Neighbors Debate How ​“Historic” To Get

Barbara Iannaconne has spent thousands of dollars on renovations to bring 86 William St. to the modern age from 1870 over the last 29 years. Now she worries that if all of Wooster Square becomes ​“historic,” she’ll have to spend more money — money she doesn’t have.

Iannaconne is one of dozens of neighbors on William and Lyon Streets worried about being held to restrictive zoning standards if local preservation activists succeed in expanding the National Register of Historic Places to properties throughout Wooster Square.

Advocates of the expansion, like Pedro Soto, argue that the opponents not only misunderstand the process — but they are in fact working to limit other neighbors from saving money on improvements to their own homes.

“This is a fantastic program that the homeowners of Wooster Square will miss out on if this district does not get expanded,” Soto argued.

Some of Wooster Square is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. As part of its Hurricane Sandy disaster relief program, the state Historic Preservation Office has been working with representatives from the New Haven Preservation Trust to expand that district to include the whole neighborhood.

“The purpose is to help recognize and celebrate properties that are places of historical significance,” said Jenny Scofield, state coordinator of the State and National Registers. That recognition ​“promotes awareness, which helps with the protection of historic properties.”

Nominated properties must be older than 50 years old to be eligible and cannot be drastically changed in structure. The state will use money through the relief program to hire a professional consultant to fill out the National Register nomination form — the first official step in the process. Afterward, a review board looks over the nomination, hears public comment and decides whether to approve it, Scofield said. If approved, it is forwarded to the National Parks Service for listing.

Wooster Square is just one neighborhood in New Haven working with the state to complete this nomination, Scofield said. State preservationists are working to put Morris Cove on the National Register and to expand the boundaries of the Orange Street National Register Historic District.

Wooster Square neighbors have had two opportunities to hear and ask questions about the project at public meetings in May and late June. The neighborhood’s preservation activists from the Historic Wooster Square Association explained that the National Register was intended to encourage the preservation of historic properties, in part by allowing government agencies to consider those properties while planning projects and directing funds to preservation activities. The National Register cannot be used to restrict the rights of private owners to use or develop their historic property.

Though the National Register itself does not restrict private owners from developing their own property as they see fit, some neighbors worry it will be the gateway leading the city to adopt a more stringent preservation ordinance.

But Scofield and other preservation activists said that the National Register nomination is not directly linked to that ordinance, and that there are no plans in the works at the city level to restrict property rights.

Iannaconne, who is 66, installed vinyl siding in 1990. She recently spent money to fix the porch. She replaced windows that used to leak out heat during the winter. And now, ​“we are broke, broke, broke,” she said. Iannaconne and her husband Vincenzo are living off of a pension.

She said she worries about being required to get the house up to historic preservation standards, and not being able to afford it.

City Clerk Michael Smart and former mayoral candidate Jeffrey Kerekes — who are Lyon Street neighbors — have mounted a campaign to warn Wooster Square about the risks they see in supporting the application for the National Register.

Smart owns four properties on Lyon and William Streets. He has major renovations planned to a house on William Street in the near future. ​“I don’t want to sit in front of a commission to say what I can do to my house,” he said.

Kerekes owns two buildings, at 43 and 93 Lyon St. At first, he was excited about the project. ​“I actually like historic preservation. I like this neighborhood. It’s fantastic. But I don’t like the compulsory element,” he said.

He said he then came upon a loophole that would allow preservationists to eventually move toward a more limiting set of regulations.

“This group is here telling everybody, ​‘Woohoo, there’s no restrictions!’ At the first meeting, about 30 people or so … Their major question was, ​‘Are there any restrictions on property?’ And they said, ​‘Absolutely not. It’s totally voluntary.’ And it’s just total bull,” Kerekes said.

In 2013, Connecticut formalized the ​“municipal preservation ordinance,” which had first been adopted in Hartford’s city policy in 2006. The municipal ordinance would require approval from a commission before the city could allow a demolition or building permit on part of a historic property listed on the State or National Register.

New Britain, Waterbury and Stamford have also passed the ordinance.

In New Haven, applying a similar ordinance would require at vote at the Board of Alders. No one locally or at the state level has proposed getting that ordinance passed.

“Just because other cities have passed legislation allowing their historic district commissions to review exterior changes to homes in historic districts, does not mean that New Haven is anywhere near to passing such legislation. New Haven’s historic districts are significantly larger than districts most cities in the state, so it would be a huge expense to establish design review across the city. That alone would likely ensure that a law like this would not be passed. To the best of my knowledge, there is not a single group advocating for such a law to become a reality here. The New Haven Preservation Trust certainly is not,” said Pedro Soto, who serves as first vice-president of the Preservation Trust board.

“I find it very disappointing that a few homeowners are so worried about a law that almost certainly would never be passed in the city that they are willing to prevent their neighbors from ever being able to participate in Connecticut’s Historic Tax Credit Program for both commercial and residential properties, one of the most generous historic preservation programs in the country.”

Kerekes said he doesn’t want to take the chance that Wooster Square’s preservationists won’t pursue that ordinance after succeeding at getting the whole neighborhood onto the National Register.

“Once you’re on the state or federal list … you can’t get off it. Then you forever have to watch the Board of Alderman to see if they’re going to pass this vote to make you restrict it,” Kerekes said.

The area in Wooster Square surrounding the park is already a local historic district. It is created through a different process from the one in the municipal ordinance, but has a similar result. Two-thirds of property owners must show they support the decision to create a local historic district. Private owners in those houses, unlike in ones solely on the National Register, must report to the New Haven Historic District Commission before they make certain changes to the exteriors.

The proposal to put Wooster Square on the National Register was not intended to bind the entire neighborhood to these rules, local preservation activists told neighbors at the meetings.

Scofield said she is aware of the concerns. ​“We’re early in the process,” she said. ​“I’m not aware of any plans at all with the city of New Haven and that ordinance, as far as my office is concerned.” Still, she said, it’s true that ​“any piece of legislation can be proposed in our government at any time.”

But the National Register nomination is a completely ​“separate entity,” she said.

“There are people who will not move into Wooster Square, to a property where there is a local historic designation, because of all the issues that are involved with the local historic designation under the current leadership of the historic district. This has nothing to do with the local historic designation. Nothing,” Historic Wooster Square Association Board President Elsie Chapman said at the meeting. ​“When issues do come up, they tend to come up along those lines.”

Chapman told Kerekes there was no plan to pursue the municipal ordinance, he said. But he doesn’t want to take the risk.

Bonnie Rosenberg, who is on the Board of Directors of the Historic Wooster Square Association, lives at 323 Greene Street, which is in the local historic district and on the National Register. ​“In this area, we have all those restrictions anyway,” she said. All of those homes have square plaques on them that read ​“Historic District,” distinguishing them from the rest.

She said she didn’t know about the municipal preservation ordinance before talking to Kerekes. She said she understands neighbors’ trepidation. Still, she said, the restrictions of the local historic district have not affected most people she knows.

Once, a neighbor changed out older, drafty windows for new energy-efficient panes. The commission forced the neighbor to take those windows out and put the old ones back in. ​“It cost them double,” Rosenberg said of the property owner. ​“That was dumb on the commission.”

But that’s the only limiting incident she can think of. She lives in an condo with multiple large historic houses; her apartment is in the attic of the Henry Cowell House dating back to 1869. Her fellow condo owners have undertaken multiple renovation projects ​“without a problem.” In her attic apartment, part of the roof was replaced with a skylight — not regulated by the city’s historic commission because it is not visible from the street.

“It wouldn’t be as drastic as people think,” she said. ​“It depends on who’s sitting on the commission.”

Kerekes said he wants the application to be withdrawn. He said it would make more sense to help individuals who want their properties on the National Register or in the local historic district to accomplish that — instead of trying to include all homes.

Soto called that alternative suggestion represents a misunderstanding of the process. Most people can’t just get their properties added to the registry: ​“Only homes that have a high level of architectural merit or are historically significant can be individually eligible. Simply having an old home doesn’t cut it. The vast majority of the homes in the proposed expansion would never be eligible on their own. They instead have to be ​‘contributing structures’ in a historic district.” Expanding the district enables everyone to qualify, he said.

Opponents are concerned about losing autonomy, concerned that house prices will rise and lead to higher taxes, and concerned that they will have to spend more money on any construction to align it with historic regulations, he said.

Beverly McClure, who lives at the corner of Jefferson and St. John Streets, attended the first meeting in May and asked whether the National Register is restrictive. She was told it wasn’t.

Kerekes hustled up to her car as she was leaving the driveway, and updated her about his research on the municipal ordinance.

McClure’s family has owned the house, which was built in 1849, since 1937.

“I’m not telling you than I’m not interested [in preserving the house],” she said. ​“It’s an historic home. It’s a beautiful home. … These homes are irreplaceable.”

But her mother passed away a month ago and she doesn’t think she can take care of it alone. She plans on selling it, likely before the National Register designation comes through. ​“If I was a person who was buying it to gut it and redo it, I wouldn’t be for it,” she said.

For some, the historic designation is directly linked to the personality of and pride in the neighborhood.

“The reality of Wooster Square is that it’s, if not the last, then certainly one of the last historic neighborhoods,” she said. ​“It is a neighborhood where people care about each other, they know each other.”