October 23, 2015 HBI Forges Partnerships to Increase Capacity for Neighborhood Revitalization
The first approach relies on the good will and significant volunteer efforts of a large number of people often over a long period of time. This approach often requires on-going fundraising for operating expenses including needed repair and maintenance. This is typically referred to as the “museum” approach to historic preservation.
typical and reasonably available finance mechanisms developer cash equity, state and federal historic tax credits, low income housing tax credits (LIHTC), New Market Tax Credits (NMTC), market debt, and possibly some city financing such as Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) or, in some locations, Tax Increment Financing (TIF). Some of these mechanisms are specific to an intended use and all come with certain criteria that need to be met over time. They can all be layered together to support the economic feasibility of the development, and yet all come with added transaction costs that increase the total cost of the development. In contrast to the first approach, the buildings are repurposed into contemporary uses and, in the end, are designed to be financially self-sustaining and provide a return on the investment to the developer and their investors. This approach is a “market driven” approach to historic preservation.
Once completed, this preservation partnering approach will result in the redevelopment of a significant historic property, new middle income homes, and new entertainment options for the community of Roslindale and its business district.