Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_HARC_07.14.2010_Special SessionHistoric and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee Page 1 of 3 July 14, 2010 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee Meeting Minutes Thursday, July 14, 2010 4:00 p.m. Georgetown Municipal Complex 300-1 Industrial Ave. Georgetown, TX 78626 Members present: Ron Pergl, Chair; Susan Firth; and Dee Rapp Members absent: none Staff present: Robbie Wyler, Historic District Planner; Elizabeth Cook, Community Development Director; Valerie Kreger, Principal Planner and Karen Frost, Recording Secretary Call to order by Pergl at 4:15 p.m. The Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee is responsible for hearing and taking final action on sign applications, by issuing Certificates of Design Compliance based upon the City Council adopted Downtown Design Guidelines. This is a regular scheduled meeting of the Sign Subcommittee, for consideration and possible action on the following: 1. Review and possible approval of the minutes from the June 9, 2010, Sign Subcommittee meeting. Firth noted two corrections to be made, the first page should indicate June 9 was a Wednesday meeting, not a Thursday. And on page 2, first line, should read, “out of proportion”. Motion by Firth to approve the minutes as corrected. Second by Rapp. Approved 3 – 0. 2. Discussion and possible action on an amendment to the Tamiro Plaza Master Sign Plan, continued from the July 7, 2010 HARC Sign Subcommittee meeting. (CDC-2010-013 / CDC- 2008-034) Gordon Baker, the applicant’s agent, distributed a new Master Sign Plan proposal packet. He stated he added the notes as previously requested and added the balcony panels with colors and dimensions, asking for only four under the balcony signs. The Commissioners clarified what was being discussed and decided to deliberate the package in segments as presented. The first item discussed ws the signage for the northwest corner, first floor tenant. Mr. Choi is proposing that if and when the present tenant moves out, the same type of signage will not be replaced. It is proposed to be a frieze sign only. There will not be any internally lit or backlit signage on the building. Commissioners and applicant discussed that. Motion was made by Rapp that the recommendation be made to the Commission that excepting existing signage, there is to be no future internally lit or back-lit signage anywhere on exterior of the building. Second by Pergl. Approved 3 – 0. Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee Page 2 of 3 July 14, 2010 Motion by Rapp that with the exception of the existing signage, there will not be any logos allowed on the building, lit or unlit. Second by Pergl. Approved 3 – 0. There was discussion of the current blade sign on the building. Mr. Choi expressed that he did not like the internal illumination of that sign. There was discussion of future tenant needs for that space and signage. Motion by Rapp to recommend to the Commission that the existing blade sign shall remain in the same location, retain the same colors and dimensions and shall be utilized only for current or future restaurant tenants. If there is a new tenant, the updated sign shall not be internally illuminated. If there is a new tenant that is not a restaurant, the blade sign will be taken down. Second by Pergl. Approved 3-0. The monument sign was discussed and the possibility of allowing more tenant names on the sign. Mr. Choi will work this out with the tenants through the lease agreements. There was no change made to the original proposal of the monument sign so no approval was needed for a recommendation to the Commission. The Master Sign Plan will use the original language. Motion by Firth to retain the original monument sign plan as approved in the original Master Sign Plan. Second by Rapp. Approved 3 – 0. The four proposed balcony frieze signs were discussed. Rapp suggested adding in two more, for a total of six additional signs, in case more tenants came forth with requests. Firth stated she still opposes any additional signage, stating she did not feel it was appropriate for downtown. Baker discussed this with the Commissioners, stating he believes that the Downtown Guidelines do not regulate signage to be like it was historically, but to be approved and installed based on what the citizens want Georgetown to look like now and in the future. Firth reiterated that she felt the signs were not locational based on the location of the tenants in the building. Motion by Rapp to recommend the addition of balcony frieze signs as presented, but to increase the number of signs allowed from four to six, with the additional two facing the 6th Street side of the building for future tenants. Second by Ron. Approved 2 – 1. (Firth opposed.) 3. Consideration and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Design Compliance for window signage at Sparks Addition, Block 1, Lot 7, also known as Faith Impact Church, located at 1905 S. Austin Avenue, Suite 102. (CDC-2010-014) The applicant was present but had to leave prior to this item due to an appointment. Wyler presented the application. The applicant seeks approval for window signage for the north side of the structure, which faces the parking lot. The signage is currently installed on three north-facing windows and requires Certificate of Design Compliance to bring the church into compliance with the UDC. By definition, the messages on all three subject windos are considered signage and exceed the maximum allowance. Staff suggests reducing the size of the signage to the left of the entrance doors to meet the Guideline 9.6, and for HARC to consider the purpose, location and style of the signage in the transom windows when Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee Page 3 of 3 July 14, 2010 making their decision. The applicant is willing to reduce the lettering on the window to the left of the door to become compliant with the 30% rule, but is asking to allow the transom windows to be covered at 100%. Commissioners discussed the options available to the church. Pergl stated the transom signage looked like frosted glass, not like a sign. He could see allowing that to remain in place. Firth concurred. Motion by Firth to approve the window signage as requested, allowing the two transom windows to remain as is with 100% coverage, and the signage on the window to the left of the entrance must be reduced to 30%. Any other signage requests for the entrance doors must come back to the Commission. Second by Rapp. Approved 3 – 0. 4. Adjournment. Pergl adjourned the meeting at 5:40 p.m. The Subcommittee is forwarding Item 2recommendations to the next meeting of the Historic and Architectural Review Commission for its consideration. That meeting is scheduled for July 22, 2010. __________________________________ _________________________________ Approved, Ron Pergl, Chair Attest, Dee Rapp, Secretary