[MassHistPres] Fwd: Rehab to the point of demolition

[James Hadley]

Sent from my iPad

Begin forwarded message:

> From: James Hadley <jameswhadley11 at gmail.com>
> Date: March 13, 2014 9:40:33 AM EDT
> To: james hadley <jameswhadley at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Fwd: [MassHistPres] Rehab to the point of demolition
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
> 
>> From: James Hadley <jameswhadley11 at gmail.com>
>> Date: March 13, 2014 9:32:28 AM EDT
>> To: William Moonan <william.moonan at verizon.net>
>> Cc: "<masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>" <masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>
>> Subject: Re: [MassHistPres] Rehab to the point of demolition
>> 
>> The misbehavior and misrepresentation by engineering firms in connection with studies of historic structures is a very old problem. Not all engineers fall in to this category, quite the contrary, but unfortunately some do. In Orleans we recognized this and were forthright in characterizing such firms. Certain engineers became known as the "go-to" firms for those seeking to justify demolition. 
>> It is important for Commissions to develop their own expertise to counter these threats disguised as "expert" testimony. Attending educational seminars on historic structures is an important part of the work of commission members. I would urge all historical commissions to support and promote these events. It is also very desirable to attempt to bring interested, and hopefully experienced professionals on to commissions.
>> James Hadley, AIA
>> Former chair, Orleans Historical Commission
>> 
>> Sent from my iPad
>> 
>> On Mar 12, 2014, at 10:38 AM, "William Moonan" <william.moonan at verizon.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> The Bedford HDC has been presented with what appears to be a hobsonian choice.  A new owner/developer of an 1840 original block house that has three, smallish 1960s additions wants to demolish the house and replace it with a relatively attractive new house.  The lot is very small, so the proposed replacement is in the same scale as adjoining houses (i.e. not a McMansion).  Just for your consideration is the fact that this house is the first house in the district as you approach Bedford from Concord, located at an intersection that splits traffic to head east to Lexington, or north to Carlisle/Billerica.
>>>  
>>> The HDC has, of course, said “NO” to tearing it down but indicated that some of the 1960 additions could be removed in favor of more attractive ones.  The owner hired a structural engineer whose report indicates there is nothing to be saved in the building.  The engineer, however, is clearly one who did not approach the building as a preservationist.  The report indicated the rubble foundation is failing and that floor supports are sagging, etc., etc.  The owner further reports that a house-mover said the building would not survive being moved (nothing in writing on this subject).  Finally, the owner asserts the wall studs are rotten (no proof of that) and that there are no clapboards under the vinyl siding (installed before there was an historic district) that are worth saving because, if they exist, they are split.  (Again, no proof.)  A site visit did confirm that the house is in rough shape.
>>>  
>>> The owner and his lawyer’s conclusion from their “analysis” is that there is nothing to save.  That to make the building structurally sound would require lifting it up to rebuild the foundation (can’t be done because a house-mover said so), that the original cladding is unusable (possible, but no proof), and, besides, there are no original windows, all having been replaced in the early 60s before there was an Historic District.  The owner further states, if they were to spend huge amounts of money to “rehab” the building, there would be nothing original that would be left.  The Town would have a reproduction, so why not allow a new structure to be built that would look like it belonged there?
>>>  
>>> I suspect the owner is correct that there wouldn’t be much left that is original.  We have asked for proof of the items for which none has been supplied.  I hope that review of this new information would show that the original siding is still there.  But if the rather unattractive 1960s additions are removed, there wouldn’t be much left of the original siding  beyond the front third of the house.
>>>  
>>> The choice seems to be coming down to a new house or a reproduction with little or no visible original material.  Your thoughts are gratefully solicited.
>>>  
>>> Bill Moonan
>>> Chair, Bedford Historic Commission
>>>  
>>>  
>>> ******************************
>>> 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/20140313/5aa93a60/attachment.htm>