Historic Landmarks Commission

[uncommon.name]

Originally Posted by NOPO

I think historic preservation only leads to more of a housing shortage by preventing new dense construction in historic zones. I would be happy if almost all preservation went away. If someone truly thinks a structure is historic, they should fund preservation on their own and not get a community covenant to protect their structure.

Thank you for your opinion! Most of us appreciate history, your concerns have been noted and filed in the circular file.

"Historic Landmark" does not necessarily mean it cannot be converted to housing. This is done all over the country. My wife used to live in a apartment complex in the outskirts of Boston called Jack Flats. The building was a historic rubber shoe factory that was over 100 years old and the historic character of the buildings were stunning. Historic Building SHOULD be preserved and preserving Historic Landmarks =/= contributing to the housing crisis.

[NOPO]

Originally Posted by uncommon.name

Thank you for your opinion! Most of us appreciate history, your concerns have been noted and filed in the circular file.

"Historic Landmark" does not necessarily mean it cannot be converted to housing. This is done all over the country. My wife used to live in a apartment complex in the outskirts of Boston called Jack Flats. The building was a historic rubber shoe factory that was over 100 years old and the historic character of the buildings were stunning. Historic Building SHOULD be preserved and preserving Historic Landmarks =/= contributing to the housing crisis.

I said, “almost all.” I’d be fine with dense old buildings being preserved.