Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_HARC_01.14.2010Minutes of the Meeting of the Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee City of Georgetown, Texas Thursday, January 14, 2010 The Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met on Thursday , January 14, 2010. Members Present: Will Moore, Ron Pergl and Dee Rapp Members Absent: none Members Present but not participating: Staff Present: Robbie Wyler, Historic District Planner; Elizabeth Cook, Community Development Director; and Karen Frost, Recording Secretary Minutes Regular Meeting Call to order by Chair Moore at 4:02 p.m. The Historic and Architectural Review Commission Sign Subcommittee is responsible for hearing and taking final action on sign applications, by issuing Certificates of Design Compliance based upon the City Council adopted Downtown Design Guidelines. This is a regular scheduled meeting of the Sign Subcommittee, for consideration and possible action on the following: 1.Review and possible approval of the minutes from the December 10, 2009, Sign Subcommittee meeting. Motion by Pergl to accept the minutes . Second by Rapp. Approved 3 – 0. 2.Consideration and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Design Compliance for signage at Glasscock Addition, Block 9, Lots 7 & 8, also known as La Maison, located at 204 E. 8 th Street. (CDC-2009-043) Wyler presented the staff report. The applicant is seeking approval to reface an existing freestanding sign. The materials frame and frame color will remain the same. Guidelines to support the staff recommendation of approval are 9.3, 9.15, 9.17, and 9.18. Wyler introduced Francois Oudomphong, the applicant. Francois stated the rendering of the French flag was upside down and he would be turning it the correct way on the sign itself. Commissioners discussed the colors of the sign. The proposal includes 5 colors with the French flag having three colors. There was discussion of what was allowed if a flag was included in a sign. Commissioners want to be consistent in their determinations. It was determined that a flag was not to be considered a corporate logo so therefore the extra colors of the flag would be allowed. Motion by Rapp to accept the new sign for LaMaison as submitted . Second by Pergl. Approved 3 – 0. 3.Consideration and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Design Compliance for a freestanding directory sign at Lost Addition, Block 66 (pt), located at 407 W. University Avenue. (CDC-2009-044) Wyler presented the staff report. The applicant is seeking approval of a freestanding directory sign to be situated in front of the business along University Avenue. Exact dimensions and color samples were given. The sign will have four panels to allow for advertisement of multiple tenants within the building. Each panel will have simple lettering and a logo, like what is proposed for the first tenant. This is for a two sided sign that will be identical on each side. Staff recommends approval of the sign with support from Guidelines 9.3, 9.10, 9.15, 9.17, and 9.18. Rapp wanted confirmation that each tenant that came forward would be limited to the colors that were being used for the first tenant. That was confirmed. There are four colors currently being used, including the black and white, and only one more color will be allowed. That was confirmed. There was discussion of the lighting options that were requested. Ray Shifley, the applicant’s agent, stated the owner was requesting two options in case the first choice of solar powered lighting did not work as well as expected. Rapp questioned the size of the sign. Wyler responded that the proposed sign is within the allowable size. The existing banner will be taken down upon approval and installation of the permanent sign and the real estate sign that is in the front yard is allowed. Pergl talks to the size of the sign and suggests bringing the sign to a better scale by reducing the height by one foot, reducing the length from the bottom of the sign to the ground to 12 inches instead of 24 inches. Shifley says that is agreeable. Moore questioned whether the other tenants would have to come before the sign committee for approval of their tenant panel. Rapp stated she was agreeable to administrative approval of those panels using the existing agreement that the colors were not to be changed or added to. Pergl and Moore concur. Shifley stated the owner has agreed to file a Master Sign Plan for approval when he moves out of the building. Motion by Pergl to accept the application for the sign design with the caveat that the 24” height from the ground be reduced to 12 inches, reducing the overall height of the sign to 60 inches; and that staff may administratively approve future tenant sign panels ; and that the lighting fixture choice be left to the applicant. Second by Rapp. Approved 3 – 0. 4.Adjournment. The Meeting was adjourned by Moore at 4:45 p.m.