Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript


WE ARE

[00:00:01]

AT THE AUSTIN HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION.

I'M CHAIRMAN TERRY MYERS, AND I WILL CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER AND TAKE THE ROLE.

COMMISSIONER HEIM.

SETH, YOU'RE VIRTUALLY I SEE YOU.

ANISA CASTILLO IS GOING TO BE ABSENT TONIGHT WITH FEATHERSTON PRESENT.

KEVIN CO PRESENT.

SORRY.

CARL LA ROCHE.

PRESENT.

HARMONY GROGAN.

PRESENT.

TREY MC WARD PRESENT.

OKAY.

BLAKE, TO PRESENT.

BETH ZU, I BELIEVE IS GOING TO BE ABSENT THIS EVENING.

AND CAROLINE WRIGHT HERE.

SEE WE HAVE A QUORUM.

[PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL]

IS THERE ANY, ANYONE HERE THIS EVENING WHO WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE LANDMARK COMMISSION ON AN ITEM THAT IS NOT ON OUR AGENDA? YES, WE HAVE MEGAN KING FROM PRESERVATION AUSTIN.

OKAY.

YOU'RE BECOMING A FREQUENT FLYER, MEGAN.

EVERY MONTH, GUYS.

OKAY.

HAVE MY MONTHLY UPDATE FOR YOU ALL.

OKAY.

UM, WE'D LIKE TO SHARE PRESERVATION.

AUSTIN WILL BE HOSTING A FREE VIRTUAL HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION TRAINING FOR BIPO, THAT'S BLACK, INDIGENOUS AND PEOPLE OF COLOR COMMUNITY MEMBERS ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 18TH, 2022 FROM 5:30 PM TO 8:00 PM TRAINING WILL BE PROVIDED BY THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS THROUGH ITS COMMISSIONS ASSISTANCE AND MENTORING PROGRAM.

BUT THIS TRAINING WE HOPE TO INCREASE RACIAL AND ETHNIC REPRESENTATION ON FUTURE HIS HISTOR LANDMARK COMMISSIONS AND AMONG ADVOCATES AT HLC MEETINGS.

THIS TRAINING WILL COVER LEGAL BASICS AND STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES TO PREPARE PARTICIPANTS FOR THE LEGAL AND TECHNICAL FRAMEWORKS NEEDED TO SUCCEED AS FUTURE COMMISSIONERS AND ADVOCATES.

CONTENT WILL FOCUS ON BEST PRACTICES, BUT ALSO TEXAS AND AUSTIN SPECIFIC CASES.

WE ENCOURAGE THE COMMISSION AND ANYONE HERE OR WHO'S WATCHING TO HELP US GET THE WORD OUT TO THE COMMUNITY ABOUT THIS TRAINING.

UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS FOR CIVIC LEADERS OR NEIGHBORHOOD ADVOCATES WANTING TO EMPOWER THEIR COMMUNITY AROUND HISTORIC PRESERVATION ISSUES.

CITIZENS LOOKING TO BE MORE INFORMED ABOUT THE PUBLIC DECISION MAKING PROCESS.

POLICY MAKERS SEEKING TO EXPAND THE KNOWLEDGE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION LAW AND INDIVIDUALS INTERESTED IN SERVING ON THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION IN THE FUTURE.

SO THOSE INTERESTED SHOULD REGISTER BY OCTOBER 14TH.

UM, WE HAVE LIKE A SHORTENED URL.

IT'S TINY URL.COM/PAMP C AMP TRAINING.

YOU CAN ALSO EMAIL ME, UM, MEGAN@PRESERVATIONAUSTIN.ORG.

UH, SPACE IS LIMITED AND WILL BE CAPPED AT 30 PARTICIPANTS FIRST COME FIRST SERVE.

UM, ANOTHER ANNOUNCEMENT.

UM, EVERY ELECTION SEASON PRESERVATION AUSTIN SHARES A QUESTIONNAIRE WITH CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATES TO INFORM OUR AUDIENCE ON THE CANDIDATE'S POSITION ON PRESERVATION ISSUES.

UH, WE'LL BE PUBLISHING THE RESPONSES OF THIS QUESTIONNAIRE ON OUR WEBSITE TOMORROW@PRESERVATIONAUSTIN.ORG.

UM, THIS QUESTIONNAIRE IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY AS A 5 0 1 NONPROFIT PRESERVATION.

AUSTIN DOES NOT ENDORSE CANDIDATES, UM, BUT WE DO WANT TO, UM, GET THEIR PERSPECTIVE.

SO, AGAIN, IF ANYBODY'S INTERESTED IN READING THOSE QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES, YOU CAN SIGN UP FOR EMAIL LIST AND CHECK OUR WEBSITE TOMORROW, PRESERVATION AUSTIN.ORG.

AND LASTLY, A FUN ONE.

WE HAVE OUR FIRST, UM, HISTORIC HAPPY HOUR SINCE 2020 NEXT WEEK AT DIRTY MARTINS ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 11TH FROM FIVE 30 TO SEVEN 30.

AND WE INVITE ALL WHO ARE INTERESTED TO JOIN US TO HEAR AND SHARE STORIES ABOUT DIRTIES AND AGAIN, PRESERVATION AUSTIN.ORG FOR MORE INFORMATION.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

MEGAN.

ANY QUESTIONS? GOOD.

OKAY.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON SOMETHING THAT IS NOT ON OUR AGENDA THIS EVENING? OKAY.

I HAVE A, A BRIEF MESSAGE.

UM, I DON'T KNOW WHERE IT IS THIS YEAR, IF ANYONE HERE KNOWS, YOU CAN TELL ME.

UH, I SAW IN, UH, PRESERVATION OKLAHOMA NEWSLETTER THAT THE, UM, NATIONAL TRUST, UH, ANNUAL CONFERENCE THIS YEAR IS, UH, NOVEMBER 1ST THROUGH THE FOURTH.

AND IT IS, UH, SPECIFICALLY GEARED TO, UM, BEING MORE INCLUSIVE AND ATTENTIVE TO DIVERSE COMMUNITIES AND SEEMS VERY MUCH IN LINE WITH OUR, UH, EFFORTS TO, UH, CREATE AN EQUITY BASED PRESERVATION PLAN.

UM, HAS ANY OF OUR STAFF GOING, DO YOU KNOW WHERE IT IS? OH, IT'S, THE WHOLE THING IS VIRTUAL.

MM-HMM.

.

I DIDN'T KNOW THAT.

OKAY.

MAYBE THAT'S WHY THEY DIDN'T SAY WHERE IT WAS.

.

OKAY.

UM, YOU MIGHT CHECK IT OUT.

UM, IT LOOKED LIKE THERE WERE A NUMBER OF,

[00:05:01]

UM, OF PRESENTATIONS ON, UM, ON EQUITY BASED PRESERVATION.

PRESERVATION PLANNING.

THANK YOU.

[Consent Agenda]

OKAY.

WE ARE GOING TO GO THROUGH THE AGENDA ONCE, UH, TO IDENTIFY CASES THAT MAY BE, UM, UP FOR DISCUSSION OR MAY BE APPROVED ON CONSENT OR POSTPONED.

UM, I WOULD SAY THAT ANYONE WHO HAS AN APPLICATION THAT IS APPROVED ON CONSENT, PLEASE LOOK TO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

UM, IN MANY CASES, ESPECIALLY WITH DEMOLITIONS, THE RECOMMENDATION, UM, IS TO RELEASE THE PERMIT.

BUT BEFORE YOU GET THE PERMIT TO DEMOLISH OR MOVE, RELOCATE A PROPERTY, UM, YOU ARE REQUIRED TO PREPARE A CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKET, WHICH CONSISTS OF EIGHT BY 10 COLOR, UM, PHOTOGRAPHS OF ALL FACADES AND ANY UNIQUE ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS, UH, PRINTED ON PHOTOGRAPHIC PAPER AND WRITE A NARRATIVE HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY THAT IS BEING LOST.

IN SOME CASES WHEN ALTERATIONS ARE, UM, SIGNIFICANT, YOU MAY ALSO BE, UH, REQUIRED TO SUBMIT A CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE.

AND STAFF WILL, UM, HELP YOU WITH THAT, UM, WHEN SHE CONTACTS YOU ABOUT THE RESULTS OF THE MEETING TONIGHT.

IF YOUR PROJECT IS PASSED ON CONSENT, PLEASE LEAVE THE AUDITORIUM QUIETLY UNLESS YOU'D LIKE TO SIT THROUGH THE REST OF THE AGENDA.

UM, AND, UH, ONCE WE GO THROUGH THE AGENDA AND IDENTIFY THOSE PRO, UH, PROJECTS THAT ARE OFFERED FOR CONSENT AND POSTPONEMENT OR DISCUSSION, UM, WE WILL TAKE THOSE IN THE ORDER THAT THEY APPEAR ON, ON THE AGENDA.

WE DO HAVE A BRIEFING TONIGHT THAT WAS SCHEDULED FOR, UM, FOR THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING.

THAT BRIEFING WILL COME LATER, UM, DUE TO, UM, SOME CONSIDERATIONS FOR RELIGIOUS OBSERVANCE AND, UM, IT MAY SEEM THAT THEY'RE CUTTING IN LINE, BUT ACTUALLY THEY WERE SCHEDULED TO BE AT THE FRONT OF THE AGENDA.

SO WE'LL TAKE THEM, UH, WHEN THE, UH, PRESENTER IS, IS HERE.

THE FIRST ITEM UP FOR CONSENT APPROVAL IS, ARE THE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 7TH MEETING.

THEN THE BRIEFING, AS I SAID, WILL COME LATER UNDER PUBLIC HEARINGS AND DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION.

UM, ITEM THREE.

THIS IS FOR HISTORIC LANDMARKS AND LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT APPLICATIONS.

UH, THE ITEM, UM, 360 3 0 1 BLUFF SPRINGS ROAD.

UM, WE ARE GOING TO, THIS IS A CONSENT POSTPONE TO JANUARY TO, TO NOVEMBER, SORRY.

OH, IT SAYS JANUARY IN THE, OH, NO, IT IS JANUARY.

MY APOLOGIES.

I'M SO SORRY.

OKAY.

TO JANUARY 23 TO GIVE THE APPLICANT A CHANCE TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS.

UM, ITEM FOUR 800 EDGE CLIFF TERRACE IS ALSO A CONSENT POSTPONEMENT, AS IS 900 BLANCO, 1202 WEST NINTH STREET, 9 0 1 SHELLEY.

THAT'S ALL ONE APPLICATION, A CONSENT POSTPONEMENT AND ITEM 6 1 15 EAST FIFTH STREET.

THE HARMON BUILDING IS ALSO, UM, THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED A POSTPONEMENT.

I'M ASSUMING THAT'S TO THE NEXT MEETING, TO THE NOVEMBER MEETING.

YES.

ITEM 7 6 0 6 EAST THIRD STREET, 1005 LYDIA STREET WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.

WE WILL, WE WILL DISCUSS THAT IN CONJUNCTION IN CONNECTION WITH ITEM 31, WHICH IS RELATED, UH, TO THIS, IT'S, UH, TWO PROPERTIES ON THE SAME LOT.

SO WE WILL DISCUSS THEM WHEN ITEM SEVEN COMES UP.

8 4 0 4 ATLANTA STREET IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT AS PER THE TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION PROJECT REVIEW ITEM 9 39 52

[00:10:02]

BEMAN DRIVE IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT APPROVAL.

ITEM TEN SIX OH NINE BAYLOR STREET IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

ITEM 11 4,001 AVENUE C WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.

ITEM 12 39 0 9 AVENUE G IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT PROPERTIES IN NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICTS.

ITEM 13 5 12 EAST MONROE STREET IS AN APPLICANT REQUESTED POSTPONEMENT 14 13 15 AND 1317.

NEWY AVENUE IS ALSO AN APPLICANT REQUESTED POSTPONEMENT.

ITEM 15 16 18 PALM PLAZA IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT ITEM 16 12 0 5 BICKLER ROAD.

I WANNA PULL THAT ITEM FOR DISCUSSION.

ITEM 17.

AND ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE, UM, IF YOU WANNA PULL AN ITEM THAT'S ON THE, THAT, UH, WE SAY IS LISTED FOR CONSENT, IF YOU WANNA PULL THAT ITEM FOR DISCUSSION, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND OR CALL MY NAME, OTHERWISE GET MY ATTENTION, AND WE WILL DISCUSS THAT ITEM IN THE ORDER THAT IT APPEARS ON THE AGENDA.

ITEM 17 21 12 CLIFTON STREET IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

ITEM 18 27 0 6 WOODRIDGE DRIVE WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.

ITEM 19 15 15.

MOLEY DRIVE IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT AS IS ITEM 20 18 10 MOLEY DRIVE.

ITEM 21, 12 0 1 CANTERBURY STREET IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

ITEM 22 900 CONGRESS AVENUE WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM UNDER DEMOLITION RELOCATION PERMIT APPLICATIONS.

ITEM 23 4,008 NORTH LAMAR BOULEVARD WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM AND CHAIR MYERS.

YES.

I DON'T BELIEVE WHERE THERE'S ANY BACKUP ON 23, BUT I COULDN'T FIND IT.

IT'S, IT'S THE, IT'S THE ONE, UM, WHERE THEY DEMOLISH THE BUILDING WITHOUT A PERMIT.

OKAY.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT.

FAVORITE THAT KIND OF APPLICATION? YES.

THANK YOU.

ITEM 24 17 21 EAST 38TH STREET HAS BEEN ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED, SO WE WILL TAKE NO ACTION ON THAT.

ITEM 25, 1800 GUADALUPE STREET IS ANOTHER APPLICANT REQUESTED POSTPONEMENT.

ITEM 26 19 0 5 TILSON AVENUE IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

ITEM 27 45 13 AVENUE B, UNIT TWO IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

OH, I'D LIKE TO PULL THAT ONE.

WHO, WHO IS THAT RIGHT? OH, 27.

WE WILL PULL THAT ITEM FOR CONSENT FOR, I'M SORRY.

WE WILL PULL THAT ITEM FOR DISCUSSION.

ITEM 21.

I'M SORRY.

UM, IT'S HYDE PARK.

ITEM 27 45 13 AVENUE B.

UNIT TWO WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.

ITEM 28 27 11 MAINER ROAD WILL IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

29 27 13.

MAINER ROAD IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

30 27 15 MADER ROAD IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.

31 WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM THAT 6 0 8 EAST THIRD STREET, UH, THIS IS THE ITEM THAT WE WILL TAKE UP UNDER, UM, IN THE SAME, AT THE SAME TIME WE TAKE UP THE ITEM.

UH, NUMBER SEVEN, ITEM 32 21 0 6 MATTHEWS DRIVE IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT AND ITEM 33 6 0 5 EAST 47TH STREET IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT NUMBER 34 1 18.

LIGHTSY ROAD WAS ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED AND WE WILL NOT BE TAKING ACTION ON THAT.

WE THEN HAVE STAFF DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON OUR MEETING SCHEDULE AND COMMITTEE UPDATES.

THERE ARE NO FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS LISTED, UM, UNLESS YOU CAN THINK OF ONE BETWEEN NOW AND THE END OF THE AGENDA, AT WHICH TIME EVERYBODY WILL BOO YOU BECAUSE THEY'LL WANT TO GO HOME BY THEN.

[00:15:01]

OKAY.

IS WERE THERE ANY ITEMS THAT WERE OFFERED FOR CONSENT THAT ANYONE FELT THEY WOULD LIKE TO PULL FOR DISCUSSION? OKAY.

SAYING NONE.

THOSE OF YOU WHOSE ITEMS WERE ON THE CONSENT, WELL, WE WILL VOTE ON IT, BUT IF YOUR ITEMS ARE, ARE APPROVED IN THE, IN THE VOTE, YOU MAY LEAVE THE, THE AUDITORIUM AND STAFF WILL GET IN TOUCH WITH YOU TOMORROW.

DO I HEAR A EMOTION ON THE, ON, UM, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA? SO MOVED.

SECOND.

OKAY.

WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND, SAY AYE.

AYE.

AYE.

AYE.

OKAY.

THE CONSENT AGENDA IS APPROVED.

DO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE, UM, CONSENT POSTPONEMENTS? SO MOVED.

SECOND.

OKAY.

WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR OF THE CONSENT POSTPONEMENTS, PLEASE SAY, AYE.

RAISE YOUR HAND.

AYE.

OKAY.

THAT AGENDA PASSES.

WE WILL NOW TAKE UP THE, UM, ITEMS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AGENDA.

THIS IS, UM, LET'S SEE, I HAVE TO GO DOWN THE LIST OF POSTPONEMENTS FIRST TO

[Items 7 & 31]

ITEM 7, 6 0 6 EAST THIRD STREET, AND 1005 LYDIA STREET.

DO WE HAVE A STAFF? GOOD EVENING.

STAFF REPORT.

YES.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS, UH, 6 0 6 AND 6 0 8 EAST THIRD STREET SHARE ONE LOT AND ONE PARCEL.

SO EVEN, EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE ADDRESSED SEPARATELY, SO WE WILL BE REVIEWING THEM TOGETHER AS, UH, THE CHAIR MENTIONED.

UH, WE'RE GONNA START WITH 6 0 8 EAST THIRD STREET.

IT'S DEMOLITION OF A CIRCUIT 1880 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE.

6 0 8 EAST THIRD STREET IS A NATIONAL FOLK STYLE HALL AND PARLOR FAMILY HOME HALL AND PARLOR.

FAMILY HOUSES ARE A BRITISH FORM THAT IS TRADITIONALLY ASSOCIATED WITH HEAVY TIMBER OR HUE LAW CONSTRUCTION, BUT WE'RE ADAPTED TO MASONRY IN OTHER TYPES OF CONSTRUCTION.

AS THE STYLE MOVED INTO TIMBER SCARCE AREAS AFTER THE EXPANSION OF THE RAILROAD, THE FORM WAS EXECUTED WITH LIGHT FRAMED WALLS AND REMAIN THE DOMINANT FORM OF FULL COW OVER MUCH OF THE RULE SOUTHEAST WELL INTO THE 20TH CENTURY.

ALL IN PARLOR HOUSES ARE TYPICALLY ONE OR ONE IN ONE HALF STORIES IN THE HEIGHT AND HAVE SIDE GD ROOFS, WHICH IS, ARE EITHER INSET AND COVERED BY THE MAIN ROOF OR ARE SHED ROOFED EXTENSIONS SHED ROOFED.

REAR EXTENSIONS ARE COMMON.

THE DESIGN WAS POPULAR AS MANY PEOPLE COULD NOT AFFORD A LARGE HOUSE.

HOWEVER, PUTTING UP A WALL IN THE ONLY ROOM CREATED A SMALLER AREA IN THE REAR OF THE HOUSE CALLED A PARLOR.

THIS WAS A PRIVATE ROOM AND USUALLY CONTAINED A BED.

THE EAST THIRD STREET DWELLING IS A WELL PRESERVED EXAMPLE OF LATE 19TH CENTURY NATIONAL FOLK HOUSING OF THE HALL AND PARLOR FAMILY WITH REAR SHED EDITION.

IT IS A SINGLE STORY DWELLING WITH A FULL FRONT PORCH WITH AN X CROSS STICK RAILING DESIGN AND METAL ROOF THAT WAS LIKELY RE REHABILITATION OF PREVIOUS DESIGNS.

IT HAS A SIDE GD ROOF AND WOOD EXTERIOR SHEATHING WITH A BALANCED SYMMETRICAL FRONT FACADE COMPOSED OF A SINGLE ENTRY WOODEN DOOR FLANKED BY FOUR OVER FOUR WINDOWS.

BOTH PROPERTIES WERE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FOR RELOCATION ACROSS THE STREET IN 2016 AND 2019.

HOWEVER, THE SITE, UH, THAT THE HOMES WERE BEING RELOCATED TO WAS DEEMED NOT VIABLE BY PUBLIC WORKS DUE TO AN EXISTING RETENTION POND.

THERE WAS NOT AN EXPLICIT DETERMINATION ON WHETHER THE HOUSES MET HISTORIC CRITERION IN, UH, AT THE PREVIOUS STAFF REPORTS BECAUSE THEY WERE BEING RELOCATED WITHIN THEIR IMMEDIATE ENVIRONMENTS.

SUCH A RELOCATION WOULD'VE HELPED RETAIN THE STRUCTURES ORIGINAL NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT.

THERE DO NOT APPEAR TO BE ANY SPECIFIC HISTORICAL FIGURES ASSOCIATED WITH THE STRUCTURE, BUT RATHER, THIS FILLING IS A RARE SURVIVING INSIGHT TO EXAMPLE OF MIDDLE TO LOWER INCOME HISTORIC HOUSING FROM THE 19TH CENTURY IN AUSTIN.

IT PROVIDES INSIGHT INTO THE CHANGING PATTERNS OF AUSTIN'S HISTORY AS AN EXAMPLE OF THE LIVING LOCATION AND CONDITIONS OF LOWER TO MIDDLE INCOME AUSTINITES.

THE WALLER CREEK SURVEY LISTS THE PROPERTY AS ELIGIBLE FOR NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACE.

LISTING THE PROPERTIES MUST MEET TWO CRITERIA FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION.

STAFF HAS EVALUATED THE PROPERTY AND DETERMINED THAT IT DOES MEET TWO CRITERIA ARCHITECTURE.

THE BUILDING IS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF A HAR AND PARLOR COTTAGE ARCHITECTURE AND CONVEYS ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE AND COMMUNITY VALUE.

THE PROPERTY POSSESSES A UNIQUE LOCATION, PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTIC OR SIGNIFICANT FEATURE THAT CONTRIBUTES TO THE CHARACTER, IMAGE OR CULTURAL IDENTITY OF THE CITY, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, OR A PARTICULAR DEMOGRAPHIC GROUP.

THE STRUCTURE PROVIDES INSIGHT INTO THE CHANGING PATTERNS

[00:20:01]

OF AUSTIN'S HISTORY AS A RARE EXAMPLE OF PRE 1900 LIVING CONDITIONS OF LOWER TO MIDDLE INCOME AUSTIN NIGHTS AND PRESERVED WITH 6 0 6 EAST THIRD HELPS TO TELL A PIECE OF AUSTIN'S HOUSING HISTORY STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO CONSIDER INITIATING HISTORIC LANDMARK ZONING.

IF THE COMMISSION CHOOSES NOT TO INITIATE LANDMARK ZONING, ENCOURAGE REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE, THEN RELOCATION OVER DEMOLITION, BUT RELEASE THE PERMIT UPON COMPLETION OF A CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE.

PARDON THE INTERRUPTION, BUT I DO BELIEVE WE NEED A MOTION TO TAKE THE TWO ITEMS TOGETHER, UM, BEFORE CONTINUING.

OKAY.

DO I HEAR A MOTION TO TAKE THE TWO ITEMS? SECOND ONE.

OKAY.

ALL IN FAVOR OF TAKING THEM TOGETHER.

PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND, SAY AYE.

AYE.

IT PASSES.

THE MOTION CARRIES.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS.

AND, OKAY, I HAVE A QUESTION OF STAFF.

UM, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO INITIATE, UH, POSSIBLY INITIATE HISTORIC ZONING.

IS THAT INTU OR ONCE IT IS MOVED, THAT WOULD BE IN INSIDE TOO.

OKAY.

AS INTU? MM-HMM.

.

THANK YOU.

MM-HMM.

.

AND I'LL NOW, UH, CONTINUE WITH THE 6 0 8 6 0 8 EAST THIRD STREET.

UH, SO 6 0 8 EAST THIRD STREET IS DEMOLITION OF A CIRCA 1880 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE.

6 0 8 EAST THIRD STREET IS A NATIONAL FOLK STYLE.

OH, I'M SORRY.

THAT WAS THE ONE I JUST READ.

I APOLOGIZE.

UH, THIS IS GOING TO BE 6 0 6 EAST THIRD STREET.

SO 6 0 6 WILL BE RELOCATION, UM, OF A CIRCA 1880 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE INTO A LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT.

SO 6 0 8 WAS FOR DEMOLITION, AND 6 0 6 IS FOR RELOCATION.

6 0 6 EAST THIRD STREET IS A CIRCA 1880 DWELLING OF SECOND EMPIRE STYLE INFLUENCES WITH A DOUBLE PILE PLAN.

IN REAR EDITION, THERE IS THE CREATION OF A FOE CENTERED WING, WHICH IS A COMMON SUBTYPE OF THE EMPIRE.

SECOND EMPIRE STYLE BY THE UPPER DORMER AND PROJECTING PORCH.

BELOW THE PORCH HAS A MODEST DECORATIVE SPINDLE FREEZE WITH BEADS.

THE STRUCTURE HAS A WOOD EXTERIOR WITH A WOOD SHINGLED STRAIGHT MANED ROOF SHAPE.

SECOND EMPIRE IS A RARE STYLE IN THE SOUTHERN STATES.

SECOND, EMPIRE STYLING WAS PARTICULARLY ADAPTED FOR TOWN HOMES FOR IT PROVIDED AN UPPER FLOOR BEHIND THE STEEP ROOF LINE AND MADE THE STRUCTURE APPEAR LESS MASSIVE THAN MOST OTHER STYLES WITH COMPARABLE SPACE.

THE BOXY ROOF LINE WAS CONSIDERED PARTICULARLY FUNCTIONAL BECAUSE IT PERMITTED A FULL UPPER STORY OF USABLE LIVING AREA OR ATTIC SPACE.

THE SECOND STORY IN REAR EDITION WAS ADDED BETWEEN 1880 AND 1935, AS INDICATED BY THE SANDBORN MAPS.

SECOND EMPIRE WAS POPULAR FOR A RELATIVELY SHORT TIME FOR, FROM APPROXIMATELY 1855 TO 1885.

SO IT WAS LIKELY THE SECOND STORY EDITION WAS CONSTRUCTED NOT LONG AFTER THE 1894 SANBORN MAP.

RESEARCH INDICATES THE STRUCTURE CONTINUOUSLY SERVED TWO FAMILIES OR LESS, BUT DOES NOT INDICATE A FRAME SEPARATION WHILE TYPICALLY FOUND WITH SEPARATE ENTRANCES.

AGAIN, BOTH PROPERTIES WERE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FOR RELOCATION ACROSS THE STREET, UM, IN 2016 AND 2019.

HOWEVER, THE SITE WAS NOT DEEMED VIABLE DUE TO THE EXISTING RETENTION POND.

AND THERE WAS NOT AN EXPLICIT DETERMINATION ON WHETHER THE HOUSES MET HISTORIC CRITERION BECAUSE THEY WERE BEING RE RELOCATED WITHIN THEIR IMMEDIATE ENVIRONMENTS.

THERE DID NOT APPEAR TO BE ANY SPECIFIC HISTORICAL FIGURES ASSOCIATED WITH THE STRUCTURE, BUT RATHER, THE SWELLING IS A RARE SURVIVING INSTITUTE EXAMPLE OF MIDDLE TO LOWER INCOME HISTORIC HOUSING FROM THE 19TH CENTURY IN AUSTIN.

IT PROVIDES INSIGHT INTO THE CHANGING PATTERNS OF AUSTIN'S HISTORY AS AN EXAMPLE OF THE LIVING LOCATION CONDITIONS OF LOWER TO MIDDLE INCOME.

AUSTINITES.

THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S HISTORIC DESIGN STANDARDS ARE BASED ON THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION, AND ARE USED TO EVALUATE PROJECTS IN THE ROBERTSON STEWART MAYOR, LOCALLY DESIGNATED HISTORIC DISTRICT THAT HAS ADOPTED THE HISTORIC DESIGN STANDARDS.

SO THIS LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT IS WHERE THE LOCATION IS, THE LOCATION OF WHERE THIS HOUSE IS BEING PROPOSED TO BE, UH, RELOCATED.

THE GENERAL STANDARDS ARE RELOCATION OF THE STRUCTURE INTO THE RE ROBERTSON STEWART MAYOR DISTRICT WILL DEEM IT INELIGIBLE FOR ANY TYPE OF HISTORIC DESIGNATION.

FURTHER, THIS STRUCTURE WILL NOT BE COMPATIBLE WITH CURRENT STRUCTURES ON THE SITE.

AT 1005, LYDIA RESEARCH DID INDICATE PAST ATTEMPTS TO UNSUCCESSFULLY RELOCATE THE STRUCTURE TO THE FOLLOWING GROUPS, THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT, PALM DISTRICT PLANNING INITIATIVE, GUADALUPE NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND COMMUNITY FIRST VILLAGE.

THE WALLER CREEK SURVEY LISTS THE PROPERTY IS ELIGIBLE FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACE.

LISTING PROPERTIES MUST MEET TWO CRITERIA FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION.

AND STAFF HAS EVALUATED THE PROPERTY AND DETERMINED THAT IT DOES MEET TWO CRITERIA ARCHITECTURE.

THE BUILDING IS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF MODEST SYNC EMPIRE STYLING AND APPEARS TO CONVEY ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE AND COMMUNITY VALUE.

THE PROPERTY POSSESSES A UNIQUE LOCATION, PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTIC OR

[00:25:01]

SIGNIFICANT FEATURE THAT CONTRIBUTES TO THE CHARACTER IMAGE OR CULTURAL DEN IDENTITY OF THE CITY, THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR PARTICULAR DEMOGRAPHIC GROUP.

THE STRUCTURE PROVIDES INSIGHT INTO THE CHANGING PATTERNS OF AUSTIN'S HOUSING HISTORY AS A RARE EXAMPLE OF PRE 1900 LIVING CONDITIONS OF MIDDLE TO LOWER INCOME.

AUSTINITES 6 0 6 AND 6 0 8 EAST THIRD TELL A PIECE OF AUSTIN'S HOUSING STORY AS AN EXAMPLE, THE HOUSING STYLE TYPE, LOCATION AND CONDITIONS OF LOWER MIDDLE INCOME AUSTINITES CONSIDER INITIATING HISTORIC LANDMARK ZONING IF THE COMMISSION CHOOSES NOT TO INITIATE LANDMARK ZONING.

ENCOURAGE REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE, BUT APPROVE THE RELOCATION AND RELEASE THE PERMIT UPON COMPLETION OF A CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE.

THANK YOU.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? OKAY.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICATIONS? OKAY, COME ON DOWN.

OKAY.

WOULD YOU TAKE THE THE FIRST ONE FIRST AND, UH, YES, I WILL.

THANK YOU.

.

UM, CAN WE SEE GOOD EVENING.

CAN A PHOTOGRAPH OF THAT ON THE SCREEN BEHIND US? GO AHEAD.

UH, GOOD EVENING LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE COMMISSION.

MY NAME IS TRAVIS YOUNG.

I'M AN ARCHITECT WITH STUDIO MOMENTUM ARCHITECTS.

I'M THE APPLICANT.

I WAS FIRST, UH, BROUGHT INTO THIS PROJECT BY, UM, A REQUEST FROM THE GUADALUPE NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND MARK ROGERS FOR WHOM, WHICH I DO, UH, PROJECTS, UH, IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING AROUND AUSTIN.

UH, THEY ASKED ME TO SEE IF THE, THE BUILDING AT 6 0 6 EAST THIRD STREET COULD BE FEASIBLY MOVED TO A SITE AT 1005 LYDIA STREET.

AND SO I COMMENCED THE FEASIBILITY, UH, REVIEW OF THAT OP POSSIBILITY AND CONCLUDED THAT WE COULD POSSIBLY MOVE THIS TO THE LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT OF THE ROBERTSON MAYOR, UM, HISTORIC DISTRICT, UH, ROBERTSON, UH, ROBERTSON STEWART MAYOR, UH, LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT.

BUT THERE WERE SEVERAL THINGS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO DO TO ACCOMPLISH THAT.

UH, THE FIRST ONE WAS A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR CONSTRUCTING THIS BUILDING IN THAT LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT.

UM, SECOND, UH, THE PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT THEY HAD WAS A RESIDENTIAL TRACK THAT HAD TWO DUPLEXES ON IT, AND THE ONLY WAY TO POSITION OF FIFTH LIVING UNIT ON THAT PROPERTY.

UH, AND THOSE OTHER TWO DUPLEXES ARE RENT AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

THEY'RE RENTAL PROPERTY THAT G AND DC OWNS.

UM, WE WOULD HAVE TO APPLY FOR RELIEF FROM AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED, UH, THAT ORDINANCE ALLOWS US TO HAVE MULTIPLE UNITS ON A PROPERTY, ALLOWS US TO AVOID SOME THINGS LIKE COMPATIBILITY ISSUES AND PARKING.

AND THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO MOVE, UH, THE STRUCTURE.

AND SECONDLY, WE'D HAVE TO GO THROUGH A SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, COMMERCIAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT BECAUSE, UH, EVEN THOUGH AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED ALLOWS FOR THIS NUMBER OF UNITS, ANYTHING OVER THREE HAS TO GO THROUGH A COMMERCIAL, UH, SITE PLAN.

UM, WE DID DEMONSTRATE THAT, UM, THIS BUILDING COULD BE PLACED AND POTENTIALLY ACHIEVE A SITE PLAN EXEMPTION IN THAT PROCESS BY MEETING THAT CRITERIA.

SO I STARTED WITH AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, THINKING THAT WOULD BE THE FIRST, UM, UH, SERIES OF, OF THINGS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO ACCOMPLISH.

AND WE, WE SUBMITTED THE APPLICATION IN AUGUST.

UM, THE PROPERTY OWNER SUBSEQUENTLY ASKED ME TO CONNECT 6 0 8, UH, THE REQUEST FOR FULL DEMOLITION ON 6 0 8 WITH THIS APPLICATION FOR THE RELOCATION AND CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR 6 0 6.

AND SO WE POSTPONED THE INITIAL ASK AND THEN SUBMITTED APPLICATION FOR 6 0 8 FOR FULL DEMOLITION.

THE PROPERTY OWNER ASKED ME ALSO TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND, UH, IN ADDITION TO SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONS THAT THEY'VE HAD WITH OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA BECAUSE IN THE 2016 AND 2019, UM, RELOCATION PERMITS THAT WERE APPROVED, THAT WAS TO HAVE THE BUILDINGS MOVED ACROSS THE STREET, WHICH WOULD KEEP THEM IN, UH, RELATIVELY IN THE SAME CONTEXT.

THAT WAS, UH, UH, STOPPED BY, UM, THE WATERSHED DEPARTMENT, I BELIEVE, DUE TO THEIR EASEMENTS AND, AND NEEDS OF ACCESS TO THE, UH, DETENTION PALM, WHICH IS IN THAT LOCATION.

UH, THE OWNER WENT AND TALKED TO A CONVENTION CENTER MANAGEMENT OF THE BRUSH OF, ALSO TALKED TO, UM, THE CONVENTION CENTER MANAGEMENT OF THE, UH, WHAT IS IT CALLED, THE CASTLEMAN BULL HOUSE LOCATION.

I SAID, IS THERE A POSSIBILITY

[00:30:01]

THAT THEY COULD POSITION THE HOUSES THERE? WHICH IT, THAT, THAT BUILDING'S A HISTORIC STRUCTURE WAS RELOCATED TO RED RED RIVER? YES.

AND, UM, ASKED IF THEY COULD POTENTIALLY BE MOVED INTO THE PARKING LOT AREA NEAR THAT STRUCTURE.

UM, AND OF COURSE, THAT WAS, UH, NOT APPROVED BY THE CONVENTION CENTER PROPERTIES.

UM, THEY ALSO TRIED TO GO TO THE BRUSHY CREEK SQUARE, UM, AREA.

AND THAT WAS, UM, HELD BACK.

UH, THEY WENT TO COUNCIL MEMBER TO O'S OFFICE AND SAID, HEY, WHAT IS THERE, IS THERE ANY OTHER OPTIONS HERE FOR US FOR THESE TWO HOUSES? WHY DON'T YOU TALK TO COMMUNITY FIRST? TALK TO GN DCS, SOME OF THESE NON-PROFITS THAT DO AFFORDABLE HOUSING, SEE IF THEY COULD TAKE IT.

COMMUNITY FIRST SAID IT DIDN'T FIT WITH THEIR MASTER PLAN, EITHER ONE OF THE HOUSES AND GN DC SAID THEY WERE NOT INTERESTED IN THE SMALLER HOUSE.

UH, SO THIS IS HOW WE GET FULL CIRCLE BACK TO GN C.

UM, I BELIEVE THE ASK ARE SEVERAL ASKS HERE, NOW THAT THESE ARE COMBINED, ONE IS, UH, RELOCATION ALLOWING FOR 6 0 6 2 WOULD BE TWO, UH, CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO ALLOW IT TO BE IN THIS HISTORIC DISTRICT WHERE THE SITE IS AVAILABLE.

THAT'S OWNED BY GN, DC AND THEN THIRD, THE DEMOLITION OF 6 0 8.

UM, I DO BELIEVE THAT REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS IS ON THE PHONE CALL TONIGHT.

AND, UM, UH, SO THEY'RE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AS WELL AS I ANYONE ELSE HAS ANY QUESTIONS OF WHERE WE ARE AT THIS POINT? I CAN ATTEMPT TO ANSWER THEM.

UM, I HAVE A QUESTION.

AM I ON, UM, SO YOU WERE APPROACHED BY MARK ROGERS OR BY THE GUADALUPE NEIGHBORHOOD TO BRING IN BOTH PROPERTIES OR RIGHT.

BOTH PROPERTIES, YES.

SO LET ME CLARIFY.

I WAS ASKED TO COME IN ON THIS PROJECT AND DO THE FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR GN DC SUBSEQUENTLY, I'VE BEEN, UH, PUT UNDER CONTRACT BY THE PROPERTY OWNER TO COMBINE THESE APPLICATIONS TOGETHER.

THE PROPERTY RUN OWNER PROCESS.

THE PROPERTY OWNER OF THE STREET? THAT'S CORRECT.

OKAY.

THAT'S CORRECT.

AND THE, THERE'S A VACANT SITE AT 1005, LYDIA? NO, IT HAS THREE OTHER PROPERTIES ON IT.

UH, LI ONE 1005, LYDIA IS, UH, THERE, THERE'S THE SITE PLAN FOR IT.

UM, ACTUALLY HAS TWO EXISTING DUPLEXES ON IT.

THERE'S A SMALL PARKING AREA IN THE FRONT.

AND WITH, UH, THE RELIEF OF AFFORDABILITY UNLOCKED, WE CAN POSITION, UH, 6 0 6 ON THAT SITE.

OKAY.

AND THE INTENTION WOULD BE FOR THAT, THAT PROPERTY TO BE REHABILITATE, THAT THE BUILDING TO BE REHABILITATED AND THEN TO BE RENTAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

OKAY.

UM, AND THE FIRST, THE, YOU WERE FIRST CONSULTING, UH, ON BRINGING BOTH PROPERTIES ON, BUT THE, NOW THE PROPERTY OWNER, UM, IS AGREEABLE TO MOVE THE ONE PROPERTY? THAT'S RIGHT.

CORRECT.

INITIALLY IT WAS, I WAS ASKED TO SEE ABOUT THE FEASIBILITY OF GETTING ONE, YEAH, 6 0 6 DID HAVE ANYTHING.

DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT 6 0 8 OTHER THAN I SAW IT THERE WHEN I WENT TO THE SITE.

AND THEN SUBSEQUENTLY IS ASKED BY THE OWNER OF THE SOUTH OF THE EAST THIRD STREET PROPERTIES TO COMBINE THESE ALL TOGETHER.

OKAY.

HAVING FAILED TO FIND ANOTHER LOCATION FOR 6 0 8.

SO LET'S JUST PUT 'EM ALL BACK TOGETHER AGAIN.

SINCE IT'S THE SAME TRACT OF LAND, IT, IT BEGS FOR A FLOW CHART.

I SEE.

UM, YEAH, SORRY, I'VE TRIED TO GET AROUND TO THAT.

WHAT ABOUT CIRCULAR TO GET TO HOW WE GOT HERE, WHAT CONSIDERATION OF LEAVING THESE VERY HISTORIC BUILDINGS, RARE EXAMPLES OF THEIR TYPES, WHERE THEY ARE, I GUESS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO TALK TO THE PROPERTY OWNER ABOUT THEIR CONSIDERATION.

THAT IS THEIR ORIGINAL LOCATION.

THEY HAVE INTEGRITY OF LOCATION ON THAT SITE.

THEY WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR, UM, PRESERVATION TAX CREDITS FOR REHABILITATION AND, UM, YOU KNOW, OTHER, UH, INCENTIVES AS HISTORIC LANDMARKS.

OKAY.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT OR THE APPLICANT'S AGENT? APPLICANT'S AGENT, YES.

OKAY.

OKAY.

UM, AND WE HAVE THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE OR THE PROPERTY OWNER ON THE LINE.

WE HAVE, UH, DOUGLAS MANCHESTER.

OKAY, MR. MANCHESTER.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.

UH, YES, I'M HERE PRESENT.

UM, AND, UH, HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR REFLECT ON ANY, UH, TIMELINE DATING BACK TILL 2016, UH, WHEN WE HAD THE ORIGINAL APPROVALS TO RELOCATED ACROSS THE STREET TO, UH, WHAT IS NOW THE RETENTION POND ON THE NORTHWEST QUADRANT OF PALM PARK.

UHHUH , I REMEMBER YOU.

UM, YES MA'AM.

WHY

[00:35:01]

NOT LEAVE THEM WHERE THEY ARE? WELL, UM, I, IF YOU RECALL MY PRESENTATION AND I APOLOGIZE, I WOULD, I WOULD, UH, BE THERE, UH, TONIGHT PRESENT.

UM, HOWEVER, I'M EXPECTING MY FIRST BOY, UH, ANY MINUTE NOW.

SO, UH, WE'RE, UH, EXPECTING A BABY BOY, UH, TO BE BORN, UH, IN THE NEXT COUPLE DAYS.

UH, OTHERWISE I WOULD BE THERE, UH, PRESENT.

UM, BECAUSE THIS MATTER IS VERY IMPORTANT TO ME.

UM, I, UM, WORKING WITH, WITH YOU ALL, UH, I REMEMBER PRESENTING OLD MAPS OF THAT'S APPROVED UP THE HISTORIC, UH, INTEGRITY OF THAT WATERLOO DISTRICT.

AND, UM, I WAS TRYING TO MY BEST TO ENCAPSULATE THAT A LOT OF HOUSES HAVE BEEN DISPERSED AND A LOT OF HOUSES HAVE BEEN MOVED, AND A LOT OF HOUSES, UM, HAVE FOUND DIFFERENT HOMES.

UH, AND I REFERENCED THE CAMAN BULL HOUSE, UH, HAS BEEN MOVED, UH, FROM ACROSS TOWN AND, UH, TRIED TO, UH, RE REVIVE THE OLD WATERLOO FEEL.

AND, AND, UH, THE WATERLOO COMPOUND, UM, RELOCATING THEM ACROSS THE STREET WOULD ACCOMPLISH OUR, UH, GOAL OF TYING IN, UH, OUR PROPERTY, OUR LAND TOGETHER, UH, FOR A, UH, SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT I, UH, ILLUSTRATED IN THAT PRESENTATION.

UM, THAT WOULD BE A HUGE IMPACT FOR THE SURROUNDING AREA, INCLUDING PALM PARK, UH, CREEK, AND, UH, THE HISTORIC RELEVANCE AND, UH, REHABILITATION OF THE WATERLOO COMPOUND.

SO KIND OF TREATED AS A WIN WIN WIN.

UM, AND THAT WAS AGREEABLE AND THAT WAS APPROVED IN 2016.

UM, AND SO SINCE THEN WE'VE HAD, UM, NEWER DISCUSSIONS AND ONCE WE WENT TO, UH, ACT ON THE, THE PERMITS THAT WERE PROVIDED TO US AND THE APPROVALS, UM, OBVIOUSLY IT WAS SIDE, IT WAS SIDE RAILED BECAUSE WATERSHED, I MEAN, NO ONE REALLY ANTICIPATED THAT.

UH, IT WAS OUR, IT WAS OUR UNDERSTANDING AND UNDERSTANDING OF MANY OTHERS THAT THAT RETENTION POND WILL, WOULD EVENTUALLY BE, UH, EXCAVATED, UM, AND ELIMINATED IN THE PALM PARK, UH, IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT PLAN THAT THEY'RE STILL UNDERWAY IN DESIGNING.

SO WE, UH, IT WAS HIGHLIGHTED EARLIER THAT WE WENT TO ALTERNATIVE LOCATIONS.

UH, WE TALKED TO PAUL BARNES AT CONVENTION AUTHORITY, UH, TO RELOCATE THEM IN THE, UH, IN THE VACANT PARKING SPACE IN BETWEEN THE CASTLEMAN BULL AND TRASH HOUSE THAT WAS DENIED.

UH, WE TALKED TO, AT THE PHILLIPS IN TOGO'S OFFICE TO, UH, WHAT HER RECOMMENDATIONS WERE.

SHE PUT US IN TOUCH WITH KEN MCKNIGHT OF PARKS DEPARTMENT AND, UH, POSSIBLY AT BRUSH CREEK SQUARE.

THEY HAVE ALREADY THEIR, UM, PLANS IN MOTION.

SO THAT WAS DENIED.

AND THEN IT WAS HIGHLIGHTED THAT COMMUNITY FIRST COULDN'T EVEN TAKE THEM.

SO, UH, WE EXHAUSTED ALL OPTIONS AND WE FOUND A, UM, A SOLUTION WITH GN C TO REAPPROPRIATE THEM TOWARDS, UH, UH, A RESPECTABLE, UH, REAPPROPRIATION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

UM, AND THAT'S PRETTY MUCH OUR, OUR, UH, ONLY OPTION AT THIS TIME TO EXERCISE THE RELOCATION.

UNFORTUNATELY, NO ONE ELSE WANTED THE 6 0 8 HOME.

AND, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS, THEY, THEY COULDN'T FIT IN ANY MASTER PLAN.

AND NOT ONLY DID THEY SAY THAT, THEY SAID, WE DON'T WANT IT.

SO, UH, THIS IS WHERE WE'RE AT AND WE WANTED TO, UM, GET A RECOMMENDATION, UM, AND GO FROM THERE.

OKAY.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE OWNER? YES.

CHAIR MYERS? YES.

COMMISSIONER HEIM, SETH.

YEAH.

WOULD YOU BE MORE SPECIFIC ABOUT THE WATERSHED SAYING THAT THEY ABSOLUTELY HAD NO OTHER OPTION BUT TO, UH, SAY THAT WHAT, WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS A REASONABLE SITE ALL OF A SUDDEN WAS NOT THEY, UM, IT WAS UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF JOE PENTEL AT THE TIME, UH, THAT, UM, I THINK THAT HE HAS MOVED ON TO SAN MARCOS.

UH, AND WHAT WE WERE TOLD IS THAT IT WAS, IT WAS A NON-STARTER BECAUSE BY CODE, UH, THEY HAD TO, UM, KEEP THEIR ATTENTION POND IN PLACE.

UM, THEY CANNOT EXHIBIT IT.

YOU COULDN'T EVEN, UH, FREE SPAN OVER IT.

WE EVEN PROPOSED THE BUILDING OVER IT.

UH, AND THAT WAS, UH, A NON-STARTER.

SO I WOULD LOVE TO, UH, REVISIT IF THAT IS STILL ON THE TABLE TO RELOCATE THEM ACROSS THE STREET.

UM, AND I KNOW THAT, UH, UH, OTHERS WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF THAT.

[00:40:01]

UM, WE JUST OBVIOUSLY, UM, AREN'T IN THE BEST SITUATION OF HAVING THE LUXURY OF TIME TO, UM, TO WAIT ON THE PALM PARK, UH, MASTER PLAN.

AND SO WE'D LIKE TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION, UM, YOU KNOW, WITHIN A SHORT SPAN OF TIME, RATHER THAN WAIT ANOTHER FIVE, SIX YEARS TO MAKE A DECISION ON THIS.

UM, AND I WOULD LOVE IF YOU WERE BE ABLE TO PUT PRESSURE ON, UH, WATERSHED OR CITY OF AUSTIN TO RECONSIDER THAT AS A LOCATION, BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE PERFECT, AND I WOULD BE ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT.

THAT WAS MY ORIGINAL VISION AND, UH, FOR THIS SURROUNDING AREA.

BUT OBVIOUSLY, UM, I'M TRYING, WE'RE TRYING TO PLAY THE BEST CARDS THAT WE'VE BEEN DEALT.

YEAH.

AND JUST FROM OUR, YOU HAVE TO RECOGNIZE FROM OUR POINT OF VIEW, UM, THAT ALSO AT THE TIME WAS AN ACCEPTABLE SOLUTION.

WE OPTED AS A RESULT OF THAT.

UH, I WASN'T NECESSARILY A PARTICIPANT HERE, BUT, UH, I KNOW THAT AT THAT POINT, THAT WOULD'VE BEEN SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, I'M SURE YOU WORKED WITH STEVE SADOWSKI, UM, AND THE IDEA THAT WE WOULD NOT HAVE HAD HISTORIC ZONING UNTIL THIS THING WAS RESOLVED.

UM, BUT THE REALITY IS, IS THAT OUR OTHER OPTION IS TO, UH, TAKE THESE TWO PROPERTIES AND PROTECT THEM WITH THE TOOL THAT WE HAVE WITH HISTORIC ZONING.

AND I THINK THEN WHAT WOULD PUT US, UH, IN A POSITION NOT NECESSARILY OF ADVANCING YOUR NEEDS, UH, IF YOU ARE TRYING TO PRESERVE THEM BY RELOCATION.

SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THE FACT IS, IS THAT WATERSHED HAS COMMUNITY INTERESTS, BUT SO DO WE, AND PRESERVATION IS IMPORTANT COMMUNITY INTEREST.

AND I THINK IT'S, UM, I THINK IT'S WORTH REVISITING.

I, I THINK THE IDEA THAT ONE DEPARTMENT SAYS, I THINK SOME COMPROMISE BECAUSE THERE'S A CODE, WELL, THE CODE IS SET BY THE COUNCIL.

THE COUNCIL CAN SET THE CODE ANY WAY IT WANTS TO.

MM-HMM.

.

YEAH.

I, I, I THINK, I THINK, UM, WE'RE, WE'RE IN ALIGNMENT THAT, UM, IT, IT CERTAINLY WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR US TO SPEND MORE TIME ON THIS.

I KNOW THAT OUTTA RESPECT TO, UM, THE COMMUNITY OR MY FELLOW NEIGHBORS ON THE, UH, EAST THIRD STREET, UH, I KNOW THAT THEY WOULD APPRECIATE MORE TIME AND CONSIDERATION AND THOUGHTFULNESS TOWARDS THIS.

UM, I UNDERSTAND, AND I WOULD LOVE TO REVISIT THIS AND CHALLENGE, UH, UH, WATERSHED TO, UM, HAVE IT BE RELOCATED ACROSS THE STREET.

I THINK THAT THAT'S A, THAT'S A MUCH MORE APPROPRIATE, UH, LOCATION.

UM, I'M GLAD THAT, UH, OF THE PROCESS AND GRATEFUL FOR THE PROCESS.

SO THAT'S LED US TO, TO, UM, DISABILITY OF, UH, DOING THAT.

AND SO, UM, I, I WOULD HAVING, UH, HAVING KIND OF PRESENTED OUR CASE AND PUT IT UP, REVIEW, UH, AND ON EVERYONE'S RADAR SCREEN, I'D LIKE TO, UM, I'D LIKE TO MOTION TO, UM, OBVIOUSLY POSTPONE, TAKE MORE TIME.

YOU'D LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT MOTION YOU CAN MAKE, SUGGEST JUST A COMMISSION.

UM, I, THAT'S WHAT I MEANT.

I MEANT TO, I MEANT TO MAKE THAT SUGGESTION FOR US TO POSTPONE BECAUSE THERE NEEDS, WE NEED TO HAVE MORE TIME SPENT ON THIS.

I, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF, IS THERE ANYONE ON THE COMMISSION NOW, UM, WHO WAS ON THE COMMISSION BACK THEN? WHEN WE SAT BEFORE COMMISSIONER TILLETT, AS I RECALL, WE, WE HAD, UM, THIS CASE CAUSED MUCH STERN AND WRONG AND GNASHING OF TEETH AT THE TIME TO COME TO THE AGREEMENT THAT, THAT WE DID MAKE, AND THAT THERE WERE CONSIDERABLE CONCESSIONS MADE TO, UM, MR. MANCHESTER AND HIS, AND HIS, UH, GROUP AT THE TIME.

UM, WE DID NOT TAKE LIGHTLY MOVE EVEN MOVING THEM ACROSS THE STREET, BUT THAT'S WHAT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT WE AGREED TO AS A COMMISSION.

UM, THE, THE IDEA OF LOSING ONE OR BOTH ALTOGETHER WAS, WAS NOT IN THE CARDS AT THAT TIME.

UM, WHAT IS YOUR RECOLLECTION, COMMISSIONER? TELE, UH, BASICALLY IT'S YOURS.

UH, IT, I HAVE, THAT'S A LONG TIME AGO, , AND I HAD, I DID NOT LOOK THIS BACK UP.

UH, THIS WAS WITH THE PALM PALM SCHOOL, THE PARK, UM, THE, UH, THE HOTEL, THE RIGHT, THE, THE, THE PARTICULARS OF THE PARKING ARENA.

RIGHT.

UH, IN THE FRONT AND ALL OF THAT.

AND, UM, BUT MAYBE WE'RE IN THE DISCUSSION PORTION OF, WE CAN, UM, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS

[00:45:01]

IN FAVOR? WE DO.

WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION.

OKAY.

WE HAVE A SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION.

THEN I THINK WE SHOULD GO TO THAT SPEAKER.

UH, LET THE APPLICANT'S AGENT OR THE APPLICANT, UM, I GUESS IT WOULD BE THE APPLICANT'S AGENT SINCE YOU MADE THE INITIAL PRESENTATION REBUT.

UH, AND THEN WE CAN DECIDE WHETHER WE WANT TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING OR LEAVE IT OPEN AND THEN DISCI DECIDE ON THE PARTICULARS.

BUT I'D LIKE, UM, MR. MANCHESTER TO STAY ON THE LINE, UM, TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AS THEY MIGHT COME UP IN OUR DISCUSSION.

SO LET'S HEAR THE SPEAKER AND OPPOSITION.

OH, I'M SORRY.

I'M SORRY.

UH, COMMISSIONER LAROCHE, JUST ONE TECHNICAL POINT, IF I MAY ADDRESS.

COMMISSIONER HAIM SAID THAT, UH, IT'S NOT, WATERSHED HAS ALREADY SET PRECEDENT ON BUILDING OVER RETENTION DETENTION AREAS.

SO IT'S NOT AN UNHEARD OF ACTION.

YOU JUST NEED TO HAVE A PRETTY SHARP AND INNOVATIVE CIVIL ENGINEER.

WHEN YOU GO TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION, YOU MEAN THEY'VE, THE THE PRECEDENT HAS BEEN SET THAT, THAT IT CAN BE, THEY'VE DONE IT BEFORE.

THEY'VE DONE IT BEFORE.

OKAY.

OKAY.

SO THIS IS NOT A, THIS IS NOT SET IN STONE.

THEY HAVE DONE IT.

THEY HAVE DONE IT BEFORE.

OKAY.

OKAY.

AND THE, AND THE SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION? YEAH.

WE HAVE MARK, UH, CHIK.

COME ON DOWN.

PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE, UH, TAPE RECORDER.

YES, YES.

UH, GOOD EVENING.

UM, COMMISSIONERS, UH, MY NAME IS MARK SEGAN.

I AM THE 26 YEAR RESIDENT OF THE WATERLOO COMPOUND, AND 24 22 YEAR OWNER, PROPERTY OWNER OF 6 0 4 EAST THIRD STREET ARE DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY.

UH, I AM HERE TODAY TO, UM, UH, TO, UH, REQUEST THAT YOU POSTPONE, YOU'RE MAKING A DECISION ON THE MOVE OF 6 0 6 AT THE ITEM NUMBER SEVEN AND DEMOL OF, UH, 8 0 8 OF 6 0 8, ITEM 31 UNTIL AT LEAST NEXT MONTH.

AND IT APPEARS THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER NOW HAS AGREED WITH THAT.

UM, THIS, THIS WILL FACILITATE OUR HAVING A CONVERSATION, UH, BETWEEN THE, UH, BLOCK 35 STAKEHOLDERS, UH, AND PROPERTY OWNERS, UH, ON THE FUTURE OF THESE HISTORICALLY, UH, ARCHITECTURAL JUMPS.

UM, PLEASE NOTE, NOTE, UH, THAT, AND THIS IS, UM, I THINK PRETTY IMPORTANT.

UH, THE NOTICE THAT WAS SENT OUT, UM, TO THE STAKEHOLDERS WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE PROPERTY, THERE WAS ONLY 1 CENT, AND IT WAS FOR 6 0 8 FOR THE, IT SAYS AT THE TOP DEMOLITION, THERE WAS NOT A REQUEST SENT FOR 6 0 6 FOR THE MOVE.

AND SO I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY MAYBE YOU HAVEN'T SEEN A LOT OF RESPONSES ON THIS.

I DID NOT RESPOND TO THIS BECAUSE ALSO THE ADDRESS ON HERE IS INCORRECT.

THEY HAVE 6 0 6, BUT THE DEMOL ACCOMPLISHMENTS ON 6 0 8.

AND SO I'M ASKING THAT YOU THE, UH, HAVE THE, THE, UH, STAFF REVIEW THIS AND ANY FUTURE HEARINGS TO BE SURE THAT THERE'S ONE FORM FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY.

OKAY.

UH, HERE TONIGHT, UM, WE HAVE BEHIND ME, UM, WE HAVE, UH, JOE TRACY, WHO, UH, REPRESENTS, UH, WHO'S A PROPERTY OWNER FOR THE OTHER ADJACENT PROPERTY AT SIX 10 EAST THIRD, AND ALSO AT MOONSHINE RESTAURANTS AT 600 EAST THIRD, UH, I BELIEVE, AND HE CAN CONFIRM THAT HE IS IN SUPPORT OF POSTPONEMENT.

YES, I AM.

OKAY.

OKAY.

WE'LL NEED YOU TO COME DOWN AND SPEAK AFTER THE CURRENT SPEAKER, UM, JUST TO HAVE YOU ON RECORD.

OKAY.

BUT YOU MAY, YOU WILL BE ALLOWED TO SPEAK EVEN IF YOU DIDN'T SIGN UP.

AND WE ALSO HAVE SARAH FROM MOONSHOT RESTAURANT.

OKAY.

UH, AND SHE IS, I BELIEVE, WOULD, WOULD COME UP AND CONFIRM THAT YOU ARE, UM, FOR, UH, POSTPONING UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING, CORRECT? CORRECT.

OKAY, GREAT.

SO, UM, I, YOU KNOW, I, I'M, I'M, UH, I THINK THAT THERE JUST NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE MORE CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT, WHAT THE HISTORY, THE FUTURE OF THESE HISTORIC BUILDINGS ARE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

DO YOU HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THEM STAYING WHERE THEY ARE? NO.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

STAFF WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE ISSUE OF THE NOTICE STAFF? YES.

UM, SO 6 0 6 AND 6 0 8 ARE ON THE SAME LOT, UM, THROUGH TCAD.

THE LOT IS GIVEN ONE ADDRESS, UH, PER HOUR RECORDS IS 6 0 6.

SO THAT, UM, I WILL SAY THAT, UH, THAT MIGHT BE SOME CONFUSION OF THE 6 0 8 VERSUS 6 0 8.

THEY ARE STILL UNDER ONE ADDRESS PER TCAD.

UM, AND THEN AS FAR AS NOTICES GOING OUT, WE DO HAVE RECORDS OF THE NOTICES LEAVING THE PRINTED MAIL, LEAVING OUR, LIKE OUR NOTIFICATION TEAM SENT THEM OUT.

WE CANNOT CONTROL THE POSTAL OFFICE AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE DELIVERED

[00:50:01]

TO YOUR ADDRESS.

UM, SO I WOULD JUST LIKE YOU TO LET YOU KNOW THAT NOTICE IS RECORDED OF GOING OUT.

SO REIFICATION IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

CAN I SPEAK TO THAT REAL QUICK? BUT, UM, BUT YOU, THE NOTIFICATION ONLY WENT OUT AND ON IT, IT SAID 6 0 6.

THERE WASN'T AN INDICATION THAT SIX OH, THAT THE HOUSE ADDRESS WAS 6 0 8 ON THE BILL ON THE BUILDING WAS PART OF THAT.

MAYBE THERE'S SOME WAY THAT YOU CAN INDICATE THAT THERE'S MORE THAN ONE PROPERTY AT THAT PARTICULAR ADDRESS AND THAT BOTH ARE AFFECTED.

BECAUSE I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY THAT WOULD CAUSE IN THE, UH, YOU KNOW, AMONG THE PEOPLE, BECAUSE THEY KNOW IT IS 6 0 6 AND SEPARATELY 6 0 8, IT'S USUALLY IN CASES LIKE THAT WE WOULD PUT ON THE NOTIFICATION 6 0 6 AND 6 0 8.

HOWEVER, PER OUR NOTIFICATION FORMATTING IN OUR PROCESSING SYSTEM, UH, WE CAN ONLY PUT ONE, UH, PROJECT PROPOSAL DEMOLITION OR RELOCATION.

WE CANNOT PUT BOTH.

SO IT'S, IT'S A SYSTEMATIC THING THAT WE CANNOT CONTROL.

TRIED TO, UH, GET HIM TO REVISE THAT.

I, I CAN SEE WHERE THAT COULD BE A, A, A REAL STICKING POINT HERE.

YEAH.

NO.

SO STAFF AGREES.

BUT THAT'S JUST WHERE WE ARE AT RIGHT NOW.

OKAY.

CAN I SPEAK REAL QUICK? UH, REAL QUICK.

UM, THERE, EVERYONE RECEIVED THE NOTIFICATION FOR 6 0 8 DEMOLITION.

OKAY.

OKAY.

BUT THERE WAS NOTHING ANYWHERE SAID ON HERE ABOUT MOVING OF 6 0 6.

OKAY.

AND SO I WOULD EXPECT THERE WOULD BE ONE THAT SAYS DEMOLITION AT THE TOP AND THE OTHER ONE THAT SAYS MOVING.

YEAH.

AND THAT'S HOW THEY CAN, AND THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT CASE NUMBERS HERE.

SO RIGHT.

AND THERE, THAT'S HOW THEY WERE LISTED ON OUR, GIVEN TO US ON OUR AGENDA.

TO ME, THERE SHOULD BE ONE NOTICE GOING OUT FOR EACH CASE.

YEAH, I UNDERSTAND THAT.

AND I, I AGREE.

I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT COULD NOTICE WAS SENT OUT FOR BOTH ADDRESSES.

OKAY.

INDIVIDUALLY.

SO IT'S UP LIKE IT MUST HAVE GOTTEN LOST IN THE POST OFFICE.

I SUGGEST YOU REACHING OUT TO YOUR POST OFFICE.

SO YOU DID GENERATE A DIFFERENT FORM WITH A DIFFERENT, WITH THE, WITH THE 6 0 6 CASE NUMBER AND IT SAID RELOCATION.

YES.

THE PEOPLE, I SUGGEST REACHING OUT TO YOUR LOCAL POST OFFICE BECAUSE THE NOTIFICATION DID LEAVE OUR OFFICE AND EMAIL DIRECT IT TO YOU.

OKAY.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

UM, WOULD THE NEXT SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION PLEASE COME DOWN? STATE YOUR NAME AND BRIEFLY, UM, STATE YOUR CASE.

YES, I'M JOSEPH TRACY, AND I AM THE PROPERTY OWNER ALONG WITH MY MOTHER FOR 600 EAST THIRD AND SIX 10 EAST THIRD STREET, 600 EAST THIRD STREET IS THE HOP FINDS RICE BUILDING, WHICH IS A CORNERSTONE OF THE WATERLOO COMPOUND FOR BUILT IN 18 60 18 65.

AND UH, WE DO, I DO OPPOSE OR OBJECT TO, UM, ANY MOVEMENT ON THIS TONIGHT.

WE WOULD LIKE SOME MORE TIME, UH, PERHAPS YOU TALK WITH, WITH TRAVIS AND OR DOUG MANCHESTER ABOUT IT AND SEE WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO DO.

I THINK THE BUILDINGS ARE, ARE ABSOLUTELY BEAUTIFUL.

AND, UH, THAT THE IDEA OF MOVING, UH, 6 0 8 ACROSS THE STREET TO THE RETENTION POND, TO KEEP IN MIND THAT THE WALL CREEK PROJECT IS GOING TO INVOLVE, I THINK, REDOING THAT RETENTION BOND.

AND THAT'S GONNA BE A WHILE.

BUT AS FAR AS KEEPING THEM THERE, I, I THINK THEY'RE BEAUTIFUL AND THEY COULD STAY THERE.

UH, I'M ALSO ONE THAT, THAT DIDN'T GET A, ANOTHER NOTICE FOR THE, FOR ONE OF THE MOVES, BUT I THINK THAT'S JUST A TECHNICALITY.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO GO.

SO I WOULD LIKE TO GO ON RECORD, ALTHOUGH I, I DIDN'T REGISTER TO SPEAK THAT.

I DO OBJECT IT UNTIL WE CAN HAVE SOME MORE TIME TO DISCUSS.

THANK YOU.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE SPEAKER? OKAY.

THANK YOU, SIR.

THANK YOU.

NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE.

HI, UH, I'M JORDAN BAXTER.

EVERYBODY CALLS ME SARAH CUZ I'M A TWIN SO THEY GET IT WRONG.

BUT, UH, I'M THE BUSINESS DIRECTOR AT MOON SHINE PATIO, BARN AND GRILL HERE TO REPRESENT THEM.

AND WE DO WANT TO REQUEST A POSTPONEMENT SO THAT WE CAN DISCUSS MORE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER.

OKAY.

OKAY.

QUESTIONS? OKAY.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

NOW, UM, THE APPLICANT'S AGENT, UH, CAN REBUT YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES.

UH, I DON'T HAVE A REBUTTAL PER SE, BUT I MIGHT HAVE AN EXPLANATION FOR WHY THE FIRST APPLICATION THAT WAS SUBMITTED IN AUGUST MAY NOT HAVE GONE OUT BECAUSE THE NOTIFICATION INITIALLY, MY APPLICATION THAT I SUBMITTED WAS FOR THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO GO TO THE ROBERTSON STEWART MAYOR.

SO I'M JUST TRYING TO SOLVE WHY THEY MAY NOT HAVE GOTTEN A RELOCATION REQUEST.

CUZ THAT WASN'T PART OF IT INITIALLY.

IN FACT, I THINK I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT WE HAD A RELOCATION PERMIT.

OKAY.

AND THAT, THAT HAD BEEN THE, THE REAL ISSUE WAS THAT THEY'RE CHANGING ITS LOCATION VERSUS THE FACT THAT WE'RE ALSO GONNA GET ANOTHER RELOCATION.

SO THAT MAY HAVE BEEN WHY, UH, JUST TRYING TO FILL THAT HOLE ABOUT WHY THAT MIGHT HAVE HAPPENED.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

[00:55:02]

OKAY.

WELL, COMMISSIONERS, WHAT IS YOUR PLEASURE? DO YOU WANT TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING OR LEAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING? OPEN CHAIR MYERS? YES, SIR.

THE QUESTION? YES, I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, OFFER A MOTION FOR POSTPONEMENT.

I DO, HOWEVER, BEFORE, UH, I DO, I JUST WANT TO AT LEAST HAVE A CHANCE TO SAY THAT, UH, I THINK IT'S COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE TO LOSE, IN PARTICULAR THE SMALLER, UH, HOLLAND PARLOR EXAMPLE.

UM, AS IT TURNS OUT, IN ADDITION, UH, I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH SOME OF THE, UH, WHAT AT THE TIME WAS AFFORDABLE MOBILE HOUSING.

OKAY.

COMMISSIONER HEIM, SETH, UH, THE QUESTION I'D ASK IS WHETHER TO LEAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENER CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING? WELL, I THINK THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING, IF WE POSTPONE, NEEDS TO STAY OPEN.

THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.

IS THAT CORRECT? UM, ONE SECOND.

UH, COMMISSIONER HEIM, SETH, CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT THIS IS THE POSTPONEMENT OF BOTH AGENDA ITEMS OR JUST THAT'S CORRECT.

THANK YOU.

YES.

BOTH AGENDA ITEMS WOULD BE POSTPONED FOR, WELL, I, AGAIN, I JUST CAN SAY THESE ARE VERY IMPORTANT HOUSES.

I THINK THE, THE OPTION IS STRICTLY DOING A, UH, HISTORIC ZONING AND HAVING AN OWNER WHO AT THIS POINT IS WILLING TO WORK WITH US ON STILL IMPLEMENTING THE ORIGINAL, UH, THE ORIGINAL, THE LOCATION, I THINK IS WORTH WHATEVER TIME WE CAN GIVE IT.

THE ALTERNATE, UH, LOCATION FOR THE LARGER HOUSE, I DON'T BELIEVE WAS ACCEPTABLE, UH, THAT I LOOKED AT THAT LOCATION AND IT WOULD NOT BE, UH, APPROPRIATE.

SO, UH, I THINK WE, THIS GIVES US THE BEST OPTION.

AND IF IT TAKES SEVERAL POSTPONES, I THINK WE SHOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT AS WELL.

BUT CERTAINLY I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO POSTPONE TO OUR NOVEMBER MEETING.

OKAY.

COULD WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE OR, UH, LEAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN? CAN THAT BE THE SAME MOTION? CAN I SECOND THE MOTION TO POSTPONE BOTH CASES AND LEAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN ON BOTH CASES IN ONE MOTION? I THINK THAT IS THE, IS LET ME ASK, UH, COMMISSIONER HEIM, SETH, IS THAT THE INTENTION? IS THAT YOUR INTENTION? IS THAT WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO DO SINCE YOU BROUGHT UP THE, IT'S MY, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, UH, AND I, I THINK WE'VE HAD SOME VERY, UH, DIFFERENT ADVICE ON THIS.

BUT IF, IF WE IN FACT ARE POSTPONING AND WE WOULD LIKE TO KEEP A CASE ACTIVE THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING STAYS OPEN.

SO THAT IS MY MOTION.

OKAY.

DO I HEAR A SECOND? ONE SECOND.

OKAY.

I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY BEFORE WE TAKE THE VOTE, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER HEIM, SETH.

I THINK THAT, UM, SOMETHING THAT WAS COMPLETELY SORT OF OVERLOOKED AND MAYBE, UM, NOT EVEN CONSIDERED BY THE GUADALUPE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, THAT THIS RECENT LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT, UM, MAY NOT BE THE APPROPRIATE PLACE FOR THE LE RELOCATION OF, UH, OF THE ONE HOUSE.

AND THAT WAS PROPOSED FOR RELOCATION THERE.

UM, SO WE WOULD LOSE A, A HISTORIC PROPERTY ON ITS ORIGINAL SITE AND WE WOULD GAIN A NON-CONTRIBUTING PROPERTY IN, UM, THE RECENTLY DESIGNATED LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT.

SO, UM, I, I THINK, UH, IT, IT WOULD SORT OF CONSTITUTE, UH, IT'S NOT NEW CONSTRUCTION, BUT IT WOULD BE NEW TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND, AND WOULD REALLY NEED TO BE CONSIDERED, UM, AS POSSIBLY AS A SEPARATE ITEM OR CASE, UM, FROM THE, UM, FROM THE, YOU KNOW, FROM ITS REMOVAL FROM THE ORIGINAL SITE.

SO I SUPPORT THE MOTION AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE CASE, UH, PUBLIC HEARING LEFT OPEN AND, UH, POSTPONING, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, IS PROBABLY THE BEST THING WE COULD DO.

NOW IN SOME WAY, WE NEED TO HAVE THE, UM, APPLICANTS REACH OUT TO, UH, WATERSHED.

UM, IN THE MEANTIME.

COMMISSIONER COOK? YES, I HAD A, A QUESTION.

IT'S RELEVANT TO THE POSTPONEMENT IN, IN TERMS OF POTENTIAL FRUITFULNESS OF THE TIME.

UH, BUT I HAD A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.

I'M, I'M LOOKING AT THE PROPOSAL, UH, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY, AND IT LOOKS LIKE THERE IS A LOW RISE PROPOSAL FOR THIS PORTION ALONG WITH A SLENDER HOTEL ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.

AND I'M ASSUMING IT SHAVES OFF, UM, CAPITAL VIEW COURT OR 15 THERE.

UH, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE A POTENTIAL FOR ELEVATING THESE TWO PROPERTIES IN CONTEXT WITH THE WATERLOO COMPOUND IN RELATION TO THE, THE HOTEL RATHER THAN REPLACING IT WITH A, A LOW RISE GATHERING PLACE.

HAS THERE BEEN ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT RETAINING THESE AND INCORPORATING THEM IN INTO THE DEVELOPMENT? IS THAT A QUESTION FOR THE, FOR THE APPLICANT? FOR THE OWNER.

FOR

[01:00:01]

THE OWNER.

OKAY.

MR. MANCHESTER, ARE YOU STILL THERE? ARE YOU STILL WITH US? AND IF HE, IF HE CAN'T ANSWER THEN, THEN POSSIBLY THE FELLOW COMMISSIONERS THAT WERE HERE AT THE TIME MIGHT, UH, HELLO? CAN YOU HEAR ME? YEAH, MR. MANCHESTER, DID YOU HEAR THE QUESTION? YES, I DID, AND I CAN RESPOND TO THAT.

OKAY.

UM, IT'S BEEN OUR EXPERIENCE, EXPERIENCES TO ANALYZING THIS, UH, DEVELOPMENT ON THE NORTH END, UM, BLOCK 35 THAT, UH, YOU ARE LANDLOCKED FROM THE RAIL AND IT'S A ONE WAY IN ONE WAY OUT OFF RED RIVER.

UH, THAT'S MAKES IT VERY COMPLICATED.

SO THE INTENT WAS TO HAVE ACCESS ONTO THIRD STREET, AND THAT IS, UM, WHAT COULD, UH, ALLOW, UH, FOR, UH, A MAJOR DEVELOPMENT TO GO THROUGH.

UH, AND SO IN, IN EXCHANGE FOR THE RELOCATION OF THOSE HOUSES, THERE WOULD BE, UH, A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF IMPROVEMENT PLANS SET IN MOTION THAT COULD BENEFIT PALM PARK, WALLER CREEK AND THE SURROUNDING AREA, INCLUDING THE REVITALIZATION AND RESTORATION, UM, AND PROTECTION OF, UH, THE HISTORIC STRUCTURES, UH, IN THAT VICINITY.

AND TOWARDS THAT ADDRESS THAT WAS THE OVERALL INTENT IN THE VISION AND THE MASTER PLAN BEHIND ALL OF THIS.

AND SO THAT WOULD BE FOR VEHICULAR ACCESS FOR AN UNDERGROUND PARKING GARAGE, OR THAT WOULD BE ACCESS, UH, INTO, AND THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THE ENTRY POINTS AND ACCESS IN AND OUT AND EGRESS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT.

YES.

AND THAT COULDN'T OF THIRD STREET IN ADDITION TO RED RIVER, AND THAT COULDN'T BE INCORPORATED BEHIND THE HOMES OR HAVING THEM INCORPORATED AS THE FRONT STEP OF THE PROPERTY.

AND, UH, FOURTH STREET BEHIND IS NOT AN ALTERNATIVE FOR AN INSURANCE.

UH, FOURTH STREET WOULD BE PRETTY CONGESTED, UH, TO OUR STUDIES.

IT'S, AND, UH, THE ALLEYWAY IS NOT, UM, IT'S NOT FEASIBLE OR PRACTICAL TO HAVE, UH, ADEQUATE CIRCULATION FOR THE, FOR THE TOWER, UH, PER OUR ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW.

OKAY.

UM, IT, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE IT'S A, WITH THE MASSING OF THIS, THAT IT'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO ELEVATE, YOU KNOW, THE NEW PROPERTY AND THE HISTORIC PROPERTIES.

BUT, UM, I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONTINUE POSSIBLY EXPLORING THAT AS WELL.

THANKS.

YES, SIR.

THAT'S WHY WE WERE WANT, WE WERE EXCITED TO, TO RELOCATE THEM ACROSS THE STREET, UH, IN AND REPLACE THE RETENTION POND THAT GOT SIDE RAILED.

SO, I MEAN, HO HOPEFULLY WE, THIS CAN, UH, REVISIT AND WE CAN, UH, WORK TOGETHER.

I MEAN, POSSIBLY WATERSHED, IT WILL ALLOW SOME, SOME SOLUTION TO PRESENT ITSELF AND WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH ORIGINAL PLAN.

OKAY.

COMMISSIONER STEIN? YEAH, COMMISSIONER, YOU SORT OF TOUCHED ON IT WITH THE, THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF WHAT WOULD ACTUALLY BE HAPPENING AT 1005.

LYDIA I THINK IS PRETTY IMPORTANT.

AND MAN, THIS THING IS REALLY TIED UP IN KNOTS WITH ALL THE DIFFERENT PARTS AND MOVING PIECES, BUT I, I WANNA BE SENSITIVE TO, IF ONLY BY ACKNOWLEDGING IT OUT LOUD, THE, THE HARD WORK THAT IT GOES INTO PUT MAKING AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON THAT LOT.

I, I WOULDN'T CLASSIFY IT SO MUCH AS, YES, YOU'RE GAINING A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, BUT A STRUCTURE THAT WOULD HAVE SO MUCH OF ITS OWN STORY AND NOT AT THE LOSS OF ANYTHING THAT IS CONTRIBUTING.

YOU KNOW, IT'S CURRENTLY A PIECE OF A LOT THAT THIS THING WOULD BE SITTING ON.

AND AGAIN, I GET THAT IT'S TIED UP IN SO MUCH, SO MANY OTHER ASPECTS.

AND IT'D BE IDEAL THAT THESE BUILDINGS REMAIN WHERE THEY ARE.

BUT I JUST WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE THE HARD WORK OF TRYING TO GET AFFORDABLE HOUSING ANYWHERE.

I, I UNDERSTAND THAT, UH, THERE'S, THERE'S A LOT HAPPENING AT THAT CORNER OF LYDIA AND, AND 11TH AND, UM, OR IS IT AT, AT 11TH? IS THAT AT THE CORNER OF LYDIA AND 11TH STREET? PROBABLY 10TH.

MAYBE IT'S 10TH.

I JUST, IT, IT WOULD BE LIKE MOVING THE ALAMO TO, UM, YOU KNOW, TO ANOTHER CITY.

YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST TOTALLY OUT OF ITS CONTEXT.

I I DON'T MEAN TO, YOU KNOW, UM, EQUATE THE, THESE BUILDINGS WITH THE ALAMO, BUT IT'S OUT OF ITS CONTEXT.

IT'S KIND OF LIKE A FISH OUTTA WATER.

AND, AND SO I THINK THAT IN ITS ORIGINAL CONTEXT, ESPECIALLY THERE AT THE WATERLOO, THE WATERLOO COMPLEX IS A, A, A LOW SCALE, MODEST, UH, LITTLE COMMUNITY THAT GIVES YOU A SENSE OF WHAT, UH, WHAT THE FRONTIER CITY OF AUSTIN WAS LIKE BACK IN THE DAY.

AND, AND IT WOULD BE, I THINK IT WOULD BE BEST TO LEAVE THOSE PROPERTIES.

AND IF THEY WANTED TO MAKE, UH, YOU KNOW, TO BUILD ANOTHER, UM, PROPERTY

[01:05:01]

AT 10 0 5 LYDIA, OR EVEN CONSTRUCT A NEW PROPERTY THAT'S IN KEEPING WITH THE, WITH THE DISTRICT, I THINK THAT WOULD BE PREFERABLE TO MOVING THESE OUT OF THEIR ORIGINAL CONTEXT BECAUSE THAT TELLS, I THINK, A STRONGER STORY, A MORE POWERFUL STORY ABOUT WHAT AUSTIN WAS LIKE AT THAT TIME WITH THESE ORIGINAL BUILDINGS.

YEAH, I AGREE WITH THAT.

JUST, AND, YOU KNOW, IT COMPLIMENTS THE OTHER RESOURCES, THE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE TAVERN AND THE OTHER, UH, SMALL RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES THERE ON THAT COMPLEX.

SO I AGREE WITH THAT.

I'M JUST WILLING TO ACCEPT A BEAUTIFUL AWKWARD FISH IN WATER.

IN WATER THAT NEEDS FISH.

OKAY.

UM, ARE THERE ANY OTHER, UH, QUESTIONS OR FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER MC WARD? OKAY.

UH, COMMISSIONER HEIM, SETH, WITH YOUR, WITH YOUR MOTION, DO YOU HAVE A POSTPONEMENT TO A DATE CERTAIN, OR WHAT, WHAT IS YOUR PLEASURE? YES, SIR.

UM, YOUR, YOUR, UH, MIC IS OFF.

YES.

MY MOTION WAS FOR A POSTPONEMENT TO THE NOVEMBER MEETING.

OKAY.

AND I THINK THAT WILL OFFER, UH, AT LEAST AN INDICATION THAT WE'RE MAKING PROGRESS.

OKAY.

AND SO WE'LL, UH, REQUIRE US TO HAVE AN UPDATE.

OKAY.

BUT I THINK THAT I, I THINK THE FEELING THAT I'M GETTING FROM THE COMMISSION IS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO WORK WITH THE APPLICANT TO POSSIBLY, UM, UH, KEEP, TO KEEP THESE BUILDINGS ON, YOU KNOW, ON THEIR SITES AND, AND WORKED WITH THE WATERSHED DEPARTMENT.

SO, UM, OKAY.

COMMISSIONER, IF I MAY, IS TO, I'M SORRY IF I MAY, UM, ACKNOWLEDGE, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT EVERYONE ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THIS WAS APPROVED IN 2016 TO RELOCATE IT ACROSS THE STREET, CORRECT? YES.

OKAY.

SO I JUST WANTED TO ESTABLISH THAT AND, AND, AND CONFIRM THAT, UH, THAT IT'S NOT UPON FURTHER REVIEW OF KEEPING THEM WHERE THEY STAND RIGHT NOW.

WE WANT TO, WE WANT TO EXERCISE AND APPROVALS OF 2016 TO RELOCATE THEM ACROSS THE STREET.

UH, AND IT'S, THE REASON FOR US CONSIDERING THEIA STREET LOCATION WAS BECAUSE WE WERE DENIED, UH, MULTIPLE AVENUES.

AND SO WE ARE OKAY WITH, UH, RECONSIDERING THEM BEING RELOCATED ACROSS THE STREET IF, UH, THAT IS STILL, IF THAT IS POSSIBLE, UH, WITH OUR COMBINED EFFORTS.

I, I THINK THAT'S, I, I THINK THAT HAS NOT, UM, WE HAVE NOT LOST THAT OPPORTUNITY.

YEAH.

AND CHAIR MEERS, THAT'S DEFINITELY THE INTENT BEHIND MY MOTION IS THAT WE WOULD REVISIT THE, UM, THE, THE, THE, UM, UNWILLINGNESS FOR THE, UM, WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT TO PARTICIPATE.

SO, UM, IN FACT, IF I'M, I'M, I'M NOT VOLUNTEERING A LOT OF EXTRA TIME, BUT CERTAINLY IF THERE'S A MEETING OR A WAY THAT I CAN HELP, I THINK THIS PROBABLY DOES GET US BACK TO, UH, TOUCHING BASE WITH COUNCIL, UH, AND POSSIBLY THE MAYOR'S OFFICE.

SO IF IT'S, UH, THE OWNER IS, WOULD LIKE TO CONSULT, UH, ASSUMING THIS MOTION PASSES, UH, I CERTAINLY WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO ASSIST.

OKAY.

CAN WE TAKE A VOTE ON THE MOTION? THE MOTION IS TO LEAVE THE PUBLIC.

YES.

I'M SORRY.

I WOULD JUST LIKE TO REQUEST THAT WE POSTPONED TO A DATE CERTAIN, SO THE NOVEMBER HLC MEETING WOULD BE NOVEMBER 2ND.

NOVEMBER 2ND, YES.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

I THOUGHT NOVEMBER WAS GOOD ENOUGH, BUT, UH, OKAY.

DO I HEAR ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO LEAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AND POSTPONE UNTIL NOVEMBER 2ND.

OKAY.

PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

ALL RIGHT.

HI, BYE.

OKAY, IT PASSES.

THANK YOU.

AND THAT TAKES CARE OF TWO CASES.

UM, THE

[11. HR-2022-137410 – 4001 Avenue C – Discussion Mary Lowry House Council District 9]

NEXT CASE FOR DISCUSSION IS ITEM 11, 4,001 AVENUE C.

WE'LL HAVE STAFF PRESENTATION BY CALLEN CONTRERAS.

ALL RIGHT.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

OH, THERE WE GO.

UH, ITEM 11 AT 4,001 AVENUE C, UM, IS A PROPOSAL TO DEMOLISH A NON-ORIGINAL GARAGE, UM, AND CONSTRUCT A GARAGE APARTMENT IN ITS PLACE, UM, AT THIS LANDMARK PROPERTY IN THE HYDE PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT.

UM, THE, UH, PROJECT IS TO BUILD A NEW TWO STORY ADU WITH AN ATTACHED GARAGE IN THE SAME LOCATION AS THIS EXISTING GARAGE.

THE PROPOSED GARAGE APARTMENT, UH, IS CLAD IN HORIZONTAL FIBER CEMENT SIDING WITH A HIP AND CROSS GD ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF,

[01:10:01]

A SECOND FLOOR ROOF DECK FACES AVENUE C WHILE A SINGLE CAR GARAGE BAY FACES THE SECONDARY WEST 40TH STREET FRONTAGE FE INCLUDES FULLY GLAZED DOORS AND FIXED SINGLE PLAIN PAIN WINDOWS.

THE MAIN HOUSE IS A ONE STORY FOOT VICTORIAN WITH A HIP ROOF, HORIZONTAL WOOD SIDING, UH, DUAL BROOK CHIMNEYS, FISH SCALE SHINGLES AT THE GABLE END, UH, AND JIGSAW TRIM AT THE, UH, THE PARTIAL WIDTH INSET PORCH.

UM, STAFF REVIEWED THIS PROPERTY ACCORDING TO THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S HISTORIC DESIGN STANDARDS.

UM, AND WHILE THE REVISED PROJECT MEET SOME OF THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS, UH, OVERALL, IT'S LESS COMPATIBLE IN ITS INCREASED COMPLEXITY THAN THE PREVIOUS SIMPLE DESIGN IT WAS PRESENTED TO.

THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MADE, UH, LAST, LAST THIS MONTH, UM, COMMITTEE FEEDBACK WAS TO USE A MORE CONVENTIONAL WINDOW PATTERN SUCH AS THE SOUTH ELEVATION, UM, IN THAT ORIGINAL PLAN, AND TO PROVIDE MATERIALS AND DIMENSIONS ON THE DRAWINGS WHICH THE APPLICANT HAS DONE.

UM, HOWEVER, STAFF BELIEVES THAT, UH, THE PREVIOUS ITERATION OF THIS PROJECT WAS MUCH MORE COMPATIBLE, UH, WITH OUR DESIGN STANDARDS, AND THUS, THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO APPROVE THE PREVISION DESIGN OR TO REFER THE PROJECT BACK TO THE, THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR MORE FEEDBACK ON THE NEW DESIGN.

DO YOU HAVE A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE HOUSE ITSELF? OKAY.

OKAY.

AND CAN YOU, CAN YOU SHOW US WHAT THE PRE REVISION DESIGN WAS? AMBER, CAN YOU BRING THAT UP OR THAT'S THERE.

OKAY.

I, OKAY.

THERE IT IS BACK.

THANK YOU.

YEAH.

OKAY.

THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL DESIGN THAT CAME.

IT'S A TWO STORY.

IT'S GOING FROM A ONE STORY, UH, EXISTING, UM, GARAGE TO TWO STORY, UH, THAT ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT WAS CONSIDERED, UM, THAT WE ASKED THE, UH, APPLICANT TO RECONSIDER WAS THE WINDOW WINDOWS ON THE ADDITION.

AND THEN THEY CAME BACK IN THE MEANTIME WITH THE NEW PROPOSAL.

YES, THERE IT IS.

UH, THE TWO STORY WITH THE, UM, PITCH ROOF AND THE, UM, THE GREATER ORNAMENTATION.

SO THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO GO WITH THE ORIGINAL DESIGN FOR TWO STORY, UM, GARAGE APARTMENT, BUT NOT THE, UH, NOT THE REVISION WHICH WE SEE HERE.

OKAY.

NOW, UM, DO WE HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE? IS THAT OKAY? COME ON DOWN, PLEASE.

WE HAVE SERGE BELO.

OKAY.

PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND GOOD EVENING, GIVE YOUR CASE.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, MY NAME IS SERGE VILO.

I WAS ST.

EL ARCHITECTURE STUDIO, AND I'M THE ARCHITECT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACCESSORY BILLING.

AND, UM, YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

WE, SINCE THE, UM, LAST TIME WE MET DURING THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW, UH, MEETING, UM, I UPDATED THE ROOF DESIGN AND WINDOW DESIGN AFTER CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF COORDINATION WITH MY CLIENTS.

AND, UH, THERE ARE PROGRAMMATIC, UH, REQUIREMENTS FOR THE BUILDING.

AND, UM, THE FOOTPRINT REMAIN THE SAME.

THE ROOFS WOULD CHANGE FROM A, UH, THREE, UH, 12 SLOPE TO 45 DEGREE SLOPE, WHICH IS THE SAME SLOPE IS IN THE, UM, EXISTING MAIN HOUSE.

AND THE REASON FORWARD ONE IS, UM, TO BE ABLE TO GAIN, UM, MORE SPACE IN THE ATTIC TO LOCATE THE, UM, H VC EQUIPMENT TO SERVE, UH, BOTH FLOORS.

AND THE SECOND REASON FOR IT WAS TO, UH, REDUCE, UM, VISUALLY THE AMOUNT OF WALL FLAT WALLS AND INSTEAD INTRODUCE SLOPED SURFACES IN THAT CORNER OF THE LOT THAT WOULD BE SIMILAR TO THE MAIN BUILDING AND ADJACENT BUILDINGS IN THE AREA.

OKAY.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? I HAD A QUESTION.

WOULD THE INITIAL PROPOSAL BE ACCEPTABLE AT THIS POINT? UM, I WOULD HAVE TO DEFER TO MY, UH, CLIENTS, THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY THERE ON THE COAL RIGHT NOW.

UM, NA AND SEMA.

YEAH, I HAVE, UH, SEMA ON THE LINE,

[01:15:04]

SO CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES.

YEAH.

SO MY HUSBAND AND I, WE, UH, YOU KNOW, SO THIS DWELLING IS GOING TO BE FOR MY IN-LAWS WHO ARE 80 YEARS OLD.

SO PART OF THE DESIGN WAS GENERATED IN COLLABORATION WITH MY IN-LAWS WHO, YOU KNOW, THOUGHT THAT THE PREVIOUS ROOF, YOU KNOW, A, DIDN'T ACCOMMODATE THE HVAC ADEQUATELY, AND B UM, YOU KNOW, IT LOOKED VERY CUBISTIC, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A CUBE AND THEN THE CUBE HAD A HAT, SO IT LOOKED BORING TO TO THEM.

AND SO WE PROPOSED THAT THE ROOF LINE BE ALTERED JUST A BIT THE, BUT ANY OTHER SUGGESTIONS YOU ALL MADE? I THINK SERGE INCORPORATED, INCLUDING THE WINDOWS, UH, A MAJOR CONSIDERATION IN OUR, IN OUR CONSIDERATION OF THIS, OF, OF YOUR APPLICATION IS THAT THE ORIGINAL HOUSE SHOULD SHINE, AND THE ADDITION OR NEW CONSTRUCTION SHOULD BE BORING.

UM, IT SHOULD BE SECONDARY TO THE HISTORIC HOUSE, AND THAT IS PROBABLY WHY THE STAFF, UM, RECOMMENDED THE EARLIER WE WANTED TO, UH, RECEDE INTO THE BACKGROUND NOT OVERWHELM OR OUTSHINE THE ORIGINAL HISTORIC DWELLING.

I COULDN'T AGREE WITH YOU MORE, YOU KNOW, SO THIS IS OUR HOUSE, AND, UH, YOU PROBABLY KNOW THAT WE SORT OF RESCUED IT FROM DOWN IN THE DUMP.

UM, SO WE HAVE EVERY DESIRE TO HAVE IT SHINE.

THE HOUSE IS NOT REALLY VISIBLE EXCEPT FROM THE 40TH STREET, AND I BELIEVE SERGE, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, I BELIEVE THE ROOF LINES ARE RATHER SIMPLE, OTHERWISE IT'S HIDDEN BY THE ALLEYWAY, OUR HOUSE AND OUR NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE.

SO IT'S ONLY VISIBLE REALLY FROM 40TH STREET AND WHERE YOU SEE THE ROOF LINE OF THE GARAGE AND I THINK A RATHER SIMPLE ROOF LINE.

SO I WONDER WHAT YOUR THOUGHT IS ON THAT.

I, I THINK IT'S THE SAME.

UM, BUT WE WE'RE NOT IN, I JUST WANTED TO EXPLAIN THE, THE RATIONALE FOR THAT RECOMMENDATION.

UH, WE'RE NOT INTO, UM, INTO DISCUSSION ON THIS AT, AT THIS POINT YET.

DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD? NO, I, NO, NOT REALLY.

OKAY.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR? WE HAVE TRAVIS YOUNG.

WHAT THE, I GUESS HE LEFT TRAVIS YOUNG , I GUESS HE LEFT.

OKAY.

UM, ANYONE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? OKAY, THANK YOU.

UM, DO I HEAR A MOTION TO, UH, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING MOVE? OKAY, SECOND.

OKAY.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND, SAY AYE.

AYE.

AYE.

OKAY.

UM, DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THE CASE? SO I DIDN'T QUITE UNDERSTAND.

ARE YOU SAYING, UH, SEMA, I APOLOGIZE, BUT THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED.

WE, WE ARE NOW, UM, DELIBERATING WE'RE, WE'RE NOW THINKING OF A MOTION ON THE CASE AND WE'LL DISCUSS IT.

I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE THE PRE REVISION DESIGN PER STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

WOULD YOU MAKE ANY, UH, CONSIDERATION FOR THAT HORIZONTAL WINDOW? YOU DON'T HAVE TO.

UH, I WOULD PREFER IT NOT BE A HORIZONTAL WINDOW, BUT, UM, CONSIDERING THE ALTERNATIVE, I'M GOING TO LEAVE IT AS IS CHAIR.

I DO HAVE A, A QUESTION FOR THE OWNER BECAUSE, UH, IF, IF IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THE REVISION INCLUDED SOME ADDITIONAL ORNAMENTATION, BUT ALSO LIFTING UP THE ROOF BECAUSE OF THE MECHANICAL QUESTION, IS, IS OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT IS A REQUIREMENT AS FAR AS YOU'RE CONCERNED, AND THAT YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DO THE ORIGINAL IF WE APPROVE THE ORIGINAL? YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DO THAT, YOU'D HAVE TO STILL MAKE CHANGES, IS THAT CORRECT? UM, I THINK SERGE, THE ARCHITECT IS

[01:20:01]

BETTER ABLE TO ANSWER THAT.

SERGE, CAN YOU ANSWER THAT PLEASE, MR. BELOW? YES, ABSOLUTELY.

SO THE, THE VERSION THAT WAS PRESENTED DURING THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING DOES TECHNICALLY WORK.

IT JUST UNFORTUNATELY PRESENTS LOWER CEILINGS ON THE SECOND FLOOR BECAUSE THERE COMPRISED IN THE EQUIPMENT THAT COULD FIT, UH, IN THE SH IN THE THREE 12 SLOPE ROOF ABOVE THE SECOND FLOOR IS DEFINITELY POSSIBLE, IS JUST, IT STILL WORKS.

OKAY.

OKAY.

IT STILL WORKS.

THEN.

YOU ANSWERED MY QUESTION.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

OKAY.

WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND TO SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON? THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION AS IT ORIGINALLY CAME.

UM, THE TWO STORY, NOT THE REVISION.

IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT.

OKAY.

IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? I'LL JUST NOTE THAT HORIZONTAL WINDOW ON THE BACK IS ON THE REAR SIDE.

OKAY.

UM, AND ACTUALLY I THINK THE PROPORTIONS OF THE WINDOWS IN THE ORIGINAL PRESENTATION ARE ACTUALLY A LITTLE MORE APPROPRIATE TO THE, UH, WINDOWS ON THE, ON THE ORIGINAL HOUSE, BUT THIS IS ALSO A, A, A LANDMARK NOT JUST IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, AND IT'S ON A CORNER.

UH, SO THIS IS GONNA BE PROMINENTLY VISIBLE, UH, FROM FROM 40TH STREET.

SO, UM, UH, THE, THE NEW ROOF LINE IS, IS JUST OVERPOWERING THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.

RIGHT.

THE NEW ROOF LINE ALSO, IT, IT SMACKS OF CLOSE TO FALSE HISTORICISM AND, UM, AND, AND REALLY DOES, UM, THE ORNAMENTATION ON IT AND THE, AND THE PITCH OF THE ROOF AND THE ROOF FORM ITSELF, UM, IS NOT, UM, REALLY DOES TEND TO, UH, COMPETE STRONGLY WITH THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.

THAT'S TRUE.

AND I BELIEVE THE STAFF ALSO NOTED THAT THE ROOF FORM, UM, OF THE EXISTING MATCHES THE, THE OLDER, UH, AND READS AS A SECONDARY STRUCTURE, UM, AS BEING A CARPORT, NOT BEING A, A SECOND HISTORIC HOUSE BEHIND THE ORIGINAL HISTORIC HOUSE.

I GUESS TO WHY WE WOULDN'T, UH, ENTERTAIN ADDITIONAL WORK WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE.

WE COULD DO THAT.

AND, AND IN FACT, STAFF, UM, WE DISCUSSED THAT AT OUR, UH, MEETING TODAY EARLIER, UH, GOING TO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW.

AND, AND THAT COULD BE, BUT I THINK THE, UM, WE WERE, THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE WAS PRETTY SATISFIED WITH WHAT THEY BROUGHT TO US THE LAST TIME.

AND THIS IS A, YOU KNOW, THIS, THIS REVISION IS SOMETHING THAT JUST CAME BE BETWEEN THEN AND NOW.

NO, I UNDERSTAND.

SO WE'RE ASKING THEM TO TAKE A STEP BACK VERSUS, YOU KNOW, SHOULD, AND I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, FOR THE ARCHITECT, WOULD YOU PREFER ANOTHER MEETING WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE TO COMPROMISE? I WOULD.

DO YOU APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY YES.

TO FIND A IN BETWEEN DESIGN SCENARIO, BOTH SATISFY, SATISFIED? THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I WAS THINKING.

OKAY.

THE, THE MAKER AND THE SECONDER, I THINK THE SECONDED OR HAS TO, UM, WELL, NO, WE CAN TAKE A VOTE.

I'M JUST, IT'S THE DISCUSSION PERIOD.

SO THAT WAS MY INITIAL THOUGHT WAS, WELL, OKAY, IF THEY WANTED TO SEEK A COMPROMISE, YOU KNOW, MAYBE WE SHOULD ENTERTAIN THAT.

AND, AND A QUESTION FOR STAFF, IF, IF WE DID VOTE TO APPROVE THE FIRST, THAT, WOULD THAT PRECLUDE THEIR ABILITY TO COME BACK WITH, WITH ADDITIONAL CHANGES? WOULD THEY HAVE TO REPOST EVERYTHING FROM THE BEGINNING AGAIN? OR COULD THEY OPT TO COME WITH, WITH ALTERATIONS TO WHAT WE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED? YOU COULD, UM, APPROVE, UH, THE, YOU COULD APPROVE THE, THE PRE REVISION DESIGN, HAVE THEM COME BACK TO INVITE THEM TO THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AND THEN DIRECT STAFF TO APPROVE ANY ADDITIONAL REVISIONS ADMINISTRATIVELY, RATHER THAN COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION.

YES.

SO THAT WOULD JUST BE A FRIENDLY TO THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENT THEN.

OKAY.

I, YEAH, I WOULD, UH, ACCEPT THAT AMENDMENT TO MY ORIGINAL MOTION TO ALSO EXTEND AN OFFER TO ATTEND THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE TO SEE IF THERE IS A NUANCED, UH, ALTERNATIVE THAT COULD BE, UM, RELEASED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL.

OKAY.

I'LL SECOND THAT.

OKAY.

SO THAT WAS OKAY.

THAT, THAT MOTION THEN IS TO APPROVE THE PRE REVISION VERSION, BUT ALSO INVITE YOU TO, UH, THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING, WHICH IS NEXT MONDAY, I BELIEVE, TO TALK ABOUT, UM, OTHER POSSIBILITIES, NUANCES, UH, THAT MIGHT BE, UM, AGREEABLE TO THE COMMISSION

[01:25:01]

AND TO, UM, YOURSELVES.

THANK YOU.

I APPRECIATE IT.

OKAY.

YEAH.

CHAIR MYERS.

YES, SIR.

IF I COULD, SINCE WE'RE STILL IN DISCUSSION, UH, AGAIN, WHERE MY ARCHITECTS HAD HERE, I, I THINK PERHAPS TO THE OWNER, UH, WHAT I, WHAT IS OUR CONCERN IS MAYBE A LITTLE BIT TOO MUCH OF A, OF A GOOD THING.

I THINK, UH, THIS ISSUE OF INTERNALIZING THE QUESTION OF THE ROOFS, UM, BY THE TIME WE SEE THIS ALTERNATE, IT IS, IT IS OVERSCALED AND WITH I, I AM PARTICULARLY WANTED TO POINT OUT IS THAT SKIRTING THAT ONE STORY SEMI ROOF THAT I'M HAVING ISSUES WITH AS WELL.

SO, UH, RIGHT.

I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY ROOM TO MAKE THAT WORK AND, UH, WOULD CERTAINLY SUPPORT THE MOTION.

OKAY.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? OKAY.

ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND, SAY AYE.

AYE.

OKAY.

IT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY YOU HAVE THAT OPTION TO COME TO THE, UM, ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN COMMITTEE.

THANK YOU.

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE.

OKAY.

OKAY.

THE NEXT

[16. HR-2022-130288 – 1205 Bickler Rd. – Consent Travis Heights – Fairview Park National Register District Council District 9]

ITEM IS NUMBER 16, I BELIEVE 1205 BICKLER ROAD COMMISSIONERS.

UM, 1205 BLER ROAD PROPOSAL IS AN ADDITION, PARTIAL DEMOLITION AND NEW CONSTRUCTION TO A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE AND ITS ADU, UM, PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING, UH, NEW ADDITION TO A LEVEL TWO TO LEVEL TWO WITH THE BALCONY FACING THE REAR ACCESSORY BUILDING ALTERATIONS IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY.

SMALL PARTIAL DEMOLITION DEMOLITION IN ADDITION TO LEVEL ONE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET, NEW STANDING SEEM CARPORT VISIBLE FROM THE STREET ATTACHED DIRECTLY TO THE HOUSE, ALL EXTERIOR SIDING TO MATCH EXISTING WOOD SIDING AND PAINT AND NEW ROOFING TO MATCH THE EXISTING COMPOSITE ROOFING MATERIAL.

THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S HISTORIC DESIGN STANDARDS ARE BASED ON THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION AND ARE USED TO EVALUATE PROJECTS IN THE TRAVIS HEIGHTS NATIONAL REGISTERED DISTRICT.

THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS APPLY TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT.

THE PROPOSED PROJECT GENERALLY MEETS THE DESIGN STANDARDS EXCEPT FOR THE CARPORT, PRIMARILY DUE TO ITS DIRECT ATTACHMENT TO THE HOUSE.

THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS DO NOT APPEAR TO BE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.

THEIR DESIGN IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE GUIDELINES FOR EXTERIOR WALLS AND TRIM.

THE EXTERIOR WALLS AND TRIM MATCH THE EXISTING MATERIALS AND ARE COMPATIBLE.

THE SMALL ADDITION TO LEVEL ONE, WHICH IS VISIBLE FROM THE STREET, IS SET BACK MORE THAN 15 FEET FROM THE FRONT FACADE AND IS COMPATIBLE WITH DESIGN GUIDELINES RIGHT ATTACHED GARAGES AND CARPORTS.

THE CARPORT IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES IN THE DISTRICT DUE TO ITS IMMEDIATE LOCATION NEXT TO THE PRIMARY HOUSE AND FORWARD LOCATION ON THE LOT.

MOST IMPORTANTLY, IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THE CARPORT TO BE DIRECTLY ATTACHED TO THE PRIMARY HOUSE.

TRADITIONALLY, CARPORTS IN THE DISTRICT ARE FREE STANDING STRUCTURES CITED TO THE REAR OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE.

IT WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE FOR THE CARPORT TO BE DESIGNED AS A SEPARATE STRUCTURE IN PLACE FURTHER TO THE REAR OF THE LOT IF POSSIBLE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING DESIGN GUIDELINES.

9.1 CONSTRUCTED NEW ATTACHED GARAGE OR CARPORT AT THE FRONT ONLY IF IT MATCHES THE PREDOMINANT GARAGE PLACEMENT AND ORIENTATION FOUND ON THE BLOCKS CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES.

AND IT IS APPROPRIATE TO THE BUILDING'S FORM AND STYLE 9.2 SET ATTACHED GARAGES AND CARPORTS BACK FROM THE FRONT WALL OF THE BUILDING TO MINIMIZE, MINIMIZE THEIR VISUAL PROMINENCE.

AND 9.3 DESIGN A NEW ATTACHED GARAGE OR CARPORT TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE HISTORIC BUILDING IN TERMS OF SIZE, MASSING PROPORTION, STYLE AND MATERIALS.

THE NEW GARAGE OR CARPORT SHOULD NOT BE DESIGNED TO APPEAR AS THOUGH IT WAS CONSTRUCTED SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH THE HISTORIC BUILDING.

IN SUMMARY, THE PROJECT MEETS SOME OF THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO COMMENT ON AND RELEASE THE PLANS.

UM, UM, KIM IN MY YES.

IN THE DRAWINGS OR IS IT IN THE RENDERINGS OR IS IT IN THESE DRAWINGS WHERE IT, IT APPEARS THAT THEY'RE REMOVING THE TAPERED PORCH POSTS AND BRICK AND BRICK PIERS AND ALTERING THE PORCH ROOF.

THAT'S WHY I PULLED THIS.

I DID NOT SEE THE, THE ONLY ALTERATION I SAW ON THE FRONT PORCH WAS THE RAILING BEING REPLACED.

I THINK THEY DID A SIMPLIFIED RENDERING, UH, DRAWING.

UM, I JUST DON'T THINK THEY PUT IN THE CROSSMAN DETAILS.

UM, BUT MAYBE THE APPLICANT CAN CONFIRM THAT, UM, IF THEY ARE HERE IS THE APPLICANT HERE.

OKAY.

WE'LL TALK THEN WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT.

THAT IS NOT SOMETHING, UM, OKAY.

WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT WHEN, WHEN WE DISCUSS IT AND ASK QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE TO SPEAK? UM, I'M SORRY, THE, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR, UM, STAFF? OKAY.

IS THE APPLICANT HERE?

[01:30:05]

HI, GOOD EVENING.

PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.

CERTAINLY.

MY NAME IS TOM BLANK, AND I'M THE OWNER AT 1205 PICKLER, UH, WITH MY WIFE WHO CAN'T BE HERE TONIGHT.

UM, TO YOUR SPECIFIC POINT AROUND THE PILLARS, WE HAVE NO INTENTION OF CHANGING THE LAYOUT OF THE FRONT PORCH.

UH, THAT'S JUST A SIMPLIFIED DRAWING AS WAS DESCRIBED.

AND WHAT ABOUT THE RAILINGS? UH, AND SO YEAH, THE RAILING WOULD ALSO STAY.

OKAY.

UH, WE ALSO, IT'S NOT HERE, BUT WE WOULD WANT TO ADD A, UM, UH, SAFETY RAILING IN THE FRONT, BUT CERTAINLY HAPPY TO TALK ABOUT THAT, IF THAT'S HELPFUL.

OKAY.

WHAT IT LOOK LIKE FROM THE RENDERINGS? IT, IT LOOKED, IT LOOKED LIKE YOU WERE REMOVING THOSE TAPERED PORCH POSTS AND, AND BRICK PIERCE, WHICH ARE ICONIC.

YEAH, WE LOVE THEM.

I'D LOVE TO KEEP THEM AS THERE.

OKAY.

UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENT ON, UH, ANYTHING TO ADD ABOUT THE CARPORT? UH, CERTAINLY AND I ALSO HAVE, UH, SOMEONE ON THE PHONE WHO CAN SPEAK ABOUT IT AS WELL.

OKAY.

BUT THE INTENTION WITH THE CARPORT IS TO FIT TWO CARS IN TANDEM THERE.

UM, WE TRIED TO MAKE IT AS UNOBTRUSIVE AS POSSIBLE.

UH, UNFORTUNATELY THERE'S NOT REALLY ENOUGH SPACE TO SUPPORT IT WITH A, A SEPARATE SET OF PILLARS, UH, RIGHT NEXT TO THE HOUSE, AND HENCE WHY WE MADE IT ATTACHED TO THE HOUSE IN ORDER TO FIT ON THE LOT.

ANY OTHER, UH, ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? GUYS? COMMISSIONER HEIM, SETH, ASK YOUR QUESTIONS NOW.

OKAY.

I JUST WAS GONNA ASK THE, UH, OWNER, UH, EVEN WHERE YOU TWO PUT SUPPORT COLUMNS RIGHT UP AGAINST THE EDGE OF THE HOUSE AND DO A, A, A SIMPLE PITCH INSTEAD OF A ONE WAY, UH, PITCH THE WAY YOU HAVE WOULD BE MUCH MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE CHARACTER IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

IS THAT SOMETHING YOU COULD CONSIDER? UH, WHEN I LOOK AT ALL OF THE OTHER CARPORTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY'RE ALL ON THE SAME BLOCK.

THEY'RE ALL PRETTY MUCH FLAT ROOFS.

I DON'T ACTUALLY SEE ANY PITCHED ROOFS.

UM, WELL, IT WOULD, IT WOULD BE, AS STAFF MENTIONED HISTORICALLY, YOU WOULD'VE HAD PARKING IN THE BACK AND IT WOULD'VE BEEN A, A, A STRUCTURAL GARAGE.

SO IT WOULD BE REFERENCING THAT.

I THINK, FRANKLY, EVEN A FLAT ROOF WOULD BE PREFERABLE TO THE, THE SLANT THE WAY IT IS NOW.

OKAY.

I'M NOT AN ARCHITECT, SO I, SORRY, I DON'T HAVE MUCH TO SAY ON THAT.

OKAY.

WELL, WELL, UM, AND THERE'S, UH, THE ARCHITECT IS ON THE LINE.

UH, OUR REPRESENTATIVE IS ON THE LINE.

OH, YOUR REPRESENTATIVE IS ON THE LINE.

YEAH.

UH, YEAH, WE HAVE RICHARD MATHIS.

MATHIAS MATHAS.

OKAY.

GOOD EVENING ERS.

RICHARD IAS HERE REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT.

I ALSO CONCERN YOU'RE CUTTING OUT MR. MATHIA, CUTTING OUT NEAR MR. MATHIAS.

CAN YOU HEAR ME ANY BETTER? OKAY, NOW WE CAN HEAR YOU.

YEAH.

YES, CAN HEAR, CAN I, I APOLOGIZE.

I'M NOT, I'M NOT IN MARBLE FALLS AND THE SALES SERVICE IS TERRIBLE, SO I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

UH, WHAT I WAS, WAS GONNA SUGGEST WITH THAT, WE'LL CERTAINLY HAVE THE ARCHITECT LOOK AT THE, AT THE PITCH ROOT STYLE.

UM, AND IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT WORKS, THEN YOU KNOW, WE, WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK AT THAT.

UM, I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF HOMES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT ARE VERY CONSISTENT, THAT WE ARE VERY CONSISTENT WITH IN SO FAR AS PLACEMENT OF THIS CARPORT.

UM, MOST OF 'EM ARE RIGHT AT THE BILL BASE, UM, WITH THE EXCEPTION TWO OR THREE FEET TI BASE.

WE HAVE A PRETTY PROMINENT, OR THAT'S ABOUT SEVEN FEET IN FRONT OF THE FACE OF THE CARPORT, WHICH WE THINK, YOU KNOW, PROVIDES SOME, SOME, UM, PROVIDE SOME COVER, IF YOU WILL, FOR THE, FOR THE PARKING, UH, CARPORT.

UH, THERE'S ALSO THAT THE UNIT DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET THAT HAS THE ENTIRE CARPORT DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THE ENTIRE BILL.

UH, SO WE FAIRLY CONS, UH, WITH THE, UH, WITH THE OTHER HOMES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

OKAY.

COMMISSIONER HEIM, SETH, I'M GONNA ASK YOU IF YOU WOULD, UH, RESTATE YOUR QUESTION FOR THE, UM, OWNER'S, UH, REPRESENTATIVE.

WELL, I'M, I'M LOOKING AT THE SITE PLAN AND YES, I UNDERSTAND

[01:35:01]

YOU HAVE, UH, THE NEED FOR TANDEM PARKING RIGHT UP IN THAT NARROW SPOT, BUT THERE IS ENOUGH ROOM TO HAVE SUPPORTS THAT WOULD BE, UH, THE, THE COLUMNS THAT YOU HAVE CURRENTLY SHOWN ON AND BASICALLY ON THE PROPERTY LINE.

UH, AND THEN THE ONES THAT YOU WOULD HAVE UP AGAINST THE EXISTING HOUSE AND, UH, EITHER A FLAT ROOF AT THAT POINT, UH, OR, OR DO A, UH, A SIMPLE PITCH.

AND I THINK BOTH OF THEM WOULD BE MORE IN CHARACTER IN KEEPING WITH A STYLE OF THE EXISTING HOUSE.

IF EITHER OF THOSE OPTIONS WAS ACCEPTABLE, UH, WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT YOU AND THE OWNER COULD ACCEPT AND DIRECT THE ARCHITECT TO, UM, PUT IN PLACE? IF, IF THAT WAS PART OF OUR MOTION? UM, YES, I WOULD DEFER TO THE ARCHITECT, OBVIOUSLY.

UH, I DO KNOW THAT I HAD A DISCUSSION WITH THE ARCHITECT ABOUT PLACING THE, THE, THE SORT POSTS OUT, YOU KNOW, UH, OUTSIDE OF THE BUILDING, BUT THEY SEEMED TO INDICATE THAT WAS GONNA BE VERY DIFFICULT TO DO.

I DON'T HAVE THE DETAILS ON WHY OTHER THAN STRUCTURALLY THEY NEEDED TO ATTACH IT TO THE HOUSE.

YEAH.

THE SITE PLAN YOU PROVIDED IN YOUR BACKUP, YOU DID NOT GIVE US THE WIDTH, UH, THERE, BUT JUST LOOKING AT IT GRAPHICALLY FROM THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK, IT DOES LOOK LIKE YOU HAVE MORE THAN 10 FEET AND THAT SHOULD BE SUFFICIENT.

IT, IT'S RIGHT AT THE, THESE I RECALL IT MIGHT BE A FEW INCHES OVER.

YEAH.

ANYWAY, UM, I THINK IT'S A, IT'S IMPORTANT BE AGREE.

I, I'D BE HAPPY TO DISCUSS THIS WITH THE ARCHITECT.

IF THERE'S A WAY TO DO THAT, THEN I DON'T SEE WHY WE WOULD HAVE A, AN ISSUE WITH IT.

UH, ONLY IF IT PRESENTS SOME STRUCTURAL ISSUE WOULD WE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS YOU APPLICATION? OKAY.

IS THERE ANYONE OPPOSED? OKAY.

UM, DO I HEAR A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? SO MOVED.

IT'S OKAY.

OKAY.

ALL IN FAVOR OF CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING, PLEASE SAY, AYE.

RAISE YOUR HAND.

AYE.

OKAY.

THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED.

DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THE CASE CHAIR MYERS, COMMISSIONER HEIM, SETH, I'LL MOVE, UH, APPROVAL WITH THE, UH, PROVISION THAT B CARPORT BE A, UH, SEPARATE STRUCTURE, HOWEVER THEY WANT TO DO THAT.

OKAY.

DO I HEAR A SECOND? OKAY.

SECOND.

FROM COMMISSIONER MACOR, UM, DISCUSSION, WOULD YOU LIKE TO DISCUSS YOUR MOTION COMMISSIONER? UH, I THINK IT WAS CLEAR IN THE, IN THE QUESTIONING.

OKAY.

THAT I BELIEVE IT SHOULDN'T MAKE THAT MUCH DIFFERENCE.

UH, THEY, IT'S TIGHT, BUT THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE ENOUGH PARKING, UH, BASED ON WHAT I CAN SEE THERE.

OKAY.

FURTHER DISCUSSION.

OKAY.

YEAH, I GUESS MY, MY QUESTION FOR COMMISSIONER HEIM, SETH, THE, I'M TRYING TO PARSE OUT YOUR PRINCIPLE CONCERN.

WAS THE ATTACHED CARPORT, OR WAS IT THE ROOF SLOPE? WELL, UM, ONCE THEY GO AHEAD AND THEY MAKE IT FREE STANDING, MY GUESS IS, IS THAT THE ROOF SLOPE ALSO WILL MAKE LESS SENSE.

UM, I, I COULD HAVE SPECIFIED A FLATTER OR A, A, A PITCHED ROOF, BUT I, I, EVEN, EVEN A FREE STANDING, UM, WITH A ROOF PITCH AS IT IS, WOULD, WOULD STILL RELATE BETTER TO THE HOUSE BECAUSE THEN YOU'D SEE IT AS SOMETHING THAT WAS SEPARATE AND WAS ADDED LATER.

SO, UM, I, I'M TRYING NOT TO ADD MORE COMPLICATION THAN WE HAVE TO.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

UM, FURTHER DISCUSSION, IF NOT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE SAY, AYE, RAISE YOUR HAND.

AYE.

AYE.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

THE MOTION CARRIES.

UM, COMMISSIONER

[2. 308-314/316 Congress Avenue]

MYERS, UH, MOUNTAIN CHAIR, UH, MICHAEL WHELAN IS HERE.

OKAY.

AND, UH, READY TO, UH, BRIEF YOU ALL ON HIS PROJECT.

OKAY.

FOR THE OTHER APPLICANTS WHO ARE STILL WAITING IN THE, UM, IN THE AUDIENCE THAT BRIEFING THAT WAS, UH, TO COME AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING AS I MENTIONED, THEN, UH, WE'LL NOW COMMENCE MR. WAYLAND.

THANK YOU, UH, COMMISSIONERS MICHAEL WAYLAND ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.

UM, I'M HERE TO PROVIDE, UH, INFORMATIONAL BRIEFING ON AN ASSEMBLAGE AT THIRD IN CONGRESS.

UH, IT'S CONSISTING OF ONE HISTORIC STRUCTURE, THE WB SMITH BUILDING, AND AN ADJACENT STRUCTURES THAT ARE, UH, COMPATIBLE THOUGH NON-CONTRIBUTING.

WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

WE'VE BEEN TO THE, UH, ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE.

THIS IS JUST A VERY QUICK SUMMARY.

WE PRESENTED, UH, ON THIS SITE AT THE COMMITTEE WHERE WE RECEIVE PRELIMINARY

[01:40:01]

FEEDBACK FROM THE, FROM CHAIR MYERS AND COMMISSIONER KOCH.

WE'VE SUMMARIZED THE GENERAL THEMES OF THAT DISCUSSION HERE.

UH, AND NOW WE'RE HERE OBVIOUSLY TO GET MORE FEEDBACK, INCLUDING PRESERVATION OF THE HISTORIC CONGRESS FRONTAGE, ENSURING PROTECTION OF THE ADJACENT HISTORIC CAPEL BUILDING THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION.

AND YOU'LL SEE IN A MINUTE THERE'S A SHARED WALL AND WHAT IMPACTS UNDERGROUND PARKING WOULD HAVE.

THE FEEDBACK ADDITIONALLY DIRECTED US TO CONSIDER THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE HISTORIC CONGRESS FRONTAGE AND TO EVALUATE PROVIDING A MEANINGFUL STEP BACK FROM THE STREET WALL FOR THE TALLER PORTIONS OF OUR NEW CONSTRUCTION.

SINCE THAT TIME, WE HAVE ALSO CONTINUED TO DIVE DEEPER INTO THE FEASIBILITY OF CONSTRUCTION, GIVEN THE SITE CONDITIONS AND ACCESSIBILITY CONSTRAINTS.

SO FIRST I WANNA NOTE THAT WE SOUGHT OUT CONTRACTORS WITH DIRECT LOCAL PRESERVATION EXPERIENCE IN AUSTIN IN ORDER TO DETERMINE WHAT WOULD BE MOST EFFECTIVE FOR ENSURING THE PRESERVATION OF THE CONGRESS FRONTAGE OF THE HISTORIC WB SMITH BUILDING THAT WE ARE PROPOSING, AS WELL AS FOR ENSURING PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION OF THE ADJOINING HISTORIC CAPEL BUILDING THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION.

FINALLY, WE ALSO TRY TO INCORPORATE THE FEEDBACK PROVIDED REGARDING ENSURING COMPATIBLE STREET WALL THAT MAINTAINS A RHYTHM AND CHARACTER WITH THE HISTORIC PROPERTIES.

AND WE'LL SEE SOME IMAGES IN A MINUTE, BUT THAT, BUT IT ALSO DEFEN DIFFERENTIATES ITSELF IN A WAY THAT EMPHASIZES THE IMPORTANCE OF THE HISTORIC CONGRESS FRONTAGE AND MAXIMIZES THE PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE.

OUR INITIAL PROPOSAL INCORPORATED AT, UH, THE ARC WAS A 20 FOOT SETBACK FOR THE WB SMITH, BUT ONLY A TWO FOOT SETBACK ALONG THE REMAINING FRONTAGES WE HAVE WITH SOME ADVICE, UH, FROM PROFESSIONALS HAVE REVISED THAT TO A 15 FOOT SETBACK IN AN ATTEMPT TO RECOGNIZE THAT FEEDBACK.

SO, THANK YOU, UH, TO BOTH OF YOU, COMMISSIONER AND AND CHAIR.

AS PART OF THIS OVERALL PROCESS, WE ARE SEEKING TO MEET OBJECTIVES OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR DENSITY, AFFORDABILITY, AND WALKABILITY ALONGSIDE THE GOALS OF PRESERVATION AUSTIN AND THE HISTORICAL LANDMARK COMMISSION.

SO, ALTHOUGH WE UNDERSTAND WE CANNOT BE ALL THINGS TO ALL PEOPLE, WE DO BELIEVE OUR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT BEST ALIGNS WITH THE INTERESTS OF ALL STAKEHOLDERS INVOLVED IN OUR CITY.

UH, AS OUR CITY CONTINUES TO GROW, WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

THIS IS GIVING A SENSE OF WHAT'S THERE.

NOW OUR SITE CONSISTS OF THREE PROPERTIES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BLOCK, WHICH YOU CAN SEE LABELED HERE ON THIS SITE, ON THIS KIND OF PHOTO MONTAGE AS THE COMBINED SITE.

IT FEATURES TWO NON-CONTRIBUTING, UH, PROPERTIES, WHICH YOU CAN SEE AS THE BUILDINGS THAT CURRENTLY HAVE THE COLORADO TOWER BEHIND THEM IN THE BACKGROUND.

IT'S JUST BEHIND THEM ON THAT ALLEY.

AND, UH, ON ONE SITE WITH THE HISTORIC.

AND THEN THE, UH, WITH THE HISTORIC STATUS, YOU SEE THE WB SMITH BUILDING.

SO THAT'S THE COMBINED SITE.

AND THEN OBVIOUSLY THE CAPEL BUILDING, UH, WHICH IS TO, UH, THE RIGHT, THERE'S A SURFACE PARKING LOT.

YOU CAN ALSO SEE HERE THAT FLANKS NOT PART OF THE PROJECT, NOT OWNED, UH, BY US.

UH, THAT IS, UH, FLANKED ON THE LEFT HERE.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

WHILE THAT PHOTO MONTAGE ON THE LAST SLIDE IS CREATED TO PRESENT A SENSE OF ELEVATION, IT IS FROM A ZOOMED OUT VIEW THAT WOULD ACTUALLY BE A VANTAGE POINT SOMEWHERE INSIDE, UH, THE BUILDING ACROSS THE STREET AND ULTIMATELY DOESN'T CONVEY THE ACTUAL LIVED PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE OF THE BLOCK.

THE IMAGES ON THIS, UH, SLIDE ARE MEANT TO PROVIDE THAT ADDITIONAL CONTEXT THROUGH EYE LEVEL VANTAGE POINTS AT ACTUAL STREET CROSSINGS THAT SHOW HOW THE SITE EXISTS FROM A HUMAN PERSPECTIVE TODAY IN RELATION TO SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT, THE TOWERS THAT YOU SEE IN THE PICTURES ARE THE COLORADO TOWER WITHIN OUR DEVELOPMENT BLOCK, AND THEN THE SIAN ON THE CONGRESS BLOCK TO THE SOUTH AND 4 0 5 COLORADO ON THE BLOCK TO THE NORTH.

GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

THIS SLIDE SUMMARIZES THE EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ENTITLEMENTS FOR THE THREE PROPERTIES ON OUR SITE, WHICH IS SHADED IN THE GRAY, UH, UH, DIAGONAL LINES RIGHT THERE.

THANK YOU.

THE DOTTED RED LINE ILLUSTRATES THE CAPITAL VIEW CORRIDOR ORDER LIMITS, AND THE BLACK LINE SHOWS THE SETBACK LINE FOR THE CONGRESS AVENUE COMBINING DISTRICT, WHICH LIMITS HEIGHT TO 90 FEET BETWEEN THE TWO LINES.

AND WE'LL SEE THAT AGAIN IN ANOTHER EXHIBIT.

NEXT SLIDE.

THIS SLIDE SHOWS AT A HIGH LEVEL HOW THE SITE CONSTRAINTS HAVE SHAPED OUR THINKING IN REGARDS TO THE LAYOUT OF, UH, REMOVAL AND NEW CONSTRUCTION.

UH, PREVIOUSLY OUR GOAL GOAL WAS TO INCORPORATE THE FACADES FROM THE NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES, BUT AFTER FURTHER INVESTIGATION OF CONSTRUCTION NEEDS, WE HAVE DETERMINED THAT THAT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR TWO MAIN REASONS.

FIRST, OUR ONLY ACCESS POINT FOR CONSTRUCTION WOULD EQUIPMENT WOULD LIKELY BE OFF OF CONGRESS AVENUE, AS THIS IS THE ONLY STREET FRONTAGE ON OUR SITE, AND THE 20 FOOT WIDE ALLEY WAY ON THE REAR IS NOT ADEQUATE FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS OF LARGE TRUCKS AND CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT.

SINCE WE ARE COMMITTED TO A PROJECT THAT EMPHASIZES IN HIGHLIGHTS THE WB SMITH BUILDING WITHIN A COMPATIBLE STREET WALL, OUR ONLY REMAINING OPTION IS TO USE THE NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES AS THE ACCESS POINT.

WE ALSO DID EXPLORE DIRECTLY THE POSSIBILITY OF RECONSTRUCTING AND REPLICATING THESE FACADES AND INCORPORATING THEM INTO THE DESIGN.

BUT OUR READING

[01:45:01]

OF THE DRAFT HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES INDICATED THAT COMPLIMENTARY DESIGN SHOULD AVOID REPLICAS OR RECREATIONS THAT WOULD CREATE A FALSE SENSE OF HISTORY.

AND WE BELIEVE THAT NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT IS DIFFERENTIATED, ESPECIALLY FROM THE WB SMITH BUILDING, BUT COMPATIBLE WITH THE DESIGN GUIDEBOOK RECOMMENDATIONS IS MOST APPROPRIATE FOR THIS AREA.

THE NEW COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION WOULD THUS BE DONE IN A COMPATIBLE MANNER ALONG CON THE CONGRESS STREET WALL, BUT WOULD ALSO HAVE A 15 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE NEW FRONTAGE BEFORE RISING TO 90 FEET, AND A FULL 60 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE FRONTAGE BEFORE, REALLY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE BEFORE RISING TO THE FULL TOWER HEIGHT.

AS SEEN ON THE RIGHT HAND EXHIBIT HERE, WB SMITH WOULD FEATURE A 20 FOOT SETBACK BEFORE CONNECTING TO A NEW, TO NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT RISES TO 90 FEET, AND AGAIN, WOULD FEATURE A 60 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE UNTIL REACHING THE TOWER HEIGHT.

SO THAT'S WHAT THOSE, UH, LINES ARE THERE FOR.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT, AGAIN, TO EMPHASIZE THAT THERE ARE MAJOR CONSTRAINTS FACED, UH, IN DETERMINING THIS DESIGN AND THE NEED TO HAVE STREET ACCESS IN AT LEAST ONE PLACE, AND THE NEED TO PROVIDE SUBGRADE PARKING TO MAKE THE REST OF THE PROJECT, UH, FEASIBLE, HAVE ALL PLAYED A SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN WHERE OUR PROPOSAL IS NOW POSITIONED.

WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

THIS IS EXISTING CONDITION.

UM, AND I WANNA PAUSE JUST FOR A MOMENT.

I KNOW I'VE THROWN A LOT OF INFORMATION.

I WANNA STEP BACK AND WALK THROUGH IT A BIT IN REAL TERM SO WE CAN SEE SOME IMAGES HERE.

WE CAN SEE THE EXISTING CONDITIONS FROM A PEDESTRIAN PERSPECTIVE, ESPECIALLY YOU CAN SEE ON THE RIGHT HERE THE BEAUTIFUL CAPEL BUILDING THAT FRONTS THE, FOR FOURTH STREET, AND THEN OUR PROPOSED SITE TO IT, UH, TO ITS SOUTH, DIRECTLY TO ITS SOUTH.

SO THAT'S KIND OF EXISTING CONDITIONS.

WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

UM, THIS, AND HERE WE CAN SEE WHAT THIS WOULD LOOK LIKE WITHIN, UH, THE BUILDING ENVELOPES I JUST DESCRIBED, THE 20 FOOT AND THE 15 FOOT SETBACKS, AND THEN FURTHER SETBACKS BEYOND THAT.

UH, WE'VE ALSO INCLUDED EXCERPTS FROM THE DRAFT DESTROYED DESIGN GUIDELINES.

I KNOW MANY OF YOU, UH, UH, WERE, WERE ON THAT GROUP IN THAT, ON THAT COMMITTEE THAT DEVELOPED THESE.

AND, UH, IT SPECIFIED LOCATING ADDITIONS TO THE REAR AT LEAST 20 FEET FROM THE FRONT WALL OF A HISTORIC STRUCTURE IS DEPICTED HERE IN OUR DIAGRAM.

IN THIS DIAGRAM, YOU'LL SEE WE ARE PROVIDING A 20 FOOT SETBACK BEFORE THE NEW VERTICAL CONSTRUCTION THAT RISES TO INITIAL, UH, TO AN INITIAL 90 FEET.

THEN YOU CAN SEE BEYOND THAT THE FULL 60 FOOT SETBACK THAT I JUST MENTIONED FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, BOTH THE 90 FOOT HEIGHT STRUCTURE IN THE EVENTUAL TOWER ITSELF WOULD LEAVE THE CAPEL BUILDING UNTOUCHED, WHICH CREATES A ROUGHLY 48 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE FOURTH STREET FRONTAGE ON THE BLOCK.

WE HAVE ALSO SOUGHT TO SUBORDINATE THE OVERALL DESIGN TO WB SMITH THROUGH A SLIGHTLY SMALLER SETBACK OF 15 FEET FOR THE NEW DEVELOPMENT ASPECTS OF THE CONGRESS FRONTAGE, WHICH IS DEPICTED HERE IN SOME DEPICT DETAIL.

AND WE'LL SEE IT IN THE NEXT SLIDE A LITTLE BIT BETTER.

GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

THERE WE GO.

THANKS.

UH, WHILE WE RECOGNIZE THE NEW FACADE FOR THE COMPATIBLE NONCONTRIBUTING LOTS IS NOT IDEAL, WE HAVE SOUGHT TO DESIGN THE NEW BUILDING ENVELOPE IN A WAY THAT MEETS THE GOALS OF THE DRAFT DESIGN GUIDELINES WITH A TWO STORY INITIAL FRONTAGE THAT REFLECTS THE MASSING AND SCALE OF WB SMITH AND CAPEL.

I THINK YOU HAVE SOME EXAMPLES OF THAT IN YOUR GUIDELINES, AND AGAIN, THE SETBACKS TO PROVIDE SPACE THAT HELPS EMPHASIZE THE HISTORIC STRUCTURES FROM A PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE.

AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THIS PARTICULAR PERSPECTIVE, THE 20 FOOT SETBACK THAT IS CALLED OUT ON THE TOP RIGHT CORNER OF THE 90 FOOT TALL STRUCTURE IS BARELY VISIBLE.

THE TOWER IS COMPLETELY BEHIND THE WB SMITH BUILDING.

WITH THE ADDITIONAL SETBACK FROM THE WB SMITH BUILDING, CARRYING THE FULL VERTICAL HEIGHT OF THE 90 FEET STRUCTURE, THE EMPHASIS ALONG THE STREET WALL WILL BE, UH, SIGNIFICANT.

IF WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, AGAIN, IN KEEPING WITH THE DESIGN GUIDELINES, WE PLAN FOR OUR PROJECT TO PROVIDE A PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE THAT IS DIFFERENTIATED, BUT, UH, DIFFERENTIATED FROM, EXCUSE ME, BUT COMPLIMENTARY TO THE WB SMITH BUILDING AND THE CAPEL BUILDING IN A WAY THAT EMPHASIZES THEIR IMPORTANCE.

AND I THINK THAT IS WHAT ULTIMATELY WILL HAPPEN.

GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

THIS SECTION SHOWS A CROSS SECTION OF HOW THE INITIAL SETBACKS WOULD WORK WITH THE COMPATIBLE, NON-CONTRIBUTING, UH, UH, TO THE LEFT, YOU CAN SEE AND THE WB SMITH TO THE RIGHT.

GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

WE WOULD ALSO USE, UH, EXCUSE ME.

UH, THIS SHOWS A, A SITE SECTION LOOKING NORTH WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE INITIAL SETBACK, THE TOWER SETBACK AND THE SUBGRADE PARKING.

SO YOU CAN SEE HOW IT ALL WORKED, UM, THAT WE WOULD NEED FOR PROJECT, UH, FEASIBILITY.

WE WOULD ALSO USE APPROPRIATE MATERIALS FOR THE ABOVE GRADE PARKING PROVIDED AS DETAILED IN THE DESIGN GUIDELINES.

UM, WE'RE NOT AT THAT STAGE OF CHOOSING YET, BUT OBVIOUSLY WE'VE READ THE DESIGN GUIDELINES AND ARE FULLY AWARE OF WHAT IS SUGGESTED WITHIN THOSE.

IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, AND HERE'S A GROUND

[01:50:01]

FLOOR.

AS I MENTIONED, WE ARE SEEKING TO PROVIDE A GROUND FLOOR ENVIRONMENT THAT RESPECTS THE SCALE AND USES IN WB SMITH, IN THE CAPEL BUILDING IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THE PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE IN A MANNER WE BELIEVE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE DRAFT DESIGN GUIDELINES.

TO THAT END, WE ARE PROPOSING MORE MODESTLY SIZED LEASEABLE SPACE AS SHOWN HERE, AND THE VEHICULAR ACCESS WOULD BE PROVIDED OFF OF THE ALLEYWAY WITH NO ACCESS FROM CONGRESS AVENUE AFTER, AFTER CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED.

AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, IN ORDER TO HAVE A RAMP UP FOR PARKING, A RAMP DOWN FOR PARKING AND A FUNCTIONING CORE AND LOBBY FOR THE TOWER ITSELF, THE REAR PORTION OF THE SITE IS VERY TIGHT.

WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

THIS SHOWS THE SECOND FLOOR CONCEPT, LEASEABLE SPACE, UH, FRONT AND CONGRESS AVENUE AND ABOVE GRADE PARKING BEGINNING ON THIS LEVEL, BUT BEHIND THE SPACE, UH, IT IS IMPORTANT HERE TO ALSO NOTE THAT THE DRIVE AISLES, UH, DEPICTED HERE MEETS CODE FOR SPACING REQUIREMENTS.

BUT AGAIN, THIS IS A VERY TIGHT SITE.

SO ALL OF THE SPACE DEPICTED HERE IS NEEDED FOR A FUNCTIONING GARAGE.

WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, AND THEN WE HAVE A TYPICAL ABOVE GRADE PARKING LOT LAYOUT WITH THE SETBACKS FROM THE GROUND FLOOR FRONTAGE, ALL OF WHICH WOULD BE APPROPRIATELY SCREENED TO AVOID VISUAL IMPACT AND TO ENSURE EMPHASIS ON WB SMITH AND THE PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE.

AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE SITE IS VERY TIGHT AND THE EFFICIENCY OF THE GARAGE IS AFFECTED BY THE SETBACKS WE ARE INCLUDING.

UM, LAST SLIDE HERE.

AND FINALLY, WE HAVE A TYPICAL SUBGRADE PARKING FLOOR PLATE, WHICH AS I MENTIONED, IS CRITICAL TO THE FEASIBILITY OF THE OVERALL PROJECT.

AND I'LL JUST FINISH BY SAYING THAT WE ARE WORKING, THAT'S ALL I HAVE, THAT THAT WE ARE FINISHED, UH, THAT WE ARE WORKING TO TRY AND BALANCE THE VARIOUS NEEDS OF THE SITE, GIVEN THESE MAJOR CONSTRAINTS IN A WAY THAT ALLOWS US TO PROVIDE A PEDESTRIAN CENTRIC EXPERIENCE WITH THE APPROPRIATE SETBACKS BEFORE THE NEW CONSTRUCTION.

AND WE KNOW THAT THIS IS AN ITERATIVE PROCESS.

THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING.

THAT'S WHY WE WENT TO THE IRC.

THAT'S WHY WE'RE COMING HERE.

WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING PENDING.

WE'RE LOOKING FOR FEEDBACK.

UM, AND OBVIOUSLY WE'RE AT THE EARLY STAGES.

SO WITH THAT IN MIND, I'M GONNA STOP AND, UH, LISTEN TO THE FEEDBACK SO THAT WE CAN, UH, SEE WHAT WE CAN HEAR.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU.

AND THANK YOU AGAIN, UH, COMMISSIONER AND, UH, COMMISSION CHAIR AND COMMISSIONER KOCH FOR THE FEEDBACK INITIALLY.

THANK YOU.

UM, I WOULD SAY THIS IS A BRIEFING.

WE ARE NOT, UM, TO TAKE ANY ACTION ON THIS CASE.

IT'S NOT REALLY A CASE BEFORE IT'S TO TAKE ACTION ON, UM, BUT YOU CAN ASK QUESTIONS AND, UH, AND OFFER FEEDBACK.

UM, SO GO AHEAD.

IF THERE'S SOMEONE, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, PLEASE GO AHEAD AND ASK AHEAD AND ASK ON THE SCREEN.

OH, I'M SORRY.

UH, COMMISSIONER.

RIGHT.

UM, THANK YOU.

UH, IS, SO, IS YOUR ASSERTION THAT ONLY THE CORNER BUILDING, THE KAPA BUILDING IS CONTRIBUTING BASED ON YOUR READINGS OR, UM, ANOTHER PROFESSIONAL READING OF THE NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION? OR WAS THERE ANY, UM, CONVERSATION WITH THE TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION STAFF ON KIND OF DELINEATING, UH, THE MEANINGS OF DESIGNATIONS IN THAT NOMINATION? UM, WELL, THE CAPEL BUILDING IS, UH, REGISTERED TEXAS.

RIGHT.

THAT ONE, BUT, AND THE WB SMITH ONE IS, I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD.

I I WAS MEANT TO ASK ABOUT THE W SMITH BUILDING.

YES.

SHE MEANT THE WB SMITH BUILDING.

OH, THE WB SMITH IS HISTORIC.

IT'S, IT'S A, IT'S A ZONED HISTORIC FROM THE, IT'S A LANDMARK, UH, LANDMARK COMMISSION.

SO IT'S NOT, IT'S ONE THAT, UH, THE FACADE IS WHAT WE'RE WORKING TO PRESERVE THERE.

THERE'S A SHARED WALL BETWEEN THE CAPEL BUILDING AND WB SMITH, WHICH IS NEEDS TO BE PRESERVED.

AND THAT'S WHY IT'S SHOWN, UH, BEING, BUT I'M ASKING ABOUT, ABOUT THE ASSERTION OF THE NATIONAL REGISTERED DESIGNATION.

YEAH.

UH, I THINK SHE'S, SHE'S CONCERNED THAT, UM, ABOUT YOU'RE CONSIDERING THE OTHER BUILDINGS NONCONTRIBUTING OH, THE, THE 3 0 8 20.

HOW SO? YEAH, THAT IT'S FROM THE 19, THE 1975 APPLICATION THAT IT LISTED THEM AS NON-CONTRIBUTING, UM, IN THAT APPLICATION.

IT, IT DOESN'T LIST.

UM, I WAS JUST LOOKING AT IT, AND IT DOESN'T LIST, YOU KNOW, OLD NOMINATIONS ARE DONE IN A VERY DIFFERENT WAY THAN THEY'RE DONE TODAY.

UM, SO THEY DID NOT LABEL NECESSARILY EVERY SINGLE BUILDING THAT WAS CONTRIBUTING.

AND SOME OF THE BUILDINGS THAT THEY CALL, UM, YOU KNOW, COMPATIBLE ARE IN FACT TODAY WOULD ABSOLUTELY BE CONTRIBUTING.

AND THAT WAS SORT OF A WEIRD BULLET IN THE, IN HOW THE NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATIONS WERE DONE AT THE TIME.

[01:55:01]

UM, THERE'S NOT, UM, YOU KNOW, AND LOOKING THROUGH, THROUGH THAT DESIGNATION, UM, OR THROUGH THAT NOMINATION NOW, THERE'S NOT ACTUALLY A LIST OF BUILDINGS THAT SAYS THESE BUILDINGS AREN'T CONTRIBUTING, AND THESE BUILDINGS ARE NOT CONTRIBUTING.

IT JUST CALLED OUT AND REFER SPECIFICALLY TO, UM, WHAT IT CALLS SIGNIFICANT BUILDINGS.

YEAH.

I THINK, UM, I CAN CORROBORATE THAT I DID, UM, AN UPDATE OF A NOMINATION IN THE, UH, SOUTH TEXAS TOWN OF CACIO WHERE THEY DID THE, UH, NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT IN 1976.

AND THEY ONLY CALLED OUT, UM, THEY SAID THERE WERE 36 BUILDINGS WITHIN THE DISTRICT, AND THEY ONLY CALLED OUT THREE OF THEM TO, TO PROVIDE AN ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION AND DISCUSS THE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE.

THAT DID NOT MEAN THAT THE OTHER 33 BUILDINGS WERE NON-CONTRIBUTING.

UM, AND SO WHEN WE DID THE UPDATE OF THAT SURVEY, UH, WE THEN DID IDENTIFY WHICH WE'RE CONTRIBUTING AND WHICH WE'RE NON-CONTRIBUTING BASED ON THE SEVEN ASPECTS OF INTEGRITY AS SET FORTH BY THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE AND SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR.

IT IS THERE A DEFINITIVE RECORD SOMEWHERE IN OUR ZONING OF WHAT IS AND IS NOT CONTRIBUTING.

THIS IS A NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT.

IT'S NOT A LOCAL, UH, HISTORIC DISTRICT.

SO THE NATIONAL, WHAT, WHAT COMMISSIONER WRIGHT IS TALKING ABOUT, AND WHAT I CAME IN WITH ABOUT SAN IGNACIO AND OTHER, UM, OF THESE, THE NATIONAL PRESERVATION ACT WAS ONLY, UM, MADE IN, INTO LAW IN 1966.

SO THESE NOMINATIONS THAT CAME UP IN TEXAS IN 1976, THIS WAS KIND OF, THIS WAS SORT OF THE BABY STEPS OF NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATIONS.

WE HAVE SEVERAL OTHERS, UM, IN TOWN, RAINY STREET, UM, AND SOME OTHER DISTRICTS THAT WERE DONE VERY EARLY ON.

THEY DON'T NECESSARILY CALL OUT, THEY DON'T DIVIDE THEM INTO CONTRIBUTING OR NON-CONTRIBUTING.

UH, THEY JUST TALKED ABOUT, UM, THEY WERE SORT OF LIKE REPRESENTATIVE OR VERY SIGNIFICANT EXAMPLES, BUT THEY DID NOT LIST THEM.

UM, THEY DID NOT LIST THEM AS NONCONTRIBUTING IN MOST RESPECTS.

SO KIND OF, IT'S SO UNLIKE LOCAL DISTRICTS WHERE WE'RE VERY LOCAL DISTRICTS, VERY SPECIFIC, THEY'RE EITHER CONTRIBUTING OR NONCONTRIBUTING.

AND THAT'S, THAT'S HOW NATIONAL REGISTERED DESIGNATIONS ARE DONE.

YES.

THAT'S HOW NATIONAL REGISTERED DISTRICTS ARE DONE TODAY.

YEAH.

OKAY.

IF YOU DO A NATIONAL REGISTERED DISTRICT TODAY, EVERY BUILDING IS LABELED AS CONTRIBUTING OR NONCONTRIBUTING.

ABSOLUTELY.

AND WE DON'T, UH, THERE USED TO BE WHEN THEY DID HYDE PARK, THEY DID POTENTIALLY CONTRIBUTING, WHICH MEANT THAT THEY WERE OLD, BUT THEY HAD SOME ALTERATIONS AND YEAH.

SO, SO WHAT WOULD BE SAFE TO SAY, UM, AS ADVICE GOING FORWARD THAT THE STATUS OF THOSE WE'RE NOT READY TO SAY THE STATUS OF THOSE BUILDINGS IS DETERMINED? I THINK THAT'S CORRECT.

AND I THINK WHEN WE, WHEN COMMISSIONER COOK AND I SAW THIS AT THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, UM, WE DID NOT KNOW WHEN THE, UM, WHEN THE NOMINATION WAS DONE OR THAT THEY HADN'T SPECIFIED.

YEAH, YEAH.

IT WAS 1975.

IF I AM I, IF I'M REMEMBERING CORRECT, 19 75, 19 74, I THINK WAS THE BEGINNING OF NATIONAL REGISTERED DISTRICTS IN TEXAS.

NO, BUT I THINK THIS ONE, THIS ONE WAS, WAS DONE IN 1975, I THINK.

YES.

THAT'S WHAT WHAT I'M SAYING.

THAT WAS JUST A YEAR AFTER SOME OF THESE WERE DONE.

YES.

COMMISSIONER WRIGHT, IT'S, NO, I WAS SAYING THE PHOTOS ON THE NA NOMINATION WERE DONE IN 1978, UM, BY YOUR, BY YOUR FORMER COLLEAGUE, UM, CHAIRMAN MYERS.

UM, I, I WANT TO ASK THAT QUESTION, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WE, WE DO HAVE, YOU KNOW, SOME COMMENTARY ABILITIES ON THINGS IN NATIONAL REGISTERED DISTRICTS, AND I THINK IT'S INAPPROPRIATE TO LOOK AT, UM, YOU KNOW, A LITERALLY A 44, YOU KNOW, 47 YEAR OLD DOCUMENT AND SAY THAT THESE BUILDINGS ARE NOT CONSIDERED HISTORIC AND SHOULD IT BE ALTERED? UM, WELL, WHAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY SAYING IS THAT THEY'RE NON-CONTRIBUTING, WHICH IN FACT IS NOT THE CASE.

MAYBE THE BEST THING, INSTEAD OF US, I HEAR WHAT Y'ALL ARE SAYING, IT'S JUST THAT'S HOW THEY WERE LABELED, AND I WAS JUST TRYING TO DISTINGUISH THEM.

THEY HAVEN'T YET BEEN, UM, IDENTIFIED AS HISTORIC OFFICIALLY WITH A VOTE OR ANYTHING.

WE KNOW WB SMITH IS A LOCAL LANDMARK, UH, AS IN GENERAL, IT'S, IT'S A LOCAL, IT'S A LOCAL LANDMARK.

BUT THESE BUILDINGS, THESE BUILDINGS, WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST MAYBE IS TO, UH, TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT THEM AND, AND MAKE THAT DETERMINATION THROUGH A PROFESSIONAL, UM, PRESERVATION CONSULTANT.

[02:00:01]

AND I, AND I WANT WHAT MY POINT, IF I CAN FINISH, PLEASE.

YES, I'M SORRY.

UM, IS THAT, UM, WE, YOU KNOW, WE AS THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION FOR THE CITY CAN MAKE DECISIONS, UM, YOU KNOW, BASED ON CITY RULES, RECOMMENDATIONS, REQUIREMENTS, ET CETERA, UM, UNDER THE NATIONAL REGISTER CRITERIA, CUTTING OFF THE BACK OF MOST OF THESE BUILDINGS WILL IN FACT TAKE BUILDINGS THAT, THAT PROBABLY ARE CONSIDERED, YOU KNOW, SHOULD BE CONSIDERED CONTRIBUTING TODAY AND WILL MAKE THEM NONCONTRIBUTING BECAUSE THERE'S NO LONGER A FULL BUILDING LEFT BEHIND.

AND SO THAT'S THE POINT THAT I WANNA MAKE HERE, THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT, UM, THAT THE CODES ALLOW FOR 90 FOOT, YOU KNOW, ADDITION TO BUILDING, THESE ARE NOT ADDITIONS TO BUILDINGS.

UM, EVEN IF THE WV SMITH BUILDING, IT'S, IT'S SALVAGING 20 FEET OF A BUILDING AND THEN BUILDING A NEW TOWER THAT'S CONNECTED TO, BUT IT'S NOT AN ADDITION.

AND I JUST, AND I JUST WANNA BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT, THAT IT DOES COST DAMAGE TO THE HISTORIC BUILDINGS, EVEN IF IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE USE THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION AND, UM, CAN COMMENT ON OR TAKE ANY AUTHORITY OVER.

DID YOU HEAR THAT CLEARLY, MR. WILL, I WAS TRYING TO READ IT A LITTLE BIT.

I HEARD SOME OF WHAT SHE SAID.

I HEARD THAT SHE DOESN'T CONSIDER IT A DAM.

IT, EXCUSE ME.

SHE DOESN'T CONSIDER IT, UH, AN ADDITION IN ADDITION AND THAT IT'S DOING DAMAGE TO THE BUILDING THAT MIGHT, UH, MAKE IT NO LONGER A, UH, CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE IF IT WAS CONSIDERED AS CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.

AND THEN BACK TO YOUR POINT OR YOUR QUESTION, MAYBE WE SHOULD GET A PRESERVATION CONSULTANT TO LOOK AT THESE TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

I WOULD ACTUALLY, I WOULD ACTUALLY CONSIDER GOING TO THE NATIONAL REGISTER DEPARTMENT, WHICH OVERSEAS NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATIONS, UH, FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS.

THEY'RE HERE, UH, 4 6 3 6 0 1 3.

GREG SMITH STAFF WOULD LIKE TO CHIME IN.

UH, WE DO HAVE THE NOMINATION AND THE MAPS IN FRONT OF US RIGHT NOW.

OKAY.

UM, UH, STAFF CAN FOLLOW UP WITH OUR FINDINGS, UM, AND LOOK INTO IT A LITTLE BIT MORE.

OKAY.

VERSUS, UH, BECAUSE THE, THE NOMINATION HAS BOTH CONTRIBUTING STATUS AND, UM, COMPATIBLE STATUS.

MM-HMM.

WHICH BOTH OF THESE, WITH WHICH BOTH OF THOSE ARE, UH, INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT.

UM, SO WE CAN FOLLOW, YOU DO A DEEPER DIVE INTO THIS, BUT AT THIS POINT, WE ARE, UM, WE ARE NOT TAKING ACTION.

UM, THIS IS MERELY A BRIEFING.

I, I DON'T, YES.

COMMISSIONER HEIM, SETH.

YEAH.

AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO EMPHASIZE WE'RE NOT DISCUSSING THE CASE.

AND, UH, AT THE SAME TIME, HAVING GENERAL INFORMATION EXCHANGE I THINK IS VERY IMPORTANT.

AND I REALLY APPLAUD THE CLIENT COMING FORWARD AT THIS EARLY STAGE.

UM, SO THAT SOME OF THE THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO BE, UM, IMPORTANT IN FUTURE DISCUSSIONS OF THIS AND SIMILAR CASES, UH, CAN BE RAISED.

AND TO THAT END, UH, I'VE BEEN EXTREMELY CONCERNED ABOUT PRESERVATION AS IT PERTAINS TO THESE HISTORIC, SMALLER SCALE DOWNTOWN BUILDINGS, UH, THAT, UH, AS I'VE POINTED OUT, ARE GETTING SWALLOWED UP BY TOWERS.

SO I THINK THE, UH, COUPLE OF THINGS THAT COME TO MIND THAT I'D LIKE TO RESPOND TO, UH, I, I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY THIS SUMMER TO ACTUALLY TOUR DOWNTOWN TORONTO WITH THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICERS THERE AND SEE WHAT A CITY THAT HAS HAD NOW SOME HISTORY, BOTH GOOD AND BAD WITH THESE TYPES OF RELATIONSHIPS.

UH, AND I THINK THE ABILITY TO HAVE SOME PORTION OR ALL OF A HISTORIC BUILDING, UH, THAT'S A, THAT'S A, A VERY IMPORTANT AND VERY VALUABLE, UH, ASPECT THAT IF THAT'S GOING TO BE PART OF THIS, THE COUPLE BUILDING, BEING ABLE TO BE IN THAT POSITION, UH, THERE'S REAL VALUE THERE.

UM, AGAIN, BASED ON SOME OF THESE STANDARDS, I DO THINK THAT ONE OTHER THING TO CLARIFY IS, UH, THEY HAVE ALSO BEEN SUCCESSFUL WITH, UH, FACADES THAT HAVE, OR, OR, OR PORTIONS OF BUILDINGS THAT WERE PRESERVED THAT WERE REBUILT.

UH, THEY HAVE SOME STANDARDS NOW.

UH, THEY DON'T JUST ACCEPT PROMISES.

UH, THEY POST FISCAL, UH, YOU HAVE TO MEET THOSE CRITERIA.

YOU DON'T GET YOUR FISCAL BACK.

SO IT, IT, YOU KNOW, LITERALLY EVERY SINGLE STONE ON ONE OF THE FACADES THAT WE SAW HAD BEEN, UH, CATALOGED, ITEMIZED, AND TRACKED THE ENTIRE TIME IT WAS OFFSITE BEFORE IT WAS REASSEMBLED.

SO I, I DO THINK THERE ARE A NUMBER

[02:05:01]

OF CRITERIA THAT WE'RE JUST NOW STARTING TO BE AWARE OF.

UH, AND I'M HOPING THAT WE'LL HAVE SOME GUIDES, UH, TO OFFER IN FUTURE, UH, DISCUSSIONS WITH OWNERS.

BUT I THINK IT'LL BE PROJECTS LIKE THESE THAT WILL HELP SHAPE WHAT ARE, WHAT ARE GOING TO BE APPROPRIATE STANDARDS THAT WE'LL BE, WE'LL BE LOOKING FOR IN THE FUTURE.

SO AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR THE, FOR THE PRESENTATION.

THANK YOU FOR THAT INFORMATION.

UH, COMMISSIONER HEIM, SETH, IS IT A TORONTO CODE, JUST SO I CAN CHASE THAT DOWN? UM, IT, IT'S NOT SO MUCH A CODE.

THEY STILL, UM, ARE DOING SOME OF THIS.

THEY'RE TRYING TO MAKE IT INTO A CODE I ASKED FOR.

OKAY.

.

OKAY.

BUT, UH, THEY, THEY HAVE A LOT OF PRECEDENT AND SO THEY'RE STILL WORKING FROM PRECEDENT.

OKAY.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

FURTHER COMMENTS? SUGGESTION? YES.

COM.

COMMISSIONER WRIGHT.

UM, THANK YOU AGAIN.

KAAN FOUND IN THE, UM, NOMINATION, THE CONGRESS AVENUE, UH, NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION, THAT THERE IS A MAP THAT I, THAT I WAS OVERLOOKING, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

BUT I WANT TO NOTE THAT THE MAP DOES CLEARLY SHOW THAT, UM, THIS WHOLE SET OF BUILDINGS, UM, IS IN FACT LABELED AS CONTRIBUTING.

OKAY.

IS THAT IN THE, IS THAT IN THE REGISTER? THE APPLICATION? PARDON? YES.

PARDON ME.

COMMISSIONER WRIGHT? UH, LOOKING AT THE MAP, UH, ONLY THE TWO LANDMARKS ARE LABELED AS CONTRIBUTING.

THE REST ON THE BLOCK ARE AS COMPATIBLE, UH, AS LABELED IN THE DARKER GRAY, WHAT I'M SAYING, THEY'RE ALL LIKE GRAY IN, IN THE 300 BLOCK.

MM-HMM.

, YEAH.

MM-HMM.

, THEY'RE ALL LABELED AS LIKE GRAY, WHICH IS CONTRIBUTING.

WHICH IS CONTRIBUTING.

MM-HMM.

.

AND WHICH DOCUMENT ARE YOU LOOKING AT? COMMISSIONER WRIGHT? JUST SO WE CAN CHASE THAT DOWN.

THE NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION.

THE NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION.

I AM A MISTAKEN.

I APOLOGIZE.

UH, COMMISSIONER WRIGHT, WE WERE LOOKING AT THE WRONG PART.

NO, IT'S ALRIGHT.

WE'RE ALL, WE'RE ALL DOING A BUNCH OF THINGS AT THE SAME TIME HERE.

, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR FINDING THAT.

THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WRIGHT FOR, FOR PULLING THAT UP.

UM, AND I THANK YOU.

I KNOW THAT THIS IS TRUE.

THAT THAT, THAT THIS IS HOW NOMINATIONS WERE DONE AT THAT TIME.

I DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR DISTRICT.

SO YOU MEAN THEY, CUZ IT'S LISTED SOMEWHERE ELSE VERBALLY AS NON-CONTRIBUTING.

I GUESS THERE'S A, THIS MAP AS WELL.

I'VE SEEN THAT IN, IN THE NOMINATION ITSELF, BUT I'LL, I'LL FOLLOW UP.

LOOK AT THE ORIGINAL.

UM, COMMISSIONER COOK, DID YOU HAVE A YEAH, I HAD A, SOMETHING TO ADD A FEW COMMENTS.

I DO APPRECIATE THE EARLY CONTACT.

I APPRECIATE THE OVERALL APPROACH, THE SETBACKS, THE BUILDING LINES OBVIOUS THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE MAKING ATTEMPTS TO, TO MAKE THIS WORK.

UH, AND PER COMMISSIONER HEIM SETH COM COMMENTS, I THINK I'D BE OPEN TO RE IF IT ENDS UP THAT THESE ARE NON-PROTECTED IN ANY WAY, UH, THE TWO BUILDINGS AND YOU NEED ONE, AS IN CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE, UH, I WOULD BE OPEN TO RECONSTRUCTION WITH ORIGINAL MATERIAL, UH, AS OPPOSED TO, UH, REPLACEMENT WITH NEW CONSTRUCTION.

UH, IF IT'S THERE, IF, IF THAT'S WORST CASE, I WOULD PREFER THAT OVER DEMOLITION AND REPLACEMENT.

BUT, UH, I'D, I'D MENTION IN THE ARCHITECTURAL VIEW COMMITTEE, TWO, TWO BIG THINGS.

AND ONE IS W B SMITH BUILDING IS A LANDMARK.

AND WITH LANDMARKS, WE HAVE TALKED, UH, FOR QUITE A BIT OF TIME ABOUT WIDENING KITCHEN WINDOWS ON BACKS OF HOUSES.

AND THIS IS REMOVING 80% OF THE STRUCTURE.

AND, UM, I, I JUST DON'T SEE, YOU KNOW, THERE MAY BE OTHER NEEDS FOR DENSITY AND AFFORDABILITY THAT ARE, THAT ARE WEIGHED TO OUTWEIGH THAT, BUT THIS IS A LANDMARK AND IT'S PROTECTED AND OUR JOB IS TO ENSURE IT REMAINS PROTECTED AND NOT TO MAKE THE CALLS IN TERMS OF WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHERE WE CAN GIVE UP ON OUR OBLIGATION TO PROTECT THESE BUILDINGS.

SO AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, YOU KNOW, THE, THE ROOF IS SACRIFICIAL, UH, AND ADDITIONS CAN BE MADE TO ROOFS, BUT THE EXTERIOR WALLS ARE PROTECTED, UH, INCLUDING THE COMMON WALLS AND THE BACK WALL.

SO I HAVE A, A REAL TIME, JUST HARD TIME TURNING THAT ENTIRE, EVEN THOUGH IT'S, UH, IT'S A, THE TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION IS SUCH THAT IT SHARES WALLS IN THE BACK ISN'T, ISN'T OFTEN SEEN.

AND, AND WE MAINLY EXPERIENCED THE FACADE.

IT IS STILL AN ENTIRE BUILDING AND, AND WE HAVE TO TREAT IT AS SUCH.

UM, AND WITH THAT, I, I DIDN'T SEE IN THE PRESENTATION, I'M SORRY IF I MISSED IT.

UM, MUCH OF, UM, IN THAT SAME VEIN, YOU KNOW, ONE WALL IS SHARED WITH ANOTHER RTL AND I DIDN'T REALLY SEE HOW THAT WAS GONNA BE TREATED, UH, BECAUSE IT'S GONNA BE VERY DIFFICULT TO BUILD A SIX STORY UNDERGROUND PARKING GARAGE IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT THAT TO THE SHARED WALL WITH THE CAPEL BUILDING.

MM-HMM.

WILL REMAIN, UH, ALL THE WAY TO THE REAR.

THE, THAT REAR PIECE, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S 20 FEET WIDE, I FORGOT WHAT IT'S, THAT'S THE ONE THAT'S FACING THE ALLEY AND THEN HAS THE TOWER BEHIND IT.

MM-HMM.

, THAT'S, I THINK THE ONE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT IS WOULD, WOULD GO ALONG WITH THE ONE

[02:10:01]

THAT'S ON THE SIDE THAT WOULD OTHERWISE HAVE A BUILDING NEXT TO IT AND WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO BE SEEN IF, SO THERE WOULD JUST BE PARALLEL WALLS THERE.

THERE'D BE A SETBACK AND YOU'D HAVE THE CAPELLA BUILDING WALL, AND THEN YOU'D HAVE THE NEW WALL ALONG THE SIDE, THE ONE RUNNING FROM CONGRESS AVENUE, STRAIGHT BACK TO THE, UH, FOR THE ENTIRE, THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF CORRECT.

AND THEN IT WOULD BE SHORE UP AND PRESERVED.

AND THEN WHAT ABOUT THE WIDTH OF THE SPREAD FOOTER NEXT TO IT THAT SUPPORTS THE WALL ABOVE IT AND THE SOIL THAT RETAINS THE SPREAD FOOTER THAT IS THE BASE FOUNDATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THAT WALL.

BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THE, THAT SPREAD FOOTING KIND OF RELIES ON ADJACENT SOIL TO DISPERSE THE FORCES.

AND YOU CAN'T JUST SHAVE IT OFF.

IT DOES.

WE BEGAN TO DIG THAT'S, I DIDN'T MEAN THE PUN.

WE BEGAN TO DIG INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT IN TERMS OF WHAT TYPE OF FOOTER WOULD BE USED TO BE SURE THAT IT DOESN'T, YOU DON'T WANT IT TO CRUMBLE IN THE MIDDLE OF CONSTRUCTION, OBVIOUSLY, SINCE IT'S A SH IT'S A SHARED WALL BETWEEN THE TWO STRUCTURES.

OKAY.

YEAH.

AND IF YOU JUST LOOK BACK AT NINE 16 CONGRESS, YOU KNOW, THAT BATTLE WENT ON FOR SIX MONTHS AND WITH MY NOT BEING CONVINCED AT THE END OF IT THAT THE TEAM COULD ACCOMPLISH THIS, AND IT'S SITS AS A VACANT, IT'S A LANDMARK THAT'S A GUTTED LANDMARK, THAT'S JUST A, YOU KNOW, FACADE NOW BECAUSE THEY COULDN'T PULL IT OFF.

SO WHICH BUILDING WAS THAT? NINE 16 CONGRESS.

THANK YOU.

UH, YEAH.

AND THAT WENT ON FOR SEVERAL MONTHS AND, AND THERE WAS NEVER ANY EFFORT TO PORTRAY ANY TECHNICAL INVESTIGATION OR EVEN UNCOVERING THE FOUNDATION TO KNOW WHAT THE FOUNDATION LOOKED LIKE BEFORE PLANNING A BUILDING NEXT TO IT.

YEAH, NO, UH, WE, THE PEOPLE WE TALK TO, YOU KNOW, UH, WE WE'RE GETTING ADVICE FROM CLAYTON CORDY, WE'RE GETTING ADVICE FROM DPR WHO'S BUILT A BUNCH OF TOWERS DOWN HERE AND IS ALREADY HAS SOME INITIAL, UH, UM, GEOLOGICAL SAMPLES AND MORE WOULD BE TAKEN, WE'RE NOT, I MEAN, THIS IS, WE'VE JUST SINCE THE ARC MEETING, WE'VE ALREADY HAD THESE MEETINGS TO BEGIN TO UNDERSTAND, UM, WHAT, WHAT CAN BE DONE GREAT.

AND IT REQUIRES SPECIAL EXPERTISE, AND IT'S TO BECOME ALL THE MORE IMPORTANT AS WE SEE MORE OF THESE TOWERS GOING UP NEXT TO THIS KIND OF CONSTRUCTION.

BUT IT SHOULD BE A MOOT POINT BECAUSE IF THE WB SMITH BUILDING IS SAVED IN ITS ENTIRETY, THEN THE CAPEL BUILDING, WHICH HAS THE SHARED WALL WITH THE LOCAL LANDMARK WOULDN'T BE TOUCHED.

SO, UM, AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S GONNA BE DIFFICULT FOR ME TO SAY, YOU CAN REMOVE 80% OF THE BACK OF AN ENTIRE LANDMARK WHEN WE'VE ARGUED OVER WIDENING A KITCHEN WINDOW.

IT, IT'S JUST, I'M, I'M, I'M VERY STRICT ABOUT OBJECTIVE, FAIR APPLICATION OF THE STANDARDS, AND, AND I WOULD BE SO HERE AS WELL.

NO, I THINK THAT, I THINK THAT'S, THOSE ARE MY POINTS AS WELL.

UH, MR. WILLIAM AND I, I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU AND YOUR, YOUR CLIENT'S EFFORTS TO PROVIDE THIS BRIEFING TO US.

I THINK THAT'S, UH, THAT'S SUPER HELPFUL AND WE'RE VERY GRATEFUL FOR IT.

UM, I WAS ALSO RELIEVED TO SEE THAT MY OLD OFFICE BUILDING AT THE VERY END OF CAPEL FACING FORESTRY JUSTED, SO, WELL, THERE'S A HISTORIC ASSOCIATION, UH, CARL.

EXACTLY.

, THAT'S RIGHT.

IN, IN 2000, THAT WAS MY OFFICE IN THE UPPER FLOOR OF THE CAPEL BUILDING.

UM, YOU, YOU MENTIONED CONSULTING WITH THOSE PRESERVATION CONTRACTORS, I BELIEVE IS WHAT WE, CAN YOU SHARE WHO THAT IS? UM, RIGHT NOW IT'S THE, THE FOLKS, IT'S THE, THE, THE TEAM CLAYTON CORE T ARCHITECTS WHO HAVE WORKED, OBVIOUSLY EMILY LITTLES THERE.

AND, UM, UH, AND DPR IS A CONTRACTOR WHO HAS WORKED WITH, UH, IN DOWNTOWN TOWERS AND STRUCTURES WITH, WE'RE OPEN TO OTHER SUGGESTIONS.

IF YOU HAVE OTHER SUGGESTIONS, WE'RE HAPPY TO GET AS MUCH FEEDBACK AS POSSIBLE.

YEAH, I THINK IN, IN TERMS OF THE FACADE WORK, YOU GET DOWN TO A PRETTY SLICK GROUP OF FOLKS, BUT, UH, I APPRECIATE THAT.

THANK YOU.

ANY FURTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, OBSERVATIONS? OKAY.

THANK YOU MR. WHEELING.

YEP.

THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH.

AND, UH, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO COME A LITTLE BIT LATE.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

OKAY.

UH,

[18. PR-2022-117676 – 2706 Wooldridge Dr. – Discussion Old West Austin National Register District Council District 10]

NUMBER 18 27 0 6 WOODRIDGE DRIVE.

ALL RIGHT, THANK Y'ALL.

ITEM 18 IS A PROPOSAL TO DEMOLISH A CERCA 1936 HOUSE.

UH, THIS IS A ONE STORY BRICK HOUSE WITH SIX OVER SIX AND FOUR OVER FOUR MOLD WINDOWS, A PARTIAL WIDTH COVERED PORCH ACROSS G ROOF WITH SHALLOW EVES AND A TAPERED BRICK, CHIMNEY, METAL AWNING, SHADE, THE PORCH AND WINDOWS AT THE MAIN FACADE.

THIS HOUSE WAS CONSTRUCTED FOR PHILIP L AND MARY YUS JOSEPH IN 1936.

UH, BOTH PHILLIP AND MARY JOSEPH WERE NATIVE AUSTINITES, WHOSE FAMILIES AFTER IMMIGRATING FROM LEBANON OWNED SUCCESSFUL BUSINESSES IN CENTRAL TEXAS.

PHILLIP JOSEPH OPERATED SEVERAL

[02:15:01]

PACKAGE STORES AND INHERITED HIS FATHER'S HABERDASHERY BUSINESS, UH, CALLED JOSEPH'S MAN'S SHOP, WHICH OPERATED ON CONGRESS AVENUE IN SIXTH STREET FROM 1890 UNTIL AFTER PHILLIP'S DEATH IN 1968.

THIS PROPERTY CONTRIBUTES TO THE OLD WEST AUSTIN NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT.

THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS THAT, UH, IF THE COMMISSION FEELS THAT THE HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS WITH THE JOSEPH FAMILY ARE SUFFICIENT FOR DESIGNATION TO CONSIDER INITIATION OF HISTORIC ZONING THAT OTHERWISE RELEASE THE DEMOLITION PERMIT UPON RECEIPT OF A CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE, UM, THIS PROPERTY IS ASSOCIATED WITH PHILIP L. JOSEPH.

UM, OTHER MEMBERS OF THE JOSEPH FAMILY HAVE BEEN HONORED WITH LANDMARK BUILDINGS.

UM, HOWEVER, UH, PHILIP JOSEPH DOES NOT, UM, AND HIS BRANCH OF THE FAMILY, UH, DO NOT HAVE, UH, CURRENTLY LANDMARK STRUCTURE ASSOCIATED WITH THEM.

ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? OKAY.

DO, UM, IS THE APPLICANT HERE? OKAY.

PLEASE COME DOWN.

STATEMENT HELLO FOR THE RECORD.

I'M MELISSA HOGARTY, DAY WOOD.

I AM PHILLIP AND MARY JOSEPH'S GRANDDAUGHTER, AND SUSAN ELAINE JOSEPH'S NIECE.

I'M THE EXECUTOR OF, UM, THE ESTATE.

UM, A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I, I DON'T AGREE WITH, UM, IN, IN HER STATEMENT.

UM, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, MY GRANDFATHER, UM, WAS ONLY INVOLVED IN THE MEN'S SHOP WITH HIS BROTHER.

AND THEN WHEN HE PASSED AWAY IN 1969, UH, THE BROTHER TOOK OVER THE, THE BUSINESS.

UM, MY GRANDMOTHER LIVED IN THE HOUSE UNTIL SHE PASSED AWAY, AND, UM, THEY WERE VERY HUMBLE PEOPLE.

AND I DON'T, MY GRANDMOTHER NEVER WANTED TO SEEK A HISTORIC, UM, UH, DESIGNATION.

UM, I THINK SHE FELT LIKE THEY WERE JUST VERY TYPICAL OF HER TIME PERIOD.

SO WE ARE, WE WOULD LOVE FOR WHOEVER THE, THE, THE, WE'D LIKE TO SELL THE PROPERTY.

NOBODY IN THE FAMILY, UM, LIVES IN AUSTIN ANYMORE, OR I'M LIKE THE, THE LAST REMAINING ONE IN AUSTIN.

AND, UM, WE WOULD LIKE TO SELL THE PROPERTY.

WE WOULD LIKE TO HOPEFULLY, IF SOMEBODY BUYS IT AND WANTS TO TRY TO REMODEL IT, THAT WOULD BE LOVELY WITH MAKING AN ADDITION.

BUT THE HOUSE WAS NOT REALLY KEPT UP.

UM, MY GRANDMOTHER DIDN'T PUT A LOT OF EFFORT INTO IT.

AND AFTER SHE PASSED AWAY, UH, IN 2007, MY AUNT DID NOT MAINTAIN IT VERY MUCH, SO IT, IT, IT WOULD NEED SERIOUS WORK.

THAT'S ALL.

ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? IS, IS THE HOUSE OCCUPIED? UH, NOT CURRENTLY, NO.

DO YOU KNOW WHEN THE LAST TIME IT WAS OCCUPIED WAS MY AUNT PASSED AWAY AT THE END OF MARCH.

OKAY.

THANKS.

OKAY.

SO YOU'RE ASKING FOR A DEMOLITION PERMIT, EVEN THOUGH YOU'RE NOT GOING TO, UH, KEEP IT.

CORRECT.

WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IT TO POSSIBLY, UM, ENCOURAGE A SALE ON THE PROPERTY.

UM, THERE, THERE IS NO ONE IN THE FAMILY WHO CAN MOVE INTO IT AND MAINTAIN IT AND AFFORD TO LIVE THERE.

AND EVERYBODY, ASIDE FROM MYSELF, LIVES OUT OF TOWN.

SO WE ARE READY TO HAVE THE PROPERTY TO GO TO SOMEONE WHO CAN ENJOY IT.

OKAY.

UM, OKAY.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSITION? OKAY.

UH, THANK YOU.

UH, DO I HEAR A MOTION TO CLO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? SO MOVED.

SECOND.

OKAY.

ALL IN FAVOR OF CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING.

PLEASE SAY, AYE.

AYE.

RAISE YOUR HAND.

AYE.

OKAY.

THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED.

DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THE CASE? I'LL MOVE TO RELEASE A DEMOLITION PERMIT PENDING A CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE.

OKAY.

DID YOU HEAR EARLIER WHAT THE CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE CONSISTS OF? A LITTLE.

OKAY.

THE STAFF WILL GET IN TOUCH WITH YOU.

IS THERE A SECOND TO THE, OKAY.

SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TOLET.

ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.

WAIT, WAIT.

OH, DISCUSSION.

WELL, I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S REALLY A SHAME THAT IT IS.

WE HAVE TO DEMO THE HOUSE TO, TO MAKE THE PROPERTY VIABLE.

I, YOU KNOW, I KNOW.

MAY I SPEAK TO THAT? NO, I'M SORRY.

THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED.

YEAH.

I

[02:20:01]

THINK WE KNOW WHAT THIS KIND OF SITUATION IS LIKE.

UM, IT'S JUST VERY UNFORTUNATE.

IT IS UNFORTUNATE.

UH, I DON'T, IN A WAY, IT'S ALMOST LIKE CURSING THE PROPERTY.

UM, SOMEBODY MAY COME ALONG AND FIND THAT THEY WANNA, UM, BUY IT, BUT IF THEY KNOW THAT THERE'S A DEMOLITION PERMIT ON, IT'S ALMOST LIKE, OH, THERE'S SOMETHING WRONG WITH THIS HOUSE.

AND, AND I HOPE, YOU KNOW, SOMEONE DOES WANT TO SAVE IT, BUT THE, THE LOT ITSELF IS KIND OF ODDLY SHAPED.

UH, AND IT'S GOT THE HUGE TREES IN THE FRONT, SO IT WOULD BE, THIS LOOKS LIKE ONE THAT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO ADD ON TO.

AND IT'S, IT'S VERY SMALL FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO I THINK JUST FINANCING WISE IS PROBABLY GONNA BE DIFFICULT TO, FOR ANYONE TO, TO BUY IT.

IT'S, UH, BUT, BUT MOSTLY I MADE THE MOTION CUZ IF THE FAMILY IS NOT NOT IN SUPPORT OF THE LANDMARKING, THE, THE FAMILY AS A WHOLE HAS BEEN, HAS BEEN, YOU KNOW, HONORED IN SEVERAL OTHER DESIGNATIONS.

UH, THE PROPERTY I, I THINK IS A GREAT HOUSE, BUT, UM, I JUST DON'T THINK IT RISE TO THE LEVEL OF THE LANDMARK.

SO, UM, I, I WOULD HATE TO SEE IT GO, BUT THAT'S HOW THE GAME IS PLAYED.

YES, SIR.

I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T MEAN TO, UM, NO, THAT'S FINE.

JUMP THE GUN THERE.

I'M GONNA, OKAY.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF, UH, THE MOTION, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

AND STAFF WILL GET IN TOUCH WITH YOU ABOUT THE D ABOUT THE DOCUMENTATION PACKET.

OKAY.

OUR NEXT ITEM

[22. SB-2022-135187 – 900 Congress Ave. – Discussion Congress Avenue National Register District Council District 9]

IS 900, 900 CONGRESS AVENUE.

ALL RIGHT, Y'ALL SOMETHING A LITTLE DIFFERENT.

ITEM 22, UH, IS A PROPOSAL TO INSTALL A SIGN ON A NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING IN THE CONGRESS AVENUE NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT.

UH, THIS PROPOSED CHANNEL LETTER SIGN IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTH ELEVATION OF 900 CONGRESS.

IT'S WHITE VINYL LETTERS OR HALO LIT WITH WHITE LEDS, A ATOP AND ALUMINUM BACKGROUND.

IT IS APPROXIMATELY 72 SQUARE FEET IN AREA.

THE FACADE MODULE CURRENTLY CONTAINS AN EXISTING NON-COMPLIANT SIGN WITH INTERNALLY LIT TEXT OF APPROXIMATELY 259 SQUARE FEET IN AREA AT THE TOP OF THE BUILDING.

UM, THE PROJECT MEETS SOME OF THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS, UM, AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO CONSIDER THE PROPOSED NEW SIGNS VISUAL IMPACT WHEN COMPARED WITH THE EXISTING NON-COMPLIANT SIGNAGE.

UH, SHOULD THE COMMISSION ALLOW THE SECOND SIGN, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION UPON THE CONDITION THAT THE PROPOSED SIGN SIZE BE REDUCED, UM, BY HOW MUCH IS UP TO Y'ALL, HOW MUCH IS UP TO THE COMMISSION? OKAY.

TELL US WHAT, WHAT IS THIS, UM, SQUARE FOOTAGE ALLOWED BY THE SIGN ORDINANCE? I BELIEVE THE SIGN ORDINANCE FOR A, UH, A LARGER BUILDING IS 40 SQUARE FEET, LET'S 40 SQUARE FEET.

AND THIS IS, YES, IT IS 40 SQUARE FEET PER FACADE.

UM, UNLESS YOU'RE A CORNER, WHICH YOU CAN HAVE, UM, MULTIPLE SIGNS AT EITHER FACADE IF YOU'RE AT A CORNER OF A LOT, WHICH THIS IS.

SO YOU COULD HAVE 40 SQUARE FEET ON EACH FACADE IF YOU'RE ON A CORNER.

OKAY.

THAT SEEMS CLEAR.

OKAY.

UM, ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? THANK YOU.

OKAY.

UH, IS THE APPLICANT HERE? YEAH, WE HAVE TWO MEMBERS OF THE APPLICANT TEAM ON THE LINE.

THE FIRST IS BROOKE BILE.

OKAY.

MR. BIDDLE OR MISS BIDDLE? YES.

UM, HELLO? UH, CAN YOU GUYS HEAR ME OKAY? YES.

OKAY, GREAT.

THANKS SO MUCH FOR, UH, HAVING US TONIGHT.

UM, BOTH MYSELF AND ALEX SMITH ARE ON THE LINE FROM CURATED.

UM, SO HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS, BUT JUST A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND.

UM, SO CURATIVE, I SEE YOU GUYS ARE NOT FAMILIAR.

WE WERE A COMPANY THAT WAS BORN OUT OF COVID TESTING.

UH, WE ACTUALLY OPENED OUR FIRST SITE IN AUSTIN BACK IN OCTOBER OF 2020.

AND I'VE HAD 20 COLLECTION SITES THROUGHOUT AUSTIN.

UH, IN THE PAST TWO YEARS, WE'VE COLLECTED OVER 200,000 COVID TESTS.

AND DURING, UM, THE TIME WHERE WE WERE SUPPORTING AUSTIN DURING THIS COVID PANDEMIC, WE REALLY FOCUSED ON PROVIDING ACCESSIBLE AND RELIABLE TESTING FOR AUSTINITE.

SO THEN THE PROCESS REALIZED THAT THERE'S A MAJOR GAP IN THE HEALTHCARE INDUSTRY, UM, AND OUR GOAL RIGHT NOW IS TO FILL THAT GAP.

AND SO WE'RE, WE'VE JUST ROLLED OUT A NEW INSURANCE PLAN, UM, THAT FOCUSES ON ALL PREVENTATIVE HEALTHCARE.

WE ARE STARTING HERE IN AUSTIN.

IT'S GOING TO BE THE FIRST CITY.

AND WE'VE REALLY DEVELOPED THIS PLAN FOR AUSTIN NIGHTS, UM, IN A WAY THAT WE HOPE WILL PROVIDE PREVENTATIVE CARE AND REALLY, UM, INSTRUCT AND GUIDE

[02:25:01]

PEOPLE ON HOW TO BETTER TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES.

AND PART OF THAT IS THIS, UH, HEALTH AND WELLNESS FACILITY THAT WE'RE DEVELOPING IN 900 CONGRESS.

SO WE PURCHASED THE BUILDING, UH, BACK IN THE SPRING OF 2020 AND HAVE BEEN IN THE PROCESS OF RENOVATING IT.

UM, THE BUILDING HADN'T BEEN TOUCHED IN A WHILE, SO IT NEEDS QUITE A BIT OF SUPPORT FROM AN STRUCTURAL PERSPECTIVE.

AND THEN WE ARE DEVELOPING, UH, INTERNALLY THIS FACILITY THAT'S GOING TO REALLY PROMOTE, UM, THAT PREVENTATIVE CARE ASPECT THAT WE'RE AIMING TO BRING TO OUR MEMBERS.

UM, AS THE PURCHASE OF THE BUILDING WENT THROUGH, WE OBVIOUSLY HAVE TENANTS THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH, ONE OF THEM BEING, UH, THE SIGN THAT IS NONCONFORMING ON THE TOP OF THE BUILDING.

UM, AND SO IN ORDER TO WORK AROUND THAT AND PROVIDE A WAY FOR CONSUMERS AND, AND OUR MEMBERS TO ACTUALLY REALIZE THAT WE ARE IN THIS SPACE, UH, THAT IT'S NOT OWNED BY A DIFFERENT ORGANIZATION THAT'S ALWAYS PROPO PROPOSED.

THE SIGN, UH, WHERE WE PLACED IT AND THE SIZE OF IT, UM, WE DID TRY TO PLAN SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT GOING TO DRAW TOO MUCH ATTENTION, BUT REALLY DID MAKE IT CLEAR, UH, WHERE OUR, OUR FOLKS CAN GO AND WHERE THEY SHOULD HEAD FOR THO THOSE HEALTH AND WELLNESS OPPORTUNITIES.

UM, SO WE WOULD LOVE TO KEEP IT AS IS.

AGAIN, WE DO HAVE THAT NON-CONFORMING SIGN, WHICH WE ARE AWARE OF, AND, UH, WE'RE WORKING WITH THAT TENANT CLOSELY.

UM, BUT THAT'S WHERE, UH, THIS ORGANIZATION HAS COME FROM AND, AND WE'RE REALLY EXCITED TO BE IN AUSTIN AND HOPING TO KEEP THAT PRESENCE ON 900 CONGRESS.

THANK YOU.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? ALSO ON THE LINE? WE HAVE ALEX SMITH.

ALEX SMITH.

OKAY.

MR. SMITH OR MS. SMITH.

HELLO.

YES, I HAVE NOTHING TO ADD AT THIS TIME.

OKAY.

THANK YOU FOR HAVING IT.

YEAH.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

UH, YES, CALLEN JUST LIKE TO MAKE A QUICK CORRECTION.

UH, IF YOU DON'T MIND.

UH, IT'S, UM, YOU CAN HAVE MORE THAN ONE SIGN PER, UM, FACADE MODULE, BUT THE CUMULATIVE, UM, SIGNAGE ALLOWED IS 40, SO THAT INCLUDES THE CUMULATIVE IS 40.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

UM, IS THERE ANYONE IN OPPOSITION? OKAY.

NONE.

UH, DO I HEAR A MOTION TO CL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? SO MOVED.

SECOND.

OKAY.

UM, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING, PLEASE SAY AYE OR RAISE YOUR HAND.

AYE.

AYE.

OKAY.

THE MOTION CARRIES.

DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THE CASE? UH, SINCE NO ONE IS OTHERWISE MOVED, I'M GOING TO MOVE TO DENY THE APPLICATION AND REQUIRE THAT THE SIGNS MEET THE SIGN STANDARDS.

SECOND, I, I MAKE IT A POINT TO NEVER MAKE EXCEPTIONS TO THE SIGN STANDARDS.

THEY ARE EXTREMELY OBJECTIVE, THEY'RE EXTREMELY STRAIGHTFORWARD, AND, UH, I, I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO BARTERING, UH, OR ADJUDICATING WHETHER THERE'S A GREAT ENOUGH NEED TO, TO, TO VIOLATE THEM.

WE'VE RECENTLY AT THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, UH, MET WITH A GROUP THAT WAS IN VERY MUCH THE SAME CASE, AND WE, UH, REJECTED THAT AND THAT THEY DIDN'T, DIDN'T BRING IT TO US.

UM, IF, IF THERE WAS AN ISSUE WHERE IT WAS 40 SQUARE FEET AND THERE WAS AN ISSUE WITH THE SIGN ON AT HEIGHT ON THE ROOF, UH, AND IT WAS THE CONFLICT BETWEEN THE TWO, I MAY CONSIDER THAT, BUT IT, IT, UM, IT, IF THAT WE'RE THE ONLY SIGN ON THE ENTIRE FACADE, IT WOULD STILL VIOLATE THE STANDARD.

SO, UM, THE SIGN ORDINANCE IS VERY CUT AND DRY.

THERE'S NOT, THERE'S NOT A LOT OF WIGGLE ROOM.

UM, THIS IS, THERE'S VIRTUALLY NO WIGGLE ROOM, IN FACT.

SO, UM, I WILL SUPPORT, SUPPORT THE MOTION, AND ON A NOTE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.

IT, IT MAY SEEM DIFFICULT TO ADHERE TO, BUT IF WE WERE TO LET THIS ONE GO AND THEN MADE THE SAME EXCEPTION ON EVERY PROPERTY ON CONGRESS AVENUE, IT WOULD, UH, HAVE A MUCH DIFFERENT APPEARANCE.

YES.

COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON.

YEAH, I'LL SUPPORT THE MOTION.

AND I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN SAID ALREADY.

I JUST WANTED TO ADD MY OWN PERSONAL NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT I THINK THE SIGN STANDARDS ARE TERRIBLE , BUT THEY ARE IN WRITING AND THEY'RE THE RULES WE LIVE BY.

SO THEY'RE DOWN TO PERCENTAGES, NUMBERS, SQUARE FOOTAGE, ALL OF THE ABOVE.

AND I'M NOT SURE IF THERE'S ANYTHING IN THE SIDE STANDARDS THAT GIVE EXCEPTION TO GRAPHICS THAT ARE BEHIND THE STORE, FRONT GLASS THAT MAYBE A TYPE OF WORK AROUND FOR A, A PARTICULAR APPLICANT WHO DOES HAVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF STOREFRONT GLASS THAT, I DUNNO, JUST THROWING IT OUT THERE.

COULD I ASK A QUESTION WHERE YES.

HOW DOES THAT, THE PROSPERITY BANK SIGN IS NONCONFORMING? CORRECT.

[02:30:01]

HOW DID HE GET THERE? DO, DOES ANYBODY KNOW HOW IT GOT THERE? I DON'T KNOW.

DOES STAFF KNOW HOW THE PROSPERITY BANK SIGN GOT THERE? I MEAN, THAT'S A FAIRLY, THAT'S A FAIRLY RE THAT'S, THAT'S A FAIRLY RECENT SIGN.

I, I WILL NOTE THAT THE OTHER CASE THAT WE LOOKED AT WAS THE INDEED TOWER THAT HAS OBVIOUSLY INDEED AT THE VERY TOP OF IT, UH, THAT WAS GRANTED AS AN EXCEPTION BY PREVIOUS STAFF BECAUSE IT IS SO HIGH, IT'S OUT OF EYE SHOT ON THE STREET.

AND I WOULD TEND TO AGREE WITH THAT.

IF YOU CAN'T SEE IT FROM THE STREET AND IT'S REALLY A, YOU KNOW, BILLBOARD TO BE SEEN FROM ACROSS THE CITY, I WOULD BE OKAY WITH THAT.

BUT THIS ONE IN PARTICULAR IS AT THE STREET WHERE IT, IT COUNTS THE MOST.

SO I, I SUSPECT IT MAY HAVE BEEN ALLOWED BECAUSE IT WAS SO HIGH.

JUST SOMEBODY, SOMEBODY DID IT ADMINISTRATIVELY.

YOU THINK? I SUSPECT? YEP.

YEAH, I'LL SUPPORT THE MOTION.

OKAY.

OKAY.

UM, ANY FURTHER? YES, COMMISSIONER WRIGHT.

UM, AND I WAS LOOKING AT GOOGLE STREET TOO, AND, AND THE SIGN HAS BEEN THERE FOR SOME TIME.

IT JUST CHANGED.

THEY PAINTED THE BUILDING AND CHANGED THE COLOR OF THE LETTERS.

SO I THINK IT JUST STICKS OUT VISUALLY MORE THAN IT USED TO.

THE PROSPERITY SIGN.

YEAH.

OKAY.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

UM, ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO DENY.

PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND, SAY AYE.

AYE.

AYE.

AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES.

OKAY.

OUR LAST ITEM FOR DISCUSSION IS ITEM 23, 4,008

[23. PR-2022-092566 – 4008 N. Lamar Blvd. – Discussion Council District 10]

NORTH LAMAR.

WE HAD 27.

YEAH, WE ALSO HAVE 27.

OH, I'M SORRY.

BUT I MEAN, UH, 23 COMES FIRST, SO, OH, I'M SORRY.

THAT WAS PULLED BY COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON.

EXCUSE ME.

I GOT EVERYBODY ALL EXCITED.

YES.

, UH, THIS ONE WILL BE BRIEF.

UM, THIS IS A, UH, PROJECT THAT, A DEMOLITION PROJECT THAT OCCURRED WITHOUT, UH, PROPER PERMITTING.

UM, THE BUILDING WAS DEMOLISHED WITHOUT A PERMIT IN SPRING OF 22 BEFORE THE SEPTEMBER 7TH, UH, HEARING.

UM, IT WAS PLACED BACK ON THE AGENDA UPON REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT WHO EXPRESSED INTEREST, UH, IN MITIGATION AT OUR FIRST MEETING.

UM, BUT I DO NOT, I DON'T KNOW IF THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO SPEAK TO IT.

UM, EITHER WAY, THIS PROJECT TIMES OUT AFTER, UH, UH, LATER THIS MONTH, I BELIEVE THE 17TH.

SO, UM, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO TAKE NO ACTION IS THE APPLICANT HERE.

OKAY.

UM, I THINK THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO TAKE NO ACTION, UM, ALLOWS IT TO TIME OUT WITH THE COMMISSION, NOT, UM, IN A POSITION TO APPROVE SOMETHING THAT WE DISAGREE WITH.

I E DEMOLITION WITHOUT A PERMIT.

CHAIR MYERS? YES.

COMMISSIONER HEIM.

SETH, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, DIDN'T WE ALSO ASK THE STAFF TO SEE IF WHAT THE LEGAL IMPLICATIONS WERE BECAUSE, UH, JUST DELAYING TO ALLOW THIS PERMIT TO GO FORWARD, UH, REALLY IS, IS HARDLY EVEN A SLAP ON THE RISK.

BUT, UH, IF WE ARE GOING TO HAVE OUR, UH, REQUIREMENTS MET, UH, WE REALLY DO NEED TO MAKE SURE WHEN SOMEONE VIOLATES THEM THAT THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES.

STAFF, ACCORDING TO PERMITS, THE APPLICANT DID, UH, COMPLY WITH A CODE ENFORCEMENT ORDER TO GO BACK AND GET A PERMIT.

UM, AND THAT IS AS MUCH RESOLUTION, UM, AS WE'RE ABLE TO GET AS FAR AS PERMITTING GOES.

OKAY.

DID YOU HEAR THAT COMMISSIONER HEIM, SETH? AM I AM I UNDERSTAND THAT SOMEHOW THEY WERE ISSUED A PERMIT IN SOME BY, BY OTHERS WITHOUT, UH, MISRE YEAH.

SPEAK CLOSER TO THE MICROPHONE.

WE COULDN'T HEAR YOU.

SO, AS A CONDITION OF CODE ENFORCEMENT FLAGGING THE DEMOLITION, UM, I BELIEVE THAT THE APPLICANT IS NOW IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING ANOTHER PERMIT, UM, TO MITIGATE THIS IS THE PERMIT THAT EXPIRES THAT, BUT THAT WE HAVE TO RELEASE ON OCTOBER 17TH.

THIS IS THE PERMIT THAT YOU ALL ARE REVIEWING, RIGHT? THIS IS THE MITIGATING PERMIT.

UM, THEY WERE PREVIOUSLY FLAGGED.

LET'S BACK UP.

YEAH.

, WHAT THEIR, I THOUGHT MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT THERE WAS AN APPLICATION, THEY DID UNDERSTAND THAT THERE WAS A REVIEW BY THE LANDMARKS COMMISSION.

THEY WERE ON OUR AGENDA, BUT BY THE TIME WE

[02:35:01]

ACTUALLY GOT THERE, THEY'D JUST GONE AHEAD AND TO IT DOWN ANYWAY.

IS THAT, AM I MISTAKEN? YES, THAT IS CORRECT.

UM, SO THIS HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY TORN DOWN.

WE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT IT, PLACED IT ON THE AGENDA.

THE PERMIT THAT WE PUT ON THE AGENDA WAS THEIR ATTEMPT TO RECTIFY THE SITUATION FROM A PERMITTING STANDPOINT, UNDERSTANDING, WERE THEY NOT EVER ALERTED TO OR AWARE? UH, AGAIN, I KNOW THIS CAME UP LAST TIME, BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE I I PROBABLY HAVE IT CONFUSED WITH ANOTHER CASE.

SO WAS THIS, THIS OWNER WAS NOT AWARE AND THEY PULLED A PERMIT, THOUGHT THEY HAD A PERMIT, AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN REALIZED IT WAS HISTORIC.

WHAT, WHAT, WHERE, WHERE'S THE, UH, RESPONSIBILITY HERE? SO I THINK WHAT HAPPENED WITH THIS ONE WAS THE, UH, APPLICANT HAD TRIED TO GET A PERMIT AND THE CONTRACTOR DEMOLISHED BEFORE THE PERMIT HAD BEEN APPROVED AND PULLED.

YEAH, THAT'S HOW I RECALL IT.

AND, OKAY, THANK YOU.

YES, NOW, YES.

APPRECIATE THAT.

I, I KNOW COMMISSIONER, WE'VE HAD TOO MANY OF THESE RECENTLY.

UH, YEAH.

WELL I THINK I WAS CONFUSING YOU WITH THE ONE UP THE FRISCO YEAH.

IN THE APARTMENT COMPLEX AND YEAH.

YEAH.

SO ACCOUNTABILITY, WE, THAT'S RIGHT.

AND I REMEMBER NOW THE OWNER, OF COURSE WAS TRYING TO SEE IF HE COULD MAKE THINGS RIGHT, BUT WE ALSO HAVE A LICENSED CONTRACTOR OR, AND OR DEMOLITION CONTRACTOR WHO VIOLATED THE CITY CODE.

AND I DO BELIEVE THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME CONSEQUENCES.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE WERE ASKING FOR, UH, SOME ASSISTANCE WITH YES, THAT'S CORRECT.

THAT WAS WHAT THE APPLICANT, UM, SAID THAT THEY WOULD RETURN WITH.

HOWEVER, WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED THAT INFORMATION FROM THE APPLICANT.

OKAY.

AND, AND THE STAFF, YOU HAVE NOT REACHED OUT TO THE CITY'S LEGAL DEPARTMENT TO SEE WHAT WE CAN DO REGARDING, UM, CONTRACTORS, THEIR LICENSES AND THEIR VIOLATING CITY LAW.

WE CAN GET MORE SPECIFIC WITH LICENSURE.

UM, I THINK THE LAST GUIDANCE WE GOT WAS THAT NO ACTION VOTE WOULD KEEP IT OFF THE RECORD.

SO WE'RE REQUIR I CAN ASK.

WE'RE REQUIRING PEOPLE IN ALL OF OUR LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICTS, ALL OF THE APPLICATIONS IN NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICTS, ALL THE LANDMARKS TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

IT IS NOT FAIR.

AND IT IS INCONSISTENT WITH OUR PROGRAM AND WITH THE CITY ORDINANCE FOR THE, FOR THE CITY NOT TO ENFORCE THESE REGULATIONS.

THERE ARE IN FACT VERY FEW AREAS OF THE CITY THAT WOULD NOT ENFORCE THOSE REGULATIONS.

YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? NOWHERE ELSE.

COULD YOU, COULD YOU GET AWAY WITH THAT? CORRECT.

YOU WOULD BE IN STRICT VIOLATION OF, WELL, THIS GOES, THIS GOES BACK TO THE SEAGRAM SNEAK HOUSE AND OTHERS WHERE THEY JUST LANGUISH, YOU KNOW, UNTIL, I GUESS THE APPLICANT THINGS, THEY'LL JUST DISAPPEAR AND THEY CAN GO ON ABOUT THEIR BUSINESS.

AND I, I, I FEEL LIKE SOMETHING, SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE.

THIS IS A SIMILAR CASE TO WHAT HAPPENED TO THE HOUSE ON AVENUE H.

WE HAD THE CONTRACTOR COME IN AND HE SAID ONCE HE GOT INTO THE HOUSE, HE DECIDED THAT IT COULDN'T BE REPAIRED.

SO WE TORE IT DOWN AND, AND BUILT A NEW HOUSE THERE.

I I THINK WE'RE ASKING LEGAL TO THAT WE'RE GONNA NEED TO MAKE AN EXAMPLE OUT OF THIS SO THAT ENFORCEMENT GOING IN THE FUTURE IS CONSIDERED APPROPRIATELY.

IS THAT, I THINK, YEAH, I THINK, I THINK THAT, I THINK THAT IT'S INCUMBENT UPON US TO DO SO.

IT, IT'S, IT, IT'S A FARCE FOR US TO SIT UP HERE AND MAKE THE REQUIREMENTS OF OTHER APPLICANTS AND JUST LET THINGS LIKE THIS GO.

SO IF, IF THAT'S THE CASE NOW, THEN LET'S, LET'S GO FURTHER.

AND IF WE COULD ASK STAFF TO MAKE A REQUEST OF THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT TO WORK WITH US ON THIS CASE, BUT ALSO, UM, CONSIDERING THE IMPORTANCE OF IT, THE, UM, EXPLORE WHAT AVENUES IN ADDITION TO, AS I SAY, THE LICENSING OF THE, OF THE ACTUAL PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE.

UH, WHAT OTHER AVENUES, UH, FOR ENFORCEMENT WE HAVE, I MEAN I I, I KNOW THAT IF I WERE TO TRY TO PUT A PROPERTY TOGETHER AND SAID, SCREW IT, I JUST DON'T WANT TO BUILD A DETENTION POND.

UH, THE CITY HAS WAYS TO MAKE SURE I GET THAT DETENTION POND OR I DON'T GET THE CHANCE TO BUILD.

SO I THINK WE HAVE TO HAVE SOMETHING THAT'S JUST AS IMPORTANT AND JUST AS SIGNIFICANT.

UH, OR ELSE AS CHAIR MYERS, YOU'RE SUGGESTING WE STARTED ERODING, UH, TO BE, UH, THE WHOLE PROGRAM.

WELL, I, I WANNA ADD ON TO WHAT COMMISSIONER HEIM SETH JUST SAID IN THAT SIMILAR TO RETENTION PONDS, THE ISSUE HERE IS THEY ACTUALLY DID TEAR DOWN THIS BUILDING WITHOUT PERMIT.

I MEAN, WE SHOULD DIRECT LEGAL STAFF TO LOOK INTO THEIR VIOLATIONS OF

[02:40:01]

EPA LAW THAT THIS BUILDING COULD HAVE BEEN RIDDLED WITH ASBESTOS AND, AND NOTHING WAS DONE TO MITIGATE THAT.

UM, I MEAN, THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN SIEMENS'S NEED, BUT THAT IS LIKE, YOU CAN'T JUST TEAR DOWN BUILDINGS IN A, IN A WAY I WOULD RATHER NOT BASE IT ON, ON SOMETHING LIKE THE EPA OR ANOTHER AGENCY OR SOMETHING WITH THAT PEOPLE MIGHT ACTUALLY FOLLOW.

I KIND OF LIKE IT TO STAND AS THIS IS A HISTORIC PROPERTY.

IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN APPROVED OR DENIED BY THE LANDMARK COMMISSION.

I'M JUST, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT OUR MOUTH AND WONDERING HOW MANY TEETH WE'VE GOT IN THERE, LET'S CONSIDER ALL OF THEM.

YEAH.

YEAH.

THANK YOU.

YES, COMMISSIONER.

TELL IT IF, IF WE'RE GONNA ASK ABOUT THIS ONE.

I DIDN'T HEAR THE ANSWER TO THE ONE ABOUT THE NIGHTHAWK.

YEAH.

AND ALSO THE, I CAN'T THINK OF THE NAME OF THE PROPERTY, BUT I'VE ASKED ASK, UH, STEPH ABOUT THIS WHILE BACK.

IT WAS THE, THE PROPERTY THEY TORE DOWN THE LITTLE ROCK HOUSE.

IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE MOVED AND THEY JUST, JUST, JUST TO THEY LAUGHED AND THEY TORE IT DOWN.

YEAH.

YES.

WE DIDN'T DO ANYTHING.

WHY ARE, WHY ARE THEY GET, WHY DOES THAT PROPERTY STILL GET A HISTORIC TAX ABATEMENT? I MEAN, THAT'S MY QUESTION.

I MEAN, IF I LIVE IN A HISTORIC HOUSE, IF I WOULD DECIDED WHAT THE HELL, I'D JUST TAKE OFF THE WALL OR SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, AND THERE WOULD BE, THERE'S NO, IF THERE'S NO CONSEQUENCES, I MEAN, WHY HAVE THE PROGRAM, WHY HAVE THE PROGRAM, WHY ARE WE SITTING UP HERE? PRETTY MUCH, I MEAN, AND, AND, AND PEOPLE AS YOU SAY, I MEAN, IF YOU WATCH US AND YOU THINK, WELL, WOW, THAT'S HOW YOU DO IT.

YOU JUST EITHER DO IT BY NEGLECT OR YOU JUST DO IT.

AND CUZ YOU KNOW, THE CITY WILL GIVE YOU YOUR TAX BREAK OR YOU DO IT AND YOU KNOW, THERE WON'T BE ANY CONSEQUENCES.

YOU MAY HAVE TO BE DELAYED A COUPLE OF MONTHS HERE BECAUSE WE WE'RE BEING TOUGH ON YOU.

HOLD YOUR, HOLD YOUR, UH, MAKE YOU MAKE YOU WAIT FOR A COUPLE OF MONTHS.

JAYLEN OUR COMMISSIONER.

NO, NO, IT'S FINE.

OH, NO, NO.

I'M WRITING AS Y'ALL ARE TALKING.

IT'S GOOD INFORMATION.

WE, WE ARE VENTING , WE ARE UNDERSTANDABLE.

I CAN OFFER A LITTLE BIT OF CLARITY.

UM, AND I CAN CHECK ON THIS TOO.

COMMISSIONER TOT ON THE, UM, THE ROCK HOUSE AT THE REAR OF THAT, THAT, UH, PROPERTY ROBBER, THAT ONE I BELIEVE, UH, WHEN OUR FORMER PRESERVATION OFFICER ELIZABETH BREIT, UM, COORDINATED WITH LEGAL THAT THEY DETERMINED THAT THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS HAD EXPIRED.

YEAH.

UM, SO THAT WAS WHAT HAPPENED THERE.

THAT WOULDN'T, HOW WOULD THE STATUTE'S LIMITATION OF PLEA, THEY, THE PROPER'S IN VIOLATION OF, OF STANDARDS IF, IF THEY, IF THEY CAME BY MY HOUSE AND SAID I HAVE TO DO A CORRECTION BECAUSE IT'S NOT CORRECT.

UH, DO WHAT? DO PAINT THE REPAIR SOME WOOD OR SOMETHING.

IF I DON'T DO IT.

YOU TAKE MY HISTORIC, YOU TAKE MY TAX ABATEMENT AWAY FROM ME FOR THAT YEAR UNTIL I CORRECT.

WHY, WHY ISN'T THE CITY GONE TO THESE FOLKS AND SAID, YOU ARE IN VIOLATION.

YOU, YOU NEED TO CORRECT IT.

AND YES, THEY CAN'T CORRECT IT.

BUT THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT THE CITY'S PROBLEM.

MAYBE IT'S, I'M NOT SURE IF THEY'RE GETTING A TAX EXEMPTION.

I CAN CHECK ON THAT FOR YOU AND SEE.

NO, I I KNOW THE PROPERTY GETS A TAX EXEMPTION DOWN THERE.

I MEAN THAT'S, THAT WAS THE WHOLE LOT.

THAT'S THE REASON THAT CAME TO US.

IT'S A HISTORIC PROPERTY AND THEY, THEY DESTROYED PART OF IT.

IT'S THE STANLEY HOUSE.

UM, I THINK IT'S IN THE 1700 BLOCK OF NEWTON STREET.

I KNOW THAT IT'S ON NEWTON AND IT IT, YES, THE, THE AT THE CORNER OF MARY WEST MARY JUST CAUSE OWNERSHIP CHANGE DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING.

I MEAN, IT'S IT'S THE PROPERTY.

I DON'T KNOW.

IT WAS ON YOUTUBE.

YEAH.

I THINK THAT'S HOW THEY FOUND IT.

THEY WERE LAUGHING CUZ THEY, THE DEMOLITION PEOPLE WERE, THERE'S, YOU KNOW, WE, WE ARE SITTING HERE QUESTIONING OUR EXISTENCE.

I I WOULD LIKE A NON EXISTENTIAL ANSWER.

SO.

ALL RIGHT.

UM, SO, UM, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY, I WANNA HIT ALL THE POINTS.

UM, I'M GOING TO ASK LEGAL TO WORK WITH US ON, UM, SOME NONTRADITIONAL AVENUES, UM, FOR ENFORCEMENT SUCH AS LICENSURE, UM, AS WELL AS EPA AND RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL LAW.

IF WE'RE NOT TAKEN SERIOUSLY, I, I SUGGEST A WALKOUT, A STRIKE OR AT THE BEGINNING OF THE NEXT LONG AGENDA.

JUST SAYING.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

DO WE, DID WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ONE? DID WE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION? IS THERE ACTION REQUIRED OF US? THERE'S NO ACTION.

THERE'S NO ACTION.

STAFF WILL RELEASE THE PERMIT ON WHEN IT TIMES OUT ON OCTOBER 17TH.

BUT WE DID NOT APPROVE THE PERMIT.

WE ARE NOT APPROVING THE PERMIT.

WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT GIVING THIS A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.

WE OKAY.

WE DID GIVE HIM THE OPTION THAT THE CONTRACTOR COULD COME

[02:45:01]

AND APPEAR.

THAT WAS ON THE, UM, THE FRISCO, THE NIGHTHAWK? NO, IT IT WAS THIS ONE.

IT WAS THIS ONE.

OH, IT WAS THIS ONE? YEAH.

OKAY.

OKAY.

SORRY.

UH, THE APPLICANT WAS HERE FOR THE FIRST AND SECOND MEETING AND COULD NOT GET THE DEMOLITION CONTRACTOR HERE.

UM, SO WE HAVE ITEM NUMBER 27 45 13

[27. PR-2022-129297 – 4513 Avenue B – Unit 2 – Consent Council District 9]

AVENUE B UNIT TO DO WE HAVE, UH, STAFF PRESENTATION? YES.

UH, OKAY.

COMMISSIONERS.

SO 45 13 AVENUE B.

UH, THIS IS A TOTAL DEMOLITION OF TWO REAR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT CIRCA 1946.

UH, THE PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS INCLUDE TOTAL DEMOLITION OF A CIRCA 19 46, 2 STORY ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT AND TOTAL DEMOLITION OF A REAR SINGLE STORY ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT.

UM, THE PRIMARY HOUSE, THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE PRIMARY HOUSE.

IT WAS BUILT CIRCA 1906 AND IS A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE OF NATIONAL FOLK STYLE.

THE TWO STORY STRUCTURE HAS A CONSTRUCTION DATE.

THE TWO STORY ACCESSORY STRUCTURE HAS A CONSTRUCTION DATE OF 1946 AND HAVE SOME CRAFTSMAN STYLE DETAILS WITH OPEN EVES EXPOSED RAFTER TAILS.

TWO WINDOWS PLACED IN ONE CENTRAL ASSEMBLY AND A HIP ROOF.

THE GROUND LEVEL FACADE HAS BEEN ALTERED FROM ITS ORIGINAL DESIGN.

THIS STRUCTURE MAY HAVE BEEN BUILT TO FUNCTION AS A GARAGE APARTMENT FOR THE PRIMARY HOUSE.

THE SINGLE STORY REAR ACCESSORY UNIT HAS REDUCED INTEGRITY AND A SIGNIFICANCE, UH, REDUCED INTEGRITY AND SIGNIFICANCE DUE TO ALTERATIONS AND LACK OF VISIBILITY FROM THE STREET.

THE PROPERTY EVALUATION IS THAT THE NORTH CENTRAL SURVEY REPORT OF 2020 LISTS THE TWO STORY, TWO STORY REAR PROPERTY AS CONTRIBUTING TO THE POTENTIAL NORTH HYDE PARK LOCAL DISTRICT, BUT NOT ELIGIBLE FOR INDIVIDUAL LISTING ALONE.

THE DESIGNATION CRITERIA IS THAT PROPERTIES MUST MEET TWO CRITERIA FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION AND STAFF HAS EVALUATED THE PROPERTY AND DETERMINED THAT IT DOES NOT MEET TWO CRITERIA.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO STRONGLY ENCOURAGE REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE SPECIFICALLY OF THE TWO STORY ABU THEN RELOCATION OVER DEMOLITION, BUT RELEASE THE PERMIT UPON COMPLETION OF A CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE.

THANK YOU.

MM-HMM.

IS THE APPLICANT HERE.

OKAY.

HELLO.

HI.

PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME.

MY NAME'S JEREMY VINCI.

UM, WE'RE, SO THERE'S TWO THE AUS IN THE BACK AND WE ARE ASKING FOR THE DEMO TO DEMO BOTH OF THEM.

UM, OBVIOUSLY THE SINGLE STORY IS NOT AN ISSUE.

I GUESS THE ISSUE IS A TWO STORY.

UM, ONE PROBLEM WITH REHABILITATION IS THAT THIS STRUCTURE IS ONLY ONE AND A HALF FEET FROM THE, FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.

SO IT'S IN THE FIVE FOOT SETBACK, IT'S ALSO ONLY FIVE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, WHICH IS IN THE 10 FOOT SETBACK.

BUT THE BIG ISSUE IS AUSTIN ENERGY'S 15 FOOT RULE ON THEIR GROUND WIRE.

THERE WOULD BE NO LOGICAL WAY TO CHOP THIS THING UP TO MAKE IT CONFORM TO THOSE STANDARDS.

UM, IT'S ALSO BECAUSE THE WAY THAT IT WAS BUILT, THE FIRST FLOOR, YOU LITERALLY WALK THROUGH THAT, THAT DOOR IN THE FRONT AND YOUR HEAD WILL HIT A BEAN.

SO THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN DO AT THE FIRST FLOOR THAT WOULD CONFORM TO ANY KIND OF BUILDING STANDARDS.

UM, SO WE'RE ASKING FOR, TO DEMO BOTH THESE PROPER, THESE BUILDINGS.

UM, THE OTHER ISSUE IS THESE BUILDINGS ARE, AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE PHOTOS RIGHT UP AGAINST THE BIG, UH, HERITAGE TREE.

AND SO REMOVING THAT BUILD THE SINGLE STORY BUILDING WILL HELP THAT TREE, WHICH I'M SURE THE ARBORIST IS GONNA, WON'T, WILL APPROVE BECAUSE THEY, UH, ALREADY HAD TOLD US THAT THAT'S, UH, HAVING A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THAT TREE.

SO WE'RE JUST ASKING TO DEMO BOTH THESE SO THAT WE CAN BUILD A NEW ADU THAT ACTUALLY FITS WITHIN THE PROPERTY AWAY FROM THE SETBACKS, AWAY FROM THE POWER LINES AND WITHIN THE TREE STRUCTURES.

THAT MAKE SENSE? SO, UM, COMMISSIONER FEATHERSTON, DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THIS APPLICANT? YEAH, SO MY CONCERN IS WITH BOTH ADU, I I LOOK AT THE THINGS THAT SHOW UP ON OUR AGENDA AND LOOK FOR NET NEGATIVE IN HOUSING UNITS AND UH, SEE IF THEY'RE WORTH TALKING ABOUT.

UM, SO THERE'S NO, YOUR REASON FOR REQUESTING THE DEMOLITION OF THESE IS TO MAKE WAY FOR ONE NEW ADU.

THERE'S NO, I MEAN, ALL THE THINGS THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT WITH REGARDS TO THEM BEING NONCONFORMING, NO.

CODE ENFORCEMENT HAS COME AND TALKED TO YOU AND SAID THESE THESE UNITS ARE BEING CONDEMNED AND THEY'RE UNINHABITABLE AT THIS TIME.

IS THAT RIGHT? THE OWNER HAD TO REHABILITATE SOME OF THEM TO BRING THEM UP TO CODE AND HE CAN SPEAK TO THAT.

UM, THE PROBLEM IS THEY'RE JUST TOO LITTLE EFFICIENCIES.

AND SO BY GETTING RID OF THESE LITTLE EFFICIENCIES, WE CAN ACTUALLY BUILD A HOME THAT'S ACTUALLY CAN FIT

[02:50:01]

A FAMILY.

AND IS MY OTHER CONCERN WAS THAT ARE WE, UH, THIS, THIS DOESN'T SOUND GOOD, BUT ARE WE BEING SLOW ROLLED THAT UH, THIS IS PART OF A LARGER PLAN FOR THE LOT THAT MIGHT AFFECT THE, THE FRONT UH, BUILDING? IS THERE ANYTHING GOING ON THERE? THE ONLY PLANS FOR THE FRONT HOUSE ARE TO REMODEL, BUT VERY MINIMAL REMODEL.

OKAY.

WHICH WILL GO THROUGH THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DEPARTMENT.

AND WHEN ARE, ARE ONE OR BOTH OF THE UNITS CURRENTLY OCCUPIED AND IF, IF NOT, WHEN WERE THEY LAST OCCUPIED? I BELIEVE THE OWNER CAN SPEAK TO THAT PIECE HERE.

OKAY.

UM, YEAH, I, I'M PROPONENT OF THE USE OF THE COMMUNITY VALUE, UH, CRITERIA IS WITH REGARDS TO HOUSING.

AND, UM, I JUST WANT THE, THE RECORD TO SHOW THAT THE COMMUNITY VALUE HERE, IT SAID THE PROPERTY DOES NOT POSSESS A UNIQUE LOCATION OF BEING ON AVENUE, BEING HYDE PARK.

UM, BUT IT'S IN THE NEX, IT'S NOT IN PROPER.

SURE.

YEAH.

BUT THEY MADE THAT BOUNDARY, YOU KNOW, THEY CALL THAT JAL PARK COMMISSIONER.

TELL IT WHAT, WHAT'S THE PROPERTY ZONE? IT'S SF THREE AND YOU'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE THREE SEPARATE S THAT'S THE OTHER PROBLEM IS IT WAS GRANDFATHERED IN BECAUSE THOSE WERE BUILT BEFORE THAT DESIGNATION.

SO THIS IS ONE WAY TO, TO REMEDY THAT SITUATION.

OKAY.

NO, I JUST, AND I, YEAH, AND I, AND I DO RECOGNIZE THAT WE HAVE AN INCIDENT, WE HAVE A HOUSING PROBLEM IN THE CITY.

I JUST, I THOUGHT HOW THEY GETTING AWAY WITH THIS BECAUSE THAT'S THREE UNITS ON ONE, ONE PIECE OF PROPERTY.

YEAH.

THE THING, I MEAN, THEY, THEY ARE GETTING AWAY WITH IT.

SO IT'S SORT OF DE FACTO AFFORDABLE HOUSING WE'RE I UNDERSTAND.

NO, AND WE SEE THAT NOT, WE SEE A LOT OF THAT AND WE SEE A LOT OF THAT JUST TAKEN DOWN AND ANYWAY, THE SINGLE STORY STRUCTURE IS NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE ANY KIND OF KITCHEN OR KITCHEN SINK, WHICH DESIGNATED AS A DWELLING UNIT.

SO YOU'RE NOT REALLY, YOU'RE NOT REALLY HELPING THAT SITUATION WHEN YOU CAN'T HAVE A FULL FLEDGED HOUSING UNIT.

IS THAT ACCURATE? IS THE, DOES THE SINGLE STORY STRUCTURE RIGHT NOW NOT HAVE, IT'S CONSIDERED AN, IT'S NOT CONSIDERED AN A TOU, IT'S CONSIDERED AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT.

I MEAN, ACCESSORY DWELLING STRUCTURE, CUZ IT, HE HAD TO RIP OUT A KITCHEN SINK WHEN HE WENT TO GO AND UPDATE IT.

YEAH, I'VE, I'VE SEEN, WELL, I'VE, I'VE SEEN THAT RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER FROM MY HOUSE.

THEY HAVE TO, YEAH.

WHEN THEY PULL, TRY TO PULL A PRINTER.

ANYWAY, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

I, I SEE THAT AS, I THINK I UNDERSTAND THE STORY NOW THAT THAT'S PROBABLY WHAT TRIGGERED THE, UH, YOU KNOW, THE THREE SEPARATE STRUCTURES WAS NO LONGER THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE WHEN ONE OF 'EM DOESN'T HAVE A KITCHEN ANYMORE.

RIGHT.

AND YOU NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH REACHING THAT HIGHS AND BEST USE.

OKAY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

THE NEXT OF THE APPLICANT OWNER PLEASE.

HI, WELCOME.

HI.

UH, YEAH, I'M SEREN VA NET NURI AND I AM THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.

UM, SO YEAH, I MEAN I'VE, I ACTUALLY LIVED IN THE FRONT HOUSE FOR SEVERAL YEARS.

UM, I I LOVE IT.

I LOVE THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD ACTUALLY.

UM, AND UH, SO THEY USED TO BE TWO, UH, THEY USED TO ACTUALLY BE TWO DWELL UNITS, THOSE TWO, THE ONE STORY AND THE, IN THE TWO STORY.

BUT, UH, SOMETIME IN THE MID TWO THOUSANDS BASICALLY, UH, I WAS ASKED TO TAKE THE KITCHEN OUT OF THE ONE STORY UNIT, UH, AND SO IT COULD NO LONGER BE USED AS A DWELLING.

UH, AND I THINK IT'S DESIGNATED AS A STUDIO SPACE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

UM, SO IN FACT, WHAT WOULD WE WOULD ACTUALLY BE IMPROVING UPON THE HOUSING SITUATION BECAUSE THE, UM, EXISTING TWO STORY UNIT IS VERY SMALL.

IT'S ABOUT, I THINK IT'S CALLED LIVING SPACE OF ABOUT 600 SQUARE FEET OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

UH, SO, UM, THE, THE, THE, THE, UM, UNIT THAT WE PLAN TO BUILD WILL ACTUALLY HAVE THREE BEDROOMS AND, AND IT WOULD BE A, A LARGER UNIT.

SO IN FACT, I WOULD CLAIM WE'RE ACTUALLY IMPROVING THE HOUSING SITUATION.

FAIR ENOUGH.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? I'M ONLY GONNA TAKE IT DOWN PATHS THAT ARE NOT THE PURVIEW OF THIS COMMISSION.

OKAY.

SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU GUYS FOR WAITING ALL NIGHT.

THANK YOU SIR.

THANK YOU.

OKAY, MOVE TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.

OKAY.

OKAY.

ALL IN FAVOR OF CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING, SAY AYE.

AYE.

IT PASSES.

IS THERE A MOTION ON THE CASE? YEP.

I, I MOVED TO, UH, ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVE THE, UH, DEMOLITION PERMIT UPON COMPLETION OF THE CITY OF BOSTON DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE, WHICH I THINK HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE.

AND I'LL SECOND THAT.

OKAY.

[02:55:01]

SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GROGAN.

FIRST TIME.

WE'VE HEARD YOU TONIGHT.

OKAY.

ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY I I HAVE, I HAVE ONE.

OH, I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER.

RIGHT? I'M, I'M SORRY.

I FORGET ABOUT YOU GUYS ON THE SCREEN.

I, YES, I'M, I'M HERE BECAUSE I, NOT SURE I CAN STAY AWAKE LONG ENOUGH FOR SOME MEETINGS.

UM, I JUST, I'M, I'M HERE WITH MY 625 SQUARE FOOT APARTMENT AND I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT, THAT SOME OF US LIKE SMALL SPACES, UM, BUT I'M TOTALLY FINE WITH THIS PROJECT.

SO HOW MANY YEARS HAVE YOU BEEN LIVING IN THAT 600 SQUARE FOOT? WHAT, 15, 15 YEARS IS TRUTH TO TONE.

OKAY.

OKAY.

UM, CAN I TAKE THAT, SEE THAT RAISING, RAISE, RAISE HANDS AGAIN.

OKAY.

IT PASSES.

THANK YOU, SIR.

OKAY.

DO WE

[35. 2023 Historic Landmark Commission Meeting Schedule]

HAVE ANY, UH, WE HAVE STAFF DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION.

LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULE? YES.

LET ME PULL IT UP.

AND I BELIEVE EVERYONE HAS A COPY AS WELL.

SO, UM, IT IS THAT TIME OF YEAR TO REVIEW AND, UM, APPROVE HOPEFULLY THE 2023 HISTOR LANDMARK COMMISSION, UH, MEETING SCHEDULE.

SO WE CAN SUBMIT THE SCHEDULE TO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE, UH, WITH A ROOM REQUEST FORM FOR THIS SPACE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

THEY WILL START, UM, DOING ROOM RESERVATIONS FOR CITY HALL, UH, IN MID-NOVEMBER.

BUT IT HAS FIRST COME FIRST SERVED BY SUBMISSION OF THE LIAISON.

SO THE SOONER WE CAN GET THIS TO SIT AT CITY CLERK'S OFFICE, THE BETTER CHANCE WE HAVE OF REMAINING IN THIS SPACE AND GETTING OUR SPOTS AND NOT HAVING TO MOVE THINGS AROUND.

I I SEE THAT THE FIRST MEETING.

UM, OUR MEETING IN JANUARY IS ON THE 11TH.

THAT'S NOT THE FIRST, NO.

SO, UH, WE SHIFTED THAT DATE BECAUSE OTHERWISE IT WOULD BE THE 4TH OF JANUARY, WHICH, UH, DOES NOT LEAVE A LOT OF WIGGLE ROOM FOR PREPARATION, UH, IN THE TWO WEEKS BEFOREHAND FOR STAFF WITH THE HOLIDAYS.

OKAY.

THE INTERNAL DEADLINES FALL ON MY CHRISTMAS DAY, SO IT'S, UH, A LOT OF STAFF IS GONE THAT WEEK BEFORE THE MEETING.

SO IT'S, IT'S INCONVENIENT FOR STAFF AND APPLICANTS.

AND IS THAT A SIMILAR SITUATION IN DECEMBER? YES.

FOR, UH, WITH THANKSGIVING? YES.

OTHERWISE ALL OF THE OTHER, UH, I THINK FEBRUARY THROUGH NOVEMBER.

IT IS THE FIRST WEDNESDAY OF THE MONTH.

OKAY.

ANY DISCUSSION QUESTIONS? YOU MYERS? YES, SIR.

I MOVE, APPROVE THE SCHEDULE IS PROPOSED.

OKAY.

SECOND.

OKAY.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE SCHEDULE AS PROPOSED KNOWING THAT IT WILL PROBABLY CHANGE AT SOME POINT DURING THE YEAR.

.

HOPEFULLY NOT.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY AYE.

THANK YOU.

OKAY.

WE'VE APPROVED THE SCHEDULE.

THANK YOU ALSO MUCH.

AND I'M SORRY, QUICK REMINDER OF OUR DECEMBER MEETING CUZ FOR SOME REASON I DIDN'T WRITE THAT ONE DOWN.

THIS COMING DECEMBER.

OH, THIS UPCOMING DECEMBER, I BELIEVE IS THE 14TH.

IT IS THE 14TH.

THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.

OF COURSE.

OKAY.

COMMITTEE UPDATES.

UH, BEFORE WE MOVE, RIGHT, BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO COMMITTEE UPDATES, I HAVE ONE MORE ANNOUNCEMENT.

I'M SORRY I DIDN'T GET THIS ON THE, THE AGENDA BEFORE.

UM, I HAD A, UH, KIND OF REFRESH WITH THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE.

UM, SO IN FEBRUARY, UH, THE END OF FEBRUARY OF 2023, ABOUT HALF OF YOU, UH, YOUR FIRST OR SECOND TERM WILL BE ENDING.

UM, WE ALSO HAVE A LOT OF ELECTIONS, UH, THE ELECTION COMING UP AND A LOT OF, UH, COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE EITHER RUNNING FOR REELECTION OR THEIR TERM LIMIT IS ALSO UP.

SO I ENCOURAGE ALL OF YOU TO EMAIL YOUR APPOINTING, UH, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, UM, AND TO BE, UH, TO DOUBLE CHECK, UH, YOUR TERM LIMITS, UM, AND ALL OF THAT.

SO I WILL SAY THE, UH, APPOINTMENTS AND THE TERMS LIT, UH, END ON FEBRUARY 28TH.

HOWEVER, PER CODE THERE IS A 60 DAY HOLDOVER, UH, UNTIL NEW APPOINTMENTS ARE MADE TO THE APRIL, THE END OF APRIL.

SO JUST QUICK ANNOUNCEMENT TO BE AWARE OF YOUR TERM LIMITS AND TO EMAIL YOUR, UH, APPOINTING COUNCIL MEMBERS ABOUT THE UPCOMING TRANSITIONS.

AND IF OUR APPOINTING COUNCIL MEMBER IS NOT RETURNING, UH, I ENCOURAGE YOU TO, UM, WHOEVER IS ELECTED IN THEIR PLACE TO, UH, CONTACT THEM, UM, TO KEEP YOUR POSITION .

I HAVE TO SAY,

[03:00:02]

I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST COMMISSIONS THAT I'VE EVER BEEN ASSOCIATED WITH IN MY 14 YEARS ON, ON THE COMMISSION.

AND I REALLY HOPE THAT IF YOU'RE, UH, IF YOU'RE ELECTED OFFICIAL, UH, IS NOT RETURNING, UM, PLEASE REACH OUT TO WHOMEVER TAKES HIS OR HER PLACE AND TELL HIM I SAID SO.

, PLEASE TO YOU, UH, RETAIN YOU ON THE COMMISSION.

SO YOU'LL GIVE US YOUR ENDORSEMENT TO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

I WOULD DEFINITELY GIVE YOU ENDORSEMENT.

AND IN YOUR CASE IN PARTICULAR, COMMISSIONER LAROCHE, I HAVE BEEN VERY GRATEFUL TO HAVE AN ENGINEER OF YOUR CALIBER AND CONVICTION ON THE COMMISSION, UH, TO COUNTERACT THE MANY ARCH, UH, ENGINEERING REPORTS THAT ALWAYS SAY, UH, IT'S A GONER.

SO.

WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHAIR MYERS.

IT'S VERY FLATTERING.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

I MAY WANT SOMETHING FROM YOU IN THE FUTURE.

OKAY.

[36. Architectural Review Committee – Updates from previous meeting]

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE.

I NOTED TONIGHT WE HAD THESE ITEMS ON OUR AGENDA 800 EDGE CLIFF.

NOW THAT WAS POSTPONED, BUT WE HAD ONE 15 EAST FIFTH, THE HIREMAN BUILDING, 4 0 4 ATLANTA, THE AMERICAN REGION BUILDING, THE MUELLER TOWER 6 0 9 BAYLOR AND 1618 PALM PLAZA.

ALL OF THEM WENT TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AND WERE APPROVED ON CONSENT, I MEAN, TO THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AND WERE APPROVED ON CONSENT.

I THINK THIS IS LARGELY DUE TO COMMISSIONER COOK'S INVOLVEMENT ON THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE.

AND I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE TO STAY AND DISCUSS ALL THOSE ITEMS BECAUSE THINGS WERE WORKED OUT ON THE, AT THE COMMITTEE LEVEL.

SO THAT'S ALL.

THANKS.

I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE ON THAT COMMITTEE.

, YOU'RE NOT THE ONLY ONE ON THE COMMITTEE, BUT BETH HASN'T BEEN THERE IN A WHILE.

BUT, BUT ANYWAY, I THINK THE COMMITTEE, WE, WE, WE SPENT MORE TIME IN THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE LAST TIME THAN WE DID IN THE LAST LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETING.

NOW WE KNOW THE LAST LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETING WAS AN EXCEPTION, BUT NEVERTHELESS, WE HAVE SPENT UPWARDS OF FIVE AND SIX HOURS AT THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE BEFORE AND TYPICALLY SPEND FOUR HOURS.

SO OPERATIONS COMMISSION COMMITTEE, UH, OOPS, I APOLOGIZE, UH, FOR THE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE AND THE GRANTS COMMITTEE, I KNOW I SAID I WOULD GET A SURVEY OUT TO YOU COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABOUT, UM, GETTING A MEETING SCHEDULED, BUT THINGS HAVE JUST BEEN REALLY BUSY.

I WENT ON VACATION, YOU KNOW, .

SO, UM, I WILL HAVE A SURVEY OUT TO YOU BEFORE THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING, I PROMISE ABOUT MEETING BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR, HOPEFULLY.

I MEAN, IT WAS SIMILAR TO THE LAST TIME WE HAD AN OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING, WHICH IS GOING ON THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO NOW.

BUT THE, THE THING WE TALKED ABOUT WAS VERY MUCH ENFORCEMENT AND OBVIOUSLY THAT CAME UP THIS EVENING AGAIN, AND I THINK THAT COULD BE ANOTHER GOOD TOPIC IF YOU GUYS GET IN TOUCH WITH LEGAL THAT THEY COULD COME AND TALK TO US AT AN OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING.

YEAH.

UH, I DO ALREADY HAVE OUR, UM, LEGAL LIAISON, UH, SCHEDULE NOT SCHEDULED, BUT SHE SAID SHE WOULD PRESENT, UM, STANDARD MOTIONS THAT SHE WASN'T ABLE TO AT THE TRAINING.

SHE WOULD PRESENT THE STANDARD TRAININGS PRESENTATION AT THE NEXT OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING, UH, ONCE SCHEDULED, AND THEN WE CAN TACK ON, UM, LEGALITY AND ALL, LIKE REGULATE ALL OF THAT STUFF ON IT AS WELL.

COOL.

THANK YOU.

AND BEN, AND SIGN GUIDELINES.

SORRY, FROM, FROM CALLEN.

BEN, CAN YOU GIVE A REPORT ON THE PRESERVATION

[39. Preservation Plan Committee – Updates from previous meeting.]

PLAN COMMITTEE? WELL, UH, ACTUALLY I, I THINK I MAY HAVE MISSED, UH, HARMONY, WERE YOU AT IN, IN THE MEETING THAT I MISSED? WE DIDN'T HAVE NECESSARILY COMMITTEE MEETING.

UM, SO I THINK WE'RE WAITING FOR THAT TO BE SCHEDULED IN OCTOBER.

UM, YOU MIGHT BE TALKING SCHEDULE ABOUT THE MEETING THAT WE HAD TO CANCEL DUE TO LACK OF QUORUM, AND I SO APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND BECAUSE I HAD STEPPED DOWN FROM THE PRESERVATION PLAN COMMITTEE.

I WASN'T READING EMAIL ADDRESS TO THE PRESERVATION PLAN COMMITTEE, AND I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT THAT, UH, WAS FOR ALL OF COMMISSION MEMBERS TO ATTEND.

AND I'M, I'M SO SORRY AND APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

SO.

WELL, AND I HAD A CONFLICT ON THOSE DAYS THOUGH.

I DO HAVE, WE DO HAVE THE MEETING ON THE 18TH AND, UH, ABSOLUTELY WE'RE THRILLED,

[03:05:01]

UH, THAT THE FUNDING WAS APPROVED TO GO FORWARD WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PRESERVATION PLAN, UH, OUTREACH PROGRAM.

AND, UH, WE'LL BE VERY BUSY.

UH, WE'VE GOT A, A FULL YEAR AHEAD OF US.

I THINK, UH, THAT'S THE END OF OUR AGENDA.

WE HAVE NO FUTURE ITEMS AND I WOULD, UH, ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I I, WELL, BEFORE I, I WANTED TO REMIND THE COMMISSION THAT THE, UH, IT GOES TO COUNCIL 2002, SCENIC GOES TO COUNCIL THIS MONTH OF 27TH, I BELIEVE.

AND IT, IT LOOKS GRIM.

UH, THE RACE CARD IS ON THE TABLE AND, UH, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT JUSTIFIED, UH, IT'S ON THE TABLE.

AND SO IT'S, IT'S A, YOU KNOW, ANYWAY, IF, IF, IF FOLKS COULD CONTACT THEIR, THEIR PEOPLE THAT HAVE APPOINTED THEM, IF IT MEANS IF THIS SAVING THIS PROPERTY OR SAVING HISTORIC PROPERTIES IN THE CITY IS IMPORTANT, UH, WE, WE GAVE IT A, A UNANIMOUS VOTE, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION WAS SIX THREE.

AND IT WAS SPECIFIC, ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS AGAINST IT SAID IT'S IS THE, THE RACE CARD THAT WAS PLAYED BY THE APPLICANTS OF REPRESENTATIVE IS WHAT TILTED, TILTED IN HIS FAVOR.

SO ANYWAY, I, UM, I CONCUR IN MY MANY EONS HERE.

I HAVE NEVER GONE TO CITY COUNCIL IN SUPPORT OF A LANDMARK COMMISSION DECISION TO, UM, ON ANYTHING ACTUALLY.

BUT I WILL ATTEND THIS MEETING.

WELL, IT, I, IT'S AN IMPORTANT PROPERTY AND IT'S JUST, IT'S, IT'S REFLECTIVE OF HOW MUCH THE HISTORIC FABRIC OF THE CITY, OUR CITY, EAST SIDE, WEST SIDE, DOESN'T MATTER WHAT SIDE THIS IS, THE HISTORIC FABRIC IS UNRAVELING.

AND IF THERE'S NOT SOMETHING THAT AT LEAST PUT A TAP ON THE BRAKES, I MEAN, ANYWAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

OKAY.

AND WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN.

OKAY.

SECONDS.

THAT'S THE EASY ONE.

OKAY.

ALL IN FAVOR OF ADJOURNING EVERYBODY.

WE'RE ADJOURNED.

THANK YOU.

BEFORE YOU LEAVE, I DID WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE STAFF TOO.

UM, WE'RE GETTING REALLY GOOD, UH, STAFF REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.

AND AMBER, YOU'RE DOING A BANGUP JOB.

THANK YOU.

I REALLY LIKE THE SUMMARY, UH, OF ITEMS, SHEETS, UM, THAT COME OUT.

YEAH.

IT'S EASIER THAN FLIPPING THROUGH LIKE EIGHT PAGES OF IT CERTAINLY IS, AND I ONLY MADE ONE MISTAKE ON IT TONIGHT ON AVENUE B.

SO THAT WAS OUR LAST CASE.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

WE SEE YOU NEXT TIME.

UM, AND DON'T TELL MY NO, BUT.