[MassHistPres] Historic Commission vs. Building department

[slater at alum.rpi.edu]

>Have you seen this?

Yes. It was applied last year when a house that had previously been
burned in a fire (3rd floor burned out) was demolished because the owner
had left the property exposed to the elements. His neighbor purchased
the property and got the structural survey board to agree that it posed
an imminent danger, and it was knocked down without ever coming in front
of the commission.

Lately, the SHC voted to deny the petition of a property owner to knock
down a circa-1898 carriage house on a property (there was no house on
the property, it was demolished long ago). The owner sued the city, but
the structural survey board voted to order the structure's demolition.
At the same time it voted to knock down an abandoned house in another
district, we learned of it from the newspaper.

I'm curious about the theory that if the property is a safety hazard,
that it must be demolished within 7-10 days. I don't think that is
happening. I can understand that this could be applied right after some
disaster happened (fire, etc.), but I don't know how a property can
suddenly be deemed a threat to public safety after sitting for months,
or even years. It seems like it is being used to clear out unwanted
property.

Ralph Slate
Springfield, MA