10.0 - 1107 W 9th St — original pdf

Backup

HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION Applications for Certificates of Appropriateness April 1, 2026 HR-2026-021800 Castle Hill Historic District 1107 West 9th Street 10 – 1 Proposal Renovate existing house. The non-contributing rear house will also be modified. Project Specifications 1) Replace existing siding with painted wood ship lap. 2) Construct new 8’0” steel fence. 3) Replace existing undivided windows with wood 1:1 windows at first floor, fixed-pane undivided square windows at dormers, and fixed-pane picture window at existing picture window. 4) Construct rear addition with dormer. 5) Remove chimney from east dormer. 6) Replace existing roof with flat terra cotta tiles and metal shingles at rear addition. Architecture A 2010 historic zoning application describes the building as follows: The house is one-and-a-half stories with a hipped roof, hipped dormers, and a wraparound porch…Above the front door there is a transom, an integral part of architecture of the period as well…The house still has 7 working transoms throughout the inside, which helped to circulate the air between rooms…The house has had a number of changes over the years. The house first appears on the 1922 Sanborn Fire Insurance Company map and shows a smaller footprint…[it] had a porch stretching all the way across the front of the house and another one along the east side. …Between 1922 and 1935, design of the house was modified to include a bay window, extend the sides and include a small porch in the middle of the back of the house. In 1962 the house was modified again — the bay window was brought forward a few feet onto the porch to create a larger living room inside — which eliminated the front porch in front of this window, and the back part of the side porch was enclosed to enlarge the bedroom. In 2008 the kitchen…was extended slightly to the rear…In 2010 the front porch was restored to again extend all the way across the front of the house (and free one of the original porch pillars from the wall built in 1962) by moving a modified version of the bay window back (Tim Cuppett was also the architect for this project). All of the finishes and details on the outside of the house are original with the exception of the new bay window.1 However, former Historic Preservation Officer Steve Sadowsky noted that the 2010 addition likely destroyed original fabric at the front of the house: The house had a projecting canted bay on the right side of the façade, which staff believes was original to the house in form, despite depictions on historical Sanborn Fire Insurance Company maps. The canted bay was pushed forward several feet in a 1962 remodeling of the house, but still retained its essential form, if not location. In 2010, the owners replaced the canted bay with a boxed picture window, which, while sensitively designed, has compromised the historic appearance of the house to the extent that staff cannot recommend the house for individual designation as it no longer retains sufficient integrity of materials and design to convey its historic appearance.2 Design Standards The Castle Hill Design Standards are used to evaluate projects within the historic district. The following standards apply to the proposed project: 1 Application for landmark designation: C14H-2010-0022 2 Zoning Change Review Sheet: C14H-2010-0022 A. GENERAL DISTRICT STANDARDS 1. Requirements 10 – 2 a) Repair, rather than replace, original materials. Replace only materials that are deteriorated beyond repair or that detract from and are not original to the building. Replacement materials shall match the original materials when feasible. The proposed project removes mostly non-historic materials, with the exception of the chimney and some existing wood siding. b) Do not make changes to the public view of an existing contributing or noncontributing building that have no historic basis and/or that seek to create the appearance of an architectural style that is not original to the existing building. The proposed terra cotta tile roof creates an appearance of an architectural style not original to the existing building. Proposed shiplap siding does not have a historic basis. c) Use best efforts to utilize photographic or physical evidence when reconstructing original historic details. Photographic references for the roof change were not provided. d) Single Family or Single Family Use: The allowable height for additions and new construction is the average height of the adjacent properties on either side of the subject property or 32’, whichever is greater. The proposed addition does not increase the building’s existing height. B. SITE IMPROVEMENTS 1. Required Standards a) Fences (1) Repair, rather than replace existing historic fences, walls, retaining walls, and steps as character defining features of the district. (2) New front yard fences must be four (4) feet or less in height, open, and must avoid obscuring the front of the building. Acceptable materials include iron, wire mesh, painted wood pickets. (3) Privacy, chain link, and wire mesh fences shall not be located in the front yard, or less than 15 feet from the front wall of the building (excluding the porch) or 1/3 of the depth of the building from the front wall of the building, whichever is greater. (4) Chain link fences are prohibited in the front yard. The proposed fence is 8’ tall, but does not obscure the front of the building. It is located approximately 16’ back from the front of the house. No material was provided. b) Masonry retaining walls (exposed on one side, earth-retaining on the other) are permitted as per city code. New retaining walls are constructed only at the rear of the main house. c) Masonry site walls (exposed on both sides of the wall) may not exceed 2’ in height unless pre-existing. No masonry site walls are proposed. d) Preserve existing mature trees greater than 60” in circumference or 19” in diameter. The proposal preserves mature trees at the front of the property. e) Driveways (1) Repair, rather than replace existing concrete ribbon or lattice driveways. (2) Do not replace concrete drives with asphalt. (3) Driveway entrances shall be consistent with the pattern on contributing buildings on the same primary street. No driveway changes are proposed. C. REHABILITATION OR ALTERATION OF CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS 1. Required Standards. 10 – 3 a) Maintain the historic style and retain character-defining features. Character-defining features generally include exterior wall materials, windows and window screens, doors and entryway details, roof form, porches, chimneys, railings, and trim. The proposed project replaces the existing lap siding with shiplap, which is not consistent with the style of the house. It removes the existing chimney. While windows are replaced, the existing windows are not original. It replaces the existing transom and sidelights, as well as the entryway detailing; while trim is not original, the existing is more consistent with the style of the house than the proposed. The proposed project replaces the existing dormer windows and screens with less-appropriate fixed windows. b) Do not install new materials that obscure or endanger original materials, including but not limited to painting of original masonry or installation of vinyl or aluminum siding over original wood siding. The proposed project does not include obscuring original materials. c) Repair existing original windows unless determined infeasible due to excessive deterioration that is adequately documented in the application for a certificate of appropriateness. Utilize recommended repair practices listed below where feasible. The proposed project replaces mostly non-original windows. The age of the dormer windows is unclear. d) Replacement windows, where permitted, must match the original, size, profile, muntin shape, configuration, and details. Do not use vinyl–clad windows. Do not use false muntins attached to or inserted between insulated glass panels. Proposed 1:1 sash windows appear to match older photos of the property (see backup), but the appearance of the original bay window at the front of the house is unknown. Proposed dormer windows do not match the original. e) Roofs. (1) When replacing a roof, maintain the original roof form and other character defining features of the roof including overhangs, barge boards, rafter tails, and cresting, where existing. (2) Unacceptable roof materials are those that are not used elsewhere in the district, are not appropriate for the subject property, or have otherwise been determined incompatible with the district or the subject property The proposed project mostly maintains the roof form, with the exception of the additional rear dormer, which is appropriate. It does not remove existing detailing. The proposed terra cotta tile roof does not appear appropriate to the style of the house. D. ADDITIONS TO EXISTING BUILDINGS 1. Required Standards a) For contributing buildings, a new addition shall not visually overpower the existing building, compromise its historic character, or destroy any unique character defining features. The proposed rear addition does not overpower the existing building or compromise its character-defining elements. b) For contributing buildings, two-story additions to one-story buildings must be set back a minimum of 1/3 the depth of the building measured from the front wall of the house (excluding the porch), or 15 feet measured from the front wall of the house (excluding the porch), whichever number is greater. The proposed addition is located at the rear of the building. 10 – 4 c) Design an addition using appropriate scale and detailing to avoid creating a top-heavy appearance. The proposed added dormer is equal in scale to the existing dormers. d) Materials of the addition (walls, roofing materials, and windows) shall be compatible with the original building, and may include use of modern materials such as fiber-cement siding, as appropriate. The proposed dormer is consistent in materiality with the proposed replacement materials on the rest of the building; however, more appropriate alternatives would be lap siding and a shingle roof for the entire project. e) New roof forms must match the pitch of the roof on the existing house to the greatest extent possible. The proposed roofline matches existing dormers and roof pitch. f) Windows shall be compatible in form and materials with the existing building, and can be used to define contemporary design when determined appropriate for the particular application. Proposed windows are more appropriate for this new dormer than for existing dormers visible from the primary street. Summary The project meets some of the applicable standards. Department Comments The project also includes remodeling of the non-contributing rear building to match the proposed modifications to the front house. Its construction was approved by HLC in 2011. A 2010 request for historic zoning for the house was denied by City Council because of modifications to the front of the house.3 Staff Recommendation Approve the rear addition. Approve the window replacement, requesting that screens be replaced atop new dormer windows. Request that the applicant provide historical precedent images of the house or neighborhood or choose more appropriate siding and roof materials, as the proposed shiplap siding and terra cotta tile do not currently comply with the design standards. Alternately, postpone the public hearing to May 6, 2026 and invite the applicant to the April 8 meeting of the Architectural Review Committee. 3 https://services.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=150336 Location Map 10 – 5