[00:00:02]
[CALL TO ORDER ]
EVERYONE.UM, LET ME CALL TO ORDER THIS, UH, WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 6TH MEETING OF THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION.
UH, WE ARE AT CITY HALL, AND IN ORDER TO PROCEED, I WILL ASK, UH, MS. CONTRERAS TO, UH, CALL THE ROLL.
PRESENT VICE CHAIR ROXANNE EVANS, PRESENT, COMMISSIONER JEFFREY ACTON PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER HARRISON FRIGHT, UH, IS ON HIS WAY, I THINK.
COMMISSIONER KEVIN COOK, PRESENT COMMISSIONER JUDA RICE.
UH, WE'LL COME BACK TO COMMISSIONER RICE AS HE'S VIRTUAL COMMISSIONER.
COMMISSIONER CARLA ROCHE PRESENT, COMMISSIONER JAIME ALVAREZ.
COMMISSIONER PATAGUCCI IS ABSENT, AND COMMISSIONER TREY HORTER IS ALSO ABSENT.
AND COMMISSIONER RICE, UH, WHEN YOU GET A CHANCE, UH, PLEASE COME ONTO, UH, YOUR SCREEN AND SIGNIFY YOUR PRESENCE.
[Consent Agenda]
A REVIEW OF TONIGHT'S AGENDA.UH, OUR FIRST ITEM TONIGHT IS NUMBER ONE, UH, THE JULY 2ND, 2025 MINUTES, WHICH ARE OFFERED TONIGHT FOR CONSENT.
THEN IN OUR HISTORIC ZONING APPLICATIONS, WE HAVE ITEM TWO C 14 H 20 25 0 0 2 2 AT 1701 SAN GABRIEL STREET.
THIS WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.
ITEM THREE, PR 20 25 0 400 1615 AT 6 0 7 EAST 38TH STREET.
THIS IS A DISCUSSION ITEM AND ITEM FOUR C 14 H 20 25 0 0 7 7 AT 200 NORTH IH 35 SOUTHBOUND SERVICE ROAD, WHICH WILL ALSO BE A DISCUSSION.
OUR CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS TONIGHT, UH, INCLUDE ITEM FIVE, HR 20 25 0 3 6 2 2 0 AT 5 0 6 BARTON BOULEVARD, ITEM SIX, HR 20 25 0 8 6 1 4 7 AT 200 NORTH IH 35 SERVICE ROAD, SOUTHBOUND ITEM SEVEN, HR 20 25 1 8 0 8 5 2 1 1 AT 1201 EAST SEVENTH STREET, ITEM EIGHT, HR 20 25 0 8 5 8 2 2 AT 7 1 3 CONGRESS AVENUE, ITEM NINE, HR 20 25 0 8 5 7 7 4 AT 5 0 7 EAST 10TH STREET, ITEM 10, HR 20 25 0 8 2 0 4 3 AT 1501 EAST 12TH STREET.
AND ITEM 11, HR 20 25 0 7 0 3 3 6 AT TWO GREEN LANES.
THESE ITEMS ARE ALL OFFERED FOR CONSENT THIS EVENING.
UNDER NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICT APPLICATIONS, WE HAVE ITEM 12, SB 2 25 0 8 5 180 8 AT 6 0 9 CONGRESS AVENUE.
THIS ITEM IS OFFERED FOR DISCUSSION ITEM 13, PR 20 25 0 6 1 4 5 0 AT 1210 WEST 12TH STREET.
THIS ITEM IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT.
ITEM 14, HR 20 24, 1 2 3 0 6 AT 1003 GRAY STREET HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT AND NO ACTION IS NECESSARY THIS EVENING.
ITEM 15, HR 20 25 0 5 6 3 4 4 WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.
ITEM 16, HR 2 25 0 7 5 2 8 3 AT 7 0 5 BROWNLEY CIRCLE WILL ALSO BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.
ITEM 17, HR 20 25 0 8 4 1 9 9 AT 1804 ALT VISTA AVENUE IS OFFERED FOR CONSENT, UH, IN OUR DEMOLITION AND RELOCATION APPLICATIONS.
WE HAVE ITEM 18, PR 20 25 83, 7 70 AT 29 0 1 DELTO ROAD.
THIS WILL BE A DISCUSSION ITEM.
AND FINALLY, UNDER DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS, UH, AFTER OUR COMMITTEE REPORTS, WE HAVE ITEM 23, UH, WHICH IS, IS A DISCUSSION ON NOMINATIONS, UM, AND APPROVAL OF A MEMBER TO REPRESENT THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION ON THE DOWNTOWN COMMISSION, WHICH YOU MAY REMEMBER WE HAVE ALREADY DONE, AND IT WAS COMMISSIONER LAROCHE.
UH, BUT WE WILL DO IT AGAIN, UH, NOW THAT HE IS, UM, NOT IN A HOLDOVER POSITION, BUT HE'S BEEN REAPPOINTED.
SO, UM, THAT WILL BE A POINT OF ORDER FOR NUMBER 23.
AND THAT CONCLUDES THE READING OF THE AGENDA.
UM, CHAIR, IF YOU'D LIKE TO CONFIRM, UH, THE ITEM NUMBERS FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, UH, WE ALWAYS HAVE THE PREROGATIVE TO PULL ANY ITEM THAT IS POSTED, UH, RECOMMENDED FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA.
ARE THERE ANY ITEMS COMMISSIONERS WOULD LIKE TO PULL AT THIS TIME? I'LL REVIEW THE ITEMS THAT WE HAVE LISTED FOR CONSENT, AND THEN STAFF WILL ALSO REVIEW THE POSSIBILITY OF HAVING SPEAKERS, UH, ON THESE ITEMS, EVEN THOUGH THESE WILL NOT BE FULL
[00:05:01]
DISCUSSIONS.SO, WHAT I CURRENTLY HAVE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA IS ITEM NUMBER ONE, AND THEN ON, WHICH IS THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
UH, UNDER HISTORIC ZONING APPLICATIONS, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY ON THE CONSENT FOR OUR HISTORIC, UH, DISTRICTS AND HISTORIC LANDMARKS.
WE HAVE ITEM NUMBER FIVE, ITEM NUMBER SIX, NUMBER SEVEN, EIGHT, ITEM NUMBER NINE, 10, AND ITEM NUMBER 11.
AND COMMISSIONERS, UH, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.
I REALLY RECOMMEND THAT YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE BACKUP ON THESE ITEMS. UH, THESE MAJORITY OF THEM ARE PART OF THE, UH, GRANT PROJECT, AND THERE'S SOME EXTREMELY WORTHY PROJECTS, UH, WITH SOME REALLY GREAT BACKUP.
BUT AS A CONSENT ITEM, WE WON'T NEED TO SEE THE FULL PRESENTATION TONIGHT FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT.
UH, PERMITS, WE HAVE, UH, CONSENT ITEM NUMBER 17, AND THEN, UH, WITH DEMOLITION RELOCATION PERMIT APPLICATIONS.
UH, THERE, THERE ARE NO CONSENT ITEMS. OUR COMMITTEE UPDATES OR REPORTS, SO THAT WILL NOT BE A CONSENT ITEM.
UH, HOWEVER, THE ITEM NUMBER 23, WHICH WAS POSTED ON OUR ADDENDUM, WE CAN TAKE THAT AS A CONSENT ITEM.
IS THERE ANY QUESTION? COMMISSIONERS? ITEM 13? DID I MISS 13? NO, I HAVE 13 AS, UH, OKAY.
I, I DID NOT HAVE THAT CORRECT.
THAT IS LISTED ALSO AS A CONSENT.
ALRIGHT, STAFF, WE MAY HAVE SOME SPEAKERS.
UH, WOULD YOU WANT TO REVIEW THOSE? YES.
SO, UH, WE HAVE A SPEAKER FOR ITEM NUMBER 5 5 0 6 BAREN BOULEVARD, UH, VICTORIA, UH, PONTI, HANG ON JUST A SECOND.
UM, I JUST WANT TO ANNOUNCE THAT, UH, PROCEDURE REQUIRES THAT EVERYBODY WHO'S SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, UM, NEEDS TO BE CALLED, UM, HOWEVER YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED TO SPEAK, UM, FOR THESE ITEMS TO REMAIN ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
UM, AND YOU ARE ABLE TO WAIVE, UM, YOUR WISH TO SPEAK IF NEEDED, UM, FOR THESE JUST, UH, INDICATE TO THE CHAIR AND AS A FURTHER POINT OF ORDER AS IT'S ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
AND IF, AS WE MAKE OUR VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, EVERYTHING PASSES, YOUR ITEM WILL PASS, AND WE CAN GO ON AND SPEND OUR TIME ON ITEMS THAT NEED LONGER DISCUSSION.
SO WE WOULD VERY MUCH ENCOURAGE PEOPLE, UNLESS THERE IS A VERY REAL REASON YOU NEED TO ADD TO THE CONVERSATION TO, UM, TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN WE CALL YOUR NAME.
AND, UH, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO, UM, MS. WAGNER AND GIVE HER A BIG THANK YOU BECAUSE SHE'S FILLING IN TONIGHT, UM, FOR OUR STAFF LIAISON, UM, LIKE I SAID, UM, ITEM NUMBER FIVE, UH, 5 0 6 BARTON BOULEVARD.
UH, MS. VICTORIA, PLAINTIFF SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK? OKAY, THAT'S, WAIT.
ITEM NUMBER SIX, UH, 200 NORTH I 35.
UH, SERVICE ROAD SOUTHBOUND, UH, WE HAVE, UH, PAUL BOOKS AND NO.
ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, UH, 7 1 3 CONGRESS AVENUE.
UH, JONATHAN HUMPHREY, DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK? THIS IS JONATHAN HUMPHREY.
I AM IN SUPPORT OF THIS, UH, PROJECT.
I JUST, I, I FIND IT TO SPEAK, BUT, UM, I'M REPRESENTING THIS PROJECT AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IF ANY QUESTIONS WERE HAD, THEY WERE ANSWERED.
SO IF THERE ARE ANY COLLECTIONS, AS AS IT IS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AND HAS NOT BEEN PULLED, THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS.
SO APPRECIATE YOUR AVAILABILITY.
ITEM NUMBER 9, 5 0 7 EAST 10TH STREET AT JEFFREY.
IS MR. WAIT ONLINE? AND DOES HE WISH TO SPEAK? MR. WAIT, IF YOU CAN PRESS, UH, STAR SIX AND YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED TO SPEAK.
UM, ITEM NUMBER 10 15 0 1 EAST 12TH STREET.
UH, WE HAVE TWO SPEAKERS, UH, BRIAN KITE AND, UH, JACK ANO.
[00:10:02]
HI, THIS IS JACK.ITEM NUMBER, UH, 17, UM, 1804 ALTA VISTA AVENUE.
AND DOES THAT CONCLUDE THE LIST? YES, THAT CONCLUDES THE LIST.
WITH THAT, COMMISSIONERS, UH, YOU HEARD THE LIST OF THOSE ITEMS ON CONSENT.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? YES, COMMISSIONER LAROCHE.
I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
ALRIGHT, IS THERE A SECOND CHAIR? CAN WE, UH, YES, ASK THAT YOU PLEASE RECOGNIZE COMMISSIONER UPRIGHT AND COMMISSIONER RICE BECAUSE THEY ARE BOTH NOW ON THE DIOCESE BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE.
COMMISSIONER UPRIGHT, WELCOME.
AND COMMISSIONER RICE, UH, WHO IS ON THE MONITOR? YES, I'M, I'M VIRTUAL.
I, UH, ON MY PARA TRIP TO THE WIFI WRITER, SO I'M HERE NOW,
UH, SO IS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION? ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONER ACTON, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.
UH, PLEASE INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND AND I SEE ALL HANDS RAISED.
UH, I DO NOT BELIEVE WE HAVE POSTPONEMENTS, IS THAT CORRECT? NO.
[2. C14H-2025-0022 – 1701 San Gabriel St. Stedman-Graves House Council District 9]
FIRST CASE.UH, THIS IS A, UH, ZONING CASE, HISTORIC ZONING CASE, UM, CHANGING THE HISTORIC ZONING AT 1701 SAN GABRIEL STREET FROM SF THREE TO SF THREE H UH, ON THE BASIS OF, UH, ARCHITECTURE AND HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS.
UM, THE HOME AT 1701 SAN GABRIEL IN THE JUDGE HILL NEIGHBORHOOD OF AUSTIN WAS DESIGNED BY PROMINENT ARCHITECT EDWIN KAY, UH, AL IN THE CO COLONIAL GEORGIAN REVIVAL STYLE FOR JUDGE IRELAND GRAVES AND HIS WIFE MARY STEADMAN GRAVES IN 1927.
THE HOME FEATURE SEVERAL HALLMARKS OF THIS STYLE, INCLUDING A GABLE ROOF RECTANGULAR PLAN, THREE PROMINENT DORMERS ON THE FRONT ELEVATION, CLASSICAL FRONT PORCH AND BRICK EXTERIOR WALLS.
FURTHER INFORMATION ABOUT THE ARCHITECT, UH, EDWARD CLINTON, UH, AL IS PROVIDED IN THE APPLICATION NARRATIVE.
CHRYSLER DESIGNED MORE THAN 1000 AUSTIN RESIDE RESIDENCES AND NUMEROUS STORES, CHURCHES, SCHOOLS, INCLUDING FULMAR, JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL, AND PUBLIC BUILDINGS, WHOSE CHARACTER MATCHED THE NEIGHBORHOODS THEY SERVED.
CHRYSLER WAS CO ARCHITECT OF, UH, KUH AND, UH, BROOKS FOR ONE OF THE FIRST FEDERALLY FUNDED PUBLIC HOUSING PROJECTS IN THE UNITED STATES.
USA PUBLIC HOUSING PROJECT NUMBER ONE, THE 18 OR 1938 TO 1939 CHALMERS COURTS IN EAST AUSTIN.
CHRYSLER ALSO DESIGNED 15 FIRE STATIONS, INCLUDING AT THE 1938 STREAMLINED MODERN STYLE AUSTIN FIRE STATION, NUMBER ONE, AS PART OF THE FEDERAL PUB, FEDERAL PUBLIC PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION, AND THE 1932 UT CAMPUS STATION NEAR MLK AND, UM, NACHOS.
CHRYSLER'S FEATURES IS ONE OF THE, UH, NOTABLE ARCHITECTS IN TEXAS IN 1940 IN TEXAS ARCHITECTURE.
UH, AND IN A 1986 PUBLICATION, UH, AUSTIN, ITS ARCHITECTS AND ARCHITECTURE, HE IS LISTED AMONG DISTINGUISHED ARCHITECTS IN THE, UH, THE DISTINGUISHED ARCHITECTS IN AUSTIN'S HISTORY.
GRAVES WAS A LECTURER AT THE UT LAW SCHOOL IN THE LATE TEENS AND TWENTIES.
HIS PORTRAIT HANGS IN THE, UH, FACULTY RESEARCH ROOM AT THE LAW SCHOOL IN 1946, IRELAND GRAVES FOUNDED THE GRAVES, UH, DOUGHERTY LAW FIRM WITH HIS SON-IN-LAW, ROBERT HENDERSON, DOUGHERTY II, WHO ALSO LIVED AT THE ADDRESS.
DOUGHERTY WAS INVOLVED IN A NUMBER OF IMPORTANT CASES OVER THE YEARS, MOST NOTABLY THE TIDELANDS CASE, A LEGAL BATTLE BETWEEN THE STATE OF TEXAS AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OVER RIGHTS TO OFFSHORE OIL.
MARY STEADMAN GRAVES WAS BORN IN FORT WORTH AND GREW UP IN PALESTINE, TEXAS.
SHE ATTENDED HOLLINS COLLEGE IN ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, AND GRADUATED FROM UT IN 1907.
SHE WAS AN ORGANIZER AND CHARTER MEMBER OF THE AUSTIN BRANCH OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY WOMEN, A MEMBER OF THE COLONIAL DAMES, A CHARTER MEMBER OF OPEN FORUM, AND MEMBER OF, UH, AUSTIN'S WOMEN, AUSTIN WOMEN'S CLUB, HERITAGE CLUB OF AUSTIN, AND SEVERAL OTHER, UH, UH, UM, CIVIC ORGANIZATIONS.
UM, THEREFORE, WITH THIS CRITERIA, UM, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE FROM FAMILY RESIDENTS SF THREE TO FAMILY RESIDENTS HISTORIC COMBINING DISTRICT SF THREE H ZONING ON THE BASIS OF ARCHITECTURE AND HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS.
THAT CONCLUDES THE STAFF REPORT.
UH, COMMERS, ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? ALRIGHT, IS THE APPLICANT HERE, WOULD YOU PLEASE COME AND LET US INTRODUCE YOURSELF PLEASE? UH, HELLO EVERYONE.
I'M ONE OF THE ARCHITECTS THAT WORKED ON RESTORING
[00:15:01]
AND THE ADDITION TO THIS PROJECT.AND WOULD YOU WANT TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS, UH, REQUEST? SURE, UH, ABSOLUTELY I WOULD.
UM, I'D ALSO JUST LIKE TO ADD, UH, THOSE ARE ALL THE POINTS I WAS HOPING THAT WOULD BE
UM, WE ALSO JUST TOOK AS MUCH CARE AS POSSIBLE TO PRESERVE AND RESTORE ALL THE FEATURES OF THIS HOME, THE EXTERIOR OF THE HOME IN PARTICULAR, UH, THE STYLE THAT IT REPRESENTS.
WE FELT VERY STRONGLY THAT THAT NEEDED TO BE PRESERVED AND ACTUALLY UPDATED, UM, ALL WINDOWS AND DOORS THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN REPLACED, REPLACED WITH STYLE TO ADHERE TO WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE.
UM, ALL THE ORIGINAL OPENINGS WERE KEPT IN LARGELY THEIR EXISTING LOCATION MATERIALS WERE RECLAIMED, UH, AND RESTORED.
AND IT'S JUST, UH, IT'S JUST OUR WANT AND NEED, UH, FOR, FOR THESE OLD HOMES TO BE TAKEN CARE OF AND PRESERVED, UH, TO, TO KEEP CHARACTER, THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN AUSTIN.
COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS? I I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION THAT YOU ACTUALLY MAY BE THE RIGHT ONE TO ADDRESS.
UH, DO YOU HAVE ANY INDICATION ABOUT WHEN THE MASONRY WAS PAINTED? AS FAR AS WE KNOW, UH, THE OLDEST PICTURES WE HAVE AT THE HOME, IT WAS PAINTED, UH, IT WAS MORE OF A CREAM COLOR.
UH, PHOTOS BEFORE THAT WERE BLACK AND WHITE AND NOT CLEAR.
UM, IT'S BEEN SINCE REPAINTED, UH, GIVEN THE RENOVATION IN THE, IN THE 2022 TIMEFRAME.
SO YOU, YOU DON'T HAVE ANY EVIDENCE OF WHAT WELL, OTHER THAN SCRAPING BACK TO THE ORIGINAL BRICK, BUT IT WOULD, IT WOULD'VE BEEN A PRETTY EARLY TIMEFRAME WHEN THEY MADE THAT DECISION? AS FAR AS WE KNOW, YES.
NOT, DON'T HAVE A DEFINITIVE TIME FOR YOU THOUGH.
IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, IS THERE ANOTHER SPEAKER HERE IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICATION? YES, WE HAVE, UH, SOMEONE ELSE.
IS THERE ANY, ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN FAVOR? NO.
IS THERE ANYBODY HERE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? ALRIGHT, WE HAVE NONE.
ALL RIGHT THEN, UH, COMMISSIONERS, UH, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
COMMISSIONER ATKIN, IS THERE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER ROCHE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND.
AND I SEE AGAIN, ALL HANDS RAISED IS UNANIMOUS.
I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THIS ITEM.
IF NOTHING ELSE TO START THE DISCUSSION, I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION BASED ON ARCHITECTURE AND HISTORIC ASSOCIATIONS.
AND MOTION BY COMMISSIONER COOK.
UH, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER, UH, LAROCHE, UH, COMMISSIONER COOK.
I THINK THE APPLICATION SPEAKS FOR ITSELF.
IT'S A GREAT STRUCTURE, CENTRAL AUSTIN.
IT'S A GREAT HISTORY AND I GOT TO TOUR IT ON THE RECENT HOMES TOUR.
SO, UH, I HEAR THE INSIDE'S PRETTY SPECTACULAR TOO.
AND, UM, A STRUCTURE OF THIS SIZE TAKES QUITE A BIT OF UPKEEP, SO, UH, I THINK IT'S JUSTIFIED TO, TO LAND, MARKET AND GET THE TAX ABATEMENTS.
COMMISSIONER ROCHE? NO, I, UH, IN THESE MATTERS, I, I THINK IT'S CERTAINLY JUSTIFIED.
I BELIEVE THE APPLICATION DOES SPEAK FOR ITSELF AND, UM, FURTHER CONVINCED AFTER HEARING COMMISSIONER COOK'S REMARKS.
IS THERE FURTHER DISCUSSION? UH, I, I AM VERY IMPRESSED WITH THE HOUSE AS IT'S BEEN PRESENTED, AND IT ALSO REMINDS ME THAT YOU CAN DO A LOT WITH AN OLD HOUSE THAT IS NOT HISTORICALLY APPROPRIATE.
AND WE'VE SEEN PROJECTS THAT COME TO US AND, UH, PEOPLE WANNA DO A LOT OF THINGS THAT MAY BE APPROPRIATE IN OTHER LOCATIONS, BUT NOT IF IT'S A LANDMARK.
AND THE AMOUNT OF EFFORT, THE AMOUNT OF INVESTMENT IN BEING CONSISTENT WITH AND TRUE TO THE HISTORY OF THIS HOUSE IS REALLY WHAT WE'RE ALL ABOUT.
AND THE FACT THAT THEY IN COMPLETING THIS DID SO BEFORE THEIR DESIGNATION DOESN'T LESSEN THE SIGNIFICANCE.
BUT IT DOES REMIND US THAT IF THIS PASSES AND IF THE COUNCIL APPROVES ALL FUTURE WORK WILL ALWAYS ADHERE TO HISTORIC STANDARDS.
SO IF, YOU KNOW THEY WANNA PUT A BIG PLASTIC, UH, ADDITION IN THE FRONT, UH, WE'D HAVE TO APPROVE IT BEFORE THAT COULD BE DONE.
YOUR OWNERS OBVIOUSLY ARE VERY AWARE OF THAT AND COULD PROBABLY FOUGHT THROUGH ALL THEIR OPTIONS, BUT I DO SAY,
[00:20:01]
UH, CONGRATULATIONS IN PRESENTING A VERY FINE PROJECT AND ONE THAT'S CERTAINLY WORTHY OF, UH, ATTENTION.SO, AND IT LOOKS LIKE YOU WANT TO ADD SOMETHING TO THIS, SO I'LL ASK A QUESTION.
AND WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD? I JUST WANTED TO THANK YOU, UH, THAT, THAT MEANS A LOT, UH, AS AN ARCHITECT, THAT'S WHAT WE LIKE TO HEAR, SO IT'S MUCH APPRECIATED.
ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONERS, UH, I UNDERSTOOD THAT WE HAVE, UH, NO MORE DISCUSSION.
WE HAVE A MOTION, UH, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC.
WELL, WE'VE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING ALREADY, SO IF THIS WOULD BE THEN TO, UH, APPROVE THE, UH, APPLICATION REQUEST.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND.
AND THERE AGAIN, I SEE ALL HANDS RAISED, SO IT IS UNANIMOUS.
CONGRATULATIONS, AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
[3. PR-2025-041615 – 607 E. 38th St. Council District 9]
THREE IS 6 0 7 EAST 38TH STREET.THIS IS A COMMISSION INITIATED, UH, HISTORIC ZONING FOR, UM, 6 0 7 EAST 38TH STREET, UM, CHANGING TO CHANGE THE ZONING FROM SF DASH THREE DASH CO DASH NP TO SF DASH THREE DASH H DASH CO DASH NP.
UM, ORIGINALLY ON, ON THE, UH, THE, THE QUALIFICATIONS BEING ARCHITECTURE AND HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS, UM, THE, UH, ORIGINALLY BUILT AS A SIDE-BY-SIDE DUPLEX IN THE HANCOCK NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE PROPERTY AT 6 0 7 EAST 38TH STREET IS ONE OF THE LAST REMAINING AND MOST INTACT EXAMPLES OF THIS TYPOLOGY.
IN THIS PART OF THE CITY, IT FEATURES WOOD FRAME CONSTRUCTION CLAD WITH LAP TEARDROP SIDING WITH A NARROW PROFILE.
WHILE MANY EARLIER PROPERTIES IN HANCOCK, AS WELL AS SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS SUCH AS HYDE PARK WERE SUBDIVIDED TO HOUSE ADDITIONAL TENANTS DURING THE GREAT DEPRESSION.
THIS HOUSE IS PURPOSE BUILT FOR TWO UNITS.
THIS IS, UH, VISUALLY APPARENT BY THE TWO EQUALLY SIZED AND PROMINENT FRONT DOORS AT THE CORNERS OF THE BU OF THE BUILDING, EACH COVERED WITH A MAZDA GABLE OVER THEIR RESPECTIVE ENTRIES.
THE HOUSE IS ELEVATED SLIGHTLY ABOVE GRADE, UH, ON P BY PIER AND BEAM CONSTRUCTION WITH ENTRYWAYS ACCESSED BY SMALL CONCRETE STAIRS THAT ARE PARALLEL TO THE STREET AND LEAD TO A SINGLE CENTERED WALKWAY.
SOME ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS SUCH AS THE EXPOSED RAFTER TAILS AND THE GABLES, UH, BARE SOME RESEMBLANCE TO HOUSES BUILT BY THE CHU UH, LUMBER COMPANY IN AUSTIN.
THESE HOUSES WERE POPULAR IN THE EARLY DECADES OF THE 20TH CENTURY AND WERE A COST EFFECTIVE OPTION FOR BUILDING HOMES ON RECENTLY PLATTERED OR DEVELOPED PROPERTIES.
AND THERE ARE SOME SURVIVING EXAMPLES OF THESE BUILDINGS NEARBY IN HYDE PARK IN NORTH CAMPUS.
IT'S UNKNOWN AT THIS TIME WHERE THE DUPLEX AT 6 0 7 EAST 38TH STREET WAS BUILT BY AND OF KASHI LUMBER, OR IF IT WAS SIMPLY MADE FROM SIMILAR CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS AT PRACTICES PREVALENT AT THE TIME.
NO KNOWN EXAMPLES WERE FOUND OF A CAL SHOE HOUSE MATCHING THE LAYOUT OF THIS PROPERTY WITH TWO FRONT ENTRYWAYS AND MODEST GABLES.
HOWEVER, THE BUILDING DOES RETAIN EXCELLENT IF WEATHERED INTO INTEGRITY OF ITS ORIGINAL MATERIAL AND CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES OF THE ERA.
AS MENTIONED, THE BUILDING, UH, WAS, UH, WAS CONSTRUCTED A, UH, AS A SIDE-BY-SIDE DUPLEX.
AND AFTER A BRIEF PERIOD OF BEING OWNER OCCUPIED, THE HOUSE WAS OCCUPIED BY RENTERS FOR AT LEAST THE NEXT 30 YEARS WITH INTERMITTENT PERIODS OF BEING VACANT.
ON ONE OF THE TWO SIDES, THESE RENTERS INCLUDED CLERKS, DELIVERY DRIVERS, PHARMACISTS, BOOKKEEPERS, ALONG WITH NUMEROUS STUDENTS ATTENDING THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS OR OTHER NEARBY INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING.
THROUGHOUT THESE EARLY DECADES OF THE PROPERTY, NONE OF THE RENTERS APPEAR TO HAVE STAYED AT THE ADDRESS FOR LONGER THAN THREE YEARS, WHICH SPEAKS TO THE PROPERTY AS A PLACE OF TRANSITION AND TENANT MOVEMENT, AND IS AN UNDER UNDERREPRESENTED HISTORY AMONG AUSTIN CITY LANDMARKS.
IT'S MORE TYPICAL THAT THESE TYPES OF BUILDINGS ARE LOST THROUGH LACK OF MAINTENANCE OR OTHER DEMOLITION OF BUILDING STOCK OVER TIME.
HOWEVER, BEING THAT THERE IS NO ARCHING OVERARCHING CONNECTION AMONG OCCUPANTS, NO LONG-TERM RESIDENTS THAT MAY YIELD A LARGER HISTORICAL NARRATIVE, AND THAT THE PROPERTY DOES NOT HAVE A UNIQUE LOCATION OR FEATURES BEYOND ITS USE OF THE RENTAL, IT STAFFS DETERMINATION THAT IT DOES NOT RISE TO THE LEVEL OF MEETING THE CRITERIA FOR COMMUNITY VALUE.
UM, AND PARDON ME, I MISSPOKE EARLIER.
THIS WAS BEING EXAMINED FOR ARCHITECTURE AND COMMUNITY VALUE INSTEAD OF HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS.
THEREFORE, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO NOT GRANT HISTORIC ZONING AS THE PROPERTY DOES NOT MEET TWO CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION.
INSTEAD, WE STRONGLY, UH, ENCOURAGE REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE OR RELOCATION, THEN MATERIAL SALVAGE, SALVAGE AND REUSE, BUT RELEASE THE DEMOLITION PERMIT UPON COMPLETION OF A CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE.
ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF COMMISSIONERS YOU MAY RECALL? UM, THIS WAS INITIALLY CAME TO US AS A DEMOLITION REQUEST.
UH, WE REVIEWED IT AND OUR LAST MEETING, UH, WE WENT AHEAD AND BEGAN THE, UH, HISTORIC ZONING PROCESS AS A WAY TO FURTHER RESEARCH THIS PROPERTY AND SOME OF ITS BACKGROUND, WHICH STAFF WAS ABLE TO DO.
UM, WE HAVE A 75 DAY TIME HORIZON FROM THE REQUEST AS IT WAS FILED.
THIS IS THE, AS I UNDERSTAND, STAFF, IS THAT CORRECT? THIS IS THE LAST MEETING THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO TAKE
[00:25:01]
AN ACTION ON THIS ITEM? THAT'S CORRECT, YES.IF IT TIMES OUT AND WE DON'T HAVE A SUBSEQUENT MEETING, I DO UNDERSTAND THEY, BY DEFAULT, UH, THE PERMIT WOULD BE ALLOWED FOR DEMOLITION, WHEREAS IF WE DO GRANT THAT WE CAN ALSO DO SO WITH THE REQUIREMENT FOR FULL DOCUMENTATION.
WE'VE, WE'VE HAD THAT DISCUSSION IN A COUPLE OF PAST PROJECTS, SO I JUST WANT EVERYBODY TO BE AWARE OF WHAT THE RANGE OF OPTIONS AND ACTIONS MIGHT BE.
UM, WE HAVE SPEAKERS SIGNED UP FOR THIS.
UH, AND SINCE THIS CURRENTLY IS POSTED AS A HISTORIC ZONING APPLICATION, UH, WE WILL ASK THOSE WHO WOULD BE HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR.
ARE THERE PEOPLE HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM? YES, WE HAVE MS. BARBARA EPSTEIN ONLINE.
HELLO, MY NAME IS BARBARA EPSTEIN.
I GREATLY APPRECIATE BEING ABLE TO, TO ATTEND THIS MEETING REMOTELY AND THEN NEARBY NEIGHBOR TO THIS PROPERTY.
I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR INITIATING HISTORIC ZONING FOR 6 0 7 EAST 38TH STREET AT YOUR LAST MEETING.
OUR ASSOCIATION MET AFTERWARDS AND ALSO VOTED TO SUPPORT HISTORIC DESIGNATION AND TO OPPOSE A DEMOLITION PERMIT.
TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, THE OWNER HAD DECLINED TO DISCUSS ANY PLAN TO BUILD A NEW ARCHITECTURALLY COMPATIBLE STRUCTURE.
HOPEFULLY, WE'VE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THE 18 PHOTOGRAPHS OF 6 0 7 EAST 38TH STREET, FOUND ON WILLOW, THAT PROFILE, AN INVITING HISTORIC CRAFTSMAN STYLE DUPLEX BUILT IN 1934 ON A MAIN STREET IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT DESERVES PRESERVATION, REFLECTING AN UNUSUAL CREATION OF MULTIFAMILY HOUSING AT THE TIME, AND IT CONTRIBUTES TODAY TO BOTH THE ARCHITECTURALLY AND TAX STREET AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD STILL PRIMARILY FILLED WITH PERIOD HOUSES AND MATURE URBAN FREE CANOPY.
ITS ARCHITECTURAL STYLE AND LOCATION MERIT PRESERVATION WHILE PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING WITH A TANGIBLE LINK FROM OUR CITY'S PAST TO AUSTIN RESIDENTS.
TODAY, I HOPE THAT YOU TWO AGREE THAT A HISTORIC DESIGNATION FOR 6 0 7 EAST 38TH STREET FULFILLS THE LANDMARK COMMISSION'S MISSION FOR AUSTIN AS WELL.
AND I WOULD NOTE THAT WHEN THIS OWNER TWO YEARS AGO, UH, APPLIED TO BUILD A NEW STRUCTURE, IT WAS TO BUILD A 4,000 SQUARE FOOT STRUCTURE.
AND WE HAVE NOT HAD ANY INFORMATION ABOUT ANY PLAN FOR HIS CURRENT APPLICATION.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR LETTING ME SPEAK, STEIN.
AND I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS ANY QUESTIONS, MS. STEIN? RIGHT.
THE NEXT SPEAKER, SPEAKER'S IN FAVOR.
NO ONE ELSE SIGNED UP, UH, OFFLINE.
COME TO THE MICROPHONE, IDENTIFY YOURSELF FOR THE RECORD.
UH, I LIVE NEXT DOOR AND I'M INVOLVED WITH THE HANCOCK, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UM, SO I WANTED TO LET Y'ALL KNOW THAT, UM, THE OFFICIAL POSITION OF THE HNA IS THAT WE OPPOSE DEMOLITION, UH, AND WOULD RECOMMEND, UM, RENOVATION OF THE EXISTING UNITS AND ADDITION OF NEW UNITS IN THE AVAILABLE SPACE.
UM, THERE'S PLENTY OF OPEN SPACE ON THE LOT.
UM, I'VE ACTUALLY REACHED OUT TO THE DEVELOPER, UM, HABITAT HOUSE.
UM, AND SO WE ACTUALLY ARE GOING TO HAVE A MEETING ABOUT THIS WITH ME AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT ON FRIDAY.
UM, AND WE'RE GONNA DISCUSS THEIR PLANS FOR THE, UM, FOR THE LOT AND WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.
UM, OUR HOPE IS THAT WE CAN KIND, WE CAN, WE CAN WORK WITH THEM TO GET TO THIS PLACE WHERE ADDITIONAL UNITS ARE BUILT, BUT THE EXISTING STRUCTURES ARE PRESERVED, OR AT LEAST THE FACADES.
UM, THEY'VE EXPRESSED CONCERNS ABOUT THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE BUILDING, SO, UH, AND BEING ABLE TO RENT IT OUT.
ALRIGHT, WELL THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR SHARING THAT INFORMATION, UH, COMMISSIONERS.
ANY QUESTION OF OUR SPEAKER? ALRIGHT, THANK YOU.
IS ANYBODY ELSE HERE TO SPEAK? ANYONE IN FAVOR? IF, IF SO, PLEASE COME FORWARD.
IS THERE ANYBODY HERE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? I
YEAH, WE MAY NOT HAVE HEARD THAT OFFLINE, BUT HE'S, HE, HE CAME AND IDENTIFIED HIMSELF AS A NEIGHBOR IN FAVOR OF THE HISTORIC ZONE.
AND, AND I GUESS MAYBE I SHOULD HAVE ASKED THIS QUESTION WHEN THAT SPEAKER WAS STILL AT THE DAIS, BUT BASICALLY THAT SPEAKER WAS SAYING THAT, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS IN TALKS WITH THE DEVELOPER.
[00:30:01]
UM, SIR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS THAT? YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.UM, I CALLED JORGE THIS AFTERNOON, UM, AT, WELL, I'VE BEEN CALLING HIM FOR THE LAST FEW WEEKS, BUT WE WERE ABLE TO GET IN CONTACT WITH EACH OTHER OVER THE PHONE.
UM, AND SO WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE TO DISCUSS, UM, AND EXPRESS THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S POSITION AND SEE WHAT THE DEVELOPER'S POSITION IS AND SEE IF WE CAN COME TO SOME, UM, MIDDLE GROUND ABOUT IT.
I, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
SO FROM, FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S PERSPECTIVE AND FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, UM, I KNOW THERE'D BEEN SOME QUESTIONS AT THE LAST MEETING WHEN WE FIRST DISCUSSED THIS CASE ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT, UM, THERE COULD BE A REWORK OF THE PLANS UNDER, UM, THE PRESERVATION BONUS AND HOME.
UM, IS, IS THAT SORT, IS THAT SORT OF WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT THERE? OR IS THERE, ARE THERE OTHER AVENUES THAT THE NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATION HAS FOUND IN REGARDS OF LIKE, YOU KNOW, PRESERVING THE EXISTING PROPERTY AND FULFILLING, YOU KNOW, THE DEVELOPERS WISH TO BUILD THIS NEW UNIT? UM, VERY MUCH WE'RE LOOKING INTO ALL THE OPTIONS, BUT OUR HOPE IS VERY MUCH TO RETAIN THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE, UM, THAT THE, THIS COMMISSION IS INTERESTED IN.
I THINK THAT'S MY, ALL MY QUESTIONS.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS? OKAY.
WE HAVE OUR FIRST SPEAKER IN OPPOSITION, BUT PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF.
UH, MY COMPANY NAME IS HABITAT HOUSE.
UM, ON 2022, I, I WAS, I GOT, I WAS HERE IN THE SAME PLACE EXPOSING ALL THE REASONS FOR, FOR A DEMOLITION PERMIT.
AND IT WAS APPROVED BACK, BACK THEN.
UM, THE ECONOMIC SITUATION AND ALL THE REAL ESTATE MARKETING HAS BEEN REALLY TOUGH.
UH, I HAVE LASTED MANY PROPERTIES IN FORECLOSURE AND THIS WAS ONE OF THE CASES, SO I WASN'T ABLE TO BUILD IT BACK THEN.
NOW I WAS ABLE TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE BANK AND I WAS ABLE TO REDO THE PROJECT.
IT'S GONNA BE A SMALLER PROJECT, NOT THE 4,000 SQUARE FEET THAT, UH, BARBARA WAS TALKING ABOUT.
NOW IT'S GONNA BE 3,300, UH, ONE HOUSE IN THE FRONT AND ONE AND A SMALL UNIT IN THE BACK.
AND, UH, UNFORTUNATELY WHEN I BOUGHT THIS HOUSE, MY PLAN, JUST LIKE HE HE MENTIONED, WAS TO REMODEL THE PLACE.
THAT PLACE IS UNFORTUNATELY, UH, A TEAR DOWN.
MY ENGINEER, GEORGE GONZALEZ IS HERE AS WELL, IN CASE YOU NEED SOME FURTHER INFORMATION IN TERMS OF ENGINEERING.
BUT THE PLACE IS FALLING APART.
I'VE BEEN TRYING TO RENT IT DURING THE LAST THREE YEARS AND NOT A SINGLE PERSON HAS BEEN ABLE TO LIVE IN THAT PLACE.
SO IN TERMS OF THE STRUCTURE, IT'S ABOUT TO, TO FALL DOWN IN TERMS OF REUSING THE FACADE.
UH, THE PICTURES ARE VERY ILLUSTRATIVE.
I MEAN, THEY, THERE IS NOTHING, I MEAN, AS A, AS A PROJECT, NO ONE WILL BUY, WOULD LIKE TO LIVE IN THE, IN A HOUSE LIKE THAT.
I MEAN, I AM, I'M HAPPY TO INVITE YOU ALL TO TAKE A LOOK TO THE FACADE.
SO IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO WORK AROUND THAT FACADE.
UM, AT THIS POINT, UM, THE STRUCTURE IS FALLING APART.
THE FACADE IS NOT REUSABLE AND, UH, TO ME IT'S NOT A HISTORIC, UH, THERE ARE NO HISTORIC ELEMENTS, BUT YOU'RE THE EXPERTS IN THAT CASE, BUT THERE IS NO VALUE IN THAT FACADE.
I, I'M, I'M RIGHT NOW TO THE LIMIT IN TERMS OF ABOUT TO LOSE AGAIN, THE PROPERTY IF I DON'T START BUILDING OR DOING THE, THE PROJECT BECAUSE THE HOLDING COST IS, IS KILLING ME.
UM, MORE, I'M HAPPY TO TALK WITH THE NEIGHBORS.
SO THEY, THEY, I MEAN, I CAN SHOW THEM WHAT I'M PLANNING TO BUILD, UH, BUT UNFORTUNATELY THE PROPERTY IS NOT USABLE AS A, AS A PROPERTY ITSELF.
UM, THE PICTURE IS THE REPORTS THE ENGINEER CAN SUPPORT THE, THE, THE, THE EVIDENCE.
BUT, UM, THAT WILL BE AN EASY ROUTE TO REUSE THE PROPERTY.
UNFORTUNATELY, I HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE LONG ROUTE, WHICH IS BUILDING TWO UNITS.
YEAH, I GUESS, AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, AND I'LL ASK KIND OF THE QUESTION OF YOU AND STAFF, BUT THE, UH, CONDITION ASSESSMENTS THAT YOU DESCRIBE ARE NOT CONTAINED IN OUR BACKUP, IS THAT CORRECT? SO, SO BASED ON THE PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE, I'M INCLINED TO DISAGREE WITH YOU IN TERMS OF THE CONDITION OF THE HOME AND IT'S NEAR COLLAPSE.
SO I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FROM YOUR STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, UH, HIS, HIS HEARING.
WELL, BEFORE WE CALL UPON HIM, UH, AS A SPEAKER, UH, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT, UH, OF THE, UH, THE OWNER WHO HAS REQUESTED THE DEMOLITION COMMISSIONERS? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UH,
[00:35:01]
CAN I REPLY, COMMISSIONER? UH, I MEAN MAYBE IT'S, UH, I MEAN IT'S NOT, IT'S FALLING APART.IT'S, MY POINT IS THAT IT'S HARD TO, TO WORK AROUND THAT PROJECT BECAUSE IT'S IN, UH, THE CONDITION.
IT'S, IT'S AN OLD, OLD HOUSE, SO I HAVE TO, I MEAN, THERE'S, IT'S HARD TO, TO, TO, TO REMODEL THAT, THAT PROJECT.
IT'S NOT FALLING APART, BUT IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT IN LIVABLE CONDITIONS.
UM, IF YOUR ENGINEER IS HERE AND WOULD WISH TO, UH, DISCUSS HIS OBSERVATIONS, UH, BUT WE DO YOU, DO YOU HAVE A REPORT FROM HIS INVESTIGATIONS? THAT'S NOTHING.
YOU HAVEN'T GIVEN THAT TO STAFF.
WE DON'T HAVE THAT IN OUR BACKUP, RIGHT? HE DID THAT.
GEORGE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO? GOOD EVENING.
I'M WITH GENESIS ONE ENGINEERING AND THE ENGINEER FOR THE PROJECT.
UH, WE EVALUATED THIS STRUCTURE LAST YEAR AND, UH, AND TO BRING IT UP TO, UH, UH, STANDARD, UH, CURRENT STANDARD CITY OF AUSTIN CODES, UH, IT WOULD, UH, IT WOULD BE INSURMOUNTABLE TO REALLY, UH, UH, BRING IT UP TO STANDARDS COMPARED TO THE SYSTEMS THAT THEY'RE EXISTING AT, INSIDE THE STRUCTURE, THE SUPPORT SYSTEMS. AND ALSO IS THAT THERE'S BEEN, UH, SOME, UH, DAMAGE, UH, INTERIOR AND IT'S IN THAT THERE IS A REPORT AND THAT WE WERE FORWARDED TO THE, TO THE STAFF AND I'M NOT SURE IF THEY HAVE A COPY OF IT, UH, BUT WE'LL BE HAPPY TO, UH, TO, UH, FORWARD A REPORT BACK AGAIN.
UH, WHEN THE, THE LAST TIME THAT MR. OGA WAS, UH, PRESENTED THIS CASE, UH, LAST YEAR, DO WE, DO WE HAVE A RECORD OF THAT? NOT THAT WE'RE AWARE OF, NO.
UM, WHEN YOU SAY UP TO CURRENT STANDARDS, THIS IS A HISTORIC BUILDING.
IT DOESN'T NEED TO COME UP TO CURRENT STANDARDS, IT NEEDS TO ADHERE TO SAFETY STANDARDS, BUT WE'RE NOT TRYING TO TURN IT INTO A BRAND NEW HOUSE.
NO, IT'S JUST THAT THE, UH, THE, UH, THE, THE, THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE, THE STRUCTURE ITSELF, OF THE ELEMENTS, THE WOOD ELEMENTS, THE FLOORING, THE, UH, THE FOUNDATION IS THAT, UH, IT IS, UH, THERE IS DAMAGE.
AND, UH, LIKE I SAID, IS THAT, THAT WE'LL BE HAPPY TO, UH, FORWARD A A, THE COPY OF THE REPORT TO THE STAFF BACK AGAIN FOR US, A BACKGROUND, UH, BACKGROUND, UH, DOCUMENTS.
WELL, I'M SURE THERE'S SOME FURTHER QUESTIONS.
WELL, YEAH, I MEAN, FIRST OF ALL, JUST TO CITE THAT THERE IS DAMAGE, WE, WE'VE GOTTA GO MUCH FURTHER IN, IN DETAIL THAN THAT.
THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT HOME AND A SIGNIFICANT HISTORIC STRUCTURE, UH, ON THE SURFACE IS FROM WHAT WE SEE ON THE DIOCESE IN REALLY FAIR SHAPE.
AND SO I, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, SIR, I, IN ORDER TO GIVE CREDENCE TO YOUR CLAIMS, I'D HAVE TO SEE A BIT MORE IN TERMS OF DOCUMENTATION, BECAUSE ON THE SURFACE, I, I JUST DON'T SEE IT.
AND AS THE, AS THE CHAIR POINTED OUT, UM, FOR AN EXISTING HISTORIC HOME, THE CODE PROVISIONS ARE QUITE DIFFERENT THAN, UH, A NEW RESIDENTIAL HOME.
SO AS YOU PREPARE FOR THAT DOCUMENTATION, PLEASE KEEP ALL THAT IN MIND.
AND WITH THE, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING OF PRETTY MUCH EVERYONE HERE ON THIS DIOCESE PRETTY MUCH RESTORES THESE STRUCTURES FOR A LIVING.
AND SO THEY'RE PRETTY WELL VERSED IN, IN THOSE PROVISIONS.
SO, ON, ON THE SURFACE, WHILE I RESPECT YOUR POSITION, AND I RESPECT THAT IT'S A, IT MAY BE A FINANCIAL IMPEDIMENT TO DO THE FULL RESTORATION.
IT, IT CERTAINLY LOOKS LIKE THIS IS A MORE THAN VALIDATE CANDIDATE TO BE RESTORED.
SO I'LL, I'LL JUST LEAVE MY COMMENTS AT THAT, AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? YEAH, I, I WOULD SAY, UH, ALSO TO ADDRESS THE QUESTION OF THE SITE, UH, WHAT I WOULD HOPE WE COULD ACCOMPLISH, AND PARTICULARLY IF AS THE OWNER, YOU ARE TRYING TO MAXIMIZE YOUR INVESTMENT, IF YOU HAVE TO GET RID OF THAT HOUSE, YOU'VE GOTTA PAY MONEY TO GET RID OF THAT HOUSE.
IF YOU USE THAT SAME AMOUNT OF MONEY TO PUT IT BACK INTO SERVICE AGAIN, IT MAY NOT BE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE, THE FINAL RENOVATION THAT YOU POTENTIALLY WOULD WANNA DO, BUT IT WOULD CERTAINLY, WITH THAT KIND OF MONEY, MY GUESS IS IS YOU'D HAVE TWO RENTABLE PROPERTIES
[00:40:01]
AND THEN YOU COULD STILL BUILD YOUR LARGER, MORE, UH, LARGER INVESTMENT WITH A LARGER RETURN ON THE REMAINING PROPERTY.YOU HAVE A VERY LARGE SITE, AND YOU CERTAINLY HAVE WITH THE CODE THE ABILITY TO DO, UH, THREE UNITS WITHOUT HAVING TO DO ANY EXEMPTION.
AND IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THE ECONOMICS WOULD MAKE A LOT MORE SENSE THAN TRYING TO SCRAPE AND START AGAIN AND WORK ON THAT VERY DIFFICULT SITE WITH ALL THOSE OTHER CONSIDERATIONS.
AND IF, AGAIN, THE NEIGHBORS ARE IN SUPPORT AND COULD DISCUSS THAT, UH, PERHAPS IF THERE IS SOME INTEREST, EVEN SOME OF THE COMMISSIONERS MIGHT, UH, OFFER SOME SUGGESTIONS.
BUT I, I REALLY DO BELIEVE THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES HERE THAT, UH, WOULD BENEFIT ALL OF US, INCLUDING YOU, THE OWNER.
I, I EXPLORED THAT, THAT CASE, AND THERE'S NO NOT ENOUGH ROOM ON THE BACK.
I MEAN, TO, I MEAN, IT COULD BE A THIRD SMALL UNIT.
I MEAN, THERE'S, I MEAN, I CAN BUILD A THIRD SMALL UNIT, BUT THE TWO, THE DUPLEX IN THE FRONT, IT'S IN REALLY BAD, BAD SHAPE IN REALLY, REALLY BAD CONDITION.
I MEAN, IT'S, UH, YOU HAVE TO REMOVE EVERYTHING.
WELL, WE, WE HAVEN'T BEEN THROUGH IT, BUT WE'VE SEEN THE PHOTOGRAPHS, WE'VE WALKED AROUND THE SITE, AND WE ALSO SAW THE INTERIORS AS PART OF THE SALES PACKAGE FROM A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO.
UH, IT WAS CERTAINLY LIVABLE THEN.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE LAST TWO TO THREE YEARS THAT WOULD MAKE IT THAT MUCH DIFFERENT OTHER THAN MAINTENANCE AND UPKEEP THAT MIGHT MAKE IT USEFUL.
UH, AGAIN, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE IS TO KEEP A HISTORIC RESOURCE THAT HAS VALUE AVAILABLE TO FUTURE GENERATIONS.
THE, UH, ONE OPTION WE MIGHT HAVE WOULD BE HISTORIC ZONING.
UH, THE STAFF HAS ALREADY SAID THERE'S SOME REASONS WHY IT MIGHT NOT RISE TO THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF HISTORIC LANDMARK, BUT THAT DOESN'T LESSEN ITS VALUE AS A HISTORIC PROPERTY THAT HAS, UH, MERIT AND IS WORTH TRYING TO SAVE.
SO THAT, THAT'S THE MESSAGE I THINK WE'RE TRYING TO CONVEY TONIGHT THAT COMMISSIONERS, ANYBODY ELSE WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE? I MEAN, I, I, I'D, I'D AGREE WITH THAT.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, I AM, I, I UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, THE, THE POSITION OF, OF THE, THE OWNER AND THE DEVELOPER.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO DISAGREE, UM, RESPECTFULLY, JUST WITH THE NOTION THAT THIS ISN'T A SIGNIFICANT PROPERTY.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, JUST BECAUSE, UM, THERE AREN'T ANY SUPER STRONG HISTORIC ASSOCIATIONS, UM, AND IT'S, YOU KNOW, A FAIRLY COMMON ARCHITECTURAL STYLE OF THE ERA.
LIKE, I THINK THAT THERE'S A LOT OF HOMES IN THE CITY THAT, YOU KNOW, WEREN'T BUILT FOR PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, OF SOME DEGREE OF WEALTH WHO ARE HIRING PARTICULAR ARCHITECTS THAT OFTEN DON'T GET PRESERVED AND OFTEN REQUIRE LESS EFFORT TO BE PRESERVED.
I, I'M HAVEN'T, I DON'T KNOW HOW I FEEL ABOUT THIS YET.
I'M STILL LISTENING TO EVERYONE, BUT I JUST, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT IS THAT I DO THINK, YOU KNOW, IT'S IMPORTANT TO, THAT THERE IS HISTORIC MERIT HERE.
UM, SHOULD THE COMMISSION PURSUE PRESERVATIONS, COMMISSIONER RICE? UM, AND, AND I WAS STRICTLY QUOTING STAFF, THAT WAS THE ONLY PLACE THAT IT CAME FROM.
SO YOU'RE CERTAINLY, UH, WELCOME TO FOLLOW THAT UP WITH A MOTION, UH, WHEN WE GET TO THAT NEXT STEP.
BUT, UH, RIGHT NOW WE'RE STILL IN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
YES, I, I, AND I SAY THAT IN, IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, UM, MAYBE DISAGREEING WITH THIS, WITH THE STAFF AS WELL.
UM, BUT YOU KNOW, RESPECTFULLY, I JUST, UM, I HOPE MY WORDS ARE COMING OUT RIGHT,
WE'RE STILL IN THE PUBLIC HEARING, SO, UH, LET'S ADDRESS THE QUESTIONS TO THE APPLICANTS AND THE, UH, SPEAKERS.
UH, ARE THERE OTHER, UH, ITEMS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY? OKAY, HEARING NONE, THEN WE SAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS HERE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? OKAY.
UM, THIS IS AN APPLICATION THAT WE HAVE INITIATED FOR HISTORIC ZONING, AND TRADITIONALLY WHEN WE HAVE A SPEAKER IN FAVOR, UH, WOULD THIS BE APPROPRIATE TO OFFER A REBUTTAL? SO WOULD ONE OF THE SPEAKERS IN FAVOR LIKE TO OFFER A REBUTTAL? SO MS. EPSTEIN WAS THE FIRST SPEAKER.
HELLO? CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES.
I, I WOULD LIKE TO REBUT THIS.
I HAVE BEEN A RESIDENT IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD NOW FOR 51 YEARS, AND I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN NEIGHBORHOOD ISSUES FOR 40 OF THOSE YEARS.
[00:45:01]
AND WHAT I CAN TELL YOU, AS SOMEONE WHO HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN THESE NEIGHBORHOOD ISSUES, THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD CAN BE DEFINED BY THE GATEWAY STREETS AND 38TH STREET, ALTHOUGH THE HOMES ARE MODEST, IS STILL ARCHITECTURALLY INTACT.MY CONCERN WITH ANY OF THE CURRENT CASES WE HAVE FOR DEVELOPMENT ARE THAT ARCHITECTURALLY INCOMPATIBLE PROJECTS ARE PLANNED AND OR IMPOSED, AND THEY WILL WIND UP ELIMINATING OUR HISTORIC ZONING AND OUR MATURE URBAN TREE CANOPY.
WHAT I THINK IS IMPORTANT HERE IS THAT THERE IS COMMUNITY VALUE IN KEEPING A STREET, LARGELY ARCHITECTURALLY PERIOD ARCHITECTURE IF YOU HAVE A NUMBER OF HISTORIC HOMES IN THE, IN THE AREA.
AND SO I THINK THAT, I THINK IT RISES TO, TO THE LEVEL FOR HISTORIC ZONING.
UM, IT'S NOT A MANSION, IT DIDN'T HAVE A FAMOUS PERSON LIVING THERE, BUT IT IS, IT IS A, A, A, AN IMPORTANT REMINDER OF OUR CITY'S PAST.
SO I, I CAN'T, I CAN'T URGE YOU MORE STRONGLY TO, TO PRESERVE IT.
AND AGAIN, I TRY, I WAS A NEIGHBORHOOD PRESIDENT AT THE TIME THAT THE, THAT THE PREVIOUS APPLICATION CAME UP.
AND I, I COULDN'T GET ANY, ANY CONVERSATION GOING.
SO I'M CONCERNED THAT WE DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT, WHAT MIGHT BE DONE.
AND I, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, I SEE THAT THERE IS, UH, THE, UH, OWNER HAS HIS HAND RAISED.
UH, THE ONLY WAY THIS POINT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THAT IS IF, UH, SOMEBODY ASKS THE QUESTION OF THE OWNER, WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO ASK HIM A QUESTION? COMMISSIONER UPRIGHT? YES.
THANK YOU FOR COMING BEFORE US.
WHEN WAS THE HOUSE LAST OCCUPIED? THREE YEARS AGO.
WHEN, WHEN WE GOT THE, THE DEMO PERMIT, UH, LAST TIME ON 2022, THERE WAS A DEMOLITION PERMIT APPROVED BY, BY THE, BY THE COMMISSION.
MY ONLY COMMENT IS, MAY I, MAY I MAKE THE COMMENT IN ANSWER TO OUR QUESTION? SURE.
IS THIS THE ONLY HOUSE IN THAT STRIP THAT IT'S BEING ASSIGNED TO BE, UH, IN THE HISTORIC ZONING? BECAUSE ALL THE OTHER HOUSES, INCLUDING BARBARA'S HOUSE LOOKS THE SAME.
SO ARE THEY, ARE YOU DOING THE WHOLE STRIP HISTORIC? I HAVE A QUESTION BECAUSE NOW I'M KIND OF SURPRISED.
UH, IF THEY CAME TO US FOR DEMOLITION, UH, WE WOULD REVIEW EVERYONE EXACTLY THE SAME AND POTENTIALLY EVERY ONE OF THEM COULD BECOME A HISTORIC LANDMARK.
BUT, AND, AND THE LAST, THE LAST THING I'M OPEN TO WORK WITH, WITH THE NEIGHBORS, I MEAN, I KNOW THEY WANT TO BLOCK THIS PROJECT.
UH, I RESPECT THEIR POSITION, BUT I'M OPEN TO WORK IN, IN TERMS OF THE DESIGN AND THE ARCHITECTURE.
IF, IF THAT'S SOMETHING WHICH IS CLEARLY BARBARA AND SOME OTHER NEIGHBORS ARE WORRIED ABOUT.
SO I'M OPEN TO, TO WORK AROUND THAT THING.
SO THE HOUSE LOOKS, BLENDS WITH THE REST OF THE HOUSE, I MEAN, OF, OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I THINK THAT ANSWERS OUR QUESTIONS.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, WE'VE HAD ALL OF OUR SPEAKERS, AND SO I WILL TAKE, UH, MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND AND THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED.
WELL, I DON'T KNOW IF I'M READY FOR A MOTION, BUT I HAVE A QUESTION.
UH, WE CAN CERTAINLY ENTERTAIN A QUESTION.
COMMISSIONER ACTON IS THERE, I KNOW WE'RE ON A TIME CRUNCH ON THIS ONE, CORRECT? STAFF? THAT'S CORRECT.
THIS IS THE LAST, UH, MEETING THAT IT CAN BE TAKEN UP.
DO WE HAVE, DO WE HAVE A METHODOLOGY? 'CAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION THAT, UH, THAT MANY OF US WOULD LIKE TO REVIEW, THE STRUCTURAL, ANY STRUCTURAL REPORTING, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT WE ACTUALLY FINALLY HAVE PEOPLE IN THE ROOM TO HAVE A CONVERSATION.
SO IS THERE A METHODOLOGY TO STOP THIS CLOCK, OR DO WE HAVE TO ESSENTIALLY VOTE TO LANDMARK TO KEEP THIS CLOCK RUNNING? COMMISSION? MM-HMM
UM, THE, THE CLOCK WON'T, UH, STOP IN EITHER WAY.
UM, IF YOU VOTE TO APPROVE THE, UM, HISTORIC ZONING, UH, IT WILL GO TO PLANNING COMMISSION WITH THE SAME, UM, REPORT BEING READ TO THEM, UM, AND IT WOULD BE
[00:50:01]
IN THEIR HANDS TO VOTE ON, UM, AND THEN IT WOULD GO TO CITY COUNCIL AFTER THAT.UM, HOWEVER, IF YOU WERE TO VOTE TO APPROVE THE DEMOLITION APPLICATION AT THIS POINT, YOU CAN ALSO REQUEST A CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE AT THIS TIME, BUT ONLY AT THIS MEETING, COMMISSIONER LA ROCHE.
AND COULD THE APPLICANT WITHDRAW? THE APPLICANT COULD REQUEST A POSTPONEMENT THAT WOULD STOP THE CLOCK, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT.
THE APPLICANT MAY WITHDRAW OR POSTPONE, UM, WITHDRAWING THE APPLICATION, UH, WILL REQUIRE SUBMITTAL OF A NEW APPLICATION TO COME BEFORE THIS BOARD, UM, OR ANY SUBSEQUENT BOARDS.
AND, UM, IF YOU WANT TO TRULY STOP THE CLOCK, THE APPLICANT WILL NEED TO AGREE TO A POSTPONEMENT, WHICH WOULD THEN POTENTIALLY ALLOW US TO THEN COME BACK TO THE SAME ISSUES AT NEXT MONTH'S MEETING IF THAT WAS INITIATED BY THE APPLICANT.
BUT NO ONE ELSE COULD INITIATE THAT.
UNDERSTAND? WELL, AT LEAST IT GIVES ALL PARTIES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR DIALOGUE.
AND SO IF THE OWNER'S WILLING TO GO FOR A POSTPONEMENT JUST TO GIVE EVERYBODY TIME TO BREATHE AND, AND SORT SOME THINGS OUT, WE MAY BE ABLE TO GET THERE.
I AGREE TO POSTPONE IT AND I AGREE TO PROVIDE YOU ALL THE, UM, ALL THE DATA AND ALL THE INFO.
YEAH, I THINK WE HAVE TO, LET ME CLARIFY WITH STAFF.
I BELIEVE YOU WOULD HAVE TO REQUEST THE POSTPONEMENT.
YOU'D HAVE TO SAY YOU, YOU WANT US TO POSTPONE IT SO THAT WE CAN CONSIDER ALL OF THIS AND THEN DISCUSS THIS AT THE NEXT MEETING, OKAY.
SO I'LL SEND THE, UH, THROUGH THE CITY, THE, THE, THE DOCUMENTS TO POSTPONE IT.
IS THAT THE WAY IT IS? OKAY, LET'S DOUBLE CHECK WITH STAFF.
OKAY, SO WE HEAR THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THE POSTPONEMENT, AND WE HAVE THE ABILITY THEN TO TAKE THAT UP AS A MOTION IF ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS WOULD BE SO INCLINED COMMISSIONERS, WOULD SOMEONE LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION TO, UM, FOLLOW UP WITH THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR POSTPONEMENT? UM, JUST, JUST SO I'M CLEAR IN MY HEAD, IF THAT'S THE REQUEST, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION ON THE DAIS.
DO WE, WE HAVE TO MAKE THE MOTION, THE REQUEST HAS TO BE STILL BE APPROVED BY US.
COMMISSIONER, YOU'LL NEED TO, UH, MOTION, UM, TO APPROVE THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, BASICALLY.
AT THE BEGINNING OF OUR AGENDA IS USUALLY WHEN THAT COMES UP AND THAT'S, YEAH, I KNOW, BUT THIS IS AN LITTLE BIT UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE, SO I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE I HAVE IT ALL STRAIGHT IN MY HEAD.
I, AND WE'D HAVE TO ALSO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THE SAME TIME.
Y YEAH, NO, I, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE APPLICANT'S, UH, REQUEST TO POSTPONE AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SECOND, COMMISSIONER ROCHE, THAT'S SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ACTON.
AND LET'S MAKE SURE THERE'S CLARIFICATION IF ANYBODY HAS COMMISSIONERS, ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE MOTION.
MCKNIGHT IS DOUBLE CHECKING WITH THE OWNER.
SHALL WE CONTINUE WITH THE PROCEEDINGS? UH, OR IS THIS SOMETHING THAT REQUIRES FURTHER CLARIFICATION? MS. MCKNIGHT, SHOULD WE, UH, WILL TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE PROCESS THEN? OKAY.
AND IN THE PROCESS, PERHAPS, SHOULD WE TABLE THIS UNTIL THERE IS A CHANCE FOR THE TWO OF YOU TO HAVE A FURTHER DISCUSSION OR ARE WE READY TO TAKE AN ACTION? ALRIGHT, COMMERS, I WAS JUST GONNA, HE WAS JUST, HE HAD SOME QUESTIONS AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE HE WAS INFORMED JUST TO KNOW THE PROCESS.
COMMISSIONERS, UH, WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE AND IT'S BEEN SECONDED.
WE CAN EITHER TAKE AN ACTION ON THIS OR I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO TABLE THIS TO LATER IN THE AGENDA, UH, PENDING THE CONVERSATION.
YEAH, HE'S COMFORTABLE POSTPONING A MONTH.
HE, HE JUST WANTED TO, TO TALK ABOUT.
OKAY, SO YOU'RE DOING A FOLLOW UP, CORRECT? YEAH.
THEN, UH, UH, WE HAVE A MOTION TO POSTPONE, UH, THERE'S, UH, OPEN FOR DISCUSSION IF WE NEED TO COMMISSIONERS, ANYBODY WANNA DISCUSS THE MOTION, JUST ENCOURAGE THE APPLICANT TO ATTEND THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NEXT WEEK, UH, POSSIBLY WITH THAT DOCUMENT IN HAND.
SO MAYBE WE CAN HAVE MORE TIME TO TALK MORE ONE-ON-ONE WITH THE THREE
[00:55:01]
COMMISSIONERS TO KIND OF GET MORE INTO THE DETAILS OF THIS WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR EVERYONE, I THINK.ALRIGHT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO POST, UH, HAVE THE APPLICANT REQUESTED POSTPONEMENT AND APPROVE AND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, UH, REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, PLEASE INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND.
THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH AND WE'LL HOPE EVERYBODY MAKES VERY GOOD USE OF THE NEXT, THE NEXT MONTH.
WE'LL ENCOURAGE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL.
[4. C14H-2025-0077 – 200 N. IH 35 Svrd SB. Palm Park Shelter House Council District 9]
BRINGS US TO THE NEXT CASE.THIS IS CASE, UH, NUMBER FOUR.
THAT CASE NUMBER C 14 H 20 25 0 0 7 7, UH, IS AN APPLICATION, UM, WHICH THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION INITIATED LAST MONTH, UH, WITH OWNER AGREEMENT FROM OUR FRIENDS AT THE PARKS AND REC DEPARTMENT, UM, WHO, UM, HAVE DECIDED TO LANDMARK THE PALM PARK SHELTER HOUSE AT 200 NORTH I 35 ON THE SOUTHBOUND SERVICE ROAD, UH, WITHIN CTE PALM NEIGHBORHOOD PARK.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO GRANT THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE FROM PUBLIC USE P WHICH IS PENDING, UH, TO THE PUBLIC USE LANDMARK PUBLIC USE, HISTORIC LANDMARK, UH, COMBINING DISTRICT ZONING.
AND THIS IS ALSO PART OF A COUNCIL RESOLUTION BACK ON MAY 8TH.
UM, THE COUNCIL, UH, MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NUMBER 20 25 0 5 0 8 DASH FOUR TWO DASH 0 4 2, EXCUSE ME, UH, WHICH INITIATED ZONING FOR PALM PARK, UH, TO A BASE ZONING THAT IS APPROPRIATE BASED ON ITS CURRENT USE.
AND ALSO DIRECTING STAFF TO PURSUE HISTORIC LANDMARK ZONING FOR THE SHELTER HOUSE IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH HERITAGE PRESERVATION, PRESERVATION GRANT FUNDING REGULATIONS.
UM, THE SHELTER HOUSE IS ZONING TO PUBLIC USE, UH, WHICH IS P IS CURRENTLY PENDING AND IT IS, UH, LOCATED ON AN UN ZONE PORTION OF LAND RIGHT NOW.
UM, CITY COUNCIL IS GOING TO HEAR THE ZONING APPLICATION APPLYING PUBLIC ZONING, UH, WHICH IS UNDER CASE NUMBER C 14 2 2 5 0 0 7 2, AS DIRECTED BY THAT RESOLUTION NUMBER 20 25 0 5 8 DASH FOUR TWO, UH, IN OCTOBER OF THIS YEAR.
AND THE SUBSEQUENT REZONING FROM P TO PH, UH, WILL ALSO BE HEARD IN TANDEM AT THAT SAME COUNCIL MEETING.
SO THIS IS WHY YOU GUYS ARE HEARING THIS APPLICATION TONIGHT.
THE PALM PARK SHELTER HOUSE EMBODIES THE DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS OF THE NATIONAL PARK'S RUSTIC STYLE, WHICH IS OFTEN CALLED ARCHITECTURE AUSTIN.
EXAMPLES WERE HEAVILY INFLUENCED BY HUGO CUNY'S INTERPRETATION OF THE STYLE IN THE THIRTIES.
AND THE STRUCTURE IS PART OF A LARGER NETWORK OF HISTORIC PARK SHELTER STRUCTURES IN AUSTIN FROM THE SAME PERIOD.
THIS WAS A DISTINCT MOMENT IN ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY.
UM, WHEN YOU CONSIDER ALL OF THESE PARK STRUCTURES AS A COMPLETE COLLECTION, UH, THERE ARE SEVEN OTHER RUSTIC STRUCTURES IN AUSTIN'S PARKS.
UM, AND IT'S THEREFORE IMPERATIVE THAT THE PALM PARK STRUCTURE HOUSE BE PRESERVED, NOT JUST FOR ITS OWN SAKE, BUT ALSO TO MAINTAIN THE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THESE HISTORICAL ASSETS WITHIN THE CITY.
THE SHELTER HOUSEHOLDS HISTORICAL IMPORTANCE FOR ITS STRONG ASSOCIATIONS, UH, WITH AUSTIN'S MEXICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY, AND ALSO IS A PHYSICAL MANIFESTATION OF A NATIONAL MOVEMENT PERTAINING TO PARKS AND THE PARK PROGRAMMING THAT WAS AVAILABLE AND BEGUN IN THE EARLY 20TH CENTURY.
UM, THE SHELTER HOUSE AT PALM PARK IS EMBLEMATIC OF A CRITICAL MOMENT OF PARK, UH, PROGRAMMING EXPANSION IN THE CITY, AND IT ECHOED LARGER NATIONAL TRENDS IN RECREATION.
THIS IS A BRICK AND MORTAR MANIFESTATION OF THE CITY'S AND THE NATION'S EFFORTS TO FURTHER PUBLIC HEALTH.
AND IT DEMONSTRATES THE INFLUENCE OF A CHANGE OF CHANGING NATIONAL CONCEPTIONS OF RECREATION IN AUSTIN'S PARKS.
THE SHELTER HOUSE IS A PRIMARY VISIBLE SYMBOL OF THIS ERA OF PARK DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY OF AUSTIN.
IN THE 2025 APPLICATION FOR HISTORIC ZONING, AUSTIN'S PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT DESCRIBES THE PALM PARKS SHELTERS HOUSE IMPORTANCE TO THE MEXICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY IN AUSTIN.
THROUGHOUT THE LATTER HALF OF THE 20TH CENTURY AND INTO THE 21ST SEVERAL DEVELOPMENTS STRAIN THE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN PALM PARK AND THE LATINO COMMUNITY.
MID-CENTURY URBAN RENEWAL EFFORTS ENCOURAGED, REDEVELOPMENT AND PUSHED THE LA THE LATINO COMMUNITY SOUTH AND EAST, AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF I 35 IN THE 1960S, FOLLOWED BY THE CLOSURE OF PALM SCHOOL IN 1976 AND THE RAPID DEVELOPMENT OF THE WALLER CREEK DISTRICT FURTHER STRAIN THE PHYSICAL CONNECTION.
DESPITE ALL OF THIS, PALM PARK REMAINS CENTRAL TO THE LOCAL LATINO COMMUNITY AND HAD EVEN TAKEN ON THE IMPORTANT ROLE OF REP OF REPRESENTING THE RESILIENCE OF THE MEXICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY.
IN THE FACE OF DISCRIMINATION, EL CONCILIO, A COALITION OF LATINO ADVOCACY AND NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS ORGANIZED TO KEEP THE PARKS AMENITIES OPEN DESPITE INTEREST FROM THE COUNCIL AND SHUTTERING THEM IN THE MID 1990S.
PAUL HERNANDEZ, THE FOUNDER OF EL CONCILIO, NOTED IN 19 60 19 96.
MANY OF US REMEMBER THE RACISM WE GREW UP WITH IN AUSTIN.
WE COULDN'T EVEN COME TO THIS POOL.
NOW THE POOL IS OUR SYMBOL FOR THE STRUGGLE TO KEEP EAST AUSTIN A VIABLE MINORITY COMMUNITY.
AS THE SHELTER HOUSE IS CURRENTLY THE ONLY MAJOR ORIGINAL BUILT STRUCTURE THAT REMAINS FROM THIS PERIOD OF GREAT IMPORTANCE IN TO THE MEXICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY.
[01:00:01]
PALM PARK POOL WAS DEMOLISHED IN 2023, ITS PRESERVATION AS AN EMBODIMENT OF THAT COMMUNITY HISTORY HAS BECOME EVEN MORE CRITICAL.A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IS CURRENTLY IN REVIEW FOR ITS REHABILITATION.
UM, AND THE ROOF HAS DETERIORATED.
WINDOWS OF THE EAST AND WEST ELEVATIONS HAVE BEEN FILLED IN, UH, AN ADDED RAMP AND SOME HANDRAILS HAVE BEEN A, HAVE BEEN, UM, CONSTRUCTED.
BUT, UH, THESE CHANGES DO NOT ALTER THE STRUCTURE ITSELF AND IT'S DEFINING CHARACTERISTICS SUCH AS RUSTIC FIELDSTONE, MASONRY, THE PARAPET ROOF, AND THE DOG TOT LAYOUT REMAIN INTACT.
THAT CONCLUDES THE STAFF PRESENTATION.
AND WE HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE, PAUL BOOKS, UH, WHO CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
ANY QUESTIONS OF MS. CONTRERAS? OKAY.
UH, LET'S HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.
AND I DID HAVE A PRESENTATION IF YOU'RE ABLE TO PULL THAT UP.
AND IF YOU PULL YOUR MICROPHONE JUST A LITTLE BIT CLOSER.
SO THIS'S A WHOLE NEW SETUP IN HERE.
UM, AND I'LL JUST TELL YOU NEXT SLIDE.
I'M A PRINCIPAL PLANNER WITH AUSTIN PARKS AND RECREATION.
HERE TO PRESENT ON THE HISTORIC ZONING CASE FOR THE SHELTER HOUSE AT PALM PARK.
YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE TONIGHT.
I'LL BRIEFLY WALK THROUGH THREE KEY POINTS.
FIRST BACKGROUND ON PALM PARK AND THE HISTORIC SHELTER HOUSE.
SECOND, THE, THE JUSTIFICATION FOR HISTORIC ZONING, FOCUSING BOTH ON COMMUNITY SIGNIFICANCE AND ARCHITECTURAL STYLE.
AND FINALLY, OUR REQUEST FOR ACTION.
THAT IS HISTORIC ZONING FOR THE SHELTER HOUSE FOOTPRINT.
SO FOR A GEOGRAPHIC REFERENCE, PALM PARK IS LOCATED IN DOWNTOWN AUSTIN AT THIRD STREET AND IH 35.
THE PARK IS APPROXIMATELY THREE ACRES IN SIZE AND IS CLASSIFIED AS A NEIGHBORHOOD PARK SERVING THE DOWNTOWN AND NEARBY COMMUNITIES.
THE PARK IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE PALM SCHOOL AS AN AND IS AN INTEGRAL PIECE OF THE WATERLOO GREENWAY.
UM, AND YOU SEE ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF THE SLIDE, THE PARK IS HIGHLIGHTED IN GREEN AND THE FOOTPRINT OF THE SHELTER HOUSE WITHIN IT IS SHOWN IN RED.
THIS SLIDE DESCRIBES THE STORIED HISTORY OF PALM PARK.
PALM PARK WAS FIRST IDENTIFIED AS PARK PARKLAND ALMOST 100 YEARS AGO.
FOLLOWING IDENTIFICATION, THE CITY SPENT SEVERAL YEARS ACQUIRING THE PROPERTIES, MAKING UP PALM PARK.
AND AFTER REROUTING WALLER CREEK, THE CITY OPENED THE FIRST PHASE OF THE PARK TO THE PUBLIC IN 1933.
IN 1935, THE PARK IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING THE PLAYGROUND, POOL AND SHELTER HOUSE, WERE COMPLETED AND OPENED TO THE PUBLIC.
CONTINUED TO SERVE THE WALLER CREEK COMMUNITY COMMUNITY FOR DECADES, PROVIDING RESPITE FROM URBAN LIFE.
IN 1976, THE ADJACENT PALM SCHOOL WAS CLOSED.
IN 2010, THE WALLER CREEK CONSERVANCY WAS ESTABLISHED, HELPING TO SET THE STAGE FOR THE PRESERVATION AND REVITALIZATION OF THE WALLER CREEK AREA AND ITS MINI HISTORIC ASSETS.
IN 2014, AN AQUATIC FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DETERMINES THAT THE POOL AT PALM PALM PARK WILL BE CLOSED INDEFINITELY.
UM, ENGAGEMENT SURROUNDING THE REDEVELOPMENT OF PALM PARK BEGAN IN 2016 AND HAS CONTINUED TO THIS DAY THROUGH AN ITERATIVE COMMUNITY PROCESS.
UM, AND SO THIS ENGAGEMENT HAS REALLY HELPED US SHAPE THE FUTURE OF PALM PARK.
THIS PARK IS ESSENTIAL COMPONENT, AS I SAID, OF THE WATERLOO GREENWAY, WHICH CONNECTS LADY BIRD LAKE TO WATERLOO PARK.
THROUGH A SERIES OF GREENWAY TRAILS AND ACTIVATED PARK SPACES, WATERLOO GREENWAY CONSERVANCY APPLIED AND RECEIVED AN HISTORIC PRESERVATION GRANT TO REVITALIZE THE SH THE SHELTER HOUSE AS PART OF THE REDEVELOPMENT OF PALM PARK.
HISTORIC ZONING IS A PREREQUISITE OF THE USE OF THE GRANT.
FUNDING CONSTRUCTION IS EXPECTED TO BEGIN IN 2026.
SO THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE CONCEPT PLAN FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF PALM PARK.
IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDE MULTIPLE PLAY AREAS, IMPROVE CONNECTIONS ALONG WALLER CREEK AND ADJACENT AND TWO ADJACENT COMMUNITIES, A SHADE CANOPY OVER THE PREVIOUS POOL LOCATION AND OPEN LAWN AREAS WITH BE USE OF DOWNTOWN AUSTIN.
ZOOMING IN, WE SEE THAT THE SHELTER HOUSE IS FEATURED AS A CENTER AS THE CENTER OF ACTIVITY WITHIN THE PLAYSCAPE AREA.
THE ROBUST STONE CONSTRUCTION WILL ALLOW FOR THE ADAPTIVE REUSE OF THE STRUCTURE FOR PARK PROGRAMMING, INCLUDING FOR STORAGE AND BATHROOM FACILITIES.
UM, SO HERE IS AN EARLY VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF WHAT THE SHELTER HOUSE COULD LOOK LIKE AFTER ITS REHABILITATION.
THE EXISTING ROOF IS REPLACED BY A HALO LIGHT CANOPY STRUCTURE, BUT THE STONE WORK REMAINS INTACT.
UM, I'LL LEAVE THIS UP FOR A SECOND JUST SO YOU GUYS GET A GOOD LOOK AT IT.
NOW TURNING TO THE JUSTIFICATION FOR HISTORIC ZONING.
THE SHELTER HOUSE MEETS TWO OF THE PRIMARY CHARACTERISTICS REQUIRED AS A CENTRAL COMPONENT OF PALM PARK.
THE SHELTER HOUSE IS A STRONG ASSOCIATION WITH AUSTIN'S MEXICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY NEARBY EAST AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE LOWER WALLER CREEK DISTRICT ACROSS ITS NEARLY 100 Y YEAR HISTORY AS A COMMUNITY GATHERING SPACE.
FURTHER, THE SHELTER HOUSE EXEMPLIFIES
[01:05:01]
THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE OF THE NATIONAL MOVEMENT, HIGHLIGHTING THE IMPORTANCE OF PARKS PARK PROGRAMMING IN THE EARLY 20TH CENTURY.THIS STYLE IS OFTEN REFERRED TO AS NATIONAL PARK RUSTIC OR ARCHITECTURE, AND IS EXEMPLIFIED THROUGH THE USE OF LARGE STONE CONSTRUCTION AND ARCH DOORWAYS OF THE SHELTER HOUSE.
WHILE THE PLANS DO NOT LIST AN ARCHITECTS BELIEVE THE STRUCTURE WAS DESIGNED BY NOTABLE LOCAL ARCHITECT, HUGO CUY, REPRESENTING AN IMPORTANT ERA OF GROWTH AND AND INVESTMENT IN AUSTIN PARKS.
OTHER NOTABLE STRUCTURES DESIGNED BY CUY INCLUDE THE BATHHOUSE OF BARTON SPRINGS, THE SHELTER HOUSES AT EASTWOOD PARK, LITTLE STACY PARK, AND WEST AUSTIN PARK.
SO, WITH A NEW UNDERSTANDING OF THE HISTORIC HISTORY OF PALM PARK SHELTER HOUSE, AND THE PLANS FOR ITS PRESERVATION, WE REQUEST THIS BODY TO TAKE ACTION TO RECOMMEND HISTORIC ZONING FOR THE FOOTPRINT OF THE PALM PARK SHELTER HOUSE, AND NEXT SLIDE.
AND I'M HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
WE ALSO HAVE SOME, UH, MEMBERS FROM THE WATERLOO GREENWAY CONCERN, SO YOU COULD HELP ANSWER QUESTIONS AS WELL.
IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE STAFF FOR THE PRESENTATION? ALRIGHT.
ARE THERE OTHER SPEAKERS HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM? IF SO, YOU CAN.
UH, IS THERE ANYBODY HERE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION AND SEEING NONE THEN? UH, COMMISSIONERS.
I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM.
COMMISSIONER, UH, LAROCHE, SECOND COMMISSIONER ACTON.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND.
SO COMMISSIONERS, UH, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
COMMISSIONER UCCI, AND I PUT THIS ON FOR HISTORIC, UH, CONSIDERATION.
UNFORTUNATELY, HE'S NOT HERE THIS EVENING.
UH, BUT CERTAINLY IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS WHO ARE SO MOTIVATED TO, UH, TO OFFER A, A MOTION ON THIS ITEM.
I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION, UH, BASED ON ARCHITECTURE, HISTORIC ASSOCIATIONS, AND COMMUNITY VALUE.
IS THAT ALL THREE WERE ON THERE? CORRECT? THAT IS, THAT IS WHAT I UNDERSTOOD THE RECOMMENDATION WAS.
SO THAT IS SECOND BY COMMISSIONER COOK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER RICE.
THIS PROJECT CAME TO US, UM, COUPLE OF TIMES AT THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE.
UH, AND THE ORIGINAL TREATMENT WAS THE, UM, CANOPY OVER.
IT WAS, UH, THE MATERIALS WERE A LITTLE MORE CONTEMPORARY, MODERN, UH, EXPOSED STEEL.
AND, UH, WE SUGGESTED THEY SOFTEN IT AND MAYBE MAKE IT APPEAR MORE LIKE A TREE SHADE, UH, LIKE THE PECAN THAT HAVE BEEN AROUND IT FOREVER.
AND THEY CAME BACK AND, UH, SIMPLIFIED IT A GREAT DEAL.
SO I REALLY BELIEVE THAT THE STRUCTURE STANDS OUT.
SO JUST IN TERMS OF THE TREATMENT PLAN FOR IT AND APPROPRIATENESS FOR A LANDMARK, I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY THIS QUALIFIES AS A LANDMARK.
IT'S, IT'S A CENTERPIECE OF A VERY IMPORTANT HISTORIC PARK AND A GREAT PIECE OF ARCHITECTURE, A GREAT LOCATION.
UM, BUT I JUST DIDN'T WANNA NOTE THAT THE APPLICANT, UM, MADE CHANGES THAT I THINK, UH, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE INTEGRITY OF, OF THE SPACE AND, UM, TWO OF THE SEVEN ASPECTS OF INTEGRITY ARE SETTING AND FEELING.
AND THAT CANOPY REALLY REINFORCES, UH, THE SHADE ASPECT OF THE TREES THAT HAVE BEEN THERE FOR, FOR MANY, MANY DECADES.
AND ALSO THE USE OF THAT AREA AS KIND OF A IMPROMPTU AMPHITHEATER AREA THAT KIND OF AMPLIFIES THE FEELING AND USE OF IT AS A COVERED AMP, UH, THEATER AREA.
SO I VERY STRONGLY SUPPORT IT, AND I'M GRATEFUL FOR THE APPLICANT FOR, UH, TAKING THE TIME TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES THAT I THINK GREATLY APPROVED.
UH, COMMISSIONER RICE, LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR SECOND.
OH, I'M JUST, I'M, I WOULD AGREE WITH ALL OF THAT.
I MEAN, I'M JUST, I'M REALLY IMPRESSED WITH WHERE THIS PROJECT HAS COME.
I KNOW I, THERE'S BEEN, UM, DISCUSSION ABOUT IT FOR A WHILE NOW, AND I JUST HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING THIS CASE FROM BEFORE WHEN I WAS ON, UM, THIS COMMISSION AROUND THE, THE PALM PARK PROJECT.
UM, AND I THINK THAT THE PLAINTIFF THAT'S PRESENTED TO US IS JUST EXCELLENT.
UM, ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER LAROCHE? I JUST WANNA THANK THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR DILIGENCE ON THAT PROJECT.
UH, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALRIGHT.
OH, I JUST, GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER.
I WANNA NOTICE PART OF THE TREATMENT, THEY ARE REMOVING THE CEILINGS IN THE RESTROOM PORTIONS.
UH, NONE OF THE MATERIAL THAT'S BEING REMOVED IS ORIGINAL AND IT'S ALL BEING DONE IN THE INTEREST OF, OF SAFETY AND STABILITY AND CONSERVATION OF, OF THE, OF
[01:10:01]
THE STRUCTURE.ALRIGHT, IF THERE ARE NO OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS, THEN I WILL CALL THE QUESTION.
THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND.
AND COMMISSIONER RICE, CAN WE GET YOU YES, YES, YES.
NO TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES THERE.
ALL I SAY, ALL HANDS ARE RAISED AND IT IS UNANIMOUS.
UH, WE WANT TO THANK THE PARKS DEPARTMENT AND ALSO NOTE THAT, UM, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF OTHER STRUCTURES, UH, OTHER PARK STRUCTURES THAT ARE WORTHY OF THE SIMILAR CONSIDERATION.
AND IN FACT, UH, THE RELATIONSHIP THAT WE WOULD HAVE WITH, UH, THE PARKS DEPARTMENT IN REALLY HELPING TO BRING FORWARD A NUMBER OF THE CITY OWNED PROPERTIES, NOT ONLY AT PAR, BUT IN OTHER DEPARTMENTS.
UH, I THINK THIS IS THE, THIS IS AN INDICATION OF WHAT CAN HAPPEN GIVEN ALL THE RIGHT CIRCUMSTANCES.
SO WE THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR MAKING THIS AVAILABLE.
I, LIKE YOU SAID, MANY HISTORIC ASSETS ON OUR PROPERTIES, SO WE'LL SEE YOU AGAIN.
AND JUST AS A REMINDER, COMMISSIONERS, ITEM NUMBER SIX WAS THE FUNDING, UH, THAT WAS ALL PART OF THE, UH, GRANTS PROGRAM.
SO IT REALLY IS A SUCCESS ON EVERY LEVEL.
ALRIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONERS, THAT
[12. SB-2025-085188 – 609 Congress Ave. Congress Avenue National Register Historic District Council District 9]
BRINGS US UP TO THE NEXT DISCUSSION CASE.AND I HAVE THAT AS, UH, ONE OF THE NATIONAL REGISTERED DISTRICT PERMIT APPLICATIONS.
THIS IS A, UH, PROPOSAL TO CONSTRUCT A 51 SQUARE FOOT SIGN ON THE FRONT OF A TWO STORY BUILDING IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, UH, AT 6 0 9 CONGRESS AVENUE IN THE CONGRESS AVENUE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
UM, THE PROJECT MEETS SOME OF THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND, UM, STAFF NOTE IS JUST THAT A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SIGN PERMIT WAS APPROVED, UH, IN 2010 FOR THE SAME SITE OF, UM, FOR A SIGN OF ROUGHLY THE SAME SIZE.
SO THIS IS A PROPOSAL TO, UH, REPLACE THE SIGN IN THE SAME, SAME AMOUNT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE, UM, BUT WITH A DIFFERENT, UM, DIFFERENT BRANDING.
UM, STAFF RECOMMENDATION, THEREFORE, IS TO APPROVE THE SIGN SIZE GIVEN THE PREVIOUSLY INSTALLED SIGNAGE IN THE SAME LOCATION, BUT DO NOT APPROVE THE INTERNAL LIGHTING DESIGN AND REQUEST INDIRECT LIGHTING PER THE, UM, CITY'S HISTORIC SIGN DESIGN GUIDELINES.
ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? ALL RIGHT.
IS THE APPLICANT HERE WOULD LIKE TO, IS THE APPLICANT HERE? I DON'T THINK THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
ALRIGHT, WELL, DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS HERE FOR OR AGAINST? ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND, PLEASE.
COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE THIS, UH, READY FOR ACTION.
WHAT IS YOUR, WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO INITIATE? I DON'T KNOW.
WE'VE DISCUSSED THE SIGN THING MANY TIMES.
I KNOW THAT COMMISSIONER COOK HAS WORKED ON THIS QUITE A LOT, SO I'LL KIND OF DEFER TO HEAR FROM HIM ON THE SIGNAGE ISSUE.
I JUST DON'T LIKE THESE, SO I'M NOT GONNA MAKE A MOTION.
UH, BUT THAT THE LIGHTING CONDITION IS NOT PART OF OUR STANDARDS, WHICH IS WHY INDIRECT LIGHTING AS OPPOSED TO BACK LIGHTING IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
SO IF WE MAKE A MOTION TO GO AHEAD WITH THE, THE PROPOSAL, BUT THE LIGHTING STILL SEEMS TO BE, WOULD BE UP IN THE AIR, IF WE, UH, MAKE A PROPOSAL AND FOLLOW STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, THIS APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO FOREGO THE, UH, BACK LIGHTING IN ORDER TO PROCEED.
THEY'D HAVE TO DO INDIRECT WELL, THEY OR NOT LIGHT AT ALL, OR NOT ALLOWED? NO.
OR OF COURSE WE COULD DENY THIS SO, UH, OR WE COULD POSTPONE THIS
SO WE GOT, WE'RE KIND OF HERE UNTIL WE HAVE A MOTION COMMISSIONER IN THE INTEREST OF JUST MOVING US ALONG, I'LL, UH, MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE SIGNAGE, UH, PER STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
UH, COMMISSIONER ACTON, OR ACTUALLY I SEE COMMISSIONER
[01:15:01]
EVANS, YOU WERE NODDING YOUR HEAD.DO, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SECOND THE MOTION? YES, I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.
I'LL RECOGNIZE COMMISSIONER EVANS AS THE SECONDER, UH, COMMISSIONER LAROCHE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? NO, I LOOK THE SIGNAGE, WELL, I, I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY WE, WE STILL HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF WORK TO DO ON THE SIGNAGE REQUIREMENTS AND I THINK THAT KIND OF SPEAKS FOR ITSELF IN THIS REQUEST.
AND SO I'LL JUST LEAVE IT AT THAT.
CHAIR EVANS, I AGREE THAT, UH, THIS SIGN SHOWS THE NEED TO, UH, TO WORK ON THE STANDARDS, CERTAINLY.
BUT, UH, YOU STILL ARE, YOU'RE STILL SECONDED.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? I'D JUST LIKE TO NOTE, I, I DON'T LIKE THESE BECAUSE THE STANDARDS ARE VERY OBJECTIVE AND WHEN WE GRANT VARIANCES, THERE NEEDS TO BE A HARDSHIP.
AND I'M CONCERNED ABOUT STATING THAT THERE IS ALREADY A SIGN THAT'S NOT COMPLIANT, UH, AS A REASON TO ACCEPT A NEW SIGN THAT'S NOT COMPLIANT.
I DO RECOGNIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF BUSINESSES THRIVING IN THESE DISTRICTS, AND I DO AGREE THERE'S MORE WORK TO BE DONE.
UH, IT BOTHERS ME LESS THAT IT'S ON THE AWNING AND NOT ON THE BUILDING.
UM, AND DEFINITELY NOT BEING LIT, BUT, UM, THESE JUST NEED, NEED TO BE FINE TUNED.
I, I JUST, I'M GONNA ABSTAIN FROM THE VOTE BECAUSE, UM, I, I DON'T LIKE GRANTING VARIANCES BECAUSE EVERYONE'S GONNA COME TO US ASKING FOR A VARIANCE AND WE'RE GONNA START VOTING ON HOW WE FEEL ABOUT HOW THE SIGN LOOKS.
AND THEY'RE VERY OBJECTIVE STANDARDS AND PEOPLE SHOULD JUST WORK WITHIN THEM.
AND IF WE NEED TO MAKE THE SIGNS A LITTLE BIGGER FOR THE BUSINESSES TO THRIVE, THEN WE NEED TO ADJUST THE STANDARDS, BUT NOT DO IT ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS? ALRIGHT, I'LL CALL THE QUESTION THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND.
AND ANY ABSTAINING WITH TWO ABSTENTIONS? SO SEVEN FAVOR, TWO ABSTENTIONS.
UH, I WILL MENTION THAT THERE IS QUITE A BIT OF RESOURCE AVAILABLE, UH, WITH OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, UH, ABOUT SIGNAGE AND HISTORIC DISTRICTS.
SO THERE ARE LOTS OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES, THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT PRECEDENT AND AS WE CONSIDER OUR STANDARDS, WHICH HAVE SERVED US UP TO A POINT, BUT STILL HAS CLEARLY HAVE SOME ISSUES, UH, THAT MAY BE VERY MUCH ONE OF THE COMMITTEE TASKS WORKING WITH STAFF ON APPRISING, THE, THE SIGNED STANDARDS IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS.
ALRIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONERS THAT NOW
[15. PR-2025-029950; HR-2025-056344 – 1703 Alameda Dr. Travis Heights-Fairview Park National Register Historic District Council District 9]
GETS US TO THE NEXT DISCUSSION.CASE ITEM, UH, ANOTHER NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT CASE ITEM NUMBER 15.
THE PROPOSAL HERE IS TO, UH, AT 1703 ALAMEDA DRIVE IS TO DEMOLISH A CIRCA 1939 HOUSE, WHICH CONTRIBUTED TO THE NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT AND TO CONSTRUCT A TWO STORY HOUSE IN GENERAL AT THE SAME LOCATION ON THE LOT, BUILT IN A SIMPLE, MINIMAL, TRADITIONAL FORM.
THE HOUSE AT 1703 EDA DRIVE IS SET AT GRADE SLIGHTLY ABOVE THE STREET ON A P AND BEAM FOUNDATION WITH A CONCRETE SKIRT DUE TO ELEVATION ON THE SITE.
UH, THE CRAWL SPACE IS MUCH HIGHER AT THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE THAN AT THE REAR, WHICH IT SITS NEARLY AT GRADE.
UH, THE HOUSE IS NEARLY RECTANGULAR AND PLANNED WITH A SMALL FRONT PORCH CUT OUT AT ONE CORNER, WHICH IS ACCESSED FROM STAIRWAY INTO A FRONT WALKWAY IS CLAD IN HORIZONTAL WOOD SIDING AT ALL.
EXTERIOR WALLS AND ORIGINAL SCREENS ARE PRESENT AT THE FOREFRONT WINDOWS AS WELL AS AT THE SIDE, ALONG WITH THE SCREEN DOOR AT THE REAR OF THE PORCH AS THE PRIMARY ENTRYWAY.
WINDOWS ARE TYPICALLY PAIRED OR ARRANGED IN THREE UNITS SIDE BY SIDE.
THERE IS MINIMAL OVERHANG FROM THE HIP ROOF, WHICH IS CLAD IN COMPOSITION SHINGLE.
OVERALL, THE HOUSE IS IN INTACT CONDITION WHEN VIEWED FROM THE STREET WITH MINIMAL ALTERATIONS APPARENT AFTER CONSTRUCTION AROUND 1939.
THE HOUSE WAS FIRST OWNED BY HIRAM AND DORIS BROWN, WHO WORKED AT LOCAL BUSINESSES, EACH AS, UH, TEXAS CLEANERS, UH, AND SHOE REPAIR, UH, SUCH AS TEXAS CLEANERS AND SHOE REPAIR.
THE BROWNS, UH, OWNED THE PROPERTY THROUGH WORLD WAR II AND SHORTLY AFTER WAS SOLD TO CHARLES AND BERTHA KINNEY.
CHARLES KINNEY WORKED AS A SALESMAN AND BERTHA WORKED FOR MANY YEARS AS A CLERK AT THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE.
FOR A TIME THERE WERE ADULT SON LIVED WITH THEM WHILE ATTENDING THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS.
UH, CITY OF AUSTIN'S HISTORIC DESIGN STANDARDS ARE BASED ON THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION AND ARE USED TO EVALUATE PROJECTS IN NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICTS.
THE PRO THIS PROJECT I HAS PROPOSED MEETS SOME OF THE APPLICABLE
[01:20:01]
STANDARDS.THE PROPERTY CONTRIBUTES TO THE TRAVIS HEIGHTS FAIRVIEW PARK NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT PROPERTY PROPERTIES MUST MEET TWO CRITERIA FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION.
STAFF HAS EVALUATED THE PROPERTY AND DETERMINED THAT IT DOES NOT MEET TWO CRITERIA.
UH, THIS PROJECT HAS ATTENDED THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AND COMMITTEE FEEDBACK INCLUDES CON, CONSIDERING A GABLE ROOF ABOVE THE GARAGE TO REDUCE APPEARANCE OF A SINGLE LARGE ROOF SLOPE FROM THE STREET.
PROVIDE RENDERINGS OR DRAWINGS FROM A LOWER ANGLE, SIMILAR TO A HEIGHT AT EYE LEVEL FROM THE STREET IN ORDER TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WHAT THE MOST PUBLICLY AVAILABLE OR PUBLICLY VISIBLE PORTIONS OF THE NEW DESIGN WILL BE.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS, UH, TO RELEASE THE DEMO PERMIT UPON COMPLETION OF A CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE AND COMMENT ON PLANS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION.
UH, ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? ALRIGHT, HEARING NONE, UH, WE, WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT? YES.
HELLO, MY NAME IS BRIAN RANDALL.
UM, THE APPLICANT FOR 1703 ALAMEDA.
UM, I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, OBVIOUSLY, AND, UH, I DID, UH, OR ACTUALLY THE HOMEOWNER AND, UM, FUTURE HOMEOWNER AND MYSELF ATTENDED THE A RC AND WENT THROUGH, UM, ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT THEY HAD.
THERE WAS A PDF OF THE ADDENDUM AND BASICALLY, JUST REAL QUICKLY, ONLY HAD THE TWO QUESTIONS.
UM, CAN YOU GO ONE MORE SLIDE PLEASE? SO WHAT WE DID WAS WE RENTED IT WITH THE, UM, GAVE A, UH, THE CONSIDERATION THAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE MEETING AND, UM, ALSO LOWER THE, UH, PERSPECTIVE FROM THE STREET VIEW.
UM, I STILL THINK IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE HIGHER THAN, OR A LITTLE LOWER THAN THIS, BUT, UM, AND ALL THE OTHER QUESTIONS THAT WERE ASKED, UM, FROM THE A RCI BELIEVE WE ANSWERED IN FULL.
AND, UM, COULD YOU GO ONE MORE SLIDE? THIS IS THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.
SO, UM, THE COLORS 'CAUSE OF THE SOFTWARE THEY USE, IT'S JUST LIKE BRIGHT SUNLIGHT VERSUS, UM, BEING IN THE SHADOWS.
UH, BUT WE ACTUALLY PREFER THIS, UM, ELEVATION.
UH, I THINK IT REALLY MEETS THE DESIGN STANDARDS.
AND ALL OF THE MATERIALS THAT ARE ON THE HOUSE ARE ACTUALLY, UM, ALSO ON THE CURRENT STREET.
SO THERE'S BOR AND BATTEN AND THE SHINGLES.
ALL THOSE ARE FOUND WITH ON THE ACTUAL BLOCK OF ALAMEDA.
AND WE USE SOME OF THE DESIGN STANDARDS OF THE, OR I'M SORRY, SOME OF THE DESIGN OF THE CURRENT HOUSE WITH THE PORCH LAYOUT UPSTAIRS AND REDUCED, UM, WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY, UM, THE UPSTAIRS PORCH WAS A LITTLE BULKY AND WE REDUCED THAT AND STILL THINK WE CAN EVEN REDUCE IT A LITTLE MORE ONCE IT'S ENGINEERED.
UM, AND THAT'LL ALL BE BROUGHT INTO, UM, CONSIDERATION WHEN WE DO THAT ASPECT.
MR. RANDALL, THANK YOU, UH, COMMISSIONERS.
ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? I JUST WANTED TO KNOW IF YOU WANTED TO SPEAK ABOUT THE OTHER CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES THAT YOU REFERENCED THAT HAD GROUND FLOOR GARAGES AND UPSTAIRS STRUCTURES THAT WERE SIMILAR BUILT INTO THE, THE HILLSIDE.
UM, IF WE COULD GO BACK TO THE FIRST BRIEFING AND GO TO ABOUT THE FEW MORE SLIDES DOWN.
SO DURING, IT SHOULD BE A PROBABLY ONE OR TWO MORE, I BELIEVE.
SO THESE ARE ALL CONTRIBUTING HOUSES ON ALAMEDA STREET.
THEY ALL ARE, UM, EXPERIENCING THE SAME DIFFICULTY TO THAT WE ARE WITH A ELEVATED, UM, AREA TO BUILD ON AND THEY ALL HAVE FRONT FACING GARAGES BUILT LOWER THAN THE EXISTING STORY.
AND IN FACT, UM, WE'RE STILL TRYING TO PUSH BACK THE TWO STORY PORTION OF THE HOUSE WHERE ALL THESE HOUSES, THEY BASICALLY LOOK LIKE TWO STORY HOUSES AT THE 25 FOOT SET BACK LINE WHERE OUR TWO STORY PORTION IS.
UM, DEFINITELY SET BACK FROM THE 25 FOOT SETBACK AREA.
I THINK THE NEXT PHOTOGRAPH DO YOU HAVE, UM, THERE IT IS.
SO THAT WAS FROM OUR VERY FIRST INTERACTION AND ONCE
[01:25:01]
WE HAD THE, UH, THE MEETING WITH THE A RC THAT WE WERE UNABLE TO ATTEND, UM, WE PUT TOGETHER THE SECOND ONE AND THEN WENT THROUGH AND, AND STILL WE REALLY THINK IT FITS WELL WITH THE DESIGN STYLE AND WILL LOOK GREAT ON THE STREET.AND OF COURSE THE THE NEWEST PRESENTATION IS THE ADDENDUM THAT JUST CAME YEAH.
AND, AND THAT IS REALLY, WE DIDN'T CHANGE ANYTHING ON THE HOUSE.
WE DID IT WITH THE GABLE ROOF IN THE FRONT, BUT, UM, HONESTLY FROM THE STREET PERSPECTIVE, THIS VERSION LOOKS AND, AND PRETTY MUCH ALL OF OUR OPINIONS LOOK, LOOK BETTER.
AND IT, IT REALLY DOES FOLLOW THE, UM, CRAFTSMAN STYLE WHEN WE WERE, UM, GOING THROUGH THOSE, UH, DESIGN STANDARDS STAFF.
CAN WE GO BACK TO THE, THE GARAGE GABLE ROOF? UH, IT WAS IN THE PREVIOUS, YEAH.
UH, THE, THE, THE UPDATED VERSION.
ALRIGHT, UM, AGAIN, ANY QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, UH, WE APPRECIATE YOUR, UH, WORK TO GET US TO THIS POINT.
ARE THERE SPEAKERS HERE IN FAVOR OF THIS ITEM? OTHER SPEAKERS? IS THERE ANYBODY HERE SPEAK TO SPEAK AGAINST? WE HAD, ALRIGHT.
YES, WE HAD SOMEONE SIGNED UP, UH, MI WEISS, UH, TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION VIRTUALLY, BUT, UH, HE'S NOT AROUND.
MR. WEISS, IS MR. WEISS ON ONLINE ANYMORE? HE'S DROPPED OFF.
I BEG YOUR PARDON? HE WAS NEVER THERE.
HE SIGNED UP BUT NEVER CAME ONLINE.
SO THEN, UM, WE HAVE NO SPEAKERS, UH, COMMISSIONERS.
I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
IT'S BEEN MOVED BY COMMISSIONER COOK, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GROGAN.
I'LL MOVE TO RELEASE THE DEMOLITION PERMIT.
WAIT, I'M SORRY TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
WE DID THAT FIRST, RIGHT? YES.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? RAISE YOUR HAND.
I WILL NOW ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THIS ITEM.
MOVE TO RELEASE THE DEMOLITION PERMIT PENDING CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE.
AND, UM, COMMENT ON THE PLANS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION.
COMMISSIONER COOK, THANK YOU FOR YOUR MOTION.
COMMISSIONER GROGAN, DID YOU WANT TO, OR COMMISSIONER ALVAREZ, WHO WOULD LIKE TO SECOND THE MOTION? COMMISSIONER ALVAREZ.
ALRIGHT, UH, COMMISSIONER COOK, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? YEAH, I THINK, UM, FIRST OF ALL, IT IS ALWAYS A SHAME TO LOSE A CONTRIBUTING PROPERTY AND I APPRECIATE THE CONTINUED ADVOCACY FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO PUSH BACK ON THAT.
I JUST DON'T SEE THAT IT RISES TO THE LEVEL OF A LANDMARK.
AND GIVEN THE OWNER'S GOOD FAITH EFFORT AND OBVIOUS IMPROVEMENTS, UM, AND BETTER COMPLIANCE WITH THE DESIGN STANDARDS IN THE NEW CONSTRUCTION, UH, I, I DO WANT TO REWARD THAT AND ENCOURAGE THAT AS, UH, FRUITFUL IN THAT BOTH SIDES CAN BENEFIT FROM IN THE FUTURE.
SO, UH, I WOULDN'T WANT TO HOLD THIS ONE UP ANY FURTHER.
I THINK THE THE NEW DESIGN IS BETTER ALL AROUND.
IT'S MORE COMPLIANT WITH THE STANDARDS.
UH, I THINK THE APPLICANT, UH, OWNERS ARE, ARE HAPPIER WITH IT AS WELL.
I APPRECIATE THE, UH, SHOWING THE OTHER CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES THAT HAD THE FIRST FLOOR GARAGES THAT REALLY PUT IT, PUT IT OVER THE TOP FOR ME.
UM, BUT, UH, YEAH, THE, THE ORIGINAL HOUSE ITSELF, THE STREET IS INTACT, BUT IT WASN'T THE MOST OUTSTANDING EXAMPLE OF ARCHITECTURE ON, ON THE STREET.
AND THE NEW ONE REALLY DOES RESPECT THE STYLE TO A, AN ENORMOUS DEGREE.
SO I APPRECIATE THE APPLICANT'S PARTICIPATION.
UH, ALL THAT COMMISSIONER COOK JUST SAID.
AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO THANK, UH, THE APPLICANT FOR WORKING WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE TO REALLY GETTING TO A POINT WHERE WE GOT SOMETHING A LITTLE MORE COMPATIBLE AND A GOOD FIT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I'M GLAD THAT ALL PARTIES SEEMED TO BE, SEEMED TO BE HAPPY.
OKAY, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS AND I, I WAS VERY IMPRESSED AS WELL TO SEE THE PROGRESS, UH, AS ILLUSTRATED BY WHAT THE APPLICANT STARTED WITH.
UH, OUR PREFERENCE ALWAYS IS TO MAINTAIN EXISTING, UH, CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE IF POSSIBLE, EVEN IF THAT MEANS INCORPORATING IT INTO SOME OTHER TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT.
SO IT STILL HAS MAINTAINED ITS INTEGRITY, UH, BUT I TELL YOU WHAT, IF WE CAN'T DO THAT, UH, THIS IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF USING THE SENSE OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD OF THE REASON WHY IT IS A HISTORIC DISTRICT AND INTEGRATING THAT, UH, INTO COMPATIBLE NEW STRUCTURE, UH, WHICH IS CERTAINLY WHAT YOU'VE BEEN ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH.
SO, UH, MY COMPLIMENTS AGAIN TO THE WILLINGNESS TO WORK AS YOU ALL HAVE, UH, CREATIVELY.
AND, UH, THANKS TO ALL THE ARCHITECTURE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEMBERS, UH, COMMISSIONER
[01:30:01]
GROGAN AS WELL, UH, UH, YOU, YOU THIS, THIS ONE WE DEFINITELY WANNA WANT TO AGAIN, OFFER AS OUR APPRECIATION.I CERTAINLY SUPPORT THE MOTION.
ALRIGHT, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, COMMISSIONERS, UH, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND.
ANY OPPOSED? NOW OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE UNANIMOUS.
[16. HR-2025-075283; PR-2025-062597 – 705 Brownlee Circle West Line National Register Historic District Council District 9]
NEXT ITEM, AGAIN, A NATIONAL REGISTERED DISTRICT DISCUSSION ITEM IS, UH, ITEM NUMBER 16.THIS IS A PROPOSAL TO CONSTRUCT A MULTI-UNIT RESIDENCE.
UH, THE PREVIOUS BUILDING ON THE PROPERTY WAS LISTED AS NON-CONTRIBUTING TO THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND WAS NOT REVIEWED BY THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION WHEN THE, UM, APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED IN MAY, 2025.
UH, THE CITY OF AUSTIN'S HISTORIC DESIGN STANDARDS ARE BASED ON THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION AND ARE USED TO EVALUATE PROJECTS IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICTS.
UH, THIS PROJECT MEETS FEW OF THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO COMMENT ON PLANS.
AND CAN WE SEE THE PLANS AS, UH, THEY'VE BEEN PRESENTED? WE HAVE THEM IN OUR BACKUP, BUT I THINK IT WARRANTS SEEING THESE.
AND AGAIN, STAFF, WOULD YOU DESCRIBE, THIS IS A FOURPLEX THAT IS BEING PROPOSED FOR THIS NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT? THAT IS CORRECT, YES.
AND IT REPLACES A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE, CORRECT? YES.
A NON-CONTRIBUTING SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE, BUT NON-CONTRIBUTING.
SO THEREFORE WE DID NOT REVIEW.
HOWEVER, IN LIGHT OF OUR CONVERSATION, OUR COMMENTS ARE RELATIVE TO THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THIS STRUCTURE FOR THE WESTLINE NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICT.
SO THAT'S WHY IT HAS BEEN POSTED.
SO, UH, UH, ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? ALL RIGHT.
HEARING NONE THEN CAN WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT? I THINK I'VE GOTTA PUSH THE BUTTON.
HI, I'M DAVID WEBER OF WEBER STUDIO ARCHITECTS, AND I HAVE, UH, ONE OF THE OWNERS, MELISSA SKIDMORE, WHO'S, UH, OBVIOUSLY HIRED US TO BE THE ARCHITECT OF THIS PROJECT.
I DO WANNA MAKE A CLARIFICATION.
UM, IT, IT ACTUALLY IS CURRENTLY A DUPLEX, IT'S TWO UNITS AND, UH, SO IT'S NOT A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE RIGHT NOW, DUPLEX.
THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
YEAH, IT DOESN'T MATTER NECESSARILY BECAUSE THE, UM, 'CAUSE WE WERE DOING THE SAME THING OVER A DUPLEX AS, UM, FROM THE BEGINNING.
UM, I WILL SAY I, THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF A MISUNDERSTANDING ABOUT THE ARCHITECTURAL, UH, REVIEW COMMITTEE HEARING THAT WAS A FEW WEEKS AGO, SO I APOLOGIZE I WAS NOT ABLE TO ATTEND THAT.
BUT I THINK OUR MAIN REACTION TODAY IS THAT, UH, SEEING THE COMMENTS THAT, UH, STAFF, UH, PROVIDED FOR TONIGHT, I THINK OUR INTENT IS TO MAKE THIS WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD OVERALL, THE NATIONAL REGISTRY HISTORIC DISTRICT, IN A WAY THAT IS COMPATIBLE WITH WHAT THE CLIENTS ARE SEEKING.
AND WE ALWAYS, UH, SEEK TO TRY AND MAKE PROJECTS WE, UH, COMPATIBLE WITH THE SPACES AROUND THEM, WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD FABRIC AROUND IT.
UH, I WISH THESE DRAW, I I THINK WE PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE PROVIDED YOU A RENDERING OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE SO PEOPLE CAN UNDERSTAND THE INTENT BEHIND THE DESIGN WAS INDEED TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE A FAIRLY SHORT, IT IS A FAIRLY SHORT TWO STORY IN THE FRONT WITH THE MAIN SLOPE OF THE ROOF SLOPING AWAY FROM THE STREET.
AS Y'ALL ARE AWARE, IT'S SLOPES DOWN SIGNIFICANTLY IN THE BACK, BUT THE IDEA WAS ALWAYS TO HAVE THE HOUSE, UM, UH, IT GET TALLER AS IT MOVED AWAY FROM THE STREET.
SO WE COULD KEEP A LOWER PROFILE ON THE STREET, UH, FACE ITSELF.
AND IT IS A LITTLE BIT BELOW THE STREET, SO IT HELPS WITH THE OVERALL SCALE.
THE OTHER THING THAT'S INTERESTING IS THAT THE CLIENTS WENT THROUGH A LONG PROCESS A FEW YEARS AGO TO GET IT ZONED SO THEY COULD ACCOMMODATE A THIRD UNIT.
LIKE I SAID, THERE WAS A DUPLEX THAT THEY ALWAYS WANTED TO MAINTAIN, BUT THEY WANTED TO BUILD FOR THEMSELVES A HOUSE THAT THEY COULD LIVE IN AND ACCOMMODATE THEIR, UH, NEEDS OF THEIR SON, WHO THEY, WHO'S GOING TO BE LIVING WITH THEM, UH, UH, FOREVER IN THIS HOUSE.
UM, SO THE HOUSE, REALLY, EVERYTHING ABOUT THE SITE WAS DESIGNED TO BE ACCESSIBLE AND THAT'S WHY THEY NEEDED THE THREE UNIT BECAUSE THE EXISTING DUPLEX THAT WAS THERE WAS NOT GOING TO WORK.
THAT WAS GONNA BE MUCH MORE DIFFICULT TO TRY AND ADAPT THAT.
PLUS THEY ACTUALLY, UH, ONE OF THE OWNERS OF AUSTRALIAN, THEY BOTH HAVE A VERY, UH, SOCIAL MINDED, UH, WAY OF WANTING TO LIVE.
SO THEY ACTUALLY LIKE THE IDEA, I'M NOT SURE I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT, BUT THEY LIKE THE IDEA OF HAVING MULTIPLE OWN, UM, OCCUPANTS ON THE SAME SITE THAT THEY CAN INTERACT WITH, WHICH I THINK IS PRETTY, UH, WONDERFUL.
SO THAT'S WHY THEY ALWAYS WANTED TO DO THE DUPLEX WITH THEIR OWN RESIDENTS ON TOP.
[01:35:01]
IN FACT, SO MUCH SO THAT THEY'VE CREATED A SPACE THAT'S KIND OF AN AMENITY SPACE FOR THEM AND OTHER OCCUPANTS THAT ARE RENTERS.THE FACT THAT THEIR SON IS GOING TO, UH, ALWAYS NEED FULL-TIME CARE IN THE FUTURE IS PART OF THE REASON THEY WANTED TO HAVE A DUPLEX SO THEY COULD HAVE BOTH FAMILY AND POTENTIALLY A, UH, LONG-TERM CARE PROVIDER, UH, BE ONSITE AND AVAILABLE.
SO THAT WAS PART OF THE REASON, UH, THEY GOT THE DUPLEX IN THE FIRST PL WELL, THAT'S PART OF THE REASON HAVING THE DUPLEX IN THE FIRST PLACE WAS ALWAYS A BENEFIT TO THEM.
AND THEN THE ONE THING, UH, ONE LAST THING I'LL SAY, AND I WANT TO NOT TEASE UP ALL THE TIME IS, IS THAT, UM, BECAUSE THEY HAD TO ZONE IT TO MF THREE AT THE TIME TO BE ABLE TO DO THE THIRD UNIT, AND AT THE TIME THAT WE STARTED THE DESIGN, WE WERE SUBJECT TO COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS.
NOW, IN OUR OPINION AS THE ARCHITECTS, WE FELT LIKE, WELL, THAT'S NOT BAD, BECAUSE IF WE'RE GONNA BE A LITTLE BIT BIGGER, IT WOULD BE GOOD TO HAVE THOSE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS.
THE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS ARE NOT IN PLACE ANY LONGER.
AND AFTER, UH, JOHAN FAULK OF JAY PINELLI, UH, CONSTRUCTION, WHO Y'ALL KNOW AS A PREEMINENT, UM, HISTORIC PRESERVATION CONTRACTOR CAME AND LOOKED AT THE EXISTING HOUSE, UH, AND, AND AGAINST MY PREFERENCES RECOMMENDED THAT THE, SORRY, THE DUPLEX, HE RECOMMENDED THAT THE, JUST SEEING DUPLEX AND LIKE THE EXPANSIVE SOILS, WERE GONNA BE TOO HARD TO MAKE THAT.
SO THAT'S THE ONLY REASON IT'S EVEN A, A DEMOLITION AND NEW BUILD AT THIS POINT.
OUR ORIGINAL DESIGN STARTED AS A RENOVATION ADDITION TO THE DUPLEX.
AND EVEN WHEN IT WAS RECON CONCEPTUALIZED, UH, EVEN WHEN WE FOUND OUT IT NEEDED TO BE DEMOLISHED, WE, WE WERE ASKED BY MELISSA AND BRAD, SHOULD WE CONSIDER THE DESIGN OF THE DUPLEX PORTION? AND OUR ANSWER WAS NO.
WE STILL THINK THE DESIGN UH, MAKES SENSE.
SORRY, I TOOK UP SO MUCH TIME.
SO YOU MYSELF OH, JOSH FOR THAT.
I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT WAS NO WORRIES.
CAN YOU PLEASE, UH, READ FOR THE RECORD? YES.
IS, UH, THE COMMISSIONER RECUSING HIMSELF? YES.
SO COMMISSIONER LAROCHE IS, IS RECUSING HIMSELF, UH, IN LIGHT OF THE, UH, ENGINEER, UH, THE CONTRACTOR WHO WILL BE WORKING ON THIS PROJECT.
OH, HE'S NOT, THEY'RE NOT SELECTED, JUST SO YOU KNOW, THEY JUST CAME OUT.
WE, IT IS A, IT IS A DECISION THAT EACH COMMISSIONER MAKES.
UH, FOR THEMSELVES, BUT WE, WE CERTAINLY RESPECT THAT.
UM, SO THE NEXT SPEAKER PLEASE.
UM, SPEAKER WELL, I, I TECHNICALLY FULL THREE MINUTES.
UH, MY NAME'S MELISSA SKIDMORE AND, UM, I'M A LONGTIME RESIDENT OF AUSTIN.
UM, MY SON PETER, UH, IS OBVIOUSLY YOU ALL SEE HE USES A WHEELCHAIR AT ALL TIMES, AND SO HE NEEDS TO BE ABLE TO ACCESS ALL PLACES ON THE LOT.
UM, WHICH IS KIND OF HOW THIS DESIGN GOT STARTED, WAS TO KEEP THE EX THE EXISTING DUPLEX AND THEN BUILD AN ELEVATOR AND A NEW GARAGE BEHIND IT, AND THEN PUT A SECOND STORY OVER THE ENTIRE SITE SO THAT HE COULD GET TO ALL AREAS OF THE HOUSE.
UM, WE ACTUALLY STARTED THIS PROCESS THREE YEARS AGO AND HAVE SOMEHOW GOTTEN CAUGHT UP IN THE SWIRL OF AUSTIN CODE, UM, ZONING AND A NEW HOUSING CODE.
UM, AND SO THE DESIGN MORPHED FROM THREE UNITS INTO NEEDING TO BE FOUR.
UM, AND SO THAT'S HOW IT STANDS TODAY.
WE'RE EXCITED TO MOVE BACK TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD SO THAT WE CAN ALL LIVE TOGETHER AND POTENTIALLY HAVE, UH, ANOTHER FAMILY MEMBER OR CAREGIVERS LIVING IN THE DUPLEX DOWNSTAIRS AND ALLOW US TO HAVE PETER WITH US ALL THE TIME.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS OF THE OWNER? YES, COMMISSIONER, I HAVE A QUESTION.
UM, I'M NOT SURE IF IT MIGHT BE THE PEER REVIEW OF THIS COMMISSION, BUT SOME OF THE, UH, PUBLIC COMMENT MENTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE A DEED RESTRICTION OR A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT ISSUE TO DEAL WITH.
UM, IT GOT BROUGHT UP TO US LAST WEEK.
UM, THIS HAS BEEN, LIKE I SAID, A THREE YEAR PROCESS.
WE WENT TO AWANA IN JULY OF 2022 AND, UM, BROUGHT UP THIS IDEA OF ADDING A SECOND STORY TO THIS D EXISTING DUPLEX.
AND THEY WERE OF THE OPINION THAT WE WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO ADD A THIRD STORY BECAUSE IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY ZONING, AND THEREFORE WE WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE REZONING PROCESS, WHICH WE DID A THIRD UNIT TO ADD A THIRD UNIT.
SO, UH, WE WENT TO THE ZONING COMMITTEE,
[01:40:01]
THEY PASSED UNANIMOUSLY DESPITE NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION, UM, A REZONE TO MULTIFAMILY.BUT THEN WITH HOME TWO, AND AGAIN, ANA AND OUR NEIGHBORS AT THE TIME SAID, YOU KNOW, WE REALLY JUST HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT BEING MF ZONING.
WE WANT YOU ALL TO BE ABLE TO BUILD WHAT YOU WANT.
THEY WERE ALL AWARE THAT WE WANTED TO BUILD A SECOND STORY ONTO THIS, UH, HOUSE AT THE TIME.
AND NOBODY VOICED ANY OPPOSITION AT THAT TIME.
WE THEN, AFTER HOME TWO CAME INTO PLAY, WE SAID, OKAY, WELL THE, THE COMMUNITY WANTED US TO HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE.
NOW WE CAN HAVE A THIRD UNIT IN SINGLE FAMILY ZONING.
LET'S SEE IF WE CAN ADDRESS THE IMPERVIOUS COVER PROBLEM WITH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS.
THEY UNANIMOUSLY SAID, OKAY, YES, WE GRANT YOU, UM, THE ABILITY TO, FOR IMPERVIOUS COVER AND THE FAR YOUR RATIO, THERE WAS SOMETHING ELSE THERE THAT WAS ALSO PASSED AT THAT TIME.
THERE WAS ALSO, UM, SOME OPPOSITION FROM OUR, FROM AWANA WHO SAID THAT THEY WISHED US TO CAP THE HEIGHT AT 35 FEET.
AND WE SAID, WELL, OKAY, THAT'S FINE.
WE WE'RE PLANNING TO DO THAT ANYWAY.
UM, SO THAT WENT THROUGH AND THEN WE HEARD THAT, WELL, ACTUALLY THERE WAS A MISTAKE MADE IN SECTION 25, 2, WHATEVER THAT SAID, YOU CAN'T, IT'S NOT, THERE'S NO P THAT SAYS THAT YOU CAN BUILD THREE UNITS IN A MULTI-FAMILY ZONING.
YOU CAN BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY, YOU CAN BUILD A DUPLEX, YOU CAN BUILD FOUR AND ABOVE, BUT YOU CANNOT BUILD THREE.
SO THEN WE WERE ADVISED, WELL, THE BEST THING FOR YOU TO DO AT THIS POINT IS JUST TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE IT INTO FOUR UNITS.
AND SO WE SAID, OKAY, THE DOWNSTAIRS BASEMENT, SINCE THERE'S A KITCHENETTE AND A BATHROOM DOWN THERE ANYWAY, WE'LL MAKE THAT BE THE FOURTH UNIT AND THEN IT'LL CHECK ALL THE BOXES.
SO HERE WE ARE,
UM, DESPITE NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION, THEY'VE ALL STILL CONSISTENTLY SAID, WE WANT YOU TO BE ABLE TO BUILD WHAT YOU NEED TO BUILD AND MOVE INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND, UM, HEARING THAT THERE WAS OPPOSITION AND THIS DEED JURISDICTION COMING INTO PLAY WAS KIND OF A SURPRISE TO US SINCE THERE ARE OTHER HOUSES THAT WERE SUBJECT TO THE SAME DEED JURISDICTION THAT ARE ALSO MORE THAN ONE STORY.
I SUPPOSE THAT IS KIND OF YOU OPERATING AT YOUR OWN RISK SINCE I'VE NEVER DEALT THIS, DEALT WITH THIS PERSONALLY BEFORE, BUT IT'S SUBJECT TO A SURPRISE.
AND THERE IS A TWO STORY HOME OR STRUCTURE RIGHT NEXT TO YOU.
WELL, THAT'S AGAIN, OUR, OUR, WE, OUR JURISDICTION IS NOT A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, BUT BY THE SAME TOKEN, IF YOU'RE IN THE PROCESS OF VIOLATING ONE, THAT THAT IS ENOUGH OF A CONCERN THAT I THINK WE DO NEED TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSED WITH STAFF.
UH, SO I, I'M, I JUST WANNA PUT AN ASTERISK BY THAT BECAUSE YOU ARE PROPOSING A MULTI-STORY BUILDING AND WE'VE BEEN ALERTED TO THE FACT THAT THAT IS A VIOLATION OF THE DEED RESTRICTION.
SO, UH, WE'LL HAVE TO KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS.
BUT AGAIN, THAT'S NOT OUR SPECIFIC JURISDICTION.
UH, UM, AND I JUST, I JUST ADD HERE FROM THE STAFF PERSPECTIVE, UM, WE CAN'T ENFORCE ANYTHING AS IT COMES TO, UH, RESTRICTIVE COMPETENCE.
BUT, BUT KNOWING, KNOWING THAT ONE IS BEING VIOLATED ALSO HAS IMPLICATIONS.
SO I, I FOR ONE AT LEAST, WOULD LIKE SOME CLARIFICATION FROM LEGAL IN THAT SITUATION.
WE HAVEN'T ENCOUNTERED THIS BEFORE, SO, UM, AGAIN, WE CAN CONTINUE WITH THE DISCUSSION, BUT I, I, I'M PERSONALLY FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE MAKING ANY ACTION WITHOUT HAVING THAT CLARIFIED.
AND MY GUESS IS WE'LL NEED TO HAVE A FURTHER DISCUSSION WITH LEGAL, UH, BEFORE POSSIBLY THE NEXT MEETING.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? NO, I HAVE A QUESTION OF STAFF IN TERMS OF THE TIMELINE OF WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED.
WE'RE NOT BEING ASKED TO RELEASE A DEMOLITION PERMIT.
WE'RE BEING ASKED TO MAKE COMMENTS.
AND THAT, ISN'T THAT A 75 DAY TIMELINE? THAT'S CORRECT, YES.
SO WE COULD POSTPONE ONE TIME, UH, WE COULD POSTPONE TWICE.
THIS CAME, UH, THIS WAS APPLICANT IT FROM LAST MONTH.
SO WE WOULD HAVE, UH, TWO MORE OPPORTUNITIES FROM THE STATE.
THAT SAID, UH, OUR PURVIEW IS TO COMMENT ON THE PLANS.
AND SO CERTAINLY IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE COMMISSIONERS IF FROM THE DIOCESE IS, UH, RESPONSE TO WHAT WE'RE SEEING TONIGHT.
UH, EVEN IF IT'S IN GENERAL, UH, DISCUSSION.
AND THEN, UH, ONE POSSIBILITY MAY BE THAT IF THERE IS A POSTPONEMENT, THAT WE WOULD ALSO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THAT FURTHER DISCUSSION WITH THE ARCHITECTURE REVIEW COMMITTEE.
[01:45:01]
SO, AND I, I DID HAVE ONE QUESTION OF THE APPLICANT.IT'S, I'M HAVING PASSWORD ISSUES, SO I'M DOING EVERYTHING ON MY PHONE AND THIS IS KIND OF AN ODD LOT, BUT, UH, THERE IS A ONE STORY MASS AT THE FRONT, IS THAT CORRECT? I'M KIND OF HAVING A HARD TIME.
I SEE IT IN THE RENDERING, BUT I'M HAVING A HARD TIME TRANSLATING THAT TO THE PLAN.
'CAUSE SORRY, THE EXISTING DUPLEXES ONE STORY MM-HMM
AND SO WHAT WE'RE ADDING ON THE FRONT IS THE SECOND STORY, BUT IT'S GOT AN EIGHT FOOT, EIGHT INCH PLATE HEIGHT ON THE FRONT, AND THE SLOPE OF THE ROOF SLOPES AWAY FROM THE STREET, THEREFORE TOWARDS THE BACK OF THE LOT.
SO THE, THE RENDERING ON THE FRONT THAT HAS A ONE STORY, UH, MASSING WITH A PARENT, A DECK ON TOP, IS THAT FACING BROWNLY OR IS THAT NO, THAT, THAT'S ACTUALLY THE TALLEST PART THAT'S IN THE BACK, THAT'S FACING THE NEW DEVELOPMENT THAT'S COMING.
AND, AND YOU'RE SEEING SLOPE THERE, WHICH IS WHY IT LOOKS AS TALL AS IT DOES.
UH, ARE THERE OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? ANY, ANY SPEAKERS IN FAVOR? TOM TOM BRA SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
IS THAT IN FAVOR? IT'S IN OPPOSITION.
SO IF WE HAVE SPEAKERS IN OPPOSITION, THEN PLEASE COME AND STEVE IN FAVOR OR OPPOSED? OH, YES.
UH, MR. AMOS, UH, SIGNED UP ON THE FIRST PAGE.
AND IS HE HERE TO SPEAK
UM, I'M STEVE AMON, THE CHAIR OF THE OTTAWA, AUSTIN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
IT'S GOOD TO SEE MANY OF YOU AGAIN.
UH, CHAIR AND CHAIRMAN, COMMISSIONERS, UH, THE APPLICANT, UH, FOR 7 0 5 BROLEY CIRCLE.
MET WITH THE ANA ZONING COMMITTEE WITH AWA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ON THURSDAY, JULY 31ST.
I HAPPENED TO BE AT THE MEETING AND DURING THAT TIME, WE LEARNED THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT HAS CHANGED FROM A TRIPLEX TO A FOURPLEX SINCE ITS PREVIOUS APPEARANCE WITH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ON OCTOBER OF 2024.
ADDITIONALLY, A NEIGHBOR BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION A RESTRICTED COVENANT AND SUBDIVISION PLOT, WHICH I THINK YOU MAY HAVE THAT LIMITS DEVELOPMENT ON LOT 34, WHICH IS 7 0 5 BROLEY, UH, BROWNLEY CIRCLE TWO, ONE STORY A NIGHT, A NEARBY NEIGHBOR PRESENT AT THE MEETING AND OTHERS UNABLE TO ATTEND, EXPRESSED CONCERNS ABOUT THE SCALE AND MASSING OF THE PROPOSED FOUR UNIT, FOUR STORY STRUCTURE, AS WELL AS IMPLICATIONS OF THE EXISTING RESTRICTED COVENANT.
ANA RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT SCHEDULE A MEETING WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AS THEY'VE NOT YET PRESENTED THE REVISED DRAWINGS.
AND WE ALSO ENCOURAGE THE APPLICANT TO ENGAGE WITH THE NEIGHBORS TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS ABOUT THE RESTRICTED COVENANT AND CLARIFY WHETHER A MULTI-STORY BUILDING IS PERMISSIBLE UNDER ITS TERMS. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
ANY QUESTIONS OF THE SPEAKER? GOOD.
UH, IS THERE ANOTHER SPEAKER? PLEASE COME TO THE MICROPHONE AND INTRODUCE YOURSELF.
HOW Y'ALL DOING THIS EVENING? MY NAME'S TOM BRAY.
I'M THE OWNER OF 7 0 7 BROWNLEY CIRCLE.
I LIVE DIRECTLY NEXT DOOR TO 7 0 5.
I'M REPRESENTING MYSELF, UM, THIS EVENING.
UM, THE NOTICE I RECEIVED FOR THE FIRST TIME LAST WEEK SHOWED A SIGNIFICANT BUILD A FOURPLEX, FOUR STORIES TALL, WHICH WAS THE FIRST TIME I'D HEARD OF IT.
SO I, UH, ATTENDED THE ANA MEETING AND, UH, VOICED CONCERNS THERE LAST WEEK.
UM, I'VE NEVER HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THE APPLICANTS ABOUT THE HOUSE HAVING MULTIPLE STORIES OR ANYTHING IN LINE.
WHAT, UH, THAT WAS JUST REPORTED BY MS. SKIDMORE.
THIS IS NEWS TO ME, AND IT'S ODD BECAUSE I LIVE DIRECTLY NEXT DOOR.
SO FIRST TIME, YOU KNOW, I'VE HEARD OF THIS, IN MY OPINION, THE SCALE AND MASSING
[01:50:01]
OF THE PROJECT DOES NOT FIT IN WITH THE NEIGHBORING HOUSES.AND WHEN I BOUGHT MY HOUSE FIVE YEARS AGO, IT WAS KNOWN THERE IS A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT IN PLACE, UM, BIDDING THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR TO BUILD OVER ONE STORY.
AND THAT WAS A BIG QUESTION OF MINE WAS, OKAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT DO I NEED TO BE WORRIED ABOUT IN TERMS OF WHAT CAN BE BUILT NEXT TO ME? AND I BELIEVE THAT'S WHY THESE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS ARE IN PLACE.
SO I THINK EVERYBODY HAS A COPY OF THE COVENANT OF THE PLAT.
UM, AND IN MY OPINION, AGAIN, UM, I JUST DON'T KNOW HOW WE CAN MOVE FORWARD DISCUSSING WHAT I WOULD SAY IS A GROSSLY OUT OF SCALE STRUCTURE WHEN WE DON'T HAVE PROOF THAT THE BUILDING CAN BE LEGALLY BUILT IN THAT PLACE.
AND SO I ASK THAT WE POSTPONE THIS HEARING UNTIL WE GET CLARITY ON THE VALIDITY OF THE RESTRICTED COVENANT AND, UM, LEGAL OPINION ON WHAT CAN BE BUILT OVER THERE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COMMISSIONERS.
ANY QUESTIONS OF THE SPEAKER? OKAY.
ARE THERE OTHER SPEAKERS? OKAY.
SEEING NONE, WE, UH, WOULD OFFER THE APPLICANT, UH, OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL WITH THE OWNER OR THE, UH, PRIMARY SPEAKER? EITHER? UH, YEAH, A COUPLE OF POINTS JUST TO BE, UH, TO MAKE EVERYBODY AWARE, FIRST OF ALL, THE DESIGN IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS IT WAS WHEN IT WAS A TRIPLEX, AS MELISSA WAS MENTIONING, BECAUSE OF A FLUTE WITH THE LEGALITY OF HAVING THREE UNITS IN AN MF THREE ZONING.
UM, THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS WE CAN DO IN AN MF THREE ZONING IS FOUR UNITS.
THAT'S NOT AT ALL WHAT BRAD AND MELISSA WANTED, BUT IT WAS EITHER GET TO GO ALL THE WAY BACK THROUGH THE REZONING PROCESS, WHICH THEY'D ALREADY SPENT MULTIPLE YEARS DOING TO GET THREE UNITS IN ORDER TO GO BACK TO THREE UNITS.
SO IT SEEMED LIKE A BACKWARD MOVE AND IT WAS EASY ENOUGH TO TAKE THE DESIGN AS IT WAS AND JUST PARTITION OFF A PIECE AND CALL IT FOUR UNITS.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYBODY'S AWARE THAT IT WASN'T AN LARGE, YOU KNOW, AN INCREASE.
IT IS ACTUALLY NOT A FOUR STORY STRUCTURE.
UM, ALSO, JUST SO YOU'RE AWARE, UM, AND THEN THE, THE ONE THING I ALSO WANNA POINT OUT IS THAT DURING THE ZONING, THE REZONING PROCESS AND HEARINGS, UM, SOME OF THE VERY PEOPLE WHO IT LOOKS LIKE HAVE SENT, UH, LETTERS QUESTIONING THE, UH, DEED RESTRICTION WERE MADE AWARE IN THE SUBMISSION PACKETS ORIGINALLY THAT THE INTENT ALWAYS WAS TO DO A TWO STORY HOUSE.
THAT'S WHY THERE WAS ALSO A DISCUSSION ABOUT AN ELEVATOR NEEDING TO GET TO THE MULTI STORIES.
SO THIS WAS ALWAYS SOMETHING THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS AWARE OF AND IT WAS PART OF THE DISCUSSION.
AND EVEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ITSELF THERE, WE HAVE A, A LETTER HERE FROM 2023 WHERE THEY ACKNOWLEDGED AN AWARENESS THAT, UM, UH, A TWO STORY STRUCTURE WOULD BE, UH, PUT IN PLACE.
AND OUR CONCERN IS THAT IF THEY REALLY FELT LIKE THERE WAS AN ISSUE AT THE TIME WITH, UH, OR AT THAT ONE STORY LIMITATION WAS IN PLACE, THEN UH, OUR QUESTION WOULD BE WHY DID, WHY WAS A TWO STORY STRUCTURE ALLOWED TO BE BUILT ON ONE OF THE OTHER THREE LOTS? AND WHY, WHY WOULDN'T HAVE THEY BROUGHT THAT UP THREE AND A HALF YEARS AGO? SO TODAY, MY BIGGER CONCERN IS THE PURVIEW OF HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION'S FOCUS, WHICH IS ON THE, THE COMMENTS Y'ALL PROVIDED FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTER TO HISTORIC DISTRICT, WHICH I THINK ARE ALL VERY VALUABLE AND HELPFUL.
AND THE QUESTION OF THE DEED RESTRICTION, I THINK IS A DIFFERENT PURVIEW ALTOGETHER.
AND THE, AND, AND IT'S ONE THAT WE CERTAINLY INTEND TO, TO CLARIFY WITH ANA, INDEPENDENT OF THE PURVIEW OF THIS PARTICULAR COMMISSION, UH, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT.
SO, AND IF I MAY JUMP IN HERE, WE DID CHECK WITH LEGAL.
UM, THEY DETERMINED THAT, UH, THE HLC CANNOT COMMENT ON, UM, ANY PRIVATE DEED RESTRICTIONS OR RESTRICTED COVENANTS.
UM, THE ONLY PURVIEW IS THE HISTORIC DESIGN STANDARDS.
SO IT, IT, IT MAKES, IT'S OF NO CONSEQUENCE THEN IN THIS JURISDICTION.
IS THAT WHAT THE LEGAL IS TELLING US? THAT'S CORRECT, YES.
SO WE CAN, WE CAN OPENLY SAY THEN, UH, WE UNDERSTAND WHY IT WOULD BE A CONCERN AND IT IS THAT SOMETHING WE WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO HAVE ADDRESSED AND ENOUGH SAID.
UH, OUR PURVIEW, HOWEVER, IS TO COMMENT ON THE PLANS AND, UH, WE ALSO, UH, FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS, MAY, UH, WISH TO HAVE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO.
SO AT THIS POINT, UH, WITH NO OTHER SPEAKERS, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE
[01:55:01]
PUBLIC HEARING.ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, UH, I NEED A MOTION ON THE FLOOR, BUT AT THAT POINT, I WOULD ENCOURAGE ALL OF US, UH, AT THIS POINT TO OFFER COMMENTS.
UH, WE'LL MAY HAVE SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES TO DO SO, BUT CERTAINLY THIS IS A CHANCE FOR US TO, UH, CONTINUE TO EXPRESS OUR RESPONSE TO WHAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED, UH, FOR THESE PLANS.
SO, DO I HAVE A MOTION? UH, YEAH.
I WILL MOVE TO POSTPONE AND INVITE THE APPLICANT TO THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NEXT WEDNESDAY.
SO THAT WOULD BE TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, REOPEN THE POSTPONE TO THE NEXT, UH, HLC MEETING NEXT MONTH, THE NEXT HLC MEETING, AND, UH, INVITE THE APPLICANT TO THE, UH, ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NEXT WEEK WHERE WE CAN TAKE A CLOSE LOOK AT, UH, A LOT OF THESE COMMENTS.
AND, UH, AND COMMISSIONER ALVAREZ, LET'S HOLD AND MAKE SURE WE HAVE A SECOND TO YOUR MOTION.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
COMMISSIONER ALVAREZ, PLEASE SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION.
UH, THE DRAWINGS THAT WE HAVE, THEY MAKE THE, UH, STRUCTURE SEEM TO BE QUITE A BIT MORE SUBSTANTIVE THAN IT MIGHT PRESENT ITSELF FROM THE STREET IF ACTUALLY DEVELOPS.
SO, UH, I THINK THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO JUST TAKE A LOOK AT THIS AND, UH, MAKE SURE IT'S A BIT MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THE DISTRICT.
CAN WE, CAN WE HAVE THE NORTH ELEVATION, UH, ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW? SO I THINK THAT'S THE ONE THAT YOU'RE ADDRESSING.
THE COVER IMAGE, WHICH, UM, I THINK IS A SIDE ELEVATION.
IT'S NOT A FRONT, UH, NO, I THINK THE, THE NEXT ONE DOWN, I BELIEVE IS THE, WAS LABELED AS THE NORTH ELEVATION.
THE TOP THERE IS THE, THE UPPER ONE THERE? YEAH, THAT WOULD BE THE, THE VIEW FROM THE STREET.
DID YOU WANT TO ADD ANY OTHER NO.
UH, COMMISSIONER ACTON? UH, NO, NO FURTHER.
WELL LET'S GO AHEAD AND PUT THAT BACK.
'CAUSE I CERTAINLY WANNA COMMENT, AND I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR THIS, UH, QUESTION OF HOW WE DEAL WITH SCALE IN THE REGISTER DISTRICT.
UH, I KNOW, UH, AND APPRECIATE STAFF GOING THROUGH THE, UH, STANDARDS AND I KNOW THE ARCHITECT AND THE OWNER HAVE UNDERSTOOD AND ARE WILLING TO WORK ON SOME OF THOSE STANDARDS.
UH, BUT I THINK THAT PARTICULARLY IN A NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT WHERE, UH, THERE IS A PREDOMINANCE OF LOWER SCALE AND SINGLE STORY, UH, HISTORICALLY, UH, I THINK WE HAVE AN ISSUE WHERE, UH, THIS, UH, I SHALL I SAY, I APPRECIATE THE INTENT OF MOVING SOME OF THE MASSING TOWARDS THE BACK.
I THINK THAT STILL A VERY LARGE, UH, OVERSCALED PRESENCE AT THE STREET.
AND I THINK I'LL, I WILL BE MORE CONVINCED IF SOME OF THE MOVES DO MORE TO REDUCE THE SCALE AND THEN ALSO, UH, PERHAPS IN THE PRESENTATION SHOWING US SOME OF THE WAYS THAT MATERIALS AND, UH, SOME OF THE DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN THE VOLUMES COULD BE DONE TO ALSO BLEND IN AND, UH, FEEL MORE CONTEXTUAL.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I GET THAT 'CAUSE I WON'T BE AT THE ARCHITECTURE REVIEW COMMITTEE.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? YES, I DO BELIEVE THAT THIS BEING IN AN HISTORIC, UH, OR A NATIONAL REGISTER, HISTORIC DISTRICT, HISTORIC DISTRICT, THAT I, I'M A BIT CONCERNED ABOUT THE SCALE OF THIS RENDERING, YOU KNOW, IN RELATION TO THE, THE, THE, THE, THE, THE HOMES, YOU KNOW, IN THAT SAME NEIGHBORHOOD OR CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, UH, ON BOTH SIDES.
I'M A BIT CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.
IS IT, IS IT WITHIN SCALE, UH, IN RELATION TO THE OTHER RESIDENCES WITHIN THAT PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD? YES.
IS THAT, IS THAT A QUESTION THAT YOU WANT US TO ANSWER OR? I THINK WE'RE JUST, I'M JUST MAKING A COMMENT.
WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DO IS AS PART OF OUR RESPONSIBILITY ON THE REGISTERED DISTRICT, I, I'M, I'M, I'M JUST A, A BIT CONCERNED, YOU KNOW, I'M CURIOUS COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE WE TAKE ACTION ON THE MOTION? ALRIGHT.
AND I THINK WE NEED TO GET, UH, WE NEED TO GET COMMISSIONER RICE BACK.
ALRIGHT, UH, IF THERE'S NO MORE DISCUSSION, THEN I WILL CALL THE QUESTION COMMISSIONERS.
WE HAVE A MOTION TO POSTPONE, UH, TILL OUR NEXT MEETING WITH THE, UH, REFERENCE TO THE ARCHITECTURE REVIEW COMMITTEE.
[02:00:01]
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND.WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT.
[18. PR-2025-083770– 2901 Del Curto Rd. Council District 5]
UH, DISCUSSION IS OUR FINAL ITEM, AND THAT IS, UH, DEMOLITION RELOCATION PERMIT.ITEM NUMBER 18 AT 29 0 1 DEL CURTO ROAD IS A PROPOSAL TO DEMOLISH THE CIRCUIT 1939 HOUSE.
THIS IS A ONE AND A HALF STORY STONE VENEER COTTAGE WITH A HIP ROOF EXPOSED RAFTER TAILS BENEATH DEEP EAVES, A STONE VENEER, CHIMNEY, AND TEARED STONE STEPS AT THE ENTRYWAY.
29 0 1 DEL CURTO WAS HOME TO THE CASTLE FAMILY FOR NEARLY 80 YEARS.
FLORENCE AND JOSEPH CASTLE WERE PROMINENT MUSICIANS AND SPENT MUCH OF THEIR LIVES AS POPULAR PERFORMERS, COMPOSERS, AND MUSIC EDUCATORS.
IN AUSTIN, FLORENCE CASTLE WAS A COMPOSER AND AN IN-DEMAND TEACHER OF PIANO AND CORT MUSIC.
WHILE JOSEPH CASTLE WAS CONCERT MASTER OF THE UNIVERSITY SYMPHONY, UH, WORKED AS AN INDIVIDUAL COMPOSER AND AS A CONTRIBUTOR TO MULTIPLE MUSICAL COMPILATIONS AND WROTE ACADEMICALLY ON GUITAR AND VIOLIN, WHILE ALSO INSTRUCTING UNIVERSITY AND PRIVATE STUDENTS IN BOTH INSTRUMENTS.
HE ALSO PERFORMED DURING THE 1940S AND FIFTIES IN MULTIPLE COUNTRY AND WESTERN GROUPS, GAINING STATEWIDE RECOGNITION AND WORKED AS A PIANO TUNER.
THE CASTLE'S BRIEFLY MOVED FROM AUSTIN DURING WORLD WAR II AND FOR PART OF 1953, BUT ALWAYS RETURNED TO THEIR HOME IN AUSTIN.
JOSEPH CASTLE DIED IN 1992 IN FLORENCE CASTLE.
IN 2019, AT THE AGE OF 103 PROPERTIES MUST MEET TWO CRITERIA FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION.
AND STAFF HAS EVALUATED THE PROPERTY AND DETERMINED THAT IT MAY MEET TWO CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION.
UH, THE BUILDING IS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF A RUSTIC TEXAS COTTAGE POPULAR IN AUSTIN DURING THE 1930S AND FORTIES, AND IT IS ASSOCIATED WITH MUSICIANS AND COMPOSERS, FLORENCE AND JOSEPH CASTLE.
UH, THUS THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS, UH, TO CONSIDER WHETHER THE BUILDING, UH, MEETS THE HIGH BAR FOR DESIGNATION.
UM, AND IF SO, INITIATE HISTORIC ZONING.
SHOULD THE COMMISSION DETERMINE THAT THE PROPERTY DOES NOT SUFFICIENTLY MEET THE CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION.
UH, AS IT IS QUITE A HIGH BAR, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS, UM, THAT THE COMMISSION STRONGLY ENCOURAGE AND ADAPTIVE REUSE AND REHABILITATION, THEN RELOCATION OR DECONSTRUCTION AND MATERIAL SALVAGE, BUT TO RELEASE THE DEMOLITION PERMIT UPON COMPLETION OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? ALRIGHT, HEARING NONE, UH, CAN WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT? YES.
CAN EVERYONE HEAR ME? YES, PLEASE PROCEED.
VAN DIDDY IS BOTH THE APPLICANT AND THE DEMOLITION CONTRACTOR FOR THIS PROJECT.
I'M ALSO HERE REPRESENTING THE DEVELOPER PARKSIDE HOMES.
UM, AS A DEMOLITION CONTRACTOR, I AM OFTEN PERCEIVED BY PRESERVATIONISTS AS SOMEONE WHO ONLY SEEKS TO TEAR THINGS DOWN AT ANY COST.
BUT I WILL TAKE THE RISK OF A GOOD RIBBING BY MY DEMOLITION INDUSTRY FRIENDS BY SAYING THIS PLAINLY, WHICH IS I HAVE A, A DEEP APPRECIATION FOR HISTORIC STRUCTURES AND THE NATURAL FEATURES THAT SURROUND THEM.
UM, I BELIEVE ANY CITY OF AUSTIN BUILDING OR ENVIRONMENTAL INSPECTOR WOULD ATTEST TO THAT.
THAT SAID, UM, I ALSO RECOGNIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF PROGRESS, THE DEVELOPMENT OF USABLE LAND THAT SUPPORTS THE LOCAL ECONOMY AND PROVIDES HOMES FOR AUSTIN FAMILIES.
WITH RESPECT TO 29 0 1 DEL CURTO.
WHILE THE STRUCTURE IS IN SOUND CONDITION, I BELIEVE THAT ITS ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE IS QUESTIONABLE.
UM, THE HLC DOCUMENTATION PRESENTED DESCRIBES IT AS A RUSTIC TEXAS COTTAGE, YET, UH, MY OWN RESEARCH INTO THAT STYLE DIDN'T SHOW ME A LOT TO DISTINGUISH IT FROM THE MANY OTHER 3 19 40 HOMES THAT ARE STILL STANDING IN AUSTIN.
UM, THE HLC REPORT ALSO NOTES THAT THIS STYLE WAS COMMON IN THE THIRTIES AND FORTIES.
SO WHILE IT MAY BE IN GOOD SHAPE, I STRUGGLE TO SEE HOW IT RISES TO THE LEVEL OF ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE.
UM, VISIBILITY IS ANOTHER ISSUE.
UM, WE DON'T SEEM TO HAVE A PICTURE FROM THE STREET IN THE, UH, DOCUMENTATION PACKET HERE, BUT, UM, IF YOU DO A A GOOGLE EARTH, UM,
[02:05:01]
THE HOME IS ALMOST ENTIRELY OBSCURED FROM THE STREET BY TWO HERITAGE TREES AND, AND SEVERAL SMALLER ONES.UH, TO MAKE IT VISIBLE TO THE PUBLIC, THOSE TREES WOULD'VE TO BE HEAVILY PRUNED OR REMOVED, WHICH UNDERMINES ONE OF THE VERY VALUES THAT THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT AIMS TO PROTECT.
UM, REGARDING THE LAND ITSELF, I'D ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT IT'S ZONING WAS CHANGED ON NOVEMBER 20TH, 2023 FROM SF THREE TO SF SIX.
THE CASE NUMBER ON THAT IS C 14 20 23 0 0 9 8, AND THE SF SIX UH, ALLOWS FOR TOWNHOUSES IN CONDOMINIUMS. I'M NOT SURE WHAT HISTORIC REVIEW, IF ANY, ACCOMPANIES ARE REZONING REQUEST, BUT OVERALL, I THINK IT COULD BE CHARACTERIZED TO SHOW THE CITY'S VISION FOR THE PROPERTIES FUTURE USE.
I WILL SAY THAT IT DEFINITELY REFLECTS THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES WHICH ARE ZONED THE SAME OR SIMILAR TO BOTH THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH.
UM, THAT LEAVES US WITH ONE POTENTIAL CRITERION FOR THE LANDMARK STATUS, WHICH IS THE HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION WITH, UM, FLORENCE AND JOSEPH CASTLE.
I AM NOT A HISTORIAN AND CALLING MYSELF AN AMATEUR HISTORIAN WOULD BE TOTALLY UNFAIR TO ALL AMATEUR HISTORIANS WORLDWIDE.
BUT I'LL DEFER TO THE LCS JUDGMENT AND, AND, UM, AND THE CITY'S JUDGMENT ON WHETHER THAT ASSOCIATION RISES TO THE LEVEL OF A LANDMARK AS ADDICTION.
UM, SO THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION.
I DO RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT THE DEMOLITION PERMIT BE, UH, RELEASED.
ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? OKAY.
UH, ARE THERE OTHER SPEAKERS? NO OTHER SPEAKERS SIGNED UP EITHER IN FAVOR OR IN OPPOSITION.
SO I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
THOSE IN FAVOR OF CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND.
I SEE ALL HANDS RAISED, UH, COMMISSIONERS, WHAT WOULD YOUR PREFERENCE BE ON THIS ITEM? I'LL MOVE TO RELEASE DEMOLITION PERMIT PENDING A CITY OF AUSTIN DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
COMMISSIONER COOK, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK TO YOUR MOTION? YEAH, I THINK IT'S A, IT'S A GREAT HOUSE.
I LOVE THE STONE SIDED HOUSES.
UH, BUT I AGREE WITH THE ISSUES OF VISIBILITY AND ALSO THE CONTEXT WITH THE HEAVY DEVELOPMENT ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS PROPERTY.
YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY IF THIS WERE AN OWNER APPLICANT, I THINK THE HISTORIC ASSOCIATION AND THE ARCHITECTURE WOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO, UH, TO GRANT DESIGNATION, BUT AGAINST OWNER'S WISHES.
I, I DON'T THINK IT MEETS THAT HIGH BAR.
COMMISSIONER ACTON, UH, AND I CONCUR MY RATIONALE AS WELL.
UM, LOOKING AT THE GOOGLE MAPS AND LOOKING AT HOW OTHER DEVELOPMENTS HAVE DONE ESSENTIALLY SF SIX TYPE HOUSING, I COULD SEE YOU COULD STILL GIVEN THE RIGHT CIRCUMSTANCES, INTEGRATE THIS INTO, UH, STILL AN SF SIX DEVELOPMENT.
THE DILEMMA IS, IS IT'S DEEP IN THE BURIED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE LOT.
SO IT REALLY WOULDN'T DO THE PUBLIC MUCH GOOD 'CAUSE YOU'D NEVER KNOW IT WAS THERE.
SO I, I DON'T THINK IT SERVES THE PUBLIC'S PURPOSE A WHOLE LOT TO ANTICIPATE IT BEING DEVELOPED THAT WAY.
THAT SAID, I, I THINK IT WOULD MAKE A WONDERFUL HOUSE IF SOMEBODY REALLY WANTED TO PLAY WITH IT.
IT'S GOT LEVEL CHANGES THAT MAKE IT VERY IMPRACTICAL FOR WHAT WOULD WE, WE CONSIDER TO BE MODERN, UH, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
IT CERTAINLY LOOKS LIKE IT HAS SOME INTEGRITY.
IT COULD BE A LOT OF FUN IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO PLAY WITH IT.
IT'D BE SUSTAINABLE TO SEE GOOD TOO.
THE, THE, BUT, BUT THERE AGAIN, AS SOON AS ANYTHING HAPPENED WHERE IT WAS INTEGRATED INTO THIS LARGER DEVELOPMENT, IT'S NO LONGER VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.
AND, YOU KNOW, THE PURPOSE OF KEEPING IT AS A HISTORIC LANDMARK KIND OF GOES BY THE WAYSIDE.
I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THE OTHER, THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLES OR MATERIALS OF THE OTHER HOMES IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
WHAT ARE, DO THEY USE THIS STONE AS WELL?
[02:10:01]
MOST EVERYTHING ON, WELL, CERTAINLY THE ONES ON EITHER SIDE THAT I'M LOOKING AT ARE ALL NEW HOMES.I SEE ALL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS.
SO IT'S KIND OF, IT'S KIND OF HIS OUTLIER.
AT LEAST RIGHT IN THAT IMMEDIATE VICINITY.
I KIND OF LIKE THE QUIRKY STYLE OF THAT.
AND JUST THAT, UM, IT WAS RIGHT UP AGAINST THE STREET.
IT'S JUST A, RATHER, IT IS A UNIQUE STYLE THAT YOU DON'T SEE TODAY.
COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A MOTION.
ARE THERE MORE DISCUSSION? OKAY.
THE MOTION IS TO, UH, GO AHEAD AND RELEASE THE REQUEST, UH, FOR THE DEMOLITION PERMIT WITH A FULL DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND.
ALL THOSE OPPOSED? WHEN, WHEN, LET ME ASK SOMETHING.
WHEN WE RELEASED THE DEMOLITION PACKET, IS THAT GIVING IT THE GO AHEAD.
BUT IT WILL ALSO HAVE TO BE FULLY DOCUMENTED BEFORE THAT, THAT THAT HAS TO HAPPEN FIRST BEFORE THEY'RE ALLOWED TO, TO DEMOLISH.
BUT ARE YOU VOTING? UH, I'M NAY.
AND I, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND ABSTAIN 'CAUSE I'M KIND OF ON THE FENCE.
UH, ONE OPPOSED AND ONE ABSTAINING.
UH, THEN WE HAVE A POSITIVE VOTE.
[19. Architectural Review Committee – Comments on the July 9, 2025 meeting. ]
TO, UH, THE COMMITTEE ITEMS. AND ITEM NUMBER 19.UH, WOULD YOU LIKE TO HAVE A QUICK REVIEW FROM THE ARCHITECT REVIEW COMMITTEE? SURE.
ONCE AGAIN, UH, YOU SAW A LOT OF WHAT WE GOT TO SEE.
IT WAS ONE OF THE MORE PLEASANT MEETINGS WITH THE HERITAGE GRANT PROJECTS.
AND IT'S A GOOD EXAMPLE OF, UM, WE OFTEN GET CAUGHT UP IN THE GRIND HERE OF TRYING TO PREVENT PEOPLE FROM TEARING DOWN HISTORIC PROPERTIES.
AND OUR TOOLS DON'T ALLOW US TO PREVENT THAT.
AND SO WE END UP ANGERING THE APPLICANT AND ANGERING THE ADVOCATES THAT ARE TRYING TO SUPPORT FOR IT.
SO IT KIND OF BECOMES A GRIND AROUND HERE.
SO IT'S REALLY NICE TO PARTICIPATE IN THESE CASES WHERE WE HAVE OWNERS WHO DO WANT TO PRESERVE THEIR HISTORIC PROPERTIES AND THE CITY HAS RESOURCES TO HELP THEM.
SO THAT WAS A, A BIG PART OF THE PRESERVATION PLAN TOO, LOOKING AT THE BIGGER PICTURE AND KIND OF GETTING OUT OF THE, THE GRIND OF PROCESSING PERMITS LIKE WE DO HERE.
SO IT'S GREAT FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION TO BE PARTICIPATING IN THAT AND ALWAYS FUN TO SEE.
UM, WE HAVE, UH, OUR OTHER COMMITTEES ARE IN THE EARLY FORMATION.
UH, I'LL HOLD ON THE GRANTS, BUT WE HAVE THE OPERATIONS
[21. Operations Committee – Discussion on scheduling meeting dates for the Operations Committee. ]
COMMITTEE THAT'S, UH, COMMISSIONER MCW, COMMISSIONER ACTON, AND COMMISSIONER RICE.AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS, IS THAT, UH, STAFF IS GOING TO BE SETTING A TIME FOR THAT GROUP TO GET AND GET STARTED.
THIS IS KIM MCKNIGHT, DIVISION MANAGER FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
I BELIEVE THERE AN EMAIL HAS GONE OUT TO TRY TO COORDINATE A MEETING.
I DON'T KNOW THAT WAS COMING FROM CAR TROT ON OUR TEAM.
I'M NOT SURE IF SHE HAS THAT SET UP OR NOT.
AND THEN SIMILARLY, THE PRESERVATION PLAN COMMITTEE? CORRECT.
UH, UH, I UNDERSTAND COMMISSIONER, UH, LAROCHE, UH, APPRIGHT AND EVANS, UH, VICE CHAIR EVANS, UH, WOULD BE ON THAT COMMITTEE.
AND I BELIEVE, UH, STAFF MEMBER, UH, KARA BERTRAN WILL BE LOOKING TO GET YOU ALL ORGANIZED.
UH, I KNOW, UH, MS. MCKNIGHT HAS BEEN WORKING DILIGENTLY TO TRY TO, UH, ORGANIZE SEVERAL EVENTS AS A FOLLOW UP FROM OUR TRAINING.
AND WOULD YOU LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND GIVE US AN UPDATE? SURE.
UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DISCUSSED WAS HOLDING A RETREAT THAT WOULD GIVE THE COMMISSION SOME OPPORTUNITIES TO JUST TALK BROADLY ABOUT, YOU KNOW, BIG PICTURE, YOUR EXPERIENCE, HOW IT COULD BE IMPROVED, WHAT YOU WANNA SEE, UM, POTENTIALLY REVISIT COMMITTEE STRUCTURES.
THERE'S, UM, DISCUSSED KIND OF PRIORITIES THAT YOU HAVE.
I DID SEND A, A POLL OUT VIA EMAIL TO YOUR HLC BOARD AND COMMISSION EMAILS.
AND IF YOU'RE ABLE TO REVIEW, I'VE HEARD FROM A FEW PEOPLE, UH, THAT THE DATES THAT HAVE BEEN OFFERED AND INDICATE YOUR AVAILABILITY, THAT WILL HELP US IDENTIFY A POTENTIAL DATE.
AND I RECOGNIZE WE, WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO GET EVERYBODY, BUT I'LL SHARE THAT INFORMATION WITH, UH, CHAIR HIM, SETH, AND HE CAN DECIDE HOW TO PROCEED.
UM, AND JUST TO, JUST TO CLARIFY, WE ARE LOOKING AT, UH, POSSIBLE FRIDAY DATES, FRIDAY DATES IN THE MORNING, I BELIEVE, UM, THERE'S A SEPTEMBER 21, 1 DATE IN SEPTEMBER AND TWO IN OCTOBER, CORRECT? CORRECT.
SO WE REALLY ENCOURAGE YOU ALL SO WE CAN GET THIS ON THE
[02:15:01]
CALENDAR AND GET IT GOING.PLEASE LET US KNOW YOUR AVAILABILITY AND, AND WE DO KNOW SOMETIMES FRIDAY'S HARD, BUT IF WE COULD, WE COULD MAKE THAT POSSIBLE, THAT BE GREAT.
WE INDICATED, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY EIGHT 30 TO TWO 30, BUT I THINK IT WOULD, TWO 30 WOULD BE THE LONGEST.
I THINK WE'D BE MORE LIKELY TO DO SOMETHING THAT WOULD WRAP UP AROUND LUNCHTIME.
WE, UH, WELL IF YOU CAN OFFER A VENUE THAT'S, UH, THAT'S ACCEPTABLE SURE.
UH, AND MAY MAYBE, UH, THE AFTER PARTY AS WELL.
SO WHO KNOWS? BUT, UH, YES, WE, WE DEFINITELY WANNA BE ABLE TO GET TIME TOGETHER, UH, LOOK STRATEGICALLY AHEAD AND ALSO DISCUSS SOME OF THESE ITEMS WHICH PERIODICALLY HAVE COME UP, UH, WITHIN OUR CONVERSATION, INCLUDING THE SIGN ORDINANCES THAT WE SAW TONIGHT.
UH, JUST WAYS THAT WE CAN BEGIN BEING MORE CONSTRUCTIVE AND PROACTIVE IN ADDRESSING THEM.
THE ONLY OTHER THING I WANTED TO MENTION IS THAT, UM, AS A TEAM, WE TALKED ABOUT WAYS TO JUST MAKE YOUR EXPERIENCE A LITTLE BETTER.
I RECOGNIZE MANY OF YOU HAVE, I SAID THIS BEGINNING OF THE BE PERSONAL EMAIL, WORK EMAIL, AND NOW YOU HAVE A WHOLE OTHER EMAIL THAT YOU HAVE TO CHECK.
WE'RE, UH, TRYING SOMETHING NEW, WHICH IS, UM, A DIGEST THAT WOULD GO OUT EVERY OTHER WEEK.
THAT IS KIND OF A CONSOLIDATION OF EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE SEEING THAT YOU MIGHT WANNA KNOW ABOUT.
IT INCLUDES, UH, MESSAGES FROM THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK THAT, THAT HAVE GONE OUT TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THAT YOU MIGHT'VE MISSED.
UH, IT ALSO INCLUDES REQUESTS TO INDICATE YOUR ATTENDANCE, SO PLEASE PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THAT.
UM, IT ALSO INCLUDES LINKS TO MEETINGS.
UM, SO WE SENT OUT TWO OF THESE AND THE HOPE IS THAT WE CAN MAKE IT A LOT EASIER FOR YOU TO FIND INFORMATION AND KIND OF UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU NEED TO RESPOND TO.
UM, WE WANNA MAKE YOUR EXPERIENCE POSITIVE AND WE WANNA TAKE, UH, WE WANNA BE MINDFUL OF THE TIME THAT YOU VOLUNTEER TO SERVE.
SO PLEASE GIVE US FEEDBACK ABOUT WHAT'S WORKING AND WHAT ISN'T IN TERMS OF COMMUNICATION.
SO IS THE IDEA SORT OF MAYBE LIKE ONCE A WEEK WE ARE, WE, WE KNOW THAT'S THE TIME WE SHOULD GO CHECK THE EMAILS BECAUSE THAT'S ABOUT WHEN IT'S GONNA COME.
I BELIEVE WE'RE RIGHT NOW EVERY OTHER WEEK ON MONDAYS.
UM, JUST TO LINE UP WITH THE HLC AND A RC DATES, UM, SO THAT Y'ALL CAN HAVE, UM, KIND OF A LITTLE PREVIEW OF, UH, OF WHAT'S UH, HAPPENING, UM, KIND OF AROUND THOSE TWO CRITICAL DATES.
SO YOU'LL KNOW THAT IT'S, YOU KNOW, EVERY OTHER WEEK ON A MONDAY.
UM, IF THERE'S, IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO, YOU KNOW, BE COMMUNICATED IN THE INTERIM, WE'LL CERTAINLY SEND THAT OUT.
BUT FOR NON-URGENT THINGS THAT ARE MORE ROUTINE, WE'RE GONNA TRY TO CONSOLIDATE THEM INTO FEWER EMAILS.
SINCE I, I KNOW I'M NOT AMONG THOSE WHO CHECK THE CITY EMAILS RIGOROUSLY TWICE A DAY, UH, AT LEAST IT GIVES US AN EXCUSE TO SAY, OKAY, AT THIS POINT FOR SURE, IF YOU HAVEN'T CHECKED IT, THIS IS THE TIME TO CHECK IT.
UH, BUT YES, WE CERTAINLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO KEEP UP AND USE THAT, UH, WAY OF COMMUNICATING AS WELL BACK TO STAFF.
ARE THERE OTHER ITEMS THAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS HERE TONIGHT? WE'D HAD, WE PUT 23 ON CONSENT.
I PUT IT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
YOU PUT IT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
SO YEAH, YOU GO BACK TO THE RECORD AND TAKE A LOOK.
COMMISSIONER LAROCHE HAS OFFICIALLY APPOINTEE TO THE DOWNTOWN COMMISSION.
SIGN HIM UP FOR ALL KINDS OF STUFF ON THE CONSENT.
WELL SEE HOW MANY THINGS WE CAN VOLUNTEER YOU FOR HERE.
I WOULD, I WOULD HAVE, WELL, UH, LET'S, LET'S FOLLOW UP OFFLINE.
THAT SOUNDS LIKE A WONDERFUL POSSIBILITY.
UH, COMMISSIONERS, I SENSE THAT WE ARE SET.
AND SO I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN.
COMMISSIONER LA ROCHE, COMMISSIONER, UH, VICE CHAIR EVANS, ALL THOSE, I SECOND THAT MOTION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND.