Newton Forum, that other blog to which I contribute, has an interesting post by Kathleen Kouril-Grieser that speaks to the advantages of creating Local Historic Districts. I know Newton Highlands is working on one and Waban is thinking about it. I think Newton Corner may also be considering the same. I know nothing about the movement, and I call it a movement, because it seems that the idea is spreading through the City’s Villages. Why, and why now? I’m certain it involves restricting one’s property rights somewhat, but what does that restriction buy? Does it save houses in a district from demolition? Does it increase property values? From what I can tell, it doesn’t insulate a property from a 40B Comprehensive Permit. Do developers hate it? Can they work within its restrictions, make some money and provide at least some affordable housing? How will Historic Districts affect any new zoning code that the Council proposes in Phase 2? I know this topic is controversial, but I really hope we can have a constructive discussion here and all of us learn something. (I know the NVA is having one of their Speaker Series devoted to this subject on Sunday from 1-2:30pm at the Windsor Club in Waban and that it is open to the public.)
Local Historical Districts Bloom in May
by Lisa Parlagreco | May 12, 2016 | Newton | 44 comments
As I understand the rationale, it adds some level of review and approval for any exterior changes to properties by a board of historic commissioners within the district. I don’t think it protects against 40B or a change in use of a building but can slow down demolitions and moderate the impact of building additions. There have been some recent instances of “undesirable” property improvements in the Highlands that prompted the Area Council to embark on forming a Historic District.
So perhaps we should just call it the blog which strongly reflects NVA viewpoints?
Hopefully historic districts represent common ground, as I reject the assertion that everyone is either in a snow globe or behind a bulldozer.
Or the blog of choice for the NVA, its political candidates and their disciples?
Adam: unnecessary sniping…I repeat, I am not an NVA member. I believe in communication that is informative. I would genuinely like to know what the advantages and disadvantages of Historic Districts are. Do developers hate them? Do they deter all affordable housing? Do they raise/lower housing prices? I’m trying to follow the money in understanding the motivations here. I am trying to understand the barriers to the rights of residents inside these districts. I am trying to see the advantages of living inside one. I hope some bloggers here who live in an Historic District will speak up and relate their views. Maybe Kathleen is 100% correct that all Newton should be an Historic District…maybe not…let’s think and talk about it out loud here.
Not sniping, Sallee, just calling it as I see it, and certainly not suggesting that you don’t have your own opinions! I’d like to understand the tradeoffs of historic districts also.
Is this suggestive that all one needs to do is get a bunch of folks in an area to just declare themselves a historic district? I’ve always assumed that such a designation has some real meaning. What criteria gets applied?
I’m familiar with some folks in Newton who haven’t liked the restrictions on what they can do to their home.
@Dan, There is a process that requires a high level of information to affected residents, though not everyone will read the paper mail until after something gets established. The AC has been working on this process for over a year and has an estimate of $21,000 to document the houses within the district. So, No, it is not a few people talking over coffee and you end up with a District.
What is this preoccupation on the part of some of the people on this blog to try to label people who comment on another blog (NewtonForum). Seems kind of strange, not to mention unnecessary. As far as I can see, there is no membership required to any group in order to comment on that blog.
@Neal Fleisher – Ironically, it is a lesson out of Donald Trump playbook. If you cant defeat on ideas, defeat them by calling names. Little Marco, Cranky Hillary, NVA blog…
Sallee, the post you are referencing does indeed reflect the “keep Newton the same” attitude of the NVA even ending with “it seems like he had a really good idea [to declare all of Newton an historic district] as you point out in your post. When you use that as your premise for starting a discussion on V14 while wondering if it’s conclusions are true, you open up a broader conversation that includes the biases of the forum and its participants. I see you haven’t posted these questions in the comments there.
As for the Local Historic Districts, I hope they are not as restrictive as painted in that post. It is certainly a topic that needs discussion here. I don’t know the answers to most of your questions but am quite interested in learning about them.
I agree with you, Neal. I don’t understand why bloggers here find it necessary to “call names”, attempting to diminish the legitimacy of opinions that are different from theirs. If Kathleen said something that offended on Newton Forum, why not ask her a clarifying question and answer with a differing opinion if desired. You are invited to write a comment on that blog, if you think the subject warrants it. People who disagree, even in basic assumptions, should not be snidely tarred by a broad brush and covered in sand thrown out to obfuscate conversation.
PLEASE: let’s cut out the nastiness. It won’t sell any more papers and it will slow down the flow of real information. I could give this blog clever, biting names, if I wanted to. What would that accomplish, other than to present myself, in that case,as a clever jerk?
Marti: I want to hear a lot of opinions and information from people who have experienced the Historic District process. I think there may be a greater chance here, since Newton Forum is so new. The fact that I referenced Kathleen’s article is based on the fact that I think the topic needs airing, discussing and learning, all of which I am trying to do. That’s why I wish we could focus on the meat of my post: What, exactly, does an Historic District offer? Is it useful? For what purpose? Does it mean nothing ever can be changed? Any readers out there with legal experience on this subject who can illuminate? If you’re in one, do you love it or hate it? Why? I would ask that we not use hearsay (I heard that…), but real experiences of those who have walked the walk.
Like Sallie, I don’t know a lot bout the historic district process, but i would worry if it not democratically determined from all within the proposed district to the majority want that result. Lso that the historic commission has a solid set of criteria, and the city council as well.
I must say if the hidden agenda is getting historic districts through so as to hinder development where it is helpful then I’d be opposed.
Here is a guide from the Massachusetts Historic Commission on establishing Local Historic Districts. It is a good place to start learning about them.
Dan, although consent of all of the property owners in a proposed local historic district is not required, a strong consensus that this is something desirable makes it much more likely that the City Council would approve it. The purpose of a historic district is preservation of historic resources, not the prevention of development. If that is a hidden agenda, then it is not going to work and would actually be counterproductive.
Sallee, the above guide should answer some if not all of your questions. Please note that the local historic district commission can review any changes that are visible from a public way. I know you live on a corner lot, so any changes or additions you might want to make would have to go through the commission if you were in a local historic district.
I live in an Historic District. In general I think it has been a good thing and without it I suspect much of what I most like about my neighborhood might have been lost over the last 20 years.
That being said, it does come at a price. Any visible external change must be approved by the Historic Commission. That can involve a somewhat annoying delay and some extra work especially for smaller jobs. My experience is that, by necessity, the workings of a historic commission are much more subjective than I like from a government regulator. I wince everytime I hear the words “what I’d like to see” from a commissioners mouth.
Also at times I think they overreach a bit. Most notably, around the corner from me they insisted that the internal frame of a historic house be preserved, though obviously that frame would not be visible once the work was completed. The project dragged on way longer than it should have and no doubt drove the price of the project up substantially.
All that said, Upper Falls,would no longer be Upper Falls without the historic commission.
Thanks Ted and Jerry. That’s exactly the kind of info I’m looking for. I hope others will read and write on this, too, especially since there seems to be so much interest in the process. Whether it’s the whirlwind of change that some might see looming in new zoning regs, a desire for stability or a genuine appreciation of the historic perspective, the move toward Historic Districts should be thoroughly vetted out loud.
uh-oh; isn’t that Jerry Reilly and Ted Hess-Mahan of the Newton Village Alliance Blog; I mean “Or the blog of choice for the NVA, its political candidates and their disciples?”
Hmm, how do you tell them apart from the NVA, Greg and Adam; or do you?
@Ted, so now there is some evidence that there may in fact be a hidden agenda [stop all development at all costs] I’d hope the council would be vigilant about that.
Here’s my experience with selling properties in a historic district:
The good news: the end result was wonderful. Two preserved houses, wonderful neighbors. All good.
The other side of the story: a local church owned two houses in such serious disrepair that no one could live in them. The church didn’t have the resources to renovate them so they wanted to remove the houses and turn the property into a small parklike area – a very nice addition to the neighborhood. But the historic commission refused to allow the houses to be taken down, so the church had to sell them. However, they were in such disrepair that the only people who could afford to buy them were developers, and not many developers are interested in this kind of project. In fact, it took two years to find a developer interested in this project. And guess who was in charge of dealing with this whole situation? My husband! As it turns out, he was retired and had the time to deal with it, but I’d estimate he spent several hundred hours getting from Point A to Point Z.
My three take aways from this experience: first, historic districts can be a wonderful addition to a neighborhood; second, you want to make sure you don’t burden individual home owners, often senior citizens, with the prospect of not being able to sell their homes in a timely manner; third, people who are on historic commissions have a very focused vision that often doesn’t consider the lives of real people.
A few things:
I’ll start with the least important. The NVA is an organization. It seems popular among a significant group of folks in Newton. It also seems to me to be active, having speaker series and generally trying to convince the population of its point of view. Good for the NVA. Really. I don’t agree with them on some issues, I sort of agree on others, and I share their view on a few things as well. The NVA tends to come at things with a certain mindset, and they don’t, to me at least, want to debate that mindset. The only invite speakers that agree with their mindset, albeit often times certainly experts in the issue at hand that agree with that mindset. My personal take is that those sessions would have been great as a discussion/friendly debate, but that is not have they’ve chosen to do it. I’m sure the folks who are part of the NVA are proud of what they are doing, and think it is in the best interests of Newton.
And I see the obvious connections between the Newton Forum and the NVA. Do I think the NVA runs the Forum? No. Do I care if they do? No. Couldn’t give two bits about it.
But Sallee, it does kind of surprise me that you view any mention of the Forum as connected to the NVA as “nastiness”, that the folks here are “clever jerks”. I read all the comments twice in this thread. At worst there was a digression to discussing the NVA/Forum connection. So what? There are lots of random digressions in any blog. But nastiness? Marti/Adam/Greg are clever jerks for the digression? Neil, this isn’t Donald Trump tactics, Greg has gone out of his way multiple times to publicize the forum, I only learned about it FROM THIS BLOG. This blog points out interesting topics. The Forum is an interesting topic. I learned about facebook ads, learned more about Chris Pitts, learned the forum existed, and now I occasionally read it…
There seems to be a theme among many folks (not just this thread, not just NVA, folks on both sides) to confuse vigorous debate with nastiness, with bullying. I’ve been bullied in my life at various points, it was distinguished by the fact that it made no sense, and was an expression of power or brute force (either verbally or physically). Crying wolf diminishes the true thing. I contrast that with being challenged on an issue, to being asked to defend my positions. You don’t agree that the NVA is connected with the Forum? Fine. You responded, you had Chris post a good post at the Forum. If Greg/Adam/Marti disagree and continue to call it the NVA blog? So be it. But that is a far cry from nastiness, they aren’t jerks, and this blog certainly isn’t Trump-like. If you or the Forum can’t handle even that little difference of opinion, my personal opinion is that you’ll have a hard time convincing the wider public in the open marketplace of ideas. And isn’t that your goal, to discuss things among a wider community, to make connections, to convince others of your opinions?
Ok, enough said. My next post will be on Historic districts.
I’m curious if anyone here knows how Historic Districts and 40B interact. Kathleen Kouril-Grieser’s column seemed to imply that Historic Districts are a way to stop or slow a 40B project.
I know that 40B can overrule many of a town’s zoning regulations. Can 40B also trump Historic District regulations?
In any case, that seems like the worse possible reason to create a Historic District.
@Neal Fleisher – Please give it a rest. Greg has already said he will stop calling it the NVA blog.
Now do you have anything to contribute about Historic Districts?
So, historic districts. First, I know a bit about this topic. I think they can work. But it really depends on honesty, the community and the map. Let me discuss why below.
It is important to distinguish between a National Historic District and a Local Historic District. National Historic Districts have no enforcement capacity, but come with benefits on tax incentives that can be great for village centers and main streets. Local Historic Districts have some enforcement power, Ted’s post above is generally a good point for anyone thinking about a local district.
Let me also say I support what those local historic districts are trying to do. It is easy to lose the soul of neighborhood one demolition at a time. And who doesn’t hate snout houses? And a local historic district can help prevent some of the harsher abuses and effects of a hot real estate market.
But even as a supporter I am honest about the costs as well. And that is the key with these types of districts. The folks trying to put it together need to be honest. You can’t overpromise what it will do. You can’t under describe the loss of rights (and there is some loss of rights). You have to acknowledge that it doesn’t just block the harsher abuses, it can do more than that, and some folks may not like that. What do you say to the young couple with a smaller house who has twins? All of my neighbors have added additions to their homes with the exception of 2 or three homes, including mine. Are additions ok? Do you take into account family situations? Additions can often be seen from the street. Does a tasteful addition that ruins the historic lines of a colonial meet with a denial? How about putting on a new porch? A fence for a new dog? New windows to take into account energy issues? A new air conditioning unit? Solar Panels? Paint? Do slate roofs need to be maintained despite the costs? How about a free standing garage that is falling down? How about a non-preservation house that is being rehabbed again? Can the commission force retroactive compliance? If folks are honest, it isn’t about snot houses and demolitions alone. All of the above issues can be touched on in a Local Historic District.
Community. The 2/3 of the city council needs to approve. But it has to have the backing of a large majority of the community. IT MUST. As much as I wish I could snap my fingers and make everyone believe is preservation as a means onto itself, I can’t. And sometimes the LHD just doesn’t work. And community is important in another way. The Local District Commission is incredibly key. And who is on that committee, and their ability to be fair and have perspective is important. These types of decisions are going to be difficult, especially where the petitioner has a legitimate reason to make a change. For safety. For energy efficiency. For Family reasons. The demolitions and the snout homes are the easy decisions. I’ve seen some amazingly dedicated LHDCs, and some truly power-mad ones. And it many areas, especially ones with long established local historic districts, the true believer preservationists tend to volunteer, and at times that creates incredible tension between the needs of preservation and the needs of the practical. Again the easy choices are the easy choices. The community who creates a new district is making a leap of faith that the commission is, and continues to be, fair. It works in dozens and dozens of districts. But there are inevitable tensions.
And this is why the map matters. To big a map, and the district collapses under its own weight. Certain streets will be largely opposed. That street should not be included. You can’t save every house. It isn’t appropriate for all of Newton. Drawing the map of the district in a thoughtful way is key.
I’ll note one other thing. The folks that push these types of districts tend to live in historic homes. Shocking, right? But they generally moved into that home with the historic nature being part and parcel of the decision. Many folks just moved to a historic neighborhood with the idea that it was a nice home. Many others have lived for decades with a neighborhood and want to sell and not be burdened by the district. So the folks who feel the burden are rarely the same folks that push the district. It just is what it is. That doesn’t mean the district is wrong for a community. It does mean that everyone should acknowledge that every homeowner will not be equally burdened, and that the potential losses or gains in value won’t hit everyone equally.
Jerry:
I cribbed this, so I haven’t checked it.
“On an appeal of a related declaratory judgment action, the Supreme Judicial Court held that the Historic District Committee of the town of Dennis was a “local board” pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws chapter 40B, section 21, and thus the applicant was not required to file a separate application with that Historic District Committee. Dennis Hous. Corp. v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Dennis, 439 Mass. 71, 83 (2003)”
I believe this means that at least one court has said that 40B applicants are not required to file a separate application to historic district committees. 40B isn’t a complete carte blanche though, and I don’t think it is as simple as 40B trumps historic district. But 40B is designed to be difficult to stop or slow in such a manner.
I do agree that creating a historic district to block a 40B feels like a bad idea to me. I’d like to think of the historic district as a positive force, not a defensive one.
One other lesser known detail of (at least our) Historic District. Upper Falls as a mill village was built in the 1800’s . When people think about protecting the neighborhood’s history, that’s primarily what they’Re thinking about.
In our district, any house,within the district that is more than 50 years old comes under Historic District jurisdiction. This leads,to the,rather bizarre scenario that if you live in a house that was built in 1960 amongst all these 1800 era houses, the commission must consider any alterations,to your house in regards to its 1960s historical context.
fig, excellent analysis. Well done.
Jerry, fig is correct. A local historic district does not trump Chapter 40B.
Our house is not in a historic district, but when we did renovations to our 1920’s Colonial-ish home, we still had to apply to the (city-wide) Historical Commission for approval. The building permit said this was necessary for any home in Newton over 50 years old, and the commission generally seems to be concerned only with changes visible from the street view, with an emphasis on window styles (may apply to window replacement jobs, also) I’ve since come to really appreciate the architectural detail of even a simple 1920’s colonial relative to modern construction.
@Jerry- great to hear, but where does Greg say he will stop making those comments, and where did his comment go?
Shouldn’t there be a note that a comment was removed?
Don’t look at me as the one who took this off topic, just not correct.
@fignewtonville- trying to associate people with groups should be up to the individual to announce , not others to surmise.
@ Jerry Rielly,
Indeed the 1960s house is apart of its historical context. All houses in a LHD irrespective of age (50 years or 10 ) are subject to review for changes. The idea is to keep a structure true to its original character. Generally the idea is to keep individual owners from building idiosyncratic additions inconsistent with the historic nature of the original structure.
The LHD does have teeth as well. Owners who do not comply with a LHD finding, or alter plans that are inconsistent with LHD rulings/agreements can be denied occupancy permits. It has been my experience, having served 24 years on the Chestnut Hill LHD ( until last year ) that the handful of appeals to a higher court over that period were all denied. Having found that the Commission did not act capriciously or outside their authority.
Also over that 24 year period there have been only no more than 4 or 5 total demolitions allowed in the district .
It has been my opinion not shared by all of my fellow membership, that new construction be of its time,.. ie “contemporary design”, and not a copy of one or another historical model. ( Colonial, gothic revival, French provincial, etc ).
In general I would say that the Chestnut Hill LHD has thrived given all the free advice, consultation, education, coercion, encouragement,etc that I had witnessed there and it’s much the better for it. Neighbors are happy with work that has gone on around them,.. Especially given that generally it has not diminished the value of their own property.
@blueprintbill –
Yes, as i said – rather bizarre
Neal:
I’ve enjoyed reading many of the posts on the Forum blog. I read through it again last night. There are a lot of unique posts not related to NVA, on Faith, poverty etc. So calling it the NVA blog isn’t accurate. But there are certainly lots of connections between the two entities. I’d call them sister organizations, separate, but with a lot of the same views/positions/members or supporters. NVA and the Forum both oppose the charter commissions proposal, support historic districts, are against the HUD process in local affairs, share views on increased density and teardowns, etc. So while calling it the NVA blog might be technically inaccurate, I can understand the shorthand. I called this blog the “old tab blog” for a while until it formed its own identity. Greg and Gail no longer worked at the Tab. Still kinda accurate for a long while until it got its own voice. Anyway, you and Sallee are free to be offended, but really over time the Forum can develop its own audience, and perhaps gain additional separation from the NVA. Having some posters with opposing viewpoints might help a bit… But again, not quite sure any of this rises past the level of annoyance. Feel free to call this Greg’s Blog, the Tab’s Blog, Ted and Emily’s Snipefest Blog, Figgy’s pontification blog, pro-development blog, Everyone Loves Jerry Blog, etc. At one point it was a biking blog, Sean used to post 10 times a day on bike issues.
Blue:
Good post, that. I think there is one difference that I see between older Historic Districts and newly proposed ones. Real estate in Newton back when the Chestnut Hill district was formed was far less heated. Teardowns happened at a much lower rate, economic loss from a district was far less. Anyone buying in your district knew what they were signing up for, and I’d guess it somewhat became self selecting through the years. Folks looking to tear down didn’t buy, but folks looking to buy knew they’d have problems with additions, teardowns, etc. And while all those appeals were denied, the fact that they exist reemphasizes the give and take of these districts. The community wins preservation, the local homeowner may love that, or they may end up hating it. It depends on what home we are talking about. The large beautiful historic home gets perserved and gets to live in a historic environment. The smaller home ripe for an addition never gets improved. The very nature of the district creates some winners and losers. You clearly feel it worked, and you have the perspective from a member of the committee. So preservation wise, clearly they work once instituted. But individual homeowners in your district might not feel the same way.
There is also a balancing act here. My neighborhood has had dozens of additions the past 5 years. Some are historic or not see from the street. Most are side by side additions over a porch. In almost every case, the owners chose to add to the house because they loved the neighborhood and didn’t want to move. My current community is intact because of that flexibility. I also don’t love all of the additions. Some of them, to quote a dear friend, are “Fugly”. Most are not, and just blend in. We’ve also had a few teardowns, and I expect a few more.
All I’m saying is that in an area like Newton at this stage of its development, a district is a tough call. And it very much depends on the current housing stock and owner base. And it very much depends on the folks on the commission. Some districts allow tasteful additions. Some say no changes, not ever.
And Jerry, what you point out about a 1950’s home is exactly the difference between a National Park Service historic district and a local historic district. the National one requires buildings be contributing to the district to get any benefits. A local historic district doesn’t distinguish. The home from the 1980s with the ugly facade needs to be preserved too. It is the weakest part of the program in my opinion. But then again, some folks love 1950s homes too. Believe it or not, ranch homes in certain locations are deemed historic…
@Blueprintbill: You said: “It has been my opinion not shared by all of my fellow membership, that new construction be of its time,.. ie “contemporary design”, and not a copy of one or another historical model. ( Colonial, gothic revival, French provincial, etc ).”
I find that statement fascinating…how the heck do you define “contemporary design” and doesn’t that profoundly conflict with the preservation of the predominant historical period homes within the District?
And thanks to all who are posting here about the nuts and bolts of Local Historic Districts. I am learning a lot!
Sallee:
So this is sort of where the rubber meets the road. There are lots of homes within any district that actually aren’t historic. Should we care if the 1970s ranch is torn down to make way for a large colonial? I certainly care if the 1875 colonial is torn down, but I’m not a fan of 1970s homes. How about the home near me which is ultra modern? It kinda sticks out, but it is funky and kinda cool and energy efficient. The home it tore down wasn’t historic but it fit the neighborhood.
I guess I leave folks with this, if the purpose of a historic district is to prevent 40Bs it won’t work, but most residential streets are in no danger of a 40B. If the purpose is to prevent teardowns it might work. But it is like a fishing net, it also catches all sorts of other changes.
I once made a small change to the outside of my house. One neighbor was thrilled, kept telling me how it was perfect and appropriate. Another neighbor came by and asked me to repaint it. Beauty is often in the eye of the beholder. But with a historic district, it is also in the eye of your neighbors. You get collective protection AND collective authority.
By the way Sallee, you can also call the MHC directly and inquire about these districts, but there is usually a head of each district on the ground level who knows an insane amount. Sounds like Blue did that for quite some time. It is never an issue in finding examples, just whether or not it is appropriate for the area.
I was one of the original “instigators” of the proposed Newton Highlands Neighborhood Local Historic District (LHD) so my comments may add some value to this discussion. This has been a great discussion and I want to thank Sallee for getting the ball rolling. There is hardly a comment or suggestion from all those that posted that hasn’t gone through our heads or been discussed at our regular monthly Area Council meeting, or in a special planning subcommittee that was set up to determine the feasibility of moving forward with a Local Historic District in the Highlands.
I have to be frank, however, and tell you that very few of the issues raised here were going through my head when I first raised an informal proposal for an LHD for Newton Highlands at one of our Area Council meetings.
I was born in Newton Highlands in 1937 and have lived in the house I was born in for all but 35 of those years. I know that many of you feel the joy we have experienced over the year when we take our of town visitors on a tour of Newton Highlands. The stores on Lincoln Street are always a major attraction, but what really grabs their attention is the presence of so many grand and preserved Victorian, Queen Anne style houses and other classical and not so classical design homes that dominate so much of our village. I walked these streets as a kid and I still walk them regularly. The same spirit and the same sense of place are still there and I can’t say that for a lot of other areas in Newton.
There are almost no tall fences that separate residents from the rest of the community here. It’s a very welcoming place. The warm and varied charm of the houses and the friendly and open reception I receive from all the residents is essentially the same now as it was in the 1940’s when I attended Hyde School. And a lot of them actually have time to talk. There’s a sense that I own a part of all this even though I don’t own a house within the proposed LHD and I feel this most strongly when I’m showing outsiders the main and back streets of the Highlands.
I didn’t want to make this so long, but I wanted to make certain that everyone understood that neither I nor anyone else involved in this particular project has ever once thought of this as a vehicle to exclude people from living here. We talk about preserving the “physical character” of the most historically significant portions of our village, not of “preserving the character” in terms of the any particular group.
I may come back to this later, but I’m dead tired from sailing and want to hit the rack.
@Fignewtonville, Ted and Blueprint Bill. You have done a masterful job of clarifying just how complex, challenging and even tedious this process is to complete.
And Jerry. You are absolutely right. Your house probably would have been razed before you and Marie had a chance to move here. That would have been a big loss for all of us.
I wish we could do more to protect trees within LDH’s.
I meant to add that three developments in Newton Highlands over the past 25 years were instrumental in turning my attention to historic preservation because I was conscious of them growing up here. These included the destruction of a beautiful 2nd Empire house with a mansard roof, the removal of one of Newton’s largest Copper Beech trees for no apparent reason and the hideous remodeling of the front of one house in a prominent location near the village center. I know there was deep concern about the two houses at the time they were destroyed or altered and I’d bet that most residents in the proposed LHD wish these events never happened. We couldn’t have done anything about the tree, but at least we can be sensitive to what trees contribute to the overall “physical character” of the village. The loss of elms, chestnuts and large sugar maples has been as devastating to the Highlands as elsewhere and Julia Malakie can attest to just how slow the rebuilding process is.
Bob, I agree with you on the trees. Julia and I share a common purposes on that issue. I think that considering the age of our treescape, Newton needs to invest major resources in planting trees around our city just to hit replacement level.
One of my friends recently showed me a redone historic village center before and after photo. The buildings looked terrific, but the village had lost its charm. Over the 10 years between the two photos, all of the city trees had been cut down for a utility project. New trees didn’t take. The benches and the sitting areas were now empty. They compensated by adding street level patios for the restaurants, but again, the charm was gone. Trees make a huge difference.
Is there any type of accountability for the decisions made by those on a Local Historic Commission that dissuades overreach? Several commenters have mentioned types of overreach and the necessity of having commissioners honestly follow the rules.
How do people become commissioners? I have read that they are appointed by the mayor and that 2 long time Chestnut Hill LHC commissioners were not reappointed because they were not allowing things not covered by the LHC or on the other side, not following the mayor’s agenda.
Is the LHC’s decision final or can it be challenged?
The Newton website says that LHC’s have the same rights and responsibilities as the Newton Historic Commission but on the individual pages of the 3 current LHC’s there are different rules for each with Chestnut Hill’s being the most restrictive. Could someone explain the difference? Why are storm windows, paint color, etc. not restricted in the NHC but are in some LHC’s.
Once an historic district commision is formed, is it retroactive or do the new restrictions apply to new owners? Can a current owner refuse to be a part of the district? Are home buyers required to be notified of the specific restrictions to the property?
The proposed LHC in the Highlands is very large and includes some, to me, questionable areas. Are proposals accepted or denied as is or are there ways to change the coverage before the decision is made?
@Marti Bowen – In regards to your questions .. here’s what I (think) I know on a few of them.
Commissioners are appointed and they typically include people with special areas of expertise (e.g. architects) as well as at least one just general interested citizen from the district.
>> Once an historic district commision is formed, is it retroactive or do the new restrictions apply to new owners?
When a new district is formed EVERYTHING is immediately “grandfathered” in – i.e. the commission can’t require changes of anything that already exists. Their jurisdiction only comes into play when a homeowner wishes to make changes to their property that will be visible form the street. Any project that will change the property in a visible way is supposed to be reviewed by the LHC before the homeowner can proceed.
>>Can a current owner refuse to be a part of the district? No, not once the district is created.
Thanks Jerry.
How does the historic district” territory get defined? Can individual streets somehow opt out of whatever the LHC petitioner is trying to circumscribe?
@Dan Fahey – There’s no hard-and-fast rules as I understand it. Whoever is proposing such a district puts together a proposed map and (if they have any sense) starts talking to homeowners. The idea is that you want to draw the map wide enough to enclose the most important and significant historic structures in the neighborhood but not wide enough that you’re including lots of people who don’t want to be included.
Whether or not the district ultimately gets approved will in large part be based on how much homeowner support their is within the proposed district and how much the district does in-fact include historically significant buildings.
I think that between the time someone first has an idea to the time that there is an actual vote on it there is typically some fine tuning of the borders of the district to take these things into account.
Under Chapter 40C of the Massachusetts General Laws, which covers the establishment and operations of local historic district commissions, the decisions of local historic district commissions can be appealed to the regional planning organization that covers the community in question. Newton is in the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Area Planning Council, and some decisions of historic district commissions in the city have been appealed to the MAPC.
Councilor Brian Yates