Pop Preservation Quiz.
By Jim Conley • Aug 20th, 2007 • Email This Post to a Friend •
Print This Post
• Email this author
B) The rectory at the St. Aidan’s Church (pictured above) - the site where John F. Kennedy was baptized - built in 1850 and listed on the National Register of Historic Places?
You’d be right to think the answer is (B) the rectory; but you’d be wrong in fact. In the case of Thorndike Street, a group of neighbors swarmed a preservation commission hearing to save the “historically significant” property (significant, I suppose due to the abundance of plywood on the structure).
In the case of St. Aidan’s, the Brookline Selectmen and their development partners at the Boston Archdiocese succeeded in muzzling the neighbors through threats of lawsuits. And the rectory will be demolished without a permit.
It’s how business is done in Brookline - with little regard for principle and with significant deference to cronies.
Update: I asked Building Commissioner James Nickerson if plans to demolish the St. Aidan’s rectory can proceed without a permit - some 15 days ago - and still no answer. Maybe he’s busy planning a parade or party [see previous post]. Or, more likely, he has no idea what to say because he has yet to receive his marching orders from…(well now, you’ll have to figure that one out on your own).
Correction: The demolition delay invoked on the Thorndike Street residence is for a period of 12 months, as it is not listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
Jim Conley is publisher of On Brookline.
Email this author | All posts by Jim Conley
As with many laws (including municipal ordinances and bylaws) that were enacted to serve as a shield, the power of the Preservation Commission to delay a demolition can be used as a sword by the majority in a neighborhood that protests a property owner’s demolition desire. Why not extend this power of the sword to changes less than demolition in order to permit the majority to maintain their neighborhoods in the manner they may wish? But each member of this majority should keep in mind that he/she might be in the position to change his/her property for what he/she perceives are good reasons, in which case he/she becomes the minority. Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander comes to mind. The majority should keep in mind that the Preservation Commission cannot force the property owner to maintain his/her property, with the potential result being deterioration which may negatively impact the neighborhood of the majoritarians. So a member of a current majority should beware of becoming the minority and suffering the pangs, whim and caprice of the Preservation Commission, aka the “Taste Police.”
perhaps Dennis Dewitt has thoughts and comments re: the preservation issues around St Aiden’s - sure would be interesting to hear what he has to publicly say