Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and officials urge hold on Greenberg historic-district law changes, citing unclear standards and equity concerns
Summary
Public commenters and planning-board representatives urged the Town Board to hold over proposed local-law CD1 to clarify standards and procedures for historic-district and landmark designations and to involve residents, citing implementation gaps and equity questions.
A stream of public commenters Dec. 16 urged the Town Board to delay a proposed local-law amendment (CD1) that would change the composition and quorum rules for the Historic Landmarks Preservation Board, arguing the law lacks clear, measurable standards and adequate community consultation.
Walter Simon, a resident, said the code does not supply a measurable standard to decide what qualifies as a landmark and cited examples of properties treated inconsistently. "There is no measurable standard in that code of how they operate," Simon said, urging the board to gather facts before acting.
Several speakers, including former planning-board members and commissioners, said the problem is not the statute's criteria but the lack of procedures and implementation by the Historic Landmarks Preservation Board. Garrett Duquesne noted that chapter 2-35 contains nomination criteria and that the local law before the board focuses chiefly on membership and process. "I just did want to call everyone's attention that chapter 2-35 is very comprehensive in that regard," Duquesne said.
Judith A. DeVille, identifying herself as a former elected official and Parkway Gardens resident, said residents should be consulted and warned that designations imposed without community engagement could reproduce inequities. "Deciding a designation of a historic African American community without bringing the residents together ... is not acceptable," she told the board.
Several commenters urged that the planning board be given an advisory or review role and recommended a pause so staff, the Historic Landmarks Preservation Board and the planning board can draft clearer procedures and outreach plans. Board members discussed recruitment challenges for volunteer boards and the difficulty of getting a quorum; some members said reducing board size responds to participation challenges, while others said the town should recruit more volunteers before reducing membership.
The transcript records a motion and discussion about CD1 near the end of the agenda but does not record a complete roll-call outcome for the local-law vote in the provided segments; public commenters repeatedly asked the board to hold the measure over for further study and community input.
