Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHistoric Preservation Law 200105/07/2081 12:21 2122494875 PHOEBE COHEN PHOEBE COHEN P~,GE 1915VILLAGE LANE ORIENT N, Y. 11957 631.323-2519 82 Ms. Jean W. Cochran Supervisor, Town of Sou,hold Town Hall P.O. Box 1179 Southold NY 11979 Dear Ms. Cochran, I would like to express my opposition to the proposed Historic Preservation Law. I have been a resident of Villege Lane, Orient, since 1~66. I have always been extremely sensitive to issues of historic; preservation, and have tried to keep my house as historically correct as possible. In fact, my husband and I received a historic preservation award from Southold Town for the fa;:mcla restoration of our late Victorian house. We did considerable research to determine the original colors of our house and the manner in which paint was applied in the late 19~ century. We repaintad our house following those guidelines, at considerable personal expense. I do not oppose the proposed law out of disinterest or insensitivity to the social and esthetic value of maintaining the architectural fabric of a histodc community. Raffler, it is because I believe the law aa pro;)o~cl places onerous restrictions on owners of historic property, threatens to destroy the economic diversity of our community, and gives enormous power to officials who are appointed rather than elected. The proposed law does not establish objective standards for historic property, but leaves dMemfinafion of what is historically appropriate to an appointed commission. The language of Section 56-7 dealing with *Criteria for Approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness' is excessiveiy vague. Words lika 'compatibility ', "appropriateness to the property', '~hythm of spacing of properties on streets" etc. etc. allow for subjective interpretations--interpretations that will be made by appointed officials who may or may not have their own agendas. The potential for abuse of power is great In the absence of clear-cut standards. The language of the pmpossd law is not specific about what constitutes extedor alterations (Section 56-6). Would one have to apply for permission to put in pral~'ra~icenS .and ~c)rm windows? Shutters? What if the historically corTent buildina IS in conflict with the town building code--e,g, the requirement for banisters on exterior Staim, which old Victorian houSeS did not have. The requirement for maintenance and repair laudable on the surface, may imlxme undue hardsh p on residents of e historic district who might be going through t~:)men_o~J_c~.d. _ff~_,.._it~_?_mt .a. pa~ .cular time. Th!s would be especially tragic for Iong- w ,,,ueny res,uen[s. Iz wouia seem that th~s provision ia dasigrted for the visual 85/87/2881 12:21 2122494875 PHOEBE COHEN PAGE 83 comfort of affluent residents-many of them. owne? of second.~n_,d_ The , .... ~., ,,~h~r~ rather than for the protect on of me communm/as a w.u,.~. ~i'n"e' ;~f"~l~'to'"'~l'-O00 per day would surely, lo.roe people to_. h~..v_e_ to And whet if there were · sovere economic oowntown, artec"ring mu~ u,a,, a H,,ving this laW on the books would become en intolerable burden. encumbered by vague but potentially far-reaching resm~au-=~ au,,,,,.~-.~. · appointed officials. For all then reasons I urge you to not to pass this well-m .eani.ng but serious architecture of our cnElrmlng VlllElge. we ~reuau~, uu, ,,,~ , burdensome legislEltion to tell us how to care for them. ThElnk you very much for your attention. Sincerely, Phoebe Cohen 05/87/200i 11:12 2122494075 PHOEBE COHEN PAGE MOUNT $11~1111 ~-V.Co~h.r&l], -~llper~Jsor SCHOOL ~"l~wll of~oIJ~hold, TowII H~l M E D icl ~3J09~ l~m~ Ro~I, PO Box 1179 Southold, N~v York 11971 May 7, 2001 Dr. Morris B. Bender Pro fe.uor of Neure/og)' One Gu~ave L Levy ~ il35 Ntwyor~ NY 10029-6574 ~one 212.241.7068 Email: bernzrd.cohen~mssm.edu I should like to express my opposition to the new H/stor/c Preserve/on Law that will be considered for passage tomorrow evening, May $~ for the followin8 reasons: First of all, it is not ncedcd. Oficnt has boon subsUmt/ally bcam/fied over the last 10-15 years, without any parlicular need for a spccial Historic Preservation Society. Some people are upset because several old bu/ldings were destroyed and replaced with buildings that do not meet their taste. In each case, the o 'nginal buildings were in bad shape and were not arch/texturally important, having been occupied by people who neither had ~ energy nor the money to repair thom. Thus, there was no dramatic loss of historic awhi~cctore. Sccondly, there are no specific criteria that dcfmc what is historic and what is riel Beaut~ here L~ essentially in the eyc of thc beholder, and the~e will be substantial opportmgty for judgments ofta~to that will have little to do with preservation of the buildings. Third, fines for noncompliancc can be onerous, particularly for people who have little money and are not able to spend it to maintain thcir houses when they have other v/tal needs to meet to smwive. One of the pleasures of Oriant has been that there is a broad range of people with different incomes and backgrounds. This will t/p the balance in favor of those for whom the costs of renovation and maintenance are not pmhibRive. Finally, this w/Il establish an unaeccasary bureaucracy that is sure to fostcr bad fi:clings among people who should bc living together in harmony. Wc own a lgstonc housc in Orient, a ted and green ldgh Victorian, built in 1890 by Cicero Bn~.,se ICing. We are aware of historic v~lucs and several ye~'s ago n:c~i,~xi a citation from the Southold Town Board for our work in restoring it. We will continue to work on our house, as needed. However, the proposed law w/Il forcc us to subm/t to the judgment of people who may or may not be hnparfial, and who may or may not have the knowledge to makc such judgmants. This will not help the restoration and lxesetvation process, mad I am slrongly opposed to thc passage of this law. Thanks for considering my opimon, FROH : Panasonic FAX SYSTEM PHONE NO. Jan Moor-Janko~ski. MD Deborah Dumont 71~ Village Lane Oricn~ long Island, NY 119g'/ (¢~1) 323-24~6 M8~. 07 2801 iO:42PM P1 Town HaU, 5~95 Maia R~ad P.O. Box 11'79 Sourhold. NY 119'/1 R.~ A LOCAL LAW TO E.SI'ABLISH A I-iI~TORIC PRESERVATION LAW IH THE TOWN OF SOUTI-10LD VIA FAX: 6~ 1-765-1823 Dear Supervisor Cochran: We both, and our child~n of v~ni~ age, Sarah and ~ a~ domicil~l at the above ,~a,4,,~a, have the old prop~'ty smc~ 1969 and vou~ ia Oriant. Wc bo~h work in New York City and ~aerefore may n~t I~ able to aUt~nd tom~,,,,.,,~'s mee,g.n~ ~ gae above law at the Southold Town Hall. We ar~ writing to you to ex~ our enthu.~iaa6c approval of the Plv..~:~v~oa Law_ Youm v~ry sine..e~ly, ~ Dumo~4~Irs. Jan l~,4aakowski) Jailt Moor Jankofski, MD EXPOSED BRICK May 1,2001 Jean Cochran Supervisor Southold Suffolk County P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Dear Jean: My family is in full support of the "Historic Preservation Law". There are some comments and questions we have regarding V-293 and V-295 and will need more time to review these resolutions. Overall, we believe that the town of Orient and the Southold district need to protect its historic properties and that the overall tone, intent and content of the proposed resolutions must move forward. Andrew Cohen Deborah Lyons 355 Skippers Lane Orient, NY cc: Orient Historic District Preservation Association MAY 3 exposedbrick corn 212.226.0060 [~ 212.226.0974 591 Broadway, NY, NY 10012 05/07/01 11:4~ FAX 212 754 4424.i BOSTON CONSULTING GRP- /~. ~,h. X~-/~i002 BILL MATASSONI To~H~ 53095 M~n Road Sou~ol~New York 11971 ~ a t~ dat~ A~ 20. 2001 to m~d~ of ~e "~t ~o~c D~' you ch~d a wi~ pmv~ '~e~ pro. on" of buildings and off~ "in~ntiv~" ~'o~e~ of ~s~ ~s. T~s develop~ mt. ~ ye~ ~e, ~ ~s~ ~t, we ~ ~g p~opl~ ~ give them up so ~at our ~o~ dghu ~ n~ inviol~ble_ They c~ ~d shoed ~ llmit~ f~ impo~t masons s~h end~ge~ ng fellow ~fiz~ns. But ~ ~ no ~o~ ~ ~. ~ent ~s nev~ loo~ be~. who bu) da ho~s ~ ~n ~ n~ ~ly love ~d ~et ~ But ~y ~so w~t ~o live in ~ ~ do ~ proper? I do~t i~ But who ~ ~ say? ~o~ ~o~t, is ~s "to~st b~" ~ecdo~ ~at up~ :~ ~ most a~m yo~ ~ is you ~v~ ~o e~ce of ha~ e~ ~s~ tssues My ~fe a~ I o~ two ho~s. We love ~ ~. ~ n~xt ~ bo~ of ~em we ~ve ~o~ who do · ings to .~d ~i~ ~ek p~o~s we don't ~. B~ we wo~ld ~v~r think to e~a~ o~ stop i~ id. ~act at ~ fe~s ~at ~k pmp~ ~nes, O~.' '~ Revolufion~ Co.ge, ckca 1730 ~ffiage L ~, Orient 1970 VILLAGE LANE ORIENT, NY 11957 770, Comment for Preservation District Public Heating May 8, 2001: Bill Matassoni, Village Lane (Revolutionary Cottage), Orient called to voice his opposition. He cannot be present for the heating and would like his comments on the record. He recognizes that it's not a black and white issue - sometimes the taking of property rights is justified. On the other hand, they should be taken very carefully. The idea of supervising the taste of a community is not a good enough reason to take people's property rights away. He is not sure that a commission is going to have a positive impact. He would put love and ownership above consensus and taste in terms of eventually doing what is right for the community. rbw 3 May 20001 Ms. Jean W. Cochran Supervisor Town Hail, 53095 Main Road PO Box 1179 SoutlaoJd, NY 11971 Dear Ms. Cochran; I am writing to express our support for the activities of the Orient Historic District Preservation Association and the Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold under review. As residents of Orient and homeowners on Village Lane, we are deeply committed to fair laws that guard historic preservation. Careful but measured oversight of the proposed commission will give us assurance that the special and unique character of Orient is protected and not lost. We will not be able to attend the May 8~h hearing, but wish here to express our full support for the Historic Preservation Law. Jane Friesen and Ed Manning 690 Village Lane PO Box 562 Orient, New York 11957 LEGALS,,. a-From previous page shall irmnediately cease. No further work shall be undertaken on the project as long as a stop work order is in effect. Section 56-13 Maintenance and Repair Required Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to prevent the ordinary main- tenance and repair of any exterior archi- tectural feature of a landmark or proper- ty within a historic district which does not involve a change in design, material. or outward appearance. No owner or person with an interest in veal property designated as a landmark or included within an historic district shall permit the property to fall into a serious state of disrepair which would result in the dete- rioration of any exterior architecture; feature which would, in the judgment of the historic preservation commission. produce a detrimental effect upon the character of the historic district as a whole or the life and character of the property itsel£ Examples of such deteri- oration include: (a) deterioration of exterior walls or other vertical supports; (b) deterioration of roofs or other horizontal members; (c) deterioration of exterior chim- neys; (d) deterioration or crumbling of (e) ineffective waterproofing of exte- rior wails, roofs, or foundations, includ- ing broken windows or doors; and (f) deterioration of any feature so as to create a hazardous condition which could lead to the claim that demolition is necessary for the public safety. Section 56-14 Violations (a) Failure to comply with any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed a violation and the ¥iolator shall be liable to a fine of not less than $250 nor more than $1000 for each day the violation continues. (b) Any person who demolishes. alters, constructs, or permits a designat- ed property to fall into a serious state of disrepair in violation of this ordinance shall be required to restore the property and its site to its appearance prior to the violation. Any action to enforce this subsection shall be brought by the town attorney. This civil remedy shall be in addition to and not in lieu of any crimi- nal prosecution and penalty. Section 56-15 Appeals Any person aggrieved by a designa- tion decision by the Town Board or a decision of the historic preservation commission relating to a hardship or a certificate of appropriateness may, with- in 45 days of the decision, file a written application with the Town Board for review oftbe decision. Reviews shall be conducted and based on the same record that was before the Town Board or com- mission and using the same criteria. Section 56-16 Severability The provisions of this Law are sever- able. If any provision of this local law or its application is held invalid, said inva- lidity shall not affect any other provi- sion or application of this local law which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application of the local law. Section 56-17 When Effective This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as provided by law. Attachment A Historic Preservation Cormnisslon 7 Members, 4 year appointment, town wide. Year New Members Old Members 2 I 6 3 2 4+1 4 2 2+1+2 5 2 1+2+2 6 I 2+2+2 7 Repeat Attachment B Historic District Review Board 3 Members, 4 year appointment, spe- cific to histrric district. Year New Members Old Members 1 3 2 3 3 I 2 4 2+1 5 2 1 6 1+2 7 Repeat BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, MARCH 27, 2001. ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE SOLrfHOLD TOWN CLERK 1834-1TA5 *** TX REPORT TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID ST, TIME [;SAGE T PGS, SENT RESULT 2354 2983287 Suffolk Times 02/04 08:12 07'22 20 OR ELIZABETH A, NEVILLE TOWN CLERK REGISTR. A.R OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRLg. GE OFFICER RECORDS M-~NAGEMENT OFFICER FREI~DOM OF INFOY4IVIATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O, Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fo~ (fiSl) 765~6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FAX TRANSMITTAL TO: SuFFOLK TIMES - ATTENTION: CHRISTINA WEBER FROM: LYNDA NL BOHN DATE: 3/30/2001 LEGAL NOTICES Number of pages being faxed 20 , including cover page If total transmittal is not received, please call 631 765-18§0. fax 631 765-6145 Two (2) Notice to Bidders: Computer Equipment & 2 Used Vehicles (1 page ca) One (1) Public Notice: Bond for $ 230,000.00 (2 pages) Five (5) Public Hearing Notices: LL on Stop Sign (2 pages) LL on Repealing a Local Law (1 page) LL on Historic Preservation (8 pages) LL on Tax Exemption (2 pages) ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE TOWN CLERK REGISTRAJ~ OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FAX TRANSMITTAL TO: SUFFOLK TIMES - ATTENTION: CHRISTINA WEBER PROM: LYNDA M. BOHN DATE: 3/30/2001 LEGAL NOTICES Number of pages being faxed 20 including cover page If total transmittal is not received, please call 631 765-1800. fax 631 765-6145 Two (2) Notice to Bidders: Computer Equipment & 2 Used Vehicles (1 page ea) One (1) Public Notice: Bond for $ 230,000.00 (2 pages) Five (5) Public Hearing Notices: LL on Stop Sign (2 pages) LL on Repealing a Local Law (1 page) LL on Historic Preservation (8 pages) LL on Tax Exemption (2 pages) LL on Building Permit Fees (2 pages) for publication in the April 5, 2001 editions newspaper. Call me if you have any questions. THANK YOU. Please acknowledge receipt of this legal notice by signing below and returning by fax to 765-6145, attention: Betty Neville. Thank you. Received By Date ~ECEIVED API~ 9 Soulhold Town Clerk DEPARTNIENT OF PLANNING -- COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ROBERT J. GAF'FNEY SUFFOLK. COUNTY EXECUTIVE THOMAS ISLES, AICP DIRECTOR OF PLANNING April 3, 2001 Town Clerk Town of Southold Re: Proposed amendments to Chapters 56 & 85 of the Code of Ordiance of the Town of Southold (public hearings: 5/8/01). Gentlemen: Pursuant to Sections A 14-14 to 23 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, the above referenced application is not within the jurisdiction of the Suffolk County Planning Commission. Very truly yours, Thomas Isles Director of Planning GGN:cc G:\CC HORNY~ZONINGW. ONIN GIWO RKING\NON-,IUR~20 JAN/SD4803 APR S/s Gerald G. Newman Chief Planner May 21, 2001 Charles T. King and Joann King 27555A Main Rd. Orient, N.Y., 11957 RECEIVED MM 2 2 2001 $outl~ol~l Town Clerk Supervisor Jean Cochran and Members of the Town Board 53095 Main Street Southold, N.Y., 11971 Dear Supervisor Cochran and Members of the Town Board: We wish to add our names to the list of homeowners who are objecting to the Historic Preservation Law, at least in it's present state. We think it is incredible that a committee could have the authority to put restrictions on our property. Please at least allow the homeowners in the community to vote on whether or not they desire to have this law. Very truly yours, Joann and Charles King RECEIVED MAY 2 'i 2001 Southold Town Cle Mr. and Mrs. Joseph M. Andrade, Jr. 975 Navy Street, P.O. Box 147 Orient, N.Y., 11957 May 21, 2001 Supervisor Jean Cochran and Members of Town Board Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Rd. Southold, N.Y., 11971 Dear Supervisor Cochran and Members of the Town Board: We oppose the enactment of the proposed historic preservation law. We built our home, pay taxes and now are possibly facing a review board who may come around and tell us what to do with it. We were initially led to believe by some proponants of this law, that this committee would be triggered by a request for a building permit. However, there seems to be nothing in the law that states that. How in America can a committee tell you what to do with your home? This should not be forced on anyone who does not want to be included. In the section that deals with violations, the teeth are mighty sharp. In fact, we cannot think of any fines (except in cases where the health and safety of the general public are at risk), in the local Court where there are fines as heavy as this. For an example, supposing that there is an elderly person living in a house in the historic district, all alone on a very limited budget. The house fails into minor disrepair because of a lack of funds to maintain the house. The person may not have the "matching funds" to apply for a grant and certainly would not have the resources to get a loan. Certainly this committee will come around and enforce their law. People should be entitled to the quiet enjoyment of their homes. We believe in the sanctity of an individual's property rights. If this law is passed, the "facade" of a home will be just the beginning. The Town has a Planning Dept., a Building Dept., and a Board of Appeals. Is this committee going to usurp their powers? Please at least let this come up for a public referendum. There is a silent majority who are not in favor of this, and a very vocal minority who are, and who we are sure will be on this committee. Please do not disregard the Petition handed in at the local meeting where 100 signatures were turned in to you, against the law. Very truly yours, Barbara and Joseph Andrade, Jr. Sttb]ect: Open let/er to the Soltthold Town Board It is with much dismay that I s t ~ere.at my :tam/lies' kitchen table contemplating my thoughts transcrib~ to thc ~cn word. Famed 8tat~en~ mmh as, 'R is with malice t~wards none and cha~ toward all' ~at I would I~c to keep th~ ~p~t of tiffs Ic~r - how flint tums o~ hewex~r is ~ee~ain, T x~ll not revise only ~it this dr~ I appeared before you'this past Tucgday evening - the issue at has~ was and w/Il continue 1o be one ofll~ most fundamental righta w~ cherish in this great nation of our% "the right of pr/vat, ownership ofproperty", My flmm w~re that thew wa~ going to be a taking of'property and righls that are guaranteed to each and every citizen oflhJs exm~ulx[ty. [ w/Il qaote a few Pres/dentS tl~m~gltont Offs letter. To Begin Thomas Jefferaon said, ~The policy of American government is to leave their citizens free, neither rcslraining nor aiding them in their ~trsuits." This present Term Board needs lo take. t,ced of that philosophy. Yet, cither tmknowingly, uncafingly, ox' conspiratorially this Town Board has allowed a much more grievons offence to occur. How in God's name could this Town Board allow bureancrats to confiscate anywhere betx~en 1,200 to 2,000 homes and properly. That's fight, confiseatel And who did these burcauerals confiscate the fights to do with their homes and property from? Wall Jn 1he words of Ronald Reagan it would be, "lndividt~als each with his or her own hopes and dreams, plans and problems and the kind of quiet core'age: that makes this whole ontmtry mn better than just about any other place on earth." Thai would be before home~ and businesses where placed on a so called "SPL1A List". What's a SPLIA List nn~ might ask? That is a fancy acronym tbr, The Society for Ihe Preservalion of Long Isle nd Antiquities. No~v, Pll pa0se for aatiqu~lies aa in,erecting word "ancient times, middle age~." Well, ] would like to introduce anyone who did ~his to M~th~elah. Just one last poJot that I would like m make. Those signatures that T presenled to you repre~nt people who live ia mxmderlifl homes. At the time of collection I had yet to fillly understand lhe impact of SPLIA, no less how feasibly lacking in Judeo-Chrisfian ethics that proposed law is. This is very gemmn.e m all of us and w/Il effect how we live our lives. 8tfll, I am encouraged that we cam right fl~is ship ofatate that has be~n so stlddenly tossed asunder. For in the. same spirit that then Gen. Washington was asked, "Why where the~ ¢mergJDg Americans happ~ and 6~nfident in the face of war and desperate time'/," he replied "There is freedom, there is space for a man to be alone and tlfink and thef~ are ffienc. La who owe each other nothing but affection." Th~k you i'br wading this and lets work toward a belief day, Ann Stevenson Colley 1251 Avenue of the Americas, 17~h Floor, New York, NY 10020 May 17, 2001 Members of the Town Council Town Hall P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 200! To whom it may concern: I was distraught to see that Whitaker House may be torn down. I wanted to appeal to the Town Council not to tear the house down if it can possibly be saved. Certainly, a decision should not be made until the forensic study is complete. Along with open space, we need to preserve historic structures such as the Whitaker House. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Ann Stevenson Colley PO Box 1 Orient, NY 11957 May 13, 2001 Southold Town Hall Southold, NY 11971 Open letter to Southold Supervisor Jean Cochran: We have lived on Village Lane in Orient for thirty years. During these years we have witnessed many changes in the character of the village. As prices for homes have risen there has been a corresponding decline in the percentage of working families consisting of people who grew up in the area. As far as the make up of the residents is concerned, the historic village now has less of an historic air. Some historic neighborhoods in Europe, North America, and elsewhere consist of buildings that were built in one architectural style and have remained relatively unchanged over time. Some of these areas do have clearly defined historic preservation laws. The Orient historic district is rather different. It contains buildings built over many years and of different architectural styles. Furthermore, these buildings have had additions and alterations added to their designs over the years. Many of these changes have occurred in recent years and it is our opinion that the new owners have gone to great effort to keep these changes appropriate. Others like us have chosen to leave as little as possible unchanged both to the interior and exterior of our homes. This is our right as a property owner; just as others have the right to make changes. We oppose the enactment of the proposed historic preservation law. We did not purchase our home with such restrictions in existence. We particularly dislike the concept of a three-member review board in each approved historic district. Who wants a committee of his neighbors judging the property he owns for things such as "visual compatibility with surrounding properties, including proportion of the property's front faqade, roof shape, and the rhythm of spacing of properties on streets, including setbacks"? [Section 56-7(b) (iii) of the proposed law] Will this local board become a local special-interest clique? The village of Orient will become an even more divided community, rather than the peaceful place we like to remember. If we are forced to live under a new historic preservation law, each property owner should be given the option to be included in the new legally regulated historic district. Many may choose to forgo some of their private property rights for the carrot being held out--tax relief. Certainly, the residents living in such a district should, at the very least, be allowed to vote as a group on being part of such a legally restricted historic district! A further concern of ours is Section 56-14 of the proposed law that deals with violations. It states, "Failure to comply with any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed a violation and the violator shall be liable to a fine of not less than $250 nor more than $1000 for each day the violation continues." It even states later that, "This civil remedy shall be in addition to and not in lieu of any criminal prosecution and penalty." A careful reading of the proposed law even appears to allow these penalties for lack of maintenance and repair of a structure. Such penalties are absurdly severe to the P.O. Box 1 :DonafacZC ~'a~ Creel ;Mina ~ler£e ~:a. Cleef 55o q~ip_per5 £o~e ~P.O. ~gox 155 Orien[, _9VIol ~ 1957-o135 651-$z$-2596 May 15, 2001 Supervisor Jean Cochran and Members of lhe Town Board Dear Fellow Citizens: We would like to comment briefly as residents of what would be thc Orient Historic District. While creation of such a district would cause those of us living here to relinquish some property rights, thc benefits for thc commtmity as a whole far exceed any personal loss. The unique historical characteristics of our co~mnuniW are what sets Orient apart. It is our observation that much of the opposing opinion is being expressed by people who have been misinformed or who themselves are planning to make changes out of character with thc community. Two of the more vocal opponents have already bulldozed one historic building and are reputed to be ready to destroy a second historic house if they are given the opportunity to purchase it. Please immediately refute the inaccurate information being presented to you and press forward toward approval of this historic district while it is still possible. Thank you. Sincerely, NYU-INFORMATION SYSTEMS 212995~228 JON A. TURNER. Ph.D. CONSULTANT N~N YORK NY 10021 0482 P.01/01 Fax To: 631 ?65 1823 May 8, 2001 Supervisor Town of Southold Suffolk County, NY Dear Supervisor Cochr~n, My wife Margaret Helfand and I recently pul'chased a home in Orient, NY, on Village Lane. We .,w, anted to expres,s our wholehearted suppo~ for the proposed "Historic Preservation Law as well as new 'Tax Exemptions of Alterations and Rehabilitation of historic property in the Town of Southold'. I understand that some in the business community may be opposed to this proposed law. Economists refer to a good shared by the cor~,,unity ~ a, 'p. ublic g. oo?'..Sinc~_~enmefi~real net private benefits of public goods do not usually equal tiae~, margin ,al net. soc~zu .o~ _. (termed 'externalities'), some mechanism, other than the mary. et, ne. em to oe emptoyeo rot their allocation. The usual approach, in this case, is to place limits of some sort on private behavior. This is what the proposed Historic Preservation Law does. Thus, it is conceptually sound. Yours sincerely, Ion A. Turner Margaret H~[fand information systems m~mtmg¥ organization development TOTAL P. 01 PUBLIC HEARING MAY 8, 2001 7:32 P.M. (7:40 P.M.) ON A PROPOSED "LOCAL LAW TO ESTABLISH A HISTORIC PRESERVATION LAW IN THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD". Present: Absent: Supervisor Jean W. Cochran Justice Louisa P. Evans Councilman William D. Moore Councilman John M. Romanelli Councilman Craig A. Richter Town Clerk Elizabeth A. Neville Town Attorney Gregory A. Yakaboski Councilman Brian G. Murphy SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We will now hear the reading of the proposed Law. COUNCILMAN MOORE: "NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 27th day of March 2001, a Local law entitled "A LOCAL LAW to establish a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold" and, NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, and hereby sets 7:32 p.m., Tuesday, May 8, 2001, as the time and place for a public hearing at which time all interested persons will be heard. The proposed "A LOCAL LAW to establish a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold" which includes the following: LOCAL LAW NO. -2001 A LOCAL LAW to establish a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: Chapter 56 of the Code of the Town of Southold, designated Landmark Preservation and originally adopted by the Town Board of the Town of Southold on January 18, 1983, as Local Law I of 1983, is hereby repealed in its entirety and the following Historic Preservation Law, to be known as Chapter 56 of the Code of the Town of Southold, be and hereby is enacted in its place and stead: Section 56-1 Short Title This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "Historic Preservation Law of Southold Town". Hist. Pres Law 2 Section 56-2 Purpose The Town Board hereby declares as a matter of public policy that the protection, enhancement, and perpetuation of landmarks and historic districts is necessary to promote the economic, cultural, educational, and general welfare of the public. Inasmuch as the identity of a people is founded on its past, and inasmuch as Southold Town has many significant historic, architectural, and cultural resources which constitute its heritage, this act is intended to: protect and enhance the landmarks and historic districts which represent distinctive elements of Southold's historic, architectural, and cultural heritage; foster civic pride in the accomplishments of the past; protect and enhance Southold's attractiveness to visitors and the support and stimulus to the economy hereby provided; and insure the harmonious, orderly, and efficient growth and development of the town. Section 56-3 Historic Preservation Commission There is hereby created a commission to be known as the Town of Sonthold Historic Preservation Commission. The commission shall consist of 7 members to be appointed, to the extent available in the community, by the Town Board as follows: At least one shall be an architect experienced in working with historic buildings; At least one shall be a resident of an historic district At least one shall have demonstrated significant interest in and commitment to the field of historic preservation evidenced by either involvement in a local historic preservation group, employment or voluntary activity in the field of historic preservation, or other serious interest in the field; and All members shall have a known interest in historic preservation and architectural development within the Town of Southold. Commission members shall serve for a term of four years, with the exception of the initial term of one of the members which shall be for one year, two which shall be for two years, and two which shall be for three years. (see attached schedule A) The chair and the vice chair of the commission shall be elected by and from among the members of the commission. The powers of the commission shall include: employment of staff and professional consultants as necessary to cany out the duties of the commission; promulgation of rules and regulations as necessary for the conduct of its business adoption of criteria for the delineation of historic district conduct of surveys of significant historic, architectural, and cultural landmarks and historic district within the town; designation recommendations of identified structures or resources as historic districts and landmarks; acceptance on behalf of the town government of the donation of fagade easements and development rights, and the making of recommendations to the town government concerning the acquisition of faCade easements or other interests of real property as necessary to carry out the purposes of this act; Hist. Pres Law 3 increasing public awareness of the value of historic, cultural, and architectural preservation by developing and participating in public education programs; making recommendations to town government concerning the utilization of state, federal or private funds to promote the preservation of landmarks and historic districts within the town; recommending acquisition of a landmark structure by the town government where its preservation is essential to the purposes of this act and where private preservation is not feasible; and approval or disapproval of applications for certificates of appropriateness pursuant to this act. The commission shall meet at least monthly, but meeting may be held at any time on the written request of any two of the commission members or on the call of the chair or the supervisor. A quorum for the transaction of business shall consist of 4 of the commission's members, but not less than a majority of the full authorized membership may grant or deny a certificate of appropriateness. All members shall attend and complete relevant training programs as the Town Board may require. Section 56-4 Historic District Review Board The Town Board, upon the recommendation of the commission, shall establish a review board for each approved historic district. The review board shall consist of 3 members to be appointed, to the extent available in the community, from a list provided by local historic district preservation organization. Review Board members shall serve for a term of four years, with the exception of the initial term of one of the members which shall be for two years. (see attached schedule B) The duties of the review board shall include: adoption of criteria for appropriateness for all landmarks and structures within the local historic district; making recommendations to the Historic Preservation Commission concerning the utilization of state, federal or private funds to promote the preservation of landmarks and structures within the local historic district; recommending acquisition of a landmark structure by the town government where its preservation is essential to the purposes of this act and where private preservation is not feasible; and recommending approval or disapproval of applications for certificates of appropriateness pursuant to this act. Section 56-5 Designation of Historic Districts or Landmarks The commission may recommend a group of properties as a historic district to the Town Board for designation if the group: contains properties which meet one or more of the criteria for designation as a landmark; and by reason of possessing such qualities, constitutes a distinct section of the town. The commission may recommend to the Town Board the designation of an individual property as a landmark if it: possesses special characteristics or historic or aesthetic interest or value as part of the cultural, political, economic, or social history of the locality, region, state, or nation; or Hist. Pres Law 4 is identified with historic personages; or embodies the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style; or is the work of a designer whose work has significantly influenced an age; or because of its unique location or singular physical characteristic, represents an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood. (c) The commission may recommend to the Town Board the recognition of a historic district that has been so designated by the state or federal government. The boundaries of each historic district designated henceforth shall be specified in detail and shall be filed, in writing, in the town clerk's office for public inspection. (d) Notice of a proposed designation shall be sent by registered mail to the owner of the property proposed for designation, describing the property and announcing a public hearing by the commission to consider the designation. Notice of a proposed designation shall also be by publication at least once in a newspaper of general circulation at least 14 days prior to the date of the public hearing. Once the commission has issued notice of a proposed designation, no building pemfitsfor construction or demolition shall be issued by the building inspector until the Town Board has made its decision. (e) The commission shall hold a public hearing prior to designation of any landmark or historic district. The commission, owners, and any interested parties may present testimony or documentary evidence at the hearing which will become part ora record regarding the historic, architectural, or cultural importance of the proposed landmark or historic district. The record may also contain staff reports, public comments, or other evidence offered outside of the hearing. (f) The commission shall forward notice of each property designation as a landmark and the boundaries of each designated historic district to the office of the Southold Town Clerk for recordation. Section 56-6 Certificate of Appropriateness for Alteration, Demolition or New Construction Affecting Historic Districts or Landmarks No person shall carry out any exterior alteration, restoration, reconstruction, demolition, new construction, or moving ora landmark or property which faces a public right of way within a historic district, nor shall any person make any material change in the appearance of such property without first obtaining a certificate of appropriateness from the historic preservation commission. In the specific case where the property or landmark is located on the waterfront, the watershed is considered a public right of way and the aspect of the property or landmark visible from the watershed is subject to the aforementioned requirement. In the specific case where the property or landmark is located on a comer, ali aspects of the property or landmark visible from the public right of way are subject to the aforementioned requirement to obtain a certificate of appropriateness before carrying out any exterior alteration, restoration, reconstruction, demolition, new construction, or moving of the landmark or property. Section 56-7 Criteria for Approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness (a) In passing upon an application for a certificate of appropriateness, the historic preservation commission shall not consider changes to interior spaces, unless they are open to the public. The commission's decision shall be based on the following principles: properties which contribute to the character if the historic district shall be retained, with their historic features altered as little as possible. Hist. Pres Law Any alteration of existing properties shall be compatible with its historical character, as well as with the surrounding district; and Ne~v construction shall be compatible with the district in which it is located. (b) In applying the principle of compatibility, the commission shall consider the following factors: the general design, character, and appropriateness to the property of the proposed alteration or new construction; the scale or proposed alteration or new construction in relation to the property itself, surrounding properties, and the neighborhood; materials and their relation to similar features of other properties in the neighborhood; visual compatibility with surrounding properties, including proportion of the property's front facade, proportion and arrangement of windows and other openings with the fasade, roof shape, and the rhythm of spacing of properties on streets, including setbacks; and the importance of historic, architectural, or other features to the significance of the property. Section 56-8 Certificate of Appropriateness Application Procedure (a) Prior to the commencement of any work requiring a certificate of appropriateness, the owner shall file an application for such a certificate with the historic preservation commission. The application shall contain: name, address, and telephone number of applicant; location of property and photographs of the property; elevation drawings of proposed changes, if available, perspective drawings, including relationship to adjacant properties, if available; samples of materials to be used; where thc proposal includes signs or lettering, a scale drawing showing the type of lettering to be used, all dimensions and colors, a description of materials to be used, method of illumination, and a plan showing the signs location on the property; and (vii) any other information which the commission may deem necessary in order to visualize the proposed work. (b) No building permit for construction or demolition shall be issued for such proposed work until a certificate of appropriateness has first been issued by thc historic preservation commission. The certificate of appropriateness required by this act shall be in addition to and not in lieu of any building permit that may be required by any other ordinance of the Town of Southold. (c) Thc commission shall approve, deny, or approve the permit with modifications xvithin 21 days from receipt of the completed application. If there has been no notification of approval, denial or approval with modifications, by the end of the 21st da); said permit shall be deemed approved. The commission may hold a public hearing on thc application at which an opportunity will be provided for proponents and opponents of thc application to present their views. (d) All decisions of the corrunission shall be in xvriting. A copy shall be sent to the applicant by registered mail and a copy filed xvith the town clerk's office for public inspection. The commission's decision shall state thc reason for denying or modifying any application. (c) Certificates of appropriateness shall be valid for 18 months, after which time the owner must reapply if he/she still wishes to undertake work on the property. Hist. Pres Law 6 Section 56-9 Demolition Hardship Criteria (a) An applicant whose certificate of appropriateness for a proposed demolition has been denied may apply for relief on the ground of hardship. In order to prove the existence of hardship, the applicant shall establish that: the property is incapable if earning a reasonable return, regardless of whether the return represents the most profitable return possible; the property cannot be adapted for any other use, whether by the current owner or by a purchaser, which would result in a reasonable return; and efforts to find a purchaser interested in acquiring the property and preserving it have failed. Section 56-10 Alteration Hardship Criteria An applicant whose certificate of appropriateness for a proposed alteration has been denied may apply for relief on the ground of hardship. In order to prove the existence of hardship, the applicant shall establish that the property in incapable of earning a profitable return, regardless of whether that return represents the most profitable return possible. Section 56-11 Hardship Application Procedure (a) After receiving written notification from the commission of the denial ora certificate of appropriateness, an applicant my commence the hardship process. No building permit or demolition permit shall be issued unless the commission makes a finding that a hardship exists. (b) The commission may hold a public hearing on the hardship application at which an opportunity will be provided for proponents and opponents of the application to present their vie~vs. (c) The applicant shall consult in good faith with the commission, local preservation groups, and interested parties in a diligent effort to seek an alternative that will result in the preservation of the property. (d) All decisions of the commission shall be in writing. A copy shall be sent to the applicant by registered mail and a copy filed with the town clerk's office for public inspection. The commission's decision shall state the reasons for granting or denying the hardship application. If the application is granted, the commission shall approve only such work as is necessary to alleviate the hardship. Section 56-12 Enforcement Ali work performed pursuant to a certificate of appropriateness issued under this ordinance shall conform to any requirements included herein. It shall be the duty of the building code enforcement officer to periodically inspect any such work to assure compliance. In the event work is found that is not being performed in accordance with the certificate of appropriateness, or upon notification of such fact by the historic preservation commission, the building code enforcement officer shall issue a stop work order and all work shall immediately cease. No further work shall be undertaken on the project as long as a stop work order is in effect. Section 56-13 Maintenance and Repair required Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to prevent the ordinary maintenance and repair of any exterior architectural feature of a landmark or property within a historic district which does not involve a change in design, material, or outward appearance. No owner or person with an interest in real property designated as a landmark or included within an historic district shall Hist. Pres Law 7 permit the property to fall into a serious state of disrepair which would result in the deterioration of any exterior architecture; feature which would, in the judgment of the historic preservation commission, produce a detrimental effect upon the character of the historic district as a whole or the life and character of the property itself. Examples of such deterioration include: deterioration of exterior walls or other vertical supports; deterioration of roofs or other horizontal members; deterioration of exterior chimneys; deterioration or crumbling of exterior stucco or mortar; ineffective waterproofing of exterior walls, roofs, or foundations, including broken windows or doors; and deterioration of any feature so as to create a hazardous condition which could lead to the claim that demolition is necessary for the public safety. Section 56-14 Violations Failure to comply with any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed a violation and the violator shall be liable to a fine of not less than $250 nor more than $1000 for each day the violation continues. Any person who demolishes, alters, constructs, or permits a designated property to fall into a serious state of disrepair in violation of this ordinance shall be required to restore the property and its site to its appearance prior to the violation. Any action to enfome this subsection shall be brought by the town attorney. This civil remedy shall be in addition to an not in lieu of any criminal prosecution and penalty. Section 56-15 Appeals Any person aggrieved by a designation decision by the Town Board or a decision of the historic preservation commission relating to a hardship or a certificate of appropriateness may, within 45 days of the decision, file a written application with the Town Board for review of the decision. Reviews shall be conducted and based on the same record that was before the Town Board or commission and using the same criteria. Section 56-16 Severability. The provisions of this Law are severable. In any provision of this local law or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, said invalidity shall not affect any other provision or application of this local law which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application of the local law. Section 56-17 When effective. This Local law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary Of State as provided by law. Attachment A Historic Preservation Commission 7 Members, 4 year appointment, town wide. Year New McmbersOld Members Hist. Pres Law 8 1 7 2 1 6 3 2 4+1 4 2 2+1+2 5 2 1+2+2 6 1 2+2+2 7 Repeat Attachment B Historic District Review Board 3 Members, 4 year appointment, specific to historic district Year New MembersOld Members 1 3 2 3 3 1 2 4 2+1 5 2 1 6 1+2 7 Repeat By order of the Southold Town Board of the Town of Southold, March 27, 2001. Elizabeth A. Neville, Southold Town Clerk." There is notice of publication in The Suffolk Times, an affidavit of posting on the Town Clerk's Bulletin Board, a correspondence saying this is not within their jurisdiction, and we had certain correspondence which the Board will share from concerned residents all part of the record. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: You have heard the reading of the proposed Local Law in Relation to Establishing a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold. Now, we would be very happy to take pro and cons. I will start on this side at this time. SUZANNE HAHN: Hello, my name is Suzarme Hahn, and I am sorry if my voice falters, but I am not used to public speaking. I own Hahn Realty and King Realty on the North Fork. I have been a resident of Orient for the past twenty years. I want to express my opinion regarding the individuals' property rights. I would like to speak tonight about the value of real estate and historic property. Preserving historic appreciate like fine antiques. In the Village of Orient during the recession which locked in the real estate market roughly from 1987 to 1993 the historic district homes. They are only one to my experience did not suffer substantial lose in property values due to the consistency of architectural integrity in the village. The demand for historic homes has always exceeded the supply, and the last two homes we sold under $450,000 on Village all within twenty-four hours. The Orient Historical Society is one of our assets, and I cannot tell you how many purchases of homes in Orient in the past twenty years have supposedly been published by the Historical Society and show their exuberant pride pointing out their homes in the publication. Orient Village is a rare gem. Its aesthetic appeal from historic prospective is not be found m]ywhere else on the North Fork. It is almost a time warp taking you back a hundred years. Families come here to bring up the children in a special place, and the appeal of Hist. Pres Law 9 the architectural consistency of the homes, the museum, the general store, and the knowledge that they are preserved homes will continue and appreciate in value. If you take into consideration the size of the lots and homes of this historic road in Orient in my opinion you will see one of the highest premiums per square foot on the North Fork. What would greatly affect values is if the architectural consistencies and appeal of this historic district diminishes. The majority of my customers initially think there is already a preservation law in place. We have been lucky so far, but all it takes is a few homes to lose that aesthetic appeal and the whole thing is ruined. As long as we feel secure that your surrounding homes will remain aesthetically preserved I will confident in investing the price to pumhase a home. A number of years ago a vacant lot came on the market for sale. Being sensitive to the historic heritage of the village I suggested to those sellers of the property to sell it so that the property be sold with the contingency of architectural approval of the plans of the house so that the construction would be in keeping with the surrounding homes. Well, as soon as it was known that the lot was in contract rumors abounded that a contemporary was going to be built on the lot in the Village. I can't tell you how many calls I received from long time residents, natives, and second homeowners horrified about this. Then we had to show the house plans that were approved. I also want to express the sales records of historic homes that are located outside the village often show a higher selling price than those who have not retained their architectural integrity. The other item I would like to mention that occurred to me while I do my power walks through the village in the early morning for the past two weeks is that a historic home would change it's value through it's preservation. If you inherited your grandmother's Chippendale set would you spray paint it with white enamel, or would turn it into a crystal electrical violin? No, because you would ruin the value. The same goes for our homes that we are lucky enough to own and view with their history and wonderful historical sense of place. While I have the floor one other question I had with regard to making this part of historic designated homes recognizing that there are homeowners on fixed incomes in the village who suffer financial problems, and those homes need exterior restoration, is there a hardship clause for them? A homeowner in this situation should not suffer financial repercussions or fines to fix their homes. Thank you. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else like to address the Board either pro or con? Jay? JAY APPLEGATE: Thank you, Jean. I would like to say to Suzanne, yes, we could make a law for hardship. My name is Jay Applegate and I am addressing you this evening in my capacity as a Vice President of Save Open Space Now 2000 Ltd., a tax exempt organization, dedicated to preserving open space, historic structures and farmland; preserving the integrity of our hamlet centers and preventing suburban sprawl. I am also a resident of Southold, and I live in an historic building that is designated by the Town Board, and I love it. Given our mission statement, it is not surprising that we are in favor of stronger legislation relating to protection of our historic buildings and tax incentives to encourage restoration and renovation. We would therefore encourage expeditious passage, implementation and enforcement of any laws designed to do this. However, the current draft of the Town Board's proposed law does not do this. It is inadequate in several ways which I would like to discuss. First, by repealing the current law as part of adopting the new law, the 14-day review period which currently exists for the Landmark Preservation Commission to review building permits relating to exterior alteration to and demolition of an historic building is eliminated. Therefore, prior to any historic districts or landmarks being designed under the new law, any building which is currently designated a land mark in Southold Hist. Pres Law 10 Town becomes totally unprotected and could be tom down without any legal restrictions. Thus, what has been portrayed to be a strengthened law has a problematic transition period where all protection is eliminated. Save Open Space Now strongly recommends that the Town Board alter its current proposal to continue the 14 day review period for all currently designated historic buildings until such time as they are designated historic under the terms of the new law and are afforded the increased protection, that would then come into effect. This would extend the minimal protection that currently exists as opposed to eliminating protection altogether. I also wonder why this meeting was called at all as you, Jean Cochran, sent out a memo on May 2nd announcing the reappointment of selected members of the existing Landmark Preservation Commission to the new Landmark Commission. Were you telling them and us that the passage of this new law was a let accompli before tonight's hearing? SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: The way it reads. I don't have it in front of me. JAY APPLEGATE: Would you like a copy? SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: The members are up. They were continuing holdovers. They are still functioning as a committee. JAY APPPLEGATE: But it is a selected group of people, not the entire Commission. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: These are people that are already serving. JAY APPLEGATE: That is not correct. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: That is your opinion. We have most of our committee. JAY APPLEGATE: I believe Mr. Greene was appointed last year, and has a two year term. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: It is not up yet. JAY APPLEGATE: He is not on the list. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: His term hasn't expired. JAY APPLEGATE: Let me continue. I asked a rhetorical question. Secondly, and I direct this to the room not to the dais. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Jay, this is a public heating, You must direct it to the Board. JAY APPLEGATE: I will address it to the Board then. As taxpayers should know that the new law as currently drafted does not meet the minimum requirements under State law to qualify Southold Town for further receipt of monies under the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan. Many of us assumed that the only reason the Town Board was moving forward to strengthen the historic preservation laws was to continue to qualify for Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan monies. This law does not do that. Steve Ridler in State Department told me yesterday that the Hist. Pres Law 11 Town board is axvare of the additional provisions needed to qualify but the last draft of the law, that he was asked to review did not include these provisions and without them the Town will not be eligible to receive further funding under the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan. The Town has received approximately $400,000 from the LWRP to date and if it complies stands to receive more in the future. Non-compliance means non-receipt of funds which mean higher taxes. Therefore, those of you in the room or on the Board who object to the new law on the grounds of property rights should be aware that you are therefore voting for higher taxes. However, that leaves us with the fact that the proposed law is not strong enough to ensure us the continued eligibility for LWRP funds. I ask the Town Board, rhetorically of course, why is that? Thirdly, the recent plans for a new Town Hall incorporate once again the proposed demolition of the historic Whitaker House which the Town acquired in 1998 and passed a resolution to demolish. I have a copy of the resolution where that was done and the accompanying memorandum written by the former town attorney, which told you how to accomplish that without a public referendum. Since then, you have allowed the building to fall into disrepair through total neglect of maintenance and protection. This treatment of an historic building is a violation of the law which you are currently proposing. On page 8 of the draft legislation, it says, and I paraphrase, no owner shall permit property to fall into a serious state of disrepair. Given the report on the condition of the Whitaker House done by James Richter for the Town Board prior to their purchase of it, it is clear that the deterioration has occurred on your watch. So you are asking the owners of historic properties in this town to be held to a different standard than that to which you hold yourselves and to standards, which we are now aware are not sufficient to get us monies to which we would otherwise be entitled under the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan. Again, I ask the Town Board, rhetorically, why? In addition to the allowed deterioration, at the time of purchase of the Whitaker House, you were advised by the New York State Department of Parks, the Society for the Preservation of Long Island Antiquities, the Southold Historical Society and the Town Historian, again I have copies of all the correspondence here, that this building was of great historic value and should not be demolished. There was also a public outcry. The estimate by Fairweather Brown at the time of purchase of the Whitaker House to renovate it for use as an mmex to town hall was approximately $250,000 and a recent study by John Collins suggested approximately the same amount despite the deterioration. Again, I ask the Town Board, why are you proposing to tear this house down? An administration which truly supports historic preservation would either take the Collins report and implement it or sell the building to some one who would restore it, whether or not you had passed a tough law which would insure its preservation, not let it deteriorate, threaten to tear it down and/or sponsor a Halloween haunted house party for which the interior was defaced. As result of your actions, a letter was sent yesterday to the Secretary of State of the State of New York by our organization which outlines these developments and expresses to him our concerns. We stated that in our opinion, given the above sighted examples, the Town Board has demonstrated that they are not responsible stewards of our historic resources and our waterfront and that we believe that you should not longer be able to exercise local control or receive funds under the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan. We further suggest to him that your actions in each of these instances have been highly hypocritical and duplicitous. We have also sent letters to Ruth Pierpont in the Department of Parks and Barbara Van Liew of the Society for the Preservation of Long Island Antiquities to advise them of your proposal regarding the demolition of the Whitaker House will not be viewed favorably in that light. Should you actually go through with the demolition, you further diminish the likelihood of gaining their approval. In conclusion, I would ask that you Hist. Pres Law 12 strengthen the proposed historic preservation law to meet the State's requirements and eliminate the loophole to which I alluded earlier in my remarks in order to truly provide ongoing protection for our historic buildings and that you become responsible stewards of all our historic buildings including those owned by the taxpayers of Southold Town. Thank you very much for your time SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you for your comments. Anyone else like to address the Town Board? LINTON DUELL: Good evening. My name is Linton Duell. I am nowhere near as eloquent as the last speaker, and the only parts of the law that I wanted to address at this time are parts that were pointed out by a lawyer the other day. Earlier in your comment's Mr. Moore you mentioned that this is only the facade of the property that would be included in the historic district. If you look at Section 56-7. I think I have the wrong set of glasses so I have to get a little closer to the words. In passing upon an application for a certificate of appropriateness, the historic preservation commission shall not consider changes to interior spaces, unless they are open to the public. The commission's decision shall be based then on the following principles. I am one of the few people in Orient that own commercial property, and prior to this day's discussion I was quite in favor of historic preservation law. Parts of it, as I understood, were good. Upon reading that, upon being shown that I find that little section there loaded with meaning. As I understand the law, unless you are specifically excluded, you are included in the law. I don't see any exclusions for my store, the post office, the ice cream parlor, the Farm Store owned by Bob Van Nostrand, and several commercial properties down by the waterfront, that are rooming houses, and people who have difference points of view. But in many instances this goes beyond some of our personal grudges, and goes to a philosophical point of view. That is where I have gotten to, and that philosophical point of view is, well, we all have certain rights that have been given to us through our Constitution, and like Mr. Carter said earlier this seems like an easement that you are surrendering. To me it seems like a factor of condemnation of property without re- course or re-compensation. At this time I will step down, but I have grave reservations on the law, especially in certain areas, but this one I wanted talk to specifically. One last thing. I read this about five and six times in the past couple of days. I read it the first time and certain things went by me. One of the ladies from the honorable opposition said that parts of this law are taken from a law that was drafted for historic districts upstate. The point I want to make is in Section 56-6, paragraph A, we go from waterfront to watershed, and if you have a chance later you can to look up the definition of watershed I am not going to go into that, but I am wondering is this law was drafted, if it is for Orient, and Southold Town. Or it was crafted for Sullivan, Dutchess, and Putnam Counties or someplace else. I think you have to take a look at this law paragraph by paragraph, because a lot of it doesn't pertain to us the way it is set up. I am now going to step down. I appreciate the opportunity to speak, and I do say that most of my words are specifically for myself, and not on behalf of anybody else. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you for your comments. CYRIL LUKEMAN: Good evening, Supervisor and members of the Board. My name is Cy Lukeman and I approach you as just a citizen of Orient. As we were discussing the law amongst ourselves in Orient we started to raise some questions. Then we felt, well, let's take a look at it when there are supposed to be more public hearings. We had one in the fall and we were Hist. Pres Law 13 supposed to have some in the winter. That was at least our understanding of it. A lot of us were either not invited or weren't aware when those scheduled meetings were being held. COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: Now, you are talking about the local Orient community? CYRIL LUKEMAN: Yes, I am talking about the local community. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Oh, O.K. because this is the first hearing that is being held .... CYRIL LUKEMAN: I am talking about the local community. So, what happened was we just decided, well, we needed to express our feelings to you, in a sense, that maybe there isn't overwhelming support for this particular law in Orient. So, what I did was I drew up a petition and I walked it around Orient. Would you like me to read it to you here? I think I should. We, the undersigned, Orient residents all ask the Town Board to reconsider your plan to create a certified local government and or a Landmark Preservation Commission for but not limited to the following reasons: One, Orient will be deprived of equal protection under the law by setting Orient apart from our sister hamlets, i.e., Southold, New Suffolk, and Mattituck. Two, by establishing a quasi-judicial body, a Orient Historic Preservation Commission, the Southold Town Board is creating an appointed body to make rules and regulation that is not responsible to the voters of Orient. Three, the supposed Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan is not a justifiable reason for Orienters for establishing an Orient Historic Preservation Commission with or without a review board. The LWRP is a whole town responsibility if the whole town so chooses, not Orienters alone. Lastly, Supervisor Cochran has stated on numerous occasions that she could not support any Historic District Preservation Commission where them was not overwhelming community support. For the above stated reasons, but not limited to, we the undersigned urgently ask the Town Board to reconsider creating any certified Local Government or Landmark Preservation Commission. I would like to submit these. There are a little over a hundred signatures. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I am correcting a statement that was made here. I get accused of making many statements that I don't necessarily make, but it comes with the job. What I am saying is that I have not said that I could not support a historic district preservation commission where there is not overwhelming support by the community. I don't how this was interpreted. CYRIL LUKEMAN: Madam Supervisor, with all due respect. A number of us may have misunderstood your comments at our public meeting at Orient Poquantuck Hall. That is where you made that statement. We believe, Madame Supervisor, maybe we misunderstood you ...... SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I would like to believe I would vote for something ifI felt that in all fairness it was best for the community, not the support that's involved. I try to make my decisions based on fairness and .... (Mr. Lukeman interjected at this point) I am going to stop you now... Cy, I have known you a long time, I am not going to debate with you. CYRIL LUKEMAN: It is important that I get this in. But, also this statement as well. In this particular law they mentioned the 1966 Landmark Preservation Act amended in 1992, but sections that I do see, show there has to be overwhelming community support. In addition, I have Hist. Pres Law 14 been on the phone with people just to get an idea of how to best look at this law, and people in the area said it is a good thing to look at some local zoning law. I know you are not going to make a decision tonight, so I hope to work with you in that next period of time to point out some important things. Thank you very much. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I am going to jump to the center, but I am going to come back over here. FREDDIE WACHSBERGER: Freddie Wachsberger. I am speaking as President of the Board of the Oysterponds Historical Society. Twenty-five years ago the members of the Board of the Historical Society worked very hard to get Orient Village made a National Historic District, and were successful in doing that. A lot of people, I think, were quite surprised over the years to learn that didn't, in fact, offer any protection from destruction or from totally inappropriate alterations. So, last year the Board of the Society voted to support Historic Preservation legislation. I would just like to say a word about the law in general. I think if you talk about the majority of members of the community I think that the conununity that has remained here is the community that lives in the historic district, because I think there is a large majority in our district that supports this legislation. I just want to say a word about the historic district of Orient. Our Director, Courtney Bums, mentioned all of the artifacts and journals, and diaries, that helps to preserve a sense of history, i think there is probably no house on Village Lane, or very few houses in which we don't have some record in the Historical Society of previous inhabitant, whether it is their journals, portraits, or bills of laden of the ships that they sailed out of the pier out of Village Lane, or records of purchases from the store, that was originally on Village Lane. So, it becomes almost an integrated living history that manages to absorb people as they come in. New people are absorbed into this continuity. People that are still living in the houses that have been in their family for generations. I think the single word that characters the historic district in Orient I think is authenticity. This is not a museum street, or tourist street, or Disneyland. It is authentic living village that has created an enormous sense of continuity from the historical past to the present over a couple of centuries. The idea that any part of that could be destroyed I think it is very upsetting to a number of people who have actually moved into that district because of that sense of history that I think we all share even if we came from elsewhere, or parents that came from other countries. Now, there is something in Tony Hess' book when he was writing about a sense of place he mentioned that to move or change, he was talking about the rural aspect, he mentioned that 10% of that landscape causes 90% alteration of people's perception of it. I think that is something that Suzanne Hahn touched on, that once you have destruction of a piece of it, it alters the whole irreplaceably. I think there was always some sad or pathetic when you have an open lot, or a gas station, or some awful industrial building, and see a sign or marker outside that says this lot is the site of such and such a house. It is this kind of thing I think our Landmark Preservation Law is designed to keep that from happening, because in the Village over the years have in fact over the years have in fact been able to accommodate change. They have been converted into homes. Pieces of one house were added on to other houses, and ail the time it was done organically with an enormous sense of continuity, preserve the authenticity. ! think the present Landmark legislation allows that to continue, accommodate that. I think certainly some of the questions that people raise need to be put into an address so that the law in its final version to accommodate, but the legislation itselfI believe is vital, and I guess that is all. Thank you. Hist. Pres Law 15 SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else? CATHERINE HARPER: My name is Catherine Harper and I live in a town designated historic home, because years ago this Board gave my husband and I a distinction for doing such a swell job on our home, and it means an awful lot to us. Thank you very much, and my comments tonight are about the law in general, and specific pleas. I would like to piggyback on what that woman said. When does a face stop being a face? Take a circle. Give it two dots for eyes, one for a nose, a curve for a mouth. Now, erase one of the eye dots, and make it a triangle, or erase the nose, and make it a straight line. Erase the mouth and make it a coma. How many features does it take before the resemblance fails to strike? It is the same thing with a historic corridor. Raze the Newbold House, raze the Whitaker, and at some point empty lots and new construction done in a kind of Colonial style trying to bridge the past with the present, and the corridor is an unsatisfying wannabe that cheats us of an historic legacy that could have been. Our North Fork has a charm that comes from the historic homes, which grace the area, and we critically undermine, in the very least, our tourist industry with every stmcture that is demolished. Nothing gets old if it gets torn down. A venerable old house is like the footprints of our ancestors in that it is the physical presence of where they once walked. Lose the house that trail is lost. When our town buildings come down so does our nation's history. Can we afford the loss of a single revolutionary structure? To paraphrase Chief Seattle, we don't own the Whitaker House. We borrow it from our children. As a people we won't be judged by the monuments or structures we build, however, efficient and convenient they seem at the time, but rather we will be judged by those, we have destroyed. Have you learned nothing from Penn Station? Please preserve the Whitaker House and our other historic structures. Thank you. PETER DEUTSCH: We have had a number of opportunities to address the Board over the past 18 moths, for which we are very grateful. Tonight the floor should belong to others. However, a brief statement is necessary simply to clarity our position. We believe that the current draft laws have been carefully crafted to strike a reasonable balance between the need to respect the property rights of the individual homeowner on the one hand, and the need to safeguard the integrity of our historic community on the other. Those who are philosophically opposed to the role of government will find little to cheer about in these new laws. Likewise those who are continually dismayed when any historic property is altered or lost will be disappointed that we haven't gone further. We can all agree that we need to protect what we currently enjoy, but can we now find the collective will this is required to go beyond simply talking about it? A careful reading of the Historic Preservation La~v will reveal that it is indeed extremely limited in scope. The emphasis has been placed on establishing clearly defined historic districts throughout Southold. The preservation of contiguous, clearly defined areas with our town, benefits not just those who choose to live in a historic property but all that live on or visit the North Fork. This is not a blanket, all encompassing, draconian attempts to enforce undue hardship on anybody who happens to own an old home. It is genuinely intended to provide added protection for those people ~vho value what is so special about Southold. At the same time there are substantial limits to the law, and it is these limitations that make this law reasonable. Firstly, the law only pertains to the aspect of a historic property that is visible from the right of way, or in some instances in New Suffolk and Orient from the waterfront. That is all, period. Not the sides, not the back, not the landscaping, not the light fixtures, sidewalks, fences, steps, paving or other exterior elements, Hist. Pres Law 16 and not the inside, unless it is a public space. It doesn't dictate paint colors. Secondly, the law isn't triggered until the owner applies for a building permit. Thirdly, the entire review process is limited to twenty-one days beginning to end. Fourthly, the members of the Historic Preservation Commission will be professionally trained, and will have access to the expertise of many more qualified people throughout the state. Current town law does not preclude the owner from demolishing the building and erecting what he or she choose. In principle, we agree that the rights of the owner should be most important. But it's interesting to consider the following. The average American lives in slightly more than six homes in his or her lifetime. Given a life expectancy of lets say eight-four years that would mean an average length of ownership of approximately fourteen years. So, we feel it is important to balance the sanctity of an individuals property rights on one hand, versus the relative importance of the preserving historic integrity of our community. Our current obsession with property and the value of real estate as an investment should not be allowed to diminish the importance of the historical record. I would like to give you some background on historic preservation. I think there are some other issues that have not been touched on. Powerful economic benefits flow to places that stress historic preservation. It is a simple equation. For every $1 million spent rehabilitating historic property in New York State, approximately $1.9 million is added to the local economy. Statewide 170 municipalities ranging from the village of Oswego to New York City, have ordinances establishing local landmarks and historic districts. Approximately 80,000 individual properties are currently on the National Register. Historic preservation can and should be used as a central component of long-term economic development and planning for our community. Historic preservation makes good economic sense. There is a misconception that historic preservation does not provide as many jobs as new construction. Since the construction industry is such an important part of our local economy it is important to understand the impact of this law on our economy. In fact, rehabilitation of historic structures is more labor intensive than new construction. One million dollars spend on the rehabilitation of a historic building in New York State will add $86,000 more to the local household income than will the same amount spent on new construction. That same million dollars invested in preservation construction creates five more construction jobs and three more permanent jobs than does $1,000,000 invested in new construction. Historic preservation is an excellent source of jobs. Travelers who participate in historical and cultural activities are a lucrative and growing market. Nationwide 92,000,000 people included a cultural or historic activity on their trip in 1997-98. Sixty-three million adults visited a historic building or site while traveling. Historical and cultural travelers spend more than others, $688 per trip versus $367 for other travelers. They also take longer trips and tend to stay in commercial lodging rant than private homes. In 1999 statewide travel was $30,000,000, creating 400,000 jobs, equivalent to 5% of the private sector workforce. For a town whose economy is so heavily dependent on the income produced by visitors to our area, we suggest that we cannot afford to overlook the importance of historic preservation. Historic preservation creates eligibility for tax credits and other incentives. In addition to the Tax Exemption for alteration of historic property to be discussed here tonight, which will provide a ten-year abatement in real estate taxes, there is a pending bill at the state level, which is proposed in Governor Pataki's 2001-2002 State Budget. The program will allow a taxpayer to take a credit against his or her personal income tax equal to 15%-25% of the cost of restoring a home designated as a historic property. If the credit exceeds the taxpayer's tax liability for the year, the excess can be credited for future years or be taken as a refund. The maximum credit is $50.000 per residence; the minimum investment is $20,000 reduced to $5,000 in designated areas of economic distress. At a Federal level, since 1986 the Hist. Pres Law 17 law has provided a 20% tax credit toward the cost of rehabilitating an income-producing national register listed building. Access to resources and funding. The NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation provided nearly $9,000,000 in 1998 to preservation programs across the state, yielding $32,000,000 in local matches and investment. These funds are being spent in Saratoga, Coming, in Cooperstown, in short anywhere that a CLG law has been enacted. Some of those funds can and should be accessed for our own. Between 1996 and 1998 over $1,000,000 in tax credits were approved for projects by the States preservation office. The preservation of Southold's historic resources, the places in which we live and work, should be a central goal for all who seek a healthy economy for our town. Historic preservation is a lasting form of community development that invests in the best of Southold's past for the benefit of the present and future generations. If Southold were on the banks of the Mississippi River, would be arguing about how much sand to put in the bag, or who was going to pay for the sand, or what color the bag should be, or how high the dike should be built? This Town Board clearly understands that the qualities that make Southold special, the very reason we all choose to live here, are currently threatened. Whether it is historic preservation, an increase in the zoning from two to five acres, protecting the open spaces, supporting the farming community or developing a comprehensive waterfront revitalization plan, this Board is showing the determination to do what is necessary to protect our most important resources. They should be commended in their efforts and supported in their endeavors. We are surrounded by communities that have had neither the foresight the will to tackle the difficult issues, and are not paying the price. As a group, the steering committee of the OHDPA, over the past year and a half, has tried to build consensus in our community for historic preservation. During the past two weeks, since the publication of the draft law our task has become more difficult. However, in our discussions with our neighbors we have received numerous suggestions regarding the proposed laws that we feel need to be carefully considered. We would like an opportunity to review these suggestions with the Code Committee to see if the initial draft can be improved. It is important to recognize the anxiety that any new law naturally creates, and to clearly differentiate between a reasonable concern and a paranoid interpretation. We believe that some form of historic preservation law will be enacted in Southold. We would like to encourage all parties to become engaged in improving the law and making sure that it works for all the residents of our community, that it is reasonable, that it is affective, that is fair, and that it is enforceable. Saving old buildings and historic neighborhoods is not an abstract idea. Each structure that is tom down takes with it part of our heritage, our connection to the lives of our neighbors and our families. We are ail poorer for the loss. It is important to increase the awareness of the historic records and to protect and preserve what is left. When historic buildings are demolished the fabric of our town is irreparably damaged. I would like to close this statement with a riddle given to me by one of the residents of Orient. How you choose how to answer this riddle is determined by whether or not you have a preservation ethic that is fruitful and vital, or is futile and easily defeated by the forces of change and decay. It is the old paradox of the farmer who says he's had the same ax all his life. He has only changed the head twice, and handle three times. Is it the same ax? Thank you. CYNTHIA HALSEY: Thank you. Cynthia Halsey. I live in the local historic district. We were asked what we thought about it. My property is old enough to be antique. However, I am very much concerned if this is passed in any shape or form at all. After that economics lecture it suspect it will in the next century. I am not worrying about the color of the paint. I like the house the way it is. I wouldn't have bought it ifI didn't but I do live across from a house used to be, and Hist. Pres Law 18 is now a vacant lot, and I fancy the soume of a great deal of hayfever I have been suffering from. I like to look at the Whitaker House as it is. I would like to see it on to the historic section being old, and preserved. I don't think it will be the same street that I am used if it is not done. I hesitate to say how long I have lived in Southold. I have not lived in this particular house very long, only since 1982, but my father bought our first summer cottage in 1934, so it has been awhile, and I do indeed cherish the whole place. Therefore I would like to see everybody protected. I would not like to see anything more tom down in front of me, and I doubt very many other people would, but Orient is not the only historic district, and I hope it will not be. I think we should think of the whole area that might be historic. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Cynthia. I am going to go back over here. Mr. Lyburt? BURT LYBURT: I would like to discuss this evening the challenge of administering standards for historic districts. I have prepared some notes which may be helpful. There won't a quiz after this, but I will hand them out. They just have dates on them. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Where you ever a schoolteacher? Would you please give each Town Board member a copy? Now would you like to address us? BURT LYBURT: Thank you. There are some word processor mistakes here also, so bear with me a moment. I took a sample of Village Lane. Obviously historic districts are more than Orient, but I live in Orient, and it was easier for me to do this. I took sampling of Village Lane and Skippers Lane just to give you an idea of how the proportion works of when houses were built. As you can see here I don't know what broad means but 11% of the houses are before 1800, 21% the next period, 41% was between 1850 to 1900, and so on. We have five distinct periods here, which ingrains actually eight different, although merging, amhitectural styles which is the next section. The point here is that, as Ted Webb eloquently stated, that Orient and many of these other districts are really organic. They are changing. They reflect differences in cultural, and architectural style. The statement here, I think the facts will show the case show that it will be very difficult, not impossible to set standards to determine what is in fact historical, and what standards one would use, or committee would use, to determine what is appropriate, and what is not appropriate. This will be very brief I assure you. We also determined that the average renovations for 100 years is about two. Our house is 260 years we lost track at five. But, that is generally the case. Now at the bottom here you will see I posted a dissection of four houses, four renovations, or reconstruction's all of these I think are terrific. In closing here I think it might be difficult for the advisory board or the regulatory board if we went back in time to determine how appropriate these, in some cases stunning renovations, how appropriate these renovations would be. I would just like to start with the Millas House, which I think, is a stunning example of renovation. In fact, it is breathtaking I think. However, there are at least two elements which perhaps are not appealing. There is the crescent window, which I doubt was there in 1860. There is a garage, which I am sure wasn't there. Now I don't know Reverend Millas very well, but I think ill told her about that. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Sir, I am going to let him finish, and then I will call on you for anything you would like to clarify. Hist. Pres Law 19 BURT LYBURT: My point is that this is a fabulous renovation that was done I think, and if you look closely I am sure there are at least one or two elements which would not be of the period. The next house is the Poggi House, which has been on the subject of some controversy, and is a replica of the 1880 house, which preceded it. It is authentic down to most details, but there might be some question about the portrayal. The pilasters weren't available. I am really posing here a dilemma, how would a committee adjudicate things of this sort? The Tupper House is a new house, which was put up in 1980, a terrific Cape Cod replica, although the back of it is out of the period, nor the garage, although no one fault it. The Madigan House is a reconstruction of was called the Tom Thumb House. The Madigan House is again very attractive. They combined gothic, stick style, late Victorian revival, but it has nothing to do with the Tom Thumb house, which preceded it. The point here is that I believe it would be impossible to have continuous standards to judge the appropriateness of historic renovation. I am not saying that it is impossible, but I think it is a challenge which we would have to consider. I am not speaking to legality or pro or con, but really that this is really a hot potato I guess, and difficult to put together. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you for your comments. ALEX WiPF: My name is Alex Wipf. I am President of Save Open Space 2000, and I would also like to offer my compliments to Bill Moore, and to you, Jean, for leading these efforts to come up with a Landmark Preservation Law. Of course I do object to the plans to tear down the Whitaker House. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: What plans? ALEX WIPF: The proposal out there that says... SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: The Board has made no decisions. We have options to work out. I am not going to defend the board again. ALEX WIPF: That is fine, but there are experts who will tell you that in fact the house can be saved, and I hope that will consider those experts before you make a decision. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We will look at all options. ALEX WIPF: Okay, very good. Thank you, Jean. Now, I want to confess that I am not a member, I don't live in Orient. In fact, I don't even live in a historic dwelling. I wish I lived in a historic dwelling because I could take advantage of all of the money that it is out there and available for people who build historic houses. I would love to do some renovation on the exterior of my house, and get the tax abate, so I hope somewhere along the way you will take a look at my house. It was built in 1948. In terms of some of the comanents that have been made tonight, Jean, I am sure that can find experts that will deal with what would be appropriate in determining what would be an appropriate renovation for different periods of houses. They are all over the country, and I know they would be willing to make themselves available to you. The one comment I have about new-old houses, like in Williamsburg. They don't sag. Old houses sag. I like old. I like old, so there is nothing to be said about that except that is what I like. I think you have to clear something up, though, Jean. I am hoping...okay ifI understand it correctly, Hist. Pres Law 20 that if Orient who has solicited the Town Board, as I understand to become the first historic district. If that district in fact, either becomes a reality, and improves the law according to the New York State Park Department to the point where you can in fact get the revitalization money, and do what you have to do to get that, because it is important to all of us. As I understand it other parts of the town could solicit to become part of a kind of Jerry Lander district, and the reason that is important is because it is more than the people of Orient to consider here. I think about the people that object to this, but at the same time the whole town of Southold is really basically involved with this, because whether they like it or not this is a historic district. It was founded in 1640. It is one of the cemeteries in the country, and that is why we are having this discussion. Whether of not you want to consider yourself historic or be outside the historic district, there is probably some way to do it in some way? Somebody probable tried to petition the town to include your house, if there is a house there, in the historic district. So, I think it is important for people in this room, and I think it is important for the Town Board to take into consideration what I think is overwhelming support in the community in general for this historic law, and hopefully when it comes down to passing it you will consider the whole town even though certainly the people in Orient. The one thing that I can't quite get from the listening to the people who are talking about not wanting the district is what their objection of it is, I mean, what are you going to lose? I sounds like everything is to be gained, and nothing is going to be lost. Most people that I know that own historic houses like them just like they are. They wouldn't do this stuff anyway, and if they got a repair to be made why not get a tax abatement for it, but what do I know. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Not back and forth, please. Sir, he is addressing us, and I will call on you if you would like to speak again. I will. ALEX WIPF: Jean, you are absolutely right. I am sorry ifI breached the protocol. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: It is not a matter of protocol. I would like to say it is a matter of Southold. Southold has a certain kind of people in their community, and if we can't sit down, or get together and discuss problems pro and con, it is not the Southold I know and love, so, please, direct to us. We will take every comment that has been made tonight under consideration. There are lots of options we ~vill look at, and nothing is a done deal. ALEX WIPF: As I understand it if you are not in Orient you have to solicit the town in order to join the district. Isn't that correct? COUNCILMAN MOORE: That is the vehicle. There is a fair concern out there. I have to acknowledge it. I hadn't really thought about it the transition period between the old and the new, because I do recognize it. You can't just create and take the old list, and incorporate it by reference, and say, done deal, because the old law was advisory. People came in, and very graciously accepted the Landmark Preservation plaques and things like that. They have an opportunity on designation to object. If your parcel is considered for designation you can object. There is process by which that gets done. So, we can't just grab in whole the existing list and say, guess what, folks, here you slam dunk all or part of that new law if we get there. I hope you have answered your question. Hist. Pres Law 21 ALEX WIPF: 1 think you have, because from what I hear from the floor it is people who are really in way not affected by it, who are objecting because as the gentleman said he doesn't like being told what to do. Well, you know there is nothing to be said about being told what to do. People tell me what to do all the time. You know I can't do what I want to do with my waterfront. I got to separate my garbage. It seems very unfair to me, and as unfair as it seems it is really not such a burden when it comes down to it. So, I hope that you will consider the whole town, the whole town's feeling about what is undeniable a historic district whether you want to be part of it or not, and I hope that you will listen very carefully to the gentleman that was speaking about commercial interior renovations. Make that note. It is on the mark, but in general to pass this law, to get that money from the Waterfront Revitalization Plan, is almost...I don't know how to say this, I mean, nothing is mandated, Jean. Just like nothing is mandated about the Whitaker House, but we would hope that you would listen to the public about passage of the law, and look favorable upon it, and also I hope that you will consider what the proposed plan is there for the Whitaker House as well. Thank you very much. JAMES BITSES: I carry a brief for neither side. Both sides have spoken eloquently, and I rise to introduce possible solution that would suit both parties, and that is if you don't want to be in the historic district you would be crazy not to be, but if you don't want to be you should have the right of an individual veto. In other words, as far as my property is concerned I do not want to be in the historic district. For all those who want to be, who I consider the wiser party, because the historic district brings quite a few advantages, basically brings more beauty for them to join the district, why fine. It is within their choice, and for all those who don't want to they opt out by exercise their individual citizen's veto not to join. One other element that has not been covered is the trees. The trees are covered under different laws, but there is no reason why the trees which comprise the greater part of the beauty of these older districts should be included as part of the district, and numbered possibly, and any tree older than twenty-five olds to remain untouched. That is the only addition that I would make. Thank you for listening to me. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Jim. JAMES GRATHWOHL: Madam Supervisor, members of the Town Board, I wear of hats in the historic arena, as you may know, but one of them is I am Chairman of the Old House on the Cutchogue Village Green. But I am also on the Executive Committee ASPLEA. As I have said publicly before, thank you for your interest in what you have done so far. I also think that the current Landmarks Commission should get a vote of thanks, because what they have been doing over these last years is still very important, and is still very evident, and commend Mr. Deutsch for an extremely well laid out plan, and as you know we have worked with Peter and others in Orient to get this law to where it is now. What I am hearing I would like to make a additional suggestion, because I am Cutchogue by the way, and I have lived there all my life, but I think instead of just focussing on Orient as has been our plan, and we have given this a lot of thought, I would go back and include all of Southold Town. I think to start in Orient, and I already started laying groundwork in Cutchogue and New Suffolk district, and there is a district in Southold, but the folks on Oregon Road are very enthusiastic. I think if we sat back, and did a little research we would find that large majority of people in Southold Town would want to be included now, either from the list or being nominated as individual properties. That way everyone in Southold Hist. Pres Law 22 Town would be covered. There is an escape clause, and I think that is a good one, but some of you know I have just bought a house built in 1680 on New Suffolk Lane. I took the effort to put it on the National Register of Historic Places because of the benefits I can get, not only economic but esthetic, and so forth for having that house on the National Register. As someone over here alluded that is not going to save a thing. Being on the National Register I can still bulldoze the house. It is going to be this Landmark Preservation here in Southold Town that will keep me from doing something drastic, not that I am going to. You may have noticed I have put a new fence in front of it that is in keeping with the house. There are a lot of questions still to be answered, and once we put or you folks do in your committee put the new Code together, as I have mentioned several times, because my business is communications, I think it would be good to have another hearing, and outline in great detail to everyone who has questions, and who wants to know, because I think when it is all said and done, yes, them will be people who are still concerned about their individual rights, as I am, but will say, it is for the good of the town. It is overall for maintaining this wonderful town that we have that is so unique, and so I commend you, and ifI can be of any further assistance I will be glad to. Thank you. JOSEPH LIZEWSKI: I would like to say that anybody is really destroying the historic of our town. However, 1 like to look at the law a little differently as it is proposed, and ask a few questions to the Town Board about of it. It says, the commission shall consist of seven members to be appointed. You turn the page, and it says, all members shall have a known interest in historic preservation and architectural design in the Town of Southold. How far is that going to be stretched. That is sort of, this whole thing leads me to believe that the only people who will be involved in this will not be all the people that will be affected. In other words there are business people who own properties in these districts, and they might not be considered to have the same tone toward historic preservation, and even though their properties will be affected this looks like a committee that will certainly be made up of a chosen few people, and not really a good cross section of our town, which I think is sort of unfair. I think that people, I know myself even as a businessman I have one of those historic houses, and I preserved the chimney. It cost me a lot of money to have filled so it didn't fall apart, and I dug out four comers of the house, and had steel put underneath it to preserve it. It was eaten by those beetles, Mountain Beetles, whatever they were. I spent a lot of money on it, but I don't think I would be looked at by this historic group as being one of those people who was interested in historic preservation. So I think there should be a greater cross section of the town, and people asked to be on these commissions. I think that having them all in one bucket is not a good thing, and I don't think it is fair. I think there are a lot of people, like I said myself, who would not be looked at in that favor. The power of the commission, it says, appointing of staff and professional consultants as necessary to carry out the duties of the commission. Who pays for that? Where is that going to come from? I mean there is money right there. I want to know who is going to pay for that? It goes on. It says, adopt a criteria for development of historic district acceptance of the Town government a donation of development fights. Where do we get development rights in this? Where is development rights coming from? I would like to know where that fits into this thing. I mean, development rights is something that we, you know for historic districts, what are we talking about here? What this basically does xvith the development rights it also tells me that these powers are going to be some of them legislative. The criteria and some of the things that are going to be done, I would like to say that to the Town Board that I would think before any these powers are delineated by any of these Boards those powers come back to you as a Town Board. I basically elected you to Hist. Pres Law 23 legislate to me. I did not elect a Historic Commission to legislate to me. That is for sure. That is your position, and that is what you should do. So, whatever they say, whatever they decide on, should come back to this Board. This Board should decide. The reason for that is as you go on to this review board you find that each little group is making their own laws, so the laws and the criteria for this, it says the review board to consist of three members to be appointed to an extent available in the community from a list provided by the local historic district preservation organization. Again, you are really leaving out a lot of people. You buttonholing this to a very small group of people, who have a lot of zeal about this, but you are leaving out a lot of people who are going to be affected. I don't think it is very fair. I don't think these people should have a comer on this market. I think there are plenty of people in town who deserve to have the opportunity to sit on these boards. I think they have other things to say, and they may look at this from a different angle. This is like putting all architects on the Architectural Review Board. Can you imagine what a problem it would be? I mean, just think of that. All right? The criteria can be different from district to district, which is another thing that, you know, is okay, but I think it is going to cause a lot of problems. ! mean it is just like the Amhitectural Review Board, if you have different districts the group in Greenport may feel a little different about buildings than the group in Southold. That may be good. That may be bad, but I think that is something that should be looked at They recommend approval and disapproval of the appropriateness, basically what we are doing here is we are taking the law out of the Building Department's hands, which are certified in New York State to take care of our benefits, and our health, and our welfare, and our safety, and we are putting a little bit of that law into a committee's hands. I think that we escaping some responsibility by doing that. This reminds me a little bit of when the Site Law, that we basically gave up from the Building Department rights that were given to our subjective board who decided after that whatever they wanted according to intensity of use interpretation of what the use of your property is. Another thing that really bothers me is Mr. Duell had brought up is that a lot of this property is probably zoned Hamlet Business. Now everybody says that their property is going to worth a lot more. We are going to have all this money. IfI was a businessman, I was the guy that wanted to buy the land with a hardware store was in Cutchogue. I was paying $5,000 in the shopping center, because that where a lot of people get started, because they don't want to go through all that rigmarole of building their own place, so they go to a shopping center, and start a business. Now, the building that was removed from that area, or was removed, but it could have been tom down, we'll say it was declared historical. This man wanted to move out of that, and that was a piece that he wanted to buy. Under this Historical Preservation Act if there were a house there he would have one heck of a time to develop a business. What this is going to do is this is a piece of business property that is not historical in a village, and it is not historical, and it is next to a place that is historical. I want to buy one that is not historical. I don't want to go through all this. I want to be able to tear it down. A lot of businesses are not going to be able to be suited for these historical businesses. You are not going to put a hardware store in a place that looks like a historical house, so among the business zoning is predicated on the building that is on it, not the land use that it was given. You taking away some of the rights of the zone of having that building on that zone. This man is going to incur a tremendous cost to convert that, so I think that should be looked into. It is another loop that you are taking away. You are talked about Route 48, you wanted to get the business offof48, and you wanted to develop the hamlets, and now you are telling me that you want to make these historic districts so you can't touch the fagade, or you can't do anything to the house if it is zoned Hamlet Business. If you are going to do that you are making the building dictate what you can do Hist Pres Law 24 with the property. Zoning was always done with the property. The zoning went with the property, not with the building, so you are making something there that really I don't think you really realized is there. But, it is going to be very, very difficult to change, to do anything with that house for a retail building, which it was zoned for, and there is about 100 uses in the Hamlet Business District that you have for those buildings. Now those uses, it is bad enough that you have to go to site plan to find out if you are allowed to have what is rightfully yours six years ago, and go through the planning process that we have. Now you are being told you can't change the faCade, or you can't change that building because it is historical, and you have to realize that is going to happen, because what you heard about the Whitaker House today. I mean, everybody is up in arms that you may tear down the Whitaker House. What do you think is going to happen to some business man, who buys a piece of Hamlet zoned Business property who wants to put up a hardware store, or wants to put up a sporting goods store, and there is this house there? Most of the houses you realize in this town that have had problems have been destroyed by businesspeople, had it happen because the laws that govern a house in a business zone that demands an elevator, that demands the handicap accessibility, the handicap bathrooms, and the openings of the doors, it got so expensive that the people felt it wasn't worth keeping the house. That's an area that you should have attack. If you want to keep this historic house I think you should find a way to make it a little easier for people who are going to stay in that business, stay in that house to not have to go by the laws of this century where that house was built a century ago. It seems very unfair to impose that upon somebody, and it is very difficult to do, because it does change the end of the house, and of course it says also, let's continue, once the commissioners issued a notice of proposed no building permits for construction or demolishing should be issued by the Building Inspector until the Town Board has made the decision. I mean, what a loop, and what a hoop. You know the Building Department has always had to the power to take care of these things. Here we are going back to the Town Board, who has to make a decision on this. It seems to me that there is responsibility for the building, and the construction end of this, isn't in your preview. It belongs with the Building Department. A Building Department certainly is the one who takes the Town Code, and goes to all those classes that you all pay for, and knows what is going on as far as the Building Code does. So, to come back to the Town Board I don't see what that is going to do. I don't why, and it is sort of overrules most of the rules we have for getting a building permit in the town. I mean it is setting another whole layer. Okay. You change a building to suit a zone? No. We cannot change a building to suit a zone. That is 56-6, and that basically tells you like I said you are going to tell me that we can't change the building to suit the zone. I just think that you are devaluing. I mean if a house is outside of a Hamlet Business zone I don't see why anyone wouldn't want to save it, or keep it the way it is, but when you start getting into business property, and the hamlets, and the Stewardship Task Force Study that you wanted these hamlets to be developed to business areas, and the focus you have been going in through this planning stuff over the last ten years it points us to strong hamlet growth, and business growth within the hamlets. Most of our hamlets have really not been developed yet. I mean if you look at the hamlet business areas they are huge in these areas, and they do contain a lot of these houses, because we haven't developed it yet because our growth rate is like 4% over the last ten years. I mean we are going to fill this with 60,000 people in the next ten years because we only grew 4% in the last ten. It is wonderful to watch the statistics. The interchanging in passing upon the application, the Historic Preservation show not consider changes unless they are open to the public, which basically means business use properties. Anything the public goes into, and when you get into that you get into old houses that Hist. Pres Law 25 (tape change) difficult again for the businesspeople, who want to have these buildings if they do want to use them for something. It doesn't come up to our Codes today. I mean we are trying to bring them up anyway, but it is just going to make it more difficult. I don't see any advantage to that at all. To me this is a little bit of government by committee, and not by our elected officials. I think giving up this zoning power in our town by making these buildings subjective to this commission and not to the Town Board, the Town Board really should be reserving much of the power that is being given to this commission as far as the use of these buildings in that business property. Basically the way I see it is you are taking away from the Town government the right to really control zoning, or a certain amount of it in our town, and what is going to go there, and giving it to the Historical Commission, because they are going to determine what you can do with that historic preservation building that is zoned Hamlet Business, not you. You are basically ttmfing it over, and that decision is going to be made by them. It is going to be very difficult. All of these things once you get into them, I mean, you look at our Architectural Review Board, it started out very simple. We couldn't get people in all the towns to fill all the slots, and it went on it got into conflict with our Planning Board at different times. It is inevitable that all of these organizations, and all of these things that are given out to committees get very powerful and headstrong after awhile. They all want to do what you are supposed to do as elected officials. They all want more than what they were set out to do. They are never satisfied with their real charge. I mean the Architectural Review Board would certainly like to tell the Planning Board a lot more about what he wants done, and there is always, you know, that power that comes with these things, especially if you are going to put all historical people on it, and people who are all behind this, and not include any average people, any working people, or any people in the business community that may be affected by it. No building permit for construction should be issued until a certificate of appropriateness has first been issued by the Historical Committee. All right? The certificate of appropriateness required by this act shall be in addition to and not allude any building permit. Even though this is supposed to be done in a short period of time I can tell you that the time limit will probably not be held strictly to the course, and then only giving it eighteen months, it takes years through permits in this town at times for different things you want to do. Here you are giving a limit of eighteen months for this to hold. That is ridiculous. I mean the Town should be held to a time limit on what it is supposed to give the people in this town, and it is certainly is not. I mean you can be wound for years, and years, and years in this town trying to get something done. So, i think you could eliminate the eighteen months. I think that this thing should be like a building permit and go consecutively at least with the building permit, which is renewable if it is not finished in two years, and you are in the middle of the project for some reasons there is no reason why an eighteen month should be on it. It should go concurrently. I think this whole thing should work a little bit more with the building permit process, because it is the Building Inspector who ultimately has to put the real stamp on this no matter ~vhat anybody says before or after. I mean the only thing that is really legal is when the Building Inspector says, okay, you are finished, you got a seal, you are done. That is the people who are going to ultimately responsible for whatever changes are made. So, I think that even though this is all good I think we already have a procedure that should be worked more closely with, and it certainly has to be worked closely with because it is the Building Department that is the power behind whatever these people decide they want to do. I mean if they decide to do something, and it is not within the Building Code, it is not going to fly. You know it is not going to go. The Building Inspector is going to say, hey, so I think that is important also. I don't see a lot of that work in here where the Building Department is involved in any of this, except it Hist. Pres Law 26 doesn't give you a building permit until you are done. I mean you can do all this work, and find out that the Building Department is not happy with what you want to do. So, I think that should be done. The government takes its time in working I think it should be responsible. The only other thing I want to make a comment on is that the fine for the $250 or the $1,000 for each day the violations continues I think is absolutely absurd. I think with just the human element, again if we can fine our own government for the loss of money it takes to get something done, and the time that spend in ~vaiting to get something passed in this town it would be nice to see how much money would come back to us, but per day is a lot of money, and I don't think that it really is, because of the problems that you would have, again. I also think that if this law was so good, and this was so wonderful to everybody, and the tax exemption was so good, that people would do it without a violation fine, and people would do it gladly without putting such a stiff arm on this thing. I mean if this thing is so wonderful nobody would tear down a building, and every body would take the tax exemption, and so by the end of this thing, and the way it is handled with a heavy hand, you have to say to yourself, boy, there is more to this than just making a tax exception, and making the town wonderful. This is another method of really slowing down growth of business in the hamlets to me, and it should be redefined as far as what these businesses can expect. People own business property, if you are stuck with a piece of that property with one of those houses on it you are really stuck. The value is just the opposite to me as a businessman, as I said. IfI had to buy a piece I wouldn't buy one with a nice house on. I would buy one I wouldn't have to alter. If you want to go into business in the hamlets you want something you are going to be easy with. I think from our viewpoint I think that we should have a little bit more input from some of business community, and I think some of the business community should be involved on these committees. I really think it is only fair because they are the ones that who are going to hit the hardest. Thank you. SUPERVISOR COCHKAN: Thank you. JIM D1NIZIO: Hi. Jim Dinizio, Jr., from Greenport. I don't live in a historic house, and you know I think you have taken a lot of time on this law. It seems like, you know, it would probably work in some way. I have some concerns about the word appropriateness, and I just want to give you an example. The Mets and the Yankees play the Series last year, and one of the pitchers, the Yankee pitcher, threw what seemed to be a bat at a player that was nmning to first. Now, if you ask any Yankee fan he is going to tell you that was appropriate. You ask any Mets fan he is going to tell you it is not appropriate. Okay? SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: He threw it at him. JIM D1NIZIO: You must be a Mets fan. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: No. I am not a fan of baseball at all. JIM D1NIZIO: I would agree with you wholeheartedly, however, I think there is probably a stadium full of people in the Bronx that would disagree. That is what I am trying to get to with this appropriateness. I wish that somehow you could define that, so that a person actually purchasing a house, or living in one of these houses knows what is appropriate. We have had an example I tell you right here at this very meeting where you could feel the tension. People think Hist. Pres Law 27 things are appropriate, and other people who live in those houses don't happen to think that they are appropriate, and I think you are going to cause a lot of people specifically older people, who lived in these houses for many, many years a lot of worry perhaps for nothing. I know there is a clause in here that says they can appeal what is appropriate. Well, they are appealing to the people who said that what they wanted to do was inappropriate. I got to tell you I wouldn't want to face those people, because I have a sneaking feeling that they still not going to think it is appropriate. You know, Orient is a beautiful place. It got that way, I don't know how. It certainly didn't get that way by this law. My own personal opinion, the first speaker of the night put the figure right on it. It has to do with property values. It has to do ~vith preserving those property values. Fine. Then make a district, a tax district, either buy all of those houses, and those people could be responsible for the property values. I don't want it put on me, or my children, or children's children to make sure that Orient property values stay the same, because they don't want a house that has a pink roof. I can just picture a poor couple that has lived in this house all along trying to figure out how they are going to afford the better vinyl siding, when they can only afford the plain old vinyl siding. By the way, I don't believe you need a permit for that. I don't even think you need to go to the Town to ask them for that, yet I can just picture these people who have a vested interest, or some type of voluntary interest of historic preservation putting their comment in on whether or not it is appropriate for these people to put up this type of siding. Windows, I don't know. Craig, you could tell me. I don't believe you need to have a building permit to replace a window in place. Well, a door, you don't need one either. Well, say I want to put a door that has a glass figurine of Mickey Mouse in it. Well, guess what? I can do it without asking the Town. Is it appropriate? No. It is not appropriate. How do I know? It is only my opinion, and I think you have got to define that in some way. Maybe it is not a certificate of appropriateness. I have a feeling afier like the past four or five months you folks up there do have sensitivity to appropriateness. I watched you on TV each one of you getting battered about the dog pound and the dog pound. Those people kept coming back. Guess what? They were passionate about what they wanted. They know what these dogs needed, and guess what? So are the Historic Preservation Committee are going to have the same passion and zeal for what they think is appropriate, and all I can say is if you are going to vote on this, and I want you each to think about this, vote on it after, the day after you make that decision on that Whitaker House. Okay? Don't vote on it before. Let's vote on it right after. Let's see ho~v you feel about it after the beating you took, because I have a feeling you are going to take a beating. I have no opinion. I know you spent $70,000 or so to determine whether or not it could be saved. I can't see some older couple spending that kind of money to prove to you. What if it was? It was a lot of money, you know. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: It was all a grant from New York State. JIM DINIZIO: Yeah, but it is still my money. It is still tax dollars. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: It was no thousands, $7,000. JIM[ D1NIZIO: What I am trying to say to you is these people who don't want to, or think what they are doing is appropriate, are going to then prove that what they want is appropriate according to the rules set up by the committee on appropriateness. I know it sounds confusing as it is. Hist. Pres Law 28 SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: No, I understand what you are saying. It is a word that is open to interpretation by the individual, and different people can interpret it in different ways what the word means. JIM D1NIZIO: The reason why I said the law looks like it could work, because ultimately it does come back to you. Okay? The Town Board has a hearing that says whether or not the ruling that the committee made is appropriate. But, then you ask you people to come and air their dirty laundry, or air things that they don't want the public to know, such as I can't afford to do what the appropriateness committee wants. I advocate property rights to the point where my preference would be to buy them, and pay the taxes. Purchase them outright, then to legislate something that people are going to have to worry about needlessly. Thank you very much. GWEN SCHROEDER: My name is Gwen Schroeder. I am the Southold coordinator for the North Fork Environmental Council, and so many people have said so wonderful things tonight. I just want to say that historic landmarks and buildings are like our natural resources. Once they are gone they are gone. There is not turning back, and NFEC supports the adoption whether this law needs to be tweaked, whether it needs to be modified, so it qualify for LWRP funds. I think the spirit of the law is what is important, and after this gentleman over here read what is not included, you know, I would like personally I would like to see more things included. I mean, some things just supersede property rights, and I think this is one of those issues that they do. I mean, I respect people's thoughts on that issue, but I just think once things are lost they are lost forever, and Southold is special. I mean, I am so grateful every time I travel west of Riverhead that I live here. Everyday. I mean truly have that sense of gratitude for living here. So, thank you to all the folks who worked on this, and hope you guys adopt it in some shape or form. Thanks. ROBERT HUGHES: My name is Robert Hughes. I live in Orient. I do not live in the historic district, and being the last person, or close to the last person to speak a lot of people have taken a lot of my thunder, which is alright, because I have been accused of having too much to begin with anyway. Mr. Moore when he started the hearing mentioned that this was a mandatory measure that we are talking about. I like the idea of the gentleman who was sitting here in front of me that it is a voluntary thing. He wanted people to able to opt out of being in a district. I would like to take it one step further, and I would like people to have to opt into it, and I would like it to be voluntary private. Don't let the government be involved at all. Why don't the people, who want to have their houses be historically preserved have their own homeowners association. They can pay dues. They own organization can collect money so they can review the plans. They can decide what they want to have done, what is appropriate. It is all private. If someone who has opted into their organization does something wrong they have civil limits that they can go after. They can go after these people as a homeowners association. Don't have the government be involved. They can have their own bureaucracy. It can be as big as they want it to be. You can then have houses any place in the town, which of course this law provides for, because any building that has nay sort of relation to a historic personage can become a historic landmark. By the way, I wouldn't want to get too famous ifI were you because your houses might become one, and maybe your businesses. Then it would the interior of your business, and they would telling you what you have to do as far the color of the walls in your law office, Mr. Moore. But, getting back to the subject it should be voluntary thing instead of being mandated by the government. Hist. Pres Law 29 Now, talking about the old law, which was since the hearing was kept open, one of the things about the old law a lot of the article in the Town Code, one of the first sections in each of those articles is definitions. There are not definitions in this proposed law. Some of these have already been discussed. Material change and appearance, what is that? Watershed? Historic personage? Open to the public, and my favorite, which was the local historic district preservation organization. These things all need to be addressed, but personally I would rather it be a private enterprise rather than have the government mandating. I would rather have voluntary cooperation. Thank you. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, sir. Anyone else like to address the Town Board, either pro or con? Don't sit there with a burning kind of something you want to say. Please say it. We want to hear everyone's opinion. DR. MONTOKOUROSKI: I am Dr. Montokouroski. I own a house in Orient which is definitely historic since 1868. It was a ruin. There were all kind of wild animals coming in and out, was standing empty for many, many, maybe twenty years. I restored to the way it was once. I enjoyed it very much, and I want to make two remarks. The gentleman who sits next to me, and is my neighbor on Village Lane stated we wouldn't own the front of the house if there is such a law. When I bought my house there was no need for such a certificate of occupancy. Then I wanted to get a mortgage many years later, a small mortgage, but to get it I had an inspector come, and he told me my insulation was not fireproof, and that I have to put some kind of special material behind my fireplace. I did I think it would day might have protected by house. Would I say that I don't own my house because I have obey by the laws established by my community? I don't think so. The last thing I want to say when I was driving in here, I came to this meeting from New York City, I had on the news that in the village somebody to spite the neighbors painted his house black. Well, that is for giving people the possibility to opt out of adhering to a unified agreement of preserving the area. Thank you. SALLY BALL: Sally Ball, Mechanic Street. I am proud to be designated as one of the houses. It is a little sea captain's house next to the blacksmith shop. I can't wait to be designated. There is so much money out there. There are grants. Washington gives grants, matching grants, but I don't have to use the cheap asphalt tile on the roof. I can go now and get white cedar from Maine, because it will be the same cost, because Washington will match whatever I put. If I put $3,000 into the house. Washington comes up with $3,000. So, now instead of using the asphalt shingles I can use white cedar shingles, and there is so many tax advantages from New York as well as from Southold Town if the proposal goes through. So, I am excited, and I don't why anybody wouldn't be, and I have always lived in old homes, but nobody would want to demolish an old home, except for what this gentleman said, maybe that is why the house on the comer of Young and Main Street went down, because they had to put an elevator in, and they had to make it apropos to business zoning, so naturally they tom that house down, and now we are looking at a beautiful gazebo instead of an old home, so I am happy for the la,v, and I think the law should have some more teeth in it, so that somebody doesn't just come down and mow down their house, because they want to put up something else. We have to keep the old homes going. I just wanted to say that. Thank you. Hist. Pres Law 30 SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Anyone else like to address the Town Board before I go for the second round to Jay over here? Everyone finished? Said what you want to say? (No response.) Okay, we will close with Jay. I just would like to say we are going to keep the heating open, this one also so that if you have any written comments and input in the period of the next couple of weeks we will be very happy to take them in as part of the heating. Jay? JAY APPLEGATE: I would just like to ask the Town Board to consider in their deliberations some sort of recognition for the contribution that has been made over the past many years, the contributions that have been made over the many past years by Ralph Williams and John Stack, who are not standing for reappointment, but have contributed greatly to the historical evolution of Landmark legislation in our town. I would ask you to consider that. SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We certainly will. Southold Town Clerk GREGORY F. YAKABOSKI TOWN ATTORNEY MARY C. WILSON ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY JEAN W. COCHRAN Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1889 Fax (631) 765-1823 E-mail: townattorney@southold.org OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: FROM: DATE: RE: MEMORANDUM SUPERVISOR COCHRAN AND TOWN BOARD MEMBERS GREGORY F. YAKABOSKI, ESQ., TOWN ATTORNEY MARY C. WILSON, ESQ., ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY APRIL 26, 2001 HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROPOSED LOCAL LAW The proposed local law in relation to Historic Preservation is proposed to replace the existing local law in relation to Landmark Preservation (Chapter 56). In addition, a separate law is proposed to provide for tax exemptions for historic properties. Historic Preservation Law The existing local law authorizes a commission to recommend landmark designation to the Town Board. No property will be designated as a landmark unless the owner consents, fails to respond within 30 days or 51% of the owners in a proposed district consent to such designation. In addition, the existing law requires the review of a building permit application before a permit is issued in the following circumstances: a designated landmark; a property listed in the S.P.L.I.A. (Society for the Preservation of Long Island Antiquities), property within an historic district or property otherwise designated as a landmark by a governmental agency. The existing law does not require a property owner to comply with any recommendations by the landmark commission. The commission merely provides an advisory report which the property owner may chose to ignore or follow. Thereafter, the building permit is issued. The proposed Historic Preservation Law would set up a new Commission and a Review Board with final determination of the designation of landmarks and historic districts made by the Town Board. A public hearing is required prior to designation. The new law would not have a voluntary component and once a notice of designation was issued, no building permits would be issued until the Commission issues a certificate of appropriateness. Only those properties designated as a landmark or historic district via this law would have the additional steps prior to the issuance of a building permit. There are no provisions for properties inventoried by SPLIA or prior designated landmarks. A grandfather clause added to the proposed law could alleviate this or proposing the new law as a separate local law without repealing the Landmark Preservation law may be feasible. Tax Exemption Law A separate local law is proposed which would provide tax exemptions for any increase in value due to alteration or rehabilitation of a historic property. The exemption is available to property which has been designated by local law as a landmark or to property that contributes to the character of an historic district. The tax exempt law does not apply to any other characterization such as SPLIA inventory properties. Simply existing as an historic property does not afford a tax exemption. The tax abatement is granted only for increased valuation due to rehabilitation or alteration of the property. Merely having a landmark or historic designation does not afford the property a tax reduction. The State Department Office of Real Property Services confirms that the tax exemption (authorized by Real Property Tax Law 444-a) is available for any designated landmark by local, state or federal government and properties within an historic distdct only. ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MAI~RIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFOR3fiATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOXVING RESOLUTION NO. 295 OF 2001 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON MARCH 27, 2001: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 27th day of March 2001, a Local law entitled "A Local Law in relation to Chapter 85 (Taxation), Article V, Tax Exemption for alterations and rehabilitation of historical property in the Town of Southold" and, NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, and hereby sets 7:34 p.m.~ Tuesday~ May 8~ 2001~ as the time and place for a public hearing at which time all interested persons will be heard. The proposed Local Law in relation to Chapter 85 (Taxation), "Article V, Tax Exemption for alterations and rehabilitation of historical property in the Town of Southold" which includes the following: LOCAL LAW NO. - 2001 A Local Law in relation to Chapter 85 (Taxation), Article V, "Tax Exemption for alterations and rehabilitation of historical property" in the Town of Southold BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold, as follows: I. Chapter 85 (Taxation) Article V Tax Exemption for alterations and rehabilitation of historical property in the Town of Southold § 85-10 Exemption for alteration and rehabilitation of historic property. A. Amount of Exemption. (1) Historic property shall be exempt from taxation to the extent of any increase in value attributable to such alteration or rehabilitation pursuant to the following schedule: ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD March 30, 2001 Thomas Isles, Director Department of Planning County of Suffolk Post Office Box 6100 Hauppauge, New York 11788-0099 Dear Mr. Isles: Transmitted are proposed Local Laws in Relation to establishing a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold. Please review and prepare an official report defining your department's recommendations with regard to this proposed local law and forward same to me. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. Very truly yours, Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk Enclosures (3) cc: Town Board Town Attorney ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE TOWN CLERK REGISTRo~R OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS ldANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 294 OF 2001 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON MARCH 27, 2001: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 27th day of March 2001, a Local law entitled "A LOCAL LAW to establish a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold" and, NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a public heating on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, and hereby sets 7:32 p.m.~ Tuesda¥~ May 8~ 2001~ as the time and place for a public hearing at which time all interested persons will be heard. The proposed "A LOCAL LAW to establish a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold" which includes the following: LOCAL LAW NO. -2001 A LOCAL LAW to establish a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: Chapter 56 of the Code of the Town of Southold, designated Landmark Preservation and originally adopted by the Town Board of the Town of Southold on January 18, 1983, as Local Law 1 of 1983, is hereby repealed in its entirety and the following Historic Preservation Law, to be known as Chapter 56 of the Code of the Town of Southold, be and hereby is enacted in its place and stead: Section 56-1 Short Title This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "Historic Preservation Law of Southold Town". ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE TOWN CLERK REGISTR2~d:~ OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hail, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 293 OF 2001 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON MARCH 27, 2001: WHEREAS, there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 27th day of March 2001, A Local Law in relation to the establishment of Chapter 56, "Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold" of the Town Code of the Town of Southold, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED that this Local Law be referred to the Southold Town Planning Department and the Suffolk County Planning Commission for recommendations and reports, all in accordance with the Southold Town Code and the Suffolk County Charter. The proposed "A LOCAL LAW to establish a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold' which includes the following: LOCAL LAW NO. -2001 A LOCAL LAW to establish a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: Chapter 56 of the Code of the Town of Southold, designated Landmark Preservation and originally adopted by the Town Board of the Town of Southold on January 18, 1983, as Local Law 1 of 1983, is hereby repealed in its entirety and the following Historic Preservation Law, to be known as Chapter 56 of the Code of the Town of Southold, be and hereby is enacted in its place and stead: Section 56-1 Short Title This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "Historic Preservation Law of Southold Town". Section 56-2 Purpose ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRLAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFOILMATION OFFICER Town Ha/l, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 295 OF 2001 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON MARCH 27, 2001: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 27th day of March 2001, a Local law entitled "A Local Law in relation to Chapter 85 (Taxation), Article V, Tax Exemption for alterations and rehabilitation of historical property in the Town of Southold" and, NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, and hereby sets 7:34 p.m.~ Tuesdav~ May 8~ 2001~ as the time and pla¢. for~blic hearing at which time all interested persons will be heard. The proposed Local Law in relation to Chapter 85 (Taxation), "Article V, Tax Exemption for alterations and rehabilitation of historical property in the Town of Southold" which includes the following: LOCAL LAW NO. - 2001 A Local Law in relation to Chapter 85 (Taxation), Article V, "Tax Exemption for alterations and rehabilitation of historical property" in the Town of Southold BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold, as follows: I. Chapter 85 (Taxation) Article V Tax Exemption for alterations and rehabilitation of historical property in the Town of Southold § 85-10 Exemption for alteration and rehabilitation of historic property. A. Amount of Exemption. (1) Historic property shall be exempt from taxation to the extent of any increase in value attributable to such alteration or rehabilitation pursuant to the following schedule: ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD March 30, 2001 Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Gentlemen: Transmitted are the proposed Local Laws in Relation to establishing a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold. Please prepare an official report defining the Planning Board's recommendations with regard to this proposed change of zone and forward same to me. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. Very truly yours, Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk Enclosures (3) cc: Town Board Town Attorney ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE TOWN CLERK REGIST1L~R OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 294 OF 2001 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON MARCH 27, 2001: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that there has been presented to the Town Board of the th Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 27 day of March 2001, a Local law entitled "A LOCAL LAW to establish a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold" arid, NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a public heating on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, and hereby sets 7:32 p.m, Tuesda% May 8, 2001, as the time and place for a public hearing at which time all interested persons will be heard. Th~ proposed "A LOCAL LAW to establish a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold" which includes the following: LOCAL LAW NO. -2001 A LOCAL LAW to establish a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: Chapter 56 of the Code of the Town of Southold, designated Landmark Preservation and originally adopted by the Town Board of the Town of Southold on January 18, 1983, as Local Law 1 of 1983, is hereby repealed in its entirety and the following Historic Preservation Law, to be known as Chapter 56 of the Code of the Town of Southold, be and hereby is enacted in its place and stead: Section $6-1 Short Title This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "Historic Preservation Law of Southold Town". ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 293 OF 2001 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON MARCH 27, 2001: WHEREAS, there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 27th day of March 2001, A Local Law in relation to the establishment of Chapter 56, "Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold" of the Town Code of the Town of Southold, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED that this Local Law be referred to the Southold Town Planning Department and the Suffolk County Planning Commission for reeomm~ndatiuns and reports, all in accordance with the Southold Town Code and the Suffolk County Charter. The proposed "A LOCAL LAW to establish a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold" which includes the following: LOCAL LAW NO. -2001 A LOCAL LAW to establish a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: Chapter 56 of the Code of the Town of Southold, designated Landmark Preservation and originally adopted by the Town Board of the Town of Southold on January 18, 1983, as Local Law 1 of 1983, is hereby repealed in its entirety and the following Historic Preservation Law, to be known as Chapter 56 of the Code of the Town of Southold, be and hereby is enacted in its place and stead: Section 56-1 Short Title This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "Historic Preservation Law of Southold TowII'. Section 56-2 Purpose LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 27th day of March 2001, a Local law entitled "A LOCAL LAW to establish a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold" and, NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, and hereby sets 7:32 p.m, Tuesday~ May 8~ 2001, as the time and place for a public heating at which time all interested persons will be heard. The proposed "A LOCAL LAW to establish a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold" which includes the following: LOCAL LAW NO. -2001 A LOCAL LAW to establish a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: Chapter 56 of the Code of the Town of Southold, designated Landmark Preservation and originally adopted by the Town Board of the Town of Southold on January 18, 1983, as Local Law 1 of 1983, is hereby repealed in its entirety and the following Historic Preservation Law, to be known as Chapter 56 of the Code of the Town of Southold, be and hereby is enacted in its place and stead: Section 56-1 Short Title This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "Historic Preservation Law of Southold Town". Section 56-2 Purpose The Town Board hereby declares as a matter of public policy that the protection, enhancement, and perpetuation of landmarks and historic districts is necessary to promote the economic, cultural, educational, and general welfare of the public. Inasmuch as the identity of a people is founded on its past, and inasmuch as Southold Town has many significant historic, architectural, and cultural resources which constitute its heritage, this act is intended to: (a) protect and enhance the landmarks and historic districts which represent distinctive elements of Southold's historic, architectural, and cultural heritage; (b) foster civic pride in the accomplishments of the past; (c) protect and enhance Southold's attractiveness to visitors and the support and stimulus to the economy hereby provided; and (d) insure the harmonious, orderly, and efficient growth and development of the town. Section 56-3 Historic Preservation Commission There is hereby created a commission to be known as the Town of Southold Historic Preservation Commission. (a) The commission shall consist of 7 members to be appointed, to the extent available in the community, by the Town Board as follows: At least one shall be an architect experienced in working with historic buildings; At least one shall be a resident of an historic district At least one shall have demonstrated significant interest in and commitment to the field of historic preservation evidenced by either involvement in a local historic preservation group, employment or voluntary activity in the field of historic preservation, or other serious interest in the field; and All members shall have a known interest in historic preservation and architectural development within the Town of Southold. Co) Commission members shall serve for a term of four years, with the exception of the initial term of one of the members which shall be for one year, two which shall be for two years, and two which shall be for three years. (see attached schedule A) (c) The chair and the vice chair of the con'nnission shall be elected by and from among the members of the commission. (d) The powers of the commission shall include: (i) employment of staff and professional consultants as necessary to carry out the duties of the commission; (ii) promulgation of roles and regulations as necessary for the conduct of its business (iii) adoption of criteria for the delineation of historic district (iv) conduct of surveys of significant historic, architectural, and cultural landmarks and historic district within the town; (v) designation recommendations of identified structures or resources as historic districts and landmarks; (vi) acceptance on behalf of the town government of the donation of faCade easements and development rights, and the making of recommendations to the town government concerning the acquisition of faCade easements or other interests of real property as necessary to carry out the purposes of this act; (vii) increasing public awareness of the value of historic, cultural, and architectural preservation by developing and participating in public education programs; making recommendations to town government concerning the utilization of state, federal or private funds to promote the preservation of landmarks and historic districts within the town; (viii) recommending acquisition of a landmark structure by the town government where its preservation is essential to the purposes of this act and where private preservation is not feasible; and (ix) approval or disapproval of applications for certificates of appropriateness pursuant to this act. (e) The commission shall meet at least monthly, but meeting may be held at any time on the written request of any two of the commission members or on the call of the chair or the supervisor. (f) A quorum for the transaction of business shall consist of 4 of the commission's members, but not less than a majority of the full authorized membership may grant or deny a certificate of appropriateness. (g) All members shall attend and complete relevant training programs as the Town Board may require. Section 56-4 Historic District Review Board The Town Board, upon the reconunendation of the commission, shall establish a review board for each approved historic district. 2 The review board shall consist of 3 members to be appointed, to the extent available in the community, from a list provided by local historic district preservation organization. (a) Review Board members shall serve for a term of four years, with the exception of the initial term of one of the members which shall be for two years. (see attached schedule B) (b) The duties of the review board shall include: (i) adoption of criteria for appropriateness for all landmarks and structures within the local historic district; (ii) making recommendations to the Historic Preservation Commission concerning the utilization of state, federal or private funds to promote the preservation of landmarks and structures within the local historic district; (iii) recommending acquisition of a landmark structure by the town government where its preservation is essential to the purposes of this act and where private preservation is not feasible; and (iv) recommending approval or disapproval of applications for certificates of appropriateness pursuant to this act. Section 56-5 Designation of Historic Districts or Landmarks (a) The commission may recommend a group of properties as a historic district to the Town Board for designation if the group: (i) (ii) contains properties which meet one or more of the criteria for designation as a landmark; and by reason of possessing such qualities, constitutes a distinct section of the town. (b) The commission may recommend to the Town Board the designation of an individual property as a landmark if it: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) possesses special characteristics or historic or aesthetic interest or value as part of the cultural, political, economic, or social history of the locality, region, state, or nation; or is identified with historic personages; or embodies the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style; or is the work of a designer whose work has significantly influenced an age; or because of its unique location or singular physical characteristic, represents an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood. (c) The commission may recommend to the Town Board the recognition of a historic district that has been so designated by the state or federal govemment. The boundaries of each historic district designated henceforth shall be specified in detail and shall be filed, in writing, in the town clerk's office for public inspection. (d) Notice of a proposed designation shall be sent by registered mail to the owner of the property proposed for designation, describing the property and announcing a public heating by the conunission to consider the designation. Notice of a proposed designation shall also be by publication at least once in a newspaper of general circulation at least 14 days prior to the date of the public hearing. Once the commission has issued notice of a proposed designation, no building permits for construction or demolition shall be issued by the building inspector until the Town Board has made its decision. (e) The commission shall hold a public heating prior to designation of any landmark or historic district. The commission, owners, and any interested parties 3 may present testimony or documentary evidence at the heating which will become part of a record regarding the historic, architectural, or cultural importance of the proposed landmark or historic district. The record may also contain staff reports, public comments, or other evidence offered outside of the hearing. (f) The commission shall forward notice of each property designation as a landmark and the boundaries of each designated historic district to the office of the Southold Town Clerk for recordation. Section 56-6 Certificate of Appropriateness for Alteration, Demolition or New Construction Affecting Historic Districts or Landmarks No person shall carry out any exterior alteration, restoration, reconstruction, demolition, new construction, or moving of a landmark or property which faces a public right of way within a historic district, nor shall any person make any material change in the appearance of such property without first obtaining a certificate of appropriateness from the historic preservation commission. (a) (b) In the specific case where the property or landmark is located on the waterfront, the watershed is considered a public right of way and the aspect of the property or landmark visible from the watershed is subject to the aforementioned requirement. In the specific case where the property or landmark is located on a comer, all aspects of the property or landmark visible from the public right of way are subject to the aforementioned requirement to obtain a certificate of appropriateness before carrying out any exterior alteration, restoration, reconstruction, demolition, new construction, or moving of the landmark or property. Section 56-7 Criteria for Approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness (a) In passing upon an application for a certificate of appropriateness, the historic preservation commission shall not consider changes to interior spaces, unless they are open to the public. The commission's decision shall be based on the following principles: (i) properties which contribute to the character if the historic district shall be retained, with their historic features altered as little as possible. (ii) Any alteration of existing properties shall be compatible with its historical character, as well as with the surrounding district; and (iii)New construction shall be compatible with the district in which it is located. (b) In applying the principle of compatibility, the commission shall consider the following factors: (i) the general design, character, and appropriateness to the property of the proposed alteration or new construction; (ii) the scale or proposed alteration or new construction in relation to the property itself, surrounding properties, and the neighborhood; (iii)materials and their relation to similar features of other properties in the neighborhood; (iv)visual compatibility with surrounding properties, including proportion of the property's front faCade, proportion and arrangement of windows and other openings with the facade, roof shape, and the rhythm of spacing of properties on streets, including setbacks; and (v) the importance of historic, architectural, or other features to the significance of the property. Section 56-8 Certificate of Appropriateness Application Procedure (a) Prior to the commencement of any work requiring a certificate of appropriateness, the owner shall file an application for such a certificate with the historic preservation commission. The application shall contain: (i) name, address, and telephone number of applicant; (ii) location of property and photographs of the property; (iii) elevation drawings of proposed changes, if available, (iv) perspective drawings, including relationship to adjacent properties, if available; (v) samples of materials to be used; (vi) where the proposal includes signs or lettering, a scale drawing showing the type of lettering to be used, all dimensions and colors, a description of materials to be used, method of illumination, and a plan showing the signs location on the property; and (vii) any other information which the commission may deem necessary in order to visualize the proposed work. (b) No building permit for construction or demolition shall be issued for such proposed work until a certificate of appropriateness has first been issued by the historic preservation commission. The certificate of appropriateness required by this act shall be in addition to and not in lieu of any building permit that may be required by any other ordinance of the Town of Southold. (c) The commission shall approve, deny, or approve the permit with modifications within 21 days from receipt of the completed application. If there has been no notification of approval, denial or approval with modifications, by the end of the 21st day, said permit shall be deemed approved. The commission may hold a public heating on the application at which an opportunity will be provided for proponents and opponents of the application to present their views. (d) All decisions of the commission shall be in writing. A copy shall be sent to the applicant by registered mail and a copy filed with the town clerk's office for public inspection. The commission's decision shall state the reason for denying or modifying any application. (e) Certificates of appropriateness shall be valid for 18 months, after which time the owner must reapply if he/she still wishes to tmdertake work on the property. Section 56-9 Demolition Hardship Criteria (a) An applicant whose certificate of appropriateness for a proposed demolition has been denied may apply for relief on the grotmd of hardship. In order to prove the existence of hardship, the applicant shall establish that: (i) the property is incapable if earning a reasonable return, regardless of whether the retum represents the most profitable return possible; (ii) the property cannot be adapted for any other use, whether by the current owner or by a purchaser, which would result in a reasonable return; and (iii) efforts to find a purchaser interested in acquiring the property and preserving it have failed. Section 56-10 Alteration Hardship Criteria An applicant whose certificate of appropriateness for a proposed alteration has been denied may apply for relief on the ground of hardship. In order to prove the existence of hardship, the applicant shall establish that the property in incapable of earning a profitable return, regardless of whether that return represents the most profitable return possible. Section 56-11 Hardship Application Procedure (a) After receiving written notification from the commission of the denial of a certificate of appropriateness, an applicant my commence the hardship process. No building permit or demolition permit shall be issued unless the commission makes a finding that a hardship exists. (b) The commission may hold a public hearing on the hardship application at which an opportunity will be provided for proponents and opponents of the application to present their views. (c) The applicant shall consult in good faith with the commission, local preservation groups, and interested parties in a diligent effort to seek an alternative that will result in the preservation of the property. (d) All decisions of the commission shall be in writing. A copy shall be sent to the applicant by registered mail and a copy filed with the town clerk's office for public inspection. The commission's decision shall state the reasons for granting or denying the hardship application. If the application is granted, the commission shall approve only such work as is necessary to alleviate the hardship. Section 56-12 Enforcement All work performed pursuant to a certificate of appropriateness issued under this ordinance shall conform to any requirements included herein. It shall be the duty of the building code enforcement officer to periodically inspect any such work to assure compliance. In the event work is found that is not being performed in accordance with the certificate of appropriateness, or upon notification of such fact by the historic preservation commission, the building code enforcement officer shall issue a stop work order and all work shall immediately cease. No further work shall be undertaken on the project as long as a stop work order is in effect. Section 56-13 Maintenance and Repair required Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to prevent the ordinary maintenance and repair of any exterior architectural feature of a landmark or property within a historic district which does not involve a change in design, material, or outward appearance. No owner or person with an interest in real property designated as a landmark or included within an historic district shall permit the property to fall into a serious state of disrepair which would result in the deterioration of any exterior architecture; feature which would, in the judgment of the historic preservation commission, produce a detrimental effect upon the character of the historic district as a whole or the life and character of the property itself. Examples of such deterioration include: (a) deterioration of exterior walls or other vertical supports; (b) deterioration of roofs or other horizontal members; (c) deterioration of exterior chimneys; (d) deterioration or crumbling of exterior stucco or mortar; (e) ineffective waterproofing of exterior walls, roofs, or foundations, including broken windows or doors; and (f) deterioration of any feature so as to create a hazardous condition which could lead to the claim that demolition is necessary for the public safety. Section 56-14 Violations (a) Failure to comply with any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed a violation and the violator shall be liable to a fine of not less than $250 nor more than $1000 for each day the violation continues. 6 (b) Any person who demolishes, alters, constructs, or permits a designated property to fall into a serious state of disrepair in violation of this ordinance shall be required to restore the property and its site to its appearance prior to the violation. Any action to enforce this subsection shall be brought by the town attorney. This civil remedy shall be in addition to an not in lieu of any criminal prosecution and penalty. Section 56-15 Appeals Any person aggrieved by a designation decision by the Town Board or a decision of the historic preservation commission relating to a hardship or a certificate of appropriateness may, within 45 days of the decision, file a written application with the Town Board for review of the decision. Reviews shall be conducted and based on the same record that was before the Town Board or commission and using the same criteria. Section 56-16 Severability. The provisions of this Law are severable. In any provision of this local law or its application to any person or cimumstance is held invalid, said invalidity shall not affect any other provision or application of this local law which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application of the local law. Section 56-17 When effective. This Local law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary Of State as provided by law. Attachment A Historic Preservation Commission 7 Members, 4 year appointment, town wide. Year New Members 1 7 2 1 6 3 2 4+1 4 2 2+1+2 5 2 1+2+2 6 1 2+2+2 7 Repeat Old Members Attachment B Historic District Review Board 3 Members, 4 year appointment, specific to historic district Year New Members 1 3 2 3 3 1 2 4 2+1 5 2 1 6 1+2 7 Repeat Old Members BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, MARCH 27, 2001. ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK 7 PLEASE PUBLISH ON APRIL 5, 2001, AND FORWARD ONE (1) AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO ELIZABETH NEVILLE, TOWN CLERK, TOWN HALL, PO BOX 1179, SOUTHOLD, NY 11971. Copies to the following: The Suffolk Times Town Board Members Town Attorney Landmark Preservation Commission John Cushman, Comptroller Town Clerk's Bulletin Board 8 STATE OF NEW YORK ) SS: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, Town Clerk of the Town of Southold, New York being duly sworn, says that on the 29Tn . day of March ,2001, she affixed a notice of which the annexed printed notice is a tree copy, in a proper and substantial manner, in a most public place in the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, to wit: Town Clerk's Bulletin Board, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: A Local Law to Establish a Historic Preservation Law May 8, 2001, 7:32 pm l~izabeth'A. Nevili/e Southold Town Clerk Sworn before me this day of {Y~ ,2001. (J Notary Public LYNDA M. BOHN Ouallfied in Suffolk County Term Expires March 8, 201~ ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 294 OF 2001 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON MARCH 27, 2001: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that there has been presented to the Town Board of the th Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 27 day of March 2001, a Local law entitled "A LOCAL LAW to establish a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold" and, NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, and hereby sets 7:32 p.m. Tuesda¥~ May 8~ 2001~ as the time and place for a oublic hearin~ at which time all interested persons will be heard. The proposed "A LOCAL LAW to establish a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold" which includes the following: LOCAL LAW NO. -2001 A LOCAL LAW to establish a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: Chapter 56 of the Code of the Town of Southold, designated Landmark Preservation and originally adopted by the Town Board of the Town of Southold on January 18, 1983, as Local Law 1 of 1983, is hereby repealed in its entirety and the following Historic Preservation Law, to be known as Chapter 56 of the Code of the Town of Southold, be and hereby is enacted in its place and stead: Section 56-1 Short Title This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "Historic Preservation Law of Southold Town". Section 56-2 Purpose The Town Board hereby declares as a matter of public policy that the protection, enhancement, and perpetuation of landmarks and historic districts is necessary to promote the economic, cultural, educational, and general welfare of the public. Inasmuch as the identity ora people is founded on its past, and inasmuch as Southold Town has many significant historic, architectural, and cultural resources which constitute its heritage, this act is intended to: (a) protect and enhance the landmarks and historic districts which represent distinctive elements of Southold's historic, architectural, and cultural heritage; (b) foster civic pride in the accomplishments of the past; (c) protect and enhance Southold's attractiveness to visitors and the support and stimulus to the economy hereby provided; and (d) insure the harmonious, orderly, and efficient growth and development of the town. Section 56-3 Historic Preservation Commission There is hereby created a commission to be known as the Town of Southold Historic Preservation Commission. (a) The commission shall consist of 7 members to be appointed, to the extent available in the community, by the Town Board as follows: At least one shall be an architect experienced in working with historic buildings; At least one shall be a resident of an historic district At least one shall have demonstrated significant interest in and commitment to the field of historic preservation evidenced by either involvement in a local historic preservation group, employment or voluntary activity in the field of historic preservation, or other serious interest in the field; and All members shall have a known interest in historic preservation and architectural development within the Town of Southold. (b) Commission members shall serve for a term of four years, with the exception of the initial term of one of the members which shall be for one year, two which shall be for two years, and two which shall be for three years. (see attached schedule A) (c) The chair and the vice chair of the commission shall be elected by and from among the members of the commission. (d) The powers of the commission shall include: (i) employment of staff and professional consultants as necessary to carry out the duties of the commission; (ii) promulgation of roles and regulations as necessary for the conduct of its business (iii) adoption of criteria for the delineation of historic district (iv) conduct of surveys of significant historic, architectural, and cultural landmarks and historic district within the town; (v) designation recommendations of identified structures or resources as historic districts and landmarks; (vi) acceptance on behalf of the town government of the donation of facade easements and development rights, and the making of recommendations to the town government concerning the acquisition of facade easements or other interests of real property as necessary to carry out the purposes of this act; (vii) increasing public awareness of the value of historic, cultural, and architectural preservation by developing and participating in public education programs; making recommendations to town government concerning the utilization of state, federal or private funds to promote the preservation of landmarks and historic districts within the town; (viii) recommending acquisition of a landmark structure by the town government where its preservation is essential to the purposes of this act and where private preservation is not feasible; and (ix) approval or disapproval of applications for certificates of appropriateness pursuant to this act. (e) The commission shall meet at least monthly, but meeting may be held at any time on the written request of any two of the commission members or on the call of the chair or the supervisor. (0 A quorum for the transaction of business shall consist of 4 of the commission's members, but not less than a majority of the full authorized membership may grant or deny a certificate of appropriateness. (g) All members shall attend and complete relevant training programs as the Town Board may require. Section 56-4 Historic District Review Board The Town Board, upon the recommendation of the commission, shall establish a review board for each approved historic district. The review board shall consist of 3 members to be appointed, to the extent available in the community, fi.om a list provided by local historic district preservation organization. (a) Review Board members shall serve for a term of four years, with the exception of the initial term of one of the members which shall be for two years. (see attached schedule B) (b) The duties of the review board shall include: (i) adoption of criteria for appropriateness for all landmarks and structures within the local historic district; (ii) making recommendations to the Historic Preservation Commission concerning the utilization of state, federal or private funds to promote the preservation of landmarks and structures within the local historic district; (iii) recommending acquisition of a landmark structure by the town government where its preservation is essential to the purposes of this act and where private preservation is not feasible; and (iv) recommending approval or disapproval of applications for certificates of appropriateness pursuant to this act. Section 56-5 Designation of Historic Districts or Landmarks (a) The commission may recommend a group of properties as a historic district to the Town Board for designation if the group: 6) (ii) contains properties which meet one or more of the criteria for designation as a landmark; and by reason of possessing such qualities, constitutes a distinct section of the town. (b) The commission may recommend to the Town Board the designation of an individual property as a landmark if it: (i) possesses special characteristics or historic or aesthetic interest or value as part of the cultural, political, economic, or social history of the locality, region, state, or nation; or (ii) is identified with historic personages; or (iii) embodies the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style; or (iv) is the work of a designer whose work has significantly influenced an age; or (v) because of its unique location or singular physical characteristic, represents an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood. (c) The commission may recommend to the Town Board the recognition of a historic district that has been so designated by the state or federal government. The boundaries of each historic district designated henceforth shall be specified in detail and shall be filed, in writing, in the town clerk's office for public inspection. (d) Notice of a proposed designation shall be sent by registered mail to the owner of the property proposed for designation, describing the property and announcing a public hearing by the commission to consider the designation. Notice of a proposed designation shall also be by publication at least once in a newspaper of general circulation at least 14 days prior to the date of the public heating. Once the commission has issued notice of a proposed designation, no building permits for construction or demolition shall be issued by the building inspector until the Town Board has made its decision. (e) The commission shall hold a public hearing prior to designation of any landmark or historic district. The commission, owners, and any interested parties may present testimony or documentary evidence at the hearing which will become part of a record regarding the historic, architectural, or cultural importance of the proposed landmark or historic district. The record may also contain staff reports, public comments, or other evidence offered outside of the heating. (f) The commission shall forward notice of each property designation as a landmark and the boundaries of each designated historic district to the office of the Southold Town Clerk for recordation. Section 56-6 Certificate of Appropriateness for Alteration, Demolition or New Construction Affecting Historic Districts or Landmarks No person shall carry out any exterior alteration, restoration, reconstruction, demolition, new construction, or moving of a landmark or property which faces a public right of way within a historic district, nor shall any person make any material change in the appearance of such property without first obtaining a certificate of appropriateness from the historic preservation commission. (a) (b) In the specific case where the property or landmark is located on the waterfront, the watershed is considered a public right of way and the aspect of the property or landmark visible from the watershed is subject to the aforementioned requirement. In the specific case where the property or landmark is located on a comer, all aspects of the property or landmark visible from the public right of way are subject to the aforementioned requirement to obtain a certificate of appropriateness before carrying out any. exterior alteration, restoration, reconstruction, demolition, new construction, or moving of the landmark or property. Section 56-7 Criteria for Approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness (a) In passing upon an application for a certificate of appropriateness, the historic preservation commission shall not consider changes to interior spaces, unless they are open to the public. The commission's decision shall be based on the following principles: (i) properties which contribute to the character if the historic district shall be retained, with their historic features altered as little as possible. (ii) Any alteration of existing properties shall be compatible with its historical character, as well as with the surrounding district; and (iii)New construction shall be compatible with the district in which it is located. (b) In applying the principle of compatibility, the commission shall consider the following factors: (i) the general design, character, and appropriateness to the property of the proposed alteration or new construction; (ii) the scale or proposed alteration or new construction in relation to the property itself, surrounding properties, and the neighborhood; (iii)materials and their relation to similar features of other properties in the neighborhood; (iv) visual compatibility with surrounding properties, including proportion of the property's front facade, proportion and arrangement of windows and other openings with the facade, roof shape, and the rhythm of spacing of properties on streets, including setbacks; and (v) the importance of historic, architectural, or other features to the significance of the property. Section 56-8 Certificate of Appropriateness Application Procedure (a) Prior to the commencement of any work requiring a certificate of appropriateness, the owner shall file an application for such a certificate with the historic preservation commission. The application shall contain: (i) name, address, and telephone number of applicant; (ii) location of property and photographs of the property; (iii) elevation drawings of proposed changes, if available, (iv) perspective drawings, including relationship to adjacent properties, if available; (v) samples of materials to be used; (vi) where the proposal includes signs or lettering, a scale drawing showing the type of lettering to be used, all dimensions and colors, a description of materials to be used, method of illumination, and a plan showing the signs location on the property; and (vii) any other information which the commission may deem necessary in order to visualize the proposed work. (b) No building permit for construction or demolition shall be issued for such proposed work until a certificate of appropriateness has first been issued by the historic preservation commission. The certificate of appropriateness required by this act shall be in addition to and not in lieu of any building permit that may be required by any other ordinance of the Town of Southold. (c) The commission shall approve, deny, or approve the permit with modifications within 21 days from receipt of the completed application. If there has been no notification of approval, denial or approval with modifications, by the end of the 21st day, said permit shall be deemed approved. The conunission may hold a public hearing on the application at which an opportunity will be provided for proponents and opponents of the application to present their views. (d) All decisions of the commission shall be in writing. A copy shall be sent to the applicant by registered mail and a copy flied with the town clerk's office for public inspection. The commission's decision shall state the reason for denying or modifying any application. (e) Certificates of appropriateness shall be valid for 18 months, after which time the owner must reapply if he/she still wishes to undertake work on the property. Section 56-9 Demolition Hardship Criteria (a) An applicant whose certificate of appropriateness for a proposed demolition has been denied may apply for relief on the ground of hardship. In order to prove the existence of hardship, the applicant shall establish that: (i) the property is incapable if earning a reasonable return, regardless of whether the return represents the most profitable return possible; (ii) the property cannot be adapted for any other use, whether by the current owner or by a purchaser, which would result in a reasonable return; and (iii) efforts to find a purchaser interested in acquiring the property and preserving it have failed. Section 56-10 Alteration Hardship Criteria An applicant whose certificate of appropriateness for a proposed alteration has been denied may apply for relief on the ground of hardship. In order to prove the existence of hardship, the applicant shall establish that the property in incapable of earning a profitable return, regardless of whether that return represents the most profitable return possible. Section $6-11 Hardship Application Procedure (a) After receiving written notification from the commission of the denial of a certificate of appropriateness, an applicant my commence the hardship process. No building permit or demolition permit shall be issued unless the commission makes a finding that a hardship exists. (b) The commission may hold a public heating on the hardship application at which an opportunity will be provided for proponents and opponents of the application to present their views. (c) The applicant shall consult in good faith with the commission, local preservation groups, and interested parties in a diligent effort to seek an alternative that will result in the preservation of the property. (d) All decisions of the commission shall be in writing. A copy shall be sent to the applicant by registered mail and a copy filed with the town clerk's office for public inspection. The commission's decision shall state the reasons for granting or denying the hardship application. If the application is granted, the commission shall approve only such work as is necessary to alleviate the hardship. Section 56-12 Enforcement All work performed pursuant to a certificate of appropriateness issued under this ordinance shall conform to any requirements included herein. It shall be the duty of the building code enforcement officer to periodically inspect any such work to assure compliance. In the event work is found that is not being performed in accordance with the certificate of appropriateness, or upon notification of such fact by the historic preservation commission, the building code enforcement officer shall issue a stop work order and all work shall immediately cease. No further work shall be undertaken on the project as long as a stop work order is in effect. Section 56-13 Maintenance and Repair required Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to prevent the ordinary maintenance and repair of any exterior architectural feature of a landmark or property within a historic district which does not involve a change in design, material, or outward appearance. No owner or person with an interest in real property designated as a landmark or included within an historic district shall permit the property to fall into a serious state of disrepair which would result in the deterioration of any exterior architecture; feature which would, in the judgment of the historic preservation commission, produce a detrimental effect upon the character of the historic district as a whole or the life and character of the property itself. Examples of such deterioration include: (a) deterioration of exterior walls or other vertical supports; (b) deterioration of roofs or other horizontal members; (c) deterioration of exterior chimneys; (d) deterioration or crumbling of exterior stucco or mortar; (e) ineffective waterproofing of exterior walls, roofs, or foundations, including broken windows or doors; and (f) deterioration of any feature so as to create a hazardous condition which could lead to the claim that demolition is necessary for the public safety. Section 56-14 Violations (a) Failure to comply with any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed a violation and the violator shall be liable to a fine of not less than $250 nor more than $1000 for each day the violation continues. (b) Any person who demolishes, alters, constructs, or permits a designated property to fall into a serious state of disrepair in violation of this ordinance shall be required to restore the property and its site to its appearance prior to the violation. Any action to enforce this subsection shall be brought by the town attorney. This civil remedy shall be in addition to an not in lieu of any criminal prosecution and penalty. Section 56-15 Appeals Any person aggrieved by a designation decision by the Town Board or a decision of the historic preservation commission relating to a hardship or a certificate of appropriateness may, within 45 days of the decision, file a written application with the Town Board for review of the decision. Reviews shall be conducted and based on the same record that was before the Town Board or commission and using the same criteria. Section 56-16 Severability. The provisions of this Law are severable. In any provision of this local law or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, said invalidity shall not affect any other provision or application of this local law which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application of the local law. Section 56-17 When effective. This Local law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary Of State as provided by law. Attachment A Historic Preservation Commission 7 Members, 4 year appointment, town wide. Year New Members 1 7 2 1 6 3 2 4+1 4 2 2+1+2 5 2 1+2+2 6 1 2+2+2 7 Repeat Old Members Attachment B Historic District Review Board 3 Members, 4 year appointment, specific to historic district Year New Members I 3 2 3 3 1 2 4 2+1 5 2 1 6 1+2 7 Repeat Old Membe~ Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 293 OF 2001 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON MARCH 27, 2001: WHEREAS, there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 27th day of March 2001, A Local Law in relation to the establishment of Chapter 56, "Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold" of the Town Code of the Town of Southold, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED that this Local Law be referred to the Southold Town Planninl, Department and the Suffolk County Planning Commission for recommendations and reports, all in accordance with the Southold Town Code and the Suffolk County Charter. The proposed "A LOCAL LAW to establish a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold" which includes the following: LOCAL LAW NO. -2001 A LOCAL LAW to establish a Historic Preservation Law in the Town of Southold BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: Chapter 56 of the Code of the Town of Southold, designated Landmark Preservation and originally adopted by the Town Board of the Town of Southold on January 18, 1983, as Local Law 1 of 1983, is hereby repealed in its entirety and the following Historic Preservation Law, to be known as Chapter 56 of the Code of the Town of Southold, be and hereby is enacted in its place and stead: Section 56-1 Short Title This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "Historic Preservation Law of Southold Town". Section 56-2 Purpose The Town Board hereby declares as a matter of public policy that the protection, enhancement, and perpetuation of landmarks and historic districts is necessary to promote the economic, cultural, educational, and general welfare of the public. Inasmuch as the identity ora people is founded on its past, and inasmuch as Southold Town has many significant historic, architectural, and cultural resources which constitute its heritage, this act is intended to: (a) protect and enhance the landmarks and historic districts which represent distinctive elements of Southold's historic, architectural, and cultural heritage; (b) foster civic pride in the accomplishments of the past; (c) protect and enhance Southold's attractiveness to visitors and the support and stimulus to the economy hereby provided; and (d) insure the harmonious, orderly, and efficient growth and development of the town. Section 56-3 Historic Preservation Commission There is hereby created a commission to be known as the Town of Southold Historic Preservation Commission. (a) The commission shall consist of 7 members to be appointed, to the extent available in the community, by the Town Board as follows: At least one shall be an architect experienced in working with historic buildings; At least one shall be a resident of an historic district At least one shall have demonstrated significant interest in and commitment to the field of historic preservation evidenced by either involvement in a local historic preservation group, employment or voluntary activity in the field of historic preservation, or other serious interest in the field; and All members shall have a known interest in historic preservation and architectural development within the Town of Southold. (b) Commission members shall serve for a term of four years, with the exception of the initial term of one of the members which shall be for one year, two which shall be for two years, and two which shall be for three years. (see attached schedule A) (c) The chair and the vice chair of the commission shall be elected by and from among the members of the commission. (d) The powers of the commission shall include: (i) employment of staff and professional consultants as necessary to carry out the duties of the commission; (ii) promulgation of rules and regulations as necessary for the conduct of its business (iii) adoption of criteria for the delineation of historic district (iv) conduct of surveys of significant historic, architectural, and cultural landmarks and historic district within the town; (v) designation recommendations of identified structures or resources as historic districts and landmarks; (vi) acceptance on behalf of the town government of the donation of faCade easements and development rights, and the making of recommendations to the town government concerning the acquisition of facade easements or other interests of real property as necessary to carry out the purposes of this act; (vii) increasing public awareness of the value of historic, cultural, and architectural preservation by developing and participating in public education programs; making recommendations to town government concerning the utilization of state, federal or private funds to promote the preservation of landmarks and historic districts within the town; (viii) recommending acquisition of a landmark structure by the town government where its preservation is essential to the purposes of this act and where private preservation is not feasible; and (ix) approval or disapproval of applications for certificates of appropriateness pursuant to this act. (e) The commission shall meet at least monthly, but meeting may be held at any time on the written request of any two of the commission members or on the call of the chair or the supervisor. A quorum for the transaction of business shall consist of 4 of the commission's members, but not less than a majority of the full authorized membership may grant or deny a certificate of appropriateness. (g) All members shall attend and complete relevant training programs as the Town Board may require. Section 56-4 Historic District Review Board The Town Board, upon the recommendation of the commission, shall establish a review board for each approved historic district. The review board shall consist of 3 members to be appointed, to the extent available in the community, from a list provided by local historic district preservation organization. (a) Review Board members shall serve for a term of four years, with the exception of the initial term of one of the members which shall be for two years. (see attached schedule B) (b) The duties of the review board shall include: (i) adoption of criteria for appropriateness for all landmarks and structures within the local historic district; (ii) making recommendations to the Historic Preservation Commission concerning the utilization of state, federal or private funds to promote the preservation of landmarks and structures within the local historic district; (iii) recommending acquisition of a landmark structure by the town government where its preservation is essential to the purposes of this act and where private preservation is not feasible; and (iv) recommending approval or disapproval of applications for certificates of appropriateness pursuant to this act. Section 56-5 Designation of Historic Districts or Landmarks (a) The commission may recommend a group of properties as a historic district to the Town Board for designation if the group: 6) (ii) contains properties which meet one or more of the criteria for designation as a landmark; and by reason of possessing such qualities, constitutes a distinct section of the town. (b) The commission may recommend to the Town Board the designation of an individual property as a landmark if it: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) possesses special characteristics or historic or aesthetic interest or value as part of the cultural, political, economic, or social history of the locality, region, state, or nation; or is identified with historic personages; or embodies the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style; or is the work of a designer whose work has significantly influenced an age; or because of its unique location or singular physical characteristic, represents an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood. (c) The commission may recommend to the Town Board the recognition of a historic district that has been so designated by the state or federal government. The boundaries of each historic district designated henceforth shall be specified in detail and shall be filed, in writing, in the town clerk's office for public inspection. (d) Notice of a proposed designation shall be sent by registered mail to the owner of the property proposed for designation, describing the property and announcing a public hearing by the commission to consider the designation. Notice of a proposed designation shall also be by publication at least once in a newspaper of general circulation at least 14 days prior to the date of the public hearing. Once the comanission has issued notice of a proposed designation, no building permits for construction or demolition shall be issued by the building inspector until the Town Board has made its decision. (e) The commission shall hold a public heating prior to designation of any landmark or historic district. The commission, owners, and any interested parties may present testimony or documentary evidence at the heating which will become part of a record regarding the historic, architectural, or cultural importance of the proposed landmark or historic district. The record may also contain staff reports, public comments, or other evidence offered outside of the heating. (f) The commission shall forward notice of each property designation as a landmark and the boundaries of each designated historic district to the office of the Southold Town Clerk for recordation. Section 56-6 Certificate of Appropriateness for Alteration, Demolition or New Construction Affecting Historic Districts or Landmarks No person shall carry out any exterior alteration, restoration, reconstruction, demolition, new construction, or moving of a landmark or property which faces a public right of way within a historic district, nor shall any person make any material change in the appearance of such property without first obtaining a certificate of appropriateness from the historic preservation commission. (a) (b) In the specific case where the property or landmark is located on the waterfront, the watershed is considered a public right of way and the aspect of the property or landmark visible from the watershed is subject to the aforementioned requirement. In the specific case where the property or landmark is located on a comer, all aspects of the property or landmark visible from the public right of way are subject to the aforementioned requirement to obtain a certificate of appropriateness before carrying out any exterior alteration, restoration, reconstruction, demolition, new construction, or moving of the landmark or property. Section 56-7 Criteria for Approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness (a) In passing upon an application for a certificate of appropriateness, the historic preservation commission shall not consider changes to interior spaces, unless they are open to the public. The commission's decision shall be based on the following principles: (i) properties which contribute to the character if the historic district shall be retained, with their historic features altered as little as possible. (ii) Any alteration of existing properties shall be compatible with its historical character, as well as with the surrounding district; and (iii)New construction shall be compatible with the district in which it is located. (b) In applying the principle of compatibility, the commission shall consider the following factors: (i) the general design, character, and appropriateness to the property of the proposed alteration or new construction; (ii) the scale or proposed alteration or new construction in relation to the property itself, surrounding properties, and the neighborhood; (iii)materials and their relation to similar features of other properties in the neighborhood; (iv)visual compatibility with surrounding properties, including proportion of the property's front facade, proportion and arrangement of windows and other openings with the facade, roof shape, and the rhythm of spacing of properties on streets, including setbacks; and (v) the importance of historic, architectural, or other features to the significance of the property. Section 56-8 Certificate of Appropriateness Application Procedure (a) Prior to the commencement of any work requiring a certificate of appropriateness, the owner shall file an application for such a certificate with the historic preservation commission. The application shall contain: (i) name, address, and telephone number of applicant; (ii) location of property and photographs of the property; (iii) elevation drawings of proposed changes, if available, (iv) perspective drawings, including relationship to adjacent properties, if available; (v) samples of materials to be used; (vi) where the proposal includes signs or lettering, a scale drawing showing the type of lettering to be used, all dimensions and colors, a description of materials to be used, method of illumination, and a plan showing the signs location on the property; and (vii) any other information which the commission may deem necessary in order to visualize the proposed work. (b) No building permit for construction or demolition shall be issued for such proposed work until a certificate of appropriateness has first been issued by the historic preservation commission. The certificate of appropriateness required by this act shall be in addition to and not in lieu of any building permit that may be required by any other ordinance of the Town of Southold. (c) The commission shall approve, deny, or approve the permit with modifications within 21 days from receipt of the completed application. If there has been no notification of approval, denial or approval with modifications, by the end of the 21*t day, said permit shall be deemed approved. The comxnission may hold a public hearing on the application at which an o.pportunity will be provided for proponents and opponents of the application to present their views. (d) All decisions of the commission shall be in writing. A copy shall be sent to the applicant by registered mail and a copy filed with the town clerk's office for public inspection. The commission's decision shall state the reason for denying or modifying any application. (e) Certificates of appropriateness shall be valid for 18 months, after which time the owner must reapply if he/she still wishes to undertake work on the property. Section 56-9 Demolition Hardship Criteria (a) An applicant whose certificate of appropriateness for a proposed demolition has been denied may apply for relief on the ground of hardship. In order to prove the existence of hardship, the applicant shall establish that: (i) the property is incapable if earning a reasonable return, regardless of whether the return represents the most profitable return possible; (ii) the property cannot be adapted for any other use, whether by the current owner or by a pumhaser, which would result in a reasonable return; and (iii) efforts to find a pumhaser interested in acquiring the property and preserving it have failed. Section 56-10 Alteration Hardship Criteria An applicant whose certificate of appropriateness for a proposed alteration has been denied may apply for relief on the ground of hardship. In order to prove the existence of hardship, the applicant shall establish that the property in incapable of earning a profitable return, regardless of whether that return represents the most profitable return possible. Section 56-11 Hardship Application Procedure (a) After receiving written notification from the commission of the denial of a certificate of appropriateness, an applicant my commence the hardship process. No building permit or demolition permit shall be issued unless the commission makes a finding that a hardship exists. (b) The commission may hold a public heating on the hardship application at which an oppommity will be provided for proponents and opponents of the application to present their views. (c) The applicant shall consult in good faith with the commission, local preservation groups, and interested parties in a diligent effort to seek an alternative that will result in the preservation of the property. (d) All decisions of the commission shall be in writing. A copy shall be sent to the applicant by registered mail and a copy filed with the town clerk's office for public inspection. The commission's decision shall state the reasons for granting or denying the hardship application. If the application is granted, the commission shall approve only such work as is necessary to alleviate the hardship. Section 56-12 Enforcement All work performed pursuant to a certificate of appropriateness issued under this ordinance shall conform to any requirements included herein. It shall be the duty of the building code enforcement officer to periodically inspect any such work to assure compliance. In the event work is found that is not being performed in accordance with the certificate of appropriateness, or upon notification of such fact by the historic preservation commission, the building code enforcement officer shall issue a stop work order and all work shall immediately cease. No further work shall be undertaken on the project as long as a stop work order is in effect. Section 56-13 Maintenance and Repair required Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to prevent the ordinary maintenance and repair of any exterior architectural feature of a landmark or property within a historic district which does not involve a change in design, material, or outward appearance. No owner or person with an interest in real property designated as a landmark or included within an historic district shall permit the property to fall into a serious state of disrepair which would result in the deterioration of any exterior architecture; feature which would, in the judgment of the historic preservation commission, produce a detrimental effect upon the character of the historic district as a whole or the life and character of the property itself. Examples of such deterioration include: (a) deterioration of exterior walls or other vertical supports; (b) deterioration of roofs or other horizontal members; (c) deterioration of exterior chimneys; (d) deterioration or crumbling of exterior stucco or mortar; (e) ineffective waterproofing of exterior walls, roofs, or foundations, including broken windows or doors; and (f) deterioration of any feature so as to create a hazardous condition which could lead to the claim that demolition is necessary for the public safety. Section 56-14 Violations (a) Failure to comply with any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed a violation and the violator shall be liable to a fine of not less than $250 nor more than $1000 for each day the violation continues. (b) Any person who demolishes, alters, constructs, or permits a designated property to fall into a serious state of disrepair in violation of this ordinance shall be required to restore the property and its site to its appearance prior to the violation. Any action to enforce this subsection shall be brought by the town attorney. This civil remedy shall be in addition to an not in lieu of any criminal prosecution and penalty. Section 56-15 Appeals Any person aggrieved by a designation decision by the Town Board or a decision of the historic preservation commission relating to a hardship or a certificate of appropriateness may, within 45 days of the decision, file a written application with the Town Board for review of the decision. Reviews shall be conducted and based on the same record that was before the Town Board or commission and using the same criteria. Attachment A Historic Preservation Commission 7 Members, 4 year appointment, town wide. Year New Members Old Members 1 7 2 1 6 3 2 4+1 4 2 2+1+2 5 2 1+2+2 6 I 2+2+2 7 Repe~ Attachment B Historic District Review Board 3 Members, 4 year appointment, specific to historic district Year New Members 1 3 2 3 3 I 2 4 2+1 5 2 1 6 1+2 7 Repeat Old Members Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk