HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_HARC_09.22.2016City of Georgetown, Texas
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
Minutes
Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 6:00 p.m.
Council and Courts Building
101 E. Th 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: Matt Synatschk, Historic District Planner; Sofia Nelson, Planning Director; and Karen
Frost, Recording Secretary.
Call to Order by Chair Bair; at 6:00iI .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 August 22, 20116 regular meeting.
Eason asked that Hood's suggestion to add a minaret at the theater black box as a solution for
different material on the building be added to the minutes. A correction on the number of
students that have attended the Palace camps, should be 600.
Motion by Eason to approve the minutes with the corrections. Second by Knight. 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.
This item was opened after Item D.
Synatschk reported the applicant is requesting the removal of an existing historic porch, replacing
it with a new porch designed to match the porch on the east side of the structure. The application
was initiated after Code Enforcement issued a Stop Work Order for the project. The historic porch
along the north fagade was removed, and partial construction of the new porch was in progress.
The 1984 survey form evaluated the current structure for its significance, determining it to be a
Low priority structure. The property was reevaluated in 2007, with the priority upgraded to
Medium priority. A survey form was not produced in conjunction with the 2007 evaluation. The
draft results of the 2016 historic resource survey reduced the priority from Medium to Low due to
the non -historic alterations along the east fagade.
The structure was significantly altered in 2012 with the construction of two porches on the east
facade of the structure. The 2012 City of Georgetown aerial photos document the construction of a
new slab for an accessory structure, and slabs for the porches. In addition, the March 2011 Google
Street View images document the construction of the new porches. The Craftsman style columns
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 1 of 4
Meeting: September 22, 2016
match those of the 2006 accessory building in design and materials. Therefore, the east porches
are not historic components of the structure.
The project at 1600 Elm Street was not reviewed by staff prior to commencing work. If staff had
been able to review the proposal before the applicant started work on the porch, staff's
recommendation would have been that a flat roofed porch, extending to the left of the historic
porch, would have been the appropriate treatment for the structure. The design would have
accomplished the applicant's goal while highlighting the historic details of the structure. Staff's
recommendation for the project would have included a design with a flat roof that highlighted
the historic character defining porch, while creating the required differentiation for new
construction.
The proposed project does not comply with the Downtown and Old Town Design Guidelines
because it results in the removal of a character defining feature, loss of a significant stylistic
element and creates a new feature that is inconsistent with the structure. The HARC has the
authority to request that the applicant reconstruct the lost Character definu.g feature and request a
design that incorporates that feature into an expanded porch.
Chair Bain asked why the 2011 renovations were allowed to occur. Synatschk explained that the
porches in Old Town were not reviewed by HARC at that time. Scott and Linda Wilkins were
present to answer questions from the Commission. They stated they had lived in the house for 25
years and did not realize the porches were historic, they only knew they were from another
structure and not stable.
Eason stated that homeowners not knowing their homes are historic is a major problem and the
city needs to notify homeowners better than has been done in the past. Synatschk said
homeowners would be notified with the new Historic Resource Survey publication. Eason and
Knight agreed the homeowners in the area do not necessarily know when to submit for a permit.
Nelson said the city will work on education of the public, but the applicants for this item fall
under the Unified Development Code and Design Guidelines regulations.
There was further discussion of ways to better educate homeowners in the Downtown and Old
Town overlay districts of the regulations that affect their homes. Synatschk reminded everyone
that the new street signs for the districts would help delineate the differences of the areas, helping
to identify that houses are in historic districts and could have specific historic significance.
Chair Bain opened the Public Hearing.
Lisa Gustayson of 1610 S. Elm Street spoke in support of the applicants' request. She said she had
not heard about HARC and the regulations until recently and she has lived here since 2005. She
presented examples of houses in the neighborhood with similar pillars and features.
Amy Baker of 1503 Elm Street spoke in support of the project. She has lived in her house since
2002 and was aware of HARC but felt that some of the permits required are not clear. "Some
maintenance" language is confusing when trying to determine if a permit is needed or not.
Eric Loyd of 1607 Elm Street supports the applicants' request. He wrote a letter stating the same.
He also explained that some of the house was destroyed by a falling tree and therefore they
should be allowed to replace the damaged area.
Michael Kamen of 1604 Church Street supports the request and thinks the house will be
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 2 of 4
Meeting: September 22, 2016
consistent with the rest of the neighborhood's character.
Chair Bain closed the public hearing with no more speakers coming forth.
Romero commented that the process was confusing but it is still the obligation of the
homeowners to take the responsibility to ask questions before doing any work.
Motion by Knight to approve the application as presented by the applicants. Second by Hood.
The discussion continued about the fact that Realtors don't know about historic structures and the
process to renovate or remodel them, so they are not helping the new homeowners. And the title
companies are not telling homeowners that properties have historic significance. They all agreed
that the homeowners should not be penalized for trying to improve their home. Hood suggested
the Planning Department work closer with realtors and homeowners and try to be proactive by
educating people about the design guidelines and application of those guidelines.
Vote on the motion: Approved 7 - 0.
D. Public hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for a
residential addition for the property located at 1605 South Church Street bearing the legal
description of Southside Addition, Block 1 (W/PT), 0.15 acres.
Synatschk presented the staff report. The applicant is proposing to add 263 square feet to an
existing structure. It is on the corner and will be differentiated by a setback and different
materials. Staff recommends approval.
Bain opened the Public Hearing and with no citizens coming forth closed it.
Motion by Eason to approve the COA for 1605 South Church Street as submitted. Second by
Bohls. Approved 7 - 0.
E. Comments or Questions by Commissioners -in -Training
Michael Friends asked questions about the porches and why what was appropriate for some were
not appropriate for others. Hood explained that although a porch and pillar design looked like
houses around the neighborhood, the design had to be consistent with the house style that it was
being built for.
F. Updates on current projects and future meetings.
• Austin Avenue Bridges are still being reviewed. Go to austinavenue@georgetown.org for
more details.
• Historic Resource Survey: work is ongoing by the consultants. They are working on the
forms and the GIS map. Staff is expecting a draft report by the end of October. There will
be notifications of public meetings and a comment period for homeowners to meet with
the consultants and/or staff.
• Table on Main is being held on October 2, 2016. Tickets are available through the Main
Street Program.
• Downtown Lowdown will be held on October 19th at Roots Bistro on the Square.
• The next HARC meeting will be Thursday, October 271h.
• The next Breakfast Bites meeting will be held November 16th.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 3 of 4
Meeting: September 22, 2016
Adjournment
Motion by Knight, second by Romero to adjourn at 6:55 p.m. Approved 7 - 0.
Approved, Lee ,Chair Attest, Lawrence Romero, Secretary
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 4 of 4
Meeting: September 22, 2016