Minutes of the  Historic and Architectural Review Commission  City of Georgetown, Texas Thursday, July 25, 2024  The Georgetown Historic and Architectural Review Commission met on Thursday, July 25, 2024 at The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please contact the City Secretary's Office, at least three (3) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or City Hall at 808 Martin Luther King, Jr Street for additional information; TTY users route  6:00 PM at Council and Court Building, 510' W 9th Street.  through Relay Texas at 711.  The following Members were in attendance:  Present were: Lawrence Romero, Linda C Burns, Michael J Walton, Alton Martin, Jennifer  Powell, Robert Blomquist, Heather Smith, Stuart Garner Public Wishing to Address the Board  On as subject that is posted on this agenda: Please fill out a speaker registration form which can bet found on the table at the entrance to the meeting room. Clearly print your name and the letter of the item on which you wish to speak and present it toi the Board Liaison prior to the start oft the meeting. You will be called forward to speak when the Board considers that item. Only persons who have delivered the speaker form prior to the meeting being called to order may speak. Speakers will be allowed upt to three minutes to speak. Ify you wish to speak for six minutes, it is permissible to use another requestor's granted time to speak. No more than six minutes for a speaker may be granted. The requestor granting time to another speaker must also submit a form On a subject not posted on the agenda: A request must be received by the Advisory Board or Commission Liaison prior to the day the agenda for this mee ng is posted. Each speaker will be given three minutes to  and be present at the meeting.  address the Board or Commission members. No action can be taken.  1. Regular Session 1.A Meeting Minutes  Consideration and possible action to approve the minutes from the July 11, 2024, regular meeting of the Historic and Architectural Review Commission - Erica Metress, Moved by Lawrence Romero; seconded by Alton Martin to Approve the July 11, 2024,  Planning Specialist  Historic and Architectural Review Commission meeting minutes.    Motion Approved: 7-0 Voting Against: None  Voting For: Lawrence Romero, Linda C Burns, Michael J Walton, Alton Martin, Jennifer  Powell, Robert Blomquist, Heather Smith 1.B 2024-16-COA (1903 S. Austin Avenue)  Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for replacement of al historic architectural feature with a non-historic architectural and the alteration to a historic architectural feature for the property located at 19035 S. Austin Avenue, bearing the legal description ofl Lots 10-11, Block 1 of the Montgomery Addition to Georgetown 2024-16-COA) - Olivia Beams, Historic and Downtown Planner  Olivia Beams presented the staff report.  Rueben Rodriguez, applicant, approached the podium to address the commission and Chair Walton asked the applicant for the date the work was done. Rodriguez explained that the work was done approximately 4 months ago or around the month of March. Chair Walton asked staff when the application was submitted to the city.  provided a presentation.  Maddison O'Kelley, Preservation and Redevelopment Manager, approached the podium to address the Commission and explained that ani incomplete application was submitted on March 18th and March 22nd. O'Kelley continued to explain that a complete  application was submitted on April 9th.  Chair Walton shared that staff's recommended approach is fair based on the letter of intent and dates provided. Chair Walton continued to explain that the letter of intent did not include adding the post but included the lower portion of the columns. Commissioner Powell asked how the lights on the column were treated in the design guidelines. Beams shared that color and llumination of lights are included in the design guidelines but there was no applicability in the Unified Development Code or UDC. Beams explained that staff was only able to review applicable requirements in the UDC. Commissioner Powell shared her appreciation in the time spent to restore and manage Commissioner Alton inquired about evidence of security for the beam of the inner columns. Rodriguez explained that there was marked evidence showing that the columns were nailed tot the top of the porch before he had it painted.  the home.  Alternate Commissioner Blomquist asked about the quality of the home if the two center columns were removed. Rodriguez shared that he was worried about the beam failing as  its sagged prior to the insert of the columns.    Chair Walton opened and closed the public hearing with no speakers coming forth. Chair Walton inquired about the space above the porch. Rodriguez explained that there Commissioner Romero asked if the beams were visible from the attic. Rodriguez Commissioner Smith asked if the applicant had thought of reinforcing the header that expanded across the porch to mitigate the sagging. Rodriguez shared that he did not think about it because he thought he was doing SO by replacing the columns. Moved by Linda C Burns; seconded by Jennifer Powell to Approve the stone to brick request and denial of the addition of the two wood porch columns. Voting For: Lawrence Romero, Linda C Burns, Michael J Walton, Alton Martin, Jennifer  was an attic space above the porch.  explained that the beams were not visible from the attic space.  Motion Approved: 7-0 Powell, Robert Blomquist, Heather Smith Voting Against: None 1.C UDC Rewrite Discussion  Presentation and discussion regarding proposed updates to the Unified Development Code (UDC) development standards for properties within the Historic Overlay Districts Maddison O'Kelley began with an outline of the presentation and encouraged feedback Chair Walton confirmed that there have been circumstances where a building height modification request would have been justified in Old Town and specifically highlighted the elevator in Lofts on Rock that required the extra height, and the parking garage stairwell required the height to accommodate the machinery to provide air flow. Commissioner Romero also confirmed that there have been circumstances where a building height modification request would have been justified in Old Town and specifically highlighted the Lofts on Rock project and downtown parking garage Commissioner Burns and Commissioner Powell agreed with the previous statements. Commissioner Martin explained that scope creep and tunnel affect was a concern of his. Commissioner Martin highlighted that specific circumstances should fit the schema of the Alternate Commissioner Blomquist shared his concern with the density growth. Commissioner Romero noted to consider the surrounding area and future plans when  Maddison O'Kelley, Preservation and Redevelopment Manager  on building height modification criteria.  request.  surrounding area.    reviewing building height modification requests.  Chair Walton mentioned that HARC considers context and recommended a benchmark as it pertains to context. O'Kelley asked if a benchmark to look at buildings on a shared block would be sufficient. Chair Walton agreed to the suggestion of a benchmark with buildings on the block and closest cross streets. Commissioner Martin suggested a benchmark of atl least 300 feet excluding buildings on the square. Commissioner Powell commented that 300 feet may be insufficient and provided a possibility of half mile marker. Commissioner Powell shared that maintaining the character requires the preservation of the experience from the pedestrian's perspective and suggested in requiring that the 3rd story of a request is set back by 10 feet. Commissioner Commissioner Martin mentioned that the current guidelines for residential height requirements are adequate and shared his concern with commercial buildings. With no further discussion, O'Kelley continued the presentation and requested feedback toe establish guidance for qualification and criteria for a demolition submitted under a Commissioner Smith mentioned that compelling public interest should include safety Commissioner Martin agreed with Commissioner Smith in that compelling public interest included the public safety. Commissioner Martin highlighted a previous request from Southwestern University that included the request of a removal of buildings on Maple Street in which they would be replace with a restaurant that would be open to the public. Commissioner Martin recounted another removal request from Southwestern University that would replace the requested buildings with a student center with a venue open to the Alternate Commissioner Blomquist shared that "public interest" can include a positive Commissioner Powell shared that immediate neighbors of a demolition request often attend the meeting to share their background with the surrounding area and highlighted Chair Walton mentioned that hygiene should be considered as public interest in the request for demolition or relocation of al building and provided an example of a Commissioner Burns shared that the public interest in a demolition was often about  Powell highlighted the building placement of the R Bank.  compelling public interest. concerns of a building.  public.  outcome such as a medical facility for the public.  that she takes what they have to say in consideration.  building with insect and animal infestation.  preservation of al building.    With no further discussion, O'Kelley continued the presentation and requested feedback to establish criteria for demolition that may occur unplanned because of Chair Walton shared that in his experience no unrevealed planned demolition request Commissioner Romero recalled an instance where the applicant was approved a remodel request, but instead began the demolition process of the house. Commissioner Romero explained that unforeseen possibilities should be brought to HARC with solutions and shared that this may happen with an inspection. Chair Walton agreed and recommended that an analysis of a possibility of certain circumstances is brough to HARC and approved or disapproved before it occurs. With no further discussion from the dais, the meeting temporarily recessed at 8:24 PM O'Kelley continued the presentation and requested feedback on fence standards for Commissioner Romero expressed concern with approval of fence request and later seeing the request slightly modified to change the transparency. Commissioner Romero shared that there may need to be a follow up to ensure the applicant is in  other work occurring on a historic property.  would be unjustified.  and returned at 8:29 PM.  lots with more than one frontage.  compliance with the approved request.  Commissioner Burns shared that the most challenging aspect of fence COA review was that residents aren't aware of it and suggested that the descriptions to be clearer for all to Chair Walton shared that the most challenging aspect of fence COA review was that HARC was not provided an explanation of why the fence is requested. Chair Walton explained that the front height standard on corner and double frontage lots should be clarified and shared that the code should include verbiage regarding the front door signifying the location of the front yard. Chair Walton explained that opacity should be clarified in the code regarding corner and double frontage lots. Chair Walton shared that Commission Powell suggested in increasing communication and educating residents on fence regulations with a regularly scheduled letter. Commissioner Powell recommended in Commissioner Martin shared that the most challenging aspect of fence COA review was that the UDC requires something that conflicts with the design guidelines or vice versa. Commissioner Martin added that another challenging aspect of fence COA review is when the resident replaces an existing fence that then would be out of compliance with  understand.  gates higher than human height needs to be address in the code.  clarifying the front yard regarding the front door.    the setback.  Adjournment These minutes ère F  at the meeting of