HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_HARC_01.24.2013City of Georgetown, Texas
His[orie and Arcbitec[ural R¢v w Commission Me¢Hng
Minu[¢
Tk�ursday, January 24, 2013, at 6x00 p.m.
City Council and Municipal Court Building
10l F. 7�^ Street, Geor etown, 'I'X 98626
Members Present: Dee IZapp, Chair; Sarah Blankenship; 7ennifer Brown; Anna Eby; David
Paul; Tine Urban and Raymond Wahrenbroek
Commissioaer(al absent: none
Statf Pre nt Valerie Kreger,. Principal Planner; Matt Synatschk, Historic District Planner; and
Karen Frost, Recording Secretary.
R¢gular S¢saion - To begin no earli¢r than 6:00 p.m.
Chair Rapp called the meting to order at 6c00 p.m.
The Historic and Architectural Revie�.V' Commission, appointed by the Mayor and the City.
Council, esponsible for bearing and taking final action applications, by mg
Certificates of Desigtz Complianre based upon the City Council adopted Downtown Design
Gssidelines and Unified Development Code.
(Commission may, at any tim s the Regular Session To c an Executive Session at
the request of the Chair, a Commissioner, th¢ Director or legal c sel for any purpose
authorized by the QPe' Meetings Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 551_)
Welcom¢and Meetin Procedur¢a.
Staff Presentation
Applicant Presentation (limited to ten (10) m utas unless stated otherwise by the Commission)
Quesrions Erom Commission to Staff and Applicant
Comments from Citizens "
Applicant Response
Commission Deliberative Process
Commission Acri�,n
'- Those who speak must turn in a speaker Form, located at the back of the room, to the recording
retary before the item that they wish ro address begins. Each speaker will be permitted to
address the Commission one time only For a maximum of three (3) minutes.
Conant Agenda:
1. Review and possible approval of th¢ minut¢s from the December 13, 2012, regular HARC
meering.
Rapp asked the commissioners if anyone had comments. 1V d one. spoke but Rapp had
menxs. Oiz page 2 of 9, item 6, she asked to add the c ant, that the applicant agreed
to move the parallel parking if the garage doors were used that were adjacent to the parking
lot The taye teas r wed and this w net included in the applicrsnt's c mments so cannot be added
to the minutes. Commissioners inetuded a required fere safeEJ revtezo. to the motion that wsZZ force the
as .=.rd.: eeeea�a: rze.ne.., coa...aaamn x -age + �r s
ia..uar`y zs, mas
applicant to move the parking spaces if they are a j -ire haza>d to the buttd:ng
Mo4ion by Paul to approve the minutes with the possible amendment. Second by
Wahrenb::ock. Approved 6 — O — 1 (Blanlcensbip abstained because she was roti present at
that meeting.)
Rapp made the statements twat she felt the applications and reports For this meeting did not
have enough detail For the commissioners to make decisions and to tape action. She asked
that the rest of the agenda be tabled until further information was provided. Blankenship
espectfttlly disagreed staring that she Felt the commission had been requesting too much
detail Erom the applicants and that the purpose of rhe commission was to preserve the
historic structanres in the overlay districts, the exact details ware not needed to do that The
other Commissioners stated agreement with Blartkenship.
Regular Agenda -
2. Public Hearing and possible action o a Certificate. of Design Compliance for Facade changes
ial bullding at Lost Addition, Block 69 (pt), located at n03 W. University
Avenue. (CDC -2D12-050)
Kreger presented the staff report The applicant seeps Certificate of Design Compliance
(CDC) approval from HARC to make extesior changes to an fisting commercial building:
The building is not listed a a priority structure in the historic r vey. Wtile the
buildirxg is older, it appears to leave been modified o r the yearsoand may have lost any
historic significance. 'I1te following changes arc proposed.
Repaint exterior colors_ The applicant proposes to paint the siding to a darn brown,
identified a "Boulder Brown^: the trim ould be "French Crean^ and the doors, shudders,
and accents "Blade Magic". They indicate rhe[ 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 cave 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 strua-tures throughout Downtown and Old Town, per the applicant.
No other changes are proposed to the building at this rime. Staff recommended approval of
the application.
Rapp opened the floor for discussion by the commissioners. She stated that she Eelt the
decorative elements should not be added a ording Yo Guiiielin¢ 4.11 which clearly states
decorative dements should not be added to historic buildings. She stated only o e building
m this a a has shutters and o e has eaves in tFtis style_ Kreger explained chat sire ¢this was
ot. an historic structure and that it would not harm the structure to r e themcin the
future; staff supported the use of them. Commissioners questioned the mstallatfon of
shutters on the upper story wvndow, stating it would be difficult with the cut of the roof the
way it is.
Lee MCIntash, owner/ applicant, gave a mall history of the building. He said fkis was
originally a post WWII ranch style house, built from a Sears kit. The original renovation
la.,...�:y a zoa w
tec[u�al 2¢view Coin miastoi Bage 2of 6
s to change the boos¢ from ranch style to aturn-of-the-cenniry structure. Mch.tosh is
trying to cortin e that enhance.nent and is trying to refinish the house c ectly. He
explained that mor¢ shutters were not sec -n ss� this arca because people Y.ave removed them.
Rapp opened the Public Hearing at 6:19 p.m. and as no speakers came forth closed the
hearing.
Wahrenbrock asked how the shutters w e to be 'm anted, decoratively on the outside of
the w ndows, or functionally on the inside trim. McIntosh stated he c old do either one.
W ahrenbrock staged that he thought there wa of c ugh r � H � upper story w ndow
Tv install 2lze .shutters any way e cept for decorativ ely� I -le also stated that there should not
be any shutters on the bay window. Mcln cosh agreed.
Rapp asked for the style of shutters, louvered or flat. Mcln tosh stated he was using two
bo rd she tte with c spie ade of hardw od and 1" stook. H¢ xplaxncd that
hise�,ricauy tt,� lnn.,erea shutters w seam along rhe c est ane nit seen a nch hz
this area. Rapp asked about putting shutters o. rail the w ndows. Mchttosh explained he
would put shutters only on the windows when¢ they would Fit.
W ahr¢n Brock explained that h¢ did not like thea styles e this w oY typical for an
historical ranch house. Blankenship explav�ed that she w okay with the colors, and
slru He and the de ativu features be us it i of an histo cal r ch ho it has been
odernized, so the e e brackets a okay withsher. She prefers that the shutters only be
stalled whe ¢ they c old b¢ onsidarcd funcr:onal_ Ocher commasvoners agr ed with her
nn the placement of the shutters.
Motion by Blankenship to approve the CDC as presented with the c ndition that the
shsstters only b¢ applied to the windows where they c old be c sidered functional,
xclssding the shutters from the s nd story. All other items to be approved as
presented. Second by Urban- App oved 6 — 1. (Wahrenbrock opposed.)
3. I ublic Hearing and possible action o a Certificate of Design Coxrpliance for ar addition to
sidoxztial structure in Old Town at Hughes Addition, Block 9 (w/pt), located at 1503 Ash
Str¢¢t. (CDC -2012-051)
Kreger presented the staff report The applicant sucks approval to r odel the existing
2,560 square foot home by c nstructing an addition to the r ands uth side, c fisting of
1,239 squ e feat of living a apo ch, nd a two c r ga age rThe ps ry fr nt Iasade
facing AshrStreec is not being affected by tree addition; however, thurc 3 a bump out about
half -way down the s uth facing Eagade that will be enlarged by the addition. As proposed,
the 15th Street facing faEade, which is a side of the house, will be extended by the addition.
Per Unified Development Code (UDC) Suction 4.09.03QB.], ad diHons shall not be anade to
the streee facing fagade of ane fisting single-family r sidential structure within the Old
Town Overlay District, unless a CDC is approved by HARC in ord ance with the adopted
Design Guid elfin s. The house is listed a a Low Priority Historic Structure in 1954 Historic
Resources Survey and a Medium Priority in Hie 2007 Survey, and the existing garage was
identified as a Medium Priority hz 2009.
tc-ctum] rze�.aaw Commwa�on PaBc 3 0! s
Ianuv�cy 2a, 2013
As proposed, the addition will be attached to the rear of the house, o a deck is
demolished and the existirzg r and side walls are opened. The addition would extend
uth ward toward Ste 16th Street Alley and wrap a urtd the side of the house that faces the
alley, keeping in alignmen[ with the existing 15th Street fagade and setting back
approxtmately 45 feet from Ash Street The existing detached historic garage would r
n place. The applicant intends for the addition to " "the existing house. Buildiragam
materials, roof design, window placement and style and chimney style aze proposed to be
dmtilaz to the existing boos¢, with the intention of reusing any windows the[ are removed
uring [he renovation if at all possible.
Bryant Boyd, Architect fon the project was available for commentsor questions. Rapp asked
the width of the original house and the addition. Boyd responded the original hossse is 39
feet wide and the addition will be around 39'. He explained the garage addition will not be
attached but will be a separate structure. Ther¢ was discussion of whether the driveway to
the side would be wide eaough For them to tum into the garage. Commissioner Paul stated
he saw workers turning in without a problem. I[ was also stated that the original garage
structure w old remain on the property Eor now_ It 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 eleva[ion. Boyd did not want to change the rootlia-.e.
Rapp opened the Public Hearing at 6:50 p.m.
Le¢ Ni¢Intosh, 1001 Church Street r ndedapproval. He explained the c
approved his application in. 2009 for a very s miler application for a house of the serine age
nd s style and this house is consistent with what has been done 3h the past He also
apprec ated Mr. Boyd for being a good architect for tktis type of Mstorical structure in
Georgetown.
Rapp closed the Public Hearing at 6:52 p.m. with no more speakers comutg forth.
Paul made the Erst comment He seated he had visited the house and appreciated [he
salvaging the interior wooden wall slats. He also. stated the lot was very large and
couldnaccommodate the additional structures.
Blankenship stated she understood Rapp's concern about the house looking mor¢ like a
arch 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 rooflin she felt
it was okay. She suggested painting the new addition a slightly darker color to offset it even
Wahrenbrock agreed the }rouse would appear very large across the Front but felt like the
large lot could a moda[e the size. He still would like to see the roofline on the addition
to have "doge red ct " to match other sections of the r ofline. Blankenship added,
citing Design Guidel a 7.5, that because it was an addition o t was supposed to be slightly
distinguishable from the original building such that the character of the original eau be
mterpceted.
Motion by Paul to approve the CDC as presented with the option for the new gazage
structur¢ to hav¢ its original roofline as designed or to incorporate Hte dog eared roofline
d A�ch1[¢cmcal Revrew CommLvelbr Page 9 of 6
]anvary 24, 201@
as suggested. Second by Eby. Approved 7 — O.
4. Public Hearing and possible action o a Cerrificate of Design Compliance for building
fagade changes and signage at City of Georgetown, Block 51, Lot 2 Ce/pt), to be known a
Renew Med Spa, located at 114 W. 8th Street (CDC -20T 2-052) application withdrawn at
the request of the nppZicaxt
5. Public Hearing and possible action o a Certificake of Design Compliance for an addition to
sidentiat structure i � Old Town at University Park, Block 6, Lots 30-33 (n/pt), located at
1402 E.. 15th S[reet. (CDC -2012-053)
Kreger presented the staff report. The applicant seeks Certificate of Desig-n Compliauc�
(CDC) approval From HARC to remodel the c- fisting home by adding a 196 square Eoot
udroom and a zed two car garage including a storage a a. As proposed, the
udroom addition w uld be a xtension of the house est wall that Faces Viaze Street,
with the ga age -etback three f et from the udr utside wall. The pnm ry Eront
fapade facing 15th Street is not being affected by the addition.
Per Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 4.09.030.B.1, additions sh al] � of be made to
the street fa � ng fa4ade of a stings ngle-family r sidcv Hal structure within the Old
Town Overlay District, unless a CDC is approved by HARC in ordance with the adopted
Design Guid elfin s. The ranch style house i of listed in the ]984 Historic Resources Sv rvey,
but is idcntitied as a Medium Priority in the- 2009 Survey.
T'he addition will have Hardie siding to match the a tsting exterior in style and color. lri
addition, then endow and door trim will match the materials, style, and color of the
fisting. The addition will utilize the s ooF pitch as the c fisting structure, and both the
house and addition will be roofed u mg a 3-D Architectural c mposition shingle in � slate
grey color. One new window will be added ro the existing w st facing wall at the mudroom
portion of the house.
Theo r, Steven Hood, and Debbie Sparkman of Green Earth Builders were available For
questions or comments.
Rapp opened the- Public Hearing at 9:05 and with no speakers closed it immediate-ly.
Rapp began the questions, stating she did not feel there w ugh information provided.
She questioned whether the garage door w old have glass panels a indicated �, of the
pictures. 'The response was no, ie w old be an alumin m flat panel door. The next question
whether the roof pitch changed. Ms. Sparkman explained [hat the garage w uld have a
4/12 pitch, and the mudroom w old be offset back thine feet so the wall height could remain
the s e as the house. The pitch looks ditferont because of the different location of the
walls to
Blankenship questioned the color of the roof. [vis. Sparkman explained that they w old be
keeping the odea do nd the care br � to s thr ughout. The � nt r of 3s brown_
The addition is shown with a slate gray col r but should be the same brown color.
Rapp asked how they planned to keep the balance and scale in the neighborhood with the
additlon. Mr. Hood explained that they w old be leaving the fence along the bade of
the house so that the neighbors would wave the same view, nd then they would be
la..�a. r za, zms
elimina tv�g the Fence and adding landscaping along Vine Street. Wahrenbrock discussed
further ways to mak¢ 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 r board at the break where the house and mud room ect. This
uld c ual break in the board and batten siding. BlaxakensMp suggested making
the new board and bat[en on the addition have sligl-qtly different spacing than the original.
Blankenship also skated that she Likes the style bF the house.,. the older than Hfty yeaz old
house that the c . will begin [o see more oE. She likes the landscaping and the look
of the addie9on, and likes the corner board with the board and batten spacing slightly
difFeren t. Shc also wants to give the applicant an option of garage door style..
Motion by Rapp to approve the CDC as presented with the following c ndfHons:
r board will b¢ added to theside to. diFferenti ate between the old and new,. the
applicant should c aider the spacing of the new board and batten and make it alightly
lazger or smaller to differentiate between the old and new, the garage door should be
mple in design, may have glass panels along the top if ao chosen, and should b¢ painted
Bae same color as the trim, and [hen of materials should be consistent with the
existing roof. Second by Urban. Approved 7 — O_
6. Updates from staff and reminder abou t a possible February 13, 2013, HARC Sign
Subcommittee meeting at the Georgetown Mssnicipal Complex and flue February 28, 2013,
HARC/HARC Sign Subcommittee meetings at City Councll Chambers.
?: Adjournment Rapp adjourned the meetirag at '730 p.m.
. oo �_., ��/�
Ap roved, Dee pp, Chair
fl ��
Attes£ David Paul retary
Historic antl Ax64cc W vat R¢v+ew Cvrt�misaion Pag¢ 6 of 6
January zw 2013