HomeMy WebLinkAboutHARC_Agenda&Minutes_2013Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, October 24, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission will meet on Thursday, October 24, 2013 at 06:00 PM
in the Council Chambers, located at 101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Members:
Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown; Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; David Paul; Tim Urban; and Mary Jo
Winder. Commissioners in Training: Martine Rousseau and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 06:00 PM
Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 6:00 p.m.
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.
Legislative Agenda:
1.Review and possible approval of the minutes from the September 266th Regular HARC
Meeting and October 3rd Special Meeting
2.Preservation Brief – Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner
3.Public hearing and possible action on an amended Certificate of Design Compliance for
exterior alterations and signage at Glasscock Addition, Block 9, Lots 1 & 2, located at 224
E. 8th Street. (CDC-2013-052) Staff report
4.Public Hearing and possible action on an amended Certificate of Design Compliance for
exterior alterations at City of Georgetown, Block 40, Lot 7 (SW/PT), .0705 acres, located at
719 S. Main Street. (CDC-2011-019, CDC-2013-053) Staff report
5.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for
exterior alterations and signage at City of Georgetown, Block 52, Lot 5(S/PT), .1133 acres,
located at 812 South Church St. (CDC-2013-046) Staff report
6.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for
exterior alterations and signage at Sparks Addition, Block 1, Lot 7, .1653 acres, located at
1905 South Austin Ave. (CDC-2013-047) Staff report
7.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for infill
construction at Glasscock Addition, Block 9, Lot 5, .165 acres, located at 201 East 9th Street
(CDC-2013-049) Staff report
8.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for
exterior alterations at City of Georgetown, Block 41, Lot 6-8 (PTS), .14 acres, located at 718
South Austin Ave. (CDC-2013-051) Staff report
9.Questions and comments from HARC Commissioners in Training
10.Updates from staff and reminder about the November 11, 2013 Sign Subcommittee and the
December 12, 2013 HARC meetings.
11.Adjournment
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, October 24, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee will meet on Thursday, October
24, 2013 at 05:30 PM in the Council Chambers, located at 101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee Members:
Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; and Tim Urban
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 05:30 PM
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 action on the minutes from the October 14, 2013 Sign
Subcommittee meeting.
2.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for
signage at City of Georgetown, Block 40, Lot 1, 4, .33 acres, located at 114 E. 7th Street.
(CDC-2013-048)
3.Adjournment
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Monday, October 14, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission will meet on Monday, October 14, 2013 at 04:00 PM
in the Georgetown Municipal Complex, located at 300 Industrial Blvd, Georgetown, Texas.
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Members:
Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; and Tim Urban
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 04:00 PM
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 action on the minutes from the September 9, 2013 Sign
Subcommittee meeting.
2.Public Hearing and possible action on an amended Certificate of Design Compliance
Request for signage at City of Georgetown, Block 50, Lot 1 (S/PT), .08 acres, located at
824 S. Austin Ave. (CDC-2013-013) Staff Report
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for
signage at City of Georgetown, Block 41, Lot 4 (PT), located at 706 S. Austin Avenue,
Suite 201 (CDC-2013-044). Staff Report
4.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for
signage at Glasscock Addition, Block 16, Lot 1-2 (PTS), .095 acres, located at 314 East 6
th
Street (CDC-2013-045) Staff Report
Adjournment.
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, October 3, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission will meet on Thursday, October 3, 2013 at 05:30 PM
in the Council Chambers, located at 101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Members:
Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown; Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; David Paul; Tim Urban; and Mary Jo
Winder.
Commissioners in Training: Martine Rousseau and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 05:30 PM
Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 5:30 p.m.
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.
Legislative Agenda:
1.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior
alterations and signage at City of Georgetown, Block 51, Lot 2(E/PT), .08395 acres, located at 114 W
8th Street. (CDC-2013-043)
2.Adjournment
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, September 26, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission will meet on Thursday, September 26, 2013 at 06:00
PM in the Council Chambers, located at 101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Members:
Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown; Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; David Paul; Tim Urban; and Mary Jo
Winder. Commissioners in Training: Martine Rousseau and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 06:00 PM
Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 6:00 p.m.
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.
Legislative Agenda:
1.Review and possible approval of the minutes from the August 22nd Regular HARC Meeting
2.Preservation Brief – Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for exterior
alterations at City of Georgetown, Block 52, Lot 1(NE/PT), .0391 acres, located at 124 East 8th Street.
(CDC-2013-030) Staff report
4.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior
alterations and signage at City of Georgetown, Block 51, Lot 2(E/PT), .08395 acres, located at 114 W
8th Street. (CDC-2013-043) Staff report
5.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior
alterations and addition at Glasscock Addition, Block 12, Lot 1, .16 acres, located at 502 S. Myrtle St.
(CDC-2013-038) Staff report
6.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior
alterations at Nolen Addition, Block 2, Lot 3-4(PTS), .130 acres, located at 1602 Vine St.
(CDC-2013-042) Staff report
7.Update and discussion on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior alterations at
Glasscock Addition, Block 11, Lot 3-4, .33 acres, located at 205 East 7th St and 606 South Myrtle St.
(CDC-2013-036)
8.Questions and comments from HARC Commissioners in Training
9.Updates from staff and reminder about the October 14, 2013 Sign Subcommittee and the October 24,
2013 HARC meetings.
10.Adjournment
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Minutes of the Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, September 26, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met on Thursday ,
September 26, 2013.
Members Present:
Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown; Nancy Knight; David Paul; Tim Urban; and Mary Jo Winder.
Commissioners in Training present: Raymond Wahrenbrock
Members Absent:
Richard Mee and CIT, Martine Rousseau
Members Present but not participating:
Staff Present:
Matt Synatschk, Historic District Planner; Jackson Daly, Executive Assistant; and Shelly Hargrove, Main
Street Manager
Minutes
Regular Meeting
Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 6:00 p.m.
Chair Eby opened the meeting at 6:00 p.m. and read the order of the meeting that was to be followed.
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.
Legislative Agenda:
1.Review and possible approval of the minutes from the August 22, 2013 Regular HARC Meeting and
August 1, 2013 Special Called HARC Meeting
Motion by Knight, second by Paul to approve the minutes of both meetings as presented.
Approved 6 – 0.
2.Preservation Brief
Synatschk invited John Hughes to lead a workshop on wood windows. Because of the nature of his
presentation, Mr. Hughes was unable to speak into the microphone at the workshop. Hughes
highlighted that all wood windows are different. Even windows within a single structure are different,
like at the Art Center. Those windows were built in the 1890s. A key to ensuring the longevity of your
windows is to prime the end grains prior to installation. Hughes feels one cannot spend too much
money on paint. He also feels brushing paint onto windows is preferable over spraying because
spraying does not necessarily fill every gap. Another concern with wood windows is the putty that is
used to repair them. The putty can actually outlast the wood. You may have to cut wood to remove the
old putty.
Restoring old wood windows does result in cost savings. You do not have to change the interior finish
trim. You can also use new glass in old windows to get better insulation. A drawback to new glass is
loss of the waves often found in old glass. Another trick Hughes likes is the bronze weather stripping.
It allows separation between the sash and the frame and limits windows sticking. He encourages
people to use Maze nails, which are harder than most nails and work with old wood. Hughes then
passed around a pulley from the Art Center windows that was over 100 years old and looked as if it
could work another hundred years.
Winder asked where someone could find old wood to repair wooden windows and Hughes told her
that generally Craigslist is a good place to find people tearing down old buildings and selling old
growth wood. The best wood is pre-1900 – virgin American forest wood lasts the longest. Hughes then
gave Urban a Super Blow Pop.
Synatschk led the second part of the preservation brief. He did a quick overview of the design review
process and clarified what staff reviews prior to HARC review. He also reviewed what HARC uses to
make decisions: the city charter, the code of ordinances, and the commission bylaws. Synatschk then
went into a review of the Secretary of Interior Standards of Rehabilitation.
5.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior
alternations at Nolen Addition, Block 2, Lot 3-4(PTS), .130 acres, located at 1602 Vine St. (CDC
2013-042)
Eby explained that the architect for this project requested this item be deliberated upon first.
Synatschk presented the staff report. Synatschk explained this item was tabled at the last meeting
because it did not meet the design guidelines. The applicant and architect came up with a new
solution that includes the addition but respects the historic character. The gabled roof will remain and
a shed roof will cover the new porch. Synatschk explored the interior of the building and found
additions were done without removing the exterior walls or old roof. The old addition is not historic and
moving windows on the north side is acceptable. The architect will lower the pitch of the roof on the
addition to highlight that it is a non-historic addition.
Bryant Boyd, the architect spoke and said he was planning on sticking to the minimalist style.
Eby opened the Public Hearing and with no speakers coming forth, closed the hearing.
Winder asked about the windows on the Myrtle side of the street. Boyd stated they were non-historic.
Eby asked if it was part of the CDC to replace the windows. Synatschk said the windows are historic,
but not original and that staff was ok with replacing windows because of the lack of documentation.
Motion by Knight to approve the application as re-submitted. Second by Urban. Approved 6 –
0.
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for exterior
alterations at City of Georgetown, Block 52, Lot 1(NE/PT), .0391 acres, located at 124 East 8th
Street. (CDC-2013-030)
Synatschk presented the staff report. This was for final approval for the railing, door, and tie-rod
canopy for the project. The door will be north of the mechanical equipment to emulate where a door
once was on the east side of the building. The proposed door blends with the structure, but has
modern touches to illustrate that it is not historic. HARC will decide on the stain color. The railing will
match the existing railing on the ADA ramp. The retaining wall will be made with bricks pulled from the
door way. Staff has approved the installation of a red oak tree to replace the Arizona ash and the
applicant will be using a Silva Cell system. The trash will be addressed by shortening the steps and
moving trash to the other side of the steps. This was the last concern of the neighboring properties.
Staff has asked that HARC approve two site plans to allow the applicant to accommodate the
neighbor’s wishes.
The canopy lighting hangs from the canopy. The lighting above the canopy will be concealed.
Synatschk then passed around bead board and galvanized aluminum to illustrate the materials to be
used on the canopy. The applicant, David Dollar, was present and expressed agreement with
Synatschk’s presentation.
Eby opened the Public Hearing.
David Kellerman (912 Shinnecock Hills Dr.) introduced himself as Chair of the Main Street Advisory
Board. The Board’s vision is to provide assistance and guidance to business and property owners
downtown. The Board reviews plans and provides matching funds for up to 50% of the façade and
sign projects costs. Grant money is only given when work is completed and HARC must have
approved the plan prior to the grant being received. He explained that this project has received a grant
from Main Street.
Larry Olsen (300 E. 9th Street, 3 extra minutes given by Ed Olsen) worked with neighbors and City
staff to resolve trash issue. He suggests moving the trash collection to the south of the steps and
using steel gates. He showed two elevations, one from the north and one from the west illustrating his
plan. He thinks his discussions with the City have been productive and Ms. Mealy and the Seamans
appear happy with the project. He suggested rethinking the retaining wall to be covered with a stone
veneer to make it more unique and ease the ability to expand the retaining wall in the future. He also
asked the commission to reconsider the furniture layout because it limits people’s ability to use the
sidewalk and appears that the public is not allowed on the sidewalk.
Eby closed the Public Hearing with no other speakers coming forth.
Knight asked if the area they were addressing was a patio or a sidewalk. There is no verbiage on
sidewalk cafés. She said that one can hardly walk around Gumbos or the Hollow because of too many
tables. New businesses are going to want the City to have a fully executed sidewalk along Austin
Avenue. It’s difficult to push a stroller though diners, drinkers, and smokers. Page two of the design
guidelines highlights that the sidewalk should only have pedestrian amenities.
Winder asked about putting tables at the front of the building, requiring another railing. Synatschk
explained that Guideline 8.11 states that tables and chairs are reviewed by staff and he will work with
the applicant and code enforcement. HARC is only looking at the railing and retaining wall materials
on the east side of the building. The sidewalk is required to have three feet of clearance per ADA
standards.
Eby reminded the Commissioners that staff used the design guidelines also to make decisions. Paul
mentioned that no tenant was decided upon yet.
Synatschk explained that tenants will have the ability to use the sidewalk, but it is still a public
sidewalk. He also explained that a comprehensive sidewalk study is being completed to identify
sidewalk priorities city-wide. The highest priorities will be between the square and the library and 9th
Street between Austin and Main. Knight said the front of the building looks great.
Winder had questions about the historic curbing. Synatschk stated that it would be incorporated in the
retaining wall. Winder expressed concern that the proposal had a lot of brick. The ADA ramp is
concrete and maybe the retaining wall should blend with the ramp. She felt that matching the building
was not a good idea. Knight noted the brick will be a stark contrast with the wall and that HARC
needs to consider the adjacent property.
Urban asked if Mr. Olson’s proposal was what was agreed upon and if the commission was okay with
the iron gate. Synatschk said that this was the agreed upon proposal and there is a possibility that
TDS will provide a dumpster. Urban asked if stone wall was going to blend with the brick. Maybe the
applicant could explore using a stone façade.
Motion by Knight to approve the application as submitted minus the railing. Second by
Winder. Denied 2-4 (Paul, Eby, Urban, Winder opposed)
Motion by Urban to approve the application as submitted, but for the applicant to explore the
option of the retaining wall façade to be stone and allow staff approval. Second by Paul.
Approved 4-2 (Knight and Brown opposed)
4.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior
alterations and signage at City of Georgetown, Block 51, Lot 2(E/PT), .08395 acres, located at 114 W
8th Street. (CDC-2013-043) Staff report
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant is proposing awnings, signage, and a portable
sign. The signage fits within the design guidelines and staff recommends approval. The applicant, Kay
Briggs, thanked Synatschk for presenting the proposal well.
Eby opened the Public Hearing and with no speakers coming forth, closed the hearing.
Knight said that Guideline 9.16 discourages bright, fluorescent colors. She feels the hot pink color of
the awnings overpower the building. She suggested making the awning black with pink accents.
Knight also mentioned Guideline 10.1 that states that the City needs to use colors that are compatible
among projects.
Synatschk said there is no part of the design guidelines that address specific awning colors. Eby
pointed out that the awning sample is muted compared to the rendering. Winder clarified that the
commission has no review authority on awning color. Synatschk said the commission can only
approve awning style. Knight disagreed and stated Guideline 10.1 allows the commission to review
color. Eby believes Chapter 10 does not address types of colors for awnings.
Winder asked the commission to look at the overall scheme of the district, not just the business. The
building façade itself is very modern.
Briggs explained she chose pink because of the large tree that blocks her façade. From every angle it
is hard to see the building and the fabric of the awning allows it to stand out. The shade is a muted
pink and has low contrast. The awnings were lowered to accent the architectural features in the
bricks. The colors are essential for visibility and branding. She has been in business on the square for
three years and the pink is essential to her business.
Knight suggested black with pink lettering and that the awnings need to work in context with the rest of
the block. She also said that it did not look like the applicant was maximizing her signage allotment.
The bright pink letters would help the building stand out.
Motion by Knight to approve the application as submitted, but to change the awning from pink
to black citing Guidelines 10.1 and 9.16. Second by Paul. Denied 3-3. (Eby, Urban, Winder
opposed).
Motion by Winder to approve the application as submitted. Second by Eby. Denied 3-3 (Knight,
Paul, Brown opposed)
Knight asked if the applicant would consider changing colors.
Briggs said she would reduce the size of the awning to highlight the brick architectural features, but
feels strongly about the color and that black would not have the same effect. She is already on a
difficult part of the square where it is hard to get pedestrian traffic.
There was discussion between the applicant and commissioners about color options and possibilities.
Synatschk stated the commission needs to give the applicant clear guidance.
Motion by Paul to approve the signage as submitted and for the awning to be tabled until a
future meeting. Second by Brown. Approved 4-2 (Eby and Winder opposed).
6.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior
alterations at Nolen Addition, Block 2, Lot 3-4(PTS), .130 acres, located at 1602 Vine St.
(CDC-2013-042)
Synatschk presented the staff report. This is a residential remodel with exterior alterations to the
porch. The applicant will be replacing the porch with a concrete porch and will be replacing damaged
siding. Staff is concerned about the iron columns that may be replaced by wooden 6”x6” posts. Staff
feels these should be replaced with in-kind materials or repaired. The applicant clarified that the
damaged siding is actually a replica of the existing asbestos plank.
Motion by Urban to approve the signage as submitted, except the applicant needs to reuse the
existing columns and the seams of the new planks needs to be staggered in order to hide the
remodel. Second by Winder. Approved (6-0).
7.Update and discussion on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior alterations at
Glasscock Addition, Block 11, Lot 3-4, .33 acres, located at 205 East 7th St and 606 South Myrtle
St. (CDC-2013-036)
Synatschk presented an update. The property owners have a stop work order until October 31 and will
submit an application to HARC on November 1. Synatschk met with the applicant to discuss the doors
and street facing windows and what will be required to make them compliant.
8.Questions and comments from HARC Commissioners in Training.There were none.
9.Updates from staff and reminder about the October 14, 2013 Sign Subcommittee and the October 24,
2013 HARC meetings.
There will be a sign sub-committee meeting on October 14. The Little Caesar’s project has pulled
construction permits. The applicant on the Austin Ave. house told Synatschk that he saved a lot of
money by salvaging the old siding and wanted to thank the commission for the suggestion.
Urban said he likes the updates. He’s also concerned about all the temporary signage he is seeing in
the district.
Knight said she will not be attending the Oct. 14 subcommittee meeting. She also does not
understand why HARC reviewed the expanded sidewalk on item 3 at all. Synatschk clarified that
developers build sidewalks for the City all the time and that this is not a unique situation.
10.Adjournment
Motion to adjourn by Urban. Second by Winder. Approved (6-0).Eby adjourned the meeting at 9:03
p.m.
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Special Meeting on Downtown
Master Plan
City of Georgetown, Texas
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission Special Meeting on Downtown Master Plan will meet
on Tuesday, September 17, 2013 at 05:30 PM in the Georgetown Public Library - Friends Room located at
402 W. 8th Street, Georgetown, TX 78626
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Special Meeting on Downtown Master Plan Members:
Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown; Nancy Knight; David Paul; Tim Urban; Richard Mee, and Mary Jo
Winder. Commissioner(s) in Training: Martine Rousseau; and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 05:30 PM
Members of the Historic and Architectural Review Commission may or may not be in
attendance for the Downtown Master Plan Update Public Meeting, hosted by the City of
Georgetown. There will be discussion with the presenter and group regarding the update of the
2003 Downtown Master Plan, but no action will be taken.
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, September 9, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee will meet on Thursday, September
9, 2013 at 04:00 PM in the Georgetown Municipal Complex, located at 300 Industrial Blvd, Georgetown,
Texas.
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee Members:
Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; and Tim Urban
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 04:00 PM
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 action on the minutes from the July 25, 2013 Sign Subcommittee
meeting.
2.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for
signage at City of Georgetown, Block 41, Lot 4 (PT), located at 706 South Austin
Avenue (CDC-2013-032). staff report
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for
signage at City of Georgetown, Block 28, Lot 1-8, 1.32 acres, located at 500 S. Austin
Avenue. (CDC-2013-041) staff report
4.Adjournment
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Minutes of the Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, September 9, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee of the City of Georgetown, Texas,
met on Thursday , September 9, 2013.
Members Present:
Nancy Knight, Richard Mee
Members Absent:
Tim Urban
Members Present but not participating:
Staff Present:
Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner; Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager; Jackson Daly, Executive
Assistant; and Karen Frost, Recording Secretary
Minutes
Regular Meeting
Call to order by Mee at 4:05 p.m. and he read the order of business.
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 action on the minutes from the July 25, 2013 Sign Subcommittee meeting.
Motion by Knight to approve the minutes as submitted, second by Mee. Approved 2 – 0.
2.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for signage at
City of Georgetown, Block 41, Lot 4 (PT), located at 706 South Austin Avenue (CDC-2013-032).
Synatschk explained this application. The applicant is requesting a color change to the original
application, along with approval to change the sign in the sign frieze on the building façade in a
minor way. The new color depictions were provided and the applicant was available for questions.
Commissioners discussed the different background color options with the applicant. Camille’s
preference is the light blue background. The discussion included a request that the existing
approved signs be changed in color to be consistent with the newly approved signs.
Mee opened the Public Hearing at 4:11 and with no speakers, closed it.
Motion by Knight to approve the signs with the background being the light blue, Pantone
PMS 631, and the hibiscus flower in the design should be the same coral color on all the
signs, and the sign should fit into the frieze on the façade with the exception of the leaves
of the flower that may extend slightly beyond the frieze as needed. Second by Mee.
Approved 2-0.
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for signage at
City of Georgetown, Block 28, Lot 1-8, 1.32 acres, located at 500 S. Austin Avenue.
(CDC-2013-041)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks approval for exterior signage on the
three street facing façades. The request includes flush mounted signs above the primary
entrance, and one sign each on the other two facades. HARC approved the Infill project
(CDC-2013-025) at the July 25th meeting. The signs will be installed under the roofline and lit
from recessed lights.
The applicant, Stratton Hrncir, brought color samples of the signage.
The Commissioners discussed the project. Knight took issue with the appropriateness of the
original application so feels this is still a problem. They discussed the size and scale of the
signage being appropriate and the standard process that allows corporate colors.
Mee opened the public hearing at 4:16 and with no speakers coming forth, closed it.
Motion by Mee to approve the signage as presented. Second by Knight. Approved 2 – 0.
4.Adjournment.
Synatschk stated there would not be a sign subcommittee meeting on September 26 because
there were not any applications ready to move forward. Mee stated he would not be in attendance
at the regular meeting on September 26.
There was general discussion with Brewer and the Commissioners. They asked that there be a
discussion with council for direction regarding the appropriateness of “bright” corporate colors on
historic buildings. Knight also asked that staff make more appropriate recommendations on
applications. Brewer suggested encouraging applicants to utilize the conceptual review meetings
more often before bringing in inappropriate applications.
Motion by Knight to adjourn, second by Mee. Meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m.
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Special Workshop/ B&B
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, September 5, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission Special Workshop/ B&B will meet on Thursday,
September 5, 2013 at 04:00 PM in the Georgetown Public Library - Friends Room, located at 402 W. 8th
Street
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Special Workshop/ B&B Members:
Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown; Nancy Knight; David Paul; Tim Urban; Richard Mee, and Mary Jo
Winder. Commissioner(s) in Training: Martine Rousseau; and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 04:00 PM
Members of the Historic and Architectural Review Commission may or may not be in
attendance for the Bed and Breakfast Public Meeting, hosted by the City of Georgetown. City
staff will lead a facilitated discussion on Bed and Breakfast establishments in Georgetown, but
no action will be taken.
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, August 22, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission will meet on Thursday, August 22, 2013 at 06:00 PM
in the Council Chambers, located at 101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Members:
Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown; Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; David Paul; Tim Urban; and Mary Jo
Winder. Commissioners in Training: Martine Rousseau and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 06:00 PM
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.
Legislative Agenda:
Review and possible approval of the minutes from the July 25, 2013 Regular HARC Meeting and 1.
August 1 Special Called HARC Meeting
Preservation Brief – Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner2.
Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for exterior 3.
alterations at Lost Addition, Block 64 (PT), Acres .16, located at 1000 South Austin Avenue.
(CDC-2013-035) Staff Report
Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior 4.
alterations at Glasscock Addition, Block 11, Lot 3-4, .33 acres, located at 205 East 7th St and 606
South Myrtle St. (CDC-2013-036) Staff report
Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior 5.
alterations at Glasscock Addition, Block 26, Lot 2 (S/PT), .1928 acres, located at 1006 South Ash St.
(CDC-2013-011) Staff report
Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior 6.
alterations at Glasscock Addition, Block 20, Lot 1, 2(pt), .2409 acres, located at 1002 South Elm
Street (CDC-2013-034) Staff report
Public hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior 7.
alterations and addition at Morrow Addition, Block C (S/PT), .20 acres, located at 1263 South Austin
Avenue. (CDC-2013-037) Staff report
Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior 8.
alterations and addition at Glasscock Addition, Block 12, Lot 1, .16 acres, located at 502 South Myrtle
St. (CDC-2013-038) Staff report
Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior 9.
alterations and addition at Rosenblad Estates, Block A, Lot 2 & 1, .73 acres, located at 1702 South
Olive St. (CDC-2013-039) Staff report
Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior 10.
alterations and addition at Dimmit Addition, Block 92 (sw/cor), .359 acres, located at 911 South
Walnut Street (CDC-2013-040) Staff report
Discussion and possible action regarding the establishment and appointment of HARC Conceptual 11.
Design Committee
Questions and comments from HARC Commissioners in Training 12.
Updates from staff and reminder about the September 9, 2013 Sign Subcommittee and the 13.
September 26, 2013 HARC meetings.
Adjournment14.
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Minutes of the Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, August 22, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met on Thursday ,
August 22, 2013.
Members Present:
Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown; Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; David Paul; Tim Urban; and Mary Jo
Winder.
Commissioners in Training present: Martine Rousseau and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Members Absent:
none
Members Present but not participating:
Staff Present:
Matt Synatschyk, Historic District Planner; Jackson Daly, Executive Assistant; and Karen Frost,
Recording Secretary
Minutes
Regular Meeting
Chair Eby opened the meeting at 6:00 p.m. and read the order of the meeting that was to be followed.
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.
Legislative Agenda:
1.Review and possible approval of the minutes from the July 25, 2013 Regular HARC Meeting and
August 1 Special Called HARC Meeting
Motion by Knight, second by Mee to approve the minutes of both meetings as presented.
Approved 7 – 0.
2.Preservation Brief – Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner
Synatschk gave a presentation on historic windows and methods for preserving them.
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for exterior
alterations at Lost Addition, Block 64 (PT), Acres .16, located at 1000 South Austin Avenue.
(CDC-2013-035)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks approval from HARC to make exterior
changes to a medium priority historic structure located in Area 2 of the Downtown Overlay. HARC
approved exterior alterations to correct unapproved alterations at the May 23rd Regular HARC meeting
but did not approve the paint color. Applicant is resubmitting for exterior paint based upon the
recommendations of the Commission. The proposed colors are the corporate colors for the business
and do not exceed 20% of the primary façade.
Commissioners discussed the item.
The Public Hearing was opened at 6:20 p.m. and closed with no speakers coming forth.
Motion by Knight to deny the application for additional colors. Second by Richard. Vote 3 – 4.
(Opposed by Paul, Eby, Urban and Winder). Motion denied.
Motion by Knight to approve the base color of buff and to deny the red and yellow bright
colors based on Guideline 11.5. Second by Mee. Approved 7 – 0. Motion to amend the
original motion to include retention of small black stripes, instead of the proposed red and
yellow stripes. Second by Mee. Amendment approved 7 – 0.
4.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior
alterations at Glasscock Addition, Block 11, Lot 3-4, .33 acres, located at 205 East 7th St and 606
South Myrtle St. (CDC-2013-036)
Synatschk explained the application. The applicant seeks approval from HARC for unapproved
exterior changes to the medium priority historic structures located at 606 S. Myrtle St and 205 E 7th
St. The completed changes include replacement of historic decorative porch columns, doors and
windows. The Applicant also requests approval for exterior paint.
The Applicant met with staff in 2012 to discuss the project, but indicated at that time they wanted to
repaint the exterior the existing colors. Additionally, the applicant applied for building permits for
interior alterations only. While completing the interior renovations, the applicant elected to make the
exterior alterations as well. These alterations were completed without additional building permits or a
Certificate of design Compliance.
The applicant removed the existing historic wooden doors and replaced them with non-historic
residential style doors, incompatible with the design and period of significance of the structure.
Additionally, the applicant removed the existing wooden double hung windows and replaced them with
vinyl windows. The applicant also removed the decorative porch columns, replacing them with
non-historic columns.
Although these changes have been completed, they were completed without a Certificate of Design
Compliance or approved building permits. The current alterations do not comply with the design
guidelines. HARC may approve the changes as completed or require alterations to comply with the
Design Guidelines. Staff recommends enforcement of the 365 delay of a CDC application.
Don Holcomb, the applicant was available for comments. He stated that his client had purchased the
buildings in 2012. They had a Pre-application conference at that time and said they were not told that
they would need a CDC for the window and door replacement. They were told to proceed with the
work and bring the structures up to code. He was at this meeting to ask forgiveness and explain the
extreme hardship that they were under. The floors had not even been installed and they had two
leases staring in November. He explained replacing the new windows and doors now would cost too
much. Synatschk explained that they were told, according to the notes of the meeting, that they could
start interior work, but that exterior work would require further review and possibly a CDC. Holcomb
disagreed, but then presented the notes from that meeting, which explicitly stated that the applicant
should come back for review of exterior window and door replacement.
The commissioners asked questions. Synatschk and Knight explained that they have been working
on a program to educate not only the general public about preserving and renovating structures in the
Downtown and Old Town Overlays, but to educate the Realtors in the area so they can explain it to
potential buyers of these properties.
Eby opened the Public Hearing.
Mark Lehnick, 101 Jaydee Terrace, spoke in support of approval of the changes made to these
structures. He stated he felt the citizens need more specific guidelines about what they can and can’t
do downtown.
Lou Denton, 509 Myrtle, asked the commission to not impose the 365 day penalty. He felt the work
that was done was an improvement and that enforcing the penalty would harm the neighborhood.
Eby closed the Public Hearing with no more speakers coming forth.
The Commissioners debated the time penalty that should be assessed.
Motion by Mee to impose a penalty to stop work or application until September 30 based on
the Unified Development Code Section 3.13.010D4, placing a hardship on the applicant and
since further work would have a limited impact on the remaining historic façade. Second by
Knight. Motion denied. 3 – 4 (Opposed by Urban, Eby, Paul and Brown.)
Motion by Urban to delay any further application or work until October 31, based on UDC
Section 3.13.010D4. Second by Paul. Motion approved 5 – 2 ( Mee and Knight opposed.)
5.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior
alterations at Glasscock Addition, Block 26, Lot 2 (S/PT), .1928 acres, located at 1006 Ash St.
(CDC-2013-011)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks approval from HARC to demolish an
existing porch on the street facing façade due to deterioration. The applicant will replace the porch
with a new porch, built to similar design and size. Applicant also seeks approval to remove the existing
concrete porch floor and replace it with a wooden porch floor. Additionally, applicant wishes to replace
the wooden skirting with a masonry skirting.
This project was first presented at the April 25th HARC meeting, following a Stop Work Order issued
by Code Enforcement. The order was issued after the property owner or responsible party failed to
obtain the proper building permits and Certificate of Design Compliance for the project. HARC
reduced the 365 day moratorium to 60 days, allowing the applicant to submit an application for
demolition of the existing porch and construction of a new one. Additionally, HARC directed staff to
review the existing porch for compliance with all adopted building codes, at which time it was
determined that the porch failed to meet building codes in several aspects. The partially completed
porch will need to be removed and replaced with the new porch.
Tim Todd, the contractor, was available for questions.
Eby opened the Public Hearing and closed it with no speakers coming forth.
Motion by Paul to approve the CDC as presented at this meeting. Second by Mee. Approved 7
– 0.
6.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior
alterations at Glasscock Addition, Block 20, Lot 1, 2(pt), .2409 acres, located at 1002 South Elm
Street. (CDC-2013-034)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks approval from HARC to alter a Medium
Priority historic structure located in the Old Town Historic Overlay. The Applicant proposes to install a
half wall along the existing concrete steps, creating a uniform appearance of the structure. The half
wall will be clad with fiber cement siding designed to blend with the cedar shakes on the primary
structure. The dimensions of the half wall are 43 inches high by 68 inches long and 14 inches deep. It
will end in a column which will be 46 inches high and 16 inches square.
There were no questions by the commissioners.
Eby opened the Public Hearing and closed it with no speakers coming forward.
Motion by Knight to approve the application as presented. Second by Mee. Approved 7 – 0.
7.Public hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior
alterations and addition at Morrow Addition, Block C (S/PT), .20 acres, located at 1263 South Austin
Avenue. (CDC-2013-037)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The proposed project for the 1909 Hugh Barron House, a High
Priority Historic Structure, is designed to rehabilitate the existing structure while increasing the
usability and livability of the space. The structure is currently in a diminished state, due to many years
of deferred maintenance. The current rear addition is deteriorating and is not integral to the historic
significance of the structure. The windows and siding of the structure are in disrepair due to rot and
other factors, while the front porch is sagging and in need of repair. The proposed project seeks to
address these needs, while incorporating a new addition to the rear of the structure.
Approval of a Certificate of Design Compliance is required from HARC for the following components:
rehabilitation of existing porch, demolition of an existing addition to the primary structure, construction
of a new addition to the structure and repair and replacement of existing wood siding and windows.
Staff recommends approval of the application.
The applicant, John Patch, was available for questions. He explained that he didn’t know if he would
be able to keep all the windows and siding until getting into the project. He understands about trying
to keep the historic windows but some had been replaced with other windows that don’t match. If he
has to replace the windows, he will keep the wooden frames and try to maintain their character. He
will also replace the rotted siding with wood siding, closely matching the existing as much as possible.
Matt explained the recommendation to move old good siding from the back to the front of the house,
to maintain the same type of siding. Then replace any siding with new siding on the back side of the
house, away from street view.
Knight stated she appreciated the applicant keeping the character of the building and putting the extra
work into maintaining it.
Eby opened the Public Hearing and with no speakers coming forth, closed the hearing.
Winder expressed concern about not seeing the structure up close to determine the damage to be
repaired. She asked for a site visit. Mee asked the applicant to maintain the cresting strip at the top
of the roofline. The applicant said he would try to keep it.
Motion by Winder to table this application to the next meeting so a site visit could be scheduled. The
motion died with no second.
Motion by Mee to approve the application as submitted. Second by Urban. Approved 6 – 1.
(Winder opposed.)
8.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior
alterations and addition at Glasscock Addition, Block 12, Lot 1, .16 acres, located at 502 S. Myrtle St.
(CDC-2013-038)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The Low Priority Historic Structure located at 502 South Myrtle
is redesigned to remove existing non-historic materials, replacing them with appropriate materials for
the structure. The 1935 Minimal Traditional structure has been altered over time with the addition of
vinyl siding and the construction of a non-historic accessory structure. The Applicant proposes to
remove the vinyl siding and install new wood siding, enhancing the historic value of the structure. The
proposed addition and front porch will create additional living space inside the house without
significantly altering the historic integrity of the structure.
The proposed project significantly alters the historic appearance of the Minimal Traditional style home,
creating a false sense of history for the structure. The alterations to the front façade of the structure
remove much of the character defining features of the Minimal Traditional style, while incorporating
elements of earlier styles. The Unified Development Code, Design Guidelines and the Secretary of the
Interior Standards for Rehabilitation stress the importance of retaining the character defining features
of a property and not adding additional detail inappropriate for the architectural style.
The demolition of the non-historic accessory structure was approved administratively by staff in July
(CDC-2013-033) and does not require HARC review. Additionally, HARC does not review the
installation of new driveways or sidewalks within the Old Town Historic District.
Approval of a Certificate of Design Compliance is required from HARC for the following components:
removal of vinyl siding and replacement with wood siding, construction of a new addition, replace all
existing historic windows, new paint for the structure, and an addition of a new porch on the Myrtle
Street façade.
The applicant/architect, J. Bryant Boyd, was available for questions. He commented that he did not
agree with Syantschk. The entire structure would be changed, as that is what the applicants wanted.
Eby opened the Public Hearing.
Len Denton, 509 Myrtle, explained that he was a neighbor across the street and that he was glad to
see anything done to this house since this was the last one in the neighborhood to be renovated. He
was supportive of the application.
Eby closed the Public Hearing at 7:55 p.m. with no other speakers coming forth.
The commissioners debated the original style type of the house and whether it should be completely
changed or not. They discussed appropriateness of preserving the architectural style. Boyd
explained that there may other style elements underneath the vinyl siding that won’t be discovered
until the vinyl siding is removed.
Motion by Winder to approve the addition in concept, but to deny the application because the changes
to not meet the Guidelines. The motion died with no second.
Motion by Paul to table the application with instructions to the applicant to work with staff to
find a more appropriate conversion and use of the existing structure, so that the guidelines are
followed. Second by Mee. Approved 7 – 0.
9.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior
alterations and addition at Rosenblad Estates, Block A, Lot 2 & 1, .73 acres, located at 1702 Olive St.
(CDC-2013-039)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant approval from HARC to alter a High Priority
historic structure located in the Old Town Historic Overlay. Built in 1870, the National Register of
Historic Places eligible property was altered after 1904 to include a second story sleeping porch and
additional chimneys. The structure is sited at a 90 degree angle from the street. Applicant proposes to
demolish an existing concrete porch to replace it with an extended wooden porch. The new porch will
wrap the corner of the structure, extending along the west side. The existing addition will be
rehabilitated to correct construction failures, reusing original materials when possible. Staff
recommends approval of the changes.
The applicant and architect, J. Bryant Boyd was available for questions.
Eby opened the Public Hearing and closed it with no speakers coming forward.
Motion by Knight to approve the application as presented. Second by Mee. Approved 7 – 0.
10.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior
alterations and addition at Dimmit Addition, Block 92 (sw/cor), .359 acres, located at 911 South
Walnut Street (CDC-2013-040)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The proposed project for the 1915 Charles Atkinson House, a
High Priority Historic Structure, is designed to rehabilitate the existing structure while increasing the
usability and livability of the space. The structure is a Recorded Texas Historic landmark, requiring the
applicant to notify the Texas Historical Commission of their project and allow 60 days for staff
comments. While the project adheres to the local design guidelines and to the Secretary of the Interior
Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic Properties, Texas Historical Commission staff may request
alterations to ensure compliance with the RTHL requirements. Due to the significant setback from the
street, the property has limited options for expansion without severely impacting the primary structure.
Approval of a Certificate of Design Compliance is required from HARC for the following components:
adding a new addition to the northeast corner of the house, and altering the roof of the existing carport
to create a deck for the primary structure. The project does not require a Certificate of Design
Compliance to level the garage and replace deteriorated materials.
The applicant/architect, J. Bryant Boyd, was available for questions. Commissioners verified the
location of the addition.
Eby opened the Public Hearing and closed it with no public speakers coming forth.
Motion by Urban to approve the application as presented with staff given the authority to
include any directions given by the Texas Historical Commission. Second by Mee. Approved 7
– 0.
11.Discussion and possible action regarding the establishment and appointment of HARC Conceptual
Design Committee.
After discussion of this item, the commission looked at options and decided that the preference was
for Synatschk to present those items that were for a major project as a concept to the entire
commission prior to the application being submitted in direct conflict of the Design Guidelines.
Synatschk is to discuss with the applicants and then as part of the staff report for the meeting,
determine that a concept design should be discussed and approved first. The Commissioners did not
want to form another subcommittee for reviewing concept plans.
12.Questions and comments from HARC Commissioners in Training.
Rousseau suggested using the Sanborn pictures more frequently to determine footprints, etc. of
historic buildings.
13.Updates from staff and reminder about the September 9, 2013 Sign Subcommittee and the
September 26, 2013 HARC meetings.
14.Adjournment
Eby adjourned the meeting at 9:03 p.m.
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Special Meeting
City of Georgetown, Texas
Tuesday, August 6, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission Special Meeting will meet on Tuesday, August 6, 2013
at 05:30 PM in the Georgetown Public Library - Friends Room 402 W. 8th Street, Georgetown, TX 78626
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Special Meeting Members:
Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown; Nancy Knight; David Paul; Tim Urban; Richard Mee, and Mary Jo
Winder. Commissioner(s) in Training: Martine Rousseau; and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 05:30 PM
Members of the Historic and Architectural Review Commission may or may not be in
attendance for the Downtown Master Plan Update Public Meeting, hosted by the City of
Georgetown. There will be discussion with the presenter and group regarding the update of the
2003 Downtown Master Plan, but no action will be taken.
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, August 1, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission will meet on Thursday, August 1, 2013 at 06:00 PM in
the Council Chambers, located at 101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Members:
Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown; Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; David Paul; Tim Urban; and Mary Jo
Winder.
Commissioners in Training: Martine Rousseau and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 06:00 PM
Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 6:00 p.m.
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.
Legislative Agenda:
1.Discussion and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for exterior alterations
at City of Georgetown, Block 52, Lot 1(NE/PT), .0391 acres, located at 124 East 8th Street.
(CDC-2013-030) Staff Report revised
2.Questions and comments from HARC Commissioners in Training
3.Updates from staff and reminder about the August 12, 2013 Sign Subcommittee and the August 22,
2013 HARC meetings.
4.Adjournment
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Minutes of the Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, August 1, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met on Thursday ,
August 1, 2013.
Members Present:
Anna Eby, Chair; Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; Tim Urban and Mary Jo Winder.
Commissioners in Training: Martine Rousseau, and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Members Absent:
Jennifer Brown and David Paul
Members Present but not participating:
Staff Present:
Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner; Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager; Jackson Daly, Executive
Assistant; and Karen Frost, Recording Secretary.
Minutes
Regular Meeting
Chair Eby opened the meeting at 6:07 p.m. and explained the meeting procedures. She explained that
since this was a Special Called meeting to discuss an item that had been tabled at the last meeting, the
Public Hearing had already been held, but the Commission would hear public speakers again in
accordance with Council standards. The order of business would proceed as if this was a regular item.
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.
Legislative Agenda:
1.Discussion and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for exterior alterations
at City of Georgetown, Block 52, Lot 1(NE/PT), .0391 acres, located at 124 East 8th Street.
(CDC-2013-030)
Synatschk reported that the applicant was asking approval of the paint, the canopy , the patio to the
east side of the building, and the reinstallation of the east side exterior door. He stated the intent
would be to keep the historic curbing as asked at the previous meeting and he provided pictures of the
historical canopies as requested. He also stated that the commission would not be voting on the
removal of the tree as that was not in their review parameters, and he asked the public to not discuss
the tree.
Cary Rabb, the applicant, explained that he was asking HARC for approval of the concepts of some of
these items since he was unable to provide the exact details. But before he spent the money to
design the exact details, he needed a general approval and then he will find a tenant and finish the
details.
Commissioners were invited to ask questions. Knight began by asking why the applicant was allowed
to submit an application that did not include the items from the required checklist. Synatschk
explained that not all items on the checklist were to be submitted with every application, each project
is different.
Winder asked why the patio had to be on the Church Street side of the building. Synatschk
responded there was not enough room on the 8th Street sidewalk for a patio.
Chair Eby opened the Public Hearing.
Larry Olsen, 300 E. 9th Street, (3 extra minutes given by Ed Olsen) Mr. Olsen presented a scaled
drawing of the patio and per his measurements the access to the patio, due to the fire code, would
decrease the number of people allowed in the restaurant from 49 to 66. He also stated the door could
not be used as an egress to a sidewalk that was blocked by outdoor furniture. His concern was with
the proposed, shared sidewalk agreement with the city.
Diane Guame, 122 E 8th Street, the building directly next door to the project. Ms. Guam was excited
about the new business but concerned about the placement of the trash, stating the extension of the
proposed patio would cover the area where the existing trash cans are placed for her and the other
neighbor. She was also concerned about the application not having a specific design to review.
Ann Seaman, 810 S. Church Street. She stated she wanted to talk about the tree, but that was off the
table. She stated the tree is in the city right-of-way and provides shade for her yard. She stated she
was okay with the patio concept but concerned about the actual design and lack of information in the
application.
Liz Mealy, 120 E. 8th Street. Ms. Mealy was concerned about the location of the trash receptacles for
the restaurant and where they would go. She was also concerned about the lack of design details on
the application.
Dwight Richter, 206 S. Main St. Came to speak against taking the tree down.
J.C. Johnson, 303 E. 9th Street. Mr. Johnson expressed concern about the lack of information on the
application and the guidance of staff to the commissioners. He said there was not enough information
on the canopy, size, depth, and width. There is not mention of there the garbage will go. He stated
the commissioners owed it to the citizens to delay action on this application.
Ross Hunter, 908 S. Walnut Street. (3 minutes shared from Dwayne Boydston.) Mr. Hunter
expressed concern that the commissioners and citizens were being “sidelined” at the last minute by
not enough information, no scaled drawings, and no information on the patio or the redesigned
handicap ramp. He stated HARC can demand that staff provide more information and in a more
timely manner. He asked for the item to be tabled again until more information was provided by the
applicant.
Gary Seaman, 810 S. Church. (3 minutes shared from Roy Peck.) Mr. Seaman lives behind the
subject property. He discussed the historical curbing and said that although he appreciates staff
mentioning it, it is not practical. He suggested extending the curb and preserving the rings in the
concrete. He stated those were almost the last historical rings left on the square. He applauded the
owner for restoring the façade like Mr. Rabb had it originally. He was concerned about the width of
the patio and the possibility that workers from the restaurant would use the back alley for smoking and
put trash in his yard.
Rick Williamson, 204 Holly Street. (3 minutes shared from Marc Truxillo.) Mr. Williamson was
concerned about the notice of citizens of this application, stating he had only heard about it 72 hours
before the meeting. He expressed concern about the proposal of the patio on public land. He said
the construction of that alone needs building plans and that no plans were provided for the
commission to discuss and make decisions on. He asked that the item be delayed until such time as
documents and more information could be produced to answer all the outstanding questions.
Renee Hanson, 1252 South Austin Ave. (3 minutes shared from Herb Hanson.) Ms. Hanson stated
that nothing with the application had changed since the last public hearing where the item was table
until more information could be gathered. She quoted the Design Guidelines, stating the applicant
had not followed the step to “prepare and submit a complete application packet for formal review.”
She also quoted the section that states the city is to promote friendly walkable streets. She also
quoted items from Chapter 8, Site Design and stated that the application itself does not comply with
the guidelines and should not be approved.
Paulo Pinto, 117 Tescate. Mr. Pinto was there to speak for saving the tree and stated he looked
forward to seeing what comes of this application.
The Public Hearing was closed at 7:06 p.m.
Cary Rabb, the applicant was asked to respond. He stated that he was not going to spend money on
an engineer until he received approval of the concepts. He also stated the tree was not protected,
research had shown that it was installed in the 80’s with a 30 year life span. He was told the city
wants it removed. The canopy and façade are proposed to go back to the original design.
Chair Eby expressed concern that there seemed to be miscommunication about what constitutes a
complete packet and what HARC should be receiving for review. Synatschk explained that during the
pre-application conference an applicant is given all the forms, lists of fees, and a check list of items to
submit. Once the applicant has all the items they are to submit those and pay the fees. If the
application submittal is not complete, the applicant is asked to provide more before the meeting.
Some items are approved administratively and not brought forward. Staff has to determine the
balance between some applications that are brought in with engineered drawings and those that are
brought in as a rough “napkin” sketch. Synatschk tries to find the common ground. Eby clarified by
stating that if the patio is approved, the applicant would have to still apply for a building permit,
complete with building plan to meet code compliance, fire code items and public safety. HARC design
approval does not invalidate the permitting review. If the submittal for permitting is not what is
approved in design concept by HARC, then it must be resubmitted to HARC. HARC is part of the
public review process, but it is not the beginning and the end.
Knight expressed confusion about the purview of HARC. There was a discussion of public and private
space. The city typically pays for sidewalks, but in this case the applicant is paying to expand the
sidewalk in this area for the benefit of both the city and the applicant.
Commissioners then discussed the items of the application individually. It was agreed that the front
façade paint colors were good. There were many questions still about the exact details of the canopy,
materials, lighting, etc. Urban asked that the east side door be reviewed carefully against the health
and safety codes. There were no details for the materials and type of door. Synatschk explained that
the applicant would be repointing the brick façade on the east side of the building, not disturbing the
old painted wall signage. The front façade has old pressed metal panels on a wooden frame that
would be removed. The wooden frames would be reconstructed and the metal panels replaced.
There was an extensive discussion of what could be approved with the information provided.
Motion by Winder to approve the restructuring of the façade, including repair of the cladding
and the paint; to approve the conceptual drawing of the canopy and the conceptual drawing of
the patio but the applicant must return with complete design and details for approval to
construct; and to approve the concept of the east side door but to bring back the details to
HARC before installing. Second by Mee. Approved 4 – 1 (Knight opposed.)
2.Questions and comments from HARC Commissioners in Training. There were none.
3.Updates from staff and reminder about the August 12, 2013 Sign Subcommittee and the August 22,
2013 HARC meetings.
There will not be an August 12 meeting. There will be a Downtown Master Plan Public Workshop on
Tuesday, August 6th. All Commissioners are invited.
4.Adjournment
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, July 25, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission will meet on Thursday, July 25, 2013 at 06:00 PM in
the Council Chambers, located at 101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Members:
Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown; Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; David Paul; Tim Urban; and Mary Jo
Winder. Commissioners in Training: Martine Rousseau and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 06:00 PM
Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 6:00 p.m.
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.
Legislative Agenda:
1.Review and possible approval of the minutes from the June 27, 2013 Regular HARC meeting.
2.Preservation Brief – Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for exterior
alterations and signage at City of Georgetown, Block 52, Lot 1(NE/PT), .0391 acres, located at 124
East 8th Street. (CDC-2013-030) Staff report
4.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for exterior
alterations at City of Georgetown, Block 28, Lot 1-8, 1.32 acres, located at 500 S. Austin Avenue.
(CDC-2013-025) Staff report
5.Update and discussion on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior alterations at
Glasscock Addition, Block 26, Lot 2 (S/PT), .1928 acres, located at 1006 Ash St. (CDC-2013-011)
6.Questions and comments from HARC Commissioners in Training
7.Updates from staff and reminder about the August 12, 2013 Sign Subcommittee and the August 22,
2013 HARC meetings.
8.Adjournment
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Minutes of the Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, July 25, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met on Thursday ,
July 25, 2013.
Members Present:
Jennifer Brown; Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; David Paul; Tim Urban and Mary Jo Winder.
Commissioners in Training: Martine Rousseau and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Members Absent:
Anna Eby, excused
Members Present but not participating:
Staff Present:
Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner; Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager; Jackson Daly, Executive
Assistant; and Karen Frost, Recording Secretary.
Minutes
Regular Meeting
Vice-Chair Night opened the meeting at 6:00 p.m. and explained the 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.
Legislative Agenda:
1.Review and possible approval of the minutes from the June 27, 2013 Regular HARC meeting.
Motion by Mee to approve the minutes as presented. Second by Urban. Approved 6 – 0.
2.Preservation Brief – Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner
Synatschk presented the History of Preservation in Georgetown.
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for exterior
alterations and signage at City of Georgetown, Block 52, Lot 1(NE/PT), .0391 acres, located at 124
East 8th Street. (CDC-2013-030)
Synatschk presented the application. The applicant seeks approval from HARC for exterior changes
to the historic structure located. The proposed changes include repair of the pressed metal façade
and a new paint scheme. The Applicant also requests the addition of a patio on the east side of the
structure, a roof top patio with stairs mounted on the east wall, and a new tie rod canopy to replace
the existing awning. Staff recommends approval of all items. The applicant, Cary Rabb was available
for questions.
Knight opened the Public Hearing. There were several speakers, each were allowed three minutes
unless noted six minutes with addition of someone else’s minutes.
Susan Firth, 1403 Olive Street, shared concerns about the look of the restaurant not being consistent
with the vision of the downtown master plan, the rooftop that was proposed, the removal of a
protected tree, and the patio that would block the city walkways. She cited the Downtown Master Plan
and the Design Guidelines that supports street trees and walkability. She asked for the item to be
tabled until further information was presented.
Ann Seaman, 810 S. Church Street, shared concerns about the noise, and outdoor music that would
be allowed, along with the patio blocking the sidewalk that was already small. She brought up the
privacy issue and asked where the dumpster would be stored. She asked that the item be tabled until
further information was gathered.
Gary Seaman, 810 S. Church Street, complained about the proposed rooftop patio having a direct line
of site into his residence behind the building. He expressed concern that the city was using the “East
6th Street model” of Austin to develop Georgetown, and in their front yard. He is not opposed to a
commercial use here but asked for consideration of the nearby residences. He also mentioned the
historic curbing that he asked to be saved.
Liz Mealy, 120 E. 8th Street, owns the building next door to the applicant and asked for the item to be
tabled until design views from all sides could be considered. She is delighted that the business will be
open again but wants consideration of the lighting and what the patio and streetscape will look like in
the winter. She also expressed concern about the handicapped sidewalk and accessibility of the
business.
Ross Hunter, 6 minutes (3 minutes from Linda Johnson), 908 S. Walnut Street, stated the application
was deficient and he asked HARC to give specific instructions to the applicant about what must be
presented. He said the staff analysis missed points because not enough information was given. He
opposed the taking of a public tree and replacing it with umbrellas, privatizing the public sidewalk, and
questioned the transition from commercial uses to residential uses in that area. He asked the
commissioners to be “clever” in their actions.
Reneé Hanson, 6 minutes (3 minutes from Rick Williamson), 1252 S. Austin Avenue, explained that
the Design Guidelines were based on a consensus of opinions, not the concept of a few. She read
the Goals of Area 1 are pedestrian oriented, friendly walkable streets. The sidewalks in that area are
currently narrow and the city should be looking at widening the sidewalks, not narrowing them. She
stated the application was incomplete and the elements were not present for the commissioners to
make a good decision. She asked them to table the application until more information could be
presented.
With no further speakers, Knight closed the Public Hearing and asked the applicant if he would like to
respond. Cary Rabb stated he was willing to take the rooftop patio off the application but would like to
keep the sidewalk café and work with the city to design the sidewalk. He explained that the tree is an
Arizona Ash and that is not protected by the city ordinance so will choose to remove the tree whose
roots are damaging the sidewalk. He would like to keep the façade as designed.
The commissioners were invited to ask questions. Knight asked if a tenant had been secured for the
building. Rabb responded not at that time, but they were hoping to find a tenant that would be a
restaurant, retail or ice cream shop.
Urban asked if there was really a public/ private partnership as described to develop the sidewalk café
area. Synatschk stated the Street Department Superintendent, Mark Miller, has discussed this
proposal and approved the concept in the city right-of-way. He cited the examples of Austin Avenue
and 7th Street, Main and 9th Street as comparable public outdoor areas with seating in the right-of-way.
Mee asked why if there was not a tenant, the applicant was proposing an outdoor patio. Rabb
explained that he thought it would make the property more marketable.
Winder asked about the posting requirements for notice of this application. Synatschk explained that
all HARC applications were posted as a sign on the property for a minimum of 15 days prior to the
meeting with the public hearing, per state statute. There are no regulations regarding mailing of
notice to adjacent property owners. Winder also asked about what the commission was supposed to
review, stating there were not enough details to offer an approval on all the items presented.
Synatschk explained that they were to review only those items that were listed in the Design
Guidelines and presented. Sidewalk furniture and sidewalks were not on the application. If items
were listed in the Design Guidelines but referred to the Master Plan, and those items met the criteria,
there would not be any HARC review.
Knight asked the commissioners to discuss the application items individually. They would not be
discussing signage until another application was presented. They were also told that the brick facing
Church Street would not be repainted; only repointed as necessary for repairs. Winder asked for the
photos of the historical canopy that Synatschk had stated existed.
Motion by Winder to table the application until pictures and adequate information were
provided. Second by Paul. Approved 4 – 2. (Mee and Urban opposed.)
4.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for exterior
alterations at City of Georgetown, Block 28, Lot 1-8, 1.32 acres, located at 500 S. Austin Avenue.
(CDC-2013-025)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks approval from HARC for infill construction
on an existing site. The infill project is located on the southeast corner of the property and includes a
bandstand facing northwest towards the restaurant with an Automatic Teller Machine (ATM) mounted
in the rear facing southeast towards Austin Avenue. The ATM canopy portion of the structure will
extend slightly over the sidewalk and landscaping will be placed around the structure to obscure the
site of the ATM. Staff recommends approval of the application.
Rusty Winkstern, owner and applicant was available for questions. He explained that he wanted to
enlarge the outdoor venue of the Monument Restaurant and Biergarten and thought that by doing this
he would bring pedestrians from the downtown area, further off the Square, extending the Square to
the north.
Knight opened the Public Hearing, there was one citizen speaker.
Susan Firth, 1403 Olive Street, stated that the Monument has brought so much business and notoriety
to Georgetown, but questioned the installation of an ATM at that corner. She felt it would be
redundant, across the street from an existing ATM, and inappropriate for that corner. She noted it
lacked signage and lighting.
Knight closed the Public Hearing.
Winkstern explained that he wanted to put in a bandstand on that corner of his lot and the Extraco
ATM would help him pay for that. He realizes that the Bank of America ATM is popular, but states it is
dangerous for that portion of 6th Street.
Paul questioned the location of the bandstand, stating the only thing in front of it would be a grassy
area. Winkstern explained that his intention was to open up the biergarten fencing and have some of
the seating extended onto the grassy area when the band was playing.
Urban questioned the different architectural style of the Monument, the new bandstand has a pitched
roof, while the Monument has a flat roof. Winkstern explained that he was moving toward a new look
with the expansion of the site. Urban expressed concern about the design being geared toward future
buildings that have not been planned.
Motion by Mee to approve the application for the CDC as submitted. Second by Winder.
Motion amended by Urban to have the applicant explore the flat roof architectural style and
allow it to be approved by staff if chosen. Second by Winder. Vote on the amendment failed, 2
– 4 (opposed Knight, Brown, Mee and Paul.) Original motion passed, 4 – 2 (Knight and Brown
opposed.)
5.Update and discussion on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior alterations at
Glasscock Addition, Block 26, Lot 2 (S/PT), .1928 acres, located at 1006 Ash St. (CDC-2013-011)
Synatschk reported that the applicant has a new contractor and will be resubmitting a new application
for her remodel by August 1 to be placed on the August 22 agenda.
6.Questions and comments from HARC Commissioners in Training
There were no questions but Wahrenbrock stated he had a friend that had asked for assistance with a
property and Synatschk was very helpful and Wahrenbrock was appreciative.
7.Updates from staff and reminder about the August 12, 2013 Sign Subcommittee and the August 22,
2013 HARC meetings.
Synatschk stated there would not be a Sign Subcommittee on August 12th, no applications.
There is a Downtown Master Plan update meeting and workshop on August 6th at the Library. This will
be a posted public meeting if HARC members would like to attend. The Downtown Master Plan
update process has a website with a survey: www.dtmasterplan.georgetown.org.
Urban expressed concerns about the applications that have been coming before the commission. He
feels that the Texas Historical Commission (THC) architectural renderings that have been submitted
are inappropriate and misrepresent the applications. He states they are not true architectural
renderings and do not include enough detail to make an informed decision, but the applicants thing
they have approved drawings. Synatschk explained that the renderings are meant to be conceptual,
not actual and that there should be a letter that accompanies the drawings that gives the disclaimer
that they are not meant for structural or design review. Urban feels the THC gives the applicant false
hope when the drawings are issued.
Other commissioners complained about the lack of information that is coming through in the
applications, citing they cannot approve a concept, but they are being asked to approve an application
that is in affect a concept of what the applicant intends to do. There is a common complaint of the
presentations that are given, stating not enough information is presented in the packets to show what
is actually being proposed. The commissioners felt like they are being “blindsided” by the staff when
the information is presented at the meeting. Mee gave the example of the canopy in this meeting.
There were no details of the size of the canopy, the lighting, or whether there would be lighting and the
materials proposed. They were asked to approve a canopy with no details. They all expressed
concerns.
Knight asked Synatschk for the next Preservation Brief to cover the review of site plans by HARC.
8.Adjournment
Meeting adjourned at 7:43 p.m.
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, July 25, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee will meet on Thursday, July 25,
2013 at 05:30 PM in the Council Chambers, located at 101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee Members:
Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; and Tim Urban
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 05:30 PM
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 action on the minutes from the July 8, 2013 Sign Subcommittee meeting.
2.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for signage at
Lost Addition, Block 13, Lot 3-4, 7-8, .6611 acres, located at 1003 South Austin Avenue
(CDC-2013-031). Staff report
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for signage at
City of Georgetown, Block 41, Lot 4 (PT), located at 706 South Austin Avenue (CDC-2013-032).
Staff report
4.Adjournment
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Minutes of the Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, July 25, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee of the City of Georgetown, Texas,
met on Thursday , July 25, 2013.
Members Present:
Nancy Knight, Richard Mee and Tim Urban
Members Absent:
none
Members Present but not participating:
Staff Present:
Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner; Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager; Jackson Daly, Executive
Assistant; and Karen Frost, Recording Secretary
Minutes
Regular Meeting
Call to order by Urban at 5:30 p.m. and he read the order of business.
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 action on the minutes from the July 8, 2013 Sign Subcommittee meeting.
Motion by Mee to approve the minutes as submitted. Second by Knight. Approved 3 – 0.
2.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for signage at
Lost Addition, Block 13, Lot 3-4, 7-8, .6611 acres, located at 1003 South Austin Avenue
(CDC-2013-031).
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks approval for exterior signage on the
primary façades. The request includes one canopy sign mounted on the Austin Avenue awning,
four flush mounted signs on the 10th street façade, and door and window signage. The awnings
would remain black, and all signage would have black backgrounds, with beige colored letters.
The name of the business is The Screen Door.
Urban opened the Public Hearing at 5:33 p.m. and closed it with no speakers coming forth.
There was no discussion amongst the commissioners other than the comment that the submittal
was nice.
Motion by Knight to approve the CDC for signage as submitted. Second by Mee.
Approved 3 – 0.
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for signage at
City of Georgetown, Block 41, Lot 4 (PT), located at 706 South Austin Avenue (CDC-2013-032).
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks approval from HARC for exterior
signage on the primary façade. The request includes one flush mounted sign above the primary
entrance, a projecting sign, door and window signage and a portable sign. The colors are white,
orange, dark blue and light blue. Staff recommends approval. The applicant, Camille Sweezy,
was available for questions.
Urban opened the Public Hearing at 5:37 p.m. and closed it with no speakers coming forth.
Knight started by saying that she thinks the sign is inappropriate for the building, it covers up the
frieze and obscures the architectural details of the building, directly inconsistent with the Design
Guidelines. She expressed that the proposed colors were incompatible with the rest of the
building colors. Ms. Sweezy took the stand and explained that the colors were meant to stand
out, and that she would narrow the sign to fit within the frieze on the front façade. There was back
and forth discussion between the applicant and the commissioners about the colors of the current
banner being more appropriate to the building colors. Those colors are a blue background with a
red/coral flower. Ms. Sweezy agreed to use those colors.
Motion by Knight to approve the signage for 706 S. Austin Avenue provided the colors
used are a light blue background with a coral colored flower and lettering, and with the
façade signage to fit into the existing sign frieze, with staff approval as needed for the final
drawings. Second by Richard. Approved 3 – 0.
4.Adjournment. Urban adjourned the meeting at 5:46 p.m.
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee
City of Georgetown, Texas
Monday, July 8, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee will meet on Monday, July 8, 2013
at 04:00 PM in the Georgetown Municipal Complex, located at 300 Industrial Blvd, Georgetown, Texas.
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee Members:
Tim Urban, Nancy Knight, and Richard Mee
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 04:00 PM
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 action on the minutes from the June 27, 2013 Sign Subcommittee
meeting.
2.Public Hearing and possible action on an amendment to a Certificate of Design
Compliance for signage at City of Georgetown, Block 41, Lot 4 (pt), located at 708 S.
Austin Avenue, Suite 201. (CDC-2012-013)
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for
signage at City of Georgetown, Block 42, Lot 3-4 (PTS), .2226 acres, located at 712
Rock St. (CDC-2013-027)
4.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for
signage at City of Georgetown, Block 51, Lot 4 (PT) .0158 acres, located at 810 S. Main
St. (CDC-2013-028)
5.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for
signage at City of Georgetown, Block 38, Lot 2-3, 1(PT) .3581 acres, located at 109 W.
7th St., Ste. 115. (CDC-2013-029)
6.Adjournment
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Minutes of the Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee
City of Georgetown, Texas
Monday, July 8, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee of the City of Georgetown, Texas,
met on Monday , July 8, 2013.
Members Present:
Nancy Knight, Richard Mee
Members Absent:
Tim Urban
Members Present but not participating:
Staff Present:
Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner; Jackson Daly, Executive Assistant; and Karen Frost, Recording
Secretary
Minutes
Regular Meeting
Call to order by Mee at 4:02 p.m. and read the order of business.
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 action on the minutes from the June 27, 2013 Sign Subcommittee meeting.
Motion by Knight, second by Mee to approve the minutes as presented. Approved 2 – 0.
2.Public Hearing and possible action on an amendment to a Certificate of Design Compliance for
signage at City of Georgetown, Block 41, Lot 4 (pt), located at 708 S. Austin Avenue, Suite 201.
(CDC-2012-013)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks an amended Certificate of Design
Compliance to include portable signage, an A-frame sign, in their approved signage plan. The
applicant was not in attendance.
Mee opened the public hearing at 4:06 p.m. and with no speakers coming forth, closed it.
Mee questioned Synatschk on the purpose of the A-frame signs downtown. The response was to
increase sidewalk visibility of the businesses.
Motion by Knight to approve the CDC as presented. Second by Mee. Approved 2 – 0.
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for signage at
City of Georgetown, Block 42, Lot 3-4 (PTS), .2226 acres, located at 712 Rock St.
(CDC-2013-027)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance
approval from HARC for exterior signage on the secondary façade. The request includes one
flush mounted façade sign facing south. The signage will be wall mounted into the mortar, not
disturbing the brick. The applicant, Steve Doering, was available to answer questions.
Mee opened the public hearing at 4:09 p.m. and with no speakers coming forth, closed it.
Motion by Knight to approve the CDC as presented. Second by Mee. Approved 2 – 0.
4.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for signage at
City of Georgetown, Block 51, Lot 4 (PT) .0158 acres, located at 810 S. Main St. (CDC-2013-028)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance
approval from HARC for exterior signage. The request includes one flush mounted sign, one
hanging sign, window signage and portable signage. This is for the J. Paul Aubin Real Estate
office. Mr. Aubin was available to answer questions.
Mee opened the public hearing at 4:12 p.m. and with no speakers coming forth, closed it.
Knight questioned the plastic A-frame sign and whether it was heavy enough to withstand the
wind. There was assurance that it would be weighted and heavy enough.
Motion by Knight to approve the CDC as presented. Second by Mee. Approved 2 – 0.
5.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for signage at
City of Georgetown, Block 38, Lot 2-3, 1(PT) .3581 acres, located at 109 W. 7th St., Ste. 115.
(CDC-2013-029)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance
approval from HARC for exterior signage. The request includes one projecting sign, window
signage and a portable sign.
Mee opened the public hearing at 4:16 p.m. and with no speakers coming forth, closed it.
Knight stated that she felt there were too many A-frame signs going up and asked about the
regulations restricting the numbers. Synatschk explained that each business was allowed one
A-frame sign, and in the case where there was an upstairs business above another business on
the first floor, each business would be allowed an A-frame sign. Knight expressed it was too
crowded to allow that may signs.
There was no discussion on this specific A-frame request.
Motion by Knight to approve this CDC as presented. Second by Mee. Approved 2 – 0.
6.Adjournment. Motion to adjourn the meeting at 4:22 p.m.
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, June 27, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee will meet on Thursday, June 27,
2013 at 05:30 PM in the Council Chambers, located at 101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee Members:
Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; and Tim Urban
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 05:30 PM
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 action on the minutes from the May 13, 2013 Sign Subcommittee meeting
2.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for signage at
City of Georgetown, Block 39, Lot 2-3(PTS), .0699 acres, located at 109 E. 7th Street.
(CDC-2013-026)
3.Adjournment
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Minutes of the Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, June 27, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee of the City of Georgetown, Texas,
met on Thursday , June 27, 2013.
Members Present:
: Nancy Knight, Richard Mee and Tim Urban
Members Absent:
none
Members Present but not participating:
Staff Present:
Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner; Jackson Daly, Executive Assistant; and Stephanie McNickle,
Recording Secretary
Minutes
Regular Meeting
Call to order by Urban at 5:32 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 action on the minutes from the May 13, 2013 Sign Subcommittee
meeting.
Motion by Mee to approve the minutes as written. Second by Urban. Approved 2 – 0.
(Knight not on dais for this vote.)
2.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for
signage at City of Georgetown, Block 39, Lot 2-3(PTS), .0699 acres, located at 109 E. 7
th
Street. (CDC-2013-026)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design
Compliance approval for exterior signage on the primary façade. The request includes
one projecting sign mounted on the front façade of the building, and additional signage
on the windows and door . The applicant also seeks approval of a portable sign to be
placed in front of the business during business hours. Staff recommends approval of all
signs as proposed.
Urban questioned whether the signage was within the size guidelines. Synatschk
responded that the signage was within the requirements.
Mee asked the applicant about the method for hanging the hanging sign. Lisa King, the
applicant responded that they were intending to install chain loops to install the sign, as
opposed to the current straps.
Knight asked the applicant if she would consider changing the awning color to black to
better match the signage . The applicant stated the owner was installing new awnings
but that they would remain blue so they would not have to obtain any further
approvals.
Urban opened the Public Hearing and as no citizens wished to speak, closed it.
Motion by Knight to approve the CDC for signage at 109 E. 7
th
Street as proposed.
Second by Mee. Approved 3-0.
3.Adjournment. Urban adjourned the meeting at 5:35 p.m.
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, June 27, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission will meet on Thursday, June 27, 2013 at 06:00 PM in
the Council Chambers, located at 101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Members:
Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown; Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; David Paul; Tim Urban; and Mary Jo
Winder. Commissioners in Training: Martine Rousseau and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 06:00 PM
Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 6:00 p.m.
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.
Legislative Agenda:
1.Review and possible approval of the minutes from the May 23, 2013 Regular HARC meeting.
2.Preservation Brief – Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for exterior
alterations and signage at City of Georgetown, Block 26, Lot 7-8 – 1-2 pts, .387 acres, located at 503
S. Main Street. (CDC-2013-024)
4.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for exterior
alterations at City of Georgetown, Block 28, Lot 1-8, 1.32 acres, located at 500 S. Austin Avenue.
(CDC-2013-025) – REMOVED AT APPLICANT’S REQUEST
5.Update and discussion on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior alterations at
Glasscock Addition, Block 26, Lot 2 (S/PT), .1928 acres, located at 1006 Ash St. (CDC-2013-011)
6.Questions and comments from HARC Commissioners in Training
7.Updates from staff and reminder about the July 8, 2013 Sign Subcommittee and the July 25, 2013
HARC meetings.
8.Adjournment
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Minutes of the Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, June 27, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met on Thursday ,
June 27, 2013.
Members Present:
Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown; Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; Tim Urban and Mary Jo Winder.
Commissioners in Training: Martine Rousseau, and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Members Absent:
David Paul, excused
Members Present but not participating:
Staff Present:
Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner; Jackson Daly, Executive Assistant; and Karen Frost, Recording
Secretary
Minutes
Regular Meeting
Chair Eby opened the meeting at 6:00 p.m. and explained the 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.
Legislative Agenda:
1.Review and possible approval of the minutes from the May 23, 2013 Regular HARC meeting.
Motion by Knight to approve the minutes, second by Mee. Approved 5 – 0. (Brown was not on the
dais at this time.)
Item 3 was discussed next.
2.Preservation Brief – Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner
Synatschk gave a presentation on the history of historic preservation.
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for exterior
alterations and signage at City of Georgetown, Block 26, Lot 7-8 – 1-2 pts, .387 acres, located at 503
S. Main Street. (CDC-2013-024)
Synatschk presented the staff report. This structure was built in 1961 and is a Medium Priority
structure but is not listed in the Historic Resource Survey because at the time the property was less
than 50 years old. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance approval from HARC for
exterior changes to the historic structure located at 503 South Main Street. The current structure will
continue to serve as commercial offices. The proposed changes include installation of pine trim
around all windows and doors, along with new paint and landscaping. Applicant also requests
approval for new signage for the business contained within the structure. Staff recommends approval
of the CDC.
The applicant. Dean Eddy was available to answer questions. Knight appreciated the improvements
and the signage.
Eby opened the public hearing and with no speakers closed the public hearing.
Motion by Mee to approve the CDC for this application as presented. Second by Urban.
Approved 6 – 0.
4.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for exterior
alterations at City of Georgetown, Block 28, Lot 1-8, 1.32 acres, located at 500 S. Austin Avenue.
(CDC-2013-025) – REMOVED AT APPLICANT’S REQUEST
5.Update and discussion on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior alterations at
Glasscock Addition, Block 26, Lot 2 (S/PT), .1928 acres, located at 1006 Ash St. (CDC-2013-011)
Matt gave a brief history of this application. The applicant was given a 60 day hold on work and
permits. The 60 day hold has expired and staff has notified the applicant. The applicant may request
a CDC review for the July 25th meeting. Staff has reviewed the unfinished project for code
compliance.
6.Questions and comments from HARC Commissioners in Training. No comments.
7.Updates from staff and reminder about the July 8, 2013 Sign Subcommittee and the July 25, 2013
HARC meetings. Synatschk indicated there will be a July 8th Sign Subcommittee meeting and staff is
accepting applications for the July 25th meeting.
Synatschk also reported that the city council approved the bid from Noré Winter to update the
Downtown Master Plan. The Commission will be invited to provide input, but the meeting has not
been scheduled at this time.
Commissioners asked for a preservation history of Georgetown for the next Preservation Brief.
8.Motion to adjourn at 6:50 p.m.
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, May 23, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission will meet on Thursday, May 23, 2013 at 06:00 PM in
the Council Chambers, located at 101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Members:
Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown; Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; David Paul; Tim Urban; and Mary Jo
Winder. Commissioners in Training: Martine Rousseau and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 06:00 PM
Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 6:00 p.m.
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.
Legislative Agenda:
1.Review and possible approval of the minutes from the April 25, 2013 Regular HARC
meeting.
2.Preservation Brief – Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for
exterior alterations at Glasscock Addition, Block 22 ½, Lot 5-6, .3305 acres, located at 101
East University Avenue. (CDC-2013-006) Staff Report
4.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for
exterior alterations at Lost Addition, Block 64 (PT), .16 acres, located at 1000 South Austin
Avenue. (CDC-2013-017) Staff Report
5.Public hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for an
addition to a residential structure at Dimmit Addition, Block 90 (PT), .3336 acres, located at
906 South Pine Street. (CDC-2013-018) Staff Report
6.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for
exterior alterations and addition at Lost Addition, Block 81 (PT), .43 acres, located at 1904
South Austin Avenue. (CDC-2013-019) Staff Report
7.Public hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for
exterior alterations to a residential structure at Morrow Addition, Block C (S/PT), .20 acres,
located at 1263 South Austin Avenue. (CDC-2013-020) Case removed from agenda at
applicant’s request
8.Public hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for
exterior alterations to a residential structure at Glasscock Addition, Block 33, Lot 3-4 (PTS),
.14 acres, located at 410 South College Street. (CDC-2013-021) Staff Report
9.Public hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for an
addition and exterior alterations to a residential structure at Snyder Addition, Block 3
(CTR/PT), .421 acres, located at 806 East University Avenue. (CDC-2013-022) Staff
Report
10.Update and discussion on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior
alterations at Glasscock Addition, Block 26, Lot 2 (S/PT), .1928 acres, located at 1006 Ash
St. (CDC-2013-011)
11.Questions and comments from HARC Commissioners in Training
12.Updates from staff and reminder about the June 10, 2013 Sign Subcommittee and the June
27, 2013 HARC meetings.
13.Adjournment
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Minutes of the Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, May 23, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met on Thursday ,
May 23, 2013.
Members Present:
Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown; Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; David Paul; and Mary Jo Winder.
Commissioners in Training: Martine Rousseau, and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Members Absent:
Tim Urban
Members Present but not participating:
Staff Present:
Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner; Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager; Jackson Daly, Executive
Assistant; and Karen Frost, Recording Secretary
Minutes
Regular Meeting
Chair Eby opened the meeting at 6:00 p.m. and explained the meeting procedures.
Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 6:00 p.m. 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.
Legislative Agenda:
1.Review and possible approval of the minutes from the April 25, 2013 Regular HARC meeting.
Commissioner Winder asked that her discussion listed on Item 4 be revised. So done.
Motion by Winder, second by Knight to approve the minutes as amended. Approved 6 – 0.
2.Preservation Brief – Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner
Synatschk presented a report on the treatment of historic structures. He explained the difference
between preservation, reconstruction, restoration and rehabilitation.
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for exterior
alterations at Glasscock Addition, Block 22 ½, Lot 5-6, .3305 acres, located at 101 East University
Avenue. (CDC-2013-006)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance approval
from HARC for exterior changes to the historic structure located at 101 E. University Ave. The current
convenience store will be renovated for use as a Little Caesar’s Pizza restaurant. The proposed
changes include repair of the existing canopy and brick, addition of walk-in cooler on the rear of the
structure, and repair of the existing parking lot. The Applicant wishes to replace existing siding with
fiber cement siding and paint the structure. Although the structure was built circa 1930, extensive
renovations in 1978 altered the original form and removed most of the historic materials. The
Applicant also proposes installing a line of planter boxes along the intersection of University Avenue
and Main Street, and landscaping along the rear wall to mask the cooler from view. This is the
second HARC meeting that the applicant has attended. There was no action taken at the first meeting
so the applicant had the opportunity to further review possible changes with staff.
Allen Sandor, the applicant was available for questions. Commissioner Knight expressed concern
that the cooler added onto the back of the building was not compatible with the Design Guidelines.
Synatschk explained that the cooler was necessary for the business owner to do business and that it
will be shielded.
Commissioner Winder asked about the historic significance of the building. Synatschk explained that
structure lost it’s significance when the alterations were done over the years and that the changes
being made were to make the building compatible with the district.
Eby opened the Public Hearing at 6:20 p.m. A memo from the Heritage Society was distributed. The
hearing was closed with no one coming forth to speak.
Commissioners asked questions and offered suggestions regarding the signage and landscaping.
There was discussion about placing a fence around the cooler at the back of the building, but the
fence posts would harm the tree roots so the fence was not allowed. There was further discussion of
the cooler connection to the building and how it would be painted to match the new siding of the main
building. It was noted that if the contractor discovered original siding underneath the existing siding,
the contractor would try to reconstruct the building using that material.
Motion by Commissioner Winder to approve the application for the CDC as presented. Second
by Commissioner Brown. Approved 5 – 1. (Knight opposed.)
4.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for exterior
alterations at Lost Addition, Block 64 (PT), .16 acres, located at 1000 South Austin Avenue.
(CDC-2013-017)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance (CDC)
approval from HARC to make exterior changes to a low priority historic structure located in Area 2 of
the Downtown Overlay. The following changes are proposed to the exterior of the building: remove
garage doors and install aluminum storefront, paint the exterior of the structure, and remove particle
board covering the former primary entrance and install opaque panel. The structure is designated as
a Medium Priority structure, requiring preservation of character defining features. The proposed
rehabilitation project incorporates a modern interpretation of the historic design, maintaining the
character defining features while allowing the building to be repurposed. Staff recommends approval.
The applicant, Eddie Waltman, was available for questions. Matt explained that the changes had
already been made but were unpermitted and were still subject to change. He also explained that the
red painted portion of the building was only 15% of the building and so therefore not considered
corporate signage. The applicant was questioned about the existing red signage on the red façade
and was told that any change to the signage would need to come back to the commission for review.
Commissioners discussed the bright color combinations.
Eby opened the Public Hearing at 6:44 p.m. and closed it immediately with no one coming forth.
Motion by Knight to approve the removal of the garage doors and the installation of the
aluminum storefront and the removal of the particle board covering with former primary
entrance and installation there of the opaque panel, but not the painting of the exterior of the
structure. Second by Paul. Amendment of the motion to include allowing the red color to be
painted on the banding of the building. Second by Paul. Amended motion approved 6 – 0.
The applicant asked why he could not paint his building bright red and was told that the Design
Guidelines were subjective and the commissioners felt the colors were too bold and not in keeping
with the character of the downtown overlay. Eby cited the Design Guidelines, “bold and bright colors
are inappropriate”.
5.Public hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for an addition to a
residential structure at Dimmit Addition, Block 90 (PT), .3336 acres, located at 906 South Pine Street
. (CDC-2013-018)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance (CDC)
approval from HARC to remove an existing half bathroom, located along the 9th Street façade and
replace it with a full bathroom. The addition will be similar in size to the existing addition, and will not
significantly alter the exterior of the structure. In addition to the construction, applicant proposes to
replace all siding with fiber cement siding and paint the structure.
Tim Todd, the contractor for the applicant was available for questions. Commissioners asked
clarifying questions about the look of the structure and the windows and roof. Todd explained it would
all remain the same in look, that the portion of the house with the bathroom was just being enlarged
slightly.
Eby opened the Public Hearing at 6:54 p.m. and with no one coming forth closed it.
Winder espressed concern about preserving the original siding. Todd and Synatschk explained that
as with most projects on historic structures, if historic siding is uncovered it will be refinished and
preserved. But if the siding is not in good shape, it will have to be replaced with similar materials.
They won’t know until the outside siding is removed.
Motion by Mee to approve the CDC as presented. Second by Knight. Approved 5 – 1. (Winder
opposed.)
6.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior
alterations and addition at Lost Addition, Block 81 (PT), .43 acres, located at 1904 South Austin
Avenue. (CDC-2013-019)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance approval
from HARC for exterior changes to the historic structure located at 1904 South Austin Ave. The
current church will be renovated for use as offices and production facilities for Minuteman Press. The
following changes are proposed for the structure: addition of a primary entryway on the north facing
façade; installation of an overhead delivery door in the west facing façade; installation of a clock on
the existing bell tower; business signage; and exterior paint for the structure. Staff recommends
approval.
Ty Gibson, owner of the business was available for questions. Knight expressed that she appreciates
the repurposing of the building but did not like the clock and the pennants, stating they detracted from
the building and not appropriate features. The architect, Richard Elsasser explained that they were
trying to change the look of the building and distinguish it from the current church use.
Winder questioned the different brick use on the façade. Synatschk explained that the new brick
would be the same color, but a smaller brick than the original for differentiation between the old and
new, as the Guidelines prescribe.
Eby opened the Public Hearing at 7:04 p.m. and with no one coming forth, closed it.
Motion by Paul to approve the CDC as presented. Failed, no second.
Motion by Knight to approve the CDC with the exception of the clock and pennants. Second by
Winder. Tied vote, 3 – 3. (Paul, Mee and Brown opposed.)
Motion by Mee to approve the CDC as presented but to remove the primary sign over the front of the
building, along with the pennants. Second by Paul. Vote failed, 2 – 4. (Paul and Mee for.)
Motion by Knight to approve the CDC as presented with the removal of the pennants. Second
by Brown. Approved 6 – 0.
7.Public hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior
alterations to a residential structure at Morrow Addition, Block C (S/PT), .20 acres, located at 1263
South Austin Avenue. (CDC-2013-020) Case removed from agenda at applicant’s request.
8.Public hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior
alterations to a residential structure at Glasscock Addition, Block 33, Lot 3-4 (PTS), .14 acres, located
at 410 South College Street. (CDC-2013-021)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance (CDC)
approval from HARC to construct a front porch, enlarge an existing window and replace the brick
veneer with limestone. The structure located at 410 South College Street was built after 1973 and
does not meet the 50 year threshold for historic structures. The proposed changes require a
Certificate of Design Compliance due to the location within the Old Town Historic Overlay District.
However, since the property is non-historic, it is exempted from the Design Guidelines for exterior
alterations. Staff recommends approval.
The applicant, Joel Nichols, was available for questions. Knight expressed concern that the drawings
were not accurate enough for the commission to make an educated decision. Mr. Nichols tried to
explain his drawing, the porch would not have railings or steps as it appears and the carport was to
remain as is, the drawing did not indicate that.
Eby opened the Public Hearing at 7:21 p.m. and with no one coming forth, closed it.
Motion by Winder to approve the CDC as presented. Second by Mee. Approved 6 – 0.
9.Public hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for an addition and
exterior alterations to a residential structure at Snyder Addition, Block 3 (CTR/PT), .421 acres, located
at 806 East University Avenue. (CDC-2013-022)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance (CDC)
approval from HARC to construct an addition to the street facing façade. The addition will include 510
square feet of space and allow for a more usable interior layout. The addition will be set back 3 feet
from the front of the structure. In addition to the construction, applicant proposes to remove
non-historic siding materials to reveal the existing siding. The historic siding may be restored or
replaced with fiber cement board based upon the condition.
The applicant, Robert Crowson, was available for questions. He explained that his intent was to
replace the vinyl siding with lap siding and that he hoped the addition would correct the incorrectly built
roof. He also stated he would be replacing the windows with Pella double pane windows.
Eby opened the Public Hearing at 7:36 p.m.
Susan Firth, of 1403 Olive Street, spoke against the proposed changes. She stated she felt the
changes were too significant for the historic structure. She thinks the addition should be setback
further from the street, has a concern about the replacement windows, and cited the Design
Guidelines stating any alterations to a medium priority structure should be subordinate to the original
structure, which this is not.
Eby closed the Public Hearing at 7:41 p.m. with no further speakers coming forth.
The commissioners discussed the roofline and Mr. Crowson stated he could set the addition back
three feet if needed.
Motion by Knight to approve the CDC provided the applicant work with staff to structure the
roofline to be more in keeping with the bungalow style of home and to differentiate the roofline
from the main structure’s roofline. Second by Paul. Approved 6 – 0.
10.Update and discussion on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior alterations at
Glasscock Addition, Block 26, Lot 2 (S/PT), .1928 acres, located at 1006 Ash St. (CDC-2013-011)
Synatschk reported that the homeowner has hired a new contractor who is working with staff to
determine what should be done to meet the residential building code requirements. They are still
within the 60 day waiting period before coming back to the commission for approvals.
11.Questions and comments from HARC Commissioners in Training
No comments were received.
12.Updates from staff and reminder about the June 10, 2013 Sign Subcommittee and the June 27, 2013
HARC meetings.
13.Adjournment.
Motion by Knight to adjourn. Second by Paul. Meeting adjourned at 7:48 p.m.
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission CANCELLED
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, May 16, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission CANCELLED will meet on Thursday, May 16, 2013 at
04:00 PM in the Council Chambers, located at 101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission CANCELLED Members:
Members: Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown; Nancy Knight; David Paul; Tim Urban; Richard Mee, and
Mary Jo Winder. Commissioner(s) in Training: Martine Rousseau; and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 04:00 PM
THIS MEETING HAS BEEN CANCELLED.
Workshop - To begin no earlier than 4:00 p.m.
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. This meeting is a
training workshop for the commissioners .
1.Presentation by Matt Synatschk , Historic District Planner .
2.Discussion of appropriate treatment for historic structures . Meeting may include
on-site examples at historic structure located at 816 S. Main St.
3.Adjourn.
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Monday, May 13, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission will meet on Monday, May 13, 2013 at 04:00 PM in
the Georgetown Municipal Complex, located at 300 Industrial Blvd, Georgetown, Texas.
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Members:
Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; and Tim Urban
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 04:00 PM
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 action on the minutes from the April 25, 2013 Sign Subcommittee meeting.
2.Consideration and possible action to elect the Chair of the HARC Sign Subcommittee.
3.Confirmation of meeting times and location.
4.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for signage at
Lost Addition, Block 41, Lot 64 (PT), .016 acres, located at 1006 S. Austin Ave. (CDC-2013-016)
5.Adjournment
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Minutes of the Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Monday, May 13, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met on Monday ,
May 13, 2013.
Members Present:
Nancy Knight, Richard Mee and Tim Urban
Members Absent:
none
Members Present but not participating:
Staff Present:
Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner; Jackson Daly, Executive Assistant; and Karen Frost, Recording
Secretary
Minutes
Regular Meeting
Call to order by Urban at 4:03 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 action on the minutes from the April 25, 2013 Sign Subcommittee meeting.
Motion by Mee to approve as presented. Second by Knight. Approved 3 – 0.
2.Consideration and possible action to elect the Chair of the HARC Sign Subcommittee.
Knight nominated Urban as Chair. Mee confirmed with a second. Approved 3 – 0.
3.Confirmation of meeting times and location.
Knight moves confirmation of the first sign subcommittee of the month to be on the 2nd
Monday at 4:00 p.m. Second by Urban. Approved 3 – 0.
4.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for signage at
Lost Addition, Block 41, Lot 64 (PT), .016 acres, located at 1006 S. Austin Ave. (CDC-2013-016)
Staff report was presented by Synatschk. The applicant seeks approval from HARC for exterior
signage on the Austin Avenue façade and the 9th Street façade. The request includes one sign
mounted on the east façade of the building, and one sign mounted on the south façade of the
structure. Staff recommends approval of the flush mounted signs on both sides of the building.
Commissioners discussed with the applicant, Ty Gibson for Minuteman Press, why the sign was
to be made in two smaller (6’) lengths instead of one 12’ length. Gibson explained that it was less
expensive to do it that way and it would not be noticed from the street. The aluminum sign with
vinyl applied would be guaranteed to last 5 – 7 years and would be attached to the 16” center
ridge supports.
Motion by Mee to approve the CDC for the signage as submitted. Second by Knight.
Approved 3 – 0.
5.Adjournment. Synatschk announced there would not be a Sign Subcommittee Meeting on May
23. Urban adjourned the meeting at 4:13 p.m.
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, April 25, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee will meet on Thursday, April 25,
2013 at 05:30 PM in the Council Chambers, located at 101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee Members:
Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; and Tim Urban
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 05:30 PM
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 action on the minutes from the February 13, 2013 Sign
Subcommittee meeting.
2.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for
signage at City of Georgetown, Block 41, Lot 4 (PT), .07acres, located at 708 S. Austin
Ave. (CDC-2013-015)
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for
signage at Dalrymple Addition, Block G (NE/PT), .258 acres, located at 402 W.
University Ave. (CDC-2013-12)
4.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for
signage at City of Georgetown, Block 50, Lot 1 (S/PT), .08 acres, located at 824 S.
Austin Ave. (CDC-2013-013)
5.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for
signage at City of Georgetown, Block 51, Lot 6-7 (PTS), .1446 acres, located at 113 W.
9th St. (CDC-2013-014)
6.Adjournment
The Subcommittee may forward these items to the next meeting of the Historic and
Architectural Review Commission for its consideration. That meeting is scheduled for May 23
2013.
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Minutes of the Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, April 25, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee of the City of Georgetown, Texas,
met on Thursday , April 25, 2013.
Members Present:
Nancy Knight, Richard Mee and Tim Urban
Members Absent:
Members Present but not participating:
Staff Present:
Matt Synatsch, Historic District Planner; Jackson Daly, Executive Assistant; and Karen Frost, Recording
Secretary
Minutes
Regular Meeting
Call to order by Urban at 5:32 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 action on the minutes from the February 13, 2013 Sign Subcommittee meeting.
Motion by Knight, second my Mee to approve the minutes as presented. Approved 3 – 0.
2.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for signage at City
of Georgetown, Block 41, Lot 4 (PT), .07acres, located at 708 S. Austin Ave. (CDC-2013-015)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance approval
from HARC for exterior signage on the Austin Avenue Facade. The request includes one sign
mounted on the tie rod canopy, one hanging sign over the door underneath the tie rod canopy and
window signage on the primary entrance. The canopy sign will be mounted within the existing sign
bracket, while the hanging sign will attach to the existing rings.
Knight questioned the material of the signs. Jacob Hiller, applicant for The Hollow, explained it would
be MDO/ wood or Plexiglas. The Plexiglas will fit over the existing structure of MDO. He also
explained that the brown paint that was chosen will match the reddish tone of the existing trim. No
further discussion.
No one was present for a Public Hearing to be held.
Motion by Knight to approve the CDC for 2013-015 as presented. Second by Urban. Approved
3 – 0.
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for signage at
Dalrymple Addition, Block G (NE/PT), .258 acres, located at 402 W. University Ave. (CDC-2013-12)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance approval
from HARC to install a new sign to reflect the current business. The new sign will include new
mounting brackets, posts and materials. The sign consists of ½” MDO and measures 6’ by 5’. It will
replace the existing monument sign. Staff recommends approval.
Commissioners questioned the lighting of the sign. Casey Bond, applicant for Renew Med Spa,
explained the lighting will be underneath the sign and will point straight up, not into oncoming traffic
view. Commissioner Mee complimented the sign and stated it was well done.
No one was present for a Public Hearing to be held.
Motion by Urban to approve the sign CDC for 2013-012 as presented. Second by Mee.
Approved 3 – 0.
4.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for signage at City
of Georgetown, Block 50, Lot 1 (S/PT), .08 acres, located at 824 S. Austin Ave. (CDC-2013-013)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance approval
from HARC for exterior signage on the Austin Avenue Façade and the 9th St facade. The request
includes one sign mounted east facing façade of the building, and one sign mounted on the south
facade of the structure. The sign design exceeds the maximum color requirements. However, the
colors proposed are included in the business logo and exempted from the color requirements. Staff
recommends approval of both signs.
Erland Schulze, owner/ applicant, was available for questions from the commissioners. Urban asked
why there were two fonts used. Erland explained that it was because there were two companies
housed there.
There was discussion of how both signs would be mounted, using a structurally sound method, into
the mortar joints when they could be identified under the existing stucco finish.
Urban opened the Public Hearing at 5:47 and with no one coming forth, closed the hearing.
Motion by Knight to approve the CDC for 2013-013 as presented. Second by Mee. Approved 3
– 0.
5.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for signage at City
of Georgetown, Block 51, Lot 6-7 (PTS), .1446 acres, located at 113 W. 9th St. (CDC-2013-014)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance approval
from HARC for exterior signage on the Austin Avenue Façade and the 9th St facade. The request
includes one sign mounted on the east facing façade of the building, and one sign mounted on the
south facade of the structure. Staff recommends approval of both signs. Synatschk explained that
although the sign on the door is not included, the applicant would like permission to replicate their sign
in white vinyl lettering for the front door.
The commissioners did not have any questions or comments.
Urban opened the Public Hearing at 5:50 and with no one coming forth, closed the hearing.
Motion by Mee to approve the original application as submitted for the CDC of 2013-014, and
to include the white vinyl lettering for the door as presented at the meeting. Second by Urban.
Approved 3 – 0.
6.Adjournment Urban adjourned the meeting at 5:52 p.m.
The Subcommittee may forward these items to the next meeting of the Historic and Architectural Review
Commission for its consideration. That meeting is scheduled for May 23, 2013.
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, April 25, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission will meet on Thursday, April 25, 2013 at 06:00 PM in
the Council Chambers, located at 101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Members:
Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown; Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; David Paul; Tim Urban; and Mary Jo
Winder. Commissioners in Training: Trenton Jacobs, Martine Rousseau, and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 06:00 PM
Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 6:00 p.m.
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.
Legislative Agenda:
1.Review and possible approval of the minutes from the March 28, 2013 Regular HARC
meeting.
2.Discussion and possible action to support City of Georgetown’s application for Arts and
Culture District Designation - Eric Lashley, Director, Georgetown Public Library
3.Preservation Brief – Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner
4.Discussion and possible action to support Olive Street National Register District Nomination
– Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner
5.Discussion and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for exterior
alterations at City of Georgetown, Block 38, Lot 5 (N/PT), .0689 acres, located at 602 S.
Main St. (CDC-2013-010) Item presented at March 28, 2013 HARC meeting, at which time
it was tabled until April 25, 2013 meeting .
6.Public hearing and possible action on an amended Certificate of Design Compliance
request for an addition to a residential structure at Hughes Addition, Block 9 (w/pt.), located
at 1503 Ash Street.
7.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for
exterior alterations at Glasscock Addition, Block 26, Lot 2 (S/PT), .1928 acres, located at
1006 Ash St. (CDC-2013-011)
8.Questions and comments from HARC Commissioners in Training
9.Updates from staff and reminder about the May 13, 2013 Sign Subcommittee and the May
26, 2013 HARC meetings at Council Chambers.
10.Adjournment
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Minutes of the Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, April 25, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met on Thursday ,
April 25, 2013.
Members Present:
Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown; Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; David Paul; Tim Urban and Mary Jo
Winder.
Commissioners in Training: Martine Rousseau, and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Members Absent:
Trenton Jacobs, Commissioner in Training
Members Present but not participating:
Staff Present:
Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner; Jackson Daly, Executive Assistant; Valerie Kreger, Principal Planner;
and Karen Frost, Recording Secretary
Minutes
Regular Meeting
Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 6:00 p.m.
Chair Eby opened the meeting at 6:03 p.m. and explained the 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.
Legislative Agenda:
1.Review and possible approval of the minutes from the March 28, 2013 Regular HARC meeting.
It was noted that Jennifer Brown was shown as absent and Mary Jo Winder was present at the
meeting. That should be reversed. And Richard Mee should attest to the approval of the minutes as
he is the new Secretary of the Commission.
Motion by Paul to approve the minutes as amended. Second by Knight. Approved 7 – 0.
2.Discussion and possible action to support City of Georgetown’s application for Arts and Culture
District Designation - Eric Lashley, Director, Georgetown Public Library
Eric Lashley presented a letter for the commissioners to consider in support of the Arts and Culture
District that would have the same boundaries as the current Downtown Overlay. He explained the
designation would help the city be eligible for more grants in the future. He answered Commissioners’
questions in regards to how this would affect existing and future businesses on the Square. He and
Synatschk assured the commissioners that this designation would not add any restrictions on any of
the businesses, that the idea is to create synergy thereby creating jobs and more commerce around
the arts and cultural businesses. This is a strictly honorary designation.
Motion by Knight to approve the letter to the Texas Arts and Culture Association. Second by
Mee. Approved 7 – 0.
3.Preservation Brief – Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner
Synatschk presented “Making Sense of Historic Designations”. He explained the different types of
designations: National Register of Historic Places, State Historic Designations, and Local Landmark
Designations.
State Archeological Landmarks are properties that must be listed on the National Register and all
interior and exterior alterations require a permit from THC. This includes the Williamson County
Courthouse, which was so designated in 1986.
Recorded Texas Historic Landmarks are the highest level of state designation and sites are protected
from unapproved alterations and are eligible for financial and technical assistance. There are 33
individually designated structures in Georgetown.
Subject Markers are educational plaques intended to tell a significant story and no restrictions are
placed upon property or site. There are 82 subject markers in Georgetown. Georgetown currently
has two overlay districts: The Downtown Historic Overlay, which includes the Town Square Historic
District, established in 1975 and expanded in 2000 to include the Downtown Area 2, made up primarily
of commercial and government properties. The Old Town Historic Overlay was established in 2000
and consists primarily of residential properties.
4.Discussion and possible action to support Olive Street National Register District Nomination – Matt
Synatschk, Historic Planner
Synatschk segued into this next item. He presented and read the letter to the commission that he
would like to submit on their behalf.
Motion by Paul to support the nomination and send the letter of recommendation. Second by
Mee.
Winder had comments. She questioned the styles of some of the buildings that were being submitted.
She also discussed that some of the listings were made after the period of significance. She was
asked to forward specific suggestions to Synatschk.
Eby called for the vote. Motion of support passed, 7 – 0.
5.Discussion and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for exterior alterations
at City of Georgetown, Block 38, Lot 5 (N/PT), .0689 acres, located at 602 S. Main St.
(CDC-2013-010) Item presented at March 28, 2013 HARC meeting, at which time it was tabled until
April 25, 2013 meeting .
Synatschk explained that this item was posted incorrectly, that the item that was listed as tabled was
actually taken off this agenda, 101 E. University, and would return with full notification at another
meeting. The application for 602 S. Main was to be discussed in full at this meeting.
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks CDC approval from HARC to make
exterior changes to a low priority historic structure located in Area 1 of the Downtown Overlay. The
following changes are proposed to the exterior of the building: exterior paint, repair to the existing
transom windows, and removal of wood cladding along top of façade and replacement with
appropriate metal panels. Synatschk explained the wood was being taken off the front of the building
and replaced with metal panels that would match the rest of the building, and improve the integrity of
the structure. Staff recommends approval of all items.
The applicant, Shirley Barber, was present for questions. Urban stated he appreciated the work the
applicant was doing and that it was a definite improvement.
Eby opened the Public Hearing at 6:35 p.m. and with no one coming forth, closed it.
Motion by Urban to approve the application as stated. Second by Knight. Approved 7 – 0.
6.Public Hearing and possible action on an amended Certificate of Design Compliance request for an
addition to a residential structure at Hughes Addition, Block 9 (w/pt.), located at 1503 Ash Street.
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks to amend an existing Certificate of Design
Compliance (CDC-2012-051) approval from HARC to alter the approved design with the addition of a
dormer on the 15th St façade. The dormer will be incorporated into the planned addition, avoiding any
impact on the original historic structure. Staff recommends approval of the addition.
Commissioners did not have any questions.
Eby opened the Public Hearing at 6:37 p.m. and with no one coming forth, closed it.
Knight and Paul commented that the additional dormer actually improved the look of the addition.
Motion by Mee to approve the application as submitted. Second by Urban . Approved 7 – 0.
7.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for exterior
alterations at Glasscock Addition, Block 26, Lot 2 (S/PT), .1928 acres, located at 1006 Ash St.
(CDC-2013-011)
Synatschk presented the staff report. He explained that this case came from Code Enforcement who
responded to a report that a porch was torn down and rebuilt without a permit or HARC authorization.
The applicant now seeks CDC approval to demolish the porch on the street facing façade due to
deterioration. The applicant has replaced the porch with a new porch, built to similar design and size.
The applicant also seeks approval to remove the concrete porch floor and has already replaced it with
a wooden porch floor. Additionally, applicant wishes to replace the wooden skirting with a cast
concrete veneer, designed to mimic rock construction. Synatschk explained the UDC requirements
that state if work is done prior to approval or permit, there is a punitive wait period of 365 days before
approval or permits can be granted. The applicant was given a stop work order and was told the
procedures that must be taken. Synatschk recommended a delay, not necessarily the 365 days,
which HARC can determine and proposed allowing them to do minimal work to protect the wood and
work that has already been done, including the skirting, caulking, priming and painting of the porch,
trim and steps to protect the raw wood.
The applicant, Luanne Dickerson was present for questions and stated that she was surprised to learn
that she was in the overlay and apologized for not coming forth, stating her builder told her he had the
necessary permits. IT was reported that no permits had been issued.
Commissioners asked if there were any structural issues or undue hardships as a result of the stop
work order and the response was that there were some interior permits, electrical, plumbing, etc. that
needed to be pulled but those would have to wait now. Nothing structural was needed with the
exception of those items mentioned to protect the existing new structure.
Eby opened the Public Hearing at 6:58 and with no one coming forth, closed it.
Commissioners deliberated further upon the undue hardships, and reason for the punitive nature of
the code. There was discussion of the timeline it would take to submit a full proposal and what would
be required. Some did not want the applicant to go to the expense of protecting the new porch if the
new porch would ultimately not be approved.
Paul suggested a 90 day waiting period before an application could be submitted. Knight thought that
might be too long. Synatschk suggested allowing the applicant to meet with city staff to determine
whether the porch, built without permits, would meet the codes, before submitting applications for
permits for it.
Motion by Mee to reduce the penalty for applying for the HARC CDC to 60 days, using criteria
3.13.010.D.4: the 365 day delay places an undue hardship on the owner, only a portion of the
structure was demolished, the porch that was demolished was not historic, the remaining
portions of the structure need to be secured or strengthened to protect if from further
deterioration, and some construction work is required to make the structure safe and
habitable. Second by Knight. Approved 6 – 1 (Paul opposed.)
Motion by Knight to allow the property owner to work with staff to determine which work
needs to be done to prevent any hazardous conditions and to complete such work as needed,
allowing building permits as needed based on the limited impact on the remaining historic
significance of the property, the reduced delay is appropriate based on health, safety and
welfare, and that the delay would put an undue hardship on the property owner. Second by
Mee. Approved 7 – 0.
8.Questions and comments from HARC Commissioners in Training. Wahrenbrock expressed
appreciation for the Presentation on Historic Structures by Synatschk. Rousseau did not have any
questions or comments.
9.Updates from staff and reminder about the May 13, 2013 Sign Subcommittee and the May 26, 2013
HARC meetings at Council Chambers.
Synatschk reiterated that the case for 101 E. University would hopefully be coming back to the May 26
meeting, and that there would be new signage posted on the property to notify the public.
Urban asked that the next Training Moment topic be a broad training and discussion of the
appropriate alterations allowed for historic sites that have lost their historic significance. Synatschk
also explained the fact that the Downtown Master Plan is the vision of the areas, but that the Design
Guidelines and the Unified Development Code are the regulatory plans that the commission must use
to make their decisions.
Synatschk mentioned that City Hall windows were to be redone in the near future, a historic building
with historic windows, and that part of the contract with the contractor was to provide on-site training
workshop for commissioners and interested parties. The date is to be determined but commissioners
will be notified.
10.Adjournment. Motion by Knight to adjourn the meeting. Second by Urban. The meeting was
adjourned at 7:22 p.m.
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, March 28, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission will meet on Thursday, March 28, 2013 at 06:00 PM in
the Council Chambers, located at 101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Members:
Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown; Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; David Paul; Tim Urban; and Mary Jo
Winder.
Commissioners in Training: Trenton Jacobs, Martine Rousseau, and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 06:00 PM
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.
Regular Agenda:
1.Review and possible approval of the minutes from the February 28, 2013 Regular HARC meeting.
2.Citizen comments and presentation of An Evening with Noré Winter video disk to commissioners by
Ross Hunter.
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for signage at
1008 S. Main Street, to be known as KPA Engineers.
4.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for signage at 122
E. 8th St, to be known as Artisans Connect.
5.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance for minor project at 605 E. 3
rd Street, to be known as the Hoppe Residence.
6.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance of minor project at 101 W.
University, to be known as Little Caesar’s.
7.Review and discussion of the Advisory Board By-Laws – Staff Liaison
8.Review and discussion of the City Council Attendance Policy for Board Members -- Staff Liaison
(See attached for the most current Ordinance regarding Board attendance Sec. 2.36.010 D)
·75% minimum attendance
·excused absences for sick leave and military leave
·warning letter (2 absences)
·removal letter (3 absences )
9.Consideration and possible action to set date & time for 2013 HARC meetings and 2013 HARC Sign
Subcommittee Meetings – Staff Liaison
10.Consideration and possible action to elect the Vice-Chair of the HARC – Staff Liaison
11.Consideration and possible action to elect the Secretary of the HARC – Staff Liaison
12.Consideration and possible action to approve volunteers for HARC Sign Subcommittee – Staff Liaison
13.Review and Discussion of recommended meeting procedures – Staff Liaison
14.Reminder about April 2nd Public Meeting for Olive Street NR District – Matt Synatschk
15.Updates from staff and reminder about the April 25, 2013 HARC meeting at Council Chambers,
selecting vice-chair, secretary, volunteers and a date for Sign Subcommittee meetings.
16.Adjournment
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Minutes of the Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, March 28, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met on Thursday ,
March 28, 2013.
Members Present:
Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown; Nancy Knight; Richard Mee; David Paul; and Tim Urban.
Commissioners in Training:, Martine Rousseau, and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Members Absent:
Commissioners Absent: Mary Jo Winder and Trenton Jacobs
Members Present but not participating:
Staff Present:
Matt Synatschk, Historic District Planner; Jackson Daly, Executive Assistant; Valerie Kreger, Principal
Planner; Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager; and Karen Frost, Recording Secretary
Minutes
Regular Meeting
Chair Eby opened the meeting at 6:11 p.m.
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.
Regular Agenda:
1.Review and possible approval of the minutes from the February 28, 2013 Regular HARC meeting.
Motion by Paul, second by Urban to approve the minutes as written. Approved 6 – 0.
2.Citizen comments and presentation of An Evening with Noré Winter video disk to commissioners by
Ross Hunter.
Mr. Hunter introduced himself as the Chair of the new citizen action group called the Downtown
Resource Council. He stated the mission of the organization is to support the Downtown Master Plan
by working with the Historic and Architectural Review Commission. He then gave each commissioner
a CD of the taped presentation regarding the Downtown Master Plan.
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for signage at
1008 S. Main Street, to be known as KPA Engineers.
M. Synatschk explained the application process to the commissioners, outlining the review process
that is used and explaining the information the commissioners receive. Then he presented the staff
report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance approval from HARC for installation of
a new monument sign in front of their property. The applicant was present but did not make any
comments. Commissioners did not have any questions.
Eby opened the Public Hearing at 6:19 p.m. and with no one coming forth, closed it.
Commissioners deliberated, Knight commented that the sign had an excellent design.
Motion by Knight to approve the signage for CDC-2013-007 as presented. Second by Mee.
Approved 6 – 0.
4.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance Request for signage at 122
E. 8th St, to be known as Artisans Connect.
M. Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance
approval from HARC for installation of new signage for the property at 122 E. 8th Street. The request
includes: exterior primary signage for façade, door and window signage, canopy edge signage, and
portable sidewalk signage (A-frame).
The applicant, Diane Guame, was available for questions. Urban asked if the building was currently
painted and if the signage would be painted directly on the existing painted façade. Yes. Guame also
explained the window signage would be made of vinyl cling material so it could be changed out to
represent the artist being spotlighted. Knight expressed concern about the sandwich board sign
materials. Synatschk explained it meets the Guidelines and although it is not to be anchored to the
sidewalk, it will be weighted to not blow over.
Eby opened the Public Hearing at 6:27 p.m. and with no one coming forth, closed it.
Motion by Paul to approve CDC-2013-008 as presented. Second by Urban. Approved 6 – 0.
5.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance for a minor project at 605 E.
3rd Street, to be known as the Hoppe Residence.
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance (CDC)
approval from HARC to remove an existing porch on the 3rd Street façade due to unsafe conditions.
The property owner received multiple notices from City of Georgetown Code Compliance regarding
the condition of the porch. Once removed, the applicant will expand the existing foyer, bringing it in
line with the front of the house. In addition, applicant requests approval to construct a porch across
the front façade, approximately 8 feet deep by 66 feet wide. In addition to the construction, applicant
proposes to expose the historic wood siding and paint the house and new garage.
The applicant also wishes to demolish a non-historic carport, built in 1977, and construct a new
garage. The existing carport and new garage construction face Walnut Street. The applicant received
administrative approval to demolish a non-historic, accessory structure and requires HARC approval
to extend the foyer and construct the new garage.
The applicant, Patrick Hoppe, was available for questions. Commissioners asked questions regarding
the type of siding that was proposed to be added and the type of installation. After further discussion,
Mr. Hoppe explained he would be replacing all the siding with “hardi-planker”, making the entire
structure look uniform. There was concern about the second level of historic siding that was
underneath the exterior level.
Eby opened the Public Hearing at 6:37 p.m. and with no one coming forth, closed it.
Motion by Knight to approve CDC-2013-007 as presented and discussed. Second by Mee.
Approved 6 – 0.
6.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance of minor project at 101 E.
University, to be known as Little Caesar’s.
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance approval
from HARC for exterior changes to the historic structure located at 101 E. University Ave. The current
convenience store will be renovated for use as a Little Caesar’s Pizza restaurant. The proposed
changes include repair of the existing canopy and brick, addition of a walk-in cooler on the rear of the
structure, and repair of the existing parking lot. The applicant previously requested to paint the
masonry exterior but withdrew the request after consultation with staff. The existing brick façade will
be repaired and cleaned. In addition, applicant is seeking approval for window and canopy signage.
The applicant, Allen Sandor, a contractor from Salado, Texas was available for questions. There
were none at that time.
Eby opened the Public Hearing at 6:43 p.m. and two speakers came forth.
Susan Firth, of 1403 Olive Street and using Scott Firth’s 3 minute allotment too, spoke against the
proposed design of the structure. She stated concern about this corner, citing this structure does not
represent the downtown corridor well. She explained that the commission had a unique opportunity
for improving the building and landscape that is a gateway to the downtown area. She asked for the
item to be tabled until a better solution ccould be found for this corner.
Clare Easley, of 912 Forest, spoke against the current application for this building. As a previous
HARC Commissioner, she asked for a proper design of the project that would fit in with the historic
area and serve better as a gateway.
With no other speakers coming forth, Eby closed the Public Hearing at 6:54 p.m.
The applicant, Allen Sandor, asked to comment. He explained that he agreed with the comments,
and that he wanted to improve the condition of the building and the city has helped him with the
design. He explained that he was unable to paint the brick because he could not prove it was not
historic. He felt he was doing all he was allowed to do to improve the building. He is also hindered by
the large tree in the back of the building. And he needs additional space and plans to add a cooler
onto the back of the building, painting it to closely match the rest of the building.
Knight discussed the project with the applicant and expressed concern that he was only going to paint
over existing bad siding. She felt it could be improved upon. Paul also stated he felt the painted
cooler was inappropriate for this area. Knight cited Guideline 9.1 which is “Consider the building front
as part of an overall sign program”. Since the signs were not complete, she felt the overall building
front would be incomplete. Matt explained the applicant was limited on signage by the corporate logo
and franchise signage. Mee suggested the possibility of a 1960’s style signage on this age and style
of building.
Sandor explained that he would be replacing the siding but that he had asked to redesign the exterior
of the building but staff had explained the Design Guidelines restrict him to replacing the building with
the existing style, not something redesigned. There was further debate amongst commissioners
regarding a course to take. And further discussion regarding the lack of documentation dating this
building.
Motion by Knight to table any action on this item until the next regular meeting of HARC, April
25, with direction to the applicant and staff to re-address the physical features of the building,
signage and lighting specifications, and possible screening of the cooler. Second by Mee.
Approved 6 – 0.
7.Review and discussion of the Advisory Board By-Laws – Staff Liaison
Frost presented the Bylaws, highlighting the purpose of the commission and the commissioners’ roles
on the commission.
8.Review and discussion of the City Council Attendance Policy for Board Members -- Staff Liaison
(See attached for the most current Ordinance regarding Board attendance Sec. 2.36.010 D)
·75% minimum attendance
·excused absences for sick leave and military leave
·warning letter (2 absences)
·removal letter (3 absences )
Frost reviewed the attendance policy with the commissioners explaining that excused absences must
be reported to her for the attendance records, and then reviewed the consequences of too many
absences.
9.Consideration and possible action to set date & time for 2013 HARC meetings and 2013 HARC Sign
Subcommittee Meetings – Staff Liaison
Motion by Paul to keep the 4th Thursday of the month as the meeting date for regular HARC
meetings. Second by Knight. Approved 6 – 0.
10.Consideration and possible action to elect the Vice-Chair of the HARC – Staff Liaison
Nomination by Paul of Nancy Knight for Vice Chair. Second by Urban. No other nominations.
Approved 6 -0.
11.Consideration and possible action to elect the Secretary of the HARC – Staff Liaison
Nomination by Paul to elect Richard Mee as Secretary. Second by Urban. No other
nominations. Approved 6 – 0.
12.Consideration and possible action to approve volunteers for HARC Sign Subcommittee – Staff Liaison
Volunteers for the Sign Subcommittee: Tim Urban, Nancy Knight and Richard Mee.
13.Review and Discussion of recommended meeting procedures – Staff Liaison
Frost reviewed the meeting procedures, posted at the beginning of every agenda. She reminded
them to speak into the microphones for recording purposes and to be clear with any motions. A total
count should be said at the end of every vote for the audio record.
14.Reminder about April 2nd Public Meeting for Olive Street NR District – Matt Synatschk
15.Updates from staff and reminder about the April 25, 2013 HARC meeting in Council Chambers. The
next regular meeting will be held at 6:00 p.m., immediately following the Sign Subcommittee meeting
at 5:30 p.m.
16.Adjournment. Motion by Knight to adjourn at 8:20 p.m. Meeting was adjourned.
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, February 28, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission will meet on Thursday, February 28, 2013 at 05:00
PM in the Georgetown Municipal Complex, located at 300 Industrial Blvd, Georgetown, Texas.
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Members:
Dee Rapp, Chair; Sarah Blankenship; Jennifer Brown; Anna Eby; David Paul; Tim Urban; and Raymond
Wahrenbrock.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 05:00 PM
Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 5:00 p.m.
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.
Regular Agenda:
1.Review and possible approval of the minutes from the January 24, 2013 Regular HARC meeting.
2.Discussion and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for minor exterior
changes at City of Georgetown, Block 52, Lot 3, to be known as Southern Hippie, located at 809
South Main Street. (CDC-2013-003)
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance for signage at City of
Georgetown, Block 38, Lot 4, for business to be known as Grape Creek Winery, located at 1112 S.
Rock Street (CDC-2013-004)
4.Updates from staff and reminder about the March 28, 2013 HARC meeting at Council Chambers,
selecting vice-chair, secretary and volunteers for Sign Subcommittee.
5.Adjournment
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Minutes of the Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, February 28, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met on Thursday ,
February 28, 2013.
Members Present:
Dee Rapp, Chair; Sarah Blankenship;; Anna Eby; David Paul; Tim Urban and Raymond Wahrenbrock
Members Absent:
Jennifer Brown
Members Present but not participating:
Staff Present:
Matt Synatschk, Historic District Planner; and Karen Frost, Recording Secretary
Minutes
Regular Meeting
Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 5:00 p.m.
Chair Rapp called the meeting to order at 5:03 p.m. The order of the agenda was changed to
accommodate those members had to leave early. The items were discussed in order of 3,2,1,4 then 5.
(The minutes will reflect the original order, not the order in which they were discussed.)
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.
Regular Agenda:
1.Review and possible approval of the minutes from the January 24, 2013 Regular HARC meeting.
Wahrenbrock asked that the minutes be changed to reflect different language for item #2. Since that
language was not actually on the tape, the minutes will remain as they were written.
Motion by Paul to approve the minutes as they may be amended. Second by Eby. Approved 6
– 0.
2.Discussion and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance request for minor exterior
changes at City of Georgetown, Block 52, Lot 3, to be known as Southern Hippie, located at 809
South Main Street. (CDC-2013-003)
Synatschk presented a brief staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance
approval for exterior signage on the 7th Street façade. The request includes one sign mounted on the
tie rod canopy, one blade sign hanging over the door underneath the tie rod canopy and one sidewalk
sign for display during business hours. Staff recommends approval.
Ray Shawley, of Affordable Signs, explained that the applicant would prefer the tan background sign
over the white background sign. No other changes were requested.
Rapp opened the public hearing at 5:05 and closed it immediately with no speakers coming forth.
Motion by Paul to approve the CDC Application as presented with the tan background.
Second by Wahrenbrock. Approved 5 – 1 (Blankenship opposed.)
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance for signage at City of
Georgetown, Block 38, Lot 4, for business to be known as Grape Creek Winery, located at 1112 S.
Rock Street (CDC-2013-004)
Blankenship recused herself from this item stating conflict of interest because she helped with the
design. Synatschk presented a brief staff report. H also passed around the material that was to be
used on the planter boxes and the wall sign. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance
(CDC) approval from HARC to make exterior changes and add signage to a high priority historic
structure located in Area 1 of the Downtown Overlay. Both the 1984 and 2007 Historic Resources
Surveys list the property as high priority. In addition, the property is located within the Williamson
County Courthouse National Register Historic District.
The following changes are proposed to the exterior of the building:
1. The existing vinyl awning mounted above the primary entry will be removed.
2. All signage related to the previous tenant will be removed.
3. A new tie rod canopy will be installed.
4. Signage for the new tenant will be installed above the tie rod canopy.
5. Existing painted surfaces will be repainted.
6. Installation of planter boxes on each side of main entry
The applicant may seek approval for window signage and hanging signage at a future date. Staff
recommends approval of Items 1-5 on the Certificate of Design Compliance as proposed. Staff
recommends denial of Item 6 on the CDC, as it will obscure architecturally significant elements on the
structure, i.e. bulkheads.
The applicant, Elizabeth Lockhart, was present for comments.
Rapp opened the Public Hearing at 5:10 and closed it immediately with no speakers coming forth.
Commissioner Paul asked about the type of plants that would grow in the planter boxes, stating only
succulents could survive the summer sun. Lockhart explained that there is a water spigot close to the
boxes that would supply enough water to keep them alive.
Rapp questioned the mounting of the wall sign. Mr. Lockhart, Elizabeth’s father, explained that the
individual letters would be mounted to the mortar and they were trying to keep the anchors into the
mortar as few as possible. He also stated he would not be using any adhesive on the brick. Ms.
Lockhart stated she would do whatever the commission asked her to do, explaining the mortar had
already been damaged.
The commission discussed the canopy and questioned the lack of lighting. Ms. Lockhart did not want
lighting under the canopy.
Rapp confirmed the color scheme, the front door would be teal and everything else would be cream
colored, including the metal canopies on the second floor. There was discussion of the door
immediately to the left of the store front. It was explained that the door did not belong to this business,
was another tenant’s but she would check with the owner and paint it teal if allowed.
Wahrenbrock questioned the use of two fonts in the signage. Ms. Lockhart explained that was part of
her logo and it needs to stay that way. There was further discussion of the wall signage, location and
size of letters.
Motion by Rapp to approve the CDC with the condition that the applicant will work with staff
on the size and placement of the metal letters and the second door of the front façade, though
not part of the application, may be painted the same color teal as the front door. The 2nd floor
dormer window awnings will be painted cream, as well as the trim, and the front door is to be
painted teal. The letters of the wall sign are to be mounted into the mortar and are to be made
of ¼” sheet metal with a flash powdered finish, and a maximum height of 14 inches. Second
by Urban. Approved 5 – 0. (Blankenship recused.)
4.Updates from staff and reminder about the March 28, 2013 HARC meeting at Council Chambers,
selecting vice-chair, secretary and volunteers for Sign Subcommittee.
5.Adjournment. Rapp adjourned the meeting at 5:42 p.m.
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee
City of Georgetown, Texas
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee will meet on Wednesday,
February 13, 2013 at 04:00 PM in the Georgetown Municipal Complex, located at 300 Industrial Blvd,
Georgetown, Texas.
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee Members:
Sarah Blankenship; Tim Urban; and Ray Wahrenbrock
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 04:00 PM
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 action on the minutes from the December 13, 2012 Sign Subcommittee
meeting
2.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance for signage at Lost
Addition, Block 66 (s/pt), for law offices located at 1112 S. Rock Street (CDC-2013-001)
3.Adjournment
The Subcommittee may forward these items to the next meeting of the Historic and Architectural Review
Commission for its consideration. That meeting is scheduled for February 28, 2012.
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Minutes of the Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee
City of Georgetown, Texas
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee of the City of Georgetown, Texas,
met on Wednesday , February 13, 2013.
Members Present:
Sarah Blankenship, Chair and Ray Wahrenbrock
Members Absent:
Tim Urban
Members Present but not participating:
Staff Present:
Matt Synatsch, Historic District Planner; Valerie Kreger, Principal Planner; and Karen Frost, Recording
Secretary
Minutes
Regular Meeting
Call to order by Blankenship at 4:05 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 action on the minutes from the December 13, 2012 Sign Subcommittee
meeting
Motion by Wahrenbrock to approve the minutes as written. Second by Blankenship.
Approved 2 – 0.
2.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance for signage at Lost
Addition, Block 66 (s/pt), for law offices located at 1112 S. Rock Street (CDC-2013-001)
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance
approval from HARC for replacing an existing sign to reflect the current tenants. The existing sign
was installed by the previous tenant. The new sign will utilize the existing sign posts, trim and
color palette. The sign consists of ½” MDO and meas ures 4’ by 8’. Synatsch explained that the
application had one too many colors but since the white and cream were similar, he
recommended approval of the application.
Ray Shawley, of Affordable Signs, the applicant’s agent, pointed out that there was a mistake in
the application and that only cream would be used as the background for the signage, not white
so it meets the Guidelines.
Wahrenbrock asked if the sign could be lowered. Shawley explained that the sign was already
lowered 6” on the previous application and that lowering it anymore would make it difficult to read
because of the white picket fence in front of it.
Blankenship opened the Public Hearing at 4:08 and with no speakers coming forth closed it.
Blankenship began the commenting. She stated the sign was “busy” and quoted Design
Guideline 9.15: A simple, easy-to-read sign design is preferred. She suggested putting just the
service instead of all the names, logo and phone numbers. Shawley explained that the owners
had reduced the amount of lettering as much as they were willing to do, the tenants expected their
names on the sign, and that the red lettering at the bottom of the sign was required by law.
Wahrenbrock asked for the size of the lettering. He explained that he had a chart for measuring
the distance that a sign could be read while driving by at a certain speed. Shawley stated the
applicant was placing the sign so that it could be read by people on Rock Street, realizing that
traffic on University would be going too fast to read all the wording.
Blankenship asked if the red on the sign would be the same as that on the window trim. Shawley
stated it could be.
Motion by Blankenship to approve the application as submitted with the lighting of this
sign to be brought to staff for administrative approval. Second by Wahrenbrock.
Approved 2 – 0.
3.Adjournment. Blankenship adjourned the meeting at 4:20 p.m.
The Subcommittee may forward these items to the next meeting of the Historic and Architectural Review
Commission for its consideration. That meeting is scheduled for February 28, 2012.
Notice of Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, January 24, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission will meet on Thursday, January 24, 2013 at 06:00 PM
in the Council Chambers, located at 101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas
If you need accommodations for a disability, please notify the city in advance.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Members:
Dee Rapp, Chair; Sarah Blankenship; David Paul; Raymond Wehrenbrock; Tim Urban; Jennifer Brown;
and Anna Eby
Historic and Architectural Review Commission meets every fourth Thursday of the month at 6:00 p.m.
unless otherwise specified.
Call to Order at 06:00 PM
Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 6:00 p.m.
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.
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.
1.Review and possible approval of the minutes from the December 13, 2012, regular HARC meeting.
Regular Agenda:
2.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance for façade changes on a
commercial building at Lost Addition, Block 67 (pt), located at 401 W. University Avenue.
(CDC-2012-050)
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance for an addition to a
residential structure in Old Town at Hughes Addition, Block 9 (w/pt), located at 1503 Ash Street.
(CDC-2012-051)
4.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance for building façade changes
and signage at City of Georgetown, Block 51, Lot 2 (e/pt), to be known as Renew Med Spa, located at
114 W. 8th Street. (CDC-2012-052) Application
withdrawn at the request of the applicant.
5.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance for an addition to a
residential structure in Old Town at University Park, Block 6, Lots 30-33 (n/pt), located at 1402 E. 15th
Street. (CDC-2012-053)
6.Updates from staff and reminder about a possible February 13, 2013, HARC Sign Subcommittee
meeting at the Georgetown Municipal Complex and the February 28, 2013, HARC/HARC Sign
Subcommittee meetings at City Council Chambers.
7.Adjournment
Certificate of Posting
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all
times, on the _____ day of _________________, 2013, at __________, and remained so posted for at
least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Minutes of the Meeting of the
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
City of Georgetown, Texas
Thursday, January 24, 2013
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met on Thursday ,
January 24, 2013.
Members Present:
Dee Rapp, Chair; Sarah Blankenship; Jennifer Brown; Anna Eby; David Paul; Tim Urban and
Raymond Wahrenbrock
Members Absent:
none
Members Present but not participating:
Staff Present:
Valerie Kreger, Principal Planner; Matt Synatschk, Historic District Planner; and Karen Frost, Recording
Secretary.
Minutes
Regular Meeting
Chair Rapp called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
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.
Consent Agenda:
1.Review and possible approval of the minutes from the December 13, 2012, regular HARC meeting.
Rapp asked the commissioners if anyone had comments. No one spoke but Rapp had comments.
On page 2 of 7, item 6, she asked to add the comment, that the applicant agreed to move the parallel
parking if the garage doors were used that were adjacent to the parking lot. The tape was reviewed
and this was not included in the applicant’s comments so cannot be added to the minutes.
Commissioners included a required fire safety review in the motion that will force the applicant to
move the parking spaces if they are a fire hazard to the building.
Motion by Paul to approve the minutes with the possible amendment. Second by
Wahrenbrock. Approved 6 – 0 – 1 (Blankenship abstained because she was not present at that
meeting.)
Rapp made the statements that she felt the applications and reports for this meeting did not have
enough detail for the commissioners to make decisions and to take action. She asked that the rest of
the agenda be tabled until further information was provided. Blankenship respectfully disagreed
stating that she felt the commission had been requesting too much detail from the applicants and that
the purpose of the commission was to preserve the historic structures in the overlay districts, the
exact details were not needed to do that. The other Commissioners stated agreement with
Blankenship.
Regular Agenda:
2.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance for façade changes on a
commercial building at Lost Addition, Block 67 (pt), located at 401 W. University Avenue.
(CDC-2012-050)
Kreger presented the staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance (CDC)
approval from HARC to make exterior changes to an existing commercial building. The building is not
listed as a priority structure in the historic resource survey. While the building is older, it appears to
have been modified over the years and may have lost any historic significance. The following
changes are proposed:
Repaint exterior colors: The applicant proposes to paint the siding to a dark brown, identified as
“Boulder Brown”, the trim would be “French Cream” and the doors, shudders, and accents “Black
Magic”. They indicate that the colors are identified as 1010-1930 color schemes in paint companies’
historic color charts.
Add exterior shudders: Custom made wooden shudders are proposed to be added on the front of the
building, similar to other houses of the same period.
Add architectural eave supports: Decorative soffit accent pieces will be added at various locations
under the eaves. These are planned to add another dimension to the house and are common on other
structures throughout Downtown and Old Town, per the applicant.
No other changes are proposed to the building at this time. Staff recommended approval of the
application.
Rapp opened the floor for discussion by the commissioners. She stated that she felt the decorative
elements should not be added according to Guideline 4.11 which clearly states decorative elements
should not be added to historic buildings. She stated only one building in this area has shutters and
one has eaves in this style. Kreger explained that since this was not an historic structure and that it
would not harm the structure to remove them in the future; staff supported the use of them.
Commissioners questioned the installation of shutters on the upper story window, stating it would be
difficult with the cut of the roof the way it is.
Lee McIntosh, owner/ applicant, gave a small history of the building. He said this was originally a post
WWII ranch style house, built from a Sears kit. The original renovation was to change the house from
ranch style to a turn-of-the-century structure. McIntosh is trying to continue that enhancement and is
trying to refinish the house correctly. He explained that more shutters were not seen in this area
because people have removed them.
Rapp opened the Public Hearing at 6:17 p.m. and as no speakers came forth closed the hearing.
Wahrenbrock asked how the shutters were to be mounted, decoratively on the outside of the
windows, or functionally on the inside trim. McIntosh stated he could do either one. Wahrenbrock
stated that he thought there was not enough room on the upper story window to install the shutters
any way except for decoratively. He also stated that there should not be any shutters on the bay
window. McIntosh agreed.
Rapp asked for the style of shutters, louvered or flat. McIntosh stated he was using two board
shutters with crosspieces, made of hardwood and 1” stock. He explained that historically the louvered
shutters were used more along the coast and not seen as much in this area. Rapp asked about
putting shutters on all the windows. McIntosh explained he would put shutters only on the windows
where they would fit.
Wahrenbrock explained that he did not like the eave style since this was not typical for an historical
ranch house. Blankenship explained that she was okay with the colors, and shutters and the
decorative features because it is not an historical ranch house, it has been modernized, so the eave
brackets are okay with her. She prefers that the shutters only be installed where they could be
considered functional. Other commissioners agreed with her on the placement of the shutters.
Motion by Blankenship to approve the CDC as presented with the condition that the shutters
only be applied to the windows where they could be considered functional, excluding the
shutters from the second story. All other items to be approved as presented. Second by
Urban. Approved 6 – 1. (Wahrenbrock opposed.)
3.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance for an addition to a
residential structure in Old Town at Hughes Addition, Block 9 (w/pt), located at 1503 Ash Street.
(CDC-2012-051)
Kreger presented the staff report. The applicant seeks approval to remodel the existing 2,560 square
foot home by constructing an addition to the rear and south side, consisting of 1,237 square feet of
living area, a porch, and a two car garage. The primary front façade facing Ash Street is not being
affected by the addition; however, there is a bump out about half-way down the south facing façade
that will be enlarged by the addition. As proposed, the 15th Street facing façade, which is a side of the
house, will be extended by the addition.
Per Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 4.09.030.B.1, additions shall not be made to the street
facing façade of an existing single-family residential structure within the Old Town Overlay District,
unless a CDC is approved by HARC in accordance with the adopted Design Guidelines. The house is
listed as a Low Priority Historic Structure in 1984 Historic Resources Survey and a Medium Priority in
the 2007 Survey, and the existing garage was identified as a Medium Priority in 2007.
As proposed, the addition will be attached to the rear of the house, once a deck is demolished and the
existing rear and side walls are opened. The addition would extend southward toward the 16th Street
Alley and wrap around the side of the house that faces the alley, keeping in alignment with the existing
15th Street façade and setting back approximately 45 feet from Ash Street. The existing detached
historic garage would remain in place. The applicant intends for the addition to “mimic” the existing
house. Building materials, roof design, window placement and style and chimney style are proposed
to be similar to the existing house, with the intention of reusing any windows that are removed during
the renovation if at all possible.
Bryant Boyd, Architect for the project was available for comments or questions. Rapp asked the width
of the original house and the addition. Boyd responded the original house is 37 feet wide and the
addition will be around 39’. He explained the garage addition will not be attached but will be a
separate structure. There was discussion of whether the driveway to the side would be wide enough
for them to turn into the garage. Commissioner Paul stated he saw workers turning in without a
problem. It was also stated that the original garage structure would remain on the property for now. If
they wish to tear it down, the applicant must return to HARC.
Wahrenbrock made comments about the roofline and offered suggestions of how to break up the
elevation. Boyd did not want to change the roofline.
Rapp opened the Public Hearing at 6:50 p.m.
Lee McIntosh, 1001 Church Street, recommended approval. He explained the commission approved
his application in 2009 for a very similar application for a house of the same age and same style and
this house is consistent with what has been done in the past. He also appreciated Mr. Boyd for being
a good architect for this type of historical structure in Georgetown.
Rapp closed the Public Hearing at 6:52 p.m. with no more speakers coming forth.
Paul made the first comment. He stated he had visited the house and appreciated the owners
salvaging the interior wooden wall slats. He also stated the lot was very large and could
accommodate the additional structures.
Blankenship stated she understood Rapp’s concern about the house looking more like a ranch style
house with the additional footage visible from the front. But because the different portions of the
structure will be visually broken by the change in roofline, she felt it was okay. She suggested painting
the new addition a slightly darker color to offset it even more.
Wahrenbrock agreed the house would appear very large across the front but felt like the large lot
could accommodate the size. He still would like to see the roofline on the addition to have “dog eared
corners” to match other sections of the roofline. Blankenship added, citing Design Guideline 7.5, that
because it was an addition, it was supposed to be slightly distinguishable from the original building
such that the character of the original can be interpreted.
Motion by Paul to approve the CDC as presented with the option for the new garage structure
to have its original roofline as designed or to incorporate the dog eared roofline as suggested.
Second by Eby. Approved 7 – 0.
4.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance for building façade changes
and signage at City of Georgetown, Block 51, Lot 2 (e/pt), to be known as Renew Med Spa, located at
114 W. 8th Street. (CDC-2012-052) Application withdrawn at the request of the applicant
5.Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificate of Design Compliance for an addition to a
residential structure in Old Town at University Park, Block 6, Lots 30-33 (n/pt), located at 1402 E. 15th
Street. (CDC-2012-053)
Kreger presented the staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Design Compliance (CDC)
approval from HARC to remodel the existing home by adding a 196 square foot mudroom and an
oversized two car garage including a storage area. As proposed, the mudroom addition would be an
extension of the house’s west wall that faces Vine Street, with the garage setback three feet from the
mudroom’s outside wall. The primary front façade facing 15th Street is not being affected by the
addition.
Per Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 4.09.030.B.1, additions shall not be made to the street
facing façade of an existing single-family residential structure within the Old Town Overlay District,
unless a CDC is approved by HARC in accordance with the adopted Design Guidelines. The ranch
style house is not listed in the 1984 Historic Resources Survey, but is identified as a Medium Priority in
the 2007 Survey.
The addition will have Hardie siding to match the existing exterior in style and color. In addition, the
new window and door trim will match the materials, style, and color of the existing. The addition will
utilize the same roof pitch as the existing structure, and both the house and addition will be roofed
using a 3-D Architectural composition shingle in a slate grey color. One new window will be added to
the existing west facing wall at the mudroom portion of the house.
The owner, Steven Hood, and Debbie Sparkman of Green Earth Builders were available for questions
or comments.
Rapp opened the Public Hearing at 7:05 and with no speakers closed it immediately.
Rapp began the questions, stating she did not feel there was enough information provided. She
questioned whether the garage door would have glass panels as indicated on one of the pictures.
The response was no, it would be an aluminum flat panel door. The next question was whether the
roof pitch changed. Ms. Sparkman explained that the garage would have a 4/12 pitch, and the
mudroom would be offset back three feet so the wall height could remain the same as the house. The
pitch looks different because of the different location of the walls.
Blankenship questioned the color of the roof. Ms. Sparkman explained that they would be keeping the
wooden door and there are brown tones throughout. The current roof is brown. The addition is shown
with a slate gray color but should be the same brown color.
Rapp asked how they planned to keep the balance and scale in the neighborhood with the new
addition. Mr. Hood explained that they would be leaving the fence along the back of the house so that
the neighbors would have the same view, and then they would be eliminating the fence and adding
landscaping along Vine Street. Wahrenbrock discussed further ways to make the distinction between
old and new and asked about moving the location of the mud room towards the back yard. Tom
Norrell, contractor, explained that by doing that, the roofline would need to change and that would be
cost prohibitive. He suggested he add a corner board at the break where the house and mud room
connect. This would cause a visual break in the board and batten siding. Blankenship suggested
making the new board and batten on the addition have slightly different spacing than the original.
Blankenship also stated that she likes the style of the house, the older than fifty year old house that
the commission will begin to see more of. She likes the landscaping and the look of the addition, and
likes the corner board with the board and batten spacing slightly different. She also wants to give the
applicant an option of garage door style.
Motion by Rapp to approve the CDC as presented with the following conditions: a corner
board will be added to the side to differentiate between the old and new, the applicant should
consider the spacing of the new board and batten and make it slightly larger or smaller to
differentiate between the old and new, the garage door should be simple in design, may have
glass panels along the top if so chosen, and should be painted the same color as the trim, and
the new roof materials should be consistent with the existing roof. Second by Urban.
Approved 7 – 0.
6.Updates from staff and reminder about a possible February 13, 2013, HARC Sign Subcommittee
meeting at the Georgetown Municipal Complex and the February 28, 2013, HARC/HARC Sign
Subcommittee meetings at City Council Chambers.
7.Adjournment. Rapp adjourned the meeting at 7:30 p.m.