Final Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Policy Statement on Affordable Housing and Historic Preservation, 7387-7389 [07-703]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
7387
Notices
Federal Register
Vol. 72, No. 31
Thursday, February 15, 2007
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains documents other than rules or
proposed rules that are applicable to the
public. Notices of hearings and investigations,
committee meetings, agency decisions and
rulings, delegations of authority, filing of
petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are
examples of documents appearing in this
section.
ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC
PRESERVATION
Final Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation Policy Statement on
Affordable Housing and Historic
Preservation
Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation.
ACTION: Notice of Final Policy Statement
on Affordable Housing and Historic
Preservation.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation (ACHP) adopted a
‘‘Policy Statement on Affordable
Housing and Historic Preservation,’’ on
November 9, 2006.
DATES: The final policy went into effect
upon adoption on November 9, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Blythe Semmer, 202–606–8505.
Electronic mail:
affordablehousing@achp.gov
The
Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation (ACHP) is an independent
Federal agency, created by the National
Historic Preservation Act, that promotes
the preservation, enhancement, and
productive use of our Nation’s historic
resources, and advises the President and
Congress on national historic
preservation policy.
Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act (Section 106), 16
U.S.C. 470f, requires Federal agencies to
consider the effects of their
undertakings on historic properties and
provide the ACHP a reasonable
opportunity to comment with regard to
such undertakings. ACHP has issued the
regulations that set forth the process
through which Federal agencies comply
with these duties. Those regulations are
codified under 36 CFR part 800.
ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
In 1995, the ACHP adopted its first
‘‘Policy Statement on Affordable
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:37 Feb 14, 2007
Jkt 211001
Housing and Historic Preservation’’
(1995 Policy) to serve as a guide for
federal agencies and State Historic
Preservation Offices (SHPOs) when
making decisions about affordable
housing projects during review of
federal undertakings under Section 106
of the National Historic Preservation
Act, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 470f
(Section 106), and its implementing
regulations, ‘‘Protection of Historic
Properties’’ (36 CFR Part 800). The
ACHP adopted the policy to guide
federal agencies and SHPOs at a time
when conflicts between the dual goals
of providing affordable housing and
preserving historic properties was
making the achievement either more
difficult. After a decade, the provision
of affordable housing has developed
into an even more pressing national
concern, prompting a reconsideration of
the principles in the policy statement.
In 2005, the ACHP Chairman
convened an Affordable Housing Task
Force to review this policy statement in
light of changes to the Section 106
regulations in 2001 and 2004 and other
ACHP initiatives. Members of the Task
Force included the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, U.S. Department of the
Interior, the National Conference of
State Historic Preservation Officers
(NCSHPO), the National Trust for
Historic Preservation, citizen member,
Emily Summers, and expert member,
John G. Williams, III, Chair. The U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) participated as an
ACHP observer.
The Task Force developed the Policy
Statement with input from the public.
An online survey of state and local
government officials and affordable
housing providers about their awareness
of and use of the 1995 Policy was
conducted in August-September 2005.
Links to the survey were distributed to
approximately 12,000 individuals
representing State and Tribal Historic
Preservation Officers, local historic
preservation commission members,
Certified Local Government staff, HUD
staff and grantees, state community
development agency staffs, and
affordable housing providers.
Following development of a draft, the
ACHP posted the proposed revised draft
policy statement in the Federal Register
on July 17, 2006 (71 FR 40522), and
comments from the public were
accepted through August 16, 2006.
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Information about the July 17, 2006,
Federal Register notice was distributed
by members of the Task Force to their
respective constituencies through
electronic LISTSERVs including
communities receiving HOME program
and Community Development Block
Grant funds from HUD, members of the
National Trust for Historic
Preservation’s Forum, and members of
the NCSHPO. Additionally, the ACHP
provided information about the
comment period directly to Tribal
Historic Preservation Officers, the
National Alliance of Tribal Historic
Preservation Officers, and over a dozen
organizations with an interest in local
community development activities and
the provision of affordable housing, as
well as on the ACHP Web site.
Comments on the new policy
statement generally supported the
revision effort. Specific comments
frequently requested detailed guidance
on applying the Secretary of the
Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation
and Guidelines for Rehabilitating
Historic Buildings (Secretary’s
Standards) to affordable housing
projects. While the Task Force
recognized that specific comments on
the application of the Secretary’s
Standards were outside the scope of its
mandate, additional language
highlighting the distinction between
review for the Historic Rehabilitation
Tax Credit and Section 106 compliance
was included in the policy statement.
Commenters further requested the
development of case studies that would
illustrate the successful integration of
historic preservation and affordable
housing on a variety of topics including
accessibility, use of modern building
materials, and lead paint abatement
requirements. It is anticipated that such
case studies will become an important
component of materials developed by
the ACHP and Task Force in
implementing the revised policy
statement.
Responsiveness to local conditions
emerged as a recurring theme in the
Task Force’s deliberations. Members
recognized that affordable housing can
include housing for a specific
constituency, such as Native American
housing programs. Federal assistance for
affordable housing can also be directed
to specific geographic areas with
distinctive physical characteristics. Just
as affordable housing programs serve
E:\FR\FM\15FEN1.SGM
15FEN1
7388
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 31 / Thursday, February 15, 2007 / Notices
unique local needs, so should historical
preservation reviews, since ‘‘one-sizefits-all’’ approaches are unlikely to
produce a successful balance for these
projects. Given our national diversity,
the majority of Task Force members
embraced and encouraged creativity in
local solutions while federal agency
members emphasized the value of
consistency and predictability.
The importance of developing and
utilizing tailored guidance also shaped
the Task Force’s deliberations and its
preparation of a set of recommendations
for how the policy statement can be put
into practice. Direction from both the
ACHP and federal agencies was seen as
critical to achieving the goals of the
Task Force, but members recognized
that private and non-profit partners with
experience piecing together the
resources required for planning and
funding affordable housing projects
could provide examples of success
stories and best practices.
The policy statement, which
represents the conclusion of the
research and public outreach efforts of
the Affordable Housing Task Force and
the deliberation of its members, was
adopted by the ACHP on November 9,
2006. The final text of the policy
statement is provided in Section II of
this notice.
ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
II. Text of the Policy
The following is the text of the final
policy statement:
Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation (ACHP) Policy Statement
on Affordable Housing and Historic
Preservation
Historic buildings provide affordable
housing to many American families.
Affordable housing rehabilitation can
contribute to the ongoing vitality of
historic neighborhoods as well as of the
businesses and institutions that serve
them. Rehabilitation can be an
important historic preservation strategy.
Federal agencies that help America meet
its need for safe, decent, and affordable
housing, most notably the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) and the U.S.
Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s)
Rural Development agency, often work
with or near historic properties.
The ACHP considers affordable
housing for the purposes of this policy
to be Federally-subsidized, single- and
multi-family housing for individuals
and families that make less than 80% of
the area median income. It includes, but
is not limited to, Federal assistance for
new construction, rehabilitation,
mortgage insurance, and loan
guarantees.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:37 Feb 14, 2007
Jkt 211001
National policy encompasses both
preserving historic resources and
providing affordable housing. The
National Historic Preservation Act
(NHPA) of 1966, as amended, directs the
Federal government to foster conditions
under which modern society and
prehistoric and historic resources can
exist in productive harmony and ‘‘fulfill
the social, economic, and other
requirements of present and future
generations.’’ Similarly, affordable
housing legislation like the CranstonGonzalez Act of 1990, which aims to
‘‘expand the supply of decent, safe,
sanitary, and affordable housing,’’
anticipates historic preservation as a
tool for meeting its goals. Actively
seeking ways to reconcile historic
preservation goals with the special
economic and social needs associated
with affordable housing is critical in
addressing one of the nation’s most
pressing challenges.
Providing affordable housing is a
growing national need that continues to
challenge housing providers and
preservationists.
In issuing this policy statement, the
ACHP, consistent with Section 202 of
the NHPA, offers a flexible approach for
affordable housing projects involving
historic properties. Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act
Section 106 requires Federal agencies to
take into account the effects of their
actions on historic properties and afford
the ACHP a reasonable opportunity to
comment. This policy provides a
framework for meeting these
requirements for affordable housing.
Federal tax incentives provide
opportunities for historic preservation
and affordable housing to work together,
including the Low-Income Housing Tax
Credit and the Historic Rehabilitation
Tax Credit. Projects taking advantage of
the Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit
must be reviewed by the National Park
Service (NPS) for adherence to the
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for
Rehabilitation and Guidelines for
Rehabilitatinq Historic Buildinqs
(Secretary’s Standards) in a separate and
distinct process. Review of these
projects is more comprehensive than
Section 106 review and necessitates
early coordination with NPS and the
State Historic Preservation Officer
(SHPO) since work must adhere to the
Secretary’s Standards to obtain the tax
credit. Nonetheless, coordination with
Section 106 consultation and these
reviews frequently occurs.
In an effort to better focus Section 106
reviews for affordable housing, the
ACHP encourages Federal and State
agencies, SHPOs, Tribal Historic
Preservation Officers (THPOs), local
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
governments, housing providers, and
other consulting parties to use the
following principles in Section 106
consultation.
Implementation Principles
I. Rehabilitating historic properties to
provide affordable housing is a sound
historic preservation strategy.
II. Federal agencies and State and local
government entities assuming HUD’s
environmental review requirements are
responsible for ensuring compliance
with Section 106.
III. Review of effects in historic districts
should focus on exterior features.
IV. Consultation should consider the overall
preservation goals of the community.
V. Plans and specifications should adhere to
the Secretary’s Standards when possible
and practical.
VI. Section 106 consultation should
emphasize consensus building.
VII. The ACHP encourages streamlining the
Section 106 process to respond to local
conditions.
VIII. The need for archeological
investigations should be avoided.
I. Rehabilitating Historic Properties to
Provide Affordable is a Sound Historic
Preservation Strategy.
Continued investment in historic
buildings through rehabilitation and
repair for affordable housing purposes
and stabilization of historic districts
through the construction of infill
housing should be recognized as
contributing to the broad historic
preservation goals of neighborhood
revitalization and retention.
II. Federal Agencies and State and
Local Government Entities Assuming
HUD’s Environmental Review
Requirements Are Responsible for
Ensuring Compliance With Section 106.
Federal agencies, notably USDA Rural
Development and HUD, provide
important funding for affordable
housing. These Federal agencies, and
funding recipients assuming HUD’s
environmental review requirements,
must comply with Section 106. SHPOs,
THPOs, and local historic preservation
commissions provide expert opinions
and advice during consultation.
Consultation should be concluded and
outcomes recorded prior to the
expenditure of funds.
III. Review of Effects in Historic
Districts Should Focus on Exterior
Features.
Section 106 review of effects focuses
on the characteristics that qualify a
property for listing in the National
Register of Historic Places. The
significance of historic districts is
typically associated with exterior
features. Accordingly, unless a building
E:\FR\FM\15FEN1.SGM
15FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 31 / Thursday, February 15, 2007 / Notices
is listed or considered eligible for listing
in the National Register as an individual
property or specific interior elements
contribute to maintaining a district’s
character, review under Section 106
should focus on proposed changes to
the exterior. In all cases, identifying the
features that qualify a property for
inclusion in the National Register
defines the scope of Section 106 review.
IV. Consultation Should Consider the
Overall Preservation Goals of the
Community.
When assessing, and negotiating the
resolution of, the effects of affordable
housing projects on historic properties,
consultation should focus not simply on
individual buildings but on the historic
preservation goals of the broader
neighborhood or community. If the
affected historic property is a historic
district, the agency official should
assess effects on the historic district as
a whole. Proposals to demolish historic
properties for new replacement housing
should be based on background
documentation that addresses the
broader context of the historic district
and evaluates the economic and
structural feasibility of rehabilitation
that advances affordable housing.
ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
V. Plans and Specifications Should
Adhere to the Secretary’s Standards
When Possible and Practical.
Secretary’s Standards outline a
consistent national approach to the
treatment of historic properties that can
be applied flexibly in a way that relates
to local character and needs. Plans and
specifications for rehabilitation, new
construction, and abatement of
hazardous conditions in affordable
housing projects associated with
historic properties should adhere to the
recommended approaches in the
Secretary’s Standards when possible
and practical.
Projects taking advantage of the
Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit must
be reviewed by the National Park
Service for adherence to the Secretary’s
Standards in a separate and distinct
process that benefits from early
coordination. The ACHP recognizes that
there are instances when the Secretary’s
Standards cannot be followed and that
Section 106 allows for the negotiation of
other outcomes.
VI. Section 106 Consultation Should
Emphasize Consensus Building.
Section 106 review strives to build
consensus with affected communities in
all phases of the process. Consultation
with affected communities should be on
a scale appropriate to that of the
undertaking. Various stakeholders,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:37 Feb 14, 2007
Jkt 211001
including community members and
neighborhood residents, should be
included in the Section 106 review
process as consulting parties so that the
full range of issues can be addressed in
developing a balance between historic
preservation and affordable housing
goals.
VII. The ACHP Encourages
Streamlining the Section 106 Process
To Respond to Local Conditions.
The ACHP encourages participants to
seek innovative and practical ways to
streamline the Section 106 process that
respond to unique local conditions
related to the delivery of affordable
housing. Programmatic Agreements
often delegate the Section 106 review
role of the SHPO to local governments,
particularly where local preservation
ordinances exist and/or where qualified
preservation professionals are employed
to improve the efficiency of historic
preservation reviews. Such agreements
may also target the Section 106 review
process to local circumstances that
warrant the creation of exempt
categories for routine activities, the
adoption of ‘‘treatment and design
protocols’’ for rehabilitation and new
infill construction, and the development
of design guidelines tailored to a
specific historic district and/or
neighborhood.
VIII. The Need for Archaeological
Investigations Should Be Avoided.
Archaeological investigations should
be avoided for affordable housing
projects limited to rehabilitation and
requiring minimal ground disturbance.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 470j
Dated: February 12, 2007.
Ralston Cox,
Acting Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 07–703 Filed 2–14–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–K6–M
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Office of the Secretary
Notice of the National Agricultural
Research, Extension, Education, and
Economics Advisory Board Meeting
Research, Education, and
Economics, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of meeting.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, the
United States Department of Agriculture
announces a meeting of the National
Agricultural Research, Extension,
Education, and Economics Advisory
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7389
Board. This meeting is open to the
general public.
DATES: The National Agricultural
Research, Extension, Education, and
Economics Advisory Board will meet
March 7–9, 2007.
The public may file written comments
before or up to two weeks after the
meeting with the contact person.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place
at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel, 1330
Maryland Avenue, SW., Washington,
DC 20024. Written comments from the
public may be sent to the Contact
Person identified in this notice at: The
National Agricultural Research,
Extension, Education, and Economics
Advisory Board; Research, Education,
and Economics Advisory Board Office,
Room 344–A, Jamie L. Whitten
Building, United States Department of
Agriculture, STOP 2255, 1400
Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20250–2255.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joseph A. Dunn, Executive Director,
National Agricultural Research,
Extension, Education, and Economics
Advisory Board; telephone: (202) 720–
3684; fax: (202) 720–6199; or e-mail:
JADunn@csrees.usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
Thursday, March 8, 2007, from 8 a.m.–
5:30 p.m. the full Advisory Board
Meeting will meet beginning with
introductory remarks provided by the
Chair of the Advisory Board, and the
Under Secretary for Research,
Education, and Economics (REE),
USDA. This meeting will have two
focus sessions, one on ‘‘Farm Bill’’
topics and the other on the subject of
‘‘Food Safety and Human Health’’. An
evening session beginning at 6:30 p.m.,
and adjourning at 8:30 p.m. with a guest
speaker who will present remarks on
food safety. On Friday, February 9,
2006, the meeting will reconvene at 9
a.m. to hear recap highlights from the
previous day’s focus sessions followed
by overall Board discussions. You will
hear remarks from within and outside
the USDA pertaining to the agency
prospective on the individual topics. An
opportunity for public comment will be
offered after the meeting wrap-up. The
Advisory Board Meeting will adjourn by
12 (noon).
Written comments by attendees or
other interested stakeholders will be
welcomed for the public record before
and up to two weeks following the
Board meeting (by close of business
Friday, March 21, 2007). All statements
will become a part of the official record
of the National Agricultural Research,
Extension, Education, and Economics
Advisory Board and will be kept on file
E:\FR\FM\15FEN1.SGM
15FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 31 (Thursday, February 15, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7387-7389]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-703]
========================================================================
Notices
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings,
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents
appearing in this section.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 31 / Thursday, February 15, 2007 /
Notices
[[Page 7387]]
ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION
Final Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Policy Statement
on Affordable Housing and Historic Preservation
AGENCY: Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.
ACTION: Notice of Final Policy Statement on Affordable Housing and
Historic Preservation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) adopted a
``Policy Statement on Affordable Housing and Historic Preservation,''
on November 9, 2006.
DATES: The final policy went into effect upon adoption on November 9,
2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Blythe Semmer, 202-606-8505.
Electronic mail: affordablehousing@achp.gov
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation (ACHP) is an independent Federal agency, created by the
National Historic Preservation Act, that promotes the preservation,
enhancement, and productive use of our Nation's historic resources, and
advises the President and Congress on national historic preservation
policy.
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (Section
106), 16 U.S.C. 470f, requires Federal agencies to consider the effects
of their undertakings on historic properties and provide the ACHP a
reasonable opportunity to comment with regard to such undertakings.
ACHP has issued the regulations that set forth the process through
which Federal agencies comply with these duties. Those regulations are
codified under 36 CFR part 800.
I. Background
In 1995, the ACHP adopted its first ``Policy Statement on
Affordable Housing and Historic Preservation'' (1995 Policy) to serve
as a guide for federal agencies and State Historic Preservation Offices
(SHPOs) when making decisions about affordable housing projects during
review of federal undertakings under Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 470f (Section 106),
and its implementing regulations, ``Protection of Historic Properties''
(36 CFR Part 800). The ACHP adopted the policy to guide federal
agencies and SHPOs at a time when conflicts between the dual goals of
providing affordable housing and preserving historic properties was
making the achievement either more difficult. After a decade, the
provision of affordable housing has developed into an even more
pressing national concern, prompting a reconsideration of the
principles in the policy statement.
In 2005, the ACHP Chairman convened an Affordable Housing Task
Force to review this policy statement in light of changes to the
Section 106 regulations in 2001 and 2004 and other ACHP initiatives.
Members of the Task Force included the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
U.S. Department of the Interior, the National Conference of State
Historic Preservation Officers (NCSHPO), the National Trust for
Historic Preservation, citizen member, Emily Summers, and expert
member, John G. Williams, III, Chair. The U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD) participated as an ACHP observer.
The Task Force developed the Policy Statement with input from the
public. An online survey of state and local government officials and
affordable housing providers about their awareness of and use of the
1995 Policy was conducted in August-September 2005. Links to the survey
were distributed to approximately 12,000 individuals representing State
and Tribal Historic Preservation Officers, local historic preservation
commission members, Certified Local Government staff, HUD staff and
grantees, state community development agency staffs, and affordable
housing providers.
Following development of a draft, the ACHP posted the proposed
revised draft policy statement in the Federal Register on July 17, 2006
(71 FR 40522), and comments from the public were accepted through
August 16, 2006. Information about the July 17, 2006, Federal Register
notice was distributed by members of the Task Force to their respective
constituencies through electronic LISTSERVs including communities
receiving HOME program and Community Development Block Grant funds from
HUD, members of the National Trust for Historic Preservation's Forum,
and members of the NCSHPO. Additionally, the ACHP provided information
about the comment period directly to Tribal Historic Preservation
Officers, the National Alliance of Tribal Historic Preservation
Officers, and over a dozen organizations with an interest in local
community development activities and the provision of affordable
housing, as well as on the ACHP Web site.
Comments on the new policy statement generally supported the
revision effort. Specific comments frequently requested detailed
guidance on applying the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for
Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
(Secretary's Standards) to affordable housing projects. While the Task
Force recognized that specific comments on the application of the
Secretary's Standards were outside the scope of its mandate, additional
language highlighting the distinction between review for the Historic
Rehabilitation Tax Credit and Section 106 compliance was included in
the policy statement. Commenters further requested the development of
case studies that would illustrate the successful integration of
historic preservation and affordable housing on a variety of topics
including accessibility, use of modern building materials, and lead
paint abatement requirements. It is anticipated that such case studies
will become an important component of materials developed by the ACHP
and Task Force in implementing the revised policy statement.
Responsiveness to local conditions emerged as a recurring theme in
the Task Force's deliberations. Members recognized that affordable
housing can include housing for a specific constituency, such as Native
American housing programs. Federal assistance for affordable housing
can also be directed to specific geographic areas with distinctive
physical characteristics. Just as affordable housing programs serve
[[Page 7388]]
unique local needs, so should historical preservation reviews, since
``one-size-fits-all'' approaches are unlikely to produce a successful
balance for these projects. Given our national diversity, the majority
of Task Force members embraced and encouraged creativity in local
solutions while federal agency members emphasized the value of
consistency and predictability.
The importance of developing and utilizing tailored guidance also
shaped the Task Force's deliberations and its preparation of a set of
recommendations for how the policy statement can be put into practice.
Direction from both the ACHP and federal agencies was seen as critical
to achieving the goals of the Task Force, but members recognized that
private and non-profit partners with experience piecing together the
resources required for planning and funding affordable housing projects
could provide examples of success stories and best practices.
The policy statement, which represents the conclusion of the
research and public outreach efforts of the Affordable Housing Task
Force and the deliberation of its members, was adopted by the ACHP on
November 9, 2006. The final text of the policy statement is provided in
Section II of this notice.
II. Text of the Policy
The following is the text of the final policy statement:
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) Policy Statement on
Affordable Housing and Historic Preservation
Historic buildings provide affordable housing to many American
families. Affordable housing rehabilitation can contribute to the
ongoing vitality of historic neighborhoods as well as of the businesses
and institutions that serve them. Rehabilitation can be an important
historic preservation strategy. Federal agencies that help America meet
its need for safe, decent, and affordable housing, most notably the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the U.S.
Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) Rural Development agency, often
work with or near historic properties.
The ACHP considers affordable housing for the purposes of this
policy to be Federally-subsidized, single- and multi-family housing for
individuals and families that make less than 80% of the area median
income. It includes, but is not limited to, Federal assistance for new
construction, rehabilitation, mortgage insurance, and loan guarantees.
National policy encompasses both preserving historic resources and
providing affordable housing. The National Historic Preservation Act
(NHPA) of 1966, as amended, directs the Federal government to foster
conditions under which modern society and prehistoric and historic
resources can exist in productive harmony and ``fulfill the social,
economic, and other requirements of present and future generations.''
Similarly, affordable housing legislation like the Cranston-Gonzalez
Act of 1990, which aims to ``expand the supply of decent, safe,
sanitary, and affordable housing,'' anticipates historic preservation
as a tool for meeting its goals. Actively seeking ways to reconcile
historic preservation goals with the special economic and social needs
associated with affordable housing is critical in addressing one of the
nation's most pressing challenges.
Providing affordable housing is a growing national need that
continues to challenge housing providers and preservationists.
In issuing this policy statement, the ACHP, consistent with Section
202 of the NHPA, offers a flexible approach for affordable housing
projects involving historic properties. Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act Section 106 requires Federal agencies to take
into account the effects of their actions on historic properties and
afford the ACHP a reasonable opportunity to comment. This policy
provides a framework for meeting these requirements for affordable
housing.
Federal tax incentives provide opportunities for historic
preservation and affordable housing to work together, including the
Low-Income Housing Tax Credit and the Historic Rehabilitation Tax
Credit. Projects taking advantage of the Historic Rehabilitation Tax
Credit must be reviewed by the National Park Service (NPS) for
adherence to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for
Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitatinq Historic Buildinqs
(Secretary's Standards) in a separate and distinct process. Review of
these projects is more comprehensive than Section 106 review and
necessitates early coordination with NPS and the State Historic
Preservation Officer (SHPO) since work must adhere to the Secretary's
Standards to obtain the tax credit. Nonetheless, coordination with
Section 106 consultation and these reviews frequently occurs.
In an effort to better focus Section 106 reviews for affordable
housing, the ACHP encourages Federal and State agencies, SHPOs, Tribal
Historic Preservation Officers (THPOs), local governments, housing
providers, and other consulting parties to use the following principles
in Section 106 consultation.
Implementation Principles
I. Rehabilitating historic properties to provide affordable housing
is a sound historic preservation strategy.
II. Federal agencies and State and local government entities
assuming HUD's environmental review requirements are responsible for
ensuring compliance with Section 106.
III. Review of effects in historic districts should focus on
exterior features.
IV. Consultation should consider the overall preservation goals of
the community.
V. Plans and specifications should adhere to the Secretary's
Standards when possible and practical.
VI. Section 106 consultation should emphasize consensus building.
VII. The ACHP encourages streamlining the Section 106 process to
respond to local conditions.
VIII. The need for archeological investigations should be avoided.
I. Rehabilitating Historic Properties to Provide Affordable is a Sound
Historic Preservation Strategy.
Continued investment in historic buildings through rehabilitation
and repair for affordable housing purposes and stabilization of
historic districts through the construction of infill housing should be
recognized as contributing to the broad historic preservation goals of
neighborhood revitalization and retention.
II. Federal Agencies and State and Local Government Entities Assuming
HUD's Environmental Review Requirements Are Responsible for Ensuring
Compliance With Section 106.
Federal agencies, notably USDA Rural Development and HUD, provide
important funding for affordable housing. These Federal agencies, and
funding recipients assuming HUD's environmental review requirements,
must comply with Section 106. SHPOs, THPOs, and local historic
preservation commissions provide expert opinions and advice during
consultation. Consultation should be concluded and outcomes recorded
prior to the expenditure of funds.
III. Review of Effects in Historic Districts Should Focus on Exterior
Features.
Section 106 review of effects focuses on the characteristics that
qualify a property for listing in the National Register of Historic
Places. The significance of historic districts is typically associated
with exterior features. Accordingly, unless a building
[[Page 7389]]
is listed or considered eligible for listing in the National Register
as an individual property or specific interior elements contribute to
maintaining a district's character, review under Section 106 should
focus on proposed changes to the exterior. In all cases, identifying
the features that qualify a property for inclusion in the National
Register defines the scope of Section 106 review.
IV. Consultation Should Consider the Overall Preservation Goals of the
Community.
When assessing, and negotiating the resolution of, the effects of
affordable housing projects on historic properties, consultation should
focus not simply on individual buildings but on the historic
preservation goals of the broader neighborhood or community. If the
affected historic property is a historic district, the agency official
should assess effects on the historic district as a whole. Proposals to
demolish historic properties for new replacement housing should be
based on background documentation that addresses the broader context of
the historic district and evaluates the economic and structural
feasibility of rehabilitation that advances affordable housing.
V. Plans and Specifications Should Adhere to the Secretary's Standards
When Possible and Practical.
Secretary's Standards outline a consistent national approach to the
treatment of historic properties that can be applied flexibly in a way
that relates to local character and needs. Plans and specifications for
rehabilitation, new construction, and abatement of hazardous conditions
in affordable housing projects associated with historic properties
should adhere to the recommended approaches in the Secretary's
Standards when possible and practical.
Projects taking advantage of the Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit
must be reviewed by the National Park Service for adherence to the
Secretary's Standards in a separate and distinct process that benefits
from early coordination. The ACHP recognizes that there are instances
when the Secretary's Standards cannot be followed and that Section 106
allows for the negotiation of other outcomes.
VI. Section 106 Consultation Should Emphasize Consensus Building.
Section 106 review strives to build consensus with affected
communities in all phases of the process. Consultation with affected
communities should be on a scale appropriate to that of the
undertaking. Various stakeholders, including community members and
neighborhood residents, should be included in the Section 106 review
process as consulting parties so that the full range of issues can be
addressed in developing a balance between historic preservation and
affordable housing goals.
VII. The ACHP Encourages Streamlining the Section 106 Process To
Respond to Local Conditions.
The ACHP encourages participants to seek innovative and practical
ways to streamline the Section 106 process that respond to unique local
conditions related to the delivery of affordable housing. Programmatic
Agreements often delegate the Section 106 review role of the SHPO to
local governments, particularly where local preservation ordinances
exist and/or where qualified preservation professionals are employed to
improve the efficiency of historic preservation reviews. Such
agreements may also target the Section 106 review process to local
circumstances that warrant the creation of exempt categories for
routine activities, the adoption of ``treatment and design protocols''
for rehabilitation and new infill construction, and the development of
design guidelines tailored to a specific historic district and/or
neighborhood.
VIII. The Need for Archaeological Investigations Should Be Avoided.
Archaeological investigations should be avoided for affordable
housing projects limited to rehabilitation and requiring minimal ground
disturbance.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 470j
Dated: February 12, 2007.
Ralston Cox,
Acting Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 07-703 Filed 2-14-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-K6-M
