Brentwood Neighborhood Association Serving Our Neighborhood from 45th St. to Justin Lane and North Lamar to Burnet Road Metcalfe Wolff Stuart & Williams, LLP March 5, 2021 To: Michele Rogerson Lynch Re: 6800 Woodrow Ave. Thank you for attending our March 3rd Steering Committee meeting to apprise us of the redevelopment plans for 6800 Woodrow Ave. As presented at that meeting, the prospective buyer of this property has submitted a Demolition Permit for the church property. Further, they intend to re-develop the existing platted lots (zoned SF-3) as single family residential (as allowed under the Land Development Code). No variances or waivers will be sought, per the Applicant. In addition, good faith efforts will be made to retain and protect the existing trees. This church (along with several others on Woodrow Ave.) has been in place for many decades, but we understand that its current use is no longer viable. And given that the church architecture is not historically significant, we further acknowledge that this transition to a new use is inevitable. Therefore, the Brentwood Steering Committee has voted to not oppose this redevelopment. It is our hope that the new houses will provide greater opportunity for other residents of Austin to make Brentwood their home. Sincerely, Kristine Poland, BNA President
From: To: Subject: Date: Jennifer Awbrey PAZ Preservation Case Number GF 21-015104 - 6800 Woodrow Ave. Hearing Date Feb. 22, 2021 at 6 pm. Monday, February 22, 2021 4:44:13 PM *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Dear Mr Rice, I am writing to express our objection to the demolition of the Historic Landmark located at 6800 Woodrow Ave. My husband, Joseph Munden, and I are property owners within 500 feet of the subject property. We live at 1402 Ruth Ave. As I am sure you know, First Cumberland Presbyterian Church is one of the oldest congregations in Austin. When they moved the congregation from downtown to Woodrow in the 1950’s, they built a beautiful and architecturally interesting church as their new home, about the same time our home was built. It is sad that the church closed, however the building continues to add beauty and historical value to our area. Today, in particular, the steeple and spire stand out as a picturesque landmark in our neighborhood, with a stunning green patina on the spire. I am lucky to be able to gaze out my back windows and enjoy a view of the steeple and spire, which is often topped by one of our area's birds of prey perched on the cross surveilling its surroundings. It would be a shame to lose such a beautiful sight and popular bird perch to the pressures of development. Surely, at least the steeple and spire portion of the building can be preserved. What’s the point of a Historic Landmark designation if all it takes is money to destroy it? I won't go into more pressure on our infrastructure, more traffic on our narrow neighborhood streets, etc. I am certain you are well aware of those issues. I hope you find in favor of preserving this beautiful neighborhood landmark. Best regards, Jennifer Awbrey 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 E E E E HISTORIC LANDMARK INSPECTION RESULTS 2020-2021 Zoning Case Number Landmark Name Street Address Parcel # Result Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Driskill, Day & Ford Building Depot Hotel Horton - Duval House Sneed (Sebron) Home Nalle (Joseph) Building Risher - Roach Building (Part 2 Of 2) Mansbendel - Williams House Larmour (Jacob) Block (F) Grandberry Building Berner-Clark-Mercado House Mitchell-Robertson Building Majors-Butler-Thomas House Howson House Tips (Walter) House Caswell (Daniel) House Millican House Paggi, Michael, House Oliphant House Red - Purcell House St. Charles House Ney (Elizabet) Museum Porter, William Sidney, House (O Henry Museum) St. David'S Episcopal Church Castleman-Bull House Hirshfeld House And Cottage Smoot Family Home Taylor Lime Kiln Goodman Building French Legation St. Edwards Main Building & Holly Cross Hall Trask House St. Mary'S Cathedral Smith (B. J.) House 6th Street 5th Street Bluff Springs Road Nelms Drive 6th Street 6th Street Avenue F Congress Avenue Congress Avenue Cesar Chavez Street Congress Avenue 11th Street San Antonio Street Congress Avenue West Avenue West Avenue Lamar Boulevard Avenue C Academy Drive 6th Street 44th Street 5th Street 7th Street Red River Street 9th Street 6th Street Pecos 13th Street San Marcos Street Congress Avenue Red River Street 10th Street Guadalupe Street C14H-1974-0043 C14H-1977-0008 C14H-1977-0009 C14H-1977-0011 C14H-1978-0010 C14H-1978-0045-B C14H-1978-0048 C14H-1982-0001-F C14H-1986-0015 C14H-2000-0009 C14H-2004-0008 C14H-2014-0010 C14H-1974-0001 C14H-1974-0002 C14H-1974-0003 C14H-1974-0004 C14H-1974-0006 C14H-1974-0008 C14H-1974-0009 C14H-1974-0014 C14H-1974-0015 C14H-1974-0016 C14H-1974-0017 C14H-1974-0017-A C14H-1974-0019 C14H-1974-0020 C14H-1974-0021 C14H-1974-0022 C14H-1974-0023 C14H-1974-0025 C14H-1974-0026 C14H-1974-0027 C14H-1974-0029 0206040103 0206040514 0206040108 0206040502 0206040105 0206040507 0219060509 0206030507 0206031003 0206030712 0206031004 0205070505 0206010505 0210000322 0211010803 0219050815 0206031709 0220061601 0206031808 0204041306 0208011103 0108031175 0210022508 0204041307 0206031501 0206010904 0206011001 0206011006 0206011007 0113000502 0206011002 0206011005 0206010501 403 504 6706 1801 409 511 3824 916 907 1807 909 1119 700 2336 1404 1610 211 3900 210 316 304 409 300 201 303 1316 2614 202 802 3001 211 201 610 E E E E W W S W E E S S 1 W W 705 402 404 E E E San Antonio Street 7th Street 7th Street HISTORIC LANDMARK INSPECTION RESULTS 2020-2021 Zoning Case Number Landmark Name Street Address Parcel # Result Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass …
907-09-11 Congress Avenue Grandberry Building and Mitchell-Robertson Building, Congress Avenue Historic District March 22, 2021 907-911 Congress Avenue 1881 Image 1924 Image Proposal Buildings to be deconstructed and reconstructed with redevelopment of site. • • • Property owner to submit detailed deconstruction and reconstruction plan for these sites for historic approval of partial demolition permit. Property owner to submit and receive site development permit for new structure, to include reconstructed facades per plan. Property owner to reconstruct facades along with redevelopment of site. Timeline of Events Initial HLC Approval for 907, 909 Congress 10/10/2006 307 E. 2nd Street: Leonard East House Timeline of Events Initial HLC Approval for 907, 909 Congress Summer-Fall 2014 10/10/2006 Deconstruction Plans for Three Sites Heard by COA Review Committee Initial HLC Approval for 907, 909 Congress Timeline of Events Deconstruction Application Presented to HLC Summer-Fall 2014 10/10/2006 1/26/2015 Deconstruction Plans for Three Sites Heard by COA Review Committee Initial HLC Approval for 907, 909 Congress Timeline of Events Deconstruction Application Presented to HLC Deconstruction Application for 907-911 Congress to Full HLC Summer-Fall 2014 Spring 2018 10/10/2006 1/26/2015 6/25/2018 Deconstruction Plan for Three Sites Heard by COA Review Committee Presented Further Deconstruction Plans to COA Review Committee Initial HLC Approval for 907, 909 Congress Timeline of Events Deconstruction Application Presented to HLC Deconstruction Application for 907-911 Congress to Full HLC Summer-Fall 2014 Spring 2018 10/10/2006 1/26/2015 6/25/2018 Deconstruction Plan for Three Sites Heard by COA Review Committee Presented Further Deconstruction Plans to COA Review Committee Never Finalized Deconstruction Plans to Commission’s Satisfaction Timeline of Recent Events BSC Complaints Fall 2020 Timeline of Recent Events BSC Complaints Filed First Presentation to ARC Second Presentation to BSC Installed Repairs 1/28/2021 2/22/2021 3/8/2021 Fall 2020 2/12/2021 2/24/2021 3/11/2021 First Presentation to BSC Cancelled HLC Meeting Second Presentation to ARC Façade Protection Timeline of Future Events Present Partial Demolition Permit for approval Site Plan Submitted and Reviewed by HLC Site Plan Approved and Site Redeveloped with Reconstructed Facade April 2021 3/22/2021 Presentation and Directions from full HLC Demo Permit Within 90 Days Summary • Buildings are in significant risk of further decay, and BSC would like to see action ASAP. • Property owner working to satisfy both HLC and BSC, ensuring that the façades are protected for future use. • Property owner committed to develop site and reinstall façades in a reasonable timeframe. Request We respectfully request : • Specific …
907 – 909 – 911 CONGRESS AVENUE AUSTIN, TEXAS FAÇADE DECONSTRUCTION / RECONSTRUCTION SCOPE OF WORK / OUTLINE TO COMPLETE A. BRIEF SYNOPSIS OF CURRENT CONDITIONS B. ASSUMPTIONS / PREMISES C. OVERALL PROJECT ORGANIZATION (OVERVIEW – SEE BELOW FOR DETAIL) a. Research and Documentation Search b. Visual and Non Destructive Testing c. Confirmation of structural integrity and ability to withstand deconstruction d. Deliverable 1 – Abstract and Bibliography of information used to inform reconstruction, summary of mortar, brick composition and condition testing e. Review of deconstruction Scope of Work based on Information gathered in a, b & C above f. Finalized Scope of Work and Sequence of Implementation g. Preparation of Specifications, drawings and other elements required for contract/bid documents for h. Deliverable 2 – Final drawings and documentation of existing conditions i. Deconstruction Phase: Confirm document accuracy based on profiles, details and other site deconstruction work collected information. j. Document, number and record palletting of materials as part of deconstruction. k. On‐site observation of work in progress l. Deliverable 3– Final Documentation of deconstruction, material inventory and proper storage m. Deliverable 4 – Reconstruction documents and coordination with redevelopment design team n. On‐site observation of work in progress o. Final documentation of historic materials in place D. DOCUMENTATION preparation. Work. a. Review of existing photographic documentation to inform deconstruction and reconstruction plan b. Review all building inspection reports. c. Review all environmental documents and incorporate any outstanding items into final Scope of d. Photograph current conditions prior to any additional demolition. e. Document stone construction to same extent as brick construction f. Recommendation: Laser scanning of the existing construction. Provide point cloud to be used in documentation and to assist in the deconstruction and reconstruction activities. g. Work with Austin History Center and City Preservation Officer on document preparation and retention requirements for archival purposes CARTER ● DESIGN ASSOCIATES ‐‐ 21‐Mar‐21 1 | P a g e E. THE NON – DESTRUCTIVE EVALUATION PROGRAM a. Determine logistics, fieldwork and site requirements. Work with contractor to determine scaffolding plan, safety procedures and building exposure strategies b. Confirm areas that are stable and can support further investigation c. Prior to deconstruction, expose representative areas of the structures for documentation. Ensure all representative masonry patterns and types will be exposed in this controlled fashion. Look for ghosting patterns that may indicate construction sequence or technique, additional materials that may not be present, …
X * see below comm Robert Kinney 2406 Harris Blvd, Austin, TX 78703 3/21/2021 1. Site plan for new build does not accurately show position of garage in back, which is 2.7 feet from the property line per the survey attached to demo plan. 2. Currently, the garage is 2.3 feet into the PUE, and 7.3 feet into the setback.3. The 1997 permit (application) to convert carport to a garage is likely the origin of the garage. That permit was never issued and is listed as VOID in the records. 4. Generally, we are strongly in favor of the house plan. Drainage across our property toward Harris can be managed. But the site plan should show the actual position of the garage, and doesn't.
Brummett, Elizabeth From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Mary Reed Friday, March 19, 2021 12:22 PM Terri Myers; Myers, Terri - BC; Wright, Caroline - BC; Little, Kelly - BC; Koch, Kevin - BC; Jacob, Mathew - BC; McWhorter, Trey - BC; Featherston, Witt; Papavasiliou, Alexander - BC; Tollett, Blake - BC; Valenzuela, Sarah - BC; Heimsath, Ben - BC Brummett, Elizabeth; PAZ Preservation Objecting to demolition of 1104 Toyath and requesting a postponement of decision Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Follow up Flagged *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** I am writing to you on behalf of the Clarksville Community Development Corporation (CCDC), the neighborhood organization for historic Clarksville, www.clarksvillecdc.org. I am president of its board of directors. We oppose the request of Paradisa Homes to demolish 1104 Toyath Street (Case # HR 21‐029755) because the house contributes to the Clarksville NRHD. Also, the house that Paradisa intends to build in its place is architecturally inappropriate for Clarksville. This case is Three members of the CCDC board of directors met with Luis Zaragoza with Paradisa Homes this past Tuesday to discuss a possible way to retain the house as a contributing structure. Our conversation was positive and as a next step, one of those board members ‐‐ an architect ‐‐ will meet with several Pardisa staffers next Wednesday at the company's office. I also put Luis in touch with Elizabeth Brummett so he could find out how much of 1104 Toyath can be removed without affecting its historically contributing status. Therefore, the CCDC would like you to delay any decision on Paradisa Homes' request to demolish 1104 Toyath until after the meeting next takes place next Wednesday and we have a clearer sense of what Paradisa wants to do. Thanks for your consideration of this request. Mary Reed MR•PR Austin, TX 78703 512 657 5289 Be Kind "I have decided to stick with love. Hate is too great a burden to bear." MLK CAUTION: This email was received at the City of Austin, from an EXTERNAL source. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious and/or phishing email, please forward this email to cybersecurity@austintexas.gov. 1
ITEM D.1.0 – 5613 Patton Ranch Road Historic Landmark Commission March 22, 2021 I. Revised Proposal from St. Andrew’s School. After numerous discussions with City historic preservation staff, community historic preservationists, and neighborhood groups, St. Andrew’s has revised its original proposal regarding the log structures at this site. Originally, St. Andrew’s had proposed (with staff support and assistance) to deconstruct the log structures and deliver them to Pioneer Farms for reconstruction and public interpretation. After discussions with Oak Hill community members and preservationists, and after thoughtful consideration by St. Andrew’s, the school has revised its proposal as follow: A. Requested HLC Action. Grant a permit that will allow: (i) partial demolition of the more recent additions to both the main structure and structures that are comprised of log construction, and (ii) the relocation of the log structure portion of the main building, the log pole barn (or smokehouse) behind the main building and the log corn crib to one of the following potential site locations, at St. Andrew’s election, both of which are near the current site and are on the original Patton Ranch: 1. School Site Option. A site on the currently undeveloped portions of the St. Andrew’s school site within a secured perimeter which will be located somewhere chosen by St. Andrew’s on Lot 2, Block A Harper’s Park Section 1; Lot 3, Block A St. Andrew’s Subdivision; or Lot 4, Block A St. Andrew’s Subdivision. 2. School Rd./ Patton Ranch Rd. Site. If St. Andrew’s determines that Option 1 above is not feasible because of the application of City of Austin regulations (e.g. CEF or creek buffers), a second option would be a site on the currently undeveloped portions of the southern portion of tract on which the structures are currently located, within a secured perimeter, and which will be located somewhere chosen by St. Andrew’s near the intersection of School Road and Patton Ranch Road. NOTE: St. Andrew’s would not be required to relocate the log structures and could choose to demolish the non-log structural portions of the main building and other non-log structures on the site and keep the remaining log structures in place. B. Additional Commitments of St. Andrew’s. If the St. Andrew’s exercises the right to relocate the log structures under the permit, it is fully committed to the following additional measures: 1. Secure and maintain the structures in an enclosed are to …
BENCHMARK ELEV = 547.74' STOP SIGN B R U C T E L N I ) ' 0 6 ( T E E R T S E G D R N E K C A R B I EAST MONROE STREET (RIGHT-OF-WAY VARIES) CONCRETE WALK 548' CURB WATER METER STOP SIGN 549' 25" LYGUSTRUM 550' 1/2 CRZ E T E R C N O C K L A W S77°59'26"E (137.06') CONCRETE WALK (77sf) EXISTING PRIMARY DWELLING 1576sf FRONT PORCH 322sf ' 8 . 3 5 5 = . . E F F . GAS METER AC 9sf K C A B T E S ' 5 2 O.E. ) ' 0 0 . 6 4 ( E " 9 1 4 0 ° 2 1 N ' N77°59'26"W (137.05') 551' LOT 6304sf 15' SETBACK 552' PROPOSED ADU 945sf LANDING 9sf 1/2 CRZ 24" PECAN 553' K C A B T E S ' 5 Y A W E V R D I ) f s 0 3 ( ADDITION TO BE REMOVED AC 9sf 5' SETBACK 12'-6" ) ' 0 6 ( E U N E V A E K A R D " 0 - ' 5 1 " 0 - ' 6 2 " 0 - ' 5 U.P. NEW TYPE 1 " 0 DRIVEWAY - ' 0 (433S-1A) 1 B R U C O . E . 25'-8 1/2" 10'-2" 38'-5" 17'-9" 16'-0" 24'-0" 5'-0" 15'-0" . E . O U.P. O . E . ) ' 0 0 . 6 4 ( ' W " 0 0 5 0 ° 2 1 S 1 SITE PLAN SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" N A L P E T S I - I E G D R N E K C A R B 1 0 6 1 4 0 7 8 7 X T , I N T S U A N DATE: 3/16/21 1601 Brackenridge - North Elevation (View from E. Monroe Street) New dormer at rear of roof New 2nd floor window within existing trim Restore front porch Siding to match original: stucco up top, 3" reveal tear drop in middle and 8" reveal flat wood siding at bottom 1601 Brackenridge - Proposed Floorplan Front Porch Dining Room Stairs to 2nd floor Living Room Owners Closet Owners Bed Owners Bath Kitchen Tub 1st Floor Storage Closet Guest Bed Lounge Stairs Tub Bath Storage HVAC Guest …
1601 Brackenridge: Historic Review Application Proposed Scope of Work Structure 1. Foundation: Due to the age and condition of the existing foundations, replacement of the existing pier and beam foundation is required to meet existing structural requirements and codes. The new foundations will match the current footprint of the original house on all sides of the structure. The finished floor height of the 1st floor will be roughly 18” lower than the current height to allow for the proper height within the interior space and allow for us to keep the roofline at the exact same height while allowing for a habitable 2nd floor. 2. Walls: Much of the wall framing will be replaced to allow for the property replacement of the foundations and to allow for the creation of the 2nd floor habitable space within the existing roofline. The original wood will be reused wherever possible. 3. Roof: The roofline will remain at the exact same height and massing. The roof will be reframed with new joists to replace the degraded joists that are currently in use. Description of Work on the Exterior Facade 1. Front Porch: The front porch will be restored to its original condition, with openings on three sides. The windows and front door that are currently at the front of the porch will be moved back to their original location. We will build new concrete steps up to the front porch. 2. Rear Addition: We will remove the 12.5’ long addition which was added at the rear of the home and is not original. 3. Framing, Siding & Trim: The existing framing, siding, trim will be removed and examined for possible reuse. Any elements that are damaged will either be repaired or replaced with similar profile components. The walls will be reframed after the new foundation is installed to meet current structural and energy guidelines. The window trim will be repainted in a similar white color but the siding will likely be repainted using a different color than the current light blue. 4. Windows, Door and Trim: Existing windows and front door will be repaired and reused. All windows appear in good working order. If any windows are found to be non-repairable upon closer inspection, they will be replaced with matching windows. Original window trim will be reused unless damaged beyond repair. Any replacement materials will match the profile and size of the existing trim. …
PROPOSAL Restore the existing home at 1601 Brackenridge Street and add a new construction ADU at the rear of the property (17’ to the rear of the original home). PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS 1) Restore front porch. The original porch was closed in and the original front windows were moved to the front of the current porch. Will return the front porch to its original design with openings on three sides. The original brick posts on either end of the front porch are in good condition and do not appear to require restoration. 2) Demolish non-original rear addition, including the rear chimney which seems to have been added when this rear addition was added. This rear addition is 12.5’ long along the entire width of the rear of the building. 3) Build new pier and beam foundation for the entire home. The existing foundation has severe movement and is not able to properly support a home. The outside dimensions of the foundation will remain exactly as they currently are built (with the exception of the removal of the rear addition discussed in Item 1). 4) Restore windows and front door and repair original siding or replace in-kind where deteriorated beyond repair. The windows along the sides facing the street (Brackenridge Street and E. Monroe Street) will remain in the exact same location as they are currently located. Due to the severe movement of the foundation all of the windows will need to be removed and restored. Some new windows will be installed along the two other sides of the house so that they can be property sized to allow for egress as required by code from bedrooms. 5) Replace shingle roof with standing-seam metal roof. The roof height and pitch will remain the same. 6) Add a dormer at the rear roof section to roughly match the existing (believed to be original) dormer at the front roof section. This dormer will have a window in it as well. 7) Add a 2nd story space within the existing pitch of the roof. GUIDING GOALS FOR THE PROJECT The following goals apply to the proposed project: 1) Do not alter or remove historic features unless they are deteriorated beyond repair. 2) If replacing deteriorated historic features, match the original as close as possible. Historic windows and siding will be repaired, with in-kind replacement reserved for only those elements that are deteriorated beyond repair. 3) …
1904 Mountain View Rd. Austin, TX 78703 Prepared for: Zach Savage Inspector: Jeffrey K. Prokaski TREC# 9866 Phone 512-731-0513 Prokaski Home Inspections Prokaski Home Inspections, PLLC 1406 Piney Creek Lane Cedar Park, TX 78613 By: Jeffrey K. Prokaski PHI: Managing Member TREC License #9866 Phone: 512-731-0513 Inspection Date 03/10/2021 Inspection Customer Invoice CUSTOMER NAME: Zach Savage PROPERTY INSPECTED: 1904 Mountain View Rd. Austin, TX 78703 Description Amount Paid with credit card 365.00 365.00 TOTAL T h a n k y o u f o r y o u r t r u s t By: PROPERTY INSPECTION REPORT Prepared For: Zach Savage (Name of Client) Concerning: 1904 Mountain View Rd. Austin, TX 78703 (Address or Other Identification of Inspected Property) Jeffrey Kent Prokaski TREC #9866 (Name and License Number of Inspector) 03/10/2021 (Date) PURPOSE, LIMITATIONS AND INSPECTOR / CLIENT RESPONSIBILITIES This property inspection report may include an inspection agreement (contract), addenda, and other information related to property conditions. If any item or comment is unclear, you should ask the inspector to clarify the findings. It is important that you carefully read ALL of this information. This inspection is subject to the rules (“Rules”) of the Texas Real Estate Commission (“TREC”), which can be found at www.trec.texas.gov. The TREC Standards of Practice (Sections 535.227-535.233 of the Rules) are the minimum standards for inspections by TREC- licensed inspectors. An inspection addresses only those components and conditions that are present, visible, and accessible at the time of the inspection. While there may be other parts, components or systems present, only those items specifically noted as being inspected were inspected. The inspector is NOT required to turn on decommissioned equipment, systems, utility services or apply an open flame or light a pilot to operate any appliance. The inspector is NOT required to climb over obstacles, move furnishings or stored items. The inspection report may address issues that are code-based or may refer to a particular code; however, this is NOT a code compliance inspection and does NOT verify compliance with manufacturer’s installation instructions. The inspection does NOT imply insurability or warrantability of the structure or its components. Although some safety issues may be addressed in this report, this inspection is NOT a safety/code inspection, and the inspector is NOT required to identify all potential hazards. In this report, the inspector shall indicate, by checking the appropriate boxes on the form, whether each item was …
ammond, Consulting & Engineering, LLC Residential & Commercial Structural Solutions Texas Firm# 17051 email: rhammond@RDHCE.com phone: 956.367.5561 03/16/2021 On 02 March 2021, R. Derek Hammond of RDH C&E performed a site observation to view the existing single story residence located at 1904 Mountain View Drive in Austin, Texas. This report details what was encountered during the site visit, conclusions, and recommendations. Thank you for the opportunity to provide these services to you. If we have erred in our understanding of the work or if you have a questions, feel free to contact me and we will be happy to adjust and resend, C/O Zach Savage Savage Homes 512.801.2488 Austin, Texas Dear Mr. Savage, Respectfully, R. Derek Hammond, PE Owner RDH C&E LLC ammond, Consulting & Engineering, LLC Residential & Commercial Structural Solutions Texas Firm# 17051 email: rhammond@RDHCE.com phone: 956.367.5561 Existing Site Conditions The existing residence was located in west Austin, east of the Colorado River. The home, according to The Travis County records indicate it was constructed in 1949. The existing structure was composed of a structural clay tile stem walls with shallow foundations below. The floor was an elevated floor composed of structural clay tile, grout and steel mesh reinforcing. The exterior walls were composed of structural clay tile on the inner wythe and brick veneer on the outer face within, and a multi wythe brick veneer façade at the courses above grade. The roof was composed of cast in place concrete and structural clay tile. Multiple penetrations had been made through the stem walls and damage was noted on more than 25% of the walls. Some molding was noted on the stem walls adjacent to the garden beds on the east end of the home. Rusting in the ladder joints was observed throughout the stem walls, and were blooming in more than 25% of the stem walls observed. Two sump pumps were located on the east and west sides, each appeared to be inoperable as water was present in each of the pits. The interior wall adjacent to the living room was heaving, and the floor adjacent to the wall was also buckling/ faulting. The crack was approximately over 1” and over 36” in length Figure 1: Stem walls (taken in crawl space) supporting clay tile floor Figure 3: Hand railing on roof, approximately 24" tall, 42" required Figure 2: Cracked stair Figure 5: Rusted/blooming ladder joints within …
Brummett, Elizabeth From: Sent: To: Subject: Gretchen Otto Monday, March 22, 2021 10:37 AM PAZ Preservation; Brummett, Elizabeth; Sadowsky, Steve; Contreras, Kalan 503 E. Annie St. Demo Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Follow up Completed *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Hello, I live near this property and received a notice about the demolition. As of now, I'm in opposition to this demo and I'm writing to request an extension on this case. As far as I know, none of the neighbors have been able to get in touch with the owners and none of us understand what is planned or why this demo is necessary. We request an opportunity to talk with the owners, especially given that this property is located in a National Register District and backs up to a Local Historic District. Thank you, Gretchen Otto Austin, TX 78704 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 Brummett, Elizabeth From: Sent: To: Subject: pascal regimbeau Monday, March 22, 2021 1:02 PM PAZ Preservation; Brummett, Elizabeth; Sadowsky, Steve; Contreras, Kalan 503 East Mary Street Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Follow up Flagged *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Hello all, We are the owners of oppose the demolition of 503 E. Annie St as we have no idea what the owners plan to build instead. Thank you for your help Sincerely Pascal Regimbeau & Sybil Reinhart 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. and wanted to write you to tell you that we do 1
March 18, 2021 Matt Sloan Owner, Wild Susan LLC RE: Case Number GF 21-015014 Comments for Consideration These comments are in relation to the demolition permit applied for on 6800 Woodrow Avenue 78757 (“First Cumberland” or “FCPC” hereafter) by Michael Tevis and/or a business interest of his (including but not limited to Intrinsic Ventures, Intrinsic Companies, and Woodrow Studios). I am the owner of a local candle business called Wild Susan and have a prior business relationship with the owner. This is a description of mine and my business’ experience with the aforementioned owner. On November 11, 2020, I responded to a posted ad for art studios for lease because my business was at the point of outgrowing my home studio and I needed a separate work space. I spoke with Mr. Tevis the same day, describing my business and what my use of a studio looks like. He responded favorably and I scheduled a walkthrough with Patrick Hill, the NAI Partners real estate broker, the following day. I described my business again to Mr. Hill, and we agreed that the space would be a good fit for my business needs. I signed the commercial lease on November 16, 2020 and began moving my production within the next few days. Within a couple weeks, I realized I needed more space for storage as 50lb boxes of wax take up a good bit of room, so I contacted Mr. Hill to lease another space in the building which was signed on December 14, 2020. On December 10, 2020, a substantial water leak occurred in a closet adjacent to my space, which damaged the protective floorboards I placed to avoid damaging the carped and forced me to dispose of them as well as some other business assets. I reported the leak and made no issue over the business property. The first (and only) time I met Mr. Tevis was on December 15, 2020 at a building-wide meeting. Prior to the meeting, Mr. Tevis commented to me that “I’m used to artists just piddling around in their studios, and you’re running a business.” Obviously, I was a bit taken aback for two reasons – one, I described in full detail in our initial discussions what I would be using the studio for, and yes, I run a business to support my family; two, if his view of artists is that they “piddle” around, …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION MONDAY, MARCH 22, 2021 – 6:00 PM VIA VIDEOCONFERENCING COMMISSION MEMBERS: x x x x x x Terri Myers, Chair Ben Heimsath, Vice Chair Witt Featherston Mathew Jacob Kevin Koch Kelly Little x ab x x x Trey McWhorter Alex Papavasiliou Blake Tollett Beth Valenzuela Caroline Wright CALL TO ORDER: 6:01 PM AGENDA CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first ten (10) speakers who register to speak no later than noon the day before the meeting will be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES January 25, 2021 – Offered for consent approval MOTION: Approve the minutes, per passage of the consent agenda, on a motion by Commissioner Koch. Commissioner Valenzuela seconded the motion. Vote: 10-0. 2. PRESENTATIONS, DISCUSSION, AND POSSIBLE ACTION Presentation on the Translating Community History project. http://www.austintexas.gov/page/current-projects Presentation by Cara Bertron, Housing & Planning Department. A. A. B. Presentation on recently completed historic resource surveys: Historic Resources Survey for Old Austin Neighborhood Association (2020) Historic Building Survey Report for North Central Austin: West Campus, North University, Heritage, Bryker Woods, and North Hyde Park (2021) http://www.austintexas.gov/page/historic-survey Presentation by Andrew Rice, Housing & Planning Department. 1 C. Presentation, discussion, and possible action to seek a recommendation to City Council for the Parks and Recreation Department’s preferred design scenario for the Dougherty Arts Center Replacement Project. Presentation by Kevin Johnson, Parks & Recreation Department, and Jonathan Pearson, Studio8 Architects. MOTION: Recommend endorsement of either Option 1A or Option 1B on the basis of preservation of the historic PARD Headquarters building on a motion by Vice Chair Heimsath. Commissioner Little seconded the motion. Vote: 10-0. 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Discussion and Possible Action on Applications for Historic Zoning, Discussion and Action on Applications for Historic District Zoning, and Requests to Consider Initiation of Historic Zoning Cases A.1. No cases. B. Discussion and Possible Action on Applications for Certificates of Appropriateness B.1. C14H-2009-0021 – 2406 Harris Blvd. – Discussion Jackson-Novy Kelly-Hoey House Council District 9 Proposal: Construct a swimming pool and terrace, landscape modifications; remove an attic vent opening on the front of the house Applicant: Tina Contros City Staff: Elizabeth Brummett, Historic Preservation Office, 512-974-1264 Committee Feedback: Provide evidence of historic nature of proposed changes and consider another location for the proposed pool; concerns regarding the appropriateness of a pool in the front yard. Staff Recommendation: Approve the …
Design Commission March 22, 2021 Design Commission to be held March 22, 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 (March 21st by Noon). All public comment will occur at the beginning of the meeting. To speak remotely at the Design Commission Meeting, members of the public must: • Call or email the board liaison at (512) 974-1243 and aaron.jenkins@austintexas.gov no later than noon, (the day before the meeting). The information required is the speaker name, item number(s) they wish to speak on, whether they are for/against/neutral, and a telephone number or email address. • Once a request to speak has been called in or emailed to the board liaison, residents will receive either an email or phone call providing the telephone number to call on the day of the scheduled meeting. • Speakers must call in at least 15 minutes prior to meeting start 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 aaron.jenkins@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 this meeting is broadcast live, residents may watch the meeting here: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch- atxn-live Reunión del Design Commission FECHA de la reunion (Marzo 22, 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 (Marzo 21st antes del mediodía). Todos los comentarios públicos se producirán al comienzo de la reunión. Para hablar de forma remota en la reunión, los residentes deben • junta en (512) 974-1243 and Llame o envíe un correo electrónico al enlace de aaron.jenkins@austintexas.gov a más tardar al mediodía (el día antes de la reunión). La información requerida es el nombre del orador, los números de artículo sobre los que desean hablar, si están a favor / en contra / neutrales, y un número de teléfono o dirección de correo electrónico. la • • Una vez que se haya llamado o enviado por correo electrónico una solicitud para hablar al enlace de la junta, los residentes recibirán un correo electrónico o una …
Location Map & Zoning North EMS-10/AFD-25 Proposed New Building view North Proposed Project Site Plan Proposed Landscaping Plan Proposed 1st Floor Plan North Proposed 2nd Floor Plan North Proposed New Elevations
City of Austin - Design Commission Project Review Application The Design Commission provides advisory recommendations to the City Council to assist in developing public policy and to promote excellence in the design and development of the urban environment. The Design Commission reviews three types of projects: 1. City projects (see page ii for process) The Commission reviews all municipal buildings and associated site plans to ensure they demonstrate compliance with city design and sustainability standards (Council Resolution No. 20071129-046), including those seeking Subchapter E Design Standards Alternative Equivalent Compliance (AEC) (Council Resolution No. 20100923-086). 2. Destiny Bonus projects (see page iv for process) The Commission reviews density bonus projects for substantial compliance with the Urban Design Guidelines for Austin in accordance with the Gatekeeper requirements of LDC 25-2-586 for the Downtown Density Bonus Program. 3. Advisory Recommendations for Private projects (see page ii for process) The Commission will consider Project Review Applications from private projects during its regularly scheduled monthly public meetings and may issue an advisory recommendation in the form of a Project Review Letter to the Applicant. This Project Review Application must be submitted before your project can be presented to the Design Commission for their review. Design Commission requests project be presented in their Conceptual/Schematic Design phase. This application primarily addresses inhabited buildings and structures and their effect on the public realm; please refer to Appendix A for infrastructure type projects. The Commission's review of projects is based on the planning/design principles in the Urban Design Guidelines for Austin. Ensure that all applicable principles are addressed in the application questions and in your presentation. https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Boards_and_Commissions/ Design_Commission_urban_design_guidelin es_for_austin.pdf The Design Commission supports the vision and principles of Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan, especially those that affect the urban environment and fabric. All projects should consider this vision and principles, many of which are similar to the Urban Design Guidelines. Refer to Appendix C for the most pertinent sections of Imagine Austin. The Design Commission expects the applicant’s design team to present their project with those most knowledgeable and encourages the inclusion of sub-consultants at the presentation, when deemed necessary. EXHIBITS TO PRESENT 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) Completed Project Review Application (p.1-6) Existing zoning classification, adjacent zoning & uses, future land use map classification, topography Vicinity plan, including public transportation and connectivity on-site and within quarter mile Site plan and landscape plan Ground level, basement …
DESIGN COMMISSION MONDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 2021 5:30 PM VIA REMOTE WebEx Meeting Minutes Call to order by: Chair D. Carroll at 5:41 p.m. Member List David Carroll – Chair (District 1) Melissa Hanao-Robledo – Vice-Chair (District 5) X X Martha Gonzalez – (District 2) Samuel Franco (District 3) Josue Meiners (District 4) Evan Taniguchi (Mayor) X “X” Denote Commission Members who were in attendance X Jorge E. Rousselin, Executive Liaison X Aaron D. Jenkins, Staff Liaison X Art Zamorano, Staff Liaison CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: None. 1. NEW BUSINESS (Discussion and Possible Action): CITY OF AUSTIN HOUSING AND PLANNING STAFF Beau Frail (District 6) Jessica Rollason (District 7) Aan Coleman (District 8) Bart Whatley (District 9) Ben Luckens (District 10) X X X X X a. Discussion and possible action to evaluate and make recommendations regarding whether the Fiesta Gardens Complex Rehabilitation, addressed at 2101 Jesse E. Segovia Street, complies with the Urban Design Guidelines, for the City of Austin. Marc Toppel Clayton Korte; Glen Frey Jose I Guerra, Inc.; • Marc Toppel, Clayton Korte and Ellen Colfax COA/PARD presented and answered questions from the Commissioners. No Action was taken, however a written list of recommendations was provided to the applicant. Page 1 of 3 b. Discussion and possible action to evaluate and make recommendations regarding whether the Dougherty Arts Center Project, addressed at Butler Shores Park, 200 S. Lamar, complies with the Urban Design Guidelines, for the City of Austin. Laura Gass Square One Consultants; Robert Byrnes Studio 8 Architects; Barbara Austin RVi Landscape Architects; Kevin Johnson City of Austin Parks and Recreation Department. • Commissioner E. Taniguchi recused himself from Item 1b. • Robert Byrnes, Studio 8 Architects and Kevin Johnson COA/PARD presented and answered questions from the Commissioners. • Commissioner A. Coleman made a motion for more consideration and emphasis is made toward option 1a, to create a denser building footprint, better relationship to the street scape, and keeping the beach front more accessible to all Austinites. Commissioner J. Rollason seconded. • Commissioner B. Frail provided a friendly amendment that option 1a or 1b be recommended by the Design Commission with preference to Option 1a. Commissioner J. Rollason does not accept the friendly amendment. • The motion failed [4 ayes, 2 nays, 2 abstain] • Commissioner J. Rollason made a motion to support the project, with the recommendation that it applies tactics to mitigate that it is a space …
Location Map & Zoning North EMS-10/AFD-25 Proposed New Building view North Proposed Project Site Plan Proposed Landscaping Plan Proposed 1st Floor Plan North Proposed 2nd Floor Plan North Proposed New Elevations
Location Map & Zoning North EMS-7/AFD-8 Proposed New Building view North Proposed New Building view North Proposed Project Site Plan Proposed Floor Plan North Proposed New Elevations
City of Austin - Design Commission Project Review Application The Design Commission provides advisory recommendations to the City Council to assist in developing public policy and to promote excellence in the design and development of the urban environment. The Design Commission reviews three types of projects: 1. City projects (see page ii for process) The Commission reviews all municipal buildings and associated site plans to ensure they demonstrate compliance with city design and sustainability standards (Council Resolution No. 20071129-046), including those seeking Subchapter E Design Standards Alternative Equivalent Compliance (AEC) (Council Resolution No. 20100923-086). 2. Destiny Bonus projects (see page iv for process) The Commission reviews density bonus projects for substantial compliance with the Urban Design Guidelines for Austin in accordance with the Gatekeeper requirements of LDC 25-2-586 for the Downtown Density Bonus Program. 3. Advisory Recommendations for Private projects (see page ii for process) The Commission will consider Project Review Applications from private projects during its regularly scheduled monthly public meetings and may issue an advisory recommendation in the form of a Project Review Letter to the Applicant. This Project Review Application must be submitted before your project can be presented to the Design Commission for their review. Design Commission requests project be presented in their Conceptual/Schematic Design phase. This application primarily addresses inhabited buildings and structures and their effect on the public realm; please refer to Appendix A for infrastructure type projects. The Commission's review of projects is based on the planning/design principles in the Urban Design Guidelines for Austin. Ensure that all applicable principles are addressed in the application questions and in your presentation. https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Boards_and_Commissions/ Design_Commission_urban_design_guidelin es_for_austin.pdf The Design Commission supports the vision and principles of Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan, especially those that affect the urban environment and fabric. All projects should consider this vision and principles, many of which are similar to the Urban Design Guidelines. Refer to Appendix C for the most pertinent sections of Imagine Austin. The Design Commission expects the applicant’s design team to present their project with those most knowledgeable and encourages the inclusion of sub-consultants at the presentation, when deemed necessary. EXHIBITS TO PRESENT 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) Completed Project Review Application (p.1-6) Existing zoning classification, adjacent zoning & uses, future land use map classification, topography Vicinity plan, including public transportation and connectivity on-site and within quarter mile Site plan and landscape plan Ground level, basement …
DESIGN COMMISSION MONDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 2021 5:30 PM VIA REMOTE WebEx Meeting Minutes Call to order by: Chair D. Carroll at 5:41 p.m. Member List David Carroll – Chair (District 1) Melissa Hanao-Robledo – Vice-Chair (District 5) X X Martha Gonzalez – (District 2) Samuel Franco (District 3) Josue Meiners (District 4) Evan Taniguchi (Mayor) X “X” Denote Commission Members who were in attendance X Jorge E. Rousselin, Executive Liaison X Aaron D. Jenkins, Staff Liaison X Art Zamorano, Staff Liaison CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: None. 1. NEW BUSINESS (Discussion and Possible Action): CITY OF AUSTIN HOUSING AND PLANNING STAFF Beau Frail (District 6) Jessica Rollason (District 7) Aan Coleman (District 8) Bart Whatley (District 9) Ben Luckens (District 10) X X X X X a. Discussion and possible action to evaluate and make recommendations regarding whether the Fiesta Gardens Complex Rehabilitation, addressed at 2101 Jesse E. Segovia Street, complies with the Urban Design Guidelines, for the City of Austin. Marc Toppel Clayton Korte; Glen Frey Jose I Guerra, Inc.; • Marc Toppel, Clayton Korte and Ellen Colfax COA/PARD presented and answered questions from the Commissioners. No Action was taken, however a written list of recommendations was provided to the applicant. Page 1 of 3 b. Discussion and possible action to evaluate and make recommendations regarding whether the Dougherty Arts Center Project, addressed at Butler Shores Park, 200 S. Lamar, complies with the Urban Design Guidelines, for the City of Austin. Laura Gass Square One Consultants; Robert Byrnes Studio 8 Architects; Barbara Austin RVi Landscape Architects; Kevin Johnson City of Austin Parks and Recreation Department. • Commissioner E. Taniguchi recused himself from Item 1b and then returned to participate in discussion after the project was presented. • Robert Byrnes, Studio 8 Architects and Kevin Johnson COA/PARD presented and answered questions from the Commissioners. • Commissioner A. Coleman made a motion for more consideration and emphasis is made toward option 1a, to create a denser building footprint, better relationship to the street scape, and keeping the beach front more accessible to all Austinites. Commissioner J. Rollason seconded. • Commissioner B. Frail provided a friendly amendment that option 1a or 1b be recommended by the Design Commission with preference to Option 1a. Commissioner J. Rollason does not accept the friendly amendment. • The motion failed [4 ayes, 2 nays, 2 abstain] • Commissioner J. Rollason made a motion to support the project, with the …
DESIGN COMMISSION MONDAY, March 22, 2021 5:30 PM VIA REMOTE WebEx MEETING MINUTES X X X Beau Frail (District 6) Jessica Rollason (District 7) Aan Coleman (District 8) Bart Whatley (District 9) Ben Luckens (District 10) Call to order by: Chair D. Carroll at 5:34 p.m. Member List David Carroll – Chair (District 1) X X Melissa Hanao-Robledo – Vice-Chair (District 5) X X X Martha Gonzalez – (District 2) Samuel Franco (District 3) Josue Meiners (District 4) Evan Taniguchi (Mayor) “X” Denote Commission Members who were in attendance X Jorge E. Rousselin, Executive Liaison X Aaron D. Jenkins, Staff Liaison X Art Zamorano, Staff Liaison CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: None. 1. NEW BUSINESS (Discussion and Possible Action): CITY OF AUSTIN HOUSING AND PLANNING STAFF a. Discussion and possible action to evaluate and make recommendations regarding whether City of Austin EMS Station 7, addressed at 8989 Research Blvd, complies with the City Design and Sustainability Standards, for the City of Austin: Owen Harrod MWM Design Group. • Owen Harrod MWM Design Group presented and answered questions from Commissioners. • Commissioner A. Coleman made a motion that the City of Austin consider the Design Commission’s recommendation for alternative fencing (Ameristar, Design Master, or equivalent product) to eliminate the razor wire and where possible, add a shrub line or some sort of green landscaping onsite. Commissioner J. Meiners seconded. Page 1 of 3 • The motion was approved [8 ayes, 0 nays] b. Discussion and possible action to evaluate and make recommendations regarding whether City of Austin EMS Station 10, addressed at 5228 Duval Road, complies with the City Design and Sustainability Standards, for the City of Austin; Owen Harrod MWM Design Group. • Owen Harrod MWM Design Group presented and answered questions from Commissioners. • Commissioner E. Taniguchi made a motion that the City of Austin consider the Design Commission’s recommendations to install a Monument Sign closer to the street for increased visibility and for additional landscape elements near the parking spaces both at the North and South ends of the property. Commissioner J. Meiners seconded. • The motion was approved [8 ayes, 0 nays] 2. COMMISSION-SPECIFIC BUSINESS (Discussion and possible action): a. Approval of February 22nd Meeting Minutes. • Commissioner A. Coleman requested that the February 22nd minutes reflect that although Commissioner E. Taniguchi recused himself from Item 1.b, Commissioner E. Taniguchi engaged in a brief dialogue during that item. • Commissioner …
Versión en español a continuación. College Student Commission Meeting March 19th, 2021 College Student Commission meeting to be held 03/19/2021 with Social Distancing Modifications Public comment will be allowed via telephone; no in-person input will be allowed. All speakers must register in advance (03/18/2021 by noon). All public comment will occur at the beginning of the meeting. To speak remotely at the 3/19 College Student Commission Meeting, members of the public must: •Call or email the board liaison at 512-972-5042 or David.Alcorta@austintexas.gov no later than noon, (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 David.Alcota@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 Font Size: 12; Font: Times New Roman; Font Style: Regular Reunión del Comisión de Estudiantes Universitarios al correo envíe un electrónico enlace de FECHA de la reunion (03/19/2021) 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 (03/18/2021 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 en 512-972-5042, la David.Alcorta@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 (debe ser el número que se utilizará para llamar ). • Una vez que se …
College Student Commission Meeting Minutes 3/19 Meeting called to order 3:09pm, Friday March 19, 2021 Members present: Brandow Barrows, Cristobal Garcia-Quiroz, Jared D. Breckenridge, Jeffrey Clemmons, Kindle Kreis, Kristen Marx, Jessica Riley, and Lira Ramirez Citizens communication: none Old Business: Item 2: A.Working groups food insecurity grant program 1. Call into the city council meetings 2. 221 people have signed petition a. UT cannot lobby therefore cannot send out petition through official routes 3. St. Edward’s has been working on a letter addressed to university leadership asking for support on the grant and updates on our work so far a. Ask other schools to do a personal outreach letter B. Updates on meetings with campus advisors 1. Brandow Barrons discussed how Concordia is looking for commissioners a. New advisor for Concordia 2. St. Edward’s advisors are beginning open application process for commissioners a. Request for possible new members to observe meetings before school year ends New Business: Item 3: A. Update from transition working group a. Started creating a “how to” manual for the commission. “New student commissioner handbook”- easy to read, need to know information b. Jeffery Clemmons has created a jam board for planning what needs to be in the handbook c. Nest steps: meeting next week, to be scheduled B. Discussion and possible action for graduating commissioners a. All are graduating seniors except for Lira and Jeffrey b. Order stoles i. c. Certificates Have been approved C. Issues/Concerns with current legislation regarding school a. Mental health task force for college students b. Exempt tuition for homeless students c. Limiting tuition cost d. Carrying firearms on campus (regardless public/private) e. Contacting local lawmakers Item 4: A. Election of chair, co-chair, and secretary 2021-2022 1. Secretary: no nominations 2. Co-chair: Commissioner Jess nominates Commissioner Lira, Commissioner Kristen 3. Chair: Commissioner Jeeffrey nominates himself, Commissioner Jess seconds it. Vote seconds it. Vote passes unanimously. a. Lira Amari Ramirez is elected as Co-chair passes unanimously. a. Jeffrey Clemmons is elected as chair. Future Items: none Meeting Adjournment 3:53pm.
Versión en español a continuación. Finance/Allocations Committee Meeting of the HIV Planning Council WEDNESDAY, March 17, 2021 Finance/Allocations Committee Meeting to be held March 17, 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 (03/16/2021 by noon). All public comment will occur at the beginning of the meeting. To speak remotely at the March 17, 2021 HIV Planning Council Meeting, members of the public must: •Call or email the board liaison at (512) 972-5806 and Jaseudia.Killion@austintexas.gov no later than noon, (the day before the meeting). The information required is the speaker name, item number(s) they wish to speak on, whether they are for/against/neutral, and a telephone number or email address. •Once a request to speak has been called in or emailed to the board liaison, residents will receive either an email or phone call providing the telephone number to call on the day of the scheduled meeting. •Speakers must call in at least 15 minutes prior to meeting start 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 Jaseudia.Killion@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 this meeting is broadcast live, residents may watch the meeting here: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch- atxn-live la junta en Reunión del Finance/Allocations Meeting of the HIV Planning Council Wednesday, March 17, 2021 FECHA de la reunion (Marzo 17, 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 (03/16/2021 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 (512) 972-5806 and Jaseudia.Killion@austintexas.gov a más tardar al mediodía (el día antes de la reunión). La información requerida es el nombre del orador, los números de artículo sobre los que desean hablar, si están a favor / en contra / neutrales, y un número de teléfono o dirección de correo electrónico. • Una vez que se haya llamado o enviado por …
Electrical Board March 17, 2021 @10:00 AM Electrical Board to be held March 17, 2021 at 10:00 am with Social Distancing Modifications Public comment will be allowed via telephone; no in-person input will be allowed. All speakers must register in advance (Tuesday March 16, 2021 by noon). All public comment will occur at the beginning of the meeting. To speak remotely at the March 17, Electrical Board Meeting, residents must: •Call or email the board liaison at Rick Arzola at 512-974-2417 no later than noon, (the day before the meeting). The information required is the speaker name, item number(s) they wish to speak on, whether they are for/against/neutral, and a telephone number or email address. •Once a request to speak has been called in or emailed to the board liaison, residents will receive either an email or phone call providing the telephone number to call on the day of the scheduled meeting. •Speakers must call in at least 15 minutes prior to meeting start 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 rick.arzola@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 this meeting is broadcast live, residents may watch the meeting here: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch- atxn-live Tabla eléctrica 17 de marzo de 2021 a las 10:00 a.m. El tablero eléctrico se llevará a cabo el 17 de marzo de 2020 a las 10:00 a.m. con modificaciones de distanciamiento social Se permitirán comentarios públicos por teléfono; no se permitirá ninguna entrada en persona. Todos los ponentes deben registrarse con anticipación (martes 16 de marzo de 2021 antes del mediodía). Todos los comentarios públicos se producirán al comienzo de la reunión. Para hablar de forma remota en la reunión de la Junta Eléctrica del 17 de marzo, los residentes deben: • Llame o envíe un correo electrónico al enlace de la junta en Rick Arzola al 512-974-2417 a más tardar al mediodía (el día antes de la reunión). La información requerida es el nombre del orador, los números de artículo sobre los que desean hablar, si están a favor / en contra / neutrales, y un número de teléfono o dirección de correo electrónico. Una vez que se haya …
MARCH 17, 2021 REGULAR CALLED MEETING Electric Board APPROVED MINUTES The Electric Board convened in a Regular Called Board Meeting on March 17, 2021 via Web Ex Video Conference at 10:07 am. Board Members in Attendance: Gabe Flores, Delwin Goss, Mark Weaver, Ben Brenneman, Rogelio Wallace and David Johnson Members Not in Attendance: Nicole Stasek, Derek LaRue, David Adamson, Randy Pomikahl and Michael King Staff in Attendance: Rick Arzola (DSD), Eric Zimmerman (DSD), Mitchell Tolbert (DSD) and Todd Wilcox (DSD), Marty Starrett (DSD) and Jordan Word(DSD) 1. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION: There was no registration of citizens to speak at this Electrical Board. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes from the November 17, 2020 regular called meeting was approved as written after modifications were made to Item 4B per Board member Weaver. Board member Johnson made a motion to accept the minutes as written. Board member Goss second the motion, motion passed 6-0. 2 DISCUSSION a. Criteria Manual Update- Commercial Electrical Supervisor Marty Starrett updated board members that DSD Staff met with Austin Energy back on Jan 21st. In that meeting AE discussed some new post design criteria manual changes. Here are some of those changes even though awaiting feedback from DSD: On underground, would require either rigid or scheduled 80 but added a change where you can use scheduled 40 if it was concreting casing. Fees for affordable housing waivers- A.E line extension fees. Conductor clearances on overhead multiplex lines for buildings. Added code changes to NEC 230.85 and 230.71- Emergency disconnects and 6 handle rule removal but later removed it from the code language and just put references to those codes. Made edits to their temporary figures to show main breakers in panels based on the NEC article 230.71 but DSD suggested since edits are being made to remove grounding details. DSD also suggested to add grounding to represent City of Austin electrical code for grounding electrode conductor requirements. AE accepted this. DSD also requested for removal the previously inspected homebuilders loop being allowed to be connected without a permit or inspections to be removed from the Criteria Manual. AE agreed to that removal. Discussion on creating a new flowcharts for design and construction for electrical utilities. As far as the point of attachment (service), staff felt that AE was putting this on the back burner for later. b. Inspection Update on …
Versión en español a continuación. Economic Prosperity Commission Meeting March 17, 2021 at 5:30 pm Economic Prosperity Commission to be held March 17, 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 (March 16, 2021 by noon). All public comment will occur at the beginning of the meeting. To speak remotely at the Economic Prosperity Commission Meeting, members of the public must: •Call or email the board liaison at Michelle Clemons at 512-974-2713 michelle.clemons@austintexas.gov or Nydia Castillo at 512-974-6452 Nydia.castillo@austintexas.gov no later than noon, (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 Michelle.Clemons@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 Economic Prosperity Commission FECHA de la reunion 17 de Marzo 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 (16 de Marzo 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 Michelle Clemons at 512-974-2713 michelle.clemons@austintexas.gov or Nydia Castillo at 512-974-6452 Nydia.castillo@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 …
Economic Prosperity Commission Recommendation (20210317-002B) WHEREAS, the Economic Prosperity Commission advises council on matters of construction, job creation, and the prosperity of all Austinites and all of these areas were gravely impacted by and are still recovering from the extreme winter events of February 2021; WHEREAS, extreme weather is becoming more frequent due in part to the negative effects of climate change and these events strain our emergency management services, utility infrastructure, transportation, and communication networks which are under the auspices of the City of Austin; WHEREAS, the lack of effective communication to the public by Austin public utilities and the government instilled a lack confidence in local government during Winter Storm Uri; WHEREAS, the City of Austin is not in a recovery, we are still in a crisis as Austinites are still struggling with water, food, and electricity shortages (and fear of high utility and water bills); WHEREAS, Austin City Council recently appointed the first Resiliency Officer and has proactively prepared for extreme weather events recognizing their potential devastation to the local economy in the response to Climate Resilience Resolution 20190509-019, which specifically called for opportunities for city staff and the community to work together and comprehensively address extreme weather impacts and increase Austin’s climate resilience. However, did not account for, or include evaluation of extreme cold occurrences, such as the events of Winter 2011, and Winter 2021; WHEREAS, extreme winter weather has impacted Austin as recently as January, 2021, 2011 and prior to that in 1989. The data shows that these are not 100 year events. The House Committee on State Affairs issued an Interim Report in December 2012 that specifically addressed cold weather concerns and directly questioned via included memo the ERCOT and Public Utility Board’s decision to raise the system wide megawatt hour cap 180 times its normal rate to $9,000; WHEREAS, March 11, 2021, the American Rescue Plan (ARP)—designed to assist in the ongoing economic and public health efforts—was signed into law by President Joseph R. Biden. Included in this bill is $195.8 million dollars for the City of Austin, portions of which can be used to make necessary investment in water, sewer, or broadband infrastructure; WHEREAS, advanced notice of the polar vortex was given by the National Weather Service Austin/San Antonio and knowledge that it would create historic lows and winter storms in early February yet the city was still underprepared for this event; …
