SANDWICH — In an unexpected vote Thursday, the Sandwich Historic District Committee allowed for synthetic siding to be placed on the First Church of Christ.

The 174-year-old church, famous for being the backdrop of Elvis Presley’s first gospel album “How Great Thou Art,” is situated on Main Street in the heart of the town's historic district.

The downtown square holds Town Hall, built in the 1830s; the Newcomb Tavern, located next door and built in the 1770s; and the First Church of Christ, which sits in the corner.

“We have three large iconic buildings practically rubbing shoulders a little,” said William Collins, chairman of the Sandwich Historic District Committee. “It is a magnet and in the dead center of the district. We want to keep it as authentic as possible.” 

At a meeting of the Historic District Committee held over videoconference on Thursday, three of the committee's five members voted to approve the man-made siding and two members abstained. 

The committee disallowed the use of man-made material in the front of the Town Hall when it was renovated about 10 years ago, and it also did not allow synthetic materials in the front of Newcomb Tavern, whose owner is still battling the committee over the issue.

After looking back at historic guidelines set by the U.S. Secretary of the Interior, which governs historic districts across the nation, and those set by the Old King’s Highway Regional Historic District Commission, Collins came to the conclusion to allow for the new material.

The guidelines state that man-made materials are not appropriate, but alternative materials can be allowed in areas in which there is extreme exposure. The guidelines also state to repair when possible and then to replace it with similar material. 

After seeing the material in person, Collins said he wanted to accept the project as presented. 

“You really can’t tell the difference,” Richard Alger, a committee member, said at last week's meeting. After showcasing the samples to people around town, no one was able to tell the difference between the wood and the synthetic material, he said. 

From an aesthetic perspective, Historic District Committee member Mary Foley agreed that the two materials are comparable. But, she abstained from voting because of the notion of preservation, noting how the church is such an historic structure in town.

Committee member Ross Vander, who also abstained from voting Thursday, noted that the synthetic material will not react to the environment in the same way as wood.

“The PVC replacement doesn’t have the life that a piece of wood does,” he said. “We are talking about a historic structure here.” 

What differentiates this decision from prior ones is that the material being used on the church is not vinyl, Collins said. 

“They think synthetic is all the same – it is not,” he said.

The PVC material being used looks just like wood when it is painted, Collins said. After putting up a sample piece of wood next to the synthetic material, “no one could tell the difference,” he said. 

Collins also said that if wood were used today to replace the material on the church, it wouldn’t be the same wood that was put up over 200 years ago, Collins said. The wood at the time was first growth wood, which was heartier and preserved with oil paints that are no longer available today. 

The wood available today is “punky” and “very soft” and has a limited life span, Collins said. He said it is an unpopular wood for exterior projects that are open to the weather elements. 

Although the wood on the church is mostly original material, it is becoming too costly to maintain. Water problems have caused rot and deterioration.

The church is undergoing its largest renovation and restoration since the congregation added the classrooms and office in 1985, said Mark Romanowicz, a member of the First Church congregation and an engineer working on the project. 

In January, the church had some water staining on the ceiling, Romanowicz said. After going up into the attic, it was found that the ceiling joists had been disconnected. 

“You take apart something and you always find something new,” he said.

Although work has been done to stop the leaking from the steeple, there is still structural work to be done inside to secure it, Romanowicz said. 

Since the church was addressing these concerns, it was decided to also look at the front of the building. The wood on the outside of the building is deteriorating and every two to three years, the congregation has to pay $20,000 to $25,000 for a paint job. 

“We can’t sustain that activity or spending,” Romanowicz said. 

The cellular PVC, once installed, would only need a paint job every 15 to 20 years, he said.  

The project will be paid for through the congregation, which is made up of over 300 active members, and hopefully some Community Preservation Act funding, Romanowicz said. 

“This is a debate that is going on across the country in historic districts,” said Sarah Korjeff, a historic preservation specialist for the Cape Cod Commission.

So far, the federal Secretary of the Interior standards discourage the use of synthetic materials on historic buildings, Korjeff said. 

Across the country and state, there are a number of historic districts that have taken a hard line on  man-made materials on historic structures, Korjeff said. But an equal number have allowed man-made materials in certain circumstances, specifically when the material has deteriorated beyond repair, she said. 

“This is a difficult situation that a lot of boards are grappling with,” Korjeff said.

“It’s not something that is being treated the same way, on the Cape, the state or in the country,” she added.

Follow Beth Treffeisen on Twitter: BTreffeisenCCT.