Regular Session. Legislative Regular Agenda

Transcription

1 Notice of Meeting for the Historic and Architectural Review Commission of the City of Georgetown April 23, 2015 at 6:00 PM at Council and Courts Building, 101 East 7th Street Georgetown, TX The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please contact the City at least four (4) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) or City Hall at 113 East 8th Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711. Regular Session (This Regular Session may, at any time, be recessed to convene an Executive Session for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code 551.) A The Historic and Architectural Review Commission, appointed by the Mayor and the City Council, is responsible for hearing and taking final action on applications, by issuing Certificates of Design Compliance based upon the City Council adopted Downtown Design Guidelines and Unified Development Code. Commission may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene an Executive Session at the request of the Chair, a Commissioner, the Director or legal counsel for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 551. Welcome and Meeting Procedures: Staff Presentation Applicant Presentation (Limited to ten minutes unless stated otherwise by the Commission.) Questions from Commission to Staff and Applicant Comments from Citizens * Applicant Response Commission Deliberative Process Commission Action * Those who speak must turn in a speaker form, located at the back of the room, to the recording secretary before the item they wish to address begins. Each speaker will be permitted to address the Commission one time only for a maximum of three minutes. Legislative Regular Agenda B Review and possible approval of the minutes of the March 26, 2015 meeting. C Discussion and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Design Compliance (CDC) for a residential addition on the property located at 711 East 8 th Street bearing the legal description of Clamp s Addition Revised, Block E (E/PT) acres. This item was continued from the February 26, 2015 HARC Meeting. D Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Design Compliance (CDC) for Page 1 of 34

2 E F exterior alterations for the property located at 104 and 106 West 8 th Street, bearing the legal description of City of Georgetown, Block 51, Lot 4 pt, acres. CDC Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Design Compliance (CDC) for exterior alterations for the property located at 812 South Church Street bearing the legal description of City of Georgetown, Block 52, Lot 5 (S/PT), acres. (CDC ) Questions and comments from Commissioners in Training. G Staff updates and reminder of upcoming meetings related to HARC. Adjournment CERTIFICATE OF POSTING I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all times, on the day of, 2015, at, and remained so posted for at least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting. Jessica Brettle, City Secretary Page 2 of 34

3 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review April 23, 2015 SUBJECT: The Historic and Architectural Review Commission, appointed by the Mayor and the City Council, is responsible for hearing and taking final action on applications, by issuing Certificates of Design Compliance based upon the City Council adopted Downtown Design Guidelines and Unified Development Code. Commission may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene an Executive Session at the request of the Chair, a Commissioner, the Director or legal counsel for any purpose authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 551. Welcome and Meeting Procedures: Staff Presentation Applicant Presentation (Limited to ten minutes unless stated otherwise by the Commission.) Questions from Commission to Staff and Applicant Comments from Citizens * Applicant Response Commission Deliberative Process Commission Action * Those who speak must turn in a speaker form, located at the back of the room, to the recording secretary before the item they wish to address begins. Each speaker will be permitted to address the Commission one time only for a maximum of three minutes. ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: na SUBMITTED BY: Karen Frost, Recording Secretary Page 3 of 34

4 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review April 23, 2015 SUBJECT: Review and possible approval of the minutes of the March 26, 2015 meeting. ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: Page 4 of 34

5 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review April 23, 2015 SUBJECT: Discussion and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Design Compliance (CDC) for a residential addition on the property located at 711 East 8 th Street bearing the legal description of Clamp s Addition Revised, Block E (E/PT) acres. This item was continued from the February 26, 2015 HARC Meeting. ITEM SUMMARY: CDC , a request for a residential addition, was submitted for review at the February 26, 2015 meeting. As agreed by the applicant, the Commission voted to continue the item to the April 23, 2015 HARC meeting to allow the applicant additional time to research options for acquiring time to research options for acquiring a portion of the adjacent 40 feet ROW/easement and other design options for the proposed additions. On April 15, 2015 the applicant submitted a written request to postpone the item to continue researching options for acquiring the adjacent property and addressing outstanding items. Staff recommends accepting the applicant's request to postpone this case. The CDC application will be presented to the Commission at a future meeting, in accordance with the procedures outlined in the UDC and following public notifications. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. The applicant paid the required application fees. SUBMITTED BY: Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner Page 5 of 34

6 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review April 23, 2015 SUBJECT: Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Design Compliance (CDC) for exterior alterations for the property located at 104 and 106 West 8 th Street, bearing the legal description of City of Georgetown, Block 51, Lot 4 pt, acres. CDC ITEM SUMMARY: The City of Georgetown is in receipt of a request for a CDC for exterior alterations to the High priority structure located at 104 & 106 West 8 th Street. According to the submitted letter of intent, the applicant wishes to paint the structure. Staff recommends approval of the request based on the findings that the request meets the approval criteria of Section of the Unified Development Code (UDC), as outlined in the attached Staff Report. The affirmative vote of the majority of the HARC members is required to approve the CDC request. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The applicant paid the required fees. SUBMITTED BY: Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner ATTACHMENTS: Description CDC Staff Report CDC Exhibit Type Backup Material Backup Material Page 6 of 34

7 Downtown and Community Services Department Staff Report Historic and Architectural Review Commission Meeting Date: April 23, 2015 File Number: CDC AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Design Compliance (CDC) for exterior alterations for the property located at 104 and 106 West 8 th Street, bearing the legal description of City of Georgetown, Block 51, Lot 4 pt, acres AGENDA ITEM DETAILS Project Name: 104 & 106 West 8 th Street Rehabilitation Project Applicant: Eric Visser Property Owner: Eric Visser Property Address: 104 & 106 West 8 th Street Legal Description: City of Georgetown, Block 51, Lot 4 pt, acres Historic Overlay: Downtown Overlay District Case History: This is the first public hearing for this case HISTORIC CONTEXT Date of construction: 1905 Historic Resources Survey Level of Priority: 1984 High Priority 2007 High Priority National Register Designation: Contributing structure to the NR District Texas Historical Commission Designation: None APPLICANT S REQUEST The applicant requests a Certificate of Design Compliance to paint the structure in the attached color scheme. 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 11.1 Develop a color scheme for the entire building that coordinates all the Complies façade elements Paint colors should enhance individual building elements while creating Complies a unified, coordinated appearance for the entire structure A muted color is preferred for the base color of most buildings. Complies 11.5 In general, use bright colors for accents only Paint colors should highlight architectural details. Complies CDC & 106 East 8 th Street Page 1 of 3 Page 7 of 34

8 Downtown and Community Services Department Staff Report Historic and Architectural Review Commission STAFF ANALYSIS The applicant requests permission to paint the High Priority Structure located at 104 & 106 West 8 th Street. The areas proposed for painting are currently painted. The proposed paint scheme coordinates the existing façade elements, including the components of the Mesker storefront and the masonry surfaces. Paint schemes utilizing bright colors to highlight the entrances and architectural features are in compliance with the Design Guidelines. CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL In accordance with Section of the Unified Development Code, the HARC must consider the following criteria: SECTION CRITERIA A. The application is complete and the information contained within the application is correct and sufficient enough to allow adequate review and final action; B. Compliance with any design standards of the Unified Development Code; C. Compliance with the adopted Downtown Design Guidelines, as may be amended from time to time, specific to the applicable Historic or Overlay District; D. The integrity of an individual historic structure is preserved. E. New buildings or additions are designed to be compatible with surrounding historic properties. F. The overall character of the Historic or applicable Overlay District is protected. 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. 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 FINDINGS The application was submitted with all required information and is deemed complete. The design standards of the UDC do not apply to this project. The project complies with the Downtown Design Guidelines, as outlined in the staff analysis. The proposed project preserves the integrity of the structure and the associated architectural elements. No new buildings are proposed with this project. The proposed project does not have an adverse effect on the overlay district. No signage is proposed with this application. The proposed project will not have an adverse effect on the Downtown Overlay district. In addition, the maintenance component of the project will repair the damaged exterior features and protect them from future deterioration. CDC & 106 East 8 th Street Page 2 of 3 Page 8 of 34

9 Downtown and Community Services Department Staff Report Historic and Architectural Review Commission SECTION CRITERIA 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. FINDINGS The project will highlight the important architectural features of the structure. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based on the findings listed above, staff recommends approval of CDC as submitted. PUBLIC COMMENTS As of the date of this report, staff has received no written comments regarding the request. ATTACHMENTS Exhibit 1 Letter of Intent Exhibit 2 Plans and Specifications SUBMITTED BY Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner CDC & 106 East 8 th Street Page 3 of 3 Page 9 of 34

10 Page 10 of 34

11 Page 11 of 34

12 Page 12 of 34

13 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review April 23, 2015 SUBJECT: Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Design Compliance (CDC) for exterior alterations for the property located at 812 South Church Street bearing the legal description of City of Georgetown, Block 52, Lot 5 (S/PT), acres. (CDC ) ITEM SUMMARY: The City of Georgetown is in receipt of a request for a CDC for the construction of an outside dining area. According to the submitted letter of intent, the applicant wishes to construct a deck and attach sun shades to the structure. Staff recommends approval of the request based on the findings that the request meets the approval criteria of Section of the Unified Development Code (UDC), as outlined in the attached Staff Report. The affirmative vote of the majority of the HARC members is required to approve the CDC request. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The applicant paid the required fees. SUBMITTED BY: Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner ATTACHMENTS: Description CDC Staff Report CDC Exhibit Type Backup Material Backup Material Page 13 of 34

14 Downtown and Community Services Department Staff Report Historic and Architectural Review Commission Meeting Date: April 23, 2015 File Number: CDC AGENDA ITEM DESCRIPTION Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Certificate of Design Compliance (CDC) for exterior alterations for the property located at 812 South Church Street bearing the legal description of City of Georgetown, Block 52, Lot 5 (S/PT), acres. AGENDA ITEM DETAILS Project Name: Sweet Lemon Café Outdoor Dining Project Applicant: Kevin and Rachel Cummins Property Owner: Kevin and Rachel Cummins Property Address: 812 South Church Street Legal Description: City of Georgetown, Block 52, Lot 5 (S/PT), acres Historic Overlay: Downtown Overlay District Case History: This is the first public hearing for this project. HISTORIC CONTEXT Date of construction: 1920 Historic Resources Survey Level of Priority: 1984 Medium Medium National Register Designation: No designation Texas Historical Commission Designation: No designation APPLICANT S REQUEST The applicant is requesting to remove an existing non-historic accessory structure to make way for planned improvements. The proposed improvements include the construction of a new outdoor dining area, comprised of a deck, pergola and sunshades. 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 4.3 Protect and maintain significant stylistic elements Complies 5.6 Historic building materials or features shall not be covered Complies 6.22 Preserve the original roof form of an historic structure Complies 6.25 Maintain an historic porch and its detailing Complies CDC South Church Street Page 1 of 4 Page 14 of 34

15 Downtown and Community Services Department Staff Report Historic and Architectural Review Commission GUIDELINES FINDINGS 6.27 The Detailing of decks and exterior stairs should be compatible Complies with the style and period of the structure 7.1 Avoid alterations that would damage historic features Complies 7.2 Properties designated by the City as High or Medium Priority Complies Historic Structures should be preserved and their historic character retained 8.10 Outdoor dining and seating areas should be simple in design and Complies compatible with the approved street furniture as detailed in the Downtown Master Plan STAFF ANALYSIS The property owner of the Medium Priority historic structure located at 812 South Church Street is requesting the removal of a non-historic accessory structure and the construction of an outdoor dining area with the following components, a new pergola, deck and sun shades. The proposed project is designed to mitigate the impact of the alterations on the primary structure, while providing additional usable space for the business. The proposed deck design does not obscure any character defining features of the structure, in compliance with Design Guideline 5.6. The proposed outdoor dining area is simple in design and the furniture will comply with the Design Guidelines, as outlined in Chapter 8. The new pergola will be located at the rear of the property, with limited visibility from the public right of way. The proposed sunshades respect the historic roof form of the structure and allow the architectural details to remain visible and intact. The proposed design is compatible with the structure, but utilizes different materials to differentiate the new construction. Other types of awnings or shade structures would adversely impact the structure, and would obscure significant architectural features of the structure. The proposed design accomplishes the property owner s needs, while complying with the Design Guidelines. CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL In accordance with Section of the Unified Development Code, the HARC must consider the following criteria: SECTION CRITERIA A. The application is complete and the information contained within the application is correct and sufficient enough to allow adequate review and final action; B. Compliance with any design standards of the Unified Development Code; FINDINGS Complies/Does Not Comply/Not Applicable The application is deemed complete by staff. The design standards of the Unified Development Code do not apply to this CDC South Church Street Page 2 of 4 Page 15 of 34

16 Downtown and Community Services Department Staff Report Historic and Architectural Review Commission SECTION CRITERIA C. Compliance with the adopted Downtown Design Guidelines, as may be amended from time to time, specific to the applicable Historic or Overlay District; D. The integrity of an individual historic structure is preserved. E. New buildings or additions are designed to be compatible with surrounding historic properties. F. The overall character of the Historic or applicable Overlay District is protected. 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. 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. FINDINGS project. The proposed project complies with the Design Guidelines. The proposed project protects the integrity of the structure by minimizing the impact of the alterations. No additions are proposed for the project. The proposed project does not adversely affect the character of the historic district. No signage is proposed with this project. The proposed project is designed to minimize the impact on the primary structure, while creating a usable space for the property owner. No original materials will be removed or obscured by the project, and the changes have minimal impact on the surrounding properties and the Downtown Overlay District. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based on the findings listed above, staff recommends approval of CDC as presented. PUBLIC COMMENTS CDC South Church Street Page 3 of 4 Page 16 of 34

17 Downtown and Community Services Department Staff Report Historic and Architectural Review Commission As of the date of this report, staff has received no written comments regarding this application. ATTACHMENTS Exhibit 1 Letter of Intent Exhibit 2 Plans and Specifications SUBMITTED BY Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner CDC South Church Street Page 4 of 4 Page 17 of 34

18 WANG ARCHITECTS LLC Architecture + Urban Design March 27, 2015 Historical and Architectural Review Commission City of Georgetown RE: Application to HARC, Sweet Lemon Kitchen Dear Members of the Historical and Architectural Review Commission: On behalf of my clients, Rachel and Kevin Cummins, I am pleased to submit here our application for review of the Sweet Lemon Kitchen, located at 812 South Church Street. Kevin and Rachel purchased this property in summer After receiving approval from HARC in late 2013, the Sweet Lemon Inn officially opened in March 2014, and Rachel started the Sweet Lemon catering company in August. The proposed scope of work here is the next and final phase of work, the Sweet Lemon Kitchen. The Sweet Lemon Kitchen will be a café that is friendly and welcoming to guests, sourcing locally-grown and organic ingredients. The Sweet Lemon Kitchen will serve the community of Georgetown for years to come. This proposed design seeks to advance many of the urbanistic and local goals found in our Design Guidelines. Through our many discussions with City Planning, we have adhered to two main tenets of the Design Guidelines, also shared by the Secretary of the Interior s Standards for Rehabilitation for Historic Buildings: First, that the design be compatible, yet differentiated, from the existing building; secondly, that the renovation be reversible and done in a way that, if removed, the integrity of the historic building would be unimpaired. We have also met informally with the Texas Historical Commission to ensure that we adhere to these guidelines. The building at 812 S. Church currently lies outside the boundary of the Williamson County Courthouse Historic District, but we anticipate it will be recommended for Contributing status in the future. There are several challenges and opportunities within the given building/site, leading us to the design proposal submitted here. Our design features a new seating area that flanks the South and West of the existing building. This seating area will be defined by a deck/terrace and overhead pergola structure. Although composite materials are much more economical, we are electing to use natural materials commonly found throughout Texas: The pergola will be made predominantly from cedar, and structural members will be made from galvanized steel to weather gracefully over time. Attached here are the following drawings for your review and consideration: 1) A Site Map; 2) Rendered Conceptual Plan; 3) Proposed Plan with Annotation; 4-6) Rendered Elevations; 7-9) Perspectives from 3D Model; and 10) Existing Photos for Reference. There are several reasons additional outdoor seating is critical for the future success of the Sweet Lemon, and here are some specific issues the proposed design will address: Building Size: At the ground floor, the existing building is less than 1,300SF. Two existing restrooms will be relocated to make more room for guest seating at the interior, but this still leaves us only approximately 765 square feet for guest seating - shy of 60% of the total building footprint. Page 18 of 34

19 Fortunately for us, Texas is one of the few places in the country where outdoor seating can be enjoyed for much of the year, under the right conditions. The proposed design will add approximately 1,200SF of outdoor seating. (In plan, the 'jog' at the Southeast portion of the seating area and the angle at the West follow the existing property line.) Orientation and Solar Shading: Whereas most downtown buildings have only one 'front', the Sweet Lemon building is fortunate enough to have three 'fronts': 1) a front on Church Street, 2) a 'side front' on 9th Street across Founder's Park, and 3) a 'back front' to the West at Main Street, where the structure is visible across the existing parking lot. The proposed design addresses all three of these 'fronts'. We conducted numerous sun studies through different times of the day and year, and we calibrated a new pergola structure overhead to provide maximum sun shading for guests during the sweltering summer months. Urbanistic Considerations: For those of us who know Georgetown, Church Street is one of the main arteries into the downtown core, when headed West on University Avenue by car or by foot. This sets up Founder's Park as a potential visual 'gateway' into the city center - even when we consider a potential future parking lot across Founder's Park to the South, as has been mentioned by city staff. The proposal includes a new door that will open onto the South terrace, allowing food to be served as well as providing ADA access for guests. We have had numerous discussions with the City about how the Sweet Lemon might serve as a 'backdrop' to Founder's Park at the South façade. Ideas have included providing a screen that hangs from the upper shading structure for projecting movies on the park, and partnering with the Palace Theatre to use the terrace for performance, among other shared uses. Our proposal 'cleans up' the existing façade South facing the park by relocating and concealing A/C units and unsightly HVAC equipment; this will make Founder's Park a much more enjoyable place. At the West (a.k.a. the 'back front'), the existing freestanding structure will be replaced with a new freestanding pergola that matches the proposed at the South. This new pergola will provide shading for seating, and the space below can also house live musical performance. We look forward to presenting these concepts to you at our upcoming meeting on April 23 in more detail. We will have additional information as well as material samples at this meeting. If you have any questions or need any supplemental information in advance, please feel free to contact me at Thank you in advance for your time, and I look forward to seeing you in April. Yours truly, Gary Wang, AIA Principal Wang Architects LLC Page 19 of 34

20 Design Concepts for Review by HARC The Sweet Lemon Kitchen March 27, 2015 Page 20 of 34 Wang Architects ARCHITECTURE URBAN DESIGN MASTERPLANNING

21 THE SWEET LEMON KITCHEN FOUNDER S PARK Design Concepts for and review by HARC Georgetown, Texas March 27, 2015 Wang Architects LLC Architecture Urban Design Masterplanning Page 21 of 34 1 Site Map

22 NEW STAIR AND RAILING AT EXISTING RAMP CAFE SEATING P.O.S. KITCHEN CAFE SEATING NEW TERRACE / SEATING Design Concepts for and review by HARC Georgetown, Texas March 27, 2015 north Wang Architects LLC Architecture Urban Design Masterplanning 2 Rendered Conceptual Plan Page 22 of 34

23 Design Concepts for and review by HARC Georgetown, Texas March 27, 2015 Wang Architects LLC Architecture Urban Design Masterplanning 3 Proposed Plan (Annotated) Page 23 of 34 Scale: 1/8 = 1-0

24 Design Concepts for and review by HARC Georgetown, Texas March 27, 2015 Wang Architects LLC Architecture Urban Design Masterplanning 4 North Elevation Page 24 of 34 Scale: 1/8 = 1-0

25 Design Concepts for and review by HARC Georgetown, Texas March 27, 2015 Wang Architects LLC Architecture Urban Design Masterplanning 5 South Elevation Page 25 of 34 Scale: 1/8 = 1-0

26 Design Concepts for and review by HARC Georgetown, Texas March 27, 2015 Wang Architects LLC Architecture Urban Design Masterplanning 6 South Elevation Page 26 of 34 Scale: 1/8 = 1-0

27 Design Concepts for and review by HARC Georgetown, Texas March 27, 2015 Wang Architects LLC Architecture Urban Design Masterplanning Page 27 of 34 7 View from 3D Model Looking Over Founder s Park

28 Design Concepts for and review by HARC Georgetown, Texas March 27, 2015 Wang Architects LLC Architecture Urban Design Masterplanning Page 28 of 34 8 View from 3D Model Looking Northwest

29 Design Concepts for and review by HARC Georgetown, Texas March 27, 2015 Wang Architects LLC Architecture Urban Design Masterplanning Page 29 of 34 9 View from 3D Model The Back Front

30 Structure at NW Corner of Site North Facade View from Main Street West Facade Looking Northwest, Founder s Park View from Church Street, East Facade Church Street Page 30 of 34 South Facade Equipment Facing Park to be Relocated

31 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review April 23, 2015 SUBJECT: Questions and comments from Commissioners in Training. ITEM SUMMARY: Questions and comments from Commissioners in Training. FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: Karen Frost, Recording Secretary Page 31 of 34

32 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review April 23, 2015 SUBJECT: Staff updates and reminder of upcoming meetings related to HARC. ITEM SUMMARY: a) Promotion (Cindy, Marcy, Jim, Vicki): 5 th Anniversary Swirl; updates on other action plan projects b) Economic Restructuring (Marcy, Jim, Julie, Vicki): Breakfast Bites; Granbury Trip; College Town Committee; updates on other action plan projects c) Design (Amanda, Julie, David): Main Street Mural call for art; updates on other action plan projects d) Organization (David, Cindy, Amanda): Board action plan update and committee suggestions; updates on other action plan projects FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A SUBMITTED BY: Matt Synatschk ATTACHMENTS: Description HARC Meetings Schedule Type Backup Material Page 32 of 34

33 Historic and Architectural Review Commission (4th Thursday) Applications may be submitted at any time. The Agenda Deadline is not a submittal deadline; it is the last day an item may be added to a meeting agenda to meet notification requirements. Additional time is needed for processing and review of applications; therefore you are encouraged to submit your application as early as possible in advance of this date to avoid delays. Please refer to the Application Review Timelines chart in this Development Manual to estimate overall processing time. All issues must be resolved before an item can be added to an agenda. Staff will determine when your application is ready for the public meeting and notify you accordingly. Historic & Architectural Review Commission Agenda Deadline HARC Meeting December 26, 2014 January 22, 2015 January 27, 2015 February 26 February 27 March 26 March 27 April 23 May 1 May 28 May 29 June 25 June 26 July 23 July 31 August 27 August 28 September 24 September 25 October 22 * November 13 * December 10 December 31 January 28, 2016 January 29, 2016 February 25 February 26 March 24 April 1 April 28 April 29 May 26 May 27 June 23 July 1 July 28 July 29 August 25 August 26 September 22 September 30 October 27 ** November 11 * December 8 * November and December regular meetings are combined due to the Holidays. The combined meeting is held on the second Thursday of December. Page 33 of 34

34 City of Georgetown, Texas Historic and Architectural Review April 23, 2015 SUBJECT: ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: na SUBMITTED BY: Page 34 of 34