[MassHistPres] Another collapse in the historic district

[Tucker, Jonathan]

We can't answer the first question without knowing the scope of the
original certificate of appropriateness and whether or not your local
district regulations address such changes in circumstance.

 

The second question is not about building codes but about zoning (the
universally beloved MGL Ch. 40A, Sec. 6).  The non-conforming ell is
grandfathered and could be rebuilt on the same footprint so long as
substantial construction on that work began within two years.

 

Jonathan Tucker

Planning Director

Town Hall, 4 Boltwood Ave.

Amherst, MA  01002

(413) 259-3040

(413) 259-2410 [fax]

tuckerj at amherstma.gov   

 

-----Original Message-----
From: masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu
[mailto:masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu] On Behalf Of
Dcolebslade at aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 11:52 AM
To: masshistpres at cs.umb.edu
Subject: [MassHistPres] Another collapse in the historic district

 

Several months ago I noted that the roof of a historic building
collapsed in the historic district.  Work was done without a permit,
including gutting the house and weakening the support structure. The
town took the applicant to court asking for protection of the building
from the elements and for the applicant to submit proper documentation
to the historic district commission for approval of rebuilding.  Finally
these two requests were met and the town lawyers closed the case.  No
fines were assessed.  The case was recently closed.

 

The applicant got a certificate of appropriateness to restore three
buildings on his property, two of which are residences.  

 

The property configuration is "grandfathered" because it had these
buildings before zoning.  

  

This week the chimney collapsed on one of the other buildings and took
an ell with it.  The building is right on the boundary line so the
rubble fell onto the neighbor's yard.  That building also had been
gutted and left in the open for more than a year which led to the
collapse.  The building inspector has ordered a demolition of the ell
for safety reasons.

 

My questions are:

 

(1)  Does the applicant have to return to the WHC now that the
circumstances have changed?  Note he already has a certificate of
appropriateness.

There is a concern by the neighbor about the proximity of the ell to his
boundary.  This is the third time that the boundary has been breeched.
The neighbor has stated he will not allow his property to be a "staging
ground" for any work on the building, a threat which if carried through,
means that it would be extremely difficult to do anything on that side
of the building.

 

(2)  Can the building inspector require a setback now that the ell is
gone?  (I know that is a building inspector question, but some of you
may have experience in such a case.)

 

Thank you.

 

Betty Slade

Westport

 

________________________________

Worried about job security? Check out the 5 safest jobs in a recession
<http://jobs.aol.com/gallery/growing-job-industries?ncid=emlcntuscare000
00002> .

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/private/masshistpres/attachments/20090311/d1f5109d/attachment.htm