Wilmington Historic Preservation Commission Meeting - April 14, 2022
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Wilmington Historic Preservation Commission Meeting - April 14, 2022
The Wilmington Historic Preservation Commission held an evidentiary hearing meeting on Thursday, April 14, 2022, beginning at 5:34 p.m. and adjourning at 9:16 p.m. The agenda listed the location as City Council Chambers, Skyline Center, 929 North Front Street, while the minutes state the meeting was held in City Council Chambers, City Hall, 102 North 3rd Street; this location discrepancy is noted. Chair Kathleen Egan introduced new staff members Jessica Baldwin, Historic Preservation Planner, and Megan Bacik, Associate Planner. All persons wishing to speak were sworn in. The next regular meeting is scheduled for May 12, 2022.
Public Comments & Testimony
- No members of the public provided testimony for the 214 Church Street, 310 North 6th Street, 505 Ann Street, or 223 South 5th Avenue evidentiary hearings.
- For 411 South 2nd Street, several neighbors and interested parties spoke. Jeff Mason, 412 South 3rd Street, opposed the project, citing concerns about a 2,800-square-foot structure next to his bed-and-breakfast backyard, construction duration, noise, and paving of the shared right-of-way affecting his parking. Robert Stanich, 416 South 3rd Street, asked how close the pool wall would be to his property. Sean Maxwell, 405 South 2nd Street, presented an extensive opposition statement concerning proposed right-of-way paving, drainage and flooding, tree loss, unpermitted water and sewer lines, traffic speeds, construction traffic, and the scale of the project. Richard Bunting, 409 South 2nd Street, read a letter from Cathleen Pierson of 407 South 2nd Street expressing concerns about the right-of-way being used as a driveway, increased speed, construction vehicles, and trees; he also personally expressed concerns about lack of landscaping details and mechanical locations. Travis Gilbert, representing Historic Wilmington Foundation, noted a preservation easement on an adjacent property and raised archaeological significance from the British occupation of Wilmington in 1781. Rabbi George Holland, 210 Nunn Street, opposed the project, mentioning noise, scale, lack of notification, and precedent-setting concerns. Julian Cochram, 416 South 2nd Street, supported the project, stating he did not expect to be impacted by the garage height and that vegetation could help hide the cabana.
Discussion Items
- 214 Church Street: The applicant requested demolition of partial construction and approval of a rear addition comprising a 106-square-foot mudroom, a 110-square-foot screened porch, and an exterior entry stair and landing. The property is a contributing resource in the Historic District-Residential. The item was continued from January 2022. Vice-Chair Christopher Yermal recused himself due to professional involvement. Applicant representative Eric Jabaley said a survey had been ordered and the addition was designed to blend with the historic house while preserving the original corner board. The commission conditionally approved the request 6-0, with conditions including clear glass, CMU foundation parged to match adjacent brick, siding matching existing, and screening matching porch screening.
- 310 North 6th Street: The applicant requested replacement of four original one-over-one wood windows with two-over-two vinyl windows on the front elevation of a noncontributing 1993 house. Applicants Nathanial Fabian and Jasmine Vesterfelt cited energy efficiency and cost effectiveness and provided examples of similar windows in the area. Staff noted the original windows were wood, but the commission determined the wood-window condition was not appropriate for a noncontributing structure. The commission conditionally approved the request 6-1, with conditions including clear glass, a one-over-one lite pattern, matching existing window color, and compliance with building codes. Michael Smith voted no.
- 505 Ann Street: This was an after-the-fact request to approve replacement of a historic standing seam metal roof with a CMP 5V 26G Galvalume metal roof on a contributing 1890s Queen Anne house. Applicant Tyler Broughton of Revitalize ILM said the old roof had rusted holes and that he had believed replacing with like material did not require a COA. Kyle Kelsay of Revitalize ILM asked the commission to consider the request as if new; commissioners stated they would not approve the proposed roof because it was not historically appropriate. The motion to deny carried 7-0.
- 411 South 2nd Street: The applicant proposed enclosing an existing rear porch, constructing a two-story, three-car garage with a porch, an in-ground pool and hot tub, a one-story cabana, a louvered privacy fence, and landscaping changes. The house is a contributing 1893 Colonial Revival. Staff noted the garage would be approximately 2,800 square feet and 25 feet high, and the cabana would be about 560 square feet and 13 feet high. Chair Egan stated she lives across the street but did not recuse herself. After extensive public testimony and deliberations, Assistant City Attorney Huffman said stormwater plans could not be required for a property of this size, and private right-of-way improvements were outside the commission's purview. Concerns remained about the scale and massing of the garage and cabana. The commission voted 7-0 to continue the request to allow the applicant to reconsider the size and scale of the garage.
- 223 South 5th Avenue: The applicant requested permission to paint the main body of the house Sherwin Williams Waterloo and replace the historic slate roof with asphalt shingles on a contributing circa 1900 Colonial Revival house. Applicants Dan and Cassandra Tollins agreed to use CertainTeed Highland Slate Shingles after commissioners suggested that product was more compatible with the existing slate. They also agreed to donate salvageable slate. The commission conditionally approved the request 7-0, with conditions including Highland Slate Shingles, roof shingle color approved by bypass, no new roof or gable vents, chimneys remaining, and paint specified as Sherwin Williams Waterloo SW 9141.
Other Business
- Education Subcommittee: Chair Egan approved creation of an education subcommittee to examine public education programs about historic preservation. Michael Smith was appointed chair, with Ron Wilson and Vice-Chair Yermal as members. Staff may assist but cannot vote. Subcommittee meetings must comply with public notice and open meetings requirements.
- Budget Process Update: Interim Planning Director Ron Satterfield reported that a $285,000 request for a historic district inventory update was included in the Planning Department's budget request. The amount was calculated at approximately $70 per property for six of eight districts. There were 122 citywide budget enhancement requests totaling approximately $10.2 million. The city manager was scheduled to present a recommended budget to city council on May 3, 2022. Chair Egan also presented an alternative community-volunteer-assisted survey plan in case full funding is not approved.
- Legislative Update: Michael Smith reported that stay-of-demolition legislation would not be on the short session agenda in May but could return in January. Assistant City Attorney Huffman noted there was still an opportunity to get it on the city's long-session legislative agenda.
Key Outcomes
- 214 Church Street: Conditionally approved 6-0, with Vice-Chair Yermal recused.
- 310 North 6th Street: Conditionally approved 6-1, with Michael Smith voting no.
- 505 Ann Street: Denied 7-0.
- 411 South 2nd Street: Continued 7-0 for further review of garage scale and massing.
- 223 South 5th Avenue: Conditionally approved 7-0.
- Education subcommittee created with appointed members.
- Budget update received; alternative survey process discussed.
- Next Historic Preservation Commission meeting: Thursday, May 12, 2022.
Meeting Transcript
I think I asked pretty much a one second. Okay, we're gonna get started. Um good evening, and welcome everyone to the April 14th meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission. Hearings before this commission are quasi judicial in nature. This is a design review process to determine whether a proposed project is congruous with the special character of the historic district or landmark in which it is located. Decisions of the commission are based on the record of these proceedings, the Wilmington Design Standards for Historic Districts and Landmarks, and the Secretary of Interior standards for rehabilitation. Evidence submitted to the Commission for review will become part of the record. Appeal of a commission decision must be submitted to the Wilmington Board of Adjustment within 30 days of the date of the Commission's action. Further appeal must be submitted to the Superior Court. Evidence pertaining to an agenda item must be presented during the evidentiary portion of the of that item. Individuals who wish to address the commission will be sworn in as witnesses to present material and substantial evidence. The chair will recognize each witness who wishes to address the commission during the evidentiary portion. In order to ensure that witness evidence is properly recorded, each individual should come to the podium and clearly state their name and address before addressing the commission. As a brief reminder, members of the commission are appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the city council. Our charge is with respect to the protection and preservation of properties located within the city's designated historic districts. The commission is held to the requirements of the Wilmington design standards for historic districts and landmarks, as well as applicable North Carolina state law. We are to determine whether exterior changes to buildings are congruous with the special character of the city's historic districts. It is important that the commission deliberate the merits of each request in a manner that provides a record of the basis for our decisions. Please remember our deliberation should be centered on how a project meets the Wilmington design standards and whether the requested changes are congruous. Commissioners, if you have received or been made aware of any information outside this evidentiary hearing relating to an agenda item before the commission, please recuse yourself from that agenda item. Before the meeting begins, please ensure that all cell phones are in silent mode or turned off. First, I will introduce the city staff. We have two new members. She looks forward to growing her knowledge of the rich Wilmington history while enjoying the beach with her dog Tito. And Megan Basic has presented before, but she's also new, and I wanted to introduce her again. Megan comes from San Diego, California, where she earned her Bachelor of Arts in History from San Diego State University. She worked as a junior historic preservation planner and assistant historic preservation planner for the City of San Diego, where she reviewed building permits for historic properties and facilitated the designation of new properties in her free time. She enjoys practicing her genealogy skills, spending time with her dog and exploring her new home in Wilmington. We also have Amy Bradshaw, who is our planning coordinator, Melissa Huffman, who is the assistant city attorney. Ron Satterfield, the assistant director of planning. I think I got everyone. Stephen Solkey. Ashley Wilson. Joan Keston. Ron Wilson. Michael Smith. Thank you. Now we will swear in those present who wish to present evidence related to any agenda item. If I could have all staff applicants and members of the public who wish to speak tonight, please stand up and raise your right hand. Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank you. Okay, we will begin the proceeding. Um we don't have uh minute. We're not going to go through the minutes any correction to the minutes. I'm sorry, there are no minutes for this meeting for last month. They will be available for your review and consideration next month. Okay. All right, then the evidentiary proceeding may now begin with the first agenda item. If we could please have the staff report. I'm gonna recuse myself from this item.
openpublica.com