February 18, 2020 Melissa Neslund Development Manager Stratus Properties 212 Lavaca St, Ste. 300 Austin, TX 78701 Re: Project Consent Agreement & SOS Amendment for 7415 Southwest Parkway Ms. Neslund, Thank you very much for continuing to speak with us regarding your proposed project at 7415 Southwest Parkway, which is part of the overall development otherwise known as “Lantana.” As I’m sure you can imagine, given the history of this site and the request for an amendment to the Save Our Springs Initiative Ordinance (“SOS Ordinance”), it has generated quite a bit of conversation at the Save Our Springs (“SOS”). We appreciate that Stratus has continually demonstrated a willingness to engage in dialogue surrounding their projects and their willingness to incorporate community benefits into their projects. This letter is intended to continue that dialogue so that we can help reach a reasonable resolution to allow the project to occur, while still furthering the City of Austin’s and SOS’s missions to improve the overall water quality of the Barton Springs Zone and the Edwards Aquifer. History and Dialogue re: Lantana Project To help explain how we got to our current position, we thought it would be helpful to provide some context with a brief description of key facts. As you are aware, the Lantana Letter Agreement arose out of a dispute over vested rights alleged to be applicable to a 1986 preliminary plan. This Letter Agreement (which was never approved by the City Council) has been interpreted by the City to grandfather projects in the area to pre-SOS Ordinance regulations, which has enabled Stratus (and other landowners to which Stratus sold land) to develop much of the land without SOS-water quality ponds and well over the impervious cover limits established to protect water quality. SOS has continually questioned the validity of the Letter Agreement and has advocated for projects within the area to be developed under current environmental regulations. Last summer, the site plan approved for 7415 Southwest Parkway was set to expire by its own terms. As a result, Stratus requested an extension from the Planning Commission. SOS raised objections to this site plan extension, because we received notice that Stratus intended to change the proposed use of Phase 5 of the site plan from “office” to “multi-family”. A “change of use” such as the one envisioned would typically be an indication that there is a new project under normal …
M E M O R A N D U M Fayez Kazi, Chair and Members of the Planning Commission TO: FROM: Andrew Linseisen, Assistant Director Development Services Department DATE: April 27, 2020 SUBJECT: Project Consent Agreement Lantana Block P, Lot 3 (SP-2014-0262C) Backup and Staff Recommendation As provided in Section 25-1-544 of the City of Austin Land Development Code, the developer of the Lantana Development on Lot 3 and 5, Block P of the Lantana Phase 1, Section 2 Subdivision has requested consideration of a Project Consent Agreement (PCA). The proposed PCA will allow the development to add a residential use to the existing approved site development permit. A PCA is a voluntary mechanism for determining applicable regulations where the extent of a project’s vested development rights are unclear or for incentivizing projects with clearly established vested rights to achieve greater compliance with current regulations. In such cases, a PCA provides a means for the Council to modify development regulations applicable to a property. The Lantana Block P, Lot 3 project is located at 7415 Southwest Parkway which was approved for a commercial and office development under Site Development Permit No SP-2014-0262C. Phases 1, 2, and 3 of the existing development have been constructed and Phase 4 is currently under construction. The Planning Commission approved a request to extend the life of the application to April 30, 2022, on June 25, 2019. The proposed PCA will apply only to the currently unconstructed Phase 5 of the project modifying the project to include a residential use. A summary of the major tenants of the proposed PCA are outlined below: No additional impervious will be added to Phase 5, the overall impervious cover in the entire development will be fixed at 17.6 acres. 6.326 acres known as Lot 8, Block P, of the Lantana Phase 1, Section 2 Subdivision will be dedicated to the City of Austin. 3.098 acres of Lot 8 will remain natural area with any development limited to pedestrian trails so that the entire site, all phases, maintain 40% natural area; 3.228 acres will be utilized for City of Austin Public Park amenities; Lot 8 will be dedicated to the City within six months of the effective date of the PCA; Extension of the life of Phase 5 of the Lantana Block P, Lot 3 Site Development Permit (SP-2014-0262C) by two years to …
Dear Members of the Planning Commission, I live on Scenic Brook Dr and would like to comment on the subdivision plan for the Simon-Caskey Tract which proposes to extend Little Deer, Harvest Trail, and Oak Forest streets. The major problem with the plan from my perspective and that of all of the neighbors that I have talked to is the traffic flow from the new subdivision through the existing neighborhoods. I think the best solution is to connect the new subdivision directly to Highway 71, so as not to burden neighborhood streets, such as Scenic Brook and Silvermine (which do not have sidewalks), with all of the traffic from this new development. Another solution, suggested by a resident of Harvest Trail, is to design the development so that Little Deer doesn't connect to Harvest Trail or Oak Forest - make two separate loops, one that comes off Oak Forest and one that comes off Little Deer. This would split the traffic from the development - some would exit via Little Deer, the rest would exit via Harvest Trail or Oak F orest. This would eliminate any cut-through traffic that may occur with the current proposal. Another solution would be to keep the current street design, but install a gate that could be unlocked by emergency personnel - this would also keep cut-through traffic from affecting residents yet still allow emergency access when needed. A similar gate has been installed on Mocassin Path in the new subdivision, the enclave at Covered Bridge, to prevent cut-through traffic on that street. Either of those solutions would be superior to the current street layout of the proposed development. I think a direct connection to Highway 71 would be the best option, but failing that, these other potential options would be acceptable to neighborhood residents. The problem here is not the infill development or the additional housing, but the traffic patterns that will be generated by the development. Please support an option that has the least impact on current residents and keeps neighborhood safety at the forefront. Thank you, Tom Thayer 7405 Scenic Brook Drive
27 April 2020 To: Planning Commission and City Council Members Re: NPA-2019-0015.02 3500 Pecan Springs Road This letter serves to recommend that the Planning Commission and City Council deny the above-referenced plan amendment request, which seeks to change the land use of this property from Single Family to Higher Density Single Family. Although the Owner’s representative for the proposed development at 3500 Pecan Springs Road, Ms. Victoria Haase of Thrower Design, attended meetings of the East MLK Combined Neighborhood Plan Contact Team (EMLK NPCT), the City of Austin-hosted Community Meeting, and a meeting of the Pecan Springs/Springdale Neighborhood Association (PSS NA), and in doing so was open and responsive in communicating with the community stakeholders regarding the development, the owners never agreed to any of the compromises proposed by the community in order to assuage their concerns, which centered around environmental impact as well as traffic. Because the owner was ultimately unwilling to find any kind of compromise with the community, the EMLK NPCT voted in its April meeting to oppose the PLA. For the reasons listed above, the EMLK NPCT opposes the plan amendment request for the Property. If the Planning Commission chooses to approve this request, the EMLK NPCT urges consideration of any or all of the following: • Require that a minimum of 10% of the units be affordable to persons earning no more than 80% MFI for the Austin Metro area. • Require that the project be certified under the Better Builder Program or a program with • Require that the project achieve a minimum 1-star rating under the Austin Energy Green equivalent requirements Building Program. Sincerely, Jon Hagar Chair, EMLK NPCT jonhagar@gmail.com (512) 739-4101
Historic Landmark Commission Applications under Review for April 27, 2020 Meeting This list does not constitute a formal agenda and is subject to change. A final agenda will be posted at least 72 hours prior to the meeting. Historic Zoning 2408 Harris Boulevard – Application for historic zoning of the Teer House. 1119 E 11th Street – Application for the removal of historic zoning of the Majors-Butler-Thomas House. Originally scheduled for March 23, 2020 meeting (cancelled). 2402 San Gabriel Street – Change zoning from CS-MU-H-NP to CS-1-MU-H-NP Certificates of Appropriateness 302-304 E. 6th Street – Install a second-story balcony and modify two windows into doors. Postponement from February 24, 2020 meeting. 612 E 6th Street – Install a second sign. 1200 E 6th Street – Restoration of existing building. 114 W. 7th Street – Restore and replace windows on the east elevation. Originally scheduled for March 23, 2020 meeting (cancelled). 3809 W 35th Street – Replace roof and construct an ADA-compliant ramp from upper grounds to the lower sculpture park. Originally scheduled for March 23, 2020 meeting (cancelled). 4000 Avenue C – Construct additions to the rear of the house and the front of the garage. Postponement 1105 Castle Court – Construct an accessible ramp on the south elevation. Originally scheduled for March 23, from February 24, 2020 meeting. 2020 meeting (cancelled). 522 Congress Avenue – Replace window panels. 602 Highland Avenue – Construct an addition to the basement at the rear of the residence. 703 Oakland Avenue – Replace windows, siding, and roof. Originally scheduled for March 23, 2020 meeting 1705 Willow Street – Demolish a rear garage; construct an accessory dwelling unit. Originally scheduled for (cancelled). March 23, 2020 meeting (cancelled). National Register Historic District permits 3006 Beverly Road – Construct a second-story addition atop the house, construct a rear one-story addition, and demolish a garage. 1517 Murray Lane – Construct an addition to rear of house, install new roofing and exterior ship lap siding, and replace front porch columns, new entry door. Originally scheduled for March 23, 2020 meeting (cancelled). 1616 Northumberland Road – Construct an addition and garage. 2902 Oakmont Boulevard – Construct a new carport and rear addition. Originally scheduled for March 23, 92 Rainey Street – Demolish a house and construct a high-rise building (Postponement from February 24, 2020 meeting (cancelled). 2020 meeting). 613 West Lynn Street – Construct an addition to the rear …
Historic Landmark Commission April 27, 2020 The Historic Landmark Commission meeting will be held April 27, 2020 with social distancing modifications. Public comment will be allowed via telephone; no in-person input will be allowed. All speakers must register in advance (no later than Sunday, April 26th by noon). All public comment will occur at the beginning of the meeting. To speak remotely at the April 27, 2020 Historic Landmark Commission meeting, residents must: Call or email the board liaison at preservation@austintexas.gov or (512) 974-1264 no later than noon on Sunday, April 26th. 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 the meeting start in order to speak (not later than 5:45 p.m.). Late callers will not be accepted and will not be able to speak. Speakers will be placed in a queue until their time to speak. Handouts or other information may be emailed to preservation@austintexas.gov no later than noon on Sunday, April 26th. This information will be provided to commissioners in advance of the meeting. Residents may watch the meeting here: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch- atxn-live HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION Monday, April 27, 2020 - 6:00 p.m. Regular Meeting NOTE: This meeting will be conducted remotely via teleconference. Please see the special notes attached for how to participate. COMMISSION MEMBERS: _____ Emily Reed, Chair ______ Beth Valenzuela, Vice Chair ______ Witt Featherston ______ Ben Heimsath ______ Mathew Jacob ______ Kevin Koch ______ Kelly Little ______ Trey McWhorter ______ Terri Myers ______ Alex Papavasiliou ______ Blake Tollett CALL TO ORDER 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. February 23, 2020. AGENDA B. October 22, 2018 (Correction of previously approved minutes). 2. PRESENTATIONS, DISCUSSION, AND POSSIBLE ACTION None. The Parks and Recreation Department briefing on Oakwood Cemetery will be scheduled for May. 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 THE INITIATION OF A HISTORIC ZONING CASE 1. C14H-2020-0020 – Majors-Butler-Thomas House – Discussion 1119 E. 11th Street Council …
A.1 - 1 ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET April 27, 2020 HLC DATE: CASE NUMBER: C14H-2020-0020 PC DATE: APPLICANTS: Neema and Pedram Amini HISTORIC NAME: Majors-Butler-Thomas House WATERSHED: Boggy Creek ADDRESS OF PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE: 1119 E. 11th Street ZONING FROM: CS-1-H-NP-NCCD to CS-1-NP-NCCD SUMMARY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The application is to remove historic zoning from the property. Staff cannot recommend the proposed zoning change to remove H zoning from this parcel without a plan for the landmark house and seeks guidance from the Commission for exploring courses of action. The applicant has provided substantial evidence of the long-term deterioration of the existing house, indicating that the house has been rendered unusable without an imprudent investment of funds for restoration and rehabilitation, and will therefore seek demolition of the house if the requested zoning change is recommended and ultimately approved by the City Council. QUALIFICATIONS FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION: The Majors-Butler-Thomas House was designated as a historic landmark in 2015 for its significance in architecture and historical associations. The original staff report and supporting materials are appended to this report. HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION ACTION: PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: DEPARTMENT COMMENTS: The house was designated as a historic landmark by the City Council in 2015. Since then, it has failed several inspections relating to maintenance of the property and the owners were denied their tax exemption for this property last year. ACTION: ORDINANCE NUMBER: CITY COUNCIL DATE: ORDINANCE READINGS: 1ST 2ND 3RD CASE MANAGER: Steve Sadowsky NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATION: Organization of Central East Austin Neighborhoods BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATION: The applicants seek to remove the historic landmark designation (H) zoning from the property based upon its deteriorated condition and infeasibility to repair, restore, and rehabilitate. While staff recognizes the condition of the house, and agrees with the assessments contained therein, the designation of the property as a historic landmark was known to the current applicants, who are the prospective buyers of the property. The condition of the house has worsened since the time of initial designation of this house, as it PHONE: 974-6454 A.1 - 2 has remained vacant. Staff seeks further evaluation of ways the historic landmark house can be incorporated into the applicants’ proposal for the property or other alternatives to eventual demolition of the structure. Rehabilitation of this house in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for use as a non-homestead property may also qualify for state and federal tax credits to …
600 N Pearl Street Suite S1900 Dallas, TX 75201 (855) 349-6757 Texas Registered Engineering Firm 20170 Project No. 16596 February 14, 2020 Re: Structural Review of Existing Residence 1119 E 11th Street Austin, TX 78702 Dear Pedram Amini, As requested, personnel of GreenWorks Engineering and Consulting have completed a structural review of the address referenced above on February 11, 2019. The purpose of the observation was to collect information and provide information about the current state of the structure. For the purposes of this report, the house faces north. The house is a single-story wood framed structure built in 1916. The foundation system of the house is a pier and beam with a perimeter skirt. The house has had at least (2) additions constructed at the rear of the residence. All the information gathered was from the visual evaluation and no destructive or invasive testing was performed. Introduction: Observations: Roof: The roof of the house is a hip roof, with a gable roof over the kitchen addition, and a flat roof over the family room addition. The roof is composed of 2x4 rafters spaced at 24 inches on center. The roof is covered with composition asphalt shingles. There is a visible dip in the north side of the hip roof, as viewed from the exterior of the house. There was some water damage noted on the wood shakes at the south face of the hip roof as viewed from the attic. There was noticeable separation between the roof and the ceiling. The rafters at the kitchen addition have been excessively notched over the exterior wall. A portion of the roof framing over the family room has collapsed due to apparent water damage. Ceilings: The ceiling framing is composed of 2x4 joists spaced at 24 inches on center and are oriented in the east/west direction. The ceiling joists bear on the interior wall and both exterior walls. There is a noticeable deflection in the ceiling joists as viewed from the attic. Portions of the ceiling drywall and sheathing have detached from the ceiling joists throughout the residence. The beam on the east Project No. 16596 February 14, 2020 side of the porch has broken and is no longer supporting the roof and ceiling. The base of the guardrails around the porch have deteriorated, and no longer support the rail. Walls: The exterior walls of the living room, bathroom, and kitchen appear …
A.2-1 ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET HLC DATE: April 27, 2020 PC DATE: CASE NUMBER: C14H-2020-0033 APPLICANT: Willy Fischler, owner HISTORIC NAME: Teer-Peterson House WATERSHED: Shoal Creek ADDRESS OF PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE: 2408 Harris Boulevard ZONING FROM: SF-3 to SF-3-H SUMMARY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the proposed zoning change from single family residence (SF-3) district to single family residence – Historic Landmark (SF-3-H) combining district zoning. QUALIFICATIONS FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION: Architecture and historical associations. HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION ACTION: PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: DEPARTMENT COMMENTS: The house is beyond the bounds of the Comprehensive Cultural Resources Survey (1984), but was identified as contributing to the Old West Austin National Register Historic District. ACTION: PHONE: 974-6454 ORDINANCE NUMBER: CITY COUNCIL DATE: ORDINANCE READINGS: 1ST 2ND 3RD CASE MANAGER: Steve Sadowsky NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATION: Pemberton Heights Neighborhood Association BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATION: Architecture: One-story, L-plan, stone-veneered Tudor Revival house two steep front-facing gables, a prominent front-facing exterior stone chimney, a stuccoed gabled bay with false half- timbering containing the principal entry, and a combination of 9:9 and diamond-paned casement fenestration. There is an integral screened porch to the left of the principal block of the house. The house was designed by Charles H. Page, of the prominent Austin architectural firm of Page Brothers in 1930 and completed in 1933. Page designed a rear addition, known as the “Lodge” in 1935, and another addition designed by Austin architects Niggli & Gustafson was completed in 1945. There is a more modern gabled wood carport to the south (left) of the house. A.2 - 2 Historical Associations: The house was designed and built for former state representative and then-chair of the State Board of Control Claude D. Teer and his wife Clara. Teer lived in his home town of Granger until 1927, when he moved his family to Austin. Prior to their residence in this house, the Teer family lived in a rented house on W. 13th Street. The family moved in around 1934. The 1932- 33 city directory shows the family on W. 13th Street; by 1935, they lived at this Harris Boulevard address. Claude D. Teer was born in Arkansas in 1881 but lived as a young man in Granger, Texas. He was elected to the State House of Representatives from Granger in 1919 and served until 1927 with a position on the appropriations committee. While in the legislature, he was active in the Texas Committee on Prisons, …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS B.1 - 1 APRIL 27, 2020 C14H-1989-0020 and -0021 PLATT AND DITTLINGER BUILDINGS 302-04 E. 6TH STREET Construct a new balcony across the front of the buildings; convert two second-story windows to doors. PROPOSAL PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS The applicant proposes the construction of a wood balcony across the front of both buildings, in accordance with historic photographs. The current awning will be removed for the construction of the balcony. The applicant has based the design and positioning of the balcony on the historic photographs and will recreate the balcony exactly as shown. The applicant further proposes the conversion of two of the second-story windows to doors to allow for access to the new balcony. The applicant proposes to keep the existing original window in place, secure the sashes with a wooden member and interior steel bracing, and then install hinges on the windows so that it will swing in to the building. The applicant asserts that the window will operate securely and will cause no change to the exterior appearance of the building. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation are used to evaluate projects on historic landmarks. The following standards apply to the proposed project: 1) A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. Evaluation: Historic photographs indicate the existence of the balcony across both buildings, which is typical for 19th century commercial buildings along 6th Street. The balconies principally provided shade to the sidewalk below; use of the balconies as outdoor space for the businesses is less apparent in historic photographs. However, it is not uncommon for the balconies to have some use, especially on buildings where the windows could be opened to the extent to allow the ingress or egress from the second story to the balcony. 2) The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. Evaluation: The applicant maintains that the proposal to convert two windows to doors will not affect the exterior appearance of the building and will not require the removal or alteration of historic features other than changing the way two windows on the second story operate. 3) …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS B.10 - 1 APRIL 27, 2020 C14H-1982-0014 LAGUNA GLORIA 3809 W. 35TH STREET PROPOSAL Replace roofing on the villa; repair/replace deteriorated wood elements, including window screens, powerwash the windows and stucco exterior, and replace awnings. This proposal is an application for a heritage grant. PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS The applicant proposes to replace the existing shingled roof with a new shingled roof, and the flat membrane roof with a new membrane roof. The applicant further proposes to repair and paint deteriorated wooden elements on the structure, including the decorative wood window screens, and replace any wooden elements that are too deteriorated to repair with a replica of the existing feature, power-wash the stucco and windows, replace awnings, and design new ADA walkways as part of a greater plan for landscape modifications at a later date. Staff asked the applicant to provide the answers to the questions below: their answers are in green. 1. What is the roof replacement material, and has there been a determination that the roof is failing in its entirety or whether the existing materials can be repaired (assuming that it is a historic roof)? Please see the attached bids from Lone Star Roofing for details regarding the roof replacement materials. The existing roof has deteriorated significantly and additional patch repairs are no longer a viable option for the existing roof, which has led to significant leaks in multiple locations across the interior of the Villa. Also, please reference the attached Plans and Specifications document, which includes pictures of the failing roof, which clearly has extensive patching, on page 5. 2. Do you have a plan for the ADA walkway and other accessibility features that are being proposed? I have talked with Laurie Limbacher about this, but to my knowledge, I can't remember seeing a plan yet. Please see the attached Plans and Specifications document, which includes a preliminary plan for the ADA walkway on pages 6 and 7. At the time the museum submitted the application for the Heritage Tourism Grant, our budget for the ADA walkway included design fees, as the plans had not been drawn in detail at the time of submission. In addition, the narrative in the application indicated that further study of the landscape, as well as investigation into permitting, would be necessary after the award had been made in order to move forward with …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS B.10 - 1 APRIL 27, 2020 C14H-1982-0014 LAGUNA GLORIA 3809 W. 35TH STREET PROPOSAL Replace roofing on the villa; repair/replace deteriorated wood elements, including window screens, powerwash the windows and stucco exterior, and replace awnings. This proposal is an application for a heritage grant. PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS The applicant proposes to replace the existing shingled roof with a new shingled roof, and the flat membrane roof with a new membrane roof. The applicant further proposes to repair and paint deteriorated wooden elements on the structure, including the decorative wood window screens, and replace any wooden elements that are too deteriorated to repair with a replica of the existing feature, power-wash the stucco and windows, replace awnings, and design new ADA walkways as part of a greater plan for landscape modifications at a later date. Staff asked the applicant to provide the answers to the questions below: their answers are in green. 1. What is the roof replacement material, and has there been a determination that the roof is failing in its entirety or whether the existing materials can be repaired (assuming that it is a historic roof)? Please see the attached bids from Lone Star Roofing for details regarding the roof replacement materials. The existing roof has deteriorated significantly and additional patch repairs are no longer a viable option for the existing roof, which has led to significant leaks in multiple locations across the interior of the Villa. Also, please reference the attached Plans and Specifications document, which includes pictures of the failing roof, which clearly has extensive patching, on page 5. 2. Do you have a plan for the ADA walkway and other accessibility features that are being proposed? I have talked with Laurie Limbacher about this, but to my knowledge, I can't remember seeing a plan yet. Please see the attached Plans and Specifications document, which includes a preliminary plan for the ADA walkway on pages 6 and 7. At the time the museum submitted the application for the Heritage Tourism Grant, our budget for the ADA walkway included design fees, as the plans had not been drawn in detail at the time of submission. In addition, the narrative in the application indicated that further study of the landscape, as well as investigation into permitting, would be necessary after the award had been made in order to move forward with …
