Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Additions And Restoration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Owners of 106 Winslow Road present multiple exterior repairs, new screened porch and dormer plans; staff urges caution on visible dormer
Summary
Owners and architect proposed exterior maintenance, a rebuilt screened porch and new dormers and garage door replacements at 106 Winslow Road. Staff said most restorative work is appropriate, but cautioned that a proposed right‑side dormer will be highly visible from the right of way and recommended careful placement and review of dormer scale.
Owners Steven and Nancy Marr and their architect presented a multi‑part proposal at the DRC meeting to address deferred maintenance and modest additions at 106 Winslow Road.
Their package includes exterior repairs (new shingles, gutters, trim and repointing), replacement of a deteriorated screened porch with a redesigned screened porch set back from the corner, roof and dormer work on a 1975 rear addition (two new dormers proposed, one on each side), replacement of garage doors with wood carriage‑style doors, a small new rear covered porch/breezeway, enclosure of a basement entrance, and a new private fenced yard punched through a low stone wall.
Staff reviewed each element and generally supported routine restorative work — roofing in kind, repair and repointing, and replacing 1975 windows with wood windows matching the rest of the house. Staff said the proposed porch is smaller in plan but higher in height and that the left‑side dormer is “tucked behind the main form” and likely acceptable. However, staff cautioned that a right‑side dormer would be highly visible from Winslow Road and recalled a 2014 commission decision that denied a similar right‑elevation dormer because of visibility. Commissioners asked the applicants to consider lowering or simplifying the right‑side dormer and offered alternatives including making the dormer a bit taller but narrower so its window proportions match the house, or exploring a hip form that better matches the historic dormer on the building.
On the chimney, staff advised a modest extension — ideally a chimney pot or a small masonry cap — rather than an obvious tall extension in mismatched stone. For the proposed garage door replacements, commissioners said wood carriage‑style doors would be appropriate if they read as secondary and are carefully proportioned; applicants said the new doors might be fixed in place if the historic garage area is repurposed.
Staff noted the 2008 COA that granted a porch previously and again encouraged restoration work that is "in kind" where possible. The DRC asked the applicants to return with gutter profiles, dormer window proportions scaled to the house, and clearer drawings of porch and chimney details for the voting submission.
Why it matters: The house has multiple changes spanning decades; the DRC's guidance aims to preserve the primary historic form while allowing necessary maintenance and limited additions.
Next steps: Applicants to provide material samples, scaled elevations with fixture sizes and dormer window proportions, and specific gutter and chimney details for Historic Zoning Commission review.
