Why I signed the Pro-LHD Petition

Interesting bit of juxtaposition in today's blogs by Mary Baker Eaton and the P. Preservationist.

Mary writes of the successful campaign she and others helped waged a decade ago to stave off the gutting of High Street. (I still shudder at the thought.) And tells how difficult it was to get people behind a cause as EPIC as that one.

Meanwhile, the P. Preservationist reveals what appears to be the loss of another historic home.

The timing of the two posts is telling. Arguments against the idea of a Local Historic District seem to be settling around two points

• Private home owners can do as good or better job of preserving our cities inventory of homes without the restrictions provided in an LHD.
• The "people" will rise up again to oppose significant historical affronts as they did with High Street.

To the first point, the argument of property rights is easy to understand. However, I feel those rights end when they begin to impact the community as a whole. And I could see that happening here. If you look at communities with tonier ZIP codes than our's - like Wellesley - builders preferred to tear down older homes to make space for newer ones.

This means the fight to save Newburyport's historic character won't be one epic battle that we can all rally behind and summarize on a bumper sticker. Instead, it'll be a series of draining skirmishes fought house-by-house, neighborhood by neighborhood. I'm not sure we have the will to win such a fight.

In short, I support the concept of a LHD. Here's why ...

If I look 20 years into the future and imagine each nightmare scenario with either an LHD or Developers run amuck, I find the former - a strong LHD - more appealing. Historic homes will still be in place. The city's character will be intact. 

Furthermore, I know residents will be able to keep the LHD from becoming the monster some folks fear. I see no way of preventing developers from buying and bulldozing old homes in favor of new.

I invite you to sign the petition here.