In May, a new Historic District Review Board was put in place with Susan Eidam and Kerry Shackleford replacing chairman Joe Fehrer and vice-chair David Gay respectively. The new board has publicly proclaimed that it has a new direction—to take its charge to adhere to the town’s Historic District Guidelines in the strictest, most black and white way possible.
This direction appears to come from the Town Council. In public comments last month, Councilman Paul Grossman noted:
While this new board could draw a line in the sand and said they would be consistent from now on, this was not enough since board members could change. It was important for a consensus to be reached on various gray areas in the design guidelines, and clarifications needed to be written into the guidelines to remove ambiguity to the greatest extent possible. He would like them to start with the use of vinyl siding and chimney retention/removal. – taken from HDRB minutes.
While this rigor by the new board is marginally laudable, the outcome has become a nightmare. What was once a collaborative process between the HDRB and the community has instead become more like a 1930s style Soviet Tribunal.
If you are planning on using a vinyl product in the Historic District, don’t bother. The HDRB has gone to war against vinyl, and other materials that are not listed in the guidelines. Wood is now the material of choice, no matter the cost of construction and maintenance.
Below is a list of materials that have led to denials:
Vinyl siding
Azek trim
Marvin windows
Composite handrails
Vinyl windows
Grills between glass
Stucco foundations
These materials can found being used throughout the Historic District.
Denial is the new normal
In May, the Board denied Certificate of Appropriateness at 532 Jefferson and 210 Bay Avenue due to insufficient details in the plans and the use of “inappropriate” materials. In June, the board once again denied several applications—the use of vinyl products was the main culprit. An application for a new single-family home on Strawberry Street was denied because the design was deemed inappropriate—it supposedly did not fit into the “character” of the rest of the neighborhood.
In the last few months, almost 75% of applications have either been denied, deferred or only given conditional approval. In this time, no major projects have been approved.
What the board has not recognized is that the guidelines are just that. At one point in the June meeting, Chairwoman Eidem held up a copy of the guidelines as she chastised Quality Construction’s Sean Ingram as members of the audience shook their heads in disbelief. It’s frightening to hear members of the board try to defend their decisions by using language such as “the way I see the what the guidelines are saying”, or “I interpret the guidelines to mean”, or “I think it would be more aesthetically pleasing if you did this”, or “It doesn’t fit into the character of the neighborhood”.
In the board’s defense, they have said that they are not happy with the guidelines either, but that is the document they must work from. If there is enough public outcry, they say they would be happy to entertain changes to the text of the document.
Still, the HDRB is making subjective judgements based on myopic interpretations of a document that was totally lifted from another locality back in the 90s. There doesn’t appear to be any self-reflection or common sense when trying to apply the guidelines to the real world—and there are real world consequences.
All these denials and deferrals have a monetary impact on workers and families in our community. In past two months, contractors have told the Mirror that the HDRB has cost the local economy close to $10 million dollars in new construction and renovations that have stalled or been canceled completely. Some applicants have pulled projects because the just don’t want to deal with the board anymore. That frustration boiled over in June’s meeting when a property owner that only wanted to put in a “wood” staircase became so angry, that he began yelling at Susan Eidam from his seat in the audience. This turned into a raucous shouting match as Eidam slammed the desk and shouted several times, “PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE CLOSED!”
Another worry is that there does not appear to be an excessive amount of expertise on the board. In the past, former chairman Joe Fehrer made his living renovating older homes in Maryland. He had an understanding of how to preserve the historic character while allowing for the property owner to make quality changes to their home.
In public comments at the Town Council Regular Meeting Thursday, developer Eyre Baldwin accused the HDRB of not only being ignorant of the Department of the Interior Guidelines, but also for propagating misinformation by cherry picking sections of the code to defend their actions while leaving out portions that that might refute them.
All this is happening against the backdrop of the release of a scholarly review of academic and practitioner literature concerning historic plan preservation. The work was done by Christopher Newport University for the Town of Cape Charles. The document provides a nutshell view of historic preservation. Whether it will be useful in helping the town understand just what preservation means is yet to be seen.
Opinion – One thing the document does make clear is that historic preservation is really a money game, success judged by socio-economic factors. Those of us in the old school fight learned that lesson the hard way—historic tax credits and government involvement in historic preservation is basically a way of funneling tax dollars into developer’s pockets. You know, we’ll preserve this old tobacco warehouse by converting into a 5-star restaurant. Which is fine—just be clear about what this means, and stop blowing smoke about the town’s historic character. Vinyl windows and Azec trim don’t matter one way or the other.
The Mirror knows Susan Eidem, and can vouch for her as being a funny, nice, intelligent and dedicated person. No one is questioning her and the board’s integrity, but the process as it stands now is not working and needs some adjustment.
Town Council Members Andy Buchholz and Tammy Holloway attended the last HDRB and claim to be aware of the issue. A joint work session and a Come-to-Jesus sit-down between Town Council and the board is planned for next month.
About the Author
Stupid is as stupid does, goes that saying made famous by Forrest Gump back when and it is as true today as it ever was.
These people are obviously trying to keep Cape Charles mired in some backward period of time when the choice of building materials was very limited.
Reminds me of someone up this way who bought an old house and wanted to restore it, but to keep it “original,” which means as it was back in the 1800s, so they replaced, on advice of a “consultant” on historical restoration, and against the advice of people like myself, the old single pane windows with new single pane windows that looked just like the old ones, and were just as energy inefficient, this in a place where it goes down to zero or below in the winter.
So the fools got to freeze inside that huge mausoleum just like the people did back in the 1800s, when double pane windows weren’t around.
“But it will hurt the value of the house if I replace the original windows with something new,” whined the New York City homeowner who wanted a “mansion” in the country, which is a ridiculous assertion, since only a fool from the city would buy a house in the cold country with wood-frame single pane windows that shrink in the winter and leave cracks you could throw a cat through.
I would defy any of those “experts” on that board to point out Aztex trim on a house and tell it was not wood.
The same with Hardiboard siding.
The first time I saw Hardiboard siding, it was on a very upscale new Colonial-style house in tony Saratoga, New York, which probably boasts near as many millionaires and multi-millionaires as does Cape Charles, and I thought it was clear Cedar.
Since it was an open house by the builder, I asked him where he managed to find so much clear Cedar, and that was when I learned it wasn’t clear Cedar at all, but Hardiboard.
Suffice to say, I am now using Hardiboard, and Azec, as well, and why no?
The Hardiboard is fire resistant, and more importantly, resistant to ants and these wood-eating bees we now have up this way as a result of climate changes that are decimating exposed wood up this way where I am.
It is the 21st century, afterall, so why be stuck with having to use building materials and technologies from a couple of centuries ago?
I once lived in a wonderful town in “The Historic District” and needed/wanted to make a repair to my home. I had owned it for 5 years and the neglect it had endured prior to me could not be reversed. Any homeowners out there with a porch know they require replacement periodically. I applied for a permit with my detailed plans for an $7,000 repair/replacement. The design was an exact replacement with some artistic touches from my wife with everything meeting existing codes. The Historical Society denied my permit and came back with a complete replacement saying the partial was not allowed, that all materials had to be replaced, and that only their approved materials could be used. The lowest estimate I could get for that design was $17,000. Well, I understand the Hist. Society wanting to preserve the integrity of the town, I do not understand them exerting excessive control and going beyond that directive. My plan was historic by design, and beautiful. There are many practical ways, and newer materials, that can continue that idea. Anyway, I told the town “okay. Forget it. I can’t afford to do what you demand. So now we are both stuck with a house, in the historic district, that will fall into disrepair. No one will want to buy such a house, and when the floor collapses, and the columns roll into the street, perhaps you will consider that your demanded dominance of the situation was foolish bullying”. 2 months later they changed their minds and I completed the repair. The original replacement idea with my wife’s’ embellishments. After completion I can’t tell you how many people told us we had the prettiest porch in town. Hello Cape Charles Historical Society !! Is anybody home ? Creative uses of new materials, especially in salt air environments, lead to longer lasting, quality repairs. They are actually improvements. Do you want proof ? How many mahogany and teak boats do you see in your historic harbor ? New materials are just as attractive, and in a practical sense, last much longer.
Following what Jack has said about wood rotting, here is a video which shows rotted wood paneling on a house being replaced with Azek, and again, I would defy these people on this board to say which was which when the job was done.
How to Use and Install AZEK Trim
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWs52RWipO8
This is an abbreviated version of an email sent to town officials sent based upon my interaction with HDRB on June 18, 2019
I am writing in order to address the June 18, 2019 meeting of the Town of Cape Charles Historic District Review Board (HDRB), and the implications of how the HDRB is currently performing its role.
This correspondence is prompted by what I witnessed over two hours last evening. In my opinion, it is imperative that Town Council take immediate action to remedy a Historic District Review Board which is abusing its statutory power-because of their inability or unwillingness to recognize the scope and purpose of the current Historic District Guidelines under Article VIII of the Town Code.
This perspective I offer is two-fold.
First, I have over twenty years working as a general contractor and developer on historic tax-credit projects. I am very, very well acquainted with the National Park Service Guidelines, and historic district restrictions and processes. Second, I am now closing in on 20 years as a part-time resident/business owner in Cape Charles, who cares deeply about this community. Finally, I completely agree with and understand the importance for the review of development for historic compatibility in a town such as Cape Charles
However, what I experience/witnessed last evening is a perversion of the historic review process. In fact, it is the exact scenario citizens typically cite when they oppose the creation of historic overlay districts.
The current HDRB is applying the Historic District Guidelines (HDG) as a set of mandatory dictates. While strict adherence to National Park Service (NPS) standards is necessary to qualify for Historic Tax Credits (HTC), there is a completely different standard of analysis in a review of historic compatibility in a historic district. That is why, as the HDG makes very clear-these guidelines are GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS.
For two hours, I witnessed the HDRB’s deliberations regarding multiple applications. I watched as the HDRB told homeowners and contractors specifically how to renovate and/or build their homes. A very limited example includes:
Applicants were told to remove vinyl or aluminum siding to see if original wood siding could be restored. Contractors were told what brand and form of trim boards to use in new construction. A home owner was told how a post-cap should be applied on a staircase newell post.
These deliberations were frequented by members referencing specific provisions of the guidelines-and then concluding that the guidelines DICTATED these outcomes.
The current HDRB id subjectively applying their own vision of what Cape Charles should look like. They are doing so by enforcing MANDATORY COMPLIANCE with a set of historic guidelines which are supposed to be recommendations to ensure historic compatibility.
Any objective observation of this process will conclude that these five unelected individuals are presently exercising powers far beyond what is contemplated by Article VIII of the Town Code. They are doing this to the detriment of the Town, its citizens, and its businesses.
David M. Gammino
Another comment I feel I should make is that I think we might be able to get more active participation in this forum if some of the topics were not presented or backed in such an outlandish manner with any sort of an over the top opinion or insult to the subject to be discussed. I feel an example of this opinion is the photo and the words that present this subject on the website. Comparing our HDRB, and their style, to that of Russia ? And I guess that’s an old picture of the Politburo ? Really ? That’s helpful ? I think presentations like this hurt the credibility of the discussion and push people away from participating. I think it’s almost comparable to the outlandish representations we get from A O C up there in Queens. Her saying our ICE detention centers along the border are comparable to Nazi camps in WW2 ? Silly. I’d just like to see everyone, on all sides, to accurate with comments, and not outlandish to try to cry for attention.
Note: Maybe should start new comedy club and call it ‘Don’t Get It’.
I have found over the years that regardless of the site, except for TWITTER, which I don’t follow, very few people ever actually comment, on anything.
People who don’t like the presentation of the CCM are probably those who read the Washington Post, instead, or the New York Times, anyway, so it is a bridge too far to think that they would come here to comment unless the Cape Charles Mirror were to become a Washington Post clone, in which case, I doubt that you would find me and you in there, and the Cape Charles Mirror would be ruined.
Moral of the story: if something is not broken, then there should be no effort being made to fix it.
Wash with gasoline, dry with a match.