tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2064659105461495134.post6754421634247543877..comments2023-10-25T05:32:38.533-04:00Comments on And Now, Anacostia: the mighty warriors e x p a n dDavid Garberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00514522127258982490noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2064659105461495134.post-78300677053676684782008-10-20T17:47:00.000-04:002008-10-20T17:47:00.000-04:00thank you both!thank you both!David Garberhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00514522127258982490noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2064659105461495134.post-30042900950679763322008-10-20T17:44:00.000-04:002008-10-20T17:44:00.000-04:00The bill as currently proposed only applies to pro...<A HREF="http://www.dccouncil.washington.dc.us/images/00001/20080611140423.pdf" REL="nofollow">The bill</A> as currently proposed only applies to properties designated after 1993. If this site is inside the Anacostia Historic District and is considered a contributing building (it sure looks like one), then the bill should not apply, because that district was <A HREF="http://planning.dc.gov/planning/frames.asp?doc=/planning/lib/planning/preservation/brochures/anacostia.pdf" REL="nofollow">designated in 1978</A>. Therefore, you should be okay.<BR/><BR/>The bill is bad for all the reasons Richard lists, but it's not quite as far-reaching as some fear. But if enacted, it would be a problem for future historic districts.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2064659105461495134.post-19403451022927863732008-10-20T12:41:00.000-04:002008-10-20T12:41:00.000-04:00Likely it would include all property owned by a re...Likely it would include all property owned by a religious institution, whether or not the property is used for a direct religious purpose, regardless of when the properties were purchased. In short, it's a blanket exemption.<BR/><BR/>It's a bad and poorly thought out law in many respects. The freedom to practice religion is one that is often separate, not part and parcel of owning real estate. <BR/><BR/>For example, the church that holds services in the movie theaters at Union Station or Courthouse in Arlington rents the use of a place to meet from for profit entities.<BR/><BR/>There are multiple examples of churches managing properties in deleterious ways, which justify that churches be responsible to follow city building regulations, including historic preservation regulations, when relevant.<BR/><BR/>Ironically, DC's local historic preservation law was created in response to the Capitol Hill Baptist Church's demolition of "historic" rowhouse buildings at 5th and E. Capitol Streets NE.<BR/><BR/>This happened despite the fact that the Capitol Hill Historic District had been created a few years before.<BR/><BR/>People discovered that the "legal protections" of being on the National Register of Historic Places as a historic district pertained only to federal government undertakings, and that stronger protections, covering all properties regardless of ownership, were necessary.<BR/><BR/>Hence the passage and implementation of an additional local law in 1978-1979.Richard Laymanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02765521217875752850noreply@blogger.com