Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes HARC 09.23.2021City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review Commission Minutes September 23, 2021 at 6:00 p.m. Council and Courts Building 510 West 91" Street Georgetown, TX 78626 Members !'resent: Terri Hyde; Michael Walton; Lawrence Romero; Steve Johnston; Catherine Morales; Pamela Mitchell; Robert McCabe Members Absent: Faustine Curry; Karalei Nunn Staff present: Britin Bostick, Historic Planner; Nat Waggoner, Assistant Planning Director; Mima Garcia, Program Manager Meeting called to order by Chair Walton at 6:01 pm. Public Wishing to Address the Board On a subject that is posted on this agenda: Please fill out a speaker registration form which can be found at the Board meeting. Clearly print your name, the letter of the item on which you wish to speak, and present it to the Staff Liaison, preferably prior to the start of the meeting. You will be called forward to speak when the Board considers that item. On a subject not posted on the agenda: Persons may add an item to a future Board agenda by filing a written request with the Staff Liaison no later than one week prior to the Board meeting. The request must include the speaker's name and the specific topic to be addressed with sufficient information to inform the board and the public. For Board Liaison contact information, please logon to http://government.georgetown.org/category/boards-commissions/. A. At the time of posting, no persons had signed up to address the Board. Legislative Regular Agenda B. Staff presentation of the updated HARC Commissioner manuals, including the updated Historic District Guidelines. Bostick provided an overview of the new Commissioner manuals. Alternate Commissioner Mitchell asked when the new guidelines are in effect related to new applications. Bostick explained that any applications submitted after September 1st are subject to the new guidelines. Anything submitted prior to September 1st are under the old guidelines. C. Consideration and possible action to approve the minutes from the September 9, 2021 regular meeting of the Historic and Architectural Review Commission. - Mirna Garcia, Program Manager Motion to approve by Commissioner Johnston. Second by Commissioner Romero. Approved 5-0. Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 1 of 3 Meeting: September 23, 2021 D. Updates, Commissioner questions, and comments. — Sofia Nelson, Planning Director No updates. Bostick explained that as we approach the holiday season there will be one meeting in November and December. E. Consideration and possible action to appoint members to the Demolition Subcommittee. - Britin Bostick, Downtown & Historic Planner Bostick explained that the Commission previously discussed how alternate members serve on the Commission, as well as how they serve on the Demolition Subcommittee. The Commission asked about possible adding alternate members to the Subcommittee. There can be as many alternates added. Motion to appoint Commissioner Romero by Commissioner Morales. Motion to appoint Commissioner Walton by Commissioner Hyde. Approved 5-0. F. Conceptual review of a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for an addition that creates a new, or adds to an existing street facing fagade and replacing historic architectural features with a non -historic architectural features at the property located at 907 S. Myrtle Street, bearing the legal description Lots 5 & 6, Block 19, Glasscock Addition. (2021-49-COA) — Britin Bostick, Downtown & Historic Planner Staff report by Bostick. The applicant is requesting HARC approval of a rehabilitation and rear addition to the high priority main structure on the property, which began as an 1890 Folk Victorian structure and later expanded with rear additions. The applicant is proposing to remove the 1950s and 1960s-era rear additions, construct a new rear living space and screened porch addition with a two-story portion for the living space addition, replace the historic windows, replace the historic siding, remove and replace the existing chimney and remove the decorative detail above the front porch, as well as adjust the slope of the roof over the front porch to create a steeper slope to assist drainage. As part of the rehabilitation scope the applicant is also requesting to remove and replace the lapped wood siding and the windows, both of which are known to have lead -based paint. Although the materials have been maintained through periodic repainting and reglazing, the thin glass windows continue to provide maintenance challenges and do not provide a tight closure in the window opening, which allows dirt and debris to enter through the window gaps. Although the applicant could employ the use of storm windows or other techniques, they prefer to install single -hung energy -efficient windows in the same size and light pattern as the historic windows with a vinyl -clad wood rather than the all -wood existing windows. The windows would also have screens. The removal of the wood siding would also remove layers of lead -based paint, and the replacement siding is proposed to be fiber cement lapped siding with a similar profile and reveal. The trim would be repaired or replaced with either fiber cement trim or cedar. The remaining brick chimney no longer functions and the applicant is requesting approval to remove it and construct a new brick chimney in a new location further to the interior of the house than the existing chimney. As the existing chimney is not on an exterior location the new chimney would have similar characteristics to the existing, although a change Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 2 of 3 Meeting: September 23, 2021 in interior location. The applicant is also requesting approval to replace the historic front door with a new front door which would have a glass section and a transom. The proposed foundation leveling and repair does not require approval of a COA, however the applicant is proposing to replace the underpinning or skirting with a mesh and concrete skirting that would have an stucco appearance. To address an ongoing maintenance issue and remove a feature that is not original to the house, the applicant is requesting approval of the removal of the decorative railing above the front porch roof and the replacement of the roof with a slightly steeper - pitched shed roof to assist with drainage and cleaning leaves and debris, which collect moisture. The applicant has provided photos from 1917 and the 1940s showing the porch without the railing, which was in place by the 1960s. Commissioner Romero asked what material will be used for the roof. Bostick explained that right now it is a tin roof. However, it will be another metal roof, but it will be a better lasting material and will keep the same color. The Commission reviewed the questions asked by staff. There was discussion regarding the requests in the project, specifically the compatibility of the proposed windows compared to the existing windows. There was also discussion regarding maintaining the historic character of the fagade. Adjournment Motion to adjourn by Commissioner Romero. Second by Commissioner Morales. Approved 5-0. Adjourned at 7:07p.m. ustine-eumy, Chair r l chG�-Ll Wq tt�i.� Historic and Architectural Review Commission Meeting: September 23, 2021 1 ,ti C h Attest, Terri Asendorf-Hyde,-Secretary Page 3 of 3