Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Polar District Affordable Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission sends 4‑story affordable housing proposal in Polar district to ARC for material and scale refinements
Summary
The Historic Resources Commission referred a 4‑story, 45‑unit project in the National Register district near the Polar Building to the Architectural Review Committee to refine materials, fenestration and massing so the design better aligns with the district and Secretary of the Interior standards.
The Historic Resources Commission voted 4‑0 to refer a new‑construction, multi‑story housing project in the National Register historic district near the Polar Building to the Architectural Review Committee for design refinement.
Staff described HRC‑250004 as a state‑law review project in a national register historic district and the downtown urban conservation overlay. Staff noted the property was originally recorded as significant open space in the district nomination but subsequent research shows a structure historically existed on the lot; the applicant’s research and Sanborn maps were included in the packet.
The applicant, CT Design architect Connor Trainor, said the project is a multi‑story, modern building with punched window openings and a mix of materials, including white brick and metal panels. Patrick Watkins, an attorney working with the developer, said the project is an affordable housing proposal tied to state and federal low‑income housing tax‑credit (LIHTC) financing and that design decisions are constrained by programmatic requirements tied to affordability and unit mix. Watkins said prior LIHTC projects in the neighborhood proceeded through ARC and reached agreements on compatibility.
Staff raised several points for ARC review: the proposed white brick and modern fenestration may not provide sufficient architectural detail to be compatible with the Polar Building and other contributing structures; many district buildings are two stories and staff questioned whether the proposed height should be reduced or otherwise massed to remain subordinate to the Polar Building; and the project’s punched window openings lack the historic architectural detailing present in the district.
Commissioners asked whether lowering the building by a story was feasible; staff and the applicant said building height affects unit count, programmatic needs and the viability of the LIHTC financing. The applicant said the stated unit plan is driven by the affordable‑housing program and that further discussions about internal layout and possible massing changes are appropriate for ARC.
Commissioner Buchanan moved, and Commissioner Klein seconded, that the HRC refer the project to ARC for design refinement focusing on materials, fenestration, scale and mass; the commission voted 4‑0. ARC will work with the applicant and return a refined proposal to HRC for final action.
Staff noted the project seeks compatibility with the Polar Building — the design guidelines intend that new construction be subordinate to the Polar Building — and recommended ARC explore material choices and additional detailing to better meet the Secretary of the Interior’s standards for new construction in a National Register district.
