6/23/2021 Op-Ed | Don’t forget the “I” in LGBTQIA+ | amNewYork AMNY Newsletter Tackle the city, with our help. Subscribe Boroughs ⌵ Business Events Games Digital Editions Webinars Podcasts Contact Us Op-Ed Op-Ed | Don’t forget the “I” in LGBTQIA+ By NYC Councilmember Daniel Dromm 0 comments Posted on June 21, 2021 F Ho X Photo via Getty Images https://www.amny.com/opinion/op-ed-dont-forget-the-i-in-lgbtqia/?fbclid=IwAR3F34c9kMlZSFdQ7TbUotQT1KWAlJwxTEnkpETw8GkOmaf05Oc1DAS9wc4 1/7 ___Flipthroughtoday’spaper 6/23/2021 Op-Ed | Don’t forget the “I” in LGBTQIA+ | amNewYork Facebook Twitter Print More 2 Ea Ta ou S Sign up for our PoliticsNY newsletter for the latest coverage and to stay informed about the 2021 elections in your district and across NYC I founded Queens Pride 29 years ago to be a welcoming space for all the borough’s diverse communities. Through the years, I excitedly watched as this colorful celebration, with a serious political message, grew. It seems every country is now represented. The transgender presence, always there from the beginning, is ubiquitous at this point. Many others of all stripes ock to an event that is grounded in family, friends, and neighbors, not corporations. And, of course, so many straight allies have come to stand with us, which always makes me swell with emotion. If asked to distill the essence of Pride, I would say it is about creating a home for all who do not conform to rigid societal notions of gender and sexuality. One group is taking this a step further and challenging the idea of what “normal” bodies should look like: the intersex community. Eliot Glazer, Thank You For Coming Out (While Staying In) Thank You for Coming Out 00:00 00:00 SUBSCRIBE: RSS iTunes Spotify Stitcher Amazon Google Play LATEST “Intersex” is an umbrella term for differences in sex traits or reproductive anatomy. Intersex people are born with these differences or develop them in childhood. There are many possible differences in genitalia, hormones, internal anatomy, or chromosomes, compared to the usual two ways that human bodies develop. According to the United Nations, up to 1.7 percent of the world population are born with intersex traits. Medical professionals often encourage parents and guardians to agree to procedures to treat intersex traits and variations in sex characteristics, even when such procedures are medically unnecessary. Despite the prevalence of these violations of basic human rights, there is no federal or state law …
REGULAR MEETING HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, April 26, 2021 The Human Rights Commission convened in a regular meeting on Monday, April 26, 2021 via teleconference in Austin, Texas. Chair Sareta Davis called the Board Meeting to order at 5:44 p.m. Board Members in Attendance: Chair Davis, Vice Chair Jamarr Brown, Commissioner Breckenridge, Commissioner Garry Brown, Commissioner Caballero, Commissioner Casas, Commissioner Griffith, Commissioner Museitif, and Commissioner Santana. Staff in Attendance: Jonathan Babiak, Human Resources Coordinator, Office of Civil Rights CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: GENERAL None 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. The minutes from the regular meeting of March 22, 2021 were approved on a vote of 9-0: Chair Davis motion, Commissioner Garry Brown second. Voting in favor were Chair Davis, Vice Chair Jamarr Brown, Commissioner Breckenridge, Commissioner Garry Brown, Commissioner Caballero, Commissioner Casas, Commissioner Griffith, Commissioner Museitif, and Commissioner Santana. Commissioner Areche and Commissioner Weigel were absent. b. The minutes from the special called meeting of April 19, 2021 were approved on a vote of 8-0-1: Chair Davis motion, Commissioner Griffith second. Voting in favor were Chair Davis, Vice Chair Jamarr Brown, Commissioner Breckenridge, Commissioner Garry Brown, Commissioner Caballero, Commissioner Casas, Commissioner Griffith, and Commissioner Santana. Commissioner Museitif abstained. Commissioner Areche and Commissioner Weigel were absent. 2. NEW BUSINESS a. Discussion and possible action on Human Rights Commission Officer Elections for Chair and Vice Chair. (Davis/Brown, J.) The Commission voted to override the term limits provisions in the bylaws for the election of the office of Chair by a vote of 9-0: Commissioner Garry Brown motion, Commissioner Museitif second. Voting in favor were Chair Davis, Vice Chair Jamarr Brown, Commissioner Breckenridge, Commissioner Garry Brown, Commissioner Caballero, Commissioner Casas, Commissioner Griffith, Commissioner Museitif, and Commissioner Santana. Commissioner Areche and Commissioner Weigel were absent. The Commission elected Sareta Davis to the office of Chair on a vote of 9-0: Commissioner Santana motion, Commissioner Griffith second. Voting in favor were 1 Chair Davis, Vice Chair Jamarr Brown, Commissioner Breckenridge, Commissioner Garry Brown, Commissioner Caballero, Commissioner Casas, Commissioner Griffith, Commissioner Museitif, and Commissioner Santana. Commissioner Areche and Commissioner Weigel were absent. The Commission elected Isabel Casas to the office of Vice Chair on a vote of 9-0: Chair Davis motion, Commissioner Garry Brown second. Voting in favor were Chair Davis, Vice Chair Jamarr Brown, Commissioner Breckenridge, Commissioner Garry Brown, Commissioner Caballero, Commissioner Casas, Commissioner Griffith, Commissioner Museitif, and Commissioner Santana. Commissioner Areche and Commissioner Weigel were …
REGULAR MEETING HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, June 28, 2021 The Human Rights Commission convened in a regular meeting on Monday, June 28, 2021 via teleconference in Austin, Texas. Chair Sareta Davis called the Board Meeting to order at 5:36 p.m. Board Members in Attendance: Chair Davis, Vice Chair Casas, Commissioner Caballero, Commissioner Griffith, Commissioner Museitif, and Commissioner Weigel. Staff in Attendance: Jonathan Babiak, Human Resources Coordinator, Office of Civil Rights CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: GENERAL None 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. The minutes from the regular meeting of April 26, 2021 were approved on a vote of 6-0: Chair Davis motion, Commissioner Griffith second. Voting in favor were Chair Davis, Vice Chair Casas, Commissioner Caballero, Commissioner Griffith, Commissioner Museitif, and Commissioner Weigel. Commissioner Areche, Commissioner Breckenridge, Commissioner Brienzi, Commissioner Garry Brown, and Commissioner Jamarr Brown were absent. NOTE: The audio recording of the meeting malfunctioned. This item will be returned to a future agenda for action. 2. NEW BUSINESS a. Discussion and possible action related to Campaign Zero’s 8 Can’t Wait initiative and recommending Austin Police Department address inappropriate use of force by implementing a Duty to Intervene policy for officers. (Casas/Davis) The Commission discussed this item. The Commission took no action on this item. b. Discussion and possible action on setting goals for July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022. (Davis/Casas) The commission discussed this item. The Commission voted to continue the current goals unchanged for the coming year on a vote of 6–0: Chair Davis motion, Commissioner Griffith second. Voting in favor were Chair Davis, Vice Chair Casas, Commissioner Caballero, Commissioner Griffith, Commissioner Museitif, and Commissioner Weigel. Commissioner Areche, Commissioner Breckenridge, Commissioner Brienzi, Commissioner Garry Brown, and Commissioner Jamarr Brown were absent. NOTE: The audio recording of the meeting malfunctioned. This item will be returned to a future agenda for action. 1 c. Discussion on the 2020-21 Annual Internal Review Report. (Davis/Casas) The Commission discussed this item. The Commission took no action on this item. d. Discussion and possible action on a recommendation regarding Public Health Crises and Vaccine Inequities. (Museitif/Davis) The Commission discussed this item. The amended recommendation was adopted on a vote of 6–0: Commissioner Museitif motion, Chair Davis second. Voting in favor were Chair Davis, Vice Chair Casas, Commissioner Caballero, Commissioner Griffith, Commissioner Museitif, and Commissioner Weigel. Commissioner Areche, Commissioner Breckenridge, Commissioner Brienzi, Commissioner Garry Brown, and Commissioner Jamarr Brown were absent. NOTE: The audio recording …
Allen, Amber From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: DIANA CULBERSON Friday, July 23, 2021 12:09 PM PAZ Preservation Historic Case Number: C14H-2000-0005; Review Case Number: HR 21-103182 - 13300 DESSAU RD Bldg A *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** IN FAVOR OF RELOCATION!!!!! IN FAVOR OF RELOCATION!!!!! IN FAVOR OF RELOCATION!!!!! IN FAVOR OF RELOCATION!!!!! Our family would like to express our deepest hopes and prayers to RELOCATE the Evangelical Lutheran Church at Dessau to Pioneer Farms. It was an answered prayer (miracle) when Pioneer Farms contacted us, with their desire to acquire our Church, and move it to their location. They have been looking for a Church for quite some time. The relocation of this Church will answer prayers of so many church and family members, who have attended services, funerals, weddings, picnics, reunions, landscape upkeep, and visiting family at the grave sites in the Cemetery. We are a seven generation family of the Wielands and Nauerts. I know, from the bottom of my heart, that our ancestors and future descendants of our family, want this endeavor to be accomplished. 1) The current location of the Church is growing with development and will soon prevent the ability to move the structure. 2) The Church will be restored and utilized at Pioneer Farms, to exhibit the history of our ancestors, and possibly provide a historical site for future events, such as those which have been conducted at the Church's current location. 3) The future location, at Pioneer Farms, will be near the cabin of one of the original builders - Frederick Kruger. 4) When the construction of this Church was completed (my Maternal Great Grandfather, Martin Wieland, drew the plans for construction), the first services were held in the German language. My Mother remembered this from her childhood, as she was born on the Nauert Farm, across the street from the Church, which is now being covered with apartment buildings. 5) There has to be an awareness, that there are some structures in this city, that NEED TO BE RESTORED - NOT DESTROYED. This is our opportunity to give future generations the ability to experience and cherish their history. 6) This project needs to proceed, having been in limbo for three years. RELOCATION of this Church is the only hope that our family has, in preserving our German history, and answering prayers of so many families, who have worked so …
From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments: Ed Richardson Allen, Amber Brummett, Elizabeth; Contreras, Kalan; Sadowsky, Steve Re: July 26 Historic Landmark Commission Meeting Call-In Information Monday, July 26, 2021 10:38:08 AM image001.png *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Hi Folks, I’m out sick today and will not be able to speak on behalf of 1415 W 10th today. What we had planned to share at the meeting was: In response to the small committee meeting comments, our client has agreed to: Not have a front fence at the property And to incorporate additional landscape screening/planting at the front of the property between the proposed building and the street Respectfully, Ed Richardson Clark Richardson Architects Get Outlook for iOS From: Allen, Amber <Amber.Allen@austintexas.gov> Sent: Monday, July 26, 2021 10:25:52 AM To: Allen, Amber <Amber.Allen@austintexas.gov> Cc: Brummett, Elizabeth <Elizabeth.Brummett@austintexas.gov>; Contreras, Kalan <Kalan.Contreras@austintexas.gov>; Sadowsky, Steve <Steve.Sadowsky@austintexas.gov> Subject: July 26 Historic Landmark Commission Meeting Call-In Information Dear applicants and community members, In order to join the Historic Landmark Commission meeting this evening, please call the highlighted number below: Phone Number: 1-844-992-4726 Conference ID: 146 408 8046# This meeting is scheduled to begin at 6:00 pm. Please plan to call the number above at least 15 minutes ahead of time 5:45 pm. Late callers will not be accepted. Initially when you call in you will hear music before being queued into the actual teleconference of the meeting. Once on the teleconference it will be silent prior to the start of the meeting (everyone is muted). Once the Commission is in session, participants will hear audio of the meeting and then shortly be joined live with the meeting. All participants should remain muted. When it is your time to speak, unmute yourself. Once you are finished, you can either hand up or mute yourself to listen to the remainder of the meeting. If you are also viewing the live recording of the meeting (http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch- atxn-live) while on the phone, make sure this is on mute while you’re speaking, or else everyone in the meeting will hear echoing feedback. Meeting Order: Roll call and reading of the agenda (Please remain on mute during this time). The Commissioners may ask clarifying questions about items on the consent agenda and/or they may decide to pull items off the consent agenda for a full discussion. The Commissioners will vote to pass the consent agenda. The Commissioners will review items …
01 1415 W 10th Street Residence HLC PRESENTATION | CLARK RICHARDSON ARCHITECTS | 7.09.2021 02 1415 W 10th | Site Survey (1415 W 10th Street) (1417 W 10th Street) 03 1415 W 10th | Street View Looking South 04 Existing Structure: Photo from Front of Property Existing Structure: Photo from Middle of Property 05 Existing Structure: Photo Looking South at Structure Existing Structure: Photo Looking East at Structure 06 96 FT Proposed Project: Site Plan 07 Proposed Project: Site Axonometric 09 10 11 12 OWANA Zoning Committee & Neighborhood Outreach Summary: 13 9.24.2020: OWANA Zoning Committee Meeting: Ed Richardson | CRA presents existing site conditions and proposed design to OWANA Zoning Committee. 10.13.2020: Meeting with Adjacent Neighbors: Ed Richardson | CRA meets all directly adjacent neighbors at 1415 W 10th to review proposed design. Topics included: - Reviewed Existing and Proposed Drainage on site with east neighbor. - Reviewed Height and Location of proposed structures. Reviewed what each neighbor with views into the lot could expect to see from their homes. - Discussed Fence Heights and Location. We will have lowered the fence along W 10th St. - Reviewed Second Floor Window Alignments: Between the proposed structure and the existing home to the east. - Clark Richardson field surveyed the window locations - and mapped them on the survey and reviewed with property owner. There are no direct window alignments. 10.22.2020: OWANA Zoning Committee Meeting II: Ed Richardson | CRA presented our responses to the comments / concerns from the previous meeting Shoring: The noise and disruption from potential shoring for the construction of the basement was a primary concern for neighbors. CRA recommends no driven piles be used for shoring and instead drilled piers be used in any temporary shoring required. The structural work for the shoring will be part of the means and methods for construction of the basement by the contractor and therefore while it will be engineered. The precise drawings will not be included in the architectural drawings. Street Façade: We’re proposing a specimen tree be added in front of the street façade complimenting the window located towards the west side of the façade (see 9). Site Drainage: We’ve sketched in the proposed French drain system for the lot and plan to use the front yard to filter run off from the southside of the lot. Not mentioned in the previous meeting, the second-floor roofed areas …
PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION Although applicants and/or their agent(s) are expected to participate in a public hearing, you are not required to participate. This meeting will be conducted online and you have the opporhrnity to speak FOR or AGAINST the proposed development or change. Email or call the staff contact no later than noon the day before the meeting for information on how to participate in the public hearings online. You may also contact a neighborhood or environmental organization that has expressed an interest in an application affecting your neighborhood. During a public hearing, the board or commission may postpone or continue an application's hearing to a later date, or recommend approval or denial of the application. If the board or commission amounces a specific date and time for a postponement or continuation that is not later than 60 days from the announcement, no further notice is required. A board or commission's decision may be appealed by a person with standing to appeal, or an interested party that is identified as a person who can appeal the decision. The body holding a public hearing on an appeal will determine whether a person has standing to appeal the decision. An interested party is defined as a person who is the applicant or record owner of the subject property, or who communicates an interest to a board or commission by: o delivering a written statement to the board or cornmission before or during the public hearing that generally identifies the issues of concein (it ntay be delivered io the contact person listed on a notice); or . appearing and speaking for the record at the public hearing; and: . occupies a primary residence that is within 500 feet of the subject property or proposed development; o is the record owner of property within 500 feet of the subject properly or proposed development; or o is an officer of an environmental or neighborhood organization that has an interest in or whose declared boundaries are within 500 feet ofthe subject property or proposed development. A notice of appeal must be filed with the director of the responsible department no later than 14 days after the decision. An appeal form may be available from the responsible department. For additional information on the City of Austin's land development process, please visit our website: \\':y):.t.rjjlt:glLq:!:.1t,.*,gyi_AhS Written comments must be submitted to the board or commission (or the contact …
6 1 3 W E S T L Y N N 1 9 J U LY 2 0 2 1 E X I S T I N G S I T E C O N D I T I O N S WEST LYNN SPEC613 W LYNN ST, AUSTIN TX 7870319 JULY 2021 AIR CONDITIONED AREA: 4,854 SQFT PROJECT CODE ANALYSIS ZONING: PARCEL ID: CONSTRUCTION TYPE: LOT SIZE: FLOOR AREA RATIO: IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE: MAIN HOUSE BASEMENT FLOOR: LEVEL 01: LEVEL 02: TOTAL: ADU LEVEL 01: LEVEL 02: TOTAL: CARPORT: GARAGE: 10'-9 1/2" BUILDING TENT 5; HIGHEST GRADE: 523'-11 3/4" MF-4 NP 106602 V-B 10,130 SQFT (.233 ACRES) PROVIDED: 39% (3,934 SQFT) ALLOWED: MAX 40% (4,052 SQFT) PROVIDED: 44% (4473.5) ALLOWED: 45% (4558.5) 1,187 SQFT 1,868 SQFT 701 SQFT 3,756 SQFT 549 SQFT 549 SQFT 1,098 SQFT 267 SQFT 445 SQFT 40'-0" BUILDING TENT 4; HIGHEST GRADE: 524'-9 1/2" 40'-0" BUILDING TENT 3; HIGHEST GRADE: 527'-2" 40'-0" BUILDING TENT 2; HIGHEST GRADE: 532'-3" 40'-0" BUILDING TENT 1; HIGHEST GRADE: 536'-6" 32'-1/4" BUILDING LINE Y E L L A ' 4 1 . 7 4 W " 5 2 ' 3 2 ° 5 2 S 520 D R A Y R A E R D E C U D E R " 0 - ' 5 K C A B T E S 521 522 D R A Y R A E R " 0 - ' 0 1 K C A B T E S 520 521 FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION: LEVEL 1 521'-7 3/4" FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION: LEVEL 2 533'-7 3/4" NEW 2 GARAGE (445 SF) NEW 2-STORY ADU (1,098 SF + 295 SF CARPORT) 523 524 525 0.233 ACRES 10,130 SQ.FT EXISTING POOL HIGH POINT TENT 2 +532'-3" HIGH POINT FRONT SETBACK +536'-3 3/8" 15'-0" HISTORIC PRESERVATION REQUIRED " 7 - ' 9 " 2 / 1 7 - ' 9 SIDE YARD SETBACK 5'-0" MIN. ADJ. GRADE +527'-5 1/2" BASEMENT BELOW REPRESENTED AS HATCHED. FULLY CONTAINED WITHIN LEVEL 1 D R A Y T N O R F " 0 - ' 5 2 K C A B T E S LANDSCAPED FRONT YARD EXISTING PAVING FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION: LEVEL 0 527'-7 3/4" FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION: LEVEL 1 538'-7 3/4" FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION: LEVEL 2 550'-7 3/4" NEW 2-STORY ADDITION (3,417 SF) EXISTING 1-STORY TO REMAIN (339 SF) MAX ADJ. GRADE +536'-2" D E P A C S …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICT PERMITS JULY 26, 2021 PR-21-092304 2521 JARRATT AVENUE OLD WEST AUSTIN NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICT C.9 – 1 PROPOSAL ARCHITECTURE RESEARCH Demolish a ca. 1948 house that is contributing to the historic district. One-story, wing-and-hipped roof brick veneered ranch house with a partial-width inset porch o ornamental metal supports; banded fenestration in an early mid-century Modern aesthetic. The house was built in 1948 by Gibson R. Randle and his wife, Sarah. Gibson Randle was a prominent attorney in town, having served as Austin’s city attorney for many years. Sarah Randle was the daughter of a prominent judge. While living here, Gibson Randle had a private law practice, and in 1962, he was appointed to the State Board of Law Examiners. He and Sarah divorced in 1979k and Gibson married Audray Bateman, one of the founders of the Austin History Center. However, it is not known at this time whether Audray Bateman lived in this house. PROPERTY EVALUATION The property contributes to the Old West Austin 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 may meet two criteria: a. Architecture. The house reflects a ranch house design, popular in Austin after World War II, with its long, low configuration and expansive front porch; there are also elements of mid-century Modern design in the house in the use of banded windows. The house may have architectural significance as an intact example of its design type. b. Historical association. The property is significantly associated with Gibson R. Randle, a prominent attorney who served as Austin’s city attorney for a number of years and was a member of the State Board of Law Examiners. His first wife, Sarah, was a teacher and counselor in the Austin public schools. 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, …
July 24, 2021 To the Austin Historic Preservation Office and Historic Landmark Commission Regarding the Demolition Application on 1173 San Bernard, Case # PR 21-093159-1173 To Amber Allen, or Whom it May Concern: My wife and I wish to voice our support for the demolition permit on 1173 San Bernard. We own an adjoining property (1170 Angelina St), so we have a particular interest in what becomes of 1173 San Bernard. The current structures are sub-standard and are not well-suited to a cost- effective rehabilitation. Therefore, we believe that a new build is more appropriate for that site. My interest in that street, and my familiarity with it, date back to 1974. I believe the new owners of 1173 San Bernard also have a strong appreciation for the neighborhood, and will develop the property in a way that is compatible with that fine street. Thank you. Charley and Diane Mansfield
From: CleanTag Permits <c Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2021 10:45 AM To: Contreras, Kalan <Kalan.Contreras@austintexas.gov> Cc: Allen, Amber <Amber.Allen@austintexas.gov> Subject: Re: 3703 Meadowbank Dr. - Existing Photos Hello Kalan and Amber, The owner of 3703 Meadowbank called a few moments ago to request a postponement for their hearing with HLC. There has been extensive damage to the structure due to pipes bursting in February and they are waiting for a structural engineer to assess the damage. The plans under review currently are for an addition/remodel. The engineer's report may recommend complete demolition. What is your advice moving forward? Thanks, Linda Linda Sullivan Mindy Briggs 4804 Menchaca Rd. Unit B Austin, TX 78745 CleanTag Permits
Allen, Amber From: Sent: To: Subject: Carla Penny Friday, July 23, 2021 10:36 AM PAZ Preservation 2502 Park View GF-21-103669 Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Follow up Flagged *** External Email ‐ Exercise Caution *** Please save this house from demolition. I have lived in this neighborhood 29 years and deeply value the history of the mid‐century homes that give our community character. This home in particular has such important provenance that it would be an irreplaceable loss to Allandale and Austin we’re it to be destroyed. Carla Penny 2500 Albata Ave Austin, TX 78757 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
Allen, Amber From: Sent: To: Subject: Neena Husid Friday, July 23, 2021 11:02 AM PAZ Preservation 2502 Park View Drive *** External Email ‐ Exercise Caution *** Please, please, please stop developers from destroying the integrity of our Austin neighborhoods. This is a great house. I have long admired it and wondered how, if it ever went on the market, I might be able to buy it—to refurbish it, not steam shovel it into oblivion. Allandale is a tight enclave, chocked‐full of friends and neighbors deeply distressed over the systematic leveling of cherished mid‐century homes for cookie‐cutter, poorly built, price‐gouging new constructions. On our street alone there are three identical Paradiso homes priced well‐over a million dollars. Two of these homes have had significant construction issues and detract from the quaint beauty of the much‐loved older homes on the block. It seems to me a city that respects its roots should be working overtime to encourage revitalization to older neighborhoods rather than allowing for the destruction of its gems. Entice architects and builders into our neighborhood who would like nothing more than to help homeowners maintain the integrity of these historic homes. When history, particularly a unique community history, is diminished, caring neighbors and good citizens become apathetic strangers living in rows of uninviting, generic, over‐priced, houses. It’s a sad future and one I hope Austin can avoid. Thank you for listening, Neena Husid 2503 Ellise Avenue 78757 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
Allen, Amber From: Sent: To: Subject: Margaret Herman Friday, July 23, 2021 11:44 AM PAZ Preservation public comment re: 2502 Park View Drive *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Dear Historic Landmark Commission, I'd like to submit a comment on the proposal to demolish 2502 Park View Drive being discussed at your July 26th meeting. My name is Margaret Herman, and I work at a historic preservation agency in New York City (writing today for myself as an individual). I happen to be a former resident of Allandale ‐ my family moved into a house a few streets over from 2502 Park View Drive in the 1980s when I was a young child, and my mother still resides there today. As longtime residents of the neighborhood and for myself as an architectural historian, we both strongly oppose this proposal for demolition. I recently became aware of the proposed National Register nomination for Allandale's Air‐Conditioned Village, of which this property at 2502 Park View Drive is an essential piece. Referred to as the "Chrysler Air Temp Home," it retains a high degree of integrity to its period of significance during the air‐conditioning tests, and its paneled facade and window pattern, its perforated brick screens, and overhanging roof line continue to express the story of Allandale's role in the history of mid‐20th century HVAC engineering and modern architecture in the southwestern United States. Local residents such as my mother are supportive of efforts to preserve the low‐slung 1950s ranch homes of Allandale, many on large lots with mature trees, which contribute to its distinct sense of place and have made it such a beautiful community to raise their families. Now that the historical significance of 2502 Park View Drive and the Air‐Conditioned Village project as a whole has come to light, there's a new level of pride in the neighborhood. Please prevent this demolition from occurring. Surely there are preservation‐minded ways to repair/rehab the house while retaining its historic fabric so that residents in the future can be reminded of the house's and the historic district's importance. Best Regards, Margaret E. Herman, Ph.D. 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
June 12, 2020 Emily Reed, Chair City of Austin Historic Landmark Commission Re: 2502 Park View Drive Dear Ms. Reed, Preservation Austin has been our city’s leading nonprofit voice for historic preservation since 1953. We write today to express our dismay at the proposed demolition of 2502 Park View Drive, located in Allandale’s Air Conditioned Village. We ask the Historic Landmark Commission to support historic zoning for this significant property in the areas of Architecture, Historical Associations, and Community Value. The Air Conditioned Village was built in 1954 to assess the cost-effectiveness and profitability of central air in middle-class housing. Twenty-three houses, each featuring air-conditioning systems from a different manufacturer, were sold to families who agreed to allow their homes and habits to be studied by University of Texas scientists. Austinite Ned Cole, an architect and head of the air-conditioning subcommittee of the National Association of Homes Builders, spearheaded the project, which was the first multi-home experiment of its kind worldwide. Local architects and builders designed each unique home with energy-saving design elements to test their effectiveness. These include window placement along north and south facades; trees, trellises, and overhangs; pale paint colors and white roofing materials to reflect sunlight. Architect Fred Day designed 2502 Park View Drive, known as “The Air Temp.” Energy-efficient features include south-facing orientation and a wide, low-pitched roof which extends nearly four feet beyond the home’s footprint on all sides. Distinctive brick screens, exposed roof beams, and its asymmetrical façade make this home one of the development’s most stylized examples of mid-century design. Day (1926-2014) was a recent graduate of the UT School of Architecture. He worked for Ned Cole and Fehr & Granger before establishing his own firms in the 1960s. Day merged with Jessen Jessen Millhouse Greeven & Crume to become Jessen, Inc. in 1969, and served as the firm’s principal and president until 1993. His distinguished career included numerous awards from AIA Austin and the Texas Society Architects. He was president of AIA Austin and awarded an honorary Life Membership on the UTSOA Advisory Council. His works include Austin’s Teacher Retirement System Building, Faulk Central Library, Austin Doctors Building, renovations to the UT Law School and Student Union, the Recreation and Convocation Center at St. Edwards University, the pro bono master plan and drawings for Laguna Gloria, and the Visitors Center at McDonald Observatory. According to his obituary: “An innovative designer, he …
