Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_HARC_01.23.2014City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural R¢vi.¢w Commission Meeting Minutes 'i'hursday, January 23, 20]4 at 6:00 p.m. Council sad Courts Building l OI E. 7m Street, Gcor crown, T'X 9fl626 Members n es nt Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown; Naucy KnighT; Tim Urban; and Mary Jo W rode Commissioners in Training present: Raymond Wahrenbrock Commissioners absent Richard Mee, David Paul and Martin¢ Rousseau due to ice storm S[a Ef present Matt Synatschk, Historic District Planner; Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager Andreina Davina, Project Coordinator; Jackson Daly, Executive Assistant, Shelley Hargrove, Main Street Manager; and Karen Prost, Recording Secretary Call to Order by Eby at b:00 p.m. with the reading of the meeting procedures. Welcome and M¢etin¢ Procedur¢s: Staff Presentation Applicane Presentation (lirraited to ten (10) manures unless stated atherwise by the Commission] Q.aesrions from Commission to Staff and ApplicaiY[ Comments from Citizens " Appltcant Response Commission Deliberative Process Commission Action Those who speak must tum in a speaker form, located at the back of the xoom, to the recording secretary before the item that they wish to address begins. Each speaker wffi be permitted to address the Commission one tim¢ oNy for a maximum of three (3) minutes. Lecialative A¢enda: 1. Review and possible approval of the minutes from the December 12�^ Regular HARC Meeting Corrections noted by Wind¢r: Item 4, change wording in motion from transom ro store Front windows; and, Item S, complete the action with list of volunte¢rs. and motion. So noted. Motion by Knfgbt to approve the minutes with the modifications. Second by Urban" Approved 4 — O. (Brown came in after the vote.) 2. Discussion and possible actton on Downtown Master Plan adoption recomm¢ndarion. Synatschk presented the draft. plan and explained that the document was to establish The of the downtown a nd it is not a regulating plan. He presented the timeline of public meetirvgs and propos d readings of the ordinance at the council meeting. Commissioners provided c.amments. Overall, they stated the elements w e good. Winder expressed concern that there was not enough emphasis. on historic preservation in the plan_ - tea) iie.,.e.-. commie raGc a o[ s anee� c-ala...,��r�zs�zots Synatschk stated commenks were still being accepted. Motion by Knight to authorize the Chair to sign a letter in support of the document. Second by Winder- Approved S — D. 3. Discussion and possible- sexton o a Certificate of Design Compliance request for infill nstruction at Glasscock Addition, Block 9, Lot 5, .165 acres, located at 20] East 9�^ Street (CDC -201 X049) Synatschk presented [he staff report_ 'The applicant seeks a CDC for Infill Construction on a nT parcel located within the Downtown Overlay. The proposed project includes a two story structure with a low stone wall adjacent to the street and parkia�g located at the r of the structure. The proposed two story strucrurc is to provide overnight lodging for guests. The structure will be clad in stone and stucco, with a standing s a notal roof. The n design is basad on pray lous HARC e nts and the architect used the historical Ow n I-Iouse a odel for the structures. The architect, Raul Saldivar, the ardzitect of tl-.is projecq designed Ylzrcnbuilding to merge architecturally with tlz� buildings of the area. Eby opened the Public Hearing at 6:34 p. m. Susan Firth, speaking For the Heritage Society, r nded the Commissioners to u e the GuidelinEs for guidance in sidering this project She asked that they c v cider the character of the building, the scab of the building and keep it with the dz<�acter of the neighborhood. Larry Olsen, of 300 E. 9�^ Street, stated he looks forward to having the IDn in the eighborhood. He asked thae the c s .z look at the buffer yards as described in the UDC, c cider placing stone on the back wall 'instead of the solid stucco material, and asked that a s r ng fence o shrubs be placed on the backside of the parking lot so that the car lights wciu ldan of shine auto the adja ent house. David Kellerman, of 912 Shirvt ock Hills Drive, representing the Main Street Advisory Board, expressed that the city nods this business downtown. lT is a beautiful buil3ing that will be a good transition from downtown into the residential neighborhood. He asked that the c a s cider the cost of �-u�y proposed changes For the developer and asked that there noc be any more delays on this project. Ross Hunter, of 908 S. Walnvi Street, stated he feels the c -should deny the CDC based on the design not meeting the guidelin s 13.10, ] 3.13113.16, 13.22, and 13.6. he does not believe the building Fits the character of the neighborhood. FIe agrees with the � rn about then ary setbacks and a -ages traditional elements be used. He encourages a design that will fit the neighborhood. Eby of osed the Public Hearing with no further speakers coming forth. The applicant, A.K. Makiya, spoke to the c nts. He agreed that it i mportanu [o ha v¢ a buffer with The neighboring house. He wants to harmonize with the style and character of the city, but to do run the business it is difficult to reduce the size of the building. He stated he was trying to work with everyone. Commissioners deliberated. They asked the applicant why be would not put this on two .�nu��rorai rs�.•,ew c�...m.-�=.nn rase z of s rvi¢ue ng-'Ja wary 2a. 201a lots sin a there is another lot betweeu his building and the restaurant on the north corner. He explained that he did not own that lot_ There was discussion of which plans w ost nt. Winder stated she c uld approve the plans conceptually, but not in detail¢rShe Felt the scale ands w appropriate but wants the look to. be more resfdeutial, using modulation and mora windows. Urban appreciated the new application, but felt the 3D drawings m -represented the 's and scale of the developm enc Brown liked the idea of using a n fence instead of arstone wall around the perimeter, to open ssp Hie Front faSade. Knight was asked to provide exact items thaf she felt were m mg from the applies Hon. Shc listed lighting, mechanicals, trash -screening, and c n about the ten foot buFFer. She appreciated the materials board, but felt there should have been color samples in the package. There was discussion a oug the commissioners regarding what was asked of the applicant and what was brought forward. They discussed the need for consistency of the applications. After much discussion, the followug motion was made - Motion. by Urban to approve the CDC for 201 E_ 9•^ Street with the following. amendments to the application: The approval included these conditions: Require more modulation on the side facing 9th street both aides of the building. Require more openings/windows on the aides Facing 9th street and on the back of the property, so that the building appears more residential in nature_ The front F¢hc¢ shall b¢ an open style, made of wrought iron_ The rear buffer should be reviewed toe sure compliance with iSDC buffer yards, considering it backs. up to reaidenHal pmperYy Th¢ rear fence shall be solid, so that no light from vehicles passes through to •mpact the residential property behind it_ Consider (nok required) a different, darker color palert¢ on the shuK¢ra and courtyard wall. Consider changing the rear facade From stucco to masortry_ Second by Winder. Approved 4 — 1. (IGxtight opposed.) 4. Public I-iearir�g and possible action o a Car Hficate of Desigx� Compliance request for exterior alters Hans and signage at Lost Addition, Block 64 (PT), .16 acres, located at 1004 and 1006 South Austin Ave. (CDC -2014-002) Synatschk presented the staFf report The applicant seeks CDC approval to alter a Medium Priority historic structure locaTed in the Area 2 of Tire Downtown Historic Overlay. The Applicant proposes to install new a mgs a s the length of the str.ncturc, with signage. included on thea rung_ Applican[ also proposes amulti-tenant sign to be mounted o isring poles in the parking lot_ The c nt poles a e 14 fee[ high, but will be rc-duced to 10 Feet in height to comply with Chapter lOrof the UniRed Development Code. Eby opened the Public Hearing and with no speakers coming forth, closed ie_ There was a question abou[ the location of the signage (lettering) on the awning_ It was ..a rm.ueaa=ai ae.,,e... co,n..ss.on rase 3 ae s Meet xag Hjsnuary 23. 2014 explained that the Relmagine portion of the sign would be centered between the two tenant spaces it occupies in the building. Motion by Knight to approve the CDC as presented. Second by Urban. Approved 5 — O. 5. Public Hearing and possible action on a Certificafe of Design Compliance request for exterior alterations and signage at City of G' orgctown> Block 52, Lot 1 (WC/P'T), .4434 acres. located at Y1B E 8•^ Sc (CDC -2014-003) Synatschk presented the staff report The applicant seeks CDC approval from HARC fox ing. signage. The current awnings wlll be replaced in kind with a change of name Eor the age t Commissioners did not have questions. Eby opened the Pvblic Hearing and with no speakers coming forth, close it. Motion by Knight to approve the CDC as requested provided the awnang is the same as the existing. Second by Urban. Approved 6 — O. 6. Pvblic Hearing and possible action o a Certificate of Design Compliance request For exterior alterations at Snyder Addition, Block 50(S/PT), .66 acres, located at 1604 Olive St. (CDC -2013-060) Synatschk presented the staff report The proposed project for the historic structure located at ]604 Olive Street is designed to rehabilitate the existing structure while in ing the sability and livability of the space. The 1955 structure was altered in the 19706•, which included enclosing the garage. The applicant proposes to demolish the section of the house that previously contained the garage; and add a 1,237 square Eoot addition. Dna to the setback From the street and the corner location, the property has limited options Eor expansion without severely impacting the primary structure. Winder commented that. since this is anon -contributing structure, she Feels is should be and ts. compatible with the neighborhood. Motion by Winder to approve the CDC as presented. Second by Knight. Approved 5 — O. Public Hearing. and possible action on a Cerb ficate of Design Compliance Request for exterior alterations at Hughes Addition, Block 7 (NE/PT), .33 acres, located at 1402 S. Ash St. (CDC -2013-061) Syiiatschk presented the staff report. The proposed projecx for the 1912 Mary De Bardeleben House, a High Priority Historic Structure, is designed to rehabilitate [lie a fisting structure wMle in ing the usability and livability of the space. The National register eligible historic structure iso - of many structures in the historic core c nstrvcted by the Belford Lumber Company. Due to the significant setback from the street,. the property has Bmited options for expansion without severely impacting. the primary structure. Bryant Boyd, the architect for tragi owner, was available for comments or gvesti.ons. .Eby opened the Public Hearing. Rosa Hunter; of 906 S. Walnut Streeq expressed concerns that the house will los¢ its historic value, style, look and character if this application is approved. 1-3e cited design guidelines 14.9, 14.12, and 14.15. ��d Architectural R¢va¢w Commsvov Page 4 0! 6 M�n..g �lanuerg J3. 2014 The Public Hearing was closed with no fur-th¢r speakers coming forth. Bryant Boyd provided additional 3D pictures. He explateed that he is 1-zclping this Family r.akc this house m e livable. He explained that the only part of the original sh-u c[ur¢ that was being touched/ removed w s the s n¢d porch. Any n w portions of the house uld be of diff¢r¢zit materials so as tocdisting uish the difference. T1wy will be using landscaping to diminish the long lines of the front of the house. Urban clu¢s(ioncd dzc work changing the historic prioriry status of the- house. Synatshek explained that the new portions of the house w uld be clearly different than the existing materials so it would mamtaie its high priority status. Knight expressed c � about the abry pt change of maeeri els from wood to stone and the whc=hrzing a of stone on the front wall. She suggested u reg the scone only for the skirting and column footings. Winder agreed that the stone overpowers the wood siding nd is boo promin¢n t. Joel Goode, the o r, discussed his options with the commissioners ed stax¢d ha would reduce the amount of stone if it meant he could geb approval for the CDC. Motion by Knight to approve the CDC provided du' sand stone w uld not be used on the fa4adc,. but only for the skirting and the columns. Motion die -d with no second. Wia�der moves to approve the CDC with ehe c edition that the stone is elim Hated aed either wood siding, clapboard or ood shir�glcs are used to differentiate the new porrion of the fapad¢. Motion died with no second. Motion by Winder to approve the CDC with the c nditioe that the stun¢ cladding be replaced wit!-. w od o od like aiding and approved for u c n the underpinning and columns. Second by Knight Motion failed, 2 — 3. (L -by, Brown and Urban opposed.) Motion by Urban to approve CDC -2013-061 as preaent¢d. Second by Brown. Failed 3 — 2. (W ceder and Knight opposed) ^Ayprovai is dented i ace zrdarzre wit)z 1lDC Section 3.!3.060 (D), wftich states a appFica Care before HARC rz ust he ayprover2 by a rrz jot-ity vole a%�a(I members of eh¢ Cornnz fission. ConsequeazHy it taXas f w' (4Jz �rnza Hue votes to approve a CDC_ 8. Discussion on proposed project at 902 Forest St. Bryant Boyd made a pres¢etation of a proposed change to a sid¢ntial structure that w built in 1 J25 and is medium priority listed stru c[u re. The applicant w nts to add on to the istitrg stnstu re and Boyd pr¢s¢aztcd proposals of how hew uld do this, asking the ssr n s to c ent. There was discussion of d:ffcr¢n Hatioe and how to define that. NOT everyone sees that the same way. "I'h¢rc w also discussion of coming to c us nn ¢xpectahoes of rhe c nrs - whole and�how the applicants should try to address those expectations. It w oted that there would be training for the commass.on one¢ the new members are added in March. 9. C2u estioes and comments from HARC Commissioners its Training. None at this time-. l0. Upd axes From staff and r order about the February 1.0, 20]4 Sign Subcommittee and the February 27, 2014 HARCcm¢etings. Synatschk stated that after the posting of this ageeda, it was determined that there would r� rat xz�...E... c�:»...r,.�.o.. .•.sem so. s +�"�. saJa ��=y 3, 20 is not be. a sig.. subcommittee meeting on February 10. ll. Adjouxzirr�erit. Eby adjourned the meeting at S:aS p.m. pR' proved, � by, atr A ttest,�n .���. ��«u�a� ac��e..,, coa....�.,s:o.. nagcb �r s Mc -e n8 BI n ary 23, 2089