Laserfiche WebLink
Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />19 April 2021 <br />Page 4 of 11 <br />representative of downtown. She stated that while there had been historically mixed -use <br />downtown, the use was not up to the Commission. She acknowledged that there were some <br />three-story commercial buildings and some residential buildings downtown, but they didn't <br />overlap. <br />Burg noted that Front Street was not as historic as Main Street and represented an eclectic mix <br />of time periods. She thought the proposal was trying to work within the design handbook while <br />offering something that people would want to live in. <br />Dunlap stated that it was a thoughtful use. He asked if the top of the barbershop was residential. <br />Zuccaro replied that it was not proposed as residential. <br />Klemme asked if the little green house to the south was residential or commercial. <br />Zuccaro replied that that part of the block was definitely commercial and might have some <br />residential. <br />General discussion on the varied uses on the block. <br />Klemme stated that her gut reaction was that she was more concerned about the height than <br />the stories. She thought that it met mass and scale of what's going on around it minus one or <br />two buildings. Klemme discussed the height, stating that it was a thoughtful design that they <br />tried to push back a bit with thoughtful use of colors and materials to not make a giant mass. <br />That said, she agreed with Chair Haley's point about three-story residential with what are you <br />opening the door to with three-story residential. <br />Klemme stated that she was more concerned about the height than the stories. The application <br />met mass and scale of the surrounding area and represented a thoughtful design using colors <br />and materials to avoid making a giant mass. That said, she agreed with Chair Haley's point that <br />a three-story residential building could open the door to similar developments in the future. <br />Haley added that the third story alone, regardless of use, was a little more obvious. Visually <br />there is something different between three stories and two stories even though it was the same <br />height. Three stories was a busier design, though she had no problem with the design of the <br />building. She stated that she did not have a strong opinion either way. <br />Klemme wondered what the setback requirements could be if the proposal were for commercial <br />use only. <br />Zuccaro replied that there was some specificity in the handbook, which stated in C6 that the <br />third floor should be setback substantially from the sidewalk edge such that the building will <br />appear to be two stories in height as seen from across the street. So the concept was more <br />about the street view. Zuccaro replied that it could be considered as a two-story building due to <br />its height or due to its massing. <br />Keller stated that he thought it was not about two- versus three-story, it was more about the <br />relative height. If it was no taller than the buildings around it, it would not be an eyesore. He <br />4 <br />