Report a Comment

To understand that issue here you have to look at the basis for the legal standing of Historic Preservation.

Historic Preservation laws are typically based on preserving a neighborhood esthetic or a historically significant facade based on the views of a building that the public can perceive from what is defined as the legal public right of way. This is the reason that unless a building is of specific historic importance, usually the interiors and the rear are not proscribed in historic zoning ordinances. The public right of way is usually a street, but it may include views from parkland and those from hiking, biking, riding trails.

Rail lines are typically excluded because they are not public in this country, they are privately owned and have been since their creation. In other countries where they are considered a public commodity this law might be different, but because of this they are not included in protected status. This is similar to the view from another private building, drive or yard: historic zoning ordinances cannot preserve a private view.

Whether this is a good thing or a bad thing depends on whether you are the developer or the public observer. As it stands, historic preservation ordinances can create an enormous burden on architectural design and development, but it is one that we as a society have decided is worth it for the preservation of our cultural legacy. If other non-public views are added to the equation how do we avoid becoming a society where once something is deemed preservation worthy (or within a preservation district)it must be preserved irrespective of its usefulness and adaptability to the the modern world. The current culture is not perfect, but it provides a means for allowing these buildings to be occupied and edited so that they are still useful and avoids them becoming abandoned and demolished by neglect.

by Spencer on Jul 5, 2011 1:08 pm • link • report