by Erika Brown
Just as the Essex received state approval for its Housing Production Plan, a potential development of a long-blighted property on Southern Avenue may give the town the chance to activate that plan. Then, in Manchester, the Planning Board is mulling a “demolition delay” bylaw to bring to voters as early as next spring to help preserve historic properties. Let’s get started …
In Essex, Housing Plan Gets Real
No sooner has the state formally approved Essex's Housing Production Plan (HPP) that town officials turned their attention to an opportunity to go from “vision” to “action,” as a potential development enters the picture.
At a joint meeting of the Board of Selectmen and Planning Board two weeks ago, residents learned that the long-vacant "Allen property" on Southern Avenue, which the town acquired through tax title and sold at auction last year, may be the site of affordable housing. According to Town Administrator Brendhan Zubricki, the purchaser left the area and is now interested in transferring the property to Beverly-based Harborlight Homes to develop what could become a 10-unit affordable housing project. Essex currently has about 40 affordable housing units, Zubricki said, so if it comes together this new project would represent a 25% boost to the town's affordable housing inventory.
The proposal, however, hinges on acquiring a small abutting slice of land owned primarily by the Woodman family.
The narrow strip—believed to be contaminated from historic use by the former Allen property owner—is needed for sufficient frontage, setbacks and site access. Without it, the project is unlikely to move forward. The developer has indicated a willingness to assume responsibility for the property's environmental remediation as part of a larger redevelopment.
Housing Production Plans lay out how a community intends to encourage housing over the next five years. Essex’s latest five-year plan is complete. Manchester is currently in the process of finalizing its own HPP.
To earn state approval, an HPP must inventory the town's existing housing, identify local needs, and recommend specific strategies for increasing housing opportunities. The state also expects communities to pursue practical initiatives, like identifying sites suitable for housing, considering zoning changes, partnering with nonprofit developers, or adopting policies that encourage affordable units in new developments. Once approved, the state allows towns to access grants and other resources to realize their goals.
In the joint PB/BOS meeting, officials also focused on creating a new “inclusionary zoning bylaw” as another major step in the HPP initiative. The new bylaw would be to require a dedicated percentage of affordable units be included in any future large residential development.
Zubricki said the Affordable Housing Trust hopes to receive technical assistance from the Metropolitan Area Planning Council to draft a bylaw tailored to Essex that would identify the ideal project size that would trigger the requirement. The idea is to strike a balance that encourages development without discouraging investment.
Several participants urged moving quickly—even if the bylaw is later refined—arguing that Essex has produced virtually no new affordable housing since 1969, more than 50 years ago, when Chebacco Terrace was built.
“This should be a major priority (for the November Town Meeting),” said the Affordable Housing Trust’s John Guerin, adding that Essex’s remaining “develop-able” lands are drawing interest right now from developers.
Stay tuned.
Historic Demo Delay
One of the more intriguing ideas beginning to emerge in Manchester is a proposal to establish a “demolition delay bylaw,” a historic preservation tool already used by about 150 or 160 Massachusetts cities and towns—nearly half the Commonwealth—to provide a "cooling-off period" before historically significant buildings can be demolished.
The idea, discussed last week in a joint meeting of the Manchester Planning Board and Manchester Historical Commission (HDC) is expected to come before the Select Board in the coming months before potentially heading to next year’s Annual Town Meeting.
The group is starting a public push to understand the idea.
Contrary to what some may assume, a demolition delay bylaw doesn’t prohibit demolition. Instead, it’s a waiting period—anywhere from six to 18 months—during which the HDC can determine whether a building is historically significant and work with the property owner to explore alternatives such as renovation, adaptive reuse, relocation, or sale to a preservation-minded buyer. If no agreement is reached, the owner ultimately retains the right to demolish the structure.
The concept of a demo delay has become one of the Commonwealth's most widely used historic preservation tools since Cambridge adopted the first ordinance in 1979. Today, communities from Hingham and Wellesley to Salem, Lexington and Concord have adopted some version of the bylaw, and the Massachusetts Historical Commission actively encourages municipalities to adopting one.
Advocates argue that the delay often provides enough time to save architecturally or historically important buildings that otherwise might be lost before alternatives can be explored.
Typically, the work of Manchester's HDC—which regulates exterior changes to homes and buildings within the town's compact downtown Historic District—draws little public attention. But in the past 18 months, the commission has found itself at the center of community frustration over the legal demolition of two properties.
The first flashpoint came when new owners of the former Cargo Unlimited building on Central Street presented plans to replace the deteriorating structure with residential townhouses. Those opposing the plan quickly faced an inconvenient truth: Manchester's zoning for the downtown actually favored residential development (allowable “by right”), while new commercial uses required special approval reserved for “non-compliant” projects.
Pressure to intervene turned to the HDC, but the commission's authority extended only to architectural design, not whether the building could be demolished.
In the end, compromise saved the day. The property owner revised designs to preserved street-level commercial space, and the Zoning Board of Appeals approved them, albeit with much discussion. Meanwhile, the controversy prompted the Planning Board to overhaul downtown zoning, which voters approved last year at Town Meeting.
Then, earlier this year, another demolition prompted a broader preservation discussion. The razing of the former Unitarian Church rectory on Masconomo Street—also entirely legal—sparked neighborhood handwringing after the property was listed for sale. The diminutive Tudor-style building lies outside the Historic District and the HDC’s authority. That meant if the building was to be preserved, it fell on finding a preservation-minded buyer, which clearly did not happen. The building was razed last month.
Those two episodes have become the backdrop for the idea of a demolition delay bylaw, and the resulting expansion of the HDC’s regulatory authority. For Manchester, where historic homes and civic buildings are a defining part of the community's character, the proposal could simply be one of many tools to save a part of history.
In the end, the devil will be in the details. What will be defined as an historic structure? Will it be about the age of a structure? Its connections to important people or events? Its location in town? Will it be about the preservation of unique historic architectures, such as Colonial homes or small post-WWII working class bungalows?
And what resources will the town bring to bear to support property owners who may want to do the right thing but are unable to surrender financial value of their real estate that may lie in another use?
All these will be ironed out over the next several months.
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here