Almost everyone actively involved in the establishment of local historic preservation or design review ordinances has had opportunity to become engaged in a discussion of “property rights.”  When that phrase is mentioned, it typically refers to the idea that historic district legislation, like any land use or zoning regulations, affects the ability of an owner to use his or her property.  Sometimes, however, it also carries the additional erroneous connotation that such limitations are somehow inherently “wrong.”

A positive approach on property rights is evident in the work of a task force in Columbus’ inside-suburb Upper Arlington, where the city has undertaken consideration of a new historic preservation ordinance.  Prompted by public outcry after recent demolitions and incompatible infill (sometimes referred to nationally as “McMansions”), Upper Arlington city leaders took the positive step of convening a working group composed of City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and community members, with that group set to make recommendations back to the full Council.

In its initial meeting, the minutes of which can be accessed here, the group considered and agreed on three basic principles, the first of which was that “[historic preservation legislation restricts, limits, and in some cases prohibits what property owners can do to their buildings. It is a restriction or limitation on private property rights.”  The group also agreed that courts have routinely upheld such legislation if properly drafted and operated.

In considering the relationship between local historic preservation legislation and property rights, particularly the modern so-called “property rights movement,” one could look to an excellent overview available online by noted preservation economist Donovan Rypkema.  In a presentation entitled “Property Rights and Public Values” made to the Community Planning Association of Southeast Idaho (click here to access), Rypkema points out the long history of planning in the context of community development in America, dating back to the original days of settlement.  Instead of being “un-American,” he points out that from the time of the Pilgrims to the present, this type of land use regulation has always been a key part of the American experience, as it combines a recognition of public good with that of individual gain.  It is, in fact, quintessentially “American.”

The bottom line is that Rypkema’s talk is a great read, and it is a must-read for those working locally for enactment of local preservation legislation.

Photo: Upper Arlington streetscene - JulieHicks75/Creative Commons License