Minutes of the  Historic and Architectural Review Commission  City of Georgetown, Texas Monday, September 23, 2024  The Georgetown Historic and Architectural Review Commission met on Monday, September 23, 2024 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 tot the scheduled meeting date, at (512)930-3652 or City Hall at 808 Martin Luther King, Jr Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay  at 6:00 PM at Council and Court Building, 510 W 9th Street.  Texas at 711.  The following Members were in attendance: Stuart Garner, Heather Smith Agenda Notice  Present were: Lawrence Romero, Linda C Burns, Michael J Walton, Evan Hein, Robert Blomquist,  This is a special workshop to discuss UDC Rewrite topics. No action items will be discussed.  Public Wishing to Address the Board  On a subject that is posted on this agenda: Please fill out as 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 to the Board Liaison prior to the start of 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 willl be allowed up 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 at form Onas subject not posted on the agenda: A request must be received byt 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 address the  and be present at the meeting.  Board or Commission members. No action can bet taken.  1. Regular Session  1.A Historic Old Town and Downtown UDC amendments  Presentation and discussion regarding Unified Development Code (UDC) standards related to demolition of a historic structure within the Historic Overlay Districts - Sofia    Nelson, Planning Director  Sofia Nelson, Planning Director, approached the podium to provide a presentation on Commissioner Hein shared that the words "intentional or negligent destruction" within criteria A of the Demolition Criteria of Approval was not clear on the recourse ifit pertains Chair Walton questioned how demolition due to neglect could be monitored, stopped, or addressed. Chair Walton expressed that criteria A and B of the Demolition Criteria of Approval need to be more encapsulated and clearer in addressing the concept of the prior Nelson followed up with a question on whether the commission would like to retain  the UDC Update regarding demolitions.  tot the case.  owner and the current economic situation that Georgetown is in.  criteria B.  Chair Walton believed that criteria C of the Demolition Criteria of Approval included public safety and hygiene. Chair Walton concluded with his opinion that criteria B of the Demolition Criteria of Approval should be removed. Commissioner Romero agree with Chair Walton. Commissioner Burns shared that property value is such that criteria B of the Prior to moving forward in the discussion, Nelson summarized the commissioners comments as recommendations to remove criteria B of the Demolition Criteria of Approval, noting a challenge in knowing what documentation to ask for, a challenge in being fair and consistent, and noting the market changes ini the community. Chair Walton highlighted that situations vary when applicants request a demolition. Chair Walton noted that in some instances, the applicant just purchased the property with the intent to demolish the structure, whereas other instances include an inheritance Nelson moved forward with the discussion aspect of the demolition portion of the UDC Rewrite Workshop and asked the commission for words that come to mind when met with the phrase "public interest." Chair Walton shared that public safety, public hygiene, and beneficial structures such as a hospital all come to mind when met with "public interest." Alternate Commissioner Blomquist added that the wel-being of the public comes to mind. Commissioner Hein shared that affordable housing comes to mind. Commissioner Burns added the need for a grocery store as public interest. Chair Walton shared that emotional support could be included as public interest and gave an example of the fire at the pet shelter. Commissioner Hein communicated that education, parks, and environmental Nelson asked the commission if there were any challenges that may be encountered with qualification for demolition. Chair Walton highlighted that public opinion on different aesthetics and intent of potential uses were some challenges. Commissioner  Demolition Criteria of Approval is no longer valid.  of the property with no means to rehabilitate the structure.  reasons would qualify as public interest.    Hein suggested in a criteria that is inherent with the existing structure and not potential Nelson asked if there were other factors to consider. Commissioner Romero acknowledged that public safety could include unhouse individuals going in and out of vacant structures. Commissioner Hein added that broken windows attract crime to an area and connected that with a house that may attract crime to the area which would Alternate Commissioner Garner highlighted that there may be overlap with other cases like a case law on what public interest means. Nelson acknowledged that staff does not want to contradict other rules and highlighted that there should be flexibility for the average reader. as most COA applicants are homeowners who do not have a lot of experience in the development process. Nelson shared that staff would draft code language around what was discussed and brought back to the commission for review. Nelson turned the discussion to Maddison O'Kelley, Preservation and Redevelopment O'Kelley spoke about a drafted Certificate of Appropriateness Scope of Work Form. For recordation purposes, please note that Nelson's presentation moved forward to  use of the property.  cause safety issues.  Manager, to present on process improvements.  item 1.C and then concluded with item 1.B.    1.B Historic Old Town and Downtown UDC amendments related to fences - Sofia Nelson, Planning Director Nelson continued the presentation with fence standards.  Presentation and discussion regarding Unified Development Code (UDC) standards  Chair Walton expressed that the purpose of the fence would matter and suggested that the front yard setback would be based on applicant's identification of the front door. Chair Walton added that if the applicant would like to complete maintenance on an existing fence with approved materials, then it would require the review of the Historic  Preservation Officer.  Commissioner Hein expressed favor of staff's recommended fence standard stating "In the Old Town Overlay District, fences located within a side setback or on a double frontage lot abutting a local or collector-level street that do not have sidewalk and are not planned to have a sidewalk constructed adjacent to the property line may construct a fence 6' in height if more than 15' away from the edge of pavement when 100% transparent." Commissioner Hein's only hesitation was with the portion of the standard that refers to 100% transparency. Nelson clarified that the idea behind the percentage Chair Walton thought that the language regarding a double front or corner lot needs to be Nelson referred to fences located in the front or side setback and asked the commission ifthey would like to see the measurement from the property line retained or if there were circumstances in which they would like the measurement from the street. Commissioner Romero believed that the measured setback should be from the Nelson recommended to include language regarding fences that are in the sight triangle or fences that create a known safety issue. Nelson shared that she and staff would need to workshop what was discussed during the meeting. 1.C Historic Old Town and Downtown UDC amendments  was regarding a wrought iron fence.  clearer.  pavement.  Presentation and discussion regarding Unified Development Code (UDC) criteria for Nelson continued the presentation with the Building Height Modification Criteria of Approval and staff's recommendation. The commission requested to further review staff's recommendations for the Building Height Modification Criteria of Approval. For recordation purposes, please note that Nelson's presentation concluded with item  Building Height Modifications - Sofia Nelson, Planning Director  1.B.  Adjournment    These minutes/were approved at the meeting of  Attest