Town Climbs Down from Fake Chimney Demand

Jefferson as it appears today

621 Jefferson as it appears today — minus chimney (and TV antenna)

621 Jefferson as it appeared in May 2013 (Wave photo)

By GEORGE SOUTHERN
Cape Charles Wave

February 17, 2014

A year ago, members of the Historic District Review Board resigned en masse after Town Council overruled their requirement that Hotel Cape Charles modify its new glass balconies.

Following the resignations, a new Historic District Review Board was appointed, and at their first meeting last May, they denied a request by the owners of 621 Jefferson Avenue to elimante a non-functioning chimney, stipulating that it be replaced with a new fake chimney as part of their renovations.

Now, Town Planner Rob Testerman has recommended that the Review Board overrule its own decision and forget about the chimney.

A May 30, 2013, report in the Wave on the fake chimney requirement drew a number of comments – none of them in agreement with the Board’s decision.

Most vocal was Planning Commissioner Dan Burke, who wrote: “Dear HRB — Get off your duffs and go take a look at what you’ve done. There are several houses right across the street that a stiff wind could knock down, half of the older houses don’t have chimneys, one has a stainless steel pipe through the roof, and two other houses have been recently remodeled with no chimneys. These people are investing in our town. We desperately need people like this and you are concerned about a broken-down chimney.”

The four owners of 621 Jefferson originally agreed to comply with the requirement for a fake chimney, but have had second thoughts. A recent letter from the owners to the Board echoes Commissioner Burke’s comments. Reviewing the 600 block of Jefferson Avenue, they found “enormous variation in the condition of these structures ranging from uninhabitable to completely and handsomely renovated. . . . The pattern is very clear: the overwhelming majority of renovated, well maintained homes (and those recently built) do not have chimneys. Most of the homes with chimneys are dilapidated and poorly maintained,” they wrote the Board.

CONTINUED FROM FIRST PAGE

The letter continues: “The three structures immediately to the east of our property currently have chimneys. These three structures are some of the worst looking structures on the block. The structure adjacent to ours, 623 Jefferson, has been uninhabited for nearly 10 years. Currently, most windows and doors are broken allowing it to serve as a haven for birds, rodents, and other wildlife. It is without a doubt one of the worst structures in the entire town. If you look to the west, you will find a vacant lot (upon which a home with no chimney will likely be built) and two homes that have been wonderfully renovated and maintained. Both of these structures have had their chimneys removed.”

Town Planner Testerman has now advised the Board that “Due to the evidence presented which indicates that replacing the chimney at 621 Jefferson is not necessary in order to maintain compatibility with other homes in the vicinity, staff recommends the Certificate of Appropriateness be amended to allow the removal of the chimney, with no replacement required.”

The town is charging the owners an additional $50 application fee for reconsideration of the Board’s original decision.

The Historic District View Board meets 6 p.m. Tuesday, February 18, at Town Hall. Click here to read the complete information packet.

Share

Comments

6 Responses to “Town Climbs Down from Fake Chimney Demand”

  1. Steve Downs on February 17th, 2014 7:44 am

    They shouldn’t have to pay one dime extra for doing what they wanted to do in the first place. The article states that the new board members were appointed. By whom? Idiots beget idiots, and stupidity reigns!

  2. Karen Gay on February 17th, 2014 12:42 pm

    Oh, now, Mr. Downs! Don’t you think that your opinion is a little extreme? My husband is on the Historic District Review Board and I am very aware of the considerable time he has spent in the vault at the Library and at the Town offices researching not only the rules to which they must adhere, but also the history of the town so that he understands the context. He has not always voted the way the Town Council would have liked him to and I admire and respect how much he cares for the town and how much work he has invested in this volunteer “job.” I don’t know the other members of the Board, but I hope that they all have spent similar time in considering their decisions.

    I believe that the issue with the chimney came up at the first meeting of the new Board. They were still learning the job. As you can see, it all worked out fine for the homeowners in the end. It is a very hard job to find a good middle ground so that homeowners can make their houses livable with little extra expense levied by the Board. I expect there will be other false starts, but hopefully with feedback published by the Wave, the Board can think again about their decisions. I would only hope that those differing opinions be be courteous to all concerned.

  3. Susan Bauer on February 17th, 2014 2:46 pm

    I value the service of the members of the Historic Review Board. They work hard to ensure that the town retains its authentic historic character. Notwithstanding, I commend everyone who has decided to take a second look at this issue, and I hope the decision to remove the non functioning chimney is upheld. My house is in this block, which is a wonderful mix of full and part timers, come heres and always been heres. I was heartbroken when my dear neighbor, the previous occupant of this home, and a part time employee of the Cape Charles Library, passed away. However, I think she would have been happy to see these two young couples restore this house, mostly by their own hard labor, and hopefully they will enjoy many years in this historic residence.

  4. Daniel Burke on February 17th, 2014 7:02 pm

    Another way to look at this is the system actually worked. The HRB was considerate enough to take another look at that particular situation. At first glance these decisions seem to be simple. Making decisions that impact others is not simple, especially to those directly affected by it. This is especially true when you are new to these commissions. The tendency is to “go by the book.”

    Being on The National Historic Register can mean many thousands of dollars in tax credits to the brave folks willing to take on rehabilitation of one of these old houses. Without the Historic Review Board we would not be eligible for this program. Without this stimulus, rehabbing one of these old timers would not make sense for most folks. We may take issue with this or that specific ruling but it is the responsibility of The HRB to keep us on the National Register and that isn’t always as easy as it seems.
    Subsequent to my comment on 621 Jefferson (for the record I don’t know those people) I found out that the chairman of The HRB, David Gay, made a trip to Richmond, at his own expense, to research historical guidelines for Cape Charles. I think that more than qualifies as “getting off your duff,” and I apologize for that remark. I know David and I guarantee that no one takes the welfare of Cape Charles more seriously.

  5. Steve Downs on February 17th, 2014 11:22 pm

    It worked out fine for the homeowners minus 50 bucks and time wasted in their renovation.

  6. David Boyd on February 26th, 2014 2:57 pm

    Sounds like congrats are in order to both David Gay for his hard work and to Daniel Burke for being magnanimous enough to apologize in writing for his earlier remarks.
    I know nothing about this issue, or those involved, but it seems to me that despite a few false starts, the system has ultimately worked as designed and an equitable final decision made.
    For a board comprised entirely of brand new members, trying to strike a balence between allowing rennovation and preserving history, I think this is a laudable result.