OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/Wilmington, North Carolina/Historic Preservation Commission
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Wilmington Historic Preservation Commission Meeting - September 10, 2026

Historic Preservation Commission — Thursday, September 10, 2026
BodyWilmington, North Carolina
SessionHistoric Preservation Commission
DateThursday, September 10, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 2:37:10

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it
0:00

30 days of the date of the commission's action.

0:02

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

0:06

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

0:12

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

0:17

Evidence should be directed to the commission.

0:19

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

0:26

Members of the historic preservation commission are uh appointed by the city council and serve at its discretion.

0:31

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

0:37

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.

0:49

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

0:56

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

1:03

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

1:11

And if you would all please turn off your cell phones or set them to silent mode.

1:16

Thank you for that.

1:17

I would like to introduce staff over here, stage right, uh, I'm sorry, stage left.

1:22

We have Gina Esse, Assistant City Attorney, Brian Chambers, assistant planning director, Ben Riggle, Historic Preservation Planning Manager, Alden Finholm, uh historic preservation planner, Amy Bradshaw over to my right, uh planning coordinator.

1:38

And I've uh commissioners could please introduce themselves, starting over here with Paul.

1:42

Uh Paul Lawler.

1:45

Joan Keston.

1:46

Christopher Yermel.

1:47

Ashley Wilson.

1:48

Stephen Salke, Carrie Williams.

1:51

Uh staff uh will now swear in any witnesses who wish to speak this evening.

1:57

If you would uh facing over there with um Amy, please.

2:02

If I could have all applicants, staff and members of the public, if you wish to speak tonight, please stand up and raise your right hand.

2:10

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

2:16

Thank you.

2:19

Uh so first item of business uh review and approval of the meeting minutes from Thursday, August 13th.

2:29

Uh we got an email earlier.

2:31

Paul, if we wanted to make some adjustment to that, we can go ahead and discuss that now, and then we'll get uh a motion for approval.

2:39

Yes, under um evidentiary hearing number nine, 1403 Market Street, which was the uh church windows.

2:48

There's notations in here about the um special circumstances, and it noted the institutional nature of the property, and I think that's what was first brought up last meeting, but I think we discussed it and suggested it'd be more perhaps just uh religious institution because if it's all institutions, um that would be uh I mean I hate to see Citicorp and they brings their headquarters down here and claims poverty, they toss all the windows out.

3:18

Yeah, I mean I I brought up at that meeting just uh it was a broader outlook I had that I was mentioning uh the institutional nature of the building, not necessarily just the fact that it was a religious or church.

3:30

So uh, and I think in the I'm sorry, in the minutes it does say I'm sorry, Paul.

3:36

Tell me again in the minutes it does say uh the fact that it was a a church.

3:40

No, when you spoke and then I added on that it was a church, and that was then added into it.

3:44

Right.

3:45

The minutes say institutional, yeah.

3:47

But uh we also had subsequent discussion when that point came out, and I thought um the the consensus is more of just church to to narrow the exception.

3:58

Okay.

3:58

So does that do how do we want someone like to go ahead and state it?

4:02

How do how do we want because then we're gonna you know get a second and some approval for this?

4:06

How do we want that to actually be stated then on that note?

4:09

Um that detail.

4:13

Yeah.

4:15

What was that address?

4:16

Word be the religious nature of the property or the church affiliation.

4:23

Uh nature of the property as a house of worship.

4:29

Gina, did does this matter?

4:33

Yeah.

4:34

Yeah, I think it does.

4:35

I mean, you you brought it up last month as if it was something that we needed to kind of state and pay have noted in the minutes.

4:42

So we just want to make sure it's reflected properly.

4:44

Like I said, I I I know that it was institutional.

4:46

Like, for example, next door.

4:47

I know New Hanover High School is not in the district.

4:50

New Hanover County, I'm sorry, New Hanover High School does not have its original wood windows and saw anymore.

4:54

So it's an institution, it's an institution, it's an institution.

4:57

That was my that was my my take on it.

5:00

But my recollection is that we were using the word commer or you were using the word commercial, and then Mr.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Historic Preservation█████████████████████████████████████████████84%
Procedural███6%
Building Permits███5%
Tree Preservation█2%
Zoning And Land Use█1%
Engineering And Infrastructure█1%
Public Safety█1%
Summary of Proceedings

Wilmington Historic Preservation Commission Meeting – September 10, 2026

The Wilmington Historic Preservation Commission held a regular meeting on Thursday, September 10, 2026, at 5:30 p.m. in City Council Chambers, Skyline Center, 929 N. Front Street, Wilmington, NC. The meeting was called to order by Chair Christopher Yermal and adjourned at 8:07 p.m. The Commission considered nine evidentiary hearings (three old business items continued from August 13, 2026, and six new business items), approved minutes, and discussed additional matters including property conditions and the annual report. Seven commissioners were present throughout; Chair Yermal recused himself from items 1–3 due to a professional conflict, with Vice Chair Joan Keston presiding for those items. All votes on contested items were unanimous.

Consent Calendar

  • Approval of Minutes – August 13, 2026: The minutes were amended to clarify that a prior decision for the church at 1403 Market Street considered the property as an institutional building specifically religious in nature. The motion to approve as amended passed 7–0.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Item 4 (120 N 8th St): Glenn Wilson, 806 Chestnut Street, asked when construction would begin. The applicant estimated 4–5 weeks subject to approval and permitting.
  • Item 5 (620 Orange St): Bruce Bowman, 115 South Seventh Street, expressed concern about the South Seventh Street elevation’s window treatment and the visibility and vulnerability of the condenser unit near the sidewalk. He requested a larger first-floor window, horizontal band boards, and relocation of the condenser. The applicant agreed to these changes.

Discussion Items

Old Business (Items 1–3, chaired by Vice Chair Keston)

  • Item 1 – 23 N. Front St. (Courtyard design, COA-2026-0204): Staff presented plans for a rear courtyard redesign at a contributing resource in the CBD-HDO. The courtyard would include a pergola with clear polycarbonate roof, cantilevered planted steel trellis, landscaping, and permeable pavers. The applicant (David Mauer, Mauer Architecture) explained the courtyard would serve outdoor seating for a restaurant and wine bar occupying the three buildings. Commission supported the reuse. Motion to approve with conditions passed 6–0 (Yermal recused).
  • Item 2 – 27 N. Front St. (Masonry, windows, rear exit door, steps, COA-2026-0205): Staff described masonry repairs, reopening an infilled opening for basement entry, installing storm windows on all six rear windows (as revised), and removing stucco. The applicant clarified no new rear stairs would be built; egress would be via interior stairs and an elevator in the adjacent building. Motion to approve with conditions (including storm windows) passed 6–0 (Yermal recused).
  • Item 3 – 35 N. Front St. (Storefront replacement, masonry, COA-2026-0206): Staff outlined storefront glazing replacement with bronze-finished insulated glass, masonry infill, new rear window, and courtyard wall/gate. Commissioner Lawler asked about fire code regarding gate swing; the applicant noted gates would be recessed to swing outward without encroaching on the right-of-way. Motion to approve with conditions passed 6–0 (Yermal recused).

New Business (Items 4–9, chaired by Chair Yermal)

  • Item 4 – 120 N 8th St. (New house construction, COA-2026-0208): Staff presented a two-story, 2,826-sq-ft Victorian-inspired house on a corner lot (non-contributing in HD-R). Setbacks: 5 ft (8th St), 2 ft (Chestnut St), 11 ft (east), 4 ft (south). The Commission discussed window placement on the Chestnut Street elevation. After deliberation, the applicant agreed to enlarge three existing windows to full-height and add one window on the second floor (three windows total enlarged). Motion to approve with this condition passed 7–0.
  • Item 5 – 620 Orange St. (New house construction, COA-2026-0226): Staff described a 23-ft-wide, 2-story house (approx. 1,800 sq ft per applicant) on a sunken corner lot, noting grading/stormwater issues and a sycamore tree in the right-of-way. Public comment requested improvements to the South Seventh Street elevation. The applicant agreed to: add a full-size first-floor window near the base of the stairs, horizontal band boards separating floors on both side elevations, and relocate the condenser to the opposite side toward the rear. Motion to approve with these conditions passed 7–0.
  • Item 6 – 511 Grace St. (Pool installation, COA-2026-0227): Staff presented a 15’×30’ in-ground pool with a 20’×10’ wood pergola, travertine deck, and water-feature wall (contributing resource in HD-R). The applicant showed a revised rendering adding two waterfalls and replacing an entry railing with two 5-ft planters. Commission asked about landscaping and construction access. Motion to approve with conditions (including the planter substitution) passed 7–0.
  • Item 7 – 712 Red Cross St. (Renovations, COA-2026-0228): Staff presented a complete renovation: standing-seam metal roof, long shed dormers, foundation stabilization, front porch reconstruction, new wood windows/doors, screened rear porch, and landscaping (contributing resource in HD-R). The applicant, Sue Boone, noted the chimney had collapsed and would be replaced with a replica; the distinctive diamond-shaped gable would be restored with a matching diamond-shaped window. Motion to approve with conditions (including diamond-shaped gable window) passed 7–0.
  • Item 8 – 19 N 5th Ave. (Securing and underpinning, COA-2026-0229): Staff described installing wood lattice underpinning (1×4 members, 2.5”×4” openings) to secure open bays, and custom carriage-style garage doors matching a 1966 photograph (contributing resource in HD-R). The applicant (Bruce Bowman, BMA Architects) stated the building was purchased by First Baptist Church and would be used for adult classes after repairs. Commission appreciated the security improvements. Motion to approve with conditions passed 7–0.
  • Item 9 – 407 & 411 S 3rd St. (Pool and setbacks, COA-2026-0202): Staff proposed installing a 12’6”×26’ fiberglass pool with integrated spa on two commonly owned parcels, adjusting the property line to place the pool in the rear yard of 407 (after midpoint) to comply with code (contributing resource in HD-R). The applicant, Paige Tootoo, noted a large oak tree prevented siting directly behind the house. An existing 6-ft fence and automatic pool cover would provide screening and safety. Motion to approve with conditions passed 7–0.

Key Outcomes

  • All items approved unanimously: Nine Certificates of Appropriateness were issued, each with specific conditions as noted above.
  • Meeting duration: The meeting convened at 5:30 p.m. and adjourned at 8:07 p.m.
  • Next meeting: Scheduled for Thursday, October 8, 2026.

Other Business

  • Items from the Commission: Members discussed a county condemnation notice for the historic church at Fourth and Church Streets (structurally unsound walls); the congregation’s board had been notified with a 30-day response period. Concerns were raised about the continued condition of the “Greystone” property (no roof, unresolved insurance, incomplete structural assessment). A commissioner reported the availability of factory-painted storm windows in custom colors, encouraging their use to preserve historic windows.
  • Items from Staff: Assistant Planning Director Brian Chambers noted the FY 2026 Annual Report was included for information only. He also advised that NCDOT is accepting comments on the bridge-replacement project, with public meetings scheduled for the following Monday and Tuesday; project details are on the city website. Staff noted a decline in after-the-fact cases (now 8% of total) and a rise in commission applications and administrative approvals, attributed to increased activity and awareness. A commissioner identified an attendance error in the annual report (April); staff agreed to review and correct.

Meeting Transcript

30 days of the date of the commission's action. Evidence is received during the evidentiary hearing portion of an 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 uh appointed by the city council and serve at its discretion. Our responsibility is to protect and preserve properties within the city's designated historic districts. 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 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 a project meets to the design standards and whether the proposed change is congruous or not. Commissioners, if you have been uh I'm sorry, if you have received or been made aware of any outside evidence related to any of the matters, please recuse yourself. And if you would all please turn off your cell phones or set them to silent mode. Thank you for that. I would like to introduce staff over here, stage right, uh, I'm sorry, stage left. We have Gina Esse, Assistant City Attorney, Brian Chambers, assistant planning director, Ben Riggle, Historic Preservation Planning Manager, Alden Finholm, uh historic preservation planner, Amy Bradshaw over to my right, uh planning coordinator. And I've uh commissioners could please introduce themselves, starting over here with Paul. Uh Paul Lawler. Joan Keston. Christopher Yermel. Ashley Wilson. Stephen Salke, Carrie Williams. Uh staff uh will now swear in any witnesses who wish to speak this evening. If you would uh facing over there with um Amy, please. If I could have all applicants, staff and members of the public, if you 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. Uh so first item of business uh review and approval of the meeting minutes from Thursday, August 13th. Uh we got an email earlier. Paul, if we wanted to make some adjustment to that, we can go ahead and discuss that now, and then we'll get uh a motion for approval. Yes, under um evidentiary hearing number nine, 1403 Market Street, which was the uh church windows. There's notations in here about the um special circumstances, and it noted the institutional nature of the property, and I think that's what was first brought up last meeting, but I think we discussed it and suggested it'd be more perhaps just uh religious institution because if it's all institutions, um that would be uh I mean I hate to see Citicorp and they brings their headquarters down here and claims poverty, they toss all the windows out. Yeah, I mean I I brought up at that meeting just uh it was a broader outlook I had that I was mentioning uh the institutional nature of the building, not necessarily just the fact that it was a religious or church. So uh, and I think in the I'm sorry, in the minutes it does say I'm sorry, Paul. Tell me again in the minutes it does say uh the fact that it was a a church. No, when you spoke and then I added on that it was a church, and that was then added into it. Right. The minutes say institutional, yeah. But uh we also had subsequent discussion when that point came out, and I thought um the the consensus is more of just church to to narrow the exception. Okay. So does that do how do we want someone like to go ahead and state it? How do how do we want because then we're gonna you know get a second and some approval for this? How do we want that to actually be stated then on that note? Um that detail. Yeah. What was that address? Word be the religious nature of the property or the church affiliation. Uh nature of the property as a house of worship. Gina, did does this matter? Yeah.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com