DC does have a strong preservation ordinance

When all is said and done, DC has pretty good laws covering historic preservation. Sure they aren't perfect, and the system can still be gamed, but there are two extremely important provisions that many cities don't have:

1. Neighborhood organizations within their own neighborhood and city-wide preservation and planning organizations, so long as preservation is listed as a primary task in the organization's bylaws or articles of incorporation, have standing to file landmark nominations on buildings in the city, regardless of ownership of the building-area in question.

2. DC does not have an opt-out provision for property owners with regard to historic designation, both for buildings or for historic districts.

Plus:

3. Once a nomination is filed, until the hearing determination, the building is protected. (Although there can still be illegal demolitions then, see the H Street CDC's demolition of 721-727 H Street NE as an example. Nothing happened to the demolisher of the buildings, but in effect, the HPO director lost his job...); and

4. Once a nomination is filed, notice is provided to the property owner and published in the DC Register, notification is sent ANCs and other agencies, and at some point, a hearing is scheduled.

Apparently, the Landmarks Preservation Commission in NYC will quash nominations by never scheduling a hearing. You can't do that in DC.

But the provisions that matter the most to me:

1. Design review for alterations as well as for new construction. (note to various people: design is not merely "aesthetics" it has to do with the dictates of particular architectural styles, materials, and the period of significance);

2. Protections against demolition;

apply only to buildings and districts once they are designated.

Compare this to Baltimore, where I thought they had strong provisions. According to the op-ed in yesterday's Baltimore Sun, "Save Baltimore's other Rochambeaus," by the president and director of Baltimore Heritage, they don't have it so good. From the article:

Mayor Martin O'Malley, Councilman Keiffer J. Mitchell Jr. (whose district includes the Rochambeau), and the Baltimore Commission for Historical and Architectural Preservation, or CHAP, have said they would like to keep the building but do not have the tools to do so. Now is the time to get those tools.

For guidance, we can look to a report issued by a task force chaired by Council President Sheila Dixon that studied Baltimore's historic preservation in 2004. The report outlines steps to better protect and revitalize the city's historic buildings and neighborhoods. Among the most imperative recommendations are the following:

• Develop a citywide preservation plan to protect historic resources and guide investment in the city's economic revitalization....
• Develop new incentives for neighborhoods that are designated local historic districts. ...
• Strengthen the historical commission's ability to protect historic buildings. CHAP lacks the tools to do its job....
• Develop strategies for preserving city-owned historic structures.....
_____
Well, DC has a preservation plan, but we need to do a comprehensive survey of undesignated areas, and the city needs to be more pro-active in expanding the areas that are designated as historic districts.

As I said yesterday, we need design review everywhere, whether or not an area is designated.

We just added provisions to the law to cover city-owned historic structures, and the capabilities of the Historic Preservation Review Board are pretty strong.

That doesn't mean we can't improve.

Index Keywords: historic-preservation