COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY, September 8TH, 2026 The COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION convened in a REGULAR MEETING on TUESDAY, September 8TH, 2026, at CITY HALL, BOARDS AND COMMISSION ROOM in Austin, Texas. Some members of the commission participated by video conference. Board Members/Commissioners in Attendance: Lyric Wardlow, Vice Chair Jenny E. Achilles Omar Gamboa Cynthia Jaso Valeria Menard Board Members/Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Taniquewa Brewster Raul Longoria Sonia Martinez Staff Members in Attendance: Nefertitti Jackmon Miguel Lopez Angel Zambrano CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair Lyric Wardlow called the meeting to order at 6:48 PM. PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first 10 speakers signed up prior to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. Marian Sanchez, speaking on behalf of PODER, provided public comment. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the CDC Regular meeting on August 11, 2026. The minutes from the Community Development Commission Regular Meeting on August 11th, 2026, were approved on Commissioner Menard’s motion, Commissioner Gamboa’s second, on a 8-0 vote. STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. Staff briefing regarding Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) activities and outcomes. Presentation by Angel Zambrano, Program Manager III, Austin Public Health. The presentation was made by Angel Zambrano, Program Manager III, Austin Public Health. DISCUSSION ITEMS 3. Discussion on the recent meeting of the Housing Investment Review Committee (HIRC). Discussion led by Commissioner Valeria Menard. This item was tabled for the October meeting. 4. Update and discussion of the CDC Election process. Discussion led by Chair Noe Elias. This item was tabled for the October meeting. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 5. Discussion and action on the election and nomination process for APH concerning Public Sector and Private Sector Appointees. Presentation by Angel Zambrano, Program Manager III, Austin Public Health. This item was tabled for the October meeting. 6. Discussion and possible approval of a recommendation regarding the Dog’s Head Development. Discussion led by Commissioner Valeria Menard. The motion to approve the recommendation regarding the Dog’s Head Development was approved with the listed amendments on Commissioner Jenny E. Achilles’s motion, Commission Raul Longoria’s second, on 8-0 vote. • Addition of the number 20 item as “Allow and prioritize affordable housing ranging from 30%-80% Median Family Income (MFI) throughout the area.” • Replacement of the Environmental Commission with the Community Development Commission on the second WHEREAS. …
REGULAR MEETING OF THE AUSTIN-TRAVIS COUNTY FOOD POLICY BOARD MONDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2026, AT 5:00 P.M. PERMITTING AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER, ROOM 1406 6310 WILHELMINA DELCO DRIVE, AUSTIN, TEXAS Some members of the Austin-Travis County Food Policy Board may be participating by videoconference. Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely via telephone. Speakers may only register to speak on an item once either in-person or remotely and will be allowed up to three minutes to provide their comments. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required for remote participation by telephone. To register to speak remotely, contact Amanda Rohlich, (512) 974-1364, Amanda.Rohlich@austintexas.gov. CURRENT AUSTIN-TRAVIS COUNTY FOOD POLICY BOARD MEMBERS: Lisa Barden, Chair Maggie Amaku Andrea Abel Beth Corbett Nitza Cuevas Kacey Hanson Alexandra “Lexie” Lewis Seanna Marceaux Melody McClary Natalie Poulos Amanda Wadsworth AGENDA CALL TO ORDER Board Member roll call and introduction of new and existing board members. PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first 10 speakers signed up prior to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three- minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Austin-Travis County Food Policy Board Regular Meeting on Monday, September 14, 2026. STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. Staff briefing regarding Austin-Travis County Food Plan Implementation. Presentation by Edwin Marty, Food Policy Manager, Austin Climate Action & Resilience, Yaira Robinson, Assistant Director of Environmental Programs, Travis County. DISCUSSION ITEMS 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Presentation and discussion on the Regional Food Policy Council. Presentation and discussion on the City of Austin Social Service contract needs assessment and subsequent process. Discussion of upcoming Strategic Planning session in November. Presentation and discussion regarding the working group to expand access to nutritious foods. Presentation and discussion regarding the working group to participate in the USDA Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP) application for funding for conservation easements as a regional partnership. Review Board Member Assignments. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ITEMS 9. 10. Discuss and take possible action on City Council and County Commissioner Court Candidate and Member Questionnaire. Discuss and take possible action on a Vice-Chair appointment. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ADJOURNMENT The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications will be provided upon request. For assistance, please contact the Liaison or TTY users’ route through …
ZERO WASTE ADVISORY COMMISSION - CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION REFORM COMMITTEE WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2026, AT 11:00 A.M. CEPEDA BRANCH LIBRARY 651 N PLEASANT VALLEY RD AUSTIN, TEXAS 78702 Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely via telephone. Speakers may only register to speak on an item once either in-person or remotely and will be allowed up to three minutes to provide their comments. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required for remote participation by telephone. To register to speak remotely, contact Elizabeth Nelson, 512-974-6492, Elizabeth.Nelson@austintexas.gov. CURRENT COMMITTEE MEMBERS: Ian Steyaert, Chair; Gerard Acuna; and Seth Whaland CALL TO ORDER AGENDA PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first 10 speakers signed up prior to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Zero Waste Advisory Commission Construction and Demolition Reform Committee meeting on June 24, 2026. STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. Staff briefing on proposed changes to City Code and the department’s Administrative Rules for the Construction and Demolition Recycling Ordinance and Qualified Processor program. Presentation by Elizabeth Nelson, Planner Principal and Cahill Ordones, Planner Senior Austin Resource Recovery. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ADJOURNMENT The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications will be provided upon request. For assistance, please contact the Liaison or TTY users’ route through 711. A person may request language access accommodations no later than 48 hours before the scheduled meeting. Please call or email Elizabeth Nelson at Austin Resource Recovery Department, at 512-974-6492 or Elizabeth.Nelson@austintexas.gov, to request service or for additional information. For more information on the Zero Waste Advisory Commission, please contact Gustavo Valle at 512-974-4359 or Gustavo.Valle@austintexas.gov.
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION APPLICATIONS UNDER REVIEW FOR OCTOBER 7, 2026 MEETING This list does not constitute a formal agenda and is subject to change. A final agenda will be posted at least 3 business days prior to the meeting. Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely via telephone. Speakers may only register to speak on an item once either in-person or remotely and will be allowed up to three minutes to provide their comments. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required for remote participation by telephone. Speaker Registration will open once the formal agenda is posted. For questions, please email preservation@austintexas.gov. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Historic Landmark Commission regular meeting on September 2, 2026. BRIEFINGS 2. Staff briefing regarding progress on the development of the Central City District Plan by Olivia Beams, Planner Senior, Austin Planning. PUBLIC HEARINGS/DISCUSSION ITEMS Historic Zoning 3. 4. PR-2026-053670 – 1109 Travis Heights Blvd. Travis Heights-Fairview Park National Register Historic District Council District 9 Proposal: Commission-initiated historic zoning. Applicant: Historic Landmark Commission City Sta(cid:431): Austin Lukes, Historic Preservation O(cid:431)ice, 512-978-0766 PR-2026-086869 – 1005 E. 13th St. Council District 1 Proposal: Commission-initiated historic zoning. Applicant: Historic Landmark Commission City Sta(cid:431): Austin Lukes, Historic Preservation O(cid:431)ice, 512-978-0766 Historic Landmark and Local Historic District Applications 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. PR-2026-008188 – 1005 E. 8th St. Robertson/Stuart & Mair Local Historic District Council District 1 Proposal: Demolish a contributing building. (Postponed by applicant on September 2, 2026) Applicant: Robbie MacGregor City Staff: Austin Lukes, Historic Preservation Office, 512-978-0766 PR-2026-018321; HR-2026-112231; C14H-1982-0001-f – 916 Congress Ave. Larmour Block (F) Council District 9 Proposal: Reconstruct and construct a performance venue behind the existing façade. Applicant: Patrick Georgiou City Staff: Kalan Contreras, Historic Preservation O(cid:431)ice, 512-974-2727 HR-2026-114321 – 2406 E. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. Rogers-Washington-Holy Cross Local Historic District Council District 1 Proposal: Rehabilitate and construct an addition to a contributing building. Applicant: Felicia Foster City Staff: Austin Lukes, Historic Preservation Office, 512-978-0766 HR-2026-106327 – 2410 E. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. Rogers-Washington-Holy Cross Local Historic District Council District 1 Proposal: Construct two new residences. Applicant: Felicia Foster City Staff: Austin Lukes, Historic Preservation Office, 512-978-0766 HR-2026-104982 – 4309 Avenue D Hyde Park Local Historic District Council District 9 Proposal: Remodel a contributing building and convert the garage into an additional housing unit. Applicant: Susan Pryor City Staff: Austin …
REGULAR MEETING OF THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2026, AT 6:00 P.M. CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBERS 301 W. 2ND STREET AUSTIN, TEXAS Some members of the Historic Landmark Commission may be participating by videoconference. The meeting may be viewed online at: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch-atxn-live Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely via telephone. Speakers may only register to speak on an item once either in-person or remotely and will be allowed up to three minutes to provide their comments. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required for remote participation by telephone. To register to speak remotely, please use the QR code or link at the end of this document. For questions, please email preservation@austintexas.gov. CURRENT COMMISSIONERS BEN HEIMSATH, CHAIR (D-8) KEVIN KOCH (D-3) VACANT, VICE CHAIR (D-2) CARL LAROSCHE (D-6) JEFFREY ACTON (MAYOR) TONYA PLEASANT-WRIGHT (D-1) JAIME ALVAREZ (D-7) JUDAH RICE (D-4) HARMONY GROGAN (D-5) BAT TANIGUCHI (D-9) AUGUST HARRIS III (D-10) AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first 10 speakers signed up prior to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Historic Landmark Commission regular meeting on September 2, 2026. BRIEFINGS 2. Staff briefing regarding progress on the development of the Central City District Plan by Shanisha Johnson, Principal Planner and Olivia Beams, Senior Planner, Austin Planning. PUBLIC HEARINGS/DISCUSSION ITEMS Historic Zoning 3. 4. PR-2026-053670 – 1109 Travis Heights Blvd. Travis Heights-Fairview Park National Register Historic District Council District 9 Proposal: Commission-initiated historic zoning. Applicant: Historic Landmark Commission City Staff: Austin Lukes, Historic Preservation Office, 512-978-0766 Staff Recommendation: Do not recommend historic zoning, as the property does not meet the required criteria. PR-2026-086869 – 1005 E. 13th St. Council District 1 Proposal: Commission-initiated historic zoning. Applicant: Historic Landmark Commission City Staff: Austin Lukes, Historic Preservation Office, 512-978-0766 Staff Recommendation: Do not recommend historic zoning, as the property does not meet the required criteria. Historic Landmark and Local Historic District Applications 5. 6. PR-2026-008188 – 1005 E. 8th St. – POSTPONED BY APPLICANT Robertson/Stuart & Mair Local Historic District Council District 1 Proposal: Demolish a contributing building. (Postponed by applicant on September 2, 2026) Applicant: Robbie MacGregor City Staff: Austin Lukes, Historic Preservation Office, 512-978-0766 Staff Recommendation: Grant the applicant-requested postponement to the November 4, 2026 …
REGULAR MEETING OF THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 2026, AT 6:00 P.M. CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBERS 301 W. 2ND STREET AUSTIN, TEXAS Some members of the Historic Landmark Commission may be participating by videoconference. The meeting may be viewed online at: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch-atxn-live CURRENT COMMISSIONERS X BEN HEIMSATH, CHAIR (D-8) X CARL LAROSCHE (D-6) AB ROXANNE EVANS, VICE CHAIR (D-2) X AUGUST HARRIS III (D-10) X JEFFREY ACTON (MAYOR) AB TONYA PLEASANT-WRIGHT (D-1) X JAIME ALVAREZ (D-7) X JUDAH RICE (D-4) AB HARMONY GROGAN (D-5) X BAT TANIGUCHI (D-9) X KEVIN KOCH (D-3) Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Commissioner Rice, Commissioner Larosche, Commissioner Alvarez DRAFT MINUTES CALL TO ORDER: 6:00PM PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first 10 speakers signed up prior to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. Susan Moffat spoke about 4115 Avenue D. Bill Bunch spoke about the Barton Springs Bridge. Meghan King Namour provided updates from Preservation Austin. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Historic Landmark Commission regular meeting on August 5, 2026. MOTION: Approve the minutes per passage of the consent agenda, on a motion by Commissioner Larosche. Commissioner Acton seconded the motion. Vote 7-0. Commissioner Rice abstained. The motion passed. BRIEFINGS 2. Staff briefing regarding a feasibility study for an addition to the Old Bakery Emporium building by Susan Hagerty, Project Manager, Austin Capital Delivery Services. PUBLIC HEARINGS/DISCUSSION ITEMS Historic Landmark and Local Historic District Applications 3. 4. PR-2026-008188 – 1005 E. 8th St. – POSTPONED BY APPLICANT Robertson/Stuart & Mair Local Historic District Council District 1 Proposal: Demolish a contributing building. (Postponed by applicant on August 5, 2026) Applicant: Robbie MacGregor City Staff: Austin Lukes, Historic Preservation Office, 512-978-0766 Staff Recommendation: Grant the applicant requested postponement to the October 7, 2026 Historic Landmark Commission meeting. MOTION: Postpone the public hearing to October 7, 2026 meeting per passage of the consent postponement agenda, on a motion by Commissioner Harris. Commissioner Larosche seconded the motion. Vote 8-0. The motion passed. HR-2026-101469; C14H-2025-0086 – 1712 Rio Grande St. Malcolm and Margaret Badger Reed House Council District 9 Proposal: Rehabilitate the exterior of a landmark and construct a rear addition. Applicant: Tere O’Connell City Staff: Austin Lukes, Historic Preservation Office, 512-978-0766 Staff Recommendation: Approve the Certificate of Appropriateness in concurrence with Architectural Review Committee feedback. MOTION: Approve the …
Central City District Plan Historic Landmark Commission | October 2026 Austin Planning Agenda 01 Team Introduction 02 About the Project 03 Feedback to Future 04 Key Plan Content 05 Next Steps 2 Team Introductions Shanisha Johnson, PMP Project Lead/Principal Planner, City of Austin Romina Tafazzoli GIS Analyst/Senior Planner, City of Austin Chris Ryerson Division Manager, City of Austin Olivia Beams Senior Planner, City of Austin 3 About the Project Lamar Blvd. University Area Downtown Austin I- 35 South Central Waterfront About the Central City District Plan The 2011 Downtown Austin Plan is being updated as the Central City District Plan, including the University of Texas area and the South Central Waterfront. The Plan will create a 10-year blueprint for future growth and investments with a unified vision for improving land use, mobility, public spaces, and economic and cultural vibrancy in our urban core. It will align with existing citywide strategic plans and policies and seeks to build consensus for effective implementation. What Will This Plan Achieve? Community-informed vision and goals Place Types mapping to inform future development patterns Public realm and multimodal improvements Program, policy, project, and partnership recommendations Implementation Strategies 5 From Feedback to the Future Future of the Central City District ▪ Vision, Goals, Objectives, and Actions ▪ Online surveys, popups, and community open houses ▪ Stakeholder Advisory Group feedback ▪ Planning analysis ▪ Imagine Austin Place Types ▪ Existing projects and policies ▪ Interagency Technical Advisory Group feedback Central City District Plan 7 Growth Concept Map Existing Character: Areas expected to generally maintain their existing character and development pattern. Mid to High Density Mixed Use: Areas expected to accommodate the greatest residential growth while supporting existing nonresidential uses, particularly around light rail expansion and other infrastructure investments. Cultural & Entertainment: Areas that reinforce Austin’s cultural and entertainment focus, with development supporting community events, activities, retail, and dining. Transitional Mixed Use: Areas that provide transitions in development intensity through a mix of uses and densities, while maintaining existing scale and adapting existing structures where appropriate Adaptive Reuse: Areas with concentrations of architecturally or culturally significant buildings suited for adaptive reuse when feasible. Existing character is preserved while accommodating new businesses and additional residential density to suit evolving District Needs. 8 Key Plan Content Vision Statement The Central City District is a complete, connected, and livable district that supports housing, jobs, commerce, education, tourism, arts, culture, and recreation within …
ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET CASE NUMBER: PR-2026-053670 HLC DATE: October 7, 2026 PC DATE: CC Date: APPLICANT: Gabe Joseph, Joseph Design Build HISTORIC NAME: WATERSHED: Lady Bird Lake ADDRESS OF PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE: 1109 Travis Heights Boulevard, Austin, TX 78704 ZONING CHANGE: SF-3-NP to SF-3-H-NP COUNCIL DISTRICT: 9 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Do not recommend historic zoning, as the property does not meet the required criteria. QUALIFICATIONS FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION: architecture and historical associations. HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION ACTION: Initiated historic zoning on September 2, 2026 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: CITY COUNCIL ACTION: CASE MANAGER: Austin Lukes, 512-978-0766 NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS: Austin Neighborhoods Council, Friends of Austin Neighborhoods, Greater South River City Combined Neighborhood Plan Contact Team, Homeless Neighborhood Association, Overton Family Committee, Preservation Austin, South Central Coalition, South River City Citizens Association, Zoning Committee of South River City Citizens DEPARTMENT COMMENTS: This property was designated as a contributing resource to the Travis Heights-Fairview Park National Register historic district. BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATION: Several Roy L. Moore buildings that retain more integrity than 1109 Travis Heights Blvd. have already been designated as City landmarks, including the Herbert and Alice Bohn House and the Stephen F. Austin Hotel. There are also other examples of Prairie Style design in the neighborhood, including nearby at 1310 Travis Heights Blvd, though this house does occupy a prominent location in the district. Finally, the associations with developer William T. Caswell as well as Elmer and Cora Young do not meet the designation requirements for historical associations. The Caswell Houses, located at 1404 and 1502 West Avenue, better embody the associations with the Caswell family. § 25-2-352(3)(c)(i) Architecture. The property embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a recognized architectural style, type, or method of construction; exemplifies technological innovation in design or construction; displays high artistic value in representing ethnic or folk art, architecture, or construction; represents a rare example of an architectural style in the city; serves as an outstanding example of the work of an architect, builder, or artisan who significantly contributed to the development of the city, state, or nation; possesses cultural, historical, or architectural value as a particularly fine or unique example of a utilitarian or vernacular structure; or represents an architectural curiosity or one-of-a-kind building. This American Foursquare house with Prairie School stylistic influences was constructed around 1920. The two-story house features a hipped roof with broad overhangs. The full-width, hipped-roof porch has a long, open span supported at …
Historical Information 6 – 7 The Austin Statesman; Austin, Tex.. 13 April 1924 (left) & The Austin American; Austin, Tex.. 26 February 1928 (right) 6 – 8 The Austin American (1914-1973); Austin, Tex.. 27 May 1934: 4. Charles J. Brunner obituary, The Austin American, 7/23/1933 (left) & Mrs. Kate H. Brunner obituary, The Austin Statesman, 2/2/1963 (right) 6 – 9 Photo of 1109 Travis Heights Blvd. featured in article on natural gas service, The Austin American, August 15, 1926 Permits 6 – 10 Water service permit, 1925
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION July 22, 2019 - 6:00 p.m. Regular Meeting Council Chambers, Austin City Hall 301 W. 2nd Street Austin, Texas COMMISSION MEMBERS: Emily Reed, Chair Beth Valenzuela, Vice Chair Ben Heimsath Emily Hibbs Kevin Koch Mathew Jacob Kelly Little Terri Myers Alex Papavasiliou Blake Tollett Witt Featherston REVISED AGENDA a) b) c) NOTES ON HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETINGS The first speaker signed up for each side of a contested public hearing will be allowed up to 5 minutes to speak. Any further speakers will be allowed up to 3 minutes. The Commission does not allow for the donation of time. The applicant or their agent may have a rebuttal after the conclusion of testimony of up to 3 minutes. Speakers should not repeat the testimony previously given on any case. Cases passed by the Commission on the consent agenda will not have a formal public hearing. If a citizen would like to speak on a case proposed for passage on the consent agenda, that person should make it known to the Chair of the Commission at the time of the reading of the consent agenda. Otherwise, the case will pass on consent, and there is no later recourse. In cases involving the review of demolition or relocation permit applications, the Commission may initiate a historic zoning case to further study the evidence regarding the potential of the subject property for landmark designation. If the Commission initiates a historic zoning case, the Commission will review the case again at its next regularly scheduled meeting for a recommendation regarding historic zoning. There will be no new notification sent out by the City stating the next hearing date. d) All public comments must be received by staff by 1 p.m. on the day of the meeting. Staff cannot forward public comments to commissioners after this time. 1. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first three speakers signed up prior to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address items not posted on the agenda. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. June 24, 2019 3. BRIEFINGS, DISCUSSION, AND POSSIBLE ACTION A. Heritage Grant Program By Melissa Alvarado 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ON APPLICATIONS FOR HISTORIC ZONING, DISCUSSION AND ACTION ON APPLICATIONS FOR HISTORIC DISTRICT 1 ZONING, AND REQUESTS TO CONSIDER THE INITIATION OF A HISTORIC ZONING CASE 1. HDP-2019-0180 – Tuke-Lyon Store – Discussion 220 …
ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET CASE NUMBER: PR-2026-086869 HLC DATE: October 7, 2026 PC DATE: CC Date: APPLICANT: Joseph Design Build HISTORIC NAME: WATERSHED: Waller Creek ADDRESS OF PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE: 1005 East 13th Street ZONING CHANGE: SF-3-NP to SF-3-H-NP COUNCIL DISTRICT: 1 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Do not recommend historic zoning, as the property does not meet the required criteria. QUALIFICATIONS FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION: architecture and historical associations. HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION ACTION: Initiated historic zoning on September 2, 2026 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: CITY COUNCIL ACTION: CASE MANAGER: Austin Lukes, 512-978-0766 NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS: Austin Neighborhoods Council, Del Valle Community Coalition, East Austin Conservancy, Friends of Austin Neighborhoods, Homeless Neighborhood Association, Organization of Central East Austin Neighborhoods , Overton Family Committee , Preservation Austin, Swede Hill Neighborhood Association, Waterloo Greenway DEPARTMENT COMMENTS: The 2016 East Austin Historic Resource Survey recommends the building as eligible for designation as a local landmark and as a contributing resource to a potential local historic district. However, additional research did not reveal sufficient historical associations to recommend historic zoning. BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATION: § 25-2-352(3)(c)(i) Architecture. The property embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a recognized architectural style, type, or method of construction; exemplifies technological innovation in design or construction; displays high artistic value in representing ethnic or folk art, architecture, or construction; represents a rare example of an architectural style in the city; serves as an outstanding example of the work of an architect, builder, or artisan who significantly contributed to the development of the city, state, or nation; possesses cultural, historical, or architectural value as a particularly fine or unique example of a utilitarian or vernacular structure; or represents an architectural curiosity or one-of-a-kind building. This wide, single-story house was built with National Folk elements and features an inset porch at the northeast corner. The porch is supported by a single metal support structure in the front corner which is attached to a short metal rail. The front door is set at the rear of the porch, next to a single- hung window. A tripartite window assembly is present at the other half of the front façade, surrounded by ample wood trim painted blue. Narrow wood siding clads the entire house and, while sagging in some areas, is overall in repairable condition. Due to the width of the house, the moderately pitched hipped roof form visually dominates over the property. It is clad in composition shingle and features a …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION Applications for Certificate of Appropriateness October 7, 2026 PR-2026-008188; GF-2026-025308 Robertson/Stuart & Mair Historic District 1005 East 8th Street 5 – 1 Proposal Demolish a ca. 1906 house listed as contributing to a local historic district. Architecture The house at 1005 East 8th St. was likely originally constructed as a single story building, with the sloping elevation of the site creating a crawlspace or cellar to the east side of the building footprint. Since its construction, this has been enclosed, and a rear addition built, increasing the enclosed area of the building. However, the U-shaped form and Folk Victorian elements still read legibly, and decorative elements, especially at the front porch and gable ends, remain present. The integrity of the architecture is strong and the property remains contributing to the Robertson/Stuart & Mair historic district. Research For the first 30 years after construction, the property went through a series of renters, made up of families and individuals employed by various local industries and services, including carpenters, foundry workers, and porters. The first long term owners were Ernest & Marie Kemp, who operated a local grocery. Marie Kemp continued to live at the address after her husband’s death, but by the 1950s, the property was vacant before becoming subdivided for oil industry and other professional offices. A third housing unit was added in 1970, indicating that this property continued use as residential rentals. An overnight fire occurred at the property on November 12th, 20251. Department Comments This application will time out on October 13, 2026. Property Evaluation The property contributes to the Robertson/Stuart & Mair Historic District. Staff Recommendation Grant the applicant requested postponement to the November 4, 2026 Historic Landmark Commission meeting. 1 “Firefighter injured in East Austin house fire, investigation underway”. https://cbsaustin.com/news/local/afd-responding-to- house-fire-in-east-austin-no-injuries-reported Location Map 5 – 2 Property Information Photos 5 – 3 Texas Historical Commission, photograph, May 29, 1975. The Portal to Texas History. Google Streetview, 2024 5 – 4 Site visit, showing fire damage (see backup for additional photos), May 2026 Occupancy History City Directory Research, March 2026 1959 1957 1955 1952 1949 1947 1944 1941 1939 1935 1932 1929 1927 1924 Offices: Norman Texas Company; Roche Oil Company; Pierre Aubuchon, engineer; Hamco Oil & Drilling Vacant Vacant Joseph & Maria Tamayo, owners; painter at South Lamar Automotive Service Same as above Alfredo, Joseph, and Maria Tamayo, renters; mechanic at Bergstrom Airfield Anna …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION Applications for Certificates of Appropriateness October 7, 2026 C14H-1982-0001-f; PR-2026-018321, HR-2026-112231 Larmour Block F 916 Congress Avenue 6 – 1 Proposal Install a new storefront and security grille. Install egress doors in wall between 916 and 918 Congress Avenue. Retroactively permit raised wooden deck and pavers, installed behind the façade. Project Specifications 1) The proposed new fenestration includes fully glazed aluminum fire doors between 916 and 918 Congress. 2) The proposed new storefront comprises three bays. It features molded wood trim, transom windows above each bay, and a wood trifold door at the central bay. The flanking openings are infilled with metal security grilles and gates. 3) The project includes retroactive approval of pavers and an event stage constructed previously without historic review at the rear of the now-exterior courtyard. Architecture Two-part 1876 commercial block with Italianate stylistic influences, limestone masonry, and arched second-floor windows with decorative stonework. The original storefront was lost, likely during the 1930s or 1940s. See Department Comments for discussion of previous modifications. Design Standards The City of Austin’s Historic Design Standards (March 2021) are based on the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and are used to evaluate projects at historic landmarks. The following standards apply to the proposed project: Repair and alterations 1. General Standards 1.1 Do not remove intact historic material from the exterior of a building. Removal of historic material occurred prior to the current proposal. See Department Comments above. 1.2 Always attempt repair first. Replacement should only be undertaken when absolutely necessary, and for the smallest area possible. The proposed project seeks to replace some of the missing storefront elements. 1.3 When historic material must be replaced due to damage or deterioration, replacement materials should look the same, perform reliably within the existing construction, and, in most cases, be made of the same material. The proposed new storefront is constructed of wood trim with a wooden door and security grilles. While the trim is appropriate, the security grilles in place of glazed or partially glazed fenestration are not, and the transom windows are not appropriately glazed. 1.4 Do not attempt to re-create an architectural detail or element without proof that it existed on the building historically. Documentation can be physical (traces on the building), written (such as building plans), or photographic. The proposed new front storefront is similar in proportions to the previous storefront, with two exceptions: …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS C14H-82-0001-F 916 CONGRESS AVENUE C.2 - 1 MARCH 26, 2007 PROPOSAL Remove existing second-story window and replace with a new steel-framed door in the shape and profile of the existing window; construct a new steel deck and canopy across the front of the building. PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS The proposed replacement door will have a pained steel frame with a profile and configuration matching the existing window. The proposed new deck and canopy will be constructed of painted steel columns with a painted steel guardrail in an X-pattern and a perforated metal scalloped-edge canopy with a cloverleaf pattern to complement the cloverleaf pattern on the quoins of the building. The ceiling of the canopy will be pressed tin with recessed lighting. The floor of the deck will be tiled. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW The Commission’s Standards for Review of applications for Certificates of Appropriateness include: · Do not destroy the distinguishing original qualities or character of a building, structure, or site and its environment. Avoid the removal or alteration of any historic material or distinctive architectural features. · Recognize all buildings, structures, and sites as products of their own time. Do not construct alterations which have no historical basis and which seek to create an earlier appearance. · Treat with sensitivity distinctive stylistic features or examples of skilled craftsmanship which characterize a building, structure, or site. · Repair, rather than replace deteriorated architectural features wherever possible. In the event replacement is necessary, the new material should match the material being replaced in composition, design, color, texture, and other visual qualities. Base the repair or replacement of missing architectural features on accurate duplications of features, substantiated by historical, physical, or pictorial evidence rather than on conjectural designs or the availability of different architectural elements from other buildings or structures. · Contemporary designs for alterations and additions to existing properties are appropriate when such alterations and additions do not destroy significant historic, architectural, or cultural material and such design is compatible with the size, scale, color, material, and character of the property, neighborhood, or environment. STAFF COMMENTS The front of this building was extensively renovated in 1982, when the non-historic storefront was replaced. Historic photographs of the Larmour Block show canopies with decks across the fronts of the buildings. The canopy and deck at 916 Congress Avenue appears to have a scalloped three-bay fascia across the front, although the …
A B B.3 C C.3 D E E.7 F G 1 S0.01 ] 8 1 [ 6 1 / 5 X 2 1 X 2 1 S S H EXISTING WALL BRACING AND DEADMEN BY OTHERS, REF 1/S0.01. 5"Ø STD PIPE HORIZONTAL BRACE@ 5'-0" MAX. BY OTHERS (SIZE AND SPACING PROVIDED FOR PRICING. ALTERNATE DESIGNS BY BRACING ENGINEER MAY BE ACCEPTABLE AND SHALL BE REVIEWED BY CHW) LOCATE BRACING ELEVATION WITH 18" OF EXISTING SECOND FLOOR DIAPHRAGM. A LEVEL 2 EXISTING WALL BRACING PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" A B B.3 C D E E.7 F G PROVIDE ADDITIONAL BRACING AT EXISTING WALL WITHIN 18" OF EXISTING ROOF DIAPHRAGM WHERE EXISTING THIRD FLOOR OCCURS B LEVEL 3 EXISTING WALL BRACING PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" EXISTING WALL 5"Ø STD PIPE HORIZONTAL BRACE@ 5'-0" MAX. BY OTHERS (SIZE AND SPACING PROVIDED FOR PRICING. ALTERNATE DESIGNS BY BRACING ENGINEER MAY BE ACCEPTABLE AND SHALL BE REVIEWED BY CHW) LOCATE BRACING ELEVATION WITHIN 18" OF EXISTING THIRD FLOOR / ROOF DIAPHRAGM. 1 S0.01 1 S0.01 " 6 - ' 6 " 0 - ' 7 " 6 - ' 6 BRACING AND DEADMEN BY OTHERS, REF 1/S0.01. 1 1.2 1.5 1.8 2 1 1.2 1.5 1.8 2 G CONT. WT12X52 +/-14,000# CONT. HSS REF. B/S0.01 +/-16,000# CONT. HSS REF. A/S0.01 +/-16,000# VARIES FIELD VERIFY " 2 / 1 6 2 S0.01 2 S0.01 " 2 / 1 6 3/8" MIN. KNIFE PL., TYP. DEADMAN BY OTHERS 3 S0.01 CORNICE EL. = 138'-4" I Y F R E V D L E F I I Y F R E V D L E F I I Y F R E V D L E F I " 3 - ' 8 " 9 - ' 3 1 " 4 - ' 6 1 LEVEL 3 T.O.C. EL. = 130'-1" LEVEL 2 T.O.C. EL. = 116'-4" SUPPORT WALL ABOVE FOR COLUMN REPLACEMENT EXISTING FINISH FLOOR EL. = 100'-0" FUTURE FOUNDATION ELEMENTS EXISTING DEMIZING WALL AND CONCRESS AVE HISORIC FAÇADE BRACING SEQUENCE: 1. 2. 3. 4. MAX. 5. 6. DOCUMENT PRE-CONSTRUCTION CONDITION OF BOTH SIDES OF EXISTING DEMIZING WALLS AND CONCRESS AVE HISORIC FAÇADE. NOTE ANY VISIBLE CRACKS, LOOSE ROCKS, OR ANY OTHER VISIBLE DISTRESS IN THE WALL OR ADJACENT PROPERTY SLAB ON GRADE. INSTALL NEW STEEL BRACING BEAMS AS SHOWN ON A & B/S0.01 AT CONGRESS AVE HISTORIC FAÇADE. PROVIDE TEMPORARY FLOOR SUPPORT POST SHORES …
• Existing Cast Iron Columns to Remain In‐Place • No modifications to historic masonry façade • New Paint on existing wood storefront system will be provided. • New Glazing Putty will be provided only as necessary on existing wood storefront system. Renderings courtesy of Michael Hsu Office of Architecture 916 Congress – Historic Facade SIXTHRIVER ARCHITECTS | AUSTIN, TEXAS 916 Congress – Elevations SIXTHRIVER ARCHITECTS | AUSTIN, TEXAS Renderings courtesy of Michael Hsu Office of Architecture 916 Congress – Elevations SIXTHRIVER ARCHITECTS | AUSTIN, TEXAS Renderings courtesy of Michael Hsu Office of Architecture Historic Façade Faceted Glazing Area of New Faceted Glazing • Previously Approved Plans showed “flat” glazing design @ Level 3. • Current Building design shows enhanced design feature of “faceted” glazing design @ Level 3. • This minor modification enhances the visual connection between the new structure and the existing faceted glazing at the historic ground level entry. • 3rD Floor glazing design enhances visual separation between historic and new, and creates a traditional “belt‐line” floor, breaking building mass into classical proportions of base, middle, top. 916 Congress – Façade Articulation SIXTHRIVER ARCHITECTS | AUSTIN, TEXAS Renderings courtesy of Michael Hsu Office of Architecture EACH PANEL IS APPROX. 6” X 60” INSTALLATION PHOTO OF OKO‐SKIN INSTALLATION PHOTO OF OKO‐SKIN – EXAMPLE OF PRODUCT’S MASONRY‐LIKE COLOR VARIATION • Previously Approved Plans showed masonry cladding on rear of building. • Current Building design shows rain screen panel cladding on rear of building. • Architect, owner, and contractor have logistical and safety concerns of installing brick masonry above adjacent structures. • Fiber cement panels are lighter, larger, and require far less structural support, while providing a varied, natural texture similar to a masonry wall. • • System Specified is a high‐end European product produced by Reider, called “OKO‐Skin” “Fiber Cement” is not synonymous with “Hardie.” No Hardie Products are specified or desired. 916 Congress – Masonry VS. Fiber Cement SIXTHRIVER ARCHITECTS | AUSTIN, TEXAS Renderings courtesy of Michael Hsu Office of Architecture SAMPLE OF STANDING SEAM METAL WALL PANELS – PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DESIGN. INSTALLATION PHOTO OF OKO‐SKIN VARIED PANEL PROFILES AND COLORS CURRENTLY SPECIFIED EXAMPLE OF OIL‐CANNING PRESENT IN STANDING SEAM INSTALLATIONS • Previously Approved Plans showed standing seam metal panel system. Design team has concerns about oil‐canning of these panels. • Current design uses higher‐end, more commercial‐grade system better‐suited for installation in this location, no oil‐canning. • 3 profiles …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION Applications for Certificate of Appropriateness October 7, 2026 HR-2026-114321 Rogers Washington Holy Cross Historic District 2406 East Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard 7 – 1 Proposal Rehabilitate a contributing property and construct a rear addition. Project Specifications 1) Repair existing exterior cladding including horizontal siding and stone skirt, replace street-facing windows, construct a small utility addition at the rear of the existing carport. 2) Construct a small, one-room addition behind the main house. Architecture The property is a single story ranch house with a corner inset carport. There is a stone clad skirt around the perimeter of the front façade, with the remainder of the walls clad with horizontal wood siding. There are two sets of paired windows at the front, but it is not certain if the units are replacements. The roof is a shallow pitched side gable form. Design Standards The Rogers Washington Holy Cross Design Standards are used to evaluate projects within the historic district. The following standards apply to the proposed project: 4. Alterations to Contributing Properties 4.1. Exterior walls Exterior wall materials at the rear addition are proposed to match the horizontal-oriented siding of the main house. Trim around windows are to be of similar dimension to existing as well. As the addition will be minimally visible from the street, there is little concern about the material matching too closely, and the rear-projecting shape of the addition gives indication that it is a later addition. Existing wall materials are to be retained, and should be repaired or refinished to bring them back into serviceable condition. Where cladding is too damaged to be repaired, it should be patched with matching material. The Historic Preservation Office must be alerted if substantial material loss is encountered for guidance on how to proceed. 4.2. Roofs A TPO roof is proposed for the addition, which will not exceed the height of the overall roof structure for the original house. While this material will not match the historic exactly, it is compatible and will allow the addition to be read as from a later date of construction. 4.4. Porches and entrances Existing front porch and entrance is to be retained in its orientation. 4.5. Windows Front windows are proposed to be replaced with fixtures of a similar size, appropriate to their respective wall in material, and openings. In keeping with the design standards, window frames must not be …
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 1 HOLY CROSS HEIGHTS AUSTIN, TX. TRAVIS COUNTY LOT SIZE: IMP. COVER: 6843 SF 35.8% IMPERVIOUS COVER AREA CHART PROJECT SCOPE: NAME EXISTING SLAB PROPOSED SLAB EXISTING DRIVEWAY PROPOSED DECK EXISITNG SHED AC PAD IMPERVIOUS COVER TOTAL: AREA 1,184.83 SF 152.20 SF 828.55 SF 120.00 SF 156.93 SF 9.00 SF 2,451.51 SF REMODEL - ADDITION Existing one story 2 Br, 1 Ba woodframe on Pier beam. Remodel kitchen, convert bedroom to bath and add new bedroom (2 Br 2 Ba) SF-3-HD-NP 19" PECAN MULTI-TRUNK N80° 53'17" E 51.24' 5' P.U.E. (PER PLAT) SHED LOT 1 6843 SF HOLY CROSS HEIGHTS (8/27) UNCOVERED DECK NEW ADDITION 4 ' - 1 1 " 4 2 ' - 3 " 4 7 ' - 7 " ) T A L P R E P ( . E . U P . ' 5 ' 2 1 . 0 2 1 W ' " 5 3 2 3 ° 8 0 N ' 9 9 . 9 1 1 W ' " 8 0 7 1 ° 9 0 N ) T A L P R E P ( . . E . U P C R T C E L E I ' 5 17" PECAN MULTI-TRUNK EXISTING 1 STORY WOOD HOUSE. APPROX. 931 SQ. FT. BUILDING FOOTPRINT R 15' - 0" R 15' - 0" " 5 - ' 0 3 " 0 - ' 5 2 PROPOSED ADDITION OUTSIDE OF REQUIRED ELECTRICAL CLEARANCE 5' - 6" 40' - 11" 6' - 2" PLT LVL 01 8' - 0" F.F. LVL 01 0" 23" MAGNOLIA 2 5 ' - 4 " EXISTING CONCRETE DRIVEWAY REFER TO AE LETTER FOR DRIVE OVERHEAD ELECTRIC LINES POWER POLE R E N N U R E T E R C N O C 7' - 7" 7'-6" MIN. REQUIRED CLEARANCE FROM OVERHEAD ELECTRICAL LINES - NEED TO VERIFY ON FIELD 4 REAR ELEVATION ELECTRICAL CLEARANCE 1/8" = 1'-0" (22x34) 1/8" = 1'-0" (11x17) S80° 45'23" W 52.80' EXISTING CONCRETE WALK SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE NORTH POWER POLE 2410 E. MLK JR BLVD 1 01 - Plan - Site - 1"=10' 1" = 10'-0" (22x34) 1/8" = 1'-0" (11x17) Felicia Foster, Principal, Assoc. AIA, CPBD 512.637.4426 barroncustomdesign.com info@barroncustomdesign.com These Plans have been Prepared by Felicia B. Foster, CPBD # 44-719 Stamp and Signature Provided in Blue on originals for Regulatory Submittals. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION STAMPED …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION Applications for Certificate of Appropriateness October 7, 2026 HR-2026-106327 Rogers Washington Holy Cross Historic District 2410 East Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard 8 – 1 Proposal Construct two housing units on a vacant lot. Project Specifications 1) At an existing vacant lot, construct two housing units utilizing the HOME ordinance. Each housing unit will be two-stories and will be of similar size, with one located directly behind the other. 2) Construct a driveway at the western edge of the lot to provide for off-street parking. Architecture The existing property is a vacant lot, with no record of permanent structures ever built on the site. Design Standards The Rogers Washington Holy Cross Design Standards are used to evaluate projects within the historic district. The following standards apply to the proposed project: General Standards 2. Lot Configuration The subject lot was created as a result of subdividing 2406 E. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. While the design standards prohibit the replatting of lots, this situation may be unique in the district. The original 2406 property was much wider than the typical lot in the neighborhood, and it is bisected by a utility easement that prevents a single structure that uses the entire street frontage from being constructed. Additionally, the two properties immediately to the rear of the 2406 lot both have single-family structures on them. Given these circumstances, the development patterns of the larger district are maintained even through the lot subdivision. 3. Site and Site Elements 3.2. Driveways Proposed driveway is concrete in material. There is no existing driveway on the property, and the proposed work requires a new curb cut on E. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. The layout of the driveway will be consistent with the standards with regard to design and width, and will terminate at two carports located within the footprint of the two housing units. No circular or semi-circular layout is proposed. 3.7. Mechanical and energy conservation equipment Proposed mechanical equipment is to be located between the two units and not visible from the street. 8. New Construction of Infill (Principal Buildings and Accessory Dwelling Units) 8.1. Orientation, Setbacks, and Height The front housing unit will be oriented toward the street, and will have a similar setback to contributing resources. The overall height of the new buildings will be close to the 27 foot maximum outlined in the design standards. However, the two …
DRIVEWAY TYPE I - NOTES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. "ZERO" CURB AT PT OR SIDEWALK EDGE, WHICHEVER IS ENCOUNTERED FIRST. THE DRIVEWAY EDGE SHALL BE SMOOTHLY TRANSITIONED INTO THE SIDEWALK BEGINNING AT THE RADIUS PC LINE IF DIMENSION IS LESS THAN 1.5 METERS (5 FEET), REMOVE CURB AND GUTTER TO EXISTING JOINT AND POUR MONOLITHICALLY WITH THE DRIVEWAY. IF THE BASE IS OVER EXCAVATED WHERE THE CURB AND GUTTER WAS REMOVED, BACKFILL WITH CONCRETE MONOLITHICALLY WITH THE DRIVEWAY. ALL DRIVEWAYS MUST BE CONSTRUCTED WITHIN THE STREET FRONTAGE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS DETERMINED BY EXTENDING THE SIDE PROPERTY LINES TO THE CURB DRIVEWAYS SHALL NOT EXCEED 70% OF A LOTS' STREET FRONTAGE TYPE I DRIVEWAYS ARE TO BE LOCATED NO CLOSER TO THE CORNER OF INTERSECTING RIGHTS-OF-WAY THAN 60% OF PARCEL FRONTAGE OR 15 METERS (50 FEET) WHICHEVER IS LESS. DRIVEWAYS SHALL NOR BE CONSTRUCTED WITHIN THE CURB RETURN OF A STREET INTERSECTION. SINGLE FAMILY LOTS LIMITED TO ONE DRIVEWAY EXCEPT FOR APPROVED SEMICIRCULAR DRIVES. WHEN TWO DRIVEWAYS ARE USED(ONE PER UNIT;TWO MAXIMUM) FOR DUPLEXES AND TOWN HOMES, SINGLE FAMILY STANDARDS SHALL APPLY. WHILE THE PROPERTY OWNER REMAINS RESPONSIBLE FOR GRADE BREAKS WITHIN PRIVATE PROPERTY, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT SHOULD BE CONSULTED WHERE THE DRIVEWAY IS ESSENTIAL TO EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS AND "G2" IS GREATER THAN 15%. "G1" PLUS "D" SHOULD NOT EXCEED 15%. SEE TRANSPORTATION MANUAL SECTION 5 FOR OTHER APPROVED MATERIAL, FOR CURB AND GUTTER EXPANSION JOINTS. USE 12MM (½") ASPHALT BOARD, OR OTHER APPROVED MATERIAL, FOR CURB AND GUTTER EXPANSION JOINTS. THE SIDEWALK, REGARDLESS OF ITS LOCATION WITH RESPECT TO THE CURB OR PROPERTY LINE, SHALL BE CONNECTED TO THE DRIVEWAY AT THESE LOCATIONS. PLACE AN EXPANSION JOINT DOWN THE CENTER OF ALL DRIVEWAYS. WATER METER BOXES AND WASTEWATER CLEAN OUTS ARE PROHIBITED FROM BEING LOCATED IN DRIVEWAY AREAS. EXPANSION JOINT CENTERLINE EXPANSION JOINT SEE DETAIL BELOW AND NOTE 14 ON SHEET 4 OF 4 0.6 m (2'-0'') TYP. R.O.W. 1.2 m (4'-0'') MIN. 2% MAX. SLOPE SIDEWALK TIE-IN LOCATION. SEE NOTE 13 SEE DRIVEWAY CRITERIA CHART BELOW PT SEE NOTE 1 EXIST. JOINT SAW-CUT & EXP. JT. PC TRANSITION TO ZERO CURB MATCH CATCH/SPILL GUTTER SECTION OF EXIST. CURB & GUTTER PLAN SEE NOTE 2. R.O.W. A PEDESTRIAN CROSSING SIDEWALK TIE-IN LOCATION. SEE NOTE 13 R INLET B CURB & GUTTER 3 m (10'-0'') MIN. NOTE: …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION Applications for Certificate of Appropriateness October 7, 2026 HR-2026-104982 Hyde Park Historic District 4309 Avenue D 9 – 1 Proposal Rehabilitate a contributing property and construct a rear addition. Construct a second housing unit at the existing garage. Project Specifications 1) Interior selective demolition of the existing main house, as well as alterations to the front of the building and replacement of non-original windows. 2) Construction of a rear addition consisting of several rooms and a rear porch, to be minimally visible from the street. 3) Construction of a second-floor addition to the existing detached garage for conversion to a secondary housing unit. Architecture This property is a single-story residence in the Hyde Park neighborhood with Craftsman elements, which fits well with surrounding properties. It features a large hipped roof with a front facing gable projecting at a front corner. While other contributing properties on the street feature elevated porches facing the street, this house has no such porch, with its two front doors accessed via simple concrete stairs. City directory research indicates that the house was built as a single unit but was split into two in the early 20th century. A roof overhang in front of the two doors is supported by two simple wood posts. At the rear of the lot is a garage facing a rear alley. Design Standards The Hyde Park Design Standards are used to evaluate projects within the historic district. The following standards apply to the proposed project: 1. General Standards 1.1. Prevention of Demolition The proposal calls for reuse of the main house structure as well as two of the walls at the rear garage. The overall form of the historic residence will be retained, with the rear addition tying into the existing very appropriately. 1.2. Retention of Historic Style There are few remaining stylistic flourishes at this property that are more common elsewhere in the district. However, the Craftsman form and appearance will be retained. There is a concern that loss of some more utilitarian elements, such as the simple posts, concrete pad in place of a porch, and double front entry doorways previously serving the additional unit, may change the overall character of the property. This concern is relatively minor but it is recommended that options including retention of the second doorway, fixed in place, be explored to retain some of the change over time that occurred …
Submission to Historical Preservation Office 4309 Avenue D Hyde Park Austin TX 2026-093502 PR We are restoring 4309 Avenue D to a single family residence and adding an Accessory Dwelling Unit to the garage in back. For the front house, we are removing the second front door and adding a brick porch at the floor level of the home. Common in much of Hyde Park. Photos of area included: The new porch will have new 8” round traditional painted columns by HBG PermaCast – smooth non-tapered. Gable will be resided with smaller fiberglass rectangular make-up air vent typical of Hyde Park. New siding as reqd will be Hardie lap siding in coursing to match original as possible. New Asphalt shingle roof – three tab – grey. Columns and gable vents to fit Hyde Park. New Windows will be operable one over one double-hung units to match existing rough openings. The kitchen and bedroom extensions happen at the rear of the building leaving original structure intact. Hip and gable roof forms of matching pitch for addition with attic for mechanical equipment. Electrical service will be relocated underground. Existing sewer and water lines to remain with no disruption of tree root zones. New rear porch to fit neighborhood The addition will not be seen from Avenue but will be viewed from alley. The second dwelling unit (ADU) in back will abut and span over the existing garage. The original north and east walls of the garage will remain and the ADU will be set back from existing garage. The west wall (facing house) and south wall will be new and incorporate same materials as front house but with different expression – a cantilever balcony and blind arch transom are unlike the front house. Setbacks follow alley and Hyde Park standards.
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION Applications for Permits in National Register Historic Districts October 7, 2026 PR-2026-059982; GF-2026-073317 Travis Heights-Fairview Park Historic District 2009 Travis Heights Boulevard 10 – 1 Proposal Demolish a ca. 1939 house. Architecture The original portion of this house can be seen at the right two thirds of the street-facing façade, which still retains some Tudor Revival details such as the arched door and steep roof pitch. Original side lites and modest front porch with concrete stairs continue with this style. The exterior material is stucco or plaster, which may be original but has been painted. To the north of the main house is a 2012 addition of a covered porch, which was enclosed with walls covered in matching painted stucco, and appears from the street as conditioned space. Behind this is a pergola that is also enclosed by full height walls, though no roof covers it. Research Original owners of this house S.R. & Maxine Blake, who worked in sales and briefly lived at the property before it was acquired by Frank & Florence Schirripa, then Jason & Virginia Forbes, who owned the property for the next ten years. During their ownership, Jason Forbes went from a record keeper at the Texas State House Reporter to a correspondent and finally an editor of the publication. By 1957, the property was sold again to Floy & Pearl Forister. Department Comments Per city code § 25-11-213 (G)(4), the Historic Landmark Commission has 180 days to review demolition permits in National Register historic districts starting from the date the application was submitted. This period is set to time out on November 9, 2026. An update to the demolition application has been submitted, which has changed the scope of work to not include the detached garage. As a result, this proposed demolition is now limited to the main house only. Property Evaluation The property contributes to the Travis Heights-Fairview Park National Register district. Designation Criteria—Historic Landmark 1) The building is more than 50 years old. 2) The building appears to retain integrity. 3) Properties must meet two criteria for landmark designation (LDC §25-2-352). Staff has evaluated the property and determined that it does not meet two criteria for landmark designation: a. Architecture. The building is an intact, if altered, example of Tudor Revival architecture in the district. b. Historical association. The property does not appear to have significant historical associations. c. …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION Applications for Permits in National Register Historic Districts October 7, 2026 SP-2026-035365; HR-2026-070009 West Line Historic District 611 West Lynn Street 11 – 1 Proposal Construct eight detached residential units on a property. Project Specifications Construct a total of eight multi-story housing units, oriented around a center driveway and pool area. Five units at the front of the property will face this new driveway, and the three rear units will face a rear alley. This driveway will require a new curb cut. Architecture The property is currently a vacant lot. The original house on the property was demolished in 2020. Design Standards The City of Austin’s Historic Design Standards (March 2021) are based on the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and are used to evaluate projects in National Register districts. The following standards apply to the proposed project: Residential new construction 1. Location The front units will have their walls closest to the street with a setback that approximately matches surrounding properties. Other units are spread equally across the property and don’t extend beyond required setbacks. Due to the site elevation, which slopes down towards the rear alley, units will be less visible as they are more set back from the front of the property. 2. Orientation The front five units will face the central driveway, which is not typical to single family houses in the district. However, design revisions have been made since the August 12, 2026 Architectural Review Committee, and both units closest to West Lynn St. have been revised to include porch areas and details at the ground floor. Additionally the massing has been altered to make these units interface with the street more than in previous design iterations. The three rear units, facing the alley, are in keeping with the standards in their guidance on additional structures on the property. 3. Scale, massing, and height All housing units are designed to be at least three stories in height. This is taller than surrounding contributing properties, with the exception of the Sheeks-Robertson House across the street. The massing of each unit appears very vertical due to each being detached, which may not be as perceptible if the structures were duplexes or rowhomes. Revisions have been made to the design to break up the massing into smaller elements and to create a “stepped back” effect when viewed from the street. These revisions are …
GOSSET AND Co. 824 W 10th STREET AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701 512-842-9904 CEDAR BUILD, INC. 800 BRAZOS ST #340 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701 512-402-7586 HOLT CARSON INC. 1904 FORTVIEW ROAD AUSTIN, TX 78704 512-442-0990 TBPLS FIRM #10050700 1 P:\21102.01 West Lynn 611\CADD\Construction\Sheet Files\21102.01 - Cover Sheet.dwg, 4/16/2026 11:40:35 AM 04-15 0 20' 40' SCALE: 1" = 20' W W W W W W W W W W W W g n i v a p f o e g d e W W W W R.L. Slaughter & Helen Slaughter to Charles J. Fruth Volume 287 Page 518 1916 conflicting elements R.L. Slaughter et Ux. to C.R. Anderson et Ux. Volume 334 Page 193 December 1921 R.L. Slaughter et Ux. to C.R. Anderson et Ux. Volume 334 Page 194 December 1921 ASPHALT TO BE REMOVED Michael W. Little Document No. 2024108611 INT #2153 I G N T S X E I Y A W E V R D I W W ' 0 2 W . I . C " 0 2 X E W W C S C " 6 3 X E W I G N T S X E I ' 0 2 Y A W E V R D I b r u c n o e l g n W a i r t : k r a m h c n e b ' 8 9 . 4 3 5 t a x o b r e b i f e l g o o G W b r u c G E H O G E G H O G E H G O G E H O G P P G W W ) ' 0 5 ( T E E R T S N N Y L T S E W W ' 1 . 3 3 5 t a e l o W p ' 3 . 1 6 5 t a e r i w G E H O G G E H O G M W G E H O G N E G H G O S I G E H G O G E H O G G k l a w G E H O G e t e r c n o c G E H O G 611 WEST LYNN STREET CUT, PLUG AND ABANDON G Y N EXIST.3/4" COPPER WATER SERVICE AT THE A …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION Applications for Demolition and Relocation Permits October 7, 2026 PR-2026-079349; GF-2026-090393 Travis Heights-Fairview Park Historic District 706 East Monroe Street 12 – 1 Proposal Demolish a ca. 1927 house. Architecture This property is a single-story Craftsman bungalow featuring an ample, projecting front porch that is supported by two square wood posts. These posts, along with the porch railing and brackets above, decorate the front of the house, which retains strong integrity. The front gabled roof features prominent overhangs and rafter tails still present under a later gutter addition. Windows all appear to be original and are in good condition. The walls are clad in narrow horizontal siding, and the elevated foundation is covered by a concrete or stucco skirting. Behind the house is a porch structure that has been confirmed by a previous owner to have been designed by former University of Texas architecture professor Bob Mather. The design of this structure, made from portions of the original garage, matches the roof pitch to create a sheltered space at the rear, and was likely designed while Mather lived, along with his wife Jean Mather, nearby at 1611 Alameda Drive. Research After its construction, this property was shortly owned by Walter & Larah Bergfield, the former of whom was employed as a barber. After a series of short term owners and residents, including a taxi driver and a telephone repairman, the property was bought by Edmund & Dorothy Morris around 1944. Edmund Morris worked at the Mutual Benefit Health Association as a manager, before starting his own insurance agency by 1949. Doris is listed as assisting in this operation, and the couple raised several children at the property. By 1957, the property was purchased by Clyde & Georgia Priddy, a chef at the Commodore Perry Hotel. Department Comments Per city code § 25-11-213 (G)(4), the Historic Landmark Commission has 180 days to review demolition permits in National Register historic districts starting from the date the application was submitted. This period is set to time out on February 17, 2027. Property Evaluation The property contributes to the Travis Heights-Fairview Park National Register district. Designation Criteria—Historic Landmark 1) The building is more than 50 years old. 2) The building appears to retain high integrity. 3) Properties must meet two criteria for landmark designation (LDC §25-2-352). Staff has evaluated the property and determined that it does not meet two criteria for …
06/09/2026 June 18, 2026 City of Austin Development Services Department Historic Preservation Office / Austin Planning Re: Residential Total Demolition Permit Application — 706 E Monroe Street, Austin, Texas To Development Services and Historic Preservation Staff: We recently acquired the property at 706 E Monroe Street and are submitting this Residential Total Demolition Permit application to begin the City’s required review process for the existing bungalow and related accessory structure. We understand that the property is located within the Travis Heights-Fairview Park National Register Historic District context and that review by Historic Preservation staff and/or the Historic Landmark Commission may be required before any permit may be released. At this stage, we are evaluating multiple paths for the existing bungalow. Demolition is not our first or only path. In parallel with this permit application, we are actively exploring preservation alternatives, including retention of the structure as part of the overall site plan and potential relocation/donation to a house preservation nonprofit. We are submitting the application now so that the required City review can proceed while those preservation and relocation conversations continue. Based on the information currently available to us, we understand that the bungalow may be a contributing-age structure within the National Register district context, but we do not believe it independently meets the City’s criteria for local historic landmark designation. Specifically, while the structure may meet the age threshold, we are not currently aware of facts indicating that it has individual architectural significance, significant historical associations, unique community value apart from the broader district context, archaeological significance, or landscape significance sufficient to support individual landmark designation. We welcome staff’s review and will provide additional information requested by Historic Preservation staff. We are submitting an updated combined survey for 700 and 706 E Monroe, including current tree information. No tree removal is proposed as part of this demolition permit application. We are not proposing to impact the critical root zone of any protected or heritage tree or to prune more than 25% of any protected-size tree canopy as part of this application, except as may be separately reviewed and approved by the City. We understand that any required tree protection and erosion/sedimentation controls must be installed and inspected before demolition or removal work occurs. The application materials identify the existing bungalow and the existing accessory shed, approximately 125 square feet. No demolition, relocation, or removal work will occur unless and …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION Applications for Permits in National Register Historic Districts October 7, 2026 HR-2026-101908 Old West Austin Historic District 1614 Preston Avenue 13 – 1 Proposal Construct a two-story addition at a contributing property. Project Specifications 1) Remove or cover existing stone exterior cladding and remove existing windows. 2) Construct a second floor addition above the existing house, doubling the footprint. Architecture This house is a single-story, stone clad residence with an inset porch and modest decoration at the corner of Preston Avenue and Jefferson Street. The front elevation is dominated by a large picture window at the rear of the porch and a broad low-pitch gable roof above. The house is set slightly above grade on an elevated foundation, with the stone cladding extending to the ground. At the side street, a two car garage is present behind the house and attached to the main house by a non-original conditioned space. Research For at least the first two decades after its construction, this property was owned by pastors from the University Christian Church in Austin. There is no record that this was ever designated as an official residence, and deed details show that each of the pastors owned the property outright. It is likely that the first owners, Lawrence & Letha Bash, sold the property upon the installment of Dr. William Gibble to the same position, at which point the former owners moved. Design Standards The City of Austin’s Historic Design Standards (March 2021) are based on the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and are used to evaluate projects in National Register districts. The following standards apply to the proposed project: Residential additions 1. Location The second story addition extends roughly the entire floorplate of the ground floor, approximately doubling the square footage of the property. 2. Scale, massing, and height By doubling the size of the house, the addition does not propose a similar scale to the existing. However, there are numerous examples of large additions found throughout the district that have been approved. 3. Design and style This proposal removes or covers the existing first floor cladding and creates a unified appearance between original and the addition. Due to issues with the existing masonry cladding, it is not inappropriate to remove and replace with another appropriate material. 4. Roofs The proposed roof form is hipped, which will entirely eliminate the character-defining front gable. A …
August 20, 2026 Historic Preservation Office City of Austin, Texas preservation@austintexas.gov RE: Condition of Existing Masonry at 1614 Preston Avenue, Austin, Texas 78703 Mr. Lukes and Members of the Historic Landmark Commission, I am the general contractor for the proposed renovation and second-story addition at 1614 Preston Avenue. I have over 20 years of experience in residential construction in Austin and Central Texas, including work on homes of this era, and with the kinds of masonry challenges present at 1614 Preston. This letter details my professional assessment of the condition of the existing masonry, the origin of the present issues, and my recommendation. On the structural questions, I have relied on the concurring opinion of the project’s structural engineer, Bradley Shaw. The existing stone masonry at 1614 Preston does not extend around the building. The stone is present on the front and along a little more than half of the left side. The remaining walls are not stone- clad. In my assessment, significant portions of this masonry do not appear original to the 1939 structure. This is most apparent at the chimney and along the Jefferson Street side. This conclusion is based on the variation in the stone’s cut and color, differences in coursing and mortar, and the way the stonework terminates, particularly at and around the chimney and the earlier addition area. These observations are consistent with the property’s other evidence of prior additions, as well as the structural engineer’s findings. The existing masonry is deteriorating and cannot be reliably stabilized. I observe cracking and displacement within the stonework, failed mortar joints, and clear evidence of chronic moisture intrusion. This evidence includes staining, dampness, and heavy biofilm growth in areas that appear to remain persistently wet rather than occasionally damp. The concentration of biofilm at grade and across the lower half of the wall is consistent with water collecting and remaining at the base of the wall, from ground contact, splashback, and the lack of appropriate base flashing. At the chimney, the biofilm marks sustained water entry at a junction that is a common source of leaks. Mortar loss and stone decay are most advanced in these same areas. In my experience, the cause is most often the manner of construction. A masonry wall always takes on some water. Without sufficient weather-resistive barriers, drainage cavities, flashing, or weep systems, water is held against the back of the stone and …
