Like many non-profit fields, supporters of historic preservation and preservation-based revitalization continue to be influenced by how they were made aware of the importance of historic resources. One typical avenue toward that awareness is the threat of demolition of an important local landmark, a place that contributes to a community’s sense of place – or, as noted urban advocate Ed McMahon calls them, “places of the heart.” When these demolition crises arrive, individuals and organizations mobilize and seek to influence owners to consider alternative paths. If that is unsuccessful, attention often shifts to encouraging local government officials to enact protections for historic resources.

The best advocacy, of course, is of the proactive variety. One of the key benefits of local historic preservation organizations is their ability to work toward creating “environments for preservation.” Such an environment is one where property owners are made generally aware of possible preservation financial incentives, of the importance of individual buildings and houses to downtowns and neighborhoods, and of the possibility of public outcry if they pursue demolition or insensitive renovation.

A real challenge exists when it is the local government itself that is the source of possible demolition. Such is the situation in Mansfield, where the city is pursuing an aggressive demolition program to combat blight, and local preservation advocates are seeking the opportunity to be a part of the process of evaluating the historic integrity and value of targeted structures. In fact, the ability to do so is written into federal law. Click here to read blog entries profiling this situation.

All over Ohio, local governments are using federal stimulus funds to combat the after-effects of the national foreclosure crisis – but in some cases, are doing so in a piecemeal fashion. Without paying attention to long-term neighborhood revitalization strategies, the net result may well be making the situation worse, not better. As the National Vacant Properties initiative has pointed out, simply creating a vacant lot can actually serve as a substantial long-term disincentive for investment in surrounding properties.

What is needed is a dialogue in Ohio communities on the best way to approach revitalization of traditional neighborhoods. What preservation and revitalization advocates can and should do is to seek ways to become a part of that conversation.

On October 23, Preservation Ohio will host its third "live blog" of the year -- this time with a topic of "Social Media Meets Preservation", which will look at the relationship between the world of social media on one hand, and Ohio preservation and revitalization on the other.

An increasing number of statewide and local preservation and revitalization organizations are waking up to the potential of social networking to generate positive awareness, support and revenue. Perhaps the most important benefit of this new area of communication is the ability to build community behind a mission or project. From Facebook to Twitter; from Tumblr to Flickr - as we near the end of the first decade of the 21st century, the potential of social media is outstanding. Learn about best practices, tips and ideas to use social media to your advantage, including exciting projects now launching that use social media to help to communicate the message of preservation and revitalization. We'd be thrilled to welcome statewide and local preservation, Main Street and other preservation-related organizations to the discussion as well.

Preservation Ohio is a national leader in the use of social media to advance the cause of statewide historic preservation. From hosting the country's first and oldest blog on preservation, to owning the most-followed Twitter page for any organization in America, to launching the country's first stand-alone social network for preservation -- we have alot to share! Join us on October 23, from 10:00 a.m. to noon, on any Preservation Ohio website -- including on the main website, on the Ohio Preservation Network, and on this page.

Over the last few months, several Ohio preservation and downtown revitalization organizations have established a more thorough presence on Facebook with the creation of an official “Page.”

Facebook Pages are a more robust version of the former Facebook Groups, the latter of which basically allowed only static information, simple posts and some discussion. Pages have all of this and more, including the ability for those registered as “fans” to receive updates on their own individual sites. Pages can also be outfitted with applications, which provide increased functionality and features.

Both the Cincinnati Preservation Association and Columbus Landmarks Foundation have active Facebook Pages, which are updated often with news, event information, advocacy alerts and more. Fans can comment on these posts, can add their own content, and can embed posts them on their own pages.

Downtown revitalization organizations with Facebook Pages include Downtown Mansfield, Inc., Main Street Kent, the Heritage Centre Association (Mount Vernon), Main Street Oberlin, the Main Street Area Association (Hamilton), the Marysville Uptown Renewal Team, Main Street Canal Winchester, Main Street Medina, Main Street Orrville and Main Street Delaware.

Preservation Ohio’s Facebook Page includes all of the standard features, as well as our latest “Tweets,” the most recent photographs posted on our Flickr page, and the ability to easily invite friends to the page.  The Preservation Ohio Facebook Page interconnects with both our website and the new Ohio Preservation Network. Together, through Twitter, Facebook, the Ohio Preservation Network, Flickr and our blog, MyHometownOhio, Preservation Ohio now enjoys between 2,000 and 3,000 friends, fans, followers and subscribers just through online social networking. All of this work is an attempt to build a cohesive and effective community for preservation and preservation-based revitalization in Ohio.

To access any of the Facebook Pages for the organizations referred to in this post, visit www.facebook.com/preservationohio and look for the “Favorite Pages” in the left-hand column. And, while you’re there, please become a “fan” of Preservation Ohio!

Tuesday’s day-long workshop in Columbus, co-sponsored by Preservation Ohio and the Columbus Landmarks Foundation, turned out to be more of a conversation than a series of staid presentations. From the beginning breakfast panel discussion on local building issues in Columbus, all the way to the final session of the day, the emphasis was combining the latest information on financial incentives for preservation with the opportunity to dialogue with experts on each of those tools.

Speakers and panelists included the following:

•    Vince Papsidero - Planning Administrator, City of Columbus
•    Don DeVere - President, DeVere LLC
•    Laura MacGregor Comek, Esq. - Crabbe, Brown & James
•    Charissa W. Durst - President, Hardlines Design Company
•    Robert Loversidge - Principal, Schooley Caldwell Associates
•    Jeffrey Darbee and Nancy Recchie - Owners, Benjamin D. Rickey & Co.
•    Thomas Palmer - Executive Director, Preservation Ohio
•    Mark Lundine - Historic Preservation Tax Credit Program Coordinator, Ohio Department of Development
•    Judith Kitchen - Technical Preservation Services Department Head, Ohio Historic Preservation Office

Topics included use of the Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit, Clean Ohio funding, the new Ohio Historic Preservation Tax Credit, the use of historic conservation easements, New Markets Tax Credits, and more.

Anonymous evaluations of the event included the following comments:

•    “All of these topics are very interesting. Very practical information.”
•    “This was the most useful presentation on historic preservation financial aid that I have ever seen. Many thanks for putting this all together.”
•    "Good! Program!"
•    "A great seminar."
•    "Terrific, well-informed speakers, good selection of topics for background information."

This was the first workshop of its kind in Columbus in some time, and participants were clearly anxious to continue the discussion after sessions and into the future. Preservation Ohio has been involved in similar workshops over the last three years in other Ohio locations, and is already lining up venues to continue the series in the coming months.

Photos: Preservation Ohio File Photos

by Thomas Palmer, Executive Director

On Tuesday, I will be speaking on the subject of historic conservation easements at “Financial Incentives for Historic Properties,” a day-long workshop on tax benefits for preservation work co-sponsored by Preservation Ohio and the Columbus Landmarks Foundation.

As you can imagine, easements have occupied my thoughts as of late as I prepared for this presentation. The attendees to the event will be diverse – including many to obtain continuing education credit for architects, lawyers and real estate professionals. And, as the event is taking place somewhere other than Cleveland or Cincinnati where historic conservation easements are better known, it is likely that for many this will be their first exposure to this important tool for preservation.

Two facts highlight the importance of historic conservation easements – also known as “preservation easements.” First, unlike the Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit, the tax incentive for easement donation is equally available to owners of non income-producing properties – that is, your family home if you so choose. Second, and perhaps most importantly, they represent the only “slam-dunk” path toward preserving the historic resources of a given property, for many reasons:

• Placement on the National Register of Historic Places, or inclusion in a National Register Historic District, provides no protection against alteration or even demolition if federal funding is not used.
• While many Ohio communities have historic preservation or design review ordinances that provide protection, not every community has the resources to provide ongoing monitoring.
• Decisions of administrative boards can be appealed and can therefore have the potential to end up in politically-charged settings.
• Not all design review or historic preservation ordinances protect against demolition. Even if an ordinance protects a property, many ordinances allow for an economic hardship appeal, and the decision may be challenged legally on that basis.
• More than one Ohio community has actually rescinded a preservation ordinance.

Its little surprise that noted preservationist Arthur P. Ziegler, Jr. once said, “There are only two sure ways to save a building: you either have to own it or protect it through an easement.”

While the easement program nationwide has been in a state of flux over the last several years, some clarity is returning and the tool is again being used in many locations. Click here for an introduction to historic conservation easements on our website.

Photo: Pennsylvania House, Springfield - Preservation Ohio File Photo

The first time that a post appeared on MyHometownOhio concerning the Seneca County Courthouse was on February 16, 2007. The post featured a video which had been placed on YouTube which lamented both the condition of the Tiffin landmark as well as its endangered status.

Over the two and a half years which followed, this blog chronicled the ongoing saga of the building - including the work of the Tiffin Historic Trust, the incredible efforts of the Courthouse and Downtown Redevelopment Group, and Preservation Ohio’s own involvement. We have joined our friends in Tiffin in rallies, speeches and presentations, have spoken to the Commissioners, have provided testimony in design review hearings, filed an amicus curiae brief in ongoing legal action, and joined with others to sponsor the Ohio Courthouse Summit in late 2007.

Yesterday, the Seneca County Commissioners voted 3-0 to support the renovation of the Seneca County Courthouse - the first building to be selected to lead the annual list of Ohio’s Most Endangered Historic Sites. This honor was made in recognition of its importance to the local community and county, the quality of its architecture, and because we knew that the eyes of many across the state were tuned toward Tiffin as they looked at their own facilities.

Preservation Ohio applauds the three Seneca County Commissioners, members of the Courthouse and Downtown Redevelopment Group including their point person Franklin Conaway, members of the Tiffin Historic Trust, and everyone else who has played a role in this effort. Franklin is a co-founder and former Board President of Preservation Ohio, and we're thrilled to recognize him for his role in this project.

The work continues, as funds must be raised for the courthouse tower and other improvements. MyHometownOhio will continue to follow this story - and we will be there on the day in the hopefully not-too-distant future when we can cover the opening of the newly renovated Seneca County Courthouse.

For Toledo Blade coverage of this story, including video of the actual vote, click here.

Photo: Seneca County Courthouse, Tiffin - circa 1884

In the aftermath of the July 20 presentation of the Seneca County Courthouse and Downtown Redevelopment Group, there has been a great deal of activity in Tiffin as Commissioners consider the renovation proposal, and the public hears and reacts to the plan. Not surprisingly, the matter, which has been extensively covered in media over the last three years, has continued to generate substantial coverage. Here is a sampling of recent articles and letters to the editor on the subject:

"Cost Effectiveness is determining factor" - Letter to the Editor by Seneca County Commissioner Ben Nutter - "... As a Seneca County commissioner, my position in relation to the courthouse has been exactly the same from the moment I took office, and that is; I will support the course of action that is most fiscally responsible in providing space to the judiciary of Seneca County..."

Advertister-Tribune editorial – “Majority just want the issue to be over” - "Arguments and legal wrangling over the 1884 courthouse have resulted in a false dichotomy. The county, it may seem, is split into two camps: Those who favor renovating the "grand old lady" and those who favor removing "big ugly"..."

“Courthouse lines in the sand have become scars” – Advertiser-Tribune - "When a line is drawn in the sand, who has the courage to scratch it out?..."

“Figues, opinions change” – Advertiser-Tribune - "...The long journey of decision-making in the commissioner board room has inspired the passions of county residents on two distinct sides of a divided county..."

“Seneca County Courthouse report is full of details to make the case” – Toledo Blade - "The head of a group aiming to save and restore the abandoned Seneca County Courthouse turned in his final report Monday, a thick photo-and-drawing-filled document stuffed with the kinds of details supporters hope will win over hesitant county residents..."

“Seneca County diverts $687,000 in courthouse funds” – Toledo Blade - "More than $687,000 set aside to tear down and replace Seneca County's 1884 courthouse was diverted to the county's general fund yesterday to cover expenses in the sheriff's office and department of job and family services...."

“Seneca County’s renovation foes rethink positions” – Toledo Blade - "...Based on the best information we had available two years ago, it was cheaper to remove and replace," Mr. Nutter said. "But based on the information we have today, it may very well be less expensive to renovate and provide more space and still be able to keep a building and our sense of cultural identity..."

Photo: Seneca County Courthouse - Preservation Ohio File Photo

Once and a while, Preservation Ohio learns of and reports on a national preservation issue which truly transcends state lines -- one which, while occurring in another state, nevertheless has an Ohio impact.

Such a situation has been occurring over the last several months in Orange County, Virginia. There, Wal-Mart Corporation has announced their intention to construct a 138,000 square-foot Supercenter immediately adjacent to the Wilderness and Chancelorsville Battlefields. And, with the ancillary development that typically accompanies such a store, the grounds of the battle itself are seriously threatened with loss.

According to Wikipedia, The Battle of the Wilderness took place from May 5 through May 7, 1864, and involved some 162,000 soldiers. While estimates vary as to the number of casualties, most place losses in the range of 15,000 to 18,000 for the Union troops, with approximately 10,000 losses for the Confederacy. It was a bloody battle that represented the first between Generals Grant and Lee during the former’s Virginia Overland Campaign. Ohio was certainly there at this battle, as it was in almost all of the war, including the valiant 8th Ohio Volunteer Infantry, a unit raised from the cities and fields of Seneca County.

The fight to save the battlefield’s historic integrity has been ongoing, with an initial planning decision going in favor of the Wal-Mart developers. Without question, the primary resource for this situation has been provided by the Civil War Preservation Trust, the country’s leading non-profit advocate for preserving the land of the Civil War. On their “Save the Wilderness Battlefield” page visitors can get up-to-the-minute details on the struggle. The goal has been to encourage the company to choose an alternative location for their store more removed from the battlefield, not to stop it from building in the area.

Preservation Ohio strongly recommends becoming informed about this issue, and doing what you can to make a difference.

Photo: Painting, Battle of The Wilderness - Public Domain