REGULAR MEETING  HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION  MAY272020  Chairperson Greenwood opened the meeting at 4:35 p.m.  Commissioners in attendance: Jeffrey Halferty, Kara Thompson, Nora Berko, Roger Moyer, Commissioners not in attendance: Bob Blaich, Scott Kendrick, Sherri Sanzone Amy Simon, Interim Planning Director/Historic Preservation Officer  Gretchen Greenwood  Staff present:  Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney Wes Graham, Deputy City Clerk  APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mr. Moyer motioned to approve the minutes of April 22, Ms.  Thompson seconded. All in Favor, Motion carried.  PUBLIC COMMENT: None.  COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Ms. Berko stated that the windows on the Harren house are Ms. Simon stated that she met with the applicant and discussed an application being submitted to HPC to correct the glare. Ms. Simon further stated that it is a film on the window that makes it Mr. Moyer stated that one oft the nominees for the HPC award is up for sale and should be Ms. Greenwood stated that it is ok foraj property to change hands and that should not be a  very reflective. reflect.  Mr. Halferty. joined the meeting 4:37 PM disqualified from the award. disqualifier.  Ms. Simon stated that the awards will be set for a later meeting.  CONFLICTS: Ms. Thompson stated that she must recuse herself from the discussion of611 W. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Simon stated that she is working on a window change at 210 W.  Main Street. Main  CERTIFICATES OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: NONE  CALL UPS: Ms. Yoon stated that the 920. E. Hyman went to Council for first reading and  scheduled for Second Reading (06/09).  OLD BUSINESS: 303 S. Galena Street- Minor Development.  Ms. Simon reminded HPC that this is the Aspen Block Building that came before them to request anew paint job. Ms. Simon stated that they have been working with the applicant and hopefully  aconsultant on this project. STAFF COMMENTS: None  Ms. Greenwood stated that this project will be continued to September 9th.    REGULAR MEETING  HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION  MAY272020  NEW BUSINESS: 227 E. Main Street - Final Major Development. Kim Raymond Architecture Ms. Raymond stated at the last meeting HPC had an issue with the windows on the eastside facing wall. Ms. Raymond stated that they kept the fascia smaller on the new addition keeping in line with HPC's suggestion. Ms. Raymond stated that they will be renovating and restoring everything they can on the historic resource and will be working with their monitor. Ms. Raymond showed an aerial site plan outlining the footprint oft the project. Ms. Raymond stated that the owner would like to add solar panels on the westside oft the gable on the new addition and flush with the building. Ms. Raymond showed a visual oft the landscape plan. Ms. Raymond stated that there is very little room tol have landscaping. Ms. Raymond said there will be a gravel border around the historic resource and plant garden beds in the front. Ms. Raymond stated that a deal has been struck between Explore Booksellers and thej project about the removal oftrees. Ms. Raymond pointed out ift trees can not be removed for whatever reason they are willing to adjust the basement plans, and no visual changes will happen. Ms. Raymond stated that the exterior lights on the historic front porch will keep the jelly jar fixture and the new addition will havea subtle more modern fixture. Ms. Raymond pointed out that all the lights are dark sky compliant. Ms. Raymond stated that they will be working with a shoring engineer for a one-sided pour for the basement. Ms. Raymond show visual aids oft the trim on the historic resource and how they plan tol keep it in line. Ms. Raymond pointed out the new extra room in between historic windows and facia tol keep with the historic framework. Ms. Raymond stated that they reduced the number of windows on the east sidewall. Ms. Raymond stated that with the reduction in windows that they have added louvers in certain areas to help bring in light. Ms. Raymond stated that the link between the new addition and historic resource will have louvers to connect the two. Ms. Raymond referred to the HPC packet for details about the green roof. Ms. Raymond showed the materials that will be used on the project starting with the front historic resource. Ms. Raymond stated that they are hoping to find historic wood siding that can be renovated and restored, and repair and replace any wood shingles on the roof. Ms. Raymond stated that on the new addition the roofwill be a standing seam metal and a glass railing for the deck to keep appearances low. Ms. Raymond stated that the windows will be aluminum clad, and the soffit will stand light wood. Ms. Raymond showed that the louvers would be painted black to match the seams. Ms. Raymond stated that venting of the fireplaces was a concern for HPC and they have addressed that. Ms. Raymond pointed out that in the historic resource the fireplace will be vented out the side, and you will not be able to see this from street view. Ms. Raymond pointed out that the fireplace in the basement will be vented to the back oft the garage along with the vented hood. Ms. Raymond stated that they are very excited about how this has turned out. Ms. Raymond stated that the transformer will bej placed on the Main Street Bakery property and that STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Simon stated that this final proposal has been vetted well by this board and that they are at final details. Ms. Simon stated that they are recommending final approval. Ms. Simon reminded the board that this is a change from commercial to residential and that this historic building will have slightly more use and that staffi is ok with that. Ms. Simon stated that staffis looking at plant selection ini the landscape plan to make sure nothing is too tall toi interfere with the structure. Ms. Simon said they will be looking for a gravel border around the building to keep plants and water away from the building. Ms. Simon stated that further  +I Interiors.  ad deal has been made with the owners.    REGULAR MEETING  HSTORICPAESERVATION COMMISSION  MAY272020  investigation on the historic siding will have to wait until the house is lifted and able to really get in there on all sides, with preservation documentation. Ms. Simon stated that staff wants to see historic windows and doors preserved. Ms. Simon pointed out that there arel historic details on the gable that will need tol be replicated and that the porch will need to be restored to resemble historic photos. Ms. Simon pointed out that the wood shingle that was presented for replacement needs to be natural and non-treated with stain or blackened. Ms. Simon stated that the roofvents that were presented will need tol be vetted and making sure that they are apparently placed. Ms. Simon stated that the installation that willl be used needs to be review before building permits are issued. Ms. Simon reminded the applicant that they still need to turn in their stormwater plan to Ms. Greenwood stated that this project presentation was very thorough by the applicant and staff. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Ruth Carver neighbor to the project. Ms. Carver asked where the  the Engineering Department.  garbage cans would be located.  Ms. Raymond stated that the garbage will be in the garage.  COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Ms. Greenwood stated that the updated windows are an improvement to the project. Ms. Greenwood said that she is in total favor oft the solar panels and that the project looks really nice. Ms. Greenwood stated that she is in favor ofall staff's Mr. Halferty stated he is pleased to see how the applicate applied HPC's comments especially the east-facing wall. Mr. Halferty said that he agrees with Ms. Greenwood and staff comments Mr. Moyer stated that he agrees with staffa and should move forward. Ms. Thompson stated that she agrees with comments and isi in favor ofs solar panels. Ms. Berko stated that she appreciates the redesign. Ms. Berko stated that she has a concern about the window ratio and is fearful oft too much light spilling out. MOTION: Ms. Thompson motion to approve Resolution #12, Mr. Halferty seconded. Roll Call Vote: Mr. Halferty; Yes, Ms. Thompson; Yes, Ms. Berko; Yes, Mr. Moyer; Yes, Ms.  comments and would like to see this move forward. and would like to see this move forward.  Greenwood; Greenwood. All in favor motion carries.  Ms. Thompson left the meeting.  NEW BUSINESS: 611 West Main Street - Conceptual Major Development, Commercial Design Review, Setback Variations, Relocation, Growth Management Quota System (GMQS), Special Review, Transportation and Parking Management, and Certificates of Affordable Housing. REPRESENTATIVE: Sara Adams from BendonAdams, and Garfield&Hecht. Ms. Adams stated that 611 West Main Street is a locally designated landmark on a 9,000-sfl loti in the Mixed-Use zone district and the Main Street Historic District. Ms. Adams proposed that this project will be 100% affordable housing. Ms. Adams stated that they will not be asking for approval at this point, rather looking for design direction. Ms. Adams showed a five-point slide outlining the proposed project. Ms. Adams stated that they will be seeking affordable housing credits. Ms. Adams stated that two oft the units will need a special review because they are below grade. Ms. Adams stated they will be seeking a dimension variation for the distance between the historic resource and the new addition. Ms. Adams stated that she has worked closely with the Parks Dept. to identify the trees that need tol be kept. Ms. Adams said there will be outdoor    REGULAR MEETING  HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION  MAY272020  amenity space for the residence. Ms. Adams stated that parking will have to remain in the back along the alley and is proposing seven spaces for nine units. Ms. Adams further explained that the garbage and recycling will need to be along the alley as well. Ms. Adams stated that there will be exterior storage for each unit. Ms. Adams showed ai rendering of the units that are below grade. Ms. Adams outlined that there will be a staircase and elevator access attached to the new addition with zero distance between the proposed addition and the historic structure. Ms. Adams outlined the individual floor plans. Ms. Adams stated that all the units are within the 20% reduction of unit size and all units have their own private deck. Ms. Adams stated that special review is needed for the units below grade, to ensure they are livable. Ms. Adams stated that APCHA and her planning team did not agree on the number of] FTES going to be awarded to the three-bedroom units. Ms. Adams explained that APCHA felt that the three-bedroom units should receive less. Ms. Adams showed two visual aids oft the elevation ofthe new addition compared to the historic building. Ms. Adams asked a few questions for HPC to consider; ifHPC would support the design relating to materials and fenetrations, a zero distance between the historic building and the new addition, a rear yard setback variation of five feet where ten feet is required, the reduction in unit size within the 20% allowance, and finally ifHPC would support Ms. Adams stated that they wanted to have the new addition have its own style while the three Ms. Greenwood asked ift they could provide renderings oft the back of the building.  cash in lieu for the loss oftwo parking spaces. levels tie into the historic element.  Ms. Greenwood asked ifto the addition was relating to form as presented.  Ms. Adams stated that they are in HPC's packet.  Mr. Hecht stated that if the plans for the new addition roof were gables that it would compromise Ms. Greenwood asked what does it mean when they say reduce the space between resource. Ms. Adams stated that it's the space between the back ofthe historic building and the front of Ms. Berko asked if APCHA has requirements about unit size why would they supporta a Ms. Adams stated that APCHA guidelines are fluid and APCHA recognizes that. Ms. Adams Ms. Berko asked how community amenities would look like in a post-COVID-19 world. Ms. Adams stated that they are proposing private decks, private storage, and a small bbq area STAFF COMMENTS: Kevin Rayes Community Development. Mr. Rayes reviewed the history of the historic building and ai review oft the applicant's proposal. Mr. Rayes showed ai rendering of the elevations of the proposed project. Mr. Rayes stated that one of the basement units is 67% subgrade and the other is 52% subgrade. Mr. Rayes followed up by stating that APCHA would like to see all subgrade units at 50%. Mr. Rayes stated that APCHA is requesting a reduction of 17% FTE credits. Mr. Rayes listed the bonus amenities that could help maintain or grant more FTES. Mr. Rayes stated that staffi is very supportive of amenities on site. Mr. Rayes stated that staffi is very supportive ofthis project. Mr. Rayes said that staff feels that the units that are smaller are adequately compensated with amenities. Mr. Rayes stated that staff supports a reduction of FTE credits for the units that are below grade. Mr. Rayes said that the parking spaces are in a mixed-use zone which dictates that 60% of parking must be on-site and that cash  the unit space inside. the new addition. reduction.  explained that is why APCHA allows for the 20% reduction.  with limited seating.    REGULARI MEETING  HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION:  MAY272020  in lieu maybe provide for the remaining spaces. Mr. Rayes stated that the staffi is very comfortable with the seven spaces toj provide and cash in lieu oft the remaining two. Mr. Rayes stated that there has been communication between staff and the applicant about TIA options. Ms. Yoon stated that dimensional variations may be granted by HPC and are site-specific. Ms. Yoon said that since this project isi in a mixed-use zone, there is a requirement for the detached structure to have at least a ten-foot separation between structures. Ms. Yoon pointed out that the new addition being presented is in fact a detached structure. Ms. Yoon stated that this now impacts the design review in two ways, first it triggers chapter 11 ofdesign guidelines about detached structure. Ms. Yoon showed the rendering ofthe new addition wrapping around the historic building. Ms. Yoon points out that the third level oft the new addition is, in fact, hanging over the historic building. Ms. Yoon stated that staffwould like a restudy on proximity between the historic building and the new addition. Ms. Yoon stated that the design oft the detached structure needs to relate to the historic resource through two ofthe three elements: form, material and fenestration. Ms. Yoon does not agree with the application that the form oft the new addition relates to the historic resource but finds that ai relationship to materials is met. Ms. Yoon pointed out that there is some flexibility in chapter 11 and urges the applicant to restudy fenestration to meet the guidelines. Ms. Yoon stated that staffi is recommending a continuance to restudy and increase the distance between the new addition and the historic building, and the fenestration of Ms. Greenwood asked if the units get credit for square footage from the storage units. Ms. Greenwood asked ift they were planning to increase between five to 10 feet. Ms. Adams stated that it is correct that they are hoping for 5 feet, sO they maintain the density. Ms. Greenwood asked ifit was approperate for HPC to be approving the size ofbuilding in Mr. Rayes stated the HPC can reduce the number of credits a project receives. He reiterated that PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mr. Rayes read two letters that were submitted by Mike Haisfield and  the new addition.  Ms. Adams stated that they don't.  retaliations ofFTE credits.  HPC can also grant up to the allotted amount which is twenty-one.  Jeff Sgroi attached to the minutes. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS:  Ms. Greenwood stated that the existing historic resource has a strong form. Ms. Greenwood further stated that the gambrel roofi is a strong stand-alone roof and that could be used in a modernized form. Ms. Greenwood said while the new addition is an interesting design it does not belong next to this build. Ms. Greenwood stated that the applicant needs to go back to the drawing board and rethink what would be compatible with this lot and neighborhood. Ms. Greenwood stated that there are no materials or penetrations that link to the historic building. Ms. Greenwood reiterated that the applicant needs to get inspiration from the historic build when in the redesign. Ms. Greenwood stated that she isi in favor of some separation between the buildings. Ms. Greenwood said that shei is in favor ofa 20% reduction and that outside space is a necessity, especially in a COVID-19 world. Ms. Greenwood stated that she is in support of cash in lieu oft the parking. Ms. Greenwood said she is in support oft the staffs' comments for going Mr. Moyer stated that this is an absurd scale and mass for this historic resource. Mr. Moyer asked ifa code change would be necessary. Mr. Moyer stated that he does not agree with the  back to the drawing board.    REGULAR MEETING  HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION  MAY272020  zero distance between the new addition and historic resource, he further explained that he would like to see space between the two structures. Mr. Moyer stated that HPC needs to stop giving up parking spots for projects. Mr. Moyer said that the proposed parking solution does not make sense and will create more problems. Mr. Moyer stated that overall this project is too big, too many units, and not enough parking. Mr. Moyer stated that it is not HPC's) job to design the Ms. Berko stated that we are walking a delicate balance and that everyone supports housing. Ms. Berko said that HPC's role is to protect historic resources and one cannot place a monster project like this behind a special building like this. Ms. Berko stated that she will not be supporting any design. Ms. Berko stated ifaj project needs all these variations, the project is simply too big. Mr. Halferty stated that there is a need for affordable housing up and down the valley. Mr. Halferty said that he agrees with the board that this project is too big. Mr. Halferty stated that he likes what the applicant has done with thel historic resource. Mr. Halferty stated that a zero-lot- line to the reari is not feasible and would congest the area more. Mr. Halferty said he isi in support ofar reduction of the size ofu units to help with how to condense it is in the west end. Mr. Halferty stated that he is in favor of cash in lieu of parking however everyone has cars and uses them. Mr. Ms. Greenwood stated that the new addition is dominating the historic resource and that HPC has areal problem with that. Ms. Greenwood said that the historic building needs tol be the focal point and if the applicant can reduce the new addition size that goal can be met. Mr. Hecht stated that the proposed project was a huge mess, he further explained that he understands the comments and will do better. Mr. Hecht stated that he would like to investigate Ms. Greenwood stated that when aj project receives set back that it is intended for the benefit of MOTION: Mr. Moyer moved to continue the public hearing of611 West Main Street to July MOTION: Mr. Moyer motioned to adjourn; Ms. Berko seconded. All in favor, motion carried  project.  Halferty stated that the applicant needs to go back to the drawing board.  the setbacks.  the historic resource, not the new addition.  8th Ms. Berko Seconded. Voice call vote. All in favor.  Wes Graham, Deputy Clerk    611 W. Main Public Comments Received  1. Mike Haisfield: 616 West Hopkins Ave.  The current proposed architecture design for 611 West Main Street is not sympathetic to, nor does it share the historic integrity of the historical west end. After reading most of the staffs and departments conclusions from the application An necessary restudy of the building footprint of the new detached addition & more compatibility between front and back structures. Considering if you flipped the structures and put the rear building on Main Street it would not be compatible The proposed structure will be the tallest building on the block. Incorporating it  submitted, some of the following issues need to be addressed.  with the neighborhood.  into the existing neighborhood needs to be a priority. Parking is a concern for nine units in regards to density-  As neighbors, we hope the HPC works with developer to consider the historic  charm of the neighborhood.  2. Jeff Sgroi: 617 West Main  As an owner of 4 units at the adjacent property and tenant since 1998 (617 West  Main), I have major concerns about  1.1 the number of units/density of proposed project, 2. lack of parking proposed per units and the likely spillover onto our 3. request by developer for an exception to a 2' setback.  limited, private parking, and  These three items, combined, are potentially problematic for the already  congested area.  Thank you for your consideration.