Laserfiche WebLink
Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />19 April 2021 <br />Page 5 of 11 <br />thought that the design was pleasing visually and thought mixed -use would bring vitality <br />downtown. It fit within the guidelines even if it did not meet the exact letter. <br />Dunlap stated that he thought it was a nice design and that the height was in line. His only <br />reservation was about someone pushing the limits in the future regarding the number of stories. <br />As long as the City's guidelines remain the same they could always have this conversation on <br />any future properties. <br />Haley wondered if the design met the guidelines about the street view. <br />Keller clarified that he thought the guidelines meant that it appeared as a two-story not that it <br />was a two story. <br />Zuccaro clarified that the design had a visible third story. He noted that the street view of two- <br />story appearance was a "should" statement. It was a specific standard that didn't have to be met <br />but it required interpretation because there was no set checklist for the guidelines. <br />Haley stated that the building across the street had more openings on the third story, which <br />might affect the appearance of a second or third story. She generally discussed the appearance <br />of the second and third stories of the proposed building versus what was across the street. <br />Klemme stated that other western towns had big mixed -use buildings and this building would <br />have that feel. She wasn't super bothered that it was three-story residential but she was <br />cognizant that it was a slippery slope. <br />Burg stated that she thought mixed -use was historical and noted that commercial real estate <br />might not be used in the near future. She thought it was done well even if it was potentially <br />establishing a precedent that the Commission didn't want. <br />Haley replied that she did not have an issue with the design. She wondered if the third story <br />deck made it more obvious that it was a third story. She noted that it was a newer area of <br />downtown and that it wasn't a historic area, it really was about the two-story versus three-story <br />for her. She noted that the new development on the other side of the tracks had three stories <br />and wondered if they wanted to bring that look into the downtown space. <br />Dunlap agreed that precedent may be an issue but as long as the City's guidelines remain the <br />same then the City could always have this discussion on any future property. He thought the <br />design brought a lot of advantages. <br />Dunlap moved to find that the proposal was consistent with the downtown design handbook <br />standards regarding historic and traditional context. <br />Klemme added that she would say that it was consistent with the intent of the downtown <br />handbook standards but it was not consistent with the letter of the standards. <br />Dunlap restated and moved to find that it was in the spirit of compliance with the guidelines. He <br />noted that staff could draft the formal language. Burg seconded. <br />5 <br />