BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS Archives

The listserv where the buildings do the talking

BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Mary Delaney Krugman <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS The historic preservation free range.
Date:
Fri, 30 Jan 1998 13:53:16 EST
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (56 lines)
Here is a cross-post from the National Trust that might interest some folks
out there.

M. Krugman
___________________________
Subj:    Application of Secretary of Interior Standards
Date:   1/30/98 9:23:42 AM EST
From:   [log in to unmask] (Bradford J. White)
Sender: [log in to unmask]
Reply-to:       [log in to unmask] (Bradford J. White)
To:     [log in to unmask]
CC:     [log in to unmask]

According to information available from the National Park Service, a large
portion, if not a majority, of the rehabilitation tax credit projects that
have been undertaken over the past five or more years have been combined
with the low income housing tax credit.  Combining the tax credits has
resulted in the production of thousands of low and moderate income housing
units while preserving historic buildings and revitalizing urban areas.
However, there is a perception in the low income housing development
community which is shared by others, including some that have been active in
the preservation movement, that the application of the Secretary of Interior
Standards to low income/rehabilitation tax credit projects has made
coversion of buildings for low and moderate income housing economically
infeasible.  Some have said that maintaining interior fabric or complying
with historic window requirements runs counter to producing economically
viable low income housing units.

I want to find out what is perception and what is reality.  Please forward
actual cases where the application of the Standards has killed a low income
housing tax credit project or forced a developer to forego undertaking the
project in conjunction with the rehabilitation tax credit program.  In
addition, examples of successful projects are also needed including
descriptions of creative preservation solutions.

The purpose of this is to compile as many examples as possible so that the
issue can be properly analyzed and allow us to address the real challenges
with the development of low and moderate income housing in conjunction with
use of the rehabilitation tax credit.

For information purposes I am the immediate past president of the Landmarks
Preservation Council of Illinois and Programs and Policy Vice Chair of
Preservation Action, the national grass roots lobby for historic
preservation.  The information requested is being compiled independently of
these organizations.  I am not representing any organization in relation to
this analysis.

Sincerely,
Brad
Brad White
Project Management Advisors, Inc.
117 North Jefferson, Suite 303
Chicago, Illinois  60661-2300
Ph: 312.207.1764
Fax: 312.207.1046

ATOM RSS1 RSS2