Owner withdraws plan to replace roof and decks at 189 Center Street; committee requests more specific materials and samples

The Old Kings Highway Committee of the Town of Yarmouth reopened and considered a previously tabled certificate of appropriateness application for 189 Center Street on Monday, March 24. The owner, Kelly McGill, and her contractor, Joseph Stafford of Lewis Bay Builders LLC, presented plans that included a full roof replacement, replacement of four windows, deck replacement and new gutters.

Stafford said the proposal calls for a full roof replacement with weathered-wood architectural asphalt shingles rather than red cedar shingles, arguing that partial replacement of only the front third of the roof would make future warranty and maintenance difficult. He told the committee a full asphalt replacement would “protect the integrity of the house” and that the front third-only approach could force the homeowner into an unaffordable replacement of the remaining roof later. The builder said the house’s roof area measures roughly 95 squares and warned of likely additional cost for unseen sheathing replacement if the existing shingles are stripped.

Owner Kelly McGill said she wants to preserve the house’s historic look but cannot afford a full cedar-shingle roof. “I can't afford to do cedar shingles on the roof,” McGill said, adding she has been denied insurance coverage by two companies and has had to provide a contractor letter to a third insurer to secure inspection. McGill and the contractor discussed alternate materials and colors; several committee members and the architect who submitted a written opinion said any asphalt replacement should be an architectural shingle in a weathered tone that convincingly resembles cedar from the street.

Committee members and preservation advisors raised several concerns. Vice chair Cindy Acker’s written comments, read into the record, urged retention of as much original fabric as possible and suggested limited repairs in lieu of wholesale replacement where feasible. A separate written note from preservation contractor Fred Ecker (cited by the committee) said “95% of the deck is in perfectly good condition,” and urged salvaging existing mahogany decking rather than wholesale replacement. The builder disputed that assessment in-person, saying framing beneath the decking is failing and that the decking would need removal to repair framing.

After extended discussion about costs, insurance, visible materials and environmental impact, the applicant and builder agreed to withdraw the current application and return with specific material samples and revised plans. The committee accepted the withdrawal without prejudice by voice vote. The applicant said she will present two or three shingle/color options (the applicant indicated a preference to test a cobblestone or heather blend color), documentation on synthetic alternatives, and more specific proposals for deck repair or replacement at a future hearing.

Next steps: applicant will resubmit a revised application with material samples and specific scope items; the committee indicated it will consider samples and will work with the applicant to find a compromise that protects character-defining features visible from Center Street while addressing the owner’s maintenance and insurance constraints.