B.4.a - 809 E. 9th Street - citizen comment — original pdf
Backup
All documents
B.4.b - 809 E. 9th Street - citizen comment — original pdf
Backup
B.4.c - 809 E. 9th Street - citizen comment — original pdf
Backup
B.4.d - 809 E. 9th Street - citizen comment — original pdf
Backup
C.1.c - 1805 Waterston Ave - CCDC postponement request — original pdf
Allen, Amber From: Sent: To: Subject: Mary Reed Sunday, August 22, 2021 4:54 AM Myers, Terri - BC; Wright, Caroline - BC; Little, Kelly - BC; Koch, Kevin - BC; Jacob, Mathew - BC; McWhorter, Trey - BC; Featherston, Witt; Papavasiliou, Alexander - BC; Tollett, Blake - BC; Valenzuela, Sarah - BC; Heimsath, Ben - BC; terrimyers@preservationcentral.com; PAZ Preservation Asking for a postponement. Again. Item C.1.0, 1805 Waterston Avenue *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** On behalf of the Clarksville Community Development Corporation (CCDC), I once again request that you delay making a decision on release of a demo permit for the contributing house located at 1805 Waterston in the Clarksville National Register District. As I have explained previously, CCDC representatives met with Jesse Nalle of Nalle Custom Homes on June 3. We knew the odds of convincing him not to demo the home were dismal, so we focused on suggesting changes to the new home he wants to build that would make it less ”suburban,” more Clarksville. In fact, we asked him to address some of the very issues that Kalan Contreras later pointed out in her staff report. And we offered to work with Mr. Nalle on revisions to his plans. Since our first meeting, we have communicated regularly with Mr. Nalle and his staff and have been told repeatedly that new plans would be coming soon. However, the plans you have on file are the same ones we saw on June 3rd. In other words, nothing has changed. I am an optimist so I want to believe that Nalle Custom Homes truly intends to do what it said it would. Postponing a decision on its request for a demo permit will give the company yet another chance to do that. Mary Reed President, Clarksville Community Development Corporation 1 MR•PR Austin, TX 78703 Be Kind "I have decided to stick with love. Hate is too great a burden to bear." MLK CAUTION: This email was received at the City of Austin, from an EXTERNAL source. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious and/or phishing email, please forward this email to cybersecurity@austintexas.gov. 2
C.2.1 - 2521 Jarratt Avenue - drawings — original pdf
F E D C B A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 G 10'-101/4" E D 3'-6" 8'-71/4" 7'-63/4" F C B 15'-7" A 18'-21/2" 10 12 10 12 K C A B T E S E D S ' I 5 10 RF-1 12 10 12 10 12 9 12 I E N L Y T R E P O R P +11'-6" LEVEL 2 " 2 / 1 1 - ' 9 2 I T H G E H G N D L U B I I . . A O C . I E N L Y T R E P O R P K C A B T E S E D S ' I 5 S-1 +11'-6" LEVEL 2 ±0" LEVEL 1 605.8' H.P.A 605.1' A.A.G GATE ST-1 605.8' H.P.A ±0" LEVEL 1 Friday, August 20, 2021 FINISH KEY S-1 RF-1 ST-1 MT-1 STUCCO METAL (SLATE STYLE) ROOF TILES LIMESTONE (HONED SMOOTH FINISH) POWDER COATED STEEL (DARK FINISH ANODIZED BRONZE OR SIMILAR) 3 FRONT ELEVATION (FACING STREET) SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0" 0 4' 8' 12' F CAUTION: DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS THESE DRAWINGS ARE THE PROPERTY OF THE ARCHITECT AND MAY ONLY BE USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THIS PROJECT CONSULTANTS CLIENT GREG & KIM GRESKOVICH ARCHITECT HOGAN ARCHITECTS + DEVELOPMENT LLC 2700 E 3RD ST AUSTIN, TX 78702 JOSHUA HOGAN, AIA joshua@hoganbuildings.com 903-244-7919 STRUCTURAL ENGINEER TBD GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER TBD GENERAL CONTRACTOR TBD JOSHUA HOGAN TEXAS ARCHITECT REGISTRATION #25207 This document is incomplete and may not be used for regulatory approval, permitting, or construction. I H C V O K S E R G E C N E D S E R I I N T S U A E V A T T A R R A J 1 2 5 2 A S U 3 0 7 3 7 X T DESIGN DEVELOPMENT Friday, August 20, 2021 REV ID CHANGE NAME DATE E D C B PROJECT NO: MODEL FILE: 2521 Jarratt DRAWN BY: COPYRIGHT: SHEET TITLE A Project No. JH, AJ © 2021 HOGAN ARCHITECTS AND DEVELOPMENT LLC ELEVATIONS AND RENDERINGS Friday, August 20, 2021 | 5:26 PM A0-01 SHEET 49 OF 50 1 2 3 4 5 7 GSPublisherVersion 7.28.98.13 EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVE 2 EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVE 1 6 F E D C B A 1 2 3 7 4 " 5 - ' 4 3 " 7 - ' 5 1 " …
C.4.b - 1104 Toyath St - citizen comment — original pdf
Backup
C.4.c - 1104 Toyath St - CCDC Postponement Request — original pdf
Allen, Amber From: Sent: To: Subject: Mary Reed Sunday, August 22, 2021 5:20 AM Myers, Terri - BC; Wright, Caroline - BC; Little, Kelly - BC; Koch, Kevin - BC; Jacob, Mathew - BC; McWhorter, Trey - BC; Featherston, Witt; Papavasiliou, Alexander - BC; Tollett, Blake - BC; Valenzuela, Sarah - BC; Heimsath, Ben - BC; terrimyers@preservationcentral.com; PAZ Preservation Requesting a delay on your decision regarding Paradisa Homes' Permit Request, Item C.4.0 *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** On behalf of the Clarksville Community Development Corporation (CCDC) I request that you delay release of a building permit for 1104 Toyath in order to give the applicant, Paradisa Homes, more time to develop plans for a home that will be compatible with Clarksville. Most homes in Clarksville, even new ones, are relatively simple, but nothing about 1104 will be. It appears that Paradisa Homes completely ignored the architecture in the neighborhood and assumed that the kind of home it builds in the more suburban neighborhoods where it typically works, would be appropriate. Paradisa also ignored the impact of the home’s height on its neighbors and especially on the Lawson House, a historic landmark next door. It will loom over that house. More does not necessarily mean better and that is certainly true when it comes to the home Paradisa proposes to build. I therefore ask that the company go back to the drawing board and scale its plans way back so that 1104 Toyath better reflects the scale and style of other homes on the block and respects Clarksville’s unique history and traditional architecture. In order to do so, a meeting with the HLC’s Architectural Review Committee would seem wise. One final note: Months ago, representatives of the CCDC met with Luis Zaragosa of Paradisa to discuss its plans for 1104 Toyath. During the meeting, we suggested changes that would make the new home more appropriate for Clarksville. Although the plans on file indicate that the company did not make most of the changes we asked for, we do appreciate the fact that Paradisa relocated the carport to the back of the house. We also appreciate the size of the front porch. Both design features are good first steps, but there is much more work to be done before the home Paradisa Homes envisions will be right for the neighborhood. 1 Thank you for considering my request. Mary Reed President, …
C.8.a - 1510 Ashwood Rd - citizen comment — original pdf
Allen, Amber From: Sent: To: Subject: maxsonia Friday, August 20, 2021 4:14 PM PAZ Preservation Property at 1510 Ashwood Road, Delwood Duplex Historic District *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** I received notification of an application for a building permit for the house at 1510 Ashwood Road in the Delwood Duplex Historic District, Case # HR 21‐119779. I own property nearby at 3902 Maplewood. The windows of the house are being replaced, and I assume are the items under discussion. I’m an architectural historian, formerly with the National Register Department of the Texas Historical Commission. I know that the metal casement windows found throughout the Historic District are now likely 70 years old and generally require maintenance. But these are also character‐defining features for the neighborhood, as virtually every house or duplex in the Districts does or did have casement windows, and the loss of these particularly at a house at the gateway of the neighborhood would have a negative effect, causing me to object. The windows that have already been replaced at this property seem to be tinted plate glass with fake interior muntons. These detract from the historic character of the property for at least four reasons: ‐ They have no shadow lines, which to the eye define divided light windows ‐ They divisions are different than those of the historic casement windows ‐ The tinted glass is non‐historic, and it sometimes totally obscures that there are any muntin elements at all ‐ The introduction of those windows sets a precedent in the neighborhood When I was at the Historical Commission and reviewed similar cases, the in‐house nickname for such windows was "The Orphan Annie Look,” as the windows read as large black eyes where divided light clear windows belong. The circa 1950 architecture of the district was at a time of few embellishments, very simple. The windows are distinctive, and certainly worth restoration or replacement in kind. Thanks for the opportunity to comment. Peter Flagg Maxson CAUTION: This email was received at the City of Austin, from an EXTERNAL source. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious and/or phishing email, please forward this email to cybersecurity@austintexas.gov. 1
C.9.c - 82 San Marcos Street - citizen comment — original pdf
Allen, Amber From: Sent: To: Subject: Sunday, August 22, 2021 6:01 PM PAZ Preservation 82 San Marcos St case # PR-21-113815 This message is from Sylvia Marroquin. I received a notice of the hearing on the demolition of the property located at 82 San Marcos on Thursday. I see that the letter was dated for mailing on Aug 12. I do not believe that a local letter should take over a week to be delivered. In any case, the mailing date and the delivery dates are 2 very different things. I do not believe that enough notice has been given to all my neighbors to have the hearing as scheduled . I object to having the hearing until all interested parties are properly notified. Additionally, I would like to add that I went by the house and found the sign lying on the ground behind tall weeds. not visible to the street! The house in question in inside of the Willow Spence National Historic district. The entire district is comprised of 4 blocks total. Thus far we have had no one try to destroy any of our historic homes. The house in question is by far in better condition than my house at 908 willow street was when I purchased it. I restored my home! The house will need some updating as all these 1920‐ 1930's homes do, but it is not a tear down. There are plenty of homes all over the east side that developers can buy and tear down without hardly any problem. This house is in a National Historic District. If the buyers of this property did not like the house and had no intention of restoring, then they should not have bought it. It was their choice! Do not set a precedent that it is okay to tear down the homes in the Willow Spence National Historic District!! We must work to preserve the homes . It is only 4 blocks! Please do not allow historic homes to be torn down and contemporary style homes be built in these 4 little blocks!! 1
D.3.2 - 3400 Hillview - Structural Report — original pdf
ammond, Consulting & Engineering, LLC Residential & Commercial Structural Solutions Texas Firm# 17051 email: rhammond@RDHCE.com phone: 956.367.5561 08/20/2021 Mellissa Power 3400 Hillview Road Austin, Texas Dear Ms. Powers, On 18 August 2021 R. Derek Hammond on behalf of RDHammond Consulting & Engineering (RDH C&E) performed a site visit to 3400 Hillview Road to view the condition of the existing structure. The following details what was encountered, conclusions, and recommendations. Based on the issues observed, it would likely be less expensive and safer for the building to be removed in its entirety. Thank you for the opportunity to provide these services to you. If we have erred in our understanding of the work or if you have a questions, feel free to contact me and we will be happy to adjust and resend, Respectfully, Owner RDH C&E LLC R. Derek Hammond, PE ammond, Consulting & Engineering, LLC Residential & Commercial Structural Solutions Texas Firm# 17051 Existing Site Conditions email: rhammond@RDHCE.com phone: 956.367.5561 The existing residence was located in west Austin, east of the Colorado River. The home, according to The Travis County records indicate it was constructed in 1935. The existing structure was composed of a structural clay tile stem walls with assumed shallow foundations below (foundations were not visible to view). The floor was an elevated floor composed of structural clay tile, stiffened by ribs spaced at 36” intervals with grout and steel mesh reinforcing. The exterior walls were similarly composed of structural clay tile. The roof was composed of wood roof framing spaced at 24” intervals with a 2x6 ridge beam supported at 12’ intervals. Multiple locations around the exterior had stair step cracking occurring. Most openings had stair step cracking to some degree. Walls were noted as bulging on the north end of the building and the south west of the structure. Large cracks and faulting was also noted in the crawl space within the ribs of the floor support system. Large cracks was also noted on the terrazzo flooring on the interior, radiating outward from interior wall corners. It was also noted that the living room floor had sunken down approximately 18” during the 80’s. Figure 1: Stair Step cracking on West wall Exposed rebar was noted on multiple locations on the front cantilevered portion of the second floor above the entry. Cracks had formed off the ends of several of the cantilevered beams, had opened up …
Play video — original link
Play video
8/23/2021 Recorded Meeting — original link
Play video
20210823-1A: Elizabet Ney Museum bridge improvement project, located at 304 East 44th Street — original pdf
David Carroll, Chair 304 East 44th Street. Jessica Rollason, Vice Chair Melissa Henao-Robledo, 3. Project complies with Atlas 14 floodplain regulations. parking. Aan Coleman Samuel Franco Martha Gonzales Ben Luckens Josue Meiners Evan Taniguchi Jen Weaver Bart Whatley Jorge Rousselin, Executive Liaison Aaron D. Jenkins Staff Liaison Art Zamorano Staff Liaison City of Austin Design Commission DESIGN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 20210823-01A Date: August 24, 2021 Subject: Design Commission recommendations for the Elizabet Ney Museum bridge improvement project, located at Josue Meiners Seconded By: Evan Taniguchi Motioned By: Recommendation: The City of Austin Design Commission recommends that the Elizabet Ney Museum bridge project, located at 304 East 44th St., as presented on August 23, 2021 meets the City’s design standards. Rationale: Dear Honorable Mayor & City Council, This letter is to confirm the Design Commission’s support of the Elizabet Ney Museum’s bridge improvement project as presented to us. Our review found the following positive attributes: 1. The project respects the historical nature of the site by using distinct, but not distracting, materials. 2. The project increases accessibility and usability of the museum grounds, including the addition of accessible 6 - 0 - 0 Respectfully, City of Austin Design Commission Vote: For: Jen Weaver, Evan Taniguchi, Melissa Henao-Robledo, David Carroll, Josue Meiners, Bart Whatley Against: NA Abstain: NA Absent: Martha Gonzalez, Jessica Rollason, Samuel Franco, Aan Coleman, Ben Luckens Attest: David Carroll, Chair of the Design Commission 1 of 1 Design Commission Recommendation 20210823-01A Elizabet Ney Museum Bridge Page 1
20210823-2B: Downtown Density Bonus Program — original pdf
DESIGN COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 20210823-2B August 24, 2021 Honorable Mayor Adler Honorable City Council Members City Manager Spencer Cronk Re: Downtown Density Bonus Program Dear Mayor and City Council Members, The resolution attached is the third of three resolutions adopted by the Design Commission to improve the Downtown Density Bonus Program (DDBP). The first two resolutions were forwarded earlier this month. As Gatekeepers of the DDBP, we believe our input is valuable to the work currently underway to revise the fees for this program. This final resolution provides reasoning as to why an assessment of the onsite affordable housing component is needed, especially as it relates to fee-in-lieu calibration. While the DDBP aims to help create affordable housing downtown, it has no assurances that these units are ever occupied, which is a failure of the program. Operational and financial barriers have been identified that can prevent affordable units from being utilized and therefore these barriers should be addressed so that all affordable housing units built downtown are occupied. As the Design Commission reviews all of the DDBP projects, we believe we have a thorough understanding of the program’s successes and failures and we offer this resolution to improve the program for your consideration so that it may provide more benefit to our community. Sincerely, David Carroll Chair City of Austin Design Commission RESOLUTION ON DOWNTOWN DENSITY BONUS ONSITE AFFORDABILITY ASSESSMENT WHEREAS, providing affordable housing downtown is needed to create a vibrant and diverse community; and WHEREAS, the downtown density bonus program is an essential tool for supporting affordable housing; and WHEREAS, assessing the implementation of on site affordable housing is needed to improve the downtown density bonus program; and WHEREAS, the calibration report by EcoNorthwest did not include feedback from the developers responsible for providing on-site affordable housing and financing the Downtown Density Bonus fees-in-lieu; and WHEREAS, on-site affordable housing can be problematic to implement and it has not been assessed as part of the Downtown Density Bonus program; and WHEREAS, increasing costs through city fees can cause developers to charge higher rent or sell at a higher cost per square foot to cover the minimum required Debt Service Coverage Ratio (DSCR); and WHEREAS, when a condo project has hotel financing which requires all condo owners to use the units as a second residence, providing on-site affordable units to an income-restricted group that also owns a second home is very unlikely; …
Play audio — original link
Play audio
Play audio — original link
Play audio
20210823-003b: Public Health Crises and Vaccine Inequities — original pdf
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Human Rights Commission Recommendation Number 20210823-003b: Public Health Crises and Vaccine Inequities WHEREAS, Covid19 pandemic has disproportionately impacted low income communities and communities of color; WHEREAS, solutions are not equitable in terms of digital access and transportation; and WHEREAS, the only way we can end this pandemic is vaccinating our population and reaching herd immunity; and WHEREAS, the Human Rights Commission encourages community groups and the Health District to meet unvaccinated people of color in their own communities; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Human Rights Commission recommends easy access to vaccine registration portals and administration of vaccines in a culturally sensitive manner by exploring all available means in order to create short, medium, and long-term solutions for public health crises and vaccine inequities in Austin. Date of Approval: August 23, 2021 Record of the vote: 6-0; Commissioner Garry Brown motion, Commissioner Griffith second. Voting in favor were Vice Chair Casas, Commissioner Brienzi, Commissioner Garry Brown, Commissioner Caballero, Commissioner Griffith, and Commissioner Weigel. Chair Davis, Commissioner Areche, Commissioner Breckenridge, Commissioner Jamarr Brown, and Commissioner Museitif were absent. Jonathan Babiak Jonathan Babiak, Staff Liaison Attest:
Approved Minutes — original pdf
DESIGN COMMISSION MONDAY, August 23, 2021 5:30 PM VIA REMOTE WebEx Meeting Minutes Call to order by: Chair D. Carroll at 5:34 p.m. X X X Member List David Carroll – Chair (District 1) Jessica Rollason – Vice-Chair (District 7) Martha Gonzalez (District 2) Samuel Franco (District 3) Josue Meiners (District 4) Evan Taniguchi (Mayor) “X” Denote Commission Members who were in attendance X Jorge E. Rousselin, Executive Liaison X Aaron D. Jenkins, Staff Liaison X Art Zamorano, Staff Liaison CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: None. 1. NEW BUSINESS (Discussion and Possible Action): CITY OF AUSTIN HOUSING AND PLANNING STAFF X Melissa Hanao-Robledo (District 5) X X X X Jen Weaver (District 6) Aan Coleman (District 8) Bart Whatley (District 9) Ben Luckens (District 10) a. Discussion and possible action on recommendations whether the Elisabet Ney Museum Building Restoration and Site Improvements, addressed at 304 E. 44th Street, complies with the City Design and Sustainability Standards, for the City of Austin; Nick Faust The Lawrence Group, Christina Bies City of Austin Parks and Recreation Department, George Maldonado City of Austin Parks and Recreation Department • Ellen Cofax, and Christina Bies City of Austin Parks and Recreation Department and Nick Faust The Lawrence Group presented and addressed questions. Page 1 of 3 • Commissioner J. Meiners made a motion to support the project as presented as it complies with the City’s Design and Sustainability Standards, seconded by Commissioner E. Taniguchi. • The motion was approved [ 6 ayes, 0 nays] 2. COMMISSION-SPECIFIC BUSINESS (Discussion and possible action): a. Approval of June 28th and August 5th meeting minutes. • Commissioner E. Taniguchi made a motion to approve the June 28th and August 5th meeting minutes as distributed. Commissioner J. Meiners seconded. • The motion was approved [ 6 ayes, 0 nays] b. Discussion and Possible action on recommendations related to the Downtown Density Bonus Program. • Chair D. Carroll reiterated, that at the August 5th Special Called Meeting regarding the Downtown Density Bonus program, 2 of the 3 resolutions passed. The third resolution has been re-worded by Commissioners J. Weaver to address the concerns from the August 5th meeting. 6:20 PM Commissioner A. Coleman joined the meeting 6:22 PM Commissioner B. Luckens joined the meeting. • Commissioner B. Whatley made a motion to approve the Resolution regarding the Downtown Density Bonus Program as amended. Commissioner E. Taniguchi seconded. • The motion was approved [ 7 …
ICRC Public Forum All Districts No 1_agenda_08212021 — original pdf
Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission (ICRC) August 21, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. Via Videoconference Register in advance for this Virtual Public Forum #1 webinar: https://zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_jyywSIEgSU6qJHMpJcg5hg After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar. Members: Joshua Blank Camellia Falcon Shaina Kambo Hoang Le Eugene Schneider CALL TO ORDER Sara Inés Calderón Luis Gonzalez, Vice-Chair Prabhu Kannan Brigham Morris Selina Yee Erin Dempsey Errol Hardin Dr. Sterling Lands Christina Puentes, Chair AGENDA DEFINING THE ICRC: WHY WE ARE HERE TODAY 1. INTRODUCTION TO PUBLIC FORUM 1. Logistics 2. Public Forum Rules 2. 3. 4. MAP ACTIVITY SESSION CITY DEMOGRAPHICS PRESENTATION A. To Identify Aspects/Areas of the District that Matters to You/the Community B. District Map Drawing Priority Discussion (ICRC Charter: Section 3E) CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: INDIVIDUAL – Must Have Signed In Prior to Meeting (Each speaker will be limited to 3 minutes) 5. ADJOURNMENT The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the American with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications will be provided upon request. Meeting locations are planned with wheelchair access. If requiring Sign Language Interpreters or alternative formats, please give notice at least 2 days (48 hours) before the meeting date. Please the Housing and Planning Department, at 512-974-7665 and call Matt Dugan at matthew.dugan@austintexas.gov, for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711. For more information on the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission, please contact Matt Dugan at 512-974-7665 and matthew.dugan@austintexas.gov or Lisa Rodriguez at 512-974-3119 and lisa.rodriguez@austintexas.gov. Versión en español a continuación. Public Forum Procedure 1. Purpose: to receive public input on redistricting matters prior to approval of preliminary redistricting plan • Logistics: request that all cell phones and electronic devices be silenced, and identify location of restrooms, entrances, and exits. Discourage speakers from repetitious or irrelevant testimony. • Chair: move meeting along • Vice-Chair: assist chair with time, schedule, and speaker names • Staff: MC/host, assist with handouts and speakers • Commissioners: limit questions to clarifications only. Specific questions shall be written and handed to Chair. Chair will have the discretion to approve questions and ask them of the speakers. 2. Public Forum Rules: Chair. • All individuals wishing to make comments must sign in prior to the meeting. • Each speaker is limited to 3 minutes, unless additional time is granted by the • Those in attendance are asked to refrain from disrupting the meeting by …