[MassHistPres] demolition and 'partial demolition'

[Dennis De Witt]

Daniel

At the risk of repetition, when Brookline adopted its DD by-lay 15 years ago there was only in the state code a permit for complete demolition, including foundations.  And even then in Brookline all complete and partial demolition was done using a building permit with demolition.  Hence the non-SBC definition in the Brookline by-law already provided.  It would appear that at this point perhaps any by-laws dependent upon an SBC “demolition permit,” may want to be updated, even if one's commissioner may be more understanding than your’s seems to be,

Dennis De Witt



> On Jan 4, 2019, at 10:01 PM, Daniel Bibel <dbibel at verizon.net> wrote:
> 
> Mr. Blauch --
> 
> Thank you for your message.  You have confirmed what I had found -- that the State Building Code does not now have a definition for 'demolition' or 'partial demolition' -- and I have searched through the on line editions of current and past versions without finding any useful information. If I am mistaken, I would very much appreciate if someone would send a copy of the language from any edition of the Code which has these definitions.
> 
> So I remain puzzled and concerned.  I have collected information from a number of Massachusetts' communities on their handling of demolition, and many of them refer to the State Building Code as if there were some standard language there to assist in understanding the issue. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel Bibel
> dbibel at verizon.net
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Blauch Architect <jamesblauch_architect at verizon.net>
> To: 'James J O'Rourke Jr' <jamesjorourkejr321 at gmail.com>; 'Skelly, Christopher (SEC)' <christopher.skelly at state.ma.us>; masshistpres <masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>
> Sent: Wed, Jan 2, 2019 4:40 pm
> Subject: Re: [MassHistPres] demolition and 'partial demolition'
> 
> Good afternoon:
> 
> 
> 
> Recently, there have been quite a number of emails concerning "Demolition"
> and "Demolition Delay" circulating in this forum.  I believe that some of
> the comments need to be clarified (or corrected); hence this email.
> 
> The current State Building Code (SBC) is 780 CMR.  This state document is
> referred to as the "SBC ninth edition" and is available on-line; and, is
> applicable for all communities in the commonwealth.  This document includes
> the 2015 International Building Code (2015 IBC), the 2015 International
> Existing Building Code (2015 IEBC) and other International Codes; including
> the state's modifications to these documents.  These unmodified 2015
> International Code Council documents ARE available on-line, without any
> cost.
> 
> 
> 
> There are zero definitions of "Demolition" or 'Demolition Delay" in 780 CMR.
> Demolition is referred to in a few paragraphs of 780 CMR - but NO
> definition.  When a Town or City references these definitions in the SBC,
> this would provide, at the best, very ambiguous definitions since they do
> not exist within the SBC.
> 
> 
> 
> The City of Boston addresses "Demolition" and "Demolition Delay" in the
> Boston Zoning Code; specifically Article 85 which includes definitions.  I
> have attached a PDF of Article 85 which I downloaded today from the City of
> Boston's website.  Article 85 is for specific areas of Boston, for buildings
> at least 50 years old and does NOT apply to demolition or demolition delay
> in all areas of Boston.  Perhaps historic commissioners and other concerned
> individuals using this forum might consider Boston's Article 85 as a
> guideline to address "Demolition" or 'Demolition Delay".
> 
> 
> 
> Depending on the location of the demolition structure there may be other
> permits required for the demolition (i.e. DEP for land located near a body
> of water or waterway due to water runoff; etc.).
> 
> 
> 
> Sincerely:
> 
> 
> 
> James Blauch Architect, NCARB
> 
> Vice Chairman of the Silas Felton Historic District Commission in Hudson MA
> 
> Cell: 508-868-8095
> 
> Email:  <mailto:JamesBlauch_Architect at verizon.net <mailto:JamesBlauch_Architect at verizon.net>>
> JamesBlauch_Architect at verizonnet <mailto:JamesBlauch_Architect at verizon.net>
> 
> Registered in MA & SC
> 
> 
> 
> From: MassHistPres [mailto:masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu <mailto:masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu>] On Behalf Of
> James J O'Rourke Jr
> Sent: Monday, December 31, 2018 10:49 PM
> To: 'Skelly, Christopher (SEC)' <christopherskelly at state.ma.us <mailto:christopher.skelly at state.ma.us>>;
> masshistpres at cs.umb.edu <mailto:masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>
> Subject: Re: [MassHistPres] demolition and 'partial demolition'
> 
> 
> 
> Chris:
> 
> 
> 
> As I understood Daniel's post, Medfield incorporated by reference the State
> Building Code ("SBC") definition of demolition and partial demolition into
> their bylaw.  The Building Commissioner and the Historical Commission must
> follow the SBC definitions, whatever they may be. It appears to me the
> Building Inspector's position is the right one if the applicable SBC
> provision does not define a partial demolition.
> 
> 
> 
> Frankly, I would suggest that the Town "uncouple" the demolition definition
> in their bylaw from the SBC. The bylaw is concerned with historic
> preservation while the SBC's primary concern is safety. Most demolition
> delay bylaws I have reviewed have not linked the definition of demolition
> with the SBC's definition. (In November 2018 Dennis De Witt posted to
> listserv a definition recently adopted in Brookline which is very good.)
> 
> 
> 
> If people disagree with my position, I would like to hear the reasons why
> linking the demolition delay bylaw definition to the SBC is a good idea. I
> have had some experience with the definition of "Historic Building" under
> the SBC and found it to be a "moving target." The SBC is linked to the
> International Existing Building Code ("EBC"). There have been several
> editions of the EBC since 2012.  The one that Massachusetts adopted (the 9th
> edition) is not available for free online. 
> 
> 
> 
> Jim O'Rourke, Chairman, Somerset Historical Commission 
> 
> 
> 
> From: MassHistPres <masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu <mailto:masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu>
> <mailto:masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu <mailto:masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu>> > On Behalf Of Skelly, Christopher
> (SEC)
> Sent: Monday, December 31, 2018 9:20 AM
> To: masshistpres at cs.umb.edu <mailto:masshistpres at cs.umb.edu> <mailto:masshistpres at cs.umb.edu <mailto:masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>>
> 
> Subject: Re: [MassHistPres] demolition and 'partial demolition'
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel, demolition delay bylaws typically have their own definition for
> demolition within the bylaw itself. It is my understanding of the Medfield
> demolition delay bylaw that it includes no definition of demolition or
> partial demolition.  
> 
> 
> 
> If your bylaw refers to partial demolition as being regulated, then I'm not
> clear how it can be entirely ignored by the building commissioner.  What is
> the current language included in your definition section of the bylaw?
> 
> 
> 
> I'd start with deciding, as the commission, what constitutes a partial
> demolition.  Discuss your definition with the building commissioner.
> Ideally, at an upcoming town meeting, your bylaw would be changed to include
> definitions for demolition and partial demolition if they aren't there now.
> In the meantime, including these definitions within your operating rules and
> regulations/rules of procedure would be a good idea.  Chris.
> 
> 
> 
> Christopher C. Skelly
> 
> Director of Local Government Programs
> 
> Massachusetts Historical Commission
> 
> <mailto:Christopher.Skelly at state.ma.us <mailto:Christopher.Skelly at state.ma.us>> Christopher.Skelly at state.maus <mailto:Christopher.Skelly at state.ma.us>
> 
>   _____  
> 
> From: MassHistPres [masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu <mailto:masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu>] on behalf of Daniel
> Bibel [dbibel at verizon.net <mailto:dbibel at verizon.net>]
> Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2018 8:07 AM
> To:  <mailto:masshistpres at cs.umb.edu <mailto:masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>> masshistpres at cs.umb.edu <mailto:masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>
> Subject: [MassHistPres] demolition and 'partial demolition'
> 
> The bylaws in the Town of Medfield (and those in a number of other
> Massachusetts' cities and towns) refer to 'demolition and partial
> demolition' as defined in the State Building Code ("SBC"). 
> 
> 
> 
> We have been informed by the current Building Commissioner in Medfield that
> the current edition of the SBC no longer has a definition for 'partial
> demolition.'  As a result, his attitude is that he will only forward to us
> applications for the total demolition of structures.
> 
> 
> 
> How are other Historical Commissions dealing with this?  A large number of
> the reviews which we have done over the past dozen years have dealt with
> major changes to the exteriors of building, but were not total demolitions.
> I would imagine this would also be true for other Historical Commissions. 
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel Bibel
> 
> co-chair, Medfield Historical Commission
> <mailto:dbibel at verizon.net <mailto:dbibel at verizon.net>> dbibel at verizon.net <mailto:dbibel at verizon.net>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MassHistPres mailing list
> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu <mailto:MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu>
> http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/listinfo/masshistpres <http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/listinfo/masshistpres>
> _______________________________________________
> MassHistPres mailing list
> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
> http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/listinfo/masshistpres

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/pipermail/masshistpres/attachments/20190107/e18e281d/attachment-0001.html>