Since the mid-1970s, my wife and I have watched and participated in the successful impact of historic preservation in Oklahoma City.

As recent college graduates with no down payment, we found opportunity in a transitional inner-city neighborhood where we could invest in our future and create a home for our son where diversity was part of daily life.

As a preservation consultant and then State Historic Preservation officer, I recognized the impact of historic preservation on economic development, from the adaptive re-use of old Central High School and the renovation of the Skirvin Hotel to the rise of unique commercial districts such as Automobile Alley and Film Row.

Most importantly, as a historian, I have traced the legacy of historic preservation on our collective sense of community, the belief that all of us share a common heritage that is still creating opportunities and posing challenges we must face. If we work together for a harmonious blend of new and old, as we have done with the MAPS initiatives, we can move forward as a community.

Today, despite that record of success, historic preservation in Oklahoma City is under a stealth attack, especially in our historic neighborhoods.

The battle cry of that subtle assault is the often repeated mantra of “density, density, density.” In the urban core, density is a perfect solution in many cases, but in neighborhoods designed as suburban additions with a careful spatial balance of single-family and multi-family homes, density for density’s sake threatens to destroy why people want to live in those neighborhoods.

This is a battle waged through zoning changes, disregard for historic district standards and the misrepresentation of facts.

I have heard appointed members of city commissions claim that historic preservation advocates are racists and elitists. I have heard city leaders claim that historic preservation veterans are senile if they disagree with their opinions and that the only solution is to put young but inexperienced people in charge.

As I am writing this letter, preservationists are fighting an effort to change the zoning in a historic neighborhood so a developer can build a high-density apartment complex on NW 30 without adequate parking and disregard for historic setbacks. Supporters of the zoning overlay claim that people want the apartments because of the rich architectural heritage, diversity and sense of community in surrounding neighborhoods. Ironically, if they are successful, they will be part of the effort to destroy the special qualities of those neighborhoods.

Yes, we need affordable housing, but there are many alternatives available through not-for-profit community groups such as Positively Paseo. Yes, we can use density to create exciting places to live, but it should not destroy what is special in historic districts.

More: The Village on Walnut in OKC using unusual tech for affordable, historic neighborhood

For those in city government who think that everything new is better than anything old, they did not experience the trauma of urban renewal and the destruction of inner-city neighborhoods. For those in city government who think that density, whether an apartment complex or backyard rental properties, is the solution to every problem, they do not recognize the contributions that historic preservation has made to the community.

Historic preservation has and will make a difference in our quality of life in Oklahoma City. We have to push back on misguided efforts that threaten that success.

Bob Blackburn is the former executive director of the Oklahoma Historical Society.

This article originally appeared on Oklahoman: High-density housing harmful to historic preservation neighborhoods