08 C14H-2022-0099 - Delisle House; District 10 Part 1.pdf

Planning Commission – Aug. 9, 2022

08 C14H-2022-0099 - Delisle House; District 10 Part 1.pdf — original pdf

Backup

Thumbnail of the first page of the PDF — Page 1 of 100 pages

ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET HLC DATE: July 6, 2022 CASE NUMBER: C141H-2022-0099 PC DATE: 8/9/2022 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: Recommend historic zoning based on architectural significance, landscape features, and historical associations, on a motion by Commissioner Koch. Commissioner Tollett seconded the motion. Vote: 10-0 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: CITY COUNCIL DATE: ORDINANCE READINGS: CASE MANAGER: Kimberly Collins, 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, is a two-story Spanish eclectic residence with Modern and eclectic additions constructed during the historic period. It is clad in stucco and masonry and capped with a compound-hipped roof with deep eaves. Fenestration includes multi-light wood casement windows irregularly placed throughout. A cylindrical turret with a crenelated parapet and arched windows flanks an open masonry porch that leads to an expansive designed landscape. The secondary building is an eclectic Gothic Revival cottage. It is two stories in height with an arched palisade, cedar-shake roof, and masonry cladding. A two-story turret with faux chequerboard trim dominates the principal elevation. Each round arch includes a limestone keystone carved by famed local stoneworker Peter Mansbendel. A renovation was designed circa 1946-47 by prominent Austin architects Fehr & Granger. Officially established in 1946, Fehr & Granger was one of the first and possibly most influential mid-century modern architectural firms in Austin. The firm flourished, with an extensive body of work consisting of both residential and commercial projects. They received multiple awards for their work in the magazine Progressive Architecture. §25-2-352(A)(3)(b)(ii) Historical Associations. The property has long-standing significant associations with persons, groups, institutions, businesses, or events of historic importance which contributed significantly to the history of the city, state, or nation; or represents a significant portrayal of the cultural practices or the way of life of a definable group of people in a historic time. The property appears to have significant historical associations with builder, entrepreneur, and optician Raymond Delisle. The house at 2002 Scenic Drive, called River Street or River Avenue before 1940, was constructed around 1923 by Raymond Maurice Delisle as his homestead. Delisle, the son of a Houston architect, built 16 other houses in the River Street area while also working as an optician in Austin. He owned and operated the Austin Optical Company from the early 1920s until his retirement around 1940. He was one of the 1927 incorporators of the Urnite Manufacturing Company. Urnite, a synthetic stone material created by Austinite C.F. Paul, appears to have been used in several landscape features, and terraces around the property. Delisle’s other designs appear to reflect his unique “fairytale cottage” aesthetic, and his own home is a testament to his appreciation for Gothic Revival detailing. Later occupants include William Foster and then Mr. and Mrs. K.D. Shoudy. After the Shoudy family lost a young son while living at the property in 1945, they sold the house to C.H. and Mildred Slator. It stayed in the Slator family until 2021, according to TCAD records. C.H. Slator, was a local attorney and co-owner of the Tavern (ca. 1953). §25-2-352(A)(3)(b)(v) Landscape Feature. The property is a significant natural or designed landscape or landscape feature with artistic, aesthetic, cultural, or historical value to the city. The property appears to have a significant and unique designed landscape with aesthetic and historical value. Some landscape features, including the arched bridge and bench, appear to incorporate Delisle’s Urnite material. This local Austin- based building material is rare today. Additionally, the landscape designed by Delisle specifically relates to his architectural vision for the house, with meandering walks, an expansive lawn, and an early swimming pool built into the hillside topography to provide a river view. PARCEL NO.: 0117090604 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 3-5 LESS S39.53 FT OF E26.74FT AV OF LOT 5 BLK 4 LAUREL HEIGHTS ESTIMATED ANNUAL TAX ABATEMENT: Non-homestead, no cap: $16, 107.62 total, city portion $5,654.81. Homestead: $8,500 total (capped), city portion $2,500 (capped). PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE: 1923-1972 APPRAISED VALUE: $3,503,552 DATE BUILT Ca. 1923 INTEGRITY: High ALTERATIONS/ADDITIONS: Addition to the primary residence during the historic period ORIGINAL OWNER(S): Raymond and Ammon Delisle PRESENT USE: Residential, vacant PRESENT OWNERS: Michael P. Murphy OTHER HISTORICAL DESIGNATIONS: None. LOCATION MAP PROPERTY INFORMATION Photos Northwest view of primary residence Northwest view of accessory building North-facing view of accessory building West-facing view of accessory building North-facing view of accessory building (middle window) West elevation of accessory building West elevation of accessory building North elevation of primary residence Primary residence West elevation turret (primary residence) West elevation (primary residence) Landscape (Southside of property) Landscape (Southside of property) Landscape (Southside of property) Landscape (Southside of property) Pool (Southside of property) Bridge (Southside of property) Bench (South of primary residence) Historic Preservation Office, 2022 Occupancy History City Directory Research, March 2022 C. H. and Mildred E. Slator, owners Lawyer 1211 Perry-Brooks building C. H. and Mildred E. Slator, owners Lawyer 1211 Perry-Brooks building C. H. and Mildred E. Slator, owners Lawyer 1211 Perry-Brooks building C. H. and Mildred E. Slator, owners Lawyer 1211 Perry-Brooks building C. H. and Mildred E. Slator, owners Lawyer 709 Littlefield building 1947 Address not listed 1959 1957 1955 1952 1949 Aerials 1940 Aerial 1977 Aerial Permits 1977 Aerial Water service permit, 1951 Building permit, 1949 Fehr & Granger Stamp Fehr & Granger remodel plans, date. Fehr & Granger remodel plans. Fehr & Granger remodel plans. Timeline of Raymond Delisle family 2002 Scenic Lake Austin Case Rationale for 2002 Scenic Architecture Historical Association Archaeology Community Value Landscape Feature ? X X ? ? The Commission must find that the property meets at least two of the above criteria. ARCHITECTURE? We believe the case for architectural significance is weak, but at the very least, it – alone – is not sufficient. STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY Much of the structures could not be preserved as they exist today – they would need to be deconstructed and rebuilt. LANDSCAPE FEATURE The “Landscaped Features” in the staff report are common yard amenities laid out in a functional manner. COMMUNITY VALUE It is not physically or visually accessible to the community and does not meet precedent for “Community Value.” Cases WITH “Historic Association” Cases With NO “Historic Association” HISTORIC ASSOCIATION ) 2 2 0 2 - 1 1 0 2 ( s e s a C g n n o Z i c i r o t s i H It is highly unusual to have an historic landmark case in which there is no historic association. HISTORIC ASSOCIATION Cases With NO “Historic Association” Staff Presentation (Outlier Case): “Struggle as I have to come up with a second criterion to recommend historic zoning for this house, I have not been able to do it. Professor Sellstrom – as far as I can tell, in conversations I have had and research that I’ve done – his career has not been as noteworthy and significant as we generally look for when we’re designating a house as a historic landmark. We have to look at both the architecture – where, I think we have architecture here in spades, I mean there’s no doubt about it – but the Historic Associations, in staff’s opinion, are just not there.” It is highly unusual to have an historic landmark case in which there is no historic association. Rationale for 2002 Scenic Architecture Historical Association Archaeology Community Value Landscape Feature ? X X X X This case does not meet at least two of the above criteria. “The masonry walls are not adequate for load-bearing, and their reuse as a non-load-bearing veneer is not practical. The foundation is questionable and likely not adequate for reuse in an extensive renovation.” “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.” For the Apartment Unit: “These walls cannot be reused as load-bearing.” “These [pool] walls and slab have failed… The pool and deck are not suitable for reuse.” Engineer’s Report – Major Structural Issues Impact: Foundation Masonry Walls Wood Framing Extensive Water Damage Pool Deck and Slab 2002 Scenic faces extensive structural issues that will necessitate demolition. Landscape Feature Rationale to have appears property a “The significant and unique designed landscape with aesthetic and historical value. Some landscape features, including the arched bridge and bench, appear to incorporate Delisle’s Urnite material. This material is the landscape rare today. Additionally, designed by Delisle specifically relates to his architectural vision for the house, with meandering walks, an expansive lawn, and an early swimming pool built into the hillside topography to provide a river view.” Staff Report’s Landscaping Rationale Relies on Three Claims: 1. That Delisle designed the landscaping. 2. That the landscaping features Urnite. 3. That the landscaping has significant and unique value. Landscape Feature Rationale to have appears property a “The significant and unique designed landscape with aesthetic and historical value. Some landscape features, including the arched bridge and bench, appear to incorporate Delisle’s Urnite material. This material is the landscape rare today. Additionally, designed by Delisle specifically relates to his architectural vision for the house, with meandering walks, an expansive lawn, and an early swimming pool built into the hillside topography to provide a river view.” Staff Report’s Landscaping Rationale Relies on Three Claims: 1. That Delisle designed the landscaping – UNVERIFIED 2. That the landscaping features Urnite – UNVERIFIED 3. That the landscaping has significant and unique value. “Landscape Feature” Precedent (Casa McMath) Intentional Design Connected to the Site’s History Distinct and Unique Style We reviewed every historic zoning case in the city’s system over the past decade in order to determine precedent for what constituted an historic “Landscape Feature.” 2002 Scenic’s landscaping is NOT historic. It largely consists of common yard amenities laid out in a functional manner. 2002 Scenic’s landscaping is NOT historic. It largely consists of common yard amenities laid out in a functional manner. Subject Area Precedent (McMath) 2002 Scenic Who What Where Historic Association — Integrated Site Features Common Yard Amenities Intentional Functional How Distinct and Unique Style Unverified “Urnite” Claims 2002 Scenic’s landscape features are not historic. It largely consists of common yard amenities laid out in a functional manner. Subject Area Precedent (McMath) 2002 Scenic Who What Where How ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ X X X X 2002 Scenic’s landscape features are not historic. It largely consists of common yard amenities laid out in a functional manner. to have appears property “The a significant and unique designed landscape with aesthetic and historical value. Some landscape features, including the arched bridge and bench, appear to incorporate is Delisle’s Urnite material. This material rare today. Additionally, the landscape designed by Delisle specifically relates to his architectural vision for the house, with meandering walks, an expansive lawn, and an early swimming pool built into the hillside topography to provide a river view.” Staff Report’s Landscaping Rationale Relies on Three Claims: 1. 2. That Delisle designed the landscaping – UNVERIFIED That the landscaping features Urnite – UNVERIFIED 3. That the landscaping has significant and unique value. Urnite • “Urnite” is NOT historic. It was a short-lived and failed business venture. • Delisle is NOT historic. HLC chose not to invoke the Historic Association criterion. • Delisle’s connection to “Urnite” is tenuous. He was just one of “the men who owned stock.” r a e Y r e P e t i n r U t u o b A s e l c i t r A e u q n U i l a t o T We reviewed every newspaper archive reference available related to “urnite.” r a e Y r e P e t i n r U t u o b A s e l c i t r A e u q n U i l a t o T There were four unique articles about “urnite” in 1927, the year the Urnite Manufacturing Company was founded. r a e Y r e P e t i n r U t u o b A s e l c i t r A e u q n U i l a t o T There was one more “urnite” article in 1928. r a e Y r e P e t i n r U t u o b A s e l c i t r A e u q n U i l a t o T And two more “urnite” articles in 1929. After that we were unable to locate more “urnite” articles. “Community Value” Factors Precedential Cases Accessible Location Visually Accessible Publicly Accessible / Public Purpose Connection to Black or Latinx History ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ We reviewed every historic zoning case in the city’s system over the past decade in order to determine precedent for what constituted “Community Value.” Average “Community Value” Case Distance to Closest Public Transit Stop (ft.) “Community Value” cases tend to be accessible to the broader Austin community. Average “Community Value” Case 2002 Scenic Dr. 2002 Scenic is nearly four times farther away from public transit than the average “Community Value” case. Distance to Closest Public Transit Stop (ft.) Population in WANG Boundaries According to the Census Bureau, there are a little bit less than 14,000 people in the neighborhood (West Austin Neighborhood Group). Population in WANG Boundaries Pedestrians Passing Site (On a Weekend) Cyclists Passing Site (On a Weekend) Yet a transportation study found only 151 pedestrians and 66 cyclists passing this property over an entire weekend (48 hours, Saturday and Sunday). Combined, that is less than 2 percent of the neighborhood. Virtually all “Community Value” cases (over 90 percent) were visually accessible from public right-of-way. Virtually all “Community Value” cases (over 90 percent) were visually accessible from public right-of-way. Virtually all “Community Value” cases (over 90 percent) were visually accessible from public right-of-way. Virtually all “Community Value” cases (over 90 percent) were visually accessible from public right-of-way. Unlike virtually all “Community Value” cases, 2002 Scenic is not visually accessible for the public. We evaluated every historic zoning case over the past decade to determine what constituted “Community Value.” Most “Community Value” cases either involved a landmark that was publicly accessible or had a public purpose… … or was part of the history of the Black or Latinx communities. Very few cases did not include one or more of these factors. “Community Value” Factors Precedential Cases Accessible Location Visually Accessible Publicly Accessible / Public Purpose Connection to Black or Latinx History ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ We reviewed every historic zoning case in the city’s system over the past decade in order to determine precedent for what constituted “Community Value.” “Community Value” Factors 2002 Scenic Dr. Accessible Location Visually Accessible Publicly Accessible / Public Purpose Connection to Black or Latinx History X X X X 2002 Scenic Dr. does not meet any of these factors – and is an extreme outlier among “Community Value” precedents. Rationale for 2002 Scenic Architecture Historical Association Archaeology Community Value Landscape Feature ? X X X X This case does not meet at least two of the above criteria. Back-Up Slides Precedent 2002 Scenic Designed By: Designed By: ? Hugh McMath • Professor of Architecture (UT) • Director of School of Architecture • President of Central Texas AIA literally “Although Hugh McMath did not design this house, his interventions a modernist take quite architectural form and seek to ground it, both through integration into the landscape from regional architectural traditions.” borrowing and Staff Report: Staff Report: “Landscape features, including arched bridge to bench, incorporate Delisle’s Urnite material.” appear and The staff report’s rationale focuses on the unverified assumption that certain common yard amenities may incorporate “urnite” – a short-lived material without historic significance. 2002 Scenic is not accessible to the community. It is located on an isolated West Austin street – and fronts onto the lake, far away from the right-of-way. Staff Presentation: “Struggle as I have to come up with a second criterion to recommend historic zoning for this house, I have not been able to do it. Professor Sellstrom – as far as I can tell, in conversations I have had and research that I’ve done – his career has not been as noteworthy and significant as we generally look for when we’re designating a house as a historic landmark. We have to look at both the architecture – where, I think we have architecture here in spades, I mean there’s no doubt about it – but the Historic Associations, in staff’s opinion, are just not there. I don’t know that it could qualify as a historic landmark – especially with owner opposition.“ … Cases WITH “Historic Association” Cases With NO “Historic Association” HISTORIC ASSOCIATION ) 2 2 0 2 - 1 1 0 2 ( s e s a C g n n o Z i c i r o t s i H It is highly unusual to have an historic landmark case in which there is no historic association. And all of the “Community Value” cases that Council actually approved included at least one of these factors. The property appears to have a significant and unique designed landscape with aesthetic and historical value. Some landscape features, including the arched bridge and bench, appear to incorporate Delisle’s Urnite material. This material is rare today. Additionally, the landscape designed by Delisle specifically relates to his architectural vision for the house, with meandering walks, an expansive lawn, and an early swimming pool built into the hillside topography to provide a river view. The staff report’s rationale focuses on purely speculative claims about Delisle and “urnite” – a short-lived material without historic significance. 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 is not possible. The south wall has a significant crack (photo on page 19) that was previously patched and continues to move. This wall is noticeably out-of-square and out-of-plumb. Foundation movement is likely occurring. Further investigation will be required, but if the foundation is rubble, which is typical for the era, less invasive stabilization techniques will not be possible. The masonry walls will need to be removed so that the foundation can be rebuilt with reinforced concrete. Similar to the apartment, widespread water leaks in the roof have damaged wood framing to the point that total replacement will likely be necessary for the roof. The damage may include the floor in several locations, and more investigation will be required to make this determination. Duffy Engineering, Inc. | 1402 Cuernavaca Drive N. | Austin, Texas 78733 | phone: (512) 402-0074 | Texas Firm Registration No. F-8637 Page 2 of 2 For the floor over the large room (photo on page 22), significant deflection is apparent from above and below. The beams and joists will likely need to be reinforced to support modern loads. Pool And Landscape The pool geometry violates modern code requirements, particularly where concrete was added along the east edge, apparently to divert rain runoff around the pool (photo on page 29). Cracks in the shell are significant enough that the basin will not hold water. The walls of the changing rooms support the slab of the pool deck. These walls and slab have failed (photos on page 30). Again, the load-bearing, uncoursed random rubble masonry has no definable capacity once it cracks and displaces like these walls have. I recommend not allowing anyone on or around these walls and slab until they are shored or demolished. The pool and deck are not suitable for reuse. Summary The wood framing has been severely damaged by water and immediate shoring or demolition is recommended. The masonry walls are not adequate for load-bearing, and their reuse as a non-load-bearing veneer is not practical. The foundation is questionable and likely not adequate for reuse in an extensive renovation. Other considerations that are not part of this structural assessment but important to the practicality of a renovation are waterproofing, building envelope and site drainage. All have obvious challenges with no reliable solutions without complete demolition. SIGNED: Dennis Duffy, PE DISTRIBUTION: Ryan Perstac r Eran Montoya Duffy Engineering, Inc. | 1402 Cuernavaca Drive N. | Austin, Texas 78733 | phone: (512) 402-0074 | Texas Firm Registration No. F-8637 Phil Gilbert 3805 Stevenson Ave. Austin, Texas 78703 May 3, 2022 City of Austin Residential Permitting To Whom It May Concern, Re: Objection to Complete Demolition of 2002 Scenic Drive, Austin, Texas I am opposed to the complete demolition of the house at 2002 Scenic Drive, Austin. I live across the street and while a complete demo and new build would no doubt be quicker, it is worth the time and eﬀort to see that the essence of the beautiful, important structure(s) be built upon, not completely torn down. Austin oﬀers a lot to the imagination. It’s that mythology, if you will, that is fueling our growth; it’s enticing hundreds of thousands to become new Austinites. That’s good. Bob Dylan wrote: “He not busy being born is busy dying.” Austin is constantly being born — from the 70’s “outlaws” that turned us into “the live music capital of the world” through to the 21st century technologists we are home to today. Change is good. But we must direct that change into something that is authentic. Something of Austin, not just in Austin. Change for change sake is childish… and change for convenience sake is even worse: it threatens the essence of the Austin ethic that is the wellspring for each renewal. The house at 2002 Scenic Drive is a great example of that weird, wonderful Austin ethic. It may be one of only a handful of remaining properties with this aesthetic. In fact, Scenic Drive itself is an Austin icon… and on Scenic there's only one other house that achieves the result of the house at 2002 Scenic — and it’s The Rock House, right next door. (It also has a colorful history… no doubt when Robert Redford was coming to play at his grandparents’ Rock House in those 1950’s summers he played with friends next door!) 1 of 2 I won’t speak much about the speciﬁc architectural and design elements that can never be recreated except to say: why would we destroy these last of a kind works when there is no need? The exterior easily displays its uniqueness. But inside is where the magic truly happens. There are literally dozens of one-of-a-kind design elements that would be destroyed forever, if we allowed a total demolition. If you question their value, then go to the property to see them yourself! While we want growth, we surely don’t want indiscriminate and undiﬀerentiated mansions that inspire nothing more than calculations of price per square foot and “oh my gosh what a view.” If you buy a property with this beauty, history and landmark location I would hope you pay homage to it, restoring and renovating it into a modern expression of itself. I hope the house at 2002 Scenic is restored and renovated into a new architectural masterpiece that will inspire citizens 100 years from today to ﬁght for it, as we ﬁght for this 100 year old masterpiece. I strongly urge the City to reject the complete demolition of 2002 Scenic Drive. I also urge the City to approve any limited demolition only with simultaneous approval of the new home to be built, so that the essence of the property can be assured, prior to the demo of the old one. Sincerely yours, /s/ Phil Gilbert cc: Mayor Pro-Tem Alison Alter 2 of 2 Allen, Amber From: Sent: To: Subject: Collins, Kimberly Thursday, August 4, 2022 2:01 PM Allen, Amber FW: C14H-2002-0099 Kimberly B. Collins Senior Planner‐Historic Preservation Office Department of Housing and Planning 512.974.1801 | kimberly.collins@austintexas.gov Pronouns: she/her/hers Historic Preservation | AustinTexas.gov Please Note: Correspondence and information submitted to the City of Austin are subject to the Texas Public Information Act (Chapter 552) and may be published online. Tenga en cuenta: La correspondencia y la información enviada a la Ciudad de Austin están sujetas a la Ley de Información Pública de Texas (Capítulo 552) y pueden publicarse en línea por la internet ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: TWT Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2022 12:43 PM To: Collins, Kimberly <Kimberly.Collins@austintexas.gov> Subject: C14H‐2002‐0099 *** External Email ‐ Exercise Caution *** Dear Kimberly, My husband and I mailed the forms stating our support of rezoning 2002 Scenic. However, in case the mail doesn’t arrive by the deadline, we would like to state it here also. Thank you, Tracy and Jay Thomas 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 Allen, Amber From: Sent: To: Subject: Collins, Kimberly Thursday, August 4, 2022 2:03 PM Allen, Amber FW: Scenic Drive (Case # C14H-2022-0099) Kimberly B. Collins Senior Planner‐Historic Preservation Office Department of Housing and Planning 512.974.1801 | kimberly.collins@austintexas.gov Pronouns: she/her/hers Historic Preservation | AustinTexas.gov PER CITY ORDINANCE: All individuals scheduling or accepting a meeting invitation with a City Official are requested to provide responses to the questions at the following link: https://bit.ly/HPDLobbyingForm Please note that all information provided is subject to public disclosure. For more information please visit: City of Austin Ordinance 2016-0922-005 | City Clerk’s website | City Clerk’s FAQs Please Note: Correspondence and information submitted to the City of Austin are subject to the Texas Public Information Act (Chapter 552) and may be published online. Tenga en cuenta: La correspondencia y la información enviada a la Ciudad de Austin están sujetas a la Ley de Información Pública de Texas (Capítulo 552) y pueden publicarse en línea por la internet From: Collins, Kimberly Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2022 11:13 AM To: Rivera, Andrew <Andrew.Rivera@austintexas.gov> Subject: FW: Scenic Drive (Case # C14H‐2022‐0099) On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 8:54 AM gari wier wrote: Use your power to leave 2022 scenic drive at its original place… it’s what makes my city of 68 years a desirable place. It is admired greatly and once it’s gone history will be demolished. Sincerely GARi WIER Sent from my iPhone 1 licious and/or phishing email, please forward this email to cybersecurity@austintexas.gov. 2 Allen, Amber From: Sent: To: Subject: Collins, Kimberly Thursday, August 4, 2022 2:04 PM Allen, Amber FW: 2002 Scenic Drive Kimberly B. Collins Senior Planner‐Historic Preservation Office Department of Housing and Planning 512.974.1801 | kimberly.collins@austintexas.gov Pronouns: she/her/hers Historic Preservation | AustinTexas.gov PER CITY ORDINANCE: All individuals scheduling or accepting a meeting invitation with a City Official are requested to provide responses to the questions at the following link: https://bit.ly/HPDLobbyingForm Please note that all information provided is subject to public disclosure. For more information please visit: City of Austin Ordinance 2016-0922-005 | City Clerk’s website | City Clerk’s FAQs Please Note: Correspondence and information submitted to the City of Austin are subject to the Texas Public Information Act (Chapter 552) and may be published online. Tenga en cuenta: La correspondencia y la información enviada a la Ciudad de Austin están sujetas a la Ley de Información Pública de Texas (Capítulo 552) y pueden publicarse en línea por la internet From: Collins, Kimberly Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 4:17 PM To: Rivera, Andrew <Andrew.Rivera@austintexas.gov> Subject: FW: 2002 Scenic Drive Kimberly B. Collins Senior Planner‐Historic Preservation Office Department of Housing and Planning 512.974.1801 | kimberly.collins@austintexas.gov Pronouns: she/her/hers Historic Preservation | AustinTexas.gov PER CITY ORDINANCE: All individuals scheduling or accepting a meeting invitation with a City Official are requested to provide responses to the questions at the following link: https://bit.ly/HPDLobbyingForm 1 Please note that all information provided is subject to public disclosure. For more information please visit: City of Austin Ordinance 2016-0922-005 | City Clerk’s website | City Clerk’s FAQs Please Note: Correspondence and information submitted to the City of Austin are subject to the Texas Public Information Act (Chapter 552) and may be published online. Tenga en cuenta: La correspondencia y la información enviada a la Ciudad de Austin están sujetas a la Ley de Información Pública de Texas (Capítulo 552) y pueden publicarse en línea por la internet From: Steve Luning Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2022 6:27 PM To: Collins, Kimberly <Kimberly.Collins@austintexas.gov> Subject: 2002 Scenic Drive *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Dear Ms. Collins, (cid:1) I am writing to you regarding 2002 Scenic Drive (Case # C14H-2022-0099). I urge you to support the unanimous recommendation of the Historic Landmark Commission to change the zoning to SF-3-NP-H. (cid:1) I live across the street from 2002 Scenic Drive and have owned my house since 2006 and, through the years, I have appreciated the uniqueness of the house inside and out. The view from my house, and from the street, provides glimpses of the lake and a view of Tarrytowns history. It is significant that 2002 Scenic Drive was and is the anchor point for the immediate neighborhood. If this property is not protected, it’s likely to be replaced by multiple large houses to maximize the value of the owner’s investment. Please support the Historic Landmark Commission’s unanimous recommendation and help preserve the character of my neighborhood. Steve Luning 2005 Scenic Dr, Austin, TX 78703 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. 2 Allen, Amber From: Sent: To: Subject: Collins, Kimberly Thursday, August 4, 2022 2:04 PM Allen, Amber FW: 2002 Scenic Drive (Case # C14H-2022-0099) Kimberly B. Collins Senior Planner‐Historic Preservation Office Department of Housing and Planning 512.974.1801 | kimberly.collins@austintexas.gov Pronouns: she/her/hers Historic Preservation | AustinTexas.gov PER CITY ORDINANCE: All individuals scheduling or accepting a meeting invitation with a City Official are requested to provide responses to the questions at the following link: https://bit.ly/HPDLobbyingForm Please note that all information provided is subject to public disclosure. For more information please visit: City of Austin Ordinance 2016-0922-005 | City Clerk’s website | City Clerk’s FAQs Please Note: Correspondence and information submitted to the City of Austin are subject to the Texas Public Information Act (Chapter 552) and may be published online. Tenga en cuenta: La correspondencia y la información enviada a la Ciudad de Austin están sujetas a la Ley de Información Pública de Texas (Capítulo 552) y pueden publicarse en línea por la internet From: Collins, Kimberly Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 3:42 PM To: Rivera, Andrew <Andrew.Rivera@austintexas.gov> Subject: FW: 2002 Scenic Drive (Case # C14H‐2022‐0099) Kimberly B. Collins Senior Planner‐Historic Preservation Office Department of Housing and Planning 512.974.1801 | kimberly.collins@austintexas.gov Pronouns: she/her/hers Historic Preservation | AustinTexas.gov PER CITY ORDINANCE: All individuals scheduling or accepting a meeting invitation with a City Official are requested to provide responses to the questions at the following link: https://bit.ly/HPDLobbyingForm 1 Please note that all information provided is subject to public disclosure. For more information please visit: City of Austin Ordinance 2016-0922-005 | City Clerk’s website | City Clerk’s FAQs Please Note: Correspondence and information submitted to the City of Austin are subject to the Texas Public Information Act (Chapter 552) and may be published online. Tenga en cuenta: La correspondencia y la información enviada a la Ciudad de Austin están sujetas a la Ley de Información Pública de Texas (Capítulo 552) y pueden publicarse en línea por la internet From: Laura Des Enfants < Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 10:57 AM To: Collins, Kimberly <Kimberly.Collins@austintexas.gov> Subject: 2002 Scenic Drive (Case # C14H‐2022‐0099) *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Dear Kimberly, As the city of Austin grows we are undergoing many changes—mostly good ones. That said it is important during this growth spurt to preserve our architectural history in all neighborhoods to ensure we don’t end up with a neighborhood like Penn Station in NYC. I am writing specifically about 2002 Scenic Drive (Case # C14H‐2022‐0099). I really want you to support the unanimous recommendation of the Historic Landmark Commission to change the zoning to SF‐3‐NP‐H. I have lived within two blocks of the 2002 Scenic Drive since 2013. If this property is not protected, it’s likely to be replaced by multiple large houses to maximize the value of the owner’s investment. While that may be good for the property owner it’s not good for this neighborhood nor for the preservation and architectural history of Austin. Please support the Historic Landmark Commission’s unanimous recommendation and help preserve the character of my neighborhood. Best, Laura Des Enfants 3706 Stevenson Avenue Austin, Texas 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. 2 Allen, Amber From: Sent: To: Subject: Collins, Kimberly Thursday, August 4, 2022 2:04 PM Allen, Amber FW: 2002 Scenic Drive (Case # C14H-2022-0099)-public comment Kimberly B. Collins Senior Planner‐Historic Preservation Office Department of Housing and Planning 512.974.1801 | kimberly.collins@austintexas.gov Pronouns: she/her/hers Historic Preservation | AustinTexas.gov PER CITY ORDINANCE: All individuals scheduling or accepting a meeting invitation with a City Official are requested to provide responses to the questions at the following link: https://bit.ly/HPDLobbyingForm Please note that all information provided is subject to public disclosure. For more information please visit: City of Austin Ordinance 2016-0922-005 | City Clerk’s website | City Clerk’s FAQs Please Note: Correspondence and information submitted to the City of Austin are subject to the Texas Public Information Act (Chapter 552) and may be published online. Tenga en cuenta: La correspondencia y la información enviada a la Ciudad de Austin están sujetas a la Ley de Información Pública de Texas (Capítulo 552) y pueden publicarse en línea por la internet From: Collins, Kimberly Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 3:34 PM To: Rivera, Andrew <Andrew.Rivera@austintexas.gov> Subject: FW: 2002 Scenic Drive (Case # C14H‐2022‐0099)‐public comment FYI Kimberly B. Collins Senior Planner‐Historic Preservation Office Department of Housing and Planning 512.974.1801 | kimberly.collins@austintexas.gov Pronouns: she/her/hers Historic Preservation | AustinTexas.gov PER CITY ORDINANCE: All individuals scheduling or accepting a meeting invitation with a City Official are requested to provide responses to the questions at the following link: https://bit.ly/HPDLobbyingForm 1 Please note that all information provided is subject to public disclosure. For more information please visit: City of Austin Ordinance 2016-0922-005 | City Clerk’s website | City Clerk’s FAQs Please Note: Correspondence and information submitted to the City of Austin are subject to the Texas Public Information Act (Chapter 552) and may be published online. Tenga en cuenta: La correspondencia y la información enviada a la Ciudad de Austin están sujetas a la Ley de Información Pública de Texas (Capítulo 552) y pueden publicarse en línea por la internet From: Lisa Gilbert < Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 3:01 PM To: Collins, Kimberly <Kimberly.Collins@austintexas.gov> Subject: 2002 Scenic Drive (Case # C14H‐2022‐0099) *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Dear Kimberly, I am writing you regarding 2002 Scenic Drive (Case # C14H-2022-0099). I support the Historic Planning Commissions unanimous recommendation to make this home a historic landmark. I am a neighbor, and my home was originally a fishing cabin built about the same time as this house. The corner of Scenic Drive and Stevenson Avenue has six of these old fishing cabins/stone houses remaining. Most have been modified like this home, but all have keep a portion of the stone cabins intact. If the previous family, who owned this property for 50 plus years had applied for Historic Landmark Status they surely would have received it with no questions asked. I understand why the new owners purchased the property, it has a beautiful view. But, the unique stone carvings both inside and out are truly special along with two interesting buildings could make this property one of the first "keep Austin Weird" houses. This house helps to keep our neighborhood feel like old Austin. And another large modern house will only scream we have money, while the entire community will lose a bit of Austin’s history and character. I ask that you support the Historic Planning Commissions recommendation and help preserve the character of my neighborhood. Thank you. Lisa Gilbert 3805 Stevenson Avenue Austin, Texas 78703 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. 2 Allen, Amber From: Sent: To: Subject: Collins, Kimberly Thursday, August 4, 2022 2:05 PM Allen, Amber FW: 2002 Scenic Drive (Case # C14H-2022-0099) Kimberly B. Collins Senior Planner‐Historic Preservation Office Department of Housing and Planning 512.974.1801 | kimberly.collins@austintexas.gov Pronouns: she/her/hers Historic Preservation | AustinTexas.gov PER CITY ORDINANCE: All individuals scheduling or accepting a meeting invitation with a City Official are requested to provide responses to the questions at the following link: https://bit.ly/HPDLobbyingForm Please note that all information provided is subject to public disclosure. For more information please visit: City of Austin Ordinance 2016-0922-005 | City Clerk’s website | City Clerk’s FAQs Please Note: Correspondence and information submitted to the City of Austin are subject to the Texas Public Information Act (Chapter 552) and may be published online. Tenga en cuenta: La correspondencia y la información enviada a la Ciudad de Austin están sujetas a la Ley de Información Pública de Texas (Capítulo 552) y pueden publicarse en línea por la internet From: Collins, Kimberly Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2022 10:05 AM To: Rivera, Andrew <Andrew.Rivera@austintexas.gov> Subject: FW: 2002 Scenic Drive (Case # C14H‐2022‐0099) From: John Falvey Sent: Monday, August 1, 2022 2:18 PM To: Collins, Kimberly <Kimberly.Collins@austintexas.gov> Subject: 2002 Scenic Drive (Case # C14H‐2022‐0099) *** External Email - Exercise Caution *** Dear Ms. Collins, the letter below was emailed to Planning Commissioners yesterday. Sincerely, John Falvey 1 I am writing to you regarding 2002 Scenic Drive (Case # C14H-2022-0099). I urge you to support the unanimous recommendation of the Historic Landmark Commission to change the zoning to SF-3-NP-H. I have lived within two blocks of the 2002 Scenic Drive since 1991. Throughout this period I have appreciated looking at the buildings and grounds of this unique property. The view from the street with glimpses of the lake conjures the old, tranquil Austin and anchors the immediate neighborhood. If this property is not protected, it’s likely to be replaced by multiple large houses to maximize the value of the owner’s investment. Please support the Historic Landmark Commission’s unanimous recommendation and help preserve the character of my neighborhood. Thank You, John Falvey Sent from my iPad 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. 2 Dear Ms. Collins, I am writing to you regarding 2002 Scenic Drive (Case # C14H-2022-0099). I urge you to support the unanimous recommendation of the Historic Landmark Commission to change the zoning to SF-3-NP-H. I have lived within two blocks of the 2002 Scenic Drive since 2001. Throughout this time, our family has marveled at this unique property and always wondered who owned and built it. The view from the street, with Lake Austin in the background, is reminiscent the old, tranquil Austin and is one of the few remnants of some of the unique remaining architecture in the neighborhood. It would be unfortunate if this property is not protected. The likelihood it will to be replaced by a single McMansion or multiple large houses to maximize the value of the owner’s investment would be tragic and disruptive to the neighborhood for years to come. Please support the Historic Landmark Commission’s unanimous recommendation and help preserve the character of my neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration in saving this amazing property. Mark and Stefanie Hernandez 3710 Gilbert Street August 4, 2022 To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to you regarding 2002 Scenic Drive (Case# C14H-2022-0099) I urge you to support the unanimous recommendation of the Historic Landmark Commission to change the zoning to SF-3- NP-H. I have lived in a neighborhood adjacent to this property for over 18 years. I walk often and have enjoyed the presence of this lovely property on numerous occasions. The view from the street with glimpses of the lake call to mind the spirit of the heart of old Austin and its tranquil scenes. If this property is not protected, it is, in all probability, doomed to be replaced by soulless multiple large houses to maximize the value of the owner’s investment. Please support the Historic Landmark Commission’s unanimous recommendation and help preserve the character of this unique place. Respectfully,