Roshek Building_National Park Service Brochure`or . •
nnua Resort for Fisca Year 20
may 4••r ■
Aiwsiv Ov/4::: oat low
Aor.w/ Ador
/ /1
//
/Aar Air Ar Aer ,/ ast
Arr Aar Ar 177 BM
Air Air Aor Air Air Mt
W "%kV 11111k 111111 MIL
vloww, 111k MOIL
\ \ \ \ \
\ \ \ \ \ \ \
\ \ \ \
\\
\ \ \
\ \ \
\ \ \ \
\ \ \
1
ne Rome - Bu 'm Du,as,ue, Ioaa�'
Federal Tax Incentives for
Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
ASuccessful Federal /State Partnership Since 1976
The Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives Program, administered by the
National Park Service and the Internal Revenue Service in partnership with the State
Historic Preservation Offices, is the nation's most effective program to promote historic
preservation and community revitalization through historic rehabilitation. The tax
credit program has generated over $62 billion in the rehabilitation of income producing
historic properties since its inception in 1976. With over 38,000 approved projects, the
program is the largest federal program specifically supporting historic preservation. It
has been instrumental in preserving the historic places that give cities, towns, and rural
areas their special character and in attracting new private investment to the historic
cores andMain Streets of the nation's cities and towns. The tax incentives also generate
jobs, enhance property values, create affordable housing, and augment revenues for
the Federal, state and local governments. This annual report includes information
excerpted from Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, Statistical
Report and Analysis for Fiscal Year 2011. The cover photo is of the Roshek Building
in Dubuque, Iowa taken by Aaron DeJong (see back page).
Record Number of
Jobs Created
Completed projects certified in FY
2011 by the National Park Service cre-
ated an estimated 55,458 new jobs na-
tionwide. Despite the downturn in the
economy and particularly in the real
estate market, the program continues
to be a strong catalyst for job creation
and economic recovery in older com-
munities with a record 78 jobs created
on the average per project in FY 2011.
Over 1.39 Million
Buildings Listed
Over 1.39 million historic buildings are
listed in or contribute to historic districts
in the National Register of Historic Places,
with thousands of contributing resources
added each year. The National Park Ser-
vice estimates that 20% of these buildings
qualify as income - producing. Income-
producing buildings listed individually
or certified as contributing to a registered
historic district are eligible for tax credits.
2011
at a glance
• $ 4.02 billion in new
rehabilitation work
approved
• 55,458 jobs created
• 937 new projects
approved
• 7,470 low and
moderate income
housing units created
• 15,651 housing
units created or
renovated overall
Source Federal Tax Incentives for
Rehabilitating Historic Buildings,
Statistical Report andAnalysis for Fiscal
Year 2011
Federal Tax Incentives For Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, 1977 -2011
The chart above shows the number of submitted projects and estimated project costs approved by the National Park Service Since the pas-
sage in 1976 of the first Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, there have been a number of changes in the tax laws
Notably, there was the Economic Recovery Act of 1981 which resulted in the most favorable incentives in the program's history followed by
the Tax Reform Act of 1986 which reduced the historic preservation tax credits from 25% to 20% and imposed several significant restrictions
on all forms of real estate investment
Over
$4.02 Billion
Investment in
Historic Rehabilitation
While the historic preservation tax
incentives encourage the rehabilita-
tion of historic buildings of national,
state, and local significance, they also
stimulate mayor private investment in
our older, disinvested neighborhoods
Older cities across the country rely
upon the historic tax credits program
as an important marketing tool to
foster economic revitalization In FY
2011 the number of approved projects
was 937 The investment in proposed
projects totaled an estimated $4 02 bil-
lion, while the investment in approved
completed projects totaled $3 47 bil-
lion This continuing level of activity
can be attributed, in part, to an increase
in public awareness of the benefits of
the Historic Preservation Tax Incen-
tives program as well as the existence
of various Federal, state, and local tax
incentives that can be piggybacked with
the Federal historic tax credits
Piggyback
State Credits
Helping to promote the rehabilitation
of historic buildings are the many
states that provide state tax incen-
tives for historic preservation Last
year,over 48% of the completed proj-
ects receiving certifications from the
National Park Service also benefited
from the use of state historic tax cred-
its, the largest percentage use ever At
least 30 states now offer historic tax
credits that can be used in tandem with
the Federal historic tax credit Piggy-
backing state credits have proven to be
an invaluable additional incentive for
rehabilitating historic buildings, espe-
cially considering the current condi-
tion of the real estate market
Economic Revitalization Utilizing
Federal Historic
Preservation Tax Incentives
Investing in historic structures in older neighbor-
hoods, providing local fobs, and stimulating neigh-
borhood revitalization are all signature features of
the Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives
program An essential financial tool for historic
building rehabilitation, the Federal tax incentives
help preserve historic structures of every period,
size, style, and type Abandoned or underutilized
schools, warehouses, factories, churches, retail
stores, apartments, hotels, houses, agricultural
buildings, and offices throughout the country have
been given new life in a manner that maintains
their historic character In FY 2011, 69% of the
rehabilitation programs provided housing, includ-
ing 7,470 affordable housing units Commercial
and office accounted for the second and third
most common new uses
i
2
6
1 Walker Bank Building, Salt Lake City, U T (photo Dana Sohm), 2 Hennessey Funeral Home, Portland, OR
(photo Christi Wuthnch), 3 Kent Road Village, Richmond, VA (photo Sadler & Whitehead Architects, PLC),
4 New Indianola Historic Distnct, Columbus, Ohio (photo Community Properties of Ohio), 5 Chemistry
Research Building, Chicago IL (photo Illinois Histonc Preservation Agency), 6 Cheney MITI Yarn Dye House,
Manchester, CT (photo CrosskeyArchitects, LLC, 7 DaylightApartments, Knoxville, TN (photo Daylight
Partners, LLC)
Finding Out More About the Program
Information on the histonc rehabilitation tax credits and copies of techmcal publications that explain cost - effective methods
of repairing and mamtauung histonc buildings are available from the Techmcal Preservation Services (TPS) office of the Na-
tional Park Service and from State Histonc Preservation Offices Our Web site <http 11 www nps govltps> helps explain the
program The Web site also has a wealth of information on the preservation and rehabilitation of histonc buildings TPS's
catalog of publications, entitled Caring for the Past, provides a listing of free and for sale publications currently available from
the National Park Service and the Government Pnnting Office The more than 100 publications are the most comprehensive
source of mformation available on the care and reuse of histonc buildings The publications catalog can be obtained by wnting
to Technical Preservation Services, National Park Service, 1201 Eye Street, NW, Washington, DC 20005 or by emailing your
request to <nps_tps amps gov>
State Histonc Preservation Offices (SHPOs) are the first pomt of contact for property owners wishing to use the rehabilitation
tax credit They can be contacted to help determine whether a histonc building is eligible for Federal or state histonc preserva-
tion tax mcentives, to provide guidance before the project begms so as to make the process as fast and economical as possible,
and to advise on appropnate preservation work For the phone number or address of a state office near you, call the National
Conference of State Histonc Preservation Officers at (202) 624 -5465 or visit their Web site at <wwwncshpo orgy
on the cover
Job Creatzon Sets New Record
Roshek Building, Dubuque, Iowa
While promoting the rehabilitation and preservation of historic buildings, the Federal
Historic Tax Incentives program also serves as an important economic catalyst to
helping revitalize older communities
One of the important immediate benefits is job creation More labor intensive than
new construction, rehabilitating histonc buildings has the added economic benefit in
that it usually involves a faster start to completion time than new construction Job
creation is realized not only through the immediate rehabilitation work, but when the
underutilized or vacant building is once again placed in service in the community
In FY 2011, the Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives program set a record photo Design Photography, Dubuque, Iowa
high of 78 jobs created on the average for each certified rehabilitation project A
major Increase over the previous year and breaking the old record of 68 jobs set in FY 2009, the program is a proven fob stimulant in today's troubled
economy In FY 2011, more than 55A58 fobs were created, concentrated In the construction, service,
and retail sectors
1
The Roshek Building in Dubuque, Iowa, featured on the cover and on this page, is an outstanding
example of this activity Formerly the Roshek Department Store building, it has had a long history of
job creation Built dunng the early years of the Great Depression, it provided much needed jobs for
construction workers and the department store became a major retail employer and served as a key
component of downtown Dubuque's final pre -World War II building expansion
The tallest building in the city, it remained remarkably intact through 1970 when the department store
relocated and the building was converted to office use By 2008 with the loss of mayor tenants, the Ro-
shek Building was on the verge of becoming a white elephant In the central downtown
tar'
Through the efforts of the City, the developer Dubuque Initiatives, Inc , and others, an ambitious and
successful turnaround for the building was achieved, beginning when IBM selected the city and the Ro-
photo Aaron DeJong shek Building in 2009 for its new regional service headquarters A fast track rehabilitation of the building
was essential, since IBM would be creating 1,300 well - paying technical and support jobs by 2011
With a commitment to preserving the histonc character of the building and making the building a model of sustainability, rehabilitation work started in
2009, providing employment to more than 200 dunng the construction phase Cast-iron canopies, omamental millwork, plaster ceilings and decorative
columns were restored or carefully replicated Historic steel windows and terrazzo floors were repaired and new system furniture installed, providing
desirable office space while respecting the building's historic open floor plan
Over $45 million in rehabilitation work took place, resulting in nearly 260,000 square feet of leasable space Today, the first floor includes restaurants
and retail stores with new businesses and others which relocated into expanded spaces Besides the 1,300 new jobs at IBM, commercial and retail
tenants in the building added over 40 additional new jobs
For Additional Information:
Please contact Kaaren Staveteag, Technical Preservation Services, Cultural Resources, Nataonad Park Servace, 1201 Eye Street, NW Washington, DC20005,
(202) 354 -2053 Information on Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings as also available on the Nataonad Park Service's Technical
Preservation Services Web sate at <http / /www nps gov/tps>
400, 411111.7 oar
Awi As"' ow Amor „ow awl
/Air AI sow AoilI/
AW
/ // /1
/ /1 1/
AV7 r A177 1:77
ArrAilvar AV AIN
Arr Ar AO ACir 147/
/1 I
WNW w W 111W
IOW litk W TW. Ma\ MK\ 1101
lift\ 11W\ NIEW MIL MIL
via\
"I■ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
\ \ \ \ \
\ \
e os e ui r Rususue, ow.
S,
Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
Statistical Report and Analysis for Fiscal Year 2011
U S Department of the Interior, National Park Service
Cultural Resources, Technical Preservation Services, Washington, DC
December 2011
Job creation sets new record
Roshek Building,
Dubuque, Iowa
While promoting the rehabilita-
tion and preservation of historic
buildings, the Federal Historic
Tax Incentives program also
serves as an important eco-
nomic catalyst to helping revi-
talize older communities
One of the important immediate
benefits is job creation More
labor intensive than new con-
struction, rehabilitating historic
buildings has the added eco-
nomic benefit in that it usually
involves a faster start to completion time than new construction Job creation is realized not only through the
immediate rehabilitation work, but when the underutilized or vacant building is once again placed in service
in the community
photo Design Photography, Dubuque, Iowa
In FY 2011, the Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives program seta record high of 78 fobs created on
the average for each certified rehabilitation project A major increase over the previous year and breaking
the old record of 68 jobs set in FY 2009, the program is a proven fob stimulant in today's troubled economy
In FY 2011, more than 55,458 jobs were created, concentrated in the construction, service, and retail sectors
I
photo Aaron DeJong
The Roshek Building in Dubuque, Iowa, featured on the
cover and on this page, is an outstanding example of this
activity Formerly the Roshek Department Store building, it
has had a long history of fob creation Built during the early
years of the Great Depression, it provided much needed
jobs for construction workers and the department store be-
came a major retail employer and served as a key compo-
nent of downtown Dubuque's final pre -World Warll building
expansion
The tallest building in the city, it remained remarkably intact
through 1970 when the department store relocated and the
building was converted to office use By 2008 with the loss
of major tenants, the Roshek Building was on the verge of
becoming a white elephant in the central downtown
Through the efforts of the City, the developer Dubuque Initiatives, Inc , and others, an ambitious and success-
ful turnaround for the building was achieved, beginning when IBM selected the city and the Roshek Building in
2009 for its new regional service headquarters A fast track rehabilitation of the building was essential, since
IBM would be creating 1,300 well - paying technical and support jobs by 2011
With a commitment to preserving the historic character of the building and making the building a model of
sustainability, rehabilitation work started in 2009, providing employment to more than 200 during the construc-
tion phase Cast -iron canopies, ornamental millwork, plaster ceilings and decorative columns were restored
or carefully replicated Historic steel windows and terrazzo floors were repaired and new system furniture
installed, providing desirable office space while respecting the building's historic open floor plan
Over $45 million in rehabilitation work took place, resulting in nearly 260,000 square feet of leasable space
Today, the first floor includes restaurants and retail stores with new businesses and others which relocated into
expanded spaces Besides the 1,300 new jobs at IBM, commercial and retail tenants in the building added
over 40 additional new jobs
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
Highlights for 2011
Estimated investment in historic rehabilitation
Rehabilitation costs (Part 2): $4.02 billion
Average cost of projects: $4.29 million
Number of approved applications (Part 2s): 937
Number of housing units sets new record
Number of housing units: 15,651
Rehabilitated housing units: 7,435
New housing units: 8,216
New low and moderate income housing units: 7,470
Job creation sets new record high
Average number of local jobs created per project:
Estimated number of local jobs created:
Program Accomplishments 1977 -2011
78
55,458
Number of historic rehabilitation projects certified (Part 3s): 38,075
Rehabilitation investment: $62.94 billion
Rehabilitated housing units: 231,486
New housing units: 209,913
Low and moderate income housing units: 117,975
Numbers used an this report are taken from the Part 1, 2, and 3 Hastorac Preservation Certcataon
Applications and voluntary User Profile and Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire
Federal Tax Incentives For Rehabilitating Historic Buildings 1977 -2011
6000
5000
...A4000
3000
lir
2000
1000
0
--Investment
Approved Part 2s
(dollars in millions)
Figure 1 above shows estimated rehabilitation investments and number of proposed projects approved by the National
Park Service.
Since the passage in 1976 of the first
Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating
Historic Buildings, there have been
a number of changes in the tax laws.
Notably, there was the Economic
Recovery Act of 1981 which resulted
in the most favorable incentives in the
program's history followed by the Tax
Reform Act of 1986 which reduced
the historic preservation tax credits
from 25% to 20% and imposed several
significant restrictions on all forms of
real estate investment.
LL
Choanke Area Development Association of North Carolina, Inc. has now
completed 3 senior housing projects using historic tax incentives: Wood-
land -Olney School Apartments, Ahoskie High School Apartments, and
Enfield School Apartments. In this rural, economically distressed area,
this would not have been possible without the rehabilitation tax incentives.
Jobs were created and much need standard housing has been provided.
Enfield NC
Foreword
The Historic Preservation Tax Incentives
program, administered by the National
Park Service in partnership with the
State Historic Preservation Offices,
is the nation's most effective Federal
program to promote both urban and
rural revitalization and encourage
private investment in historic building
rehabilitation. Since 1976, the tax
incentives have spurred the rehabilitation
of historic structures of every period,
size, style, and type. The incentives
have been instrumental in preserving
the historic places that give cities,
towns, and rural areas their special
character, and have attracted new private
investment to historic cores of cities
and towns. The tax incentives also
generate jobs, enhance property values,
create affordable housing, and augment
revenues for Federal, state, and local
governments. Through this program,
abandoned or underutilized schools,
warehouses, factories, churches, retail
stores, apartments, hotels, houses, and
offices throughout the country have been
restored to life in a manner that maintains
their historic character.
The tax credit applies specifically to
income - producing historic properties
and throughout its history has leveraged
many times its cost in private expendi-
tures on historic preservation. This pro-
gram is the largest Federal program spe-
cifically supporting historic preservation,
generating over $62 billion in historic
preservation activity since its inception
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
in 1976. During fiscal year (FY) 2011,
the National Park Service approved 937
proposed projects (Part 2 applications)
representing an estimated $4.02 billion
of investment being spent to restore and
rehabilitate historic buildings.
Over 38,000 projects to rehabilitate
historic buildings have been undertaken
in the past 35 years using the Federal
Historic Preservation Tax Incentives.
Rehabilitation work has taken place in
all 50 states, the District of Columbia,
the Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico.
The completed projects have brought
new life to deteriorated business and
residential districts, created new jobs and
new housing, and helped to ensure the
long -term preservation of irreplaceable
cultural resources.
In 1986, Congress amended the Federal
Tax Code, significantly reducing the
Federal tax incentives for historic
preservation and creating more stringent
rules for their use. The result was a
dramatic decline in activity. Starting
in the mid- 1990s, activity nationwide
rebounded, reaching record highs in
recent years in the amount of investment
dollars. While the recent downturn in
the economy in general, and the real
estate market in particular, has continued
to impact program activity in FY 2011,
the amount of rehabilitation investment
in proposed new projects increased 17%
surpassing the $4 billion mark for only
the fourth time in the program history.
(continued next page)
Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings 1
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
The average investment in completed
certified projects (Part 3 applications) in
FY 2011 was $4.88 million, the second
highest in program history.
During FY 2011, National Park Service
review of project submissions continued
to be undertaken by the Cultural
Resources, Technical Preservation
Services Branch, in Washington, DC.
To enhance customer service, Technical
Preservation Services maintains a Web
site, <http: // www.nps.gov /tps >, where
applicants, State Historic Preservation
Offices, and others can check the status
of projects online. In addition, the
certification application, guidance on
applying the Secretary of the Interior's
Technical Preservation Services
December, 2011
2 Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
Standards for Rehabilitation, and
technical information concerning the
treatment of historic buildings can be
found on the National Park Service Web
site.
This statistical report and analysis
was prepared by Kaaren Staveteig of
the Technical Preservation Services
Branch. Questions regarding the data
and analysis discussed may be addressed
to Ms. Staveteig by e -mail at < kaaren_
staveteig@nps.gov>. Special thanks
are due to the staff of the Technical
Preservation Services Branch for their
assistance in the preparation of this
report, particularly Charles Fisher,
Michael Auer, and Liz Petrella.
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
Table of Contents
Foreword 1 -2
States By Geographic Region 4
Preservation Tax Incentives Project Activity 5 -13
Estimated Future Investment
Certifications of Significance
Approvals of Proposed Rehabilitation Work
Certified Rehabilitation Projects
Investment by Region
Activity on a State -by -State Basis
Denials and Appeals 14
Ownership of Certified Rehabilitation Projects 15
Ownership and Size of Completed Projects
Uses of Rehabilitated Properties 16
Housing and Preservation 17
Use of Additional Incentives and Funding Assistance 18
State Historic Preservation Tax Incentives 20
Appendices:
Appendix A: Alphabetical List of State Activity in FY 2011 21
Appendix B: States Ranked by Approved Proposals (Part 2s)
in FY 2011 22
Appendix C: States Ranked by Certified Projects (Part 3s)
in FY 2011 23
Appendix D: States Ranked by Certified Expenses
in FY 2011 24
Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings 3
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
States By Geographic Region
for Purposes of Statistical Reporting and Analysis
Figure 2
States listed by Geographic Regions: Southeast:
Alabama
Arkansas
Flanda
Georgia
Northeast: Kentucky
Mountain/Plains: Connecticut Louisiana
Colorado Delaware Mississippi
Mmois Indiana North Carohna
Iowa Maine Puerto Rico
Kansas Maryland South Carohna
Minnesota Massachusetts Tennessee
Missouri Michigan Virgm Islands
Montana New Hampshire
Nebraska New Jersey Far West:
New Mexico New York Alaska
North Dakota Ohio Arizona
Oklahoma Pennsylvania California
South Dakota Rhode Island Hawau
Texas Vermont Idaho
Wisconsin Virginia Nevada
Wyommg Washington DC Oregon
Utah West Vi gima Washmgton
4 Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
Preservation Tax Incentives Project Activity
Reflecting the downturn in the economy
in recent years, and in particular the real
estate market, the number ofrehabilitation
projects utilizing the historic tax credits
continued the general decline which
has occurred over the past three years
Despite this decline, in FY 2011 there
was some very positive economic news,
as the total amount of rehabilitation
investment in proposed rehabilitation
projects increased 17% to $4 02 billion
and the average investment in certified
rehabilitation projects rose 25% to $4 88
million FY 2011 set a significant record
for the program with the average number
of jobs created per project rising to 78, a
15% increase over the previous record
The Historic Preservation Tax Incentives
program remains an outstanding means
of leveraging private investment in
the adaptive reuse and preservation
of historic buildings The program
continues to be a major stimulus for
economic recovery in older communities
throughout the nation, including an
estimated 55,458 jobs created last year
in certified rehabilitations across the
nation
Table 1 Projects & Expenses (Part 2 applicat ons) FY 2007 -2011
The Wilmont Building, Livingston, Montana
Historic Main Streets are an important part of the local economy in smaller
cities and towns, and the 20% Federal historic tax credits are being suc-
cessfully used to assist owners with meeting the cost of building reno-
vation During the past two years in Montana, more than $13 million in
project work along historic Main Streets was approved by the National
Park Service
The Wilmont Building on South Main Street in the Livingston Commercial
District is a good example of a local building being successfully reha-
bilitated, returning the building back to full use Before the project work
began, the only principal occupant was the Truex Furniture and Appliance
store, a locally -owned firm which utilized the lower floors while the upper
floors were unoccupied The recent rehabilitation work returned the upper
floors to their original use as apartments while providing upgraded retail space below Adding an
elevator for access and undertaking work to meet modern building codes, the owners repaired the
historic stairs, stripped lead paint off and refinished historic doors, and restored the principal historic
corridors Upon completion of the rehabilitation work, the 1902 Wllmont Building once again is fully
operational, with offices and apartments above the thriving furniture and appliance store
photo Dan Kaul
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Histonc Buildings
FY07
FY08
FY09
FY10
FY11
Approved Prolects (Part 2s)
1,045
1,231
1,044
951
937
Rehabilitation Expenses
On millions)
$4,346
$5,641
$4,697
$3,418
$4,023
Average Expense/Protect
On millions)
$4 16
$4 58
$4 49
$3 59
$4 29
Maximum Amount of Credit to be
Clazmed {inmillions)
$869
$1,128
$939
$684
$805
Average Credit/Project (approx)
$831,579
$916,328
$899,938
$718,885
$858,767
The Wilmont Building, Livingston, Montana
Historic Main Streets are an important part of the local economy in smaller
cities and towns, and the 20% Federal historic tax credits are being suc-
cessfully used to assist owners with meeting the cost of building reno-
vation During the past two years in Montana, more than $13 million in
project work along historic Main Streets was approved by the National
Park Service
The Wilmont Building on South Main Street in the Livingston Commercial
District is a good example of a local building being successfully reha-
bilitated, returning the building back to full use Before the project work
began, the only principal occupant was the Truex Furniture and Appliance
store, a locally -owned firm which utilized the lower floors while the upper
floors were unoccupied The recent rehabilitation work returned the upper
floors to their original use as apartments while providing upgraded retail space below Adding an
elevator for access and undertaking work to meet modern building codes, the owners repaired the
historic stairs, stripped lead paint off and refinished historic doors, and restored the principal historic
corridors Upon completion of the rehabilitation work, the 1902 Wllmont Building once again is fully
operational, with offices and apartments above the thriving furniture and appliance store
photo Dan Kaul
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Histonc Buildings
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
Estimated Future Investment
Two major events have impacted the
Historic Preservation Tax Incentives
program in the past 25 years. Changes
in the Federal tax law in 1986 led to a
dramatic decline between FY 1989 and
1993 in the estimated investment in new
historic rehabilitation projects throughout
the country. This trend was reversed
starting in FY 1994, as the number of
new projects steadily increased and the
amount of investment in new projects
reached a record high in FY 2008. Since
then, the downturn in the economy has
led to a general decline in approved
proposed projects. Within two years, the
amount of investment in proposed new
projects dropped 65% to $3.4 billion.
While the number of proposed new
projects decreased slightly in FY 2011,
the amount of proposed new investment
increased 17% to $4.02 billion, reversing
the previous two -year decline.
Table 2 Size of Approved Rehabilitation Projects (part 2s)
As Percentage of Total
COST
FY07
FY08
FY09
FY10
FY11
Less than
$20,000
1%
2%
0 5%
0 5%
1%
$20,000-
$99,999
8%
15%
8%
9 5%
7%
$100,000-
$249,999
15%
19%
17%
15 5%
13%
$250,000-
$499,999
19%
15%
17%
17 5%
18%
$500,000-
$999,999
15%
12%
14 5%
13%
12%
$1,000,000
and over
42%
37%
43%
44%
49%
TOTAL
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Certifications of Significance
Certifications of Historic Significance
(Part ls) are the first step in establishing
eligibility for the historic tax credit and
an early economic indicator for future
rehabilitation projects. A building must
be individually listed in the National
Register of Historic Places or be certified
as contributing to a registered historic
district (Part 1), in order to qualify for the
20% credit. Last year, 1,058 properties
were approved for Certification of
Historic Significance, a 7% increase
over the previous year. The National
6 Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
Park Service also certifies buildings as
nonsignificant, i.e., not contributing to
a National Register historic district.
A building that has been certified as
nonsignificant but was built before 1936
can qualify for a 10% tax credit if it is
rehabilitated for income - producing,
non - residential purposes. The National
Park Service also can certify State or
Local Historic Districts that are not
listed in the National Register. This
allows buildings in these districts to
qualify for tax credits if they meet other
cntena of contnbuting and being
income - producing, and the rehabilitation
meets the Secretary of the Intenor's
Standards for Rehabilitation In addition,
the Part 1 submissions are certified
where the applicant is seeking only to
take a charitable donation for a historic
preservation easement In such a case,
no Part 2 or 3 submissions are necessary
In FY 2011, there were 21 Certifications
of Significance for easement purposes, a
42% decline from the previous year
Table 3 Approved Certaficataons of Sagnaficarrce (Part Is)
REGION
FY07
FY08
FY09
FY 10
FY 11
NE
690
648
657
470
484
SE
303
356
309
242
301
MP
408
317
300
239
236
FW
30
44
103
32
37
TOTAL
1,431
1,365
1,369
983
1,058
photo Sadler &Whdehead RrchRects PLC
Kent Road Village, Richmond, Virginia
Buildings within a National Register historic district orwithin a complex of buildings that is individually
listed in the National Register need to individually contnbute to the histonc significance of the district
or listed property in order to qualify as a certified historic structure for historic tax credit purposes
The late 19th and early 20th century saw mass migration from rural to urban areas When built in
1943, the Kent Road Village apartment complex provided a unique opportunity for Richmond resi-
dents facing an acute wartime housing shortage Charactenzed by groups of two- and three -story
buildings harmoniously arranged in a landscaped, suburban setting, the buildings featured walk -up
apartments with central entrances, and floor plans that provided for ample light, ventilation, and
pleasant views, while allowing ready access to the outdoor space
Today Kent Road Village is a rare example of an intact WW II era garden apartment complex with
both buildings and the surrounding landscape retaining a high degree of integnty Utlizing the Fed-
eral histonc tax credits, a $2 7 million rehabilitation project was undertaken The original 11 buildings
were preserved with no extenor changes except for the removal of some contemporary shed addi-
tions The histonc features and finishes within the common spaces were also retained Intenor plan
changes occurred within 8 of the 88 units where new two -bed room units were created, otherwise,
the majority of the units retain their original configuratons
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
Federal Taos Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings 7
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
Approvals of Proposed Rehabilitation Work
In comparison to FY 2010, when
decreases in the number of approved
Part 2s occurred in three of the four
regions, in FY 2011 only the Northeast
region saw a decrease in activity. In
the Southeast region, which witnessed
a small increase in approved proposed
projects, Kentucky (aided by a state
historic tax credit) and Louisiana
(benefiting from both an enhanced
Federal historic tax credit of 26% due to
Federal disaster relief and state historic
tax incentives) had major increases of
16% and 41% respectively.
In the Mountain Plains region the number
of approved proposed projects was
essentually the same as the previous year.
However, a significant decline in the
number of approved projects in Missouri
masked the increases which otherwise
occurred in the large majority of the
states. Leading the way in the Mountain
Plains region were major increases in
approved proposed projects in Michigan
(61 %) and in Illinois (111 %). Other
states with significant increases in the
number of projects included Minnesota
and Iowa.
Table 4 Approved Proposals (Part 2s) by Geographic Regions FY 1988 -2011
REGION
FY88
FY89
FY90
FY91
FY92
FY93
FY94
FY95
NE
561
430
333
270
307
217
195
220
SE
271
321
295
214
224
145
178
204
MP
204
201
146
160
155
137
149
150
FW
56
42
40
34
33
39
38
47
TOTAL
1 092
994
814
678
719
538
560
621
REGION
FY96
FY97
FY98
FY99
FY00
FY01
FY02
FY03
NE
283
348
406
404
467
542
493
642
SE
208
219
384
315
319
408
399
320
MP
204
293
204
211
217
264
258
272
FW
29
42
42
43
62
62
52
36
TOTAL
724
902
1,036
973
1,065
1,276
1,202
1,270
REGION
FY04
FY05
FY06
FY07
FY08
FY09
FY10
NE
558
467
543
454
574
463
470
440
SE
286
217
289
252
251
251
230
244
MP
319
379
341
301
371
279
219
219
FW
37
38
80
38
35
51
32
34
TOTAL
1,200
1,101
1,253
1,045
1,231
1,044
951
937
Certified Rehabilitation Projects
Certifications of completed projects
(Part 3s) are issued only when all work
has been finished on a certified historic
building or building complex. These
approvals are the last administrative
actions taken by the National Park
Service for taxpayers eligible for the
historic rehabilitation tax credit. Due
8 Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
in part to the significantly large number
of designated historic buildings in the
Northeast region, that region continues to
lead the nation in certified projects (Part
3s), while the percentage breakdown by
region basically remained the same from
the previous year.
Table 5 Certification of Completed Work (Part 3s) by Region FY 2011
REGION
Ira
SE
1\4P J
FW
TOTAL
Number
308
161
212
30
100%
Percent
43%
23%
30%
4%
100%
Project review by the National Park
Service may extend over more than one
fiscal year, accounting for some of the
discrepancy in the number of Part 2s and
Part 3s received and approved in any
given year (see Table 6). Other factors
include projects with pending approvals,
phased projects, withdrawn projects,
and those not approved. The National
Park Service makes final decisions on
certification within 30 days of receipt of
a complete application. However, more
time may be required if the information
provided by the owner is incomplete.
Table 6 Comparisons of Proposed Projects (Part 2s) Received & Approved and
also Completed Projects (Part 3s) Received and Approved FY 2007-2011
Table 7 Summary of Regional Rehabilitation Activity for FY 2011
FY07
FY08
FY09
FY10
FY11
Part 2s
Received
1,228
1,278
1,138
1,003
1,006
Part 2s
Approved
1,045
1,231
1,044
951
937
Part 3s
Received
936
903
849
910
733
Part 3s
Approved
908
830
806
883
711
Table 7 Summary of Regional Rehabilitation Activity for FY 2011
The table above summarizes national
rehabilitation activity by geographic
region. During FY 2011, more Part 2s
and Part 3s were received and approved
from the Northeast than any other
region. With the largest number of
historic properties listed in the National
Register of Historic Places, the Northeast
continues to dominate the total certified
investment, accounting for nearly one-
half (49 %) of all project dollars.
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings 9
NE
SE
"IP
• FW
TOTAL
Part 2s
Received
467
248
253
38
1,006
2s
Approved
440
244
219
34
937
Part 3s
Received
323
186
199
25
733
Part 3s
Approved
308
161
212
30
711
Part 3
Investment
(in millions)
$1,706
51
$323 26
$1,154
71
$288 36
$3,472 84
The table above summarizes national
rehabilitation activity by geographic
region. During FY 2011, more Part 2s
and Part 3s were received and approved
from the Northeast than any other
region. With the largest number of
historic properties listed in the National
Register of Historic Places, the Northeast
continues to dominate the total certified
investment, accounting for nearly one-
half (49 %) of all project dollars.
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings 9
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
Rehabilitation investment is estimated on
the Part 2 application and submitted as
part of the information on the proposed
rehabilitation work. While work is
supposed to be completed within 24
months, projects can be phased under a
special 60 -month provision, or may be
otherwise delayed because of financing
or other reasons. Thus, the estimated
investment cannot be relied upon for
actual costs or activity in any given year.
Certified investment, reported on the
Part 3 of the application form, represents
the amount claimed as qualifying costs
associated with the rehabilitation and
does not include new construction costs.
Table 8 Rehabilitation Investment Since the Tax Reform Act of 1986
Rehabilitation Investments by Region
Estimated Investment
There was an increase last year in
estimated investment in three of the four
regions, reversing a two -year decline.
The $4.02 estimated investment was
Certified Investment
In FY 2011, the investment in certified
projects was the second highest in the
history of the program. The national
10 Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
the 5th highest in the program history.
The Mountain Plains region out paced
increases in the Northeast and Southeast
with a 38% upswing in investment.
average cost per completed project was
$4,811,533, representing a 25% increase
over the previous year.
FY86
FY87
FY88
FY89
FY90
FY91
FY92
FY93
FY94
Estimated
Investment
(in millions)
$1,661
$1,083
$865
$927
$750
$608
$491
$468
$641
Certified
Investment
(in millions)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
$735
$547
$483
FY95
FY96
FY97
FY98
FY99
FY00
FY01
FY02
FY03
Estimated
Investment
On millions)
$812
$1,130
$1,720
$2,085
$2,303
$2,602
$2,737
$3,272
$2,733
Certified
Investment
On millions)
$569
$757
$688
$694
$945
$1,676
$1,663
$2,110
$2,859
FY04
FY05
FY06
FY07
FY08
FY09
FY10
FY11
Estimated
Investment
(in millions)
$3'877
$3,127
$4,082
$4,346
$5,641
$4,697
$3,421
$4,023
Certified
Investment
On millions)
$2,204
$2,491
$2,776
$2,988
$3,272
$4,539
$3,438
$3,473
Rehabilitation Investments by Region
Estimated Investment
There was an increase last year in
estimated investment in three of the four
regions, reversing a two -year decline.
The $4.02 estimated investment was
Certified Investment
In FY 2011, the investment in certified
projects was the second highest in the
history of the program. The national
10 Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
the 5th highest in the program history.
The Mountain Plains region out paced
increases in the Northeast and Southeast
with a 38% upswing in investment.
average cost per completed project was
$4,811,533, representing a 25% increase
over the previous year.
Table 9 Estimated Investment by Region (in millions) FY 1988-2011
Regional project actzvaty continuer long -term trend
Since 1976 the Federal Historic Preservation Tax
Incentives have spurred the rehabilitation of his-
toric buildings all across the country The regional
breakout of rehabilitation investment for FY 2011
had the Northeast with the largest share and the
Far West the smallest The Mountain Plains con-
tinue to outpace the Southeast
photo Crosskey Architects WC
Clockwise from top left Hennessey Funeral Home, Portland, OR,
Walker Bank Building, Salt Lake City, UT, Daylight Building, Knoxville,
TN, and Cheney Mill Yarn Dye House, Manchester, CT
photo Daylight Partners, LLC
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings 11
FY88
FY89
FY90
FY91
FY92
FY93
FY94
FY95
FY96
FY97
FY98
FY99
NE
550
476
357
422
144
178
353
427
444
849
1,249
990
SE
74
218
135
41
84
18
152
122
240
245
355
355
MP
207
143
184
82
111
129
94
233
287
521
356
709
FW
35
90
74
65
152
81
42
30
159
113
124
248
TOTAL
866
927
750
610
491
406
641
812
1,130
1,728
2,085
2,303
FY00
FY01
FY02
FY03
FY04
FY05
FY06
FY07
FY08
FY09
FY10
FY11
NE
1,571
1,248
1,401
1,264
1,718
1,331
2,046
2,037
2,844
2,494
2,074
2,305
SE
195
520
467
408
376
453
427
541
944
709
400
429
MP
666
632
1,146
793
1,090
1,252
1,204
1,353
1,386
1,164
705
1,142
FW
170
337
258
268
693
91
405
414
467
330
242
147
TOTAL
2,602
2,737
3,272
2,733
3,877
3,127
4,082
4,345
5,641
4,697
3,421
4,023
Regional project actzvaty continuer long -term trend
Since 1976 the Federal Historic Preservation Tax
Incentives have spurred the rehabilitation of his-
toric buildings all across the country The regional
breakout of rehabilitation investment for FY 2011
had the Northeast with the largest share and the
Far West the smallest The Mountain Plains con-
tinue to outpace the Southeast
photo Crosskey Architects WC
Clockwise from top left Hennessey Funeral Home, Portland, OR,
Walker Bank Building, Salt Lake City, UT, Daylight Building, Knoxville,
TN, and Cheney Mill Yarn Dye House, Manchester, CT
photo Daylight Partners, LLC
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings 11
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
Table 10: Estimated Regional Investment as a Percentage
of Total Rehabilitation Expenditures: FY 1988 -2011 *
*Totals may not add up to 100% due to rounding
Proposed projects up in most of Mountain Plains states
Chemistry Research Building
Chicago, Illinois
Rehabilitation projects in Illinois were up 111 %from last year, the largest increase in the Midwest
Last fiscal year (2011), Illinois ranked number one in the nation in terms of rehabilitation expendi-
tures in completed projects with a total investment of over $365 million, representing over 10% of
the nationwide total of $3,472 billion
Formerly the Illinois Institute of Technology's Chemistry Research Building, this 1959 era building
was purchased by a private company for redevelopment Using the Federal historic tax credits, it
became the new home for a wet - and - dry-lab- capable research and development facility Work to
accommodate future tenants included installation of a new atrium, exterior wall and window reno-
vations, and new mechanical, electrical and plumbing services The creation of an atrium provides
a more modern, open interior and natural Tight that meets modern tenants' expectations as well as
allowed the primary facades to be preserved
Above before, Right after
photos Illinois Historic Preservation Agency
12 Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
FY88
FY89
FY90
FY91
FY92
FY93
FY94
FY95
FY96
FY97
FY98
FY99
NE
64%
51%
4g%
69%
29%
38%
55%
52%
39%
42%
60%
43%
SE
8%
24%
18%
7%
17%
17%
24%
15%
21%
16%
17%
15%
MP
24%
15%
25%
14%
22%
28%
15%
29%
25%
34%
17%
31%
FW
4%
10%
10%
11%
31%
17%
7%
4%
14%
7%
5%
11%
TOTAL
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
FY00
FY01
FY02
FY03
FY04
FY05
FY06
FY07
FY08
FY09
FY10
FY11
NE
60%
46%
43%
46%
44%
42/0
50%
47%
50%
53%
60%
57%
SE
7%
19%
14%
15%
10%
15%
11%
13%
17%
15%
12%
11%
MP
26%
23%
35%
29%
28%
40%
29%
31%
25%
25%
21%
28%
FW
7%
12%
8%
10%
18%
3%
10%
9%
8%
7%
7%
4%
TOTAL
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
*Totals may not add up to 100% due to rounding
Proposed projects up in most of Mountain Plains states
Chemistry Research Building
Chicago, Illinois
Rehabilitation projects in Illinois were up 111 %from last year, the largest increase in the Midwest
Last fiscal year (2011), Illinois ranked number one in the nation in terms of rehabilitation expendi-
tures in completed projects with a total investment of over $365 million, representing over 10% of
the nationwide total of $3,472 billion
Formerly the Illinois Institute of Technology's Chemistry Research Building, this 1959 era building
was purchased by a private company for redevelopment Using the Federal historic tax credits, it
became the new home for a wet - and - dry-lab- capable research and development facility Work to
accommodate future tenants included installation of a new atrium, exterior wall and window reno-
vations, and new mechanical, electrical and plumbing services The creation of an atrium provides
a more modern, open interior and natural Tight that meets modern tenants' expectations as well as
allowed the primary facades to be preserved
Above before, Right after
photos Illinois Historic Preservation Agency
12 Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
The regional share of rehabilitation
investment in certified proj ects, indicative
of the final cost of the rehabilitation work,
is shown in Table 11. The Northeast
continues to dominate the country with
49% of the nation's total investment
in certified projects reflecting, in part,
the large number of historic buildings
in the region potentially eligible for
historic preservation tax incentives. The
Mountain Plains increased to 8.5% while
the Southeast dropped to 4.5 %.
Table 11 Certified Rehabilitation Investment by Region (in millions)
FY 2007-2011
Activity Investment on a State -by -State Basis
Comparisons of state -by -state activity
may be made by referring to the lists in
the Appendices. Project activity occurred
in 49 states, Washington, DC, and the
Virgin Islands, with only Nevada and
Puerto Rico reporting no rehabilitation
projects in FY 2011.
Appendix B shows state ranking by
approved proposed projects (Part 2s). In
FY 2011, Virginia claimed the top spot
for the most approved projects. The
four states with the most rehabilitation
activity were Virginia (118), Missouri
(89), Louisiana (79), and New York
(69). Six of the ten states with the most
proposed preservation activity are in
the Northeast region (VA, MI, MA, NY,
OH, and MD); three are in the Southeast
region (LA, KY, and NC); and one in the
Mountain Plains (MO).
Twenty -four states had more proposed
projects approved in FY 2011 than
in FY 2010. These states included
Arkansas, California, Delaware, Florida,
Georgia, Iowa, Idaho, Illinois, Kentucky,
Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts,
Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, North
Dakota, Nebraska, New Hampshire,
New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, South
Dakota, Vermont, and West Virginia,
and also the Virgin Islands. When states
were ranked by the number of completed
projects certified (Part 3s) in FY 2011,
Missouri claimed the number one spot.
Appendix C ranks the states in descending
order by the number of certified projects.
For certified projects (Part 3s), states
ranking by investment dollars in FY 2011
(Appendix D), finds Illinois on top with
$365 million.
it
I think this program is a government incentive that actually works It preserves historic build-
ings while making such preservation economically viable
ITC applzcantfrom Oklahoma Czty
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings 13
FY07
i.
FY08
FY09
_' _'1_L;:
°;
FY11
NE
$1,411
(46 %)
$1,631
(50 %)
$2,157
(48 %)
$1,799
(53 %)
$1,706 (49 %)
SE
$434
(14 %)
$287
(9 %)
$1,032
(22 %)
$492
(14 %)
$323 (9 5 %)
MP
$951
(32 %)
$1,099
(33 %)
$896
(20 %)
$860
(25 %)
$1,154 (33 5 %)
FW
$242
(8 %)
$255
(8 %)
$452
(10 %)
$285
(8 %)
$288 (8 %)
TOTAL
$2,988
(100 %)
$3,272
(100 %)
$4,539
(100 %)
$3,438
(100 %)
$3,473 (100 %)
Activity Investment on a State -by -State Basis
Comparisons of state -by -state activity
may be made by referring to the lists in
the Appendices. Project activity occurred
in 49 states, Washington, DC, and the
Virgin Islands, with only Nevada and
Puerto Rico reporting no rehabilitation
projects in FY 2011.
Appendix B shows state ranking by
approved proposed projects (Part 2s). In
FY 2011, Virginia claimed the top spot
for the most approved projects. The
four states with the most rehabilitation
activity were Virginia (118), Missouri
(89), Louisiana (79), and New York
(69). Six of the ten states with the most
proposed preservation activity are in
the Northeast region (VA, MI, MA, NY,
OH, and MD); three are in the Southeast
region (LA, KY, and NC); and one in the
Mountain Plains (MO).
Twenty -four states had more proposed
projects approved in FY 2011 than
in FY 2010. These states included
Arkansas, California, Delaware, Florida,
Georgia, Iowa, Idaho, Illinois, Kentucky,
Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts,
Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, North
Dakota, Nebraska, New Hampshire,
New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, South
Dakota, Vermont, and West Virginia,
and also the Virgin Islands. When states
were ranked by the number of completed
projects certified (Part 3s) in FY 2011,
Missouri claimed the number one spot.
Appendix C ranks the states in descending
order by the number of certified projects.
For certified projects (Part 3s), states
ranking by investment dollars in FY 2011
(Appendix D), finds Illinois on top with
$365 million.
it
I think this program is a government incentive that actually works It preserves historic build-
ings while making such preservation economically viable
ITC applzcantfrom Oklahoma Czty
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings 13
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
Denials and Appeals
Projects are denied certification by the
National Park Service if they are found
not to meet the Secretary of Interior's
Standards for Rehabilitation. Meeting
the Standards is required to ensure that
the historic character of the building
is retained, a primary purpose of the
preservation tax credit. The Internal
Revenue Service disallows the tax credit
for projects without certification. If a
project is denied certification, the owner
may appeal the decision to the National
Park Service's Chief Appeals Officer.
In FY 2011, 1,058 certifications of
significance (Part ls) were approved,
and 26 were denied. For rehabilitation
projects, 39 were denied certification
(Part 2s and/or 3s), the lowest number in
more than 10 years. Thirty -one denials
were appealed to the Chief Appeals
Officers in FY 2011, with 28 being heard.
(Appeals are not necessarily heard in the
same fiscal year as the projects were
denied. The data presented here refers to
appeals heard during FY 2011.) During
the year 33 appeals were decided. Of
these, six denials were overturned,
14 were upheld outright, and 13 were
upheld with conditions. The ruling to
uphold a denial decision with conditions
allows the developer /owner the option to
make changes to bring the project into
conformance with the Secretary of the
Interior's Standards and then resubmit
the project for further consideration.
Table 12 Denials and Appeals Parts 2s and 3s FY 2002 -2011
Ownership of Certified Rehabilitation Projects
Information collected from the User
Profiles and Customers Satisfaction
Questionnaires sent to property owners
post- certification indicates that the limited
Table 13 Type of Ownership in FY 2011
liability company form of ownership is
the most common and is used in over half
of all projects.
Individual
FY02
FY03
FY04
FY05
FY06
.
FY07
FY08
FY09
FY10
FY11
Initial
Denials
52
51
46
45
48
52
43
54
49
39
Appeals
Decisions
29
30
18
24
20
23
19
30
31
33
Ownership of Certified Rehabilitation Projects
Information collected from the User
Profiles and Customers Satisfaction
Questionnaires sent to property owners
post- certification indicates that the limited
Table 13 Type of Ownership in FY 2011
liability company form of ownership is
the most common and is used in over half
of all projects.
Individual
Corporation
General
partnership
Limited
partnership
Limited liability
company
TOTAL
22%
6%
1%
9%
62%
100%
14 Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
Bringing vacant properties back to life
Baron & Company Cigar Building
Baltimore, Maryland
An invaluable financial tool for historic building rehabilitation, the Federal tax incentives help pre-
serve historic structures of every period, size, style, and type Abandoned or unoccupied schools,
warehouses, factories, churches, retail stores, apartments, hotels, houses, and offices throughout
the country have been given new life in a manner that maintains their historic character
The Baron & Company Cigar Building, Baltimore, Maryland, is an industrial -style building con-
structed in 1880 The local cigar company occupied the building until 1910 when a clothing manu-
facturer, the American Coat Pad Company, moved in Several decades later the apparel company
relocated and the budding became vacant In 2008 O'Connell &
Associates purchased the budding and began a rehabilitation proj-
ect using Federal historic tax credits Project work included saving
and restoring existing doors, replicating metal windows where the
originals had deteriorated too badly to be salvaged, and keeping the
original metal shutters The interior spaces were largely compatible
for light manufacturing, and were kept intact The $1,2 million proj-
ect was completed in 2011 and became the new home of Premiere
Rides, designers and suppliers of amusement park rides
photo National Park Service
Ownership and Size of Completed Projects
Table 14 shows the breakout of
projects by the amount of rehabilitation
investment developed under each type of
ownership. The largest groups investing
in tax incentive projects in FY 2011
were limited liability companies with
62% of all projects, individuals with
22 %, and limited partnerships with 9 %.
A wide distribution of project valuation
was posted in FY 2011 with the $20,000
- $99,999 range accounting for 6.5 %; the
$100,000 - $249,000 range comprising
14 %; and $250,000 - $499,999 range
accounting for 18 %; the $500,000
- $999,999 range accounting for 11.5 %,
and projects costing more than $1,000,000
making up over 49% of the total projects
rehabilitated within the program.
Table 14 Size of Projects By Ownership Type as a Percentage of Reported
Projects from Customer Questionnaire in FY 2011
Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Histo
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
is Buildings 15
<$20,000
$20,000-
$99,999
$100,000-
$249,999
$250,000-
$499,999
$500,000 -
$999,999
x$1,000,000
TOTAL
Owner
Individual
0%
4 5%
4 5%
7%
3%
3%
22%
Corporation
0%
0%
2%
0%
0%
4%
6%
General
partnership
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
0%
1%
Limited
partnership
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
9%
9%
Limited
liability co
1%
2%
6 5%
11%
8 5%
33%
62%
TOTAL
1%
6 5%
14%
18%
11 5%
49%
100%
Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Histo
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
is Buildings 15
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
Table 15 Comparison of Percentage of All Certified Projects in
Each Size Category FY 2007-2011
Primary Uses of Rehabilitated Properties
The following table (Table 16) shows the customer questionnaires. Of projects
final primary use of projects certified over reporting housing as a final primary use,
the past five fiscal years as drawn from 69% were for multiple - family housing.
Table 16 Uses of Certified Rehabilitation Projects FY 2007 -2011
<$20,000
$20,000-
$99,999
$100,000-
$249,999
$250,000-
$499,999
$500,000-
$999,999
x$1,000,000
TOTAL
FY11
0 5%
8%
13%
19%
15 5%
44%
100%
FY10
0 5%
5%
30%
14%
12 5%
38%
100%
FY09
0%
8%
12 5%
9 5%
15%
55%
100%
FY08
0%
5%
15%
17%
10%
53%
100%
FY07
1%
7 5%
12%
18%
17 5%
44%
100%
Primary Uses of Rehabilitated Properties
The following table (Table 16) shows the customer questionnaires. Of projects
final primary use of projects certified over reporting housing as a final primary use,
the past five fiscal years as drawn from 69% were for multiple - family housing.
Table 16 Uses of Certified Rehabilitation Projects FY 2007 -2011
Table 17 Percentage of Projects Listing Uses After Rehabilitation by
Region in FY 2011
FY07
FY08
FY09
FY10
FY11
Housing
45%
40%
36%
43%
69%
Office
21%
23%
25%
23%
16%
Commercial
27%
34%
31%
24%
3%
Other
7%
3%
8%
10%
12%
Table 17 Percentage of Projects Listing Uses After Rehabilitation by
Region in FY 2011
16 Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
Housing
Office
Commercial
Other
Total
NE
37%
29%
25%
9%
100%
SE
49%
15%
21%
15%
100%
MP
54%
13%
18%
15%
100%
FW
26%
21%
19%
34%
100%
16 Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
Record number of new affordable housing units
Beattyville School Apartments
Beattyville, Kentucky
Besides preserving historic buildings and promoting community revitalization, the Federal Preser-
vation Tax Incentives program has led to the creation of 117,975 low and moderate income housing
units Over the years, the number of affordable housing units has continued to rise In 1993, only
19% of the total 8,236 housing units in that year aided by the historic tax credits were specifically
targeted for affordable housing In FY2011, a record number of 7,470 low and moderate income
housing units representing 48% of the total 15,651 housing units were
in approved historic tax credit projects
Historic school buildings in older communities often have outserved
their intended use yet, remain important to a community's sense of
time and place Historic tax credits have proven to be an important
incentive to returning vacant and underutilized school buildings back
into productive new use, often as affordable housing
The Beattyville School in Beattyville, Kentucky, was built in 1926 and
for 40 years served the small town as a learning center for children in
grades 1 -12 In 1940, it also became home to the first educational ra-
dio station in the country, WBKY, owned and operated by the University
of Kentucky By the early 1970s, the school had closed and the build-
ing had been converted into the local board of education administrative
and maintenance facility
In 2008, the school property was purchased by AU Associates of Lexington, Kentucky, and soon
the building was being converted to provide
18 affordable housing units in the community
Having a proven track record of historic school
rehabilitations, AU Associates considered the
historic interior of the school to be an attractive
and desirable feature to help foster a distinc-
tive place for people to live They preserved
the wide hallways along with the glazed door
transoms and sidelights, converted class-
rooms to apartments, and retained the audito-
rium for resident use and community activities
photos Holly B Wiedemann, AU Associates
The $2 5 million rehabilitation of Beattyvllle
School is one of eight historic school buildings
across Kentucky which AU Associates has de-
veloped in the past 10 years for affordable housing utilizing the historic tax credits, including prot-
ects in Glasgow, Buffalo, Winchester, Irvine, Louisville, and Covington, Kentucky
Housing and Preservation
The Historic Preservation Tax Incentives
program has been an invaluable tool
in both the revitalization of historic
communities and neighborhoods and in
the increased public awareness of the
importance of preserving tangible links
to the nation's past In many cases, the
rehabilitation of one key building has
resulted in the rehabilitation of adjacent
buildings Housing has been the single
most important use for rehabilitated
historic buildings under the Historic
Preservation Tax Incentives program
Over the past five years, between 36%
and 69% of the projects have included
housing Since the program began, the
National Park Service has approved the
rehabilitation of 224,051 housing units
and creation of 209,913 new units In FY
2011, 15,651 housing units were approved,
including 7,435 housing units rehabilitated
and 8,216 new units Table 18 shows
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Histonc Buildings 17
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
the total number of housing units
proposed, including those rehabilitated
and new housing over the past decade.
One of the objectives of the program
is the retention of affordable housing
in historic districts, particularly for
longtime residents. Various Department
of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) programs, such as the low -
income housing tax credits, have been
used by private investors in conjunction
with preservation tax credits to achieve
this goal. Over the past 35 years, the
National Park Service has approved,
for purposes of the historic tax credits,
117,975 low and moderate income
housing units. Data from the User
Profile and Customer Satisfaction
Questionnaire show that in FY 2011,
5.5% of the respondents used the low -
income rental housing credit.
Table 18 Historic Rehabilitation Projects Involving Housing FY 2002 -2011
i .
Number
of Housing
Units
Number
of Units
Rehabilitated
New Units
Number of
Low/Moderate
Units
Percentage of
Low/Moderate
Units to Total
Number of
Housing Units
FY11
15,651
7,435
8,216
7,470
48%
FY10
13,273
6,643
6,630
5,514
42%
FY09
13,743
5,764
7,979
6,710
49%
FY08
17,051
6,659
10,392
5,220
31%
FY07
18,006
6,272
11,734
6,553
36%
FY06
14,695
6,411
8,284
5,622
38%
FY05
14,438
5,469
8,969
4,863
34%
FY04
15,784
5,738
10,046
5,357
34%
FY03
15,374
5,715
9,659
5,485
36%
FY02
13,886
5,615
8,271
5,673
41%
Use of Additional Incentives and Funding Assistance
Using Federal historic preservation tax
credits generally does not preclude the use
of other Federal, state, or local funding
sources, or other programs designed to
encourage rehabilitation. Information
from the User Profile and Customer
Satisfaction Questionnaire indicates
that 94.5% of the projects used one or
18 Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
more forms of additional incentives or
publicly - supported financing in FY 2011.
Of the additional incentives, 48 %utilized
state historic preservation tax incentives
and 5.5% used the low- income housing
credit. Other incentives included the
HUD programs such as HOME, Insured
continued on page 20
0
0
0
1
0
I
Seising a neap standarcl for economic revitalisation
Columbus, Ohio
The Federal Historic Tax Incentives promote
not only the preservation and rehabilitation of
historic buildings, but also the revitalization of
older communities Columbus, Ohio, is well
known for its historic neighborhood districts
and a downtown commercial center with a
large concentration of historic buildings With
a population of 800,000, the city has more
than 20 historic districts
Community Properties of Ohio, a subsidiary
of the nonprofit Ohio Capital Corporation for
Housing, recently completed a multi -year
citywide rehabilitation of 71 historic buildings
in seven urban historic neighborhoods, utilizing the historic tax credits Their overall effort cen-
tered on the acquisition and subsequent rehabilitation of 209 buildings of Section 8 housing,
the majority of which were located in neighborhoods suffering from disinvestment and criminal
activity One neighborhood with a significant concentration of these properties is adjacent to the
Ohio State University, which served as a critical partner in this reinvestment effort
photo Judy W iilliarns
photo Community Properties of Ohio
The portfolio within these seven communities con-
sisted of vacant buildings and dilapidated housing,
with units in extremely poor physical condition The
revitalization and preservation of the existing Sec-
tion 8 housing was considered key to helping sta-
bilize and stimulate community renewal All historic
buildings were certified as completed rehabilitations
by the National Park Service
The renovation work included groups of historic
buildings and other scattered site properties, with
varying architecture and building materials Missing
porches were replaced and exterior repairs made,
which along with new landscaping, blended into and
contributed to the stability of the respective city neighborhoods At the same time the interiors of
the affordable housing units were modernized, adding amenities that were previously nonexis-
tent such as showers and air conditioning Residents who had been temporarily relocated while
the work took place were provided the opportunity to return to the newly renovated buildings
The award - winning work of Community Properties of Ohio (CPO) did not end following the
investment of more than $100 million in the project As the quality of housing improved, CPO
established a 501(c)3 non - profit foundation, CPO Impact, and began to focus on building resi-
dent relationships with community partnerships to address resident needs, stabilize housing,
increase neighborhood safety, and identify ways to help residents move beyond poverty
CPO Impact has partnered with local law enforcement to
launch a public safety program, help send kids to summer
camp, implemented an at -risk resident program, added se-
nior /disabled supportive services, as well as many other
programs which support their resident and community ob-
jectives
photo Community Properties of Ohio
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings 19
Statistical
Report and
Analysis for
Fiscal Year
2011
Loan Programs and the Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG); New
Market Tax Credit Program (NMTC); Tax
Increment Financing (TIF); Brownfields
Economic Development Initiative
Grant; and USDA Rural Development
Loan Programs. Local property tax/ad
valorum tax abatement was used by 15%
of the respondents, and low interest loans
through their cities were obtained by 3 %.
Table 19 Other Incentives Used In Addition to Preservation
Tax Credits in FY 2011 *
None
5 5%
Low -income Rental Housing Credits
5 5%
Local Property Tax/Ad Valorum Tax
Abatement
15%
Historic Preservation Easement
1%
Facade Grant Program
4%
State Historic Preservation Tax Incentives
48%
HUD Program
6 5%
Low Interest Loan
3%
Local Historic Preservation Tax Credits
0%
Other
11 5%
*Many projects used more than one type of program This is reflected in the percent-
age rates above This data is taken from the questionnaire voluntarily returned by
property owners
State Historic Preservation Tax Incentives
Many states offer state tax incentives
of various kinds for preservation
rehabilitation projects. Over 48% of the
projects receiving Part 3 certification also
used state historic tax credits in FY 2011.
At least 30 states offer state income tax
credits, including: Arkansas, Colorado,
Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Indiana,
Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts,
Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi,
Missouri, Montana, New Mexico, New
York, North Carolina, North Dakota,
Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah,
Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, and
20 Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
Wisconsin. Property tax relief is available
for qualified projects through statewide
programs in Alabama, Arizona, Georgia,
Illinois, Indiana, Nebraska, Michigan,
Oregon, and South Dakota. Half of the
states offer property tax relief as a local
option. These states include: Alaska,
California, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii,
Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts,
Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri,
Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey,
New York, North Carolina, North Dakota,
South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, and
Washington.
Appendix A: Alphabetical List of State Activity in FY 2011
State
Part 1 R*
Part 2 R*
Part 3 R*
Part 1 A **
Part 2 A **
Part 3 A **
Certified Expense
Average
Expense
AK
0
0
0
0
0
0
$0.00
$0.00
AL
13
5
5
8
5
4
$5,635,214.00
$1,408,803.50
AR
16
10
10
16
11
9
$13,114,147.00
$1,457,127.44
AZ
14
2
0
10
1
1
$5,600,000.00
$5,600,000.00
CA
18
19
14
16
15
15
$213,143,571.00
$14,209,571.40
CO
3
6
4
1
2
3
$1,103,897.00
$367,965.67
CT
19
5
4
19
3
5
$92,561,630.00
$18,512,326.00
DC
6
2
4
4
2
4
$33,863,224.00
$8,465,806.00
DE
2
2
12
1
2
12
$37,666,321.00
$3,138,860.08
FL
23
19
7
21
14
6
$5,589,882.00
$931,647.00
GA
27
29
17
27
23
16
$33,521,098.00
$2,095,068.63
H I
0
0
0
0
1
0
$0.00
$0.00
IA
30
29
25
30
27
27
$161,924,069.00
$5,997,187.74
ID
0
2
1
0
3
3
$6,377,610.00
$2,125,870.00
IL
22
26
10
26
21
13
$365,424,124.00
$28,109,548.00
IN
7
5
8
6
3
8
$7,305,134.00
$913,141.75
KS
33
29
20
29
22
17
$34,512,157.00
$2,030,126.88
KY
47
44
32
45
46
28
$19,637,125.00
$701,325.89
LA
100
76
41
89
79
29
$85,769,605.00
$2,957,572.59
MA
53
51
25
47
48
20
$104,222,495.00
$5,211,124.75
MD
42
33
20
40
29
20
$71,081,795.00
$3,554,089.75
ME
12
13
6
12
12
6
$28,459,790.00
$4,743,298.33
MI
51
52
27
44
50
22
$151,025,883.00
$6,864,812.86
MN
21
16
2
19
15
2
$32,077,684.00
$16,038,842.00
MO
86
94
93
79
89
99
$330,838,654.00
$3,341,804.59
MS
36
19
21
31
19
23
$41,820,328.00
$1,818,275.13
MT
5
2
2
5
4
2
$8,041,612.00
$4,020,806.00
NC
53
39
42
55
37
38
$89,712,744.00
$2,360,861.68
N D
1
2
0
1
1
0
$0.00
$0.00
NE
8
8
3
8
7
7
$55,418,927.00
$7,916,989.57
N H
0
1
0
0
1
0
$0.00
$0.00
NJ
10
8
4
7
7
5
$31,750,125.00
$6,350,025.00
NM
0
2
3
0
3
3
$21,120,431.00
$7,040,143.67
NV
0
0
0
0
0
0
$0.00
$0.00
NY
58
73
17
60
69
15
$298,071,761.00
$19,871,450.73
OH
39
35
29
39
36
30
$266,166,006.00
$8,872,200.20
OK
11
7
5
9
6
6
$45,214,906.00
$7,535,817.67
OR
7
10
6
6
10
7
$48,211,580.00
$6,887,368.57
PA
41
26
38
38
19
35
$305,466,790.00
$8,727,622.57
PR
0
0
0
0
0
0
$0.00
$0.00
RI
6
7
17
5
6
16
$110,540,998.00
$6,908,812.38
SC
3
2
6
2
2
5
$12,536,733.00
$2,507,346.60
SD
7
7
6
5
5
5
$8,772,396.00
$1,754,479.20
TN
10
5
4
7
7
3
$15,925,000.00
$5,308,333.33
TX
10
8
2
8
7
4
$21,124,993.04
$5,281,248.26
UT
2
3
5
2
1
6
$19,844,215.00
$3,307,369.17
VA
135
124
97
129
118
97
$161,423,815.00
$1,664,163.04
VI
0
0
1
0
1
0
$0.00
$0.00
VT
25
23
7
25
23
7
$4,347,804.00
$621,114.86
WA
5
5
4
5
4
4
$15,028,199.00
$3,757,049.75
WI
14
13
18
13
8
17
$49,247,758.00
$2,896,926.94
WV
8
7
8
8
12
6
$2,558,458.00
$426,409.67
WY
1
1
1
1
1
1
$39,990.00
$39,990.00
1140
1006
733
1058
937
711
$3,472,840,678.04
* Received ** Approved
21
Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
Appendix B: States Ranked by Approved Proposals (Part 2s) in FY2O11
Rank
State
Part 2 Approved
1
VA
118
2
MO
89
3
LA
79
4
NY
69
5
MI
50
6
MA
48
7
KY
46
8
NC
37
9
OH
36
10
MD
29
11
IA
27
12
GA
23
12
VT
23
13
KS
22
14
I L
21
15
MS
19
15
PA
19
16
CA
15
16
MN
15
17
FL
14
18
ME
12
18
WV
12
19
AR
11
20
OR
10
21
WI
8
22
NE
7
22
NJ
7
22
TN
7
22
TX
7
23
OK
6
23
RI
6
24
AL
5
24
SD
5
25
MT
4
25
WA
4
26
CT
3
26
ID
3
26
IN
3
26
NM
3
27
CO
2
27
DC
2
27
DE
2
27
SC
2
28
AZ
1
28
ND
1
28
NH
1
28
UT
1
28
VI
1
28
WY
1
28
HI
1
29
AK
0
29
NV
0
29
PR
0
937
22 Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
Appendix C: States Ranked by Certified Projects (Part 3s) in FY2011
ank
Rank
State
Part 3
Approvals
1
M O
99
2
VA
97
3
NC
38
4
PA
35
5
OH
30
6
LA
29
7
KY
28
8
IA
27
9
MS
23
10
M I
22
11
MA
20
11
MD
20
12
KS
17
12
WI
17
13
GA
16
13
RI
16
14
CA
15
14
NY
15
15
I L
13
16
DE
12
17
AR
9
18
IN
8
19
NE
7
19
OR
7
19
VT
7
20
FL
6
20
M E
6
20
OK
6
20
UT
6
20
WV
6
21
CT
5
21
NJ
5
21
SC
5
21
SD
5
22
AL
4
22
DC
4
22
TX
4
22
WA
4
23
CO
3
23
ID
3
23
N M
3
23
TN
3
24
M N
2
24
MT
2
25
AZ
1
25
WY
1
26
AK
0
26
HI
0
26
N D
0
26
N H
0
26
NV
0
26
PR
0
26
VI
0
711
Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings 23
Appendix D: States Ranked by Certified Expenses in FY2011
Rank
State
Part 3
A royal
PP
Certified Expense
1
IL
13
$365,424,124.00
2
MO
99
$330,838,654.00
3
PA
35
$305,466,790.00
4
NY
15
$298,071,761.00
5
OH
30
$266,166,006.00
6
CA
15
$213,143,571.00
7
IA
27
$161,924,069.00
8
VA
97
$161,423,815.00
9
MI
22
$151,025,883.00
10
RI
16
$110,540,998.00
11
MA
20
$104,222,495.00
12
CT
5
$92,561,630.00
13
NC
38
$89,712,744.00
14
LA
29
$85,769,605.00
15
MD
20
$71,081,795.00
16
NE
7
$55,418,927.00
17
WI
17
$49,247,758.00
18
OR
7
$48,211,580.00
19
OK
6
$45,214,906.00
20
MS
23
$41,820,328.00
21
DE
12
$37,666,321.00
22
KS
17
$34,512,157.00
23
DC
4
$33,863,224.00
24
GA
16
$33,521,098.00
25
MN
2
$32,077,684.00
26
NJ
5
$31,750,125.00
27
ME
6
$28,459,790.00
28
TX
4
$21,124,993.04
29
NM
3
$21,120,431.00
30
UT
6
$19,844,215.00
31
KY
28
$19,637,125.00
32
TN
3
$15,925,000.00
33
WA
4
$15,028,199.00
34
AR
9
$13,114,147.00
35
SC
5
$12,536,733.00
36
SD
5
$8,772,396.00
37
MT
2
$8,041,612.00
38
IN
8
$7,305,134.00
39
ID
3
$6,377,610.00
40
AL
4
$5,635,214.00
41
AZ
1
$5,600,000.00
42
FL
6
$5,589,882.00
43
VT
7
$4,347,804.00
44
WV
6
$2,558,458.00
45
CO
3
$1,103,897.00
46
WY
1
$39,990.00
47
AK
0
$0.00
47
HI
0
$0.00
47
ND
0
$0.00
47
NH
0
$0.00
47
NV
0
$0.00
47
PR
0
$0.00
47
VI
0
$0.00
711
$3,472,840,678.04
24 Federal Tax Incentives for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings