Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_HARC_01.25.2018Notice of Meeting for the Historic and Architectural Rev iew Commission of the City of Georgetown January 25, 2018 at 6:00 PM at Council and Courts Bldg, 101 E 7th Street Georgetown, TX 78626 The City o f G eo rgeto wn is committed to comp lianc e with the Americans with Dis abilities Ac t (ADA). If yo u req uire as s is tanc e in participating at a p ublic meeting d ue to a disability, as d efined und er the ADA, reas onab le as s is tance, ad ap tatio ns , or acc o mmo d ations will b e provid ed up o n req uest. P leas e c o ntact the City Sec retary's Office, at leas t three (3) days prior to the sc hed uled meeting d ate, at (512) 930-3652 o r City Hall at 113 Eas t 8th Street fo r add itional info rmation; TTY us ers ro ute through Relay Texas at 711. Regular Session (This Regular S es s io n may, at any time, b e rec es s ed to convene an Exec utive S es s io n fo r any p urpose authorized b y the Op en Meetings Act, Texas Go vernment Co d e 551.) A The His to ric and Architec tural Review Commis s ion, ap p o inted by the Mayo r and the City Counc il, is respons ible fo r hearing and taking final ac tion on applic ations , b y is s uing C ertific ates o f Appropriatenes s based upo n the C ity Co uncil ad o p ted Do wntown Design Guidelines and Unified Development Code. Welcome and Meeting Procedures: Staff P res entation Applic ant P res entation (Limited to ten minutes unles s stated otherwis e by the Commission.) Q ues tio ns fro m Co mmis s io n to S taff and Ap p licant Comments fro m Citizens * Applic ant Res p o nse Commis s ion Delib erative Pro ces s Commis s ion Ac tion * Tho s e who s peak mus t turn in a speaker fo rm, lo cated at the b ack of the ro o m, to the rec o rd ing sec retary b efo re the item they wish to add res s begins. Each speaker will b e permitted to ad d res s the Co mmis s ion one time only fo r a maximum o f three minutes. Legislativ e Regular Agenda B Co nsideration of the Minutes from the Dec emb er 14, 2017 HARC meeting. Karen Frost, Rec o rd ing Secretary C Public Hearing and possible actio n o n a reques t fo r a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for the demolition of a residence loc ated at 703 E. 13th Street, bearing the legal desc rip tion of 0.16 ac. Snyder Ad d ition, Bloc k 1 (SW/PT). - Nat Waggo ner, AICP, Long Range Planner D Public Hearing and possible ac tion o n a req uest fo r a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) fo r the demolition of a single s tory res id enc e loc ated at 1205 S. Walnut, bearing the legal desc rip tion o f 0.160 ac . Snyd er Ad d ition, Blo ck 1 (W/PT). - Nat Waggo ner, AICP, Long Range P lanner E Presentation and discussion of conceptual design fo r the reno vatio n of a residential property loc ated at 1227 Churc h S t - Nat Waggo ner, AICP, Lo ng R ange P lanning Manager Page 1 of 163 F Presentation and discussion of conceptual design for the renovation of a c o mmerc ial p ro p erty loc ated at 1102 S. Aus tin Ave - Nat Waggo ner, AIC P, Lo ng Range P lanning Manager G Up d ates of Downto wn P ro jects and up co ming meetings . Next regular HARC Meeting, February 22, 2018 Mad is o n T homas, new Histo ric Dis tric t Planner H Public Hearing a n d possible action on a reques t fo r a C ertific ate o f Ap p ro p riatenes s (COA) for the demolition o f a garage lo cated at 204 E 8th, b earing the legal des c riptio n of 0.33 ac . Glas s c oc k Addition, Bloc k 9, Lot 7 - 8. - Nat Waggoner, AICP, Long Range Planner Adjournment CERTIFICATE OF POSTING I, Shelley No wling, C ity S ecretary fo r the C ity of Geo rgeto wn, Texas , d o hereby c ertify that this Notice of Meeting was p o s ted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a p lace read ily acc es s ible to the general p ublic at all times , on the ______ d ay o f __________________, 2018, at __________, and remained so p o s ted fo r at leas t 72 c o ntinuo us ho urs p receding the sc heduled time o f s aid meeting. ____________________________________ S helley No wling, City Sec retary Page 2 of 163 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review January 25, 2018 SUBJECT: Cons id eration o f the Minutes fro m the Dec ember 14, 2017 HARC meeting. Karen F ro s t, Recording Sec retary ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: Karen Fro s t ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Minutes _HARC_12.14.2017 Backup Material Page 3 of 163 Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 1 of 3 Meeting: December 14, 2017 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review Commission Minutes Thursday, December 14, 2017 at 6:00 p.m. Council and Courts Building 101 E. 7th Street Georgetown, TX 78626 Members present: Lee Bain, Chair; Terri Asendorf-Hyde; Justin Bohls; Art Browner; Shawn Hood, Vice-Chair; Karl Meixsell and Lawrence Romero and Scott Revier (alternate) Absent: Catherine Morales (alternate) Staff present: Sofia Nelson, Planning Director; Nat Waggoner, Long Range Planning Manager; Glen Holcomb, Chief Building Official; Kim McAuliffe, Downtown Development Manager; and Karen Frost, Recording Secretary. Call to Order by Chair Bain at 6:02 p.m. with the reading of the meeting procedures. Regular Session A. Welcome and Meeting Procedures Legislative Regular Agenda B. Consideration of the Minutes from the November 9, 2017 HARC meeting. Karen Frost, Recording Secretary Motion by Browner, second by Bohls to approve the minutes. Approved 7-0. Item C was moved to the end of the agenda but written in the original order of the agenda. C. Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) of a four (4) story mixed use building at 204 E. 8th St., bearing the legal description of 0.33 ac. Glasscock Addition, Block 9, Lot 7 - 8. - Nat Waggoner, AICP, Long Range Planner Commissioner Bohls recused himself with a conflict of interest affidavit and Commissioner Revier took his seat. Waggoner presented the staff report. This project is in area 2 of the Downtown Overlay District and Waggoner explained how the project complies with the Guidelines. He gave a recap of the Commissioners comments from a previous concept review meeting. The applicant made modifications to address those comments. There are efforts to reduce height and to improve articulation to address massing concerns. The applicant has reduced the number of units, modified the number of roof types, and changed the variation of materials including railing types. They feel that the changes comply with the UDC and the applicant has filed Administrative Exceptions for the four extra feet of height and for parking requirements. Waggoner generally finds this development complies with the Guidelines and cited his findings. Staff recommends approval with the submitted revisions. Revier asked about ADA parking requirements reducing the number of parking spaces. Waggoner responded this will be a building code requirement and is not part of the application but staff feels they will be able to meet the requirements. Revier asked about the number of access points on the east side. Waggoner says the applicant is working on the design to meet the Page 4 of 163 Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 2 of 3 Meeting: December 14, 2017 building code and fire code criteria and is working on the setback design change and if it changes the façade it will be brought back to the commission. Chair asked about height and transition zones. Matt Synatchk, Project Manager with Matkin Hoover, explained that applicants took the comments they were given and brought back the reduction in height to 44 feet height, broke the project into more modules, reduced the amount of commercial space to create parking, added more roof type variations, and reduced a material type by taking out one style of brick and made all trim colors the same. There is a green wall to shield the parking area from the pedestrian view. He says they pulled materials from adjacent buildings. This is in the transition zone which calls out multi-family as appropriate and puts the building to the front property line with parking in the rear. Revier asked if Guideline 13.7 applies which requires the maintenance of the view of courthouse. It was explained that this property is outside of the Courthouse View Corridor. Nelson explains that there are not any current view sheds in this location. Maxseill asked which structures in the downtown area are comparable to this height. Synatschk stated the City Hall is three stories. Then there is the Courthouse which is more than three stories. Tamiro Plaza is 40 feet tall. Waggoner said there is discretion by the Commission to allow the difference in height and to determine where the grade rests to measure the maximum height. Nelson explains the definition of the height that is given in the UDC. “The vertical distance from grade to the average height of the highest roof structure.” Staff will determine what is grade for this property. Hood asks about Guideline 13.4 and is concerned about the fact that this property is surrounded by one and two story buildings and although the district allows 40 foot buildings, the guidelines do not support that. He brings up how Synatschk should step the building down to the two story size buildings. Synatschk presented a new design that shows some other alterations. Bain explains the downtown master plan states a multi-family structure is appropriate if two to three stories. Synatschk says that is contextual and that new materials should look new and not try to recreate history. Eric Visser spoke and wants to lay the foundation for the discussion. He thanked you to everyone that serves and cares. He owns several properties and has been active in the community when it has been tough. This application is driven by needing a better critical core in Georgetown. There is a lot of misinformation online and he wants to be open to discussion. It is not an “us versus them” situation and they are not trying to work against the public. He asks for a definite action tonight. Nelson also asked that the commission take action in some form and if this action is tabled that it be with specific direction. Chair Bain opened the Public Hearing: John Foliot, 209 Elm Street, strongly opposed to the application and the mass of this structure in this area with low buildings. Thinks the current design is ugly and it’s too close to the downtown core and will negatively affect tourism. Erin Allen, 705 E 3rd Street, wants to speak to Mr. Visser and wants to empathize with trying to get something through but wants to express that there is an insensitivity to what the people want. Page 5 of 163 Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 3 of 3 Meeting: December 14, 2017 And this building needs to be stair stepped down and she thinks it is too massive. Michael McAndrew, 913 S College, looked at many places and chose Georgetown because of its charm and this project will take away from that. He stated, “Just because you can doesn’t mean you should.” Richard Cutts, 1312 Elm Street, talks about the historic structures and how this project does not match that scale. Alex Fuller, 1531 Ash Street, talks about the view of this from the other perspectives, north, south and west. He thinks there are too many units trying to fit onto this lot. He says this will add too many cars to the block and the residents will be frustrated by this. He suggests that the commission does not have to follow staff’s recommendation and asks them to turn this down. Pam Mitchell, 1017 S College, says this is a blend of art and science and the code is the art. She is concerned about the mass and scale and pedestrian friendliness, but also the heritage tree. Feels that the 10% reduction in height is too little and disingenuous. Asks the commission to deny the application. Asks staff to consider the community. Ann Seaman, 810 S Church Street, lives next to 600 Degrees and is definitely involved and affected by this project. She thinks the commission shows care in all their reviews, but thinks this is too big and too tall and not in keeping with the character of the downtown. She does not agree with staff who says this complies. “A Best Western would not be allowed and this shouldn’t either.” Nick Ramos, 407 E 4th Street, appreciates Mr. Visser and believes he has developed beautiful properties. He has been living here for last 10 years and seen the changes that have occurred, this will have a large impact on congestion and density. He thinks the scale is not in proportion to the neighborhood. This building needs to be revised. Ross Hunter, 908 S. Walnut, states the commission has already noted several guidelines that are violated by this application and urges the commission to deny this application. This building does not belong here and will get in the way of downtown life. It does not fit in the transition zone, which should be a mix of the two areas. This building should fit in with its surroundings. Heather Fraser, 282 Logan Ranch Road, feels this building is beautiful but belongs in the Domain or someone else. Believes we should bring people to downtown, but people come here for the Square and she hopes the commission will listen to the people who live here and those who visit who like the way it is today, without this building. She suggests doing something in keeping with the neighborhood. Larry Olsen, 300 E 9th Street, given an extra three minutes to speak by Larry Brundidge. Mr. Olsen lives near this property and is astonished and amazed that staff says this scale is appropriate for the neighborhood. The footprint of the tallest building nearby is the courthouse with 9700 square feet. This project is projected to have a mass of 15,000 square feet, without a lawn. There is no step-down to the adjacent properties and it defeats the transition zone. He supports residential on this site but it needs to be scalable and appropriate. He called out the 3rd and Rock Street project as appropriate. He feels administrative approvals are matter-of-fact and not really thought through. He determined that there would be an additional 3.5 feet on top of the 44 feet. If you measure it on the east side of the building, from grade it will be 50 feet. He feels this is not appropriate. Page 6 of 163 Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 4 of 3 Meeting: December 14, 2017 Susan Firth, 1403 Olive Street, sent a letter and states this project has a place, but not at 204 E 8th. She feels it does not meet 9 of the 10 guidelines. She asks that the commissioners deny this application and should not render a decision without further reviewing the options. Tim Solano, 414 Starview Lane, just moved here and feels this is less about the aesthetic and more about what it is promising and can’t deliver. Young people are moving to Georgetown to get away from larger developments and his peer group are moving into historic homes or rural areas. This will miss the mark. Patrick O’Brien, 207 John Thomas, complained about the height and parking – doesn’t understand why parking can’t go underground. Aesthetics – thinks it’s ugly, mortar and brick don’t give it character. Shannon Spears, 901 College Street, agrees that people like her (26 year old) don’t look for this type of structure. They look for multi-family that has the character of the area. Chair Bain closed the public hearing with no further speakers coming forth. Motion by Revier to deny the COA based on the building height has not been addressed or met, overall schematic design is incomplete – other codes will have a domino effect and it will come back, handicap parking and the parking count is not realistic, Chapter 13 with the five foot setback on the top floor is too shallow for that mass, and the impervious cover is too much. Second by Romero. Hood likes what Mr. McAndrews said, “Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.” The outpouring of the community shows how important this is to the community. He appreciates how hard it is to do a project like this, but feels this project does not fit on this location. Motion of denial approved. 7 – 0. D. Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for the renovation, to include the enclosure of an existing screening porch, to property located at 1414 S. College, bearing the legal description of 0.514 ac. Hughes Addition, Block 8 (SE/PT). - Nat Waggoner, AICP, Long Range Planner Waggoner presented the staff report. Staff recommends approval as submitted as the proposed renovations to the rear, being a non-historic addition, maintains the character of the high priority structure as well as with surrounding properties. Chair Bain opened the Public Hearing and with no speakers coming forth closed it. Motion by Asendorf-Hyde to approve the COA as submitted. Second by Hood. Approved 7 – 0. E. Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for the demolition of a garage and renovation of a residence, to include the construction of a new window opening on the east facade of the home, construction of a new garage, and replacement of an existing column, for a property located at 1402 Hutto Road, bearing the legal description of 0.411 ac. University Park, Block 5, Lot 1-5. - Nat Waggoner, AICP, Long Range Planner Waggoner presented the staff report. The application supports the UDC and the Design Guidelines and supports the character of the district. The demolition subcommittee met previously and recommends demolition of the accessory structure garage. Page 7 of 163 Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 5 of 3 Meeting: December 14, 2017 Gary Wang, the architect for the project, further explained the project. He showed a floorplan that is being proposed to change the back rooms into a master bedroom suite. The new second bedroom is the reason for the additional window. The courtyard will be maintained. The garage will be rebuilt to allow driveway access from 14th Street, instead of the long driveway from Hutto Road. This will be placed to achieve the setbacks and will save a large heritage tree. Browner asked about salvaging any part of the garage. Wang responded the instructions to the contractor are to salvage as much as possible, both in the garage and in the home. Chair Bain opened the Public Hearing and with no speakers coming forth closed it. Romero moves to approve the application, with demolition, as proposed for 1402 Hutto Road. Second by Hood. Approved 7 – 0. F. Presentation and discussion of conceptual design for the renovation of a residential property located at 501 S. Elm Street - Nat Waggoner, AICP, Long Range Planning Manager Waggoner introduces the proposed changes and the applicant. J. Bryant Boyd, project architect, spoke and asked for any issues the commission sees in this project that will change the entire lot. The applicant is proposing moving the house six feet back to accommodate additions, removing non-historic bay windows, possibly adding French doors, adding a new master bedroom suite and garage and adding a street facing porch. The garage will have a second floor. This is a medium priority structure. The intent is to not change the historic significance of the house but to enhance it. The commissioners were supportive and felt this was a good project. G. Updates of Downtown Projects and upcoming meetings. • Next regular HARC Meeting, January 25, 2018 • Introduction of Madison Thomas, the new Historic District Planner Adjournment Motion by Hood, second by Romero to adjourn at 8:05 p.m. Approved 7 – 0. ________________________________ ______________________________ Approved, Lee Bain Chair Attest, Justin Bohls Page 8 of 163 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review January 25, 2018 SUBJECT: Public Hearing and possible actio n o n a reques t fo r a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for the d emo lition o f a res id enc e lo c ated at 703 E. 13th Street, bearing the legal d es c riptio n of 0.16 ac. Snyder Additio n, Blo c k 1 (S W/P T ). - Nat Waggo ner, AIC P, Lo ng Range Planner ITEM SUMMARY: The s ingle story res idence lo cated at 703 E. 13th, is id entified as a medium p rio rity s truc ture in the City’s 2016 His toric Res ources Surveys Rep o rts (HRS R). The applic ant is s eeking a d emo lition of the struc ture b as ed on unreas o nable econo mic hardship . Ac c ording to the applic ant, in order fo r the p ro p erty to be inhab itable, the res idence req uires a new ro of, a new foundatio n, new electric al wiring, and s tructural reinforc ement (cu rrently sin g le wall b a tton). In p res ent c o nditio n, the res idenc e is no t rentab le. Acc o rd ing to the applic ant, the City o f Georgetown will no t re-es tablish elec tric service until the s tructure is brought into c o mp lianc e with current build ing c o d e. Public Comments As req uired by the Unified Development Cod e, all property o wners within a 200 fo o t rad ius o f the s ubjec t p ro p erty that are loc ated within City limits were notified of the rezoning app lic atio n (19 no tic es mailed), and o ne (1) s ign was p o s ted o n-site on January 8, 2018. To d ate, staff has rec eived one (1) written comment in o p p o s ition to the demolitio n. The letter o f op p o s ition refers to concerns ab o ut what will replac e struc ture and les s about demolitio n o f the s tructure its elf. Staff has rec eived two (2) written c o mments in sup p o rt of the reques t. Findings This med ium priority s tructure d o es no t conform to the c urrent b uilding co d e and s truc tural defic ienc ies render the rep o s itioning of the ho me infeas ible. The HARC Demolitio n Subc o mmittee includ ing the HPO and Chief Building Official conferred on 12/6/2017 and reaffirmed the ap plic ant’s s ummary o f struc tural is s ues. If HAR C ap p ro ves the demolitio n, staff recommend s that HARC co ns ider req uiring the c reation o f a his toric al arc hive inc luding archival-quality p hoto -d o cumentation, and/o r arc hitec tural drawings of the b uilding o r struc ture p ro p o s ed to be d emo lis hed or relo cated similar to thos e req uired b y the His toric Americ an Build ings S urvey to b e sub mitted to the His toric P res ervatio n Offic er as d es cribed in the Unified Develo p ment Code, 3.13.030. E.3 (b). FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Nat Waggoner, PMP, AICP ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Exhibit 1 - Location Map Exhibit Page 9 of 163 Exhibit 2- HARC Demolition Subcommittee Findings Exhibit Exhibit 3 - HPO Report Exhibit Exhibit 4- HRSR Survey (Demo)Exhibit Exhibit 5- Public Comment Exhibit Page 10 of 163 EL M S T A SH ST PI N E ST E 1 5 T H S T E 1 3 T H S T MAP LE ST S M A IN S T E U N I V ERS I T Y AV E S C H U R C H S T S C O L L E G E S T OLI VE S T E 8 TH ST S M Y R TL E S T WA L N U T S T E 1 0T H S T E 1 1 T H S T E 1 6T H S T VI N E ST E 1 4T H S T LA U R E L S T S A N J O S E S T SO U LE D R J A M E S S T E 1 7T H ST E RUTERSVILL E D R E 9 T H S T A N N I E P U RLDV M C K ENZIE DR GE ORGE S T W 1 7 T H S T E 9 TH 1 /2 S T W 16T H S T K N I G H T S T W 11TH ST HO L L Y S T W 9 T H S T W R U T E R S V I L L E D R E 1 6 T H S T S M Y R T L E S T L A U R E L S T E 1 6TH ST E 1 7 T H S T V I N E S T E 1 7 T H S T E 1 1 T H S T E 9 TH ST E 1 0T H S T E 1 6T H S T E 1 7T H S T E 1 4 T H S T E 1 4T H S T WA L N U T S T E 1 6T H S T E 1 7T H S T COA-2017-032Exhibit #1 Coordi nate System : Texas State Plane/Centr al Zone/N AD 83/U S FeetCartographic Data For G eneral Plann ing Pu rpo ses Only ¯ Location Map LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ 0 500 1,000Fee t Page 11 of 163 Page 12 of 163 Page 13 of 163 Page 14 of 163 Page 15 of 163 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:703 E 13th St 2016 Survey ID:124013 City Georgetown 2016 Preservation Priority:Medium SECTION 1 Basic Inventory Information WCAD ID:R047405Property Type:Building Structure Object Site District Date Recorded 3/4/2016Recorded by:CMEC EstimatedActual Source:WCADConstruction Date:1925 Duplex Bungalow Other: Center Passage ShotgunOpen2-roomModified L-plan Rectangular T-plan Four Square L-plan Irregular Plan* International Ranch No Style Post-war Modern Commercial Style Other: Pueblo Revival Prairie Art Deco Spanish Colonial Craftsman Moderne Gothic Revival Neo-Classical Mission Tudor Revival Beaux Arts Monterey Shingle Folk Victorian Renaissance Revival Romanesque Revival Colonial Revival Exotic Revival Log traditional Italianate Eastlake Greek Revival Second Empire Queen Anne Stylistic Influence(s)* Note: See additional photo(s) on following page(s) General Notes: (Notes from 2007 Survey: asbestos shingles) High Medium Priority: Low High Medium Low ID:321 ID:229 *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:124013 2016 Survey High Medium Low Explain:Property retains a relatively high degree of integrity; property is significant and contributes to neighborhood character Latitude:30.63259 Longitude -97.670647 None Selected None Selected Photo direction: Northeast Page 16 of 163 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:703 E 13th St 2016 Survey ID:124013 City Georgetown 2016 Preservation Priority:Medium Additional Photos NorthPhoto Direction WestPhoto Direction Page 17 of 163 Page 18 of 163 Page 19 of 163 1 Nathaniel Waggoner From:Janie Barrette <janiebarr47@yahoo.com> Sent:Thursday, January 18, 2018 9:20 AM To:Nathaniel Waggoner Cc:Alan Barrette Subject:Request to demolish 2 properties Mr. Waggoner,  After reviewing the letter from your office, concerning properties at 1205 S. Walnut and  703 E. 13th street, my husband and I agree that the owner should be allowed to remove The houses since they  are in bad condition and would better serve the neighborhood By having new homes built (like J Bryant Boyd  designs), that retain the historic look.    Thank you,  Janie Barrette  Alan Barrette  1305 S. College St.  Georgetown, TX    Sent from my iPad  Page 20 of 163 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review January 25, 2018 SUBJECT: Public Hearing and possib le ac tion on a reques t fo r a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for the d emo lition o f a s ingle s tory resid enc e loc ated at 1205 S. Walnut, b earing the legal d es criptio n of 0.160 ac . Snyder Ad d itio n, Bloc k 1 (W/P T). - Nat Waggoner, AICP, Lo ng Range Planner ITEM SUMMARY: The s ingle story res idence lo cated at 1205 S. Walnut Street, is id entified as a lo w p rio rity struc ture in the City’s 2016 His to ric Resources Surveys Reports (HRS R). Ac cording to the 2016 HRS R, the s tructure lac ks a definab le stylistic influenc e, floor p lan and integrity. The 2007 HR SR ind icates that the fro nt doo r has been replac ed , vinyl windows and a d etac hed carport have been add ed . As s uch, the struc ture does no t p o s s es s any s ignificant arc hitectural features , nor d o es it rep res ent the wo rk o f a s p ecific arc hitect or c rafts man. Ac cording to the ap p licant, a mo ving company in Bertram exp res s ed interes t in the property, however after close inspec tio n, dec lined to acc ep t the prop erty due to struc tural c o nc erns and moving the s tructure. Public Comments As req uired by the Unified Development Cod e, all property o wners within a 200 fo o t rad ius o f the s ubjec t p ro p erty that are loc ated within City limits were notified of the rezoning app lic atio n (19 no tic es mailed), and o ne (1) s ign was p o s ted o n-site on January 8, 2018. To d ate, staff has rec eived one (1) written comment in o p p o s ition to the demolitio n. The letter o f op p o s ition refers to concerns ab o ut what will replac e struc ture and les s about demolitio n o f the s tructure its elf. Staff has rec eived two (2) written c o mments in sup p o rt of the reques t. Findings This s truc ture is a low p rio rity due to a lac k o f integrity, d efinable c harac teristics and no n-his toric features . The HARC Demolitio n Sub committee inc luding the HPO and Chief Building Official conferred o n 12/6/2017 and reaffirmed the applic ant’s summary of s truc tural issues . The S ubc o mmittee did not see any o uts tand ing features that could b e s alvaged o ther than p o s s ib ly the windows for dec o rative o r art purp o s es and externally the c yp res s lap may be of value, ho wever it may contain as b es tos . The s ubc o mmittee agreed that nothing is s tructurally s o und eno ugh to save fo r rec o nstruc tion. If HARC approves the demolition, s taff rec ommend s that HARC c o ns ider requiring the c reatio n of a histo rical archive inc luding arc hival- q uality pho to-doc umentation, and/o r architec tural d rawings of the b uilding or struc ture p ro p o s ed to be d emo lis hed o r relo cated s imilar to those req uired by the Histo ric Americ an Buildings S urvey to be s ubmitted to the His toric Pres ervation Offic er as desc ribed in the Unified Develo p ment Code, 3.13.030. E.3 (b ). FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Nat Waggoner, PMP, AICP ATTACHMENTS: Page 21 of 163 Description Type Exhibit 1 - Location Map Exhibit Exhibit 2- HARC Demolition Subcommittee Findings (1205 S. Walnut) Exhibit Exhibit 3 - HPO Report (1205 S. Walnut)Exhibit Exhibit 4 - Public Comment Exhibit Exhibit 5- His toric Res ources Survey Exhibit Page 22 of 163 EL M S T A SH ST PI N E ST E 1 5 T H S T E 1 3 T H S T MAP LE ST S M A IN S T E U N I V ERS I T Y AV E S C H U R C H S T S C O L L E G E S T OLI VE S T E 8 TH ST S M Y R TL E S T WA L N U T S T E 1 0T H S T E 1 1 T H S T E 1 6T H S T VI N E ST E 1 4T H S T LA U R E L S T S A N J O S E S T SO U LE D R J A M E S S T E 1 7T H ST E RUTERSVILL E D R E 9 T H S T A N N I E P U RLDV M C K ENZIE DR GE ORGE S T W 1 7 T H S T E 9 TH 1 /2 S T W 16T H S T K N I G H T S T W 11TH ST HO L L Y S T W 9 T H S T W R U T E R S V I L L E D R E 1 6 T H S T S M Y R T L E S T L A U R E L S T E 1 6TH ST E 1 7 T H S T V I N E S T E 1 7 T H S T E 1 1 T H S T E 9 TH ST E 1 0T H S T E 1 6T H S T E 1 7T H S T E 1 4 T H S T E 1 4T H S T WA L N U T S T E 1 6T H S T E 1 7T H S T COA-2017-032Exhibit #1 Coordi nate System : Texas State Plane/Centr al Zone/N AD 83/U S FeetCartographic Data For G eneral Plann ing Pu rpo ses Only ¯ Location Map LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ 0 500 1,000Fee t Page 23 of 163 Page 24 of 163 Page 25 of 163 Page 26 of 163 Page 27 of 163 Page 28 of 163 Page 29 of 163 1 Nathaniel Waggoner From:Janie Barrette <janiebarr47@yahoo.com> Sent:Thursday, January 18, 2018 9:20 AM To:Nathaniel Waggoner Cc:Alan Barrette Subject:Request to demolish 2 properties Mr. Waggoner,  After reviewing the letter from your office, concerning properties at 1205 S. Walnut and  703 E. 13th street, my husband and I agree that the owner should be allowed to remove The houses since they  are in bad condition and would better serve the neighborhood By having new homes built (like J Bryant Boyd  designs), that retain the historic look.    Thank you,  Janie Barrette  Alan Barrette  1305 S. College St.  Georgetown, TX    Sent from my iPad  Page 30 of 163 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:1205 Walnut St 2016 Survey ID:123945 City Georgetown 2016 Preservation Priority:Low SECTION 1 Basic Inventory Information WCAD ID:R047409Property Type:Building Structure Object Site District Date Recorded 3/4/2016Recorded by:CMEC EstimatedActual Source:WCADConstruction Date:1930 Bungalow Other: Center Passage ShotgunOpen2-roomModified L-plan Rectangular T-plan Four Square L-plan Irregular Plan* International Ranch No Style Post-war Modern Commercial Style Other: Pueblo Revival Prairie Art Deco Spanish Colonial Craftsman Moderne Gothic Revival Neo-Classical Mission Tudor Revival Beaux Arts Monterey Shingle Folk Victorian Renaissance Revival Romanesque Revival Colonial Revival Exotic Revival Log traditional Italianate Eastlake Greek Revival Second Empire Queen Anne Stylistic Influence(s)* Note: See additional photo(s) on following page(s) General Notes: (Notes from 2007 Survey: door replaced; vinyl windows; detached carport added) High Medium Priority: Low High Medium Low ID:1071 ID:711 *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:123945 2016 Survey High Medium Low Explain:Property lacks integrity Latitude:30.632745 Longitude -97.670689 None Selected None Selected Photo direction: West Page 31 of 163 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:1205 Walnut St 2016 Survey ID:123945 City Georgetown 2016 Preservation Priority:Low Additional Photos NortheastPhoto Direction Shed WestPhoto Direction Page 32 of 163 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review January 25, 2018 SUBJECT: Presentation and discussion of conceptual design for the renovation of a res idential p ro p erty loc ated at 1227 Church St - Nat Waggoner, AICP, Lo ng Range Planning Manager ITEM SUMMARY: This review will p ro vide d irectio n o n the pro jec t regard ing c o mp lianc e with the Do wntown and Old To wn Design Guidelines . C o nc ep tual review allo ws the o p p o rtunity fo r dialogue with the Commission and staff to d is cus s the c o mp o nents o f the p ro ject, pos s ible wind o w and s id ing replac ements , the d emo lition of the existing garage and rear ad d itions includ ing. This property is bound b y The d emo litio n s ubc o mmittee has no t convened o n this property. Per the Unified Development Code, Sec tion 3.13.30, “u p on d eeming the a p p lication comp lete, requests for a C ertificate of Approp ria teness for d emolition of a Historic L a n d ma rk or contrib u tin g historic structu re shall b e su b ject to a 60-day d emolition delay p eriod. T h e Historic a n d Architectu ral Review Commission sh a ll not take a ction on a req u est for demolition until th e 60-day d emolition d elay p eriod is comp lete.” No fo rmal ac tio n will b e taken on this ap p lication at this meeting. A formal C ertific ate o f Appropriateness review will oc c ur at a future meeting. The ap p licant is s eeking feed b ack on the following projec t components : i. Window replac ement ii. S id ing replac ement iii. Garage demolitio n iv. Rear ad d ition FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Nat Waggoner, PMP, AICP ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Exhibit 1 - Plans and Specifications Exhibit Exhibit 2a- Chapter 6 Guidelines Exhibit Exhibit 2b - Chapter 7 Guidelines Exhibit Exhibit 2c - Chapter 11 Guidelines Exhibit Exhibit 2d - Chapter 14 Guidelines Exhibit Exhibit 3- HRSR Survey Exhibit Page 33 of 163 Exhibit 4 - Location Map Exhibit Page 34 of 163 1227 CHURCH ST. REMODEL To Whom It May Concern: Owners, Jeff and Lisa Zook purchased this home in 2013 with a dream of moving to Georgetown. And with their last child heading off to college soon, they are finally making this dream a reality. We are looking for your help and support in renovating this home, to allow ample space for their family, while maintaining the character of the structure. Siding/Paint: The house is currently covered in vinyl siding. Our goal is to remove the vinyl siding to unencapsulate historic siding materials. If possible, we will seek to preserve or replace the original siding. Alternatively, we propose to utilize James Hardie lap siding to match other houses in the area, and paint the siding an off white color (please see Material Sample). As mentioned in Section 11 of the Design Guidelines, we are seeking to create a unified appearance for the entire structure, while complementing the character of the home. Windows: The existing single pane windows leak air and water, and result in high heating and cooling charges. We are looking to replace the existing windows with black, double hung, vinyl windows from M/I, to match existing sizes and locations, per Section 6.12 of the Design Guidelines. For budget purposes, we would prefer to utilize a vinyl product with undivided glass, to allow maximum light on the interior. Demolition of Attached Garage/New Addition: To the east, facing Myrtle Street, the structure has an attached single car garage. Prior to purchase, this portion of the structure had been converted to a utility space and game room. The current condition of this area is substantially deteriorated, as the foundation has failed, resulting in water entering the structure during periods of rain. The flooding has also caused structural damage to the supporting walls. To repair this portion of the structure correctly, the converted garage will need to be removed, and proper foundation installed. Due to the costly nature of this repair, and in an effort to adaptively use the space, we propose to construct an addition, as opposed to simply rebuilding the garage. As identified in Section 7 of the Design Guidelines, the addition will be located to the rear of the structure, and be compatible with the primary building. We will match the existing roof, windows, siding, and paint to complement the existing structure, but also maintain the original character of the home. We greatly appreciate your help and consideration, and look forward to working with you. Page 35 of 163 Page 36 of 163 Page 37 of 163 Page 38 of 163 Page 39 of 163 Page 40 of 163 Page 41 of 163 Page 42 of 163 Page 43 of 163 3 ¼" frame depth Dual- or triple- pane insulated glass Welded multi-chamber mainframe design True-sloping sill Dual-point weatherstripping DOUBLE HUNG TO P SELLER GLASS BREAKAGEWARRANTY TRIPLEP ANE PA INTEDEXTERIOR Our 1650 replacement double-hung window features superior styling, handcrafted quality, and long-term performance. Aesthetically beveled sashes and eight exterior color options complement energy-efficient design options such as insulated dual-pane glass and heavy-duty weatherstripping to help set our 1650 double-hung replacement windows apart. These advanced engineering and aesthetic details that go into every 1650 double-hung make it the ideal replacement window for any remodeling or renovation project. PERFORMANCE FEATURES ■Metal-reinforced meeting rail delivers superior strength and durability ■Interlocking sashes help reduce air infiltration ■True sloping sill optimizes water drainage and eliminates unsightly weep holes ■Warm-edge spacer system maximizes energy efficiency and improves seal performance of insulated glass units ■Inverted-coil balances with detent clip prevent sash from drifting, and provide smoother operation and lower operating force 1650 Vinyl Double-Hung Window Standard Optional IN THE U S A P R E C ISION B U I L T Page 44 of 163 OUR MISSION Getting It Right Every Time We build each of our products the same way we built our company: with integrity and precision. Every MI window and door is handcrafted in the United States using state-of-the-art manufacturing techniques, and is backed by vigorous in-house testing procedures. We are 100% committed to offering the styles, value, and performance you’re after. Discover everything we have to offer at miwindows.com, or by calling 1-717-365-3300. Copyright © 2016 MI Windows and Doors, LLC. All rights reserved. Experience Clarity™ MI1650DH-12-17 CREATE A CUSTOMIZED LOOK HARDWARE FINISH OPTIONS ■Color-matched GRID TYPES & SIZES ■ 5/8" flat grids-between-the-glass ■ 7/8" flat grids-between-the-glass ■ 11/16" sculptured grids-between-the-glass ■ 15/16" sculptured grids-between-the-glass ■ 1" simulated divided light GRID PATTERNS Colonial 9-Lite Perimeter 6-Lite Perimeter Diamond VINYL/EXTRUDED COLORS AlmondWhite LAMINATES* Hillside Oak Natural Oak Cherry EXTERIOR PAINT† Cream Almond Clay Forest Green Bronze BlackCocoa Silver ENGINEERED TO PERFORM ■Multi-chamber mainframe design ■3 ¼" frame depth ■3/4" dual-pane insulated glass ■Finless frame ■Wood extension jambs available for 4 9/16”, 6 9/16”, and 7 9/16" wall depths CONVENIENCE & STYLE The 1650 features the following design details on every window: ■Beveled exterior profile ■Mortised recessed locks ■Balance channel covers ■Clarity Screen mesh ■Integral lift rails ■Tilt-in sashes Designed smarter, from the inside out SAFETY & SECURITY FEATURES ■Push-button night latches keep the window secure even when partially opened, providing ventilation without sacrificing safety and security ■Dual-opposing locks create a stronger, safer seal ■Latching extruded half screen with Clarity Screen™ mesh offers 50% clearer view than standard fiberglass screen, allows fresh air in, and keeps pests out ■Optional Window Operating Control Device (WOCD) restricts sash opening and reduces the risk of accidental falls SIZING MINIMUM & MAXIMUM (available in 1/8" increments. DP upgrade required for any unit greater than 84” tall) ■14"–14 7/8 " wide × 36"–96" high ■15"–16" wide × 28"–96" high ■16 1/8"–17" wide × 26"–96" high ■17 1/8"–48" wide × 23 ½"–96" high ■48 1/8"–52" wide × 23 ½"–72" high GLAZING TYPE U-VALUE SHGC Argon and Low-E glass 0.27 0.27 Argon and Low-E glass with grids 0.27 0.24 Foam-enhanced frame, Argon, and Low-E glass 0.27 0.27 Foam-enhanced frame, Argon, and Low-E glass with grids 0.27 0.24 Argon and Low-E triple-pane glass 0.21 0.23 Argon and Low-E triple-pane glass with grids 0.22 0.21 Argon and HP Low-E glass 0.27 0.21 Argon and HP Low-E glass with grids 0.27 0.19 Foam-enhanced frame, Argon, and HP Low-E glass 0.26 0.21 Foam-enhanced frame, Argon, and HP Low-E glass with grids 0.26 0.19 ENERGY-EFFICIENT FEATURES ■Our dual-pane or triple-pane insulated glass package options help save on heating and cooling costs while enhancing home comfort ■In cool weather, it provides outstanding thermal performance to keep interior glass surfaces closer to room temperature, eliminating cold spots near windows ■In warm weather, insulated glass reduces solar heat gain and minimizes interior glare ■Meets ENERGY STAR® requirements in all four climate zones ® CERTIFIED Bronze Note: all values based on standard 3/4" dual-pane IGU * Laminates available with 5/8" flat or 11/16" sculptured grids only; bronze exterior available with white interior only; woodgrain available on interior only † Exterior paint available with 11/16" sculptured grids only; silver and black not available with woodgrain interiors Page 45 of 163 1312 Sleek and strong, HardiePlank® lap siding is not just our best-selling product – it’s the most popular brand of siding in America. With a full spectrum of colors and textures, homeowners can enjoy protection from the elements and the versatility to make their dream home a reality. From Victorians to Colonials, HardiePlank lap siding sets the standard in exterior cladding. A classic look for THE HOME OF THEIR DREAMS. HardiePlank® 6.25 in. Smooth Arctic White HardieTrim® 5/4 x 3.5 in. Arctic White Products are available primed or with ColorPlus Technology finishes. For more details, visit jameshardie.com Thickness 5/16 in. Length 12 ft. planks Width 8 in. Exposure 6.75 in. ColorPlus Pcs./Pallet 216 Prime Pcs./Pallet 240 Pcs./Sq.14.9 Thickness 5/16 in. Length 12 ft. planks Width 8.25 in. Exposure 7 in. ColorPlus Pcs./Pallet 210 Prime Pcs./Pallet 240 Pcs./Sq.14.3 Thickness 5/16 in. Length 12 ft. planks Width 5.25 in.6.25 in.7.25 in.8.25 in.9.25 in.12 in. Exposure 4 in.5 in.6 in.7 in.8 in.10.75 in. ColorPlus Pcs./Pallet 324 280 252 210 Prime Pcs./Pallet 360 308 252 230 190 152 Pcs./Sq.25.0 20.0 16.7 14.3 12.5 9.3 SELECT CEDARMILL©* Woodstock Brown SMOOTH* Countrylane Red CUSTOM BEADED CEDARMILL© Light Mist CUSTOM BEADED SMOOTH Heathered Moss CUSTOM COLONIAL™ ROUGHSAWN Mountain Sage CUSTOM COLONIAL™ SMOOTH Timber Bark *6.25 in. and 8.25 in. also available in coastal colors. 9.25 in. and 12 in. only available primed. Page 46 of 163 Design Guidelines for Historic Resources page 51 This chapter presents design guidelines for the preservation of individual historic building ele-ments in Georgetown. They apply to individually listed historic resources, as well as historic prop-erties located in the Downtown and Old Town Overlay Districts. The guidelines are organized into a series of relevant design topics. Within these design topics are individual policy and design guideline statements upon which the City will base its decisions. Commercial FacadesOrnamentation and details of elements such as cornices and parapets are original components that “dress up” a building and give it a sense of style and character. Ornamental items include hood molds, trim at doors, and windows; plaques and medallions; signboards or sign panels; date or name stones; and simple geometric shapes in metal, stone, or concrete. Cornices, which are usually found at the top of building walls, and ornamental moldings or belt courses, which are located just above storefronts, are horizontal projecting elements that provide a visual break in or termination to a wall. A parapet is an upward extension of a building wall above the roofline, sometimes ornamental and sometimes plain, used to give a building a greater feeling of height or a better sense of proportion. Cornices are most apparent on late 19th cen-tury commercial structures, when several ornate, bracketed types were used. Early 20th century buildings were, as a rule, less decorated and had simpler ornamentation. Rather than cornices, they tend to have parapets, some low and some extending several feet above the roof surface. A parapet may be capped with brick, stone, or tile, and frequently decorative elements or panels are placed in it. Chapter 6 Design guiDelines for inDiviDuAl BuilDing eleMents In This Chapter:Commercial facades 55Windows and doors 59 Roofs, gutters, and downspouts 64Porches 66 Commercial buildings should, for the most part, all relate to the street and to pedestrians in the same manner: with a clearly defined primary entrance and large windows that display goods and services offered inside. The repetition of these standard elements creates a visual unity on the street that should be preserved. Typical commercial storefront components. pediment cornice upper-story windows belt course transom display window piers kickplate recessed entry Page 47 of 163 City of Georgetown page 52 Windows & DoorsWindows and doors are some of the most impor-tant character-defining features of historic struc-tures. They give scale to buildings and provide visual interest to the composition of individual façades. Distinct window and door designs in fact help define many historic building styles. Windows and doors often are inset into relatively deep openings or have surrounding casings and sash components, which have a substantial dimension that casts shadows that contribute to the character of the historic style. HARC should consider the following when evaluat-ing proposals to replace historic windows: 1. Historic windows and doors are not neces-sarily decorative, so their functionality as well as appropriate design should be con-sidered.2. Whether the repair of the historic windows and/or doors is technically not feasible.3. The window and door openings should not be altered to accommodate windows or doors of different sizes, proportions, views, or configurations.4. If the windows and doors are visible to the public they should not be removed, enclosed, or obscured.5. Windows and doors visible to the public view should be retained in the original location.6. Whether the appearance matches the details such as window or door size, shape, opera-tion, glass configuration, material, and finish. The appearance of the sash, opening size, and decorative detail should look like the historic window or door. 7. Whether the operation of the replacement window or door is the same; for example, double-hung or casement windows that open inward.8. Whether the muntin style, configuration, detailing, and installation is the same for the replacement window or door as the historic window or door.9. Whether the sash and frame materials are the same materials, match the historic detail-ing, style, complexity, and profile. HARC should assess the following when evaluat-ing proposals to replace non-original windows: 1. Whether the proposed replacement windows and/or doors are based on the documented configuration of the building’s original win-dows and/or doors.2. Whether historic window and door openings are proposed to be altered to accommodate windows or doors of different sizes, propor-tions, views, or configurations.3. A historic window or door opening should not be enclosed, altered in its dimensions, or obscured. 4. Whether the non-original windows and/or doors have taken on historic significance and now contribute to the history of the build-ing. Page 48 of 163 Design Guidelines for Historic Resources page 53 Typical Roof Types Shed roof Gabled roof False front(pediment) Cross-Gabled roof Mansard roof Hipped roof Flat roofwith parapet RoofsThe character of the roof is a major feature for most historic structures. When repeated along the street, the repetition of similar roof forms contributes to a sense of visual continuity for the neighborhood. In each case, the roof pitch, its materials, size, and orientation are all distinct features that contribute to the character of a roof. Gabled and hip forms occur most frequently in residential areas while flat roofs appear on most historic commercial buildings in Georgetown. Although the function of a roof is to protect a structure from the elements, it also contributes to the overall character of the building. The Overlay Districts have seen the construction of various roof forms, as illustrated below. When evaluating roofing proposals HARC should consider the following: 1. The condition of the deteriorated or damaged existing roof materials and whether they can be economically repaired.2. Whether the proposed new roofing material can be installed without removing, damaging, or obscuring character-defining architectural features or trim, such as cupolas, dormers, cornices, brackets, chimneys, cresting, fini-als, and weathervanes.3. If the proposed new roofing material is similar in regard to size, style, and details of the original historic roofing materials, to the extent that such original roofing can be documented. If no photographic or other documentation exists for original historic roofing materials, selection of new roof ma-terials shall be typical of those used in the style of the historic building.4. The original form and shape of the roof are retained.5. The original character of the structure should be maintained. Page 49 of 163 City of Georgetown page 54 3. If inadequate documentation of original porches exists, a new porch should be typi-cal of those built in the style of the historic building. A simplified adaptation may be al-lowed if physical evidence of the original is non-existent or if the design is prohibitively expensive to recreate.4. Whether the existing porch materials are be-ing retained, unless it is technically infeasible to do so.5. If proposed new railings and balusters on an existing or new porch use historic or appro-priate new materials, are designed in a style similar in appearance to historic balusters, and whether railings are characteristic of the style of the historic building.6. The porch floor is of a type characteristic of the style of the historic building. Spaced planks shall not be used where painted tongue-and-groove boards would have been used historically.7. New and existing wood visible from the right-of-way is painted unless it can be docu-mented that the original wood was unpainted or stained (generally, unpainted pressure treated wood will not be allowed).8. Concrete steps and porches are allowed if it can be shown that they existed on the build-ing historically or if they are characteristic of the style of building. PorchesMany residential styles and building types devel-oped with the porch as a prime feature of the front façade. Because of their historical importance and prominence as character-defining features, porch-es should be preserved and they should receive sensitive treatment during exterior rehabilitation. Porches vary as much as architectural styles. They differ in height, scale, location, materials, and ar-ticulation. Some are simple one-story structures, while others may be complex with elaborate details and finishes. These elements often correspond to the architectural style of the house and there-fore the building’s design character should be considered before any major rehabilitation work is begun. HARC should take the following into consideration when asked to approve the alteration or addition of a historic porch: 1. If the existing porch has deteriorated or become badly damaged such that repair is technically infeasible.2. The proposed new porch is similar to the historic porch in regards to size, style, de-tail, and shape and will be constructed from historic or appropriate new materials. Page 50 of 163 Design Guidelines for Historic Resources page 55 Policy: Maintain an historic storefront and all of its character-defining features. For a commercial storefront building, a rehabilitation project shall preserve these character-defining elements. 6.1 For a commercial storefront building, a rehabilitation project shall preserve these character-defining elements:• Display windows: The main portion of glass on the storefront, where goods and services are displayed. This will help maintain the interest of pedestrians by providing views to goods and activities inside first floor win-dows.• Transom: The upper portion of the display window, separated by a frame.• Kickplate: Found beneath the display win-dow. Sometimes called a bulk-head panel.• Entry: Usually set back from the sidewalk in a protected recess.• Upper-story windows: Windows located above the street level. These usually have a vertical orientation.• Cornice molding: A decorative band at the top of the building. • These features shall not be altered, obscured or removed. 6.2 Maintenance of storefronts.• Wash display windows.• Repair damaged kickplates.• Re-caulk display windows to reduce air infil-tration.• Install weather-stripping around doors. 6.3 If a storefront is altered, restoring it to the original design is preferred. • If evidence of the original design is miss-ing, use a simplified interpretation of similar storefronts. The storefront still should be de-signed to provide interest to pedestrians. • Note that, in some cases, an original store-front may have been altered early in the his-tory of the building, and may itself have taken on significance. Such alterations should be preserved.• See also Preservation Briefs #11: Rehabili- tating Historic Storefronts, published by the National Park Service. Page 51 of 163 City of Georgetown page 56 Using historic photographs can help in determining the original character. (Compare with below.) This rehabilitation preserves surviving details and reconstructs missing ones. (Ft. Collins, CO) If a storefront is altered, restoring it to the original design is preferred. (Compare with the two photos of the same building to the right.) Combining Rehabilitation Principles - A Case Study This sequence of photographs illustrates the positive results of combining procedures for preserva-tion, repair, reconstruction, and sympathetic alterations that are set for in the design guidelines in this chapter. Page 52 of 163 Design Guidelines for Historic Resources page 57 If evidence of the original design is missing, use a simplified interpretation of similar storefronts. The storefront still should be designed to provide interest to pedestrians. (Boulder, CO) Retain the kickplate as a decorative panel. Preserve an original cornice molding. 6.4 Alternative designs that are contempo-rary interpretations of traditional storefronts may be considered.• Where the original is missing and no evi-dence of its character exists, a new design that uses the traditional elements may be considered.• However, the new design should continue to convey the character of typical storefronts, including the transparent character of the display window. 6.5 Retain the kickplate as a decorative panel.• The kickplate, located below the display window, adds interesting detail to the streetscape and should be preserved.• If the original kickplate is covered with an-other material, consider exposing the original design. 6.6 If the original kickplate is missing, de-velop a sympathetic replacement design.• Wood is an appropriate material for replace-ments on most styles. However, ceramic tile and masonry may also be considered when appropriately used with the building style. 6.7 Preserve the character of the cornice line.• An original cornice moulding should be pre-served.• Most historic commercial buildings have cornices to cap their facades. Their repeti-tion along the street contributes to the visual continuity on the block.• Many cornices are made of sheet metal. Ar-eas that have rusted through can be patched with pieces of new metal. Page 53 of 163 City of Georgetown page 58 When a building is missing its cornice, consider the two options presented below. Reconstruct a missing cornice when historic evidence is available. A simplified interpretation also is appropriate for a replacement cornice if evidence of the original is missing. 6.8 Reconstruct a missing cornice when his-toric evidence is available.• Use historic photographs to determine de-sign details of the original cornice.• Replacement elements should match the original in every detail, especially in overall size and profile. Keep sheet metal ornamen-tation well painted.• The substitution of another old cornice for the original may be considered, provided that the substitute is similar to the original. 6.9 A simplified interpretation is also appro-priate for a replacement cornice if evidence of the original is missing.• Appropriate materials include stone, brick, and stamped metal. 6.10 Retain the original shape of the transom glass in historic storefronts.• Transoms, the upper glass band of traditional storefronts, introduced light into the depths of the building, saving on light costs. These bands should not be removed or enclosed.• The shape of the transom is important to the proportion of the storefront, and it should be preserved in its historic configuration. • If the original glass is missing, installing new glass is preferred. However, if the transom must be blocked out, be certain to retain the original proportions. One option is to use it as a sign panel or decorative band. 6.11 A parapet wall should not be altered, es-pecially those on primary elevations or highly visible facades. • When a parapet wall becomes deteriorated, there is sometimes a temptation to lower or remove it. Avoid doing this because the flashing for the roof is often tied into the parapet, and disturbing it can cause moisture problems. • Inspect parapets on a regular basis. They are exposed to the weather more than other parts of the building, so watch for deteriora-tion such as missing mortar or excessive moisture retention. • Avoid waterproofing treatments, which can interfere with the parapet’s natural ability to dry out quickly when it gets wet. Page 54 of 163 Design Guidelines for Historic Resources page 59 Policy: Historic windows and doors significantly affect the character of a structure and should be preserved. The upper-story windows on the side of this historic commercial building have been filled in with brick. Where instances like this exist, consider reopening the windows. After: The upper-story windows have been reopened. The size, shape and proportions of window and door openings are important features. They give scale to buildings and provide visual interest to the composition of individual facades. These features are inset into relatively deep openings in a building wall or they have surrounding casings and sash components that have substantial dimensions. They cast shadows that contribute to the character of the building. 6.12 Preserve the position, number, size, and arrangement of historic windows and doors in a building wall.• Enclosing an historic opening in a key char-acter-defining facade is inappropriate, as is adding a new opening. • Do not close down an original opening to accommodate a smaller window. Restoring original openings which have been altered over time is encouraged.• Historically, windows had a vertical em -phasis. The proportions of these windows contribute to the character of each residence and commercial storefront. 6.13 Preserve the functional and decorative features of an historic window or door.• Features important to the character of a window include its clear glass, frame, sash, muntins, mullions, glazing, sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operation, location, and relation to other windows. • Features important to the character of a door include the door itself, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms, and flanking sidelights. • Historic screen and storm doors should be preserved and maintained. Page 55 of 163 City of Georgetown page 60 6.14 Maintenance of windows.• Wash windows.• Clean debris from windows.• Replace loose or broken glass in kind. This will reduce air leaks.• Replace damaged muntins, moldings, or glazing compound with material that matches the original in shape, size, and material.• Repair window hardware or replace with materials that match the original in scale and design. If the replacement hardware does not match the original design it should be simple, unobtrusive, and compatible with the style and building’s period of significance.• Install weather-stripping. This will enhance energy conservation significantly.• Maintain the interior views, so that either merchandise or furniture can be seen. 6.15 Repair wood features by patching, piec-ing-in, consolidating, or otherwise reinforcing the wood. • Avoid the removal of damaged wood that can be repaired.• Rebuild or repair portions of existing window frames, sashes, sills, or portions thereof, rather than replacing complete windows un-less it is technically infeasible to do so.• See also Preservation Briefs #9: The Repair of Historic Wooden Windows, published by the National Park Service. 6.16 Glass in doors and windows should be retained. • If it is broken or has been removed in the past, consider replacing it with new glass. If security is a concern, consider using wire glass, tempered glass, or light metal security bars (preferably on the interior). • Replacement glass may be insulating glass, but it should match the style and color of the original glass.• Replacement glass should match the historic glass - clear, rolled (‘wavy”), tinted, etc. • Removal of historic leaded, art, stained, beveled, prismatic glass, etc. should not be permitted, unless it is damaged and is technically infeasible to repair. Consider use of a storm window to enhance the energy efficiency of an existing historic window rather than replacement. (Deadwood, SD) Preserve leaded glass decorative features. (Texarkana, TX) Page 56 of 163 Design Guidelines for Historic Resources page 61 6.17 Installing window air-conditioners in win-dows on building fronts is inappropriate. 6.18 Maintain recessed entries.• The repetition of recessed entries provides a rhythm of shadows along the street, which helps establish a sense of scale.• These recessed entries were designed to provide protection from the weather and the repeated rhythm of these shaded areas along the street helps to identify business entrances. Typically, recessed entries were set back between three and five feet.• Restore the historic recessed entry if it has been altered. • Avoid doors that are flush with the sidewalk, especially those that swing outward. 6.19 Where entries were not recessed histori-cally, maintain them in their original position. • However, one may also need to comply with other code requirements, including door width, direction of swing, and construction.• In some cases, entries must comply with accessibility requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Note, however, that some flexibility in application of these other regulations is provided for historic proper-ties.• See also Preservation Briefs #32: Making Historic Properties Accessible, published by the National Park Service. Maintain recessed entries where they are found. This recessed form, for example, preserves the original character, even though it no longer serves as a doorway. Page 57 of 163 City of Georgetown page 62 Policy: A new or replacement window or door should match the appearance of the original. The side wall of a historic building located on a corner will have fewer openings. While replacing an entire window or door is dis-couraged, it may be necessary in some cases. Although wood is preferred as a replacement material, metal is common on the market today and sometimes is suggested for replacement. It is possible to consider alternative materials, if the resulting appearance matches the original as closely as possible. The substitute also should have a demonstrated durability in this climate. 6.20 When window or door replacement is nec-essary, match the replacement to the original design as closely as possible.• Preserve the original casing, when fea-sible.• If the original is double-hung, then the re-placement window should also be double-hung, or at a minimum, appear to be so. Match the replacement also in the number and position of glass panes.• Very ornate windows or doors that are not appropriate to the building’s architectural style are inappropriate.• Using the same material (wood) as the origi-nal is preferred.• A new screen door added to the front of a visible door should be “full view” design or with minimal structural dividers to retain the visibility of the historic door behind it.• A screen door should be sized to fit the origi-nal entrance opening and the design should be of the appropriate style and period of the building.• Security doors are non-historic additions. If installed, they should follow the guidelines for screen doors. Page 58 of 163 Design Guidelines for Historic Resources page 63 6.21 Maintain the historic ratio of window and storefront openings to solid wall.• Significantly increasing (or decreasing) the amount of glass will negatively affect the integrity of a structure.• On traditional storefronts, first floors should be more transparent than upper floors. • Upper floors should appear more solid than first floors.• Avoid a blank wall appearance that does not provide interest to pedestrians. Note, how-ever, that the side wall of a historic building located on a corner will have fewer open-ings.• Large surfaces of glass are inappropriate on residential structures and on the upper floors and sides of commercial buildings. • If necessary, divide large glass surfaces into smaller windows that are in scale with those seen traditionally. Maintain the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall. YES!NO! Page 59 of 163 City of Georgetown page 64 Policy: Preserve the original form and scale of a roof. In residential areas, most roof forms are pitched, such as gabled and hipped. Most commercial buildings have flat, or slightly sloping roofs. 6.22 Preserve the original roof form of an his-toric structure.• In residential areas, most roof forms are pitched, such as gabled and hipped. Most commercial buildings, on the other hand, have flat, or slightly sloping roofs.• Avoid altering the angle of a historic roof. Instead, maintain the perceived line and orientation of the roof as seen from the street. • Retain and repair roof detailing. All archi-tectural features which give the roof its fun-damental traits, such as dormer windows, cupolas, cornices, brackets, chimneys, crest-ing, and weather vanes, shall be retained.• Often repairing a basically sound roof can be much less expensive than a complete replacement. If a new roof is necessary, try to match the color, material, and pattern of the old as closely as possible. A roof may be re-roofed with substitute materials, such as asphalt or composite shingles that resemble the original style, if the original materials are determined to be beyond repair, are no longer available, or the historic roofing has been previously removed or covered.• Skylights shall not be added where they are visible from the public right-of-way.• Skylights should be placed at the rear roofli-nes or behind gables or dormers.• Do not install new ornaments unless it can be shown that they historically existed on the roof.• Roof alternations such as adding a green-house, roof deck, solar panels, vents, and mechanical and electric equipment are not recommended if they would be visible from the street. These items should be made less noticeable by minimizing the size and using subdued colors. Page 60 of 163 Design Guidelines for Historic Resources page 65 6.23 Locate downspouts to minimize impacts on historic canopies and other facade de -tails.• Water from downspouts should drain away from the building properly. • Ideally, a downspout should empty into an underground drainpipe that takes the water to the sewer or street. • If this is not possible, a downspout should empty onto a metal or concrete splashblock that slopes downward and away from the building. • Maintain and repair existing gutters and downspouts in place.• If existing gutter and downspouts are de-teriorated to the extent that they must be replaced, new gutters and downspouts shall match the original historic gutters and downspouts. They shall be of size and profile that would be characteristic of the period of significance.• Where built-in gutters exist and must be re-paired, repair or replace only those sections needing it, using similar materials to existing historic built-in gutters.• Note that galvanized half-round sheet metal gutters may in many cases be more appro-priate for historic buildings that had exposed gutters than the colonial profile aluminum gutters and downspouts commonly used today. 6.24 Regular maintenance and cleaning is the best way to keep your roof in good shape. • Inspect the roof for breaks, or holes in the surface, and check the flashing for open seams. • Many commercial buildings have shallow sloping flat roofs that are hard to see, so there is a tendency to forget about them until problems develop. • Clean debris from gutters and downspouts to prevent the backing up of water.• A roof should not hold water.• Patch leaks in the roof. This should be a high priority for ongoing building maintenance.• Replace deteriorated flashing.• Re-solder downspout connections to prevent water from leaking into walls. Page 61 of 163 City of Georgetown page 66 Historically, porches were popular features in residential designs. A porch protects an entrance from rain and provides shade in the summer. It also provides a sense of scale to the building and provides a space for residents to sit and con-gregate. A porch provides stylistic details to the house, and in some cases is an integral part of an architectural style. 6.25 Maintain an historic porch and its detail-ing.• Do not remove original details from a porch. These include the columns, balustrade, and any decorative brackets that may exist. • Maintain the existing location, shape, details, and columns of the porch. • Missing or deteriorated decorative elements should be replaced with new wood, milled to match existing elements. Match the original proportions and spacing of balusters when replacing missing ones. • Unless used historically, wrought iron porch posts and columns are inappropriate.• Where an historic porch does not meet cur-rent code requirements and alterations are needed or required, then retrofit it to meet the code, while also preserving original features. Do not replace a porch that can otherwise be modified to meet code requirements.• A missing porch and its steps should be re-constructed, using photographic documenta-tion and historical research, to be compatible in design and detail with the period and style of the building.• Most precast concrete steps are not ac-ceptable alternatives for primary façade porches.• Construction of a new non-original porch is usually inappropriate.• The construction of a non-original second or third level porch, balcony, deck, or sun porch on the roof of an existing front porch is inappropriate. Policy: Maintain a porch and its character-defining features. When replacing porch posts, use supports that are of adequate size. This porch reconstruction was based on neighboring houses of similar character and age. (Spartanburg, SC) This porch has experienced an inappropriate alteration; wrought iron supports have replaced wood piers. Compare it with its “twin” in the photo below. (Spartanburg, SC) Page 62 of 163 Design Guidelines for Historic Resources page 67 6.26 Avoid enclosing an historic front porch with opaque materials.• Enclosing a porch with opaque materials that destroy the openness and transparency of the porch is inappropriate.• If historic porches that have been enclosed in the past are proposed to be remodeled or altered, they should be restored to their ap-pearance during the period of significance, unless the enclosure, by nature of its age, architectural significance, or other special circumstance, has achieved historic signifi-cance of its own.• When a porch is enclosed or screened, it shall be done with a clear transparent mate-rial. This material should be placed behind porch columns. 6.27 The detailing of decks and exterior stairs should be compatible with the style and period of the structure. • The color and material of decks and stairs should complement the main structure.• New decks should be minimally visible from the street and should have no major impact on the original building. 6.28 Avoid altering original chimneys.• Existing brick chimneys should not be re-moved or covered with stone, stucco, or other non-original material.• If chimneys are damaged or missing they should be restored to their original condition or reconstructed in keeping with the chimney design of the period.. When a porch is enclosed or screened, it shall be done with a clear transparent material. This material should be placed behind porch columns. (Memphis, TN) Page 63 of 163 City of Georgetown page 68 Page 64 of 163 Design Guidelines for Additions & Alterations page 69 Chapter 7 Design guiDelines for ADAPtive re-use, ADDitions, & AlterAtions In This Chapter:Alterations 71Commercial Additions 75Residential Additions 77Adaptive Use 79 This chapter presents design guidelines for addi-tions and alterations to historic buildings. They ap-ply to individually listed historic resources, as well as historic properties located in the Downtown and Old Town Overlay Districts. The design guidelines are organized into a series of relevant design top-ics. Within each category, individual policies and design guidelines are presented, which the City will use in determining the appropriateness of the work proposed. Design of AlterationsAlterations may be considered for historic build-ings; however, these alterations should occur in a manner that will not diminish the historic integrity of the property and they should be reversible for future property owners. AdditionsMany buildings have experienced additions over time, as need for additional space occurred, par-ticularly with a change in use. An historic addition typically was subordinate in scale and character to the main building. The height of the addition was usually positioned below that of the main structure and it was often located to the side or rear, such that the primary facade remained dominate. An addition was often constructed of materials that were similar to those in use historically. In some cases, owners simply added on to an existing roof, creating more usable space without increasing the footprint of the structure. This tradition of adding on to buildings is anticipated to continue. It is im-portant, however, that new additions be designed in such a manner that they maintain the character of the primary structure. The compatibility of proposed additions with histor-ic buildings will be reviewed in terms of the mass, the scale, the materials, the color, the roof form, and the proportion and spacing of windows and doors. Additions that echo the style of the original structure and additions that introduce compatible contemporary design could be acceptable. Adaptive UseThe adaptive use of a residence for a commercial or office use is a distinct possibility in Georgetown. In fact, a large majority of the Downtown Overlay District is zoned Mixed Use Downtown (MU-DT), which allows for a variety of uses. However, when such adaptations occur, they should be designed to have the least impact on the historic character of a neighborhood—some of which is residential in character. Although for commercial use, these adapted properties should not be commercial in character. This means that the overall form of a building with a sloping roof and the landscaped front lawn should not be altered. More detailed information about the treatment of an adaptive use project can be found in the Design Guidelines, on page 79. Page 65 of 163 City of Georgetown page 70 Demolition/RelocationDemolition is forever, and once a building is gone it takes away another piece of the city’s charac-ter. Demolition of an historic building or resource should only be an action of last resort. HARC can delay or deny requests for demolition while it seeks solutions for preservation and rehabilitation. HARC should not allow the demolition or reloca-tion of any resource that has historical and/or architectural significance unless one or more of the following conditions exist and if, by a finding of HARC, the proposed demolition or relocation will materially improve or correct these conditions: 1. The resource constitutes a hazard to the safety of the public or the occupants, as determined by the Building Official.2. The resource is a deterrent to a major im-provement program that will be of substantial benefit to the community and the applicant proposing the work has obtained all neces-sary planning and zoning approvals, financ-ing, and environmental clearances.3. Retention of the resource will cause undue financial hardship to the owner when a gov-ernmental action, an act of God, or other events beyond the owner’s control created the hardship; and all feasible alternatives to eliminate the financial hardship, which may include offering the resource for sale at its fair market value or moving the resource to a vacant site within the historic district, have been attempted and exhausted by the owner.4. Retention of the resource is not in the interest of the majority of the community. HARC should consider the following when evalu-ating proposals to demolish or relocate historic resources: 1. Does the resource proposed for demolition or relocation have architectural and/or historical significance?2. What would be the effect on surrounding buildings of demolition or relocation of the resource?3. What would be the effect on the Overlay District as a whole of demolition or relocation of the resource?4. What would be the effect on safeguarding the heritage of the city of the demolition or relocation?5. What has been the impact of any previous inappropriate alterations?6. Has the owner offered the property for sale?7. Has the owner asked a fair price?8. Has the property been marketed for a rea-sonable time?9. Has the property been advertised broadly in a reasonable manner?10. Has the owner sought the advice of a profes-sional experienced in historic preservation work?11. What would be the effect of open space in that location if the lot is to be left open?12. What will be done with the empty lot?13. What would the effect of any proposed re-placement structure be to the community?14. What is the appropriateness of design of any proposed replacement structure to the Overlay District? Page 66 of 163 Design Guidelines for Additions & Alterations page 71 Policy: Design an alteration to be compatible with the historic character of the property. Storefront windows were reopened and upper-story windows were repaired. (Ft. Collins, CO) The windows in this structure were boarded and architectural details needed repair. (Compare with the photo below.) 7.1 Avoid alterations that would damage his-toric features.• Avoid alterations that would hinder the abil-ity to interpret the design character of the original building.• Alterations that seek to imply an earlier pe-riod than that of the building are inappropri-ate. 7.2 Properties designated by the City as a High or Medium Priority Historic Structure should be preserved and their historic char-acter retained.• Due to special circumstances, a structure’s historic priority may change over time (be-cause a reduced number of similar style structures in stable condition still exist within the district or city, or if unknown historic information becomes available that adds significance). After rehabilitation, the row of buildings shown in the photograph above conveys a stronger sense of its historic character. Note that some old uses were retained, while other new uses were also introduced. Some noncontributing alterations were removed and storefronts reconstructed. One was retained, but was painted to minimize impacts. (Ft. Collins, CO) This row of buildings had lost some details over time and a monochromatic color scheme obscures the original design character. Overhead garage doors that had replaced original storefronts were later alterations without historic significance. (Compare with the “after” photograph below.) Page 67 of 163 City of Georgetown page 72 Photo (circa 1900) - A modest building can also be renovated to be compatible with the context. In this photograph the original millinery shop front had simple moldings at the top. (Compare with the photos to the right and below.) Design of Alterations, continued... Photo (circa 1980) - Years later, all original detail had been stripped from the building. (Compare with the photos below.) Photo (circa 1982) - An interim renovation recalls the original molded cornice and includes a simple kickplate. In 2009, a more extensive rehabilitation includes a brick molding and a more detailed kickplate. Page 68 of 163 Design Guidelines for Additions & Alterations page 73 Rehabilitation Case Study 1885 Condition In this case study, the application of the preservation guidelines is demonstrated for a major rehabilitation project. The Stromberg and Hoffman Company Building, at 718 Austin Avenue, was constructed in the late nineteenth century (circa 1885). Early photographs show a handsome Victorian-era facade, with decorative cornice. 1920s (20th Century) Condition In the early twentieth century, the front was substantially altered. Decorative masonry was applied in simple rectilinear patterns, evocative of some craftsman styles popular at the time. In keeping with that approach, windows were installed with divided lights in the upper portions and a multi-paned transom was constructed above the display windows. The new display windows included a stone base and metal frames. A center island display element was the focal point of the ground level. 2001 Existing Condition In the later part of the 20th century, however, the facade was covered, obscuring the upper floor details. The key elements of the street level display windows remained, although the center island was removed. 2009 Restoration in Progress In 2009, rehabilitation in progress illustrates the principle of removing non-contributing coverings. Original details are revealed. 21st Century Proposal The early 20th century design serves as the basis for the rehabilitation. Although an earlier design is documented in photographs, no significant features from that period survive. The second-generation facade, the early twentieth-century design, has taken on historic significance of its own, and substantial portions survive. In the rehabilitation design, the covering material is removed, exposing original details. Page 69 of 163 City of Georgetown page 74 Rehabilitation Case Study After: In the sketch of the proposed rehabilitation, brick veneer at the ground level is removed and a new storefront, using metal and wood frame elements, is constructed to be similar in character to that seen historically. The display windows are reopened, as well as the transoms above them. Kickplates with decorative trim are reconstructed and a horizontal canopy shades the sidewalk. The stone above is cleaned, using a gentle wash technique and mortar is repointed, using a mix that matches the original in composition and appearance. The corner entry is preserved as well. Before: This example, of the McDougal-Booty Building at 120 West 8th Street (photographed in 2001), illustrates the application of the rehabilitation principles for historic buildings. In this case, significant details of the upper floor are intact; these include a decorative cornice and trim around upper story windows. The stone above the storefront also survives. In contrast, the lower floor has experienced alterations: Display windows are enclosed and the original kickplates are missing. Page 70 of 163 Design Guidelines for Additions & Alterations page 75 Policy: Minimize the visual impacts of an addition to a commercial building. New roof-top addition set back from the front facade. New ground-level additions to the side and rear. Where a building is set back from the front property line, the first consideration for the placement of an addition should be to fill the gap between the existing building and sidewalk. Two distinct types of additions are considered to be appropriate by HARC: ground-level or roof-top. First, a ground-level addition that involves expand-ing the footprint of a structure may be considered. Such an addition should be to the rear or side of a building. This will have the least impact on the character of a building, but there may only be limited opportunities to do this. Second, an addition to the roof may be designed that is simple in character and set back substan-tially from the front of a building. The materials, window sizes and alignment of trim elements on the addition should be compatible to those of the existing structure, but also visually subordinate in character so as to avoid calling attention alteration to the addition. Another option, which will only be considered on a case-by-case basis, is to design an addition to the front wall plane of the existing building. This option may only be considered on a “newer” or more contemporary building that was originally constructed set back from the front property line or sidewalk edge. 7.3 An addition shall be compatible in scale, materials, and character with the main build-ing.• An addition shall relate to the building in mass, scale, and form. It should be designed to remain subordinate to the main struc-ture. • An addition to the front of a building is inap-propriate. However, where a building in the Downtown Overlay is set back from the front property line and the structure does not have historic significance, the first consideration for the placement of an addition should be to fill the gap between the existing building and sidewalk. This will maintain the consistent “street wall” desired in the downtown.• For example, mounting a sign panel in a manner that causes decorative moldings to be chipped or removed would be inappropri-ate. Page 71 of 163 City of Georgetown page 76 7.4 An addition shall not damage or obscure architecturally important features.• For example, loss or alteration of a cornice line should be avoided. 7.5 An addition may be made to the roof of a commercial building if it does the following:• An addition should be set back from the pri-mary, character-defining facade, to preserve the perception of the historic scale of the building.• Its design should be modest in character, so it will not attract attention from the historic facade.• The addition should be distinguishable as new, albeit in a subtle way.• The roofs of additions should not interfere with the original roof form by changing its basic shape and should have a roof form compatible with the original building. In the angle view above, two newer floors are visible. Note how in this building the addition cannot be seen when looking at the building straight on in the top photo. (Denver, CO) This historic, three-story building has a two-story addition that is set back from the front. Page 72 of 163 Design Guidelines for Additions & Alterations page 77 Policy: Design an addition to a residential structure to be compatible with the primary building. Design a new addition such that the original character can be clearly seen. This addition to the front of the historic structure is inappropriate. An addition to a structure can radically change its perceived scale and character if inappropriately designed. When planning an addition, consider the effect the addition will have on the building itself. When creating an addition, keep the size of the ad-dition small, in relation to the main structure. If an addition must be larger, it should be set apart from the main structure and connected with a smaller linking element. A design for a new addition that would create an appearance inconsistent with the character of the building, especially an historic one, is discouraged. One also should consider the effect the addition may have on the character of a street or neighbor-hood, as seen from the public right-of-way. For example, a side addition may change the sense of rhythm established by side yards in the block. Locating the addition to the rear could be a better solution in such a case. 7.6 Design a new addition such that the origi-nal character can be clearly seen.• In this way, a viewer can understand the history of changes that have occurred to the building.• An addition should be made distinguishable from the original building, even in subtle ways, such that the character of the original can be interpreted. • Creating a jog in the foundation between the original and new structures may help to define an addition.• The amount of foundation exposed on the addition should match that of the original building, in appearance, detail, and mate-rial.• Even applying a new trim board at the con-nection point between the addition and the original structure can help define the addi-tion.• See also Preservation Briefs #14: New Exte- rior Additions to Historic Buildings, published by the National Park Service. Page 73 of 163 City of Georgetown page 78 7.7 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impacts.• Setting an addition back from any primary, character-defining façade will allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent.• Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate, and an addition should be to the rear of the building, when feasible. 7.8 Do not obscure, damage, destroy, or re-move original architectural details and materi-als of the primary structure.• When preserving original details and materi-als, follow the guidelines presented earlier in this chapter. 7.9 An addition shall be compatible in scale, materials, and character with the main build-ing.• An addition shall relate to the historic build-ing in mass, scale, and form. It should be designed to remain subordinate to the main structure. • While a smaller addition is visually prefer-able, if a residential addition would be sig-nificantly larger than the original building, one option is to separate it from the primary building, when feasible, and then link it with a smaller connecting structure.• An addition should be simple in design to prevent it from competing with the primary facade.• Consider adding dormers to create second story spaces before changing the scale of the building by adding a full second floor. Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impacts. An addition shall be set back from any primary, character-defining facade. An addition should be to the rear of the building, when feasible. (Durango, CO) An addition should be simple in design to prevent it from competing with the primary facade. Although this is a new building, it demonstrates the effective use of a connector Page 74 of 163 Design Guidelines for Additions & Alterations page 79 Policy: When adapting a residence to a commercial use, respect the residential character of the building. 7.10 The roof form of a new addition shall be in character with that of the primary building.• Typically, gable, hip, and shed roofs are ap-propriate for residential additions. Flat roofs are appropriate for commercial buildings in the downtown area.• Repeat existing roof slopes, overhangs, and materials.• If the roof of the primary building is symmetri-cally proportioned, the roof of the addition should be similar. • The roofs of additions should not interfere with the original roof form by changing its basic shape or view of the original roof, and should have a roof form compatible with the original building. Converting a building to a new use that is different from that which its design reflects is considered to be “adaptive use.” When residential use ceases to be viable, the first preference is to choose new uses that minimize the negative changes in build-ing features. Often there are new uses that are inherently less disruptive to residential structures such as bed and breakfasts, professional offices, small specialty restaurants, and personal service businesses. 7.11 Seek uses that are compatible with the historic character of the building.• The primary goal should be to preserve the original residential character, appearance, and scale of the structure. • Building uses that are closely related to the original use are preferred. Avoid radical al-terations to either the interior or exterior of the structure.• Avoid altering porches and original windows and doors. Seek uses that are compatible with the historic character of the building. The openness of a front yard should be preserved for example. A new use that requires a large number of parking spaces is not a compatible use. Page 75 of 163 City of Georgetown page 80 7.12 When use changes demand that struc-tures be altered such that little or no use can be made of the original structure, consider mov-ing the structure to a compatible location. • This move can be made to another location on the same site or to a vacant site in another neighborhood. 7.13 Only as a last resort should an historic structure be considered for demolition.• Demolition of any original feature or part of an historic building should be avoided.• Demolition of a building that contributes to the historic or architectural significance of a locally or nationally designated district should not occur, unless:+ Public safety and welfare requires the removal of the building or structure;+ The building has lost its architectural and historical value/significance and its removal will improve the viability of the neighborhood;+ A building does not contribute to the historical or architectural character and importance of the district and its removal will improve the appearance of the neigh-borhood; or+ The denial of the demolition will result in a substantial hardship on the applicant as determined by the process outlined in the City’s Unified Development Code. When adapting a residence to a commercial use, respect the residential character of the building by preserving the overall form of the building, the front porch and front yard character. • Where a structure must be razed, then a record shall be made of it prior to any de-construction or demolition. The owner shall be responsible for providing the record, which shall include, but is not limited to, photographs, architectural drawings, and deed records, if available. This record shall be deposited with the Planning and Develop-ment Department.• A structure should never be demolished as a matter of convenience.• If a demolition is approved, work with HARC to identify salvageable materials and poten-tial buyers or recipients of salvaged materi-als. The removal of all salvageable building materials before demolition is encouraged, through a proper demolition by deconstruc-tion method as determined by HARC at the public hearing, and may be required depend-ing on the significance of the building.• Preserve historic garages and other second-ary buildings where feasible.• Demolition of secondary buildings (garages, etc.) 50 years or older may be appropriate if substantially deteriorated (requiring 50% or more replacement of exterior siding, roof rafters, surface materials, and structure members).• Relocating buildings within the Overlay Dis-tricts may be appropriate if compatible with the district’s architectural character through style, period, height, scale, materials, setting, and placement on the lot.• Relocation of a building out of the Overlay Districts should be avoided unless demolition is the only alternative.• See also Unified Development Code Sec-tion 3.13 for demolition or relocation criteria, standards, and procedures. Page 76 of 163 Design Guidelines for Colors page 117 Chapter 11 Design guiDelines for colors in the overlAy Districts This chapter presents design policies and guide-lines that apply to paint colors. The City of George-town does not have a specific color palette. Paint color changes to single-family and two-family resi-dential properties in the Old Town Overlay District do not require design review. Historic Color Schemes When renovating an historic building, first con-sider returning to the original color scheme, which can be discovered by carefully cutting back paint layers. Accurately determining the original color scheme requires professional help, but one may get a general idea of the colors that were used by scraping back paint layers with a penknife. Since the paint will be faded, moisten it slightly to get a better idea of the original hue. It is not necessary, however, to use the original color schemes of the building. An alternative is to use colors in ways that were typical of the period or architectural style, and with them create a new color scheme. With respect to the treatment of color on individual historic buildings, colors that represent the ap-propriate period of history are preferred, but not necessarily required. Color does not damage the historic materials or alter significant details and can always be changed in the future and thus its application is not as critical as some other design options. Inappropriate applications of color, however, may hinder one’s ability to perceive the character of the building’s architecture. For example, if a building with jig-saw brackets and moldings is painted solid black, with no contrast between the background and the details, and little opportunity for expression of shadows, the perception of the character of the building may be diminished. In This Chapter:Color schemes 118Accent colors 119When to paint 120 This concern for perception of character is more relevant in the context of the Downtown Overlay District, where assemblage of buildings on the street is important to one’s perception of the char-acter of the streetscape. In this sense, one building that stands out from the rest with an inappropriate color scheme will impede one’s perception of the continuity in the district. For this reason, the city reviews the use of color as part of its consideration of design issues. In general, HARC will consider color on a case-by-case basis, and in context with the building’s location. Page 77 of 163 City of Georgetown page 118 11.1 Develop a color scheme for the entire building that coordinates all the façade ele-ments.• Using the historic color scheme is encour-aged.• Choose a base color that will link elements of the entire building face together. It can tie signs, ornamentation, awnings, and en-trances together. It can also help the building better relate to others on the block.• A single color scheme should be used for the entire exterior so upper and lower floors and subordinate wings of buildings are seen as components of a single structure.• For a newer building in the Overlay Districts, a color scheme that complements the historic character of this district should be used. 11.2 Paint colors should enhance individual building elements while creating a unified, coordinated appearance for the entire struc-ture.• Paint colors and placement should create a cohesive look for the structure. There should be one main color on the body of the building to unify the façade.• Choose colors for trim, accents, and archi-tectural details that complement the main color on the body of the structure.• Consider the palette of surrounding struc-tures to create a harmonized appearance along the block face.• Background and accent colors should be consistent within separate buildings, where a number of buildings are attached or where unity in theme is desired. Policy: In general, bright colors used on large surfaces are discouraged. In all cases, the following standards for use of color shall apply. Develop a color scheme for the entire building that coordinates all the façade elements. Choose colors for trim, accents, and architectural details that complement the main color on the body of the structure. Page 78 of 163 Design Guidelines for Colors page 119 11.3 A muted color is preferred for the base color of most buildings.• Use muted colors to minimize the apparent scale of buildings and blend them with the natural colors of area.• Matte finishes are preferred to glossy ones. 11.4 Roof colors must complement the style and overall color scheme of the structure. Policy: Focus attention to a building’s decorative details and entrances. 11.5 In general, use bright colors for accents only.• Colors of a vivid saturation are not appropri-ate for the body of commercial buildings.• Overly strong or bold colors are not appropri-ate for the main body of a structure. Reserve the use of strong, bright colors for accents when you want to draw the customer’s eye, such as to the sign, the building’s ornamenta-tion or entrance.• In most cases only one or two accent col-ors should be used in addition to the base color.• Doors may be painted a bright accent color or they may be left a natural wood finish. Historically, many of the doors would have simply had a stain applied.• Window sashes, casings, and trims are also an excellent opportunity for accent color.• Brilliant luminescent or day-glow colors are not appropriate.• Minimize the metallic shine of aluminum and door frames. 11.6 Paint colors should highlight architec-tural details.• Plan painting to use more than one color. It is inappropriate to allow architectural details to be camouflaged by painting them the same color as the background of the structure• Strong or bold colors can be appropriate for trim, accents, and architectural details. Bright colors can be used to identify a building entrance. Paint colors should highlight architectural details Page 79 of 163 City of Georgetown page 120 11.7 Wooden structures must be painted.• Historically wooden structures in George-town were painted and would not have been left exposed wood.• Stained wood is inappropriate for the body of a structure.• Certain wooden details, such as doors and windows, may remain unpainted. But the wood must not be exposed to the elements, so the materials need to be treated.• The use and color of stain must be a typical style for the period of the structure. 11.8 Leave natural masonry finishes unpainted when feasible.• Where the natural color of the materials ex-ists, such as with stone or brick, they should be left unpainted.• Painting an unpainted brick or stone wall may trap moisture inside the walls and will drasti-cally alter its character and appearance.• For other parts of the building that do require painting, select colors that will complement those of the natural materials. 11.9 Where brick has been painted historically it should remain painted.• If a wall is made of porous brick, which has al-ways been painted, it should remain painted. Removing the paint will expose the brick to weather, accelerating its deterioration.• If a building was originally plain brick, but was painted sometime in the past, consider applying new paint colors that simulate the original brick color. Policy: It is important to know when to paint buildings and when to leave the material in its natural state or color. Leave natural masonry finishes unpainted when feasible. Page 80 of 163 Design Guidelines for Infill and Additions in Old Town Overlay District page 145 Chapter 14 Design guiDelines for infill construction AnD ADDitions in the olD town overlAy District This chapter presents design guidelines that apply to non-residential and multi-family development in the Old Town Overlay District, the area that sur-rounds the Downtown Overlay District, and the construction of additions to and new construction of residential structures that propose to exceed the minimum standards of Unified Development Code Section 4.09.030.B, Single-Family and Two-Family Residential Development Regulations. The design guidelines are organized into a series of relevant design topics. Within each category, individual policies and design guidelines are pre-sented, which the City will use in determining the appropriateness of the work proposed. This area has a history of residential buildings, with some institutional type uses such as churches and a school, with later development of some small commercial uses such as medical offices and small convenience retail sales. These non-residential uses are developed at a relatively low density, with substantial areas devoted to parking for the use. Most of the office uses are located within former residential structures that have been converted to commercial use. Overall, the District has preserved its residential feel and pedestrian-orientation with sidewalks and generally lower traffic volumes on neighborhood streets. Most of the residential buildings have some historic signifi-cance and these resources should be preserved, protected and when feasible, incorporated into new developments. In This Chapter:Building setbacks 149Mass and scale 150Building materials 151Architectural character 152Additions 152 The area should remain primarily residential in character with a minimum of non-residential encroachment. Any improvements should occur in a manner that enhances the experience for residents, pedestrians, and to build a sense of visual relatedness between the residential and non-residential properties. Any new design should relate to the traditional de-sign characteristics of surrounding buildings while also conveying the stylistic trends of today, as well as attempting to incorporate sustainable practices. The sense of human scale must be conveyed and maintained with any new development or conver-sion to a non-residential use. Page 81 of 163 City of Georgetown page 146 Summary of Key Characteristics Key design characteristics of this area include:• Buildings have similar setback alignment along the street frontage • One- to two-story, traditional residential buildings, with an occasional third floor for the grander houses• Masonry and wood are the primary construc-tion materials • First floor porches and multiple windows on all façade sides and floors • Pitched roofs• Primary building entrance that faces the street with a walkway connected to a side-walk along the street• Sidewalks and typically on-street parking• Parking accessed via a driveway with park-ing area or garage located to the rear of the main building façade• Traditional landscape features such as large trees, shrubs, and other plantings that are visible from the street Design GoalsThe dominant character of this area should con-tinue to be that of a quiet, residential environment with a street edge that is oriented toward pedes-trian traffic from the nearby houses. The design goals for the Old Town Overlay District are:• To rehabilitate existing historic residential buildings rather than construct new build-ings.• To respect the design period or style of residential properties with any additions or alternations.• To respect the residential character of the district.• To continue the use of traditional building materials found in the area.• To maintain traditional residential mass, size, and form of buildings seen along the street (i.e., a building should generally be a rectangular mass that is one- to two-stories in height). • To design commercial buildings without store-front elements.• To minimize the visual impacts of automo-biles.• To locate parking to the rear of properties screened by buildings and located to limit visibility from residential properties.• To maintain a residential front yard appear-ance related to landscaping, trees, lighting, etc..Building SetbacksNew buildings and additions in Old Town need to respect the residential setbacks established over time. There should be a defined front yard that is not overly encumbered by parking. Mass and ScaleA variety of building sizes exist in this area. While contemporary design approaches are encouraged, developments should continue to exhibit a variety of sizes, similar to the buildings seen traditionally in the neighborhood. Building FormOne of the most prominent unifying elements of the Old Town District is the similarity in building form. Generally, residential buildings are simple rectangular solids, either wider than they are deep or deeper than they are wide. Typically, residential roof forms are pitched. These building form charac-teristics are important and should be preserved. Building MaterialsBuilding materials of structures should contribute to the visual continuity of the area. They should appear similar to those seen traditionally to estab-lish a sense of visual continuity. Brick, stone, and wood siding are the dominant materials and their use in new construction is preferred. Page 82 of 163 Design Guidelines for Infill and Additions in Old Town Overlay District page 147 Architectural CharacterThere is a variety of architectural character in the Old Town area. There are simple vernacular farm houses, Sears Roebuck kit houses, and Prairie style architecture as well as more elaborate Vic-torians. Additions to existing buildings should be respectful of a building’s original style or design or in the case of subsequent renovations the period of significance and seek to not alter that significance. New construction should be sensitive to the char-acter of the existing buildings in the area and any design should attempt to maintain a similar mass and scale and be in context to the area. Properties designated by the City as a High, Medium, or Low Priority Structure shall be given a more in-depth review, so that its architectural character is not lost or damaged by any proposed addition or alteration. Pedestrian EnvironmentStreets, sidewalks, and landscaping should pres-ent a residential sense of scale rather than a more urban, congested appearance. Projects that have automobile activity associated with them should be designed to provide a safe environment for the pedestrian. Automobile circulation patterns, both internal and external, should be clearly identified and should not interfere with pedestrian circula-tion systems. New ConstructionNew construction in the historic district is encour-aged if the proposed design and siting are compat-ible with the District’s character. When siting new construction, compatibility with existing setbacks, the spacing of buildings, and the orientation of buildings should be considered. Compatibility of proposed landscaping, lighting, paving, signage, and accessory buildings is also important. The purpose of guidelines for new construction is not to prevent change in the Old Town Overlay Dis-trict, but to ensure that the District’s architectural and historic character is respected. The height, the proportion, the roof shape, the materials, the texture, the scale, and the details of the proposed building must be compatible with existing historic buildings in the District. However, compatible con- temporary designs rather then historic duplications are encouraged. AdditionsAn addition to a structure can radically change its perceived scale and character if inappropriately designed. When planning an addition, the effect the addition will have on the building itself should be considered. When creating an addition, keep the size of addition small in relation to the main structure. If an addition must be larger, it should be set apart from the main structure and be connected with a smaller linking element or placed to the rear, not in prominent view from the street. A design for a new addition that would create an appearance inconsistent with the character of the building, especially an historic one, is discouraged. One also should consider the effect the addition may have on the character of a street or neighbor-hood, as seen from the public right-of-way or from neighboring residential properties. For example, a side addition may change the sense of rhythm established by side yards in the block. Locating the addition to the rear could be a better solution in such a case. The compatibility of proposed additions with historic buildings will be reviewed in terms of the mass, the scale, the materials, the roof form, and the proportion and the spacing of windows and doors. Additions that echo the style of the original structure and additions that introduce compatible contemporary design are both acceptable. Adaptive UseThe adaptive use of a residence for a commercial or office use is a distinct possibility in Georgetown. In fact, a large majority of the Downtown Overlay District is zoned Mixed Use Downtown (MU-DT), which allows for a variety of uses. However, when such adaptations must occur, they should be designed to have the least impact on the historic character of a neighborhood—some of which is residential in character. Although for commercial use, these adapted properties should not be com-mercial in character. This means that the overall form of a building (with a sloping roof) and the landscaped front lawn should not be altered. Page 83 of 163 City of Georgetown page 148 Demolition/RelocationDemolition is forever, and once a building is gone it takes away another piece of the City’s character. Demolition of a historic building or resource that has most of its original design and features should only be an action of last resort. HARC can delay or deny requests for demolition while it seeks solu-tions for preservation and rehabilitation. HARC should not allow the demolition or reloca-tion of any resource which has historical and/or architectural significance unless one or more of the following conditions exist and if, by a finding of HARC, the proposed demolition or relocation will materially improve or correct these conditions: 1. The resource constitutes a hazard to the safety of the public or the occupants, as determined by the Building Official.2. The resource is a deterrent to a major im-provement program that will be of substantial benefit to the community and the applicant proposing the work has obtained all neces-sary planning and zoning approvals, financ-ing, and environmental clearances.3. Retention of the resource will cause undue financial hardship to the owner when a gov-ernmental action, an act of God, or other events beyond the owner’s control created the hardship, and all feasible alternatives to eliminate the financial hardship, which may include offering the resource for sale at its fair market value or moving the resource to a vacant site within the historic district, have been attempted and exhausted by the owner.4. Retention of the resource is not in the interest of the majority of the community. HARC should consider the following when evalu-ating proposals to demolish or relocate historic resources: 1. Does the resource proposed for demolition or relocation have architectural and/or historical significance?2. What would be the effect on surrounding buildings of demolition or relocation of the resource?3. What would be the effect on the Overlay District as a whole of demolition or relocation of the resource?4. What would be the effect on safeguarding the heritage of the City of the demolition or relocation?5. What has been the impact of any previous inappropriate alterations?6. Is the demolition solely a matter of conve-nience?7. Has the owner offered the property for sale?8. Has the owner asked a fair price?9. Has the property been marketed for a rea-sonable time?10. Has the property been advertised broadly in a reasonable manner?11. Has the owner sought the advice of a profes-sional experienced in historic preservation work?12. What would be the effect of open space in that location if the lot is to be left open?13. What would the effect of any proposed re-placement structure to the community?14. What is the appropriateness of design of any proposed replacement structure to the Overlay District? Page 84 of 163 Design Guidelines for Infill and Additions in Old Town Overlay District page 149 Policy: A new building should maintain the wall of the building at a residential setback. Continuity of design within the Old Town Overlay District is a goal of the City, both in terms of con-necting individual project, houses and town blocks. Not only should a new building in Old Town be set back from the sidewalk edge, but it should be designed to provide visual interest. 14.1 Locate a new building using a residential type setback.• Align the new non-residential building front at a setback that is in context with the area properties.• New residential buildings should meet the minimum front setback requirement of the UDC or use an increased setback if the block has historically developed with an extended setback.• Generally, additions should not be added to the front facing façades.• Where no sidewalk exists, one should be installed that aligns with nearby sidewalks. 14.2 In the front yard, acknowledge the resi-dential character of the area with residential type landscape treatments.• Landscaping elements should be compat-ible with the character of the area in size, scale, and type. Free-form, suburban type landscaping is inappropriate in this setting.• Consider using landscaped beds, trees, low level lighting, sidewalks, etc. to reflect a more residential appearance of the property.• Limit front yard pavement to driveways rather than parking lots, or if parking lots are deemed necessary make them heavily screened by low level shrubs, vines, and decorative walls. Consider pavers or other less impactive materials. Locate a new building using a residential type setback. Page 85 of 163 City of Georgetown page 150 Buildings in the Old Town Overlay District should appear similar in height and width to residential structures seen traditionally in the area. 14.3 Consider dividing a larger non-residen-tial building into “modules” that are similar in scale to buildings seen traditionally.• If a larger building is divided into “modules,” they should be expressed three-dimension-ally throughout the entire building. 14.4 Building heights of larger projects should provide variety.• A larger development should step down in height towards the street or smaller sur-rounding structures.• A larger house should step down in height towards all setbacks, especially near smaller surrounding houses. 14.5 Large project sites should be developed with several buildings, rather than a single structure.• This will help reduce the perceived size of the project.• Large residential projects might utilize a detached garage to reduce the size of the main structure. 14.6 Where a large building is needed, divide the building into modules that reflect the tra-ditional size of residential buildings.• A typical building module should not exceed 20 feet in width. The building module should be expressed with at least one of the follow-ing: - A setback in wall planes of a minimum of 3 feet - A change in primary façade material for the extent of the building module - A vertical architectural element or trim piece.• Variations in façade treatments should be continued through the structure, including its roofline and front and rear façades. Policy: The overall mass of a new building or addition should convey a sense of human scale. 14.7 Maintain views to the courthouse.• In certain circumstances views to the court-house shall be taken into consideration when designing a new building or addition.• A new building shall not be so tall as to block views of the courthouse. Note: See UDC Section 4.12 Courthouse View Protection Overlay District. It is appropriate to use changes in materials as an accent in building design. This can help to express individual modules or units. (Boulder, CO) Variations in façade treatments should be continued through the structure, including its roofline and front and rear façades. Page 86 of 163 Design Guidelines for Infill and Additions in Old Town Overlay District page 151 New materials should relate to the scale, durability, color, and texture of the predominate materials of old town and in the case of building additions, to the existing structure. Additions to existing historic buildings should use the same materials as the primary building. 14.8 Masonry materials that convey a sense of scale are preferred for new non-residential buildings.• Brick and stone are preferred for new con-struction.• New materials should appear similar in character to those used traditionally. For example, wooden siding, brick, and stone should be detailed to provide a human scale.• New materials should have a demonstrated durability in the Central Texas climate. For example, some façade materials used in new construction are more susceptible to weather and simply do not last as long as stone or brick. 14.9 Historic building materials of existing buildings should be maintained and respected when additions are proposed.• See Chapter 5 for design guidelines related to maintaining and protecting historic building materials. 14.10 Non-traditional siding materials are discouraged.• Typically, artificial stone and brick veneer are not appropriate.• Asphalt shingles are not appropriate.• Aluminum and vinyl are not appropriate.. Policy: Building materials for new construction should be visually compatible with the predominate materials of this area. Materials for additions should be the same materials as the predominate materials of the existing building. Building materials that appear similar in scale, color, texture and finish to those seen historically in the context are preferred. (Arvada, CO) Page 87 of 163 City of Georgetown page 152 14.11 Avoid alterations that would damage historic features.• Avoid alterations that would hinder the abil-ity to interpret the design character of the original building or period of significance.• Alterations that seek to imply an earlier pe-riod than that of the building are inappropri-ate. 14.12 An addition shall be compatible in scale, materials, and character with the main build-ing.• An addition shall relate to the building in mass, scale, and form. It should be de-signed to remain subordinate to the main structure.• An addition to the front of a building is usually inappropriate. Policy: Design alterations and additions to be compatible with the historic character of the property. Minimize the visual impacts of an addition. Policy: Design an addition to a residential structure to be compatible with the primary building. 14.13 Design a new addition such that the original character can be clearly seen.• In this way, a viewer can understand the history of changes that have occurred to the building.• An addition should be distinguishable from the original building, even in subtle ways, such that the character of the original can be interpreted.• Creating a jog in the foundation between the original and new structures may help to define an addition.• Even applying new trim board at the con-nection point between the addition and the original structure can help define the addi-tion.• See also Preservation Briefs #14: New Exte- rior Additions to Historic Buildings, published by the National Park Service. An addition shall be compatible in scale, materials, character, and character with the main building. Page 88 of 163 Design Guidelines for Infill and Additions in Old Town Overlay District page 153 14.14 Place an addition at the rear of a build-ing or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impacts.• This will allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent.• Locating an addition at the front of a structure is usually inappropriate. 14.15 Do not obscure, damage, destroy, or remove original architectural details and ma-terials of the primary structure.• When preserving original details and materi-als, follow the guidelines presented in this document. 14.16 An addition shall be compatible in scale, materials, character, and architectural style with the main building.• An addition shall relate to the historic build-ing in mass, scale, and form. It should be designed to remain subordinate to the main structure.• While a smaller addition is visually prefer-able, if a residential addition would be sig-nificantly larger than the original building, one option is to separate it from the primary building, when feasible, and then link it with a smaller connecting structure.• An addition should be simple in design to prevent it from competing with the primary façade.• Consider adding dormers to create second story spaces before changing the scale of the building by adding a full second floor. 14.17 An addition shall be set back from any primary, character-defining façade.• An addition should be to the rear of the build-ing, when feasible. 14.18 The roof of a new addition shall be in character with that of the primary building.• Typically, gable, hip, and shed roofs are ap-propriate for residential additions. Flat roofs may be more appropriate for commercial buildings.• Repeat existing roof slopes and materials.• If the roof of the primary building is symmetri-cally proportioned, the roof of the addition should be similar. Page 89 of 163 City of Georgetown page 154 Architectural details play several roles in defining the character of an historic structure and area. A building’s features are often associated with particular styles, and therefore their preservation is important. 14.19 The architectural features of existing buildings should be protected when additions are proposed.• See Chapter 4 for design guidelines related to protecting architectural features. 14.20 An addition shall not damage or ob-scure architecturally important features.• For example, loss or alteration of a porch should be avoided.• Addition of a porch may be inappropriate. 14.21 An addition may be made to the roof of a building if it does the following:• An addition should be set back from the pri-mary, character-defining façade, to preserve the perception of the historic scale of the building.• Its design should be modest in character, so it will not attract attention from the historic façade.• The addition should be distinguishable as new, albeit in a subtle way. Policy: Additions should acknowledge and respect and where appropriate include architectural features of existing building. This two-story rear and rooftop addition is compatible with, yet remains subordinate to, the original one-story structure. Page 90 of 163 Design Guidelines for Infill and Additions in Old Town Overlay District page 155 Individual building elements give structures their sense of style and character and taken with other structures set the character for a particular area. 14.22 Individual building elements of existing buildings should be preserved, protected, and replicated where appropriate when additions are proposed.• See Chapter 6 for design guidelines related to preserving individual building elements. Policy: Additions should maintain and where appropriate include compatible building elements. Policy: When adapting a residence to a commercial use, respect the residential character of the building and neighborhood. Converting a building to a new use that is different from that which its design reflects is considered to be “adaptive use”. When residential use ceases to be viable, the first preference is to choose new uses that minimize any negative changes in build-ing features. Often there are new uses that are inherently less disruptive to residential structures such as a bed and breakfast, professional offices, small specialty restaurants, and personal service businesses. 14.23 Seek uses that are compatible with the historic character of the building and neighbor-hood.• The primary goal should be preserving the original residential character, appearance, and scale of the structure.• Building uses that are closely related to the original use are preferred. Avoid radical alterations to either the interior or exterior of the structure.• Avoid altering porches and original windows and doors. When adapting a residence to a commercial use, respect the residential character of the building and neighborhood. Page 91 of 163 City of Georgetown page 156 14.24 When use changes demand that struc-tures be altered such that little or no use can be made of the original structure, consider mov-ing the structure to a compatible location.• This move can be made to another location on the same site or to a vacant site in the neighborhood or another neighborhood.• Historic structures should be relocated within Georgetown whenever possible. 14.25 Only as a last resort should an historic structure be considered for demolition.• Where a structure must be razed, then a record shall be made of it prior to demoli-tion. This shall include photographs and architectural drawings.• A structure should never be demolished as a matter of convenience.• See UDC Section 3.13 for provisions related to proposed demolition and/or relocation of historic structures. This house was moved to a new, compatible location. Page 92 of 163 TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION County Williamson Local District:Old Town District Address:1227 Church St 2016 Survey ID:125738 City Georgetown HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY FORM 2016 Preservation Priority:Low SECTION 1 Basic Inventory Information WCAD ID:R041539Property Type:Building Structure Object Site District Date Recorded 3/4/2016Recorded by:CMEC EstimatedActual Source:WCADConstruction Date:1950 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 page 2 General Notes: Explain Upon reassessment, due to alterations, priority has been lowered from the previous survey. Geographic Location Latitude:30.63123 Longitude -97.675391 Current/Historic Name:None/None High Medium Priority: Low High Medium Low ID 795 ID Not Recorded 2007 Survey 1984 Survey ID 125738 2016 Survey High Medium Low Photo direction: Northeast Page 93 of 163 TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION County Williamson Local District:Old Town District Address:1227 Church St 2016 Survey ID:125738 City Georgetown HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY FORM 2016 Preservation Priority:Low Additional Photos EastPhoto Direction Page 94 of 163 Page 95 of 163 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review January 25, 2018 SUBJECT: Presentation and discussion of conceptual design for the renovatio n o f a c o mmercial property lo cated at 1102 S. Aus tin Ave - Nat Waggoner, AICP, Long Range Planning Manager ITEM SUMMARY: This review will p ro vide d irectio n o n the pro jec t regard ing c o mp lianc e with the Do wntown and Old To wn Design Guidelines . C o nc ep tual review allo ws the o p p o rtunity fo r dialogue with the Commission and staff to d is cus s the c o mp o nents o f the p ro ject, primarily material selec tion, s torefro nt treatment, and entrance d es ign for the p ro ject. Staff has provided a firs t round o f review co mments /rec o mmendatio ns to the ap p licant, related primarily to the separation of s ignage and façade ap p ro vals . T he Unified Development C o d e and Do wntown Design Guidelines allo w s taff to ad ministratively review s ignage. If the proposed s ignage des igns d o no t confo rm to the Do wnto wn Des ign Guid elines, the applic ant mus t s eek ap p ro val through HAR C. The applic ant has res p o nded to the firs t ro und of s taff comments and provid ed a s econd c onc eptual d raft o n January 18, 2018 with the removal of s ignage and inc o rporatio n o f faç ad e treatments inc lud ing the re-intro d uc tion of awnings and s torefront wind o ws. Staff has provid ed a curs o ry review of thos e c hanges prior to s ubmitting this item for dis c us s ion at the January 25th HARC meeting. Staff will c o ntinue full review of the applic ation and p ro vide c o mments bac k to the applic ant in ad vance o f the final review b y HARC. No fo rmal ac tio n will b e taken on this ap p lication at this meeting. A formal C ertific ate o f Appropriateness review will oc c ur at a future meeting. The ap p licant is s eeking feed b ack on the following projec t components : 1. Primary b uilding entranc e related to loc atio n and d es ign of tower element s een on south elevation a. Tower element (Design Guid elines (13.13) 2. Street fac ing faç ad e modific ations required fo r internal sto re c o nfigurations to includ e: a. S o uth façade (elevation) i. Sto refro nt windows and graphic d is p lay walls within s torefront related to transparency and lighting (Guidelines 13.13). ii. S W c o rner o f faç ade b rick infill design b . Eas t façade (elevatio n) i. S torefront wind ows and grap hic display walls within s to refro nt related to transparency and lighting (Guidelines 13.13) c . No rth faç ad e (elevation) i.Sto refro nt windows and graphic d is p lay walls within s torefront related to transparency and lighting (Guidelines 13.13) Public Comments N/A Findings The fo llo wing items will require future HARC approval: 1. Faç ad e mo d ificatio ns to inc lude tower elements and sto refro nt treatments FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A Page 96 of 163 SUBMITTED BY: Nat Waggoner, PMP, AICP ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Exhibit 1 - Plans and Specifications Exhibit Exhibit 2a- Chapter 6 Guidelines Exhibit Exhibit 2b - Chapter 7 Guidelines Exhibit Exhibit 2c - Chapter 13 Guidelines Exhibit Exhibit 3- HRSR Exhibit Page 97 of 163 NORR, LLC An Ingenium International Company 150 W. Jefferson Avenue, Suite 1300 Detroit, MI 48226 U.S.A T 313 324 3100 F 313 324 3111 norr.com December 28, 2017 Planning Department 406 W. Eighth Street Georgetown, TX 78626 (512) 930.3575 Attn: Georgetown Planning Department Dear Sir/Madam Re: CVS Georgetown TX NWC University Ave & Austin Ave HARC Submittal The intent of this letter is to address the project scope and identify any deviations from the Design Guidelines. The existing single story multi-tenant building is located at the intersection of Austin and University Ave at the northwest corner. The building’s façade has remained largely as is it exists today by maintaining the existing building materials, glazing locations, and canopies. There are only three alterations and they are as follows; 1. The addition of some sign banding along Austin and University Avenues which would replace the existing canopies and significantly minimize the amount of tenant signage. In total the number of signs were reduced from 12 to 5. 2. The addition of a focal point for entry into the building for the tenant which will occupy the entire space. A tower will be constructed in close proximity to Austin Ave and the parking lot for easy access to both pedestrian and vehicular traffic. The tower will be finished in a complimentary stone veneer with large amounts of glazing in order to strongly identify the entrance into the building while allowing natural daylight to enter the building. 3. The addition of a drive-thru window and canopy. The drive thru has been strategically located to allow access off of 11th Street and will support multiple cars lined up at this location in order to better serve the community. A 6’-0” screen wall has been added at the property line to shield the adjacent neighbor from any unwanted noise or lights from these vehicles. The remainder of the building will maintain the color palette as it exists today and all the materials will also remain in place. There are a couple of locations where some fenestration will need to be removed and a wall will be constructed to match the adjacent material which are identified on the elevations. Page 98 of 163 755' 755' 755' 7 5 5 ' SITE PLAN 2 OF 2 DEVELOPER: CONSULTANT: ARCHITECT OF RECORD SEAL: SUITE G-50 BIRMINGHAM, AL 35242 PH. (205) 408-3443 1200 CORPORATE DRIVE NGINEERS, INC.ONSULTINGARLSON Bartlett, TN 38133 Phone (901) 384-0404 ECC 7068 Ledgestone Commons Fax (901) 384-0710 Suite 1300 Detroit, MI 48226 www.norr.com 150 W. Jefferson Ave. ORANGE DEVELOPMENT GEORGETOWN, TX NWC - W. UNIVERSITY AVE. & S. AUSTIN AVE. STORE NUMBER:6894 PROJECT TYPE: NEW STORE 15,173 SFEXISTING BUILDING CS PROJECT NUMBER:106713 DEAL TYPE: FEE FOR SERVICE Page 99 of 163 Page 100 of 163 20 4 FEET8 16 32 FINISH FLOOR 0' - 0" EXISTING 5' - 10" EXISTING 13' - 5" EXISTING 4' - 9" EXISTING 4' - 9" 16 ' - 0 " EX I S T I N G 30 ' - 9 " NE W 28 ' - 1 1 " EXISTING EXISTING 12' - 6" EXISTING 12' - 6" EXISTING 13' - 5" EXISTING 12' - 9" EXISTING 12' - 9" EX1 EX I S T I N G 8' - 8 " EX I S T I N G 8' - 8 " EXISTING DOWNSPOUTSEXISTING DOWNSPOUT EX14EX14 EX5 NEW AWNINGS EXISTING CANOPIES GRAPHIC DISPLAY WALL BEYOND 4' - 9 " FINISH FLOOR 0' - 0" NEW RECEIVING DOOR. WINDOW INFILL TO MATCH CORNER DETAILS 16 ' - 0 " EXISTING 13' - 6" EXISTING 13' - 6" NEW 13' - 6" WINDOW INFILL TO MATCH CORNER DETAILS NEW DOOR EX I S T I N G 8' - 8 " EX I S T I N G 8' - 8 " EXISTING NEW DRIVE THRU CANOPY EXISTING CANOPY XP1 XP1GRAPHIC DISPLAY WALL BEYOND GRAPHIC DISPLAY WALL BEYOND FINISH FLOOR 0' - 0" STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF (BEYOND) NEW 28' - 11" NEW AWNING BRICK INFILL TO BE PAINTED TO MATCH EXISTING WALL BRICK INFILL TO BE PAINTED TO MATCH EXISTING WALL EX1EX5 EX5 EXISTING 13' - 6" EXISTING 13' - 9" NEW 20' - 7" EXISTING 73' - 1" EXISTING 7' - 4" EXISTING DOWNSPOUT EX14EX14 NEW AWNINGS GRAPHIC DISPLAY WALL BEYOND 4' - 9" NEW AWNING NEW AWNING FINISH FLOOR 0' - 0"CVS EGRESS DOOR NEW ELECTRICAL SERVICE BRICK INFILL TO BE PAINTED TO MATCH EXISTING WALLXP1EX9 NEW 28' - 11" EXISTING 30' - 9" EXISTING NEW DRIVE THRU WINDOW & CANOPY EX1EXISTING WINDOW (BEHIND) EXISTING WINDOW NEW LADDER EXISTING DOWNSPOUT EXISTING DOWNSPOUT EXISTING DOWNSPOUT EX14 EX14EX14 6' - 0" EX5 10' - 0" NEW AWNING CV S G E O R G E T O W N , T X , A U S T I N A V E . & U N I V E R S I T Y A V E . NOTE: ALL EXISTING BUILDING MATERIALS ARE EXISTING UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED NOTE: FOR ALL SIGNAGE SEE SIGN PACKAGE BY SIGN VENDOR EXTERIOR MATERIAL SCHEDULE Material: Mark Material: Manufacturer Material: Description EX1 NICHIHA STACKED STONE KURASTONE, COLOR: DESERT, FINISH: TEXTURED, SIZE: 6"H X 25-5/8"L EX5 RE: SPECIFICATIONS ALUMINUM WITH CLEAR ANODIZED COATING EX9 RE: SPECIFICAITONS PLASTIC TO MATCH OSHA YELLOW EX14 RTU SCREENING ENVISOR - CITYSCAPES : SHADOW GRAY - PAN STYLE XP1 BENJAMIN MOORE PAINT, BM 1001 (4B) NORTH CREEK BROWN, FINISH: SATIN 1/8" = 1'-0"D4 1 EAST ELEVATION (AUSTIN AVE.) 1/8" = 1'-0"D4 4 NORTH ELEVATION (11TH ST.) 1/8" = 1'-0"D4 2 SOUTH ELEVATION (UNIVERSITY AVE.) 1/8" = 1'-0"D4 3 WEST ELEVATION (ROCK ST.) 01.18.2017 Page 101 of 163 2 SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" ENCLOSURE SECTION EQ 3'-8" 8' - 0 " 2' - 8 " 1' - 0 " EQ 2" #4 @ 12"O.C. EW T&B #5 @ 24" O.C. DOWELS #5 @ 24" O.C. - CORES GROUTED SOLID AT VERT. REINF. & BELOW GRADE (4'-0" LIFTS MAX.) 8" CMU TO MATCH BUILDING CENTER CONCRETE CAPSTONE ON FINISHED WALL & SET IN MORTAR SETTING BED. FILL JOINTS WITH SEALANT HORIZ. JOINT REINF. 16" O.C. EVERY OTHER COURSE 8" BOND BEAM RE: STRUCT CONCRETE SLAB RE: STRUCT, TYP PAVING RE: CIVIL PRE-MOLDED JOINT FILLER & SEALANT 2 2 EA 6'-0"± GATES 2"X2'' GALV FRAME W/ METAL GATE W/ SELF TAPPING SCREWS. PROVIDE HINGES, CENTRAL GATE STOPS & LATCH W/ EYE FOR PADLOCK 12 ' - 0 " PROVIDE STL RECEIVER SLEEVE SET IN CONC @ CANE BOLT (4) #5 W/ MATCHING DOWELS GROUT REINF CORE EA SIDE (TYP) 12'-0"x14'-0" CONC APRON 12'-8" CLR 14 ' - 0 " 14'-0" 3" 1'-0"12'-0" 6" THK SEALED CONC PAD - SEE SITE DWGS FOR GRADE ELEVS 6" 6" 6" DIA BOLLARD RE: 4/A10 6" 6" 4'-0" 4'-0"EQEQ 7" 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE PLAN CV S G E O R G E T O W N , T X , A U S T I N A V E . & U N I V E R S I T Y A V E . 01.18.2017 RTU SCREENING SITE LIGHTING DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE Page 102 of 163 Design Guidelines for Historic Resources page 51 This chapter presents design guidelines for the preservation of individual historic building ele-ments in Georgetown. They apply to individually listed historic resources, as well as historic prop-erties located in the Downtown and Old Town Overlay Districts. The guidelines are organized into a series of relevant design topics. Within these design topics are individual policy and design guideline statements upon which the City will base its decisions. Commercial FacadesOrnamentation and details of elements such as cornices and parapets are original components that “dress up” a building and give it a sense of style and character. Ornamental items include hood molds, trim at doors, and windows; plaques and medallions; signboards or sign panels; date or name stones; and simple geometric shapes in metal, stone, or concrete. Cornices, which are usually found at the top of building walls, and ornamental moldings or belt courses, which are located just above storefronts, are horizontal projecting elements that provide a visual break in or termination to a wall. A parapet is an upward extension of a building wall above the roofline, sometimes ornamental and sometimes plain, used to give a building a greater feeling of height or a better sense of proportion. Cornices are most apparent on late 19th cen-tury commercial structures, when several ornate, bracketed types were used. Early 20th century buildings were, as a rule, less decorated and had simpler ornamentation. Rather than cornices, they tend to have parapets, some low and some extending several feet above the roof surface. A parapet may be capped with brick, stone, or tile, and frequently decorative elements or panels are placed in it. Chapter 6 Design guiDelines for inDiviDuAl BuilDing eleMents In This Chapter:Commercial facades 55Windows and doors 59 Roofs, gutters, and downspouts 64Porches 66 Commercial buildings should, for the most part, all relate to the street and to pedestrians in the same manner: with a clearly defined primary entrance and large windows that display goods and services offered inside. The repetition of these standard elements creates a visual unity on the street that should be preserved. Typical commercial storefront components. pediment cornice upper-story windows belt course transom display window piers kickplate recessed entry Page 103 of 163 City of Georgetown page 52 Windows & DoorsWindows and doors are some of the most impor-tant character-defining features of historic struc-tures. They give scale to buildings and provide visual interest to the composition of individual façades. Distinct window and door designs in fact help define many historic building styles. Windows and doors often are inset into relatively deep openings or have surrounding casings and sash components, which have a substantial dimension that casts shadows that contribute to the character of the historic style. HARC should consider the following when evaluat-ing proposals to replace historic windows: 1. Historic windows and doors are not neces-sarily decorative, so their functionality as well as appropriate design should be con-sidered.2. Whether the repair of the historic windows and/or doors is technically not feasible.3. The window and door openings should not be altered to accommodate windows or doors of different sizes, proportions, views, or configurations.4. If the windows and doors are visible to the public they should not be removed, enclosed, or obscured.5. Windows and doors visible to the public view should be retained in the original location.6. Whether the appearance matches the details such as window or door size, shape, opera-tion, glass configuration, material, and finish. The appearance of the sash, opening size, and decorative detail should look like the historic window or door. 7. Whether the operation of the replacement window or door is the same; for example, double-hung or casement windows that open inward.8. Whether the muntin style, configuration, detailing, and installation is the same for the replacement window or door as the historic window or door.9. Whether the sash and frame materials are the same materials, match the historic detail-ing, style, complexity, and profile. HARC should assess the following when evaluat-ing proposals to replace non-original windows: 1. Whether the proposed replacement windows and/or doors are based on the documented configuration of the building’s original win-dows and/or doors.2. Whether historic window and door openings are proposed to be altered to accommodate windows or doors of different sizes, propor-tions, views, or configurations.3. A historic window or door opening should not be enclosed, altered in its dimensions, or obscured. 4. Whether the non-original windows and/or doors have taken on historic significance and now contribute to the history of the build-ing. Page 104 of 163 Design Guidelines for Historic Resources page 53 Typical Roof Types Shed roof Gabled roof False front(pediment) Cross-Gabled roof Mansard roof Hipped roof Flat roofwith parapet RoofsThe character of the roof is a major feature for most historic structures. When repeated along the street, the repetition of similar roof forms contributes to a sense of visual continuity for the neighborhood. In each case, the roof pitch, its materials, size, and orientation are all distinct features that contribute to the character of a roof. Gabled and hip forms occur most frequently in residential areas while flat roofs appear on most historic commercial buildings in Georgetown. Although the function of a roof is to protect a structure from the elements, it also contributes to the overall character of the building. The Overlay Districts have seen the construction of various roof forms, as illustrated below. When evaluating roofing proposals HARC should consider the following: 1. The condition of the deteriorated or damaged existing roof materials and whether they can be economically repaired.2. Whether the proposed new roofing material can be installed without removing, damaging, or obscuring character-defining architectural features or trim, such as cupolas, dormers, cornices, brackets, chimneys, cresting, fini-als, and weathervanes.3. If the proposed new roofing material is similar in regard to size, style, and details of the original historic roofing materials, to the extent that such original roofing can be documented. If no photographic or other documentation exists for original historic roofing materials, selection of new roof ma-terials shall be typical of those used in the style of the historic building.4. The original form and shape of the roof are retained.5. The original character of the structure should be maintained. Page 105 of 163 City of Georgetown page 54 3. If inadequate documentation of original porches exists, a new porch should be typi-cal of those built in the style of the historic building. A simplified adaptation may be al-lowed if physical evidence of the original is non-existent or if the design is prohibitively expensive to recreate.4. Whether the existing porch materials are be-ing retained, unless it is technically infeasible to do so.5. If proposed new railings and balusters on an existing or new porch use historic or appro-priate new materials, are designed in a style similar in appearance to historic balusters, and whether railings are characteristic of the style of the historic building.6. The porch floor is of a type characteristic of the style of the historic building. Spaced planks shall not be used where painted tongue-and-groove boards would have been used historically.7. New and existing wood visible from the right-of-way is painted unless it can be docu-mented that the original wood was unpainted or stained (generally, unpainted pressure treated wood will not be allowed).8. Concrete steps and porches are allowed if it can be shown that they existed on the build-ing historically or if they are characteristic of the style of building. PorchesMany residential styles and building types devel-oped with the porch as a prime feature of the front façade. Because of their historical importance and prominence as character-defining features, porch-es should be preserved and they should receive sensitive treatment during exterior rehabilitation. Porches vary as much as architectural styles. They differ in height, scale, location, materials, and ar-ticulation. Some are simple one-story structures, while others may be complex with elaborate details and finishes. These elements often correspond to the architectural style of the house and there-fore the building’s design character should be considered before any major rehabilitation work is begun. HARC should take the following into consideration when asked to approve the alteration or addition of a historic porch: 1. If the existing porch has deteriorated or become badly damaged such that repair is technically infeasible.2. The proposed new porch is similar to the historic porch in regards to size, style, de-tail, and shape and will be constructed from historic or appropriate new materials. Page 106 of 163 Design Guidelines for Historic Resources page 55 Policy: Maintain an historic storefront and all of its character-defining features. For a commercial storefront building, a rehabilitation project shall preserve these character-defining elements. 6.1 For a commercial storefront building, a rehabilitation project shall preserve these character-defining elements:• Display windows: The main portion of glass on the storefront, where goods and services are displayed. This will help maintain the interest of pedestrians by providing views to goods and activities inside first floor win-dows.• Transom: The upper portion of the display window, separated by a frame.• Kickplate: Found beneath the display win-dow. Sometimes called a bulk-head panel.• Entry: Usually set back from the sidewalk in a protected recess.• Upper-story windows: Windows located above the street level. These usually have a vertical orientation.• Cornice molding: A decorative band at the top of the building. • These features shall not be altered, obscured or removed. 6.2 Maintenance of storefronts.• Wash display windows.• Repair damaged kickplates.• Re-caulk display windows to reduce air infil-tration.• Install weather-stripping around doors. 6.3 If a storefront is altered, restoring it to the original design is preferred. • If evidence of the original design is miss-ing, use a simplified interpretation of similar storefronts. The storefront still should be de-signed to provide interest to pedestrians. • Note that, in some cases, an original store-front may have been altered early in the his-tory of the building, and may itself have taken on significance. Such alterations should be preserved.• See also Preservation Briefs #11: Rehabili- tating Historic Storefronts, published by the National Park Service. Page 107 of 163 City of Georgetown page 56 Using historic photographs can help in determining the original character. (Compare with below.) This rehabilitation preserves surviving details and reconstructs missing ones. (Ft. Collins, CO) If a storefront is altered, restoring it to the original design is preferred. (Compare with the two photos of the same building to the right.) Combining Rehabilitation Principles - A Case Study This sequence of photographs illustrates the positive results of combining procedures for preserva-tion, repair, reconstruction, and sympathetic alterations that are set for in the design guidelines in this chapter. Page 108 of 163 Design Guidelines for Historic Resources page 57 If evidence of the original design is missing, use a simplified interpretation of similar storefronts. The storefront still should be designed to provide interest to pedestrians. (Boulder, CO) Retain the kickplate as a decorative panel. Preserve an original cornice molding. 6.4 Alternative designs that are contempo-rary interpretations of traditional storefronts may be considered.• Where the original is missing and no evi-dence of its character exists, a new design that uses the traditional elements may be considered.• However, the new design should continue to convey the character of typical storefronts, including the transparent character of the display window. 6.5 Retain the kickplate as a decorative panel.• The kickplate, located below the display window, adds interesting detail to the streetscape and should be preserved.• If the original kickplate is covered with an-other material, consider exposing the original design. 6.6 If the original kickplate is missing, de-velop a sympathetic replacement design.• Wood is an appropriate material for replace-ments on most styles. However, ceramic tile and masonry may also be considered when appropriately used with the building style. 6.7 Preserve the character of the cornice line.• An original cornice moulding should be pre-served.• Most historic commercial buildings have cornices to cap their facades. Their repeti-tion along the street contributes to the visual continuity on the block.• Many cornices are made of sheet metal. Ar-eas that have rusted through can be patched with pieces of new metal. Page 109 of 163 City of Georgetown page 58 When a building is missing its cornice, consider the two options presented below. Reconstruct a missing cornice when historic evidence is available. A simplified interpretation also is appropriate for a replacement cornice if evidence of the original is missing. 6.8 Reconstruct a missing cornice when his-toric evidence is available.• Use historic photographs to determine de-sign details of the original cornice.• Replacement elements should match the original in every detail, especially in overall size and profile. Keep sheet metal ornamen-tation well painted.• The substitution of another old cornice for the original may be considered, provided that the substitute is similar to the original. 6.9 A simplified interpretation is also appro-priate for a replacement cornice if evidence of the original is missing.• Appropriate materials include stone, brick, and stamped metal. 6.10 Retain the original shape of the transom glass in historic storefronts.• Transoms, the upper glass band of traditional storefronts, introduced light into the depths of the building, saving on light costs. These bands should not be removed or enclosed.• The shape of the transom is important to the proportion of the storefront, and it should be preserved in its historic configuration. • If the original glass is missing, installing new glass is preferred. However, if the transom must be blocked out, be certain to retain the original proportions. One option is to use it as a sign panel or decorative band. 6.11 A parapet wall should not be altered, es-pecially those on primary elevations or highly visible facades. • When a parapet wall becomes deteriorated, there is sometimes a temptation to lower or remove it. Avoid doing this because the flashing for the roof is often tied into the parapet, and disturbing it can cause moisture problems. • Inspect parapets on a regular basis. They are exposed to the weather more than other parts of the building, so watch for deteriora-tion such as missing mortar or excessive moisture retention. • Avoid waterproofing treatments, which can interfere with the parapet’s natural ability to dry out quickly when it gets wet. Page 110 of 163 Design Guidelines for Historic Resources page 59 Policy: Historic windows and doors significantly affect the character of a structure and should be preserved. The upper-story windows on the side of this historic commercial building have been filled in with brick. Where instances like this exist, consider reopening the windows. After: The upper-story windows have been reopened. The size, shape and proportions of window and door openings are important features. They give scale to buildings and provide visual interest to the composition of individual facades. These features are inset into relatively deep openings in a building wall or they have surrounding casings and sash components that have substantial dimensions. They cast shadows that contribute to the character of the building. 6.12 Preserve the position, number, size, and arrangement of historic windows and doors in a building wall.• Enclosing an historic opening in a key char-acter-defining facade is inappropriate, as is adding a new opening. • Do not close down an original opening to accommodate a smaller window. Restoring original openings which have been altered over time is encouraged.• Historically, windows had a vertical em -phasis. The proportions of these windows contribute to the character of each residence and commercial storefront. 6.13 Preserve the functional and decorative features of an historic window or door.• Features important to the character of a window include its clear glass, frame, sash, muntins, mullions, glazing, sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operation, location, and relation to other windows. • Features important to the character of a door include the door itself, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms, and flanking sidelights. • Historic screen and storm doors should be preserved and maintained. Page 111 of 163 City of Georgetown page 60 6.14 Maintenance of windows.• Wash windows.• Clean debris from windows.• Replace loose or broken glass in kind. This will reduce air leaks.• Replace damaged muntins, moldings, or glazing compound with material that matches the original in shape, size, and material.• Repair window hardware or replace with materials that match the original in scale and design. If the replacement hardware does not match the original design it should be simple, unobtrusive, and compatible with the style and building’s period of significance.• Install weather-stripping. This will enhance energy conservation significantly.• Maintain the interior views, so that either merchandise or furniture can be seen. 6.15 Repair wood features by patching, piec-ing-in, consolidating, or otherwise reinforcing the wood. • Avoid the removal of damaged wood that can be repaired.• Rebuild or repair portions of existing window frames, sashes, sills, or portions thereof, rather than replacing complete windows un-less it is technically infeasible to do so.• See also Preservation Briefs #9: The Repair of Historic Wooden Windows, published by the National Park Service. 6.16 Glass in doors and windows should be retained. • If it is broken or has been removed in the past, consider replacing it with new glass. If security is a concern, consider using wire glass, tempered glass, or light metal security bars (preferably on the interior). • Replacement glass may be insulating glass, but it should match the style and color of the original glass.• Replacement glass should match the historic glass - clear, rolled (‘wavy”), tinted, etc. • Removal of historic leaded, art, stained, beveled, prismatic glass, etc. should not be permitted, unless it is damaged and is technically infeasible to repair. Consider use of a storm window to enhance the energy efficiency of an existing historic window rather than replacement. (Deadwood, SD) Preserve leaded glass decorative features. (Texarkana, TX) Page 112 of 163 Design Guidelines for Historic Resources page 61 6.17 Installing window air-conditioners in win-dows on building fronts is inappropriate. 6.18 Maintain recessed entries.• The repetition of recessed entries provides a rhythm of shadows along the street, which helps establish a sense of scale.• These recessed entries were designed to provide protection from the weather and the repeated rhythm of these shaded areas along the street helps to identify business entrances. Typically, recessed entries were set back between three and five feet.• Restore the historic recessed entry if it has been altered. • Avoid doors that are flush with the sidewalk, especially those that swing outward. 6.19 Where entries were not recessed histori-cally, maintain them in their original position. • However, one may also need to comply with other code requirements, including door width, direction of swing, and construction.• In some cases, entries must comply with accessibility requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Note, however, that some flexibility in application of these other regulations is provided for historic proper-ties.• See also Preservation Briefs #32: Making Historic Properties Accessible, published by the National Park Service. Maintain recessed entries where they are found. This recessed form, for example, preserves the original character, even though it no longer serves as a doorway. Page 113 of 163 City of Georgetown page 62 Policy: A new or replacement window or door should match the appearance of the original. The side wall of a historic building located on a corner will have fewer openings. While replacing an entire window or door is dis-couraged, it may be necessary in some cases. Although wood is preferred as a replacement material, metal is common on the market today and sometimes is suggested for replacement. It is possible to consider alternative materials, if the resulting appearance matches the original as closely as possible. The substitute also should have a demonstrated durability in this climate. 6.20 When window or door replacement is nec-essary, match the replacement to the original design as closely as possible.• Preserve the original casing, when fea-sible.• If the original is double-hung, then the re-placement window should also be double-hung, or at a minimum, appear to be so. Match the replacement also in the number and position of glass panes.• Very ornate windows or doors that are not appropriate to the building’s architectural style are inappropriate.• Using the same material (wood) as the origi-nal is preferred.• A new screen door added to the front of a visible door should be “full view” design or with minimal structural dividers to retain the visibility of the historic door behind it.• A screen door should be sized to fit the origi-nal entrance opening and the design should be of the appropriate style and period of the building.• Security doors are non-historic additions. If installed, they should follow the guidelines for screen doors. Page 114 of 163 Design Guidelines for Historic Resources page 63 6.21 Maintain the historic ratio of window and storefront openings to solid wall.• Significantly increasing (or decreasing) the amount of glass will negatively affect the integrity of a structure.• On traditional storefronts, first floors should be more transparent than upper floors. • Upper floors should appear more solid than first floors.• Avoid a blank wall appearance that does not provide interest to pedestrians. Note, how-ever, that the side wall of a historic building located on a corner will have fewer open-ings.• Large surfaces of glass are inappropriate on residential structures and on the upper floors and sides of commercial buildings. • If necessary, divide large glass surfaces into smaller windows that are in scale with those seen traditionally. Maintain the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall. YES!NO! Page 115 of 163 City of Georgetown page 64 Policy: Preserve the original form and scale of a roof. In residential areas, most roof forms are pitched, such as gabled and hipped. Most commercial buildings have flat, or slightly sloping roofs. 6.22 Preserve the original roof form of an his-toric structure.• In residential areas, most roof forms are pitched, such as gabled and hipped. Most commercial buildings, on the other hand, have flat, or slightly sloping roofs.• Avoid altering the angle of a historic roof. Instead, maintain the perceived line and orientation of the roof as seen from the street. • Retain and repair roof detailing. All archi-tectural features which give the roof its fun-damental traits, such as dormer windows, cupolas, cornices, brackets, chimneys, crest-ing, and weather vanes, shall be retained.• Often repairing a basically sound roof can be much less expensive than a complete replacement. If a new roof is necessary, try to match the color, material, and pattern of the old as closely as possible. A roof may be re-roofed with substitute materials, such as asphalt or composite shingles that resemble the original style, if the original materials are determined to be beyond repair, are no longer available, or the historic roofing has been previously removed or covered.• Skylights shall not be added where they are visible from the public right-of-way.• Skylights should be placed at the rear roofli-nes or behind gables or dormers.• Do not install new ornaments unless it can be shown that they historically existed on the roof.• Roof alternations such as adding a green-house, roof deck, solar panels, vents, and mechanical and electric equipment are not recommended if they would be visible from the street. These items should be made less noticeable by minimizing the size and using subdued colors. Page 116 of 163 Design Guidelines for Historic Resources page 65 6.23 Locate downspouts to minimize impacts on historic canopies and other facade de -tails.• Water from downspouts should drain away from the building properly. • Ideally, a downspout should empty into an underground drainpipe that takes the water to the sewer or street. • If this is not possible, a downspout should empty onto a metal or concrete splashblock that slopes downward and away from the building. • Maintain and repair existing gutters and downspouts in place.• If existing gutter and downspouts are de-teriorated to the extent that they must be replaced, new gutters and downspouts shall match the original historic gutters and downspouts. They shall be of size and profile that would be characteristic of the period of significance.• Where built-in gutters exist and must be re-paired, repair or replace only those sections needing it, using similar materials to existing historic built-in gutters.• Note that galvanized half-round sheet metal gutters may in many cases be more appro-priate for historic buildings that had exposed gutters than the colonial profile aluminum gutters and downspouts commonly used today. 6.24 Regular maintenance and cleaning is the best way to keep your roof in good shape. • Inspect the roof for breaks, or holes in the surface, and check the flashing for open seams. • Many commercial buildings have shallow sloping flat roofs that are hard to see, so there is a tendency to forget about them until problems develop. • Clean debris from gutters and downspouts to prevent the backing up of water.• A roof should not hold water.• Patch leaks in the roof. This should be a high priority for ongoing building maintenance.• Replace deteriorated flashing.• Re-solder downspout connections to prevent water from leaking into walls. Page 117 of 163 City of Georgetown page 66 Historically, porches were popular features in residential designs. A porch protects an entrance from rain and provides shade in the summer. It also provides a sense of scale to the building and provides a space for residents to sit and con-gregate. A porch provides stylistic details to the house, and in some cases is an integral part of an architectural style. 6.25 Maintain an historic porch and its detail-ing.• Do not remove original details from a porch. These include the columns, balustrade, and any decorative brackets that may exist. • Maintain the existing location, shape, details, and columns of the porch. • Missing or deteriorated decorative elements should be replaced with new wood, milled to match existing elements. Match the original proportions and spacing of balusters when replacing missing ones. • Unless used historically, wrought iron porch posts and columns are inappropriate.• Where an historic porch does not meet cur-rent code requirements and alterations are needed or required, then retrofit it to meet the code, while also preserving original features. Do not replace a porch that can otherwise be modified to meet code requirements.• A missing porch and its steps should be re-constructed, using photographic documenta-tion and historical research, to be compatible in design and detail with the period and style of the building.• Most precast concrete steps are not ac-ceptable alternatives for primary façade porches.• Construction of a new non-original porch is usually inappropriate.• The construction of a non-original second or third level porch, balcony, deck, or sun porch on the roof of an existing front porch is inappropriate. Policy: Maintain a porch and its character-defining features. When replacing porch posts, use supports that are of adequate size. This porch reconstruction was based on neighboring houses of similar character and age. (Spartanburg, SC) This porch has experienced an inappropriate alteration; wrought iron supports have replaced wood piers. Compare it with its “twin” in the photo below. (Spartanburg, SC) Page 118 of 163 Design Guidelines for Historic Resources page 67 6.26 Avoid enclosing an historic front porch with opaque materials.• Enclosing a porch with opaque materials that destroy the openness and transparency of the porch is inappropriate.• If historic porches that have been enclosed in the past are proposed to be remodeled or altered, they should be restored to their ap-pearance during the period of significance, unless the enclosure, by nature of its age, architectural significance, or other special circumstance, has achieved historic signifi-cance of its own.• When a porch is enclosed or screened, it shall be done with a clear transparent mate-rial. This material should be placed behind porch columns. 6.27 The detailing of decks and exterior stairs should be compatible with the style and period of the structure. • The color and material of decks and stairs should complement the main structure.• New decks should be minimally visible from the street and should have no major impact on the original building. 6.28 Avoid altering original chimneys.• Existing brick chimneys should not be re-moved or covered with stone, stucco, or other non-original material.• If chimneys are damaged or missing they should be restored to their original condition or reconstructed in keeping with the chimney design of the period.. When a porch is enclosed or screened, it shall be done with a clear transparent material. This material should be placed behind porch columns. (Memphis, TN) Page 119 of 163 City of Georgetown page 68 Page 120 of 163 Design Guidelines for Additions & Alterations page 69 Chapter 7 Design guiDelines for ADAPtive re-use, ADDitions, & AlterAtions In This Chapter:Alterations 71Commercial Additions 75Residential Additions 77Adaptive Use 79 This chapter presents design guidelines for addi-tions and alterations to historic buildings. They ap-ply to individually listed historic resources, as well as historic properties located in the Downtown and Old Town Overlay Districts. The design guidelines are organized into a series of relevant design top-ics. Within each category, individual policies and design guidelines are presented, which the City will use in determining the appropriateness of the work proposed. Design of AlterationsAlterations may be considered for historic build-ings; however, these alterations should occur in a manner that will not diminish the historic integrity of the property and they should be reversible for future property owners. AdditionsMany buildings have experienced additions over time, as need for additional space occurred, par-ticularly with a change in use. An historic addition typically was subordinate in scale and character to the main building. The height of the addition was usually positioned below that of the main structure and it was often located to the side or rear, such that the primary facade remained dominate. An addition was often constructed of materials that were similar to those in use historically. In some cases, owners simply added on to an existing roof, creating more usable space without increasing the footprint of the structure. This tradition of adding on to buildings is anticipated to continue. It is im-portant, however, that new additions be designed in such a manner that they maintain the character of the primary structure. The compatibility of proposed additions with histor-ic buildings will be reviewed in terms of the mass, the scale, the materials, the color, the roof form, and the proportion and spacing of windows and doors. Additions that echo the style of the original structure and additions that introduce compatible contemporary design could be acceptable. Adaptive UseThe adaptive use of a residence for a commercial or office use is a distinct possibility in Georgetown. In fact, a large majority of the Downtown Overlay District is zoned Mixed Use Downtown (MU-DT), which allows for a variety of uses. However, when such adaptations occur, they should be designed to have the least impact on the historic character of a neighborhood—some of which is residential in character. Although for commercial use, these adapted properties should not be commercial in character. This means that the overall form of a building with a sloping roof and the landscaped front lawn should not be altered. More detailed information about the treatment of an adaptive use project can be found in the Design Guidelines, on page 79. Page 121 of 163 City of Georgetown page 70 Demolition/RelocationDemolition is forever, and once a building is gone it takes away another piece of the city’s charac-ter. Demolition of an historic building or resource should only be an action of last resort. HARC can delay or deny requests for demolition while it seeks solutions for preservation and rehabilitation. HARC should not allow the demolition or reloca-tion of any resource that has historical and/or architectural significance unless one or more of the following conditions exist and if, by a finding of HARC, the proposed demolition or relocation will materially improve or correct these conditions: 1. The resource constitutes a hazard to the safety of the public or the occupants, as determined by the Building Official.2. The resource is a deterrent to a major im-provement program that will be of substantial benefit to the community and the applicant proposing the work has obtained all neces-sary planning and zoning approvals, financ-ing, and environmental clearances.3. Retention of the resource will cause undue financial hardship to the owner when a gov-ernmental action, an act of God, or other events beyond the owner’s control created the hardship; and all feasible alternatives to eliminate the financial hardship, which may include offering the resource for sale at its fair market value or moving the resource to a vacant site within the historic district, have been attempted and exhausted by the owner.4. Retention of the resource is not in the interest of the majority of the community. HARC should consider the following when evalu-ating proposals to demolish or relocate historic resources: 1. Does the resource proposed for demolition or relocation have architectural and/or historical significance?2. What would be the effect on surrounding buildings of demolition or relocation of the resource?3. What would be the effect on the Overlay District as a whole of demolition or relocation of the resource?4. What would be the effect on safeguarding the heritage of the city of the demolition or relocation?5. What has been the impact of any previous inappropriate alterations?6. Has the owner offered the property for sale?7. Has the owner asked a fair price?8. Has the property been marketed for a rea-sonable time?9. Has the property been advertised broadly in a reasonable manner?10. Has the owner sought the advice of a profes-sional experienced in historic preservation work?11. What would be the effect of open space in that location if the lot is to be left open?12. What will be done with the empty lot?13. What would the effect of any proposed re-placement structure be to the community?14. What is the appropriateness of design of any proposed replacement structure to the Overlay District? Page 122 of 163 Design Guidelines for Additions & Alterations page 71 Policy: Design an alteration to be compatible with the historic character of the property. Storefront windows were reopened and upper-story windows were repaired. (Ft. Collins, CO) The windows in this structure were boarded and architectural details needed repair. (Compare with the photo below.) 7.1 Avoid alterations that would damage his-toric features.• Avoid alterations that would hinder the abil-ity to interpret the design character of the original building.• Alterations that seek to imply an earlier pe-riod than that of the building are inappropri-ate. 7.2 Properties designated by the City as a High or Medium Priority Historic Structure should be preserved and their historic char-acter retained.• Due to special circumstances, a structure’s historic priority may change over time (be-cause a reduced number of similar style structures in stable condition still exist within the district or city, or if unknown historic information becomes available that adds significance). After rehabilitation, the row of buildings shown in the photograph above conveys a stronger sense of its historic character. Note that some old uses were retained, while other new uses were also introduced. Some noncontributing alterations were removed and storefronts reconstructed. One was retained, but was painted to minimize impacts. (Ft. Collins, CO) This row of buildings had lost some details over time and a monochromatic color scheme obscures the original design character. Overhead garage doors that had replaced original storefronts were later alterations without historic significance. (Compare with the “after” photograph below.) Page 123 of 163 City of Georgetown page 72 Photo (circa 1900) - A modest building can also be renovated to be compatible with the context. In this photograph the original millinery shop front had simple moldings at the top. (Compare with the photos to the right and below.) Design of Alterations, continued... Photo (circa 1980) - Years later, all original detail had been stripped from the building. (Compare with the photos below.) Photo (circa 1982) - An interim renovation recalls the original molded cornice and includes a simple kickplate. In 2009, a more extensive rehabilitation includes a brick molding and a more detailed kickplate. Page 124 of 163 Design Guidelines for Additions & Alterations page 73 Rehabilitation Case Study 1885 Condition In this case study, the application of the preservation guidelines is demonstrated for a major rehabilitation project. The Stromberg and Hoffman Company Building, at 718 Austin Avenue, was constructed in the late nineteenth century (circa 1885). Early photographs show a handsome Victorian-era facade, with decorative cornice. 1920s (20th Century) Condition In the early twentieth century, the front was substantially altered. Decorative masonry was applied in simple rectilinear patterns, evocative of some craftsman styles popular at the time. In keeping with that approach, windows were installed with divided lights in the upper portions and a multi-paned transom was constructed above the display windows. The new display windows included a stone base and metal frames. A center island display element was the focal point of the ground level. 2001 Existing Condition In the later part of the 20th century, however, the facade was covered, obscuring the upper floor details. The key elements of the street level display windows remained, although the center island was removed. 2009 Restoration in Progress In 2009, rehabilitation in progress illustrates the principle of removing non-contributing coverings. Original details are revealed. 21st Century Proposal The early 20th century design serves as the basis for the rehabilitation. Although an earlier design is documented in photographs, no significant features from that period survive. The second-generation facade, the early twentieth-century design, has taken on historic significance of its own, and substantial portions survive. In the rehabilitation design, the covering material is removed, exposing original details. Page 125 of 163 City of Georgetown page 74 Rehabilitation Case Study After: In the sketch of the proposed rehabilitation, brick veneer at the ground level is removed and a new storefront, using metal and wood frame elements, is constructed to be similar in character to that seen historically. The display windows are reopened, as well as the transoms above them. Kickplates with decorative trim are reconstructed and a horizontal canopy shades the sidewalk. The stone above is cleaned, using a gentle wash technique and mortar is repointed, using a mix that matches the original in composition and appearance. The corner entry is preserved as well. Before: This example, of the McDougal-Booty Building at 120 West 8th Street (photographed in 2001), illustrates the application of the rehabilitation principles for historic buildings. In this case, significant details of the upper floor are intact; these include a decorative cornice and trim around upper story windows. The stone above the storefront also survives. In contrast, the lower floor has experienced alterations: Display windows are enclosed and the original kickplates are missing. Page 126 of 163 Design Guidelines for Additions & Alterations page 75 Policy: Minimize the visual impacts of an addition to a commercial building. New roof-top addition set back from the front facade. New ground-level additions to the side and rear. Where a building is set back from the front property line, the first consideration for the placement of an addition should be to fill the gap between the existing building and sidewalk. Two distinct types of additions are considered to be appropriate by HARC: ground-level or roof-top. First, a ground-level addition that involves expand-ing the footprint of a structure may be considered. Such an addition should be to the rear or side of a building. This will have the least impact on the character of a building, but there may only be limited opportunities to do this. Second, an addition to the roof may be designed that is simple in character and set back substan-tially from the front of a building. The materials, window sizes and alignment of trim elements on the addition should be compatible to those of the existing structure, but also visually subordinate in character so as to avoid calling attention alteration to the addition. Another option, which will only be considered on a case-by-case basis, is to design an addition to the front wall plane of the existing building. This option may only be considered on a “newer” or more contemporary building that was originally constructed set back from the front property line or sidewalk edge. 7.3 An addition shall be compatible in scale, materials, and character with the main build-ing.• An addition shall relate to the building in mass, scale, and form. It should be designed to remain subordinate to the main struc-ture. • An addition to the front of a building is inap-propriate. However, where a building in the Downtown Overlay is set back from the front property line and the structure does not have historic significance, the first consideration for the placement of an addition should be to fill the gap between the existing building and sidewalk. This will maintain the consistent “street wall” desired in the downtown.• For example, mounting a sign panel in a manner that causes decorative moldings to be chipped or removed would be inappropri-ate. Page 127 of 163 City of Georgetown page 76 7.4 An addition shall not damage or obscure architecturally important features.• For example, loss or alteration of a cornice line should be avoided. 7.5 An addition may be made to the roof of a commercial building if it does the following:• An addition should be set back from the pri-mary, character-defining facade, to preserve the perception of the historic scale of the building.• Its design should be modest in character, so it will not attract attention from the historic facade.• The addition should be distinguishable as new, albeit in a subtle way.• The roofs of additions should not interfere with the original roof form by changing its basic shape and should have a roof form compatible with the original building. In the angle view above, two newer floors are visible. Note how in this building the addition cannot be seen when looking at the building straight on in the top photo. (Denver, CO) This historic, three-story building has a two-story addition that is set back from the front. Page 128 of 163 Design Guidelines for Additions & Alterations page 77 Policy: Design an addition to a residential structure to be compatible with the primary building. Design a new addition such that the original character can be clearly seen. This addition to the front of the historic structure is inappropriate. An addition to a structure can radically change its perceived scale and character if inappropriately designed. When planning an addition, consider the effect the addition will have on the building itself. When creating an addition, keep the size of the ad-dition small, in relation to the main structure. If an addition must be larger, it should be set apart from the main structure and connected with a smaller linking element. A design for a new addition that would create an appearance inconsistent with the character of the building, especially an historic one, is discouraged. One also should consider the effect the addition may have on the character of a street or neighbor-hood, as seen from the public right-of-way. For example, a side addition may change the sense of rhythm established by side yards in the block. Locating the addition to the rear could be a better solution in such a case. 7.6 Design a new addition such that the origi-nal character can be clearly seen.• In this way, a viewer can understand the history of changes that have occurred to the building.• An addition should be made distinguishable from the original building, even in subtle ways, such that the character of the original can be interpreted. • Creating a jog in the foundation between the original and new structures may help to define an addition.• The amount of foundation exposed on the addition should match that of the original building, in appearance, detail, and mate-rial.• Even applying a new trim board at the con-nection point between the addition and the original structure can help define the addi-tion.• See also Preservation Briefs #14: New Exte- rior Additions to Historic Buildings, published by the National Park Service. Page 129 of 163 City of Georgetown page 78 7.7 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impacts.• Setting an addition back from any primary, character-defining façade will allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent.• Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate, and an addition should be to the rear of the building, when feasible. 7.8 Do not obscure, damage, destroy, or re-move original architectural details and materi-als of the primary structure.• When preserving original details and materi-als, follow the guidelines presented earlier in this chapter. 7.9 An addition shall be compatible in scale, materials, and character with the main build-ing.• An addition shall relate to the historic build-ing in mass, scale, and form. It should be designed to remain subordinate to the main structure. • While a smaller addition is visually prefer-able, if a residential addition would be sig-nificantly larger than the original building, one option is to separate it from the primary building, when feasible, and then link it with a smaller connecting structure.• An addition should be simple in design to prevent it from competing with the primary facade.• Consider adding dormers to create second story spaces before changing the scale of the building by adding a full second floor. Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impacts. An addition shall be set back from any primary, character-defining facade. An addition should be to the rear of the building, when feasible. (Durango, CO) An addition should be simple in design to prevent it from competing with the primary facade. Although this is a new building, it demonstrates the effective use of a connector Page 130 of 163 Design Guidelines for Additions & Alterations page 79 Policy: When adapting a residence to a commercial use, respect the residential character of the building. 7.10 The roof form of a new addition shall be in character with that of the primary building.• Typically, gable, hip, and shed roofs are ap-propriate for residential additions. Flat roofs are appropriate for commercial buildings in the downtown area.• Repeat existing roof slopes, overhangs, and materials.• If the roof of the primary building is symmetri-cally proportioned, the roof of the addition should be similar. • The roofs of additions should not interfere with the original roof form by changing its basic shape or view of the original roof, and should have a roof form compatible with the original building. Converting a building to a new use that is different from that which its design reflects is considered to be “adaptive use.” When residential use ceases to be viable, the first preference is to choose new uses that minimize the negative changes in build-ing features. Often there are new uses that are inherently less disruptive to residential structures such as bed and breakfasts, professional offices, small specialty restaurants, and personal service businesses. 7.11 Seek uses that are compatible with the historic character of the building.• The primary goal should be to preserve the original residential character, appearance, and scale of the structure. • Building uses that are closely related to the original use are preferred. Avoid radical al-terations to either the interior or exterior of the structure.• Avoid altering porches and original windows and doors. Seek uses that are compatible with the historic character of the building. The openness of a front yard should be preserved for example. A new use that requires a large number of parking spaces is not a compatible use. Page 131 of 163 City of Georgetown page 80 7.12 When use changes demand that struc-tures be altered such that little or no use can be made of the original structure, consider mov-ing the structure to a compatible location. • This move can be made to another location on the same site or to a vacant site in another neighborhood. 7.13 Only as a last resort should an historic structure be considered for demolition.• Demolition of any original feature or part of an historic building should be avoided.• Demolition of a building that contributes to the historic or architectural significance of a locally or nationally designated district should not occur, unless:+ Public safety and welfare requires the removal of the building or structure;+ The building has lost its architectural and historical value/significance and its removal will improve the viability of the neighborhood;+ A building does not contribute to the historical or architectural character and importance of the district and its removal will improve the appearance of the neigh-borhood; or+ The denial of the demolition will result in a substantial hardship on the applicant as determined by the process outlined in the City’s Unified Development Code. When adapting a residence to a commercial use, respect the residential character of the building by preserving the overall form of the building, the front porch and front yard character. • Where a structure must be razed, then a record shall be made of it prior to any de-construction or demolition. The owner shall be responsible for providing the record, which shall include, but is not limited to, photographs, architectural drawings, and deed records, if available. This record shall be deposited with the Planning and Develop-ment Department.• A structure should never be demolished as a matter of convenience.• If a demolition is approved, work with HARC to identify salvageable materials and poten-tial buyers or recipients of salvaged materi-als. The removal of all salvageable building materials before demolition is encouraged, through a proper demolition by deconstruc-tion method as determined by HARC at the public hearing, and may be required depend-ing on the significance of the building.• Preserve historic garages and other second-ary buildings where feasible.• Demolition of secondary buildings (garages, etc.) 50 years or older may be appropriate if substantially deteriorated (requiring 50% or more replacement of exterior siding, roof rafters, surface materials, and structure members).• Relocating buildings within the Overlay Dis-tricts may be appropriate if compatible with the district’s architectural character through style, period, height, scale, materials, setting, and placement on the lot.• Relocation of a building out of the Overlay Districts should be avoided unless demolition is the only alternative.• See also Unified Development Code Sec-tion 3.13 for demolition or relocation criteria, standards, and procedures. Page 132 of 163 Design Guidelines for Infill Construction in Area 2 page 129 This chapter presents design guidelines that apply to Area 2, the ring of streets and blocks that en-circle the Town Square Historic District. The design guidelines are organized into a series of relevant design topics. Within each category, individual poli-cies and design guidelines are presented, which the City will use in determining the appropriateness of the work proposed. However, if your property is located within the boundaries of the Town Square Historic District (Area 1) and you are considering a new construc-tion project, then please consult Chapter 12 for the relevant design guidelines, instead of this chapter. If your project is in the Old Town Overlay District please consult Chapter 14 for the relevant design guidelines, instead of this chapter. This area has emerged from a heritage of residen-tial buildings and then later structures that were commercial in nature, but developed at a relatively low density, with substantial portions of land given over to automobiles. In more recent years, the area has developed with a mix of uses, including offices, retail, and some residential. While many of the buildings are relatively new, some older struc-tures survive, which contribute to a pedestrian-orientation and may in some cases have historic significance. Preserving these resources should be encouraged and, when feasible, they should be incorporated in new developments. Chapter 13 Design guiDelines for infill construction in AreA 2 - Downtown overlAy historic District In This Chapter:Building setbacks 132Mass and scale 133Building materials 135Pedestrian-friendly character 136Transitional character 137Applying the guidelines 140 See the Downtown Master Plan for specific design information related to infill development in the downtown. Page 133 of 163 City of Georgetown page 130 The area should continue to develop with a mix of uses and improvements should occur in a manner that enhances the experience for pedestrians and to build a sense of visual relatedness among prop-erties. Even though automobile circulation routes significantly affect the character, it is still possible to strengthen pedestrian links and to improve the edges of properties such that a sense of human scale is conveyed. In those portions of Area 2 that developed as residential blocks a “transitional” character—a blend between commercial and residential struc-tures—should be seen. Rather than constructing a storefront type building in these blocks with predominantly residential characteristics, a new design should relate to the traditional design characteristics of surrounding buildings while also conveying the stylistic trends of today. Design GoalsThose commercial streets in Area 2 surrounding the Town Square Historic District should develop in a manner that is inviting to pedestrians while also accommodating automobiles. Development should include a mix of building types, including older structures and more contemporary ones. Each should reflect the design trends of its own time, while also contributing to a sense of visual continu-ity and strengthening the pedestrian experience. In addition, a combination of uses is encouraged, including residential, office, and retail. The design goals for Area 2 are:• To define the sidewalk edge with elements that are amenities for pedestrians. • To establish a sense of scale in buildings and streetscape design that can be understood by pedestrians.• To minimize the visual impacts of automo-biles.• To strengthen the pedestrian network of sidewalks, plazas, and paths.• Retain native vegetation with project de-sign.• Maintain the feel of historic surroundings, for example if the area is predominately con-verted residential structures the residential appearance, scale, and character should remain.• To utilize similar building materials, store-front design, recessed entries, and front setbacks. Building SetbacksA wide variety of building setbacks can be seen throughout Area 2. Much of this variety is due to the influence of the automobile and the need to provide on-site parking. This parking typically has been provided in front of the building for consumer convenience. However, this trend erodes the view of the edge of buildings located along a sidewalk as was seen historically. Therefore, it is strongly encouraged that new developments in Area 2 should build on this tradition and locate buildings at the front lot line. Page 134 of 163 Design Guidelines for Infill Construction in Area 2 page 131 Mass and ScaleA variety of building sizes exist in this area. While contemporary design approaches are encouraged, developments should continue to exhibit a variety of in sizes, similar to the buildings seen historically and traditionally. Building MaterialsBuilding materials of structures should contribute to the visual continuity of the area. They should ap-pear similar to those seen traditionally to establish a sense of visual continuity. Architectural CharacterCommercial buildings throughout the Downtown Overlay District should relate to one another through the consistent use of similar building materials, storefronts, recessed entries, and the alignment of these different elements along a block. This tradition is strongly encouraged for new developments in Area 2. One of the concerns in building design is that when national chain companies or their franchises construct buildings in Area 2 that they do so in a way that reinforces the design traditions of George-town. Some typical issues and negative impacts often associated with national chain or commercial franchise designs include:• Bright logo colors are used over large ex-panses of a building.• Large blank walls on “big box” buildings are bland and out of scale, and discourage pe-destrian activity.• Buildings are surrounded by parking lots and cars. Primary entrances are typically oriented to these parking lots, rather than to the street.• Metal panels and large areas of featureless stucco are often used and these are out of character and not of human scale. Instead, these building types shall comply with the design guidelines that follow. Pedestrian EnvironmentArea 2 should provide a controlled, organized automobile system which provides a safe pedes-trian environment. Streets, sidewalks, lighting, and landscaping should define the road edge and encourage walking, sitting, and other pedestrian activities. Projects that can occur in the area also may have automobile activity associated with them. This should not, however, make it an unsafe environ-ment for the pedestrian or cyclist. Automobile circu-lation patterns, both internal and external, should be clearly identified and should not interfere with pedestrian or cyclist circulation systems. Page 135 of 163 City of Georgetown page 132 Policy: A new building should maintain the wall of buildings at the sidewalk edge. Continuity of design within the Downtown Overlay District is a goal of the city, both in terms of con-necting individual projects and town blocks. Not only should a new building in Area 2 be located at the sidewalk edge, but it should be designed to provide visual interest. 13.1 Locate a new building at the front prop-erty line.• Align the building front at the sidewalk edge.• A minimum of 50% of the street frontage of a property shall have a building wall at the sidewalk edge.• Where no sidewalk exists one should be installed that aligns with nearby sidewalks. 13.2 Where a portion of a building must be set back, define the edge of the property with landscape elements.• For example, define the edges of a lot with landscaping, such as low-scale urban street trees or shrubs.• Landscaping elements should be compat-ible with the character of the area in size, scale, and type. Free-form, suburban type landscaping is inappropriate in this setting.• Also consider using a fence, or other struc-tural element, that reflects the position of typical storefront elements. These elements should align with nearby traditional commer-cial building types. Also consider using fence, or other structural element, that reflects typical storefront elements. Define the edges of a lot with landscaping, such as low-scale urban street trees or shrubs. (Georgetown, Washington, DC) A minimum of 50% of the street frontage of a property shall have a building wall at the sidewalk edge. Building Parking A new building should contribute to a pedestrian friendly environment by providing an active street edge. (2008) Page 136 of 163 Design Guidelines for Infill Construction in Area 2 page 133 Policy: The overall mass of a new building should convey a sense of human scale. Buildings in the downtown should appear similar in height and width to commercial structures seen traditionally in Area 1. 13.3 A new building shall reflect the traditional lot width as expressed by the following:• Variation in height at internal lot lines.• Variation in the plane of the front façade.• Variation in architectural detailing and materi-als to emphasize the building module.• Variation in the façade height to reflect tra-ditional lot width. 13.4 Building heights of larger projects should provide variety. • A larger development should step down in height towards the street or smaller, sur-rounding structures.• Vary the building height in accordance with traditional lot width.• Set back the upper floor to vary the building façade profile(s) and the roof forms across the width and the depth of the building.• Vary the façade (or parapet) heights at the front. Divide a larger building into “modules” that are similar in scale to buildings seen traditionally. Consider dividing a larger building into “modules” that are similar in scale to buildings seen traditionally. Page 137 of 163 City of Georgetown page 134 13.5 Large project sites should be developed with several buildings, rather than a single structure.• This will help reduce the perceived size of the project.• The façade height shall be varied to reflect traditional lot width. 13.6 Where a large building is needed, divide the building into modules that reflect the tra-ditional size of buildings.• A typical building module should not exceed 30 feet in width. The building module should be expressed with at least one of the follow-ing: - A setback in wall planes of a minimum of 3 feet - A change in primary facade material for the extent of the building module - A vertical architectural element or trim piece• Variations in facade treatment should be continued through the structure, including its roofline and front and rear facades.• If a larger building is divided into “modules,” they should be expressed three-dimension-ally throughout the entire building. Variation in height should occur where the site is larger than two traditional lot widths, in order to reduce overall scale of the building. 13.7 Maintain views to the courthouse.• In certain circumstances views to the court-house shall be taken into consideration when designing a new building.• A new building shall not be so tall as to block views of the courthouse. A method of achieving height variation within a single building is to step the building along the primary façade. Note: See UDC Section 4.12 Courthouse View Protection Overlay District. Subdividing a larger building mass into smaller “modules” that are similar in size to buildings seen traditionally is encouraged. (Danville, CA) Page 138 of 163 Design Guidelines for Infill Construction in Area 2 page 135 Masonry materials that convey a sense of scale are preferred. (Boulder, CO) New materials should appear similar in character to those used traditionally. For example, stucco, cast stone, and concrete should be detailed to provide a human scale. New materials should relate to the scale, durability, color and texture of the predominate materials of downtown. 13.8 Masonry materials that convey a sense of scale are preferred.• Brick and stone are preferred for new con-struction. • New materials should appear similar in char-acter to those used traditionally. For example, stucco, cast stone, and concrete should be detailed to provide a human scale.• New materials should have a demonstrated durability for the Central Texas climate. For example, some facade materials used in new construction are more susceptible to weather and simply do not last as long as stone or brick. 13.9 A simple material finish is encouraged for a large expanse of wall plane.• A matte, or non-reflective, finish is pre -ferred. • Polished stone and mirrored glass, for example, are inappropriate and should be avoided as primary materials. 13.10 Traditional building materials such as wood, brick, and stone are encouraged.• Horizontal lap siding of traditional dimensions is appropriate in most applications. • Maintenance of traditional siding dimensions are encouraged.• Brick or stone, similar to that used tradition-ally, is also appropriate.• Highly reflective materials are inappropri-ate.• New materials that are similar in character to traditional ones may be considered. Alterna-tive materials should have a proven durability in similar locations in this climate. Policy: Building materials for new construction should be visually compatible with the predominate materials of this area. Page 139 of 163 City of Georgetown page 136 Policy: A new building should contribute to a pedestrian-friendly environment by providing an active street edge. 13.11 Use roof materials that appear similar to those seen traditionally.• Metal and shingle roofs are preferred. • Clay tile is discouraged. Consider using display cases on the ground floor where an active storefront is not a possibility. (Boulder, CO) A new building—such as this gas station in downtown Boulder, CO—that draws upon the fundamental characteristics of building in Georgetown is encouraged. The downtown should continue to develop as a pedestrian-oriented environment. Streets and sidewalks should encourage walking, sitting, and other outdoor activities. Buildings also should be visually interesting to invite exploration by pe-destrians. Existing pedestrian routes should be enhanced. These are important concepts because buildings are experienced at close proximity by pedestrians. 13.12 Develop the ground floor level of a proj-ect to encourage pedestrian activity. • Provide at least one of the following along primary pedestrian ways: - A storefront - Display cases - Landscaping - A courtyard or plaza• Include traditional elements such as display windows, kickplates, and transoms on com-mercial storefronts.• Avoid a blank wall or vacant lot appear-ance. 13.13 Orient the primary entrance of a building toward the street.• A building should have a clearly-defined primary entrance. • The building entrance should be recessed. • A primary building entrance also should be at or near street level. 13.14 Clearly identify the road edge and project entrances for both automobiles and pedestrians.• Use landscaping and lighting accents to identify entrances. Page 140 of 163 Design Guidelines for Infill Construction in Area 2 page 137 Buildings shall convey a sense of human scale. Provide a one-story entry element that is similar in size to those seen traditionally. (Boulder, CO) Policy: In those portions of Area 2 that developed as residential blocks a “transitional” character—a blend between commercial and residential structures—should be seen. A building shall fit within the range of yard dimensions seen in the block. (Boulder, CO) 13.15 Minimize the number of entrances along a street edge.• Sharing ingress and egress points with neighboring projects is strongly encouraged with consideration to safety. 13.16 Place parking areas to the rear of a site when feasible or disburse throughout the site.• See also the design guidelines for Parking found in Chapter 8. Several blocks of Area 2 were originally part of a single-family neighborhood. It is now, in essence, a place of transition between the true commercial core of the Downtown Overlay District and the surrounding residential neighborhoods. Although commercial uses are expected throughout Area 2, residential-type structures still establish the architectural tone for many of the blocks. There-fore, new developments should sensitively relate to these traditions while also building upon com-mercial characteristics seen elsewhere in the downtown. Variation in height should occur where the site is larger than two traditional lot widths, in order to reduce overall scale of the building. 13.17 A building shall fit within the range of yard dimensions seen in the block.• The front yard setback of a new building should match the established range of ad-jacent buildings. • Where the setbacks are uniform, the new building should be placed in general align-ment with its neighbors. • In those areas where setbacks vary slightly, but generally fall within an established range, the new building should be within 10 feet of the typical setback in the block. Page 141 of 163 City of Georgetown page 138 13.18 Buildings shall convey a sense of hu-man scale. • Use building materials that are of traditional dimensions.• Provide a one-story entry element that is similar in size to those seen traditionally.• Use a building mass that is similar in size to those seen traditionally.• Use elements that provide a sense of scale. 13.19 Building heights of larger projects should provide variety. • A larger development should step down in height towards the street or smaller, surround-ing structures. Height varied between two and three stories. Buildings on sites larger than two traditional lot widths should be designed to reflect the traditional scale of development. Page 142 of 163 Design Guidelines for Infill Construction in Area 2 page 139 13.20 Sloping roofs such as gable and hipped roofs are appropriate for primary roof forms.• A blending of sloping roof forms and flat roofs may be appropriate for larger projects. 13.21 A porch on a converted residential structure should remain in place. • Retain the original residential integrity of the building. 13.22 New interpretations of traditional build-ing styles are encouraged.• A new design that draws upon the fun -damental similarities among commercial and residential buildings in the community without copying them is preferred. This will allow them to be seen as products of their own time yet compatible with their historic neighbors. New interpretations of traditional building styles are encouraged. (Boulder, CO) Develop the ground-floor level of a project to encourage pedestrian activity. Consider providing a courtyard or plaza where a building’s entrance must be setback. (Boulder, CO) Traditional building materials such as wood, brick, and stone are encouraged (2008). Page 143 of 163 City of Georgetown page 140 The first case study, in Danville, California, includes the redevelopment of two blocks along a major arterial, which parallels the historic Main Street. Design standards required that new buildings be constructed at the sidewalk edge. This row of new, double-fronted buildings defines the sidewalk edge of a major arterial street in Danville, California. The building is also divided into modules that reflect the traditional building characteristics. Seen from the interior parking lot, the “second” storefront facade is apparent. The edge of the infill site in Danville reveals the parking area, which is located in the interior of the lot and accessed between the two rows of buildings. Applying the Design Guidelines: How may the infill guidelines be applied in real situations? The design guidelines for new commercial construction in Area 2 presented in this chapter can be combined to develop a comprehensive program of development of a property. The images on the following pages depict two infill examples from other communities and a potential infill development scenario for Georgetown. These examples all address situations where auto-oriented areas have re-developed to appeal more to pedestrians. Page 144 of 163 Design Guidelines for Infill Construction in Area 2 page 141 Application of guidelines for a new development in Area 2In this example, the guidelines for new development in Area 2 are applied to an entire block. The as-sumption is that the entire block is developed as a single project, although similar results could occur with cooperative development among individual property owners. The focus of the project is providing a mix of uses, including retail at the street level, and offices and residences above. The structure is divided into a series of “modules” that reflect the traditional widths of buildings constructed in the downtown. Canopies and awnings align along the first floor level, providing a sense of visual continuity while also sheltering the sidewalk. Building heights vary among one and two story segments. This creates variety in massing and also creates some upper level balconies and decks. A corner plaza contributes to the open space; this could be outdoor seating for a café. While “notches” such as this are provided along the street, the majority of the street wall is defined with storefronts, to define the pedestrian zone. A limited amount of parking is provided in the interior of the lot, in an auto court. The remainder of the parking would be provided off-site, preferably in a civic parking structure. corner plaza canopies & awnings buildin g m o d u l e s Canopies and awnings align along the first floor level, providing a sense of visual continuity while also sheltering the sidewalk. interior of block parking shared loading facility building entrances building entrances Page 145 of 163 City of Georgetown page 142 Application of guidelines for a new development in Area 2In this example, the guidelines for new development in Area 2 are applied to an entire block. The assumption is that the entire block is developed as individual projects that adhere to one overall de-velopment plan. Compared with the development scenario on the opposite page, this particular infill scheme includes a lower density of buildings with a landscaped street edge. The key to this scenario is the use of “anchor” buildings at the corner of all lots. Such a development could include commercial uses (such as retail) on the ground levels of buildings and office space or residential units on upper floors. primary auto access from alley landscaping buffers parking lots buildings anchor corners outdoor activity space commercial buildings align at sidewalk edge Page 146 of 163 Design Guidelines for Infill Construction in Area 2 page 143 Application of guidelines for a new “transitional character” developmentIn this example, the guidelines for a new “transitional” development in Area 2 are applied to an entire block. The assumption is that the entire block is developed as a single project, although similar results could occur with cooperative development among individual property owners. This mixed-use project would provide neighborhood-oriented commercial and residential units. This building complex complements the nearby single-family residential neighborhood in that it steps down in height on the block face nearest the residences and incorporates sloping roof forms. The residential units also incorporate one-story porches and small front yards. The parking is located to the interior of the lot and would be buffered along the street edge. Commercial uses - which include office and retail space - are mostly located on the ground floor and several residential units are located on the second floor. residential units front porches interior parking lot commercial ground floor uses sloping roof forms residential and office uses on upper floors mixed-use buildings residential units interior parking lot Page 147 of 163 City of Georgetown page 144 Page 148 of 163 TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION County Williamson Local District:Downtown District Address:1102 S Austin Ave 2016 Survey ID:123490 City Georgetown HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY FORM 2016 Preservation Priority:Low SECTION 1 Basic Inventory Information WCAD ID:R089981Property Type:Building Structure Object Site District Date Recorded 3/4/2016Recorded by:CMEC EstimatedActual Source:WCADConstruction Date:1965 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 page 2 General Notes: Explain Property lacks significance and integrity Geographic Location Latitude:30.633761 Longitude -97.678319 Current/Historic Name:None/None High Medium Priority: Low High Medium Low ID Not Recorded ID Not Recorded 2007 Survey 1984 Survey ID 123490 2016 Survey High Medium Low Photo direction: Northwest Page 149 of 163 TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION County Williamson Local District:Downtown District Address:1102 S Austin Ave 2016 Survey ID:123490 City Georgetown HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY FORM 2016 Preservation Priority:Low Additional Photos SouthwestPhoto Direction Page 150 of 163 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review January 25, 2018 SUBJECT: Public Hearing a nd possible action on a reques t for a Certific ate of Ap p ro p riatenes s (COA) fo r the d emo lition of a garage loc ated at 204 E 8th, b earing the legal desc rip tion of 0.33 ac . Glassc oc k Addition, Blo ck 9, Lot 7 - 8. - Nat Waggo ner, AICP, Lo ng R ange P lanner ITEM SUMMARY: The garage lo c ated at 204 E 7th Street, is identified as a lo w p rio rity struc ture in the City’s 2016 Histo ric Resources Surveys Reports (HRS R). This ac c es s o ry s tructure, estimated to have b een b uilt in 1930, was used as a garage fo r a two sto ry res id enc e, known as the P.J Anderson Hous e. T he hous e was later converted into a c ommerc ial build ing. The primary s truc ture was heavily damaged b y fire in 2016 and s ubsequently demolis hed . T he garage has been heavily mo d ified over time inc luding the replac ement of the wood s id ing with c ementitio us fib er board and the ad d ition of mo d ern metal garage d o o rs . Rehab ilitatio n o f the s tructure wo uld req uire rep lacing many o f the o riginal struc tural materials , fully remo ving the his toric fab ric o f the s truc ture. T he s tructure d o es not pos s es s any signific ant arc hitec tural features, no r does it rep res ent the wo rk o f a s p ecific arc hitect or c rafts man. T he ap p licant als o notes in their s ubmittal that the s tructure is wired with a F ed eral P acific breaker b o x, whic h are prone to arc ing and failure. Public Comments As required by the Unified Development Code, all p roperty owners within a 200 fo o t radius of the sub jec t p ro p erty that are loc ated within City limits were notified of the rezoning app lic atio n (24 no tic es mailed), and o ne (1) sign was posted o n-site o n January 8, 2018. To date, s taff has rec eived two (2) written c o mments in s upport of demolitio n fro m the interes ted pub lic . S ee Exhib it 4. Findings This low priority s truc ture no longer c ontributes to the s ignificanc e o f the area as the primary s tructure it s upported was d es troyed in a fire in 2016. The s truc ture has been heavily o ver time; lacking architec tural integrity. T he HARC Demo lition Sub co mmittee inc lud ing the HPO and Chief Build ing Offic ial conferred o n 11/15/2017 and found little salvage o r relo c atio n value in the s tructure. FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Nat Waggoner, PMP, AICP ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Exhibit 1 - Location Map Exhibit Exhibit 2- Letter of Intent and Supporting Materials Exhibit Exhibit 3 - Demolition Subcommittee Report Exhibit Page 151 of 163 Exhibit 4 - HPO Report Exhibit Exhibit 5 - Public Comment Exhibit Page 152 of 163 EL M ST A SH ST R O C K S T E 7 TH ST E 5 TH ST E 8 TH ST E 6 TH ST S M A I N S T S M Y R TL E S T S C H U R C H S T S A U S T I N AV E S C O L L E G E S T WAL NUT S T W 9T H S T W 8T H S T W 6T H S T W 11TH ST W 10T H S T W 7T H ST E 1 0T H S T E 1 1 T H S T E U N IV ER S IT Y AV E MA R T I N L U TH E R KI N G JR S T FORE S T S T W U N I V E R SI TY AV E W 5 T H S T PI N E ST E 9 T H S T E 9 TH 1/2 S T T I N B A R N A LY WA L N U T S T F O R E S T S T P I N E S T E 1 0T H S T E 11T H S T E 9 TH ST E 9 T H S T COA-2017-033Exhibit #1 Coordi nate System : Texas State Plane/Centr al Zone/N AD 83/U S FeetCartographic Data For G eneral Plann ing Pu rpo ses Only ¯ Location Map LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ 0 500 1,000Feet Page 153 of 163 October 18, 2017 The Historic and Architectural Review Commission c/o Ms. Sofia Nelson, CNU-A Planning Director Dear Commissioners, The owners of the property at 204 East 8th Street are excited to present a new infill project for the Downtown Overlay District. This project will provide new retail and residential opportunities for Georgetown and continue the development patterns outlined in the 2013 Downtown Master Plan. The Master Plan identifies the blocks surrounding the property as an important opportunity area, utilizing the existing development as an anchor to draw new projects to the district. The upcoming sale and redevelopment of the historic US Post Office, currently utilized as the City of Georgetown municipal offices, provide a great opportunity for private investment to enhance the east side of the district. The project requires the demolition of an existing accessory structure on the site. The primary structure was heavily damaged by fire in 2016 and previously demolished. The existing structure is identified as a Low Priority historic structure on the 2016 Historic Resource Survey. The wood frame structure was constructed ca 1930, and has been heavily modified over time. Rehabilitation of the structure would require replacing many of the original materials, removing the historic fabric of the structure. The structure does not possess any significant architectural features, nor does it represent the work of a specific architect or craftsman. The exterior cladding consists of cementitious fiber siding, and modern metal garage doors. In addition, the structure is wired with a Federal Pacific breaker box, which are prone to arcing and failure. The attached photos document the current condition of the structure, including the deterioration of existing materials and the lack of character defining features. The proposed project complies with the Unified Development Code, and the Downtown and Old Town Design Guidelines, and creates a mixed-use project as envisioned by the Downtown Master Plan. Thank you for your service to the City of Georgetown. We look forward to your approval and the completion of this project. Sincerely, 204 East 8th Street Project Team Page 154 of 163 TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION County Williamson Local District:Downtown District Address:204 E 8th St 2016 Survey ID:124055 B City Georgetown HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY FORM 2016 Preservation Priority:Low SECTION 1 Basic Inventory Information WCAD ID:R042441Property Type:Building Structure Object Site District Date Recorded 3/2/2016Recorded by:CMEC EstimatedActual Source:previous surveyConstruction Date:1930 Bungalow Other Center Passage Shotgun Open2-roomModified L-plan Rectangular T-plan Four Square L-plan Irregular Plan International Ranch No Style Post-war Modern Commercial Style Other Pueblo Revival Prairie Art Deco Spanish Colonial Craftsman Moderne Gothic Revival Neo-Classical Mission Tudor Revival Beaux Arts Monterey Shingle Folk Victorian Renaissance Revival Romanesque Revival Colonial Revival Exotic Revival Log traditional Italianate Eastlake Greek Revival Second Empire Queen Anne Stylistic Influence(s) General Notes: Explain:Property lacks significance Geographic Location Latitude:30.636228 Longitude -97.675642 Current/Historic Name:None/None High Medium Priority: Low High Medium Low ID 181b ID Not Recorded 2007 Survey 1984 Survey ID 124055 B2016 Survey High Medium Low Photo direction: South Page 155 of 163 Page 156 of 163 Page 157 of 163 Page 158 of 163 Page 159 of 163 Page 160 of 163 Page 161 of 163 Page 162 of 163 Page 163 of 163