In the wake of the Reading City Council's recent HARB resignations, the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission has stepped in to offer guidance and recommendations for the city's historical preservation efforts. This is a critical moment for Reading, as the mass resignation of the Historical Architectural Review Board (HARB) has left a void in the city's historic preservation program. The HARB, a volunteer-based advisory group, plays a pivotal role in reviewing and approving alterations to the exteriors of buildings in the city's five historical districts. With the HARB's absence, the city has been left to navigate the delicate balance between preserving its rich historical fabric and accommodating the needs of property owners.
Megan McNish, the eastern region community preservation coordinator for the Pennsylvania State Historic Preservation Office, has provided a comprehensive evaluation and a set of recommendations to help the city get back on track. Her plan is a thoughtful and strategic approach to rebuilding the HARB and strengthening the city's historic preservation program. One of the key insights from McNish's evaluation is the need to reevaluate the city's historic preservation ordinance. She suggests that the Historic District Act may not be the best fit for the city's current goals and needs, and proposes the use of the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code as an alternative or complementary approach. This recommendation is particularly interesting, as it highlights the flexibility and adaptability of the planning code, which could provide a more streamlined and efficient process for regulating preservation.
What makes McNish's recommendations particularly compelling is her emphasis on the immediate need for a rewrite or revision of the city's historic preservation ordinance. She suggests that this could be funded through grants, such as the 2026 Certified Local Government Project Grant or the Keystone Historic Preservation Grant. This is a practical and forward-thinking approach, as it ensures that the city has the financial resources to implement the necessary changes. Additionally, her suggestion to translate the ordinance into Spanish is a thoughtful and inclusive gesture, as it ensures that all members of the community, regardless of their language background, can understand and engage with the preservation process.
In the short term, McNish recommends assessing current staffing responsibilities and reassigning them based on the number of permits being reviewed. This is a crucial step to ensure that the workload is distributed equitably across staff, preventing overwhelm and inefficiency. Integrating historic preservation into the digital permitting process is another innovative recommendation, as it provides tremendous access to information and streamlines record-keeping. These short-term recommendations are practical and achievable, and they lay the groundwork for a more robust and efficient preservation program.
Looking to the medium term, McNish's plan includes developing and adopting design guidelines for each of the city's historic preservation districts. This is a critical step to ensure that any alterations to the exteriors of buildings are in keeping with the character and history of the districts. The new preservation review board would also have continuing education and training requirements to comply with the standards, which is a necessary step to ensure that board members are well-equipped to make informed decisions. These medium-term recommendations are thoughtful and strategic, and they address the need for a more comprehensive and consistent approach to preservation.
In the long term, McNish's plan includes implementing the survey plan, which is a critical step to ensure that the city's historic districts are comprehensively surveyed and preserved. This is a bold and ambitious goal, and it reflects the city's commitment to its historical fabric. However, it is important to note that the entire process could take until early 2029, which is a significant timeframe. This raises a deeper question about the city's ability to implement these recommendations in a timely manner, and it highlights the need for a clear and concise plan with defined milestones and responsibilities.
In conclusion, the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission's recommendations for Reading's historical preservation efforts are a thoughtful and strategic approach to rebuilding the HARB and strengthening the city's preservation program. McNish's plan is a comprehensive and well-thought-out strategy that addresses the immediate, short-term, medium-term, and long-term needs of the city. However, it is important to note that the implementation of these recommendations will require a clear and concise plan with defined milestones and responsibilities. As the city navigates this critical moment, it is essential to ensure that the preservation of Reading's rich historical fabric is a priority, and that the community is engaged and informed throughout the process.
