Brunswick’s Village Review Board (VRB) has been in the news a good deal lately. Recently, I wrote a letter to them complaining about the poor treatment of St. John’s Church.

The parish wishes to demolish the rectory they have not used for 10 years and will not use again The VRB chairwoman was gracious enough to respond to my letter, but I was not reassured by that response.

Concerning the VRB’s mission, here is chairwoman Emily Swan’s response to my letter:

“(The Village Review Board) is charged, among other things, with ‘fostering civic pride in the town’s history and development patterns as represented in distinctive sites, structures and objects; promoting and protecting neighborhood character; (and) promoting and protecting significant features of the historic patterns of development …’ You are absolutely right that economic viability and practicality are extremely important considerations when demolition applications come before the board, but keeping buildings which contribute to the Village Review Zone is at least as important. This is a balancing act that can be difficult but that constitutes the crux of the VRB’s function.”

Bottom line, the Village Review Board chairwoman interprets the ordinance to mean saving historic buildings is “at least” as important as any other consideration, meaning that is equal to or greater in importance than any other consideration.

This is not what the ordinance states. The ordinance clearly states that the party seeking demolition can appeal a decision based on, among other things:

“4. In the case of a proposed demolition, any estimates from architects, developers, real estate consultants, appraisers or other real estate professionals experienced in rehabilitation as to the economic feasibility of restoration, renovation, or rehabilitation of any existing structures or objects. 5. The cost to relocate the structure, object or artifact as determined by a written estimate(s) from professional( s) in the field.”

Economics is an equal consideration; otherwise they would not allow an appeal based strictly on economics. The logic of this is easy to understand.

If the VRB is able to deny a demolition permit, they are in effect requiring the owner to spend money restoring a building they do not want and do not need.

In the case of St. John’s Church, the VRB requires them to maintain a building that detracts from the real gem on that property which is of course the church itself.

I stand by my original complaint to the VRB: The church presented information from at least two architects, developers and real estate professionals that it would cost $400,000 or more to restore the building and $100,000 to move it. At their last meeting, the VRB ignored the economic information altogether as it was not discussed.

The confirming test will be if the Zoning Board of Appeals overturns the VRB on economic grounds.

The VRB is a citizen board made up of good people who care about preserving historic architecture. Rather than putting them in the unenviable position of deciding the fate of development projects in town, why not leave demolition permitting to the full-time paid experts in the planning office?

Planning staff are accustomed to interpreting laws and ordinances.

Harness the passion of the VRB members to recommend tax breaks, grants and other incentives to developers who may otherwise see no way out of demolishing historic structures.

With the likely appeal of the VRB’s recent ruling, they will have saved exactly zero buildings from the wrecking ball. A busy developer may be more inclined to save a building for which she or he can gain a tax benefit or grant to preserve their building. The odds cannot be any worse than they are now.

The alternative is that demolition requests continue to be denied by the VRB and reversed later. Good projects will continue to be unnecessarily delayed.

I am told the town spent $20,000 on legal fees related to the VRB on the Stanwood street properties — and of course the town is paying the staff and legal expenses of the VRB itself.

The parishioners of St. John’s Church have a beautiful vision for improving their campus, surrounding the church with trees and lawn to set off its beautiful architecture, and adding parking and disability access to make the church more accessible to aging congregants.

I have no idea with the last several months of delays, legal and professional fees have cost them, but it is too much, unnecessary and needs to stop.

It’s time to change the role of the VRB to be more in line with its capabilities, and allow paid town staff to do what they were trained to do.

ART BOULAY lives in Brunswick.

[email protected]