Versión en español a continuación. Historic Landmark Commission Meeting Wednesday, July 6, 2022, 6:00 PM Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely by telephone. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required for remote participation (Tuesday, July 5th by noon). To speak remotely at the Historic Landmark Commission Meeting, members of the public must: Call or email the board liaison at (512) 974-3393 or preservation@austintexas.gov no later than noon, Tuesday, July 5th (the day before the meeting). The following information is required: speaker name, item number(s) they wish to speak on, whether they are for/against/neutral, email address and telephone number (must be the same number that will be used to call into the meeting). Once a request to speak has been made to the board liaison, the information to call on the day of the scheduled meeting will be provided either by email or phone call. Speakers must call in at least 15 minutes prior to meeting start time in order to speak, late callers will not be accepted and will not be able to speak. Speakers will be placed in a queue until their time to speak. Handouts or other information may be emailed to preservation@austintexas.gov by noon the day before the scheduled meeting. This information will be provided to Board and Commission members in advance of the meeting. If the meeting is broadcast live, it may be viewed here: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch-atxn-live Reunión del Historic Landmark Commission FECHA de la reunion (6 de julio, 2022) Se permitirán comentarios públicos en persona o de forma remota por teléfono. Se requiere registro a más tardar al mediodía del día anterior a la reunión para la participación remota. (Domingo 1 de junio al mediodía). Para hablar de forma remota en la reunión, los miembros del público deben: Llame o envíe un correo electrónico al enlace de la junta en (512) 974-3393 or preservation@austintexas.gov a más tardar al mediodía (el día antes de la reunión). Se requiere la siguiente información: nombre del orador, número (s) de artículo sobre el que desean hablar, si están a favor / en contra / neutral, dirección de correo electrónico (opcional) y un número de teléfono (debe ser el número que se utilizará para llamar ). Una vez que se haya realizado una solicitud para hablar con el enlace de la junta, la información para llamar …
ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET HLC DATE: July 6, 2022 PC DATE: TBD CASE NUMBER: C14H-2022-0078 ADDRESS OF PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE: 813 Park Boulevard APPLICANT: O’Connell Architecture, LLC HISTORIC NAME: Miller-Long House WATERSHED: Waller Creek ZONING CHANGE: SF-3-CO-NP to SF-3-CO-NP-H COUNCIL DISTRICT: 9 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the proposed zoning change from family residence (SF-3) – conditional overlay (CO) – neighborhood plan (NP) to family residence (SF-3) – conditional overlay (CO) – neighborhood plan (NP) – historic landmark (H) combining district zoning. QUALIFICATIONS FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION: Architecture and historical associations HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION ACTION: N/A PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: N/A CITY COUNCIL DATE: N/A ACTION: N/A ORDINANCE READINGS: N/A ORDINANCE NUMBER: N/A CASE MANAGER: Kalan Contreras, 512-974-2727 NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS: Austin Independent School District, Austin Lost and Found Pets, Austin Neighborhoods Council, CANPAC (Central Austin Neigh Plan Area Committee), Central Austin Community Development Corporation, Friends of Austin Neighborhoods, Hancock Neighborhood Assn., Homeless Neighborhood Association, Neighborhood Empowerment Foundation, North Austin Neighborhood Alliance, Preservation Austin, SELTexas, Sierra Club, Austin Regional Group DEPARTMENT COMMENTS: The 2021 North Loop-Hancock-Boggy Creek historic resource survey recommends the property as eligible for local landmark designation, a contributing resource to a potential local historic district, individually eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, and contributing to a potential National Register Historic District. BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATION: Architecture: The Miller-Long House demonstrates significance in the categories of Architecture as a beautiful example of the Tudor Revival style popular from 1890-1940 and specific to the Perry Estate Addition, developed by D.W English in 1928. The home’s massing and detailing are representative of the Tudor Revival style, with a steeply pitched frontfacing gable with wing, a smaller gable nested within the larger one, shed dormers, arched detailing, and distinctive patterned brickwork. The material pallet of variegated brick, stucco, steel casement windows and Tudor-styled entry doors. The original roof was wood shingles but is now composition shingle. The interior paneling and woodwork are intact as other interior features, including Tudor arches over interior doorways, built-in cabinetry, a brick fireplace with a Tudor arch and a decorative surround embellished with a floral and drape relief. The asymmetrical design of the front façade is typical of the style after 1920. A detached garage is located just southwest of the main house and dates to the same period of construction as the main house. The garage matches the house in form, roof pitch and wall materials, and consequently …
City of Austin - Historic Preservation Office Historic Zoning Application Packet F. 1: Historical Documentation - Deed Chronology Deed Research for (fill in address) ________________________________ List Deeds chronologically, beginning with earliest transaction first and proceeding through present ownership. The first transaction listed should date at least back to when the original builder of any historic structures on the site first acquired the property (i.e., should pre-date the construction of any buildings/structures on the site). Please use the format delineated below. For each transaction please include: name of Grantor/Grantee, date of transaction, legal description involved, price, and volume/page number of deed records. If there is a mechanic's lien please copy the entire document. Plat Records Volume 435, Page 353B Volume 442, Page 369A Online Deed Record CNY0080108CNY CNY0076603CNY Grantor Date Executed 4/23/1929 10/11/1929 10/21/1946 Instrument Warranty Deed Warranty Deed Warranty Deed 1/13/1947 Warranty Deed E. H. Perry R. Tom Miller Nellie May Miller and husband, Tom Miller Rex D. Kitchens and wife, Effie Kitchens Mrs. J.M. Hooper Jay H. Brown Mrs. J.M. Hooper W.L. "Jack" Armstrong Stuart Long and wife, Emma Long John C. Buckley Austin Doctors Bldg Corp Stuart and Emma Long Warranty Deed Warranty Deed Warranty Deed Warranty Deed Warranty Deed Warranty Deed Warranty Deed Release of Lien 4/14/1947 4/14/1947 7/28/1948 11/2/1950 11/1/1971 11/1/1971 10/17/1974 10/21/1974 5/24/1977 UCC-1 NON STD OPR Austin Doctors Bldg Corp 10/26/2017 Special Warranty Deed Laverne Henderson (deceased); Marvin Grantee R. Tom Miller Nellie May Miller Rex. D. Kitchens Mrs. J.M. Hooper Jay H. Brown Mrs. J.M. Hooper W.L. "Jack" Armstrong Stuart Long and wife, Emma Long John C. Buckley Austin Doctors Bldg Corp Marvin and Laverne Henderson John C. Buckley Travelers Insurance Co 811-813 Park LLC Volume 825, Page 56 Volume 827, Page 424 Volume 846, Page 436 Volume 846, Page 437 Volume 933, Page 387 Volume 1065, Page 633 Volume 4211, Page 1685 Vol. 4228, Page 2357 Vol. 5031, Page 1477 Volume 5052, Page 1854 Volume 5782, Page 2173 Floyd Henderson; Mayrene Henderson; Pattye Henderson and Johnn Robert Henderson 3/6/2020 Deed 811-813 Park LLC Xinesi Holdings LLC 505201854 582302392 503101477 505201854 578202173 2017172429 2020038245 10 Adopted December 2012 813 Park Blvd., Austin, Texas 78751 City of Austin - Historic Preservation Office Historic Zoning Application Packet F. 2: Historical Documentation - Occupancy History Occupancy Research for (fill in address) ___________________________ Using City Directories available at the Austin History Center or other information available, please …
Current Photographs All photos by O’Connell Architecture staff, March 2020 – August 2021 Photo 0001 Main House - North elevation Camera facing southwest Photos – Page 1 Miller-Long House 813 Park Blvd. Photo 0002 Main House - South elevation Camera facing north Photos – Page 2 Miller-Long House 813 Park Blvd. Photo 0003 Main House - West elevation Camera facing east Photos – Page 3 Miller-Long House 813 Park Blvd. Photo 0004 Main House - West elevation Camera facing east Photos – Page 4 Miller-Long House 813 Park Blvd. Photo 0005 Garage - North elevation Camera facing south Photos – Page 5 Miller-Long House 813 Park Blvd. Photo 0006 Garage - South elevation Camera facing north Photos – Page 6 Miller-Long House 813 Park Blvd. Photo 0007 Garage - East elevation Camera facing west Photos – Page 7 Miller-Long House 813 Park Blvd. Photo 0008 Garage - West elevation Camera facing east Photos – Page 8 Miller-Long House 813 Park Blvd. Photo 0009 Main House – Interior foyer and staircase Camera facing southwest Photos – Page 9 Miller-Long House 813 Park Blvd. Photo 10 Main House – Second floor landing and railing Camera facing northeast Photos – Page 10 Miller-Long House 813 Park Blvd. Photo 11 Main House – Interior doors with tudor arches Camera facing northwest Photos – Page 11 Miller-Long House 813 Park Blvd. Photo 12 Main House – Front Door and Screen Camera facing east Photos – Page 12 Miller-Long House 813 Park Blvd. Photo 13 Main House – Living Room Fireplace Camera facing east Photos – Page 13 Miller-Long House 813 Park Blvd. Photo 14 Main House – Dining Room Camera facing north Photos – Page 14 Miller-Long House 813 Park Blvd. Photo 0015 Main House and Garage Camera facing southeast Photos – Page 15 Miller-Long House 813 Park Blvd. Photo 16 Rock Entrances at west end of Perry Estates Addition between Barrow Street and Waller Creek Bridge Camera facing west Photo 17-18 Rock Entrances at west end of Perry Estates Addition between Barrow Street and Waller Creek Bridge Camera facing southwest and northwest respectively Photos – Page 16 Miller-Long House 813 Park Blvd. Photos 19 Rock Entrances at east end of Perry Estates Addition at the corner of Park Blvd. and Red River Street Camera facing southwest Photos 20 Rock Entrances at east end of Perry Estates Addition at the corner of Park Blvd. and …
ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET HLC DATE: July 6, 2022 CASE NUMBER: C14H-2022-0073 PC DATE: ADDRESS OF PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE: 1122 Colorado Street APPLICANT: Brian Evans, Westgate Condominium Association HISTORIC NAME: Westgate Tower WATERSHED: Lady Bird Lake ZONING CHANGE: CBD to CBD-H COUNCIL DISTRICT: 9 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the proposed zoning change from Central Business District (CBD) zoning to Central Business District – Historic Landmark (CBD-H) combining district zoning. QUALIFICATIONS FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION: Architecture and historical associations: The Westgate Tower is an excellent example of New Formalism, is the only building in Austin designed by architect Edward Durell Stone, and has served as a model for mixed-use building.1 HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION ACTION: 2012 – recommend historic zoning (5-0; Leary/Wolfenden-Guidry). PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: CITY COUNCIL DATE: N/A ORDINANCE READINGS: N/A CASE MANAGER: Kalan Contreras, 974-2727 ACTION: N/A ORDINANCE NUMBER: N/A NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS: Austin Independent School District, Austin Lost and Found Pets,Austin Neighborhoods Council, Central Austin CommunityDevelopment Corporation, City of Austin Downtown Commission,Downtown Austin Alliance, Downtown Austin Neighborhood Assn.(DANA), Friends of Austin Neighborhoods, Homeless NeighborhoodAssociation, Neighborhood Empowerment Foundation, PreservationAustin, SELTexas, Sierra Club, Austin Regional Group DEPARTMENT COMMENTS: The building was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 2010. Land Development Code §25-2-352(A)(3)(a) states that City Council may designate a historic landmark if it retains integrity, is over 50 years old, and is individually listed in the National Register of Historic Places. The Historic Landmark Commission recommended historic zoning in 2012; however, the application was withdrawn by the applicant prior to Planning Commission hearing. BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATION: §25-2-352(A)(3)(a) The property is individually listed in the National Register of Historic Places; or is designated as a Recorded Texas Historic Landmark, State Archeological Landmark, or National Historic Landmark. The building was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 2010. §25-2-352(A)(3)(b)(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. …
One Texas Center | 505 Barton Springs Road, Austin, TX 78704 | 512.978-4000 Property Profile Report Capitol Dominance Overlay Capitol View Corridors: BARTON CREEK PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE, ZILKER CLUBHOUSE, MOPAC BRIDGE - SDCC, BARTON CREEK PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE - SDCC, WOOLRIDGE PARK, MOPAC BRIDGE Downtown Austin Plan Districts: Uptown / Capital Downtown Density Bonus: FAR - 15 | Max Hgt - 400 Green Building Mandatory: Central Business District/Downtown Mixed Use Residential Design Standards: LDC/25-2-Subchapter F Selected Sign Ordinances Zoning Map Zoning Guide The Guide to Zoning provides a quick explanation of the above Zoning codes, however, the Development Assistance Center provides general zoning assistance and can advise you on the type of development allowed on a property. Visit Zoning for the description of each Base Zoning District. For official verification of the zoning of a property, please order a Zoning Verification Letter. General information on the Neighborhood Planning Areas is available from Neighborhood Planning. Current Imagery General Information Location: Parcel ID: Grid: 1122 COLORADO ST 0208011906 MJ23 Planning & Zoning *Right click hyperlinks to open in a new window. Future Land Use (FLUM): No Future Land Use Map Regulating Plan: No Regulating Plan Zoning: CBD Zoning Cases: C14H-2012-0078 Zoning Ordinances: None: Zoning Overlays: Infill Options: Neighborhood Restricted Parking Areas: -- -- -- -- Mobile Food Vendors: Historic Landmark: Urban Roadways: Yes No No No No No No Environmental Fully Developed Floodplain: FEMA Floodplain: Watershed Boudaries: Creek Buffers: Austin Watershed Regulation Areas: URBAN Lady Bird Lake Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone: Edwards Aquifer Recharge Verification Zone: Erosion Hazard Zone Review Buffer: Political Boundaries Jurisdiction: AUSTIN FULL PURPOSE Council District: 9 County: TRAVIS School District: Austin ISD Community Registry: Vicinity Map Austin Independent School District, Austin Lost and Found Pets, Austin Neighborhoods Council, Central Austin Community Development Corporation, City of Austin Downtown Commission, Downtown Austin Alliance, Downtown Austin Neighborhood Assn. (DANA), Friends of Austin Neighborhoods, Homeless Neighborhood Association, Neighborhood Empowerment Foundation, Preservation Austin, SELTexas, Sierra Club, Austin Regional Group The Information on this report has been produced by the City of Austin as a working document and is not warranted for any other use. No warranty is made by the City regarding its accuracy or completeness. Date created: 3/28/2022 NPS Form 10-900 OMB No 1024-0018 (Expires 5/31/2012) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service ^) ^ NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES Registration Form Registration Form 1. NAME OF PROPERTY HISTORIC NAME: Westgate T …
A.4 - 1 ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET HLC DATE: PC DATE: September 24, 2012 CASE NUMBER: C14H-2012-0089 APPLICANT: Westgate Condominium Association HISTORIC NAME: The Westgate Tower WATERSHED: Lady Bird Lake ADDRESS OF PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE: 1122 Colorado Street ZONING FROM: CBD to CBD-H SUMMARY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the proposed zoning change from Central Business District (CBD) zoning to Central Business District – Historic Landmark (CBD-H) combining district zoning. QUALIFICATIONS FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION: The Westgate Tower is an excellent example of the New Formalism approach to modern architecture, is the only building in Austin designed by internationally-known architect Edward Durell Stone, and has served as a model for continued mixed-use growth in the city, combining residential, commercial, and social uses in the same building. HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION ACTION: PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: DEPARTMENT COMMENTS: The building is not listed in the Comprehensive Cultural Resources Survey (1984) because of its age. ACTION: PHONE: 974-6454 ORDINANCE NUMBER: CITY COUNCIL DATE: ORDINANCE READINGS: 1ST 2ND 3RD CASE MANAGER: Steve Sadowsky NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATION: Downtown Austin Neighborhood Association BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATION: Architecture: The Westgate Tower was designed by internationally-known New York architect Edward Durell Stone in 1962; the building was completed under the supervision of prominent local architects Fehr and Granger in 1966. It is an excellent example of the New Formalism in the modern movement of architecture in the 1960s, as espoused by Stone, who was known throughout the world for his high-rise buildings that combined verticality with the monumental scale, refinement, and ornamentation of Classical building styles. The Westgate, named for its location just west of the State Capitol grounds, also served Stone’s philosophy of building up-scale residential buildings in park-like settings in or near downtown areas, luring wealthy residents away from single-family houses in the suburbs. Stone was concerned that most high-rise architecture of the era was sole solution to A.4 - 2 overdevelopment where going up was the only way to develop a site that was otherwise overbuilt already. The location of the Westgate Tower provided Stone the opportunity to express the ideals of downtown living with a green setting. The Westgate was also innovative in several other ways, providing a model for future central city development – combining residential and commercial uses, and a necessary amenity in the modern era – an integral parking garage that formed a significant part of the entire composition rather than as an auxiliary, utilitarian structure. …
ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET HLC DATE: July 6, 2022 CASE NUMBER: TBD PC DATE: ADDRESS OF PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE: 2002 Scenic Drive APPLICANT: Historic Landmark Commission (owner-opposed) HISTORIC NAME: Delisle House WATERSHED: Lady Bird Lake ZONING CHANGE: SF-3-NP to SF-3-H-NP COUNCIL DISTRICT: 10 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the proposed zoning change from family residence – neighborhood plan (SF-3-NP) zoning to family residence – historic landmark – neighborhood plan (SF-3-H-NP) combining district zoning. Should the Commission decide against recommendation over owner objection, require completion of a City of Austin Documentation Package prior to permit release. QUALIFICATIONS FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION: Architecture, landscape features, and historical associations HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION ACTION: TBD PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: CITY COUNCIL DATE: ORDINANCE READINGS: CASE MANAGER: Kalan Contreras, 974-2727 ACTION: ORDINANCE NUMBER: NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS: Austin Lost and Found Pets, Austin Neighborhoods Council, Central West Austin Neighborhood Plan Contact Team, Friends of Austin Neighborhoods, Neighborhood Empowerment Foundation, Preservation Austin, SELTexas, Save Barton Creek Assn., Save Historic Muny District, Sierra Club, Austin Regional Group, TNR BCP - Travis County Natural Resources, Tarrytown Alliance, Tarrytown Neighborhood Association, West Austin Neighborhood Group DEPARTMENT COMMENTS: A valid petition against historic zoning has been filed by the owner’s agent. BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATION: §25-2-352(A)(3)(b)(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. A property located within a local historic district is ineligible to be nominated for landmark designation under the criterion for architecture, unless it possesses exceptional significance or is representative of a separate period of significance. The primary building is a good example of Spanish eclectic architecture with Modern-style Fehr and Granger influences. The accessory structure is a unique example of eclectic, mid-century, and Gothic Revival architecture; it features unique Mansbendel keystones throughout. It appears to convey architectural significance as a one-of-a-kind structure in Austin. The primary building at 2002 Scenic Drive, known historically as River Street or River Avenue, …
Page 1 of 2 Engineer’s Report SUBJECT: Assessment of structural conditions 2002 Scenic Drive, Austin, Texas JOB NUMBER: DATE OF REPORT: 21206.01 June 20, 2022 At the request of Ryan Street Architects, I have visited the site twice to review existing conditions of structural elements and to offer an opinion about the suitability for reuse in a renovation. This report is a summary of my observations and refers to photos in the June 21, 2022 report by Ryan Street Architects. Apartment The degradation of the roof and windows has allowed water into the building for an unknown but obviously prolonged period of time. The wood roof framing has obvious rot in areas exposed by holes, and I believe it is likely that further investigation will reveal that none of the roof framing is salvageable. Given the excessive deflection of the roof (photo on page 12) and the concerns about the floor joists mentioned below, I caution against entering this building until the roof and floor can be adequately shored. The existing floor joists are supported in slots gouged into the face of the exposed limestone cut (photo 1, page 16), which was leaching water (photo 3, page 16) during my visits despite no antecedent rainfall. The ends of the joists are spliced onto the original joists as part of a previous repair which was undoubtedly caused by previous similar rot. The splices are not adequate and show clear signs of deflection and distress. The repair ends are now showing signs of rot. These structural connections are inadequate and dangerous. The stone wall on the second floor is supported on an inverted steel railroad rail, which is not properly supported at points of bearing or against rotation. The elevated concrete slab over the garage also appears to use steel railroad rails as reinforcement, and the steel shows severe corrosion. Again, I recommend caution under and on this slab until in can be properly shored. The walls are load-bearing, uncoursed random rubble masonry that do not meet the minimum requirements of modern or recent building codes for thickness and for height-to-thickness ratios. These walls cannot be reused as load-bearing in the renovation. Two Story House The exterior walls are load-bearing, uncoursed random rubble masonry, similar in construction and deficiencies to the apartment. These walls cannot be reused as load-bearing in the renovation. Additionally, the reuse of the existing masonry walls as non-load-bearing …
2 0 0 2 S C E N I C D R I V E R E S I D E N C E , E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N S | J U N E 2 8 , 2 0 2 2 2 0 0 2 S C E N I C D R I V E E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N S J U N E 2 8 , 2 0 2 2 3 2 0 0 2 S C E N I C D R I V E R E S I D E N C E Site Diagram A p a r t m e n t J U N E 2 8 , 2 0 2 2 5 2 0 0 2 S C E N I C D R I V E R E S I D E N C E Site Diagram 1. 2. APARTMENT EXTERIOR 1. ROOF DAMAGE INDICATED BY DISPLACED, DAMAGAGED AND MISSING SHINGLES. HOLES IN THE ROOF POINT TO BROAD WATER DAMAGE WITHIN AND POTENTIAL DAMAGE TO STRUCTURE. 2. WOOD WINDOWS - JAMBS, SILLS, AND FRAME ARE ROTTED. BROKEN PANES THROUGHOUT. J U N E 2 8 , 2 0 2 2 6 2 0 0 2 S C E N I C D R I V E R E S I D E N C E Apartment - Exterior 1. 2. APARTMENT EXTERIOR 1. METAL IS RUSTED AND VINES ARE ENTERING INTO APARTMENT. 2. WOOD WINDOWS - JAMBS, SILLS, AND FRAME ARE ROTTED. BROKEN PANES THROUGHOUT. VINES ARE OVERGROWN AND ARE ENTERING INTO THE INTERIOR. J U N E 2 8 , 2 0 2 2 7 2 0 0 2 S C E N I C D R I V E R E S I D E N C E Apartment - Exterior 1. 2. APARTMENT EXTERIOR 1. THE ROOF IS FALLING APART AND IS SHOWING SIGNS OF WATER DAMAGE. 2. THE ROOF IS SLANTING, WHICH IS A SIGN OF STRUCTURAL FAILURE AND MATERIAL DETERIORATION. J U N E 2 8 , 2 0 2 2 8 2 0 0 2 S C E N I C D R I V E R E S I D E N C E Apartment - Exterior …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS JULY 6, 2022 HR-2022-064555 HYDE PARK 4402 SPEEDWAY B.1 – 1 PROPOSAL Construct an addition. Replace windows and doors. Demolish detached garage and replace with new accessory dwelling unit. Add a deck and porch. Replace roof with metal roof. PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS 1) Construct an addition to existing house. Construct a deck at the north elevation and screened porch at the west elevation. The proposed addition is clad in horizontal siding and is capped with a standing-seam metal roof. 2) Demolish detached garage and construct new accessory dwelling unit. ARCHITECTURE One-story Craftsman bungalow with exposed rafter tails, triangular brackets at eaves, partial-width gabled porch, and horizontal wood siding. DESIGN STANDARDS The Hyde Park Design Standards are used to evaluate projects within the historic district. The following standards apply to the proposed project: 1.2: Retention of Historic Style: Respect the historic style of existing structures and retain their historic features, including character-defining elements and building scale. The proposed project mostly retains the primary building’s scale, though it removes historic features from primary elevations. 1.3: Avoidance of False Historicism: Respect each contributing structure as an example of the architecture of its time. Do not make alterations that have no historic basis, such as the addition of gingerbread trim to a 1920s bungalow. Do not give an existing contributing structure a “historic” appearance it never had. When developing plans for additions, porches, and other exterior alterations, look to other houses of similar vintage to see how these changes were made historically, and then use that information as a guide to developing an appropriate size, scale, and massing for your proposed exterior change. The proposed project does not include alterations without historical basis; however, the proposed alterations to the main elevation do not appear to have historical precedents. 1.4: Appropriate Treatment Options for Contributing Structures: 1. Preserve the historic fabric: Repair deteriorated historic features and architectural elements. 2. Reconstruct missing or un-repairable architectural features with the following: a) Recycled historic materials that approximate the size and match the scale, profile, and appearance of the deteriorated or missing feature, if available. b) New material that that approximates the size and matches the scale, profile, and appearance of the historic material. Reconstruct or rebuild missing architectural features using photographic or physical indications as a guide. The proposed project preserves some historic fabric, but significantly alters the building’s façade. …
622'6" n 30°00'00"e 42.13' 10'-0" a l l e y R A E R " 0 - ' 0 1 K C A B T E S M O R F S I D " 2 / 1 0 1 - ' 3 1 E L O P R E W O P ] E [ 32'-0" " 0 - ' 6 6'-7" 622'3" 1/2" MAX " 6 - ' 3 NE NE NE " 0 - ' 4 " 0 1 - ' 9 NE NE NE 14'-8 1/2" NE NE [E] POWER POLE 621'8" D A E H R E V O ] E [ " 0 - ' 8 I E C V R E S E S A H P 3 4'-0" TALL WD. FENCE " 3 - ' 2 1 NEW OVERHEAD POWER LINE TO NEW ELECTRICAL SERVICE NEW UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL SERVICE LINE ADDITION SHOWN SHADED " 6 NE NE 5'-0" SETBACK FFE 622'-3" UE UE UE REGRADE FOR 6" STEP DOWN NE NE NE UE UE 621'7" SCREENED PORCH FFE 622'-5 1/2" LOWEST ADJ GRADE ELEVATION 621'5" 621'4" s 5 9 ° ' 5 4 0 2 " e 1 2 9 . 9 3 ' " 2 / 1 9 - ' 0 1 UE " 2 / 1 2 - ' 1 4'-9" 7-1/4" RISER UE N D E U E U E U E U E U E U 3'-6" 1'-3" NEW UNCOVERED WOOD STEPS IN SIDE YARD ARE LESS THAN 30" ABOVE NATURAL GRADE + EXTEND LESS THAN 36" INTO REQUIRED YARD ELECTRICAL SERVICE. CONSULT CODE FOR CLEARANCE FROM WINDOWS, HOSE BIBBS, ETC, IT WILL BE NEAR THE UNDERGROUND POWER LINE ADDITION SHOWN SHADED Z R 2'-0" 1/2 C 1 24" BHD PROTECTED PECAN 6'-0" 1/4 CRZ 620'10" single family 1 story wd frame remodel + addtion on pier + beam [e] 720 sf TOTAL NEW 1,551 SF FFE 622'-6" 5'-3" " 2 HIGHEST NATURAL GRADE ZONE 3 WD. DECK AT GRADE HIGHEST ADJ NATURAL GRADE ELEVATION ' 0 4 ≤ 3 E N O Z N O I S N A M c M ACCESSORY APARTMENT PER 25-2-901, WITH COMMON FOUNDATION AND ROOF HIGHEST NATURAL GRADE ZONE 2 " 7 - ' 7 2 622'2" 622'0" 1 2 9 . 9 3 ' n 5 9 ° 5 4 0 2 " w ' [E] FENCE DASHED LINE OF …
' 0 4 ≤ 3 E N O Z N O I S N A M c M " 0 - ' 0 4 2 E N O Z N O I S N A M c M " 0 - ' 0 4 1 E N O Z N O I S N A M c M " 2 / 1 1 - ' 9 1 I T N R P T O O F ] E [ " 0 1 - ' 9 2 5'-0" SETBACK T S N O C " 0 - ' 0 2 S L I O P S / H S A R T 622'6" n 30°00'00"e 42.13' 10'-0" a l l e y M O R F S I D " 2 / 1 4 - ' 2 1 E L O P R E W O P ] E [ P E T S O N E T U O R E L B A T I S I V HIGHEST NATURAL GRADE ZONE 3 HIGHEST ADJ NATURAL GRADE ELEVATION R A E R " 0 - ' 0 1 K C A B T E S 622'3" " 2 / 1 0 - ' 7 1 622'0" HIGHEST NATURAL GRADE ZONE 2 HVAC 622'2" [E] FENCE DASHED LINE OF TOPOGRAPHY CONTOURS AVG ADJ GRADE ELEVATION 1 2 9 . 9 3 ' " 5 - ' 4 2 n 5 9 ° 5 4 0 2 " w ' HIGHEST ADJ GRADE ELEVATION " 2'0 2 6 621'9" 621'7" [E] POWER POLE 621'8" D A E H R E V O ] E [ " 0 - ' 8 I E C V R E S E S A H P 3 " 3 - ' 2 1 4'-0" TALL WD. FENCE WD. DECK AT GRADE " 0 - ' 4 " 0 1 - ' 9 P E T S O N E T U O R E L B A T I S I V 5'-0" SETBACK NEW OVERHEAD POWER LINE TO NEW ADU ELECTRICAL SERVICE REGRADE FOR VISITABLE ENTRY ROUTE ≈ 1:12 SLOPE; ENSURE NO STEP > 1/2" LOWEST ADJ GRADE ELEVATION N E N E N E N E N E U E U E U E U E U E U E 32'-0" " 0 - ' 6 12'-0" 1/2" MAX NEW CONSTRUCTION SHOWN SHADED …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS JULY 6, 2022 HR-2022-062618 LINDEMANN HOUSE 1100 E. 8TH STREET PROPOSAL Repair windows. Replace window at rear elevation with door. B.2 – 1 PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS 1) Repair 18 windows. See full restoration proposal in backup. 2) Replace one window with door at rear of house. The proposed door’s dimensions will match existing opening width and upper extent. 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 at historic landmarks. The following standards apply to the proposed project: Repair and alterations 5. Windows, doors, and screens The proposed project repairs 18 historic-age windows. It removes historic fabric at the rear of the building where a window replaces a door. Summary The project partially meets the applicable standards. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Request that the applicant retain the rear window to be removed on-site for replacement in the future, then approve the application. The applicant has amended the proposal to be more sensitive to the building’s historic fabric. LOCATION MAP B.2 – 2
June 21, 2022 WINDOW RESTORATION PROPOSAL Proposal For: Amanda & Ben Wahlstom – Project Address: 1109 E. 8th Street, Austin, TX Number of windows: 18 Wood Window Full Restoration Scope of Work: Note: Restoration is an art, not a science. Although this is our general process, we may have to adjust as needed • • • • Sashes and stop will be removed and openings sealed with plywood (Faux Acrylic inserts available as upgrade) Transport sashes from job site to our shop in Austin. Sashes will be thoroughly examined in the shop and numbered prior to restoration process Jambs and sills at the job site will also be thoroughly inspected for necessary repairs. RRR estimates 10% of sills (or 2 windows) will require replacement. Sashes: Sashes will be stripped, sanded, primed, painted, glazed and slotted for weatherstripping. • • Abatron will be used to repair holes, splitting and cracks throughout the sash. Any areas of rot more than 8” will require Dutchman repairs. • A borate-based preservative (Boracare) will be applied to all bare wood prior to finish. This will minimize the risk of • • future rot or pest damage to the wood. Sash Rebuilds: rebuilds will use Spanish Cedar or Sipo Mahogany. RRR assumes 22% of sashes (or 4 windows) will require a component to be rebuilt (i.e. bottom or upper rail, stile or meeting rail). Sashes requiring major or complete rebuild will require a change order unless noted on the schedule. Paint & Stain: Sashes will be painted, glazing lines hand painted. Benjamin Moore Regal Select in Low Lustre will be used unless otherwise specified. Includes one color only. Pricing includes painted interior and exterior on all of the windows. • Glazing Putty: Glazing putty will be Sarco Type M. Glazing lines will be hand painted to seal putty for longevity • Glass: All historic wavy glass will be re-used if possible. Replacement glass will be 1/8” double strength clear flat glass. Wavy glass available as an upgrade Jambs/Sills: Jambs prepped and painted onsite Sash Hardware: Hardware can be cleaned and reused - excludes removal of paint, repair or replacement hardware Stop and parting bead to be replaced • • • • Weatherstripping: New concealed interlocking weatherstripping will used on functional windows when the sashes are reinstalled in the jambs. Bulb will be used at the meeting rails. Sash Cord: New Sampson spot sash cord will be …
HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS JULY 6, 2022 HR-2022-084104 SEBRON SNEED HOUSE 6301 BLUFF SPRINGS ROAD B.3 – 1 PROPOSAL Construct an apartment complex around the Sneed House ruins. PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS 1) Construct a three-building apartment complex around the Sebron Sneed House ruins, providing a 25’ buffer zone between the ruins and the pool and other new construction. Proposed buildings are each three stories in height and display Mission Revival stylistic cues; they are clad in stucco and capped with hipped, tiled roofs. Columned arches accent the main entrance to each building. 2) Construct a fence around the ruins. Note: The applicant has provided 2015 correspondence, per Committee feedback, showing that former Preservation Officer Steve Sadowsky requested a mortar analysis and preliminary stabilization plan. The applicant specified that tuck-pointing and consolidation would be implemented following an observation report and recommendation from a masonry restoration contractor, as well as erection of a double steel fence around the ruins (see backup). 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 at historic landmarks. The following standards apply to the proposed project: Residential new construction 1. Location, 2. Orientation, 4. Proportions While individual design standards cater to neighborhood residences’ setbacks and streetscapes, the proposed project does not comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s guidance for siting new buildings near historic properties. The proposed apartment complex will visually overpower the existing ruins. 3. Scale, massing, and height The proposed project does not appear to conform to the relevant standards, though each building does appear to be segmented into two modules. 5. Design and style, 6. Roofs, 7. Exterior walls, 8. Windows and doors The proposed building’s Mission Revival design elements and modern fenestration do not reflect the Sneed House during its period of significance, nor do they relate to its current state by incorporating similar materials, scale, etc. 10. Chimneys The proposed buildings do not include boxed chimneys. Sites and streetscapes 1. Vegetation, topography, and landscaping The proposed project maintains only a 25’ buffer between the historic ruins and the apartments’ active circulation elements and amenities. Since no bracing is planned for the ruins, there may be safety concerns as well as concerns regarding accelerated deterioration, as the 25’ buffer immediately abuts the complex’s swimming pool. 2. Walls and fences …
SLIDING GATES SOLID WOOD FENCE THE CIRCLE AT THE NELMS APARTMENTS 6301 BLUFF SPRINGS ROAD AUSTIN, TEXAS 78744 (BLDGS-1, 2,&3) Tchen Architect 1303 ELM FOREST DRIVE CEDAR PARK, TEXAS 78613 512.351.1801 512.870.9427 (FAX) tchenarch@gmail.com Drawings & written materials appearing herein constitute original and unpublished work of the architect and may not be duplicated, used, or disclosed without written consent of the architect. C 2022 TCHEN ARCHITECTS NELMS DR. 1 BLDG-2 (4) 1-B UNITS (20) 2-B UNITS "RUINS" AREA 2,050 S.F. 7826 s.f. Roof 598 1 LAUNDRY MECH D A O R S G N I R P S F F U L B MAIL BOX 318 APT OFFICE BLDG-1 (12) 1-B UNITS 9,739 S.F. BIKE RACKS K L A W T E F SID 5 300 4315 s.f. Roof 1 1 S E T A G G SLIDIN TRUE NORTH INDEX OF DRAWINGS SHEET DRAWING TITLE SYNOPSIS & VICINITY MAP ADA-TAS STANDARDS DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE LIFE SAFETY FIRST FLOOR LIFE SAFETY SECOND FLOOR LIFE SAFETY THIRD FLOOR LIFE SAFETY FIRST FLOOR LIFE SAFETY SECOND FLOOR LIFE SAFETY THIRD FLOOR LIFE SAFETY FIRST FLOOR LIFE SAFETY SECOND FLOOR LIFE SAFETY THIRD FLOOR FIRST FLOOR PLAN SECOND FLOOR PLAN THIRD FLOOR PLAN ROOF PLAN ENLARGED UNIT FLOOR PLAN ENLARGED UNIT FLOOR PLAN ENLARGED UNIT FLOOR PLAN ELEVATION ELEVATION BUILDING CROSS SECTION STAIRWAY TYPICAL DETAILS WALL & FLOOR ASSEMBLIES DOOR SCHEDULE & WALL TYPES FIRST FLOOR PLAN SECOND FLOOR PLAN THIRD FLOOR PLAN ROOF PLAN ENLARGED UNIT FLOOR PLAN ENLARGED UNIT FLOOR PLAN ELEVATION ELEVATION ELEVATION BUILDING CROSS SECTION STAIRWAY TYPICAL DETAILS WALL & FLOOR ASSEMBLIES DOOR SCHEDULE & WALL TYPES FIRST FLOOR PLAN SECOND FLOOR PLAN THIRD FLOOR PLAN ROOF PLAN ENLARGED UNIT FLOOR PLAN ENLARGED UNIT FLOOR PLAN ELEVATION ELEVATION BUILDING CROSS SECTION STAIRWAY TYPICAL DETAILS WALL & FLOOR ASSEMBLIES DOOR SCHEDULE & WALL TYPES A0-0.0 A0-0.1 A0-0.2 L1-1.0 L1-1.1 L1-1.2 L2-1.0 L2-1.1 L2-1.2 L3-1.0 L3-1.1 L3-1.2 A1-1.0 A1-1.1 A1-1.2 A1-1.3 A1-1.4 A1-1.5 A1-1.6 A1-2.0 A1-2.1 A1-3.0 A1-3.1 A1-3.2 A1-4.0 A2-1.0 A2-1.1 A2-1.2 A2-1.3 A21.4 A2-1.5 A2-2.0 A2-2.1 A2-2.2 A2-3.0 A2-3.1 A2-3.2 A2-4.0 A3-1.0 A3-1.1 A3-1.2 A3-1.3 A3-1.4 A3-1.5 A3-2.0 A3-2.1 A3-3.0 A3-3.1 A3-3.2 A3-4.0 S-1 S-2 S-3 S-4 S-5 S-6 S-7 S-8 S-9 S-10 S-11 S-12 S-13 S-14 S-15 S-16 S-17 S-18 S-19 S-20 S-21 S-22 S-23 S-24 S-25 M-00 M-01 M-02 E-00 E-02 E-03 P-00 P-01 P-02 S-01 BLDG-1 FOUNDATION PLAN BLDG-2 FOUNDATION PLAN BLDG-2 FOUNDATION TYPICAL FOUNDATION DETAILS BLDG-1 …
Subject: Fwd: Ruins at 1801 Nelms, (6305 Bluff Springs) Stone Restoration , SAEEDAH MINHAS Harry Karr From: Tracy Chen Date: June 9, 2022 at 3:23 PM To: TChen Projects Forwarding email-1. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Tracy Chen Date: Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 9:36 PM Subject: Fwd: Ruins at 1801 Nelms, (6305 Bluff Springs) Stone Restoration To: Sadowsky, Steve <Steve.Sadowsky@austintexas.gov> Cc: Saeed Minhas Dear Steve, Thank you for your time meeting with Mr. Saeed Minhas, the project owner, and me, the Architect on Record, for the stone restoration of the subject project. We would like to propose that the owner will immediately undertake the process of obtaining a qualified Masonry Restoration Contractor to begin the preservation work. Upon such time of selecting the Contractor, we will explore and consult with persons with expertise in these restoration areas: we will evaluate the stability of the stone walls with a detailed Observation Report, and obtain a Recommendation of the scope of work. Mortar specification is based on Sec. 04902 - 1.1 MORTAR MATERIALS Add specific requirements to suit Project. A. Portland Cement: ASTM C 150, Type I or Type II. B. Hydrated Lime: ASTM C 207, Type S. Product below must be slaked before it is used. C. Quicklime: ASTM C 5, pulverized lime. 1. Provide white cement containing not more than 0.60 percent total alkali when tested according to ASTM C 114. 2. Low-Alkali Cement: Portland cement for use with limestone shall contain not more than 0.60 percent total alkali when tested according to ASTM C 114. D. Factory-Prepared Lime Putty: Screened, fully-slaked lime putty, prepared from pulverized lime complying with ASTM C 5. E. Mortar Sand: ASTM C 144, unless otherwise indicated. 1. Color: Provide natural sand[ or ground marble, granite, or other sound stone]; of color necessary to produce required mortar color. 2. For pointing mortar, provide sand with rounded edges. 3. Match size, texture, and gradation of existing mortar sand as closely as possible. Blend several sands, if necessary, to achieve suitable match. If known, indicate source of sand and size and gradation. G. Water: Potable. The main effort of restoration will be concentrated in the stabilization of the "Ruins", by ways of "Tuck Pointing" with specified Tuck-pointing Mortar (referencing to the Video: http://quikrete.com/AtHome/Video-Tuckpointing-Mortar-Joints.asp? gclid=CO36tfK30sgCFQmJaQod3F8ACw ), and apply/inject epoxy where deem required. Structural Bracing is not considered at this point. Please note the Limit of Restoration will …
