Portland Update: Town approves demolition of Brainerd house

On June 30 the Portland Planning and Zoning commission unanimously approved revised plans for Portland Town Place, a mixed-use development on the site of the former Elmcrest Hospital, turning down preservationists’ requests that the commission require the preservation of two historic houses on the property (see CPN, July/August 2009). 

            In a slight improvement on earlier proposals, the approved plan calls for retaining, rather than demolishing, the central block of the Hart-Jarvis house (1829-30). The remnant will be rotated to face Marlborough Street and given new flanking wings.     The developers made no change to the proposed fate of the Erastus Brainerd, Jr., house (1852), designed by Henry Austin. As in earlier plans, it will be razed and replaced by a so-called ‘replica’ ornamented with a few salvaged fragments.

            The Planning and Zoning commissioners, along with the first selectman, Susan Bransfield, wanted this development to bolster the tax base and were reluctant to pose any additional requirements, for fear of driving away the developers.

            It is particularly unfortunate that some proponents of the project were able to paint those who wanted to retain the houses as anti-development. Throughout the process the preservationists’ aim clearly was not to stop the project but rather to incorporate those two buildings into it. Far from being anti-development, this would have given the project an appeal and a point of distinction that no new construction, certainly not the bland designs shown on the developer’s submission, could hope to possess.

            Worst of all, the developer has not actually signed agreements with tenants, and the whole project could end up stalled on the drawing board—except for the loss of one of Connecticut’s most distinguished 19^th-century houses and the disfiguring of another. In an attempt to prevent this from happening, the preservationists asked that the developer not be allowed to begin demolition until tenants were signed and committed. Town officials replied that they did not have the power to require this.

One basic lesson is for communities to ensure that important sites are listed on the National Register wherever possible, before threats arise. National Register listing provides the potential for protection through the Connecticut Environmental Protection Act, which allows lawsuits to prevent the unreasonable demolition of buildings listed on the National Register. While this law has had only mixed results, it can sometimes be a useful bargaining chip. In addition, National Register listing allows buildings to qualify for rehabilitation tax credits and, and, in some cases zoning incentives. Moreover, official status itself can sometimes encourage preservation.

Portland actually has a strong statement about the importance of preserving historic sites in its plan of conservation and development, which says, “Historic sites, buildings, and structures…are key components for helping to understand the Town’s cultural heritage and development. It is imperative that these historic sites and structures be preserved in order to pass along some of Portland’s history to future generations.” In addition, the town zoning regulations call, among other things, for considering the preservation of historic and architectural features when evaluating proposed mixed use development projects.

In this case, the town clearly was aware of the historic character of the site and could have consulted with historic organizations early in the planning process, which, according to newspaper accounts, has lasted more than three years. Unfortunately, the historical society and the public were able to be involved only after a plan had been created. If they had been in at the beginning they might have been able to help procure a better outcome.

Posted 8/24/09