Historic district approves flat replacement windows for M&T Bank at 1 Center Street

On July 16, the Exeter Historic District Commission voted 4–1 to approve flat replacement windows with painted wood trim for the M&T Bank building at 1 Center Street (HDC case 26-4).

Chair Kevin Khan opened the meeting and invited the applicant's representative to speak. Sean McCarthy of McCarthy Restoration, representing M&T Bank, outlined two options: a less invasive straight-across replacement and a more costly curved or bow window that would more closely match the building's existing rounded glass. McCarthy told the commission the proposed windows are Oldcastle Series 3000 thermal units with true divided lights and anodized aluminum painted to look like wood.

"The least expensive and the least invasive is the straight across option," McCarthy said, noting that fully curved, historic-style glass can cost tens of thousands of dollars per window. He cited an example of curved wood windows that ran about $23,000 each, excluding installation.

Commission members weighed historic character against durability and energy efficiency. Julie Gillman, the Select Board representative, said she favored the flat option. "I really appreciate the look of option 2, the flat windows," Gillman said. "I think that they are more in keeping with the style of the upper floor, and the style of the main block entrance."

Others acknowledged the aesthetic value of the building's existing bowed glass but described ongoing maintenance problems: rotting wood mullions, a leaking valance and tin roof, and water stains inside the lobby. Commissioners discussed alternatives such as inset interior glazing and careful repair, but several said the flat units would keep the facade's scale while reducing maintenance and improving thermal performance.

A motion to approve option 2, the flat windows as presented, with the trim above the windows specified as painted wood, was made and seconded. The commission approved the motion by voice vote; the chair announced the motion passed 4 to 1. Adam, a commission member who said he preferred the bowed option, was the lone dissenting vote.

After the vote, commissioners suggested salvaging the existing curved glass where feasible and noted local architectural salvage contacts. McCarthy thanked the commission for its time and said his team would proceed with the approved design.

The commission's approval applies to the design and materials presented at the meeting; any significant deviation from those materials would require the applicant to return to the commission.