Our View: PMA Campus Expansion & Unification

Aerial view of the Portland Museum of Art’s campus with the Payson Building at center-right and, to its left, the former Children’s Museum where the expansion plan is focused. Photo appeared in the Portland Press Herald, June 1, 2022, courtesy of the Portland Museum of Art.

On Sunday, March 19, 2023, we offered our thoughts on the Portland Museum of Art's campus expansion and unification plan in a Portland Press Herald Maine Voices column (full text below). We offer these comments in a constructive and collegial manner and look forward to being actively involved in community discussions about the future of this historic and contemporary campus. 

Sarah Hansen
Executive Director

As the area’s nonprofit organization devoted to historic preservation, Greater Portland Landmarks’ mission is to ensure that Greater Portland preserves its sense of place for all and builds vibrant, sustainable neighborhoods and communities for the future. We seek to build awareness and encourage public participation in the discourse and decisions that are shaping our region. It is with this mission in mind that we offer considerations on the Portland Museum of Art’s proposal to expand and unite its campus, with special concern for its implications to the PMA’s architectural legacy.
 
The PMA recently announced the selection of LEVER Architecture to design a major new building and master plan to unite the museum’s campus. LEVER’s initial proposal has many worthy distinctions, including its scale, choice of sustainable materials, homage to Maine’s Wabanaki heritage, and ability to welcome the public into the museum. It does not appear that the program gave significant weight to preservation considerations, including how the design should interface with existing buildings and the surrounding community.
 
The historic buildings of the campus are a part of the PMA’s admirable “Art for All” initiative by showcasing important pieces of Portland’s architectural history. All of the campus’ buildings—including the Payson building (1983)—are contributing structures both to Portland’s local Congress Street Historic District and the Spring Street National Register District. The proposed design implicitly assumes complete demolition of one of these buildings—142 Free Street, the former Children’s Museum—without any specified justifications. Yet, the PMA will have to seek multiple City approvals to do so as 142 Free Street enjoys preservation protections against demolition or reduction to a facade based on its significance as a structure of nearly 200 years and association with notable architects, including John Calvin Stevens, a founding member of what is now the PMA.
 
Outside of the preservation protections for 142 Free Street (and the other buildings of the campus), the signature Payson building was designed to be in conversation with the façade of 142 Free Street, and its rhythm and scale were influenced by the earlier building. Removing that context thus diminishes the Payson building, which is also proposed to be significantly modified with the introduction of an archway leading to a High Street courtyard. This design effectively re-orients the museum away from Congress Square. These changes would dramatically affect the museum’s interactions with a major intersection undergoing significant publicly funded upgrades, including the Congress Square Park redesign. The redesigned courtyard itself has the potential to eliminate the beloved, heritage Copper Beech tree that presently graces that space.
 
As a major cultural institution for the city and heart of the Arts District, it is entirely appropriate for the PMA to make a bold architectural statement fitting of the twenty-first century to augment its historic campus and provide spaces for new forms of programming and exhibitions. But the PMA is also integrally stitched into the fabric of the existing city and Portland’s sense of place. As the museum looks to enhance its actions on accessibility and equity, we hope that it will also prioritize the stories that these spaces and historic structures on its campus represent—that it will use its architecture to teach us about the history and cultural heritage of the city. This is an extraordinary opportunity for the PMA to fully incorporate its architectural legacy and our shared built environment into its plans for the future.

Advocacy Alert: Munjoy Hill Neighborhood Conservation Overlay Zone REPEAL

Portland City Council to hold workshop on repealing the Munjoy Hill Neighborhood Conservation Overlay Zone on Monday, June 13

In February, Portland’s planning board recommended that Portland City Council dissolve the Munjoy Hill Neighborhood Conservation Overlay Zone (MHNCOZ).

The Council will hold a workshop on Monday, June 13 at 5pm to consider this, with a public hearing and vote scheduled for Wednesday, June 22.

The removal of this zone will significantly impact historic resources on Munjoy Hill that are outside the new historic district!

Greater Portland Landmarks strongly believes that evaluation of the MHNCOZ should occur as part of the broader review of the impact of historic preservation to be completed by Place Economics in September 2022, as well as ReCode Phase II and the revision of the R6 design standards.

With these three major reviews coming up, it is premature to pull the MHNCOZ out for review.

If the MHNCOZ is repealed, we would lose:

• Demolition delay, which allows the city, the property owner and the community an opportunity for conversation and study about the best path forward for the property

• Workforce housing incentive specific only to Munjoy Hill

• Opportunity for review in context of ReCode Phase II

We are afraid that removing the Overlay Zone, which was never meant to be temporary, will result in a divided neighborhood – creating two Munjoy Hills – and destroy the cohesive and vibrant neighborhood we know today.

We encourage you to submit public comment as well as contact city councilors and urge them to delay considering this repeal until the MHNCOZ can be evaluated as part of the ReCode process! To submit written public comment, please send an email to publiccomment@portlandmaine.gov (and be sure to include your name and legal address).

• Access the meeting agenda and informational packet

• Read Landmarks comments to City Council

• Find councilor contact information here

Please reach out with any questions about what the repeal could mean for Munjoy Hill or if you would like assistance in crafting your public comment talking points.

Ian Stevenson, Director of Advocacy
istevenson@portlandlandmarks.org
207.774.5561 x102

Visualizing the impact of urban renewal in Bayside

By Kate Burch

One of the topics we are asked about most frequently at Landmarks is the widespread demolitions in the Bayside neighborhood during Portland’s urban renewal efforts. Like cities across the country, urban renewal was in full swing in the 1950s-1970s in Portland, with the city eager to clear neighborhoods designated as slums and to improve automobile infrastructure by building high-traffic arterial streets and parking lots.

Bayside was particularly affected by urban renewal policies. The neighborhood around Franklin Street was a dense, mixed-use neighborhood of residences, religious buildings, and stores with Jewish and Italian immigrant communities. This map from Portland’s 1943 report on Bayside shows how the city graded various neighborhoods, from best (A rating) to worst (E rating means the neighborhood is a slum.) These assessments were used to justify the razing of entire neighborhoods and move residents to new housing, fragmenting these communities. Families were compensated for relocation and offered additional relocation assistance.

Driving on Franklin Street today, it can be difficult to visualize what the area looked like before urban renewal demolition. This map is an overlay of the Sanborn Fire Insurance Company’s 1909 maps of the area to demonstrate what the streets looked like before the bulldozers came through.

View the full map as a PDF by clicking here.

To provide a better picture of what these neighborhoods were like, this next map reconstructs the buildings in from the 1909 Sanborn maps, color-coded according to use and overlaid on a contemporary map. You can see the dense residential blocks anchored by stores and religious buildings (both an Italian Catholic Church and a synagogue) in a walkable, mixed-use neighborhood.

View the full map as a PDF by clicking here.

You can explore the neighborhood buildings that were spared by the bulldozers in our West Bayside Virtual Walking Tour.

To learn more about urban renewal in Bayside, check out these resources:

Vine-Deer-Chatham Project, 1959 report

Does Bayside Need Rebuilding?, 1944 report

Model Cities, Housing, and Renewal Policy in Portland, Maine

1909 Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps of Portland, Maine

Historic Preservation in the Urban Renewal Era (Greater Portland Landmarks blog)

Gorham's Historic Districts

Gorham Academy (part of the Gorham Campus Historic District), c.1880

By Alessa Wylie

The Town of Gorham is home to not one, not two, but three historic districts, each showcasing different aspects of the Town’s history. South Street Historic District (1988) reflects neighborhood growth, Gorham Historic District (1992) reveals village development, and Gorham Campus Historic District (1978) illustrates educational history in Maine.

European colonists first settled in Gorham in 1736, but it was not until after 1760 that significant growth took place, resulting in its incorporation in 1764. The town center was laid out at the junction of Main and South Streets (Maine State Routes 25 and 114) in the 1750s, with a small cemetery and schoolhouse just to its south. The area south of the cemetery, along South Street, was originally farmland, but gradually developed as a residential area in the early 19th century.

Baxter Memorial Library

The South Street Historic District was designated in 1988 and is a nearly rectangular area of about nine acres. It contains 20 buildings constructed between about 1790-1840 that show remarkable consistency in the overall form of the buildings during this 50-year period.  neighborhood. Prominent in the district is the Baxter House, now a museum, which is notable as the home of two of Maine's governors, James Phinney Baxter and Percival Baxter. It stands next to the 1907 Colonial Revival Baxter Memorial Library, the only non-residential building in the district, which was a gift to the town by James Phinney Baxter.

The Gorham Historic District is roughly L-shaped, encompassing the town center, and includes a small cluster of religious and commercial buildings at School and Main Streets, with some residential properties on streets spreading from the center. It’s comprised of 19th and 20th century buildings and was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1992.

Architecturally, the Gorham Historic District reflects the wide variety of styles that were popular from the early 19th century through the 1930s, including Federal and Greek Revival buildings. There is a single Queen Anne building and a handful of Colonial Revival houses too. The Italianate style is well represented in the district, principally in commercial, fraternal and religious structures. Among the most notable of these are the former Masonic Hall and the Lewis McLellan Block both of which were erected in 1875 from plans drawn by Portland architect Charles H. Kimball. The district abuts the Gorham Campus Historic District.

The Gorham Campus Historic District encompasses seven buildings that make up the historic core of the campus of the University of Southern Maine in Gorham. Built between 1806 and 1931, they reflect the varied academic history of the campus, and were listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1978. The district is important not only for the architectural merit of the buildings, but also because the buildings illustrate educational development in Maine. Beginning as Gorham Academy in 1803, it grew to become the Gorham Academy and Teachers Institute in 1847. Almost 100 years later, in 1945, it became Gorham State Teachers College and now is part of the University of Maine system.

Our new virtual Gorham Walking Tour is a great way to explore all the districts. Check it out today!

10 Facts about the proposed Munjoy Hill Historic District

For nearly three years, the historic designation process has yielded a tremendous amount of information and prompted passionate discussion. These conversations have also revealed misconceptions and misinformation about the Munjoy Hill Historic District.

View fullsize

As the district heads to a city council vote, we’re here to clear things up with some of the most important facts about the proposed District.

1.      The Munjoy Hill Historic District was initiated by Portland City Council and city staff in June 2018 in response to residents concerned about development pressure, and to fulfill preservation, sustainability, and affordable housing goals central to Portland’s Comprehensive Plan.

(Source: City of Portland Staff Memo July 1, 2020: While the zoning amendments, demolition delay ordinance and revised R6 design standards and design review process were adopted by the Council in June, the Council was not yet in a position to make a financial decision on staff's proposal to create a historic district on Munjoy Hill. As staff explained, Portland's historic preservation ordinance requires that detailed documentation and analysis be conducted in order to delineate district boundaries and make the case for designation. As of June 2018, staff was simply seeking the Council's general support for moving forward with consideration of a district. With the Council's support, the work got underway late last summer.)

2.      More than 80% of public comments received by the city so far are IN FAVOR of the proposed District. (Source: Public Comment Received To Date)

3.      The proposed district protects buildings that reflect the story of Portland’s most historically diverse neighborhood. Over the past 180 years, the Hill has been home to a robust Black community and immigrants from Europe, Africa, and the Caribbean – the District will preserve the stories of communities underrepresented in Portland’s other historic designations. (Source: Munjoy Hill Historic District Development & Context Statement April 2019)

The buildings on Munjoy Hill represent several major periods of significance (1850s-1930s) in Portland’s development and history:

View fullsize

• Expansion of the Eastern Waterfront

• Rebuilding after the Great Fire of 1866

• Turn of the 20th century Immigration                      

• Portland’s Black History 

4.      Historic designation is NOT a factor included in property valuation, and historic districts have no impact on property taxes. (Source: City of Portland Tax Assessor Chris Huff)

5.      Portland’s Historic Preservation ordinance does NOT place costly or onerous requirements on homeowners. The regulations are much looser than in many other cities – nobody’s going to regulate your paint colors! Only exterior changes visible from the street are regulated, in-kind replacements of modern materials are allowed, and the ordinance doesn’t apply to interior changes or building use. Decks, garages, and solar panels have all been approved. (Source: Portland Historic Preservation Program FAQ)

View fullsize

• See more recently approved projects from the proposed Munjoy Hill Historic District

View fullsize

Population Density in Portland’s Historic Districts

6.      New housing and increased density is possible in historic districts - 46% of Portland’s new housing units added in the past five years were built in an area subject to Historic Preservation Board review. Accessory dwelling units, additions, new units within existing buildings, and new infill housing are allowed in local historic districts. Portland’s historic districts include some of the city’s densest neighborhoods. (Source: Portland, Maine Population Density, 2018 American Community Survey, US Census Bureau)

• Click here to read the Standards for Review of New Construction in Portland’s Historic Preservation Ordinance.

• Click here to learn more about housing and community development in Portland.

7.      Historic Districts support affordable housing. Demolition and building new is expensive, and older housing stock is rarely replaced with affordable units.

View fullsize

8.      Historic districts make buildings eligible for state and federal tax credits that make many affordable housing projects possible. Greater Portland Landmarks, along with other organizations across the country, are advocating for technical changes to tax credit programs that will make them easier to pair with low-income housing tax credits.

• Click here to read the new Maine Historic Tax Credit Economic Impacts Report.

• Click here to read 24 Reasons Historic Preservation is Good for Your Community from PlaceEconomics.

9.      Building reuse fights climate change and supports local and state sustainability goals. Reuse is greener than demolition and new construction - it takes an average of 20-30 years for a new energy efficient building to compensate for the initial carbon impacts from construction. (Source: The Greenest Building: Qualifying the Environmental Value of Building Reuse)

10.      The Munjoy Hill Conservation Overlay District is a separate land use tool that was implemented in 2018 with the intention that it would work in conjunction with a future historic district. As with most new zoning, the city will audit the overlay and make adjustments, probably as part of the planned city-wide zoning re-write, known as ReCode Phase II. (Source: ReCode Portland)

How to Participate in the Munjoy Hill Historic District Virtual Public Meeting

Join the zoom meeting via this link.

When prompted, use your full name to register as an attendee. You will never be seen on video, you will only be heard when the moderator allows you to speak.

You can also call in to the meeting with your phone to speak. Use the phone number 312-626-6799 and follow the prompts. The webinar ID is 841 4318 1611 and the passcode is 861430.

When public comment opens on a specific agenda item, the moderator will announce it. To indicate you want to speak, you will "raise your hand" - click the raise your hand button (depending on your device, it will be at the bottom of the screen or in the upper right).

The moderator or chair will recognize you and ask you by name to unmute your microphone. A small window will pop up. Select the unmute option. You will have three minutes to speak. We suggest writing notes beforehand to read! When you are finished, you can click mute to mute yourself or the moderator will can turn off your mic after 3 minutes.

That's it! To leave the meeting, you can click "leave meeting".

Tell City Council you support the Munjoy Hill Historic District!

City Council will hold a public meeting and vote on the proposed District Monday, November 16. We need you to email your support to Mayor Snyder and the City Council before the meeting - the district designation is in your hands!

Here's how you can help:

Copy these email addresses into the TO: line of your email: ksnyder@portlandmaine.gov, pali@portlandmaine.gov, tchong@portlandmaine.gov, kcook@portlandmaine.gov, jcosta@portlandmaine.gov, jduson@portlandmaine.gov, nmm@portlandmaine.gov, bsr@portlandmaine.gov, sthibodeau@portlandmaine.gov, planningboard@portlandmaine.gov
 

Use the SUBJECT: Please support the Munjoy Hill Historic District!

State your name & place of residence, and copy this message (or add your own personalized message):

Mayor Snyder and City Councilors,
I urge you to support the proposed Munjoy Hill Historic District. The district will protect those properties that reflect the unique history of the hill and its residents for the last 180 years, including immigrants from Eastern and Western Europe, Scandinavia, Africa, and the Caribbean. The district will also support sustainability and affordable housing goals established in the City’s 2017 comprehensive plan.

Hundreds of units of affordable housing, as well as new market rate units, have been built in Portland’s existing historic districts in the last five years. Portland’s historic districts provide access to federal and state Historic Tax Credits, significant funding for challenging housing projects. Reusing and improving our existing building stock will also significantly help meet our goals to cut carbon emissions, reducing the need for the manufacture and transportation of new building materials - as well as reducing the amount of building demolition materials that enter our waste stream. 

Please vote to support the district on November 16th. Thank you.

SEND before noon on Monday, 11/16!

Get the facts on the Munjoy Hill Historic District:

Read more about the proposed historic district here.

Learn about how historic districts positively impact affordable housing.

Munjoy Hill Local Historic District

Did you know that the protections of the historic district have been temporarily in effect since the Historic Preservation Board recommended the district move forward last year? Several projects have already been reviewed and approved by the Historic Preservation Board with these protections in place, demonstrating that adding new housing units, incorporating modern additions, and incorporating solar panels are all possible in a Historic District!

49 St. Lawrence Street

Architectural rendering of 49 St. Lawrence Street with new additions and rehabilitated front facade. Mark Mueller Architects

The current owner of the building is proposing to convert the 2 ½ story wood frame residence from three units to four units. The project is prompted by a number of goals, including a desire to increase the number of units within the building, convert the attic area into useful living space, improve the layout and functionality of each floor, and address the generally deteriorated condition of the house. The existing structure was built c. 1858 and is typical of the architecture that characterizes much of Munjoy Hill with its wood frame construction, simple mass and scale, and gable-end-to-the-street orientation. The building is a vernacular expression of the Greek Revival style with most of its architectural detail covered by the application of replacement siding in the late 20th century.

In working to meet the client’s goals, the project architects found that they needed to introduce a stair tower addition to comply with code requirements triggered by the project. The project includes: new cementitious clapboard siding, corner boards, new windows and window openings, new doors, refurbished entry stairs with new treads, risers and code-compliant railings, and a standing seam metal roof. New additions include the stair tower, shed dormers, and entry porch. A rear addition is proposed to replace existing rear decks, stairs and porch addition and will accommodate an elevator. Solar panels are to be installed on the roof. The project was approved by the Historic Preservation Board in early March.

9 Howard Street

9 Howard Street existing conditions.

The two ½ story, wood frame residential structure at 9 Howard Street represents a building type, form and style that dominates much of the Munjoy Hill neighborhood. The building was built in 1881 and exhibits the proportions and architectural details generally associated with the Italianate style, including prominent bays on the front and south elevations, an oriel window on the north elevation, tall windows, and a prominent projecting cornice with eave returns. Instead of a bracketed hood over the front entry, there is a flat-roofed portico supported by square columns and pilasters and featuring a wide frieze. It is likely that the front portico is a later alteration as the entry off the rear ell features a typical Italianate bracketed hood.

The project includes new dormers, windows, and the rehabilitation of the front entry. At the front entry, the single door and sidelight will be replaced with double-doors, consistent with original appearance and the existing porch railings will be replaced or reconfigured to extend to the bottom stair. New posts with turned ball finials (matching the documented design) will replace existing posts. The application was submitted on January 29th and approved on March 24, 2020.

Before and after design for the front entrance at 9 Howard Street. Blue Anchor Designs

24 St. Lawrence Street

This 1924 Portland Tax assessor image documents the early look of the dwelling. This photographic collection is a great resource for homeowners. You can search for your home!

This project includes a new garage and a multi-story rear addition. The project proposal also includes extensive exterior rehabilitation of the original 1851 Greek Revival side gable, two-family dwelling. A previous proposal to demolish the house and build a multi-unit condominium building was withdrawn following classification of the house as Preferably Preserved under the Munjoy Hill Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District ordinance, permitting issues, and neighborhood opposition.

Part of the early wave of development on the south side of Munjoy Hill after the founding of the Portland Company and the Atlantic & St. Lawrence Railroad, the dwelling is a contributing building in the proposed Munjoy Hill Historic District. The current owners purchased the property in July 2019. The project will demolish the existing one-story, hip-roofed, single-car detached garage and an existing deck and stair structure attached to the rear of the house, and construct a new garage. The new two-car garage will be connected to the rear of the house by a new deck and stairs. A new elevator will rise from the garage to a new third-floor dormer on the rear roof plane of the house and connect to the house by upper floor hallways. All of the proposed construction is on the rear of the house; the front of the building will be rehabilitated. The project was applied for in late January and approved less than two months later in March 2020.

The house at 24 St. Lawrence Street will remain largely as is, but a modern addition will be built at the rear, along with a new garage. Sheri Winter, architect.

34-36 North Street

This project features a second floor addition to an existing one-story bay to add more light to the owners’ living space. This two-family, wood-framed residence is a fairly simple transitional Queen Anne designed by John Calvin Stevens and built in 1882. It closely resembles 38 North Street next door, also designed by Stevens. 34-36 North Street is classified as a contributing structure in the proposed Munjoy Hill Historic District, while 38 North is listed as noncontributing because of numerous alterations to the original fabric. Nevertheless, the strong resemblance between the two houses is still evident, and the still extant original two-story bay at 38 North Street provided valuable design clues for the proposed project. The owners applied for the project on January 7, 2020 and it was approved by the Historic Preservation Board with conditions a few weeks later on January 30th.

Before and after drawings of the proposed exterior changes. Dextrous Creative

Benefits of Living in a Local Historic District

Exchange Street in the Old Port Historic District (Photo by Corey Templeton)

By Mark McDonnell, 2020 Intern

Each summer, Greater Portland Landmarks hires interns currently enrolled in historic preservation programs at colleges across the country to assist in our advocacy and education work. Our interns bring their knowledge of the preservation world in academia and in other parts of the country. In return, they gain valuable experience working in a historic preservation non-profit. This year, they’re working remotely.

Mark was raised in New Jersey and is enrolled in the Preservation Studies M.A. program at Boston University.

What is a Local Historic District?

Historic districts fall under two major types: National Register Historic Districts (NRHDs) and Local Historic Districts (LHDs). LHDs protect and regulate the buildings within them, while NRHDs are more useful for identifying historic resources and securing federal funding for rehabilitation of these structures. The impact of a LHD on the homeowner can be greater than that of the NRHD, but there are some similarities. For example, both types of historic districts can promote tourism. The NRHD might seem more appealing to the homeowner because it lacks the regulatory power of the LHD, but LHDs offer plenty of benefits as well, and common concerns about their negative impacts do not hold up against the data.

Local historic districts (LHDs) are defined and regulated areas containing groups of properties that have been determined to contribute to a municipality’s culture or heritage. Generally, street-facing facades of buildings in LHDs cannot be significantly altered, but interior changes and exterior alterations not visible to the public are usually approved by the LHD’s regulatory body. Local historic districts preserve the historic character of an area with tools such as demolition delay and design review. Likewise, new construction in or near a LHD might be subject to design requirements or otherwise be encouraged to be compatible with nearby historic construction. Living in a LHD can provide environmental and economic benefits, among others.

Environmental Benefits

Rehabilitating a building on Commercial Street in the Old Port Historic District (Photo by Corey Templeton)

Local historic districts benefit the environment by maintaining and reusing historic buildings rather than demolishing and replacing them. Using an already-existing building is better for the environment than new construction, even if the new construction would be energy efficient. Reusing an existing building that has outlived its original purpose is called “adaptive reuse.” Adaptive reuse is almost always better for the environment than new construction because fewer materials need to be made, transported, or assembled. Local historic districts are inherently “green” because they encourage the use and reuse of already-existing buildings rather than demolition and new construction.

Economic Benefits

Economic benefits of owning a home in a local historic district are well-documented, contrary to popular concerns that regulations governing a LHD might lower property values. In fact, property values in historic districts appreciate faster than in surrounding areas that are not designated historic districts. “City or regional studies where historic districts are compared to non-historic districts have provided generally conclusive data regarding the history of property value increases over time in historic districts that exceed the rate of growth in non-historic districts.”[1] For example, a 2011 study of single-family homes in Connecticut towns, conducted by the Connecticut Trust for Historic Preservation, found, “Overall there appears to be a 2-4% value premium from location within a local historic district.”[2] This positive effect on property values is exaggerated in urban areas. In New York City, the value premium ranges from 8% in the bottom quantile of house prices to 5% in the highest.[3]

A snowy day in the Deering Street Historic District (Photo by Corey Templeton)

While property values appreciate faster in historic districts than outside them, there is no evidence that this causes gentrification or other displacement, despite several studies evaluating exactly this possibility. The largest of these studies found that “nothing happens” regarding demographic changes connected to historic designation. Any demographic change that occurs in the area within a decade of historic designation, the authors conclude, is unrelated to the historic designation.[4]

Historic districts offer economic and environmental benefits. Using and reusing existing buildings is a major environmental, and potentially financial, benefit in itself. Likewise, the positive effect of historic district designation on property values is well established, despite common concerns about regulations. Historic districts preserve a town or neighborhood’s historic character while providing many important benefits to their residents and to the environment.

References

[1] Mimi Morris, “The Economic Impact of Historic Resource Preservation,” California Cultural and Historical Endowment, November 2012: 13, https://resources.ca.gov/CNRALegacyFiles/docs/cche/EconomicImpact_of_HistoricResourcePreservation.pdf.

[2] PlaceEconomics, “Connecticut Local Historic Districts and Property Values,” Connecticut Trust for Historic Preservation, October 2011: 3, http://lhdct.org/documents/Property%20Values%20LHD%202011.pdf.

[3] Edward L. Glaeser, “Preservation Follies: Excessive Landmarking Threatens to Make Manhattan a Refuge for the Rich,” City-Journal, Spring 2010, https://www.city-journal.org/html/preservation-follies-13279.html.

[4] N. Edward Coulson and Robin M. Leichenko, “Historic Preservation and Neighbourhood Change,” Urban Studies 41, no. 8 (July 2004): 1587, https://buprimo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/g23ind/TN_sage_s10_1080_0042098042000227028.

Further Reading

“National Park Service Historic Preservation Economic Impact.” National Park Service. Updated January 11, 2015, https://www.nps.gov/subjects/historicpreservation/economic-impacts.htm.

Rypkema, Donovan, Caroline Cheong, and Randall Mason. “Measuring Economic Impacts of Historic Preservation: A Report to the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.” November 2011. https://www.achp.gov/sites/default/files/guidance/2018-06/Economic%20Impacts%20v5-FINAL.pdf.

Zahirovic, Velma, and Swarn Chatterjee. “Historic Preservation and Residential Property Values: Evidence from Quantile Regression.” Urban Studies 49, no. 2 (February 2012): 369-382. https://buprimo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/g23ind/TN_sage_s10_1177_0042098011404936.