HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_HARC_01.25.2007Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 1 of 3
Meeting January 25, 2007
City of Georgetown, Texas
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Meeting
Minutes
Thursday, January 25, 2006 at 6:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers
101 E. 7th Street Georgetown, Texas 78626
Members Present: Mike Sparks, Chair; Rick O’Donnell, Vice Chair; John Chapman; Chris
Damon; Clare Easley; Beebe Gray; Linda McCalla
Alternates: Nancy Knight; and J. C. Johnson
Members Absent: Jim Keys; and John Truehardt
Staff Present: Rebecca Rowe, Historic Planner; Bobby Ray, Director of Planning & Development;
Barbara Quirk, Assistant City Attorney; 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 scheduled 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. Knight and Johnson were asked to
serve on the dais.
2. Review and possible approval of the minutes from the December 7, 2006 meeting.
Questions were asked regarding the minutes. Johnson pointed out two typographical errors.
Motion by Knight to approve the minutes with the noted corrections. Second by Damon.
Approved 9 – 0.
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.
3. Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Design Compliance for
signage at City of Georgetown, Block 38, Lot 3, a 0.3581 acre portion located at 105 West 7th
Street. CDC-2007-002
4. Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Design Compliance for
signage at Lost Addition, Block 14, a 0.33 acre portion located at 1104 South Main Street.
CDC-2007-001
5. Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Design Compliance for
signage at City of Georgetown, Block 41, Lot 4 a 0.07 acre portion located at 708 South Austin
Avenue. CDC-2007-003
Easley requested number 4 pulled from the Consent Agenda for discussion. Knight
requested number 3 pulled from the Consent Agenda for discussion. There was a
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 2 of 3
Meeting January 25, 2007
discrepancy in the numbering of the reports that the Commission received and the agenda
numbering. These items were numbered inconsistently and discussed separately for
clarification.
Motion by Knight to approve item 5 on the consent agenda. Second by O’Donnell.
Approved 9 – 0.
Quirk asked that all commissioners confirm that the item they just voted on was 708 S.
Austin. They each confirmed their vote.
Regular Agenda:
Item number 3 was opened for discussion. This was clarified that this item was 105 W. 7th
Street’s application for Cianfrani Coffee. Rowe stated the applicant is proposing painted
signage and an awning sign.
Motion by Chapman to approve the CDC. Second by Knight. Approved 9 – 0.
The owner of this property said his address has been changed to 109 W. 7th Street, Suite 105.
Item number 4 was opened for discussion. 1104 S. Main Street, Dos Salsas Restaurant. Rowe
presented the report and stated the applicant is proposing new wall mounted signs and a
monument sign. The monument sign is to be located within the property line at the corner of
Main Street and University Avenue. This sign is proposed to be 12 feet long and 6 feet high
for a total of 72 square feet. The Design Guidelines do not restrict the size of the sign,
however the UDC states that monument signs in the Downtown Overlay District shall not be
higher than 5 feet. Two wall/roof mounted signs are proposed to replace the existing
wall/roof mounted signs.
Knight questioned the applicant being allowed three primary signs and whether the
monument sign would be placed in the ROW. Rowe stated the monument sign would have
to be placed in the 5 foot setback and that the restaurant already has two wall primary signs
and if the commission allows it, they can have the monument sign also.
Rowe also responded to a question about parking space removal for the sign. She stated that
there is an existing site plan change that would indicate a reduction in parking spaces and
that the sign was proposed to be placed in the planting bed on the corner. The Main Street
streetscape that is being constructed will also affect the parking lot and aesthetics of that
corner.
Easley made the comment that she felt the sign was inappropriate in regards to section 9.01
and 9.18 of the Design Guidelines. She prefers a simple sign with a limit of three colors per
the guidelines.
Motion by Easley to deny the Certificate of Design Compliance as presented. Second by
Knight. Easley amended her motion to include the reasons for denial being that the
monument sign was over 5 feet tall, the signage used more than three colors and a simple
sign is preferred and this sign was non-historic in nature. Second of the amendment by
Knight. Amendment voted on and passed with an 8 – 1 vote. (Damon opposed.)
Original motion to deny was voted on and failed 4 (Easley, Knight, O’Donnell and Johnson)
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 3 of 3
Meeting January 25, 2007
to 5 (Chapman, Damon, Gray, McCalla, and Sparks).
Motion by Johnson to deny the application based on the logo being in poor taste. No second.
Motion by Knight to deny the application based on the monument sign size, and the signs
not following the color guidelines found in Section 9.17. Second by Easley. Discussion of
definition of three colors, versus three colors plus black and white which are considered
neutral. Motion to deny failed, 1 (Johnson) to 8 against.
Motion by Damon to approve the application for a CDC with the conditions that the
monument sign be reduced to 5 feet tall and the colors of all signs be redesigned to only
include three colors plus black and white. Second by McCalla. The question was raised
whether the staff could approve these corrections once resubmitted, and the answer was yes.
Motion to approve the CDC passed, 8 – 0 – 1 (Easley abstained because she didn’t want to
vote either for or against.)
6. Comments, questions and general discussion from Commission and/or staff.
A. Reminder of the next meeting of the Commission on Thursday, March 22, 2007.
Sparks requested an update on the status of the rewrite of the Commission’s bylaws.
Ray responded that the Council has not approved any changes yet but that they have proposed
that alternates be eliminated, term limits are set at two two-year terms, and that the size of the
HARC be reduced to 7 members. Ray stated he did not have any answers on how this is to be
implemented. Sparks requested that the Commissioners affected by the changes receive a letter
from the Mayor explaining the changes.
Motion by Knight and second by Johnson to adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 6:59 p.m.
__________________________________ _________________________________
Approved, Chair Mike Sparks Attest, John Truehardt