The Zoning and Platting Commission voted 7-3 to recommend against adding historic zoning to part of the site of the former Running Rope Ranch during a special called meeting on Feb. 6, with Chair Hank Smith abstaining due to a conflict of interest.
The Austin Monitor has previously reported on the long process of redevelopment at the 5.77-acre property at 7304 Knox Lane, in Northwest Austin. The former home of the Knox family and their outdoors summer camp for boys, the site is home to a house and outbuildings but also multiple natural springs and evidence of Native American involvement going back thousands of years.
Those features have made redevelopment contentious, with the Historic Landmark Commission fighting to apply historic zoning to the property over the objections of the owner, Jimmy Nasour, who currently seeks to build a 20-unit housing development on the property, originally triggered by an application for a demolition permit on the house.
After an independent review of its historic value concluded that the house itself had been too heavily modified over time to qualify as a landmark, the commission changed its proposal to include historic zoning only for the portion of the property that contains the natural springs.
Champe Fitzhugh, a lawyer who served as the primary speaker in favor of the historic zoning at the meeting, argued that it was necessary to protect the site’s potential Native American history, which is closely connected to the springs.
He cited preliminary research by the University of Texas at Austin that found at least two burned-rock middens on the site, an archaeological feature typical of Central Texas created by the systematic use of heated rocks to slowly bake tough vegetable matter for eating by prehistoric peoples, including archaic Native Americans. Those sites are frequently found near sources of fresh water.
“We don’t live in an area where the pre-recorded history is recognized as significant because there aren’t large structures,” Fitzhugh said. “This is an opportunity where that could be done or it could be destroyed, and I’d prefer to see it protected.”
Several speakers at the meeting noted that the relevant tract is already protected by environmental regulations relating to the springs themselves, including Leah Bojo, director of land use and entitlements with Drenner Group, who spoke against the zoning on behalf of the owner.
She argued that the regulations imposed by a historic zoning would only complicate the owner’s efforts to comply with existing environmental regulations and restore the springs, which are currently compromised by a large concrete structure previously installed by the Knox family for swimming.
“There’s several environmental features here with environmental buffers, a critical water quality zone, things like that. So it can’t be developed anyway,” Bojo said. “We didn’t really see the purpose in zoning historic on top of those regulations that already exist.”
Bojo said the developer was committed to voluntarily performing “shovel tests” before disturbing any part of the property, a means of testing for artifacts that might be destroyed by digging or development, and would be open to including that commitment in a restrictive covenant with the city.
In voting against the proposed zoning, the Zoning and Platting Commission contradicted the recommendation of both the Historic Landmark Commission and Planning Department staff. Several commissioners who voted “nay,” including Alejandra Flores, Ryan Puzycki and Taylor Major, cited private property rights and concerns about normalizing the practice of city-initiated historic landmark zonings.
“This historic designation seems redundant, given the other protections in place already,” said Puzycki. “I’m also uncomfortable, given some of the more recent (Historic Landmark Commission)-forced rezonings, that this will become a means of preventing sensible development from happening in the future.”
Commissioners Betsy Greenberg, Carrie Thompson and Scott Boone voted in favor of historic preservation.
The proposal will now head to City Council, where it faces long odds, as owner-opposed historic zoning cases rarely result in historic status being granted.
The Austin Monitor’s work is made possible by donations from the community. Though our reporting covers donors from time to time, we are careful to keep business and editorial efforts separate while maintaining transparency. A complete list of donors is available here, and our code of ethics is explained here.
And we’re honored you look to us for serious, in-depth news. You know a strong community needs local and dedicated watchdog reporting. We’re here for you and that won’t change. Now will you take the powerful next step and support our nonprofit news organization?
City of Austin Zoning and Platting Commission: The City of Austin's Zoning and Platting Commission addresses issues of land use as assigned to it by Austin's City Code. It has sovereign authority, or the right to make final decisions on certain cases.
historic preservation: Official actions of a municipality such as the City of Austin taken to preserve structures with their jurisdiction. Preservation is often accompanied by a property tax exemption.
