Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_HARC_04.27.2006Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 1 of 3 Meeting April 27, 2006 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review Commission Meeting Minutes Thursday, April 27, 2006 at 6:00 p.m. Georgetown Municipal Complex 300-1 Industrial Avenue, Georgetown, Texas 78626 Attending Members: Mike Sparks, Chair; Chris Damon; Clare Easley, Jim Keys, Linda McCalla, Rick O’Donnell and John Truehardt Members Absent: John Chapman, Beebe Gray, Nancy Knight, and Karalei Nunn Staff Present: Rebecca Rowe, Historic Review Planner and Karen Frost, Recording Secretary The Historic and Architectural Review Commission 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. This is a regular meeting of the Historic and Architectural Review Commission, for consideration and possible action on the following: 1. Chairman may appoint alternate(s) to serve at this meeting. Linda McCalla was asked to sit on the dais. 2. Review and possible approval of the minutes from the March 1, 2006 regular meeting and the March 17, 2006 subcommittee meeting. Motion by Damon to approve the minutes of the March 17, 2006. Second by Truehardt. Approved 5-0. (Easley and McCalla were not present for this vote.) There was not a motion for the approval of the March 1 minutes because there was not a quorum of people that were present at that meeting. 3. Consideration and possible action on a new Vice Chair and new Secretary. There was no action taken on this because the Chair voiced a concern that Commission membership would be changing in the near future and this item needed to be addressed after that time. Consent Agenda: The Consent Agenda includes non-controversial and routine items that the Commission may act on with one single vote. A Commissioner or any member of the public may request that any item from the Consent Agenda be pulled in order that the Commission discuss and act upon it individually as part of the Regular Agenda. The Historic and Architectural Review Commission's approval of an item on the Consent Agenda will be consistent with the staff recommendation described in the report, unless otherwise noted. 4. Request for a Certificate of Design Compliance for signage and rear facade changes at City of Georgetown, Block 41, Lot 4 (PT) located at 708 South Austin Avenue, Suite 101. This item was pulled from Consent Agenda and placed as the first item in the regular agenda. Rowe gave the staff report. She summarized the applicant is proposing a temporary banner, door signage and an above canopy sign. They are also proposing changes to the rear of the building including improvements to the rear deck and stairs and adding an exhaust air hood and intake screen for the restaurant. Staff recommends approval of the Certificate of Design Compliance. Commissioners asked questions of Rowe and deliberated amongst themselves. Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 2 of 3 Meeting April 27, 2006 Motion by Truehardt to approve the request as outlined in the application and recommended by staff. Second by Damon. Approved 6 – 0. 1 abstention by Easley. 5. Request for a Certificate of Design Compliance for signage at City of Georgetown, Block 41, Lot 4 (PT) located at 708 South Austin Avenue, Suite 201. Motion by Truehardt to approve the item on the consent agenda based on staff recommendations. Second by O’Donnell. Approved 6 – 0. (McCalla not present at this time.) Regular Agenda: 6. Request for a Certificate of Design Compliance for signage at Lost Addition, Block 69 (PT), a 0.303 acre portion located at 214 West University. Rowe gave the staff report. The applicant is proposing a low profile pole sign to be located in the front yard at 214 West University. The colors for the sign will be burgundy, off white and blue which match the colors of the house. The applicant is also asking for a variance which would allow the sign to go to 24.32 square feet, additional 4.32 square feet over the standard, based on the larger sign next door and faster speed on University Ave. Staff recommends approval of the request and the application. Motion by McCalla to approve the Certificate of Design Compliance for signage including a variance as requested by the applicant and recommended by staff. Second by Truehardt. Approved 7 – 0. 7. Request for an amended Certificate of Design Compliance for paint colors at Lost Addition, Block 65 (SW/PT), a 0.3122 acre portion located at 215 West University. Rowe gave the staff report. The applicant is asking to change the paint colors on the main house and the garage at 215 West University. Currently they are approved for brown on the main body of the house and garage with white and red trim and accents. They are proposing to use Palm Leaf for the body of the house with Poncho White and Black Silk for the trim and accents. Additionally they are proposing Calypso for the body of the garage with Poncho White and Black Silk for the trim and accents. Staff recommends approval of the amended Certificate of Design Compliance. Motion by Easley to approve the amended Certificate of Design Compliance for Palm Leaf, Poncho White and Black Silk for the main house and Calypso, Poncho White and Black Silk for the garage as recommended by staff. Second by Damon. Approved 7 – 0. 8. Request for a Certificate of Design Compliance for renovation of structure at Lost Addition, Block 64 (PT), a 0.12 acre portion located at 211 West 11th Street. Rowe gave the staff report. The applicant is proposing to finish a renovation that is in process. The applicant is proposing to add a garage to the rear of the house and add to the covered porch areas on the front of the house. Because of the lack of integrity and the amount of remodeling that has already been completed staff feels that the best course of action is to allow the remodel to continue as planned. The historic character of this structure is already compromised to the point of being lost. While the remodeling has had Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 3 of 3 Meeting April 27, 2006 a detrimental effect on the structure itself the proposed changes are in keeping with the character of the district and will not have a negative impact on the district as a whole. In its current state of remodel the structure does have a negative impact on the district while its completion would have a more positive affect. The applicant was available for questions. Commissioners discussed paint color options. The applicant said he would like the option of replacing the third color on the window trim with the same color as the siding. Commissioners strongly encouraged the applicant to not do that, but to spend the extra money to improve the look of the structure. Motion by McCalla to approve the application as presented and recommended by staff with the color scheme to be approved in both ways at the owner’s discretion, and encourage the owner to not eliminate the color #3 and replace it with #2. Second by Easley. Approved 7 – 0. 9. Discussion on proposed amendments to the Unified Development Code pertaining to the Historic and Architectural Review Commission, the Downtown Overlay District and Historic Structures. Rowe presented the proposed amendments, including the demolition clause that would require all demolition requests to present a site plan for the site after the demolition or removal of the structure. Also, applicants with substantial rehabilitation of structures in the review district will be required to present a concept plan to the commission for review prior to making formal application for a CDC. There is also a new Demolition by Neglect section added to the UDC that requires owners in the Historic Overlay and Downtown District to maintain their property, and enforcement of such. 10. Comments, questions and general discussion from Commission and/or staff. A. Reminder of the next meeting of the Commission on May 25, 2006. Rowe reported that the City of Georgetown received an $8000 certified local government grant for the historic district survey. This item will be requested in the 2006/2007 budget. Frost presented everyone with new notebooks including the Downtown Master Plan and Design Guidelines. These will be available at the next meeting for those that were not present. Chair Sparks adjourned the meeting at 7:18 p.m. _______________________________ _________________________________ Approved, Chair Mike Sparks Attest, Commissioner Chris Damon