[MassHistPres] S.993: another poison pill

[Dennis De Witt]

There has been relatively little comment on the listserve about this proposal to weaken 40c vs comments about the prior bill, whose sponsor has now said it is dead.  

This bill could be as much an LHD poison pill to the integrity of some LHDs as that one — depending on the age mix of their inventories.  Think, for instance, of towns with many mid-century houses.   As has been pointed out, there are a lot of technical questions about the cut off date (125 years and counting), the so-called reasonable profit, and the unconventional terminology.

For instance, given the statewide ADU legislation, developers can add ADUs to residential buildings in LHDs.  This bill would then automatically open up a huge design review loophole for such projects that qualify by age.

Has anyone reached out to the committee or their own legislators about it?

Dennis De Witt
Brookline

> On Jun 27, 2025, at 10:23 AM, Jared Eigerman via MassHistPres <masshistpres at cs.umb.edu> wrote:
> 
> I'm sorry to butt in, again, but here is how lawyers, and so courts, will read Section 6 of this bill :
>    1. If an application would result in the "creat[ion]" of even just one residential unit (affordable or not) and the historic resource at issue was built on after January 1, 1900, the commission must approve that application, no matter what any other state or local law provides.  Full stop.
>    2. In the certificate approving an application like that, so long as the application is for a project that is "primarily residential in nature," the commission is forbidden to add any conditions of approval that would "render [the] project ... unable to realize a reasonable financial return in construction or operation of said housing."
> 
> Unless a specific agency of the state is authorized to write regulations to flesh out this change to Chapter 40C [no mention of that in the bill], key terms left to courts to figure out when reviewing challenged conditions of approval include:
>    A. "primarily residential in nature" [51% of square footage?]
>    B."reasonable financial return" [same as "reasonable return" under Chapter 40B regulations?  why not say so?]
> 
> To emphasize, these undefined terms relate to conditions of approval. The certificate itself will have already been issued automatically, so long only one residential unit is to be created and the historic resource at issue was built after January 1, 1900.
> 
> - Jared Eigerman, Nbypt., Mass.
> 
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 8:22 AM Burks, Sarah via MassHistPres <masshistpres at cs.umb.edu <mailto:masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>> wrote:
>> After reading the proposed change to 40C a few times through, it looks like it would require a historic district commission to issue a certificate for a residential project that adds one or more housing units if the structure was built on or after 1/1/1900 and would not allow a commission to place any conditions on a certificate that would prevent a “reasonable financial return in construction or operation of said housing.”
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> It’s all about profit.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>                                                                                 
>> 
>> Sarah L. Burks
>> 
>> Cambridge Historical Commission
>> 
>> 831 Massachusetts Ave., 2nd Fl.
>> 
>> Cambridge, MA 02139
>> 
>> 617-349-4687
>> 
>> sburks at cambridgema.gov <mailto:sburks at cambridgema.gov>
>> www.cambridgema.gov/historic <http://www.cambridgema.gov/historic>
>>  
>> 
>> From: MassHistPres <masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu <mailto:masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu>> On Behalf Of Jessica Rudden-Dube via MassHistPres
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2025 2:40 PM
>> To: listserve MHC MHC <MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu <mailto:MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu>>
>> Subject: [MassHistPres] S.993: An Act Accelerating Housing Production
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Preservation Massachusetts is monitoring S.993 <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/S.993__;!!GolgDdAAPFHvrrz0!bEDx_z53r0Vr_ps9vq3a85nbSegMYuewHp0wavVTxP8EE4KjUr-5p0cAxGDlrfW7icI6B7O8iB_NthkMdhF9AijIkYYDz10$> An Act Accelerating Housing Production which came up for a hearing today.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Sections 2 and 6 reference the state register and historic districts.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Written testimony can be submitted via email at meg.ribera at masenate.gov <mailto:meg.ribera at masenate.gov> or at luke.oroark at mahouse.gov <mailto:luke.oroark at mahouse.gov> or physically mailed to the House Chair:
>> 
>> Chair Richard Haggerty
>> Joint Committee on Housing
>> ATTN: Luke O'Roark
>> 24 Beacon St. Room 146
>> Boston, MA 02133
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Jessica Rudden-Dube
>> 
>> Executive Director
>> 
>> Preservation Massachusetts
>> 
>> (617)723-3383 x103
>> 
>> jruddendube at preservationmass.org <mailto:jruddendube at preservationmass.org>
>> www.preservationmass.org <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.preservationmass.org__;!!GolgDdAAPFHvrrz0!bEDx_z53r0Vr_ps9vq3a85nbSegMYuewHp0wavVTxP8EE4KjUr-5p0cAxGDlrfW7icI6B7O8iB_NthkMdhF9AijIoJKnTi0$>
>> 6 Main Street Extension, Suite 613
>> 
>> Plymouth, MA 02360
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> MassHistPres mailing list
>> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu <mailto:MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu>
>> https://mailman.cs.umb.edu/listinfo/masshistpres
> 
> 
> 
> --
> - Jared Eigerman
> jeigerman at gmail.com <mailto:jeigerman at gmail.com>_______________________________________________
> MassHistPres mailing list
> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
> https://mailman.cs.umb.edu/listinfo/masshistpres

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/pipermail/masshistpres/attachments/20250702/d02e1e9e/attachment-0001.html>