Grace, beauty, common sense, aesthetics, prevailing, incongruous, aggressive—all words used to describe the monumental home proposed for 8 Bay Avenue. Words, however, were no match for the cold hard numbers of the town’s zoning ordinance and Historic District Guidelines. Local citizen Erin Harvey appealed the Historic District Review Board’s ruling which will allow the 9000-square foot structure to be constructed at 8 Bay, and attempted to use the town’s zoning ordinance, as well as aesthetics and common sense as the foundation of his argument.
Town Planner Larry DiRe countered that, contrary to the data presented by Harvey, the home meets all the criteria of the town’s zoning ordinance as well as falling into line with the historic guidelines. DiRe told Town Council that as a government official, he could not be swayed by emotion, but is bound by the language of the town’s code.
Town Council agreed. After reviewing the appeal, they concluded that there was nothing in the town’s code that would allow them to stop the construction. “I think it is too big,” said Mayor George Proto. “But the home does not violate…it is in line with our ordinances.” Councilman Steve Bennett of Bay Creek added that he felt the home would add to the aesthetic beauty of the beachfront. While he would not come out and say he felt the home was inappropriate, Councilman Andy Buchholz noted that a careful review and re-writing of the zoning ordinance needed to be undertaken to prevent this type of situation.
Town Council unanimously agreed to reject Harvey’s appeal and green-light the construction of the home.
A handful of Bay Creek residents penned short letters in favor of the new home. Sean Ingram, who will be constructing the home, also spoke in favor of the home during public comments.
There was a ground swell of protests from homeowners in the historic district against the new construction, both spoken during public comments, as well as submitted to council in writing (most of the written comments were several hundred words). Former council member Bruce Evans, who served when the Historic Guidelines were first adopted, passionately pleaded with council to interpret the intent of guidelines, and to reject the home based on aesthetic and real notions of historic integrity. Evans used the “little bit” defense to make his argument. When the Department of Historic Resources first met with Cape Charles, it was adamant that to maintain historic integrity, the town needed to fight for every “little bit” of its history. If you allow home owners and developers to chip away, eventually you will be left with faux history, essentially nothing.
Opinion: The chipping away of historic Cape Charles has been going on for some time—the Hotel Cape Charles, the old High School, most new renovations and construction, have all served to bastardize the historical integrity of this town. And it has all been sanctioned and promoted by town council and the boards and commissions that serve them. That town council would allow such a home at 8 Bay Avenue should not come as a surprise. The precedent was set several years ago.
About the Author
This building is going to be huge and an aesthetic mismatch for our historic district and the beachfront, but that was not the basis of my legal argument to town council. My argument was based on our town ordinances. In a town where the largest homes are about 3,900 square feet, a 9,239 square foot building does not comply with an ordinance that says, “the proportions of new construction should relate, 1:1, to the prevailing standards present in the neighborhood.” And if one gets distracted by other items such as the proper yard setback or the proper roof height, it is important to remember, “Where there is conflict between provisions or requirements of this ordinance, the more restrictive provisions or requirements shall apply.” But when the town planner lobbies the town council members in the halls and via inappropriate emails behind-the-scenes, it is difficult for more reasoned interpretations of our ordinances to gain traction.
I support your position on objecting to the size of this house. It will be completely out of sync with the typical sizes of houses in the historic district and will stick out like a monstrous sore thumb that will be an irritation everytime you walk down Bay Avenue. I am a new resident here and had become aware of this only after reading this article.
Grace, beauty, aesthetics, common sense? The Town Council, except for one, and Town Managers, have no appreciation for these terms. “Yogurt bar…coming soon (in 3 years or so).” The harbor is turning into a dump. Their solution: sell it. They have a serious case of the “we cant’s”. Cape Charles, to an objective eye, looks like crap. This summer I saw a kid, who I guess was temporary summer help, painting the Bay Ave Gazebo standing on a step ladder painting with one hand and holding up his pants with the other. Who’s in charge of that???
I completely agree with Erin’s argument against the construction of this huge “home”. Anyone who thinks that it will remain a “home” for a large extended family is kidding themselves. It’s all about precedent isn’t it? How does this behemoth fall in with historic guidelines? We’re told to find a precedent when we want to build. What precedent was presented when this was proposed? I guess now that this precedent has been set anyone who owns multiple lots can combine them and build up to a 9000 sq/ft home. After all isn’t this what’s happening here?
Wayne, while I agree with you wholeheartedly on the School, the rest of your list is attributable to the economic depression CC found itself in for decades. Frankly, if not for the Hotel, you’d have yet ANOTHER empty building on Mason. Like the one across the street from it.
Or any of the others up and down the block.
Historical? I think I am the only one ever to take my kids to the train station museum.
Historical turns into timber and trash if no one is around to renovate and maintain it.
As for your ‘elected officials’ hosing y’all…Each. And. Every. Chance. They. Get……well, DEMS de breaks.
I wish the builders of the new home clear skies and low cost lumber, profit to the skies.
I wish the new residents best of luck in a town full of people ready to demonize them for the sin of having success.
Cape Charles is actually full of highly successful people across many different fields of business. It adds to the wonderfully eclectic collection of people from all walks of life that are drawn to this special place. Nobody resents success here, and nobody is against this family. It’s just that, since the beginning in 1884, not a single one of the many other successful people that have moved here has ever tried to erect a building so gigantic that so clearly doesn’t belong, ordinance or not. There are many other large, gorgeous, extravagantly beautiful homes in Cape Charles that were built by highly successful people who earned it. Several of them were also built across three lots – they can serve as great models for how one might build such a home. But while these other homes are shining stars in our town, proudly displayed by their owners and admired by passing neighbors, their construction also respected the location, location, location where they were built. A home that looks beautiful in Cape Charles might be an eyesore if it were in a suburb in Texas and vice-versa. Even a house from one side of Bay Creek wouldn’t work if it was planted on the other side. It’s not a matter of being successful or not, but what you do with it. Even our town planner has said this home is too big for our town – he just disagrees about the ability of the technicalities in our ordinances to stop it.
“Nobody resents success here, and nobody is against this family.”
I’ll meet you in the Firehouse restaurant to discuss tha…….errrrrr, ooops.
Gee, it sure sounds like the family is resented, from the postings here.
And do you expect me to forget the enmity that the Hotel encountered? Or how about the others chased outa town over the years because they were ‘different’? Yes, I recall that too…….
Wanna talk about what really doesn’t belong, aesthetically? The concrete plant. BUT y’all recognize the economic import of THAT but not a home.
How do you spell ‘freedom’ in Virginia? G O V E R M E N T.
And once again, please tell me how the empty brick square(across from the Hotel) fits the ‘historical nature’ of CC? You know, the one that’s been there for decades?
EMPTY?
It’s hilarious, but I’ll give the owners of this proposed home the same advice I gave Dave when the Town was gonna run him outa town because of the dividers on the porches:
LEAVE. Cancel the contracts, fire the contractors and LEAVE. Deprive the town of the taxes and associated revenue.
If you ain’t local, CC don’t want ya.
Freedom in America sure ain’t what it used to be.