Start with the exact Article 85 paper you are missing. In Boston, an application marked complete, a significance determination, a hearing notice, a Commission determination, a written delay-expiration notice and an Inspectional Services demolition permit answer different questions. Match the application reference and date before treating any two files as the same case.
The Boston Landmarks Commission says its online portal can review past Demolition Delay applications. Use that route to locate the application trail, then compare any hearing notice or decision by title and date. A significance finding sends a case into later review; it is not the demolition permit.
Name each paper before you compare dates
- Complete application: the City’s Article 85 filing page explains that staff first decides whether the submission is complete. Completeness starts review; it is not a significance decision.
- Significance determination: staff records whether the building is significant or not significant. A significant finding leads to a hearing and alternatives review, rather than directly supplying permission to demolish.
- Hearing notice: preserve the hearing date and application reference. The notice identifies a scheduled proceeding; it does not record the Commission’s result.
- Commission determination: the Article 85 text linked from the current City page distinguishes a determination and its stated reason from the delay that may follow. Record the exact document title and decision date.
- Terminal notice and later permit: the linked text identifies a written delay-expiration notice and a no-feasible-alternative determination that can authorize Inspectional Services to issue a demolition permit. Neither document is the permit itself.
This order is a record-matching aid, not a deadline calculator. The linked Article 85 text shows that the records have different roles, but it does not display a newly verified edition date. Recheck the current City route before relying on a document label for a live project.
When the dates point to different files
Consider a fictional folder with a completeness email dated April 2, a significance memo dated April 10, a hearing notice dated May 6 and an unsigned scan marked “delay ended” on June 14. A demolition permit in the folder is dated June 28 but carries a different reference. Sorting those papers by date does not prove that they belong to one Article 85 case.
Make a short reconciliation note for each paper: title, application reference, address as printed, decision date, signer or issuing office, and the next record it names. If the June scan lacks the reference shown on the earlier papers, keep it separate. Ask for the official written notice or determination that connects the two references instead of filling the gap with an assumed delay date. The dates and references in this example are invented.
Use the portal and hearing notices as separate routes
The Commission page documents two public starting points: review of past Demolition Delay applications in its portal and a separate search for public hearing notices. The portal returned no readable text in this check, so no address, parcel, application-number control, attachment or coverage year was verified. An address or application reference you already possess can narrow an inquiry, but it is not presented here as a tested portal field.
If a named older notice or determination is missing, the Commission page lists BLC@boston.gov as a general program contact. Ask which City record holds the specific document, using the known application reference, document title and approximate date. This contact is not a verified formal copy-order procedure, and the reviewed pages do not promise retention, disclosure, delivery time or a complete online archive. No contact or request was made.
Follow the Inspectional Services record separately
The current-linked Article 85 text treats a no-feasible-alternative determination as authorization for Inspectional Services to issue a demolition permit. That wording leaves a separate permit step. Verify the permit number and issue record rather than treating the Commission determination as the permit.
If the missing material is a plan kept with the permit file, the Boston building-plans guide explains the separate long-form permit and bin-number route. If the question concerns later occupancy or fire signoff, use the Boston occupancy-record guide instead. Those later records do not change which Article 85 decision was issued.
A missing online result does not prove that Article 85 review never occurred or that demolition was authorized. Official Boston sources reviewed October 8, 2026 UTC. No property, application, portal, hearing, permit or records-request search was performed.