The Council voted to re-designate after court voided first designation. The City Council voted on July 25, 2007 to amend the Douglaston Hill Historic District to include a home at 41-45 240th Street that has been the subject of a protracted designation dispute. 4 CityLand 3 (Apr. 15, 2007). Landmarks originally designated the home as part of the Douglaston Hill Historic District in December 2004. The owners, Kevin and Diana Mosley, successfully challenged the home’s designation in court, aided by evidence that the house was constructed in the 1920s and not the 1870s as claimed by Landmarks. Landmarks calendared the home for re-inclusion in January 2007 based on the 1920s construction date, putting a stop to the home’s renovations, which were 75 percent complete at the time.

The Council’s Land Use Committee voted to amend the historic district to re-include the house by a vote of eighteen to three with Council Members Charles Barron, Leroy G. Comrie Jr. and Vincent Ignizio voting against re-inclusion. Barron felt that the homeowners had made a reasonable compromise in trying to appease the preservationists by designing renovations to the house in such a way as to maintain the historic and architectural style of the street. Comrie argued that in this case the homeowner’s rights should be protected over preservation goals. Despite voting in favor of reinclusion, Council Member Miguel Martinez noted his general concerns for the rights of homeowners. Martinez then explained his vote by stating that in this case the designation was based on an ongoing, thorough process, and there was no overnight seizing of the homeowner’s rights. (read more…)

Landmarks re-designates home struck from district by court order. Following a lengthy public hearing, Landmarks voted unanimously on April 3, 2007 to re-include the single- family home at 41-45 240th Street back into the Douglaston Hill Historic District.

Landmarks originally included the home within a December 2004 designation, but a court struck down the home’s inclusion, ordering Landmarks to hold a second hearing focused on the owners’ claim that the home dated to 1920 rather than the 1870s date in the designation report. At the courtordered Landmarks hearing, the owners, who remained opposed, explained that they significantly enlarged the home in the year that it took Landmarks to hold the hearing and it no longer merited designation. 4 CityLand 43 (April 15, 2007). (read more…)

Contentious public hearing held on re-inclusion of private home into Queens historic district. Over a year after a court vacated Landmarks’ decision to include 41-45 240th Street into the Douglaston Hill Historic District, Landmarks held a public hearing on its re-inclusion on March 13, 2007.

Landmarks originally included 41-45 240th Street, a private home owned by Kevin and Diana Mosley, within its December 2004 designation. The Mosleys challenged their home’s inclusion and the designation of the entire district, arguing that the decision was arbitrary and Landmarks ignored evidence suggesting their home dated to the 1920s, not the 1870s as Landmarks claimed. In December 2005, a court upheld the designation of the Douglaston Historic District but removed the Mosleys’ home from the district, ordering Landmarks to hold a new hearing and consider the Mosleys’ evidence. 3 CityLand 15 (Feb. 15, 2006). (read more…)

Homeowners claimed house was wrongly described in Historic District report. In December 2004, the Landmarks Preservation Commission designated the Douglaston Hill Historic District in Queens. The Mosleys, who had purchased a home in the District in October 2004, sued Landmarks, seeking to do away with the Historic District altogether or alternatively, remove their home from the District. The Mosleys claimed that the designation of the District was arbitrary and capricious because the Commission had denied designation only one year earlier.

With respect to their home, the Mosleys claimed that it was erroneously classified as historically significant because Landmarks had relied on incorrect and incomplete information included in the Douglaston Hill Designation Report. The Report listed the Mosley home under the early development section and indicated that it was built in the 1870s. It stated that the home dated back to the railroad’s arrival, appeared in the 1873 Beers Atlas, and described the home as largely intact.

The Mosleys introduced a 1919 survey showing a house that was different from both the 1873 house and their house. They also demonstrated that their house was a different size, shape and location from the house in the Beers Atlas, and presented an affidavit from an architect who determined that their house was built in the first quarter of the 20th Century. The Mosleys alleged they had made several attempts to contact Landmarks to present the newly discovered documents and information, but were told the status of their home would not be reconsidered. Finally, the Mosleys claimed they were unaware the house was to be landmarked when they purchased it. (read more…)

Landmarks designates northeastern Queens suburb a historic district. On December 14, 2004, Landmarks designated the Douglaston Hill Historic District in Queens, a residential park-like community developed between 1890 and 1930, to preserve the special historical and aesthetic values of early twentieth-century architectural styles within the area. The new district consists of 31 freestanding, wooden, single-family homes of Queen Anne, Colonial and Tudor Revival style. Douglaston Hill became one of the first commuter suburbs that marked Queens’ transformation away from small farms and colonial villages. It was also the home of many prominent New Yorkers, including the O’Leary, Stuart and Hamilton families.

At the August 3, 2004 public hearing, Council Member Tony Avella and other public officials spoke in favor of designating the district to preserve styles which are becoming increasingly rare due to over-development or inappropriate alterations throughout Queens. Landmarks noted that the newly created historic district protects the turn-of-century picturesque architectural styles of the rapidly disappearing era of suburban development. (read more…)