By James Lomuscio
A Sunday New York Times real estate article titled “Vintage Homes Lose Appeal” has struck a sour note with Westport preservationists. 
Maggie Feczko, chair of the Westport Historic District Commission, cited 101 Clapboard Hill Road as an example of a vintage home saved and called its owner a hero of historic preservation. (CLICK TO ENLARGE) Dave Matlow for WestportNow.com
The story, which focuses heavily on the Westport real estate market, not only likens vintage homes to buying a used car. It quotes one local real estate agent as saying people have lost “respect” for history when it comes to the luxury market.
Dorothy E. Curran, president of the Westport Historical Society and a Realtor, said the report is “so out of balance, I think it’s absurd. It’s not substantiated by the inventory and the patterns.”
“The houses that are truly historic were not built on a grand scale particularly,” she added. “They were built in other times for other purposes. Until early in the 20th century, Westport was a farming and maritime community.”
Homes built during the Colonial period, for example, are often small and close to the road, which might not interest someone looking for an expansive estate. But that does not negate the number of potential buyers who appreciate history, preservationists say.
Maggie Feczko, chairman of the Historic District Commission, called the article “distorted.”
“This article is about the luxury market, so in some ways it appears to be mixing apples and oranges,” she said. “The inventory of vintage homes in the luxury price category is very small, so of course the number sold is considerably less than new construction.
“Most antique homes would not, because of their size and their condition, if not well maintained, fit into the $3 million plus price range.” Feczko said. “Contrary to some comments in the article, I believe interest in and preservation of our built environment is at an all time high.”
The Times article attributes the “dwindling inventory” of vintage homes to years of teardowns. It also cites a WestportNow.com Dec. 14 story about an application to demolish a 1930s Beachside Avenue Colonial after the buyer paid $20 million for three adjoining parcels.
But to hear Feczko tell it, that was an aberration, not the rule as to how people view historic homes.
“Just this past year alone there were three historic designations, initiated by the property owners themselves, and there are three more that are in the process of designation,” she said.
Feczko added that there are more than 1,500 properties on the town’s Historic Resources Inventory, and “the Westport Historical Society is a thriving organization.”
“The Historic District Commission, of which I am chairman, gives awards for excellence in preservation on a yearly basis and we have many candidates from which to choose,” she said.
One example Feczko gave was an antique luxury home at 101 Clapboard Hill Road. It was saved from demolition by Ariane Mermod, who restored it and built an extensive addition “sympathetic to it’s historic style,” she said.
“She created a luxury home from what was considered to be a teardown by one of the so-called luxury new construction builders in town,” said Feczko said.
“She is one of the heroes of historic preservation because she understands the long term benefits to our community of cherishing history instead of obliterating it.”
“These days, people tend to connect a little history with a high odometer,” the Times said.
The newspaper goes on to quote Lisa Passavant, sales manager of the Westport-Riverside office of Coldwell Banker, saying, “There’s kind of an aura that surrounds older homes, and it’s the aura of the unknown. Buyers feel like they don’t want to take on somebody else’s headache.”
The story said new construction “rules the luxury market” in Westport and notes that last year vintage homes from the 1930s and older accounted for just four sales out of 57 houses selling for more than $3 million.
Perhaps the story’s biggest rub for preservationists was the quote from Coldwell Banker agent Patti McGovern stating, “Nobody seems to have any kind of respect or fond thoughts of history.”
Regarding Ms. Feczo’s defense of “historic” homes, me thinks the lady doth protest too much.
Old houses are old house, built with small bathrooms, low ceilings and now need constant up keep. The folks who have ‘em (I’m one) should just live in ‘em, enjoy them as the pieces of art that they are and forget about the market value.
Trying to defend their place in the financial world is silly at best and, at worst, makes an unsound argument.
I think the Westport Historical Society would better serve this community by helping to educate local builders on what, exactly, classical architecture is, rather than fight to save decrepit wooden homes that were never intended to stand through the millennia. Beautiful new construction does exist, just not in Westport.
Maggie Feczo’s point was that there IS interest in historic homes. I appreciate that she and Dorothy Curran gave more information that the NYT article overlooked.
DECREPIT WOODEN HOMES?
I would suggest you visit a few of Westport’ s jewels, one of our antique homes. Ours was built in 1885, the home is supported by a single solid chestnut beam. The quality of the lumber, the attention to detailed framing and the pure solid workmanship blows away any house built today. Our antique has been restored over the years adding insulation, new burner and added of a modern kitchen done with period design inside and out. It is sad, almost criminal when we see antique homes go down with claims it could not be saved. Owners and admirers of antique homes respect our heritage, yearn for quality in our lives that existed yesterday, and know the value of our homes. I suggest these decrepit wooden homes give our town the true character that give value to today
It may be sad when antique homes go down, when history recedes as it must, but it is a reality. And if Westport’s true character is based on preservation of antique homes, it is destined to be characterless. Other communities—like New Canaan—are focusing their efforts on what is going up rather than what is going down. And this is my point—Westport doesn’t need laws stopping development, it needs a competent (and empowered) architectural review board.
Eric
This is Westport, Not Valley Stream, LI This is New England not LA County I believe your comment is said in jest just to rile opinion, I hope so because I can not imagine the thought process that truly believes your view on the folly historical preservation.
Even in great cities like NY the most beloved and visited buildings are those historical treasures like Flat iron or Empire State not Trumps glass and steel architecture
I guess it all comes down to what one believes character to be. I see character in the homes our forefathers built and that still stand in neighborhoods where neighboring lots have seen houses rise and fall multiple times in the style du jour.
Chip, some don’t get the charm of antiquity nor do they care. They’d rather rip it down in lieu of saving the beauty.
The comment that “history will recede as it must,” is absolutely ludicrous.
Reminds me of the lyrics, “and put up a parking lot.”
Once it’s torn down, that’s it, it’s done. Westport does not need a competent architectural review board, it needs what each surrounding town already has; a historical society that is willing to stick to its guns and not bend to the chopping block in order to keep these homes standing. At least the ones that are obviously habitable 🙂 lest anyone think I’m suggesting we go out and become the historical commission for the run down, I’m not.