Dispelling Common Preservation Myths

Reality: NOT preserving costs even more. Demolition has significant expenses: workers who tear down a historic place and carry away the debris must be paid; landfills grow sizeably with used construction materials; construction in previously undeveloped areas comes with added costs such as new roads, water and sewer lines. Numerous recent projects prove that preservation is often cheaper.

Destroying our past has costs that extend far beyond money. Lost is the work of talented craftsmen who created beautiful, lasting buildings. Lost are the memories and pride that a community took in one of its landmarks. Lost is the opportunity for future generations to enjoy and to learn from the places that help us understand and appreciate where we came from. And, lost is the embodied energy that went into Building and maintaining that resource. For more on the carbon impacts of demolition, check out the Carbon Avoided Retrofit Estimator (CARE) tool.

Reality: Preservation involves every aspect of America’s past. Preservation cares about the homes of the rich and the poor, industrial sites and downtown commercial districts, schools and colleges, religious sites and governmental buildings, parks and other places for recreation, rural landscapes, and structures – just about any place that helps tell America’s story. Evolving from a movement to save individual structures associated with America’s founding era, advocates are now promoting intangible cultural heritage associated with historically-disenfranchised populations. The movement continues to evolve, helping to tell America’s full history. An ongoing effort, and the first step to preservation on a large scale, is to identify and document places through survey work. We have surveyed Connecticut’s barns, industrial historic properties, town greens, places associated with artists and writers, and landscapes designed by Frederick Law Olmsted– and plan to keep going!

There are many variations on this theme:

• I won’t be able to change anything about my house, such as paint color or landscaping or plumbing, without the approval of the “history police.”
• I must open my house for tours.
• I won’t be able to sell my house.

Reality: None of those statements is true. No one from the local, state, or federal government, for example, paint color. Local Historic District Commissions can only evaluate changes visible from the public right of way and only if the property is located in designated historic district. Though many people choose to open their homes to once-a-year neighborhood tours, no one must give the public access. Numerous studies, including many by PlaceEconomics, have proven that being part of a historic district may actually improve property values,  since potential buyers can count on their neighborhood looking largely the same for a long time to come.

Reality: Unfortunately, buildings that are important enough to have made a local, state, or national register can still be torn down. Listing in the National Register of Historic Places, for example, does provide some protection, since a project built with federal money — like a highway — must consider its impact on historic resources, but even then, historic resources can be damaged or destroyed if there is no “feasible” alternative. Because legal protection is limited, it’s vital for communities to fight for their historic places. One such tool is the local historic district (LHD), typically enacted by a municipal governing body as a zoning change. The LHD allows local historic district commissions to review exterior changes, including applications for demolition, which may be denied in certain circumstances. Few new projects — roads, offices, stores — must be built in a specific place in a particular way. Citizens can make sure that their elected officials understand the need to protect the historic places and find ways to combine the best of the old and the new.

Reality: State and National Register designation does not involve third-party review of changes made to private property with private funds and local permits and should not affect replacement costs. In the event of an unexpected loss, there is no requirement to re-create lost features, or reuse specific materials such as lead, asbestos, or historic materials that can no longer be purchased. It is also recommended that property owners communicate with their insurance carriers regarding the actual age of building systems, materials, and upgrades.

Reality: People think that preservation regulations slow down development; however, 95% of all projects reviewed by the SHPO get approved within 30 days. Preservation is a good business — and a big one. A recent travel industry survey found that more than 40% of Americans made visiting a historic place -a building, battlefield, or historic community — part of their vacations, and that these people spent nearly 40% more than the typical traveler. Communities participating in the National Trust’s Main Street program, which revitalizes traditional commercial districts, have generated more than $16 billion in private and public investment since 1980. Preservation is also better business than new construction. One study shows that $1,000,000 spent on Rehabilitation will create more jobs and keep more money in the local economy than the same $1,000,000 spent on new construction .

Reality: Preservation is about preserving the past for the future. Through preservation we honor the achievements of previous generations, the places they lived and worked, and their history. By protecting our past, it helps us remember how we came to be where we are and helps guide us through our lives. Preservation also cares about giving future generations the same opportunities to enjoy beautiful buildings and landscapes that will last for years to come if cared for.

Reality: While the needs and interests of Planning & Zoning Boards may often overlap with those of Historic Preservation Commissions, the two boards have significantly different purview. Planning & Zoning Boards are concerned with use and a Site’s compatibility with surrounding sites, whereas a Historic Preservation Commission is interested in protecting the character of culturally or architecturally significant places. Connecticut’s Local Historic Districts and Historic Properties law enables municipalities to identify, evaluate, designate, and regulate historic resources—individual sites and historic districts alike—with a historic preservation ordinance and Historic Preservation Commission. The Local Historic Districts and Historic Properties law sets requirements for both the size and make-up of these commissions to ensure that decisions are made by those with demonstrated expertise in history or architecture. You can learn more about local districts here.

Reality: Yes there is money! While funding for private homeowners of historic properties is limited, the State Historic Preservation Office offers the Historic Homes Rehabilitation Tax Credit (HHRTC) program for properties listed on the State or National Registers of Historic Places. You can contact the SHPO to learn more.

Reality: Most homeowners who are striving to improve their energy efficiency are seeking to lower utility bills and reduce their carbon footprint. While it may be tempting to blame your home’s energy loss on its historic windows, roughly 10% of energy lost is through windows. The bulk of energy loss comes from attics, doors, and floors. Window manufacturers and installation companies widely promote that the new windows are “greener” than historic windows. In fact, repairing or restoring an original set of windows can not only meet the efficiency Standards of new, but will far surpass them at price point, structural compatibility, and overall Sustainability.

Restoration work produces ⅕ of the waste of the replacement process. Furthermore, the high cost of new windows amounts to a near impossible return on money invested for the fractional improvement in efficiency. New windows are often created as one unit and are thus difficult to repair. Often modern windows must be completely replaced, incurring further cost, and producing even more waste. In addition to the energy and cost savings, there are several advantages to retaining your historic windows. Windows created before 1940 are more than likely made with old growth wood. Old growth wood is far denser than any new wood purchasable today—it tends to hold paint and stain better than new growth wood and is naturally rot and insect resistant. In many instances, old growth wood used to create windows was locally sourced and is therefore ideally suited for your local climate.

Reality: Older multi-family units like duplexes, quadplexes, and apartment buildings are some of the most affordable housing options in the city and are often referred to as Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing or “NOAH.” Many older buildings have been turned into affordable housing with the use of preservation incentives, like historic tax credits and grants, which can be paired with other incentives, such as the low-income housing tax credit (LIHTC) and new markets tax credits (NMTC).