Apparently all of our comments regarding the lack of recourse following the Sunday night demolition of 124 East ave have been heard. Council President Mike Coffey and chair of the ordinance committee committee has followed the links here to craft a new demolition delay ordinance that increases the delay to 180 days and adds a penalty.
I am thrilled that the blog has prompted some quick and positive action about this issue, and while its not the only issue that has prompted council activity, this one is deserves a big thank you. All of our current council members deserve much thanks for listening and responding behind the scenes on many of the issues raised here.
From The Hour:
offey said he will put forward for consideration a 180-day demolition delay ordinance modeled after what the town of Monroe has adopted. The Monroe ordinance allows the town to fine property owners $1,000 — or the assessed value of the property — for demolishing a historic structure without a permit.
“Extending the time period is good, so it keeps everyone talking for a longer period,” said Norwalk Zoning Commissioner Jackie Lightfield. And the Monroe ordinance “answers the question of penalizing a property owner for violating the demolition delay order. There is no penalty in Norwalk.”Lightfield added, however, that “invoking that type of fine (the assessed value) should be limited to properties that meet a very exacting and high standard of criteria, so you don’t end up having property owners fearful of being fined for demolishing something old.”
A structure would have to have some significant attributes and not simply be 50 years old, according to Lightfield.
Like Norwalk’s existing ordinance, the Monroe ordinance sets forth rules by which demolitions of building 50 years and older may be delayed. Those rules include a provision for a public hearing.
Under the base legislation adopted by the state, a building must be 50 years or older and meet eligibility criteria for inclusion in the Norwalk Historic Resource Inventory, State Register of Historic Places or National Register of Historic Places, to be eligible for demolition delay.
State Sen. Bob Duff, D-25, who pushed to have the state double the delay period, said additional time is needed to find alternatives to demolition — if municipalities so choose.
…
Last year, when the city’s Historical Commission and Norwalk Preservation Trust invoked the 90-day demolition delay for the Grumman St. John House at 93 East Ave., Chris Handrinos, owner of the property, protested.Handrinos is co-owner of the Norwalk Inn & Conference Center.
Siding with Handrinos was Mayor Richard A. Moccia and many fellow Republicans who contended that the commission could not itself invoke the delay and remain objective when hearing testimony during the resulting public hearing.
Their theory was based upon an opinion from the city’s law department.
Moccia indicated Friday that he has concerns about boosting the city’s demolition delay period to 180 days, but added he might support it provided the city redefines what constitutes “historic.”
“If we’re going to look at that ordinance and go to (180 days), then I’d like to look at changing the (building) age,” Moccia said. “I don’t think I could support 180 days without moving the age to 75. I just don’t believe houses built in 1956 or 1957 are historical. They may be interesting, but I don’t consider them historical.”
Council Minority Leader Richard A. McQuaid, a Republican and member of the Ordinance Committee, said he wants to see the proposed ordinance before commenting on it. Speaking generally, he expressed skepticism about applying another municipality’s ordinance to Norwalk or hastily changing the city’s existing ordinance.
source: The Hour, Ordinance panel weighs longer demolition delay, By ROBERT KOCH. August 18, 2007
