Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_HARC_08.25.2016City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review Commission Minutes Thursday, August 25, 2016 at 6:00 p.m. Council and Courts Building 101 E. 711, Street Georgetown, TX 78626 Members present: Lee Bain, Chair; Nancy Knight, Vice -Chair; Justin Bohls; Patty Eason; Shawn Hood, Richard Mee and Lawrence Romero. Commissioners in Training present: Michael Friends and Lynn Williams Commissioners absent: CIT, Jan Daum Staff present: Sofia Nelson, Planning Director; and Karen Frost, Recording Secretary. Call to Order by Chair Bain at 6:00 p.m. with the reading of the meeting procedures. Regular Session A. Welcome and Meeting Procedures Legislative Regular Agenda B. Consideration and possible action to approve the minutes of the July 21, 2016 regular meeting. Motion by Knight to approve the minutes as submitted. Second by Mee. Approved 7 - 0. C. Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for exterior alterations to the street facing fagade for the property located at 1600 Elm Street, bearing the legal description of Southside Addition, (resub Blk Pt 1), Lot s 1 and 3, 0.374 acres. The applicant asked that this item be postponed to the next meeting. Motion by Knight, second by Romero to postpone action on this item until the next meeting, September 22, 2016. Approved 7 - 0. D. Conceptual Review for the proposed Smith Performance Center - Gary Wang, AIA Sofia Nelson presented the policies that the commissioners should consider when reviewing this project and offering comments to the applicant. Those comments should be based on building materials, massing and compatibility with the District. They were not supposed to consider the economic reasons and use of the building. Michael Davis, Committee Chair for the Palace introduced the architect. He stated the board is very excited about the new building, stating that over 6000 children have attended classes at the Palace in the last year and 11 of the 13 classes offered over the summer were booked before they were publicized. They are appreciative of the new space. Gary Wang, architect presented the design of the building, explaining that they want to make children feel welcome, but also safe and secure. He oriented the building's face toward Blue Hole for the good view. He explained that the owners needed 21,000 square feet, but with the small lot, the most he could get was 14,000 square feet, so the plan is a condensed floor plan using every available space. The exterior building materials are Minaret, which is a type of concrete, and corrugated metal. There might be some masonry on the first floor. They are proposing an open lettered blade sign on the west side of the building. Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 1 of 3 Meeting: August 25, 2016 Commissioners offered comments. Chair Bain started the conversation by giving specific Guidelines that he felt were not being met. Other Commissioners added comments to the discussion. Guideline 13.1: Locate a new building at the front property line. Wang says this is not done because of the front sidewalk, accessibility ramp and parking area. Guideline 13.2: Where a portion of a building must be set back, define the edge of the property with landscape elements. Commissioners noted that there was not any landscape shown, or areas to put it later. Wang stated he was trying to maximize the size of each floor so the building is 40 feet tall. With the 15 foot rear setback requirement, he felt there was no room for any landscape elements. Guideline 13.3: A new building shall reflect the traditional lot width as expressed by variations in the fagade. Commissioners expressed concern over the big box style of the structure and the lack of material variations. They even suggested stone. Wang stated he needed the theatre side to be a solid wall, the east side. And that the committee he was working with did not prefer stone, stating they did not have a preference of the stone or the Minaret material. Guideline 13.4: Building heights of larger projects should provide variety. Wang stated he could not change the fagade height or dimensions without affecting the classroom size. Sofia Nelson stated the articulation would be reviewed by staff as part of the technical analysis. Guideline 13.8: Masonry materials that convey a sense of scale are preferred. Knight commented that it seems like the inside of the structure was designed before the outside and that the guidelines were disregarded. Wang insisted the building was more about urbanism and that the new materials downtown would be typical of buildings in bigger cities. Eason commented that the building should be compatible with Georgetown's downtown, not other cities. She feels the current design is cold and sterile and does not match the vision of the city. Wang presented another drawing of the building which included stone and brick as material options. He stated the committee still did not respond with a preference. Mee stated the proposed metal panels were out of character and not to human scale. Guideline 13.9: A simple material finish is encouraged for a large expanse of wall plane. (Matte or non -reflective). Guideline 13.10 Traditional building materials such as wood, brick, and stone are encouraged. Hood commented that he appreciates the open-air balcony and the view of Blue Hole, but has issues with the materials, mass and compatibility. He prefers the square run metal versus the wavy metal on the second and third floors. He suggested something more organic on the first floor, regional limestone would be more appropriate. He suggested the compatibility is not as critical since this is a "special place" but still things it should be designed more contextually. Romero, Mee, Eason, and Knight agree with Hood about the limestone suggestion. Eason suggested a mural on the west side for interest. Wang said he looked at that as an option. Sam Pfeister, the owner of the property directly behind this building, suggested that limestone be used on the first and second floor, to be consistent and in character with the approved townhome design on the same block. The metal can be used on the third floor as an accent and not along the pedestrian levels. Commissioners liked that idea. Wang thanked everyone for their comments. Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 2 of 3 Meeting: August 25, 2016 E. Comments or Questions by Commissioners -in -Training No comments. F. Updates on current projects and future meetings. Adjournment Motion by Hood, second by Eason to adjourn at 7:28 p.m. Approved 7 — 0. Approved, Lee Bain, hair Historic and Architectural Review Commission Meeting: August 25, 2016 r r Attest, Lawrence Romero, ecretary Page 3 of 3