Category Archives: Local Historic District (LHD)

A Local Historic District (LHD) is a specifically-designated area deemed historically or architecturally significant that is protected by ordinance from changes that would negatively impact that area’s historic character.

Fines and Newburyport’s Local Historic District (LHD)

The literature that is being mailed, handed out by those who oppose Newburyport’s proposed Local Historic District (LHD) , the “Say No to LHD” folks, would have you believe that if you do something in the proposed LHD that the LHD Commission (should the Newburyport City Council vote in favor of the LHD) might have some reservations about, you will be fined $500 a day into bankruptcy.

I think this is what one could call “propaganda” because it is so ridiculously not true.

Good grief!

(Definition of propaganda: “Information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc.” “The deliberate spreading of such information, rumors, etc.”)

On Monday night at the LHD informational meeting the subject of fines was cleared up (at least for those who have an open mind, and for those who don’t think that the LHD is some sort of government conspiracy).

What the chair of the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) said, and I am paraphrasing here, is that the Planning Board, the Building Inspector and the ZBA all have the ability to use fines but they do NOT and never have levied fines.

Fines are there in municipal law as a last resort. If they did not exist, a developer could come into town and say, “I’ll do anything I want,” and there would be no legal tool to stop them.

The LHD Study Committee is writing a city ordinance, a city law, which is not done lightly. (And the LHD Study Committee is not a “group” the way one of the leaders of the “Say No to LHD” keeps describing them.)

The drafting of a municipal law is a “process,” and is a “work in progress.”

And the LHD Study Committee is still clarifying the whole “fine” thing in the ordinance-law that is in the process of being written.

So no, contrary to the propaganda being distributed by the “Say No to LHD” folks, if you live in Newburyport’s proposed Local Historic District (LHD), you would not be fined daily into bankruptcy.

As was explained at the informational hearing on Monday night, the same criterion would apply to the proposed Newburyport LHD that applies to the Newburyport Planning Board and the Newburyport ZBA.

Chimneys are New England, Newburyport Iconic

It has been suggested by some of the anti-LHD group that for a homeowner to be required to maintain/keep their chimney or chimneys in the proposed LHD is basically un-American.

Oh good grief!

Chimneys in New England and Newburyport are iconic. Much the way New England church steeples are iconic.

They are a fundamental, intrinsic, deep-rooted symbol of what it means to live in an historic New England home. Of what it means to live in a historic Newburyport, Massachusetts home.

And really and truly I think that most of those who oppose the proposed Newburyport Local Historic District (LHD) would agree.

I’ve included some examples of “iconic” homes with chimneys in Newburyport (all courtesy of the City of Newburyport, MA).

Historic Newburyport Home

Local Historic District (LHD) Public Meeting, March 19, 2012

The video of the Local Historic District (LHD) public informational meeting on March 19, 2012, is actual better than being in the meeting itself. The the speakers as well questions and answers are much easier to understand. There is a lot of good information on the video about the proposed LHD. It is well worth watching.

Local Historic District Public Meeting, March 19, 2012, press to start video

The March 19, 2012 Local Historic District (LHD) informational public meeting at Newburyport City Hall.

1 Little’s Lane Being Demolished

The Tappan House being demolished

The Tappan House, 1 Little’s Lane, Newbury, being demolished today, right now.

This is what can happen anywhere in Newburyport without a Local Historic District (LHD). By law zoning cannot stop it. A demo delay just delays the destruction for a year.

1 Little's Lane being demolished, Courtesy of Skip and Marge Motes

Destruction of The Tappan House, 1 Little's Lane, Courtesy of Skip and Marge Motes

The Tappan House being destroyed, March 20, 2012.

The Tappan House, Courtesy of P.Preservationist

The Tappan House, 1 Little’s Lane before demolition.

Newburyport, the Way a Fence Looks Matters

A fence on High Street is like a jewelry on a beautiful woman.

A fence on High Street, Sally Chandler © 2004, Courtesy of "Historic Gardens of Newburyport"

Last night at the Local Historic District (LHD) informational meeting, a person who owns a gorgeous mansion on High Street in the South End, up on the Ridge, one of the most important homes on High Street, asked if they would have to go in front of the LHD Commission (if the proposed LHD is passed) to put in a privacy fence, as I heard it, to protect their children.

To put a privacy fence in front of this particular mansion, or any mansion on High Street–“No.” That should have been the answer.

If they would like to put a privacy fence in the back of their property for their children to play in, of course (and that would not come under the proposed Local Historic District (LHD) guidelines).

The way a fence looks in the proposed LHD (High Street and downtown Newburyport from Winter to Federal Street) matters. It matters a lot.

A fence on High Street is like a jewelry on a beautiful woman.

How a fence looks makes a big difference. And it made me wonder, I don’t know if my wondering is true or not, if this wasn’t a “got-cha” question. Because the answer is so obvious, that the panel and the LHD Study Committee was a little confused as how to answer it.

Facts about Newburyport’s Local Historic District (LHD)

Facts about Newburyport’s proposed Local Historic District (LHD)

Newburyport’s proposed Local Historic District (LHD) consists of High Street and downtown Newburyport from Winter to Federal Street. (It just includes those areas. It does not include Plum Island.) For a map of the proposed LHD press here.
The purpose of the proposed LHD is to protect and preserve distinctive historic characteristics in the proposed area.
High Street and downtown are vital to cultural and economic the wellbeing of the city.
There is no longer protection for downtown Newburyport. The Urban Renewal Plan for Downtown Newburyport expired in 2005.
High Street was almost destroyed by MassHighway in 1999. The LHD provides protection to the roadway so that would never happen again.
The LHD strives to create a balance between protection of our historic heritage and homeowner’s rights.
The creation of an LHD is an ongoing process that continues to incorporate public feedback.
The LHD deals with architecture that is only visible from the public way.
The LHD only applies to architecture built before 1930.
The LHD does not affect ordinary maintenance and repairs, landscaping, sidewalks, terraces, roofing material, shutters, shutter hardware, gutters, storm doors, storm windows, exterior lights, driveways, and minor details such as paint color (for all all of the outside of the building, including doors and trim).
The LHD does not affect the interior of a building, and by state law can never affect the interior of a building.
By Massachusetts state law, the LHD can not be voluntary and home owners cannot “opt-out.”
Fines: The Planning Board, the Building Inspector and the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) all have the ability to use fines, but they do not and never have levied fines. Fines are in municipal law as a last resort. If they did not exist, a developer could come into town and say, “I’ll do anything I want,” and there would be no legal tool to stop them. The same criterion would apply to the proposed LHD.
By state law the only tool available to prevent demolition of historic homes is a LHD. Zoning laws cannot solve this issue.
The LHD will be voted on by the Newburyport City Council, and needs a super majority of the Newburyport City Council votes, 8 out of 11 councilors.
If the LHD passes, by law the LHD requires the creation of a commission to oversee the LHD, that is made up only of Newburyport residents.
If the LHD passes, by law the LHD ordinance cannot be changed without a super majority of the Newburyport City Council Vote, 8 out of 11 councilors.
If the LHD passes, by law the LHD cannot be expanded except by a very long and tedious process, just like the one that Newburyport has been going through for the last 4+ years.

Proposed LHD Map

Yes! LHD Signs (Newburyport Local Historic District)

The “YES! LHD” signs are going up all over town today.

They say “YES! LHD” Support a Local HIstoric District, Citizens for Historic Newburyport (CHN).

Yes! LHD, Support a Local Historic District

To read more about Newburyport’s proposed Local Historic District (LHD) press here.

And to see the map of the proposed LHD and the link to the online petition press here.

YES! LHD (Newburyport's proposed Local Historic District)

YES! LHD, Support a Local Historic District

Citizens for Historic Newburyport (CHN) can be reached at citizens@historicnewburyport.com, www.historicnewburyport.com.

If you would like a sign you can also contact The Newburyport Blog.

The Tappan House, 1 Littles Lane, Soon to be Demolished

The Tappan House, Courtesy of P.Preservationist

“One billionaire’s castle is another billionaire’s teardown. Never mind the existing mansion—it’s the location these moguls want, not someone else’s hand-me-down house. Instead of renovating, the very rich call in the wrecking ball and build their personal playgrounds from scratch.”

One of the most startling ones to me is a mansion bought by Steve Jobs.

“For years, Steve Jobs, the founder of Apple wanted to tear down a 17,000-square-foot, 35-room Spanish-style mansion he owned since the 1980s in Woodside, Calif., south of San Francisco. He instead envisioned a smaller, likely more techno-savvy home for his family on the lot. After battling legal challenges to save or move the 1920s “Jackling House,” built by the California architect George Washington Smith for a prosperous copper entrepreneur, Jobs received a demolition permit. Howard N. Ellman, Jobs’s lawyer, said the house was bulldozed in February but Jobs’s dwindling health put the plans on hold. Janet Koelsch, the Woodside town clerk, confirms there have been no applications for development received for the property since demolition of the house.”

The article “America’s Doomed Mansions,” By Marcelle Sussman Fischler, Forbes.com, November 21, 2011 can be read here.

Not to compare anyone in Newbury or Newburyport to Steve Jobs!! But, the tale and others like it in the article does remind one of the impending demolition of 1 Littles Lane, the Tappan House, in Newbury, MA, just down the street from Newburyport.

The article in the Newburyport Daily News about the impending demolition of the Tappan House can be read here.

To read more about the Tappan House, 1 Little’s Lane, Newbury, MA, press here.

Newburyport’s Local Historic District, LHD-YES!

LHD-YES!, Support a Local Historic District

This is my car. Gorgeous new LHD-YES!, Support a Local Historic District.

Good for Citizens for Historic Newburyport!!

You go guys!!

To read more about Newburyport’s proposed Local Historic District (LHD) press here.

And to see the map of the proposed LHD and the link to the online petition press here.

Citizens for Historic Newburyport (CHN) can be reached at citizens@historicnewburyport.com, www.historicnewburyport.com.

Newburyport March Local Historic District (LHD) Meetings

This is an announcement from the Newburyport Local Historic District (LHD) Study Committee:

Got Questions about the Proposed LHD?

Get the answers at two

Public Information Forums at the

City Hall Auditorium

1. Ask the Experts – Monday, 19 March 2012 at 7:00 P.M.

Preservation lawyer Marilyn Fenollosa, preservation consultant Gretchen Schuler, and Massachusetts Historical Commission Director of Local Government Programs Chris Skelly will answer your questions about LHDs in general, preservation law, and additional preservation options among other topics.

2. Follow-up – Monday, 26 March 2012 at 7:00 P.M.

Informal discussion groups with Study Committee members.

Send in your questions to lhdsc@cityofnewburyport.com or

Local Historic District Study Committee

City Hall, 60 Pleasant Street

Newburyport, MA 01950

To see the new Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) meant to clarify some of the misinformation and confusion about Newburyport’s proposed LHD see previous post or press here or on the City of Newburyport’s website here.

To see the NEW updated LHD proposed Guidelines (3/5/2012) press here.

To see the NEW updated LHD proposed Ordinance (3/5/2012) press here.

New FAQ about Newburyport’s Local Historic District (LHD)

I just received this via email. This is the new, updated Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) by the Newburyport Local Historic District (LHD) Study Committee. I imagine that the FAQ are in response to much of the confusion and misinformation that is out there about Newburyport’s prosed LHD.

Frequently Asked Questions NEW

The Study Committee has revised the proposed ordinance and guidelines in response to public input. The process of creating an LHD that is fair to property owners and protective of the city’s historic architecture continues; please send questions and comments to lhdsc@cityofnewburyport.com.

Newburyport seems to have gotten along fine without an LHD; why have one now?

Appearances can be deceiving. In recent years there have been numerous tear downs, destructive repairs, and incompatible additions to historic buildings. Critically, the Newburyport Redevelopment Authority no longer oversees the downtown. The LHD would help stop harmful practices, encourage sympathetic renovations and new construction, and attract new property owners respectful of Newburyport’s historic character.

I take good care of my home and wouldn’t sell to anyone who would not; why is that not sufficient?

Sellers ordinarily cannot control what is done to their properties. And annual residential turnover in Newburyport is a high 15% despite the recession.

Would I have to go before the LHD Commission every time I wanted to do something to my house? And have to hire architects and lawyers?

No. Firstly, review applies only to exterior work viewable from the street on structures built before 1930. Secondly, whatever presently exists would be grandfathered in, so like may be replaced with like. Thirdly, most common work is excluded from review (see next question). Review would only be triggered if you already had to apply for a regular building permit and the work was not excluded by the preceding.

Where review is required, applicants are encouraged to have a preliminary working session with the Commission. You would not have to have professional help unless you wanted it.

What work is excluded from review?

A long list including ordinary maintenance and repair, landscaping, storm and screen windows and doors, exterior painting, roofing, gutters, and shutters (see section 4 of the ordinance).

How would windows be treated?

The guidelines emphasize repairing damaged windows, and windows in good repair give good energy efficiency with storms. However, replacement windows would be allowed if they matched the historic windows, and many such replacements are available.

Could the Commission change the ordinance if it wanted to? And could the LHD be expanded?

Only with the same public review and two-thirds vote of the City Council that the proposed ordinance and guidelines themselves have required.

How would an LHD affect my taxes and the value of my house?

By law, there can be no effect at all on your real estate taxes; and many studies have shown that LHDs help maintain property values.

Who would be on the Commission?

Only City residents can be; and the ordinance requires that at least 3 of the 5 members also be residents of the district itself. The ordinance also recommends that membership include architects, realtors, historic preservationists, and business owners. The aim is a supportive Commission with useful expertise and broad community oversight.

The Newburyport Local Historic District Study Committee’s website can be found here.

To see the NEW updated LHD proposed Guidelines (3/5/2012) press here.

To see the NEW updated LHD proposed Ordinance (3/5/2012) press here.

Newburyport Postcards of Wolfe Tavern

State Street, Wolfe Tavern in the foreground and the YMCA below. Press image to enlarge.

In chit-chatting on The Newburyport Blog about Newburyport’s proposed Local Historic District (LHD), the subject of buildings that used to exist in downtown Newburyport comes up.

One of the literally gaping holes in downtown Newburyport, is the parking lot on the corner of Harris and State Streets where the Wolfe Tavern once existed.

And I wasn’t sure when the Wolfe Tavern was demolished, but in doing some research it was demolished by its owner in the fall of 1953. Real late. Wow, I thought it was much earlier.

Postcard of the Wolfe Tavern, Newburyport, MA. Press to enlarge.

Wolfe Tavern, at the corner of State Street and Thread Needle Alley was destroyed, like so much of downtown Newburyport in the great fire of 1811. And shortly after, the tavern was reopened on the corner of Temple Street and State Streets. One Temple Street (demolished in 2006 by the Five Cents Savings Bank, see earlier post here) was an addition to the Wolfe Tavern (see info on the City of Newburyport’s website here). In 1814 the Wolfe Tavern moved to the Col. John Peabody’s house, the one that is in all the postcards, at the corner of Harris and State Streets.

The upper post card shows what State Street used to look like. Wolfe Tavern is in the foreground, followed by the YMCA (which burned down in 1987, see earlier post here). The postcards are pretty cool.

Local Historic District (LHD) and High Street in 1971 from P.Preservationist

High Street, Courtesy of the Library of Congress

The P. Preservationist has written a fascinating story about the effort to have High Street be a Local Historic District (LHD) in 1971.

The P. Preservationist has gone to the Newburyport Archives and done some mega research.

Everyone here at the Newburyport Blog, me and the frogs, are mighty impressed. This is definitely a must read.

P. Preservationist points out that there are differences today:

“First, we have far fewer Townies present today and they represent a minority in our political scene. Second, our demographics have changed. We have a large percentage of people who have moved here precisely because of the historic neighborhoods. Third and most importantly, the class structure that so bedeviled Bossy Gillis and John Marquand no longer exists.”

High Street, © Sally Chandler, 2004, Courtesy of "Historic Gardens of Newburyport"

He has a marvelous quote which, as he points out, is reminiscent of today:

“High Street resident, Elizabeth L. Whiting complained, ‘Surely informative ideas of the many, gently and rationally expressed, deserve as much attention than the ideas of the latter [opponents] which are presented in deliberately caustic and irrelevant oratory.’ ”

You can read the whole post here.

False Statements on the “Say No to LHD” Mass Mailing

Disclaimer here: Dr. Heersink who wrote a Letter to the Editor on on February 27, 2011 is my favorite doctor in Newburyport. As a doctor he is amazing. I just happen to disagree with his stance on the proposed Local Historic District (LHD).

In the letter, among other things, Dr. Heersink defends the “Say No to LHD” (which he is a member of) literature that was mass mailed (2,700 pieces of mail) about 10 days ago. The frogs and I on the Newburyport Blog have put our heads together and where to begin to counter all the allegations made in this disingenuous mailing.

Now usually I don’t like the comment section of the Newburyport Daily News, but the Newburyport Daily News has clarified their comment policy recently, so it looks like I won’t be called a “Nazi controlling zealot” any more, because that would be “racist and abusive.” So whew! (I hope.)

There was a reply to Dr. Heersink by “GloryBe456” (another poster thought it was moi, not so). It’s a little strident for the Newburyport Blog’s taste, but since it makes so many points that the frogs and I agree with, I thought I would quote it on the Newburyport Blog (and it may capture the anger and frustration that is out there with “Say No to LHD”).

GloryBe456 (Whoever you are, and the spelling was corrected by moi-I am the Editor of The Newburyport Blog after all.)

“If Dr. Heersink is a member of “Say No to LHD”, then he should know that, considering the people he’s working with, the errors are not inadvertent, but on purpose.

If the members of this group knew city law, they would know that all members of all boards and commissions have to be city residents. But, “inadvertrently” they stated in their mailing that LHD commission members didn’t have to be.

Another “inadvertent” error is that people are going to be fined left, right and sideways if they do something the LHD commission doesn’t like. Well, isn’t that interesting – did you know that the ZBA, Planning Board and Conservation Commission and Tree Committee and Building Inspector can levy fines, too? Guess when the last time was that happened? That’s right, never.

Yet another “inadvertent” error was that all work requiring a permit will force homeowners to go in front of the LHD Commission. Oh, really? WRONG!!!! a small fraction of work currently requiring a permit would require review by an LHD Commission.

Shall I go on?

Funny, the “Say No” group states that LHDs will DECREASE the value of your home. At the same time, in his letter, Dr. Heersink, a Say No member, states that it’s irrelevant if the LHD INCREASES your property values. Really? Which is it, Dr.? Show me your data, Say No, that LHDs decrease property values. You can’t.

Let’s keep going – “Say No” claims that “no construction, alteration, moving, demolition, etc.” will not be permitted without a “certificate of approval”. WRONG AGAIN! It’s called a “check off” at the building department that what the applicant is looking to do doesn’t come under the LHD commission’s jurisdiction. Same was planning and zoning stuff is taken care of now.

Another incorrect “fact”. That the study committee has agreed to a “phased approach” to implementing the LHD throughout the national register historic district. WRONG! there is no ‘agreement’ to “phase in” more of the district. IF anyone wanted to try such a thing, the ENTIRE process that the study committee has gone through would have to be started ALL OVER AGAIN – and good luck with that!

Costs of owning your home will increase by being in an LHD. WRONG! they are not requiring expansive features, finishes, etc. Like vinyl siding? You’ll SAVE money in the end by not installing it because you won’t trap moisture in the walls of the house (which would lead to mold and moss growth, sheathing that will never dry out and have to be replaced – the removal of these things later will end up costing you way more than you think you “saved” on painting and regular maintenance had you not put it on to begin with.

Finally, all of the things the “Say No” people have listed as “at your expense” and “at the homeowner’s expense” are NO DIFFERENT than how the ZBA and planning boards work now. the building inspector himself has ordered people to hire structural engineers “at the homeowner’s expense” if he sees a problem with a project. So, stop the fear-mongering. Better to spend your time learning how your government works first.”

The Newburyport Redevelopment Authority (NRA) in 2012

Courtesy of the Newburyport Public Library Archives, Ancient buildings demolished during Urban Renewal, The Unitarian Church on Pleasant Street in the background, Press image to enlarge

My fellow blogger Tom Salemi over at Newburyport Posts has taken a major civic plunge. No tip-toeing into the Newburyport civic world for Tom. Nope, a full dive, right in. Last week Tom Salemi’s appointment to the NRA (Newburyport Redevelopment Authority, not the National Riffle Association) passed the Newburyport City Council unanimously.

Everyone here at the Newburyport Blog, me and the frogs, are mighty proud.

It would be hard to pick a more controversial board or committee in our fair city of Newburyport than the NRA. (This is a vast understatement.)

The lots that the NRA are in charge of, have literally been fought over for the last 40+ years. And if P.Preservationist is right, “It is known that the Committee for the Open Waterfront are cracking open their old file cabinets and rallying to restart their efforts. This sounds like a huge brouhaha coming!” And that would surprise me not in the least.

I‘ve always thought that the issue of the waterfront, the NRA’s two dirt lots down by the waterfront, would never be resolved in my life time (to see long ago post, press here). Maybe this is the golden moment, who knows, we will see. But I am not holding my breath.

I’ve always thought that those two dirt lots are cursed (the history is so complex, who could begin to explain). And in my wanderings to find stuff about the proposed Newburyport Local Historic District (LHD), which includes downtown Newburyport, I came across the picture in this post (I think it was taken in 1968, but I’m not 100% positive), in the Newburyport Public Library Archives. The caption reads, “First Unitarian Church on Pleasant St. rises from area cleared of ancient buildings as Newburyport’s urban renewal program moves ahead.” And the photograph looks as if it is taken way, way back from the Unitarian Church, on those two dirt lots. (If you press the image, it will enlarge.)

The photograph is haunting. It is a reminder to me that when stuff is gone, it is gone for good. All those “ancient” houses gone for good. And I always wondered if that area, not to sound silly, is haunted. It has been so difficult to get anything accomplished over the last 40+ years, so many people have tried, that I really and truly wonder.

(If you download the image would you please give The Archival Center at The Newburyport Public Library and The Newburyport Blog credit. Thank you.)

“Say No to LHD” Campaign

It is possible that only Tom Salemi could approach the whole Newburyport’s Local Historic District (LHD) thing with humor, marked with wisdom and humility. (Alas, the Newburyport Blog‘s experience is what my fellow blogger recommends in his Newburyport Today article, that we be “a community” and “stay classy,” might not actually be possible in what has been dubbed, and what I thought had disappeared, but has seemingly been resurrected, “Cannibal City.”)

A bagel

Tom opens his article with his experience of being aggressively approached in front of Abraham’s Bagels by one of the “Say No to LHD” folks on their anti-LHD campaign, at 8:30 on a Saturday morning, as he was trying to get some breakfast (great bagels from Abraham’s Bagels, a thumbs up from this born and raised in New York, New Yawker, who knows from bagels, a “blow in,” a “newby,” moi, who has “only” lived here, in Newburyport, for 31 years) for his family.

In his piece in Newburyport Today, Tom Salemi (the author of the well loved blog, Newburyport Posts) writes, “But let’s all do this right. Let’s handle this with the same grace that we’ve employed with the IBEW protests. We don’t need to roll in the mud.”

And I agree with Tom, what is necessary is “an informed and engaged public,” Tom’s words.

And what Tom Salemi points out with grace and dignity, is at this point, the “Say No to LHD” folks are giving people information filled with inaccuracies and omission of the facts.

And, yes, this makes it difficult to have an informed and thoughtful discussion.

I guess aggressively handing out information in front of Abraham’s Bagels was not enough. The “Say No to LHD” folks have made a mass mailing-2,700 pieces of mail (which one of my neighbors, when they received the mailing, thought was going to be an anti-drug missive), including the flyer handed out in front of Abraham’s Bagels, full of misinformation, scare tactics and omission of the facts.

As one friend said to me, on one of my many walks around my beloved historic city, “It’s hard to get a positive message out there when the default reaction is ‘No,’ and you are dealing with lies” (their word, not mine).

You can read Tom Salemi’s article at Newburyport Today, February 16, 2012, “Take the Bagels, Leave the Petition,” here.

The online petition in favor of Newburyport’s Local Historic District (LHD) can be found here.

The Newburyport LHD Wars

From what I can make out, and George and the other “political consultants” to the Newburyport Blog can make out, there are two groups of folks who are against Newburyport’s proposed Local Historic District (LHD).

The “Say NO to LHD” folks, who appear to be Tea Party folks, who are misrepresenting and distorting the facts (see previous posts here and here).

And it also appears that the opposition, also often very hostile opposition, which might be the “masses” that Newburyport City Councilor Dick Sullivan was referring to in his quote in the article on the Local Historic District by Brenda Buote in the Boston Globe that can be read here.

The film “A Measure of Change”

There is an amazing film made about Newburyport in 1975 called “A Measure of Change” that can be seen here. I think two of the comments below the video sum up what some of the more “silent” opposition to the LHD are feeling.

“…our heritage replaced by tourist traps, overpriced specialty shops, higher taxes, impossibly high rents for working-class citizens… I loved the old town, but it wasn’t rebuilt, it was essentially destroyed, and replaced with some architectural designs that our ancesters would never have tolerated. Why do you think so many former Newburyporters ARE former Newburyporters?? They can no longer afford to live there. The city has been taken over by special interests from out of state… This pathetic attempt to put lipstick on this pig won’t make it acceptable to me, for one.”

And another commentator in reply:

“You said it in a nut shell! I was born and raised there, but by the time i was 30ish my parents had to put their house on the market because they could no longer afford to live there. And they both grew up there as well, and hated to leave. They spend the rest of their day in NH.”

And from one of the opposition LHD petitions.

“…tell the do gooders to get a life and get out of ours.”

“Work in town. This is a really bad idea. Old time nbpter, not a blow in.”

“Another layer of socialist bureaucracy, by a board of permit komaczars who answer to no one with unlimited autocratic authority…And to think this whole nonsense began because some newby didn’t like the way his neighbor kept his property. Disgusting!”

Lots of anger there.

But at this point, and it could most certainly change, the pro-LHD petition now has 300 signatures, mostly from “blow ins,” who “blew in” 30 to 40 some years ago, to more recently. And the two anti-LHD petitions, one has 24 signatures, and the other has 4 signatures (I don’t think “Oecpexgrmu” counts).

So the “masses” that Dick Sullivan has referred to, might be the folks who are not “blow ins” or “newbies” or “do gooders,” but “old time Newburyporters” (“nbpter”).

I’ve been told that local historic districts don’t create friction in the community, but they do bring to the surface the frictions that already exist.

The “No LHD” Folks and Distortion of the Facts

One of the real problems I have with the “Say No to LHD” folks is not only presenting wrong information as the truth (see previous post), but also the weird distortion of the facts about Newburyport’s proposed Local Historic District (LHD). The point of the misinformation and distortion of the facts appears to be 1) to scare folks into either being terrified that this “socialist” agenda, or 2) just scaring them in general with distorted and false information. And that distorted information gets out there, and is perceived by good and well intentioned folks as fact.

I wish I was making this up.

The proposed Newburyport LHD is based on state law. Each state differs in their laws about a LHD. Our state law is called Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40C, which can be read here. The draft of the proposed LHD ordinance references Chapter 40C.

Folks have emailed me and I have read many “alternatives” to having a LHD. Have the guidelines under the Zoning Board of Appeals, the Planning Board, the Building Inspector to prevent another layer of government. Have a voluntary LHD the way they do in Rhode Island.

Our state law is very specific. And a LHD cannot be voluntary (it maybe in other states, but not in our state). By law, the Zoning Board, Planning Board and the Building Inspector do not have a say over what a LHD in our state would cover.

And if the LHD passes, by state law, the ordinance can only be amended by a super majority of the Newburyport City Council, 8 out of the 11 councilors. If the city wanted to expand the LHD, it would have to go through what it went through to create the proposed LHD. There would be a new investigation, the new area would be reviewed by the Massachusetts Historical Commission, there would be a public hearing and it would need to be approved by the council by a super majority, 8 out of the 11 councilors. This is laid out in Section 3 of our state law, which can be read here.

State law requires a LHD Commission, and that is laid out in Section 4 of Mass General Law 40C which can be read here.

Also their claim that only 2 city residents will be on the LHD Commission is false. Our own Newburyport City law 2-62 states very clearly:

“Persons appointed to City of Newburyport boards, committees, commissions and authorities that are established by ordinance shall be residents of the City of Newburyport. This shall pertain to new appointments made after the date of approval of this section.”

The creation of the proposed Newburyport LHD is also a work in progress. As an example, this is from the Newburyport Daily News, February 13, 2012, by Dyke Hendrickson.

“The Local Historic District Study Committee has voted to avoid the potential of expensive roofing bills by deleting a measure in its draft that would have required slate roofs to be replaced by slate roofs on structures within the proposed historic district.

The committee met Thursday night, and in discussing feedback it has received, it was stated that homeowners have expressed concern about a proposed requirement stating that a building owner had to replace slate with slate.

In mulling the matter, co-chair Doug Locy called on his own experience to say that a slate roof could cost $110,000, while a roof of another (appropriate) material could cost about $10,000…

The five-member study committee agreed to delete “slate” from its final report, and thus the use of asphalt shingling or other surfaces will be included in the proposed ordinance the committee sends to the City Council in late spring.”

The revised guidelines for the proposed Newburyport LHD will be put up on the City’s website after March 1st. And the proposed 2nd draft of the LHD has not yet had a Public Hearing, or gone before the Newburyport City Council, where it will most, if not very likely, if not definitely be further amended.

The No LHD Literature-Wrong Information

I was given a copy of the literature (one piece of paper) from the “Say No To LHD” folks.

2 things immediately stand out as just wild misinformation !! Just plain WRONG information!! Hello.

1) Their claim that the LHD Commission would only require 2 Newburyport residents. WRONG! FALSE!

Every member on the LHD Commission would be a Newburyport resident, just like any other Newburyport board and commission. It was assumed that people would understand this. But since there is so much misinformation out there, the wording on the second draft of the LHD ordinance will clarify that the Commission will be made up of Newburyport residents only, not “outsiders.”

2) Their claim that any changes, including enlargement of the LHD or additional restrictions, would require a simple majority vote in the Newburyport City Council. WRONG! FALSE!

A) Any change to the ordinance would require a super majority vote in the council, 8 out of the 11 councilors. (Mass General Law 40C, Section 3)

“Any ordinance or by-law creating an historic district may, from time to time, be amended in any manner not inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter by a two-thirds vote of the city council in a city..”

B) And if the LHD were to be enlarged, the city would go through the exact same thing that it has gone through with the creating this LHD. There would be a new investigation, the new area would be reviewed by the Massachusetts Historical Commission, there would be a public hearing, and it would need to be approved by the council by a super majority, 8 out of the 11 councilors. (Mass General Law 40C, Section 3)

“An historic district may be enlarged or reduced or an additional historic district in a city or town created in the manner provided for creation of the initial district…”

Please, facts are important. Get the facts right!!

Boston Globe Article about Newburyport’s Local Historic District (LHD)

There is an article in today’s Boston Globe on Newburyport’s Local Historic District (LHD). There are some excerpts below. You can read the entire article by Brenda Buote here.

“The proposal has reignited a decades-old dispute between those who believe a local historic district is needed to guide future development and protect Newburyport’s rich heritage, and homeowners who view the proposed commission as an assault on their property rights…

Newburyport is widely considered one of the most architecturally rich areas of the country. High Street, for example, includes many Federal-style homes that were built between 1778 and 1818, at the height of New England’s maritime culture, as well as a number of homes that represent a greater variety of architectural styles, from bungalows to Colonials and Greek Revivals…

“There is a totally different kind of development pressure today than there was in the 1970s,’’ said Sarah White, chairwoman of the city’s Local Historic District Study Committee, noting that “many property owners on High Street have been approached because they have deep lots that could support another structure. For years, we’ve been relying on luck and the largesse of a lot of people who don’t want to sell to developers. The question is, how much longer do we want to rely on luck?’’…

Local historic districts offer the strongest form of protection for structures deemed worthy of preservation, giving a locally appointed commission the authority to review proposed changes to exterior architectural features visible from a public way. Under state law, such districts can be created by local ordinance, but require two-thirds majority approval by the municipality’s city council or town meeting…

White said the study committee is working to address the concerns of those opposed to the local historic district, and will be modifying language in the draft ordinance before the panel’s final report reaches the City Council…

Rather than having authority over buildings that are more than 75 years old, the commission would likely only review proposed alterations to buildings constructed before 1930, White said. In addition, the study committee plans to eliminate language requiring review of roofing materials, and add a residency requirement mandating that all members of the commission live in Newburyport….

White stressed that the levying of fines would be “rare, an absolute last resort,’’ and was quick to point out that if the commission is established, it would not be able to expand the district’s boundaries on a whim; a study committee would have to examine the issue, and any proposed change would have to be approved by a two-thirds vote of the City Council. Likewise, if the commission wanted to extend its powers to include purview over new items, such as paint colors or landscaping, such a change would have to be approved by at least eight of the City Council’s 11 members, White said, to meet the two-thirds requirement.”…