Among Westport’s many charms, historic homes are high on the list.
But — like the venerable trees that surround many — they’re disappearing at a rapid rate.
Residents express frustration with developers who demolish old houses, and at the Historic District Commission that cannot save them.
Part of the issue though, is regulatory. Town rules sometimes disincentivize developers from saving older structures.
This historic Frazier Peters home on Charcoal Hill Road was demolished 10 years ago. (Photo by Bob Weingarten)
Tonight (Monday, January 12, 6 p.m., Zoom), the Planning & Zoning Commission discusses a text amendment that could help keep those homes from the wrecking ball.
The language of Amendment #859 — submitted by Wendy Van Wie, on behalf of the Historic District Commission — is dry:
to delete the existing regulations and add a new … Historic Residential Structure (HRS), which clarifies and strengthens the intent to preserve and ensure continued use of Historic Structures explicitly tying incentives to Page 2 of 3 preservation outcomes; requires formal designation by the HDC before HRS application with criteria to be used by HDC; limits structures to pre-1940, with flexibility for later structures of exceptional integrity or significance; adds explicit definition of alteration for purposes of the section, as any exterior change, including enclosed historic feature; requires all exterior alterations reviewed, regardless of visibility; requires mandatory HDC review for changes impacting significant features or additions; clarifies process for ongoing review by HDC Administrator and Planning & Zoning for all future exterior changes; retains incentives but more explicitly ties them to demonstrated preservation necessity and scale compatibility; clarifies subdivision incentive, generally limited to pre1800 structures, with limited extensions for exceptional cases and prohibited in Local Historic Districts or after demolition; adds clear timelines (generally 18 months from notification) for required maintenance and repair; clarifies procedures, including 72-hour notice, repair plans, and restoration deadlines, adds explicit enforcement authority, including nullification of approvals for unauthorized alterations and permits greater flexibility in incentives provides by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Yet, Van Wie says, there is a long and interesting history to the historical homes story.
In the early 2000s — during the hot housing market that preceded the 2008 financial crisis — there were many teardowns. The land beneath some older homes became more valuable empty, than with the house still on it.
An 1803 farmhouse, in fine condition, sat across Cross Highway from Van Wie’s house (which predated the farmhouse by another 80 years).
The farmhouse sat close to the road, on 2 acres. But in a AAA zone, which permits only 1 single family house on the lot, the farmhouse had to be demolished before a new large house could be built.
Van Wie wondered why the lot could not be split in 2 — preserving the farmhouse in front, and allowing the new home to built in back.
Demolition notices are a common sight in Westport.
In 2007, the Planning & Zoning Commission adopted a special permit regulation. Recognizing that zoning can sometimes be an obstacle to historic preservation, it allowed relief from some requirements like setbacks and coverage.
In exchange, the owner grants the town a preservation easement, to perpetually protect the historic structure.
Over time, a few situations arose where the only practical way to save the historic house was by carving out a piece of land with a subdivision that would not ordinarily be permitted. The regulation was amended to allow such Historic Preservation Subdivisions.
But they applied to very few instances.
The 1803 Cross Highway farmhouse — now long gone — would not have been saved. But the Coleytown Mill house was.
The original mill house …
It is scrunched between Coleytown Road — with almost not setback — and the Aspetuck River. No one would buy the property until it was subdivided. Then a new, large house was constructed in the field on the other side of the river. (Click here to read that 2015 “06880” story.)
… and the rear of the house, at 277 North Avenue. The original lines of the 1740s saltbox remain.
But — frustrated by still not having enough tools to save historic houses when they came before the HDC for demolition — a few years ago the commission wrote the regulation that finally, tonight, comes before the P&Z.
The proposal has more rigorous historic preservation standards than the original regulation. But it potentially allows for more subdivisions, for the purpose of saving important historic structures.
Several preconditions must be met before a house is even considered for a historic preservation subdivision. It must have been built:
- Before 1800
- Between 1800 and 1940, but be of exceptional integrity and importance
- Between 1800 and 1940, but among the last examples of its architectural style in its neighborhood.
If the HDC concludes that — under the above criteria — a house is historic, the P&Z must agree.
If the regulation is adopted, one beneficiary may be 125 Riverside Avenue.
That’s the 1756 home near the foot of Burr Road now owned by an LLC. Lucien Vita — principal architect of Vita Design Group, whose office and own home are in historic buildings, and who is working on the Riverside project — calls the new regulation “well considered, and a big improvement. We’re very supportive of the way it could preserve historic structures.”
125 Riverside Avenue (Photo/Charles Tirreno)
For Text Amendment #859, and all related materials, click here, then scroll down.
(“06880” regularly covers local politics, real estate, town history — and their intersection. If you appreciate stories like this, please click here to support our work. Thank you!)
