSAL TO DEMOLISH AND RECONSTRUCT THESE BUILDINGS AS A RESULT OF THE CONDITION THAT THEY'RE IN RIGHT NOW.

UM, WE ARE CURRENTLY UNDER AN ORDER BY THE BUILDING AND STANDARDS COMMISSION TO EITHER DEMOLISH OR FULLY REPAIR THE BUILDINGS, WHICH WE OBVIOUSLY CANNOT DO WITHOUT YOUR APPROVAL.

UM, WE HAVE CONTINUED OUR INVESTIGATION INTO THE BUILDINGS AND, UH, ONLY FURTHER CONFIRMED THAT THE PLAN TO DECONSTRUCT AND RECONSTRUCT IS THE ONLY FEASIBLE PATH FORWARD.

IF WE WANT TO HAVE ANY HISTORIC REPRESENTATION LEFT AT ALL, UH, WHICH WE'LL TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT HERE LATER IN THE PRESENTATION.

UM, LIKE I SAID, THE PLAN IS TO BE BACK BEFORE YOU IN JUNE WITH THE DEMOLITION PERMIT PAIRED WITH THE, UM, CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, UM, AS WELL AS ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE CONDITION OF THE SITE WHEN IT WAS LANDMARKED, WHICH WE'VE HAD A LITTLE TROUBLE TRACKING DOWN BECAUSE THE CITY'S RESEARCH GROUP IS CLOSED DUE TO COVID, BUT WE WILL HAVE ACCESS TO THAT AGAIN IN JUNE.

UM, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE, TO THREE.

UM, AGAIN, WE ARE, UNFORTUNATELY IN THIS SITUATION WHERE THE BUILDING STANDARDS COMMISSION HAS ORDERED THAT WE RECEIVE ALL PERMITS BY JUNE 22ND.

SO EVEN WITH OUR PLAN TO BRING THIS PERMIT TO YOU IN JUNE, WE WILL NOT BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THAT ORDER.

UM, WE'RE DEFINITELY GONNA HAVE TO GO THROUGH AN APPROXIMATELY YEAR LONG SITE PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS, AS I THINK YOU ALL KNOW IN ORDER TO REDEVELOP THE SITE AND, AND RECONSTRUCT THIS SIDE, UM, THAT SAID WE'RE DOING AS MUCH AS WE, UM, TO HEAR FROM YOU AND GET YOU WHAT YOU NEED TO FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH OUR PROPOSAL.

AND TONIGHT IS, IS REALLY OUR LAST OPPORTUNITY FOR THAT FEEDBACK.

BEFORE WE BRING THE APPLICATION TO YOU NEXT MONTH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

UM, SINCE THE PREVIOUS HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETING, THE DESIGN TEAM HAS CONDUCTED SEVERAL ONSITE VISUAL ASSESSMENTS, WE'VE ACQUIRED PRELIMINARY

[00:30:01]

LASER SCANS AND BEGUN A DIGITAL 3D MODEL TO BE USED IN THE FUTURE DOCUMENTS FOR EACH OF THE THREE PROPERTIES.

THE TEAM HAS ALSO BEEN IN COMMUNICATION WITH THE AUSTIN HISTORY CENTER.

LIKE I MENTIONED, TO TRY TO FIND ADDITIONAL ARCHIVE DOCUMENTATION OF THOSE PROPERTIES.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

UM, SO THIS SLIDE SHOWS SOME INFORMATION THAT WE DID GET FROM THE HISTORY CENTER.

THESE ARE DOCUMENTS FROM BELTLINE AND HOFFMAN, UM, OF WHICH ONE MEMO WRITTEN BY THEM ABOUT NOT BUILDING AT THE BUILDING AT NINE OH SEVEN STATES THAT THE BRICKS APPEARS TO BE FIRE DAMAGED IN AREAS AFTER THAT IT WAS STUCK OUT IN SCORED.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

UM, ADDITIONALLY TO THE HISTORY CENTER PROVIDED US WITH SIGNAGE DRAWINGS FROM THE 1982 FROM 1982 PERMIT SHOWING THE ELEVATIONS OF NINE 11 AND NINE OH NINE.

WHAT THESE DOCUMENTS TELL US IS THAT BOTH NINE 11 AND NINE OH NINE, AND I'M SORRY, NONE OF THE SEVEN HAVE BEEN COVERED IN STUCCO FOR OVER 50 YEARS.

UM, AND IT WAS THE NEXT SLIDE.

I'LL TURN IT OVER TO ZACH ROBINSON TO DISCUSS THE VISUAL EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THE BUILDINGS.

AND HE SHOULD BE ON THE LINE AS WELL.

THANK YOU.

THIS IS ZACH ROBINSON.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN GO AHEAD.

OKAY.

UH, SO ON BUILDING NINE 11, ALL, UM, ALL ORNAMENTATION AND PROTRUDING ELEMENTS, INCLUDING THE SILLS HEADERS AND CORNERS WERE REMOVED AND THE BRICK WAS SCORED IN ORDER FOR THE STUCCO TO BE ADHERED TO THE FACADE, UH, THE IRREPARABLE DAMAGE DONE TO THE FACADE AND THE YEARS OF WATER INFILTRATION DUE TO THE FAILED STUCCO WOULD REQUIRE SIGNIFICANT REPLACEMENT OF THE BRICK STONE AND MORTAR AND ARCHITECTURAL OTHER ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS BASED PURELY ON KNOWN HISTORICAL DOCUMENTATION.

NEXT SIDE, PLEASE ON BUILDING NINE OH NINE, IT APPEARS TO BE IN THE BEST CONDITION OF THE THREE BUILDINGS.

THE MODERN INTERVENTIONS OF THE STEEL HEADER AND COLUMNS HAVE CAUSED SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION OF THE EXTERIOR FACADE AT THE GROUND LEVEL.

THE STEEL HEADER IS RUSTED AND HAS MINOR DEFLECTION OVER 20, OVER THE 21 FOOT SPAN, LIKELY REQUIRING REPLACEMENT.

THERE IS NO NOTICEABLE CRY OR SORRY.

THERE IS NOTICEABLE CRACKING AND MOISTURE IN THE UPPER FLOOR WALLS.

NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

UH, ON NINE OH SEVEN, VERY SIMILAR TO NINE 11.

MOST, IF NOT, ALL OF THE ORNAMENTATION OF THE EXTRA FACADE IS DAMAGED OR MISSING DUE TO THE ADDITION OF STUCCO ADDED IN THE SIXTIES OR SEVENTIES, THE FAILURE OF THE STUCCO IS ALSO CAUSING SIGNIFICANT WATER INFILTRATION THAT IS JEOPARDIZING THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE BUILDINGS.

EXTERIOR.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, ALONG WITH THE DAMAGE TO THE EXTRA FACADE, THERE IS MAJOR WATER INFILTRATION THAT IS SHARED, UH, IN THE SHARED WALL BETWEEN NINE OH SEVEN AND 905 THAT IS LIKELY CAUSED BY THE ROOF FAILURE.

THESE TWO BUILDINGS NEED TO BE SEPARATED IN ORDER TO PROVIDE PROPER WATERPROOFING AND SUPPORT AT THE SHARED WALL.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

UH, WE HAVE, UH, STARTED INITIAL SCANS AND PRELIMINARY DIGITAL 3D MODEL, UH, WERE UNDERTAKEN LAST WEEK.

UH, WE ALLOWING US TO COMPARE WHAT WAS BOAT, UH, TO A RECTIFIED MODEL IN ORDER TO DETERMINE ANY MAJOR STRUCTURAL ISSUES ALONG WITH LOCATING MOISTURE INFILTRATION, UH, ADDITIONAL SCANS WILL BE REQUIRED AT THE FRONT FACADE AFTER THE PLYWOOD AND MESH COVERINGS ARE REMOVED IN ORDER TO FINALIZE THE 3D MODEL, WHICH WE WILL BE USING FOR THE DECONSTRUCTION AND RECONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS.

UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE, UH, BASED ON THE ROUGH DATA RECEIVED, UH, THIS PAST FRIDAY EVENING, UH, THESE IMAGES JUST DEPICT A FEW POTENTIAL ISSUES IN THE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS, SUCH AS AN APPROXIMATE ONE AND A HALF INCH DEFLECTION AND THE FORWARD JOYCE, IF EACH BUILDING A THREE-EIGHTHS INCH DEFLECTION AND THE STEEL HEADER OF THE BUILDING, IF BUILDING NINE OH NINE AND THE EXTERIOR FACADE OF 909 OR NINE 11 BEING ABOUT THREE INCHES OUT OF PLUM, UH, WE'RE HOPING THAT THE, UH, FURTHER ANALYSIS OF THE SCANS WILL HELP TO DETERMINE THE STRUCTURAL CRACKS AND MOISTURE WITHIN THE WALLS.

UH, NEXT SLIDE, WHERE JERRY, JERRY GARCIA WILL SPEAK ABOUT THE STRUCTURAL AND ACCESS ISSUES.

COMMISSIONER.

THIS IS JERRY GARCIA SPEAKING.

UM, HI THERE.

UM, I'M A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER HERE IN AUSTIN.

I, UM, STARTED MY FIRM FOUNDING PRINCIPLE OF STRUCTURES WHEN I STARTED 31 SHORT YEARS AGO.

AND WE HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN MANY, MANY OF, UH, PROJECTS OF THIS NATURE WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP AS MUCH HISTORICAL FABRIC AS POSSIBLE.

WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS PRODUCT PROJECT IN DISCUSSIONS WITH THE ARCHITECT AND ALL, UH, TO TRY AND SEE IF THERE'S WAYS TO KEEP THIS IN PLACE AND REPAIR IT IF AT ALL POSSIBLE.

NOW,

[00:35:01]

ALTHOUGH THERE ARE THREE BUILDINGS, THE ONE THAT SEEMS TO HAVE ANY AMOUNT OF INTEGRITY REMAINING IS A, THE 909 CENTER BUILDING.

UM, WE DON'T KNOW THE, WHAT THE FABRIC OF THE OTHER TWO BUILDINGS ARE.

ONCE THE STUCCO COMES OFF IN GREAT CONCERN AS TO WHAT REALLY THERE IS TO SAVE NOW, UH, I'M IN, UH, I AGREE WITH THE NOTION OF REMOVING IT CATALOGING, REPLACING IT APPROPRIATELY.

ONE OF THE CASES, ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT I REALLY AM CONCERNED ABOUT IN KEEPING IT AND REPAIRING IT IN PLACE IS THAT ON THE SLIDE YOU'RE SEEING RIGHT THERE, YOU CAN SEE WHAT IS PROPOSED IN SOME FASHION OR OTHER.

THAT'S GOING TO GO ON IMMEDIATELY BEHIND IT.

THERE WILL BE EXCAVATIONS BELOW THE CONGRESS, UH, ELEVATION OR PARKING.

THERE WILL BE, UH, CRANES AND SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS OF, UH, CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS BEING BROUGHT ONTO THE SITE ALL THE WHILE THESE FACADES WOULD NEED TO BE PROTECTED.

AND IT CONCERNS ME THAT IF INDEED WE KEEP IT IN PLACE, THE VIBRATIONS WOULD DAMAGE.

IF NOT DESTROY IT AFTER WHICH IT'D BE IMPOSSIBLE TO PUT IT BACK TOGETHER IN AN APPROPRIATE FASHION SHORT IF INDEED NO ONE GOES IN THERE TO PROPERLY CATALOG THE MATERIALS IN PLACE.

SO I THINK IT IS THE BEST, UM, SUGGESTION RECOMMENDATION THAT IT BE PROPERLY REMOVED AND STORED SAFELY AND BRING IT BACK TO ITS INTENDED, UM, FABRIC, UH, ONCE THE COMPLETION OR DURING THE, DURING THE, UH, CONSTRUCTION OF THE TOWER BEHIND IT.

AND I BELIEVE AFTER THIS, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A SEPARATE SPEAKER RIGHT BEHIND ME.

SO I'LL, I'LL, I'LL LEAVE IT TO THEM.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS.

DO WE HAVE THAT? YES, YES.

THIS IS CHARLIE WITH THE JENNER GROUP.

SO IF YOU'LL TURN TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WHICH IS SLIDE 14, CAN PLEASE SEE OUR LIST OF NEXT STEPS.

SO WHAT WE PLAN TO DO BETWEEN TODAY AND WHEN WE COME BEFORE YOU AGAIN IN JUNE WITH THE DEMOLITION PERMIT AND CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPLICATIONS, AS WELL AS ACCOMPANYING DECONSTRUCTION AND RECONSTRUCTION PLAN.

SO WE WILL COORDINATE ACCESS FROM CONGRESS AVENUE THROUGH A SCAFFOLDING CONTRACTOR THAT CAN PROVIDE SAFE PASSAGE ADJACENT TO AND ON TOP OF THE BUILDINGS EXPOSE EXTERIOR FACADES FOR FINAL LASER SCANNING ENGAGE A FORENSIC TESTING COMPANY FOR ASSESSMENT OF THE BRICK, MORTAR, STONE, STEEL, AND OTHER ELEMENTS LOCATED ON THE FACADE.

AND WE WILL INTEGRATE THE COMMISSION'S DIRECTION AND COMMENTS INTO THE ARCHITECT'S PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, WITH ALL THIS, WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE COMMISSION PROVIDE ANY DIRECTION REGARDING THE ARCHITECT'S SCOPE OF WORK THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED AS BACKUP BOTH TONIGHT AND THAT YOUR APRIL MEETING THAT YOU LET US KNOW, IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE DEMOLITION PERMIT PAIRED WITH A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS OR THE PROPER PERMITS TO ACHIEVE THE DECONSTRUCTION AND RECONSTRUCTION THAT WE ARE PROPOSING, AND THAT YOU LET US KNOW THAT IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR DETAIL THAT YOU'D LIKE TO SEE AS YOU MAKE YOUR DECISION IN JUNE DUE TO THE TIMELINE DESCRIBED EARLIER, WE WILL BE REQUESTING THAT YOU TAKE ACTION ON THE PERMIT AT THAT MEETING.

SO WE WOULD LIKE TO BE SURE YOU HAVE EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO MAKE THAT DECISION.

THANK YOU.

AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR DIRECTION AND QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? WE HAVE A MIST OF HOLOCAUST, PAULA.

OKAY.

AND THIS KAUFMAN POLAR COPLIN.

I THINK SHE HAD SAID SHE WOULD NOT BE AVAILABLE UNTIL LATER ON.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT IS, BUT I'M HERE.

I'M SPEAKING.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES.

WE CAN HEAR YOU NOW.

PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND GIVE YOUR, UH, MY NAME IS PAULA POSTMAN AND I SPEAK IN OPPOSITION OF THIS CASE.

THESE PROPERTIES ON CONGRESS AVENUE ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO THE VISUAL AND CULTURAL HISTORY OF AUSTIN.

WHEN THE OWNER PURCHASES PROPERTIES, THEY SHOULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THE STRUCTURAL ISSUES AND THEY SHOULD HAVE DECIDED WHAT THEY COULD DO ABOUT THEM DURING THAT DUE DILIGENCE PERIOD.

[00:40:02]

AND I ABSOLUTELY OPPOSE THEM BEING DEMOLISHED TO SAY THAT THEY HAVE TO BE DEMOLISHED.

I AM NOT CONDENSED.

I LIVED IN A THOUSAND YEAR OLD BUILDING AND AUSTRIA FOR A LONG TIME.

I THINK THIS BUILDING CAN BE REPAIRS THERE WHERE IT IS, AND WHEN THE OWNER PURCHASED IT, THEY DID AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.

AND WHAT DOES, WHEN, WHEN WE BUY PROPERTIES IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS, WE, WE HAVE CERTAIN PROMISES THAT WE MAKE WHEN WE BUY THOSE PROPERTIES.

AND SO IF THE COMMISSION CAN HELP THEM TO FIGURE OUT HOW IT CAN BE REPAIRED ON SITE WOULD BE MOST APPRECIATIVE.

I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD REWARD PROPERTY OWNERS TO BUY HISTORIC PROPERTIES AND THEN LET THEM FALL INTO DISREPAIR BECAUSE THEY WANT TO GET OUT OF THEIR HISTORIC DESIGNATION.

AND IF THIS OWNER HAS HAD ANY TAX BENEFITS BASED ON IT, HISTORIC VALUE, THEN THEY SHOULD BE PAYING BACK ANY OF THOSE TAX ABATEMENTS OR OTHER BENEFITS THAT THEY GOT BECAUSE THEY BOUGHT A HISTORIC PROPERTY.

IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE DEMOLISHING IT, THAT'S NOT THE DEAL THEY MADE.

OKAY.

THANK YOU FOR COMMENTS, MS. COOKMAN, DOES THE, DOES THE APPLICANT WANT TO REBUT? UM, SURE.

THIS IS .

UM, I, UM, AS PART OF OUR, OF THE RESEARCH THAT I KNOW HAS BEEN DELAYED, LIKE I SAID, BECAUSE THE RESEARCH CENTER IS NOT, UH, OPEN.

WE HAVE HAD TROUBLE PIECING TOGETHER ALL OF THE DETAILS OF THE, OF THE HISTORY OF THESE BUILDINGS.

UM, BUT I WILL BE HAPPY TO REPORT, UM, ON THAT, LIKE THE CONDITION THAT THEY WERE IN, FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN THEY WERE LANDMARKED, WHEN THEY WERE PURCHASED, ALL OF THAT, I SHOULD BE ABLE TO PRESENT THAT TO YOU IN JUNE, WHEN WE PRESENT OUR PERMIT APPLICATION, WE JUST HAVE BEEN ABLE TO GET VERY LIMITED INFORMATION FROM THE HISTORY CENTER.

AND THEN THE, THE RESEARCH, UM, THE RESEARCH CENTER HAS BEEN CLOSED.

I I'M AWARE OF THAT TOO.

I, I CAN'T GET ACCESS EITHER, SO.

OKAY.

UM, THANK YOU.

WE'LL LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING, UM, WHAT YOU FIND AT OUR JUNE MEETING.

OKAY.

MOVING ON.

WE HAVE, UH, POSTPONE 1501 NORTHWOOD SECOND.

[3.B.5. HR-2021-144747 – 2406 Harris Blvd. – Discussion Jackson-Novy-Kelly-Hoey House Council District 9 (Part 1 of 2)]

OUR NEXT ITEM FOR DISCUSSION IS 24 OH SIX HARRIS BOULEVARD.

THE PROPOSAL IS TO CONSTRUCT A SWIMMING POOL AND PERIMETER FENCE, AND WE RECEIVED CONSIDERABLE BACKUP FROM STAFF ON THIS ITEM.

AND THE APPLICANT, UM, IS AVAILABLE NOW TO SPEAK TO US, MR. KENNY, GOOD EVENING.

THIS IS ROBERT KENNEY.

I'M ONE OF THE OWNERS OF 24, SIX HARRIS, ALONG WITH MY WIFE AND I, WE GO INTO THIS HOUSE FOR 12 YEARS.

WE EXPECT TO OWN IT AS LONG AS WE'RE ALLOWED TO BE ON THE, OR, UM, IF SLIDES, ONE OF OUR PRESENTATION IS UP.

THERE'S A PHOTOGRAPH OF OUR HOME, UH, WITH A PATIO IN FRONT OF OUR HOME.

AT THE TIME IT WAS LANDMARK.

THE PROPOSAL WE HAVE HERE, UH, IS TO, UH, HAVE A SWIMMING POOL, THE SWIMMING POOL THAT WE'RE PROPOSING.

UH, IF THIS IS THE, WE HOPE THIS IS A CULMINATION OF A NINE MONTH PROCESS DURING WHICH WE LISTENED TO AND, UH, EXECUTED ON, UH, SIGNIFICANT FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMITTEE AND THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEES AND THE COMMISSION WE'VE GONE FROM HAVING, UH, A PLAN FOR A POOL THAT WE THOUGHT WAS QUITE CONSISTENT WITH THE, UH, EXISTING PRECEDENTS.

UH, HOWEVER, WE ARE APPRECIATIVE OF THE FEEDBACK.

THE POOL WE ARE NOW PROPOSING IS INVISIBLE FROM THE STREET VIEWS.

THE ONLY VIEW THAT'S RELEVANT IN THE CODE IN AUSTIN.

UM, THIS POOL IS INTENDED TO BE AN ADULTS POOL.

WE ARE ADULTS, OUR CHILDREN ARE ADULTS.

IT'S A SMALL COCKTAIL.

COOL.

THAT'S BEEN MOVED OFF AWAY FROM THE FACADE.

SO ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS TO BE AROUND THE POOL, WOULDN'T BE IN FRONT OF THE FACADE AND AGAIN, THE POOL ITSELF AND ALL OF THE CONSTRUCTION AROUND IT WILL BE INVISIBLE FROM THE STREET.

THE STAFF REPORT IS OUTSTANDING ON THIS PROPOSAL.

UH, ELIZABETH BRUMMETT, UH, W UH, REGARDLESS OF HOW THIS COMES OUT, I HAVE TO SAY HAS DONE AN OUTSTANDING

[00:45:01]

JOB WITH A 12 PAGE REPORT RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF OUR PLAN, UH, BASED ON ALL OF THE STANDARDS THAT APPLY THERE'S SIGNIFICANT PRECEDENT FOR A POOL, LIKE WE ARE PROPOSING EVEN A VISIBLE VERSION OF THE POOL.

WE'RE PROPOSING.

AGAIN, WE ARE PROPOSING AN INVISIBLE POOL FROM THE STREET.

UH, THAT'S ABOUT ALL I HAVE TO SAY.

I LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR DECISION.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

OH, SORRY.

I SHOULD SAY WE HAVE A FENCE THAT'S REQUIRED TO BE AROUND THE STREET AROUND THE TOOL.

AND WE WERE LOOKING FOR THE COMMISSION SPEED BACK ON WHAT THAT FENCE WOULD LOOK LIKE.

UH, IF YOU GO TO SLIDE THE LAST SLIDE OF OUR LITTLE DECK, WE HAVE TWO IDEAS, UH, THAT WE ARE INTERESTED IN THE COMMISSION'S FEEDBACK ON THE FIRST ONE ON THE LEFT IS A FENCE DESIGN THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE, UH, HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION, UH, IN FRONT OF A HISTORIC LANDMARK IN 2012.

UH, WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE A SHORTER VERSION OF THAT SORT OF FENCE.

UH, THE OPENINGS MIGHT NEED TO BE A LITTLE BIT SMALLER DEPENDING ON WHAT'S REQUIRED FOR SWIMMING POOL ENCLOSURES.

UH, WE BELIEVE THAT IT'S A NICE OPEN DESIGN THAT WE WOULD NOT HAVE A WALL.

WE SIMPLY WANT AN OPEN DESIGN FENCE WITH MASONRY PILLARS, PERHAPS.

AND ON THE RIGHT IS THE GOVERNOR'S MANSION, UH, FENCE.

UH, WE DO NOT WANT SOMETHING AS TALL AS THE GOVERNOR'S MATCHING FENCE.

HOWEVER, THIS IS A DANGEROUS STREET.

WE'VE HAD ONE DOG DIE.

WE DEFINITELY DID A FENCE IN FRONT OF OUR HOUSE.

UH, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THE COMMISSION'S FEEDBACK IS ON THE FENCE VERSION THAT WE MIGHT CHOOSE TO SURROUND OUR INVISIBLE POOL.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.

THANK YOU, MR. KENNEY, UM, WITH TINA CONTRAS ON THE LINE AS WELL, OR WAS IT JUST YOURSELF? OKAY, THANK YOU.

ANY FURTHER.

ANY OTHER SPEAKERS HEARING? NONE.

WE HAVE NO OTHER REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR .

OKAY.

UM, LET'S MOVE ON TO BASICS

[3.B.6. HR-2021-067051 – 1805 E. 3rd St. – Discussion Herrera House Council District 3 (Part 1 of 2)]

1805 EAST THIRD.

THIS IS THE HERRERA HOUSE.

WE HAVE A MR. WILLIAM HODGE.

OH.

UH, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.

UM, MY NAME IS WILLIAM HYGIENE AND THE APPLICANT FOR 1805 EAST THIRD STREET.

UM, I'LL ASK, I HAVE A VERY PRECINCT DECIDED THAT I, I DO WANT TO ASK PARDON? I AM WATCHING MY THREE-YEAR-OLD.

WELL, WE A WHILE MY BISON, THANK YOU VACCINATED.

SO IF I GET INTERRUPTED, PLEASE, PLEASE FORGIVE THEM.

UM, AND, AND OR IF I HAVE TO INTERRUPT MYSELF, UM, YOU KNOW, WE PRESENTED THIS PROJECT BEFORE THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AND, UM, THE, I WON'T GO TOO FAR INTO, UM, BECAUSE THOSE ARE SHOWN IN OUR DRAWINGS, BUT, UM, OUR INTENT IS, UH, TWOFOLD IS TO RE RESTORE THE, THE HISTORIC, THE HISTORIC PORTIONS OF THE HISTORIC CAREER HOUSE AND IS TO OUR OTHER INTENT, IS TO DO AN ADDITION TO THE HOUSE.

UM, WE ARE PROPOSING A TWO STORY ADDITION, UH, AND WE ARE DOING THIS, UH, BECAUSE THE KIND OF, UM, LONG-TERM PLAN FOR THIS PROPERTY IS THAT TO THE REAR OF THE EXISTING HERRERA HOUSE, WHAT MY OWNER WOULD LIKE TO DO AT SOME POINT IS TO ACTUALLY CONSTRUCT, UH, ANOTHER HOUSE.

UM, THAT HOUSE WOULD ACTUALLY BE THE PRIMARY USE IN A TRUE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AS REGULATED BY, UM, DELAYED DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION, UH, 25 TO 77 FOUR.

UH, THE INTENTION WOULD BE THAT WITH, IF WE HAVE LIVING SPACE ABOVE A GARAGE, AS THE STATE IS IN THE CODE, THAT WE CAN MAKE THEIR CAREER HOUSE INTO WHAT IS TECHNICALLY AN ADU AND THUS MAKE A LARGER PRIMARY HOUSE POSSIBLE.

AND, UH, TO BE ABSOLUTELY BLUNT THAT PRIMARY HOUSE WILL, UH, WILL HELP TO FIGHT IN THE RECONSTRUCTION AND RENOVATION AND RESTORATION OF THE HORIZON HOUSE.

UM, WE HAVE, THERE'S BEEN SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF, UH, COMMUNICATION WITH STAFF AND, UH, THEY'VE GIVEN, UH, THEY HAVE GIVEN INPUT AS TO CHANGES TO MAKE, UM, WHEN IT COMES TO THE DETAILS, WE ARE COMPLETELY ABLE TO, UH, TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES.

THEY HAVE RE THERE HAS BEEN SOME DISCUSSION THAT A ONE-STORY ADDITION, UM, WOULD BE DESIRABLE.

UM, WE WOULD NEED A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT VARIANCE FOR THAT.

AND SO THAT'S WHY WE TRIED TO PERCEIVE AS MINIMALLY, VISUALLY

[00:50:01]

INTRUSIVE AS A, OF A TWO-STORY ADDITION AS POSSIBLE.

UM, THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAVE.

AND, UM, I, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S REALLY ALL I HAVE.

OKAY.

WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. HODGE.

UM, ARE THERE ANY, ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? WE HAVE NO OTHER SPEAKERS.

OKAY.

WE'LL TAKE THIS UP.

UM, IN THE ORDER, IT APPEARS ON THE AGENDA GOING ON TO THE NEXT CASE WE HAVE, UH, MR. ERIC LARSON FOUR, B SEVEN, B SEVEN

[3.B.7. PR-2021-058680 – 4006 ½ Avenue B. – Discussion Hyde Park Historic District Council District 9 (Part 1 of 2)]

HAS, IS 4,006 AND A HALF AVENUE B.

I'D LIKE TO SAY SOMETHING BEFORE MR. LARSON, UH, SPEAKS.

THERE WAS, UM, THE FRIENDS OF AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOODS SIGNED UP IN FAVOR OF THIS.

UH, THIS WAS IN OUR BACKUP THAT GROUP FAN, UM, SAYS THAT IT'S A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, BUT IT'S NOT THE OFFICIAL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OF HYDE PARK.

UM, GO AHEAD, MR. LARSON.

HELLO.

MY NAME IS ERIC LARSON.

I'M THE OWNER OF 4,006 AND A HALF AVENUE B.

I'VE LIVED IN THE HOUSE FOR EIGHT YEARS.

UM, I'VE BEEN PLANNING THIS EDITION FOR A LONG TIME, AND I'VE ALWAYS INTENDED THE PLAN TO COMPLY AND RESPECT THE HISTORICAL NATURE OF THE HOUSE AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

THIS ADDITION WAS DESIGNED BY MY NEIGHBOR AND ARCHITECT, JIM DUNAWAY, AND HE WORKED ON MANY PROJECTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, INCLUDING HIS OWN HOME NEXT DOOR.

UM, ON FRIDAY, I HAD A DISCUSSION WITH CAITLIN CONTRERAS FROM THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE, FOLLOWING HER REVIEW OF THE PROJECT.

AND AFTERWARDS I HAD 3D RENDERINGS PREPARED OF THE EDITION.

UH, SO THERE COULD BE BETTER, BETTER VISUALIZED THE 3D VIEW, AND I'VE ALSO INCLUDED STREET VIEWS OF HOMES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAVE SIMILAR ADDITIONS, AND THAT'S IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS THAT I SUBMITTED ON SUNDAY.

UM, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE PLANTS.

THANK YOU, MR. LARSON.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? WE HAVE NO, UH, NO MORE SIGNED UP.

OKAY.

UM, THEN MOVING ON OUR NEXT.

OKAY.

HEY, WE HAVE THE REST OF, UH, ITEM B.

WHAT ALL WENT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA UNDER C OUR FIRST ITEM IS WE HAVE CAMP, SORRY, SORRY.

WE HAVE AN ITEM B 11, 1809 AND 1811 NEWTON STREET.

I'M SORRY.

I KNEW THAT WAS ON HERE.

I JUST PASSED IT BY.

OKAY.

B 11

[3.B.11. C14H-1993-0024, C14H-2000-0012 – 1809 and 1811 Newton – Discussion Stanley Homestead and Outbuilding Council District 9 (Part 1 of 2)]

STANLEY HOMESTEAD.

DO WE HAVE A SPEAKER ON THAT? WE HAVE MR. JAMES STOCKBAR.

OKAY.

MR. STOCKBAUER ARE YOU ON THE PHONE? ARE YOU ON THE LINE, SIR? SEEMS HE IS NOT ON THE LINE.

WE MIGHT MOVE ON.

OKAY.

LET'S ON.

THEN WE HAVE A MEGAN KING WHO WAS AN OPPOSITION.

WHO'S AN OPPOSITION.

OKAY, MS. HI, THIS IS MEGAN KING.

I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF, UM, PRESERVATION, AUSTIN.

THANK YOU TO THE COMMISSIONERS.

UH, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT PRESERVATION AUSTIN HAS A, UM, COVENANT ON THIS PROPERTY.

AND WHEN WE WERE ALERTED TO THE VIDEO IN DISCUSSION TONIGHT, WE WERE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT WE SAW.

SO WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO HEARING MORE FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THE COMMISSION'S DISCUSSION ON THIS VIDEO.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MS. KING.

OKAY.

NOW GOING ON TO DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS AND NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICTS.

WHERE'S OUR FIRST CASE.

UM, I THINK THAT WOULD BE ITEMS C THREE

[3.C.3. GF-2021-060230 – 1805 Waterston Ave. – Consent Clarksville National Register District Council District 9 (Part 1 of 2)]

1805 WATERSTON AVENUE.

IS THERE ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS? WE HAVE A MS. MARY REED.

OKAY.

MS. REED, ARE YOU ON THE LINE? MARY I'M HERE.

OKAY.

STATE YOUR NAME, MARY MARY STATE.

YOUR DAYS.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

SO, UM, MY NAME IS MARY REED.

I'M PRESIDENT OF THE CLARKSVILLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, WHERE

[00:55:01]

THE NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATION FOR STORE CLARKSVILLE, WHICH IS A NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICT.

AND ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD, I AM ASKING THAT YOU DELAY MAKING A DECISION ON DER'S REQUEST FOR A PERMIT TO DEMOLISH 1805 WATERSHED AVENUE.

IT'S A FULLY RENOVATED UPSCALE HOME THAT CONTRIBUTES TO THE DISTRICT.

I SHARED THE ZILLOW LISTING FOR THIS HOUSE, WITH ALL OF YOU IN AN EMAIL, I SENT YOU A DAY OR TWO AGO, BUT I'LL DELAY.

WE'LL GIVE THE CCDC TIME TO CONTACT NOL CUSTOM HOMES, WHICH WE'VE JUST RECENTLY LEARNED IS THE NEW OWNER OF 1805 WATERSTONE, UH, THE HOUSE BY THE WAY, SOLD FOR OVER A MILLION DOLLARS.

UM, WE WANT TO TALK TO NOW CUSTOM HOMES ABOUT NOT KNOCKING IT DOWN, KNOCKING THE HELL DOWN AND FEELING THAT I'M DESIGNING A NEW HOME.

THAT WOULD BE IN CHARACTER WITH CLARKSVILLE.

WE WOULD HAVE CONTACTED NOT EARLIER, BUT THE PERMIT APPLICANT IS DAR STAFF WOULD NOT TELL US WHO THE OWNER'S NAME WAS.

AND THE NAME OF THE OWNER DID NOT APPEAR ON THE TICKET UNTIL LAST THURSDAY.

UM, AND AS A FINAL NOTE, THE CCDC BELIEVES THAT THE DEMOLITION OF A FULLY RENOVATED EXPENSIVE HISTORICALLY CONTRIBUTING HOME WOULD BE A VERY DANGEROUS PRECEDENT FOR CLARKSVILLE.

SO THANKS FOR CONSIDERING OUR REQUEST, MS. REED, ARE YOU SAYING THIS HOUSE IS ALREADY UNDERGONE RENOVATION AND THE, THE APPLICANT, THE NEW OWNER IS ASKING TO DEMOLISH IT AND BUILD SOMETHING THAT'S 10 ITS PLACE, A LISTING I SHARED WITH ALL OF YOU SHOWS THAT IT'S A VERY, VERY NICE HOME THAT MOST EVERYONE WOULD BE VERY HAPPY LIVING IN WELL MAINTAINED UP TO DATE, MODERN HOME, AND NO CUSTOM HOMES BOUGHT IT FOR A MILLION PLUS, AND THEIR PLANS ARE TO KNOCK IT DOWN AND BUILD A NEW HOME.

THAT WILL BE MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE OBVIOUSLY.

AND, UH, WE FEAR NOT AT ALL IN KEEPING WITH PAREXEL.

OKAY.

I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.

THANK YOU.

YEAH.

YEAH.

ANY, ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS MATTER? WE MAY MR. ANYONE SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.

OKAY.

OKAY.

I THINK OUR NEXT CASE FOR DISCUSSION IS C6

[3.C.6. HR-2021-066941 – 71 Rainey St. – Discussion Rainey Street National Register District Council District 9 (Part 1 of 2)]

71 RAINY STREET IS THE APPLICANT OR OWNER, UH, AVAILABLE TO SPEAK ON THIS? WE HAVE A MR. MARK TOPPLE.

YES.

OKAY.

PLEASE STATE YOUR CASE.

RIGHT.

MAKING THE CASE TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AT 71 RAINY STREET.

UH, THE BUILDING HAS BEEN IN VIOLATION OF MULTIPLE CODES, UH, BECAUSE THE STRUCTURE IS WHAT WE SEE IS DAMAGED BEYOND REPAIR, BOTH THE ROOF, UH, AND OUR INFILTRATION AND STRUCTURALLY.

AND SO WE'RE LOOKING TO TAKE DOWN THE BUILDING, UH, IMMEDIATELY.

OKAY.

ARE THERE ANY FURTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS CASE? OH, WE HAVE A MR. CLAY, WOODY.

MR. WOODY, ARE YOU ON THE LINE? YES, I'M HERE.

OKAY.

PLEASE STATE YOUR CASE.

JUST PRETTY MUCH THE SAME AS MARK SAID.

UM, THE, THE STRUCTURE SEEMS IN DISREPAIR.

IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S KINDA HARD TO EVEN SEE FROM THE PICTURE A LITTLE BIT.

UH, IT'S IT'S FALLING OVER IS WHAT LOOKS LIKE, UM, THE FOUNDATION.

UM, I MEAN, EVERYTHING'S PRETTY WRECKED SINCE THEN.

WE'VE HAD TO ACTUALLY BORE PULL THE WINDOWS.

WE'VE HAD PEOPLE, UM, CONSTANTLY TRYING TO GET IN AND LIVE THERE AND, UH, YEAH, IT, IT JUST, UH,