HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_HARC_02.22.2018Notice of Meeting for the
Historic and Architectural Rev iew Commission
of the City of Georgetown
February 22, 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 January 25, 2018 HARC meeting. Karen Frost, Rec o rd ing
Secretary
C Public Hearing and pos s ible ac tion o n a reques t fo r a Certificate o f Ap propriateness (COA) for setbac k
modific atio ns to an ac ces s o ry s tructure loc ated at 1212 Vine St., bearing the legal desc riptio n o f 0.15 ac .,
Bloc k 11(PT) o ut of the S nyd er’s Ad d itio n.
D Public Hearing and p o s s ib le ac tion on a C OA for the modific ation of a s treet-facing façade and a reques t
for an exc eptio n to allo w an enc ro achment o f 3-fo o t 7-inches into the sid e s etb ack, o f a p ro p erty loc ated
at 1812 Eubank St., bearing the legal desc riptio n o f 0.24 acres, lot 6, bloc k 4 o f the Eub ank Additio n –
Madison T homas , AICP, His toric and Downto wn P lanner
E Public Hearing and p o s s ib le ac tion on a reques t fo r a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for the
Page 1 of 180
replac ement o f the ro o f and the ad d ition o f new ro o fing materials for an exis ting p o rtic o loc ated at 1236
S. Main S t., b earing the legal d es criptio n of 0.16 ac . Mo rro w Ad d ition, Bloc k B (NE/PT). – Mad is o n
Tho mas , AIC P, His toric & Do wntown P lanner
F Public Hearing and possible action o n a req ues t for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for
rec o nstruc tio n, alteratio ns and c hanges to the exis ting b uilding, and new s ignage that is inc o nsistent with
applic ab le guid elines for the p ro p erty loc ated at 1102 S. Aus tin Ave. - Nat Waggo ner, AICP, Lo ng Range
Planning Manager
G Presentation and discussion of conceptual design of a mixed us e p ro p erty loc ated at 204 E. 8th St.
Ave - Nat Waggo ner, AICP, Long Range P lanning Manager
H Up d ates of Downto wn P ro jects and up co ming meetings .
Next regular HARC Meeting, Marc h 22, 2018
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 180
City of Georgetown, Texas
Historic and Architectural Review
February 22, 2018
SUBJECT:
Cons id eration o f the Minutes fro m the January 25, 2018 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_01.25.2018 Backup Material
Page 3 of 180
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 1 of 3
Meeting: January 25, 2018
City of Georgetown, Texas
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
Minutes
Thursday, January 25, 2018 at 6:00 p.m.
Council and Courts Building
101 E. 7th Street Georgetown, TX 78626
Members present: Lee Bain, Chair; Terri Asendorf-Hyde; Art Browner; Shawn Hood, Vice-Chair; Karl
Meixsell, Lawrence Romero and Catherine Morales (alternate)
Absent: Justin Bohls
Staff present: Sofia Nelson, Planning Director; Nat Waggoner, Long Range Planning Manager;
Madison Thomas, Historic and Downtown Planner; 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 December 14, 2017 HARC meeting. Karen Frost,
Recording Secretary
Motion by Browner, second by Hood to approve the minutes. Approved 7-0. (Bohls absent,
Morales in seat.)
C. Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for the
demolition of a residence located at 703 E 13th Street, bearing the legal description of a 0.16 acres
Snyder Addition, Block 1 (SW/PT). – Nat Waggoner, AICP, Long Range Planning Manager
Waggoner reported on the project. The single story residence is identified as a medium priority
structure in the City’s 2016 Historic Resources Surveys Reports (HRSR). The residence was built
in 1925 and was originally located adjacent to the former Georgetown Hospital (likely 601 E.
University). The applicant estimates the home to have been relocated from the northeast corner of
University Ave and College St. to its present location on 13th Street ca. 1961-1962. According to
the applicant the home was renovated and the small apartment enlarged in 1964/1965.
As outlined in HRSR, this medium priority structure contributes to the neighborhood character
and high degree of integrity. According to the HRSR, there are 11 low priority properties
including the commonly owned property at 1205 S. Walnut, 7 medium priority properties and 0
high priority properties within 200’ of the subject property. The HRSR does not note any stylistic
influences and identifies the property as a duplex floor plan. There are no other duplex plans
within the immediate area surrounding the property.
The applicant is seeking a demolition of the structure based on unreasonable economic hardship.
The applicant estimates required improvements would exceed $250K. According to the applicant,
in order for the property to be habitable, the residence requires a new roof, a new foundation,
new electrical wiring, and structural reinforcement (currently single wall batton). In present
condition, the residence is not rentable. According to the applicant, the City of Georgetown will
not re-establish electric service until the structure is brought into compliance with current
Page 4 of 180
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 2 of 3
Meeting: January 25, 2018
building code. If HARC approves the demolition, staff recommends that HARC consider
requiring the creation of a historical archive including archival-quality photo-documentation,
and/or architectural drawings of the building or structure proposed to be demolished or relocated
similar to those required by the Historic American Buildings Survey to be submitted to the
Historic Preservation Officer as described in the Unified Development Code, 3.13.030. E.3 (b).
Chair Bain opened the Public Hearing:
Craig Cossmer, 705 E 13th Street, expressed concern about drainage in that area and states that the
area retains three to six inches of water when it rains. He asked for that to be addressed before
allowing anything else to be built there.
Janie Barrette, 1305 S. College, expressed agreement with letting the structures be demolished.
With no more speakers coming forth, Chair Bain closed the public hearing.
Motion by Romero to approve the demolition as recommended by the subcommittee with the
archival record required prior to demolition. Second by Hood. Approved 7 – 0.
D. Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for
the demolition of a single story residence located at 1205 S. Walnut, bearing the legal description
of 0.160 acres, Snyder Addition, Block 1 (W/PT) - Nat Waggoner, AICP, Long Range Planner
Waggoner presented the staff report and recommendation. The single story residence located at
1205 S. Walnut Street, is identified as a low priority structure in the City’s 2016 Historic Resources
Surveys Reports (HRSR). According to the 2016 HRSR, the structure lacks a definable stylistic
influence, floor plan and integrity. The 2007 HRSR indicates that the front door has been replaced,
vinyl windows and a detached carport have been added. As such, the structure does not possess
any significant architectural features, nor does it represent the work of a specific architect or
craftsman.
According to the applicant, a moving company in Bertram expressed interest in the property,
however after close inspection, declined to accept the property due to structural concerns and
moving the structure.
The HARC Demolition Subcommittee including the HPO and Chief Building Official conferred
on 12/6/2017 and reaffirmed the applicant’s summary of structural issues. The Subcommittee did
not see any outstanding features that could be salvaged other than possibly the windows for
decorative or art purposes and externally the cypress lap may be of value, however it may contain
asbestos. The subcommittee agreed that nothing is structurally sound enough to save for
reconstruction. If HARC approves the demolition, staff recommends that HARC consider
requiring the creation of a historical archive including archival-quality photo-documentation,
and/or architectural drawings of the building or structure proposed to be demolished or
relocated.
Motion by Hood to approve the demolition as recommended by the subcommittee with the
archival record required prior to demolition. Second by Romero. Approved 7 – 0.
E. Presentation and discussion of conceptual design for the renovation of a residential property
located at 1227 Church Street - Nat Waggoner, AICP, Long Range Planning Manager
Waggoner introduces the proposed changes and the applicant. The applicant is seeking feedback
on the proposed siding replacement and the garage demolition.
Page 5 of 180
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 3 of 3
Meeting: January 25, 2018
Matt McConnell states the new homeowners have come from Austin andwant to remodel this
house. They are proposing vinyl, double hung windows instead of the existing windows. He
suggested maybe using a variety of styles to cut costs. The garage is small and they would like to
demolish that and add space to the house with a two-story addition. The applicants are open to
using hardi-siding to replace the existing vinyl siding. They want to add to the character of the
house, not detract from it.
Commissioners asked questions about adding distinction/difference between the old and new
additions. They also asked how this will fit with the surrounding houses. This is a low priority
structure in the 2016 Historic Resources Survey. Hood expressed concern about the scale and
proportion of the replacement windows. He thinks that the wooden windows by Anderson 100
or Marvin wooden windows would be appropriate. He said a using a divided light window
could provide a more historic look. Meixsell asked for pictures of surrounding houses in the
official application.
Waggoner summarized the comments: consider context as it relates to surrounding properties,
consider that in the new design, and consider a historic profile on the old house windows with a
more modern window in the new addition to the rear. Browner wants the new addition to be in
character with the existing house, including the roof materials and style, pitch and design.
F. Presentation and discussion of conceptual design for the renovation of a commercial property
located at 1102 S. Austin Ave - Nat Waggoner, AICP, Long Range Planner
Waggoner provided an overview of the project.. Signage will still be coming in and all will be
submitted at next meeting on February 22. The applicants are asking for a thorough overview by
the commission.
Vernacular storefronts were explained with cornice features, canopies and treatments of materials
provided by current availabilities when it was built in 1965, with improvement made in 2006. A
development agreement was entered into for this building and how the sidewalks and
landscaping were developed. The applicant is proposing to add a tower addition on the
southeast corner. They are proposing to add a roof parapet to hide rooftop mechanical
equipment. This building will be developed for a single tenant instead of the current multi-tenant
use. The southwest corner doors will be closed. The awnings on the southwest corner will be
remaining but with a different color. Fabric awnings will be retained but with a logo added and
window development. The east elevation will have an additional roof parapet to hide the
mechanical equipment. Retaining existing awnings. The entry ways along this side will be
closed. They will be retaining the cornice and profile of the roof. Glass will be transparent in all
instances, but some will have storefronts behind them. This will allow for internal configuration
of the store.
The south elevation introduces a cloth awning and internally will have a 72” wall, which will
allow transparency and visibility into the space. Material samples and colors were shown. The
applicant is seeking feedback on the primary entrance and window treatments.
All ingress and egress will be from University Avenue. The applicant is proposing a drive-
through pharmacy from 11th Street. The main entrance faces University Avenue. Commissioners
asked questions of the applicant. Jean Pelissero, the applicant, discussed why they wanted the
tower. The main priority is to identify the front door. There was discussion of the internal spaces
which is driving the entry on the main corner. The architect explained the concept.
Page 6 of 180
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 4 of 3
Meeting: January 25, 2018
Hood commented that he likes the tower on the south side and the glazing on the east side which
allows people to see into the building. He asked for consideration of a better view on the north
side of the building. They will look into this. Waggoner explained that the list will be reviewed
and addressed for the submittal for action
Chair Bain allowed the public to speak:
William Harris, 560 E 19th St, thanks everyone for protecting this gateway. He is concerned about
the pedestrian loss along Austin Avenue and the loss of access off that street. Mr. Pelissero
addresses his concerns by explaining the tower entrance can be extended to the corner on Austin
Avenue, making the vestibule larger and more open.
Waggoner provides a summary of comments. Commissioners found the tower and storefront
treatments and canopies to be in keeping with the guidelines. Materials are appropriate. Hood
asked about glazing. Existing windows are anodized, dark bronze and they will be adding in the
same color to be consistent. The commission is comfortable repeating both the cantilevered
canopy and fabric awnings. They like the black, red is not preferred. The south elevation with
the tower will meet the guidelines. Hood feels there is an opportunity on the north side to take
some of the stone used in other locations on the building to add to the north side to provide
continuity. Using the tower is a good way to address the focal point.
Waggoner explained the next steps. Hood suggests using landscaping to enhance the building.
Item H was addressed next.
G. Updates of Downtown Projects and upcoming meetings.
• Next regular HARC Meeting, February 22, 2018
• Introduction of Madison Thomas, the new Historic District Planner
Waggoner introduced Madison Thomas and expressed she has a degree in Art History
and is a certified urban planner and is passionate about urban design and preservation.
She expressed her appreciation of being here and working with the commission.
H. Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for the
demolition of a garage located at 204 E 8th Street, bearing the legal description of 0.33 acres
Glasscock Addition, Block 9, Lot 7 – 8. Nat Waggoner, AICP, Long Range Planner
Waggoner presented the staff report. The applicant is requesting the demolition of the 1930, low
priority structure. It is an accessory structure to the high priority structure on the property that
burned down and was removed. The applicant says this structure has been highly modified over
time, including hardi-siding and a metal garage-style door. The demolition subcommittee
recommends approval of the demolition of the property, staff concurs. There is a loss of
significance with the main structure being gone. The applicant presented photographs and an
explanation of the application.
Chair Bain opened the public hearing and with no speakers coming forth, closed the hearing.
Motion by Meixsell, second by Assendorf-Hyde to approve the demolition as submitted.
Approved 7 – 0.
Page 7 of 180
Historic and Architectural Review Commission Page 5 of 3
Meeting: January 25, 2018
Adjournment
Motion by Romero, second by Hood to adjourn at 7:58 p.m. Approved 7 – 0.
________________________________ ______________________________
Approved, Lee Bain Chair Attest, Lawrence Romero
Page 8 of 180
City of Georgetown, Texas
Historic and Architectural Review
February 22, 2018
SUBJECT:
Pub lic Hearing and pos s ible ac tion on a reques t for a Certificate of Appropriatenes s (COA) for setb ac k
mo d ificatio ns to an acc es s o ry struc ture lo cated at 1212 Vine S t., bearing the legal desc rip tion o f 0.15 ac .,
Blo ck 11(PT) out o f the Snyder ’s Additio n.
ITEM SUMMARY:
Ac cording to the ap plic ant, modific ations to the side and rear s etb ack are req uired in o rd er to be able to
acc o mmo d ate a d irect ap p ro ach into the new garage with limited s p ace between the main struc ture
(existing) and fenc e and allow fo r maneuvering a vehicle onc e b eyond the main s tructure. Staff c o nducted
a s ite s urvey and d etermined that the rear yard of the lot is to o s mall to acc o mmodate a reasonable
ap p ro ach to the p ro p o s ed garage at the required setb acks . Witho ut mod ific atio n (red uc tion) to the s id e and
rear setb acks , the ad d ition c o uld not be reas onab ly us ed as a garage.
Findings
Bas ed o n the findings lis ted above, s taff rec o mmends ap p roval of the fro nt fac ing façade fo r the ac cessory
s tructure and approval of an exc ep tion to sid e and rear s etbac ks.
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 - Site Vis it Notes Exhibit
Exhibit 4- HRSR Survey Exhibit
Exhibit 5- Staff Report Exhibit
Page 9 of 180
A
SH
ST
PI
N
E
ST
EL
M
ST
E 1 5T H S T
MAPLE S
T
E 1 3T H S T
E U N IV ER S IT Y AV E
S C
OLL
E
G
E
S
T
H
U
T
T
O
R
D
O
LI
VE
S
T
E 8 T H S T
WA
L
N
U
T
S
T
E 7 TH ST
E 1 9 T H S T
E 1 8 T H S T
SO U T H W ESTERNBLVD
VI
N
E
ST
S
A
N
J
O
S
E
S
T
E 1 6T H S T
FINCH LN
E 1 4 T H S T
E 1 0T H S T
L
O
U
I
S
E
S
T
LA
U
R
E
L S
T
H
A
V
E
N
L
N
V
I
R
G
I
N
I
A
S
T
B
A
R
C
U
S
D
R
P I R A T E D R
W
E
S
L
E
Y
A
N
D
R
P
E
C
A
N
S
T
SO U LE D R
VIVION LN
M
I
M
O
S
A
S
T
S E R V I C E R D
T
A
Y
L
O
R
R
D
P
I
R
A
T
E
C
V
E 1 1 T H S T
J
A
M
E
S
S
T
E 1 7T H S T
B E R G I N C T
E RUTERSVIL
L
E
D
R
K
A
T
H
E
R
I
N
E
C
T
E 9 T H S T
S
C
H
U
R
C
H
S
T
M C C O Y P L
A
N
N
I
E
P
URLDV
H
O
L
L
Y
S
T
M C K E N Z I E D R
E 9 TH 1/2 S T
W
R
U
T
E
R
S
V
I
L
L
E
D
R
P
E
A
C
H
T
R
E
E
L
N
E 16TH ST
E 1 9 T H S TE 1 7 T H S T
V
I
N
E
S
T
E 1 6T H S T
E 1 3 T H S T
E 1 6 T H S T
E 1 7 T H S T
A N N I E P U R L D V
E 1 4T H S TE 1 4T H S T
E 1 0T H S T
E 1 8 T H S T
E 9 TH ST
S
O
U
T
H
W
E
S
T
E
R
N
B
L
V
D
L
A
U
R
E
L
S
T
E 1 6 T H S T
E 1 4 T H S T
WA
L
N
U
T
S
T
E 1 7T H S T
E 9 T H S T
COA-2017-040Exhibit #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 10 of 180
Page 11 of 180
Page 12 of 180
Page 13 of 180
Page 14 of 180
Page 15 of 180
Page 16 of 180
Page 17 of 180
Page 18 of 180
Page 19 of 180
Page 20 of 180
Page 21 of 180
Page 22 of 180
Page 23 of 180
TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION
County Williamson Local District:Old Town District
Address:1212 Vine St 2016 Survey ID:125967
City Georgetown
HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY FORM
2016 Preservation Priority:Low
SECTION 1
Basic Inventory Information
WCAD ID:R047437Property Type:Building Structure Object Site District
Date Recorded 4/21/2016Recorded by:CMEC
EstimatedActual Source:WCADConstruction Date:1960
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 integrity
Geographic Location
Latitude:30.632655 Longitude -97.665395
Current/Historic Name:None/None
High Medium
Priority:
Low
High Medium Low
ID Not Recorded
ID Not Recorded
2007 Survey
1984 Survey
ID 125967 2016 Survey High Medium Low
Photo direction: West
Page 24 of 180
TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION
County Williamson Local District:Old Town District
Address:1212 Vine St 2016 Survey ID:125967
City Georgetown
HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY FORM
2016 Preservation Priority:Low
Additional Photos
NorthwestPhoto Direction
Page 25 of 180
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
[COA-2017-040] – 1212 Vine St. Page 1 of 5
Meeting Date: 2/22/2018
File Number: COA-2017-040
AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION
Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for setback
modifications to an accessory structure located at 1212 Vine St., bearing the legal description of 0.15 ac.,
Block 11(PT) out of the Snyder’s Addition.
AGENDA ITEM DETAILS
Project Name: Sienkiel Residential Remodel
Applicant: Zach Sienkiel
Property Owner: Zach and Stevie Sienkiel
Property Address: 1212 Vine St., Georgetown Texas 78626
Legal Description: 0.15 ac., Block 11(PT) out of the Snyder’s Addition
Historic Overlay: Old Town
Case History: This is the first review for this application.
HISTORIC CONTEXT
Date of construction of main property: 1960
Historic Resources Survey Level of Priority: 1984 – Not Recorded
2007- Low
2016 -Low
National Register Designation: N/A
Texas Historical Commission Designation: N/A
APPLICANT’S REQUEST
The applicant has requested approval for two setback modifications; an approximate 3-foot setback
modification from the 6-foot minimum side setback requirement and an approximate 7-foot
setback modification from the 10-foot minimum rear setback requirement of Unified
Development Code (UDC) Section 6.02.050. The applicant is also seeking approval for the
addition of a front facing façade, created with the placement of the accessory structure whose
south elevation is parallel to the property line along 13th Street.
APPLICABLE DESIGN GUIDELINES
The following guidelines are applicable to the proposed accessory structure in accordance with the
adopted Downtown and Old Town Design Guidelines:
GUIDELINES FINDINGS
14.1 Locate a new building at the front property line. N/A
Page 26 of 180
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
[COA-2017-040] – 1212 Vine St. Page 2 of 5
GUIDELINES FINDINGS
14.2
Where a portion of a building must be set back, define the edge of the
property with landscape elements. N/A
14.03 A new building shall reflect the traditional lot width as expressed by the
following N/A
14.04 Building heights of larger projects should provide variety. N/A
14.5 Large project sites should be developed with several buildings, rather than a
single structure. N/A
14.6 Where a large building is needed, divide the building into modules that reflect
the traditional size of residential buildings.
N/A
14.7 Maintain views to the courthouse N/A
14.8 Masonry materials that convey a sense of scale are preferred. N/A
14.9 Historic building materials of existing buildings should be maintained and
respected when additions are proposed. Complies
14.1 Non-traditional siding materials are discouraged. Does Not
Comply
14.11 Avoid alterations that would damage historic features. N/A
14.12 An addition shall be compatible in scale, materials, and character with the
main building. Complies
14.13 Design a new addition such that the original character can be clearly seen. Complies
14.14 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to
minimize the visual impacts. Complies
14.15 Do not obscure, damage, destroy, or remove original architectural details and
materials of the primary structure. Complies
14.16 An addition shall be compatible in scale, materials, character, and
architectural style with the main building. Complies
14.17 An addition shall be set back from any primary, character-defining façade. Complies
14.18 The roof of a new addition shall be in character with that of the primary
building. Complies
14.19 The architectural features of existing buildings should be protected when
additions are proposed. N/A
14.2 An addition shall not damage or obscure architecturally important features. Complies
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 primary, 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.
N/A
14.22 Individual building elements of existing buildings should be preserved,
protected, and replicated where appropriate when additions are proposed. N/A
Page 27 of 180
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
[COA-2017-040] – 1212 Vine St. Page 3 of 5
GUIDELINES FINDINGS
14.23 Seek uses that are compatible with the historic character of the building and
neighborhood. Complies
14.24
When use changes demand that structures be altered such that little or no use
can be made of the original structure, consider moving the structure to a
compatible location.
N/A
14.25 Only as a last resort should an historic structure be considered for demolition. N/A
STAFF ANALYSIS
According to the applicant, modifications to the side and rear setback are required in order to be able to
accommodate a direct approach into the new garage with limited space between the main structure
(existing) and fence and allow for maneuvering a vehicle once beyond the main structure. Staff
conducted a site survey and determined that the rear yard of the lot is too small to accommodate a
reasonable approach to the proposed garage at the required setbacks. Without modification (reduction)
to the side and rear setbacks, the addition could not be reasonably used as a garage.
CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL
In accordance with Section 3.13.030 of the Unified Development Code, the HARC must consider the
following criteria:
SECTION 3.13.030 CRITERIA FINDINGS
A. The application is complete and the information contained within the application
is correct and sufficient enough to allow adequate review and final action; Complies
B. Compliance with any design standards of the Unified Development Code; Seeking
exception, see
Exhibit 3
C. Compliance with the adopted Downtown Design Guidelines, as may be
amended from time to time, specific to the applicable Historic or Overlay District;
See above
table
D. The integrity of an individual historic structure is preserved. Complies
E. New buildings or additions are designed to be compatible with surrounding
historic properties. Complies
F. The overall character of the Historic or applicable Overlay District is protected. Complies
G. Signs that are out of keeping with the adopted design standards, and are not in
character with the site or landmarks within the Historic or applicable Overlay
District in question will not be permitted.
N/A
H. The following may also be considered by the HARC when determining whether
to approve a Certificate for Design Compliance:
1. The effect of the proposed change upon the general historic, cultural, and
architectural nature of the site, landmark, or District.
2. The appropriateness of exterior architectural features, including parking and
loading spaces, which can be seen from a public street, alley, or walkway.
1. Complies
2. N/A
3. Complies
Page 28 of 180
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
[COA-2017-040] – 1212 Vine St. Page 4 of 5
SECTION 3.13.030 CRITERIA FINDINGS
3. The general design, arrangement, texture, material, and color of the building
or structure and the relation of such factors to similar features of buildings or
structures in the District, contrast or other relation of such factors to other
landmarks built at or during the same period, as well as the uniqueness of
such features, considering the remaining examples of architectural, historical,
and cultural values.
The Historic and Architectural Review Commission may grant a Certificate of
Appropriateness, per Section 4.08.080.D of this Code, to modify the setback standards of the
underlying base zoning district for residential properties located within the Old Town Overlay
District.
HARC may take in consideration the following in determining whether to approve a Certificate
of Appropriateness for a setback exception:
SECTION 3.13.030 CRITERIA - Additional Criteria for Approval of a Setback
Exception
FINDINGS
A. Whether the proposed setback encroachment is solely a matter of convenience Complies
B. Whether there is adequate room on the site to allow the proposed addition or
new structure without encroaching into the setback; Complies
C. Whether the proposed setback is compatible and in context within the block in
which the subject property is located; Complies
D. Whether the proposed addition or new structure will be set closer to the street
than other units within the block; Complies
E. Whether the proposed structure is replacing a structure removed within the past
year; Complies
F. Whether the proposed structure will replace a structure that previously existed
with relatively the same footprint and encroachment as proposed;
Does Not
Comply
G. If the proposed encroachment is for a structure that is replacing another
structure, whether the proposed structure is significantly larger than the original; N/A
H. If the proposed encroachment is for an addition, the scale of the addition
compared to the original house; Complies
I. Reserved. N/A
J. The size of the proposed structure compared to similar structures within the
same block; Complies
K. Whether the proposed addition or new structure will negatively impact adjoining
properties, including limiting their ability to maintain existing buildings; Complies
L. Whether there is adequate space for maintenance of the proposed addition or
new structure and/or any adjacent structures; and/or Complies
Page 29 of 180
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
[COA-2017-040] – 1212 Vine St. Page 5 of 5
SECTION 3.13.030 CRITERIA - Additional Criteria for Approval of a Setback
Exception
FINDINGS
M. Whether the encroachment would enable existing large trees or significant
features of the lot to be preserved.
N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Based on the findings listed above, staff recommends approval of the front facing façade for the accessory
structure and approval of an exception to side and rear setbacks.
As of the date of this report, staff has not received any written comments.
ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1 – Location Map
Exhibit 2 - Letter of Intent
Exhibit 3 – Plans (rendering) and Specifications
Exhibit 4 – Survey (Site Design)
Exhibit 5 – Historic Resources Survey
SUBMITTED BY
Nat Waggoner, AICP, Long Range Planning Manager
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Page 30 of 180
City of Georgetown, Texas
Historic and Architectural Review
February 22, 2018
SUBJECT:
Pub lic Hearing and pos s ible actio n o n a COA fo r the mo d ificatio n o f a s treet-fac ing faç ad e and a req uest
fo r an exception to allow an encroac hment of 3-foot 7-inc hes into the s id e s etbac k, of a property lo cated at
1812 Eubank S t., b earing the legal d es cription of 0.24 ac res , lo t 6, bloc k 4 of the Eubank Ad d ition –
Mad is o n Tho mas , AICP, Histo ric and Downtown Planner
ITEM SUMMARY:
The applic ant is p ro p o s ing to exp and their exis ting his to ric ho me as well as add ac cessory s tructures in the
rear o f the property to allow fo r mo re us able s q uare footage. T he ap p licant proposes to ad d a front p o rc h
to the ho me’s faç ade facing Eub ank Street. Additio nally, the northeast c o rner of the ho me is currently in the
s id e s etbac k, and the additio n of the proposed porc h will further encroac h into the s etbac k by 3 feet 7
inc hes. An exc ep tion granted b y HARC is need ed to allo w the proposed porc h to enc ro ach into the s ide
s etbac k.
The ad d ition to the exis ting struc ture will be to wards the rear of the p ro p erty. All ac c es s o ry struc tures
inc luding the wo rks ho p , the p o o l hous e and the garage will be lo cated at the rear o f the p ro p erty and are
s ubjec t to s taff review.
The applic ant is also proposing c hanges to the exterior of the home includ ing the rep lacement of exterior
(n on-historic) siding and the enlargement o f the no rthern most existing wind o w on the fro nt faç ade. The
exterio r o f the home is c o vered with vinyl siding, b ut the ap plic ant rec ently d is covered a wood, s hiplap like
s id ing that exis ts und erneath the vinyl. The applic ant is s eeking to remove all existing s iding, inc lud ing the
wooden siding and replac e with hard i siding.
HARC’s review is required fo r the proposed porc h additio n, the exception to allo w the p o rch to enc ro ac h
into the sid e setb ack, removal o f the his toric wood s iding and the alterations to window on the s treet fac ing
façade (fro m the rear ad d ition and the window enlargement).
Findings
Staff finds that the proposed addition o f the p o rch d o es no t wholly comply with the Design Guid elines ,
s p ecific ally sec tio n 6.25, “c o nstruc tion of a new non-o riginal porc h is us ually inappro p riate”. Porc hes are
common amenities within the district. T he ad d ition o f the p o rch will not impac t the histo ric character in of
the district. The req uest to alter the his to ric windo w openings to allow for a larger window meets the
guid elines, as the expans io n is mino r, and wo uld no t s ignificantly impac t the his to ric character of the
façade. Removing the exis ting vinyl meets the guidelines , and the reques t to replac e with hard i siding,
reflects the p o licy of finding a material that is the s ame or similar to the original. Staff recommends
ap p ro val o f the reques t.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
Nat Waggoner, PMP, AICP
Page 31 of 180
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Exhibit 1 - Location Map Cover Memo
Exhibit 2- Letter of Intent Exhibit
Exhibit 3 and 4 - Plans and Specifications Exhibit
Exhibit 5- His toric Res ources Survey Exhibit
Exhibit 6 - Public Comment Exhibit
Page 32 of 180
A
S
H
S
T
PIN
E
ST
S M
A
I
N
S
T
M
A
P
L
E
S
T
E 1 5 T H S TS
A
U
S
TI
N
AV
E
E 1 3T H S T
RAILROAD AVE
F M 146 0
EL
M
ST
S
C
H
U
R
C
H
S
T
W 1 7 T H S T
E 1 8 T H S T
E 1 9 T H S T
OLI
VE
S
T
FO
R
E
S
T
S
T
E U N I V ERS I T Y AV E
W 2 2 N D ST
S
C
O
LL
E
GE
S
T
L
E
A
N
D
E
R
S
T
SCENIC DR
W 1 8 T H S T
S
A
N
J
O
S
E
S
T
L E A N D E R RD
W U N I V E R SI T Y AV E
W 21ST ST
W 1 6 T H S T
E 2 1S T S T
H A R T S T
E 1 6T H S T
TI
M
B
E
R
S
T E 1 4T H S T
W 1 5 T H S T
VIN
E
ST
B
R
U
SH
Y S
T
LA
U
R
E
L S
T
A
LL
E
Y
H
O
G
G
S
T
KENDALL ST
S M
Y
R
TL
E
S
T
Q U A I L V ALLEYDR
E
U
B
A
N
K
S
T
K
N
I
G
H
T
S
T
PAIGE ST
E 2 0T H S T
W 24T H ST
W 14T H S T
W 1 3 T H S T
E 2 2 N D S T
BRIDGE ST
T
O
W
E
R
D
R
C A N T E R BURYTR L
T
E
X
S
T
A
R
D
R
C
A
N
D
E
E
ST
E 1 7 T H S T
G
E
O
R
G
I
A
N
D
R
L
O
N
D
O
N
L
N
E 1 9 T H 1 /2 S T
A N N I E P U R L D V
H
I
G
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
H
O
L
L
Y
S
T
W
AL
NUT
S
T
GE
ORGE
S
T
W 19T H S T
C
O
F
F
E
E
S
T
STONE CIR
W 18TH ST
E 1 4 T H S T
E 1 6T H S T
A
L
L
E
Y
E 1 4T H S T
WA
L
N
U
T
S
T
E 2 0 T H S T
W16TH ST
E 1 6T H S T
H
A
R
T
S
T
S
M
Y
R
T
L
E
S
T
E 1 7 T H S T
E 2 1 S T S T
E 1 7T H S T
COA-2017-041Exhibit #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 33 of 180
Ron and Sharon ZarrieIIo’s
1812 EubankSt
Georgetown, TX, 78626
City Of Georgetown (Historic and Architectural Review Commission)
406 W. 8th st「eet
Georgetown, TX, 78627
Dear Committee,
Sharon and l are requesting a ′‘certificate of Appropriateness’’relating to the subject property. We
purchased this property in 」une of2017 withthe intent of living here in OldTown forthe rest ofour
iives. The rich culture andthe sense ofsmall community iswhat attracted ustothis area. We have
Submitted pIansthatw用redesign this home and tum it into a house that contributesto the
neighborhood and the area, Whiie keepingwith the characterofthe neighborhood" The plans calI
fora front porch thatw帖mprove curb appeaI, and better its position in the neighborhood" The
interiorw川also be updated and remodeIed, AIso, the pIans caIl for a rearaddition thatw用add a
master bedroom suite, and a great room that exits to the rear. 1n addition the plans cail fora 450
square foot pool house, a 400 square footworkshop, and a 2 carcarport′ a)i situated on the rearof
the p「operty. We are very excited about presenting this project, and are looking fo「ward to getting
Started as soon as pQSSibIe. Thank you for vour consideration.
Sincereiy,
図星囲
、勤勃ノ助字圏圏Ronald and
Page 34 of 180
Ron & Sharon Zarriello
1812 Eubank Street
Georgetown,丁X. 78626
February 15, 2018
City Of Georgetown
Zoning Board of Adjustments
406 W. 8th street
Geo「getown, TX, 78626
This lette「 isto explain our intentions ofwhat we want to do with the cur「ent siding and
Windows on the house at 1812 Eubank Street. The current windows are replacements that
appearto be at Ieast与Oyears old or more. The originai windows were replaced sometime ago.
The current windows are drafty′ in need of repairand most ofthe seals a「e broken. They are
also very inefficient. We would like to repiace them with new vinyi windows with casing b「ick
mold trim. (Pictu「e attached) The pictu「e is ofa house being remodeIed at 1611 George Street,
Georgetown, 78626. This isjust one street overfrom our house. The sidingon our house is 75%
Plywood and 25% wood. The 25% of original wood is rotting and needs to be replaced. (Pictures
attached〉丁o repiace the rotting areas would probabIy decrease that number to around 20%.
We wouId like to renewa= ofthe sidingwith Hardie siding. (Picture attached〉 Our pians areto
「epu「pose the salvageabIe orjginal wood siding inside ofthe main house during renovations.
Sincerely,
園長団扇圏四
Ronald Zarrie=o
与12-669-870与
R765@vahoo.com
Page 35 of 180
千五鴫S心丸ふよ直るboがds
千、もび餌諒b。a「ds頂、、も恥もしd千。「庇ふ山高も・
Page 36 of 180
○高庇p両立ぐ0l〇十AbYSS f…へ陵缶詰高調O旺」
丁トe十品?定、トトc○、o u;、\\も巳轟ト古色一
Page 37 of 180
誤蕊霊霊轟音嵩悪罵
Page 38 of 180
FOREST SURVEYING AND MAPPING CO.
T.B.P.L.S Firm # 10002000
1002 Ash St.
Georgetown, Tx. 78626
DESCRIPTION FOR RONALD J. AND SHARON ZARRIELLO
BEING O.24 acres? including Lot 6 in BIock 4 ofthe 2nd Revised Map ofthe Eubank
Addition to the City of Georgetown, Texas, aCCOrding to the plat filed in Cabinet A, S量ide 143,
Of the plat records of WiIliamson County, Texas (indexed on-1ine as Eubank Addition Block 4
2nd Revision. This property is the same property that was conveyed to RonaId J. and Sharon
ZarrieIIo, aS described in Doc. 2017050618, Of the O鮪cial PubIic Records of Wi1獲iamson
County, Texas (OPRWCT). This tract was surveyed on the ground in November of2017
under the direction of William F. Forest, Jr., Registered Professional Land Surveyor No. 1847.
Survey note: The bearing basis for this survey is the State Plane Coordinate System, Texas
Central Zone, Western Data VRS Network.
BEGINNING at an iron pin that was found at the Northwest corner of said Lot 6 and
at the Southwest comer ofLot 5 in said Block 4, in the East line ofan alley (19.2’wide per
p獲at).
THENCE with the North line ofLot 6 and the South line ofLot 5, With a line that does
not follow the existing fence, N 82O46’26,’E 168.86 feet to an iron pin that was found in the
West line ofEubank Street (50 feet wide per plat).
THENCE with the West line ofEubank Street and the East line ofLot 6, S 20O38,30,, E
63.82 feet to a square bolt that was found at the Northeast comer of 7.
THENCE with the South line ofLot 6 and the North line ofLot 7, With a line that does
not folIow the existing fence, S 84O35’29’’W 179.19 feet to a capped % inch iron pin that was
Set (CaPPed Surveyor No. 1847).
THENCE with the East line ofthe alley and the West Iine ofLot 6, N llO51’36’’W
56.58 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
I, WM. F. FOREST, JR., do hereby certify that this survey was made on the ground of the
PrOPerty legally described hereon, under my supervision. This description is true and correct
to the best of my knowledge and belief The attached plat identi鮭es any signi縦cant boundary
line conflicts? ShoI.tageS in area? aPParent PrOtruSions? intrusions or overIapping of
improvements・ This property abuts a public roadway, eXCePt aS Shown. Ownership and
easement information for this tract has not been researched except as shown on the attached
plat.
TO CERTIFY WHICH, WITNESS my hand and seal at Georgetown, Texas,
this the 30th day of November of 2017} A・D. FiIe: ZarrielIo Iot Eubanks Add.doc
図四墨図星自己王国王国
帆的.F.すOR田S冒∴JR.
REG工S冒ERED PROFESS工ONA1 LZ±ND SURV電YOR∴NO. 1847
Page 39 of 180
S肌eU如
月o同の!d凸$I脇7℃れZの諦euo
Loき6, BLo諦4
耽e細d Reび誌ed娩.p of振
Eなあのれ鳥Add雄0れ掃き庇C棚Of Geoγgeねひれ
Cαb4解きA,測るde 143
用のきReco関はof W祝電ns脇的他州机的雷のS
4蝕め瑠ed o7祝7榔αS E叫bα毎度A脇掃われ
Bわc鳥4 27教寄月e高sわれ
l!
† H ?∴∴∴†車
重くまノU」〇三・ 1賀"事象0.
藷剛を
e鴫郵; 1掛
軸耽りNロ調
c寄東町職重要1篇閲
Page 40 of 180
萱 昌 竃 毒 害 童 墓 室 宝 互 恵 自 ら 吾 曽 筈 互 恵 宝 互 恵 重 § § § § § 菖 重 賞
重 富 吾 善 書 毒 害 壷 藍 重 富 壷 営 舎 壷 百 雷 営 倉 毒 害 毎 昌 萱 壷 菖 葺 菖 壷 昌 軍 産 塵 葺 軍 事 葺 軍 事 菖 邑 ぎ 垂 萱
葺 華 重 萱 重 富 き 菖 墨 壷 言 蓋 昌 言 萱 暑 畠 重 重 富 重 軍 重 富 萱 重 葦 § 合 昌 ざ 貢 菖 重 富 萱 重 雪 雷 重 富
竃
♀ 寧 3 ミ 葦 石 垣 蜜 堅 8 嘗 葛 3 さ
雪 曽 く 曽 堅 § 曽 堅 曽 堅 曽 宮 宮 曽
Page 41 of 180
● 冨
旨
菖
曽 害 裏 轡 § 轡 寅 § 8 賀 臼 8 青 8 京8
醜 董 曽 雪 碧 雲 雪 宵 雷 電 冨 曽 害 毒 宝 島 昌 抽
罵 琶 費 § 昌 自 昌 房 轡 璽 棚
○○i′ ￣し "c十賀 .e●1乙 l
.鋤十〇⊥ 習 .ナ.置OI●青￣ ヽα や菖仇’“’●i’ ●“1’ 拙 .0ト.′ .青く..= ,の-.0 ￣
虹二 ○○青 箭 箭 欝 ’許 ’蕎“
宝 至 ‡ 虫 ‡ ま ま 8◎ 8② §㊥ 婦 §◎ †.〇・、 責 雷電 陣 容 ●-丁● 訴“ 紺 巾 i i i∴∴害 菖 農⊂⊃ 剛の∴∴事 も 菖 ま
錆 彊嘗 墓 室 曾 3㊤ ○○タ 三三三二 ,の● .
口 も 雷 主
・ケ・タ￣i"への 詩ま く 字 種 壷 竃
掴
雷
出 講 烹 ㊤ i 1 ●●“,e 9京 呈 主 曾§ 葦害 毒 キ i;
聞
上 ! ヨ ゐ
さ 息 る
書 き ‡ 打⑪ 言 匪 塑再 ‡ 主
冒
高 十●’ 軒
±二塁皇∴∴墨 X き き ヽ
∴:∵「二 間 ! ♀ 為. l
) 盈 I 屈 伸“心ei舶丁
○○-嘉 一 ●γ“β ,寄●・,● .▼(●-,タ .●-,`1 .0電・,` .0ト′ ￣ .°ト,γ ,寄手.○ ○耶-○○
○○“Iの ふ-。タ1 鳩.し〇〇〇▼匂○○deすd ●し-.タと 刷上○○e .印○卜,筒
門 Å 鶏 1
」 .叫録 "拘
種.eぐ
Page 42 of 180
Page 43 of 180
Page 44 of 180
Page 45 of 180
Page 46 of 180
用 量, ∴∴ さ\ ∴∴∴言 う ! l †
ゴ
」 、___
i ここここここ三三二三重
∴」 と $」 5こ
手 ! ㌻￣●∵:
墓干 し￣“￣￣.
喜≡ 】 さ ! ! ! 言 \\ 三 言 ∴
〒善
!
∴∴∴ ! き
丁 手 し 【 雪
∴.i● ∴ 〉
)
Page 47 of 180
Page 48 of 180
Page 49 of 180
Page 50 of 180
Page 51 of 180
Page 52 of 180
Page 53 of 180
Page 54 of 180
Page 55 of 180
Page 56 of 180
Page 57 of 180
Page 58 of 180
Page 59 of 180
〇品-占当か↓し〇、〇十AbYSS f…へ捷缶詰高相○○に
丁トe十高専証もじ。\eぐふ\同じ青いし
Page 60 of 180
Ron & Sharon Zarriello
1812 Eubank Street
Georgetown,丁X. 78626
February 15, 2018
City Of Georgetown
Zoning Board of Adjustments
406 W. 8th street
Geo「getown, TX, 78626
This lette「 isto explain our intentions ofwhat we want to do with the cur「ent siding and
Windows on the house at 1812 Eubank Street. The current windows are replacements that
appearto be at Ieast与Oyears old or more. The originai windows were replaced sometime ago.
The current windows are drafty′ in need of repairand most ofthe seals a「e broken. They are
also very inefficient. We would like to repiace them with new vinyi windows with casing b「ick
mold trim. (Pictu「e attached) The pictu「e is ofa house being remodeIed at 1611 George Street,
Georgetown, 78626. This isjust one street overfrom our house. The sidingon our house is 75%
Plywood and 25% wood. The 25% of original wood is rotting and needs to be replaced. (Pictures
attached〉丁o repiace the rotting areas would probabIy decrease that number to around 20%.
We wouId like to renewa= ofthe sidingwith Hardie siding. (Picture attached〉 Our pians areto
「epu「pose the salvageabIe orjginal wood siding inside ofthe main house during renovations.
Sincerely,
園長団扇圏四
Ronald Zarrie=o
与12-669-870与
R765@vahoo.com
Page 61 of 180
Page 62 of 180
Page 63 of 180
Page 64 of 180
Page 65 of 180
County Williamson
TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION
Local District:Old Town District
Address:1812 Eubank St 2016 Survey ID:125834
City Georgetown
HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY FORM
2016 Preservation Priority:Low
SECTION 1
Basic Inventory Information
Owner/Address MCCOLLUM, LUPE J, 1812 EUBANK ST, , GEORGETOWN,TX 78626-7918
Latitude:30.627467 Longitude -97.675746
Addition/Subdivision:S3601 - Eubank Addition
WCAD ID:R042230Legal Description (Lot/Block):EUBANK ADDITION, BLOCK 4, LOT 6, ACRES .24
Property Type:Building Structure Object Site District
Current Designations:
NR District Yes No)
NHL NR
(Is property contributing?
RTHL OTHM HTC SAL Local:Other
Date Recorded 3/16/2016Recorded by:CMEC
Other:
Historic Use:GovernmentEducationalDomestic
SocialReligiousRecreation/cultureIndustry/processing
DefenseCommerce/tradeAgriculture
Other:
Current Use:GovernmentEducationalDomestic
SocialReligiousRecreation/cultureIndustry/processingHealthcare
DefenseCommerce/tradeAgriculture
Function
EstimatedActual Source:WCADConstruction Date:1947
Builder:Architect:
Healthcare
Note: See additional photo(s) on page 4
Vacant
Vacant
Old Town District
Current/Historic Name:None/None
Photo direction: Southwest
Page 66 of 180
County Williamson
TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION
Local District:Old Town District
Address:1812 Eubank St 2016 Survey ID:125834
City Georgetown
HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY FORM
2016 Preservation Priority:Low
SECTION 2
Architectural Description
General Architectural Description:
One-story house with no particular style clad in vinyl siding with a rectangular plan, hipped roof, and a projecting entry
stoop with a front-gabled roof and a single front door.
Relocated
Additions, modifications:Siding replaced, some windows resized, addition to rear, awnings added to windows
Stylistic Influence(s)
Queen Anne
Second Empire
Greek Revival
Eastlake
Italianate
Log traditional
Exotic Revival
Colonial Revival
Romanesque Revival
Renaissance Revival
Folk Victorian
Shingle
Monterey
Beaux Arts
Tudor Revival
Mission
Neo-Classical
Gothic Revival
Moderne
Craftsman
Spanish Colonial
Art Deco
Prairie
Pueblo Revival
Other:
Commercial Style
Post-war Modern
No Style
Ranch
International
Gable Hipped Gambrel Shed Flat w/parapet
Structural Details
Roof Form
Mansard Pyramid Other:
Wood shingles Tile Composition shingles Metal Other:
Roof Materials
Wall Materials
Metal
Brick
Wood Siding
Stucco
Siding: Other
Stone
Glass
Wood shingles
Asbestos
Log
Vinyl
Terra Cotta
Other:
Concrete
Fixed Wood sash Double hung Casement Metal sash
Windows
Decorative Screenwork
Other:
Single door Double door With transom With sidelights
Doors (Primary Entrance)
Other:
Plan
Irregular
L-plan
Four Square
T-plan
Rectangular
Modified L-plan 2-room Open ShotgunCenter Passage
Other
Bungalow
Chimneys
Brick StuccoStone Corbelled Caps
Interior Exterior
Other
Specify #0
PORCHES/CANOPIES
Form:Shed Roof Hipped RoofFlat Roof Gabled Roof Inset Other
Support
Suspension rods
Box columns Classical columns
Wood posts (plain)
Spindlework
Wood posts (turned)
Tapered box supports
Masonry pier
Other:
Fabricated metal
Jigsaw trim
Suspension cables
Materials:Metal FabricWood Other:
# of stories:1 PartialNone FullBasement:
Ancillary Buildings
Garage Barn Shed Other:1; Metal carport
Landscape/Site Features
Stone
Sidewalks
Wood
Terracing
Concrete
Drives Well/cistern Gardens
Other materials:Brick
Other
Landscape Notes:
Shutters
None
None
None
None
Unknown
Asphalt
Page 67 of 180
County Williamson
TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION
Local District:Old Town District
Address:1812 Eubank St 2016 Survey ID:125834
City Georgetown
HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY FORM
2016 Preservation Priority:Low
SECTION 3
Historical Information
Immigration/Settlement
Religion/Spirituality
Commerce
Law/Government
Science/Technology
Communication
Military
Social/Cultural
Education
Natural Resources
Transportation
Exploration
Planning/Development
Other
Health
Applicable National Register (NR) Criteria:
National State LocalLevel of Significance:
Integrity:
Setting Feeling
Location
Association
Design Materials Workmanship
Yes NoIndividually Eligible?Undetermined
Is prior documentation available
for this resource?Yes No Not known
General Notes:
Associated Historical Context:Agriculture Architecture Arts
C
D
B
A Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad pattern of our history
Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past
Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction or represents the work of a
master, or possesses high artistic value, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components
lack individual distinctions
Has yielded, or is likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history
Areas of Significance:
Periods of Significance:
Integrity notes:See Section 2
Yes NoWithin Potential NR District?Undetermined
Yes NoIs Property Contributing?Undetermined
High Medium
Priority:
Low Explain:Property lacks significance and integrity
Other Info:
Type:HABS Survey Other
Documentation details
2007 survey
Contact Survey Coordinator
History Programs Division, Texas
Historical Commission
512/463-5853
history@thc.state.tx.us
Questions?
1984 ID:Not Recorded2007 ID:732
2007 Survey Priority:Low 1984 Survey Priority:Not Recorded
Page 68 of 180
Page 69 of 180
City of Georgetown, Texas
Historic and Architectural Review
February 22, 2018
SUBJECT:
Pub lic Hearing and pos s ible actio n o n a reques t for a Certific ate o f Approp riatenes s (COA) fo r the
rep lacement of the roof and the additio n o f new roofing materials fo r an exis ting portico lo cated at 1236 S .
Main St., bearing the legal d es criptio n o f 0.16 ac . Mo rro w Ad d ition, Blo ck B (NE/PT). – Mad is o n
Thomas, AICP, His to ric & Downto wn Planner
ITEM SUMMARY:
The ap p licant is p ro p o s ing to remove the exis ting p o rtic o roof d ue to water d amage and rep lace it with a
p itc hed hip roof that has a larger roof coverage footp rint and proposes adding a c o p p er finis h.
Findings
S taff finds that the p ro p o s ed reno vatio ns to roof o f the existing portico, is no t maintaining the c harac ter of
the existing po rtic o by c hanging the roof p itc h and roof material. Ho wever, the propos ed ro o f style change
is a typic al style of p o rtic o roof that is his toric ally found o n Colonial Revival homes and is proposed as so
to reduce p o tential water d amage in the future d ue to d rainage c o nc erns. The req ues t to us e c o p p er for the
roofing d o es not meet the d es ign guidelines p o lic y of finding a material that is the s ame or s imilar to the
original nor d oes it matc h the material of the main s tructure. S taff recommends ap p ro val with the reques t to
provid e material that is c o hesive with roofing materials us ed on the histo ric main s truc ture and througho ut
the neighborhood.
The current p o rtic o was c o nstruc ted in ap proximately 1945. The design of the flat roofline has resulted in
water damage, requiring numerous repairs s inc e its cons tructio n. The applic ant would like to remove the
flat ro o f of the exis ting portico, and replac e it with a pitched hip roof to eliminate the issue of water
d raining that has c aus ed s o much rot and damage in the exis ting ro o f. The footp rint of the proposed ro of
will als o be s lightly larger than the exis ting one, to ad d additio nal aid in water runoff and p ro tec tion of the
p o rtic o struc ture. The proposed ro o f will be c o ns truc ted o f c o p p er.
The ap p licant has provid ed a written statement doc umenting his res earch on the property to d etermine the
histo ric s ignific anc e of the portico. Fro m what was fo und , they b elieve that the p o rtic o was no t o riginal to
the ho me, b ut ad d ed at a later d ate. They p rovid ed bluep rints that sho w exis ting fo o ters o f a large p o rch
that was p revio us ly removed before the portic o was c o nstruc ted.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
Nat Waggoner, PMP, AICP
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Exhibit 1 - Location Map Exhibit
Page 70 of 180
Exhibit 2- Letter of Intent and Supporting Materials Exhibit
Exhibit 3 and 4 - Plans and Specifications Exhibit
Exhibit 5- His toric Res ources Survey Exhibit
Exhibit 6 - Staff Report Exhibit
Page 71 of 180
EL
M
S
T
A
SH
ST
S M
A
I
N
S
T
W 1 6 T H S T
S
C
H
U
R
C
H
S
T
FO
R
E
S
T
S
T
S A
U
S
TIN
AV
E
TI
M
B
E
R
S
T
S M
Y
R
TL
E
S
T
E 1 5 T H S T
W U N I V E RSI TY AV E E U N I V ER S I T Y AV E
E 1 7T H S T
E 1 3T H S T
E 1 4T H S T
E 1 6 T H S T
W 1 4 T H S T
H
A
R
T
S
T
R
O
C
K
S
T
GE
ORGE
S
T
W 1 7 T H S T
M
A
R
TI
N
LU
T
H
E
R
K
I
N
G
J
R
S
T
S
M
Y
R
T
L
E
S
T
E 1 6 T H S T
COA-2018-001Exhibit #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
0 250 500Fee t
Page 72 of 180
Page 73 of 180
Page 74 of 180
Page 75 of 180
Page 76 of 180
Page 77 of 180
Page 78 of 180
Page 79 of 180
Page 80 of 180
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:1236 S Main St 2016 Survey ID:124329
City Georgetown 2016 Preservation Priority:Medium
SECTION 1
Basic Inventory Information
WCAD ID:R043415Property Type:Building Structure Object Site District
Date Recorded 3/14/2016Recorded by:CMEC
EstimatedActual Source:2007 surveyConstruction Date:1940
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:2007 survey address: 2030 S. Main St (Notes from 2007 Survey: door replaced; vinyl siding)
High Medium
Priority:
Low
High Medium Low
ID:516
ID:430
*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:124329 2016 Survey High Medium Low
Explain:Property retains a relatively high degree of integrity; property is significant and contributes to neighborhood character
Latitude:30.631671 Longitude -97.677204
None Selected
None Selected
Elevation, photo taken facing West; Photo direction: West
Page 81 of 180
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:1236 S Main St 2016 Survey ID:124329
City Georgetown 2016 Preservation Priority:Medium
Additional Photos
SouthwestPhoto Direction
Page 82 of 180
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
[COA-2018-001] – 1236 S. Main Street Page 1 of 5
Meeting Date: 2/22/2018
File Number: COA-2018-001
AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION
Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for the
replacement of the roof of the existing portico located at 1236 S. Main St., bearing the legal description
of 0.16 ac. Morrow Addition, Block B (NE/PT). – Madison Thomas, AICP, Historic & Downtown
Planner
AGENDA ITEM DETAILS
Project Name: Burke Residential Remodel
Applicant: Tim, T.A. Todd Construction
Property Owner: Joe and Kathy Burke
Property Address: 1236 S. Main Street, Georgetown Texas 78626
Legal Description: 0.16 ac. Morrow Addition, Block B (NE/PT)
Historic Overlay: Old Town Overlay, Belford Historic District being a National Register District
Case History: This is the first review for this application.
HISTORIC CONTEXT
Date of construction: est. 1940
Historic Resources Survey Level of Priority: 1984 – Low
2007 - Medium
2016 - Medium
National Register Designation: No
Texas Historical Commission Designation: No
APPLICANT’S REQUEST
The applicant is proposing to remove the existing portico roof due to water damage and replace it with
a larger, pitched hip roof.
The current portico was constructed in approximately 1945, shortly after the construction of the main
house. The applicant has provided a written statement documenting their research on the property to
determine the historic significance of the portico. From what was provided, they believe that the
portico was not original to the home, but added at a later date. They provided blueprints that show
existing footers of a large porch that was previously removed before the portico was constructed.
The design of the flat roofline has resulted in water damage, requiring numerous repairs since
construction. The applicant is seeking to remove the flat roof of the existing portico, and replace it with
a pitched hip roof to eliminate water pooling and intrusion which has caused rot and damage. The
footprint of the proposed roof will also be slightly larger than the existing one, to provide additional
Page 83 of 180
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
[COA-2018-001] – 1236 S. Main Street Page 2 of 5
aide with water runoff and protection of the portico structure. The proposed roof will be plated with
copper.
APPLICABLE DESIGN GUIDELINES
The following guidelines are applicable to the proposed scope of work in accordance with the adopted
Downtown and Old Town Design Guidelines:
GUIDELINES FINDINGS
4.1 Avoid removing or altering any significant architectural detail. Complies
4.2 Avoid adding elements or details that were not part of the original building. Does Not
Comply
4.3 Protect and maintain significant stylistic elements. N/A
4.4 Repair only those features that are deteriorated. Complies
4.7 Remove only that which is deteriorated and must be replaced. Complies
4.8 Replace missing original details in kind. Does Not
Comply
4.9 Replacement of missing or deteriorated details shall be based on original
features.
Does Not
Comply
4.11 Avoid adding decorative elements, unless thorough research indicates that the
building once had them.
Does Not
Comply
5.4 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing it
on a primary surface.
Does Not
Comply
5.5 Do not use synthetic materials, such as aluminum, vinyl siding, or panelized
brick, as replacements for primary building materials on an historic structure.
Complies
5.8 Protect wood features from deterioration. Complies
5.9 Plan repainting carefully. N/A
6.25 Maintain an historic porch and its detailing. Does Not
Comply;
copper is not
original
6.26 Avoid enclosing an historic front porch with opaque materials. N/A
6.27 The detailing of decks and exterior stairs should be compatible with the style
and period of the structure.
N/A
STAFF ANALYSIS
The Downtown and Old Town Design Guidelines refer to porches as the prime feature of the front
façade that boast character-defining features and possess historical importance that should be
preserved. The architectural styles of porches differ in scale, materials, height, etc. that typically
correspond with the architectural style of the house. The Downtown Design Guidelines reinforce the
Page 84 of 180
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
[COA-2018-001] – 1236 S. Main Street Page 3 of 5
concept of historical significance and integrity with the Basic Preservation Principles for Georgetown
focusing on respecting the historic character of the building, preserving key character-defining features
of the property and repairing deteriorated historic features, and replacing only those elements that
cannot be repaired. The sequence of preservation actions should be to replace those features beyond
repair while designing any new feature to be compatible.
Because the applicant is requesting to replace the roof, instead of maintaining and repairing the
damaged portions, the proposed portico varies in style and size and therefore does not comply with the
Design Guidelines’ direction to maintain the existing location, shape, details and columns of the porch.
However, it is typical of Colonial Revival homes to have porticos with both styles of rooflines, flat and
pitched. Both styles can be found among historic homes within Georgetown.
Using materials to match those that have been used historically is the best approach. If a substitute
material is considered, it should be similar in color, design, composition and texture to the original.
Changing to a copper roofing material neither meets the intention of the guidelines for identifying a
substitute material, nor is compatible with the main structure’s roofing material or with the materials
used in the surrounding neighborhood.
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, detail, and
shape and will be constructed from historic or appropriate new materials.
3. If inadequate documentation of original porches exists, a new porch should be typical of
those built in the style of the historic building. A simplified adaptation may be allowed 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 being 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
appropriate 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 documented
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 building
historically or if they are characteristic of the style of building.
Page 85 of 180
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
[COA-2018-001] – 1236 S. Main Street Page 4 of 5
CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL
In accordance with Section 3.13.030 of the Unified Development Code, the HARC must consider the
following criteria:
SECTION 3.13.030 CRITERIA FINDINGS
A. The application is complete and the information contained within the
application is correct and sufficient enough to allow adequate review and final
action;
Complies
B. Compliance with any design standards of the Unified Development Code; Complies, see
Exhibit 3
C. Compliance with the adopted Downtown Design Guidelines, as may be
amended from time to time, specific to the applicable Historic or Overlay
District;
Does Not
Comply, see
Exhibit 3
D. The integrity of an individual historic structure is preserved. Complies
E. New buildings or additions are designed to be compatible with surrounding
historic properties.
Complies
F. The overall character of the Historic or applicable Overlay District is protected. Complies
G. Signs that are out of keeping with the adopted design standards, and are not in
character with the site or landmarks within the Historic or applicable Overlay
District in question will not be permitted.
N/A
H. The following may also be considered by the HARC when determining whether
to approve a Certificate for Design Compliance:
1. The effect of the proposed change upon the general historic, cultural, and
architectural nature of the site, landmark, or District.
2. The appropriateness of exterior architectural features, including parking
and loading spaces, which can be seen from a public street, alley, or
walkway.
3. The general design, arrangement, texture, material, and color of the
building or structure and the relation of such factors to similar features of
buildings or structures in the District, contrast or other relation of such
factors to other landmarks built at or during the same period, as well as the
uniqueness of such features, considering the remaining examples of
architectural, historical, and cultural values.
1. Complies
2. Complies
3. Does Not
Complies
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff finds that the proposed renovations to roof of the existing portico, with proposed roof pitch and
material, do not maintain the character of the existing portico. However, the proposed roof style is a
common style of portico that can be found on Colonial Revival homes and the purpose of the change is
to reduce water damage. The request to use copper for the roofing does not meet the design guidelines
policy of finding a material that is the same or similar to the original nor does it match the material of
Page 86 of 180
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
[COA-2018-001] – 1236 S. Main Street Page 5 of 5
the main structure. Staff recommends approval with the consideration to provide a material that is
cohesive with roofing materials used on the historic main structure and throughout the neighborhood.
As of the date of this report, staff has not received any written.
ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1 – Location Map
Exhibit 2 - Letter of Intent
Exhibit 3 and 4 – Plans (rendering) and Specifications
Exhibit 5 – Historic Resources Survey
SUBMITTED BY
Madison Thomas, AICP, Historic & Downtown Planner
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Page 87 of 180
City of Georgetown, Texas
Historic and Architectural Review
February 22, 2018
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing and possible action o n a reques t for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for
recons truction, alterations and c hanges to the existing build ing, and new s ignage that is incons is tent with
ap p licable guidelines fo r the property loc ated at 1102 S. Austin Ave. - Nat Waggoner, AICP, Lo ng Range
Planning Manager
ITEM SUMMARY:
At the January 25th regular meeting of HARC Commis sioners reviewed conc ep tual rend erings of the
fo llo wing improvements :
1. Primary b uilding entranc e related to loc atio n and d es ign of tower element s een on south elevation
a. To wer element (Des ign Guidelines (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
trans parency and lighting (Guidelines 13.13).
ii. S W c o rner o f faç ade b ric k infill design
b . Eas t façade (elevatio n)
i. S torefront wind o ws and grap hic display walls within s to refro nt related to
trans parency 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
trans parency and lighting (Guidelines 13.13)
The Commiss io n p ro vided the following rec ommend ations to the ap p licant:
1) Primary entrance alo ng Univers ity is appropriate, ad d an entrance along Aus tin Ave.
2) Street fac ing façade mo d ificatio ns required for internal s tore configuratio ns s hould includ e:
a. S o uth façade (elevation)
i. S torefront wind o ws and grap hic display walls within s to refro nt related to
transparency and lighting (Guidelines 13.13). Incorp o rate his to ric p hoto s of
Georgetown into disp lay walls . Zero window glazing is proposed.
ii. S W c o rner o f faç ade b rick infill design to acc o mmodate future mural. Mural to
be coordinated b y City s taff through the Arts and C ulture Bo ard .
b . Eas t façade (elevatio n)
i. S torefront wind o ws and grap hic display walls within s to refro nt related to
transparency and lighting (Guidelines 13.13). Inc o rporate his toric pho tos o f
Georgetown into disp lay walls . Zero window glazing is proposed.
c . No rth faç ad e (elevation)
i. S torefront wind o ws and grap hic display walls within s to refro nt related to
transparency and lighting (Guidelines 13.13). Inc o rporate his toric pho tos o f
Georgetown into disp lay walls . Zero window glazing is proposed. Incorporate
to wer d es ign materials into NE corner of north to further unify develo p ment.
The fo llo wing items will require HARC ap proval:
1) To wer additio n
2) Window treatments along s o uth, east and north elevatio ns
Page 88 of 180
3) Ad d itio n o f to wer s tone elements o n no rth elevation
4) Ad d itio n o f mec hanical s creening material
5) Enc lo s ure of wind o w o n north façade (replac ement with service d o or entranc e)
6) Signage whic h exc eed s Do wntown and Old Town Design Guidelines fo r window c o verage and
numb er of p rimary s igns .
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- HRSR Exhibit
Exhibit 4 - Chapter 6 Guidelines Exhibit
Exhibit 5 - Chapter 9 Guidelines Exhibit
Exhibit 6 - Chapter 13 Exhibit
Exhibit 7- Staff Report Exhibit
Page 89 of 180
EL
M
ST
A
SH
ST
S
M
A
IN
S
T
W 8T H S T
W 10T H S T
W 9T H S T
W 11TH ST
S
C
H
U
R
C
H
S
T
S A
U
S
TI
N
AV
E
S
M
Y
R
TL
E
S
T
E 8 TH ST
R
OC
K
S
T
E 9 TH ST
E 1 0T H S T
E 1 1 T H S T
W U N IV E R SI TY AV E
H
A
R
T
S
T
RAILROAD AVE
TIM
B
E
R
S
T FO
R
E
S
T
S
T
WE
S
T
S
T
E 1 5T H S T
W 1 5 T H S T
E U N IV ER S IT Y AV E
E 1 3T H S T
E 1 4T H S T
W 14T H S T
W 1 3 T H S T
M
A
R
T
I
N
L
U
T
H
E
R
K
I
N
G
J
R
S
T
S
C
E
N
I
C
D
R
T
I
N
B
A
R
N
A
LY
E 1 6 T H ST
MONT
GOM
E
RY
ST
WE
S
T
S
T
W 9TH ST
WE
S
T
S
T
W 14T H S T
F
O
R
E
S
T
S
T
SC
E
N
I
C
D
R
COA-2018-002Exhibit #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
0 250 500Feet
Page 90 of 180
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
February 9, 2018
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 sign banding location along Austin and University Avenues which would
complement the existing canopies and significantly minimize the amount of tenant signage. In
total the number of signs are reduced from 12 to 2.
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. An entrance (sliding door) facing Austin will
also be added.
3. The addition of a drive-thru window and awning. 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 91 of 180
p:\retail\cvs\new stores\jcdt17-0222 - 06894 georgetown tx\200-design\georgetown tx_harc letter 02-09-2018.docx Page 2
The intent of the minor building modifications are to maintain the already constructed facade by minimizing
the changes to the rhythm and fabric of the existing retail building. We believe that these improvements
will maintain or add to the character of this intersection while maintaining conformance to the previous
approved guidelines.
Sincerely,
John Polsinelli NCARB, AIA
Page 92 of 180
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 93 of 180
20 4
FEET8 16 32
FINISH FLOOR
0' - 0"
EXISTING
5' - 10"
EXISTING
13' - 5"
EXISTING
4' - 9"
EXISTING
4' - 9"
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"
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
XP2
NEW DOOR
8' - 9"
4'
-
9
"
WINDOW 1 WINDOW 2
7'
-
8
"
NEW WINDOW
4' - 0"
FINISH FLOOR
0' - 0"
NEW RECEIVING DOOR.
WINDOW INFILL TO MATCH
CORNER DETAILS
16
'
-
0
"
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 BEYONDXP2XP2
XP2
WINDOW 2WINDOW 1
EX1
FINISH FLOOR
0' - 0"
STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF
(BEYOND)
NEW
28' - 11"
NEW CANOPY
EX1EX5
EX5
EXISTING
13' - 6"
EXISTING
13' - 9"
NEW
20' - 7"
EXISTING
73' - 1"
EXISTING
7' - 4"
EXISTING DOWNSPOUT
XP4EX14
NEW AWNINGS
GRAPHIC DISPLAY WALL BEYOND
NEW
AWNING
NEW
AWNING
XP3
XP4
XP3
4' - 9"
WINDOW 1 WINDOW 2
WINDOW 3
12' - 0"
LOCATION OF FUTURE
MURAL BY CITY. EXACT
SIZE TBD.
7' - 8"
FINISH FLOOR
0' - 0"CVS EGRESS DOOR NEW ELECTRICAL SERVICE
XP1 EX9
NEW
28' - 11"
EXISTING
30' - 9"
EXISTING
NEW DRIVE THRU
WINDOW & CANOPY
EX1
NEW LADDER
EXISTING DOWNSPOUT
EXISTING DOWNSPOUT
EXISTING DOWNSPOUT
EX14 EX14EX14
6' - 0"
EX5
NEW AWNING
XP2
XP3 XP3
XP3
10' - 0"
EAST ELEVATION
TOTAL WINDOW AREA = 815 SQ FT.
MAX. SIGNAGE CAN NOT BE GREATER THAN
30% x 815 SQ. FT. OF TOTAL WINDOW AREA ON
ELEVATION = 245 SQ FT
SIGNAGE CANNOT BE GREATER THAN 50%
OF INDIVIDUAL WINDOW
WINDOW 1 = 116 SQ FT.
ALLOWABLE SIGNAGE ON WINDOW 1 = 58 SQ FT.
ACTUAL SIGNAGE ON WINDOW = 3 SQ FT.
SIGNAGE ON WINDOW 1 = 2.6%
WINDOW 2 = 116 SQ FT.
ALLOWABLE SIGNAGE ON WINDOW 2 = 58 SQ FT.
ACTUAL SIGNAGE ON WINDOW = 3 SQ FT.
SIGNAGE ON WINDOW 2 = 2.6%
TOTAL WINDOW SIGNAGE =
6 SQ FT. < 245 SQ FT.
SOUTH ELEVATION
TOTAL WINDOW AREA = 569 SQ FT.
MAX. SIGNAGE CAN NOT BE GREATER THAN
30% x 569 SQ FT. OF TOTAL WINDOW AREA ON
ELEVATION = 171 SQ FT
SIGNAGE CANNOT BE GREATER THAN 50%
OF INDIVIDUAL WINDOW
WINDOW 1 = 119 SQ FT.
ALLOWABLE SIGNAGE ON WINDOW 1 = 59.5 SQ FT.
ACTUAL SIGNAGE ON WINDOW = 3 SQ FT.
SIGNAGE ON WINDOW 1 = 2.6%
WINDOW 2 = 117 SQ FT.
ALLOWABLE SIGNAGE ON WINDOW 2 = 58.5 SQ FT.
ACTUAL SIGNAGE ON WINDOW = 3 SQ FT.
SIGNAGE ON WINDOW 2 = 2.6%
WINDOW 3 = 186 SQ FT.
SIGNAGE ON WINDOW 3 = 41 SQ FT.
SIGNAGE ON WINDOW 3 = 22%
TOTAL WINDOW SIGNAGE =
47 SQ FT. < 171 SQ FT.
NORTH ELEVATION
TOTAL WINDOW AREA = 325 SQ FT.
MAX. SIGNAGE CAN NOT BE GREATER THAN
30% x 325 SQ. FT. OF TOTAL WINDOW AREA ON
ELEVATION = 97.5 SQ FT
SIGNAGE CANNOT BE GREATER THAN 50%
OF INDIVIDUAL WINDOW
WINDOW 1 = 116 SQ FT.
SIGNAGE ON WINDOW 1 = 23 SQ FT.
SIGNAGE ON WINDOW 1 = 20%
WINDOW 3 = 116 SQ FT.
ALLOWABLE SIGNAGE ON WINDOW 2 = 58 SQ FT.
ACTUAL SIGNAGE ON WINDOW = 3 SQ FT.
SIGNAGE ON WINDOW 2 = 2.6%
TOTAL WINDOW SIGNAGE =
26 SQ FT. < 97.5 SQ FT.
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
XP2 PITTSBURGH PAINTS PAINT, EARL GRAY 522-5
XP3 PITTSBURGH PAINTS PAINT, PHOTO GRAY 411-4
XP4 PITTSBURGH PAINTS PAINT, BON BON 426-3
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.)
02.16.2018
Page 95 of 180
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
.
02.09.2018
RTU SCREENING SITE LIGHTING DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE
GOOSENECK FIXTURE
Page 96 of 180
SITE RISK ASSESSMENT
CS Project #106713; NEC University Ave & Austin Ave Georgetown, TX
FREESTANDING SIGN
CVS FCO’s LTRS
B5
WALL PLAQUES & ALUM. PANELS
B6
DIRECTIONAL SIGNS DRIVE-THRU FCO’s LTRS
C1
3'
-
0
"
1'
-
6
"
1'-6"
SIDE A SIDE B
1.77 SQ. FT.
Colonial White,
Placement TBD
2'-0"
1'-6"
3 SQ. FEET
B1
Zone - Downtown overlay - design guidelines to follow & subject for review
Wall allowance -1 sign allowed - Flush mounted only & NTE 1 sq ft for every one ft of linear facade width
Freestanding sign - 1 sign only fpr 1 sq ft per linear foot og primary facade NTE a max of 48 sq ft per sign face & 5' OAH from grade to top of sign
Setback - 5' from ROW
In addition to sign permits applicants in the Downtown Overlay DIistrict must also receive a Certifacte of Compliance for all permittable signage
QTY of signage subject to change upon confirmation by the City
NOTE: Gooseneck lighting preferred per city code
5’-0” from R.O.W.
5’-0” from Property Line
5’
-
0
”
f
r
o
m
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
L
i
n
e
1.87 SQ. FEET
A1
12’ WHIPS
74.43 SQ. FEET
20
3
/
8
"
33
3
/
4
"
26’-5 9/16”
FACE: 14.76 SqFt.
drive-thru pharmacy
13
"
B
a
s
e
2"
2"
6
1
/
2
"
3’
-
4
”
[
4
0
”
C
V
S
C
a
b
i
n
e
t
]
3’
-
1
0
1
/
2
”
[
4
6
1
/
2
”
M
a
i
n
S
i
g
n
B
o
d
y
]
5’-3/4” [60 3/4” CVS Cabinet]
5’-6 3/4” [66 3/4” Main Sign Body]
12"
Front Elevation Side Elevation
Scale: 1/2” = 1’-0”
35
”
55 3/4”
Electric sweep
to be coordinated
with GC on site at
time of install
B3
B4
68 1/8"
6 SQ. FEET
10 SQ. FEET
Front Canopy Sign Layout
Side Canopy Sign Layout
12
"
5
1
/
4
"
6'-0"
68 1/8"
10'-0"
5
1
/
4
"
12
"
2
1
/
2
"
Page 97 of 180
CS Project #106713; NEC University Ave & Austin Ave Georgetown, TX
Scale: 1/16” = 1’-0”NORTH ELEVATION
EAST ELEVATION
WEST ELEVATION
SOUTH ELEVATION
33
3
/
4
"
33
3
/
4
"
26’-5 9/16”
26’-5 9/16”
Page 98 of 180
CS Project #106713; NEC University Ave & Austin Ave Georgetown, TX Page 99 of 180
CS Project #106713; NEC University Ave & Austin Ave Georgetown, TX
1
2
3M 3630-53 CARDINAL RED3
4
drive-thru pharmacy
13
"
B
a
s
e
2"
2"
6
1
/
2
"
3’
-
4
”
[
4
0
”
C
V
S
C
a
b
i
n
e
t
]
3’
-
1
0
1
/
2
”
[
4
6
1
/
2
”
M
a
i
n
S
i
g
n
B
o
d
y
]
5’-3/4” [60 3/4” CVS Cabinet]
5’-6 3/4” [66 3/4” Main Sign Body]
FACE: 14.76 SqFt.
A1 5’-0” Monument
12"
Front Elevation Side Elevation
Scale: 1/2” = 1’-0”
35
”
55 3/4”
Electric sweep
to be coordinated
with GC on site at
time of install
Page 100 of 180
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 101 of 180
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 102 of 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
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 180
City of Georgetown
page 68 Page 120 of 180
Design Guidelines for Signs
page 101
Chapter 9
Design guiDelines for signs
This chapter presents design guidelines for the de-sign of signs. The design guidelines are organized into a series of relevant design topics. Within each category, individual policies and design guidelines are presented, which the City will use in determin-ing the appropriateness of the work proposed.
Traditionally, a variety of signs were seen in the downtown. Five different types occurred:• Small, freestanding signs mounted on a pole or post; located near the sidewalk because the primary structure or business was set-back from the street (e.g., an area with resi-dential character); printed on both sides• Medium-sized, square or rectangular shaped signs that projected from the building above the awnings or canopies; printed on both sides• Small, horizontally-oriented rectangular signs that protruded from the building below the awnings or canopies but above pedestrians’ heads; printed on both sides• Medium- to large-sized, horizontally-oriented rectangular signs attached flat against the building, above and/or below the awnings; printed on one side only• Window signs, painted on glass; used at the street level and on upper floors
Signs that were mounted on the exterior advertised the primary business of a building. Typically, this use occupied a street level space and sometimes upper floors as well. In the case of a large structure that included several businesses on upper floors, the name of the building itself was displayed on an exterior sign. Tenants relied on a directory at the street level.
In addition, signs were mounted to fit within ar-chitectural features. In many cases, they were mounted flush above the storefront, just above moldings. Others were located between columns or centered in “panels” on a building face. This method also enabled one to perceive the design character of individual structures.
In This Chapter:Sign context 102Appropriate signs 103 Sign character 111
Each nonresidential structure in the Downtown and Old Town Overlay Districts may have up to five types of signs in use at any given time: pri-mary, secondary, window, portable, and temporary. Multi-tenant buildings shall share signage through co-locating the various businesses’ advertising on directories and monument or other approved signs via an approved Master Sign Plan. • A primary sign represents the owner’s largest sign expense and is likely the most important of the five sign types. Only one primary sign will be allowed per business per building. The primary sign’s audience is specifically the viewer driving past in a vehicle. • Secondary signs are utilized in addition to the primary building sign. Typically, a secondary sign protrudes from the building below the awnings or canopies but above pedestrian heads, printed on both signs. This may also be a small to medium free-standing sign mounted on a pole or post. The secondary sign is generally intended to capture the attention of the pedestrian walking on the sidewalk.• Window signs are painted or applied to the glass used at street level and/or on upper floors. The window signage is intended for the pedestrian walking on the sidewalk and conveys specific information about the busi-ness offered.• Portable signs are intended for the pedes-trian walking on the sidewalk. Portable signs include sandwich boards, signs mounted on easels, or freestanding frames with sign inserts.• Temporary signs are used for a special pur-pose, such as limited-time offer or a sale. Planning and Development Department staff may approve temporary signs for up to 45 days. If more time is requested the item will be forwarded to HARC.
Page 121 of 180
City of Georgetown
page 102
A sign typically serves two functions: first, to at-tract attention, and second to convey information, essentially identifying the business or services offered within. If it is well designed, the building front alone can serve the attention-getting func-tion, allowing the sign to be focused on conveying information in a well-conceived manner. All new signs should be developed with the overall context of the building and of the area in mind.
9.1 Consider the building front as part of an overall sign program.• Coordinate a sign within the overall façade composition.• A sign should be in proportion to the building, such that it does not dominate the appear-ance.• Develop a master sign plan for the entire building; this should be used to guide indi-vidual sign design decisions.• This is especially important in Area 2 where the use of contemporary building forms and styles and several colorful, attention-getting signs have appeared in the past. Such a typi-cal “strip-commercial” development pattern is inappropriate in the Downtown and Old Town Overlay Districts.
Policy: Design a sign to be in balance with the overall character of the property.
The overall facade composition, including ornamental
details and signs, should be coordinated.
The applicable sign standards shall be
those contained within these design guide-
lines. In the event that no standard exists,
the standards in the Unified Development
Code, Chapter 10, shall apply, and may be
modified in order to more accurately reflect
the express language or the intent of these
design guidelines in regards to signs. The
sizing, placement, manner, and overall
aesthetics of a sign shall be regulated to
conform to other guidelines in this chapter.
A business logo cannot be altered if it is
federally trademarked.
Page 122 of 180
Design Guidelines for Signs
page 103
9.2 A sign shall be subordinate to the overall building composition.• A sign should appear to be in scale with the facade.• Locate a sign on a building such that it will emphasize design elements of the facade itself. • Mount a sign to fit within existing architectural features. Use the shape of the sign to help reinforce the horizontal lines of moldings and transoms seen along the street.
Well-designed signs are needed in the historic District for communication and identifying goods and services available in the District. But signs are artifacts in themselves. They are a significant component of the environment. Signs affect the quality, image, and cohesiveness of the entire historic District.
The placement or location of a sign is a critical factor in maintaining the order and integrity of the Downtown Overlay District and Old Town Overlay District. Consistent placement of signs according to building type, size, location, and even building materials create a visual pattern that the pedes-trian can easily interpret and utilize to the mutual benefit of merchants, tourists, and customers.
Policy: Appropriate signs include freestanding, flush mounted, window, projecting, hanging, awning, and directory signs.
A sign should be in proportion to the building, such
that it does not dominate the appearance.
Page 123 of 180
City of Georgetown
page 104
9.3 A primary sign should identify the ser-vices or business offered within.• To avoid driver confusion, the information on the primary sign should be in a large enough font or design that it is easily viewable from a vehicle.• The sign should contain only enough in-formation to alert the viewer in a vehicle to the location of the business or entity at the building.• Whenever possible, other signs should be utilized for information geared towards pe-destrian or other viewers.• The primary sign should be easily viewable from a vehicle with as little visual clutter as possible.
9.4 A secondary sign should identify the services or business offered within.• Typically, a secondary sign is intended to capture the attention of pedestrians walking on the sidewalk.• The sign should contain only enough infor-mation to alert the viewer on a sidewalk to the location of the business or entity at the building.• The secondary sign should be easily view-able from the sidewalk with as little visual clutter as possible.
9.5 Freestanding or pole mounted signs may be considered.• A freestanding sign may be used in the front yard of a former residence with a commercial use.• A freestanding sign may also be used in ar-eas where the primary use is set back from the street edge.
Freestanding or pole mounted signs may be
considered.
Page 124 of 180
Design Guidelines for Signs
page 105
9.6 A flush-mounted wall sign may be con-sidered.• In many cases, turn-of-the century building types common in Georgetown have a sign frieze, which is a panel by trim that sits just above the transom. This is the ideal location for the primary building sign. The sign frieze is typically located above the transom and below the second-floor windows.• When utilizing the sign frieze as the sign placement location, it is important to respect the frieze borders. In other words, the sign should not overlap or crowd the top, bottom, or ends of the frieze.• When feasible, place a wall sign such that it aligns with others on the block.
9.7 A flush-mounted wall sign shall not ex-ceed one square foot for every one foot of linear facade width.• For instance, a building with twenty feet of street frontage would be eligible for a sign of twenty square feet (20 x 1 = 20). In true sign dimensions, this would be a sign of ap-proximately two feet by ten feet.• Note that the formula establishes the maxi-mum permitted sign area, when all other factors of scale, proportion, and compatibility are met. A sign does not have to be as large as this equation allows. The first consider-ation shall be compatibility with the size and character of the facade.• In a case where a building has more than one face exposed to a public way, the allowed sign area may not be combined.
Locate a flush-mounted sign such that it fits within a
panel formed by moldings or transom panels.
When utilizing the sign frieze as the sign placement
location, it is important to respect the frieze borders.
Page 125 of 180
City of Georgetown
page 106
9.8 A window sign may be considered.• A window sign may be considered in addi-tion to the primary building sign to convey specific information regarding contact in-formation (i.e. telephone number, email, or web address of a business), other business locations, or list more than one (1) specific product or service.• A window sign should cover no more than thirty percent (30%) of the total window area.• It may be painted on the glass, attached with flush vinyl, or hung just inside a window using appropriate attachment materials, as reviewed and approved by HARC.• No more than 50% of a window shall be cov-ered by business signage, advertisements, open signs, hours of operation, and other messages.• One small (maximum 2 square feet) window sign with a dark background displaying the business’ hours of operation with contrasting, but not in a vivid color, lettering is allowed without Certificate of Design Compliance re-view; if additional size or design is requested, then a CDC is required.• One small (maximum 1.5 square feet) ‘open’ sign per business is allowed to be placed in a window without Certificate of Design Compli-ance review, if additional size is requested then a CDC is required. The sign message cannot be in a flashing or traveling mode.• Electronic message center signs that are designed to be visible from the right-of-way are not allowed.• While window displays are not reviewed by HARC, their use is very important to retailers. The attractiveness of a display is likely the highest contributing factor to whether or not a pedestrian will enter a store, and its design should be carefully planned.• Please note that HARC will take cognizance
and assume jurisdiction of signs within a
store that is obviously intended to be viewed
through a window.
A window sign may be considered. A window sign may
be painted on or hung just inside a window. (Wichita,
KS)
Page 126 of 180
Design Guidelines for Signs
page 107
9.9 A hanging sign may be considered.• A small hanging sign is easier for a pedes-trian to read than other sign types and is encouraged.• A small hanging sign should be located near the business entrance, just above the door or to the side of it. • A hanging sign installed under a canopy should be a maximum of 50% of the canopy’s width.• A hanging sign should be mounted perpen-dicular with the building facade.• A hanging sign should provide a minimum of eight feet clearance between the sidewalk surface and the bottom of the sign. However, a hanging sign mounted under a canopy may provide a minimum clearance of seven feet.• A hanging sign shall be no more than eight square feet in size.
9.10 A projecting sign may be considered.• A projecting sign should appear to be in proportion with the building. It should not overwhelm the appearance of the building or obscure key architectural features.• A projecting sign shall provide a minimum clearance of eight feet between the sidewalk surface and the bottom of the sign.• A projecting sign shall be no more than fifteen square feet in size with a maximum sign height of five feet.• Additionally, a projecting sign shall in no case project beyond 1/2 of the sidewalk width.• Signs should not obscure the view of any windows, existing signs, and/or adjacent buildings to an unreasonable extent.• A large projecting sign is not permitted unless other types of signage are not appropriate for the building. • A large projecting sign, if approved, should be mounted higher, and centered on the facade or positioned at the corner of a build-ing. Generally, a projecting sign should not be located above the second floor.• “Blade” signs are considered projecting signs and should follow the guidelines for project-ing signs.• Any two-sided sign shall be designed to be back to back and in no case shall both sides of the sign be visible at any time to the reader.
A small hanging sign should be located near the
business entrance.
A larger projecting sign should be mounted higher, and
centered on the facade or positioned at the corner of
a building.
Page 127 of 180
City of Georgetown
page 108
9.11 Awning and canopy signs may be con-sidered.• An awning or canopy sign shall not exceed one square foot for every one linear foot of facade width. In no case should an awning or canopy sign exceed the size of the awning or canopy surface to which it is applied.• The size of an awning or canopy sign shall be calculated by its actual area and shall be included in the calculation for total allowable building signage.• Consider mounting a sign centered on top of a building canopy where a flush-mounted sign would obscure architectural details.• A sign mounted on top and affixed to a build-ing canopy, and located perpendicular to the building shall not be allowed.• Appearance of a sign as viewed from an upper level out must be considered.
9.12 A directory sign for multi-tenant buildings must be considered.• A Master Sign Plan is required for multi-ten-ant buildings.• Where several businesses share a building, coordinate the signs. Align several smaller signs, or group them into a single panel as a directory. • Use similar forms or backgrounds for the signs to tie them together visually and make them easier to read.• The manner in which a directory sign is mounted to a building, either flush to or projecting from a wall, will determine the maximum allowable sign area. • Electronic message centers are not al-lowed.• Signage allocation must be considered when setting up a building for multiple tenants, and the appropriate distribution of allowable sign square footage and sign sizes and locations planned for the various tenants.
- For the maximum area of a flush-mounted
sign see design guideline 9.7.
- For the maximum area of a projecting sign
see design guideline 9.10.
Awning and canopy signs may be considered.
Where several businesses share a building, coordinate
the signs. (Boulder, CO)
Page 128 of 180
Design Guidelines for Signs
page 109
9.13 A portable sign may be considered, in the Downtown Overlay District.• Portable signs are intended for pedestrian traffic on the sidewalk and can convey spe-cific information regarding contact informa-tion.• A portable sign may list more than one spe-cific product or service and/or promotional information (i.e., daily specials, sales, or business related announcements.)• Portable signs include A-frame, sandwich boards, signs mounted on easels or free-standing frames with sign inserts.• An A-frame or sandwich board sign should be limited to 12 square feet of surface per side and should in no case exceed four feet in height and three feet in width.• A sign mounted on an easel or a free-stand-ing frame with a sign insert should be limited to six square feet of surface per side and should in no case exceed five feet in height and three feet in width.• A portable sign should not interfere with pedestrian traffic.• A portable sign should be secured to the sidewalk. If an eye bolt is used it should be installed by the City of Georgetown and placed below the sidewalk surface, and a steel wire should be used to attach the sign to the bolt.• If the sign is not anchored with an eye bolt, then the sign shall be internally weighted rather than secured with sand bags or other external means.• Portable signs shall be taken inside when the business being advertised is not open.• Portable signs in Area 2 are discouraged, except when placed on a sidewalk adjacent to a street with heavy pedestrian traffic.
A portable sign may be considered, in the Downtown
Overlay District.
Page 129 of 180
City of Georgetown
page 110
9.14 A temporary sign may be considered.• A temporary sign (including banners) should be limited to a maximum of twenty-four square feet in area with a maximum height of three feet.• A temporary sign, when installed, should not obscure windows or other architectural details of a building.• In no case will a temporary sign be allowed to substitute as a permanent sign.• Planning and Development Department staff may approve temporary signs for up to 45 days, a request for a longer time period will be forwarded to HARC. • Temporary signs should respect the design and color guidelines for permanent signs.
9.15 A sign should not in any way obscure or compete with architectural details of an his-toric building facade. • This is especially important for a building with historic significance.• A sign should be designed to integrate with the architectural features of a building not distract attention from them.
Although this sign is appropriately designed and scaled
to fit this traditional building, it is mounted in a manner
that obscures architectural details. (2001)
This position keeps details visible. (2008)
Page 130 of 180
Design Guidelines for Signs
page 111
9.16 Signs that are out of character with those seen historically and that would alter the historic character of the street are inappropri-ate.• Animated signs are prohibited.• Any sign that visually overpowers the build-ing or obscures significant architectural features is inappropriate.• Murals that include signage may be consid-ered appropriate and HARC may exclude portions of the mural from the size calcula-tions of Guideline 9.7. • Murals shall not be painted onto previously unpainted brick or masonry of historical sig-nificance.
9.17 Sign materials should be compatible with that of the building facade.• A simple, easy-to-read sign design is pre-ferred.• Typefaces that are in keeping with those seen in the area traditionally are encour-aged. • Select letter styles and sizes that will be compatible with the building front. Generally, these are typefaces with serifs.• Avoid hard-to-read or overly intricate type-face styles.• Painted wood and metal are appropriate materials for signs. Their use is encouraged. Unfinished materials, including untreated wood, are discouraged because they are out of character with the context of the Overlay Districts.• Plastic is not permitted, except for flush, adhesive, professionally installed lettering.• Highly reflective materials that will be difficult to read are inappropriate.• Painted signs on blank walls were common historically and may be considered.
Policy: A sign should be in character with the material, color, and detail of a building.
Painted wood and metal are appropriate materials for
signs.
Page 131 of 180
City of Georgetown
page 112
9.18 Using a symbol for a sign is encour-aged.• A symbol sign adds interest to the street, can be read quickly and is remembered better than written words.
9.19 Use colors for the sign that are compat-ible with those of the building front.• Sign colors should be limited. In general, no more than three colors should be used. For these Guidelines, black and white are not counted as colors.• HARC may consider different shades of a color similar enough to count as one color in the determination of the number of colors being allowed.• Signs with photo images, including multiple colors, are appropriate on A-frame/ sandwich board type signs only.
Symbol signs, like this barber’s pole, were used
historically and their use is encouraged today.
Symbol signs add interest to the street, are quickly
read and are remembered better than written words.
(Durango, CO)
Page 132 of 180
Design Guidelines for Signs
page 113
9.20 The light for a sign should be an indirect source.• Light should be directed at the sign from an external, shielded lamp.• The fixture should have a sense of design, which is coordinated with the sign surface and appropriate to building style and char-acter.• A warm light, similar to daylight, is appropri-ate. • Light should not shine directly or reflect into the eyes of pedestrians.• Exposed up-lights are inappropriate.
9.21 If internal illumination is used, it should be designed to be subordinate to the overall building composition.• Internal illumination of an entire sign panel is discouraged. If internal illumination is used, a system that backlights only the sign text is preferred.• Neon and other tubular illumination may be considered. However, use neon in limited amounts so it does not become visually obtrusive.• Internal illumination of an awning is inap-propriate.
9.22 Neon signs may be considered in limited situations.• The use of neon signs is more appropriate to new construction, non-historic structures, and historic structures built after 1930. These signs should have an historic character.• Neon is not appropriate on structures built before 1930 or on residential structures.• Unshielded neon is not permitted, per the UDC.
Lighting that is directed at a sign from an external,
shielded lamp, is preferred.
Internal illumination of an entire sign panel is
discouraged.
Page 133 of 180
City of Georgetown
page 114
9.23 Sign brackets and hardware should be compatible with the building and installed in a workman-like manner.
9.24 Maintenance of signs shall be required.• Re-secure sign mounts to the building front.• Repaint faded graphics.• Repair worn wiring.• Replace burned out bulbs.• Remove non-historic, obsolete signs.• Preserve historic painted signs in place as decorative features.
9.25 Signage should have a professional qual-ity and a finished appearance.• Signs that appear to be temporary, unfin-ished, or homemade are not allowed.• A change in a portion of a multi-tenant sign should be consistent with the original, ap-proved design.
9.26 Changing tenants in buildings with ap-proved multiple tenant signs.• Staff may approve sign face changes if they are the style of the approved multi-tenant sign.
Note: Signs for home-based businesses are not allowed per the Unified Development Code. The limitations of Unified Development Code Chapter 5 related to Home-Based Business shall apply.
Signs should have a professional quality and a finished
appearance.
Page 134 of 180
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 135 of 180
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 136 of 180
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 137 of 180
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 138 of 180
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 139 of 180
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 140 of 180
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 141 of 180
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 142 of 180
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 143 of 180
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 144 of 180
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 145 of 180
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 146 of 180
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 147 of 180
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 148 of 180
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 149 of 180
City of Georgetown
page 144 Page 150 of 180
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
COA-2018-002 (Commercial Renovation) Page 1 of 8
Meeting Date: 1/25/2018
File Number: COA-2018-002 (Commercial Renovations)
AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION
Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA)
for reconstruction, alterations and changes to the existing building, and new signage that is
inconsistent with applicable guidelines for the property located at 1102 S. Austin Ave. - Nat
Waggoner, AICP, Long Range Planning Manager
AGENDA ITEM DETAILS
Project Name: CVS Pharmacy
Applicant: John Polsinelli, Norr
Property Owner: Pelanje LP.
Property Address: 1102 S. Austin Ave, Georgetown Texas 78626
Legal Description: Block 65 (e/pt), Acres 0.8815 - Lost Addition, City of Georgetown,
Williamson County, Texas
Historic Overlay: Downtown Overlay, Area 2
HISTORIC CONTEXT
Date of construction: 1965
Historic Resources Survey Level of Priority: 1984 – N/A, 2007 – N/A, 2016 - Low
National Register Designation: No
Texas Historical Commission Designation: No
APPLICANT’S REQUEST
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 two (2) signs (window, wall sign) along University Avenue. This approval
requires an exception to the regulations pertaining to signage within the Downtown and Old
Town Design Guidelines.
2. The addition of one (1) signs (wall) along Austin Avenue. This approval requires an exception
to the regulations pertaining to signage within the Downtown and Old Town Design
Guidelines.
3. The addition of one (1) signs (window) along 11th Street. This approval requires an exception
to the regulations pertaining to signage within the Downtown and Old Town Design
Guidelines.
Page 151 of 180
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
COA-2018-002 (Commercial Renovation) Page 2 of 8
4. The addition of an internally illuminated monument sign at the driveway along University .
This approval requires an exception to the regulations pertaining to signage within the
Downtown and Old Town Design Guidelines.
5. The addition of an entry point along the south elevation.
6. The addition of down lighting (gooseneck) along east and south elevations.
APPLICABLE DESIGN GUIDELINES
The following guidelines are applicable to the proposed scope of work in accordance with the adopted
Downtown and Old Town Design Guidelines:
GUIDELINES FINDINGS
Chapter 4 - Design Guidelines for Individual Building Elements
4.1 Avoid removing or altering any significant architectural detail. - Do not remove
or alter architectural details that are in good condition or that can be repaired in
place.
N/A
Chapter 6 - Design Guidelines for Individual Building Elements
6.1 For a commercial storefront building, a rehabilitation project shall preserve these
character-defining elements:
N/A
6.2 Maintenance of storefronts. Complies
6.3 If a storefront is altered, restoring it to the original design is preferred. Does Not
Comply
6.4 Alternative designs that are contemporary interpretations of traditional
storefronts may be considered.
Complies
6.5 Retain the kickplate as a decorative panel. N/A
6.6 If the original kickplate is missing, develop a sympathetic replacement design. N/A
6.7 Preserve the character of the cornice line. Complies
6.8 Reconstruct a missing cornice when historic evidence is available. N/A
6.9 A simplified interpretation is also appropriate for a replacement. N/A
6.10 Retain the original shape of the transom glass in historic storefronts. N/A
6.11 A parapet wall should not be altered, especially those on primary elevations or
highly visible facades.
N/A
6.12 Preserve the position, number, size, and arrangement of historic windows and
doors in a building wall.
Does Not
Comply
6.13 Preserve the functional and decorative features of an historic window or door.
Does Not
Comply
Page 152 of 180
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
COA-2018-002 (Commercial Renovation) Page 3 of 8
GUIDELINES FINDINGS
6.14 Maintenance of windows. N/A
6.15 Repair wood features by patching, piecing-in, consolidating, or otherwise
reinforcing the wood.
N/A
6.16 Glass in doors and windows should be retained. N/A
6.17 Installing window air-conditioners in windows on building fronts is
inappropriate.
N/A
6.18 Maintain recessed entries. N/A
6.19 Where entries were not recessed historically, maintain them in their original
position.
Complies
6.20 When window or door replacement is necessary, match the replacement to the
original design as closely as possible.
Complies
6.21 Maintain the historic ratio of window and storefront openings to solid wall. Does Not
Comply
6.22 Preserve the original roof form of an historic structure. Complies
6.23 Locate downspouts to minimize impacts on historic canopies and other facade
details.
Complies
Chapter 9- Design Guidelines for Signs
9.1 Consider the building front as part of an overall sign program. Complies;
9.2 A sign shall be subordinate to the overall building composition. Does Not
Comply
9.3 A primary sign should identify the services or business offered within. Complies;
exceeds in
number
allowed
9.4 A secondary sign should identify the services or business offered within. Complies
9.5 Freestanding or pole mounted signs may be considered.
Complies
9.6 A flush-mounted wall sign may be considered. Complies
9.7 A flush-mounted wall sign shall not exceed one square foot for every one foot of
linear facade width.
Complies
9.8 A window sign may be considered. Does Not
Comply;
north and
south
elevations
exceed 50%
coverage of 1
window
Page 153 of 180
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
COA-2018-002 (Commercial Renovation) Page 4 of 8
GUIDELINES FINDINGS
9.9 A hanging sign may be considered. N/A
9.10 A projecting sign may be considered. N/A
9.11 Awning and canopy signs may be considered. Complies
9.12 A directory sign for multi-tenant buildings must be considered. N/A
9.13 A portable sign may be considered, in the Downtown Overlay District. N/A
9.14 A temporary sign may be considered. N/A
9.15 A sign should not in any way obscure or compete with architectural details of
an historic building facade.
Complies
9.16 Signs that are out of character with those seen historically and that would alter
the historic character of the street are inappropriate. - Any sign that visually overpowers
the building or obscures significant architectural features is inappropriate.
Does Not
Comply
9.17 Sign materials should be compatible with that of the building facade. Complies
9.18 Using a symbol for a sign is encouraged. Complies
9.19 Use colors for the sign that are compatible with those of the building front. Complies
9.20 The light for a sign should be an indirect source. Does not
Comply;
monument
sign
9.21 If internal illumination is used, it should be designed to be subordinate to the
overall building composition.
Does Not
Comply
9.22 Neon signs may be considered in limited situations. N/A
9.23 Sign brackets and hardware should be compatible with the building and
installed in a workman-like manner.
Complies
9.24 Maintenance of signs shall be required. N/A
9.25 Signage should have a professional quality and a finished appearance. Complies
9.26 Changing tenants in buildings with approved multiple tenant signs. N/A
Chapter 13 - Design Guidelines for Infill Construction Area 2 Downtown Overlay District
Locate a new building at the front property line. N/A
Where a portion of a building must be set back, define the edge of the property
with landscape elements. N/A
A new building shall reflect the traditional lot width as expressed by the following N/A
Building heights of larger projects should provide variety. Complies
Large project sites should be developed with several buildings, rather than a single
structure. N/A
Page 154 of 180
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
COA-2018-002 (Commercial Renovation) Page 5 of 8
GUIDELINES FINDINGS
Where a large building is needed, divide the building into modules that reflect the
traditional 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 following: Complies
Maintain views to the courthouse. N/A
Masonry materials that convey a sense of scale are preferred. Complies
A simple material finish is encouraged for a large expanse of wall plane. Complies
Traditional building materials such as wood, brick, and stone are encouraged. Complies
Use roof materials that appear similar to those seen traditionally. Complies
Develop the ground floor level of a project to encourage pedestrian activity. Complies
Orient the primary entrance of a building toward the street. Does Not
Comply
Clearly identify the road edge and project entrances for both automobiles and
pedestrians. Complies
Minimize the number of entrances along a street edge. Complies
Place parking areas to the rear of a site when feasible or disburse throughout the
site. Complies
A building shall fit within the range of yard dimensions seen in the block. Complies
Buildings shall convey a sense of human scale. Does Not
Comply
Building heights of larger projects should provide variety. N/A
Sloping roofs such as gable and hipped roofs are appropriate for primary roof
forms Complies
A porch on a converted residential structure should remain in place. N/A
New interpretations of traditional building styles are encouraged. Complies
Locate a new building at the front property line. N/A
STAFF ANALYSIS
CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL
In accordance with Section 3.13.030 of the Unified Development Code, the HARC must consider the
following criteria:
SECTION 3.13.030 CRITERIA FINDINGS
A. The application is complete and the information contained within the application
is correct and sufficient enough to allow adequate review and final action;
Complies
Page 155 of 180
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
COA-2018-002 (Commercial Renovation) Page 6 of 8
SECTION 3.13.030 CRITERIA FINDINGS
B. Compliance with any design standards of the Unified Development Code; Does Not
Comply,
signage
C. Compliance with the adopted Downtown Design Guidelines, as may be
amended from time to time, specific to the applicable Historic or Overlay District;
Does Not
Comply,
signage
D. The integrity of an individual historic structure is preserved. Complies
E. New buildings or additions are designed to be compatible with surrounding
historic properties.
Complies
F. The overall character of the Historic or applicable Overlay District is protected. Complies
G. Signs that are out of keeping with the adopted design standards, and are not in
character with the site or landmarks within the Historic or applicable Overlay
District in question will not be permitted.
Does Not
Comply
H. The following may also be considered by the HARC when determining whether
to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness:
1. The effect of the proposed change upon the general historic, cultural, and
architectural nature of the site, landmark, or District.
2. The appropriateness of exterior architectural features, including parking and
loading spaces, which can be seen from a public street, alley, or walkway.
3. The general design, arrangement, texture, material, and color of the building
or structure and the relation of such factors to similar features of buildings or
structures in the District, contrast or other relation of such factors to other
landmarks built at or during the same period, as well as the uniqueness of
such features, considering the remaining examples of architectural, historical,
and cultural values.
1. Complies
2. Complies
3. Complies
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The applicants request for signage exceeds the Unified Development Code and the guidelines set forth
in the Downtown and Old Town Design Guidelines, in three areas (1) Primary signage (2) secondary and
(3) window signage.
1) Primary Sign
a. 1 Primary sign allowed. Application includes 2 (1 south, 1 east elevation).
b. Definition per UDC:
i. Sign, Primary. A medium to large-size, horizontally oriented sign attached flat
against the building, above the awning, printed on one side only. Or, a medium-
size sign that projects from the building above the awning(s) or canopy(es),
printed on both sides. Or, a medium-size sign that is mounted on a free-standing
pole or post.
Notes - Length of primary entrance facade in feet is the max. sq. ft. permitted in the primary sign (south
façade is 101’).
Page 156 of 180
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
COA-2018-002 (Commercial Renovation) Page 7 of 8
Where a sign consists of individual letters, words, or symbols attached to a surface, building, canopy,
awning, or wall and all such elements are located in the same plane, the sign area shall be the area of the
smallest rectangle which completely encompasses all such letters, words, or symbols and any
accompanying background of a color different than the natural color of the wall. Where such sign
includes multiple words, each word located in the same plane shall be computed separately.
2) Secondary signs
a. Monument sign (located at University Ave)
i. Downtown and Old Town Design Guidelines:
1. 9.20 “The light for a sign should be an indirect source.” The applicant is
proposing internal illumination with matching material of building.
2. 9.21 “If internal illumination is used, it should be designed to be
subordinate to the overall building composition. Internal illumination of
an entire sign panel is discouraged. If internal illumination is used, a
system that backlights only the sign text is preferred.
a. Guideline 9.21 is not currently achieved, applicant is seeking
additional information on how to achieve 9.21. Staff recommends
applicant use down lighting (gooseneck) and discourages use of
internal illumination even if applicant can meet Guideline 9.21.
Applicant is seeking internal illumination.
ii. Staff recommends applicant consider placing monument sign at intersection of
Austin Ave/University at the SE corner of the property. Staff recommends
applicant use down lighting (gooseneck) and discourages use of internal
illumination even if applicant can meet Guideline 9.21recommend allowing
internal illumination of the sign and recommends
b. Staff does not support signage along horizontal face of drive thru cantilevere d canopy of
west elevation.
i. Staff recommends consideration of hanging signs below awning for additional
signage opportunities. Examples do exist within district include Wildfire on
Austin Ave, State Farm on 8th Street.
3) Window sign(s)
c. Heart within window 1 (north elevation) and window 3 (south elevation) are considered
window signage –
i. Sign. “Any device that uses letters, numerals, emblems, pictures, outlines,
characters, spectacle delineation, announcement, trademark, logo, illustrations,
designs, figures, or symbols for advertising purposes. The term "sign" shall also
include any use of color such as bands, stripes, patterns, outlines or delineations
displayed for the purpose of commercial identification (corporate colors) that
comprises more than 20 percent (20%) of any facade or visible roof face. This
term shall also include all flags other than Governmental Flags. “
Page 157 of 180
Planning Department Staff Report
Historic and Architectural Review Commission
COA-2018-002 (Commercial Renovation) Page 8 of 8
ii. Sign, Window. Any sign that is placed inside a window or upon the window or
upon the window panes or glass and is intended to be visible from the exterior of
the window. Merchandise displays shall not be considered window signs.
1. No more than 50% of a window shall be covered by business signage,
advertisements, open signs, hours of operation, and other messages.
iii. Staff recommends revising corporate color (red walls of window 1 and window 2) be
reduced to meet 50% requirement. Consider using a white wall color and using
the red heart banded by white outline.
iv. Applicant does not consider “red wall” color to be signage and will be asking
HARC to consider approval.
4) Façade
d. Staff requests applicant remove awning on SW corner (west elevation) and adding down
lighting for future mural illumination.
i. Staff requests removing the brick inset along the south elevation at the at the SW
corner to allow a flush surface for the mural.
As of the date of this report, staff has not received any written.
ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit 1 – Location Map
Exhibit 2 - Letter of Intent
Exhibit 3 – Plans (rendering) and Specifications
Exhibit 4 – Historic Resources Survey Information
SUBMITTED BY
Nat Waggoner, Long Range Planning Manager
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Page 158 of 180
City of Georgetown, Texas
Historic and Architectural Review
February 22, 2018
SUBJECT:
Presentation and discussion of conceptual design o f a mixed use p ro perty lo cated at 204 E. 8th St. Ave
- Nat Waggoner, AIC P, Lo ng Range Planning Manager
ITEM SUMMARY:
The ap p licant has no t mad e sub mitted a fo rmal ap p licatio n and s taff has no t p ro vided a review o f the
p ro p o s al. The applic ant is p ro p o s ing a new d es ign for a c o mmercial and offic e develo p ment whic h is three
(3) s tories. The ap p licant is no t s eeking varianc es for height, nor p arking.
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.
Chapter 13 - Guidelines for Infill Construction in Area 2
Building s etb acks
Mas s and s cale
Building materials
Pedes trian-friendly c harac ter
Trans itio nal character
This chap ter pres ents d es ign guidelines that ap p ly to Area 2, the ring o f streets and bloc ks that enc ircle the
Town Square His to ric District. The d es ign guid elines are organized into a s eries o f relevant design topic s .
Within eac h c atego ry, individ ual p o licies and des ign guid elines are presented , which the City will use in
d etermining the appropriateness o f the work p ro p o s ed . T he area sho uld co ntinue to develo p with a mix of
uses and improvements whic h s hould oc cur in a manner that enhanc es the exp erienc e for p ed es trians and
to b uild a sens e o f vis ual relatednes s among properties . Even tho ugh auto mobile circ ulatio n ro utes
s ignificantly affec t the character, it is s till p os s ible to s trengthen pedestrian links and to imp ro ve the edges
o f properties s uc h that a sens e of human s cale is c onveyed .
Those commerc ial s treets in Area 2 s urrounding the Town Square His toric Dis tric t s ho uld d evelop in a
manner that is inviting to p ed es trians while als o ac commodating automobiles. Development s hould include
a mix o f build ing typ es , inc luding older s truc tures and mo re c o ntemporary ones . Each sho uld reflec t the
d es ign trends o f its own time, while als o c o ntribute to a s ens e of vis ual c o ntinuity and strengthen the
p ed es trian exp erienc e. In additio n, a c o mb inatio n of us es is enc o uraged , inc luding residential, offic e, and
retail.
The d es ign goals fo r Area 2 are:
To d efine the sidewalk ed ge with elements that are amenities for p ed es trians .
To es tablish a sens e of sc ale in b uildings and streetsc ap e d es ign that c an be understo o d b y
p ed es trians .
To minimize the vis ual imp acts o f automobiles.
To s trengthen the p ed es trian network of s id ewalks , p lazas , and paths .
Retain native vegetatio n with p rojec t d es ign.
Page 159 of 180
Maintain the feel o f his toric s urroundings, for examp le if the area is p red o minately converted
res id ential s truc tures the res id ential ap p earanc e, s cale, and c harac ter s ho uld remain.
To utilize s imilar b uilding materials , s torefront d es ign, recessed entries , and front s etbac ks.
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.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
SUBMITTED BY:
Nat Waggoner, PMP, AICP
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Exhibit 1 - Plans and Specifications Backup Material
Exhibit 2- Chapter 14 Guidelines Backup Material
Page 160 of 180
EXISTING
GARAGE
STRUCTURE
EXISTING
DRIVEWAY
120' - 0"
12
0
'
-
0
"
CH
U
R
C
H
S
T
.
8TH STREET
EXISTING STREET PARKING HC
STALL
120' - 0"
SIDEWALK
SI
D
E
W
A
L
K
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
B
R
I
C
K
W
A
L
L
-
O
F
F
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y
12
0
'
-
0
"
ELEV.
STAIR
DUMP.
COVERED
PARKING
COVERED
PARKING
MOTORCYCLE
PARKING
RAMP SLOPE = 1:15
OR .8125" PER FOOT
HC STALL
HC STALL
STAIRS
HC
STALL
LANDING
NO SLOPE
24
'
-
0
"
TRANS.
120' - 0"
12
0
'
-
0
"
COMPACT
PARKING
Scale:
Date:
Revisions
No.Date Description
1
2
3
4
Sheet Name
Sheet No.
By:
File:
SRE
A P P R O V A L , P E R M I T T I N G
N O T F O R R E G U L A T O R Y
O R C O N S T R U C T I O N"R E V I E W O N L Y "
Bob Thomas, NCARB
Registered Architect
30418 Briarcrest Dr.
Georgetown, TX 78628
512-635-0621
btncarb@yahoo.com
1" = 10'-0"
A7
SITE PLANS
WS-DE
20
4
8
t
h
S
t
.
G
e
o
r
g
e
t
o
w
n
,
T
X
HE
R
I
T
A
G
E
C
O
U
R
T
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
2-15-18
40 FULL-SIZED PARKING SPACES ON PROPERTY
9 MOTORCYCLE SPACES ON PROPERTY
49 TOTAL PARKING SPACES ON PROPERTY
9 EXISTING PARKING SPACES @ 8TH ST.
5 PROPOSED PARALLEL SPACES ON CHURCH ST.
63 TOTAL PROPOSED PARKING SPACES - 3 HC STALLS
1" = 10'-0"2 EXISTING SITE PLAN
N
LOT AREA
ZONING DISTRICT
EXISTING & PROPOSED USE
EXISTING STRUCTURE AREA
EXISTING FAR
PROPOSED STRUCTURE AREA
PROPOSED CONC. ON SITE
PROPOSED FAR/IMPERV.
14,400 sf
C-1
MIX-USE
COMMERECIAL
528 sf
3.7%
10,971 sf
13,507 sf
93.7%
PROJECT INFORMATION
LOCATION REFERENCE
MAP
PROJECT
SITE
COURTHOUSE
1" = 10'-0"1 PARKING LVL
Page 161 of 180
1st FLOOR
5' - 0"
2nd FLOOR
17' - 0"
1st FLOOR PH
15' - 0"
2nd FLOOR PH
26' - 0"
3rd FLOOR PH
36' - 6"
3rd FLOOR
27' - 6"
ROOF PLAN
38' - 0"
(9' - 0")
(9' - 0")
(FINISH GRADE = 751' - 3")
RED BRICK
STONE
STOREFRONT WINDOW
SYSTEM - WHITE
METAL AWNING
WHITE
OPEN TO
PARKING AREA
STONE
GREEN SCREEN
WALL
ELEVATOR
TOWER
RED BRICK
CAST STONE
CORNICE
METAL PANELING
GALVANIZED
CAST STONE
CORNICEWHITE GUTTER
PIPE
PARKING LVL
-4' - 0"
(F.F.E. = 756' - 3")
MAX HT
39' - 6"
COURTYARD LVL
1' - 0"
5' - 0"5' - 0"
4' - 0"
6'
-
0
"
2' - 0"14' - 0"2' - 0"24' - 6 1/2"23' - 5"36' - 0 1/2"18' - 0"
5' - 0"5' - 0"29' - 7"9' - 7"14' - 3 1/2"12' - 0"32' - 1 1/2"
CAST STONE
CORNICE
CAST STONE
CORNICE
3' - 0"3' - 0"
RED BRICK
RED BRICK
STOREFRONT WINDOW
SYSTEM - WHITE
9'
-
0
"
11' - 3 1/2"
10
'
-
0
"
11' - 3 1/2"10' - 0"10' - 0"10' - 0"
RED BRICK METAL PANELING
SYSTEM - WHITE
METAL PANELING
SYSTEM - WHITE
STONE
CAST STONE
CORNICE
CAST STONE
CORNICE
METAL AWNING
DARK BRONZE
SIDEWALK
ELEVATOR
TOWER
RED BRICK
CAST STONE
CORNICE CAST STONE
CORNICEWHITE GUTTER
PIPE
CAST STONE
CORNICE
CAST STONE
CORNICE
RED BRICK
RED BRICK
RED BRICK
METAL PANELING
SYSTEM - WHITE
STONE
CAST STONE
CORNICE
CAST STONE
CORNICE
STONE
RED BRICK
STONE
GREEN SCREEN WALL
4' - 0"
6'
-
0
"
5' - 0"5' - 0"
2' - 6"
5' - 0"5' - 11"
2' - 0"17' - 6 1/2"2' - 0"25' - 0"2' - 0"25' - 0"2' - 0"25' - 11"2' - 0"8' - 7 1/2"2' - 0"3' - 11"2' - 0"
7'
-
0
"
Scale:
Date:
Revisions
No.Date Description
1
2
3
4
Sheet Name
Sheet No.
By:
File:
SRE
A P P R O V A L , P E R M I T T I N G
N O T F O R R E G U L A T O R Y
O R C O N S T R U C T I O N"R E V I E W O N L Y "
Bob Thomas, NCARB
Registered Architect
30418 Briarcrest Dr.
Georgetown, TX 78628
512-635-0621
btncarb@yahoo.com
As indicated
A3
8TH & EAST
ELEVATIONS
WS-DE
20
4
8
t
h
S
t
.
G
e
o
r
g
e
t
o
w
n
,
T
X
HE
R
I
T
A
G
E
C
O
U
R
T
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
2-15-18
3/16" = 1'-0"2 8th St. ELEVATION
1/8" = 1'-0"1 EAST ELEVATION
ALL BUILDING SIGNAGE IS BEING APPLIED
AND APPROVED SEPARATELY
EXTERIOR FINISHES
NAME
BRICK
STONE
CORNICE/BANDING
TRIM/METAL - WHITE
TRIM/METAL - DARK
METAL PANEL
GREEN SCREEN WALL
DESCRIPTION
ACME BRICK - "BUFFALO SPRINGS" OKP-515, 820494
BORAL BRICK - COUNTRY LEDGESTONE - ASPEN
AMERICAN ARTSTONE 4700MAE, AA16232
BERRIDGE METAL SYSTEMS - PARCHMENT
BERRIDGE METAL SYSTEMS - DARK BRONZE
BERRIDGE HR-16 WALL PANEL - GALVANIZED
JAKOB ROPE SYSTEMS - www.jakob-usa.com
Page 162 of 180
1st FLOOR
5' - 0"
2nd FLOOR
17' - 0"
1st FLOOR PH
15' - 0"
2nd FLOOR PH
26' - 0"
3rd FLOOR PH
36' - 6"
3rd FLOOR
27' - 6"
ROOF PLAN
38' - 0"
(9' - 0")
(9' - 0")
(F.F.E. = 751' - 3")
MAX HT
39' - 6"
COURTYARD LVL
1' - 0"
STONE
STOREFRONT WINDOW
SYSTEM - WHITE
METAL AWNING
WHITE
STONE
ELEVATOR
TOWER
RED BRICK
CAST STONE
CORNICE
METAL PANELING
GALVANIZED
CAST STONE
CORNICE
WHITE GUTTER
PIPE
CAST STONE
CORNICE
CAST STONE
CORNICE
RED BRICK
RED BRICK
STOREFRONT WINDOW
SYSTEM - WHITE
RED BRICK
METAL PANELING
SYSTEM - WHITE
METAL PANELING
SYSTEM - WHITE
STONE
CAST STONE
CORNICE
CAST STONE
CORNICE
METAL AWNING
DARK BRONZE 4' - 0"
6'
-
0
"
2' - 6"5' - 11"5' - 0"30' - 9"12' - 0"30' - 2 1/2"9' - 7"14' - 0 1/2"3' - 0"3' - 0"
5' - 0"5' - 0"
6' - 0"12' - 0"27' - 8"8' - 0"63' - 10"2' - 6"
11' - 3 1/2"
9'
-
0
"
11' - 3 1/2"
10
'
-
0
"
10' - 0"10' - 0"10' - 0"
3' - 0"5' - 0"5' - 0"5' - 0"5' - 0"
2' - 6"
ELEVATOR
TOWER
RED BRICK
CAST STONE
CORNICECAST STONE
CORNICE WHITE GUTTER
PIPE
CAST STONE
CORNICE
CAST STONE
CORNICE
RED BRICK
RED BRICK
RED BRICK
METAL PANELING
SYSTEM - WHITE
STONE
CAST STONE
CORNICE
CAST STONE
CORNICE
STONE
RED BRICK
10' - 10 1/2"2' - 0"19' - 0"2' - 0"19' - 0"2' - 0"19' - 0"2' - 0"19' - 0"2' - 0"19' - 1 1/2"2' - 0"
STONE GREEN SCREEN WALL
4' - 0"
6'
-
0
"
0"0"0"0"
4'
-
0
"
4'
-
6
"
Scale:
Date:
Revisions
No.Date Description
1
2
3
4
Sheet Name
Sheet No.
By:
File:
SRE
A P P R O V A L , P E R M I T T I N G
N O T F O R R E G U L A T O R Y
O R C O N S T R U C T I O N"R E V I E W O N L Y "
Bob Thomas, NCARB
Registered Architect
30418 Briarcrest Dr.
Georgetown, TX 78628
512-635-0621
btncarb@yahoo.com
As indicated
A4
CHURCH &
SOUTH
ELEVATIONS
WS-DE
20
4
8
t
h
S
t
.
G
e
o
r
g
e
t
o
w
n
,
T
X
HE
R
I
T
A
G
E
C
O
U
R
T
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
2-15-18
3/16" = 1'-0"1 CHURCH St. ELEVATION
1/8" = 1'-0"2 SOUTH ELEVATION
EXTERIOR FINISHES
NAME
BRICK
STONE
CORNICE/BANDING
TRIM/METAL - WHITE
TRIM/METAL - DARK
METAL PANEL
GREEN SCREEN WALL
DESCRIPTION
ACME BRICK - "BUFFALO SPRINGS" OKP-515, 820494
BORAL BRICK - COUNTRY LEDGESTONE - ASPEN
AMERICAN ARTSTONE 4700MAE, AA16232
BERRIDGE METAL SYSTEMS - PARCHMENT
BERRIDGE METAL SYSTEMS - DARK BRONZE
BERRIDGE HR-16 WALL PANEL - GALVANIZED
JAKOB ROPE SYSTEMS - www.jakob-usa.com
Page 163 of 180
Scale:
Date:
Revisions
No.Date Description
1
2
3
4
Sheet Name
Sheet No.
By:
File:
SRE
A P P R O V A L , P E R M I T T I N G
N O T F O R R E G U L A T O R Y
O R C O N S T R U C T I O N"R E V I E W O N L Y "
Bob Thomas, NCARB
Registered Architect
30418 Briarcrest Dr.
Georgetown, TX 78628
512-635-0621
btncarb@yahoo.com
A9
PRESENTATION
SHEET
WS-DE
20
4
8
t
h
S
t
.
G
e
o
r
g
e
t
o
w
n
,
T
X
HE
R
I
T
A
G
E
C
O
U
R
T
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
2-15-18
8th STREET NORTHWEST CORNER PERSPECTIVE
CHURCH ST. TO COURTYARD PERSPECTIVE
ACME BRICK - "BUFFALO SPRINGS"
OKP-515, 820494 BORAL BRICK - COUNTRY LEDGESTONE - ASPEN
BERRIDGE HR-16 WALL PANEL - GALVANIZED
CORNICE/BANDING - AMERICAN ARTSTONE
4700MAE, AA16232
WHITE TRIM - BERRIDGE METAL SYSTEMS - PARCHMENT DARK TRIM - BERRIDGE METAL - BRONZE
AERIAL TO COURTYARD
EXTERIOR FINISHES
NAME
BRICK
STONE
CORNICE/BANDING
TRIM/METAL - WHITE
TRIM/METAL - DARK
METAL PANEL
GREEN SCREEN WALL
DESCRIPTION
ACME BRICK - "BUFFALO SPRINGS" OKP-515, 820494
BORAL BRICK - COUNTRY LEDGESTONE - ASPEN
AMERICAN ARTSTONE 4700MAE, AA16232
BERRIDGE METAL SYSTEMS - PARCHMENT
BERRIDGE METAL SYSTEMS - DARK BRONZE
BERRIDGE HR-16 WALL PANEL - GALVANIZED
JAKOB ROPE SYSTEMS - www.jakob-usa.com
Page 164 of 180
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 165 of 180
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 166 of 180
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 167 of 180
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 168 of 180
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 169 of 180
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 170 of 180
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 171 of 180
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 172 of 180
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 173 of 180
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 174 of 180
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 175 of 180
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 176 of 180
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 177 of 180
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 178 of 180
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 179 of 180
City of Georgetown
page 144 Page 180 of 180