[MassHistPres] Legislative tools to secure fire-damaged buildings

[Ralph Slate]

We are facing a situation in Springfield where an 1870's-era house was 
recently damaged by fire. Although the insurance company and building 
inspector initially agreed that the building could be repaired, the 
insurance company settled with the owner and the owner has cashed the 
check and does not want to rebuild -- she apparently wants to tear the 
structure down and keep the money.

The building has been "secured", but apparently "secured" in building 
code terms does not mean "secured to the elements", it only means 
"secured to entry" (at least in Springfield) -- the roof is wide open 
due to the fire and the recent rains and freezings have caused more 
damage to the structure.

Are there any legislative tools out there to use to prod a property 
owner toward securing a building to the elements? Specifically any 
powers that, due to a building being a significant historic and cultural 
resource, would allow the city to enter the property to secure it to the 
elements within a prescribed amount of time (giving the owner a chance 
to do the same)?

In my opinion, since the initial assessment after the fire (the 
hardship) was that the property could be rehabilitated, any damage 
occurring after this would not fall under hardship because it would be 
the direct neglect of the property owner. However, while that's great in 
theory, if there is nothing the city can do to secure the building to 
the elements, that will become moot as the property moves further and 
further beyond reasonable repair, except maybe deny any new construction 
on the site due to the unauthorized "demolition by neglect".

We have no "demolition by neglect" ordinance in Springfield - would such 
an ordinance cover this kind of situation?

Does any community have legislation that would allow a municipality to 
do annual inspections on "secured" buildings to determine if they are 
truly secured to the elements? Many of our potential teardowns are 
buildings which are kept up to code on the exterior, but have years of 
water damage due to leaking roofs. Springfield has many challenges, and 
it is not out of the question for properties in our districts to sit 
abandoned for ten years or more.


Thanks,

Ralph