[MassHistPres] rehab subcodes

[slater at alum.rpi.edu]

>Hello, The New Jersey Rehabilitation Subcode has
>reportedly reduced building rehab costs by as much as 50%. In its first
year
>(1998), historic rehab projects increased by 40% over the previous year
to $510
>million, and in 1999 to a 60% increase to almost $600 million. How does
this
>compare with Massachusetts in terms of codes and incentive for
preservation? 

I think this may be a problem in Massachusetts, based on what I've seen
and heard recently.

There seems to be some kind of kick-in level for certain mandatory
upgrades when doing rehabilitation. Note, I'm not an expert here, this
is based on heresay, so I'd like to hear if I have the facts wrong.

>From what I understand, if you do over a certain amount of work to, for
example, an apartment building, you have to add a sprinkler system that
could add $30-100k to the total cost of rehab. If true, this would seem
to be a disincentive to rehabbing buildings.

In Springfield, we are faced with 80-100 year old apartment blocks that
are languishing; their owners are just taking as much money out of them
in rents as possible without putting any money back in. At some point
they become run down or abandoned, and then enter the "affordable
housing" cycle, where they are gutted (using federal dollars), rehabbed,
and then gutted again in 20 years because the tenants generally don't
take care of them. 

Unfortunately, many of these buildings are in, or just near historic
districts, and the presence of a 20-unit apartment building with problem
tenants is a big drag on our other historic properties.

I heard Lt. Governor Tim Murray speaking about how this administration
will embrace historical preservation. Hopefully that will include
providing incentives rather than disincentives to restoring historic
properties.

Ralph Slate
Springfield, MA