[MassHistPres] Demo delay: 18 mo / interiors / siding

[Dennis De Witt]

Sorry, one just assumes we are all on the same page.

CPA = Community Preservation Act -- if you don't know Google
ZBA = zoning Board of Appeals
PB = Planning Board which does design review etc but is solely  
advisory to the ZBA which always has the final say
TM = Town Meeting (in Brookline a representative TM)
LHD = Local Historic District
DD = Demo Delay
NR - National Register
AC = Advisory Committee the standing Committee of TM which is in some  
towns called the Finance Comm or FinComm
BoS = Board of Selectmen

Hope this helps.

Dennis


On Nov 16, 2006, at 2:11 PM, johanna erickson wrote:

> Probably everybody but me knows what all the alphabet soup means,  
> but could list members translate CPAs and LHDs and TMs at least  
> once in their emails? Thanks, Roger
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dennis De Witt" <djdewitt at rcn.com>
> To: "MHC listserve" <masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>
> Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 11:56 AM
> Subject: [MassHistPres] Demo delay: 18 mo / interiors / siding
>
>
>> I am pleased to say that last nite Brookline town meeting by a
>> unanimous vote passed an upgrading of our Demo Delay law.  I thought
>> it would pass but didn't expect ZERO opposition.  (Significantly, a
>> week ago CPA lost at the polls -- due in no small part to opposition
>> from the schools community who thought it would weaken support for an
>> inevitable schools override.)
>>
>> Maybe it was dumb luck but I have been trying to think of why there
>> was not one word said against our proposal.  For whatever it's worth,
>> earlier in the evening TM had passed, but not unanimously, a
>> clarification, (overriding a ZBA ruling), which made it clear that,
>> under its design review power, the Planing Board and ZBA had the
>> right to review demolition as a "design change" and to permanently
>> prevent demolition of a facade along the town's five major streets,
>> over which the PB & ZBA have design review.
>>
>> We have our quota of libertarian types in TM but one of them strongly
>> endorsed our article, after a lot of negotiation and revision, which
>> helped immeasurably.  Maybe the recent creation of three new LHDs has
>> given the commission a lot of good will in an anti-development pro-
>> neighborhood TM zeitgeist.  And the very process of getting three
>> LHDs through the Advisory Committee and Selectmen has developed some
>> rapport with them that lead to unanimously favorable reports from a
>> BoS, three of whose members have said they would not want to live in
>> an LHD, and from a conservatively weighted (but very fair-minded)  
>> sub-
>> committee of the Advisory Committee.  Good networking also helped.
>> (Maybe even an overspill of some goodwill towards one supportive
>> Selectman may have played a part.)  And maybe TM just had its eye on
>> the clock.
>>
>> In any case we now have the following enhancements.
>>
>> a) DD on all NR properties found Significant is extended from 12
>> months to 18 months.  The only selling point we offered was that we
>> reported that some opponents of the three LHDs had argued the LHDs
>> were put through in a hasty manner because of the 12 month delay, and
>> so we said that this would give more time to everyone for a more
>> orderly process.
>>
>> b) DD can be applied to the "substantially total" gutting of historic
>> spaces open to the public in NR buildings.  We figure there are about
>> 20 such in town and that such a case might come up once a decade.
>>
>> c) DD can be applied in cases where all the trim is stripped off an
>> NR building to re-side it.  Re-siding if the trim is kept is not
>> covered.
>>
>> d) the definition of demolition is significantly fleshed out to
>> include criteria for partial demolitions.
>>
>> e) We added a definition of demo-by-neglect and included Demo-by-
>> neglect in the definition of demolition.  This probably will only be
>> useful in a case where a building is condemned due to DbN, in which
>> case we may be able to impose a two-year no build penalty.  However,
>> the concept is on the table -- more on that below.
>>
>> f) we incorporated language and definitions from MHCs new model
>> bylaw, including the right to create rules and regulations -- more on
>> that below.
>>
>> Initially we had also several other new features but the whole
>> package proved, understandably (see link), mind-numbing for the AC &
>> BoS.  So we agreed to remove them for consideration at a later time.
>> This too may have helped get the favorable reports from them.
>>
>> The sections removed were to do the following:
>>
>> i) prevent speculative demolitions by requiring that no demolition
>> occur until the replacement project was ready to begin
>>
>> ii) Prevent "timing out" of delays by requiring that demolition must
>> occur within a three year time frame after the end of the delay or
>> the process would have to recycle.
>>
>> iii) Add a demolition by neglect enforcement cause to allow an owner
>> to be taken to court and required to stabilize (but not restore or
>> even bring up to code) a property.
>>
>> iv) add an anti-arson clause (cribbed from Newton)
>>
>> During the course of our conversations with the AC we were strongly
>> advised by several attorneys involved that some or all of these
>> things might be accomplished through rule-making -- altho our Town
>> Counsel disagreed.  We would be very interested in knowing of towns
>> that have an apparatus of rules or guidelines to accomplish any of
>> the above.  Please let me know.
>>
>> Here is a link to the Warrant article.  The original version of the
>> bylaw, as first proposed is at the beginning, including the abandoned
>> sections.  The final version is at the end.
>>
>> http://www.townofbrooklinemass.com/TMM/PDFs/111406TM/
>> A19-111406COMBINEDREPORTS.pdf
>>
>> The deleted sections in the first version are 5.3.9 & .16 & .17.  The
>> second version is structured slightly differently especially with
>> respect to the definition of demolition, which is the core of its
>> extended power.
>>
>> Dennis De Witt
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ******************************
>> For administrative questions regarding this list, please contact  
>> Christopher.Skelly at state.ma.us directly.  PLEASE DO NOT "REPLY" TO  
>> THE WHOLE LIST.
>> MassHistPres mailing list
>> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
>> http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/listinfo/masshistpres
>> ********************************