OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Wilmington Historic Preservation Commission Meeting – November 13, 2025

Historic Preservation CommissionThursday, November 13, 2025
BodyWilmington, North Carolina
SessionHistoric Preservation Commission
DateThursday, November 13, 2025
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 2:32:20

Transcript — Verbatim
4:38

Good evening.

4:39

Welcome to the historic preservation commission meeting on this Thursday, November thirteenth, twenty twenty-five.

4:44

Hearings before the historic preservation commission are quasi judicial in nature.

4:49

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

5:00

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 the Interior Standards for Rehab Rehabilitation.

5:07

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

5:11

Appeals of commission decisions are made to the Wilmington Board of Adjustment and then to the Superior Court, and based on the record, appeals must be filed within 30 days of the date of the Commissioner's action.

5:21

Evidence is received during the evidentiary hearing portion of an agenda agenda item.

5:26

Those who want to address the commission are sworn as witnesses to present material and substantial evidence to the commission.

5:32

The chair recognizes those who want to submit such evidence during the evidentiary hearing.

5:37

Evidence should be directed to the commission.

5:39

To ensure that evidence is properly recorded, please come to the podium to address the commission, state your name and address, and speak clearly.

5:47

Members of the Historic Preservation Commission are appointed by the City Council and serve at its discretion.

5:53

Our responsibility is to protect and preserve properties within the city's designated historic district.

5:58

We adhere to the Wilmington Design Standards for Historic Districts and Landmarks, as well as applicable North Carolina state law to assess whether exterior changes align with the unique character of the city's historic districts.

6:10

It is important that we deliberate the deliberate the merits of each request in a manner that provides a record of the basis for our decisions.

6:18

Please remember that our deliberation should center on how our project meets the design standards and whether the proposed change is congruous or not.

6:27

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

6:33

Please turn off or set your cell phones to silent mode.

6:36

Thank you.

6:38

Introducing our staff, Gina Essay as Assistant City Attorney, Brian Chambers, Assistant Planning Director, Ben Riggle, Historic Preservation Planning Manager, Aidan Finholm, Historic Preservation Planner, Hillary Taylor, Planner 2, Amy Bradshaw, Planning Coordinator, Catherine Thurston, Zoning Administrator.

6:59

I'm going to ask the commissioners to introduce themselves.

7:01

I mean I am Joan Kisten serving as the uh chairman this evening.

7:06

Stephen Salke.

7:07

Ashley Wilson.

7:08

Alison Watts.

7:09

Beth Rutledge.

7:11

On the staff will now swear in any witnesses who wish to speak this evening.

7:14

Please stand.

7:16

If I could have all staff, applicants and members of the public.

7:21

If you wish to speak tonight, you'll need to stand and raise your right hand.

7:25

You must be sworn in in order to speak tonight.

7:27

So please, if you plan to speak, please stand up.

7:31

Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

7:36

Thank you.

7:39

Okay, first we're going to review the minutes from the October meeting.

7:42

Does anybody have any comments to make?

7:44

Edits?

7:46

May I have a motion, please?

7:47

A motion.

7:49

Second.

7:50

All favor?

7:52

Aye.

7:52

Um the minutes are so approved.

7:54

Um, we need to uh the first item on the agenda is going to be continued.

7:59

We need a motion for that.

8:01

Okay.

8:02

Motion to continue item one on tonight's agenda.

8:05

Is that being continued till December?

8:07

Correct.

8:09

Second.

8:10

Okay.

8:10

All in favor.

8:11

Aye.

8:12

I so passed.

8:13

Item number two.

8:18

That's October's number two.

9:35

Uh evening commissioners.

9:36

Uh case two was continued from the October Commission meeting is for and is for the proposed subdividing of the existing lot, construction of an access road, and the construction of a new small house at 515 South Third Street.

9:49

As described in the Wilmington Historic District boundary expansion report, the Mauler House constructed circa 1910 is a hipped roof, two story house for projecting pedimented bay with a flattened polygonial bay window.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Historic Preservation█████████████████████████████████████████████83%
Public Engagement███6%
Zoning And Land Use███5%
Budget Equity Analysis██3%
Procedural2%
Water And Wastewater Management1%
Summary of Proceedings

Wilmington Historic Preservation Commission Meeting – November 13, 2025

The Wilmington Historic Preservation Commission met on Thursday, November 13, 2025, at 5:33 p.m. in City Council Chambers, Skyline Center, 929 North Front Street, Wilmington, North Carolina. Vice-Chair Joan Keston presided with Commissioners Alison Watts, Ashley Wilson, Beth Rutledge, and Stephen Sulkey present. Chairman Christopher Yermal and Commissioner Ross Tomaselli were absent. With five of seven members in attendance, four votes were required for any approval or denial. The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Tori Fish (1703 Pope Court) spoke during the discussion on Item 9 (507 Grace Street), sharing her experience using limewash on brick as a breathable alternative to paint, which influenced the commission's decision to allow either masonry paint or limewash.
  • No other members of the public spoke during the evidentiary hearings, though several applicants and their representatives provided testimony.

Old Business (Items 1–3)

  • Item 1 – 515/517 South 4th Street (Roof replacement with material change): The applicant requested a continuance; the commission voted 5–0 to continue the item to December 8, 2025.
  • Item 2 – 515 South 3rd Street (Subdivision, access road, new house): Approved 5–0 with conditions, including clear glazing, protection of mature trees, proper permits, smooth-side fiberboard installation, and TRC‑required driveway modifications.
  • Item 3 – 323 South 4th Street (Roof replacement with standing seam metal): Approved 5–0 with conditions requiring flat‑channel panels (no striations), proper disposal of old materials, and compliance with building codes. A 1966 photo showing a standing‑seam porch roof provided historical precedent.

New Business (Items 4–12)

  • Item 4 – 505 South 5th Avenue (Siding, trim, soffit, fascia replacement): The applicant proposed LP SmartSide wood‑composite siding. Commissioners debated whether composite met the “replace like with like” standard. Motion to approve failed 3–2 (Watts, Sulkey in favor; Wilson, Rutledge opposed), resulting in denial.
  • Item 5 – 722 Red Cross Street (Exterior renovations including window replacements): Approved 5–0. Because the house is a non‑contributing structure, the commission allowed LP SmartSide composite siding. Conditions include clear glazing, proper disposal, tree protection, and code compliance.
  • Item 6 – 1707 Princess Street (Window replacements with material change): The applicant initially requested wood‑composite windows; after discussion, she agreed to install wood windows. The commission approved 5–0 with conditions that windows be wood and final selection reviewed via administrative bypass.
  • Item 7 – 114 North 8th Street (After‑the‑fact roof replacement): The applicant replaced a flat‑channel metal roof with a striated metal roof without a Certificate of Appropriateness. A motion to deny the after‑the‑fact request failed 3–2 (Sulkey, Wilson, Rutledge in favor; Keston, Watts opposed), meaning the roof was not approved. The city attorney advised the applicant that the violation runs with the property and that the roof must be brought into compliance or appealed.
  • Item 8 – 613 Chestnut Street (Small rear addition): Approved 5–0 with conditions for clear glazing, proper disposal, tree protection, and code compliance. The contractor clarified siding would be pine, not OSB.
  • Item 9 – 507 Grace Street (Painting unpainted brick columns): Approved 4–1 (Sulkey voted no). The masonry had been poorly repaired; the commission allowed painting with breathable masonry paint or limewash to avoid moisture trapping, with final product approved via administrative bypass.
  • Item 10 – 712 Chestnut Street (Removal of small brick chimney at Chestnut Street Presbyterian Church): Approved 5–0. The chimney was non‑original, deteriorated, and not historically significant. Conditions include matching roof patch, protection of stained‑glass windows, and proper disposal.
  • Item 11 – 1519 Princess Street (Rear window and door alterations): Approved 5–0. The proposal replaced two mismatched doors with French doors and added a matching window, improving rear symmetry. Conditions require clear glazing and matching brick/mortar.
  • Item 12 – 707 Grace Street (After‑the‑fact rear porch enclosure): Approved 5–0. Work had been started without a COA by a contractor who abandoned the project. The commission accepted the applicant’s completed work (with revised decking materials) and allowed finishing via conditions including clear glazing and administrative bypass for stairs and railing.

Other Business

  • Item 13 – Mary Etta Williams House and Property Study List Application (709 North 8th Street): Approved 5–0 to add the property to the Local Landmark Study List. The property has been in the same family for 140 years and is associated with African‑American heritage and the Rosenwald Canetuck School. The commission noted that study‑list placement does not yet designate the property as a local landmark.

Key Outcomes

  • Vote tally: 11 items approved, 1 denied (Item 4), 1 continued (Item 1), and 1 after‑the‑fact request not approved (Item 7), requiring compliance or appeal.
  • Four‑vote requirement: Because only five members were present, four affirmative votes were needed; Item 4 (3–2) and Item 7 denial (3–2) both failed to meet that threshold.
  • Staff announcement: The Planning Department warned that scammers are sending fake invoices impersonating the department; residents should verify any suspicious invoices.
  • Commissioner reminder: Stephen Sulkey cautioned property owners against paying contractors large sums upfront, advising payment only as work progresses.
  • Next meeting: December 11, 2025.

Meeting Transcript

Good evening. Welcome to the historic preservation commission meeting on this Thursday, November thirteenth, twenty twenty-five. 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 special character of the historic district or landmark. 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 the Interior Standards for Rehab Rehabilitation. Evidence submitted to the Commission for review becomes part of the record. Appeals of commission decisions are made to the Wilmington Board of Adjustment and then to the Superior Court, and based on the record, appeals must be filed within 30 days of the date of the Commissioner's action. Evidence is received during the evidentiary hearing portion of an agenda agenda item. Those who want to address the commission are sworn as witnesses to present material and substantial evidence to the commission. The chair recognizes those who want to submit such evidence during the evidentiary hearing. Evidence should be directed to the commission. To ensure that evidence is properly recorded, please come to the podium to address the commission, state your name and address, and speak clearly. Members of the Historic Preservation Commission are appointed by the City Council and serve at its discretion. Our responsibility is to protect and preserve properties within the city's designated historic district. We adhere to the Wilmington Design Standards for Historic Districts and Landmarks, as well as applicable North Carolina state law to assess whether exterior changes align with the unique character of the city's historic districts. It is important that we deliberate the deliberate the merits of each request in a manner that provides a record of the basis for our decisions. Please remember that our deliberation should center on how our project meets the design standards and whether the proposed change is congruous or not. Commissioners, if you have received or been made aware of any outside evidence related to any of the matters, please recuse yourself. Please turn off or set your cell phones to silent mode. Thank you. Introducing our staff, Gina Essay as Assistant City Attorney, Brian Chambers, Assistant Planning Director, Ben Riggle, Historic Preservation Planning Manager, Aidan Finholm, Historic Preservation Planner, Hillary Taylor, Planner 2, Amy Bradshaw, Planning Coordinator, Catherine Thurston, Zoning Administrator. I'm going to ask the commissioners to introduce themselves. I mean I am Joan Kisten serving as the uh chairman this evening. Stephen Salke. Ashley Wilson. Alison Watts. Beth Rutledge. On the staff will now swear in any witnesses who wish to speak this evening. Please stand. If I could have all staff, applicants and members of the public. If you wish to speak tonight, you'll need to stand and raise your right hand. You must be sworn in in order to speak tonight. So please, if you plan to speak, please stand up. 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, first we're going to review the minutes from the October meeting. Does anybody have any comments to make? Edits? May I have a motion, please? A motion. Second. All favor? Aye. Um the minutes are so approved. Um, we need to uh the first item on the agenda is going to be continued. We need a motion for that. Okay. Motion to continue item one on tonight's agenda. Is that being continued till December? Correct.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com