It’s a great building but will it’s historic status stop any development in that side of the street between it and the Elks club? Or can it stop the demolition of the building itself? What does a historic status mean to the future of the building? Is it detremental for the owner and his/her future plans if they want to change the buildings use, looks, additions, ect, etc, etc…

I’m glad Historic Tacoma has taken this on! It’s not often you see people or groups ruffle feathers in quiet Tacoma.

This is a great opportunity to educate the public and property owners about what being on the historic registry can and can’t do. While it can create a barrier to demolition, I think the more important facet is that it tells the world that historic preservation gets more than lip service by the community. Also, there are financial incentives made available to the owner of a registered property that would not be available otherwise.

Let’s keep the discussion going!

<i>It immediately drops the value of the property.</i>

Not true. The information I have seen indicates the opposite is true. In fact, a study conducted by the State of Washington indicates that the values of homes in historic districts tend to hold steady to value and actually increase in value. It has to do with pride of ownership and pride in neighborhood.

But simply being listed on a historic registry is actuilly neutral, the value of the building remains unchanged. However, if you choose to renovate the building, then you can take advantage of the financial benefits that go along with being on the registry. And the value then increases. It’s as simple as that: it’s an incentive to help people restore historic buildings. That said, there are guidelines that must be followed when doing the renovations, but again the goal is to increase the value of the property by doing the work properly, not decrease the value by using substandard materials.

Great dialog! Let’s keep it going!

Morgan: If it’s truely an incentive for property owners to have thier structures on the hstoric registry, why is the owner of this building fighting it? That makes no sense.

I’m with #4 here. If the community deems a building worthy of saving, perhaps they should put thier money where thier mouth is and not punish the owner.

My understanding is that this would do little to limit the land’s potential use or value. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think there’s anything in law right now that would prevent a future owner of a registered property from demolishing the building to build tall or build big. It may limit the incentives available, but if those aren’t needed, it doesn’t matter.

On the other hand, the historic designation would provide additional incentives and tax credits for those developers that wanted to keep the history.

Gain for historic preservation minded developers. Neutral effect for the non-preservation minded developer.

Yes, a nomination to the Register can be made by a non-owner in Tacoma. In this case, neighbors grew concerned about status of the building several years ago and started the research necessary to submit a nomination. Historic Tacoma became involved last year when we listed it on our Watch List of vulnerable properties, see www.historictacoma.n… Board member Brett Santhuff completed the nomination this winter and submitted it to the City in early February while notifying the owner of the nomination. The owner has not yet taken a position on the nomination and we are certainly hoping for their support or neutrality.

This is not the first time a property has been nominated to the Register by a non-owner. Residents successfully nominated both Lincoln High School and Washington Elementary to the Register in 2006 and were pleased by the owner’s (Tacoma School District) support. A new ordinance makes it much easier for a new owner of a Register-listed property to make a change in use (e.g. from a school to an office building), this encourages adaptive re-use of historic structures.

Listing on the Register cannot prevent demolition… a demolition permit for a Register-listed property must go before the Tacoma Landmarks Preservation Commission which makes a recommendation to Council. The best example is the owner’s request to demolish the Elks Lodge a few years back. The Commission denied the request and a lawsuit followed which upheld the City’s opinion that the building is significant to the city and should be preserved.

As for constraints on potential owners, the design review process is not terribly onerous, but requires that original building fabric be retained and any modifications comply with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Historic Rehabilitation. Extensive detail on the nomination process, effects, incentives are listed on the City’s historic preservation office website at www.tacomaculture.or…

Historic Tacoma believes that its architecture, both high style and vernacular, are significant assets for the city, worth preserving. The City’s Historic Preservation Office, Landmarks Commissioners and Historic Tacoma stand ready to support and advise on rehabilitation and re-use options for historic structures.

— Sharon Winters, Historic Tacoma board member

I have been told by Reuben McKnight with regard to Trinity Methodist Church on McKinley Hill, that no building can be placed on the register against the wishes of the current owner (the Methodist church opposed the nomination of Trinity).

This is very specific to churches. A 1996 state Supreme Court ruling exempts churches from historic status against their wishes. This came up frequently during the First United Methodist debate a few years ago.