Laserfiche WebLink
<br />The buildings are designed separately with either horizontal wood siding or wood shingles, and <br />brick with wood trim. Second floor wood decks, some with decorative wood brackets, are <br />proposed on the front elevations of the buildings. French doors open onto the decks. Vinyl <br />windows and wood entrance doors are proposed. <br />The multi-family residential building (units B-1 and B-2) is shown approximately as 25.5 feet <br />in height and the single-family detached residential units (C1-C4) are shown approximately as <br />23.5 feet in height. <br />Below is a comparison between the proposed project and the Downtown Design Guidelines. <br />Downtown Design Guidelines: Design. Rooflines. Materials. Windows. Entries, and Details <br />The sections below compare the design of the proposed buildings to the applicable Downtown <br />Design Guidelines. <br />Desir!n <br />. New construction, additions, and remodels should reflect the architectural style and <br /> detailing of the surrounding neighborhood. <br />Staff received initial public comments that the homes were not unique, and therefore not <br />characteristic of the Downtown in general. The applicants have revised the facades of the <br />units to provide for more diversity. Staff believes this is appropriate. <br />Rooflines <br />. New homes should use roof forms and materials of similarly styled homes in the <br /> neighborhood. <br />. Coordinate roof material with the architectural style of the house, i.e., tile roofs on <br /> Spanish or Mediterranean style homes. <br />The neighboring house at 730 Peters has a composition shingle roof, similar to that <br />proposed. Nearby houses at 536 St. John and 417 St. Mary Street have hip roofs similar to <br />those proposed. Staff believes that the proposed roofing material is appropriate for the <br />proposed architecture. Thus, in staff's opinion, the project would be consistent with these <br />guidelines. <br />Materials <br />. Install the highest quality materials. <br />Case No. PUD-37 Planning Commission <br /> Page - 9- <br />