16.0 - 1607 Gaston Ave — original pdf

Backup

HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION PERMITS IN NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICTS JULY 2, 2025 PR-2025-055263; HR-2025-060397 OLD WEST AUSTIN HISTORIC DISTRICT 1607 GASTON AVENUE 16.0 – 1 PROPOSAL Construct and expand a side addition and a rear detached pool house structure. PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS 1) Expand existing side addition, including the footprint towards the street as well as towards the rear of the property. Addition will also include two dormer windows at the second floor that face the street. 2) Construct a detached pool house at the rear of the lot, facing the existing in-ground pool. 3) Install new second floor porch covering and supporting columns, replace existing railing, install wood shutters at existing front façade. ARCHITECTURE The house at 1607 Gaston Avenue is built was built in the Colonial Revival style, and has seen several alterations since construction, though the original form remains. These alterations include new cladding on all exterior walls, as well as a side addition that is set back from the front line of the house. The original front elevation, excluding the side addition, is separated into three bays, with the entry door at center. At the first floor, a porch extends the width of the house and is covered with a flat roof that also serves as a porch accessed from the second floor. Above, a low-pitched front gable frames the overall house shape. RESEARCH Constructed around 1950, the house was first occupied by Elmer Hinkel and his family until around 1955. Hinkel served as vice president at Texas State Bank. The next owner was Frank Culver, who had been elected as an associate justice on the Texas State Supreme Court in 1952, where he served through the decade. DESIGN STANDARDS 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 districts. The following standards apply to the proposed project: Repair and alterations 1. General standards Porch alterations are generally in keeping with the Standards. Details that are proposed to be removed are non-historic and don’t match the historic appearance. While the construction of a second-floor porch roof is sensitive to the design of the front elevation and appears visually cohesive, it does not appear to be based on any historic images or documentation. 3. Roofs Extension of the front porch roof at the second floor is proposed to be hipped in form. This change from the gable form at the original house differentiates it. 5. Windows, doors, and screens Installation of wood shutters at the front windows do not meet the Standards, as no evidence has been provided that there were such fixtures originally. However, the design is simple and the windows they will attach to are replacements. 6. Porches Replacement of the porch railing is appropriate, as the existing is not original and does not fit visually. By creating a two- story porch, the appearance of the front elevation is altered, though it doesn’t look inappropriate. More information about the original design of the house would be ideal to provide further guidance. 16.0 – 2 Residential additions 1. Location Expanding the existing addition at the side of the house minimizes the visual impact. However, by extending this addition towards the street, it makes it more visually prominent when viewed from the right-of-way. Even with this expanded footprint, it does not extend to the front of the original house. 2. Scale, massing, and height By utilizing the existing side gabled roof, the height of the addition is not increased. Extending the footprint to the rear meets the Standards. 3. Design and style The design of the addition would make it appear more like the original section of the house. However, it will likely read like an addition, as it does in its current size. 4. Roofs Two dormer windows are proposed, which extend back towards the existing roofline. Given the low pitch of the roof at this section of the house, the dormers appear very long and not typical, which are more commonly seen on steeper roof pitches. 5. Exterior walls The entire house is proposed to be clad in a layer of brick. This will result in the addition matching the original house. However, the original cladding at the main house has been already lost. 6. Windows, screens, and doors In addition to the dormers mentioned above, there is a bay window proposed at the location of an existing window in the addition. The scale and size of the proposed is appropriate for its location. Residential new construction 1. Location The pool house is proposed in the backyard and will not be easily visible from the street. 2. Orientation New construction is proposed to be oriented towards the existing pool. 3. Scale, massing, and height Structure will be a single-story in height, with a moderately pitched roof topped with a cupola, extending the overall height. 4. Proportions The footprint will be long and narrow, which is appropriate for the use as amenity space for the pool. 5. Design and style The style of the new construction will generally match the addition, as well as the brick cladding proposed throughout the project. 6. Roofs The pitch will be steeper than elsewhere on the property, though it won’t be noticeable, as the pitch will extend across the short axis of the pool building. The proposed cupola is tall and appears out of place at this building. 7. Exterior walls Like elsewhere in this application, the walls are to be clad in brick. 8. Windows and doors Three pairs of doors are proposed to open up at the pool-facing wall, creating a hybrid interior/exterior space. Summary The project meets some of the applicable standards. PROPERTY EVALUATION The property contributes to the Old West Austin National Register district. Designation Criteria—Historic Landmark 1) The building is more than 50 years old. 2) The building appears to retain moderate integrity. 3) Properties must meet two criteria for landmark designation (LDC §25-2-352). Staff has evaluated the property and 16.0 – 3 determined that it does not meet two criteria: a. Architecture. The building is a heavily altered, but generally intact, example of Colonial Revival architecture in the district. 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 Comment on plans. LOCATION MAP 16.0 – 4 PROPERTY INFORMATION Photos 16.0 – 5 Google Streetview, 2024 Occupancy History City Directory Research, June 2025 1959 1957 1955 1953 1949 Frank Culver, owner; associate justice at Texas State Supreme Court Same as above Same as above Elmer Hinkel, owner; vice president at Texas State Bank Address not listed Historical Information The Austin Statesman (1921-1973); Austin, Tex.. 14 Feb 1950: 14. Postal Card for Frank Culver’s candidacy (Portal to Texas History), July 14, 1952 16.0 – 6 The Austin American (1914-1973); Austin, Tex.. 15 June 1952: C1. The Austin Statesman (1921-1973); Austin, Tex.. 12 Feb 1958: 20. Permits 16.0 – 7 Water service permit, 1950