Minutes of the  Historic and Architectural Review Commission  City of Georgetown, Texas Thursday, June 13, 2024  The Georgetown Historic and Architectural Review Commission met on Thursday, June 13, 2024 at 6:00 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 through Relay  PM at Council and Court Building, 510 W 9th Street.  Texas at 711.  The following Members were in attendance:  Present were: Linda C Burns, Evan Hein, Alton Martin, Jennifer Powell, Robert Blomquist, Stuart  Garner, Heather Smith  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 thei item on which you wish to speak and present it to the Board Liaison prior tot the start of the meeting. Youv 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 upt to three minutes to speak. Ify you wish to speak for six minutes, iti is permissible to use another requestor's granted time to speak. No more than six minutes for as speaker may be granted. The requestor granting time to another speaker must also submit af form Onasubject not posted on the agenda: Ar 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 address the  and be present at the meeting.  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 May 09, 2024 regular meeting of the Historic and Architectural Review Commission - Erica Metress, Moved by Evan Hein; seconded by Robert Blomquist to Approve the May 09, 2024,  Planning Specialist  Historic and Architectural Review Commission minutes.    Motion Approved: 7-0 Blomquist, Stuart Garner, Heather Smith Voting Against: None 1.B Meeting Minutes  Voting For: Linda C Burns, Evan Hein, Alton Martin, Jennifer Powell, Robert  Consideration and possible action to approve the minutes from the May 23, 2024 regular meeting of the Historic and Architectural Review Commission - Erica Metress, Moved by Evan Hein; seconded by Jennifer Powell to Approve the May 23, 2024, Historic and Architectural Review Commission minutes. Voting For: Linda C Burns, Evan Hein, Alton Martin, Jennifer Powell, Robert  Planning Specialist  Motion Approved: 7-0 Blomquist, Stuart Garner, Heather Smith Voting Against: None 1.C, 1.D, 1.G.  At the Vice Chair's discretion, the agenda items were reordered as such: 1.E, 1.F,  1.C 2023-60-COA (907 S. Myrtle)  Consideration and Possible Action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for Addition to a Street Facing Façade, a 10' setback encroachment into the required 25' street facing garage setback to allow for the construction of a new garage pursuant to UDC Section 4.08, and new infill construction for the property located at 907 S Myrtle, bearing the legal description of Lots 5&6, Block 19, Glasscock Addition  2023-60-COA) = Olivia Beams, Historic and Downtown Planner  Olivia Beams presented the staff report.  Bill Stump, Applicant, approached the podium to address the Commission and Commissioner Hein inquired about the possible looming concern from the second story windows. Stump explained that he discussed the situation with the neighbors, and they shared that they were okay with the windows as shown in the design.  provided a presentation.  Vice Chair Burns opened the public hearing.  Linda Austin, 1009 South Elm Street, approached the podium to address the Commission and shared her personal experience with an apron garage. Austin shared  that she was in favor of the request. Vice Chair Burns closed the public hearing.    Moved by Robert Blomquist; seconded by Jennifer Powell to Approve as presented. Voting For: Linda C Burns, Evan Hein, Alton Martin, Jennifer Powell, Robert  Motion Approved: 7-0 Blomquist, Stuart Garner, Heather Smith Voting Against: None    1.D 2024-32-COA (816 S. Main Street)  Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for new signage that is inconsistent with the applicable guidelines for the property located at 816 S. Main Street, bearing the legal description ofl Lot 1, Block 1, Old Fire Station Subdivision 2024-32-COA) - Maddison O'Kelley, Preservation and  Redevelopment Manager  Maddison O'Kelley presented the staff report. responded that it was not illuminated. illuminate the sign to stay in compliance.  Alternate Commissioner Blomquist asked if the current sign was illuminated. O'Kelley Commissioner Powell asked if there was consideration to utilize overhead lighting to Amanda Still, Applicant, approached the podium to address the Commission and acknowledged that there was no consideration for overhead lighting because the intent Commissioner Burns acknowledged that CVS was not allowed to have internally lit signs and was required to have the gooseneck lights. Still acknowledged that the reason for internal illumination was an artistic purpose. Still explained that the requested was, also, to update the lettering of the sign to be in alignment with the new city branding of all city Commissioner Burns explained that she agreed with the font, lettering, and size, but disagreed with the internal lighting as it is not allowed in the area.  was to have lighting in the back of the sign.  owned facilities.  Vice Chair Burns opened the public hearing.  Liz Weaver, 1221 South Main Street, approached the podium to address the Commission and acknowledged that if the request were approved in area 1 the Commission would allow for other businesses to request the same proposal. Weaver commented that it would be an insult for businesses who were not allowed this type of lighting and that the internal light would detract from what is inside the building. Weaver added that if the current sign was removed and if a similar sign with similar size were not added, stone damage would  be visible. Weaver disagreed with the illumination request. Vice Chair Burns closed the public hearing.  Commissioner Powell commented that she understood the need for branding alignment for city properties but thought that the city could add a creativity to the sign to signify the  art center.    Moved by Jennifer Powell; seconded by Robert Blomquist to Deny as presented because of the backlit sign does not meet the criteria for the location. Voting For: Linda C Burns, Jennifer Powell, Robert Blomquist Voting Against: Evan Hein, Alton Martin, Stuart Garner, Heather Smith  Motion Failed: 3-4  Due to a lack of a majority vote, the item failed, and Vice Chair Burns requested a new Moved by Evan Hein; seconded by Heather Smith to Approve with the condition that Voting For: Linda C Burns, Evan Hein, Robert Blomquist, Stuart Garner, Heather Smith  motion from the dais. illumination is noti included. Motion Approved: 5-2  Voting Against: Alton Martin, Jennifer Powell  Due to the reordered agenda items, the meeting proceeded to item 1.G.  1.E 2024-19-COA (817 S. Austin Avenue)  Public Hearing and Possible Action on a request for a Certificate of Appropnateness (COA) for the demolition of street-facing façade (elevation facing S. Austin Avenue) ona Low Priority Structure located at the property addressed at 817 S. Austin Avenue, bearing the legal description of Lots 6-8 (PTS), Block 51, City of Georgetown 2024-19-COA)-  Maddison O'Kelley, Preservation and Redevelopment Manager  Maddison O'Kelley presented the staff report.  Adam Starr, applicant, approached the podium to address the Commission and Commissioner Hein asked for clarification on the material found behind the wood construction of the front façade. Starr explained that the front façade consisted of a Commissioner Burns inquired about the condition of the downspouts. Starr mentioned that the downspouts were installed when the roof was replaced in the 2000s. Commissioner Martin shared that he was a part of the demolition sub-committee and confirmed that the façade was not in good condition. Martin stated that he was not an engineer, sO he was unable to speak on the structural impact but echoed that thet façade Alternate Commissioner Blomquist asked the applicant if he considered reapplying stucco to the front façade. Starr confirmed that it has been considered, but as soon as stucco is removed, the metal behind it will be removed, leaving a partial demolition to the  provided a presentation.  wood structure with metal sheathing.  wasn't in good condition.  front facade.    Vice Chair Burns opened the public hearing.  Debra Hobbs, 817 Austin Avenue, approached the podium to address the Commission and shared that she is the owner of AllI Thing New, a store within the structure that is under request. Hobbs provided a brief explanation of her background andi involvement with the city of Georgetown. Hobbs believed that the small shops are what made Georgetown's square successful and shared that the square loses something when large developers gain ownership of many stores. Hobbs hoped that they Commission show appreciation for the small shop owners and did not want to see the square diminished. Hobbs expressed her appreciation for the presentation from the applicant and requested that if a sign were to be uncovered under the wall, that it would be preserved. David Wolf, 414 Indigo Lane, approached the podium to address the Commission and shared that he was borni in Georgetown. Wolf shared that his first memory of the building was an organized antique auction. Wolf shared that he served on the Historic and Architectural Review Commission in the mid-90s and would like to see Georgetown remain historic when appropriate. Wolf expressed his support in the applicant's request. Linda Austin, 1009 South Elm Street, approached the podium to address the Commission and shared that she and her husband bought their house in 2002. Austin shared that they love the community and restored two other homes in Old Town. Austin questioned why the building was marked as al low priority structure and shared that she was an advocate for private property rights. Austin shared that she would not like to see O'Kelley explained that the most historic survey was completed in 2016 and clarified that the survey noted alterations over time that have impacted the building's Sharon Doerfler, 305 River Ridge Drive, approached the podium to address the Commission and shared that she is al lifelong resident of Georgetown. Doerfler commented that change is inevitable and agreed that the building should have been maintained. Doerfler believed that there still is an opportunity to preserve some of the façade. Doerfler shared that not everything needs to be renovated to something newer and younger. Doerfler highlighted that the garage opening is a conversation piece and suggested that the owner listen to what the visitors and shoppers think. Doerfler shared that she would not like to see the square replicated into South Congress or the domain. Doerfler ended her comment with memories of visiting the building in question.  businesses become displaced and treated badly.  architectural significance.  Vice Chair Burns closed the public hearing.  Commissioner Burns shared that rebuilding the same style of the façade would be  more appropriate.    Commissioner Hein asked the applicant to speak to the condition of the wood frame. Starr explained that he was unable to speak to the integrity of the wood structure as iti is. Commissioner Hein inquired about whether the sheet rock on the inside oft the façade would be replace. Starr explained that if the façade is removed then the structural walls, concrete foundation, and double a frame truss would be the only material to remain in With no further discussion from the dais, Vice Chair Burns asked for a motion. Moved by Alton Martin; seconded by Jennifer Powell to Approve as presented. Commissioner Powell inquired about HARC's options if lettering were to become visible, that is not visible today, during the demolition. O'Kelley explained that HARC has the authority to place a condition of approval that during the demolition that material is unencapsulated and salvageable, that it can be provided to the Historic Preservation Commissioner Burns asked about how that is determined ifiti is unknown that the material may be salvageable. Okelley explained that the motion that would be able to be conveyed would be the condition to require a salvage report upon demolition to be provided by the HPO. O'Kelley continued to explain that ift there is, within the salvage report, found to be features or material that is salvageable, the HPO can provide discretion on how to salvage said material and to provide a record. Commissioner Hein referred to Design Guideline 1.2.B.2, "Repair or replace only those features that are deteriorated." Commissioner Hein contended with the compliant finding as it appeared that it was not confirmed that the stucco needed to be replaced. Starr explained that the stucco has begun to bellow outward at the bottom of the windows and Commissioner Martin clarified that this request was independent oft the next item on the Based on discussion, Commissioner Martin requested to amend the original.  place.  Officer in the form of a report or salvaged.  he guessed the whole wall would bellow out as well.  agenda.  Moved by Alton Martin; seconded by Robert Blomquist to Approve with the condition that during the demolition salvageable or historic items are found, stop, and have the Historic O'Kelley offered an example of a motion with a condition for a previous COA as a point of clarification for what the Commission was trying to achieve during the meeting.  Preservation Officer assess next steps.  Vice Chair Burns announced a recess at 7:13 PM.    The meeting reconvened at 7:32 PM.  O'Kelley explained that the amendment altered the scope of the request and offered the following options available to the Commission: the amendment is withdrawn, and a new amendment is proposed with the original motion on table. O'Kelley further clarified that the Commission can include in the condition that a salvage report is prepared. O'Kelley explained that if the applicant were to uncover sign, staff would strongly advise that the applicant work with staff to create a record of it. O'Kelley clarified that the city staff and HARC do not have the authority to require the sign be repurposed in the design as iti is an alteration of the scope of work requested on the demolition request and COA.  With that, Commissioner Martin withdrew his amendment.  Motion Withdrawn: 0-0 Voting For: None Voting Against: None  Commissioner Martin asked if the motion could include a condition that the permit for the demolition cannot bei issued until the associated COA is approved. O'Kelley referred to Section 3.13.030.Fa.v Criteria and confirmed that the Commission can include a condition of approval with the demolition request to require that permits would not be issued until a COAI has been authorized for an approved remodel of the  same façade.  With guidance from staff, Commissioner Martin amended the original motion. Moved by Alton Martin; seconded by Robert Blomquist to Approve with two conditions: that if any signage is uncovered and intact during the demolition oft thei facade, that the signage is preserved, and that permitting may not be issued to allow for the demolition to commence until an approved COA is authorized for the restoration or remodel of the Voting For: Linda C Burns, Evan Hein, Alton Martin, Jennifer Powell, Robert Blomquist,  facade. Motion Approved: 7-0 Stuart Garner, Heather Smith Voting Against: None original motion as amended. Motion Approved: 6-1 1 Garner, Heather Smith Voting Against: Evan Hein  Following the vote on the amendment, the Commission proceeded to vote on the  Voting For: Linda C Burns, Alton Martin, Jennifer Powell, Robert Blomquist, Stuart    1.F 2024-33-COA (817 S. Austin Avenue)  Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for an alteration of street-facing façade (elevation facing S. Austin Avenue) on a Low Priority Structure located at the property addressed at 817 S. Austin Avenue, bearing the legal description of Lots 6-8 (PTS), Block 51, City of Georgetown (2024-33- COA) - Maddison O'Kelley, Preservation and Redevelopment Manager  Maddison O'Kelley presented the staff report. the Commission and provided a presentation.  Craig Henry, architect, and Chris Marble, applicant, approached the podium to address Alternate Commissioner Blomquist inquired about the reason for the windows at the top of the building despite it being one-story. Henry explained that the goal was to allow the Commissioner Martin described the request as jarring and clarified that the design is very modernistic. Commissioner Martin highlighted that economic considerations were not a part of HARC's purview. Commissioner Martin referred to the Design Guidelines for Downtown Area 2- Chapter 2, Part 1, page 103, section 2.1.D- Building Characteristics. Commissioner Martin shared that he did not agree with the requested design. Marble requested that Commissioner Martin mention the specific changes that he did not agree with. Commissioner Martin highlighted the double gabled roof and floor to ceiling windows. Commissioner Martin mentioned that the request is out of scale with surrounding Marble explained that the requested design has the same three rhythm pattern as the building in 1938 and clarified that walli is recessed at the same locations where the doors Commissioner Powell highlighted that the request complied with 41 out of 60 criteria and explained that there is room to incorporate stylistic changes. Commissioner Powell shared that there was no detail of cornices, transoms, and supports for awnings. Commissioner Powell provided examples of current downtown renovations that show improvements Commissioner Burns shared that she disagreed with staff's findings in that the request complied with Design Guideline 1.5.A.2 and further explained that a variety of building and Commissioner Smith shared her appreciation with the effort to highlight the double gables, but agreed with other Commissioners that this request was out of place.  light deep into the building and to highlight the wooden trusses.  buildings.  are recessed.  without a drastic change.  architectural styles was part of the history of Georgetown.    Commissioner Smith recommended that the applicant incorporate the double gables  buti in less of an overt way.  Vice Chair Burns opened the public hearing.  Debra Hobbs, 817 Austin Avenue, approached the podium to address the Commission and commented that the request did not look like surrounding buildings. Hobbs shared that the tenants would like tol be informed of the start date of the project. Hobbs expressed her appreciation for the Commission and for Georgetown's square. Linda Austin, 1009 South Elm Street, approached the podium to address the Commission and explained that she wished to capture the charming, old gas station and brought it to the façade oft the request in question. Austin added that the design was very stark and had no charm. Austin requested that the applicant's request blend in with Liz Weaver, 1221 South Main Street, approached the podium to address the Commission and referred to the Approval Criteria number 61 found in UDC section 3.13.030. Weaver commented that rebuilding the façade would be applicable to this criteria but noted that the design does not comply. Weaver requested that the Commission reject the request based on two reasons, the first reason being historical precedent. Weaver provided examples of the roof line with surrounding buildings with at false front. Weaver commented that the design was not meant for the space and shared the history of the building dating back to 1938. Weaver mentioned that this request was out of keeping with the square. Weaver concluded with a request that the Commission reject proposed design and requested that the Michael Molz, 1609 Highland Ridge Road, approached the podium to address the Commission and stated that the building was bland and in poor condition. Molz acknowledged that the stucco front provided no curb appeal. Moiz commented that the owners and architects care for the building and the square and referred to other buildings that were approved with the similar design. Molz believed this request would be a step in the right direction and acknowledged that he was in favor of the project. Annette Montgomery, 1604 Mimosa Street, approached the podium to address the Commission and shared her personal story about moving to Georgetown. Montgomery shared her route to work and mentioned the various buildings that she passes. Montgomery believed that the request provided a unique, attractive, and new façade that included the celebration of the past. Montgomery shared that she was int favor of the Megan Dimartino, 115 West 9th Street, approached the podium to address the Commission and highlighted the charm and uniqueness of Georgetown. Dimartino  the old gas station.  applicant returned with something more traditional.  request.    shared that history wasi important to her and noted the concern of the change oft the square. Dimartino agreed that the building required maintenance, but not to change the history. Dimartino shared a personal story of her building's maintenance which related  toi the concern of safety for pedestrians for this building. Vice Chair Burns closed the public hearing.  th  Moved by Evan Hein; seconded by Alton Martin to Postpone to the July 11 HARC meeting to allow the applicant to address concerns raised around the new façade being compatible with surrounding properties int the Historic Overlay District. Voting For: Linda C Burns, Evan Hein, Alton Martin, Jennifer Powell, Robert Blomquist,  Motion Postpone to Date Certain: 7-0 Stuart Garner, Heather Smith Voting Against: None  Due to the reordered agenda items, the meeting returned to item 1.C.    1.G Discussion Items  Updates on Upcoming Training for HARC Commissioners, Downtown Master Plan, UDC Rewrite, and Commissioner questions and comments Maddison O'Kelley, Preservation Maddison O'Kelley mentioned the potential to schedule the discussion and feedback on  and Redevelopment Manager  the UDC requirements during the July 11, 2024, HARC meeting.  Adjournment  These minutes were approved at the meeting of  b  Chair  te