[MassHistPres] demolition permit question

[Sara Wermiel]

But surely, even if "vacant lot" is accepted on the demo app, the EHC has
the right to review the details of the vacant lot, and would still have the
right to review any subsequent proposed construction at the site.

The vacant lot should be compatible with the district. That probably means,
not a parking lot. In fact, maybe you should require a complete landscaping
plan, since the use would be changing, and review that. Or do your design
guidelines only deal with above-ground features?

 

Sara Wermiel

Preservation consultant

Jamaica Plain, MA

 

From: masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu
[mailto:masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu] On Behalf Of melanie deware
Sent: Sunday, January 03, 2010 3:12 PM
To: masshistpres at cs.umb.edu
Subject: Re: [MassHistPres] demolition permit question

 

There is a new proposal at hand that would preserve the site.  However, the
question originally arose when the demo apps were filed, with "vacant lot"
expressed as the proposed reuse of the site.  Our question comes from a
disagreement over whether or not this was really answering the question of
proposed reuse.  The Historical Commission, citizens, proponent, and Town
Counsel all disagree.  We are really looking for precedent on whether or not
this is an acceptable answer, or just an attempt to do skirt the bylaw and
then do whatever one wants to do with the location in the future by avoiding
Historical Commission input on the replacement plans.
 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/private/masshistpres/attachments/20100103/a46e83c6/attachment-0001.htm>