HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION Applications for Demolition and Relocation Permits November 4, 2026 PR-2026-125678 3308 Cherry Lane 22 – 1 Proposal Demolish a ca. 1949 house. Architecture This single-story L-shaped house is simple in form and does not have many decorative elements. The front façade features a small center recessed porch set a few steps above grade and accessed via concrete stairs. There are three 6-over-6 wood windows on this side, two of which feature decorative shutters. The side gabled roof is set at a moderate pitch, and features a small front gable projecting out toward the street. The lap siding that clads the house is original and in good condition. Overall, this property has not been significantly altered and is an excellent intact example of port-WWII housing in this area of Austin. Research Original owners of this house were Brunelle & Mildred Moon, who raised at least one child while living at the address. Brunelle worked as a cabinet maker, and together the family stayed at the property until around 1950. By the 1960s, it was owned by Nelda Ryden (later Nelda Starkey), who worked as a typist and office secretary. During this time, she raised daughter Teri Kay Starkey until she married and moved out in 1972. Nelda Starkey was listed as the owner until around 1976, at which time she worked for the Austin Chamber of Commerce. Department Comments This application will time out on December 18, 2027. Property Evaluation Designation Criteria—Historic Landmark 1) The building is more than 50 years old. 2) The building appears to retain integrity. 3) Properties must meet two criteria for landmark designation (LDC §25-2-352). Staff have evaluated the property and determined that it does not meet two criteria for landmark designation: a. Architecture. The building is an excellent example of 1940s minimal traditional architecture. b. Historical association. The property does not appear to have significant historical associations. c. Archaeology. The property was not evaluated for its potential to yield significant data concerning the human history or prehistory of the region. d. Community value. The property does not possess a unique location, physical characteristic, or significant feature that contributes to the character, image, or cultural identity of the city, the neighborhood, or a particular demographic group. e. Landscape feature. The property is not a significant natural or designed landscape with artistic, aesthetic, cultural, or historical value to the city. Staff Recommendation Encourage rehabilitation …
GUIDELINES FOR SIGNS IN NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICTS OR AT A CITY HISTORIC LANDMARKHISTORIC SIGN STANDARDS These standards apply to City of Austin historic landmarks, local historic districts, and National Register districts. The Historic Landmark Commission and City Historic Preservation Office consider the following guidelines these standards in reviewing new sign applications for signage and changes to existing signage, per City of Austin Land Development Code § 25- 10-81. Purpose These standards explain requirements for new signage and preservation and maintenance of existing signage. They apply to all types of exterior signage. All signs must comply with applicable standards in the Land Development Code. Historic Preservation Office staff may refer any sign application to the Historic Landmark Commission. What Is a Sign? The Land Development Code § 25-10-4 (18) defines a sign as “a display surface, structure, light device, banner, plaque, poster, billboard, pennant, figure, painting, drawing, flag, or other thing, whether mounted on land, air, or water, that is designed, intended, or used to display or draw attention to a communicative visual or graphic image, whether or not the image includes lettering, and that is visible from any portion of the public right-of-way open to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. A sign includes both on- and off-premise signs, including billboards, and any moving part, lighting, sound equipment, framework, background material, structural support, or other part thereof.” Definitions Historic Sign: Any sign, as defined by the City of Austin Land Development Code definition (Section 25-10-4 (18)) and/or otherwise meeting the requirements of Section 25-10-121, that is included within the designation language of the district or property, was present on the building or building site at the time of designation, or meets other requirements for review by the Historic Preservation Office and/or Historic Landmark Commission, such as minimum age or cultural importance. Preservation: Preserve historic signs, such as ghost signs or other signs characteristic of the building’s or district’s period of significance or those that have otherwise gained cultural importance whenever feasible. Maintenance: Repair historic signs and replace historic parts in-kind when deteriorated beyond repair. STANDARDS FOR NEW SIGNS Number of Signs: The Commission Each building is allowspermitted one sign per building, unless the building has multiple tenants;. iIn thise case of multiple tenants, the Commission may allow one sign per façade module is permitted, provided thatif the façade modules correspond to tenant spaces. The Commission may also allow oOne sign for …
REGULAR MEETING OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 2026, AT 6:00 P.M. PERMITTING AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER, ROOM 1405 6310 WILHELMINA DELCO DRIVE AUSTIN, TEXAS Some members of the Environmental Commission may be participating by videoconference. The meeting may be viewed online at: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch-atxn-live Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely via telephone. Speakers may only register to speak on an item once either in-person or remotely and will be allowed up to three minutes to provide their comments. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required for remote participation by telephone. To register to speak remotely, contact Nicole Corona, 737-291-3084, Nicole.Corona@austintexas.gov. CURRENT COMMISSIONERS: Mariana Krueger, Chair Jennifer Bristol, Vice Chair Haris Qureshi, Secretary Sean Atkins Richard Brimer Isabella Changsut AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL Annie Fierro Justin Fleury Martin Luecke Allison Morrison David Sullivan The first ten speakers signed up prior to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Environmental Commission Regular Meeting on October 21, 2026. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 2. Approve a recommendation to Council for proposed amendments to the existing Interlocal Agreement between the City of Austin and the University of Texas related to the area generally bounded by Lady Bird Lake (formerly Town Lake) to the south and west, Enfield Road and 8th Street to the north, and Veterans Drive and Hearn Street to the east that establishes the parties' expectations related to the conveyance of Lion's Municipal Golf Course (Muny), development regulations, the vacation of City rights-of-way, the creation of a regulating plan, and the creation of a tax increment reinvestment zone (TIRZ). Sponsored by Chair Krueger and Commissioner Brimer. 3. Approve the creation of a working group for bird-friendly design to update Staff and City Council on data requested in the memorandum and staff report from January 16, 2026. Sponsored by Chair Krueger and Vice Chair Bristol. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS City Code requires at least two board members sponsor an item to be included on an agenda. This section of the agenda provides members an opportunity to request items for future agendas. Staff should assume that if there is no objection from other members expressed at the meeting, the members’ silence indicates approval for staff to include on the next …
REGULAR MEETING ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION MINUTES WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 2026 The Environmental Commission convened in a regular meeting on Wednesday, October 21, 2026, at the Permitting and Development Center, Room 1405, located at 6310 Wilhelmina Delco Drive in Austin, Texas. Chair Krueger called the Environmental Commission Meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Commissioners in Attendance: Mariana Krueger, Chair Haris Qureshi, Secretary Richard Brimer Isabella Changsut Justin Fleury Martin Luecke David Sullivan Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Sean Atkins PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL None present. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Environmental Commission Regular Meeting on October 7, 2026. The minutes from the Environmental Commission Regular Meeting on October 7, 2026, were approved on Commissioner Sullivan’s motion, Commissioner Brimer’s, on a 7-0 vote. Commissioner Changsut was off the dais. Vice Chair Bristol and Commissioners Fierro and Morrison were absent. STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. Staff briefing regarding Sustainable Building Materials Forum and hands-on deconstruction workshop to increase local contractors’ capacity, salvage high-quality materials for reuse, and reduce demolition waste. Presentation by Cara Bertron, Program Manager II, Austin Planning; Beth Larkin, Project Manager, Austin Parks and Recreation; and Elizabeth Nelson, Planner Principal, Austin Resource Recovery. 1 The presentation was made by Cara Bertron, Program Manager II, Austin Planning; Beth Larkin, Project Manager, Austin Parks and Recreation; and Elizabeth Nelson, Planner Principal, Austin Resource Recovery. 3. Staff briefing regarding proposed amendments to the existing Interlocal Agreement between the City and the University of Texas related to the area generally bounded by Lady Bird Lake (formerly Town Lake) to the south and west, Enfield Road and 8th Street to the north, and Veterans Drive and Hearn Street to the east that establishes the parties' expectations related to the conveyance of Lion's Municipal Golf Course (Muny), development regulations, the vacation of City rights-of-way, the creation of a regulating plan, and the creation of a tax increment reinvestment zone (TIRZ). Presentation by Trish Link, Division Chief, Land Use and Real Estate, Austin City Attorney's Office, and Kim Olivares, Director, Austin Financial Services. The presentation was made by Trish Link, Division Chief, Land Use and Real Estate, Austin City Attorney's Office, and Kim Olivares, Director, Austin Financial Services. The meeting was recessed from 8:33 p.m. until 8:44 p.m. without objection. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 4. Discussion and action to approve a recommendation to Council regarding the Green Infrastructure Initiative. Presentation by David Sullivan, Environmental Commissioner. Sponsored by Chair Krueger …
. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Environmental Commission Recommendation 20261104-002: City of Austin and University of Texas Brackenridge Interlocal Agreement WHEREAS, the City of Austin and the University of Texas at Austin propose to amend the 1989 Brackenridge Development Agreement (BDA) to preserve Lion’s Municipal Golf Course (Muny) as an open public green space for the people of Austin and prepare the remaining 190 acres of university-owned land for the benefit of the University community; and WHEREAS, the BDA will describe the general process for the conveyance of Muny, a proposed update to the University’s lease of property at Mueller, the exchange of City rights-of-way, the proposed creation of a tax increment reinvestment zone (TIRZ) and the development of a mutually agreed to regulating plan; and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Environmental Commission recommends Council adopt the following additional requirements as part of the amended BDA: • Maximum height limits of all buildings be limited to 75 feet. • Require adherence to City Codes Chapter 6-2, 25-8-520 and 30-5 regarding the environment and storage of hazardous materials by the University and subsequent owners of the property within the amended BDA. • City of Austin’s Heritage Tree Ordinance shall be enforced. Mitigation of trees shall be within the BDA unless authorized by the City Arborist. • Limit impervious cover to 67 percent of each parcel. . • Impervious cover shall not be transferred between sites. • Maximum impervious cover for sites is 70 percent. • Floor area ratio (FAR) per site development shall not exceed .6:1 FAR unless Council authorizes an increase in FAR for the site using the process to rezone property. • Establish a setback of 250 feet landward from the shoreline. • Prohibit impervious cover within the 250-foot setback. • Require adherence cut/fill 5-8-341, and 25-8-342 of the City Code regarding cut and fill requirements. • Require adherence slope regulations including, but not limited to Sections 30-5- 302, 25-2-1122 and 25-2-1123 of City Code. • Require a public easement within the setback from Lady Bird Lake to allow for a hike and bike trail administered by the Austin Parks and Recreation Department. • Require the University to retain the Brackenridge Field Laboratory for a minimum of fifty years under the same conditions as provided by the current BDA agreement. • Should the University decide to close the Brackenridge Field Laboratory, require the University to give the option to the …
RESOLUTION NO. 20241121-073 WHEREAS, the City of Austin is committed to promoting environmental sustainability and biodiversity as a key part of its climate resilience and sustainability initiatives; and WHEREAS, Texas is recognized nationally and internationally for its important migration corridors for birds, with approximately one of every three birds migrating through the U.S. in the spring, and one of every four birds migrating through the U.S. in the fall, or nearly two billion birds, passing through every year; and WHEREAS, tourism generated from bird-watching brings more than $1.8 billion into the state’s economy annually; and WHEREAS, bird populations face significant threats from collisions with buildings, particularly due to glass structures and night lighting, which result in one billion bird fatalities every year from collisions with manmade structures in the United States; and WHEREAS, Audubon Texas initiated the Lights Out, Texas! campaign of education, awareness, and action that focuses on protecting the billions of migratory birds traveling through Texas; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 20210902-050 previously directed the City Manager to initiate a program to turn off non-essential lighting in City buildings where feasible during peak fall and spring bird migration periods; and WHEREAS, Audubon Texas and the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department created the Bird City Texas campaign to promote science-based bird conservation initiatives and community-centric action; and Page 1 of 4 WHEREAS, the City of Austin became a Bird City in 2023; and WHEREAS, the Travis Audubon Society has been a leading conservation organization in Travis County since 1952, and in 2024, they contracted with bird- friendly design expert Heidi Trudell to present a report on bird friendly building design to the South-Central Waterfront Commission, Design Commission and Environmental Commission; and WHEREAS, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in partnership with the American Bird Conservancy, DarkSky International, and Yale University has developed Bird-Friendly Building Toolkits that provide strategies and guidelines for designing and retrofitting low-rise, mid-rise and high-rise buildings to reduce bird collisions through the use of bird-friendly materials, lighting strategies, landscaping, and architectural designs; and WHEREAS, cities across the United States, including New York, Madison, San Francisco and twenty-three other cities, have successfully adopted bird- friendly building standards, demonstrating the feasibility and benefits of such measures; and WHEREAS, the integration ofbird-friendly building design supports Austin's existing efforts to protect wildlife habitats, promote urban biodiversity and sustainable development practices and provides an opportunity to lead by example in environmental stewardship; …
To: Through: From: Date: Subject: MEMORANDUM Mayor and City Council Susana Carbajal, Assistant City Manager Jorge L. Morales, P.E., CFM, Austin Watershed Protection Director January 16, 2026 Staff Response Related to Bird Friendly Design (Resolution No. 20241121-073) The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a response to Resolution No. 20241121-073 related to bird-friendly design. Staff developed a comprehensive report on bird-friendly building design implementation informed by stakeholder engagement with local developers, environmental organizations, and members of the public using virtual sessions, public tours, and professional roundtable discussions in collaboration with the American Institute of Architects. The staff report provides an overview of the impact that building collisions and light pollution have on bird populations and how Austin can address the problem through an examination of available building solutions, cost feasibility, and regulatory frameworks from peer cities including New York, Madison, Portland, Toronto, Berkeley, and Arlington County, Va. The research also explores how Austin's built environment and land development regulations present many opportunities for bird- friendly design implementation, including already existing regulatory mechanisms and programs like the Austin Energy Green Building program and Planned Unit Development (PUD) Zoning. These findings, while clearly illustrating the broad concern about bird collisions and light pollution, lack the context of robust local data, an issue that was raised several times during the boards and commissions stakeholder engagement process. Staff also acknowledge the significant community concern for affordability. Given these findings, staff suggest the following steps be taken in advance of providing final recommendations on specific code amendments and guidelines: 1. Bird collision data collection over the 2026 spring and fall migration seasons Build off national research data and findings to further explore the impact that Austin’s built environment has on the rate of bird collisions. Staff will engage with local organizations including Travis Audubon and area universities/colleges to encourage and advise on local bird collision data collection during two migration seasons (spring and fall). The data will provide information to tailor any future regulation recommendations to Austin’s unique landscape. Page 1 of 2 City of Austin Climate, Water, Environment, and Parks Committee Meeting Backup: January 28, 2026File ID: 26-2781Page 1 of 38 Date: Subject: January 16, 2026 Staff Response Related to Bird Friendly Design (Resolution No. 20241121-0173) 2. Coordinated updates to Austin Energy Green Building program policies Staff recommend ongoing interdepartmental coordination with Austin Energy to implement progressive enhancements to existing green building frameworks …
REGULAR MEETING OF THE COMMISSION ON AGING NOVEMBER 4, 2026, 12:00 P.M. AUSTIN ENERGY HEADQUARTERS, SHUDDE FATH ASSEMBLY HALL 4815 MUELLER BLVD AUSTIN, TEXAS 78723 Some members of the Commission on Aging may be participating by videoconference. Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely via telephone. Speakers may only register to speak on an item once either in-person or remotely and will be allowed up to three minutes to provide their comments. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required for remote participation by telephone. To register to speak remotely, call or email Ryan Sperling, 512-974-3568, Ryan.Sperling@austintexas.gov. CURRENT COMMISSIONERS: Richard Bondi, Chair Teresa Ferguson, Vice Chair Suzanne Anderson Martin Kareithi Faith Lane Fred Lugo Agnieszka Ozarowski Jennifer Scott Luan Tran Preston Tyree Henry Van de Putte Selina Yee Xiaoyi Zeng AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first ten speakers signed up prior to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the September 9, 2026 and October 14, 2026 regular Commission on Aging meetings. STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. Staff briefing regarding the Human Rights Impact Review and Report. [Dr. Lindsey Wilson, Director, Austin Equity and Inclusion and Shafina Khaki, Human Rights Officer, Austin Equity and Inclusion] DISCUSSION ITEMS 3. Update on the October 26, 2026 Age Friendly Advisory Committee Meeting. 4. Update on the status of proclamations approved at the September 9, 2026 Commission on Aging meeting. WORKING GROUP UPDATES 5. Update from FY2027-28 Budget Working Group regarding the first meeting and next steps. 6. Update from Quality of Life Study Analysis Working Group regarding their previous recommendations and additional changes to recommendations. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ADJOURNMENT The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications will be provided upon request. For assistance, please contact the Liaison or TTY users’ route through 711. A person may request language access accommodations no later than 48 hours before the scheduled meeting. Please call or email Ryan Sperling at Austin City Clerk’s Office, at 512- 974-3568 or ryan.sperling@austintexas.gov, to request service or for additional information. For more information on the Commission on Aging, please contact Ryan Sperling at 512- 974-3568 or ryan.sperling@austintexas.gov.
COMMISSION ON AGING REGULAR MEETING MINUTES WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2026 The Commission on Aging convened in a regular meeting on Wednesday, October 14, 2026, at Austin City Hall, Boards and Commissions Room 1101, 301 W 2nd Street in Austin, Texas. Chair Bondi called the Commission on Aging Meeting to order at 12:09 p.m. Commissioners in Attendance: Richard Bondi (Chair) Xiaoyi Zeng Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Teresa Ferguson (Vice Chair) Suzanne Anderson Faith Lane Fred Lugo Agnes Ozarowski Jennifer Scott Preston Tyree Henry Van de Putte Selina Yee PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Commission on Aging meeting of October 14, 2026. Withdrawn without objection. STAFF BRIEFINGS 2. Staff briefing regarding the “Age-Friendly Austin News!” quarterly newsletter and Public Health Emergency Preparedness Team efforts on dispensing supplies during emergencies. Briefing by 1 Nicole Alexander, Age Friendly Program Coordinator, Planning and Evaluation Unit, Health Equity and Community Engagement Division, APH. The presentation was made by Nicole Alexander, Age Friendly Program Coordinator, Planning and Evaluation Unit, Health Equity and Community Engagement Division, APH. COMMITTEE UPDATES 3. Update on discussions and actions at the October 5, 2026 Age Friendly Advisory Committee meeting. Update by Chair Bondi. DISCUSSION ITEMS 4. Presentation regarding the National Association of Caregiving (NAC) 2025 Caregiving in the US Report. Presentation by Commissioner Jennifer Scott. Presentation by Jennifer Scott. 5. Joint Inclusion Committee update regarding a calendar for member presentations. Update by Chair Bondi. 6. Discussion regarding the status of proclamation recommendations approved at the September 9th Commission on Aging meeting. Update by Chair Bondi. 7. Update on the status of social services contracts in the FY2026-27 budget. Update by Chair Bondi. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 8. Discuss potential locations for next year’s meetings and approve the 2027 Commission on Aging Annual Meeting Schedule. The 2027 Annual Meeting Schedule of the Commission on Aging was approved on Commissioner Lugo’s motion, Commissioner Anderson’s second on an 11-0 vote. Commissioners Kareithi and Tran were absent. 9. Approve a recommendation regarding the Age Friendly Action Plan 2026-2030. There was a motion by Chair Bondi, seconded by Vice Chair Ferguson, to strike “AARP” and insert “World Health Organization/AARP Age Friendly Network”. The motion was approved on an 11-0 vote. Commissioners Kareithi and Tran were absent. The recommendation was approved as amended on Commissioner Anderson’s motion, Commissioner Scott’s second on an 11-0 vote. Commissioners Kareithi and Tran were absent. …
COMMISSION ON AGING REGULAR MEETING MINUTES WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 2026 The Commission on Aging convened in a regular meeting on Wednesday, September 9, 2026, at Austin City Hall, Boards and Commissions Room 1101, 301 W 2nd Street in Austin, Texas. Chair Bondi called the Commission on Aging Meeting to order at 12:09 p.m. Commissioners in Attendance: Richard Bondi Selina Yee Xiaoyi Zeng Agnieszka Ozarowski Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Suzanne Anderson Martin Kareithi Faith Lane Fred Lugo Jennifer Scott Preston Tyree PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Commission of Aging on August 12, 2026. 10-0 vote. The August 12, 2026 minutes were approved with amendments to strike a duplicate call to order line and correct the meeting location on Commissioner Anderson’s motion, Commissioner Ozarowski’s second on a 10-0 vote. Vice Chair Ferguson and Commissioners Tran and Van de Putte were absent. DISCUSSION ITEMS 2. Discussion on the wrapping up of proclamations recommended at the June meeting. Update by Chair Bondi. 1 3. Review of revised bluelines for Age Friendly Action Plan (AFAP) Focus Areas One and Two. Discussion was held. 4. Discussion regarding AFAP Focus Area Three. Discussion was held. 5. Discussion regarding potential updates to the previously approved Commission on 2026-2030 internal framework. Discussion was held. 6. Update on Joint Inclusion Committee discussions at the August 26 meeting. Update by Chair Bondi. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 7. Approve a recommendation to Council for a proclamation on National Adult Day Services Week – September 20-26. The recommendation to Council for a proclamation on National Adult Day Services Week was approved on Commissioner Scott’s motion, Commissioner Anderson’s motion on a 10-0 vote. Vice Chair Ferguson and Commissioners Tran and Van de Putte were absent. 8. Approve a recommendation to Council for a proclamation on Health Literacy Month – October. The recommendation to Council for a proclamation on Health Literacy Month was approved on Commissioner Lugo’s motion, Commissioner Scott’s second on a 10-0 vote. Vice Chair Ferguson and Commissioners Tran and Van de Putte were absent. 9. Approve a recommendation to Council for a proclamation on Veterans Day – November 11. The recommendation to Council for a proclamation on Veterans Day was approved on Commissioner Tyree’s motion, Commissioner Anderson’s second on a 10-0 vote. Vice Chair Ferguson and Commissioners Tran and Van de Putte were absent. 10. Approve a recommendation to Council …
URTH CAFFÈ HLC BRIEFING November 4, 2026 PROJECT BRIEFING: 1. SPE UPDATE • Austin Energy requirements to meet pole clearances impacted original building position of the 104 Medina St. bakery building. This was not reviewed by AE during permitting, and therefor required design team to resubmit a plan revision and site plan exemption to update bakery building position to meet AE requirements for distance of building to pole clearances. Both the SPE and building plan revision have been approved by the city of Austin as of October 16, 2026. 2. CONSTRUCTION PROGRESS • Concrete foundations have been poured for both the 104 Medina St. building and the 1010 E Cesar Chavez Main Restaurant building. • Framing is underway for both the 104 Medina St. building and the 1010 E Cesar Chavez Main Restaurant building. 3. HISTORIC FACADE PRESERVATION • Preservation of the historic “L” front facade will begin by completing all framing/ sheathing for new wall construction, ensuring a tight building envelope before adding the required sheathing for the historic “L” facade to meet current fire rating requirements. Framing/sheathing of the historic “L” front facade will be completed last to maintain the integrity of the existing wall system. • GC to begin work from the interior of the historic “L” facade by removing existing ship lap, removing all nails, and removing and preserving interior ship lap for re-use on other projects (Urth corporate elected not to maintain this original interior finish). • Nails will be carefully removed from the exterior historic siding so the siding can be removed and placed in the GC’s climate-controlled shop for storage. Any rotten or damaged siding found insufficient for reinstallation will be replaced with new custom milled cedar matching the original siding profile. • Structural sheathing and GlassMat Securock must be installed over the existing studs on the exterior side to meet the building code’s 1-hour fire rating requirements. • Waterproofing will be installed before the historic siding is reinstalled. CITY OF AUSTIN COMMUNICATION SEPTEMBER 11, 2024 — ARC REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOVEMBER 11, 2024 — ARC REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING DECEMBER 4, 2024 — HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETING AND APPROVAL APRIL 28, 2025 — INITIAL PERMIT SUBMISSION JUNE 2, 2025 — RESUBMISSION 1 JULY 24, 2025 — RESUBMISSION 2 NOVEMBER 20, 2025 — RESUBMISSION 3 DECEMBER 13, 2025 — PERMIT APPROVAL MARCH 2, 2026 — SELECTIVE DEMOLITION START DATE MARCH 10, 2026 — STOP …
24'-2 1/8" 15'-7 5/8" 2'-10 1/2" 5'-8" 4'-11" 1'-7 1/4" 1 6 2 0 F O R A B E T T E R A R C H I T E C T U R E & I N T E R I O R S NO PROTECTED TREES ON PROPERTY REMOVED ONE STORY FRAME RESIDENCE TO BE MOVED " 8 / 1 8 - ' 4 " 8 / 7 3 - ' 4 " 4 / 1 0 1 - ' 9 " 8 / 5 2 - ' 0 1 " 8 / 7 0 - ' 0 2 REF 2 0 3 0 STOVE 1 6 2 0 KITCHEN 3 0 68 MECH. 2 0 68 BATHROOM CLOSET 2 0 68 4 0 68 2 6 68 LIVING BEDROOM 3 0 68 2 0 3 0 5'-7 1/4" 2'-9 1/2" 12'-10 5/8" 24'-2 1/8" 2 0 3 0 11'-3 1/2" 5'-7 3/4" N PLAN SITE PLAN 1 / 3 2 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 PLAN DIMENSIONED FLOOR PLAN 2 1 / 4 " = 1 ' - 0 " " 8 / 1 1 - ' 4 " 2 / 1 4 - ' 8 1 6 2 0 " 8 / 7 0 - ' 0 2 " 8 / 3 8 - ' 1 1 2 0 3 0 " 4 / 1 0 1 - ' 5 N IMAGE EXHIBIT 3 SOUTH (FRONT) WEST (EAST SIM. & OBSCURED BY PLANTS) NORTH ISTERED K C I TR A P G E R IHCRA O USE Y T E C T M KR A S S 6 9551 OFETAT TEXA XX-XX-22 EXPIRES: 10/31/23 E V O M K R O Y W E N E V O M E S U O H 2 0 7 8 7 • X T , N I T S U A • E V A K R O Y W E N 2 0 0 2 DATE: PERMIT SET 2025-09-08 REVISIONS: THESE DRAWINGS ARE PROPERTY OF THE ARCHITECT AND MAY ONLY BE USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THIS PROJECT CAUTION: DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS FIRST FLOOR PLAN A1.1 EXPIRES:10/31/2509/10/25 SOUTH ELEVATION - FRONT EAST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION - REAR WEST ELEVATION To whom it may concern: I am the beneficiary of the Trust which is requesting the relocation of this building. My father bought the …
URTH CAFFÈ HLC BRIEFING November 4, 2026 PROJECT BRIEFING: 1. SPE UPDATE • Austin Energy requirements to meet pole clearances impacted original building position of the 104 Medina St. bakery building. This was not reviewed by AE during permitting, and therefor required design team to resubmit a plan revision and site plan exemption to update bakery building position to meet AE requirements for distance of building to pole clearances. Both the SPE and building plan revision have been approved by the city of Austin as of October 16, 2026. 2. CONSTRUCTION PROGRESS • Concrete foundations have been poured for both the 104 Medina St. building and the 1010 E Cesar Chavez Main Restaurant building. • Framing is underway for both the 104 Medina St. building and the 1010 E Cesar Chavez Main Restaurant building. 3. HISTORIC FACADE PRESERVATION • Preservation of the historic “L” front facade will begin by completing all framing/ sheathing for new wall construction, ensuring a tight building envelope before adding the required sheathing for the historic “L” facade to meet current fire rating requirements. Framing/sheathing of the historic “L” front facade will be completed last to maintain the integrity of the existing wall system. • GC to begin work from the interior of the historic “L” facade by removing existing ship lap, removing all nails, and removing and preserving interior ship lap for re-use on other projects (Urth corporate elected not to maintain this original interior finish). • Nails will be carefully removed from the exterior historic siding so the siding can be removed and placed in the GC’s climate-controlled shop for storage. Any rotten or damaged siding found insufficient for reinstallation will be replaced with new custom milled cedar matching the original siding profile. • Structural sheathing and GlassMat Securock must be installed over the existing studs on the exterior side to meet the building code’s 1-hour fire rating requirements. • Waterproofing will be installed before the historic siding is reinstalled. CITY OF AUSTIN COMMUNICATION SEPTEMBER 11, 2024 — ARC REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING NOVEMBER 11, 2024 — ARC REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING DECEMBER 4, 2024 — HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION MEETING AND APPROVAL APRIL 28, 2025 — INITIAL PERMIT SUBMISSION JUNE 2, 2025 — RESUBMISSION 1 JULY 24, 2025 — RESUBMISSION 2 NOVEMBER 20, 2025 — RESUBMISSION 3 DECEMBER 13, 2025 — PERMIT APPROVAL MARCH 2, 2026 — SELECTIVE DEMOLITION START DATE MARCH 10, 2026 — STOP …
ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET CASE NUMBER: C14H-2026-0063 HLC DATE: November 4, 2026 PC DATE: CC Date: APPLICANT: Loren Kirkpatrick HISTORIC NAME: White-Sheffield House WATERSHED: Waller Creek ADDRESS OF PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE: 103 West 33rd Street, North University NP ZONING CHANGE: SF-3-HD-NCCD-NP to SF-3-H-HD-NCCD-NP COUNCIL DISTRICT: 9 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the proposed zoning change from family residence- historic district-neighborhood conservation combining district-neighborhod plan (SF-3-HD-NCCD- NP) zoning to from family residence-historic landmark-historic district-neighborhood conservation combining district-neighborhod plan (SF-3-H-HD-NCCD-NP) combining district zoning. QUALIFICATIONS FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION: architecture, community value, and historical associations. HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION ACTION: PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: CITY COUNCIL ACTION: CASE MANAGER: Austin Lukes, 512-978-0766 NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS: Aldridge Place Local Historic District Board, Austin Neighborhoods Council, CANPAC (Central Austin Neigh Plan Area Committee), Friends of Austin Neighborhoods, Homeless Neighborhood Association, North University Neighborhood Association, North University Neighborhood Association Development Review Committee, Preservation Austin DEPARTMENT COMMENTS: This property is listed as a contributing property to the Aldridge Place local historic district. BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATION: § 25-2-352(3)(c)(i) Architecture. The property embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a recognized architectural style, type, or method of construction; exemplifies technological innovation in design or construction; displays high artistic value in representing ethnic or folk art, architecture, or construction; represents a rare example of an architectural style in the city; serves as an outstanding example of the work of an architect, builder, or artisan who significantly contributed to the development of the city, state, or nation; possesses cultural, historical, or architectural value as a particularly fine or unique example of a utilitarian or vernacular structure; or represents an architectural curiosity or one-of-a-kind building. Located in the Aldridge Place local historic district, the White-Sheffield House is an exceptional example of Craftsman and Arts & Crafts details that is largely unaltered in the area. Details such as exposed rafters and wide eaves, while common amongst other houses in the district, are oriented in such a way in this house that it emphasizes the horizontal while also gently sloping upwards towards the peak of the roof. Combined with the wide front porch, which features a very wide span without columns or supports uncommon to this era of construction, the horizontality of the design is emphasized by the symmetry of the front façade with its paired windows on either side of the central front door with large dormer above, projecting from the side-gabled roof. While roofing material is not original to …
architectural elements that lend themselves in scope and size to many of the homes on our street and in this historic district. Like so many homes in the Travis Heights-Fairview Park District and on E. Monroe street, this 1920s Craftsman bungalow being considered for demolition is a contributing structure within the Travis Heights-Fairview Park National Register Historic District and appears to retain strong architectural integrity. We are concerned that demolition of this contributing structure would remove an important piece of the historic fabric of the neighborhood. As you know, historic districts derive much of their character from the collection of individual buildings that remain in place. Once a contributing house is demolished, its contribution to the district cannot truly be replaced by a new structure, regardless of how well designed that new structure might be. As direct neighbors to this property we value the historic character and continuity of E. Monroe and our neighborhood. The loss of 706 E. Monroe would affect not only the property itself but also the surrounding streetscape and the historic district as a whole. What will that mean for future development of our neighborhood? Will it set a precedent to raze any “old” structure? Our neighborhood's culture was built upon contributing structures like this one, where front porch conversations with fellow passersby are frequent and critical for community connection among our neighbors. We believe Austin has an obligation to protect the historic resources that make these neighborhoods distinctive - that make this city distinctive, and that cannot be recreated once gone. We respectfully ask the Historic Landmark Commission to: 1. Deny the requested demolition of the contributing structure at 706 E. Monroe Street, and 2. Request the applicant to continue exploring feasible alternatives to demolition. We truly hope this letter gives the Commission pause before allowing the permanent loss of this contributing structure. Perhaps walk the several blocks of E. Monroe and see for yourselves.This home, like many similar homes in our neighborhood, is a treasure to our local heritage and warrants protection and preservation for future generations and for the city of Austin. Sincerely, Kim-Marie and Dermot O’Driscoll *Photos of home in consideration for demolition attached below. View looking east from 706 E Monroe 708 and 710 E. Monroe: Contributing structures next to 706 E. Monroe. CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe …
2. Direct the applicant to continue exploring all feasible alternatives to demolition, including preservation, rehabilitation, and adaptive reuse. This home is more than a building. It is a tangible part of Travis Heights' history, character, and identity. It deserves to be protected for the benefit of current residents and future generations alike. Respectfully, Ann and Eric Darcy CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at "cybersecurity@austintexas.gov".
CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at "cybersecurity@austintexas.gov".
October 30, 2026 TO: Mike McHone University Area Partners (UAP) Austin, Texas FROM: A West Campus Stakeholder & Property Occupant (20+ Years) 909 W. 22 ½ Street, Austin, TX 78705 SUBJECT: Urgent UAP Stakeholder Intervention — Formal Opposition to Total Demolition Application: 909 W. 22 ½ Street (HLC Case No. PR-2026-127240 | Public Hearing: November 4, 2026, 6:00 PM) Dear Mike, I am writing to you directly in your leadership role with University Area Partners on behalf of dedicated neighborhood stakeholders who have lived, invested, and operated in West Campus for more than twenty years. The City of Austin Historic Preservation Office has formally posted an official Historic Landmark Commission (HLC) public hearing placard at 909 W. 22 ½ Street for Wednesday, November 4, 2026, at 6:00 PM at City Hall (301 W. 2nd Street). Critically, on the official city placard for Case No. PR-2026-127240, the applicant has specifically struck through "Relocation" and checked "Demolition." Rather than pursuing an adaptive reuse plan, sensitive relocation, façade preservation, or an integrated infill design, the applicant intends to execute a total scrape and land clearing of one of the most intact turn-of-the-century landmark structures remaining in the University area. As long-term neighborhood stakeholders who have witnessed decades of West Campus growth and evolution under the University Neighborhood Overlay (UNO), we recognize and support thoughtful, high-density residential housing for students and residents. However, density must not come at the expense of our most historically and architecturally significant civic landmarks. Below is a comprehensive historical dossier, genealogical lineage, family commercial profile, and architectural evaluation demonstrating why 909 W. 22 ½ Street meets multiple criteria for City of Austin Historic Landmark designation and must not be demolished. I. ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION & FAÇADE ANALYSIS 909 W. 22 ½ Street is a textbook, high-integrity two-story Late Victorian / Transitional Queen Anne residence constructed circa 1907. Unlike the vast majority of original West Campus homes that were demolished, heavily reconfigured, stripped of ornamentation, or clad in synthetic siding, 909 retains an exceptional degree of historic fabric: 1. Façade Massing & Rooflines: The structure displays an asymmetrical, steeply pitched cross-gable and hipped roofline typical of high-style Edwardian-era Queen Anne design. The primary street elevation features a prominent, projecting two-story polygonal bay turret terminated by a conical roof form, decorative trim bands, and boxed eaves. 2. Exterior Cladding & Millwork: The exterior preserves original, narrow-profile horizontal wood lap (drop) siding with …
Mayor’s Committee for People with Disabilities Human Rights Impact Review Austin Equity and Inclusion Aging Commission Wednesday, November 04, 2026 What is a Human Rights Framework? A human rights framework evaluates government performance through the lens of residents’ rights, and equitable access to services. dignity, Rather than asking whether programs exist, it asks whether people's rights are being fulfilled and where barriers remain. Why is it important and how does it support the City? • Identifies barriers that prevent residents from accessing services. • Improves accountability by measuring outcomes, not just activities. • Informs better decisions that promote equity, dignity, and public trust. • Prioritizes resources where needs and disparities are greatest. 2 Co - Created Impact Review The City engaged Henekom Group, a human rights consulting firm, to conduct an independent Human Rights Impact Review. The review included research across 160+ sources , engagement with 30+ stakeholders and a community workshop with participants and prioritize opportunities across 12 key issue areas. to identify human rights risks 120+ , Result: Co - created recommendations grounded in community input and aligned with international human rights best practices. 3 City of Austin - Human Rights Framework "Design and implement a Human Rights framework for assessing existing City services and programs to improve accessibility and responsiveness for residents' needs." - Austin City Manager’s Top 25 Goal 160+ 300+ Sources and commissions reviewed Stakeholders identified and engaged 120 Registered workshop attendees 92 Issues identified 69 Proposed mitigations for salience 4 Steps to Conduct a Human Rights Impact Review and Report Issue Identification → Mitigation Identification → Stakeholder Engagement → Implementation 1 2 3 4 Desk Research 12 issue areas, 160+ sources Issue & Mitigation Identification Defined salient human rights issues and potential mitigations Stakeholder Mapping Built 300+ stakeholder list with City Departments, Community and City Council recommendations Landscape Assessment Reviewed existing programs, initiatives, ordinances, and laws informed by community and City Council Human Rights Workshop - Building Consensus 5 Multi-stakeholder dialogue at March 23 workshop, approximately 120 attendees 7 6 7 8 9 HeneKom’s Activity Analysis HeneKom scored and identified salient issues and mitigations for priority action set forth by community stakeholders Post Workshop Survey Sent to all registered stakeholders unable to attend to ensure all feedback was collected Human Rights Impact Report Developed feasible municipal strategies based on knowledge- based best practices research Cross-Functional Integration, Briefings and …
Greening Austin: Sustainable Building Materials Forum & Deconstruction Workshop Austin Energy | Austin Parks & Recreation | Austin Planning | Austin Resource Recovery November 4, 2026 Goals Broadly define building sustainability: green building, green retrofits, building retention, building deconstruction, and circular materials Highlight sustainable building initiatives in the Austin area and beyond Workforce development: build practical local capacity for green practices, especially building deconstruction 2 Sustainable Building Materials Forum: Design, (De)Construction, and the Circular Economy November 13, 2026 Forum Free, full-day event open to the public Educational panels Applied workshops on technical specifications and measuring embodied carbon (EC3) Tabling by companies and organizations Breakfast and lunch provided Continuing education credits for AIA and GBCI available 4 Panels The Carbon We've Already Invested: Cutting Emissions through Reuse and Retrofits From Scrappy to Scalable: Building a Reuse Business Innovating for Circularity: Building Technologies, Materials, and Processes That Transform Waste Navigating Challenges and Celebrating Success in Building Deconstruction One Region, Shared Resources: Scaling Material Exchange Rethinking What's Already Built 5 Deconstruction Workshop November 16-20, 2026 Hands-on Training Practical workshop for professional contractors led by experienced trainer Deconstruct a single-family house Workshop will cover safety, site logistics, structural systems and pathology, deconstruction techniques, and materials management Limited spaces available $250 fee 7 Subject Building John Trevino Metro Park Wood-frame house built in late 1950s Used as caretaker’s residence Materials will be salvaged for use on site and in other parks Above: North elevation, 2002 Left: West elevation, 2026 8 Impact Demolition: 30 tons of waste (approx.) 150 cubic yards to the landfill Deconstruction and salvage: Old-growth wood for reuse Less landfill waste Charitable donation for donated materials 9 SpeakUpAustin.org/SustainableBuilding
PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION This zoning/rezoning request will be reviewed and acted upon at two public hearings: before the Land Use Commission and the City Council. Although applicants and/or their agent(s) aree expected to attend a public hearing, you are not required to attend. However, if you do attend, you have the opportunity to speck FOR or AGAINST the proposed development or change. You may also contact a neighborhood or environmental organization that has expressed an interest in an application affecting your neighborhood. . DDuring its public hearing, the board or commission may postpone or continue an application's hearing to a later date, or may evaluate the City staff s recommendation and public input forwarding its own recommendation to the City Council. If the bboard or commission announces a specific date and time for a ppostponement or continuation that is not later than 60 days from the announcement, no further notice is required. DDuring its public hearing, the City Council may grant or deny a zoning request, or rezone the land to a less intensive zoning than requested but in no case will it grant a more intensive zoning. However, in order to allow for mixed use development, the Council may add the MIXED USE (MU) COMBINING DISTRICT to certain commereial districts. The MU Combining District simply allows residential uses in addition to those uses already allowed in the seven commercial zoning districts. As a result, the MU Combining District allows the combination of office, retail, commercial, and residential uses within a single development. For additional information on the City of Austin's land development process, visit our website: www.austintexas.gov/Planning. Written comments must be submitted to the board or commission (or the contact person listed on the notice) before or at a public hearing. Your comments should include the board or commission's name, the scheduled date of the public hearing, and the Case Number and the contact person listed on the notice. Case Number: C14H-2026-0063 Contact: Austin Lukes, 512-978-0766 Public Hearing: November 4, 2026, mstoric Landmark Commission oejf y`J /<iRp:pA;rf t` I c,IL Your Name (please print) /o= LJ Tie- Ni¥f 'J +9qoJ- •t=1 , am in favor CJ I object I I -2.-2:o2Y Date Daytime Telephone: €nL. ~ Gs6-e>s2] Comments: Beu`el`Z17 S|\€FF`r~iD L|®Me. im4ACT or3 c` a ``oui® `?ig uoaloe€4) If you use this form to comment, it may be returned to: Austin Planning Historic Preservation Olr]ce P. 0. Box 1088, …
Sturgill, Hunter From: Sent: To: Subject: External Email - Exercise Cau(cid:415)on Juno Monday, November 2, 2026 8:05 PM Historic Preservation Office 706 E Monroe Dear Board Members, Please vote against the demoli(cid:415)on of the bungalow at 706 E Monroe. My husband and I have lived in Travis Heights since 1981. Even as we near 80 years of age, we s(cid:415)ll walk regularly in our beau(cid:415)ful neighborhood. The sweet house on Monroe has always been a favorite. Its sweet yellow light is always a welcomed sight and perfectly reflects the warmth of our neighborhood. It is heartbreaking that people now see our community as an investment opportunity. The architectural jewels con(cid:415)nue to be destroyed. The very fabric of our neighborhood is being unraveled, house by house. We strongly urge you to save this precious house!! I’m sorry we are out of town for the mee(cid:415)ng, but we plead with you to vote against demoli(cid:415)on. Thank you, Susie Mauldin Michael McKane Sent from my iPhone CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use cau(cid:415)on when clicking links or opening a(cid:425)achments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" bu(cid:425)on in Outlook. For any addi(cid:415)onal ques(cid:415)ons or concerns, contact CSIRT at "cybersecurity@aus(cid:415)ntexas.gov". 1 Sturgill, Hunter From: Sent: To: Subject: Michael McKane Monday, November 2, 2026 8:19 PM Historic Preservation Office 706 E. Monroe [You don't o(cid:332)en get email h(cid:425)ps://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIden(cid:415)fica(cid:415)on ] Learn why this is important at External Email - Exercise Cau(cid:415)on Dear Board Members, As a long-(cid:415)me resident of Travis Heights, I am wri(cid:415)ng to urge you to vote against the demoli(cid:415)on of the house at 706 E. Monroe. Not only is it a beau(cid:415)ful architectural example, but it is also an important piece of our neighborhood history. Please help us save this house. Thank you, Michael McKane Alameda Dr. Sent from my iPhone CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use cau(cid:415)on when clicking links or opening a(cid:425)achments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" bu(cid:425)on in Outlook. For any addi(cid:415)onal ques(cid:415)ons or concerns, contact CSIRT at "cybersecurity@aus(cid:415)ntexas.gov". 2 Sturgill, Hunter From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: CLIFTON LADD Tuesday, November 3, 2026 11:43 AM Acton, Jeffrey - BC; Alvarez, Jaime - BC; Grogan, Harmony - BC; Harris, August - BC; Heimsath, Ben - BC; Koch, Kevin - BC; Larosche, Carl - …
Sturgill, Hunter From: Sent: To: Subject: Angela Reed Wednesday, October 28, 2026 2:48 PM Historic Preservation Office PR 2026-125072 Categories: Blue Category External Email - Exercise Caution Re: PR 2026-125072 1918 Newning Ave., 78704 HLC meeting Nov. 4, 2026 Attention: Historic Landmark Commission Hunter Sturgill, CoA Preservation Office Dear Mr. Sturgill, I am writing to oppose the demolition of 1918 Newning Avenue. I live on this street, and I have been disheartened to see that after witnessing continuous occupancy by long-term tenants, after the property was sold to the current owner it fell into what appears to be intentional neglect. I was not surprised to see that the next stage of this property was a permit for demolition. I am one of many volunteers who worked for many years, and raised funds from neighborhood donations, to designate Travis Heights as a historic district. One of our primary hopes was to keep the smaller historically intact bungalows like this one, because they are not only iconic for this neighborhood with its history of middle income City workers and creatives, but they allow for lower rental rates, starter homes, and homes for small families and individuals. As we all know, such homes are increasingly hard to come by in central Austin as high property values prompt developers to seek properties like this one, who allow them to fall into disrepair, then demolish and flip for a high profit. It’s a familiar story that’s a surprise to no one, and try as we might, our neighborhood residents seem to have no recourse. My opinion is that this home’s demolition is avoidable. The house sits on a very deep lot that, if the owner wished, he could perhaps add onto this house. It could also be renovated and restored, as so many smaller homes have had done with great success in our neighborhood. One need only look to our locally historic designated street, Mary Street, which is half a block away from this house, for many fine examples. I hope that Mr. Hutchinson will be encouraged to go this route rather than demolition. Thank you, Angela Reed 20-year resident on Newning Ave. CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, …
2307 Rio Grande Street Historic Landmark Commission DA-2026-133248, SP-2026-108262 November 4, 2026 1 Neighborhood Aerial 2 Site Aerial 3 Sanborn Map – 1920 and 1935 4 2307 Rio Grande • Built in 1924 • Craftsman Bungalow • Former Resident: Eugene and Blanche Gatlin –Eugene worked at Nelson Davis Wholesale Grocery, died 1951 • Home was converted to a salon by Daniel Clayton by 1965 • Doors and some porch materials have been replaced • 2020 North Central Austin historic resource survey recommends the building ineligible for individual designation • Staff Rec: approve the demolition permit application 5 2307 Rio Grande Street: Landmark Designation Criteria § LDC 25-2-352: 1. years ago; and The property must be 50 years old and must represent a period of significance of at least 50 The property must retain a high degree of integrity, as defined by the National Register of 2. Historic Places, that clearly conveys its historical significance and does not include an addition or alteration which has significantly compromised its integrity; and 3. Demonstrates significance in at least two of the following categories: • Architecture • Historical Associations • Archaeology • Community Value • Landscape Feature 6 2307 Rio Grande Street: Landmark Designation Criteria i. Architecture. Embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a recognized architectural style, type, or method of construction; × Exemplifies technological innovation in design or construction; × Displays high artistic value in representing ethnic or folk art, architecture, or construction; × Represents a rare example of an architectural style in the city; × Serves as an outstanding example of the work of an architect, builder, or artisan who significantly contributed to the development of the city, state, or nation; Possesses cultural, historical, or architectural value as a particularly fine or unique example of a utilitarian or vernacular structure; or × Represents an architectural curiosity or one-of-a-kind building. 7 2307 Rio Grande Street: Landmark Designation Criteria × ii. Historical Associations. institutions, The property has long-standing significant associations with persons, groups, businesses, or events of historic importance which contributed significantly to the history of the city, state, or nation; or represents a significant portrayal of the cultural practices or the way of life of a definable group of people in a historic time. × iii. Archaeology. The property has, or is expected to yield, significant data concerning the human history or prehistory of the region; × iv. Community Value. The property …
2309 Rio Grande Street Historic Landmark Commission DA-2026-132279, SP-2023-0269C November 4, 2026 1 Neighborhood Aerial 2 Site Aerial 3 Sanborn Map – 1920 and 1935 4 2309 Rio Grande • Built in 1925 • American Foursquare plan with Craftsman and Italianate ornamentation • Converted to dental offices in the late 1940s • Rear addition - later, date unclear • Harry Hofer is associated with the property from 1925-1952. He worked for US Post Office as a claims supervisor. 5 2309 Rio Grande Street: Landmark Designation Criteria § LDC 25-2-352: 1. years ago; and The property must be 50 years old and must represent a period of significance of at least 50 The property must retain a high degree of integrity, as defined by the National Register of 2. Historic Places, that clearly conveys its historical significance and does not include an addition or alteration which has significantly compromised its integrity; and 3. Demonstrates significance in at least two of the following categories: • Architecture • Historical Associations • Archaeology • Community Value • Landscape Feature 6 2309 Rio Grande Street: Compromised Integrity • Residence Built (1924) • Rear Addition (Potentially 1952 when converted from residential to commercial) • Not the same period of significance of original construction • Second Floor Balcony Roof Removed (1979) 1940 Aerial 1976-1977 Aerial 7 2309 Rio Grande Street: Landmark Designation Criteria i. Architecture. Embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a recognized architectural style, type, or method of construction; Exemplifies technological innovation in design or construction; × Displays high artistic value in representing ethnic or folk art, architecture, or construction; Represents a rare example of an architectural style in the city; Serves as an outstanding example of the work of an architect, builder, or artisan who significantly contributed to the development of the city, state, or nation; Possesses cultural, historical, or architectural value as a particularly fine or unique example of a utilitarian or vernacular structure; or × Represents an architectural curiosity or one-of-a-kind building. 8 2309 Rio Grande Street: Landmark Designation Criteria × ii. Historical Associations. institutions, The property has long-standing significant associations with persons, groups, businesses, or events of historic importance which contributed significantly to the history of the city, state, or nation; or represents a significant portrayal of the cultural practices or the way of life of a definable group of people in a historic time. × iii. Archaeology. …
I respectfully ask the Commission to oppose this demolition, reconsider the property’s eligibility for historic designation, and fully explore preservation alternatives. Once these homes are gone, their history cannot be rebuilt. We owe it to the generations who shaped East Austin, and those who will live here in the future, to take their preservation seriously. Please include this letter in the official public record for Case PR-2026-130461 and ensure it is distributed to all members of the Historic Landmark Commission for their review ahead of the November 4, 2026 hearing. I respectfully ask that the Commission consider these concerns before making a decision on the proposed demolition. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Kyle Grantier East Austin, Texas Sent from my iPhone CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at "cybersecurity@austintexas.gov". 2
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Environmental Commission Recommendation 20261104-002: City of Austin and University of Texas Brackenridge Interlocal Agreement WHEREAS, the City of Austin and the University of Texas at Austin propose to amend the 1989 Brackenridge Development Agreement (BDA) to preserve Lion’s Municipal Golf Course (Muny) as a public golf course and prepare the remaining 190 acres of university- owned land; and WHEREAS, the BDA will describe the general process for the conveyance of MUNY, a proposed update to the University’s lease of property at Mueller, the exchange of City rights-of-way, the proposed creation of a tax increment reinvestment zone (TIRZ) and the development of a mutually agreed to regulating plan; and WHEREAS, the Environmental Commission was given a Staff briefing at the October 21, 2026 meeting; and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Environmental Commission recommends the Council adopt the following additional requirements as part of the amended BDA: • Require the University to retain the Brackenridge Field Laboratory for a minimum of fifty-years under the same conditions as provided by the current BDA agreement. • Should the University decide to close the Brackenridge Field Laboratory, require the University the option to the City to acquire the property for Water Quality Protection Lands purposes via conservation easements, voter approved municipal bonds, fee simple purchase, or other mechanisms. • Require the University to provide a minimum of five-years notice to the Council of its intent to close or restrict the scope of research at the Brackenridge Field Laboratory. • Establish a setback of 250 feet landward from the shoreline of Lady Bird Lake and prohibit impervious cover within the 250-foot setback. • Require a public easement within the setback from Lady Bird Lake to allow for a multi-use trail on par with the Butler Hike and Bike Trail to be implemented by the Austin Parks and Recreation (APR) and managed by APR or an established partner. • Limit building height to 75 feet. • Require adherence to City Codes Chapter 6-2, 25-8-520 and 30-5 regarding the environment and storage of hazardous materials by the University and subsequent owners of the property within the amended BDA. • Enforce the City of Austin’s Heritage Tree Ordinance. Mitigation of trees shall be within the BDA unless authorized by the City Arborist. • Limit impervious cover to 67 percent of each parcel with a total of 70 percent impervious cover for the entire project. Impervious …
11/3/26, 9:38 AM November 4 Brackenridge Agreement - Request for Permanent Protection of Field Laboratory - Corona, Nicole - Outlook 1. Permanent protection of the full BFL property through a conservation easement or an equally durable, legally enforceable mechanism compatible with continued research and education. 2. An explicit prohibition on non-university development within the laboratory's boundaries. 3. Exclusion of BFL acreage from transferable development entitlements, including impervious-cover and floor-area allowances benefiting development elsewhere. 4. Appropriate ecological buffers and protections against impacts from adjacent construction. 5. A comprehensive, independent environmental assessment before development parameters are finalized. I support the preservation of Lions Municipal Golf Course, but that effort should not compromise another extraordinary resource on the same historic tract. The Brackenridge agreement presents a rare opportunity to protect both public recreation and scientific research for future generations. I hope the Commission will recommend protections that reflect the laboratory's long-term importance to the University, the City, and the wider scientific community. Thank you for your consideration and for the Commission's work on this issue. Please include this letter in the written public comments for the November 4 meeting and distribute it to the commissioners. Sincerely, Stuart Robertson CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at "cybersecurity@austintexas.gov". about:blank?windowId=SecondaryReadingPane6 2/2 11/3/26, 9:38 AM Nov 4 Brackenridge Agreement - Protect the Field Lab & Conservation Programs - Corona, Nicole - Outlook 1. Permanent protection of the full BFL property through a conservation easement or an equally durable legal mechanism compatible with continued research, education, and conservation activities. 2. An explicit prohibition on non-university development within the laboratory's boundaries. 3. Continued access to appropriate greenhouse and research infrastructure for university and community conservation programs. 4. Exclusion of BFL acreage from transferable development entitlements, including impervious-cover allowances that could facilitate construction elsewhere. 5. A comprehensive environmental assessment and appropriate ecological buffers before development parameters are finalized. 6. Meaningful consultation with BFL researchers, conservation organizations, and community stakeholders before decisions affecting the laboratory are made. I support preserving Lions Municipal Golf Course, but that effort should not come at the expense of another irreplaceable community resource. Brackenridge Field Laboratory supports scientific research, education, biodiversity conservation, and practical community-based conservation efforts. Its …
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL SMALL AREA PLANNING JOINT COMMITTEE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE ZONING AND PLATTING COMMISSION Recommendation 20261104-01: Dissolution of the Small Area Planning Joint Committee (City Code § 2-1-205) and return of its review functions to the Planning Commission WHEREAS, Section 2-1-205 of the Austin City Code creates the Small Area Planning Joint Committee (the “Committee”) of the Planning Commission and the Zoning and Platting Commission to advise the Council on planning and zoning issues in areas such as downtown, corridors and centers, neighborhoods, the waterfront, planned unit developments, and transit- oriented developments; and WHEREAS, the Committee is advisory only, and the Code gives it no decision-making authority apart from the recommendations it forwards to Council; and WHEREAS, Article X of the City Charter and Section 2-1-166 of the City Code charge the Planning Commission with reviewing and making recommendations to the Council on planning matters, including amendments to the comprehensive plan, and the Planning Commission also serves as a Land Use Commission under Title 25 of the City Code; and WHEREAS, the Committee's own Annual Internal Review for July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2026, identifies the Planning Commission as a body that overlaps with the role and work of the Committee, and states that the Planning Commission reviews and has purview over all cases that come before the Committee; and WHEREAS, during that same period the Committee approved only two recommendations, on C814-2008-0087.02 (South Shore PUD Addition) and C814-2025-0111 (1404 East Riverside Planned Unit Development), each of which is also subject to review by the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Committee meets at 11:30 a.m. at the Permitting and Development Center, on alternating first and second Wednesdays of every other month or quarterly, while the Planning Commission and the Zoning and Platting Commission each hold their regular meetings in the evening, and the Committee's Annual Internal Review reports that midday meetings make it difficult for both commissioners and members of the public to attend; and WHEREAS, during calendar year 2025 the Committee was unable to convene a quorum at, or cancelled, four of its six scheduled meetings, and during calendar year 2024 the Committee was unable to convene a quorum at one meeting and cancelled two others due to lack of agenda items; and WHEREAS, Austin Planning staff must prepare, post, and support each Committee meeting, including preparing the agenda, posting notice under the Texas …
Commission on Aging Older Adult Quality of Life Study Analysis Work Group Report I. Purpose This report consolidates the analyses submitted by members of the Commission on Aging Quality of Life Study Analysis Work Group upon their review of the 2025 Austin Older Adult Quality of Life Study, its population and district summaries and recommends priorities for Commission recommendations to City Council. Work Group members Commissioners Tran, Yee, Zeng, Ferguson and Scott all provided feedback on their analysis of portions of the study. II. Key Points • Older adults may know that programs exist yet still be unable to use them o Issues: cost, physical accessibility, transportation, language, cultural safety, or fragmented information. • Immediate material needs warrant the strongest initial attention. o Housing, food, utilities, and access to essential care • Transportation, trusted outreach, and social connection are necessary supports that should be included with immediate material needs and not treated as optional. • Customer assistance programs (CAPs) can help older adults access essential services and reduce financial barriers, but awareness, eligibility, and enrollment processes may limit their effectiveness. III. Ranking Methodology Considerations were: • Severity and immediacy of harm, • Breadth of reported need • Disproportionate impacts across populations and districts, and • Plausible City or partner action. Additional Rationale: Food insecurity and utility shutoffs may require more immediate intervention than an internet-access problem. • Housing is first because loss of housing can be especially difficult to reverse • Food, utilities, and essential health access are in a second urgent basic needs category. • Communication and internet access rank fourth as standalone issues, as they are often delivery mechanisms for higher-priority assistance. IV. Ranking of Issues Priority 1: Housing stability, essential repairs, and aging in place. • Highest priority because housing loss, unsafe or inaccessible homes can produce severe, lasting harm, • 16% of study respondents unhoused, Compiled by: Richard Bondi Page 1 of 4 11/02/2026 Commission on Aging Older Adult Quality of Life Study Analysis Work Group Report • 56% reported housing insecurity, meaning they worried about maintaining their current housing, and • 36% rating home accessibility fair or poor. The study identifies home repair, accessibility improvements, and affordability as recurring needs. Proposed recommendation topic(s): Assess and strengthen housing preservation, emergency assistance, home repair and modification, accessible housing options, including automatic enrollment where feasible. Priority 2. Food security, utility assistance, and access to essential health services. Immediate …
REGULAR MEETING OF THE HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2026, AT 6:00 P.M. CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBERS 301 W. 2ND STREET AUSTIN, TEXAS Some members of the Historic Landmark Commission may be participating by videoconference. The meeting may be viewed online at: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch-atxn-live CURRENT COMMISSIONERS X BEN HEIMSATH, CHAIR (D-8) X CARL LAROSCHE (D-6) VACANT, VICE CHAIR (D-2) X AUGUST HARRIS III (D-10) X JEFFREY ACTON (MAYOR) X TONYA PLEASANT-WRIGHT (D-1) X JAIME ALVAREZ (D-7) AB JUDAH RICE (D-4) X HARMONY GROGAN (D-5) AB BAT TANIGUCHI (D-9) X KEVIN KOCH (D-3) Commissioners in Attendance Remotely: Chair Heimsath, Commissioner Pleasant-Wright, Commissioner Alvarez DRAFT MINUTES CALL TO ORDER: 6:02PM PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first 10 speakers signed up prior to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. Bill Bunch spoke about the Barton Springs Bridge. Meghan King Namour provided updates from Preservation Austin. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Historic Landmark Commission regular meeting on September 2, 2026. MOTION: Approve the minutes per passage of the consent agenda, on a motion by Commissioner Larosche. Commissioner Acton seconded the motion. Vote 8-0. The motion passed. BRIEFINGS 2. Staff briefing regarding progress on the development of the Central City District Plan by Shanisha Johnson, Principal Planner and Olivia Beams, Senior Planner, Austin Planning. PUBLIC HEARINGS/DISCUSSION ITEMS Historic Zoning 3. 4. PR-2026-053670 – 1109 Travis Heights Blvd. Travis Heights-Fairview Park National Register Historic District Council District 9 Proposal: Commission-initiated historic zoning. Applicant: Historic Landmark Commission City Staff: Austin Lukes, Historic Preservation Office, 512-978-0766 Staff Recommendation: Do not recommend historic zoning, as the property does not meet the required criteria. MOTION: Close the public hearing on a motion by Commissioner Harris, seconded by Commissioner Pleasant-Wright. Vote 8-0. The motion passed. MOTION: Recommend historic zoning on the basis of architecture, historical association, and community value on a motion by Commissioner Harris, seconded by Chair Heimsath. Vote 8-0. The motion passed. PR-2026-086869 – 1005 E. 13th St. Council District 1 Proposal: Commission-initiated historic zoning. Applicant: Historic Landmark Commission City Staff: Austin Lukes, Historic Preservation Office, 512-978-0766 Staff Recommendation: Do not recommend historic zoning, as the property does not meet the required criteria. MOTION: Close the public hearing on a motion by Commissioner Grogan, seconded by Commissioner Harris. Vote 8-0. The motion passed. MOTION: Accept the staff recommendation …
Sturgill, Hunter From: Sent: To: Subject: jeff.sculptorium Tuesday, November 3, 2026 2:00 PM Historic Preservation Office Public comment for Nov 4 Historic Landmark Commission — Browning Hangar, 4550 Mueller Blvd (case C14H-02-0008) External Email - Exercise Caution Dear Commissioners, I'm writing about the Browning Hangar at 4550 Mueller Blvd., the 1943 wooden bow-truss hangar in Mueller's Lake Park. I would appreciate this being forwarded to the Commission and included in the record for the November 4 meeting. In 2002 this Commission voted 8–0 to zone the Hangar historic, and the Planning Commission agreed 6–0. City Council approved the case on first reading in January 2003, but it was never completed. City staff told Council Member Qadri's office on October 30 that "Banbury and the City are committed to securing historic designation," but that the City "will move forward with historic zoning as we know more about the development planned." Staff also confirmed that a sale or lease of the Hangar would not require a Council vote. Designation should not wait for a deal. Its purpose is to define what is significant about the Hangar before any buyer or tenant changes it, not to be shaped around their plans. I respectfully ask the Commission to: 1. Initiate historic zoning for the Browning Hangar now, as it has done for other properties, before any sale or lease; and 2. Identify the open, clear-span floor under the arches, and its long public use, as a character-defining feature. Thank you for your service and for considering this request. Jeffrey Wade Brown Austin (District 1) https://browninghangar.org CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" button in Outlook. For any additional questions or concerns, contact CSIRT at "cybersecurity@austintexas.gov". 1
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION Applications for Demolition and Relocation Permits November 4, 2026 PR-2026-079349; GF-2026-090393 Travis Heights-Fairview Park Historic District 706 East Monroe Street 8 – 1 Proposal Demolish a ca. 1927 house. Architecture This property is a single-story Craftsman bungalow featuring an ample, projecting front porch that is supported by two square wood posts. These posts, along with the porch railing and brackets above, decorate the front of the house, which retains strong integrity. The front gabled roof features prominent overhangs and rafter tails still present under a later gutter addition. Windows all appear to be original and are in good condition. The walls are clad in narrow horizontal siding, and the elevated foundation is covered by a concrete or stucco skirting. Behind the house is a porch structure that has been confirmed by a previous owner to have been designed by former University of Texas architecture professor Bob Mather. The design of this structure, made from portions of the original garage, matches the roof pitch to create a sheltered space at the rear, and was likely designed while Mather lived, along with his wife Jean Mather, nearby at 1611 Alameda Drive. Research After its construction, this property was shortly owned by Walter & Larah Bergfield, the former of whom was employed as a barber. After a series of short term owners and residents, including a taxi driver and a telephone repairman, the property was bought by Edmund & Dorothy Morris around 1944. Edmund Morris worked at the Mutual Benefit Health Association as a manager, before starting his own insurance agency by 1949. Doris is listed as assisting in this operation, and the couple raised several children at the property. By 1957, the property was purchased by Clyde & Georgia Priddy, a chef at the Commodore Perry Hotel. Department Comments Per city code § 25-11-213 (G)(4), the Historic Landmark Commission has 180 days to review demolition permits in National Register historic districts starting from the date the application was submitted. This period is set to time out on January 18, 2027. Property Evaluation The property contributes to the Travis Heights-Fairview Park National Register district. Designation Criteria—Historic Landmark 1) The building is more than 50 years old. 2) The building appears to retain high integrity. 3) Properties must meet two criteria for landmark designation (LDC §25-2-352). Staff has evaluated the property and determined that it does not meet two criteria for …
706 E. Monroe home condition findings (2026 inspection) ● ● ● Foundation found to be deficient, with moving / seling, wood in contact with soil, deteriorated shims, etc.; can be seen through multiple drywall cracks ○ Grading is sloping toward home Safety hazards in terms of furnace flue (in contact with combustibles and flue pipe not connected to the furnace correctly) and electrical systems (e.g., open ground outlets; exposed wiring; extension cords used as permanent wiring for water heater, which is located outside house; no AFCI breakers) Across systems, lack of modern sealing (e.g., crawl space/subfloor openings, exposed wiring, not sealed refrigerant line, etc.), insulation, etc. 706 E. Monroe home condition findings (2026 inspection) ● Deck improperly framed to support load (only used screws, deck joists are overspanned, needs additional support) ○ Patio posts incorrectly installed 706 E. Monroe site plan, including trees ● Heritage tree in backyard prevents building in “back” of 706 E. Monroe Tree
Sturgill, Hunter From: Sent: To: Subject: External Email - Exercise Cau(cid:415)on Melanie Martinez Wednesday, November 4, 2026 8:53 AM Historic Preservation Office 706 E. Monroe PR-2026-079349; GF-2026-090393 Dear Commissioners, I spoke at the last mee(cid:415)ng in opposi(cid:415)on to the demoli(cid:415)on of 706 E. Monroe but am unable to a(cid:425)end tonight. I s(cid:415)ll care! As a neighbor of this home for almost 40 years, I have been in love with it all this (cid:415)me. Even though it’s not landmark- worthy in rigid legal terms, to me it typifies everything about Aus(cid:415)n’s history, vibe and charm. Its loca(cid:415)on at the entrance to Li(cid:425)le Stacy Park and that connec(cid:415)on with our beloved Jean Mather, its architecture (a perfect bungalow transi(cid:415)oning from the Victorian era, seen in some of its detail), its integrity (the care shown by its owners over 100 years), and the stories of those who have lived there all speak to me and many other neighbors. I worked hard with our community to create our Na(cid:415)onal Register District, with homes like this in my heart and mind. Working class people made up Travis Heights—and this is how they lived. This is our historic district’s story! It breaks my heart that the owners didn’t see its community value when they bought it, expec(cid:415)ng to demolish it for a need that is temporary. It would make so much sense to adapt the interior for aging in place, and unobtrusively bridge it to their modern home. This is an acceptable approach in historic preserva(cid:415)on. Otherwise, one day, when needs change and these owners move, we are le(cid:332) with another page missing from our story. I am pleading with the owner to reconsider demoli(cid:415)on and work with the Commission members for a more equitable solu(cid:415)on to the problem. Thank you, Melanie Mar(cid:415)nez 1214 Newning Ave Travis Heights-Fairview Park NRHD Coordinator CAUTION: This is an EXTERNAL email. Please use cau(cid:415)on when clicking links or opening a(cid:425)achments. If you believe this to be a malicious or phishing email, please report it using the "Report Message" bu(cid:425)on in Outlook. For any addi(cid:415)onal ques(cid:415)ons or concerns, contact CSIRT at "cybersecurity@aus(cid:415)ntexas.gov". 1 Hello Chair Heimsath and Commission Member Rice, I wanted to alert you to a demolition case for PR-2026-079349, scheduled for at your August 5, 2026 meeting. While we reside within 500' of the
