Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City planning proposes clearer landmark standards, changes to demolition rules following appellate guidance
Summary
The City—9s Division of City Planning presented ordinance changes to clarify landmark designation standards and to align the demolition review process with a recent appellate court interpretation of the Municipal Land Use Law (MLUL).
The City—9s Division of City Planning presented ordinance changes to clarify landmark designation standards and to align the demolition review process with a recent appellate court interpretation of the Municipal Land Use Law (MLUL). The items were discussed with the council during the Jan. 27, 2025 caucus.
Planner Maggie O—9Neil told the council the proposed ordinance (ordinance 25-6) revises chapters 345 and 105 to replace the city—9s existing one-sentence designation standard with a fuller set of criteria and required documents modeled on state and national preservation standards. O—9Neil said the State Historic Preservation Office reviewed and approved the revised standards and both the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) and the Planning Board signed off on the change.
She also described modifications to the city—9s demolition ordinance that were prompted by a July 2023 appellate court ruling. O—9Neil said the court—9s interpretation of the MLUL required the city to stop using a prior administrative "determination of significance" pathway; the ordinance therefore removes that route and instead routes demolition review through the HPC and standard demolition-permit procedures. Staff said the department has been operating under the revised process since October 2023 and that applicants have not experienced delays under the new workflow.
Council members asked whether work on historic Engine 10 and Ladder 12 required additional review; staff said the planned repairs had been reviewed by the Division of Architecture and Infrastructure and, because the work is limited to repairs, no additional state review was required. Staff also noted bid documents for that rehabilitation were issued the prior week and they expected to pick a contractor within about 20 days.
The ordinance language and process changes were presented for council consideration and insertion on the formal agenda; no final votes were taken at the caucus.
