NEW YORK – Yesterday, Manhattan Borough President Gale A. Brewer offered testimony (PDF) at a hearing of the New York City Council Land Use Committee, raising her deep concerns about the current version of Int. 775. In its current form, the legislation sets up hard deadlines for the Landmarks Preservation Commission’s consideration of items on its calendar, and would ban any and all items not designated within the set time frame from reconsideration for at least five years, regardless of whether a decision was made on the item’s merits.
Borough President Brewer issued the following statement after the hearing:
“As I testified yesterday, I think Land Use Chairman Greenfield, Landmarks Chairman Koo, and I share a common goal – property owners, residents, and preservationists alike all deserve a more transparent and predictable landmarking process, with real timelines. That said, the current draft of this bill does more harm than good.
“I’m encouraged that Chairmen Greenfield and Koo indicated their willingness today to listen and consider changes to the bill. I think we can accomplish our common goal of a better landmarking process without undermining the work of the Landmarks Preservation Commission or dramatically weakening the Landmarks Law. With the input and help of all stakeholders, including real estate, community boards, and our city’s passionate and sophisticated preservation advocates, I think we can come up with effective reforms that make sense.
“I offer my thanks and congratulations to the many preservation groups who mobilized to raise concerns about this legislation and made their presence felt at yesterday’s hearing, including the New York Landmarks Conservancy, the Historic Districts Council, Landmarks West!, the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation, and Friends of the Upper East Side Historic Districts. In addition, I thank my fellow elected colleagues who submitted testimony, including Assemblymembers Richard Gottfried, Deborah Glick, and Jo Anne Simon.”
Brewer identified three key problems in Int. 775 that a good compromise would need to address. These are:
• Five-year ban on reconsideration of items. The current draft of Int. 775 would tie the agency’s hands in an unprecedented manner by banning for five years the reconsideration of any individual landmarking item that does not receive a landmark designation within the timeline set by the bill (up to a year for individual landmarks and up to two years for proposed historic districts).
• Inflexible, impractically short timelines. The 1- and 2-year time frames are too short to allow for the additional research and negotiation that often are part of finalizing more complex items. Under the framework in the current version of Int. 775, more than a quarter of the city’s historic districts would not have been created, including Mott Haven in the Bronx, Bedford-Stuyvesant in Brooklyn, Hamilton Heights and Mount Morris Park in Manhattan, and Jackson Heights in Queens.
• Forcing LPC to clear its entire existing calendar within 18 months. This provision of the bill includes no requirements for public hearings or any public process, and it too applies a five-year ban on reconsideration for any item that is not designated within the time limit. This would interfere with the execution of LPC’s already-announced plan for clearing its backlog, and it virtually guarantees a large number of calendared items would not be considered in a public or transparent manner.
Contact: Andrew Goldston | agoldston (at) manhattanbp.nyc (dot) gov | 917.960.1187
