HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_HARC_01.13.2022Notice of Meeting for the
Historic and Architectural Rev iew Commission
of the City of Georgetown
January 13, 2022 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 P ublic Hearing and Possible Action on a reques t for a C ertific ate of Appropriatenes s (C O A) for the
demolition of a medium priority historic s tructure at the property located at 412 E. 7th S treet, bearing the
legal desc ription Lot 1, G lassc ock’s S ec ond Addition. (2021-64-C O A) –Nat Waggoner, Asst. P lanning
Dir. - Long R ange
C P ublic Hearing and Possible Action on a reques t for a C ertific ate of Appropriatenes s (C O A) for a new
fence, railing or wall that is inconsistent with the overlay district's characteristics and applicable
guidelines at the property loc ated at 1307 S. Myrtle S treet, bearing the legal des cription 0.13-acre in the
C lement S tubblefield S urvey, Abs trac t No. 558, also being known as the s outhwes t part of Block B,
Hughes S ec ond Addition, an unrec orded subdivision. (2021-73-C O A) –Nat Waggoner, As s t. P lanning
Dir. - Long R ange
D Updates , C ommis s ioner questions, and c omments . - S ofia Nels on, P lanning Director
Page 1 of 183
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 _________________, 2022, 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 183
City of Georgetown, Texas
Historic and Architectural Review
January 13, 2022
S UB J E C T:
Public Hearing and P ossible Action on a request for a C ertificate of Appropriateness (C O A) for the
demolition of a medium priority his toric struc ture at the property loc ated at 412 E. 7th S treet, bearing the
legal des cription Lot 1, G las s coc k’s S econd Addition. (2021-64-C O A) –Nat Waggoner, As s t. P lanning
Dir. - Long R ange
IT E M S UMMARY:
Overview of Applicant’s Request:
T he Ap p licant is reques ting HAR C approval for the c o mp lete d emo lition of the struc ture under the c riteria
of loss of signific anc e.
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 1 of the 3 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.
Public Comments:
As required by the Unified Development C ode (UDC ), one (1) sign was pos ted on-site, and thirty-four
(34) letters were mailed to property owners within a 300-foot radius of the s ubjec t property. As of the
public ation date of this report, s taff has received 0 written comments in favor and 2 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:
Nat Waggoner, P MP, AI C P
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 - Property Ins pections Exhibit
Exhibit 4 - His toric Resource Surveys Exhibit
Exhibit 5 - Demolition Subcommittee Report Exhibit
Exhibit 6 - Photos Exhibit
Exhibit 7 - Public Comment Exhibit
Page 3 of 183
Staff Pres entation Exhibit
Page 4 of 183
HISTORIC AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
DEMOLITION REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Report Date: January 7, 2021
File Number: 2021-64-COA
AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION
Public Hearing and Possible Action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for the
demolition of a medium priority historic structure at the property located at 412 E. 7th Street, bearing the
legal description Lot 1, Glasscock’s Second Addition.
AGENDA ITEM DETAILS
Project Name: 412 E. 7th Street Demo
Applicant: Amy Miller
Property Owner: James G. Miller
Property Address: 412 E. 7th Street
Legal Description: Lot 1, Glasscock’s Second Addition
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: 1890 (HRS)
Historic Resources Survey Level of Priority: Medium
National Register Designation: N/A
Texas Historical Commission Designation: N/A
Notable Property Owners/Events: Property owned by the Glasscock family until 1912
STAFF ANALYSIS
Background
Per a deed from April 5, 1912, Albert Horton Glasscock, Elizabeth Jane Glasscock Talbott, and Margaret
C. Glasscock Boatner, three of Georgetown founder’s George Washington Glasscock’s children, along
with their brother Andrew’s heirs, sold Lots 3 & 4 in Block No. 30 of Glasscock’s Addition to D. F.
Draper for $800. The deed described the property as having improvements. George Glasscock died in
1868, and the historic structure may have been constructed at some point by the Glasscock family,
based on ownership history, although if so, it was likely a rental property as the Glasscock family were
known to have other residences in Georgetown and in other Texas cities.
Per a deed from July 31, 1918, D. F. Draper and his wife sold Lots 3 & 4 in Block 30 of Glasscock’s
Addition to E. B. Queen for $1,000.
Page 5 of 183
File Number: 2021-64-COA
Report Date: January 7, 2021
Page 2 of 4
Per a deed from July 21, 1920, E. B. Queen (Elias Butler “Pomp” Queen II) and his wife E. A. Queen
(Elizabeth Alice Bryant Queen) sold Lots 3 & 4 in Block 30 of the Glasscock Addition and another lot in
the Dalrymple Addition to W. L. Woods for $3,000. According to information posted on Find A Grave:
“From "Sketches from Williamson County, Texas: Its History and Its People" Compiled and Edited by
Mrs. Jean Shroyer, History Book Chairman, and Mrs. H Hazel Hood, President of WCGS, published in
1985, p.243:
"THE QUEEN FAMILY" by Dewey Don Queen:
Elias Butler Queen was born 5 Feb 1821 in North Carolina. He married Edna PETTY in Aa Arkansas
about 1841. They had one son, Samuel. Edna died between 1843 and 1846. Then in 1847, Elias married
Martha Jane BARBER. Their first child, James S. was born in Missouri. The other eleven were born in
Texas. They were: Texana, William L., John, Elias Butler, Arizona, David, Fanny L., Joseph Anderson,
Robert Lee, Matie, and Mabel D. Elias acquired the land between Weir and Jonah that is still called
"Queen Hill." Sometime after the 1850 Census, he brought Martha, Samuel,
James and Texana to their new home from Caldwell County, TX Elias and Martha's son, Robert Lee,
grew up to become a Texas Ranger and Sheriff while some of his cousins were on the opposite side of the
law. Samuel "Kep" Queen, Elias' nephew, and John Toliver Bar Barber, Martha's nephew, were two who
rode the outlaw trail. Kep was shot and killed when he was trapped by a posse near Claremore, OK in
Nov., 1888. John died in Dec. 1889. On the 1900 Census, Elias stated as his occupation as CAPITALIST.
But most of his life was spent as a horse rancher. He passed away at his home 16 Oct 1906 and is buried
at the Queen Hill Family Cemetery. Martha died 22 March 1910. She was laid to rest next to her
husband.
PAGE 244, THE QUEEN FAMILY OF QUEEN HILL, by John Lee and Katy McMillen:
Elias' mother was Mary Butler (born ca 1789, NC, to Elias and Elizabeth Butler). Her other chi children
were: Mrs. John Dawson (Tempe); Mrs Aaron Franklin Shaw (Bettie); Mrs. Laura Garner; Mrs. John
Ringer (Huldah)(sic); birth date also shown as 2/5/1821 - Montgomery Co., NC
Elias and Samuel Queen married sisters Edna and Jane Petty.
It is reported that Edna died at the birth of her first child and that it died also. Elias Queen afterward
remarried and raised a large family, some of whom have been in contact in latter years. Elias lived in New
Mexico and it is said that there is some sort of public monument erected to his honor in that state.
The family moved from Montgomery CO, NC to Carroll Co, TN to Carroll CO, AR to Milam CO, TX in
1847. Elias and his father were part of the petition to form Williamson CO, TX in 1848.
"We are sad to report the death of one of our respected and venerable gentlemen, Mr. Elias Queen, who
had so many years bravely faced the battles of life and from the standpoint of time had almost proven
himself invulnerably, but in accordance with the established vale of the universe the ravages of time
brought death and decay upon the earthly temple of this worthy citizen. He succumbed to the inevitable at
11 A.M., October 16, 1906, thus ending a useful career of 87 years. Mr. Lee Queen, sheriff of Hartley
County, (Texas) and two brothers arrived in time to attend the funeral and burial of their father." Source:
Williamson Co. Sun, Georgetown, Williamson Co., TX Thursday October 25, 1906. Obit is in the
University of Texas American History Center.
Page 6 of 183
File Number: 2021-64-COA
Report Date: January 7, 2021
Page 3 of 4
{Elias Butler Queen was buried at Queen Hill in the family cemetery. He was survived by his wife,
Martha Jane, and sons, Elias Butler, Jr., David Walton, Joe Anderson, and Robert Lee. . Apparently all of
the daughters had passed away by this time. Mary Queen Boren having died in Roby, Texas in 1902.}
notes of Katie McMillen. Also, not listed in the list of son's is James S. Queen, the second child for Elias
Queen, Sr. Dixie McCutchan”
Per an affidavit from September 8, 1958, Annie Bell Woods Singleton (b. 1882) was married to Walter
Lee Woods until his death in 1929, and after married L. M. Singleton. She died in Williamson County in
1954 having seven children from her first marriage. Her granddaughter Marjorie Woods Frizzle, the
only child of Annie’s son Ole Woods and his first wife Alma, was one of the heirs of other property in
Georgetown after Annie’s death and may have been one of the heirs to this property after Walter’s
passing in 1929, which may have led to the court case referenced below.
Per a deed from December 10, 1945, the District Court of Williamson County directed the sale of Lots 3
& 4 in Block 30 of Glasscock’s Addition in the cause of Annie Bell Singleton, et al vs Marjorie Lynn
Woods. A. F. Morris and wife Mary Lessie Morris purchased the property for $1,500 from the court-
appointed receiver Dor W. Brown. A mechanic’s lien from January 30, 1946, was payable to the Belford
Lumber Company for the amount of $1,500. The lien release described the improvements as completed
according to the plans and specifications, with a sum of $975.32 remaining due. The lien was paid off in
April 1947.
Per an affidavit from 1977, Anderson Fambrue Morris and Mary Leslie Mitchell Morris were married
on December 23, 1913, in Winnfield, Louisiana and had nine children. Mary passed away in 1969 in
Williamson County and Anderson passed away in 1977. Following their parents’ deaths, the Morris
children sold the property to Thomas & Betty Davis, and the property passed between they and
Timothy Davis until 1988 when it was sold to Federico & Mary Flores after it was replatted as a single
lot rather than half of Lots 3 & 4. Jim and Amy Miller purchased the property in 2021.
Findings
The house at 412 E. 7th Street first appears on the Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps in 1916, four years after
the purchase by D. F. Draper. The 1916 map shows a small, one-story wood frame structure with a wide
front porch and an accessory structure at the rear of the property. The 1925 and 1940 maps do not show
a change to the property, but the house does appear in the corner of an aerial photo from c. 1934 (photo
from Southwestern University Special Collections) with an asymmetrical roof, indicating that the
structure either had an asymmetrical roof originally, or that the rear addition where the kitchen and
living space are currently located was added prior to 1934. A front view of the house from the same photo
collection is not sufficiently clear to distinguish detail of the façade. By 1964 changes can be seen in the
aerial photo from that year, which were likely the alterations and additions made by the Belford Lumber
Company in 1946. A driveway and carport on the west side of the structure are visible in the 1964 photo.
The 1974 photo shows a similar site layout, with the addition of residential structures on other lots on
the block.
Page 7 of 183
File Number: 2021-64-COA
Report Date: January 7, 2021
Page 4 of 4
The 1984 Historic Resource Survey form and photos describe and show a one-story frame dwelling
(which was called an I-House plan, not reflected in the current structure) with asbestos siding, a stone
chimney, wood windows with 4/4 lights and a porch with Doric (round) columns, as well as an attached
carport. The structure today does not reflect historic building materials, which have all been removed
and replaced, excepting the porch columns, which appear to be the same as those in the 1984 photos. The
current exterior materials are low quality and not durable or contributing to the historic character. The
remaining historic materials are the limestone chimney and framing, and the interior finishes are not
historic or conducive to salvage. Rear and side additions have been constructed after 1984 which are not
of quality construction or materials, and which do not contribute to historic character. At this point the
majority of the historic fabric has been removed, with only the form of the house recognizable as historic
from the exterior. Based on the current condition of the structure, the potential age of the framing and
stone and the form of the house, which is a simple rectangular shape with a steep gable roof and front
porch, the HPO recommends that the request for demolition be approved, but that an archive document
of the property be provided to the City, and that the historic materials be salvaged to the extent feasible.
RECOMMENDATION
Approval
Approval with Conditions: That the framing, flooring and chimney stones be salvaged to the extent
feasible, and that an archive document with a floor plan and photos be provided to the City prior to the
issuance of the Certificate of Appropriateness.
Disapproval
12/07/2022
FOR: Sofia Nelson, CNU-A Date
Historic Preservation Officer
As required by the Unified Development Code, all property owners within a 300-foot radius of the
subject property were notified of the Certificate of Appropriateness request (34 notices), and one (1) sign
was 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 – Property Inspections
Exhibit 4 – Historic Resource Surveys
Exhibit 5 – Demolition Subcommittee Report & Recommendation
Exhibit 6 – Photos
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
Page 8 of 183
Location
2021-64-COA
Exhibit #1
WA
L
N
U
T
S
T
WALNUT
ST
S
COLLEGE
S
T
E 7TH ST
EL
M
S
T
E 8TH S
T
E 5TH ST
S
M
Y
R
T
L
E
S
T
E 6TH ST
S
C
H
U
R
C
H
S
T
E 8TH ST
AS
H
S
T
W
A
L
N
U
T
S
T
E 9TH S
T
0 200100
Feet
¯
Site
Parcels
Page 9 of 183
To whom it may concern,
We have recently moved to Georgetown because we love the charm, warm neighborhood and historic
Texas feel.
We purchased the property 412 E 7th street as it is adjacent to 611 S Elm street where we live. 412 is
currently occupied by a small house and two small storage sheds. The original house is a 1900 vintage
farm house. The house has been largely vacant for many years, its former owner, now 99, lives out of
state so time has taken a toll on the house. Understanding that the house is a level 2 historical designation
we have had it inspected for structural and pest issues. We have also talked with John Lawton on-site to
get his impressions. Our observations and consultations indicate that over the years it has been
remodeled and refit at least 4 times. These additions include a kitchen on the north side, a carport on the
east side, a front porch on the south side and a laundry room again on the north side. These remodels and
refits have essentially entombed the original structure. There are indications of termite activity. We
believe bringing the house back to current code and comfort standards while retaining any historical
significance would be cost prohibitive and not yield a structure whose size and layout would be
economically viable.
However, we have discovered that much of the original material may be salvaged and repurposed. Attic
and subfloor visual surveys yielded a potential treasure trove of rough sawn wood in dimensions not used
in a long time. (This is a visual observation of the attic & crawl space; we have not had authorization to
tear through the refit paneling and carpet to see what is actually there so a specific amount is hard to
determine at this time.) Amy and I have a history of repurposing building materials. At our ranch near
McDade Tx, we disassembled 3 original 1900 to 1940 era buildings and retained a huge amount of tin and
lumber. We believe that much of the lumber was originally harvested from the property as it is the same
species of pine. We have been able to reuse more than half of it for our new builds and have given some
of it to friends and family for their projects. It lends beauty, charm and a story to the new construction.
Our ultimate desire is to disassemble the structures on 412 and repourpose whatever material we can.
We would then combine the property with 611 to create a larger back yard. We would landscape the back
yard consistent with the neighborhood keeping as many trees as possible. If the salvaged material is of
sufficient quantity, we will use it for an architecturally appropriate pavilion on the east or south side of
the property.
Based on our findings, we believe it appropriate to disassemble the structures on the property under the
criteria ‘Loss of Significance’.
These are:
i. The building or structure is no longer historically, culturally or architecturally significant, or is no longer contributing to the historic overlay district;
a. The house has been refit and remodeled numerous times since it’s original construction. These additions and refits are consistent with the time of remodel and
have no historical significance.
b. Refits and remodels have changed the footprint and exterior of the house such that
the only real historically significant feature of the house is the roof pitch.
Page 10 of 183
ii. The building or structure has undergone significant and irreversible changes, which have caused the building or structure to lose the historic, cultural or architectural significance, qualities or features which qualified the building or structure for such designation.
a. Carpeting, paneling, exterior coverings and interior cabinetry have covered up and
damaged any of the original interior and exterior. b. Kitchen, carport, laundry room and front porch are all recent structural modifications cover up 3 sides of the original structure. The forth side is paneled over.
c. Half of the kitchen addition is not original.
iii. Changes to the building or structure were not caused either directly or indirectly by the
owner, and were not due to intentional or negligent destruction, or lack of maintenance rising to the level of a demolition by neglect. a. The house has been largely unoccupied for many years. This neglect has allowed water and termites to degrade some of the structure.
b. Damage caused by remodels and refits were not intentional destruction, just a by-
product of then current construction rules. It’s unfortunate but previous contactors did not prioritize preservation of historical significance. c. The electrical and plumbing systems have been an ad-hoc series of ‘band aid’ type fixes applied in a handy-man manor. Almost all are substandard and certainly
outside of any existing electrical or plumbing codes. Several may pose a risk for
further damage. d. Drainage, roof leakage and siding rot issues have been discovered. It’s likely the damage in the sub structures have been impacted by this. iv. Demolition or relocation of the building or structure will not cause significant adverse
effect on the historic overlay district or the City's historic resources;
a. The house is not situated in a prominent location or adjacent to any other historically important structures. b. New landscaping and a potential pavilion will be architecturally consistent with the historic nature of the neighborhood.
Page 11 of 183
Patio Concrete addition with tile covering brick work.
Electrical rework
Page 12 of 183
Original Exterior window covered by laundry addition
Painted over exterior window. Note crawl space entry frame rot/damage.
Page 13 of 183
Roof is being pushed up by deterioration of sub structure
Roof line, note paneling being pushed out from inside
Page 14 of 183
Electrical outlet on exterior side. This provided power to the large tin shed.
Plumbing additions for laundry room extension
Page 15 of 183
Main water line. Note frame rework on crawlspace access. It shows masonry coverings applied over
brick underpinning.
Fireplace may be original but has been regrouted several times. It is also closed up on inside.
Page 16 of 183
Porch addition showing newer windows and doors.
Page 17 of 183
Front door frame looks old but has been refitted with newer door frame and screen door.
Typical paneling throughout with dropped ceiling with popcorn finish.
Page 18 of 183
Bedroom door frame. This may have been the original back door. It is the only door frame with this
trim dimension. All of the doors have been replaced.
Page 19 of 183
Paneling in living room showing signs of water penetration.
Fireplace brick covering up original stone. Some of the painted timber may be original.
Page 20 of 183
Paneling in closet
View in through attic crawl space.
Page 21 of 183
Some of the original wall paper in the attic but covered by drop ceiling.
This view shows the original internal ceiling and wall timber in attic
Page 22 of 183
More attic and original wall paper.
Kitchen cabinetry rework
Page 23 of 183
Water standing on floor after rain.
Leak over light in laundry addition
Page 24 of 183
Cabinetry built over exterior wall but internal to laundry extension. Note rot around wall vents at top.
Evidence of termite activity
Page 25 of 183
Evidence of termite/pest activity
Crawl space screen is torn and has allowed pest activity under the house
Page 26 of 183
Termite activity
Pest damage to sub floor beams
Page 27 of 183
Water rot along base of siding
Water rot under exterior porch
Page 28 of 183
More water damage near base of siding.
Page 29 of 183
.
.
GUIDED INSPECTIONS, PLLC
(512) 786-5526
jesse@guidedinspections.com
https://guidedinspections.com/
PROPE RTY INSPECTION REPORT
412 E 7th S t
Georg etow n TX 78626
In sp ecto r
Jesse Bryant
TREC 8511
(512) 786-5526
jesse@ guidedinspect ions.com
A g en t
Paul a Brent
Century 21 H ellmann Stribling
(512) 818-4232
paulabrentrealt or@ gmail.com
Page 30 of 183
.
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
Prepared For: Jim Miller & Amy Miller
(Name of Clients)
Concerning: 412 E 7th St, Georgetown TX 78626
(Address or Other Identification of Inspected Property)
By:
(Name and License Number of Inspector)
09/21/2021 1:00 pm
(Date)
(512) 936-3000
P ROPERTY INSPECTION REPORT
PURPOSE, LIMITATIONS AND INSPECTOR / CLIENT RESPONSIBILITIES
This pro p erty in spectio n rep o rt may include an insp ect io n ag reemen t (cont ract), ad d enda, an d o ther in formatio n rel ated to
pro p erty con d itions. If any it em o r commen t is u n clear, you sh o u ld ask t h e in spector t o clarify th e fin d ings. It is imp o rtant th at
you carefu ll y read ALL of th is i n fo rmation.
This i n sp ecti on i s subject to th e ru les ("Ru les") of th e Tex as Real Estate Co mmission ("TREC"), wh ich can be foun d at
www.t rec.t exas.g o v .
The TREC Stan dard s of Practi ce (Sect ion s 5 35.2 27-5 3 5.2 3 3 of t he Rules) are the min imu m stan d ard s fo r in spectio n s by TREC-
licen sed insp ecto rs. An i nsp ection ad d resses onl y th o se co mp o n ent s an d cond i ti ons that are presen t, visib le, an d accessi ble at the
time of t he in spectio n. While th ere may b e oth er parts, co mp o nent s or syst ems presen t, o nly those items sp ecificall y noted as
bei ng in spected were insp ect ed. The i nsp ecto r is NOT req uired t o tu rn o n d eco mmissi o ned eq uip men t, sy stems, u tility serv ices or
ap p ly an open flame or l ig h t a p il ot to o p erate an y ap p li ance. The in spector is NOT requ i red to climb o v er ob stacles, move
fu rni shi n gs o r stored items. The insp ection rep o rt may address issues th at are co d e-b ased o r may refer to a p articular co d e;
howev er, th is is NOT a co de co mp li ance in spectio n an d d oes NOT verify co mp l ian ce wi th man ufactu rer's i n st allat io n
in struct io n s. The in specti o n d o es NOT i mp ly in su rab il it y o r warrantability o f th e stru ctu re or its co mpo n en ts. Alt hough so me
safet y issues may be ad d ressed in t h is repo rt, thi s in sp ect io n i s NOT a safet y/co de in spectio n , an d th e insp ect o r is NOT req u ired to
id entify all po t ent ial h azards.
In th is rep o rt, the in sp ect or shall in d icate, by check in g th e app ropriate b o x es o n t h e form, whether each i tem was i nsp ected , n ot
in spected , no t presen t or d efici ent and ex p lai n th e fi ndin g s i n th e corresp ondi n g secti on in th e b o dy of th e rep o rt form. The
in spector must ch eck the Defici ent (D) b o x if a co n d ition exists t h at ad v ersely and materiall y affects t h e p erforman ce o f a sy stem
or co mp o n ent o r co nst it utes a h azard to life, limb o r p ro p ert y as sp ecified b y t h e TREC St andards of Practice. Gen eral d efici enci es
in clu d e in o p erability, material d istress, water pen etration, damag e, d eterio ratio n , mi ssing co mp o nent s, and u n su i tab le
in stall ation. Comments may b e pro v id ed by the insp ect or wh eth er o r n o t an item is d eemed d eficien t. The insp ect or is n ot
req uired to p rio ritize o r emphasize t he impo rtan ce of on e d eficien cy o ver an o th er.
Some items repo rted may b e considered life-safet y u p g rad es to the pro p erty. Fo r more info rmation , refer to Texas Real Estate
Consu mer No ti ce Co ncernin g Recogni zed Hazards o r Deficien cies b elo w.
THIS PROPERTY INSPECTION IS NOT A TEC HNICALLY EXHAUSTIVE INSPECTION OF THE STRUCTURE, SYSTEMS OR
COMPONENTS. Th is insp ect io n may n o t reveal al l d eficien cies. A real estat e in spectio n hel p s to red u ce so me o f th e risk
in v o lv ed in p urch asing a h o me, but it can n o t el imin ate t h ese risk s, n o r can th e insp ection ant icipat e fu t ure ev ents o r chan g es in
perfo rmance du e to ch anges i n u se o r o ccu p ancy . If is reco mmen d ed t hat y o u ob t ain as much in fo rmati on as is av ail able ab o ut
th is p roperty , i n clu d in g seller's discl o su res, previo u s in specti o n rep orts, eng i neerin g rep o rts, b u il din g /remo del in g p ermits, an d
rep orts perfo rmed fo r an d b y relo cat io n co mp anies, mu n ici pal insp ection dep artments, l end ers, in surers, an d ap praisers. Yo u
sh o u ld also att emp t to determin e wh ether rep airs, renovatio n , remod eli n g, ad d itions, o r o th er such activ ities hav e t aken place at
th is p rop erty . It i s no t th e in spector's resp onsibility t o con firm that in formati o n obt ain ed from th ese so u rces i s co mp l ete or
accu rate or t h at t h is i nsp ection is co n si stent with th e o p inio n s exp ressed in previo u s or fu tu re rep o rt s.
ITEMS IDENTIFIED IN THE REPORT DO NOT OBLIGATE ANY PARTY TO MAKE REPAIRS OR TAKE OTHER ACTIONS,
NOR IS THE PURCHASER REQUIRED TO REQUEST THAT THE SELLER TAKE ANY ACTION. Wh en a d efici ency is rep o rted ,
it is t h e clien t's responsibi li ty to o b tai n furth er evaluat io n s and/o r cost estimates fro m qual ified serv ice p rofession als. An y such
fo llo w-up sh o u ld tak e p lace p ri or to t he exp i ratio n o f any ti me limi tatio n s such as o p ti o n p eriods.
Promulgated by the Texas Real Estate Commission (TREC) P.O. Box 12188, Austin, TX 78711-2188
(http://www.trec.texas.gov)
Jesse Bryant - T RE C 8511
Page 1 of 34Page 31 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
Ev alu ati o ns by qualified tradesmen may lead to t h e discovery of ad d it ion al deficien cies wh ich may in v o lve ad d it io n al rep air costs.
Fail ure to add ress deficien cies o r co mmen ts n o ted in th is rep o rt may l ead to further d amag e o f t h e stru ctu re or systems and ad d t o th e
o rig in al rep air co st s. Th e i nsp ecto r is n o t req u ired to pro v id e fo ll ow-u p serv ices to v erify t hat p roper rep airs h ave been mad e.
Prop erty co nditio n s chan g e with t ime an d u se. Fo r exampl e, mech anical d ev ices can fail at an y time, p lumbin g g ask ets an d seal s may
crack if th e app l ian ce o r plu mb ing fix ture is not u sed o ften, roo f leaks can o ccur at an y ti me reg ard less of th e apparen t con d ition o f
the ro of, and th e perfo rmance o f th e structu re an d the sy st ems may chan g e d ue to ch ang es in u se or o ccupan cy , effects o f weather, etc.
Th ese ch ang es or rep airs made t o th e st ru cture after th e in spectio n may ren d er info rmat io n co ntained h erein o b solete o r i n val id . This
rep o rt is p ro v ided fo r th e sp eci fi c ben efi t o f the cli ent named ab ove and i s b ased o n observ ati ons at the time of the in sp ect io n . If y o u
d id no t hire th e in spector y o urself, relian ce o n t his rep o rt may pro v ide inco mp l ete or o u tdated i n fo rmation. Repai rs, p rofessional
o p in i ons or add i ti onal i nsp ection rep o rts may affect the meanin g o f t he info rmat io n in th is rep o rt . It i s reco mmen d ed that yo u hire a
licensed i nsp ecto r to p erform an in spectio n to meet y o u r sp ecific need s and to pro v ide you wit h cu rrent in fo rmati on concerni n g this
p rop erty .
TEXAS REAL ESTATE CONSUMER NOTICE CONCERNING HAZARDS OR DEFICIENCIES
Each y ear, Tex ans sustain pro p erty d amage an d are i n ju red b y accid en ts in the h ome. Wh i le some acci d ent s may n o t b e av o idab le,
man y o ther accid ents, in ju ries, an d d eath s may be av o ided th ro u g h t he id en ti fi cat io n an d repai r of certain hazard o u s condi ti o ns.
Ex amp les o f such h azard s in clud e:
malfu nct io n ing, improperly instal led , o r missin g g ro u n d fau lt circu it p rot ect io n (GFC I) dev ices fo r el ect ri cal recept acl es i n
g arages, bat h ro o ms, kitch en s, an d exteri o r areas;
malfu nct io n ing arc fau l t pro tecti o n (AFCI) d evices;
o rd inary g lass in lo cat io n s wh ere modern constru cti on tech niq u es call fo r safet y g lass;
malfu nct io n ing or lack of fire safety featu res such as smo k e alarms, fire-rat ed d oors in certain lo cations, and fu n ctional
emerg ency escape an d rescu e o p eni n gs in b ed ro o ms;
malfu nct io n ing carbon mo n oxid e alarms;
excessi ve sp acin g b etween b alusters on stairways an d p o rch es;
impro p erly in stalled applian ces;
impro p erly in stalled o r defect iv e safety dev i ces;
lack o f electrical bo n d ing an d gro undi n g; an d
lack o f b ondi n g o n g as pip ing , includi n g corrugated st ain less st eel t ubin g (CSST).
To ensu re that co n sumers are info rmed o f h azards such as these, th e Tex as Real Estate Co mmissio n (TREC) has ad o p ted Stan d ard s o f
Practice req u irin g licen sed i n specto rs to report th ese co n d ition s as "Deficien t " wh en perfo rming an in specti o n for a b u y er or seller, if
they can b e reaso nab l y d etermin ed.
Th ese co n d it io n s may n ot hav e v io lat ed buildi n g codes o r co mmon practices at t h e time o f th e constru ction of t he home, o r th ey may
h ave b een "grandfath ered " b ecause th ey were p resent prior to th e ad o p ti o n o f co d es p roh ibitin g su ch co n d it io n s. Wh ile th e TREC
Stan d ard s o f Pract ice d o n ot requi re i nsp ecto rs t o p erform a co d e co mpl ian ce in spectio n , TREC con sid ers t he pot ential for inj ury o r
p rop erty l oss fro m th e h azard s add ressed in th e Stan d ard s o f Practice to b e sig n ifican t enou g h t o warrant th is n o tice.
Co n tract fo rms d ev elo p ed b y TREC for use by i ts real est ate licen se h o lders also in form the buyer of th e right to h ave the h ome
insp ected and can pro v ide an opt io n cl ause p ermitting th e b u y er to t ermi n ate t he con t ract wit hin a sp ecified t ime. Neith er th e
Stan d ard s of Pract ice no r t h e TREC contract forms req uire a sell er to remed y co n d it io n s revealed by an i n specti on. The d eci si o n t o
co rrect a hazard o r an y d efici ency iden tified in an in spectio n rep o rt is left to th e parti es to th e co n tract for the sale or p u rch ase o f th e
h o me.
INFORMATION INCLUDED UNDER "ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PROVIDED BY INSPECTOR", OR PROVIDED AS AN
ATTACHMENT WITH THE STANDARD FORM , IS NOT REQUIRED B Y THE COMM ISSION AND M AY CONTAIN
CONTRACTUAL TERMS BETWEEN THE INSPECTOR AND YOU, AS THE CLIENT. THE C OMM ISSION DOES NOT REGULATE
CONTRACTUAL TERM S BETWEEN PARTIES. IF YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE EFFECT OF ANY CONTRACTUAL TERM
CONTAINED IN THIS SECTION OR ANY ATTACHMENTS, CONSULT AN ATTORNEY.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PROVIDED BY INSPECTOR
Ag e o f Ho me: 192 5
Area of Home: 1 0 0 0 - 1 5 00 ft ²
Front En t ra n ce o f Buildin g Fa ces: So uth
In Att enda n ce: In specto r, Buyer, Termit e Insp ect o r
Occupan cy: Occu p ied
Ou tdoo r Tempera tu re (hi g h) : 8 5 - 9 0 °F
S tat u s of Utilities: All o n
Wea th er Co n d it io n s: Overcast, Light Rain
Page 2 of 34Page 32 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
NOTICE: THIS REPORT IS PAID FOR BY AND PREPARED FOR THE CLIENT NAM ED ABOVE.
THIS REPORT IS NOT VALID WITHOUT THE SIGNED SERVICE AGREEM ENT AND IS NOT
TRANSFERABLE.
I. Insp ect io n l imitat io n s can be fo u nd in t h e “In specti o n Au th o rization an d Servi ce Agreement”, an d in th e
Texas Real Est ate Co mmissio n 's Stan d ard s o f Practice fo r Ho me Insp ecto rs.
II. Th is rep o rt is g o o d onl y fo r the d ay t hat is was perfo rmed as th e co n d it io n of a stru ctu re and i ts
componen ts can ch ange from o n e d ay to th e n ext, esp eciall y if t h e h ome is cu rren tl y o ccu p ied .
III. Th is report is i n ten d ed fo r the so le use o f the perso n l isted on th e “Prep ared for” lin e o f th e p ag e above.
IV. If th ere are an y qu estions or co n cern s asso ciated wit h this i nsp ection rep o rt, the cl ien t ag rees to cont act
th e i n sp ecto r as so o n as p o ssible.
V. The in specto r reserv es th e rig h t to make add itional commen ts t o the report, i f need b e, wit hin 2 4 h rs of
rep o rt d eli v ery b y t h e addi ti o n o f a rep o rt ad d end u m.
VI. A ful l, in d epth eval uat io n (by a q u alified p rofessio n al repai r specialist) o f an y it em with an i n th e
“deficien cy ” co lumn box i s stro n gly reco mmen d ed before clo sin g to d etermin e if hid d en defects, not
apparen t to th e insp ect o r at the time of i nsp ection, are p resent. Writ ten estimates fo r all rep lacement an d
correctiv e wo rk sh o u ld also b e o btain ed p rio r to cl o si n g
VII. Accep tan ce o f th is rep ort sig n ifies the buy ers un d erstan d ing of t h e terms li sted above.
SCOPE OF INSPECTION
Th ese stand ards of practice define th e min i mu m lev els of in spectio n requi red fo r su bst antially completed
resid en ti al impro vemen t s to real property u p t o fo u r d wellin g units. A real est ate in spectio n i s a non-
tech nically exhau stive, limi ted vi sual surv ey and b asic performance ev aluatio n o f the sy stems an d
componen ts of a b u ild ing u si n g n o rmal cont ro ls and d o es n o t req u ire t h e u se o f sp eci alized eq u ipment or
p ro cedures. The p urp o se o f th e in specti o n is to pro v id e the client wit h in formati on regard in g th e g eneral
cond i ti on of the residen ce at the time o f in spectio n . Th e insp ect o r may p rovi d e a hi gher lev el o f in spectio n
p erforman ce than req u ired by these stan d ard s of p racti ce an d may insp ect componen ts and sy stems in
addi ti o n to th o se descri bed by th e stan d ard s o f practice.
GENERAL LIM ITATIONS
Th e in sp ect or is n o t req uired to :
(A) i n sp ect:
(i ) it ems oth er th an tho se listed wi th in th ese st andards of p ractice;
(i i) elev ato rs;
(i ii ) det ach ed b u ild in g s, deck s, d o cks, fen ces, o r waterfro n t structures or eq u ipmen t ;
(i v ) an y thin g b u ri ed, h idden , laten t, o r co ncealed ;
(v ) sub-surface d rai nag e sy stems;
(v i ) auto mated or pro g rammab le control sy stems, auto mati c shut-off, ph o toel ect ri c senso rs, timers, clo ck s,
meterin g d evi ces, sign al l igh ts, light n in g arrestor system, remot e co n tro ls, securit y or d ata d istrib u tio n
systems, sol ar pan els o r smart h o me au to matio n co mp o n ent s; o r
(v i i) co ncrete flatwork su ch as; d ri v eway s, si dewal ks, walk way s, p av in g stones o r p atios;
(B) report:
(i ) past rep airs th at appear to be effecti v e and wo rk man lik e ex cep t as specificall y requ ired b y t h ese
standards;
(i i) co smetic or aesth etic con d itions; o r
(i ii ) wear an d tear fro m ord in ary use;
(C) d etermine:
(i ) in surability, warrant ability, sui tab il it y , ad equacy , co mp ati bility, capacit y, rel iab ility , mark etability,
o perating costs, recalls, count erfei t pro d u cts, p roduct lawsu it s, l ife expectan cy, ag e, en erg y effi ciency , v apor
b arriers, thermo st atic p erforman ce, compl ian ce wi th any co d e, list in g , t estin g or pro toco l au th o rity, utility
sou rces, or man u facturer or regul ato ry req u irement s excep t as sp ecifically req u ired by th ese st andards;
(i i) t he presen ce o r absence of p ests, t ermi tes, or o ther wo o d -d estroyi n g insects o r org anisms;
(i ii ) th e presen ce, ab sen ce, o r risk o f asb est os, lead-b ased p ain t, mo l d, mi ld ew, corro siv e o r co n tamin ated
d ry wall “Ch in ese Dry wall ” or any oth er en v ironment al h azard, en vironmen t al p ath o g en, carcin o g en, to x in,
my coto x in s, pol lu t ant , fu n g al p resen ce or acti v it y, o r p o iso n ;
(i v ) ty p es of woo d or p reserv ati v e treat men t an d fast ener co mp atibility; o r
(v ) the cau se or so u rce o f a co nditio n s;
(D) an ticip ate fu tu re even ts or co n d it io n s, i n clu d in g b u t n o t limit ed to :
(i ) decay , deterio ration , o r damag e t h at may occu r after the in spectio n ;
(i i) d efi cien cies from ab u se, misu se o r lack o f use;
(i ii ) chan g es in p erfo rman ce o f any compon en t or sy stem du e t o ch ang es in use o r o ccup an cy;
(i v ) th e co nseq u ences o f th e insp ection or i ts effects o n cu rrent o r futu re bu y ers an d sellers;
(v ) co mmo n h o u seh o ld acciden ts, p ersonal inju ry , o r death;
(v i ) th e p resence o f water p enet ratio n s; o r
(v i i) futu re perfo rmance o f any it em;
(E) o p erate shut -off, safet y , sto p , pressu re o r pressu re-reg ulati n g val ves o r items requi ri ng th e u se o f co d es,
Page 3 of 34Page 33 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
k eys, combin ations, or simil ar dev ices;
(F) d esi g nat e condi ti o ns as safe;
(G) recommen d or pro vid e en g ineerin g , arch it ect ural, ap p rai sal, mitigatio n , p h ysi cal su rvey ing, realty, or
o th er sp ecialist serv i ces;
(H) revi ew h istorical record s, installati o n in stru ction s, repai r pl ans, cost estimates, di scl osu re docu men ts, or
o th er rep o rt s;
(I) verify sizing , efficien cy , or ad equacy o f th e g round su rface drain ag e system;
(J) v erify sizing, efficien cy , or ad equacy o f the gu t ter and downsp o u t sy stem;
(K) o p erate recircul ation or su mp pu mps;
(L) remedy co n d ition s p rev en ti n g insp ect io n of an y item;
(M ) app l y o p en fl ame o r light a p i lo t to operate an y applian ce;
(N) t u rn on deco mmi ssioned eq u ip men t, sy stems o r utility serv ices; or
(O) p rovid e rep air co st esti mates, reco mmend atio n s, o r re-in spectio n serv ices.
Th e Cli ent, by accept in g t h is Prop erty Insp ect ion Rep o rt o r relyi n g u pon it in an y way , ex p ressly agrees to
th e SCOPE OF INSPECTION, GENERAL LIMITATIONS an d the sig n ed INSPECTION AGREEM ENT for
th i s in spectio n repo rt.
Th is in sp ect io n rep o rt is mad e fo r th e so le p u rpo se of assistin g th e p urch aser t o det ermi n e hi s an d /or her
o wn op i nio n of feasi bility o f p u rch asin g th e i n sp ected pro perty and d o es n o t warrant or guarant ee all
d efects to b e fo u n d. If y o u hav e any questions o r are un clear regard in g o u r fin d ings, p lease call p rio r t o th e
expi ratio n o f any ti me l imitat io n s such as o p tio n p eri ods.
Th is rep o rt co n tains t echn ical informatio n . If y o u were n o t presen t d u ri ng th is in specti o n, p lease cal l to
arran g e fo r a co n sul tatio n wit h your in spector. If y o u cho o se no t to consu lt with th e in spector, t h is
in sp ect io n comp any cannot b e held liab le for y o u r u n d erstan d in g o r misunderst andi ng of th e rep o rt's
cont ent.
Th is rep o rt is n o t in ten d ed to b e u sed for d etermin i ng in surability or warrantability of the stru ctu re an d may
n ot co n fo rm to th e Texas Department o f In surance g u id elin es for p roperty i nsu rab i li ty . This rep o rt is n o t to
b e u sed b y or for an y p roperty an d /or h o me warran ty co mpan y .
Digi tal p ict ures in thi s rep o rt are a samp le of deficien cies in p lace an d sh ould n o t b e co n si d ered to show all
o f th e d efici enci es ob serv ed. There wil l be so me d amag e and/o r deficien cies that are n o t rep resented with
d ig ital imag ing
Page 4 of 34Page 34 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
I. STRUCTU RA L SYSTEMS
A. F oundations
Type of F oundation(s): Pier & Beam (Crawl Space)
Comments:
Crawlspace vantage point: E ntered crawlspace and traversed accessible areas
Foundation Performance Opinion: Performing as Intended (with some evidence of previous stress or
movement) -
While many components of the floor str ucture and supporting piers are considered to be "outdated" and
no longer considered acceptable methods / practices / designs, the f oundation appeared to be in fair
condition and adequately supporting the structure at the time of the inspection. While some evidence of
previous structural str ess / shifting was observed within the structure, these conditions were moderate and
typically expected for a home of this age. No visible indications of significant differential structural
movement or foundation damage were observed; such as substantial drywall cracks, numerous out-of -
square doors or windows that were binding or stuck, significant sloping of the f loors, etc. However, any
deficiencies listed below should be investigated further and repair ed as necessary.
Buyers Advisory Notice: This opinion is based solely on the observations of the inspector, which were
made without sophisticated testing procedures, specialized tools and / or equipment. Therefore the
opinion expressed is one of apparent conditions, not absolute fact, and are only good or applicable on
the date of the inspection.
Torn / damaged foundation vent
screening
Unsupported floor joist splice under
kitchen
Hollow-core masonry blocks used as
piers
1: Deficient foundation components
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
T orn / damaged foundation vent screening
Unsupported floor joist splice under kitchen
Hollow-core masonry blocks used as piers (do not provide sufficient strength unless grouted and
stacked on sides)
Cedar log posts used as piers (susceptible to wood rot / deterioration over time)
Wood shims observed at multiple piers (susceptible to compression / settling over time)
T oenailed and unsuppor ted floor joist ends at various locations (hanger or ledger support required)
Deteriorated and poorly supported floor fr ame components at Southeast corner of crawlspace
Poor masonr y support in crawlspace under fireplace hearth extension
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended where necessary.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified professional.
Page 5 of 34Page 35 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
B. Grading and Drainage
Comments:
Cedar log posts used as piers Wood shims observed at multiple piers Toenailed and unsupported floor joist
ends at various locations
Deteriorated and poorly supported floor
frame components at Southeast corner of
crawlspace
Poor masonry support in craw lspace
under fireplace hearth extension
2: Crawl space ventilat ion inadequate or not perf orming
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Crawl spaces are required to have 1 sq/ft of ventilation for every 150 sq/ft of cr awl space area, with vents
located within 3 feet of crawlspace corners. Proper ventilation will help to control humidity in the
cr awlspace and reduce the potential for condensation, fungal growth and / or wood rot. NOTE : When the
ground surface is covered by a Class 1 vapor retarder material, the minimum net area of ventilation
openings shall not be less than 1 sq/ft for each 1,500 sq/ft of under-floor space area. One such ventilating
opening shall be within 3 feet of each corner of the building.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified professional.
1: Deficiencies in gutt er / downspout systems
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Clogged gutters
Damaged / loose gutters and downspouts
Poor downspout dischar ge near foundation
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended where necessary.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified gutter contr actor
Page 6 of 34Page 36 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
C. Roof Covering Materials
Types of Roof Covering: Metal
Viewed F rom: Roof Surface
Comments:
NOTE : METAL ROOF SYSTEM FASTENERS:
Given the shear number of roof fastener s present, each and every fastener cannot be inspected or
evaluated. Annual inspection and maintenance (tightening loose fasteners) is recommended as necessary.
Clogged gutters Damaged / loose gutters and downspouts Damaged / loose gutters and downspouts
Poor downspout discharge near
foundation
Poor downspout discharge near
foundation
Poor downspout discharge near
foundation
1: FYI: EVIDENCE OF PREVIOUS ROOF REPAIR(S)
Gen e ral In fo rmat i o n
Multiple locations
Monitor and repair is recommended as necessary.
Page 7 of 34Page 37 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
sealant applied around furnace vent
penetration
sealant applied to various seams
metal on shingles, on cedar shakes
2: Improper t riple layer roof system
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
The roof system was found to be comprised of layers of cedar shakes, asphalt shingles and metal r oofing
panels. This roof system will likely be difficult / impossible to ensure and will likely need r eplacing. I f
you are concer ned about the triple layer roof, or what it would cost to replace versus a single layer roof,
it is recommended that you consult with a qualified roofing contractor for replacement options.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified roofing pr ofessional.
unsealed and non-gasketed fasteners unsealed and non-gasketed fasteners
3: Roof fastener deficiencies
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Multiple unsealed and exposed fasteners observed at various locations - Potential water entry points.
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended where necessary.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified roofing pr ofessional.
4: Roof flashing detail deficiencies
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Page 8 of 34Page 38 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
D. Roof Structures & Attics
Viewed F rom: E ntered accessible attic spaces
Approximate A verage Depth of Insulation: 6 - 12 Inches
Comments:
Poor flashing / sealant at roof / chimney intersections
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended where necessary to pr event potential water entr y.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified roofing pr ofessional.
1: FYI: EVIDENCE OF WATER P ENETRATION WITHIN THE ATTIC
Gen e ral In fo rmat i o n
Various locations
While much of the staining observed at the cedar shakes are likely from years past, some newer staining
and evidence of water penetr ation was observed at por tions of the insulation at the Nor theast corner of the
attic space. Further evaluation is recommended by a qualified roofing contractor .
Recommendation: Contact a qualified roofing pr ofessional.
2: FYI: OLDER ROOF F RAMING METHODS & LUMBER DIMENSIONS
Gen e ral In fo rmat i o n
The roof f raming for this structure was observed to be comprised mainly of 2 inch x 4 inch lumber. This
dimension of lumber is smaller than what is commonly used today and is typically considered less-than-
ideal by most of today's framing standards. Furthermore, no ver tical supports were observed directly
under some ridge and hip / valley rafter ends (common practice by today's standards). However, no
significant deflections were observed in the roof surf ace and no damage was observed to the visible
framing members in the attic and, in my opinion, the roof framing appear ed to be structurally sound at
the time of the inspection. Monitoring is recommended at this time.
Page 9 of 34Page 39 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
E. Walls (Interior and Exterior)
Comments:
Wall Covering Materials (E xterior): Hardboard Siding
NOTE : ACCESS LIMITED IN OCCUPIED HOMES:
In homes where stor age items and furniture may be pr esent, not all portions of the walls are completely
visible for inspection. All attempts ar e made to completely inspect the wall surfaces; however, no
furniture, large storage items, boxes or personal items are moved during the inspection.
1: FYI: HARDBOARD SIDING NOTICE
Gen e ral In fo rmat i o n
Hardboard siding is particularly subject to rot and deterioration unless properly maintained. With this
type of siding product, it is especially impor tant to ensure that all edges are proper ly sealed with caulk
and paint. I recommend annual inspection and repair as needed in order to properly maintain this
product.
2: FYI: VEGETATION IN CONTACT WITH EXTERIOR WALL(S)
Gen e ral In fo rmat i o n
All vegetation should ideally be kept trimmed off of and at least 12 inches away from the exter ior wall
surfaces in order to limit or prevent insect activity, surface damage and mildew on the wall surfaces.
3: FYI: LEAD PAINT NOTICE
Gen e ral In fo rmat i o n
In homes built prior to 1978, the presence of lead paint is likely. Special precautions should be taken by
qualified contr actors if any wor k is to be performed that will disturb the paint (scraping, sanding, etc.).
For more information on lead paint, visit https://www.epa.gov/lead .
4: Water penet ration deficiencies
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Rippled / damaged paneling at rear exterior door
While no active moisture was observed during the inspection, the damaged paneling appeared to be the
result of a previous roof leak and subsequent water penetration. Fur ther evaluation and repair is
Page 10 of 34Page 40 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
Rear
recommended as necessary.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified professional.
Damaged / rotted siding and trim
materials at various locations
Damaged / rotted siding and trim
materials at various locations
Damaged / rotted siding and trim
materials at various locations
Damaged / rotted siding and trim
materials at various locations
Potential water entry points at siding
materials
5: Exterior wall cladding deficiencies
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Damaged / rotted siding and trim mater ials at various locations
Potential water entry points at siding materials
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended as necessary.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified professional.
6: Flashing def iciencies
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Missing cap flashing above various windows / trim
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended where necessary to help prevent possible water penetration
Recommendation: Contact a qualified siding specialist.
Page 11 of 34Page 41 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
F. Ceilings and Floors
Comments:
Flooring Materials Observed: Carpet, Vinyl
NOTE : FLOOR ING ACCE SS LIMI TE D IN OCCUP IED HOMES:
In homes where stor age items and furniture may be pr esent, not all portions of the f loors are completely
visible for inspection. All attempts ar e made to completely inspect the floor surfaces; however, no
furniture, large storage items, boxes or personal items are moved during the inspection.
G. Doors (Interior and Exterior)
Comments:
Missing cap flashing above various
windows / trim
Missing cap flashing above various
windows / trim
Bathroom
1: Damaged / sagging ceiling materials
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Bathroom ceiling
While no active moisture was observed at the time of the inspection, this material appears to have been
negatively impacted by suspected previous moisture penetration, such as from a r oof leak. Further
evaluation and r epair is recommended.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified drywall contractor.
1: Door / hardware condition and performance deficiencies
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Non latching door to laundry room
Rubbing and non-latching door between kitchen and living room
Adjustment / repair is recommended as necessary for improved operation.
Recommendation: Contact a handyman or DIY project
Page 12 of 34Page 42 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
H. Windows
Comments:
NOTE : LIMI TE D WI NDOW ACCE SS I N OCCUPIE D HOM E S:
In homes where stor age items and furniture may be pr esent, not all windows are accessible for oper ation.
All attempts are made to completely operate and inspect each window; however , no furniture, large
storage items, boxes or personal items are moved during the inspection.
Non latching door to laundry room Rubbing and non-latching door between
kitchen and living room
poor weatherstripping at rear exterior
door
2: Door weatherstripping damaged / insuff icient
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Rear exterior door
This can result in energy loss, pest intr usion and / or moisture intrusion. For garage pedestrian doors, this
can also result in possible garage fumes within the living space.
Recommendation: Contact a handyman or DIY project
1: Glazing / weatherstripping / glazing compound deficiencies
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
L iving room window pane cracked
Rear bedroom window glass painted over
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended as necessary.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified window repair /installation contractor.
Page 13 of 34Page 43 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
I. Stairways (Int erior and Exterior)
Comments:
Living room window pane cracked Rear bedroom window glass painted
over
Missing w indow lock hardware in
laundry room
2: Window component performance / condition deficiencies
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Missing window lock hardware in laundr y r oom
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended as necessary.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified window repair /installation contractor.
step heights shall not vary more than 3/8
inch
1: Stairway deficiencies
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Variance of more than 3/8 inch between tallest and shortest riser at rear stairway
Repair is r ecommended as necessary.
2: Guardrail / handrail deficiencies
Page 14 of 34Page 44 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
J. Fireplaces and Chimneys
Comments:
Type of F ireplace: Masonry wood-burning fireplace -
Converted to gas log, unvented fireplace at some point in the past
Height and opening
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Insufficient guardrail height at rear exterior
Baluster openings larger than 4-3/8 inches at rear stairway handrail
Repair is r ecommended as necessary.
1: Deficient flexible gas line connectors
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Multiple connectors used together with poor routing outside front of fireplace
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended as necessary.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified plumbing contractor.
2: Deficiencies in chimney st ructure, termination, coping, crown, caps and/or spark arrestor
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Unlined chimney flue
If this f ireplace is to be restored to a wood-burning f ireplace, or a vented gas fireplace, re-lining of the
chimney flue will be requir ed for improved occupant safety as unlined chimney flues are unsafe and no
longer permitted. Further evaluation and r epair is recommended.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified fireplace contr actor.
Page 15 of 34Page 45 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
K. P orches, Balconies, Decks, and Carports
Comments:
masonry chimney flue unlined.
3: Fireplace chimney flue blocked and not vented
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Most, if not all, ventless gas log fireplaces are equipped with and oxygen depletion sensor. The proper
operation of the oxygen depletion sensor in the ventless f ireplace cannot be tested during the inspection
and it is unclear if this particular fir eplace is even rated for ventless use. Be sure to thoroughly review
and understand the manufacturers data (operation, safety, etc.) and have this fireplace reviewed /
inspected to ensure pr oper and safe usage.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified professional.
1: Poor / improper carport roof materials
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
The materials used f or the carport roof appeared to be an aluminum siding product, intended for vertical
use, but not horizontal use. Further evaluation and repair / replacement is recommended.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified professional.
2: Porch roof beam rotation / sagging
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Front porch, above steps
Page 16 of 34Page 46 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
II. ELEC TR IC AL SY STEMS
A. Service Entrance and Panels
Comments:
Service type : Overhead
Service Size : 150 amp
Service Disconnect in Place?: Yes
Electrical P anel Box Locations : Exterior
front porch beam appears to have sagged
/ rotated in the past
Monitor and repair is recommended as necessary.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified professional.
1: FYI: MISSING ARC FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTER (AFCI) BREAKERS
Gen e ral In fo rmat i o n
Although not required when this home was constructed, all 120-volt, single-phase, 15- and 20-ampere
branch circuits supplying outlets or devices installed in dwelling unit kitchens, family rooms, dining
rooms, living rooms, parlors, libraries, dens, bedrooms, sunrooms, r ecreation rooms, closets, hallways,
laundry areas, or similar r ooms or areas shall be protected by AFCI devices. AFCI breakers are electrical
devices designed to protect against fires by monitor ing the circuit f or the presence of dangerous arcing
conditions. For more inf ormation on AFCI breakers, click here.
2: FYI: FEDERAL PACIFIC ELECTRIC (F P E) BRAND PANEL BOX(ES) IN USE
Gen e ral In fo rmat i o n
A Federal Pacific Electric (F PE) brand electr ical panel box was observed on this pr operty. Many
members of the electr ical industry consider the design and operation of this brand problematic. The
breaker design has been proven to be unreliable and, in some cases, can become a fire / safety hazard.
Furthermore, replacement parts / breakers can be difficult and expensive to obtain. Ther e is no onsite
test that can be perfor med to determine if the breakers will operate r eliably and I am not per mitted to
remove the breakers in order to inspect the breaker connections to the buss bars. If you would like mor e
information on this brand of panel boxes, go to https://codecheck.com/wp-
content/uploads/2018/10/FPE_2012.pdf or consult with a qualified electrician who has experience with
this brand of electr ical equipment. In the meantime, the electrical deficiencies within this report should
be addressed.
Page 17 of 34Page 47 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
B. Branch Circuits, Connect ed Devices, and F ixtures
Type of Wiring: Copper
Comments:
Missing breaker fill plate Unlinked 30 amp 240 volt circuit Unlinked 20 amp 240 volt circuit
Double-wired breaker unmarked whit "hot" conductors
(arrows) with example of proper
marking (circle)
3: Deficiencies in panel boxes, elect rical cabinets, gutters, cutout boxes, etc.
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Unmarked circuits
Missing breaker fill plate
Unlinked 240 volt circuits
Double-wired breaker
Unmarked or identified white ungrounded conductors
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended as necessary for improved electrical system integrity and
occupant safety.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified electrical contractor.
1: FYI: OLDER KNOB & TUBE WIRING COMPONENTS OBSERVED
Gen e ral In fo rmat i o n
Knob and tube wiring was the preferred wiring system used in the 20's and 30's and, in some areas, was
used up until the 50's. Knob and tube wiring does not utilize an effective means to ground the circuit and
Page 18 of 34Page 48 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
is typically considered an unsafe wiring option (insuring homes with knob and tube wiring may prove
difficult). It is believed that all previous knob and tube wiring has been disabled and is no longer in use.
However, consultation with a qualified electr ician may be desirable to be completely sure, as multiple
components were observed within the attic space.
2: Missing Ground Fault Circuit Interrupt er (GF CI) protection where required
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
All requir ed locations
Although this type of protection may not have been required at certain receptacles when the home was
built, all bathroom, garage, laundr y, outdoor, crawl space and kitchen counter r eceptacles (as well as
receptacles within six feet of the outside edge of a sink) are to now have GFCI protection and, if lacking
this protection, are r equired to be marked as “deficient” as per the Texas Real E state Commission's
(TREC) standards of practice for inspectors. F YI: A more recent addition to the safety codes /
requirements also requires GF CI protection for circuits serving appliances that utilize both water and
electricity (dishwashers, washing machines, etc.).
Recommendation: Contact a qualified electrical contractor.
3: Missing or damaged cover plate(s)
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Front and back porch ar eas
Repair or replacement is r ecommended where necessary.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified electrical contractor.
4: Hardwired appliance(s) missing appropriate elect rical disconnect
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Water heater
Page 19 of 34Page 49 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
A localized disconnect, or some type of lockout device at the appliance breaker, is required in or der to
prevent these circuits from being accidentally energized while the appliance is being worked on.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified electrical contractor.
Reversed polarity Southwest exterior Reversed polarity laundry room
5: Receptacle deficiencies observed
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Reversed polarity (hot / neutral wired backwards) at Southwest exterior receptacle and laundry room
receptacle
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended where necessary.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified electrical contractor.
6: Wiring deficiencies observed
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
E xposed non-metallic sheathed wiring routed on wall / ceiling surfaces without conduit protection
E xtension / flexible cord wiring used as permanent wiring at various locations
Improperly terminated wiring within junction box behind washer
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended where necessary.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified electrical contractor.
Page 20 of 34Page 50 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
Exposed non-metallic sheathed wiring
routed on wall / ceiling surfaces
Exposed non-metallic sheathed wiring
routed on wall / ceiling surfaces
Exposed non-metallic sheathed wiring
routed on wall / ceiling surfaces
Extension / flexible cord w iring used as
permanent wiring
Extension / flexible cord w iring used as
permanent wiring
Extension / flexible cord w iring used as
permanent wiring
Improperly terminated wiring within
junction box behind washer
West exterior West exterior above range exhaust hood
Crawlspace behind washer in laundry room
7: Junction box deficiencies observed
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Missing junction box covers at multiple locations
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended where necessary.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified electrical contractor.
Page 21 of 34Page 51 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
Front bedroom closet
8: Device / fixture def iciencies observed
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Missing bulb covers at back porch ceiling fan and front bedroom closet
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended for improved safety.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified electrical contractor.
9: Deficiencies with smoke / carbon monoxide alarms
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Missing adequate smoke and carbon monoxide alar ms - Smoke alarms are required in each bedroom,
areas directly outside of each bedroom and on each habitable story. Smoke alarms should ideally be
installed in accordance with current standards in that all smoke alarms shall be interconnected so that the
actuation of one alarm will activate all others. Smoke alarms older than 10 years should be replaced. --
Carbon monoxide alarms are to be installed in homes that utilize gas furnaces, appliances, etc and / or
homes with attached garages. Carbon Monoxide alarms are to be installed outside of each separate
sleeping area, in the immediate vicinity of the bedrooms.
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended as necessary for improved safety.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified electrical contractor.
10: Missing / improper exterior receptacle cover(s)
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Outdoor r eceptacle in "wet location" underneath main panel box
Exterior receptacle covers in wet locations should ideally be changed out to newer “bubble covers”.
T hese covers keep the receptacles covered, even while in use (cords plugged in).
Recommendation: Contact a qualified electrical contractor.
Page 22 of 34Page 52 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
III. HEATING, VENTILATION & AIR COND ITION IN G SYSTEMS
A. Heating Equipment
Type of System(s): Central For ced Air Unit
Energy Source: Gas -
Manufactured 2017
Comments:
EXAMPLE
1: FYI: OLDER, NON-PROGRAMMABLE THERMOSTAT(S) P RESENT
Gen e ral In fo rmat i o n
Programmable thermostats are recommended for impr oved efficiency and unit operation.
2: Deficient or non-ideal combust ion / dilution air provisions observed
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Combustion air obtained from living space with louvered doors directly above return air openings
While combustion air may be permitted in some cases, provided a number of factors are taken into
account, the ideal and safer method of obtaining combustion air is from the exter ior (attic, outdoors,
etc.). Sealing these furnace closet doors and obtaining combustion air fr om the exterior is recommended
for improved energy efficiency, as well as to prevent possible combustion byproducts entering the return
air stream beneath the furnace closet; especially with this particular furnace where obtaining outdoor
combustion air would be relatively simple. Further evaluation and r epair is recommended as necessary
for improved combustion air supply and gas appliance operation. Refer to manufacturer specifications
regarding this detail
Recommendation: Contact a qualified heating and cooling contractor
Page 23 of 34Page 53 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
an attached combustion air vent into attic
provides adequate combustion air,
allowing furnace closet doors to be
sealed
improper flue clearance improper flue clearance
3: Deficiencies in furnace exhaust f lue clearances / terminations
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Flue in contact with wood ceiling and attic insulation - Minimum 1-2 inch clearance required and
achieved with metal escutcheon ring and insulation shield in attic.
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended to ensure proper and safe venting of the f urnace.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified heating and cooling contractor
replace flue cap and clear flue and
exhaust fan of debris
4: Deficiencies in furnace exhaust f lue piping / components
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Rusted / damaged flue cap with flue cap debr is heard within exhaust fan during operation.
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended to ensure proper and safe venting of the f urnace(s).
Recommendation: Contact a qualified heating and cooling contractor
Page 24 of 34Page 54 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
B. Cooling Equipment
Type of System(s): Central Air Conditioner -
3 ton condenser unit manufactured 2017
Comments:
Measured ΔT at evaporator coil: Return: 78.1 degrees - Supply: 57.2 degrees -
ΔT: 20.9 degrees
refrigerant line insulation damaged
1: Damaged / missing / insufficient insulation at refrigerant line(s)
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Refrigerant line in crawlspace
Refrigerant vapor (suction) lines shall be fully insulated with minimum R-4 insulation having a external
surface permeance not exceeding 0.05 perm, when tested in accor dance with curr ent standards. Further
evaluation and r epair is recommended at sections of missing / damaged insulation in order to prevent
condensation.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified heating and cooling contractor
2: Condenser unit deficiencies observed
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Missing tamper r esistant covers at r efr igerant line access ports, as required by current standards.
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended to ensure proper system performance and component
longevity.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified heating and cooling contractor
3: Deficiencies in primary / auxiliary drains systems and/or em ergency pan
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Discharge of pr imary condensate drain line too close to structur e - Minimum 3-5 feet clearance from
foundation recommended, where possible.
Page 25 of 34Page 55 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
C. Duct System, Chases, and Vents
Comments:
condensate discharge line terminates near
foundation
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended where necessary to ensure pr oper condensate drainage and
to pr event potential leakage or damage to the property.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified heating and cooling contractor
1: Gas piping and / or sewer vents concealed in plenum / chase
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Gas pipe routed through retur n air chase
These items are prohibited from being located within the r eturn air chase, plenum, etc. Further
evaluation and r epair is recommended as necessary for impr oved indoor air quality.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified heating and cooling contractor
2: Deficiencies in ret urn air filter(s)
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Undersized f ilter located at living room return air opening
Repair is r ecommended to ensure proper filtration.
Recommendation: Contact a handyman or DIY project
Page 26 of 34Page 56 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
IV. PLU MBING SY STEMS
A. P lum bing Supply, Distribution Systems, and Fixtures
Location of Water Meter: E xterior
Front yard
Location of Main Water Supply Valve : Within water meter box
Static water pressure reading: 70 - 75 PSI
Front hose bib
Comments:
filter undersized for opening
Portion of galvanized steel piping still in
use
1: FYI: GALVANIZED STEEL SUPPLY PIPING OBSERVED
Gen e ral In fo rmat i o n
Portions of the supply piping materials used in this home were observed to be galvanized steel (initial
supply line entry into home - front exterior). Galvanized steel piping can become clogged over time due
to internal corrosion and is mor e likely to develop leaks at f ittings as it ages. Further evaluation by a
qualified plumber may be desirable as repair or replacement of the steel piping may be necessary in the
near future. Monitoring and r epair is recommended as necessary.
2: Active supply plumbing leakage observed
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
E xterior PVC piping at Northwest exterior of home
The damaged section of piping was not persistently leaking as a shutoff valve adjacent to the leak was
found in the off position. The piping only leaks when this valve is turned on (to supply downstream hose
bibs). Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified plumbing contractor.
Page 27 of 34Page 57 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
Water leak at Northeast exterior piping
(click image to right for video)
missing vacuum breaker at hose bibs
3: Missing air gaps or ant i-siphon / backflow device at flow end of fixtures.
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Multiple exter ior hose bibs
Proper air gaps or backflow prevention measures are r equired at certain locations in order to pr event
“cross connections” between supply water and waste water or other contaminants. Further evaluation and
repair is recommended where necessary.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified plumbing contractor.
4: Water supply line def iciencies
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
E xterior and crawlspace water lines lacking suff icient insulation
All exposed exter ior water lines shall be pr operly insulated to protect against potential freezing during the
colder winter months. Further evaluation and repair is recommended where necessary.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified plumbing contractor.
5: Reversed or im proper "hot / cold" orientation at fixture(s)
Page 28 of 34Page 58 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
B. Drains, Wastes, & Vents
Comments:
Location of main cleanout: Northeast corner of house
Visible Drain Plumbing Materials: PVC, Cast Iron, Steel
hot / cold reversed at bathroom sink
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Bathroom sink fixture
Plumbing fixtur es shall always have cold on the right, and hot on the left when facing and operating the
fixture (for bathtubs, perspective is from within tub).
Recommendation: Contact a qualified plumbing contractor.
6: Shower, tub & enclosure def iciencies
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Cracked tile at shower floor
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended where necessary.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified tile contractor
1: FYI: CAST IRON P IPING
Gen e ral In fo rmat i o n
Page 29 of 34Page 59 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
C. Water Heating Equipment
Energy Sources: Electric
Capacity: 50 gallon tank Manufactured 2021
cast iron vent stack cast iron main drain line at point of entry
into soil
Some of the waste piping materials were observed to be older cast ir on piping. Cast iron piping materials
may be prone to unexpected problems as this material typically cor rodes from the inside out. Although
virtually all drain piping materials underneath the home were observed to have been changed out to PVC,
it is unknown if the entire buried main dr ain line to the str eet was replaced. Further evaluation by a
qualified plumbing contractor (camera test) is strongly recommended.
S-trap at kitchen sink S-trap at bathroom sink S-trap at shower drain
Drain pip corroded in crawlspace under
bathroom
2: Waste piping deficiencies observed
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Improper S -traps at sink and shower fixture drains - S-traps not permitted due to potential for
siphoning
Rusted / corroded steel drain pipe at soil line in crawlspace
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended where necessary.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified plumbing contractor.
Page 30 of 34Page 60 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
Comments:
D. Hydro-Massage Therapy Equipment
Comments:
E. Other
Comments:
Gas meter location:
Southwest corner of house
Visible Main Gas Piping M aterial(s): Steel Hard Pipe
1: FYI: ANNUAL MAINTENANCE FLUSH RECOMMENDED
Gen e ral In fo rmat i o n
Water heaters should be flushed annually to prevent sediment buildup and to maintain ef ficiency. Here is
a DIY link to help.
2: Deficient Tem perat ure And Pressure Relief Valve (TPRV) discharge piping
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
The T PRV shall have attached discharge piping that ter minates not more than 6 inches and not less than
two times the discharge pipe diameter above the ground. Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified plumbing contractor.
rust / corrosion at pipe surface in contact
w ith concrete
1: Poor gas line protection
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Gas line routed through concrete step to fr ont porch
In addition to not being protected against direct contact with the concrete, and subsequent corrosion, the
pipe appeared to be bent of offset within the concrete step. Further evaluation and repair is
recommended to prevent pipe damage and potential gas leaks.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified plumbing contractor.
Page 31 of 34Page 61 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
V. A PPLIA NC ES
A. Dishwashers
Comments:
B. Food Wast e Disposers
Comments:
C. Range Hood and Exhaust Systems
Comments:
Range exhaust vent type: Recirculating
D. Ranges, Cooktops, and Ovens
Comments:
Appliance Type: Gas Range
1: FYI: GAS SHUTOF F NOT "READILY ACCESSIBLE"
Gen e ral In fo rmat i o n
Although present and located in correct proximity to the appliance, the gas shutoff valve to the range was
located directly behind the range and is not considered "r eadily accessible".
Timer and control panel buttons
inaudible
2: Appliance perform ance deficiencies
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Range timer and control panel buttons inaudible
In some cases, this can be due to an adjustable setting at the control panel. Further evaluation and repair
is recommended as necessary to ensure pr oper operation.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified appliance repair pr ofessional.
3: Appliance component def iciencies
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Page 32 of 34Page 62 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
E. Microwave Ovens
Comments:
NOTE : COUNTE R TOP UNITS NOT I NSP E CTED:
Only built-in microwave units are operated / inspected.
F. Mechanical Exhaust Vents and Bathroom Heaters
Comments:
G. Garage Door Operators
Comments:
H. Dryer Exhaust Systems
Comments:
NOTE : NON-ACCESSIBLE P ORTIONS OF DR YE R E X HAUST DUCT:
Inter ior portions of the dryer exhaust duct cannot be visually inspected.
Missing anti tip br acket behind r ange
Anti-tip brackets are required behind ranges in order to prevent the range from potentially tipping
forward during use or when childr en are at play. Further evaluation and repair is recommended as
necessary.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified appliance repair pr ofessional.
1: Exhaust fan component deficiencies
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Missing bulb cover at fan unit in bathroom
Further evaluation and repair is r ecommended as necessary.
Recommendation: Contact a handyman or DIY project
2: Improper t erm inat ion of mechanical exhaust fan ducts
TR EC De fi ci e n cy
Fan exhaust not ducted to the exterior
Mechanical exhaust fans shall be discharged to the building exterior and shall not be exhausted into attic,
soffit, r idge vent or crawlspace areas.
Recommendation: Contact a qualified professional.
1: FYI: ANNUAL DRYER VENT CLEANING RECOMMENDED
Gen e ral In fo rmat i o n
Page 33 of 34Page 63 of 183
R eport Identification: 412 E 7th S t, Georgetown TX 78626 - September 21, 2021
I = In sp ected NI = Not In sp ected NP = Not Presen t D = Deficien t
I NI NP D
REI 7-5 (5/4/2015)
V I. OPTIONA L SYSTEMS
A. Landscape Irrigation (Sprinkler) Systems
Comments:
Backflow Prevention Device Location:
Rain Sensor Device Location:
NOTE : HOMEOWNER-INSTALLED OR NON-PROF E SSIONA L SYSTEM :
The observed sprinkler system components appeared to be a homeowner-installed system and did not
appear to meet many of the requirements of a yard irrigation system. Further evaluation is recommended
by a qualified ir rigation system technician in order to determine what wor k will be needed in order for
this sprinkler system to meet the T exas Commission on E nvironmental Quality's (TCEQ) requirements.
C. Outbuildings
Comments:
NOTE : DETACHE D STOR A GE B UI LDING NOT INSPECTED. :
As lint buildup can commonly occur within dryer exhaust ducts or at other dryer exhaust components,
annual inspection / cleaning is r ecommended for improved safety.
Page 34 of 34Page 64 of 183
Licensed and regulated by: Texas Department of Agriculture P.O. Box 12847, Austin, TX 78711-2847, Phone (866) 918-4481
Prescription Pest Company License (TPCL) – 0728115, Responsible Certified Applicator - Marybeth Roberts, License 0725201
Executive Summary
For SPCS/T5 Wood Destroying Insect Report
We appreciate you choosing Prescription Pest for your WDI. A WDI is a Wood Destroying
Insect report, commonly called a “Pest Inspection” by realtors. A WDI is a visual inspection
for wood destroying insects that can harm your structure such as termites, carpenter ants
etc. This summary is to assist in understanding the attached TDA SPCS/T-5.
Address: 412 East 7th Street, Georgetown, TX 78626 Date: 9/21/21
Wood Destroying Insect Activity
Inspection revealed evidence of sub termites damages along beams and shelter tube left front corner under
crawlspace ES, multiple areas of wood rot CM. Refer to report for more information .
*Active means we have physically seen the insect. Evidence means there is evidence that they have been there at
some point. We have included pictures for your reference if evidence was found.
Conducive Conditions
Conducive conditions make your structure a hospitable place for termites. During the inspection were
conducive conditions found? Yes Wood Rot (M)
Recommendation
We recommend a termite treatment on the structure. We are happy to discuss this in detail with you.
Drawing of inspected area:
Page 65 of 183
Inspected Address: 412 East 7th Street, Georgetown, TX 78626
SPCS/T-5 Licensed and Regulated by the Texas Department of Agriculture
(Rev. 09/01/20) P.O. Box 12847, Austin, TX 78711-2847, Phone (866) 918-4481, (FAX) 888-232-2567
TEXAS OFFICIAL WOOD DESTROYING INSECT REPORT
Rule §7.176 Requires this department prescribed form to be used for real estate transactions in Texas regarding the visible
presence or absence of wood destroying insects and conditions conducive to infestations of wood destroying insects.
Inspected Address: 412 East 7th Street, Georgetown, TX 78626
SCOPE OF INSPECTION
A. This inspection covers only the multi-family structure, primary dwelling or place of business. Sheds, detached garages, lean-tos,
fences, guest houses or any other structure will not be included in this inspection report unless specifically noted in Section 5 of this
report.
B. This inspection is limited to those parts of the structure(s) that are visible and accessible at the time of the inspection. Examples of
inaccessible areas include but are not limited to (1) areas concealed by wall coverings, furniture, equipment and stored articles and (2)
any portion of the structure in which inspection would necessitate removing or defacing any part of the structure(s) (including the
surface appearance of the structure). Inspection does not cover any condition or damage which was not visible in or on the
structure(s) at time of inspection but which may be revealed in the course of repair or replacement work.
C. Due to the characteristics and behavior of various wood destroying insects, it may not always be possible to determine the presence
of infestation without defacing or removing parts of the structure being inspected. Previous damage to trim, wall surface, etc., is
frequently repaired prior to the inspection with putty, spackling, tape or other decorative devices. Damage that has been concealed or
repaired may not be visible except by defacing the surface appearance. The WDI inspecting company cannot guarantee or
determine that work performed by a previous pest control company, as indicated by visual evidence of previous treatment;
has rendered the pest(s) inactive.
D. If visible evidence of active or previous infestation of listed wood destroying insects is reported, it should be assumed that some
degree of damage is present.
E. If visible evidence is reported; it does not imply that damage should be repaired or replaced. Inspectors of the inspection company
usually are not engineers or builders qualified to give an opinion regarding the degree of structural damage. Evaluation of damage and
any corrective action should be performed by a qualified expert.
F. THIS IS NOT A STRUCTURAL DAMAGE REPORT OR A WARRANTY AS TO THE ABSENCE OF WOOD DESTROYING
INSECTS.
G. If termite treatment (including pesticides, baits or other methods) has been recommended, the treating company must provide a
diagram of the structure(s) inspected and proposed for treatment, label of pesticides to be used and complete details of warranty (if
any). At a minimum, the warranty must specify which areas of the structure(s) are covered by warranty, renewal options and approval
by a certified applicator in the termite category. Information regarding treatment and any warranties should be provided by the party
contracting for such services to any prospective buyers of the property. The inspecting company has no duty to provide such
information to any person other than the contracting party.
H. There are a variety of termite control options offered by pest control companies. These options will vary in cost, efficacy, areas
treated, warranties, treatment techniques and renewal options.
I. There are some specific guidelines as to when it is appropriate for corrective treatment to be recommended. Corrective treatment
may only be recommended if (1) there is visible evidence of an active infestation in or on the structure, (2) there is visible evidence of a
previous infestation with no evidence of a prior treatment.
J. If treatment is recommended based solely on the presence of conducive conditions, a preventive treatment or correction of conducive
conditions may be recommended. The buyer and seller should be aware that there may be a variety of different strategies to correct the
conducive condition(s). These corrective measures can vary greatly in cost and effectiveness and may or may not require the services
of a licensed pest control operator. There may be instances where the inspector will recommend correction of the conducive conditions
by either mechanical alteration or cultural changes. Mechanical alteration may be in some instances the most economical method to
correct conducive conditions. If this inspection report recommends any type of treatment and you have any questions about this, you
may contact the inspector involved, another licensed pest control operator for a second opinion, and/or the Structural Pest Control
Service of the Texas Department of Agriculture.
Page 1 of 4
Page 66 of 183
Inspected Address: 412 East 7th Street, Georgetown, TX 78626
SPCS/T-5 Licensed and Regulated by the Texas Department of Agriculture
(Rev. 09/01/20) P.O. Box 12847, Austin, TX 78711-2847, Phone (866) 918-4481, (FAX) 888-232-2567
1A. Name of Inspecting Company: Prescription Pest 1B. SPCS Business License Number: 0728115
1C. Address of Inspecting Company: 7508 Meadowview Lane, Austin TX 78752 Phone 512-248-0950
1D. Name of Inspector: Tyrone Fisher, 0752554
1E. License Type: Certified Applicator
1F. Inspection Date: 9/21/21
2. Name of Person Purchasing Inspection: Jim & Amy Miller - Buyer
3. Owner/Seller Name: Unknown
4. REPORT FORWARDED TO: Title Company or Mortgagee [ ] Purchaser of Service [X] Seller [ ] Agent [ ] Buyer [ ]
(Under the Structural Pest Control regulations only the purchaser of the service is required to receive a copy)
The structure(s) listed below were inspected in accordance with the official inspection procedures adopted by the Texas
Department of Agriculture Structural Pest Control Service. This report is made subject to the conditions listed under the
Scope of Inspection. A diagram must be attached including all structures inspected.
5A. Residence Only
List structure(s) inspected that may include residence, detached garages and other structures on the property. (Refer to Part A, Scope of Inspection)
5B. Type of Construction:
Foundation: Pier & Beam, Pier type: Bricks/Cinder blocks
Siding: Wood Plywood
Roof: Metal
6A.This company has treated or is treating the structure for the following wood destroying insects: None
If treating for subterranean termites, the treatment was:
If treating for drywood termites or related insects, the treatment was:
6B. Date of Treatment: Common name of Insect : Name of Pesticide:
This company has a contract or warranty in effect for control of the following wood destroying insects: List Insects:
If “Yes”, copy(ies) of warranty and treatment diagram must be attached.
Neither I nor the company for which I am acting have had, presently have, or contemplate having any interest in the property. I do
further state that neither I nor the company for which I am acting is associated in any way with any party to this transaction.
Signatures:
7A. Tyrone Fisher, 0752554
Inspector (Technician or Certified Applicator name and License Number)
Others Present:
7B.None
Apprentices, Technicians, or Certified Applicators Name (s) and Registration/License Number(s)
Notice of Inspection Was Posted At or Near:
8A. Beneath the Kitchen Sink 8B. Date Posted: 9/21/21
9A. Were any areas of the property obstructed or inaccessible? Yes
(Refer to Part B & C, Scope of Inspection) If “Yes” specify in 6B.
9B. The obstructed or inaccessible areas include but are not limited to the following: Insulated area of attic, plumbing
areas, Slab Joints, Eaves, Weep holes, all other wall voids, Other, Portion of slab along back patio obstructed
by large cabinet on patio
10A.Conditions conducive to wood destroying insect infestation:Yes
(Refer to Part J, Scope of Inspection) If “Yes” specify in 10B.
10B.Conducive Conditions include but are not limited to: Wood Rot (M)
Other:
Page 2 of 4
Page 67 of 183
Inspected Address: 412 East 7th Street, Georgetown, TX 78626
SPCS/T-5 Licensed and Regulated by the Texas Department of Agriculture
(Rev. 09/01/20) P.O. Box 12847, Austin, TX 78711-2847, Phone (866) 918-4481, (FAX) 888-232-2567
11. Inspection Reveals Visible Evidence in or on the structure:
(Possible evidence includes: Active infestation, Previous Infestation or Previous Treatment)
11A.Subterranean Termites: Previous Infestation
11B.Drywood Termites: None
11C.Formosan Termites: None
11D.Carpenter Ants: None
11E.Other Wood Destroying Insects: None
Specify:
11F.Explanation of signs of previous treatment (including pesticides, baits, existing treatment stickers or other
methods) identified: None
11G.Visible evidence of: Shelter tube under crawl and termite damage along beams ES has been observed in
the following areas: Left front corner under crawl space and along beams in center and front section of crawl
If there is visible evidence of active or previous infestation, it must be noted. The type of insect(s) must be listed in the first blank and all identified
infested areas of the property inspected must be noted in the second blank. (Refer to Part D, E & F, Scope of Inspection)
12A. Corrective treatment recommended for active infestation or evidence of previous infestation with no prior treatment
as identified in Section 8. (Refer to Part G, H, and I, Scope of Inspection) Yes
12B. A preventive treatment and/or correction of conducive conditions as identified in 7A & 7B is recommended as
follows: No If yes, specify reason:
Refer to Scope of Inspection Part J
The inspector must draw a diagram including approximate perimeter measurements and indicate active or previous
infestation and type of insect by using the following codes: E-Evidence of Infestation, A-Active; P-Previous; D-
Drywood Termites; S-Subterranean Termites; F-Formosan Termites; C-Conducive Conditions; B-Wood Boring
Beetles; H-Carpenter Ants; Other(s)
Additional Comments: Keep landscape trees and plants trimmed back from structure.
Page 3 of 4
Diagram of Structure(s) Inspected
Page 68 of 183
Inspected Address: 412 East 7th Street, Georgetown, TX 78626
SPCS/T-5 Licensed and Regulated by the Texas Department of Agriculture
(Rev. 09/01/20) P.O. Box 12847, Austin, TX 78711-2847, Phone (866) 918-4481, (FAX) 888-232-2567
Statement of Purchaser
I have received the original or a legible copy of this form. I have read and understand any recommendations made. I have
also read and understand the “Scope of Inspection.” I understand that my inspector may provide additional information as
an addendum to this report.
If additional information is attached, list number of pages: N/A
Signature of Purchaser of Property or their Designee
Date:
[ ] Customer or Designee Not Present Buyers Initials:
Page 4 of 4
Page 69 of 183
TEXAS HISTORIC SITES INVENTORY
1. County Williamson
FORM — TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION
5. USGS Quad No. 3097-31 3
(rev. 8-82)
Site No 47 WM
City/Rural Georgetown GE UTM Sector 627-3389
2. Name 6 Date: Factual Est 1 890
Address 412 E. 7th 7 Architect/Builder
Contractor
3. Owner Steven L. Rokovich 8 Style/Type vernacular
Address 410 R. 7th, 78626 9. Original Use rPcidp.atial
4. Block/Lot Glasscock/Blk. 29/Lot p. 1 ,p. 8 Present Use residential
10. Description One—story wood frame dwelling w/ I—house plan: exterior wal 1 s w/ achpstnc chifiglp
siding & asbestos roll siding; gable roof w/ standing—seam metal ropring; front elev farPq.
S.: exterior atone chimney w/ corbled cap on E_ e1pv_, wnnd each dnuhlp—hling wind Q ws
4/4 lights7 sin.gle—dnar entrance: three—hay porch w/ hip roof across S. elev., D ric
11. Present Condition fair: altered--porch changed, ori gi nal si cling covered
12. Significance Primary area of significance: archi texture An altered hot Gnrwi evomple
of nineteenth rentnry vernacular dwelling with T-hnitse plan
13. Relationship to Site: Moved Date or Original Site x (describe)
14. Bibliography Sanborn Maps 15. Informant
16. Recorder A . Taylor Date Tilly 10RA
DESIGNATIONS
PHOTO DATA
TN R IS No Did THC Code B&W 4x5s Slides
0 RTHL 0 HABS (no.) TEX-35mm Negs.
NR: 0 Individual 0 Historic District YEAR DRWR ROLL FRME ROLL FRME
0 Thematic 0 Multiple-Resource 1 32A to
NR File Name 26 24 to
to
26 26
Other
No 2 oft
CONTINUATION PAGE
TEXAS HISTORIC SITES INVENTORY FORM — TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION (rev. 8-82)
1. Williamson WM 5. USGS Quad No. 3097 313 Site No 47 County
GeorgetownCity/Rural GE
Name 2.
#10. Description (cont'd): columns. Other noteworthy features include brick foundation
wall; attached single carport on W. elev. Outbuildings include modern sheet—metal
storage shed.
Page 70 of 183
Page 71 of 183
Page 72 of 183
Page 73 of 183
Page 74 of 183
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:412 E 7th St 2016 Survey ID:124999
City Georgetown 2016 Preservation Priority:Medium
SECTION 1
Basic Inventory Information
WCAD ID:R042598Property Type:Building Structure Object Site District
Date Recorded 3/2/2016Recorded by:CMEC
EstimatedActual Source:2007 surveyConstruction Date:1890
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:
High Medium
Priority:
Low
High Medium Low
ID:135
ID:47
*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:124999 2016 Survey High Medium Low
Explain:Despite some alterations, property is significant and contributes to neighborhood character
Latitude:30.637697 Longitude -97.673577
None Selected
None Selected
Photo direction: North
Page 75 of 183
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:412 E 7th St 2016 Survey ID:124999
City Georgetown 2016 Preservation Priority:Medium
Additional Photos
NorthwestPhoto Direction
Page 76 of 183
Page 77 of 183
Page 78 of 183
Page 79 of 183
Page 80 of 183
Page 81 of 183
Page 82 of 183
Page 83 of 183
Page 84 of 183
Page 85 of 183
Page 86 of 183
Page 87 of 183
Page 88 of 183
Page 89 of 183
Page 90 of 183
Page 91 of 183
Page 92 of 183
Page 93 of 183
Page 94 of 183
Page 95 of 183
Page 96 of 183
Page 97 of 183
Page 98 of 183
Page 99 of 183
Page 100 of 183
Page 101 of 183
Page 102 of 183
Page 103 of 183
Page 104 of 183
Page 105 of 183
Page 106 of 183
Page 107 of 183
Page 108 of 183
Page 109 of 183
Page 110 of 183
Page 111 of 183
Page 112 of 183
Page 113 of 183
1/6/22
1
Regarding the request to demolish the 130-year old home at 412 E. 7th St.:
Although there may be a single question HARC must answer: “Is it appropriate to demolish a
medium-priority historic structure?“ there are actually several other questions that must first be
answered by our community and our neighbor requesting to erase a piece of our collective
history.
1. What is our historic district without its historic buildings?
Page 114 of 183
1/6/22
2
2. Will this block of 7th St. still be recognizable if the last historic building is removed?
3. Does the future benefit of demolishing this historic structure outweigh the generational
benefits this home has provided to our community for last 130 years?
4. How many families lived on this block up until 2006, and how many families will live on this
block beyond 2022?
5. If a “medium-priority” historic structure can become a “NO-priority” empty lot via a bulldozer,
can a “medium-priority” historic structure also become a “high-priority” via creative
determination?
Historic homes may not meet modern expectations for size, amenities, and energy
efficiency. They may have “caked-on” gaudy paint and mismatched materials. But, you don’t see
anyone asking to shoot Granny just because she has wrinkles, can’t hear very well, and doesn’t
know how to use a smart phone. If only, our grannies were so lucky as our historic homes to have
the opportunity for restored facades, utility upgrades, and even living other lives!
Historic buildings are quite amazing in that they are known to adapt and live-on when
given the chance. Here in Georgetown, a bank has become a museum, a church has become a
community center, a home has become a wedding venue… and so it goes. Appropriateness is
always a matter of context with regard to the demolition of our historic buildings:
1. Is it appropriate to demolish this historic home if it poses a public danger to due to some health
hazard or imminent collapse? – YES.
2. Is it appropriate to demolish this historic home because a family cannot afford to make it
livable or useable in any way? – MAYBE.
Page 115 of 183
1/6/22
3
3. Is it appropriate to demolish this historic home to enlarge the backyard of an adjacent
property? – NO.
I implore the owner of the 130-year old home at 412 E. 7th St. to consider adaptive reuse
over demolition. I call upon Preservation Georgetown to reach-out to the owner and share their
knowledge, connections, and resources. I invite our neighbors in Old Town neighbors attend the
HARC hearing scheduled for Thursday, January 13, to mourn the possible loss of a community
elder. And I trust that HARC will do its duty and make the appropriate recommendation to City
Council regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
Trenton H. Jacobs, Architect, LEED® AP
504 E 7th St.
Page 116 of 183
Page 117 of 183
412 E. 7th Street Demo
2021-64-COA
Historic & Architectural Review Commission
January 11, 2022
1Page 118 of 183
Item Under Consideration
2021-64-COA –412 E. 7th Street Demo
•Public Hearing and Possible Action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA)
for the demolition of a medium priority historic structure at the property located at 412 E.
7th Street, bearing the legal description Lot 1, Glasscock’s Second Addition.
2Page 119 of 183
Item Under Consideration
HARC:
•Demolition of a Medium Priority Structure
3Page 120 of 183
Item Under Consideration
4Page 121 of 183
First
Presbyterian
Church
5Page 122 of 183
Current Context
6Page 123 of 183
History
•Year Constructed: Estimated 1890
•Builder: Unknown
•Past Owners:Federico Flores 1988-2021
Davis Family 1977-1988
A. F. & Mary Morris Family 1945-1977
Walter Woods & widow Annie Woods Singleton (1920-1945)
Elias & Elizabeth Queen (1918-1920)
D. F. Draper (1912-1918)
Glasscock Family (?-1912)
7Page 124 of 183
1916, 1925 & 1940 Sanborn Maps
8Page 125 of 183
c. 1934 SU Special Collections Photos
9Page 126 of 183
1964 Aerial Photo
10Page 127 of 183
1974 Aerial Photo
11Page 128 of 183
1984 HRS Photo
12Page 129 of 183
1984 HRS Photo
13Page 130 of 183
1984 HRS Photo
14Page 131 of 183
1984 HRS Photo
15Page 132 of 183
Current Photo
16Page 133 of 183
Current Photos
18Page 134 of 183
Current Photos
19Page 135 of 183
Current Photos
20Page 136 of 183
Current Photos
23Page 137 of 183
Current Photos
25Page 138 of 183
Current Photos
26Page 139 of 183
Current Photos
27Page 140 of 183
Current Photos
28Page 141 of 183
Current Photos
29Page 142 of 183
Design Guidelines 4.2
30
4.2 HARC should consider the following when evaluating proposals to demolish or relocate
historic resources:
Staff’s
Finding
1. Does the resource proposed for demolition or relocation have architectural and/ or historical
significance?No
2. What would be the effect on surrounding buildings of demolition or relocation of the resource?Minimal
3. What would be the effect on the Overlay District as a whole of demolition or relocation of the resource?Minimal
4. What would be the effect on safeguarding the heritage of the City of the demolition or relocation?Minimal
5. What has been the impact of any previous inappropriate alterations? Removed
Significance
6. Is the demolition solely a matter of convenience?No
7. Has the owner offered the property for sale?N/A
8. Has the owner asked a fair price?N/A
9. Has the property been marketed for a reasonable time?N/A
10. Has the property been advertised broadly in a reasonable manner?N/A
11. Has the owner sought the advice of a professional experienced in historic preservation work?Yes
12. What would be the effect of open space in that location if the lot is to be left vacant?MinimalPage 143 of 183
Demo Approval Criteria UDC Sec. 3.13.030.F.2.a.iv
31
Criteria Staff’s Finding
i. The applicant has provided information that the building or structure is no longer historically,
culturally or architecturally significant, or is no longer contributing to the historic overlay district; and Complies
ii. The applicant has established that the building or structure has undergone significant and irreversible
changes, which have caused the building or structure to lose the historic, cultural or architectural
significance, qualities or features which qualified the building or structure for such designation; and
Complies
iii. The applicant has demonstrated that any changes to the building or structure were not caused either
directly or indirectly by the owner, and were not due to intentional or negligent destruction, or lack of
maintenance rising to the level of a demolition by neglect; and
Complies
iv. Demolition or relocation of the building or structure will not cause significant adverse effect on the
historic overlay district or the City's historic resources;Complies
Page 144 of 183
Demo Approval Criteria UDC Sec. 3.13.030.F.2.b/c
32
Criteria Staff’s Finding
i. The applicant has demonstrated that the property owner cannot take reasonable, practical or viable
measures to adaptively use, rehabilitate or restore the building or structure, or make reasonable
beneficial use of, or realize a reasonable rate of return on a building or structure unless the building or
structure may be demolished or relocated; and
N/A
ii. The applicant must prove that the structure cannot be reasonably adapted for any other feasible use,
which would result in a reasonable rate of return; or N/A
Criteria Staff’s Finding
There is a compelling public interest that justifies relocation, removal or demolition of the structure.N/A
Page 145 of 183
33
Public Notification
•34 property owners within the 300’ buffer
•1 Sign posted on the property
•To date, staff has received:
•0 written comments IN FAVOR
•2 written comments OPPOSED
Page 146 of 183
Demolition Subcommittee Recommendation
The HARC Demolition Subcommittee recommends approval of the
request for demolition with the condition that the framing, flooring and
chimney stones be salvaged to the extent feasible, and an archive
document of the property be provided to the City prior to the issuance
of the COA approval, which shall include plans and photographs of the
structure.
34Page 147 of 183
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the request for demolition with the
condition that an archive document of the property be provided to the
City prior to the issuance of the COA approval.
35Page 148 of 183
HARC Motion –2021-64-COA
•Approve (as presented by the applicant)
•Deny (as presented by the applicant)
•Approve with conditions
•Postpone
36Page 149 of 183
City of Georgetown, Texas
Historic and Architectural Review
January 13, 2022
S UB J E C T:
Public Hearing and P ossible Action on a request for a C ertificate of Appropriateness (C O A) for a new
fence, railing or wall that is inconsistent with the overlay district's characteristics and applicable
guidelines at the property located at 1307 S . Myrtle Street, bearing the legal desc ription 0.13-ac re in the
C lement S tubblefield S urvey, Abstract No. 558, als o being known as the southwest part of Bloc k B,
Hughes S econd Addition, an unrecorded s ubdivis ion. (2021-73-C O A) –Nat Waggoner, Asst. P lanning
Dir. - Long R ange
IT E M S UMMARY:
Overview of Applicant’s Request:
T he Applic ant is req uesting HAR C ap p ro val for a 6’ tall privacy fenc e alo ng the E. 14 th S treet property
line, whic h would enclose the side s treet 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 3, partially complies with
2, does not comply with 1 of the 8 criteria establis hed in UDC S ec tion 3.13.030 for a C ertificate of
Appropriateness, as outlined in the attached S taff R eport. 2 of the 8 c riteria were not applic able to the
propos ed projec t.
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 2 - Letter of Intent Exhibit
Exhibit 3 - Plans & Specifications Exhibit
Exhibit 4 - His toric Resource Surveys Exhibit
Staff Pres entation Pres entation
Page 150 of 183
Historic & Architectural Review Commission
Planning Department Staff Report
Report Date: January 7, 2021
File Number: 2021-73-COA
AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION
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 1307 S. Myrtle Street, bearing the legal description 0.13-acre in the
Clement Stubblefield Survey, Abstract No. 558, also being known as the southwest part of Block B,
Hughes Second Addition, an unrecorded subdivision.
AGENDA ITEM DETAILS
Project Name: 1307 Myrtle Fence1307 Myrtle
Applicant: Cory Shaw (Damon Marie CO)
Property Owner: Cory Shaw (Damon Marie Co)
Property Address: 1307 S. Myrtle Street
Legal Description: 0.13-acre in the Clement Stubblefield Survey, Abstract No. 558, also being known
as the southwest part of Block B, Hughes Second Addition, an unrecorded
subdivision
Historic Overlay: Old Town Overlay
Case History: This is the first hearing of the request for 6’ privacy fence.
Prior COA Denials: N/A
Prior COA Approvals: Porch addition, garage enclosure, rear addition, setback modifications and 4’-
6” fence with the condition of a minimum 50% transparency approved via 2020-
14-COA on May 28, 2020.
HISTORIC CONTEXT
Date of Construction: c. 1965 per public records, rebuilt 2021
Historic Resources Survey Level of Priority: Low
National Register Designation: N/A
Texas Historical Commission Designation: N/A
Notable Property Owners/Events: Original house likely constructed by Barbara Norment c.
1965, rebuilt from foundation and framing in 2021.
APPLICANT’S REQUEST
HARC:
New 6’ privacy fence along the south side street property line
Page 151 of 183
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
2021-73-COA – 1307 S. Myrtle Street Page 2 of 5
STAFF ANALYSIS
Present Property Description:
The subject property has undergone a reconstruction from the foundation and framing during a
remodel that was approved for additions a garage enclosure and a new fence in 2020. The low priority
historic structure, which had a construction date of 1950 on the 2016 HRS, was shown to have been
constructed between 1965 and 1974 based on aerial photos and deed records, with a likely year of 1965.
Requested Changes:
The applicant is requesting HARC approval of a new fence design along the E. 14th Street property line.
The proposed fence would be a 6’ tall wood privacy fence that would align with the front or southwest
corner of the house and enclose the side street and rear yards.
Justification for Requests:
The applicant is requesting the approval of a privacy fence to provide additional privacy to the master
bedroom, bathroom and a secondary bedroom.
Technical Review:
In their meeting on May 28th, 2020, HARC approved a 3’ tall front yard fence and a 4’-6” tall side street
yard fence with the condition that both fence sections be a minimum of 50% transparent. The proposed
fence height and lack of transparency do not comply with the Design Guidelines effective September 1,
2021, although the proposed wood materials do comply. In the near vicinity fences are generally lower
height and partially transparent, with privacy fences separating properties. A privacy fence enclosing
the side yard is not generally compatible with the character of the near vicinity.
DESIGN GUIDELINE COMPLIANCE
Staff has determined that the proposed project complies with 0 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:
Masonry or stone walls
Masonry may be used at the base for no higher than 8
inches, or on posts flanking the walkway to support a
gate or on corner posts.
Partially Complies
The proposed fence is a wood
privacy fence; however, it is solid
and not transparent.
Page 152 of 183
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
2021-73-COA – 1307 S. Myrtle Street Page 3 of 5
GUIDELINES FINDINGS
CHAPTER THREE– OLD TOWN DESIGN GUIDELINES
Ornamental iron
Ornamental iron fences should be more delicate than
the standards for wood picket fences.
Wood picket
Pickets should be vertical and should not occupy more
than 50% of the fence panel. The pickets or materials
should not be more than 2.5 inches wide at its widest
point. Posts should be no more than 6 inches wide.
Solid, “stockade” fences do not allow views into front
yards and are inappropriate.
c. Side yard fencing
A side or rear yard fence that is taller than its front yard
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 Complies
The proposed 6’ side yard fence is
located to the street side of the
building line and over four feet in
height. The east portion of the fence
is located behind the building,
however, and may be constructed as
a 6’ privacy fence from wood as
proposed.
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 3 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;
Does Not Comply
Residential properties in the Old Town
Overlay District are required to have a 3’
tall and 50% transparent fence in the front
yard and side street setback, and the
proposed fence is a 6’ privacy in the side
street setback.
Page 153 of 183
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
2021-73-COA – 1307 S. Myrtle Street Page 4 of 5
SECTION 3.13.030 CRITERIA FINDINGS
3. Compliance with the Secretary of the
Interior's Standards for the Treatment of
Historic Properties to the most extent
practicable;
Complies
Proposed fence 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 partially complies or does
not comply with applicable Design
Guidelines.
5. The general historic, cultural, and
architectural integrity of the building,
structure or site is preserved;
Complies
The proposed fence does not alter the
integrity of the building or site.
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.
7. The overall character of the applicable historic
overlay district is protected; and
Partially Complies
Fences existing in a variety of heights, styles
and materials within the Old Town Overlay
District. However, the overall character, and
the character of the near vicinity of the
subject property, is generally lower height,
transparent fences, including wood pickets,
chain link (which is no longer permitted),
and decorative iron fencing along street
property lines. The height and lack of
transparency of the proposed fence are not
compatible with the general character,
although the wood fence materials are
compatible.
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 DENIAL of the request.
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.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
Page 154 of 183
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
2021-73-COA – 1307 S. Myrtle Street Page 5 of 5
ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1 – Location Map
Exhibit 2 – Letter of Intent
Exhibit 3 – Plans and Specifications
Exhibit 4 – Historic Resource Surveys
Exhibit 5 – 2020-14-COA Approval Memo
SUBMITTED BY
Britin Bostick, Downtown & Historic Planner
Page 155 of 183
Letter of Intent
Re: 1307 Myrtle St
The following letter spells out our intent to remodel the property at 1307
Myrtle St, which is in the Historic Overlay District.
We have a COA approved by HARC but would like to change the details
of the fencing around the property. The previous approval included a
fence 4’6” tall along the 14th Street side, on the property line - which is
within the 15’ setback, and a 3’ tall fence from the front of the home
along 14th Street and wrapping around to the front of the property line
along Myrtle Street.
Our update would be for a standard 6’ high fence along the 14th Street
side to the front corner of the house. Going with a higher fence will
provide more privacy to the master bathroom, bedroom and a
secondary bedroom. We do find precedence for this configuration on
several corner-lot properties.
Thank you,
Lisa Shaw
Page 156 of 183
S
M
Y
R
T
L
E
S
T
E 14TH ST
S
E
L
M
S
T
SITE LOCATION N
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
1307 S MYRTLE ST
GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 78626
HARC SUBMITTAL FOR CDC
Page 157 of 183
Page 158 of 183
26
'
-
0
"
6'
-
0
"
62
'
-
0
"
20 20 40
1" = 20'-0"
0
FEETSCALE
EXISTING 1-STORY HOME
PROPOSED ADDITION
PROPOSED
GARAGE
ADDITION
PORCH ADDITION
60' - 0"
94
'
-
0
"
2' - 6"
11' - 7"34' - 3"
EXISTING
DRIVEWAY
S MYRTLE STREET
E
14
T
H
S
T
15' SIDE/REAR STREET SETBACK
NORTH
4'6" (h) WOOD
FENCE ON E 14TH;
REF. RENDERINGS
3'0" (h) WOOD
FENCE ON S MYRTLE ST;
REF. RENDERINGS
25' STREET FACING
GARAGE SETBACK
6' SIDE SETBACK
10' REAR SETBACK
BUILDING RIDGE
HEIGHT @ 18'-9";
REF. ELEV
10' - 8"
1' - 2"
17
'
-
9
1
/
2
"
26
'
-
0
"
PROJECT INFORMATION:
Lot Area: 5,640 sf
Zoning District: Residential Single-Family
Old Town Overlay District
Existing and Proposed Area: Single-Family
Residential
Existing Residence Area: 1271 sq.ft.
Existing Garage Area: Carport -262 sq.ft.
Existing FAR: 0.23
Proposed Addition Area: 630 sq.ft.
Proposed FAR: 0.34
Impervious Cover: 2560 = 45%
Driveway will remain gravel
1" = 20'-0"1 SITE PLAN
Page 159 of 183
SOUTH ELEVATION ALONG 14TH ST
4’6” WHITE WOOD FENCE
ON 14TH ST
1-3/4” TALL STANDING SEAM
METAL ROOF SYSTEM;
4/12 SLOPE ROOF
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
1307 S MYRTLE ST
GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 78626
HARC SUBMITTAL FOR CDC
Page 160 of 183
WEST ELEVATION ALONG MYRTLE ST
3’-0” WHITE WOOD FENCE
W/GATE ON MYRTLE ST
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
1307 S MYRTLE ST
GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 78626
HARC SUBMITTAL FOR CDC
Page 161 of 183
Page 162 of 183
County Williamson
TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION
Local District:Old Town District
Address:1307 Myrtle St 2016 Survey ID:125863
City Georgetown
HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY FORM
2016 Preservation Priority:Low
SECTION 1
Basic Inventory Information
Owner/Address DAYTON, LARRY R & TREVA K, 177 THE OAKS BLVD, , ELGIN,TX 78621-5986
Latitude:30.631751 Longitude -97.674765
Addition/Subdivision:S3809 - Hughes 2nd Addition
WCAD ID:R042841Legal Description (Lot/Block):HUGHES 2ND ADDITION, BLOCK B(PT), ACRES .13
Property Type:Building Structure Object Site District
Current Designations:
NR District Yes No)
NHL NR
(Is property contributing?
RTHL OTHM HTC SAL Local:Other
Date Recorded 3/4/2016Recorded by:CMEC
Other:
Historic Use:GovernmentEducationalDomestic
SocialReligiousRecreation/cultureIndustry/processing
DefenseCommerce/tradeAgriculture
Other:
Current Use:GovernmentEducationalDomestic
SocialReligiousRecreation/cultureIndustry/processingHealthcare
DefenseCommerce/tradeAgriculture
Function
EstimatedActual Source:WCADConstruction Date:1950
Builder:Architect:
Healthcare
Note: See additional photo(s) on page 4
Vacant
Vacant
Old Town District
Current/Historic Name:None/None
Photo direction: Southeast
Page 163 of 183
County Williamson
TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION
Local District:Old Town District
Address:1307 Myrtle St 2016 Survey ID:125863
City Georgetown
HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY FORM
2016 Preservation Priority:Low
SECTION 2
Architectural Description
General Architectural Description:
One-story Minimal Ranch style house clad in aluminum siding with a hipped roof and a shed roof addition at the rear; it
has a rectangular plan, attached carport, and an entry stoop with a shed roof and a single front door.
Relocated
Additions, modifications:Siding replaced, windows replaced, addition at rear
Stylistic Influence(s)
Queen Anne
Second Empire
Greek Revival
Eastlake
Italianate
Log traditional
Exotic Revival
Colonial Revival
Romanesque Revival
Renaissance Revival
Folk Victorian
Shingle
Monterey
Beaux Arts
Tudor Revival
Mission
Neo-Classical
Gothic Revival
Moderne
Craftsman
Spanish Colonial
Art Deco
Prairie
Pueblo Revival
Other:
Commercial Style
Post-war Modern
No Style
Ranch
International
Gable Hipped Gambrel Shed Flat w/parapet
Structural Details
Roof Form
Mansard Pyramid Other:
Wood shingles Tile Composition shingles Metal Other:
Roof Materials
Wall Materials
Metal
Brick
Wood Siding
Stucco
Siding: Other
Stone
Glass
Wood shingles
Asbestos
Log
Vinyl
Terra Cotta
Other:
Concrete
Fixed Wood sash Double hung Casement Metal sash
Windows
Decorative Screenwork
Other:
Single door Double door With transom With sidelights
Doors (Primary Entrance)
Other:
Plan
Irregular
L-plan
Four Square
T-plan
Rectangular
Modified L-plan 2-room Open ShotgunCenter Passage
Other
Bungalow
Chimneys
Brick StuccoStone Corbelled Caps
Interior Exterior
Other
Specify #0
PORCHES/CANOPIES
Form:Shed Roof Hipped RoofFlat Roof Gabled Roof Inset Other
Support
Suspension rods
Box columns Classical columns
Wood posts (plain)
Spindlework
Wood posts (turned)
Tapered box supports
Masonry pier
Other:
Fabricated metal
Jigsaw trim
Suspension cables
Materials:Metal FabricWood Other:
# of stories:1 PartialNone FullBasement:
Ancillary Buildings
Garage Barn Shed Other:
Landscape/Site Features
Stone
Sidewalks
Wood
Terracing
Concrete
Drives Well/cistern Gardens
Other materials:Brick
Other
Landscape Notes:
Aluminum siding
Vinyl
Metal Posts
Metal hand rail
None
None
None
Unknown
Asphalt
Minimal Ranch
Page 164 of 183
County Williamson
TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION
Local District:Old Town District
Address:1307 Myrtle St 2016 Survey ID:125863
City Georgetown
HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY FORM
2016 Preservation Priority:Low
SECTION 3
Historical Information
Immigration/Settlement
Religion/Spirituality
Commerce
Law/Government
Science/Technology
Communication
Military
Social/Cultural
Education
Natural Resources
Transportation
Exploration
Planning/Development
Other
Health
Applicable National Register (NR) Criteria:
National State LocalLevel of Significance:
Integrity:
Setting Feeling
Location
Association
Design Materials Workmanship
Yes NoIndividually Eligible?Undetermined
Is prior documentation available
for this resource?Yes No Not known
General Notes: (Notes from 2007 Survey: aluminum windows and siding; side carport)
Associated Historical Context:Agriculture Architecture Arts
C
D
B
A Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad pattern of our history
Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past
Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction or represents the work of a
master, or possesses high artistic value, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components
lack individual distinctions
Has yielded, or is likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history
Areas of Significance:
Periods of Significance:
Integrity notes:See Section 2
Yes NoWithin Potential NR District?Undetermined
Yes NoIs Property Contributing?Undetermined
High Medium
Priority:
Low Explain:Property lacks integrity
Other Info:
Type:HABS Survey Other
Documentation details
2007 survey
Contact Survey Coordinator
History Programs Division, Texas
Historical Commission
512/463-5853
history@thc.state.tx.us
Questions?
1984 ID:Not Recorded2007 ID:883
2007 Survey Priority:Low 1984 Survey Priority:Not Recorded
Page 165 of 183
County Williamson
TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION
Local District:Old Town District
Address:1307 Myrtle St 2016 Survey ID:125863
City Georgetown
HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY FORM
2016 Preservation Priority:Low
Additional Photos
NortheastPhoto Direction
Page 166 of 183
1307 Myrtle Fence
2021-73-COA
Historic & Architectural Review Commission
January 13, 2022
1Page 167 of 183
Item Under Consideration
2021-73-COA –1307 Myrtle Fence
•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 1307 S. Myrtle Street, bearing the legal
description 0.13-acre in the Clement Stubblefield Survey, Abstract No. 558, also being
known as the southwest part of Block B, Hughes Second Addition, an unrecorded
subdivision.
2Page 168 of 183
Item Under Consideration
HARC:
•New 6’ privacy fence along the south side street property line
3Page 169 of 183
Item Under Consideration
4Page 170 of 183
5
Tony & Luigi’s
First United
Methodist
2021-73-COA
Page 171 of 183
Current Context
6Page 172 of 183
1307 Myrtle Street –Previous Photos
7Page 173 of 183
1307 Myrtle Street –Previous Photo
8Page 174 of 183
Current Photo
9Page 175 of 183
Current Photo
10Page 176 of 183
Previously Approved Fence
11Page 177 of 183
Proposed Privacy Fence Location & Design
12Page 178 of 183
Current Context
13Page 179 of 183
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;Does Not
Comply
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 Partially
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 14Page 180 of 183
Public Notification
•Two (2) signs posted
•To date, staff has received:
•0 written comments IN FAVOR
•0 written comments OPPOSED
15Page 181 of 183
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends disapproval of the request for a 6’ privacy fence.
16Page 182 of 183
HARC Motion –2021-73-COA
•Approve (as presented by the applicant)
•Deny (as presented by the applicant)
•Approve with conditions
•Postpone
17Page 183 of 183