Loretta Neumann
7124 Piney Branch Road NW, Washington DC 20012
202-882-9274 - LNeu@rcn.com
November 21, 2008
Statement before the DC Council, Committee of the Whole
On Bill 17-911, “Public Participation in Historic District Designation Act”
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today in opposition to Bill 17-911. It would provide that
if a majority of property owners in a proposed historic district object, the historic district would
not be designated and could not be reconsidered for designation for 3 years thereafter.
By way of background, I have lived in Takoma for nearly 35 years. During the late 1970s I was
active in helping designate the Takoma Historic District. I served for 4 years as an Advisory
Neighborhood Commissioner (4B02), was president of Neighbors Inc. and co-founder of Historic
Takoma, Inc. More recently, I was for six years on the board of the DC Preservation League, and
am currently a trustee of the Committee of 100 on the Federal City, a founding member of the
board of the Alliance to Preserve the Civil War Defenses of Washington, and co-founder and
president of the Takoma Theatre Conservancy. I also worked on historic preservation programs
and legislation for the US House of Representatives for more than 14 years and worked for
several years on a river conservation and historic preservation program with the White House
Council on Environmental Quality.
I have just a few major points to make today.
(1) Public Interest in historic preservation. My personal and professional experiences have
demonstrated again and again how important it is to save the historic fabric of our
neighborhoods. This is what gives our older communities like Takoma the character and
charm that draw people back to our city. It is as a much a part of the public interest as zoning,
a factor long recognized by the US Supreme Court.
(2) Need for legal protections. Historic places like Takoma can be ruined if there are no legal
protections to safeguard them. Before the Takoma Historic District was designated, we lost
many beautiful homes that were torn down by developers for apartments and parking lots.
After the designation in 1980, we’ve still had changes in the area—including construction of
new apartment buildings along Blair Road and Carroll Avenue—but under the protections of
the DC preservation law, the design of them has been guided by the DC Historic Preservation
Office and Historic Preservation Review Board, to assure compatibility with the historic
qualities of the neighborhood. By including many properties within the designated area,
rather than dealing with each of them individually, we can assure that the character and charm
of a neighborhood remain intact.
(3) Value of Historic Districts. It is hard to imagine now, but the most majestic home in our
neighborhood, the Cady-Lee Mansion at the corner of Eastern Avenue and Piney Branch
Road, was nearly torn down in the early 1970s. Indeed, several lovely homes next to it were
demolished to build new, bland-looking apartments. The Cady Mansion, designed by Leon
Dessez the architect of Admiralty House, now the official residence of the Vice President, was
saved in 1974 only because it was listed as a National Landmark, through the efforts of
neighborhood residents. Last year, the proposed demolition of the historic Takoma Theatre at
4th and Butternut was prevented because the Historic Preservation Review Board determined
that it was a compatible building within our historic district.
DC Council Hearing on Bill 17-911
November 21, 2008
2
(4) Historic Designations as Professional Decisions. As with zoning, the designation of historic
districts is and should remain a thoughtful, deliberative process by public officials appointed for
their experience and expertise. In this case, the historical and cultural values of a proposed
historic district are of paramount importance. While public opinion should be sought to help
inform the deliberations, these are not political campaigns or popularity contests. As with zoning
cases and other land protection measures, property owners should have a chance to express their
views but not a final vote to effectively veto the larger public interest. In the case of Takoma,
great efforts were made to contact property owners and educate them on what the historic district
would mean. Flyers were distributed house to house, public notice was given, and many meetings
were held, including by the ANC (I was a commissioner at the time) in addition to the formal one
by the HPRB. Most people favored the historic district, although, as usual, there were some who
objected for personal reasons.
(5) Benefits of Historic Districts to Property Owners. Today, residents take pride in our
neighborhood and people seek to live in Takoma because it has an historic district. Many
residents qualify for funding under the DC Historic Homeowners Grant Program that applies
to 12 historic districts in the city including, thanks to our then-Council Member now Mayor
Adrian Fenty, Takoma. Our local preservation organization, Historic Takoma, Inc., received a
grant from the HPO to conduct historical studies in and around our historic district. Commercial
property owners may also benefit from Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credits that are available for
substantial rehabilitation of income-producing structures listed in the National Register of Historic
Places either individually or as part of a historic district.
(6) Coordination with Federal Law. I would just add that I’ve worked on many laws and
regulations, both local and national. The best rule of thumb is that if it isn’t broken don’t try to fix
it. You just create new problems. In this case, you could be opening the door for potential,
unnecessary litigation as people on one side or the other use it to suit their own purposes. If,
however, the bill proceeds despite these and other objections, I would strongly urge you to include
a provision that would clearly couple the notice and commenting provisions with those required
under the National Historic Preservation Act and its implementing regulations. This would at
least avoid ambiguity in the requirements and prevent costly and unnecessary duplication of effort
between the local and federal laws and regulations.
In conclusion, I would simply stress that DC’s historic preservation law has withstood the test of
time. Please don’t change it now.
Thank you.