Village historian presses design and preservation concerns at Sherman House Hotel and Spa public hearing

At a special Village Planning Board meeting on Dec. 1, 2025, the board held a public hearing on the site plan for the proposed Sherman House Hotel and Spa in Homer. Mr. Sweeney, who identified himself as the village historian, urged the board to consider the proposal’s impact on the historic district and pressed for design choices that preserve the appearance of separate historic structures.

Mr. Sweeney told the board he had reviewed the plans and asked whether state and county approvals — and DRRI funding — meant the project was effectively unalterable. “It’s my responsibility to be apprised of such things that may have impact on the historic district,” he said, and asked whether the applicant’s approval by the state and awareness by the D R R I made the proposal a “done deal.”

The applicant representative responded that “the project itself has been approved by the state” and that the county had also given approval; the representative said economic development funding and the DRRI award had been made with knowledge of the plans and that staff were meeting with the relevant approval body the following day. The applicant said they had reduced the planned height in response to concerns and that the proposed link between the hotel and spa had been revised to lower its visual profile.

Much of the hearing centered on how a physical connection between the Sherman House and the spa would look from Main Street and from the courtyard. Mr. Sweeney suggested disguising any connection with a carriage‑house facade so the complex would appear as separate buildings. The applicant described design changes — including removal of one floor from an earlier design — and said the three‑story section “won’t be any higher” than nearby buildings such as the Exchange building. The applicant also described materials and finishes: granite or stone foundation up to window sill height, granite paving for portions of the courtyard, and wood clapboard siding above, with a darker charcoal color under consideration.

Board members and the applicant discussed sight lines and mechanical equipment. The applicant said mature trees and landscape architecture would screen the courtyard and that mechanical units would be largely obscured from typical sight lines on Main Street. On signage, the applicant said signs would be “very discreet, tasteful” and noted a county recommendation that any signs return to the Village for approval.

Mr. Sweeney also reiterated a desire for historical interpretation tied to the property, noting a prior request for a plaque explaining the Sherman House history (now the Exchange Restaurant). He said he had expected to be more involved in the process and stressed the importance of preserving visible historic character.

The board closed the public hearing after the exchange; a motion to close the public hearing was made and was seconded (Jess was named as a seconder in the record). The transcript does not provide a roll‑call tally. The board also addressed another, separate site‑plan item that had not yet received county planning review and directed that it be tabled to the Dec. 18 meeting for further consideration.

What happens next: the Sherman House site plan will remain under the Planning Board’s review; applicants noted pending reviews with county and state bodies and committed to design and landscape revisions intended to reduce visual impacts and respond to historic‑district concerns. The Planning Board set its next meeting for Dec. 18, when the delayed site‑plan item will be on the agenda.