[MassHistPres] CPC funds prevailing wage and volunteers on town owned building

Wed Apr 20 15:58:56 EDT 2016

Thank you to everyone. Looks as if this is an issue for others. I hope to use this information going forward but 
Maybe it will require a CPA fix?
sally Urbano
harwich , Mass .   grassroots group

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 20, 2016, at 10:50 AM, Roughan, Michael <Michael.Roughan at hdrinc.com> wrote:
> 
> Jonathan,
> 
> Once again I appreciate your due diligence. With your permission, I would like to forward your "Brief" to my associates in the Town Building Department and CPC to see if I can get consensus on this reinterpretation of painting as rehabilitation instead of maintenance.
> 
> ....Mike
> 
> Michael Roughan, AIA, EDAC, LEED AP
> 
> D +1.617.357.7725 M +1.617.784.6463
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tucker, Jonathan [mailto:tuckerj at amherstma.gov] 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 11:40 AM
> To: Roughan, Michael; Dennis Sears; 'sally urbano'; 'MA Historic Preservation'
> Subject: RE: [MassHistPres] CPC funds prevailing wage and volunteers on town owned building
> 
> Well, here's a shot at refutation.
> 
> The CPA statute (MGL Ch. 44B, Sec. 2) includes the following definitions:
> 
> ''Capital improvement'', reconstruction or alteration of real property that: (1) materially adds to the value of the real property or appreciably prolongs the useful life of the real property; (2) becomes part of the real property or is permanently affixed to the real property so that removal would cause material damage to the property or article itself; and (3) is intended to become a permanent installation or is intended to remain there for an indefinite period of time.
> 
> "Rehabilitation", capital improvements, or the making of extraordinary repairs, to historic resources, . . . with respect to historic resources, ''rehabilitation'' shall comply with the Standards for Rehabilitation stated in the United States Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties codified in 36 C.P.R. Part 68 . . . ."
> 
> And here are the Secretary of the Interior's Standards (36 C.P.R. Part 68):
> 
> "Rehabilitation projects must meet the following Standards to qualify as "certified rehabilitations" eligible for the 20% tax credit for historic preservation.
> 
> The Standards are applied to projects in a reasonable manner, taking into consideration economic and technical feasibility.
> 
> 1.    A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment.
> 2.    The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved.  The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided.
> 3.    Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken.
> 4.    Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved.
> 5.    Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved.
> 6.    Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence.
> 7.    Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used.  The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible.
> 8.    Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved.  If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken.
> 9.    New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment.
> 10.    New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired."
> 
> 
> So, under CPA, any capital improvement of an historic resource specifically includes actions "which appreciably prolong[s] the useful life of the real property" and "is intended to remain there for an indefinite period of time."  I'd like to see someone try to argue that repainting an historic building to ensure its long-term survival, or even to restore its original color scheme (where that has significant historical meaning) does not meet those standards.
> 
> For those unfamiliar with historic preservation practice, it is understandable that they might think this is just "maintenance."  But it is not maintenance.  Under nearly a century of national, state and local practice of historic preservation, doing ANYTHING that physically sustains, prolongs, and protects an historic resource, including repainting or repairing an historic structure, is "preservation."  Technically, in most cases, it qualifies as the form of preservation referred to as rehabilitation, something that is explicitly allowed for under CPA.  The Secretary of the Interior's standards explicitly presume that such changes will include actions which require maintaining consistency in "design, color, texture, and other visual qualities."  Certainly repainting an historic structure to--for instance--maintain its historic appearance (much less keep it safe from weather) is anticipated by those federal standards.
> 
> This is, again, where communities need MHC to step up and help DOR and the CPC understand what their responsibilities entail with respect to implementing the historic preservation aspects of the Community Preservation Act.  Failing that, it might be necessary to ask the courts to resolve this question.  It might also be useful to approach the National Park Service for help, as well.
> 
> Jonathan Tucker
> Senior Planner
> Amherst Planning Department
> 4 Boltwood Avenue, Town Hall
> Amherst, MA  01002
> (413) 259-3040
> tuckerj at amherstma.gov 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu [mailto:masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu] On Behalf Of Roughan, Michael
> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 3:14 PM
> To: Dennis Sears; 'sally urbano'; 'MA Historic Preservation'
> Subject: Re: [MassHistPres] CPC funds prevailing wage and volunteers on town owned building
> 
> Dennis,
> 
> Apparently this is a legal counsel interpretation that I would like to rebuke but I haven't been able to find any definitive ammunition.
> 
> ....Mike
> 
> Michael Roughan, AIA, EDAC, LEED AP
> 
> D +1.617.357.7725 M +1.617.784.6463
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dennis Sears [mailto:HDennisSears at verizon.net] 
> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 1:13 PM
> To: Roughan, Michael; 'sally urbano'; 'MA Historic Preservation'
> Subject: RE: [MassHistPres] CPC funds prevailing wage and volunteers on town owned building
> 
> Michael, are you telling me the Town defines "painting" as maintenance?  I'm not sure about Mass, but in most cases and I think the Feds, "painting" when you are doing it as a restoration or to increase the value of property and the amount is beyond what most people would consider "touch up"; ie those nicks in the paint along side of the stairs where you carried things in and out, would consider this a "capital" item that could and should be covered under CPA.  I'd be interested in getting an answer in case we ever run into this in our Town.  Dennis Sears, Chair Town of Sheffield Historical Commission.  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu
> [mailto:masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu] On Behalf Of Roughan, Michael
> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 9:50 AM
> To: sally urbano <urbanosally at yahoo.com>; MA Historic Preservation <masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>
> Subject: Re: [MassHistPres] CPC funds prevailing wage and volunteers on town owned building
> 
> Sally,
> 
> As previously stated on this group listserv, Hopkinton is struggling with the same issues you are. Since the "official" town interpretation is we can't use CPA funds for maintenance, we've asked the town to paint the exterior of one of the historic homes (McFarland Sanger) while we secure additional CPA funds to reconstruct the front (south) side from sill to roof. Unfortunately, once the funds are secured we will have to bid the work out, but we are hopeful that we can work with a North Bennett St School / Keefe Tech to have the work done by a faculty / student program. The only dilemma is you need the funds secured first and the group needs to have the availability.
> 
> The HHC's intent is to restore the house to the point where it can serve beneficial use but we have not yet secured a tenant and may end up selling it with a deed restriction. This is something we recently did with a historic farmstead (Elmwood Farms) and the owner is doing a fabulous job of restoration of both the house and barn. As you know, your challenge will be, once you've renovated the schoolhouse, how do you maintain it?
> 
> As for the volunteer approach, we have another historic building (Train
> Depot) that has been kept up primarily by volunteer labor from the HHC so we are cautious about taking on too many volunteer projects.
> 
> ....Mike
> 
> Michael Roughan, AIA, EDAC, LEED AP
> 
> D +1.617.357.7725 M +1.617.784.6463
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu
> [mailto:masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu] On Behalf Of sally urbano
> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 11:02 AM
> To: MA Historic Preservation
> Subject: [MassHistPres] CPC funds prevailing wage and volunteers on town owned building
> 
> When i need help i have always found members of this group to be generous with their time.
>        Our volunteer group applied and received CPC support for the rehab and reuse of a Historic schoolhouse 1871.  There has been an incredible amount of obstacles thrown in our path.
> CPC wanted us to Have oversight through the town and apply for a smaller amount of money, which we did . We then applied for a matching grant.(outcome not yet known) The finance committee feels we haven't asked for enough money and because the town owns the building expects that we should bid out for prevailing wage. We leveraged the CPC  money and were going to use the sheriffs program as well as the local Tech School. Not together of course.
> We are being held to standards others are not as the library several years ago used the Sheriffs program and the town hall had them do some painting.
>      This scenario is similar to an orphaned historic building that sat for years unpainted. CPC said it was maintenance to paint,  the town didn't have the money and so it sat until a volunteer group painted it.
>      I would love to hear your thoughts on this matter,
>  Thank You,
> 
> Sally Urbano      Volunteer group
> Harwich,mass
> ******************************
> 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
> ********************************
> 
> ******************************
> 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
> ********************************