Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commission tables Kilmer Mansion private-property sign decision, asks for period-appropriate designs and police input

City of Binghamton Commission on Architecture, Urban Design, and Historic Preservation · August 5, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Temple Concord and Kilmer Mansion representatives sought approval to post private-property/no-trespassing signs at 9 Riverside Drive. Commissioners asked for more detail on sign placement, fonts and materials for street-facing entrances and voted to table the request pending additional design options and police consultation.

Glenn Thomas, speaking for Temple Concord (which manages the property connected to Kilmer Mansion), presented a security-driven request to post private-property/no-trespassing signs at entrances. Thomas described steps already taken — security film, cameras and perimeter lighting — and said legal and security advisers recommended door-mounted signage to strengthen enforcement.

Thomas also reported the Binghamton Police Department had been conducting frequent unsolicited checks at the site, saying that "This year, as of May 24, they've done it 76 times," which commissioners noted as context for the security request. Commissioners debated aesthetics, materials and placement: several urged historically appropriate fonts and colors for street-visible signs while allowing simpler signs on rear/service doors. Commissioners suggested the applicant research period-appropriate fonts and provide visual mock-ups showing exact placement on each door.

After discussion Commissioner Brian Haas moved to table the item pending submission of specific sign locations, fonts and colors and consultation with the police department; the motion was seconded and passed by voice vote.