Loading...
Camp Commission Assistance and Mentoring Program from the National Alliance of Preservation Commissions - FMSF c..., r tl° It .... Commission Assistance and Mentoring Program � .' ,} - h i } tld f1 f .,, ,.,,,-- „.,. . Y �`{ n.f€s . , Y . Y -..,.,,,, ;,..,-...r A* „,- . s ( 4t -;::Al rw i'V * > s i- 2 p� ' iitt ''' Nt ' ',lir -A,`'`---'? s .." 'IS' � e ^S z aZ. ' , IA'` from the National Alliance of Preservation Commissions Section 1 Community Goals and Preservation Planning "Planning for Successful Preservation," The Alliance Review, National Alliance for Preservation Commissions, Nov/Dec 2005. "Preservation Plans and Planning," Drane Wilkinson, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, 2004. "Zoning and Historic Preservation," Stephen A. Morris, Preservation Planner, Local Preservation, National Park Service, August 1998. "Neighborhood Conservation Districts,"Julia H. Miller, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Nov-Dec 2003. "Neighborhood Conservation Districts Bibliography," Nicole Bell, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Nov-Dec 2003. "The Economics of Historic Preservation," Donovan Rypkema, A speech to the Georgia Historic Preservation Conference, 1996. "Building Codes and Historic Rehabilitation Conference: Synopsis and Reflections," Caroline Alderson and Marilyn Kaplan, AIA. "Smart Codes: ICC Consolidation Benefits Building Safety and Public," Steve Daggers, The Alliance Review, National Alliance for Preservation Commissions,Jan/Apr 2003. "Cities 'Get Smart'Without State Initiatives," Katie Burns, The Alliance Review, National Alliance for Preservation Commissions, Jan/Apr 2003. "International Code Council Offers Guidelines for Existing Buildings," Jennifer M. Lewis, The Alliance Review, National Alliance for Preservation Commissions, Jan/Apr 2003. Excerpt From "Smart Codes in Your Community: A Guide to Building Rehabilitation Codes," David B. Hattis, The Alliance Review, National Alliance for Preservation Commissions, Jan/Apr 2003. Section 2 Legal and Procedural Aspects "Law and the Historic Preservation Commission:What Every Member Needs to Know,"James K. Reap and Mel Hill,Jr., Cultural Resources Partnership Notes,The National Parks Service, 2007. "Protecting Potential Landmarks Through Demolition Review,"Julia H. Miller, National Trust for Historic Preservation, 2007. "For the Record:The NAPC Short Guide to Parliamentary Procedure," Ed. Heather McDonald with Introduction by Drane Wilkinson, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, 2009. "A Letter to George: How to Keep the Preservation Commission Out of Court and Avoid Being Sued," Robert E. Stipe, North Carolina State University, 1994. "All the World's A Stage: How to Conduct A Preservation Commission Meeting," James K. Reap, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Sep/Oct 2005. "Design Review Do's and Don'ts: Top Ten List of No-No's," Debbie Abele, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions,Jan-Feb, 2007. "Building a Defensible Record," Stephen N. Dennis, National Center for Preservation Law, March 1991. "Economic Hardship and Demolition by Neglect,"James Reap, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Nov/Dec 2003. "Assessing Economic Hardship Claims Under Historic Preservation Ordinances," Julia Miller, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions,Jan/Feb 2001. "Demolition By Neglect," Preservation Law Reporter, National Trust for Historic Preservation, 1999. "Establishing a Demolition by Neglect Ordinance," Dan Becker, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Feb/Mar 1999. Highlights From: "Takings Law in Plain English" Christopher J. Duerkensen and Richard Roddewig, American Resources Information Network, 1994. Section 3 Making Design Review Work "Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation," National Park Service, October 1992. "The Secretary of the Interior's Standards: How They Apply To Your Commission's Work,"Janine Duncan, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Sep/Oct 2006. "The What, Why and How of Design Guidelines," Drane Wilkinson, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, May-June 2003. "Design Review Reviewed: Administrative versus Discretionary Methods,"Jack L. Nasar& Peg Grannis, Journal of the American Planning Association, Autumn 1999. "Design Guidelines for Historic Districts Within the Context of Community Planning," Nore V.Winter, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Fall 1990. "Design Guidelines for the Landscape," Dale Jaeger, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Fall 1990. "Preparing a Project for Design Review,"Technical Paper No. 28, King County Landmarks and Heritage Program, King County, Washington. "And How Many Sets of Guidelines Does This Make?" Nancy Jane Baker, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, May-June 2003. Section 4 Identification and Designation "Questions and Answers About Historic Properties Surveys," National Park Service, Local Preservation, 1987. "National Register Historic District/Local Historic District: There is a Difference," State Historic Preservation Office, Division of Archives and History, North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, 1999. "The Standards of Surveying," Ken Kocher, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Apr/May 1999. "Cultural Resource Surveys: Documenting Your Community's Character," Meredith Bzdak, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Apr/May 1999. "Surveying for Success,"Vanessa Bernstein and Drane Wilkinson, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Nov/Dec 2005. Section 5 Public Education & Outreach "Preservation Commissions: Educating the Community and Public Officials," Jo Ann Radetic, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Jul/Aug 2004. "Working Cooperatively: Local Commissions and Non-Profit Partners," Lisbeth Cort, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions,Jul/Aug 2004. "Educating Community:Twelve Tips for Reaching Out,"Compiled by NAPC, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Sep/Oct 2005. "Reaching Out to Realtors or How to Get Them to Tell Clients They're in Historic Districts,"Compiled by NAPC, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Sep/Oct 2005. "Sexy Signage Symbiosis: How Local Commissions&Sign Companies Can Get Together," Raoul Adams, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Mar/Apr 2005. "Avoiding Unnecessary Animosity:The Contractor/Commission Relationship," Raoul Adams, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Sep/Oct 2006. "Best Practice Techniques for Local Preservation Commissions," Monica Callahan, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Sep/Oct 2005. "Prompting Positive Public Participation,"Ann McGlone, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Jan/Feb 2006. "The Art of Negotiation," Leah J. Konicki, AICP, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Nov/Dec 2006. "Considering Color in Historic Districts,"Compiled by NAPC, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Mar/Apr 2007. "What I Wish Historic District Commissions in Arkansas Knew About Enforcement," Boyd Maher, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Nov/Dec 2004. "Education and Public Outreach Planning for Preservation Commissions,"Stacy Patterson, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions,Jul/Aug 2007. "You Don't' Get If You Don't Ask:The ABC's of Lobbying," Rory Hays, The Alliance Review, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, Jul/Aug 2004. Section 6 Resources and Contacts "Caring for the Past: Preserving, Rehabilitating, and Restoring Historic Buildings," Technical Preservation Services, National Park Service, 1996-97. Free of charge"Order Form," Heritage Preservation Services Information Desk, National Center for Cultural Resource Stewardship and Partnerships, P.O. Box 37127, Washington, D.C., 20013-7127, or e-mail: hps-info@nps.gov ■ H Community Goals and Preservation Planning Planning LA tN FOR SUCCESSFUL PRESERVATION Compiled by NAPC Editors note: The following article was compiled in response to numerous requests from our members using materials collected by NAPC including training presentations and con- ference handouts. Many excellent books with more extensive information are available from the American Planning Association (www.planning.org) and the National Trust for Historic Preservation (www.nationaltrust.org). In order to be optimally successful, a local preservation program must plan for its future growth as well as its ongoing maintenance. The need for local preservation plans has become more obvious as historic preservation and local preservation commissions have Although become accepted as legitimate parts of local government, and as their work has become developing and more complex. In some states, having a local preservation plan is a requirement of the Certified Local Government (CLG) program or may be mandated by state legislation. maintaining a Many communities, however, do not have a local preservation plan or have allowed their preservation plan to become out of date. Although developing and maintaining a preservation plan is plan is not an not an endeavor to be taken lightly, it is not beyond the reach of most local preservation endeavor to be programs taken lightly, it What is a Preservation Plan? is not beyond Simply put, a preservation plan is a roadmap for a government's future preservation activ- the reach of ity. Ideally, a local preservation plan is an element of the city or county's comprehensive mOSt local plan; but in cities and towns without comprehensive plans, it can be a stand-alone docu- ment. Whatever its form, a preservation plan and the planning process provide a proac- preservation tive way to ensure the preservation and protection of a community's historic resources and programs. character. By informing property owners about the community's preservation goals, a preservation plan can be a public outreach tool for the preservation commission. Community buy-in is achieved by involving the public in the planning process, which lets property owners and residents help shape the community's future in a positive way. As the public becomes more aware of local history,enthusiasm and support for its preservation will grow. In many cities and towns,the preservation plan is also an economic development tool used to help attract businesses and individual property owners who value the characteristics usually found in communities with strong preservation programs. Elements of a preservation plan may exist in a city or town's different policies and land use management tools and it is not uncommon for objectives that would be included in a preservation plan to be found in the local zoning or preservation ordinance. Since these ordinances do not provide the other elements of a preservation plan, they cannot take its place. Naturally, preservation plans vary from place to place depending on community size,stage of development, public awareness of historic resources,when the local preser- vation ordinance was passed, etc. In all cases,however, an effective preservation plan has certain characteristics. Common Characteristics Future oriented -An effective preservation plan establishes goals and objectives that will be achieved over time through survey activity,district designation,regulations, and ordinance administration. Continuous - To be effective and remain relevant, a preservation plan requires peri- odic reevaluation and amendment to adjust to changes in local conditions as well as further development of other, related municipal policies and local ordinances. 4 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Planning k Y Realistic -The preservation plan should be based on identified current and anticipat- ed conditions as well as designed to help shape those conditions. It will not be effec- tive if it only explores desired results and does not acknowledge real challenges and local conditions. Comprehensive- Even if the preservation plan has to be a stand-alone document, it should contain all the elements it would have as a part of a comprehensive plan. Briefly, these elements include: • Statement of goals and the purpose of the preservation plan. This element provides direction by establishing the community's preservation work program and sets forth the philosophy underlying the other elements of the plan. The goals must accurately reflect the community's vision for its future as well as its preser- vation needs. The community's vision is identified through public participation in the planning process. • Definition of historic character. By describing the community's unique charac- ter, this element provides context for other parts of the plan and continuity when the plan is updated or amended. It can be as simple as a summary of the com- munity's history and significant periods, or a very detailed narrative citing individ- ual character defining resources. • Summary of past preservation efforts. An overview of the local preservation movement helps people understand the evolution of the community's preservation program. It also informs future decisions about preservation priorities and plan- ning activity. •Historic resource surveys and plans for future surveys. A community's his- toric resources survey and a process for maintaining it are essential to success- ful local preservation. This element includes information about where and when surveys have been conducted,what areas will be surveyed in the future, and how the surveys will be maintained. The rationale behind prioritizing future survey areas should also be included. (See"Surveying for Success"on page 14 for more information about local historic resource survey programs) • Explanation of legal basis for historic preservation. An overview of the state and local preservation laws establishes the legitimacy of the local preservation program and plan. Reference should be made to all applicable state statutes such as the state enabling legislation and any comprehensive planning legislation. An explanation of the local preservation ordinance and how it is administered, includ- ing enforcement and appeals provisions, is essential. • Discussion of relationship between historic preservation and other land use and growth management authority. How preservation will be coordinated with other governmental decisions concerning land use, transportation, public works, etc. should be addressed in the plan to avoid conflicting decisions. This element should also provide a process to reconcile potentially contradictory regulations. These provisions are easier to coordinate when the preservation plan is an ele- ment in a comprehensive plan. • Explanation of public sector responsibilities. How the municipality will man- age historic properties that it owns must be defined to guide its future treatment of them. In many states, city owned property is not subject to review by the local TAR Nov/Dec 2005 5 Planning ve�iiYf✓yn preservation commission. A commitment by the local government to be a respon- sible steward can prevent inappropriate public sector actions. This section should also include a means for ensuring that public actions, such as infrastructure improvements, will not adversely affect privately owned historic resources. Discussion of preservation incentives. This section of the plan does not cre- ate incentive programs, but summarizes programs that are already in place and recommends programs that should be developed in the future. Local regulation is more readily accepted when accompanied by incentives such as tax credits, facade grants, and low income housing assistance to promote historic resource protection. (See The Alliance Review, May-June 2005 for more information) Discussion of preservation education activity. Public outreach to promote preservation is essential for successful local preservation. Programs to educate the public about the local historic preservation program,the importance of historic resources, and to raise awareness and appreciation of local history should be summarized and potential future programs outlined in the plan An agenda for future preservation activity. This section provides time frames for implementing the plan's goals and objectives and sets implementation priori- ties. Just as importantly, it establishes a system for periodic review to monitor progress, identify any, necessary amendments, and to update the plan on a regu- lar basis. The Process No single planning process fits every community in detail, but most include a steering committee comprised of representatives from the various stakeholders. Stakeholders include the local preservation commission, property owners, from various municipal agencies, elected officials, members of local preservation non-prof- r a �ha it groups, business owners commission staff, and others. The steering corn- ). � • , mittee typically works with commission staff(if available) or a consultant who provides expertise and experience and guides the process. L tit t x Through a series of community meetings and surveys, the committee learns Y ! what is important to the community and how the community wants to grow. A r skilled facilitator is essential. These community values and vision are then �. { c' compiled and presented to the community for review and comment. The steering committee,along with staff or a consultant, uses the information from the community to develop and refine the goals and objectives eventually set ;''?'tis'•�'� forth in the plan. Whatever process is followed, public participation is essen- tial. Through a series of community meetings and surveys,the corn- The committee can develop other parts of the plan like historical background, past preser- mittee learns what is important vation efforts, legal basis, public sector responsibilities, etc. with less public involvement; to the community and how the but nothing in the plan should be developed without giving the public an opportunity to community wants to grow. comment. By involving as many stakeholders as possible and actively seeking public par- Photo:NAPC File Photo ticipation, you can help ensure that the plan will be readily adopted and its implementation supported. Challenges As with anything,there are challenges to developing and maintaining a preservation plan. Fortunately, they are not insurmountable. The most common challenges include: 6 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Planning -fttri The Preservation Planning Process: Steering committee Multiple facilitated formed, works with —► community _•. community —► Goals and objectives survey developed staff or consultant visioning meetings Multiple Multiple 77' opportunities for r Revision ., opportunities for further public public review& review&comment comment Multiple opportunities for Preservation plan Revision Revision ► fierther public review adopted! &comment • Funding-Even if commission staff is available to guide the process, staff time usually isn't free and the additional work required may necessitate hiring additional personnel. Frequently, hiring an outside consultant is the most reasonable option. Potential sources of funding include CLG grants, local preservation organizations, and civic-minded busi- nesses. Scope -Avoid having so large a scope to the planning endeavor that the task becomes impossible to manage. A community may need to begin with small plans for distinct dis- tricts and then expand to include other areas. Public participation-Even though the strength of a plan depends on it, public participation can be difficult to get. Use multiple meetings scheduled for different times of the day and evening as well as on weekends. Hold them in a variety of safe, fully accessible places. If transportation is difficult for part of the population, consider asking local civic groups to help. Have translators available at meetings held in neighborhoods with large non-English speaking populations.Announce the meetings frequently and well ahead of time in multi- ple places including television, radio, and the alternative press. Implementation - Once a plan is adopted, implementation can prove to be more difficult than anticipated. Revision to the agenda may be necessary, but should not be so severe as to negate its effectiveness. Maintenance-The more the plan is used and referenced, the easier it will be to maintain. Make reviewing the plan part of the annual review of commission work and include it in the commission's annual report. TA R Nov/Dec 2005 7 Preservation Plans and Planning Overview prepared by Drane Wilkinson,NAPC Program Director 2004 What is a preservation plan,anyway? A proactive way to provide for the preservation and protection of a community's historic resources and character. Why bother? To identify and articulate community preservation goals. "I guess we pretty much all know what we want." Commissioner, Americus, GA To let current and future property owners know how the community intends to grow. "Honest!I had no idea I was in the district!" Property owner, Anytown, USA To stay out of court by having a legal defense against lawsuits alleging unfair treatment or arbitrary decisions. "So,y'all have a plan and guidelines and stuff?" Resident, Johnson City, TN To help eliminate confusion about the purpose of the local preservation ordinance. "They'll tell you what color to paint your house and take you to court if you don't do it!" Alarmist resident, Jonesborough, TN To help avoid conflict between various local government policies that affect historic resources. "The fire department tells me one thing,public works tells me something else, and now you've got a whole different set of rules. Can't you people get it together?" Frustrated property owner, Madison, WI To educate the public about the community's history and heritage. "You mean this place used to be a whorehouse? Cool!" Owner, Pain and Wonder Tattoos and Piercing, Athens, GA To create an agenda for future preservation work. "We've got an ordinance and guidelines. Now what?" Commissioner, Deadwood, SD To create a way to measure preservation's progress. "I guess we're doing okay, but I just can't tell if we're getting anywhere. " Commission chair, Cleveland, MS To provide a basis for interim protection for resources while taking steps to adopt a preservation ordinance. "I can't tell you how S@%$*mad 1 am! We just couldn't do anything before he tore it down. " Angry parishioner, Cranston, RI To encourage economic development through historic preservation. "That plan y'all put together is the best sales pitch I've got. " Surprised city manager, Jonesborough, TN To strengthen political understanding and support of historic preservation policies. "Well, I don't like some committee telling my folks what to do; and if they want my support, they'll have to let me know what they're up to." Elected official, Mount Pleasant, SC To give the public a chance to determine local preservation policy. "I got so freakin'tired of those meetings!" Commissioner, Windsor, CT Characteristics Future oriented—establishes goals and objectives that will be implemented over time. Continuous—requires periodic reevaluation and amending to adjust to changes. Realistic—based on current and projected conditions as well as hopes and dreams. Integrated — ideally, a component in a comprehensive plan; at a minimum, tied to other municipal policies Informed - based on public input and priorities Contents Acknowledgements — thank the folks that have helped and give early notice that the public was involved Introduction and statement of purpose—let the reader know up front what the plan is and its purpose. Overview of planning process — how the plan was developed — steering committee, consultants,public meetings, opinion surveys, etc. Steering committee ' Consultant hired ' Community survey Public review and * Goals and Community comment objectives visioning meetings ir Revision ► Preservation plan (Multiply most adopted ! stages at least 3X) Overview of historical context—a documented summary of the community's history. Overview of historical context—make effective use of historic photographs. Contextual overview of relevant areas—existing and proposed districts indicated on one or more maps accompanying written descriptions of current uses and resources. Cite historic resource surveys whenever possible. Community values and vision statement—a statement of broad community values and goals. Specific Recommendations—recommendations for steps to be taken to maintain community values and to realize community vision. Recommendations can have varying degrees of specificity. At a minimum, they should include a list of goals and objectives. Recommendation—planned course of action Goals—desired ultimate results Objectives—steps to be taken toward reaching the goal Recommendation: To facilitate healthy economic growth and neighborhood stability Goal: Maintain mixed residential and commercial use Objective: Provide financial incentives to promote dual residential and commercial use of individual properties by waiving permitting fees for mixed-use development or rehabilitation. Implementation and maintenance plan—a general plan setting forth a time line according to which the plan will be implemented and a system for revision and updating. Annual review-how much did you accomplish? Update every five to ten years—use results of annual reviews to make updating easier. Make updating local survey part of updating the plan—you can't protect it if you don't know what it is. Appendix—results of all surveys and summaries of community input meetings. (Show your work rule) Great! How do we do it? Hire a consultant to do everything—can be expensive, but may be necessary. Unfortunately doesn't always guarantee that the result will be really based on the community's input. Hire a consultant to advise and guide—professional expertise and assistance, steering committee bears the brunt of the work. Steal someone else's plan and copy it—can be an effective low cost starting point. Use the original plan only for framework and structure. Make everything else your community's work. Challenges Funding—CLG grants, city/town coffers, local preservation organizations, local civic minded businesses. Scope—avoid biting off more than your commission can chew. Start small and then expand. Public participation—can be difficult to get. Use multiple meetings scheduled for different times of the day and evening as well as on weekends. Hold them in different safe,fully accessible places. Have translators available. Implementation—can be harder than it appeared when the ideas were flying. Don't be afraid to revise and trim, but don't stop all together. Maintenance—can be easy to forget to do,particularly if the plan is set on a shelf and ignored. The more the plan is used and referenced, the easier it will be to maintain. Make reviewing the plan part of your annual review of commission work and include it in your annual report. , � . v 4 yJ'v. '� • Cultural Resources , ` y AN , s, , ..., ,,��•ra �.; ,_.. ,a� " --fix �' g., ,v.. . . t"'�� � �' _ ,� ..�.,. Wit, � s.�, � Technical assistance in historic preservation planning, related planning/land use topics, and preservation strategies for Federal agencies, Indian tribes, States, and local governments ' �, ZONING AND k HISTORIC PRESERVATION 3 8E Stephen A.Morris 4. _-..W. „ -g. ^ r:: ONING IS ONE OF MANY ORDINANCES AFFECTING the use of land in a local community.Others include building and fire codes, " ,,. ' ,` '"' environmental regulations,subdivision ordinances,and the land- s use policies expressed in a comprehensive or master plan. Of all these, -.,� however,zoning is the most far reaching and,perhaps, the best estab- lished. Historic properties and archeological sites occupy land area and, '�O like other land uses,are subject to zoning regulations.When properly ' applied,zoning can be a powerful tool in protecting historic properties. --Le Af Although zoning may be more effective in protecting historic buildings y ,'1; and historic districts than other kinds of historic resources,it is impor 1' _* r . tant to become knowledgeable about zoning in your community and to ;: :. understand how it affects historic resources and archeological sites and how it might better protect these historic properties. r�.i y What is zoning? {a 6 Under state enabling legislation,a local government is authorized to ' ,-. divide the land area in its jurisdiction into districts,or zones,each with a , '", set of regulations governing the development of private land.The dis- s ;r7 •, tricts are marked on a zoning map,which is an official government docu- $ , ment.Generally,the text of the ordinance specifies the categories of uses allowed in each district (residential,commercial,industrial,agricultural, ¢ etc.),the density of development,the maximum size of the buildings,the i size of the lot,the required spaces around the buildings, the number of " :'° off-street parking spaces,and other requirements for development,such _ ,,,,r; as the building setback from the lot lines and the number of off-street ;. ; parking spaces.Zoning districts are designated by classifications,such as "RS1"which might stand for Residential Single Family Low-Density,or eR ` ' "C2,"which could be Commercial Medium-Density (generally letters ,ASERVICE OP I�R1 FAO,11 I SLRVATION $,iRVIGTF, NA' €Q . C N R P , ,, s x ..0 L.ruR .L' .out $ s WEAN P RTl z s;N, 'or A,1 i> SIB CI ' . 2 • CULTURAL RESOURCES=PARTNCRSHIP NUiits° ;., f J.040i MN 1 ,LI I . - • --- •--.. AU:11110:11;-AFIR ' " ; fill 1 Brio` III 'CI 91 11 EimpiElioloon • 1:::11rmi: 1=1:110 - :jinn Ian ilk!°a ;,i.:-- l-= AMih Q' I R -) _ ii. w;l,ii,Gt_�' .rl _ 4 r 'J J i v ® flija112iiiiii - : ' 0,® ill ;1 1'01 . rIi: r :A II nal:f l:OFESEIORD 1 EXISTING ZONING W . �__ (SCHEMATIC BOUNDARY ONLY) p la EOM' C-1 C-2 C-M i COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS rI. RC-1 RC-2 RC-3 RC-4 RESIDENTIAL-COMMERCIAL COMBINED DISTRICTS Commercial zones in a section of San Francisco.Source:Neighborhood Commercial Rezoning Study,San Francisco Department of City Planning,May 1984. refer to uses while the numbers can adopt zoning laws; in others, ing ordinance in 1916. The indicate density),as shown in the zoning is a function reserved for Standard State Zoning Enabling zoning map from San Francisco, municipalities.The State of Act was drafted by the Depart- above. Texas, for example, restricts zon- ment of Commerce in 1922 and ing to cities and towns of a cer- had much to do with the wide- What kinds of tain size and requires counties to spread adoption of State enabling local governments can get special permission from the legislation and the acceptance of adopt zoning? state legislature in order to adopt zoning by many of the larger a zoning ordinance. cities and suburban communities State zoning enabling legislation around the country.The right of generally specifies which local How long has zoning local governments to zone was jurisdictions are authorized to been in practice? affirmed by the Supreme Court's adopt a zoning ordinance.In landmark decision in Village of some states, both municipalities New York City adopted the Euclid v.Ambler Realty Co. in (cities and towns) and counties nation's first comprehensive zon 1926,which upheld that,in prin tt NI 'AND HISTORIC PRESERVA'3rIO&',;'4 n f 3 ciple, zoning was a valid expres- patterns of development and par- between changes that apply to a sion of the police power (i.e., the ticular land use issues in a corn- small area or to the entire corn- power of the government to regu- munity.After the ordinance and munity. late activity by private persons map are finalized and adopted, for the health,safety, morals,and an appointed zoning board of What is a variance general welfare of the public). appeals or board of adjustment is and under whose authority established to decide when ex- is it granted? What about pre-existing ceptions to the ordinance can be uses or buildings? granted to particular property Given the unique characteristics owners.A zoning administrator of each parcel of land, zoning Buildings or uses in existence prior or officer administers the zoning authorities recognized early on to the establishment or amend- ordinance on a day-to-day basis, that although every property ment of the zoning ordinance, owner within a district would be granting zoning permits for pro- which are inconsistent with the posed developments that comply bound to the same requirements, new or amended zoning require- in certain cases exceptions would with the terms of the ordinance. ments,are called non-conformities.A have to be made. One common lot that does not meet minimum type of exception is a variance, in How are changes made size requirements can also be which a property owner is ex- to a zoning ordinance? non-conforming. Non-conformi- empted from all or a number of ties are sometimes given a set Changes to the text of a zoning the provisions of the zoning ordi- period within which they must ordinance or a zoning map can be nance.Variances require the be brought into conformity with in the form of zoning amendments property owner to prove to the the zoning ordinance; in some or revisions.A revision is consid- zoning appeals•board that, due cases they are allowed to remain ered to be more comprehensive to the particular physical Bur- in existence indefinitely under than an amendment and usually poundings,shape, or topographi- the condition that they will not results in a completely new ordi- cal condition of the property, be expanded or improved. nance.Both require following the compliance with the zoning regu- legal process established by the lations would result in undue How is a state enabling legislation and hardship.Variances may cover zoning ordinance adopted must be approved by the local any aspect of the zoning require- and administered'? governing body.If state law ments, such as use, number of requires that the zoning ordinance parking spaces, size of building, The zoning ordinance and its be consistent with the local corn- or setbacks (the required distance supplemental map are adopted prehensive plan,policies in the between buildings and lot lines). by the local governing body,such plan must be considered.Often as the city or county council or the planning commission reviews What about town board, based on the recom proposed amendments and makes special exceptions? mendations of the planning com recommendations to the town mission, or a specially appointed Special exceptions, also known as council.The term rezoning applies zoning commission.The zoning to both amendments and revs special permits or conditional uses, commission makes its recommen- apply to uses that, although they sions and does not distinguish dations after studying existing don't conform to the zoning reg- 4 ' CI4UR RESOURCES PARTNERS Nis • ulations,are considered to be design review board or historic number of zoning ordinances desirable in a particular district preservation commission adminis- provide a degree of coordination under certain circumstances, ters the regulations contained in by allowing the historic district such as a school in a residential the historic overlay zone. commission or design review zone.Unlike variances,special board to review and make recom- exceptions are listed in the text Should historic zoning or mendations on all use permits, of the zoning ordinance along design review regulations variances,rezoning requests, and with those uses permitted as a and base zoning be zoning text amendment applica- matter of right or by right under coordinated? tions within the historic district. the ordinance.The conditions r Where Regardless of whether or not preservation and zon- required for the zoning board to separate, an ideal solution grant a special exception are also design review in historic districts ing are is called historic zoning or is is to include a clause in each set forth in the ordinance, al- implemented through an inde- ordinance stating that where though sometimes the board negotiates particular conditions pendent process, it is essential there are conflicts, the preserva- to be placed on a proposed devel- that preservation regulations, tion ordinance takes precedence. with a property owner. such as historic district design Alternatively,the zoning ordi- opment review,and zoning be coordi- nance might have a provision nated.Where there is no coordi- stating that there is a presump- What is historic zoning or nation, the preservation regula- tion against developments, historic district overlay zoning? lions that seek to preserve and rezonings,and variances that protect the integrity of historic harm individual landmarks or Where historic district design neighborhoods may be working historic districts. In addition, review is established through the at cross-purposes with the zoning successful preservation commis- zoning ordinance,it is often ordinance, the goal of which sions build in the opportunity to referred to as historic zoning or his- could well be to attract high- comment on any zoning issues toric district overlay zoning.An over- density new development. that may affect historic proper- lay zone is an additional layer of ties and have the authority to regulations for a particular area, How can preservation recommend a suspension of cer- which is laid atop the underlying regulations and zoning taro zoning requirements that or base zoning regulations.There be coordinated? hamper preservation. are many different kinds of over- Coordination can take place in a lay zones including those that What are the variety of ways. One way is to establish additional controls on typical problems that arrange for regular meetings result from a lack of development in areas subject to airport noise or those that between members of the zoning coordination between pro- board and the preservation corn- preservation ulations mote downtown retail develop mission or to have a member of p on reg ulations and zoningrules7 . ment.The base zoning provi- the the zoning board also serve on sions,which relate to use and Zoning incompatible with the preservation commission. density,continue to be adminis- current use. The most typical Interaction between the staff of tered by the zoning authorities.A both groups is also important. A problems arise because the cur 4 '. ,zor4i ier A lk TiiTiiRTG xiizr.s a grit l 4 ' ' ' 5 rent and historical uses in an buildings, or to build incompati- hoods close to the downtown. area do not match the current ble additions to smaller historic The zoning enlarged the mini- zoning designation. Often a his- buildings.Residential areas mum lot size beyond the tradi- toric residential neighborhood zoned for densities much higher tional size (small urban lots) in may be zoned for retail, office,or than those represented by the order to redevelop the district in industrial uses.The pressure to existing buildings frequently suf- a manner similar to a large lot convert to one of these uses can fer from disinvestment,since suburban neighborhood. result in the demolition or snap- owners of the existing houses Redevelopment did not take propriate remodeling of historic may be reluctant to maintain place as planned, and years later residences.Additionally,but them without any assurance that the area became desirable as a often not considered, the demoli- a large apartment building will historic residential neighborhood. tion or inappropriate remodeling not be built on a neighboring Property owners, however,were of the buildings to more prof- property. prevented from building compati- itable uses could damage or ble in-fill houses on traditionally Allowable density may be the destroy important archeological critical factor in archeological site sized vacant lots by the 1950s remains that may exist on the zoning,which required large lots. protection. Higher density means property greater square footage of floor The inability to develop the (either horizontally,acevacant lots hampered the revital- Density.A related conflict space verti- ization of the neighborhood. between zoning and preservation cally, or both) or a greater num- is density.In many cases, the ber of housing units permitted The converse situation can current and traditional uses in a per acre. If in certain zoning cat- also work against preservation. historic district may conform egories, the zoning ordinance In historic areas where houses with the uses permitted under allows a density that essentially were traditionally built on large the zoning regulations, but the fills up the entire property, there lots,current zoning or subdivi- density of the property's actual will be no opportunity for pro- sion regulations may allow new use may be lower than the zon- tecting an archeological site in dwellings to be wedged between ing allows.This is frequently the place.The site protection goal historic houses on newly subdi- case in older commercial districts conflicts with the allowable den- vided lots much smaller than where historic commercial build- sity. On the other hand,the those of the surrounding houses. ings are an average of two or lower the permitted density in a Off-street parking. Finally, three stories in height but the particular zoning category,the zoning allows much taller build- greater the opportunity to find preservation regulations and zon ways toprotect archeological ing often appear to be working at ings.This also happens when y cross-purposes in regard to off- farm acreage is zoned, for exam- sites in place. street parking requirements. ple, at a density of three houses Lot sizes. Minimum lot sizes Typically,modern zoning requires per acre.The greater economic can also be a source of problems. a greater number of off-street return generated by larger com For example, the 1950s zoning in spaces than can be easily accom- mercial buildings or more intense one Virginia town encouraged modated on a small historic lot. residential development creates redevelopment of older,so-called As a result,the property owner pressure to demolish the existing 'obsolete," residential neighbor- rehabilitating a historic building 6 CULTURAL RESOURCES,PtRTNERSM N S or constructing a compatible should be analyzed to determine drive-through facilities,ser- infill building in a historic dis- the requirements for each zoning vice facilities, or large park- trict often faces the dilemma of district and whether or not they ing lots, that conflict with either demolishing an adjacent support or conflict with the pres- the traditional street-front historic building to provide ervation and revitalization of the and pedestrian orientation enough space for the required historic properties or areas. of historic commercial parking or abandoning the pro- buildings? ject altogether. Neither of these The following questions provide a starting point for an analysis of MI Does the zoning require so results is a favorable preservation many off-street parking this sort: outcome. spaces that it hampers the ■Are historic residential Each of the problems dis neighborhoods with . rehabilitation of historic cussed above can be resolved by single-family houses zoned buildings or the construc changing the existing zoning. tion of new in fill buildings? for single-family residential However, prior to considering or other compatible uses? If an analysis of zoning designa- solutions to individual problems, M Do lot sizes and the build- tions in historic districts reveals it is advisable to take a compre situations of the kind mentioned hensive look at zoning and ing setback requirements preservation conflicts throughout from the front lot line above, the next step is to exam match historic patterns? ine the zoning ordinance to a community. determine what, if any,existing I Do separate zoning districts with widelydiver gent n? la zoning classifications might be What steps should a g more appropriate, or if it is nec community take to study tions (one for high-density the effect of zoning commercial use, one for sin- es.sary to amend the zoning in residential use, other ways. on the protection of �e-famil y historic properties for example) divide a single in the area? historic neighborhood? What kinds of amendments should be A logical place to begin studying Does the zoning for areas considered to make immediately surrounding a the relationship between zoning the zoning in and preservation in a community historic district provide an historic districts is to compile a single map show- adequate buffer against more responsive to ing both the boundaries of development that would preservation historic districts (or potential his- have a negative impact on concerns? toric districts) and individual the historic area? Amendments might involve shift- landmarks and the boundaries of ® Do commercial zones allow ing the boundaries between adja- the various zoning districts that much taller and larger cent zones or substituting one affect the same area.This type of buildings than currently classification for another,such as map clearly illustrates what zon exist in the historic district? changing from an inappropriate ing designations apply in areas of I Do commercial zones per- low-density residential designa- historic interest.At this point the mit automobile-oriented lion to a more appropriate text of the zoning ordinance commercial uses,such as medium-density residential one. ' ' . tc ZCIViP,C.AND l&T-tIRI `PRS # `R ...�r� '° 1� ?p_ 7 The existing zoning ordinance, which aims to maintain the zone. For example, in Denver, however,may not include classifi- International District core as an offices or art galleries are permit- cations that are entirely appropri- Asian cultural,retail,and resi- ted by special exception in resi- ate for historic districts.In such dential center by encouraging dential zones if they are housed cases, a particular requirement such uses as small scale food pro- in historic buildings.This mea- may have to be changed.If, for cessing and craft work with an sure has made the large mansions instance,the required minimum Asian emphasis. in the city's Capitol Hill district lot size in a particular single-fami- more economically competitive ly residential zone is too large What is downzoning? with new residential buildings. and discourages in-fill construe- Similarly,the District of Colum- Iftion and rehabilitation, changing the current zoning permits bia created a special exception to this regulation to allow smaller development at densities far allow nonprofit organizations to lot sizes may be required. Or,if higher than existing buildings, use residential landmark build- parking requirements are such rezoning might involve what is ings for certain nonresidential that it is difficult to rehabilitate known as downzoning, or reducing use under specified circumstances buildings in historic areas, then the permitted height and bulk of (the building must contain a the number of required parking buildings. Downzoning can be gross floor area of 10,000 square spaces should be reduced. controversial since affected prop feet or greater,for example). erty owners may perceive it as Some cities, such as Richmond, Another option would be to diminishing the value of their draft an entirely new zoning clas- Virginia,provide for the waiver property.If this issue can be of certain zoning requirements, sification with requirements tai- resolved, downzoning may be the bred to the specific needs of a such as height and area regula- single most effective protection tions and off-street parking and historic district. Zoning classifi- measure that can be achieved loading requirements for build- cations that apply only to panic- through zoning in historic com- ings in historic districts, when it ular areas of a community are mercial areas,particularly in can be demonstrated that the known as special purpose districts downtown business districts, or special use districts. Cities have waiver is necessary in order to because it substantially removes achieve the purposes outlined in enacted these not only for his- the pressure for high density toric districts but also for other the.city's preservation ordinance. development from the district. areas of the city with speciall7ed Transfer of development rights uses or needs such as ethnic What other measures are or TDR is another zoning tech- neighborhoods or areas with large available to make zoning nique that has been used to pro- institutions (hospitals, universi- compatible with mote preservation in a few cities ties, etc.).Seattle has two dis- historic preservation? and counties. Basically,the TDR tricts of this kind: the Pioneer technique separates the rights to Square Preservation District, A number of cities have amended develop a parcel of land from which was established to protect their zoning ordinances to in other rights associated with the the historical and architectural clude special exceptions that parcel.The development rights character of that commercial his- allow historic properties to be of agricultural land, low density toric district; and the Inter- used in ways not permitted as a historic buildings, or the air national Special Review District, matter of right in a particular space above a historic building, 8 Cut.T>Rm.RhsouncEs PARTNERsm °Nam: _ a� `., for example,are transferred to only if certain conditions are met, Despite the potential benefits sold for use in another location such as the dedication of land for of this technique, there are some where higher density develop- a community park,the provision drawbacks. The success of such ment is permitted or encouraged. of a playground, or street an approach depends upon local Subsequent development on the improvements to accommodate government staff and/or commis- land from which these rights traffic associated with the new sioners being knowledgeable have been transferred can be lim- development. Sometimes called about historic preservation and ited to very low density or pre- proffers, these conditions are nego- archeological protection issues, cluded altogether, depending tiated and agreed upon by local being able to participate in the upon the community's regula- government staff and the proper- rezoning review process,under- tions.The cost and expertise ty owner.Once approved by the standing the business objectives required to administer a full-scale local governing body,these condi- of development, and having skills TDR program have presented tions become legally binding as in effective negotiation. Where difficulties,especially for smaller part of the property's zoning. knowledgeable and skilled staff communities which lack full-time This technique has been suc are lacking, historic resource planning staff. cessfully used in Fairfax County, preservation may never receive Virginia,where archeological consideration unless citizens Bonus or incentive zoning has graise the issue during public also been used to encourage sites have been surveyed, exca- vated, set aside in openspace, hearings. historic preservation in commu- P nities around the country.The and donated to the county park bonus refers to the additional system,and historic buildings Some practical density (beyond what would oth- have been incorporated into suggestions erwise be permitted) granted to development project designs as residences and communityPreservationists should demon- developers in exchange for pro- cen- viding specified public amenities, ters. This technique is also used strate a sincere, constructive,and such as open space or affordable effectively in Massachusetts.For continuing interest in local zon- in Sharon,Massachu- meetings issues by attending scheduled housing.Philadelphia's plan forexample, meetings and public hearings of Center City proposed that densi- setts proffers helped protect the Stoughtonham Furnace Site,list the zoning commission or board ty bonuses be granted for the g of zoning adjustment (whether preservation of locally designated ed on the National Register of Historic Places for its historicallyor not a "preservation case" is on historic structures and that the the agenda). It is not necessary city's zoning code be revised to significant remains of an iron foundrywhere cannons were (and sometimes counterproduc- include standards to define the tive) to give formal testimony on requirements. made during the Revolutionary War.The developer of a large res- every topic. However,thoughtful Conditional zoning is another idential development donated queries by the public at a hearing technique that can benefit the the site to the town for conserva- will often raise questions that preservation of historic resources tion land and donated a preser- board members themselves and archeological sites.The local vation restriction (or easement) would not have considered,and government may grant a to the Massachusetts Historical ideas from the public can help landowner's request for rezoning Commission. the board develop the conditions c ZON1 iG-As" D HTSiome,P,R.ES A Q Tom ' 9 and requirements to be included in its decisions.Preservationists can also frame their questions and observations to make clear connections between historic preservation and zoning issues— connections board members might not otherwise see. Secondly, having demonstrat- ed their commitment, credibility, and interest in local zoning, preservationists should take the next step and offer historic preservation training or presenta- tions for local zoning (and other land use) boards.The training has to be attractive, appealing, and user-friendly and should be promoted as a way to enhance the board members' ability to do their work more effectively and efficiently, not as a"favor" or as lobbying from a special-interest group.Arranging for co-sponsor- ship of the sessions by the state or regional planning agency,the State Historic Preservation Office, local non-profit or service clubs,and business organizations demonstrates that preservation concerns are varied and widely shared public policy issues and not special-interest concerns. ®® Photography credits.Page one top to bottom: photos 1,2.5("Mama Axtmonn Smith Design/ Communication.Alexandria.Va..1998:photo 3, Paul Ciblin;photo 4,National Park Service:photo 6.Fti7abeth Anderson. CAA. E RESt)>`IJRc PARTN RSI Nciri s Sources of Information Kelly,Eric Damian. "Zoning." Chapter 9 in The Practice of For those interested in learning Local Government Planning. more about zoning and pursuing Edited by Frank S. So and the connections between zoning Judith Getzels. 2nd Edition. and historic preservation the fol- Washington, D.C.:Inter- lowing publications may be use- national City Management ful. Publications of the American Association, 1988. Planning Association are available from APA's Planners Book Morris, Marya. Innovative Tools for Service, 122 S.Michigan Avenue, Historic Preservation. (Planning Suite 1600, Chicago,Illinois Advisory Service Report 60603;or check out a wider selec- Number 438) Chicago:Amer- tion of planning,zoning,and scan Planning Association, related publications on APA's Web 1992. site at <wwwplanning.org>. Smith,Herbert H. The Citizen's American Planning Association. Guide to Zoning. Chicago: Preparing a Conventional Zoning American Planning Associa- Ordinance. (Planning Advisory tion, 1983. Service Report Number 460) Chicago:American Planning Stokes, Samuel N., A. Elizabeth Association, 1995. Watson, and Shelley S. Mastran. Saving America's American Planning Association. Countryside:A Guide to Rural Zoning Bonuses in Central Cities. Conservation. 2nd Edition. (Planning Advisory Service Baltimore,Maryland:Johns Report Number 410) Chicago: Hopkins University Press, American Planning Associa- 1997. Lion, 1988. Yaro, Robert D., Randall G. Duerkson, Christopher J. "Local Arendt,Harry L. Dodson,and Preservation Law." Chapter 2 Elizabeth A. Brabec. Dealing in A Handbook on Historic with Change in the Connecticut Preservation Law. Edited by River Valley:A Design Manual Christopher J. Duerkson. for Conservation and Washington, D.C.:The Con- Development. Cambridge, servation Foundation and the Massachusetts:Lincoln National Center for Preserva- Institute of Land Policy and tion Law, 1983. the Environmental Law Foundation, 1988. ✓ ye QNa cANI?I SC Pltt� r#T 11 • June 1998 Updated by Susan L. Henry Renaud This publication appeared earlier in the former Local Preservation series. Stephen A. Morris, former Certified Local Government Coordinator, wrote and edited the original publication, which was issued in August 1989. CIATURt� . �a s, ` irrr�r tt �c Na:ins . A - N - + D- Rv.y.$ .A try •;F',: _.. rye ' "'.! .y.. E . HERITACE PRESERVATION SERVICES,NATIONAL PARK SERVICE Series editor:Susan L.Henry Renaud,Coordinator,Historic Preservation Planning Program U.S.Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street,NW,Room NC330,Washington,DC 20240 HPS U.S.Department of the Interior "^l C- r r National Park Service Prawrratlon Survf,es `? Cultural Resources Legal Toolbox . NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICTS Julia H. Miller Increasingly, local jurisdictions are turning to conservation districts in an effort to address neighborhood development concerns-whether mansionization,the proliferation of vacant parcels and parking lots, disinvestment, or commercial encroachment. Through the use of a preservation-based design review process and/or special development concerns, conservation districts offer an alternative mechanism;for protecting older, residential neighborhoods that may not qualify for historic district status.Conservation district programs have beenestablished to stabilize existing neighborhoods, as in Nashville, to increase or preserve the supply of affordable housing, as in Phoenix, and to , revitalize close-in neighborhoods, as in Davis, California. ., What is a Neighborhood Conservation District? Neighborhood conservation districts are areas located in residential neighbor- LTRI('�. hoods with a distinct physical character that have preservation or conservation HISTORIC%_.. as the primary goal.Although these neighborhoods tend not to merit designa- DISI tion as a historic district, they warrant special land use attention due to their distinctive character and importance as viable, contributing areas to the corn- munity at large. s As with historic preservation,there is no one size fits all"conservation district program. Each conservation district must be tailored to respond to the con- cerns of the neighborhood seeking protection. Some conservation district pro- grams focus on design review issues, some focus on planning/zoning/devel- opment issues, and some focus on both.The difference in focus can be attrib- uted to the goals of the conservation district program overall and the concerns of the community seeking conservation district status. Some conservation dis- Community pride may help a trict programs are housed in historic preservation offices while others are district thrive, but lacks the administered through the planning department. necessary authority of law. NAPC file photo Conservation districts based on a preservation model focus on protecting the character of older neighborhoods that cannot meet the standards for historic designation or would otherwise remain unprotected due to tack of political sup- port. See, e.g. Napa, California. Conservation districts based on a planning model are typically broader in scope. They may address development issues such as height and scale, design issues to some extent, and either promote or discourage certain kinds of uses such as parking lots.The underlying objec- -tive may be,for example,to retain affordable single-family housing or prevent encroachment by neighboring commercial centers, per se. See, e.g. Boise, Idaho. They may also be adopted in residential areas, commercial areas, mixed use areas,and so forth_ 24 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Legal Toolbox In recent years, there appears to be a blending of the two types of conservation districts, especially in residential communities.For example,the newly-enacted M Streets Conservation District in Dallas includes both development and architec- tural standards. Indeed, it is interesting to note that conservation districts are being used increasingly as a measure to address mansionization. (See, e.g. Dallas, Boulder,and Atlanta, to name a few.) How are Neighborhood Conservation Districts Established? The primary mechanism for establishing conservation districts is the "neighbor- hood conservation district ordinance." As with historic preservation ordinances, authority to enact conservation district laws comes from power delegated to local communities through state enabling law or home rule authority. In some cases, the authority to establish conservation district programs is derived from historic preservation enabling laws. In other situations, authority may come from an express delegation of authority to enact conservation districts, home rule authori- ty or implied through a broad grant of zoning authority. Depending upon the particular circumstances within a community, a conservation district may be established as an overlay or a stand-alone zoning district.An over- lay places restrictions and/or conditions on development in a specific geographic area in addition to those already in place by the underlying zoning classification. Stand-alone zoning districts combine the underlying zoning restrictions with the specific goals of an overlay into a single district. Both types of districts can address elements such as height, bulk, design, historic preservation, traffic and transportation needs, tree protection, and other factors necessary to address the concerns and desires of a particular neighborhood. Authority to adopt neighborhood conservation districts is generally accomplished through the adoption of a local enabling ordinance. Individual conservation dis- tricts are subsequently established in accordance with the procedures and stan- dards contained in the enabling ordinance. In communities that operate a conser- vation district program in conjunction with a historic preservation program, there may or may not be a distinction between the two in terms of criteria for designa- tion. In Nashville,for example, the criteria for designation are the same. It is the standards of review that vary. In Cambridge, Mass., on the other hand, a conser- vation district is an area that has distinctive character but cannot qualify for des- ignation as a historic district. It contains structures that together"constitute a dis- tinctive neighborhood or have a distinctive character in terms of exterior features." While new construction, demolition, and alterations to exterior architectural fea- tures require approval in Cambridge,only actions governing demolitions,the con- struction of new buildings and additions, and the construction of parking lots as a principle use are binding. In Nashville, changes are reviewed by the historic preservation commission. In Cambridge, changes are reviewed by a neighbor- hood conservation district commission,whose members include three residents of the neighborhood, not less than two of whom must be homeowners; one neigh- borhood property owner (who may or may not be a neighborhood homeowner); and one member or alternate of the Cambridge Historical Commission. T A R Nor/Dec 2003 25 Legal Toolbox An increasing number of conservation district programs are housed in planning departments and are administered by neighborhood conservation district com- missions based on a neighborhood-specific plans for residential areas. The plan usually, but not always, includes architectural review standards, which are often preservation-based. Similarly,there is also a high emphasis on neighborhood-ini- tiated designations and development controls. Thus, in contrast to historic dis- tricting, conservation districting is increasingly accomplished by neighborhood consensus and the standards of review are neighborhood-based. See,e.g. Dallas and Boulder. In some cases, review may be mandatory but compliance is option- al. See Atlanta. Gauging A Program's Success Many neighborhood conservation district programs are just taking root and thus their effectiveness as a neighborhood preservation tool cannot yet be gauged. The initial reports, however, look promising. What most experts agree on at this point is that good neighborhood programs don't just happen. They require ample research on the problems and solutions faced by a neighborhood, effective com- munication and consensus, and the development of controls, whether preservation or planning-based, that respond to the needs of the neighborhood seeking protected. Compromised solu- tions may or may not work. For example, Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) restrictions may be effective in restricting the size of houses but may not necessarily produce compatible development. Some level of design review may also necessary. Correspondingly, some restrictions may become so complex or cumbersome to administer that affordable housing goals in older neighborhoods become thwart- ed rather than encouraged. Other nagging questions include whether neighbor- hood commissions make good decision-makers?Can they meet the due process requirement of providing a fair and reasoned decision? Is historical architecture being compromised by inadequate protection? Is flexibility an asset? As with any regulatory tool a conservation district program can be effective if the right questions are asked and the answers respond to the specific concerns of the community seeking protection.Whether a conservation district program is right for a particular community, however, must be determined by that community alone. (Julia Miller, along with Rebecca Lubens,a summer legal intern at the National Trust,have written a more extensive article on conservation districts entitled "Protecting Older Neighborhoods Through Conservation District Programs.' This article will appear in the next issue of the PRESERVATION LAW REPORTER.] 26 NEWS front the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Legal Toolbox NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICTS BIBLIOGRAPHY Ordinances and Regulations Metropolitan Planning Council.(2001,May 10). Zoning ordinance for Knoxville, Tennessee: Artide 4:Specific districts regulations: Section 22: NC-1 neigh- Bill Status:HB 509. Georgia. From Pratt Cassiy,University of Georgia borhood conservation overlay district. Knoxville,TE Author. Retrieved Report of the failed bit to modify the warring of the historic district ord October 1,2003 from httpJ/wow.knoxmpc.orglzoning/dtyzonela4s22.htm nonce In order to make ft compatible with conservation districts. Shows Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District ordinance for Knoxville, original bill and proposed changes. Tennessee. Boulder County Government(2002,June 6). 4-118 Neighborhood conserva- The Parish of Jefferson. (n.d.). A guide for the old metairie neighborhood can- ton overlay district(6/4/02). Boulder County,CO: Author. Retrieved October serration district. Retrieved October 20,2003 from 7,2003 from httpJAvww.en.boulder.co.usAullucode/amendmentsldc0201ad- httpllwow.jeffparish.netfindex.dm?DoclD=1214 Proved•Pm A grade describing the purpose of the Old Metairie Neighborhood Boulder County's ordinance enabing neighborhood conservation overlay Conservation District,what activities are reviewed by the Old Metairie di'stricts Commission,and the process for having a proposal reviewed Cambridge Historical Commission. (1983). Neighborhood conservation cis- Volume I: A Model Program. (1992,December). The Philadelphia- trids in Cambridge. [Flier). Cambridge,MA: Author.or. Neighborhood Conservation District. Philadelphia,PA:The Preservation A good overview of the history and methodology of Neighborhood Coalition of Greater Philadelphia and John Milner Associates. Conservation Districts in Cambridge,MA including an excerpt of the oral Detailed account of Philadelphia's preparation to pass an ordnance to nance allowing conservation districts and landmark designations. atowfacilitate Neighborhood Conservation Districts. Chicago Department of Planning and Development (1996,October). "HOW-TO" Lakeview special districts tour for the national trust for historic preservation. Chicago,IL,Author. Boulder County Planning Commission. (2002,March 20). Agenda item#7. Brief overview of key points regarding conservation districts and a copy of Retrieved October 14,2003 from Chicago's Special District legislation. http://www.co.boulder.co.ustitr/pdf/recs/pc ma2002/dc0201 pc.pdf City of Boise Office of the City Clerk (n.d). Boise municipal code: DiANne of purpose of amendment to allow for Neighborhood Conservation Chapter 11-19:Neighborhood conservation districts. Boise,ID: Author. may Districts,the key advantages of such a district,a basic outline of Retrieved October 7,2003 from http/iWv.cifyolhoiss.oryclty_ how such a district would come to being and would operate,and support for clork/codes 1119.pd/ the amendment Boise's neighborhood conservation district ordnance. City of Dallas Department of Planning and Development. (2002,July 1). City City of Boise Office of the City Clerk (n.d.).Boise municipal code:Chapter 11- of Dallas department of planning and development conservation district general 20: Near north end conservation district. Boise,ID:Author. Retrieved October overview. Dallas,TX: Author. Retrieved October 17,2003 from 20,2003 from httplhvww.ciyotboise.orgidty_derk/codes/1120.pd/ httPJhvww.dagasdtyhall.coMdatl�as/engrpdf/planrtirxyConservationTotalPadcet Ordnance for the Near North End Conservation District in Boise. Pdi A packet of information for those wishing to seek neighborhood conservation City of Manhattan Beach Community Development Office.(n.d.). Chapter district status for their neighborhood Includes frequently asked questions, 10.40: NC Neighborhood conservation overlay district City of Manhattan comparison with historical district,applicable ordnance,and an application. Beach,CA: Author. Retrieved October 14,2003 from http://wvnv.d.manhattan- beach.ca.us/commdevIzoning110-40.htm City of Raleigh Planning Department. (n.d.). Neighborhoodplanning. Raleigh, Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District ordinance for City of Manhattan : Author Retrieved October 20,2003 from trttpJiwww.raleigh nc orglplan Beadr,California. ning/CP/Neighborhoods2.htm Overview of neighborhood planning and neighborhood conservation overlay City of San Antonio Development Services Department.(n.d.). 35-335 neigh- risticts borhood conservation district(NCD). San Antonio,TX: Author. Retrieved Creating a neighborhood conservation overlay dsrld the step-by-step October 7,2003 from httpJArnmsanardonio.govidsd/pdf/Udc ar ide3drvi sion4.pedf process. (200Z AugusffSeptember). Boulder County News,3. Retrieved San Antonio's ordnance enabling Neighborhood Conservation Districts. October 20,2003 from httpJAvww.co.boulder.co.usibocc/bcnews/2002/augseptpdf City of San Antonio Planning Department(2003,April 15). Ma Vista neighbor- A list of steps required In proposing and approving a neighborhood conser hood conservation district Proposed design standards. San Antonio,TX: ration district in Balder County. Author. Retrieved October 7,2003 from httpJ/www.d.sattx us/planr>;rng/ordi Indianapolis Historic Preservation Commission. (n.d.). Conservation District nanoes.asp?res=80heprotrio Conservation Plan Workbook Indianapolis,IN: Preservation Development. A breakdown of the proposed design standards for both residential and non- Inc residential properties within the Alfa Ma Neighborhood Conservation DistrictA step-by-step working leading citizens through the process of designating their neighborhood as a neighborhood conservation district from initial pro Indianapolis Historic Preservation Commission. (1998,July 13). Ransom posal through creating their own design guidelines. place conservation district: Historic area preservation plan. Indianapolis,IN: Author. Public Relations Complete plan for the Ransom Place Conservation District inducting sighrfi Boulder County Planning Commission_ (2002,March 20). Agenda item#7. cane,existing conditions,objectives,recommendations,design standards and guideines, and building inventory Retrieved October 14,2003 from httpJtwww.co.boulder.co.us/u/pdf/recs/pc mar2002/dc0201pc.pdf Indiana State Legislature. (n.d.). IC 36-7-11.1 Chapter 11.1.historic preserve- Outline of purpose of amendment to allow for Neighborhood Conservation lion in Marion County. Indianapolis,IN: Author. Retrieved October 14,2003 overlay Districts,the key advantages of such a district,a basic ourline of from http://wervin.govilegislativetickodertitie36/ar7/ch11.1.html how such a district would come to being and would operate,and support for Ordinance enabling neighborhood conservation districts in Indiana. the amendment Cambridge Historical Commission. (2002,October). Neighborhood con- servation districts.(Brochure), Cambridge,MA:Author. An overview of what a conservation district Is and how it works,aimed at homeowners in the district. TA R Noel Dec 2003 27 • Lsgal Toolbox • Cambridge Historical Commission_ (1983). Neighborhood conservation dis- Goodman,J.&KeNy,D.M.(1993,Spring). Philadelphia neighborhood censer- tricts in Cambridge. [Flier]. Cambridge,MA: Author. vation district program. The Alliance Review News from the National Alliance A good overview of the history and methodology of Neighborhood of Preservation Commissions,3-50-3-51. Conservation Districts in Cambridge,MA inducing an excerpt of the ordi A summary of the purpose and functionality of the Philadelphia nance allowing conservation dtsbicts and landmark designations. Neighborhood Conservation District Program. Chanen,Jill Schachner.(n.d.). Preserving Wrigley Fields neighborhood: Kely.'D.M.&Goodman,J.B. (1993,September/October). Conservation dis- Zoning rules keep low-rise character ot a historic area. tricts as an alternative to historic districts:Viable planning tools for maintaining Newspaper article about success of neighborhood conservation district in the character of older neighborhoods. The Journal of the National Trust for preserving character of area around Wrigley Fields. Historic Preservation.Forum 7(5),6-14. Chicago Department of Planningand DevelopmentExplores the use of conservation programs as alternatives to traditional (1996.October). preservation planning tools for meeting needs of older Lakeview special districts tour for the national trust for historic preservation. varying degrees of significance. Describes how the ighborhood bofioods with Chicago,IL Author. lionwaschallenges in Philadelphiaconserve Brief overview of key points regarcing conservation districts and a copy of program developed to meet Chicago's Special District legislation. Kelly.D.M.&Goodman.J.B.(1991.June). Philadelphia neighborhood con- servationCity of San Antonio Planning Department. (n.d.). Conservation districts.San district research report. Philadelphia.PA: The Preservation Alliance Antonio,TX: Author. Retrieved October 7.2003 from for Greater Philadelphia. httpJAwww.sanarrtonio.gov/planrrng/neighlwrhoods/highland%20plaNAppendix Research and analysis of present conservation district legislation and con- %20H.Consenration%20Distrids.pdf nervation districts across the country to analyze how they work and how A summary of the purpose of conservation districts in San Antonio,Texas. successful they are a Prey to� 0 a conservation dstrid model for Philadelphia. City of San Antonio Planning Department. (n.d.). Conservation districts.San Moms,M.(n.d.). Chapter 2:Conservation districts. In Morris.M., Innovative Antonio,TX: Author. Retrieved October 7,2003 from httpJ/wow.sanantonuo.goo/planning/neighbortoods/north%20central/Appendix tools for historic preservation(pp.13 24). Washington,DC: National Trust for %20H.pdf • Historic Preservation and American Planning Association. An information pamphlet for citizens of San Antonio about Neighborhood A good summary of the history of conservation districts,the variety of Conservation Districts. conservation&Wills across the country in purpose and design,and how Talking Points.(March 5,1999). conservation cisbids can be designed and utilized dependent upon context- (New) Georgia. From Pratt Cassity,University ualism. of Georgia. Morris,Ma rya_(1993, Talking points from presentation of why amendment should be passed allow Spring). What is a conservation district? The Alliance conservation aistrids Review: News from the National Alliance ofPreservation Commissions.3-51- 3-52. Overlay Districts Approved. (2002,August/September). Boulder County An excerpt from Morris's'Chapter 2'listed above,describing conservation News,1-3. Retrieved October 20,2003 from districts. http:Awnv.co.boulder.co.us/bocc/bcnews/2002/augsept.pdf Neighborhood Conservation Districts. (2000,November 4 National A public relations article stressing that the Neighborhood Conservation Preservation LosCA) Overlay Districts recently established were due to citizen concerns and Angeles, desires and that the new districts should allow for more local citizen control A list of presenters and bibliography of applicable literature regarding with less conflict regarding new development conservation diistnds Volume I: A Model Program. (1992,December). The Philadelphia Stipe,R.E. (1993,July). Conservation Areas:A New Approach to An Old Neighborhood Conservation District. Philadelphia,PA:The Preservation Problem In Local Preservation Issues Paper Conservation Districts. Coalition of Greater Philadelphia and John Milner Associates. Washington,DC: National Park Service. Detailed account of Philadelphia's preparation to pass an orrinance to Defines conservation districtsas having value because they are very rifler- Detailed lacilitete Neighborhood Conservation Districts. I ant from historical citizens s and do not add any regulatory,but weigh the opinions of local citizens highly and allow for planning and design. What an NCOD Does and Doesn't Do. (2002,August/September). Boulder Volume Program. (1992,Decerthlxr I: A Model County News,3. Retrieved October 20,2003 from ). The Philadelphia httpJ/wowco.boulder.co.uslbocr/bcnews/2o02/augsept.pdf Neighborhood Conservation District. Philadelphia PA The Preservation Coalition A list of key purposes of neighborhood conservation overlay district and list of Greater Philadelphia and John preparation Associates. of key things a neighborhood conservation overlay district does not do. Detailed account of Phn7adelphnia's Conservation to pass an ordnance to allow/facilitate Neighborhood Cervati Districts. Articles and Other Resources Zellie,C. (1993,July). A consideration of conservation districts and preserve- Blake,J.L (n.d.). Neighborhood conservation for low-income areas. All lion planning:Notes from Si.Paul,Minnesota. In Local Preservation Issues About Preservation,86-92. Paper. Conservation Districts,9-15. Discusses the importance of preserving low-income neighborhoods for rasa A summary of St Paul Minnesota's review of 20 conservation districts dents despite the myriad challenges. Lists orgarazations that lead fund pro across the United States and possible uses for neighborhood conservation jests across the United States to preserve neighborhoods. Also reviews districts in St Paul. types of legislation available to preserve neighborhoods. Zimmerman,S.(ed.).(2000,November 2). The Marsh Neighborhood Dennison,M.S. (1992,November). Conservation districts: Latest zoning tool to preserve neighborhood character. Zoning News,1.4. Conservationeighborh Disue Final Study Reportd Cambridge,MA: The Marsh An overviewof conservation dis rict designation,uses around the country Neighborhood finalgOd Conservationeportthe DistrictroStudy Marsh leg. and strengths as a zoning toot The study report for proposed Neighborhood Conservation District. Gledhill,E.L (2001). An Investigation of Historic Conservation Districts as A Viable Option for Saint Paul,Minnesota. Unpublished master's thesis,Goucher College.Baltimore,MD. Compiled by Nicole Bell,Intern,Massachusetts Historical Commission, • A research article on the various uses of neighborhood conservation districts November 2003 across the country and a working definition of historical neighborhood con- servation districts. 28 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS The Economics of Historic Preservation A presentation made by Donald R.Rypkema at the 1996 Georgia Historic Preservation Conference,Atlanta, February 16, 1996. Mr. Rypkema,a principal of Real Estate Services Group,is a nationally recognized expert on the economic benefits of historic preservation. His firm specializes in real estate and economic development with an emphasis on historic properties. He lives in Washington, D.C. • n the first paragraph of The Economics of Historic Preservation, I quote Greg Paxton, president of the Georgia Trust for Historic Preservation. Greg wrote, "The economic benefits of historic preservation are enormous. The knowledge of the economic benefits of preservation is minuscule." I began the book with that citation because I thought Greg was right on both counts. He is still right on the first point—the economic benefits are enormous. But across the country the understanding of these benefits is growing daily. In the last 18 months, economic analyses of historic preservation have been either completed or are underway in Malaria, New York, Phoenix, Kentucky, Virginia, South Carolina, Maryland, and elsewhere. Why, when in the past there • • was such a paucity of research, is so much emerging now? I think there are three reasons. First, the preservation movement continues to broaden, and is no longer dominated by those who consider the discussion of historic preservation and money in the same breath as crass and inappropriate. Second, we are currently in a political environment at all levels of government wherein public policy of all types has to be defended in the vocabulary of economics. But third and most importantly, as we learn from the ongoing research, we are consistently discovering that we don't need to be nervous about the outcome. Study after study shows that far from being a luxury which can be dispensed with in difficult fiscal times,far from being a hamper on economic growth, far from being cute buildings and house museums, historic preservation has an enormous positive impact on local economies and can be at the core of a long range economic development strategy. Stop a moment and consider why state and local governments have economic development programs at all: to increase the tax base, to increase loan demand and deposits in local financial institutions, to enhance property values, to generate additional sales of goods and • services, and—most importantly—to create jobs. What does historic preservation do for a local economy? Increases the tax base, increases loan demand. enhances property values, generates sales of goods and services, and—most importantly—creates jobs. 1 Jobs Creation • In Georgia, $1,000,000 spent rehabilitating an older building creates 39 jobs-20 in the construction industry and 19 elsewhere in the economy. That is, by the way, 2.2 more jobs than the same amount spent in new construction. Because of this greater impact on the local economy, every time a decision is being made on a new school, a new city hall, a new courthouse, historic preservation needs to be considered among the alternatives.Local officials who don't consider the preservation option cannot claim to be doing all they can to support local economic development. But it isn't just in comparison to new construction that preservation is a favorable job creator. In Georgia a million dollars of historic preservation creates 12 more jobs than manufacturing a million dollars of electronic equipment, 13 more jobs per million than does textile production, and 29 more jobs than harvesting a million dollars of timber. Historic preservation means jobs for Georgia. Numbers of jobs, however, is but one way to measure local economic impact. Another is the output generated throughout the economy through the activity within a particular sector. Here again preservation stands up well. In Georgia, $1,000,000 spent rehabilitating an historic building ultimately adds nearly S2.3 million to the state's economy. This is a larger overall impact than $1,000,000 of hotel room rents, $1,000,000 of peanut production, or $1,000,000 of communications output. Historic preservation means benefitting the entire Georgia economy. Household Income The other most common way of measuring the economic importance of an individual sector of the economy is to determine how much household incomes increase as a result of production within the sector. Here again historic preservation is among the most potent. $1,000,000 spent rehabilitating an historic building adds $819,000 to household incomes of Georgia residents. This is not only $112,000 more than the same amount of new construction but also $182,000 more than $1,000,000 worth of furniture manufacturing, $108,000 more than $1,000,000 in wholesale trade and $156,000 more than $1,000,000 of restaurant sales. Historic preservation adds to the household incomes of Georgians. Heritage Tourism A few years ago the Historic Preservation Division of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources completed an excellent study of the 2 impact of historic preservation on local economies in Georgia. One of the major industries benefiting from preservation was tourism—probably no.surprise to anyone in this room.Last fall, the Preservation Alliance of Virginia released a report on preservation's impact on Virginia's economy. Here's what we learned regarding tourism - preservation visitors stay longer, visit twice as many places, and spend two and a half times as much money as do non-preservation visitors. As in Virginia, historic preservation brings tourist dollars into Georgia's economy. Neighborhoods and Property Values Let's talk about neighborhoods for a moment. By far the largest percentage of historic'properties in America is made up of houses in historic neighborhoods. There is sometimes a concern that creating local historic districts to protect those neighborhoods will have an adverse effect on property values. The one type of evaluation of the economic effect of preservation that has been most frequently conducted is that one—what effect does historic districting have on property values. There is some variety in the outcomes—some studies show rates of appreciation in historic districts much greater than the market as a whole;some show historic districts are an important catalyst to new investment in the neighborhood; some that the existence of an historic district protects the neighborhood from wide volatile swings in the real estate market. But not one study I have read—and I think I've read almost every one that's been done—not one shows that historic districts reduce property values, not one! In the Virginia study we looked at the five historic districts in the small town of Staunton. In every case the rate of property appreciation—among both residential and commercial property—was greater than the city of Staunton overall. One of the criticisms that preservation sometimes receives is that historic districts may benefit property values in rich neighborhoods but are only a burden in moderate income neighborhoods.In Staunton, four of the five historic districts contained residential property.In two of them the average house value was greater than the citywide average value. In the other two, however, the average value was in fact below the typical price throughout the community. What this means is that even though two of the four historic neighborhoods contained housing termed '-affordable"and occupied by families of very modest means, still those property owners benefitted by increased values at a rate greater than people, rich or poor, living in non-historic neighborhoods. Historic pres- ervation benefits people of modest means. But let's look for a moment at the other side of the coin— neighborhoods where property values are falling. A couple of years ago, the National Association of Home Builders analyzed which factors played the biggest role in changing property values. And you know what had the greatest adverse effect on value? Empty and abandoned 3 buildings in a neighborhood. And where, in our towns and cities of every size, do those vacant and abandoned houses exist? In our older and historic neighborhoods. This is more than just local governments losing tax revenues. For the vast majority of us our home is our biggest financial asset. When we allow older neighborhoods to deteriorate we are literally stealing the savings of our citizens. And in too many communities city government is consciously allowing that felony to take place. Meaningful public intervention in close-in neighborhoods is dismissed by saying, "They're just a bunch of old houses that are about to fall down anyway," or we allow demolition for parking, or intrusions of commercial uses, or fail to enforce property maintenance ordinances, or concentrate public housing there, or cut back on municipal services, or let the schools fall apart, and guess what happens? Properties first go into tax delinquency,then suffer deferred maintenance,mortgage foreclosure, abandonment, vandalism, and finally demolition—by neglect, or arson, or misguided public policy. And, importantly, the loss isn't just to the property owner and the mortgage holder. The entire neighborhood suffers an economic loss. And then, in addition to this malign neglect of close-in older neighborhoods, the city at the same time is encouraging, usually subsidizing with scarce taxpayers' dollars, the continuing expansion at the edges. Any competent industrial developer today understands at the top priority is retaining the industries you already have, followed by encouraging the expansion of existing firms, and only then focusing on trying to attract new companies. Absolutely the same priorities ought to apply to neighborhoods—first maintain the ones we have, then encourage the reinvestment in and expansion of existing neighborhoods, only then spend scarce resources on building new subdivisions. Today everyone maims to be for fiscal responsibility, and I happen to share that philosophical position. But the Urban Land Institute—hardly the foe of development—has reported that the life time public costs of servicing dispersed development is between 30 and 300 percent more than meeting the needs of more compact development. Any public official who allows the continued deterioration of older neighborhoods while at the same time providing the public infrastructure for suburban sprawl simply cannot claim to be fiscally responsible. There is no more flagrant waste of local taxpayers dollars than this combination of neglected neighborhoods'and subsidized sprawl. Anyone who tells you differently is a liar or a fool. What mayor of a community of any size doesn't struggle with how to get middle-class taxpayers to move back to the city? But think for a • minute where there have been packets of back-to-the-city migration— St. Paul, Chicago, Louisville, Boston, New York, Des Moines,"Seattle, Oakland. It has not been back to the city in general—in fact many of those cities are still losing population overall. In every instance, it has 4 been back to historic neighborhoods within the city. City governments that allow their historic neighborhoods to disappear through demolition, neglect, commercial encroachment or abandonment preclude themselves from being beneficiaries of a future back-to-the-city movement. Downtown Revitalization But the bulk of my work isn't in residential neighborhoods. It is in downtowns and urban commercial districts. I have a hard time separating downtown revitalization and historic preservation.And here's the reason. I visit about a hundred downtowns a year. I have never been in one that had a successful record of economic revitalization where historic preservation wasn't a key element of the strategy. That doesn't mean such a place doesn't exist—successful downtown revitalization without historic preservation—but I haven't been there, I haven't heard of it, I haven't read of it. And of course leading that process is the National Trust's National Main Street Center and statewide programs like your very successful Georgia Main Street Program. I defy anyone to find an approach to economic development of any kind—downtown revitalization or other— that makes a more frugal use of public resources with a larger impact on the local economy. In an environment where some states are paying $150,000, $200,000, even $250,000 of public incentives per job to attract some new industry, the cost effective, fiscally responsible economic development approach of Main Street provides sharp contrast indeed. The cost/benefit of Main Street is without parallel. And, we are in a time when all kinds of public policies are subject to economic cost/benefit analysis. I for one think that's a perfectly appropriate measurement by which public issues be considered. As most of you know, the Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit—although only a shadow of what it was a decade ago—has been a major component of not only historic preservation, but downtown revitalization, neighborhood stabilization, affordable housing, and economic development throughout the country. But maybe it's time we looked at the cost/benefit of the tax credit. In Fiscal Year 1995 the Department of the Interior reports that there were 529 projects representing investment of $467,000,000. What is the cost of that program to the Federal Treasury? Well, with a 20 percent tax credit, the revenue loss to the treasury is a maximum of $93,400,000. But what is the economic benefit? Income taxes paid by construction workers of almost $51 million; income taxes from other workers of over $39 million; business income taxes of nearly $15 million; capital gains taxes of over S 19 million;totaling Federal economic benefits from this program of $124,250,000 last year--significantly more than the revenue cost. Additionally, this activity created 14,000 jobs, added S348 5 • • million to local household incomes, and will generate each year local property tax revenues of between $7 and S 11 million. Independent of the social, cultural, and aesthetic benefit historic preservation provides, the U.S. taxpayers are absolutely getting more than their money's worth with this program. And I thought that's what reinventing government was all about. But, I'm afraid that sometimes when we are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars and tens of thousands of jobs we miss the point. I want to tell you a short story on an entirely different scale. For the last three years I have been privileged to work with the National Trust on a demonstration program in three urban commercial districts. One of these pilot projects is an inner city Detroit neighborhood. There, with some • guidance by a great local development corporation, a little technical assistance, and a loan guarantee from the National Trust, Omar Hernandez bought an 1890 three- story commercial building that was once the Odd Fellows Hall. This was hardly a giant project—maybe Omar spent a total of $120,000 acquiring and rehabilitating the building. But for five months now Omar's Mexicantown Bakery has been open for business. Omar today has customers from all over the metropolitan Detroit area and.is making way more money in the bakery than his most optimistic projections indicated. That's economic development. He now employs nine people in addition to the three family members who work there. And that's economic development. Nearly every day Omar gets a call from someone asking if there's space in the building available for rent, and offering $8 to $12 per square foot. This in a neighborhood where, before Omar opened up, the highest rents were perhaps $4 or $5 a foot. And that is economic development. Omar and his family are hard workers - the bakery is open until 8 o'clock five nights a week and until 9 o'clock on Friday and Saturday — a seven day a week operation. But Omar doesn't complain about the long hours.He's a great small businessman and is very happy about the deposits he's making in the bank every day. But, you know what he's most thrilled about? Over Christmas, lots of young people came back to the neighborhood—as they do in every neighborhood—kids in their late teens and early twenties. And they all stopped in at Mexicantown Bakery. And they told Omar and Cecilia how proud they were of their neighborhood and of Hernandez for reinvesting there. That small investment told them someone cared about their neighborhood. And that too is economic development. But Omar's investment in Detroit is representative of another reality of today's economic development and that is the scale of the enterprises that are creating nearly all of the net new jobs in this country. Jobs are being created by firms employing less than 20 people—not IBM, AT&T, GM or the rest of the Fortune 500 alphabet. Every day, we hear of the tens of thousands being laid off by those firms. 6 The Workforce and the Workplace of the Future Now what does all of this have to do with historic preservation? I call it the myth of the 20,000 square foot floorplate. You know that office tower developer and his leasing agent with their leased Mercedes, rented Armanis and cubic zirconium pinkie rings? Weekly, they are at city hall saying, "We have to raze these old buildings because the tenant today needs a 20,000 square foot floor plate, older buildings can't accommodate them, if we're going to grow, it has to be with big buildings." Some would call that an out and out lie. I would rather think of it as factually challenged. Of the 20 fastest growing industries in the country, do you know the average firm size? 11 people. Now how much space do those people need. Well, it will vary a little but, 200 to 250 square feet per person would be typical - or around 2500 square feet. What is the size of the typical older building in your Main Street? 25 by 100 or 2500 square feet. And regardless of poor configuration,virtually all older office buildings can provide readily useable space ranging from 500 to 5000 square feet. We ought to be thinking about our historic commercial buildings—particularly in our downtowns of every size—as our industrial parks for growth industries. You know as preservationists we often celebrate high quality restorations of landmark buildings certified by the Secretary of Interior, and that pride is certainly warranted. But there is another aspect of preservation that too often we overlook. Older commercial buildings—even if they haven't been rehabilitated—serve a crucial role in meeting the challenges of today's economic development. A start up business has very few costs that it can control—utility costs, taxes, wholesale purchases, equipment, insurance premiums—these are all costs that are largely fixed. One of the few budget items over which decisions can be made is occupancy costs—rent. Older commercial properties provide the locational affordability critical for the survival of small and start-up businesses. These older structures serve as incubators in which new businesses can grow. The real estate fact of life is this—barring massive public subsidies, cheap space cannot be provided in new buildings. It can't be done.We need to maintain • a sizable inventory of older structures if for no other reason than that the source of economic growth in this country—small businesses —need a place they can afford. Well, I think there are probably a dozen more ways that historic preservation contributes to the economy. But I'm not really in the business of historic preservation. I'm in the business of economic development. So I want to conclude with some observations of what's going to be important in economic development in the coming years. By early in the next century, the workforce is going to be divided roughly in thirds. A third of us will be able to live absolutely anywhere we choose. This group will include consultants like me, but also the actuary for the insurance company, the stock broker, the software engineer, the import-export dealer, and hundreds of other job categories. These people 7 will be able to live anywhere there is a telephone and electricity. Another third of us will have to live someplace, but that someplace can be anyplace. The police officer, the clergyman, the dentist, the school teacher, the garbage collector. While these jobs will have to be attached to a location, since every location needs them, the choice of which location in which to work will be nearly limitless. Therefore, two-thirds of the entire workforce will be locationally independent—can choose virtually anyplace in which to live. No longer will most of us need to care where the port is, or the factory, or the mine. We will live not where our job mandates, but where we choose. And that choice will be made not on how cheap the utility rates, how close to major markets, or how near the Interstate. It will be based on that overused phrase, quality of life. We will each have a different set of variables that constitute our own quality of life criteria. I live in the middle of Washington, DC, although, in fact, I could live anywhere.And it is because Washington provides a very high quality of life for the things important to me. I understand that many of you wouldn't want to live there—your set of criteria are different than mine, and that is as it-should be. But underlying any sustainable quality of life has to be a sense of community, a sense of belonging, a sense of ownership, a sense of evolution. That's why few of us would choose for our permanent home Club Med or Disneyland, fine places to visit, of course, but no sense of ownership or evolution, belonging - in short no sense of community. Sustainable Growth and Quality of Life For those industrial development types still wearing their Nehru jackets and thinking the only route to economic growth is recruiting one more manufacturer. these quality of life, sense of community factors will be dismissed as imaginings of some aesthetic elite. They are very wrong. Companies who are attracted to communities because they were given a free lot in the industrial park, or to save 20 mills on their property taxes, or because they can hire workers at 50 cents an hour cheaper, will pick up and leave when the town down the road, or the country across the Caribbean cuts taxes another nickel or gives them both the land and the building, or has even cheaper workers. Sustainable economic growth will come from companies who choose your community because of the quality of life it provides. But quality of life is fragile -those things that make up a given community's quality of life need to be identified, enhanced, and protected. And that's where historic preservation comes in. Historic buildings are an important • element in most communities' quality of life criteria because it is those buildings that provide a sense of belonging, a sense of ownership,a sense of evolution—that sense of community that sustainable economic growth requires. t • • That is also why the biggest threat to tomorrow's sustainable economic growth is not high taxes, lack of capital, or shortage of entrepreneurial capacity. Rather, the biggest threat is the so called "property rights" movement. Think about it. If quality of life is the most significant variable for economic development, and if the physical environment is a major element in the quality of life criteria, then there is no greater threat to sustainable economic growth than the elimination of those community-based enactments whose sole purpose is the protection of that physical environment whether it is built or natural. In the name of real estate rights, these myopic fast buck artists are the ones dooming the economic future of our communities—not the preservationists, environmentalists, and our allies. Yet the property rights advocates are getting away with claiming the opposite. I'm all for property rights, but where is the discussion of property responsibilities? That's where we need to move the focus. Conclusion I want to conclude with two quotations from very disparate sources but both of which bring us back to this relationship between historic preservation and economy of our community. First, from Marketing Places, the most cutting edge book on economic development, the authors write, Current approaches...emphasize. . .ways to resurrect the older c arar_ter and history of places. Such thinking also r Mires vision blending old with new,and an appreciation that place character is a valuable asset in retaining firms and people as well as in attracting new investment and businesses . . . . Places lose much when they neglect or destroy their historical landmarks. City officials, erroneously thinking that the cost of maintaining these places exceeds their value,may bulldoze mansions and historical structures to make room for faceless new buildings. And then back nearly 150 years, John Ruskin was referring to buildings but I think what he said applies to our entire communities as well. He wrote; When we build let us think that we build forever. Let it not be for present delight,nor for present use alone; let it be such work as our descendants will thank us for, and let us think, as we lay stone on stone,that a time is to come when those stones will be held sacred because our hands have touched them,and that men will say as they look upon the labor and wrought substance of them, 'See!This our fathers did for us.' What you are doing for historic preservation in Georgia today, your descendants will thank you for. 9 Building Codes and Historic Rehabilitation Conference: Synopsis and Reflections By Caroline Alderson and Marilyn Kaplan,AIA As the representative of the U.S.General Services Administration(GSA)Public Buildings Service at the Building Codes and Historic Rehabilitation Conference(April 26-27, 2004)and as chair for the closing conference session, I was invited to offer a public-sector perspective with conference highlights as a segue to the concluding remarks of Marilyn E. Kaplan,AIA,about future directions in the application of codes to historic buildings. One thing the conference in San Francisco made clear: The line dividing public and private sectors grows thinner every day.Attorney Frank Baltz's session on GSA's lease redevelopment of Washington D.C.'s 1840s-era General Post Office by the Kimpton Hotel Group enumerated the benefits and complexities of America's continuing trend toward public-private partnerships, mirrored in other countries. In this case, a third-party expert in hotel occupancy was retained to serve as the Authority Having Jurisdiction,allowing the federal government to maintain its sovereign authority while ensuring safety in a new use not within the agency's expertise to oversee.Among the conference's principal connecting threads was another take on public-private partnerships, one that redefines the project team as a larger collaboration between code enforcers, preservationists, owners,and designers employed to translate program to plan. Smart-Code Alternatives Encourage Reuse, Rehabilitation, Reinvestment The introductory remarks of Natalie Bull,president of conference sponsor Preservation Technology International(APT), recounted the organization's history of leadership in promoting alternative compliance approaches for historic buildings,as founding APT members in Canadian and American national government preservation programs have joined private practitioners and institutional members to play an active part in this effort.The keynote address by Sharon C.Park, FAIA,reviewed code compliance issues and solutions,illustrating approaches that worked well in Tax Act projects overseen by the National Park Service.Common factors in these success stories were flexibility and the benefit of getting everyone to the table from the onset for collaborative dialogue. Kaplan's overview of historic building code alternatives provided the context for succeeding sessions with a history of regulation in response to disasters caused by unsafe conditions,the development of alternative codes and compliance approaches,and emerging issues. States and municipalities are exploring "smart code" alternatives to traditional building codes principally written for new construction,applying new requirements in proportion to project scopes to make reuse affordable.Codes official Margaret Mahoney described a program through which Portland, Ore., allows phased compliance and developer-municipality compliance agreements as another alternative to put safety improvements within the financial grasp of owners reliant on revenue that doesn't come in all at once.These common-sense approaches to managing risk within financial constraints have, to some extent,been de facto public-sector practice for years as GSA and other agencies prioritized costly safety interventions based on building-by- building risk analysis to ensure public safety in the nation's vast inventory of federal facilities. Architects Tom Winters and Alan Dreyfuss,AIA, of the California State Historical Building Safety Board offered case studies illustrating the goal of California's Historic Building Code to facilitate the preservation and continued use of historic buildings while providing reasonable safety,exemplified in the determination that a former brick kiln converting to institutional use could take the heat, so to speak, and that reasonable safety could be achieved by installing sprinklers in high-hazard areas such as kitchens.Encouraging trends include the growing prominence of modeling in conjunction with expanded research on the fire resistance of archaic materials for evaluating the efficacy of alternative compliance solutions under different fire scenarios. In the Oakland Rotunda case study, advances in modeling supported replicating original,noncompliant railings and maintaining open access from all floors to the building's grand atrium. David Hattis of Building Technology Inc.,an author of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Guideline on Fire Ratings of Archaic Materials and Assemblies and Maryland's Rehabilitation Code,discussed how the principle of proportionality—focusing compliance on delineated work areas—is improving the predictability of rehabilitation costs to encourage reinvestment in historic buildings. Other smart-code principles include triggering compliance requirements through change in the hazard ranking of the occupancy, not change of occupancy alone.For jurisdictions exploring rehabilitation code options,Hattis cautioned that adopting a code is not enough to effect change. Maryland was successful because it followed the code's adoption with extensive training and a building officials hotline. In a permitting process,as San Francisco Chief Building Inspector Lawrence Komfield reminded conference attendees,the analysis begins with critical threshold questions such as "Is the building qualified(designated)?" and"What is the equivalency?" Kornfield elaborated on the growing importance of new technologies that help to achieve equivalency with less intervention, such as intumescent coatings and rated glass for smoke and fire separation. Code officials Dennis Richardson,Mike Broomfield, and Mahoney stressed the importance of ensuring that the design team does its homework before seeking approval for alternative solutions.This begins with identifying affected code provisions and conditions and being prepared to offer a plan for achieving a reasonable level of safety with specific solutions because code officials do not have the time to perform the analysis or develop the solutions. Richardson's program in California has developed a helpful matrix aligning corresponding provisions of each code,available online. In Oregon's program, compliance agreements are recorded in the property deed to give applicants assurance that an approved solution is durable.The state has also begun documenting equivalency determinations for future reference,with the intent of improving code interpretation consistency and eliminating redundant effort. Documentation plays an important part in liability risk management for design professionals as well.Attorney Frank Baltz reviewed liability issues for project architects and owners, recommending that architects document agreed-upon,reasonable design solutions; manage liability through risk-sharing contract provisions; and insist upon a project budget contingency for claims.Historic building redevelopment projects depend upon predictability so that owners and developers can create a reliable project pro forma to secure financing. Case Studies Show How to Meet Code Challenges Successfully Conference technical sessions explored in greater detail the complexities associated with alternative code compliance approaches and how challenges have been successfully resolved. Fire Safety Engineer Melvin Green reiterated the importance of thinking through the specific building occupancy to identify conditions and hazards and documenting how each is resolved. Alice Carey,AIA,presented the case study of the Columbo Building, for which new construction accommodated accessible restrooms,provided horizontal egress, and buttressed a historic commercial building to meet seismic requirements. Several projects demonstrated how modeling,though somewhat costly,can net substantial project savings and preserve historic character.Engineer Cheryl Domnitch pointed to the value that an $8,000-to-$80,000 modeling study offers when it saves a five-story building's open ceremonial stair or eliminates the need for mechanical smoke evacuation. Green's review of the Balboa Theater project,where modeling cut seismic upgrade costs from$2.5 million to$1 million, reinforced this truth. In the Ahwanee Hotel case study presented by Naomi Miroglio,AIA, modeling confirmed the efficacy of proposed egress improvements and the benefit of incorporating operational solutions, such as staff training,into the compliance program. Developing an alternative compliance program requires the project team to look beyond individual spaces and assemblies to take larger building performance, operations,and stewardship concerns into account.Domnitch urged conferees to consider the importance of continuity of operations in choosing among smoke or heat alarm and fire suppression options,for example,by asking how long functions housed in a building can afford to be down. In that regard,costlier detection technologies sometimes offer net savings in combination with other systems. In Domnitch's San Jose, Calif.,example, projected-beam smoke detection eliminated the need to replace sprinklers below the code-mandated distance from the ceiling. Similarly,fire safety engineer Nick Artim's review of detection and suppression technologies showed how costlier mist suppression offered savings where existing water delivery was insufficient for conventional water suppression.Exceeding minimum code requirements can also offer net savings and preservation gains,as Miroglio illustrated by a Stanford University project where adding detection not required by code kept the wings of Toyon Hall open. Many projects achieve equivalency using a combination of high-and low-tech solutions to meet the intent of the code while preserving original features.The case studies of Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA,used intumescent coatings to achieve 3/4-hour rating equivalents for fire escape windows,recessed accordion fire separation doors to preserve historic lobbies,reversibly installed rated walls to preserve glazed historic doors that do not need to remain operable,and historic exit signs modified with modern illumination to meet current egress requirements. Miroglio's Calvert Presbyterian Church project illustrated how far the application of codes to historic buildings has advanced in sophistication since the 1970s—rethinking a compliant,if inefficient, solution for fire separation between adjoining buildings to gain usable space by examining the complex holistically and eliminating an unnecessary stair addition. The Future: "Unique Solutions for Unique Buildings" So where does this leave us?Kaplan had opened the conference with a history of codes and recent developments, striving to find a reasonable balance between safety,economy, aesthetics, and integrity.At the close of the conference, she offered these reflections on future directions for continued discussion: "The mix of attendees reinforced the necessity of code officials,fire protection engineers,and architects to work together to address the problems faced when making historic buildings fire- safe in a manner that does not damage historic character. Whereas some codes, such as the California State Historic Building Code and NFPA 914 Code for Historic Structures explicitly recommend a team approach,the need to convene numerous sources of expertise is implicit in other codes.Throughout the conference,presenters and conferees identified the team as the source of all successful solutions. "With the move toward a single national code framework(if not a single national code) continuing to gain footing,regional differences that go beyond technical differences become increasingly clear. States and municipalities vary greatly in the amount of discretion given to the code enforcement officer,their approach to the acceptance of alternate.solutions not prescribed by the codes, and their reliance on the team approach as the key to a successful outcome. "Although recent decades have brought many more tools for developing successful code solutions for historic buildings,the challenge facing historic buildings will continue as the public's expectation of acceptable levels of safety increases.There is no single,fits-all solution,and sprinklers are not the only answer.The latter is particularly evident when viewed in the context of severe budget restrictions of some private nonprofit organizations or through a critical preservation lens seeking a minimal level of intervention. "Because the national move to proportional codes for existing buildings is still in its childhood, the next decade will determine whether these approaches are widely endorsed and the extent to which modifications can be made while maintaining the basic,underlying philosophy.The next decade also promises to make performance-based codes and computer modeling techniques accessible and affordable to more projects,permitting unique solutions to be developed for unique buildings." Caroline Alderson is program manager of the Center for Historic Buildings, Public Buildings Service, U.S. General Services Administration Marilyn Kaplan,AIA, is principal of Preservation Architecture, Albany, N.Y. • ,, Ainik sok,imi'm s ,, - , - , SMART ,. .._,__.. ..vm..w..xa..v w-w......� \ .e.+......e...._ -...�._.,.... .....cw.2...< .ry..,M.....sw.. ...v.-.....ec...-.� x»._a«..,._»w...,.. ems..-......n..,..m,nvw,w¢ ,d>.s ym�,...�-...,.Y.,..,., .,...�.....+.. x.w+„_.............w,......«w,.,.-.-.. «............ . , ICC Consolidation Benefits Building Safety and Public With the stroke of a pen, more than 190 years of combined r _` , a ``�' i,,t building and fire safety code development and 30 years of 2' * < g.. ,- � r q' �ri� •, anticipation for one organization to produce codes for use . across the country and around the globe became a reality. x ��� , ,\41 ^-" The International Code Council (ICC)became one onsoli-. '_ ' :-� '7 dated organization effective Feb. 1. Directors signed docu- ` '-r i` . ments to create a unified ICC made up of what is Building , f ` '' Officials and Code Administrators International (BOCA), Source:Malin E.Weaver, International Conference of BuildingOfficials ICBO and Conserving Buildings i .,( ) Revised Edition ; : Southern Building Code Congress International (SBCCI). • a ti.;.- "The new ICC will continue to be dedicated to public safe- and public safety.A single set of codes has strong support ty,"said ICC CEO Bob D. Heinrich. "The ICC will represent from government, code enforcement officials, fire officials, and support those rarely recognized champions who make architects, engineers, builders, developers, and building sure the buildings we and our loved ones live in, go to owners and managers. school in and work in are constructed safely." In 1994, BOCA, ICBO and SBCCI created the ICC to devel- Services, products and staff operations of BOCA, ICBO and op a single set of comprehensive, coordinated model con- SBCCI will be consolidated and phased in during the next struction codes that could be used throughout the United few months, Heinrich said. States and around the world. The first I-Code published was the 1995 International Plumbing Code. "The Board is dedicated to providing quality services to our members," said ICC Board President Paul E. Myers. "In By 2000, a complete family of I-Codes was available includ- fact, the consolidation should be seamless to members. ing the International Building, Fire, Residential, Private The goal is to build upon the high level of service and prod- Sewage Disposal, Mechanical, Fuel Gas, Property ucts offered by the three organizations to best serve ICC Maintenance, Energy Conservation,Zoning and ICC members." Electrical Codes. Prior to the ICC, building safety codes were regional. BOCA The ICC Performance Code for Buildings and Facilities National Codes were used mostly in Eastern and Great joined the I-Code family in 2001. Two new codes debut in Lakes states; ICBO Uniform Codes in Western and Midwest 2003: The International Existing Building Code and states; and SBCCI Standard Codes in Southern states.As a International Urban-Wildland Interface Code. ICC also pub- result,the construction industry often faced the challenge, lishes I-Code Commentaries and a host of products and and cost, of building to different codes in areas of services that strengthen its position as the leader in building the country. and fire safety codes. The ICC International Codes (I-Codes)combine the The ICC code development process allows input from all strengths of the regional codes without regional limitations. interested individuals and parties. To ensure public safety -Codes respond to the needs of the constructionindustry always comes first, only government officials are eligible to vote on the final code requirements. ICC provides technical 4 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Smart Codes I, SMAR€ CODES and educational services to support the I-Codes and I-Code -"µ-" ' Webs i t e s users. www.smartgrowth.orq Today's building codes can be traced back to the Code of The Smart Growth Network was formed in response to increasing Hammurabi, circa 2200-1800 B.C.The Code of Hammurabi community concerns about the need for new ways to grow that boost provided for the death of a builder if the construction of a the economy, protect the environment. and enhance community vitality. Partners include environmental groups,historic preservation dwelling collapsed and caused the death of the owner. organizations, professional organizations, developers, real estate interests,local and state government entities. The first building codes in the United States, established in http:/lwww.state.nj.Us/dca/codes/rehab/rehab.htm 1625, addressed fire safety and specified materials for roof The New Jersey Rehabilitation Subcode set the bar for develop- coverings. In 1630, Boston outlawed chimneys made with ing safety codes for existing buildings. Rehabilitation work in New wood and thatch roof coverings. In the late 1770s George Jersey increased an average of 60%in the year after the rehab code Washington recommended that height and area limitations was implemented. According to their website. "jwjhile savings on privately funded projects may accrue to owners or to buyers, tax- be imposed on wood frame buildings in his plans for the payers reap the benefits when the project is publicly funded. The District of Columbia. In 1788,the first known formal building Subcode enables communities to stretch public dollars, providing code was written in the United States (in German)in Old more affordable housing for less and reusing buildings that might Salem, (now Winston-Salem) North Carolina. otherwise stand vacant or be destroyed." http://www.dhcd.state.and.us/smartcodes/handbookltoc.cfm Larger U.S. cities began establishing building codes in the The Maryland Building Rehabilitation Code Handbook is also early 1800s. In 1865, New Orleans was the first city to online. In 2001, Maryland Governor Parris N. Glendening pro- enact a law requiring inspections of public places.The claimed. "By adopting common-sense solutions to code issues that arise in building rehabilitation projects,the Code will encourage pri- National Board of Fire Underwriters published its vate investment in existing buildings, help improve the safety of Recommended National Building Code in 1905. In 1915, these buildings, and offer a valuable tool to those working to bring the world's first model code organization was established to new spirit to our older communities:' provide a forum for exchange of ideas regarding building http://www.huduser.org/publications/destech/narrp.html safety and construction regulations. In 1973, the American In 1997,the Department of Housing and Urban Development span- Institute of Architects called for one code to be used sored the publication of the Nationally Applicable Recommended throughout the United States. Rehabilitation Provisions(NARRP). These provisions are intend- ed to be suitable for use by state and local jurisdictions or model code organizations with a minimum of adaptation.They incorporate EDITORS NOTE: Photos are available at www.iccsafe.org the philosophy that improvements required when work is being done in existing buildings should be proportional to the nature and extent By:Steve Daggers Reprinted with permission. Available at: of the underlying work. httpiM'ww,iccsafeorg/newsinr012103consolidationlhtm htto://www.iccsafe.orgiaboutfindex.htm The International Code Council (ICC) is a merger of Building Officials and Code Administrators International, Inc. (BOCA). lir '" International Conference of Building Officials(ICBO), and Southern Building Code Congress International, Inc. (SBCCI). Since the early part of the last century,these nonprofit organizations developed the three separate sets of model codes used throughout the United States, and now produce the set of model codes known as the '`1, International Codes,or I-Codes. * ~~a t ;` http://www.nfpa.org/catalog/home/index.aso .4k ',-,,'kl lit „ , The National Fire Protection Association has over 300 fire and lid life safety codes available. According to the NFPA, "Virtually every Ai building,process,service,design,and installation in society today is li r: affected by NFPA documents" htto://www.wichitagov.org/Codeftitle 18/lndex,html The City of Wichita, Kansas. has developed their own Existing `. *. ' ` Buildings Rehabilitation and Change of Use Code by comparing f I ; 4 ;r. Source:Aar . the NARRP and other national model codes with their state and local 1 „ 1 . �° www.aps.org codes. The entire code is available online. TAR Jan/Feb Mar/Apr 2003 5 Smart Codes Cities 'Get Smart' Without Since the implementation of the new codes,interest in devel- oping existing buildings in Kansas City's city center has increased 15 to 20 percent according to Chris Sully, down- State Initiatives town development manager for the Economic Development Corp. in Kansas City. As in many of America's city centers, there has been an Within the last two years,2,015 additional residential housing urban renaissance of sorts in Kansas City, Mo., to restore units have been built or are under construction - 70 percent and revitalize aging buildings for both residential and corn- of which have used existing buildings. mercial use. But unlike other cities where the demand for rehabilitation often outstrips planners'ability to develop effec- "There's been a similar increase in commercial use as well," tive building and maintenance codes to govern these activi- Sully added,saying the interest would likely have been there ties, Kansas City has addressed the issue head on through without the code change, but"it wouldn't be nearly as much the use of Smart Codes. as we're seeing right now," nor would it have taken place as quickly. According to Barry Archer, Kansas City's director of codes administration, Missouri has no uniform state building code. The city has essentially eliminated retrofitting problems,Sully That's why the city in September implemented its own new said. codes to address the needs of growing demand. The move has given the city a great advantage, Scully said, Kansas City's problem was a common one-an older down- in attracting downtown development because developers are town area with vacant and even dilapidated buildings that finding the process so clean and easy. "We're not having Id bn very costly for developers to rehab using the city's problemswithdevelopers not wanting look at using YYVUIU Uli developers to exist- former building code specifications. It wasn't that the city ing buildings because they've heard horror stories from other needed to relax the codes, it just needed codes that more developers about the process." adequately addressed rehabilitation,thereby making reuse a _ .,, _° s t z .''Y , more attractive option for developers. z-, "'}' •* .. ' I ' .. The existing codes didn't take into consideration how the `k buildingwould be used or adjust requirements accordingly. ' And when the cost of renovation exceeded 50 percent of the I lit= ±rw RI" „,„ ... r .10.„:, replacement value of the building, then the entire structure I had to be brought up to par with code requirements for new k �_-yam :, ,,`' ' f A---,* ,: 4 : construction. This requirement, along with a lack of clearly _ i . - t 8 :forgor . defined costs in repairing older buildings, made developers t ,�. ,t ' ---m-- t• ' 4 t wit .y.�..,v 1 ._, reluctant to take on such projects. �{{ "We wanted to do something that would spur economic ... ''. _ # A--•f: development downtown," Archer said. The city updated its �"t', . -4° > w • ._ codes based upon federal code recommendations, input from the chamber, builders, building owners and managers. Source:Housing Facts&Finding' The changes haven't helped just developers, they've helped Fannie Mae Foundation' the government staff who have to explain the rules. Smart development through smarter codes These rehabilitation codes, referred to as "Smart Codes" by "It's resulted in more efficiency for them and for us,"Archer the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, said. "It's one less phone call you have to answer and one aren't just making a difference in Kansas City.They're taking less fax you have to send. It eliminates the gray areas." root all across the country because they simplify regulations T A R Jan/Feb Mar/Apr 2003 7 Smart Codes and provide the framework necessary to spur reinvestment in The New Jersey code defined three primary criteria - han- existing building infrastructure with minimal effort. dling projects as routine rather than as special cases; creat- ing an applicable law and doing away with arbitrary treat- Simply put, Smart Codes are building codes that encourage ment; and providing reasonable safety without imposing alteration and reuse of existing buildings.The term can also excessive additional costs. refer to other zoning and regulatory statues that affect build- ing. The new code achieved this by essentially redefining the term "alteration," splitting it into three categories of work - Already,New Jersey, Maryland, Minnesota and Rhode Island renovation, alteration and reconstruction. have developed codes that directly address building reuse. And communities like Kansas City are following suit,creating New Jersey defined renovation as work involving no recon- their own codes without state involvement. figuration of spaces in the building.Alteration was defined as work involving reconfiguration of spaces.Reconstruction was The existing regulatory system in the United States is based defined as work that is so extensive the area cannot be occu- upon three model codes: the BOCA (Building Officials and pied during the project. Code Administrators) National Building Code; the Standard Building Code; and the Uniform Building Code. According to HUD, New Jersey has seen an increase of rehabilitation work since the code was implemented,jumping In 2000, these three model code organizations pooled their from 1.6 percent of all construction prior to the change to 60 efforts to develop a single set of model codes, the percent after the code change. New Jersey's experience was International Codes.Some states have adopted these codes, so positive that HUD set out to adapt the state's innovation mandating all jurisdictions to use them while others leave it into a model rehabilitation code that could be used by other up to the local municipality to adopt them. states and municipalities. The result was the Nationally Applicable Recommended Rehabilitation Provisions Then there are states like Missouri, which had to contend (NARRP). with a state law that actually forbade building codes in com- munities of a certain size. That law was repealed last year, The NARRP, however,took the New Jersey plan a few steps Archer said, but until then there were 26 counties in Missouri farther, expanding"alteration"into six rather than three cate- where it was illegal to adopt a building code. gories: Repair,renovation,alteration,reconstruction,addition and change of occupancy. The goal was to provide propor- While the new international codes have simplified to an tionality so that the requirements are proportional to the extent the regulation of design and construction, only two extent of the intended work. chapters of the 700-page code book address existing build- ings. This lack of information can sometimes leave building HUD suggests that communities and/or states with underuti- owners and builders to rely on the judgment of the local code lized older buildings or with outdated building codes consid- official. er the development of a Smart Code based upon the NARRP recommendations. Wichita, Kansas did so in 2000, seeking The History of Smart Codes support from HUD, which provided a one-day presentation Virtually anyone who deals with building codes or redevelop- and seminar on the NARRP and the Uniform Code for ing existing structures has heard of the changes New Jersey Existing Buildings. made in 1998 to its rehabilitation subcode. Wichita began with a side-by-side comparison of the provi- The state's efforts are considered by many to be the most sions of the UCEB and NARRP with current Wichita and significant reform in the regulation of codes addressing exist- Kansas regulations.The result was a modified version of the ing buildings. The New Jersey Uniform Construction Code UCEB that suited the city's needs. has played a key role in redefining the way rehabilitation codes are written today. By: Katie Bums Reprinted with permission from Economic Development Now, newsletter of International Economic Development Council, February 28, 2002, Volume 2, Issue 8 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Smart Codes (I c.r,....as.............. ........ ,�.e .e...—.. ,........«.. .«.,.-,..,.........mus,m...._,.� .....,w...,.. �....... ,..... ....,_ , ......,,.,...,.... ....., .,ev..,..—..—,_.,._.. _........v. International Code Council Offers Guidelines for Existing Buildings . f By:JenniferM. Lewis In late 1999, the board of the International Code Council (ICC)appointed a committee to draft a document that better ��:� Luulluuw addressed code compliance and safety issues for existingbuildings. With the success of, and demand for, the NewJersey Rehabilitation Code, the ICC sought to develop their own rehabilitation code that could be offered alongside their already well-respected selections: the International Building h ' Ps Code, Fire Code, Residential Code, Plumbing Code and Mechanical Code to name a few. Previously, only Chapter 34 of ICC's International Building Code compliance on new porch railing Code addressed code compliance for existing buildings. ICC Madison, GA felt that Chapter 34 did not provide a clear enough guide for Source:Jennifer M.Lewis rehabilitation project., .ea inn ninny iCCIIPC open to debate and causing more reliance on the opinion of a single code know exactly what was expected,as would their community's official. The ICC sought to incorporate the philosophies code official. Projects could move along in a more timely found in existing "smart codes" - including the New Jersey fashion and with creative solutions for non-compliant, yet Rehabilitation Code, HUD's Nationally Applicable character-defining features, in a historic structure. For Recommended Rehabilitation Provisions (NARRP), and example, a common fire-safety issue for historic buildings is California and New York historic codes-by way of open dis- an open stairwell. An unenclosed grand stairway in a historic cussion and wide participation from stakeholders and various hotel lobby may be the aesthetic highlight of the interior. public meetings. The drafting committee included code offi- However, an open stairwell serving multiple floors can send vials,architects,engineers,and others with experience in the smoke from a first floor fire up to the higher floors, hamper- rehabilitation of historic buildings. A draft of the new code ing a safe exit and the health of occupants. The IEBC was made available to the public in AUgust of 2001 and,after addresses this issue by offering mitigation solutions such as receiving nation-wide input,holding public hearings and mak- fire escapes or additional enclosed stairwells, sprinkler ing changes based on 117 different proposed code changes, heads around the opening and draft curtains in an effort to the International Existing Building Code 2003 premiered in make the stairwell compliant while retaining its original February. appearance. The major goals of the drafters' of the International Existing Reasonable Building Code (IEBC) were to develop a code for officials, One of the most difficult areas of Chapter 34 to negotiate was building owners and architects that was predictable,reason- when a change of occupancy was part of the rehabilitation. able and proportional and that would lead to safe and effec- Historic buildings that have out-lived their original purpose five use and re-use of existing buildings: often find new life as a completely different use:textile mills Predictable to artists lofts, large residences to office space, public schools to assisted-living apartments. But many would-be Hamid Naderi, senior staff engineer with ICC, explains that investors ran into roadblocks via Chapter 34 and its require- the IEBC is written with the intention that a building owner or ment that a change in occupancy, in general, equaled bring- architect making alterations to an existing building would ing the entire structure into full compliance with the current building code, unless the code official found the new use 10 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Smart Codes (r "less hazardous". There was not clear guidance provided to Naderi says the advantage to adopting the IEBC is its coor- the code official comparing hazard levels for various occu- dination with the family of International codes, or I-codes, pancies. Naderi says the ICC realized this requirement was that many communities are familiar with. Another advantage unreasonable, especially when the change in occupancy is the I-codes' 18-month development cycle in which the ICC resulted in a less intensive use -a massive upgrade should receives suggested code changes from iany interested party, not be required! While the IEBC does not allow the safety holds public hearings for the next redrafting and republishes level of an existing building be reduced below what is cur- the codes every three years. The ICC is hoping that states rently available in that building, the new code is written with and local jurisdictions who would previously have had to a more reasonable approach to occupancy changes. develop their own rehabilitation codes will find a benefit in adopting a code that is coordinated with the I-codes and is Proportional regularly updated based on input from across the nation. Depending upon the nature of the work in a rehabilitation pro- ject, certain changes initiated by the owner result in certain The IEBC is available from the International Code Council at safety improvements required by the current building code. a rate of$34.00a for members and$42.00 for non-members. Similar to the NJ Rehabilitation Code, the IEBC strives to The 1-codes may be available for check-out from your city, make safety proportional to the work involved. In many county or university library and local bookstore. If you are instances similar materials and same methods of construe- interested in obtaining a copy of the provisions in the IEBC to tion could be used, even if not allowed by the current new see if the new code will work for your community, contact the buildings code, as long as they are not"unsafe" or"danger- ICC Through their website at:wwwiccsafe.org. ous". Jennifer M.Lewis, Certified Local Govemement Coordinator,Public Service&Outreach, University of Georgia 71 ny , , , .. Promoting the best ins. t, ,*, preservation technology ,4 ,;,f't in 11,, For more information on ?> "`�l'~�; ` , the ''° ` : " ": „Ili ' -**;:'7, .- ,-: . , .,,,: �4�� 17'1. 2003 APTI Conference, •'i � � ,ass.. , , contact APT at: _ i err �'F.{ �� � � .�' ��� �,� , , 4 www.apti.org • .Ott ,„ tf i. a. r. _� slk Sri or write to: , Portland,Maine �"� $ J'�; -,) , ,:i ' September�i-io . " 1,1' 4135 Lincoln Ave., >_. WedneWa}�through { { , Saturday - "� : 7 Suite 213 '� Y I' b , t - - �, - �e t � � 11 � Lisle, Illinois 't` 60532-1290 µ`I , i°! 7'ELF- TA R Jan/Feb Mar/Apr 2003 11 Smart Codes • An older downtown with underutilized and deterio- Excerpt From rating buildings. • Commercial activity shifted from downtown to sub- Smart Codes in Your urban hubs and malls. • A decreased and decreasing downtown tax base. Community: A Guide to • Urban and suburban sprawl at the peripheries. • Gridlock on roads and highways,with citizens Building Rehabilitation Codes spending increasing amounts of time commuting. While investment in existing buildings (remodeling, renova- Prepared for HUD Office of Policy & Research tion, and adaptive re-use) has increased significantly by Building Technology Inc., August 2001 nationwide in recent years, it has not reversed development patterns. Recent policy initiatives at the federal, state and local levels have been directed at managing uncontrolled America's stock of existing buildings-both residential and urban growth.A central feature of these initiatives is the non-residential-continues to age.This stock represents a development of methods to encourage the revival and vital national asset that can be used to meet the demand reuse of existing neighborhoods and buildings.These policy for housing and commercial development, consistent with initiatives have come to be known as"smart growth."Your state and local efforts to wisely manage continued growth. state or community may have such "smart growth" pro- In many cases, the demand for repairs, renovation and grams. "Smart growth"programs have produced an arsenal rehabilitation of existing buildings has outpaced the ability of of tools to accomplish their goals.These have included: state and local planners to develop effective building and maintenance codes that govern these activities. • Zoning that encourages urban infill and re-use of sites and buildings. This report, Smart Codes in Your Community:A Guide to • Enterprise zones that attract investment to inner Building Rehabilitation Codes, provides a broad overview of cities. the general regulatory environment governing the use and • "Brown-fields"development that provides for the re- reuse of existing buildings. It also provides examples of use of abandoned industrial sites. state and local efforts to reduce regulatory complexity and • Mass transit and transportation planning. suggests possible strategies to help spur reinvestment in • "Smart codes." the existing building infrastructure. "Smart codes" is the term used to describe building and HOW CAN "SMART CODES" LIKE THE NARRP HELP construction codes that encourage the alteration and reuse YOU? of existing buildings. It sometimes also refers to the other zoning and regulatory statutes that affect building, but for The age of the building stock in the U.S.-residential, com- the sake of clarity this document discusses building codes mercial and industrial-is increasing. In 1995 the median only. "Smart codes"were developed because the building age of the housing stock was nearly 30 years, and almost regulatory system in the U.S., including building codes, is a 30 percent of housing units were constructed before 1950. significant impediment to investments in the alteration and A similar situation applies to commercial buildings. reuse of existing buildings.This has led to a complete re- At the same time, urban development in most parts of the thinking of how existing buildings should be regulated. U.S. is typified by rapid suburban growth and expansion "Smart codes"are being developed with increasing frequen- into the open areas adjacent to cities and towns.While cy in states and local jurisdictions across the country: New each community is unique-the product of its particular Jersey, Maryland, Minnesota, and Rhode Island, locale and history-chances, are that your community dis- Wilmington, Delaware, Wichita, Kansas and others. Benefits plays some form of these symptoms have already been demonstrated in New Jersey. Such codes can improve the rate of reuse of existing buildings in your community, too. 12 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Smart Codes _„a s THE CURRENT BUILDING REGULATORY SYSTEM Codes: International Building Code, International Plumbing Code, International Mechanical Code, and others. There are three categories of regulations that affect build- ings in most communities in the U.S.: Still more recently,the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) has begun to develop its own model building code, • Zoning regulations,which control land use and often designated NFPA 5000. regulate the types of buildings that can be construct- ed at particular locations in the community. All building codes refer to standards that control the quality • Building codes,which regulate the design and con- of materials and the designs of systems used in buildings, struction of buildings. the loads that building elements must resist, and other • Building maintenance and use codes and regula- aspects of building design and construction.These stan- tions,which regulate the use of buildings. dards are developed by a wide variety of organizations that have technical expertise in each subject. What Are Building Codes? • The model codes, as well as the standards they reference, Construction codes in a community are generally referred to are modified and updated from time to time, depending on as "the building code." They include a complete family of new materials, new technology, and improved information related codes that address different parts or aspects of a on building failures due to various causes such as natural building: disasters, environmental effects, and normal wear and tear. • Building code In addition to technical updates these modifications some- • Plumbing code times reflect shifts in priorities for public spending. • Mechanical code • Electrical code While traditionally the requirements in the codes were • Specialty codes (boilers and pressure vessels, ele- intended to meet goals of health, safety,welfare and prop- vators etc.) erty protection, they have been expanded in recent years to include other societal goals. Some of these goals are: "Smart codes"relate to the latter two categories.To under- stand them, though,you need some background in how all • Energy conservation building regulations work. • Accessibility • Disaster mitigation These codes are enforced to regulate health and safety • Historic preservation through the issuance of construction permits and inspec- • Affordability tions.The codes'objective is to ensure a certain level of safety, health,welfare, and property protection for building One result of the periodic updating and expansion of the occupants and for the general public.To accomplish this, codes is that buildings built before the current building they regulate many aspects of the design and construction codes were enacted are probably not in full compliance. So, of buildings and the systems within them. Some states communities have had to develop special codes to deal adopt these codes and mandate their use by all jurisdictions with existing buildings for general safety. in the state,while others leave it up to the local jurisdictions to adopt them. What Are Building Maintenance and Use Codes? While some states and jurisdictions have developed their For general health and safety,the maintenance and use of own, most codes currently enforced in the U.S. are based existing buildings is regulated by a category of codes and on model codes developed by model code organizations. regulations that vary from community to community. While Recently, the three model code organizations have gotten building codes generally describe how a new building together to develop a single set of model codes,first pub- should be built, maintenance and use codes describe what lished in the year 2000, and referred to as the International needs to be done once people already live and work in a TAR Jan/Feb Mar/Apr 2003 13 Smart Codes III ....._..,._,.,w.-...-..m.,.......,� � �,..ra w...-«.......p�.�-,..�,.�.�...,a.., se..,. .-..-��...�_..�.N.,._,...,,...-........W.,......«..� .....,,_,.., a«,.,.�,..-.....o..... .....,< ,..,,...�..r..,.....,..-,.a.,,....,_.��......h ,..�-,...,. building.They may include some or all of the following: requirements placed on similar projects differ from commu- nity to community, and in the same community over time), • Housing code, or property maintenance code unpredictable(in that requirements are unknown to build- • Fire prevention code ing owners in advance), and arbitrary(in that there is no • Health regulations apparent basis for requirements that are imposed). • Hazard abatement code • Retroactive regulations As was mentioned, building or construction codes generally are oriented to the design and construction of new build- The first three codes regulate the uses of facilities that may ings. For example, of the 35 chapters and nearly 700 pages be detrimental to health and safety, as well as the mainte- of the International Building Code 2000 (IBC), only Chapter nance of facilities to continue to provide adequate health 34 and its 14 pages address existing buildings. In many and safety. Some parts of these codes cover the same cases this disproportionate consideration of existing build- building items covered in the building code, but often the ings forces building owners and builders to rely on the dis- level of specified performance is lower. Generally speaking, cretion and judgement of the code official.This results in a older buildings do not have to perform like new ones. lack of predictability and in arbitrariness, both of which deter investment in existing buildings. A hazard abatement code provides the jurisdiction with the authority to condemn or raze an existing building that is an The model codes classify potential work in existing build- imminent hazard to its occupants or the public at large. If a ings into four categories: community has a hazard abatement code, it represents • Repairs what that community considers to be a minimal acceptable • Alterations level of building performance. In other words,the communi- • Additions ty will not allow its buildings to deteriorate below that level. • Change of occupancy Retroactive regulations mandate improvements for existing Repairs in existing buildings are usually defined as minor buildings. Usually they apply to a class of buildings, such as projects with very minimal requirements specified in the high-rise buildings (where retroactive sprinklers or enclo- code.Additions to existing buildings, both horizontal and sure of open stairways may be required), housing (where vertical, are well defined, and the code requires that the retroactive smoke detectors may be required), or unrein- addition comply with the requirements of the new building forced masonry buildings (where retroactive seismic code, while requirements applicable to the existing part of strengthening may be required). Retroactive regulations the building are minimal. vary from one community to the next. They reflect a com- munity's economic development environment and its politi- It is in alterations and change of occupancy where the arbi- cal and social needs. trariness and lack of predictability show up the most. "Alteration" is defined in the IBC 2000 as"any reconstruc- All these building maintenance and use codes can apply to tion or renovation to an existing structure other than repair any or all buildings in the community, regardless of whether or addition."This definition covers a wide range of work, construction work is going on in them. If some renovation or from the addition of plumbing fixtures or electrical circuits to construction work is planned in an existing building, though, "gut rehab."The code specifies that alterations must comply it may be that the building or construction codes (that is, the with the requirements of the code for new construction, and more stringent codes)apply in your community. that alterations shall not cause the existing building "to be in violation of any provisions of this code." What about Construction Work in Existing Buildings? While these requirements may seem clear and unambigu- HUD's 1998 study entitled A National Survey of ous, there is, great diversity among communities in the U.S. Rehabilitation Enforcement Practices concluded that the on how to apply them. Earlier model codes applied a so- regulation of design and construction in existing buildings in called "25-50 percent rule"that related the extent of require- many communities in the U.S. is non-uniform (in that ments to the ratio of the cost of the alteration to the value of 14 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Smart Codes c the existing building.When this ratio exceeded 50 percent, The Uniform Code for Building Conservation (UCBC) the entire building had to be brought into compliance with The UCBC was first developed by the International the code for new construction.While this requirement was Conference of Building Officials(ICBO)in 1985. It was dropped from the model codes in the 1980s, HUD reported intended to be a model code for design and construction in in the 1998 study entitled A National Survey of existing buildings and to reduce the previously prevalent Rehabilitation Enforcement Practices that 38 percent of sur- arbitrariness in the enforcement of the UBC's provisions veyed jurisdictions still use such a trigger, and another 16.4 applicable to existing building.The UCBC has been updat- percent stated that while they do not have such triggers, ed periodically,with the last update occurring in the year they are useful rules-of-thumb.An owner of an existing 2000, but it has not been widely adopted by states or local building is likely to invest elsewhere, and leave the building jurisdictions.The major innovation of the UCBC over as it is,when faced with this unpredictability and arbitrari- Massachusetts Article 22 was the recognition that hazards ness.The result is further deterioration of the building stock in buildings are multi-dimensional, and that they can best and, ultimately, its abandonment. be addressed by multiple hazard scales, rather than the sin- gle scale used in Massachusetts. But recent changes and reforms offer much hope and serve as models for your community.These pioneering codes and The New Jersey Rehabilitation Subcode code guidelines have been shown to support the rehabilita- The most significant recent reform in the regulation of work tion and reuse of existing buildings across the country and in existing buildings happened in New Jersey with the adop- can serve as a model for your community. tion of the New Jersey Uniform Construction Code- Rehabilitation Subcode in January 1998. Prior to that, New The building code classifies all buildings into specific cate- Jersey enforced an earlier edition of the Building Officials gories called occupancy classifications.The adaptive re-use and Code Administrators International (BOCA)code that of existing buildings often involves changing from one occu- included the 25-50 percent rule, and the requirement that in pancy classification to another. Earlier model codes any change of occupancy the building had to be brought up required that an existing building in which the occupancy to compliance with the code for new construction.The new classification is changed should be brought into compliance subcode was developed because it was recognized that the with all provisions of the code for new construction, or with then current code was constraining the re-use of older the"intent of the code"for new construction. buildings in New Jersey. EARLIER APPROACHES TO REFORM Three criteria were defined for the new system in New Jersey: Some of the most significant approaches to reform of the • Timeliness of processing and enforcement(i.e., building regulatory system applicable to work in existing most projects should be handled routinely rather buildings are summarized below. than as special cases). • Predictability(i.e., people should know the law Massachusetts applicable to them and be free from arbitrary treat- In June 1979 the State of Massachusetts,following a thor- ment). ough study,deleted its building code sections applicable to • Reasonableness (i.e., provide a reasonable level of existing buildings and substituted Article 22.Article 22 safety without imposing excessive additional costs). reformed the regulation of work in existing buildings, and with some changes and re-numbering, it continues in use to this day. It reduced the arbitrariness that had previously existed in the regulation of existing buildings. Perhaps the most significant innovation of Article 22 is its approach to the requirements for a change of occupancy. Rather than applying building code requirements to all changes of occu- pancy, requirements are applied only in relation to this haz- ard classification when the hazard is increased. TAR Jan/Feb Mar/Apr 2003 15 Smart Codes The Rehabilitation Subcode that was developed to meet The Rehabilitation Subcode has been in place in New these criteria reflected a true paradigm shift in the regula- Jersey for about two years and is serving its purpose.The tion of alteration work in existing buildings. It takes the State reports that investment in building rehabilitation in rather broad building code definition of"alteration"and cities such as Trenton, Newark, and Elizabeth has splits it into three well-defined categories of work in pro- increased substantially[almost 60%] in the past two years gressive increase of complexity: due to the new code. • Renovation-defined in general as work involving WHAT IS THE NARRP? no reconfiguration of spaces in the building. HUD published the Nationally Applicable Recommended • Alteration-defined in general as work involving Rehabilitation Provisions, or NARRP, in May 1997.The reconfiguration of spaces. NARRP set out to adapt the innovations and principles of • Reconstruction-defined as work so extensive that the New Jersey Rehabilitation Subcode into a model reha- the work area cannot be occupied during the work. bilitation code that could be used by other states and local jurisdictions. Another element of the paradigm shift was the creation and definition of the term"work area." Both innovations go a There are many similarities between the New Jersey long way toward achieving predictability and reasonable- Rehabilitation Subcode and the NARRP.The key paradigm ness. Progressively more complex rehabilitation work shift happened in New Jersey, and the NARRP are behold- entails progressively more extensive additional required life en to New Jersey in adopting the concepts.The safety improvements. Reasonableness is achieved by NARRPcondensed New Jersey's three criteria into two: pre- establishing proportionality between the voluntary work pro- dictability and proportionality. It achieves predictability and posed by the owner and the additional work imposed by the proportionality by borrowing four concepts from New regulatory system. Jersey: • Categories of work • Work area Hazard category scales / "t ��` • Supplemental requirements :`i? lni.. ` NATIONAL TRUST Categories of Work ,Car HISTORIC PRESERVATION.. As previously noted,the model codes currently address Preservation I�a�ershi� work in existing buildings under four categories: repair, alteration, addition and change of occupancy. Following New Jersey,the NARRP expand"alteration" into three fur- Training ther categories, resulting in the following six categories: Advanced PLT:Organizational Excellence • Repair July 27-Auguste,2003 • Renovation-defined, as in New Jersey, as work Grand Isle,Vermont involving no reconfiguration of spaces in the build- Application Deadline:June 6,2003 ing • Alteration-defined, as in New Jersey, as work Alumni Reunion involving reconfiguration of spaces or extension of October 1,2003 plumbing, mechanical, or electrical systems National Preservation;Conference" • Reconstruction-defined, unlike in New Jersey, as Denver Colorado work involving reconfiguration of spaces including corridors and exits For more information,email:plt@nationaltrust.org • Addition or call(202)588-6067 • Change of occupancy 16 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Smart Codes This categorization provides predictability, in that the may be required if the change was to a department store. respective requirements are known at the start. It provides proportionality, in that requirements are proportional to the Historic Buildings extent of the intended work.Work in each category is addressed by a separate chapter of the NARRP. Chapter 9 of the NARRP, the last chapter, addresses his- ' toric buildings. Rehabilitation work in historic buildings is Work Area categorized as for other buildings: repair, renovation, alter- Work area is defined in the NARRP as"that portion of a ation, reconstruction, and change of occupancy. Chapter 9 building affected by any renovation, alteration or reconstruc- outlines an optional alternative procedure for regulating his- tion work as initially intended by the owner...". toric buildings and presents a series of exceptions to the I requirements of the NARRP that may be applicable in his- Supplemental Requirements , toric buildings. These changes, then, make the require- Supplemental requirements are triggered in the NARRP , ments for historic building rehabilitation much more clear. when reconstruction work is extensive.When the recon- For example, historic buildings in which there is a re-con- struction work area exceeds 50 percent of the area of the struction are exempted from most of the improvements of floor,the NARRP extend some life safety improvements to ' stairway enclosures, stairway railings and exit signs applica- the entire floor.When the total of reconstruction work areas ' ble to other buildings. in a building exceed 50 percent of the building area,the NARRP extend these life safety improvements to the entire building, up to the highest work area floor. When doing a • -,,„ reconstruction, sprinklers must be installed under certain °`WORKING conditions (e.g., in high-rise buildings).Their installation, F 1 t r 1 r however, is limited to the work area. If the work area ON TI I it exceeds 50 percent of the area of the floor on which it is PAST'C:7i1I. , located, the sprinklers must be installed throughout the i S �: :. ..„,} , floor. If the total reconstruction work areas in the building 1.)TSt.Nt`,i� exceed 50 percent of the building area, the sprinklers must be installed throughout the building up to the highest floor on which there is a work area. Visit the National ark Service's new information program,'s'ii-rl . ei,tho°,.t i!-Looaf.Ilistur, rtevrlopod npoci+tlylnrh of n proprrt;r Hazard Category Scales owners,new:centers of district ccmmr ions The NARRP establish four hazard category scales for clas- community ity officials and design proiessicna s,it's 1-- „.'''',..,',:,',,,Sr sifying building occupancies. In this it differs from the easy to navigate to topic areas depending upon what hlig 'i r" you know,and ghat you want to find out UCBC, which has five, and the New Jersey Rehabilitation .;.yip Subcode,which has six.These differences are not si nifii- For example,do you knew the strengths and benefits g of focal historic districts? What local preservation �"`" cant. The NARRP scales are as follows: ordinance is and how it can"hold the line'on , 7 ., inappropriate work in a historic cornmunity?What local design guidelines are and haw they can help I • Life Safety and Exits owners and reviewers.alike?Thu major differences =r- , ,` • Heights and Areas between preservation,rehabilitation,restoration,and s + ' reconstruction—and whyit's so important to choose ,�..< • Exposure of Exterior Walls the most appropriate approach for your work? Choose ? • Seismic a specific topic or read it all! See"Chrisfreld a historical model of a property that The NARRP hazard scales provide predictability by clearly changes over time;review protects in Oregon that relating specific requirements to specific increased hazards illustrate foist work approaches in the Secretary of the Interiors Standards for the Treatment of historic • in the existing buildings.The conversion of an office build- Properties,and tate a Quirt f;,, ing to an apartment building may require significant upgrad- ing of life safety and exits in the building, but no height and Lawn'r`:+otr tenryns 4:ra,'.4'JS.,Cnitale:;rr.lf3r NA!SS Caltxtum,nD4 � a„ areas or exterior wall exposure improvements.The latter T A R Jan/Feb Mar/Apr 2003 17 Smart Codes WHAT CAN YOU DO NOW? current regulations in your state and community that may have impact on existing buildings. Such a study will lay the groundwork for the orderly development of the rehabilitation If you are concerned about"smart growth," if there is a code that will mesh with the current regulatory system. Be stock of under-utilized older buildings in your community, sure to include your local building department and/or rede- and if you have reason to believe that the building regulato- velopment agency in this analysis as well as inform the city ry system in your community is contributing to the under- council or relevant legislative bodies that you are consider- investment in these buildings,you should consider the ing various options. Have information on these options development of a"smart code,"a rehabilitation code based ready to present to any concerned citizens or public offi- on the NARRP. cials. Here are some specific steps you should take: 4. Develop or adopt a rehabilitation code Use the comparative analysis study as the basis for devel- 1. Stakeholders committee opment of your rehabilitation code. The stakeholders corn- Create a committee of stakeholders who think this might be mittee, or a similar body, should be involved in this process. a problem, and want to do something about it. Be sure to Enlist the support of these stakeholders so that the process include potential critics or opponents of a rehabilitation by which you propose code changes becomes easier and code.The committee should include building officials, fire more productive. officials, housing advocates, private-sector building owners or the associations representing them, historic preservation- 5. Establish follow-up mechanisms ists, accessibility advocates, architects and engineers, con- Consider developing the following activities to ensure the • tractors, environmentalists, etc.The committee should artic- effectiveness of your new rehabilitation code: ulate the problems that exist with the current regulatory approach relative to existing buildings and the objectives of • Developing a training curriculum and program a new"smart code." intended for code enforcement officials, architects and engineers, and others who will use the new • 2. Exploration of options code. Review all of the different options and models that exist, • Creating an administrative body responsible for including HUD's publications on building rehabilitation periodically reviewing and updating your rehabilita codes. Familiarize yourself with these so that you know tion code, including the option of adopting the which options suit your community best, and which are International Existing Building Code or the NFPA most feasible politically. Request that HUD provide your 5000 when they become available. stakeholders committee with an expert presentation on the • Evaluating the code's success (i.e., testing to see NARRP, the UCEB, the New Jersey Rehabilitation whether more existing buildings are being rehabili Subcode, and other related initiatives. Following the presen- tated and re-used since the adoption)to gauge tation there should be an open discussion of options avail- whether changes are needed. able to you.These may include anything from the develop- • Spreading the word about your code adoption and ment of legislation and the drafting of a rehabilitation code of its use to other municipalities, other groups inter (as in Maryland)to a decision to wait for the development of ested in existing building rehabilitation, and gov- the International Existing Building Code or NFPA 5000 and ernment agencies like HUD. to adopt one of them when it becomes available. 3. Comparative analysis If you make the decision to move forward with the develop- ment of a rehabilitation code, then you should initiate a study that involves detailed comparison of the provisions of the NARRP(or the UCEB, or the New Jersey code)with all 18 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Smart Codes With the steps presented here and the information provid- ed in this and other HUD publications about existing build- ing rehabilitation, you now have the tools to consider advo- Applying the NARRP cating and developing a"smart code" in your own commu- nity.The benefits of the code for local builders, housing and commercial developers of all kinds and all target audi- To test the provisions of the NARRP, HUD docu- ences, and for the maintenance and physical development "Stone the remodeling of the 1747 Lodge" of your whole community are clear. By drafting guides and residence in Chester, New Jersey. While the model codes, HUD and the model code groups are making the adoption of the codes easier, too. As with all changes actual rehabilitation Code used was New Jerseys, in local regulations and with local community interests, it and the NARRP are extremely similar and the though, the first steps lie with interested citizens and gov- project was an opportunity for HUD to analyze the ernments like you. NARRP while comparing it to the state's former HUD has been interested in building codes in general, and building code (the1993 BQCA-Code)." -- building rehabilitation codes in particular, for several years. In addition to codes,we also provide a variety of design During the project, officials,from the New Jersey. and technology tools to help you with rehabilitation work. Department of Community Affairs analyzed. the For a sample of this work, please visit the HUDUSER web- project scope under both the old and new codes, page at http://www.huduser.org. and determined that a great deal of additional This Guide to Building Rehabilitation Codes was produced work would have been 'required under the old by Building Technology inc. (BTl). It was authored by code. Significant changes would have been David B. Hattis of BTI, and is based on his experience, as required for some the building's most significant well as that of William E. Koffel of Koffel Associates, Inc., architectural features, including the foundation and Melvyn Green of Melvyn Green &Associates, Inc., in (stone), egress windows(small, unique casement applying the NARRP to the development of rehabilitation codes. The entire article[Smart Codes in Your windows), corridor width (narrow),stair geometry Community:A Guide to Building Rehabilitation Codes (narrow), and ceiling heights (low). (August 2001, 24 p.)]can be found at http://www.huduser.org/publications/ The final project led HUD to Conclude that the NARRPINew destech/smartcodes.html. Jersey.Rehabilitation Code allowed for a more cost-effec- tive remodeling of the residence than the older building code; that the predictability of the regulations allowed for the code to be applied consistently; that the reduced need for variances translated into substantial time-savings; and, importantly,it promoted the continued use of older buildings -therefore preserving the past. The entire report, including pictures, pro- ject budget and cost comparison tables can be found at: http:/lwww.huduser orglpub(ications! destechlrehabpr.html TAR Jan/Feb Mar/Apr 2003 19 di n O z N Legal Aspects i r • y z i P çukurai Re ,. 8 c l M r .? ¢ . ;} ; ,' , . ,+ . , ,, "-� tasdp--,._..,a ., '�.s, � ' `' ..x,;a: . £. : .. . on r egies Technical assistance in historic preservation planning, related planning/land use topics, and preservation strategies for Federal agencies, Indian tribes, States, and local governments i' h t , s LAW AND THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION: . a„ WHAT EVERY MEMBER NEEDS , � TO KNOW • " �6� ;�_ 3'-, James K.Reap and Melvin B.Hill,Jr. x —.." ;; VIBRANT REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY DEPENDS UPON li d I d THE active involvement of its citizens in a variety of ways, . y4_ - 4 from simply voting to running for elective office. One ; yq4; _ important type of governmental involvement is that of service on ' � boards and commissions established by state or local law to provide _f ,, input and direction regarding state or local public policy. The historic 'K ` ` : preservation board or commission is one of these important service opportunities for citizens at the local level. Those appointed to serve ore a 4 on preservation commissions want and need to know what is expected I of them and what legal issues they may encounter. Serving can be a z,. i rewarding experience and commissioners should not fear the law—or ,,..0, t i s • >`..s to ; lawyers! Ili. ..,. ., =' 1t No commission member wants to have his or her actions chal- ij.! lenged. But it happens. When it comes to protecting what they per- `"� " `_74 ceive to be their"property rights,"Americans can be very territorial! f ,l': ,, ,..„...;,,,,7%‘_,1 r _, _ A 1998 survey by the National Alliance of Preservation Commissions, i for example, found that 15% of responding commissions had been . . r sued. However, many of those challenges were unsuccessful. : .`. The primary purpose of this primer is to provide readers with an introduction to • basic legal concepts and issues they may encounter =..—»� aspreservation commissioners. The authors hope this brief ublica- , . J P tion will help answer basic questions and point readers to other useful -' , ;• `: .; sources. Our overall goal is to demystify the law governing historic i r'•- , „- preservation and give commissioners the information they need to '�'" make sound and legally defensible decisions. 3 s t t 3 Q77 �,f'g+ �,,. ,; 1 4 Sr t e' ®YaR1ia^€ e� '"e,xu4 g' ' ,- 3d J 3 _ a�4 r E... • s. t 1ta s,F tti G ` P l � ? i t E � -. '�• s t� s adt,, . az 4< '�qP £ t f 3 �' ,, s t1a5� r a .,,,: fi r i` s} - a '. 2 ter, f � 1Sit , 3i g ; - x 1 P x z 1i1j a BASIC CONCEPTS by it to the States, are reserved the most eloquent defense of the to the States respectively, or police power ever written: Commission Authority to the people." One of those The concept of the pub- The first issue facing any local powers not held by the Federal lic welfare is broad and historic preservation commis- government, but reserved to the inclusive. The values it sion is whether it has the legal states is known as the police represents are spiritual as authority to act. If it doesn't, its power. Based on the Latin well as physical, aesthetic actions will be determined to be maxim sic utere tuo ut alienum as well as monetary. It is null and void when challenged, non laedas (so use your own within the power of the and everycommission mem- property as not to injure anoth- legislature to determine ber will have wasted his or her er's), the concept is of Anglo- that the community should time. So where does a historic Saxon origin and was adopted be beautiful as well as preservation commission get by the American colonies from healthy, spacious as well its authority to make decisions British common law. Basically, as clean, well-balanced as affecting the property of other it can be described as the power well as carefully patrolled' individuals and organizations in of a government to provide for the community? the public health, safety, morals, States exercise the police The Tenth Amendment of the and general welfare of its citi- power by passing laws and United States Constitution pro- zens. As Justice Douglas stated adopting regulations affecting vides that, "The powers not del- in the famous Supreme Court such matters as public health, egated to the United States by decision of Berman v. Parker, environmental protection, build- the Constitution, nor prohibited 348 U.S. 26 (1954), in probably ing safety, and zoning. Historic preservation, too, falls within the scope of the police power. What Does That Mean? 1 Every state has enacted some In reading this publication or cases cited here, you may encounter form of historic preservation unfamiliar legal terminology. Legal dictionaries are available in legislation, and many state your public library and there are several searchable Internet sourc- courts have upheld the regula- es for legal definitions. Two sites that are simple to use are: tion of individual properties and areas having special historic, Lawyers.com—based on Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law I architectural, or cultural signifi- 2001: www.lawyers.com/legal_topics/glossary/index.php cance. Law.com—with three different search methods for finding words: The U.S. Supreme Court http://dictionary.law.com explicitly recognized preserva- tion as a legitimate government References to cases and statutes mentioned in the text are in the purpose within the scope of the technical language of legal citation. Professor Peter W. Martin police power in Penn Central of Cornell University has produced a useful online guide to help Transportation Company v. you decipher these strange "hieroglyphics:" www.law.cornell.edu/ 1 City of New York, 438 U.S. 104 citation/ 1 (1978). In that case the Court —I upheld the constitutionality of the New York City landmarks Executors, 25 Iowa 163 (1868). took hold and grew that matters ordinance and the city's denial Written by Judge John Dillon, a of"local concern" could and of the railroad's request to build recognized expert on local gov- should be delegated down to the a 55-story office tower above ernment law, his pronouncement local governments themselves. historic Grand Central Terminal. came to be known as Dillon's The course of this path dif- The Court's majority observed Rule: fered from state to state, but that it is "not in dispute" that the overall trend throughout [A]municipal corporation "States and cities may enact the twentieth century was [i.e., city]possesses and land-use restrictions or controls can exercise the follow- toward more local control. In to enhance the quality of life ing powers and no oth- many cases, this new approach by preserving the character and ers: First, those granted involved changes in the state's desirable aesthetic features of a constitution. Some states adopt- in express words;second, city." 2 ed very broad and generous those necessarily implied But how does local govern- provisions delegating significant or necessarily incident to ment get into the business of powers to local governments the powers expressly grant- exercising the police power? ed; third, those absolutely over revenue-raising, form of It comes as a surprise to many essential to the declared government, and other key fac- people to learn that the United tors, while others took modest or objects and purposes of the States Constitution makes no even confused steps. corporation—not simply mention of cities, counties, Many state legislatures were convenient, hut indispens- school districts, or any other able;fourth, any fair doubt willing to entertain seriously the forms of local government. as to the existence of a notion of a true partnership with Rather, the form, number, pow- power is resolved by the local governments, one in which ers, and other matters pertaining courts against the corpora- the powers and responsibilities to local government structure of governance were shared in tion—against the existence and administration are left up 3 a significant and meaningful of the power. the individual states themselves. way. Others continued to apply As so-called"creatures" of the Although Dillon's Rule is a strict standard of limited local states, local governments owe couched in terms of"municipal government powers. their very existence to the state corporations," the concept—and In terms of historic preser- governments of which they are bias—has applied historically vation commissions, what this a part(whether they like it or to counties and other forms of legal backdrop means is that not not!). local governments (townships, only local law but also state law In interpreting the powers that boroughs, etc.) as well. must be consulted to determine have been given to local govern- This restrictive view toward the extent to which commissions ments by the states, the courts local government power was have been empowered to regu- initially adopted a very restric- the prevailing sentiment in most late historic property. If there tive view. This bias against state legislatures for genera is doubt about the existence local government power was tions, but, as the needs of urban of this power, the courts may essentially codified in an 1868 residents grew more extensive rule against the commission. Iowa case, Merriam v. Moody's and complex over time, the idea Commission members should 3 4 .1 is Y4 �" � 7 } �„i„�V�+''k.,'s. �.1'k.,.. �� *.<��"��,.rt. ,ak 4�t �'*�i4-11 1�i.�.ri's.,, '' c � y., : �-- 6._� .... , ;,,,,,...z..,�_wA�,...._ .. .�...,..., .,�,� n°�rs. .+,�+z... fe<r�_.,. . '.x-�..,x s.w..�...:,,. ,�I�...., be certain of the scope of their Congress shall make no No State shall. . . deprive authority and that all systems law respecting an estab- any person of life, liberty, are "go" for a vigorous pursuit lishment of religion, or or property, without due of historic preservation objec- prohibiting the free exer- process of law; nor deny to tives.As commissions move for- cise thereof,• or abridging any person within its juris- ward in designating and regulat- the freedom of speech, or diction equal protection of ing historic properties and dis- of the press; or the right the laws. This provision tricts they should be certain their of the people peaceably to assures Americans that actions are consistent with state assemble, and to petition their rights are protected law. The local government's the Government for redress against state encroachment legal office should be able to of grievances. This most as well as that of the fed- provide this documentation; esteemed provision of the eral government, so that commission members are not Bill of Rights drops a pro- nothing the state does can expected to be legal researchers! tective cloak around United deprive them of the right to States citizens and keeps use their property, nor may Individual Rights the federal government at it treat them in an arbitrary Whilegovernment clearlyhas bay concerning these most or capricious manner.And this protection extends to the constitutional authority to basic human rights. local government action as protect historic resources as part m The Fifth Amendment of well, since all local govern- of its inherent police power, the Constitution provides ments are creations of the both law and tradition circum- that No person shall be . . states. scribe that power. The motto . deprived of life, liberty, without due While these rights guaranteed of the State of New Hampshire or property,p in the United States Constitution provides an apt starting point for process of law; nor shall propertybe taken and in the respective state con- a discussion of the limitations private stitutions must be honored, the of historic preservation law— for public use, without just "Live Free or Die!" This state- compensation. This provi- government may establish rea- ment reflects the attitude most sion protects the citizens sonable laws, rules, and regula- tions to promote the common Americans share. We begin with of the United States from weal or general welfare. a presumption of freedom on the encroachment by the fed- Litigation involving preserva- part of the American citizen. eral government upon their tion commissions often involves This foundational premise property, and ensures them situations where the govern- is bolstered by several provi- that the property will be mental interest in promoting the sions of the Bill of Rights of paid for if the encroach- general welfare clashes with the the United States Constitution, ment goes beyond a certain desires of the individual citi- as well as by similar provisions point. If the encroachment zens. The good news for pres- in the respective state constitu- goes too far, it becomes an ervationists is that the citizens tions. unconstitutional taking. espousing private property rights 71 The First Amendment m The Fourteenth do not often win these legal of the United States Amendment of the battles, nor should they. In the Constitution proclaims, Constitution provides, that United States, property rights }. 3; fl y-, 3 ' 5,, Y k d� .:Ak K RK+ 3 � fl` i t Y" ti 4$ � l -5 d s a ,r s w 3'"'b w �, & x' .t `4 e $�F � ���arq�.` ¢t t�O$rk�"1 � '� zn � r,: �fin,` t Lz li,,...,......v::Lw: sr.@w"aa,,,„. F, f e "o-ry 'd* .45:',a'a ':,. ..f.. „ . .x „. have never been unlimited. If There are two primary from one private owner by emi- we want to live in a society ways physical takings and nent domain was transferred to that respects both the built and regulatory takings. another private owner for future the natural environments that The first way is the most economic development. This were passed down to us, then obvious—the government con- raised the question whether the there must be reasonable restric- demns the land and buys it resulting development was a tions on private property. The outright. This is known as the public use, as required by the stewardship of the cultural and power of eminent domain, and Fifth Amendment. historic, as well as the natural, it is part of state government's A challenge from citizens of resources of the planet demand inherent power as a sovereign New London, Connecticut who as much. entity. When a road is widened lost their properties in a rede- So what can historic pres- or a new government build- velopment project reached the ervation commissions do to ing is needed, the government United States Supreme Court minimize their chances of being pays the owner(s) of the land to in Kelo v. City of New London, brought into court, without be acquired for this improve- 545 U.S. 469 (2005). The court relinquishing their rightful role ment an amount equal to its broadly interpreted public use as value, termed just compensa- public purpose and confirmed as the guardian of historic and tion. Usually this compensation its longstanding policy of defer- prehistoric resources? In order represents fair market value, or ring to the judgment of legisla- to better answer this question, . what a willing seller and willing tive bodies as to what public let us look at the kinds of prob buyer agree is a fair price. What needs justify using the takings lems that have arisen in the past, constitutes just compensation power. It held that the require- and see how they have been is not always clear, however, ments of the Constitution could resolved. We will begin our so the resolution of this issue be met by the general benefits a examination of individual rights sometimes leads to litigation by community would receive from with three key phrases found the parties. increased jobs and other eco- in the Fifth and Fourteenth For preservationists, eminent nomic opportunities created by Amendments to the Constitution, domain is a two-edged sword. redevelopment. quoted above: takings, due pro- Local governments have used it This decision outraged many cess, and equal protection. to protect historic properties by people who felt that state and acquiring them for museums or local governments should Takings other public functions, or, as a not use the power of eminent ...nor shall private prop- last resort, by preventing their domain in this way.As a result, erty be taken for public use demolition through the action many state legislatures have without just compensation. or inaction of their owners. On amended their general laws or the other hand, the power also constitutions to restrict eminent This sounds straightforward has been used to acquire land domain in situations involv- enough, but in the context of for redevelopment, even if the ing transfer of property from private land use control and his- area contained structures that one private owner to another toric preservation, how does a were still usable. In many of or for economic development taking occur? these situations, land acquired purposes. In many cases local 6 f }} 4 .e!_ governments retain the power vent the subsidence of nearby change in the general law."5 to acquire blighted proper- structures caused by a myriad Government regulation can be ties, though the new legislation of honeycomb mining shafts constitutional even if it reduces has tightened the definition beneath populated areas. This property value. of blight. As a result of these law offered no compensation to So when does regulation go developments, preservation the mining companies who had too far and become a taking? commissions should review their retained the mining rights at the The U.S. Supreme Court has state legislation and consult with time they sold the surface, and indicated that decisions on tak- legal counsel when potential as a result of the new law, could ings should be made on a case- eminent domain situations arise. no longer mine all the coal. The by-case basis, and established The second type of taking mining companies sued, alleg- criteria for lower courts to use is less obvious. In fact, it was ing a taking of their sub-surface in making this determination. not until the early twentieth property without compensation These criteria provide useful century that this type was even in violation of the takings clause guidance to local governments recognized legally. This type is of the Fifth Amendment of the and commissions. known as a regulatory taking or U.S. Constitution. There has been no more inverse condemnation. Courts In Pennsylvania Coal, Justice important case for modern tak- have found this kind of taking Oliver Wendell Holmes made ings jurisprudence—particularly in situations where a general the following oft-quoted pro- for preservation commissions— governmental regulation has the nouncement than the Penn Central case, unintended effect of denying the The general rule at least cited above. The decision set out owner a reasonable economic is, that while property may a three-part inquiry for analyz- use of a property. The effect on be regulated to a certain ing a broad range of regulatory the owner, then, is much the takings claims.6 Under this extent, if regulation goes same as in the first kind of tak- too far it will be recog- inquiry, courts must examine: ing, except the owner retains nized as a taking.... We are ri the economic impact of the physical possession of the prop- in danger of forgetting that regulation on the property erty. In this situation, one of a strong public desire to owner, two things happens—either the improve the public condi- -n the effect of the regula- regulation is nullified, or the tion is not enough to war- tion on the owner's distinct property owner is compensated rant achieving the desire investment-backed expecta- for his or her loss. by a shorter cut than the tions, and One of the first and most constitutional way o .fpay- r the character of the govern- important regulatory takings ingfor the change. a mental action. cases is Pennsylvania Coal g Co. v. Mahon, 260 U.S. 393 Nevertheless, the Court also The opinion also established (1922). In this seminal case, the recognized that, "Government a rule requiring that review- United States Supreme Court hardly could go on if to some ing courts look at the effect overturned a Pennsylvania law extent values incident to prop- on the entire property interest that had prohibited the min- erty could not be diminished (parcel as a whole), not just the ing of coal in cities to pre- without paying for every such part affected by the regulation c _ >, •s �,C,:4 qs"� :4 . p;7 k >vu c z �.,. r ,66 '• �'v 4 »..m-�, i.w+..i.L ...564' � �' ,LL ;;;6 :wY'i 1. 6d'1 in question.? Owners were not decisions in some states, but counsel and closely monitor entitled, according to the court, may have no effect on cases proposed regulatory takings leg- to the so-called highest and best in other states. Two relatively islation or initiatives that might use, but rather to a reasonable recent cases are included in the invalidate protection for historic and beneficial use of the prop- Appendix. On the legislative resources. erty. The idea that a property front, in 2004, Oregon voters owner could"establish a `tak- approved a regulatory takings Due Process and Equal ing' simply by showing that they initiative known as Measure 37 Protection have been denied the ability to (ORS 197.352). This legisla- ...nor shall any state exploit a property interest that tion allows landowners to claim deprive any person of life, they heretofore had believed compensation for any decrease liberty, or property, without was available for development is in property value resulting from due process of law. quite simply untenable."8 land use, environmental, or other Fifteen years after Penn government regulations. Local If constitutional protections had Central, the Supreme Court gave governments must either pay the to be prioritized, due process a partial answer to the ques- property owners for this loss or and equal protection might well tion of when does a regulation waive the regulation. be at the top. Nothing in our go too far, declaring in Lucas v. Property rights organizations system of government is more South Carolina Coastal Council, seized the opportunity presented important in terms of protect- 505 U.S. 1003 (1992), that a by Proposition 37 to introduce ing the citizens from arbitrary categorical taking occurs if all legislation or ballot initiatives and capricious government economically beneficial use of in a number of other states and behavior. Supreme Court Justice property is denied.9 If some via- capitalized on citizen anger over Felix Frankfurter captured this ble use remains, then the three- the Kelo decision to add takings reverence for fundamental fair- part inquiry of Penn Central measures to unrelated eminent ness in his opinion in McNabb must be applied.Although a domain legislation.Although v. United States, 318 U.S. 332 number of years have elapsed only one takings initiative mod.- (1943): "The history of liberty since the decision, as recently as eled on Proposition 37 was suc- has largely been the history of 2001, Justice O'Connor of the cessful in the 2006 elections, observance of procedural safe- U.S. Supreme Court referred to proponents continue to advocate gUa'ds•"11 Penn Central as the "polestar" legislative or constitutional Due process has two distinct for analyzing takings claims in changes. dimensions procedural and a land use case,Palazzolo v. This development could effec- substantive. These dual doc- Rhode Island, 533 U.S. 606, 633 tively undermine historic preser- trines often appear together and (2001) (O'Connor, J., concur- vation ordinances and other land are related to one another. ring).1° use regulations throughout the Procedural due process Many state courts have also country that have been upheld in relates to the manner in which addressed the takings issue. court challenges such as Mahon actions are taken, and is intend- These decisions are binding on and Penn Central. Preservation ed to protect citizens against the respective states, and per- commissions should review unfair governmental action. If haps are persuasive on court the situation in their state with a property interest is involved, then that interest cannot be Putting Due Process Principles to Work adversely affected without prop- er notice and an opportunity to If your commission wants to avoid running afoul of due process and equal protections problems, you should ask whether every be.heard by a competent tribu- action the commission takes passes legal muster—is it orderly, I nal. Proper procedures must be fundamentally fair, and impartial? followed. These procedures are Adequate Notice set by law and are usually very 7/ Have you followed the notice requirements of state law specific. For example, notice (including sunshine laws) and the local ordinance in all may require publication once 1 details, including specified methods and deadlines? per week for three consecutive Have you given appropriate notice to affected applicants, property owners, neighbors, and the general public? weeks in the official organ of I the county, etc. Opportunity to Be Heard What this means in practi- n Have you given all parties a reasonable opportunity to pres- ent their arguments and evidence? cal terms is that commission- r Are time restrictions reasonable and equitable? ers should know the procedural R requirements in their enabling Impartiality 7 Are all commissioners free from conflict of interest and legislation, local ordinance, bias on every issue in which they participate—both finan- bylaws, rules, and regulations cial and personal? If you are not sure, talk to your local and follow those procedures to government attorney or ethics officer for guidance. the letter. It does not mean that 11 Have you avoided ex parte contacts—having discussions with interested parties outside the official process and the the commission must reach a public eye—and revealed any inadvertent contacts for the result based on the information record? provided by an applicant. One Informed Decision Making court put it this way: "[T]he pro- n Are you prepared for each decision on which you vote, cedural requirements we have having read the application, visited the site, and been pres- identified serve not to protect ent for all of the proceedings? the public from unwise decisions r, Do you understand all the issues; have you listened care- } fully and asked questions? but from uninformed decisions. n Have you treated all similarly situated properties or proj- ...Although the board was not ects similarly or given reasons for any different treatment? bound to listen to plaintiffs con- - Is your decision supported by reasons and findings of fact cerns, it was bound to hear them and based on the criteria in your ordinance and any appli- I cable design guidelines? before making its decision."12 If the procedures are not working, Prompt Decision Making don't ignore them; change them n Have you made decisions within the time limits allowed by law and within a reasonable time given the circumstances or request a change from your of the case? legislative body. Some tips for putting due process to work are Preparing for Challenges £ n Have you prepared an adequate record—written, audio, found in the accompanying box, video—of each case and the proceedings that can support but ask your local government your decisions if challenged? legal department for further m Does the record document and make clear that you have passed all of the "smell tests" above? guidance on proper procedure. E z 1.ar * , V „ � l a A 4 ,z -:y • .- ,,-4, vi t ,.., Substantive due process is jurisdiction equal protec- nal basis, then the classification not as clear-cut as procedural tion of the laws. will be upheld. In the case of due process in that the substan- classifications which the courts The constitutional protection tive aspect of due process relates consider suspect(such as race provided by the equal protec- to the basic fairness or equity of or national origin), the govern- tion clause of both the Fifth a decision. If the court believes and Fourteenth Amendments ment will have to meet a higher that some fundamental principle standard of proof. In those types is a fundamental aspect of due of fairness has been violated, of cases, the government will process; that is why the two then it can take action to correct V have to show that the classifica- terms appear together so often. it. Of course, fairness, like beau- Equal protection in practice tion was necessary to promote a ty, is very much in the eye of means freedom from improp- compelling state interest. This is the beholder, so courts are less erly differential treatment and a high standard to meet. likely to overturn a decision on from arbitrary and capricious Because every situation is these grounds than they are on treatment by the government. In different, and because every procedural due process grounds. other words, everyone is entitled landowner thinks that his or her For example, an Illinois court to fair treatment under the law; property or case is special, the overturned a zoning decision treatment is not based on bias, courts are full of equal protec- of a local government board prejudice, or cronyism. Similar tion challenges. Several cases because the board failed to pro- situations should produce simi- relating to historic preserva- vide for cross-examination—a lar outcomes, no matter who the tion issues are discussed in the procedural defect. Plaintiffs parties might be. Appendix. One general principle had also challenged the action What equal protection does to keep in mind is to treat simi- on substantive due process not mean is that the government larly situated properties simi- grounds. On those grounds, the can never treat any person or larly. If you have a legitimate court refused to substitute its property differently than anyone reason for treating them differ- judgment for that of the board else. The government does have ently, make sure your basis for in an area where the board had the right to make classifications doing so is clearly entered into been given discretion by the of people, and it does so all the the record. legislature. The court put it this time. People who make higher way: "If the board's decision incomes pay a higher percent- Religious Freedom is unwise but does not violate age of their salaries in taxes, for substantive due process [that is, example. People who own prop- During the past two decades basic fairness], the plaintiff's erty in residential areas are not there has been a vigorous permitted to erect a gas station debate on the role of religion remedy lies in the political in American socie and an arena; simply put, if unhappy, on their lot if a zoning ordinance h' prohibiting this use is in effect. increasing number of challenges the plaintiffs may campaign to These are perfectly valid distinc- by churches and other religious throw the rascals out."13 tions. organizations to laws and regu- Equal protection under the What the government must be lations. Land-use regulations Fourteenth Amendment states: able to show is that any classifi- affecting religious institutions ...nor shall any state deny cation that it makes has a ratio- have come under particular to any person within its nal basis. If it can show a ratio- scrutiny. Prior to this time, the 4 77 �{ D0 .s '? R 99 '4'*E 1 ° ``�� u 8 ,r€, s y 4P;. y a da`v i t --, .gai- � .RFL ,- relatively few cases involv- government may not"substan- applied for a permit to enlarge ing religious organizations tially burden" the free exercise of its building. When the permit that reached the courts were religion unless there is a"corn- was denied, the church brought often decided as taking claims pelling governmental interest" suit under RFRA. The Court under the Fifth and Fourteenth and the government employs the held that there was no show- Amendments rather than as reli- "least restrictive means" of fur- ing of a widespread pattern of gious freedom claims. Instead of thering that interest. religious discrimination in the applying an economic return test In 1990, the U.S. Supreme country that would justify such a used for commercial properties, Court recognized an excep- sweeping approach by Congress the courts examined whether the tion to that rule in Employment and that the act contradicted regulations either"physically Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872, the principles necessary to or financially prevented or seri- 879 (1990). The Court held maintain separation of powers ously interfered with" carrying that "neutral laws of general and the federal-state balance. out an organization's charitable Incidentally, the church ended applicability" do not require or religious purpose. Cases a showing of compelling state up using a"compromise"plan taking this approach include that was initially negotiated with interest, even though they might Trustees of Sailors'Snug Harbor preservationists before the years v. Plat, 288 N.Y.S.2d 314 (App. substantially burden the exercise of court battles. of religion. Preservation ordi- Div. 1968) and Lafayette Park In the decade after Boerne, Baptist Church v. Board of nances may generally be consid- at least 13 states passed their Adjustment, 599 S.W.2d 61 (Mo. ered as neutral laws of general own religious protection laws: Ct.App. 1980).' applicability where they seek to Alabama,Arizona, Connecticut, More recently, challenges and preserve all historic properties Florida, Idaho, Illinois, New decisions have focused squarely Without regard their secular or Mexico, Oklahoma, Rhode on First Amendment protections. religious nature or the owner's Island, South Carolina, and The First Amendment's estab- religious orientation. Texas. lishment clause requires that Religious groups reacted The U.S. Supreme Court has government be neutral toward strongly against the "neutral yet to rule directly on these state religion. Laws must have a law" exception, and Congress laws. These "little RFRA's" are secular purpose. They must not sought to nullify it by passing the based on the widely recognized advance or inhibit religion, give Religious Freedom Restoration principle that states may afford preference to one religion over Act(RFRA) in 1993, 42 U.S.C. a higher degree of protection of another, or foster"an excessive §2000bb, et. seq. individual rights under their own entanglement"with religion.14 Four years later, the Supreme constitutions than that guaran- The free exercise clause, on Court struck down RFRA in City teed by the U.S. Constitution. the other hand, prohibits gov- of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. Therefore, states are free to emment from interfering with 507 (1997), a case involving apply the higher"compelling the free exercise of religion or the application of a local pres- state interest" test when decid- coercing individuals into violat- ervation ordinance to a Roman ing religious freedom cases ing their religion. Catholic church in Texas. The within their own jurisdiction. In applying these guarantees, church, which was located in The Washington State Federal courts have held that a local historic district, had Supreme Court took this IC' � it�''i=+, f:`."` t,�r�,, �, t ,.*-^ ^fie .�w � iy ,� ,� i N i�"`� f,� #* F 4a s.4 auk �F" t x 4.t,�sc "sa e�` Zf �° `t«.itN $t e `f S �� - 11 • • approach in First Covenant that governmental interest. (1991), has held that financial Church of Seattle v. City of Whether the new law passes burdens alone do not rise to a Seattle, 840 P.2d 174 (1992), Constitutional muster has yet to constitutionally significant level. ' based on interpretation of the be decided by the U.S. Supreme • In that case the church had been state constitution, and not a Court, but a number of chal- denied a permit to demolish its "little RFRA."There, the land- lenges are working their way historic community house in mark designation of a church up through the federal courts. order to build a new office tower building in Seattle was held a Regarding institutionalized per- to generate revenue for its chari- violation of both federal and sons, RLUIPA, section 3 has table and religious activities. state constitutional free exercise been held valid by a unanimous The Seventh Circuit Court protections. On appeal, the U.S. court in Cutter v. Wilkinson 544 of Appeals in Civil Liberties Supreme Court sent the deci- U.S. 709 (2005).15 for Urban Believers v. City of sion back to the Washington While most cases to reach Chicago, 342 F.3d 752, 761 Court to reconsider in light of the courts focus on discrimina- (7th Cir. 2003), a case involving Smith. In its subsequent opinion, tory zoning and land use issues Chicago's zoning ordinance, has the Washington Court based its other than historic preservation, also held that, "in the context decision in favor of the church many religious organizations of RLUIPA's broad definition solely on the "greater protection have used RLUIPA's existence of religious exercise, a land- for individual rights" contained to argue for exemptions before use regulation that imposes a in the Washington Constitution. preservation commissions and substantial burden on religious Congress also responded to local governing bodies. To avoid exercise is one that necessarily the Boerne decision by enacting intimidation and misunderstand- bears direct, primary, and funda- in 2000 the Religious Land Use ing, it is important for commis- mental responsibility for render- and Institutionalized Persons Act sions to know what the law does ing religious exercise—includ- (RLUIPA), 42 U.S.C. §2000cc, and does not do. Some clarity of ing the use of real property for et seq. Crafted to overcome the purpose may be found in a joint the purpose thereof within the constitutional problems of the statement issued at the time of regulated jurisdiction gener- earlier law, RLUIPA focused the law's passage by the spon- ally—effectively impracticable." narrowly on laws regulating sors in the United States Senate. The court went on to say that to land use and institutionalized The main points of the statement hold otherwise would render the persons, which were laws are included in the Appendix. word "substantial" meaningless. alleged to pose specific threats A key to proving a RLUIPA Preservation ordinances are to religious practices. RLUIPA violation is a showing that the designed to protect the appear- provides that a land use regula- preservation ordinance is con- ance of designated religious tion may not substantially bur- sidered a"substantial burden on buildings and surrounding his- den the religious exercise of a religious exercise". This may toric districts, and such protec- person or institution unless the be difficult to prove. The U. S. tions would generally not render government can demonstrate a Court of Appeals in Rector of St. impractical their use for reli- compelling-interest for doing so, Bartholomew's Church v. City of gious exercise. and the regulation is the least New York, 914 F.2d 348 (2d Cir. Once a substantial burden is restrictive means of furthering 1990), cert denied, 499 U.S. 905 established, however, commis- r s 12° ip's i,t�aa-.p A^mod '' 'oa'*£T '"'"n t a ,n { ,f •,„l„,.�d :3 sions may find it difficult to government control of signs Commissions should be argue that historic preservation and billboards. First, the U.S. careful to establish how the is a compelling government Supreme Court recognized aes- regulation of signs directly interest. While Penn Central thetic reasons alone as sufficient advances preservation goals and held preservation to be a legiti- support for this exercise of the go no further than necessary. mate government interest, no police power. Secondly, the Communities should never try court has yet found it to be corn- opinion would permit reason- to prohibit whole categories of pelling. In fact, the Washington able "time, place, and manner" speech such as controversial State Supreme Court held restrictions such as the regula- political statements. specifically in First Covenant tion of sign color, size, shape, In three Eleventh Circuit Church v. Seattle, 840 P.2d 174 height, number, placement, and cases, the Federal Appeals (Wash. 1992), that the city's lighting as long as the ordinance Court withstood challenges to interest in preserving historic does not control content. The restrictions on expression in structures was not compelling. court also agreed that off-prem- historic districts. Ordinances This area of the law is devel- ises sighs (such as billboards) restricting the use of tables to oping rapidly and commissions could be banned entirely. sell message-bearing t-shirts facing religious freedom chal- In the case of signs, the law (One World One Family Now v. lenges should seek legal advice distinguishes between commer- City of Miami Beach, 175 F.3d as soon as the issue arises. It is cial speech (as in advertisements 1282 (11th Cir. 1999)), limiting important, however, to remem- for goods and services) and restaurant advertising by "off ber that churches are not exempt non-commercial speech (such premises canvassers" (Sciarrino from local land-use laws, as as political or religious signs). v. City of Key West, 83 F.3d 364 many argue. They must follow Non-commercial speech is gen- (11th Cir. 1996)), and prohibit- the same certificate of appropri- erally accorded a higher degree ing street performances in an ateness and variance processes of protection. Central Hudson historic district (Horton v. City as secular property owners. Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public of St. Augustine, 272 F.3d 1318 Service Commission, 447 U.S. (11th Cir. 2001)) were upheld Freedom of Speech 557 (1980), contains a four-part as appropriate "time, place, and While few cases address free- test on constitutionality of con- manner"restrictions on speech trols on advertising. A similar that did not discriminate based dom of speech directly in a pres- ervation context, there is a sub- test for non-commercial signs on content, and were consid- stantial body of state and federal can be found in United States v. ered narrowly-drawn means law on sign regulation. Many O'Brien, 391 U.S. 367 (1968). of addressing congestion and local preservation ordinances In the case of City of Ladue v. unruly conduct in historic dis- regulate signs on landmark Gilleo, 512 U.S. 43 (1994), the tricts. properties and within historic U.S. Supreme Court struck down Like signs, a proliferation districts. a city ban on most non-commer- of newsboxes can negatively The seminal case of cial signs enacted in response impact the appearance of his- Metromedia, Inc. v. City of San to a resident's yard sign reading toric districts. Since these boxes Diego, 453 U.S. 490 (1981), set "Say No to War in the Persian are the means of distributing down the parameters for local Gulf, Call Congress Now." speech, they enjoy the same First Amendment protection as ISSUES THAT CAN TAKE of those under their jurisdiction. signs; nevertheless they are sub- A COMMISSION TO In this case, a property owner of ject to regulation. Guidelines for COURT a building located within a his- their appearance and location toric district sought a certificate . would be appropriate. Enforcement and Liability of appropriateness for planned The First Circuit Court of changes to a building. The local Appeals even approved an effec While Americans believe strong- ly in the due process and equal historic commission objected to tive ban on all sidewalk news- the owner's plans to enclose five boxes in Boston's Beacon Hill protection guarantees of the 5th historic district. The opinion in and 14th Amendments, they also windows and ordered him to Globe Newspaper Co. v. Beacon believe strongly in justice. And keep the windows'original con- figuration. The property owner Hill Architectural Commission, justice sometimes calls for sanc- 100 F. 3d 175 (1st Cir. 1996), tions and punishment for actions disregarded the commission's found the regulation was content that violate the law. The follow- instructions and enclosed the neutral, the aesthetic concern ing case discusses one of these entire wall where the five win- was a significant government kinds of situations. down had been positioned. interest, and alternative means City of Toledo v. Finn, No. L- The city issued three stop existed in the district for dis- 92-168, 1993 WL 18809 (Ohio work orders, which the owner tributing newspapers; therefore, Ct. App. Jan. 29, 1993), demon- also disregarded. The property there was no violation of the strates the scope of historic pres- owner appealed his misdemean- freedom o speech. ervation commissions' authority or conviction for failure to corn- to bring about criminal sanctions ply with the stop work orders, that punish the noncompliance claiming alternatively no viola- { Seeking Legal Advice The watchwords for members of historic preservation commissions when dealing with legal issues should be vigilance, caution, and education. It is easy to get into trouble in this field, especially for the layperson. However, don't let yourself be intimidated by bogus claims of takings, RLUIPA violations, etc. Do not hesitate to ask your local government attorney or some other person with legal knowledge and understanding to explain or clarify a point. If you think there's going to be trouble at a preservation commission meeting, definitely ask your attorney to attend. It could save time, money, and reputation for all concerned. Other possible sources of help and advice include the following: lj National Alliance of Preservation Commissions: www.uga.edu/napc Li Law Department of the National Trust for Historic Preservation: www.nationaltrust.org/ law/index.html LI Your state's Certified Local Government(CLG) contact http://grants.cr.nps.gov/CLGs/ CLG_Search.cfm a National Park Service Certified Local Government Program: www.nps.gov/history/hps/ clg/index.htm tion of the orders, no intention provision in their local code to ers, including tax relief, loans, to violate the orders, and most prevent owners from neglecting grants, public acquisition, or significantly, that the stop work their properties and then arguing zoning variances. orders were unconstitutional and that restoration or repair is an Third, hardship provisions unreasonable exercises of the economic hardship. can head off litigation by pro- city's police power. Also to be effective, preserva- viding an administrative process The court affirmed the valid- tion commissions must coordi- for resolving differences that ity of aesthetic regulation as an nate with their code inspection is less formal and costly than exercise of police power, includ- and enforcement office. There going to court, and communities ing historic district regulations can be conflict when a code can strengthen their positions if such as certificates of appro- enforcement officer orders a they do go to court. priateness. The commission, designated building be demol- Courts generally defer to as an entity of the city govern- ished as a fire or safety hazard preservation commissions where ment, had the right to enjoin the without coordinating with the there is a reasonable basis in owner from altering the original preservation commission or the record for their decision. window configuration of his staff. Good working relation- Further, by lightening the eco- building as an application of the ships with other local govern- nomic burden on the property city's police power. The owner's ment officials and resolution of owner, the commission can . failure to comply with the corn- ordinance conflicts are keys to help defeat a takings argument. mission's orders regarding his success. Several cases on economic plans was "`illegal' and/or 'con- Courts generally have been hardship are discussed in the trary to the public welfare"' and supportive of ordinances pro- Appendix. properly countered with a stop hibiting demolition by neglect. work order.16 Several cases are described in Open Meetings and Open more detail in the Appendix. Records Demolition by Neglect Economic Hardship Most states have strict require- Demolition by neglect describes ments regarding open meetings a situation in which an owner It is important for communities and open records, including the intentionally allows a prop- to address economic hardship requirements for notice of meet- erty to deteriorate, sometimes for several reasons. ings. These must be followed beyond the point of repair. In First, it helps make preserva- closely and carefully, or the some cases, the owner passively tion ordinances more acceptable commission runs the risk of hav- defers maintenance beyond a to the community by assuring ing its decisions nullified later. reasonable point or abandons property owners of relief where In some states, courts can award the property. More often it is an strict application of the ordi- court costs and attorney fees to active strategy to redevelop the nance or guidelines would have those improperly denied access. property in the face of preserva- an unusually harsh result. The open meetings laws, tion and zoning laws that would Second, it allows communi- often referred to as sunshine preserve historic character and/ ties to develop and implement a laws, typically provide a defini- or current use. Communities range of approaches to relieve ' tion of what constitutes a public need an affirmative maintenance the burden on all property own- meeting, specify the actions TIPS FROM THE EXPERTS # 1 Effectively Addressing DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT in Local Ordinances and Procedures , Require compliance with all codes, laws, and regulations regarding the mainte- nance of property. .= Require that all structures be preserved from decay and deterioration and be free from structural defects. • Identify specific problems that will constitute demolition by neglect, such as • Deteriorated or inadequate foundations, walls, floors, ceilings, rafters and other { supports; • Ineffective waterproofing of roofs, walls, and foundation including deteriorated paint, brick, mortar, and stucco, along with broken doors and windows; • Holes and other signs of rot and decay; the deterioration of any feature so as to create a hazardous condition; • Lack of maintenance of the surrounding environment (such as accessory struc- tures, fences walls, sidewalks, and other landscape features). a Specify how the provisions of the ordinance will be enforced. Identify how stop work orders and citations are to be made, the time frame for problem correction, and an appeals procedure. Mandate coordination between the preservation commission and staff, and the local government's inspection and code enforcement office. A good working relationship with code officials is critical to ensuring effective problem identification and cor- rection. .1., Specify the penalties for failure to comply with citations. While fines and equi- table remedies are typical, an additional and more effective alternative (if allowed by state law) may be to authorize the government to make the repairs directly and charge the owner by putting a lien on the property. • Authorize acquisition of the property by local government, by eminent domain if necessary. a Provide economic incentives to encourage the maintenance and rehabilitation of historic properties. Encourage volunteer programs to assist lower income residents. a Specify that demolition by neglect will bar a property owner form raising an eco- nomic hardship claim in a certificate of appropriateness process. Only circumstanc- es beyond an,owner's control should entitle him or her to economic relief. 1 For a more detailed analysis, see Becker 1999 in the Sources of Information. 1 1 �; l � � c,.._,.. _.,..��. .. n...,,.. __.. _ ,w., .._a. _,,... n,.,s ,s.._ _�,aes., a zr °€x. saT_ .�..._, ° .,, «,,. ..r?✓_w., i �: _. ��'F,ra-......,_ e.,a...z,ne� ._,,........m..v,tea. TIPS FROM THE EXPERTS # 2 Effectively Addressing ECONOMIC HARDSHIP in Local Ordinances and Procedures 74 Do not consider economic hardship arguments during the designation process. Economic impact is only speculative until a property owner makes a specific propos- al. Further, it clouds the issue of significance, the primary concern for designation. 7 In considering economic hardship, it is crucial that the preservation commission focus on the property and not the particular economic circumstances of the owner. While the impact on a "poor widow" may appear unreasonable, the inquiry should be whether the restrictions prevent the owner from putting the property to a reasonable economic use or realizing a reasonable profit. 7 Put the burden of proof on the property owner, not the commission. n Evidence of cost or expenditures alone, is not enough. The commission should require information that will assist it to determine whether application of the ordi- nance will deny reasonable use of the property or prevent reasonable economic return. The evidence should address the property"as is" and if rehabilitated (which may mean just bringing it up to code). Some other factors to consider include: pur- chase price, assessed value and taxes, revenue, vacancy rates, operating expenses, financing, current level of return, efforts to find alternative use of the property, recent efforts to rent or sell the property, availability of economic incentives or special financing ( such as tax benefits, low-interest loans, grants, or transferable develop- ment rights). Additional consideration may be appropriate in assessing the impact on non-profit organizations such as the ability to carry out their charitable or religious purposes (although a non-profit is not entitled to relief simply because it could otherwise earn more money). 2 Determine who caused the hardship. If the owner has neglected the building, paid too much for the property, or is just gambling on getting a permit in spite of knowing the ordinance provisions, he may have created his own hardship. Government isn't required to bail an owner out of a bad business decision or speculative investment. ri Commissions should consider bringing in their own expert witnesses where neces- sary. If the matter goes to court, the decision will be based on evidence in the record. Local government housing, engineering, and building inspection staff may provide useful testimony. For a more detailed analysis of economic hardship provisions see Julia Miller 1996 and 1999 in the Sources of Information. ViliP:iffi-74-707W1124-Wita-WM457iiiiiM.;iX-77,§I..ritAMMTV8SISIK§WagggaggiMPla 17 tit giya ,��s. ep ..�.,i"`x s '..�.€.. ems, RK><. - < .,? ia ^.,t„ ,. . A,.. • that can be taken and who may ered, and may need to maintain go up. These contacts can affect attend, address required public a certain level of confidentiality individuals'rights to due process notice—adopting a schedule of in order to reduce the possibility and equal protection and could regular meetings, giving notice that the sites may be looted or result in the invalidation of of special and emergency meet- vandalized. commission action. While such ings, and identifying very limit- a communication may cause a- ed instances where meetings can Off-the-Record serious problem, it is not always be closed, such as for discussion Communications fatal to a commission decision. of personnel actions or property Another important aspect of One thing a commissioner who acquisition. In addition to invali- the need to conduct business in has such a contact can do is to dation of commission action, public relates to contacts and reveal the content of the conver- Georgia law, for example, pro- conversations about a case that sation in the course of a public vides that"any person know- are off-the-record, or outside of hearing on the matter. In that ingly and willfully conducting the normal proceedings. These case, the information becomes or participating in a meeting in are known as ex parte communi- a part of the record and other violation of this chapter shall cations. The process of issuing interested parties can respond to be guilty of a misdemeanor and or rebut the information. a certificate of appropriateness, upon conviction shall be pun- for example, is considered in ished by a fine not to exceed Regulating Non-historic $500.00." 17 many jurisdictions as a quasi- properties and Vacant judicial proceeding.The corn- Land �+ i in Historic ✓%striV iJ Open records laws require mission is acting as judge and governments to provide prompt jury by applying the law to the In order to protect the character access to public records when facts in a particular case. The of historic districts, it is impor- requested by a citizen. This same analogy applies to a local tant that preservation commis- would include the materials sub- governing body hearing appeals sions have the power to regulate mitted as part of a commission's from a preservation commission non-historic properties and decision-making process. It is decision. undeveloped land within the dis- important that commissions cre- Just as it would be improper tricts. Courts have consistently ate accurate records and main- for an interested party to corn- ruled that these types of proper- tain them in an accessible loca- municate with the judge or a ties are not exempt from control. tion. juror outside official channels In A-S-P Associates v. City of All commissioners should while a case is going on, a Raleigh, 258 S.E.2d 444 (N.C. review these open meetings/ similar communication with a 1979), for example, the North open records laws and refer preservation commissioner is . Carolina Supreme Court rejected any questions to their attor- also improper. When a commis- such a claim, stating that"pres- ney. The chairman in particular sion member receives a tele- ervation of the historic aspects needs to understand clearly the phone call or is approached in of a district requires more than do's and don'ts of these laws. church or at the grocery store by simply the preservation of those Commissions may have some- someone who wants to discuss buildings of historical and archi- what different rules when arche- a pending issue before the corn- tectural significance within the ological sites are being consid- mission, warning flags should district."18 The court also noted 18 � � � � ' r r : z4 � es'� a � � ..z.a that, as opposed to banning new to keep those impending regula- After a preliminary determina- structures, the ordinance simply tions from being destroyed by an tion of a property's eligibility, required the plaintiff"to con- individual or group seeking to the owner must follow the same struct them in a manner that will circumvent the ultimate result of procedure for development as if not result in a structure incon- the rezoning."2° However, sev- the property were already land- gruous with the historic aspects eral courts, including Southern marked until the city council of the Historic District."19 National Bank of Houston v. acts on designation. Whatever Another relevant case is City of Austin, 582 S.W.2d approach is employed, the corn- Coscan Washington, Inc. v. 229 (Tex. Civ.App. 1979) and mission should be certain its Maryland-National Capital Park Weinberg v. Barry, 604 F.Supp. process follows the mandates of & Planning Commission, 590 390 (D.D.C. 1985), have noted state and local law. A.2d 1080 (Md. Ct. Spec.App. that moratoria should have rea- Another approach is the 1991), which upheld restrictions sonable time limits. demolition review law, which on building materials in new In 2002, the U.S. Supreme may be separate from the his- subdivision near an historic area Court upheld the constitutional- toric preservation ordinance. because of the public interest in ity of a 32-month moratorium Such an ordinance would apply protecting the historic district. on development of property in to the proposed demolition of the Lake Tahoe Basin pending any building over a certain Protection of Properties the completion of a compre- age, or a significant portion of Pending Designation and hensive land use plan in Tahoe- a building, or otherwise meet- Anticipatory Demolition Sierra Preservation Council, ing the criteria spelled out in In order to keep the bulldozers Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning the ordinance. During a specific at bay while a preservation des- Agency, 535 U.S. 302 (2002). period of time, a determination ignation is under consideration, Rejecting a claim that any total would be made as to whether the a number of communities estab- moratorium on development was property was eligible for protec- a temporary taking, the court tion. Following the review, the lish a temporary time-out called held that restrictions on develop- property might or might not be a moratorium while the commu- ment must be considered on a designated under the historic nity decides whether to provide case-by-case basis under the test preservation ordinance or other- permanent protection. Courts set out in the Penn Central case. wise receive protection. This can have generally been supportive To hold otherwise, the court be an effective tool to address of this approach. said, "would render routine gov- buildings that may have been In a case involving the ernment processes prohibitively "missed"by the community's Swiss Avenue Historic District expensive or encourage hasty survey and designation program in Dallas (City of Dallas v. decision making."21 or buildings that do not meet the Crownrich, 506 S.W.2d 654 An alternative to a total standards or designation but oth- (Tex. Civ.App. 1974)), the development ban pending desig- erwise have characteristics that court declared that, "it would be nation is an approach to interim enhance the community. It can inconsistent to allow a city...the protection employed by some certainly buy time for preserva- power to make zoning regula- cities, such as Chicago in its tionists to try and negotiate an tions, and then deny it the power Landmark Ordinance §21-67. alternative to their destruction. • e ., sma x a— n—SY re .�'. e:; ^";, cC,r"'° c. r t E a'.g , �£ �r �'4 is f rl..S € '�`$ � �i a "v t ✓ ok' �Y�,. ".1 9 r 1 ., w `Li , ..xia .' ., x . '..� , .,� - .:, LITIGATION ISSUES tions. The Civil Rights Act of are acting under color of law 1871, which has been codified (under the authority of the his- There are several issues that will in the United States Code as sec- toric preservation ordinance). be relevant to a preservation tion 1983 of Title 42, provides, So it behooves all members commission facing litigation, in pertinent part, as follows: of historic preservation corn- or considering the possibility of missions, as well as all public instituting litigation. The local § 1983. Civil action for of of rights officials generally, to be cau- deprivationgovernment's legal departmenttious in how they exercise the will usually handle the corn- Every person who, under powers of their positions. If mission's interests in litigation. color of any statute, ordi- they are found to have violated Nevertheless, it is important for nance, regulation, custom, someone's civil rights, they will commission members to under- or usage, of any State or pay for it, and out of their own stand what is going on in order Territory or the District pockets. However, by carefully to assist the attorney, who may of Columbia, subjects, or following the provisions of the not be familiar with historic causes to be subjected, any local ordinance and established preservation issues. citizen of the United States procedures and treating every- or other person within the one fairly and equally, commis- Liability jurisdiction thereof f to the sinners should be able to avoid Few issues cause greater con deprivation of any rights, individual liability.23 cern among local government privileges, or immunities officials than that of liability, Secured by the Constitution Juri diction both for the government itself and laws, shall be liable the partyinjured in an One of the most important issues and for public officials individu- to action at law, suit in equity, in American jurisprudence is ally. In most jurisdictions, this or otherproperproceedingthat of jurisdiction. This concept problem has been addressedp p or redress.22 relates to the authority of the through the purchase of liabil- f court to act. The court system ity insurance policies or by tort (both federal and state) exists claims acts.As long as a gov- What this means in lay lan- to resolve disputes between ernment official acts within the guage is this: if a public offi- opposing parties. But in order scope of his or her authority cial's action deprives someone for the courts to be able to do and without malice, qualified of his or her civil rights, that that and impose any penalties or immunity will normally attach to official can be sued for redress, sanctions on anyone, they must the actions taken, and no liabil- and that includes money dam- have jurisdiction over both the ity will be found. If an error is ages. In such a case, the official subject matter of the lawsuit made, however, the official will will be responsible for the pay- and over the parties themselves. be protected by the insurance ment, not the government (and Strict rules have been developed policies that are in place, since not the government's insurance to guide this process, and they he or she was performing a pub- policies). must be carefully followed if a lic function or duty. Members of historic preserva- plaintiff(or claimant) hopes to One major exception to this is tion commissions are considered prevail. When considering or in the area of civil rights viola- public officials, because they facing a lawsuit, a commission 20 ' " z *»r i i' 1 '" a ' 4." rd -i 0 .. i -1 ifA ,._emsM _, .., , ,_ ' .w 4Z' ._ __.,a,, >FW., ,,_ .,1.:: ., should be sure the action is filed not conjectural or hypo- demonstrated "special harm in a court with jurisdiction over thetical; that would occur to him if the the matter. 71 that the injury fairly can Certificate of Appropriateness Preservation commissions be traced to the challenged awarded by the regional corn- have issues of jurisdiction, too. action; and mission is allowed to stand."24 State enabling legislation and that the injury is likely to local ordinances specify the Ripeness/Exhaustion of be redressed by a favorable parameters within which the Administrative Remedies commission may act. A com- decision from the court. Ripeness is a concept that refers mission may have authority to Federal courts have generally to the timetable of a legal dis- prevent demolition of designated recognized that aesthetic or pute. Courts are reluctant to step properties, for example, but not environmental "injuries" can in and make a decision before of properties that might be eligi- meet these tests. ble but not designated. In such a the established administrative One of the most striking process has been followed to its case, the commission would lack aspects of the American inter- conclusion. The courts want to c jurisdiction and be unable to governmental system is the rela- prevent the issuance of a demo- avoid making a decision unless tive independence of the states, theyhave to. Thus, they permit. Commissioners will especially in matters of land use should make themselves aware often require that all administra- law. "Standing denied" in the of their jurisdiction—the subject tive remedies provided by state court of one state can well be matters and parties over which law be exhausted before they "standing approved" in another. they have authority. proceed to address the merits or While many preservation demerits of a particular fact situ- Standing ordinances allow appeals by ation. persons aggrieved by the deci- Likewise, federal courts are Standing to sue refers to the sion of the preservation commis- reluctant to consider Consti- legal right of an individual to sion, state courts differ widely tutional claims until plaintiffs bring a lawsuit. Not everyone on the meaning of that term. have exhausted their state rem- has that right. What is required A plaintiff's participation in is that theplaintiff be able to edies.A federal court in the the administrative process or District of Columbia25 found show an actual stake in the out- ownership of property adjacent that a case was ripe for federal come of the proceeding. The or close to the property in ques- review where the historic pres- U.S. Supreme Court set out the tion can be significant factors test for standing to sue in fed- in conferring standing in some ervation commission denied requested permits, that decision eral courts in Lujan v. Defenders cases. Other courts impose a was adopted by the major's of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, very narrow interpretation. In agent, and District of Columbia 560-61(1992). The Lujan test Allen v. Old King's Highway law did not provide for corn- requires Regional Historic District, 2000 pensation for denied building :z that the plaintiff person- Mass. App. Div. 330 (Mass. permits. ally has suffered actual or Dist. Ct.), for example, the court Where issues have been threatened injury that is held that person aggrieved resolved outside the judicial pro- concrete and particularized, applied only to those who have cess by an administrative agency 2 21 or even an act of God, a court when it is shown that the plain- them. If those who govern will generally dismiss a case tiffs have be actively engaged in the District of Columbia as moot. For example, when a the administrative process and decide that the Nation's building that is subject of litiga- have not "sat on their hands" Capital should be beauti- tion is demolished, a court will after it became clear that there ful as well as sanitary, generally dismiss the case. were no further administrative there is nothing in the Fifth However, in situations other- remedies available to them. Amendment that stands in wise moot, courts have discre- the way.27 tion to resolve an issue of con- Doctrine of Judicial tinuing public interest likely to Restraint and Deference Modern courts have contin- reoccur in other cases and affect to Other Branches of ued to apply the doctrine of the future rights of the parties Government judicial restraint and deference before them.26 to other governmental branches Judges are not shy by nature, but With both ripeness and moot- generally they do not like to pre- in reviewing the decisions of ness, timing is everything. empt the role of other branches local historic preservation coin- Courts are generally not eager of the government. They believe missions. to take up a controversy when in, and practice, the separation In Collins v. Fuller, No. other remedies exist or the issue of powers doctrine, and are gen- 912479B, 1993 WL 818633 has been otherwise resolved erally reluctant to invade the (Mass. Dist. Ct.Aug. 6, 1993), unless there is a compelling pub- owners of a lot located in a L1eCi-i-n-making --harp that bac lic policy reason to do so. been carved out for the legisla- historic district sought a cer- ture and the executive branch. tificate of appropriateness for Laches new construction; the local his Many cases can be found in Laches also relates to the time- which the doctrine of judicial toric preservation commission table of a case, but at the other restraint is front and center. denied their request. The owners end of the proceeding. If a party In the famous Berman v. appealed to the local superior waits too long to bring a lawsuit, Parker decision cited earlier, court to annul the decision and the court may well dismiss it Justice Douglas not only defend- to issue the certificate. because of excessive delay. ed the police power, he also Deferring to the commission's Laches is similar to a statute defended the right of the legisla- determination "unless it is of limitations, except it is judi- tive branch to determine what legally untenable, arbitrary, or cial rather than statutory. In that concept means. He said this: capricious," the state district general, the partyattempting to court held that the commission P g We do not sit to determine use laches to bar a lawsuit must had the statutory authority to whether a particular hous- rove that theplaintiff's delayin base its decision on consider- prove ing project is or is not ation of"exterior architectural bringing suit was unreasonable desirable... [T]he Congress or inexcusable and that the delay and its authorized agencies features subject to public view has been prejudicial. have made determinations that might impact on the historic Most courts are reluctant to that take into account a and architectural integrity of the uphold a laches defense in envi- wide variety of values. It ing the preservation of a historic surrounding district,"28 includ- ronmental cases, particularly is not for us to reappraise l ^t 5PF«. fir.,, .ds_.�, ��. `f _. _...,.. .>...b.,, .. ,..,,,_z, .. ., ,,_ ..,>rx..�...., ,t.... ...._>_._ ... _.,, _ __.. ...>..e.•., <..,_ r�...._ :gas ..., r�,,...,_.._ _..a',„. ..,��. Massachusetts landscape. The application and any public This primer on the legal • commission had the right to con- testimony; aspects of historic preserva- clude that any structure promi- 7 make a determination tion in America is intended to nently visible from a historically whether those facts warrant provide commission members significant wooded parkway the approval or denial of with enough legal armor to keep would "spoil the very aspect of the owner's application; them out of trouble and out of [the district] that caused its des- identify the sections of the the courts. Forewarned is fore- ignation as an historic place,"29 ordinance, guidelines or armed! and to deny any applications for standards that support that certificate of appropriateness determination; and that would have this effect. X X X This deference to legislative "' make certain that these decisions can even extend to actions are entered into the administrative agencies. Farash official record. Corp. v. City of Rochester, 713 N.Y.S.2d 423 (N.Y. App. Div. CONCLUSION 2000), was a New York case in which the appellate divi- Protecting historic resources can sion reversed the holding of the be challenging, especially in an environ- lower court, because it had not increasingly litigious ment. The situation, however, deferred to the local commis- is neither impossible nor hope- sion's "administrative determi- less. It does require a careful nation"to deny a demolition reading of the U.S and State permit. The court found the Constitutions and laws, as well commission's decision had sup- as local ordinances, and an port in the record, had a reason- understanding of the ways that able basis in the law, and was the courts have interpreted these not arbitrary or capricious. In documents. other words, the decision of the A person appointed to serve administrative agency appeared ' on a local historic preserva- sound on the record, and should tion ordinance should not be not have been overturned by the frightened or worried, but he lower court, barring evidence of or she must be prepared to act some abuse of discretion by the in a legal manner. Commission agency. members do not need to be Therefore, in reaching its lawyers in order to act legally. decisions, the commission Commission members do need should: to know what kind of rules and identify the relevant facts behavior legally protects them of the case based on the and their decisions and when to evidence presented in the consult their local legal experts. 123 MORE LESSONS LEARNED For Keeping Your Commission Out Of Court • Ensure your ordinance is written in clear, simple language and is in accord with state legislation. Some of the key elements to consider are: • Statement of purpose • Definitions { • Establishment of preservation commission; powers and duties • Criteria and procedures for designating and removing designation of historic properties and districts • Identification of actions reviewable by commission(e.g., new construction, alterations, demolition, moving, landscape features) • Criteria and procedures for review • Legal effect of commission decisions (e.g., advisory, binding) • Economic hardships provisions • Affirmative maintenance or demolition by neglect provisions • Appeals procedures • Enforcement provisions • Be familiar with your laws, rules, and procedures: • Basic Federal and State constitutional principles, • State laws • Local ordinances • Commission bylaws • Rules of procedure • Design guidelines Ci Give your procedures and guidelines careful consideration, adopt them formally and follow them carefully; revise them if they are not working or not being followed. L Be sure you comply with all open meetings and open records laws. L, Maintain the highest ethical standards and comply with all relevant state and local ethics legisla- tion. • Decide issues on their merits, not on public opinion. Courts generally defer to the preservation commission where there is a reasonable basis in the record for their decision. • Be aware of commission precedent and follow it or explain any dissimilar treatment. • Ensure decisions are fairly and consistently enforced. u Seek legal advice on difficult or controversial issues. • Document, document, document. The written record will be the basis for understanding and upholding you commission's decisions. Li Regularly evaluate your own performance and make necessary changes. • Take advantage of training opportunities; stay informed and polish your skills. 4 • 24 g e �3I{ 0 €€ , 4 ��' ! 14 3�1 f 'w 1 � �k dxh �...i : Ess s,4,� ? >'�^-y. f "§,, � �( . ., _ .....� ..d d., � nit_. ._._. d.<��....,. .i�x..._. �.�. : 1. _ _ ...,... _._..... �'.4 APPENDIX bility of renovation versus new mission did not prove economic construction on the site, and the hardship. The property owners Case Examples marketability of the house in did not demonstrate that "they its current state. The commis- could not make any economic Commission Authority sion denied the property owners' use of their property;"27 selling The importance of carefully fol- request for demolition, finding the house in its current condi- lowing state statutory require- that the house was architectur- tion could conceivably turn a ments is illustrated in the case ally and historically significant, profit for the owners, thereby of Russell v. Town of Amite was structurally sound, and that allowing some economically City, 99-1721 (La.App. 1 Cir. - renovation costs were compara- viable use of the property, so as 11/08/00); 771 So. 2d 289. ble to those of new construction. not to be a taking. There, the Louisiana Court The property owners appealed of Appeals affirmed the trial the commission's decision to the Historic Albany Foundation, court's holding that an ordinance local trial court, which found in Inc. v. Coyne, 558 N.Y.S.2d creating a local historic district the property owners' favor. 986 (N.Y.App. Div. 1990). and preservation commission The Supreme Court of A non-profit historic preser- was null and void because the Pennsylvania reversed. It vation organization sued the city failed to comply with state applied the standard of United County of Albany, New York over its decision to demol- enabling legislation that required Artists'Theater Circuit v. City of ish a county-owned block of creation of a study committee, Philadelphia, 635 A.2d 612 (Pa. houses located within the City an investigation, and a report 1993): "[T]he mere fact that the to designating the district. of Albany without first comply- priorg regulation deprives the property ing with provisions of the city's As a consequence, preservation owner of the most profitable use Historic Resources Commission commissioners should particular- of his property is not necessarily Ordinance. The county argued ly beware of national models— enough to establish the owner's structur- what works in one state might 30 that the buildings were right to compensation." ally unsound and posed a risk not work in a neighboring state. In addition, the court used to the public. Under the city's State Takings Cases the test of Maher v. City of New ordinance, however, demoli- Orleans, 516 F.2d 1051 (5th Lion without a showing of either City of Pittsburgh v. Weinberg, Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 426 economic hardship or that a 676 A.2d 207 (Pa. 1996). U.S. 905 (1976),.requiring "the building was a non-contributing Property owners sought a cer- property owner to show 'that structure was forbidden. tificate of appropriateness from the sale of the property was Under the city's ordinance, a the City of Pittsburgh Historic impracticable, that commer- hardship determination had to Review Commission to demol- cial rental could not provide a be based on three factors: abil- ish a house, locally designated reasonable rate of return, or that ity to earn a reasonable return, as a historic structure. Testimony other potential use of the prop- adaptability to another use that at the commission hearing for erty was foreclosed.'"31 Using would make for a reasonable the property owners' certificate these standards, the court found return, and whether an attempt of appropriateness application that the evidence presented by has been made to sell the prop- dealt with the economic feasi- . the homeowners before the com- erty to a party interested in its zs , di s 4 }v h 4v i v P ,. ii A r �$2kzx" ro Lu€ er�a 25& , ' . 5 , s . . preservation. The county also Procedural Due Process had not filed an application or challenged the constitutional- paid a permit fee prior to the ity of the ordinance on a tak- Sometimes a case will be won or city commission's vote, and in ings claim since even publicly lost simply because procedural part because the certificate of owned property cannot be taken requirements were not followed. appropriateness was not properly by another governmental entity A pair of recent procedural due approved. The developer sued, without just compensation being process cases that originated in claiming a violation of his pro- Deadwood, South Dakota illus- paid. cedural due process rights. The appellate division court trates the impact of the failure The district court found for found that the ordinance's pro- of historic preservation commis- the city, arguing that the cer- visions for demolition met the sions to follow statutory proce- tificate of appropriateness was tests of the Penn Central case, dures for decision making. not properly issued, because "an by tying "demolition in effect to Achtien v. City of Deadwood, affirmative vote by only two a showing either that the build- 814 F. Supp. 808 (D.S.D. 1993), members of the five-member ing is not of historical, archeo- involved the permit process for commission in favor of...the logical or aesthetic value, or that new construction within a his- certificate is insufficient to the owner will suffer hardship toric district.A developer sought constitute a valid action by the by being required to repair or a certificate of appropriateness commission."36 Since a validly maintain property incapable of for new construction from the approved certificate of appropri- yielding a reasonable return."33 local historic preservation com- ateness was a prerequisite to the The county failed to demonstrate mission as a prerequisite to a issuance of a building permit, that the prerequisite of prepar- building permit from the city the issuance of the building per- ing, presenting, and having commission. At a joint meeting mit was void. approved a new development of the city commission and the The court held that, because plan for the post-demolition site historic preservation commis- the permit process was proce- would"deprive[] the county of sion, only three members of the durally flawed, both as to the all economically viable use of five-member historic preserva- certificate of appropriateness the subject property."34 tion commission were present. and as to the building permit, The county's arguments for Two members voted to issue the the developer did not "possess a taking without just compensa- certificate of appropriateness, property right in the [building] tion, based only on its being one voted against. Then the city permit,"37 failing to trigger the "subjected to some as yet commission approved the build- right to procedural due process. unknown expense of new devel- ing permit. opment before it can demolish Decided two years after the The state historic preservation Achtien decision,Donovan v. the property if[the historic pres- officer challenged this decision, City of Deadwood, 538 N.W.2d ervation ordinance] is enforced," citing the legal requirement that 790 (S.D. 1995), dealt with local were rejected as we11.35 The a majority (three members of the ) ordinance stood, and the order designation of a historic prop- five-member commission) con- erty and demolition permit deci- for demolition(and the takings cur. The city then rescinded its sions.A property owner sought claim) did not. issuance of the building permit, a building demolition permit for in part because the developer s ,,� ,''a s" �''4. $ '• Z '` ggs ....., ,.. ..., at.xA�.« na _,.«.._w > ��,�; :.,..K:A s_,..��.... ...,,. r� .w �.,u..,A sd5..v;. _<4 ,a a"historic" icehouse, which was public hearing on the proposal The developer challenged neither listed on the National for designation, and give written the city's decisions as based Register of Historic Places nor notice to the affected property on, among other issues, "imper- locally designated as a historic owner. Furthermore, a 180-day missibly vague and indefinite" resource. A city ordinance pur- waiting period from the time "historic-zoning legislation."40 • ported to empower the local of notice to the property owner Vagueness can be a violation historic preservation commission "had to be observed prior to its of due process because citizens to issue or deny building and [the designated historic proper- are not put on clear notice about demolition permits. ty's] demolition, material altera- what is or is not permissible. The Deadwood Historic tion, remodeling, or removal."38 The court in this case, how- Preservation Commission denied The City of Deadwood did not ever, disagreed, holding that the permit, basing its decision, follow the procedural steps the enabling legislation was not among other things, on eligibil- mandated by the South Dakota "unconstitutionally vague," cit- ity of the building for listing on enabling legislation dealing ing the statute's outlined pur- the National Register of Historic with the designation of historic poses, and its factors for review Places, on its status as the only properties, and its decision was of applications, which together historic commercial property in therefore nullified. "sufficiently alert the public of the Pluma neighborhood, and the statute's scope and mean- Substantiveon the lack of a proposal for Due Process ing."41 Therefore, the enabling a replacement building for the The case of Bellevue Shopping legislation did not violate due site. The owner won in the trial process. Center v. Chase, 574 A.2d court, with the court holding that 760 (R.I. 1990) originated in the Commission's denial went Tourkow v. City of Fort Wayne, Newport, Rhode Island, where a 563 N.E.2d 151 (Ind.App. beyond its constitutional and developer sought a certificate of 1990), echoed the ruling of the statutory powers and was there- a ro riateness for a new shop- fore invalid, and a violation of PP P P Bellevue Shopping Center court, ping center within the town's upholding the decision of a local due process. historic district. The local his- historic preservation commis- The South Dakota Supreme toric district commission as sion as valid and not a violation Court affirmed, holding that well as zoning board of review of substantive due process. In the Commission violated the denied his request after con- this case, the owner of a home property owner's procedural due ducting hearings, on the basis located within a historic district process rights. The state historic that the center would "seriously sought certificate of appropriate- preservation enabling statute set impair the historic and/or archi- ness for installation of vinyl sid- out a series of procedural steps tectural value of the surrounding ing for her home. The local his- for the designation of historic toric reservation review board area,"the materials and design P properties, triggering the local would be incompatible with denied her application, and the preservation ordinance. Under those of neighboring structures, homeowner appealed to the local the statute, a local historic and increased traffic from the trial court, which affirmed the preservation commission must center would pose a threat to review board's decision. investigate and report on the sig- the structure of a neighboring The homeowner claimed that nificance of the property, hold a historic site.39 the denial of the certificate by d t 7 the review board"substantially written findings of fact in the obtain a certificate. Meanwhile, prejudiced her," and argued Review Board's notice of deni- the homeowner received a letter that the review board's decision al."47 The state code required advising him that his application was "arbitrary and capricious the board to "state its reasons for vinyl siding would probably because public opinion influ- for the denial...in writing be denied, and the village plan- enced it."42 The court found that and...advise the applicant."48 ning staff prepared a report to the board had a "long-standing The court found that although the same effect, citing the state practice of denying applica- the board did not state its ratio- preservation agency's guid- tions to install artificial siding" nale for its denial in its notice ance against vinyl siding as not because of the material's lack of to the homeowner, the inclusion meeting the Secretary of the historic authenticity and tenden- of the board's findings of fact Interior's Treatment Standards cy to damage original materials, in the minutes of the meeting for facades visible to the public. and so did not treat the applicant (during which the homeowner's The homeowner in Nevel homeowner any differently than application was discussed) was filed a federal suit, claiming it had treated similarly situated sufficient to meet the statutory denial of equal protection. The applicants.43 The court found requirement of"written find- homeowner alleged that he had therefore that the board's denial ings."49 been "intentionally treated dif- was not"arbitrary and capri- ferently from others similarly cious." Equal Protection situated" and that there was no The homeowner also claimed In Nevel v. Village of "rational basis for the differ- that the standards in the local Schaumburg, 297 F.3d 673 ence in treatment," a two-part architectural review ordinance (7th Cir. 2002), the owner of test established in Village of were "vague and unascertain- a locally designated landmark Willowbrook v. Olech, 528 U.S. able."44 The ordinance stipulated home informed the village plan- 562 (2000). Under this test, the "before 'a conspicuous change ner that he intended to cover the claimant must show that (1) "he in the exterior appearance'of an exterior of his home to eliminate was singled out for differential historical building takes place, a lead paint hazard. Initially, the treatment," and (2) "the differ- the board must issue a certificate village planner advised against ential treatment was irrational or of appropriateness."45 The court arbitrary."5o a stucco-like treatment and, found that the proposed installa- according to the homeowner, Here, the homeowner's tion of vinyl siding was"clearly suggested use of aluminum or evidence of differential treat- a `conspicuous change' in vinyl siding, and directed the ment—the village's approval of appearance," and that the horn- owner to obtain building per- siding for a non-historic home eowner applicant failed to dem- mits for the planned work. The and for a historic non-residential onstrate the board's denial to be homeowner filed an application city building—was not persua- "either contrary to constitutional for the commission's approval of sive, and failed to show that any right or arbitrary and capricious" the project, and meanwhile the differential treatment was either and to meet her burden of proof building contractor applied for "irrational or arbitrary," or pro- on these issues.46 and obtained a building permit moted by ill-will. Because the The homeowner further to install vinyl siding without homeowner could not establish objected to the "absence of being informed of the need to that he was in fact singled out AL .�..,v.aav av2L, „..,......._.:TA',,-.:zz4.,_ _zr _.2S ,u�a.,LIZ:..�__. ... .. for differential treatment, the accommodation to relieve a ing permit was in violation of circuit court affirmed the district substantial burden, the bur- RLUIPA because it did not fur- court, ruling for the village. den of persuasion that the ther a compelling government accommodation is unrea- interest and was not the least Religious Freedom sonable or ineffective is on restrictive means to achieve the In a joint statement issued at the religious claimant. government's end. The proposed the time the Religious Land Use 25,000 square foot building was and Institutionalized Persons The last point may be par- denied by the city because the Act (RLUIPA) was passed in ticularly important for local footprint was deemed too large 2000, the Senate sponsors spe- governments that, for example, given the size of the property cifically noted(as reported in try to accommodate the needs and the scale of the neighbor- the Congressional Record, 146 of a religious institution through hood. Cong. Rec. S7774-01) that: flexible application of design However, in The Episcopal the act does not provide standards to its historic property Student Foundation v. City of religious institutions with while substantially accomplish- Ann Arbor, 341 F.Supp.2d 691 immunity from land use ing the purpose of the preserva- (E.D. Mich. 2004), a city's deni- regulation, nor relieve tion ordinance. al of a demolition permit did not religious institutions from In Mintz v. Roman Catholic violate RLUIPA because the city applying for variances, spe- Bishop, 424 F.Supp.2d 309 did not impose a substantial bur- cial permits or exceptions, den on the exercise of religion. hardship approval, or other (D. Mass. 2006), the District g relief provisions; Court of Massachusetts decided Obviously the differing a RLUIPA claim by finding that approaches of the various lower ra not every activity carried the city's regulations regarding courts could be resolved bythe out by a religious organiza- building coverage, setbacks, tion constitutes "religious Supreme Court should it choose exercise" (such as situa- parking, and permitting did not to take a RLUIPA case as it did tions where a church owns apply to a church that wanted with RFRA in the Boerne case. a commercial building and to build a parish center because uses the revenues to sup- the activities to occur in the par- Freedom of Speech port its religious activities); ish center encompassed those Freedom of speech issues can the act does not change protected by the term religious also become enmeshed with the "substantial burden" exercise and the bylaws put a other aspects of cultural heri- substantial burden on this reli- standard to reservation. In Mellen v.articulated by the ge P gious exercise Supreme Court; City of New Orleans, 1998 WL a the religious claimant chal- Likewise, in Living Water 614187 (E.D. La. 1998) the lenging a regulation bears Church of God v. Charter Twp. court struck down New Orleans' the burden of proof on the Of Meridian, 384 F.Supp.2d noise ordinance as "overbroad." issue of substantial burden 1123 (W.D. Mich2005), the The court found that music on religious exercise; and District Court for the Western is a form of speech and it is appropriate to impose n where the government District of Michigan held that reason- demonstrates a specific denial of a church's build- able time, place, and manner P 6 G u E s ri i ,t a 4 29 a N 1 k . ' ^ X . , IX restrictions on speech. However, In Buttnick v. City of Seattle, tion of the law. The court found the ordinance in question was a 719 P.2d 93 (Wash. 1986), that would be an appropriate blanket restriction placed across the Washington State Supreme option since the record indicated the city. The court decided that Court upheld the city's require- that the corporate owner was it had to look at the particular ment that a property owner largely responsible for the build- neighborhood to determine the remove and replace a deteriorat- ing's rapid decline and for the validity of the ordinance. Here, ed and unsafe parapet. The court destruction of its most important music was found to be an impor- referenced a city council finding features, and that the building tant part of the culture of the that"a reasonable effort was was not beyond repair. French Quarter where the club not made by the property owner that violated the ordinance was to correct the public safety Economic Hardship located. hazard presented by deteriorated parapet and pediment when the The Pennsylvania Supreme Demolition by Neglect hazard was first cited" in spite Court was presented a combined of numerous contacts and hear- takings and economic hardship In Maher v. City of New ings.52 claim in City of Pittsburgh v. Orleans, 516 F.2d 1051 (5thWeinberg, 676 A.2d 207 (Pa. Cir. 1975), the U.S. Court of The opinion found sufficient g� Appeals upheld provisions in a evidence that the council applied 1996) and held in favor of the local ordinance requiring rea- by appropriate standard required Preservation-commission. The maintenance and repair by Penn Central and Maher owners had known when pur- sonabler,_ ,• ,._ Orleans's _ when it concluded that the esti- chasing the dilapidated house of buildings in New French Quarter. Where the over- mated cost of replacement of that it was a landmark needing all purpose of the preservation the parapet did not impose an substantial repairs. Nevertheless, ordinance is a proper one, the unnecessary or undue hardship they failed to hire an architect or court reasoned that required on the plaintiff, considering the contractor to give them an esti- upkeep of buildings was reason- property's market value and mate of the feasibility and cost ably necessary to accomplish the income producing potential. of renovation. law's goals. The court held that the own- In District of Columbia Rejecting the takings claim, Preservation League v. ers did not meet their burden the court stated: "The fact that of proof because they failed to Department of Consumer and an owner may incidentally be Regulatory Affairs, 646 A.2d establish the house could not required to make but-of-pocket 984 (D.C. 1994), the Court of be resold "as is" for the amount expenditures in order to remain Appeals reversed an approval by they paid or that the combined in compliance with an ordinance purchase price and rehabilitation the mayor's agent to demolish does not per se render that ordi- a dilapidated historic building costs exceeded market value. nance a taking."51 The court Thus, no significant economic because the demolition permit cited other examples of accept- hardship had been established. able affirmative requirements was unauthorized under District law. The court's opinion noted Similarly, in Zaruba v. tillage placed on a property owner including provision of fire sprin- that the law authorized the city of Oak Park, 695 N.E.2d 510 klers, emergency facilities, exits, to require reconstruction where (Ill.App. Ct. 1998), the Illinois and lights demolition was done in viola- Supreme Court upheld the denial .._ , .va. '. .,. .._ . _ _ ._, . ,... _. . .:as e,,e .«41;E z... ..L., .,_.,.µ..s.W Fs..,.. 1.,.,r, . .,,s'. of an economic hardship vari- dence in the record, including application] cured any improper ance to demolish an historic the applicant's failure to prove it influence from the ex parte house, rejecting the owner's was not economically feasible to communications."56 The court claim that he was unaware of renovate or sell the property as a established that"when a govern- the specifics of the preservation single-family dwelling. ing body sits in a quasi-judicial ordinance. Factors cited by the capacity, it must confine its court included the owner's over- Ex-parte Communication decision to the record produced payment for the property and In Idaho Historic Preservation at the public hearing, and that his failure to either try selling it Council, Inc. v. City Council of failing to do so violates proce- "as is" or exploring alternatives Boise, 8 P.3d 646 (Idaho 2000), dural due process of law."57 that might have received com- a property owner sought a per- Deviation from this standard mission approval. Interestingly, mit for demolition of a ware- means in actual fact that "a the preservation alternative was house. The local historic pres- second fact-gathering session more favorable financially to the ervation commission denied the [has occurred] without proper owner than the proposed plans application; the property owner notice, a clear violation of due for the property. appealed to the city council, process."58 Members of the city which approved the certificate. Courts are generally unwilling council who received calls prior A local historic preservation to allow owners to use economic to the public meeting failed to organization filed petition for hardship claims to get them- review of the council's decision record or disclose the substance selves out of bad business deci- in the local trial court, which of the calls, and the commission sions. In Kalorama Heights ruled that the city council vio- therefore had no chance to rebut Ltd. Partnership v. District lated due process "because it any evidence or arguments of of Columbia, 655 A.2d. 865 the callers. received and considered infor- the callers. (D.C. 1995), the D.C. Court of mation outside of the appellate The court discussed the situa- Appeals found that the appli- record in granting the certificate tions which would be exceptions cant's purchase of the contribut- of appropriateness [for demoli- to the general prohibition on ex ing property in a historic district with the hope of developing tion]."54 parte communications: The historic preservation n the exparte contacts were a twelve-story luxury condo- P minium was "a `speculative organization had appealed the not with the proponents investment' tantamount to a council decision, seeking review of change or their agents, `gamble'."53 of among other issues the ques- but, rather,with relatively This case also demonstrates tion of"[w]hether the City disinterested persons; how important it is for the pres- Council's receipt of phone calls 71 the contacts only amounted ervation commission to build from interested parties and the to an investigation of the a solid record and place the general public violated the due merits or demerits of a pro- burden of proving economic process standards of a quasi- posed change; and, most hardship on the applicant. The judicial proceeding."55 importantly, Kalorama court upheld the The city claimed no due P the occurrence and nature District's denial of a demolition process violation "because the of the contacts were made permit citing substantial evi- subsequent hearing [on the a matter of record during r °�,,€ i:0'g z ...x '4 j,'"�`"'.`�.i CFz n � �r Y'"a.,k' "";f s a quasi-judicial hearing so commission's decision, claim- allowed such appeals by any that the parties to the hear- ing, among other issues, that person aggrieved by its deci- ing then had an opportunity their decision was invalid and lions. Faced with the question to respond.59 violated due process because of whether or not these property of ex parte communications owners were persons aggrieved The court, however, declined between commission members with standing to appeal, the to apply these exceptions in this and an expert witness. court held the statutory defini- situation, finding that the non- The Rutherford court held that tion of person aggrieved applied disclosure of the identities of the ex parte communications only to those who have demon- the callers or the nature of the referred to by the homeowner strated "special harm that would conversations between the call- did not violate the homeowner's occur to him if the Certificate of ers and council members made it due process. The commission, Appropriateness awarded by the "impossible for the Commission composed of laypersons, has regional commission is allowed to effectively respond to the the right to "receive technical to stand."63 arguments that the callers may advice to carry out its respon- In addition, the court con- have advanced."60 The court sibilities, as long as the [appli- cluded, "[g]eneral civic interest held here that"the receipt of cant] was provided with the in the enforcement of historic phone calls in this case, without opportunity to examine [the zoning is not sufficient to con- more specific disclosure, violat- expert witness] and to rebut his fer standing."64 For example, edprocedural due rocess."61 testimony."62 Furthermore, there « p [s]ubjective and unspecified is no evidence that the rnmmi - fears about the possible impair- The Rutherford v. Fairfield sion received evidence after the ment of aesthetics or neighbor- Historic District, No. 25 58 74, public hearing; the expert testi- 1990 WL 271008 (Conn. Super. mony took place in public, and hood appearance, incompatible Ct. May 18, 1990) decision the homeowner-applicant had architectural styles, the diminish- the right toquestion and rebut ment of close neighborhood feel- from Connecticut demonstrates g ing, or the loss of open or natural the sort of situation in which a the witness. space are all considered insuf- historic preservation commis- ficient bases for nevement sion can find itself—and prevail Standing aggrievement Massachusetts law."65 against an ex parte communica- A state case involving this prin- Finally, the court held that tions challenge. ciple arose in Massachusetts a party's participation in the In this case, the owner of in 2000—Allen v. Old King's administrative appeal process a home in a historic district Highway Regional Historic or ownership of property close sought a certificate of appro- District, 2000 Mass.App. Div. to the tract in question was not priateness from the Fairfield 330 (Mass. Dist. Ct.). Nearby enough to confer standing. Historic District Commission owners to an affected property for window replacements for his appealed the grant of a cer- Burke v. City of Charleston, home, located in a historic dis- tificate of appropriateness by 139 F.3d 401 (4th Cir. 1998) is trict. The commission denied the a regional historic preserva- another case relating to the issue homeowner's application, and tion commission; the enabling of standing. In this case, after the homeowner challenged the statute for the commission a local artist painted a bright, 4;4 a ._, ,, .�.<_. ���..9 .tea„_�.,... .. s .�: . ,,� r�., • colorful mural depicting a fanci- 1999). The prior owner of a and avoid frivolous lawsuits, it ful "creature world" on the side home failed to obtain a building is equally important to take legal of a building located within the permit or certificate of appro- action without delay when it is Charleston historic district and priateness for construction of a necessary. sold it to the building's owner, metal carport located within the the city board of architectural historic district. review ordered its removal. The The city received a complaint X X X artist sued the city, challeng- about the carport and notified ing the constitutionality of the the current owner within ten ordinance on First Amendment days.After the owner failed grounds. to remove the carport, the city The artist appealed the sought a declaratory judgment adverse determination of the and injunction. The trial court federal district court; the Fourth denied both claims, holding that Circuit Federal Court of Appeals laches barred the city's claim. found that the artist lacked The state supreme court standing, because when the art- reversed, and considered the fac- ist sold his mural to the owner tors for applying laches—length of the building on which it was of the delay, the reasons for it, painted, the artist"relinquished the resulting loss of evidence, his First Amendment rights."66 and the prejudice suffered. In Therefore, the owner alone had this case, the court found that the right to display the mural, the city did not delay enforce- and thereby the "legally cogni- ment of its architectural review zable interest in the display" of ordinances, but notified the the work.67 The artist did not property owner within ten days prove "injury-in-fact"—the court found that the one who had the of receiving the complaint, right to display the mural (the and that it was the predecessor owner, if anyone, but not the art- owner's failure to obtain the ist) suffered a potential injury building permit that caused a six from the city's order to remove month delay between construe- it. Thus, the artist did not have tion and discovery. legal standing to oppose the Furthermore, the property removal of the mural. owner failed to comply with the city ordinances after noti- fication. "Under these circum- Photography credits.Page one Laches stances...it is not inequitable top to bottom:photos 1,2,5© to permit the city to enforce Marcia Axtmann Smith Design/ A state court case that addressed its claim against [the property Communication,Alexandria,Va., 1998; this issue was Ci o Dalton v. photo 3, Paul Giblin;photo 4,National ty fowner]."68 While it is important Park Service;photo 6,Elizabeth Carroll, 515 S.E.2d 144 (Ga. to pursue out-of-court solutions Anderson. I b' %9. 'v,,, 3 $ 1 5 �' £ x# a �.. `` s „� x xr.w F &" 1 47 fi 3 3 ; di A;. i 2.. r a ,'' z. t r ems, P a ,, ,-. Sources of Information Duerksen, Christopher J. and R. Miller, Julia.Layperson's Matthew Goebel.Aesthetics, Guide to Preservation Law. The Alliance Review, News Community Character, and Washington,D.C.:National from the National Alliance of the Law. Scenic America and Trust for Historic Preservation, Preservation Commissions, the American Planning 2004. www.uga.edu/napc Association, 2000. www. planning.org Miller, Julia. Protecting Becker, Dan. "Establishing Potential Landmarks Through a Demolition by Neglect Duerksen, Christopher J. Demolition Review. National Ordinance." The Alliance and Richard J. Roddewig. Trust Preservation Law Review, National Alliance of Takings Law in Plain Publication. Washington, Preservation Commissions, English. Washington, D.C.: D.C.:National Trust for February/March 1999. National Trust for Historic Historic Preservation, 2006. Preservation, 2002. Certified Local Government Miller, Julia. Providing for Program, U.S. Department Goss, Sarah L.,Esq.Propriety Economic Hardship Relief of the Interior, National Park of Using the Police Power in the Regulation of Historic Service, www.nps.gov/his- for Aesthetic Regulation: Properties. 16 Preservation tory/hps/clg/index.htm A Comprehensive State-by- Law Reporter 1129, 1996. State Analysis.Washington, Diehlman, Nicole A. D.C.:U.S.Department of the Morris, Stephen A. Subdivision Defensible Decision Making: Interior,National Park Service Regulations and Historic Preservation Commissions and the National Center for Preservation. Cultural and the Law. Crownsville, Preservation Law,Washington, Resources Partnership Notes. Maryland: The Maryland D.C., 1992. (Out of print,but Washington, D.C.: U.S. Historical Trust, Maryland may be available in libraries or Department of the Interior, Department of Housing and local historic preservation orga- National Park Service, 1998. Community Development, nizations.) On-line at www.nps.gov/ 2000.Available on-line at history/hps/pad/partnership/ www.marylandhistoricaltrust. Longstreth, Richard W. History Subdiv699.pdf net/video.pdf on the Line: Testimony in the Cause of Preservation. Ithaca, Morris, Stephen A. Zoning and "Demolition by Neglect." NY: Historic Urban Plans Historic Preservation. Cultural Preservation Law Reporter and the National Council on Resources Partnership Notes. Educational Materials, Preservation Education, 1998. Washington, D.C.: U.S. National Trust for Historic On-line at www.nps.gov/ Department of the Interior, Preservation, 1999. history/history/online_books/ National Park Service, 1998. hp/longstreth.pdf On-line at www.nps.gov/ Dowling, Timothy J., Douglas history/hps/pad/partnership/ T. Kendall, and Jennifer Miller, Julia.Assessing Zoning699.pdf Bradley. The Good News Economic Hardship Claims. About Takings. (The Citizen 18 Preservation Law Reporter Osborne, Rebecca, compiler. Planning Series) Chicago: 1069, 1999. "Three Demolition-by- American Planning Neglect Case Studies." The Association, 2006. Alliance Review, National 34 '�Y $Y 4 �s3ts7 4 a )i} z�u as ar 1.��'�., � �, ,+ -`mZr � � 3' �����'� "3r�t x..c�airy` s x �'a�s° ,�L � s Alliance of Preservation White, Bradford J. and Paul 11 McNabb v. United States,318 U.S. 337(1943) Commission, May-June 2007. W. Edmondson. Procedural 12 Thee People ex rel.Klaeren v. The Due Process in Plain Village of Lisle,316 Ill.App.3d 770, Preservation Law Reporter pub- English. Washington, D.C.: 786(2000) lished by the National Trust National Trust for Historic 13 Id. for Historic Preservation, Preservation, 2004. 14 Lemon v.Kurtzman,403 U.S. 602 www.nthp.org (1971). Working on the Past in Local 15 See Autumn L.Rierson,RLUIPA: Four Years Later,20 Preservation L. Reap, James K. "How to Historic Districts,U.S. R. 1169(2003). Conduct a Preservation Department of the Interior, 16 City of Toledo v.Finn,No.L-92- Commission Meeting." The National Park Service, 168, 1993 WL 18809(Ohio Ct.App. Alliance Review, National www.nps.gov/history/hps/ Jan. 19, 1993). Alliance of Preservation workingonthepast/ 17 O.C.G.A. § 50-14-6(2005). A-S-P Associates v. City of Commissions, Spring 1994. Raleigh,258 S.E.2d 444,451 (N.C. Wright, Robert R. and Morton 1979). Roddewig, Richard J.Preparing Gitelman. Land Use in a 19 Id. a Historic Preservation Nutshell. 4th Edition. St. 20 City of Dallas v. Crownrich,506 Ordinance.(Planning Advisory Paul, Minnesota, West Group, S.W.2d 654,659-60(Tex.Civ.App. Service Report Number 374) 2000. 1974). 21 Tahoe-Sierra Pres. Council,Inc. Chicago:American Planning v. Tahoe Reg'1 Planning Agency,535 Association, 1983. X X X U.S.302,335(2002). 22 Civil Rights Act of 1871,42 Roddewig, Richard J. and U.S.C. § 1983 (2007). Christopher J. Duerksen. End Notes 23 A commissioner would be en- Responding to the Takings titled to immunity unless his"act is Challenge:A Guide for 1 Berman v.Parker,348 U.S.26,33 so obviously wrong,in the light of (1954). preexisting law,that only a plainly Officials and Planners. 2 Penn Cent. Transp. Co. v. City of incompetent officer or one who was (Planning Advisory Service New York,438 U.S. 104, 129(1978). knowingly violating the law would Report Number 416) 3 Merriam v. Moody's Ex'r,25 have done such a thing."Lassiter v. Chicago:American Planning Iowa 163, 170(1868)superceded by Alabama A&M University Board of Association, 1989. statute Iowa Code §§364.2(2)and Trustees,28 F.3d 1146, 1149(11th 364.2(3)(1983),as recognized in Cir. 1994);abrogated by Hope v. Pel- Council Bluffs v. Cain, 342 N.W.2d zer,536 U.S. 730, 739(2002). Stipe, Robert E. "A Letter to 810(Iowa 1983). 24 Allen v. Old King's Highway Reg? George: How to Keep the 4 Pa. Coal Co. v.Mahon,260 Historic Dist.,2000 Mass.App.Div. Preservation Commission Out U.S.393,415-16(1922)(emphasis 330,331 (Mass.Dist.Ct.). of Court and Avoid Being added). 25 District Intown Properties Ltd. 5 Id.at 413. Partnership v.District of Columbia, Sued." Published originally 6 Penn Cent.,438 U.S.at 124. 23 F. Supp.2d 30(D.D.C. 1998). in The Alliance Review, 1993; 7 Id. at 131. 26 San Diego Trust&Savings Bank republished on the website 8 Id.at 130. V.Friends of Gill, 121 Cal.App. 3d of the National Alliance of 9 Lucas v. S.C. Coastal Council,505 203 (1981). Preservation Commissions, U.S. 1003, 1015(1992). Scalia does 27 Berman v.Parker,348 U.S.26,33 not use the exact term`categorical (1954). www.sed.uga.edu/pso/ taking"in the opinion of the Court. 28 Collins v.Fuller,No.912479B, programs/napc/pdfs/a_letter_ 10 See also Lingle v. Chevron,544 1993 WL 818633,at*1 (Mass.Dist. to_george.pdf U.S.528,539(2005)(reaffirming Ct.Aug. 6, 1993). Penn Central test). 19 Id. 35 30 UnitedArtists'Theater Circuit v. 60 Id. at 651. in the School of Environment City of Philadelphia,635 A.2d 612, 61 Id. and Design at the University of 617(Pa. 1993). 62 Rutherford v.Fairfield His- Georgia, who invited the authors 31 City of Pittsburgh v. Weinberg, tonic Dist.,No.25 58 74, 1990 WL to co-teach historic preserva- 676 A.2d 207,211 (Pa. 1996)(quot- 271008,at 3(Conn. Super.Ct.May ing Maher v. City of New Orleans, 18, 1990). tion law in his program many 516 F.2d 1051, 1066(5th Cir. 1975), 63 Allen v. Old King's Highway long years ago. Finally, to our cert. denied,426 U.S.905(1976)). Reg'1 Historic Dist.,2000 Mass. colleagues who reviewed the 32 Weinberg,544 Pa.at 287. App.Div.330,331 (Mass.Dist. CO- document and provided valu- 33 Historic Albany Found,Inc. v. 64 Id. able input: Dan Becker, Paul Coyne,558 N.Y.S.2d 986,988(App. 65 Id. (quoting Barvenik v.Bd. of Edmondson, Julia Miller, Bryan Div. 1990). Aldermen of Newton,597 N.E.2d 48, 34 Id.at 989-90. 51 (Mass.App.Ct. 1992)). Mitchell, John Renaud,Autumn 35 Id.at 990. 66 Burke v. City of Charleston, 139 Rierson, and Christopher Skelly. 36 Achtien v. City of Deadwood,814 F.3d 401,403(4th Cir. 1998). F.Supp. 808,813 (D.S.D. 1993). 67 Id. 37 Id. 68 City of Dalton v. Carroll,515 38 Donovan v. City of Deadwood, S.E.2d 144, 145(Ga. 1999). 538 N.W.2d 790,793 (S.D.1995) (quoting S.D.Codified Laws§ 1- 19B-23 (1995)). X X X 39 Id 40 Id 41 Id at 765. Acknowledgments: The authors 42 Tourkow v. City of Fort Wayne, acknowledge with gratitude the 563 N.E.2d 151, 153 (Ind.app. contributions of many important as90)' people who made this publica- Id. 44 Id tion possible. First and fore- 45 Id, most, the authors wish to thank 46 Id. Sue Renaud of the National 47 Id Park Service for her support, 48 Id guidance, patience, editorial soId. at 153-154. assistance, and abiding positive Nevel v. Village of Schaumburg, 297 F.3d 673,681 (7th Cir.2002) spirit. A sincere note of thanks (quoting Albiero v. City of Kankakee, is due to Ramona Bartos, a stu- 246 F.3d 927,932(7th Cir.2001)). dent in the joint J.D./M.H.P. 51 Maher v. City of New Orleans, program at the University of 516 F.2d 1051, 1067(5th Cir. 1975). Georgia when this project corn- 52 Buttnick v. City of Seattle,719 2007 menced and a lawyer when it P.2d 93,97(Wash. 1986). 53 Kalorama Heights Ltd.Partner- ship v.District of Columbia,655 and Lawton Zum, other M.H.P. James K. Reap A.2d.865,872(D.C. 1995). students who went on to law Public Service Associate 54 Idaho Historic Pres. Council,Inc. school; and to Trent Myers, University of Georgia College of v. City Council of Boise, 8 P.3d 646, graduate law student teaching Environment and Design 648(Idaho 2000). assistant, who made sure all the 55 Id. Melvin B. Hill, Jr. 56 Id.at 649. quotations and case citations 57 Id were accurate.A hearty thank Senior Public Service Associate 58 Id. you is in order for John Waters, University of Georgia Institute 59 Id.at 650. director of the M.H.P. program of Higher Education IlERITAGE RESERVATION SERVICES,NATIONAL PARK SERVICE Series editor: Susan L.Renaud,Manager,Historic Preservation Planning Program U.S. Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street,NW,Mail Stop 2255,Washington, DC 20240 UPS , ,,c U.S.Department of the Interior GVI National Park Service Cultural Resources I A National Trust preservation law publication . . . Protecting Potential Landmarks Through Demolition Review by Julia H. Miller r ,„ ; r 0 50 ft oft " r r g f p ` r mom, '1'1.72-- 111 - -- NATIONAL TRUST forHISTORIC PRESERVATION 1785 Massachusetts Avenue,NW Washington,D.C.20036 102.588 6()35 The National Trust for Historic Preservation provides leadership,education,and advocacy to save America's diverse historic places and revitalize our communities. Support for the National Trust is provided by membership dues,endowment funds,individuals,corporate and foundation contributions,and grants from federal and state agencies. The National Trust's Law Department provides educational materials and workshops on legal developments in historic preservation law for the benefit of citizens,organizations,and governmental institutions throughout the United States.Through this work,the Trust helps communities protect their heritage,their homes and businesses,their neighborhoods,and their history. For further information, contact the Law Department at 202-588-6035 or send an email to lawC�nthp.org. Also visit our website at www.nthp.org/law.html. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered.It is sold or otherwise made available with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal or other professional services. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required,the services of a competent professional should be sought. National Trust for Historic Preservation 2007. All rights reserved. For additional copies,reproduction permission,or for information about our other legal publications,please contact the National Trust's Law Department at the contact information listed above. Cover Photo:Redwood Street Historic District,Baltimore,MD(Historic American Buildings Survey,NPS) Protecting Potential Landmarks through Demolition Review By Julia H. Miller* n downtown Baton Rouge,the wrecking ball fell twice—almost.Two historic buildings, the 1910 S.H. Kress Building,the site of a 1960 civil rights protest at the then all-white, lunch counter of the five and dime,and the adjacent Welsh&Levy Building,built in 1885, were spared only after the owner backed off his plans to demolish the buildings for a surface parking lot in response to public outcry.The fate of a third building, the Old Baton Rouge Ice Plant, proved less fortunate.This 1880s one-story brick building was demolished for a riverfront condominium project. Once used for ice production,the building had been located on the Mississippi River on one of the city's few remaining intact blocks dating from the Nineteenth Century. Baton Rouge has since taken steps to protect its unprotected resources and other communities can too. Through the adoption of a"demolition review ordinance,"older buildings(generally those over 50 years) cannot be demolished without review by a preservation commission or special committee to determine whether a building is historically significant. If the building qualities as significant,then a commission may delay the issuance of a demolition permit to explore preservation alternatives,such as designating the building as a historic landmark or finding a purchaser who may be interested in rehabilitating the building. What is a Demolition Review? Demolition review is a legal tool that provides communities with the means to ensure that potentially significant buildings and structures are not demolished without notice and some level of review by a preservation commission. This process creates a safety net for historic resources to ensure that buildings and structures worthy of preservation are not inadvertently demolished. Demolition review does not always prevent the demolition of historically significant buildings or structures. Rather, as the name suggests, it allows for review of applications for demolition permits for a specific period of time to assess a building's historical significance. If the building is deemed significant, then issuance of the permit may be delayed for a specific period of time to pursue landmark designation,or alternatively, to explore preservation solutions such as selling the property to a purchaser interested in rehabilitating the structure or finding alternative sites for the proposed post-demolition project. What is the Difference between "Demolition Review Laws" and "Demolition Delay" or "Interim Protection"Provisions used in Preservation Ordinances? Demolition review laws are typically, but not exclusively, separate and distinct from historic preservation ordinances. They preclude the demolition of any building or structure over a certain age, or any building or structure identified for protection—regardless of significance—for a specific period of time, to allow for a determination of historical or architectural merit. Historic properties may or may not he designated as a landmark at the culmination of this process, depending upon a law's specific terms, and such laws may or may not include a"demolition delay"or"waiting period"component. The nomenclature can be confusing. Demolition review laws are sometimes called "demolition delay ordinances"or simply,"demolition ordinances." Demolition delay provisions in historic preservation ordinances are used to prevent the demolition of buildings or structures that have already been designated as historic landmarks or as contributing structures in a historic district for a specific amount of time, usually ranging from 6 to 24 months. During that time, the preservation commission, preservation organizations, concerned citizens, and others may explore alternatives to demolition, such as finding a purchaser for the structure or raising money for its *Special Counsel and Legal Education Coordinator,National Trust for Historic Preservation rehabilitation. These provisions are typically used by communities that lack the authority to deny demolition permits. For example, in North Carolina, local jurisdictions generally only have the authority to delay a demolition permit up to 365 days unless the structure at issue has been determined by the State Historic Preservation Officer to have"statewide significance."See N.C. Gen.Stat. § I60A.400.14. Interim protection provisions are also found in preservation ordinances. They preclude the demolition or alteration of buildings or structures during the period in which the building is under consideration for historic designation. The objective is to preserve the status quo pending designation and to prevent anticipatory demolitions. For further information, see Edith M. Shine, "The Use of Development Moratoria in the Protection of Historic Resources," 18 PLR 3002(1999). Why Do Communities Adopt Demolition Review Procedures? Demolition review procedures help to prevent the demolition of historically significant buildings. Given the vast numbers of older buildings in cities and towns across the United States, it is virtually impossible for a community to identify all buildings that should be protected under a historic preservation ordinance in advance. By establishing a referral mechanism, communities can he assured that buildings meriting preservation will not fall through the cracks. The delay period provides an opportunity for the municipality or other interested parties to negotiate a preservation solution with the property owner, or to find persons who might be willing to purchase, preserve, rehabilitate, or restore such buildings rather than demolish them. Demolition review procedures have also been adopted to protect buildings that may not meet the standards for designation but nonetheless embody distinguishing features that help to make a community an attractive place to live or work. For example, demolition review provisions are being used to address the proliferation of"teardowns" in many of our older neighborhoods. By delaying demolition for a period of time,concerned residents may be able to negotiate the preservation of character-defining houses on a case- by-case basis.See, e.g. Santa Monica,California,and Highland Park, Illinois. Which Properties are Subject to Demolition Review Procedures? Demolition review ordinances typically set forth objective criteria for determining which properties are subject to review. For example, a demolition review ordinance may require some level of review for all buildings built before a specific date or all buildings that have attained a certain age on the date the permit application is filed. Many communities use "50 years" as the critical benchmark. See, e.g. Boston, Massachusetts, Boulder,Colorado,and New Castle,Delaware. A few jurisdictions have opted for a shorter time period, largely in recognition of their younger building stock, see, e.g. Santa Monica, California (which uses a 40-year benchmark), and Gainesville, Florida (all structures listed in the state's "master site file"and/or 45 years of age). Still others utilize a specific date. See, e.g. Alameda, California, and Weston, Massachusetts,which protect all buildings constructed prior to 1945. Alternatively, the demolition ordinance may only apply to properties identified on a historic survey or listed on a state historic register or the National Register of Historic Places. Chicago, for example, requires review for the roughly 6,200 buildings designated as "red" or "orange" on its 1996 Historic Resources Survey. Montgomery County, Maryland, stays the issuance of a demolition permit for properties included on its Locational Atlas and Index of Historic Sites. Finally,some communities limit the scope of protection afforded to buildings located within a specific geographic area. Baton Rouge's demolition ordinance,for example,applies only to its downtown buildings. Boston's law governs any buildings located in its downtown area, Harborpark, and neighborhood design overlay districts,in addition to all those that are at least 50-years old. Keep in mind that the viability of this system may depend upon an applicant's representation or a permit official's ability to verify or accurately determine a building's age. Boston addresses this issue by insisting that all demolition permit applications be referred to the city's landmark commission. Staff to the commission makes the determination as to whether the building is subject to review. In Wilton, Connecticut, the burden of establishing the age of the building rests on the demolition permit applicant. Applications must include a statement regarding the size and age of the building or 2 structure to be demolished with verification through independent records such as tax assessment records or the city's cultural resource survey. Santa Monica bases its age determination on the date the original permit for the building or structure was issued.Alameda,California's law provides that the age is to be determined by review of city records. Weston, Massachusetts, protects against the potential problem that the date of a building or structure cannot be determined by record by also requiring the review of all properties of "unknown age." What Actions Generally Trigger Demolition Review? All demolition review procedures are triggered by the filing of an application for a demolition permit. The scope of demolition work requiring review, however, varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In addition,requests for permits to move or substantially alter buildings may also require review. In Boulder, demolition review is required for the demolition or relocation of any building over fifty years old.Demolition includes the act of either demolishing or removing— • Fifty percent or more of the roof area as measured in plan view (defined as the view of a building from directly above which reveals the outer perimeter of the building roof areas to be measured across a horizontal plane);or • Fifty percent or more of the exterior walls of a building as measured contiguously around the "building coverage";or • Any exterior wall facing a public street, but not an act or process which removes an exterior wall facing an alley. To meet the exterior wall retention standard, • The wall shall retain studs or other structural elements, the exterior wall finish, and the fully framed and sheathed roof above that portion of the remaining building to which such wall is attached; • The wall shall not be covered or otherwise concealed by a wall that is proposed to he placed in front of the retained wall:and • Each part of the retained exterior walls shall be connected contiguously and without interruption to every other part of the retained exterior walls. In Davis, California, the city's demolition review procedures apply to "the destruction, removal, or relocation of a structure not classified as an 'incidental structure,' or the permanent or temporary removal of more than twenty-five percent (25%) of the perimeter walls of a structure." Incidental structures are accessory buildings such as sheds,fences,play structures,and so forth. In Newton, Massachusetts, the demolition review requirement applies to any permit, without regard to whether it is called a demolition permit,alteration permit,or building permit, if it involves total and partial demolitions. A "total demolition" is "Mlle pulling down, razing or destruction of the entire portion or a building or structure which is above ground regardless of whether another building or structure is constructed within the footprint of the destroyed building or structure." A "partial demolition" is "[tihe pulling down, destruction or removal of a substantial portion of the building or structure or the removal of architectural elements which define or contribute to the character of the structure." A few jurisdictions have narrowed the number of applications requiring review by limiting referrals to projects entailing the demolition of at least 500 square feet of gross floor area. See, e.g., Concord, New Hampshire,and Monroe,Connecticut. How is Demolition Review Accomplished? Under typical demolition review procedures, the permitting official is directed to refer a demolition permit application to a review body for an initial or preliminary determination of significance. In San Antonio, for example, all demolition permits are referred to the city's Historic Preservation Officer(HPO) to determine within 30 days whether or not a building or structure is historically significant. If the HPO finds the building significant, the HPO is required to forward the application to the Historic and Design 3 Review Commission (HDRC) for review and recommendation as to significance. If the HDRC concurs in the HPO's finding of significance,then the Commission must recommend designation to the City Council. Buildings and structures not deemed significant at any time during these proceedings may be demolished. San Antonio Demolition Review Process - iknropxkmpermit,gtplk:nrontikht I fir0nvkw Re rem! HDRC` ' ' Demolition permit kw,xl .�{ =1iTAC.tecomirrMt tk+ignatkow _, City Gowned tuxes M de ipn,re ) Pm{artty prewrvcd -:Citp Cooneil aatex:xn toticeignntt j iknwyMain ptnnit k.w& �,.�� „_t)enxttsion pettnit n rAted Santa Monica and Chicago also delay issuance of a demolition permit to allow for the landmark designation of the building, if warranted. In Santa Monica, the demolition permit may be issued if no application to designate is filed within 60 days. Chicago's demolition ordinance delays issuance of permit up to 90 days "in order to enable the department of planning and development to explore options to preserve the building or structure, including, but not limited to, possible designation of the building or structure as a Chicago Landmark in accordance with Article XVII of Chapter 2-120 of this code." Some demolition review laws simply provide for a delay in the issuance of a permit to explore preservation-based solutions. New Castle County, Delaware utilizes this approach. The county may delay issuance of a demolition permit for any building "thought to be over 50 years old" for a period up to I0 days, during which time the Historic Review Board must make a determination whether the building is historically significant. If the building is deemed significant,then the board may order further delay up to 9 months from the date the application was initially tiled to seek demolition alternatives. New Castle County Demolition Review Process Demolition Permit Application Filed Building over 50 years Building under 50 years 1 ' HPC Review-- J Building not significant 1)emolition pennit issued Building significant 9-month delay period invoked Building preserved j ::Building demolished 4 In Boston,the Inspectional Services Department must transmit a copy of an application for a permit to demolish a building to the Boston Landmarks Commission within three days. The commission staff, in return, must make a determination within 10 days as to whether the building is(1) subject to review and (2) significant under specific criteria. If the property is determined not to be significant,then no further review is required. If the property is significant, the commission must hold a public hearing to determine whether the building should be subject to demolition delay.A decision on whether to delay the permit must he made within 40 days from the date the demolition permit application was initially filed. To invoke the delay period, the commission must find that, in considering the public interest, it is preferable that the building be preserved or rehabilitated rather than demolished. Factors for consideration include: (a)the building's historic, architectural,and urban design significance; (b) whether the building is one of the last remaining examples of its kind in the neighborhood, the city, or the region; and (c) the building's condition. If the commission finds that the building is subject to demolition delay, issuance of the demolition permit may be delayed for up to 90 days from the close of the public hearing. A "Determination of No Feasible Alternative" may be issued during the public hearing or prior to the expiration of the 90-day period if the commission finds that there are no feasible alternatives to demolition. Who Makes the Determination of Significance? In most cases, the historic preservation commission makes the determination of significance, with initial review by the staff to the commission. See. e.g., Boston, Massachusetts, Davis, California, and San Antonio, Texas. Variations, however, do exist from community to community. In Santa Monica, for example, demolition permit applications are forwarded directly to each of the members of the landmarks commission. In Boulder, initial review is performed by the city manager and two members of the landmarks board, unless the building was built in or after 1940, in which case only city manager review is required. If there is "probable cause" that the building may qualify as a landmark, then the matter is referred to the entire landmarks board. In the cities of Keene and Concord, New Hampshire,the demolition review committee, comprised of three members of each city's heritage commission, is responsible for conducting the initial review, making an official determination of significance, and holding a meeting to explore preservation alternatives. What Evidence Must be Submitted for Review? Most jurisdictions require the submission of sufficient information to enable the decision maker to make an informed decision on a building's age and significance. In Santa Monica, for example, a completed application form must be submitted to the landmarks commission, along with a site plan, eight copies of a photograph of the building, and photo verification that the property has been posted with a notice of intent to demolish. Boston requires the submission of photographs of both the subject property and any surrounding properties with a demolition permit application. In addition, the applicant must provide a map identifying the location of the property, a plot plan showing the building footprint and those in the immediate vicinity; plans for site improvements, including elevations if a new structure is planned,and the notarized signatures of all owner's-of-record along with proof of ownership. Additional materials may be required if a public hearing on the issue of whether the property is "preferably preserved" is held. Items such as a structural analysis report, adaptive reuse feasibility studies, the availability of alternative sites for the proposed project, effects of post-demolition plans on the community, and other materials the commission may need to make a feasibility determination may be requested. Newton, Massachusetts has comparable requirements. In the case of partial demolitions involving alterations or additions,the town also requires the submission of proposed plans and elevation drawings for the affected portion of the building. What Standards are Used to Determine Historical Significance? In Gainesville, Florida, the preservation planner is essentially charged with determining whether the structure would qualify as a landmark under the city's historic preservation ordinance. A demolition permit may be issued if the planner finds that the structure "is not designed in an architectural 'high style' or a recognized vernacular building pattern,and it does not have historic events or persons associated with it." 5 In New Castle County, Delaware,the Historic Review Board makes a determination as to whether the building or structure is historically significant, based on the criteria for listing in the New Castle County Register of Historic and Architectural Heritage. In Baton Rouge,Louisiana,the city's planning commission is charged with determining whether"[t]he structure is individually listed on the National Register of Historic Places or included in a National Register Historic District, or the structure is classified as National Register Eligible or Major Contributing in the historic building survey of the Central Business District." In Westfield, Connecticut, individual findings of significance are not made. Rather, to invoke the 90- day,demolition delay period,the structure must he listed in or located within a historic district listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the State Register of Historic Places, the Westfield Historical Commission Register of Historic Places, or a local historic district created under the city's historic preservation ordinance. To be included on the city's historic register, the property must "contain or reflect distinctive and demonstrably important features of architectural, cultural, political, economic or social significance to the City of Westfield." In Boulder,a preliminary finding on whether there is"probable cause"for designation as an individual landmark is made. If there is "probable cause," then the matter is required to he referred to the landmark commission for a public hearing on the eligibility of the building for designation as a landmark. In addition to determining whether the building meets the objectives and standards for landmark designation under its preservation ordinance, the Boulder commission must also take into account: (1) "(t]he relationship of the building to the character of the neighborhood as an established and definable area;" (2) "the reasonable condition of the building;"and(3)"the reasonable projected cost of restoration or repair."If the building is found to merit designation,then a delay period not to exceed 180 days from the date the demolition permit application was initially filed may be invoked. Cities and towns enacting demolition review procedures in Massachusetts may not invoke a delay period until the building or structure at issue is found to he both "significant" and "preferably preserved." The term"preferably preserved"essentially means that it is in the public's interest to preserve the building. In some cases, a determination may be made to seek landmark status. Newton's "demolition delay ordinance" is illustrative. Under the city's law, a significant building is"any building or structure which is in whole or in part fifty years or more old"and which: (I) is in any federal or state historic district, or if in any local historic district, is not open to view from a public street,public park or public body of water;or (2)is listed on or is within an arca listed on the National Register of Historic Places or eligible for such listing,or listed on or is within an area listed on the State Register of Historic Places, or eligible for such listing;or (3) has been determined by the commission or its designee to be a historically significant building after a finding that it is: a) importantly associated with one or more historic persons or events, or with the architectural, cultural, political, economic or social history of the City of Newton, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts or the United States of America:or b) historically or architecturally important by reason of period, style, method of building construction or association with a particular architect or builder,either by itself or in the context of a group of buildings or structures;or c) located within one hundred fifty (150) feet of the boundary line of any federal or local historic district and contextually similar to the buildings or structures located in the adjacent federal or local historic district. A building or structure is"preferably preserved"if issuance of the requested demolition permit"would result in the demolition of a historically significant building or structure whose loss would be detrimental to the historical or architectural heritage or resources of the City of Newton." 6 What Procedures are Used to Evaluate Significance? The notice and hearing requirements set forth in demolition review ordinances normally address two concerns. One is meeting the constitutional rights of the applicant to due process.The other is ensuring that the community knows about the pending demolition and has a meaningful opportunity to participate in the proceedings.Determinations of significance are generally held upon review by a city's historic preservation commission at a public hearing. Notice. Individual notice is often required when specific findings are made affecting the applicant's request for a demolition permit. For example, in Boulder, notice must be provided to the applicant upon a finding by an initial review committee that probable cause exists that the building or structure may be eligible for designation as an individual landmark. The applicant is also entitled to notice of the public hearing before the full commission regarding the property's eligibility for landmark status and notice of the commission's final decision to stay the demolition permit for a period of 180-days to explore preservation alternatives. Public notice requirements under demolition review ordinances can also be extensive. In situations where delay periods may be invoked for the purpose of exploring preservation alternatives, public awareness can be critical. In Monroe, Connecticut, for example, concerted efforts are made to inform the public. The city's ordinance requires publication of notice in newspaper of general circulation and individually-mailed notice to the city's historic district commission, the town historian, the Monroe Historical Society, and all abutting property owners. In addition, the city is required to post for at least 30 days a 36 by 48" sign visible from nearest public street with the words "DEMOLITION" printed on the sign with the letters being at least 3 inches in height. Among other requirements, Gainesville, Florida, requires that the historic preservation planner post a sign on the property "notifying the public of the owner's intent to demolish the structure in order to allow interested parties to come forward and move the structure upon consent of the owner." Hearings. Public hearings are typically required under demolition delay provisions to determine whether the building or structure posed for demolition is historically significant. See, e.g. Baton Rouge, Louisiana, Boston, Massachusetts, Boulder, Colorado, Westfield, Connecticut, Gainesville, Florida, and Concord, New Hampshire. Some demolition delay laws also use the public hearing format to consider alternatives for demolition delay. The Westfield, Connecticut, ordinance, for example, specifically states that "It_ihe purpose of said Hearing shall be to discuss, investigate and evaluate alternatives that will allow for the preservation of such buildings, structures, features/components or portions thereof." It provides, however,that [t]he applicant's intended use/reuse of the property is not a topic of the hearing." How Long Do Delay Periods Typically Run? The delay periods invoked under demolition review ordinances run from 30 days to two-years, with most falling within the 90-day to six-month range. In some jurisdictions,the length of the delay period may be prescribed by state law. For example, in Connecticut, § 29-406(b)of the Connecticut General Statutes authorizes any town, city, or borough to impose a waiting period of not more than ninety days. Also note that the effective length of equivalent waiting periods can vary significantly,depending upon the date upon which the delay is measured. Boston, for examples, measures its 90-day delay period from the close of the public hearing.Chicago, in comparison, measures its 90-day delay period from the application tiling date. Communities with longer delay periods sometimes include specific provisions that enable the issuance of a demolition permit prior to the expiration of the waiting period if specific conditions are met. For example, in Lake Forest, Illinois, the city's 2-year waiting period for all demolition permits may be waived or shortened,upon a finding by the Building Review Board,after holding a public hearing,that— a.The structure itself, or in relation to its environs, has no significant historical,architectural, aesthetic or cultural value in its present restored condition;or b. Realistic alternatives (including adaptive uses) are not likely because of the nature or cost of work necessary to preserve such structure or realize any appreciable part of such value;or c. The structure in its present or restored condition is unsuitable for residential, or a residentially compatible use;or 7 d. The demolition is consistent with, or materially furthers, the criteria and.purpose of this section and Section 46-27 of the Zoning Code. In Newton, Massachusetts a demolition permit may he issued before the expiration of the city's 12- month delay period if the Newton Historical Commission is satisfied that the permit applicant: • has made a"bona tide,reasonable and unsuccessful effort to locate a purchaser for the building or structure who is willing to preserve, rehabilitate or restore the building or structure;or • :has agreed to accept a demolition permit on specified conditions approved by the commission. See, also, Boston's Demolition Delay Ordinance, which provides for the issuance of a finding of"no feasible alternative to demolition"at the public hearing or any time prior to the expiration of the delay period. Also note that some jurisdictions insist that the property be secured during the demolition delay period. In Boston, for example, the applicant is required to secure the building during the review period. If the building is lost during this period due to tire or other causes, then the action is treated as an unlawful demolition. How are Demolition Alternatives Explored? The historic preservation commission usually sits at the center of the preservation effort. The commission will work with the owner and other interested organizations, public agencies, developers, and individuals who may be instrumental in developing a workable solution. Boston's demolition review ordinance specifically identifies who must be asked to participate in the city's investigation of alternatives. In addition to the owner, the Landmarks Commission must invite the Commissioner of Inspectional Services, the Director of the Boston Redevelopment Authority, and the Chairperson of the Boston Civic Design Commission, and any other individual or entity approved by the applicant. In Boulder, the Landmarks Board may"take any action that it deems necessary and consistent with this chapter to preserve the structure, including, without limitation, consulting with civic groups, public agencies, and interested citizens." The range of alternatives that may he pursued may be specifically identified in the ordinance or left to the preservation commission's discretion. In addition to considering the possibility of landmark designation,the moving of a building to an alternative location,and the salvaging of building materials,the Boulder Landmarks Board is empowered to "take any action that it deems necessary . . . to preserve the structure." In Wilton, Connecticut, the Wilton Historic District Commission or the Connecticut Historical Commission is charged with "attempting to find a purchaser who will retain or remove such building or who will present some other reasonable alternative to demolition"during the 90-day delay period. Alternatives that are often considered include the possibility of rehabilitating the building with the assistance of tax incentives or other financial assistance; adapting the building to a new use; removing the building to another site; finding a new owner who is willing and able to preserve the building; incorporating the building into the owner/applicant's redevelopment plans; and using an alternative site for the owner/applicant's project. The submission of specific information pertaining to the property is generally required. An applicant, for example, may be required to submit a structural engineer's report and information on the cost of stabilizing, repairing, rehabilitating, or re-using the building, plans for the property upon demolition, and the availability of other sites that would meet the applicant's objectives. What Exceptions May Apply to the Strict Application of Demolition Review Laws? Many demolition review laws recognize exceptions upon a showing of economic hardship or where the public safety is at stake. In Gainesville, Florida, for example, the demolition delay period may he waived by the historic preservation board if the applicant can demonstrate"economic hardship."As is generally the case with the consideration of economic hardship claims under historic preservation ordinances, the burden of proof rests on the applicant to show that retention of the property is not economically viable and the applicant must set forth specific relevant information to make his or her case. 8 Virtually every demolition review law recognizes an exception on public safety grounds. Gainesville also provides that "any structure that has been substantially burned or damaged by an event not within the landowner's control with more than 50 percent of the structure affected" may also be demolished, regardless of the building's significance. Weston,Massachusetts provides the following exception: Emergency Demolitions Notwithstanding the following provisions,the Building Inspector may issue a demolition permit at any time in the event of imminent and substantial danger to the health or safety of the public due to deteriorating conditions. Prior to doing so,the Building Inspector shall inspect the building and document, in writing, the findings and reasons requiring an emergency demolition, a copy of which shall be forwarded immediately to the Commission. Before allowing emergency demolition, the Building Inspector shall make every effort to inform the Chairperson of the Commission of his intention to allow demolition before he issues a permit for emergency demolition. No provision of this by-law is intended to conflict with or abridge any obligations or rights conferred by G.L.c.143 regarding removal or demolition of dangerous or abandoned structures. In the event of a conflict,the applicable provisions of Chapter 143 shall control. Once the Delay Period Expires, What Other Restrictions May Apply? Some jurisdictions also require the submission of documentation of the property and/or the salvage of significant architectural features prior to the issuance of the demolition permit. Boulder, Colorado, expressly authorizes the city manager to require the submission of documentation about the building prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, such as a description of significant events, information. on its occupants, photographs, plans, and maps. In Keene, New Hampshire,the demolition review committee is required to "photographically document the building" prior to demolition. In addition, the salvage of • significant architectural features is encouraged. • How are Demolition Review Ordinances Enforced? Experience has shown that historic buildings will be demolished, without regard to protections against demolition, if the ramifications for non-compliance are minor or insignificant. Accordingly, communities generally seek to establish penalties that will, in fact, discourage violations from occurring. Commonly used penalties, for example, include the imposition of significant tines for each day of the offense, and the preclusion of a permit to develop or occupy the property for specific period of time. In New Castle County, Delaware, the county attorney is authorized by ordinance "to take immediate action prosecute those responsible"for the demolition of structures determined to have historic significance prior to the issuance of a demolition permit. In addition, building permits for the parcel affected may be withheld for a period of one to three years. Violators of the demolition ordinance in Monroe, Connecticut, may be subject to a fine amounting to the greater of one thousand dollars or the assessed value of the property for each violation. In Highland Park, Illinois, a person who violates the demolition review ordinance may be assessed a fine equal to "90 percent of the fair market value of the.cost of the replacement of such regulated structure." Newton,Massachusetts,authorizes the imposition of a$300 tine and two year ban on the issuance of a building permit against anyone who demolishes a historically significant building or structure without first obtaining and fully complying with the provisions of a demolition permit issued in accordance with its demolition review ordinance. However, a waiver on the building permit ban may be obtained in instances where reuse of the property would "substantially benefit the neighborhood and provide compensation for the loss of the historic elements of the property" either through reconstruction of the lost elements or significant enhancement of the remaining elements. As a condition to obtaining the waiver, however, the owner must execute a binding agreement to ensure that the terms agreed to are met. 9 Do Demolition Delay Ordinances Work? On December 15, 2003, a Chicago Tribune article written by architectural critics, Blair Kamin and Patrick T.Reardon,made headline news. Kamin and Reardon reported that,in a year's time,only one of 17 buildings slated for demolition had been preserved under the city's much acclaimed "demolition delay ordinance." The critics asserted that the city's much-touted effort to preserve the buildings coded red or orange on Chicago's 1996 Historic Resources Survey through the imposition of a 90-day waiting period on demolition permits, was not working.They attributed the loss of the buildings to the city's failure to make preservation a priority and by not providing sufficient legal protections and financial incentives to get the job done. In the same article, Kamin and Reardon also reported that the Chicago Landmarks Division had made a contrary assessment. Sixteen out of the 17 orange-rated buildings posed for demolition were not recommended for designation because they had failed to meet the criteria for landmark status and the one building that was saved would have been demolished but for the demolition delay ordinance. It cannot be denied,as Kamin and Reardon noted, that demolition review laws seem to support an "ad hoc"approach to landmark designation.The buildings being designated are those threatened by demolition rather than those most deserving. Also, the question of what is preserved often depends upon who cares about the matter,rather than the historical or architectural merit of the building at issue. Keep in mind, however, that the need for a demolition review law really stems from the fact that it is impossible to designate every building worthy.of protection in advance, especially in cities like Chicago, where over 17,000 buildings have been listed on the city's historic survey. Historic preservation commissions are often understaffed,and often cities simply lack the resources or political will to protect all of their historic properties through their historic preservation ordinances. Indeed, in Massachusetts, where over 100 demolition review laws have been adopted, demolition review laws are considered overwhelmingly successful. According to the Massachusetts Historical Society, demolition delay enabled the preservation of the Coolidge Corner Theater and a Lustron house in • Brookline. Negotiations under Eastham's delay provision enabled a historic house to be moved rather than demolished. Demolition review requirements have also helped to stem the tide of teardowns in residential areas in Newton,and resulted in the rehabilitation of the circa-1710 Foster Emerson House in Reading. For more information, see Christopher Skelly, "Preservation through ByLaws and Ordinances"(Massachusetts Historical Commission 2003). What Else do I Need to Know About Demolition Review Laws? By now you should be aware that demolition review laws can vary significantly. In developing your own program, it is important to understand not only how such laws work generally,hut also to think about how such a law would work in your own community. Basic considerations include the types and number of buildings likely to require review, who should conduct that review, and how the law would relate to your city or town's historic preservation program. Communities should also seek to— • Establish an efficient process. Provide a quick and efficient means for ensuring that permits on non-significant buildings are not held up unnecessarily. The number of demolition permit applications filed in a given year can sometimes be staggering. The San Antonio Historic Preservation Office, for example,reports that it reviews approximately 900 applications per year. • Have resources in place which help applicants and/or permitting officials determine the age and significance of their buildings.In other words,take the guesswork out of the process. • Avoid making the safety net too small. It is important to ensure that potential landmarks are, indeed, subject to the law's protections. In communities with resources from the recent past, for example, it may be necessary to establish a threshold date that is commensurate with those resources. Communities relying on specific dates rather than the age of the building may find the need to amend the ordinance over time. If demolition review is limited to a category of buildings or list of structures, comprehensive survey work must be done prior to the law's enactment to ensure that all buildings meriting protection are included. 10 • Keep the community informed. Effective notice provisions, such as the posting of a large sign, are critical. Members of the public cannot respond to a demolition threat unless they know about it. • Don't make the delay period too short. Without a meaningful delay period, leverage is lacking. It takes time to find a new buyer or a new site, or to even make an assessment as to whether an adaptive reuse project would work. • Give the preservation commission the necessary tools to negotiate a solution. Preservation solutions are more likely to be forthcoming with some level of financial assistance or tax savings. Enable the commission to draw on the expertise of other city officials when necessary and invite critical players to the table. Demolition review provides an invaluable opportunity to improve communication between a preservation commission and its staff, and other governmental officials and the development community. • Enable the property to be designated, if designation is warranted. Negotiated preservation is no substitute for a strong preservation ordinance. • Enforce your ordinance. Ensure that the penalties effectively deter non-compliance and be prepared to enforce your ordinance if violations occur. Where Can I Find Examples of Demolition Delay Ordinances? Listed below are examples of demolition delay ordinances that have been adopted around the country. California Alameda City Code § 13-21-7. http://www.ci.alameda.ca.us/codeLDATA/TITLEI3/13_2 l_PRESERVATION_OF_HISTORICAL_A /index.html Davis Building Ordinance§ 8.18.020 http://www.city.davis.ca.us/pb/pdfs/planning/forms/Demolition_Permit_Requirements.pdf Santa Monica Municipal Code§9.04.10.16.010(as amended by Ordinance No. 2131 (July 27,2004)). http://www.codemanage.com/santamonica/ Colorado Boulder Revised Code §9-I 1-23. http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/files/PDS/New%2OLUC/Training%20Copies/9_1 1_tra.pdf Connecticut Monroe Demolition Delay Ordinance http://www.cttrust.org/index.cgi/I 049 New Haven Code of Ordinances,Ch. 15,Art.1I,Sec. 15-50 http://www.mu icode.com/Resources/On1 ineLibrary.asp http://cityofnewhaven.com/CityPlan/pdfs/HistoricPreservation/DemolitionDelay.pdf Plainville Demolition Delay Ordinance http://www.plai nvi l lect.com/pdfs/82-050705%20DEMOLITION%20DELAY%200RDINANCE.pdf Wilton Demolition Ordinance http://www.cttrust.org/index.cgi/1049 11 Delaware New Castle County Code§6.3.020(B). http://www.municode.com/Resources/OnlineLibrary.asp Florida Gainesville Code of Ordinances§6-19. http://www.municode.com/Resources/OnlineLibrary.asp Illinois Chicago,Illinois. Municipal Code of Chicago§13-32-230(a)-(c)and §2-76-215. http://www.amlegal.com/library/il/chicago.shtml http://www.preservationchicago.org/success/demodelay.html Kenilworth,Illinois.Kenilworth Village Code, §§2B-21-2B-22; 1 10.4-1 10.14 http://www.villageofkenilworth.org/forms.html Highland Park Ordinances,Ch. 17§§ 170.040. http://www.cityhpil.com/pdf/ordinances/chapter170.pdf Lake Forest,Illinois. Building Scale and Environmental Ordinance§ 9-87. http://www.cityoflakeforest.com/pdf/cd/bsord.pdf Louisiana City of Baton Rouge and East Baton Rouge Parish Code of Ordinances,Tit. 7,§ 3.06 http://brgov.con-ildept/ddd/pdf/DemolitionRelocation.pdf Massachusetts Boston Zoning Code,Art. 85, §§ 1-8. http://www,cityotboston.gov/hri/pdf/ZoningCode/Article85.pdf Cambridge Municipal Code Ch.2.78,Art.II http://bpc.iserver.net/codes/cbridge/index.htm Newton Revised Ordinances,Ch. 22,Art. III,§ 22-44. http://www.ci.newton.ma.us/legal/ordinance/chapter_22.htm#artl Maryland Montgomery County Code, Part II § 24A-10 http://www.amlegal.com/montgomery_county_md/ New Hampshire Concord Code of Ordinances, Art.26-9 §§16-9-1 through 16-9-5. http://www.municode.com/Resources/OnlineLibrary.asp Keene Code of Ordinances,Art. IV, §§ 18-331 through 18-335. http://www.municode.com/Resources/OnlineLibrary.asp Oregon Portland Code and Charter,Tit.24,Ch.24.55,§24.55.200 http://www.plainvillect.com/pdfs/82-050705%20DEMOLITION%20DELAY%200RDINANCE.pdf 12 Texas Alamo Heights Code of Ordinances,Ch.5,Art. XII, §§5-360 through 5-373 http://www.ci.alamo-heights.tx.us/admin/ordinances/1597_demo_delay.pdf San Antonio Unified Development Code. Art. IV, §35-455(b)(2). hap://www.municode.com/Resources/OnlineLibrary.asp 13 A LETTER TO GEORGE: HOW TO KEEP THE PRESERVATION COMMISSION OUT OF COURT AND AVOID BEING SUED by Robert E. Stipe Emeritus Professor of Design School of Design North Carolina State University EDITORS NOTE: Since A Letter to George was first published by the National alliance of Preservation Commissions (NAPC), it has occasionally been distributed without its attachments (sample procedural motions and findings of fact).NAPC believes that it is important that both be available and used. The attachments illustrate much of what is discussed in the letter and serve as concrete examples for commissions to follow. While the Letter&attachment are based on North Carolina law, many other state historic district laws are subject to the same constraints insofar as evidentiary and fact-finding procedures are concerned. The findings of fact are but samples that should always be based on the law of individual states and localities,but they are essential elements of the process. NAPC is pleased to make A Letter to George available and hopes that all who read it will benefit from it as so many others have in the past. NAPC serves the United State's more than 3,000 local preservation commissions and architectural review boards through a program of education, training, and advocacy. You can learn more about NAPC at www.uga.edu, or by calling 706-542-4731. EDITORS NOTE: • Since A Letter to George first appeared, it has occasionally been distributed without its attachments (sample procedural motions and findings of fact).NAPC believes that it is important that both be available and used.The attachments illustrate much of what is discussed in the letter and serve as concrete examples for commissions to follow. While the Letter& attachment are based on North Carolina law, many other state historic district laws are subject to the same constraints insofar as evidentiary and fact-finding procedures are concerned.The findings of fact are but samples that should always be based on the law of individual states and localities, but they are essential elements of the process. Before You Go Any Further... This little publication is dedicated to the many citizens who already have or who may presently be thinking about accepting an appointment to the local historic preservation commission,whether it is called historic district commission,the landmarks board, or something else—perhaps even something unmentionable in polite company. Its origins are to be found in a very short letter I wrote to a friend many years ago,congratulating him on being appointed to such a commission. Like me,he accepted his appointment with stout heart, good intentions, and not much prior exposure to all that one needs to know to hold down such a position and stay out of court. In the ensuing years as board members and/or commission chairmen, we both learned a lot—the hard way. This essay tackles a special problem common to almost all local preservation commission members,which is that they are not lawyers. Unfortunately, however, there are a lot of legal rituals and many legal pitfalls attached to the work of these commissions that layman must know about. Especially so, since the system itself requires that these common folk act like lawyers and judges, even if they don't know how, or, worse, don't like lawyers and judges. In the larger world of preservation, everyone is writing guidebooks, handbooks, etc. for these people. There are some really good ones out there and you ought to have one by your side all the time. However, most of them are pretty long and somewhat complicated for the beginner, so you ought to read this one first. The challenge of this piece was to attempt to present the main points of a big and fairly complex set of ideas to ordinary folks without including a single citation or reference to state statutes or court decisions, and to get the message across using mostly words of three or fewer syllables. There are a lot of special topics that this piece doesn't deal with. I hope, though,that it gets a lot of beginners off to useful start. It may even encourage a few individuals, presently considering acceptance of an appointment to a commission who can't or won't live up to what is required, to turn it down. Both outcomes, I should think, would be positive both for the individuals and for preservation. I should be sorry if some members of the professional preservation community find this publication beneath their dignity; but it is, after all, not primarily for them. Bob Stipe Chapel Hill,N.C. February 1994 ROBERT E. ST1PE 100 Pine Lane Chapel Hill,North Carolina 27514-4331 Dear George: Good to hear from you. You and Mabel have had a bad winter with colds and all, and I'm glad Little Herman's knee is healing o.k. I agree, kids are a pain until they are potty trained, but enjoy them while you can. They grow up and leave home all too soon! You will miss them! On to the main subject of your letter... [ was impressed and delighted to hear that the city council has asked you to consider filling a vacancy on the local historic preservation commission, and maybe even serving as chairman of the same. This letter is my response to your question,"What the heck am I getting myself into?" I can tell you what you are "getting into,"as you put it, but whether the experience of serving on the board is a good deal or not is something only you can answer. It is a bit like one of those "good news-bad news"jokes—there are ups, and there are downs. Me? I got a lot out of my years on our local commission, and I like to think the town did, too. But it depends on who you talk to, and how you handle the responsibility involved. There is much more to it than most new members are told before they accept the position. I did lose a lot of hair during those years, and I must admit I went in brown and came out gray. The good news is that serving on a preservation commission wraps together a lot of opportunities to help preserve the heritage of a town. Here in North Carolina, the historic preservation commission (I'll just call it the"commission" from here out—it's easier than typing"historic preservation commission" over and over) can be more than just another"regulatory" board, lording it over the people who want to do something for(or something to) a historic house or building. Our state law encourages the commission to do surveys, prepare a preservation plan for the town as part of its comprehensive plan, authorizes the commission to serve as an appearance commission for the historic district, and even act as a revolving fund to save individual buildings. That's the positive side of things. Lot of opportunity there. [Excuse the interruption. The cat needed out. She's trying to deal with a hair- ball] The flip side of being on a preservation commission—the bad news, some might say—stems from its other, more traditional role as a regulatory agency of the city. It depends on who you talk to and whether you are a liberal or conservative on what are called "property rights." Different people see it differently, and need to understand that from the beginning. Some people will call you a Commie in ' Sheep's Clothing or worse. But most folks who care about their towns and think about it, though,will look at you and smile and tell you what a great job you're doing. I will try to keep this sort of simple and informal. On the regulatory side, it's not as complicated as the lawyers and all make out, but it is a very serious deal,both from the standpoint of the town and the property owner. Basically, state law and your local preservation ordinance say that any time a property owner in a local historic district(whether the owner of an old building or a new one that isn't"historic") wants to do something with or to his building or property, he's first got to go to your preservation commission for a permit. That is, he may want to build something on a vacant lot in the district, or he might want to remodel or put an addition on an existing building; or he might want to move the structure someplace else,tear it down, etc. This is where the stuff hits the fan. The owner will often grumble about your "regulating taste,"and say that has nothing to do with protecting public health or safety. Or maybe the owner's architect will gripe about his design being protected "free speech." And these days most everybody will scream about how you are stomping on their sacred"property rights." And if you really screw up and issue a permit for a design the neighbors don't like, they will be on your tail. So, serving on the commission can be one of the more thankless jobs in city government. Believe me, 1 know. The good news here grow out of the longer view, which is that history, architecture,the character of the neighborhood and the town and so on are really important,that we are all part of a community that was here before us and will be here long after, and that the community has a long-term interest in protecting its character. I don't mean to knock the property rights people;they are good people, too, by and large. But they tend to put property rights on a pedestal to the exclusion of everything else. With them, community, heritage, and stuff like that come in a distinct second. (Also, some of them are fuzzy on their economics. Poor John Locke would turn over in his grave.) [Sorry. The cat wanted back in again. I hope I can.finish this before something else happens. Now the dog is barking at something...Did I tell you we had a mouse in the kitchen last week?! A real honest-to-God mouse. First one. The cat was terrified!! Anyway, back to Topic A...] All this regulatory stuff is a tough call. The permit thing is important,though, because the property owner has to have this permit from you all before he can get a zoning permit, or a building permit or an occupancy permit, or whatever. It has a great name: it's usually called a"Certificate of Appropriateness,"which is just what it says it is. It's an official piece of paper"certifying," in the opinion of your commission, that what the property owner wants to do is"appropriate" and won't be something aesthetically or architecturally stupid or nasty-looking that will goof up the neighborhood. And without that certificate,the property owner is stopped dead in the water. So, potentially you have a big and heavy hand in what people can or can't do with their property. That's a lot of responsibility. There are limits to this, or course. [I am going to put some limits on that damn cat! It just threw up the hair ball! Back in a sec.] So much for the cat. Like I said,there are limits to what the commission can do. You can't be so tough on property owners that they can't make any use of or profit from their property;there has to be wiggle room. And you can't hold them up forever or make them spend just horrendous amounts of money to restore the building's historical/architectural details. Our law says that the property owner who wants to tear down an important building can only be held up for 365 days unless it's a building of"statewide importance." So you will be frustrated sometimes, especially by the property owner who lets a property decay to the point where it has to be pulled down because it is a menace to public safety. That is a tough one. So is the situation where the owner is messing up the beautiful interior of an old building. Can you regulate him as to the inside details? Sometimes, maybe...There are a number of areas where you will want to proceed carefully and with the advice of the city attorney. But you shouldn't let this scare you away from the job. Again, though, I come down on the side of trying to preserve the character of the town,the district,the building. A buddy of mine says of old buildings, "You can't make one, you can't buy one,and when it's gone, it's gone forever." I needn't add that losing the character of a neighborhood through a lot of little, one- bye-one bad deeds by individual property owners is like being nibbled to death by ducks. You wake up one day and Whoa! Where did it go? I think you have to look at it like, Hey, nobody lives forever. We're only the temporary custodians of a little piece of civilization, and here, like elsewhere, we hope to make a better life for those who come after us. So you work to leave them the best place you can. Now, having said all that... [Darn! There is a commode downstairs that keeps running. You have to take off the top after you flush it and jiggle the floating ball that turns off the water. I have tried to explain this to the kids, who do Nintendo and all that complicated electronic games stuff. But do you think they can be taught to keep the toilet from running all night?! When I was a kid, we—well, never mind You asked me a question.] Back to the main topic. This preservation commission thing has a distinctly weird side to it. Not really weird,but it's legally a little complicated,and you have to understand it before you go on to the commission. It all has to do with where the preservation commission fits in the local government scene and the different nature of its job. This is important stuff,and to explain it I have to paint a bigger picture for you. You probably remember from Doc Howe's Civics I class in high school that the city is governed by a council, like the county is run by the county commissioners. This is called the"governing board" because it does just that: it governs. Which is to say it passes ordinances (the historic district or landmarks ordinance is one of many), and it sends out tax bills and spends our money. It is accountable at the polls, and if things get too bad, we can throw the bums out, as they say. But the governing board can't do it all. It has to have help. So they hire staff people like a city manager, and a city attorney, and planners, and police and fire people, and building inspectors, and what-all. Now because the governing board usually needs special kinds of advice on various matters, it appoints various commissions:planning commissions, recreation commissions, tree commissions, appearance commissions, downtown commissions, and so on. And they give advice to the city fathers and mothers on planning, recreation,trees, downtown, civic appearance and design, and so on. The preservation commission is a different kind of commission from the above. This is terribly important to understand. Of course, the preservation commission may sometimes give advice on planning or appearance or trees or whatever where the historic districts are concerned, but most of the time it is regulating_private property. This is something that other commissions don't do—at least not in the same way or to the same extent the preservation commission does. To get the worst of it out of the way fast,you also need to know that the preservation commission is called a"quasi-judicial" commission. Only rarely is it acting as your typical "advisory" board, like the planning commission. Well, so what is this"quasi-judicial," and what difference does it make? It is a quasi-judicial commission for the simple reason that the enabling legislation—that is, the state law that authorizes local governments to establish preservation commissions in the first place—says, specifically, that all appeals from a preservation commission are"in the nature of certiorari." No, that is not a funny disease or a household spray. It's an old latin phrase that for all practical purposes says what kinds of appeals may be taken from the preservation commission if an applicant doesn't like its decision. The state law (which all local preservation ordinances must follow) says that in the case of preservation commissions, someone who is dissatisfied can appeal to higher authority only when the board or court being appealed to says it can. And this is strictly limited to situations where there was some substantive or procedural irregularity in the way the case was first handled. For you,though,what is important to remember is that the findings or decision of the preservation commission regarding the appropriateness of what he proposes is final. Crazy?! Not really. Let's see if I can explain that without calling the lawyers. Let's say Joe Btzlpfsk comes in with his application for a Certificate of Appropriateness. He wants to modernize his front porch with big black wrought iron railings(he liked some he saw in New Orleans)and put a jacuzzi on his side deck facing the street. After a lot of discussion and maybe a split vote,the commission decides it doesn't like the porch or the jac1177i he and his architect(and wife) designed, and that it is not appropriate to build something looking like this in the historic district. So it denies Joe the necessary certificate of appropriateness. Joe wants to appeal on the grounds that the preservation commission's decision is entirely subjective, is based on mere aesthetic preferences only, and that his addition or whatever is indeed appropriate. In short: he can't, not these grounds. He can take his appeal and win only if the written record of his case shows that there was some procedural mistake or error in the way his application or hearing was handled by the commission, or if there was no evidence to support the commission's decision. (Of course, he might also win if there was some real hanky-panky in the handling of his application. This will be rare, but it happens). Conversely,the preservation commission might have decided that what Joe wants to do looks just fine, but the neighbors think it will be a blot on the neighborhood. You gave Joe a permit and now they want to appeal. But they're in the same boat as Joe. They can't appeal either, except on procedural grounds. This is important stuff to understand. The matter of deciding, as a legal "fact," whether something proposed by an applicant is"inappropriate" or"incongruous" or not is very much like the findings or decisions in any other legal proceedings. When the jury says"We find the defendant guilty," or the judge "finds the facts" in a civil case,the facts thus pronounced become legally binding once and forever for all legal purposes. The body to which an appeal might be taken may not re-open the issue of appropriateness and hear and decide the issue all over again if there is some reasonable evidence in the record to support the commission's decision and no sign of foul play in the decision-making process. In other words, the preservation commission's findings of fact must be affirmed on appeal if there is some reasonable evidence in the minutes to support those findings. So all that is left is for Joe Btzlpfsk to find some other grounds that will justify an appeal. And there may well be some. In fact, as a practical matter,there usually are! [This letter is getting much too long. The cat is yowling again. Another hairball? A mouse? Let's keep going.] So the net result of all this is that the preservation commission really is a kind of court, in spite of the fact that its members are almost always ordinary citizens who,while highly intelligent, are not particularly skilled in the law or the niceties of legal proceedings. And this means that the preservation commission—including you, George, if you take the job, and all the other members—must stiffen up and try to act like a court,because that's just what you are. If you don't feel you are quite ready to live up to this,then you should say"Thank you,but no thanks"to the council and spend your spare time doing something else. Well,just what more is implied by all this? What do I mean by "stiffen up?" Basically, it means that all your hearings are going to have to be fair and open. More than this, as the North Carolina Supreme Court and maybe others have said, it means all the elements of a fair trial must be present at the public hearing when Joe's application comes up. There will have to be formal advance notice to Joe and his neighbors about the time,date, and place of the hearing and a description of Joe's proposals. It will have to be an open meeting and meet all the requirements of the open meetings law.. It also means that anyone who speaks for or against Joe's application will have to be sworn in to tell the whole truth, nothing but the truth,etc.—even the lawyers. And the Chairman will have to conduct the proceedings in a relatively formal way, in terms of which parties speak when and to which issues. He or she will also have to very carefully summarize all the evidence on which the preservation commission bases its decisions. (Enclosed with this letter is a"Chairman's Checklist"that should help keep the proceedings on track. You will need this, especially if you are going to be chairman, and all the other members need to be familiar with it as well.) There are a lot of rules about all this. Some are spelled out by state law. Some are set forth in the ordinance. Most of them are set forth in the commission's "Rules of Procedure" or"bylaws." Wherever they come from, the procedural rules must be followed to the last jot and tittle. Otherwise, you get reversed immediately on appeal, or maybe the case is sent back to you to hear all over again. This is hard on Joe,bad for preservation, and it makes the commission look like a bunch of monkeys. You need to know the rules and follow them. Above all, in judging appropriateness, the commission will have to match what Joe wants to do against your"design guidelines,"and make very careful "findings of fact"about the appropriateness of Joe's jacuzzi or whatever. And these "findings"have to be supported with real honest-to-goodness, written-down reasons. This is terribly important, because as I said a minute ago,these facts, once found, are cast in legal concrete and can't be changed later on! Again, George, I've added some sample"findings"and some discussion of all this as a supplement to this letter. You will want to look at that enclosure, too. Finally, very good and precise minutes have to be kept, since, after all, the minutes, along with all the applications, forms, etc., will constitute the"record on appeal" if one is taken. I guess I should have mentioned earlier that appeals from the commission go to the local zoning board of adjustment(and, according to state law, nowhere else, especially not the council), and from the board of adjustment to superior court and maybe beyond. All this"ritual" may sound hokey, but believe me,the courts insist on it! I sometimes think it is a sad fact of life that state law and court decisions ask more of the non-lawyer members of a preservation commission than they are often able to handle. I would guess that 98%of all the decisions made by preservation commissions—at least in the smaller cities, and even some of the largest ones— could be overturned on appeal by any half-bright, first-year law student,just because there was some very minor procedural mis-step along the way. It is an even sadder fact of life that when an appeal is taken, most zoning boards of adjustment(which are also quasi-judicial boards and who must handle their cases in the same manner as the preservation commissions), don't know how to handle the appeal itself! All of a sudden they have to step out of their usual role as a fact- finding kind of trial court and act like an appellate court dealing with procedural stuff. They often really mess up! Talk about confusion! George, you are going to face some tricky stuff, here. When we talk about "fair" hearings, etc. we're talking about basic concepts like"Due Process"and "Equal Protection of the Laws," and so on. But we're also talking about your own personal behavior. Some of it is simple,just good P.R. stuff, like showing up on time for meetings. You have to remember that most citizens, once past garbage collection, have little contact with city government. You and your fellow commission members are the city so far as Joe and other applicants are concerned. That have a right to expect you will be interested enough to come on time, every time, and to take whatever effort is necessary to insure that their property rights, as well as the interests of the city, are well and fairly looked after. This includes everything like following the rules, staying awake, participating in an orderly way, keeping quiet unless you're recognized by the chairman, not carrying on side conversations, and so on. You might even wear a necktie. Seriously, less than all this is not good for Joe, for the image of city government, or for preservation. That's public relations stuff, and it's not unimportant. Equally important in terms of "Due Process" and"Equal Protection" are such issues as"conflict of interest." Most people can recognize these conflicts without much difficulty. Any time you have even the smell of a financial or personal interest in a property coming before the commission, you have a conflict of interest. "Financial" interest is pretty clear. "Personal" interest is when your mom comes in looking for a certificate of appropriateness to improve the old family place. In both cases you want to excuse yourself(go sit in the audience and keep quiet). But what if the applicant is your mother-in-law,whom you hate? Your boss? Your next door neighbor? What about your friend from down the street,or a member of your club? President Eisenhower once said that members of his administration had to be"as clean as a hound's tooth" on ethical matters. That sums it up well. When it doubt, be extra cautious and quit that particular case. A concealed conflict of interest can not only be very embarrassing if caught by the press, but worse, it also runs the risk of invalidating the commission's decision in a given case. George, my friend, I wish you well. This letter is far too long already. I could write on and on and on about many things. Among others, about how to run a good meeting, deal with individual landmarks, get rid of non-performing commission members, and so on. There are some good commission handbooks out there that deal with the details. You should buy one, read it, and clutch it to your bosom! Meantime, I smell dinner, and so I will knock it off. The preservation business is sometimes a nasty one, and you will no doubt bring home some lumps from time to time, but overall it is one of the most rewarding kinds of service you can provide for your town and its heritage. Enjoy the best of it, and look to Mabel to bandage you up when things get out of hand. Good luck! Bob P.S. I know that reading is not exactly your favorite form of indoor recreation, but I hope you will look over the enclosures I'm sending with this letter. As I mentioned, one of them is a chart or outline I made up when I was the commission chairman to help me figure out what to do or say when. You and all the commission members, not just the chairman, need to be familiar with it. And because the paper-work backup to your decisions, especially the "findings of fact" and the form of"motions," are so darned important, I've included a bunch of material on those subjects as a second enclosure. You don't need to read it word for word—it's, like, totally tedious. But you sure as heck need to know when to use this stuff as a kind of starting point. So everything following this letter goes to the real heart of the whole business. Take it seriously and it will keep you sane and help you stay out of jail! P.P.S. I forgot! Most everything in this letter also applies to individual landmarks! ■ Enclosure#1 Chairman's Checklist Before the Meeting 1. Check with staff 5 days before meeting to insure that: a.Notices have been sent to applicants, board members, media, attorney. b. All applications have been properly advertised and mailed on time. c. Copies of completed applications have been mailed to commission members with maps and photographs attached. d. Check on availability, content, and mailing of minutes from last meeting. 2. Check with staff on day of meeting to insure that: a. Meeting room is available,cleaned and in good order. b.Adequate seating is available for applicants, neighbors, press, others. c. District or landmark maps hung in place. d. Photographs ready to hang and/or slides and projector ready to go. e. Bible on hand for taking oath. f. Public address system working. g. Tape recorder working and supply of tape at hand. h. Members called in advance to insure attendance and presence of quorum. 3. Visit each property and review each application to come before commission. At the Meeting 1. Call meeting to order 2. Instruct secretary to call roll. a.Note absences and reasons therefore, for the record. b. for the record, record presence of a quorum. 3. Hearing of cases: a. Call case or application according to agenda. b. Check for, or note any conflicts of interest, excuse members from participation in case, and record action for the minutes. c. Inquire whether opposition is present or whether any controversy exists concerning the facts stated in the application. (1) If opposition or controversy is anticipated, swear in all the parties who wish to testify for either side, including their attorneys. d. Call on staff to: (1) Indicate location of property on map. (2) State level of architectural and/or historical significance (3) Summarize applicant's proposals (4) Indicate impacts on other properties in vicinity and visibility of work proposed from public right of way, including level of significance of adjoining properties. e. Call upon applicant or representative to confirm correctness/adequacy of staff summary, and for any additional information or corrections. (1) Solicit any other supporting evidence in favor of application, after requiring identification as to name and address of speaker. f. Solicit statements in opposition to granting of application. (1) Get name and address for record. (2) Ask respondents to confine statements to work proposed and its impact in terms of the criteria listed in the ordinance (see below). g. Solicit sworn statements pro or con from: (1) Planning staff or commission. (2) Historical or preservation society. (3) Any other interested parties present. h. Read and submit for the record any written representations received, pro or con, from absent parties i. Summarize facts and evidence presented on both sides, if disagreements have been forthcoming. If no disagreement or conflict, note for the record that in the absence of objections, representations appearing in record are uncontested. 4. Deliberation of cases a. Proceed to discussion of congruity vis a vis criteria stated in ordinance. One such ordinance includes the following: (1) Height. (2) Setback and placement. (3) Materials to be used(textures and patterns, color if authorized). (4)Architectural detailing. (5) Roof shapes, forms and materials. (6) Fenestration proportions, shapes, position, and location, pattern. (7) General form and proportions of buildings and structures. (8) Appurtenant features and fixtures: lighting,walls, fences, landscaping (if authorized). (9) Structural condition and soundness. [N.B.: Chairman should take up each of the elements in turn and ask each member to state any opinion regarding that element and no others. Some of the criteria may appear irrelevant to a given application,but they should not be ignored. Changes in design or suggestions for imposition of conditions on certificate may be elaborated. The minutes should indicate which members spoke to which criteria or issues.] 5. Findings of fact a. Call for a motion stating, as findings of fact, that the applicants proposal is/is not incongruous with the historic aspects of the district with respect to each of the 9 criteria, including the reasons therefore and subject to any conditions that may be imposed. [see proper form of motion below.] b. Call for a second to the motion. c. Discuss the motion, asking each member for his/her opinion. d. Call the question. e. Record the vote for the minutes. 6. Approval of certificate of appropriateness a. Call for a motion that the application for a certificate of appropriateness be approved, subject to any conditions commission requires. Conditions should be explicitly stated and made part of record. b. Call for a second to the motion. c. Discuss the motion. e. Record the vote for the minutes. 7. Thank applicant, neighbors, others for attending meeting. Invite them to stay but indicate they may leave. Indicate to applicant that work cannot commence until formal or written notification is received from the Inspections Division. 8. Proceed to hear next application. 9. Take up unfinished business or holdover business or cases from previous meeting(s). 10. Call for committee reports(when appropriate). 11.New business, approval of minutes of previous meeting, announcements, etc. 12. Call for adjournment. After the Meeting 1. Meet informally with press if requested. 2. Review minutes as soon as available. 3. Check with staff to insure follow-up paper work has been completed, permits issued, etc. Enclosure.No. 2 • Appropriate Motions for a Commission Two(2)motions,made and adopted as separate actions,are required to grant or deny a certificate of appropriateness. The first motion states and adopts findings of fact regarding the appropriateness of the project itself: "I move that the preservation commission find as a fact that the proposed project [application, file no. or location , if constructed according to the plans reviewed at this meeting, is not incongruous with the character of the district, for the reason(s)that the [specify which: height, setback and placement, materials, architectural detailing,roof, fenestration, general form and proportion appurtenant features] are, for the following reasons, [see pages 18-241 , generally in harmony with the special character of the neighboring properties and/or the historic district as a whole." If the application is to be approved conditionally,the following phrase should be added: "This finding is subject, however, to the following conditions: 1These should generally follow the lines of conditions agreed to by the applicant or proposed by Commission members or staff in the earlier discussion and on which there appeared to be a consensus.' In specifying the reasons, it is not sufficient merely to parrot the standards or criteria listed in the ordinance. Reasons why the project is not incongruous must be spelled out. The same is true if the commission decides that the project is inappropriate. Reasons must be given. (Later there are given a variety of"sample"statements regarding the impact of the application on each of the criteria listed in the ordinance. Such statements, suitably worded to meet the needs of a given situation, must be made part of the motion.) The minutes should contain the entirety of the above motion, including the findings of fact. These minutes have special legal connotations, since they (along with the application documents) are the only papers in the case that will go up to the Board of Adjustments on appeal. These findings are legally binding in the case and cannot be looked into or changed by the Board of Adjustment(or the courts), absent allegations of some hokey-pokey, bad faith or improper conduct of the preservation commission. They are as binding as a matter of law, as would be a guilty or not guilty finding by a jury in a criminal case. The findings of fact, as set forth in the minutes, establish the matter of congruity or the lack of it, for all subsequent legal proceedings. If there is any reasonable evidence in the minutes to support the commission's findings of fact,the Board of Adjustment has no basis for overturning the Commission's decision. (It may, of course, remand the case to the Commission for another hearing if the findings of fact are inadequate. But it cannot look into the findings or change them.) A second motion, immediately following upon the first, is next made to approve (or deny)the application: "Based on the preceding findings of fact, I move that the preservation commission grant a certificate of appropriateness to [applicant] approving the proposals as shown in the [application, file no. or location] , such certificate to be subject to the conditions contained in the previous motion." The chairman should always make clear to the applicant that the passage of these two motions does not constitute and immediate go-ahead, and that work must await the issuance of proper written authorizations, usually in the form of a Certificate of Appropriateness from the building or inspections department, or the Commission's secretary. That piece of paper not only establishes for all legal purposes the running of the period for taking an appeal, but also minimizes the possibility of misunderstandings about what was approved. A useful device is to supply each member of the commission with a copy of the wording of the above motions. These should be kept readily at hand, perhaps by printing them in large type on the reverse side of the member's table name or identification placard, where it will always be visible. The Review Process The chairman or someone designated by him or her should take each of the factors shown on pages 18-24, one by one, and go around the table, soliciting comments from each member with respect to the relevance and suitability of that factor only. These comments will not only assist members to make reasoned judgments regarding congruity or the lack thereof, but will also assist in framing the first and most important motion to be considered and debated by the commission after all factors have been considered. No factor should be omitted, except upon affirmation by the chairman that it is not relevant to the current application. Other factors related to congruity or the lack of it should be framed and incorporated into the motion where this is appropriate in particular cases. It is especially to be noted that the language of the statute and the local ordinance must be followed to the letter. The language is: "The commission...shall take no action...except to prevent...[a result]...which would be incongruous with the special character of the...district." The intent of the provision, expressed by the words"shall take no action...except to prevent..." is to establish a presumption favoring the property owner. It is not up to the commission to re-design a submitted project according to the commission's view of what might be more"historically correct"than the proposal submitted to it. Nor is it even within the commission's mandate to prevent all change to architectural details of the existing structure. It is the job to prevent work that is clearly incongruous or out of character with the district as a whole. In other words, the applicant's proposals do not have to measure up to a high standard of "good design," or even a scholarly level of restoration detail, desirable though that result may be. It is sufficient that the proposal not be out of character with what already exists. In almost every case to come before the board,the focus of attention will be a building or structure,to which the owner or occupier wishes to make some change or move or demolish it. This focus of attention, while important, has broad ramifications, especially regarding the impact of the proposal on its immediate neighborhood, beyond the boundaries of the applicant's property lines. It has been clear with respect to historic districts from the earliest court decisions to those of the present day that it is the tout ensemble or character of the entire area—which is presumed to be something greater than the sum of its parts—that the law primarily intends to protect. Thus,the practical implication of the wording of the legislation is to establish something of a presumption in favor of the property owner. This, in turn,throws the burden of proof regarding incongruity on the preservation commission. Does this legislative focus mean that the commission does not also have a responsibility to protect the architectural character of individual buildings that singly or in the aggregate contribute substantially to the"special character of the area?" Clearly not. Review Item (4) Architectural detailing; Item (5) Roof shapes, forms and materials; Item (6) Fenestration proportions, shapes position and location, pattern; and item(7)General form and proportions of buildings and structures all relate directly to issues directly concerned with architectural style period, and integrity. (See page 18.) A well-drafted local ordinance will thus have, in addition to guidelines dealing with the overall character of the area,a supplemental set of guidelines dealing with issues related to the preservation of architectural style or period of individual buildings. However,tempting as it may be to incorporate the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation,these are of very marginal utility as guidelines for the district as a whole, and their well-intended but sloppy use may present legal problems as well. Design guidelines should always be derived locally and never copied from another town or city. At this point, a difficult issue emerges—a basic one that most towns don't usually think through before adopting the ordinance. It has to do with the overall preservation goals for the neighborhood itself. Does the city wish to preserve the neighborhood or district as an architectural set-piece,more or less frozen in time? This is an appropriate goal where the special character of the area is established by a large number of buildings built during the same limited period of time. Williamsburg, Va. And Old Salem,N.C., would be examples. Or does the city wish to use the overall character of the district as it existed at the time the ordinance was adopted as the baseline expression of its"special character?" A third alternative is presented by the district or neighborhood whose overall character is derived from a variety of architectural styles found in buildings constructed over many decades, and where"character" is expressed merely by an ancient townscape, continuity in landscape elements, and the patina of age. The several Chapel Hill,N.C. historic districts would be examples. In such neighborhoods,the ordinance might even encourage contemporary building forms. After all, everything in the district was "modern"when it was first built! What the commission must remember is that, regardless of the basic objective chosen from those outlined above, historic district ordinances are essentially what are called"look-alike" ordinances, which have as their basic purpose to encourage all new building construction to look more or less like what already exists. (The contrary goal was expressed in the no-look-alike ordinances found on Long Island,N.Y. after World War II,which sought to prevent the repetitive use of stock building plans endlessly throughout the neighborhood.) Both types of ordinances are, at heart, legally binding aesthetic goals or community design policies set forth by the local governing board. The second troubling question often asked at this stage is: "But all of this is very subjective! How can we take the subjectivity out of our decision-making once and for all, and state our goals in a sufficiently crisp manner that all property owners, designers and builders will know exactly what is permitted and what is not?" The answer is that such subjectivity can not be eliminated, nor is it necessarily desirable to do so. Of primary importance is the fact that a legally binding decision must be made, and in much the same way and for the same reason that juries in criminal and civil cases must often also make decisions in complex factual situations. In this situation,the commission can only seek to minimize such subjectivity by adhering,to the letter, with its established review procedures. This will tend to insure that each applicant to come before it is treated fairly, which in our society is probably more important than reaching a perfect aesthetic result or preservation outcome. To do so will also have the beneficial effect of forcing the commission to establish a good written record that will stand up on appeal. That is why this publication places so much emphasis on the review procedure itself and relatively less on matters of the aesthetic result or preservation "correctness." Members of the commission may wish to frame their reactions to various aspects of the application by referring to the statements below,pro and con. The chairman may wish to poll the members as the various factors are reviewed to see whether there is consensus or disagreement regarding each one. It should also be noted that where the facts suggest an incongruity, conditions to moderate or remove that incongruity should be placed on the table for later discussion and possible incorporation into the findings of fact, the motion approving the permit, and the minutes of the meeting. Such conditions are legally valid and enforceable so long as, in the opinion of the courts,they are "reasonable." Factors to be Considered in Making Findings of Fact The state historic preservation enabling legislation lists a number of factors that must be reviewed by the commission in the process of deciding whether a given proposal is or is not, as a legally binding"fact," incongruous with the special character of the district. These factors are usually repeated in the local ordinance, sometimes in an edited form. (Editing is permissible provided none of the required factors are ignored.) Here is a list of factors that is fairly typical of a number of North Carolina ordinances: (1) Height. (2) Setback and placement. (3) Materials to be used(textures and patterns, color if authorized). (4)Architectural detailing. (5) Roof shapes, forms and materials. (6) Fenestration proportions, shapes, position and location, pattern. (7) General form and proportions of buildings and structures. (8)Appurtenant features and fixtures: lighting,walls, fences and landscaping (if this is authorized). The Formal Determination of Congruity or Incongruity, Factor by Factor: Some Starting Points The materials that follow are included to help the commission spell out its reasons why a given project might or might not be appropriate. They are not intended to be literally or slavishly followed. They are simple illustrative or "sample" statements that might be used as starting points in discussing a project, or in making motions or preparing the minutes. In other words, they are nothing more or less than an aid to coming up with appropriate words or ideas in discussing matters related to design or aesthetics, an activity that commissions sometimes find difficult. (1) Height Pro The height of the building is generally the same at the average height of buildings in the same block and across the street. It is not substantially different, being within %or so of the height of the others in this block and thus not incongruous with the special character of the area in this respect. Con The height of the building is very different from those on either side and across the street within the same block and the adjoining area. It is very significantly different. The other properties in the vicinity are about stories high; the proposed property is a least(50% 100%etc.) higher(or lower) and thus, in this respect, incongruous with the special character of the area. (2) Setback and placement Pro The setback of the main building is within the average setback of all the buildings on this side of the street and those across the street, and in any case complies with the setback requirements of the zoning ordinance. It is not significantly different from others in the district and thus not incongruous with the special character of the area. The placement of the building on the lot is much like that of the majority of others in the same block and across the street. It faces the street at a degree angle and it has side yards similar to the adjoining properties. It has side and rear yard spaces that are much like others in the district and thus, in this respect, not incongruous with the special character of the area. Con The building setback is very different from others in the block and in the neighborhood. They average about feet; the setback proposed here is feet,which is a difference of per cent. This is a significant difference and will have an adverse effect on the special character of the area as it has developed over the years and is thus incongruous with the special character of the area. The placement of the buildings on the lot is significantly different from the others in the vicinity. They are mostly placed near or within the front and side yards historically established over the years and face the front of the lot. The building proposed does not face the street in the same way as the others, and the(front, side, rear)yard is %(larger, smaller) than the others in the neighborhood. This kind of variation will have and adverse effect on the special character of the area. (3) Materials to be used (textures and patterns, color if authorized) Pro The exterior materials in the vicinity as seen from the street are mostly (wood, aluminum siding, vinyl siding, brick, stone, a combination of materials including ). Their textures are (smooth, rough, reflective, non-reflective) and the patterns they create are (regular, irregular, obvious and highly visible, subtle and not noticeable, random, repetitive). The predominant colors throughout the district and in the immediate vicinity of the applicant's property are (customary, white or shades of brown, gray, green, subdued red or brick, Williamsburg-type colors, earth colors, etc.). They are also (bright, obtrusive, rather dull, unobtrusive) for the most part. The exterior materials, patterns, textures and colors proposed by the applicant are similar to those existing in the immediate vicinity of the project and elsewhere throughout the district and thus not incongruous with existing character. Con The exterior materials in the vicinity as seen from the street are mostly (wood, aluminum siding, vinyl siding, brick, stone, a combination of materials including ). Their textures are (smooth, reflective, non-reflective, rough) and the patterns they create are (regular, irregular, obvious and highly visible, subtle, random, repetitive). The predominant colors throughout the district and in the immediate vicinity of the applicant's property are (white, earth tones of brown, gray, green, subdued red or brick, Williamsburg-type colors, etc.). They are also (bright, obtrusive, rather dull, unobtrusive) for the most part. The exterior materials, patterns, textures and colors proposed by the applicant are in most respects quite different from those in the immediate vicinity of the project and elsewhere throughout the district(being, according to the application, [list attributes] , and are thus not in keeping,or incongruous,with the special character of the area. (4) Architectural detailing Pro The architectural detailing of buildings in the immediate vicinity or the proposed project and throughout the neighborhood generally is (simple, complex,traditional, vernacular, high-style). Window and door surrounds are (simple and unadorned, moderately complex,very elaborate). Decorative details are (relatively few, many) and the overall appearance of buildings as seen from the street is (clear, clean and clearly articulated, moderately complex, richly ornamented). The applicant's detailing generally is(simple,complex,traditional,vernacular, high-style). Window and door surrounds are (simple and unadorned, moderately complex,very elaborate). Decorative details are(relatively few, many) and the overall appearance of buildings as seen from the street is(clear, clean and clearly articulated, moderately complex, richly ornamented). Most of the buildings in the vicinity and elsewhere in the district have similar characteristics. For these reasons the application is not incongruous with existing character. Con The architectural detailing of buildings in the immediate vicinity or the proposed project and throughout the neighborhood generally is(austere, simple, complex, traditional, vernacular, high-style). Window and door surrounds are(simple, clean and unadorned, moderately complex, very elaborate). Decorative details are (few, many)and the overall appearance of buildings as seen from the street is (clear, clean and clearly articulated, moderately complex, richly ornamented). However,the architectural detailing shown in the application is (simple, complex, traditional, vernacular, high-style). Decorative details are (few,many)and the overall appearance of buildings as seen from the street is (clear, clean and clearly articulated, moderately complex, richly ornamented). The details proposed are in most respects quite different from those in the immediate vicinity of the project and elsewhere throughout the district, and thus incongruous with the special character of the neighborhood. (5) Roof shapes, forms and materials Pro The roof shapes proposed in the application are predominantly (square, rectangular) and (simple, clean, moderately complex). The roof forms proposed, when viewed from the street, will appear primarily as(shed, gable, gambrel, flat, butterfly, high pitched, moderately pitched, low pitched) roofs. The roof materials proposed are (black,white, gray, metallic, reflective, non-reflective) (wood shingle, asphalt shingle, fired clay tile shingle, slate, rolled, galvanized metal, standing seam tin). The roof shapes, forms, and materials proposed have many or most of the visual characteristics of other roofs in the vicinity and/or the district are thus not incongruous with the general or overall character of the district. Con The roof shapes proposed in the application are predominantly (square, rectangular) and (simple, clean, moderately complex). The roof forms proposed, when viewed from the street, will appear primarily as(shed, gable, gambrel, flat, butterfly, high pitched, moderately pitched, low pitched) roofs. The roof materials proposed are (black, white, gray, metallic, reflective, non-reflective) (wood shingle, asphalt shingle,fired clay tile shingle, slate, rolled, galvanized metal, standing seam tin). The roof shapes, forms, and materials proposed have little if anything in common with most of the other roof shapes, forms or materials in the district and are thus incongruous with the overall character of the district. (6) Fenestration proportions, shapes, position and location, pattern Pro The windows, doors, and other openings in the application are, with respect to their proportions, (large, small, moderate in size). The shapes indicated are mostly (horizontal, vertical, rectangular, square, regular, irregular). Their position and location in the exterior facades are (traditional, untraditional) for a building of this kind and function and not significantly at variance with the position and location of doors, windows and other openings in similar buildings in the vicinity and throughout the district. The pattern they create in form, outline and placement, is generally (random, regular, easily grasped, orderly, complex, simple). The fenestration proportions, shapes, position and location, and patterns of other buildings in the vicinity and/or throughout the neighborhood have many of the same or similar characteristics and are not dissimilar. Thus, when compared with other buildings in the vicinity the proportions, shapes, position, location and pattern of these fenestrations or openings are generally like those found on other buildings in the immediate vicinity and throughout the district and not incongruous therewith. Con The windows,doors, and other openings in the application are,with respect to their proportions, (large,small, moderate in size). The shapes indicated are mostly (horizontal, vertical, rectangular, square, regular, irregular). Their position and location in the exterior facades are (traditional, untraditional) for a building of this kind and function and thus not significantly at variance with the position and location of doors, windows and other openings in similar buildings in the vicinity and throughout the district. The pattern they create in form, outline and placement, is generally (random, regular, easily grasped, orderly, complex, simple). Taken as a whole, the fenestration proportions, shapes, position and location, and patterns of other buildings in the vicinity and/or throughout the neighborhood have little in common with what is proposed in the application before us. When compared with other buildings in the vicinity or throughout the district,the proposed the proportions, shapes, position, location and pattern of these fenestrations or openings are significantly different, and thus what is proposed is incongruous with the existing character of the area. (7) General form and proportions of buildings and structures Pro The form and proportions of the proposed building or structure, as revealed by its profile is ( -storys tall, short,essentially horizontal, essentially vertical) and its shape.or plan is(rectangular, square, irregular) (with offsets, without offsets). In its setting, its scale relative to its neighbors is (large, small, imposing,unimposing, overwhelmingly large, relatively small and insignificant). Its bulk is seen as (light and graceful,heavy and formidable). Other buildings in the immediate vicinity and throughout the district tend to share these characteristics, and it is therefore not incongruous with the special character of the area. Con The form and proportions of the proposed building or structure, as revealed by its profile is ( -storys tall, short,essentially horizontal, essentially vertical) and its shape or plan is(rectangular, square, irregular) (with offsets, without offsets). Its scale in its setting relative to its neighbors is(large, small, imposing, unimposing, overwhelmingly large, relatively small and insignificant). Its bulk is seen as (light and graceful,heavy and formidable). However, other buildings in the immediate vicinity and throughout the district are significantly different in some of these respects,being,with respect to profile, ( -storys tall, short, essentially horizontal, essentially vertical); shape or plan (rectangular, square, irregular), (with offsets, without offsets); and with respect to bulk is (large, small, imposing, unimposing, overwhelmingly large, relatively small and insignificant). For these reasons the proposal as described in the application is incongruous with the special character of the area. (8) Appurtenant features and fixtures: lighting, walls, fences, and landscaping (if authorized) Pro The lighting fixtures and features proposed in the application consist of(pathway, entrance, garage, landscaped, spot, security) lights. The materials and locations are not unlike other such appurtenant features in the district, and the wiring, location, aiming and shielding of these features is such as to maximize protection and access to the property under consideration. Lighting fixtures are designed, located, and aimed in ways that minimize any disturbance, functional or aesthetic, to the occupants of adjoining properties. Aesthetically the lighting fixtures themselves are unobtrusive and do not call attention to themselves. Other lighting fixtures and features in the immediate vicinity and throughout the district tend to have similar characteristics, and the fixtures here proposed are therefore not incongruous with the special character of the area. Con The lighting fixtures and features proposed in the application consist of(pathway, entrance, garage, landscaped, spot, security) lights. The materials and locations are not unlike other such appurtenant features in the district. The (wiring, location, aiming, shielding) of these features create disturbing functional and aesthetic relationships,to the occupants of adjoining properties. Aesthetically speaking, the lighting fixtures and features in the immediate vicinity and throughout the district tend to have very different characteristics, and the fixtures here proposed are therefore incongruous with the special character of the area. Pro The walls and fences proposed by the applicant are comparable in(design, materials, length, height, bulk, character, color, overall appearance, and placement) with respect to the building and the lot lines to other buildings similarly situated within the immediate vicinity of the applicant's property,the block, and the district as a whole. In addition, they conform to the requirements of the zoning ordinance. Other walls and fences in the immediate vicinity and throughout the district tend to have the same or similar characteristics, and this fence is thus not incongruous with the special character of the area. Con The walls and fences proposed by the applicant are dissimilar in (design, materials, length, height, bulk, character, color, overall appearance, and placement)with respect to the applicant's building and lot lines, and significantly different relative to other buildings similarly situated within the immediate vicinity of the applicant's property,the block and the district as a whole. In addition,they do not conform to the requirements of the zoning ordinance. Other walls and fences in the immediate vicinity and throughout the district tend to have very different characteristics in materials, color, height, location and placement, and the fence is thus incongruous with special character of the area. Pro The landscaping proposed consists of plant material well suited to the climate and soils of the area and aesthetically appropriate to the building and the adjoining properties, as well as throughout the district. The spatial structure, colors, and landscape and/or garden features created by the proposed plant materials are similar to the patterns and colors found in the immediate vicinity of the applicant's property and elsewhere within or throughout the district. No historically appropriate plant material is proposed to be unnecessarily trimmed, cut, removed, destroyed or replaced. Thus, the landscape features of the application are not incongruous with the special character of the area. Con The landscaping proposed consists of plant material that is aesthetically out of character with adjoining properties and the district as a whole. The predominant species proposed are not native to or characteristic of other properties in the neighborhood or the immediate vicinity of the applicant's property, nor are they well suited to the climate and soils of the area. The spatial structure, seasonal colors and landscape and/or garden features created by the proposed plant materials are very different from the patterns, colors and features found in the immediate vicinity of the applicant's property and throughout the district. Historically appropriate plant material is proposed to be unnecessarily (trimmed, cut, removed, destroyed, replaced). Thus,the landscape features of the application are incongruous with the special character of the area. c. 1994 Robert E.Stipe. All rights reserved. This publication may be freely distributed by any nonprofit or governmental organization,provided credit is given and further provided that it is reproduced in full in its present format. The"Chairman's Checklist,"first published in 1978,was originally adapted from Zoning in Worth Carolina,by Phillip P.Green Jr.,the author's then faculty colleague at the Institute of Government,University of North Carolina. The Nuts and Bolts of Commission Operation ALL THE WORLD'S A STAGE: HOW TO CONDUCT A PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING Editor's Note: Since first appearing in The Alliance Review in 1994, "How to Conduct a Preservation Commission Meeting" by preservation attorney and CAMP Counselor, James Reap, has become one of the most frequently requested articles. We are pleased to present it again by popular demand. THE DRAMA'S LAWS THE DRAMA'S PATRONS GIVE. FOR WE THAT LIVE TO PLEASE, MUST PLEASE TO LIVE. -Samuel Johnson If all meetings are theater, as George David Kieffer insists in his book, The Strategy of Meetings, then preservation commission members and their staffs must learn to be effec- tive producers, directors, script writers, and actors to ensure their production is success- ful and their objectives are met. It is largely through the conduct of public meetings and hearings that a community's perception of the preservation commission is formed, and their public image will help determine their ultimate success of failure. It is also at these meetings that commissions may be most vulnerable to procedural missteps that may ren- der their decisions, regardless of their merits, null and void when challenged in court. Communication is essential in meetings and the "theater" can either enhance or under- mine the verbal message. Everything we do communicates something—where we meet, how the room is arranged, what we wear, our tone of voice, body language, punctuality, attitude, what we give most attention to, and how we treat others. Since we can't elimi- nate these messages,we should turn them to our advantage. Think about the image you want to project and the impressions, such as disorganization and arbitrariness, you want to avoid. With proper preparation, active participation and attention to detail we can be effective communicators and accomplish our purposes within the requirements of the law. Preparation • • Be familiar with your. ■ Laws, rules and procedures , ,� • State Constitution : • Statutes ' ... • Local Ordinance 3 ' ■ Commission's Bylaws ',474,,!:1"1":; ■ Rules of Procedure ;:;5* ! 4 <. • Design Guidelines -le • Take advantage of training opportunities • Observe and critique meetings of other boards • Evaluate your own performance in past meetings • In preparing for your role you need to be familiar with the laws, rules and procedures under which you operate. Know the relevant provi- sions of the state constitution and its statutes, the local ordinance, and the commission's bylaws, rules of procedure and design guide- lines. Commissioners can learn from others by taking advantage of conferences and Communication is essential workshops on historic preservation law and commission operation. Observe and critique to hold things together. meetings of other boards such as planning and zoning commissions as well as other Photo:Public Domain preservation commissions in other towns and cities. Commissioners can even evaluate performance by viewing a videotape of meetings and by surveying the audiences. The Script: The Agenda • Common items: • name of the group • title of the meeting • date, place, starting and ending times TAR Sep/Oct 2005 11 The Nuts and Bolts of Commission Operation • name of the chair • items to be considered and persons responsible • references to background materials • Identify action items and list them first • Identify items for discussion only • Distribute the agenda ahead of time • Go "on location"to view included properties Every production needs a script, and yours is the agenda. A good agenda helps members come to the meeting prepared and stay focused. Some common elements include: the name of the group, title of the meeting, date, place, starting and ending times, the chair, items to be considered and those responsible, and references to background materials. It's helpful to identify those items that require action and those which are for discussion only. Action items are generally listed first, followed by other issues in order of their urgency. Distributing the agenda and background materials ahead of time helps partici- pants learn their parts. Whenever possible, members should prepare by going "on loca- tion"to get a firsthand view of the properties which will be discussed in the meeting. It's crucial to develop rules of procedure and supplement them with standardized parlia- mentary procedures such as Robert's Rules of Order. Like the agenda,the rules help the group remain in control of its own processes and eliminate confusion. Operating a meet- ing without them would be like playing baseball without rules. There is a danger, howev- er, that misused parliamentary procedure can block creative thought and the interchange of ideas. The chair must make the right decision on the degree of formality required at any given time. ^w , Setting the Stage: Meeting Room • Size—neither too big nor too small ■ Proper lighting and sound t Tape recording equipment , `:,1 • Seating arrangement that enhances interaction ' $F _ 4 ID Set the stage properly. The room you choose can enhance commu- nication or become a barrier. The space should be neither too big ktr4A, � t` nor too small for the group, and everyone should be able to see and „ i 14I hear what's going on. Pay attention to proper lighting and sound. If �'.Al r 1 possible, arrange for equipment to tape record the proceedings to ensure an adequate permanent record. Among other appropriate -i 1 1 i ' ' I _ configurations, a semicircular arrangement for commission members facing others in attendance is conventional and promotes interaction. The room you choose can The Leading Role: The Chair enhance communication or • Know the rules become a barrier. • Remain impartial Photo:Public Domain • Seek contributions from everyone • Make certain minority views are expressed • Clarify and summarize issues • Separate facts from opinions • Look for and diffuse emotional build-ups • Never permit personal attacks or derogatory comments The lead role in meetings belongs to the chair. As the production's moderator, his/her main job is to facilitate communication. To do this, the chair must know the rules and remain impartial. He/she should seek contributions from all participants, make certain 12 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS The Nuts and Bolts of Commission Operation minority views are expressed, clarify and summarize issues, help separate facts from opinions and keep on the lookout for and diffuse emotional buildups. He/She should never permit personal attacks or derogatory comments. The Curtain Rises: A Strong Opening VP • Begin on time • Start with the right attitude `!r ,elf►`' • Project a sense of confidence ■ Make sure you can be heard and understood ■ Avoid jargon and acronyms ■ Introduce key participants • Summarize the process ■ Invite audience participation ,,', • Cover your legal requirements 9 q er k o ;. When the curtain goes up, make sure you have a strong opening. Begin on time. This is the commission's first test of control and t = - sends a message the meeting will be conducted in a businesslike manner. Start with the right attitude and project a sense of confi- ""'~ dence. Your audience will be quick to pick up on nervousness or Set the stage by introducing uncertainty. Make sure you can be heard and understood. Speak clearly and avoid using the cast of characters. jargon and acronyms that require translation. Photo:Public Domain Set the stage by introducing the cast of characters. Summarize how the plot will unfold and invite audience participation. Be sure to cover your legal requirements for the record: note the presence of a quorum, determine if notice and advertisement requirements have been met, state the rules on conflict of interest, and approve the minutes of previous meet- ings. Now you're ready for the first act. The Feature Presentation: Considering Applications • Allow applicants to: • present their case • rebut opposing case ■ Allow others to express their views • Hear staff presentations • Listen carefully and ask questions ■ Verify required documentation Whether you're considering applications for designation or certificates of appropriateness, at a minimum, you must allow applicants to be heard, present their case, and rebut the opposing case. Some states require witnesses to be sworn in and an opportunity to cross examine. If so, these formalities must be observed. Allow others present to express their views and hear any staff presentations. Ask"experts"to describe their qual- ifications and take their testimony for what it is just professional advice. Listen carefully and ask questions to make certain you understand the issues involved. Verify that all required documentation is in order. ■ Discuss the application thoroughly • Examine the facts and alternatives in terms of: • practicality • cost • effectiveness • enforceability • Develop a consensus, then call for a vote ■ Always try to achieve some consent Cont'd on page 15 TA R Sep/Oct 2005 13 The Nuts and Bolts of Commission Operation ■ Reserve formality for times when: • there would be confusion without it • when action is needed for the record After all views are heard, members should discuss the application thoroughly, examining the facts and alternatives in terms of practicality,cost,effectiveness and enforceability. It's here that strictly following Robert's Rules of Order—where the motion comes first and the discussion follows-can discourage consensus and allow a motion to pass before all issues have been considered. A more informal approach encourages collaboration and is less threatening than debate. The negotiated solution acceptable to all members may not be the first choice of any, but it should be something everyone can live with. Conflicts can often be resolved by finding common ground. Develop a consensus first, if possible, and then call for a vote." Always try to achieve some consent even if there is not unanimity. Reserve formality for times when there would be confusion without it and when action is needed for the record. The Drama Builds -141 ■ Give reasons for your decision • Summarize the evidence $ • Recite the standards applied • Stay clearly within your area of responsibility , • When review of applications is completed, move "tip through the rest of your agenda � ` "� ff „ It is important for the commission to give reasons for each of 1 � its decisions, even if state law doesn't require it. Courts find it difficult to evaluate actions where no reasons are given, and they will not tolerate findings and conclusions good for any occasion. Members framing motions for approval or denial of an application (for a designation or a certificate of appropriateness)should summarize the evidence, recite the standards applied—using the language of the ordinance— and state why the commission is taking the action. In reach- x=, s ing decisions, always stay clearly within the area of respon- sibility described by your ordinance. Avoid emotional escalation as the drama builds. When you have completed your action items, move through the remaining matters on the Photo:Public Domain agenda. The Final Curtain: Concluding the Meeting ■ Summarize actions taken • Inform participants what happens next in the process • Thank all who have participated ■ End on a positive note As the final curtain approaches, members will have begun to turn off substantive discus- sion. Use the last few moments of a meeting to summarize actions taken and inform par- ticipants what happens next in the process and who must be involved. Thank all those who have participated. End like you began, on a positive note, leaving your audience with a favorable impression of the commission. In the end, don't confuse theatre with showboating. If you watch the real meeting mas- ters, they are smooth and subtle. It takes hard work and practice to run a good meeting, but the results in decisions sustained, good working relationships and a positive image in the community, are worth the effort. Break a Legl TAR Sep/Oct 2005 15 Going Green II DESIGN REVIEW DOS & DON'Ts TOP TEN LIST OF NO-NOS Compiled by Debbie Abele,Akros Inc., for NAPC #10 Not Handling "Conflict of Interest" Matters Properly • It is important to understand what actually constitutes a conflict of interest for your City, so consult with your City attorney to get a clear idea. In many places it only exists when you have a financial interest.(So also don't use it improperly to get out of tough cases or dealing with an application from a friend). • Always state why you are declaring a conflict. If there is any doubt, it is always bet- ter to not participate. • Even if no conflict exists, reveal any relationship you may have with the applicant to avoid suspicion. #9 Not Acknowledging the "Public" at your Public Hearings • Do NOT participate in side conversations or whisper to other Com- mission members during the public hearing. It can be disruptive, rude and color the appearance of the openness of the decision-making pro- cess. • Don't fall into the habit of talking and looking ONLY at your fellow Corn- mission members. Acknowledge the public in the audience or across the table. • Be mindful of your comments, even after a decision is made. Remem- ber all comments are part of the public record. • Give members of the public equal opportunity to speak at appropriate times in the hearing. #8 Forgetting that it is the Application Under Review, Noto the Applicant • Do not let your decision be influenced by your previous expert- : ,., W ence and/or the reputation of an applicant, both positive or nega- tive. • Do not let the behavior of the applicant unduly affect what you de- cide. While decorum is desirable for all involved, the application must be judged on its merits, not how it is presented. • Keep decisions within the scope of the commission's authority. • Consistently base your decisions on facts and your review standards, not person- alities. #7 Not Participating at the Meeting • Commission members are appointed because you have some- thing to offer the decision-making process—knowledge, experi- t ence, expertise, etc., so contribute to the proceedings. I • Show up on time, stay alert, ask relevant questions, and help formulate motions. • Do not ask impertinent questions or make unnecessary corn- / ments for the sake of appearing to participate. • Don't be the person who always seconds the motions but other- wise doesn't say anything. Jan-Feb 2007 11 Going Green #6 Coming to the Meeting Unprepared • Read materials sent to you in advance and know your guidelines and what applies to the particular case. • Visit the property. • Your process is not going to be credible to the applicant or public if it appears you are making uninformed decisions. • Avoid discussing applications before the meeting. #5 Asking Questions and Finding Facts about Areas Outside the HP 5 Commission's Purview • Remember that the HP Commission's review powers are limited and defined in your ordinance. • Don't inquire about or voice concerns about matters that do not relate to the Com- mission's authority, such as land use or interior space. • Don't use the commission meeting to discuss matters not germane to the commis- sion's work. #4 Reviewing Incomplete Applications L 1 • If an application is incomplete, don't assume what was meant to 4 be included. , • The burden is on the applicant to provide enough detail for you sn '' to render a decision. If sufficient information is not provided, defer the decision and get exactly what is needed for your con- sideration. • Do not assume an applicant will know what to include in an ap- plication. Provide clear instructions and a checklist. • Being"nice"and reviewing an application because you don't think the applicant has the ability or resources necessary to complete the application requirements can be a "due process"violation because it is unfair to the applicant who has followed the rules and procedures. #3 Structuring Motions that are Complex or Misleading • Decisions should be clearly communicated. The facts that have lead to the deci- sion and the guidelines that were used to make the decision should be explained to the applicant, public, and made part of the public record. 4 4 • Trying to avoid denying an application by adding numerous stipulations, caveats, vague directions, etc.that essentially approves something different than what was submitted is not good decision-making. Better to be straightforward and deny or continue with specific instructions on changes to be made rather than create a convoluted record of possible variations that might be acceptable. • Do not try to be more efficient by grouping decisions to approve multiple applica- tions into one motion. It is better to have multiple motions that are simple and precise than to have one large motion that is confusing. 12 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Going Green • #2 Making Decisions that might be Perceived as Arbitrary • Using language that makes it seem like a decision is based on per- r` sonal opinion, rather than the guidelines, is easy to do. Stating "That • won't do" or"I really like that" can make it appear that the decision is a matter of personal preferences. Be mindful to always relate your statements to specific provisions of your ordinance or guidelines. • Citing facts that don't support your decision or are irrelevant also makes your actions suspect and could result in overturning your deci- sion if an applicant can show that it was not based upon findings of fact. • Do not make decisions based on information that has not been pre sented. #1 Redesigning an Application at the Hearing • Most applicants spend a lot of time, money,and effort in planning a project for your review. To believe that you can do a better job than they or their architect have done and attempt to redesign by committee is rude, at best. • If a design is totally inappropriate, deny or defer it with specific instructions as to why it is not acceptable. • If it is acceptable, but you think it might be enhanced by a few ideas that you have that will make it"even better," resist the temptation to impose them as part of the review process. • Do not hesitate to make suggestions that help bring an application into compliance with guidelines. But be judicious with such comments and careful that are you are not starting down the path to substantially redesigning what has been submitted. ANNUCING N�APC-1. • 'T'hebng-awaited and:much'anticipated national"commission listserwl • .,• Anovervvhelinin number r participants in the National Commission Forum asked'ICI PC try • start a itstsery for our members,and vve are happy to announce that eve have. NAPC .dives you access local commis o members,,sta f,and others across'the-United Mates ' o join FCC-L, simplysend an e- ail to n u xx edra subject line:Join NAPC-L : , "lccess to N 1I� Lis limited. o IVr i'C menl�ierx .: Jan-Feb 2007 13 Building a Defensible Record By: Stephen Neal Dennis. 1991 Annual Preservation Workshop, Arlington County Historical Affairs and Landmark Review Board, Arlington County, Virginia. Originally published by the National Center Ibr Preservation Law, Washington, D.C. Each September, the National Center for Preservation Law sends a short questionnaire to its mailing list of nearly 800 local historic preservation commissions across the country. Commissions are asked to indicate if they have been in court during the past year or eighteen months, and the brief responses help the Center pinpoint cases which should be monitored and to locate court decisions which need to be analyzed. Every year since 1987, the Center's questionnaire has confirmed our growing conviction that there are a large number of court cases at the trial court level involving local historic preservation commissions. Unfortunately, indications are that far too many of these commissions have gotten to court without thinking through the implications of being there or constructing with adequate malice aforethought a useful (and defensible) record. And all too often, no one has a chance to help these commissions before it is too late and they have lost in court. Let's explore together briefly this afternoon some of the factors which should go into the development of an adequate record of a local preservation commission's decision. I will not focus on Virginia law, because I believe the points I will be making are applicable to commissions regardless of the individual jurisdictions in which they find themselves. ONE: A preservation commission's decision should be clear and comprehensible. It can be tempting for the chairman or secretary of a commission, or for a staff to a commission, to cut corners and "abbreviate" the description of the issue which the commission decided, and to omit the reasons for the commission's decision. Minutes of a commission meeting, as well as a decision letter to an applicant, should ideally both contain findings of fact and a certain, quite specific, decision. Leaving out crucial details may make a decision hopelessly opaque to an individual not immediately familiar with the situation which was before the commission. Assume that this will he the posture of any city council member or judge before whom the commission's decision may need to be defended in the future. Above all, do not leave your applicant and his attorney wondering what happened. TWO: A preservation commission's decision should indicate the significance of the structure or district involved. You may be a brilliant architectural historian and posess a detailed and comprehensive knowledge of the defining characteristics ofo the building involved in an application to your commission,but unless you can convince a reviewing authority of the importance of the building, it will be more difficult than it should be to argue the propriety of your commission's decision. Occasionally I have suspected that a preservation organization 1 has lost a case that might have been won simply because it could not generate any sympathy for the building involved from the presiding judge, often not a local historian. There is no need here for elaborate and obfuscating detail,but the building should be put into a context which can be easily and convincingly explained, and appropriate visual materials should be included in the file for the application and the record of the commission's action. THREE: Know at least as much about your commission's existing precedents as the other side does. I remember attending nearly ten years ago a meeting of the Alexandria City Council at which the future of Alfred Street Baptist Church was to be argued. Several preliminary appeals to the Council from the Alexandria Board of Architectural Review (BAR) were heard first, and two of these involved the issue of artificial siding. It was quickly apparent that individual members of the Council and members of the public were more familiar with previous BAR decisions involving artificial siding than was the individual trying to justify the BAR decisions to the City Council. Assume that"the other side" will make every effort to use your commission's previous decisions against you if this style of attack can become a persuasive argument. There may be unique reasons why a change you have previously approved for another applicant is totally inappropriate in the situation now before you. Explain these factors, and use them to justify your decision. FOUR: Hope to have one member of the commission with a good working knowledge of parliamentary procedures. Your commission's meetings should not become cumbersome with elaborate strategic thrusts and counterarguments,but having one member who can propose a good resolution will save a lot of time over the years. If this member can in addition summarize the arguments presented prior to a resolution and then explain why he wishes to propose a resolution for formal adoption, this approach should clarify issues for other commission members as well as the applicant and any members of the general public present. The passage of a resolution containing your commission's decision is always a splendid opportunity to refer tellingly to criteria, standards or guidelines contained in your preservation ordinance. It is especially crucial to leave members of the press with the sense that the commission is operating so methodically that its public hearings do not constitute news, though the fate of the individual applications may be of some interest to a newspapers readers. FIVE: If there is an interested neighborhood group or local preservation organization,hope that it will be able to supplement the commission's careful homework on individual applications. 2 In Kensington, Maryland, a well-organized neighborhood effort has now beaten back twice a developer's attempt to insert overscaled new houses into small original lots which functioned for many years simply as side yards for a lot with an original Victorian residence. Without this encouraging support from the public, the Montgomery County Historic Preservation Commission might have been somewhat cowed by a determined developer and his highly-compensated architects, attorneys and preservation consultants. Without such a watchdog group, the county attorney's office might not have been willing to make defending a challenged commission's actions a priority. SIX: If you smell trouble, try to get your commission's attorney to review with you ahead of time issues that you anticipate needing to decide and arguments that you believe will be presented to the commission. A good attorney can often suggest to a commission chairman questions that the commission should seek to have answered as an applicant is making his or her case before the commission. This is particularly important when an applicant may intend to glide smoothly over an issue which will not bear close examination by the commission, such as claimed economic hardship. If you think the"hardship" issue will be argued, the commission's attorney should review carefully the court cases in your state dealing with "takings" in land use regulation contexts. Learn in advance what an applicant must prove to establish a legitimate hardship claim, and be prepared for the possibility that your applicant cannot meet the tests. SEVEN: Don't decide all of the issues before your commission in one sentence. If an applicant says, in effect, "This is what I want to do, and if you don't let me life won't be fair and besides I stand to loose a lot of money," realize that you could be dealing with three important and quite separate issues: A. A challenge to the commission's developed expertise to make an "aesthetic" decision; B. A challenge to the adequacy of the commission's procedures and the willingness of the commission to follow these established requirements; C. An economic hardship challenge to the commission's regulatory authority. This is no the time for your commission to respond "Gosh!"A careful commission chairman will try to see that these issues become separate for discussion and argument, and that an applicant is not allowed to confuse the issues as he presents his case. But this may mean that a chairman will need to "play through" an application in his mind before meeting in order to decide how to ask that debate he structured. EIGHT: Establish and maintain adequate working files for your commission. 3 This is the downfall of many commissions. Over a period of time, the commission is moved from one temporary location to another, and files have a way of becoming misplaced. In a recent case in New York City involving the designation of a group of Broadway theaters,the trial court judge became concerned that the commission could not produce a stenographic transcript of the hearings held by the commission on the package of designations. Eventually, the missing stenographic tapes were located and could be transcribed. But because the New York commission had moved briefly into one temporary location and then relocated into new permanent quarters, some materials which were infrequently used had gone into storage. If the commission had not finally located the missing stenographic tapes, arguments that the commission had not followed basic due process procedures would have been much more compelling. I have known of commissions which cannot locate basic documents such as "official" maps of local historic districts and copies of publication notices or required letters to owners. If an owner decides to challenge the city's authority to regulate a building, you certainly don't want to be responsible for helping the owner prove that the structure isn't even properly designated. This is particularly likely to be a problem in a city with an older historic preservation program which has seen designations develop over several separate stages and which has had two or more different historic preservation ordinances. NINE: Remember that an applicant's experts have been hired to produce a desired result and analyze or challenge their assertions accordingly. Too often, commission members listen politely to testimony from individuals appearing in support of an application the commission should probably deny. If the commission subsequently ignores this testimony, it could be difficult to explain on appeal why the testimony carries no weight with the commission. But if the commission members question an"expert" vigorously and challenge assumptions or conclusions, the commission will set the stage for a decision which indicates that the commission did not find the testimony credible or found it outweighed by countervailing arguments presented by other witnesses. A"muscular" decision may be one achieved after some exercise by the commission. TEN: Avoid any appearance of having been arbitrary or capricious. A reviewing court will want to be convinced that the commission was not arbitrary or capricious, and that the commission's decision is supported by substantial evidence. This need not usually mean a preponderance of the evidence, rather than there is some evidence in the record supporting the outcome favored by the commission. If an application is too awful to be taken seriously, it should always be treated seriously. Don't let an applicant win on appeal because of your procedural errors. Some commissions still loose in court, and some of these commissions probably deserve to lose. If an applicant comes before a commission with a strong economic hardship argument and the commission focuses entirely on the contribution of a building to a local historic district, this is a certain recipe for trouble. If a commission uses"guidelines" 4 which are in no sense official, sooner or later someone may wake up to this fact and challenge the alleged guidelines. Over time, most historic preservation commissions develop a secure sense of their own powers. If the occasional commission betrays timidity and fears exercising the full range of its stated powers, one can hope that eventually this commission will gain new members with a surer understanding of the commissions potential as a regulatory agency. In Virginia, where municipalities are subject to the often-criticized Dillon Rule which requires the local governments exercise only those powers expressly delegated to them, it is going to be necessary to amend the state enabling legislation for commissions to clarify the role that local historic preservation commissions can play. But this will take time, and meanwhile you need to be certain that your commissions have a fighting chance if they are challenged on appeal. • Legal TooZox ECONOMIC HARDSHIP AND DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT: HARD DECISIONS FOR HARD TIMES James Reap Trainers at NAPC-sponsored CAMPs1 are often asked about two thorny issues facing local commissions - economic hardship and demolition by neglect. They are tough issues by themselves, but when combined can pack a double punch. Every commission should have provisions in its ordinance and procedures for dealing with these issues. . Demolition by neglect describes a situation in which an owner intentionally allows " a property to deteriorate, sometimes beyond the point of repair. In some cases, 41 the owner passively defers maintenance beyond a reasonable point or abandons :M the property. More often it is an active strategy to redevelop the property in the .. face of preservation and zoning laws that would preserve historic character and/or } current use. It is important to address this issue up front in the preservation ordinance and pro- cedures. A number of states have specific enabling legislation for dealing with the problem, and those parameters should be followed. Other communities have An ordinance against demolition by more flexibility under their home rule statutes or the police power. neglect may be instrumental in saving significant resources. Here are some tips from the experts for effectively addressing demolition by Source: William Kennedy neglect in local ordinances and procedures: 1. Require compliance with all codes, laws, and regulations regarding the main- tenance of property. Require that all structures be preserved from decay and deterioration and are free from structural defects. 2. Identify specific problems that will constitute demolition by neglect, such as: • Deteriorated or inadequate foundations, walls, floors, ceilings, rafters and other supports; • Ineffective waterproofing of roofs, walls and foundations including deteriorated paint, brick, mortar and stucco, along with broken doors and windows; • Holes and other signs of rot and decay; the deterioration of any fea- ture so as to create a hazardous condition; • Lack of maintenance of the surrounding environment (e.g. accessory structures, fences, walls, sidewalks, and other landscape features.) 3. Specify how the provisions of the ordinance will be enforced. Identify how stop work orders and citations are to be made, the timeframe for problem correction, and an appeals procedure. 4. Mandate coordination between the preservation commission and staff, and the local government's inspection and code enforcement office. A good working relationship with code officials is critical to ensuring effective problem identifi- cation and correction. TAR Nov/Dec 2003 9 • Legal Toolbox • 5. Specify the penalties for failure to comply with citations. While fines and equi- table remedies are typical, an additional and more effective alternative may be to authorize the government to make the repairs directly and charge the owner by putting a lien on the property. 6. Authorize acquisition of the property by local government, by eminent domain2 if necessary, along with its rehabilitation and resale. 7. Provide economic incentives to encourage the maintenance and rehabilita- tion of historic properties. Encourage volunteer programs to assist lower income residents. 8. Specify that demolition by neglect will bar a property owner from raising an economic hardship claim in a certificate of appropriateness process. Only circumstances beyond an owner's control should entitle him to economic hardship relief. Beyond demolition by neglect issues, addressing economic hardship is important for a number of reasons. First, it helps make preservation ordinances more acceptable to the community by assuring property owners of relief where strict 'application of the ordinance or guidelines would have an unusually harsh result. Second, it allows communities to develop and implement a range of approaches to relieve the burden on all property owners including tax relief, loans,grants, pub- lic acquisition, or zoning variances. Third, hardship provisions can head off liti- gation by providing an administrative process for resolving differences that is less formal and costly than going to court. Fourth, by addressing hardship concerns administratively, communities can strengthen their positions if they do go to court. Courts generally defer to preservation commissions where there is a reasonable basis in the record for their decision. Further, by lightening the economic burden on the property owner, the commission can help defeat a "takings" argument. Here are some tips from the experts for effectively addressing economic hardship in local ordinances and procedures: 1. Do not consider economic hardship arguments during the designation process. Economic impact is only speculative until a property owner makes a specific proposal. Further, it clouds the issue of significance, the primary concern for designation. 2. The focus must be on the property itself and not on the financial means of the owner. Determine whether the impact of the ordinance is unreasonable for this property. (The situation of the"poor widow" may cause the commission political or public relations problems, but from a legal standpoint keep the focus on the property.) 3. Put the burden of proof on the property owner, not the commission. 4. Evidence of cost or expenditures alone, is not enough. The commission should require information that will assist it to determine whether application of the ordinance will deny reasonable use of the property or prevent reason- able economic retum. The evidence should address the property"as is"and if rehabilitated (which may mean just bringing it up to code.) Some other fac- tors to consider include: purchase price, assessed value and taxes, revenue, 1� NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Legal Toolbox vacancy rates, operating expenses, financing, current level of return, efforts to find alternative uses for the property, recent efforts to rent or sell the prop- erty, availability of economic incentives or special financing (tax relief, low- interest loans, grants, transferable development rights (TDRs), etc.) 5. Additional considerations may be appropriate in assessing the impact on non-profit organizations such as the ability to carry out their charitable or reli- gious purposes (although a non-profit is not entitled to relief simply because it could otherwise earn more money.) 6. Determine who caused the hardship. If the owner has neglected the build- ing, paid too much for the property, or is just gambling on getting a permit in spite of knowing the ordinance provisions, he may have created his own hardship. Government isn't required to bail an owner out of a bad business decision or speculative investment. 7. Commissions should consider bringing in their own expert witnesses where necessary. If the matter goes to court,the decision will be based on evidence in the record. Local government housing, engineering and building inspec- tion staff may provide useful testimony. Addressing demolition by neglect and economic hardship issues before they arise through clear provisions in your preservation ordinance and procedures can be one of the best insurance policies against both legal liability and a public relations disaster. 1Commission Assistance and Mentoring Program. 2The inherent power of government to protect the health,safety and welfare of the public. The U.S.Supreme Court has held in the Penn Central case that historic preservation is within the police power Additional demolition by neglect resources: Maher v. City of New Orleans, 516 F. 2d 1051 (5th Cir. 1975), cert. Denied 426 U.S. 904 (1976); Harris v. Parker, Chancery No. 3070 (Cir. Ct. Isle of Wight County, Va.Apr. 15, 1985); Buttnick v. City of Seattle, 719 P.2d 93, 95 (Wash. 1986); District of Columbia Preservation League v. Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, 646 A. 2d 984 (D.C. App. 1994); "Demolition by Neglect", Preservation Law Reporter Educational Materials(1999). Additional economic hardship resources: Zaruba v. Village of Oak Park, 695 N.E.2d 510 (III.App. 1998);City of Pittsburgh v.Weinberg,676 A.2d 207(Pa. 1996); Kalorama Heights Ltd. Partnership v. District of Columbia, 655 A.2d 865 (D.C. App. 1995); "Assessing • Economic Hardship Claims," 18 Preservation Law Reporter (PLR) 1069 (1999); and "Providing for Economic Hardship Relief in the Regulation of Historic Property," 15 PLR 1129(1996). • James K. Reap is an attorney who teaches historic preservation law at the University of Georgia and Georgia State University and serves as a trainer for NAPC CAMPs. He has served on three historic preservation commissions. • TA R Nov/Dec 2003 11 Assessing Economic Hardship Claims under historic preservation ordinances By Julia Miller Historic preservation ordinances in effect around the Commissions should look at a variety of factors in evaluat- country often include a process for administrative ing the economic impact of a proposed action on a particu- relief from preservation restriction in situations of"econom- lar property. Consideration of expenditures alone will not is hardship." Under typical economic hardship procedures, provide a complete or accurate picture of economic impact, an applicant may apply for a "certificate of economic hard- whether income-producing property or owner-occupied resi- ship" after a preservation commission has denied his or her dential property. Revenue,vacancy rates, operating expens- request to alter or demolish a historic property protected es, fmancing,tax incentives, and other issues are all rele- under a preservation ordinance. In support of an applica- vant considerations. With respect to income-producing tion for relief on economic hardship grounds,the applicant property, economic impact is generally measured by look- must submit evidence sufficient to enable the decision mak- ing at.the effect of a particular course of action on a proper- ing body to render a decision. The type of evidence ty's overall value or return. This approach allows a com- required is generally spelled out in preservation ordinances mission to focus on the'bottom line'of the transaction or interpreting regulations. The burden of proof is on the rather than on individual expenditures. applicant. In addition to economic impact,the Supreme Court has said The exact meaning of the term"economic hardship" that "reasonable" or"beneficial use" of the property is also depends on how the standard is defined in the ordinance. an important factor. Thus, in evaluating an economic hard- " -ler many preservation ordinances economic hardship is ship claim based on the constitutional standard for a regula- `__med as consistent with the legal standard for an uncon- tory taking, commissions will need to consider an owner's stitutional regulatory taking,which requires a property ability to continue to carry out the traditional use of the owner to establish that he or she has been denied all reason- property, or whether another viable use for the property able beneficial use or return on the property as a result of remains. In Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New the commission's denial of a permit for alteration or demoli- York,438 U.S. 104(1978),the landmark decision uphold- tion. ing the use of preservation ordinances to regulate historic property,the Supreme Court found that a taking did not Requests for relief on economic hardship grounds are usual- arise because the owner could continue to use its property ly decided by historic preservation commissions, although as a railroad station. some preservation ordinances allow the commission's deci- sion to be appealed to the city council. In some jurisdic- The Supreme Court has also said that the applicant's "reason- tions,the commission may be assisted by a hearing officer. able investment-backed expectations" should be taken into A few localities have established a special economic review consideration. Although the meaning of this phrase has not panel, comprised of members representing both the devel- been delineated with precision,it is clear that"reasonable" opment and preservation community. expectations do not include those that are contrary to law. Thus,an applicant's expectation of demolishing a historic Economic Impact property subject to a preservation ordinance at the time of In acting upon an application for a certificate of economic purchase(or subject to the likelihood of designation and reg- hardship, a commission is required to determine whether ulation)may not be considered"reasonable." Also pertinent the economic impact of a historic preservation law, as is whether the owner's objectives were realistic given the applied to the property owner,has risen to the level of eco- condition of the property at the time of purchase,or whether nomic hardship. Thus,the first and most critical step in the owner simply overpaid for the property. Under takings understanding economic hardship is to understand how to law, government is not required to compensate property own- aate economic impact. ers for bad business decisions. Nor is the government required to guarantee a return on a speculative investment. 16 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Commissions may also be able to take into account whether eration of financial impact may be appropriate, a nonprofit the alleged hardship is "self created." Clearly relevant is organization is not entitled to relief simply on the basis that v her the value of the property declined or rehabilitation it could raise or retain more money without the restriction.) e>r..nses increased because the owner allowed the building to deteriorate. The Proceeding Under a typical hardship process, the applicant will be Application of the takings standard in the context of invest- required to submit specific evidence in support of his or her ment or income-producing property is usually fairly claim. Once a completed application has been filed, a hear- straightforward. The issue can be more complex, however, ing will be scheduled,at which time the applicant generally in situations involving hardship claims raised by homeown- presents expert testimony in support of the economic hard- ers. In the context of homeownership,it is extremely diffi- ship claim on issues such as the structural integrity of the cult for an applicant to meet the standard for a regulatory historic building, estimated costs of rehabilitation,and the taking,that is,to establish that he or she has been denied all projected market value of the property after rehabilitation. reasonable use of the property. When a commission insists Once the applicant has presented its case,parties in opposi- that houses be painted rather than covered with vinyl siding, tion or others may then present their own evidence. The and windows be repaired rather than replaced,the applicant commission may also bring in its own expert witnesses to can still live in the house. The fact that these repairs may testify. As noted above,the burden of proof rests on the be more costly is not enough. Even if extensive rehabilita- property owner. tion is required,the applicant must show that the house can- not be sold"as is," or that the fair market value of the prop- In hearing economic hardship matters,commissions must erty in its current condition plus rehabilitation expenditures be prepared to make a legally defensible decision based on will exceed the fair market value of the house upon rehabil- all the evidence presented. In the event of conflicting itation. See City of Pittsburgh v.Weinberg, 676 A.2d 207 expert testimony, which is often the case.in economic hard- (Pa.1996). It is also important to note that"investment- ship proceedings, the commission will need to weigh the backed expectations" are different in the Context of home evidence,making specific findings on the relative credibili- o,- 'rship,owners often invest in home improvements or ty or competency of expert witnesses. re.. cations without the expectation of recouping the full cost of the improvement in the form of increased property In evaluating the evidence,the commission should ask itself value. five distinct questions: In addressing hardship claims involving historic homes, I.Is the evidence sufficient? Does the commission have all commissions must be careful to be objective and consistent the information it needs to understand the entire picture, or in their approach. Otherwise, a commission may undermine is something missing. The application is not complete the integrity of its preservation program and raise due unless all the required information has been submitted. If process concerns as well. Ideally, grant money,tax relief, additional information is needed, ask for it. and other programs should be made available to historic 2. Is the evidence relevant? Weed out any information that homeowners who need financial assistance. is not relevant to the issue of economic hardship in the case before you. Commissions may be given more information Special standards for economic hardship may apply to non- than they need or information that is not germane to the profit organizations. Because these entities serve charitable issues,such as how much money the project could make if rather than commercial purposes,it is appropriate to focus the historic property were demolished. The property owner on the beneficial use of their property,rather than rate of is not entitled to the highest and best use of the property. return,taking into account the particular circumstances of 3. Is the evidence competent? Make an assessment as to the owner(i.e.,the obligation to serve a charitable purpose). whether the evidence establishes what it purports to show. In such situations,hardship analysis generally entails look- 4. Is the evidence credible? Consider whether the evidence ing at a distinct set of questions, such as: the organization's is believable. For example, ask whether the figures make charitable purpose,whether the regulation interferes with sense. A commission will need to take into consideration the organization's ability to carry out its charitable purpose, the source of the evidence and its reliability. (If the evi- the condition of the building and the need and cost for dence is based on expert testimony,the commission should re 3,and whether the organization can afford to pay for determine whether the expert is biased or qualified on the the repairs,if required. (Note,however,that while consid- issue being addressed. For example, it may matter whether TAR January-February 2001 17 a contractor testifying on rehabilitation expenditures actual- assessed valuations, ly has experience in doing historic rehabilitations.) •All appraisals obtained within the last two years by the 's the evidence consistent? Look.for inconsistencies in owner or applicant in connection with the purchase, tue testimony or the evidence submitted. Request that financing, or ownership of the property, inconsistencies be explained. If there is contradictory evi- • Form of ownership or operation of the property,whether dence,the commission needs to determine which evidence sole proprietorship, for-profit or not-for-profit corporation, is credible and why. limited partnership,joint venture, or other, •Any state or federal income tax returns relating to the In many instances the applicant's own evidence will fail to property for the last two years. establish economic hardship. However, in some situations, the question may be less clear. The participation of preser- 2.Any listing of property for sale or rent,price asked,and vation organizations in economic hardship proceedings can offers received, if any within the previous two years, be helpful in developing the record. Commissions should including testimony and relevant documents regarding: also be prepared to hire or obtain experts of their own. For •Any real estate broker or firm engaged to sell or lease the example, if a property owner submits evidence from a property, structural engineer that the property is structurally unsound, •Reasonableness of price or rent sought by the applicant, the commission may need to make an independent determi- •Any advertisements placed for the sale or rent of the prop- nation,through the use of a governmental engineer or other erty. qualified expert, as to the accuracy of that information. It may be impossible to evaluate the credibility or competency 3.Feasibility of alternative uses for the property that could of information submitted without expert advice. earn a reasonable economic return: •Report from a licensed engineer or architect with experi The record as a whole becomes exceedingly important if the ence in rehabilitation as to the structural soundness of any case goes to court. Under most standards of judicial review, buildings on the property and their suitability for rehabili- a decision will be upheld if it is supported by substantial tation. -fence. Thus, in conducting administrative proceedings, • Cost estimates for the proposed construction, alteration, ▪ Ls important that evidence provides a true and accurate demolition, or removal, and an estimate of any additional story of the facts and circumstances and that the commis- cost that would be incurred to comply with the require- sion's decision is based directly on that evidence. ments for a certificate of appropriateness, •Estimated market value of the property: (a) in its current condition,(b) after completion of the proposed alteration EVIDENTIARY CHECKLIST or demolition, and(c) after renovation of the existing The following checklist may serve as a useful tool for local property for continued use, commissions and other regulatory agencies considering eco- nomic hardship claims: 4.Any evidence of self-created hardship through deliberate neglect or inadequate maintenance of the property. 1. Current level of economic return: •Amount paid for the property, date of purchase,party from 5. Knowledge of landmark designation or potential designa- whom purchased,and relationship between the owner of lion at time of acquisition. record,the applicant, and person from whom property was purchased, 6.Economic incentives and/or funding available to the •Annual gross and net income from the property for the applicant through federal, state, city, or private programs. previous three years; itemized operating and maintenance expenses for the previous three years, and depreciation deduction and annual cash flow before and after debt ser- Julia Miller works in the Law and Public Policy office at the vice, if any, during the same period, National Trust for Historic Preservation. • Remaining balance on the mortgage or other financing , secured by the property and annual debt-service, if any, airing the prior three years, al estate taxes for the previous four years and assessed value of the property according to the two most recent 18 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS -A - PRESERVATION LAW REPORTER ` EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS NATIONAL TRUST for HISTORIC PRESERVATION © 1999 National Trust for Historic Preservation. All Rights Reserved. DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT "Demolition by Neglect"is the term used to describe a situation in which a property owner in- tentionally allows a historic property to suffer severe deterioration, potentially beyond the point of repair. Property owners may use this kind of long-term neglect to circumvent historic preservation regulations. Contexts in Which Demolition by Neglect Arises Sometimes demolition by neglect occurs when an owner essentially abandons a historic prop- erty. More often, neglect is an affirmative strategy used by an owner who wants to develop the prop- erty. The context in which the issue is raised depends on what action the city decides to take,if any. At one end of the spectrum, some local governments have taken affirmative enforcement ac- tions against the owners of such properties,ultimately going to court if necessary. At the other end of the spectrum,occasionally the owner of a neglected or deteriorating property will file a lawsuit against the local government, challenging the historic designation or some other feature of the preservation ordinance. The problem with both of these extremes is that courts are very unpredictable. More commonly,demolition by neglect controversies end up somewhere in the middle of this spectrum,with the local government issuing citations to repair the building,and the owner ignoring the citations. 'The skirmishes involved in this process often result in a statement that leaves all sides frus- trated. Relationship Between Demolition by Neglect and Economic Hardship Property owners using demolition by neglect as a tactic to work around preservation laws will often argue that the prohibitive cost of repairs and deferred maintenance creates an economic hardship. Ideally historic preservation ordinances need a safeguard provision to protect against this kind of argument,creating a loophole. Generally, the owner's own neglect should not be allowed to create an economic hardship. However, it is often difficult to sort out the extent to which an economic hardship is attributable to an owner's actions, or to things beyond the owner's control (i.e., circum- stances that would have existed in any event). In looking at economic hardship and demolition by neglect, it is important for commissions to look beyond simply the relationship between the cost of repairs and the purchase price or the"as is"value. Tools for Controlling Demolition by Neglect The most important tool for controlling demolition by neglect is a carefully drafted provision in the local preservation ordinance requiring affirmative maintenance and ensuring that the local com- mission is equipped with adequate remedies and enforcement authority. Even if a community.already has some type of affirmative maintenance provision,it may want to review your ordinance and amend it in order to increase its effectiveness. The first step is to look at the state's enabling legislation to determine the specific legal authority for affirmative maintenance provisions. Affirmative maintenance provisions have repeatedly been upheld and enforced by the courts. The leading case is Maher a City of New Orleans, 516 F.2d 1051 (5th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 426 U.S. 905 (1976), in which a federal appeals court upheld an affirmative maintenance provision for the French Quarter in New Orleans,ruling that the provision was constitu- tional as long as it did not have an unduly burdensome effect on the individual property owner. In Harris v. Parker, Chancery No. 3070 (Cir. Ct. Isle of Wight County, Va. Apr. 15, 1985), a case from Smithfield,Virginia, the court actually ordered repairs to be carried out in compliance with the affirma- tive maintenance requirements in the ordinance. And in Buttnick v. City of-Seattle,719 P.2d 93,95 (Wash. 1986), the court ruled that requiring an owner to replace a defective parapet on a historic building did not result in unreasonable economic hardship. Finally, the D.C. Court of Appeals in District ofCo/>rmbia Preservation League v. Department of Consumer and Regu/alory./1(l'airc, 646 A.2d 984 (D.C. App. 1994), re- versed approval of the demolition of a historic landmark in dilapidated condition caused by the owner's own actions,because the demolition permit was unauthorized under the District's preservation act. When drafting an affirmative maintenance provision,it is important to mandate coordination between the preservation commission and the building code enforcement office, to ensure that the commission is consulted before code citations and enforcement orders are issued. Be specific in defining what repairs will be required,and what remedies will be available under what circumstances. One important remedy to include in the ordinance is the authority for the local government to make the repairs directly and then charge back the owner by placing a lien on the property. Also make sure that the economic hardship provision is drafted so that it prevents owners from arguing that their own neglect has caused an economic hardship. Incentive Programs and Other Forms of Assistance Another important tool for controlling demolition by neglect and increasing the effectiveness of affirmative maintenance programs is the use of incentives. Tax incentives,low cost loans,and grants are always encouraged as a way to help owners fund necessary maintenance. Maintenance expenses can also be defrayed through the use of volunteer maintenance crews: Enforcement One reason why demolition by neglect is such as frustrating issue for preservationists and his- toric preservation commissions is that it often involves a branch of local government over which we have little influence or control—the code inspection and enforcement office. Most preservation groups have good relationships with their preservation commissions, but probably no relationship at all with the building inspection office. There is often a conflict between these two governmental functions. Even under the best of circumstances, these two offices rarely coordinate their actions. At worst,an outright turf battle may erupt, in which the code enforcement office orders a building demolished as a safety hazard without consulting the preservation commission. It is therefore very important for local preservation groups to get to know code enforcement officials. A good working relationship with these officials can be critical to helping to ensure that deferred maintenance problems are identified and corrected before they reach the point of demolition by neglect. Selected Examples of Demolition by Neglect Provisions • Cited below are: • examples of provisions in state historic preservation enabling laws authorizing localities to prevent the destruction of historic buildings by"demolition by neglect;" 2 -• sample local ordinance provisions dealing with demolition by neglect through maintenance requirements;and • examples of the use of eminent domain to prevent demolition by neglect. 1. .State Enabling Legislation A number of states permit local governments to prevent the"demolition by neglect" of historic properties. Below are some examples of provisions in state enabling laws for historic preservation intended to address this problem: North Carolina: "The governing board of any municipality may enact an ordinance to prevent the demolition by neglect of any designated landmark or any building or structure within an established historic district. Such ordinance shall provide appropri- ate safeguards to protect property owners from undue economic hardship." Rhode Island: "Avoiding demolition through owner neglect. a city or town may by ordinance empower city councils or town councils in consultation with the historic dis- trict com-mission to identify structures of historical or architectural value whose deterio- rated physical condition endangers the preservation of such structure or its appurte- nances. The council shall publish standards for maintenance, of properties within his- toric districts. Upon the petition of the historic district commission that a historic structure is so deteriorated that its preservation is endangered, the council may establish a reasonable time not less than 30 days within which the owner must begin repairs. If the owner has not begun repairs within the allowed time, the council shall hold a hear- ing at which the owner may appear and state his or her reasons for not commencing re- pairs. If the owner does not appear at the hearing or does not comply with the council's orders, the council may cause the required repairs to be made at the expense of the city or town and cause a lien to be placed against the property for repayment." Alabama: "Demolition by neglect and the failure to maintain an historic property or a structure in an historic district shall constitute a change for which a certificate of ap- propriateness is necessary." - Wisconsin: "[A] political subdivision may acquire by gift,purchase,or condemnation any property right in historic property,whether the property is real or personal." 2. Local Ordinance Provisions Concerning Demolition by Neglect Many local ordinances include provisions for dealing with the problem of demolition by neglect. Some noteworthy examples are described below: San Francisco: Language in the San Francisco ordinance is quite explicit and detailed with re- spect to the problem of demolition by neglect: "Maintenance: The owner, lessee, or other person in actual charge of a Significant or Contributory building shall comply with all applicable codes,laws and regulations gov- erning the maintenance of property. It is the intent of this section to preserve from deliberate or inadvertent neglect the exterior features of buildings designated Significant or Contribu- tory,and the interior portions thereof when such maintenance is necessary to prevent • deterioration and decay of the exterior. All such buildings shall be preserved against such decay and deterioration and shall be free from structural defects through prompt corrections of any of the following defects: 3 1. Facades which may fall and injure members of the public or property. 2. Deteriorated or inadequate foundation, defective or deteriorated flooring or floor supports,deteriorated walls or other vertical structural supports. 3. Members of ceilings,roofs,ceiling and roof supports or other horizontal mem- bers which sag,split or buckle due to defective material or deterioration. 4. Deteriorated or ineffective waterproofing of exterior walls, roofs, foundations or floors,including broken windows or doors. S. Defective or insufficient weather protection for exterior wall covering,including lack of paint or weathering due to lack of paint or other protective covering. 6. Any fault or defect in the building which renders it not properly watertight or structurally unsafe." Culpeper,Virginia: A somewhat different approach has been taken by the town of Culpeper, which states in its ordinance: "Sec. 28-27.2. Demolition.By Neglect. No officially designated historic landmark or con- tributing structure within the historic district shall be allowed to deteriorate due to ne- glect by the owner which would result in violation of the intent of this Section. "Demolition by neglect" shall include any one or more of the following courses of inac- tion or action: 1. Deterioration of the exterior of the building to the extent that it creates or permits a hazardous or unsafe condition. • 2. Deterioration of exterior walls or other vertical supports, horizontal mem- bers, roofs,chimneys, exterior wall elements such as siding,wooden walls, brick, plaster,or mortar to the extent that it adversely affects the character of the historic district or could reasonably lead to irreversible damage to the structure. In the event the Culpeper County Building Official,or the agent officially recognized by the Town of Culpeper as serving that capacity, determines a structure in a historic district is being`demolished by neglect',he shall so notify the Chairperson of the Historic and Cultural Conservation Board,stating the reasons therefor,and shall give the owner 30 days from the date of the notice to commence work rectifying the spe- cifics provided in the notice; or to initiate proceedings as provided for in Section 28- 27. If appropriate action is taken in this time, the Town may initiate appropriate le- gal action as provided therein." Charlottesville,Virginia: The Charlottesville ordinance not only requires the maintenance of a landmark property but also requires the maintenance of the land on which the landmark sits. Note the following: "Section 31-141. Maintenance and repair required. Neither the owner of nor the person in charge of a structure or site in any of the catego- ries set forth in section 31-127.2 of this Code shall permit such structure,landmark or • property to fall into a state of disrepair which may result in the deterioration of any exte- rior appurtenance or architectural feature so as to produce or tend to produce,in the judgment of the appropriate board,a detrimental effect upon the character of the dis- trict as a whole or the life and character of the landmark,structure or property in ques- tion,including but not limited to: 4 1. The deterioration of exterior walls or other vertical supports; 2. The deterioration of roofs or other horizontal members; • 3. The deterioration of exterior chimneys; 4. The deterioration of crumbling of exterior plasters or mortar; 5. The ineffective waterproofing of exterior walls,roofs and foundations,including broken windows or doors; 6. The peeling of paint, rotting, holes and other forms of decay; 7. The lack of maintenance of surrounding environment, e.g.,fences,gates, sidewalks, street signs, accessory structures and landscaping(emphasis added); 8. The deterioration of any•feature so as to create or permit the creation of any hazardous or unsafe condition or conditions. The enforcing officer shall give notice by certified or registered mail of specific in- stances of failure to maintain or repair. The owner or person in charge of such structure shall have sixty days to remedy such violation; provided, that the appropriate board, upon request, may allow an extension of up to sixty days to remedy such violations. Thereafter, each day during which there exists any violation of this section shall consti- tute a separate violation and shall be punishable as provided in articles XXVIII of this chapter." Montgomery County, Maryland: Montgomery County requires a public hearing when charges of demolition by neglect are raised. If a property owner has been requested to maintain his property but refuses to do so, the ordinance allows the director of the county's Department of Envi- ronmental Protection may arrange for necessary repairs and charge the expenses to the owner. "Sec. 24A-9. Demolition by Neglect. ... In the event the corrective action specified in the final notice is not instituted within the time allotted, the Director may institute,perform and complete the necessary reme- dial work to prevent deterioration by neglect and the r.penf'es incurred by the Director for such work. Labor and materials shall be a lien against the properly, and draw interest at the highest legal late, the amount to be amortiryd over a period of 10 years subject to a public sale i/•there is a dep.ult in payment." (Emphasis added.) Portland, Maine: Portland permits its Department of Planning and Urban Development to older property owners to make necessary repairs to deteriorating buildings within specified time periods. The city also spells out in its ordinance procedures for appealing such orders. "Section 14-690. Preservation of Protected Strictures. (a) Minimum Maintenance Requirement. All landmarks,and all contributing structures located in an historic district, shall be preserved against decay and deterioration by being kept free from the fol- lowing structural defects by the owner and any other person or persons who may have legal custody and control thereof. (1) Deteriorated or inadequate foundation which jeopardizes its structural in- tegrity; (2) Defective or deteriorated floor supports or any structural members of in- sufficient size to carry imposed loads with safety which jeopardize its structural integrity; 5 (3) Members of walls, partitions or other vertical supports that split,lean, list or buckle due to defective material or deterioration which jeopardize its structural integrity; (F) Structural members of ceilings and roofs, or other horizontal structural members which sag, split or buckle due to defective materials or deteriora- tion or are of insufficient size to carry imposed loads with safety which Jeopardize its structural integrity;• (5) Fireplaces or chimneys which list,bulge or settle due to defective material or deterioration or are of insufficient size or strength to carry imposed loads with safety which jeopardize its structural integrity; (6) Lack of weather protection which jeopardizes the structural integrity of the walls, roofs, or foundation; (b) The owner or such other person shall repair such building, object, or structure within a specified period of receipt of a written order to correct defects or re- pairs to any structure as provided by subsection (a) above,so that such structure shall be preserved and protected in accordance with the purposes.of this article. (c) Any such order shall be in writing, shall state the actions to be taken with rea- sonable particularity,and shall specify dates for compliance which may be ex- tended by the Department (of Urban Planning and Development) for reason- able periods to allow the owner to secure financing, labor or materials. Any such order may be appealed to the Board of Appeals within 30 days. The Board shall reverse such an order only if it finds that the Department had no substan- tial justification for requiring action to be taken, that the measures required for time periods specified were not reasonable under all of the circumstances. The taking of an appeal to the Board or to Court shall not operate to stay any order requiring structures to be secured or requiring temporary support unless the Board or Court expressly stay such order. The City shall seek preliminary and permanent relief in any court of competent jurisdiction to enforce any order." The Portland ordinance also deals firmly with people who violate these and other provisions. In addition to having to pay fines for "each day on which there is failure to perform a required act," the ordinance applies a sort of"scorched earth" policy: If a person violates the ordinance either will- fully or through gross negligence, he may not obtain a building permit for any alteration or construction on the historic landmark site for five years. Moreover, for a period of 25 years, any alteration or con- struction on the property is subject to special design standards imposed in the ordinance,whether or not the property involved is historic. 3. Eminent Domain • Several cities-authorize the use of eminent domain as a means of protecting historic buildings from deterioration or neglect. Specific examples include: San Antonio,Texas: San Antonio permits the city to "condemn the [historic] property and take it by the power of eminent domain for rehabilitation or reuse by the city or other disposition with appropriate preservation restrictions in order to promote the historic preservation purposes of [the ordinance] to maintain the structure and protect it from demolition." Richmond,Virginia: Chapter 10,Section 21, of the Code of Virginia states that the Depart- ment of Conservation shall have the power to acquire, by purchase,gift or eminent domain,properties of scenic and historical interest which in the judgement of the Director of the Department should be • 6 acquired,preserved and maintained for the use and pleasure of the people of Virginia. (Emphasis added) Richmond,Va.,recently obtained a charter change that allows the city to condemn and acquire properties in historic districts suffering from demolition by neglect. The city is currently using this authority to save a Greek Revival house in the Church Hill Historic District. Baltimore, Maryland: Though not a recent example, the City of Baltimore exercised its emi- nent domain authority to acquire the historic Betsy Ross Iouse in order to preserve it. In.Flaccomio A. Mayor and Council of Baltimore(71 A. 2d 12 1950), the Supreme Court of Maryland upheld the city's use of this power. Louisville,Kentucky: In the late 1970s,the City of Louisville condemned two Victorian town- houses that Louisville the Louisville\`'omen's Club planned to demolish for a parking lot. The city then resold the properties,with preservation covenants attached, to a developer. The Club took the city to court, but the court upheld the city's action. • "fie ALLIANCE :REVIEW NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS February/March 1999 1.a �; a l \ h 'rt• ' •a; , r r 7rx. 'ehl 4 y - �� •. :e j `` f te•.. T '�i ''}} • y —...: a ,y • t. -, �Lyi -'r: n y=,�''�i^P" ._"C tI * '; Establishin a Demolition by Neglect Ordinance by Dan Becker Many historic resources are demolished each year due to a your enabling legislation has provisions that authorize mini- lack of maintenance that leads to deterioration. When deteri- mum maintenance provisions. oration reaches the extent that it creates health and safety vio- lations, building officials are obligated to act in the public A number of states (including Alabama, North Carolina, interest to abate the hazard; the frequent result is demolition Rhode Island, Virginia, and Wisconsin) have specific lan- that circumvents local historic preservation ordinances. guage in their enabling legislation regarding demolition by Whether such lack of maintenance is intentional in order to neglect of historic structures. This is the best case scenario. avoid preservation ordinance controls on demolition,or unin- Lacking such specific language, in some cases authority can tentional due to a lack of awareness or financial resources,the be inferred from statutes that allow governments to create result is the same: loss of a community asset. preservation programs to protect historic resources, or from general enabling legislation that gives local authorities power While demolition by neglect is a serious problem for many to protect or promote the public health, safety, and welfare. communities, it is a challenge that can be met. Meeting the In these cases, consult your local government's attorney for challenge requires understanding the fundamental legal prin- guidance, perhaps even seek an opinion from your state's ciples required for a defensible demolition by neglect ordi- attorney general. nance, including the key components required for a useful Your ordinance must ensure due process. It must be clearly demolition by neglect ordinance, and selecting effective strategies for the adoption (or improvement) and implemen- related to the governmental goal of preserving historic tation of a successful demolition by neglect program in your resources,and it must be designed to be reasonable, fair, and community. of general applicability to the community. The issue of regu- latory taking also has great bearing upon demolition by Fundamental Legal Principles neglect ordinances, especially as it relates to economic hard- ship. Further information on these principles can be found in The first step toward a demolition by neglect program is the reading list at the end of this article. determining your community's authority to adopt an ordi- nance. In most cases,such authority is dependent upon state Key Components of an Ordinance enabling legislation; however, some local governments have "home rule" powers that permit them to adopt ordinances An effective ordinance will contain specific elements: stan- without specific enabling legislation. This is a critical deter- dards, petition and action procedures, economic hardship mination...home rule governments can directly adopt their provisions, appeals, and enforcement. You must be able to own demolition by neglect ordinance. If your community define deterioration in order to abate it. Standards are does not have home rule, then you must establish whether required to provide a benchmark for evaluation. A general The ALLIANCE REVIEW statement requiring that a building be kept in good repair will that might attract undue attention and controversy. prove to be difficult to enforce because judgments of"good Because the city's ordinance was the first in the state to take repair" can be challenged as arbitrary. Precise language in advantage of the new enabling authority, we modeled many your ordinance should clearly define what is considered to be of its procedures after state prescriptions for enforcement of deterioration. Petitions that allege demolition by neglect minimum housing standards. Our plan,if challenged,was to should list specific defects that reference these standards, so avoid the view that it something entirely new to be defended. that a reasonable person viewing the deterioration can see We would treat demolition by neglect as an extension of pow- what part of the ordinance is being violated. ers the state had already granted: we were taking advantage of a familiar process that had been on the books.a long time, Clear procedures are necessary to ensure that each case is was a matter of general course, and was recognized as a handled in the same way and that property owners are assured ' process for affirmative enforcement of deficiencies. A case of due process. Provisions should be included in the ordi- can be made for equal treatment under the law...property nance for the submittal of petitions alleging demolition by with deficiencies (minimum housing standards, demolition neglect, the process for notification of the property owner, by neglect standards)are handled the same way. Happily,we procedures for conducting hearings, and time frames for were not required to make these arguments,and the ordinance actions. Also necessary are criteria for evaluating and mak- was adopted after routine review. ing findings regarding economic hardship,the manner for fil- ing of appeals,and modes of enforcement by remedy, abate- Using the Ordinance ment,and/or penalty. Again,state law provisions may dictate what kind of enforcement tools you have at your disposal. A demolition by neglect ordinance is not for the faint of heart. It is aggressive,pro-active preservation. Recognize that such Particular attention should be paid to criteria for evaluating a program is staff-resource intensive, and requires great pre- economic hardship. This is a necessary safeguard that pro- cision in the application of due process. It is important to tects the local government and property owners from claims build cooperative partnerships both with neighborhoods and of regulatory takings. Your ordinance should spell out in with local government agencies charged with enforcement. detail the kind of financial information that the property Initially, we have undertaken only one case at a time. We owner must provide in order to demonstrate.a claim of eco- have requested that neighborhood groups prioritize properties nomic hardship, and ensure that findings are made with they wish to have considered under the ordinance's provi- regard to the claim. In the event that the evidence proves that sions, and to keep the Iist short. Commission staff assist such a claim is valid, then the ordinance should also provide inspections department staff with moni- guidance in the preparation of a plan to relieve the hardship. toring and evaluating property compliance. Knowing when to use the ordinance is important. Be sure Strategies for Adopting an Ordinance that deterioration is substantial enough to warrant the appli- cation of such governmental power,but not so severe that the Each community has its own personality when it comes to the expense of repair exceeds the market value of the property kinds of ordinances that are appropriate for its citizens, and which could lead to a finding of economic hardship. no one strategy will fit all. It will not advance your preser- vation cause if such an ordinance becomes controversial, so The City of Raleigh's demolition by neglect ordinance can it will pay dividends to carefully consider whether such an be accessed on-line by going to: ordinance is right for your community, and how to establish http://www.municode.com/database.html. Navigate to support for its adoption. Raleigh,North Carolina,search for'10-6180'and you will call up the section of the code for demolition by neglect. Several lessons can be learned from our experience in Raleigh. Enabling legislation authorizing local demolition by For further guidance regarding demolition by neglect and • neglect ordinances was adopted by the North Carolina legis- related legal issues, the following resources are recom- lature in 1989 as part of a general re-write of the statutes gov- mended: erring preservation in the state. In 1992,the city completely reorganized its preservation program as part of a successful Duerksen, Christopher J. and Richard J. Roddewig. Takings preservation community effort to establish a county preserva- Law in Plain English, 3rd ed (Chicago and Denver: Clarion tion program. The justification for the city's ordinance revi• - Associates, Inc., 1998) sions was to ensure that the two programs were well coordi- Pollard, Oliver A, III. "Counteracting Demolition by nated, as well as to incorporate the state legislation changes. Neglect: Effective Regulations for Historic District Demolition by neglect became part of a routine updating of Ordinances," The Alliance Review, Winter 1990. National the ordinance, rather than the sole focus of a "sales effort" Ailliance of Preservation Commissions,Athens,GA. . Continued on page 15 2 February/March 1999 Continued from page 2 because a building is in poor condition doesn't mean it Pollard, Oliver A, III. "Minimum Maintenance Provisions: should be torn down. Preventing Demolition by Neglect," Preservation Law Can the building be mothballed? Mothballing a building is Reporter, Volume 8, 1989 Annual. National Trust for less expensive than demolition and it preserves the building Historic Preservation,Washington,DC. until economic conditions, a new owner or funds are avail- Roddewig, Richard J. and Christopher J. Duerksen. able to restore the building. If the building is to be demol- "Responding to the Takings Challenge:A Guide for Officials ished because it is vacant,it need not be a blight on the neigh- and Planners,"Planning Advisory Service Report#416,May borhood.The building and boarded up windows can be paint- 1989. American Planning Association, Chicago,IL. ed.The grounds can be maintained.The windows and doors can be properly secured from unwanted access. White, Bradford J. and Paul W. Edmondson. Procedural Due Process in Plain English: A Guide for Preservation A Commission should not be afraid to deny a request for Commissions. (Washington DC:National Trust for Historic' demolition. Once the building has been demolished, it will Preservation, 1994) never return. Furthermore, new construction can never replace the historic character and fabric of a building. Dan Becker serves as'Executive Director of the Raleigh Historic Districts Commission, Raleigh, NC and is a NAPC Board Member. Highlights From: Takings Law in Plain English By Christopher J. Duerksen &Richard J. Roddewig Preservation Books, National Trust,for Historic Preservation, Washington, D.C. (www.preservationbooks.org) As discussed in further detail in this publication, the courts have laid out a number of general principles that should be kept in mind by those wishing to understand the law of takings: • No one has an absolute right to use his land in a way that may harm the public health or welfare, or that damages the quality of life of neighboring landowners, or of the community as a whole. • Historical precedent and recent case law make clear that reasonable land use and environmental regulations will have little trouble withstanding constitutional scrutiny in the vast majority of cases. Only in rare instances will such regulations be deemed so onerous as to effect a"taking" under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which holds that private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation. • Courts have outlined several broad factors to be considered on a case-by-case basis in determining if a taking has occurred, including: the economic impact of the regulation on the property owner; the public purpose for which the regulation was adopted; and the character of the government action. Generally, a regulation will be upheld if it (1) furthers a valid public purpose; and (2) leaves a property owner with some viable economic use of the property. • Property owners have a right to a reasonable return or use of their land, but the U.S. Constitution does not guarantee the most profitable use. • Courts have upheld a wide variety of purposes as valid reasons for enacting environmental and land use regulations—including pollution prevention, resource protection, historic preservation, design controls, and scenic view protection. • Communities can legitimately insist that development pay its own way. Land dedications or mandatory exactions are valid, assuming that they are adopted to respond to the demands created by the project. • Before a landowner or developer can bring a lawsuit to claim a taking, a development plan must be submitted for review and all administrative avenues of relief must be exhausted. • The focus of the takings inquiry continues to be on the entire property interest. A severe adverse impact of a regulation on one portion of the property or ownership interest will not amount to a taking if the property as a whole continues to have a reasonable economic use. • On the rare occasion that a taking is found to have occurred, the community does not have to buy the entire property. Damages are payable only for a temporary taking for the period in which the regulations were in effect. Generally, the measure of damages will take into account the difference in value of the property without the offending regulations in place and with • them, an appropriate interest rate to be applied for the temporary loss of value, and the length of time the regulations were in effect. • As a part of legislation,lawmakers should include an administrative process that allows those who administer the law to consider the specific effect of the law on an individual landowner, and—consistent with the interest of the public being protected—afford an administrative relief process for undue economic hardship. 2 cn tli 0 H W Making Design Review Work The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties 1992 • • U. S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Preservation Assistance a Division Washington, D.C. October, 1992 3-2 Preservation is defined as the act or process of applying measures necessary to sustain the existing form, integrity, and materials of an historic property. Work, including preliminary measures to protect and stabilize the property, generally focuses upon the ongoing maintenance and repair of historic materials and features rather than extensive replacement and new construction. New exterior additions are not within the scope of this treatment; however, the limited and sensitive upgrading of mechanical, electrical,and plumbing systems and other code-required work to make properties functional is appropriate within a preservation project. Standards for Preservation 1. A property shall be used as it was historically, or be given a new use that maximizes the retention of distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. Where a treatment and use have not been identified,.a property shall be protected and, if necessary, stabilized until additional work may be undertaken. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The replacement of intact or repairable historic materials or alteration of features,spaces,and spatial relationships that characterize a property shall be avoided. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Work needed to stabilize, consolidate, and conserve existing historic materials and features shall be physically and visually compatible, identifiable upon dose inspection, and properly documented for future research. 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be preserved. 6. The existing condition of historic features shall be evaluated to determine the appropriate level of intervention needed. Where the severity of deterioration requires repair or limited replacement of a distinctive feature, the new material shall match the old in composition, design, color, and texture. -7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. 8. Archeological resources shall be protected and preserved in place. if such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. Th.S.o'inary of the Interior's Si *tadr for the Treatment of fistork Properties,Rev. 1992 3-3. Rehabilitation is defined as the act or process of making possible an efficient compatible use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving.those portions . or features which convey its historical, cultural, or architectural values. Standards for Rehabilitation 1. A property shall be used as-it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property shall be avoided. • 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, shall not be undertaken. 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature,the new feature shall match the old in design, color,texture,and, where possible,materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. 8. Archeological resources shall be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in a such a manner that, if removed in the future,the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. • • The Secretary of the interior's Standards for the Treatment of ffsmriie Properties,Rev. 1392 • 3-4. Restoration is.defined as the act or process of accurately depicting the form, features, and character of a property as it appeared at a particular period of time by means of the removal of features from other periods in its history and reconstruction of missing features . from the restoration period. The limited and sensitive upgrading of mechanical, electrical,and plumbing systems and other code-required work to make properties functional is appropriate within a restoration project. Standards for Restoration 1. A property shall be used as it was historically or be given a new use which interprets the property and its restoration period. 2. Materials and features from the restoration period shall be retained and preserved. The • removal of materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize the period shall be not be undertaken. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Work needed to stabilize, consolidate and conserve materials and features from the restoration period shall be physically and visually compatible, identifiable upon close inspection, and properly documented for future research. • 4. Materials, features,spaces,and finishes that characterize other historical periods shall be documented prior to their alteration or removal. 5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize the restoration period shall be preserved. 6. Deteriorated features from the restoration period shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. 7. Replacement of missing features from the restoration period shaft be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. A false sense of history shall not be created by adding conjectural features, features from other properties, or by combining features that never existed together historically. 8. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. 9. Archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. 10. Designs that were never executed historically shall not be constructed. fle Secretary of the Interior's Standards far the Treatment of historic Properties,Rev. 1592 3-5: • • Reconstruction, is defined as the act of process of depicting, by means of new construction, -the form, features, and detailing of a non surviving site, landscape, building, structure, or object for the purpose of replicating its appearance at a specific period of time and in its historic location. Standards for Reconstruction 1. Reconstruction shall be used to depict vanished or non-surviving portions of a property when documentary and physical evidence is available to permit-accurate reconstruction with minimal conjecture, and such reconstruction is essential to the public understanding of the property. 2. Reconstruction of a landscape, building, structure, or object in its historic location shall be preceded by a thorough archeological investigation to identify and evaluate those features and artifacts which are essential to an accurate reconstruction. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. 3. Reconstruction shall include measures to preserve any remaining historic materials, features, and spatial relationships. 4. Reconstruction shall be based on the accurate duplication of historic features and elements substantiated by documentary or physical evidence rather than on conjectural designs or the availability of different features from other historic properties. A reconstructed property shall re-create the appearance of the non-surviving historic property in materials,design,color, and. texture. • 5. A reconstruction shall be clearly identified as a contemporary re-creation. 6. Designs that were never executed historically shall not be constructed. • • • • The Secretary of the interior's St ndrds for the Treatment of Jfst tic Ploperdss,'Rev. 1992 3-6. Old Building Basics THESTR Ifiir L VTR ' Dg HOW THEY APPLY TO YOUR COMMISSION'S WORK Janine Duncan for NAPC Many local preservation commissions use The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation as the basis of their Design Guidelines, but few commissioners ever stop and consider what the Standards mean for the care and feeding of historic resources. Here then, are the Standards annotated with a commissioner's work in mind. .S .' „ 3 :: SOI standard #1: �,. )v. ,,, r i. 44 .4 'r - „i,; A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in ',' " . ,. ,� ,li. a new use that requires minimal changes to the defining char- :b UNIV r„ to . .,,i'...,`..,a: .,, . acteristics of the building and its site and environment. .a >l -- -- Y.,.,,,., y .% �'' Adaptive use projects frequently do not utilize a structure for its """"`jam—=— p historic purpose, but the building's original use should be read- §,' , ily apparent. For example, the large garage door openings of t� ti i an old gas station should remain identifiable as such even if the '' ' : f _ , , _ �., doors have been converted into walls and the space used for ` . , retail sales. Similarly, a mill converted into loft condominiums 4 should still look like a mill. When reviewing adaptive use pro- - ;;4 t=-'' • jects, ask yourself, "Would the property be recognized by a vis- itor from the property's heyday?" This former service station in SOI standard #2: Atlanta,Georgia retained its . architectural identity when con- The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of verted to a restaurant. historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall NAPC file photo. be avoided. Part of the integrity of historic buildings is in the retention of their details, features, and spaces. Examples include ornate sawn scrollwork on late nineteenth-century houses, the simple lines of craftsman style structures, and site plans that facilitate the smooth flow of vehicular traffic around bus stations and other buildings associ- ated with the growth of the automobile age. Commissions should identify the char- acter defining features as part of their local survey process. SOI standard #3: Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjec- tural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. Well meaning property owners may want to make changes to a building to make it look"more historic" by adding features from earlier styles or more ornate buildings. In some cases the motivation may be to make a building from the 1940s or '50s more compatible with older buildings in the district. Doing so creates a false sense of history and does not honestly convey the building's life. While salvaged/ recy- cled materials are frequently used in rehabilitation projects, they should be appro- priate for the building. Sometimes, a building will have been altered to such an extent over the years that it has lost its historical identity. Avoid inappropriate con- jectural alterations by requiring documentation (photographs, drawings, etc.)of the building's earlier appearance. If documentation is not available, require that the changes be in keeping with the building's original style. 14 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Old Building Bares SOI standard #4: Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic signifi- cance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. Property owners frequently do not see "recent" changes as being part of the his- tory of their building or structure. Even alterations and additions that fail the fifty year test, may be significant. For example, a drive-up service window and canopy added to a restaurant after the advent of the Model T Ford are indicative of a sig- nificant period of history. The significance of a later alteration should be careful- ly explained to applicants, though it can be challenging. Think of the applicant who says, "It can't be historic because I remember when it was added." The appli- cant may be in his/her nineties and the memory from when he/she was a teenag- er, but it unless the significance is made clear, the commission's decision will appear arbitrary and capricious. Alterations that have gained significance with time should be noted in a building's entry in the local historic resource inventory. SOI standard #5: Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsman- ship that characterize a property shall be preserved. Many historic resources have distinctive elements or were constructed using uncommon techniques that help make them unique. Preserving these elements is necessary to maintain the building's historical and architectural integrity. For example, a large cross painted on the outside of a brick church should be pre- served even if the building is no longer used for Christian worship. An owner may not realize that a detail or construction method is distinctive, so the commission should make an effort to explain its significance. SOI standard #6: Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where pos- sible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by docu- mentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. Property owners frequently wish to replace deteriorated features with new repli- cas because it is easier, or because they don't realize that repair is possible. If it is determined that repair isn't feasible, the replacement should match the origi- nal as closely as possible. Repair options and an examination of the historical evidence should be included in the preservation discussion. As with Standard Number Three, missing features should not be replaced without clear documen- tation of the original's appearance. SOI standard #7: Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Many of the cleaning treatments available today and with which many contractors and property owners are most familiar are simply too harsh for antique building TAR sup/Oct 2006 15 Old Building Basics materials. While old buildings do require cleaning they don't require the harshest methods frequently employed. To quote Bill Kennedy, chair of the Jonesborough, Tennessee Historic Zoning Commission, "Just because grandma should exercise doesn't mean she should work out with the football team." Commissions should require proof that unfamiliar techniques be proven to not harm historic materials before approving them and should provide information about appropriate tech- niques. SOI standard #8: Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and pre- served. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. While most projects that come before a local preservation commission will not have much potential for disturbing archaeological resources, commissions should still make applicants aware of the appropriate agency to call if a contractor unearths a skeleton or a trench of pottery shards. Commissioners should be aware of the resources and on-going projects in their area in order to provide guidance to prop- erty owners. SOI standard #9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy his- toric materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. "It looks like the old house was swallowed by the addition." Don't let that be said of something your commission approved. Help property owners understand how new additions can enhance a property without being intrusive by providing clear information and examples in your design guidelines. When considering applica- tions for new additions, carefully examine whether the addition will be easily iden- tified as new and appear secondary to the original building.A visitor should be able to visualize the property without the new addition and be able to understand what the building/structure and site were like during their historic period. SOI standard #10: New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. Removing new construction from a property should reveal the basic form of the base structure, show it located on a site that has retained its historic character, and not require damaging the original structure or site. When reviewing applications for additions, commissions must determine that neither the construction, nor later removal of the addition, will damage the original building. Janine Duncan serves as NAPC support staff and is a Master of Historic Preservation student at the University of Georgia. 16 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Design Guidelines THE WHAT, WHY, AND HOW OF DESIGN GUIDELINES By:Drane Wilkinson,NAPC Support Staff Many of the calls NAPC receives concern design guidelines-what they are, mortar,why ; theyare necessary, and how a commission can use them effectively. �����'� y Joints, and Many of the questions we receive arise from intelligent, well-meaning corn- bricks %�- �Aor missioners and property owners, confusing guidelines with standards or in originad slim l ,, bylaws. Other questions concern what guidelines should include, their orga- and new 1� • nization, and whether and how exceptions can be made. The following sections information provides a basic overview of what design guidelines are, why they are necessary, and how they are used. Mismatched Design Guidelines are only one of four basic documents a preservation color of •• ' f commission uses in performing its duties.The"Fundamental Four" are: brick and of mortar f • Local Preservation Ordinance The local preservation ordinance and bonding pattern in . (LPO)is the local law that establishes the commission, states its pur- new section 111%®111111 ®' •" pose, and states its powers and responsibilities. The LPO is based do not match pit the original � ,' on the state preservation act or enabling legislation' The LPO often contains language taken directly from the state enabling legislation, =®� particularly concerning powers and duties, because it must not con- — — tradict the state law or give the local commission more authority than is allowed. Good Match of Old and New:An example of illustrated design guidelines for brick ♦ Commission Bylaws A commission's bylaws are written and adopt- masonry. ed by the commission and state how the commission will operate. By Source:Guidelines&Standards For the Protection adopting and following bylaws, a commission ensures consistent and Enhancement of the Seneca Falls Historic operation and equal treatment of all applicants,thus building a defen- District, 1986. sible record. Bylaws do not regulate what the public may or may not do, but they regulate how a commission operates. • Policies and Procedures (Not all commissions have this docu- ment)Although bylaws are a public document, they can be hard for many laymen to understand and usually contain more information than is needed to answer most people's questions. Policies and pro- cedures are the public version of the bylaws and contain only basic information about how the commission operates. Since they are not usually legally binding, they should not contain anything that is not also in the bylaws. ♦ Design Guidelines Design guidelines are the written tenets accord- ing to which the commission interprets the preservation ordinance. Guidelines guide the applicant's work and the commission's deci- sions. 1 The enabling legislation is the slate law that,at a minimum,establishes the stale historic preservation office(SHPO), states that local governments may pass local preservation ordinances and the purpose for which they may be passed. TAR May/Jxne 2003 3 Design Guidelines Many of the common misconceptions of a preservation commission's rights and responsibilities and how it operates stem from a failure by commission- ers and staff to understand the purpose, potential, and use of design guide- lines. The following addresses the most common issues. • Guidelines VS Standards Although the two terms are often used • Numbering Guidelines are typical- interchangeably, standards and guidelines are not the same. ly numbered so that they can be Standards are general criteria against which work can be measured. easily referenced by commissioners Guidelines are specific instructions for how to meet standards. For when reviewing applications and example, "Antique masonry shall be preserved" is a standard and making motions. Numbering is usu- "Avoid sandblasting antique masonry" is a guideline for meeting the ally by section and specific guide- standard. Guidelines should not contradict standards. Many guide- line. For example, if the second lines are based on The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for section of the guidelines was Rehabilitation.2 masonry and it had seven separate guidelines, the section would be • Content Design guidelines usually cover only exterior work, unless section 2.0; the guidelines would be the LPO specifically gives the preservation commission authority numbered 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, etc. through over interior spaces. Guidelines are usually divided into several sec- 2 .7. tions, each pertaining to a different type of work or building material, like wood, masonry, roofs, structural systems, windows, demolition, ♦ Accessibility Guidelines are a new construction, signage, etc. public document and must be avail- able to the public from an official ♦ Exceptions The commission may make exceptions to the guide- place like town hall. They may also lines and grant a C of A for work that does not strictly follow the be made available to the public guidelines but in the commission's opinion, meets the relevant stan- through other venues such as the dard(s). When making exceptions, however, the commission must Internet, public library, and local state why it is making the exception and how the proposed work preservation organization. meets the standard(s) in order for the decision to be defensible, should it ever be challenged. This information would typically be contained in the finding of fact for the motion to approve the pro- But wait! There's more! posed work. ♦ Illustrations Many design guidelines are illustrated, some more Design guidelines have an addition- extensively than others. Illustrations help property owners and corn- al use apart from helping keep your missioners understand the information and can make the guidelines commission out of court-they can be more user-friendly. an effective public relations tool. By providing property owners with clear accurate information about the care and maintenance of their old build- ing and how to achieve compatibility for infill construction, design guide- lines can show your commission to 2The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.1992,United States Department of the Interior,Washington,D.C. The Standards are neither technical nor pre- be the supportive preservation part- scriptive,but are intended to promote responsible preservation practices that help protect irre- ner it is. placeable cultural resources.The Standards provide philosophical consistency to the treatment of historic resources. 4 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Design Review Most American cities use design review Reviewed to improve the visual quality and corn- patibility of ordinary nonhistoric pro- jects. They often use a discretionary design review process. How well does discretionary design review improve Administrative versus community appearance by keeping building projects compatible with their Discretionary Methods surroundings?This article presents a . two-part study aimed at answering this question. For a neighborhood in Jack L. Nasar and Peg Grannis Columbus, Ohio, our research team did a physical inventory of the com- patibility of 96 projects that under- went discretionary design review and 68 that did not.The latter projects met rban form results from many activities by many actors,including gov- iess restrictive administrative appear- erning bodies,developers,banks,and independent groups (Bacow, ance controls present in the zoning or- 1995).To shape the design decisions of these agencies and individu- dinance.The team also surveyed 39 als, urban designers use a variety of administrative,regulatory,and finan- residents for their opinions on a subset cial techniques(Shirvani,1985).This article centers on one such technique: of projects built according to either the design review. Design review differs from most zoning, subdivision, and discretionary review of the design or building regulations in its emphasis on appearance.Local governments say the administrative controls.The results indicate that discretionary design re they use design review to serve such purposes as improving quality of life, view is not demonstrably better than enhancing a unique place,promoting vitality, creating comfortable places administrative review. Communities for pedestrians,protecting property values,promoting compatible develop- can use methods like the ones dis- ment,or improving community appearance(Scheer,1994).Critics complain cussed here to evaluate their own de- that design review is cosmetic,limits designer creativity,and unnecessarily sign review programs.They may find intrudes on private property (Lightner, 1992). Yet most courts support that the replacement of discretionary design review and hold aesthetics alone as an adequate public purpose in design review with more explicit land use regulation(Mandelker, 1993;Smardon&Karp, 1993).In early de- administrative appearance controls cisions,courts found aesthetics to be an adequate government purpose if it achieves the intended compatibility advanced other legitimate purposes,such as the protection of property value. more efficiently. In Berman v.Parker(1954),however,the U.S.Supreme Court went further to Nasar is professor of city and regional state that the values of public welfare include"spiritual as well as physical, planning at The Ohio State University.He aesthetic as well as monetary.It is within the power of the legislature to de- recently published The Evaluative image ofthe termine that the community should be beautiful as well as healthy"(p.33). City(Sage,1998)and Design by Competition: Most state courts followed suit. Design review might also raise problems Making Design Competition Work(Cambridge University Press,1999).Grannis is a dot with free speech(Costonis,1989;Lightner,1992;Scheer,1994).For example, toral candidate in city and regional plan- if the review goes beyond regulating"the time,place and manner of archi- ning and a research specialist at the Ohio tectural expression. . . [to] totally exclude an architectural style . . . courts Supercomputer Center, The Ohio State could hold[this an]invalid prohibition on the content of free speech"(Man- University. delker, 1993,p.479).However,the courts have consistently supported reg- Journal ofthe American Planning Association, ulation of design over free speech,although in such cases the local govern- Vol.65,No.4,Autumn 1999.0 American ment may have the burden of showing that design review serves a legitimate Planning Association,Chicago,IL public interest,such as aesthetics(Mandelker, 1993). DESIGN REVIEW REVIEWED Design review remains a major tool that local gov- sign review boards perform,especially with discretionary ernments use to improve community appearance. A reviews. Does discretionary design review improve the study of 1114 U.S.cities found that more than 90%had publicly perceived compatibility and appearance of de- architectural appearance controls (International City velopments?Previous research suggests that it does not. Management Association, 1984).A later survey of 700 A series of studies in California found that more city and county planning departments obtained usable often than not, discretionary design review by a board responses from 369 cities and towns (Lightner, 1993). did not result in buildings that the public found more Most of them(78%, 83%when counties were dropped, appealing(see Stamps, 1997a).Consider one case study and 93%of cities having more than 100,000 residents) that examined the performance of discretionary design had some form of design review, and only 3%"limited review in the Oakland Hills Restoration Area,California design review to historic districts".(p. 1). Most of these (Stamps&Nasar,1997).After a 1991 fire destroyed more ordinances apply to single-family residences(Mandelker, than 2500 houses in Oakland Hills, the Oakland Hills 1993). Restoration Area rebuilt rapidly. People built many In areas with design review,private and public pro- houses without design review.Later,the local planning posals for development must be approved by the design department set up a discretionary design review process, review board in order to proceed.Typically,one submits in which planning staff served as reviewers.The criteria a design to local planning staff,who may approve it,dis- the reviewers had for evaluating the projects were vague. approve it,or ask for modifications.A planning(or re- For example,one criterion referred to not having an ad- view)commission or a staff member makes the decision. verse effect on the"livability of adjacent homes"or"the The review may evaluate many factors,such as architec- harmony of neighborhood appearance."At the time of tural excellence, visual bulk, style, scale, materials, or the study,the Oakland Hills Restoration Area had corn- environmental or historical factors,but it most often pleted 257 projects prior to discretionary design review evaluates the compatibility of projects with their sur- and 476 under discretionary design review. Because all roundings (Lightner, 1993; Preiser & Rohane, 1988). of the rebuilt houses had many characteristics in corn- Court support for zoning rests on the compatibility mon,such as topography,planning process, demogra- principle: Courts allow communities to protect areas phy,geographical location,trees,utility poles,street fur- from incompatible uses.Thus controlling appearance niture,and car parking, the Oakland Hills Restoration for compatibility eases substantive due process problems Area provided a good opportunity to evaluate the per- (Mandelker, 1993). Psychological studies also suggest formance of design review by comparing popular re- that humans need visual compatibility and order,espe- sponses to houses built under discretionary design re- cially in residential areas (Nasar, 1998). Compatibility view to ones built with no design review. does not necessarily require one to mimic the surround- Forty-two local and 40 nonlocal observers viewed ings. Rather it refers to the degree to which a proposal photographs of seven projects selected at random from has features that make it appear to fit with its surround- the design review projects and seven selected at random ings.Project approval often rests on the appraisal of the from projects with no design review.The results indi- compatibility of the proposed project.' cated that design review did not make a noticeable differ- Communities vary in the amount of discretion left ence. Though the observers judged the discretionary to the reviewers in deciding whether or not to approve a design review houses as slightly more pleasant than the proposal.Discretionary design review refers to ordinances houses built without design review or appearance codes, in which the decision rests on the reviewers'personal dis- the difference did not achieve statistical significance.Be- cretion.Administrative design review refers to ordinances yond statistical significance, the study examined the that limit personal discretion by requiring projects to magnitude of effect.Cohen(1988)discusses three effect satisfy clear, precise, and measurable standards (Shir- sizes—small,medium,and large.The analysis indicated a vani,1985).As most U.S.cities lack the standards for ad- small effect(0.14).This means that the Oakland Hills ministrative review(Lightner, 1993),they typically rely Restoration Area discretionary design review had a on a discretionary approach.This approach leaves them nearly undetectable effect on public preferences. vulnerable to charges of abuse for being arbitrary,capri- In cases when design review deals with issues beyond cious,or vague(Hinshaw, 1995;Lai, 1994;Poole, 1987). appearance, such as functional effects of a structure To avoid such problems, communities have a corn- through its site plan or building bulk,public opinion pelling need to know how specific modifications of the may not be the sole criterion.In the more typical case in physical environment will affect community appearance, which design review focuses on appearance,measures of and they need to develop clear guidelines or controls to the responses of individuals exposed to the project rep- support their objectives.They need to know how well de- resent appropriate measures of success. APA Journal•Autumn 1999•Vol.65,No.4 425 JACK L.NASAR AND PEG GRANNIS Design Review in a Columbus, Ohio, December, 1992,city planners asked the first author for Neighborhood help in determining whether the City should continue the discretionary design review for the outer area.The No single study in one city can fully evaluate the per- City attorney indicated that for the City to continue,he formance of design review in the hundreds of commu- had to be convinced that the level of regulation would nities that use it.The projects,designers,reviewers,cri- be legally defensible.3 In the research,we compared pro- teria.,and degree of review board discretion may affect jects completed under administrative review only with the result.We offer the present research to suggest that those completed under discretionary review.Recall that individual communities should evaluate the perform- we use the term administrative review to refer to a process ance of design review, and as an example of how they removing discretion from the reviewers rather than to might go about such an evaluation. identify who does the review. City staff in the zoning The research reported here adds to the information department conducted the administrative reviews.One provided in the Oakland study in several ways. First, it city planning staff member and a panel of residents ap- tests the performance of discretionary design review in a pointed by the City made the discretionary review deci- different city:Columbus,Ohio.Second,it does so in the sions.Consistent with national data showing that a ma- context of additions and renovations, rather than new jority of design review commissioners come from fields buildings.Third,to improve internal validity,it matches other than design, such as business, real estate, edu- and compares discretionary review projects with neigh- cation,law, engineering, or home building (Sanders& boring administrative review projects.Fourth,while the Getzels, 1987),the panel had people from various back- Oakland study compared discretionary design review grounds as well as design professionals. with no design review,the present research compares dis- cretionary review with administrative review of man- Methodology datory appearance controls (such as roof pitch) in the zoning ordinance. Fifth, it looks at several dimensions We evaluated 164 projects-96 completed under dis- of response and uses a multiple method approach.One cretionary review(DR)and 68 completed earlier under method examines the physical compatibility of the administrative review(AR).The 96 DR projects included houses resulting from the discretionary review and those all applications heard by the interim review board during resulting from the administrative review;the second ex- the 27-month trial period that were approved and even- amines residents'ratings of preference and compatibility wally constructed. At the time of the study, the board of the discretionary review and administrative review had reviewed applications for 113 projects, 17 of which, projects.2 though approved,had not yet completed construction. The study centered on the University District, one We also selected 68 AR projects from a list of building of fourteen designated Area Commission Neighbor- permits issued during the year prior to the establishment hoods in Columbus, Ohio. Such neighborhoods elect of the interim design review board.We chose AR projects their own commissioners to oversee development issues that matched as closely as possible the neighborhood lo- in the neighborhood and forward recommendations to cations and type of work performed on the DR projects. City Council.The University District contains approxi- For example, if a DR project involved new siding, we mately 45,000 households in an area of 2 square miles.In chose an AR project from the same block that involved September, 1.990, the City of Columbus extended the new siding. jurisdiction of an appearance/compatibility review First,we conducted a physical inventory of the corn.- board from a core area of the University District to the patibility of the specific building features (e.g., roof full district on an interim basis for a 27-month trial pitch,siding material,lot coverage,deck size)that were period.To proceed,proposed projects had to meet zon- considered in the.discretionary review and administra- ing requirements for appearance and gain approval from tive review work,and gave each relevant feature a corn- this review board.The review board had no explicit cri- patibility rating. Next, we had the public rate the teria.Many projects in the outer district were completed compatibility of and their preferences for the appeal of both before and after the city established the interim selected discretionary review and administrative review design review board to do discretionary review.Prior to projects.We used two approaches to mitigate biases in- this design review process, the neighborhood had only herent in each one.The physical inventory evaluations an administrative review process in which residential allowed us to obtain ratings for a large number of disv projects had to satisfy some appearance controls in the cretionary and administrative review projects,but it did zoning ordinance. not assess popular reactions. The public ratings ob- The research grew from a request from the City.In tamed popular reactions,but the research design limited A.26 ADA-Tr,irnal•Anmmn 1999•Vol.65.No.4 DESIGN REVIEW REVIEWED these ratings to a small number of projects.Together, It is possible,however,that because the physical inven- the approaches allowed us to get compatibility judg- tory was conducted by a small sample ofjudges,though ments for every discretionary review and administrative it was comprehensive,it did not reflect the perceptions of review project completed between September 1989 and the public who experience the buildings on a regular December 1992,plus public appraisals of a selected sub- basis.Also,the sum of the ratings of various elements of set of projects from that same time period. each building may not accurately reflect public percep- tions.We therefore conducted a second component of Physical Inventory Evaluations of the study to gather and examine public evaluations of Compatibility DR and AR designs. We constructed a checklist covering a comprehen- Public Evaluations of Compatibility and sive set of the physical features in all the projects under Preference study.The checklist included the address,type of modi- For the public evaluations,we sought pairs of pro- fication,broad categories of work,and features within jects similar to one another in location,kind of build those categories that could affect compatibility (see ing,and type of work,but differing in whether they were Figure 1). AR or DR projects. We photographed all AR projects Our judges scored whether or not each project fea completed during the 12-month period prior to the start ture was compatible with the rest of the building and the of the discretionary review process and all DR projects surrounding neighborhood. For reliability, we would completed during the 27-month period of the interim have preferred to have a large number ofjudges complete discretionary review.Each photograph presented a color the physical inventory on all 164 projects, but this view of the target building from directly across the street. proved impractical.Instead we enlisted seven graduate To show the building in its setting,the photograph in students in city and regional planning.To improve con- cluded portions of the building on either side of the tar sistenc}, we had these judges run through pretests in get building. We used color photographs because re- which each person rated the same building followed by search consistently confirms that responses to color comparison and discussion of the ratings.The process was repeated until all judges had given consistent re- photos accurately reflect on site response (Stamps, spouses for three buildings. Then the seven students 1990).As the interviewees(see below) lived in the same divided into teams of two or three members to inventory neighborhood,we assumed they would judge the target their subset of the properties. buildings against their broader sense of their neighbor- The judges made their evaluations independently. hood s character. For purposes of experimental control,we used a sub- They visited each project location and evaluated only set of the DR and AR projects for the public evaluation. the work completed under design review.While the yes/ We selected pairs of DR and AR buildings that had siin- no choice may have overlooked degrees of compatibil filar kinds of structures, locations, types of work, and ity,this simplification was necessary in order to inven other site features. For example,we compared DR and tory so many projects in a such a short period. We AR buildings of similar size;DR porch projects with AR assigned each project one score between 0 and 100,rep porch projects,DR siding projects with AR siding pro- resenting the percentage of the relevant features judged jects, etc.; and DR and AR buildings that had similar as compatible. amounts of vegetation.In each case,we tried to control Results.The physical inventory evaluations did.not features other than the type of design review that might show the DR projects as more compatible than the AR affect ratings.This process led to six pairs of projects; projects;we found no significant differences in scores. see Figure 2 for a black and white version of one color The tally revealed a mean compatibility score of 87.7% photo pair. (SD=15.00)for DR work and 84.4%(SD=23.24)for AR For each matched pair,we obtained paired compar- work.Though the results seem to favor the DR process, ison evaluations by surveying area residents.Interviewers the difference did not achieve statistical significance. worked in teams of two or three in each subarea of the Further, the magnitude of the effect was small. This study area,where they selected residences at random to means that the difference may have resulted from recruit participants for the survey. They randomly chance,and that discretionary review had a relatively choose streets,cross streets,number of houses from the undetectable effect on the rated compatibility.' corner,and the side of street.They returned to the se- The physical inventory evaluations suggested that lected addresses in early morning and late afternoon.If the addition of DR did not produce a meaningful im- they failed to get an interview,they selected at random provement in compatibility over what resulted from AR. one of the five houses surrounding the target house. APA Journal•Autumn 1999•Vol.65,No.4 427 JACK L.NASAR AND PEG GRANNIS Address: Type of Modification: Addition _ Garage Carport Porch Roof _- Siding _ Window _ Door Staircase Handrails _ Deck Fence Walkway — Ramp Parking Landscape _ Satellite Dish — New Structure Demolition Massing Yea No Shape\Style of trim Form of structure Color of trim Size of structure Material of trim Height of structure Doors Yes No Matched roofline Size Pitch of roof Shape/Style Special features(towers,bay windows) Shape/Style of trim Sltework Yea No Color of trim Setback Material of door Lot coverage Material of trim Building location&orientation Porch or Deck Yes No Orientation of front door Size Pavement materials Form Landscaping Color Facade Material Roof Yes No Shape/Style of trim Color Size of Supports Material Shape/Style of supports Sidin¢ Yes No Ornamental detail Size Fencing Yea No Shape Height Color Style • Material Color Yea No Material Size Misc. Yes No Shape/Style Dormers Color Cornices Material Re)otnting • Ornamental detail Awnings Foundations Yes Na Lighting Material House numbering Windows Yes No Handrails Size Gutter; 1 Shape/Style FIGURE 1. Physical inventory checklist for building features. .., . . . r - — s ono V..i AG hTn d a DESIGN REVIEW REVIEWED • 14, • 2- _ _1_7 ...., . _ .._ . . . 10* ......... .... 471., hErr Ir""' " � r }fir l . ,mow.... `c N 1 A r by ' •I t t // / _ _ ,I ' . '. S 4L �Y. b ••. � l. ....f 11` `��". a� . anti.// 77..•,•. •3 • r 1. .,Sti"S FIGURE 2. One of the six pairs of University District buildings used in the public opinion survey.These houses were evaluated for new siding; a dot in each photo marked which house had undergone the work. The top one passed discretionary review, while the bottom one passed administrative review. APA Journal •Aurumn 1999•Vol.65,No.4 429 JACK L.NASAR AND PEG GRANNIS A questionnaire given to participants stated that spondent had owned or rented,whether they owned any they would see photos of pairs of buildings. It asked other properties in the area, how long they had lived at diem to respond to a marked building in each photo. their present address,and whether or not they thought The interviewers shuffled the photograph pairs before the area needs some form of regulation to ensure that each interview to reduce potential order effects on re- new buildings, additions, and changes fit their sur- spouses. They also randomly varied the order of the roundings.6 placement of the DR and AR projects on the right or left. The photographs did not have labels, and we did not Results.Of the 39 participants,most(72%)said they inform participants which project had gone through dis- were renters.Their tenure in the area varied.Most(67%) cretionary review and which had gone through adminis- said they had lived there for more than a year(1-3 years, trative review.As each photograph showed several build- 41%; more than 3 years, 26%). They should have had ings,we placed a dot above the building that we wanted enough familiarity with the area to make judgments participants to judge. about the target house's compatibility with the neigh- For each pair,the interviewers called attention to the borhood.This sample had enough participants to allow kind of work done(e.g.,siding,front porch,roof).To re- statistical comparisons. duce biases from considering other portions of the Tests of results by question order did not reveal sig- buildings,participants were instructed to consider only nificant differences.Therefore,we combined the data the remodeling work.Participants then answered two or and examined the 2S responses to fit and the 33 re- three of the following questions: sponses to like.Table 1 shows the percentages ofpartici- ]} When you look at the[name of work done] on pants who evaluated DR or AR work as a better fit to the each pair of buildings,which one better fits with surroundings, or better liked. It also shows the associ- its neighboring buildings? ated test statistics when differences were significant.For 2) When you look at the name of work done] on each measure, DR work received scores lower than or each pair of buildings,which one do you like equal to those for AR work. better? FIT.As shown in'Fable 1,more participants judged 3) When you look at the [name of work donee on DR projects the better fit in three project pairs(A,C,and each pair of buildings which one do you think and AR in two project pairs (B and B), but only one would command a higher rent?s difference achieved statistical significance. For project pair E,significantly more people selected AR as the bet- The interviewers told participants that if they felt the same ter fit.Adjusting for multiple comparisons, this effect about the two buildings,they could answer"neither." becomes statistically insignificant. The analysis also Design review often seeks to create more compati- looked at the effect size,calculated by transforming the ble and more pleasant results.We used the first two ques- X2 into a standardized difference between the means,d tions to look at those aspects of design review. Of the Oudd et al.,1991).Project pair E achieved a large effect(d various ways to obtain responses,we chose a rank order =1.21)strongly favoring the AR project over the DR one. procedure which involved ordering projects relative to For discretionary review to be justifiable, it should each other. We considered other kinds of scales and produce work that more than equals the fit of work done checklists, but studies have found that these different under administrative review: It should yield better re- kinds of measurement scales produce similar results sults.To test whether it did in our study,we compared (Gould&White, 1974;Stamps, 1997a). Rank order ap- the number of people judging DR work as a better fit to proach offers additional benefits.It tends to produce a those choosing AR work or neither.The results of these higher level of agreement among respondents,and it has comparisons suggested that discretionary review is not greater efficiency in that it allows one to obtain re- demonstrably better than administrative review.For all spouses to many scenes rapidly(Brush,1976;Zube et al., six project pairs,62.0%of participants rated the fit of the 1974). AR projects as equal to or better than that of the DR pro- Thirty-nine residents took part in the survey. We jects.Considering multiple claims,this became statisti- had 19 participants answer all three questions,and to re- cally insignificant,but it had a large effect(d= 1.72).The duce biases for judgments of like or fit on one another, results for each pair paralleled those for the full set:A we had 20 participants answer the like and rent questions majority of the participants rated the fit of the AR pro- only and 20 participants answer the fit and rent questions ject as equal to or better than that of the DR project.The only.We varied the order of the questions to reduce sys- differences achieved statistical significance for two pairs, tematic bias from question order.The interviewers also B and E,but with multiple claims,only the comparison requested demographic information: whether the re- in pair E remained significant.The effect sizes varied 7n nun r......„.,ram A..r.,.,,., 1n08•Vnl 65.No.4 DESIGN REVIEW REVIEWED TABLE 1. Resident ratings of fit to surroundings and preference for DR versus AR projects. Better Fit Better Liked Project Pair DR AR Neither Project Pair DR AR Neither A(n=25) 44.0% 28.0% 28.0% A(n=33)* 0.0% 90.9% 9.1% B(n=25) 28.0 44.0 28.0 B(n=33) 63.6 18.2 18.2 C(n=25) 48.0 40.0 12.0 C(n=33) 39.4 48.5 12.1 D(n=25) 48.0 20.0 32.0 D(n=33) 42.5 42.4 12.1 E(n=25)* 20.0 68.0 12.0 E(n=33) 30.3 57.6 12.1 F(n=25) 40.0 40.0 20.0 F(n=33) 39.4 39.4 21.2 Mean* 38.0 40.0 22.0 Mean* 35.9 49.5 14.1 Total(=or better) n = 150 38.0 62.0 - Total(=or better)n= 198 37.9 62.1 - *Significant differences,Bonferonni adjusted for multiple *Significant differences,Bonferonni adjusted for multiple comparisons comparisons E:AR+neither better than DR:X1=9.0, 1 d f p<.02 A:AR better than DR:X2=30.0,1 df p<.02 A:AR+neither better than DR:X2=33.0,1 df p<.02 TOTAL:AR+neither better than DR:X2=11.64,1 df p<.02 from medium(B: d=.86) to large (E:d= 1.80)against Discussion DR Residents thus judged the fit of these AR,projects as noticeably better than the fit of the DR projects. The public opinion data on the six project pairs sug- LIKE.Table 1 also shows that the AR project was bet- gest that projects done under discretionary design review ter liked in three pairs(A,C,and E),while the DR project produced results that were viewed as neither more com- was better liked in one pair(B).The differences achieved patible nor more preferable than projects undergoing statistical significance for two pairs,A and B.With mul- administrative review. These findings agree with the tiple claims,only the comparison in pair A remained sta- broader findings From the physical inventory,which in- tistically significant.Both A and B had large effect sizes, dicated only minor differences in physical compatibility with A Favoring AR(d= 11.57) and B favoring DR(d= between the DR and AR projects.Both sets of findings re- 1.15).The comparison of those judging DR as better suit from a relatively small sample of respondents evalu- liked versus those judging AR as equal to or better than ating a small set of changes,additions,or remodeling of DR does not offer support for discretionary review.For existing houses.Though limited, they agree with find- all six pairs,62.1%of the participants rated the AR pro- ings from larger samples of respondents evaluating the jects as equally or better liked than the DR projects.This overall impact of completed projects (Stamps, 1997a; remained statistically significant under multiple claims. Stamps&Nasar,1997). It also had a large effect(d= 1.72).The findings held for As the present research only evaluated completed pro- the comparisons of each pair. In five of the six pairs, jects,it does not indicate whether discretionary review fewer participants liked the DR projects better than liked had improved any projects as initially proposed.The re- the AR project equally or better.The differences achieved sults do indicate that discretionary review failed to yield statistical significance for two comparisons (A and E), projects more compatible than or preferred to those ap- but with multiple claims,only the comparison in pair A proved through only administrative review.Because dis- remained statistically significant.The comparisons for cretionary review involves extra cost,resources,and time A and E had a large and medium effect size,respectively for both the City and individuals proposing changes,the (A:d=4.00;E:d=.69). findings did not support it as a cost effective procedure. In sum, the results show that residents rated DR Columbus discontinued the discretionary design review projects as having a poorer fit for pair E and for the full process for the tested area. set,with large effect sizes for each. For preferences,the Can we rely on public opinion over the informed results show DR projects rated as less liked for pair A and judgment of design reviewers?Yes.Federal and state law the full set,with large effect sizes for each, support design review to improve the built environment for the public(Costonis,1989),but the judgments of de- sign professionals and other outsiders on such boards often differ from the judgments of residents (Nasar, APA Journal•Autumn 1999•Vol.65,No.4 431 JACK L.NASAR AND PEG GRANNIS 1999).Though some people believe the public will even- dicated an insignificant correlation(n=42,r= .09) be- tually follow the views of the experts,research suggests tween discretionary design review and public preferences otherwise.Public preferences are remarkably stable over (Stamps,1997a). time. For example,a series of studies of an award-win- The meta-analysis and the present study did not ex- ning building found that negative public evaluations of amine the effects of the makeup of the review board on the building remained unchanged 10 years after corn- the results.Research has consistently found that for eval- pletion of the project(Nasar, 1999). When a developer uations of appearance, design professionals and out- proposed the Transamerica Tower in San Francisco, siders differ from local residents and the public(Brower, local planners objected.Public opinion obtained 2 years, 1988;Nasal-,1994).Though these findings may point to 18 years,and 23 years after construction revealed that some benefits of design review panels ofnonprofession- the public initially liked the building and continued to als and residents for issues of community appearance, do so (Stamps, 1997b).A study of 20 buildings in San those who choose to serve on review commissions may Francisco revealed similar stability in public evaluations judge design differently than their neighbors.Ambigu- (Stamps, 1997b).In sum,research indicates that corn- ous criteria may also skew their judgments. pared to judgments by design professionals,public opin- Our results point to the need for continued evalua- ion polls offer a better indicator of likely long-term pub- tions of design review in various contexts,and the pre- lic preferences. sent research offers methods chat planners can use for such evaluations.The present findings suggest that com- munities could opt for administrative design controls Conclusion over discretionary design review.Administrative controls Through a two-part study,we sought to determine involve less cost and time,and,if the present results are whether discretionary design review adequately served accurate,they produce designs that are judged equal to the purpose of enhancing aesthetics in building designs, or better than those obtained through discretionary re- often mandated by local governments.The approaches view.However,the lower scores for discretionary review also demonstrate methods for evaluating the effective- projects may have resulted from the absence of explicit ness of both types of review.Placing discretionary review criteria or criteria based on scientific evidence to guide and administrative review projects in matched pairs for the reviewers' judgments. Communities may reduce the survey portion of the present study provided greater problems by improving the discretionary review proce- internal validity than the previous Oakland study dures through replacing ambiguous or unstated criteria (Stamps&Nasar, 1997) by controlling for extraneous with clear,specific,and explicit criteria.Courts have up- variables.However,its reliance on a small sample of pro- held challenges on the grounds of vagueness (Blaeser, jects and survey participants may have reduced the gen- 1994; Lai, 1994). For example, in Anderson v. City oflssa- eralizability of the findings. In response to this limita- quah (1993), an appeals court in Washington decided Lion, the Columbus study supplemented the small against unconstitutionally vague provisions such as sample by examining compatibility judgments for all of "compatible,"stating that"aesthetic standards...must its 164 projects. be drafted to give clear guidance to all parties concerned. The Oakland and Columbus findings differ in de- Applicants must have an understandable statement of tail, but both show potential problems with discre- what is expected"(p. 82).The Supreme Court has also tionary design review.For the Columbus additions and placed a greater burden on local governments to demon- renovations, the administrative review projects out- strate the benefit of their regulatory actions and has scored those subject to discretionary review in popular called for heightened judicial scrutiny for land use regu- judgments of compatibility and preference.The physi- lations(Dolan v. City of Tigard, 1994;Nollan v. California cal inventory evaluations showed the discretionary re- Coastal Commission, 1987). Implicit or arbitrary appear- view work as slightly more compatible,but this differ- ance guidelines and controls may not provide an ade- ence did not achieve statistical significance, and the quate legal basis for design review decisions. strength of the effect was small. For Oakland, the dis- cretionary design review houses emerged as preferred to ACKNOWLEDGMENTS the houses that had no design review,but the strength of We thank Art Stamps for his comments on early drafts of this the effect was again relatively small.The findings repli- paper.We thank Steve Cochrun,Leigh Hennings,Jiyeong Lee, care other work highlighting problems with discre- Jon Pawley,Sarosh Saber,and Brad Slavens for collecting and • tionary design review(Stamps, 1997a).Though limited, coding the Columbus neighborhood data. Co-author Peg • our research agrees with a larger set of data. A meta- Grannis also helped collect and code the data. , analysis of several design review studies in California in- DESIGN REVIEW REVIEWED NOTES Judd,C.,Smith,E.,&Kidder,L.(1991).Research methods in social relations(6th ed.).New York:Holt,Rinehart and Winston. 1. To prevent monotony,some ordinances require moder- Lai,R.T.(1994).Can the process of architectural design review ate but not excessive variation from the typical appearance withstand legal scrutiny?In B.C.Scheer&W.F.E.Preiser in the surrounding neighborhood(Mandelker,1993). Design 2. We also examined the minutes of review board meetings (Eds.), review:Challen n gurban aesthetic controls(pp' to understand the basis for decisions and to make recom 31 41).New York:Chapman and Hall. mendations for guidelines that could help applicants. Lightner,B. C. (1992). Design review:A critical evaluation. This article does not include the analysis of the meeting Cities:The International Journal of Urban Policy and Planning, 9 280-287. minutes. Lightner,B.C.(1993,January).Surveyof design review practices. 3. Recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions suggest that al- (Planning though aesthetics represents an adequate basis for con- Planning Advisory Service Memo). Chicago:American trol,in some cases,local governments may have a greater Planning Association. Mandelker,D.(1993).Land use law(3rd ed.).Charlottesville, burden to show an adequate public purpose(Lai, 1994; VA:The Michie Co. Mandellcer,1993). Nasar,J. L. (1994). Urban design aesthetics:The evaluative 4. For this test,we transformed the Fvaluc into the stan- qualities of building exteriors.Environment and Behavior, dardized difference between the means(d=.03).Accord 26,377 401. ing to Cohen(1988),this represents a stnalI effect. Nasar,J. L. (1998). The evaluative image of the city. Thousand 5. The question about rent related to aspecific interest olCity Oaks,CA:Sage. officials.As the rent variable does not link to the theoreti Nasar,J.L.(1999).Design by competition:Making design competi- cal framework,we do not present results for it other than to lion work New York:Cambridge. note that they echo the findings for the other variables. Noilan v.California Coastal Commission,483 U.S.825(1987). 6. The question about support for regulations related to a Poole,S.E.(1987).Architectural appearance review regulations specific interest of City officials.As the support variable and the first amendment:The good,the bad,and the con- does not link to the theoretical framework,we do not pre census ugly.The Urban Lauryer,19,287-344. sent results for it other than CO note that most respon Preiser,W.F.E.,&Rohane,K.(1988).A survey of-aesthetic con- tents (63%) favored regulation to ensure that design trols in English-speaking countries.In J.Nasar(Ed.),En- changes fit their surroundings. vironmental aesthetics:Theory,research,and applications(pp. 422-433).New York:Cambridge. REFERENCES Sanders,\V.,&Getzels,J. (1987).The planning commission:Its Anderson v.City of Issaquah,70 Wash.App.64:851,p 2d 744 composition and function.(Planning Advisory Service Report (1993). No.400).Chicago:American Planning Association. Bacow,A.F.(1995).Designing the city:A guide for advocates and Scheer,B.C.(1994).Introduction:The debate on design re- public officials.Washington,DC:Island Press. view.In B.C.Scheer&W.F.E.Preiser(Eds.),Design review: Berman v.Parker,348,U.S.26(1954). Challenging urban aesthetic controls(pp. 1-10). New York: Blacser,B.W.(1994).The abuse ofdiscretionaty power.in B.C. Chapman and Hall. Scheer&W.F.E.Preiser(Eds.),Design review:Challenging Shirvani,II. (1985). The urban design process. New York:Van urban aesthetic controls(pp.42-50).New York:Chapman Nostrand Reinhold. and I-lall. Smardon,R.C.,&Karp,J. P.(1993).The legal landscape.New Brower,S. (1988). Design in familiar places: What makes home York:Van Nostrand Reinhold. environments look good.New York:Praeger. Stamps,A.E.(1990).Use of photographs to simulate environ- Brush,R.O.(1976).Perceived quality of scenic and recreational ments:A meta-analysis.Perceptual and Motor Skills,71,907- environments: Some methodological issues. In K. H. 913. Craik&E.H.Zube(Eds.),Perceiving environmental quality: Stamps, A. E. (1997a). Meta-analysis in environmental re- Research and applications(pp.47-58).New York: Plenum. search.In.M.S.Amiel&J.C.Vischer(Eds.),Place design Cohen,J.(1988).Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. and management for place making(pp. 114-124).Edmond, Hillsdale,NJ:Erlbaum. OK:Environmental Design Research Association. Costonis,J.J.(1989).Icons and aliens:Law,aesthetics and environ- Stamps,A.E.(1997b).Of time and preference:Temporal sta- mentalchange.Urbana,IL:University of Illinois Press. bility of environmental preferences.Perceptual and Motor Dolan v.City of Tigard,512 U.S.374(1994). Skills,85,883-896. Gould, P.,&White,R. (1974).Mental maps.Middlesex, UK: Stamps,A.E.,&Nasar,J.L.(1997).Design review and public Penguin. preferences:Effects of geographical Iocation,public con- International City Management Association.(1984).Facilitat- sensus,sensation seeking and architectural styles.Journal ing economic development: Local government activities ofEnvironmental Psychology,17,11-32. and organization structures.Urban Data Service Report,16, Zube,E.H.,Pitt,D.G.,&Anderson,T.W.(1974).Perception 11-12.Washington,DC:Author. and measurements of scenic resources in the Southern Hinshaw,M.L.(1995).Design review.(Planning Advisory Service Connecticut River Valley.Amherst:University of Massa- Report No.454).Chicago:American Planning Association. chusetts,Institute for Man and Environment. APA Journal•Autumn 1999•Vol.65,No.4 433 Design Guidelines for Historic Districts Within the Context of Community Planning By Norc V. Winter. In The Alliance Review, Fall 1990; The National Alliance of Preservation Commissions. Public officials often find themselves reviewing designs for new construction in historic districts to determine the appropriateness of proposed new buildings. These people are accustomed to dealing with standards for rehabilitation, based on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, that are generally applied uniformly from one jurisdiction to another. When dealing with the issue of new construction, however, they are often rudely awakened to wide variations in local design policies for new construction. The reason is that design policies for new construction are not developed in a pristine setting in which "pure" preservation theory establishes the playing field. Local government structure, public opinion, and basic community goals influence the standards as do variations in the physical characteristics of the individual historic districts themselves. Spacing between buildings is one of the most important characteristics of Remington Avenue in Eon Collins.The core group used this illusuahon to weigh the relationship of spacing to other visual cheracteelshcs of the street, STd�EET Titlfl Al E EVEAU' WACED AND AWNED,WHICH CRfNE5 A 5TRONd PATTERN. boors ;.,:fert rLCWJCU R PORCH TiO1DIN05 VNDOVA QI ENTED llA Z ALX fffD. VERTKnLLX Illustration from the Fort Collins design guidelines prepared by Nort Winter. The Factors That Influence Local Design Standards Governmental structure affects the character of the guidelines. The degree of regulation provided for an individual historic district will greatly influence the level of review and the specificity of the standards that are applied. City governments usually hold the strongest review powers. Some county governments have similar powers, but many have advisory capabilities only. Some state governments may also provide for design review of historic resources on state-owned lands, but the level of protection and detail of review varies widely. Even federal projects that involve Section 106 process may yield widely varying results, depending upon the particular agency and the corresponding State Historic Preservation Officer. 1 Community goals also affect the character of the guidelines. Communities seeking to encourage development and growth may be less restrictive in their preservation regulations of historic districts than governments that are trying to limit the rate of expansion. Even where protection is provided for historic resources within the district, guidelines for new construction may be quite lenient. Other communities may seek to encourage new, creative architectural designs, and therefore may feel that inhibiting creativity through design review in the historic district is inappropriate. They may argue for very limited criteria in order to allow wider flexibility in design solutions for new construction. The agenda of neighborhood groups may also influence the outcome of design review for new construction. They are usually more concerned about change in social character of the neighborhood than in the rehabilitation of the existing buildings. Other factors, including land use, traffic impacts, and property values often color their response to new design proposals and these sentiments frequently come to light in the design review process. The desire to preserve general community character that extends beyond the boundaries of defined historic district boundaries may also influence local design guidelines and the public review process. Design guidelines for"transitional" or"conservation" areas may be developed in such cases. Other community goals for the overall density of development, as defined in local zoning regulations and building codes, may also influence the character of new construction. These policies often suggest architectural solutions that contrast with the existing historic context and may be in direct conflict with stated policies in the design guidelines. The physical setting also greatly influences the details of the guidelines. Each district is a unique combination of physical characteristics, many of which may contribute to the historic significance of the area, and some of which do not. An inventory of the characteristics of the district helps catalog those features that contribute to its significance and to establish priorities for writing guidelines based on the importance of these characteristics. Features to consider when conducting a visual survey include: • The physical characteristics of individual buildings, including their style, materials, and scale • The physical character of the landscape, including fences, plantings and paving. • The spatial arrangement of these features, including buildings, site elements and public infrastructure • The natural site forms and topography that often influence the way things are arranged Temporal issues also influence guidelines. Our attitude about design standards is also influence by how important we perceive the physical characteristics of the district to be. Our perception of this character is often a mixture of what is was like historically and how it exists today. Our sense of priorities for design standards is also influenced by how 2 we anticipate the district will appear in the future, given current development policies and trends in the community. Operating in a Changing Arena What do these factors mean, in terms of developing designs for new construction in historic districts? They suggest that officials should be prepared to operate in a political environment that holds a high degree of variability. Local zoning regulations may contradict what are assumed to be federal standards. For example, local regulations may allow an increase in site density, resulting in a reduction of open space that is an important characteristic of the area. In some cases, the historic context is so "sub-standard" with respect to today's building codes that any new construction by definition will differ from the character of the original architecture. Local zoning may also allow new uses, with correspondingly different building types, that were unknown historically. If current zoning allows auto service businesses in the district, for example, there is little likelihood that structures built to accommodate them will resemble a row of townhouses, no matter how materials are used or what style is used. In these cases, the relationship of preservation goals to broader community plans and goals becomes very important. A residential neighborhood that seeks to reserve development to single family occupancy structures may therefore oppose a multi-family apartment project, even if the massing is configured to resemble the established building fabric. Some confusion often occurs in the review process because local boards have a dual allegiance. They must serve their local masters (their town councils) by law, for these are the groups that create them. On the other hand, they also seek to conform to what are perceived to be national standards for historic districts. In some cases they are more strongly obliged to promote such standards by participating in the Certified Local Governments program. Blending planning and preservation policies. Policies for new construction will be a combination of the factors described above. As an example, the review board in the mountain resort of Telluride, Colorado, of which a significant part is a National Historic Landmark District, is concerned about loosing historic open space in the yards in the residential neighborhoods, but it also seeks to accommodate more employees as local residents, because of housing pressures of a ski resort. The town cannot expand its boundaries to allow new development on the periphery without altering its "small town" character that is an essential marketing ingredient and source of civic identity. Should the community allow an increase in density in its established neighborhoods to provide close-in worker housing, or does it maintain the historic low density, forcing new housing out of town and causing an increase in commuter traffic by employees who must then drive into work? Such questions arise with each new development proposal. The 3 results of the review process, the designs of structures that are built and of those that are denied permits will vary each year as the politics, local sentiment and community needs are blended into evolving preservation policies. Most communities with historic districts face similar questions. Each must find their own answers to these and related design policies, which, if founded on clearly articulated goals and well understood design policies will help to retain the unique character of the district. Norc Winter is president of Winter & Company, a consulting form in Boulder, Colorado, specializing in historic preservation and urban design. lie has developed design guidelines and has conducted design review training programs,for numerous communities and states. Recent projects include design guidelines.for Biltmore Village, North Carolina, design review training/br the counties of Hawai'i and planning for Flagstaff Arizona and Aspen, Colorado. Winter also directs the architectural team for the rehabilitation of the Colorado governor's mansion and is member of the board of directors of the National Alliance of Preservation Commissions. 4 Design Guidelines for the Landscape By Dale Jaeger. In The Alliance Review, Fall 1990; The National Alliance of Preservation Commissions Design guidelines have typically addressed buildings and have given little attention, if any, to the landscape setting. The preservation movement in recent years has moved away from this building-only orientation to a recognition of the important role a setting plays in creating and preserving historic character. A comprehensive set of design guidelines should include all aspects of the built environment, including the landscape setting, natural and man-made. To develop guidelines for the landscape one should begin with a recognition of the overall form of a setting and the arrangement of elements within it, and identify the details which characterize it. In the following article, the elements which effect design guidelines are identified and examples of each form Georgia and South Carolina cities are discussed. Overall Form and Elements within the Form—The overall form of a setting is its layout. Layouts can be formal or informal. The most typical example of a formal layout is the grid, the town plan found in most historic southern cities. An informal layout contains a curvilinear street pattern and is many times reflective of terrain. Design guidelines should identify the district's form, evaluate its importance, and make recommendations on how this form should be treated in the future. In most cases, the form of a town or district should be preserved in its original configuration. The unique town form in Aiken. South Carolina, is the framework upon which the community's built environment has evolved. Without this intact form, Aiken's historic resources would lose much of their meaning and context. The plan contains a grid street pattern with most avenues containing landscaped medians, known as parkways. A majority of the structures in the community face the parkway spaces, giving the entire community a park-like character. This grid form of streets divided by parkways has only experienced minor alteration and this has been limited to the business district. Here the parkway space has been lost to a central island which contains a double row of parking spaces. Preliminary, discussions for downtown improvements include a desire to see the parkway space either completely reconstructed or at least rebuilt to accommodate both cars and vegetation. Aiken's parkways are the community's most unique feature. Illustrations of walkway systems within the parkway spaces appear on Sanborn maps from the turn-of-the-century. This attests to the significance of the parkways, since Sanborn insurance maps typically only documented building data. The character of the 200 parkway spaces varies, and depending on the location within the community, the parkway may be curbed with lush plantings or flush with the road with sparse plantings. The individuality of each parkway is what is important. Retain the diversity and the historic character is maintained. In a similar manner to the parkways, the streetscape elements in Aiken relate to the location within the town. The public right-of-way space near the center of town is formal and is divided into distinct sections. The streetscape layout at the periphery is more informal with less defined edges. It is important in the future that the inthrmality found at the town's periphery be preserved and the formality near the town center maintained. Formal Streetscape Section n • J/ '•;,tk.<, - ....-.` Y. .`. , -- `'' . • A T Parkway Street Curb Paved Private Naik Yard Greene pace Fence' Watt Informal Streetscape Section [I b.r..4,,,,„„tt_ • Parkway Street 1 Pedestrian) Private may or may not paved or unpaved: grass mayYardYar be present gravel Green pace i Curb Fence' may or may nor ,ya;t be present Formal Streetscape Section/In formal Streetscape Section Aiken, South Carolina. Fitzgerald, Georgia, provides another example of a unique grid plan in a southern city. Founders of the city came from the Midwest and brought with them town planning traditions. The city was laid out in 1895, one mile square and divided into four wards. The two central streets included landscaped medians. Every lot within the city was accessible through an intersecting pattern of streets and alleys. In this flat south Georgia landscape, this regimented street pattern created long vistas, but recent development in Fitzgerald interrupted this pattern. In one project two blocks were assembled for commercial development and a street closed, while in another, a multi-story housing structure utilized former alley space. Both projects resulted in visual and physical impacts. The continuity of the street system was lost as views were blocked and former circulation paths hindered. Guidelines developed for Fitzgerald in 1989 emphasized preservation in town form, including the grid street system, the alleys, and parkways. 2 Details—Details specific to a district play an important role in the creation of district character. To assess the details within a landscape setting, one should consider the dominant materials, particularly vegetation, and other elements, such as street furniture, walks, drives, and enclosures. Guidelines should identify the details, not the desired approach for their treatment in the future, and also, if appropriate, provide technical information for sensitive repair. Materials— In most cases, dominant materials in a community have a direct correlation to location. Historically, shipping of materials was difficult and expensive, so local products relied on indigenous materials. In Milledgeville, Georgia, a unique material is brick and decorative ceramic and terra cotta pieces produced from local piedmont clay and made by a master craftsman, James Wilson McMillan, around the turn-of-the- century. McMillan's enterprise, known as "Milledgeville Brick Works" reportedly produced 17 million bricks per year. The community is filled with Mr. McMillan's products, including, coping, end posts, fence slots, flower urns, birdbaths, and a variety of ornamentation as well as common bricks. Bricks are found primarily in commercial and institutional building,but are also a common materials for walls and fences. One of the most interesting is a pierced-brick wall, enclosing a former home of Flannery O'Connor. This wall historically encircled the entire block which also contains the original Governor's Mansion. In contrast, Fitzgerald, Georgia, located within the sandy coastal plain, is characterized by an abundant use of concrete block. Produced locally within a 10 year period, the molded concrete block is one of Fitzgerald's most character-defining features. Known locally as "granitoid," and produced by the"Fitzgerald Granitoid Company," products included window sills, arch blocks, keystones, chimney and sidewalk tiles, sewer pipe, and porch columns. In the landscape, the block is found primarily in walls and as sidewalk paving. According to historical data, the company constructed 10 miles of the city's sidewalk surfaces utilizing hexagonal pavers. Guidelines for both Milledgeville and Fitzgerald identified these unique materials, offered an understanding of their use through historical information, and provided technical information on how these materials should be repaired or reproduced. Vegetation— Vegetation is a particularly important feature of a district. In most cases, vegetation the most abundant detail. Depending on the placement of the plant material or its inherent form, vegetation can create informal or formal settings. The Laney-Walker Historic District, a large minority neighborhood in Augusta, Georgia, has an informal landscape character. Large hardwood trees planted in random patterns line the streets. Dominant tree species include elms with their drooping habit and indigenous varieties, such as sweet gums and sycamores. The addition of Bradford pears to the district was a federally-sponsored effort to "improve"the area. Today, isolated plantings of Bradford pears stand in sharp contrast to vegetation in the remainder of the district. The pyramidal shape of the Bradford pear as well as the regularity of its planting in straight rows reinforce the foreign character of this plant material. The guideline recommended for this situation stated that the informal character of street tree plantings 3 should be maintained through the preservation of existing trees or the replanting of trees using historic or native species. Plant materials also give clues about the age of a district. Plant materials appropriate to the age of structure or district convey authenticity. Vegetation and the way it was used in the garden are a reflection of people and the time in which they lived. An easy correlation is the Victorian-era. It was a time of"fussiness" in both architecture and landscape. Building styles, such as the Queen Ann, were heavy in detail and texture. Descriptive words for Victorian landscape design are exotic, colorful, and full of variety and ornamentation. A popular plant material was the Mahonia aquifolium. Commonly known as Oregon Holly grape, the plant features spiny leaves and yellow flower clusters in the spring. It is a striking plant in the landscape, one that is appropriate to the character of turn-of-the-century architecture. Suggested plant lists are a helpful element in design guidelines. Plant materials also convey the physical location of a district and provide a method of expressing regional identity. Native varieties were always available for use in the garden. The selection of the Palmetto tree for a streetscape concept plan in Beaufort, South Carolina, addressed functional requirements and at the same time utilized a historic and native material. There was little existing vegetation in the Beaufort downtown. In an area where summer months can be oppressively hot, greenery was desired, but, space was limited. In one location the existing sidewalk was only four feet in width. The palmetto tree was recommended. Its vertical form with branching top, provided the necessary shade and green character, while at the same time it required minimal space at the pedestrian and automobile level. The palmetto reinforced the community's location. Although the palmetto is the state tree of South Carolina, it can only be found growing in nature from the coast to a point approximately 60 miles inland. Street Furniture- Street furniture can also express the age of a district. This is particularly important for guidelines in historic downtowns. Street furniture, which typically includes benches, trash receptacles, and lighting, can be re-created based on documentation or a new compatible element introduced. If a former feature, such as a historic light, can be documented and the age of buildings in the downtown district are appropriate to the character of the fixture, the recommended approach might be to duplicate the former light fixture or repair the former fixture, if it still exists. In Rome, Georgia, an "acorn-style" luminaire with a fluted metal based used in the community around the turn-of-the-century reinforced the age of the district, which was dominated by Victorian era structures. In contrast, the approach in Beaufort, South Carolina, was the introduction of a new fixture. In Beaufort the evolution of the district with buildings dating from the early 1800's to the present was expressed. A contemporary fixture made of copper was selected. Its simplistic design and quality of materials related to all periods of development. 4 Walks and Drives—The materials and design of walks and drives contribute to the character of community. In the city of Aiken, the informality of the small town environment is reinforced through its walks and drives. Many are surfaced in gravel, an important element to retain in the future for visual as well as functional reasons. Pervious surfaces in the landscape also help in storm water management. Other details of importance to consider with walks and drives include unique paving patterns, such as herringbone brick, a common historic paving pattern. Double driveway tracks of concrete are another common feature that might be lost as additional width is needed and new paving is added. Driveway tracks can many times be retained as a distinct part of the new paved surface. Enclosures—Enclosures include walls and fences in a variety of materials, heights, and design. Enclosures can be transparent or solid. The character of a community's enclosures should be analyzed and recommendations developed on how these features can be maintained in the future or how new compatible enclosures should be designed. Repairs to existing walls and fences should utilize approved preservation methods. Additions to existing historic walls should complement the historic walls through design and material. In the city of Aiken, the diversity of that community's numerous enclosures made strict rules difficult. A guideline was developed for a unique situation was recommendation on a method to perpetuate the vegetative hedge. Located on a corner lot near the center of town, ws a vegetative hedge almost eight feet high, encircling a frame dwelling with an arched entryway cut into the hedge. The hedge was deemed such an important feature that an underplanting scheme was sought. Consultation with a local county extension agent resulted in a guideline that stated, "annual thinning and shaping of the common privet, utilized in many vegetation hedges, produces suckers as a method of self- rejuvenation. Other typical hedge materials, such as abelia and holly, will need to be refurbished through replacement plantings as hedges age." Landscape settings are filled with character-defining elements. The identification and evaluation of these elements provides a basis in the development of design guidelines. Elements include the overall form, the elements within that form, and details, such as, materials, vegetation, street furniture, walks, drives, and enclosures. These landscape elements are an important foundation in the creation and perpetuation of historic character. Dale Jaeger, a Landscape Architect and Preservation Planner, has assisted in the development of design guidelines,for a number of communities throughout the southeast. Ms. Jaeger is a Principle in the.firm, Jaeger/Pyburn, which is located in Gainesville, Georgia. The.firm provides services in Historic Preservation, Landscape Architecture, Architecture and Planning. 5 . PREPARING A PROJECT FOR DESIGN REVIEW Technical Paper No. 28. ® g County Tandmarks and Heritage Program,King County Office of Cultural Resources 506 Second Avenue,Suite 200,Seattle,WA 98104-2307(206)296-7580, 1-800-325-6165 V/TDD Any major restoration or changes of a significant feature of a designated King County Landmark property requires a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA),which is granted through a design review process. This paper explains the purpose of design review,and offers suggestions for planning a restoration or rehabilitation project that will require a COA. You are encouraged to contact Historic Preservation Program staff early in your project planning, since they may be able to help you identify resources and information which will help you plan your project. Purpose of Design Review To be designated as a King County Landmark,a property must have "integrity." This means that the property retains the physical features that contribute to its historic significance. These features,which are called the "character-defining features," are unique for each property,and may include the overall scale of a building, details such as front porches or windows, or even the plantings and open space around a group of buildings. The purpose of design review is to ensure that any project affecting a Landmark property has been planned to protect the integrity—or historic character—of the property. Design Guidelines The King County Landmarks and Heritage Commission uses the Secretary of Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Rehabilitation to guide its design review process. Because the Guidelines will be used to review a project, it is a good idea to consult them before you begin planning a project. Copies of the Guidelines are available from the Historic Preservation Program. Because each historic property is unique,the Guidelines prioritize restoration and rehabilitation activities rather than providing a specific list of"do's and don'ts." The priorities outlined in the Guidelines are summarized below: 1. Identify,Retain and Preserve Identify which materials and features define the character of the property and must be retained in the process of rehabilitation work. These character-defining features are noted in the final Design Review Page 2 designation report. 2. Protect and Maintain Extending the life of the historic building materials through timely and appropriate maintenance . is always a priority. Protecting the historic materials typically helps reduce the need for more extensive repairs in the future. It is also important to consider the protection of historic features during a rehabilitation project. For example, if your project involves cleaning a roof,choose a gentle cleaning method that does not damage the historic roofing material. 3. Repair When.character-defining features and materials are deteriorated,repair is the first possibility to consider. Repair also includes the limited replacement of deteriorated or missing parts when there are surviving prototypes. For example, if shingles are missing from a roof, new shingles that match the originals should be installed to fill the gaps. 4. Replacement When a character-defining feature is too deteriorated or damaged to repair, "in-kind" replacement (using the same design and materials) is the preferred option. If replacement in-kind is not technically or economically feasible,use of a compatible substitute material may be considered. For example,a carved stone porch rail might be replicated with cast stone if the original stone was no longer available. 5. Design for Missing Historic Features When an important architectural feature is missing,reconstructing the element(based on documentation of the original design)is preferred. However, if documentation is unavailable, a second option for the replacement feature is a new design which is compatible with the remaining historic features of the property. 6. Alterations/Additions to Historic Buildings The construction of a new addition to a landmark buildings or within the boundaries of a landmark site should be considered only after determining that the need for the space can not be met by altering secondary(i.e. non-character defining) spaces. If a new addition is required, its design should be compatible in scale and materials with the existing historic building. Preparing A Project For Design Review The Design Review Committee uses the guidelines outlined above to determine whether a proposed project is appropriate for the landmark property. To prepare an application for design review,you will need to be able to explain the scope of the project, the present condition of the Design Review Page 3 feature(s) involved,the original appearance of the feature,and how the guidelines were used to plan the project. The following section outlines some questions you should consider and some information to gather when preparing a project for design review. 1. Define the Scope of the Project What parts of the building(s)or site does the project involve?How do these elements relate to the other parts of the landmark property. For example, does the project involve part of the property visible from a public road? Enlarge photographs or prepare drawings (such as a site plan)which illustrate the extent of the project area. 2. Document the Present Condition • What is the present condition of the part(s) of the property affected by the proposal? Are the building features in good repair,deteriorated, or missing?Take photographs of the features or gather other information to document the condition. 3. Describe the Historic Appearance What did the property(building and site)look like originally? What changes, if any,have been made over time? Gather photographs or other materials illustrating the historic appearance of the property and identify any changes over time. The landmark registration form,prepared prior to the designation of the property, may discuss the property's historic appearance. Also, consult the King County Historic Preservation Program to find out if there are historic photographs of your property on file or where photographs might be located. Plans,maps,and interviews may also help document the original appearance. Physical examination of the property,such as paint color testing,can also yield important information. For example looking at other local buildings of a similar date,material,and style may also provide insight about a building's original appearance. Architectural style guides or historic books of architectural plans may be another source of information. 4. Evaluate Alternatives and Determine Most Appropriate Action. Once you have completed the steps discussed above,use the information to evaluate alternatives recommended in the Guidelines. For example, if you are restoring a porch that has been removed from the building,you will be designing for a missing feature(Guideline 5 above). So, you will need to use photographs or original plans to document the original appearance of the porch and use this information to design the replacement porch. If historic documentation is not available, you will need to design a new porch that is compatible with the historic character of the building. Design Review Page 4 Considerations in the Design Review Process While retaining or restoring a Landmark's historic appearance is always a priority,the design review process acknowledges that changes are often needed to extend the life of the property. In _ evaluating proposed alterations to historic properties,the Landmarks and Heritage Commission considers a number of factors. These include: • the extent of impact on the historic structures, • the reasonableness of the alteration in light of other alternatives available, • the extent alteration is necessary to meet the requirements of law, and • the extent alteration is necessary to achieve a reasonable economic return. Gathering information which helps answer these questions will enable you to work with the Design Review Committee to identify a restoration or rehabilitation strategy which preserves the historic nature of the property while ensuring its continued use. For more information about preparing applications for design review, contact the Design Review Coordinator at 296-8682. Revised 6/99 Design Guideline..' AND HOW MANY SETS OF GUIDELINES DOES THIS MAKE? By:Nancy Jane Baker Lately there has been a rash of neighborhoods in Memphis wanting to become Landmarks Districts (historically designated areas).After one partic- ularly long neighborhood design guidelines meeting, a friend asked me why I s - didn't use one set of guidelines for all districts (other cities are doing it). The massing, scale, setback, etc. all have to be compatible with the surrounding area and that should be enough to maintain the nuances of that neighbor- • • hood's character, right? Several of our districts' design guidelines looked N\ pretty much the same, so why go to all of the effort to create different sets for different districts? Because, I answered, by creating different guidelines for different districts, each neighborhood has a better chance of retaining what makes it tick-that quality of life thing we are all talking about. It also answers that perennial question "What will make us different from any of the existing districts? We don't want to look like they do!" The answer is obvious-"Let's create your neighborhood's guidelines so that what is important to you in your neighbor- hood is protected and preserved." Yes, it takes time, and yes, staff will pull their hair out keeping up with the • nuances of each district's guidelines, but it is important. The base set of guidelines will almost always have the same basic elements. The details will be different, however, reflecting how the residents see their neighborhood A GAe PAT-FC\I and what they value. These unique pieces and parts of the guidelines and how they work together are what protect the neighborhood's real character. Character, according to Webster's, is defined as a"distinctive trait", and char- acter is what makes each district different. After all, the creativity, style, and connectivity that are fundamental to character are what we need to preserve and protect. Architecture is the base line that holds these fundamentals together and provides the canvas from and into which the neighborhood's character evolves. But what really is the bottom line for creating different guidelines for different districts? Neighborhood buy-in. The residents have a very important part in CNPNGE IN FIE►GNT OR SEVAGK the process of creating--the verbal part—they explain the why, what, and where that are so important to the makeup of the whole district. Resident involvement in developing design guidelines is crucial. The discussion that Rhythm and Design Guidelines occurs in the neighborhood between each design guidelines writing session stirs up interest and generates new responses for what can be done to fix a Source:The Salem Handbook:A Renovation Guide given problem. Yes, it takes time, and yes, as the facilitator you spend a lot for Homeowners of time rehashing items that you have already covered, but it allows the TAR May/June 2003 17 Design Guidelines neighborhood to feel included and comfortable with the guidelines. The residents must be a part of the process not just at the inception of a dis- trict, but at anytime that the guidelines change. After all, I am not in the business of saving every old house,just those that have a body of peo- ple who feel that the old houses are worth saving. Landmarks designa- tion is a tool for neighborhoods to use in helping themselves be a better place. Nancy Jane Baker is Manager of the Memphis, Tennessee Landmarks Commission Historic Preservation Development Council ;. An affiliate of the y'` • National Housing & Rehabilitation Association NEW HPDC Web Site! The Historic Preservation Development Council is pleased to announce that we have upgraded our web site -- at http:llwww.housingonline.com/hpdc/index.htm -- to include more information than ever before on the federal historic rehabilitation tax credit pro- gram and HPDC's activities. We've added information that first-time, and repeat, users of the historic rehabilitation tax credit pro- gram will find useful, including all the necessary applications, forms, guidelines, and background information and advice. Our Resources section is broken down into the following sections: * What Is the Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit? * State Historic Preservation Office Information * Rules and Regulations * State Economic Impact Reports * Legislation/Public Laws * Preservation Links A separate section of our web site has been reserved to update tax credit professionals, preserva- tionists, and others, on the activities of our new Secretary Standards Working Group. Regardless of whether you're an active user of the historic rehabilitation tax credit, or want to learn more, we encourage you to use the vast repository of information that we have collected. 18 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Cr7 C] H O z Identification and Designation Questions and Answers About Historic Properties Survey By Patricia L. Parker,.for The National Park Service, 1987 1. What is a historic properties survey? A historic properties survey is a study designed to identify and evaluate properties in an area—a community, a neighborhood, a rural area, the area of a proposed land-use project—to determine whether they may be of historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance. 2. What do you mean by "historic properties?" The national historic preservation program deals with the full range of properties significant in American history, prehistory, architecture, engineering, archaeology, and culture, including properties significant to the whole nation, those significant to a particular State or region, and those significant at the local level. "Historic property" is the shorthand term for all these kinds of properties. 3. Why do a survey? Perhaps the foremost reason—as will be discussed below—is to know where historic properties are so that their protection and improvement can be considered in planning new projects and use of the land. A second reason is to increase public understanding of, and interest in, an area's history and historic properties, through publication or other use of the information in the survey itself. A third reason is to identify properties whose owners may be eligible for various kinds of Federal, State, and local assistance if they want to restore, preserve, or rehabilitate them. A fourth reason is to provide a data base for research in history or prehistory. 4. What information does a survey produce? The survey will produce written reports, files or photographs, perhaps videotapes or audio tapes, maps showing areas surveyed at different levels of intensity, drawings, plans, and bibliographic information on background data. Based on the data, and an evaluation of the properties recorded, an organized inventory can be produced listing properties that have been evaluated and found to be historic, together with a list of properties found not to be historic. 5. What do you mean by"different levels of intensity?" Two general levels of survey coverage are usually recognized. An intensive survey is one in which the entire area is inspected so closely that, within a reasonable margin of error, it can be assumed that all historic properties of all kinds have been found. A reconnaissance survey is a"once over lightly" inspection that provides a general idea of the kinds of historic properties that may be present, and perhaps documents a few in detail,but does not necessarily identify them all. For example, a reconnaissance survey 1 might reveal that there are historic commercial buildings within the survey area and provide a few examples. An intensive survey of the same area would reveal exactly how many historic commercial buildings there were in the survey area. There are also "different levels of intensity" in the amount of information gathered about each property identified in the survey. "National Register Level of Documentation" means there is sufficient information to nominate the property to the National Register of Historic Places. "A Minimum Level of Documentation" means that there is enough information about a property to make an initial evaluation of its significance,but not enough information to put together a National Register nomination. 6. Are there also different kinds of surveys? Yes. The kind of survey you do depends on the kinds of properties you have to deal with, and the purposes you're trying to serve. Some examples are: • "Predictive" survey, usually applied to large areas (a whole community, a large rural area), in which predictions are made about where historic properties of different kinds will be found, based on background research, and then these predictions are tested through the inspection of sample blocks or tracts of land. • "Windshield" survey, which means literally driving the streets or roads, looking for buildings, structures, or groups of buildings and structures that may be historic. • Intensive architectural survey, which means a very detailed survey,but one that concentrates only on standing buildings and structures. • Thematic survey, which means a detailed survey concentrating on specific property types (e.g. apartment buildings, school houses). • Intensive archaeological survey, which concentrates on identifying archaeological sites and may involve detailed inspection of land surfaces coupled with small-scale excavations to find buried sites. • Oral historical survey, which involves the extensive use of interviews with people who are knowledgeable about local history or about the cultural patterns (e.g. the traditions of an ethnic neighborhood) that may give significance to an area. There are other kinds of surveys as well, and all of the above can be combined in different ways, depending on the purpose of the survey and what background research tells you about the kinds of historic properties that are likely to be present. 7. What do you mean by"background research?" It is a very bad idea to start looking for historical properties without first developing a good understanding of the area's history, prehistory, traditional and contemporary land use patterns and social groups, and so on. Lacking such understanding, you may miss significant properties, or evaluate properties incorrectly, or literally not know what you're looking at. Every good survey begins with a background study of written sources on the 2 area—not only published local histories, but sources of primary data such as tax maps, unpublished journals and historical, archaeological, or ethnographic data held by universities, colleges, museums, historical or archaeological societies, and other institutions. It is usually appropriate to continue such research as the field survey itself gets underway, because the field survey is likely to raise questions that can be answered only through further background research. 8. How does the purpose of the survey affect how it is done? If you are undertaking a survey in advance of a project that will result in demolition of buildings and disturbance of the land, you will probably want to try to identify all the historic properties that may be affected, so that they can be considered in planning and, if possible, preserved. If the project involves only the rehabilitation of existing buildings, however, you may not need to identify archaeological sites, and may need a less intensive survey of buildings and structures than would be necessary if demolition were likely. If your survey is carried out as a part of a long-term program of community planning or land-use planning, you may find it best to begin with background research and a predictive survey, providing a basis for more detailed reconnaissance and intensive surveys later on, as planning proceeds. If your purpose is research, you may want to focus on a particular kind of historic property, representing a particular period, style of construction, or type of land-use. 9. What sorts of records should be kept regarding the methods used in the survey? It is very important to maintain records about what kind of survey you did, and about any variations there may have been in the methods used in different parts of the area surveyed. If such records are not kept, future users of the survey results may assume that a given area was, for example, subjected to an intensive survey when in fact it was given only reconnaissance, or that it was subjected to architectural survey when only archaeological sites were sought. If the survey results are misinterpreted in this way in connection with planning a construction or land-use project, historic properties can be unnecessarily destroyed. On the other hand, if good records are not kept, future users may not be able to figure out which areas have and have not been surveyed, and may spend unnecessary time and money on further survey. 10. How can the public participate in surveys? Surveys should be designed and overseen by experienced people, generally with professional training in history, archaeology, architectural history and other pertinent fields, or at least in consultation with such people. Actual background research and field survey, however, can be carried out by volunteers, students, community groups, and other members of the public interested in participating. Organizations of survey data, or of systems and standards for the maintenance of such data, should be supervised by professionals. 3 11. How are surveys funded? Funds may be available from your State Historic Preservation Officer(SHPO). The National Park Service provides grants-in-aid for surveys from the Historic Preservation Fund, which can be subgranted by SHPO's to local governments and others to carry out survey projects. Some States have other funding for survey work that they can make available. Some States and local governments require land developers to pay for surveys in advance of their development projects, and payment for such surveys is routinely required when a development project is conducted, assisted, or licensed by a Federal agency. Of course, local funding, private funding, and funds from agencies and groups that provide grants for research projects in history, architecture, archaeology, and other fields can be used. 12. How are the results of survey used in local planning? One of the most important ways to use information from a survey is in local land-use and development planning. The following are a few of the ways that survey information can be integrated into such planning. Comprehensive planning: Many States require that local governments develop comprehensive plans to guide their growth and development, and assist them in developing such plans. Some local governments have developed or are developing general plans without State direction. Among the basic functions of a general plan is to identify opportunities for and constraints on development. Historic properties may present both opportunities and constraints—opportunities for rehabilitation, for enhancing the quality of life, for public participation, and constraints on development that would destroy them or be insensitive to their important qualities. Based on survey data, areas within a community know or thought to contain historic properties can be identified in comprehensive plans, and the kinds of opportunities and constraints associated with each property or type of property can be identified. This information can then be factored into future decisions about specific development and land use projects. Zoning: It is vital to try to minimize conflict between a community's historic preservation system and its zoning system. Otherwise, zoning within historic districts or in areas where historic properties exist may permit uses that will destroy or diminish their historical, architectural, or archaeological values. Where permitted by local and State law, survey data can be used to define a historic preservation zoning classification. If this is not possible, a historic preservation overlay can be created on the basis of survey data. When superimposed on zoning maps, the overlay identifies areas in which architectural design or modification of existing structures or land must be subjected to historic preservation review. Ordinances: By demonstrating the fact that historic properties exist within a community, the results of a survey can be used to convince local lawmakers of the need for various kinds of protective ordinances. Moreover, survey data can be used to "fine-tune" local ordinances to ensure that they are effective and reasonable. For example, if the survey 4 shows that one part of the community contains historic buildings but no archaeological sites, while another contains archaeological sites but no historic structures, an ordinance or ordinances might require review of the design of new buildings and additions in the first area and archaeological survey and data recovery in advance of land disturbance in the other,but would not need to require both activities in both areas. Influence on Federal Undertakings: Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act requires that Federal agencies take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties. Section 106 requires review of a wide range of activities, including activities carried out by local governments using Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) funds. Local survey data can be used to ensure that a Federal agency (or a local government using CDBG funds) that plans to undertake, assist, or permit a project is aware that historic properties are (or are not) in the vicinity of the project area, so that they can be taken into account. This saves the Federal agency the trouble of identifying and evaluating the properties itself, so it may help move the project move forward. On the other hand, it puts the agency on early notice that it must carry out its responsibilities under Section 106, so it increases the chance that the historic properties involved will be taken into consideration. 13. What if the survey isn't complete? A survey does not need to be complete to be useful. A survey that has covered only part of a community will be useful to planning in those areas that have been covered, even if it is not helpful elsewhere. A survey that has addressed only standing structures and districts will be useful in deciding where design review of additions or demolitions should be required, even though it cannot be used to determine where archaeological surveys and data recovery should or should not be required. Ideally, a survey is conducted in stages of greater and greater detail and intensity. That is, initial work may involve only background research and small-scale field reconnaissance, such as a"windshield" survey (driving through a neighborhood or area, briefly recording apparently significant buildings), or a"spot-check" of areas thought to be archaeologically important. Subsequent stages may involve more intensive survey of sample neighborhoods, streets, or pieces of land. Ultimately, very detailed intensive surveys may be conducted of areas where previous work indicates that particular kinds of properties are likely to exist, with fieldwork keyed to the kinds of properties expected (for example, archaeological sites as opposed to standing structures). At each stage in such a phased survey, the information created can be useful to planning. Early background research and reconnaissance can at least identify broad areas in which historic properties of different kinds are likely to occur, alerting local officials that developers should be required to conduct more detailed surveys of area they propose to modify, so that they can consider historic properties in development planning. As more detailed information becomes available, of course, more detailed input can be provided to planning decisions. Officials will need to require fewer surveys by developers, and will 5 be able to provide developers with more information, earlier, to guide them in their planning. 14. Are there standard forms and methods used in survey? Yes, all States have standard recording forms, and many have guidelines for completing survey work. These can be obtained from your State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), who can also provide valuable advice about methods to use, sources of background data, and professionals in various preservation-related fields who might be consulted. If you do not know who your SHPO is, you can find out, or obtain a current listing of all SHPO's by contacting: National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers Suite 342, Hall of the States 444 North Capitol Street NW Washington, D.C. 20001-1512 15. Are there national guidelines for survey work? Yes. These are necessarily less detailed and specific than those that may be available from SHPO's, but are particularly important to consult if you are conducting survey work as part of your participation in the national historic preservation program (for example, in preparing nominations of properties to the National Register of Historic Places), or in conjunction with a project that uses Federal funds or needs a Federal permit or license. Some basic guidelines are listed below. • The Secretary of the Interior's "Standards and Guidelines for Identification" (Federal Register, September 29, 1983, Vol. 48, No. 190, p. 44720) • The Secretary of the Interior's "Standards and Guidelines for Evaluation" (Federal Register, September 29, 1983,Vol. 48, No. 190, p. 44723) • Guidelines for Local Surveys:A Basis for Preservation Planning, National Register Bulletin 24; National Park Service, 1986. (For information on these publications and other related materials, please contact the National Park Service, www.nps.gov.) 6 National Register Historic District / Local Historic District: There is a Difference "A National Register District Identifies; A Local District Protects" State Historic Preservation Office, Division of Archives and History, North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources. 1999 National Register District Local Historic District A National Register historic district is a historic A local historic district is a district designated by district that is listed in the National Register of local ordinance and falls under the jurisdiction of a Historic Places. The National Register is our local preservation review commission. A local country's official list of historic places worthy of historic district is generally"overlaid"on existing preservation. It includes individual buildings, zoning classifications in a community; therefore,a structures,sites,and objects as well as historic local district commission deals only with the districts that are historically,architecturally,or appearance of the district,not with the uses to archaeologically significant. which properties in the district are put. National Register listing recognizes the According to the 1980 Georgia Historic significance of properties and districts. By doing Preservation Act which makes such local so,it identifies significant historic resources in a designations possible,a local historic district is a community. Boundaries of National Register "geographically definable area, urban or rural, districts are tightly drawn to encompass only which contains structures,sites,and/or works of art concentrated areas of historic buildings. which have special historical or aesthetic interest or Information compiled to nominate a historic district value;represent one or more periods or styles of can be used in a variety planning and development architecture typical of one or more eras in the activities. National Register listing also makes history of the municipality,county,state,or region; available specific preservation incentives and and cause that area to constitute a visibly provides a limited degree of protection from the perceptible section of the community. effects of federally funded,licensed,or permitted activities. The National Register is maintained by the U.S. The designation of a local district protects the Department of the Interior. In Georgia,the significant properties and historic character of the National Register program is administered by the district. It provides communities with means to Historic Preservation Division of the Department of make sure that growth,development,and change Natural Resources. Districts and other properties takes place in ways that respect important are listed in the National Register through a 17-step architectural,historical and environmental process that involves identification, characteristics. Local designation encourages documentation,and evaluation. National Register sensitive development in the district and historic districts most commonly encompass central discourages unsympathetic changes from occurring. business districts,residential neighborhoods, This happens through a process called design industrial areas,rural areas,and occasionally,entire review,whereby the preservation commission communities. approves major changes that are planned for the district and issues Certificates of Appropriateness which allow the proposed changes to take place. 1 National Register District Local Historic District Identifies significant properties and districts Protects a community's historic properties for general planning purposes. and areas through a design review process. Analyzes and assesses the historic character Protects the historic character and quality of and quality of the district. the district with specific design controls. Designates historic areas based on uniform Designates historic areas on the basis of national criteria and procedures. local criteria and local procedures. Sets district boundaries tightly,based on the Sets district boundaries based on the actual distribution pattern of intact historic distribution pattern of historic resources plus properties in the area. other preservation and community planning considerations. Makes available specific federal tax incentives for preservation purposes. Provides no tax incentives for preservation purposes unless such are provided by tax Provides a limited degree of protection from law. the effects of federally assisted undertakings. Provides no additional protection from the effects of federally assisted undertakings. Qualifies property owners for federal and state grants for preservation purposes,when Does not qualify property owners for federal funds are available. or state grants for preservation purposes. Does not restrict the use of disposition of Does not restrict the use to which property is property or obligate private property owners put in the district or require property owners in any way. to make improvements to their property. Does not require conformance to design Requires local commission review and guidelines or preservation standards when approval,based on conformance to local property is rehabilitated unless specific design guidelines,before building permit is preservation incentives (tax credits, grants) issued to any"material changes" in are involved. appearance to the district. Does not affect state and local government Does not affect federal, state, or local activities. government activities. Does not prevent the demolition of historic Provides for review of proposed demolitions buildings and structures within designated within designated areas;may prevent or areas. delay proposed demolitions for specific time periods to allow for preservation alternatives. 2 Districts in Context National Register and locally designated historic districts can be used independently or together to help preserve a community's historic resources. For example, the National Register program might be used as a convenient and credible way to identify a community's historic resources, followed by a local district designation which would further protect and enhance those historic resources. Conversely, a local survey done to establish a local historic district might also be used as the basis for a National Register district, which would afford additional preservation incentives, including rehabilitation tax credits, to properties protected in the local district. Local district designation might be used to protect, selectively, portions of National Register districts considered especially significant to a community or subject to particularly strong development pressures. Local designation also might be afforded to an area larger than a National Register district to provide an even greater degree of protection to the historic resources within the National Register district. Some community's preservation needs may be met entirely with either a locally designated district or a National Register district; there are many examples in Georgia of both situations. Other communities may believe that package deal involving both types of districts works best. The point to remember is that local districts and National Register districts are different,but complementary, and can work effectively by themselves or together in meeting a community's historic preservation needs. • April/May 1999 The Standards ofSurveying �as �.':' e- ; { ,--yo Usingthe Secreta ofthe Interiors Standards -� - �: w � _ems �- for Identification in conducting a local survey. .- � ' ¢ , _ by Ken Kocher -�'' �� A historic resource survey is the most low the standards --. basic tool in preservation. In fact, the but that the survey first responsibility listed for State was finished and then Historic Preservation Officers in the shelved. Historic " National Historic Preservation Act(as resource surveys ` „ amended) is to, "in cooperation with should always be a -- ' Federal and State agencies, local gov- work-in-progress '' 7 p .::.� f Vernacular house type ernments,and private organizations and rather that a static individuals, direct and conduct a corn- one-time project. m absent from most state survey r ! • forms. The result is that the prehensive statewide survey of historic. Beaong die Se }y's ,.4 --� survey properties." This mandate to survey Standards in mind, 3`" z... ` 3 o s dd may wherelonger the acknowledges the truth in the old adage let us look at some �` ram A .o "� that.one must know what one has before of the ways that "identification of historic avga — one can plan how best to use it. commissions can .._ ,." ----R�' +• properties is undertaken to the and do continue to Eck of roof ng material degree required to make deci- To guide state and local governments to use their local sur- . and der type. sions." To correct this situa- tion, many commissions have complete these mandated survey activi- veys. undertaken steps to augment their sur- ,ties,the Secretary of the Interior created the Standards for Identification. These Most commissions have surveys of their veys. standards are similar to the more widely local historic districts. Such surveys Madison, Georgia, for example, experi- known Standards for the Rehabilitation may have been part of an earlier enced a sharp increase in design review of Historic Buildings in that they pro- National Register nomination, per- applications for the construction of new vide a procedural baseline for a specific formed by the state government as part fences. The district design guidelines preservation activity. They are as fol- of its survey activities, completed by stipulated that new fences should be lows: local volunteers,or conducted by a pri- consistent in both design and placement vate preservation consultant. These sur- Standard L Identification of historic with historic examples in the surround- veys are usually performed using the • properties is undertaken to the degree forms and methodology of the State ing neighborhood. Within the district, required to make decisions. Historic Preservation Office's (SHPO) fence design often varied depending • Standard IL Results of identification survey program- The primary aim of upon the age of the property. To supple- activities are integrated into the preser- state survey programs is to gather infor- meat their design guidelines, the corn- oration relevant to their federal reson- mission conducted a fence survey of the vation planning process. p historic district. The survey noted fence sibilities. Therefore, state surveys are materials, Standard III. Identification activities geared primarily toward determining age, design, height, and include explicit procedures for record- National Register eligibility of the placement. For each fence application, keepingand information distribution. - the commission now refers to both their resources in question guidelines and their fence survey to How does your local historic preserva- Surveys conducted using the SHPOs evaluate a fence's compatibility for a ton commission's survey measure up to format are well suited for local district particular property's age and style. these standards? Gauged by the stan- designation. However,while the survey dards noted above, many local surveys data can also be useful to commissions This type of additional survey informa- fall short of optimum. The problem is for design review,some facts more rele- ton generally does not require special not that the original surveydid not fol- training to gather,so the task can be per- vast for design review are routinely Continued on page 14 5 • The ALLIANCE REVIEW Continued from page 5 HI 'armed by the commission,volunteers, logical reason to the owner based on properties. A slide presentation allows or interns at little or no cost. Other known facts, as well as establishes commissioners and the public alike to examples of additional information sound legal standing for the decision. view the property in question as well as - include: setback depths, lot coverage, adjacent properties and properties with signage size and placement, entry walk The third and final standard,that"iden- similar characteristics. In Natchez, placement, driveway placements,park- tification activities include explicit pro- Mississippi, a Certified Local ing size and placement, and paving cedures for record-keeping and infor- Government grant from the SHPO is materials. The addition of these nontra- mation distribution," is where most being used to digitally photograph ditional survey items allows a historic commissions will find an opportunity to properties in all local districts. The resource survey to achieve the degree of improve the usefulness of their surveys. planning department will use these information necessary for a commission Traditionally, surveys have been images to advise property owners who to make informed decisions. recorded on archival paper and with are planning projects and to prepare black and white photographs. As tech- commissioner information packets for Making decisions in this manner means nologies evolve, opportunities emerge design review. These digital records commissions must be mindful of for more efficient use of survey infor- will also be shared with Historic Standard II: "Results of identification nation. Natchez Foundation, Main Street activities are integrated into the preset-- Natchez, the Chamber of Commerce, vation.planning process." Survey data Mississippi Department of Archives provides baseline information for ti. and History,and the National Park design review, and commissions Service. should routinely refer to surveys , r' �. . during the design review process. t �t j An up-to-date and well used sur- In New Orleans, Louisiana, the vey can be one of the most flexible Historic District Landmarks • - it tools available to a historic preser- Commission bases its decisions,in . , .. vation commission. The Secretary part,on the level of significance ofz �i� �3 of the Interior's Standard for property determined from survey - —"— Identification is a commission's information. The use of survey " t #; blueprint for maintaining a useful 1 , information in the discussion of �_„Y � „„• survey Adding needed survey design review applications and Eranipzz of fencing in a neic&¢ntial neighborhood information, citing survey recording this refeieuce in the offi- specifics in design review, and cial minutes counters any claim pursuing effective record-keeping that commission decisions are based In the last ten years computer database alternatives will allow a commission to merely on personal tastes. programs have become much more achieve its aims in an informed, effi- user-friendly and affordable. Storing cient,and legally defensible manner. To further illustrate this point, take a all survey information in a database can hypothetical application to add an make the information far more usable. Ken Kocher is a preservation consul- asymmetric element to the facade of Including application information with- tant with Piedmont Preservation and Greek Revival style house. Those in the database also allows commis- has worked in the Mississippi and familiar with preservation principles sions to reference similar properties and. Louisiana CLG Programs. He can be recognize this as inappropriate, but it former decisions when considering pro- reached at klkocher@mindspring..com. may seem perfectly reasonable to the posed projects - a valuable source of owner. If such a proposal were denied information as commissioners and staff using terms such as"that wouldn't look change. Eventually the database can be right," the perception is that personal imported into a city, county, or state taste is governing the decision. Global Information System (GIS) and However, referencing the survey data, integrated more fully into the larger the commission should note that the planning process. house is an identified Greek Revival dwelling-a style which is noted for its A survey's photographic record is also symmetry - and such a change would vital during design review. Some corn- disrupt the symmetry of the facade. missions have opted to augment their :herefore, the commission provides a files with color slides of all designated 14 • April/May 1999 y :' : ;,, ' tkr—' X '.G� r / , r Cultural Resource Surveys Documenting Your Community's Character by Meredith Bzdak A carefully prepared cultural resource survey is essential to a should be one of the first tasks undertaken by a local com- historic preservation commission. These catalogues that dos- mission once the commission has been established by ordi- ument the historic buildings,sites,and objects within a corn- nance and has secured a strong foundation of civic support. munity serve a number of purposes. In general,they help a Ideally, a survey is.best prepared by an outside consultant commission to better understand the historic character of who brings no preconceived notions of the community's his- their community,but more specifically,they aid the commis- tory or personal preferences regarding local resources to the sion in determining which resources are a preservation prior- study. The consultant should work with, and be guided by, ity and why. the commission or a subcommittee of the commission, as members can offer input as to the goals of the community and The primary goal of any cultural resource survey is to provide serve as an important liaison with owners and residents. a database for integrating survey information into the historic 1 preservation element of a municipal master plan and to eval- While it makes sense to hire an outside consultant to conduct nate resources for the purpose of identification, evaluation, your survey, limited funds may frequently necessitate that and designation of locally significant sites and districts. A commission members carry out survey duties themselves. In survey functions as one component in the evaluation of sites this instance,careful planning is key to the successful corn- considered for nomination to the National Registers of pletion of the survey. Prior to commencing fieldwork activi- Historic Places,or sites undergoing environmental review. It ties, commission members should take time to thoroughly aids in state, county, and municipal planning efforts, and familiarize themselves with the physical geography of the should serve as the basis for decisions made by the local his- area to be studied,the history of the area, and the types of . ' y n:. toric preservation coin- resources that might be encountered. If the commission _ :�'"`, :R, "'> • mission. Commissions includes an architect or architectural historian,consider hold- *„ ... -{. should rely on their cul- ing a special meeting where those members can conduct a zs .,t. tural resource surveys review of architectural styles and terminology. Set a reason- „- lic••1''• s ,1 f 4.* . to help them make deci- able schedule for the survey,and carry out fieldwork in teams ; . I it.`�'Ca,L ' -,:k -=-4 sions, and to help of two for reasons of economy and safety. You may even . �3 1 .�. ss�; C ensure that the deci- want- to divide your commission into two teams, with one t� ;yt- sions they make are fair responsible for historic research and the other for fieldwork. ' T D=>:.n(t f- ::;` and reasonable and not Just be certain that you set aside time for the two teams to . ��ti 4 i'°° `•_"•e subject. to personal meet and share information. Above all, look to your State tF ' 2s' "-� 6 4 z ,? whim. The survey can Historic Preservation Office for guidance in survey method- , 14)- -- t ;- .' ` :-q-'�' also be used to help pro- ology and in understanding and interpreting the National ,' "Y, <- mote local awareness of Register criteria. - ' ? .':/*' ,,, a community's cultural '1• w resources,. and to In determining which structures,sites, and objects to survey, 'i` tf? ' '` gip'' encourage their protec- most communities opt to evalnat" all properties considered Signags is the Bouani Historic iron and preservation. by the National Register of Historic Places to be"historic"— The preparation of a in other words, all. resources over fifty years of. age. Distnct,Athens, GAcultural resource survey Exception is often made for later structures of special archi- 3 The ALLIANCE REVIEW The survey report should include an nent municipal offices (including those I . introduction summarizing the results, of the Mayor,planning board,and zon- - an explanation of the survey methodol- ing board), local libraries, and local Q. ogy, an outline of the criteria used in schools. A thorough, well-researched _ evaluating properties, historical and survey can be one of the best public AIL"'== , architectural narratives, a bibliography, relations tools a commussion can have! '", survey forms, maps_(historic and con- ! Aim),l .k. a temporary) and a list of recommends- - :.T �•�: . lions detailing which properties,objects Meredith Ames Bzdak -- and districts are considered to be eligi- Board of Directors,NAPC Places the National Register of Historic Preserving New Jersey ;. Surveys can be costly projects to under- .. tectural or historical merit. Although take, particularly when your commis- Come to the main focus of most cultural resource sion opts to hire a consultant to carry surveys is usually the built environ- out the majority of the work involved. p. merit, communities are increasingly It is possible to find financial help, 1 .1 s�1.rgh turning their attention to the documen- however,matching grants are available tation of archaeological resources. It is each year through the Certified Local for the also important to remember that your Government (CLG) program admitlis- town may have resources such as tered by your State Historic Second Biannual bridges,monuments,and roadways that Preservation Office (SHPO). You should be recorded and evaluated for should also investigate the possibility of NAPC Forum their historic significance and the role other, more local grants, such as those that they have played in the town's his- that are sometimes found through coun- August 4-6, 2000 tray. ty cultural and heritage or planning V agencies. held at the Nhe survey report is usually a two-part • document consisting of a reconnais- If your commission plans to undertake a Wegtin William Penn sane-level inventory and an intensive- survey independent of a consultant,be level evaluation. The reconnaissance- sure to take advantage of the wealth of Pitis�urg�, Pennsylvania level inventory usually includes,at min- printed information that your SHPO can imum,a brief description of each build- provide. Another source of information ing or structure, approximate dates of is a new online guide to the preparation Witness Pittsburgh'a urban construction, a map,a photograph, and of historic resource surveys that was a preliminary evaluation of the proper- recently established through the restoration as this evolving ty's National Register eligibility. The University of Houston Center for city serves as the backdrop for intensive-level portion of the survey is a Historic Architecture. This guide, more in-depth examination of the which was made possible in part Fbrum 2000: a gathering of resources identified during the recon- through funding provided by the innovative tl,inbera aspiring naissance-level work as having a high National Park Service (NPS) and the potential for eligibility. The main pur- National Center for Preservation to expand preservation efforts pose of the intensive-level survey is to Technology and Training(NCPTI),can in the next inillenium. then evaluate those properties further be accessed at www arch.uh.edu/sur- and make definitive recommendations w " as to their eligibility The intensive- f 7 level survey typically involves detailed 1. It is important to remember that a cut ' • s r s #','� '� background research using historic toast resource survey is a living docu `" I t maps, photographs, and sec- 1 ,1 . i'` e> y 4 t p tip primary meat;and that it should be revised on a Ii, d ondary sources,deeds,inventories,and � ' N regular hams as changes in the environ- :� � k, oral interviews. Properties may be went are made or additional informa- ' 'L evaluated individually,or for their pos- iron is uncovered.Be sure to make your + ° -ible contribution to a historic district or . � survey widely available to the public, ��,�_;� „,�,�_. .'•-„ �: , �,��,,:i�e etscape• and distribute the document to all perti- 4 • Planning • SURVEYING FOR SUCCESS r Vanessa Bernstein, Planning staff, Forsyth County, Georgia Drane Wilkinson, NAPC Program Coordinator Despite widespread acknowledgment that a local historic resources survey is fundamen- tal to a successful local preservation program, an alarming number of commissions rely on surveys that are either out of date or incomplete. Lack of a survey may also deter efforts to designate and protect new districts. After the resource is threatened, however, is usually too late to survey and designate. Surveys are often allowed to become out of date or are not done in areas not currently considered for designation for a variety of reasons. Often it is because of a lack of under- standing about what a survey is and what it can do, as well as misperceptions about what is required to conduct and maintain a survey. This article looks at some survey benefits, how to start and maintain a local survey program, and some common pitfalls. Survey Benefits An up-to-date survey: • Enables forward looking proactive local preservation. By surveying areas that have not been designated, you can identify areas where future preservation activity should take place before the resources begin to disappear. • Describes character-defining features in detail-not just for documentation, but also to inform the commission's decisions. • Increases public awareness and appreciation of historic resources. Use the survey and survey process to help educate the community. Surveyors can distribute infor- mation, answer questions, and serve as preservation ambassadors while in the field. • Looks beyond buildings to include all visible aspects of the built environment that com- bine to form local historic fabric,such as canals, silos, cemeteries,gardens,windmills, parks, etc. Your local survey program will require certain tools and techniques including survey forms and surveyors who are proficient with a camera and have some basic architectural knowl- 4 Federal edge ante The Survey Form t Many State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPOs) have survey manuals and architectur- al guides,which can provide valuable information. SHPOs also have survey forms,which Greek Reveal you may choose to use for your local survey. Frequently, though, state survey forms are complex and can be difficult to use, so you may want to develop your own local survey t form. If you do, keep it simple and give it several "trial runs"to refine it before using it for Appro�-date- your local survey. An effective survey form will include space for: You may want to develop your • Address/property name own local survey form. • Approx. date of construction Source: NAPC file • General and detailed architectural descriptions • Space for a simple photograph of the resource • Photograph data (Roll 3, frame 17) • Survey date and surveyors names • Name of district if applicable 14 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Planning • List of site features r: • Detailed site plan :r� • Map showing property location • • Space for a site plan sketch d p • Space for additional notes ;;Y Photography :4 R � � `. Z" When you conduct a local historic resources survey, you are creating a .14 jr historical record. The photographs in that record should be high enough ' -= a quality to accurately represent the resources at the time the survey was ' conducted. rt#" ,r Common photographic weaknesses include: • Over and under exposed photographs. Surveyors should take the time to learn the idiosyncrasies of the cameras they will be using and learn how to take The photographs in that record light meter readings to avoid over or under exposing the film. The same rule is true should be high enough quality for digital cameras. to accurately represent the • Poor composition. Compose your photographs so that they depict the resource as resources at the time the sur- accurately as possible. In some cases, photography will be best done in the winter vey was conducted. months when the leaves are off the trees. Avoid extremely long or short focal lengths Source:NAPC file photo that can distort spatial relationships, but zoom in on architectural details after pho- tographing the overall resource. • Lack of context. For individual resources, include one or two photographs that show adjacent properties and surrounding landscape. For the overall survey,include a vari- ety of streetscapes to show the area's overall composition. • Overlooked site features. Site features such as outbuildings,retaining walls,wells and = ' , cisterns, etc. should also be photographed as well as recorded on the survey form. vicit. • Orientation. Use a vertical format for vertically oriented resources and a horizontal for- s .„� .4„, mat for horizontally oriented resources. �, s� > Surveyors % Your survey team does not have to be limited to commission members and staff. By using < " , outside volunteers,you can raise public awareness, understanding,and interest in preser- ` ; . ' vation. Serving on the local survey team can also be excellent training for future com- '�' rt#- mission members. " Potential sources of surveyors: "- s �� zj • Local preservation non-profit organizations w• • a 2 • Neighborhood associations ( • • Civic groups „ . • Senior citizen groups , "1 ,a , z • Former commission members � � _ Surveyors will need training and as new surveyors join the team, they should be paired Serving on the local survey with seasoned surveyors to benefit from their experience. Training can be provided by team can be excellent anyone with expertise including commission members, staff, the local preservation non- training for future profit, and others. In some cases, your state CLG coordinator may be able to provide commission members. basic training to help you get started. State preservation conferences are another poten- Source:NAPC file photo tial source of training. In the end, however, a local survey team has to go into the field and learn from its mistakes. Fairly quickly,though,the kinks will be worked out and your com- munity will be on its way to a comprehensive and up-to-date local survey. TAR Nov/Dec 2005 15 Planning Maintaining the Survey After surveying existing districts and then potential districts,you can begin an ongoing pro- gram of survey maintenance. Updating the entire survey at one time is usually not an option because of the number of resources involved. In cities with multiple districts, sur- veying one district per year may be an effective approach. For example, if a city has eight districts and four potential areas for future designation, surveying one or two per year would result in a comprehensive survey no part of which is ever more than six to twelve years out of date. In smaller communities, consider surveying only a percentage of the resources each year on an ongoing basis. Your historic resource survey should be at the center of all preservation planning. It is also a valuable tool for doing design review and educating the public. A continuous survey pro- gram will help ensure that your commission is at the front of local preservation activity and ready for challenges when they arise. FIELD SUGGESTIONS FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION SURVEY Vanessa Bernstein, Planning Department, Forsyth County, Georgia —'-\‘.0--' ✓/ 1,\. \ The term"Historic Resource Survey"doesn't need to strike fear in the "� C . \ \ heart of a localpreservation volunteer, yet,\ many people seem to \ �\ 1\ \ shake and tremble when faced with the prospect of recording the �6- ..-� �= 1 .\ resources found in a potential historic district. Preservation planning, �� �, a,� �� A ,-r \ \ local designation, and maintaining a local register depend on know- \ ._ ,\ `ss +;`✓�'' ,.•, \ ing what the resources are. Since surveys often depend on volunteer VV>> `\- . \. labor; here are a few suggestions for cutting the task down to size. �` • .:,. ),' ; � \ 1. Carry proper ident�cation with you on every field visit, prefer j� ` "- \\ ably a business card indicating who is responsible for the survey. If a �s<•f i ,Vl% possible, drive a city owned, or otherwise professionally identified, �, k � � vehicle that clearly indicates your affiliation to local residents. �`,s � 2. Be safe and keepa proper distance-at all times when in Y,, > ir '' '� ...a' the field. Alwayspark off the road on thepublic right of way never on jf ,\ Y 9 Y, :\ ', '4` :�-'• private property. Remain visible to oncoming traffic, but move far i -y . � %rr enough from the roadway to be safe while avoiding trespass: Never ti. , ;�i � % drive or walk on a property that has been posted. Refer to proper . �`�:! .;! C"' \�i, maps to ensure that you are driving on a public road. Private drive- ' \-:f" 46'* " e_ \� \1( ways are not permissible to enter unless invited by the landowner Refer to proper maps to ensure that you are driving on a public 3. Practice courtesy in every situation. Some people will respond to a surveyor's road. presence with suspicion, fear, or irritation. Immediately identify yourself, who you Source:Public Domain work for, and your purpose. If someone has a problem with your presence or taking photographs,give them your business card and the contact information of your super- visor. Do not be surprised if police are called (This occasionally happens). 16 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Planning Remember that you are a visitor to the community in question and remain profession- al. Surveyors may park on the public right of way and take photographs as long as they remain on public property and do not obstruct traffic. Friendliness goes a long. way to diffuse most situations where a resident has initial concern as to why you are parked in front of their house with a clipboard and camera. 4. Take time to analyze the structure in question. Refer to the proper structure identification guides like McAlester's A Field Guide to American Houses, but remem- ber that vernacular architecture does not always match 9eneric types. If you have a survey partner, ask questions. Remain inquisitive and if you are unsure, write down descriptive notes in order to complete research after the field visit. 5. Be mindful that analysis of floor plans can be tricky, particularly since you most likely will not see the interior of the house when completing a survey(occasion- ally a homeowner will tell you or even invite you inside to look). Do the best you can based on the exterior type. 6. Remember that modifications make analysis nearly impossible to analyze properly in structures. Always write down significant details and make an educated guess. Remember, field notes and photographs are an essential record, so complete these to the best of your ability. You may have to refer to them later in order to change or reevaluate a structure type. 7. improve your survey skills with time and experience. it will become easier to analyze structures from a distance. Remain detail oriented. Do not complete a sur- vey form too quickly based on assumptions from previous properties. At the same time, it isn't necessary to spend an inordinate amount of time on description. Follow the survey form and add side notes as necessary; but remember a survey is just that, it isn't a nomination for the National Register! 8. Develop your own survey style and recognize your preferences for certain prop- erties over others, it is important to remember that you are surveying all the resources in the area, not just the ones you like or that meet the fifty year mark. When a riAta- a"' structure is clearly modified to the extant that it is difficult to identify,then; pro- _ -' A ' ,.. fessional judgment calls must be made. Don't become an elitist. It is rather ' . _ w easy to do when you have experience under your belt. Always follow the pars- "•-•i < meters of the survey project. ,v= . 9. Remember the landscape as an important part of the resource. In addition to the structure, contextual description is essential. This includes significant , hardscapes like retaining walls as well as living plant material. Do not neglect • Ai y this aspect of the survey. 10. Don't forget to have fun while surveying! Working as a historic resource surveyor is a unique opportunity. You will find that many people you meet dur- ing the course of a survey are excited and flattered that you are taking an inter- = 4x est in their property and community. It is a special way to involve yourself in the discipline of historic preservation and one that you will always remember., The Don't forget to have fun! friendships you will make with your fellow surveyors will be among the most rewarding Source:NAPC file photo parts of the experience. TAR Nov/Dec 2005 17 r C� H 0 z ul Public Education & Outreach Public Education &Advocacy EDUCATING THE COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC OFFICIALS 1 Jo Ann Radetic, National Park Service, CLG Coordinator, Missouri SHPO The most important method of preserving local historic resources is public outreach and edu- cation. Citizens must be informed about what in their community is worth preserving, why it • should be preserved, and how to preserve it. A local commission must work constantly to build and maintain public consensus on the importance of preserving local historic resources. Working within Local Government Preservation Commissioners :,,. �`'- . . ;'"' ` Before preservation commissioners begin to consider educating their community and pub- :-,.,-.A' +l:". 7..i 9 s ..‘...:NI,- „�,., � •—� lic officials, they must first educate themselves. Even commissioners who are supported Y -> I ,. by professional preservation staff should not sit back and let the staff do their learning for :-,; x ,Q , them. r m' '", ' �5"� `l, , "' All commissioners should be good spokespersons for historic preservation. They must fi .ems, - understand not only the powers and duties of the historic preservation commission,but also � � A -7;;. the"system"of the local government within which they operate. The most important thing 4It .-5 that historic preservation commissioners should remember is that they serve at the plea- .s. ':. ,r ,4 ` v sure of the local elected officials. Without some support from elected officials, the corn- .' x -, mission will not exist. • . .r To assure that commissioners understand their role within local government, the commis �..w, , t ' sion should conduct an annual self-assessment and review of the local historic preserva- I t-`* :• -- ., ': F`. - tion ordinance. Review of the ordinance will help the commission set goals and evaluate ILI "� t 8 - to. the role of preservation in the community. The commissioners will also reinforce their {> i I I( # s" ` knowledge of their responsibilities and assess the progress toward integration of historic f 1I :t preservation into local government's structure. i�,Atr •- .- • I The commission should issue an annual report that summarizes their activities and accom- • ...... plishments, which can be used as a tool to train new commissioners. This report should OF p ti�' l tr4rtn, be presented at a public meeting or city council meeting and should be distributed to the -• MOM city's elected officials, staff, and to the media. Historic preservation public outreach effort by the City of The commissioners must attend annual training to keep informed on preservation methods and Pasadena Hills, Missouri. issues. If the commission is to effectively guide and educate the community on preservation Photo courtesy of Kris Zapalac, matters,then commissioners must maintain their knowledge and expertise on those subjects. Missouri Department of Natural Resources. Local Government Staff and Appointed Boards and Commissions The entire City of Pasadena Hits(pop. The commission will find it necessary to work with every department of city government and 1147)is being nominated to the every employee at City Hall should know that the historic preservation commission is a part of National Register,including their strut- city govemment.The preservation commission may be the"new kid on the block"compared to tures,landscaped areas,streetlights, other city commissions and departments; and may have to work to be recognized as an estab- streets andfsidewalks. They are in the fishedpart of citygovernment. To be effective, commissioners must appreciate the technical process of designating the entire city pp as a local historic district,also. The expertise of city staff and promote an atmosphere of candor,fair dealing, and mutual respect in preservation commission has been working with city staff. working tirelessly on a number of public outreach projects. Using their training and expertise in historic preservation methods and design review,the preser- vation commission can assist city staff and other appointed commissions. The building official, the planning department and the planning and zoning commission, the parks commission,and • the economic development department can all benefit from information provided by the preser- vation commission. Such assistance will help those city departments understand the important 4 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Public Education &Advocacy role that historic preservation plays in maintaining and improving the quality of life in the community. Commissioners should be a visible part of city government by regularly attending city council meetings and keeping informed on all of the issues and projects fi' 171% .. 44t, undertaken by the city. When invited, commissioners should attend city social ti_ f Y tem t4 functions such as the annual holiday party and the City Employees Picnic. "` � ' ' Local Elected Officials z, As part of the local government, preservation commissions have a unique advo- 03 K A " cacy role. It is important to emphasize again that historic preservation commis- sioners must remember that they serve at the pleasure of the local elected offi- cwre, - ' cials. Without some support from them,the commission will not exist. 1-1 Presenting an annual report is a necessary part of educating the elected officials about the work Horton House(1859) in the of the preservation commission. This is also an opportunity to give the elected officials cred- historic Museum Hill District of it for the accomplishments of the historic preservation commission. St.Joseph, Missouri, before rehabilitation. The commission should design programs to explain to the elected officials specifically how his- Photo courtesy of Caroline Petrie. toric preservation benefits the community, and should show how preservation addresses spe- cific concerns such as neighborhood revitalization or restoring and maintaining economic vitali- ty in the historic downtown area. Demonstrating the economic advantages of historic preserva- tion is a particularly effective method of gaining support from elected officials. The mayor should appoint a liaison from the City Council to the historic preservation commis- sion. This council member attends the preservation commission meetings and regularly reports to the council on commission activities. If an issue arises on which the elected officials and the preservation commission do not agree, the commission should not argue with the elected officials. The preservation commission should make their recommendation or decision according to their :x duties as outlined in the preservation ordinance. The elected officials can then ^ act on the recommendation or reject it. The elected officials generally have the It :AA decision and, right or wrong, they usually reflect the feelings of the corn munity that elected them. • Effective Advocacy: Integrating Preservation into Community Decision- } Makin General Public t Since the elected officials generally reflect the feelings of the community that elected them, it is important to have a community consensus in favor of good ���. ..�;. historic preservation practices. .. .. ,' :, . " The historic preservation commission should play a significant role in promoting an appreciation Horton House(1859) in the of the community's heritage. To be really effective,they should do this in cooperation with non- historic Museum Hill District of profit groups such as the local historical society, the local non-profit preservation organization, St. Joseph, Missouri, the downtown Main Street organization,and the Chamber of Commerce. after rehabilitation. Photo courtesy of the City of St.Joseph. Public outreach and education efforts by the preservation commission should not only increase a community's appreciation of the local historic resources and the value of preserving the com- munity's character, but should also increase the public's confidence in the expertise of the preservation commission. Demonstrations of the commission's knowledge and ability to assist TAR Jul/Aug 2004 5 Public Education &Advocacy ' 4.:a- �. . a • : ' ' !, property owners in preserving local historic resources support the c t4}fi-r .7i"N '•‘,. 1.` ' ways in which the historic preservation commission can assist in -, il. Na r 'T' �'r F,,fr r-'*.. protecting those resources. ,-; ' �' ~' . ` Decision Makers r t al' ; lY,;i 4, ' The historic preservation commission must identify the key decision- '� ' '` -' 4. • } makers in the community. In addition to the elected officials, this ue • ".- I 1 ': group includes property owners, business owners, bankers and t ' 7: . , 61 - ,:^,�.. , other community leaders. The preservation commission should ^ t.£ Ck� conduct special workshops to educate these decision-makers about :�-�•r fa: ;< t,�{ • i .`- the economic value of historic preservation, financial incentives, '`4 ..i li F� ' , 'C' `•' ,\ using design guidelines, and planning for preservation. .t r• t -r•Y ' t 7cr, ,:" Commissioners should attend meetings and public hearings and ''� o ' iE ,.. a x pE �r4s t _ t testify for the integration of preservation into the city's comprehen- v 'o e •' to .t £ : sive plan as well as proposed transportation plans and other com- .. I~' �' a nlik - munity planning and zoning issues.The process of developing or 1 �'' i -= A-•-='�'" - updating local historic preservation plans and design guidelines pre- , " sents good opportunities for building support for the local historic . , _ . preservation program. The course of action leading to the publics- The Webster Groves, Missouri, tion of preservation planning documents should involve soliciting historic commercial district has input from community leaders as well as the general public. Community leaders provide input recently been nominated to the and ideas for the plan thereby giving those involved a sense of ownership and responsibility for National Register. implementing those ideas. i Photo courtesy of Jo Ann Radetic, i Missouri Department of Natural Conclusion/Summary I Resources "At the heart of our Webster Groves Preservation commissioners must be well versed in preservation issues and methods to be able business districts are historically pre- to educate the public. If the public supports preservation,then the elected officials,reflecting the served buildings. These lovely,old, views of their constituents,will support a knowledgeable historic preservation commission and charming structures house attractive allow it to be stronger and more effective in their efforts to assist in the preservation of local his- and successful shops,restaurants and offices. Doing business in historic toric resources. buildings complements our historic • homes and neighborhoods to enrich There is a wealth of educational resources available to preservation commissions. Webster Groves'reputation ast a corn- Organizations like The National Trust for Historic Preservation and The National Alliance of munity that values its past as the key to the future" Preservation Commissions are prepared to help historic preservation commissions in their pub- Gerry Welch,Mayor lic outreach efforts and a number of resources are available online and through local libraries. Webster Groves,Missouri Commissioners must take time to take advantage of what is available. Sources of preservation commission training and information Always check with your state CLG coordinator for this information. Other resources are: httpiMwww2.crnps.govAvorldngonthepast httpiMnvw.a:nps.go vrtaining.htm If commissions have not already joined NAPC,they should seriously consider doing so. In addition to NAPCs biennial Forum,which is the best preservation commission training in the world,NAPC has the Commission Assistance and Mentoring Program(CAMP),and a great bibliography of "must read"information for preservation commissioners. When I was just starting out in the preservation commission business,NAPC was a life- saver.I would make a call to NAPC to receive wonderful support and information. In addition to all of their other publications,the National Trust publishes a great list of"Preservation Resources on the Internet'every year as a supplement to Forum News. Of course,the National Trust Conference is a good source of annual training and preservation networking for com- missions. The website of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation is also a good source of preservation information httpi/w w.achp.gov 6 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Archaeology COMMUNITY PRESERVATION PARTNERSHIPS Public Outreach Activity Local Partners/Source of Assistance Non-profit preservation organizations, preservation commissions and historical societies are potential partners in all activities Media releases Newspapers, radio stations Radio programs Radio stations Regular newspaper columns Newspaper Newsletters Corporate sponsors. print shops Public meetings televised over City staff, community college Local cable TV community access Guided walking tours of historic districts Chamber of Commerce, civic organizations, Eagle Scouts Preservation workshops Main Street org., Chamber of Commerce Local contractors, hardware stores Neighborhood meetings Property owners, historic district residents Presentations to civic groups Rotary, Kiwanis, Optimists. Lions Presentations to school groups Teachers, schools Assisting school teachers with Teachers, schools lesson plans that include a local historic preservation focus Technical advice Local craftsmen, SHPO Public access files: Museum, Public Library Technical information City Hall, Genealogical Society Survey information Local historians, SHPO Historic information Design Guidelines Main Street org., Chamber of Commerce City Hall Preservation Plans and/or Main Street org., Chamber of Commerce Historic District Plans City Hall Architectural Treasure Hunt Main Street org., Chamber of Commerce, Newspaper, print shops For details on the above activities contact: Jo Ann Radetic, Phone: (573) 522-2473, Email:jo.ann.radetic@dnr.mo.gov TA R Jul/Aug 2004 7 Public Education e'r Advocacy i LOCAL COMMISSIONS AND NON-PROFIT PARTNERS Lisbeth Cort, Executive Director, Washington Trust for Historic Preservation i I Successful local preservation programs depend on three sectors. Public Sector process, gov- ernment mandates, citizen support and city politics all have an impact on the strength of local preservation ordinances, commission designees, and staffing levels. All give commissions great regulatory power and influence in times of supportive local governments but can threaten the very existence of local programs when detractors are in office or controversial decisions put heat on local elected officials. In the"Independent Sector,"non-profits live and die by their suc- cess in being focused on their mission,creative in their outreach,strategic in their advocacy,and successful in building public support for their organization (translate dollars) and preservation. Private Sector developers can be our greatest heroes when they articulate vision and secure financing for rehab projects or they can swing into the"evil developer"camp if they bring money and influence to the task of redevelopment without preserving existing historic assets. -,,._,,.-' In the ideal,yet fully-achievable,world of successful local preservation,the government(Public t -- *,: , Sector) along with the non-profit (Independent Sector) and business (Private Sector) are an if y� ' 1 unbeatable combination to reach the highest level of preservation in a city. Between the three, i. 'f.c) they possess the full range of tools necessary to achieve preservation success. Alone, each t k ,., can accomplish good things but never maximize the environment for local preservation in a way 'NA I itt s that strategic advocacy, targeted public education, financial investment, complimentary public r policy, and government regulations can achieve. In fact, none can do it alone and each very much needs the other to achieve the best preservation on a local level. Beyond need, when - 41 working at cross purposes we have—at best—bad PR for preservation, public confusion about what"hysterical preservationists"do and want,and silly time-and resource-consuming back bit- it f ' r ' ` ', a ing and turf wars. At worst,we have buildings demolished,a negative reactionary swing in pub- * e' `:=., ._-_';; 4.,, CUT:: : lic policy against preservation,and a platform for property rights advocates to gain the ear of the public. This property in East Tennessee was saved through Local non -profit preservation organizations and landmark commissions obviously do business public and private sector col- very differently. Everyone's busy and it's hard to find time to look beyond what we each must labotion. do to think bigger than ourselves and work in concert. But, I submit, however, that working Photo c Photo courtesy of Nancy Jane Baker, gg Memphis Landmarks Commission. closely together, thinking bigger, and being strategic are not luxuries of time but are, instead, essential in order to build the most effective local preservation program possible.What are the keys to success in that"ideal yet achievable" world of public and non-profit sectors working toward common purpose? Identify roles To the outside world it sometimes seems that our movement has redundant players;why does it take a local non-profit and a commission to achieve preservation? We in the field know each has distinct as well as overlapping roles;and we know that's a good thing. Government preser- vation programs exist to provide preservation services to citizens,to implement zoning codes, forward public policy,carry out public processes,apply planning regulations,and protect a com- munity's public assets—historic buildings that make our communities better places to live. Preservation non-profits exist to educate,advocate(and yes,lobby within legal limits),and pro- mote preservation. Both build community leadership through their commissions, boards,and committees. Both can provide economic incentives for rehab through grants,loans,and ease- ments. Both can provide expertise and technical assistance. Both can hold property. When used most intentionally,the distinct roles absolutely maximize the power of preservation. 10 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Public Education dr Advocacy For instance: • If a building is threatened, the commission's role in being able to delay demolition won't ultimately save a building if the will and players aren't there to rehab. A non- profit who testifies in support of demolition delay, builds positive PR for rehab, helps educate elected officials about the value of saving the landmark, brings awareness in the press about the value of preservation, and helps identify new owners, technical experts, similar successful models, or financing options can make the difference on whether demolition is just delayed or rehab is achieved. Alternately, a non-profit can't help turn around a proposed demolition if there are no tools to"buy time"for negotia- tions, identify additional resources, or change political will. When used most strategically and cooperatively, the sectors' overlapping roles result in a full range of expertise,services and incentives to property owners,and an environment of support for preservation as a fundamental community value. Establish partnerships and use the roles to your advantage No matter how good the commission or how strong the non-profit, neither can do everything. Because human and financial resources are not limitless, difficult choices have to be made No matter how good the about what each can do and where each should focus its energies. Choices have to be made commission or how strong and priorities determined for where to direct scarce resources to best advance preservation. the non-profit,neither can Each has to ask itself,if we can't do it all,then what can our partners do and what kinds of things do everything. are they better positioned to do? For instance: • If the commission is beginning to work on survey and designation of a mid-Twentieth century landmark or historic district, the non-profit could focus public education beforehand on the architecture of the recent past. Then the public and elected offi- cials are better attuned to the value of such "modern" buildings before the designa- tion comes before them. • A commission in my state wanted to spotlight and reward owners who had completed projects under design review guidelines but felt that doing so might be perceived as prejudicing itself if the same owners came before the commission again on another matter in the future. The non-profit therefore, added an award category to it's already successful annual preservation awards program and began highlighting owners who completed model projects in compliance with local design review guidelines. The commission's processes were recognized in a positive way, there was a venue to praise city staff and elected officials, perceived future conflicts were avoided, and reg- ulation's positive role was reinforced. Get beyond turf issues and keep your eye on the prize Its human nature to get comfortable with the"way we do things"and feel protective of our hard- earned status. If,however,we"keep our eyes on the prize,"stay focused on our mutual preser- vation mission, and keep that at the forefront of how we do business,rather than who gets the credit or who does what work,we can achieve great things. • One non-profit with a strong revolving loan program uses its revolving fund commit- tee to make lending decisions. It has a member of the city's preservation staff on its committee and has found that member to be invaluable. The staff person gives valu- able insights into regulatory, zoning, political, or code issues associated with a partic- ular project. He also assists when the committee plans for the future by helping iden- tify "emerging" areas for lending or districts that are being surveyed and soon-to-be T A R Ja1/Aug 2004 11 Public Education &Advocacy designated in order for the non-profit to focus loan resources concurrently with desig- nation. The expertise and perspective of each bring more tools together for property owners. •A local landmark commission has strong architectural expertise on staff. The city's non-profit is relatively new and has achieved great success in public education and events that involve the public in preservation. Rather than focusing limited resources on providing technical preservation expertise, the non-profit chose instead to direct technical preservation questions to commission staff and use its time to build mem- bership, provide activities for children and adults to be involved in preservation, and help build a stronger preservation ethic locally. It easily could have felt threatened by not having that architectural expertise on staff; but, it was building a better local move- ment by focusing on its strengths and having the strong commission staff focus on theirs. Together they provided strong assistance to property owners-just in different ways. Successful partnerships demand strong and regular communication. Keeping the other partner informed,including them at times of key decision-making about a strategy or initiative, and giv- ing each other a heads up when there are potential delicate political issues,make the difference between disjointed local programs and a strong environment for preservation. For instance: • One local non-profit, like many, has a board Advocacy Committee which meets monthly. In its case, the local historic preservation officer attends the monthly meet- ings. This insures that the committee and the city preservation staff know what issues each is dealing with, can communicate freely about positions and potential strategies, can help "pick battles", and can be clear about the roles each will play on difficult preservation issues. It helps insure a strong non-profit advocacy position, an informed city staff and politicos, and the use of regulatory, advocacy, and public awareness tools to the highest degree. • Including the historic preservation officer in a non-profit's annual planning retreat can insure that both are informed about each other's work and coming initiatives. It also helps insure that citywide preservation-related issues are tackled from both the pub- lic and the non -profit sides. • One commission had a regular informational item on each meeting agenda that offered the non-profit an opportunity to bring forward key preservation issues and/or opportunities to the commission's attention. This simple measure kept commission- ers educated about upcoming public education or advocacy issues, brought advoca- • • • cy issues to the public front, and got items on the record early. • In one western city, the commission denied an inappropriate modern awning on a house in an historic district. Stubborn owners installed the awning anyway and the city began enforcement which eventually led to a civil suit against the owners. Unfortunately, contentious enforcement led to bad PR for the commission, which was portrayed by the local media as being the "taste police." The local non-profit moved quickly to distance itself from the issue and reinforce that it was not the same as that group of overbearing regulators. In the end, preservation lost. The public didn't know or care what the difference was between the commission and the non-profit. The 12 NE\v s from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Public Education &Advocacy I I property owners appealed and then sued and ultimately hated preservation. City r k:, ''„ council took a public hit and looked less favorably toward strong preservation regula- '4 d`*v= " tions next time they considered ordinance changes. Summarily, preservation in the ,nr 'd city got a black eye. If, instead, the commission and non-profit staff had communi- n '"° 'rl t.r T�.nt4 ;, cated about the issue early and often,things could have been different. The non-prof- ,t ..' it could have understood and been better positioned to advocate publicly for the r � ' t'-G 7 ''" '•JIB� aa!E4 +: commission's difficult design review decision and resulting city enforcement. '- • Likewise,they could have been proactive in exploring ways to get positive press about .., �"" `".77?„4-., good design review decisions and satisfied historic district property owners. If the staff and board had been knowledgeable about the decision and resulting enforce "„ -.r,. � ment,they might have been prepared to develop a positive spin in the press or among colleagues instead of reacting defensively and distancing themselves from the regu- Public/private sector partner- ships can turn the press'atten- , Cultivate and build local leadership tion to your advantage. Non-profits generally know that a major part of their success in sustaining and in growing their NAPC file photo organization comes from building a strong board of directors. They also know that board devel- opment is a pointed task, not just luck. Similarly, good commissions don't just happen. They are the product of the dedication and skills of the people who serve on them. • Commission chairs and staff can take a cue from non-profits who focus time on board development by recognizing the need to identify and develop a constant pool of qual- ified people to serve, take the initiative to place their names in front of the appointing bodies, and train commissioners in the regulations as well as broader local preserva- tion issues. Leadership skills are different from preservation skills. Good commis- sioners need to have both. Cross cultivation between potential commissioners and non-profit board members can also help ensure that skilled and connected leaders serve preservation in the best way they can—either on the public or non-profit side. • Likewise, as part of board orientation and ongoing board education, non-profits should educate their boards about local regulations and processes,about the benefit of these and the arguments in favor of design review, preservation zoning, and demolition delay or denial. Board members are often well-connected individuals who span lots of different worlds in a community. If they are educated, they are better able to be advocates for local government preservation and the value that distinct public and non-profit preservation tools bring to a community. Similarly, if they are briefed about controversial commission decisions, they are better prepared to defend such actions as they interact professionally and socially with a range of contacts in the community. Before asking others to preserve,we owe it to ourselves, our constituents, our members, and the public we serve to best position preservation to be successful. If we can't work together, how can we ask a property owner to work with one or the other of us? How can we advocate for more funding for preservation if we're not convinced we're using our existing human and resources most efficiently? How can we best fight against demolition if we fight among our- selves? How can we strengthen public ordinances if we don't support the decisions that com- missioners are making? We craft an environment for preservation to be supported and buildings to be saved if we work together and work smart. If we communicate about what needs to be done to ensure that we have the best policies,laws, incentives,and public support for preservation; if we set aside our egos and determine who does what best and how we can best support each other to build the strength of the other sector,and, if we keep communication open and our eye on the prize,we will reach our goals. Together. TAR Jul/Aug 2004 13 The Nuts and Bolts of Commission Operation TWELVE TIPS FOR REACHING OUT Compiled by NAPC Many of the misperceptions and erroneous myths about local preservation commissions and their work,tribulations that plague us every day,can be avoided by simply talking to people. Don't wait for an invitation, though, it might not come until it accompanies a crises. Be proactive! Actively seek opportunities to educate the community about preservation, its benefits, and the commis- sion. Chances are that neighborhood associations, community groups, professional organiza- tions and others will be glad to have you address their meetings. Here are twelve tips for talking. 1. Contact the local chamber of commerce for contact information for community groups to address. 2. Make a slide show or Powerpoint presentation using pictures of local districts and sites.A local survey may be a good source for this material. Keep it simple and direct,avoiding"Bells and Whistles"that might distract the audience from the information. 3.Discuss architectural styles and the history of local districts and other areas that might be eli- gible for designation. 4. Show details of the local buildings. Teach your audience to "look up" many people have never taken the time to really examine the buildings around them. By showing them things they've never noticed, you can pique their interest. 5. Leave out preservation jargon. If you must use jargon or terms your audience can't be expected to understand,take the time to explain them. 6.Aim to educate during your presentations. Keep your comments to the point and avoid digres- sions or"Giving a guided tour of all things historic." 7.Always make the talk positive in spirit, never negative. You might be disheartened by recent political developments or the attitude of some property owners; but leave it at home. Folks aren't likely to be attracted to your cause if they're are turned off by your attitude. 8. Give a strong,targeted message, aimed specifically toward your audience. For example, a talk about the economic benefits of historic preservation might be of interest to a business own- ers organization that would fall asleep during a slide show of local architecture that the neighbor- hood association would find interesting. • 9. Use BEFORE and AFTER photographs.Show positive projects that have been successful- ly completed in the community. Emphasize the commission's role. 10.Always have time for questions and discussion. Answer questions to the best of your abil- ity and encourage your audience to talk. The discussion will not only help you get the information across, but it will also help you understand how the community perceives the commission and its work. 11. Distribute commission brochures or copies of your guidelines that explain the commis- sion's work and role in the community. 12.Always remember that you represent the commission. Be professional and avoid involve- ment in discussions regarding policy decisions and personalities. • Making a Good Program Even Better -The National Park Service has established a committee of the National Park System Advisory Board to consider the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation that guide the Federal Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit Program and how effective the program is for developers, property owners, and others who work with the program. The Committee will develop recommendations concern- ing the administration of the Federal Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit Program and, specifically, the interpretation of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit Program users and members of the historic preservation community are invited to submit comments for the Committee's consideration. For more information, visit the NPS website at www.cr.nps.gov/hps/tps/tax/committee.htm 8 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS The Nuts and Bolts of I Commission Operation or How to get them to tell clients they're in the historic district Compiled by NAPC It's a problem almost as old as local designation: new property owners not knowing that . . 4t the house they purchased is in a locally designated historic district. "The realtor didn't say A 'a anything." "It's not on the deed." "The previous owner didn't say anything, how were we to know?" The key, as with most things, is education and communication. Both sides, the 'p; realtors and the local preservationists, need to know where the other is coming from and t✓! why. With time, they will find that they are on the same side; the side of good neighbor- DIhoods with attractive property values. Here are some basic ways to build a good rela- tionship with the realtors in a community: -^ • Know the Law: Some state real estate disclosure laws require realtors and/or sellers to m tell prospective buyers how the property is zoned. Inclusion in a local historic district should be included in this disclosure. Check with the city attorney about real estate dis- closure laws. Use attractive signage to let Realtor Education: Many realtors don't know or understand what local designation people know they are in a means or how it works. They simply understand that it is additional regulation and might local historic district. Photo:NAPC File photo make a property less attractive to prospective buyers. Pay them a friendly visit and give them a copy of the design guidelines, explain how to get a Certificate of Appropriateness, and let them know that property values in local historic districts tend to be higher than else- where. Answer their questions and encourage them to call when showing property in the district. A commissioner's enthusiasm can help them make the sale. District Signage: A few attractive signs at the entrances to the district letting people know that they are entering "XYZ Historic District" or small signs atop "" , street signs within the district can be an effective way to let folks know that they are not in just any neighborhood. Prospective buyers will see the signs and probably ask questions. °•',,;:"--, • 1,-:zy ii -.) a Meet With Professional Associations: Many cities have professional real- r • tor associations. Ask to attend one of their regular meetings and introduce `y . ' yourself. Let them know where the local historic districts are and why local � ' ate ' designation is a good thing. Distribute design guidelines and answer their . , questions. Show them that preservation is their friend, not their enemy. Also �" • consider collaborating with the local preservation non-profit organization to ' hold a special workshop or social function for local realtors as a way of III : �"`4 r; spreading the word and disarming ideas about the "Hysterical Commission" Neighborhood and community rou s can be strong allies. Work with them. Realtors are required to attend continuing education sessions to maintain licensure and historic preservation commission training can often qualify. Welcome the Newcomers: When someone moves into the district, wel- s...i come them! A friendly visit from the neighborhood association to say hello is a great way to make sure that the new property owners have a copy of the Disarm the Hysterical commission's design guidelines and to disarm any fears they may have. If Commission stereotype. their realtor hasn't told them about the district, he or she is probably going to get a call. Photo:Public Domain After a while, they'll catch on. 1 t I i 16 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Signs and Signage HOW LOCAL COMMISSIONS AND SIGN COMPANIES CAN GET TOGETHER Raoul Adams is a retired itinerant sign painter living in Belfast,Maine In my many years in the sign industry, I have frequently been bewildered by the acri- monious relationship that often seems to exist between sign makers/companies and local preservation commissions. Assumptions by sign makers/companies that the corn- mission is going to place unreasonable restrictions on their work and assumptions by commissions that sign makers/companies are unwilling to follow guidelines are usually unfounded and only lead to unnecessary animosity. The reality is that the sign maker needs the business and is likely going to be willing to follow any applicable guidelines; and the commission wants quality signs in its historic district and is going to be realis- tic in its requirements. The key is good, proactive communication. Here are a few sug- gestions for how commissions and sign makers can work together. For Local Commissions: • Let the sign makers/companies know where the local districts are and how to go about get- ting approval. If sign makers don't know that they are working in a historic district,they don't know that they have to follow additional regulations. A personal visit from a commission member or staff can go a long way toward engendering good will. • Distribute your design guidelines. If a sign maker is familiar with the applicable guidelines from the beginning, the project is much more likely to go smoothly. • If your guidelines specifically prohibit certain kinds of materials, fasteners, lighting, styles, colors,etc., explain the reason behind the prohibition. Most sign makers work primarily with businesses outside historic districts and can't be expected to be familiar with preservation philosophy. Until explained, your guidelines may seem a bit silly and unnecessary. • Seek sign makers' advice when developing or revising your guidelines. They will have a unique perspective on the subject and may be able to help write simpler, more effective guidelines. You may want to consider asking them to review your guidelines and comment even if you aren't considering changing them. • Don't try to redesign a sign when it meets the guidelines. It may not be legible, or effective, and everybody may see it but the sign maker's client; but if it meets the guidelines, approve it. Chances are that the sign maker did what the client requested. Redesigning it when that isn't your job only makes the sign maker's job harder. For the Sign Maker/Company: • Find out whether you are working in a historic district and if so,what guidelines apply. Don't rely on your client or the local preservation commission. A little research at the beginning may save you considerable heartache at the end. • Familiarize yourself with any and all applicable guidelines. Your client may not be familiar with them, but the commission is and you should be too. • Take advantage of the commission's expertise. If you are inexperienced in working on his- toric buildings, commission members and staff can give you invaluable information about their sensitive care and feeding. • Offer your help and expertise to the commission. Commissioners can no more be expect- ed to know about making and hanging signs than you can be expected to know about the world of historic preservation. Help them understand,and you will help yourself when work- ing in the historic district. • T A R Mar/Apr 2005 15 Old Building Basics THE CONTRACTOR/COMMISSION RELATIONSHIP Raoul Adams It's a common story:A homeowner needs some work done to his/her house and calls a contractor. The contractor gives an estimate and then bristles when he/she learns that the house is in a historic district and that the work will need approval. The appli- cation goes before the commission and the commissioners are automatically skepti- cal when the contractor gets up to explain the work he/she plans to do and the tech- niques to be employed. The application was off to a bad start from the beginning with the contractor assuming that the commission was going to make life difficult and the commissioners assuming that the contractor was going to try to get around the guide- lines. In my many years working with contractors and commissions alike, I rarely saw cases where these assumptions were valid. I did see many cases where a little proac- tive communication would have saved considerable heartache. Here a few sugges- tions: What the Commission Can Do • In addition to having its design guidelines easily accessible to the public, dis- tribute them to local building suppliers, large and small, along with information about the application process, where local districts are located, and where to go for additional information. Ask them to share this information with their cus- tomers. • Periodically send letters to local contractors and subcontractors reminding them that the preservation commission must approve certain types of work done in historic districts. Include information about where districts are locat- ed, the type of work that requires approval, and where to go for more infor- mation. • Invite contractors and subcontractors to review and comment on your design guidelines. They have insight into materials, tools, and techniques that can be invaluable when updating or even just using your guidelines. Tap into their expertise and experience. What Contractors and Subcontractors Can Do • Learn where local historic districts are located and what sort of work must be approved. Familiarize yourself with the guidelines and application process. A client will be more impressed if you know these things when you visit to give your estimate. • Introduce yourself to the commission and staff. Let them know what sort of work you do and that you are willing to follow the rules. Give examples of work you have done and answer their questions about your preservation experience. Even if you've never worked on anything built before 1980, let them know you are willing to learn. • Offer to review and comment on the design guidelines and then follow through with constructive criticism. With your experience and perspective, you may notice something that is unrealistic or utterly ridiculous that the commission- ers and staff wouldn't notice. Help the commission help you and your clients. Raoul Adams is a retired itinerant sign painter living in Belfast, Maine. 12 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS The Nuts and Bolts of Commission Operation 3f FOR LOCAL PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Monica Callahan, Planning Director, Madison, Georgia Effective preservation commission operation is a dynamic, ongoing process, constantly improving as it responds to community needs and evolving preservation practice. The fol- lowing article looks at six aspects of commission operation and offers some best practice techniques to help your commission be more than just another review board. ASPECT ONE: THE PUBLIC How do property owners discover the commission and what will be their first impression? M.. Outreach and Information Send friendly welcome letters to new property owners telling them about the ,. 4 "* l commission and its work. Include a boundary map and a simple brochure e that outlines the type of work reviewed, the basic standards, and a flow chart showing the review process. Let them know where they can get copies of the guidelines and apply for a Certificate of.Appropriateness (COA), as well as who they can call for more information. A friendly annual letter to all proper- t 'TS ty owners in the district will help keep them informed and aware of the corn- L mission and its work. • Is the COA application designed for the average property owner? . Application & Checklist COA applications should be easy to read and complete. Use readily under- stood terms and, where appropriate, illustrations to make it user-friendly. First impressions of the procedure Include a checklist of required application materials and steps. Keep ideal applications can affect the proposal as well as with adequate support materials such as design guidelines readily available. design review. Photo courtesy of Monica Callahan Can property owners get help completing their COA application? Commission staff and members should be willing and available to help property owners understand the application, review process, and standards and guidelines. ASPECT TWO: THE POLICY Ordinance When is the last time the ordinance was looked over? Periodically review your ordinance to ensure that you are familiar with its provisions and are following them. A periodic review will also help identify any deficiencies that need to be corrected. Standards Take into consideration the general standards and use them as backup. Guidelines only go so far. Ultimately, The Secretary of the Interior's Standards are the baseline criteria against which the commission is measuring proposed work. Refer to them often and cite them when rendering decisions. Design Guidelines Are the design guidelines based upon the local community and preservation objec- tives? One size does not fit all. Design guidelines should fit the district's composition and char- acter. For example, if the district doesn't have any commercial buildings, a section on storefronts would be superfluous and confusing; or if the community's preservation goal is to maintain a certain streetscape rhythm, the guidelines should provide ample information about size, scale, massing, setbacks, and spacing. 4 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS The Nuts and Bolts of Commission Operation Design Criteria & Brochure Think about simplicity - such as a "Preservation for Dummies" "°°'' `�"rI" brochure. STt'3REFRONT A simple brochure explaining what sort of work the commission reviews and giving general criteria used, as well as an overview of the review process and where to get more information, can help educate the public GOAC_ :,.--=-::=,- and dispel erroneous information from the uninformed. Make the o brochure available from multiple locations like town/city hall, the public _a..... library, and real estate offices. Keep a supply on hand to distribute as ,�. i - opportunity arises. Updates _ Is policy that is not working being revisited? As you identify guideline gaps and gaffs„take the necessary steps to do so. Correcting an ineffective policy when the problem is first identified will prevent future L.G.O.P:Looks Good on Paper } problems and help keep the commission operating efficiently. Professionalism extends beyond demeanor and Ian- ASPECT THREE: THE PROCEDURE-BEFORE. DURING.AND AFTER THE MEETING guage and to the documents that are distributed. Notice-Publishing & Posting Photo courtesy of Monica Callahan Have the minimums been met and is there something more? Be aware of what is required and try to do more. If the ordinance says thirty days notice, twenty-nine will not do. Consider additional notice measures like yard signs, posting in multiple places, and online notice through the municipal Web site. Boy Scout Mentality Is all homework done? When are materials viewed 1 11.11rw — 1. for the first time? Be prepared. Review application packets before the .- meeting to become familiar with the applications so that there is no struggle to keep up during deliberations or, , N` a-. worse yet, an uninformed decision being made. # I '4 .: Site Visits Try to make the effort to know the particulars of the '"= property. . Take the time to look at the property for which work is . being proposed. Photographs are informative, but they x' < don't tell the whole story. Check it out in person. :� ; `, ` , r Welcome Statement& Place Cards I Set the tone and acknowledge who is at the table. t The meeting should always start on an upbeat, positive, and professional note. The chair should always acknowl- A public servant serves the pub- edge all commissioners and staff by name and try place cards so the audience can know lic—the public at the table and who is speaking during deliberations. the public not present. Practice Patience Photo courtesy of Monica Callahan Try to remember when it is a the applicant's first time at the table. Seasoned commissioners might be old hand at design review. Be patient with new corn- missioners and applicants and help them understand the process. TAR Ssp/Oct 2005 5 The Nuts and Bolts of Commission Operation 1 i Timely Minutes ` Are minutes produced on time and adopted at every meeting? Accurate and timely minutes help keep a commission's work on track. Even if the meet- ing is taped, the longer the time between the meeting and writing the minutes, the less likely they are to be accurate. After adoption, make the minutes publicly available. If the commission is doing its job according to the rules, minutes can be an effective public rela- tions tool. ASPECT FOUR: THE PRACTICE t 1 -; " f , Annual Training ',1?-, „..--. 1 r [ t " '``�`�' `"'"', Has everyone at the table made the effort? ! In addition to a basic training and orientation session for r t ' 1. i 1 new commissioners, everyone should attend some sort of [ • annual training event. Many state preservation conferences ': offer sessions specifically for local preservation commis- h I I I sions. Other opportunities include NAPC's Commission f ° ,, m1 I i Assistance and Mentoring Program (CAMP, see page 16) t " and the National Commission Forum (see page 9 CLG cA"„ 1 r`= �. 'f. r . ,, grant money may be available to help defray the cost of par- , _,,,. — r � t— -_.- ,-� , ticipation. 4.T, .�,.,- '- ,.,1. - - ``" Commissioner Notebooks `a - /" i Into which end of the swimming pool was the commis- -- P sioner tossed? -- , ` New commissioners should receive a notebook containing, i - •,, ,< f at a minimum, the local preservation ordinance, any ethics policy the municipality may have adopted, the commission Get together at the end of the year bylaws, standards, and guidelines, a map of the district(s), and any other information the to review and reflect on the corn- commission distributes, like brochures and other handouts. Update the notebook when mission's work. these documents are revised and improved. Photo courtesy of Monica Callahan Consent Agenda &Administrative Review Is there a way to streamline part of the process for efficiency and expediency? If a commission has staff, identify work that can be approved at the administrative level and include a list of that work in the guidelines. If a commission does not have staff, con- sider designating several commissioners as "Expediting Commissioners" who can give administrative approval for a limited range of work. It is advisable to require approval by more than one expediting commissioner to receive a COA. Fieldtrips Is there something to be learned from another commission? Consider visiting other commissions'meetings and inviting other commissions to yours. It will be a rare visit when something useful isn't learned by both the guest and the host. Year End Wrap Up Is work reviewed and reflected upon? Take the time to review the commission's operation and decisions at the end of the year. Don't just identify areas where improvements can be made and seek ways to do so, acknowledge areas where a good job was done and pat yourself on the back as well. i i 6 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS The Nuts and Bolts of Commission Operation ASPECT FIVE: THE POLITICS Proactive Preservation Are the city/town council members informed of the YESes as well as the NOs? `' ` err Use an annual report to inform elected officials of how many applica- `v t F x _I r ipp — tions the commission approved and how many were denied. Chances r t ; are officials won't hear about the approvals unless unless the commis- • sion tells them. Send the report to the local media along with a brief press release,. Joint Meetings with Elected Officials How often are meetings held with the local leadership? Periodic meetings with elected officials by the commission staff and/or k chair help keep officials informed and aware of the commission's work and needs. Build a base of allies before they are needed. Preservation is politics— Like-Minded Liaisons perhaps not at the table, Can more support be solicited from the elected body and local non-profits? but it is a reality. Photo courtesy of Look for ways to improve communication between the commission and other bodies. Monica Callahan Ask that a preservation-minded city/town council member be appointed liaison to the preservation commission and seek commission representation on local non-profit boards and committees. Internal Cross Pollination How can an organization participate to share the vision and garner support? Look for ways to involve the commission in as many aspects of local government as possible. IV s• °,' Representation on other boards, like the planning com- -` '+� mission, and commissioner participation in civic activi- ties can help spread the word and recruit allies. I c Njt ASPECT SIX: THE PERCEPTION - 1 Award Programs and Recognition Programs �, -' I r Is recognition given for the good preservation works of others? j t _,• Look for ways to recognize good preservation work in 1, E-RiC^ the community—not just the large-scale projects, but the small ones as well. Consider starting a joint awards program with the local preservation non-profit organiza ill Ilk - tion or participating in programs that are already in aiis~ , x `� place. Positive reinforcement Preservation Incentive Programs is a necessity. Is there a local program and are the state and national programs touted? Photo courtesy of If local incentive programs exist, like tax abatement opportunities or facade rehabilitation Monica Callahan grants. make sure that people know about them. Look for ways to create additional incen- tives and let people know about national incentives like the Investment Tax Credit pro- gram. Consistency The best tool for managing public perception of historic preservation. A commission doing its job well and consistently following the rules is its best defense against accusations of being arbitrary and capricious. TAR Sep/0ct 2005 7 Small Towns • ., ` N G Forum 200(0 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 1 i"t it 4 m : nt, Ann McGlone, Preservation Officer, San Antonio, Texas Editor's note: Several recent articles in The Alliance Review have stressed the impor- tance of public participation in preservation activity. The following article offers some suggestions for building public participation—and support. Public participation is important. Whether trying to save a building, designate a new his- i - 4 , =- toric district, or adopt a preservation code you will need ; e ., ,' _ !`"" community support. Because preservationists usually0. s`: _. , , represent only a small segment of the community, it z ' becomes important in local government to reach out to x r.t neighborhoods and citizen groups to rally that much ,. ' �� � needed support. - _ Sometimes this outreach isn't easy, especially if we �"` have strongly held visions of what our hometowns need. = ' We are often convinced we know what's best for our communities, (and we're probably right) but forging ahead without meaningful community involvement is a . Le s .�:,{,e�`` recipe for disaster. ` ,, `, v a _ Positive and meaningful public participation will make ,,,;... « ` your project better.The key is attitude and management t-a ,_ i of the public process. A positive attitude toward the T i .` . : . public process means that you are willing to listen to what others have to say, and incorporate those ideas Highlands small group works together. into your project, process, or code. Photo:courtesy of the author Getting Participation isn't easy. The first challenge is to get people to your meetings. As simple as it sounds, a good way to get started is to . invite people to participate. Don't relyOpen House Begin by sending out letters and postcards. on the old "Our meetings were open to the public, but to review nobody came!" excuse. With the abundance of Access databases, Excel spreadsheets, and GIS systems there NOgalitos- IZarnOrd Community Plan are plenty of mailing lists that can be found. Put the e important part of your invitation, WHO WHAT WHERE September 13th, 2004 WHY at the top of the page, preferably in BOLD. Don't • .A� p11 8 00 p make people read a lengthy letter to finally get to the important part. The better designed and eye catching ` the invitation, the more people will respond to it. Try v eag 1#S Recreation Center sending postcards, if you have a large list. Always include a name and phone number for more informa- r `� —y"` ""`ter tion. Think about language. Should you have the invita- F __ :_. . tion in more than one language? Do you use too much preservation jargon? A sign advertising an open house is placed in a busy location. Mailed invitations aren't enough. Pick up the phone and call critical people: the Photo:courtesy of the author movers and shakers; the heads of clubs; and officers of organizations. Personally TA R Jan/Feb 2006 13 Small Towns NIV6 Forum 20o(a mr .r I extend the invitation and ask them to bring representatives from their organization.Ask them to put the invitation in their newsletter, advertise it on their Web page, or send it out to their membership by e-mail. A word of caution when using the personal invita- tion method—make sure all sides are invited equally. Don't invite the entire Historic Society and only 2 business owners. It will be very obvious that you were "stacking the deck", and the credibility of your public meetings will definitely be questioned. Make sure everyone feels included and knows they are welcome by posting signs. Informative signs at important intersections can be very effective, but watch the con- • tent and legibility. Can you read it from the car? Does it include essential information? Use Community Bulletin boards and remember that, grocery stores and coffee houses usually have a bulletin board for community events. Send a press release to your local newspaper, well in advance. It should be to the point and let readers know where to go for more information. To help ensure publica- tion, ask the newspaper to give you its preferred press release format and then follow it. Better yet, see if you can get an article written about your issue and include the Public Meeting announcement in the story. Don't forget local radio stations, public access television, and the "alternative" press. For good participation, don't limit your- self to only one method to let the community know about your meeting. Find out about scheduled community or neighborhood events and see if you can be there with flyers and invitations. Consider setting up with Public Works at the heavy brush collection points to hand out fliers, attending Free Spay and Neuter Clinics, or attending the Little League sign up days. Don't just show up with your fliers—ask per- mission first, preferably before the event. a � �,r �, , Meeting Locations and Times ' i ,.~ Where and when you have your meetings is critical. Is the meeting f, . . +; place convenient? Is there adequate parking? Is it accessible? How jv "Ij, .``` many people do you expect? Northridge Park 1 °"" —j—`$a For some topics. it is better to meet in more personal settings with a • i , 1 NE GHBO H INiVEA.LOOP.; small groupof people. Coffee in a neighbor's livingroom is often more •-®i BAPTIST -d NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING. P P 9 CHURCH - ' 8JAN. S It AM comfortable and less threatening than a public meeting place. The (, O.AVIL a • _,PASTO conversation can be personal and the idea of a new historic district . _... could be less daunting. Of course, you have to have a lot of these lit- ;;.,y tle meetings, but they can be very effective. • ' ".."" �- ' Large meetings should be held in a space that can hold everyone. The -.. ,. - ..- - ' space needs good ventilation, sound, and lighting. Don't waste your Select an accessible, meeting listening to complaints about the temperature of the room. comfortable location for Food is usually a good idea, even if it is coffee, water, and store bought cookies. public meetings. People like free stuff and the caffeine/ sugar boost keeps folk happier. Try to avoid Source:courtesy of the author creating a cause for grumpiness. Accept the fact that you should probably have more than one meeting. Some people are more accessible during the day and others in the evening. If the area affected is large, meet in different parts of town and at different times. Additionally, don't let the meeting habits of your committee influence your meeting time—just because Tuesday mornings at 7:15 is good for your committee, doesn't mean that would be a good time for the general public. 14 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Small Towns 0 NAPE Forum 20010 ` ° ', tm ` -•, $ _ Finally, be aware of what is happening in your community. It's not -� i �.' a good idea to schedule your meeting during the District �- , ` i Championship football game. Unfortunately, this happens more , rt F «EI is, . often than you might think; and we wonder why no one showed up. * •;` .-, '" Strong local preservation programs depend on strong public par- ticipation, N. so make sure everyone has ample opportunity to be �, x • itiiheard. You will also be giving yourself ample opportunity to get .,,.• , the preservation message across. -� '"i - One final note: It is guaranteed that no matter how hard you try, no , r- •� ` '1 matter what you do, there will be someone who stands up and • r -.'‘\..- �___..---- ' r says they never heard about the meeting. Try to avoid pointing out that they are attending the very meeting they claim to have never Positive and meaningful public • heard about. participation can make your project better.Photo:courtesy of the author. 1)Overall, I believe The Alliance Excellent Good Adequate Review is: 44% 55% 1% 2)Overall I find the articles: Very Relevant Relevant Somewhat Relevant 60% 34% 6% 3) Overall I find the articles: Too Long Not Long Enough The Right Length 12% 5% 83% 4) Please rate The Alliance Excellent Good Adequate Fair Review's design and appearance: 26% 65% 7% 2% 5) My favorite regular feature of Chair's Corner Prog. Coordinator's Forum Report State News Other/None The Alliance Review is: 0 Introduction 28% and Notes 8% 31% 33% 6) My least favorite regular fea- Chair's Corner Prog. Coordinator's Forum Report State News Other/None ture of The Alliance Review is: 18% Introduction 4% and Notes 65% 9% 4% 7) I find the occasional feature Very worthwhile Worthwhile Somewhat Worthwhile Not Worthwhile Commission Staff Profiles: 5% 14% 73% 8% Thank you to everyone who took the time to complete our 2005 Readers' Survey! In the com- ing months, we will continue to use the responses to guide The Alliance Review's ongoing development. Comments and questions are always welcome. Send them to NAPC, P.O. Box 1605, Athens, GA 30603 or napc@uga.edu Subject line: NAPC Feedback. TAR Jan/Feb 2006 15 Ethics&Authenticity • THE ART Leah J. Konicki,AICP Editor's Note: The Art of Negotiation first appeared in The Alliance Review in November — December 1997. Its timeless information remains among the best guides for anyone serving on or working with a local preservation commission. Sometimes, amid the de- mands of a commission's work, it can be easy to forget the human interaction aspect of local preservation. In response to numerous requests, NAPC is pleased to offer The Art of Negotiation once again. The new owner of a turn-of-the-century bank building applies for a Certificate of Appropri- ateness to paint the building in a jazzy new paint scheme, reflecting the building's new use as an art gallery. The glazed brick façade has never been painted. The owner of a rambling Queen Anne house with a delicate wraparound porch applies for permission to replace the historic wood windows with vinyl replacement windows,citing the According to the high cost of heating the house during the winter months. Oxford American The owner of a boutique furniture store would like to demolish the building adjacent to his, Dictionary, the verb complaining the property is not historic anyway and, besides, he needs additional parking negotiate means for his customers. "to try to reach an agreement or Each of these scenarios is familiar to members and staff of historic preservation commis- arrangement by sions. They can also be some of the most difficult issues local preservation commissions discussion." In an face. Yet there are proven negotiation techniques staff and boards can use in attempting to informal sense, solve these thorny preservation issues, at the same time reducing conflict and decreasing negotiation is the negative impressions of historic preservation these situations can imprint in the minds something we do of the public. Unfortunately, negotiation skills are not often taught in the preservation, plan- everyday. ping, design,and history programs which many historic preservation professionals have as their background or training workshops for commission members.As a result, negotiation techniques tend to be acquired through on-the-job training. After more than a decade of work with local design review boards, historic tax credit projects, and Section 106 reviews, I have developed some techniques for working through the often thorny issues each of these reviews can involve. These techniques are based on information from a variety of books and articles on conflict management and negotiation. One of the best resources is a 160-page book entitled Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In by Roger Fisher and William Ury.1 This article will outline some steps in the negotiation process to provide a framework for preservation commissions and their staffs. What is Negotiation? According to the Oxford American Dictionary, the verb negotiate means"to try to reach an agreement or arrangement by discussion." In an informal sense, negotiation is something we do everyday. Deciding on a restaurant with friends, helping a child pick clothes to wear to school, and arranging meeting times are all examples of ne- gotiations. There are several key components to any negotiation, as discussed in details below. Try to understand the applicant's point of view. When someone requests permission for work that conflicts with our guidelines,one of the first things I do is ask questions to find out just what the applicant is trying to accomplish. In most cases, the answer is to reduce heating and cooling costs,to reduce the amount of maintenance required,or to save money on the remodeling costs. In some cases, the answer is to improve the appearance of the building or to update its look. By getting at the underlying reasons for the proposed work,it is sometimes possible to present alternatives to help applicants meet their stated needs. Nov-Dec 2006 21 Keeping it Real • Avoid confrontational language. Diplomacy is critical to every negotiation situation. For example, not long ago I received a phone call from an owner of rental property who was inquiring about installing vinyl siding on her brick building. My first instinct was to blurt out, "Why on earth would you want to do that?" I managed to catch myself in time, and instead asked, "What is the advantage to siding?" (The answer, perhaps not surprisingly, was to make the building maintenance free!) Two words to avoid when dealing with potentially controversial situations are "you" and "why."2 They are both loaded and their use can cause any discussion to become downright unpleasant before you know it. Instead of phrases such as "Why would you want to do this?"consider, "It isn't clear to me what the basis for this proposal is." Avoiding the use of "you" can help applicants save face and keep them from feeling it is necessary to defend proposals to the limit. Another phrase to avoid altogether is"because the guidelines[or ordinance]says so." Most people accept rules and regulations with greater ease when they understand the logic be- hind them. Rather than saying"because it says so right here,"explain "our guidelines rec- ommend not painting unpainted brick because it creates an on-going maintenance problem for the owner." Along these lines, it is helpful to have readily available guidelines, which if possible, can be distributed free of charge to applicants. Our guidelines used to be quite thick, and were stored in a big black binder. There was only one copy of that binder, and it was mine. I was never comfortable telling an applicant, "you can't have the type of sign you'd like because it says so right here." When we developed new guidelines, I made sure they were well illustrated, in plain language, and easily reproduced for wide distribution. I can now hand applicants copies of our guidelines and point out the relevant language to them. I'm more comfortable, and hopefully, so are the applicants. . }: +:.. Make sure applicants understand the design review process. Applicants .,,,,x " ` should also be given all information about the design review process, including the process for appeals. If your local regulations allow for staff approval of some 41. items, use it as a negotiating tactic. We have found it sometimes helps to tell an applicant, "Look, I can't approve what you're proposing, which means you'll have to go to our preservation commission. Their next meeting is scheduled for a week from Monday. However, if you can agree to do the project in a way that meets our guidelines, I can approve your application today and you can get all :., your permits." Most people accept rules and Just as providing copies of your design guidelines can facilitate discussions, outlining the regulations with greater ease complete process, including how to appeal a decision of the preservation commission, when they understand the logic gives you credibility with the applicant. Use this to your advantage by providing applicants behind them. with complete information about their potential route through the system. Be a problem solver. The most consistently helpful tack to take with applicants is to be a problem solver, someone who can help identify alternatives. It can be much more effec- tive to say, "Have you considered doing your project this way?" rather than simply saying, "no, you can't do it." Very often applicants are just not aware there may be another way to tackle a problem; by presenting them with alternatives, you may accomplish two things. First, applicants may choose alternatives which are more in keeping with preservation prin- ciples; second, and perhaps more importantly, if applicants can select from acceptable alternatives,they feel they have retained control. (Of course,for commission members—as opposed to staff—suggesting alternative designs is not appropriate,especially in a commis- sion meeting. This role should be left to commission staff.) 22 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Ethics&Authenticity • Be informed. One of the most effective negotiation tools commission staff and members can have is information. Technical information is found in various publications, including The Alliance Review, Preservation Briefs series from the National Park Service, and Old House Journal. Whenever possible, I offer this material to applicants to provide informa- tion that may help them understand the logic behind our recommendations. Again, when presenting this information to applicants,be as diplomatic as possible.using language such as"were you aware..."or"studies have shown..." Use other tools. Sometimes, other regulations and codes can help in the negotiation pro- cess. For example,a recent applicant requested permission to add a new window opening on the side of a building where no window had been located. Although the local design re- view board probably would have approved the request,a check with the local building code officials revealed a window in the requested location violated the code. Zoning codes often regulate the size and locations of parking pads or garages, and may address fence heights and design. Signs in historic business districts also are subject to zoning approval. In addition to local regulations, there may be incentive programs a property owner can utilize. For example, for properties located in both local and National Register Historic Districts undergoing substantial rehabilitation as income-producing property, owners can utilize the federal Investment Tax Credit for Historic Preservation. This valuable incentive is a 20%credit on the amount of money spent on the rehabilitation of a certified project;it also Don't let them includes a review of the proposed work. Make sure applicants are aware when projects are eligible for these tax credits. As the saying goes, money talks,and a 20% return on the personalize the investment in a historic building gets the attention of most people. Check with your State issue . . . Sometimes Historic Preservation Office for assistance in answering questions about proposed work this is an honest items, and share this information with the applicant. It can take the pressure off the local misunderstanding, review if proposed work does not meet the federal design standards. but it can also be a negotiation ploy. Use resource people. It is helpful to develop relationships with your colleagues in city hall, especially those individuals who work with the housing and building codes. When I was still new to my job, I relied on the expertise of the city's rehab staff to help understand some of the proposals coming before our local design review board. For example, on one occasion an applicant requested permission to apply vinyl siding to a frame townhouse with ginger- bread and shaped shingles on the front façade. The owner complained she was unable to keep paint on the building; after only a year, large blisters would develop, and before long the paint would peel off. After conferring with our rehab staff, I learned about the insulation that had been blown into the wall cavities of this house. In all likelihood,this insulation was contributing to the exterior paint problem, as the building was no longer able to breathe. The compromise solution was to allow vinyl siding to be installed on the plain side and rear elevations, with the front façade preserved. Developing a relationship with my colleagues helped me understand this issue and develop a solution that was indeed "win-win" for all involved. Don't let them personalize the issue. Negotiations can be especially difficult when the applicant attempts to blame the staff person or board members as individuals for a design review decision. Sometimes this is an honest misunderstanding, but it can also be a ne- gotiation ploy. On one occasion I was meeting with an investment tax credit applicant and his architect. The owner hoped to fill in a second floor side porch to create additional interior space. Be- cause it was an original porch with Eastlake detailing,our State Historic Preservation Office felt this would result in a denial of the project by the National Park Service. The property owner asked me why I would not let him fill in the porch. I responded, "I am not telling you Nov-Dec 2006 23 Keeping it Real that you cannot fill in the porch. I am telling you if you fill in the porch, the project will no longer qualify for tax credits. It is your decision." He changed his demeanor, and left the porch open. Separate the people from the problem. As the last example illustrates, it is important to keep the issue under discussion separate from the people involved. Do your homework. Be familiar with the buildings in your local district. My files contain a black and white 35mm photograph of each building in our local districts; these are invalu- able in discussing design proposals with applicants, and can reduce the time it takes to review applications. Have them do their homework. Whenever possible, encourage the applicant to explore alternatives. I once met with a building owner who planned to paint the decorative trim on an unpainted brick building; he first proposed a scheme of five colors. I suggested five colors were too many, but he was convinced it was the right approach. I encouraged him to buy small quantities of each color and try a test area on the building. He returned to my office a few hours later with a simpler color scheme and the statement, "If you had insisted I not use these colors, I would have fought you tooth and nail. As it turns out, you were right;there were too many colors." By encouraging him to explore alternatives, I helped him reach an informed decision that was his own. Take a course or seminar in negotiation techniques. If you'd like to learn more about negotiation, in addition to the books mentioned,consider a course or seminar at a local col- lege or university in negotiation and/or communication techniques. Courses with qualified instructors can help reinforce the suggestions outlined in this article. Accept your losses and move on. A final note: even when utilizing these suggested ap- proaches to negotiation, there are times when nothing works. When that happens, give it your best shot and then let it go. One summer Friday, I was asked by the city's building inspector to talk to the owner of a historic building outside our local districts about his plan to sandblast his building. I talked with the property owner for almost an hour, explaining to him that in the long run he would be doing more harm than good by sandblasting the brick. At the end of our discussion, I was convinced I had gotten through to him. Early the next week, however, I learned that he had sandblasted the building. I had given it my best shot, and the owner made his own decision. I was disappointed,of course, but realized that there was not way to undo what had been done. Negotiation is an integral part of every preservation job, and learning basic communication and negotiation skills can smooth the road and make even the hardest part of the job—tell- ing applicants"no"—a little easier to do. Happy negotiating! Leah J. Konicki, AICP was the Preservation Officer for the City of Covington, Kentucky at the time this article first appeared. I Fisher,Roger and William Ury. Getting to Yes:Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. New York,NY:Pen- guin Books, 1983. 2 For a complete discussion of"Eleven things never to say to anyone,"and other verbal negotiation techniques,I recommend Verbal Judo:The Gentle Art of Persuasion by George J. Thompson,PhD. (New York:William Mor- row&Co., 1993.) 24 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Reader's Requests CONSIDERING COLOR Compiled by NAPC Can a historic preservation commission regulate paint colors in a locally desig- nated historic district? It is a concern that many people have about local designa- tion. NAPC receives numerous questions about this issue and has compiled the following basic information. Generally, regulating paint color is a tricky activity for local preservation commis- sions. The threat of a lawsuit is always a possibility if a commission hasn't done their homework. Commissions should remember that paint is at best a temporary treatment. In five, seven, or ten years a building will have to be painted again and the color reflects the owner's personality. In order to legally regulate paint color, several important rules apply. 1) Regulating paint color in historic districts must be allowed by the en- abling legislation in a state's statutes or administrative code. In some states it is specifically prohibited, in some states it is specifically allowed, and in other states the language is ambiguous, leaving it up to the local govern- ment for interpretation. Check your state's historic preservation enabling leg- islation before anything else (see examples below). 2) Regulating paint color in historic ,• . ( (--- districts must be allowed by a city's local preservation ordinance. Ev- `' g;r erything just said about state enabling ? :. • legislation applies. If the state enabling �%'� _'"` legislation is ambiguous and the local ` y government chooses to interpret it as al- j lowing the regulation of paint color, the commission's authority [to regulate color] f, Y must be specifically enumerated in the local ordinance. ., 3) If regulating paint color in histor- ', j is districts is allowed by ordinance, �' guidelines need to be adopted to en- , `,. 1: k / able a preservation commission to s" - make informed and defensible deci- - sions. These guidelines need to state . ",.. l el - P' what colors are acceptable and why, and may include a published palette of colors and a schematic of acceptable combinations. There should also be a logical reason for the colors on the palette, i.e.: the period of significance for the dis- trict and/or the period colors for the style of the house. Interpreting the Language of State Enabling Legislation and Local Ordinanc- es Concerning Regulating Paint Color As mentioned earlier, state enabling legislation may either clearly allow or disallow commissions to regulate paint color, or may leave it open to interpretation. Ala- 4 NEWS f Om the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Reader's Requests bama's state enabling legislation, for example, allows regulation: "No change in the exterior appearance of an historic property or any building, structure or site within an historic district may be '"" "" .. "''•' made...until a certificate of appropriateness for such change...is N gar ._ approved by the historic preservation commission...A municipal , ,- = ity enacting an ordinance, pursuant to this chapter, may include ``"- selection of paint colors (emphasis added) in changes requir- 7`,mom i, ing a certificate of appropriateness. The painting of originally un- f A t =s I painted surfaces shall require a certificate of appropriateness." ;ti; ,,;,;- r...,�_„ 421:4 ,,,,,,,_, •.._,,,,,,.„ (Alabama Code, Sec. 11-68-9) , .., The state of Georgia, on the other hand, does not allow regula- i . :w tion: "'Material change in appearance'means a change that will affect only the exterior architectural features of a historic property or • - -• ••R-»'• ---•--- •-M•--- ----- of any structure, site, or work of art within a historic district and may include... the erection, alteration, restoration, or removal 1 of anybuildingor other structures within a designated historic . ... „.. .....,,R.,.., 9 ., _ . district, including walls, fences, steps, and pavements, or other appurtenant features, except exterior paint alterations (em- ..,,...-,.._,.,.. _..,.....,. .,......,...,F._ phasis added)."(Official Code of Georgia, Sec. 44-10-22e) Commissions whose local ordi- Commissions whose local ordinances do not allow regulation can still advise prop- nances do not allow regulation erty owners on appropriate historic colors and palettes. Commissions may want to can still advise properly owners include a section on historically appropriate color in their design guidelines. This on appropriate historic colors and section of the guidelines, however, should include language making it clear that palettes. the guidelines are provided for informational purposes only and that the commis- sion does not regulate color. Many states do not specifically mention paint colors in their state enabling legis- lation, meaning that local governments and commissions have to be much more explicit in their ordinances concerning paint. For example, Michigan's state enabling legislation does not specify whether com- missions can regulate paint color, and defines any exterior changes to a property as "work": "'Work'"means construction, addition, alteration, repair, moving, excavation, or demolition. (Michigan Compiled Laws, Sec. 399.201a(v)) A permit shall not be issued and proposed work shall not proceed until the commission has acted on the application by issuing a certificate of appropriateness or a notice to proceed as prescribed in this act." (Michigan Compiled Laws, Sec. 399.205) Note the ambiguity of these statements-does changing the paint color of a house fall under any of these categories? Consequently,the city of Detroit's preservation ordinance borrowed language from the state enabling legislation and altered it in order to specifically include a refer- ence to regulating paint colors: Mar-Apr 2007 5 Reader's Requests "'Work-means any excavation, new construction or erection of a building, fence, wall or other structure or significant landscape feature, including pavements. The term also includes any removal of an architectural or significant landscape feature, as well as reconstruction, alteration, a change of surface treatment, a change of color by painting or other means (emphasis added), or any demo- lition or a structure, a portion thereof, or significant landscape feature. (Detroit Code of Ordinances, Sec. 25-2-2) Commissions should be aware that the regulation of paint colors in historic districts is as uncommon as it is common. Many local governments feel that such regula- tion can be unnecessary and overbearing for property owners who must already obtain certificates of appropriateness for other exterior modifications. In addition, many property owners who would otherwise be enthusiastic supporters of historic preservation may be turned off by color regulation and less inclined to invest in lo- cally designated districts. As if all of the above wasn't already confusing enough, there are additional facets to the issue. • Previously Unpainted Surfaces. If a commission is prohibited from regulating paint color, it may still prohibit or restrict the painting of previously unpainted surfaces. While both issues concern paint, they are different because painting previously unpainted surfaces is a material change that may harm the building, regardless of the color. • Sign Colors. If a commission that is not allowed to review paint color has regulatory authority over signs in historic districts, it may be allowed to regulate their color since they are not buildings. Additionally, signs are frequently regu- lated by ordinances and policies not administered by the local preservation commission; so while the commission may not be able to regulate the color of buildings, another body may be able to regulate what colors are used on signs. The local preservation commission should try to work with these other bodies to make sure they are in accord with sound preservation practice. • Murals. A commission that does not have regulatory authority over paint color may have the authority to approve or deny murals in locally designated dis- tricts. Check with your city attorney for clarification. (See pages 17 and 18 for recent discussions on this issue on NAPC-L). In summary, it is important for a commission to be aware of the legal implications concerning the regulation of paint colors — local and state ordinances should be consulted and clear and appropriate guidelines need to be available to home and business owners if paint colors are regulated. Paul Trudeau, Pratt Cassity, and Nancy Jane Baker made significant contributions to this article. 6 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Louisville: Special Conference Issue KNEW ABOUT ENFORCEMENT Boyd Maher, Certified Local Government Coordinator, Arkansas Enforcement. Compliance. That's really what it all comes down to. All the ordinances passed, all the volunteer hours in meetings, all the staff visits to the project site,the design advice, the standards, the guidelines, the consultants, the architects, the engineers, the negotiations, the compromises, the procedures, and the paperwork ...They don't amount to much if the property owner doesn't follow through. Ain't that frustrating? In my short time coordinating Arkansas's Certified Local Government program, I've had the opportunity to watch several successful enforcement actions, as well as a number of unsuccessful ones; and I think I'm starting to notice some trends. What follows in this arti- cle are the four things I wish local preservation commissioners knew about enforcement 1.) Enforcement is not your job, 2.) Enforcement reflects poorly on everyone involved, 3.) Following your procedures is crucial, and 4.) Advocacy and education are the best enforcement. You will notice a recurring theme through all of these, and it's one you might expect ... Relationships are everything! Note: With the acknowledgement that preservation law and culture in every state and town has its individual nuances, this piece is written from an Arkansas per- Whatever the spective. That said, I hope everyone can identify some material that may be useful to your commission. case, 1) Enforcement is not your job. relationships are everything! The city or county preservation ordinance that created your commission, established your procedures, and gave you design review authority gave you broad discretion to regulate the actions of private citizens. It did NOT, however, deputize you as an officer of the law. Your commission is a rule-maker, an administrator, a bureaucrat (and a volunteer one, at that). You are NOT a cop! Nor a code officer, nor a building inspector, city engineer, or whoever else writes tickets and citations in your city. The commission's job is design review. Stick to that. And if those charged with enforcing the law drop the ball, then that is not your fault. OK, maybe that's a little cynical. After all, commissioners are investing their scarce extra time in this "preservation stuff' and will be much less likely to continue in that capacity if they don't feel their efforts have any impact. Officials in a large Arkansas city very pub- licly botched an enforcement effort a few years back. Several commissioners resigned, and the ones that stayed declined reappointment. An entirely new commission is still cleaning up the mess. So there still needs to be a coordinating mechanism between the commission and those agents of the city charged with enforcement. That may be a city attorney, code depart- ment, or even police. Whatever the case, relationships are everything! It is important that they know your preservation ordinance, your procedures, and the importance of preservation. Invite them to meetings, send them a copy of your minutes, and ask them to give you updates on other goings-on in City Hall. TA R Sep/ocr 2004 17 Enforcement In cities of all sizes though, law enforcement officials have lots of other things on their mind. Cruising the beat for preservation violators is not always high on their list of priori- ties. Still, these folks are sworn to uphold the law and take that charge seriously. And if you are willing to take the time to manage your relationship with them, they will pay atten- tion when you bring a potential enforcement concern to their attention. 2) Enforcement reflects poorly on everyone involved. Maybe there are exceptions in other states, but I cannot think of one enforcement case in Arkansas where the preservation commission came out smelling like a rose. If we think of relationships as debit accounts, your commission's request for enforcement action can be seen as a withdrawal, rather than the deposits you've worked so hard to develop. ! (Remember this metaphor ... we will use it again.) Enforcement makes your commission a liability to elected officials, rather than the asset it should be. Enforcement creates extra work for enforcement officials. This is not to say there are no success stories. For example, the Historic District Commission in a small town in the Arkansas Delta recently issued a Certificate of Appropriateness for the '1i= e - demolition of an unsafe building in a downtown commercial dis- trict. (Yeah, we always hate to lose a historic building, but this j' one really did meet all their guidelines for an appropriate demo- • ?` lition.) They attached a few conditions to the COA, one of which Q ;r-- .► ,, „; -- involved the owner consulting with an architect regarding the :� ' , I protection of the adjoining structures. Sure enough, a few 1. , , o weeks later the bulldozer is in the street, but no architects have ; • been consulted! Tf PF ,,�, i At the request of the HDC staff person,the City Engineer placed a t a "stop-work" order on the project. The property owner, of all - --- ,rtfl •-- - -- course,was furious and threatened legal action. In the end, the - f .,. - ' " owner complied with conditions of the COA, but the damage k g was done. Talk travels fast in small towns, and the HDC was '""` ` I- , , d painted as an obstructionist, out-of-control body with an axe to 11 g> i grind. The elected officials refused to comment on the situation. Iiif ala t- \ _ Even if you win, you lose. Even when the system works, you .. n ` have to consider the consequences, especially in places with fierce property-rights traditions. Ewww! This poor old building (On the upside, did you notice that the system worked because of the working relation- is just not safe! Yes... that is ship commission staff had with the City Engineer?) daylight you see in the top story windows. And bricks are 3) Following Your Procedures Is Crucial 3 falling in to the street every day. How can we demolish it Just as your commissioners don't want to spend their time making decisions that don't without damage to the other have teeth; your law enforcement officials don't want to waste their time enforcing cases buildings? And how can we that are unlikely to hold up in court. enforce that decision? 18 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Enforcement There is a lot of material out there on preservation law, so we won't get into all that here. But, by-and-large, the courts know they are not preservation experts. They will defer to your commission's expertise if, IF, IF you followed your procedures. We live in a rule- based society, and folks that play by the rules will almost always have a leg up. Do your city attorneys, code officers, and building inspectors a favor. Make their work easier by conducting your meetings according to your by-laws, base all your decisions on your standards and guidelines, and observe all freedom of information laws. Do these things and you will reduce the size of the withdrawals you make from that "relationship bank"whenever you need their help. 4)Advocacy and Education are the Best Enforcement In case you have not gathered, I really, really, really feel strongly that the best enforce- ment is pro-active. Nothing brings your district into compliance like a long-term, compre- hensive advocacy and education campaign. There have been a great many articles writ- ten about preservation advocacy, but we'll examine it from a local enforcement angle. The key to any advocacy effort, as you probably know, is creating that sense of"buy-in". The property owners in your district must feel invested your commission's preservation work or you will live a futile, miserable life (at least whenever your commission's monthly meetings are called to order.) Preservation is at its worst when nobody in town wants it. Lots of the advocacy literature is written for individuals and non-profits. And that's fine. But that advice does not always translate cleanly to a government-appointment commis- sion. In addition, there are those who would maintain that bureaucrats (and, yes, corn- missioners ARE bureaucrats)should not be advocates of the thing you're regulating ... the whole "conflict of interest" argument. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the door-to-door "selling" of preservation is an excellent opportunity to partner with your local historical society. (Relationships are everything!) They are in a better position than you to do the selling. But there are still things a public body, like your commission, can do to build that ever-elu- sive "buy-in". Some are obvious: invite public input at meetings, involve property owners in the development of your preservation plan and design guidelines, be nice to people, etc. Of course, there are always going to be new folks in town who are not yet familiar with the rules and procedures for your district. It is incumbent upon you to change that! New owners and tenants should receive a copy of your district's guidelines before the next commission meeting. Whether you accomplish this through staff, a non-profit partner, or a special welcome committee of commissioners is up to you. Just make sure everyone knows they are in a historic district and what that designation entails. (Relationships are everything!) Another strategy I'm coming to admire is the regular press release. This is especially effective in small towns with weekly or bi-weekly newspapers. These publications are always looking to fill space and are found in the kind of towns where everyone reads the whole paper. First pick a slogan or motto for your commission.Your mission statement, if you have one, may be perfect. "We are improving downtown through preservation." OR "We are enhancing quality of life through preservation." You get the idea. TA R Noy/Dec 2004 19 Enforcement Use your catch phrase in every meeting. Your chair can open and close meetings with it. Use it in deliberations too. Then put together a press release after every commission meeting, and be sure to include that slogan or motto each time. It is important for the pub- lic to see what business took place, but it's more important that they see your catch phrase again and again. Does this sound hokey? Annoying? Darn right! And effective too! Hundreds of books and articles are out there on the power of a regular, consistent mes- sage. Believe it! And your constituents will believe that YOU are the experts at preser- vation. There are dozens of other tools available for commissions undertaking a public relations effort—but how does this relate to enforcement? Enforcement efforts often coincide with a lack of awareness on the part of the property owner. He didn't know he was in a dis- trict. She had never heard of any design guidelines. He was unaware staff assistance was available. She didn't understand why preserving this little old house was important. Advocacy and education eliminate these misunderstandings. Relationships minimize the need for messy, sticky enforcement issues. Note: See the Jul/Aug 2004 issue of The Alliance Review for more information about public edu- cation and advocacy. VERY The Americans with Disabilities Act: LIMITED A Self-Guided training Course for Historic Preservation Commissions SUPPLIES REMAIN! Training Notebook and accompanying Resource Guide are now available. NAPC has a limited quantity of training notebooks and the accompanying resource guide from this groundbreaking training initiative. The training notebook guides course moderators through the entire process of planning and conducting the train- ing session for preservation commissioners. Individual commissioners can also use the notebook on their own. The notebook presents..the material in easy to understand layperson's terms without leaving out important information and includes several design exercises to give commissioners "hands-on".experience in reviewing ADA pro- jects. The 300+ page resource guide provides all the material referenced in the train- ing notebook plus other information specifically useful to preservation commissions. To order The Americans with Disabilities Act: A Self,Guided training Course for Historic Preservation Commissions -nd t e accompanying Resource Guide, send a check or money order .`, $• : ► i to . NAPC o� 4,0o 01. PO Box 1605 P�GeS R�ON Athens, GA 30603 20 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Education&Outreach EDUCATION AND PUBLIC OUTREACH PLANNING FOR PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS by Stacy Patterson, Preservation Consultant, Silver Spring, Maryland Red tape, "paint police," "hysterical commission"—every local preservation commission has heard these words at one time or another. How can a commission combat these ste- reotypes with little or no staff,small budgets,and lots of work?By creating an outreach and education plan, commissions can proactively address these challenges and many others. Although public outreach and education are central responsibilities of historic preservation commissions, these important activities and opportunities often come second to the com- mission's regulatory duties. Outreach and education at the local level is often perceived as work that would be nice to do instead of something that is critical. Small or no staff and budgets, public apathy, media misrepresentation, and local bureaucracy can make it more difficult to conduct activities specifically focused on outreach and education; yet these same challenges are the reasons outreach and education are essential.An outreach and education plan can be an effective tool to overcome these challenges. What is an Outreach and Education Plan? "•nu,,,,urs argit41=e....4,}Q--C nts. �- An outreach and education plan is a tool any commission can create the �reSerVG�l.l� l to streamline their public programming efforts.The plan addresses cur- rent and future needs of a commission, staff, and the community they ul"``'"'' serve,as well as the promotion of local historic resources. Through the Tax Credits Cale Savo 'feu planning process,a commission can discuss and evaluate their current .- t.-. , dr Tst6,: :;nImm :::_,ato. K 1 , outreach and education resources, research and develop new ideas, „ ' Z-_rt� E p- and plan for the specific implementation of the chosen activities. Like 1:;. .�.x_- `' M .. .'.y .�� ..". a master plan or work plan, an outreach and education plan is a fluid .--, , ;:a° " =,:, "' :`"- .r } '" document, meant to be reviewed and updated as programs are imple- 1 --- I. k mented and new needs and opportunities arise. V ...,,,A.l.y.r.sh,14.11.N,R, 6 w. 4 Ill '' . ' Taking an organized and methodical approach to the outreach and edu- w,_ ,. „N, " ---j � a- :%� °""' — cation planning process allows a commission to develop a plan that mt meets their needs and falls within their budget and capabilities.A plan - should serve as a tool to increase an entire community's knowledge and understanding of the significance of local historic resources and •, 1 Y ..1 .J, „, ,,,,,;, the need to protect them through designation, regulation, and review. w ,,, - It should identify community values and how historic preservation fits I�t`- "`"":`"� Y in or protects those values. Overall, an outreach and education plan is 1t a way for a commission to demonstrate to the public how its regulatory f�;, yi 7 g 'd h, i y1 1.0 IW. '"` .,w:� '' A`, y,,,I.,n._ s 1 role benefits a community through printed materials,public forums,and 1 ,� " " personal efforts. L__-i A� " What are Outreach and Education Resources? Outreach and education resources can be broadly defined as any ma- terial or activity which revolves around an aspect of historic preser- Newsletters are good examples of vation and is available to local stakeholders and the general public. These can include outreach and education resources. brochures, walking tours, websites, design guidelines, newsletters, events, workshops, Photo courtesy of the author meetings, books, maps, technical, and procedural information.Any document released to the public by the commission should be considered in an outreach and education context. Through outreach and education planning, these resources can be redesigned, redistrib- uted, publicized, and promoted to further the understanding of historic preservation in a community. Why should your commission create an Outreach and Education Plan? By educating the public about local historic resources and their preservation, and demon- 4 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Education&Outreach strating how preservation connects to existing community values, commissions can bring historic preservation into the mainstream. Failing to educate the community about preser- vation hurts the preservation movement as a whole and can compromise the commission's efficacy. While it is nearly impossible to convince every citizen of how important historic preservation is as a community value, it is still possible to raise community awareness about historic preservation and gain better coverage in the local media. Planning specifically for outreach and education can refocus commission efforts toward these important activities and gamer new support. While many preservation commissions include outreach and education as a goal within their larger work plans or action plans, it is frequently the part of the plan that is least implemented. By developing a formal, stand- alone outreach and education plan, a commission can ensure that it works toward accom- plishing that part of its mission. Preservation commissions stand on the front lines of historic preservation and their impact—or lack there of—determines the public's impression of historic preservation as a movement overall.Appreciation for cultural and historic resources often starts at the local level, where people feel the greatest sense of connection to a place. Whether a commis- sion is large or small,whether they have public support or not,all commissions can benefit from planning for outreach and education. Step-by-Step: Creating an Outreach and Education Plan Creating an Outreach and Education Plan is a major commitment for any preservation commission, but it is also an important investment in the community and the role historic preservation will play within it.The following nine steps provide a suggested formula for the creation of a plan for a local commission. 1. Commit Deciding to create and implement an outreach and education plan is a major step. This means a commission must commit time and money to the development, implementation, and ongoing review of the plan. To make the plan successful, it is essential to designate someone—a staff or commission member—to lead the effort. The organization as a whole must commit to helping in the development, implementation, and review process in one way or another. Make sure everyone is willing to accept potential changes resulting from the plan. When the time and budget become available,the planning can begin in earnest. 2. Develop Goals and Identifying the Target Audience Since the organization is committing time and money to the plan,it is essential that the final product satisfy the needs of the commission as well as the community it serves. It is therefore important to establish a set of goals for the plan. The com- mission,staff,and other important stakeholders should be included in the develop- ment of goals.These goals can include more organized planning of outreach and education activities,stronger media relations, better educational materials and op- portunities, and greater participation at local events. During this process it is also necessary to identify the plan's target audience. The target audience can include the commission,staff and residents of historic districts, as well as school children, politicians, local architects and builders, or an entire city or county. As the target audience broadens, so must the reach of the plan. 3. Evaluate Current Resources An important preliminary step is identifying resources and activities a commission Jul Aug 2007 5 Education&Outreach already has in place for outreach and education. Examining all current brochures, books, events, and websites will help establish where the commission stands. To keep an organized record, these resources can be logged into a database. Once the list of current resources is complete,the commission or staff can analyze how well these serve the needs of the organization.Asking questions like "Is this bro- chure current?","How easy is it to find and navigate the website?"or"How effective is our participation at this event?" can help an organization make the most of its current materials before investing in new ones. 4. Conduct Interviews and Surveys Once current resources have been identified and established, it is time to find out which outreach and education activities work,which ones need to be changed,and which need to be removed.The best way to address this is through interviews and surveys. The person leading the planning process should take time to interview staff and commission members as well as other stakeholders such as district resi- dents,business people,local non-profit organizations,civic groups,educators,and elected officials to learn their opinions on current resources, as well as what they would like to see in the future.Do not be afraid to think outside the box—or budget. Even if an idea will take a lot of money and time, if it is in the plan, it may become possible to secure a grant in the future to see it accomplished. Next, it is important to involve the community you serve. By surveying a historic district or creating fo- cus groups,the commission and staff can learn the opinions of residents, business Do not be afraid to owners, politicians, and visitors. Surveying your target audience before the plan think outside the is created will help assure that the time and money spent on new and improved box—or budget. Even resources won't be wasted. if an idea will take a lot 6 Look Around of money and time, if So far the process has been rather internally focused, but now it is time to move it is in the plan, it may outside of your commission and look to others. Get in touch with other commis- become possible to sions to see what has worked for their organizations. Learn the nitty-gritty of a suc- secure a grant in the cessful project by asking about funding sources,time commitments, partnerships, future to see it and publicity. Do not be afraid to copy another idea, in this case imitation is the accomplished. highest form of flattery. Creating open communications between commissions can only benefit each organization.Look at other commission websites,brochures,and events for inspiration.Attend local,state, and national conferences to network and gather new ideas. 6. Get Organized Now that the staff and commission have identified their goals and target audience, their existing resources, and their needs, it is time to get organized and set priori- ties.The leader,along with the commission and staff must decide which resources and activities are most important to accomplish their goals and which must be ac- complished right away. It is often helpful to categorize activities based upon which goal they will meet and then select a priority from each category. For instance, if your goals involve more organized planning of outreach and education activi- ties, stronger media relations, better educational materials and opportunities, and greater participation at local events,you could choose a priority from each of these goals. In that case, you could include in your plan monthly outreach and educa- tion updates at staff meetings, drafting regular press releases, holding an annual tax credit seminar,and taking part in a new local event.With commission priorities organized and set,the plan can begin to develop as a document. 6 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Education&Outreach 7. Develop a Timeline The next essential step in the process is developing a timeline for implementing __ �-aoi` the plan.This work becomes easier once organizational priorities are set. Based on the priorities established, it is possible to organize activities on a timeline. 'NNAI'C)i IS vt Take into consideration the people-hours and budget needed for each activity as "'" "'"� well. While there are numerous ways to construct a timeline, simple categories can be Existing(never forget to pat yourself on that back for what you are already a GCIIDE doing), Immediate, One year, Two years, and Future (five or ten years). Refer- ring to the plan each year when planning for the next assures that outreach and Try THE education activities will be budgeted for and accomplished. PROCESS 8. Compile Now that the commission and staff have goals, a target audience, a list of priori- " tized outreach and education activities, and a timeline for implementation, all of i � ,.4 this information can be compiled into the plan.The plan can be a simple spread- = , e _ sheet or a lengthy document, so long as it is organized and useable. Insert rel- z „.„..,,:is. evant graphics, such as examples of brochures or websites, as well as any rel- 01 i',.,evant tables. A detailed plan will provide a clear picture of the organization's i `` .,goals and how they will be met. r 9. Implement,Share, and Review ;, ... After all of the hard work on planning, do not just put the document on a shelf! Thisplan is meant to be used, shared, and constantlyupdated. Implement the '"`"`"`� `r '"' P P ��,nrr'�M,�n .,�,t„ activities listed under immediate and feel the satisfaction of checking them off I, 7.7:::: ,aura,,,. the list. Have the plan formally adopted by the commission and celebrate its Ii not K.r� , t,r.,.r, completion.Bring the plan to yearly meetings for updates and think up new ideas *air a ra r r�_I, for the plan over time. Remember to share the plan, especially with anyone who � .�--- contributed through an interview, survey, or research. Effective outreach requires good Recommendations for a good Outreach and Education Plan printed materials that familiarize After reviewing input from plans already in use and advice from practicing profession- applicants with the review process. als with experience in outreach and education, the following recommendations have Photo courtesy of the author been developed for commissions interested in creating their own outreach and education plan. The recommendations are structured based upon the examples of organizational goals listed previously—more organized planning of outreach and education activities, stronger media relations, better educational materials and opportunities, and greater participation at local events—but are relevant to all outreach and education planning. The recommendations were abbreviated into the following categories: planning, media, education,and events. Planning Planning for preservation outreach and education in a formal way is critical, whether it is through a master plan, an action plan, or a yearly work plan. The plan must address the needs of the community and the commission, and be realistic given staff and budget limitations. Advanced planning and assigning members to specific tasks can help keep the plan on track. Commissions should plan for more costly activities in advance to allow time to se- cure funding.Another critical element is updating the plan regularly as various elements are implemented and new needs arise. Jul Aug 2007 7 Education&Outreach Media All relevant materials should be made available to the public. This can be done through websites and in print, by promoting the commission at local events, in the media, at com- munity presentations, in schools, within the local government, and by any other means possible. Commissions and staff should think outside the box when considering locations to distribute material. All information should be easy to find, easy to use, and highly de- tailed. Create a website that educates citizens about historic preservation through a wide variety of written material, such as histories, design guidelines, and plans, as well as images in- cluding photographs, drawings, and maps. Utilize technology such as video, audio, and blogging capabilities.An interactive site can allow residents to post information and images of local historic properties and can assist in engaging the public in historic preservation. Staff or commissioners should maintain the site and take responsibility for moderating any interactive features. Commissions should keep citizens up to date on the variety of historic preservation re- sources available to them. Provide technical material and assistance when and wherever possible. Maintain useful print and online resources, as well as contractors'lists, organiza- tions that assist preservation projects, and examples of past projects for interested par- ties. Education Integrate historic preservation into the lives of community members by teaching the impor- tance of preserving community heritage along with historic preservation goals, benefits, • and techniques to students in grade school, college and graduate students, craftsmen, architects, contractors, planners, politicians, realtors, bankers,the media, historic property owners,and any other interested parties.Develop a curriculum for schools and educational opportunities for students of all ages, or provide assistance so local educators can create lesson plans based on historic resources. Inform local government officials about the work of the commission on a regular basis. Be sure to educate them about how preservation can benefit the communities they serve and address many larger social, economic,and planning issues. Develop a proactive media campaign that tackles the negative perception of commissions and highlights the many benefits historic preservation has provided a community through time. Letters to the editor can be an effective tool to address problems when they arise, and to keep the media apprised of the good work preservation is doing.Take advantage of opportunities to appear on public access cable TV programs, and other media outlets. Create strong partnerships with local, state, and national historic preservation and preser- vation-related organizations to assist in providing technical information,funding,advocacy, and support for outreach and education goals. Along with partnering, take advantage of opportunities to network with and learn from other preservation commissions by attending state and national conferences, attending commission meetings in other jurisdictions, and co-sponsoring preservation events. Provide seminars and workshops to help owners of historic properties and professionals learn proper techniques and understand the procedural aspects of historic preservation. Also discuss the economic incentives for doing historic preservation work. Develop hands- on workshops and classroom seminars on a wide variety of topics and hold them on a regular basis. Strive to familiarize local craftsman, homeowners, and professionals with 8 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Education&Outreach proper preservation techniques. Partner with local hardware stores and other companies to raise the profile of an event and provide funding and tools. Inviting banks and developers to seminars about economic incentives can show these companies how preservation can work for their business and the community. Publish information about these events in the local media and leave information with local businesses. Events Hold events that emphasize historic preservation efforts in the community, including award ceremonies, dedications for preservation projects, and local events during National His- toric Preservation Month. Utilize local historic resources as education and outreach tools by hosting events,walking tours,exhibits,and other public activities that demonstrate the importance of historic pres- ervation and the critical role the commission plays in protecting these resources. Demonstrate how historic preservation ties t • = ,, •�� -- • - into the broader ethics of maintaining a . � € �SR� t� �. �°• healthy environment and reducing sprawl Explain how the goals and work of preser ,r >s •.<- `" � �-"� +.ee.rE.�>-�«.m..-� .�..�:F«�f�.�=�«..��. vation are environmentally friendly and en- _-v courage re-use of old structures rather than „ the construction of new ones. Publish or "" "K provide information about how saving and $ "" using cultural resources can help preserve ,__=,. �., . ,,. natural resources around Earth Day to draw particular attention to these connections. Fi- nally, don't forget that commission meetings are events and work to make participating -- in them a positive experience. Help rest dents understand that the approval process =a * » a: protects the investment they have made in their neighborhood along with their respon- sibilities to protect their historic resource rt_s Provide applicants with procedural informs- ��- °" _. i � tion about hearings so they can be prepared Make effective use of the should they need to appear before the commission. Hold pre-hearing meetings with ap- World Wide Web to reach plicants and invite new residents to commission meetings.At the commission meetings,try a broad audience. to maintain a positive atmosphere to avoid the notion that the commission is unnecessary, Photo courtesy of the author bureaucratic"red tape." These recommendations are only a starting point for developing for a strong outreach and education program. The most important concept is to be proactive. Develop a plan, implement it, and bring historic preservation to your community rather than waiting for the community to come to you.A plan won't eliminate all of the challenges, but it will ensure that your commission and community are ready to meet them when they arise. Jul Aug 2007 9 • Public Education &Advocacy THE ABCs OF LOBBYING Rory Hayes, Phoenix Preservation Commission i Over the last few decades, historic preservation has evolved from a preoccupation of edu- cators and the wealthy to a grassroots movement involving all types of neighborhoods and groups. It is no longer principally the province of non-profit organizations and foundations and is now closely associated with government support through tax incentives,grants, and planning and zoning activities. As a result, it is the rare preservation activist who will never make contact with a policy-maker,whether a member of the Federal Congress or the local city council. Most folks are amazed that people actually get paid to engage in policy advocacy. "How hard can it be?"they ask. Actually, there's nothing to it as long as you are patient, per- sistent, and prepared. In short, it is a challenging activity but often necessary to advance preservation goals. To guide you in your efforts, here are some lobbying "ABCs". Al. Always Be Honest The most precious character trait that a lobbyist can possess is a reputation for hon- esty. It is important to provide credible information and be bound by your promises. Sometimes when you are asked a question for which you don't have an answer it is tempting to "wing it"; but it is better to look unknowledgeable than to provide incorrect information. Just admit you don't know, offer to provide the information later, and then make sure that you do. Also be certain that you have authority to enter into negotia- tions. You want to avoid agreeing to compromise only to reverse your position later because your organization or allies can't support the deal you endorsed. 2. Be Prepared Compile information for every possible question that could be raised about your issue. Play devil's advocate with yourself and think about the points of dispute likely to be raised by your opposition. You are wise to inform the policy-maker of any contrary arguments and take the opportunity to respond to them in advance. 3. Contact Other Stakeholders C Policy makers like nothing better than consensus. Try to arrive at one before you • launch into a full-scale battle. Marshall your forces by contacting potential allies. Par- ticularly identify supporters who are constituents or friends of policy-makers. Prepare a simple position paper your supporters can use when they contact their representa- tives. Don't rule out overtures to the opposition if you think there are potential areas of compromise. At the very least you will have a better understanding of their position and how to oppose it. 3. Don't Engage in Personal Attacks Whatever your frustration with the process, personal attacks are not only unprofes- sional, they are just dumb. You must always exercise patience and professionalism. In an era of instant computer communication, an unwise comment about an opponent can find its way to the recipient of your scorn within hours. You could make an enemy i for life of someone who might be an ally the next time around. E4. Educate Yourself About Procedures In the advocacy process timing can be everything. Many city and town councils have specific time frames for the consideration of proposals. Most state Legislatures only meet for a period of sixty to one hundred days. Ask for copies of rules and procedures from city or legislative clerks. Use contacts with other NAPC members in your state 16 NEWS from the NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS Public Education &Advocacy who have had lobbying experience. The national preservation advocacy organization, Preservation Action has very knowledgeable staff if you need guidance on Federal matter. 5. Find Out About Your Audience A city council member from a largely blue-collar district is going to have a different point of view than one representing an affluent silk-stocking area. For conservatives, the appeal of historic preservation may be patriotism and education; for liberals, it's quality of life. Do some homework about the policy-maker with whom you are meet ing. What are his or her priorities? What kind of legislation have they introduced? What organizations or individuals have been important in their political careers?Tailor your arguments to appeal to their concerns. 6. Grasp the Big Picture Understand that however important your issue is to you and your supporters (Western Civilization obviously hangs in the balance) it is only one of hundreds faced by the average policy-maker. If a state legislator is struggling with a huge budget shortfall, your request for millions in historic preservation grants is not merely ill-timed, it is a fool's mission. Be realistic about what you can accomplish. 7. Have A Goal in Mind There are generally two types of meetings with policy makers. Some are largely edu- cational. You might, for example, want to introduce yourself to a newly elected coun- cil member or legislator and provide information about preservation programs; but more often you will have a particular issue you want to address. Be clear about what you want them to do (vote in favor or opposition, sponsor legislation, call a meeting, etc.) and ASK THEM TO DO IT. They may say"no", avoid your question, or offer an alternative; but at least you will get a better idea of where they stand. You don't get if you don't ask. 8. Identify Lobbying Registration Requirements The Congress and most states and political subdivisions have rules regarding lobby- ing activity. The good news is that contacting a policy- maker as an individual citizen rarely requires registration (thank goodness for the First Amendment). But if you claim to be representing an organization, even as an unpaid volunteer, you may be trigger- ing lobbying requirements. Check with Congressional, state, and political subdivision officials before proceeding. Our"ABCs" are only a starting point. Every lobbying experience has its own challenges and don't be surprised at the unexpected obstacles your may encounter; but if you can develop good advocacy skills you can make significant contributions to historic preserva- tion. National Alliance of preservation Commissions Annual Meeting OFFICIAL NOTICE The National Alliance of Preservation Commissions Annual Meeting will be held Friday 1 October from 12:00 noon until 1:30 p.m. in the Keeneland Room at the Hyatt Regency Hotel in Louisville, Kentucky. T A R Jul/Aug 2004 17 Cr1 C'1 O z Resources & Contacts Caring for the Past Preserving, Rehabilitating. and Restoring Historic Buildings US. ofthe Interior National Park Service National Center for Cultural Resource Stewardship and Partnerships Heritage Preservation Services Tedmical Services 1996-97 • Foreword • In the 70s,the National Park Service saw a preservation guidance on preserving historic critical need for guidance to ensure that his- buildings and landscapes. Responding to toric buildings were properly seated. Home key envirorunental and educational issues of owners working on historic.buldings did the day,its publications address topics such not have access to reliable,accurate unforana- as the need for sensitivity to historic land- tion on appropriate preservation and rehabil- stapes;acrei&eihrtity to historic properties for itation techniques and products. As a result, people with disabilities;lead paint abate- building materials and features were being merit in old houses,and heritage awareness- lost to destructive approaches,such as building for scnoolage children. The series improper cleaning,poor repainting,and indtsde Preservation Briefs,Preservation incompatible replacement windows. Tech Notes,Technical Reports,Co-published books,and Preservation Case Studies. The Service's first challenge in reversing these trends was to develop professional As the National Park Service begins its third Standards which were mmanon seine print- decade of providing guidance,the Standards pies against which project work could be and Guidelines have been adopted by many weighed. As such,the Secretary of the local review eonmvssioms nationwide and Interior's Standards are the bulwark of the information in the Preservation Brits is mu- program and distinguish it from every other tinily referenced in architectural specifica- program in the nation. They were designed Horns. Overall,the publications listed in this to address a variety of treatments,such as Catalog have had a profound impact an the preservation,rehabilitation,restoration,and way the pubic both perceives and treats his- :eoornsesucbori,and have.been revised boric properties. For example,the dangers of throughout the years to reflect the most abrasive cleaning are now widely known;the recent tednnalogies. lie Standards are in repair of historic windows is now rceoy"ved evidence in each technal publication pro- as a viable option;repainting is eonsid duced by Tedmial Preservation Services. both far its appearance and longterm erect on the building envelope tie importance of The nod program goal was to publish state- historic interiors is more widely appreciated; of-the-art information that would vary in and historic landscapes are now acknowl- intant,coaapleudty,and audience ht order to edged for the significant role they play in convey responsible methods of caring for defming our nation's past. historic buildings.The information needed to be easy-to-read,readily available,and free or modestly priced. For the National Park Service's Technical Preservation Services, 1995 marled the 20th anniversary of a tech- nical publication program which claims over 100 titles carently in print and available to the public,and which has sold and dist alert ed over 3 million copies daring this time- The scope and diversity of the National Park Service's tecmial preservation guidance • publications over a 2)-year period is best appreciated when seen in a comprehensive catalog listing. The collection includes Standards and Guidelines,public service leaflets and books on using the Tax Incentives,reports on conserving fragile his- toric building materials,case studies on spe- cific structures,and a wealth of technical con f Foreword TPS Program Activities 1 Free and Sales Publications 2 C'itaing Listing 3 Standards and Guidelines 3 Program/Trairting Information 4 Preservation Tax Incentives 5 Caring for Historic Buildings 6 Pnesevaton Briefs 6 Technical Reports 11 Preservation Tech Notes 12 Preservation Case Studies 14 Co-Published Books 15 Heritage Education 16 TPS Archive 16 Order Farces 17 GPO Catalog Sales. 17 GPO Standing Orders 17 NIA Sales 19 Tedinicaf Preservation Services Conducts a variety of activities to guide Fedi agencies,States,°mu mifies,and the private sector in the treatment and long-term protection of historic buildings,structures,sites,objects,and districts listed in the National Register of historic Places ■ Develops professional standards and guidelines on historic preservation treatments. ■ Provides technical assistance to Federal agencies,States,coumuahities,and privatecitizens who undertake historic preservation project work on National Register properties. ■ Sponsors and conducts training,workshops,and study groups on key historic preservation treatment issues in partnership with national professional organizations. ■ Administers the Preservation Tax Incentives Program,izndnd ng review of-historic rehabilitation projects. ■ Produces and distributes a variety of technical and educational publications to promote the maintenance and long-term preservation of arhural resources, • ■ Reviews Federal surplus property transfers to State and local governments for historic morumnent purposes. • • • • - Ordering Information Free Publications Partnership Sales The National Park Service makes essential The National Park Service often participates -program information available free of charge. in cooperative publication projects with This information includes the Standards, other organizations. In these instances,gtad- brochures on various divisional activities, ance publications(or videos)may be offered and applications for the preservation tax at competitive prices through alternative or incentives program. Finally,a few technical "partnership"sales outlets. No order forms guidance publications may still be obtained are provided in these cases;addresses are • in single issue,subject to availability. For noted within the Catalog teat. your ordering convenience,free publications • are always listed first in every section and • highlighted for easy reference(°). Single ILS.Department of Commerce, copies may be requested from TPS by coat- National Technic' Information tacti ng: Heritage Preservation Services Service(NTIS). Information Desk(2255),National Center for - Cultural Resource Stewardship and In limited instances,Technical Preservation Partnerships,P.O.Box 37127,Washington, Services makes information available D.0 20013-7127. Or phone (202)343 9583, through NT$.it should be noted that N IS FAX: (2 2)343-3803,=maiil: publications are available in paper copy or • bps-infotitnps.gov mraofiche. The paper copy is a photocopy, not a printed publication. Please note the Saks Publications NTIS ruder form on page 19. When order- ing a TPS publication from MIS,you must include the title and the N175 order mrmbcr. Tedmial Preservation Services makes its sales publications available through the Superintendent of Documents,Government Printing Office a variety of Partnership Sales outlets;and the National Technical Information Services. They always appear in that order in the catalog. Superintendent of Documents, . Government Printing Office (GPO). The majority of technical guidance publica- tions listed in this catalog axe sold by GPO through direct catalog sales. When ordering a publication from GPO,you must include the title and the GPO stock number. Please use the GPO order form on page 17. Ned,you may wish to take advantage of the new GPO Standing Order Service to receive each Preservation Brief or Preservation Tech Note autonnaticaly—as soon as it is released. You establish an account by chnedc or with a aedit card;GPO does the rest See also the special order Standing Order form on page 17 for additional details- Finally,GPO aedit card users may also order by telephone 2012-783-3238;or by fax 202-512- =50. Or3e :r.= Standards and Guidelines Since then publication in 1976,the The of the Interior's f Secretary's Standards developed by the Standards for Rehabilitation with National Park Service have been used by Illustrated Guidelines for State Historic Preservation Officers and the Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, - I National Park Service to ensure that projects wing Federal grant 'or tax benefitsW.Brown Morton III.Gary L.Hume,Kay D. were reviewed in a coasisttent manner Weeks,and H.Wad Jmnd1. • nationwide. The principles embodied in the All projects that owners wish to be certified Standards have also been adopted by hum- for purposes of Federal tax incentives are dreds of preservation conunissioa>s nation- reviewed and evaluated in accordance with wide in local design guidelines. While the the ten Standards for Rehab. Standards provide a consistent philosophical Acocanpaurying guidelines and captioned framework for treatment,the Guidelines its assist in applying the Standard suggest a model process to follow in the reconmienci responsible methods and work,and thus assist in applying the approaches and also list those tr+eatmertts Standards to both historic braidings and that should be avoided. 160.pages. 23011hz -.__ _.---- landscapes. tratioans. 1992 GPO scoot marrba: 024-005- 010912. S1200 per copy. Fire from TPS The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Hiistori Single copies may be requested from TPS by n- Properties with Guidelines for fading: Heritage Preseraatmn So vies Preservisng.Rehabilitating,Restoring, Lifurn ion Desk(2255),National Carter for and Reconstructing historic Buildings ---- - -- -_- Gaye Resource Steamdship and Partnerships, P.D.Box 37127,Washington,D.0 20023-7127. Kay D.Weeks and Anne E.Grmaner. Or phone (202)343-9583,FAX (202)343- Updated Guidelines for four treattt hat ' 3803,email: / enps gov address all four work options offered in the i ' -—^�. Standards,as applied to htstcaic buildings, ` ■ The Secretary of the Interior's Standards 188 pages.79 gyrations. GPO snick mmm- for the Treatment of tristoric Properties bur: 024-00541157-9. 1995. 512.00 per copy. �-- _ (1995) _ .s ■ The Secretary of the Interior's Standards NEW The Secretary of the Interior's mt... for Rehab:M art' tioa(1990)in English and Standards for the Treatment of Iiistorit Spanish h■e� (please ) Properties Ire of•Culturalth G Lauidelines ndscapes. Ail Superintendent of Document °aarlrs A•Birnbasan,ASLA.with Ciaistine --or... ,-- Government Printing Office Capella-Pietas,Editors. s_ New Guidelines l� developed b9 the National The Secretary of the Inferior's Park Service that address all four work --- - - Standards for Rehabilitation with opts offered in the Standards,as applied ;... ..a .: ':�""iiii-f, Guidelines for EZt stapes.Rehabilitating to Ya:ruular and designed historic land- " }lista&Buildings 180 ilhstratioats. 1996. GPO sbxk lumber: 024-0 501172-4. 516.00 'a group effort that brings Uzulhrstiated vecsan. The Standards are Mac* together prominent opens used in the Preservation Tax hincmtives pro- mnd tradespeople in dr gram to determine whether the historic char- appropnate fIdds...nhairs acter of a building is preserved in the process for rod!-motcsdad tee ztmenrfs of=balalai a. Accompanying guidelines that dram on scholarly assist in applying the Standards. 59 pages. mean*as men as practical 1990. GPO stook man 024-005-02061 I. S2-00 per copy. ' Sal Alfan°,senior editor )The Journal of Light Constructs n . Richmond,Vt. • — - - (Video)Working on the Past with the Superintendent of Documents •- 1 Sec.ivtaty of the Interior's Standards for Government Printing Office •-- Historicthe Treatment of Properties. S Provides a den ecplanation of the phnio- wry of Cultural Resource -ht......s�°' sophical differences between the treatments Education Programs. it` _ NEIV Preservation,Rehabilitation Restoration,and Compiled and edited by Enxrgerc Bevitt and Reconstruction in a views,graphic' Heather L.Minor with others. and a cambiatiosi of four historic properties. Provides information in an attractive,user- '�r r F! • Intended to apt owners,managers,andfriendly format on long-term educational r.ki y t design Professionals in selecting and apply- and training opportunities related to the pro- ing the most appropriate treatment. Ako `_�=� �• '`•' tediaah and preservation of cultural heritage _s s r< discusses the interpretive consequences of in the United States. Includes a wide variety : fit. 40 minutes. VHS. Developed by _ �_ '�`..:. disciplines,including anthropology,crafts, ".'" the National Park Service,Technical trades and apprenticeships,history,history - -= " -. = _ Preservation Services(Kay Weeks)and • Hors M. of science,interpretation,landscape preser- vation,language retention and ethic studies, a<- Boyd). Sold by the Historic Preservation and preservation law. 96 pages. 1994. GPO Education motion- 515 includes the moo, stock norther:024-005-01146-3. $9.00. postage and handling and a copy of the treatment : ............. Standards. Write HPEF,P.O.Box 77160, Federal Historic Preservation laws. __ - . �" iiiashangton,D.0 20013. Sara K Blumenthal,revised by _ `={ Emogene A.scant. ' Information Replacing the 1990 version,lists the major . - ' -='7,i historic preservation laws governing a national program that coordinates and sup- lime' A mmhber of publications—both free and ' sales--are available that desmbe or explain Pam. public protectan private r efforts tonden. _ tify,evaluate,and our historic and specific program activities or are produced archeological resources. The 1993 editiarh as a result of outmatch training,worishops, adds the Native American Graves Protection f T Irmil and study groups. and Repatriation Act the im p am to the National Historic Preservation Act of Free • • _ -'{_ Singl TPSe copiesrs nary be requested hour TPS by con- 1966;and updates most other laws as well. _ = _ Also explains how to order copses of the Singl Code of Federal Regulations(CFR),devil- s tooting: HeritageP nsavation S vines aped to implement the laws cited. 96 pages. Information Dak t2255h,National Carter far 1993.GPO stork number:024-ORS-01124-2. _ - Cultural Resource Stetandshrp and Partnerships, Sim Par copy. PA.Box 37I27,Washington,D.C. 20013-7127. Or p eraw (202)343-9583,FAX: (201)343- Second Lives Architectural Study .: ,eI Collections in the United States. -_ Enwgene A.Banff: ._-__ _ . Aool Hl y to stonc Pape tree: Provides information on 170 collections of • ar nit Ural fragments removed from his- II Cultural Resaeaoe Training Directory tonic structures.Information about the eollea aa:e t) tins is organized by state and izdeond by A.,,.,-._ • Federal Land-to-Parks Program& the of structural or building el& I rsbocic y am meat Includes addresses and telephone • Pmseving the Past and Mating it numbers of organizations and individuals . Aon sable forwith Disabilities. �-- - ' --- People with ardhitecisaal eollentioahs. 102 pages. 23 ■ hiadow Directory for Historic Buildings illustrations. 1994. GPO stack member 024- - — IIStudent Inborn Program 005-01145-5.$4 75. acme that mg — Pr _: n :-:tn: : :_.:rri7;.on . . gor9Bama 1 ---- '- Partnership Sales (Video)Accessibility and HistoricPreservation:Entrances to the Past. Kay D.likels,with Kay Ellis and David C Park. Focuses on the dual need to achieve reason- able access •solutions for utobility-impaired individuals and to save historic buildings for future generations. of Requirements the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 are II Preservation Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating llistaic Buildings III Iftstoric Preservation Certification Application E Preservation Tax hu:entives for Historic Buildings: Current Fact Sheet I8 Tax Incentives for Rehabilitatint. g Historic Current Fiscal Year Analysis • The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation Q6 CFR 67)) - - graphically explained;and a simple step-by- step planning pnxess is shown. Superintendent of Documents p....... ..=maw= Acoessidity products,technokigies,and Government Printing Office .. - approaches are described,including ramps, _... , -paths,lifts,stair climbers,and new additions. Affordable Housing Through Historic I. -. . Site-specific examples are used to Mustrate Preservation:A Case Study Guide to EL: 14- - successful solutions for both large scale and Combining the Tax Credits. --- - sooner structures. 1993. VHS. Closed or Susan Escherith and William:Dekoac. open optima& Rumring tanc 2825. Amiable for saw twin Historic mason inc.,P.O.Box Provides art moldiest overview of how to 1777,Windsor,VT 05089-0021. Call Historic finance historic handbags for affordable Wordsor fir specifr information on ordering, housing,discussing the"nuts and bolts'of indialing milm methods of payment. (802)674-6752. two federal tax incentives programs—the AMMAR11211116 historic rehabilitation tax czedit(preservation ......Nowlefim tax incerdives program)and the low-income - ,- Accessilulity and fristoric Preservation Resource Guide. housing tax credit—and how the two pro- _ grams can be combined to raise additional .F.7--.-.. - Thimars C.Jester and Judith Hayman:. pect funds. &:c case studies ilhstrate S'"1-- 0. - F• --..:,-_.: Compendium of resource materials on the cessfol rehabilitation projects by nonpro .4- .--"-........:- iaw and its application to historic properties. and fix-profit organizations. 74 pages. 3L - 1/8 ". 'ear Used in a series of NPS-sponsored work- illustrations. 1994. GPO stork number: 024- shops on accessilinity. 7 sections+bilkogra- 005-01148. 55.00 per copy. phy. 1992. 550 from Historic Windsor,Inc., P.O.Box 1777,Waidsor,VT 05099-0021-Call Affordable Housing:Through Historic • (802)674-6752. Special offer:Resource Guide Preservatiorr Tax Credits and the ......A........... . ......—........; mad Video(above),155.00. Secretary of the Interior's Standards for •••••••••••••••••. Reha fffstoric bilitation. . .. .. _ -• ----,--- --- -- Susan Esdurich,Stephen J.1 Farradh,Ta hicardives Bnox Judd,.A IA. Preface by Katherine IL Federal tax incentives are available to stimu- Focuses on rehabilitating schools,hotels, 1111 • late private investment in the rehabilitation shotgun houses,watehoisies,angle-familY of historic structures. Certifications from the rowhouses,and factories within context of NEVI NPS are required from the National Park the histaic rehabilitation tax credit. Case Service to qualify for the investment tax studies are presented to show how architects, credit connactors,and owners were able to provide • convenient,attractive living space for mod- ern families and special populations;meet Free from IPS • health and safety codes;and meet the •Seaetary of the Interior's Standards for Single apes may be requested from IPS by con- Rehab:lila' boa 110 pages. 64 Mustrations. fluting:Heritage PtINCITCH011 SeltiCES Appendices. 1995. GPO stack number: 024- Infonnetion Desk(2255),National Center for 005-01163-3. $7.00 per copy. Info Resourre Stewenisirip and Partnerships, P.O.Box 37127,Washington,DC 20013-7117. Or plimm (202)313-9583,FAX: (202)343- 3803,cmall: lips-infoiitirps.gov. 01 -=::37. -:.?..) inZenZ:Ve5 ..- - - Caring for Historic WIkfings WI-- • Technical Preservation Services produces and promote the imbue- Preservation Briefs 3: Conserving disinbutes a variety of thlmical and educa- tional Energy in Historic Buildings. .: -� ihana to Baud M Smith,AIA. -r- m preservation and care ri 1 of the historic built environment. This 20- Provides mformatian on materials and tech- year collection includes a wide variety of niques to consider or avoid when u dertak publications, gg Preserva Briefs, weathaizatiaah and energy conservation Preserv-ation Tech Notes,Technical Reports, measures in historic buI7dings. 8 pages. 8 Preservation Case Studies and Co-Published illustrations. 1978. Preservation Briefs 4: Roofing for Preservation Briefs Historic Buildings. Preservation Briefs assist owners and devel- Sara M.Sroeetser ma opus of historic buildings in recognizing Provides a brief historic of the most k- 1 's. and resolving common preservation and manly used roofing materials in America. repair problems prior to work. The briefs are Presents a sound preservation approach to especially useful to preservation tax inceri- roof repair.roof replacement,and the rise of five program applicants because they hut. . alternative roofing materials. 8 pages. mend those methods and approaches for 1978. rehabilitating histceic buildings that are con- sistert with their historic character Preservation Briefs 5: The Preservation of Historic Adobe • Buildings. Superintendent of Documents Government Printing Office Provides information on the traditional materials and construction of adobe Elistoric Buildings Preservation Briefs ings,and the causes of adobe deterioration.4 #1-14(set). Makers reconnikendaticros for preserving his- toric adobe buildings.ngs. 8 pages. 15 ilitsira- The`classic'padmge,many of the issues Lions. 1978. and topics parallel the early history of the NPSbepmesavationh program. Brien 1-14� Preservation Briefs fc Dangers of only P Abrasive Cleaning to Historic classrooms„rehabilitation warirshops„and motion conferences. 1987. GPO shoat Braidings. number: 024-005-01026-2. 523.00 AMIE E.Grimmer - Preservation Briefs 1 The Cleaning Cautions against the use of • to dean various bum and erg;a - Coating of Masonry saes to mitigate the eft of impawer ceasing. Explains the limited circizrzfrAnces Robert C Mack AiA. tack which abrasive dear g may be Provides guidance on the techniques of appropriate. 8 pages. 10 illustratioul. 1979.dinnin . S and waterproofmg'nd ocplains Preservation Briefs 7: The m m "If there's a Preservation Brief the osequces of their inappropriate use Preservation of c Glazed zoniable on a project you're 4 P 5 iW ass 1975. Architectural Ten-Cotta. contempletin8'whetherPreservation youBriefs t Repainting de red Patterson Trl2er. purr to do the work easel f or Mortar joints in Ilistoric Brick hire a professional,you d be Disc detciocation problems that co�t- wise to refer to it bate the B seas y occur with terracotta and provides .' Robert C.Mack,AIA. methods for wing the extentsuch Clof su woric begins de Ted Paterson Tiller,and James S.Asidns. deterioration. Makes raxenmendations for Popular Mechanics Provides infommtiaa on appropriate materd- maintenance and repair and suggests als and methods for repainting historic brick 11appropriate replacement materials. 8 pages. illustrations 1979. buildings. 8 pages. 12 illustrations. Rev.,1980. - L77. '.= ::): -.c _...c..._5 •' Preservation Briefs& Alm and Presavatioa Briefs 13: The Reps id Vinyl Siding on Historic Bmldinngs,. Thermal Upgrading of Historic $� The Appropriateness of Substitute Steel Windows. Materials fra for Resurfacing Wood Sharon G Park,ALA. law. _.•:' Frame Buildings. 0 i,�H Presents brief historical backgro and on the • • jam H.Myers,revised by Gary L.Hume. development,use,and styles of rolled steel .1 Disuses the appearance of various types of windows popular in the first half of the 20th Ti.-J. historic wood siding and makes neraamuen century. Explains steps for cleaning and datioas for repair and repiacement. Outlines repairing damaged steel windows;also pro- the very limited instances under which sub- vides information on appropriate methods ol stitute siding may be an acceptable ale rna- weatherstripping and options for storm pan- tive. 7 pages. 5 illustrations. Rev,1984. els or the installation of thermal glass. 12 pages. 10 illustrations. 1984. Preservation Briefs 9: The Repair of Hlstaaic Wooden Windows. Briefs 14: New Exterior Additions to- John H.Myers. Preservation Concerns. `3, Provides useful information on evaluating � ," - and repairing historic wooden windows Kay D.Weeks. found is typical rehabilitation projects. Uses a series of examples to suggest ways Emphasizes practical methods for homeown- that attached new additions can successfully ers or developers. 8 pages. 10 illustrations. serve contemporary uses as part of a zehabili• 198. tali t project while preserving significant historic materials and features and the build- Preservation Briefs Ilk Exterior Paint ing's historic dnaractez 12 pages. 30 ilust ra- • Problems on Inc Woodwork. tons.1986. Kay D.}Meeks and David W.Look,N . Historic i3uildir.g,s Presen'atio Identities and desaibes common types of Briefs=1 E' I s e t). • paint surface conditions and fa hires. Provides guidance on preparing historic By popular demand,a second padagimg woodwork for repainting,including limited of the Preservation Briefs at a bargain price! and total paint removal 12 pages. 14 illus- Preservation Briefs 15-23 on only be por- irations. 1982 chased in this set 1991. GPO stout rumba: • 024-00541085-8. S5.00. Preservation Briefs 11: Rehabilitating tic Storefronts. Preservation Briefs 1& Preservation of Iru:bask Concrete Problems and H.Wad jmrdl. General Approaches. Explores the role of the storefront in histloric buildings and Proms S on rebabdr i1 r�ism B.Caney,AIA Mica tedmiques for historic storefronts as FOCUS on reinforced urn rate(cast-he-place or well as rang:sale new sto:eh+rtt designs. reinforced),useful for anyone undertaking 12 pages. 12 illustrations. 1982. repair or limited replacement. The guidance nce addresses the ones of concrete deterioration, Preservation Briefs 1r The the signs of de ate:tom and actual concrete "—the Preserortion Assistance Preservation of iftisto is cemented ze 12 per. 27i>lustrm'ocs. 1987. Division has set the standards Structural Glass(Vitrolite and for.*preservation field. The Gana Glass). Substitute Materials Preservation Bads 1& The Use of paiblications art alas Provides information on the early mazurfac Bng on I�rsboric tional in their clarity of text fie,lea.and use of this decorative Sirarvn C Ptak,ATA. and gam." bmidnng Product commonly found in 20th y reasons far its Iachrdes a dismission of when to use substi- Paaela W.Hawker,AIA and a general approach for its maintenance, tote materials,cautions regarding their 'Ann Beha Associates repair,and replacement 8 pages. 16 ilhtsna- expected performance,and descriptions Baffin.Mass. lions. 1984. of several substitute materials together v=-'+. advantages and disadvantages. St= • drams included. 16 pages. 34 illustrations. 1988. - `-..-� :17 F.1z: I:1_ 5.-:...j.:1n125 Preservation Briefs 17: Architectural Preservation Briefs 22: The _ = Character-Identifying the Visual Preservation and Repair of • Aspects of Historic Buildings as an Aid Historic Stucco. , to Preserving Their Character. An=E.Grinner: lie H.Ndson,FAIR Desaibes the evolution of stucco as a popu- Fssential guidance to help Property ow Jar building material,beginning with a brief --- and azdiitects identify those features of his- history of how stucco is applied,and how it boric bmuildumgs that give the building its visit- composition,texture,and surface patterns imnimminammot al character so that their preservation can be have changed. includes guidelines for the maximized in rehabilitation. 12 pages. 27 historic property owner or manager on how Sans. 1988. to plan for and any out repair of historic stucco,with sample mixes for 18th,19th,am Preservation Briefs 18: Rehabilitating 20th centiny stucco types. 72 pages. 33 Mu: Interiors in Historic Buildings- tratioats. 1990. Identifying Character-Defining -zeal Elements. Preservation Briefs 23: Preserving rfq k H.•yrd Jana. Historic Ornamental Plaster. Waairs• Assists building owners in identifying signif- David Flaherty. •- icant interior spaces,features,and finishes so Discusses ornamental piaster production, they may be preserved in rehabilitation explain the processes of nut-at-place and work. The guidance applies to al building cast ornamentation using three common den types and styles,from 18th century churches orative forms as examples: the cornice,oeil- to 20th century office buildings. 8-pages.11 fag medallion,and coffered ceiling. illustrations. 1988. • Guidance will help an owner identify deteri- oration Briefs 14: The Repair and oation ruses and better understand con- Replacement of Historic Wooden pier restoration�°�' Useful advice Shingl e Roofs. an selecting and evaluating a restoration con. tractor is included. 12 pages.34 rations. Suva C Pink,AlA. 1990. Discusses historic wooden roofing,ecpecsa- lions for longevity,and repair and replace- Historic Buildings Preservation • went options.Identif es roofing material that Briefs=_4• 4 (set). duplicates the appearance of a historic roof, o6ers guidance on pepper installation,and Eleven Preservation Briefs at a bargain provides information oat coatings and amau►- 1994. GPO stock martin: 024�005-011471r.. tenaace procedures to help preserve the new roof. 12 pages. 16 illmtratioaes. 1989. Per Preservation Briefs 20: The Note Presaaattion Briefs 24-34 niay also be par- ' Preservation of Historic Barns. chard individually for$1.00 tv 51.50 per copy, Michael J.Auer as noted below: Identifies historic barn types,helps owners Preservation Briefs 24: umde stand the historic character of then Ventilating,and Cooling Historic hams,and offers advice on the maintenance, Building=Problems and repay and rehabilitation of old and historic Reno ended bans. 12 pages. 30 ghistrafioos. 1989. Shaun C Park,AUI. • Preservation Briefs 21: Repairing Underscores the importance of careful plan- Historic Flat Plaster—Walls nmg in order to balance preservation objec and Ceilings. tiives with the interior climate needs of the Ma MmcDouerld. building. Useful charts indrded. 14 pages. 28 illustrations. 1991. GPO stvnc member. Guides building owners on historic 024, 1Q90-4. $1.00 pa miry. piaster using traditional materials(wet phis- - ter)and techniques. Suggests replacement - optioafs if the historic plaster is severely dete- riorated.Useful chart on various plaster bases and compatible baseooats and finish mats. 14 pages. 17 illustrations. 1989. L 7..._ .': H._: r ..'....... • Preservation Briefs 25: The Preservation Briefs 29:The Repair, Preservation of frotoric Signs. • Replacement,and Maintenance of Michael J.Auer. Slate Roofs. Discusses the history of sign types pre-1800 Jeffrey S.Irvine. to the 20th century,including symbol signs, Describes the causes of slate roof failures and flat signs,fascia signs,hanghtg signs, provides comprehensive guidance on their goldleaf signs,rooftop signs,and neon signs. sensitive repay and,when necessary,their Makes recommendations for their repair and appropriate replacement. A useful re-use. 12 pages. 29 gyrations. 1991. Repair/Replacement Guideline is included GPO stock number: 024-005-01086-6. to assist owners prior to work. 16 pages. 42 $1.00 per copy. illustrations. 1992. GPO stock rumba: 024- 005-01109-9. 5125 Per copy. Preservation Briefs 20 The Preservation and Repair of flistoric Preservation Briefs 30: The Log Buildings. Preservation and Repair of Historic Bruce.L Bomberger: Clay Tile Roofs. Focuses on horizontally laid or vertically Anne E.Grimmer and Paul K Williams. positioned logs,but the preservation and . Reviews the history of clay roofing tiles and repair liniments are essentially the same for describes many types and shapes of historic all log Mixtures. Discusses traditional splic- toes,as well as their method of attachment. ing-in tedutiques,the use of epoxies,and Provides general guidance for hsooaic prop- replacement,as well as guidance on the erty owners on bow to plan and any out a repair and replacement of drinking and project involving the repair and selected daubing. 14 pages. 32 illustrations. 1991. replace ne nt of historic day roofing tiles. 16 GPO stock number: 024005-01087-4. SI.00 per pages. 33 gyrations. 1992. GPO stock ropy, member:024-005-01110-2. 5125 per copy. Preservation Briefs 27: The . Preservation Briefs 31:Mothballing Maintenance ce and Repair of Historic Buildings. Architectural Cast hon. Simon C Park,AIA. John G.Wrft historical aorraiew by Describes process of protecting a deteriorat Mold Gayle. ing historic buildMg from weather as well as Discusses the role of cast iron in the irdustsi- . vandalism when funds are not currently al development of ow coorutry during the available to begat a preservation,rehaba"lita- 19th century and the resulting advances in tioci,or restoration project 14 pages. 27 building design and technology and orna- illustrations.1993. GPO sea k number:024- meNal deter Provides essential grad- OQS•01120-0. 5150 per copy. anoe on maintaining and repairing architec- tural cast iron within rehabilitation projects. Preservation Briefs 3Z Making 12 pages. 30 illustrations. 1991. GPO stock Mitotic Properties Accessible. number: 024-005 0l088-2 SILO per copy. Thanes C jester ad Shaw C Pink,AU. Preservation Briefs 2& Paid woes the ampler issue of providing IEoric Interiors:. aooese;rba"bty at historic properties,and underscores the need to balance acceseahility Sevin B.Orate. and historic preservation. Provides guidance Dianaaes wall paint and decorative surface and merry crumples of successful projects. treatments from the late 17th cenriay to the • 14 pages 43 illustrations. 1993. GPO stuck 1950s. Deenafbes the usefulness of a coin- number: 024-005.01121-8. S1S0 per copy. plate paint investigation fir Preservation and• restoration projects. Provides guidance on the common causes of interior paint failure and preparing surfaces for repainting. Makes recommendations about new paint with health and safety factors in mind. 16 pages. 22 illustrations.1992. GPO stock maee- ber: 024-005-01089-2. SI.00 per copy. • • - Preservation Briefs 33: The Preservation Briefs 37: Appropriate Preservation and Repair of Stained Methods of Reducing Lead-Paint '� Hazards in Historic Housing. s and Leaded Glass. 3. r = Neal A.Vogel and Rolf Addles. Shoran C Park,AIA,and Douglas C Hicks. Gives a short history of stained and leaded Recommends an appropriate methodology glass in America. surveys basic preservation for planningand S measues to and doaanerdation issues and addresses reduce lead-paint hazards in historic houses common antes of detaioration and presents while preserving their character-deft g fee- protection,repair and restoration options. tuna. Follows a well-balanced approach that 1993. 16 pages. 25 ilhsstrations.1993. GPO is sensitive to the health and safety of ctul- stock number:024-005-01122-6. S150 per arpy. then who live in historic houses as well as those involved in rehabilitation and restora- Prese vation Briefs 34: Applied restora- tion projects. Includes useful decidonmak- Decoration for Historic Interiors ing charts. 16 pages. 32 illustrations. 2995. Historic Composition GPO stack number: 8 Preserving024-005-01149. . 5175 Ornament per Q° Jonathan Thornton and William Adair,FAAR. NEW Preservation Briefs 38: Removing Describes the history,appearance,and char- Graffiti hot Historic Masonry. acteristics of this wrriqudy pliable material Martin E.Weaver. Provides guidance on identifying OOmpo and Focuses on cleaning methods that an be sugger te tz+catments,depending used to remove s acra upon whether the Project goal is preserve- out wv pphed graffiti with- upon or restoration. 16 pages. 52 E hnen- damaging historicEmphasizesLions. 16 pages. 51 1994. GPO P removal as the key to preventing stack number:024-005.01137-4. SIS0 per copy. of graffiti,as well as the impoz lance cif developing a maintenance program Preservation Briefs 3& Understanding in advance to be prepared when graffiti Old Buildings: The Process of occurs-Includes Mom.for successful an d 1 a discussion boomer coatings, graffiti- Thais C McDor:ad,jr. remeoval uide the proct:ss. 16 pages.useful dints designed to 23 r'>lerroations. Explain architectural investigation as the 1995. GPO stock lumber: 024-005-00158-7. critical first step in planning an appropriate 5175 per copy. how a building has changed over time and assessing levels NEW Preservation Briefs 39: Holding of deterioration. Addresses the other conk- the Line Controlling Unwanted Plea investigative process in broad,easy-to- Moisture in Historic Buildings, understand terminology. 1994. 16 pages. 23 Shoron C Park,AIA. r'>h aticaas. 1994. GPO stoat haanbrr 024- Otdlata a way to diagnose moisture rob- OQrr01114-7. $1.50 per copy. lean and choose remedial treatments within Preservation Beefs 3& Protecting a historic presavadorh contact Cis the five Cultural Landscapes: major sources of moistr�,including Treatment,and af the exterior building envelope,gYaemd mo s- Mato& tore infiltration,irrtaicr aarudertssticar,leak ing pipes,and moisture from cleaning or Glories A.Birnbaum,ASIA. new construction. Provides guidance on Describes cultural landscapes as special managing moisture deterioration,repairing places that reveal aspects of our country's and maw historic building materials, origins and development through their farm and=acting coax Problem areas. and feattms and the ways they were used. Inhales charts on types of diagnostic tools, Provides a step-by-step process for pinery-ere- recommended treatments and treatments ing historic designed and venaadar land- that should always be avoided.16 pages. 30 capes to ensure a successful balance i 1ustrations. 1996. GPO stock numbs:024- between historic preservation and change. 005-01168-4. $125 Per wind. 16 pages. 50 illustration. 1994. GPO stock number: 024-005-01143-9. SI30 per copy. • • NEW Preservation Briefs 40: Preserving Metals in Ammca's Historic Bur'.igs: -z c Ceramic The Floors. Uses and Preservation.Treatment, ` r�"§ . - Anne E.Grimmer andA.Konrad. z�?l KimberlyMargot Gayle,David W.L .ALA,and Jain G. Summarizes the historical use of glazed and Waite,ALA. k- unglazed ceramic tiles as a traditional soaring Outstanding resource on the history,n ainte- . • ••--..- material,and desarbes different types of tiles, Hance,and repair of architectural metals,this - inchali rg quarry tiles, c tales and geo- 1980 book has been updated in 1992 by jolur metric tiles,and mosaic tiles. Provides useful G.Waite,ALA,to reflect the newest tedunolo- • guidance for maintaining and preserving gies. 168 pages. 183 illustrations. 1992. '�`,� historic ceramic tile flooring,on cleaning treat GPO stork manta:0224-005-0 108-1. no.O0 r _-=,r merits,and on protective and code-required, F mpJ -, - - slip resistant coatings Also contains asfo®a- - tics'on various repair options,as well as the - selective replacement of damaged tiles. Partnership Sales - _ _ Useful sources for replacement tiles. 16 pages. _ -• 25 ors. 1996. GPO stock number:024- raalighting in America: A Guide to - -. 005-01169-2. 31.5 per copy. tic Preservation. :-..,-.....---;,,,a Denys Peter Myers. '-.K Future Topics Surveys the types and style of gas fixtures • that appeared in the roots and an the streets Additional topics for Preservation Briefs an, of 19th and early 20t h century America. %UMG redly being developed in 1996.97 include: Originally published by the National Park ees.r2..0e•10 maintaining historic buildings,.preserving Service in 1978,re-issued by Dover . historic ruins,and the seismic retrofit of his- Publications in 1990. Appendix. Notes. i ti;j tonic buildings. Bibliography. 279 pages.120 illustrations. el st 1 516.95. Write Dover PubIiortiores,31 East Second St.,Mineola,New York 11051. ----D.- .;"'-'--4 . Tldtlirvl Reports Moving ffistoric Bnildi rgs. I " i Tell Reports address in detail problems John Mod Curtis. confronted by architects,engineers,govern- Discusses the limited circumstances under meat goals,and other tedmiclans involved which a historic masoray or frame building i• _ _. e preservation buildings. in the rvation of historic bdings. should be moved. Establishes a methodolo- ' - -- gy for planning,research,and reooedmng - _ ems- prior to the move and addresses the swag, : sNs,..- ••: Superintendent of Documents foundation construction,building reassean- - .,r�:, Government Printing Office bly,and restoration work after a successful '=: `' move has taken place 50 pages. 47 rlha Ilk -iretra- .. = L Keeping it Clean: Removing Dirt„ boars.Selected bibliography. 1975. Reprinted " Paint,Stains,and Graffiti from c 1991 by W.Patram far the Tonal 's-.j Exterior Masonry. Association of Structural Movers. S2S0 each r~ ' + SO one del SJS Anne E.Griiraria. 51 p for copy; palor Corns virtually every aspect of a ea.additional copy. Buy 50 and IASM pays pwject— 9�g building materials to be postage. Send to: Cl. or TuuzuB,Director,IASM. • domed and ones that might be affected by P.O.Box 1213,Flbridgie,NY 13060. m d_scheduling cling around other WIrk what to ask for in cleaning"sped' and what hand of test cleaning procedures rs to use. Useful&art stars dermas and removal techniques. 45 pages. 35 illustra- tions. 1987.Bffiliographyt GPO mock nobler: 024-005-01035-2. S2.S0 per copy. • C - :o- . .._ _-.: F. ...u. - _. Preservation Tech Notes P es=vativra,"by Ron Sheetzand Charles • Fishes(1993) Preservation Tech Notes provide innovative Finishes No.1,"Process-Printing Decals as a L solutions to specific prom's in preserving Substitute for Hand Stenciled Ceiling = •, cultural resources—buildings,structures,and Meriallirms,"by Sharon Park.(1990) ---- _ objects. Tech Notes are intended for practi- tioners in the preservation field,including Historic Interior Spaces No.1,"Preserving ate,contractors,and maintenance per- Historic Corridors in Open Space Office some!,as well as for owners and developers Pam,"by Christina Henry,1985. seeking the preservation tax investment red- Historic Spaces No.2,"Preserving it for Historic Office Building Corridors,"by • Thomas Keohan,(1989) Frye from TPS NEW Maintenance No.1,'Preventive Care Although there is no subsaiptiaan list for this for Lens s, by Gregory series,new Tech Notes appear as inserts in S.Byrne. e (1 Q996) the National Park Service's CRM magazine. Far subscription information write CRM Masonry No.1,"Substitute Materials: (400)National Park Service,P.O.Box 3127, Replacing Deteriorated Serpentine Stone Washington,DC,20013-7127. The with Pre-Cast Concrete",by Robert Powers. Preservation Tech Notes dealing with win- (1988) dow issues have also been irduded in The Masonry No.2,"Stabilization and Repair of %%dory Hairdboal:Successful Strategies for a Historic Terra Cotter Cornice."by Jeffrey Rehabilitating Windows in Doric Buildings. Levine and Donna Harris. (1991) Finally,three separate sets of Tech Notes are sold by the US.Department of Commerce, Masonry No.3,"Water Soak Cleaning of National Technical Information Service Limestone,"by Robert M.Powers.(1992) (hflS). See next section in the catalog listing. NEW Masonry No.4,"Non-Destructive Evaluation Tedmiques for Masonry MI Single copies of up to three Preservation Tad' . Co stmction,"by Marilyn E.Kaplan and Notes below ere aambbk free from TPS by Marie L Ennis. (1996) cvnmctbrg: Heritage Preservation Services Irtforhriatiort Desk(Z255),National Carter for• Mechanical Systems No.1, g Culture/Rt4orrrcr Steaorrrdship and Historic Elevator Enclosures,"by Marlyn Pmtnersicgs,P.O.Box 37127,fibsIrirngton, Kapp ALA,(1969) D.0 20013-7127. Or pitons(202)343- 9583,FAX (202)343-3803,t rrrar7: Metals No.1,"Come ving Outdoor Bronze ilPs'infoenP 'S°D Sculpture,'by Dennis Mo ntagsne. (1989) Doors No.1,"Historic Garage and Carnage Metals No.2,wring Metal Roof Dooms Rebabilitaticn Solutions, by Bonnie Condos,"by Richard Pieper. (1990) Hallo. (1m) Exterior Woodwork No.1,'Proper Painting' M No.3,In-kind Replacement of " and Surface Preparation,"by Sharon Park, aIhsbaa a Exterior by AIA.(1986) Rebe (1991) Museum Collections No.1,`Museum Exterior Woodwork No.2,'Paint Removal Collection Storage in a Inc Building from Wood Siding,"by Alan O'Bright.(1966) Using a Prefabricated Structure,"by Don Cumberland.(1985) Extatior Woodwork No.3,"Log Crown Repair and Selective Replacement Using NEW Metals No.4,'Rebutting and Epoxy and fiberglass Reinforcing Rods,"by Reixofitting Historic Iron Bridges,"by Joseph Harrison Goodall.(1989) P.Saldrliar,M.(1996) Exterior Woodwork No.4,'Protecting Museum Collections No.2.' edurdng Woodwork Against Decay Using Borate Vmlrle and Ultraviolet Light Damage to 2 Ca-. .. :r^_; 7_.-.•.••.::..1:.'.75'VI. Charles Interior Wood Finis Finishes,"by Ron and Repair ai and •lea he/`ia`ion `th anes Es (1990) 111 •- = Windows No.14:"Reinforcing Deteriorated Site No.1,'Restoring Yee Coverage to Wooden Windows,"by Paul Stem m,P. - Historic Buildings,"by Kann Day. (1991) Eng.(1986) - - - Windows No.16:"Repairing and Upgradanf - _= Temporary Protection No.1,'Temporary Multi-Light Wooden Mill Windows,"by —_- Protection of historic Stairways Dining Christopher Cloe;s.(1986) Rehabilitation Work,"by Charles(19 5) Fmsh Windows No.17:"Repair and Retrofitting Industrial Steel Windows"by Robert Powers Temporary Protection No.2,"Specifying (1989) Temporary Protection of Historic Interiors Lining Construction and Repair"by Dale H.Frees. (1993) Double Glazing Historic Windows Windows No.11,"Installing Insulation Glass Wadaws No.2:"Installing Insulating Glass in Existing Wooden Sash Incorporation the in Existing Steel Windows,"by chalks Historic Glass," by Chada Fish(1985) F, (1964) •Windows No.17,"Repair and Retrofitting No.3: 'Exterior Storm Windows Industrial Steel Windows,"by Robert Casement Design Wooden Storm Sash,'by Pawns (1969) Wayne Tessier and Charles Fishes(1964) Windows No.18,"Aluminum Replacement Windows No.5:"Interior Metal Storm Windows With True Divided Lights Interior Windows,"by Laura Muckenfuss and Piggyback Storm Panels,and Exposed Charles Esher(1984) aseptic Wooden Frames,"by Charles Windows No.&"Thermal Retrofit of Parrott. (1991): Historic Wooden Sash Using Interior • Piggyback Storm Panels,"by Sharon T Partnership Sales ALA.(1984) Windows-No.9: 'Interior Storm widows: The Window Handbook: Successful . Magnetic Seal.by Charles Esher Strategiesfor Rehabilitating Wmdows (1964) it Mitotic Buildings. Widows No.11:'Installing Insulating Glass Charles Esher,Editor. in Existing Wooden Sash Incorporating the National Park Service,the Center for Public Fistaric Cuss,"by Charles Fishes(1985) Georgia Institute of Tedmolo&y, Widows No.15:interior Stories for Steel and the Flstaric Preservation Education Casement Windows,"by Charles Esher Foundation. Techniad guidance,featuring and Christina Henry(1986) 17 Preservation Tech Notes in a sturdy, attractive loose-leaf notebook. All Tech Note Replacement Frames and Sash topics listed below See also Tech Note sales under Co-Published Boils this section. Wmdows No.4:'Replacement Wooden Write:The Wisdom Handbook HPEF,PA.Bar Frames and Sash,"by William Feist(1984) 77260,lihshitiron,D.C.'20O13. 532.0O Windows No.&'Replacement Wooden Sash includes postase and handling. and Fees With Insulating Glass and Integral Mom,"by Charles Parrott.(1984) Tech No;e; included in the Window Widows No.l2"Ahuninum Replacements H an d hook.above: for steel Industrial Sash,"by Charles Fish(1966) Planting and evaluation. Windows No.13:"Ahmenur n Replacement Wrrdows with Sealed Insulating Glass and Windows No.1:'Planning Approaches to 'Trapezoidal Month'Grids."by Charles Window Preservation,'by Charles Falls Parrott.a985) (1964) Windows No.10:"Temporary Window Writs in Unoompied Fllst ric Buildings,'by Charles Esher and Tomas Wawa.(1965) • Windows No.18:"Ahu nunim Repiacemeat Mechanical Systems No.1:"Replicating . •;i Windows with True Divided-Lights,Interior Historic Elevator Enclosures,"by Marilyn Piggyback Storm Panels,and Exposed Kaplan,ALA.(1989) tttmrattI_ Historic Wooden Frames,"by Charles Metals No.1:"Conserving Outdoor Bronze Parrott.(1991) Sculpture,"by Dennis Montagne.(1989 Screens,Awnings,and OtherPreservation Tech Notes (Set=3). Accessories Windows No.7:"Wndow Awnings, IV1TS orderma>rbrr PB92-160274. SI750 Laura Muckenfuss and Charles Fisher. pper 00 microfiche. INOMMIS swum (1984) Finishes No.1,"Process-Painting Decals as a _� U.S.Department of Commerce Substitute for Hand-Stencilled Ceiling National Technical Information Medallions,"by Sharon Park,AIA(1990) Service Masonry No.2,"Stabilization and Repair of a Historic Terra Cotta Cornice,"by Jeffrey Levine and Donna Harris.(1991) Preservation Tech Notes ISet=7). Metals,No.2,"Restoring Metal Roof les- Cornices,"by Richard Pieper.(1990) MIS order member: PB88-192257. $1750 Metals No.3,"In-kind Replacement of paper.S9.00 microfiche. Historic Stamped Metal Exterior Siding,"by Rebecca Sniffer. (1991) Exterior Woodwork No.1:"Proper Painting Museum Collections No.2,'Reducing and ALA.Surface face Preparation,"by Sharon Park, Visible and Ultraviolet Light Damage to Interior Wood Finishes,"by Ron Sheep and �_- Exterior Woodwork No.2 "Paint Removal Charles Esher. (1990) from Wood Siding,"by Alan O'Bright.(1986) Sete No.1,"Restoring Vine Coverage to Asiatic Interior Spaces No.1:"Preserving Historic Buildings,"by Karen Day. (1991) • Historic Corridors in Open Office Plans,"by Christina Henry.(1985) Museum Collection Storage No.1:''Musetmn Preservation Case Studies • Collection Storage in a Historic Building Using a Prefabricated Strun3eae;,"by Don Preservation Case Studies provide practical Cumberland,Jr(1965) information for developers, Temporary Protection No.1,'Temporary planners,and owners by presenting and Protection of Historic Stairways,"by Charles illustrating a specific coterie of action taken Esher(1985) to preserve are building or an entire block of build . Individual case studies may high- .Presen-ation Tech \etec (Set ='_) light� ���" """'r'� fmancing strategies,or an overall planning NTTS order number: PB90-247461. S1750 methodology. See titles listed under Preservation Tax Incentives. ma=S9.00 microfidre. Doors No.1:'tic Garage and Carriage Superintendent of Documents Doors Rehabilitation Solutions,"by Government Printing Office Bonnie Halda.AlA.(1989) Exterior Woodwork No.3:'Log Crown The books on affordable housing are also list- Repair and Selective ReplacementUsing ed raider Preservation Tax Incentives. Epcocy and Fiberglass Reinforcing Harrison Goodall.(1999 Bars"by Affordable Housing Through c FiPrsooric Interior Spaces No.2'Preserving Preservation:A Case Study Guide to Fl55b &Office Burlditg Conidars,"by Combining the Tax Credits. Thomas Keohan.(1989) Susan Fsdreridr arid William Ddosc. Provides an excellent overview of how to finance historic buildings for affordable horning,dismissing the"nuts and bolts"of . ' . . - - two federal tax incentives programs—the Partnership Sales - --!.- -2....l historic rehabilitation tax credit(preservation tax incentives program)and the low-income Interiors Handbook for Historic housing tax credit—and how the two pm- Buildings. grans can be combined to raise additional h Michael les is ,mut project funds. Six case studies illustrate sue- Auer,Char Fer Anne .... ... .- - Grimm -,Editors. cessful rehabilitation projects by nonprofit .._.,....;., - and for-profit organizations. 74 pages. 32 National Park Service/Historic Preservation • 7jr, z- illustrations. 1994. GPO stock monber: 024- Education Foundation. Includes nearly 400 005-07148. 55.00 per copy. pages of technica' 1 papers as well as guidance for architects,developers,building man- . _ NEW Affordable Housing Through ages,curators,and property owners. Historic Preservafion: Tax Credits and Addresses both rehabilitation and restoration TIIC AMMON NANIIMOCK Illa!mom mums the Secretary of the Interior's issues,inchding inspection,evaluation and -:..---- ---,. Standards for Historic Rehabilitation. planning,architectural features and materi- als,systems and fixtures,space ubldicai Susan Esdrerich,Stephen J.Farneth,ALA, and adaptive reuse,E unishes and decorative t.•.."''.. -- and Bruce Judd,ALA.Pnlace by accessories,and fire protection and building (IP . •:.-.-- Kathrinee H.Stevenson. ,,• •• -.7: .1 codes. 1988.550 pages. Avaaable for 556, .- ,. r... Focuses on rehabilitating schools,hotels, which includes postage and handling,from: \ • qa . .4i -•• shotgun houses,warehouses,single-family HPE,F,P.O.Box 77160,Washbrgton,D.C rowhouses,and factories within context of 20013. the historic rehabilitation tax credit. Case Studies are presented to show how ardiitects, Interiors Handbook for Historic FIBENE= contractors,and owners wee able to provide Buildings,Vohmte IL 15 =-- I convenient,attractive living space for mod- Michad Auer,Charles Fisher,Thomas jester,and ern families and special populations;meet Marilyn Kaplan,Editors. health and safety codes;and meet the Li.. , Secretary of the Interior's Standards for National Park Service/Historic Preservation r .--:-"' Rehabilitation. 110 pages. 64 illistralions. - Education Fotmdation. Companion to ' • - • :' Appendies 1995. GPO sbxk manber: 024- volume,a ready reference tool on the i' ,ra- 61liar;;;ggi 005-01163-3. 57.00 per copy. tion and rehabilitation of historic interiors. Sections on piamting and maintenance White House Stone Carving:Builders architectinal and mechanical features;walls. and Resto cengs and floor=wall coverings and tex- rers. tiles;paints and consolidants;and banish- Ire H.Nelson,FAIA. ings.Annotated bibliography of recent Describes the fascinating story of the original literature and a 20-page products and ser- stone carving at the White House and the vices directory. 550 pages.Illustrated. 1993. . . careful MIBERMS that are being taken today Available for SOSO,wind:irecludes postage and to restore its historic stone walls.32 pages. handling,from: HPEF,P.O.Box 77160, 37 illustrations. 1992. GPO_- mem kington,D.C.20013. 024-005-0r107-2. 5325 per copy. Preserving the Recent Past. Deborah Sidon and Rebecca Shiftier,Editors. Co-Published Books Naticnal Park Servirzalistoric Preservation Education Ritmtim. A compilation of Tedmical Preservation Services wads coop- essays and related material on evaluating, eratively with a variety of regain:onions to maintainhg,and re-using historic buildings produce tedmical and guidance publications and properties from the twentieth century. These may include conference and workshop Organized in Low major chapters renounce materials,as well heritage education books evaluation;preservation and re-use strate- for younger audienos. gie=conservation of modern materials;and history and pseservation of curtain wall con- struction. Sped&essays address the philo- sophical and pradial issues involved with idattifying and maintaining buildings,: - tures,and landscapes designed in this c ry. A detailed list of recommended readings • .. - . -on this subject is also provided. 574 pages. uses 43 National Historic Landmarks to 215;n„saa'oms 1995. Available for 549, make important points about the American • 'A- _ 'includes postage g. e�cperienoe It begins with a pre-historic cave ' `'' HPEF P.O.Box 77160,Wu:I::gton,D.C.20013. painting,then moves forward dunnolcgical_ ly in time,ending with America's 1969 rocket • Respectful Rehabilitation: Answers to to the moon. Illustrations may be colored • • •. • •- Your Questions on Wash ric Buildings. with crayons,pencils,or pens. 48 pages. 43 Kay D.Weeks and Dime Madder,Editors. illustrations. 1992. GPO stock number: 024- 005-01105-6. 5325 per copy. National Park Service/National Trust for Historic Preservation. Provides answers to NEW American Defenders of Land, 150 auesticas often asked in rehabilitating Sea&sky + historic buildings for new uses. 185 pages. 150 ill+*�ti�. 1982. Available for S14.95 Kay Weeks,illustrated by Rorie Munro. `-•'.. _i. plus S4 00 postage and handling from: The National Park Service/Department of Prcsrrw:ison Press,1785 Ma aducsetts Aaame, Defense,Legacy Program. A second exciting ;.tit:> -NW.,Washington,D.C. 20036. Orders and book for kids,famfies,and teachers that coy- .....: a customer semi= (202)673-4058 or toll as an almost:a -,..;� 200-year period,from the ��:,t,�••,.;-- • (800)7666847. FAX:(202)673-4172. American Revolution to the Cold War era �- �.•: +.yt ANT • following Weald War Il. Enjoy wonderful art ---- . . Twentieth-Century Baling Materials: and leant more about National Historic History and Conservation. Lardrnark battle sites,drydocks,forts,ships, airfields--and much more! A guide for vis- Thoe s C.Jester,Editor icing Landmarks and Other Great Places is National Park Service/McGraw-Hill. included.88 paw, 55 illustrations. 1996. Provides an historical overview of building GPO stock nuanber: 024-005-01167-6. 5550 materials from 1880-1960. includes chapters Per coPY- cn: may;metals;woods and plastics; and roofing,siding and • walls. Brief histories and coanservationt approaches by preserration experts nation- TPS Ar hive wide are oovaed for thi ty-sic materials. Sources for ressuch twentieth-century mate- A • " ,,, .Technical are compiled in an appendix. To order, listing and Preservation Case Studies from • write McGraw ThU Inc.,II West 19th Street, Reports the 1970s and 1980s that are available 4th Floor,New York,NY.10011,or rill toll-free (800)7224726. The cost per copy is 555.00, from the National Tedmicai Information plus postage,hanging,and kcal s+ala tax. Service,but are no longer referenced in this catalog,may be requested from TPS(ATIN: Arcfdve),Heritage Pneseroat ion Seroices &formal,n Desk(2255),National Center for Heritage Eduattion Cultural Resources Stewardship and PartnersOlcips,P.O.Bar 37127,libshbrgton, • TES also creates for D.C. 20013-7127. Or phone; (202)343-9583, P Aga' FAX:(202)343-3803,email: itps-infolliaps.gov audiences to help raise awareness about pro- tecting and preserving America's most exceptional eptioaal properties—National Historic Landmarks. , • Superintendent of Documents Government Printing Office The Great American Landmarks Adventure. Kay% s,illustrated byRosieMiaao. National Park Service/American Ardaitectmal Foundation. A heritage eoluca- don book for kids,families,and teachers that :r C7--.1_ .. . H:=_- ric E: . d:•rs GPO Catalog Sales • • crew rf.e.:.g ow= - -Superintendent of Documents Publication Order Form Charge your order.r—-� C I. 6732 To fax your orders (202)512-2250 • •Please Type or Print(Form is aligned for typewriter use.) To phone your orders(202)612-1800 Prices include regular domestic postage and handling and are subject to change.International customers please . add 25%. Oty, Stock Number Trtle Price Total Each Price • Total Please Choose Method of Payment Company or personal name (Please type or pri • nt) ❑ Check payable to the Superintendent of Documents ❑ GPO Deposit Account —❑ AddOicetat adonnsrae+croor+fine ❑ VISA ❑ MasterCard Account Street amass 1 MIME (a peation doe) Thank you for City.Stare.Zp code your order! Daytime phone including arse code (Authorizing signnurn 7oss Mai To: Superir.Lendent of Documents Pun:ese order no. loptont0 P.O.Box 371954,Pittsburgh,PA 15250-7954 • • •GPO standing Orders only arw�.rgorec Superintendent of Documents Order Form ra'Swi ! •IdrO QZ TO tare yea orders 0020 512-2250 . To Phone your orders 0021 51241100 YES.I want to receive ivaae*Mons d the following indicated publcalkrns—automatically—as soon as they ale wleesed.with Standing Order Swipe. Qty. Last ID Tithe Briefs • Zip N Preservation Tech Notes Far privet%check boot below: • O Do not make my tame evadable to other mailers Cewoarer or peraommt narrre Pisan type err wino Chad(mAtod of payment O Check payabie to Superintendent of Documents Ada.ear amissw..aren erne O GPO Deposit Account 11 11 7 I i I—❑ O VISA O MasterCard Swam address city:e ns.2ipaxis ■EIM wv:.sendaltJ Then kyov for yaradn! twine OOPS:rekteno arm Dods Awhodzino sipwse ••• r1.ea.e eras ore er lopaoea0 Mai Tar Superintendent of Documents PA.Box 371954.Plnebtaph.PA IS:150-7054 .Cider Servant si the auitoritsb-an below to c ine select- Sending orders rennin in effect unto canceled'r ed items to your existing Deposit Account, VISA or wiling pdrphane ameba-_are apoepad but mast be Master-Card Accent.Or open a Deposit Account with followed up writ a written colseelion wain 10 days)or an initial deposit of 150 or more Your amour*will be cero i d by the Supsinle dent of Doarrents dinged arty when each sickens is issued or mailed. Service begins waft the next issue release of sect Sufficient money must be kept in your account to dam selected.An ack nowkcignerrt card is sent for insure that deem:are shipped each Sanding Order dent sel-Cled. • 0 YES,1 mulct den sembi h a Deposit*mare.E++cioaid is an inrW deposit or S50 to a ustili.a never Dapdt Accost so you an stint n+y Staving OrderSenna My deck nude ad b the Sioseirarrdent of Daarsents is emceed.) What's New at GPO? • Here's a quick tamnnary of new TPS offerings. Be shin to use the coned GPO order form on page 17,as noted Mow. Please note that the video is available only from the Historic Preservation Education Foundation. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Illustrated Guidelines for Preserving,Rehabilitating,Restoring,and Reconstructing Historic Buildings. Kay D.Weeks and Anne E.Grimmer. 188 pages. 79 illustrations. GPO stock number. 024-005- • 01157-9. $12.00 per copy. (Use GPO Catalog Order Form on page 17.) The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes. Charles A.Birnbaum,ASLA,and Christine Capella-Peters,Editrors. 180 pages. 110 illustrations. 1996. GPO stock number: 024-005-01171-4. 515.00 per copy.(Use GPO Catalog Order Form on page 17.) Working on the Past with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties(Video). Kay Weeks and Jim Boyd.40 minutes.VHS. Distributed through by the Historic Preservation Education Foundation. $15 includes the video,postage and handling and a copy of the treatment Standards. Write HPEF,P.O.Bar 77160,i izshingt n,D.0 20013. Affordable Housing Through Historic Preservation: Tax Credits and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic Rehabilitation. Susan Fscherich,Stephen J.Farneth,AIA,and Bruce Judd,AIA. Preface by Katherine H.Stevenson. 110 pages. 64 illustrations. Appendices.' ! 1995. GPO stock number. 024-005-01163-3. $7.00 per copy. (Use GPO Catalog Order form on page 17.) Preservation Briefs 38: Removing Graffiti from Historic Masonry. Martin E Weaver: 16 pages. 23 ffiustrations. 1995. GPO stock number: 024-005-00158-7. $1.75 per copy. (Use GPO Catalog Order Form or Standing Order Form on page 17.) Preservation Briefs 39: Holding the Line Controlling Unwanted Moisture in Old Buildings Sharon C.Park,AIA 16 pages. 30 illustrations. 1996. GPO stock number.024-005-01168-4. 5125 per copy. (Use GPO Catalog Order Form or Standing Order Form on page I7.) Preservation Briefs 40: Preserving Historic Ceramic Tile Floors. Anne E Grimmer and Kimberly A.Konrad. 16 pages. 25 illustrations. 1996. GPO stock number.024-005 01169-2. 51.25 per copy. (Use GPO Catalog Order Form or Standing Order Form on page 17.) - - -Preservation Tech Note Maintenance No.1,"Preventive Care for Classical Lighthouse Lenses," - by Gregory S.Byrne. (1996) Use only GPO Standing Order Form on page 17. Preservation Tech Note Masonry No.4,"Non-Destructive Evaluation Techniques for Masonry Construction,"by Marilyn E Kaplan and Marie T.Ennis. (1996) Use only GPO Standing Order Form on page 17 Preservation Tech Note Metals.No.4,"Relocating and Retrofitting Historic Iron Bridges,"by Joseph P.c+LI,bar,M. (1996) Use only GPO Standing Order Form on page 17. American Defenders of Land,Sea do Sky. Heritage education for younger audiences. Kay Weeks,illustrated by Ronde Munro. 88 pages. 55 illustrations. 1996. GPO sax*nnornb r. 024-005- - 01167-6. $530 per copy. (Use GPO Catalog Order Form on page 17.) • • CarmLz :o- Preservation Notes(Set#1). • You can buy all three sets NITS order nrarrlxr P988-192257. SI750 imper:S9.00 of the Tech Notes! microfiche. Exterior Woodwork No.1:"Proper Painting and Surface Preparation,"o Sharon (1986) wN2. mil Available only from NTIS Wood Siding," by '° `.(1986'Historic (please use the order h tetior Spaces 'Preserving Historic No.1:'Pr Corridors in Open o ,"by Christina Harry(1 ) form below). Museum Collection Storage No.1:'Museum Prefabricated Storage�++ in. as,Historic Bddinyg�Usiin�gia Prefabricated Structure,"by Don Cumberland,Jt Preservation Tedi #3). (1985) Temporary��y Protection No.11,,"Temporary Protection of NITS aria n�rarnbrr: Px92-I60274. $17.50 paper copy Historic Stair wayss,"by Charles�(1985) S9.00 microfiche. r -. �r7,. • Presentation Ted Notes(Set#2) Finishes No.1,"Process-Pakding Decals as a • Substitute for Hand-Stencilled Ceiling Medallions,"by NITS order number PB90-247461. $1750 paper,S9.00 Sharon Paz'lA.(1990) microfiche. Masonry No.2,"StabBivaon and Repair of a Historic Doors No.1:"PTrstoric Garage and Carriage Doors: Tara Cotta Cornice,"by Jeffrey Levine and Donna Rehabilitation Solutions,"by Bonnie Hilda,AlA. Harris.(1991) (1989) Metals,No.2."Restoring Metal Roof Cornices,"by Exterior Woodwork No.3:"lag Crown Repair and Ridrand Pieper(1990) Selective Rep/acematt Using Epoxy and Fiberglass Reinforcing Bars."by Harrison Goodall(1989) Metals Na 3,"In-kind Replacement of Historic Historic Interior Spaces No.2'Preserving Historic ExteriorSidarg,"by Rebecca Shrffier.. (19'91) Office Building Corridors,"by Thomas Keohan.(1989) Mechanical Systems Na is Historic Ultraviolet Collections Na 2,"Reducing vmble ana Elevator ,"by Marilyn Kaplan,AIA.(1989) by Ronht to Interior 990) Faiislies," by Ron Sheds and Chains Fishes (1990) • • Metals Na 1:"Conserving Outdoor Bronze Sculpture,"by Dennis Montagne.Q989) Site No.1,"Restoring Vine Coverage to Historic Buildings,"by Karen Day (1991) NTIS order form for products and services • NTIS ones a 25%(isoourt for orders ramify;from 5 to 100 copies. U.S.DEPAITMENr OF COWIE= N� _ Missed Tamed leis-atien fordo O *n SSS Rut Royal Rood•Spaiegfidd,VA 22161 Melva: Telephone(703)4 -1 OO Goy,Stale,23P Teteplione Mother _ Osier pad perhuts ea this ate al ampmr O Charge my NTIS Deposit Aaooint No Podaes • c O Here is my duck to NTIS for S Dery is soy OAaaedeA Earls DVSs Meow God. Moment No. &pied=Dee► —lumber*se OE applicable) (required to validate order) PRICES ARE SUBJECTTO CHANGE • For mote iufora ation,write or can(703)d87-4650 and ask Taal s for the NTIS Products Sr Services Catalog,PR-627/360. MIR Repir Service tarmac Foe}s alder(D U.S..Goads. Memo'cc Si atlsfs) TPS Archive at NTIS • listed below in alphabetical order,thdse tides air generally from TPS•earlier years. They are all still available for purchase in photocopy form g the National Technical Information Service(NTIS). For more detailed information on these golden oldies,'see TPS Archive on page 16. Abbeville,South Carolina: Rehabilitation Planning and Project Work in the Commercial Town Square. John M.Bryan and the Triad Architectural Associates. 1979. A Glossary of Historic Masonry Deterioration Problems and Preservation Treatments. Anne E.Grimm 1984. Cyclical Maintenance for Historic Buildings. J.Henry Chambers,AIA. 1976. Epoxies for Wood Repairs in Historic Buildings. Morgan W.Phillips and Dr:Judith E. Selwyn 1978. Fort Johnson,Amsterdam,New York A Historic Structure Report - Cohen. 1978. paper; Main Street Historic District,Van Buren,A Storefront Within a Districtwide Plan. Susan Guthrie. 1980. . Maymont Park-The Italian Garden,Richmond,Virginia: Landscape Restoration. Barry W.Starke,ASLA. 1980. Photogrammetric Recording of Cultural Resources. Perry E.Borchers. 1977. Planning for Exterior Work on the First Parish Church,Portland,Maine,Using Photographs as Project Docammtatian. John C Hecker,AIA,and Sylvarirs W.Doughty. 1979. • Olmsted Path System,Jamaica Pond Boathouse,Jamaica Plain,Massachusetts: Planning for the Preservation of the Boathouse Roof. Richard White. 1979. Rectified Photography and Photo Drawings for Historic Preservation. J.Henry Chambers AIA. 1973. Rehabilitating Historic Hotels: Peabody Hotel,Memphis,Tennessee. Ploy A.Brown. 1979. Skills Development Plan for Historical Architects in the National Park Service. Hugh C Millet;FAIA,Lee H.Nelson,FAIA,and Emogene A.Devitt. 1986. The M,arse-Libby Mansion: A Report on Restoration Work 1973-1977. Morgan W. Phillips. 1977. Using Photogammetry to Monitor Materials Deterioration and Structural ral Problems on Historic Bn1dangs: Dorchester Heights Mom,A Case Study. J.Henry Chambers, AIA. 1985. X-Ray Examination of Historic Structures. David M.Hark 1975. • - HPS BookStore 'National Park Service ;1itettl 111 HPS Free Bookshelf I't r ` roil zoom How to Order Free HPS Publications gilbfikep The following Heritage Preservation Services publications are offered in righiffit single issue FREE OF CHARGE, subject to availability. You may order up to five titles total. raja Please send an e-mail to hps-infoOnps.gov with your address and LIALoijafgat telephone number, and list of requested materials. iltimariat The American Battlefield Protection Program ;,a lows - Altogether Fitting and Proper: Saving America's Battlefields. (CRM What Do thematic issue. Vol. 20. No. 5.) za Until American Battlefield Protection Program: Working Together to Preserve E-itioit America's Historic Battlefields. Battlefield Update. (Quarterly newsletter.) • Caring for the Past: Historic Preservation Publications. (Battlefields) Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation's Civil War Battlefields. Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia. A Guide to the Campaign and Siege of Vicksburg. Dollars and Sense of Battlefield Preservation: The Economic Benefits of Protecting Civil War Battlefields. Hispanics in the Civil War. Immediate Action Agenda for Preserving Our Nation's Civil War Heritage. The Civil War at a Glance. Visiting Battlefields: The Civil War. Visiting Battlefields &Sites: The US-Mexican War. Certified Local Governments Caring for the Past: Historic Preservation Publications. (CLG) Preserving Your Community's Heritage Through the Certified Local Government Program. Questions and Answers About CLG Grants from SHPOs: An Introductory Guide. Historic Landscape Initiative America's Landscape Legacy (leaflet). A Reality Check for Our Nation's Parks. (CRM thematic issue, Vol.'16, No. 4.) Caring for the Past: Historic Preservation Publications. (Landscapes) The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (36 CFR 68). Historic Preservation Fund Caring for the Past: Historic Preservation Publications (HPF) Historic Preservation Fund Grants-in Aid. Program leaflet. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation. This includes: The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Preservation Planning and Guidelines for Preservation Planning. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Identification and Guidelines for Identification. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Evaluation and Guidelines for Evaluation. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (36 CFR 68). The Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards Historic Preservation Planning A Planning Companion: Suggestions for Designing and Implementing a State Historic Preservation Process. (NO REQUESTS AT THIS TIME, • PLEASE. THE PUBLICATION IS CURRENTLY OUT OF PRINT) Caring for the Past: Historic Preservation Publications. (Planning) Chapter 5, Section E.6, Comprehensive Historic Preservation Planning. Chapter 31, Section K, Review and Approval of Comprehensive Statewide Historic Preservation Plans (State plans). Local Historic Preservation Plans: A Selected Annotated Bibliography. National Register Bulletin 24: Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis for Preservation. NEW SERIES! Partnership Notes Conservation Districts; Subdivision Regulations and Historic. Preservation; and Zoning and Historic Preservation. Protecting Archeological Sites on Private Lands. Reaching Out, Reaching In: A Guide to Creating Effective Public Participation in State Historic Preservation Planning. Taking Command of Change: A Practical Guide for Applying the Strategic Development Process in State Historic Preservation Offices. • Mapping and GIS Caring for the Past. Program brochure. Please: One title only for Open File Reports. Open File Report No. 1: Survey of Battlefield Features at the Civil War Site of Stones River, Murfreesboro, Tennessee (Winter 1993) Open File Report No. 2: Atlas of Civil War Battlefields in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia (Summer 1993) Open File Report No. 3: Survey of Battlefield Features at the Civil War Site of Perryville, Kentucky (Summer 1993) Open File Report No. 4: GPS Survey of Archeological Sites in Mesa Verde National Park, Mesa Verde, Colorado (Summer 1993) Open File Report No. 5: Atlas of Principal Civil War Battlefields in the Seventh Congressional District, Virginia (September 1993) Open File Report No. 6: Historic Stone Masonry of Great Smoky Mountains National Park (1995) Open File Report No. 7: Siege of Port Hudson, Louisiana: GPS Survey 1993-1994 (Summer 1994) Open File Report No. 8: Mammoth Cave National Park, Cooperative Project Phase II, Information Management Assessment Survey (September 1994) Open File Report No. 9: GPS Survey of Surviving Civil War Features in Corinth and Alcorn County, Mississippi (Summer 1995) Open File Report No. 10: Chancellorsville: Hookers Apex, GPS Survey 1994 (Summer 1995 IN DRAFT) American Battlefield Protection Program Battlefield Survey Manual: Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Methodology (1995) Training Series: GPS Field School Training Guides, Cultural Resources GIS Facility, National Park Service (1995-1997) Study of Civil War Sites in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia. Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, September 1992 National Historic Landmarks Assistance Initiative Annual Report to Congress on Endangered National Historic Landmarks. Caring for the Past: Historic Preservation Publications. (NHL) National Historic Landmarks: Illustrating the History of the United States. (program brochure.) The National Historic Landmarks Program--Common Questions and Answers. • Technical Preservation Services Accessibility to Historic Properties: Checklist. Caring for the Past: Historic Preservation Publications. (TPS) .NEW! Case Studies in Affordable Housing for Historic Preservation Cultural Resource Training Directory (current). NEW! Historic Surplus Property Program--New Uses for Federal Properties. A Glossary of Historic Masonry Deterioration Problems and Preservation Treatments Historic Preservation Easements Preservation Tech Notes (choose UP TO THREE): Doors No. 1: Historic Garage and Carriage Doors: Rehabilitation Solutions. Exterior Woodwork No. 1: Proper Painting and Surface Preparation. Exterior Woodwork No. 2: Paint Removal from Wood Siding. Exterior Woodwork No. 3: Log Crown Repair and Selective Replacement Using Epoxy and Fiberglass Reinforcing Rods. Exterior Woodwork No. 4: Protecting Woodwork Against Decay Using Borate Preservatives. Finishes No. 1: Process-Printing Decals as a Substitute for Hand Stenciled Ceiling Medallions. Historic Interior Spaces No. 1: Preserving Historic Corridors in Open Space Office Plans. Historic Interior Spaces No. 2: Preserving Historic Office Building Corridors. Masonry No. 1, Substitute Materials: Replacing Deteriorated Serpentine Stone with Pre-Cast Concrete. Masonry No. 2: Stabilization and Repair of a Historic Terra Cotta Cornice. • Masonry No. 3: Water Soak Cleaning of Limestone. Masonry No. 4: Non-Destructive Evaluation Techniques for Masonry Construction. Mechanical Systems No. 1: Replicating Historic Elevator Enclosures. Metals No. 1: Conserving Outdoor Bronze Sculpture. Metals No. 2: Restoring Metal Roof Cornices. Metals No. 3: In-kind Replacement of Historic Stamped-Metal Exterior Siding Metals No. 4: Rehabilitating a Historic Iron Bridge Museum Collections No. 1: Museum Collection Storage in a Historic Building Using a Prefabricated Structure. Museum Collections No. 2: Reducing Visible and Ultraviolet Light Damage to Interior Wood Finishes. Site No. 1: Restoring Vine Coverage to Historic Buildings. Temporary Protection No. 1: Temporary Protection of Historic • Stairways During Rehabilitation Work. Temporary Protection No. 2: Specifying Temporary Protection of Historic Interiors During Construction and Repair. Windows No. 11: Installing Insulation Glass in Existing Wooden Sash Incorporation the Historic Glass. Windows No. 17: Repair and Retrofitting Industrial Steel • Windows. Windows No. 18: Aluminum Replacement Windows With True Divided Lights, Interior Piggyback Storm Panels, and Exposed Historic Wooden Frames. Preserving the Past and Making it Accessible for People with Disabilities The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation (36 CFR 67). In English and Spanish (please specify). The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties_(36 CFR 68). Window Directory for Historic Buildings. Tribal Preservation Program • America's Tribal Cultures--A Renaissance in the 1990s. (CRM thematic issue, Vol. 14, No. 5.) Caring for the Past: Historic Preservation Publications.(Tribal) • Keepers of the Treasures: Protecting Historic Properties and Cultural Traditions on Indian Lands. National Register Bulletin 38: Guidelines on Evaluating and Documenting Traditional Cultural Properties. Traditional Cultural Properties: What You Do and How We Think. (CRM thematic issue, Vol. 16.) Back to the HPS Bookstore for Sales and Free Publications! Yapping ram, Plano & Grants & Training & • ' & GIS I •1 Preservation V Tax Credits Internships IIIII Bookstore Mews Events • Priv_aclr&Disclaimer N P Service Last Muffled:Tue,Jul 3 2001 12:4724 pm EDT KDW