[MassHistPres] demolitionby neglect
John Worden
jworden at swwalaw.com
Wed Jan 16 14:33:21 EST 2008
Adding to Chris Skelly's list, some, if not all, of the historic districts
in Boston include demolition by neglect provisions.
J. Worden
Arlington HDC
**********
This transmittal is intended only for the use of the named recipient,
and may contain information that is privileged, confidential,
and/or exempt from disclosure. If the reader of this transmittal is
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is
strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in
error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all
copies of this message and any attachments. Thank you.
----- Original Message -----
From: <masshistpres-request at cs.umb.edu>
To: <masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 12:00 PM
Subject: MassHistPres Digest, Vol 23, Issue 11
> Send MassHistPres mailing list submissions to
> masshistpres at cs.umb.edu
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/listinfo/masshistpres
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> masshistpres-request at cs.umb.edu
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> masshistpres-owner at cs.umb.edu
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of MassHistPres digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. illegal historic tear-down (John Worden)
> 2. demolition by neglect by-laws (SCeccacci at aol.com)
> 3. Re: Fwd: Rebuilding after demolition (Tristram W Metcalfe 3)
> 4. Re: demolition by neglect by-laws (Chris Skelly)
> 5. Re: demolition by neglect by-laws (blever3043 at aol.com)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 11:29:54 -0500
> From: "John Worden" <jworden at swwalaw.com>
> Subject: [MassHistPres] illegal historic tear-down
> To: <masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>
> Message-ID: <028b01c856ca$b2ac7bd0$6633a8c0 at JLW>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1;
> reply-type=original
>
> There was a case in Cambridge a few years ago where they tore down a
> house
> & the Com'n made them reproduce the facade exactly as it was before,
> Cambridge Historical Com'n can provide details. The structure was on
> Waterhouse St., just about opposite the Law School and adjacent to the
> Christian Science Church.
>
> J. Worden
> Arlington HDC
>
>
> **********
>
> This transmittal is intended only for the use of the named recipient,
> and may contain information that is privileged, confidential,
> and/or exempt from disclosure. If the reader of this transmittal is
> not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
> dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is
> strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in
> error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all
> copies of this message and any attachments. Thank you.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <masshistpres-request at cs.umb.edu>
> To: <masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>
> Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 12:00 PM
> Subject: MassHistPres Digest, Vol 23, Issue 9
>
>
>> Send MassHistPres mailing list submissions to
>> masshistpres at cs.umb.edu
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/listinfo/masshistpres
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> masshistpres-request at cs.umb.edu
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> masshistpres-owner at cs.umb.edu
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of MassHistPres digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. Rebuilding after demolition (Dcolebslade at aol.com)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:21:37 EST
>> From: Dcolebslade at aol.com
>> Subject: [MassHistPres] Rebuilding after demolition
>> To: masshistpres at cs.umb.edu
>> Message-ID: <c31.22f74461.34b98c41 at aol.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>>
>>
>> The architect working for an owner in the historic district who has
>> demolished a substantial portion of an 1803 house is stating that since
>> most of the
>> house is gone, that the rest should be torn down and a new house of a
>> similar
>> external appearance can be built, but with new materials if they so
>> desire,
>> and that the historic district commission has no say over that. A good
>> portion of the building and roofing structure that collapsed has been
>> saved
>> through quick action by the building inspector although it is on the
>> ground and in
>> dumpsters. The architect challenged the commission with the following
>> two
>> questions:
>> (1) Is there any requirement in Chapter 40C or bylaw that states that
>> original materials be used in a renovation?
>> (2) Does the Commission have oversight over internal framing?
>> Your responses were most helpful in how other commissions have dealt
>> with
>> the issue of demolition and rebuilding. I am hoping that you can give
>> us
>> some
>> insight into your responses to these questions - within the context of
>> demolition.
>> Thank you. Betty Slade, Westport
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> **************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
>> http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> MassHistPres mailing list
>> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
>> http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/listinfo/masshistpres
>>
>>
>> End of MassHistPres Digest, Vol 23, Issue 9
>> *******************************************
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 17:42:02 EST
> From: SCeccacci at aol.com
> Subject: [MassHistPres] demolition by neglect by-laws
> To: masshistpres at cs.umb.edu
> Message-ID: <be5.22bae8ca.34be90ba at aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
> Several historic buildings listed on Preservation Worcester's Most
> Endangered lists over the past few years have been condemned recently as
> unsafe and
> ordered demolished by the City of Worcester. If the owners will not or
> cannot
> repair these buildings, the City requires demolition. All have arrived
> at
> their current state as a result of lack of care and maintenance over
> several
> years' time. In some cases, we have actually seen the deterioration
> occur
> right before our eyes. Most can be considered cases of "Demolition by
> Neglect".
>
> Although Worcester has a Demolition Delay ordinance, it does not include
> provisions to prevent demolition by neglect. Such an ordinance might have
> helped prevent the deterioration of these buildings to such a point that
> there is
> little other alternative to demolition.
>
> I am interested to know what cities and towns have demolition by neglect
> by-laws, what are the provisions of their by-laws, how they are
> administered,
> and how effective they are.
>
> Susan McDaniel Ceccacci
> Historic Preservation Consultant
> Jefferson, Massachusetts
>
>
>
> **************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
> http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:54:08 -0500
> From: Tristram W Metcalfe 3 <twm33 at verizon.net>
> Subject: Re: [MassHistPres] Fwd: Rebuilding after demolition
> To: <Dcolebslade at aol.com>, <masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>
> Message-ID: <C3B16E60.1D01D%twm33 at verizon.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
> The most egregious comment attributed to the architect &/or owner is the
> use
> of the word "similar". "Exact same" should be your position especially if
> they have blatantly violated trust and LHD zoning law.
>
> If built exactly, then what ever the materials,, with it's precisely same
> appearance, then the highest value to the public can be saved in the
> historic visual aesthetics.
>
> Tris
>
> Tristram W. Metcalfe III, AIA NCARB NY MA CT
> 142 Main St. Northampton, Mass 01060
> Ph 413.586.5775 Fx 586.2577
> Mobile 413.695.8200
> twm3 at rcn.com
>
>
>
>
>> Dcolebslade at aol.com1/13/08 9:02 PMDcolebslade at aol.com
>
>> How is this answer to the questions originally posed below?
>>
>> It is our understanding that the house now requires reconstruction. The
>> owner's opportunity for the renovation of an existing structure was lost
>> when
>> his crew's reckless activity caused the collapse of the building. We
>> believe
>> that the exterior of a historic building includes the
>> shingles/clapboards/trim/window frames and sash, the sheathing that
>> stuff was
>> nailed to and the frame
>> that supported everything and defined the building's distinctive form.
>> By
>> understanding and arguing this logic, the commission could require that
>> the
>> original cape be reconstructed in its original manner, post and beam,
>> vertical
>> sheathing, etc. Internal structure could be hermaphrodite construction
>> (a
>> logical combination of new and old). The architect would have to prepare
>> detailed construction plans including structural building sections, not
>> vague
>> elevations.
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________
>> From: Dcolebslade at aol.com
>> To: masshistpres at cs.umb.edu
>> Sent: 1/11/2008 10:24:19 P.M. Eastern Standard Time
>> Subj: [MassHistPres] Rebuilding after demolition
>>
>>
>>
>> The architect working for an owner in the historic district who has
>> demolished a substantial portion of an 1803 house is stating that since
>> most of the
>> house is gone, that the rest should be torn down and a new house of a
>> similar
>> external appearance can be built, but with new materials if they so
>> desire,
>>
>> and that the historic district commission has no say over that. A good
>> portion of the building and roofing structure that collapsed has been
>> saved
>> through quick action by the building inspector although it is on the
>> ground
>> and in
>> dumpsters. The architect challenged the commission with the following
>> two
>>
>> questions:
>> (1) Is there any requirement in Chapter 40C or bylaw that states
>> that
>> original materials be used in a renovation?
>> (2) Does the Commission have oversight over internal framing?
>> Your responses were most helpful in how other commissions have dealt
>> with
>> the issue of demolition and rebuilding. I am hoping that you can give
>> us
>> some
>> insight into your responses to these questions - within the context of
>> demolition.
>> Thank you. Betty Slade, Westport
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 10:01:49 -0500
> From: "Chris Skelly" <Skelly-MHC at comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [MassHistPres] demolition by neglect by-laws
> To: <masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>
> Message-ID: <008e01c85850$b9757610$6401a8c0 at Advantage>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> In Massachusetts, Lowell, Nantucket and Newton have a demolition by
> neglect ordinance.
> *********************
> Christopher C. Skelly
> Director of Local Government Programs
> Massachusetts Historical Commission
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu
> [mailto:masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu] On Behalf Of SCeccacci at aol.com
> Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 5:42 PM
> To: masshistpres at cs.umb.edu
> Subject: [MassHistPres] demolition by neglect by-laws
>
> Several historic buildings listed on Preservation Worcester's Most
> Endangered lists over the past few years have been condemned recently
> as unsafe and
> ordered demolished by the City of Worcester. If the owners will not or
> cannot
> repair these buildings, the City requires demolition. All have arrived
> at
> their current state as a result of lack of care and maintenance over
> several
> years' time. In some cases, we have actually seen the deterioration
> occur
> right before our eyes. Most can be considered cases of "Demolition by
> Neglect".
>
> Although Worcester has a Demolition Delay ordinance, it does not include
>
> provisions to prevent demolition by neglect. Such an ordinance might
> have
> helped prevent the deterioration of these buildings to such a point
> that there is
> little other alternative to demolition.
>
> I am interested to know what cities and towns have demolition by neglect
>
> by-laws, what are the provisions of their by-laws, how they are
> administered,
> and how effective they are.
>
> Susan McDaniel Ceccacci
> Historic Preservation Consultant
> Jefferson, Massachusetts
>
>
>
> **************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
>
> http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489
> ******************************
> 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
> ********************************
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 11:35:26 -0500
> From: blever3043 at aol.com
> Subject: Re: [MassHistPres] demolition by neglect by-laws
> To: Skelly-MHC at comcast.net, masshistpres at cs.umb.edu
> Message-ID: <8CA2674EEB6F2A7-E74-10 at WEBMAIL-DF19.sysops.aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>
> Newton's applies to local landmark properties, not every property, so the
> property would have to be landmarked before the neglect could be evaluated
>
>
>
> Brian Lever
>
> City of Newton
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Skelly <Skelly-MHC at comcast.net>
> To: masshistpres at cs.umb.edu
> Sent: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 10:01 am
> Subject: Re: [MassHistPres] demolition by neglect by-laws
>
>
>
>
> In Massachusetts, Lowell, Nantucket and Newton have a demolition by
> neglect ordinance.
> *********************
> Christopher C. Skelly
> Director of Local Government Programs
> Massachusetts Historical Commission
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu
> [mailto:masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu] On Behalf Of SCeccacci at aol.com
> Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 5:42 PM
> To: masshistpres at cs.umb.edu
> Subject: [MassHistPres] demolition by neglect by-laws
>
> Several historic buildings listed on Preservation Worcester's Most
> Endangered lists over the past few years have been condemned recently
> as unsafe and
> ordered demolished by the City of Worcester. If the owners will not or
> cannot
> repair these buildings, the City requires demolition. All have arrived
> at
> their current state as a result of lack of care and maintenance over
> several
> years' time. In some cases, we have actually seen the deterioration
> occur
> right before our eyes. Most can be considered cases of "Demolition by
> Neglect".
>
> Although Worcester has a Demolition Delay ordinance, it does not include
>
> provisions to prevent demolition by neglect. Such an ordinance might
> have
> helped prevent the deterioration of these buildings to such a point
> that there is
> little other alternative to demolition.
>
> I am interested to know what cities and towns have demolition by neglect
>
> by-laws, what are the provisions of their by-laws, how they are
> administered,
> and how effective they are.
>
> Susan McDaniel Ceccacci
> Historic Preservation Consultant
> Jefferson, Massachusetts
>
>
>
> **************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
>
> http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489
> ******************************
> 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
> ********************************
>
> ******************************
> 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
> ********************************
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail ! -
> http://webmail.aol.com
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> MassHistPres mailing list
> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
> http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/listinfo/masshistpres
>
>
> End of MassHistPres Digest, Vol 23, Issue 11
> ********************************************
>
More information about the MassHistPres
mailing list