This is a printer-friendly version of an article from Zip06.com.
09/20/2017 08:15 AMA draft of a demolition-delay ordinance went before the Board of Selectmen (BOS) for discussion at the Sept. 12, the second of what will be at least three times the BOS will have reviewed the issue. An earlier draft rule that the BOS in March 2017 agreed to send to Town Meeting was never scheduled for Town Meeting consideration, primarily due to concerns about how the public would be notified of demolition actions.
First Selectman Carl Fortuna, Jr., said he consulted with Mark Branse, the attorney for town land use boards, to improve the draft. Branse is responsible for assisting the Planning Commission in drafting the ordinance language.
Fortuna explained the biggest changes were to “modernize” the prior draft’s requirements for public notice of a request for a historic structure demolition. The revised draft would allow a public notice to be posted on the town’s website instead of in a print newspaper. Also, the prior stipulation that the Notice of Intent to Demolish be sent to interested parties by certified mail was also dropped in favor of email notification.
“The [new language] would substitute an email blast for [notice by] certified mail,” said Fortuna.
The language concerning the posting of a sign in front of structure proposed for demolition was also changed. The original language said the sign’s dimensions had to be 36” by 48” and required the building official to post the sign in front of the property. The new draft requires the applicant to obtain a demo notification sign from the building official and post it at his or her property.
One goal of this approach would to be standardize the notice signs and ensure that they remain standing when placed in front of a property proposed for demolition. Fortuna suggested the Building Department could have about 10 standard signs made of a durable material like foam-core board. These notice signs could then be given to any property owner filing a Notice of Intent to Demolish to post at their property.
“Any other changes were to standardize the language,” said Fortuna. “The [demo delay] ordinance should be seeking to protect the historic character of the town. But we should [also] the protect property rights of owners.”
If the Town Meeting were to adopt the ordinance, Fortuna said he would ask the building official to suggest a fee to cover the town’s costs for the demolition process oversight.
Selectman Scott Giegerich and Selectman Carol Conklin both offered their support for the changes Fortuna described.
Fortuna then committed to prepare a clean copy of the draft ordinance and bring it back to the selectmen at the board’s next meeting for discussion and possible action.
Resident Tedd Levy, active in the Old Saybrook Historical Society, cautioned then that the BOS already had approved on March 28, 2017 a draft demo delay ordinance to send to Town Meeting. He asked Fortuna to consult with the town attorney about whether the earlier motion to approve the earlier demo delay ordinance to send to Town Meeting would need to be rescinded and a new motion forwarding the new draft approved.
Ordinance Elements
In the draft ordinance’s Title and Purpose section, it states that the Connecticut General Statutes Section 29-406 authorizes municipalities to approve a waiting period before granting any permit for the demolition of any building, structure, or part thereof: “Under this chapter, the town shall impose a waiting period of 120 days before granting a permit for the demolition of any building or structure that is designated as a significant building according to the definitions in Section 3.”
During discussions before the BOS and the Planning Commission, some board members and members of the public asked if a shorter delay period such as 90 days should be considered.
As described in the ordinance, the goal of the demo delay is to set a time period “during which the owner of a significant historic building or structure shall consider any viable alternatives to demolition, including preservation, restoration, rehabilitation, relocation, or detailed recordation.”
Even if adopted, the demo delay ordinance would not prevent the demolition of a historic structure, it would merely provide more time for those seeking to preserve or restore the historic structure to pursue strategies and funding options to do so.