Subj:    Demolition by Neglect
Date:   2/14/98 2:00:57 PM EST
From:   [log in to unmask] (Ralston Cox)
Sender: [log in to unmask]
Reply-to:       [log in to unmask] (Ralston Cox)
To:     [log in to unmask]

Federal regulations ("Protection of Historic Properties," 36 CFR Part
800) which implement Section 106 (16 U.S.C. 470f) of the National
Historic Preservation Act, include the following refereces:

[36 CFR Part 800.9(a)]: An undertaking has an effect on a historic
property when the undertaking may alter characteristics of the property
that may qualify the property for inclusion in the National Register.
For the purpose of determining effect, alteration to features of the
property's location, setting, or use may be relevant depending on a
property's significant characteristics and should be considered.

[36 CFR Part 800.9(b)]: An undertaking is considered to have an adverse
effect when the effect on a historic property may diminish the integrity
of the property's location, design, setting, materials, workmanship,
feeling, or assosciation.  Adverse effects on historic properties
include, but are not limited to:

[36 CFR Part 800.9(b)(1)]: Physical destruction, damage, or alteration
of all or part of the property; ....

[36 CFR Part 800.9(b)(4)]: Neglect of a property resulting in its
deterioration or destruction ....

It is this last section that is the source of the Advisory Council's
definition of "demolition by neglect." The Advisory Council issued a
position paper on the subject a few years ago but I don't have it here
at home where I'm working at the moment. I'll scare it up when I return
to the office next week and will post more information about it at that
time.

The Council's "demolition by neglect" standard was cited by plaintiffs
in their unsuccessful attempt to convince the U.S. District Court for
the District of Columbia that the U.S. Army was "adversely affecting"
the historic buildings they occupied at Forest Glen Seminary (Maryland)
through demolition by neglect. I'm neither a lawyer nor an attorney (!),
but maybe a lawyer lurking on this list will offer a brief analysis of
the case and its complete citation. It is my understanding that while
the plaintiff's did not, ultimately, prevail that there was some very
interesting -- maybe helpful? -- language included in the court's
ruling.

Calling Betsy Merritt! Calling Betsy Merritt!

Ralston Cox
Office of Planning and Review
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation