Lexington’s historic preservation may save buildings, but it causes bigger problems

Lexington does historic preservation badly.

Now, many people will read that and nod along, thinking I mean we don’t preserve enough buildings, but that’s the opposite of what I mean. We’re architectural hoarders. Lexington has the H-1 overlay, which allows for the preservation of a single building (landmark) or a district, but it is overwhelmingly used to preserve districts. And therein lies the problem. Most of our H-1 districts arose as knee jerk reactions to some sort of development, not as some sort of forward thinking preservation initiative. This has led to some negative side effects for both those in those districts and the city as a whole. By imposing an artificial housing scarcity on neighborhoods it drives up property values and therefore rents and taxes. It also pushes growth outward, causing an undue burden on other neighborhoods while also locking people out of easy access to existing amenities. It also cheapens future preservation efforts when we preserve wide swaths of land rather than looking at each buildings’ merits. We have historical preservation, not historic preservation. Historic means important or influential to history, while historical just relates to something from the past, important or not.

When we freeze an entire neighborhood in amber, it has long lasting effects on both the neighborhood and the city. We have forced many neighborhoods to permanently be stuck at low densities, limiting the people that have access to existing amenities, whether that be parks, grocery stores, or neighborhood commercial districts. This imposed scarcity in areas with desired amenities leads to increased property values, which in turn increases rents for any potential renters and property taxes for existing homeowners. Some preservationists claim this increase in property values is because people value the historical nature of a place, but don’t consider the broader context of the neighborhood or city. This is especially heinous when our city has a substantial housing shortage, as people still want and need to live in Lexington, but we’ve cut them off from entire neighborhoods. So those people have to look elsewhere, whether it be other neighborhoods who will have to deal with disproportionate growth or in whole other cities, increasing the number of cars on the road.

When it comes to demolitions in an H-1, there are only two reasons it is allowed — the building is deemed to not contribute to the character of the historic district or no reasonable economic return can be realized from the property. Leaving aside the problem of how vague and arbitrary defining “character” is, this also leads to another form of informal demolition, demolition by neglect. This is when a property owner purposefully allows the building to fall into disrepair, then uses the total cost of all required repairs to justify demolition. So in a roundabout way the regulations actually encourage what they are intending to prevent. Our architectural hoarding also has the effect of weakening future preservation efforts. When everything is considered special, then nothing is special. Are we going to preserve every subdivision because it is an example of an architectural trend of the time?

We need to focus on preserving individual buildings of historic importance, like the Palmer Pharmacy, Henry Clay’s law office, or the Miller House recently showcased by Linda Blackford. We can’t continue to freeze entire neighborhoods for perpetuity just because someone had the audacity to propose a few townhouses on one lot or proposed to build much needed student housing right next to campus. We need to also drastically raise the bar for any new H-1 districts, ensuring that they have true historic significance and limiting their size. We need to balance preservation with the city’s current and future needs. We should be asking who historic preservation serves. If it only serves those wealthy enough to live in H-1s while pushing everyone else further and further away, is that really in the best interest for our community?

Blake Hall is an advocate for better urban design and walkability who blogs at Build A Better Lexington and is a member of Lexingtonians United for Livability.