News updates are sent daily. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Memories shouldn’t erode private-property rights
Digg|
Save|
License|
Print|
E-mail|
Knowledge of history is important; knowing where a person or a community has been is key to knowing where he, she or it is going in the future.
Preserving buildings that are landmarks which jog personal or civic memories is one of the most powerful ways to connect people with that past, whether the connection is “Carl Hayden slept here” or “my mom used to work there.”
But private property rights is one of the core ideals that American history is built upon. The past informs us that people are passionate about their property, but you can’t force them to hold history over any other value it holds.
Because of this reality, it appears Tempe will reject the proposed historic designation for the city’s Maple-Ash neighborhood next month, Garin Groff reported in Sunday’s Tribune.
The more than half-century-old bungalows along tree-lined streets are certainly landmarks for generations of Arizona State University students who traveled these tree-lined streets just west of campus. Considering how many Valley residents have connections to ASU, that’s a huge reserve of collective memory.
But the city also zoned the area for higher-density housing decades ago, attracting many investors with their sights trained on the future, setting up the conflict over the historical designation over the past two years. It’s a testament to the neighborhood’s appeal that it hasn’t been redeveloped already.
City planners have been trying to reassure owners that adoption of an historic district would slow, but not stop, any change within its boundaries. But that’s going to be difficult until the city establishes exactly what kind of hurdles owners would have to clear in the process of updating or tearing down their homes.
Fear of this kind of government intrusion on property rights led to voter passage of Proposition 207 last year, a law opponents of the historic district are threatening to sue Tempe under if the district is OK’d.
Maple-Ash owners may have a case because the underlying zoning makes it likely a district dedicated to preserving the atmosphere around these small homes would decrease the property’s value. But in most other instances an historic designation would likely have either no impact or a positive one, so cities looking to dodge controversy shouldn’t use Prop. 207 as a crutch.
Please add your comments, but follow these guidelines to keep this a safe, credible place for discussing the news: