MEMORANDUM
TO: Members Of Belmont Historic District Commission, Belmont
Historical Commission and Other Interested Parties
FROM: Richard G. Pichette, Esq.
RE: Overview of Massachusetts Law As It Applies To Historic Districts
and Commissions In Belmont (Draft 3)
Date: January 13, 2005
I. Introduction
Article 15 of the Belmont Town By-laws was approved on December 16, 1971 by a vote of at least two-thirds of Town Meeting. Its passage accomplished three major goals:
1. First, it created a Historic District in Belmont and it created a Historic District Commission to oversee it pursuant to Chapter 40C of the Massachusetts General Laws ("The Historic District Act").
2. Second, it endowed the newly formed Belmont Historic District Commission ("BHDC") with all of the powers and duties of Historical Commissions as provided in Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40 Section 8D. In so doing, the BHDC took over the powers and duties of the Belmont Historical Commission ("BHC") which then ceased to exist.
3. Third, in addition to vesting the BHDC with all of the powers and duties set forth in Chapter 40C and those in Section 8D of Chapter 40, Article 15 itself sets forth certain powers and duties of the BHDC not found in either Chapter of the general laws.
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide an overview and hopefully in the process, a clarification of the myriad of roles that the BHDC has been charged with directly and indirectly under Article 15.
II. Belmont's Historic District Commission
A. Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40C
The Historic District Act
Massachusetts has established a statutory scheme known as the "Historic Districts Act" which permits local communities to create and then regulate historic districts within their communities. M.G.L. c. 40C, §1 et. seq. (A copy is attached hereto as Exhibit A). Whenever an historic district is created, an historic district commission must be established to administer the district. Chapter 40C §4.
The stated purpose of Chapter 40C, and thus the mandate of the commission, is to "promote the educational, cultural, economic and general welfare of the public through the preservation and protection of the distinctive characteristics of buildings and places significant in the history of the commonwealth and its cities and towns or their architecture, and through the maintenance and improvement of settings for such buildings and places and the encouragement of design compatible therewith." M.G.L. c. 40C §2.
In order to accomplish this goal, the statute provides, in general - unless set forth otherwise by local ordinance or by law - that "no building or structure within an historic district shall be constructed or altered in any way that affects exterior architectural features unless the commission shall have first have issued [1] a certificate of appropriateness, [2] a certificate of non-applicability, or [3] a certificate of hardship with respect to such construction or alteration." M.G.L. c. 40C §6.
B. Belmont Adopts Version of Chapter 40C
Chapter 40C, in effect, created the framework by which municipalities in Massachusetts could, if they so desired, establish Historic Districts and Historic District Commissions to preserve their heritage. On December 16, 1971, Belmont voted, by Town Meeting, to create the Wellington Historic District which was to be overseen by the Belmont Historic District Commission(“BHDC”).
The by-law was last modified by vote of the annual town meeting on April 22, 1991, and can be found in its current from in toto in Article 15 of the town by-laws. (A copy of Article 15 is attached hereto as Exhibit B).
Since its inception, members of the BHDC have been asked, formally and informally, to serve in a consulting or advisory role outside of the Historic District and the Town Hall Complex Building Committee. Such a role was contemplated by Chapter 40C §10(I), which provides that the commission shall have such other powers, authority and duties as may be delegated or assigned to it from time-to-time by vote of the City Council or Town Meeting. Several recent examples of this include when the BHDC was charged with the responsibility of passing on exterior changes to Historic properties at McLean Hospital or when the BHDC was asked to have a representative sit In on the Annex. A map of the District as presently constituted is attached as Exhibit C.
The district has been enlarged pursuant to M.G.L. c. 40C §3 on six occasions, a brief history of significant events in the history of the District and Commission follows:
1. (1968) The Belmont Historical Commission ("BHC") created.
2. (1971) The Wellington Historic District is created with oversight provided by the BHC.
3. (1972) The Belmont Historic District Commission ("BHDC") is created and it assumes the role of and supplants the BHC.
4. (1975) The District is enlarged by the addition of Pleasant Street.
5. (1978) The District is placed on the National Register.
6. (1989) Moore Street is added to the District.
7. (1992) The Alexander Avenue Underpass is added to the District.
8. (1996) The Town Annex is added to the District.
Section 15.4(b) empowers the BHDC to enlarge, reduce or create an additional district within the town in the same manner as provided for in connection with the creation of the original district (See Chapter 40C §3), except that "(a) in the case of the enlargement or reduction of an existing historic district the investigation, report and hearing shall be by the historic district commission having jurisdiction over such historic district instead of by a study committee; (b) in the case of creation of an additional historic district the investigation, report and hearing shall be by the historic district commission of the city or town, or by the historic district commissions acting jointly if there be more than one, instead of by a study committee unless the commission or commissions
recommend otherwise; and (c) if the district is to be reduced, written notice as above provided of the commission's hearing on the proposal shall be given to said owners of each property in the district. (As of the date of this memorandum, the BHDC is investigating the possibility of including the former railroad station occupied by the Belmont Lion's Club in the Clarke Street Historic District).
Belmont, in Article 15, exercised its local discretion and made various modifications to Chapter 40C and exercised certain options, all as contemplated by Chapter 40C. To the extent that these changes or elections are germane to this general overview of Chapter 40C, they will be noted.
C. Membership On The Historic District Commission
The Historic District Commission is to consist of "not less than three nor more than seven members . . . appointed by the board of selectmen . . . unless (a) the report from the town recommending the establishment of the district recommends that alternate or additional organizations submit names for membership, or (b) the town elects to have an existing historic district commission administer the district. M.G.L. Chapter 40C §4. Belmont, in Article 15, provided that the membership would be made up of "one member, where possible, from two nominees submitted by the Belmont Historical Society; one member, where possible, from two nominees, one of whom shall be submitted by the Chapter of American Institute of Architects covering Belmont and one of whom shall be submitted by
the Boston Society of Landscape Architects; and one member, where possible, from two nominees of the Board of Realty covering Belmont. [Article 15 also provides that [o]ne or more of the foregoing shall be a resident of an historic district established in Belmont pursuant to the Historic Districts Act [and that] the Selectmen shall also appoint three alternate members of the Commission." M.G.L. c. 40A The appointments to membership in the commission are to be arranged so that the term of at least one member will expire each year, and their successors shall be appointed in the same manner as the original appointment for terms of three years. Vacancies are to be filled in the same manner as the original appointment for the unexpired term. In case of the absence, inability to act or unwillingness to act because of self-interest on the part of a member of the commission, his or her place shall be taken by an alternate member designated by the
chairman. Each member and alternate shall continue in office after the expiration of his term until his successor is duly appointed and qualified. All members shall serve without compensation. The commission shall elect annually a chairman and vice-chairman from its own number and a secretary from within or without its number. M.G.L. c. 40C §4.
D. Scope Of BHDC's Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Chapter 40C provides that any city or town may provide that the authority of the commission not extend to a number of potentially excluded items in which case a Certificate of Non-Applicability would issue. In Article 15, as amended, however, Belmont has provided that the Commission "shall have all of the powers and duties of an historical district commission. Thus, in Belmont, the commission has full authority over all exterior architectural features, including but not limited to the items listed below:
(1) Temporary structures or signs, subject, however, to such conditions as to duration of use, location, lighting, removal and similar matters as the commission may reasonably specify.
(2) Terraces, walks, driveways, sidewalks and similar structures, or any one or more of them, provided that any such structure is substantially at grade level.
(3) Walls and/or fences.
(4) Storm doors and windows, screens, window air conditioners, lighting fixtures, antennae and similar appurtenances, or any one or more of them.
(5) The color of paint.
(6) The color of materials used on roofs.
(7) Signs of not more than one square foot in area in connection with use of a residence for a customary home occupation or for professional purposes, provided only one such sign is displayed in connection with each residence and if illuminated is illuminated only indirectly; and one sign in connection with the nonresidential use of each building or structure which is not more than the nonresidential use of each building or structure which is not more than twelve square feet in area, consist of letters painted on wood without symbol or trademark and if illuminated is illuminated only indirectly; or either of them.
(8) The reconstruction, substantially similar in exterior design, of a building, structure or exterior architectural feature damaged or destroyed by fire, storm or other disaster, provided such reconstruction is begun within one year thereafter and carried forward with due diligence.
The Commission has no jurisdiction whatsoever over (1) "interior arrangements" or (2) "architectural features not subject to public view." Chapter 40C §7. As to this latter exclusion, while towns may choose to limit the scope of what is considered within "public view" (See Chapter 40C §8(c)), Belmont has not chosen to do so. In Belmont, "public view" includes a view from any public street, way, park, body of water and presumably from any public building. See Chapter 40C §8C.
Furthermore, the Commission has no authority to "prevent the ordinary maintenance, repair or replacement of any exterior architectural feature within an historic district which does not involve a change in design, material, color or the outward appearance thereof, nor to prevent landscaping with plants, trees or shrubs, nor [can Chapter 40C be] construed to prevent the meeting of requirements certified by a duly authorized public officer to be necessary for public safety because of an unsafe or dangerous condition, nor [can Chapter 40C be] construed to prevent any construction or alteration under a permit duly issued prior to the effective date of the applicable historic district ordinance or by-law." M.G.L. c. 40C §9.
E. Factors To Consider In General, In Making Decisions Under 40C
"In passing, upon [all] matters before it [be it requests for certificates of appropriateness, non-applicability, or hardship], the commission shall consider, among other things, the historic and architectural value and significance of the site, building or structure, the general design, arrangement, texture, material and color of the features involved, and the relation of such features to similar features of buildings and structures in the surrounding area. In the case of new construction or additions to existing buildings or structures, the commission shall consider the appropriateness of the size and shape of the building or structure both in relation to the land area upon which the building or structure is situated and to buildings and structures in the vicinity, and the
commission may in appropriate cases impose dimensional and set-back requirements in addition to those required by applicable ordinance or by-law." M.G.L. c. 40C §7.
F. Specific Standards To Be Used In Passing On Requests For Certificates Of Hardship
The term "hardship," as used in regard to historic preservation legislation, refers to situations where denial of a certificate of appropriateness in a particular case would be unduly oppressive, arbitrary or confiscatory. See generally, Marr v. Back Bay Architectural Commission, 23 Mass. App. Ct. 679 (1987); Gumley v. Board of Selectman of Nantucket, 371 Mass. 718 (1977). Furthermore, hardship should not be considered an isolated factor. The public interest and the intent of the ordnance/bylaw must be balanced against the particulars of a situation. See Wolfson v. Sun Oil Co., 357 Mass. 87 (1970) (c. 40A Zoning case which holds that all requirements must be satisfied before a variance is issued).
The hardship exception language of Chapter 40C §6 is substantially similar to the language authorizing zoning variances for hardship purposes which appears in G.L. c. 40A §10. As such, the courts in passing on decisions rendered by local districts have relied upon court decisions under both sections of Chapter 40. See, Sleeper v. Old King's Highway Regional Historic District Commission, 417 N.E.2d 987 (1996).
"Hardship" has been construed to be limited to situations where the locus is peculiarly affected. See Abbott v. Appleton Nursing Home, Inc., 355 Mass. 217, 221, 243 N.E.2d 912 (1969); Garfield v. Board of Appeals of Rockport, 356 Mass. 37, 41, 247 N.E.2d 720 (1969). The hardship may not be merely a personal hardship to the owner. Dowd v. Board of Appeals of Dover, 5 Mass.App. 148, 156, 360 N.E.2d 640 (1977). Financial or pecuniary hardship to the owner alone will not establish substantial hardship. In other words, the hardship asserted must be unique to the applicant's property and affect it in a particular manner. It cannot constitute a condition which generally afflicts other property within the district. See
Twomey v. Board of Appeals of Worcester, 347 Mass. 684 (1964) (parallel zoning provision regarding variances - M.G.L. c. 40A); Girard v. Board of Appeals of Easton, 14 Mass.App.Ct. 334 (1982) (re: M.G.L. c. 40A). For instance, if artificial siding is not allowed within a district, a property owner cannot claim hardship because he is required to retain the structure's natural siding. Another pre-requisite to a finding of hardship is that it be based only upon factors which directly affect the property and not upon circumstances which result in personal hardship to the owner. See Sleeper v. Old King's Highway Regional Historic District Commission, 11 Mass.App.Ct. 571 (1981) (denial of certificate to erect antenna to amateur radio operator does not constitute statutory hardship). Everpure Ice Mfg. Co. v. Board of Appeals of Lawrence, supra, 324 Mass. at 438, 86 N.E.2d 906 (1949).
Hardship applications are often based on alleged financial loss. Financial detriment alone, however, is not sufficient to constitute statutory hardship. The standard has been strictly construed to require a showing of substantial deprivation of beneficial uses for the property. Delgaudio v. Board of Appeals of Medford, 1 Mass.App. 850 (1973) (fact that it is not economically feasible to erect a two story motel is not sufficient to warrant issuance of variance for six stories).
Furthermore, there is no hardship merely because potential profit may be lost. Abbott v. Appleton Nursing Home, Inc., 355 Mass. at 221, 243 N.E.2d 912; City Council of Waltham v. Vinciullo, 364 Mass. 624, 631, 307 N.E.2d 316 (1974), or because a need exists for the proposed use. Cass v. Board of Appeal of Fall River, 2 Mass.App. 555 557, 317 N.E.2d 77 (1974). Nor will preliminary construction, expense incurred, or the existence of nearby nonconforming uses constitute a hardship. Raia v. Board of Appeals of No. Reading, supra, 4. Mass.App. at 321-322, 347 N.E.2d 694 (1976).
G. Procedural Steps To Be Taken In Connection With Applications For Certificates
Article 15 requires the BHDC to "adopt rules and regulations for the conduct of its business not inconsistent with the provisions of the Historic Districts Act, [40C] or this Article, as the case may be." Exhibit §15.6. The rules applicable to the Belmont Historical District Commission are summarized below.
1. The Meeting
Meetings of a commission shall be held at the call of the chairman and shall be called at the request of two members of the commission and in such other manner as the commission shall determine in its rules. A majority of the members of a commission shall constitute a quorum. The concurring vote of a majority of the members of the commission shall be necessary to issue a certificate of appropriateness, a certificate of non-applicability or a certificate of hardship.
A commission shall determine promptly, and in all events within fourteen days after the filing of an application for a certificate of appropriateness, a certificate of non-applicability or a certificate of hardship, as the case may be, whether the application involves any exterior architectural features which are subject to approval by the commission. If a commission determines that such application involves any such features which are subject to approval by the commission, the commission shall hold a public hearing on such application unless such hearing is dispensed with as hereinafter provided.
The commission shall fix a reasonable time for the hearing on any application and shall give public notice of the time, place and purposes thereof at least fourteen days before said hearing in such manner as it may determine, and by mailing, postage prepaid, a copy of said notice to the applicant, to the owners of all adjoining property and other property deemed by the commission to be materially affected thereby as they appear on the most recent real estate tax list of the board of assessors, to the planning board of the city or town, to any person filing written request for notice of hearings, such request to be renewed yearly in December, and to such other persons as the commission shall deem entitled to notice.
As soon as convenient after such public hearing, but in any event within forty-five days after the filing of the application, or within such further time as the applicant may allow in writing, the commission shall make a determination on the application. If the commission shall fail to make a determination within such period of time, the commission shall thereupon issue a certificate of hardship.
A public hearing on an application need not be held if such hearing is waived in writing by all persons entitled to notice thereof. In addition, a public hearing on an application may be waived by the commission if the commission determines that the exterior architectural feature involved or its category or color, as the case may be, is so insubstantial in its effect on the historic district that it may be reviewed by the commission without public hearing on the application, such action is subject to the proviso, however, that if the commission dispenses with a public hearing on an application, notice of the application shall be given to the owners of all adjoining property and other property deemed by the commission to be materially affected thereby as above provided and ten days shall
elapse after the mailing of such notice before the commission may act upon such application.
In sum, the time constraints governing the commission are as follows:
a. Within 14 days of the filing of an application, BHDC must determine whether an exterior architectural feature is involved, such that public hearing is necessary and, if so;
b. Within a reasonable period of time thereafter, a hearing must be scheduled with a minimum of 14 days notice to owners, adjoiners and others materially affected; and
c. As soon as convenient but no later than 45 days after the hearing, the commission shall make a determination.
2. The Decision
In the case of a disapproval of an application for a certificate of appropriateness, the commission must place upon its records, and must issue to the applicant, the reasons for its determination.
In the case of a determination by the commission that an application for a certificate of appropriateness or for a certificate of nonapplicability does not involve any exterior architectural feature, or involves an exterior architectural feature which is not then subject to review by the commission in accordance with the provision of section eight, the commission shall cause a certificate of nonapplicability to be issued to the applicant.
If the construction or alteration for which an application for a certificate of appropriateness has been filed shall be determined to be inappropriate, or in the event of an application for a certificate of hardship, the commission shall determine whether, owing to conditions especially affecting the building or structure involved, but not affecting the historic district generally, failure to approve an application will involve a substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the applicant, and whether such application may be approved without substantial detriment to the public welfare and without substantial derogation from the intent and purposes of this chapter. If the commission determines that owing to such conditions failure to approve an application will involve substantial
hardship to the applicant and approval thereof may be made without such substantial detriment or derogation, or in the event of failure to make a determination on an application within the time specified in section eleven, the commission shall cause a certificate of hardship to be issued to the applicant.
Each certificate issued by the commission shall be dated and signed by its chairman, vice-chairman, secretary or such other person designated by the commission to sign such certificates on its behalf.
The commission is obligated to keep a permanent record of its resolutions, transactions and determinations and of the vote of each member participating therein, and may adopt and amend such rules and regulations not inconsistent with the provisions of the Historic District Act and prescribe such forms as it shall deem desirable and necessary for the regulation of its affairs and the conduct of its business. The commission shall file a copy of any such rules and regulations with the city or town clerk.
H. Standard Of Review Of BHDC Decisions Under 40C
The standard of review used by the courts in passing on decisions by local historic district commissions is "analogous to that governing exercise of the power to grant or deny special permits" under a local zoning bylaw. Gunley v. Selectmen of Nantucket, supra at 719, 724, 358 N.E.2d 1011. The judge is required to affirm the commission's decision unless, on the facts found by the judge, the local committee's decision was arbitrary, capricious, or legally invalid. Anderson v. Old King's Highway Regional Historic District Commission, 397 Mass. 609 (1986). Appeals from the final judgment entered in the District Court may be pursued to the Appellate Division and to the Appeals Court. These appeals concern only issues of law. See
Anderson v. Old King's Highway Regional Historic District Commission, 493 N.E.2d 188 (1986).
I. Miscellaneous Matters
A. Case Sampling
Several examples of court decisions are illustrative of the approach taken by the Courts in the context of an appeal from the decision of local commissions:
1. In Sleeper v. Old King's Highway Regional Hist., supra a landowner sought review of a decision of a historic district committee denying him a certificate of appropriateness to allow the erection of a 68-foot radio antenna in his backyard. The Appeals Court held that: (1) the committee's finding that the antenna would be inappropriate within the historic district was not irrational; and (2) the landowner was not entitled to affirmance on the basis of hardship," with the court noting that "[b]eing prevented from engaging in his hobby to the fullest, while undoubtedly a blight on Sleeper's spirit, is not a hardship in the statutory sense."
2. In Harris v. Old King's Highway Regional Historic District Commission, 658 N.E.2d 972 (1996), a landowner sought review of a regional historic district commission decision which affirmed the determination of the local historic district committee denying a certificate of appropriateness to convert a garage on the property after a certificate of appropriateness the originally granted for the destruction of the garage and the construction of other buildings. The District Court, determined that there was no rational basis for denying the certificate and reported its decision to the appellate division of the district courts, which discharged the report. Upon appeal, the Supreme Judicial Court held that denial of the certificate was supported by the
record. The Supreme Judicial Court concluded that the basis for the local committee's determination was reasonable, and that the committee could conclude that, with the addition of the shed or studio, the plaintiff's project went beyond what had been generally permitted (and was desired) in the historic district and was incompatible with the district. The local committee possessed a substantial measure of discretion in deciding whether the plaintiff's applications for certificates of appropriateness were in congruity with the historic district. The local committee was required to balance the conflicting interests of the plaintiff to use his property as he saw fit with the rights of others in the district to have the heritage, culture, and physical environment therein (as encompassed in the words "early days of Cape Cod" used in §1 of the Act, as amended) preserved reasonably intact. Since the local committee's decision had a rational basis,
the judge should not have set it aside."
3. In Abbott v. Appleton Nursing Home, Inc., et al., 243 N.E.2d 912 (1969), the fact that a nursing home would not be able to continue economically unless it was enlarged to 34 rather than 22 beds did not create a hardship of a type to justify zoning variance the hardship to a particular nursing home because of a zoning restriction on nursing home expansion generally in an area zoned for single family residences was personal to the nursing home and its use of the land, and was not a hardship especially affecting nursing home's parcel of land per se.
4. In Anderson v. Old King's Highway Regional Historic District Commission, 493 N.E.2d 188 (1986), the owners of a home located within the historic district applied for a certificate of appropriateness for the installation of vinyl clapboards over painted shingles at the ell at the rear of the home. The local committee denied the certificate and the owners appealed. The District Court reversed, stating that the certificate should have been issued on the grounds that only a trained eye at close range could distinguish vinyl clapboards from wooden clapboards. The Supreme Judicial Court in effect upheld the Historic District Commission's decision concluding that (1) the District Court's conclusion that only a trained eye at close range could
distinguish vinyl clapboards from wooden shingles was unwarranted as a matter of law, and (2) the local committee's denial of the certificate of appropriateness was not obviously incongruous with the intent and purposes of the act creating the historic district."
B. Other Miscellaneous Matters
1. Amendments to Town By-law. The by-law creating the district may, "from time-to-time" be amended in any manner not inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter by a two-thirds vote of the city or by two-thirds vote of a town meeting in a town, provided that the substance of such amendment has first been submitted to the historic district commission having jurisdiction over such district for its recommendation and its recommendation has been received or sixty days have elapsed without such recommendation.
2. Applications for Certificates. "Any person who desires to obtain a certificate from the commission shall file with the commission an application for a certificate of appropriateness, a certificate of non-applicability or a certificate of hardship, as the case may be, in such form as the commission may reasonably determine, together with such plans, elevations, specifications, material and other information . . . as may be reasonably deemed necessary by the commission to enable it to make a determination on the application."
3. Demolitions Within Historic District. [I]n the case of [a request for a] demolition, no building permit for construction of a building or structure or for alteration of an exterior architectural feature within an historic district and no demolition permit for demolition or removal of a building or structure within a historic district shall be issued by a city or town or any department thereof until the certificate required by this section has been issued by the commission. M.G.L. c. 40C §6.
III. Belmont's Historical Commission
Chapter 40 Section 8D provides, in its entirety that:
A city or town which accepts this section may establish an historical commission, hereinafter called the commission, for the preservation, protection and development of the historical or archeological assets of such city or town. Such commission shall conduct researches for places of historic or archeological value, shall cooperate with the state archeologist in conducting such researches or other surveys, and shall seek to coordinate the activities of unofficial bodies organized for similar purposes, and may advertise, prepare, print and distribute books, maps, charts, plans and pamphlets which it deems necessary for its work. For the purpose of protecting and preserving such places, it may make such recommendations as it deems
necessary to the city council or selectmen, to the Massachusetts historical commission, that any such place be certified as an historical or archeological landmark. It shall report to the state archeologist the existence of any archeological, paleontological or historical site or object discovered in accordance with section twenty-seven C of chapter nine, and shall apply for permits necessary pursuant to said section twenty-seven C. Any information received by a local historical commission with respect to the location of sites and specimens, as defined in section twenty-six B of chapter nine, shall not be a public record.
The commission may hold hearings, may enter into contracts with individuals, organizations and institutions for services furthering the objectives of the commission's program; may enter into contracts with local or regional associations for cooperative endeavors furthering the commission's program; may accept gifts, contributions and bequests of funds from individuals, foundations and from federal, state or other governmental bodies for the purpose of furthering the commission's program; may make and sign any agreements and may do and perform any and all acts which may be necessary or desirable to carry out the purposes of this section. It shall keep accurate records of its meetings and actions and shall file an annual report which shall be printed in
the case of towns in the annual town report. The commission may appoint such clerks and other employees as it may from time to time require.
The commission shall consist of not less than three nor more than seven members. In cities the members shall be appointed by the mayor, subject to the provisions of the city charter, except that in cities having a city manager form of government, said appointments shall be by the city manager, subject to the provisions of the charter; and in towns they shall be appointed by the selectmen, excepting towns having a town manager form of government, in which towns appointments shall be made by the town manager; subject to the approval of the selectmen. When a commission is first established, the terms of the members shall be for one, two or three years each. Any member of a commission so appointed may, after a public hearing if requested, be
removed for cause by the appointed authority. A vacancy occurring otherwise than by expiration of a term shall in a city or town be filed for the unexpired term in the same manner as an original appointment. Said commission may acquire in the name of the city or town by gift, purchase, grant bequest, devise, lease or otherwise the fee or lesser interest in real or personal property of significant historical value and may manage the same.
IV. The Independent, Substantive Provision of Article 15
As previously stated in addition to incorporating chapters 40C in toto and Section 8D of Chapter 40, Article 15 contains some provisions which are separate and distinct from those chapters and which create additional powers and duties for the BHDC and BHC.
These include "without limitation" the following:
15.13 The Commission established hereunder shall have all of the powers and duties of the Belmont Historical Commission, as provided In Chapter 40, Section 8D, of the General Laws and, upon the establishment of the Commission hereunder, the former Belmont Historical Commission shall cease to exist.
15.4 The Commission shall have all of the powers and duties of a historic district commission and all of the powers and duties of a historical commission (and may in the exercise of any of the powers and duties accept money gifts and expend the same, and, subject to appropriation or receipt of such gifts, employ clerical and technical assistants or consultants) and the aforesaid powers and duties shall include without limitation the following:
(a) To conduct a survey of Belmont buildings for the purpose of determining those of historic significance, architecturally or otherwise, and pertinent facts about them, acting in collaboration with the Planning Board and the Belmont Historical Society to the extent either may from time to time be able to undertake such work, and to maintain and from time to time revise detailed listings of historic sites and buildings in Belmont and data about them appropriately classified with respect to national, state or local significance, to period or field of interest, or otherwise;
(b) To propose from time to time as it deems appropriate the establishment, in accordance with the provisions of the Historic Districts Act, of additional historic districts and changes in historic districts;
(c) To determine an appropriate system of markers for selected historic sites and buildings not already sufficiently marked, to arrange for preparation and installation of such markers and to arrange for care of historic markers;
(d) To arrange for preparation and publication of maps and brochures and descriptive material about Belmont historic sites and buildings, arrange for convenient walks or tours, or otherwise;
(e) To cooperate with and advise the Planning Board, the Highway Department and other town departments in matters involving historic sites and buildings;
(f) To cooperate with and enlist assistance for Belmont from the National Park Services, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, the Society for the Preservation of New England Antiquities, and other agencies, public and private, from time to time concerned with historic sites and buildings;
(g) To advise owners of historic buildings in Belmont on problems of preservation.
15.5 The Commission may recommend to the Selectmen as needed appointment of advisory committees of historians and persons interested in architecture or other arts or in historic restoration or preservation to assist in a manner comparable to the National Park Service Advisory Board or Consulting Committee.
| 
