Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the 4901 Ridge Oak Demolition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission postpones decision on demolition request at 4901 Ridge Oak Drive to allow further study
Summary
The commission heard staff and applicant testimony on a 1951 house at 4901 Ridge Oak Drive, possibly designed by Barton Riley and associated with Edgar Perry III. Staff recommended considering historic zoning; the owner and consultant presented structural concerns. Commissioners voted to postpone the item to April for more time and fuller review.
The commission took public testimony and heard technical reports on a request to demolish a circa‑1951 house at 4901 Ridge Oak Drive. Staff said the property may be significant both architecturally as a mid‑century residence (possibly by Austin architect Barton Riley) and historically for its association with former City Council member Edgar Perry III.
Staff recommended initiating historic zoning consideration based on architecture and association, and — if designation is not pursued — encouraged rehabilitation, adaptive reuse or relocation and asked that the permit be released only on completion of the City of Austin documentation package.
Mike McCone, representing the property owners, and a structural/home inspection team described extensive deferred maintenance, water penetration, roofing and foundation issues. McCone cited a structural engineer’s opinion that foundation elements were suspect and that repairs would be extensive. The owner, Reagan Sahidi (on the phone), said cost estimates for full restoration were prohibitive and that the owners plan a replacement residence consistent with neighborhood character.
Neighbors and contractors spoke about observed deterioration; one neighbor asked whether earlier notice or survey attention should have prompted maintenance before the property reached this condition.
Commissioners debated the significance of the architecture and the extent of structural deterioration. Commissioner discussion noted the property’s association with the Perry family but differed on whether the historic and architectural criteria were met and whether repairs were feasible. Given technical uncertainties and neighborhood interest, the commission moved to postpone the item to the April meeting for further review and to allow a fuller record; the postponement passed unanimously (6–0). Staff had advised that a documentation package would be required if the demolition permit were released.
