YourCT.com header image 2

Historic Activity in Westport and Fairfield


by turfgrrl


September 8th, 2007 · 25 Comments

The Advocate started out this morning with a series on Westport and the Connecticut Post also had a story so I give you clips.

First up Westport:

AdvocateNearly three years ago, the small, wood-shingled farm house at 131 Sturges Highway was about to be torn down, and concerned neighbors rallied to prevent its destruction.

Today, the circa-1800 house still stands, next to a modern addition that mirrors its historic facade.

Once feared to be Westport’s latest teardown, the Abel Bradley House is now among several that the Historic District Commission is recognizing with a Historic Preservation Award.

The awards will be presented today to nine building owners at a 10 a.m. ceremony today in the lobby of Town Hall.

After a coalition of neighbors launched a campaign to save the Bradley House in late 2004 - going so far as to secure a court injunction against the demolition - owner and developer Mark Iuraduri decided a year later to work with Southport architect and preservationist Jack Franzen to incorporate the house into a new structure. It is now close to completion.

“We’re very pleased that they acknowledged this,” Iuraduri said. “We all felt we tried to figure out a nice compromise.”

Iuraduri said the outside of the original house - including an unusual gambrel roof with a bell-shaped curve, the only one of its kind in Westport - remains intact. The layout inside was changed so that the structure can be used as a library and bedroom. The addition will serve as the main part of the house, with the entire structure measuring around 6,000 square feet.

On this one it makes you wonder why similar accommodations can’t be met with 93 East ave. Also in Westport:

Advocate
Owners of historic or culturally significant buildings may soon find it easier to transform a barn into an apartment or home office, under proposed rules that would give them greater flexibility under zoning regulations to reconstruct or restore.

A subcommittee of the Planning and Zoning and Historic District commissions recently drafted new regulations that would allow owners to apply for special permits if plans that include historic building preservation call for changes not normally allowed.

Property owners currently apply for zoning variances, which are more difficult to get because residents must show hardship.

The idea is to encourage property owners to preserve historic structures, Planning and Zoning Director Larry Bradley said.

Projects still would have to be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission, but approval “is not out of reach,” Bradley said.

“This gives them some incentive to preserve the structure that might otherwise come down,” he said.

Then we have Fairfield:

The Connecticut Post
A dozen homeowners in the town’s historic Southport neighborhood are getting another shot at protecting their street from new developments.
Town Clerk Betsy Browne said Friday that Spruce Street residents voted 9-3 to join the Southport Historic District, more than the two-thirds majority required.
But the Spruce Street residents’ request still needs approval from the Representative Town Meeting.
The RTM in May rejected their request to join Southport’s historic district because the oldest house on Spruce Street would not have been within the district’s boundaries.
The 80 Spruce St. house was built in 1853 and its owner, Jerry Shea, vehemently objected to being in the historic district.
But after the RTM’s vote in May, Shea’s house was included within the proposed boundaries of the expanded Southport Historic District.
“I think, as a neighborhood, we did our due diligence and we did exactly what the RTM asked for,” said Gaylord Meyer, a 29-year resident of Spruce Street who wants to be in the historic district. “Once again, the neighbors have spoken, and hopefully they will hear us this time.”
“I hope that they will realize if they don’t acknowledge the fact the neighbors have spoken, anybody can come in and tear down these beautiful houses and can put up anything they want. There’s nothing that can stop them,” Meyer said.

Tags: In the News

25 Responses so far “Historic Activity in Westport and Fairfield”



  • 1 Anonymous // Sep 8, 2007 at 3:24 pm

    Historic preservation presents a problem to the City because of all the property developers greedily eyeing Norwalk. There’s no political will to support it unless there’s something in it for the City as well. That can be seen in the Wall Street redevelopment plans as the City has applied for an Historic District designation.

  • 2 Anonymous // Sep 8, 2007 at 3:27 pm

    Isn’t having a Historic District in the wall street area good?

  • 3 Anonymous // Sep 8, 2007 at 3:49 pm

    I would like to see the areas that are left in Norwalk with older homes become historic districts, much as I would like to see trees replanted and some of the nice things in the past replaced or encouraged - but with the current climate of “no developer left behind” here in Norwalk, if they plow down some 100-150 year old buildings, or destroy a neighborhood in order to build some large condo or upscale housing, the quick money always wins here.
    Thank the hated law-firm that covers all angles with zoning.

  • 4 indiga // Sep 8, 2007 at 4:32 pm

    Norwalk’s Mayor Moccia called the State Historic Preservation Office to try to stop the Golden Hill State Register District…something that the Historical Commission, the neighborhood association, and the NPT have put a lot of time and effort into — and something that can benefit homeowners who are rehabbing, repairing or restoring. One can only assume that this was at the behest of cronies who are afraid improvements in the neighborhood will cut into the illegal apartment business.

  • 5 anon // Sep 8, 2007 at 6:31 pm

    Indiga how do you know this? You keep trying to say that Moccia is against preservation and has “called” the State on other issues too. What is your source?

  • 6 anon // Sep 8, 2007 at 6:54 pm

    Moccia has done a horrible job as the protector of Norwalk legacies; he has actively worked against historic preservation. I’m a Republican but what is happening to this town’s beautiful buildings is a travesty. Most other mayor’s would have been flabergasted and angry at the teardown across from City Hall; he’s been pretty much silent. 93 East Avenue!–the Mayor has allowed the Norwalk Inn to slowly beauty,making it painful to drive down East Avenue and watch what the Inn is doing to that building; Norwalk has been forced to watch a form of cruelty– all for the sake of an ugly motel addition.

  • 7 indiga // Sep 8, 2007 at 7:26 pm

    Source is people who recieved the call at the State. Can’t get more direct than that. Ask the Mayor; see what he says.

  • 8 MGeake // Sep 9, 2007 at 10:11 am

    indiga: since the mayor will (presumably) be appearing before the GHA either this Tuesday or next month, could you send me the details (eMail via my website)? I’m sure we members will want to know why.

  • 9 Anonymous // Sep 9, 2007 at 11:25 am

    I’d be interested to see just who owns all the multifamily properties in Golden Hill, and which are supporters of the Mayor. Could be a conflict of interest situation, at the very least a violation of ethics if there are any links between he and the property owners. Shouldn’t be too hard to find out. I wouldn’t give this knucklehead enough credit for being intelligent enough to cover his tracks. Arrogance and a reliance on the lack of public interest in the details of his administration is what will allow this seedy situation to continue.

  • 10 MGeake // Sep 9, 2007 at 2:23 pm

    #9 When GHA was working on this last Spring, I prepared a list of the registered owner of every parcel within Golden Hill’s boundaries. You are welcome to that list; it’s in Microsoft Access, but I can convert it if you need some other format.

    BTW: this list was prepared because we were being so secretive about this process that we invited each and every owner on that list to a public hearing at Franklin School. Convince me that people didn’t know!!!

  • 11 Conspiracy Under Every Rock // Sep 9, 2007 at 8:46 pm

    What are the City of Norwalk’s obligations under any Historic DIstrict? If the answer is none, then why would Moccia have any interest in whether one is requested from the State?

  • 12 Golden HIll Association // Sep 13, 2007 at 6:46 am

    We in Golden Hill heard that the Mayor had contacted the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and there was concern that he was against our nomination as an historic district. In order to find the facts we did the following:
    We called SHPO and spoke directly to the person with whom the mayor spoke. She detailed her conversation with the mayor.
    Then we met with the mayor and asked him what happened, without disclosing what SHPO told us.
    Here are the facts:

    Mayor Moccia received a letter from the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) regarding the Camp Street and Golden Hill nominations to the State Register of Historic Places. He called SHPO to inquire whether there was any action he, as Mayor, needed to take as a result of this letter. He said he was unaware of these pending designations and also asked if the public had been informed.
    In response to his inquiries, SHPO faxed him the State regulations for an historic district.

    In order to clarify the situation, Jim Clark and Jim Del Greco met with the Mayor and shared with him the details of the public process and brought him up to speed on the designations. In no way was the Mayor speaking out against either nomination and was certainly not saying anyone opposed the nominations. Also, no resident had contacted him expressing concern or opposition to the nomination.

    As a result of this meeting, the Mayor will write a letter to SHPO supporting Golden Hill’s designation as a State Historic District. He understands the benefit of tax credits and supports homeowners who wish to use them to maintain or renovate their historic homes.

  • 13 indiga // Sep 13, 2007 at 7:32 am

    Or the mayor could simply have contacted the chair of the Historical Commission, the City Agency that had been working on the project,at any time in the previous year or so that the HC had been working on it. I’m surprised he was so unaware — especially since Corporation Counsel, a few months back, informed the HC that it could not continue its work on this very project. So I guess Corp Counsel does not talk to the Mayor and vice versa.

  • 14 turfgrrl // Sep 13, 2007 at 11:49 am

    indiga: The HC was never told by Corporation Counsel that it could not continue work on the Golden HIll Association project, and the association has just posted above that it was the State Historic Preservation Office that contacted the Mayor, not the other way around.

    It would be really helpful to us all that you provide supporting documentation so people can verify things. I have looked in the minutes for last year and do not see any mention of Golden Hill and Historic Districts. There’s lots of mention of Fodor Farm.

    In one of the meetings, “Ms. Falasca commented that it is a shame that Norwalk as the sixth largest city in the State does not have one historic district.”

    Now it appears that at least 2 are moving through the process of getting registered. It seems odd that you fixate on the City for what should be a “people powered” process.

    Note:
    Under Connecticut State Statutes any interested group of residents may request the town government to appoint a local historic district study committee to investigate the possibility for a district and prepare a report.

    The report should include an analysis of the historic and architectural significant properties in the proposed district and the significance of the district as a whole; a general description of the area, including number of buildings and map showing boundaries; and proposed ordinances formulated to help in the operation of the historic district.

    Once the study committee has completed its report it is submitted to the town planning and zoning board and the State Historic Preservation Office for review and comment. A public hearing is also scheduled to give interested citizens an opportunity to comment.

    It is important to note that a Local Historic District cannot be established without a referendum among it property owners. 2/3’s of the all the property owners within the proposed district must support the designation or it is not permitted. If the referendum is passed it must go onto the municipal government for final approval

    Once a Local Historic District is established, the study committee ceases to exist and a new Commission is established to regulate the Local Historic District. The Commission is comprised of electors of the community and a minimum number must be a resident of the newly designated district.

  • 15 anonymous // Sep 13, 2007 at 2:36 pm

    Turfgirl: Thanks for publishing the process on establishing a local historic district above - interesting to see the process. I think this is what some in the Preservation Community want to see happen at Fodor Farm vs. deed restrictions.

    I’m no expert, so other’s input would be appreciated…

    I don’t believe, though, that Golden Hill and Camp Street are applying for “local historic district” status, they are just trying to be listed as a “historic district” on the state register (vs. a local historic district or a national register historic district) so that homeowners are eligible for tax credits for maintaining and improving their homes. I do not believe this type of historic district requires establishing a new commission to oversee it, nor does it require any type of reviews or restrictions on what homeowners can do to their houses and properties. That’s my understanding, anyway…

  • 16 indiga // Sep 13, 2007 at 8:51 pm

    TG — The State Historic Districts are mentioned in a “what everyone has been working on” in the 1/3/2007 HC minutes on-line. And here is the exceprt that refers to the project from the “annual report” that the HC submitted in December of 2006 to inform the Mayor about its activities over the past year. It was sent to the Mayor and the Common COuncil.

    ” Historic Preservation in the Community
     Wrote and published the Historic Homeowner’s Tax Credit Handbook in English, Creole French and Spanish, held an introductory workshop for eligible homeowners to explain the state tax credits and completed the applications for four new State Register Historic Districts (Whistleville, West Main Street, Camp Street and Golden Hill) that will pre-qualify over 1,000 homeowners in Norwalk to take advantage of the Historic Homes Rehabilitation Tax Credit – identified by the State as “A catalyst for renewal in Urban Neighborhoods.”
    o These homeowners will qualify for up to $30,000 per unit for qualified home rehabilitation. Norwalk’s ongoing pilot program targets historic homes in state designated and federally approved areas of chronic economic distress and addresses the community needs of rehabilitation of affordable housing, historic preservation, increased property values/tax bases, and improvement of neighborhood stability.
    o It is a pioneering program in the state and is being watched in Hartford as a potential model for communities, was funded by a Community Development Block Grant, and is a continuing partnership with the Norwalk Redevelopment Agency.”

    I don’t know when Corp Counsel determined that the HC could no longer proceed with the project — fairly recently, though. Mayeb the June minutes which I can’t seem to access.

    I do know that the NPT was asked to follow-through on the work since the HC was told that it was outside their purvue. Maybe a Historical Commissioner could provide insight as to why this occurred…

  • 17 turfgrrl // Sep 13, 2007 at 9:55 pm

    indiga: You quoted something not in the minutes. And what you quoted certainly looks like it is a state historic district that I pulled the process from the CT Trust for Historic Preservation. SO that would mean that ….

    a) there’s some council created historic district panel
    b) that the report you cite is the output of that panel
    c) that a referendum was held in approval of the district by 2/3 of the homeowners

    Right?

    Or is this something else, or some other procedure was done?

  • 18 indiga // Sep 13, 2007 at 10:07 pm

    TG…you are confusing a State District with a local district. Two very different animals. I think you may need to actually talk to a human at the CT Trust or the State to clarify. And what I quoted was a document sent over the then-HC chair’s signature. Pretty official, no? Plus the discussion of the project in the 1/7/2007 minutes. Just for clarificaton, the State Distrcit imposes no restrictions and requires no local oversight. Think of it as an honorarium with benefits.

    But the best way to clear up your confusion is a call to Helen Higgins at the CT Trust or to the State Historic Preservation Office when you get the chance. You seem almost as confused as our Mayor on this — although I believe you are considerably brighter.

  • 19 turfgrrl // Sep 13, 2007 at 10:29 pm

    indiga: My confusion stems from the use of To qualify for this, the buildings must be located in a registered State Historic District. Not to be all picky on semantics here, since I mangle the English quite routinely, but why would a local historic district be called a registered State Historic District? And what is then the criteria for creating a local historic district, and maybe we should seek a more clarifying name for it?

    I read the 1/3/2007 minutes, I don’t see this discussion except for the part I just quoted above. Here’s the rest Ms. Mathies displayed copies of a booklet to help owners of historical homes in specified districts of low income, economic distress. To qualify for this, the buildings must be located in a registered State Historic District. Ms. Mathies stated that the Commission was in the process of designating four historic districts in Norwalk; Whistleville, Golden Hill, West Main Street and Camp Street. After these districts are approved by Hartford, there will be about one thousand new homeowners who qualify for the economic benefit, which is $30,000 per unit for rehabilitation..

    Again, I don’t see the above as a discussion of creating historic districts, just a brief mention of creating 4 in Norwalk with no specification except for the preceding sentence of what they were.

  • 20 indiga // Sep 14, 2007 at 5:14 am

    TG — Here’s a handy rundown of the levels of historic designations in CT — but I suggest a personal call to clear up your confusion. I still don’t understand why you’re looking for some discussion in the HC minutes of a Local Historic District for these neighborhoods when that was never an option or ever under discussion — any where, by any City or State body.

    Remember, this is all part of that “package” — helping homeowners understand and qualify for State tax credits.

    http://www.connecticutbarns.org/84

    As an FYI, since part of SoNo is already a State Regsiter District (due to its National Register District status) and since it is in the right census tract, homeowners in SoNo are already eligible for the tax credits. The NPT can supply the information and how to apply, if interested.

  • 21 indiga // Sep 14, 2007 at 11:14 am

    Jsut wanted to raise this to the top briefly so that TG sees the link and gets the information she needs.

  • 22 turfgrrl // Sep 14, 2007 at 11:57 am

    indiga: I saw it thanks. I looked in the HC minutes because you said this: the mayor could simply have contacted the chair of the Historical Commission, the City Agency that had been working on the project,at any time in the previous year or so that the HC had been working on it. I’m surprised he was so unaware — especially since Corporation Counsel, a few months back, informed the HC that it could not continue its work on this very project.

    So, I was curious as to what the HC was doing regarding the Historic Districts, and when Corporate Council said that the HC could not work on historic district applications. The HC minutes don’t mention Golden Hill, they don’t mention a Local Historic District or a referral from the Corporation Counsel.

    I don’ think the issue has to be confusing, but it is, chiefly because there’s a degree of many statements being made that are based on conversations rather than within the framework of meetings and referrals. It’s the later that I hope I link back to the arguments discussed.

  • 23 Anonymous // Sep 14, 2007 at 12:05 pm

    Indigna, cut the nonsense, you tried to mislead the people about the Mayor and was caught. The Golden Hill Association laid out what happened, you outright lied when you stated that the Mayor tried to stop the process. I have tried to tell everyone in the past that anything you state has to be questioned, and now you were exposed on you attempts to mislead by an impartial group.

  • 24 indiga // Sep 14, 2007 at 4:18 pm

    Bottom line: Talk to someone on the HC if you want the facts. Try to pick someone who’s been on it for a while and knows the project. The newbies won’t know.

  • 25 anonymous // Sep 14, 2007 at 5:00 pm

    Golden Hill and Camp Street nominations are NOT seeking “local historic district” designations; they are only seeking to be listed on the State Register as historic districts for tax credit purposes. There are no restrictions to property rights that comes with this designation nor any special commission creation requirement.

Leave a Reply