Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council adopts future‑land‑use changes after heated public comment on Sixth Street historic districts
Summary
After extensive public comment and a narrow planning commission recommendation against the change, the City Council approved an amendment to the 2040 comprehensive plan’s future‑land‑use map affecting blocks of Sixth Street to add residential scale preservation designations.
The Brookings City Council voted Tuesday to amend the 2040 comprehensive plan’s future‑land‑use map for a stretch of Sixth Street, a change recommended by the Brookings Historic Preservation Commission intended to protect the form and scale of two adjoining historic districts.
The amendment replaces certain medium‑density residential (MDR) designations with Residential Scale Preservation (RSP) in targeted blocks between Main Avenue and Madera Avenue. Supporters said the change is a guidance decision about “how change should occur” rather than an immediate zoning change; opponents and some staff earlier cautioned it could affect future development flexibility.
“Future Land Use Map is not gonna stop the removal of historic structures. There's a whole other process through the 11.1 review that they would need to go through,” Community Development Director Mike Struck told the council, briefing members on the technical limits of plan maps. But members of the Historic Preservation Commission and several residents urged the council to adopt the amendment so the city’s long‑range guidance would reflect preservation priorities.
“Historic housing stock remains one of the most affordable housing options for entry‑level households,” BHPC Chair Matthew Weiss told the council. Commissioners also argued the amendment would better align the plan with the scale of existing homes and reduce the risk of incompatible, larger developments that could undermine neighborhood character.
Dozens of residents—many from the two local historic districts—spoke in favor of the amendment during a lengthy public hearing. They described the neighborhoods as walkable, cohesive and historically significant and warned that large redevelopment could reduce the districts’ visibility and erode neighborhood character.
Planning staff and the Development Review Team recommended leaving the future land use map unchanged and the planning commission—after two hearings—recommended 5‑4 against the change. Council members, however, said they were persuaded by testimony and by a desire to ensure the comp plan’s vision aligns with preservation goals in this specific corridor.
The motion to adopt the amendment passed on a roll call vote. Councilmembers said the change is advisory—zoning and state historic review processes would still govern any demolition or construction proposals—and that future rezonings or projects would continue to subject to public review.
The council also directed staff to continue public outreach and clarified that the amendment does not itself change zoning or halt development; rather it updates the city’s long‑range vision to reflect preservation priorities for these blocks.
