Town Committee Imposes 90-Day Demolition Delay on St. Aloysius-Owned House on Maple Street

Though a representative of the building’s owner said the house at 30 Maple St. is structurally unsound, has no practical use for St. Aloysius Church, is to be razed to make way for an improved drop-off area for schoolchildren and isn’t the defining historic structure on the property, town officials last week voted unanimously to impose a 90-day demolition delay for the structure.

The ca. 1906-built “Stick-style” building that fronts Maple Street between South Avenue and Park Street is to be demolished as part of St. Aloysius Church’s plans to rebuild its campus. Plans call for a 26,000-square-foot facility that will include a new school, community room, youth center, meeting spaces and large green area connecting all parts (see filing with the Planning & Zoning Commission here). 

While the iconic Stapleton Hall will be preserved as part of the project, the current school as well as the structure at 30 Maple—formerly used to house St. A’s priests and then, briefly, nuns—is to be razed, attorney Amy Zabetakis of Rucci Law Group told members of the Historical Review Committee during a regular meeting held Dec. 21 at Town Hall.

“The church tried to use it for religious education classes and they simply can’t,” Zabetakis said. “The building is not in good shape. It is in terrible shape. It is structurally unsound. And the rooms themselves are of such size that it really cannot be used. So since it cannot be used for religious education, parishioners are currently forced to have religious education in their homes, which is not something the Diocese is in favor of at all. So that is why we are looking to build a community center.”

Zabetakis submitted a three-page Dec. 9 structural engineer’s report from Brookfield-based Archer Engineering Company P.C. whose findings include that “the foundation is very poor,” she said.

“And if we were to try to use it, the amount of work to be done is extreme and extremely cost-prohibitive. And I say that because the church did look into that. In the fall, the church invited both some representatives of the Historical Society and some representatives of the Preservation Alliance to tour the building. The Historical Society, we asked if there was anything in the house that they thought was historically significant that should be removed before demolition. The Historical Society said no. We did agree that we would thoroughly photograph the building so that it could be part of the Historical Society’s files. The Preservation Alliance did at that time indicate that they thought there was some significance to the building, so our architect did review the possibility of renovating this building so that it could be used, and it simply is not possible. We have looked into it.”

Zabetakis added that a Special Permit issued when St. A’s built its sanctuary requires the church to have at least 190 parking spaces, and that those spaces, as well as a new school drop-off loop, are to be installed on the current site of 30 Maple St. 

“One of the issues we have now is that, currently, there is not a clear pathway to drop the students off at the school so that they can safely enter the school,” Zabetakis said. “The new school will have a preschool, as well, so the idea is to have a dropoff—and, again, that is programmatic—but the idea is to have a dropoff loop so that students walk directly into the school.”

Despite her reasoning, the Committee voted unanimously to impose a 90-day demolition delay, as allowed by local ordinance. Under Section 12A-9 of the Town Code, if the Town Building Official “receives a pertinent written objection” to a demolition application within 15 days of public notice of the demo, the matter can be referred to the Committee. If the appointed body then finds that the structure in question is of “historical, architectural or cultural significance” to the town, it can delay demolition for up to 90 days. 

New Canaan resident Mimi Findlay, chairman emerita of the New Canaan Preservation Alliance, filed an objection letter Nov. 30. 

She addressed the Committee during the meeting.

Findlay said she had “talked to several parishioners who were unaware that that house was going to be demolished because they kept saying, ‘Oh it’s in terrible condition’ and I said no it isn’t.”

“I wrote my letter Nov. 30 opposing the demolition of the building for many reasons,” Findlay said. “It’s been one of my favorite buildings in New Canaan for years. It’s a very unusual example and an excellent example of what is called the ‘Stick style’ of architecture in New Canaan.”

Findlay cited a 2012 report regarding the house, and said the only other example of “Stick style” architecture is the former “Red Cross building” on Main Street (which would be moved closer to the road as part of a proposed affordable housing redevelopment there that’s now before the Planning & Zoning Commission).

Of the Maple Street “rectory,” as she referred to it in her objection letter, Findlay said, “This building looks just as original as the day it was built, and I think that this is a real treasure in our village and we should do everything, and the church should do everything it can to preserve this building.”

The Committee members agreed. 

Chair Mark Markiewicz said, “ I very much appreciate the presence of this building in town, in New Canaan. And I found Mimi’s comment very interesting and informative especially in light of the fact that it and the Red Cross Building are the only Stick style buildings in town, which is interesting for me to find out. It was a movement in the late 19th Century and it is part of history. And in a certain way represents a very American sense of optimism and prosperity at that time. It’s a nice asset to the town. Furthermore, I was looking at the Master Plan of the development that is being planned, and it seems to me that it should not interfere with the rest of construction. Its location is right here where there is a parking lot being shown, so to maintain it in that spot, I don’t think it would detract from the Master Plan. In fact it might even add to filling in the void at the intersection of the original church and new structure. It has a very solid and remarkable presence on Maple Street. I think having an assertive and solid history in town is very appropriate and needed. With the large library building across the street, I would very much favor the reconsideration of the demolition and considering a use that it could be put to.”

Committee member Ed Vollmer said he “disappointed to see the attempt to remove this older, marvelously characteristic” building.

“This is another historic building and I just find that it should be kept as an important building for the town, for the residents of the town,” he said. “I just hate to see these things destroyed.”

Committee member Frederick Whitmer said he was “troubled” in visiting 30 Maple St. to perceive that the outside of the structure “had not seen any material maintenance within any reasonable period of time.”

“There’s lots of stuff falling off of the siding of the house, and a paintbrush has not been in presence, I don’t think, at that house for many years,” Whitmer said. “Is that a reason to tear it down? It’s a reason to criticize the owne, it seems to me. And the owner is coming to us and saying, ‘We don’t have a choice, we have to tear it down.’ Well I think you do have a choice and there’s no indication from what we have heard that any serious thought has been given to rehabilitating this building.”

Rose Rothbart, the Committee’s secretary, said that during the site visit over the summer “from what we could see—and we went in from the basement to the attic—there was nothing obviously wrong with the house.”

“There was a major plumbing leak that had caused some plaster to fall,” she said. “Personally, and I have looked at a lot of buildings in my time, it was one of the best looking buildings I’ve ever seen. And I’ve looked at a wide array of buildings. The foundation looked very good. Certainly I’m not an engineer but there was nothing that I saw that would have caused me to call in an engineer. And the foundation itself looked very good.”

Rothbart added that St. A’s has owned the structure since 1914 “so they’ve known what they have.”

“It’s not like it was a surprise,” she said.

Rothbart said the planned demolition raises larger questions for the community.

“To me New Canaan needs to decide, do you support preservation or do you not support preservation?” she said. (Rothbart added that when structures like 30 Maple St. are razed, the debris goes into a landfill elsewhere, though Zabetakis noted that the church intends to reuse the demo debris from the school and house as fill for the construction projects.)

Zabetakis responded to some of the comments made by the Committee and others in attendance at the meeting. The building is “just structurally not sound enough for rehabilitation and functionally not proper for the use of church needs,” she said.

Part of the structural engineer’s report, as read aloud by Markiewicz, said, “It should be expected that extensive gutting and reconstruction of the existing house, framing along with underpinning and replacement of foundations will be required.”

When Whitmer said the summary conclusion of the report is not that it’s “impossible to rehabilitate” the structure, Zabetakis noted that the church’s architect has said it’s not possible to convert the house into a “functionally useful space.”

“And that will be part of our P&Z presentation,” she said.

This exchange followed:

Whitmer: But in point of fact, it does not have to be functionally useful to maintain the historical presence of the house and its aesthetic value to the community. Isn’t that true? 

Zabetakis: It has to be functionally useful to be used by the church as a building on the church property. This is owned by the church. The buildings on the church property need to be useful to the church. This is a nonprofit organization. There are limitations on what the church can do and they need to have every building on the property something they can use. As I stated, I think the important building on this property is Stapleton Hall and the church is doing everything to preserve it.

Later, this exchange took place:

Whitmer: It seems to me to be a terribly, terribly practical view of the building that it has got to be able to do something we want it to do or we turn it into dust. That’s a binary choice that I don’t think has to be made.

Zabetakis: I understand your position and I take note of it. I will say that the church has tried for many years to find a use for this building and has not been able to.

Whitmer, Markiewicz, Rothbart and Vollmer voted to impose the 90-day delay. Committee member Marty Skrelunas was absent. Yet in an unusual maneuver, Markiewicz said, “I have with me a proxy vote from Marty Skrelunas who says ‘I will be absent for today’s meeting, I would like to assign a proxy to you to vote in my place. I vote in favor of the 90 day delay for 30 Maple Street, the house remains one of most intact historic structures in town. Its adherence to the principle of the Stick style is remarkable. Signed Martin Skrelunas.’ So that is his vote.”

It’s unclear whether the meeting minutes will reflect the Skrelunas vote. They haven’t been posted yet. The word ‘proxy’ does not appear in the Town Code, according to a search of the document online.

Others attending the meeting included Norwalk’s Susan Guerrero, who spoke against the demolition. 

At one point during the meeting, she said, “This sounds like ‘demolition by neglect’ to me.” (Vollmer and Whitmer both said later that they agreed.)

New Canaan resident Robert Mantilia said he was a St. A’s parishioner who is active in various church groups.

“There was a period of time when we tried to use the house for one of our meetings, a group that I’m with, about 10 people,” he said. “The rooms are very small, not practical, not certainly fit for a meeting on a regular basis, so we stopped using it after two or three times. So it wasn’t neglect of the property at all. It’s just not practical.”

P&Z is expected to take up the St. A’s application at its Jan. 24 meeting.