How the Commissioners Vote
The Historic Preservation Commission is a volunteer board, and its members turn over regularly. This looks at who's actually served, how each of the more active members voted by project type, and what they're on record as having said — not as a scorecard of who's "tough" or "easy," but as a plain record of eleven-plus years of real public decisions.
Who's served, and when
Each line is one commissioner's time on the board, from their first recorded meeting to their most recent. Dot size reflects how many votes they cast. Hover for exact dates.
A mostly-volunteer board with real turnover
Geoffrey Darby chaired the commission for essentially the entire dataset before stepping down in December 2025 after 15 years of service — the only member present at both the very first and very last meeting in this archive. Most others serve a few years and move on, which means the commission a homeowner meets today is rarely the same group that heard their neighbor's application five years earlier.
How each member votes by project type
For the 20 members with enough recorded votes to make this meaningful, each cell shows how often they voted No or Abstained (rather than Yes) on that category of project. Blank cells mean that member never voted on that category.
Hover any cell for the exact vote count. A single No or Abstain out of only 2-3 votes shows as a dark cell but isn't a strong pattern — check the count before reading too much into it.
Dissent is rare and unevenly distributed
Across every member and category, outright No votes and abstentions are a small minority of all votes cast — this commission overwhelmingly approves what comes before it, usually after negotiating changes first rather than voting it down. Where dissent does concentrate, it's mostly a handful of members on a handful of categories, not a broad pattern across the board.
Commissioner by commissioner
The 12 most active members, with a sample of their own on-the-record remarks, quoted exactly as the minutes phrase them.
Darby
Most active on: Addition (212), Porch/Deck/Stairs (123), Windows/Doors (65)
- Vinyl: 26 of 27 approved outright
- Aluminum siding: 12 of 12 approved outright
- Slate roof removal: 14 of 15 approved outright
- Solar panels: 8 of 8 approved outright
“Suggested the seam between the two shutter layers should be celebrated, not hidden.”
117 Midland Avenue · 2017-12-06
“Agreed with Stearns that the porch railings needed better detailing on baluster spacing.”
172 Bay Avenue · 2023-04-10
“Raised concerns that the proposed porch and chimney were oversized for the house.”
79 Forest Avenue · 2025-12-03
McMahon
Most active on: Addition (153), Porch/Deck/Stairs (98), Windows/Doors (52)
- Vinyl: 23 of 23 approved outright
- Aluminum siding: 11 of 12 approved outright
- Slate roof removal: 13 of 13 approved outright
- Solar panels: 9 of 9 approved outright
“Along with Herrigel, reviewed revised plans and felt the skylight was too large and too visible.”
307 Ridgewood Avenue · 2016-06-01
“Questioned discrepancies on the drawings regarding post sizes (4x4 vs. 6x6).”
272 Ridgewood Avenue · 2021-11-03
“Noted the deck is about 60 feet from the street and mostly masked by the existing bump-out, addressing the cable-rail concern.”
26 Hamilton Road · 2022-12-07
Herrigel
Most active on: Addition (130), Porch/Deck/Stairs (104), Windows/Doors (51)
- Vinyl: 21 of 22 approved outright
- Aluminum siding: 13 of 13 approved outright
- Slate roof removal: 10 of 11 approved outright
- Solar panels: 6 of 6 approved outright
“Along with Wright, found the submitted hardiplank siding sample was not smooth as required and asked for a smooth-side resubmission.”
2 Brooklawn Road · 2015-08-05
“Said the fireplace wall does not block the view of the carriage house from the street.”
78 Ridgewood Avenue · 2019-11-06
“Requested more detail on the conservatory window to ensure it wasn't a stand-in for a skylight.”
1 Douglas Road · 2021-12-01
Githens
Most active on: Addition (132), Porch/Deck/Stairs (98), Windows/Doors (50)
- Vinyl: 18 of 22 approved outright
- Aluminum siding: 12 of 12 approved outright
- Slate roof removal: 11 of 12 approved outright
- Solar panels: 5 of 5 approved outright
“As part of a subcommittee with Kopec and Wright, viewing an artificial slate sample, preferred the homeowner stay with asphalt shingle instead.”
100 Stonehouse Road · 2015-08-05
“Concerned about changing from two garage door openings to one, and about the fake wood-grain texture on the proposed steel doors.”
233 Forest Avenue · 2018-12-05
“Found the front parking layout a problem despite massing fitting context; wanted more modern architecture in town but found this design too stark for the district.”
959 Bloomfield Avenue · 2021-04-07
Moriarty
Most active on: Addition (94), Porch/Deck/Stairs (54), Windows/Doors (32)
- Vinyl: 18 of 18 approved outright
- Aluminum siding: 9 of 9 approved outright
- Slate roof removal: 7 of 7 approved outright
- Solar panels: 5 of 5 approved outright
“Asked how the cornice returns at 340 Ridgewood Avenue were being detailed, prompting a consultant site visit to confirm the work matches what was approved.”
340 Ridgewood Avenue · 2019-02-06
“Said she is a 'bad example' since she has rehabilitated houses in worse condition, so the economic argument may not sway her.”
558 Ridgewood Avenue · 2021-10-06
“Asked whether the handrails should be curved.”
39 Wildwood Terrace · 2023-06-07
Colello
Most active on: Addition (124), Porch/Deck/Stairs (44), Windows/Doors (28)
- Vinyl: 15 of 16 approved outright
- Aluminum siding: 7 of 7 approved outright
- Slate roof removal: 9 of 9 approved outright
- Solar panels: 4 of 4 approved outright
“Noted that adding a different material such as wood would be easy since the extension's roofline already separates it from the main house.”
281 Bay Avenue · 2021-04-07
“Expressed a preference for the solid railing at the stairs.”
90 Baldwin Street · 2023-01-04
“Expressed concern about removing or enlarging the small historic tower window, noting it was a distinctive long-standing feature.”
269 Ridgewood Avenue · 2026-06-03
Yewaisis
Most active on: Addition (117), Porch/Deck/Stairs (44), Windows/Doors (26)
- Vinyl: 14 of 15 approved outright
- Aluminum siding: 3 of 3 approved outright
- Slate roof removal: 8 of 8 approved outright
- Solar panels: 2 of 3 approved outright
“Agreed with Switzer, saying she drives by daily and appreciates its distinctive architecture.”
558 Ridgewood Avenue · 2021-09-01
“Added that the addition's bay projection is also problematic.”
29 Windsor Place · 2023-02-01
“Concluded the application couldn't be decided without revised drawings showing correct dimensions.”
63 Hawthorne Avenue · 2026-08-05
Vande Stouwe
Most active on: Addition (82), Porch/Deck/Stairs (50), Windows/Doors (27)
- Vinyl: 12 of 14 approved outright
- Aluminum siding: 6 of 6 approved outright
- Slate roof removal: 6 of 6 approved outright
- Solar panels: 4 of 4 approved outright
“Concerned that switching from 'S' style to 'Mission' style synthetic tile will change the roof's appearance.”
42 Woodland Avenue · 2018-06-06
“Questioned the lack of fenestration making the building appear industrial and said the design needed more scrutiny given it differs from the district.”
959 Bloomfield Avenue · 2021-04-07
“Recommended turning the existing opening into a window shadow box.”
66 Highland Avenue · 2022-03-02
Way
Most active on: Addition (70), Porch/Deck/Stairs (61), Windows/Doors (23)
- Vinyl: 10 of 10 approved outright
- Aluminum siding: 5 of 5 approved outright
- Slate roof removal: 7 of 7 approved outright
- Solar panels: 3 of 3 approved outright
“Suggested the architect double-check window alignment and bracket proportions.”
160 Linden Avenue · 2017-11-01
“Questioned why the corner windows extend to the floor when other windows do not.”
Baldwin Street Properties (Clarus Project / JMF Properties) · 2018-06-06
“The weathered/exposure dimension of the siding (aluminum vs. vinyl) would be important to his decision on the material.”
38 Clinton Road · 2018-12-05
Stearns
Most active on: Addition (85), Porch/Deck/Stairs (38), Windows/Doors (22)
- Vinyl: 13 of 14 approved outright
- Aluminum siding: 3 of 3 approved outright
- Slate roof removal: 7 of 8 approved outright
- Solar panels: 1 of 2 approved outright
“Noted windows on the northeast elevation are at two different heights/sizes; noted plans and elevations do not appear to align.”
61 Willow Street · 2022-01-05
“Confirmed the new shingles would use 7-inch exposure to match existing, and explained composite shingles typically don't match wood and have been rejected before.”
64 Benson Street · 2023-10-04
“Requested clarity on the deadline for corrective work after retroactive approval, and whether fines should be reduced rather than fully waived for after-the-fact approvals.”
general · 2026-06-03
Wright
Most active on: Addition (57), Porch/Deck/Stairs (52), Other (20)
- Vinyl: 4 of 5 approved outright
- Aluminum siding: 4 of 4 approved outright
- Slate roof removal: 4 of 5 approved outright
- Solar panels: 3 of 3 approved outright
“Along with Schackner, reviewed a New Cedar Shingle siding sample for the Country Club and said they liked it, but wanted the commission to approve the color given repainting difficulty.”
555 Ridgewood Avenue · 2015-06-03
“Authorized the permit with the condition the architect submit the window design for subcommittee approval before installation.”
7 Ardsley Road · 2016-09-07
“Difficult to assess the application because the drawings don't adequately show existing conditions or the sunroom's attachment to the house.”
195 Sherman Avenue · 2018-02-07
Kopec
Most active on: Addition (46), Porch/Deck/Stairs (45), Windows/Doors (16)
- Vinyl: 7 of 7 approved outright
- Aluminum siding: 3 of 3 approved outright
- Slate roof removal: 6 of 7 approved outright
“As part of a subcommittee with Githens and Wright, viewing an artificial slate sample, preferred the homeowner stay with asphalt shingle instead.”
100 Stonehouse Road · 2015-08-05
“Noted the sign blocks the front of the building and duplicates the sign above the entrance doors.”
205 Linden Avenue · 2017-11-01
“The bump-out treatment creates imbalance, and the overhangs accentuate the top-heavy appearance.”
300 Linden Avenue · 2018-01-03
How this was put together: every meeting's minutes were gone through individually to record each named commissioner's vote on every application (Yes, No, Abstain, Recused, or Absent) and any position, concern, or suggestion the minutes attribute to them by name. Generic "the Commission discussed..." language isn't attributed to anyone specific. The minutes are themselves a third-person summary written by the commission's consultant, not a verbatim transcript, so a quote here is the minutes' paraphrase of what was said, not a direct recording. A "dissent" means a No vote or an Abstain; voluntary recusals (usually a conflict of interest) are set aside rather than counted as a position either way.
This is a one-time look back, not a live feature — it won't update automatically as new meetings are published. See the borough's official agendas & minutes for the current record.