The Historical and Architectural Review Board denied a certificate of appropriateness for a proposal to erect additional stories atop the Woolworth Building at a meeting held Jan. 8 in city hall’s Rotunda.

Already uncomfortable with the proposal, HARB tabled it after hearing public pushback. Commissioners made a few suggestions that could possibly make the new construction more palatable, including reducing the height by one story.

Returning to represent the project for 555 Main St. were Lou Pektor III and Gabriel Solms from Ashley Development, along with MKSD architects Todd Chambers and Shayne Serrano.

Saying they needed to go with the same number of stories originally proposed for economic reasons and a need for “affordable housing,” the applicants tweaked the plans per board suggestions.

The new proposal would include two stories of residential units with a six-foot outdoor terrace in front and the parapet of the existing two-story building serving as a railing. The addition would align with the neighboring Main Street Commons building.

Three stories of apartments would be built atop the one-story back section of the building facing Rubel Street to align with the section built atop the existing building facing Main Street.

Chairperson Connie Postupack read emailed comments from concerned resident Mary Toulouse protesting the project.

As she had done previously, Bethlehem resident and former HARB chair Marsha Fritz urged the board to reject the proposed altering of the Woolworth Building. “It is in violation of both common sense and the guidelines that guide you,” she said, listing five of 10 historic guidelines the new construction would, in her opinion, be unacceptable for the Main Street project. “This proposal is threatening the existence of an important historical artifact.”

Architect Chris Carson, another city resident, voiced objections to changing the Main Street streetscape by the additional massing above the two-story former Five and Dime. “The proposed addition alters the Woolworth building appreciably.”

“Last month we met on this and we laid out specific guidelines for what we would approve,” remarked Mike Simonson as he challenged Postupack’s motion to deny a COA. “Why does it seem like we are moving the goal line here?”

Simonson was the only member in favor of permitting the COA, and it is back to the drawing board for the applicants.

Business owner Sarolta Stange was granted a COA for double-sided 24-inch diameter sign for 79 W. Market St. Hanging by a black scroll bracket, the “Glow By Laser” is spelled out in metallic gold on a carved brown MDO disk with gold pinstripe.

The commercial masonry building is owned by CRB Properties, LLC.

Assisted by architect Steven Glickman, Nora and Dino Fantozzi were granted approval for replacing the wood siding around their home with cedar and restoring the front porch at 476 North New St.

The applicants provided an historical photo of the front of the house with the porch in place and detailed plans on recreating the now missing structure. The siding is to be painted a “Pearl” gray and the trim “Jamestown Gold.”

Homeowners Martin and Brenda Silfies scored a COA for removing a decaying patio roof and replacing it with a free-standing second-floor deck in the same footprint as the existing contemporary patio roof at 233 E. Church St. Located at the rear of the residence, the new deck would be accessed by a new door that replaces a pair of windows.

The homeowners pointed out that the new construction would be blocked from view by their 2-bay garage.

Voting was unanimous on all but the Woolworth Building proposal.

Martin Romeril informed the commissioners about a property on his block that apparently altered the historic look of some upper story windows.

Since there wasn’t a full contingent of commissioners, it was decided to elect officers in February.

The Historical and Architectural Review Board regularly meets the first Wednesday of every month to review all exterior changes proposed to buildings in the Bethlehem Historic District north of the Lehigh River. When a proposed project receives a certificate of appropriateness from the board, applicants must wait for city council to vote on it before proceeding. Meetings can be viewed on YouTube.