[00:00:04]
I'D LIKE TO WELCOME THE COMMISSIONERS AND STAFF AND ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC TO THIS MEETING OF THE AUSTIN HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION, JULY 26TH, 2021.
THE ORDER OF OUR BUSINESS IS AFTER WE TAKE THE ROLE, UM, IS TO GO THROUGH THE AGENDA.
AND IF THERE ARE ANY ITEMS THAT ARE ON FOR CONSENT, THAT ANYONE WANTS TO PULL, WE'LL PULL THEM THEN.
AND THEN WE WILL TAKE THE SPEAKERS WHO ARE WAITING ONLINE IN THE ORDER THAT THE, THE CASE APPEARS IN THE AGENDA.
THEN WE WILL TAKE UP THE AGENDA ITEMS.
[CALL TO ORDER]
SO YOU MAY, IF YOUR ITEM PASSES ON CONSENT, YOU MAY LEAVE THE MEETING.BUT IF YOUR ITEM HAS BEEN PULLED FOR DISCUSSION, YOU MAY STAY ON AND LISTEN TO THE PROCEEDINGS.
I'LL TAKE ROLL TEARY MYERS HERE.
UM, BEN HINDSIGHT, I THINK IS COMING IN IN A MINUTE, UH, ANESSA CASTILLO.
SO THAT, AND SAY, HERE ARE PRESENT FOR THE RECORD.
UM, FEATHERSTON WIT CHAIR, KEVIN COOK.
CARLA ROCHE KELLY, LITTLE BABY, NICK WATER BLAKE TO LET YOUR ETHANOL SUELA HERE.
[ Citizen's Communication]
THE FIRST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS CITIZENS COMMUNICATIONS.IF THERE'S ANYONE WHO HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM THAT IS NOT POSTED ON OUR AGENDA, IT MAY BE AN ITEM HAVING TO DO WITH PRESERVATION, BUT NOT PARTICULARLY NOT ON OUR AGENDA TONIGHT.
IF THERE'S ANYONE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON SUCH AN ITEM, PLEASE LET US KNOW ONE REGISTERED SPEAKER FOR CITIZEN COMMUNICATION.
KATHY, ARE YOU ON THE LINE? YES, MA'AM GO AHEAD PLEASE.
MY NAME IS KATHY ROBINSON AND I'M THE AUSTIN AREA MANAGER FOR A NONPROFIT FOUNDED IN 1993 CALLED THE REUSE PEOPLE.
OUR MISSION IS TO KEEP BUILDING MATERIALS OUT OF THE LANDFILL AND MAKE THEM AVAILABLE FOR REUSE.
WE CHANGED THE SKULL BY OFFERING GREEN ALTERNATIVES TO TRADITIONAL DEMOLITION.
ONE APPROACH IS HELPING PROPERTY OWNERS, DECONSTRUCT HOUSES TO SALVAGE MATERIALS FOR REUSE BY DONATING THE MATERIALS TO OUR ORGANIZATION.
THE OWNER CAN RECEIVE A POTENTIALLY SUBSTANTIAL TAX DEDUCTION.
THE SECOND APPROACH INVOLVES RELOCATING THE HOUSE FROM THE SITE, WHICH OFFERS GREATER BENEFITS.
AS I WILL EXPLAIN IN A MOMENT, THIS IS AN EXCELLENT OPTION FOR HOUSES ON PIER AND BEING FOUNDATIONS.
ABOUT FIVE YEARS AGO, I BEGAN PARTNERING WITH A GENTLEMEN WHO OVER THE YEARS HAD SAVED LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF AUSTIN HOMES FROM DEMOLITION BY GETTING THEM RELOCATED.
THERE'S NO SHORTAGE OF FOLKS LOOKING FOR HOUSES TO MOVE TO THEIR LAND AND ARE WILLING TO PAY THE FULL COST OF THE MOVE, WHICH CAN RUN FROM $15,000 TO 50,000.
SO UNLESS THE HOUSE ISN'T, AS IN EXTREMELY, I'M SORRY, IS EXTREMELY DETERIORATED.
WE CAN PROBABLY FIND SOMEONE TO TAKE IT.
NOT ONLY DOES THE OWNER SAY THE COST OF DEMOLITION, BUT THERE IS ALSO THE FINANCIAL INCENTIVE OF DONATING THE HOUSE.
AS WITH MATERIALS, WE ASSIST THE OWNER AND OBTAINING AN IRS QUALIFIED APPRAISAL TO SUPPORT THE TAX DEDUCTION.
HOWEVER, DONATING THE HOUSE THROUGH THE PROGRAM IS COMPLETELY OPTIONAL.
SEVERAL OF THE HOUSES ON YOUR AGENDA TONIGHT APPEAR TO BE GOOD EXAMPLES OF PERFECTLY USABLE STRUCTURES THAT COULD BE RELOCATED 3000 FOR LAFAYETTE NINE 16 BOLDEN AVENUE AND 2,108.
WOODMONT ARE A FEW THAT COULD ALL VERY LIKELY HAVE A NEW OWNER WITHIN A WEEK FROM STARTING OUR EFFORT AND COULD BE MOVED WITHIN FOUR TO EIGHT WEEKS.
AFTER THAT, DEPENDING ON THE MOVER SCHEDULE, SINCE LAUNCHING THIS PROGRAM HERE SIX
[00:05:01]
AND A HALF YEARS AGO, WE'VE COMPLETED MORE THAN 80 PROJECTS, A MIX OF BOTH FULL AND PARTIAL, THE CONSTRUCTION AND HOUSE RELOCATION.WE HAVE MANY SATISFIED CLIENTS WHO ARE THRILLED, THAT THEY WERE ABLE TO SAVE MONEY ON THEIR PROJECTS WHILE DOING SOMETHING GOOD FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE COMMUNITY.
THE MAIN TAKEAWAY HERE IS THAT THERE ARE VIABLE FINANCIALLY BENEFICIAL ALTERNATIVES TO THROWING AWAY HOUSES THAT IN MOST CASES HAVE MANY MORE YEARS OF LIFE IN THEM.
WE'VE HARVESTED THESE RESOURCES ONCE.
WHY JUST THROW THEM AWAY DIVERTING THESE STRUCTURES, OF COURSE ALSO HELPS THE CITY WHERE IT'S ZERO WASTE GOALS.
SO I WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR HELP IN EDUCATING FOLKS ABOUT THESE OTHER POSSIBILITIES.
JUST BECAUSE A HOUSE IS NO LONGER ONE, IT DOESN'T MEAN IT HAS TO BE DESTROYED AND DISCARDED.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, KATHY, YOU PLEASE.
UM, SOMETIME PERHAPS THIS WEEK, GIVE YOUR CONTACT INFORMATION TO THE STAFF.
UH, WE GREATLY PREFER, UH, RETAINING HISTORIC BUILDINGS ON THEIR SITES, BUT SOMETIMES IT MAY BE, UM, A GOOD OPTION TO MOVE A PROPERTY.
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
MA'AM I UNDERSTAND, AND I WILL BE GLAD TO SEND THEM MY CONTACT INFORMATION.
[Consent Agenda: B6, B9, C3, C4, C5, C6, C7, C8, C10, C11, D1, D2, D4, D6, D7, D8 D9]
I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH THE AGENDA NOW AND I'LL READ IT.UM, WHETHER AN ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION FOR POSTPONEMENT, FOR, UM, CONSENT APPROVAL.
IF YOUR ITEM IS APPROVED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, YOU MAY LEAVE THE, YOU MAY CONSIDER YOUR, YOUR, UH, APPLICATION HAS BEEN APPROVED, BUT PLEASE TAKE NOTE OF THE STAFF AND COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE MADE, UH, IN OUR BACKUP.
AND ALSO IF IT'S A DEMOLITION PERMIT, WHETHER IT PASSES ON AGENDA OR DURING DISCUSSION, YOU ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLETE A CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE THAT CONSISTS OF 11 AND A HALF BY 11 INCH PHOTOGRAPHS OF EACH FACADE PRINTED ON AND PHOTO QUALITY PAPER, AND A NARRATIVE FOR ARCHIVING AT THE AUSTIN HISTORY CENTER.
IF YOU NEED MORE INFORMATION ON THOSE REQUIREMENTS, PLEASE CONTACT STAFF.
OUR FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS A HISTORIC ZONING CASES, A 1 10 37 REINDLY THAT'S A DISCUSSION ITEM UNDER B APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS.
UM, WE HAVE A RE APPLICANT REQUEST TO POSTPONE TO THE AUGUST 23RD MEETING B 2 9 0 7.
CONGRESS AVENUE WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM B 3 9 0 9.
CONGRESS WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM BEFORE THAT DECILE EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM B FIVE, THE PEGGY HOUSE THAT WILL BE THAT'S OFFERED FOR CONSENT POSTPONEMENT.
THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT, UM, WE, WE RECEIVED A LETTER FROM NEIGHBORS SAYING THAT THEY HAD RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS ON THE PROPERTY, AND I BELIEVE EVERYONE HAS AGREED TO POSTPONE THIS UNTIL A LATER MEETING SO THAT THEY HAVE TIME TO LOOK AT THE PROPOSAL, UH, FOR THE HOUSE, FOR THE BUILDING ITEM B 6 31 0 5.
WHEELER IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
BE 7 22, 10 WINDSOR WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM B EIGHT, THE KENNY HOUSE AT SIX 11 WEST 22ND WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM B NINE.
THE OPERA HOUSE AT WHEN 10 IS NINTH WILL BE A CONSENT ITEM UNDER C PERMITS AND NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT ITEM C ONE AT NINE 11 CONDA SEVEN.
IT WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM ITEM C 2 18 0 5.
WATERSTON WAS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
BUT I HAVE, UM, ASKED TO PULL THAT FOR DISCUSSION ITEMS. C3 14, 15 WAS 10TH STREET AND THE WESTLINE HISTORIC DISTRICT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT C FOR AMENDA SIGN APPROVAL FOR 600 CONGRESS IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
[00:10:01]
C 5 31 0 1.MCCALLUM IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT C7 1906 WEST 33RD WILL BE A CONSENT ITEM, C 8 6 13 WEST LINN AND THE WESTLINE DISTRICT AS A CONSENT ITEM, C 9 25 21 GERRIT AVENUE.
THIS WILL BE A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT ITEM C 10 3103.
SEE 11, 16 0 2 NORTHUMBERLAND IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT UNDER D.
NOW WE ENJOY ALL THE CONSENT ITEMS. NOW WE'RE UP FOR THE DISCUSSION ITEMS UNDER D APPLICATIONS FOR DEMOLITION AND RELOCATION, D 1 13 0 8 ALTAVISTA IN THE PENDING TRAVIS HEIGHTS DISTRICT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
THEY HAVE MADE CHANGES TO THEIR ORIGINAL APPLICATION.
THE 2 9 16 NOW AVENUE IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
IT WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM D 5 13 0 8.
LAVACA WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM D SIX, THREE OR ONE WAS 14TH.
STREET IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT AS IS
ALSO OFFER FOR CONSENT DA 2108.
WOODMONT IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
D 9, 8 12 WAS 12TH STREET WILL BE A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT.
THAT MEANS THAT WE WILL DISCUSS WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE GOING TO POSTPONE THAT ITEM.
SAN BERNARD IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT D 11 37 0 3.
METRO BANK APPLICANT IS REQUESTED POSTPONEMENT DL 12, THAT 3000 FOR LAFAYETTE AS OFFERED FOR CONSENT D 13 25 0 2 PARK VIEW WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.
AND D 13 3400 HILLS VIEW WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.
THESE ARE ALL THE ITEMS ON, UM, PUBLIC HEARINGS.
UM, OTHER ITEMS ARE LARGELY FOR COMMISSION ITEM E DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT.
WE HAVE NO ITEMS, APPLICATIONS FOR TAX ABATEMENT UNDER F WE HAVE NO ITEMS FOR THAT.
THEN WE GO ONTO STAFF AND, UH, COMMISSIONER JEN, UM, ISSUES.
SO WHAT WE HAVE HERE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE THE MINUTES OF THE LAST MEETING.
OUR JUNE MEETING B SIX B NINE, C3 C4, C5, C6 C7, C A C 10 C 11, DEAN ONE D TWO D FOUR D SIX D SEVEN, D A D AND D 12.
DOES ANYONE ON THE COMMISSION WISH TO PULL AN ITEM? YES.
LAYLA, I GET AN EMAIL FROM STAFF SAYING THAT THE 11 OR I'M SORRY, D 10 IS A DISCUSSION AND VITAMIN D 12 IS ALSO A DISCUSSION ITEM.
IS THAT CORRECT? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
DO THE 12 BIG 10 IN D 12 ARE BOTH DISCUSSION ITEMS. I'M SORRY.
I HAD THOSE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
I MAYBE I DIDN'T SEE THE, THE MOST RECENT, SO, OKAY.
ITEM D 10, 11 73, SAN BERNARD WOULD BE A DISCUSSION ITEM AND ITEM D 12, 3000 3004.
LAFAYETTE WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.
UM, DO WE, BUT WHAT IS OUR ORDER OF BUSINESS? CAN WE GO AHEAD AND APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA OR SURVEY? YES.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT, WHERE THAT APPROVAL CAME FROM, BUT, UM, MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA
[00:15:01]
AS AMENDED AS A MANDATE.THAT, UH, THE MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER ROSHAN, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HIND SETS ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF PASSING THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED.
ANY OPPOSITION? IT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
[Postponed Items: B1, B5, D11, C2, C9]
NEXT WE HAVE, UM, APPLICATIONS TO POSTPONE AND REQUEST TO POSTPONE.THOSE ARE ITEM B ONE B FIVE AND D 11.
UM, DO I SHARE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE POSTPONEMENT AGENDA? COMMISSIONER DON SUELA THERE'S A MOVE.
DO I HEAR A SECOND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER COOK A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER VALANZUELA, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE, OF THE POSTPONEMENT AGENDA.
NOW WE HAVE DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENTS.
ARE WE TAKING UP THE DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENTS IN THE ORDER THAT THEY APPEAR IN OUR AGENDA STAFF? MADAM CHAIR? YOU CAN, YOU CAN PICK THOSE UP NOW.
UM, WE HAVE THREE, UH, TO DISCUSS FOR POSTPONE THAT SOME OF THESE ARE STAFF REQUESTS.
UM, WE HAVE ITEM B NINE ITEM C NINE AND ITEM D NINE.
UM, LET'S TAKE AN ITEM BEING NINE, UH, ITEM B NINE PASSED ON CONSENT.
YOU WANTED TO PULL IT FOR DISCUSSION.
UH, BUT WE DO HAVE A COMMUNITY MEMBER WHO HAD REGISTERED AND I WANTED TO SEE THAT CASE POSTPONED.
UM, YES, THEY DID WANT TO HAVE THAT POSTPONED.
THIS IS A CASE IN CLARKSVILLE WHERE THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, REPRESENTATIVES WANTED TO MEET WITH THE DEVELOPER, UM, AND TRY TO GET SOME, UM, SOME CHANGES OR REVISIONS TO THEIR PLAN.
THEY'RE PLANNING TO DEMOLISH THE HOUSE.
NOW THAT'S BEEN UPDATED ALREADY.
THEY WANT TO DEMOLISH IT AND BUILD A LARGER HOUSE.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS BEEN IN DISCUSSIONS WITH A DEVELOPER WHO SAID THAT HE WOULD PROVIDE REVISED PLANS, BUT AS OF TODAY, THOSE KINDS HAVEN'T COME FORTH.
AND SO THERE'S A REQUEST BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTATIVE TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM ANOTHER MONTH, THIS IS A CONTRIBUTING BUILDING IN A NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT.
WE ARE, WE CAN POSTPONE IT UP TO 180 DAYS.
DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THIS CASE? DO WE WANT TO DISCUSS IT TONIGHT OR POSTPONE IT? ANYONE THIS SUBMISSION THERE WITH BORDER.
DO YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP OR ARE YOU READING YOUR HANDS? I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO POSTPONE THIS CASE TO OUR NEXT MEETING.
I BELIEVE WE WOULD NEED TO HEAR FROM THEM LINE.
I'M CONFUSED ABOUT POSTPONEMENT AND JUST GET THE DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENTS.
UM, IS THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE? THE APPLICANT IS NOT ON THE LINE.
UH, WE DO HAVE A MS. MARY REED, WHO IS THE COMMUNITY MEMBER REQUESTING A POSTPONEMENT.
DO WE HAVE ANYONE REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT AT ALL? THEY WERE NOT AT OUR LAST MEETING EITHER.
THEY DID NOT REGISTER TO SPEAK.
THEN SHALL WE GO AHEAD AND SHARE MS. REED WHEN NOW, OR WHEN WE COME BACK TO THE ITEMS WERE ROBERT'S RULES WHEN YOU NEED THEM AGAIN? I DON'T, I THINK YOU HAVE REPRESENTED HER CASE FOR POSTPONEMENT.
I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NECESSARILY NEED TO, TO HEAR FROM HER, UH, UNLESS THE COMMISSIONER IS, WOULD, WOULD LIKE TO MADAM
[00:20:01]
CHAIR, I MOVED TO POSTPONE.COMMISSIONER LAROCHE, MOVE TO POSTPONE ITEM C TWO.
DO I HEAR A SECOND, SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER TILL ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF POSTPONING, THIS ITEM TO THE NEXT MEETING, RAISE YOUR HAND.
UM, PERHAPS WE CAN HELP PERHAPS, UH, GET STAFF TO CONTACT THE DEVELOPER AND, UM, AND LET THEM KNOW THAT WE'RE WAITING FOR THESE PLANS.
THE NEXT ITEM FOR DISCUSSION, UH, POSTPONEMENT IS C NINE.
C NINE IS 25, 21 JARRETT AVENUE.
IT'S A REQUEST TO DEMOLISH A CONTRIBUTING HOUSE AND WE HAVE THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE.
STAFF HAS ASKED TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM, UM, TO THE AUGUST 23RD MEETING TO FULLY EVALUATE, UM, ALTERNATE ALTERNATIVE TO DEMOLITION AND TO CONDUCT FURTHER RESEARCH ON THE HISTORY OF THE HOUSE.
WE HAVE A MR. JOSHUA HOGAN, THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE.
MR. HOGAN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM WHEN THEY'RE CONSIDERING POSTPONING IT TO THE NEXT MEETING? YES.
UM, I'M THE ARCHITECT REPRESENTING THE OWNERS AND THE OWNERS ACTUALLY LIVE NEXT DOOR AND WE ARE DESIGNING THEIR, UM, PERSONAL HOME.
SO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO DO ON THE PROPERTY, WE'RE ALL WE'RE CONSIDERING RIGHT NOW IS WHETHER TO POSTPONE THIS ITEM TO THE NEXT MEETING.
UM, I GUESS WE PREFER NO POSTPONE THAT, BUT OKAY.
COMMISSIONERS, UM, THE APPLICANT REQUEST THAT IT NOT BE POSTPONED.
UM, STAFF REQUESTED POSTPONEMENT.
THIS WAS MAYBE A SIGNIFICANT PROPERTY.
THEY WOULD LIKE TO, UM, EVALUATE OTHER OPTIONS RATHER THAN DEMOLITION AND CONDUCT FOR THE RESEARCH.
DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THE POSTPONEMENT REQUEST? MY STAFF, I SUPPORT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION HERE AND MOVE TO POSTPONE AUGUST 23RD.
IS THERE A SECOND? IS THAT MR. COMMISSIONER MCWHORTER? SECONDHAND.
COMMISSIONER LAROCHE MADE THE MOTION COMMISSIONER.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
AND THIS HAS, THIS IS AN ITEM THAT YOU MAY HAVE RECEIVED.
A LOT OF EMAILS ON STAFF HAS RECEIVED OVER 4,000 EMAILS ON THIS CASE.
UM, STAFF HAS SUGGESTED THAT WE MIGHT WANT TO POSTPONE THIS TO THE NEXT MEETING.
UM, IS THERE, IS THERE AN APPLICANT OR A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OWNER TO SPEAK ON THE QUESTION OF WHETHER WE SHOULD POSTPONE THIS OR HERE AT TONIGHT? WE HAVE MR. NEIL VICKERS THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE.
MR. VICKERS, CAN YOU SPEAK TO THAT? UM, POSTPONE THAT REQUEST.
UH, THANK YOU, CHAIR MEYERS AND COMMISSIONERS.
I'M THE EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT OF FINANCE ADMINISTRATION AT AUSTIN COMMUNITY COLLEGE.
UM, WHICH IS THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, WE ARE, WE ARE NOT IN FAVOR OF POSTPONING OF, OF THIS ITEM.
UM, AND, AND, YOU KNOW, WOULD REQUEST THAT YOU PROCEED WITH APPROVAL FOR THE DEMOLITION OF THIS.
UM, JUST, UM, I DON'T HAVE MUCH TIME.
I HAVE, I JUST HAVE A FEW THOUGHTS AS TO SUPPORTING WHY WE HAVE THAT RECOMMENDATION.
UH, FIRST, YOU KNOW, WE ARE A PEER GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY TO THE CITY, UH,
[00:25:01]
AND THE ANSWER TO THE PUBLIC AND TO THE COMMUNITY DIRECTLY THROUGH OUR ELECTED BOARD OF TRUSTEES.UH, WE THOROUGHLY REVIEWED THE PACKET THAT YOU'VE RECEIVED FROM STAFF.
UM, AND WHILE IT STATES, YOU KNOW, THAT NONE OF IT ACTUALLY DOES STATE IN THERE THAT NONE OF THE BUSINESSES THAT OCCUPIED THIS, UH, THREE BAY STRIP CENTER WERE SIGNIFICANT IN THEIR OWN.
SO THAT'S, NONE OF THEM WERE SIGNIFICANT AND WOULD NOT QUALIFY.
UM, CAN YOU SPEAK DIRECTLY TO THE POSTPONEMENT IDA ISSUE? YEAH.
WE'RE, WE'RE NOT IN FAVOR OF POSTPONING.
WE WOULD, WHERE YOU'RE REQUESTING THAT THE, UH, THAT THE COMMISSION APPROVE OUR DEMO PERMIT.
UM, STAFF, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO, UM, POSSIBLE POSTPONE THE MERITS OR WHAT, WHAT ARE YOUR REASONS FOR, UH, POSSIBLY POSTPONING THIS TO THE NEXT MEETING STAFF? STEVE, ARE YOU ABLE TO UNMUTE YOURSELF? DON'T THINK THIS WAS NECESSARILY A, UH, THIS WAS A POSSIBILITY, I DON'T THINK THIS WAS A MAKE OR BREAK THING.
THERE MAY BE MANY, UM, PEOPLE ON THE LINE BOTH TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICATION AND IN OPPOSITION, THIS MIGHT BE BETTER, UM, BETTER WHEN PEOPLE ARE AWARE OF THAT.
UH, MADAM CHAIR, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE INTEREST IN POSTPONEMENT IS TO ALLOW AN OPPORTUNITY FOR STAFF TO, UH, MEET WITH AUSTIN COMMUNITY COLLEGE REPRESENTATIVES, UH, POTENTIALLY VISIT THE SITE AND TO DISCUSS, UH, POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES TO DEMOLITION FOR THE PROPERTY.
UH, WE DO HAVE, UH, I THINK AROUND 70 PEOPLE REGISTERED TO SPEAK SOLELY ON THIS ITEM.
IF, IF THERE IS A POSTPONEMENT, WE WILL NEED TO MAKE VERY CLEAR TO THOSE, TO THOSE PEOPLE, HOW THEY CAN PARTICIPATE IN THE NEXT MEETING.
WE HAVE, UM, WE HAVE THE APPLICANT, UM, OBJECTING TO A POSTPONED MAT.
WE HAVE STAFF REQUESTS TO POST POWER.
WHAT IS YOUR PLEASURE CONDITIONER? YEAH, LET ME CLARIFY.
THIS IS THE FIRST TIME WE'VE SEEN THIS IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSION, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, IT IS.
AND, UH, I'M VERY RESPECTFUL ON, UH, UH, ANOTHER AGENCY AND I KNOW THERE ARE LOTS OF PLANS THAT I'M SURE WE WILL ADVANCE, BUT IT IS, ARE PRETTY MUCH, UH, UH, CUSTOM, I SHOULD SAY.
I DON'T SAY THERE'S ANY WRITTEN POLICY.
UH, WE WANT TO GET THIS RIGHT.
AND WE HAVE ONE TIME TO DO OUR RESEARCH.
AND IF STAFF TELLS US THAT WE'RE NOT PREPARED, UM, IT'S NEVER REALLY BEEN A, UH, AN ISSUE FOR US AND, UH, THE APPLICANTS AND THE NEIGHBORS.
EVERYBODY'S PRETTY MUCH AWARE THAT IF WE NEED AN EXTRA MONTH, THAT WE'RE VERY GENEROUS IN GIVING THAT OUT.
SO, UM, I KNOW IT MAY BE INCONVENIENT, BUT I DO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE DISTRICT AND THE, THE, THE, THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE KNOWS THAT THIS IS NOT A BURDEN WE'RE PLACING ON THEM, BUT MERELY A WAY OF MAKING SURE WE'RE DOING OUR DUTY THOROUGHLY.
SO, SO THAT REASON I MOVED TO THE, UM, GRANT STAFF'S REQUEST FOR THOSE, I HEAR A SECOND TO THAT MOTION.
ANY DISCUSSION COMMISSIONER ROCHE? WELL, I DO THINK SO.
HOW DOES THIS WORK? BECAUSE I, I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THE PUBLIC COMMENTS RIGHT THERE, 70 PEOPLE THAT HAVE PATIENTLY WAITED THROUGH THIS PROCESS TO SPEAK ON THIS TOPIC.
AND SO, UH, I DON'T KNOW HOW EVERYBODY ELSE FEELS, BUT I THINK THIS IS PROBABLY A GOOD TIME FOR THEM TO BE HEARD.
I, IF THERE'S 70 PEOPLE WHO HAVE COME OUT TONIGHT TO BE HEARD ON THIS CASE, I DON'T KNOW, IT WOULD EITHER RELEASE THE PERMIT OR RECOMMEND HISTORIC ZONING.
AND IN THAT CASE, THAT WOULD GIVE STAFF TIME TO DO SOME ADDITIONAL RESEARCH.
I THINK IF THERE'S 70 PEOPLE ON THE LINE AND I DON'T, I WOULD PREFER TO HEAR IT TONIGHT RATHER THAN POSTPONE FOR ANOTHER MONTH.
IT IS, I UNDERSTAND IT IS POSSIBLE FOR US TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING.
AND THEN AT THE POINT WHERE WE WOULD TAKE ACTION, WE WOULD BE STILL WITHIN OUR RIGHTS TO, UH, REQUEST A POSTPONEMENT UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING.
[00:30:01]
OKAY.SO WITH THAT, I COULD WITHDRAW MY MOTION AND, UM, WE COULD KEEP IT ON DISCUSSION WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT AT THE TIME THE HEARING IS COMPLETE, UM, UNLESS I'M SUADED, OTHERWISE MY MOTION WILL RETURN OR SOMEONE ELSE MIGHT MAKE THE SIMILAR MOTION ON THE SECONDARY, UM, CONDITIONER.
ARE YOU, I MEAN, I APPRECIATE THE, THE IDEA THAT STAFF WANTS TO SEE THE PROPERTY IN PERSON AND MEET WITH PEOPLE SINCE THERE IS SUCH GREAT NUTRITIONISTS.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO SUPPORT, UH, UM, A PROCESS THAT ALLOWS THAT, ALTHOUGH I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY WHO'S EMAILED AND CALLED IN TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS ABOUT THIS.
SO, UM, COMMISSIONER VALANZUELA, I DID JUST WANT TO ADD, I DEFINITELY AGREE IF WE HAVE 70 FOLKS HERE THAT I WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE, BUT, UM, I THINK IT'S WHAT, IT'S OUR DUTY TO, TO HEAR THAT OUT.
BUT I ALSO THINK, UM, IT'S AGAIN, NOT A WRITTEN RULE, BUT A TRADITION THAT IF THE OWNER OPPOSES THE DEMO, THE DISCUSSION, THE SPOON, THAT REQUESTS, WE USUALLY GRANT THAT AND, AND MOVE IT TO DISCUSSION ITEM.
AND DON'T USUALLY GRANT A DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENT IF THE APPLICANT IS AGAINST IT.
SO THAT THOSE REASONS I WOULD NOT HAVE VOTED FOR THE, AND I THINK THE FACT THAT WE'VE RECEIVED 4,000 EMAILS, STAFF HAS RECEIVED 4,000 EMAILS, UH, PRETTY MUCH, UH, LETS US KNOW THAT PEOPLE IN A COMMUNITY, UM, YOU KNOW ABOUT THIS AND ARE PROBABLY WATCHING OR LISTENING TONIGHT.
UM, IF THEY'RE NOT ON THE LINE, UM, NOW TO SPEAK.
SO DO I HEAR A MOTION TO HEAR THE ITEM TONIGHT? THAT'S NOT REQUIRED GUIDE WITHDRAWN MY MOTION.
IT'S ON THE AGENDA AS A DISCUSSION ITEM NOW.
IT'LL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM COMING OUT.
SO WE'VE GOT OUR POSTPONEMENTS, OUR DISCUSSION POSTPONEMENTS, OUR CONSENT
[3.A.1. ZC-2021-100756 – 1037 Reinli St. – Discussion Travis County Fire Control Team Operations Center Council District 4 (Part 1 of 2)]
ITEMS. ARE WE READY TO HEAR FROM THE SPEAKERS? DO YOU REALLY HAVE ANYONE TO SPEAK OUR STAFF PRESENTATION? UM, ON A 1 10 37 RHINELAND? DO WE HAVE A, UM, I'M SORRY, DO WE HAVE ANYONE TO SPEAK ON THAT ITEM ONE? WE HAVE THE APPLICANT AND MR. LEE BEST SOAR ON THE LINE.OKAY, SIR, IF YOU'RE ON THE LINE.
HOW LONG, HOW LONG DID YOU SAY OKAY.
I PRETTY MUCH DEFER TO WHAT THE STAFF PUT TOGETHER, BUT THEY DID A GOOD JOB OF PRESENTING MY CASE.
UH, I WANT TO JUST SAY THAT I APPRECIATE ALL DETERGENT WORK THAT ELIZABETH AND CALLAHAN DID ON THIS PROJECT.
IF ANYBODY HAS A QUESTION OR CONCERN DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY ABOUT THE CASE, I'D BE WELCOMED, WELCOME THEIR INPUT AND TRY TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE.
WE HAVE THE HEARING ON THIS THING, AND IF ANYBODY HASN'T WANTED TO TALK TO ME ABOUT AFTER THE HEARING IS CONCLUDED, PLEASE CONTACT ME.
SO SAY BRIEFLY WHY YOU THINK THIS PROPERTY IS WORTHY OF LANDMARK STATUS.
IT PROVIDED A MAJOR OPPORTUNITY WHERE, UH, OR A SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY TO HAVE THIS COUNTY AND OFFICE OUTLINING THE STAFF REPORT.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? NO, THERE IS NOT MADAM CHAIR.
WE'LL GO ON TO THESE APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS.
UM, WE POSTPONED A B ONE, B TWO IS 9 0 7 CONGRESS.
DO WE HAVE, BUT BEFORE WE JUMP INTO THAT CASE, UM, IT JUST OCCURRED TO ME WITH SOME SIMPLE MATH STAFF.
DO WE REALLY HAVE 70 PEOPLE PLUS ON JUST ONE CASE? WHAT ARE THE TOTAL NUMBERS OF PEOPLE THAT WE HAVE SIGNED UP TONIGHT? SO, OKAY.
UH, FOR ITEM D NINE, WE HAVE 70 PEOPLE, UM, THAT IS, UH, REGISTERED TO SPEAK OVERALL.
UH, REGISTERED SPEAKERS FOR DISCUSSION ITEMS IS ABOUT 124 ALL AT THREE MINUTES.
IT'S ABOUT SIX HOURS OF SPEAKERS, RIGHT? YES.
SO, UH, WE CAN DO ONE OF TWO THINGS.
[00:35:01]
WE CAN ASK PEOPLE TO STATE THEIR NAME AND GIVE A VERY BRIEF DISCUSSIONS.UM, OR I GUESS EVEN THE, EVEN THE 70 PEOPLE, I, I, I, I THINK I'M KIND OF FLUMMOXED.
I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WOULD BE A REASONABLE REQUEST AT THIS POINT, IF I COULD SUGGEST HAVING, UM, THE APPLICANT GIVE, UM, WOULD THEIR PRESENTATION AND HAVE SUBSEQUENT SPEAKERS, UH, STATE THEIR NAME AND, OR THEIR SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION TO IT IN LESS THAN A MINUTE.
UM, AND JUST A FEW SECONDS AND NOT REPEAT SOMETHING THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN SAID, BUT JUST STATE THEIR NAME AND THEIR SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION, OR IF THEY HAVE A, YOU KNOW, HAVE A DIFFERENT OPTION, UM, MAYBE SUGGEST IT, BUT ASK FOR THE, UH, IF WE, IF WE HEAR EVERYBODY AT THREE MINUTES, WE WON'T GET TO ANY CASES TONIGHT.
THAT WAS, UM, MY SUGGESTION TO JUST HAVE THE, THE MAIN SPEAKER FOR AND AGAINST HOW THREE MINUTES AND THEN REQUEST, UM, ARDENTLY THAT SUBSEQUENT SPEAKERS JUST STATE THEIR NAME AND THEIR SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION.
DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THAT? DOES THAT OKAY.
UM, DOES THAT, DOES THAT SOUND REASONABLE COMMISSIONER HIMSELF? I JUST LIKE LISTENERS TO ALSO BE AWARE, BE RESPECTFUL.
WE HAVE STILL NOT ONLY TO HEAR ALL YOUR INPUT, BUT THEN WE STILL HAVE TO COME BACK TO YOUR PRESENTATION AND THEN VOTE ON YOUR ITEMS. EVEN WHEN WE EXTEND A LITTLE BIT PAST OUR 10 O'CLOCK DEADLINE, UM, THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT'S EASY TO DO REMOTELY.
IT'S GOING TO BE VERY DIFFICULT IF EVERYBODY DOES NOT, UM, HELP US ALONG A LOT.
AND ALSO IT WOULD HELP A LOT IF PEOPLE ARE READY TO SPEAK SO THEY CAN JUST STATE THEM ROOM, STATE THEIR SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION, AND THEN GIVE IT UP TO THE NEXT SPEAKER AND A STAFF CAN HELP US WITH THAT.
UM, CAN WE GO AHEAD THEN? UM, ON, I KNOW THAT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PEOPLE TO SPEAK ON CASES LIKE 9 0 7 AND 9 0 9 CONGRESS.
I WOULD, WE HAVE HEARD OF A LOT OF THEIR PRESENTATION BEFORE PERHAPS THEY COULD, UM, REDUCE, UH, THEIR COMMENTS AS WELL.
SO IF WE HAVE THE APPLICANT FOR NINE OR SEVEN, COULD YOU PLEASE BRIEFLY STATE YOUR CASE FOR ITEMS
[3.B.2. C14H-1986-0015; HR-2021-085731 – 907 Congress Ave. – Discussion (postponed June 28, 2021) Grandberry Building Council District 9 Proposal: Deconstruct, store, and re-erect façade. Applicant: Leah Bojo City Staff: Elizabeth Brummett, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-1264 Staff Recommendation: Approve the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for deconstruction; require regular submission of deliverables specified in the scope of work to Historic Preservation Office staff and the Historic Landmark Commission, with ongoing consultation as work progresses; and request finalization and execution of restrictive covenants regarding the reconstruction timeline before physical work commences. 3.B.3. C14H-2004-0008; HR-2021-085739 – 909 Congress Ave. – Discussion (postponed June 28, 2021) Mitchell-Robertson Building Council District 9 Proposal: Deconstruct, store, and re-erect façade. Applicant: Leah Bojo City Staff: Elizabeth Brummett, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-1264 Staff Recommendation: Approve the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for deconstruction; require regular submission of deliverables specified in the scope of work to Historic Preservation Office staff and the Historic Landmark Commission, with ongoing consultation as work progresses; and request finalization and execution of restrictive covenants regarding the reconstruction timeline before physical work commences. 3.C.1. HR-2021-085748 – 911 Congress Ave. – Discussion (postponed June 28, 2021) Congress Avenue National Register District Council District 9 Proposal: Deconstruct, store, and re-erect façade. Applicant: Leah Bojo City Staff: Elizabeth Brummett, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-1264 Staff Recommendation: Comment on and release the plans for deconstruction. Commission review of new construction within a National Register district will be required, including review of detailed plans for reconstruction of the façade, once developed. (Part 1 of 2)]
ITEM B 2 9 0 7 CONGRESS.THIS IS LEAH BOGGIO REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT.
WILL WE BE HEARING, I KNOW 7, 909 AND NINE 11 TOGETHER.
WE'RE GOING TO HEAR, WE'RE GOING TO HEAR THEM SEPARATELY.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AN OVERALL PRESENTATION BY STAFF, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO HEAR EACH, UM, EACH BUILDING SEPARATE LIGHT TONIGHT.
MADAM CHAIR, IS THAT FOR THE, THE COMMENT AS WELL? THE SPEAKERS ARE THE SAME FOR EACH.
SO SHOULD WE HEAR THE SPEAKER? SHOULD THE SPEAKERS ADDRESS? 9 0 7, 9 0 9 AND NINE 11 COLLECTIVELY IN THEIR PRESENTATIONS FOR EFFICIENCY SAKE.
UM, CAN YOU PLEASE MAKE THAT PERCENTAGE? YES.
I DID COMPILE, I'M NOT TOTALLY CLEAR, BUT I DID SOME FILE ONE UP ONE PRESENTATION FOR ALL THREE PROPERTIES AT ONCE AND THEN, OKAY, THANK YOU.
UM, SO ON SLIDE TWO, I WON'T, I WON'T REMIND YOU OF THE ENTIRE TIMELINE, BUT I WILL SAY THAT WE CAME TO YOU, UH, LAST MAY AND DID RECEIVE SOME GUIDANCE THAT 909 WAS THE PRIORITY OF THE THREE STRUCTURES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.
UM, SO WE, WE WERE RAINED OUT IN JUNE, BUT WE WERE ABLE TO COME.
WE ARE ABLE TO COME HERE TONIGHT TO SHOW YOU, UM, THE, THE UPDATES THAT WE'VE MADE AND, AND SPECIFICALLY OUR CONTINUED INVESTIGATION THAT SUPPORTS OUR REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS, AND THEN PERMISSION TO DECONSTRUCT AND RECONSTRUCT THE FACADE THAT'S IN THE LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT.
UM, I WILL SKIP AHEAD TO SLIDE FOUR, WHICH QUICKLY I WILL SAY THAT WE HAVE UPDATES ON, UM, WE HAVE, WE HAVE UPDATES ON THE ONSITE INVESTIGATION AND ASSESSMENT OF THE BUILDINGS, AS WELL AS THE SAFETY PLAN.
WE'VE ALSO COMPLETED THE DIGITAL 3D MODEL.
THERE'S A TYPO ON THE SIDE AND WE HAVE COMPLETED AN UPDATE TO THE SURVEY.
UM, THE SCOPE OF WORK THAT'S IN YOUR BACKUP HAS BEEN UPDATED TO REFLECT ALL OF THAT WORK.
[00:40:01]
SHOWS THERE IS AN UPDATED ALSO AN UPDATED RESTRICTIVE COVENANT IN YOUR BACKUP, WHICH IS A VERY IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF OUR REQUEST, UM, BECAUSE THAT RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, WHICH IS STILL IN DRAFT FORM, BUT WE ARE WORKING ON WITH CITY LEGAL IS WHAT WILL REQUIRE THAT THE PROPERTY THAT THE FACADES BE REBUILT WITHIN THREE YEARS OF THE PERMIT BEING ISSUED, UM, ON SITE I WILL SKIP FOR RIGHT NOW AND LET DONNA CARTER CARTER DESIGN IS, IS ON OUR TEAM.AND SHE'LL BE SPEAKING TO SLIDE SIX, THE LASER SCAN ASSESSMENT.
UM, WE ALSO HAVE, UM, SLIDE SEVEN, THE STRUCTURAL ASSESSMENT, WHICH, WHICH WILL BE, UM, WHICH WILL BE, UH, SPOKEN ON IN, IN OTHER TESTIMONY, UM, BY, BY RYAN STOLTZ, UM, SLIDE EIGHT SHOWS THAT WE HAVE IN TOUCH WITH SEVERAL NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS.
I THINK SOME OF WHOM ARE ON THE, ON THE LINE TONIGHT AND HAVE ISSUED LETTERS OF SUPPORT, WHICH SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN YOUR BACKUP.
THE NEXT STEP FROM HERE WOULD BE UPON YOUR APPROVAL.
YOU WOULD GET FIVE PLANT EXEMPTIONS AND DEMOLITION PERMIT.
UM, THERE ARE TERMS OF COVENANT WOULD GO INTO EFFECT BEGINNING OF THE CLOCK TICKING.
UM, AT THAT POINT WE WOULD, UM, UPON DECONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING, WE WOULD BRING FORTH DESIGNS AND A SITE PLAN TO YOU TO BE REVIEWED SINCE THE, SINCE THE SITES ARE, UM, HISTORIC AND IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, WE WILL CERTAINLY BE INVOLVED IN ONGOING STEP-BY-STEP COMMUNICATION WITH ALL OF OUR NEIGHBORS AND STAKEHOLDERS, AS WELL AS THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE.
UM, AND WITH THAT, UM, WE DO REQUEST THAT YOU GRANT A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TONIGHT FOR 9 0 9 AND NINE 11, AND THEN ALLOW 9 0 7 AS PART OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT TO BE, UM, INCLUDED IN THAT PROJECT.
UM, AND HOPE THAT, UM, DONNA CARTER AND RYAN SOLTZ CAN FOLLOW MY TESTIMONY SO THAT THEY CAN GO INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ABOUT EACH OF THOSE UPDATES.
AND AT THIS POINT, I GUESS I'M SPEAKING ONLY ABOUT 907, IS THAT CORRECT? YOU WERE SPEAKING ABOUT ALL THREE PROPERTIES, RIGHT? OKAY.
UM, THEN I WILL DO SO I THINK THE HIGHLIGHTS, THE WEATHER DID, UM, HINDER US A BIT.
AND SO WE ARE BEHIND IN ACTUALLY PUTTING TOGETHER THE DOCUMENTS, BUT WE DID FIND SOME VERY SALIENT THINGS ABOUT 9 0 7.
UM, ONE OF WHICH IS THAT THE MESH REALLY COULD NOT BE REMOVED BECAUSE OF THE SAFETY PROBLEMS. THE BRICK IS ITSELF CRUMBLES AS WELL AS THE MORTAR.
SO THE MESH IS VERY IMPORTANT, WHICH MEANS OUR SCANS ACTUALLY SHOW THE MESH, BUT WE DID FIND, UM, WE COULD, WE FOUND THAT THE BRICKS HAD NOT BEEN CUT.
UM, SO THEREFORE THE CORNICE WORK AT THE TOP WAS PROBABLY A COVER THAT WAS PUT ON IN THAT.
WE ALSO DID WORK ON THE WALL, THE NORTH WALL, THAT'S THE PARTY WALL.
AND IN YOUR DOCUMENTS, YOU WILL SEE THAT WE HAD BEGUN THE SHORING EMBRACING PLANS FOR THAT WALL, AS WELL AS THE DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT'S REALLY GOING TO NEED TO BE PUT INTO PLACE, UM, WITH A NEW DEVELOPMENT AND, UM, GETTING THAT WALL HEALTHY FOR THE OWNER ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PROPERTY LINE.
AND I THINK THEY ARE ON THE, UM, ON THE CALL THIS EVENING, I DO WANT TO REITERATE, UM, COMPLETELY THAT, UH, WE WILL NOT BE DEMOLISHING THAT WALL.
IT IS THE WALL THAT SUPPORTS THAT BUILDING.
UM, AND BECAUSE OF WHERE IT IS WITHIN THE PROPERTY LINE, THERE IS ACTUALLY THE ONLY WAY WE TOUCH IT IS TO TAKE OUR BEANS OUT AND TO, AND TO BRACE ACTUALLY, WE'LL DO THAT IN REVERSE ORDER WE'LL BRACE AND THEN TAKE THE BEANS OUT.
UM, WE HAVE, UM, ALSO WHEN WE START TO LOOK AT 9 0 9, UM, THE, THE ISSUES THERE ARE THAT, THAT, THAT THE, THE BRICKS REALLY ARE SATURATED AT THIS POINT.
AND WITH THE PAINT ON THEM, EVEN THOUGH THE PAINT IS PEELING, THERE ARE AREAS WHERE IT'S ADHERED AND THOSE BRICKS ARE IN WORSE CONDITION THAN THE ONES WHERE THE PAINT'S ACTUALLY FALLEN OFF AND ALLOWED US TO BREED RYAN STOLTZ.
WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE DIFFICULTIES OF TRYING TO KEEP THAT IN PLACE.
UM, BUT MY MAIN CONCERN IS, AND CERTAINLY AS A PERSON, AS A PROFESSIONAL THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, PREPARING THE DOCUMENTS IS THE SAFETY OF THE PEOPLE, SAFETY OF OUR NEIGHBOR TO THE SOUTH.
UM, AS WELL AS, UM, HOPE THAT THE SAFETY OF THE BRICKS AND MORTAR BRICKS AND STICKS THEMSELVES IN TERMS OF NOT ONLY SURVIVING, UM, THE DECONSTRUCTION AROUND IT, BUT SURVIVING NEW CONSTRUCTION AND AS WELL AS JUST THE, THE, UM, WHAT THAT DOES TO CONGRESS AVENUE FOR AT THIS POINT, AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME, SHOULD THAT, UH, HAVE TO BE KIND OF HUNG UP INTO THE AIR.
UM, WE HAVE ALSO INITIATED CONVERSATIONS WITH THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR AS, UM, TO GO OVER, UM, HIS SEQUENCING, THE KINDS OF, UH, INSTRUMENTS AND MATERIALS THAT HE WILL HAVE TO USE IN ORDER TO, UM, REMOVE, UM, THE, THE BRICKS AND NUMBER THEM IN
[00:45:01]
AND, AND, UH, INVENTORY THEM IN THE MANNER THAT WE HAVE, UM, SUGGESTED.AND AS YOU SEE, UM, WE'LL CONTINUE LASER SCANS THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS, UM, IN YOUR BACKUP PLAN, YOU'LL SEE US, UM, A GRID THAT WE'LL ACTUALLY BE USING ACROSS ALL THREE BUILDINGS TO, UM, START TO DOCUMENT MY NEW CHANGES IN HOW THE BRICKS AND MORTAR ARE PUT TOGETHER SO THAT WE ACTUALLY, UM, THE MASON WOULD THEN, UM, DRAW LINES TO THOSE IMPERFECTIONS SO THAT WE DON'T JUST DRAW A STRAIGHT PLUMB LINE TWENTY-FIVE FEET ACROSS.
UM, WE HAVE NOT BEEN AS SUCCESSFUL IN TERMS OF OUR HISTORIC DOCUMENTATION, UM, IN TERMS OF FINDING OUT WHAT THAT FIRST FLOOR ELEVATIONS REALLY LOOK LIKE.
WE KNOW WE HAVE EVIDENCE OF THE WOODEN, UH, UM, ARCADES AND THEIR MAKEUP AND THEIR DESIGN, BUT WHAT'S BEHIND THOSE WE DON'T.
SO ACTUALLY WE FEEL THAT WE NEED TO HAVE CONTINUED WORK WITH STAFF WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, UM, SO THAT WE CAN COME UP WITH PERIODS OF SIGNIFICANCE FOR EACH OF THESE BUILDINGS, WITH THE EVIDENCE THAT WE HAVE, AND JUST COME TO AN AGREEMENT ABOUT HOW THOSE, AND TO WHAT YEAR SO TO SPEAK, THOSE WOULD BE RECONSTRUCTED.
AND, UM, FINALLY, AND, AND RYAN, WE'LL, WE'LL SPEAK MORE TOWARDS THE, UH, I SHOULD GO BACK TO I'M SORRY, NINE 11.
UM, IT, UH, HAS BEEN SLIPPED COVERED SEVERAL TIMES.
UM, WE ACTUALLY DON'T FIND ANY EVIDENCE OF BROKEN BRICK, SO THAT ORNAMENTATION DOESN'T APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN CHOPPED OFF.
SO AGAIN, WE'RE THINKING THAT THERE WERE, UM, THAT THE WAY IT WAS CONSTRUCTED IS NOT THE WAY WE ORIGINALLY LOOKED AT.
AND THEN FINALLY, A 9 0 9, RYAN WILL SPEAK TO THE, UH, I DON'T MIND YOU BEING THE NUMBER ONE, I'M SORRY.
SOMEONE IS, UH, NEEDS TO MEET THEIR PHONE, PLEASE.
YOU SAID, RYAN, WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT THE DIFFICULTIES AND REALLY THE SAFETY ISSUES THAT WE FEEL ARE INHERENT IN TRYING TO KEEP 9 0 9 IN PLACE.
AND WE WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS AT THE END OF THIS, UM, SHOULD DO.
YES, THIS IS RYAN STOLTZ WITH STRUCTURES.
I'M A LICENSED STRUCTURAL ENGINEER AND, UH, I BELIEVE YOU HAVE THE STRUCTURAL ASSESSMENT LETTER PROVIDED BY OUR OFFICE.
SO I'LL CONTINUE TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE POINTS DONNA WAS, UH, JUST BROUGHT UP, UH, WE'VE HAD A COUPLE MAIN, UH, GOALS AND BEING HIRED TO LOOK AT THE BUILDINGS AT 9 0 7, 909 AND NINE 11.
UH, WE HAVE THE FIRST MAIN THING WE'VE LOOKED AT IS HOW TO PROPERLY BRACE THE EXISTING WALL OF 9 0 5, THAT NORTH WALL DURING DECONSTRUCTION.
AND, UH, WE ARE IN A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT TO PROVIDE STEEL BRACES, TO BRACE THAT WALL, UM, DURING DEMOLITION.
AND IT WILL PROVIDE A COMPARABLE STIFFNESS TO THE DIAPHRAGMS THAT ARE THERE TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WALL STAYS IN PLACE.
AND I BELIEVE SOMEBODY STILL NEEDS TO BE MUTED.
THE, UH,
UM, THE SECOND MAIN POINT I WANTED TO BRING UP TODAY IS THE, UH, THE POSSIBILITY OF SUSPENDING THE HISTORIC FACADE OF 909.
SO WE'VE STUDIED AND CONSIDERED, UM, ALL THE OPTIONS WE COULD COME UP WITH TO LEAVE THAT IN PLACE.
AND I LET HER PRESENT THOSE THREE OPTIONS THERE'S OPTIONS TO, UM, TO SANDWICH THAT UPPER PORTION OF THE WALL AND BRACE BACK INTO THE LOT ITSELF AWAY FROM CONGRESS.
UM, THAT OPTION OBVIOUSLY CONFLICTS WITH THE, UH, THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW DEVELOPMENT AND HAS ITS OWN, UH, HAS ITS OWN CONCERNS THERE WITH THE ONGOING DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE, UH, BRACING OUT TOWARDS CONGRESS AVENUE, OBVIOUSLY TO THE SIDEWALK OR THE STREET THERE WOULD REQUIRE SOME CLOSURES AND WOULD IMPEDE ON THE FOOT TRAFFIC AND POSSIBLY CAR TRAFFIC THERE FOR AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME.
THE LAST OPTION WOULD BE TO PROVIDE A DEEPER DRILL FOUNDATION UNDERNEATH THE WALL AND TRY TO STABILIZE IN PLACE, UH, WITH MORE OF A CANTILEVERED APPROACH, GO UP FROM DEEP DRILLED PIERS, BUT IT WOULD REQUIRE MORE EXTENSIVE, UM, CONSTRUCTION EFFORTS TO DRILL THOSE PIERS AND VIBRATION.
AND, UH, ADDITIONALLY WITH THE DEPTH OF EXCAVATION RIGHT NEXT TO IT FOR THE NEW DEVELOPMENT,
[00:50:01]
THERE'S OTHER CONCERNS OF COMPROMISING THE WALL IN PLACE.UM, SO WITH THESE THREE OPTIONS THAT WE'VE CONSIDERED, WE FOUND, YOU KNOW, PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE WAYS TO STABILIZE THEM, HOWEVER, STILL IN PLACE.
UM, THERE'S A VERY SIGNIFICANT RISK WITH AN OPERATING CONSTRUCTION SITE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY.
UH, IT FEELS LIKE HANGING A WINE GLASS IN THE MIDDLE OF A CONSTRUCTION SITE FOR A FEW YEARS.
AND IN REVIEWING THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THE EXISTING WALLS, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE FOUND SOFT, DAMAGED BRICK, DETERIORATED MORTAR, THERE'S PAINTED EXTERIOR SURFACES, AND WE'VE SEEN THE TRAPPED MOISTURE IN THE SCANS THAT HAVE BEEN TAKEN.
UH, THE BUILT UP STEEL LINTEL AT 909 IS, UH, HAS SIGNIFICANT REST.
AND IT APPEARS THAT THE FLUXION IS ACTUALLY WHAT IS INSTIGATED AND CAUSED SOME OF THE CRACKS BELOW THE WINDOWS ON THE FRONT FACADE.
SO THERE'S SOME STRUCTURAL CONCERNS ALREADY WITH WHAT IS THERE.
UM, SO OVERALL THE WALL IS IN NEED OF SOME REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE AS IT STANDS TODAY.
AND, UM, AFTER CONSIDERING ALL OF THESE THINGS, THAT IS OUR RECOMMENDATION, UH, AS YOU READ IN THE LETTER TO CAREFULLY DECONSTRUCT CATALOG BRICK BY BRICK, AND THEN RECONSTRUCT THE WALL AS PART OF THE NEW DEVELOPMENT, UH, WE FELT THAT THAT WILL PROVIDE A NEW LEASE ON LIFE FOR THIS HISTORIC WALL.
UH, WE CAN ADDRESS THE STRUCTURAL CONCERNS AND ISSUES, SORRY TO INTERRUPT TWO MINUTE LIMIT AND MUST MOVE ON TO THE NEXT SPEAKER IF WE WOULD LIKE TO, UH, KEEP GOING.
I'D LIKE TO SUGGEST, UH, TO, UM, THIS TEAM THAT YOU COME TO THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, WHERE WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO SPEAK ABOUT THESE THINGS IN MORE DEPTH, AND WITH MORE TIME, I'M STARTING TO CUT YOU OFF, BUT WE NEED TO, ARE THERE ANY MORE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? OKAY.
UM, CAN WE GO ON TO BE FOR THE ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? I BELIEVE, YES.
WE HAVE A, UM, MR. CHARLIE
MR. DARSON ALR YOU ON THE LINE.
I DON'T HAVE ANY, ARE YOU SPEAKING IN FAVOR OR IN OPPOSITION? UM, I'M ON THE APPLICANT TEAM AND I DON'T, I DON'T NEED TO SAY ANYTHING.
I DON'T NEED TO RUSH HIM, BUT WE NEED TO MOVE ON IF WE CAN.
JERRY, JERRY, WON'T BE ON THE CALL.
I REPRESENT OWNERSHIP OF 9 0 5 CONGRESS.
THE BUILDING ARE TO THE SOUTH AND 9 0 7, UH, TO START OFF, I'D LIKE TO STATE THAT WE DO SUPPORT THE DEMOLITION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF THESE SIZES OUTLINED.
HOWEVER, I'D LIKE TO STATE SOME CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL, POTENTIAL COVENANTS AND HOW THEY PERTAIN TO THE PARTY WALL THAT SEPARATES 9 0 7 AND OUR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9 0 5.
UM, IF SOME OF YOU MAY KNOW THIS COMMISSION PLACE, HISTORIC LANDMARK STATUS BY 95 CONGRESS KNOWN AS THE MUTUAL BUILDING IN THE PAST YEAR.
AND SINCE I SIGNED, WE'D BE CONDUCTING A MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR RENOVATION AND REHABILITATION OF OUR BUILDING, UH, PRIOR TO STARTING THE RENOVATION.
AND FOR THE BETTER PART OF THE LAST DECADE, WE'VE NOTICED WATER DAMAGE AND MOISTURE MIGRATION, GARDEN WORK PARTY WALL DUE TO THE COLLAPSING GROUP AND EXISTING NEXT DOOR, UH, AT 97 CONGRESS, UH, IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'VE MENTIONED MANY TIMES THE OWNERSHIP, MR. WALLACE, ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS OVER THE YEARS, HOWEVER, HE HAS ELECTED TO TAKE ACTION TO REMEDY THE SITUATION.
THE MOISTURE'S LED TO OUR PARTY WALL BEING DAMAGED.
THE HAS BEEN A MORTAR CRUMBLING, STEEPING UP THE REST.
AND DURING OUR RENOVATION AT OUR COSTS, WE'VE BEEN FORCED TO REPAIR THE WALLS AND ROOF CONNECTIONS THAT DID END DAMAGE TO OUR NEIGHBORS AND THE GLASS DAMAGE THING THING IS DOING CURRENT REGULARLY, DESPITE EVERYTHING IN OUR POWER TO PREVENT AND REMEDY THE SITUATION.
THE ONLY REASON WE'RE HERE TODAY, VOICE AND CONDITIONAL SUPPORT FOR THIS PLAN IS BECAUSE IT POTENTIALLY OFFERS US A REMEDY TO STOP THE DAMAGE THAT HAS BEEN AFFLICTED ON OUR BUILDING FOR THE PAST DECADE.
AS OF LAST THURSDAY, MR. WALTON TEAM DELIVERED A PLAN TO US, UH, FOR THE TEMPORARY OF RACING FOR WALL, WHICH IS SIGNIFICANTLY SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS CONSTRUCTED ON OUR SOUTH PARTY WALL SEVERAL YEARS AGO, WITH THIS BUILDING, THE SOLUTION DOES NOT ANY WAY THE MALL STREET PARTY WALL, AND IT PROVIDES SEPARATE RAISING OF OUR BUILDING AND SOME STRUCTURES IN ITS PLACE.
WE'LL CONTINUE DISCUSSIONS WITH MR. WALTON, HIS TEAM, AND WE'LL ENDEAVOR TO REACH AGREEMENT, UM, ON THE ENGINEERING AND SEQUENCING OF THE WORK ON OUR COMMON WALL AND EXACTLY HOW THE NEW BUILDING WILL INTERACT WITH OUR HISTORIC STRUCTURE.
HOWEVER, WE ALWAYS VERY GOOD REASONS.
DON'T CONCERN THAT THE UNDERSTANDING OF 9 0 7 WILL ACTUALLY SEE THIS PROCESS THROUGH, UM, AS STATED AND PROPERLY SECURE THE SITE IN A WAY TO PROTECT CONGRESS AVENUE AND THE BUILDINGS SURROUNDING THE SITE, WHAT MUST BE OUTLINED AND UPHELD BY THIS COMMISSION.
AND THE CITY HAS A REASONABLE TIMELINE FOR RECONSTRUCTING THE FACADE APPROPRIATE PROTECTION FOR PARTY WALLS AND NEIGHBORHOOD HISTORIC STRUCTURES, AND A REASONABLE PLAN FOR SECURING AND PROTECTING THE SITE WHILE PLANS FOR AN EVENTUAL DEVELOPMENT TAKE PLACE.
THE SITE CANNOT CONTINUE TO BE ABANDONED AND UNSECURE AS IT HAS BEEN THE LAST TWO THAT DAY, THIS COMMISSION TO CONSIDER THE FACTS WHEN MAKING A DECISION TONIGHT AND PLEASE PUT THE COVENANTS IN PLACE THAT WILL PREVENT
[00:55:01]
THE FURTHER DESTRUCTION OF DEMISE OF THESE HISTORIC SITES, NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND THE INTEGRITY OF CONGRESS AVENUE.IS THERE ANYONE ELSE TO SPEAK? NO, WE CAN MOVE ON TO ITEM BEFORE.
[3.B.4. C14H-2000-0005; HR-2021-103182 – 13300 Dessau Rd. – Discussion Evangelical Lutheran Church Council District 7 Proposal: Relocate church to Jourdan-Bachman Pioneer Farms, 10621 Pioneer Farms Drive. Applicant: Mike Ward City Staff: Elizabeth Brummett, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-1264 Staff Recommendation: Approve the application. To maintain the landmark designation once the move is complete, future Commission action will be required to initiate historic zoning at the new location and remove historic zoning from the Dessau Road tract. (Part 1 of 2)]
OKAY.THIS IS THE DESSA EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH TO THE PIONEER FARM.
IT'S A, IT'S AN AUSTIN LANDMARK.
WE, UH, WE VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO APPROVE THEIR MOVE LAST TIME, BUT THEY NEEDED TO GET A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
SO DO I HAVE A MAIN SPEAKER? AND THEN ANYONE ELSE TO FOLLOW, PLEASE LIMIT IT TO A MINUTE OR LESS.
WE HAVE THREE SPEAKERS, UH, REGISTERED TO THIS ITEM.
THE FIRST IS MR. MIKE WARD, THE APPLICANT.
MR. WARD, PLEASE GO AHEAD, CHAIRMAN.
UH, MY FORD, UH, I'LL JUST BE BRIEF HERE.
AND, UM, WE ASKED THE LANDMARK COMMISSION TO APPROVE THIS MOVE.
DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? I'LL ANSWER THEM.
UM, I'M ALSO, UH, SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF, UH, MOVING THIS CHURCH ON YOUR FARMS TO SAVING THIS CHURCH AND TO BRING IT BACK BACK HOME TO THE GERMAN COMMUNITY THAT IS GROWING AT THE PIONEER FARM.
AND THE LAST SPEAKER WE HAVE, UH, MR. UH, KEN SOF.
I'M A PRESIDENT OF THE DECILE LUTHERAN CEMETERY ASSOCIATION THAT, UH, OWNS THE CHURCH.
UH, WE, UH, WANT TO URGE YOU TO APPROVE THIS MOVE.
UH, THE ASSOCIATION DOESN'T HAVE THE RESOURCES TO, TO, UH, PRESERVE THE CHURCH WHERE IT IS AND, UH, WHERE IT IS, IS NOT GOING TO BE ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC AS IT WILL BE AT PIONEER FORUMS. UH, SO WE URGE YOU TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION.
DO WE HAVE ANYONE ON THE OPPOSITION OR ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? NO, WE DO NOT.
[3.B.7. HR-2021-099481 – 2210 Windsor Rd. – Discussion Davis-Sibley House Council District 9 Proposal: Redesign of carport and rear modifications. Applicant: Richard Hill & Mark Lakins Committee Feedback: Explore ways to ways to rebuild the back stair. City Staff: Steve Sadowsky, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-6454 Staff Recommendation: To be determined (Part 1 of 2)]
THINK OUR NEXT ITEM IS B 7 22 10 WINDSOR.YES, WE HAVE THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE.
MR. TIN PUPPET FOLLOWED BY ONE ADDITIONAL SPEAKER.
MR. KAPUTT, PLEASE STATE YOUR CASE CONCISELY FELLOW COMMISSIONER, TIM.
THIS IS TIM PUPPET ON THE ARCHITECT FOR THE HOMEOWNER.
UM, WE ARE BRINGING THIS PROPERTY BACK.
IT IS CURRENTLY UNDER REHABILITATION AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF CASE, THE CASE THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.
UH, THIS ROUND, WE ARE ASKING FOR APPROVAL FOR A REVISED CARPORT DESIGN, WHICH IS SLOWER AND SMALLER THAN WAS ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED.
WE ARE ALSO ASKING TO NOT RECONSTRUCT A NON-CONFORMING STAIR ON THE BACK OF THE HOUSE ON THE P'S ROAD SIDE, UM, THAT THE WOODEN STAIR IT'S A WOODEN STAIR WITH A STUCCO SCAN THAT WAS BEING HELD AT, BY AT STUCCO.
SO IT WAS DECONSTRUCTED FOR SAFETY REASONS.
UM, AT THIS POINT, THE OWNER HAS PUT, THERE IS SO MUCH MORE RECONSTRUCTION AND REHABILITATION GOING TO THE HOUSE THAT WOULD THEN WAS INITIALLY ANTICIPATED.
UM, THE OWNER IS NOT INCLINED TO WANT TO RECONSTRUCT A NON-CONFORMING STARE AND TRY TO WORK WITH INSPECTION TO GET THAT THROUGH, UH, BUT HAS REQUESTED THAT WE CONSTRUCT A COVERED ENTRANCE.
AND YOU CAN SEE ALL OF THIS IN YOUR BACKUP.
UM, I'M NOT SURE WHERE MY VIDEO WAS SUCH A LAG TIME.
I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT.
UM, WE'RE LOOKING AT PAGE ONE, IS IT THE DRAWINGS OR THE, UH, THE FIGHT PLAN SHOWS THE NEW PROPOSED PORTRAITS AND THE NEW CARPORT, IF YOU CAN GO TO BACKUP, WHICH IS, UM, LET'S GO TO THE PRESENTATION, WHICH IS AFTER THE DRAWINGS.
[01:00:01]
UH, B 7.4.YOU CAN SEE IN A 3D IMAGE AT THE TOP, THE PROPOSED ROUTE AND, UH, FOR A COVERED PORCH AND PROPOSED CARPORT, UM, THEN THERE ARE SLIDES ILLUSTRATING DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE NEW CAR FOUR AND ONE THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED.
UH, THE NEXT SLIDE DOWN IS A RENDERING SHOWING THE PR THE FORMER STAIR, WHICH WAS NON-CONFORMING AND A PROPOSED NEW PORCH WITH COVER.
I DID MEET WITH CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS COMMITTEE THIS MONTH.
UM, AND THE STAIR BEING A PROMINENT FEATURE OBVIOUSLY, IS SOMETHING THAT, UM, WE WERE ENCOURAGED TO HOLD ONTO.
UM, I DID MAKE A DRAWING THAT SHOWS WHAT A CONFORMING STAIR RE CONSTRUCTING A CONFORMING SARAH WOULD BE REQUIRED TO DO.
AND THERE ACTUALLY JUST THAT ROOM ON THAT CONFORMING STAIR, UM, I WAS ALSO ASKED TO LOOK TO MINIMIZE, SHOULD WE HAVE REACHED OUR THREE MINUTE, UH, LIMIT ON THIS SPEAKER? OKAY.
CAN WE PLEASE WRAP IT UP IN ONE SENTENCE? UM, THE NEW PROPOSED ROOF IS AS MINIMALLY INVASIVE AS I COULD THINK OF BECAUSE THE ADJACENT ROOF THAT'S OVER THE ADJACENT GARAGE IS SO LOW.
UM, SO I PROPOSED EXPANDING IT AROUND THE CORNER AT LEAST.
UH, IS THERE ANOTHER SPEAKER TO SPEAK IN FAVOR? YES, WE HAVE OUR SECOND AND LAST SPEAKER ON THE ITEM, MR. RICHARD SUTTLE.
THANK YOU FOR HAVING US TOO, TO CONCLUDE TIM'S COMMENTS.
IF WE WERE FORCED TO PUT THE STAIRS BACK ON, THEY WOULD BE BASICALLY A, AN IMITATION.
UH, IT WAS MIMIC, UH, I WOULD SAY THAT IT WOULD BE LIKE MAIN STREET DISNEYLAND TO PUT THEM ON BECAUSE YOU CAN'T MAKE THEM FUNCTION.
THIS IS THE BACK OF THIS HOUSE.
IT'S NOT ON THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
THE HOMEOWNERS HAVE SPENT OVER $3 MILLION, UM, RESTORE, RESTORING THIS FINAL HOUSE AND HAVE HAD A LOT OF UNEXPECTED COSTS.
THEY DID NOT THINK THAT THEY WOULD HAVE ANY PROBLEM PUTTING ON A, PUTTING BACK A STAIR THAT WAS, UH, UH, NON-FUNCTIONAL AND NON-CONFORMING.
AND WE'RE ASKING TONIGHT, UH, TO, TO BE APPROVED, TO PUT THE IMPROVED, UH, CARPORT IN, NOT PUT THE STAIRWAY BACK ON THE REAR OF THE HOUSE.
UM, BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.
AND THIS WAS THE LAST SPEAKER ON THIS.
I'M ASSUMING THAT IN YOUR PACKET, YOU SAW THAT ALL THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS SUPPORT THIS, UH, THIS MODIFICATION.
YOU PROBABLY SAW THAT IN YOUR PACKET.
[3.B.8. 611 W. 22nd St. – Discussion Kenney House Council District 9 Proposal: Redesign of signage. Applicant: Patti Imbus & John Britten Committee feedback: Either reduce the size of the front door sign or craft a suspended sign to avoid obscuring any architectural feature of the house. City Staff: Steve Sadowsky, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-6454 Staff Recommendation: Reduce the size of the sign. (Part 1 of 2)]
TO SPEAK ON D A THE KENNY HOUSE AT SIX 11 WAS 22ND.WE HAVE TWO REGISTERED SPEAKERS.
THE FIRST IS MR. MIKE MCKONE, WHO IS A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPLICANT.
YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU JUST FINE.
GO AHEAD AND MAKING IT SHORTER.
YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO.
PICK UP IS A BRAND NEW BRAND FOR STARBUCKS.
THEY HAD DECIDED THAT THEY CAN RENT AND HELP PAY FOR THE RESTORATION OF THE HISTORIC KENNY HOUSE, WHICH I'VE BEEN INVOLVED WITH SINCE IT WAS ZONED HISTORIC, THE, A, THERE WILL ONLY BE ONE SIGN ON THE MAIN BUILDING AND THE, UH, WE WANT TO THANK THE ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE, UH, COMMISSIONERS COOK AND VALANZUELA FOR MEETING WITH US ON OUR, UH, WE HAD THREE OPTIONS.
I LET YOU GO THROUGH THEIR SIDES AND I TAKE THE TIME TO LOOK AT THEM.
THE FIRST ONE WAS JUST TO PICK UP WITH THE SIREN ON IT.
UH, MR. UH, THE DISCUSSION HERE WAS THAT IT, UH, IMPACTED THE TWO BANDS OF TRAM ON THE SITE FACIA, AND THEREFORE IT WAS, UH, NOT, UH, LIKED, UH, THEY DID SUGGEST WE DO A HANGING SIGN.
WE DESIGNED A HANGING SIGN, BUT IT TURNS OUT IT'S NOT QUITE, UH, TO CODE IS WHEN YOU GET, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH CLEARANCE.
SO THE FINAL SIGN WE DESIGNED WAS TO REMOVE THE SIREN AND PUT NINE INCH THE LETTERS, NINE INCHES TALL, UH, BETWEEN THE TWO ALL WERE ON THE CALL RIGHT NOW WITH, WITH, UH, OKAY.
SO I COULD LEAVE, UH, THREE MINUTES FOR THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE STARBUCKS, THE, UH, DEPENDENT FOR THIS TIME.
HE HAS A STATEMENT TO READ TO THE END, TO THE RECORD.
[01:05:01]
STATE YOUR NAME, MR. DEWAYNE BERGE.AND I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND EVERYONE TO PLEASE KEEP YOUR PHONE ON MUTE GOING FORWARD.
MY NAME IS FOR FULL DISCLOSURE.
I AM THE STORE DEVELOPMENT MANAGER WHOSE JOB, AND I SUPPORT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION RELATED TO FIND THE JET SIX, 11 BUCKS FROM SECOND STREET PRIOR TO COVID, LESS THAN 20% OF ALL CUSTOMERS CHOSE TO ENJOY THEIR BEVERAGE INSIDE ONE OF OUR CAFES, AS THE RESPONSE AND SHIFT IT TO CUSTOMER BEHAVIOR STARBUCKS FOR LUNCH, THE BRAND NEW CONCEPT CALLED THE PICKUP.
SO CUSTOMERS WILL ONLY HAVE THAT TO ABOUT 300 SQUARE FEET OF THE FIRST FLOOR.
A SMALLER FOOTPRINT DOES NOT MEAN SACRIFICE DESIGN WITH EVERY DECISION.
OUR INTENT HAS BEEN TO PAY HOMAGE TO THE LEGACY AND HOPEFULLY INSPIRE PEOPLE TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THE KENNY HOUSE AND RECOGNIZE ITS CONTRIBUTION TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
I HAVE ACTUALLY JOKED WITH MY PEERS THAT IT'S IRONIC THE MOST BEAUTIFUL STORES STARBUCKS EVER BUILT IN AUSTIN IS THE ONE STORE WHERE YOU CAN'T SIT NEWS DAY.
THE HLC AND ITS STAFF HAS CHALLENGED STARBUCKS TO BETTER BALANCE THE TENANTS FOR SIGNAGE THAT CAN COMMUNICATE THE TYPE OF EXPERIENCE THAT CUSTOMER CAN EXPECT THAT THEN THE STORE WITH THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
AND I BELIEVE WE HAVE MET THAT CHALLENGE WITH THE SMALLER SCALE SIGN.
I RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU SUPPORT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION WITH THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO PLACE A LEGIBLE, BUT APPROPRIATE SONG ON THE DOUG.
THAT WAS, THAT WAS OUR LAST SPEAKER ON THAT ITEM.
WE CAN CONTINUE TO, UH, D THREE, I WOULD SAY
[3.D.3. PR-2021-084005 – 3009 Bowman Ave. – Discussion (postponed by applicant June 28, 2021) Council District 10 Proposal: Demolish a ca.1941 house. Applicant: Ross Rathgeber City Staff: Steve Sadowsky, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-6454 Staff Recommendation: Consider initiating historic zoning on the original portion of the house. (Part 1 of 2)]
D THREE IS 3009 BOWMAN.DO WE HAVE A SPEAKER FOR THAT CASE? WE HAVE THREE SPEAKERS.
UH, MR. MICHAEL WHELAN IS A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OWNERS AND THEN THE NEXT TWO SPEAKERS ARE THE OWNERS.
AND MR. WAYLON ARE, UM, IF YOU'RE THE MAIN SPEAKER, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES, THE OWNERS WILL HAVE ONE MINUTE A PIECE.
LET ME KNOW WHEN THE PRESENTATION'S UP.
I'M HERE TODAY TO ASK THAT YOU RELEASE THE DEMOLITION PERMIT FOR 3009 BOWMAN IN TARRYTOWN, WEST AUSTIN, AS WE WILL DISCUSS STAFF HAS REPORTED THAT THIS SITE MAY MEET TWO CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION THOUGH.
IN STAT'S OWN WORDS, THERE IS A QUESTION OF INTEGRITY AND QUOTE, AS TO WHETHER IT TRULY MEETS ONE OF THOSE DUE TO SIGNIFICANT WORK OVER THE YEARS AND HAS ULTIMATELY CHANGED THE STRUCTURE.
MEANINGFULLY, NEXT SLIDE, IN THIS CASE, STAFF HAS INDICATED THAT THE SITE MAY MEET THE CRITERIA FOR ARCHITECTURE AND FOR HISTORIC ASSOCIATION.
THE HISTORIC ASSOCIATION IN THIS CASE IS REVEREND JOHN BARKLEY, WHO SERVED AS PASTOR FOR CENTRAL CHRISTIAN CHURCH.
WHEN THE THEN SENATOR LYNDON BAINES JOHNSON WAS A CONGREGANT AND WHO SPOKE AT JOHNSON'S INAUGURATION AS VICE-PRESIDENT AND KENNEDY'S FOR PRESIDENT.
THE OTHER LISTED CRITERIA IS ARCHITECTURE.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE STAFF WRITES IN THEIR REPORT THAT THERE IS A QUESTION OF INTEGRITY AS TO WHETHER THIS CASE ACTUALLY MEETS THE ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA.
ONE OF THE REASONS FOR THAT AS STAFF NOTES IS THAT THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT NEW ADDITION THAT QUOTE, DWARFS AND QUOTE THE ORIGINAL PART OF THE HOUSE.
THERE HAVE ALSO BEEN WORKING MODIFICATIONS DONE TO THAT ORIGINAL PART OF THE HOUSE ITSELF WITH NEW WINDOWS AND NEW FRENCH DOORS, ALL DONE PRIOR TO THE CURRENT OWNERS.
THIS EXTENSIVE WORK HAS MEANINGFULLY CHANGED THE WAY THAT SOMEONE WOULD EXPERIENCE THIS STRUCTURE IN EFFECT, THE ORIGINAL HOUSE HAS BEEN MODIFIED IN SUBSUMED INTO A LARGER BUILDING BECAUSE OF ALL THIS WORK STAFF FINDS THAT QUOTE.
IT UNLIKELY THAT REVEREND BARKLEY WOULD RECOGNIZE THE CURRENT BUILDING AS THE HOME THAT HE AND HIS WIFE OCCUPIED.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, TO PUT THAT IN PERSPECTIVE, HERE'S THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT.
AND WHEN YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, YOU CAN SEE THAT MUCH OF THE BUILDING IS NOT PART OF THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE.
OLD, ALL TOLD WE CALCULATE THAT ABOUT 60% OF THE FACADE PARAMETER OF THE CURRENT BUILDING IS NOT ORIGINAL.
YOU CAN SEE HOW THAT PLAYS OUT IN PRACTICE.
IF MR BARK, IF THE REVEREND BARKLEY WERE ALIVE TODAY AND STANDING IN HIS OLD BACKYARD, HE WOULD SEE A STRUCTURE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THAN THE ONE HE WANTS.
THE HISTORIC ASSOCIATION RAISES KEY POLICY QUESTIONS.
REVEREND BARKLEY WAS A LOCAL RELIGIOUS LEADER IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN IN THE FORTIES AND FIFTIES, AND LIKE MANY LOCAL LEADERS OF THE TIME PERIOD.
HE HAD A CONNECTION TO LYNDON JOHNSON.
THE QUESTION TO US IS, DOES THIS CONNECTION WARRANT HISTORIC DESIGNATION? AND IF IT DOES, WHERE DOES THAT TYPE OF DECISION LEAD US? IF CONNECTION LBJ IS A SUFFICIENT CRITERIA FOR HISTORIC ASSOCIATION, SUCH AS A DECISION WHEN APPLIED CONSISTENTLY HAS THE POTENTIAL TO ROPE IN NUMEROUS OTHER WEST AUSTIN PROPERTIES,
[01:10:01]
OFTEN IN AFFLUENT AREAS, AND THE RESULT WOULD BE A POSSIBLE EXPANSION OF LAND USE RESTRICTIONS AND A PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTIONS IN WEST AUSTIN.NEXT SLIDE, THERE ARE ALREADY FIVE HISTORIC LANDMARKS WITHIN JUST HALF A MILE OF THIS PROPERTY, INCLUDING ONE WITH THE LYNDON JOHNSON CONNECTION TO US.
REVEREND BARCLAY'S TRUE LEGACY LIES WITH CENTRAL CHRISTIAN CHURCH.
UH, ONE OF THE OWNERS, HEATHER BOWMAN WILL TALK ABOUT THE FACT THAT LEAD PAINT EXISTS AND THEY'RE CONCERNED WITH THEIR TWO CHILDREN.
THE HISTORIC DESIGNATION CRITERIA WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE FINALLY TO RECAP IS INDICATED AT 3009 MAY MEET TWO CRITERIA FOR HISTORIC DESIGNATION RELATED TO JOHN BARKLEY, REVEREND JOHN BARKLEY.
HOWEVER, THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE HAS UNDERGONE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN STAFF STATES THAT THE CURRENT BUILDING WOULD, WOULD LIKELY BE UNRECOGNIZABLE TO REVEREND BARKLEY.
ULTIMATELY, THE STRUCTURE DOES NOT MEET.
WE THINK THE CRITERIA FOR HISTORIC DESIGNATION, AND WE ASKED THAT THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION RELEASE A DEMOLITION PERMIT.
THANK YOU WITH THE NEXT, WITH THE NEXT SPEAKER.
HI, THIS IS, UH, TEEBO BOWMAN.
UH, ONE OF THE OWNERS OF 3009 BOWMAN.
UM, I'M HERE TO ASK THE SAME THING TO RELEASE THE DEMOLITION PERMIT AND, UH, ALLOW US TO MOVE FORWARD ON OUR PLANS TO BUILD A HOME WHERE OUR FAMILY CAN SAFELY LIVE.
UM, ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS WE NOTICED LOOKING AT THIS PROPERTY AND AT THE TIME THAT WE BOUGHT IT IS THAT A LOT OF WORK HAS BEEN DONE TO THE HOUSE.
UM, THE HOUSE FEATURES A REALLY EXTENSIVE ADDITION HAS COMPLETELY CHANGED THE WAY THAT SOMEONE WOULD EXPERIENCE THE BUILDING.
AND EVEN THE AREA THAT USED TO BE THE ORIGINAL HOUSE HAS BEEN MODIFIED WITH NEW WINDOWS AND FRENCH DOORS.
UM, I MEAN THE STAFF SAYS IT THEMSELVES IN THE REPORT THAT REVEREND BARKLEY, THE MAN WHO'S AT THE CENTER OF THIS CASE, WOULDN'T EVEN RECOGNIZE THIS HOUSE IF HE WERE ALIVE TODAY.
UM, SO THAT'S WHERE THINGS STAND TODAY AND, AND IT'S, IT'S WHERE THINGS STOOD AT THE TIME THAT WE BOUGHT THE HOUSE, UM, GIVEN ALL OF THE WORK AND CHANGES THAT THE HOUSES PRIOR OWNERS HAD DONE OVER THE YEARS HAVE HEATHER.
AND I NEVER REALLY IMAGINED THAT WE MIGHT, LIKE ONE DAY BE ASKED TO, YOU KNOW, ROLL BACK THE CLOCK AND RECREATE A HOUSE THAT DOESN'T REALLY EXIST ANYMORE.
UM, I MEAN, I APPRECIATE THAT THIS COMMISSION HAS A VERY IMPORTANT MISSION AND, AND YOU'LL HAVE A TOUGH WORK.
UM, BUT IN THIS CASE, I JUST THINK THAT THIS WOULDN'T BE HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
IT, IT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, HISTORIC RECREATION.
AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S REALLY THE GOAL.
UM, I DO KNOW THAT REVEREND BARKLEY'S FAMILY OWNED OUR HOUSE UNTIL AUGUST OF 2002.
UM, AND THAT MANY OF THE EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR RENOVATIONS WERE DONE BY THE BARKLEY FAMILY AND WHEN THEY WERE MAKING THOSE CHANGES AND ADDITIONS, WE WRAP THIS UP REAL QUICK, OKAY.
HOUSE THAT THEIR GOAL IS TO HAVE A PLACE TO LIVE.
AND THAT'S JUST WHAT HEATHER AND I ARE TRYING TO DO HAVE A HOME THAT'S SAFE AND OUR OWN.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HEARING US AND WE APPRECIATE THE CONSIDERATION SERVICE ON THE CAR.
WE HAVE MS. HEATHER BOWMAN ALSO THE OWNER ONE MINUTE.
UM, I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT ANOTHER ASPECT OF THE CASE.
THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO US, AND THAT'S THE ABILITY FOR US TO HAVE A HOME THAT'S SAFE AND ENSURES THE HEALTH OF OUR CHILDREN.
UM, WE BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE WE WANTED TO HAVE A PLACE WHERE WE COULD LIVE AND RAISE OUR FAMILY.
AND THAT'S REALLY AT THE HEART OF OUR REQUEST HERE TODAY BECAUSE, UM, WHILE PARTS OF THIS HOUSE HAS STOOD FOR A WHILE, THOSE PARTS HAVE ALSO, UM, ALSO HAVE SOME OF THE PROBLEMS THAT GO ALONG WITH BEING OLDER.
AND ONE OF THE MOST CONCERNING TO ME IS THE LEAD PAINT.
UM, WE HAD AN ENVIRONMENTAL TEST DONE AT THE AREA THAT USED TO BE THE ORIGINAL PART OF THE HOUSE, AND IT CAME BACK CONFIRMING THAT THERE IS LEAD PAINT PRESENT THERE.
AND TO ME, WHEN I'M THINKING ABOUT THE HOUSE THAT I WANT MY FAMILY TO LIVE IN, IT'S ONE THAT'S, THAT'S HEALTHY AND THAT ISN'T COMPROMISED BY THESE SORTS OF PROBLEMS. AND THAT'S OUR GOAL HERE, UM, TO HAVE A PLACE WHERE WE CAN LIVE AND YOUR DECISION HERE TODAY WILL HAVE A VERY BIG IMPACT ON OUR GOALS.
SO, UM, ASK YOU TO PLEASE RELEASE THE DEMOLITION PROMO PERMIT.
IT'S CERTAINLY THE RIGHT DECISION FROM OUR PR PERSPECTIVE, BUT ALSO AS YOU'VE HEARD ALREADY THE RIGHT DECISION IN TERMS OF YOUR OWN CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATING OR NOT PROPERTY, THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
[3.D.5. DA-2021-080264; GF-2021-103631 – 1308 Lavaca St. – Discussion Council District 9 Proposal: Demolish a ca. 1940 building. Applicant: Leah Bojo City Staff: Elizabeth Brummett, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-1264 Staff Recommendation: Consider initiation of historic zoning. Should the Commission instead choose to release the demolition permit, encourage rehabilitation and adaptive reuse, then require completion of a City of Austin Documentation Package prior to release of the permit. (Part 1 of 2)]
IS D 5 13 0 8 LAVACA.[01:15:01]
WE HAVE THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE, MISS LEAH, JO.UM, THIS BO JOKE, PLEASE LIMIT YOUR COMMENTS TO THREE MINUTES OR LESS THAT'S CHAIR.
UM, IF WE COULD QUICKLY MOVE TO SLIDE TWO.
UM, THE SITE IS LOCATED AT SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LAVACA AND FOURTH STREET, WHICH IS AN IMPORTANT TRANSIT CORRIDOR WITH A NEW ORANGE LINE AND BLUE LINE.
SOON TO BE TRAVELING UP LAVACA PAST THE SITE.
WE ARE REQUESTING THIS PERMIT IN ORDER TO CONSTRUCT A RESIDENTIAL HIGH RISE USING THE DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM.
HIS OWN CBD STRUCTURE IS CURRENTLY VACANT AND APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN VACANT VACANT SINCE AROUND THE 1970S.
IT'S ESTIMATED TO BE BUILT, HAVE BEEN BUILT AROUND 1940 THOUGH.
THIS SPECIFIC DATE I BELIEVE HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED SIDE.
PLEASE, YOU CAN SEE HERE ON SLIDE FOUR, THE CURRENT STATE OF THE STRUCTURE, YOU CAN ALSO SPECIFICALLY SEE THAT THE PUMPS ARE GONE AS WELL AS WHAT LOOKS LIKE WHAT'S MAYBE WAS THE SIGNPOST NO LONGER HAS IT SIGNED, UM, SIDE FIVE ISN'T IS JUST ANOTHER VIEW OF THAT, OF THE SITE.
UM, SLIDE SIX, OBVIOUSLY, AS WE ALL KNOW, UM, IN ADDITION TO BEING 50 YEARS OF AGE AND RETAINING A HIGH DEGREE OF INTEGRITY AS REQUIREMENTS, UM, THE SENATE, THE STRUCTURE MUST MEET TO THE REQUIRED CRITERIA.
STAFF IS RECOMMEND RECOMMENDING IT BASED ON ARCHITECTURE AND HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS, WHICH WE DO NOT AGREE WITH.
UH, ON SLIDE SEVEN, YOU CAN SEE THAT, UM, WHILE THE SERVICE STATIONS MID-CENTURY ARCHITECTURE IS A DISTINCTIVE DESIGN ASSOCIATED WITH MAGNOLIA AND MOBILE GAS STATIONS, UM, WITH THE PUMPS AND SIGNAGE THAT WERE ASSOCIATED WITH IT AS A MAJOR COMPONENT OF IDENTIFICATION, UM, MISSING THE HISTORICAL STRUCTURE, UH, IS NOT COMPLETELY IN KEEPING WITH THIS CRITERIA ON SLIDE EIGHT, YOU CAN SEE SOME EXAMPLES FROM THE FIELD GUIDE TO TEXAS GAS STATIONS SHOWING THAT THE MAGNOLIA AND MOBILE STATIONS GENERALLY DID HAVE VERY SPECIFIC SIGNAGE DUE TO THE NEED TO DIFFERENTIATE THEM FROM COMPETING BRANDS.
AND ALSO I WOULD IMAGINE TO BE IDENTIFIED FROM A MOVING CAR, WHICH YOU CAN SEE FROM THESE EXAMPLES THAT THE PUMPS AND THE SIGNS ARE IMPORTANT FEATURES.
AND WITHOUT THOSE TWO FEATURES, THIS PARTICULAR STRUCTURE IS REALLY JUST THE MID CENTURY, A ONE STORY COMMERCIAL BUILDING.
UM, ADDITIONALLY, UH, BASED ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY STAFF PROPERTY REALLY DOES NOT HAVE THE REQUIRED HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION AS IT'S NOT ASSOCIATED WITH A SPECIFIC PERSON GROUP EVENT OR ANY KIND OF LOCAL SIGNIFICANCE.
THERE'S REALLY NOTHING ABOUT THE LOCATION, ITS OWNERS OR THE CULTURAL PRACTICE OF PUTTING GAS IN YOUR CAR IN THE FIFTIES THAT DIFFERENTIATES THIS SITE.
UM, THERE'S NOT A REFERENCE TO A DEFINABLE GROUP OF PEOPLE.
UM, STAFF HAS DONE THEIR RESEARCH AND THERE'S JUST REALLY NOTHING EXCEPTIONAL ABOUT THIS STRUCTURE.
IS THERE ANOTHER SPEAKER? NO, THERE ARE NO MORE SPEAKERS.
[3.D.9. PR-2021-087495 – 812 W. 12th St. – Possible discussion postponement Council District 9 Proposal: Demolish a ca. 1946 commercial building. Applicant: Jordan Poe City Staff: Steve Sadowsky, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-6454 Staff Recommendation: Postpone to August 23, 2021. (Part 1 of 2)]
IS D NINE.THAT'S THE ONE WITH THE 70, UH, REGISTERED SPEAKERS.
I WOULD LIKE TO SAY BEFORE WE START, THERE ARE TWO SPEAKERS IN FAVOR.
THE REST OF THE 68 ARE IN OPPOSITION.
UM, SO YEAH, WE WILL START WITH, UH, WHO WE HEARD FROM BEFORE MR. NEIL VICKERS, UM, FROM ACC, UH, THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
THE NEXT SPEAKER IN FAVOR WILL HAVE ONE MINUTE AND OPPOSITION.
UM, IF YOU HAVE A MAIN SPEAKER, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES OTHER PEOPLE, I URGE YOU TO STATE YOUR NAME AND JUST SAY THAT YOU OPPOSE IT, UH, MAYBE GIVE A BRIEF REASON WHY STANDARD ONE MINUTE AT THE VERY LEAST.
SO THANK YOU AGAIN FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.
UH, WE ACTUALLY, UH, UM, UH, THE COLLEGE HAS PROVIDED YOU A WRITTEN VERSION OF OUR STATEMENT, SO I WILL JUST SUMMARIZE, UM, FOR THE SAKE OF TIME.
UM, SO, UH, YOU KNOW, AS FELLOW STEWARDS OF, OF COMMUNITY ASSETS, YOU KNOW, ACC, YOU KNOW, HAS ROUTINELY ACTED TO PRESERVE AUSTIN'S HERITAGE.
SO WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT, THAT, THAT THAT'S CLEAR THAT WE'RE, WE'RE KIND OF IN THAT SAME PUBLIC MISSION OF, OF, UH, YOU KNOW, SERVING THE COMMUNITY.
I MEAN, OF COURSE WE HAVE EXAMPLES OF THAT ON THAT VERY SITE, WHICH ARE RECENT, A $80 MILLION RENOVATION OF THE, UH, HISTORIC, UM, AUSTIN HIGH SCHOOL.
UM, AND, UH, IT WAS NOT A HISTORIC, BUT WE CHOSE TO TREAT IT AS SUCH, UH, THE, UH, THE HIGH SCHOOL GYMNASIUM, WHICH IS ALSO ON THAT SITE, WHICH WE INVESTED $15 MILLION IN A LITTLE OVER 10 YEARS AGO.
UM, SO WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE VERY MUCH SUPPORTIVE OF, OF TRYING TO KIND OF MAINTAIN, YOU KNOW, THE LEGACY OF BOSTON IN, IN ANY WAY WE CAN, UM, AS FOR THIS PARTICULAR, THAT, UH, ITEM THOUGH, UH, THIS BUILDING IS NOT CONDUCIVE TO A MODERN EDUCATIONAL, UM, FACILITY.
[01:20:01]
UM, WE KNEW THAT WHEN WE BOUGHT IT AND THEREFORE IT WAS ABSOLUTELY OUR INTENT AND WE PURCHASED THIS IN 2009, WAS THAT IT WOULD ULTIMATELY NEED TO BE, UH, DEMOED, UM, IN ORDER TO, UM, SUPPORT FUTURE GROWTH OF OUR CAMPUS.UH, AND LOOKING, LOOKING AT THIS REPORT, UH, THE STAFF THAT DOES NOT IDENTIFY ANY HISTORIC PRESERVATION CRITERIA THAT APPLY OTHER THAN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE OF A COMMERCIAL BUILDING.
UM, BUT TO POINT OUT, EVEN IN THE REPORT, IT RECOGNIZES THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS REFERENCING IS ACTUALLY NOT THERE ANYMORE, UM, THAT, THAT NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE IT MAY HAVE FIT AT ONE POINT, UM, THAT'S NOT THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, GIVEN, UH, OBVIOUSLY IN OUR OPINION THAT THERE IS A LIMITED HISTORICAL VALUE OF THE BUILDING, UH, YOU KNOW, ACC FIELDS IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF COLLEGE AND THE COMMUNITY, UH, THAT THIS, UH, BUILDING B DEMO TO PAVE THE WAY FOR FUTURE EXPANSION OF, OF THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE CAMPUS ON THAT SITE.
AND THEREFORE WE REQUEST THE COMMISSION TO VOTE, TO APPROVE THIS PERMIT OF GOING FORWARD.
I'VE ALSO JUST, UM, UM, LIKE, OR FEEL THE NEED, I GUESS, TO POINT OUT ASSUMING THAT MANY OF THE OTHER SPEAKERS ARE HERE REALLY TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE TENANT, AS OPPOSED TO THE HISTORICAL NATURE OF THE BUILDING.
UM, I KNOW THE COMMISSION KNOWS THIS, BUT I JUST FEEL THE NEED TO SAY IT OUT LOUD THAT THOSE ARE REALLY TWO SEPARATE ISSUES.
UM, THE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE TENANT THAT CURRENTLY OCCUPIES THAT, AND, YOU KNOW, FOR, FOR HOW LONG THEY CONTINUE TO OCCUPY THAT IT'S REALLY AN ISSUE SEPARATE AND APART FROM THE HISTORIC NATURE OF THAT FACILITY.
AND I, SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT I KNOW, YOU KNOW, THAT WE NEED TO MOVE ON, PLEASE.
UM, WE UNDERSTAND THAT, UH, AND WE'LL MAKE THAT CLEAR IN OUR DELIBERATIONS AS WELL.
I APPRECIATE THE TIME TO SAY THAT WHERE THE RESIDENTIAL, UM, AREA MIGHT BE GONE.
THERE IS A COMMUNITY OF PEOPLE WHO, WHO DO FREQUENT THIS BUILDING AND IT'S PART OF THEIR COMMUNITY.
SO, UM, GOING ON TO THE NEXT SPEAKER, THE NEXT SPEAKER AND LAST SPEAKER, UH, WHO ARE IN FAVOR, UH, IS MR. MARK VAUGHN, MR. VAUGHN, YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE.
HI, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
UM, I'M IN FAVOR OF THE DEMOLITION AND I MOVED TO AUSTIN IN 2000 AND SHORTLY THEREAFTER BEGAN ATTENDING AUSTIN COMMUNITY COLLEGE, RIO GRANDE CAMPUS.
UM, I HAD A WONDERFUL EXPERIENCE THERE.
I LOVE THE AREA, AND I KNOW THAT THE CAMPUS ITSELF PROVIDES TREMENDOUS COMMUNITY VALUE FOR, FOR THAT AREA.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE DEMOLITION IS, UH, FOR THE PURPOSE OF A PARKING EXPANSION AND IT SEEMS NEEDED IN THIS CASE BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF OVERFLOW PARKING IN THAT AREA.
IT SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD, UH, IMPROVE THE COMMUNITY TO HAVE ADDITIONAL PARKING FOR STAFF AND FACULTY.
THANK YOU NOW, UM, WITH THOSE COMING UP TO SPEAK, UM, I WOULD LIKE TO DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT, UM, THAT WAS PRESENTED, THAT THE BUSY-NESS IS SEPARATE FROM THE BUILDING, WHAT OUR, UM, WHAT OUR MISSION IS OR WHAT OUR CHARGE IS, IS TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE BUILDING ITSELF, UH, MEETS CRITERIA FOR LANDMARK STATUS.
UM, SO WITH THAT, UM, DO WE HAVE THE FIRST SPEAKER WHO MAY HAVE THREE MINUTES? THE FIRST SPEAKER WE HAVE REGISTERED AS THE SHOP TENANT? MR. ELIAS BINGHAM, SIR.
HI, UH, MY NAME IS ELIAS AND I AM THE FOUNDER OF NO COMPLIANCE STATE SHOP.
UM, THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME.
UM, YEAH, I TH THE MAIN THING I WANT TO, YOU KNOW, I KNOW THIS HEARING IS MAINLY REGARDING THE HISTORICAL RELEVANCE OF THE PHYSICAL BUILDING AT EIGHT, 12 SOLID STREET, BUT OF THE 45 PLUS YEARS.
UM, AND POST-WORLD WAR ARCHITECT DESIGN THAT IS, IS, YOU KNOW, IT'S ALL IS SIGNIFICANT AND ERA, AND IS ALMOST LOST TO, AS WAS JUST STATED THAT THAT DESIGN IS COMPLETELY DAWNED FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND, UM, SO IF THIS HAS GONE, I GUESS IT WILL ACTUALLY BE COMPLETELY GONE, BUT WHAT I'M, I AM, YOU ARE THE EXPERTS ON THAT.
AND, UM, BUT WHAT I'M ALSO ASKING YOU, WHAT HAS BEEN BUILT AROUND THIS BUILDING IN THE LAST 14 YEARS IS CONSIDERED AS IT IS OF GREAT SIGNIFICANCE TO THE AUSTIN COMMUNITY.
AND BEYOND THAT, THE HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS SPACE DRAWING THAT
[01:25:01]
THE SPACE HAVE GONE IN THE PAST 14 YEARS HAS HAD A HUGE IMPACT ON THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND WHAT IT MEANS AS A COMMUNITY.AND, AND IT, AS IT IS A PLATFORM THAT REPRESENTS AUSTIN ON A GLOBAL SCALE, BUT I'M HOPING THIS HEARING IT, I'M HOPING THIS HEARING IS FOR THE CITY OF AUSTIN FOR THIS HEARING.
SO THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND AUSTIN COLLEGE TO TAKE NOTICE THAT NO COMPLIANT SKATE SHOP EXISTS, NOT JUST AS A SMALL BUSINESS, BUT AS A COMMUNITY MEMBER AND A PLATFORM OF OFF OF IMPORT AUSTIN, IF THIS HISTORICAL DESIGNATION IS NOT APPLIES, I ASKED THAT THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS NOT ISSUED FOR A SPECIFIC AMOUNT OF TIME.
THAT IS REALISTIC IN THIS REAL ESTATE CLIMATE TO FIND ANOTHER LOCATION IN AUSTIN, FOR US TO CONTINUE OUR SERVICE TO OUR, IN YOUR COMMUNITY.
UM, NEXT SPEAKER, NEXT WE HAVE MR. JOA, UH, SPEARMAN.
HELLO, THANK YOU, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.
MY NAME IS SHEILA SPEARMAN AND I AM IN OPPOSITION TO THE DEMOLITION PERMIT.
UM, I LIVE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD AND I, IT'S NOT JUST IN SUPPORT OF THAT BUSINESS, BUT IN, ON THE HISTORIC FRONT, I REALLY THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE NOTE THE FACT THAT MR VICKERS SHARED, UM, THAT UPON PURCHASE OF THIS PROPERTY, THEY WERE ALREADY THINKING OF DEMOLITION.
UM, AND YET THE, THE CURRENT TENANT WHO'S BEEN IN THERE FOR LONGER THAN THEIR OWNERSHIP, THEY WERE NOT INFORMED OF THIS PLAN.
AND AT NO POINT WHERE WE'RE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE MADE AWARE OF THIS PLAN.
AND SO WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THESE SORTS OF SIGNIFICANCE, UM, TO ME, WHETHER, UH, THE CURRENT TENANT OR ANY OTHER TENANT FROM IT COULD HAVE BEEN A SAME TENANT FOR THE LAST 50 YEARS, THAT BEHAVIOR ALONE, UM, SPEAKS TO A LACK OF TRUST IN THE COMMUNITY AND, AND WILLINGNESS TO BE A, A, A WILLING PARTNER IN PROTECTING THE, THE HISTORIC NATURE OF THAT SPACE.
UM, AND SO THAT'S WHY I, IN OPPOSITION OF THIS, WE MUST MOVE ON.
THE NEXT SPEAKER IS MR. MICHAEL SIMON, GO AHEAD.
UM, MY NAME IS MICHAEL STEVEN I'M, UH, IN OPPOSITION OF DEMOLITION.
I'M THE MANAGING EDITOR OF THRASHER SKATEBOARDING MAGAZINE.
I LIVE HERE IN AUSTIN, BUT I'VE TRAVELED ACROSS THE WORLD, DOCUMENTING SKATEBOARDING COMMUNITIES, AND THE HEALTHIEST COMMUNITIES ALL HAVE ONE THING IN COMMON, WHICH IS A CENTRAL SKATE SHOP WHERE THE YOUTH CAN CONGREGATE.
I THINK, UH, I THINK WE'D BE SENDING A VERY BLEAK MESSAGE TO OUR KIDS IF WE DEMOLISH THIS PROPERTY, UM, IN THE AGE OF SMARTPHONES AND DIGITAL MEDIA, NO COMPLIANCE, SOMETHING TANGIBLE FOR OUR YOUTH, THE PHYSICAL SPACE WHERE THE KIDS CAN MEET UP IN PERSON AND SHARE REAL LIFE EXPERIENCES.
AND I THINK THAT'S INVALUABLE.
THANKS NEXT WE HAVE MR. MARK JACKSON.
UM, I AM IN OPPOSITION OF THE DEMOLITION PERMIT.
I'M THE CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER AT THE CENTRAL TEXAS FOOD BANK.
AND I JUST WANTED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, UM, I THINK THIS BUILDING AND THIS, UH, COMPANY NO COMPLY ARE INTEGRAL TO THE COMMUNITY IN MANY WAYS.
ONE OF WHICH IS HOW, UH, THEY STEPPED UP AND IN LIGHT OF WHAT THE FOOD BANK WAS SEEING WITH THE PANDEMIC WE HAD UNPRECEDENTED NEED AND, UH, ALIVE FROM THE TEAM, UH, RALLIED THEIR COMMUNITY AND RAISED $200,000 TO SUPPORT, UH, PEOPLE WHO ARE FACING HUNGER AND MAKE AUSTIN A BETTER PLACE TO CALL HOME.
NEXT, WE HAVE MR. TOM GIMBEL MR. GAMBLE.
NEXT, WE HAVE MS. HOLLY HODGE.
NEXT WE HAVE MR. UH, BAKARI ENGLISH.
WE HAVE MR. AARON KELLER, MR. ALEJANDRO CASTRO.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO SAY I'VE BEEN A LONG TIME SKATEBOARDER OF 14 YEARS.
I'VE ALSO BEEN A STUDENT AT BOTH THE ACC RIO GRANDE CAMPUS, AS WELL AS THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN.
UM, I AM DEFINITELY IN OPPOSITION OF HAVING THIS BUILDING BUILDING TOWARD DOWN.
UM, JUST KIND OF GIVE YOU A BACKGROUND OF OUR CULTURE.
[01:30:01]
SHARE A VERY TIGHT KNIT COMO CULTURE.THAT IS A GOOD COMMUNITY THAT CIRCLES AROUND ATHLETIC TALENT PROGRESSION BROTHERHOOD, AS WELL AS THE CAPITALISTIC BUSINESS ASPECT OF WESTERN LIVING.
ALL OF THESE IDEAS KIND OF FLOW TOGETHER TO CREATE THE SKATEBOARDING CULTURE, WHICH HELPS CONTRIBUTE TO THOSE WHO DON'T SHARE THE SAME INTERESTS AS SPORTS.
THEY INCLUDE A SPORTS WALL, UM, AS WELL AS OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY WHO ALSO PREFER SKATEBOARDING AS A MODE OF TRANSPORTATION.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT NO COMPLIES LOCATION IS ALREADY A MIRACLE TO CURRENT SKATEBOARDERS, AS WELL AS THE USE OF SKATEBOARD PARK IS DEFINITELY A PLACE THAT'S A VERY UNDERSTANDABLE AND LIKELY PLACE FOR SOMEBODY TO BREAK THE SKATEBOARD PARKS.
UM, THE ABILITY TO HAVE IT JUST LITERALLY RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER REALLY DOES HELP, NOT ONLY THE KIDS, BUT AS WELL AS THE EXPERIENCED ATHLETES.
UM, THIS IS DEFINITELY A BLESSING TO ALL OF US IN MY EYES.
I WOULD NOT VIEW OF REPAIRING A VEHICLE AND TAKING IT TO A DEALERSHIP, HAVING TO GET IT TOWED ALL THE WAY.
UM, WELL LAST THING, JUST TO WRAP IT UP THEN, UM, I WOULD DEFINITELY SAY THAT THIS CENTER AND CENTRAL PLEX HAS HELPED NOT ONLY JUST THE AUSTIN COMMUNITY, BUT IT KEEPS A LOT OF OTHER BIG BRANDS COMING BACK BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT KEEPS AUSTIN WEIRD IS THAT THEIR STATE PARK IS A LITERALLY RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER FROM THE SKATE SHOP AND IT SHOULD NOT BE MOVING.
WE HAVE MS. ALICE WALTON AS WALTON.
NEXT WE HAVE MISS AMBER PERLEY AMBER NEXT, MR. BENJAMIN MCBRIDE.
MR. MCBRIDE NEXT, MR. BOBBY GASCON, BOBBY NEXT, MR. BRANDON RIVERA, MR. RIVERA NEXT, MR. BRENT COOPS, MR. COOPER.
UM, MY NAME IS BRENT THOMPSON.
I'M AN OPPOSITION OF THE, UH, THE DESTRUCTION OF THIS PROPERTY.
UM, MY BACKGROUND IS I WORKED FOR A COMPANY CALLED FULL TECHNOLOGY INCORPORATED.
WE FELT SKATE SHOES TOO, AND I'VE TRAVELED ALL OVER THE WORLD.
AND AS FAR AS SKATE SHOPS ARE CONCERNED EXACTLY LIKE MR. SIMON SAID THEY ARE AN OUTPOST FOR NOT ONLY SKATEBOARDING IN THE COMMUNITY, BUT FOR SKATEBOARDING ALL OVER THE WORLD.
SO FOR ME, DESTROYING THE SKATE SHOP WOULD BE A DETRIMENT TO SKATEBOARDING ALL OVER THE WORLD, AND I KEEP THEM MUCH OUR NEXT SPEAKER, MR. CARSON, UH, GUSTAFSON MR. THIS, I AM ON THE LINE NEXT, MR. CHIMU CHOI, MR. DRIVE I ONE MINUTE.
TO PUT IT ON RECORD THAT I AM IN OPPOSITION, BUT DIDN'T DEMOLITION OF THE BUILDING.
AND I THINK THIS IS, UH, COMING FROM RESPECTIVE, UH, A TAXPAYER, A COMMUNITY MEMBER, UH, ALSO A STUDENT, A FORMER STUDENT OF ACC, UH, VO GRANT RIGHT THERE.
UM, I BELIEVE THAT BUILDING CAN BE MARKED AS A HISTORICAL LANDMARK AND JUST HIDE THE HOUSING PARK.
I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GREAT IDEA.
I THINK, UH, ATC INSTEAD OF BUILDING A HUGE, UH, GARAGE COMPLEX, UM, WHICH WOULD ENCOURAGE MORE CARS AND ENCOURAGE MORE DRIVING ON, YOU KNOW, UH, SMALL ROADS, UH, ENCOURAGE, YOU KNOW, ISOLATING AND SKATEBOARDING AND, YOU KNOW, WALKING INTO SCHOOL.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE'S LIKE A, YOU KNOW, PARKING OVERFLOW, I THINK AS A STUDENT, UM, I SEEM TO, IS THAT THE REASON WHY, UM, A LOT OF STUDENTS PARK ON THE STREET IS BECAUSE THEY JUST DON'T WANT TO PAY FOR THE PARKING PERMIT THAT DAY CC WOUND DOESN'T REQUIRE IS OPTIONAL, BUT IT ALSO COST.
SO ANYWAYS, UM, HI, IT'S A HEALTH PART, MAKE IT A LANDMARK AND THEN MOVE FORWARD.
[01:35:02]
OKAY.NEXT SPEAKER, MR. CHRISTOPHER.
NEXT, MR. DAVID LANGSTON, SIR.
NEXT WE HAVE, UH, MR. DAVID, UH, PALACIOS.
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, UH, TO, UH, THE PERMIT TO DEMOLISH NO COMPLAINTS, HATE SHOP.
I LOVE, I LOVE THE POINTS THAT EVERYBODY HAS BROUGHT UP BOTH AROUND THE BUILDINGS THEMSELVES.
I ALSO LOVE THE IDEA TO TIE IT TO HOUSE AND PROCEED THAT WAY.
I THINK ANOTHER THING ABOUT THE COMMUNITY AROUND NO COMPLY IS THAT WE'VE ALSO DONE A LOT TO SUPPORT LOCAL ARTISTS, ORGANIZING ART SHOWS, CONCERTS, FILM SCREENINGS, GIVING LOCAL ARTISTS, MARK COMMUNITY, THE CHANCE TO GET INVOLVED, HAVE A PLATFORM AND PROMOTE THAT.
AND I REALLY THINK OF DEMOLISHING THE SHOP RIGHT HERE AND ITS CENTRAL LOCATION WILL BE DETRIMENTAL TO THAT COMMUNITY.
AND I REALLY THINK THAT IF WE DEMOLISH THIS AND IT'S CURRENT, IT'S A PIECE OF AUSTIN'S UNIQUE CULTURE AND SOUL WILL BE DEMOLISHED WITH IT.
WE HAVE, UH, MS. DEBRA ANTI-IGE MS. SANTOS, ONE MINUTE.
MA'AM UH, THANK YOU ALL FOR TAKING THE TIME TO LISTEN.
UM, I AM TRAINING IN AS A PARENT, A FORMER SKATEBOARDER AND SOMEONE THAT HAS WORKED IN A SKATE SHOP.
UM, I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT.
AND I ALSO WANTED TO MENTION, UM, MR. VICKERS, UH, PUT A PICTURE IN HIS PROPOSAL.
IF YOU GO OUT THE FRONT DOOR OF NO COMPLIANCE SKATE SHOP AND RIGHT DOWN THE STREET AND RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER, THAT'S WHERE HOUSE PARK, HIS HOUSE, HOUSE PARKS, SKATE PARK, EVEN TO PUT A BUSINESS ACROSS THE STREET WOULD CREATE A SAFETY ISSUE.
HOW NO COMPLY IS IMPERFECT PROXIMITY TO THE SKATE PARK.
UM, IT'S NOT JUST A BUSINESS, IT'S A PLACE.
AND AS SOMEONE THAT HAS WORKED IN A SHOP, THERE ARE SO FEW LOCAL SHOPS STILL AROUND ALL OVER THE COUNTRY.
AND JUST TO HAVE A KID COME IN AND HAVE THEIR VERY FIRST FOOD BUILT RIGHT IN FRONT OF THEM, BY SOMEONE THAT THEY WATCH SKATE AT THE PARK BY SOMEONE THAT THEY, BY SOMEONE THAT THEY SEE AS AN EXPERT THAT SAYS, YES, GET OUT THERE, DO IT AGAIN, FAIL, TRY AGAIN UNTIL THEY MAKE IT.
WE MUST MOVE ON AROUND SKATEBOARDING.
I AM OPPOSED TO THE DEMOLITION OF NO COMPLY SKATE SHOP.
UH, I WOULD ALSO BE AN OPPOSITION TO A DUMB EVOLUTION OF THE GATE SHOP BUILDING, UH, AND TIE IT TO HOW SPARK, BUT ALSO INSTEAD OF WASTING A LOT OF MONEY ON PARKING GARAGES, IT WOULD BE BEST IF THEY WOULD INVEST IN HELPING THEIR STUDENTS NOT GET COVID IN CLASS, THAT WOULD BE A BETTER USE OF MONEY.
WE HAVE A MR. DYLAN JONES IS GOOD.
UH, MY NAME IS DARREN JONES AND I'M SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OF THE DEMOLITION OF EIGHT, 12 WEST 12TH STREET.
AND I BELIEVE THE DEMOLITION OF THIS BUILDING NOT ONLY WILL CHANGE THE LANDSCAPE AND THE HISTORICAL VALUE OF THIS STREET.
I ALSO BELIEVE THAT IT WILL CREATE A LARGE SAFETY HAZARD WITHIN THE COMMUNITY, MUCH AS MANY OTHER COMMUNITY MEMBERS HAVE MENTIONED WITH CHILDREN CROSSING THE STREET, EVEN IF THE SKATE SHOP WERE ON THE OPPOSING SIDE OVER THE LAST PROBABLY THREE YEARS, AS ACC HAS CURRENTLY BEEN DOING CONSTRUCTION ON THEIR CAMPUS, WE HAVE WATCHED NUMEROUS CONSTRUCTION WORKERS, EMPLOYEES, AND STAFF TAKE A LEFT TURN OUT OF THAT GARAGE AND COLLIDE WITH MULTIPLE PEDESTRIANS.
THREE OF WHICH HAVE BEEN INJURED BY CREATING A PARKING STRUCTURE AND PARKING LOT WHERE EIGHT 12 IS CURRENTLY LOCATED.
YOU'RE CREATING THAT TENFOLD, ESPECIALLY WITH AN INCREASED AMOUNT OF YOUTHS, PERFORMING SKATEBOARDING, BMX, AND OTHER EXTREME SPORTS.
[01:40:01]
THE OLYMPICS HAS INTRODUCED, INTRODUCED THE SKATEBOARDING AS AN OLYMPIC SPORT.MEANING THE NUMBERS WILL GROW AT AN ALARMING RATE AFTER THIS COMING WEEKEND, BY DESTROYING NO COMPLIANCE AROUND THE CORNER FROM YOU WILL BE DESTROYING MANY CHILDREN'S DREAMS AND HOPES AND CREATING A SAFETY HAZARD FOR ALL THOSE YOUTH.
NEXT WE HAVE MISS EMILY SH UM, SCHECKS NADIR, EMILY NEXT.
GRUNBERG MR. GROUNDER NEXT, MR. ERIC JOYCE, MR. JOYCE, MR. JOYCE, IS THAT? YEAH, MY NAME'S ERIC JONES.
I'D LIKE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION OF THE DEMOLITION OF H 12 WHAT'S 12 THREE.
I BELIEVE THAT THE BUILDING REPRESENTS AN IMPORTANT EXAMPLE OF, UM, LOW RISE COMMERCIAL IN A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S BEING RAPIDLY, UM, DEVELOPED.
AND WE NEED TO PRESERVE THAT AT THIS TIME.
WE HAVE A MISS EVANGELINA PENA, MS. PAINTER, MS. SHARON FLEMING.
UH, MS. PAINTER, ARE YOU ON THE LINE? NO.
UM, SHERIDAN FLEMING, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
MY NAME IS SHARON PLUMBING AND I OPPOSE THE DEMOLITION OF THIS PROPERTY.
SEVERAL OF YOU ARE AWARE OF MY BACKGROUND AS A PRESERVATION ARCHITECT AND THE FORMER DIRECTOR OF THE DIVISION OF ARCHITECTURE, THE TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION.
I WANT TO SPEAK SPECIFICALLY TO THE LANDMARK DESIGNATION CRITERIA FOR ARCHITECTURE AND ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE.
UM, I BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPERTY IS AN EXCELLENT EXAMPLE AND DOES MEET THE CRITERIA FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE COMMERCIAL BUILDING, UH, ONE OF VERY FEW IN THE AREA AND ONE THAT RETAINS ALL OF THE COMPONENTS THAT WE WOULD EXPECT TO SEE IN THIS TYPE OF BUILDING THE ALUMINUM FRAMES PLATE, GLASS, STOREFRONT WINDOWS, THE WOOD DOORS, THE CONTINUOUS CORRUGATED METAL CANOPY, THE BRICK, THE BLACK CERAMIC TILE WASTE, WAYNE SCOTT, ALL OF THESE EXTERIOR MATERIALS AND HISTORIC FABRIC REMAIN ARE AN EXCELLENT CONDITION.
UM, SO AGAIN, I, I CONTEND THAT THIS DOES MEET THE CRITERIA AND EXAMPLE OF, UM, OF NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE.
I'D ALSO LIKE TO ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONSIDER, UM, THE CONCEPT OF COMMUNITY VALUE IS ONE THAT IS CONTINUOUS.
WE NEED TO GO ONTO THE NEXT SPEAKER, BUT WE'LL CONSIDER COMMUNITY VALUE.
WE HAVE MR. GAVIN CHIN, MR. CHEN.
NEXT, MR. GILBERT TREVINO TREVINO.
MR. TRIVINIA NEXT, MR. GREG GOODMAN, MR. GOODMAN NEXT, MR. GRIFFIN SMITH.
I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE TWO MINUTES AWAY FROM ONE OF THE MISSING SPEAKERS AND HAVE DIVISIONALLY PROVIDED THREE MINUTES.
I'VE SPENT MANY HOURS WRITING THIS PETITION.
UM, MS. RAMIREZ, W UH, WE ARE NOT, WE DO NOT DO THAT AS PART OF OUR, OUR REGULAR BUSINESS.
SO I'M, I'M SORRY THAT YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE.
AND I OPPOSE THE DEMOLITION OF 8 1 2 WEST 12TH STREET.
I'M CURRENTLY AN ACC EMPLOYEE, AND I CAN CONFIDENTLY SAY THAT IF A SKATER'S PURSUING A HIGHER EDUCATION, THEY'RE OFTEN FUNDING IT THEMSELVES.
WHAT DO UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY ACC HAS FOR RECRUITMENT EFFORTS OF THIS GROWING COMMUNITY? IF NO COMPLAINT STATES THE ONLY THING TAKING HOME METALS RANGE FROM 13 TO 20, 27 YEARS OLD APCS DEMOGRAPHIC, I FIRMLY BELIEVE IT'S 8 1 2 WEST 12TH STREET COULD BE A HISTORICALLY PRESERVED PROPERTY THAT ALLOWS NO COMPLY TO CONTINUE OPERATING AS IT ACC BUSINESS STUDENTS TO THE LOCAL COMMUNITY AND OTHER BUSINESSES HAVE A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN HOW TO OPERATE A SUCCESSFUL BUSINESS.
LIKE NO COMPLAINTS, NO COMPLAINTS, EFFORT.
[01:45:01]
TO MAKE SKATEBOARDING INCLUSIVE.LIKE ACC WORKS TO BE INCLUSIVE OF AUSTIN PEOPLE, CENTRAL TEXAS PEOPLE, UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES AND BUSINESSES.
IT WOULD, WOULD'VE MADE A LARGE POSITIVE IMPACT IN MY LIFE.
AS YOU USED TO HAVE AN ADULT FEMALE PUTTING TOGETHER MY FIRST DATE, OR LIKE NO COMPLIANT OFFERS SHOPPERS AS AN EMPLOYEE OF ACC.
I AM FULLY UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT FUTURE OF EDUCATION IS CHANGING THE ONLINE EDUCATION AND HYBRID THIS PROPERTY SPECIFICALLY FOR AN ALREADY BUSY PARKING GARAGE FOR A CAMPUS THAT IS NOT EVEN CURRENTLY OPEN IS SHOCKING.
AND I WOULD SUGGEST THE PORT BUSINESS.
I ALSO DON'T UNDERSTAND THE PUSH FOR A LARGER PARKING LOT, 7 BILLION BILLION DOLLAR TRANSIT EXPANSION PLAN AS ACC IS ALSO PARTNERED WITH CAP METRO AND PUSHING GREEN PASSES TO STUDENTS TO GET VEHICLES OFF THE ROAD.
THANK YOU, MS. RAMIREZ, NEXT SPEAKER.
WE HAVE MR. JARED AMARIN JARED.
UH, THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR, UH, HEARING OUR COMMUNITY TONIGHT AS AN AUSTIN CITIZEN AND A FORMER ACU STUDENT MYSELF.
I AM IN STRONG OPPOSITION TO THE DEMOLITION OF 8 1 2 WEST CHARLES STREET DUE TO BOTH THE HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL RELEVANCE OF NOT ONLY THE BUILDING ITSELF, BUT THE BUSINESS THAT OCCUPIES IT.
THESE ARE BOTH BRIDGES BETWEEN WHAT AUSTIN WAS AND WHAT AUSTIN IS BECAUSE BECOMING, AND IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY IMPORTANT TO PRESERVE THE INTEGRITY OF OUR CITY AND THE CULTURE THAT SUPPORTS IT TO DEMOLISH THE BUILDING OF 8 1 2 WEST CHARLOTTE STREET IS THE LOCAL BUSINESS THAT IS VITAL TO A BROAD AND BELOVED COMMUNITY THROUGHOUT AUSTIN.
AND IT WOULD CUT DEEP INTO A NECESSARY AND THRIVING LOCAL ECONOMY.
I ASKED THE COUNCIL MEMBERS TO PLEASE OPPOSE THE DEMOLITION OF 8 1 2, OR POSTPONE INTO A LATER DATE.
UM, I AM A UT AUSTIN GRADUATE AND THE MASTER'S PROGRAM WITH LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE.
UM, I AM A STRONG SUPPORTER OF, UH, THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE, UH, AND TO QUOTE MR. VICKERS, UH, ACC GOAL TO MAINTAIN LEGACY OF AUSTIN IN ANY WAY POSSIBLE.
UM, LOOKING AT THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT AND DESIGNATION, UM, IN SEARCH OF THAT, THERE ARE A FEW THINGS, UM, DOES THE PROPERTY, UH, OFFER PRIZE AND APPRECIATION OF THE CHARACTER OF THE COMMUNITY? IS IT STEWARDS OF HISTORY? DOES IT HELP TO PRESERVE THE CHARACTER AND QUALITY OF THE COMMUNITY OVER TIME? AND SO I ASKED THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER WHAT IS THE FUTURE VALUE OF A BUSINESS, LIKE NO COMPLY AT THIS LOCATION.
WE HAVE MS. UH, JAYDA MENDOZA.
NEXT WE HAVE A MR. JAMES JUNIUS, MR. JULIUS.
NEXT WE HAVE A MR. JASON MURPH.
NEXT WE HAVE A MR. JEFF SMITH, MR. SMITH.
NEXT WE HAVE MR. JEFFREY POSADA.
NEXT WE HAVE A MR. BRETT JOHNSTON.
MY NAME IS BRAD JOHNSON, AND I STAND IN OPPOSITION WHILE IT'S TRUE THAT THE BUILDING AND THE TENANT ARE DIFFERENT ISSUES.
THE HISTORICAL IMPACT ON THE COMMUNITY IS ONE IN THE SAME.
AND WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, IT IS ETHICALLY QUESTIONABLE NOT TO AFFORD THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS, THEIR FULL ALLOTMENT OF PROMISE TIME FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH.
I'M A TENURED PROFESSOR AT UT AUSTIN, AND I'M THE DIRECTOR OF THE MICHENER CENTER FOR WRITERS, WHICH IS HOW IT, AND THE HISTORIC J FRANK DOBY HOUSE, NO COMPLY IS A CULTURAL CENTER OF VITAL AND INCLUSIVE.
AND YOU'RE REPLACEABLE PART OF THE COMMUNITY, A HOME AWAY FROM HOME FOR COUNTLESS PEOPLE OF EVERY AGE, GENDER, RACE, AND ETHNICITY, PEOPLE WHO WILL, I ASSURE YOU SHAPED NOT JUST THE FUTURE OF AUSTIN, BUT OF TEXAS OF THIS COUNTRY.
AND PERHAPS EVEN THE WORLD, NO COMPLIANCE, SERVING ITS COMMUNITY IN THE SAME WAY A PUBLIC LIBRARY DOES THE SAME WAY A YOUTH SENIOR OR CULTURAL CENTER DOES.
IT BRINGS PEOPLE TOGETHER IN A SAFE PLACE.
IT AFFORDS EVERYONE THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS THEMSELVES, TO BROADEN THEIR PERSPECTIVES AND TO ENGAGE WITH THE LARGER COMMUNITY IN MEANINGFUL WAYS.
THE WIDE RANGING POSITIVE IMPACT OWNERS AND STAFF HAVE MADE AND CONTINUE TO MAKE ON THE CITY OF AUSTIN CANNOT BE OVERSTATED OR IGNORED.
THEY HAVE RAISED ASTONISHING SUMS OF MONEY FOR THE FOOD BANK AND MENTAL HEALTH ORGANIZATION.
THEIR EXAMPLE IS THE ONE SKATEBOARDERS WHO VISIT THE SHOP WILL FOLLOW.
[01:50:01]
NO COMPLIANCE IS A SPACE WHERE PEOPLE'S LIVES ARE CHANGED AND CHANGED.IRREFUTABLY FOR THE BETTER THE INDIVIDUAL AND, AND THE BETTER OF THE COLLECTIVE.
I URGE YOU TO LEAVE THIS BUILDING STANDING.
I IMPLORE YOU TO AFFORD THIS COMMUNITY, THE CHANCE TO MAKE HISTORY.
I I'M SURE ALL OF US AGREE THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE EVERYONE SPEAK, UM, THERE A LOT OF TIME, BUT WE, WE HAVE A LIMITED AMOUNT OF TIME ON ZOOM.
WE HAVE MS. JULIA ANDERSON S ANDERSON.
UM, MS. KATIE, DO WE HAVE A KATIE? OKAY.
NEXT MS. LIZ WEDDINGTON, MS. WEDDINGTON NEXT, MS. MADISON BOBBITT.
UH, MS. MELISSA HEWITT, ARE YOU THERE NEXT? MS. MARIANNA?
HI, MY NAME'S MATTHEW ROSS, AND I OPPOSE THE DEMOLITION OF THAT BUILDING.
AND I HOPE THAT YOU WILL PRESERVE THE HISTORY OF THE BUILDING AND THE COMMUNITY BOTH PAST AND PRESENT.
NEXT WEEK, MS. MEGAN, MICK LOUGHLIN, MS. MCGUFFIN NEXT, MR. MATTHEW SEARS.
MR. SEARS NEXT, MR. NICK PRENTICE, MR. PRENTICE NEXT, MR. NILE GIFS.
MS. POLK NEXT, MR. PHILLIPS SPEAR.
YES, MA'AM FIRST AND FOREMOST.
I DO OPPOSE THE DEMOLITION, UH, EIGHT 12 WEST 12TH STREET BEYOND THE CURRENT HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF WHAT IS LEFT OF THE SMALL STRIP CENTER AT EIGHT 12 WEST 12TH.
I BELIEVE THE FUTURE OF HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE BUILDING SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.
I'VE BEEN SO PROUD OF OUR CITY'S EFFORTS IN BUILDING PUBLIC SKATEBOARDING SPACE IN AND AROUND AUSTIN.
IN FACT, MY DAUGHTER AND I CUT THE RIBBON FOR THE MABEL DAVIS PARK IN SOUTH AUSTIN WITH MAYOR, MAYOR WILL WIN IN THE EARLY TWO THOUSANDS, A PIECE OF THIS COMMUNITY, A PIECE OF OUR CITY AND THE SYMBIOTIC RELATIONSHIP TO HOUSE PARKS.
SKATE PARK SERVES AS THE EPICENTER FOR ONE OF THE MOST CULTURALLY DIVERSE AND INCLUSIVE GROUPS OF CHILD, YOUNG ADULT AND ADULT ATHLETES IN OUR CITY, AS WELL AS AN ARTISTIC OUTLET FOR MANY LOCAL AND NATIONAL VISUAL ARTISTS, MUSICIANS, AND OTHER CREATIVES AS WELL.
HISTORICALLY, THIS IS WHAT THE CULTURE OF AUSTIN EMBODIES AS AN AVID SKATEBOARDER, A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER AND A LOCAL AUSTIN PROFESSIONAL FOR THE LAST 28 YEARS, A KNOWN ADVOCATE KIT FOR LOCAL BUSINESS, COMMUNITY SUPPORT AND A CHARITY DONOR, AN OVERALL CHAMPION FOR OUR CITY REMAINING AS CREATIVE AND AMAZING AS ALWAYS SAYS, I STRONGLY OPPOSE THE DEMOLITION OF EIGHT, 12 WEST CROSS STREET OF TRUE STAPLE IN GEM IN OUR COMMUNITY, OUR CITY, AS WELL AS GLOBALLY.
AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR CONSIDERATION.
NEXT SPEAKER, MR. PINEAPPLE TANG, TANGO TANGO ARIA, MR. PINEAPPLE.
YEAH, BUT THEN THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
MY NAME IS RODRIGO SANTIAM AND I OPPOSE TO THE DEMOLITION OF 8 1 2 WEST OFF THE STREET IN ORDER TO SAVE NO COMPLAINTS LOCATION AND THE INTRODUCE MYSELF, PLEASE.
I AM A PERUVIAN, A SKATEBOARDER AND LICENSED ARCHITECT.
THE OWNER OF NONCOMPLIANT IS ALIVE BEACON.
HIS GREAT-GRANDFATHER IS HIRAM BINGEN.
THE ARCHEOLOGIST WHO LOCATED THE RUINS OF MAGIC BEACHY 100 YEARS AGO,
[01:55:01]
HERE IN PERU, MACHU B2 WAS RE REGISTERED IN A CULTURAL AND NATURAL UNESCO WORLD HERITAGE SITE TO PRESERVE IT AS A HISTORICAL CONTRIBUTES FOR SOCIETY.AS AN ARCHITECT, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PARALLEL BETWEEN ALLEGED HIS WORK AND HIS GREAT-GRANDFATHER, HIS CONTRIBUTION TO THE HUMANITY WITH A SKATEBOARDING AS A CULTURAL AND A HEALTHY INPUT IN THE BEND WITH THAT BEING SAID, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THIS COMMISSION TO HELP RESERVE NO COMPLAINTS, KEISHA IN ITS ORIGINAL LOCATION STATEMENT, MATCH MAGIC BEACH WITH AN IMPORTANT HISTORIC LANDMARK IN THEIR AREA, AND AS A CONTRIBUTION IN FAVOR OF ITS COMMUNITY AND TIGHT.
DO WE HAVE AN NEXT SPEAKER? YES.
NEXT, MR. RYAN YORK, MR. YORK.
I'M HERE TO EXPRESS MY EXTREME OPPOSITION OR DEM, UH, DEMOLISHING 18 12TH, 12TH, 12TH STREET.
UH, NO COMPLIANT SKATE SHOP STANDS AS A, UH, UH, W WHAT THEY CAN DO OUT OF THEIR RETAIL SPACE IS TRULY AMAZING.
THEY HAVE DONATED OVER $200,000 TO THE CENTRAL TEXAS FOOD BANK, WHICH IS EQUIVALENT TO CLOSE TO A MILLION MEALS FOR HOMES AND FAMILIES THAT DON'T HAVE ANY, UH, THEIR CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS AND THEIR COMMUNITY BUILDING ACTIVITIES, UH, STANDARDS AUSTIN'S FINEST EXAMPLE OF AN OPERATING BUSINESS.
THEY'VE INFLUENCED ME TO START MY OWN CHARITABLE BUSINESS SOON, AND I TRULY BELIEVE THAT THEY SHOULD STAY AND NOT BE DEMOLISHED.
NEXT WE HAVE MS. SALLY PHILLIPS, MS. PHILLIPS NEXT, MR. SAM LEE, MR. LEE.
NEXT, MS. SARAH DARBAR MS. BARBER NEXT, MR. TYLER, ADELE, MR. LADELLE NEXT MISS VANNA PILCHER.
UM, AND I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE COUNCIL FOR LISTENING TO ALL OF THE COMMUNITY TONIGHT.
I THINK THAT THE NUMBERS THAT WE SHOW UP TO THE VOLUME OF THIS PERIOD BECAUSE OF THIS SITUATION, UM, I WOULD LIKE TO GO ON RECORD THAT I OPPOSE THE DEMOLITION OF EIGHT, 12 WEST 12TH STREET.
MANY OTHERS HAVE MADE FANTASTIC POINT FROM A CALL FROM THE BACK OF THIS BUILDING AS THE LAST PIECE OF ARCHITECTURE FROM THAT TIME PERIOD TO THE FUTURE OF VERTICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SHOP AND WHAT THEY CONTRIBUTE.
THEN I WOULDN'T USE IT AS A DEMOLITION OF THE BUILDING.
IT'S SHOWING AT THE VERY SAME THING TO DO, NOT JUST TO DEMOLISH A LOCALLY OWNED AND OPERATED BUSINESS, BUT TO DO THIS BUSINESS, WALK ME LEADING INTO ANOTHER STAGE OF COVID IS UNSPEAKABLE.
NOT ONLY IS THIS GOING TO PERMANENTLY IMPACT THEIR BUSINESS WHILE THEY SEEK A NEW LOCATION IN THIS INSANE OFF THE REAL ESTATE MARKET, THEY'RE ALREADY TRYING TO KEEP THEIR BUSINESS RUNNING AS THE PANDEMIC CONTINUES, AND WE'LL WANT TO KNOW THIS ON THE DEMO.
PERMIT IS A SLAP IN THE FACE TO SMALL BUSINESSES, HEAVILY INVOLVED IN THE LOCAL COMMUNITY, BUT AS THE CITY TELLS US TO KEEP MASKING AND ONLY IT HAS A CENTRAL FUNCTION, THERE IS DEMOLISHING THE BUILDING ESSENTIAL TASK, I THINK.
NEXT SPEAKER, MR. ZANDER PEREZ, MR. PEREZ NEXT, MR. GEORGE RAMIREZ, MR. RAMIREZ, NEXT, THAT WAS OUR LAST SPEAKER CARE OF OPPOSITION.
IF YOU'D LIKE TO GIVE A REBUTTAL, UH, TO MR. VICKERS.
OKAY, MR. VICKERS, IF YOU'RE STILL ON THE LINE, YOU HAVE, UH, ONE MINUTE TO REBUT.
AND THEN, UM, I, I DON'T THINK I HAVE A REBUTTAL.
UM, I WOULD JUST LEAVE IT THAT WE, WE ABSOLUTELY, YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE ALL THE COMMENTS WERE MADE.
UM, BUT YOU KNOW, AND WE HAVE, UH, EXTENDED AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH, UH, NO COMPLY SKATE SHOP ON KIND OF THE FUTURE OF THEIR OPERATION.
UH, BUT NONETHELESS, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO PROCEED WITH AT LEAST THE PERMIT FOR OUR FUTURE PLANS.
[02:00:01]
UM, AND SO THAT, THAT INVITATION STILL IS THERE.AND WE WILL NO DOUBT BE MEETING WITH ELIA SO REGULARLY OVER THE COMING MONTHS.
UM, AND WE'LL JUST LEAVE THAT AT THAT.
I THINK YOU HAVE A LARGE COMMUNITY HERE THAT, UM, YOU MIGHT WANT TO, UM, MEET WITH COMMISSIONER HOMESTEADS.
DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE SPEAKER? YEAH.
UM, WHAT KIND OF APPROACH OR ACTIVITIES HAVE YOU HAD WITH THIS OWNER PRIOR TO THIS HEARING? NONE.
UM, ARE YOU SPEAKING IN TERMS OF TALK ABOUT WHAT WE'LL BE DOING WE'LL BE DOING, BUT YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS LIKE A WASTED OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COLLEGE TO HAVE THIS KIND OF ENERGY CLEARLY.
UM, THE V THE VERY CONSTITUENCY THAT YOU SERVE, UH, TO BE THIS UPSET.
IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THERE'S BEEN SOME BREAKDOWN IN COMMUNICATION.
UM, I KNOW THAT'S NOT OUR PURVIEW NECESSARILY, BUT, UM, I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF THERE'S BEEN SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN ATTEMPTED AND DIDN'T DIDN'T BEAR FRUITION, OR WHETHER THIS IS ALL BRAND NEW, AND YOU'RE JUST NOW GETTING TOGETHER AT THE TABLE.
WHAT I'LL I'LL I'LL UM, I'LL, I'D LIKE TO SAY, I WOULD SAY ALL OF THIS CAUGHT US A LITTLE BIT OFF GUARD, UM, TO BE HONEST, THIS HISTORICAL REVIEW, UM, AND THE, THE KIND OF THE PUBLIC POSTING OF THAT, INCLUDING THE SIGNAGE THAT WAS PUT OUT ON, YOU KNOW, ON THE STREET FRONT.
UM, SO I'LL, AS IT PERTAINS TO THIS, YES.
I WOULD SAY THIS PARTICULAR PROCESS OF THIS HISTORICAL DID GET A LITTLE BIT OUT IN FRONT OF THE COLLEGE.
UM, BUT IT'S NOT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE WEREN'T HAVING OTHER CONVERSATIONS WITH ELIAS.
UM, AND, AND THAT, UH, BUT YES, WE, WE, WE WERE NOT QUITE EXPECTING, UM, NOT, NOT THIS RESPONSE, THIS PROCESS THAT HAS TRIGGERED THIS RESPONSE, UM, WAS A SURPRISE TO US AS WELL.
AND I JUST WANTED TO, I WANTED TO REMIND YOU THAT, UM, NOT ONLY DID WE HAVE A LOT OF SPEAKERS SIGNED UP FOR THIS, PROBABLY SOME OF THEM, UM, YOU KNOW, DROPPED OFF BECAUSE OF TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES, WE'VE HAD THAT HAPPEN BEFORE, BUT WE GET, HAVE OVER 4,000 EMAILS AND OBJECTIONS TO THE DEMOLITIONS.
SO WE MIGHT TAKE THAT BACK TO YOUR, TO YOUR BOARD, UM, THAT THERE IS PUBLIC, UH, INTEREST IN THIS PROJECT.
K UM, LIVING ON TO OUR NEXT CASE, THAT WAS
AND OUR NEXT ONE, UH, THAT WE HAVE TO DISCUSS IS D 13, D 10.
[3.D.10. PR-2021-093159 – 1173 San Bernard St. – Consent Council District 1 Proposal: Demolish a ca. 1929 house. Applicant: Victoria Haase City Staff: Steve Sadowsky, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-6454 Staff Recommendation: Encourage rehabilitation and adaptive reuse then relocation over demolition, but release the permit upon completion of a City of Austin Documentation Package. (Part 1 of 2)]
I'M SORRY.WE HAVE THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE, MS. VICTORIA HAAS.
WILL YOU LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU'RE A PRESENTATION, WHEN THE PRESENTATION IS IN FRONT OF YOU? OKAY.
UM, THE PRESENTATION IS UP IN FRONT OF US RIGHT NOW.
THIS IS VICTORIA HAPPY, MS. RAY DESIGN, ON BEHALF OF THE LANDOWNERS WHO ARE REQUESTING TO REMOVE THE STRUCTURES AT 1173 SAN BERNARD STREET, PRIOR TO APPLYING FOR THE DEMOLITION PERMIT, I CONDUCTED RESEARCH OF THE PROPERTY AND THE INDIVIDUALS WHO LIVED THERE AND FOUND THE SAME OR SIMILAR INFO PRESENTED AND STEVE CASE REPORTS TO Y'ALL THERE WASN'T HISTORICAL DATA TO SUPPORT THE LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE REQUIRED FOR INDIVIDUAL DESIGNATION AS WRITTEN IN THE STAFF REPORT.
AND IT IS THE REASON THAT I'M, BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING, THE HOUSE HAS BEEN MODIFIED AND MOST SIGNIFICANTLY THE CLOSING OF THE FRONT PORCH, WHICH IS IN THE IMAGE ON THE RIGHT FURTHER, THE WINDOWS DOORS HAVE ALL BEEN REPLACED, IMPACTING THE ARCHITECTURAL.
MODERN MODIFICATIONS LIKELY HAPPENED IN THE 1970S WHEN MS. VIRGINIA BROWN OWNED THE HOUSE, WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN OUTSIDE OF THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE ASSOCIATED WITH REVEREND DEARTH OF HARRINGTON.
THE REAR ALSO SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN CONFIGURED TO A DEGREE WHEN COMPARED TO THE MOST RECENT SANBORN MAPS SEEN IN THE COURT.
MY CLIENT HAS COMMUNICATED WITH ALL NEARBY NEIGHBORS, INCLUDING ALL OF THAT BAPTIST CHURCH AND HAS RECEIVED SUPPORT FOR THE DEMOLITION.
MY CLIENT IS ALREADY WORKING WITH A COMPANY TO PLAN FOR CAREFUL DECONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING IN ORDER TO SAVE AND REUSE AS MANY OF THE BUILDING AS POSSIBLE FOR THE NEW DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE.
AND WITH THAT, WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE COMMISSION APPROVE THE APPLICATION.
AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
WE HAVE, UH, ONE MORE SPEAKER FOR ITEM D 10 IN OPPOSITION, UH, MS. JANICE FRIESEN, MS. FRIESEN, HAVE YOU ON
[02:05:01]
THE LINE? UH, MS. FRIESEN SENT US AN EMAIL AND DICTATING THAT, UH, SHE HAD DROPPED OFF DUE TO THE NUMBER OF SPEAKERS ON THE LINE, WHICH CERTAINLY WAS NOT STAFF, OR I BELIEVE CERTAINLY NOT THE COMMISSION'S INTENT TO DISCOURAGE SPEAKERS FROM PARTICIPATING.UH, SHE INDICATED THAT SHE WOULD LIKE TO SEE POSTPONEMENT OF THIS ITEM AND HAS BEEN IN CONTACT WITH PRESERVATION AUSTIN ABOUT THE PROPERTY.
IS THERE ANY, ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS CASE? NO.
[3.D.12. PR-2021-095546 – 3004 Lafayette Ave. –Consent Council District 9 Proposal: Demolish a ca. 1939 house. Applicant: Jason Williams City Staff: Steve Sadowsky, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-6454 Staff Recommendation: Encourage rehabilitation and adaptive reuse, then relocation over demolition, but release the permit upon completion of a City of Austin Documentation Package. (Part 1 of 2)]
AND OUR NEXT CASE, D 12, D 12, 3000 FOR LAFAYETTE.WE HAVE A MR. JIM WILLIAMS ON THE LINE, MR. WILLIAMS. YES.
THIS IS JIM WILLIAMS. I'M THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
AND I LIVE IN THE HOME AND I'M VOTING IN FAVOR OF THE DEMOLITION AND BUILDING OF A NEW CONSTRUCTION HOME.
THE, UM, THE, I HAVE A QUESTION THOUGH, TO LEAD OUT.
WE, WE WENT FROM ALL DAY, WE HAD A CONSENT AGENDA STATUS, AND, UH, EVEN MADAM CHAIRMAN SAID THAT AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS MEETING, AND THEN, UM, SOMEONE SPOKE IN AND SAID THAT IT HAD CHANGED.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO ASK FOR AN EXPLANATION OF WHY I ACTUALLY DON'T KNOW WHY, BUT, UH, LET'S TURN TO CHAT STAFF.
WE HAVE, UM, WE HAD THIS ONE FOR CONSENT, BUT, UM, IT WAS PULLED UP.
WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION.
IF THERE'S, SO IF THERE'S A SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION, THEN WE PULL IT FOR DISCUSSION.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHY, BUT SO GO AHEAD AND MAKE YOUR PRESENTATION PLACE.
UM, THE HOME IS IN, UH, IT'S, IT'S BEEN, UH, DEFERRED MAINTENANCE FOR OVER 20 YEARS AND IT, UH, PRIOR TO THAT, IT HAD BEEN ALTERED ARCHITECTURALLY WITHOUT PERMITS TO THE BACK OF THE BUILDING.
UM, THE, UM, IT'S GENERALLY IN VERY POOR CONDITION, THE FOUNDATION IS FAILING, ET CETERA.
UM, IT, IT WAS DEEMED THAT IT HAD NO HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANT ARCHITECTURE, NOT HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT BASED ON PRIOR OWNERS OR EVENTS.
UM, SO THAT COVERS THE ARCHITECTURE AND HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION PARTS, UH, COMMUNITY VALUE OF IT'S EVEN STATED THAT, UH, THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT FEATURE THAT CONTRIBUTES TO THE CHARACTER, AGE OR CULTURAL IDENTITY OF THE CITY.
AND, UH, IT GOES ON TO SAY THAT THE LANDSCAPE FEATURE, THE PROPERTY IS NOT A SIGNIFICANT NATURAL OR DESIGN LANDSCAPE WITH ARTISTIC OR, UH, VALUE TO THE CITY.
SO IT MEETS ALL THE CRITERIA TO BE REPLACED ON, ON THOSE NOTES.
UM, I'D LIKE TO TALK JUST A SECOND ABOUT THE TYPE OF HOME I'D LIKE TO BUILD HERE.
UM, THIS WILL BE A VERY MODEST, UH, ONE AND A HALF STORY HOME, UH, TO THE SCALE OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND TO THE MASSING OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
I'VE CONSIDERED THAT VERY CAREFULLY BECAUSE I DON'T WANT IT LARGE HOME IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, IT'S HISTORICALLY ACCURATE HOME.
THIS TYPE OF HOME IS A FARMHOUSE, A FRONT-FACING GABLE, UH, WITH ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS, SUCH AS CORBELS, UH, STAINED GLASS.
UH, IT WILL ALSO SIT ON THE FOOTPRINT ALMOST EXACTLY OF THE EXISTING HOME.
WE'RE NOT ENLARGING THE FOOTPRINT OF OUR NEW SPACE.
IT WILL GO INTO A SECOND STORY, BUT IT WILL BE A ONE AND A HALF STORY WITH DORMERS TO SUPPRESS THE HEIGHT OF THE HOME AND MAKE IT FIT IN BETTER WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS APPLICATION? YES.
MR. JASON WILLIAMS, MR. WILLIAMS, YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE.
UM, I FEEL LIKE JIM WILLIAMS DID A, DID A GOOD JOB OF DESCRIBING WHAT THEY WANT TO DO THERE.
I, I WOULD LIKE TO, TO JUST ADD TO THE FACT THAT, THAT THESE OWNERS, THEY LOVE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
THEY WANT, THEY WANT TO DO SOMETHING THAT'S VERY SENSITIVE THERE.
UM, AND, AND, AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, THIS, THIS HOME THAT CURRENTLY EXISTS THERE LACKS A LOT OF THAT CRITERIA AS, AS IDENTIFIED BY STAFF, UH, THAT WOULD MAKE IT A GOOD CANDIDATE FOR LANDMARK STATUS.
WE'RE TALKING ALL THE DOORS HAVE BEEN REPLACED WITH METAL AND PLASTIC DOORS.
THE, THE SHUTTERS ARE PLASTIC AND HAVE BEEN DRILLED ON TO THE, TO THE HOME THERE'S HARDY POINT CONFIDING ON THE HOME AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO IT'S, IT'S, IT'S JUST NOT, NOT A GOOD CANDIDATE.
NOW, DO WE HAVE A SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION? YES.
JUST ONE SPEAKER, MR. SAMUEL EVANS, MR. EVANS, ARE YOU ON THE LINE,
[02:10:04]
MR. EVANS? HE MUST HAVE DROPPED OFF.UM, WELL WE DIDN'T HAVE HELLO.
[3.D.13. PR-2020-064188 – 2502 Park View Dr. – Discussion Council District 7 Proposal: Demolish a ca. 1954 house. Applicant: Dominique Levesque City Staff: Steve Sadowsky, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-6454 Staff Recommendation: Strongly encourage the applicant to rehab and preserve this house by initiating historic zoning to preserve the integrity of the pending Air Conditioned Village National Register Historic District. (Part 1 of 2)]
WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM, UH, WHICH IS 25, UH, D 1325 OR TWO PART THERE.WE HAVE, UM, A NUMBER OF SPEAKERS ON THE LINE.
UM, THE APPLICANT MR. DOMINIQUE, UH,
MR. LEVESQUE, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES, UH, SPEAKERS WHO FOLLOW? YOU WILL HAVE ONE MINUTE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY.
UM, UH, WE FORMERLY HAD MET IN, UH, IN THE RECENT MONTHS OVER 25 0 5 AND 25 0 7 PARKVIEW, WHICH, UM, YOU ALL GRACIOUSLY GRANTED THE DEMOLITION PERMITS FOR THESE FORMER AIR CONDITIONED VILLAGE HOUSES? UM, I REPRESENT, UH, MY CLIENT IS, UH, HUGH CORRIGAN, WHO IS THE OFFICIAL OWNER OF THIS HOUSE, BUT WE TEAMED UP TO, UM, OBTAIN THIS HOUSE AFTER IT CAME BACK ON THE MARKET.
UM, WHEN THE FORMER OWNER, UM, FOUND THEMSELVES IN A STUCK POSITION.
AND, UM, AND I THINK PRIMARILY BECAUSE OF HIS INABILITY TO MOVE FORWARD ON THE JOB, UM, BASED ON THE, THE, THE ROADBLOCKS, I FELT PETE, HE ENCOUNTERED ON A FINANCIAL LEVEL WHEN HE PURCHASED THIS HOUSE IN.
AND, UM, COULDN'T ACTUALLY, UM, BUILD WHAT HE WANTED OVER THERE BECAUSE OF THE STIPULATIONS.
I THINK HE FELT, UM, ENCUMBERED NOW.
UM, MY, MY CLIENT WHO CORRIGAN IS IN A HOUSE THAT I BUILT IN, UH, 2016, UH, WAS FORMERLY IN AIR CONDITIONED VILLAGE HOUSE THAT WAS, UH, DEMOLISHED BECAUSE IT WAS IN, UM, UH, REALLY BAD SHAPE AND, UM, THE TYPE OF HOUSE HE LIVES IN, HOW HAS 90% SOLAR COVERAGE AND IS BUILT IN A MODERN STANDARD.
UM, WE'RE HOPING TO, UM, YOU KNOW, FACILITATE WHAT I WOULD SEE IS A, UH, A REBUILDING OF THESE HOUSES SINCE THEY ARE SO FAR OUTDATED.
UM, AND, UH, THOUGH WE APPRECIATE THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE DESIGNER, THEN THE, UM, AND THE, THE PIONEERS OF AIR CONDITIONED VILLAGE, UM, TO BASE THEIR, THE SOLE CRITERIA ON, UM, THEIR SIGNIFICANCE ON AIR CONDITIONING ALONE IS, IS, UH, IS A REALLY HARD SELL FOR THESE HOUSES BECAUSE THEY'RE, UM, STRUCTURALLY INEFFICIENT THEIR ORIGINAL DESIGN, UM, DOESN'T ACTUALLY EVEN SUPPORT GOOD QUALITY OR ENERGY EFFICIENCY.
UM, AND IN THE, IN THE MATTER OF 25 0 2 PARK VIEW, UM, THE ACTUAL CONDENSER, UH, OF THE AIR CONDITIONER SITS OUT ON THE FRONT ELEVATION OF THE HOUSE, UM, BECAUSE IT'S SO POORLY DESIGNED FOR AIR CONDITIONING, THAT IT DOESN'T EVEN, UM, UH, THERE'S A 30 FOOT LONG RUN OF, OF COPPER HOSE RUNNING FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, INTO THE INCIDENT INTERIOR UNIT.
UM, I'VE, UH, SUBMITTED AN ENGINEERING REPORT ON THIS HOUSE AS WELL.
UM, WE, THE NEIGHBORS, UM, HAVE ALL SIGNS, UM, BESIDES A FEW ARE OPPOSED TO NOT ONLY THE STATE HISTORIC COMMISSION'S ATTEMPT TO MAKE THIS A HISTORIC DISTRICT, BUT WE AS HOMEOWNERS ARE ALL, UM, AGAINST, UH, BEING LABELED A HISTORIC LANDMARK.
SO, UM, I HOPE THAT, UM, YOU ALL CAN LOOK AT THESE, UM, CASES HERE.
UM, THIS HOUSE IS 67 YEARS OLD.
IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT 50 YEARS OLD AT 67 YEARS OLD.
UM, WELL, LET ME WRAP THIS UP.
YOU'RE AT THE END OF YOUR ROPE.
DO WE HAVE ANOTHER SPEAKER IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICATION? YES, WE HAVE MR. HUGH CORRIGAN, MR. CORGAN, PLEASE LIMIT YOUR REMARKS TO ONE MINUTE.
UH, I LIVE AT 25 10 PART TWO, WHICH HAS, AS DOMINIC SAID, HE A SEATBELT THAT HAS SEVERAL YEARS AGO AND KIND OF JUST IN LINE WITH WHAT HE SAID, LIKE THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND THE THEY'RE KIND OF MODERN STANDARDS, VERY, UH, VERY HIGH AESTHETICS OF THE HOME, I THINK ARE THINGS THAT EVERYBODY IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS APPRECIATE.
[02:15:01]
YOU KNOW, HE'S GOT A VISION FOR, FOR BUILDING VERY NICE HOUSES ON THIS, IN THIS NEIGHBORHOODS, WHICH HE STILL LIVES IN.AND HE'S VERY LIKE, UH, VERY WELL-LIKED IN THE COMMUNITY AND VERY FRIENDLY WITH EVERYBODY.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT IT IS IN KEEPING WITH THE, UH, WITH WHAT PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD LIKE TO HAVE MORE HAZARDS OF THIS STANDARD AND THIS ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND KIND OF ALL THOSE THINGS.
IS THERE ANOTHER SPEAKER AND FAMOUS MISS AUDREA MOYERS, MISS MOYERS, DO YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE? THANK YOU.
I'M AUDRIA MOYERS AND I'M CALLING IN SUPPORT OF THE DEMOLITION PERMIT FOR 25 0 2.
UM, I LIVE AT 25 0 6 PARK VIEW DRIVE, WHICH IS TWO HOUSES DOWN, AND IT IS ALSO AN AIR CONDITION VILLAGE HOUSE THAT MY HUSBAND AND I HAVE OWNED AND LIVED IN FOR OVER 20 YEARS.
WE ARE INTIMATELY FAMILIAR WITH THE CONDITIONS OF THE AIR CONDITIONING VILLAGE HOUSES, DO THEIR AGE, THEIR AVERAGE CONSTRUCTION QUALITY THEY'RE POORLY ENGINEERED FOUNDATIONS, AND A LACK OF SITE WORK AND GRADING THAT HAS LED TO FLOODING ISSUES IN MANY OF THE HOUSES.
IT'S A REALITY FOR BETTER OR FOR WORSE AT THE HIGHEST ECONOMIC VALUE OF THE EDUCATION, THOSE HOUSES AND AUSTIN'S CURRENT HOUSING MARKET IS THIS DEMOLITION.
WE MAY NOT LIKE THAT, BUT THAT IS THE REALITY, THE RIGHTS OF THE PROPERTY OWNER TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY AS THE MARKET ALLOWS NEED TO BE RESPECTED.
UM, MR. JACKSON ROCHE IN SUPPORT, MR. ROCHE.
I LIVE ON NASTIER DRIVE, UH, JUST AROUND THE CORNER FROM 25 0 2 PARK VIEW.
UM, AS WELL AS DOMINIQUE AND JUST WANT TO EXPRESS MY SUPPORT FOR THE DEMOLITION PERMIT.
MY, MY HOME IS ALSO AN AIR CONDITION VILLAGE PROPERTY, UH, VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE ISSUES THAT, THAT THESE HOMES HAVE, AND MOSTLY FAMILIAR WITH THE APPLICANTS, UH, WORKED IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND VERY PLEASED WITH THAT.
AND IT WOULD BE, BE HAPPY TO ASK HIM DEVELOPING OTHER HOME.
AND NEXT SPEAKER, MR. JAMES WATSON IN FAVOR.
HI, THIS IS JAMES WATSON AND I LIVE IN 25 0 8 PARSI DRIVE.
WE ARE ALSO PART OF THE AIR CONDITIONING VILLAGE.
UM, I THINK EVERYONE ELSE IS IT VERY WELL.
WE ALSO SAID FOR THE DEMOLITION ON 25 0 2, AND THAT IS ALWAYS OKAY.
THIS IS THE LAST SPEAKER IN FAVOR OF MR. ASEEM.
HOTJAR FOLLOWED BY FOUR OPPOSED SPEAKERS.
UH, YEAH, SO LIKE
UM, I AM ALSO IN SUPPORT OF THE DEMOLITION PERMIT.
UH, THAT HOUSE IS VACANT, UH, FOR QUITE SOME TIME, THANKFULLY BECAUSE IT, BECAUSE IT ISN'T LIVABLE.
I KNOW THAT THE HOUSES ON THAT SIDE OF THE STREET, UH, CONSISTENTLY FLOOD, UM, ON THE SOUTHERN SIDE OF PARKVIEW IN IT ALSO FLOODS, UH, THERE ARE A LOT OF NEW HOMES OR HOMES THAT WERE BUILT EVEN IN THE DECADES AFTER THE AIR CONDITIONED VILLAGE, FURTHER NORTH FROM PARK VIEW.
AND THE, THE REALITY IS THAT WE HAVE NO CONTROL OVER HOW THE DRAINAGE RUNS INTO OUR YARDS, BUT MODERN STANDARDS WOULD NEVER ALLOW STRUCTURES LIKE THIS TO STAY STAND, UM, BECAUSE THEIR FOUNDATIONS ARE ALL BUILT SO MUCH HIGHER.
WE'RE JUST THE LOWEST POOLING SPOT FOR EVERYBODY.
UM, AND THESE THOUSANDS NEED AN OPPORTUNITY TO DEEP LOSS, NEED AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE BROUGHT TO THEM.
AND, UM, THE FIRST SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION HAS THREE MINUTES.
WHO WOULD THAT BE? MR. KEVIN SMITH, MR. SMITH.
ANY COMMISSIONERS AND CITY STAFF? MY NAME IS KEVIN SMITH AND I LIVE AT 2,500 PARK DRIVE, WHICH HAS BEEN NEIGHBORED TO 25 0 2.
I AM PHONING IN TODAY TO POSE THE ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT FOR 25 0 2 PARK VIEW DRIVE EVER SINCE THE 22ND OF JUNE MEETING OF LAST YEAR.
COMMISSIONER'S LITTLE AND SHARE, READ.
WE'RE BOTH OPEN TO INITIATING THE LOCAL HISTORIC ZONING PROCESS.
THE COMMISSION RECOGNIZED THE HOME'S ABILITY TO MEET THREE OF THE FIVE CRITERIA FOR BOKO HISTORIC ZONING ARCHITECTURE IS STROKE ASSOCIATION AND COMMUNITY VALLEY DURING THE COMMISSION'S NEXT SPEEDING ON THE 27TH OF JULY, THE COMMISSION TO PASS THE THRESHOLD OF A SUPER MAJORITY PUDDING TO INITIATE THE LOCAL HISTORIC BUILDING PROCESS, WHICH WAS SEVEN TO TWO
[02:20:01]
TO ONE THROUGH THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS COMMISSION AND ITS ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE WORKED WITH THE PREVIOUS APPLICANTS TO WRITE BY DESIGN THAT WAS SYMPATHETIC TO THE EXISTING CONSTRUCTION AND, AND RETAINING SOME OF THE HOMES, DEFINING CHARACTERISTICS.UNFORTUNATELY, THE PREVIOUS OWNER CHOSE TO SELL THE HOME INSTEAD OF BUILDING THE AGREED UPON DESIGN.
I RESPECTFULLY ASKED THE COMMISSION TO REINSTATE THE LOCAL ZONING, HISTORIC SOME NEW PROCESS.
SO ALL THE COMMISSION TIME TO WORK WITH THE NEW APPLICANTS.
SO WE JUST SIMILAR AGREEMENTS ACT WITH AS, AS PREVIOUSLY NOTED BY CONSTRUCT COOK.
THE CODE DOES ALLOW FOR AN ADDITION GREATER THAN 600 SQUARE FEET THAT PROVIDE FOR IT POTENTIALLY ECONOMICALLY PEACEFUL DEVELOPMENT.
IN ADDITION, I BELIEVE IT IS ONE OF THE HISTORIC LAMAR COMMISSIONS MISSIONS TO PRESERVE AUSTIN'S TREE, NOT DATE DEVELOPERS AND MAKING MONEY ETHICS EXPENSE OF OUR HISTORY.
I UNDERSTAND OTHER HOUSES ON OUR STREET DID NOT MEET THE CRITERIA FOR LOCAL HISTORIC ZONING.
AS AS MENTIONED BEFORE, THE 5 0 5 AND 25 WAS SEVEN, THE ARCHITECTURE OF 25 0 2 IS WITHOUT A DOUBT, A PRIME EXAMPLE OF MID CENTURY, MODERN ARCHITECTURE, AS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF THE WORK OF THE LOCAL ARCHITECT, FRED GAY, THERE WAS A POTENTIAL BELIEF IN THE ARE AND AUSTIN ARCHITECTURE VILLAGE WITH NOTHING MORE, NO MARKETING PLOY.
HOWEVER, THERE ARE MULTIPLE STUDIES BY UT AND THE PARK ENERGY THAT ALLOWED THE FAA, THE FEDERAL HOUSING ADMINISTRATION AND THE PRINT EDITION OF FARES THAT LED THEM TO LOOSEN THE LOAN REQUIREMENTS, TO ALLOW PEOPLE WITH MIDDLE INCOME FAMILIES, TO AFFORD HOUSES WITH AIR CONDITIONING THROUGHOUT THE BUILDING.
WITH MANY OF MY NEIGHBORS, I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS SOME CON SOME THERE'S SOME STRUGGLING FOR WORK HERE.
UM, LIKE THERE'S SOME, SOME RESERVE THAT THE HOUSE IS HERE.
MY HOUSE THAT INCLUDED KIND OF THICK SLAB ON GRADE AND CAN CONTRIBUTE TO SOME PLATING PROPERTIES.
BUT WHAT I CAN SAY, I'VE WORKED AT THE CITY FOR THE PAST 12 YEARS AND THE FLOOD PLAIN OFFICE, AND ONE PROTECTIONS, PLEASE WRAP THIS UP.
YOUR TIME IS UP AFTER WORKING AT THE CITY IN THE WINTER WINTERSET PROTECTION FLIP-TOP OFFICE, THERE'S ALL THESE POINTS B ISSUE.
SO FLOODING REGARDLESS IS FLATLINE GRADE.
UM, BY RESTATING THE LOOK OF IT IN WORKING WITH THE NEW APPLICANTS WHO HAS NOT REACHED OUT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMITTEE, THE ZONING COMMITTEE RETAIN THE CHARACTER FEATURES YOUR TIME IS UP.
I'M SORRY, MR. SMITH TO GO ONTO THE NEXT SPEAKER, UH, IN OPPOSITION TO MR. JOE, MR. JOE REYNOLDS.
HELLO, MR. REL, DO YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE? THANK YOU, SHARON COMMISSIONERS.
I'M SPEAKING TO A POST DEMOLITION OF THE HOUSE AT 25 0 2 PARK VIEW.
I'M A MEMBER OF THE ALLENDALE ZONING AND LAND USE COMMITTEE, BUT I'M HERE TO EXPRESS MY OPINIONS ABOUT THIS CASE DIRECTLY TO YOU.
YOU'RE DECIDING ABOUT PRESERVING A HISTORIC HOUSE.
IT'S MY OPINION THAT THE RESTRICTION BEING DECIDED WAS NOT IMPOSED ON THE OWNER, BUT THE HOUSE WAS PURCHASED KNOWING ITS HISTORIC NATURE.
I THINK THIS IS A CASE OF AN APPLICANT BELIEVING HE CAN GET WHATEVER HE WANTS EVERY TIME.
AND I BELIEVE THE HOUSE IS IN DANGER.
EVEN IF YOU DENY THE PERMIT, SINCE IT COULD SUFFER A FATAL FIRE GAS EXPLOSION, I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT WILL COERCE NEIGHBORS ON PARKVIEW TO SUPPORT DEMOLITION THE HOUSE AT 25 0 2 PARK VIEW IS WORTHY AND DESERVE PRESERVATION.
YOU'VE LIKELY RECEIVED SEVERAL BACKUP DOCUMENTS TO THIS EFFECT FROM KNOWLEDGEABLE AND QUALIFIED PERSONAL PEOPLE WITH DIRECT EXPERIENCE WITH THIS HOUSE.
I KNOW I SENT YOU SOME OF MY EXPERIENCE WITH EXPERIMENTAL HOUSES.
THE HOUSES HAVE AIR CONDITIONED VILLAGE OR IN A WAY LIKE RESERVED EXAMPLES OF EARLY AIRPLANES OR LOCOMOTIVE OR COMPUTERS.
THEY'RE ICONS OF THINGS THAT CHANGED IN MY LIFETIME AIR CONDITIONING.
THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS ISSUED BY MISTAKE.
YOU SHOULD DO YOUR PUBLIC 2D AND CORRECT THAT AND PRESERVE THE HOUSE.
OUR NEXT SPEAKER, MS. CAROLYN CROOM IN OPPOSITION, MS. MS. CROOM, PLEASE LIMIT EARING MARKS TO ONE MINUTE.
UM, I POSTED A DEMOLITION OF THIS ARCHITECTURALLY AND HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT HOME.
THIS OUTSTANDING REMARKABLY INTACT MID-CENTURY RESIDENTS WITH PASSIVE COOLING STRATEGIES AND INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGICAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION IS VERY MUCH A PART OF AUSTIN'S HISTORY AND CULTURE.
I'M AWARE THAT THE APPLICANT KNEW THE ARCHITECTURAL AND HISTORIC VALUE OF THIS HOME PRIOR TO PURCHASING IT.
I LISTENED TO THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETING LAST YEAR ON TWO OTHER AIR CONDITIONED VILLAGE HOMES AT 25 0 5
[02:25:01]
AND SEVEN PARK VIEW.THE APPLICANT OWNS THESE HOMES AND PROCURE TOTAL DEMOLITION PERMITS FOR THEM LAST YEAR.
AND THERE WAS DISCUSSION OF 25 0 2 PART VIEW DURING THE MEETING AND FLOOR, THE APPLICANT TO RISE TO THE OCCASION AND WORK WITH THE CITY STAFF TO RETAIN THE IMPORTANT FEATURES OF THE HOUSE.
IF THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN, I ASKED YOU TO PLEASE OF THIS HOME, LET'S SAY THIS TREASURE FOR OUR CENTRAL COMMUNITY.
AND DO WE HAVE ANOTHER SPEAKER AND OPPOSITION? WE HAVE ONE MORE.
MS. KELLY, LET ME ASK AGAIN, PEOPLE WHO ARE ON THE LINE, PLEASE MUTE YOURSELVES.
WE'RE HEARING A LOT OF BACKGROUND NOISE.
UM, THE NEXT SPEAKER PLACE MS. KELLY, AT LEAST OF AGER, I OPPOSED THE DEMOLITION PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY AT 25 0 2 PARK VIEW DRIVE.
UH, I HAVE A NEW UNIQUE POSITION BECAUSE MY FAMILY AND I ACTUALLY LIVE IN THE TWIN HOUSE TO THAT HOUSE AT 27, 10 PARK VIEWS.
IT'S THE EXACT SAME SQUARE FOOT.
UM, WE'VE LIVED HERE NOW SINCE 2005, WE'VE RAISED TWO CHILDREN HERE.
WE FELL IN LOVE WITH THE HOUSE.
THE MOMENT THAT WE SAW IT BECAUSE OF THE ARCHITECTURE AND HAD SUCH A UNIQUE AND BEAUTIFUL DESIGN.
UM, EVERY TIME WE'D HAVE PEOPLE OVER TO OUR HOUSE, THEY COMPLIMENT US EVERY TIME ON WHAT A UNIQUE AND WONDERFUL HOUSE IT IS.
IT NEEDED A LOT OF WORK, BUT WE WERE WILLING TO PUT IN THE MONEY AND THE TIME TO KEEP THE BONES OF THE HOUSE IN TEXT.
UM, UH, ALL THE NATURAL LIGHT FROM THE WINDOWS ARE JUST BEAUTIFUL.
AND EVENTUALLY WE WERE ABLE TO DO SOME REMODELING, WHICH DID COST MONEY, BUT WE WERE WILLING TO DO IT AGAIN BECAUSE WE LOVE THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE HOUSE.
UM, THINGS, BECAUSE WE THINK THAT IS ALSO TRUE OF 25 0 2 PARTS OF YOUTH.
WE HAPPILY RAISED A FAMILY HERE, WE LIVED COMFORTABLY.
UM, AND WE DON'T THINK, UH, DESTROYING THIS PIECE OF HISTORY IS WORTH WHAT YOU'RE LOSING BY DOING THAT.
UH, PLEASE PRESERVE THIS MARVELOUS PIECE OF ALLENDALE HISTORY.
UM, THERE AREN'T MANY OF THESE.
UM, DO, DOES THE APPLICANT, THE FIRST SPEAKER WISH TO READ, BUT UM, YES.
UH, THIS IS DON NICO VIC AGAIN, AND I APPRECIATE THE VIEWS OF, UM, OF THE OPPOSITION.
UM, WELL I, UM, REGRET THAT WE'RE, WE'RE BEING VILIFIED AS, UM, EVIL DEVELOPERS.
UH, I THINK THAT WE ACTUALLY CARE ABOUT OUR HOUSES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND I AM A FAMILY MAN TOO.
UM, I, UM, WOULD REGARD MYSELF AS A, AS AN ARTIST BUILDER AND NOT NECESSARILY A DEVELOPER WHO'S JUST OUT THERE TO MAKE A BUCK.
UM, WE ARE, UM, UH, BLESSED WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO PURCHASE THIS HOUSE AND ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING WITH IT THAT WOULD BE MEANINGFUL FOR THE FUTURE RATHER THAN IT FIT IN A STATE OF, UM, DILAPIDATED, UM, STATE.
UM, SO THAT IS, UM, ALL I REALLY HAVE TO, I JUST HOPE THAT THE COMMISSION WOULD SEE CLEARLY ON THIS AND, UM, GRANT THE, UH, THE DEMOLITION PERMIT FOR THIS HOUSE SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD IN, UM, WITH THIS HOUSE, UH, IN CREATE SOMETHING MEANINGFUL THAT WILL LAST MORE THAN, THAN 70 YEARS THIS TIME.
BUT I BELIEVE, UH, TWO TO 300 YEARS WITH THE NEW CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUES THAT ARE AVAILABLE.
[3.D.14. PR-2021-098969 – 3400 Hillview Rd. – Discussion Council District 10 Proposal: Demolish a ca. 1940 house. Applicant: Molly Lochridge City Staff: Steve Sadowsky, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-6454 Staff Recommendation: Either postpone to August 23, 2021 or initiate historic zoning to consider alternatives to demolition and further evaluate the potential of the house to be designated as a historic landmark. (Part 1 of 2)]
ON TO OUR LAST ITEM, UM, UNDER APPLICATIONS FOR DEMOLITION AND RELOCATION, WE HAVE D 14 3400 HILL VIEW, AND WE HAVE SPEAKERS ON THAT.WE HAVE THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE, MS. MOLLY POWERS, MS. POWERS, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
MY NAME IS MOLLY LOCKRIDGE POWERS AND I'M HERE AS APPLICANT AND OPENER ON BEHALF OF MY FAMILY.
THIS IS A REALLY SAD MOMENT FOR US TO APPLY TO THIS DEMOLITION PERMIT.
HOWEVER, AS A FAMILY, WE HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THE STRUCTURAL PROBLEMS FOR DECADES AND BELIEVE DEMOLITION TO BE THE NEXT STEP FOR THE HOME.
UM, I'D LIKE TO JUST PROVIDE TO YOU SOME CONTEXT ON THE CONDITION, THE HOME, AS YOU CONSIDER THE APPLICATION, UM, PER THE ENGINEER'S DESCRIPTION, THE, UM, THE FLOORS ARE SUSPENDED, REINFORCED, CONCRETE SLAB, THE STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS OWN.
THERE'S ACTUALLY A PRESENTATION SLIDE WHERE YOU CAN SEE THE DOCUMENTS THAT WE SUBMITTED.
UM, WE'RE LOOKING AT THEM RIGHT NOW.
UM, THE STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS OF THE SLABS REFORMED BY USING HOLLOW CLAY TILES, UM, AND THESE WERE
[02:30:01]
THE JOIST TO RIBS ARE THEN FILLED WITH CONCRETE AND REINFORCED WITH GREEN STEEL BARS.BUT UNFORTUNATELY THE SHIFTING OF THE STRUCTURE HAS RESULTED IN SIGNIFICANT CRACKING OF THE EXTERIOR, MASONRY INTERIOR WALLS FEELINGS AND THE FLOORING.
IT GOES BEYOND POOR COSMETIC CONDITION, JUST STRUCTURAL ISSUES THAT ARE TOO EXPENSIVE, ESPECIALLY SINCE THERE'S NO PRACTICAL METHODS TO STABILIZE THE FOUNDATION.
UM, THE MOST RECENT ENGINEERING REPORT BY MS. ALTON GRIEVANCE INDICATED VERTICAL FOUNDATION MOVEMENT HAD OCCURRED ON ACCOUNT OF THE UNDERLYING CLAY.
AND HE STATED THAT BECAUSE OF THE ANTIQUATED, STRUCTURAL FRAMING SYSTEM OF THE RESIDENCE, ANY REQUIRED STRUCTURAL REMEDIATION OF ANY COMPONENTS THAT ANY MEMBER MAY OR MAY NOT BE POSSIBLE.
AND IF POSSIBLE WOULD BE EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE, HE NOTED THAT CONSIDERING THE TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE FOUNDATION AND THE HIGH STRENGTH OF THE SOIL, THE FOUNDATION WILL MOVE AS MUCH AS IT HAS IN THE PAST.
AND THERE'S SIMPLY NOT A PRACTICAL METHOD TO STABILIZE THE FOUNDATION.
UM, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU CAN SEE IN THE PHOTOS, UM, SUBMITTED SOME BELOW THE DINING ROOM THAT THE CERT THAT, UM, INTERMEDIATE CONCRETE BLOCK PEER TO CRACK WORKFORCE SUPPORT BEANS ARE CANTILEVERED AND SPACE TOO FAR APART.
THE DEPT OPENING BELOW THE CRASH OR FRAME UNDERMINES THE END FOR THE HEATHER JOYCE FRAMING AND OPENING.
UM, IN ADDITION TO THE STRUCTURAL ISSUES, WE HAVE ANTIQUATED ELECTRICAL PLUMBING SYSTEMS THAT ARE PROBLEMATIC WITH WATER CUSTOMER, YOUR CLOGGED DRAIN NON-FUNCTIONAL FIREPLACES DUE TO THE BUILDUP OF CREOSOTE OVER THE YEARS AND DETERIORATION OF THE BRICK LINING.
UM, SO BASED ON THE EXTERIOR PHOTOS, I UNDERSTAND WHY THE STAFF MAY HAVE BELIEVED THAT THERE WAS POTENTIAL FOR REHABILITATION.
HOWEVER, IT'S BASED ON THE ACTUAL CONDITION OF THE HOME AS SEEN IN THE PHOTOS SUBMITTED.
AND SOME OF THE INFORMATION SHARED, WE ASKED THAT THE COMMISSION RELEASED THE DEMOLITION PERMIT, UM, FOR THEIR MORE, THE SECOND AREA BEING TOO BRIEF, FIVE OR SIX YEAR OCCUPANCIES, UM, OR ACTUAL ASSOCIATES.
AGAIN, ALLOW US TO ASK THE DEMOLITION PERMIT AND OUR RESEARCH.
AND I'M ALMOST DONE WRAP IT UP.
UM, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICATION? WE HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER.
MS. HOPE LOCKRIDGE YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE.
I GREW UP AT 3,400 HILLVIEW ROAD AND I NOW LIVE NEARBY.
I ASK THAT YOU VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE DEMOLITION PERMIT AS THE STRUCTURE AND FOUNDATION ARE NOT STABLE.
I WATCHED MY PARENTS STRUGGLE WITH THESE ISSUES FOR OVER 60 YEARS WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO THE STAFF THAT PREPARED THE REPORT.
I DO NOT BELIEVE IT HAS ARCHITECTURAL OR HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE.
I DOUBT THAT ANY POSTPONEMENT WILL BRING FORTH ANY SIGNIFICANT INFORMATION THAT WOULD ALLOW IT TO BECOME A LANDMARK.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TONIGHT.
ANYONE TO SPEAK AND OPPOSITION TO THE APPLICATION? NO, THERE ARE NO MORE RE UH, REGISTERED SPEAKERS ON THE LIST.
UM, NOW COMMISSION, IT'S TIME FOR US TO GO BACK TO THE BEGINNING OF THE AGENDA.
UH, CHAIR, MAY I POINT OUT WE'LL HAVE JUST OVER SIX MINUTES PER CASE, IF WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO, UH, END THIS MEETING AT 10, 12 DISCUSSION CASES, AND THAT'S GOING TO BE JUST ABOUT MAYBE SIX AND A HALF MINUTES PER, PER ITEM.
SO JUST BE AWARE, COMMISSIONER I'M THAT I'M MOVING AS FAST AS I CAN.
I'M ALSO TO STAFF AT ANY, ANY FEATURE.
[3.A.1. ZC-2021-100756 – 1037 Reinli St. – Discussion Travis County Fire Control Team Operations Center Council District 4 (Part 2 of 2)]
A 1 10 37 RAIN LATE STREET, UM, STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED AGE ZONING FOR THIS PROPERTY.CAN WE HAVE A PRESENTATION PLEASE? CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES.
THIS IS COWEN CONTRARAS, UH, PRESENTING ITEM A ONE, WHICH IS AN APPLICATION FOR HISTORIC ZONING ON A PROPERTY AT 10 37 RILEY STREET KNOWN AS THE TRAVIS COUNTY FIRE CONTROL TEAM OPERATIONS CENTER.
UH, THIS APPLICATION WAS INITIATED BY PROPERTY OWNERS, LEE AND DAVID DISOR.
SO THIS PROPERTY APPEARS TO BE A TYPICAL 1930S, MINIMAL TRADITIONAL HOUSE.
THERE'S MUCH MORE TO IT STORY THAN YOU MIGHT THINK IT WAS BUILT IN 1939.
AND WHAT WAS THEN BOROUGH TRAVIS COUNTY AS REMOTE FARM LAND ALONG FARM TO MARKET ROADS GRADUALLY BECAME VIABLE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
AFTER THE GREAT DEPRESSION IN 1948, CLARA AND WARREN BUSSER PURCHASED THE HOME TO RAISE THEIR THREE SONS.
THANKS TO THE BUSBAR BROTHERS.
THE HOUSE HAD TRANSFORMED FROM A SINGLE FAMILY HOME INTO THE HEADQUARTERS
[02:35:01]
FOR TRAVIS COUNTY.FIRST RURAL FIREFIGHTING BRIGADE BY THE 1960S BEFORE THE SIXTIES, THERE WAS NO OFFICIAL RESPONSE UNIT FOR FIRES AND OUTLYING TRAVIS COUNTY.
WHEN A FIRE OCCURRED, LOCAL RADIO STATIONS PUT OUT A CALL FOR VOLUNTEERS, AND IF ANYONE WAS NEARBY, THEY HELD IT OFF AS BEST THEY COULD UNTIL THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COULD SEND OUT HEAVY EQUIPMENT.
THE TRAVIS COUNTY FIRE CONTROL TEAM BEGAN IN 1961 WHEN EXPLORER SCOUT POST 13, DECIDED TO RESPOND TO ONE OF THESE CALLS OUT OF DECADES.
AFTER THE SCOUTS SAW THE DEVASTATION THAT BRUSHFIRE CAUSED, THEY CONVINCED THEIR SCOUT LEADER LEAD THE SOAR.
THEN A 21 YEAR OLD GRAPHIC DESIGNER AND FORMER SCOUT.
HIS BROTHER WAS IN THE TROOP TO START UP A FIRE BRIGADE.
THE YOUNG FIREFIGHTERS AGES, 15 TO 17, TRAINED WITH BORROWED EQUIPMENT IN THE LARGE BACKYARD OF 10 37 RYAN LAKE STREET.
AND THEY FOUGHT THEIR FIRST WILDFIRE, A TRUE EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM IN 1962, THEIR QUICK DEPLOYMENT AND EFFECTIVE FIRE SUPPRESSION USING ONLY GARDEN TOOLS AND TWO HANDHELD FIRE EXTINGUISHERS AND PRESS THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE.
AND THEY SOON BEGAN TO RADIO POST 13.
WHEN A WILDFIRE WAS RECORDED, THE RILEY STREET HOUSE WAS AN IDEAL PLACE FOR POST 13, POST 13 FIRE BRIGADE.
ITS RURAL SETTING OFFERED PLENTY OF SPACE TO STORE EQUIPMENT AND WORK ON VEHICLES.
AND IT'S LARGE BACKYARD BISECTED BY A WINDING CREEK, ALLOWED THEM TO TEST THEIR GEAR IN RESPONSE TO SEIZURES IN A CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT.
IT WOULD, THE STREETS RUN UNPAVED.
THEY ALLOWED THE TEAM TO ACCESS NEARBY ARTERIALS AND THEIR MODIFIED TRUCKS.
IN 1963, POST 13 HAD ONE $700 IN A CONTEST AND USED IT TO BUY A RUNDOWN 1940 CHEVY PICKUP, WHICH THEY COMPLETELY DISMANTLED AND REBUILT ON THE PROPERTY.
YOU CAN ONLY JUNK YARD SIGNS AND A DONATED HOSE.
OVER THE YEARS, THE ORGANIZATION GREW FROM A HANDFUL OF TEENAGE VOLUNTEERS THROUGH ITS THRIVING VOLUNTEER INSTITUTION.
THE TEAM GRADUALLY ADDED VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT TO THEIR FIREFIGHTING ARSENAL AT 10 37 RHYMING A SHED ON THE PROPERTY BECAME THE COMMUNICATIONS HUB.
FIRST HOUSING CITIZENS BAND RADIO EQUIPMENT, AND THEN ADDING VHF AND TONE AND VOICE ALERTS BY 1969, THE TRAVIS COUNTY FIRE CONTROL TEAM COVERED ABOUT 900 SQUARE MILES OF TERRITORY OUTSIDE AUSTIN CITY LIMITS.
WE OPERATED TWO TRUCKS AND OPENED A SUBSTATION OFF BURNET ROAD BY 1979.
THEY'D BECOME THE AREA'S FIRST PROFESSIONALLY EQUIPPED SEARCH AND RESCUE SQUAD.
AND THE RIMINI STREET HOUSE REMAINED THEIR CENTRAL OPERATIONS HUB DISPATCHING ALL FIRE COMPANIES AND EMS RESPONDERS UNTIL 1982.
MY OFFERING 10 37 RHINELAND AS THEIR OPERATIONS CENTER.
THE RUSTLER BROTHERS ENSURED THAT THE TCFD TEAM COULD SPEND IT.
SCAMP FUNDING OFTEN PROVIDED BY VOLUNTEERS THEMSELVES OR BY POST 13 FUNDRAISING ON IMPROVEMENTS TO EQUIPMENT RATHER THAN CONSTRUCTING OR LEASING.
ANOTHER BUILDING 10, 13 RILEY ALSO OFFERED A STRATEGIC POSITION AS HIGHWAYS ARE CONSTRUCTED NEARBY AS THE INTER-REGIONAL TRAFFIC INCREASED SORT OF BRUSH FIRE RISKS FROM DISCARDED CIGARETTES, DRAGGING, DRAGGING CHAINS AND CAR FIRES.
BY THE END OF THE 1970S, THE TCFC HAD GROWN FROM 15 TEENAGERS TO NEARLY 80 VOLUNTEERS, INCLUDING EMPS AND PARAMEDICS.
IN 2011, THE TEAM WAS REINSTATED TO ASSIST COUNTY OR TO ASSIST A BASTROP AND TRAVIS COUNTY FIREFIGHTERS AND CONTROLLING 32,000 ACRE CONFLAGRATION THAT YEAR.
AND IT REMAINS ACTIVE TO THIS DAY 10 37 RHEINLAND STREET IS SIGNIFICANT PRIMARILY FOR ITS HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS WITH THE TCFC AND FOR ITS COMMUNITY VALUE THOUGH.
THE COMMISSION MAY ALSO WISH TO CONSIDER ITS STATUS AS AN ARCHITECTURAL CURIOSITY.
CAUSE AS FAR AS WE KNOW, THERE ARE NO OTHER INTACT MINIMAL TRADITIONAL HOMES IN AUSTIN THAT HAVE BEEN USED AS EMERGENCY SERVICES HUB WITHIN OUR CITY.
MISS COMPARES FOR LANDMARK STATUS.
DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THE CASE MOVE APPROACH? I MOVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OR, UH, INITIATING HISTORIC FOR PURSUING HISTORIC ZONING.
DID I HEAR A SECOND COMMISSIONER THE QUARTER? UM, ANY DISCUSSION WE'LL GO AHEAD.
WE, I BELIEVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO RECOMMEND HISTORIC ZONING THAT IT'S ALREADY BEEN BROUGHT TO US.
WE DON'T HAVE TO INITIATE THAT, BUT YES.
IN FAVOR OF HISTORICAL, THAT'S CORRECT.
SO IT IS, UH, TO RECOMMEND, AND LET ME JUST POINT OUT THAT, UM, FOR THIS, UM, FIRST OFF HOUSES OF THIS KIND, WE'RE AGONIZING OVER WHETHER WE CAN SAVE EVEN A FEW OF THEM, PEOPLE ARE COMING TO US TRYING TO, UM, UH, ARGUE THAT THERE'S NO VALUE.
WE KNOW THAT THERE MANY OF THEM ARE VERY VALUABLE AND MANY OF THEM WON'T SURVIVE TO THE NEXT GENERATION.
UH, THIS REALLY IS A HOLDOUT IT'S IN AN ODD LOCATION.
UM, BUT IT IS THE VESTIGE OF WHAT THAT STREET, THAT PORTION OF RILEY WAS WHEN IT WAS RURAL AND THEN LATER RESIDENTIAL.
[02:40:01]
THE FACT THAT SO MUCH OF THAT HISTORY IS INTACT AND WE HAVE OWNERS WHO ARE EXCITED ABOUT THAT.UH, I THINK WE HAVE TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO SUPPORT THEM.
UH, HAS THAT HISTORIC, UM, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? I LOVE THAT.
UH, THE CUBE MARRIAGES OF TRAVIS COUNTY FIRE CONTROL TEAM.
I JUST WANT TO THANK HALAN FOR HER FANTASTIC PRESENTATION, WHICH WAS ON THE SPOT, DID A GREAT JOB.
I WANT TO SAY THE COMMISSIONERS ARE CONSIDERING THIS BECAUSE TO US IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT PEOPLE KNOW THAT TRAVIS COUNTY HAD SOMEBODY PAYING ATTENTION TO THEIR NEEDS.
DOES THE, DO THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS MATTER? WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE CASE AND A SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF RECOMMENDING HISTORIC ZONING, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
SO WE'RE RECOMMENDING LANDMARK STATUS.
[3.B.2. C14H-1986-0015; HR-2021-085731 – 907 Congress Ave. – Discussion (postponed June 28, 2021) Grandberry Building Council District 9 Proposal: Deconstruct, store, and re-erect façade. Applicant: Leah Bojo City Staff: Elizabeth Brummett, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-1264 Staff Recommendation: Approve the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for deconstruction; require regular submission of deliverables specified in the scope of work to Historic Preservation Office staff and the Historic Landmark Commission, with ongoing consultation as work progresses; and request finalization and execution of restrictive covenants regarding the reconstruction timeline before physical work commences. 3.B.3. C14H-2004-0008; HR-2021-085739 – 909 Congress Ave. – Discussion (postponed June 28, 2021) Mitchell-Robertson Building Council District 9 Proposal: Deconstruct, store, and re-erect façade. Applicant: Leah Bojo City Staff: Elizabeth Brummett, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-1264 Staff Recommendation: Approve the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for deconstruction; require regular submission of deliverables specified in the scope of work to Historic Preservation Office staff and the Historic Landmark Commission, with ongoing consultation as work progresses; and request finalization and execution of restrictive covenants regarding the reconstruction timeline before physical work commences. 3.C.1. HR-2021-085748 – 911 Congress Ave. – Discussion (postponed June 28, 2021) Congress Avenue National Register District Council District 9 Proposal: Deconstruct, store, and re-erect façade. Applicant: Leah Bojo City Staff: Elizabeth Brummett, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-1264 Staff Recommendation: Comment on and release the plans for deconstruction. Commission review of new construction within a National Register district will be required, including review of detailed plans for reconstruction of the façade, once developed. (Part 2 of 2)]
OKAY.MOVING ALONG HERE TO B 2 9 0 7 CONGRESS, UH, B3 9 0 9 AND THEN NINE 11 CONGRESS C1 STAFF IS GOING TO GIVE A PRESENTATION OF THAT ADDRESSES.
THEN GENERALLY THEY WERE GOING TO TAKE UP EACH ONE, INDIVIDUALLY STAFF, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
THIS IS ELIZABETH BRUMMETT ON STAFF.
UM, I WILL FOCUS ON, UH, SOME BACKGROUND RESEARCH THAT I DID SINCE THE LAST TIME WE HEARD THESE CASES.
UH, THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION HAS APPROVED, DISMANTLING AND RECONSTRUCTING THESE FACADES MORE THAN ONCE PREVIOUSLY IN 2006, THE LANDMARK COMMISSION APPROVED A CERTIFICATE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR 9 0 7 AND 909 CONGRESS.
THAT PROJECT DID NOT MOVE FORWARD AT THAT TIME.
AND IN 2014, THE COMMISSION VOTED TO PURSUE DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT CASES AGAINST THESE PROPERTIES.
UH, THAT THEN, UH, TRANSFORMED INTO A REQUEST IN 2015, AGAIN, TO DECONSTRUCT AND REBUILD THE FRONT WALLS OF THESE THREE BUILDINGS AND THE COMMISSION AND JANUARY, 2015 VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO APPROVE THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE APPLICANT FOLLOWS.
CERTAIN SPECIFICATIONS THAT HAD BEEN PROVIDED.
UH, THE DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT CASE APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN DROPPED IN APRIL OF THAT YEAR.
IT DID NOT APPEAR ON THAT AGENDA AGAIN IN 2018, THE EDGE AND THE JUNE MEETING THE COMMISSION APPROVED DECONSTRUCTION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF THE FACADES WITH A REQUEST THAT THE APPLICANT COMMUNICATE WHERE THE FACADES ARE STORES.
UH, SO WE ARE BACK TO THE PRESENT.
I CAN'T SPEAK TO, UH, THE REASONS BEHIND SOME OF THESE FALSE STARTS, UH, BUT I CAN SAY THAT AT THIS JUNCTURE, THE SITE PLAN AND, UH, DEVELOPMENT PROCESS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION BEHIND THESE FACADES IS GOING TO BE A LENGTHY PROCESS AND THE APPLICANT NEEDS SOME ASSURANCE THAT THEY CAN PROCEED BEFORE PLANNING FURTHER ON THOSE PROJECTS.
SO WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS AGAIN, THE REQUEST TO VERY CAREFULLY DECONSTRUCT AND RECONSTRUCT THE BUILDING FACADES FOR TWO LANDMARKS AT 9 0 7 AND 909 CONGRESS AVENUE, AS WELL AS A BUILDING AND THE CONGRESS AVENUE, HISTORIC DISTRICT, UH, NINE 11 CONGRESS.
UH, THERE IS ADDITIONAL BACKUP THAT, UM, THE APPLICANT WENT THROUGH, UH, TO SOME EXTENT AND THEIR PRESENTATION EARLIER.
WE HAVE NEW SCHEMATIC DESIGN PLANS THAT HAVE BEEN BASED ON A LASER SCAN OF THESE BUILDINGS AND AN UPDATED STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING REPORT THAT ADDRESSES THE DIFFICULTY OF SHORING, UH, 909 PONDEROUS IN PLACE.
UH, THE FINAL, UM, NOT THAT I WANT TO MENTION ON 900, 700, 909, IS THAT THESE PROPERTIES HAVE CONSISTENTLY FAILED LANDMARK INSPECTION OVER PREVIOUS YEARS.
UH, THERE WAS ONE YEAR IN WHICH, UH, 9 0 9 DID PASS, BUT I DON'T HAVE ANY EVIDENCE THAT THE, UH, OWNER RECEIVED THAT, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO HAVE APPLIED TO TRAVIS COUNTY TO RECEIVE THAT TAX ABATEMENT.
UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY NECESSARILY DID.
THERE HAD BEEN SOME MENTION AT PRIOR COMMISSION MEETINGS OF THE IDEA OF USING THE, THE TAX BENEFITS THAT THESE PROPERTIES HAD RECEIVED AS A FORM OF COLLATERAL TO ENSURE THE RECONSTRUCTION.
[02:45:02]
AND THAT REALLY DOES NOT SEEM VIABLE.INSTEAD, STAFF HAS WORKED WITH THE LAW DEPARTMENT ON LANGUAGE FOR A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT THAT FOLLOWS THE CITY TEMPLATE AND WOULD REQUIRE THAT THE FACADES BE RE-ERECTED CAREFULLY RECONSTRUCTED.
I SHOULD CLARIFY, UH, TO FOLLOW THE, UM, THE SCOPE OF WORK THAT'S BEEN SUBMITTED WITHIN THREE YEARS OF THEIR DEMOLITION.
UH, THE FINAL NOTE THAT I SHOULD MAKE REGARDING NINE 11 CONGRESS AVENUE IS IT IS NOT A LANDMARK.
UH, AT ONE POINT THERE WAS AN EFFORT TO LANDMARK THE BUILDING, UH, AT THAT JUNCTURE, IT STILL HAD A SLIP COVER ON IT WITH THE SLIP COVER REMOVED.
WE CAN SEE THAT THERE REALLY ARE NOT ANY OF THE CHARACTER DEFINING FEATURES THAT WE GIVE THAT PROPERTY INTEGRITY.
SO WHILE IT CERTAINLY WAS, UM, HISTORICALLY HOME TO A NUMBER OF BUSINESSES THAT ARE SIGNIFICANT AND IT COULD MEET THE CRITERIA FOR HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS, UH, DUE TO THE LOW INTEGRITY OF THE FACADE STAFF DOES NOT FEEL THAT IT MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE.
UM, SO THERE ARE DIFFERENT MOTIONS FOR THAT.
STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND 4 97 AND 909 VERSUS NINE 11.
I BELIEVE THAT THE COMMISSION COULD TAKE 9 0 7 AND 909 TOGETHER.
UM, IF YOU WISH TO MAKE THE SAME MOTION FOR BOTH PROPERTIES, OR IF THE COMMISSION, WHICH IS TO DIFFERENTIATE THE TREATMENT OF THOSE TWO PROPERTIES, UH, SEPARATE MOTIONS WILL BE NEEDED.
SO, UH, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR 907 AND 909 IS TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR DECONSTRUCTION REQUIRE REGULAR SUBMISSION OF DELIVERABLES SPECIFIED IN THE SCOPE OF WORK TO STAFF AND THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION WITH ONGOING CONSULTATION HAS WORKED PROGRESSES AND REQUEST FINALIZATION AND EXECUTION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS REGARDING THE RECONSTRUCTION TIMELINE BEFORE PHYSICAL WORK COMMENCES FOR NINE 11 CONGRESS, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO COMMENT ON AND RELEASE THE PLANS FOR DECONSTRUCTION COMMISSIONED REVIEW OF NEW CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THE NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT WILL BE REQUIRED.
AND THAT WILL INCLUDE REVIEW OF DETAILED PLANS FOR RECONSTRUCTION OF THE FACADE.
ONCE THOSE PLANS ARE DEVELOPED, UM, WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO YOU FOR DISCUSSION.
UM, I SHOULD EMPHASIZE THAT THE APPLICANT TEAM REMAINS ON THE LINE, UH, PARTICULARLY IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, UH, ABOUT THE NEW COMPONENTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED FOR THIS, FOR THIS MEETING.
THIS PERMIT, COMMISSIONER LAROCHE.
UH, I GUESS THIS IS DISCUSSION.
WE'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE BEFORE WE DISCUSS.
CAN YOU MAKE A MOTION? WELL, I'M A BIT CONFUSED BY THAT BECAUSE I THOUGHT COMMISSIONER COOK AND I WERE PRETTY CLEAR THE LAST TIME WE MET ON THIS TOPIC AND I THOUGHT WE HAD FROM DIRECTION.
AND SO MAYBE STAFF CAN TELL US WHY THAT ISN'T BEING IN BOTH.
THE LAST TIME THAT THIS CAME BEFORE THE COMMISSION, UM, THE APPLICANT WAS DEVELOPING THEIR PLANS AND LOOKING FOR FEEDBACK ON THOSE PLANS.
UH, THEY HAVE CONTINUED TO ENGAGE WITH THEIR STRUCTURAL ENGINEER REGARDING THE FEASIBILITY OF RETAINING 9 0 9 IN PLACE.
AND, UH, THEY DO NOT FEEL THAT THAT IS FEASIBLE.
IF YOU WANTED TO DIRECT ANY QUESTIONS TO THEM.
ALSO, I FEEL I SHOULD REEMPHASIZE THE FACT THAT THE COMMISSION HAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DECONSTRUCTION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF THE FACADE OF 909 CONGRESS.
AND SO IF THE COMMISSION WISHES TO TAKE A DIFFERENT DIRECTION TONIGHT, UH, IT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL TO STAFF TO HAVE A CLEAR STATEMENT ARTICULATING WHAT HAS CHANGED FROM THOSE THREE PRIOR APPROVALS.
I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT WE DID APPROVE THE CONSTRUCTION OF 9 0 9 FARMERS.
I THINK SHE'S REFERRING TO A ACTION THAT WAS TAKEN SEVERAL YEARS BACK.
IS THAT CORRECT? MS. PERMIT? YES.
IN 2006, 2015 AND 2018, THE COMMISSION APPROVED DECONSTRUCTION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF BOTH FACADES, BOTH LANDMARK BUILDINGS, COMMISSIONER COOK, SECOND DISCUSSION.
I WILL MOVE TO REITERATE LAST MONTH'S MOTION TO ALLOW THE DECONSTRUCTION STORAGE AND RECONSTRUCTION OF 9 0 7 TO RETAIN THE FACADE OF 9 0 9 IN PLACE.
AND TO ALLOW THE DECONSTRUCTION STORAGE AND RECONSTRUCTION OF NINE 11
[02:50:02]
AND COMMISSIONER LAROCHE, SECOND SET MOTION.AND STAFF'S QUESTION ABOUT WHAT WAS DIFFERENT IS WHAT I SEE IN 2018.
I DO NOT RECALL THAT WE APPROVED THE DEMOLITION.
I BELIEVE WE APPROVED THE APPROACH WHEN IT CAME IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT, WHICH IT NEVER DID.
I BELIEVE THE PREVIOUS REFERENCE YOU GAVE, UH, CLICKED ON THE LINK TO THE CORRESPONDENCE WHERE YOU NOTED IT WAS APPROVED.
AND THE LETTER NOTES THAT THAT DEMOLITION AND RECONSTRUCTION IS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE LARGER DEVELOPMENT.
SO IT'S ALL TACOS ON BIG PERMIT WHERE IT'S NOT GOING INTO STORAGE INDEFINITELY.
I'VE I'VE SAID IN THE PAST THAT I WOULDN'T BE IN FAVOR OF CONSIDERING ANY CONSTRUCTION OF ALL OF THEM.
IF IT WERE TIED TO A LARGER PROJECT THAT WE COULD SEE FROM BEGINNING TO END, EVEN THOUGH THAT ITSELF HOLDS RED, IT'S GOT AS CAN BE SEEN ACROSS THE STREET AT NINE 16 CONGRESS, UH, I'M JUST, UH, AND AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE, THE PATH GIVEN THE FALSE STARTS OVER THE YEARS.
UH, AND I WANT IT TO ADDRESS THE COVENANT.
I'VE READ THE COVENANT AGAIN, AND I SEE NO REMEDY WHATSOEVER, OTHER THAN SAYING, THE CITY CAN TAKE WHATEVER REMEDY IT HAS STATED IN THE AGREEMENT AND THE AGREEMENT STATES, NO REMEDY.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT REMEDY OR WHAT DAMAGES THE CITY COULD CLAIM FOR A PRIVATE PROPERTY.
UH, AND SO IF WE HAD MORE FROM BACK UP INFORMATION ON THE STRENGTH OF THAT COVENANT, I W I WOULD BE WILLING TO EXPLORE THAT PERSONALLY, IF WE HAD A LARGER DEVELOPMENT THAT THIS IS IN CONJUNCTION WITH, I'D BE WILLING TO EXPLORE THAT PERSONALLY, IN THE MEANTIME, UM, I DID APPRECIATE, UH, MS. CARTER'S, UH, MATERIALS, AND I THINK IT'S A GREAT RESPONSE TO THE DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT CASE, WHICH I THINK WAS DROPPED PROBABLY IN RELATION TO A PROMISE TO REDEVELOP.
UH, AGAIN, IT'S, EVERYTHING IS BEING STATED IN CONTEXT WITH ATTENDING REDEVELOPMENT, WITH ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO SHOW ABOUT WHEN, WHERE, HOW, WHO, WHAT THAT PENDING REDEVELOPMENT WILL BE.
SO I WOULD PREFER NO DISCUSSION OF ANY ANALYSIS OF WHAT'S BEING REQUESTED PENDING SOME FUTURE UNKNOWN REDEVELOPMENT.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S FEASIBLE FOR US TO DISCUSS IN CONTEXT OF SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T.
UM, THOSE ARE, THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS RIGHT NOW.
UM, I'M HOPING TO RESPOND AT SOME POINT, UH, IF YOU'LL DIRECT, UH, THAT TO ME, IF THE COMMISSIONER LAURA JUST WANTS TO SPEAK FOR US, THAT'S, THAT'S PERFECTLY FINE.
I JUST WANTED HIM TO HAVE MORE TO SPEAK TO THEM.
I THOUGHT WE, I DID SECOND KEVIN'S MOTION, RIGHT? SO TO SPEAK TO THAT, WELL, I WILL, TO SOME EXTENT, I THINK THAT BASED ON HOW WE'VE GOTTEN TO WHERE WE ARE, I HAVE LITTLE TO NO FAITH THAT WE ARE GOING TO, UM, HONOR THAT COVENANT MOVING FORWARD, UH, TH THAT AS COMMISSIONER FOCUS, UH, THERE THERE'S NOTHING TANGIBLE BEFORE US.
AND I ALSO FEEL LIKE WE'RE MAKING A STRUCTURAL DETERMINATION OUT OF CONVENIENCE FOR DEVELOPMENT, AS OPPOSED TO OUT OF NEED FOR PRESERVATION.
SO, YOU KNOW, I PSYCH THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER AND I TAKE NO ISSUE WITH THEIR OPINIONS, BUT THEY NOTE THAT THE BRICK WAS SOFT AND UNSTABLE, BUT YET THEY OFFERED TO CATALOG AND REUSE SAYING BRICK WELL IS, WHICH IS, IS A SOFT AND UNUSABLE, OR IS PRESERVABLE.
SO THESE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT I FIND IN THE PRESENTATION, BUT JUST INDICATE TO ME THAT THERE'S NO CRUMP EFFORT TO PRESERVE THAT FACADE.
I JUST REITERATE MY POSITION FROM PAST MEETINGS THAT I FEEL VERY STRONGLY THAT ON CONGRESS AVENUE, IF THERE'S A WILL TO PRESERVE A FACADE, IT CAN HAPPEN.
I JUST WANTED TO TAKE THE LIBERTY TO MAKE ONE, ONE LAST COMMENT ABOUT THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS REPORT, THAT THE SOD CAN'T BE STABILIZED AND MORE CABIN.
WHILE WE EVENTUALLY RELEASED A PERMIT FOR SOMEONE WHO SAID THEY COULD STAY BELOW THE FACADE AND DO FETCH WORK AT NINE 16 CONGRESS, AND THAT FACADE IS STABILIZED.
THEY ACTUALLY CAME BACK TO US TELLING
[02:55:01]
US IT'S DIFFICULT.CAN WE TAKE A SHORTCUT THAT MODEL, THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING TO STABILIZE IT? AND WE INSISTED THAT THEY DO IT IN A WAY THAT DIDN'T MODEL THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING WITH TIE BACKS.
AND THEY CURRENTLY HAVE BEAMS IN PLACE, AND IT'S STABILIZED.
I KNOW WORK IS HAPPENING, BUT IT STABILIZED.
WE ALSO AT, UH, THE MASONIC BLOG WHERE YOU APPROVED A TOWER WITH THE, BECAUSE SOMEONE CAN CONVINCE US THAT THEY CAN'T DO IT, OR SOMEONE CAN CONVINCE US THAT THEY CAN DO IT TO SERVE THEIR PURPOSE, BUT IT WAS.
BUT, UH, AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE FACADE HAS TO BE RETAINED AND IT'S A HISTORIC LANDMARK.
AND UNLESS THERE'S SOME COMPELLING REASONS THAT IT CAN'T STAND UP AND CAN'T BE RESTORED, WHICH I HAVE NOT BEEN CONVINCED OF OUTSIDE OF PUTTING A TOWER BEHIND IT, OR A PARKING GARAGE BEHIND IT, WHICH IS NOT THE SUBJECT AT HAND IT'S ITS PRESERVATION AND RETENTION OF THE LANDMARK.
UM, I, UH, THE REPORT WAS IN SERVICE OF THE LARGER PROJECT AND IT SAID IT COULDN'T BE DONE WHEN OTHER ENGINEERS THAT SAID IT COULD BE DONE.
SO I'M NOT CONVINCED BY THAT I, TO YOUR POINT ABOUT THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, I THINK THE FACT THAT WE HAD A DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT CASE ON OUR AGENDA FOR 14 YEARS AND NOTHING HAPPENED WITH IT, UM, MIGHT INFORM OUR DECISION AS TO THE CITY'S WILL TO, UM, TO STEP UP TO THE PLATE ON PRESERVATION ISSUES, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, MAKE A FEW POINTS.
UH, FOR THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, THAT IS A TEMPLATE THAT, UH, CAME FROM THE LAW DEPARTMENT WITH DETAILS FILLED IN FOR THE SPECIFICS OF THIS CASE.
UH, THE LEGAL RECOURSE WOULD BE TO SUE IF THE BUILDING IS NOT RECONSTRUCTED AND TO COMPEL THE, UH, THE OWNER TO RECONSTRUCT THE FACADES.
UM, I DO WANT TO ASK, UM, SOME, SOME CLARIFYING QUESTIONS REGARDING THE MOTION.
AT THIS POINT, THE APPLICANT IS NOT SEEKING ADVICE ON DIRECTION FOR THE PROJECTS THEY ARE SEEKING APPROVAL OR DENIAL OF CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS.
UM, SO I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY AS THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR 9 0 7 AND TO DENY THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR 9 0 9 AND THEN TO COMMENT ON AS REALLY SLOW PLANS FOR NINE 11.
NO, I'M, I'M NOT A LAWYER, BUT THAT, THAT TEMPLATE, WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE SOME ON TO EXPLAIN TO US HOW, EVEN IF THERE WAS A WILL TO SUE THAT ANYTHING COULD BE DONE, BECAUSE, UH, IT SAYS IF ANY PERSON OR ENTITY SHALL VIOLATOR ATTEMPT TO VIOLATE THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE LAWFUL FOR THE CITY OF AUSTIN TO PROSECUTE PROCEEDINGS AT LAW OR INEQUITY AGAINST SUCH PERSON VIOLATING OR ATTEMPTING TO VIOLATE SUCH AGREEMENT TO REQUIRE APPROPRIATE ACTIONS INDICATED IN THE AGREEMENT AND TO COLLECT DAMAGES FOR SUCH, FOR SUCH ACTIONS OR INACTIONS.
AND I UNDERSTAND IMAGINE WHAT THAT KIND OF, WHAT THAT LAWSUIT WOULD LOOK LIKE IF WE EVEN ENTERED INTO IT.
AND, AND IT'S, IT'S IT DOESN'T, IT'S JUST KIND OF, IT SEEMS LIKE A CIRCULAR CASE.
AND I, I DON'T SEE ANY, ANY, LIKE WITH HER THAT I WOULD EVER BE ENFORCED.
SO THE DISCUSSION, I MEAN, BETTY, TAKE A VOTE ON THIS.
I AM WONDERING, OBVIOUSLY I'M NOT AWARE EITHER, BUT I'VE WORKED WITH SOME OF THESE SITUATIONS.
UH, ACTUALLY WE EVEN DEALT WITH THIS A LITTLE BIT ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHERE WE ENCOURAGED SOME OF THE ARRANGEMENTS TO BE MADE INTO A, AS A CONTRACT BINDING CONTRACT.
I DON'T KNOW IF THE CITY WOULD BE WILLING TO DO THAT.
I DON'T KNOW IF THE, UH, OWNERS WOULD BE WILLING TO DO THAT, BUT I THINK THEY HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT, UH, ONCE THOSE FACADES ARE DOWN, THEN WE'RE ENTIRELY BEHOLDEN TO THEM.
AND SO FAR THE TRACK RECORD OF OWNERSHIP HERE IS VERY POOR.
SO I'VE, MAYBE WE SHOULD ASK, UH, IN ADDITION TO THIS MOTION THAT IS DENIED, THAT WE ASKED FOR A BETTER VEHICLE FOR THE OWNER TO INITIATE A BETTER VEHICLE THAT WOULD PROVIDE GUARANTEES.
AND I'M THINKING OF POSTING A FISCAL, I'M THINKING OF SOME SORT OF CONTRACTUAL ARRANGEMENT, SOMETHING WHERE DAMAGES WOULD BE ALREADY SPECIFIED, OR THE REMEDY WOULD ALREADY BE AGREED TO COMMISSION.
AND I THINK IT WOULD BE CLEAR THAT THE AGREEMENT SHOULD, SHOULD VARY WITH THE PROPERTY.
IF THERE'S A CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S VERY CLEAR IN A CERTAIN DOCUMENT THAT, UH, I THINK IT IS POSSIBLE THAT SOMEONE COULD SELL THE PROPERTY AND THEY'LL NEVER HAVE ANY OBLIGATIONS.
THE COVENANT IS RUNNING WITH THE LAND, UM, THAT IS INDICATED IN THE COVENANT LANGUAGE.
[03:00:01]
UM, I HAVE SOME TREPIDATION ABOUT GOING BACK TO THE LAW DEPARTMENT AND ASKING FOR A BETTER VEHICLE OF SOME SORTS, A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT IS WHAT'S TYPICALLY USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH ZONING CASES, WHERE THERE IS SOMETHING OUTSIDE OF CODE, UH, THAT THERE IS AN INTEREST TO REQUIRE.UH, WE, WE ALREADY HAD TO MAKE A STRONG ARGUMENT THAT A COVENANT WAS, UM, APPROPRIATE IN THIS CASE THAT THIS WAS SOMETHING ABOVE AND BEYOND, UM, IN TERMS OF A TIMELINE, WHETHER CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS COULD STIPULATE.
UH, SO I, I DON'T KNOW, UM, IF THAT IS ROLLED INTO THE MOTION, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TRACTION WE WILL GET.
UM, AND THEN WILL THAT HAVE TO COME BACK BEFORE THE COMMISSION? WELL, LET, LET ME ADDRESS THAT.
I THINK THE ANSWER IS YES, IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO COME BACK IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSION AND THE LAWYERS THAT I JUST ON THE FACE OF IT, A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT LAB, I WAS ALREADY WONDERING WHY THEY WERE USING THAT.
YOU KNOW, THIS IS AN EVENT THAT HAS A VERY FIXED TIMEFRAME.
WE LET THIS PROCEED, IT GETS REBUILT AND THEN IT'S NOT NEEDED ANYMORE.
AND THEN IT'S GOING TO BE AN ENCOMPASS THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.
I, I THINK THERE ARE PARTIES WHO IF THEY ARE GENUINELY WANTING TO WORK TOGETHER AND THEY REALLY DID THE BURDEN IS ON THE OWNERS, UH, THAT THERE SHOULD BE A, UM, UH, A NUMBER OF GUARANTEES THAT CAN BE NEGOTIATED.
I THINK THE CITY JUST WENT AND STARTED DOWN THE WRONG, UH, THE WRONG PATH.
AND YES, I BELIEVE WE SHOULD ASK THEM.
UH, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A HARD QUESTION, BUT IT'S CERTAINLY GOING TO BE OUR UP COMMISSIONER RUSH.
I MEAN, ESSENTIALLY BEN, WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING IS THAT THEY HAVE TO HAVE SOME SKIN IN THE GAME IN ORDER FOR THIS TO BE VIABLE.
I CAN SEE THREE YEARS PASSING AND WHAT RECOURSE DO WE REALLY HAVE TO, OR GET A REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION.
AND I'M NOT THERE THREE YEARS, THREE YEARS, AND HAVE TO EXPAND COST AND RESOURCES TO PURSUE IT AT THAT COMMISSIONER RUSH.
THE CITY IS IN A POSITION WHERE THEY'RE CREATING AN ENDANGERMENT AND, AND I THINK A REASONABLE CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION WITH SOME ESCROW WOULD ENSURE THAT THE CITY HAS SOME LEVEL OF RECOURSE TO PROTECT THEIR OWN INTEREST IN THE SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC, UM, AND STAFF.
UM, I'M WILLING TO BRAINSTORM WITH THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS IF THEY WANT TO, BECAUSE IT MAY REQUIRE AND MIGHT BE WORTH RECRUITING IF THE CITY CAN INTEROUTE CONTRACT AT THAT TIME, AN OUTSIDE ENTITY.
AND I DO BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE SOME PRESERVATION INTERESTED GROUPS THAT MIGHT HELP SERVE THAT PURPOSE.
IF THERE'S ENOUGH FURTHER DISCUSSION COMMISSIONER COOK, I'M SORRY TO ASK, BUT COULD YOU RESTATE YOUR MOTION? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
UM, UH, I MOVED TO APPROVE THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR 9 0 7 AND NINE OH AND 9 0 7 TO DENY THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR 9 0 9 AND TO, UH, UH, APPLAUD THE OWNER FOR DISASSEMBLING AND REASSEMBLING NINE 11, DESPITE IT NOT BEING A LANDMARK.
AND THAT WOULD BE MY COMMENT AND, UH, RELEASE A DEMOLITION PERMIT.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY RAISING YOUR HAND.
I'D SAY IT'S UNANIMOUS UNLESS IT PASSES.
[3.B.4. C14H-2000-0005; HR-2021-103182 – 13300 Dessau Rd. – Discussion Evangelical Lutheran Church Council District 7 Proposal: Relocate church to Jourdan-Bachman Pioneer Farms, 10621 Pioneer Farms Drive. Applicant: Mike Ward City Staff: Elizabeth Brummett, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-1264 Staff Recommendation: Approve the application. To maintain the landmark designation once the move is complete, future Commission action will be required to initiate historic zoning at the new location and remove historic zoning from the Dessau Road tract. (Part 2 of 2)]
OKAY.MOVING ON TO EAT BEFORE 13,300 DECILE ROAD, UH, THIS IS THE, UM, TRAVIS COUNTY HISTORICAL COMMISSION'S REQUEST TO MOVE THE EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH TO PLAY ON YOUR FARMS. UM, AS I STATED EARLIER IN THE MEETING, UM, THIS, THE COMMISSION ENCOURAGED, UH, AND PASSED A RESOLUTION TO SUPPORT THE MOVE, UM, THE, THE CHURCHES IN DANGER AS, AS IT IS, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO, UM, ONE THING THAT WILL HAVE TO HAPPEN, THIS IS A LANDMARK, AND PERHAPS WE NEED TO TAKE TWO VOTES ON IT.
ONE, UM, TO CONSIDER WHETHER TO ALLOW THE MOVE, TO PLAY IN YOUR FARMS AND THE OTHER TO REMOVE THE LANDMARK STATUS FROM THE EXISTING
[03:05:01]
PROPERTY, ONCE THAT MOOD HAS BEEN MADE, AND THEN IN RE INITIATE HISTORIC ZONING ON THE CHURCH INDIVIDUALLY, ONCE IT IS MOVED TO ITS NEW PLACE.AND THE REASON THAT I, I PUT THAT OUT THERE IS BECAUSE IT WOULD BE ONEROUS FOR THE APPLICANTS TO THEN HAVE TO GO BACK AND REAPPLY FOR A HISTORIC ZONING.
IF THE COMMISSION INITIATES THAT, THEN, UM, THEN THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY THOSE FEES, UM, WHICH THEY'RE ALREADY PAYING PRETTY HIGH FEES JUST TO MOVE THE BUILDING.
SO, UM, STAFF, DO YOU HAVE YES.
WE DON'T NEED A STAFF PRESENTATION, I THINK.
WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MOVE AND A SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY RAISING HAND.
NOW, DO I HEAR A MOTION TO INITIATE HISTORIC ZONING ONCE THE MOVE, THE INITIATION OF HISTORIC ZONING COULD REMAIN ON OUR AGENDA UNTIL THE TIME THAT IT ACTUALLY IS IN ITS NEW POSITION, AT WHICH TIME WE WOULD RECOMMEND HISTORIC ZONING? UM, DO I HEAR A MOTION TO THAT EFFECT? DO I HEAR A SECOND, SECOND MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HIMSELF SECOND BY COMMISSIONER? RIGHT.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
BEFORE WE CALL THE VOTE, KA, COULD I, UM, POTENTIALLY CLARIFY AND EXPAND THAT MOTION? UH, SO WE WILL, AS PART OF THE RELOCATION, WE OBVIOUSLY, WE WANT TO KEEP THE HISTORIC ZONING ON THIS PROPERTY.
WE WOULD LIKE IT TO REMAIN A LANDMARK.
UM, SO ABSOLUTELY WE WILL WANT TO PLACE HISTORIC ZONING ON THE BUILDING AT ITS NEW SITE, BUT WE ALSO NEED TO RELINQUISH THE HISTORIC ZONING ON THE EXISTING SITE.
ONCE THIS BUILDING IS NO LONGER THERE.
UM, SO I I'M ASKING IF THE, THE MAKER AND THE SECRETARY OF THE MOTION WOULD BE AMENABLE TO A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, THAT THEY ALSO INITIATE DE DESIGNATION OF THE EXISTING SITE WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT RECOMMENDATION WOULD MOVE FORWARD ONCE THE MOVE HAS OCCURRED.
I APPRECIATE THE CLARIFICATION THAT WILL BE NECESSARY, WHERE WE WILL INITIATE BOTH ACTIONS, BOTH THE REMOVAL OF THIS, UM, THE DESIGNATION ON THE SITE, ONCE THE PURITY FOR MOVE IN THE INITIATION LOCATION.
DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT AS THE SECONDARY? OKAY.
WE HAVE ACCEPTED THAT AT THAT AMENDMENT.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
[3.B.7. HR-2021-099481 – 2210 Windsor Rd. – Discussion Davis-Sibley House Council District 9 Proposal: Redesign of carport and rear modifications. Applicant: Richard Hill & Mark Lakins Committee Feedback: Explore ways to ways to rebuild the back stair. City Staff: Steve Sadowsky, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-6454 Staff Recommendation: To be determined (Part 2 of 2)]
THE 7 22 10 WINDSOR ROAD.THIS IS STEVE'S CASE, AND HE WAS HAVING SOME TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES EARLIER.
SO LET'S SEE IF WE CAN GET HIM ON UM, SORRY.
UM, COULD WE GO ONTO ANOTHER CHASE WHILE HE'S TRYING TO GET BACK ON? OH, SURELY NOT.
IS THAT THE APP? THE APPLICANT IN THE BACKGROUND? THAT'S RICHARD WHINING IN THE BACKGROUND.
CAN YOU ALL HEAR ME SECOND UP, RICHARD? YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU.
STEVE, DO WE HAVE STEVE ONBOARD YET? YES.
UH, THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE.
THIS IS ACTUALLY A FAIRLY SIMPLE CASE.
UH, A LOT OF THE WORK ON THE SOUTH HAS PREVIOUSLY BEEN APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION.
THE CARDBOARD HAS BEEN REDUCED IN SIZE, THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW, UH, RE RE REVIEWED THAT AND HAD NO ISSUES WITH IT.
SO REALLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT NOW IS
[03:10:01]
THE RETENTION OF AN EXTERIOR STAIR ON THE BACK OF THE HOUSE, BUT WHICH ALSO FACES NOW'S ROAD.DAVID SIBLEY HOUSE HAS TWO FRONTS TO IT.
SO IT'S GOT THE WINDSOR ROAD FRONT, WHICH IS THE PRINCIPAL, BUT IT'S ALSO GOT THE STREET PRESENCE ON NOW IT'S ROAD.
AND THIS IS WHERE THE STAIR IS THE STAIRS NONCOMPLIANT.
SO THE OPTIONS HERE ARE, UH, EITHER APPROVE THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATE UNITS TO CON TO REMOVE THAT STAIR, UH, AND CONSTRUCT A COVERED PORCH IN ITS PLACE.
THE SECOND OPTION WOULD BE TO RETAIN THE STAIR AS NON-FUNCTIONING, UH, BUT RETAIN IT AS A FEATURE ON THE HOUSE.
AND THEN THE THIRD OPTION WOULD BE TO, UH, DENY THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
AND, UH, WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN IS THAT YOU'D HAVE A NON-CONFORMING STAIR THAT, UH, WOULD NEVER, WHO IS NOT GOING TO PASS CODE COMPLIANCE AND WOULD OPEN THIS UP FOR AN APPEAL TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN THE CAPSULE.
UH, THE ARCHITECTURAL RE THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMITTEE, UH, FELT THAT THIS STAIR ON THE BACK OF THE HOUSE IS A CHARACTER DEFINING ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE OF THE HOUSE AND URGE THE APPLICANT TO, UH, LOOK AT WAYS TO RETAIN IT.
UH, STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS, IS THE SAME.
UM, THE NON MAKING THIS A NON-FUNCTIONING STARE IS NOT, UH, IS NOT A GOOD OPTION, BUT, UH, IT WOULD RETAIN THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE.
UH DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO TELL YA.
IT'S GOING TO BE UP TO THE COMMISSION TO DECIDE WHETHER THE STAIRS IS WORTH RETAINING OR, UH, OR, OR, UH, REPLACING.
I THINK STAFF RIGHT NOW IS SHOWING US, SAID, STARE ON THE SCREEN.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE CASE? COMMISSIONER LOU RUSH, THE ARCHITECTS MAY NOT BE THAT EXCITED ABOUT IT, BUT I MOVE TO APPROVE THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS WITHOUT THE STAIR, BECAUSE I, THAT, UH, IT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF EVERYONE AS WELL, TO NOT TO HAVE A NON-CONFORMING STARE.
IS THERE A SECOND ON TO THAT MOTION? OKAY.
WE HAVE A MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER MOSHE SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER FEATHERS THEN.
UM, I, YES, UH, COMMISSIONER VALENS WEBB.
I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT IT'S THE MOTION INTENDED, UH, ALSO TO OUR REQUEST THAT THE ROOF NOT BE CONSTRUCTED ABOVE WHERE THE PROPOSED OR THE STAIR WAS REMOVED.
I THINK THAT WAS ANOTHER POINT THAT WE MADE IN THE, IN THE, UH, ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING WAS THAT THE ROOF THAT IS PROPOSED, UM, IS A REPLICA OF, OF WHAT WAS THERE HISTORICALLY.
AND SO IT'S, UM, WE, WE ASKED THAT THAT ROOF STRUCTURE BE SIMPLIFIED COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON.
COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON WOULD ACCEPT THAT.
UM, IN TERMS OF, UH, DISCUSSION ON LIST, UM, YOU MAY HAVE SEEN AN EMAIL, UM, PROBABLY LAST WEEK FROM PHOEBE ALLEN, UM, ABOUT THE DIRECTION AND THE, UH, COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT THINGS ON THIS PROPERTY, UM, THAT SHE WAS SURPRISED, UH, THAT SENSE IT WAS A LANDMARK THAT CERTAIN THINGS WERE APPROVED.
AND THEN I WAS COPIED ON AN EMAIL FROM, UH, WAYNE BELL WHO ALSO WEIGHED IN ON THAT.
AND I THINK THE GIST OF THEIR COMMENTS ARE THAT, UM, WE HAVE PERHAPS GONE TOO FAR AND APPROVING MANY CHANGES TO A DESIGNATED LANDMARK.
AND I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT INTO THE DISCUSSION.
[03:15:01]
THAT I WAS NOT, UM, IN ATTENDANCE AT THE COMMITTED, BUT I UNDERSTAND THE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION THAT THE STEER REMAIN IN PLACE, BECAUSE IT IS A CHARACTER DEFINING FEATURE OF THIS SORT OF MEDITERRANEAN VILLA COMPLEX HERE, COMMISSIONER, YOUR WAYLON.I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY AS WELL THAT THE STAIR IS NO LONGER THERE.
SO ANYTHING, IF THE STAIR WAS TO GO BACK, IT WOULD BE A RECONSTRUCTION.
I BELIEVE THERE IS WATER DAMAGE IN THE WALL BEHIND.
SO THAT'S REALLY AN ISSUE, COMMISSIONER COOK, IS THAT CORRECT? AM I REMEMBERING THAT CORRECT? YES.
AS I UNDERSTAND THE, THE ROOF SHED WATER DIRECTLY ONTO THE STAIR, WHICH WAS A WOOD-FRAME STUCCO CONSTRUCTION THAT DIDN'T DRAIN WELL.
AND, UH, THE WALL BEHIND IT WAS DEFINITELY FROM THE PHOTOS ROTTED OUT.
SO I ASSUME THAT THE RAILING ON THE OTHER SIDE WAS AS WELL.
I DID HAVE, CAN WE ASK A QUESTION OF THE ARCHITECT BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE NON-COMPLIANT STAIR AND ALL I SEE IS THE SHADOW LINE OF THE STEPS THAT LOOKS TO ME TO BE PRETTY CLOSE TO SEVEN 11.
AND AFTER OUR MEETING, UH, AT THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, I WAS HOPING TO SEE SOME SORT OF DIAGRAM TO INDICATE WHY IT'S NOT NON-COMPLIANT AND WHY, UH, WITHIN CODE COMPLIANT, RISERS AND TREADS, IT COULDN'T BE REPLICATED IN A COMPLIANT WAY.
SO WE'VE BEEN TOLD IT'S NOT COMPLIANT, BUT WE DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHY TIM COVET.
UM, THERE IS A DRAWING IN THE DRAWING PACK.
THE LAST DRAWING IS A DIAGRAM SHOWING A POTENTIAL COMPLYING STAIR, ARE YOU THERE? OKAY.
UM, MY SCREEN IS SO DELAYED THAT I CAN'T SEE WHAT YOU'RE SEEING.
OH, WE'RE NOT SEEING ANYTHING AT THE MOMENT.
UM, CAN STAFF BRING THAT UP? WHICH PAGE DINA? IT IS? IT IS IN THE DRAWING PACKET.
THIS, THE DRAWING ITSELF HAS AN X DASH 10 MARK ON IT.
UM, STAFF, CAN YOU BRING THAT UP? THANK YOU, ELIZABETH.
UM, IT'S THE LAST PAGE OF THE DRAWINGS? YEAH.
THERE'S A, THERE'S A DIAGRAM OF EXTRA, THE SHADED PORTION.
THE SHADED PORTION ILLUSTRATE A NEW STAIR, A POTENTIAL NEW STAIR WITH THE REQUIRED LANDINGS AND THAT THERE IT IS THAT ACTUALLY PASSES.
UM, IF, IF YOU LOOK AT THE PLAN, YOU CAN SEE THE STAIR COMING DOWN THE WALL AND WRAPPING THE, THE PREVIOUS STAIR STOPPED AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT RUN.
DIDN'T TURN BACK UP INTO THE HOUSE.
UH, COMPLIANCE STAIR WOULD ACTUALLY PASS IS LONGER THAN THE WALL THAT'S THERE AND ACTUALLY PASSES INTO THE HOUSE.
I MEAN, THE LANDING AT THE BOTTOM THERE'S THERE, THERE WOULD BE ONE FOOT FOR CLEARANCE, THE STAFF AND THE D AND THE WALL OF THE HOUSE.
CAN YOU SEE THAT COMMISSIONER COOK? ARE YOU SAYING WHAT THAT HELPS? AND IT LOOKS LIKE THE RISER IS SEVEN AND A QUARTER INCH, I THINK, UH, I'M SURE, YOU KNOW, THE IRC BETTER THAN I DO, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE IT MIGHT BE SEVEN AND THREE QUARTERS ALLOWED, BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY, HOW MANY RIDES OR DID YOU PICK UP IF YOU WERE TO DO AN EXTRA HALF INCH PER STEP? WELL, WE DON'T, WE DON'T PICK UP, WE DON'T PICK UP ENOUGH TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
UM, THE PROBLEM IS THAT THAT ONE OF THE PROBLEMS WAS THE ORIGINAL STAIR HAD A TWO FOOT LANDING AT THE TOP.
UM, AND THEN IT WAS, UH, I DON'T HAVE A RECORD OF WHAT THE RISE AND RUN WAS, BUT IT GOT, IT GOT DOWN TO THE BOTTOM WITH JUST A LANDING AND A SPAN OF SINGLE STEP OFF.
AND WHAT WE'RE HAVING TO DO IS ADD THE ADDITIONAL, UH, TREADS PLUS A LANDING AT THE BOTTOM.
THERE'S JUST NO ROOM FOR THE LANDING.
WE, WE, WE WOULD HAVE TO, WELL, THERE, THERE JUST ISN'T ANY ROOM FOR IT.
[03:20:01]
TO BE CONVINCED, UH, IMMENSE BY THAT, YOU KNOW, IF, IF IT HAD BEEN RETAINED, IT COULD HAVE STAYED UNDER THE EXISTING BUILDING CODE, BUT BECAUSE IT, IT, IT WAS DETERIORATED AND HAD TO BE REMOVED AND RECONSTRUCTING A NON COMPLYING HISTORIC STRUCTURE.UH, IT'S BEYOND MY EXPERTISE TO BE QUITE HONEST, I, I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WOULD BE.
I DON'T KNOW IF THE CITY WOULD ACCEPT IT.
UH, UM, SO, UM, I AM CONVINCED TO THAT, THAT I AGREE ABOUT THE, THE OVERHANG.
I CAN SEE REMOVING SOMETHING, BUT THEN ADDING SOMETHING CONJECTURAL AND THAT'S NOT REALLY NECESSARY.
UH, THIS HAS BEEN A COMPLICATED PROJECT.
THEY HAVE SPENT A LOT OF MONEY RESTORING THIS HOUSE.
AND SO THE OWNER, YOU KNOW, SHOULD BE CONGRATULATED FOR THAT.
AND WE DID GET QUITE A BIT ON THE REAR ADDITION.
THIS IS A COMPLICATED BUILDING BECAUSE IT HAS TWO FACADES THAT ARE WIDELY OPEN AND MOST OTHER LAND LANDMARK OWNERS, UH, ARE ABLE TO ADD, UH, AT THE REAR OF THEIR PROPERTY AND WE KIND OF NEGOTIATED SO THAT, THAT COULD BE DONE SO THAT THE OWNER COULD HAVE ENJOYMENT OF THEIR PROPERTY, UH, LIKE OTHER LANDMARK OWNERS WHILE MINIMIZING IMPACT.
UH, AND SO IT'S BEEN KIND OF A LONG ROAD OF NEGOTIATIONS AND, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, I AGREED, I THINK THE ORIGINAL OWNER PROBABLY WOULD BE, WOULDN'T BE UPSET, BUT IF WITHOUT A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT OR WITHOUT SOME SORT OF EASEMENT TO FULLY PROTECT, BUT FOR NO CHANGE WHATSOEVER, WE HAVE TO, UH, CONSIDER ADDITION HAS BEEN TERMS OF SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS, WHICH ALLOWS FOR ADDITIONS.
UH, SO WHEN WE PREFERRED IT STAYED EXACTLY THE SAME.
UH, YOU KNOW, BUT I THINK WE'RE DOING OUR JOB AND I THINK IT'S FUCK A GOOD KNOWLEDGE.
AND I'LL, I'LL SUPPORT THE MOTION, ALL THE WORDS OUT OF THEIR MOUTH.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY RAISING YOUR HAND AND THEN WANT TO POST.
WE HAVE, UM, THAT WAS UNANIMOUS.
I DON'T SEE COMMISSIONER CASTEEL ON THE, ON THE DIAS.
YOU KNOW, THE, THE IMAGES CHANGE OVER HERE.
IT'S LIKE, UM, IT'S LIKE A CHESS BOARD.
THAT MOTION PASSES AND WE'LL GO ON
[3.B.8. 611 W. 22nd St. – Discussion Kenney House Council District 9 Proposal: Redesign of signage. Applicant: Patti Imbus & John Britten Committee feedback: Either reduce the size of the front door sign or craft a suspended sign to avoid obscuring any architectural feature of the house. City Staff: Steve Sadowsky, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-6454 Staff Recommendation: Reduce the size of the sign. (Part 2 of 2)]
TO BE EIGHT TO KENNY HOUSE SIX, 11 WEST 22ND STREET.COMMITTED AN APPLICATION FOR SIGNAGE.
AND, UH, THIS HAS COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION IN THE PAST, THEY HAD REQUESTED SIGNAGE ON, UH, TWO ASPECTS OF THE HOUSE, PLUS A MONUMENT SIGN THEY HAVE SINCE DROPPED THAT.
UH, SO THE ONLY SIGNAGE THEY'RE REQUESTING AT THIS POINT IS THE MONUMENT SIGN IN THE YARD, WHICH HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.
AND THEN THE PICKUP SIGN ON THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, UH, WHICH WAS DENIED BY THE COMMISSION ON STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
THE, OUR SIDE STANDARDS, UH, EMPHASIZE THAT SIGNAGE NEEDS TO BE SUBORDINATE TO THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES OF THE HOUSE.
AND STAFF FELT THAT THIS SIGNAGE HERE ON THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE WAS EXCESSIVE AND OVERSHADOWED THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE TO WHICH IT WAS ATTACHED.
SO THE APPLICANT CAME TO THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AND, UH, THE DISCUSSION WAS, UH, A SIGN THAT WOULD BE SUSPENDED FROM THAT OR REDUCED SIZE SIGN ON THE FASCIA BOARD.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO, UH, REDUCE THE SIZE OF THE SIGN ON THE FASCIA BOARD BECAUSE THE SUSPENDED TIME WOULD POSE SOME ISSUES FOR LIABILITY AND PROBABLY VANDALISM.
UM, SO THAT STAFF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS REDUCE THE SIZE AND APPROVED THE SIGNAGE.
AND I THINK THE, UH, THE APPLICANT SAID THAT THEY'VE GOT, UM, THE, THE REDUCE SIZE SIDE WAS FOR NINE INCH TALL LETTERS.
AND THAT WOULD BE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION COMMISSIONER VALANZUELA.
I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
I KNOW WITH THE OPTIONS, SEE THAT THEY SAID THAT THEY COULD REDUCE THE SIZE OF THE TEXT AND REMOVE THE LOGO, BUT IF THEY KEPT THE LOGO, COULD THEY REDUCE IT, UM, INSIGHTS FROM WHAT IS SHOWN IN THE FIRST OPTION? HELLO, THIS IS MIKE ACCOUNT.
YES, MIKE, WE CAN GO AHEAD AFTER DISCUSSION.
[03:25:01]
REDUCE, UH, THEY REALLY WANTED TO EMPHASIZE THE NEW BRAND OF PICKUP AND THEY WILL, UH, UH, THEY HAVE AGREED TO CENTER OF THE, THOSE LETTERS IN THAT SPACE AND JUST, UH, NOT, AND GO AHEAD AND TAKE A, TAKE THE SIREN OFF, UH, BECAUSE THAT SIREN WILL BE ON THE MONUMENT SIDE AND THAT'S WHAT THEY FELT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT AND, UH, WOULD, UH, COMPLY WITH WHAT THE STAFF HAD WANTED AS FAR AS BEING IN BETWEEN THOSE TWO BANDS OF THE, UH, UH, MOLDING ON THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING PATIENT THERE.SO THAT'S WHAT THE, WHAT THE OWNERSHIP HAD ALREADY.
THE TENANT HAS AGREED TO, UH, I DON'T KNOW IF GLEN STILL ON OR NOT, BUT HE CAN RESPOND, BUT THAT'S WHAT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THEIR REASONING IS THAT, UH, THEY'LL JUST LIVE WITH THE ONE SIREN, LIKE I SAY, ON THE MONUMENT SIDE, AS FAR AS, UH, APPROVED SONIC, DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THE CASE? I KNOW THAT WE APPROVED THE OPTIONS C THAT JUST HAS THE NINE INCH LETTERING ABOVE THE ENTRANCE.
NO SECOND COMMISSIONER COOK SECONDS.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.
SEE, TWO, WE POSTPONE GOING DOWN ITEMS, UH, IS OUR NEXT CASE.
SEE NINE, OR DID WE SEE NINE? WE POSTPONE THAT.
YEAH, IT WAS, IT WAS A DISCUSSION.
I KNOW YOU ALL ARE EAGER TO TELL ME I'M WRONG.
[3.D.3. PR-2021-084005 – 3009 Bowman Ave. – Discussion (postponed by applicant June 28, 2021) Council District 10 Proposal: Demolish a ca.1941 house. Applicant: Ross Rathgeber City Staff: Steve Sadowsky, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-6454 Staff Recommendation: Consider initiating historic zoning on the original portion of the house. (Part 2 of 2)]
YES.COMMERCIALLY, THIS IS AN APPLICATION.
TOMORROW IS THE 1941 HOUSE THAT WAS LIVED IN AND ASSOCIATED, UH, WITH EDITOR JOHN BARKLEY, UH, FOR OVER 20 YEARS, REVEREND JOHN BARKLEY WAS THE PASTOR OF CENTRAL CHRISTIAN CHURCH.
AND ONE OF THE LEADERS OF AUSTIN'S RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY.
HE, UH, ONE OF THE FOUNDERS OF THE AUSTIN COUNCIL OF CHURCHES AND LYNDON JOHNSON WAS ONE OF HIS CONGREGANT.
UH, HE OFFERED THE PROTESTANT PRAYER AT THE INAUGURATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY IN 1961.
AND, UH, WHILE IN AUSTIN, PRESIDENT JOHNSON WAS, UH, WAS A CONGREGANT AT CENTRAL CHRISTIAN.
THIS HOUSE, UH, IS, IS REALLY, IT'S VERY INTERESTING BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL PART OF THE HOUSE REMAINS RELATIVELY INTACT.
THE HOUSE HAS AN OVERWHELMING LARGE OVERWHELMINGLY LARGE ADDITION TO THE SOUTH.
THE SOUTH END AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO INITIATE HISTORIC ZONING SO THAT, UH, ALTERNATIVES TO D TO DEMOLITION CAN BE, UH, REVIEWED B.
AS I SAID, THIS IS A LOVELY COLONIAL REVIVAL HOUSE, VERY REMINISCENT OF THE CAROLINAS WHERE, UH, WHERE, UH, REVEREND AND MRS BARKLEY CAME FROM.
THEY CAME FROM NORTH CAROLINA AND, UH, THIS WOULD ALLOW THE APPLICANTS TO RETAIN THE HOUSE, UH, AND BUILD WHATEVER NEW ADDITIONS THAT THEY NEED.
I UNDERSTAND THE LEAD PAINT SITUATION HERE THAT, UH, THERE HAVE BEEN NEW METHODS OF ENCAPSULATION OR REMOVAL OF WHITE PAINT THAT WOULD KEEP THE STAFF SAFE, UH, BUT STAFF MEALS.
SO THERE IS ENOUGH ARCHITECTURAL AND HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE TO AT LEAST INITIATE HISTORIC ZONING ON THE HOUSE AND ALLOW FOR THE REMOVAL OF THE ADDITIONS.
SO STAFF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO INITIATE HISTORIC ZONING, TO ALLOW A TIME TO REEVALUATE, TO EVALUATE ALTERNATIVES, TO COMPLETE DEMOLITION AND DO FURTHER RESEARCH, BUT ALLOW, UM, THE REMOVAL OF ADDITIONS THAT ARE,
[03:30:01]
UM, PART OF THE APPLICATION.DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THE CASE? WELL, SO THIS THING INITIATIVE, I'LL, I'LL GO AHEAD AND FOLLOW UP WITH THAT.
SO WE INITIATED HISTORIC ZONING ON THE ORIGINAL HOUSE, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE ARE APPROVING THE RELEASE OF A DEMOLITION PERMIT, PARTIAL DEMOLITION PERMIT.
WE'RE THE OWNER TO WISH TO IMMEDIATELY PURSUE THE DEMOLITION OF A TWO STORY.
IS THAT YOUR MOTION? THAT'S MY MOTION.
DO I HEAR A SECOND TO THE APPLICANTS? THIS IS NOT A RECOMMENDATION TO GO FORWARD IT'S INITIATION, WHICH WILL GIVE MORE TIME FOR FURTHER RESEARCH.
UM, IS THERE A SECOND ON THIS MOTION SECOND BY COMMISSIONER, RIGHT? ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? OKAY.
IF THE STAFF WOULD LIKE TO, IN THE END, THE OWNER WOULD LIKE TO, UH, CONVINCE US ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
IT'S IMPORTANT, UH, COULD BE ESTABLISHED, UM, OR IT'S BASIC, UH, REASON WHY IT WOULD NOT MERIT WOULD BE ESTABLISHED MORE FULLY.
AND I THINK THAT WARRANT CERTAINLY, UH, THIS MOTION AND AT THE VERY LEAST, SOME, SOME AMOUNT OF SCRUTINY BEFORE WE HEAR THIS AGAIN, COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON, I'M SKEPTICAL.
THIS IS GOING TO REACH THE STANDARD, BUT, UM, MY JOB IS TO GET IT RIGHT, NOT GET IT FAST AS WE PROVE IN HERE TONIGHT.
IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, UH, I WOULD JUST ADD THAT.
THE STATE BORDER BRINGS YOU FOR A PROPERTY THAT'S ASSOCIATED WITH LBJ, AND IT'S NOT THIS HOUSE, BUT, UH, I THINK, UH, LBJ IS STILL HANGING HIS HAT, UH, TEXAS, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION.
ANY OPPOSED THE MOTION CARRIES INITIATE HISTORIC ZONING AND ALLOWED THAT A PARTIAL DEMOLITION OF THE DEFENSE AND MOVING
[3.D.5. DA-2021-080264; GF-2021-103631 – 1308 Lavaca St. – Discussion Council District 9 Proposal: Demolish a ca. 1940 building. Applicant: Leah Bojo City Staff: Elizabeth Brummett, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-1264 Staff Recommendation: Consider initiation of historic zoning. Should the Commission instead choose to release the demolition permit, encourage rehabilitation and adaptive reuse, then require completion of a City of Austin Documentation Package prior to release of the permit. (Part 2 of 2)]
ON TO, UM, 5, 13 0 8 LOVATO.THIS IS ONE OF FOUR PROPERTIES THAT WERE ON THE AGENDA FOR DEMOLITION TONIGHT.
UH, THE COMMISSION VOTED TO RELEASE THE OTHER THREE ON CONSENT.
UH, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IN THOSE CASES WAS THAT, UH, THE BUILDINGS DID NOT MEET TWO OF THE CRITERIA FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION.
THIS IS AN INSTANCE WHERE WE HAVE A PROPERTY THAT IS INCLUDED IN A RECENTLY COMPLETED HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY FOR THE OLD AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UH, COMPLETED BY HHM IN 2020, UH, WHERE THEY RECOMMEND THE PROPERTY IS INDIVIDUALLY ELIGIBLE FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES.
AND FOR DESIGNATION AS A HISTORIC LANDMARK, THIS IS A, UM, CIRCA 1940 MID-CENTURY MODERN MAGNOLIA OR MOBILE GAS SERVICE STATION.
UH, THE BUILDING HAS A HIGH DEGREE OF INTEGRITY.
UH, IT'S HAD THE OVERHEAD DOORS REPLACED, UH, WHICH IS CONSIDERED A TXDOT HAS A FIELD GUIDE FOR EVALUATING GAS STATIONS IN TEXAS.
AND THINGS LIKE CHANGE IN USE BRANDING CHANGE, LOSS OF SIGNAGE, LOSS OF PUMPS, UH, SERVICE BAY DOORS REPLACED PLYWOOD OR OTHER WINDOW COVERINGS ARE SEEN AS FACTORS ARE UNLIKELY TO AFFECT A PROPERTY'S ELIGIBILITY FOR DESIGNATION.
UH, SO FROM AN ARCHITECTURAL STANDPOINT, THIS IS AN EXCELLENT EXAMPLE OF A MID-CENTURY GAS STATION WITH A DISTINCTIVE DESIGN ASSOCIATED WITH MAGNOLIA AND MOBILE GAS STATIONS.
UM, IN TERMS OF THE CRITERIA FOR HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION.
THE SURVEY INDICATES THAT THE SERVICE STATION IS SIGNIFICANT AND THE AREAS OF COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REPRESENTING BROAD PATTERNS OF HISTORY, UH, AND CENTRAL AUSTIN.
IT'S A RARE SURVIVING EXAMPLE OF A ONCE MORE UBIQUITOUS PROPERTY TYPE.
UH, HOWEVER, THERE ARE NO SPECIFIC HISTORIC ASSOCIATIONS THAT STAFF COULD FIND TO TIE THIS PROPERTY TO TYPICALLY THAT'S SOMETHING I KNOW THE COMMISSION WANTS TO SEE, UH, PARTICULARLY IN CASES WHERE THERE IS AN OWNER OBJECTION TO LANDMARKING.
UM, THERE WERE A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT, UH, MANAGERS OF THIS GAS STATION.
UH, ONE OF THE LONGEST TENURES WAS DEAL ELSNER, UM, WHO WAS PREVIOUSLY AN ATTENDANT AT ANOTHER MAGNOLIA GAS STATION FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS
[03:35:01]
WHILE HE OPERATED THE STATION.HE RENTED THE NEIGHBORING HOUSE AT THREE OR THREE WEST 14TH, WHICH, UH, AGAIN IS APPROVED FOR DEMOLITION.
UM, SO IT'S, IT'S CERTAINLY KIND OF INTERESTING TO SEE THIS LITTLE POCKET OF COMMERCE, BUT, UM, THERE'S NOTHING THAT STOOD OUT AND THE RESEARCH HAS MAKING, UM, THE PROPERTY SIGNIFICANT OTHER THAN THOSE BROAD PATTERNS OF HISTORY.
UH, SO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO CONSIDER WHETHER THIS MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR HISTORIC DESIGNATION AND INITIATE HISTORIC ZONING OF SO, OR IF THE COMMISSION INSTEAD CHOOSES TO RELEASE THE DEMOLITION PERMIT, ENCOURAGE REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE USE, AND THEN REQUIRE A CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE PRIOR TO DEMOLITION.
DO I HEAR MUSH COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON ROADIES, THE DEMOLITION PERMIT UPON COMPLETE PACKAGE, MOVING WORDS ON A SECOND COMMISSIONER, UM, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION.
I JUST WISH THAT THEY COULD HAVE FOUND THAT, UH, LBJ, HE GOT HIS CAR SERVICE THERE REGULARLY.
THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN, THAT WOULD HAVE TIPPED THE SCALE PERHAPS, BUT, UH, I ALSO AM SOMEWHAT MOVED BY THE APPLICANT'S SUGGESTION THAT THE MAGNOLIA DETAILS, UH, WHICH HAD BEEN REMOVED WOULD HAVE MADE IT MORE SIGNIFICANT.
WE'LL TAKE A VOTE OF THE MOTION IS TO RELEASE THE DEMOLITION PERMIT UPON COMPLETION OF THE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND ANY OPPOSED? OKAY.
[3.D.9. PR-2021-087495 – 812 W. 12th St. – Possible discussion postponement Council District 9 Proposal: Demolish a ca. 1946 commercial building. Applicant: Jordan Poe City Staff: Steve Sadowsky, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-6454 Staff Recommendation: Postpone to August 23, 2021. (Part 2 of 2)]
TO DEAN NINE 12, THIS IS AN APPLICATION TO DEMOLISH A SMALL COMMERCIAL BUILDING AT 8 12, 8 AT EIGHT 12 WEST 12TH STREET.THIS BUILDING WAS DOPE IN 1946.
UH, THE FAMILY THAT OWNED THE PROPERTY AS AN INVESTMENT, AND IT'S A THREE BAY, ONE STORY COMMERCIAL BUILDING THAT, UH, THERE ARE HUNDREDS OF IN DALLAS AND SAN ANTONIO FORT WORTH AND HOUSTON, BUT WE HAVE A RELATIVE SCARCITY ON HERE.
THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT BUILDING TYPE.
UH, AND THIS BUILDING IS PARTICULARLY WELL INTACT.
UH, IT WAS, AS I SAID, BUILT IN 19 46, 3 BAYS, THREE DIFFERENT BUSINESSES IN THERE.
UH, AND IT WAS A NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE BUILDING THAT, UH, CATERED TO THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL AUSTIN HIGH SCHOOL, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO THERE WAS A BEAUTY SALON HERE, A PAINT STORE AND AN ICE CREAM PARLOR ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE END OF THE 1950S, UH, STAFF BELIEVES THAT THIS BUILDING QUALIFIES AS A HISTORIC LANDMARK.
THIS IS A BUILDING THAT, UH, IS, IS A RARE TYPE.
AND OFTEN IT WAS BUILT AT A LATER DATE THAN A LOT OF THE OTHERS.
UH, THERE WERE BUILDING SIMILAR TO THIS THAT WERE BUILT IN THE TWENTIES AND THIRTIES ON GUADALUPE AND LAVACA STREET, BUT IT TENDED TO SIGNIFY THE TRANSFORMATION OF A NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, OF AN ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD THAT COULD SUPPORT ITS OWN NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESSES AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF LAMAR BOULEVARD DURING WORLD WAR II, SPURRED THIS, UH, AND STAFFING.
BUT THERE'S ARCHITECTURAL MERIT TO THIS BUILDING AS WELL AS COMMUNITY VALUE.
UH, WE HAD A LOT OF TESTIMONY AND I WAS OVERWHELMED BY THE NUMBER OF EMAILS, UH, AND TESTIMONY THAT WE GOT ON THIS BUILDING.
IT WAS, THERE WAS A VERY NICE, UNFORTUNATELY IT WAS FOR A NON HISTORIC ASPECT OF THE BUILDING, RIGHT, THE SKATE SHOP.
BUT I THINK WE CAN STILL LOOK AT COMMUNITY VALUE, UH, AS A CRITERIA IN THIS BUILDING BECAUSE IT SERVED THE COMMUNITY PURPOSE AND WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN BUILT AT THIS SITE WITHOUT THE TREND OF DEVELOPMENT, CLOSE TO AUSTIN HIGH AND CLOSE TO THE NEWLY PAVED, UH, LAMAR BOULEVARD.
UH, STAFF IS, UH, IS VERY SENSITIVE TO ACC DESIRES HERE AND, UH, WONDERS IF THERE IS A WAY TO INCORPORATE THIS BUILDING, RETAIN
[03:40:01]
THE RETAIL, UH, ON 12TH STREET AND MOVE THE GARAGE ENTRANCE, UH, TO THE EAST OF THE, UH, OF THIS BUILDING AND BUILD ABOVE IT.UM, SO STAFF, THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS EITHER TO POSTPONE OR, UH, CONSIDER INITIATION OF HISTORIC ZONING SO THAT THESE CONVERSATIONS CAN CONTINUE TO RETAIN ARE REALLY VANISHING AND UNIQUE SECTOR OF AUSTIN'S COMMERCIAL BUILDING, UH, AND, UH, ACCOMMODATE ACC WISHES FOR A PARKING STRUCTURE ON THE SITE THAT COULD STILL INCORPORATE RETAIL AND THE COMMUNITY VALUE OF THE, UH, UH, OF THE SKATE SHOP.
THANK YOU, STEVE, DO I HEAR A MOTION COMMISSIONER FEATHERS DONE TO POSTPONE IT? OKAY.
IS THERE A SECOND, SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER LAROCHE DISCUSSION, UH, COMMISSIONER COOK.
I WANTED TO ASK TO CLARIFY THAT WE ARE KEEPING THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN.
UH, I THINK WE HAD AN ISSUE IN THE PAST WITH POSTPONING, A CASE THAT CAME UP FOR ZONING CONSIDERATION, UH, WHEN WE HAD HEARING, AND THEN WE POSTPONE, UH, THAT STARTED THE TOTAL IN THE 15 DAYS.
UM, I DON'T KNOW IF STAFF CAN SPEAK TO IT.
UM, WE DID NOT, WE DID NOT CLOSE THE PUBLIC SHARING ON ANYTHING TONIGHT.
STEVE, CAN YOU ADDRESS THAT? UH, AND THAT HAS BEEN OUR PRACTICE IN THESE CASES TO NOT CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO COMMISSIONER KIRK, THAT WAS A VERY WELCOME SUGGESTION.
MAKE SURE WHAT THE REORGANIZING OF PUBLIC HEARINGS ALL IN, YOU KNOW, IN FRONT, I DON'T THINK WE'RE ABLE TO HANDLE EACH ONE SEPARATELY.
SO I THINK IT MIGHT BE GOOD TO CLARIFY THAT IN THE MOTION COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON, YOU WANTED TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION TO SAY THAT WE ALMOST PASSED THIS ON POSTPONEMENT.
AND I THINK IN HINDSIGHT, GEE, DID WE LIKE SAY WE WERE NOT GOING TO DO THAT BECAUSE OF THE APPLICANT AND, UM, WHAT A BLESSING THAT WE GOT TO HEAR ALL THE TESTIMONY FROM ACTUALLY THE OTHER SIDE.
AND SO I'M GLAD THAT, UH, WHOEVER THE SMARTER PERSON WAS IN THE ROOM THAT MADE THAT CALL.
AND I THINK THAT IT'S JUST GOTTEN TOO LATE IN THE NIGHT TO GIVE THIS ONE JUSTICE.
AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY I DECIDED TO POSTPONE IT.
I SAY, I THINK, UM, EARLIER I SAID SOMETHING WE, WE HEARD FROM THE, UH, FROM ACC THAT THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, THEY MAY TRY TO MAKE A CASE THAT THERE WASN'T A COMMUNITY TO HAVE COMMUNITY VALUE.
AND I THINK THAT THAT'S REALLY KIND OF SHORT-SIGHTED, ALTHOUGH WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE LOOKING AT THE BUSINESS ITSELF, UH, OBVIOUSLY WE'VE NEVER HAD THIS KIND OF OUTPOURING OF SUPPORT BEFORE FOR ANY CASE THAT I'VE, THAT I'VE BEEN AWARE OF, UH, AT LANDMARK COMMISSION TO HAVE 4,000 EMAILS, UM, YOU KNOW, OBJECTING TO THE DEMOLITION AND HAVE THIS NUMBER OF PEOPLE COME OUT.
SO, UM, YES, COMMISSIONER LITTLE.
I WANTED TO ADD TO THAT, THAT I I'M SO GLAD THAT WE HEARD THE CASE TONIGHT AND APPRECIATE ALL THE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS.
AND AS YOU WERE SAYING, LIKE TO SAY THAT IT DOESN'T HAVE COMMUNITY VALUE.
I THINK WE HEARD A LOT OF COMMENTS ABOUT THE EXISTING BUSINESS THAT WAS NOT A HISTORIC AGE BUSINESS, BUT THESE ARE FROM PEOPLE WHO AREN'T PRESERVATION PROFESSIONALS AND DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW THE LANGUAGE THAT WE NEED TO HEAR TO CHECK OFF OUR BOXES.
THE BUILDING OBVIOUSLY HAS COMMUNITY VALUE.
UM, I, YEAH, I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT DESERVES A HEARING AND MORE THOROUGH CONSIDERATION FOR SURE.
IN A WAY THE, THE CRITERIA FOR COMMUNITY VALUE.
DOES IT SAY THAT THE COMMUNITY HAD TO VALUE IT IN THE PAST AS PRESERVATIONISTS TO HARNESS THE ENERGY THAT SOMEHOW THIS BUILDING BROUGHT TO THE MEETING TODAY, I'M THINKING ABOUT TAKING UP SKATEBOARDING, UM, COMMISSIONER'S NAME SETH? WELL, I THINK THE OTHER PART THAT REALLY IMPRESSED ME AND I APPRECIATE, UM, THE STAFF AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I I'M AWARE OF THAT BUILDING TYPE, BUT IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT IS SO EASILY OVERLOOKED.
AND AS WE'RE PREPARING TO REDO OUR PRESERVATION PLAN FOR THE CITY, AND AS WE'RE GETTING A MUCH BROADER DIVERSE GROUP OF PEOPLE TO WORK WITH US, I THINK THIS IS A REAL INDICATION OF WHY PRESERVATION.
[03:45:01]
THING, AND IT'S NOT JUST FIND A COUPLE OF THOSE MUSEUM PIECES BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO PASS THAT AND NOTHING ELSE ONTO THE NEXT GENERATION.THIS IS A, THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY LOOK AT DEEPER BECAUSE THIS IS AN OVERLOOKED BUILDING TYPE OF WHICH THIS IS AN EXCELLENT EXAMPLE.
UH, I THINK THAT, THAT, UH, THAT SURPRISED ME, BUT AS SOON AS THE STATE, AS SOON AS YOU MADE YOUR PRESENTATION, IT WAS LIKE, DUH.
SO YOU KNOW, THIS, IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE EASY, BUT KNOW IF WE DO OUR JOB WELL, AREN'T GOING TO FIND THOSE ITEMS THAT REALLY ARE TRULY REPRESENTATIVE OF IMPORTANT ELEMENTS.
OUTSTANDING ARCHITECTURE DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN IT'S ON THE COVER OF SOME ARCHITECTURE MAGAZINE.
AND I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT TO GET A FINDING OF FACT AND ON THE RECORD.
AND I THINK IT'S BEEN STATED THAT IT'S NOT ABOUT THE SKATE SHOP, ALTHOUGH THAT INITIATED A LOT OF, A LOT OF INTEREST, THAT THIS IS ABOUT THE BUILDING.
AND I THINK A BUILDING OF THIS SIZE AND THIS CONFIGURATION, THIS LOCATION TO THE STREET KIND OF FOSTERS THE SMALLER HOMEGROWN BUSINESSES THAT WE ARE LOSING.
AND I THINK SO MANY TIMES WHEN YOU HEAR DISCUSSIONS ABOUT PRESERVATION AND WHAT AUSTIN'S LOSING, IT'S THE INSTITUTIONS THAT PEOPLE ARE LAMENTING MORE SO THAN THE BUILDINGS, BUT I THINK WE NEED AN APPRECIATION FOR HOW THOSE TWO, HOW THAT HISTORICAL FABRIC REALLY FOSTERS THAT, THAT KIND OF COMMUNITY LEVEL, THAT NEIGHBORHOOD LEVEL INTERACTION.
AND I WAS ALSO MOVED BY MR. VICKERS, NOTING THAT HE WAS KIND OF SURPRISED AND JUST LOOKING AT THE SIZE OF THAT PROPERTY, AGAIN, BEING A SMALLER COMMERCIAL PROPERTY AND THE SIZE OF THE LOT THAT THEY HAVE AVAILABLE REMAINING AROUND IT.
I'M SURE, HOPING THAT THERE'S SOME SORT OF WIN-WIN SOLUTION TO KEEP SOME, SOME STREET FROM NEXT NEXT TO ACC AND ON 12TH STREET, WHICH, UH, IS, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S POISED TO BECOME OUR NEXT URBAN CANYON.
UM, WELL WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE, UM, WHICH IS TO POSTPONE, AND THAT IS NOT TO SAY THAT THIS IS NOT A DESERVING OF DISCUSSION IT'S THAT IT'S LATE IN THE EVENING.
AND, UM, WE NEED TO GIVE THIS OUR FULL ATTENTION, UM, MAYBE EARLIER, UH, ON THE NEXT AGENDA.
UM, AND TWO, CAN WE ADD TO THE MOTION, UH, THAT THE PUBLIC SHARING IS KEPT OPEN, UM, AND OKAY.
WE HAVE APPROVAL, UH, BY THE MAKER AND THE SECOND ARE, UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF POSTPONING, UH, COMMISSIONER, RIGHT? SORRY.
I HAD ONE THOUGHT, UM, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE DISCUSSION ABOUT, ABOUT POSTPONING IT EARLIER IN THE MEETING WAS, UM, SO THAT STAFF COULD HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER.
UM, I ASSUME STAFF WILL STILL DO THAT.
DO WE NEED TO SPECIFY THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT AS PART OF OUR AMENDMENT OR AS PART OF THAT WILL HAPPEN? YEAH.
I THINK, I THINK WE CAN TRUST STAFF TO, TO BE THAT, UH, THAT POINT PERSON FOR THIS.
UM, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ALL KNOW IT.
AGAIN, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF CORRESPONDING TO THE NEXT MEETING IS RAISE YOUR HAND ANY OPPOSED? IT'S UNANIMOUS.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY IT'S NEARING 10 O'CLOCK AND WE MIGHT NEED TO EXTEND THE MEETING IF YOU ALL WANTED TO TAKE A MOMENT TO DISCUSS THAT.
WE NEED A MOTION TO EXTEND PAST 10 O'CLOCK COMMISSIONER HANDSET.
I THINK WE'RE GETTING CLOSE, BUT I'LL ENTERTAIN IT.
I'LL SUGGEST A MOTION THAT WE EXTEND THE TEMPORARY.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF CONTINUING TO 10 30, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND THAT 10 NOW.
WE HAVE ALL IN FAVOR EXCEPT FOR ONE COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON.
WE'RE JUST GOING TO MUTE HIS MIC.
ELVIS HAS LEFT THE BUILDING IN MY LIFE THAT I HAVE TO ANSWER TO VOTED.
I HAVE A DOG SHE'S LOCKED IN MY HOUSE, SO SHE CAN'T YELL AT ME.
[3.D.10. PR-2021-093159 – 1173 San Bernard St. – Consent Council District 1 Proposal: Demolish a ca. 1929 house. Applicant: Victoria Haase City Staff: Steve Sadowsky, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-6454 Staff Recommendation: Encourage rehabilitation and adaptive reuse then relocation over demolition, but release the permit upon completion of a City of Austin Documentation Package. (Part 2 of 2)]
SAN BERNARD.THIS IS AN APPLICATION IT'S DEMOLISHED AND 1929 HOUSE AT 1173, SAN BERNARD.
THIS HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 1929 AS A PASTOR'S RESIDENCE FOR THE, ALL OF THAT BAPTIST CHURCH, WHICH WAS RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER FROM THE, FROM THIS HOUSE.
[03:50:01]
IT'S, IT'S A RATHER LARGE HOUSE, BUT IT HAS BEEN MODIFIED OVER THE YEARS.IT'S GOT SOME ASPECTS OF CRAFTSMEN DESIGN, THE TRAIN, TRANSFORMING THE TEMPER MINIMUM GABLE, UH, FRONT GABLE ON THE PORCH, WHICH HAS BEEN INFIELD.
THE WINDOWS THAT HAVE BEEN CHANGED OUT.
THERE'VE BEEN A LOT OF CHANGES TO THE HOUSE FOR THE FIRST, UH, 20 YEARS OF ITS EXISTENCE.
IT WAS THE HOME OF REVEREND JOSEPH, A CARRINGTON AND HIS WIFE, LEILA, WHO WAS THE PA.
HE WAS THE PASTOR AT OLIVE THAT BAPTIST, UH, IN A HOUSE THAT, UM, NO LONGER STANDS.
ALL OF THAT BAPTIST WAS, UH, FOUNDED BY MRS. BUA MURPHY IN THE HOUSE, JUST TO THE, JUST TO THE SOUTH OF HERE.
SO THE HOUSE HAS A, UH, SIGNIFICANT TIE TO ALL OF THAT BAPTIST CHURCH, BUT THERE'S VERY LITTLE INFORMATION ABOUT THE ROLE THAT POLIDENT BAPTIST PLAYED IN A CHURCH LIFE IN AUSTIN, ESPECIALLY DURING THE CIVIL RIGHTS PERIOD, REVEREND HARRINGTON, UH, MOVED AWAY AROUND 1950 AND THEN THE HOUSE, UH, BECAME A RENTAL PROPERTY AFTER THAT.
SO DUE TO THE MODIFICATIONS IN THE HOUSE AND THE FACT THAT WE COULDN'T FIND ANY SIGNIFICANT HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS, RELUCTANTLY RECOMMEND RELEASE THE PERMIT UPON COMPLETION OF A CITY DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE.
IS THERE A MOTION ON THE CASE COMMISSIONER COOK? I'LL MOVE TO, OKAY.
IS THERE A SECOND, SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER, A LITTLE, UH, DISCUSSION COMMISSIONER CUTS.
I'M NOT HAPPY ABOUT IT, BUT I ALWAYS HAVE THE BAR OF WHAT I APPROVE IT IF THIS WERE AN OWNER REQUESTED.
AND I THINK BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF CHANGES WITH THE SIDING AND THE ADVIL ON THE WINDOWS, THE INTEGRITY, WE CAN REALLY CALL THEM THE QUESTION.
UH, IT HAS, IT'S GOTTEN HIT OR MISS REMNANTS OF IN STORE, BUT IT IS A GREAT STREET.
I'M SAD TO SEE IT GO, BUT I, I, I JUST COULDN'T SUPPORT IT AGAINST OWNER'S WISHES.
UH, I, UM, I HATE TO SEE, UM, THE SORT OF EROSION OF THIS STREET, BECAUSE IN 2000, UH, WHEN I WORKED ON A, UM, SURVEY OF THESE STOCK, AUSTIN, WE RECOMMENDED SAN BERNARD IS, UM, A POTENTIAL HISTORIC DISTRICT.
AND, YOU KNOW, ANY LOSS IS A LOSS TO THE INTEGRITY OF THAT POTENTIAL DISTRICT.
UM, JUST, YOU KNOW, ONE KIND OF LONG BLOCK LONG, BUT, UM, I AGREED THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SIGNIFICANT CHANGES, UM, TO THE BUILDING.
THE INFO OF THE PORCH IS, IS PRETTY, UM, NOTEWORTHY.
UM, WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO WEIGH IN ON THIS DISCUSSION? I JUST WANTED TO SAY, I AGREE THAT I, I THINK WITH, UM, WITH SOME RESTORATION WORK, THE HOUSE COULD DEFINITELY QUALIFY UNDER ARCHITECTURE, BUT IT HAS MAJOR INTEGRITY ISSUES.
AND IN ITS CURRENT CONDITION, THERE'S PROBABLY SOME REALLY FASCINATING HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS, BUT SINCE STAFF WASN'T ABLE TO FLESH THOSE OUT ANYMORE, I THINK WITH THE INFORMATION WE HAVE, IT'S NOT AS STRONG THERE AS IT COULD BE.
SO YEAH, I HATE TO SEE IT GO A BIT AS IT IS.
I'VE WORRIED ABOUT WHAT MIGHT COME UP IN ITS PLACE.
IT HAS, IT HAS GREAT POTENTIAL, BUT I THINK WE'RE LOOKING AT IT IN, UM, AS IT LOOKS TODAY, AS IT IS TODAY, UM, FEEL FREE TO DISAGREE WITH ME, MAKE A CASE.
UM, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO RELEASE THE DEMOLITION PERMIT, AND THIS WOULD BE ON THE COMPLETION OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE, AS WE DISCUSSED FURTHER ALL IN FAVOR, ANY OPPOSED? OKAY.
[3.D.12. PR-2021-095546 – 3004 Lafayette Ave. –Consent Council District 9 Proposal: Demolish a ca. 1939 house. Applicant: Jason Williams City Staff: Steve Sadowsky, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-6454 Staff Recommendation: Encourage rehabilitation and adaptive reuse, then relocation over demolition, but release the permit upon completion of a City of Austin Documentation Package. (Part 2 of 2)]
3004, LAFAYETTE CAREER FAIRS, UH, B12 IS A DEMOLITION PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THE 1939 HOUSE AT 30 0 4 LAST NIGHT.SORRY, MY TENNESSEE WAS ABOUT TO COME OUT LAFAYETTE AVENUE.
WELL IN TENNESSEE, IT WOULD BE WITH THAT.
THAT WAS MY ORIGINAL INCLINATION.
[03:55:01]
A GOOD THING.I CONNECTED, I CORRECTED, BUT, UH, THIS HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 1939 BY WALTER STALEY, WHO WAS A REAL ESTATE MAN IN TOWN.
UH, IT WAS FIRST PURCHASED BY AN ACCOUNTANT AT THE STATE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT, A MEMBER OF HIS FAMILY.
THESE WERE JOHNSONS OWNED THE HOUSE AFTER THAT.
HE WAS AN ASSISTANT AUDITOR FOR TRAVIS COUNTY AND THEN A WIDOW WHO HAD PREVIOUSLY WORKED AS A PRIVATE SECRETARY ON PATHS.
AFTER THAT, THROUGH THROUGH 1976, THE HOUSE IS A SIMPLE WING AND GABLE.
IT'S GOT, UH, SOME INTEGRITY ISSUES WITH, UM, SYNTHETIC SIDING, UH, AND STAFF JUST DID NOT FIND HISTORICAL OR ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE, UH, TO THIS HOUSE THAT WOULD WARRANT A LANDMARK DESIGNATION.
SO STAFF RECOMMENDS, RELEASED THE PERMIT UPON COMPLETION OF THE CITY DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE.
THANK YOU, MR.
I MOVED TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
I'D SAY TO, I HEAR A SECOND SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON.
I MEAN, FOR THEIR DISCUSSION COMMISSIONER COOK, I WAS HOPING THAT WHOEVER HAD SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, WASN'T GOING TO BE HERE SO I COULD MAKE A PITCH FOR VOCALIST OR DISTRICTS, BECAUSE THIS IS A GREAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND THIS IS ONE OF THOSE GREAT HOUSES, BUT I AM HEARTENED THAT THE OWNER APPRECIATES THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND PLANS TO GO BACK AND SCALE.
WELL, UM, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
[3.D.13. PR-2020-064188 – 2502 Park View Dr. – Discussion Council District 7 Proposal: Demolish a ca. 1954 house. Applicant: Dominique Levesque City Staff: Steve Sadowsky, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-6454 Staff Recommendation: Strongly encourage the applicant to rehab and preserve this house by initiating historic zoning to preserve the integrity of the pending Air Conditioned Village National Register Historic District. (Part 2 of 2)]
TWENTY-FIVE HUNDRED TO PARK VIEW.THIS IS A CASE THAT HAS, UH, BEEN, BEEN ON THE, UH, AGENDA AGENDA.
A COUPLE OF TIMES, THIS IS A HOUSE THAT WAS BUILT IN 1954 AS PART OF THE AIR CONDITIONING AIR CONDITIONED DELAGE EXPERIMENT, UH, TO SEE IF, UH, AIR CONDITIONING WOULD BE FEASIBLE FOR THE MIDDLE-CLASS AUSTIN EXPERIMENT, WHERE THE AIR CONDITIONED VILLAGE WAS ONE OF THE FIRST, I BELIEVE IT WAS THE FIRST AND, UH, ONE OF THE MOST, UM, EFFECTIVE.
SO SEVERAL AIR CONDITIONING COMPANIES CONTRACTED TO BUILD HOUSES.
THEY HIRED A LOCAL ARCHITECTS TO BUILD THE HOUSES.
THEY INSTALLED AIR CONDITIONING, AND THEN THEY MONITORED HOW EXPENSIVE OR HOW EFFECTIVE THE AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEMS IN THESE HOUSES WERE.
AND IT WAS A WAY TO SETTLE THE SOUTHWEST, UH, PRIOR TO THIS AIR CONDITIONING WAS AVAILABLE IN COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, THEATERS, GROCERY STORES, BUT IT HAD NEVER BEEN APPLIED TO A MORE MODEST SCALE AT RESIDENTIAL BUILDING.
SO THIS EXPERIMENT IN AUSTIN WAS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT ALLOWED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AUSTIN AS A CITY UNDER TEMPERATE CIRCUMSTANCES, CLIMATE CONTROL, UH, THIS HOUSE IS MOST REMARK IS REMARKABLY INTACT.
AND IN, IN THE AIR CONDITIONED VILLAGE, UH, THESE HOUSES SHOULD BE CONSIDERED VERY CAREFULLY FOR DEMOLITION.
THIS IS, UH, THIS, THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST COMPACT ONES AND IT WAS DONE BY CHRYSLER AIR TEMP, TWO, UH, AND COMPETED SUCCESSFULLY IN THE AIR CONDITIONING VILLAGE.
SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO INITIATE HISTORIC ZONING ON THE HOUSE, UH, SAID AGAIN, YES.
AND THIS, THIS IS A CASE THAT HAD BEEN BEFORE THE COMMISSION BEFORE THIS IS A BIT COMMISSIONED, INITIATED HISTORIC ZONING IN THE PAST.
UH, THE PRIOR OWNERS THEN SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE HOUSE THAT WOULD STILL RETAIN, UH, THE FEATURES OF
[04:00:01]
THE HOUSE FROM THE STREET.SO PEOPLE COULD UNDERSTAND, UH, BUT THE RELATIVE SCALE SIZE OF THE HOUSE AND THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS EXPERIMENT TO, UH, INSTALL RESIDENTIAL AIR CONDITIONING IN MODEST HOUSES.
SO STAFF BELIEF IS THAT THIS HOUSE STILL RETAINS ITS INTEGRITY.
IT RETAINS ITS ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE AS A MID CENTURY, MODERN DESIGN, WONDERFUL MID CENTURY MODERN DESIGN, AND IT RETAINS ITS HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE AND COMMUNITY VALUE, UH, AS BEING PART OF THE AIR CONDITIONED VILLAGE.
UH, I KNOW THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE GOOD NEWS FOR THE APPLICANT, BUT UH, STAFF BELIEVES THIS IS A, THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT HOUSE TO MAINTAIN AND HOPES THAT THE APPLICANT WILL CONSIDER REHABBING THE HOUSE, UH, BRASS, EVEN MORE SENSITIVE SENSITIVELY THAN THE PRIOR OWNERS.
UH, BUT THIS COULD REALLY BE A SHOWPLACE FOR, UH, TECHNOLOGY IN THE 1950S AND THE SETTLEMENT IN DEVELOPMENT OF CITIES LIKE AUSTIN.
I THINK, UM, FOR HISTORY, UH, WE SORT OF NEGOTIATED WITH THE PREVIOUS OWNERS THAT WE WOULD NOT, UM, PURSUE HISTORIC DESIGNATION, UM, IF THEY RETAIN THE HOUSE.
AND THAT WAS SORT OF AN AGREEMENT THAT WE CAME TO, NOTHING HAS CHANGED IN TERMS OF, UH, ITS ELIGIBILITY.
UM, THE ONLY THING THAT'S CHANGED OR IS A CHANGE IN OWNERSHIP.
UM, AS FAR AS I CAN SAY, COMMISSIONER LITTLE, I UNDERSTOOD THAT THERE WAS A NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION IN THE WORKS FOR THIS.
IS THERE AN UPDATE ON THE STATUS OF IT? YES, IT IS PENDING BEFORE THE STATE BOARD OF REVIEW.
IS IT GOING TO THE BORDER FOR YOU IN SEPTEMBER? IS THAT WHAT YOU MEAN? I BELIEVE IT IS.
SO IT'S BEEN APPROVED BY TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION STAFF AND THEN GOING FORWARD ON THAT AGENDA.
UM, DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THIS CASE? OKAY.
UH, DO I HEAR A SECOND COMMISSIONER LEVEL? OKAY.
WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON TO INITIATE HISTORIC ZONING AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER LITTLE, UM, COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON.
I MEAN, I JUST REMEMBER THE FIRST TIME THIS CAME AROUND AND I SAID, LIKE, I BEGAN ASKED THE QUESTION TO THE REST OF THE COMMISSION.
LIKE, DO WE NOT INITIATE HISTORIC ZONING NOW? AND THE COMMENT BACK WAS LIKE, NO, WE'RE WORKING IN GOOD FAITH WITH THE OWNER AT THIS TIME, WORKING, WORKING IN GOOD FAITH.
AND I, I, I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT THE CURRENT OWNER KNEW OF THIS CASE AT THE TIME.
I MEAN, THEY OWN OTHER PROPERTIES IN THIS, IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, UM, SO I URGE THIS, UH, APPLICANTS APPLICANT PRESENTED TO THEM.
WE GOT QUITE A BIT OF COMMENTS FROM PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHO WERE OPPOSED TO THE DEMOLITION OF THIS PROPERTY.
AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE THEM TO EXPLORE LOCAL LANDMARK DESIGNATION BECAUSE IF THEY WANT TO PRESERVE PROPERTIES IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT'S REALLY THE ONLY WAY TO DO IT.
I ALSO THINK WE NEED TO CLARIFY THAT THERE WERE TWO OTHER PROPERTIES JUST DOWN THE STREET FROM THIS THAT THE COMMISSION APPROVED FOR DEMOLITION AND ADD SOME CLARIFICATION ABOUT WHY THOSE WERE APPROVED FOR DEMOLITION.
AND THIS ONE IS NOT, I THINK ALL, ALL THREE HAVE THE SAME HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS AND COMMUNITY VALUE, BUT THIS ONE HAS A HIGHER DEGREE OF INTEGRITY.
IT'S BEEN HARDLY MODIFIED ON ITS EXTERIOR APPEARANCE SINCE THE HISTORIC TIME PERIOD.
UM, AN GREAT EXAMPLE OF ARCHITECTURE OF THE TIME PERIOD, AND IT'S THE WORKER FOR A DAY.
SO I THINK THAT THIS ONE IS THE BEST EXAMPLE WE'VE SEEN SO FAR IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT THOSE OTHERS AREN'T HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT.
I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE CLEAR THAT, UM, THIS MOTION TO INITIATE HISTORIC ZONING IS BASED ON THE CRITERIA FOR UNDER ARCHITECTURE, HISTORIC, UM, TRENDS AND COMMUNITY VALUE.
[04:05:01]
UM, PROBABLY TO THE LARGER COMMUNITY OF AUSTIN.I'M GLAD WE HAVE AIR CONDITIONING.
UM, SO DO WE HAVE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? OKAY.
[3.D.14. PR-2021-098969 – 3400 Hillview Rd. – Discussion Council District 10 Proposal: Demolish a ca. 1940 house. Applicant: Molly Lochridge City Staff: Steve Sadowsky, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-6454 Staff Recommendation: Either postpone to August 23, 2021 or initiate historic zoning to consider alternatives to demolition and further evaluate the potential of the house to be designated as a historic landmark. (Part 2 of 2)]
AND OUR LAST CASE, 3,400 HILL VIEW.COMMISSIONER B 14 IS AN APPLICATION TO DEMOLISH THE 1940 HOUSE AT 3,400 HILLVIEW ROAD.
THIS IS, UH, THIS HOUSE WAS BUILT BY WAY WHEN RIVERS AND HIS WIFE, LORI, THEY LIVED HERE UNTIL ABOUT 1946.
WAYLAND RIVERS WAS AN OFFICER IN THE ELGAN STANDARD BRICK COMPANY, WHICH MANUFACTURED HIGH QUALITY BURKE, THE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION.
UH, I I'M AT A LOSS OF WORDS FOR THE CONDITION OF THIS HOUSE AS SHOWN BY THE, UH, PHOTOGRAPHS THAT THE APPLICANTS PROVIDED.
UH, THE REVEREND'S LIVED HERE, AS I SAID UNTIL ABOUT 1946.
IT WAS THEN ON JOHN DADDY AND DOROTHY SHIPPERS.
THEY LIVED HERE UNTIL ABOUT 1950.
MR. SHIVERS WAS A INSPECTOR FOR THE YALE LOCK COMPANY FOR MANY YEARS, W J MURRAY JR.
PURCHASED THE HOUSE IN 1953 WITH HIS WIFE JOSEPHINE.
AND THEY LIVED HERE UNTIL ABOUT 1958.
MURRAY WAS, UH, ON THE TEXAS RAILROAD COMMISSION AND HAD BEEN IN THE OIL BUSINESS IN HOUSTON PRIOR TO JOINING THE, UH, THE RAILROAD COMMISSION.
HE WAS THE FIRST PETROCHEMICAL ENGINEER TO EVER SERVE ON THE RAILROAD COMMISSION.
HE DID, UH, GET ACCUSED OF MAKING MONEY WHILE ON THE COMMISSION, BUT HE WAS EXONERATED AT THAT.
UH, AND THE EARLY 1960S STAFF BELIEVES THAT THE HOUSE MAY QUALIFY AS A HISTORIC LANDMARK.
IT'S GOT, UH, IT'S IT'S, IT'S GOT HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS WITH, UH, WJ MARI, BUT ALSO WAYLAND RECORDS WHO WAS A VERY PROMINENT BUSINESSMAN IN AUSTIN FOR MANY YEARS.
UH, AND IT'S ALSO GOT ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE.
IT'S A BRICK ASSAD'S, UH, AND, UH, A MONTERREY STYLE HOUSE WHERE THE SECOND STORE FLOATING BALCONY.
SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WAS TO POST WITH POSTPONE TO ON AUGUST 23RD TO FULLY EVALUATED ALTERNATIVE DEMOLITION OR TO INITIATE THE STORE ZONING.
UH, THE CONDITION REPORT THAT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED FIVING COMMISSION, UH, AS WELL AND MAKING THEIR DECISION THIS EVENING.
YEAH, IT'S NOT JUST FOR THE HOUR, BUT I AM GOING TO PICK UP ON STEVE, YOUR RECOMMENDATION.
I AGREE WE SHOULD POSTPONE THIS UNTIL OUR NEXT MEETING AND THAT, UH, I THINK THE RESEARCH I WANT TO SEE, UM, I DON'T, I'M USUALLY NOT THE ONE WHO IS SWAYED BY AN ENGINEER'S REPORT, BUT THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT I SAW, EVEN IN JUST THE PASSING RAISE SOME SERIOUS CONCERNS, THAT THERE MAY VERY WELL BE SOME SERIOUS STRUCTURAL ITEMS THAT, UH, PARTICULARLY IN MASONRY CONSTRUCTION ARE WAY PAST, UH, WHAT WOULD BE, UH, EASILY RESOLVED OR, OR EXPECTED TO BE RESOLVABLE.
AND I THINK IF, IF, IF, UH, THE STAFF COULD HAVE SOME TIME THAT WILL MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE IN OUR DELIBERATIONS, COMMISSIONER WILL RUSH MR. HOUSE.
I'M NOT AS CONCERNED ON THOSE MOST, THE ELEMENTS AND THE LITTLE BIT OF CORROSION LED DISTRUST I SAW.
SO I'M ACTUALLY A BIT MORE ENCOURAGED THAN YOU, BUT COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOUR POSITION, BUT, AND ALL THE MORE REASON WHY WE NEED TO KNOW INQUIRING MINDS NEED TO KNOW COMMISSIONER MINDSET.
THAT WAS A MOTION TO POSTPONE TO THE NEXT MEETING.
THIS ALLOWS AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER RUSH.
UM, I THINK THE DESIGN OF THE HOUSE, UM, AND IT'S A PARENT, UM, INTEGRITY TO THE HISTORIC PERIOD, UH, WARRANTS FOR THE CONSIDERATION, I THINK.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO STAFF TO HAVE THAT TIME.
SO IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? IT'S NOT ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF POSTPONING THIS TO THE AUGUST 23RD MEETING, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND ANY OPPOSED? OKAY.
[04:10:03]
OKAY.UM, WE DON'T HAVE ANY DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT ITEMS. WE DON'T HAVE ANY APPLICATIONS FOR TAX ABATEMENT, UH, UNDER ITEM FOUR COMMISSION AND STAFF ISSUES, COMMITTEE REPORTS, COMMISSIONER
YEAH, I WAS ONE OF THEM WITH STUFF, BUT ANY UPDATE ON THE STANLEY HOME STOOD UP BUILDING, UH, NO COMMISSIONER.
WE ARE STILL WAITING ON A BRIEF THAT THE LAW DEPARTMENT HAS ASSURED ME THEY PUTTING TOGETHER.
AND, UM, THAT WILL GO DIRECTLY TO YOU, UH, VIA EMAIL SINCE IT'S, UH, REGARDING A LEGAL POTENTIAL LEGAL MATTER.
UH, IT'LL BE INTERESTING TO SEE, UM, WHAT CITY LEGAL HAS TO SAY ABOUT THIS CASE UNDER,
[4.A.1. Architectural Review Committee]
UM, COMMITTEE REPORTS, THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, UM, COMMISSIONER VALANZUELA, CAN YOU REPORT ON THE MEETING? I'LL PUT YOU ON THE SPOT.UH, SO WE SAW SEVERAL CASES TONIGHT, UH, THAT PASSED ON CONSENT THAT WENT THROUGH THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE WHO WERE ABLE TO, UH, COMMENTS.
I KNOW, UH, THERE WERE, THERE WAS A PRESENTATION ON THE ROSEWOOD COURTS.
UM, THAT WAS, WAS REALLY INTERESTING TO SEE, UH, SOME OF THE INITIAL CONCEPTS ON THE RESTORATION OF SEVERAL OF THOSE UNITS.
UM, AND SO THAT WAS A REALLY INFORMATIVE, UH, PRESENTATION THAT, THAT WILL CONTINUE TO GET UPDATES AS THEY WORK THROUGH THE DESIGN ON THAT COMMISSIONER.
DID YOU HAVE MORE TO ADD TO THAT SUMMARY? UM, NOT REALLY.
AT THIS HOUR, UH, I WAS, UH, THE ALTAVISTA HOUSE.
WE MADE MINOR MODIFICATION ON THE FRONT.
YOU'VE ALL SEEN THEM IN, IT WENT ON, BUT IT WAS A PRETTY PRODUCTIVE MEETING.
AND WE DID A FEW TWEAKS THAT I THINK MADE SOME IMPROVEMENTS.
IT LOOKS LIKE HE HAD A PRETTY FULL AGENDA.
DO WE HAVE ANY REPORT FROM THE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE? GRANTS COMMITTEE?
[4.A.4. Preservation Plan Committee]
OKAY.PRESERVATION PLAN, COMMISSIONER CLAIM.
SETH, COULD YOU REPORT ON THE PRESERVATION PLAN COMMITTEE MEETING? WELL, SINCE I ALREADY DELIVERED A PORTION OF IT, UM, IN MY JUSTIFICATION FOR ONE OF THE MOTIONS, UH, THE GROUP IS, UH, UP AND RUNNING AND, UH, I ASSUME THAT WE'VE ALREADY HAD IF THEY HAD THEIR FIRST FACILITATED MEETING YET, OR WILL THAT COME THIS WEEK? THAT WILL BE THIS THURSDAY FROM NINE TO 11:00 AM.
SO THE PRESERVATION PLAN COMMITTEE WORKED VERY CLOSELY WITH STAFF NOT ONLY ON, UM, THE GROUP SELECTION, UH, THE CRITERIA THAN THE ULTIMATE SELECTION, UM, BUT, UH, REALLY WORK ON THE AGENDA AND HOW TO GET, UH, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE HOPING TO ACCOMPLISH VERY CLEARLY, UM, IN THE HANDS OF PEOPLE WHO BY DEFINITION ARE GOING TO HAVE A WIDE VARIETY OF BACKGROUNDS AND PRESERVATION.
SO IT'S GOING TO BE A COMBINATION OF HOPING THE GROUP WILL VERY QUICKLY START SHARING INFORMATION, BUT ALSO BRING, UM, AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
UH, AND STAFF DID A GREAT JOB AND IT REALLY ORGANIZING THIS, UH, TO BRING PEOPLE UP TO SPEED AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE ON ALL THE NUANCES, IF YOU WILL, OF PRESERVATION AND HOW IT IS ACTUALLY ADMINISTERED BY THE TIME WE GET TO PROPERTIES HERE AT THE CITY OF AUSTIN, I THINK WE DID SPEND CONSIDERABLE TIME AT THAT MEETING, TALKING ABOUT TRYING TO, UM, PUSH FOR A STRONGER ROLE FROM THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.
AND I WAS PARTICULARLY, UM, WE WERE SORT OF, UH, UM, KIND OF PUT, UH, IN THE POSITION OF, OF, UH, BEING SEEN AND NOT HEARD.
AND, UM, I THINK ONE OF THE POINTS THAT COMMISSIONER BALANCED WAYLAND MADE THAT WAS WELL TAKEN WAS THAT THE REASON THAT SHE'S ON THE PRESERVATION PLAN COMMITTEE IS TO HELP WRITE A NEW PRESERVATION PLAN AND, UM, WHICH I THINK WE ALL AGREED ON AND, AND TRIED TO, UM, UH, TRANSMIT THAT TO THE STAFF THAT WE DID WANT TO HAVE, UH, AN ACTIVE ROLE IN, IN THIS ENDEAVOR.
UM, AND THAT'S THE ROLE THAT OUR TWO MEMBERS WHO WE WERE SPANKED FOR THEIR SERVICE, UH, COMMISSIONER COOK AND COMMISSIONER WRIGHT WILL BE, UH, IN THE GROUP, UH, DOING THE HEAVY LIFTING.
SO WE'LL, WE'RE, WE'LL BE ON THE SIDELINES, SOMEWHAT CHEERING, BUT MAYBE A LITTLE COACHING.
AND, UH, WE'RE STILL KIND OF FEEL OUR WAY, BUT WE'LL HAVE AN IMPORTANT ROLE
[04:15:01]
IN HELPING TO MAKE SURE IT'S NOT ONLY WELL-PACKAGED, BUT ALSO ULTIMATELY IT'S, IT'S ONLY WORTH THE ENDEAVOR IF IT IS WELL EMBRACED A GOOD PLAN AND CAN BE EXPEDITED FOR ADOPTION BY THE COUNCIL.THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS COOK, AND RIGHT.
YOU'RE MEETING FOR THE FIRST TIME THIS THURSDAY.
WE'LL BE REALLY INTERESTED TO HEAR YOUR EXPERIENCE WITH THAT.
[4.A.5. Historic Landmark Commission Annual Internal Review Report]
THE LANDMARK COMMISSION ANNUAL INTERNAL REVIEW REPORT, UM, WAS MISTAKENLY UPLOADED TO THE JUNE AGENDA, WHICH, UM, IS NOW A MONTH, UH, PASSED, BUT THEY UPLOADED IT OR, UH, TODAY TO OUR JULY AGENDA.AND I HAVE NOT HAD TIME TO LOOK AT IT.
UM, CAN STAFF, UM, GIVE US THE HIGH POINTS OF THAT INTERNAL AUDIT, THE LOW POINTS? NO, THIS IS, THIS IS A REQUIRED ANNUAL REPORT THAT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE, UH, ASKS US TO PREPARE EACH YEAR ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMISSION AND HOW THE COMMISSION IS FULFILLING ITS MISSION IN TERMS OF THE ACTIVITIES OVER THE PREVIOUS REPORTING PERIOD.
UH, UNFORTUNATELY WE WERE GIVEN NOTICE OF THE NEED TO PREPARE THIS REPORT.
I'M UNFAIRLY, UH, SHORT TURNAROUND.
UM, WE GOT THE NOTICE JUST BEFORE THE PREVIOUS COMMISSION MEETING.
SO BY THE TIME WE GOT THE REPORT TOGETHER AND TO YOU TO REVIEW, UM, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS IF YOU HAVE ANY, UH, BY THE END OF THE WEEK, UM, IF, IF, IF COMMISSIONERS WOULD LIKE TO TAKE SOME ADDITIONAL TIME TO REVIEW THAT, OR IF A COMMISSIONERS HAVE REVIEWED IT AND WOULD LIKE TO, UM, ENDORSE WHAT STAFF HAS PUT TOGETHER, WE'D BE OPEN TO THAT AS WELL.
UM, ON A SIDE NOTE, I GOT A MESSAGE IN MY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, UM, EMAIL, UH, SAYING THAT THEY HAD HAD A NUMBER OF REPORTS RECENTLY OF, UM, PERHAPS, UH, A CODE OF CONDUCT, UM, ISSUES.
AND I WAS WONDERING IF THAT JUST CAME TO ME, EDDIE, WHAT ELSE? I JUST CURIOUS, I NEED TO, I NEED TO GO REVIEW THE VIDEO ON THAT COMMISSIONER, TELL IT I GOT IT ALSO.
AND I, I WENT AND DID THE VIDEO AND IT'S, UM, AND YOU ACTUALLY HAVE TO PAY ATTENTION BECAUSE THEY HAVE A LITTLE TEST.
SO, I MEAN, IT'S NO, I, I DON'T, I'VE NEVER SEEN ANYBODY WITHIN THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS ANYWAY, FOR US TO, TO TALK DOWN TO PEOPLE THAT ARE BEFORE US.
AND, UH, I DON'T SEE ANY SEXIST.
I MEAN, THAT, ISN'T, IT REALLY, I'VE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
I CAN UNDERSTAND WHERE PEOPLE DO GET UPSET WHEN THEY, WHEN DIFFERENT PEOPLE ON BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS HAVE A TENDENCY SOMETIMES TO TALK DOWN TO PEOPLE.
AND, UH, I KNOW HIM PERSONALLY, I'VE BEEN BEFORE, EVEN THE CITY COUNCIL AND I'VE BEEN TOLD, THEY KNOW WHAT'S BETTER FOR ME THAN I KNOW MYSELF.
AND FOR ME JUST TO BE QUIET AND I'M REALLY WEAK IN THOSE WORDS.
SO WE USED TO HAVE A FREQUENT FLYER, UM, UH, COME BEFORE US.
AND EVERY TIME IT WAS FOR A DEMOLITION AND I CALLED HIM DEMOLITION MAN, AND HE, HE LET ME KNOW THAT HE DIDN'T APPRECIATE THAT.
SO, UM, YEAH, WE, WE SHOULD ALL BE, UH, UH, AWARE OF, UM, LAPSES IN JUDGMENT, I GUESS, IN THE PUBLIC EYE.
SO I'M GLAD TO KNOW THAT YOU GOT THAT AS WELL.
I WAS JUST, I WAS WONDERING IF THAT WAS JUST A POINTED, UM, REMINDER TO ME.
DO WE HAVE ANY FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS TO DISCUSS? YEAH.
WELL, HOW ABOUT A MOTION TO ADJOURN?
IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON THAT, THANK YOU FOR SPENDING THIS EVENING WITH ME.