HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_HARC_09.25.2014Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 1 of 5
Meeting: September 25, 2014
City of Georgetown, Texas
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Workshop
Minutes
Thursday, September 25, 2014 at 6:00 p.m.
Council and Courts Building
101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown, TX 78626
Members present: Anna Eby, Chair; Jennifer Brown, Nancy Knight, Vice‐ Chair; David Paul; Richard
Mee, and Mary Jo Winder.
Commissioners in Training present: Barbara Price and Rodolfo Martinez
Commissioners absent: Ty Gipson
Staff present: Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner; Andreina Davila, Project Coordinator; and Karen Frost,
Recording Secretary.
A. Call to Order by Eby at 6:00 p.m. with the reading of the meeting procedures.
* 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.
This Regular Session may, at any time, be recessed to convene an Executive Session for any purpose
authorized by the Open Meeting Act, Texas Government Code 551.
Legislative Agenda:
B. Discussion and possible action to approve the minutes from the August 28, 2014 regular meeting.
Eby pointed out to scrivener’s errors, Gipson is misspelled and the Public Hearing did not have any
speakers coming forth. The changes were noted.
Motion by Mee to approve the minutes with noted changes. Second by Knight. Approved 6 – 0.
C. Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Design Compliance (CDC) for
exterior alterations and signage for the property located at 1008 Rock Street bearing the legal
description of Lost Addition, Block 63 (PT), .19 acres (CDC‐2014‐032).
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant requests a CDC to install an awning over the
primary entrance to the building, and signage for the business. The awning measures 10 feet across
and projects 4.67 feet from the structure. The signage includes a freestanding sign in the front yard, a
sign mounted on the wall by the primary entrance, and signage printed on the awning. Staff
recommends approval. John Jennings, the applicant/owner was available for questions. He
commented that they had taken down the old carport, painted the house and are preserving anything
of historical significance that they could find, and are adapting the house for this business.
Knight commented that she liked the awning, but that she did not like the look of the aluminum
posts. Mee quoted Guideline 10.1 that bubble awnings are inappropriate for historic structures.
Winder commented that the awning is not characteristic of the neighborhood and not compatible
with the building.
Eby opened the Public Hearing and with no public speakers coming forth, closed it.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 2 of 5
Meeting: September 25, 2014
Commissioners discussed the style of the awning. Several suggestions were made but Mr. Jennings
did not want to change his request, stating the change would affect his grand opening the following
week and would cost him too much money.
Eby stated it was unfortunate that the awning was built prior to approval. Mr. Jennings said it was a
surprise that this was not going to be approved, and that this was a timing issue in the opening of his
building. It was stated that the applicant should not be assuming that the application will be
approved. Eby explained that the commission could not approve the awning based on the
applicant’s expense but based on meeting the Guidelines. She felt she could approve the application
based on the guidelines.
Mee stated that he could agree because the Guidelines stated that these bubble awnings are
inappropriate on “most” buildings, not all.
Motion by Brown to approve the CDC‐2014‐032 as presented. Second by Paul. Approved 5 – 1.
(Winder opposed).
D. Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Design Compliance (CDC) for
exterior alterations and signage for the property located at 115 West 7th Street, bearing the legal
description of City of Georgetown, Block 38, Lot 2‐3, 1 (PT), .3581 acres (CDC‐2014‐033).
Synatschk presented the staff report. The business located at 115 West 7th Street on the north side of
the Courthouse Square wishes to update its business image. The update includes exterior paint and
signage for the structure. The structure was constructed in 1903 and is listed as a high priority
structure on the City’s List of Priority Structures (aka Historic Resources Survey). Additionally, the
structure is a contributing structure to the Williamson County Courthouse Square National Register
District.
Based upon the Design Guidelines, the repainting of the structure is appropriate. The paint colors,
identified as Storm Cloud Gray, Horizon Gray and Old Prairie in Exhibit 1, are selected to highlight
the key architectural features of the structure, including the character defining storefront
components, decorative metalwork and windows. The key architectural features of the structure are
preserved and highlighted with the paint selection.
The sign will remain mounted on the canopy to prevent the obstruction of architectural elements of
the second floor. The sign will use the Storm Cloud Gray for the Background, with the business name
painted in Old Prairie.
Eby opened the Public Hearing and closed it with no speakers coming forth.
Knight commented that this was a perfect example of colors enhancing the architectural elements of
the building. Motion by Knight to approve the CDC‐2014‐033 as presented. Second by Mee.
Approved 6 – 0.
E. Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Design Compliance (CDC) for
demolition for the property located at 321 West 8th Street bearing the legal description of City of
Georgetown, Block 42, Lot 5‐3pts, 6pt, Block 43, Lot 1‐4, Forest St/pt, 1.239 acres (CDC‐2014‐034).
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant requests a CDC for Demolition to demolish two
(2) non‐historic buildings located at 321 West 8th Street to facilitate construction of a new city parking
lot. The demolition is included in the interlocal agreement between the City of Georgetown and
Williamson County dated August 12, 2014.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 3 of 5
Meeting: September 25, 2014
Winder asked if the commission will review the parking lot, once it is designed. Synatschk
responded yes.
Eby opened the Public Hearing and closed it with no speakers coming forth.
Motion by Knight to approve the demolition for CDC‐2014‐034, based on the Section 3.13.040
Criteria, finding that the structures are non‐historic and do not retain a significant level of
structural integrity. Also that the current structure is noncontributing to the historic overlay
district and the structures are newer than the period of significance for the historic overlay district
and are not historically significant. Second by Paul. Approved 6 – 0.
F. Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Design Compliance (CDC) for
demolition and exterior alterations for the property located at 1802 South Austin Avenue bearing the
legal description of Lost Addition, Block 80(PT), 0.55 acres (CDC‐2014‐036).
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant requests a Certificate of Design Compliance for
exterior alterations to the Medium Priority structure located at 1802 South Austin Avenue. The
project includes the demolition of the ca. 1930 accessory garage, the removal of a non‐historic two‐
story addition, and the construction of a new addition to the primary structure.
. The primary structure and the accessory garage are both identified as Medium Priority structures on
the Historic Resources Survey. The addition to the primary structure complies with the design
guidelines by placing the addition to the rear, utilizing a modern connector to differentiate the
addition and setting the addition to the side. The addition will not result in the loss of any character
defining features on the primary structure.
The current site layout limits the options for placing an addition on the structure while complying
with the design Guidelines. The proposed design protects the existing heritage tree on the lot, while
respecting the original design of the structure. Designing the addition in the proposed linear manner
reduces the impact on the primary structure and allows the applicant to work within the site
constraints.
The new addition requires the demolition of the accessory garage. Design Guideline 7.13 states “Only
as a last resort should an historic structure be considered for demolition.” The guideline also includes
the direction that “demolition of secondary buildings (garages, etc.) 50 years or older may be
appropriate if substantially deteriorated (requiring 50% or more replacement of exterior siding, roof
rafters, surface materials, and structure members). The applicant has provided documentation
regarding the condition of the structure, demonstrating that more than 50% of the materials must be
replaced to restore the structure to working condition (Exhibit 2). The documentation justifies the
applicant’s request to demolish the accessory structure under UDC Section 3.13.020.D.1.c: The
structure poses an imminent threat to public health or safety.
Commissioners asked questions of the applicant, Terry Slack, and of J. Bryant Boyd for clarification.
The vent on the front of the house would probably not remain. The front porch will be demolished
and rebuilt. What appear to be bricks are actually stones, and those will be replaced with new
materials, stucco and brick, and will be overlaid over concrete, not wood as before. The
commissioners were very complimentary and stated they were pleased to see this structure being
revitalized.
Motion by Knight to approve the CDC application as submitted. Second by Mee. Winder
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 4 of 5
Meeting: September 25, 2014
encouraged preserving as many of the historic features and materials of this medium priority
structure as possible. Motion approved 6 – 0.
G. Conceptual review for proposed infill construction at 202 College Street.
Synatschk introduced the owner, Sandra Illig, representing her husband Dale Illig. She explained
that they originally acquired the first 5 units in 1985. They built 5 more in 1997. They are proposing
building another 5 units, using the old brick styles and complimentary colors. They presented a
sample board of proposed colors and brick styles. They are proposing adding parking where the
dumpster was, by moving the dumpster to the end of the parking lot, and opening up additional
spots.
Commissioners were complimentary. There was discussion about the picture of the sign that was
presented. It should ready College Place and will probably be smaller in size. They are proposing
breaking up the east facing façade by making it half brick and half siding. They will meet the UDC
Standards for the landscape design.
Dale Illig arrived and brought up the possibility of using the rain barrels. He asked about the signage
and it was suggested that it be smaller than proposed since it would be facing single‐family
residential sites. Mr. Illig thanked the commissioners for their time.
H. Conceptual review for proposed project at 1804 South Ash Street.
Kathy Miller, the owner of the single‐family residential presented her proposal. She wants to add
porches and gables to the existing 2400 square foot house, and add doors to the front of the carport
and convert the concrete structure to a guest house. Pictures were presented.
Commissioners discussed the proposal and offered comments. Knight commented that she did not
think this direction was the right design style for the era of the neighborhood, it would not be
compatible. Winder was supportive of the design because she said it mimicked the colonial revival
of the 50’s, however she suggested leaving the concrete structure as is, not painting it. She wants
historic research done of the guest house, stating that it was very unique and must have a history.
Eby, Mee and Brown voiced support of the remodel. Knight suggested looking at mid‐century
modern ideas for more appropriate designs.
I. Conceptual review for proposed exterior alterations at 812 South Main Street. This item was cancelled,
to be presented at a later date.
J. Downtown and Old Town Design Guidelines Training ‐ Renee Hanson. This item was cancelled, to be
presented at a later date.
K. Update from Sign Subcommittee. Knight reported that the subcommittee approved one sign at the
earlier meeting.
L. Questions and comments from Commissioners in Training. Martinez asked questions regarding
handicapped parking. It was explained that commissioners do not review for that, but that staff
would review those types of items during permitting.
M. Staff updates and reminder of future meetings. Synatschk listed the next meetings.
Motion by Paul to adjourn, second by Winder. Eby adjourned the meeting at 7:25 p.m.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 5 of 5
Meeting: September 25, 2014
________________________________ __________________________________
Approved, Anna Eby, Chair Attest, Nancy Knight