[MassHistPres] Westport's fight to save this house - comments please

[Dcolebslade at aol.com]

Demolished roof raises commission's ire
 
____________________________________
_ http://www.heraldnews.com/homepage/x1925681484_ 
(http://www.heraldnews.com/content/sites/fallriver/071813main/0/g2582587278e59877d0ea8798202001738d8134c3f
33abe.jpg)   
 
Photo by Omar Bradley
The Gideon Tabor House at 1813 Main Road Westport.



 



By Grant Welker
Herald News Staff Reporter
Wed Feb 06, 2008, 07:21 PM EST 
 
____________________________________
Story Tools:   _Email This _ (mailto:?subject=Demolished roof raises 
commission's ire&body=http://www.heraldnews.com/homepage/x1925681484) |    _Print This 
_ (http://www.heraldnews.com/homepage/x1925681484#) 
Westport -  
The town has filed a complaint in Fall River Superior Court seeking an  
injunction that would require the restoration of a historic Westport Point house  
that was partially demolished last month.
A permit for renovation was  approved last fall, but the man who controls the 
property, Joseph Furtado of  Portsmouth, R.I., demolished part of the back of 
the house and the roof. Furtado  has said the roof collapse was accidental.
Furtado was told by the building  inspector four times to stop work at the 
19th century house at 1813 Main Road,  and a cease-and-desist order was issued 
Jan. 3. The roof collapsed on Dec. 26,  the commission said.
The house, a white one-story Cape, is located in the  Westport Point Historic 
District, meaning it and other houses must abide by  strict guidelines for 
renovations or additions. The Historical Commission must  review all 
applications for exterior changes to buildings within the  district.
A review of the property by a historic preservation firm found that  there 
was “no way” that the roof collapse was an accident, said Steve Tyson Jr.,  the 
president of the Architectural Preservation Group of Warwick, R.I. “There  
are specific ways of taking apart of building if you want to save it,” he said.  
“Those methods clearly weren’t used here.”
Furtado’s attorney, William McKeon  Jr., said the collapse was the result of 
deterioration from age and from damage  from powderpost beetles, a conclusion 
reached by an engineer hired by Furtado.  The top of the chimney collapsed at 
the same time, McKeon said, falling on the  roof.
But Tyson’s review of the site, requested by the Historical Commission  and 
done for free, led him to say it was “extremely clear” that the roof  
collapsed before the chimney, and that the chimney was intentionally toppled. He  said 
he didn’t think the chimney collapse would be enough to also collapse the  
roof. “I’ve seen chimneys in poor condition, but I’ve never seen one fall  over.
”
Where and how the chimney broke doesn’t correspond with the direction  the 
chimney fell in, either, he added. “It clearly looked like someone was just  
demolishing that building.”
There have been major renovations of historic  homes in the district, said 
Commission Chairwoman Sharon Connors, but there has  never been a collapse. “I 
have a hard time believing it fell by accident,” she  said.
The town filed a complaint Jan. 28 seeking a preliminary injunction  
requiring Furtado to “substantially restore all structures and exterior  architectural 
features on the property that have been altered or demolished”  within 30 
days, according to court documents. There is a hearing on the  complaint 
scheduled at 2 p.m. today in Fall River Superior Court.
The  complaint charges Furtado with violating the town’s demolition bylaw, 
Historical  Commission bylaw and regulations, and the town building code.
Furtado would  also be required to immediately cease all work, protect the 
remaining structure  from the elements until restoration can begin, submit all 
necessary  documentation with the commission in order to receive necessary 
certificates,  allow the building inspector on the site to inspect compliance and 
pay the  town’s attorney fees.
Last October, the Historical Commission approved only  the demolition of an 
addition made after the house was built. Construction at  the house began 
before the approval, and Building Inspector Ralph Souza verbally  ordered work to 
stop twice in October and twice in December before the written  order Jan. 3, 
according to the complaint.
The initial application “indicated  strongly that what (Furtado) wanted was a 
new house,” Connors said. “He intended  to demolish a lot of it.”
Furtado’s attorney said the commission approved a  set of drawings showing 
what the exterior of the house was to look like under  Furtado’s plans.
Furtado applied for a building permit ex post facto on Nov.  22 and was 
approved Dec. 4. The third order from the building inspector to stop  work, on Dec. 
11, was made because the work being done went beyond the scope of  what was 
approved.
Furtado has been planning the construction, but the house  is in the name of 
his mother, Angie, who bought the house in June 2007. The  house, built in 
1806, is one of 16 parcels north of Cape Bial Lane that were  added to the 
historic district in Nov. 2006.

E-mail Grant Welker at _gwelker at heraldnews.com_ 
(mailto:gwelker at heraldnews.com) . 
Property or preservation  rights  How do you feel about  homeowner property 
rights?  A man's home is his castle. He  ought to be able to do whatever he 
wants with it.
If it's a historical structure, it should stay that way,  period.
History is worth preserving, but  people need to remember this is 2008.
I think the laws cost  homeowners too much money and limit their rights too  
severely.
Who cares about another old  building?
Preservation laws were designed  to keep history alive and preserve a town's 
heritage. You can't replace  that.    _View Result_ 
(http://nupolls.com/result/40344/) 
_Myspace  Polls_ (http://nupolls.com/) 





**************Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL Music.     
(http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?NCID=aolcmp003000000025
48)