C.4.0 - 1602 Westover Rd — original pdf

Backup

HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION PERMITS IN NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICTS MAY 24, 2021 HR-2021-064125 OLD WEST AUSTIN NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICT 1602 WESTOVER ROAD C.4 – 1 PROPOSAL PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS Partially demolish and construct an addition to side and rear of ca. 1937 contributing building. Demolish single-story garage and replace with two-story garage. 1) Partially demolish north and east elevations. Demolish existing garage. 2) Construct a one-story side and rear addition immediately beyond ridgeline. The proposed addition is clad in horizontal wood siding. Its compound gabled roof is clad in asphalt shingles to match existing. 3) Replace existing asphalt shingle roof in-kind. 4) Replace wood windows with aluminum-clad multilight windows. Proposed windows at main façade will match existing. Proposed side elevation windows will include fabric awnings. 5) Replace existing front door with partially glazed front door. 6) Construct a two-story gabled-roof garage. The proposed garage is clad in board-and-batten siding, with shingle roof to match main house and aluminum-clad fixed and casement multilight windows. ARCHITECTURE RESEARCH One-story side-gabled Colonial Revival/Cape Cod Revival cottage clad in horizontal wood siding, with 8:8 wood windows and partial-width central shed-roof porch. The house at 1602 Westover Road was constructed in 1937. Its first occupants were John Franklin and Gertrude Hutter. Franklin Hutter worked for the University of Texas as director of the accounting division before becoming an auditor. Gertrude Hutter was an active member of the Austin Woman’s Club and Texas Federation of Women’s Clubs. By 1949, the Hutters had sold the property to Byron F. and Mildred D. Kerr. Byron Kerr, who began his career at Montgomery Ward, worked as a factory repair specialist and manufacturing representative. The Kerrs lived in the home with their two children until 1957, when ownership passed to Ruth Escamilla. Escamilla, a veteran employee of the Austin National Bank. Escamilla worked in the bank’s savings department from 1917 until her retirement in 1958. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW Residential additions The City of Austin’s Historic Design Standards (March 2021) are based on the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and are used to evaluate projects in National Register Historic Districts. The following standards apply to the proposed project: 1.1 Locate additions to the rear and sides of historic buildings to minimize visual impact. 1.2 Step back side additions from the front wall a distance that preserves the shape of the historic building from the primary street. 1.5 Minimize the loss of historic fabric by connecting additions to the existing building through the least possible invasive location and means. The proposed addition is located to the rear and side of the historic building. It is set back about 8’ from the front wall of the house at the east elevation. The addition appears to affect minimal historic fabric at the rear elevation. 2.1 Design an addition to complement the scale and massing of the historic building, including height. The addition must appear subordinate to the historic building. 2.2 Minimize the appearance of the addition from the street faced by the historic building’s front wall. a. If the addition connects to the historic building’s rear wall, step in the addition’s side walls at least one foot (1’) from the side walls of the C.4 – 2 historic building. b. The historic building’s overall shape as viewed from the street must appear relatively unaltered. Recommendations: Design one-story additions to one-story buildings. Minimize the roof height of multi-story additions. The proposed addition complements the scale and massing of the historic building, as it is a one-story addition to a one- story building and is minimally visible from the street. While the addition is set back from the side walls at the west elevation, it is stepped out at the east elevation. 3.1 Design additions to be compatible with and differentiated from the historic building, if they are visible from the street. The visible portion of the proposed addition is differentiated from the historic building by its massing, placement, and lack of fenestration. The visible portion is small and relatively compatible. 4.1 If an addition will be visible from a street on the front or side, design its roof form and slope to complement the roof on the historic building. 4.2 Use roof materials that match or have similar color, texture, and other visual qualities as the roof on the historic building. The proposed addition’s visible roof form mimics the slope of the historic building’s roof and is clad in matching shingles. 5.1 If an addition will be visible from a street on the front or side, use exterior wall materials that are compatible with those on the historic building, as well as with the character of the district, in scale, type, material, size, finish, and texture. 5.2 Differentiate the exterior wall materials of the addition from those of the historic building. This could be accomplished by using different materials, using the same materials with different dimensions, or changing trim type or dimensions. The proposed addition’s visible wall materials match the existing building’s materials. The addition is differentiated by its setback and placement, though cladding materials are consistent throughout. Residential new construction 1.3 Locate accessory buildings in a way that follows the historic location and setback patterns of similar buildings on the block or in the district. Garage apartments, detached garages, and other accessory buildings are typically located at the rear of the lot, behind and to the side of the front building. The proposed new garage is located in the same place as the existing garage. 2.3 For detached garages, match the predominant garage orientation found on the block’s contributing properties. Do not use front-loaded garages on blocks where rear or alley-loaded garages historically were present. The proposed new garage faces the same direction as the existing garage. 3.6 Design accessory buildings to be visually subordinate to the primary building in height, massing, and form, as viewed from the street. The proposed new garage is two stories high and visible from the street above the roof of the primary building However, its narrow façade minimizes its visual impact. 5.1 Design new buildings to be compatible with the character of the primary building, historic district, and/or historic landmark in terms of scale, massing, proportions, patterns, materials, and architectural features. 5.2 Design new buildings to be differentiated from historic buildings. 5.5 Do not combine character-defining features from different architectural styles unless similar eclectic buildings were historically present in the historic district or on the historic landmark property. The proposed new garage is compatible with the primary building in material and features; however, its two-story massing is less compatible. 6.1 Design simple roof forms that reflect the character of the roofs on contributing buildings. 6.2 Any roof details such as dormers, eave detailing, and bargeboards must correspond to the form and architectural style of the new building. 6.3 Select roof materials that match or are compatible with the roofs on contributing buildings, particularly buildings with a similar form and architectural style to the new building. The proposed new garage’s roof is a simple gable that extends over the second-floor balcony. Its asphalt shingles match the primary building’s roof materials. C.4 – 3 7.2 For rear buildings, use siding that is compatible with the primary building. The proposed board-and-batten siding emphasizes the building’s height. It is less compatible than horizontal wood siding at the second floor or both floors. 8.3 For rear buildings, match the style, proportions, and materials of the windows to the primary building’s style and design. The proposed rear building’s windows somewhat match the style and materials of the primary building’s, but their proportions are at odds. Repair and alterations 3.1 When replacing roof material, use a material that is appropriate to the building’s history and character. 3.2 When replacing roof material, retain the configuration; pitch; soffit detailing; character-defining features such as chimney, gutters, and ventilation systems; and design, configuration, and detailing of eaves. The proposed roof repair replaces the existing asphalt shingles in kind, and does not alter the roof shape in front of the ridgeline. 5.1 Repair, rather than replace, historic windows, doors, and screens; and their trim, surrounds, sidelights, transoms, and shutters, unless they are deteriorated beyond the point of stabilization or restoration. Retain windows if 50% or more of the wood or metal sash members are intact. a. Using modern material in repairs and patches is a possibility if the material has proven appropriate and stable in similar uses. 5.2 Historic windows on non-street-facing walls may be replaced for energy efficiency if other high-impact energy efficiency upgrades have been completed or are included in the same project. All following standards for replacement windows apply. 5.3 If historic windows must be replaced, match the size and details of the existing window, including configuration, profile, and finish. a. If a window has divided lites, replacement windows must have true divided lites or simulated divided lites with dimensional muntins placed on the outside of the glass and corresponding spacers of an appropriate color, material, and thickness on the inside of the glass, so that the window appears to have true divided lites. b. Never use a replacement window with false muntins inserted inside the glass. c. In historic districts, there is more flexibility for windows not visible from a front or side street. 5.4 If historic windows visible from a front or side street must be replaced, relocate historic windows from a non-street- facing wall, if sizes allow. 5.5 Do not enlarge, move, or enclose historic window or door openings that are highly visible from a front or side street. It may be appropriate to restore historic door or window openings that have been enclosed. 5.7 If replacing a non-original door, identify the historic style of the door through research, or look to nearby similar properties to guide the choice of a replacement. The proposed project removes and replaces historic wood windows with aluminum clad windows of matching design. It does not enlarge, move, or enclose street-visible historic windows openings. The proposed partially glazed replacement door is not compatible with the Colonial Revival styling of the house. The project meets some applicable standards. STAFF COMMENTS The building contributes to the Old West Austin National Register Historic 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: a. Architecture. The building is constructed in the Colonial Revival style. 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, C.4 – 4 cultural, or historical value to the city. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Comment on plans and release the permit. LOCATION MAP C.4 – 5 PROPERTY INFORMATION Photos Applicant, 2021 C.4 – 6 C.4 – 7 Google Street View, 2021 Occupancy History City Directory Research, May 2021 Ruth A. Escamilla, owner Ruth A. Escamilla, owner Teller, Austin National Bank Byron F. and Mildred D. Kerr, owners Factory repairer Byron F. and Mildred D. Kerr, owners Factory repairer Byron F. and Mildred Kerr, owners Manufacturing representative John Franklin and Gertrude Hutter, owners Public accountant at University of Texas John Franklin and Gertrude Hutter, owners Auditor at University of Texas John Franklin and Gertrude Hutter, owners Assistant auditor at University of Texas John Franklin and Gertrude Hutter, owners Division chief at University of Texas Vacant Address not listed 1959 1957 1955 1952 1949 1947 1944 1941 1939 1937 1935 Biographical Information The Austin American (1914-1973); Mar 2, 1930 C.4 – 8 The Austin Statesman (1921-1973); Jun 14, 1937 C.4 – 9 The Austin American (1914-1973); Nov 14, 1937 The Austin American (1914-1973); Mar 10, 1940 C.4 – 10 The Austin Statesman (1921-1973); Oct 13, 1941 and The Austin American (1914-1973); Jul 28, 1946 The Austin Statesman (1921-1973); Aug 10, 1948 C.4 – 11 The Austin Statesman (1921-1973); Jun 12, 1950 The Austin American (1914-1973); Jan 6, 1952 C.4 – 12 The Austin Statesman (1921-1973); Dec 16, 1958 C.4 – 13 Permits The Austin Statesman (1921-1973); Feb 3, 1971 Building and addition permits, 1937 and 1978 Sewer tap permit, 4-12-37