The purpose of this project was to create a document which would inform readers involved with urban community development of the benefits of integrating historic preservation into their affordable housing programs. Preservation's roots in community activism are explored and compared to the community development movement. The goals of the historic preservation movement are explained as they apply to an urban context. The document also describes the achievements of preservation in ending the damage caused by urban renewal and creating a broad public appreciation of historic buildings. Development tools related to preservation are shown to be useful for urban revitalization. Readers are informed of the elements of architectural and community character which preservationists seek to save. The definition and appropriateness of several levels of preservation are discussed in terms of when they are pragmatically useful. Neighborhoods in Savannah, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, and Baltimore which have used preservation to revitalize for the poor are profiled. Several single family projects performed by an Indianapolis CDC are analyzed to determine the added cost of integrating preservation into their rehab, with the result showing that added costs are low or non existent. Three multi-unit housing rehabs in Indianapolis are analyzed to determine the cost of preservation work, and these also revealed that although preservation added less than 10% to the cost of the project, it brought valuable tax credits which raised equity exceeding these costs. The effect of preservation on low-income urban neighborhoods was broken down into benefits and costs, with benefits such as increasing property values and attracting investment to the neighborhood seeming to outweigh potential costs such as increases in taxes and rents. This advantage was particularly true if a non-profit community organization targeted their development at meeting the needs of those most likely to suffer from the costs of preservation. The document closes with guidelines on how a CDC can analyze the utility and compatibility of preservation with its existing purpose and programs. The general thrust of the conclusion is that preservation is a valuable tool for upgrading low-income communities for their existing residents, as long as it is teamed with other mechanisms to meet the needs of the disadvantaged. / Department of Architecture
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:BSU/oai:cardinalscholar.bsu.edu:handle/185098 |
| Date | January 1994 |
| Creators | Taft, William G. |
| Contributors | Truex, Scott I. |
| Source Sets | Ball State University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Format | 182 leaves : ill., maps ; 28 cm. |
| Source | Virtual Press |
| Coverage | n-us--- |
Page generated in 0.0018 seconds