Minutes of the  Historic and Architectural Review Commission  City of Georgetown, Texas Thursday, September 26, 2024  The Georgetown Historic and Architectural Review Commission met on Thursday, September 26, 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: Public Wishing to Address the Board  Present were: Linda C Burns, Michael J Walton, Alton Martin, Jennifer Powell, Stuart Garner  Onas subject that is posted on this agenda: Please fill out as speaker registration form which can bei 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 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 will be allowed up to three minutes to speak. If you wish to speak for six minutes, it is permissible to use another requestor's granted time to speak. No morei 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 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 bet taken.  1. Regular Session 1.A Meeting Minutes  Consideration and possible action to approve the minutes from the September 12, 2024, regular meeting of the Historic and Architectural Review Commission = Erica Moved by Alton Martin; seconded by Linda C Burns to Approve the minutes from the  Metress, Planning Specialist    September 12, 2024, regular meeting of the Historic and Architectural Review Voting For: Linda C Burns, Michael J' Walton, Alton Martin, Jennifer Powell  Commission. Motion Approved: 4-0 Voting Against: None order from item 1.B.  At the chair's discretion, the meeting proceeded to item 1.F and continued in sequential  1.B 2024-40-COA (1411 S. College Street)  Public Hearing and action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness: (COA) for an addition that creates a new, or adds to an existing street facing façade, a setback modification to allow a proposed addition 2'-8" into the required 6'-0" side setback, and replacing a historic architectural feature with a non-historic architectural feature for the property located at 1411 S. College Street, bearing the legal description of 0.135 acres out of Block 97 (PT) Dimmit Addition 2024-40-COA) Maddison O'Kelley, Preservation  and Redevelopment Manager  Maddison O'Kelley presented the staff report.  Chair Walton inquired about the location of the windows with the looming concern. O'Kelley acknowledged that the rear elevation was unchanged since the last HARC meeting in which the top left window did not have a sill height of 651 inches.  Dorothy Fallin, owner, approached the podium to address the commission and noted that the rear windows will be opaque. Fallin provided examples of homes that were about the same size as the proposed addition. Fallin explained that there was not an option to add a rear addition because her property was at the impervious cover limit. Fallin explained that the current home size allows for small bedrooms and bathrooms that were not usable. Fallin shared that the floor was destroyed from termite damage, the foundation was failing, and that rodent infestation did not allow the home to be sanitary. Fallin explained that the home was designed to be a rental and not necessarily for a family. Commissioner Martin inquired whether the non-compliant setbacks were a result of the current setbacks not being implemented. O'Kelley confirmed the inquiry. Chair Walton asked the applicant if they intend to keep the railings on the front porch as seen in the presentation. Fallin confirmed that the plan was to place railings similar to Commissioner Powell asked the applicant for more material information on the frost of the rear window. Fallin expressed interest in stained glass that is nontransparent, but did not believe that would be acceptable, sO she would include the rain or ripple frost for the  what is currently there.  glass.    Alternate Commissioner Garner asked if changes to the non-compliant criteria were made. Fallin acknowledged that no changes were made due to being at max impervious cover, sO a second story was requested for more. square footage.  Chair Walton opened the public hearing.  Jud Harris, 1403 South College Street, approached the podium to address the Commission and shared that he agreed with the improvements. Harris thanked Doris Curl, 1404 South College Street, approached the podium to address the Commission and asked for the number of times ai front façade has changed and kept its historic value. Curl questioned if large homes were being valued in Georgetown and did not agree with the front façade changes as it destroys the historic value and purpose of Elaine Sebald, 1810 Eubank Street, approached the podium to address the Commission and expressed that the changes in the design of the house shows the value of the process. Sebald enjoyed the changes as they were seen as improvements. Sebald spoke about the homes on her street in which have added square footage to accommodate the families that occupy them. Sebald highlighted the two demolition attempts in 2017 and expressed that the home needs significant changes to make the home livable due to the deterioration. Sebald believed that this is the time to preserve the house. Chair Walton closed the public hearing and asked for a motion from the dais. Moved by Alton Martin; seconded by Linda C Burns to Approve as presented.  everyone involved in the process.  HARC.  Commissioner Powell amended the motion.  Moved by Jennifer Powell; seconded by Alton Martin to Amend with conditions that the current railing is repurposed or rebuilt rather than what is depicted ini the proposal and that the second story windows at the rear of the home is opaque to assist with the Voting For: Linda C Burns, Michael J Walton, Alton Martin, Jennifer Powell, After voting on the. amendment, the commission proceeded to vote on the main  looming concern. Motion Amended: 5-0 Stuart Garner  motion as amended.  Motion Approved with amendment: 4-1 Voting Against: Stuart Garner Voting Against: None  Voting For: Linda C Burns, Michael J Walton, Alton Martin, Jennifer Powell    1.C 2024-24-COA (1406 Pine Street)  Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for new infill construction for the property located at 1406 Pine Street, bearing the legal description of Lot 1, Block A, Park Subdivision 2024-24-COA) = Olivia Beams,  Historic and Downtown Planner Olivia Beams presented the staff report.  Cary and Michelle Barfield, owners, approached the podium to address the commission and acknowledged that they made significant changes and were available to answer Alternate Commissioner Garner referred to the noncompliance with the applicable design standards and historic district design guidelines and ask staff for an explanation oft their Beams shared that the applicant addressed the design based on commission's suggestions from the last HARC meeting. Beams added that the gabled roof and setback of the home will not make it appear as large at the street level. Beams concluded that the adjusted design took more inspiration from other homes on the Commissioner Powell noted that the updated roof line and simplifying the fireplaces was more fitting. Commissioner Powell asked for more information on the proposed window selection as she was no familiar with it. Mr. Barfield explained that iti is a hybrid of a wood and composite material. Mr. Barfield added that the difference is not visible and that it is Chair Walton inquired about the difference in design of the garage door from the conceptual review. Mr. Barfield shared that windows across the top of the garage door Discussion about the garage windows as it relates to the design guidelines. Chair Walton asked if the front porch increased in size by width. Mr. Barfield confirmed Commissioner Burns spoke of the size of the structure but appreciated the changes. Chair Walton opened and closed the public hearing with no speakers coming forth and Moved by Jennifer Powell; seconded by Linda C Burns to Approve as presented.  questions.  recommendation of approval.  street.  sturdier than wood windows.  were added since the conceptual review.  that the front porch has increased in size.  asked for a motion from the dais.  Chair Walton amended the motion.    Moved by Michael J Walton; seconded by Alton Martin to Amend that the garage door includes the windows as shown in the applicant's provided materials. Voting For: Linda CI Burns, Michael J Walton, Alton Martin, Jennifer Powell, Stuart  Motion Amended: 5-0 Garner Voting Against: None motion as amended.  After voting on the amendment, the commission proceeded to vote on the main  Motion Approved with amendment: 5-0  Voting For: Linda CI Burns, Michael J Walton, Alton Martin, Jennifer Powell,  Stuart Garner Voting Against: None  1.D 2024-54-COA (200 W. 6th Street)  Public hearing and possible action on a request for a new Master Sign Plan that is inconsistent with the applicable guidelines for the property addressed at 200W.6 6th Street, bearing the legal description of 0.25 acres out of Block 37, Lots 2A-7A AMD, City of Georgetown (2024-54-COA) - Maddison O'Kelley, Preservation and Redevelopment  Manager  Maddison O'Kelley presented the staff report.  Commissioner Martin questioned how the request was able to comply with the design standards of the code. O'Kelley explained that the approval criteria is adopted within the section of the Unified Development Code, and the UDC will reference itself as the code, sO the requested signs do not meet the applicable design guidelines. O'Kelley added that there are no UDC standards that the sign does not comply with. Commissioner Martin referred to HARC's denial of the Georgetown art building's sign proposal because of an internally illuminated sign and highlighted the RBank building's internally illuminated sign that is extremely bright. Commissioner Martin believed there is no need for a sign of the requested size and internal illumination, and shared interest to Commissioner Burns asked if there is a limit of signs that can be added to a structure. O'Kelley explained that there is a limit based on the number of tenants and the linear width for each tenant. O'Kelley added that each tenant is limited to only one primary sign and two secondary signs. O'Kelley explained that if more signage were to be added, the applicant would need to amend the master sign plan, and if it exceeds the maximum allowable sign per tenant, it will have to return to HARC.  see the signs painted on the windows per the design guidelines.    Commissioner Burns asked ifit was possible just to have the name oft the title company Brian Birdwell, applicant, approached the podium to address the commission and shared that the preference was to have the sign as is because it is the tenant's standard sign throughout Central Texas. Birdwell clarified that the title company sign is noti illuminated and that the signs under the canopy will be illuminated. Birdwell provided images of signs Commissioner Martin asked staff if the corridor title signage will need to be reviewed by HARC if the tenant chooses to no longer occupy that specific building. O'Kelley explained that the sign is specific tot thet title company andi if the sign was to be removed, ar replacement sign would either meet the guideline that adopted at that time or return to Chair Walton asked if the signs would have to return to HARC once a business is decided upon. O'Kelley explained that signs will be approved per HPO excluding the Discussion on the size of the corridor title sign between Chair Walton and Birdwell. Sofia Nelson, Planning Director, approached the podium to address the commission and explained that if the corridor sign was to be removed, the new applicant would have to return for HARC's approval. Nelson shared that looking at the overall mass of structure is essential instead of looking at it in terms of square footage. Chair Walton opened. and closed the public hearing with no speakers coming forth and  sign instead ofi inclusion of the logo.  that are currently lit around area 1.  HARC.  corridor title sign.  asked for a motion from the dais. Motion Approved: 3-2  Moved by Stuart Garner; seconded by Jennifer Powell to Approve as requested.  Voting For: Michael JI Walton, Jennifer Powell, Stuart Garner Voting Against: Linda C Burns, Alton Martin  Chair Walton called for a recess at 7:34 PM and the meeting reconvened at 7:39 PM.    1.E 2024-60-COA (601 S. Austin Avenue)  Conceptual Review for new infill mixed-use construction and al building height modification request for the property located at 601 S. Austin Avenue, bearing the legal description of 0.33 acres out of Block 38, Lots 7-8, City of Georgetown 2024-60-COA)-  Maddison O'Kelley, Preservation and Redevelopment Manager  Maddison O'Kelley presented the staff report.  Brian Birdwell and Nash Horn, applicants, approached the podium to address the Commissioner Martin shared that he participated in the Downtown Masterplan meetings and highlighted that height was the main concern expressed by those present. Commissioner Martin shared his concern with the overall height and expressed that the interior content is suitable. Commissioner Martin concluded with Birdwell asked for clarification on height and asked if the concern was with the height of Commissioner Martin interpreted that the height oft the copula is 71 feet and questioned the exemption of height of copulas. Commissioner Martin shared that the copula's height itself is concern because it is at the edge of the building and suggested in possibility Commissioner Burns expressed appreciation for the look of the building and courtyard. Commissioner Burns echoed the concern that Commissioner Martin shared and Chair Walton agreed with the applicant in that the main entrance is clear and shared Birdwell shared that he has met with neighbors to explain the design of the request. Chair Walton highlighted the roof top area and shared that the applicant keeps the heat in Commissioner Powell suggested to provide umbrellas for the roof top area and echoed concerns with the height of the structure. Powell requested that the applicant pull in detail Alternate Commissioner Garner cautioned the applicant with regard to the exterior building materials because of the look of authenticity versus synthetic.  Commission and provided a presentation of the request.  appreciation of the concept of the copula.  the primary building, copula, or roof top covered area.  pulling it back.  suggested in the setback oft the copula. concern with the height oft the building.  mind.  from the design guidelines such as architectural elements.    1.F Demolition Subcommittee Appointment  Discussion and possible action to appoint a new member to the Historic and Architectural Review Demolition Subcommittee = Maddison O'Kelley, Preservation and  Redevelopment Manager  Moved by Michael J Walton; seconded by Alton Martin to Postpone to Date Certain to October 10, 2024, regular meeting of the Historic and Architectural Review Commission. Voting For: Linda C Burns, Michael J' Walton, Alton Martin, Jennifer Powell, Stuart  Motion Postpone to Date Certain: 5-0  Garner Voting Against: None 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 O'Kelley highlighted Commissioner Alton's end term and expressed gratitude for his service on HARC. O'Kelley continued with a welcome to Phil Rotheram as the new alternate commissioner starting October 1, 2024. O'Kelley highlighted that the next agenda will include a vote for vice chair and the appointment of a new demolition  and Redevelopment Manager  subcommittee member.  Adjournment  These minytes were approved at the meeting of  a Attest  y