[MassHistPres] Preferably Preserved Significant Structures

[Roughan, Michael]

Gretchen,

We actually discussed your approach but the commission members felt that, irrespective of the paperwork, once the existing barn was demolished the horse had left, so to speak. We have in our meeting notes the applicant’s promise to retain the barn cupola and ornate corbels as well as the copy of the proposed plans and elevations.

I suppose one scenario based on your suggestion, would be to institute a demo delay up until the applicant submitted the design drawings for the building permit and release the demo delay at that point. While the applicant could still modify what was built at least the building commissioner would have a record of what the historical commission determined to be an appropriate replacement design.

Thanks for your input!

….Mike

Michael Roughan, AIA, EDAC, LEED AP, ACHA

D +1.617.357.7725 M +1.617.784.6463


From: Gretchen Schuler [mailto:ggschuler126 at gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, January 7, 2019 12:55 PM
To: Roughan, Michael <Michael.Roughan at hdrinc.com>
Cc: Mass Historic List Serve (masshistpres at cs.umb.edu) <masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>
Subject: Re: [MassHistPres] Preferably Preserved Significant Structures

It sounds like the structure that was determined to be "not preferably preserved" was in fact historically significant, and you made the determination based on the replacement.  As you probably know, you have no authority since the "not preferably preserved" determination sends the applicant on to the building commissioner with no conditions.  Another way to handle such a situation is to make the determination that the structure is preferably preserved (if it is) and then discuss how you may consider waiving the 6-month delay....so that the new construction would be a condition of waiving the delay, remediation for loss of the significant structure.
Gretchen Schuler
Wayland Historic District Commission

On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 11:57 AM Roughan, Michael <Michael.Roughan at hdrinc.com<mailto:Michael.Roughan at hdrinc.com>> wrote:
Hopkinton last week had public hearings for 3 “historically significant”’ structures that the owners applied for demolition permits. For two of the structures the commission determined they were “preferably preserved” and instituted a 6-month demolition delay. The third structure was determined to not be “preferably preserved” based on the applicant submitting plans and elevations prepared by an architect indicating the barn to be demolished would be replicated in new construction. The following issues were discussed during deliberations and advice from this List Serv is requested:


1.       What precedents are there for assuring that (after determination an existing structure is not “preferably preserved”) an applicant who represents they will “replicate” a structure, actually does so?

2.       When the Commission encourages an applicant to preserve part of a structure, is it best practice not to release a ‘partial demolition’ permit until an agreement can be reached? Should the Commission insist on specific plans and elevations rather than a narrative of intent?

3.       One of the structures (1794) has significance both as a structure and for the past events / occupants of the structure. Has anyone tried to extend their demo delay time period for a project already under a demo delay? Our six month maximum demo delay has not seemed to be an impediment for developers taking 4-6 months to go through other town committees. Is a single structure historic district a viable option given the time frame? (Hopkinton Town Meeting is scheduled for May 2019)

Regards,

….Mike

Michael Roughan, AIA, EDAC, LEED AP, ACHA
Chairman - Hopkinton Historical Commission

Town of Hopkinton
18 Main Street
Hopkinton, MA 01748

D 617.357.7725 M 617.784.6463

_______________________________________________
MassHistPres mailing list
MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu<mailto: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/20190107/5a91a173/attachment-0001.html>