[MassHistPres] preemptive DD applications

[james hadley]

This must be in the wind right now. Orleans has gotten two successive applications from the same owner for this kind of "pocketed" demo delay hearing; leading to a 12 month waiting period and then an open and unobstructed path towards demolition. This kind of application subverts the intention of the by-law by precluding any opportunity to move the structure, or to find a prospective owner willing to preserve.

Our Town Counsel has advised us to revise the by-law as follows:

 

In order to have standing to file a Notice of Intent an applicant must have a present intent to demolish a Significant Building within twelve months of the date of the Notice of Intent.

 

He further recommends that the NOI include a copy of the demolition plan and the proposed reuse of the property.

 

In the nearby town of Chatham the by-law includes the following language:

 

All determinations by written finding made by the Historical Commission pursuant to [this by-law] shall expire two years from the date of the written finding if the work authorized has not commenced.

 

This insures that if the demolition has not proceeded within 2 years from the date of the Commission's demolition delay decision the applicant must file a new notice of intent.

I would be curious to know what Brookline's (and others') experience with limiting the life of the decision has been.

 

Jim Hadley,

Orleans Historical Commission 
 


From: djd184 at verizon.net
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2010 10:48:34 -0400
To: masshistpres at cs.umb.edu
Subject: [MassHistPres] preemptive DD applications

Brookline periodically gets "clusters" of applications for "prophylactic" demo applications for houses being put on the market where there is no specific plan to demolish and rebuild but the broker or owner has decided that the house would be more salable with the equivalent of "planning permission" for demo in hand.  Does anyone have a bylaw or regulation more restrictive than the attached with respect to time length or transferability?  When it was drafted town counsel opined that the de facto permission to demolish could not end with transfer of ownership but had to run for some set period.



Section 7.  Required reapplication 
If no Demolition Permit is issued within three years of the Commission’s determination of Significance and of the termination of any court action preventing the issuance of said permit, whichever period shall be longer, or if a Demolition Permit is issued but the building is not demolished before the expiration of said permit, including any extensions allowed by the Building Commissioner, then any subsequent Application for the demolition of the building shall be processed in accordance with sections 5.3.3. through 5.3.12 inclusive, without reference to any prior determination with respect to Significance.  Upon a showing by the applicant that due to the complex nature of the development project and despite the applicant’s significant efforts he or she has been unable to permit, design and/or finance a project within three years, the Preservation Commission may extend the time for a Demolition Permit for a reasonable time to accommodate such a project. 
 
Dennis De Witt 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/private/masshistpres/attachments/20100707/a047d894/attachment.htm>