August 6, 2013 · Exit133

Preventing Neglect of Historic Properties Info Session

If you've been following the conversation around code changes to save Tacoma's historic structures from demolition through neglect, you may want to mark your calendar for an information session this Thursday, August 8.

If you've missed the conversation, City staff has been working to develop a new ordinance that would define neglect of a historic building as a public nuisance, a step which would give the City more leverage to step in before such buildings suffer irrevocable damages. Details are still being worked out, but staff is looking at providing incentives to encourage owners of at risk properties to sell to someone who can take needed steps to protect them. Staff is also looking at giving the City both the authority to address issues of neglect, and an emergency preservation fund to fix problems before buildings become dangerous.

The new rules would likely only apply to buildings on either the Tacoma or National registers of historic places, or within a historic district. The new ordinance would apply to commercial and multi-family residential properties, but not to single family homes.

Thursday's information session will take place at 5:30 pm at the Tacoma Municipal Building. Read more from the Tacoma Daily Index or previously from Exit133: Saving Tacoma's Historic Buildings from Demolition by Neglect.

Filed under: History, Legislation, Historic Preservation

7 comments

fred davie August 6, 2013

Exit 133, kudos for providing another laughable "Tacoma City Council" story. Tacoma city infrastructure is deteriorating at an alarming rate with little interest from the council. Yet they are going to grant themselves the authority to take over the maintenance requirements of deteriorating PRIVATE property. It just doesn't get any better than that.
- James August 7, 2013
  
  Fred, You might want to learn the specifics of the plan before you make assumptions about its implementation. This is well researched and creative legislation being put forth to Council, with measures that ensure that derelict property owners be held accountable for associated costs. We can compare any action by the City to its inaction with regards to surface street maintenance, but that's not going to get us anywhere. Preserving Tacoma's landmarks is an urgent matter that's in everyone's best interests.
  - fred davie August 8, 2013
    
    Thanks James, Well, I'm responding to the specific story carried above at exit.133. Is it in "everybody's" best interest that the city spend time worrying about historic structures instead of spending time worrying about our crumbling infrastructure? That's not clear.
    - James August 8, 2013
      
      Call me naive, but I'd like to think that City leadership is capable of addressing more than one issue at any given time.
  - Jenny J August 8, 2013
    
    I'm with you James. I think protecting our historic buildings has a great deal of value to our community, and will for years to come. And I don't think working to save them precludes working on other issues like potholes. It doesn't have to be an either/or situation, and funds available for things like historic preservation don't tend to be available for road repairs, and vice versa.
Published Author RR Anderson August 6, 2013

maybe the city can flip the luzon !
- Christine August 8, 2013
  
  Uh, RR. They already did flip the Luzon. Figuratively, not literally as may have been preferred.