Local historic districts under threat in Michigan

**Pam** · February-05-16, 07:07 PM

"Local historic district legislation is under threat from a proposed amendment [[HB5232 and SB720) to Public Act 169 — the state law that allows local Michigan communities to protect their history through local historic districts.

You may have already heard that Rep. Chris Afendoulis, R-Grand Rapids, and Sen. Peter MacGregor, R-Rockford, are introducing legislation into the Michigan House and Senate that could seriously weaken the protections afforded to Michigan’s historic districts under PA 169 of 1970, the Historic Districts Act. "

http://preservationdetroit.org/local...ntative-today/

**313WX** · February-05-16, 07:27 PM

What hasn't been under "threat" in Michigan lately with Republican rule?

**Hermod** · February-05-16, 08:03 PM

Originally Posted by 313WX

What hasn't been under "threat" in Michigan lately with Republican rule?

Social and economic freedom of the individual citizen

**Ray1936** · February-05-16, 08:29 PM

Were I a political person, I would be moved to ask, "What have the democrats done for Detroit?". But I'm not such a person, so I shall not ask.

**313WX** · February-05-16, 09:27 PM

Originally Posted by Hermod

Social and economic freedom of the individual citizen

I'm pretty sure retirees who receive Pensions and the citizens of Flint would disagree, but ok.

**maverick1** · February-05-16, 10:54 PM

Originally Posted by Ray1936

Were I a political person, I would be moved to ask, "What have the democrats done for Detroit?". But I'm not such a person, so I shall not ask.

If I were a political person, I would wonder what a party as inclusive as the Republican party would do for Detroit?

**Don K** · February-05-16, 10:55 PM

Originally Posted by Hermod

Social and economic freedom of the individual citizen

The Republicans have been extremely solicitous of the social freedom of conservative Christians and of the economic freedom of the 1%. The rest of us? Not so much.

**maverick1** · February-05-16, 10:56 PM

Originally Posted by 313WX

I'm pretty sure retirees who receive Pensions and the citizens of Flint would disagree, but ok.

We also have to keep in mind that all of us aren't "individual citizens". Some of us are more individual citizens than others.

**maverick1** · February-05-16, 10:59 PM

Originally Posted by Pam

http://preservationdetroit.org/local...ntative-today/

There has to be some slimy developer that asked for this. Why would you need to constantly assess if an area is historic? When has a neighborhood gone from being historic to not historic?

**MikeM** · February-05-16, 11:14 PM

Why Historic Preservation Districts Should Be a Thing of the Past

**EastsideAl** · February-06-16, 01:13 AM

Originally Posted by Hermod

Social and economic freedom of the individual citizen

No, not what they say, but what they do.

**Pam** · February-06-16, 08:53 AM

Wow, this topic went off the rails. If you care, contact your reps. in Lansing. If not, don't.

http://detroit.curbed.com/archives/2...b5232sb720.php

On Monday, we reported that legislators in Michigan proposed an amendment changing how historic districts are created and maintained. Monday night, the Detroit City passed a resolution opposing the proposed legislation

**Pam** · February-06-16, 09:00 AM

Originally Posted by maverick1

There has to be some slimy developer that asked for this.

That's a possibility.

**Shai_Hulud** · February-06-16, 09:30 AM

Originally Posted by MikeM

Why Historic Preservation Districts Should Be a Thing of the Past

Literally every comment on that article is critical of it and or pointing out holes in the argument, not the least of which is that the author is conflating zoning policies with historic designation.

And since when is increasing affordable housing a cornerstone of the Republican agenda? What cities in Michigan have an affordable housing crisis compared to the coasts? Why is there any reason to believe that if historic protections were lifted in historic districts that developers would build affordable housing and not high profit luxury housing?

If you don't like the restrictions of a historic district, don't live in one. It's clearly not an issue anyway since every new subdivision going up in the sticks has an even more restrictive HOA and I haven't heard anything about legislating those out existence.

This bill is an answer to a question no one asked and that's why people are suspicious of it.

**Honky Tonk** · February-06-16, 10:44 AM

@ least in the COD, this sounds like unneeded legislation. Take either IV or BE, for instance. There isn't a lot of empty land within, but If you're serious about affordable housing, you can literally build within a block or two of both districts without disrupting what people living within are trying to accomplish. There's boatloads of empty land.

**Danny** · February-06-16, 02:28 PM

Those Romans in Lansing led by the Emperor Caesar Caligula Snyder had been attack historic places for the benefit for years. In their attempt to free Michigan fro Blacks and poor.

**swingline** · February-08-16, 12:49 PM

I bought an aluminum carport and my homeowners association for my neighborhood in Macomb Township won't let me install it on the side of the house. They're also demanding that I remove the backyard fence and the frontyard hedges I installed. And worst of all, they're demanding that I repaint my house because purple is not an approved color. HOA's suck. Do you think that Rep. Afendoulis will sponsor some legislation to get rid of them? My property rights are being infringed!

**Honky Tonk** · February-08-16, 02:18 PM

Originally Posted by swingline

I bought an aluminum carport and my homeowners association for my neighborhood in Macomb Township won't let me install it on the side of the house. They're also demanding that I remove the backyard fence and the frontyard hedges I installed. And worst of all, they're demanding that I repaint my house because purple is not an approved color. HOA's suck. Do you think that Rep. Afendoulis will sponsor some legislation to get rid of them? My property rights are being infringed!

Purple, traditionally, has been a Historical color.

**ndavies** · February-08-16, 02:31 PM

Originally Posted by Honky Tonk

Purple, traditionally, has been a Historical color.

He's not fighting a historic protection entity. He's fighting his Home Owners association.

HOAs have nothing to do with Historical. They are allowed to ban any color they want.

He is fighting a deed restriction, not a historic commission restriction. The deed restriction was put in place by a previous owner of the property. The deed restriction is from the builder of the HOA community he lives in. It probably states that for eternity the future owners of this property will live by the restrictions of the HOA. The HOA probably has a limited number of colors you can paint your house.

Since HOAs are usually deed restrictions, Just by buying the property swingline has agreed to follow the rules of the HOA. He has also agreed to pay any fees the HOA imposes.

**Honky Tonk** · February-08-16, 03:59 PM

Then there's this article.......

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/bus...rict/78881784/

**3WC** · February-08-16, 06:51 PM

Maverick1, would I be wrong if I though you believe all developers are "slimy?"

Voters who permit the formation of Historic Districts, run by political appointees, unelected, thereby surrendering their property rights, are sheep. Baaa.

**Hermod** · February-08-16, 08:36 PM

Originally Posted by Don K

The Republicans have been extremely solicitous of the social freedom of conservative Christians and of the economic freedom of the 1%. The rest of us? Not so much.

Economic freedom doesn't mean being rich. It means the right to make your own economic decisions the most basic of which is having the right to make the choice between working and starving.

**swingline** · February-09-16, 12:50 PM

Originally Posted by ndavies

He's not fighting a historic protection entity. He's fighting his Home Owners association.

HOAs have nothing to do with Historical. They are allowed to ban any color they want.

He is fighting a deed restriction, not a historic commission restriction. The deed restriction was put in place by a previous owner of the property. The deed restriction is from the builder of the HOA community he lives in. It probably states that for eternity the future owners of this property will live by the restrictions of the HOA. The HOA probably has a limited number of colors you can paint your house.

Since HOAs are usually deed restrictions, Just by buying the property swingline has agreed to follow the rules of the HOA. He has also agreed to pay any fees the HOA imposes.

Ndavies, you are 100 percent correct regarding my completely fictional problem at my fictional home in Macomb Twp that is burdened with HOA restrictions. My point is that there is not really much difference between HOA and Local Historic District Act restrictions.

As a matter of fact, the latter are only imposed after a protracted, transparent and public process that provides actual legal notice to each affected homeowner, as opposed to developer created and imposed HOA restrictions. If Rep. Afendoulis believes that LHDA restrictions are unacceptably burdensome to sacred property rights, he should believe the same with regard to HOA restrictions. I'm sure he doesn't though because that would piss off many of his suburban Grand Rapids constituency that live in subdivisions with HOAs. There are no historic districts in his district. East Grand Rapids fought off one a few years ago that was proposed in order to stop teardowns in favor of bigfoot construction.

**gnome** · February-09-16, 01:02 PM

Originally Posted by Pam

"Local historic district legislation is under threat from a proposed amendment [[HB5232 and SB720) to Public Act 169 — the state law that allows local Michigan communities to protect their history through local historic districts.

You may have already heard that Rep. Chris Afendoulis, R-Grand Rapids, and Sen. Peter MacGregor, R-Rockford, are introducing legislation into the Michigan House and Senate that could seriously weaken the protections afforded to Michigan’s historic districts under PA 169 of 1970, the Historic Districts Act. "

http://preservationdetroit.org/local...ntative-today/

Pam, this proposed legislation is certainly disturbing and speaks to a general ham-fisted approach to governing; however, I noticed that the original bill was introduced and passed in 1970. Many of the homes and neighborhoods protected by Historic Designation where built in the teens and 20s; meaning that in 1970 those neighborhoods were barely 50 years old.

My question, not to be smartassery, is: could the whole of Livonia or Harper Woods be declared Historic because they are over 60 years old?

**Honky Tonk** · February-09-16, 01:35 PM

Originally Posted by gnome

Pam, this proposed legislation is certainly disturbing and speaks to a general ham-fisted approach to governing; however, I noticed that the original bill was introduced and passed in 1970. Many of the homes and neighborhoods protected by Historic Designation where built in the teens and 20s; meaning that in 1970 those neighborhoods were barely 50 years old.

My question, not to be smartassery, is: could the whole of Livonia or Harper Woods be declared Historic because they are over 60 years old?

You do know the difference between one-of-a-kind, commissioned, designed, and hand built homes, like in BE or IV, and 60 year old cookie cutter suburban homes?