[MassHistPres] Possible developer threat to LHDs

[Chris Skelly]

I have submitted my written testimony to the committee.  I also sent an
email directly to Senator Jo Comerford's office as well as Senator Paul
Mark - from my district.
*Chris Skelly*
*Skelly Preservation Services*
Community Planning and Preservation
www.skellypreservationservices.com
ccskelly12 at gmail.com
********************************************************************************************************************
I have just been made aware of Bill *S.1428*-An Act relative to historic
districts and commissions.

“By Ms. Comerford, a petition (accompanied by bill, Senate, No. 1428) of
Joanne M. Comerford for legislation to establish and preserve historic
districts and commissions. Municipalities and Regional Government.”


With over 25 years of historic preservation professional experience and a
deep familiarity with MGL Chapter 40C-The Historic Districts Act as well as
the typical local bylaws and ordinances related to historic preservation, I
am deeply troubled by aspects of this bill.


It appears this bill was filed without the knowledge of the Massachusetts
Historical Commission or Preservation Massachusetts, the statewide
non-profit preservation advocacy organization.


My experience over many years has demonstrated that revisions to state law
in this area are warranted.  However, the proposed bill takes a very
unfortunate approach.  What I see in this proposed bill will be ruinous to
protecting what makes the cities and towns of Massachusetts unique and
admired around the country.


I strongly believe historic preservation, increasing access to housing that
is affordable, new opportunities for growth, economic development, and
environmental sustainability are best achieved together.  I would very much
like to see revisions to state law that encourage this collaboration.  The
current bill simply causes more confusion, division and fewer opportunities
to reach shared goals.


As a historic preservation professional, I am dedicated to making sure that
our historic areas are vibrant, welcoming, adaptable and meeting the needs
of the 21st Century.  These are readily achievable goals with proper
revisions to state law.


*I urge you to oppose this current bill. *

On Fri, Jun 13, 2025 at 7:32 PM Dennis De Witt via MassHistPres <
masshistpres at cs.umb.edu> wrote:

> Scroll down to section 10 for 40c.
>
> Dennis
>
> On Jun 13, 2025, at 11:14 AM, <robert at townisp.com> <robert at townisp.com>
> wrote:
>
> All – the comments below seem to conflate *HD 4331*, which was introduced
> by Sen. Joanne Comerford (D) of Worcester, with *S1428*, which was
> introduced in the house by Rep Amy Mah Sangiolo (D) of Newton.  S1428
> definitely has impact on 40C districts, HD 4331 doesn’t seem to mention
> them.
> Is this correct?
>
>
> *Robert Mahowald*
> Chair, Dartmouth Historical Commission
> robert at townisp.com
> 978-971-1801
>
> *From:* MassHistPres <masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu> *On Behalf Of *Dennis
> De Witt via MassHistPres
> *Sent:* Friday, June 13, 2025 9:20 AM
> *To:* Eric Dray <ericedray at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* MHC MHC listserve <masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>
> *Subject:* Re: [MassHistPres] Possible developer threat to LHDs
>
> I believe It does not automatically extend Demo Delay to every
> municipality.  Rather, it may negate all existing demo delay by-laws and
> require that any place that wanted demo delay would have to adopt the form
> in the bill, essentially without modification, just as is the case with
> LHDs under 40c.  This would definitely be a major regression for places
> that have more refined laws — perhaps not so much for others.
>
> It would be a disaster for 40c in all cases.
>
> Dennis De Witt
> Brookline
>
>
>
> On Jun 12, 2025, at 6:20 PM, Eric Dray <ericedray at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Frank and Sarah. This bill is really bad, and kind of odd.
> On the one hand, it would extend demo delay to every town or city with an
> historical commission, which is essentially every town and city (hard to
> imagine the builder class would want that)
> But then, it also extends the demo delay policy into the chapter 40C
> process. This would mean that the ability for 40C districts to prevent
> demolition outright would be substituted with demo delay. That would be a
> terrible, frankly unthinkable, consequence for 40C districts.
> Sarah, if I’m reading this wrong, let me know. And if I’m not, we need to
> sound the alarm.
> Eric
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> On Jun 12, 2025, at 4:24 PM, Dennis De Witt via MassHistPres <
> masshistpres at cs.umb.edu> wrote:
>
> It was introduced in the house by Rep Amy Mah Sangiolo (D) of Newton.
>
>
> On Jun 12, 2025, at 10:51 AM, Sullivan, Charles M. <
> csullivan at cambridgema.gov> wrote:
>
> The House designation for this bill is HD 4331.
>
> ___________________________
> Charles Sullivan, Executive Director
> Cambridge Historical Commission
> 831 Massachusetts Avenue
> Cambridge, Mass.  02139
> 617 349-4684
>
>
> *From:* MassHistPres <masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu> *On Behalf Of *Dennis
> De Witt via MassHistPres
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 11, 2025 10:39 PM
> *To:* MHC MHC listserve <masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>
> *Subject:* [MassHistPres] Possible developer threat to LHDs
>
> You should urgently be aware of S1428 a Senate bill that has been
> introduced in the Legislature, with an identical House counterpart (I don’t
> have its number).  See https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/S1428
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/malegislature.gov/Bills/194/S1428__;!!GolgDdAAPFHvrrz0!dX4iYk9y0jhxEVc5Nb2Bid6DSlM_3a-nK8fp5kNAadkVRp3Fw2UnyN5BQTFC2JML_Nv3gqAgUdwetknPaEDDKEw0nOKW4zdk$>
>
> I have just quickly scanned it, but it seems to have at least two
> purposes:
>
> 1) Create a standard MGL format for Demolition Delay bylaws that would
> have to be adopted under MGL40 Section 8D (Historical Commissions), rather
> than by home rule.  It does allow 12-24 month delays, so the devil very
> much may be in the details.  (And would it trump home rule by-laws?)
>
> 2) Amend MGL4Oc to Introduce a similar standardized Demolition Delay
> process for properties in LHDs — i.e. eliminating the ability to prevent
> demolition in an LHD.
>
> If I read (scan) this correctly, the second section may be a major 40c
> pro-developer loophole for which the first section may be a fig-leaf (he
> said, mixing his metaphors).
>
> It was introduced by Sen. Joanne Comerford (D), representing Hampshire,
> Worcester & Franklin.  I do not see any cosponsors.
>
> Dennis De Witt
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> MassHistPres mailing list
> MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
> https://mailman.cs.umb.edu/listinfo/masshistpres
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20250614/f4955a9d/attachment-0001.html>