The Preservation Board a Public Hearing or Not?
The new Chair of the St. Louis Preservation Board, Richard Callow, insists the meetings of the Preservation Board are not public hearings — that public input is taken but not required by ordinance. Callow has previously suggested I look at the enabling code, Chapter 24.08. In reading through that section I found this:
D. Subject to the written approval of the Planning Commission, the Preservation Board shall make and adopt, and may from time to time amend, rules and bylaws governing the conduct of its business and providing for the administration of this title.
This begs the question, what are the rules and bylaws that have been approved by the Planning Commission for the conduct of the Preservation Board? The city’s Cultural Resources office website certainly doesn’t list any rules, bylaws or anything else to help the public understand the process of going before the Preservation Board.
In another section of the city code, under demolition review, the law does make reference to a hearing:
The Cultural Resources Office shall immediately refer any application which is the subject of such an appeal, and the Cultural Resources Office’s entire file thereon, to the Preservation Board for hearing and resolution, based on the criteria set out in Sections 24.40.010 to 24.40.050.
Why is this important? Decisions of the Preservation Board impact the entire city but they don’t seem to have any public notice requirements — today’s meeting agenda was just posted today. Furthermore, anyone from the public wishing to speak on an item must arrive prior to 4pm and sign the sheet for that item. This, I believe, places an undue burden on the public and discourages them from becoming more involved in their community.
With the Preservation Board weighing decisions on demolitions, new construction and other concerns in Historic Districts and Preservation Review Districts you’d think there would be some form of advance notice — at least 10 calendar days prior to the hearing. The Cultural Resources Office does produce highly detailed PDF reports on each topic but at the very least they could list the property address in question, what is being decided (demo, new windows, etc…) and what neighborhood it falls under. Having at least this would alert the public in those neighborhoods that something is coming up they may wish to speak on.
Often during the Preservation Board you’ll hear one of the members ask the staff if they’ve heard from the neighborhood group. The answer is almost always no (Lafayette Square excepted). I wonder why? Perhaps because neighbors don’t have a clue a decision is being made about properties near them!
Michael Allen over at Ecology of Absence wrote about this subject last Friday.
Today’s meeting starts at 4pm. The agenda includes 7 items and encompassing hundreds of pages. Better start reading….
I get the feeling that the agendas are put together at the last minute. Anthony Robinson, who is on the board, did not get his until it came by courier at about 5pm on Saturday. I am on our neighborhoods Historic District Committee, which covers the Skinker-DeBaliviere district, and when there is an item in our district on the agenda, the Cultural Resources Office mails me the agenda item prior to the meeting. They do sometimes come last minute, but I get the impression this has to do with staffing at CRO and not that they are trying to hold something back from the public. I do agree that it would be more convenient for most people if the meetings started at 6pm instead of 4pm
Okay, sorry for asking such a dumb question…but…
Why is it that a neighborhood like Skinker DeBaliviere is a historic district but The Hill is not?
Maybe I’m just dumb, but they both seem pretty “historical” to me.
I know, I know, you don’t want to hear anymore about Denver, but they do have a “registered neighborhood organization (RNO)” ordinance that requires just this type of notification, and the state has a pretty strict “sunshine” law that requires, except for rare exceptions (contract negotiations and personnel matters), that any meeting where three or more elected officials MAY be present or discussing their official duties shall be posted and open to the public . . .
Sounds like a good opportunity to protest, push for citizen voice. I’m certainly up for that!
Considering this board determines if our history will be destroyed or preserved it seems only logical that the public should have a voice.
I enjoy reading your blog and appreciate what you do to champion making St. Louis a better city.
I enjoy reading your blog and appreciate what you do to champion making St. Louis a better city.
Steve,
I think the reference to a “hearing” under demolition review is to an applicant’s right to seek review of an initial decision denying a permit. “Hearing” in this sense does not mean public hearing, but refers to an applicant’s opportunity to present evidence or argument in support of their application. This is in line with the code’s reference to Chapter 536, which is the Missouri Administrative Procedure Act, and “contested case,” which sets the circuit court’s standard of review.
None of this is to say that as a matter of policy the public should not have the opportunity to intervene and present evidence.
Also, as a public body, isn’t the Preserveration Board required to give notice of meetings under the Sunshine Act? This isn’t my area of expertise. Maybe someone else can enlighten us.