The New Castle County Department of Land Use invites you to a virtual public meeting to discuss multiple approaches to historic preservation, including legislation and community-based efforts.
The first part of the meeting will feature Mr. Nicholas Redding, Executive Director of Preservation Maryland, who is a recognized leader in historic preservation approaches. Next, Land Use staff will present an overview of information regarding legislation and the process moving forward. At the conclusion of the presentations, there will be a facilitated question and answer session.
To register, click here. After clicking on the link, scroll to the bottom left for sign-in informationAlso read excerpts from this WDDE article from Larry Nagengast -
Participants in the county’s Historic Preservation Working Group, set up last year under the leadership of County Councilwoman Dee Durham (D-Brandywine West) are drafting ordinances that cover a range of issues – everything from strengthening rules to prevent “demolition by neglect” to recognizing owners who have taken steps to preserve and maintain their historic properties. The first of these proposals, drafted by Councilman David Carter (D-Townsend) following a hearing of the county’s Historic Review Board on the Houston House issue last June, is about a month away from reaching county council for a vote, Durham says. Carter’s proposal would establish new standards for the preservation of historic structures or sites that are located within the area included in a land development or subdivision plan. Other measures – some already introduced and others still in draft form – should receive the full council’s attention later this year, Durham says. “We can never let this happen again,” says Kevin Caneco, a working group participant who has been fighting to preserve the Houston House, located in the Village of Bayberry North, just north of Middletown. “We have to strengthen the code. We’re not going to agree on everything, but we have to do the best we can.”
........Durham distributed a collection of proposed ordinances, mostly in draft form, for members to review. Some of the drafts prepared by individual council members, primarily Durham and Carter, address their top priorities. While the Land Use Department, which would be responsible for implementing any measures passed by county council, recognizes the importance of historic preservation, it is questioning the need for some of the proposals. In a May 1 email to working group members, Land Use General Manager Richard Hall wrote: “New legislation is needed to some degree to advance historic preservation priorities in the county. However, it seems this recent approach is over-relying on local legislative actions, some of which we think have marginal benefits, or less.” Hall would rather see fewer ordinances and more attention paid to other strategies, including “public-private partnerships, financial resources, community involvement, incentives for preservation, and, yes, strong policies.” While Hall says his department recognizes the importance of historic preservation, the tone of his message suggests that the working group might be trying to do too much too soon. But Durham says that “Land Use has had 20 years to protect historic resources, but I haven’t seen it happen…. Now we’re playing catch up, trying to make up for lost time.”
Carter sums up the differences between Land Use and the preservation-minded council members this way: “We want mandatory, they want voluntary.” In Carter’s view, “We [the county council] legislate. We write the law. They implement it. It’s not their job to write the law.” Even so, the most comprehensive of the drafts being circulated is a document prepared by the Land Use Department titled Historic Resources Enhanced Fact Sheet. Durham describes as “an omnibus historic preservation bill” and notes that it proposes multiple changes to the county’s building code and the Unified Development Code, the law that governs land development issues in the county. Durham notes, however, that many of the suggestions in the fact sheet are not as extensive as the recommendations in the ordinances that she and Carter have drafted. “Land Use did write one comprehensive bill,” she says, “but why did that happen? It was because of the working group’s focus on this issue.”.........In one way or another, most of the proposals in the county’s legislative pipeline address aspects of “demolition by neglect,” the practice of developers who acquire properties that include aging structures of historic significance and, rather than preserve them, let them deteriorate to the point where they claim the only reasonable option is to tear them down. The Houston House matter in Bayberry North is not the first occasion in which a developer has sought demolition of a historic structure as part of a plan to build houses, offices or shops on the site.Click through HERE for more background on the NCC working group for Historic Preservation
New Castle County Historic Preservation Working Group
