Promoting Climate Resilience and Housing through the ACHP w/ Sara Bronin

Nakita Reed (00:00.078)
We have this overall feeling as preservationists that these places have to be reused and reuse requires modernization. The question for us as preservationists, I think, across the field, but including in this program comment discussion, is how do you ensure that we have all the best parts of the historic places we love while we are actually improving them for the future and making sure they can be used for many, many years to come?

Nakita Reed (00:30.286)
Welcome Tangible Remnants. I'm Nakita Reed, and this is my show where I explore the interconnectedness of architecture, preservation, sustainability, race, and gender. I'm excited that you're here, so let's get into it. Welcome back. This week's episode features a conversation with Sara Bronin, the chair of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, also known as the ACHP. In this episode, she shares her journey through the profession

and her interest in historic preservation. She discusses the intersection of architecture and law, specifically focusing on property law and land use law. Chair Bronin explains the role of the ACHP as the Federal Historic Preservation Agency and its regulatory and policy functions. She highlights the recent program comment on accessible, climate resilient, and connected communities, which aims to accelerate the creation of housing and

promote energy efficient and climate friendly buildings and transportation. This was such a fun conversation. And one of the main takeaways for me from this conversation is really the importance of public involvement in the Section 106 process. As you'll hear in the episode, the public comment period for the program comments we discuss is now open through October 9th, 2024. You can send written feedback or questions via email directly to program underscore alternatives.

at achp .gov. So be sure to check out the show notes for links to get more information on this important legislation. For longtime listeners, the ACHP may be familiar to you already because we've had previous guests, including Ira Matt and Susan Gilmcher, on to talk about the work that they're doing at the agency as well. So we'll be sure to link to those in the show notes as well so that you can learn more about the impressive work that this agency does.

So within the episode, we're going to get into her journey a little bit, but let me just share a quick bio with you so you have more context about who Sarah Bronin is before we jump into the episode. So Sarah Bronin was confirmed by unanimous consent by the United States Senate in December of 2022 to serve as the 12th chair of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. A Mexican -American, she is the first person of color to serve in this position.

Nakita Reed (02:50.828)
Chair Bronin is on leave from her tenured position at Cornell University, where she serves as professor in the College of Architecture, Art and Planning, professor in the Rubacho Department of Real Estate, an associate faculty member of the law school, and a member of the graduate faculty in the field of architecture. Chair Bronin received a JD from Yale Law School and a master's of science in economic and social history from the University of Oxford.

where she was a Rhodes Scholar and received a Bachelor of Architecture and Bachelor of Arts in the Plan to Liberal Arts Honor Program from the University of Texas at Austin. So as you can hear, she is incredibly credentialed and knowledgeable and just so impressive. And I'm so grateful that we had some time to connect and she could share more with me about the work that the ACHP is doing. And I'm even more excited to be able to share this episode with you to help spread the word about the initiatives that the ACHP is doing.

so that we can really get more people involved in this process. So without further ado, please enjoy this conversation between me and Sarah Bronin.

So here we are. I'm excited that you were on the show and I would love for you to share with our listeners your journey through the profession and kind of what got you interested in the work that you're doing now. Well, I started off in architecture school, learning a bit about how buildings are put together and a historic preservation studio in my fourth out of five years really piqued my interest. It focused on urban infill in

Turkey and Bosnia and culminated in a trip to Mostar, Bosnia, where we helped the local government do measure drawings of buildings. so being able to apply some architecture skills to real life building analysis that then in the ensuing years has apparently helped restore many of those sites which had been ravaged during the war.

Nakita Reed (04:56.598)
I think was my first interest in historic preservation and in that process of documenting the past in the hopes that it could be reused for the future. So from there, after architecture school, I was interested in law school. went to graduate school and then law school and wrote my thesis in graduate school on Washington, DC's historic districts and focused too in law school on urban legal history.

planning and zoning laws and then started off my legal career as a professor teaching historic preservation law. So the thread really started though in measuring those buildings out in Bosnia. That's wild. I also, love the thread of you realizing kind of how all the things are connected because when you started the story talking about, it's an architecture school went then did preservation. was not expecting to say, yeah.

taught preservation law after doing law school. I love how you were able to connect those. And so I guess for the law piece of it, did you always know that you wanted to do specifically preservation law or were you thinking of dabbling in other types of law as well? Well, as a professor, I focus broadly on property law. within that are some subcategories of law, I guess you could think about it that way, that I especially focus on, which are land use and historic preservation.

And within this category of land use law, you include zoning laws, laws like covenants that are privately made and imposed by property owners on their own property, subdivision, inland wetlands rules, any sort of rules about the way land is used, and then historic preservation being maybe a subset of land use or maybe a subset of property, but really an area of law that cuts across administrative law, what I'm doing to the federal government now.

cuts across local laws, including local land marking laws, the designation process, which happens at the state, federal, and local levels. And I guess the running theme in all of those is these are all laws that affect the built environment, that affect the way our communities are developed, that affect the way our buildings are developed, that affect the way people experience space in their everyday lives. so I think for me, when I say as a law professor, which is my normal job,

Nakita Reed (07:20.106)
I usually say I'm a property law professor. all of the aspects of property law that are encompassed in that, including constitutional rights, but including, as I said, land use law in particular. That is fascinating. I also, love the fact that it's talking about the law piece of it, because there are so many architects who I meet who think that preservation is just a hobby. They don't realize that there's actually federal regulations and laws in place, and guidelines and all of those things that...

really guide the preservation process. And so I know now you are at the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation. And we've had previous guests who've worked there, including Ira Matt and Susan Giltcher. But I would love for you to share with our listeners kind of what took you to the ACHP. And then we'll start talking about some of the work that's happening there now. So the ACHP is the Federal Historic Preservation Agency.

It is independent of any other agency and includes in its council 10 other federal agencies as well as individual presidential appointees and representatives of organizations totaling 24 members. As the chair, I'm the only full -time member and I am a presidential appointee that has gone through the Senate confirmation process. only the second full -time

Presidentially Appointed Chair of the Advisory Council, which has existed since 1966. So you can see that that was a pretty recent change. And what interested me in the council is that it has an incredible scope in terms of its regulatory scope. It oversees the Section 106 review process, which we may get a chance to talk a little bit more about. But essentially that

tells federal agencies that they have to take historic properties into account when they do certain undertakings. And it also has the potential to be very influential in policy development, not just at the federal level, but at the state and local levels too. And that's something that's written into the National Historic Preservation Act, both the regulatory function and the policy function, including

Nakita Reed (09:36.842)
the mandate that the ACHP advised state and local governments. So I really saw the opportunity to serve as the second full -time chair of this agency to be an opportunity to shape federal historic preservation policy and to ensure that our very small agency was empowered and recognized among other federal agencies, among decision makers in Congress and the White House.

And even at the state and local government levels, that as an important force for preservation in the way that the National Historic Preservation Act envisioned it, which is preservation in balance with other economic, environmental and social goals. And I know some of the most recent work that's been coming out of the ACHP is doing just that. Why don't we talk a little bit more, rather...

If you could talk a little bit more about the program comments and other measures that are out now and I believe open for public comment until October 9th. Absolutely. So last month we released a program comment on accessible climate resilient and connected communities. This program comment aims to affect undertakings in the parlance of section 106 across all federal agencies.

in three specific areas. The first area is housing, which as preservationists know, has very strong links to preservation in that we in this country rehabilitate a lot of older buildings for housing. We rehabilitate existing housing using preservation rules oftentimes. And we all recognize that we need more housing.

In fact, the ACHP released a housing and historic preservation policy statement in 2023 that said, hey, we as an agency should look at our own section 106 rules to try to figure out ways that we can accelerate the creation of housing. And the first part of the program comment aims to do that. The second and third parts of this program comment relate to what we were calling climate smart buildings. And the third part, climate friendly transportation and

Nakita Reed (11:50.926)
Both of these ideas are really embedded in another policy statement that the advisory council adopted in 2023, one on climate change and historic preservation. And that policy statement that we adopted as a council together and developed with public input said that, again, hey, as an agency, we the ACHP need to figure out how we can streamline our own process to facilitate buildings

that are energy efficient, that are electrified, that use clean energy, and that are resilient to climate risks. And then at the same time, we need to identify ways to streamline our Section 106 process to promote what we called in that policy statement, climate -friendly transportation. That means pedestrian and biking infrastructure. It means micro -mobility improvements. It means improvements to transit infrastructure.

And so you see in the program comment, our attempt in a draft to take some of these ideas, to include them in the program comment and to identify really specific activities that should receive accelerated reviews under our review process. The program comment really provides a template for federal agencies to follow when they are conducting the activities that are listed in the program comment.

And what we want to know from the public is, these activities look like the kinds of activities that preservationists should be supporting and facilitating and accelerating through the Section 106 process? One of the key things the public will tell us, I believe, is whether these activities will have adverse effects on historic places, which is something that the Section 106 process generally tries to identify and

ultimately resolve. And that's super exciting because one of the things to just to kind of give a little bit more context for some listeners, whenever any federal money is being used, then that's kind of starts triggering the undertaking or we have to go through section 106. But some of the comments that I was hearing about was that, let's say someone is using federal money to kind of adaptively reuse an interior apartment unit, like they want to add grab bars to a bathroom or something like that.

Nakita Reed (14:14.402)
before they would have to go through the entire process. It would be a long process to be able to get that approval. But it sounds like with this, there could be an opportunity for that approval to be streamlined and go through much faster. Are those some of the comments that you're seeing and kind of looking for as well? Absolutely. We actually did an initial round of general conceptual feedback and asked the public for ideas about what kinds of activities the program comment that was released last month could cover.

And those are exactly some of the examples that we heard. Examples that suggest, well, maybe the way that we've outlined the Section 106 process isn't clear enough for federal agencies. And this program comment is attempting to provide some clarity and building on some smaller program alternatives, we call them, at the state levels or with specific federal agencies that may have started the process of developing a fast track.

for let's say housing or for energy efficiency improvements. So we're building on what's been done before, but we are taking it federal government wide and we are expanding the list of activities that can reasonably be included in the process. Yeah, that's exciting. And it's going to have such a big impact, particularly on like even we've worked with developers in the past where they've gotten state grants or even federal grants that they...

actually end up triggering section 106, but it's kind of like the things that they weren't thinking about. knowing that there's going to be a process that can kind of get help us as designers and preservationists get our clients through the development process and permitting process a little bit faster, rather help our clients get through the approvals process a little bit faster is really exciting. I think you're, you know, you're exactly right that there are development professionals out there. There are architects out there. There are preservationists out there who are passionate about

historic buildings and historic places and who want to see investments in them made in service of rehabilitating them for the future, in service of serving the occupants of the building or reducing their energy costs, making it more likely that they'll be able to stay in and use the building long -term. know, aside from, you know, our needs to address the housing.

Nakita Reed (16:32.728)
housing shortage and to ensure that our communities are more climate resilient and our buildings use less energy. We have this sort of overall, I think, feeling as preservationists that these places have to be reused and reuse requires modernization. So the question for us as preservationists, think across the field, but including in this program comment discussion is how do you ensure that we have all the best parts of the historic places we love while we are actually

improving them for the future and making sure they can be used for many, many years to come. Absolutely. And one of the things that has been fascinating through seeing the various policy statements and other, I guess, thought leadership that the ACHP is putting out is really making that connection between preservation and housing and sustainability and climate action all more at the forefront. Because I think for so long, there really has been this idea that preservation and sustainability are

are not related, but I'm excited to see that, especially at the federal level, it's continuing to evolve and get more into the mainstream conversation and getting more press. Even seeing an article in Bloomberg about some of the policy statements that the ACHP has put out has been really exciting just to see how it's getting more into the mainstream. And it needs to be even more so. So what I'm trying to do in my role is to use it as best I can to try to get that conversation.

to try to move that conversation forward within the federal government, but to give others like you, who are leading in different ways, then from you from the architecture side, others from the planning side, and again, sort of, maybe you would call them traditional preservationists, that have thought many of the things that I'm saying all along. For years, people have said that buildings, existing buildings, are part of the climate solution, but I don't think it has hit.

the mainstream in a way that has helped us as preservationists carry that message forward. So I think the communication aspect that you touch on is really important and we all have to help each other move that conversation forward in the most positive way for climate change, but especially for housing because preservationists have long been about creating housing and doing it in ways that, in buildings that are so challenging and in,

Nakita Reed (18:58.676)
overcoming obstacles in some cases to remediate and to revive. Preservationists are great at creating housing, and yet maybe sometimes a small subset tarnishes our reputation by undermining, I would say, decades if not hundreds of years of history of preservationists using old buildings to create new housing. That's a story that we need to

be at the forefront of. Those are conversations that we need to be at the forefront of. that's why I was so pleased that we adopted this Housing and Historic Preservation Policy Statement because I can use that when I talk to communities, when I go out, when I talk to press, when I talk at events and say, look, this is the formal policy of the federal government. It is a pro -housing policy. And the preservationists are the ones that said it. So it gives me a great talking point because it

To me, again, it's going back to the roots of preservation. Yeah, absolutely. And even, I'm sure there are people who are thinking of this old house and other ways that the gem of the historic house has been elevated and reused. But as preservationists, we're not trying to preserve things in Ambritt. We're definitely trying to be sensitively managing change. And so I'm just excited for all of the policy statements and the leadership that the HHP is putting out on this.

But one of the other policy statements that I would love for us to talk a little bit about is the Indigenous knowledge policy statement. Because I know there's been a lot of conversation about making sure that tribal historic preservation officers are involved in the Section 106 process. But if you could talk a little bit more about how the Indigenous knowledge policy statement also expands that tent. So I'm grateful that one of your prior guests, Ira Matt, and his team in the Office of Tribal and Indigenous Peoples had actually gone through

a process, had started a process to develop this policy statement prior to my arrival as chair. And in fact, even before the development of the policy statement, the agency as a whole had been really at the forefront within the federal government of integrating Indigenous knowledge into its operations and into its thought process. So for those who don't know, the concept of Indigenous knowledge

Nakita Reed (21:19.262)
is something, as we say at the agency, that's not to be defined by the federal government, but it is something to be recognized as a body of knowledge, culture, tradition, beliefs that are held by indigenous peoples as individuals and collectively, variously, depending on the type of knowledge and the sort cultural traditions, and often tied to the understanding of those people or peoples.

to the understanding of those people, it's to the sort of connections between humans and their environment. So indigenous knowledge is something that deserves respect and recognition within the federal government as a basic principle. And if you agree with that as a basic principle, then you have to say, okay, well, what the heck does that mean? For us, we have taken

in Biden administration wide discussions about what that means. And for us, the best way to articulate that was through a policy statement that set out in about a dozen pages or so, a number of policy principles about indigenous knowledge. So first and foremost, the recognition that indigenous knowledge exists and deserves respect. And in addition to that, urging

to ourselves as an agency to try to incorporate Indigenous knowledge into the Section 106 regulatory process. And there are a lot of different ways to do that. When we issued the draft program comment that we talked about earlier, there are references to Indigenous knowledge. There are references to holders of Indigenous knowledge as possessing qualifications that would enable them to opine on different aspects.

of the program comment, something that we hadn't really included in a prior program alternative before. And we've also proposed an exemption for certain indigenous knowledge -informed activities by Native Hawaiian organizations. That exemption would allow for activities by federal agencies that are authorized or supported or where a Native Hawaiian organization participates.

Nakita Reed (23:43.064)
to go forward without additional reviews by the federal government. And the significance of that and the significance of the concept of indigenous knowledge being included into our own recent program comment draft is that we're trying in different ways to say, well, if we recognize that this is a value, if we respect it, how should it be incorporated? And frankly, to me, this is a top priority because of how many

years, decades, centuries maybe, the federal government has not fully respected Indigenous knowledge. And I will say, you know, we still have ways to go to ensure that we are truly embracing the concept of tribal sovereignty. So I've learned a lot about relationships with Indian tribes, Native Hawaiian organizations, and other Indigenous peoples while on this job. And the development of the Indigenous knowledge and historic preservation policy statement

provided me through the public comment process, through our consultation with Indian tribes, with really a wealth of understanding about the importance of this, recognizing of course that I, as not a member of an Indian tribe and not a native Hawaiian, could not really understand every aspect of indigenous knowledge. So there's some humility that goes into the adoption of a policy like this and its integration into our regulatory process.

But still, even with that humility saying, well, what can we do? And I'm also open to hearing from your listeners about what else can we do? We have a whole committee that's focused on these issues that meets regularly and that has a standing agenda item in our business meetings. And we'd love to hear more ideas from your listeners as well. I love that. And I'll make sure to put links in the show notes to the various resources and documents that we're talking about, as well as ways for listeners to get involved and provide feedback if interested.

And so why don't we, why don't we pivot a little bit and talk about two buildings in Chicago that I heard about. recently saw a post from an op -ed that you did in the Chicago Tribune that talked about two buildings in Chicago that are going through a section 106 review process. Can you elaborate on those? I think they were the Century and the Consumer Building. yes. These buildings are two absolutely gorgeous century plus year old

Nakita Reed (26:11.086)
buildings in downtown Chicago on State Street. And I have had the opportunity to visit Chicago twice during my tenure as chair, in part because these buildings have risen to the top of my radar as part of a Section 106 process that has inspired a lot of public discussion in Chicago and beyond. The issue is that a federal agency had considered

demolishing these two buildings, which again, are in the heart of downtown Chicago, occupying a corner position on a prominent block where there's a federal courthouse. And the proposed demolition was intended to address security concerns at the courthouse. The public, preservationists, architects, community -minded people, and just people who love Chicago.

generally did not like the proposal for demolition. And I think that the involvement of the public in the Section 106 consultation process suggests how important it is to keep that process in play for higher profile and more complex undertakings that federal agencies might propose. In this case,

A clear adverse effect would have been the demolition of two highly historic buildings emblematic of the Chicago architectural style, leaving a vacant lot in downtown Chicago. One of the reasons I wrote the op -ed was because not only would this create an adverse effect to these buildings, but it would have ripple effects across downtown and could be used by other federal agencies to argue that

maybe nebulous security concerns would justify demolition of historic properties. I said in the op -ed that this was almost like urban renewal all over again, and we didn't want to repeat that. Fortunately, the agency had a change of heart, or at least saw the light. They chose a rehabilitation route instead of a demolition route. And now the big question for all of us is to figure out

Nakita Reed (28:30.9)
exactly how these buildings, which haven't been occupied for a few decades, can be rehabilitated and can be rehabilitated in a way that puts them in concert and in harmony with the courthouse and all of the vibrant neighbors that it has in and around that block. So that's the next step for us. We've got to find a developer for that site or help. We've got to help the federal agency find a developer for that site.

So we can see these buildings put back in action because a lot of people were rooting for their survival. And I'm so pleased that the Section 106 process worked to ensure they would endure for some years to come. me too, because even just thinking about all of the impacts of like the avoided carbon from not demolishing buildings. So the fact that these buildings are not going to get thrown away and put into landfill, like that's going to have such a better carbon impact on Chicago and

trickle through everything. So I'm excited to hear that those buildings are going to get rehabilitated instead of demolished. only are we talking about the embodied carbon of these buildings, I think you raise a great point there, but we're also talking about the possibilities that maybe they could be reused for housing, which is something that's needed in Chicago just like everywhere. One of the great ideas that came up through consultation was something like veterans housing. Well, you would assume that somebody who was willing to give their life for our country

would be a perfectly suitable neighbor and a safe, responsible neighbor to a courthouse. And so I think there's gonna be some really interesting and worthwhile ideas out there. And I'm looking forward to that part of the conversation now that hopefully the hard part, at least some of the hard part is over. That's exciting. Well, I'm so excited to hear about all of the great things that the ACHP is doing under your tenure. I also know that you are involved in a number of other preservation organizations.

And I most recently saw one of your posts about the Latinos and Heritage Conservation Conference you attended recently. I'd love for you to talk a little bit more about that organization so our listeners can learn more about that group. As a Mexican -American and the first person of color to serve as chair of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, I found Latinos and Heritage Conservation to be a community within the broader preservation community where

Nakita Reed (30:55.166)
I feel like I'm at home. So attending their 10th congreso, their 10th anniversary conference in San Diego in August was truly a delight. Not only because I was able to see so many friends from Tucson and Chicago and Texas and California and New York and from all over the country, but also because of the relationships.

and the seriousness and the fun at the same time with which that community of thinkers and leaders and preservationists really bring together when they meet. So, Congreso for me is a time to reconnect. It's a time to envision possibilities. And I think it is also a place where

The thing that we all say as preservationists, which is we need to tell the full story and preservation needs to become more diverse and all of the things that we reiterate and even as an agency is part of our core mission. do feel like groups like Latinos and Heritage Conservation and many other groups like it around the country in bringing together a smaller community within preservation. I think that's what really helps to build the movement. What most excites me about

Congreso is that every year it is full of students and young people, young professionals, people from different fields, not just historic preservationists trained in graduate school as historic preservationists, but storytellers, muralists, people interested in food ways, people interested in the connections between art and the mind. And I think that all of that intellectual vibrancy, that kind of exchange.

is something that we need more of in preservation. it's just one of those events that, again, I feel like is home. And I'm really grateful to have been asked to attend. And by the way, Dolores Huerta gave one of the other keynotes. And that, too, was very inspiring, just in the way that she's able to pull together so many different people and lead them forward in a march for justice. And I think many of us in preservation think about

Nakita Reed (33:21.46)
that concept, the concept of community, the concept of justice, the concept of progress. And if nothing else, when I step down, ultimately, at some point, as chair of the ACHP, I hope that I've helped to move that progress along in the field in at least a few ways, hopefully lots of ways. And you can't make progress without a community. And so whether it's LHC or...

other preservation communities that I'm a part of. I'm grateful for every minute of it. And that one in particular is pretty fun too. Nakita, I'm really grateful for this conversation and for your leadership in bringing out important themes for people in lots of different professions, including young people, to think about, to understand, and to try to figure out where they fit in and can improve through their skills.

All of these questions of place that I think you grapple with. So kudos to you and again, thanks for having me on.

And now that Tangible Remnants is part of the Gable Media Network, you can listen and subscribe to all network partner content at gablemedia .com. That's G -A -B -L media .com. Until next time. Remember that historic preservation is a present conversation with our past about our future. We don't inherit the earth from our parents, but we borrow it from our children. So let's make sure we're telling our inclusive history.

Nakita Reed (35:21.464)
right then i thought of you

Nakita Reed (35:27.694)
Just catching them and setting them free Honey that's what you do

Nakita Reed (35:39.178)
That's what you do to me.