Demolition Delay Bylaw Update Earns Endorsement From Planning Board

The Planning Board voted 4-1 on Monday to recommend the approval of the Nantucket Preservation Trust's citizen petition seeking to extend the island's demolition delay law. The Historic District Commission has yet to vote on the proposal, but the board was split at a meeting last Friday.

“I think what this is going to do is incentivize people to streamline the process,” Planning Board chair Dave Iverson, who voted in favor of the recommendation, said.

If passed at the Special Town Meeting this fall, the article would extend the period property owners are required to wait for would-be movers to claim buildings that would otherwise be destroyed before beginning demolition.

Nantucket’s existing “demolition delay” bylaw established a waiting period during which the town and the applicant can propose and consider alternatives to the demolition of a building of residential value. It is intended to minimize the quantity of demolition debris ending up in the landfill, create an incentive for the reuse of residential structures, and give interested parties an opportunity to acquire reusable residential structures.

Under the existing bylaw, claimants must submit a letter stating their intention to move the building within 30 days and must carry out that move within 60 days. The Nantucket Preservation Trust's article would extend the deadline to carry out the move to 180 days.

Proponents argue that the current timeline isn't realistic and does not give would-be movers enough time to complete moves, especially given the summer moratorium on house moves that can't be completed in a single day. But not everyone is convinced.

“I just have a problem with waiting another 180 days,” Planning Board member Joe Topham said. "Right now, the way this is written, I can't do it.”

Topham, the lone no vote, said he agrees with the idea behind the article, to decrease waste and increase reuse, but believes there are other tools the town should try first.

Iverson disagreed. “I don't think us giving a positive recommendation would stop the discussion,” he said, arguing that it could stimulate more conversation on the topic.

Topham and other opponents, including Historic District Commission Vice Chair Ray Pohl, also believe that the bylaw may be subject to various strategic loopholes and could be overly punitive to homeowners seeking to demolish a structure.

At the Historic District Commission's meeting Friday, at least two Commissioners voiced concerns with the proposal while others stated their support. Among the skeptics was Commission Chair and Planning Board alternate Stephen Welch, who spoke against the article at the Planning Board's meeting but was ultimately not part of the voting board.