After a long, often raucous two-hour meeting, the Town of North Hempstead council has allowed a small portion of Roslyn Heights to declare itself an historic district. The designated area includes 68 homes on Elm and Willow Streets and the north side of Garden Street. The final vote was unanimous, with all four council members and TONH Supervisor May Newburger voting in favor of the district.

Proponents of the historic area have cited neighborhood preservation as the driving force behind the desire to create such a district. When two older homes in Roslyn Heights were destroyed and others threatened with the same fate, two Roslyn Heights residents, Kathy D'Amato Smith and Nancy Shores, began exploring the possibility of creating an historic district. When one local structure, the Ellenhoff house, was threatened to be subdivided, the idea picked up steam among other homeowners.

At the Jan. 5 meeting in Manhasset, Roslyn Heights residents showed up in force to speak out on the plan. Nearly all were in favor of the plan, but there were some dissenting voices as well.

Dr. George T. Williams, of the Historic Landmark Restoration Commission said his organization had already approved such an historic district. In addition, as early as 1989, his organization had considered such a district feasible for Roslyn Heights.

Ms. D'Amato Smith said the debate over creating the district was both open and democratic. Over the past two years, there had been "many meetings at homes and community centers" on the matter. In addition, proponents of the plan had gone door-to-door in the neighborhood soliciting support and suggestions. Of the 68 houses in question, residents in 63 homes had signed a document supporting an historic district.

While describing the neighborhood, some supporters conjured up images of a more innocent America. Lee Weinsten said he wanted his part of Roslyn Heights to be "a little Mayberry RFD...a neighborhood that's stable," adding that he didn't want modern houses with smaller driveways that don't "pay attention to the children" and their safety.

Marian McVey said "unrestricted" construction would ruin the "Norman Rockwell atmosphere" of Roslyn Heights, causing the village to be "lost forever" for longtime residents such as herself.

Supporters also defended the architectural layout of the district. In order to qualify as an historic district, a "great majority" of the homes must be 50 years or older. Joel Snodgrass, an architect hired to look at the district, said the Elm Street area is an "architecturally cohesive [area] of late 19th and early 20th century homes." Ms. D'Amato Smith added that what modern homes the district has mix in well with the older homes.

Norbert Krapf, a poet and professor of English at CW Post understood that some residents would be "nervous because of restrictions" such a district would create. Mr. Krapf used to live in such a district when he was a resident of Roslyn. He added that such restrictions would be minor in comparison to the gains residents would receive.

On the same theme, Councilman James O'Connor wondered if such an historic district would be a threat to property rights. He wondered if the district would contain "grandfathering" clauses, which can lead to the taking of some property rights.

Ben Levin, a homeowner in the designated area, opposed the plan. A resident of Elm Street, he said he was promised his house would not be included in the district.

Mr. Levin also had questions about the plan's specifics. "If I don't like the district, can I stay out of it?" he wondered. Could he, for instance, change the windows on his house if they were in front of the structure? Linda Woods, a Roslyn Heights resident who has expressed reservations about the district, also claimed that no homeowner would be allowed to take their house off the historic list even if they wished that to happen.

Nancy Shores told Mr. Levin that no promise about keeping his home out of the district had been made. Dr. Williams said the commission would make decisions on renovations in consultation with the district's architect. He said the renovation Mr. Levin had in mind would "probably" be allowed. In general, an historic district, Dr. Williams said, "doesn't take away property rights." Such restrictions usually focus on the exterior of the house as it is visible from the street.

Mr. Levin was not placated by such assurances. He said homeowners in the Village of Roslyn "became obsessed" with their own historic districts, while apparently fearing the same would happen in The Heights. Mr. Levin noted that he had spent his life's savings on his house; as such, he "doesn't want anyone to tell him what he can do with it."

Former Roslyn Heights Civic Association President Tom Seligman also spoke out against the district.

While being in favor of preserving the "wider community" with a "full an complete enforcement" of existing laws and building codes, Mr. Seligman said that he has also seen "violation after violation" of those codes; hence, numerous properties in Roslyn Heights have gone into disrepair.

Mr. Seligman then listed his grievances with the entire process: It violated New York State open meeting laws, there was no opportunity to amend the proposal, there was no notice of an October meeting concerning the plan, the public did not get an opportunity to discuss the applications made to the TONH council, there was no discussion of specific rules and regulations of the proposed district, and he had been denied due process of law concerning the meetings.

In addition, Mr. Seligman claimed the list was drawn up in an arbitrary fashion; there were homes in the district which could not be considered historic. Plus, homes outside the district, which, in Mr. Seligman's view, are historic, were not included.

"There is a structural fault in the development of the district," Mr. Seligman concluded. He added he wanted to work with the town to "preserve the entire community," imploring the council to "be creative" and "find a way for everyone to be satisfied."

Supervisor Newburger disrupted Mr. Seligman's contention that state "sunshine laws" concerning open meetings had been violated. Dr. Williams added that Mr. Seligman had "dominated" a November meeting on the district.

Before casting her vote, Councilwoman Doreen Banks said in a phone conservation, Mr. Seligman told her he would be "happy" to have his home in the district. Mr. Seligman, Councilwoman Banks said, was only unhappy some homeowners were being excluded from the district. Mr. Seligman said Councilwoman Banks' recollection was "incorrect," adding that he had asked not to have his residence included in the district, while he "voluntarily followed the principles" of the plan.

Councilman Anthony Ferrara cast his yes vote, while adding that he understood "the frustration of homeowners possibly losing their property rights." Councilman O'Connor reiterated that "preservation should not be at the expense of property rights." The present legislation, he noted, allows for renovation in the back of houses, making it acceptable to the councilman.