This is another thing that should not be on the ballot, but is because a few disgruntled people are unhappy with the result of a long public process (kind of like Measure KK). Since they couldn't win in that process, they collected signatures to force this onto the ballot.
If you want a nonpartisan history, read the Pros & Cons information by the local chapter of the League of Women Voters (scroll to end of file). Short story is that if we vote Yes, we approve the results of a 6-year public process. If we vote No, we go back to an ordinance passed in 1974 that now conflicts with state law.
I'm voting Yes. The new ordinance creates reasonable timelines and criteria for decisions by the Landmarks Commission. It will cut down on unhappy neighbors suddenly deciding that the shack next door deserves to be protected as a historic "structure of merit," just because they don't like the owner's plans to change the property.
Berkeley has lots of wonderful historic buildings, and we protect them. This new ordinance will not threaten them. It will simply restore some reason and balance to the process.
Oh, and don't be taken in by the opponents claim to being "green." They don't seem to understand (or maybe not care) that there isn't enough land for us all to live in the same buildings Berkeley had in 1920. We need some new ones so that more people can live close to their jobs or school or transit lines. Sometimes that means knocking down an old building. The new building can be a lot greener than the old one, particularly when you consider how many people live in it and how they get around.
Please vote Yes on LL.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
Thank for that, Jeff. The campaign mailing on this was indecipherable.
About LL, my friend who is a historian and who has worked for many years on historical landmarks, and is a thinking gal, is against it - because "it cuts way back on time to respond to proposed demolition, and basically a shortcut for developers from what I gather." More food for thought.
Look - I'm one of those people who hates to throw anything away. I always wonder if someone will want to look at it someday.
But LL would return some reason to the landmarking process. It is not a shortcut, it is sensible. We'll see what other voters think.
Post a Comment