[MassHistPres] Demolition Delay By law

[Jon Wilhelmsen]

Good evening Jay,

Last year we went to Town Meeting with a proposal to increase the delay from 6 months to 18 months.  The article was successful and had no opposition - though without too much development pressure down here at present, the lack of opposition was not too surprising.  

The question that is posed is hard to answer when going from 3 to 6.  As has been mentioned, there typically is not too much gained with 6 months.  I suggest either amending the timeframe on the floor of town meeting to 18 - 24 months, or if that is not possible, it may be better to pass over the article for this year and go again next at 18 or 24 months.  Sorry this is not too much help.  I think at this point it is more a question of strategy - is it better to possibly get the 6 months now - with a bit of a fight - or go next year with a stronger case for 18?  Coming back multiple times to increase may also erode the case.  In my experience, people tend not to remember the articles that get passed over.  Best of luck however you decide.  Let me know if you would like to discuss.  

Jon Wilhelmsen, Chair
Plympton Historical Commission


On Apr 27, 2011, at 6:49 PM, Tristram Metcalfe 3 wrote:

Absolutely 18 months is better,,
The purpose of demo delay is to allow AND encourage rethinking of a development plan which must also include moving the structure the most costly preservation that needs maximum time.

I look at it this way; The history is owned by the civilization, the deed holder holds ALL issues held by the deed from toxic waste found later on site to preservation of OUR history. They should be required to allow preservation if the civilization requests it.

Tris Metcalfe
Northampton

On Apr 27, 2011, at 6:36 PM, Garrett Laws wrote:

> If 12 months is also "easy enough to circumvent" wouldn't you want to
> push for 18-24 months?
> 
> Garrett
> 
> On Wednesday, April 27, 2011,  <Dcolebslade at aol.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I agree with Tris Metcalfe.
>> 
>> Betty Slade
>> Westport
>> 
>> 
>> In a message dated 4/27/2011 4:42:21 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>> twm3 at rcn.com writes:
>> 
>>  JayIts fairly simple,, a 3 month delay is a pretty much
>>  worthless.
>>  It could easily fit inside the normal process of design bidding financing
>>  permitting and start of demolition, which equals no delay.
>>  We use 12 months which Many who want to demolish feel is easy enough to
>>  circumvent since the above process can easily become a year as well. 6 months
>>  delay is therefore still almost worthless.
>>  Tris Metcalfe
>>  Northampton
>> 
>>  On Apr 27, 2011, at 8:15 PM, jjgiiilaw at juno.com wrote:
>> 
>>    Tewksbury Historical commission will present an article to next weeks
>>    town meeting extending
>>    Demolition Delay By Law from 3 months to 6 months, Solicited advice
>>    form membership when
>>    formulating article and received many helpful comments. We expect that
>>    the opposition in the debate, if
>>    any will include something along the lines of "What can you do in 6
>>    months that you can't do in 3 which
>>    justifies holding up the property owner."  any thought would be
>>    appreciated. Thanks for this and prior help.
>> 
>>    Jay Gaffney
>>    Tewksbury Historical Commission
>> 
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> Groupon™
>>    Official Site
>> 1 ridiculously huge
>>    coupon a day. Get 50-90% off your city's best!
>> Groupon.com <http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3142/4db8799e1de0d12dc18st04duc>
>>    ******************************
>>    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
>> ********************************
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Cheers,
> Garrett
> 
> The Copper & Slate Company, Inc.
> Fine Roofing and Exterior Finish Carpentry
> 238B Calvary Street, Waltham, MA 02453
> (781) 893-1916
> 
> What we do:
> http://picasaweb.google.com/copperandslate
> 
> Where we've worked over the years:
> http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=206210316541901083869.00049065ef8543e1ef9c3&ll=42.40115,-71.126862&spn=0.125241,0.289421&t=h&z=12

******************************
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
********************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/private/masshistpres/attachments/20110428/7937ba6b/attachment.htm>