Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_HARC_12.09.2021Notice of Meeting for the Historic and Architectural Rev iew Commission of the City of Georgetown December 9, 2021 at 6:00 P M at 510 W. 9th Street Georgetown, Texas 78626 Council and Courts B uilding T he C ity of G eorgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you require as s is tance in partic ipating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reas onable as s is tance, adaptations , or ac commodations will be provided upon request. P leas e c ontact the C ity S ec retary's O ffic e, at leas t three (3) days prior to the sc heduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or C ity Hall at 808 Martin Luther King Jr. S treet, G eorgetown, T X 78626 for additional information; T T Y users route through R elay Texas at 711. The H istor ic and Ar chite ctural Re view Commission (H A R C) is now me eting in pe rson with a quor um pr esent and public is we lc ome to atte nd. If spe cial ac commodations ar e nee de d due to C O V I D -19 and atte nding vi r tuall y is nec essar y, pl ease r eac h out to the staff li aison, M irna Garc ia, at mir na.gar cia@geor getown.or g or 512-930-3575 for assistance . P ublic Wishing to Address the B oard O n a s ubjec t that is posted on this agenda: P lease fill out a speaker regis tration form whic h can be found at the Board meeting. C learly print your name, the letter of the item on which you wish to speak, and pres ent it to the S taff Liais on, preferably prior to the start of the meeting. You will be c alled forward to speak when the Board cons iders that item. O n a s ubjec t not posted on the agenda: P ersons may add an item to a future Board agenda by filing a written request with the S taff Liais on no later than one week prior to the Board meeting. T he reques t must include the s peaker's name and the spec ific topic to be addres s ed with sufficient information to inform the board and the public . F or Board Liaison c ontact information, pleas e logon to http://government.georgetown.org/c ategory/boards -commissions /. A At the time of posting, no pers ons had s igned up to address the Board. L egislativ e Regular Agenda B C ons ideration and possible action to approve the minutes from the November 11, 2021 regular meeting of the His toric and Architec tural R eview C ommis s ion. - Mirna G arcia, P rogram Manager C P ublic Hearing and P ossible Ac tion on a request for a C ertificate of Appropriateness (C O A) for a new fence, railing or wall that is inc onsistent with the overlay district's c harac teristics and applicable guidelines at the property loc ated at 1503 As h S treet, bearing the legal des cription 0.36-acre in the C lement S tubblefield S urvey, Abstract No. 558, als o being known as the wes t part of Block 9, Hughes Addition, an unrec orded subdivision. (2021-62-C O A) – Britin Bos tic k, Downtown & Historic P lanner D P ublic Hearing and P ossible Ac tion on a request for a C ertificate of Appropriateness (C O A) for the addition of a porch, patio or dec k at the property located at 913 Walnut S treet, bearing the legal desc ription 0.1652-ac re in the William Addis on S urvey, Abstract No. 21, also being known as the northwest part of Bloc k 90, Dimmitt Addition, an unrecorded s ubdivis ion. (2021-63-C O A) – Britin Bos tic k, Downtown & Historic P lanner Page 1 of 90 E P resentation and dis cus s ion on the 2021 activity of the His toric & Architec tural R eview C ommis s ion. F Updates , C ommis s ioner questions, and c omments . - S ofia Nels on, P lanning Director Adjournment Ce rtificate of Posting I, R obyn Densmore, C ity S ecretary for the C ity of G eorgetown, Texas, do hereby c ertify that this Notic e of Meeting was posted at C ity Hall, 808 Martin Luther King Jr. S treet, G eorgetown, T X 78626, a plac e readily acc es s ible to the general public as required by law, on the _____ day of _________________, 2021, at __________, and remained s o posted for at leas t 72 c ontinuous hours prec eding the s cheduled time of said meeting. __________________________________ R obyn Dens more, C ity S ec retary Page 2 of 90 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review December 9, 2021 S UB J E C T: C onsideration and pos s ible ac tion to approve the minutes from the November 11, 2021 regular meeting of the Historic and Arc hitectural R eview C ommission. - Mirna G arc ia, P rogram Manager IT E M S UMMARY: F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: .N/A S UB MIT T E D B Y: Mirna G arcia, P rogram Manager AT TAC H ME N T S: Description Type minutes Backup Material Page 3 of 90 Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 1 of 5 Meeting: November 11, 2021 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review Commission Minutes November 11, 2021 at 6:00 p.m. Council and Courts Building 510 West 9th Street Georgetown, TX 78626 Members Present: Terri Hyde; Michael Walton; Lawrence Romero; Steve Johnston; Pamela Mitchell; Karalei Nunn; Catherine Morales Members Absent: Robert McCabe Staff present: Britin Bostick, Historic Planner; Mirna Garcia, Program Manager; Nat Waggoner, Assistant Director; Sofia Nelson, Planning Director Meeting called to order by Chair Walton at 6:01 pm. Public Wishing to Address the Board On a subject that is posted on this agenda: Please fill out a speaker registration form which can be found at the Board meeting. Clearly print your name, the letter of the item on which you wish to speak, and present it to the Staff Liaison, preferably prior to the start of the meeting. You will be called forward to speak when the Board considers that item. On a subject not posted on the agenda: Persons may add an item to a future Board agenda by filing a written request with the Staff Liaison no later than one week prior to the Board meeting. The request must include the speaker's name and the specific topic to be addressed with sufficient information to inform the board and the public. For Board Liaison contact information, please logon to http://government.georgetown.org/category/boards-commissions/. A. At the time of posting, no persons had signed up to address the Board. Legislative Regular Agenda B. Consideration and possible action to approve the minutes from the October 28, 2021 regular meeting of the Historic and Architectural Review Commission. - Mirna Garcia, Program Manager Motion to approve by Commissioner Johnston. Second by Commissioner Hyde. Approved 5- 0 with Commissioner Morales abstained. Chair Walton requested that Item E be moved up first. E. Public Hearing and Possible 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, the addition of a porch, patio or deck, a 0.6’ encroachment into the required 20’-0” front setback to allow a living space addition 19.4’ from the front (west) property line, and a 8.6’ encroachment into the required 20’-0” front setback to allow a porch addition 11.4’ from the front (west) property line at the property located at 1801 Eubank Street, bearing the legal Page 4 of 90 Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 2 of 5 Meeting: November 11, 2021 description Lot 8, Block 5, Eubank Addition. (2021-59-COA) – Britin Bostick, Downtown & Historic Planner Staff report by Bostick. The applicant is requesting HARC approval of a front porch addition that would be 8’ deep and extend the width of the residence, which is approximately 30’. The existing front porch would be filled in to create additional living space, with the existing wood windows moved to the new exterior wall and the front door centered in the new façade rather than facing the side. The new porch would have a shed roof with a 3:12 slope and use standing seam metal for the roof material. The new porch posts would have brackets to support the roof. The shutters and planter boxes under the windows are not historic and were added after 1984 and are proposed to be replaced with new shutters.The applicant is also requesting HARC approval of a rear addition 14’ deep and the width of the structure, with the rear windows and door to be moved to the new rear façade. The non-historic carports are proposed to be removed and a 20’ breezeway is proposed to be constructed between the rear of the house and the existing garage. A small porch with standing seam shed roof would be part of the rear addition. As the proposed project includes additions to the front and rear of the structure and the current siding is vinyl, the applicant proposes to replace the vinyl siding with lapped fiber cement siding with a 7” reveal. Both the front and rear additions would retain the existing roof form and pitch. The proposed living space additions total approximately 510 sq. ft., and the proposed porch is approximately 240 sq. ft. Chair Walton opened the Public Hearing. Elaine Sebald, 1810 Eubank, supports the project. Chair Walton closed the Public Hearing. Motion to approve Item E (2021-59-COA) by Commissioner Morales. Second Romero. Approved 6-0. C. Continued from the October 14, 2021 regular meeting: Public Hearing and Possible Action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition of a high priority structure at the property located at 309 Walnut Street, bearing the legal description 0.551 acres in Block 5, Shell Addition. – Britin Bostick, Downtown & Historic Planner Staff report by Bostick. The Applicant is requesting HARC approval for the demolition of a high priority structure in the Old Town Overlay District. The Shell family is known to have been one of the first families in Georgetown, and the subject structure was constructed for the second generation of the family on property that was owned or occupied as a homestead by the Shell family for approximately 115 years and four generations. Records indicate that the original portion of the house may have been constructed as early as 1885, and the house retains a large portion of historic materials, characteristics and features that are either original to the house or that were added early in its history, on both the exterior and interior, as many of the interior materials including floors, doors, transoms, and hardware are still intact. Although the Page 5 of 90 Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 3 of 5 Meeting: November 11, 2021 foundation requires maintenance and additional support structure and exterior elements need repair, the structure is in sufficiently sound condition that there is no clear loss of significance or decay of the structure sufficient to warrant a demolition, particularly given the structure can feasibly be rehabilitated with interior changes and/or living space additions. The Commission does not have the option to postpone a decision on this item. The applicant, Gary Wong, addressed the Commission and explained the request for this property. The property owner, Ken Schiller, also addressed the Commission and further explained the request. He also invited David Stegman, a license mold assessment consultant, to review the structure and discussed mold remediation for this property , and assessment made. Chair Walton opened the Public Hearing. Bostick read into the record additional comments received after agenda posting. Dana Hendrix, 809 East 4th Street, commented that her house had the same types of problems the subject property has but those problems were corrected. She also stated that the mold issue is not part of the criteria for a demolition. Larry Olson, E 9th, commented that he looked at the subject property, and the house looks like it is in good shape. Certain areas need to be repaired, and he has experience repairing homes in this condition. The house needs good restoration not demolition. Recommends denial of the demolition request. Christi Cowden, 116 Lockett Rd, former owner of 2 historic homes, similar to the subject property. She is against demolition. Glenn Holder, 1508 Vine St, commented that the house should not be demolished; windows should be fixed and mold remediated. John Lawton, 1103 Elm St, works a contractor restoring historic homes. He commented on the problems discussed with the subject property, and that they can be fixed. Ronald Weaver, 1221 S Main, gave his 3 minutes to Liz Weaver. Liz Weaver, 1221 S Main, is opposed to the demolition of the property. She has also purchased a historic home which needed similar restoration to the subject property, but it was done. Leonard Van Gendt, 502 S Walnut St, is also opposed to the demolition. Page 6 of 90 Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 4 of 5 Meeting: November 11, 2021 Chair Walton closed the Public Hearing. Motion to deny Item C by Commissioner Romero. Second by Commissioner Hyde. Approved 5-1 with Commissioner Johnston opposed. D. Continued from the October 28, 2021 regular meeting: Public Hearing and Possible Action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for: residential infill construction; a 3’-0” setback encroachment into the required 15’-0” side street setback for the construction of a residential structure 12’-0” from the side street (east) property line; a 13’-0” setback encroachment into the required 25’-0” street-facing garage setback for the construction of an attached garage 12’-0” from the side street (east) property line; a 0.03 floor-to-area ratio (FAR) modification to the 0.45 floor-to-area ratio for the Old Town Overlay District, to allow a floor-to- area ratio of 0.48 at the property located at 1404 E. 16th Street, bearing the legal description Lot 2A, Block 3, Nolen Addition. (2021-55-COA) – Britin Bostick, Downtown & Historic Planner Staff report by Bostick. In the public hearing on October 28, 2021 the applicant requested HARC approval of a new two-story, single-family residence with attached two car garage facing the side street. The proposed design included a partial second story over the rear of the structure and above the side-facing garage. The footprint was proposed to be 3,182 sq. ft. with a 783 sq. ft. second floor for a total of 3,965 sq. ft. Following the public hearing and a postponement of the item to the November 11, 2021 meeting to allow the applicant time to revise the design of the proposed new structure, the applicant has removed the second floor portion from the design and the revised plans include a house with a concrete foundation, typical wood framing, black composition shingle roof, and a combination of brick and board and batten siding painted a shade of white. The proposed structure has the same gable and hip roofs and an asymmetrical façade as the initial proposal, with the exception of the removal of the second floor. With the second floor removed from the plans, the structure no longer requires approval of a building height modification discussed in the conceptual review of the application on October 14, 2021, or the floor-to-area (FAR) modification discussed in the public hearing on October 28, 2021. The structure is now proposed to be 3,075 sq. ft. for a floor-to-area ratio (FAR) of 0.37, within the 0.45 maximum. With the front porch and driveway, the impervious cover is proposed to be 0.43, within the 0.45 maximum. The applicant addressed the Commission and was available to answer questions. Chair Walton opened the Public Hearing. Matthew Dola, 1408 E 15th St, is opposed. Scot Smith, 1402 E 16th St, is opposed to the project. Chair Walton closed the Public Hearing. Page 7 of 90 Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 5 of 5 Meeting: November 11, 2021 Motion to approve Item D (2021-55-COA) by Commissioner Nunn. Second by Commissioner Romero. Approved 5-1 with Chair Walton opposed. E. test F. Public Hearing and Possible Action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for the replacement of a historic architectural feature with a non-historic architectural feature at the property located at 1702 S. Elm Street, bearing the legal description 0.42 acres in Block 2, Southside Addition. (2021-60-COA) – Britin Bostick, Downtown & Historic Planner Staff report by Bostick. The subject property has a two-story structure constructed c. 1914 with Craftsman and Prairie style architectural features and still retains what appear to be the original porch deck, although the original columns have been replaced. The applicant is requesting HARC approval to replace the historic wood porch with a new fiber composite porch decking and steps. The porch foundation and steps have deteriorated and need replacement to correct deterioration and uneven walking surfaces, and the applicant prefers the longevity and low maintenance of the fiber composite decking product versus painted wood. Chair Walton opened and closed the Public Hearing as no one signed up to speak. Motion to approve Item F (2021-60-COA) by Commissioner Johnston. Second by Commissioner Romero. Approved 6-0. G. Updates, Commissioner questions, and comments. – Sofia Nelson, Planning Director Adjournment Motion to adjourn by Commissioner Romero. Second by Commissioner Johnston Approved 6-0. Adjourned at 8:55.m. ________________________________ _________________________________ Approved, Michael Walton, Chair Attest, Terri Asendorf-Hyde, Secretary Page 8 of 90 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review December 9, 2021 S UB J E C T: P ublic Hearing and P os s ible Action on a reques t for a C ertific ate of Appropriatenes s (C O A) for a new fenc e, railing or wall that is incons is tent with the overlay dis tric t's characteris tic s and applic able guidelines at the property located at 1503 Ash S treet, bearing the legal desc ription 0.36-ac re in the C lement S tubblefield S urvey, Abs trac t No. 558, also being known as the west part of Bloc k 9, Hughes Addition, an unrecorded s ubdivis ion. (2021-62-C O A) – Britin Bostick, Downtown & His toric P lanner IT E M S UMMARY: Overview of Applicant’s Request: T he Applic ant is req uesting HAR C approval for a new fenc e with a 6’ tall wood p rivac y fenc e alo ng the E. 16th S treet property line and a 6’ tall iron fence across the side yard. S taff’s Analysis: S taff has reviewed the request in ac cordance with the Unified Development C ode (UDC ) and other applicable codes. S taff has determined that the proposed request complies with 4 and partially complies with 2 of the 8 c riteria es tablished in UDC S ection 3.13.030 for a C ertificate of Appropriateness, as outlined in the attac hed S taff R eport. 2 of the 8 criteria were not applicable to the proposed project. Public Comments: As required by the Unified Development C ode (UDC ), three (3) s igns were posted on-s ite. As of the public ation date of this report, s taff has received 0 written comments in favor and 0 in oppos ition to the request. F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: None. T he applicant has paid the required application fees . S UB MIT T E D B Y: Britin Bostick, Downtown & His toric P lanner AT TAC H ME N T S: Description Type Staff Report Cover Memo Exhibit 1 - Location Map Exhibit Exhibit 2 - Letter of Intent Exhibit Exhibit 3 - Plans & Specifications Exhibit Exhibit 4 - His toric Resource Surveys Exhibit Staff Pres entation Pres entation Page 9 of 90 Historic & Architectural Review Commission Planning Department Staff Report Report Date: November 24, 2021 Case Number: 2021-62-COA APPLICATION DETAILS Project Name: The Wade Residence Remodel Applicant: Sydney Lemanski (J. Bryant Boyd, Design Build) Property Owner: Todd & Denise Wade Property Address: 1503 Ash Street Legal Description: 0.36-acre in the Clement Stubblefield Survey, Abstract No. 558, also being known as the west part of Block 9, Hughes Addition, an unrecorded subdivision Historic Overlay: Old Town Overlay District Case History: Alterations to garage approved by HPO Prior COA Denials: N/A Prior COA Approvals: N/A Post-Approval Project Amendments (Date): N/A HISTORIC CONTEXT Date of construction: Main Structure – 1924 (HRS), Accessory Structure 1935 (HRS) – Sanborn Maps show likely 1924 with house Historic Resources Survey Level of Priority: Main Structure - Medium, Accessory Structure - Low National Register Designation: N/A Texas Historical Commission Designation: N/A Notable Property Owners/Events: Public records indicate the house was built by the Belford Lumber Company for Sam (1885-1960) and Fannie (1893-1986) Harris in 1924. Sam Harris was in the grain and feed business and owned additional land outside of Georgetown for agriculture, but he and his wife lived at 1503 Ash until Fannie sold the property to Thomas Meginnis in 1981. APPLICANT’S REQUEST HARC:  New fence, railing or wall that is inconsistent with the overlay district's characteristics and applicable guidelines HPO:  Addition that creates a new, or adds to an existing street facing façade Page 10 of 90 Planning Department Staff Report Historic and Architectural Review Commission 2021-62-COA – 1503 Ash Street Page 2 of 4 STAFF ANALYSIS Present Property Description: The subject property has a medium priority Craftsman style historic structure with clipped gable roof and a detached garage along the south side street, also with a clipped gable roof. The garage structure appears in the 1925 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map, however, on the map it was separately addressed from the main structure. Requested Changes: The applicant is requesting HARC approval for a 6’ wood privacy fence along the south side street property line and a 6’ iron fence internal to the property in the side yard between the new privacy fence and the main house. The proposed fence would enclose the back yard including the west façade of the detached garage, which is being remodeled to serve as a pool house. Technical Review: The UDC allows for a 3’ tall, 50% transparent fence in the front and side yards of residential properties in the Old Town Overlay District unless HARC approves an alternate design. As the proposed 6’ fence sections would be located in the side yard, they require approval by HARC. The Design Guidelines typically recommend a maximum of 4’ in height for front and side yard fences, however, due to the location of the accessory structure, and the narrow width of E. 16th Street, the proposed fence acts more as a back yard fence than a side yard fence and is set back from the front façade of the main house and aligned with the street façade of the accessory structure. Back yard fences are typically 6’ in height, and the proposed fence facing Ash Street would have the more than 50% transparent iron fence design. DESIGN GUIDELINE COMPLIANCE Staff has determined that the proposed project complies with 1 of the 2 applicable Historic District Design Guidelines in Chapter 3 as detailed below in the Applicable Design Guidelines section below. APPLICABLE DESIGN GUIDELINES The following guidelines are applicable to the proposed scope of work in accordance with the adopted Historic District Design Guidelines: GUIDELINES FINDINGS CHAPTER THREE– OLD TOWN DESIGN GUIDELINES 3.3.G Fences & Retaining Walls G.1 Fencing b. Front yard fences along the property line can be constructed out of the following materials: Ornamental iron Ornamental iron fences should be more delicate than the standards for wood picket fences. Complies The proposed fence facing the primary street façade is ornamental iron that is more transparent than a typical wood picket fence. The proposed side street fence is a wood privacy fence. c. Side yard fencing A side or rear yard fence that is taller than its front yard Partially Complies The proposed side yard fence is Page 11 of 90 Planning Department Staff Report Historic and Architectural Review Commission 2021-62-COA – 1503 Ash Street Page 3 of 4 GUIDELINES FINDINGS CHAPTER THREE– OLD TOWN DESIGN GUIDELINES counterpart may be considered. See UDC Chapter 8 for fence standards. Side yard fences erected to the street side of the building line and within the side street setback may be of any of the above materials not over four (4) feet in height. Side yard fences behind the building may be built to a height of six (6) feet. The fence can be constructed as a privacy fence from wood. partially in front of and partially aligned with the accessory structure and is partially in front of and partially behind the main structure. Given the proposed location and design, the fence acts more as a back yard fence, which can be constructed up to 6’ in height and can be a privacy fence constructed from wood. CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL In accordance with Section 3.13.030 of the Unified Development Code, HARC must consider the following criteria. Staff has determined that the applicant has met 6 out of 8 of these criteria. SECTION 3.13.030 CRITERIA FINDINGS 1. The application is complete and the information contained within the application is correct and sufficient enough to allow adequate review and final action; Complies Staff reviewed the application and deemed it complete. 2. Compliance with applicable design standards of this Code; Partially Complies Proposed project complies with applicable UDC requirements, excepting the proposed fence exceeds the height and transparency requirements for side yard fences. 3. Compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties to the most extent practicable; Complies Proposed project is a fence that is in character with the subject property and is easily removed. 4. Compliance with the adopted Historic District Design Guidelines, as may be amended from time to time, specific to the applicable Historic Overlay District; Partially Complies Proposed fence complies or partially complies with applicable Design Guidelines. 5. The general historic, cultural, and architectural integrity of the building, structure or site is preserved; Complies Proposed fence is compatible with the existing fence and historic structures. 6. New buildings or additions are designed to be compatible with surrounding properties in the applicable historic overlay district; Not Applicable No new buildings or additions are proposed. Page 12 of 90 Planning Department Staff Report Historic and Architectural Review Commission 2021-62-COA – 1503 Ash Street Page 4 of 4 SECTION 3.13.030 CRITERIA FINDINGS 7. The overall character of the applicable historic overlay district is protected; and Complies Proposed fence is compatible with the character of the Old Town Overlay District. 8. The Master Sign Plan is in keeping with the adopted Historic District Design Guidelines and character of the historic overlay district. Not Applicable No signs are proposed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based on the findings listed above, staff recommends APPROVAL of the request. As required by the Unified Development Code, three (3) signs were posted on-site. To date, staff has received 0 written comments in favor and 0 in opposition to the request. ATTACHMENTS Exhibit 1 – Location Map Exhibit 2 – Letter of Intent Exhibit 3 – Plans and Specifications Exhibit 4 – Historic Resource Surveys SUBMITTED BY Britin Bostick, Downtown & Historic Planner PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Page 13 of 90 Location 2021-62-COA Exhibit #1 S COLLEG E ST E 15TH ST K N I G H T S T WA L N U T S T S C H U R C H S T E 17T H ST E 16TH ST AS H S T E 16TH ST E L M S T S M Y R T L E S T E 17TH ST E 16TH ST S M Y R T L E S T E 14TH ST 0 200100 Feet ¯ Site Parcels Page 14 of 90 1 City of Georgetown Planning and Development Services/HARC Georgetown, TX 78626 HARC Submission for CoA The Wade Residence Remodel 1503 Ash Street Georgetown, TX 78626 October 18th, 2021 The Project Scope Summary: This applica on is for a CoA rela ng to the remodeling of the exis ng accessory structure at 1503 Ash Street. The detached garage is es mated to have been built in 1935, and the style matches that of the original home which is a mix of tradi onal and cra'sman architectural styles. It is currently classified as Low Priority structure in the 2016 survey. The exis ng garage is a single story structure, which includes a 2 car garage and a storage room. The owners hope to convert the garage space into an outdoor kitchen and entertainment area, while the storage room will become a guest suite with a bathroom. The footprint and roofline of the building will remain the same, with the garage doors and a par al wall being removed to create openings to the outdoor kitchen. The only street-facing altera ons will be the removal of the garage doors, and the addi on of a new fence to enclose the backyard and entertainment space. In order to stay in keeping with the original style of the home, all new windows and openings, including the garage door openings facing Ash street, will be finished out with style-appropriate trim and details, while the roof and siding will remain as is. Both the style and materials will be picked to enhance the stylis c con nui- ty of the structure. New windows will be Andersen composite fiberglass (100 Series). The lite pa4erns and configura on will reflect the original architectural style of the home. The exterior will be repainted to match the current colors. These colors are reflected in the renderings in this package. The new fence will wrap around the street-facing perimeter of the garage to enclose their backyard from E. 16th Street. The fence materials would be to match the exis ng fencing on the property, being wooden privacy fence on the side adjacent to E. 16th Street (to match the fencing on the west side of the garage), and decora ve iron fencing on the side adjacent to the driveway and facing Ash Street. The fencing would serve as both a backyard and pool enclosure, being 6’ tall with a self-latching gate and mee ng the ver cal member spacing requirements of pool enclosures. We are reques ng a setback modifica on for the privacy fence adjacent to E. 16th street, as the garage sits along the property line and there is precedent of similar setback encroachment on the opposite side of the garage facing E. 16th Street. The area around the pool will also be reworked to solve an exis ng drainage issue. In order to channel the water runoff around the garage, we will pour a new drainage pathway that slopes from the level of the pool deck down to the level of the driveway, drain- ing out onto E. 16th street. This drainage pathway will be located within the new fenced area, and would not be visible from either E. 16th or Ash Street. The overall intent of this project is to improve upon the appearance, usability and historic nature of the building, while extending both the indoor and outdoor living spaces of the property. The overall style will remain the same and will be rounded out with the addi on of architectural details appropriate with the overall style. We appreciate the opportunity to present this project to HARC. Sincerely, J. Bryant Boyd, AIA Page 15 of 90 2 AERIAL VIEW HARC submittal for CoA October 18th, 2021 The Wade Residence Remodel 1503 Ash Street Georgetown, TX 78626 Page 16 of 90 3 VIEW OF EAST SIDE OF GARAGE VIEW OF NORTH WEST SIDE OF GARAGE VIEW OF SOUTHEAST CORNER OF GARAGE VIEW OF SOUTHWEST SIDE OF GARAGE FROM E. 16TH STREET VIEW OF SOUTH SIDE OF GARAGE FROM E. 16TH STREET HARC submittal for CoA October 18th, 2021 The Wade Residence Remodel 1503 Ash Street Georgetown, TX 78626 Page 17 of 90 4 EXISTING SITE SURVEY HARC submittal for CoA November 25th, 2021 The Wade Residence Remodel 1503 Ash Street Georgetown, TX 78626 Page 18 of 90 5 NEW SITE PLAN (NTS) HARC submittal for CoA November 25th, 2021 The Wade Residence Remodel 1503 Ash Street Georgetown, TX 78626 Page 19 of 90 6 EXISTING PLAN HARC submittal for CoA November 25th, 2021 The Wade Residence Remodel 1503 Ash Street Georgetown, TX 78626 PROPOSED PLAN Page 20 of 90 7 SOUTH ELEVATION (NTS) HARC submittal for CoA November 25th, 2021 The Wade Residence Remodel 1503 Ash Street Georgetown, TX 78626 NORTH ELEVATION (NTS) Page 21 of 90 8 WEST ELEVATION (NTS) HARC submittal for CoA November 25th, 2021 The Wade Residence Remodel 1503 Ash Street Georgetown, TX 78626 EAST ELEVATION (NTS) Page 22 of 90 9 View of North-Facing Facade View of South-Facing Façade from E. 16th Street HARC submittal for CoA November 25th, 2021 The Wade Residence Remodel 1503 Ash Street Georgetown, TX 78626 NEW OPENING NEW FENCE NEW DOORS NEW FENCE EXISTING FENCE Page 23 of 90 10 View of East-Facing Facade View of West-Facing Façade from driveway HARC submittal for CoA November 25th, 2021 The Wade Residence Remodel 1503 Ash Street Georgetown, TX 78626 NEW WINDOWS NEW WINDOW NEW IRON FENCE NEW BRICK COLUMN EXISTING FENCE NEW PRIVACY FENCE NEW OPENING NEW OPENING Page 24 of 90 11 Exterior Paint Selec ons Main Exterior color —”An que Pewter” Trim Color—”So Chamois” HARC submittal for CoA October 18th, 2021 The Wade Residence Remodel 1503 Ash Street Georgetown, TX 78626 Page 25 of 90 12 Page 26 of 90 1. County TEXAS HISTORIC SITES INVENTORY Williamson FORM — TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION (rev. 8-82) City/Rural 2. Name Georgetown UTM Sector 5. USGS Quad No. 773 3 ' Site No 649 _ — 8 6 Date: Factual 1924 Est Address 1503 Ash 7 Architect/Builder Contractor Belford Lumber Co. 3. Owner Tom Miginnis 8 Style/Type bungalow Address P.O. Box 282, 78626 9. Original Use residential 4. Block/Lot Hughes/Blk. 9/ p. of W. 1/2 Present Use resiential 10. Description One-story wood frame dwelling; exterior walls w/ beveled wood siding; clipped gable roof w/ composition shingles; exposed rafter ends w/ stick brackets; front elev. faces W.; interior brick chimney; wood sash double-hung windows w/ 1/1 lights; single-door entrance; one-bay porch w/ clipped gable roof on W. elev., tapered box suports on brick piers and 11. Present Condition good 12. Significance 13. Relationship to Site: Moved Date or Original Site X (describe) 14. Bibliography Tax rolls; Mechanic's Liens, 15. Informant GHS files 16. Recorder D. Hardy/HHM Date July 1984 DESIGNATIONS PHOTO DATA TNRIS No Old THC Code B&W 4x5s Slides q RTHL 0 NABS (no.) TEX-35mm Negs. YEAR DRWR ROLL FRME to to to ROLL FRME NR: 0 Individual 0 Historic District 0Thematic 0 Multiple-Resource NR File Name 10 20 47 7 47 9 Other CONTINUATION PAGE No.-2 TEXAS HISTORIC SITES INVENTORY FORM — TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION (rev. 8-82) 1. County Wi 1 liamson v M 5. USGS Quad No. 'InQ7-1." Site No. 6/19 City/Rural Georgetown 2. Name #10. Description (cont'd) 4x4 balustrade. Other noteworthy features include bungalow details Outbuildings include frame garage. Page 27 of 90 TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION Properties Documented with the THC Form in 2007 and/or 1984 That Have Not Changed Preservation Priority County Williamson Local District:Old Town District Address:1503 Ash St 2016 Survey ID:125337 A City Georgetown 2016 Preservation Priority:Medium SECTION 1 Basic Inventory Information WCAD ID:R042806Property Type:Building Structure Object Site District Date Recorded 3/14/2016Recorded by:CMEC EstimatedActual Source:2007 surveyConstruction Date:1924 Bungalow Other: Center Passage ShotgunOpen2-roomModified L-plan Rectangular T-plan Four Square L-plan Irregular Plan* International Ranch No Style Post-war Modern Commercial Style Other: Pueblo Revival Prairie Art Deco Spanish Colonial Craftsman Moderne Gothic Revival Neo-Classical Mission Tudor Revival Beaux Arts Monterey Shingle Folk Victorian Renaissance Revival Romanesque Revival Colonial Revival Exotic Revival Log traditional Italianate Eastlake Greek Revival Second Empire Queen Anne Stylistic Influence(s)* Note: See additional photo(s) on following page(s) General Notes: (Notes from 2007 Survey: stoop rails replaced) High Medium Priority: Low High Medium Low ID:989a ID:649 *Photographs and Preservation Priority have been updated in 2016, and the year built date has also been reviewed. However, the plan and style data are sourced directly from the 2007 survey. 2007 Survey 1984 Survey Current/Historic Name None/None ID:125337 A2016 Survey High Medium Low Explain:Despite some alterations, property is significant and contributes to neighborhood character Latitude:30.630559 Longitude -97.672855 None Selected None Selected Photo direction: Southeast Page 28 of 90 TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION Properties Documented with the THC Form in 2007 and/or 1984 That Have Not Changed Preservation Priority County Williamson Local District:Old Town District Address:1503 Ash St 2016 Survey ID:125337 A City Georgetown 2016 Preservation Priority:Medium Additional Photos EastPhoto Direction Page 29 of 90 TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION County Williamson Local District:Old Town District Address:1503 Ash St 2016 Survey ID:125337 B City Georgetown HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY FORM 2016 Preservation Priority:Low SECTION 1 Basic Inventory Information WCAD ID:R042806Property Type:Building Structure Object Site District Date Recorded 3/14/2016Recorded by:CMEC EstimatedActual Source:WCADConstruction Date:1935 Bungalow Other Center Passage Shotgun Open2-roomModified L-plan Rectangular T-plan Four Square L-plan Irregular Plan International Ranch No Style Post-war Modern Commercial Style Other Pueblo Revival Prairie Art Deco Spanish Colonial Craftsman Moderne Gothic Revival Neo-Classical Mission Tudor Revival Beaux Arts Monterey Shingle Folk Victorian Renaissance Revival Romanesque Revival Colonial Revival Exotic Revival Log traditional Italianate Eastlake Greek Revival Second Empire Queen Anne Stylistic Influence(s) Note: See additional photo(s) on page 2 General Notes: Explain:Property lacks significance Geographic Location Latitude:30.630377 Longitude -97.672671 Current/Historic Name:None/None High Medium Priority: Low High Medium Low ID 989b ID Not Recorded 2007 Survey 1984 Survey ID 125337 B2016 Survey High Medium Low Page 30 of 90 TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION County Williamson Local District:Old Town District Address:1503 Ash St 2016 Survey ID:125337 B City Georgetown HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY FORM 2016 Preservation Priority:Low Additional Photos NortheastPhoto Direction Page 31 of 90 The Wade Residence Remodel 2021-62-COA Historic & Architectural Review Commission December 9, 2021 1Page 32 of 90 Item Under Consideration 2021-62-COA –The Wade Residence Remodel •Public Hearing and Possible Action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for a new fence, railing or wall that is inconsistent with the overlay district's characteristics and applicable guidelines at the property located at 1503 Ash Street, bearing the legal description 0.36-acre in the Clement Stubblefield Survey, Abstract No. 558, also being known as the west part of Block 9, Hughes Addition, an unrecorded subdivision. 2Page 33 of 90 Item Under Consideration HARC: •New 6’ fence HPO: •Garage remodel 3Page 34 of 90 Item Under Consideration 4Page 35 of 90 5Page 36 of 90 Current Context 6Page 37 of 90 History •Year Constructed: 1924 •Builder: Belford Lumber Company •Past Occupants: Sam and Fannie Harris 7Page 38 of 90 1925 Sanborn Map 8Page 39 of 90 1964 Aerial Photo 9Page 40 of 90 1974 Aerial Photo 10Page 41 of 90 1984 HRS Photo 11Page 42 of 90 Current Photos 12Page 43 of 90 Current Photos 13Page 44 of 90 Proposed Site Plan 14 New Fence Page 45 of 90 Proposed E. 16th Street Elevation 15 New Fence Page 46 of 90 Proposed E. 16th Street Elevation 16Page 47 of 90 Proposed Ash Street Elevation 17Page 48 of 90 Approval Criteria –UDC Section 3.13.030 Criteria Staff’s Finding 1. The application is complete and the information contained within the application is correct and sufficient enough to allow adequate review and final action;Complies 2. Compliance with applicable design standards of this Code;Partially Complies 3. Compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties to the most extent practicable;Complies 4. Compliance with the Historic District Design Guidelines, as may be amended from time to time, specific to the applicable Historic Overlay District; Partially Complies 5. The general historic, cultural, and architectural integrity of the building, structure or site is preserved;Complies 6. New buildings or additions are designed to be compatible with surrounding properties in the applicable historic overlay district;N/A 7. The overall character of the applicable historic overlay district is protected; and Complies 8. The Master Sign Plan is in keeping with the adopted Historic District Design Guidelines and character of the historic overlay district.N/A 18Page 49 of 90 Public Notification •Three (3) signs posted •To date, staff has received: •0 written comments IN FAVOR •0 written comments OPPOSED 19Page 50 of 90 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the request for a 6’ wood and iron fence. 20Page 51 of 90 HARC Motion –2021-62-COA •Approve (as presented by the applicant) •Deny (as presented by the applicant) •Approve with conditions •Postpone 21Page 52 of 90 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review December 9, 2021 S UB J E C T: P ublic Hearing and P os s ible Action on a reques t for a C ertific ate of Appropriatenes s (C O A) for the addition of a porc h, patio or deck at the property loc ated at 913 Walnut S treet, bearing the legal desc ription 0.1652-acre in the William Addison S urvey, Abs trac t No. 21, als o being known as the northwest part of Bloc k 90, Dimmitt Addition, an unrecorded s ubdivis ion. (2021-63-C O A) – Britin Bostick, Downtown & His toric P lanner IT E M S UMMARY: Overview of Applicant’s Request: T he Applic ant is reques ting HAR C ap p ro val fo r the additio n o f a c o vered patio at the rear of the exis ting historic s tructure. S taff’s Analysis: S taff has reviewed the request in ac cordance with the Unified Development C ode (UDC ) and other applicable codes. S taff has determined that the proposed request complies with 7 of the 8 c riteria es tablished in UDC S ection 3.13.030 for a C ertificate of Appropriateness, as outlined in the attac hed S taff R eport. 1 of the 8 criteria were not applicable to the proposed project. Public Comments: As required by the Unified Development C ode (UDC ), two (2) s igns were posted on-s ite. As of the public ation date of this report, s taff has received 0 written comments in favor and 0 in oppos ition to the request. F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: None. T he applicant has paid the required application fees . S UB MIT T E D B Y: Britin Bostick, Downtown & His toric P lanner AT TAC H ME N T S: Description Type Staff Report Cover Memo Exhibit 1 - Location Map Exhibit Exhibit 2 - Letter of Intent Exhibit Exhibit 3 - Plans & Specifications Exhibit Exhibit 4 - His toric Resource Surveys Exhibit Staff Pres entation Pres entation Page 53 of 90 Historic & Architectural Review Commission Planning Department Staff Report Report Date: December 3, 2021 File Number: 2021-63-COA AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION Public Hearing and Possible Action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for the addition of a porch, patio or deck at the property located at 913 Walnut Street, bearing the legal description 0.1652-acre in the William Addison Survey, Abstract No. 21, also being known as the northwest part of Block 90, Dimmitt Addition, an unrecorded subdivision. AGENDA ITEM DETAILS Project Name: 913 Walnut Back Porch Applicant: John Lawton (Green Earth Builders, LLC) Property Owner: James Bray & Kendall Britt Property Address: 913 Walnut Street Legal Description: 0.1652-acre in the William Addison Survey, Abstract No. 21, also being known as the northwest part of Block 90, Dimmitt Addition, an unrecorded subdivision Historic Overlay: Old Town Overlay District Case History: N/A Prior COA Denials: N/A Prior COA Approvals: N/A HISTORIC CONTEXT Date of Construction: 1920 (HRS) – Public Records show 1914 Historic Resources Survey Level of Priority: Medium National Register Designation: N/A Texas Historical Commission Designation: N/A Notable Property Owners/Events: Constructed in 1914 by M. L. Langford for Mabel & Clara Wilson with a loan from Taylor Building & Loan Assc. APPLICANT’S REQUEST HARC:  Back porch addition STAFF ANALYSIS Present Property Description: The subject property is a two-story medium priority structure constructed in 1914 by M. L. Langford and financed by J. H. Griffith, the president and trustee of the Taylor Building & Loan Association and older Page 54 of 90 Planning Department Staff Report Historic and Architectural Review Commission 2021-63-COA – 913 Walnut Street Page 2 of 5 brother of notable local builder C. S. Griffith, for Clara and Mabel Wilson. Based on the construction year, and photos from the 1984 Historic Resource Survey, the structure may have undergone exterior changes to modify the front porch style, as the primary façade, including the porch, has Craftsman architectural details that were more common in Georgetown after the construction of the house. Requested Changes: The applicant is requesting HARC approval of the addition of a rear porch which would have a stone patio-style floor, cedar and pine columns and sloped or shed roof structure and a standing seam metal roof to match the roof on the existing structure. The columns would have 1’ square and 30” tall bases, which reference but do not exactly replicate the column bases on the front porch. Technical Review: The proposed porch meets the required setbacks and applicable Design Guidelines and is located fully to the rear of the structure, although it would be visible from the side street. DESIGN GUIDELINE COMPLIANCE Staff has determined that the proposed project complies with 5 of the 5 applicable Historic District Design Guidelines in Chapter 3 as detailed below in the Applicable Design Guidelines section below. APPLICABLE DESIGN GUIDELINES The following guidelines are applicable to the proposed scope of work in accordance with the adopted Historic District Design Guidelines: GUIDELINES FINDINGS CHAPTER THREE – OLD TOWN DESIGN GUIDELINES 3.5.K Additions K.1 Design alterations and additions to be compatible with the historic character of the property. Building additions should be in keeping with the original architectural character, color, mass, scale, and materials. Complies The proposed porch is a compatible scale to the main structure for a back porch, has minimal visibility at the rear of the main structure and is subordinate to the main structure. The proposed elevation shows the roof being constructed around historic features such as windows. a. Minimize the visual impacts of an addition. New additions should not be so large as to overwhelm the original structure because of location, size, height or scale. It should be designed to remain subordinate to the main structure. b. Avoid alterations that would damage historic features. K.2 An addition should be distinguishable from the original building, even in subtle ways, such that the character of the original can be interpreted. Complies The proposed porch can be distinguished from the original building through the proposed use Page 55 of 90 Planning Department Staff Report Historic and Architectural Review Commission 2021-63-COA – 913 Walnut Street Page 3 of 5 GUIDELINES FINDINGS CHAPTER THREE – OLD TOWN DESIGN GUIDELINES of materials and a simpler architectural style. K.3 Location of Additions Complies The proposed porch is proposed to be constructed fully to the rear of the main structure, is a single story in height compared to the two-story main structure and is not prominent on the side street façade as it is set back from that façade. a. Additions should be located inconspicuously on the least character-defining elevation. c. Additions should be to the rear of the existing structure or as far away from the public street unless there is sufficient side yard width. Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impacts. This will allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. K.4 The roof of a new addition shall be in character with that of the primary building. Complies The proposed porch has a shed roof with a slope and materials in character with the primary building. K.7 Exterior Materials of Additions Complies The proposed cedar and pine materials as well as standing seam metal roof are compatible with the primary building, which has wood siding and a wood front porch as well as a standing seam metal roof. a. The selection of exterior materials should be compatible with the primary building. CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL In accordance with Section 3.13.030 of the Unified Development Code, HARC must consider the following criteria. Staff has determined that the applicant has met 7 out of 8 of these criteria. SECTION 3.13.030 CRITERIA FINDINGS 1. The application is complete and the information contained within the application is correct and sufficient enough to allow adequate review and final action; Complies Staff reviewed the application and deemed it complete. 2. Compliance with applicable design standards of this Code; Complies Proposed project complies with applicable UDC criteria. 3. Compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties to the most extent practicable; Complies Proposed project complies with applicable SOI Standards, which include: Page 56 of 90 Planning Department Staff Report Historic and Architectural Review Commission 2021-63-COA – 913 Walnut Street Page 4 of 5 SECTION 3.13.030 CRITERIA FINDINGS 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. 4. Compliance with the adopted Historic District Design Guidelines, as may be amended from time to time, specific to the applicable Historic Overlay District; Complies Proposed project complies with applicable Design Guidelines. 5. The general historic, cultural, and architectural integrity of the building, structure or site is preserved; Complies Proposed project is compatible with the style of the building, is located fully to the rear of the main structure and is easily removed in the future. 6. New buildings or additions are designed to be compatible with surrounding properties in the applicable historic overlay district; Complies The proposed back porch design and materials are compatible with surrounding properties in the Old Town Overlay District. 7. The overall character of the applicable historic overlay district is protected; and Complies The proposed back porch addition will have minimal visibility and impact on the character of the Old Town Overlay District and is compatible with the overall character. 8. The Master Sign Plan is in keeping with the adopted Historic District Design Guidelines and character of the historic overlay district. Not Applicable No signs are proposed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based on the findings listed above, staff recommends APPROVAL of the request. Page 57 of 90 Planning Department Staff Report Historic and Architectural Review Commission 2021-63-COA – 913 Walnut Street Page 5 of 5 As required by the Unified Development Code, two (2) signs were posted on-site. To date, staff has received 0 written comments in favor and 0 in opposition to the request. ATTACHMENTS Exhibit 1 – Location Map Exhibit 2 – Letter of Intent Exhibit 3 – Plans and Specifications Exhibit 4 – Historic Resource Surveys SUBMITTED BY Britin Bostick, Downtown & Historic Planner PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Page 58 of 90 Location 2021-63-COA Exhibit #1 AS H S T SOULE DR WA L N U T S T MCKENZIE DR PI N E S T S CO LL E GE ST MCK E N Z I E D R E 8TH ST MA P L E S T E 9TH ST M C K E N Z I E D R E 8TH S T E 10TH ST E 11TH ST E 10TH ST E 9TH S T E 9TH 1/2 ST E 9TH S T 0 200100 Feet ¯ Site Parcels Page 59 of 90 Green Earth Builders, LLC 2306 Waizel Way Georgetown, Texas 78626 Office: 512-591-7588 Cell: 512-779-0100 Web: WWW.GREENEARTHBUILDERS.NET Email: jennhaleygeb@gmail.com 913 Walnut St Letter of Intent 913 Walnut is a two-story residence on the corner of 9 ½ St. On the east side of residence existing stone patio to be extended across the back of the residence. Will have step on south side of patio to match north side. Residence will also have a 3/12 slope roof covering full length of the patio. The patio cover will have cedar beams across the east side supported by four cedar post. Open rafters to be rough sawn 2”X4” along with ledger. The roof will be decked with 1”X3” long leaf pine flooring T/G. All materials decking and rafters are restored from homes build in 1880 to 1910. Under side of roof to be exposed, sanded, stained, and finished. Standing seam metal roof. Electrical added will be switched at exterior door for lighting and 2 ceiling fans. Page 60 of 90 Page 61 of 90 Page 62 of 90 Page 63 of 90 „iii ivn r rt.nuvi — I tAAS hiIS i Ulill;AL L;UIVIIIIIIbSWN (rev. 8-82) 1. County Williamsor. City/Rural Georgetown WM GE 5. USGS Quad No. 3097-313 Site No 707 UTM Sector 677-3389 2. Name 6 Date: Factual Est 1 020 Address 91 3 Walnut 7 Architect/Builder Contractor 3. Owner Jerome C. Lawyer 8 Style/Type Address Ra mp, 7F1626 9 Original Use rasidential 4. Block/Lot Di mmi t /111 k _ 90/T,nt N_W_ corner Present Use -r-Pidpntial 10. Description Two story wood frame dwell i ng Id modi fi ed 1.,--pl an.;_ exteri or wal 1 s w/ alurniailm siding: hip roof, wi standing-seam metal covering; extended hex eaves :j ntPri rr hr -i He- rhimr1.044 w/ corbeled rap; wood and al nmi num cash douhl ',hung wi nrinwq: wood cash l'iridOWS .r / 5/1 light6; aluminum sash w/ 1/1 1 ights: cinglp—rionr entranco 4apens onto porch; no .story porch w/ > 11. Present Condition good; altered--aliimi num si di ng 12. Significance Primary area of si gni fi ranre• arrhi terture 13. Relationship to Site: Moved Date or Original Site x (describe) 14. Bibliography Sanborn Maps 15. Informant 16. RecorderD Mnnre/1-1HM Date July 198/I DESIGNATIONS PHOTO DATA TNR1S No Old THC Code B&W 4x5s Slides q RTHL 0 HABS (no.) TEX-35mm Negs. YEAR DRWR ROLL FRME to to to ROLL FRME NR: 0 Individual 0 Historic District 0 Thematic 0 Multiple-Resource NR File Name 11 20 39 21 39 27 Other CONTINUATION PAGE No _—__2— TEXAS HISTORIC SITES INVENTORY FORM — TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION (rev. 8-82) 1. County Wil liamson I WM 5. USGS Quad No City/Rural Georgetown GE 2. Name #10. Description (cont'd): hip roof that is L-shaped in S. & W. elevations; balcony/deck on S. end; paired, tapered box supports on stuccoed piers. Outbuildings include detached frame garage w/ stick brackets; exposed rafter ends. Site No 707 Page 64 of 90 TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION Properties Documented with the THC Form in 2007 and/or 1984 That Have Not Changed Preservation Priority County Williamson Local District:Old Town District Address:913 S Walnut St 2016 Survey ID:123859 City Georgetown 2016 Preservation Priority:Medium SECTION 1 Basic Inventory Information WCAD ID:R042062Property Type:Building Structure Object Site District Date Recorded 4/21/2016Recorded by:CMEC EstimatedActual Source:2007 surveyConstruction Date:1920 Bungalow Other: Center Passage ShotgunOpen2-roomModified L-plan Rectangular T-plan Four Square L-plan Irregular Plan* International Ranch No Style Post-war Modern Commercial Style Other: Pueblo Revival Prairie Art Deco Spanish Colonial Craftsman Moderne Gothic Revival Neo-Classical Mission Tudor Revival Beaux Arts Monterey Shingle Folk Victorian Renaissance Revival Romanesque Revival Colonial Revival Exotic Revival Log traditional Italianate Eastlake Greek Revival Second Empire Queen Anne Stylistic Influence(s)* Note: See additional photo(s) on following page(s) General Notes: (Notes from 2007 Survey: aluminum screens and siding; porch piers boxed in) High Medium Priority: Low High Medium Low ID:1059 ID:707 *Photographs and Preservation Priority have been updated in 2016, and the year built date has also been reviewed. However, the plan and style data are sourced directly from the 2007 survey. 2007 Survey 1984 Survey Current/Historic Name None/None ID:123859 2016 Survey High Medium Low Explain:Property retains a relatively high degree of integrity; property is significant and contributes to neighborhood character Latitude:30.635666 Longitude -97.670707 None Selected None Selected Photo direction: East Page 65 of 90 TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION Properties Documented with the THC Form in 2007 and/or 1984 That Have Not Changed Preservation Priority County Williamson Local District:Old Town District Address:913 S Walnut St 2016 Survey ID:123859 City Georgetown 2016 Preservation Priority:Medium Additional Photos NortheastPhoto Direction Page 66 of 90 913 Walnut Back Porch 2021-63-COA Historic & Architectural Review Commission December 9, 2021 1Page 67 of 90 Item Under Consideration 2021-63-COA –913 Walnut Back Porch •Public Hearing and Possible Action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for the addition of a porch, patio or deck at the property located at 913 Walnut Street, bearing the legal description 0.1652-acre in the William Addison Survey, Abstract No. 21, also being known as the northwest part of Block 90, Dimmitt Addition, an unrecorded subdivision. 2Page 68 of 90 Item Under Consideration HARC: •Back Porch Addition 3Page 69 of 90 Item Under Consideration 4Page 70 of 90 GISD Hammerlun Center 5Page 71 of 90 Current Context 6Page 72 of 90 History •Year Constructed: 1914 •Builder: M. L. Langford •Past Occupants: Clara & Mabel Wilson (1914-1918) Clara & Clarence Mast (1918-1927) J. L. & Mary Perry (1927-1929) H. H. & Matie Onstot (1929-1932) M. B. & Alma Hall inherited from Emma Hall (1932-1943) Horace & Marjorie Blank (1943-1950) Duncan & Madie Cooper (1950-1955) Emmett & Mary Grimes (1955-1957 H. C. & Betty Carothers (1957-1970) Jerome & Ellen Lawyer (1970-1985) C. W. & Mary Stewart (1985-1993) Ed & Bertha Davis (1993-2005) James Bray & Kendall Britt (2005-Present)7Page 73 of 90 1925 Sanborn Map 8Page 74 of 90 1925 Sanborn Map 9Page 75 of 90 c. 1934 SU Special Collections Photo 10Page 76 of 90 1964 Aerial Photo 11Page 77 of 90 1974 Aerial Photo 12Page 78 of 90 1984 HRS Photo 13Page 79 of 90 1984 HRS Photos 14Page 80 of 90 Current Photo 15Page 81 of 90 Current Photo 16Page 82 of 90 Current Photo 17Page 83 of 90 Proposed Site Plan 18Page 84 of 90 Proposed Elevations 19Page 85 of 90 Approval Criteria –UDC Section 3.13.030 Criteria Staff’s Finding 1. The application is complete and the information contained within the application is correct and sufficient enough to allow adequate review and final action;Complies 2. Compliance with applicable design standards of this Code;Complies 3. Compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties to the most extent practicable;Complies 4. Compliance with the Historic District Design Guidelines, as may be amended from time to time, specific to the applicable Historic Overlay District;Complies 5. The general historic, cultural, and architectural integrity of the building, structure or site is preserved;Complies 6. New buildings or additions are designed to be compatible with surrounding properties in the applicable historic overlay district;Complies 7. The overall character of the applicable historic overlay district is protected; and Complies 8. The Master Sign Plan is in keeping with the adopted Historic District Design Guidelines and character of the historic overlay district.N/A 20Page 86 of 90 Public Notification •Two (2) signs posted •To date, staff has received: •0 written comments IN FAVOR •0 written comments OPPOSED 21Page 87 of 90 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the request for a covered patio addition. 22Page 88 of 90 HARC Motion –2021-63-COA •Approve (as presented by the applicant) •Deny (as presented by the applicant) •Approve with conditions •Postpone 23Page 89 of 90 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review December 9, 2021 S UB J E C T: P res entation and disc ussion on the 2021 ac tivity of the Historic & Arc hitectural R eview C ommission. IT E M S UMMARY: S taff report and pres entation to the commission on the number of C ertific ates of Appropriatenes s rec eived and reviewed in 2021. F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T: N/A S UB MIT T E D B Y: Britin Bostick, Downtown & His toric P lanner Page 90 of 90