Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the 1957 Norton Road topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board questions contemporary design for Norton Road lot, urges compatibility with Western Reserve style
Summary
An informal review of a proposed contemporary home at 1957 Norton Road highlighted wetlands and siting challenges; board members recommended design changes to better fit the Western Reserve character and suggested coordination with staff before resubmitting.
Get email alerts on the 1957 Norton Road topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hudson 'At an informal Feb. 25 review, the Architectural & Historic Board of Review told the designers of a proposed contemporary home at 1957 Norton Road that the plan's massing and contemporary aesthetic do not clearly fit the surrounding Western Reserve neighborhood.
Architect Miemel Al Baloma and the lot owner presented a contemporary design sited in a heavily wooded, wetland‑influenced parcel. The applicant said portions of the house (including the garage) were raised to address grade and wetlands; the design team suggested rotating the structure on the lot to improve orientation and reduce site impacts.
Board members raised repeated concerns about visibility from the road, proportion and front‑entry definition. One member said the design "doesn't really fit with" the neighborhood's Western Reserve vocabulary and urged revisiting overall proportions and fenestration; another suggested adding a more prominent central entry or adopting gable/gambrel roof forms or vertical siding to reference local barns while preserving compatibility.
Staff noted some flexibility exists when a house sits more than 130 feet from the road, but emphasized that any setback impacts or variance requests would require review by the Board of Zoning Appeals. The board recommended the applicant coordinate with staff on a revised site plan that reduces wetland fill, adjusts massing and clarifies the primary entry before returning for further review.
This item was informal and no vote was taken; staff invited the applicants to submit revised drawings for further consultation.
