During this fight to El Vado Motel standing in the past few days, I was thinking about our nation’s rather anemic preservation laws. A listing onto the National Register of Historic Places brings prestige and eligibility for loans and grants. But it offers little actual protection for historic properties. Even if an owner places a property on the National Register, he or she can do with it what they please, including level it to the ground, such as the Coral Court Motel in St. Louis as an example.
So I’ve been thinking it’s time to put teeth into the National Register of Historic Places listings. Mainly, I want it so that once a property makes it onto the list, demolition is prohibited except in a few narrow exceptions, such as extreme safety or health concerns.
What do you think of this idea? Would it discourage people from placing their properties on the National Register? Is this a case of too much government interference? Does it hurt property rights? Would such a law hamper economic growth or development in some cities? Or do you think that such a strengthening of the law is long overdue?
Let’s hear what you have to say by clicking onto the comments section. Remember, your comments may not appear on the site right away because I have to clear them first. It’s not that I wish to discourage dissent; it’s that I don’t want spammers to hijack the discussion.