Loading...
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