Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Materials Roofing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission denies retroactive cedar-shake roof and door replacement at 115 Winslow Road
Summary
The Historic Zoning Commission denied a retroactive cedar-shake roof and replacement front/side doors for a new principal building at 115 Winslow Road, citing guideline language against painting unpainted masonry and insufficient evidence that cedar shake was original to the structure.
The Franklin Historic Zoning Commission voted Dec. 8 to deny a pair of related requests for 115 Winslow Road: replacement front/side doors proposed by the applicant and a retroactive certificate-of-appropriateness request for an already-installed cedar shake roof.
Elizabeth, planning staff, said the property is a vacant lot where a COA for a new principal building and attached accessory structure was issued in May 2025. The current application sought to change the principal building's siding to painted brick and to replace the roof material with cedar shake; staff recommended denial of the painted-brick siding change and the retroactive cedar-shake roofing based on the guidelines.
The applicant's designer, Michael Katsatus of MK Studio, explained prior DRC modifications and described the selected materials. Commissioners expressed concern about setting a precedent for painted brick in new infill construction and noted the guidelines advise against painting previously unpainted masonry. Commissioner 3 argued the guidelines favor natural, historically appropriate materials and warned that approving painted brick could create future precedent.
On the roof, commissioners debated whether wood shakes are a historically appropriate material for this house type. Some members noted wood shakes are an allowed material in the guidelines but said there was no evidence that cedar shake was the original roofing material for this parcel; staff said images and attic evidence do not show historic shakes. After discussion, the commission moved to deny the door replacement and the retroactive cedar-shake roofing; both motions carried.
The applicant was advised to work with staff on revised materials, and staff said a new application would be required for any resubmittal.
Outcome: The commission denied the proposed doors and the retroactive cedar-shake roof. Staff will follow up with the applicant on next steps and resubmission requirements.
