If you missed it, Saturday December 6th’s New York Times featured an editorial, “Improving the Landmarks Process,” on the Landmarks Preservation Commission, the focus of a series of articles.
The Times wrote:
Judge Marilyn Shafer of the New York State Supreme Court ruled last month that the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission habitually acted in a manner that was “arbitrary and capricious” and ordered the commission to conduct its business in a more timely manner. Her conclusions are welcome and frustratingly familiar to New Yorkers.
Of course, as is the City’s tendency, The Times writes: “The City plans to appeal. Instead…”
…it should reform the commission, which is all that stands between the enormous pressures for development in this city and its priceless architectural heritage.
In addition:
Part of the trouble is that the commission enjoys little political independence. The chairman serves at the mayor’s pleasure; the 11 unpaid commissioners see only the cases the chairman recommends. These are attributes that a pro-development mayor is not likely to want to change.
It was alarming to read that Robert Tierney, the present chairman, was appointed by Mayor Bloomberg five years ago to head the Landmarks Preservation Commission despite having “no background in architecture, planning or historic preservation.”
To read more about some of the Times‘ reporting on this as well as about Washington Square Park and the Landmarks Preservation Commission (actually, I did not even go into the full story which is far murkier than this post reveals), and a chance to see George Vellonakis’s tarnished testimony on the Park’s redesign plan before LPC, see this previous entry.