Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Staff Contacts | Home RSS

Historic properties--Personal versus Public Rights

March 15, 2013 - Sylvia Heldreth
Some would say that architecturally striking buildings constructed more than a century or so ago should be preserved. Preservation groups on the east coast of Florida are trying to prevent new property owners from tearing down houses that might be considered historic. The property owners say that they own the real estate and should be able to do what they want with the existing buildings. There is no law to prevent that.

What do you think?


Article Comments

Apr-07-13 11:42 AM

If the want to save the building buy them when they come on the market. historic means someone famous or something happened there not just because its old offer tax incentives to restore it but requiring as a lot of places do put extreme burdens on people who have owned property for generations as cost are extremely high for restorations verses maintenance and remodeling with modern materials and often it is used to remove people who are perceive to not fit anymore and I saw Bristol Borough Pa was a mix of small business lower income people elderly decided the borough was not the way they wanted it so it started forcing business out refusing to let people insulate homes people wanted to insulate there walls and put new siding o no you have to have the wall the way they are cold and damp.etc Fort Myers city refuses demo or modernization and calls some eyesores then buys them and lets them rot while taxpayer money bleeds from them private property used to be the mark of freedom


Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web