<p>The Hon. Cornelius Moriarty 2nd said a 2014 decision by the town historic commission to deny the demolition of an old house was deficient.</p>
Midway through a trial that tested the boundaries of authority for the Edgartown historic district commission, a superior court judge this week annulled a 2014 decision by the commission to deny the demolition of an old house.
Judge Moriarty found the commission's decision was deficient.
Judge Moriarty found the commission's decision was deficient.
Ruling from the bench in the Edgartown courthouse Wednesday morning, the Hon. Cornelius J. Moriarty 2nd said the decision to deny a certificate of appropriateness to demolish a 19th century home at 8 Pease’s Point Way was deficient because the commission failed to detail the reasons it denied the application.
The ruling abruptly ended a civil trial to settle the dispute just as the town attorney began to present his case. The trial began on Tuesday.
“I find the decision of the commission is deficient,” Judge Moriarty said. “I’m going to annul the decision, simply because there is an inadequate statement of reasons. The law is the law.”
Judge Moriarty will now decide whether to send the matter back to the historic district commission for reconsideration. If he does, it must also be decided whether the commission can consider new engineering reports and other information that emerged after its original decision to block the demolition nearly two years ago.
Attorneys on both sides of the case will have until April 22 to file briefs on the two issues.
Judge Moriarty said he has only limited authority to allow the demolition.
“Unless there are some extreme circumstances, I can’t order the board to issue the certificate of appropriateness,” he said.
Homeowner Linda Simpson was the first witness called in the case.
Homeowner Linda Simpson was the first witness called in the case.
Linda Simpson and John Ettinger, who are both New York attorneys and seasonal residents of the Island, bought the home on Pease’s Point Way in 2006 after renting it for a number of summers. In 2014, they went before the historic district commission seeking to demolish the home and garage and build a new home and carriage house on the half-acre lot which borders Upper Main street at the entrance to the village. The home is currently valued at $2.3 million, according to assessors records.
The commission denied the application in a one-page letter. The homeowners appealed in superior court
“The house is quite simply, old,” said Alan Rose Jr., an attorney from the Boston law firm Rose, Chinitz & Rose representing the homeowners, in his opening statement Tuesday. “It is not historically significant as the terms are defined in the bylaw. The house, the owners, the architecture, none of this is historically significant.”
Michael Goldsmith, an attorney with Reynolds, Rappaport, Kaplan and Hackney in Edgartown representing the town in the case, had another view.
“They held a gem, a little piece of the town’s history,” Mr. Goldsmith countered in his opening statement. “Is this a candidate for the wrecking ball? Absolutely not.”
Ms. Simpson was the first witness called in the trial. She testified about her research to determine the historical significance of the home and her family’s decision to demolish the structure and build a new residence.
Home on Pease's Point Way caught in legal crossfire.
Home on Pease's Point Way caught in legal crossfire.
“My husband wanted a big white house that looked like it had been in Edgartown forever,” she said.
Following Judge Moriarty’s ruling Wednesday, Mr. Rose spoke forcefully about the commission’s action.
“This is another example of the historic district commission not following its bylaws and a judge throwing out their decision,” he said. “Their illegal conduct has a terrible impact on people who live in the district and want to redevelop homes in a way that is consistent with the bylaw.”
In a statement, historic district commission chairman Susan Catling said the commission awaits the next step in the legal process.
“The commissioners understand that this house has a rich history and look forward to their counsel’s opportunity to submit briefings on further proceedings, as requested by the judge,” she said.
Comments
To me, that already does look
John ElsewhereTo me, that already does look like a big white house that looked like it had been in Edgartown forever
Who would want to live in an historic district in a new house ?
Agree!
Paolo AquinnahAgree!
YES! Agree!
BFYES! Agree!
Agree
AlexM WyomingAgree
The historic commission is
RoseThe historic commission is charged with one task, preserving history. The commissioners, 7 members voted unanimously to deny the application for demolition. They listened to 2 presentations from the architects hired to build a new 7000+ square foot house in the spot where stands a very old home that was built in the mid 19th century and was lovingly maintained and lived in by generations of islanders. This house sits at the gateway to the village with frontage on 2 entrance roads. The current owners purchased the home years ago and have done nothing to maintain it. It's appears, despite their denial, that it was always their intention to demolish the historic home. Now it sits, paint peeling, displaying the signs of neglect. The owners arguing the deterioration, caused by deferred maintenance, justifies the demolition. The members of the historic commission did not adequately state their reasons in their letter of denial, the judge has made this clear but for the folks serving on the commission the denial reasoning was thoughtful, reasoned and clear. It is a very old house that holds several generations of history and they want to protect it from demolition. In stating their only reason for denial they quote the bylaw that charges them, as their primary duty, to protect the history of the village. For those who work to protect historic homes, the prospect of this loss is sad and completely avoidable.
A very important point bears making. The HDC encouraged that these owners asked to retain the historic "box" as part of their renovations. They were encouraged to add additions to the home that are in scale with the historic home in order to obtain the space they desire. Many, many renovations in Edgartown have been very successfully completed in this manner.
Judge Moriarty,"...there is
Jim FultonJudge Moriarty,"...there is an inadequate statement of reasons. The law is the law." Seems the judge's reasoning is deficient, vague.
Perhaps a review of core principles of an "historic district" would she some light on the Commission's decision to preserve something of Edgartown's heritage.
Its pretty classic that its
Shane EdgartownIts pretty classic that its two attorneys from NY bringing this to court.I understand by-right they have to option to demolish with approval, but who rents a house for years (obviously enjoying the house), negotiates to purchase the home, and then decides they want to tear it down. Makes no sense. Why do you choose to buy in the historic district to build new construction???? Cases like this are what's seriously damaging the island's character.
Agree!
Paolo AquinnahAgree!
The Ettingers probably want
Sam CTThe Ettingers probably want to tear it down because it is old and they haven't been able to keep up with it over the years. My family owned that house before them and allowed them to rent it, the house used to be gorgeous, but once they owned it, it's been falling apart. They just want a brand new house that they won't have to put any work on. It's very disappointing to see this happen to my childhood home.
Property rights represent
DanW Chilmark and CTProperty rights represent some of the oldest in the Commonwealth. The ability to do what you wish with your home is chief among them. Any restriction on these rights must be based in rational reasoning articulated specifically. Safety of both owners, visitors and the public is but one example where limits may exist. Preservation of important buildings also represent a valid area of control. Yet any action restricting a property owner must always be made clearly and specifically so that all involved know the what's and wherefores.
A building inspector may not fail an inspection without stating the facts that amount to a violation of a particular code section. Claiming a building merely "doesn't meet" code is always unenforceable.
Hopefully the good folks that serve on historical commissions understand how professional every action taken under their specific authority must be. It's an expensive shame for the Town and owners alike that the commission failed in its basic task.
We all may have preferences about what others do with the homes they own (and we do not), but we must press town commissions to work professionally if, for no other reason, that authority may come knocking on our doors.
Agree with comment, but not
Paolo AquinnahAgree with comment, but not decision of Judge Moriarity. Yes, give the Historic Commision an opportunity to correct its mistake and elaborate.
Shane, very well put...I was
Jim Denver COShane, very well put...I was born on M.V. and raised in Edgartown...I have walked by that property a million times, it's a wonderful home...All the place needs is a good renovation..the new owners should understand this.. Once again very well said and I agree 100% with you..Good luck to the Commission's quest in saving Edgartown, someone needs to...Once A proud Islander.
Hooray for the judge finally
Bob EdgartownHooray for the judge finally some common sense. There is more going on than just a demolition permit. Town politics rings with this historic commission which is too bad. They let a very historic house on S. Water St. on the water to be torn down they just let another house across the street from that on S. Water St. to be torn down and why save this one. It makes no difference what the bones of the house are that no one ever ever sees as long as the outside of the house fits in with the historic nature of the town. Edgartown please vote no on the expansion of the historic district this commission is a prime reason why they cannot be trusted. If you hire the right architect and kiss the ring of the commissioners you get what you want. This is not how the process is supposed to work.
Historic commisions serve an
Paolo AquinnahHistoric commisions serve an invaluable purpose and should have " teeth " to do what they have been asked to do. They, too, should be thorough and honest in their deliberations and certainly above politics. Too many old and historic homes in The Commonwealth have been destroyed. Once they are gone there is no bringing them back. In this vein, interiors of old homes need to be protected as well. Historic property easements convey a mechanism for doing this. I only hope that Judge Moriarity allows the Edgartown Historic Commision another chance to get their decision properly delineated.
In my experience, the HDC
Dan EdgartownIn my experience, the HDC wants to dictate outcomes, not follow their bylaws. We began the process with great excitement-we purchased a wonderful piece of property that needed a lot of work. We quickly found out this board was adversarial and confrontational. They pressured us to use a particular architect. One board member came by our property "shilling for business" and brazenly told me he was an expert at these types of projects. Everything we wanted to do complied with the bylaw, but when we refused to do it their way, the hostility mounted and they made life as difficult as possible for us. They refused to consider our evidence, and refused to comply with the bylaw as a way to try to make us comply with the their desired outcome. I am amazed that anyone would vote in favor of an expanded Historic District when they won't even follow their own rules.
I know this house very well.
Michael Palm BeachI know this house very well. I rented it from the original family after a contentous divorce. We rented with a purchase agreement in place for the following year. And then the problems arose. the large lovely living room was due to the removal of several bearing wall causing the 2nd floor to sink in the center. The entire wiring system needed to be replaced. The master closet had been cut trough the exterior wall and simply boxed in - which allowed rain and snow to seep in during winter storms. The garage / guest apt above had rolled completely off it's sills...in other words back in 1993 it would have conservatively cost 80 to 100K to simply correct the flaws - not tot address the basic problems it had. This was a old chopped up house with no distinctive style or history. Bravo that someone is willing to undertake a new build, and shame on those who stand in their way simply for spite.
First, many of the commenters
Chris Oak BluffsFirst, many of the commenters make a point that the owners are "lawyers from NY," as if this is detriment to the owners' character. Its not, and its irrelevant. Historical societies do great work, they preserve the nature and character of an area, ensuring that the area will remain as close to its original makeup as possible. The problem arises when historical societies determine which architect you may use, which construction company, etc. They should always allow for multiple bids. After all, the owner's home is their castle. In this case, couldn't there be an agreement that the next home will need to match the content and character of the neighborhood, with input by the society regarding the building plans? Would this not solve the issue, a new, safe home that meets the neighborhood standards?
So happy that the Historic
BFSo happy that the Historic Commission has another chance to get it right.
Please, do whatever it takes to correct this so that the permission to deny demolition will be granted.
We cannot continue to lose these grand old buildings!
I am appalled at what a drive around Edgartown on any given day has to show. House after house being demolished....
Please help to stop it from happening.
BF, then you and your friends
Dan EdgartownBF, then you and your friends should buy these grand old houses and preserve them. You could even put a deed restriction on them preventing anyone from ever tearing the house down. The only issue is that the value will be half of what you paid. Please put your money where your mouth is. If not, respect the fact that people should be able to reasonably upgrade their property.
I am very big on historic
Bruce EdgartownI am very big on historic preservation, but I must admit I am confused by the inconsistencies of the HDC. Why did they deny this demolition when the next two houses up from this one at 14 and 22 Pease Point Way (both also within the Historic District) were allowed to be demolished and replaced with modern houses over the past 6 years? What is the criteria? I can see the judge wanting to see the reasons for denial to be spelled out.
14 & 22 Pease's Point are not
Kate Edgartown14 & 22 Pease's Point are not in the Historic District.
You are correct. I was
Bruce EdgartownYou are correct. I was looking at a map that turned out to be the proposed expanded district. Sorry about that. That whole section seemed homogeneous to me.
Add new comment