In a departure from its typical focus, the Historic Landmark Commission voted to preserve a local landmark without focusing on its architecture at all.
Instead, commissioners voted unanimously to preserve a portion of a former summer camp in Northwest Hills, based on its community value, landscape features and archaeology.
The property, which is located at at 7304 Knox Lane, first appeared as a demolition case in March 2023. At the time, commissioners unanimously voted to initiate historic zoning. Since then, study of the main house revealed that additions had depleted its historic value, though the property itself has been identified as a Texas archaeological site since 1969.
Neighbor Champe Fitzhugh explained that the site was listed after the discovery of two Native American midden sites. Fitzhugh noted that the land was also home to an unknown number of springs, perhaps up to seven, and served as a much-needed green space for the neighborhood.
“I have a lot of concerns that what we have is a plan to pack as many houses as possible and pave as much as possible on a property that contains wetlands and Native American sites and there has not been an adequate investigation, there has not been an archaeological inquiry and there has not been a hydrological study,” Fitzhugh said. “We’re talking a lot about architectural stuff, but I think really it’s a historical issue.”
The commission’s motion, if endorsed by the Planning Commission and City Council, will place historic zoning on the portions of the property that are in an environmental protection zone or have previously been identified on record by the Texas Historical Commission. The commission will allow demolition of the main house and other structures on the property, and relocation or the log cabin and tack barn within the property. Commissioners also asked for “shovel tests” to check for archaeological features before proceeding with work on the property.
Leah Bojo, who is with Drenner Group, spoke on behalf of the new owner, Jimmy Nassour, who has faced a number of hurdles in redeveloping the property, including the unanimous initiation of historic zoning by the Historic Landmark Commission in March 2023. Bojo explained that they had assumed there would be “an original kernel” of the main building to preserve, but investigation proved that it had been too altered by renovation in the 1980s and ’90s. Staff agreed and endorsed demolition of the main building if the owners relocate and preserve the historic cedar cabin and tack barn instead and protect the historic landscape features, including a spring-fed pool and Native American sites.
Bojo explained that they were exploring the possibility of relocating the historic buildings onto the environmentally protected portion of the lot, constructing a trail that would highlight the history of the land, though it wasn’t clear whether the protected land could have a public or community use.
“That, quite frankly, would be a sensitive discussion no matter whether it’s historic or not,” said Donna Carter, whose firm Carter Design Associates was hired to research the buildings on the site.
Carter further explained that it’s against the law to disturb the archaeological site. If more archaeological artifacts are discovered, state antiquity rules would apply to protect the sites. Additionally, there are also setbacks around the critical environmental features on the property that cannot be touched.
As approved by the commission, historic zoning would effectively impart a new layer of protection on already-protected land.
“I just don’t want to leave this assuming everything’s covered by the various layers when we don’t understand all the nuance. I just think we should add our layer on it where we can, especially when it’s not going to impact the owner,” Commissioner Kevin Koch said.
Chair Ben Heimsath noted that the commission was concerned with archaeology as part of its mission but, compared to the state, “had few resources that we can draw upon and not very much expertise in this area.”
“I would hate to feel like we lock in an area and then find out it’s not the right area or try to do something that pertains to some parts of the site and miss something,” he said. “I think that it’s going to take a little bit more time and little bit more study.”
For Koch, the case raised the “known problem” about archaeology – that it was impossible to know what was on the site and, therefore, what should be protected.
Koch noted that the unknown nature of archaeology did not just pertain to this property and that was one of the reasons the city’s new preservation plan recommends hiring a city archaeologist.
“We could be destroying archaeological sites left and right,” he said. “(And) we can’t require a full archaeological survey. … There is a record from the historical commission, there is a survey of this area identifying those sites that already gave us much more information than we have in most other cases and, in my mind, we’re saving a lot more with this motion and with this site than we’ve ever encountered in the city.”
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?
Historic Landmark Commission: The city’s Historic Landmark Commission promotes historic preservation of buildings and structures. The commission also reviews applications and permits for historic zoning and historic grants.
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.
