Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic District Design topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ARB provides nonbinding feedback on proposed Fisher residence in historic district
Summary
City staff presented an informal review of a proposed single-family home in the historic residential district, and the board gave nonbinding feedback on massing, roof pitches, driveway setbacks and materials; the applicant said screening and siding details will be refined for formal review.
City staff presented an informal review of a proposed single-family house on PID 273-000031 in the historic residential district and asked the Architectural Review Board for early comments on massing, roof pitches and materials.
Sarah, the city planner leading the presentation, said the 2.23-acre site sits above the Scioto River and noted floodplain impacts. She described a 1½-story front elevation with traditional forms, a side-load two-car garage and a recessed single-car garage at the rear, and she said staff seeks feedback on the front and rear massing, a requested rear-height waiver and an anticipated roof-pitch waiver. "The rear facade's broken into three gables," Sarah said, and staff asked the board to weigh in on material transitions and whether the massing might read as a solid block depending on cladding choices.
The project's builder, Jeff Memmer of Memmer Homes, said the poured foundation is exposed on three sides and that the stone detail at the front could be adjusted to wrap around. "There's nothing that prevents us from bringing that front line all the way around," Memmer said, noting the team can alter board-and-batten spacing and the roof pitch to respond to board feedback.
Board members pressed for confirmation that the driveway width and setback meet code and discussed the impact of turnaround requirements for the two-car garage. Members also asked the applicant to provide low-visibility porch screening samples and clarified that any proposed 3:12 roof pitch could be changed to 4:12 if desired. Several board members said they found the front elevation appropriate and urged staff and the applicant to bring material samples and clarified dimensions at the next (formal) review.
There were no public comments. Because this was an informal review, the board provided nonbinding design guidance rather than a formal vote; staff said the project team will return with detailed materials and final waiver requests as needed.
Next steps: the applicant will refine materials, provide porch-screening examples and confirm driveway dimensions before the project returns for formal review.
