00 10' 20' GRAPHIC SCALE 10' LEGEND PROPERTY LINE ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE EASEMENT LINE CURB TO REMAIN CURB TO BE REMOVED EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN 8331 8331 EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED ON PLANS, ALL ABOVE AND BELOW UTILITIES, INFRASTRUCTURE, PAVEMENT, CURBS, AND APPURTENANCES TO BE REMOVED. EXISTING WASTEWATER TO BE REMOVED EXISTING WATER TO BE REMOVED EXISTING OVERHEAD POWER TO BE REMOVED EXISTING UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC TO BE REMOVED EXISTING WASTEWATER TO REMAIN EXISTING WATER TO REMAIN EXISTING CHILLED WATER TO REMAIN EXISTIN OVERHEAD POWER TO REMAIN EXISTING UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC TO REMAIN EXISTING GAS TO REMAIN EXISTING UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC TO REMAIN NOTES: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. TREES AND TOPOGRAPHY BASED UPON GROUND SURVEY BY 4WARD LAND SUREVYING ON DECEMBER 7, 2018 A PRECONSTRUCTION MEETING WITH THE ENVIORNMENTAL INSPECTOR IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO ANY SITE DISTURBANCE. LOCATIONS OF PUBLIC AND FRANCHISE UTILITIES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE AND MAY NOT BE COMPLETE. CONTRACTOR SHALL CALL THE ONE CALL CENTER (472-2822) AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCING DEMOLITION OR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT ANY OTHER UTILITY COMPANIES WHO DO NOT SUBSCRIBE TO THE ONE CALL PROGRAM FOR LINE MARKINGS. THE CONTRACTOR BEARS SOLE RESPONSIBILITY FOR VERIFYING LOCATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES, SHOWN OR NOT SHOWN, AND FOR ANY DAMAGE DONE TO THESE FACILITIES. REMOVAL OR RELOCATION OF EXISTING PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FRANCHISE UTILITIES (WATER, ELECTRIC, AND GAS ETC.) WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE SITE DEMOLITION SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH THE APPLICABLE UTILITY AGENCIES. ALL EXISTING UTILITY SERVICES TO BE TURNED OFF BY UTILITY FRANCHISE TECHNICIAN TO ALLOW FOR EXISTING SERVICE LINES TO BE CUT/CAPPED AT PROPERTY LINE. ALL UTILITIES IN STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY TO REMAIN IN PLACE UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. SURFACE PAVEMENT INDICATED HEREON (SUCH AS ASPHALT OR CONCRETE) MAY OVERLAY OTHER HIDDEN STRUCTURES (SUCH AS OTHER LAYERS OF PAVEMENT, BUILDING SLAB, ETC.) THAT ARE ALSO TO BE REMOVED. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEMOLITION, REMOVAL, AND DISPOSAL OF EXISTING PAVEMENT SECTION, STRUCTURAL SUBGRADE, STRUCTURAL FOUNDATION, AND UTILITIES WITHIN THE SITE. CONTRACTOR TO DISPOSE ALL DEMOLITION SPOILS OFF-SITE IN A LEGAL MANNER. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGE TO EXISTING UTILITIES, IRRIGATION LINES, PAVEMENT, ETC., TO REMAIN RESULTING FROM DEMOLITION ACTIVITIES AND REPAIR AT THEIR OWN EXPENSE. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING ALL PERMITS REQUIRED FOR DEMOLITION AND DISPOSAL. ALL ITEMS TO BE REMOVED SHALL BE DISPOSED OFF-SITE …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION PERMITS IN NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICTS NRD-2010-0125 PROPOSAL 92 Rainey Street C.3. - 1 NOVEMBER 15, 2010 Rainey Street Modifications to the north, west, and south facades of the house; construction of a new walk-in cooler on the north side of the house, a wraparound deck on the south and west sides, a new separate restroom building in back of the house, installation of a steel trellis on the back of the house, and replacement of the composition shingle roof with a metal roof. PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS The applicant proposes modifications to the exterior of the house to accommodate a walk-in cooler on the north side and a wood deck wrapping around the south and west sides, and the construction of a separate building behind the house for restrooms, storage, and an outdoor bar area. The front of the house will see the fewest modifications: only a deteriorating plaster porch pier and porch railing will be removed. On the north wall, the existing wood windows will be removed to accommodate the addition of the walk-in cooler, which will have wood siding and a flat roof. On the south wall, the existing wood-sided infill with a vinyl window will be removed and be replaced with a door and a steel-framed fixed sash window. On the west (rear) wall, the existing back door and window will be removed, as will the wood-sided infill that wraps around from the south side of the house. The infill section will have the wraparound of the steel-framed fixed sash window from the south side of the building. A new deck will surround the house on the south and west sides, and provide access to a new structure in the back yard, housing restrooms and storage. The existing composition shingle roof on the house will be replaced with a metal roof. STAFF COMMENTS STAFF RECOMMENDATION The ca. 1927 bungalow is contributing to the Rainey Street National Register Historic District. Release the building permit after completion of a City of Austin Documentation Package consisting of photographs of all four elevations and a measured sketch plan to record existing conditions and for archiving at the Austin History Center. Staff requests that the applicant reconsider the installation of the steel-framed glass at the rear of the building in favor of an architectural feature more compatible with the Craftsman detailing of the house. Overall, the appearance of the house …
Dear Preservation Committee, Thank you for reviewing our plans to build our home at 2416 Hartford Road. My name is Stan Caskey, lifelong Austin resident, I grew up in West Austin (attended Casis, O. Henry and Austin High) and am trying to relocate to West Austin again. I have and continue to be a business owner in Austin and supporter of Austin. We have plans to build this home to reflect the neighborhood. We saved the original hand hewn rock used on a portion of the original house to incorporate into the project is some manner. Thank you for your time. If you have any questions please feel free to call me or our builder Tim Elbrickt at 512-698-7970. Respectfully. Stan Caskey 512-736-2654
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION PERMITS IN NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICTS JUNE 22, 2020 NRD-2020-0024 2416 HARTFORD ROAD C.3 - 1 OLD WEST AUSTIN NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICT PROPOSAL Construct a new two-story building with two-story rear guest house. PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS The proposed primary building is two stories in height, with covered front, side, and rear porches. It is set back 36’11” from the street. Plans indicate that it will be clad with a combination of cut- stone veneer wainscoting, horizontal fiber cement siding, and board-and-batten siding at the main elevation’s gable entry and second-story central bay. Its compound roofline, clad in composition shingles, includes cross-gabled, hipped, and shed elements. Windows configuration varies throughout and consists of 3:1 and 2:1 single-hung, single-pane fixed, 1:1 single-hung, and 4-pane fixed units, as well as fixed-pane sidelights. All windows are made of wood fiber and thermoplastic polymer composite. The proposed ADU is two stories, with a first-floor garage and attached carport, a first-floor porch, and a second-floor deck. It is clad in horizontal fiber-cement siding, with board-and-batten accents at the top half of the second floor. It is mostly windowless at the first floor, save for one single- pane window at the north elevation. A collection of single-pane casement and fixed windows are irregularly arranged beneath the second-story eaves at the main (east), south, and rear elevations. The right elevation features mulled 1:1 single-hung windows with fiber-cement trim. The proposed guesthouse has a compound roof composed of flat, hipped, shed, and side-gabled elements. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation are used to evaluate new construction projects in National Register historic districts. Applicable standards include: 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. The HLC previously approved the demolition of an earlier structure at this address. The older adjacent buildings are one story while the new buildings are two stories; the ADU does not appear to be visible from the street. The primary building’s design reflects traditional concepts; however, the façade utilizes accent materials, rooflines, and fenestration patterns that do not appear on historic-age structures in its immediate vicinity. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall …
S R E D L I U B S T D A O R D R O F T R A H 6 1 4 2 2416 Hartford Road 04/22/20 S R E D L I U B S T D A O R D R O F T R A H 6 1 4 2 2416 Hartford Road 04/22/20 S R E D L I U B S T D A O R D R O F T R A H 6 1 4 2 2416 Hartford Road 04/22/20 S R E D L I U B S T D A O R D R O F T R A H 6 1 4 2 2416 Hartford Road 04/22/20 S R E D L I U B S T D A O R D R O F T R A H 6 1 4 2 2416 Hartford Road 04/22/20 S R E D L I U B S T D A O R D R O F T R A H 6 1 4 2 2416 Hartford Road 04/22/20 S R E D L I U B S T D A O R D R O F T R A H 6 1 4 2 2416 Hartford Road 04/22/20 S R E D L I U B S T D A O R D R O F T R A H 6 1 4 2 2416 Hartford Road 04/22/20 S R E D L I U B S T D A O R D R O F T R A H 6 1 4 2 2416 Hartford Road 04/22/20
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION JUNE 22, 2020 DEMOLITION AND RELOCATION PERMITS HDP-2020-0205 1615 HOLLY STREET D.1 - 1 PROPOSAL Demolish a ca. 1942 house. ARCHITECTURE The house at 1615 Holly Street is a one-story rectangular-plan cottage with a side-gabled composition shingle roof. Box columns support its shed-roofed entryway. It is clad in vertical wood siding, with 2:2 aluminum replacement windows and metal handrails flanking a poured concrete stoop. RESEARCH The house was constructed in 1942 by Martin Herman, who sold it to Ernest J. and Ethel Kunkel in 1944. Kunkel was a taxi driver. He and his wife lived at 1615 Holly until around 1946, when they sold the home to Mary Gonzales Cordova and her husband Vicente, who worked as an upholsterer. The Cordovas leased the home until after 1952. By 1955, Lorenzo and Mary Corpus had purchased it. Lorenzo Corpus worked for the City’s Water and Sewer Department as a pipe layer. The Corpus family lived at 1615 Holly until at least 1972, when they remodeled the home. STAFF COMMENTS 1615 Holly Street was recommended in the 2016 East Austin Historic Resource Survey as a contributing structure to potential National Register and local historic districts. Designation Criteria—Historic Landmark 1) The building is under 50 years old. 2) The building appears to retain moderate to high integrity. 3) Properties must meet two criteria for landmark designation (LDC §25-2-352). The property does not appear to demonstrate significance according to City Code: a) Architecture. The building does not appear to convey architectural significance. b) Historical association. There do not appear to be significant historical associations. c) Archaeology. The house was not evaluated for its potential to yield significant data concerning the human history or prehistory of the region. d) Community value. The house does not possess a unique location, physical characteristic, or significant feature that contributes to the character, image, or cultural identity of the city, the neighborhood, or a particular demographic group. e) Landscape feature. The property is not a significant natural or designed landscape with artistic, aesthetic, cultural, or historical value to the city. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Encourage rehabilitation and adaptive re-use, then relocation. Release the permit upon completion of a City of Austin documentation package. LOCATION MAP D. 1- 2 PROPERTY INFORMATION Photos D. 1- 3 Zillow.com and Google Street View, 2009-19 D. 1- 4 Occupancy History City Directory Research, May 2020 Historic Preservation Office Note: Scope of research limited …
June 16, 2020 City of Austin Historic Landmark Commission P.O. Box 1088 Austin, TX 78767 Re: 2502 Park View Drive, Austin, Texas Dear Historic Landmark Commissioners, Mid Tex Mod, the leading voice for the preservation of mid-century modern architecture in our region, submits this letter of opposition to the proposed demolition of the house at 2502 Park View Drive. As the Central Texas chapter of Docomomo US, Mid Tex Mod’s mission is to raise awareness of buildings, sites, neighborhoods, and landscapes of the modern movement and to advocate for their preservation, documentation, and sustained use. Mid Tex Mod strongly opposes the release of a demolition permit for 2502 Park View Drive. Our organization fully supports any efforts to preserve this architecturally and historically significant residence and contributing resource to the potential Austin Air-Conditioned Village Historic District. The residence at 2502 Park View Drive represents one of twenty-two original test houses constructed in 1954 as part of the Austin Air-Conditioned Village. This community of modest ranch and contemporary- style homes in the Edgewood Subdivision of Austin served as an experimental research project conducted by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) and research partners including the University of Texas at Austin to assess the integration of central air conditioning in mid-priced suburban residences. Twenty-two houses, constructed by eighteen local homebuilders, incorporated different air- conditioning systems with a variety of building plans, orientations, and cladding materials to monitor the effectiveness and affordability of central air conditioning for the middle class. Monitoring of occupants for a period of one year, under the direction of the National Warm Air Heating and Air Conditioning Association’s Mobile Laboratory, documented residents’ experiences and daily habits with air-conditioned living. Ultimately, the testing results at the Austin Air-Conditioned Village demonstrated that the installation and operation of residential air conditioning could be achieved in modest houses at a reasonable cost, thereby influencing residential building and lending practices in the ensuing decades. 2502 Park View Drive, known as “The Air Temp” house, originally incorporated a Chrysler AirTemp air- conditioning system. Designed by local architect Fred Winfield Day and constructed by local builder Wayne A. Burns (developer of the Edgewood Subdivision), the contemporary-style house features low sloping roof lines; wide overhanging eaves; fixed, horizontal-sliding sash, and clerestory windows; a variety of cladding materials including asbestos, wood siding, and brick; a large carport; and patterned brick screening walls. The addition of a small …
321 W 6th and Guadalupe Downtown Density Bonus Application 22 June 2020 - Design Commission Downtown Plan Current / Future Development Under Construction Future Development Project Site 7TH STREET 6TH STREET 5TH STREET REPUBLIC SQUARE PARK 4TH STREET I T E E R T S O N O T N A N A S T E E R T S E P U L A D A U G T E E R T S A C A V A L T E E R T S O D A R O L O C 2 / 29 Downtown Density Bonus Application22 June 2020 - Design CommissionProject321 W 6th & GuadalupeClientRyan CompaniesProject Number 119041 Downtown Plan 2023 870’ 6 X Guadalupe SP-2017-0301C 770.5’ 321 West SP-2019-0516C 520’ Hanover Republic Square Tower SP-2018-0517C 710’ The Republic SP-2018-0167C E T E R T H S 8 T E E T 7 T H S T R N U E C E S S T 6TH STREET GUADALUPE STREET 5TH STREET REPUBLIC SQUARE PARK SAN ANTO NIO ST T E E R T H S T 4 3 / 29 Downtown Density Bonus Application22 June 2020 - Design CommissionProject321 W 6th & GuadalupeClientRyan CompaniesProject Number 119041 Project Program Diagram Perspective & Section BUILDING SECTION NORTH - SOUTH LEVEL 60 Amenity 1 level Clubhouse LEVEL 44 Mechanical 1 level LEVEL 20-59 Residential 363 units 39 levels LEVEL 18-19 Amenity 2 levels Fitness & Pool LEVEL 13-17 Office 5 levels LEVEL 12 BBVA Office LEVEL 2-11 Garage 10 levels 43 cars/level 436 total cars LEVEL 1M BBVA Bank Mezzanine LEVEL 1 BBVA bank lobby Residential/office lobby BOH LEVEL B1-B1.5 Parking Garage 1 Level 54 cars W. 6th St Project 321 W 6th View from Northwest e S t p a l u d a G u Client Ryan Companies Project Number 119041 Lobby / Retail Parking Office Amenity Pool Outdoor Amenity Residential (Tier 1) Residential (Tier 2) Residential (Tier 3) Penthouse Core Building Areas Retail: 5,357 SF Office: 110,435 SF Residential Units: 363 Parking Spaces: 490 770.5’ 734’ 242’ 140’ 770.5’ 734’ 651’ 552’ 274’ 242’ 140’ 0’ " 6 - ' 6 4 " 0 - ' 8 1 " 0 - ' 6 6 " 0 - ' 8 8 " 0 - ' 4 1 " 0 - ' 4 6 2 " 0 - ' 2 3 " 0 - ' …
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 …
University Hills Branch Library Parking Lot Expansion Project Design Commission Meeting Presentation June, 2020 1 Agenda Project Information Project Background Existing Condition & Context Relationship to Public Realm Environmental / Sustainability Issues Proposed Condition Questions 2 Project Information Project Information • Type: City building and site • Zoning: GR-MU-CO-NP • Address: 4701½ Loyola Lane • Applicant: Austin Public Library • Owner: City of Austin • Status: 100% Design/Site Plan Permit • Const. Start: July 2020 (expected) • Const. End: Dec. 2020 (expected) Project Team • Sponsor: Austin Public Library Contact: Paul Sanchez • Engineer: Stantec Contact: Aldo Sotelo • Contractor: Brown and Root 3 Project Background Project Goals Provide additional parking to library visitors and staff due to: Insufficient parking during City staff training events, public outreach events, student tutoring sessions, meetings and other library activities Reduce safety hazards due to: Current need to park on and cross a curved and steep roadway with limited visibility, Close proximity of sidewalk to roadway, Limited lighting in vicinity of parking lot Improve ADA compliance / accessibility of sidewalks connecting library due to: Non-compliant sidewalk slopes Limited ADA parking spots 4 Project Background Project Scope 26 New parking spots (2 handicap) and 3 new motorcycle spots New drive aisle and driveway New/improved sidewalks/ramps New/improved parking lot lighting Provisions for 2 future electrical car charging stations New public art sculpture New monument sign New trees/landscaping & irrigation New storm water detention pond 5 Existing Condition and Context Vicinity Map 6 --- Existing Condition & Context 7 Existing Condition and Context Environmental Features --- CEFs: Wetland, Rimrocks, Seeps 8 Relationship to Public Realm Urban Design Guidelines Shared Values Density & Diversity Project includes additional parking for a diverse group of library visitors and staff to encourage use of public space, especially during staff training events, public outreach events, tutoring sessions, meetings and other activities that promote social interaction and place many people together at the library Safety Project includes new/improved sidewalk, ramps and lighting to reduce safety hazards, attract people and allow them to fully engage in library activities in a safe manner 9 Relationship to Public Realm Urban Design Guidelines Shared Values Sustainability Project includes porous pavement / pavers to reduce impervious cover and improve water quality Project includes provisions for future electric car charging stations to reduce carbon …
321 W. 6th Street - Downtown Density Bonus Request Urban Design Guidelines Compliance Matrix Additional commentary has been provided in blue in the UDG matrix to show how the project has been modified to address the comments and concerns presented by the working group. Area Wide Guidelines Guideline Applicant's Comments Achieved? (Yes/No) 10 AW-10. Avoid the development of theme environments The project is not a theme environment and does not mock or caricature past imaginary places. 5 AW-5. Incorporate civic art in both public and private development The project will incorporate an interactive art piece from a local artist near the main entry at the northwest corner of the project site (intersection of Guadalupe and W. 6th). 1 AW-1: Create dense development 2 AW-2. Create mixed-use development 3 AW-3. Limit development which closes downtown streets 4 AW-4. Buffer neighborhood edges 6 AW-6. Protect important public views AW-7. Avoid historical misrepresentations AW-8. Respect adjacent historic buildings AW-9. Acknowledge that rooftops are seen from other buildings and the street 7 8 9 Yes Yes Yes N/A Yes Yes Yes N/A Yes Yes 11 AW-11. Recycle existing building stock No Public Streetscape Guidelines 12 PS-1. Protect the pedestrian where the building meets the street Yes 13 PS-2. Minimize curb cuts Yes The project is requesting additional density throught the Downtown Density Bonus program to increase density to an FAR of 25:1. The project will span a quarter block and incorporates a diverse mix of uses including approximately 110,435 SF of office space, 5,300 SF of ground floor retail space, and approximately 363 multifamily units. No existing city streets will be permanently closed because of the project. The project is located within the Central Business District and does not border any existing residential neighborhoods. The project does not obscure existing views through public right-of way. The project is not located in the Capital View Corridor nor does it propose any pedestrian bridges or building fly overs. The building will be designed and built from high quality modern materials to create a contemporary building that reflects the high standards of the city and developer. There are no significant historically zoned buildings located adjacent to the project. The property is located adjacent to the Belmont and Austin Ale House which are pending redevelopment. The roof of the podium at level 18 will be used as an amenity space with a pool and deck space with various …
Historic Landmark Commission June 22, 2020 The Historic Landmark Commission meeting will be held June 22, 2020 with social distancing modifications. Public comment will be allowed via telephone; no in-person input will be allowed. All speakers (applicants and others) must register in advance (no later than Sunday, June 21, 2020 by noon). All public comment will occur at the beginning of the meeting. To speak remotely at the June 22, 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, June 21st. 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, June 21, 2020. 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, June 22, 2020 - 6:00 p.m. Regular Meeting NOTE: This meeting will be conducted remotely via teleconference. Please see the attached notes 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. May 18, 2020 AGENDA 2. PRESENTATIONS, DISCUSSION, AND POSSIBLE ACTION A. Oakwood Cemetery Archaeology Excavation Report By: Austin Parks and Recreation Department staff B. Preliminary design concepts for an addition to the Bartholomew Building, 1415 Lavaca Street By: William Franks C. Presentation by AISD regarding Yellow Jacket Stadium NOTE: AISD is submitting an e-mail that addresses immediate concerns regarding the preservation of Yellow Jacket Stadium, and will provide a full briefing at the July 27, …
Seaholm Intake Facility Phase 1 Rehabilitation Historic Landmark Commission Phil Reed, FAIA, Cotera + Reed Architects Kevin Johnson, Project Manager, Parks and Recreation Department Christina Bies, Project Coordinator, Parks and Recreation Department June 22, 2020 • Project site: council district 9 Project Overview • Project Purpose: Consistent with the council-approved Seaholm Waterfront Master Plan, make the Intake Building safe and inhabitable for small programs and events by restoring character defining features and updating the building for code-compliant occupancy. • Seaholm Waterfront Master Plan previously approved by Historic Landmark Commission on July 23, 2018 and unanimously adopted by City Council on August 23, 2018. • Project partners: The Trail Foundation, Austin Parks Foundation Studio Gang Master Plan Project Scopes • Architectural Restoration • Restore existing windows, parapet copings, railings, provide appropriate exterior lighting, abate graffiti (add. alternate) • Building Modifications • New ADA-compliant entrance to replace overhead door, seal water intake gates, install two rooftop ventilation units, new roof • Additional doorway on N. façade (egress requirement), new fire • Code Compliance sprinkling system • Site Modifications • Install ADA compliant parking stall and associated paths to entry 3D Photogrammetry Model • Point cloud & photogrammetry model constructed in partnership with UT SOA Historic Preservation Program Existing Site Plan Existing Floor Plan Proposed Floor & Site Plan Proposed Roof Plan Existing North Elevation Proposed North Elevation Existing South Elevation Proposed South Elevation Building 1 East Elevation Building 1 West Elevation Building 2 East Elevation Building 2 West Elevation Proposed Building 1 Section Proposed Windows & Doors
June 16, 2020 Steve Sadowsky Historic Preservation Officer Historic Preservation Office - Planning and Zoning Dept. PO Box 1088, Austin TX 78767 RE: The historic Seaholm Intake Structure - Historic Landmark Commission Dear Mr. Sadowsky: I write this to express The Trail Foundation’s support for the June 22 agenda item regarding the Seaholm Intake Structure. This Phase One effort will bring the long-abandoned Intake Structure into appropriate and respectful public use. The work before the Commission is based on design and planning done by internationally-acclaimed architecture firm, Studio Gang, who was commissioned by a partnership of The Trail Foundation, the Austin Parks Foundation and the City of Austin Parks and Recreation Department. Through their advocacy, the Studio Gang plan brings the Seaholm Waterfront, including the Intake Structure, into the public realm, while respecting the historical significance of the structure and the site. Throughout this process, the Parks and Recreation Department has worked closely with The Trail Foundation, seeking guidance and support in a constructive, collaborative and, mutually respectful effort. In our view, this process along with the skill and dedication of Cotera + Reed Architects has served the City well, particularly in terms of sensitivity to the historic significance of the assignment. We believe that this Phase One effort honors the spirit of the Studio Gang vision and honors the historic significance of the Intake Structure and its site. We are anxious for a successful outcome that will create a valuable new public amenity in the heart of our city. For this reason, we ask the Commission to approve this agenda item. Thank you, Charlotte Tonsor Project Director
Wall Mount LED Wall Sconce 101L Project: Location: Cat.No: Type: Lamps: Notes: Qty: Gardco 101 LED wall sconces feature a low-profile design that provides wide flexibility in high performance exterior wall illumination. Full cutoff performance, usable illumination patterns, and powerful wattages combine into a compact and architecturally pleasing design. 101L sconces are available in Type 2, 3, and 4 distributions, and provide output of up to 9500 lumens. Energy saving control options increase energy savings and offer California Title 24 compliance. Emergency Battery Backup option available for path of egress. Ordering guide example: 101L-32L-700-NW-G1-3-120-IMRI2-BZ Number of LEDs LED Color - Generation Drive Current Distribution Emergency Voltage Controls Electrical Finish Options Prefix 101L 101L 101L LED Wall Sconce 16L 16 LEDs (1 module) 530 530 mA 650 650 mA 1 700 700 mA CW-G1 Cool White 5700K, 70 CRI Generation 1 2 Type 2 3 Type 3 4 Type 4 UNV 120-277V HVU 347-480V 0-10V Dimming Driver 5,6 DD DCC Dual Circuit Control 6,7,8 Fusing Textured F1 Single (120, 277, 347VAC) 12 F2 Double (208, 240, 480VAC) 12 F3 Canadian Double Pull (208, 240, 480VAC) 12 BK Black WH White BZ Bronze DGY Dark Gray MGY Medium Gray EBPC Emergency Battery Pack Cold Weather 3,4,6,12 Leave blank to omitt an emergency option 120 120V 208 208V 240 240V 277 277V 347 347V 480 480V 32L 32 LEDs (2 module) 1000 1000 mA 1200 1200 mA 530 530 mA 650 650 mA 1 700 700 mA 1000 1000 mA 2 NW-G1 Neutral White 4000K, 70 CRI Generation 1 WW-G1 Warm White 3000K, 70 CRI Generation 1 Customer specified RAL Specify CC optional color or RAL (ex: OC-LGP or OC-RAL7024) Custom color (Must supply color chip for required factory quote) DynaDimmer: Automatic Profile Dimming CS50 Safety 50% Dimming (7 hours) 7,9,10 CM50 Median 50% Dimming (8 hours) 7,9,10 CE50 Economy 50% Dimming (9 hours) 7,9,10 DA50 All Night 50% Dimming 7,9,10 Photoelectric/Receptacle systems (Twist Lock Receptacle) Photocontrol Button 5,10,11,12 PCB TLRD5 Twist Lock Receptacle 5-Pin 13 TLRD7 Twist Lock Receptacle 7-Pin 13 TLRPC Twist Lock Receptacle w/ Photocell 11,12,16 Infrared Motion Response systems IMRI2 Integral with #2 lens 9,12,14 IMRI3 Integral with #4 lens 9,12,14 Network system (SiteWise) SW SW Integral module 4,17 Wireless system LLC2 LLC3 Integral module with #2 lens 5,7,9,15 Integral module with #3 lens 5,7,9,15 1. 650mA only available with Emergency Battery Pack Cold 8. Available in 32L with …
Architects Clayton&Little /Field Report Seaholm Power Plant Rehabilitation Report on Methods of Selection of Cleaning Process for Exterior Concrete Issued: 9.4.12 Action Item 1. 6.15.12 7:30 am Attended by: Elizabeth Brummett (EB) – Texas Historical Commission; Dave Stauch (DS) & Bill McCann (BM) – HS&A; Emily Little (EL) & George Wilcox (GW) – Clayton&Little Architects 1. After a visual inspection of all four facades of the Fuel Oil Building, the eastern façade was selected for test cleaning as being representative of the overall project. Reference Photograph A for a photo of the eastern façade before any cleaning work was done. 2. Four cleaning methods were decided upon (per specifications provided by Pat Sparks, PE, Principal at Sparks Engineering), and test “panels” identified; reference Photograph B. These panels will be referred to as 1, 2 (a & b), 3 & 4. GW applied cleaning solutions, BM operated the pressure washer. Test cleaning methods were as follows, with the pressure washer equipped with a 15 degree fan tip that was held approximately 10” to 12” off of the wall: a. Panel 1 – Water only, no cleaning chemical applied, panel cleaned with 2,500 psi ambient temperature water only. Horizontal spray pattern was used on the entire panel and on the right half of the panel a second pass with vertical spray pattern was used. Horizontal spray pattern took approximately 3.5 minutes and the subsequent vertical spray pattern on right half took approximately 2 minutes. b. Panel 2 – “Simple Green” spray detergent (non-ionic neutral pH detergent) applied at 50% concentration on left half of panel, labeled 2a. “Simple Green” spray detergent applied at full strength on right half of panel, labeled 2b. After an approximate 10 minute delay, the overall panel was then cleaned with 2,500 psi ambient temperature water. Horizontal spray pattern was used on the entire panel and on the bottom half of the panel, a second pass with a vertical spray pattern was used. Horizontal spray pattern took approximately 3.5 minutes and the subsequent vertical spray pattern on the bottom half took approximately 2 minutes. c. Panel 3 – “Concrobium Mold Control” product spray applied at full strength on panel; this product is a 0.95% concentration of sodium carbonate. After an approximate 15 minute delay, the overall panel was then cleaned with 2,500 psi ambient temperature water. Horizontal spray pattern was used on the entire panel and on the …
