Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Why Historic Preservation Districts Should Be a Thing of the Past [View all]
http://www.citylab.com/housing/2016/01/why-historic-preservation-districts-should-be-a-thing-of-the-past/431598/Behre reports that Charleston is changing its architectural-review process, which could ease the way for more ambitious growth. Charleston residents arent all against the idea. And as his longtime readers know, the people of Charleston bear an authentic interest in architecture; its not a front. Still, the same class of argument being levied against cutting-edge campus design is being used to thwart more affordable housing, and thats a problem. The result is a Charleston elite of increasingly wealthy downtown residents, and an affordable housing crisis for everybody else....
Historic districts thwart this access in the name of preserving the character of a neighborhood. Its not that far off from any argument about preserving the character of a single-family neighborhood. And the resultspockets of highly segregated wealth and accessare the same around the nation, whether the homes are architecturally distinct or dreadful McMansions.
That case against historic districting is similar to the case against protectionist single-family zoning anywhere. And the question isnt just aesthetic, its constitutional. The U.S. Supreme Courts decision last year on disparate impact means that wealthy communities cannot keep affordable housing out because wealthy residents feel that theyre better off without it. The federal governments Affordable Furthering Fair Housing rule means that cities and neighborhoods cannot use single-family zoning to keep affordable housing at bay.
As cities confront the growing nationwide housing crisis, there will be both a need and a market for building more densely, even in the most precious neighborhoods. Historic preservation is a tool better used to protect community assets, not private assets. Historic preservation is a tool better used to safeguard the historical resources in which everyone can take pridenot the historical resources that were only ever allotted to winners by race-based housing policies.
Historic districts thwart this access in the name of preserving the character of a neighborhood. Its not that far off from any argument about preserving the character of a single-family neighborhood. And the resultspockets of highly segregated wealth and accessare the same around the nation, whether the homes are architecturally distinct or dreadful McMansions.
That case against historic districting is similar to the case against protectionist single-family zoning anywhere. And the question isnt just aesthetic, its constitutional. The U.S. Supreme Courts decision last year on disparate impact means that wealthy communities cannot keep affordable housing out because wealthy residents feel that theyre better off without it. The federal governments Affordable Furthering Fair Housing rule means that cities and neighborhoods cannot use single-family zoning to keep affordable housing at bay.
As cities confront the growing nationwide housing crisis, there will be both a need and a market for building more densely, even in the most precious neighborhoods. Historic preservation is a tool better used to protect community assets, not private assets. Historic preservation is a tool better used to safeguard the historical resources in which everyone can take pridenot the historical resources that were only ever allotted to winners by race-based housing policies.
71 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I've always thought it was dumb that the city could decalare your house historic agaisnt your will
Travis_0004
Jan 2016
#1
I do. Most of them were built on the foundations of older destroyed buildings.
Recursion
Jan 2016
#10
This article reads like it was written by a developer eyeing a historic district building
FLPanhandle
Jan 2016
#8
You can't both be against this and be against gentrification. It's one or the other.
Recursion
Jan 2016
#11
And that will be an historical classic in 50 years, just like the rowhouses it's replacing
Recursion
Jan 2016
#23
Want to deal with the fact that the rent is too damn high? That's definitely a start (nt)
Recursion
Jan 2016
#9
Tearing down old to build new does not make the rent lower, NYC develops constantly and rents are
Bluenorthwest
Jan 2016
#47
And yet Amsterdam looks like Amsterdam while being fully modern and housing is made affordable
Bluenorthwest
Jan 2016
#48
Having lived many years in St. Augustine, FL, I got to see first-hand the struggle to maintain the
JCMach1
Jan 2016
#46
Let's take a look at the Garden of Allah Apartments in Hollywood. Residence to many, many luminaries
Bluenorthwest
Jan 2016
#49
The success with which developers have made useful idiots of the urban left is astounding
Sen. Walter Sobchak
Jan 2016
#59