B.3.b - 5312 Shoal Creek Blvd - citizen comment — original pdf
Backup
Historic Landmark Commission Homepage
B.4.0 - Lopez House - 809 E. 9th Street — original pdf
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AUGUST 23, 2021 PR-110439 LOPEZ HOUSE 809 E. 9TH STREET B.4 – 1 PROPOSAL STAFF RECOMMENDATION The applicant proposes to temporarily relocate the house to3124 Father Joe Znotas Street during construction of the adjacent housing tower. The back porch and ramp, both added in 2016, will be removed and not replaced. Approve the application as proposed. The house will be moved temporarily to pro9perty owned by the applicant in East Austin, to protect it during the course of construction of a residential tower to its south. Once the residential building, the Lopez House will be returned to its original location. LOCATION MAP B.4 – 2 B.4 – 3
B.4.1 - Lopez House appication — original pdf
Submittal Requirements1.One set of dimensioned building plans. (cid:51)(cid:79)a(cid:81)s (cid:80)(cid:88)st(cid:29) a(cid:12) s(cid:83)(cid:72)cif(cid:92) (cid:80)at(cid:72)ria(cid:79)s a(cid:81)d fi(cid:81)is(cid:75)(cid:72)s to (cid:69)(cid:72) (cid:88)s(cid:72)d(cid:15) a(cid:81)d (cid:69)(cid:12) s(cid:75)o(cid:90)(cid:72)(cid:91)isti(cid:81)(cid:74) and (cid:83)ro(cid:83)os(cid:72)d co(cid:81)ditio(cid:81)s for a(cid:79)t(cid:72)ratio(cid:81)s a(cid:81)d additio(cid:81)s.Site Plan Elevations Floor Plan Roof Plan2.Color photographs of building and site:(cid:40)levation(cid:11)s(cid:12) (cid:83)ro(cid:83)os(cid:72)d to (cid:69)(cid:72) (cid:80)odifi(cid:72)d Detailed view of each area proposed to be modifiedPROPOSED (cid:58)(cid:50)(cid:53)(cid:46) 1)PROPOSED MATERIAL(S) LOCATION OF PROPOSED (cid:58)(cid:50)(cid:53)(cid:46)2)Applicant Signature: ___________________________________________ Date: ____________________________Property Address: ______________________________________________________Historic Landmark Historic District (cid:11)Loca(cid:79)(cid:12) (cid:49)atio(cid:81)a(cid:79) (cid:53)(cid:72)(cid:74)ist(cid:72)r Historic (cid:39)istrict3)Any changes to these plans must be reviewed and approved by the Historic Preservation Office and/or Historic Landmark Commission. Historic La(cid:81)d(cid:80)ar(cid:78) or Historic (cid:39)istrict (cid:49)a(cid:80)(cid:72)(cid:29)__________________(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)Applicant Name: _______________________________ Phone (cid:6): ______________________ Email: ______________________________ Applicant Address(cid:29) _________________________(cid:66)_____ City(cid:29) ____________(cid:66)(cid:66)(cid:66)________ __ State(cid:29) ________________ (cid:61)ip(cid:29) _________(cid:66)(cid:51)(cid:79)(cid:72)a(cid:86)(cid:72)(cid:3)d(cid:72)(cid:86)(cid:70)(cid:85)(cid:76)(cid:69)(cid:72)(cid:3)a(cid:79)(cid:79)(cid:3)(cid:83)(cid:85)(cid:82)(cid:83)(cid:82)(cid:86)(cid:72)d(cid:3)(cid:72)(cid:91)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:85)(cid:76)(cid:82)(cid:85)(cid:3)(cid:90)(cid:82)(cid:85)(cid:78)(cid:3)(cid:90)(cid:76)(cid:87)(cid:75)(cid:3)(cid:79)(cid:82)(cid:70)a(cid:87)(cid:76)(cid:82)n(cid:3)and(cid:3)(cid:80)a(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:85)(cid:76)a(cid:79)(cid:86)(cid:17) If you need more space, attach an additional sheet.For Office Use OnlyDate of Submission:_________________________________Case #:____________________________________________ _________________________________________________ Historic Preservation Office approvalDate of Approval:___________________________________Historic Review Application(cid:54)ubmit complete application(cid:15) drawings(cid:15) and photos to preservation(cid:35)austinte(cid:91)as.gov. Call (cid:11)(cid:24)(cid:20)(cid:21)(cid:12) (cid:28)(cid:26)(cid:23)(cid:16)(cid:22)(cid:22)(cid:28)(cid:22) with (cid:84)uestions. 4444809 E. 9th Street Austin TX 78702Routon-Alvarez-Lopez HouseRachel Stone, GNDC813 E. 8th Street AustinTX78702Thehistoricpropertywillbeentirelypreservedbutmovedtoanotherlocationwhilethepresentlocationisunderconstruction.Thebackporch/ramp,whichwasaddedin2016,willberemoved.8/5/2021Thehousewillbetemporarilyrelocatedto3124FatherJoeZnotasStreet78702Nomaterialswillbeadded
B.5.0 - Elisabet Ney Museum - 304 E 44th St — original pdf
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AUGUST 23, 2021 C14H-1974-0015; HR-2021-116843 ELISABET NEY MUSEUM 304 E. 44TH STREET B.5 – 1 PROPOSAL In-kind structural repair of the front balcony. PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS In-kind repair of rusting and delaminating steel lintels, a leaning stone column, and a cracked column capital at the front balcony, to include the following work: 1) Carpentry: Remove the railing and decking lumber. Preserve the decorative stars for reinstallation. Rebuild the railing and decking with new lumber to match following structural and masonry repairs. 2) Masonry: Remove and catalog the stone masonry above the top of the columns. Clean and repair the stones, as necessary. Repair cracks to the northeast column capital and place a grout pad on the southeast column. Reinstall salvaged stones in original locations following structural repairs. 3) Structural: Remove and replace the steel lintels, adding a reinforced coarse masonry grout beam between the columns and waterproofing to prevent future lintel deterioration. ARCHITECTURE STANDARDS FOR REVIEW Repair and alterations The Elisabet Ney Museum, historically the home and studio of this renowned sculptor, is a flat-roofed building constructed of rusticated limestone. From the front, the porticoed main entrance leads to a lofty studio space, with a lower one-story reception room to the left, and to the right, a three-story stair tower and stepped back two-story volume that contains an exhibit room and retreat. Castellations punctuate the parapets of the tower, reception room, and two-story portion. 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 at historic landmarks. The following standards apply to the proposed project: 1. General Standards Per Standards 1.1 and 1.2, the project will retain and reuse historic materials that must be dismantled to facilitate necessary structural repairs. Individual stones will be catalogued and returned to their original locations. 4. Exterior walls and trim The Parks and Recreation Department is working with an experienced mason familiar with the Elisabet Ney Museum who will employ careful techniques to remove, clean, and replace the stones in their original locations, using appropriate mortar. Summary The project meets the applicable standards. COMMITTEE FEEDBACK Not reviewed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION While an in-depth structural assessment has determined that the identified issues are not a life-safety concern, the Parks and Recreation Department seeks to move forward quickly with repairs. Final drawings from …
B.5.1 - 304 E 44th St - Scope of work — original pdf
WJE Scope Briefing To be clear, the anticipated (subject to change) scope that our repair drawings will explain is as follows: 1. Remove all of the railing and decking lumber. Preserve the decorative stars. 2. Remove all of the stone masonry above the top of the columns. The stones should be cataloged so they may be returned to their original locations. 3. Clean and repair (i.e., crack repairs) as necessary all of the stones removed. 4. Remove the existing steel lintel. 5. Repair the northeast column capital cracks. 6. Place a ~2” grout pad on the southeast column. 7. Replace the steel lintel with a similar steel section. 8. Cast a reinforced coarse masonry grout beam spanning between the columns. 9. Reinstall the stone masonry around and above the cast beam. 10. Installation of appropriate waterproofing to prevent future lintel deterioration. 11. Construction of new lumber railing and decking. Please be sure than Brian understands that the masonry scope will include removal, cataloging, restoration, and reinstallation of essentially all of the masonry above the columns.
B.5.2 - 304 E 44th St - Structural assessment — original pdf
P u b l i c W o r k s D e p a r t m e n t Quality Management Division To: Christina Bies Project Coordinator Parks & Recreation Department, City of Austin Re: Elisabet Ney Museum 304 East 44th Street, Austin Texas, 78751 Existing Exterior Balcony Ms. Bies, April 19, 2021 This letter is in regard to the structural integrity of the existing elevated balcony. A site visit was conducted on April 7, 2021, to perform a structural observation of the exterior balcony located to the east of the main entrance. See photo A The existing building appears to be a stone structure, a full assessment of the building was not made at the time of our site visit. The existing balcony is located to the east of the main entrance of the museum. See photo B. The balcony floor system consists of wood floor joists that are supported by a double wood member beam at both supporting ends. See photos C and D. The joist sizes and supporting wood members were not measured during the site visit. There are two (2) steel lintels that support a low stone guard rail wall on along the south and east side of the balcony, the steel lintels are supported by stone columns. At the time of our site visit the two (2) steel lintels were rusted and were delaminated. See photos E and F. The stone column support located against the building along the east side of the balcony is leaning southward away from the building and a limestone block has split in the stone capital. See photos G and H. The structural integrity of the existing stone column capital and the two (2) steel lintels have been compromised, creating imminent hazard and danger to the health, safety and welfare of the public. The balcony is not to be accessed and the area needs to be roped off. It is my professional recommendation that this be addressed immediately to minimize any further damage. If you have questions, please feel free to contact me. Thank you, Karim Helmi, PE City Structural Engineer QUALITY MANAGEMENT DIVISION Public Works Department │ City of Austin 512.974.6539│ karim.helmi@austintexas.gov Photo A: Building Front View Photo B: Exiting Balcony 2 | P a g e Photo C: Balcony Wood Framing Photo D: Balcony Wood Framing 3 | P a g e Photo E: Existing Steel …
B.6.0 - 4409 Avenue C — original pdf
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AUGUST 23, 2021 HR-2021-119797 HYDE PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT 4409 AVENUE C B.6 – 1 PROPOSAL Replace aluminum windows on rear addition with vinyl windows. PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS Install 11 vinyl windows on an addition to the back of the house without altering size or location of existing openings. The windows proposed for replacement include non-original jalousie and fixed-pane windows at the rear of the building at an enclosed porch. ARCHITECTURE DESIGN STANDARDS One-story Ranch-style house with partial-width inset porch, horizontal siding, and side-gabled roof. The Hyde Park Design Standards are used to evaluate projects within the historic district. The following standards apply to the proposed project: 3.3.4. If replacing windows, use windows that approximate the size and match the scale, profile, appearance, and configuration of existing historic windows. The proposed project affects only non-original windows on a non-historic addition. Existing openings will not change in size or shape. While vinyl would not be an appropriate replacement material for historic-age windows and/or windows visible from the street, the proposed project does not impact original material or streetscape views. Summary The project mostly meets the applicable standard. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the application. The proposed windows are not visible from the street and affect a non-historic enclosed screened porch only. LOCATION MAP B.6 – 2 Photos B.6 – 3 B.6 – 4 Source: Applicant, 2021
B.6.1 - 4409 Avenue C - plan — original pdf
Backup
B.6.2 - 4409 Avenue C - photos and proposal — original pdf
4409 Avenue C Austin, TX 78751 Homeowner: Erika Bsumek Scope of Work: There are a total of 11 windows being replaced, with the room is three sided wall; the south wall will have 1 picture window and 3 hung windows. The north wall will have 1 picture window and 3 hung windows. The east wall will have 1 picture window and two hung windows. Please see attached illustrated pics. The current windows are made of aluminum metal. They were installed years ago when the back was closed and roomed up The new replacement windows will only alter this back room that is not visible to the front of the home. There are no grids being installed. The colors are white interior and white exterior. We are installing 3 picture windows in the corners, and installing 8 single hung windows. They will be vinyl windows, double pane glass. These update will only alter the look of this back room of the house facing the backyard. There is no visibility to the front of the house.
B.6.3 - 4409 Avenue C - window specs — original pdf
Backup
B.6.a - 4409 Avenue C - citizen comment — original pdf
Backup
B.7.a - 1309 Marshall Ln - citizen comment — original pdf
Backup
B.8.a - 3909 Avenue G - citizen comment — original pdf
PUBLICHEARINGINFORMATION Althoughapplicantsand/ortheiragent(S)areexpectedtoparticipateinapublichearing,yOuarenOtrequiredtoparticipate・This meetingwi11beconductedonlineandyouhavetheopportundytospeakFORorAGAINSTtheproposeddevelopmentorchange. Emailorcallthestaffcontactnolaterthannoonthedaybeforethemeetingforinformationonhowtoparticipatein血epublic hearingsonline.Youmayalsocontactaneighborhoodorenvirormentalorganizationthathasexpressedaninterestinanapplication affectingyourneighborhood. Duringapublichearing,theboardorcommissionmaypostponeorcontinueanapplication’shearingtoalaterdate,OrreCOmmend approvalordenialoftheapplication.Iftheboardorcommissionamouncesaspecificdateandtimeforapos申OnementOr COntinuationthatisnotlaterthan60daysfromtheamouncement,nOfurthernoticeisrequired. Aboardorcommission’sdecisionmaybeappealedbyapersonwithstandingtoappeal,Oraninterestedpartythatisidentifiedasa PerSOnWhocanappealthedecision.Thebodyholdingapublicheamgonanappealwi11deteminewhetherapersonhasstandingto appealthedecision. interesttoaboardorcommissionby: Aninterestedpartyisdefinedasapersonwhoistheapplicantorrecordownerofthesubjectproperty,OrWhocommunicatesan ・ deliveringawrittenstatementtotheboardorcommissionbeforeorduringthepublichearingthatgenerallyiden舶estheissues Ofconcem(itm(砂bedeliveredzo/heconlaclpe郷onlisiedonanotice);Or . appearingandspeakingfortherecordatthepublichearing;and: . occupiesaprimaryresidencethatiswithin500feetofthesubjectpropertyorproposeddeve賞opment; .istherecordownerofpropertywithin500feetofthesubjectpropertyorproposeddevelopment;Or ・isano飾cerofanenvirormentalorneighborhoodorganizationthathasaninterestinorwhosedeclaredboundariesarewithin 500feetofthesu切ectpropertyorproposeddevelopment. Anoticeofappealmustbefiledwiththedirectoroftheresponsibledepartmentnolaterthan14daysafterthedecision.Anappeal fommaybeavailablefromtheresponsibledepa血nent. ForadditionalinfomationontheCityofAustin,slanddevelopmentprocess,Pleasevisitourwebsite‥WWW.auStintexas.寝OV/abc Writtencommentsmustbesubmittedtotheboardorcommission(Orthecontactpersonlistedonthenotice)beforeapublichearing. Yourcommentsshouldincludetheboardorcommission’sname,thescheduleddateofthepublichearing,theCaseNumberandthe COntaCtPerSOnlistedonthenotice. caseNumber:HR21-114079-3909AVENUEG EIaminfivor 誌諾こ霊蕊霊豊,認諾。mmissi。n,Augus,23,2。21□Iobject \印し色輔弛」_____二塁IObU囲」三でトビ珂「 YourName佃Ieaseprint) Youraddress(es)affectedbythisapplication のレ嵐涙十甚,乙の乙l Signature 〉\\\ DateU 。。mm。ntS:十楊〃L汚し生y^ct2r,個It十h\S,p「C叩C),宮 / ヽ V 事 ( Ifyouusethisfomtocomment,itmayberetumedto: CityofAustinHousingandPlanningDepartment HistoricPreservationO飾ce,ATTN:AmberAllen P.0.BoxlO88 Austin,TX78767-8810 E-mail:DreServation(ゐaustintexas.sov
B.8.b - 3909 Avenue G - citizen comment — original pdf
Backup
C.1.0 - 1805 Waterston Ave — original pdf
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION PERMITS IN NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICTS AUGUST 23, 2021 GF-2021-060230 CLARKSVILLE NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICT 1805 WATERSTON AVENUE C.2 – 1 PROPOSAL Demolish a ca. 1952 house and construct a new house. PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS 1) Demolish existing contributing house. 2) Construct a new house. The proposed building is clad in brick, board-and-batten, and horizontal siding. It has a complex roofline with gabled, shed, and flat accents. The front-facing garage is capped with a steeply pitched gabled roof with deep eaves, while shed roofs shelter the projecting dormers and partial-width front porch. Exposed rafter tails are visible at eaves, and the roof is clad in standing-seam metal. Windows at all elevations are divided and varied in size and configuration. One-story side-gabled house with partial-width gabled porch, 2:2:2 picture window, board-and-batten siding, and attached carport. ARCHITECTURE RESEARCH The house at 1805 Waterston Avenue was built around 1952 for Kelly Louis and Johnnie Mary Jackson Meador. Kelly Meador taught vocational studies at the Texas State Blind, Deaf, and Orphan School (later the Texas State School for the Deaf). A pastor’s son, Meador was an active member of the Metropolitan AME congregation. The Meadors were both Tillotson College alumni and contributed to the United Negro College Fund as fundraising committee members. They also operated the Economy Radio and TV Service, a repair shop, around 1959. 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: Residential new construction 1. Location The proposed building is set back 25’ from the street, roughly aligned with other contributing buildings in the district. 2. Orientation The proposed building is oriented toward the primary street. 3. Scale, massing, and height While the proposed new building is two stories in height, most contributing buildings in the district are one story. Its complex massing is at odds with the relatively simple contributing buildings nearby. Step-downs at the main elevation serve to offset the building’s height. 4. Proportions While most of the building’s proportions are acceptable, the rightmost bay with its steeply pitched gable and projecting dormers is incongruous with the district’s character. 5. Design and style The proposed building is differentiated by its multiple cladding types, its compound massing, and its fenestration patterns and materials. The combination of …
C.1.1 - 1805 Waterston Ave - Plans — original pdf
0" 3'-1 2 TAKEN FOR R.O.W. VOL. 6325, PG 1319 DRTC E E L R E VIC AS TREN C. S D E A E H R E V G 87 R5 '-0 " H LINE C PSTER M U D 24'-7" 3 3 5 2 3 5 W O E N 5'-4" FOUNDATION 1,037 SF/ 45.3% 12" FOUNDATION EXCAVATION 74 SF/ 3.2% TOTAL CRZ=2,290 SF 1,111 SF/ 2,290 SF=48.5% 27" OAK CRZ CALCULATIONS N 1 TIO R O E - P 4 0'-0" N A L K P C A B T E E S SID 533.0' - HIGHEST POINT OF SIDE SETBACK PORTION 1 Point Table Point # Description TRE 13 OAK TT7374 TRE 32 ELM TT7373 REMOVE TRE 12 PECAN TT7375 TRE 16.5 ELM TT7376 REMOVE TRE 12.5 PECAN TT7377 87 88 89 90 92 189 190 191 192 194 230 246 253 258 TRE 14 OAK TT7380 TRE 18 OAK TT7379 TRE 10 ELM TT7383 TRE 6 OAK TT7382 TRE 13 ELM TT7385 TRE 9 OAK TT7378 TRE 10 TWIN TREE TT7381 TRE 24 OAK TT253 TRE 27 OAK TT7384 N 2 TIO R O E - P 4 0'-0" N A L K P C A B T E E S SID D) R 5' BL (CITY O 194 RESID FIN. FLR. ELE E N C E V =532.0' 533.2' - HIGHEST POINT OF SIDE SETBACK PORTION 2 PROVIDE 8" LAYER OF MULCH WITHIN ENTIRE AVAILABLE RO N 3 OL EQUIP. TIO R O E - P OT ZONE PO 4 0'-0" N A L K P C A B T E E S SID 1/4 CRZ 253 3 3 5 2 3 5 8'-10" 1 3 5 0 3 5 531.0' HIG A TREE PR N DJA ATU R AL G OTECTIO C HEST NT E R A D E N OL O OSED P P O R P 1 2 CRZ 2" / 25'-2 1/2" 533.2' - HIGHEST POINT OF SIDE SETBACK PORTION 3 K C A N 4 E - 7'-9 1 B T N E TIO E S A L R SID P O P 533.2' - HIGHEST POINT OF SIDE SETBACK PORTION 4 10' BL (CITY O R D) 191 LIN E O F EXIST. C 1 2 CRZ 258 192 O N C RETE F O U N D ATIO N STRAP 2X4 PLANKING (MIN. 6' TALL) AROUND TREE …
C.1.a - 1805 Waterston Ave - citizen comment — original pdf
Allen, Amber From: Sent: To: Subject: Mary Reed Saturday, July 24, 2021 9:12 AM Allen, Amber; PAZ Preservation Requesting to speak on Monday night *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** On behalf of the Clarksville Community Development Corporation (CCDC), I would like to ask the Commissioners to delay making a decision on the demo permit request related to 1805 Waterston Avenue, a contributing structure in the Clarksville NRHD. It is Item C.2 on the agenda. Thank you. Mary Reed President, CCDC board of directors MR•PR Austin, TX 78703 Be Kind "I have decided to stick with love. Hate is too great a burden to bear." MLK CAUTION: This email was received at the City of Austin, from an EXTERNAL source. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious and/or phishing email, please forward this email to cybersecurity@austintexas.gov. 1
C.1.b - 1805 Waterston Ave - citizen communication — original pdf
Contreras, Kalan From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Mary Reed Saturday, July 24, 2021 10:09 AM Myers, Terri - BC; Wright, Caroline - BC; Little, Kelly - BC; Koch, Kevin - BC; Jacob, Mathew - BC; McWhorter, Trey - BC; Featherston, Witt; Papavasiliou, Alexander - BC; Tollett, Blake - BC; Valenzuela, Sarah - BC; Heimsath, Ben - BC Allen, Amber; Contreras, Kalan; PAZ Preservation Regarding 1805 Waterston Avenue, Item C.2 on your July 26th agenda *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** On June 3 representatives of the CCDC met with Jesse Nalle with Nalle Custom Homes to do what I would best describe as damage control. The company had purchased a remodeled upscale home in the Clarksville National Register District – a home that contributes to the Clarksville NRHD -- and wanted to demo it and build something bigger and more expensive. We knew the odds of convincing the company to not demo the home were dismal so we focused on suggesting changes to the plans Jesse Nalle shared with us in an effort to end up with a new home that would be more in keeping with Clarksville and less ”suburban.” Among other things, we asked that he either substitute a carport for the front-facing garages or relocate them at the back or side of the house; get rid of the exterior brick; and enlarge the front porch so that it could function as an out-door living space. We made other requests many of which reflected the same concerns about the compatibility of the new house design that are indicated in the backup materials prepared by Kalan Contreras for your meeting on the 26th. We also suggested that Mr. Nalle drive around Clarksville to get a sense of the neighborhood. We thought that seeing what other houses here look like would help inform his redesign process. Mr. Nalle was very open to our suggestions and said that he would send us new plans based on our comments. He seemed genuine and so we left the meeting hopeful that he had heard and respected what we had to say. However, here we are 53 days after that meeting, and despite six friendly email exchanges with Nalle in which he has repeatedly told me that "new plans will be coming soon" or that he has "nothing to share with me yet," we have not seen any revised drawings. In fact, the …
C.1.c - 1805 Waterston Ave - citizen comment — original pdf
Allen, Amber From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Mary Reed Saturday, July 24, 2021 10:09 AM terrimyers@preservationcentral.com; Myers, Terri - BC; Wright, Caroline - BC; Little, Kelly - BC; Koch, Kevin - BC; Jacob, Mathew - BC; McWhorter, Trey - BC; Featherston, Witt; Papavasiliou, Alexander - BC; Tollett, Blake - BC; Valenzuela, Sarah - BC; Heimsath, Ben - BC Allen, Amber; Contreras, Kalan; PAZ Preservation Regarding 1805 Waterston Avenue, Item C.2 on your July 26th agenda *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** On June 3 representatives of the CCDC met with Jesse Nalle with Nalle Custom Homes to do what I would best describe as damage control. The company had purchased a remodeled upscale home in the Clarksville National Register District – a home that contributes to the Clarksville NRHD -- and wanted to demo it and build something bigger and more expensive. We knew the odds of convincing the company to not demo the home were dismal so we focused on suggesting changes to the plans Jesse Nalle shared with us in an effort to end up with a new home that would be more in keeping with Clarksville and less ”suburban.” Among other things, we asked that he either substitute a carport for the front-facing garages or relocate them at the back or side of the house; get rid of the exterior brick; and enlarge the front porch so that it could function as an out-door living space. We made other requests many of which reflected the same concerns about the compatibility of the new house design that are indicated in the backup materials prepared by Kalan Contreras for your meeting on the 26th. We also suggested that Mr. Nalle drive around Clarksville to get a sense of the neighborhood. We thought that seeing what other houses here look like would help inform his redesign process. Mr. Nalle was very open to our suggestions and said that he would send us new plans based on our comments. He seemed genuine and so we left the meeting hopeful that he had heard and respected what we had to say. However, here we are 53 days after that meeting, and despite six friendly email exchanges with Nalle in which he has repeatedly told me that "new plans will be coming soon" or that he has "nothing to share with me yet," we have not seen any revised drawings. In fact, …
C.2.0 - 2521 Jarratt Avenue — original pdf
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICT PERMITS AUGUST 23, 2021 PR-21-092304 2521 JARRATT AVENUE OLD WEST AUSTIN NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICT C.2 – 1 PROPOSAL ARCHITECTURE RESEARCH Demolish a ca. 1948 house that is contributing to the historic district. One-story, wing-and-hipped roof brick veneered ranch house with a partial-width inset porch o ornamental metal supports; banded fenestration in an early mid-century Modern aesthetic. The house was built in 1948 by Gibson R. Randle and his wife, Sarah. Gibson Randle was a prominent attorney in town, having served as Austin’s city attorney for many years. Sarah Randle was the daughter of a prominent judge. While living here, Gibson Randle had a private law practice, and in 1962, he was appointed to the State Board of Law Examiners. He and Sarah divorced in 1979 and Gibson married Audray Bateman, one of the founders of the Austin History Center. However, it is not known at this time whether Audray Bateman lived in this house, but at any rate, any association of Audray Bateman to this house would be outside the historic period. PROPERTY EVALUATION The property 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 may meet two criteria: a. Architecture. The house reflects a ranch house design, popular in Austin after World War II, with its long, low configuration and expansive front porch; there are also elements of mid-century Modern design in the house in the use of banded windows. The house may have architectural significance as an intact example of its design type. b. Historical association. The property is significantly associated with Gibson R. Randle, a prominent attorney who served as Austin’s city attorney for a number of years and was a member of the State Board of Law Examiners. His first wife, Sarah, was a teacher and counselor in the Austin public schools. 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 …