Chatham Historical Commission Faces Debate Over Renovation at Historic 75 Hallway Street

The Chatham Historical Commission meeting on February 4, 2025, focused heavily on a proposed renovation on Hallway Street, sparking a debate over historical preservation and property rights. The property, a contributing structure in a National Register district, faced scrutiny as the commission weighed the implications of proposed alterations against the need to retain its historical integrity.

0:28The proposed renovation on Hallway Street was the subject of extensive discussion due to its historical status and the impact of the planned modifications. The property, which has undergone numerous changes over the years, was presented with plans that aim to further alter its structure. Architect Patrick Hearn emphasized that the new design preserves character-defining features of the original building, including a modest expansion and changes to non-historic sections, aligning with preservation standards outlined by Sarah Corf from the Cape Cod Commission. However, concerns were raised about the building’s increasing size and its effect on the historic streetscape of Hallway Street.

25:29Several commission members expressed apprehension about the cumulative alterations, fearing a loss of historical streetscape character. One member reflected on the property’s transformation over two decades, noting it is “barely recognizable” compared to its original state. The removal of a chimney and the increase in height from one story to two and a half stories were highlighted as significant deviations from the original design.

Robert Wilson, a commission member, pointed out the asymmetry in the proposed addition and advocated for a more symmetrical design to maintain the building’s historical context. Other members agreed, referencing historical photographs that show the drastic changes from the 1930s to the present.

42:52Public opinion also played a role in the meeting. The Old Village Association voiced strong concerns about the proposed changes, arguing that the third-story addition would make the original single-story cottage unrecognizable. Correspondence from nearby residents echoed these sentiments, describing the plans as disproportionate and out of sync with the neighborhood’s architectural character.

59:24Property owner Rob Barsamian addressed the commission, arguing that the proposed structure should not be classified as a three-story house and complies with local codes. He expressed frustration over the classification of his altered property as historically significant. Despite these claims, no formal support from neighbors was presented, only opposition.

42:52The commission faced the challenge of balancing preservation with the owner’s desire for expansion. They discussed procedural avenues, including a potential referral to the Cape Cod Commission and the imposition of a demolition delay. It was noted that any changes exceeding 25% of the structure’s original form would require Cape Cod Commission involvement, a process that could take several months.

1:13:28Ultimately, the commission passed a motion to reaffirm the historical significance of 75 Hallway Street and determined that the proposed alterations constituted a substantial alteration, necessitating a referral to the Cape Cod Commission. They also agreed on a one-year demolition delay to allow for further exploration of alternatives that maintain historical integrity.

0:28In addition to the 75 Hallway Street case, the commission discussed other procedural and administrative matters. Members highlighted the lack of a dedicated preservation consultant for the town, noting the potential benefits of having such expertise available. The conversation included possible modifications to the administrative review process and the improvement of Form B documentation, which assesses historical significance.

1:29:31An update was provided on the status of the annual report and the loss of two long-standing commission members.

Note: This meeting summary was generated by AI, which can occasionally misspell names, misattribute actions, and state inaccuracies. This summary is intended to be a starting point and you should review the meeting record linked above before acting on anything you read. If we got something wrong, let us know. We’re working every day to improve our process in pursuit of universal local government transparency.

Receive debriefs about local meetings in your inbox weekly:

is discussed during:
in these locations: