Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_HARC_09.24.2009Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 1 of 3 September 24, 2009 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review Commission Meeting Minutes Thursday, September 24, 2009, at 6:00 p.m. City Council and Courts Building 101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas 78626 Members Present: West Short, Chair; Susan Firth; J.C. Johnson; Larry Moseley; Ron Pergl; and Dee Rapp Members Absent: Will Moore Staff Present: Robbie Wyler, Historic District Planner; Valerie Kreger, Principal Planner; and Karen Frost, Recording Secretary Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 6:00 p.m. Chair Short called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. and reads the following meeting procedures. The Historic and Architectural Review Commission, appointed by the Mayor and the City Council, is responsible for hearing and taking final action on applications, by issuing Certificates of Design Compliance based upon the City Council adopted Downtown Design Guidelines and Unified Development Code. (Commission may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene an Executive Session at the request of the Chair, a Commissioner, the Director or legal counsel for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 551.) Welcome and Meeting Procedures: Staff Presentation Applicant Presentation (limited to ten (10) minutes unless stated otherwise by the Commission) Questions from Commission to Staff and Applicant Comments from Citizens * Applicant Response Commission Deliberative Process Commission Action * Those who speak must turn in a speaker form, located at the back of the room, to the recording secretary before the item that they wish to address begins. Each speaker will be permitted to address the Commission one time only for a maximum of three (3) minutes. This is a regular scheduled meeting of the Historic and Architectural Review Commission for consideration and possible action on the following: Consent Agenda: 1. Review and possible approval of the minutes from the August 27, 2009 regular meeting. Chair Short asks if there is any discussion or motion on the minutes. Rapp explains that she wanted more detail on the more controversial items and that she would like to certain points that were made at the meeting. Frost offered to transcribe the item in question. Short asked whether the audiotape of the meeting was available for anyone that asked. Frost responded yes, it was available. Pergl stated he Motion by Rapp to table approval of the minutes as written until a transcription of Item 2 of Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 2 of 3 September 24, 2009 the August 27 meeting could be written into the minutes and posted on the web. Second by Johnson. There was further discussion and clarification of the motion. Rapp amended her motion to be that we ask that the minutes regarding Item 2 regarding Merrill Lynch be transcribed and included in the minutes and that the discussion of the minutes be tabled until the next meeting. Second by Johnson. Approved 6 – 0. Regular Agenda: 2. Certificate of Design Compliance for facade changes and signage at City of Georgetown, Block 39, Lots 1-4 (pts), to be known as Galaxy Cupcakes, located at 107 East 7th Street. (CDC- 2009-033) Wyler presented the staff report. This is for a CDC for Galaxy Cupcakes to be located at 107 East 7th Street, which is changing to 113 E. 7th Street. The address is changing, the building remains the same. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance approval for facade changes including the installation of wood paneling underneath the 7th Street display window, the replacement of fixtures and address numbers, repainting and installation of new awnings, as well as new signage. First, the applicant would like to replace the address numbers, light fixture and mailbox. A description of all proposed changes was available in the applicant’s packet. Applicant is asking to remove an existing fence around the side and back courtyard and turn that into an outdoor seating area, with an application for that specific area to be submitted at a later date. They want to repaint existing trim and add a wood panel beneath the front window. Two new black and white vertical striped awnings are also proposed for the 7th Street facade. Signage was described in the staff report. Guidelines used to support staff recommendation of this application are 5.9, 6.7, 7.1, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6, 9.8, 9.13, 9.14, 9.15, 10.1, and 10.4. Commissioners asked clarifying questions. Rapp questioned the cornice trim. Wyler projected a recent picture to give better definition. There was discussion of having part of the building trim painted black and part green. There was discussion about the placement of the hanging sign and why it was presented lower. The applicants explained that their building is about a foot lower than the other buildings on that sidewalk, even with a sloping sidewalk out front. And the other signs are already hung, leaving a lower placement as the optimal location. This also affects the placement of the awnings. The applicants, Cheryl Wilhite and Cherie Gilbert, stated the awnings and the sign will need to be lower. Rapp also questioned the fixture at the front door. The neighboring business fixtures face up and this one is placed facing down. The applicant said the existing fixture is facing down. Firth brought up that the other buildings are very different by nature and this one is designed to stand out. The applicant concurs. Short questioned the size and location of the fixture and whether it would be in the way of hurting someone if they ran into it. Wilhite stated their fixture is much smaller than the one Short used as an example. The placement of the fixture was discussed and it was decided that if it was placed according to ADA and electric code qualifications, and passed inspections, it would be allowed. The hanging sign’s bracket was discussed and Gilbert presented a bracket that was liked by the commissioners more than the existing one originally presented. Commissioners and applicants discussed some remembered history of the building. This building at one time was built all the way to the corner. There was a fire in the 1800’s.. The buildings to the west Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 3 of 3 September 24, 2009 were rebuilt and this building was added on as a possible stable. Then the cinderblock addition was added much later. It was Goodfellows Hall on the west side and this was a tin roof section that was attached to that structure. The brick and height of this section of the building are different than those of the adjacent structure. Pergl brought up that he was not a fan of the black and white striped awnings. Gilbert explained that the striped awning historically declared the building as a bakery. Pergl acquiesced but stated they would have to be aware that their awnings would require more upkeep and maintenance than some of the other styles. Moseley made a motion that an approval of the CDC was granted with the following conditions: that the painting of the cornice was not done, but left the existing color; the light fixture needs to be safe and meet ADA guidelines. Second by Pergl. Rapp clarifies that the applicant is not to paint the cornice trim black or not at all? Moseley states to not paint it black. Motion approved 6-0. 3. Reminder that the next regular HARC meeting will take place on October 22, 2009. Chair Short stated he will not be in attendance on October 22. Wyler was questioned about the November and December meeting schedule. He explain ed that since both regular commission meetings occurred during the holidays, the meetings were combined and the commission would meet once on December 10, with the regular sign subcommittee before it. 4. Adjournment Chair Short adjourned the meeting at 6:40 p.m. __________________________________ _________________________________ Approved, West Short, Chair Attest, J.C. Johnson, Vice-Chair