HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION DEMOLITION AND RELOCATION PERMITS MAY 24, 2021 GF-21-064096 1202 PEREZ STREET D.14 – 1 PROPOSAL Demolish a ca. 1952 stone house. ARCHITECTURE RESEARCH One-story L-plan masonry house with arched Spanish Eclectic partial-width porch, 8:8 and 4:4 wood windows with iron grates, and a stone retaining wall. The house at 1202 Perez Street was constructed around 1952 by Armando and Anita Lopez. Armando Lopez, born in Floresville in 1913, was a construction worker and mason, and the multiple types of stonework on the property may be examples of his work. His wife, Hutto native Anita Berlanga Lopez, was an attendant and instructor at the Travis State School. Anita and Armando Lopez moved to Austin from San Antonio between 1935 and 1940; they owned the home at 1202 Perez Street until at least 1995. STAFF COMMENTS 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 may meet two criteria: a. Architecture. The building shows examples different masonry types prevalent at midcentury, designed and built by a professional mason. It displays Spanish Eclectic influences. b. Historical association. The property does not appear to have significant historical associations, though the Commission should consider that it was occupied by Armando Lopez, the mason who ostensibly designed and installed the home’s exterior cladding and interior accent walls. c. Archaeology. The property was not evaluated for its potential to yield significant data concerning the human history or prehistory of the region. d. Community value. The property does not possess a unique location, physical characteristic, or significant feature that contributes to the character, image, or cultural identity of the city, the neighborhood, or a particular demographic group. e. Landscape feature. The property is not a significant natural or designed landscape with artistic, aesthetic, cultural, or historical value to the city. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Strongly encourage rehabilitation and adaptive reuse, then relocation and/or deconstruction, but release the demolition permit upon completion of a City of Austin Documentation Package. LOCATION MAP D.14 – 2 PROPERTY INFORMATION Photos D.14 – 3 D.14 – 4 Realtor.com, 2021 Google Street View, 2021 Occupancy History City Directory Research, April 2021 1959 Armando Lopez, owner 1957 Armando B. and Anita B. Lopez, owners Rock mason 1955 Armando and Anita Lopez, owners Construction …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION DEMOLITION AND RELOCATION PERMITS MAY 24, 2021 HR-2021 044092 2040 EAST CESAR CHAVEZ STREET D.2 – 1 PROPOSAL Demolish a ca. 1926-27 house. ARCHITECTURE RESEARCH One-story National Folk residence clad in board-and-batten siding. It features a pyramidal hipped roof clad in corrugated metal, exposed rafter tails, an inset partial-width porch supported by boxed columns, and screened 1:1 windows. The house at 2040 East Cesar Chavez Street was constructed around 1927 by Christian and Charlotte Kofahl for their family. The Kofahls were both born in Oldsloe, Germany and settled in Austin in 1878; Christian Kofahl was a successful barber and operated several barbershops and ladies’ hair salons, including for the Driskill. Kofahl was an active member of the German Lutheran church, serving as one of the first elders of St. Martin’s Evangelical Lutheran Church; the organization’s first building of worship was constructed in 1885 on land donated by Christian Kofahl. Kofahl died in 1930, and his family vacated the home. From 1932 into the 1940s, the property became primarily a rental house, with short-term residents including electricians, mechanics, salesmen, and bookkeepers. During the 1940s, it was occupied by a serviceman, a firefighter, and a driver and their families. By 1954, Otis Roe lived in the home and operated his service station across the street at 2027 East Cesar Chavez Street. In 1957, Albert G. and Zelma Gonzales purchased the house; they sold it two years later to Rosa M. Gillian. STAFF COMMENTS The 2016 East Austin historic resource survey lists the property as eligible for local landmark designation and individual listing on the National Register of Historic Places, as well as contributing to a potential local historic district and contributing to a potential National Register Historic District. The survey lists architecture and historical associations as qualifying NRHP criteria. Designation Criteria—Historic Landmark 1) The building is more than 50 years old. 2) The building appears to retain high to moderate integrity. 3) Properties must meet two criteria for landmark designation (LDC §25-2-352). Staff has evaluated the property and determined that it may meet two criteria: a. Architecture. The building is constructed in the National Folk style. b. Historical association. The East Austin survey identifies the property’s occupancy history as an example of demographic changes and settlement patterns among working- to middle-class renters in East Austin during the twentieth century. c. Archaeology. The property was not evaluated for its potential …
From: Subject: Date: Kalan, Contreras, Kalan 2040 E Cesar Chavez - demolition permit application Wednesday, May 19, 2021 5:55:11 PM *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** This demolition permit application is scheduled for the next historic review meeting on Monday, May 24. I will be out of town, so am unable to attend. I would like to explain the necessity for the demolition. The house is in disrepair and poses a liability and financial hazard if it remains. The owner's insurance company will no longer insure the property. Therefore, if anything happens to the property or a person on the property, the owner is at risk. She has tried to keep up with the home over the years but does not have the means to get it to an insurable state. The structure, including the floor and roof framing, is deteriorated beyond repair. It would need to be completely rebuilt. I've attached some pictures. I would like this information shared along with the pictures at the historical meeting. Please let me know if I need to send a formal letter. Thank you and have a great day. -- 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.
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION DEMOLITION AND RELOCATION PERMITS MAY 24, 2021 HR-2021-044104 1807 BRACKENRIDGE STREET D.3 – 1 Relocate a ca. 1927 house to property outside the city limits. PROPOSAL ARCHITECTURE RESEARCH STAFF COMMENTS One-story Craftsman bungalow with original horizontal wood siding, 1:1 single and paired wood windows with screens, cross-gabled corrugated metal roof with triangular eave brackets, vertical-slat vents at gables, and partial-width gabled porch with boxed columns and triangular brackets at gable end. The house at 1807 Brackenridge Street, constructed around 1927, served primarily as a rental property throughout the first half of the twentieth century. Most occupants lived there for only short terms; renters included farmers, salespeople, teachers, and telephone and electric company employees. The house is listed as a contributing resource to the pending Travis Heights-Fairview National Register Historic 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: a. Architecture. The building is a Craftsman bungalow. b. Historical association. The property does not appear to have significant historical associations, though the home’s occupants represent a typical example of demographics, settlement patterns, and lifeways in early Austin. c. Archaeology. The property was not evaluated for its potential to yield significant data concerning the human history or prehistory of the region. d. Community value. The property does not possess a unique location, physical characteristic, or significant feature that contributes to the character, image, or cultural identity of the city, the neighborhood, or a particular demographic group. e. Landscape feature. The property is not a significant natural or designed landscape with artistic, aesthetic, cultural, or historical value to the city. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Encourage rehabilitation and adaptive re-use, then release the permit upon completion of a City of Austin Documentation Package. LOCATION MAP D.3 – 2 PROPERTY INFORMATION Photos D.3 – 3 D.3 – 4 Source: applicant, 2021 Occupancy History: City Directory Research, March 2021 1959 Elva Hill, renter 1957 Elva Hill, renter (wid Bill) Telephone operator, T. H. Williams 1955 Dessie M. Votaw, renter Librarian, State Library 1952 Dessie M. Votaw, renter Librarian, Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary 1949 Clyde D. and Thelma Jacobson, owners Clyde – Salesman Thelma – Saleswoman, Yaring’s 1947 Raymond H. and Dorris Bell, owners 1944 William A. and Alma …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION DEMOLITION AND RELOCATION PERMITS MAY 24, 2021 SP-2021-065153; GF-2021-068010 FIRE STATION #3 201 W. 30TH ST. D.4 – 1 PROPOSAL PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS Partially demolish a 1956 fire station and construct a new apparatus bay. 1) Demolish and replace the apparatus bay due to structural inadequacy. 2) Perform structural repairs to the remainder of the building. The weight of current fire trucks exceeds the design load of the suspended floor slab in the apparatus bay. Engineering studies have indicated that continuing to use the bay was overstressing the slab and, concerningly, that a misalignment of a truck could result in structural failure. As a result, the Austin Fire Department must currently park the vehicles outside. This structural issue has been deemed nonrepairable. Prior to a decision to replace the apparatus bay, the project team explored stabilization of the floor slab. A geotechnical report indicated that filling the cavity under the suspended slab with concrete would be inadvisable due to the shrink/swell potential of the soil paired moisture from the adjacent floodplain. The new apparatus bay will use brick of a similar but slightly darker color than the original and will maintain a strong horizontal emphasis at the roofline. The height and operation of the vehicle doors will not match the historic configuration based on modern functional requirements; rather than paired overhead doors, a taller, single door will open to the side. ARCHITECTURE RESEARCH Fire Station #3 has a utilitarian, modern design. It consists of two flat-roofed, rectangular volumes: a taller apparatus bay with two large overhead doors, and a longer and lower wing. Clad in brick, the building has a simple horizontal metal band at the parapet as the only articulation. The entry is marked by a metal canopy at the corner of the wing and apparatus bay. Windows have been replaced with commercial aluminum units. Fire Station #3 at 201 W. 30th St. opened on February 1, 1957. Per the Austin Fire Department Historical Highlights timeline at austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/ AFD_History_Final.pdf, “the new station cost an estimated $66,000. Station 3 replaced the old fire hall at 3002 Guadalupe St. that was built in 1906 and housed North Austin Hose Co. No. 6.” The station was designed by architect Roy L. Thomas and built by the Austin Construction Company. The fire station was identified as eligible for historic landmark designation on the basis of its architecture and historical associations in …
Summary of Reports Concerning the Apparatus Bay of City of Austin Fire Station No. 3 § § § § § § § § § § § Summary was prepared by Rob Robbins, RA, LEED AP – Studio Director, WestEast Design Group on April 18, 2021. § Mr. Robbins is not a registered structural engineer. § Items summarized are as follows: o Phase One – Structural Floor System Capacity Assessment – CTL Group – May 12, 2017 – (Page 2) o Phase Two – Feasibility Study – CTL Group – August 31, 2017 – (Page 36) o Letter of Recommendation – Karim Helmi, P.E. City Structural Engineer, CoA PWD – September 1, 2017 – (Page 108) o Geotechnical Report – Kleinfelder – October 24, 2018 (Page 110) The accompanying PDF has been edited to omit items exclusive to Fire Station 22 for reader convenience. All page numbers are based on the PDF, not what is referenced on the sheet. Total number of pages summarized is 164. Overall Summary § The current situation does not support the fire station’s need to safely park the trucks inside the apparatus bay. The option to repair the existing apparatus bay by means of removal and replacement of the slab poses excessive risks to the remainder of the structure. The option to fill the crawl space as a means of remediation has been eliminated due to the shrink/swell potential of the soil coupled with the moisture variations inherent in being within a floodplain. As a result of the three items above, the final recommendation from the City Structural Engineer was to demolish the existing apparatus bay and replace it. Available buildable area is not sufficient for the addition of a new apparatus bay without the demolition of the existing one due to the floodplain and setbacks. This is shown graphically in the PDF document entitled: FS No3 - Remaining Buildable Area Diagram. Phase One Summary § Study used ground penetrating radar (GPR), localized concrete removal, extracted concrete core samples, and visual observations. (Page 2) The garage structural floor system consisted of a monolithic cast-in-place reinforced concrete slab over pier-supported reinforced concrete beams. (Page 5) Cracks were observed in the top of the slab (Page 6) The underside of the slab was spalled at several locations. At several spalled areas, the reinforcing steel was exposed and was exposed and was visibly corroded/rusted. (Page 6) The floor slab …
Appendix K | 10 Structural Investigations & Geotech Report The following City of Austin documents are included in this Appendix: All Stations 1. AFD 3 and AFD 22 / EMS 12 Summary Report - Ph. 1 2. AFD 3 and AFD 22 / EMS 12 Summary Report - Ph. 2 3. City Engineer letter from Forensic Study 4. AFD 3 and AFD 22 / EMS 12 Geotech Report 319 Fire and EMS Station Rebuild and Renovations | Design Criteria ManualLawrence Group | Austin New York St. Louis Architecture Interior Design Planning Landscape Graphic Design Development Construction Austin, TX Office: 3737 Executive Center Drive, Suite 255 Austin, TX 78731-1633 P: 512-219-4075 F: 512-219-4077 August 31, 2017 Karim Helmi, P.E. City of Austin – Public Works Department 105 Riverside Drive, Suite 100 Austin, TX 78704 Alejandro Wolniewitz Austin Fire Department 4201 Ed Bluestein Boulevard Austin, TX 78721 Feasibility Study Report – Austin Fire Department Fire Stations Nos. 3 and 22 Fire Station No. 3 – 201 W. 30th St., Austin, TX Fire Station No. 22 – 5309 E. Riverside Dr., Austin, TX CTLGroup Project No. 231701, Phase 2 Dear Mr. Helmi and Mr. Wolniewitz: Phone: 512-974-1286 Email: Alejandro.Wolniewitz@austintexas.gov Phone: 512-974-6539 Email: Karim.Helmi@austintexas.gov Based on the work performed during Phase 1 of this project, it was determined that the garage floor systems at both fire stations lack adequate strength to support the anticipated vehicular loads. The City of Austin (COA) requested that a repair design be developed to strengthen the existing floor systems. In order to properly identify repair requirements and a strengthening solution, a feasibility study was performed on the floor systems at each fire station garage (Phase 2). The following tasks were performed as part of Phase 2 for this project: • CTLGroup obtained additional core samples for compressive strength testing and carbonation depth testing. As discussed in our Phase 1 report, the purpose of the additional core sampling and subsequent compressive strength testing was to reduce the scatter of core strength data. This allows for more representative compressive strength values to be used in the structural analysis and subsequent repair design. Also as discussed in our Phase 1 report, carbonation could be an issue at Fire Station No. 3. The extent of carbonation will influence our repair recommendations and carbonation depth testing was performed to evaluate this condition. • The preliminary structural analysis performed during Phase 1 of this project …
City of Austin Fire Station No. 3 NUNA Executive Committee/Aldridge Place Historic District – Design Overview Presentation 3 May 2021 Context Location: 201 West 30th St Currently, all fire trucks are being parked outside the apparatus bay. Recent changes to the floodplain maps cause a significant portion of the building to be in the floodplain. Introduction Overview Construction completed on February 21, 1957 Architect: Roy Thomas Does not have any Landmark designations at present Adjacent to the Aldridge Place Historic District Building History Repairable Not Repairable Overview The building has suffered two types of structural damage: 1) General wear and tear based on age. (entire structure) 2) Overstressing of the foundation due to parking trucks that are heavier than the original design load. (apparatus bay only) Structural Damage Shore up and preserve Demolish and replace Overview For the areas that have just suffered age- related wear and tear, the intent is to shore up that portion of the structure and preserve it. For the apparatus bay, the intent is to demolish the portion of the building that is beyond repair and replace it with a new structure that is sensitive but of its time. Project Intent Structural The City of Austin has conducted three studies of the building. Two structural studies and one geotechnical report. The second structural study specifically addressed potential remediation of the existing structure. All reports have been independently reviewed by the current structural engineer, who concurs with the studies’ methodologies and conclusions. Studies Historic An historic survey of the area was conducted. This building was identified in the survey. Recommendations for landmark were included. Reasoning: Possesses integrity and significance in Postwar Infrastructure Expansion. Survey Objectives 1) Save the historic fabric that can be saved and put it in good structural standing for the future. 2) Preserve the original historic use/function of the building. 3) Provide the Fire Department and EMS with the modern facility they need to operate effectively and efficiently for decades to come thus providing vital life-safety services to the area. 4) Get the fire trucks parked indoors for protection of the equipment, speed of response times, and aesthetic improvement of the neighborhood. 5) Create an addition that is respectful of the original, but not a false recreation of mindless mimicry. Project Goals What we asking for from the neighborhood 1) Input to help the design team fully understand the concerns of all stakeholders. …
INTENSIVE‐LEVEL FORM HHM ID No. 111516 201 W 30 ST Wed, 20 Nov 2019 Wed, 20 Nov 2019 Address 201 W 30 ST 78705 Legal Description ALL OF BLK 4,ALLEY * & ADJ W25FT OF STREET OLT 73 DIV D FRUTH ADDN Acreage 2.8635999999999999 IDENTIFICATION Property Category Primary resource CLASSIFICATION Resource Type Building Property Type Fire station Form/Plan Box Stylistic Influence(s) Mid‐century Modern Classification Notes ROOF AND CHIMNEYS Roof Form/Type Flat Roof Materials Not visible DOORS AND WINDOWS Door type(s) Single door(s) primary entrance, Garage doors Door Material(s) Wood Door Features PORCH Porch type(s) Full width, Flat roof COMMERCIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FEATURES Signage location Parapet LANDSCAPE AND GROUNDS Ancillary Buildings No. of Stories 1 Exterior Material(s) Brick Exterior Features No. of Chimneys Chimney Features Window type(s) Fixed, Single‐hung Window Material(s) Metal Window Features Sills Porch Features Plain wood posts Canopy features Ground level bays Landscape Features City of Austin | Historic Building Survey Report for North Central Austin – West Campus, North University, Heritage, Bryker Woods, and North Hyde ParkAppendix D | 101 201 W 30 ST Page 2 Source Year Built Austin American‐Statesman, 20 Jul 1956, Builder Occupant History 1954/55: Not listed; 1959/60: Fire Dept Station No 3; 1965‐70: Follow up ‐ Pending AHC Reopening HHM ID No. 111516 HISTORY Current Name Fire Station No. 3 Current Use Governmental Year Built 1956 Associated People History Notes Other historical sources p. 20 INTEGRITY Alterations Additions PRIOR DOCUMENTATION Designations Prior Survey Data Historic Name Historic Use Governmental Architect Roy L. Thomas Relocation Notes LOCAL RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendation Local landmark Justification Possesses integrity and significance NATIONAL REGISTER (NRHP) RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendation Individually eligible Justification Possesses integrity and significance District Name N/A Status (N/C) N/A Criteria Architecture, Historical Associations (Section 5.1.5.5. Postwar Infrastructure Expansion) District Name N/A Status (N/C) N/A Criteria A, C Area of Significance Level of Significance Community Planning and Development, Architecture Local OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS Tourism Tag City of Austin | Historic Building Survey Report for North Central Austin – West Campus, North University, Heritage, Bryker Woods, and North Hyde ParkAppendix D | 102 City of Austin | Historic Building Survey Report for North Central Austin West Campus, North University, Heritage, Bryker Woods, and North Hyde Park For some older sections in the project area, like North University, the 1940s and 1950s represented a period of relative decline. Since the GI Bill focused on new construction, these neighborhoods did not benefit from an …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION DEMOLITION AND RELOCATION PERMITS MAY 24, 2021 GF-21-060237 2100 CHICON STREET D.6 – 1 PROPOSAL Demolish a ca. 1930 house. ARCHITECTURE RESEARCH One-story bungalow with exposed rafter tails, partial-width porch, shingle-clad gabled roof, screened 1:1 windows, and horizontal wood and stone siding. The house at 2100 Chicon Street was constructed around 1930 for Leon and Mattie Ligon. Leon Ira Ligon was a butcher and grocer who operated a store at 1116 E. 12th Street, later 1224 E. 12th Street. In his later years, Ligon worked as a meat cutter for Checker Front grocery stores. He was a longtime member of the American Legion, and both Leon and Mattie Ligon were members of the Baptist church. After they purchased the house, the Ligons spent the rest of their lives there: after Leon passed in 1959, Mattie Ligon remained in the home until her own death later that year. STAFF COMMENTS The 2016 East Austin Historic Resource survey recommends the building as contributing to a potential local historic district and to a potential National Register historic district. Designation Criteria—Historic Landmark 1) The building is more than 50 years old. 2) The building appears to retain moderate 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: a. Architecture. The building does not appear to convey architectural significance. b. Historical association. The property does not appear to have significant historical associations. c. Archaeology. The property was not evaluated for its potential to yield significant data concerning the human history or prehistory of the region. d. Community value. The property does not possess a unique location, physical characteristic, or significant feature that contributes to the character, image, or cultural identity of the city, the neighborhood, or a particular demographic group. e. Landscape feature. The property is not a significant natural or designed landscape with artistic, aesthetic, cultural, or historical value to the city. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Encourage rehabilitation and adaptive reuse, then relocation, but release the demolition permit upon completion of a City of Austin Documentation Package. LOCATION MAP D.6 – 2 PROPERTY INFORMATION Photos D.6 – 3 D.6 – 4 Zillow.com, 2021 D.6 – 5 Occupancy History City Directory Research, April 2021 1959 1957 1955 1952 1949 1947 1944 1941 1939 1937 1935 1932 1929 Leon T. Ligon, owner Leon T. and Mattie Ligon, owners …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION DEMOLITION AND RELOCATION PERMITS MAY 24, 2021 PR-2021-051493 1709 WILLOW STREET D.7 – 1 PROPOSAL Demolish a ca. 1924 house. ARCHITECTURE RESEARCH One-story rectangular-plan, hipped-roof frame cottage with a partial-width inset porch with plain, square wood posts; single and double 1:1 fenestration with incompatible gingerbread-trimmed wooden screens. From the time of its construction until around 1924, this house was a rental property, with tenants including a barber, a carpenter, and a farmer with his beauty operator wife. Around 1934, the house was purchased by Annie Hudson, a Scottish born widow who worked at Austin Laundry and Dry Cleaning for many years. Although the city directories of the period and the Sanborn map of 1935 indicate a shift in addresses, staff believes that Annie Hudson lived next door at 1707 Willow before moving into this house, where she lived until the mid-1940s. Following Mrs. Hudson’s occupancy, the house was owned and occupied by Cleveland and Kathryn McMahan, who lived here until around 1956. Cleveland McMahan was a plumber. The house then became a rental property until the mid-1960s, when Sebastian and Ernestina Martinez, who were still living here in the early 1990s. Sebastian Martinez worked at the city water treatment plant. STAFF COMMENTS The 2016 East Austin Historic Resource survey recommends the building as contributing to a potential local historic district and to a potential National Register historic district. Designation Criteria—Historic Landmark 1) The building is more than 50 years old. 2) The building appears to retain a high degree of 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: a. Architecture. The building does not appear to convey architectural significance. It is a common vernacular type in this neighborhood, which renders it potentially contributing to a future historic district, but not as an individual landmark. b. Historical association. The property does not appear to have significant historical associations. It was the home c. Archaeology. The property was not evaluated for its potential to yield significant data concerning the human to several working class families. history or prehistory of the region. d. Community value. The property does not possess a unique location, physical characteristic, or significant feature that contributes to the character, image, or cultural identity of the city, the neighborhood, or a particular demographic group. e. Landscape feature. The property …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION DEMOLITION AND RELOCATION PERMITS MAY 24, 2021 PR-2021-049619 307 E. 2ND STREET D.8 – 1 PROPOSAL ARCHITECTURE RESEARCH Relocate a house of uncertain age to 1200 Paul Teresa Saldana Street in East Austin. One-story L-plan frame house with single and double 4:4 windows; a partial-width shed-roofed independent porch on turned wood posts; asbestos siding; ornamental bracketwork in the tympanum of the projecting front gable. The house currently at 307 E. 2nd Street was moved on to the site from an unknown location around 1928 by Leonard and Vida East , who lived here for the rest of their lives. They had previously lived at other addresses in the same neighborhood, which had been an upper middle class neighborhood for many years before it began to decline with the conversion of many of the large, old houses into boarding houses and small hotels. At one time, Andrew Zilker, the prominent local ice merchant, lived at the west end of this block. Leonard and Vida East appear to have moved this house into the neighborhood around 1928 from an unknown location. It was one of the more modest houses in the neighborhood, but appears to have been fairly closely aligned with the other houses in the area in terms of age. Leonard East came to Austin from Lampasas in 1913 and established a wagon yard near the north end of the Congress Avenue bridge in the 100 block of Colorado Street. His wagon yard soon became one of the largest in Austin, and East began to expand his business to include the purchase of agricultural products, such as chickens, turkeys, ducks, guinea hens, hides, eggs, pecans, and other produce that local farmers would offer for trade. East also had an extensive ranch and raised cattle for resale at his Austin stores. Soon, East began to focus his business on buying local produce from area farmers for sale in Austin. For many years, East advertised in the local newspapers that he would buy local poultry, pecans, eggs, and other items. He began selling poultry to local restaurants and hotels, as well as opening a store, at first at his wagon yard location between 1st and 2nd streets on Colorado Street, then to a larger location at 8th Street and East Avenue (now IH-35). His businesses were very prominent in Austin, providing fresh produce, meats, eggs, and poultry to Austin citizens, …
Mitchell had two young daughters, both of whom had been born in Texas: Vida Lucille, 11; and Juanita, L., 9. His 1942 World War II draft registration card shows that Leonard East as living at this address. aff ordable housing, training for empowerment and life skills, and a supportive community to achieve life goals. Intracorp has developed the images and programming association with the relocation in concert with the Jeremiah Program. History The Leonard and Vida East house is currently located at 307 E. 2nd Street in the Central Business District of downtown Austin. Research by the City of Austin Historic Preservation Offi ce House states that the house was likely relocated to this lot ca. 1928 from an unknown location. The 1935 Sanborn Map depicts structure as a wood frame house with no synthetic siding, while the 1961 Sanborn Map indicates that the house has asbestos siding. The addi- tion at the rear of the house is not original (hence the asbestos siding) and was added at an undetermined time sometime prior to 1961. The architecture of the house exhibits many of the characteristics of the craftsman-style bungalows built and popularized in the early 1900s, however with a notably steeper roof pitch. Also of note is the front corner porch topped with a low-slope shed roof. The most prominent feature of this house, however, is the decorative bargeboard on the front and side facing gables. Each with a slightly diff erent design suggesting they have been modifi ed at some point. Additionally, most of the windows are adorned with crown molding caps. Over- all, the exterior is in fair condition for a structure of this age, but it is in need of repair. The asbestos siding has chipped off in many locations and portions of the wood trim are rotten. The interior of the house is in signifi cant disrepair as well and is in need of rehabilitation. Leonard East was born in 1883 and moved to Austin in 1913, when he founded East Poultry company. Leonard and Vida East appear in the 1910 U.S. Census of Burnet County, Texas, where they rented a farm. Leonard East was 25, had been born in Texas, and was a general farmer. Vida East was 24, had been born in Texas, and had no occupation listed. They had a son, Alvin G., 3; and a daughter, Altha, almost 2. The household also …
D.9 - 1 HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION MAY 24, 2021 DEMOLITION AND RELOCATION PERMITS PR-2021-055337 2807 BONNIE ROAD PROPOSAL Demolish a ca. 1937 house with a ca. 1985 two-story addition. ARCHITECTURE One-story, rectangular-plan, hipped-roof stone veneered frame house with a projecting front- gabled street elevation containing a round-arched inset entry portico and two 1:1 windows with decorative wooden screens and a prominent attic vent; large one- and two story stucco non-historic addition to the rear right of the original structure. RESEARCH The house was built during the winter of 1936-37 by a local contractor who built a number of stone cottages in West Austin. The first owners and occupants were Bob and Ethel Dalton, who lived here from around 1937 until around 1948. Bob Dalton was a retail clothing salesman for a tailoring company out of Cincinnati, Ohio. He later opened a custom tailor shop in Austin; his wife Ethel was the co-owner of the business. After the Daltons moved to a house on Meadowbrook Drive in 1948, this house was purchased by Alton K. (Bill) and Marguerite Jarrell, who lived here at least through 1959. Bill Jarrell was in the home insulation business. STAFF COMMENTS The house is beyond the bounds of any City survey to date. Staff has evaluated this house for designation as a historic landmark and has determined that the house does not meet the criteria for landmark designation as set forth in City Code: a. Architecture. The original part of this house is a stone 1930s cottage, which was a style prevalent in this Tarrytown neighborhood, but which is rapidly disappearing. The original part of this house is intact, and could qualify for landmark designation under the architectural criterion, but the structure was added onto in the 1980s, according to city building permit records, significantly compromising its integrity. b. Historical association. The house had two owners during the majority of the historic period; the first was a clothing salesman who later established a custom tailor shop in Austin; the second was the owner of an insulation company; there do not appear to be significant historical associations. c. Archaeology. The house was not evaluated for its potential to yield significant data concerning the human history or prehistory of the region. d. Community value. The original house was a stone cottage dating to the late 1930s, and is characteristic of the early phases of construction in Tarrytown, but …
The Kenney Lomax House KEY PLAN A B B STARBUCKS COFFEE COMPANY - STARBUCKS PICK UP FORMAT - 22ND + RIO GRANDE, AUSTIN TX - EXTERIOR SIGNAGE REVIEW The Kenney Lomax House KEY PLAN A B STARBUCKS COFFEE COMPANY - STARBUCKS PICK UP FORMAT - 22ND + RIO GRANDE, AUSTIN TX - EXTERIOR SIGNAGE REVIEW A
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS MAY 24, 2021 HR-2021-063830 1113 E. 9TH STREET JOBE HOUSE / ROBERTSON/STUART & MAIR HISTORIC DISTRICT B.8 – 1 PROPOSAL Construct a 1-story side addition. PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS ARCHITECTURE STANDARDS FOR REVIEW Residential Additions Location The addition is set back approximately 27’ from the front wall and has a footprint of 331 square feet. It is clad in 12” horizontal hardiplank siding, with 1-over-1 vinyl-sash windows. The addition is capped by a combination side-gabled and hipped roof, with a shallow flat roof over the entry; the hipped roof’s slope matches that of the historic house. Metal stairs on the primary (north) wall access a paneled, partially-glazed door. One-story, modified L-plan building capped by a combination pyramidal and flat roof, with horizontal wood siding, wood- sash windows, gabled dormers, a corner porch, and interior chimneys. The building is designed in the Queen Anne style. The City of Austin’s Historic Design Standards are based on the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and are used to evaluate proposed changes to historic landmarks. The following standards apply to the project: 1.1 Locate additions to the rear and sides of historic buildings to minimize visual impact. The proposed addition is located at the side of the historic building, 27’ back from the front wall. The project meets this standard. 1.5 Minimize the loss of historic fabric by connecting additions to the existing building through the least possible invasive location and means. The proposed addition is connected to the side of the existing building behind a projecting bay. The short section of wall includes a window opening. The project meets this standard. 1.6 Additions are not appropriate for all historic landmarks and will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Staff believes that the proposed addition is compatible with and differentiated from the historic building. Scale, Massing, and Height 2.1 Design an addition to complement the scale and massing of the historic building, including height. The addition must appear subordinate to the historic building. The proposed addition is one story high, with a ridgeline that is the same height as the adjacent side gable and substantially lower than the principal ridgeline of the historic house. The addition’s plan and massing echo the L-plan and roof shape of the principal house and its gable ends. The project meets this standard. 2.2 Minimize the appearance of the addition from the street faced …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS MAY 24, 2021 HR-2021-063882 ROBERTSON/STUART & MAIR HISTORIC DISTRICT 810 LYDIA STREET B.9 – 1 PROPOSAL Construct a 1-story accessory dwelling unit (ADU). PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS The proposed project is a 1-story ADU clad in horizontal hardiplank siding and capped by a cross-gabled roof covered in asphalt shingles. Features include fixed and single-hung 1-over-1 vinyl-sash windows and a fully glazed front door with a bracketed gabled hood. The ADU has a footprint of just over 1,000 square feet. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW The Robertson/Stuart & Mair Design Standards are used to evaluate projects within the district. The following standards apply to the proposed project: New construction shall have the same street orientation and distance from adjacent buildings as the contributing buildings in the same block. The building is located behind the principal building and oriented towards the alley. The project meets this standard. Setbacks for new construction shall be consistent with setbacks of the district’s contributing buildings. The building’s setback is similar to other secondary buildings in the district. The project meets this standard. Design new buildings so that they are compatible with and differentiated from historic buildings in the district. The building’s scale, massing, design, and materials are compatible with nearby historic buildings. Elements such as the roof form, gable-end bargeboards, and 1-over-1 window configuration are notable for their simplicity and compatibility. The project meets this standard. New construction should have floor-to-floor heights and roof heights that are the same or similar to those on contributing buildings throughout the district. The building’s roof height of 18.5’ matches the roof height of the principal building on the property. The project meets this standard. Select materials for new construction that are the same as or similar to those found on contributing buildings existing in the district. The building uses horizontal hardiplank siding compatible with horizontal wood siding found on contributing buildings. Vinyl-sash windows are not typically found on contributing buildings, but the ADU’s location at the rear of the property minimizes the windows’ visibility. The project partly meets this standard. The project generally meets the standards. COMMITTEE FEEDBACK Not reviewed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the plans. LOCATION MAP B.9 – 2 PROPERTY INFORMATION Photos B.9 – 3 Primary house at 810 Lydia Street. Source: Google Street View, 2019.
Nathaniel Bennett -�. General Contractor 11 00 Blackjack TX 78664 Lockhart, Phone: Bill To: Pat Calhoun 2401 Givens Ave Austin Tx DATE: INVOICE# FOR: May 20, 2021 1553 DESCRIPTION AMOUNT power wash house , caulk where brick is missing repair front fence and replace gate that couldn't be repaired -paint replace siding on rear addition with hardi-board paint siding, doors, garage.all trim. Stain wood vertical panels replace rotting boards of roof eaves -� out AC/Heating unit in rear addition- added 30+ years ago replace gutters-Givens side, caulk gutters Maple side 7 new windows - 2 entry doors 3,300.00 3,300.00 3,800.00 1,800.00 1,700.00 2,300.00 10,450.00 replace electrical panel -new wiring from aluminum, replace outlet burned electrical 6,695.00 replace bathroom fixture due to burned ballast that couldn't be replaced, replace burned reseal exterior and interior planter( removal of soil and plants, refill with soil and plants 2,910.00 1 TOT AL $ 36,255.00 Make all checks payable concerning If you have any questions to: Nathaniel contact: this invoice, Bennett Nathaniel Bennett, THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESS!
Versión en español a continuación. Historic Landmark Commission Meeting Monday, May 24th, 2021, 6:00 PM Historic Landmark Meeting to be held May 24th, 2021 with Social Distancing Modifications Public comment will be allowed via telephone; no in-person input will be allowed. All speakers must register in advance (Sunday, May 23rd by noon). All public comment will occur at the beginning of the meeting. To speak remotely at the May 24th Historic Landmark Commission Meeting, members of the public must: Call or email the board liaison at (512) 974-3393 or preservation@austintexas.gov no later than noon, Sunday, May 23 (the day before the meeting). The following information is required: speaker name, item number(s) they wish to speak on, whether they are for/against/neutral, email address and telephone number (must be the same number that will be used to call into the meeting). Once a request to speak has been made to the board liaison, the information to call on the day of the scheduled meeting will be provided either by email or phone call. Speakers must call in at least 15 minutes prior to meeting start time in order to speak, late callers will not be accepted and will not be able to speak. Speakers will be placed in a queue until their time to speak. Handouts or other information may be emailed to preservation@austintexas.gov by noon the day before the scheduled meeting. This information will be provided to Board and Commission members in advance of the meeting. If the meeting is broadcast live, it may be viewed here: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch-atxn-live Reunión del Historic Landmark Commission FECHA de la reunion (24 de mayo, 2021) La junta se llevará con modificaciones de distanciamiento social Se permitirán comentarios públicos por teléfono; no se permitirá ninguna entrada en persona. Todos los oradores deben registrarse con anticipación (23 de mayo, 2021 antes del mediodía). Todos los comentarios públicos se producirán al comienzo de la reunión. Para hablar de forma remota en la reunión, los miembros del público deben: Llame o envíe un correo electrónico al enlace de la junta en (512) 974-3393 or preservation@austintexas.gov a más tardar al mediodía (el día antes de la reunión). Se requiere la siguiente información: nombre del orador, número (s) de artículo sobre el que desean hablar, si están a favor / en contra / neutral, dirección de correo electrónico (opcional) y un número de teléfono …
1304 Bob Harrison - 3D Massing Fox Fox Studio ---- May 7th, 2021 East Facade Street Facade Fox Fox Studio ---- May 7th, 2021 New Addition: Vertical Metal Siding Historic House: Existing Vertical Board and Batten West Facade Street/ West Facade Fox Fox Studio ---- May 7th, 2021 East Facade (new addition) North Facade (new addition) Fox Fox Studio ---- May 7th, 2021 Remove Skylight on front roof Rebuild porch to existing specs Existing Vertical Board and Batten View 1: Street Facade Windows replaced with period wood clad Removed glass door and sidelight Fox Fox Studio ---- May 7th, 2021 View 2: Fox Fox Studio ---- May 7th, 2021 View 3: Fox Fox Studio ---- May 7th, 2021
Steve: Detailed moving instructions. Hector Masonary is doing the work they did the complete tear down and repoint of the main house in 1998. Very competent team of brothers. 1. Shed needs to be re‐mortared the existing shed has a cast in place ceiling that is dangerous and many large cracks exist on interior and exterior of building. 2. Number each Block and remove one at a time with scaffolds as to not crack or damage historic rusticated blocks of cream cordovia limestone. ( tan / cream color) 3. Pour new slab with #4 and #5 rebar with 12" wide footings around entire parameter to bedrock 2' below grade; 4. Pour 6" slab for interior w/ #5 rebar ; 5. Measure sand grain diameter for white masonry cement mixture set stones with 1" mortar joints ; 6. Use existing tin from roof and replace cedar rafters as needed; Cost is $8500.00 2 week process See pics and drawing on next email Regards, Jim Stockbauer
2406 Harris Blvd in 2009 – Year of Landmarking Patio already Existed in 2009 Photo is from zoning change review packet - 2009 Current and Future Views – The Same But Better What we have…. • Substandard landscaping • Safety issues – high traffic area • No use of >50% of property • Immediate neighbors say “eyesore” What we will have: Improved safety • • Use of front yard - >50% of property • Life in front of house • No pool parties – 14’ x 28’ only; 5’ deep • Transparent fencing – no blocking of façade. Proposed Pool – Flush with Grade – Not Visible from Street Fence at perimeter would be minimally visible and follow the pattern of neighbor’s house. Site Plan with Pool – Offset from Front Façade • No raised edge in current design • Not visible from street • 14 feet x 28 feet • Does not touch historic structure • Will not be a party pool • No pink flamingos • No yellow umbrellas • Looks better than a boat trailer Fence Design Options (Height not to Exceed 6’ from Grade) Water Feature 1706 Niles Road Fred and Margaret Sharp House • Open design; • Visual weight provided by columns; • Approved by HLC in 2012 Texas Governor’s Mansion • Open design; • Undeniably historically appropriate
PUBL IC HEARINC INFORMATION (cid:10) Akthough will be conducted online and you have the applicants and/or their agent(s) are (cid:10) to spe (cid:10) in the publ (cid:10) the staff (cid:10) eIN contact for infor on how (cid:10) orgniration has expre (cid:10) tO pa (cid:10) sscd an (cid:10) rticipate (cid:10) interesd (cid:10) orD (cid:10) the board or may posipc (cid:10)ssion (cid:10) During a public (cid:10) approval or denial of the application (cid:10) continuation that is not later than 60 (cid:10) If the board (cid:10) the annOu (cid:10) A board (cid:10) person who can appeal the decision (cid:10) appcal the decision (cid:10) The body (cid:10) Aing ap (cid:10) An interested party is defined as a person who is the applicant of (cid:10) rticipate (cid:10) in a public hcan (cid:10) FOR or AGAINST ic 1 (cid:10) the (cid:10) you are not required to do so mesting (cid:10) proposed development or change Fmeil or oall (cid:10) in an app (cid:10) aiiciton neighborhood (cid:10) Marings online You may also contact a neighborhood Or (cid:10) ton's hearing to a later date, or recomnmend (cid:10) a specific date and time for a postpone (cid:10) required (cid:10) by a personi (cid:10) ith rtanding t appeal (cid:10) of an dctemine is identified as a (cid:10) atanding to (cid:10) a peron ond owner of the property, or who (cid:10) board or (cid:10) deliveriny to the board or commission (cid:10) ot during the public hcaring (cid:10) and speakine for the record at the publi (cid:10) poperty or developme (cid:10) eccupees a prmary is the is an offhcor off am cm thetis within (cid:10) of proporty $00 foct of the propcry or proposcod (cid:10) wo feet of the (cid:10) foct of the srhood orgam (cid:10) of appcal otth the directof (cid:10) form may be an ailable from the rospomibic (cid:10) sation that han development, in or whose declared boundaries are within (cid:10) o (cid:10) departmen no later than 14 days ater the decision An appe (cid:10) imformation Amtin's land (cid:10) visil Our (cid:10) Wrinon oommonts must te (cid:10) Your porsomn listod on (cid:10) board of Oommisaon's (cid:10) Case Numbof (cid:10) HR 20-144747. 2406 HARRIS BL VD (cid:10) Comtact: Ambor Allon, (512) 974-3393 (cid:10) Pablic Hearing (cid:10) Historic Landmark Oommission (cid:10) totice) &cforg the public hcaring (cid:10) the Cave Nomber and the (cid:10) Your (cid:10) 1 22l (cid:10) Commonts (cid:10) I hae nd (cid:10) f (cid:10) of Austin Housang and Planoung (cid:10) it …
* * * E x t e r n a l E m a i l - E x e r c i s e C a u t i o n * * * T o F o m D a t e S u b j e c t l A Z e s e v a t i o n H R 2 1 - 0 6 3 8 3 0 & G 2 1 - 0 6 7 0 2 0 d a y M a y 2 1 2 0 2 1 1 1 2 1 0 6 A M C A U T I O N T h i s e m a i l w a s r e c e i e d a t t h e C i y o f A u s t i n f r o m a n E X T E R N A L s o u r c e . P l e a s e u s e c a u t o n w h e n c l i c k i n g l i n k s o r o p e n i n g a t t a c h m e n t s . I f y o u b e l i e e t h i s t o b e a m a l i c i o u s a n d / o r p h i s h i n g e m a i l p l e a s e f o r w a r d t h s e m a i l t o c y b e r s e c u r i t y @ a u s t i n t e x a s . g o .
2308 Woodlawn Blvd. 2021-066900 HR 2021-072218 PR Historic Landmark Commission May 24, 2021 1 SITE 2 SITE 3 SITE COA Historic Landmarks National Register of Historic Places 4 Facts • House was built in 1940. • Current owners purchased in August of 2020. • House was being renovated internally and almost complete when fire took place. • Current owners were two weeks away from moving in. 5 6 7 8 9 10 Request We respectfully request your support for full demolition permit and to help put this family back in their home as soon as possible. 11 Next Steps • Submit New Construction Permit application. • Receive new plans approval from HLC within ~3 months. 12 13
From: To: Subject: Date: Attachments: Gregory W. Smith Sadowsky, Steve RE: J.J. Hegman House, 4714 Rowena Street, Austin Wednesday, April 14, 2021 10:27:24 AM image001.png thc_email_logo_65px_e6b590e5-b608-48df-a46f-bbaf70308c09.png thc_email_signature_url_2_9467b7d4-3cf0-4ad6-a56a-a173b9a5102c.png thc_email_signature_fb_18px_f52434f2-a1bc-4678-9a22-33dd4606f18b.png thc_email_signature_twitter_18px_a0320705-84ac-453d-b948-ce7b9ec24d9b.png thc_email_signature_ig_18px_b246144c-2e4c-4e72-a377-d3dbb77f8934.png thc_email_signature_yt_18px_87f9dc8d-8149-47b9-988d-88c487090614.png thc_email_signature_li_18px_5bdd2c5b-c609-480e-a872-4fe1572cd908.png thc_email_signature_email_18px_61592cdc-f8f6-43c2-83c5-648830375491.png *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Hello Steve I’m still racking my brain over this. There’s so much circumstantial evidence that I wish added up to a clear narrative supporting individual significance. The house is cool and unusual, but I’m struggling to come up with a clear argument that would convince the NPS staff of its individual significance. The archival record is incomplete and hard to reconcile with what we see today. I’m confident that the core house dates to the first decade of the 20th century at the latest. It was modified at some point with the application of stucco and the pop-up roof, and I don’t think these changes would prevent it from contributing to a district. The association with Hegman is sketchy, and even if it could be proven to have been his residence at some point, he lived in other houses as well. Is the house is significant under Criterion B for association with Hegman as a theater owner? The theaters themselves (the Ritz in particular) better represent this aspect of his productive life. Is it significant for its association with Hegman as the developer of a subdivision? I would think the house at 108 E. 48th Street, where he also lived at some point, seems like a better fit. I don’t understand why he would leave the 2-story brick house on a large lot in the heart of his subdivision for a older house immediately to the west. It doesn’t add up. I think the best shot would be Criterion C in the area of architecture, as a modified turn-of-the-century house (I’ll call it Queen Anne Cottage). The key to this argument would be to detail when and by whom the changes were made, AND argue that these changes themselves are architecturally significant. This case would be more easily made if the alterations were of a type that reflected changes in popular taste - we’ve done this in nominations where a house is substantially updated to reflect an entirely new style (often Beaux Arts after the Columbian expo, or an old plantation style perhaps popularized by Gone With the Wind). That’s not the case here, and we can only guess at …
1304 Bob Harrison - HLC Design Revisions Fox Fox Studio ---- May 24th, 2021 East Facade Street Facade Fox Fox Studio ---- May 24th, 2021 New Addition: Vertical Metal Siding Historic House: Existing Vertical Board and Batten West Facade Street/ West Facade Fox Fox Studio ---- May 24th, 2021 East Facade (new addition) North Facade (new addition) Fox Fox Studio ---- May 24th, 2021 Precedent Roof and Window Examples in Neighborhood 1211 E 13th Street 1405 Bob Harrison Street 1208 Bob Harrison Street (2 over 2 window 1707 Newton Street (roof type preference) 1172 1/2 San Bernard Street 1208 Bob Harrison Street Fox Fox Studio ---- May 24th, 2021 Remove Skylight on front roof Rebuild porch to existing specs Existing Vertical Board and Batten Color: Farrow & Ball, School House White No. 291 View 1: Street Facade Windows replaced with period Removed glass door and sidelight 2 over 2 window Fox Fox Studio ---- May 24th, 2021 View 2: Windows replaced with period 2 over 2 window Fox Fox Studio ---- May 24th, 2021 Existing underside of roof - no original cedar shingle View 3: Fox Fox Studio ---- May 24th, 2021
911-09-07 Congress Avenue Grandberry Building and Mitchell-Robertson Building, 911 Congress Avenue Historic District Congress Avenue Historic District May 24, 2021 Intro • Fall 2020: Complaints made to Building and Standards Commission (BSC) • March 24, 2021: BSC ordered Landowner to finalize all necessary permits with HLC by June 22, 2021 • March-April 2021 Meetings: Applicant team provided evidence that keeping building facades in place is not feasible • May 2021 Meeting: Applicant team brings • corroboration based on extensive and ongoing investigation June 2021 Meeting: Applicant team to bring Demolition Permit with finalized deconstruction and reconstruction plan 2 BSC Order Requires All Permits, including HLC, by June 22, 2021 3 Updates • • • • • Initial onsite investigation and conditional assessment of the buildings Safety Plan for Work, Neighbors and Public Contacted Austin History Center to locate any additional photos or documentation of the properties Initial scans of the building interior and exterior (Missing final scans of front facades and roof) Preliminary digital 3D model within Revit is underway 4 Updates • Received a 1985 memo of 907 written by Bell, Klein and Hoffman from Austin History Center which states, “[the brick] appears to be fire damaged in areas. After that was stuccoed and scored.” 1978 IMAGE 5 Updates • • • At some point in the late 70s 911 was covered in stucco. Facades have been hidden for a long time. • Modifications have done damage to the original fabric. All ornamentation is missing and would need to be replaced with new based on historic photographs. 1982 DWG 1978 IMAGE 6 911 - Visual Assessment • • Brick has been scored and stucco adhered directly. All ornamentation of the window headers, cornice, and brick sills were removed in the late 70s to early 80s for the addition of stucco. • Most of the original façade • has been lost. Stucco has severe deterioration. 7 909 - Visual Assessment • • Storefront is missing. Steel header is not adequate due to rust and deflection. • Noticeable cracks in the front • • façade. Structural columns are modern and not original. Existing (potentially original) brick below steel header has deteriorated and collapsed. • Upper portion of the building is in the best condition of the three structures. 8 907 - Visual Assessment • Most original features are • • missing. Stone, brick, and mortar are in poor condition with evidence …
Supplemental Materials 4006 ½ Avenue B Built: 1923 Small addition to rear of house was added around 1991 Proposed addition Non-original aluminum frame windows to be replaced with new windows more closely resembling originals. Addition will match original lap siding. 4413 Avenue C Built: 1927 Second floor added in 2011 4113 Avenue D Built: 1932 Second floor added in 2019 4303 Speedway Built: 1920 Added second floor in 2010 4103 Avenue A Built: 1924 Second floor added in 2003 3913 Avenue F Built: 1906 Second floor added in 2008 4207 Avenue H Built: 1925 Second floor added in 2017
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS – REVISED STAFF REPORT MAY 24, 2021 HR-2021-063830 1113 E. 9TH STREET ROBERTSON/STUART & MAIR HISTORIC DISTRICT B.8 – 1 PROPOSAL Construct a 1-story side addition to a contributing building. PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS The addition is set back approximately 27’ from the front wall and has a footprint of 331 square feet. It is clad in 12” horizontal hardiplank siding, with 1-over-1 vinyl-sash windows. The addition is capped by a combination side-gabled and hipped roof, with a shallow flat roof over the entry; the hipped roof’s slope matches that of the historic house. Metal stairs on the primary (north) wall access a paneled, partially-glazed door. ARCHITECTURE STANDARDS FOR REVIEW One-story, modified L-plan building capped by a combination pyramidal and flat roof, with horizontal wood siding, wood- sash windows, gabled dormers, a corner porch, and interior chimneys. The building is designed in the Queen Anne style. The Robertson/Stuart & Mair Design Standards are used to evaluate proposed changes to contributing buildings. The following standards apply to the project: New additions should be compatible with the historic building by reflecting the scale, massing, and/or materials of the historic building, but differentiated enough so that they are not confused as historic or original to the building. If designing an addition in a contemporary style, reflect the scale, massing, and/or materials of the historic building; if designing an addition in a style that reflects the style of the historic building, differentiate the scale, massing, and/or materials, at least slightly. The proposed addition’s scale, massing, and materials are compatible with and differentiated from the historic building. Its simple style reflects the style of the historic building but will not be mistaken for original construction. The project meets this standard. Design new additions that are subordinate to and do not overpower the historic building. The proposed addition is subordinate to the historic building in terms of scale, massing, and location. Construct additions that avoid the removal or obstruction of any historic exterior features on the front of the building or the sides within 15 feet of the front. Set back a new ground-level addition a minimum of 15 feet measured from the front wall of the building (excluding the porch). The new addition is attached to the side wall and set back 27’ from the front wall. The project meets this standard. Modern materials such as fiber-cement siding are appropriate for …
