Not everything it seems - HCDRC Nov 26 Agenda
For the past few weeks I’ve been investigating demolition practices in the city, with an emphasis on historic properties and how they are handled. I believe there is a systematic effort by the city to bypass statutory historic reviews for demolitions, and I believe that effort has been ongoing for at least a year, if not more.
By my estimates, hundreds of houses have been “overlooked” by the city’s Safety & Permits department in assembly of agendas for the Historic Conservation District Review Committee (HCDRC). In doing so, demolitions - which have been largely federally funded since Katrina - have proceeded at an accelerated pace which makes a mockery of the statutory process of historic review. Considering the considerable value of the city’s historic stock of houses, this is a tremendous disservice to the residents of this city and possibly the taxpayers of this nation.
As far as I can tell, when a demolition permit is applied for, the front-line clerk or someone in Safety & Permits determines whether a building is eligible for HCDRC review. The criteria are pretty simple. The building has to lie in a geographic area bounded by the Jefferson & St. Bernard Parish lines, the river, and a northern boundary marked by a line along Metairie Rd, City Park Ave, Wisner Blvd, I-610, and Florida Ave. Also the two National Register Districts outside that area - South Lakeview and Gentilly Terrace - are also under the HCDRC purview.
Any property demolitions inside that HCDRC area which are also inside local historic districts (or are individually landmarked) are supposed to be shunted to the Historic Districts Landmark Commission HDLC for special review. But everything else is supposed to go through the HCDRC. To a surprisingly large degree, that process appears to have been corrupted.
There are two methods that Safety & Permits appears to be using to avoid HCDRC review. The first is simply not placing the property on the HCDRC agenda. From what I can gather, when a demolition permit is applied for, the front-line clerk or a supervisor is supposed to determine whether the property is HCDRC-eligible. Every couple of weeks, all the HCDRC properties are gathered into an agenda which is then made public. If an HCDRC eligibility determination isn’t done (or is avoided) at the time of application, it doesn’t get done at all. Many, many properties have slid through in this fashion. Considering how easy it is to determine HCDRC elgibility - just type the address into Mapquest or Google Maps - it is inconceivable to see how this job could not be getting done unless there is a systematic effort to avoid it. The only other reason (not out of the realm of possibility unfortunately) is massive incompetence.
Another, sneakier method involves changing damage estimates. Soon after the storm, the City Council amended the HCDRC ordinance to include a 70% rule. That is, if a property was damaged - by the flood - by more than 70% it could bypass the HCDRC. At the time, historic preservation advocates said that was opening up a loophole that could easily be exploited. Damage estimates are easily changed, especially by the agency which has access to the database. Change them to greater than 70% and - ta da! - no HCDRC review required! Such concerns were considered unwarranted.
Unfortunately, that is exactly what has happened. In the eleven months since January 1, 2007, over 500 properties have had their damage estimates INCREASED above 70%. Many of those are in the area of the Lower Ninth Ward on the lake side of North Claiborne, which has been deemed exempt from HCDRC review by (I believe) a consent decree). And a scattered few properties which have had their estimates increased above 70% lie outside the HCDRC.
However, the vast majority of the remainder lie inside the HCDRC. By my count over 320 properties have been avoided HCDRC review through this method since January. This represents nearly 10% of all FEMA-funded demolitions in the city since the storm. This correlation between damage increases and HCDRC eligibility is not a coincidence. I know of witnesses who have attended HCDRC meetings and have heard members of the committee attest to their ability to increase damage assessments above 70% in order to avoid review. These comments have been made as recently as this month.
Some cases are particularly blatant. Just this month, a demo permit was pulled on 3916 Annunciation, which is a block from the river and saw no flooding. Yet its damage assessment has somehow increased from zero to 96.73% since the end of 2006. It does not appear on the HCDRC agenda for today.
The effect has been to fast track property demolitions of historic properties without public review. It is anathema to democracy to have a public agency breaking its own government’s statutes, but that is what appears to be happening on a nearly daily basis, as recently as last week.
There is an even more disturbing aspect to this increasing of damage estimates. There are over 200 other properties which have had their damage estimates increased past 70%, but which have not yet had a demolition permit applied for. I have anecdotal evidence this is happening without property owners’ knowledge. I cannot figure out why this is happening, but it is disturbing.
What are the implications and possible motivations for this behavior? Well, it is well known the Nagin administration wishes to appear competent in the eyes of the federal government. One of the basic promises they have made is to knock down as many storm-damaged buildings as possible, since those knock downs are federally funded. The impulse to uses those federal funds is evident in the pace of demolitions of properties which have had their damage estimates increased. Before the Corps pulled out of the demo business at the end of the summer, there were about 50 demo’s of damage-increase houses every month. That pace has trickled to just a handful as the funds have temporarily dried up while the city hires a contractor, something that will likely be announced in the very near future.
To see evidence of these mechanisms at work, one has to look no further than today’s HCDRC agenda. I have gone through every residential demolition permit since the last HCDRC agenda was issued on October 30, checking for HCDRC eligibility. Due to time restrictions, I have concentrated on residential demolitions, which make up the lion’s share of all demolitions.
As you can see below, the following 7 residences are on the agenda. The dates are when their owners or the demolition companies applied for permits.
- 10/30/2007 2614 BANKS ST (on agenda)
- 10/30/2007 1815 HOLLYGROVE ST (on agenda)
- 11/2/2007 3927 CAMP ST (on agenda)
- 11/2/2007 4134 WILLOW ST (on agenda)
- 11/8/2007 5437 N ROMAN ST (on agenda)
- 11/9/2007 512 LEONTINE ST (on agenda)
- 11/12/2007 2647 HAVANA ST (on agenda)
Note that 5437 North Roman should not be on the HCDRC agenda. It lies within the area of the Lower Ninth Ward exempt from HCDRC review.
The following 16 properties are HCDRC eligible, but are NOT on today’s agenda:
- 10/31/2007 3135 N GALVEZ ST (NOT on agenda)
- 11/2/2007 3916 ANNUNCIATION ST (NOT on agenda, estimate increased from 0 to 96.73%)
- 11/2/2007 2005 ELYSIAN FIELDS AV (NOT on agenda)
- 11/6/2007 1217 N JOHNSON ST (NOT on agenda)
- 11/7/2007 407 S TELEMACHUS ST (NOT on agenda)
- 11/8/2007 1219 S GENOIS ST (NOT on agenda)
- 11/9/2007 3212 2ND ST (NOT on agenda)
- 11/12/2007 300 S MURAT ST (NOT on agenda)
- 11/14/2007 1924 6TH ST (NOT on agenda, estimate increased from 0 to 75.37%)
- 11/14/2007 2523 PHILIP ST (NOT on agenda)
- 11/14/2007 3205 S SARATOGA ST (NOT on agenda, estimate increased from 0 to 85.54%)
- 11/20/2007 108 PORTAGE PL (NOT on agenda)
- 11/20/2007 605 N ROCHEBLAVE ST (NOT on agenda)
- 11/20/2007 609 N ROCHEBLAVE ST (NOT on agenda)
- 11/21/2007 2720 BIENVILLE ST (NOT on agenda)
- 11/21/2007 3305 LOUISIANA AVE PW (NOT on agenda, estimate increased from 33.8% to 90.28%)
From my research, the numbers were similar for the last HCDRC meeting.
I am endeavoring to account for all HCDRC-eligible demolitions which have avoided HCDRC review. The segment of properties which have had their damage estimates increased is but a small sliver of that entire group, which I believe will probably total somewhere between 750 and 1000.
It is possible the city is using federally funded demolitions to eliminate long-blighted properties on the federal taxpayer dollar, which is only supposed to be paying for demolition of Katrina-damaged properties. It is then complicating that sin by avoiding statutory historic reviews.
In closing it is instructive to recall an op-ed authored by Mayor Nagin a few weeks back:
“…[Any] potential demolition in a historic district must go through all of the pre-Katrina processes. We understand and appreciate the historical significant [sic] of New Orleans and we plan to protect it — even in a post-Katrina environment.”
- “Making progress on damaged homes,” C. Ray Nagin, Times-Picayune, 10/24/07
I have never read more hollow words.
3 Comments | 2 Trackbacks |
comments feed  |
[...] In addition Matt McBride has been analyzing the data from City Hall, it is very depressing. [...]
Matt, I don’t think Nagin Recognizes the difference between Local HDLC Historic Districts and National historic districts that are not in HDLC jurisdiction. In that OP article he is only talking about districts that are in HDLC districts, I don’t think he knows what HCDRC districts even are.
“To a surprisingly large degree, that process appears to have been corrupted.” What’s the surprise? Reform may be underway, but the rot is deep and pervasive. I just wish the T-P (do we need to be reminded that the dictionary’s secondary definition of “picayune” is “small and petty”? would pay more attention to this kind of thing.
HCDRC = housing conservation district review not historic conservation district review.
[...] The process in place subverts the Historic Conservation District Review Committee (HCDRC) which must approve demolition permits, as reported by Matt McBride. First, by not going before HCDRC, or more insidiously by inflating the damage assessments. In his email communique Not everything it seems – HCDRC Nov 26 Agenda. [...]