Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission begins drafting new demolition‑delay ordinance, considers third‑party review and fees
Summary
Commissioners discussed a new demolition‑delay ordinance draft that would formalize notice, allow an independent review when opposition letters are filed, and include a fee structure to cover consultant reviews; a clean draft will be circulated to commissioners for further comment.
Members of the Norwalk Historical Commission discussed a revised demolition‑delay ordinance intended to streamline the review process and add clarity about notice and independent reviews.
Commissioner Rich Stein said he drafted new language and met with city staff and commissioners to socialize the proposal. Under the draft, an opposition letter filed in response to a demolition notice could trigger a review by an independent, third‑party consultant procured through an RFP process. Commissioners said the draft also contemplates grants and a modest fee structure so applicants share costs for consultant reviews.
Stein said he has consulted a former colleague from the Historic District Council in New York to identify qualified consultants and that contacts at the Connecticut State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) could provide additional resources. He estimated typical consultant work per project might be about 20 hours and in the range of $2,500, and suggested grant funding and applicant fees could make the approach workable for the commission’s caseload.
Commissioners asked that the draft be circulated to all members and that it be reviewed by the city ordinance committee chair, Lisa Shanahan, to check consistency with committee expectations. Members emphasized that the draft should include a critical notice‑by‑publication provision, which one commissioner noted had been omitted in an earlier markup and will be restored.
No formal vote was taken; commissioners agreed to exchange edits and return a consolidated clean draft at a future meeting. One commissioner noted the draft would formalize procurement and create more predictability for demolition reviews; another recommended exploring funding and fee options to avoid placing the cost solely on the commission’s budget.
The commission also discussed monitoring renovation work on older houses — including properties recorded as 1890s houses — and the need for earlier notification or reporting from building inspection when major exterior work begins on historically recorded properties. That point will be considered in subsequent revisions.
