DRC asks for simplification of accessory building and refinement of dormer and porch on addition at 1008 Fair Street

The Design Review Committee reviewed a rear addition, dormer strategy and accessory structure options for 1008 Fair Street. Staff said the enclosed rear porch and simplified elevations are an improvement over previous submittals, but multiple DRC members said the long shed‑like dormer is oversized and the accessory (garage) alternatives are too complex and read like a second house rather than an outbuilding.

What was proposed and staff reaction

Owner/applicant Jacob Lane presented a revised plan featuring an infill enclosure linking two rear gabled wings, a long low shed element (described by staff as not strictly a dormer) across the rear roof, and two smaller gable dormers set behind the historic ridge. Staff supported the reduced massing and simpler window patterns in the rear infill but said the long shed element’s pitch and scale (effectively a wide raised roof area) exceeded recommended subordinate dormer proportions. For the accessory structure, staff said detailing and ornamentation were still too complex and recommended simplifying the form and reducing roofplane complexity so the outbuilding would read as subordinate.

Committee guidance

- Dormers and light: Commissioners suggested alternatives to visible, full‑height gable dormers on the sides (which the house does not historically have), including a lower shed dormer, more modest in height, or skylights set out of primary street view for additional light. One member said the long shed between the two gables might already provide the needed light and the side dormers could be omitted.

- Rear porch glazing and rhythm: Members recommended enlarging porch window glass panels and reducing heavy trim between windows so the enclosed porch reads more airy and porch‑like, not solid. Pay attention to the rhythm of columns and window mullions so the porch reads subordinate to the principal façade.

- Accessory building simplification: Committee members asked the applicant to simplify the accessory building roof forms, eliminate excess gables, and avoid details (chimneys, multiple porches) that make the structure read as a second principal house. Option B (simpler roof mass) was generally favored over Option A, though commissioners encouraged further simplification and removal of the extra porch massing.

Next steps

The DRC asked for revised options showing a lower, smaller shed dormer or other skylight/egress strategy; enlarged, more open porch glazing with simplified trim; and a simplified accessory building with a reduced roof mass and a clearer plan showing how the accessory would read as subordinate and visually detached. Applicants agreed to return with alternate dormer and outbuilding schemes and photos/sections to show attic conditions and the porch relationship to the main house.