OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Wilmington Historic Preservation Commission Meeting - August 9, 2018

Historic Preservation CommissionThursday, August 9, 2018
BodyWilmington, North Carolina
SessionHistoric Preservation Commission
DateThursday, August 9, 2018
StatusFILED
Video Record

STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE

Transcript — Verbatim
0:00

We good?

0:01

Okay.

0:03

Good evening.

0:04

I'd like to go ahead and call the Thursday, August the 9th, 2018 meeting of the City of Wilmington Historic Preservation Commission to order.

0:12

Thank you all for coming.

0:13

We appreciate your interest.

0:16

Hearings before the Historic Preservation Commission are quasi judicial in nature.

0:21

This is a design review process to determine if the proposed project is congruent with the historic aspects and special character of the historic district or landmark.

0:29

Decisions of the Commission are based on the record of these proceedings, the Wilmington Design Guidelines, historic districts and landmarks, and the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation.

0:39

Evidence submitted to the Commission for review becomes part of the record.

0:43

Appeals of commission decisions are to the Wilmington Board of Adjustment and then to Superior Court and are based on the record.

0:50

Appeals must be filed within 30 days of the date of the commission's action.

0:54

Public comment is heard during the public comment portion of the giant agenda item.

0:59

Those who want to address the commission are sworn in as witnesses.

1:03

The chair recognizes those who want to address the commission during the public hearing.

1:08

Comments should be addressed to the commission to ensure that all comments are properly recorded.

1:13

Please come to the podium to address the commission, state your name and address, and speak clearly.

1:30

At this time, I'd like to request that all cell phones either be turned off or put on silence mode.

1:36

As a reminder to the commissioners, if you have received or been made aware of any outside evidence related to any of the matters, please recuse yourself.

1:48

At this time, I would like to ask each commissioner to introduce themselves.

1:52

Daniel, we'll start with you.

1:54

Daniel Hill.

1:56

Marion Kaiser.

1:57

John Muzzy.

1:58

Romero.

2:00

Sherry Demas.

2:02

Joan Keston.

2:04

We're also just joined this evening by the following city staff members.

2:07

Don Snotherly, Historic Preservation Planner.

2:10

Jeff Watton, Associate Planner.

2:13

Melissa Iverson Hales, Assistant City Attorney, and Mr.

2:18

Aaron Reese, City Arborist.

2:21

At this time, if there is anyone in attendance that wishes to speak, please stand up and we will swear you in.

2:32

Do I have to which one do I?

2:35

Okay.

2:36

Do you affirm that the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

2:41

I do.

2:42

Thank you.

2:48

Okay, a quick overview of tonight's meeting.

2:50

We have four agenda items to discuss.

2:53

And Miss Notherly, if you would please go ahead and start with agenda item number one.

3:00

Before we proceed, I might want to just update the commission and those in attendance.

3:05

The assistant city attorney Hale's last name is now Huffman.

3:11

My apologies.

3:13

So duly duly noted.

3:16

So this is a request at 612 Gray Street.

3:20

If you recall, the commission approved a project on April 25th, 2018 for a new one-story single-family dwelling and a one-story detached accessory apartment.

3:35

The request this evening is to modify that certificate of appropriateness to increase the size of the accessory structure and to reduce the setback on the east elevation from the eastern property line from six feet, which the commission approved, to four feet.

3:55

Again, this is the site.

3:57

If you recall some of the project components, included removing this tree, which has already been done, so the site is getting ready for construction.

4:08

If you can see this, this is the approved site plan.

4:13

This was the April approved site plan showing the six-foot setback, and this is the subject accessory structure.

4:23

The rear setback is not proposed to change.

4:27

This is the proposed modification with a four-foot setback, a slightly increased width by two feet, and this dimension also is increasing by two feet.

4:41

This dimension is not changing.

4:50

This is the um let me just get my bearings here.

4:58

This is the most recent.

5:00

Uh I'm sorry.

5:01

Let me get my bearing.

5:05

This was the elevations as approved in April.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Historic Preservation████████████████████████████████████████████44%
Tree Preservation███████████████████████████████████35%
Architectural Preservation███████████11%
Procedural█████████9%
Legal Framework1%
Summary of Proceedings

Wilmington Historic Preservation Commission Meeting - August 9, 2018

The Wilmington Historic Preservation Commission held a regular meeting on Thursday, August 9, 2018 at 5:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Skyline Center, 929 North Front Street, Wilmington, NC. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Tara Murphy and included consideration of four new business items, staff updates, and commissioner discussions. Commissioners present: Tara Murphy (Chair), Rob Romero (Vice-Chair), Sherry Demas, John Muzzey, Mary Ann Keiser, Daniel Hill, and Joan Keston. Staff present included Historic Preservation Planner Dawn Snotherly, Associate Planner Jeff Walton, Assistant City Attorney Melissa Iverson Hales Huffman, and City Arborist Aaron Reese. The meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Item 1 (612 Grace Street): No public comments were offered. The applicant, Georgia Savas, spoke in support of the modification, explaining that the increased size (82 square feet) was needed for storage and that the setback error was her own oversight.
  • Item 2 (214 Nun Street): No public comments were offered. The applicant, Nick Balding of Balding Brothers, spoke in favor of the proposal, arguing that repairing the built-in copper gutters would cost approximately $35,000 and that removing the crown molding to install K-style aluminum gutters was a more practical alternative. He also stated that the owner was opposed to additional expense for a less expensive metal alternative.
  • Item 3 (306 North 6th Street): No public comments were offered; the item was continued due to incomplete materials.
  • Item 4 (110 North 7th Street): Public comment included:
    • Georgia Savas (620 Varsity Drive) asked how long a tree should be expected to heal after a lightning strike (three years already passed).
    • The applicant, Gary Fossum, spoke at length in opposition to staff’s recommendation, presenting leaf samples and arguing that the tree is in a slow state of decline and poses a danger to adjacent historic structures.
    • A previous appellant (Steven) testified about a similar case where a pecan tree was removed after Hurricane Matthew deflected it, and he recommended using fertilizer stakes to encourage recovery if preservation is desired.

Discussion Items

1. 612 Grace Street – Modify Certificate of Appropriateness for accessory structure size and setback

  • Staff (Dawn Snotherly) presented the request to increase the accessory structure’s depth, width, and height (by 9 inches) and reduce the east elevation setback from 6 feet to 4 feet. Staff supported the application, noting that adjacent residences have setbacks of about 3 feet and the 4-foot setback is adequate for maintenance.
  • The Commission discussed the changes and unanimously approved the modification with conditions.

2. 214 Nun Street – Exterior alterations

  • Staff presented the request to remove crown molding and install K-style gutters, replace a rear door with a transom window, and other minor changes. Staff expressed concern about removing the architectural crown molding and recommended repairing the existing built-in copper gutters.
  • The applicant argued that the copper gutters were improperly installed and are leaking, and that repair is cost-prohibitive ($35,000 estimated). Discussion included options such as using a different metal for gutter inserts, adding a fascia board to retain the crown, or using a drip line (which the applicant opposed).
  • The Commission voted to approve the rear elevation alterations (door replacement, window with single pane, new siding) but bifurcated the request and continued the gutter/crown molding portion to the September 13, 2018 meeting to allow research into alternative metals and State Historic Preservation Office guidance.

3. 306 North 6th Street – Construct accessory structure

  • Staff reported that final elevation drawings and material specifications were not received from the applicant. The Commission unanimously voted to continue the item to the September 13, 2018 meeting.

4. 110 North 7th Street – Appeal of tree removal permit denial

  • Associate Planner Jeff Walton presented the appeal: a 32-inch pecan tree struck by lightning in 2015. City Arborist Aaron Reese inspected the tree multiple times and determined it is not in decline or a hazard, noting callus tissue formation and typical branch dieback. Staff recommended against removal.
  • The applicant, Gary Fossum, presented leaf samples showing yellowing, cited correspondence with another arborist (who gave an opinion based on discussion but no physical inspection), and expressed concern for adjacent historic structures (Bowden-Foard House, Chestnut Presbyterian Church).
  • Mr. Reese explained that bark loss and leaf yellowing are normal after lightning strikes, and that the tree’s canopy shows no signs of catastrophic failure. He stated that risk is currently low because the lot is vacant, but a re-evaluation would be needed if a structure is proposed.
  • The Commission discussed proactive vs. reactive approaches. Commissioner Keiser noted the tree looks sick and favored removal; others deferred to the City Arborist’s expertise.
  • Ultimately, a motion to deny the appeal (i.e., keep the tree) carried 5-2 (Commissioners Keiser and Demas dissenting). The Commission recommended continued monitoring by the City Arborist.

5. Items from Staff

  • Dawn Snotherly noted that minutes from May 10, 2018 were incomplete.
  • She informed the Commission that some property owners have expressed interest in seeking local landmark status, and that a refresher course on the study list and designation process will be scheduled for a future light agenda meeting.
  • She reminded the Commission of CLG training on September 21, 2018 (Commissioners Keston and Keiser to attend) and the Preservation North Carolina Conference in October, where CLG commissioner training will be offered.

6. Items from Commission – None.

Key Outcomes

  • Item 1 (612 Grace Street): Approved unanimously (7-0) to modify the Certificate of Appropriateness (MJW-18-29) for the size and setback of the accessory structure, with conditions.
  • Item 2 (214 Nun Street): Approved (7-0) exterior alterations to the rear elevation, as detailed, but continued the gutter/crown molding portion to September 13, 2018 date certain.
  • Item 3 (306 North 6th Street): Continued (7-0) to September 13, 2018 due to incomplete submittals.
  • Item 4 (110 North 7th Street): Motion to deny the tree removal appeal carried 5-2 (Keiser and Demas voted no). The tree will remain, with monitoring by the City Arborist.
  • Next Meeting: Thursday, September 13, 2018.

Meeting Transcript

We good? Okay. Good evening. I'd like to go ahead and call the Thursday, August the 9th, 2018 meeting of the City of Wilmington Historic Preservation Commission to order. Thank you all for coming. We appreciate your interest. Hearings before the Historic Preservation Commission are quasi judicial in nature. This is a design review process to determine if the proposed project is congruent with the historic aspects and special character of the historic district or landmark. Decisions of the Commission are based on the record of these proceedings, the Wilmington Design Guidelines, historic districts and landmarks, and the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. Evidence submitted to the Commission for review becomes part of the record. Appeals of commission decisions are to the Wilmington Board of Adjustment and then to Superior Court and are based on the record. Appeals must be filed within 30 days of the date of the commission's action. Public comment is heard during the public comment portion of the giant agenda item. Those who want to address the commission are sworn in as witnesses. The chair recognizes those who want to address the commission during the public hearing. Comments should be addressed to the commission to ensure that all comments are properly recorded. Please come to the podium to address the commission, state your name and address, and speak clearly. At this time, I'd like to request that all cell phones either be turned off or put on silence mode. As a reminder to the commissioners, if you have received or been made aware of any outside evidence related to any of the matters, please recuse yourself. At this time, I would like to ask each commissioner to introduce themselves. Daniel, we'll start with you. Daniel Hill. Marion Kaiser. John Muzzy. Romero. Sherry Demas. Joan Keston. We're also just joined this evening by the following city staff members. Don Snotherly, Historic Preservation Planner. Jeff Watton, Associate Planner. Melissa Iverson Hales, Assistant City Attorney, and Mr. Aaron Reese, City Arborist. At this time, if there is anyone in attendance that wishes to speak, please stand up and we will swear you in. Do I have to which one do I? Okay. Do you affirm that the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you. Okay, a quick overview of tonight's meeting. We have four agenda items to discuss. And Miss Notherly, if you would please go ahead and start with agenda item number one. Before we proceed, I might want to just update the commission and those in attendance. The assistant city attorney Hale's last name is now Huffman. My apologies. So duly duly noted. So this is a request at 612 Gray Street. If you recall, the commission approved a project on April 25th, 2018 for a new one-story single-family dwelling and a one-story detached accessory apartment. The request this evening is to modify that certificate of appropriateness to increase the size of the accessory structure and to reduce the setback on the east elevation from the eastern property line from six feet, which the commission approved, to four feet. Again, this is the site. If you recall some of the project components, included removing this tree, which has already been done, so the site is getting ready for construction.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com