Scrrrrli Idr.- "- {.llt}' {..itir*nn lnE, I1 { } Ilt i,x ,}t ilr .lj ,,1r*ij, 11'11'LL'. nttr":ii,1 \, r il.ii ,g.v ":g1il.i : i',:r.,!tL'.,1,' I il. *,. rr ),.r, i, 1-.. i r'r itr'r,:.i, rrr l lit' i \lrl",.i , t,.... | . '. r',' i ii " l1 rr I :,.1' ..'t..:'r'r :.r". 'rl r. r ,.,r 'r'. 'rl,; '.,. r, rJ^ \rr . I t.. SRCC SOUlH RIVER CITY CITIZENS AUSTIN TEXAS Historic Landmark Commission City Hall 301 W.2nd St. Austin, TX787A1 December 11,2020 Dear Commission Members: RE: SRCC opposition to demolition of 1400 Drake, case HDP-2020-0400 On November 17th 2A20, the general membership of the South River City Citizens (SRCC) Neighborhood Association voted to oppose the demolition of the home at 1400 Drake. our opposition stems from the following main issues: The home is modestly sized and would be affordable as rental property. lf demolished, it is unlikely to be replaced with a similarly affordable home. The home contributes to the pending Travis Heights-Fairview Park National Register Historic District. The house is a classic vernacular 1930s cottage, common in its time. Today, this cottage is a vanishing resource type and reflects blue-collar family housing in South Austin. This home represents the eclectic and diverse character of Travis Heights. Sincerely, Megan Spencer Vice President vicepresid ent@srccatx. org CC: Steve Sadowsky, Historic Preservation Officer Gaudette, Angela From: Sent: To: Subject: > Melanie Martinez < Sunday, December 13, 2020 11:07 AM Jacob, Mathew - BC; Papavasiliou, Alexander - BC; Little, Kelly - BC; McWhorter, Trey - BC; Heimsath, Ben - BC; Myers, Terri - BC; Featherston, Witt; Tollett, Blake - BC; Koch, Kevin - BC; Valenzuela, Sarah - BC; Bertron, Cara; Sadowsky, Steve; bc-Caroline.Wright@austin.texas.gov; Gaudette, Angela; PAZ Preservation 1400 & 1402 Drake Ave., HDP-2020-0474 & HDP-2020-0400 *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Dear Commissioners, I'm a long‐time resident of Fairview Park, and one of the many neighbors who spent the past 15 years working toward our National Register historic district designation. I also volunteer on the SRCC's Preservation Committee but I'm writing as an individual and not on behalf of that group. I oppose the demolition of 1400 & 1402 Drake Ave. (HDP‐2020‐0400 & HDP‐2020‐0474) for the same reasons as previously stated. This house is contributing to our historic district, and its location, while not considered "unique," does not diminish the value of a character‐defining home on a corner …
Gaudette, Angela From: Sent: To: Subject: Melanie Martinez < Sunday, December 13, 2020 11:10 AM Heimsath, Ben - BC; Myers, Terri - BC; Featherston, Witt; Papavasiliou, Alexander - BC; Tollett, Blake - BC; Little, Kelly - BC; Jacob, Mathew - BC; McWhorter, Trey - BC; Bertron, Cara; Valenzuela, Sarah - BC; Koch, Kevin - BC; Sadowsky, Steve; bc-Caroline.Wright@austin.texas.gov; Gaudette, Angela; PAZ Preservation Item D-4 514 Academy Dr,. HDP-2020-0424 *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Dear Commissioners, I'm a long‐time resident of Fairview Park, and one of the neighbors who spent the past 15 years working toward our National Register historic district designation. I also volunteer on the SRCC's Preservation Committee but I'm writing as an individual and not on behalf of that group. I oppose the demolition of 514 Academy Dr, HDP2020‐0424. I live near this property and completed my opposition statement in writing last month. I have not seen any plans yet for this lot, so I am still opposed to demolition. This section of Academy's historic streetscape has barely been touched by new construction, so losing a contributing property in the middle of the block‐‐so close to the historic Kirkland‐Mather House (The Academy)‐‐makes a jarring statement and diminishes the character of our historic district. Should the owner want to learn more about the possibilities of restoring the house, even with an addition and ADU, they could create an income‐producing property and earn tax credits for rehabilitation. Or they could sell that remodeled property as an income‐producing property. I believe people moving to Austin desire homes like these that provide the "missing middle" and can be a benefit, rather than a waste of embodied energy and history thrown in the dump. Of course, I cannot speak to the owners' intent. If they desire to be part of our community, I'm sure a meeting with our neighborhood's Preservation Committee would be fruitful and could open up more possibilities for compromise and find design approaches that wouldn't remove this contributing property from our historic district. Thank you for your consideration, Melanie Martinez 1214 Newning Ave. 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
TREE SCHEDULE IMPERVIOUS COVER = 40.29% FLOOR-TO-AREA RATIO = 39.93% 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 LIVE OAK LIVE OAK LIVE OAK LIVE OAK LIVE OAK LIVE OAK LIVE OAK LIVE OAK YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES 2' - 5" 2' - 4" 2' - 3" 2' - 11" 2' - 4" 3' - 6" 3' - 5" 3' - 1" SITE LOT IMPERVIOUS COVER @ 50% ENTRY DECK IMPERVIOUS COVER AC PADS BUILDING AREA CAST IN PLACE WALLS DRIVEWAY FLATWORK SITE LOT FLOOR AREA FIRST FLOOR GARAGE NON -EXEMPT SECOND FLOOR EXEMPT FLOOR AREA GARAGE EXEMPT 7,016 SF 7,016 SF 93 SF 93 SF 18 SF 2,247 SF 39 SF 179 SF 251 SF 2,734 SF 7,016 SF 7,016 SF 1,734 SF 240 SF 829 SF 2,802 SF 200 SF 200 SF 164 - LIVE OAK 41"Ø YES 12' - 0" ASPHALT Y E L L A I E N L Y T R E P O R P I E N L K C A B T E S R A E R 10' - 0" " 0 - ' 5 BLDG 1 2,563 SF 4 BED 4 BATH PROPERTY LINE SETBACK LINE 160 - LIVE OAK 27"Ø YES 163 - LIVE OAK 42"Ø YES I E N L K C A B T E S T N O R F I E N L G N D L U B I I I E V R D A D E M A L A 4 1 4 1 I E N L Y T R E P O R P 158 - LIVE OAK 29"Ø YES 159 - LIVE OAK 28"Ø YES " 0 - ' 5 SETBACK LINE PROPERTY LINE 165 - LIVE OAK 37"Ø YES 162 - LIVE OAK 28"Ø YES t v r . 3 0 0 1 0 2 0 2 _ A D E M A L A _ 4 1 4 1 _ 6 0 0 2 T V R D 3 \ \ i \ \ s g n w a r D a d e m a A _ 6 0 0 2 l \ e v i t c a \ x o b p o r D \ x o b p o r D \ r a u d e \ s r e s U \ : C M P …
Gaudette, Angela From: Sent: To: Subject: Melanie Martinez < Sunday, December 13, 2020 11:22 AM Heimsath, Ben - BC; Myers, Terri - BC; Little, Kelly - BC; Jacob, Mathew - BC; McWhorter, Trey - BC; Bertron, Cara; Featherston, Witt; Papavasiliou, Alexander - BC; Tollett, Blake - BC; Valenzuela, Sarah - BC; Koch, Kevin - BC; Sadowsky, Steve; bc-Caroline.Wright@austin.texas.gov; Gaudette, Angela; PAZ Preservation Item D-6 1414 Alameda Dr. HDP-2020-0453 *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Dear Commissioners, I'm a long‐time resident of Fairview Park, and one of the neighbors who spent the past 15 years working toward our National Register historic district designation. I also volunteer on the SRCC's Preservation Committee but I'm writing as an individual and not on behalf of that group. I oppose the demolition of 1414 Alameda HDP‐2020‐0453, given the house's contributing status to the historic district and its level of integrity. It would be nice to see the plans for what would replace this house so I could speak more directly to the issues demolition would cause. Ideally, the house could be restored and remodeled, possibly with an ADU. The owner might like to know more about tax credits for rehabilitation which could offset some of the costs, should they choose to use the property for income. While this house is a working‐class home, it is still valuable to our community's historic character and, in combination with the other working‐class homes, tells the story of our community. I feel sure that if the owners would like to meet with members of our neighborhood's Preservation Committee, there might be a good design solution that would benefit both the owner and our historic district. Sincerely, Melanie Martinez 1214 Newning Ave. 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
Gaudette, Angela From: Sent: To: Subject: > Melanie Martinez < Sunday, December 13, 2020 11:37 AM Heimsath, Ben - BC; Myers, Terri - BC; Little, Kelly - BC; Jacob, Mathew - BC; McWhorter, Trey - BC; Bertron, Cara; Featherston, Witt; Papavasiliou, Alexander - BC; Tollett, Blake - BC; Valenzuela, Sarah - BC; Koch, Kevin - BC; Sadowsky, Steve; bc-Caroline.Wright@austin.texas.gov; Gaudette, Angela; PAZ Preservation D-7 1016 Avondale Rd. GF-2020-175404 *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Dear Commissioners, I'm a long‐time resident of Fairview Park, and one of the neighbors who spent the past 15 years working toward our National Register historic district designation. I also volunteer on the SRCC's Preservation Committee but I'm writing as an individual and not on behalf of that group. I am writing to ask the owners of 1016 Avondale Rd. GF‐2020‐175404 to please consider the Mid‐Century Modern character of this home in their addition and to retain the streetview facade. I would also encourage them not to paint the natural stone. As the choice of fenestration will have such a big impact on the facade, I hope they will work with the Preservation office and their architect to select a period‐appropriate style. Thank you for your consideration, Melanie Martinez 1214 Newning Ave. 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
Concerning: Case Number: GF 20-178291 – 3107 DANCY ST 1. In the past a determination was made that this house warranted historical certification. There is no reason to assume that this is no longer valid. In addition, this past determination has the weight of a formal verification process. 2. Historical zoning is an exchange of value-received (reduced taxes) for having a development easement assigned to the property. This easement goes with the property, just like a drainage easement or a flood zone determination. Existing and/or previous landowners have already received value in exchange for adding an easement which remains with the property. That was the deal and they made it. 3. Historical certification might increase or decrease the resale value of the property. In any case, the current property owner purchased the property with eyes wide open with regard to this restriction (which reasonably was factored into the purchase price) and so no argument of undue hardship is warranted. 4. The very nature of historical certification is intended to protect property against the variations of valuation over time which might make it profitable to demolish and redevelop a site. That was the agreement which made upon applying for and accepting the historical certification and that is the arrangement which should be applied to the consideration of this request. Summary: The request should be denied. A valid and binding exchange of value-received for encumbering the property with a development easement was made and this type of development easement, by its very nature, should not subject to the whims of redevelopment valuation. Thomas Mayer 13-Dec-2020
Dear Historic District Members and Neighbors, Our names are Riley and Elliot Jackson and we recently just purchased the home on 2102 ALTA VISTA. We have been in Travis Heights for the past few years and can’t imagine starting our little family anywhere else! We are due with our first baby boy in February! We absolutely love the charm of this bungalow style house, and just want to create more space for our growing family. Our plans are to add on a master suite to the left side of the house and enclose the front porch to make some extra space in the living room. We plan on keeping the original windows and floors and hope to keep the charm that this house already has! We by no means want to change the cozy and warm feeling you get when you walk into this house, we are just wanting to create more room for our growing family since we plan on being here for a very long time. We appreciate your time, and please feel free to reach out with any questions or concerns. Warmly, Riley and Elliot Jackson 972-762-7600
Gaudette, Angela From: Sent: To: Subject: Melanie Martinez < Sunday, December 13, 2020 11:45 AM Heimsath, Ben - BC; Myers, Terri - BC; Little, Kelly - BC; Jacob, Mathew - BC; Bertron, Cara; Featherston, Witt; McWhorter, Trey - BC; Papavasiliou, Alexander - BC; Tollett, Blake - BC; Valenzuela, Sarah - BC; Koch, Kevin - BC; Sadowsky, Steve; bc-Caroline.Wright@austin.texas.gov; Gaudette, Angela; PAZ Preservation D-9 2102 Alta Vista Ave. GF-2020-17951 *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Dear Commissioners, I'm a long‐time resident of Fairview Park, and one of the neighbors who spent the past 15 years working toward our National Register historic district designation. I also volunteer on the SRCC's Preservation Committee but I'm writing as an individual and not on behalf of that group. I am writing to ask the owners of 2102 Alta Vista Ave. GF‐2020‐17951 to please reconsider the addition to the front of the house. While I have not seen their construction plans, an addition on the front sounds like it would eliminate or change the current facade and remove the home from its Contributing status in our National Register district. I'm sure a creative architect could find a way to re‐design to meet the needs of the owners while retaining the historic integrity that is still quite good and valuable to our district. Thank you for your consideration, Melanie Martinez 1214 Newning Ave. 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
What is Austin Detours? ● We are a tour company that offers tours to locals, visitors, and corporate groups. ● Our offerings include city tours, food tours, brewery / distillery tours / wine tours, live music tours, and more. ● Our corporate events range from small local teams to visiting convention groups in the 1000s. We offer social, teambuilding and charity events. ● Our team is made up of local musicians, artists, and creators. Austin Detours Pre-Pandemic ● We grew from 1 employee in 2013 to 27 employees in 2020. We also had a 2nd location in San Antonio with 8 employees. ● In 2019, we were recognized as a nominee for “Best CEO,” “Fast 50,” “Best Family Business,” and ranked as “#2 Best Place to Work in Austin” (micro-category). These awards are given out by the Austin Business Journal and highly respected in our city. ● In 2019, we hosted over 27,000 public tour guests and 14,000 corporate guests. ● In 2019, we were the largest tour company in Austin. We have been featured in Lonely Planet, National Geographic Travel, the Washington Post, USA Today, Forbes, and countless blogs / online publications. ● Austin Detours directly supported hundreds of small businesses in Austin, featuring food trucks, musicians and artists on our tours. Many of these creative entrepreneurs have told us that we were the sole reason they were in business, or that we were integral in the launching of their small business. Austin Detours Post-Pandemic ● Austin Detours has been 100% closed since March 11, 2020. ● We have laid off 26 employees. We have one remaining. ● We have completely closed our 2nd operation in San Antonio. ● Many of our key partners have also been forced to close indefinitely. Other Tour Companies in Austin ● AO Tours has continued to operate 1-2 private tours / week. ● Austin Tour Company closed in March and has not reopened. ● Twisted Texas Tours was closed from March - September. They have reopened for private groups only, and have had 12 small private tours to date. Austin Detours Recovery In order for Austin Detours to recover, we will need: ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● A vaccine that is available to the general public Financial assistance to help with start-up costs (basically starting the business from new again) Depending on timing, the ability to bring my staff …
Travel & Tourism Update STR 2020 Week Over Week March 7 - December 5 Adam Sacks President Tourism Economics Cindy Lo CEO RED VELVET Billy Carter President & General Manager Carter Transportation (Formerly Super Shuttle/ Execucar) Elizabeth Alderson Owner Austin Detours Dennis Randolph Owner Strong Events 9
RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, iconic venues and other local tourist destinations have been forever lost resulting in the tourist destinations; and economy and real estate boom, and WHEREAS, iconic venues and local tourist destinati ible for launching WHEREAS, a recent Billboard List (And Why It Matters) speaks to oss the country and struggling without revenue and insufficient nce due to the continuing COVID-19 pandemic; and WHEREAS, the Billboard artic l list of permanently closed venues by state, listing fif l exas, eight of which are in Austin and being the city ures; and WHE ssfully provided a means to save these resulting in the loss of such places as the iconic Thre dquarters and Shady Grove, Barracuda, Plush, Scratchouse, -2-One Bar, and North Door; and WHE -19 public health crisis continues to negatively impact our tourist related economies due to the general public limiting their travel, public health limitations on the ability to gather, and subsequent requirements of social distancing; and 1 of 9 WHEREAS, businesses that promote tourism and the hotel and convention industry are faced with nearly complete loss of operating income due to COVID-19 precautions on top of the pre-COVID conditions of rising rents; and WHEREAS, despite best efforts by the City Council and staff, relief funds to assist with expenses have fallen significantly short to meet the need and to date have been unable to address the loss of iconic venues and tourist destinations that serve WHEREAS may be possible federal fun uch as SAVES funding, could be utilized to stabilize WHEREAS, from around the world; and reputation for live musi attracts visitors WHEREAS, culin venues founded in Austin, and unique to Austin, pr nd convention industry by defining tha e filled with distinctive experiences for visitors foun of those contributing essential talents and businesses thrive upon r and WHE Council Resolution No. 20200326-091 directed City Management to prioritize all necessary resources available to address the public health and economic crises connected to the emergency declaration related to COVID-19; and WHEREAS, Austin City Council Resolution No. 20200326-091 further directed the City Manager to consider possible options for reassessing other uses of and repurposing of existing Hotel Occupancy Tax (HOT); and 2 of 9 WHEREAS, Texas Attorneys General have affirmed that cities must determine in the first instance whether an expenditure of hotel occupancy tax revenue is proper under Texas Tax Code Section 351.101 and have discretion in …
PARKS AND ENVIRONMENT PROJECTS/ACTIVITIES ELIGIBLE FOR HOT FUNDING Tourism-Promoting Advertising, Solicitations, and Promotional Programs : Tax Code Sec. 351.101(a)(3) (“(a) Revenue from the municipal hotel Statutory Basis occupancy tax may be used only to promote tourism and the convention and hotel industry, and that use is limited to … (3) advertising and conducting solicitations and promotional programs municipality or its vicinity”). to attract tourists and convention delegates or registrants to the Geographic Limitation : None Maintenance and Operation Funding : No Statutory Cap : None. : According to “What Cities Need to Know to Administer Municipal Hotel Statutory Minimum Occupancy Taxes,” state law requires that, for cities with a seven percent local hotel tax rate, at least one-seventh of the hotel tax proceeds must be spent advertising and promoting the city to directly impact tourism and the hotel and convention industry. Tax Code §§ 351.103, 351.1035, 351.104(d), 351.105(b), and 351.106(a). this assertion is unclear. Statutory basis for Real World Examples promotional programs, including paying musicians to promote Austin tourism. : Visit Austin expends HOT on tourism advertising, solicitations, and Proposed Project Description public art in parkland. Funding for a promotional guide to area parks, such as an expanded version of SBCA’s “Explorer’s Guide to the Hill Country Oasis.” : Hiring musicians to play in our parks. Paying artists for Additional “advertising” and “promotional programs” funding could be applied to parks or park projects that are featured in documentary, tv series, social media, or other tourism promotion efforts, such as "lifeguards of Austin," "park rangers of Austin," "restoring the historic Victory Grill," "trailbuilders of Austin," "restoring the neglected neighborhood pools of East Austin," "rowing racers of Lady Bird Lake," "Nature schools of Austin," "eel hunters of the Colorado", "community farms of Boggy Creek," "reversing climate change in Austin," "restoring habitat of endangered wildlife of Central Texas," etc. In addition to funding filmmakers and social media producers that feature Austin parks and environmental settings, “advertising” and “promotional programs” funding could be applied to the work or activities being filmed, such performers and musicians in such promotional projects, thereby employing the Austin creative community while also protecting our environment, improving our parks, etc. Texas Municipal League historic/cultural arts projects. Cultural Arts and Commercial Music : Allowable use unless used to improperly avoid funding caps for : Tax Code Sec. 351.101(a)(4) (“(a) Revenue …
1 BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION City of Austin Tourism Commission Recommendation Number: 20201203-?: HOT Funding for Parks and Environment Projects WHEREAS, Texas state law imposes significant restrictions on how hotel occupancy tax (HOT) funds can be used, including but not limited to Texas Tax Code, Chapters 334 and 351; and WHEREAS, the City of Austin has numerous parks and environmental features which are some of the strongest tourist attractions in our city and which are prominently featured in local tourism promotion campaigns, including Visit Austin’s promotion of “9 Reasons to Explore Austin’s Outdoors” (https://www.austintexas.org/austin-insider-blog/post/explore-austins-outdoors); and WHEREAS, the Parks and Environment Working Group was appointed at the February 20, 2020 Tourism Commission meeting to investigate possible uses of HOT funding for parks and environment projects, including (1) Chapter 351 funding options for using hotel occupancy tax funds to benefit parks and/or environment, (2) Chapter 334 funding options for using hotel occupancy tax funds to benefit parks/environment, (3) park amenities to leverage tourism funding for park-specific projects, and (4) Palm Park HOT funding options; and WHEREAS, it was recognized that economic turmoil and tourism impacts from Covid-19 could impact how the city handles hotel occupancy tax dollars in the future; and WHEREAS, the Parks and Environment Working Group has assembled the attached report and recommendation to help City Council envision possible uses of HOT funds to benefit our parks and environment; and WHEREAS, the attached report and recommendation from the Parks and Environment Working Group includes a listing of parks and environment projects/activities that are eligible for HOT funding by identifying specific categories of allowable HOT funded projects (e.g., “Tourism-Promoting Advertising, Solicitations, and Promotional Programs,” “Cultural Arts and Commercial Music,” “Visitor Information Centers,” etc.) along with a description of the statutory basis, limitations, allowed uses, and descriptions of real world examples and parks/environment projects for using HOT funds. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Tourism Commission encourages the Austin City Council to consider the attached report and recommendation from the Parks and Environment Working Group on allowable HOT funding to benefit parks and environment projects in any future decision to allocate HOT funds. Date of Approval: _____________________________ Record of the vote: Attest: _____________________________________________ (Staff or board member can sign) 2
From: To: Subject: Date: Mike Bowen Ramirez, Elaine C16-2020-009 Sunday, December 06, 2020 11:18:43 AM *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** "The Only Thing Necessary For The Triumph Of Evil Is For Good Men To Do Nothing" -Edmund Burke 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. C-1/1-LATE BACKUP C-1/2-LATE BACKUP
D-4/1-LATE BACKUP To whom this may concern, I am writing as an owner within RobRoy on the Lake and nearby neighbor to the Goodwins at 1201 N. Weston Ln. The Goodwins have always been a good steward of the neighborhood as well as Lake Austin. Please consider this letter my support in favor of a variance to the impervious coverage, (“IC”), issue, which was unknowingly created several decades ago. After further research into the applicant’s plans for the creation of a rain garden, I believe this a reasonable compromise within the intent of the IC regulations and is more than a net gain for the city and its water source. Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me via email at or via cell at 432-‐638-‐4200. Respectfully, Nick McClure 1201 N. Weston Ln. D-4/2-LATE BACKUP November 9, 2020 City of Austin Planning & Development Services PO Box 1088 Austin, TX 78701 Ladies and Gentlemen, Re: 1209 North Weston Lane; June Goodwin, Property Owner/Applicant The purpose of this letter is to provide you information regarding the application of regulatory authority in the Rob Roy on the Lake, Section 1 Subdivision. This subdivision application was filed in 1982 and the plat was recorded in 1983. Homes began being built in late 1983and early 1984. There are 83 lots in the subdivision. I was President of the HOA for two terms in the late 90’s. Thereafter, I assumed the role of Chair of the Architectural Control Committee, a position that I held until I sold my house in the subdivision in 2014. I was very familiar with the permitting status of new home and remodel home construction during that period. There are approximately 13 lots in the subdivision with frontage on Lake Austin. There are several other lots up the hill from the dead end of Weston Lane that, while not being on Lake Austin, are within 500′ of the 504.9 contour line which historically was the limit of the City’s jurisdiction. None of the original homes built on Lake Austin were built with City building permits. Furthermore, the City of Austin Water and Wastewater Utility did not review and approve on-site sewage facility permits for these homes. This was done by Travis County. I am now aware that the City of Austin adopted a limited purpose annexation in May of 1982 that extended 500′ from the 504.9 …
D-5/1-LATE BACKUP F o r a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n o n t h e C i t y o f A u s t ~ s ' l a n d d e v e l o p m e n t E l a i n e R a m i r e z p r o c e s s , v i s i t o u r w e b s i t e : w w w . a u s t i n t e x a s . g o v / d e v s e r v i c e s . . 1 S c a n & E m a i l t o : e l a i l i 1 e . r a m i r e z @ a u s t i n t e x a s . g o v m a i l ( a s w e d o n o t h a v ~ a c c e s s t o o u r m a i l d u e t o s o c i a l d i s t a n c i n g ) : I f y o u u s e t h i s f o r m t o k o m m e n t , i t m u s t c u r r e n t l y b e r e t u r n e d v i a e - b e a v a i l a b l e f r o m t h e r e s p o n s i b l e d e p a r t m e n t . d e p a r t m e n t n o l a t e r t h a n 1 0 d a y s a f t e r t h e d e c i s i o n . A n a p p e a l f o r m m a y A n o t i c e o f a p p e a …
From: To: Subject: Date: peggy pevateaux Ramirez, Elaine Case C15-2020-0069 1230 Rockcliff Rd Friday, December 11, 2020 3:32:11 PM *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Elaine, one of my neighbors said she thinks case C15-2020-0069 is to be reconsidered on Mon. Dec. 14. We still oppose the variance. I was told that the variance also requested cutting down a tree. I want you to know that the applicant has already cut down trees on that property. This was done as soon as they had a contract on the property. Our main concern is the variance would allow for a larger house to be built. We do not believe this will allow enough land for a septic field that is up to code. The house plans the previous owner had developed proposed a cess pit in place of a septic. This piece of property is surrounded on 3 sides with Lake Austin water. This could be a health issue. When this case had it’s first hearing, I read the reasons given for opposing it. Perhaps the most compelling reason was offered by a person who uses that waterway as access for boating. He said when the boats from the slew enter the main body of the lake, their entrance is already obscured as the shoreline curves there and it’s hard for boaters to see emerging boats. Allowing the variance would obscure line of sight even further. It’s a safety issue. We think the variance should not be allowed based on safety and health concerns. Thank you. John and Peggy Pevateaux 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. E-4/1-LATE BACKUP E-4/2-LATE BACKUP
