Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Certificate Of Appropriateness topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rockwall historic board backs 900‑sq‑ft accessory garage at 710 Hartman with color condition
Summary
The Rockwall City Historic Preservation Advisory Board recommended approval of a certificate of appropriateness for a 900‑square‑foot detached garage at 710 Hartman Street, conditioning the recommendation on the accessory building’s color matching the existing house; the matter will proceed to Planning & Zoning for a Specific Use Permit review.
The Historic Preservation Advisory Board of Rockwall City voted to recommend approval of a certificate of appropriateness (COA) for a detached 30-by-30 (900 sq ft) accessory garage proposed at 710 Hartman Street in the Old Town Rockwall historic district.
Staff member (Speaker 3) told the board the subject parcel is a 0.57-acre lot (Lot 1, Hurst Addition) with a 1,548-square-foot, folk‑Victorian house built in 1950 and described the applicant’s request for a detached garage. Staff said the city’s development codes require accessory buildings to be architecturally compatible with the primary structure and noted that approval of the COA is discretionary for the historic board; if the COA is recommended, the applicant still must obtain a Specific Use Permit (SUP) from Planning & Zoning before construction.
Applicant Marcelino Rendon (Applicant/Property owner) said the yard currently contains three small accessory structures and temporary covers that have degraded and that the family wants to remove those and consolidate storage into a single shed/garage to park vehicles and store equipment. “...so it’ll look nice and tidy in the back,” Rendon said, describing the goal of cleaning up the rear yard and protecting vehicles from falling pecan debris.
Board members questioned visibility, materials and color; one member noted existing sheds are visible from Clark Street and urged that the proposed building blend with the house. The applicant agreed to pursue neutral/house‑matching colors and said they would work with the manufacturer to match the house appearance. Staff reported it mailed 23 notices to property owners and occupants within 200 feet and had received no responses as of the meeting.
Speaker 7 (historic preservation officer/staff) clarified that the board’s COA review focuses on architectural compatibility, while size and entitlement for a larger accessory building are matters for Planning & Zoning and the SUP process. Staff said it would add the board’s color‑matching stipulation to the draft ordinance for the P&Z case to aid review.
Board member (Speaker 6) moved “to approve the COA as presented with 1 stipulation of color to match the existing house.” The motion was seconded by the presiding board member (Speaker 2) and passed. The board did not record individual vote tallies in the transcript; the motion was announced as passed.
The COA recommendation and the applicant’s pending SUP application will be forwarded to the Planning & Zoning Commission for formal consideration of size and any required permits. The board adjourned at 6:19 p.m.
