Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2021 10 18

Home Browse Search

Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes 18 October 2021 Page 4 of 8 Brauneis stated that the funkiness of the neighborhood was part of what we love, but what we currently allow is just too big for this area. Haley stated that additional lot coverage was a strong incentive than the financial ones. She would not have trouble with a cap but it would take incentive options away. Brauneis stated that a lower cap would not necessarily preclude offering incentives. Onaran stated that the additional coverage was not really working as an incentive except on larger lots and then that was when the buildings got too big. That then brings up the question, are we really preserving the neighborhood at that point. Haley stated that she would appreciate having some Code say what was too big to help guide the Commission, which we don't have right now. Dunlap stated that he liked the presentation. He mentioned seeing how many large lots were available for subdividing. He thought that design and aesthetics were a part of the character and there were not addressed as much. The only design element in the Code now was the porch of the roof, but community outreach had brought up design aspects like porches and historic looks. He asked if the consultants saw a place for design in their analysis. Onaran replied that they would add it because the commissioners had brought it up. Dunlap stated that they had been fortunate that local architects put forward pleasing designs that are congruent, though there are some that aren't congruent whether they're modern or not. He wanted to look at more design aspects than just the pitch of the roof. He noted that it was important for the Commission to differentiate additions from the original design of historic buildings according to the Department of the Interior. Parker replied that the four building types could be a starting point for addressing other design issues. Howe stated that he wanted to allow small lots, but to present the devil's advocate point, he wondered how that would affect the preservation of downtown, as population density may be affected and that could change the historic view of the downtown and traffic. He stated that hopefully this would maintain diversity and affordability, though he noted that while it might initially be more affordable there could be an increase in value through the building of a new hosue. He was not convinced that it would improve affordability downtown. He thought ADUs would also decrease affordability by increasing the value of the land. Details would be important in balancing affordability but maintaining diversity. Onaran asked the other commissioners about the design pieces that Commissioner Dunlap brought up. Brauneis cautioned that we might incur the wrath of people from a political perspective. Hoefner agreed and added that design elements should be captured in a guidelines or standards document, and should not be overly prescriptive. 4