By Dave Schwab

The city Planning Commission has sided with land-use attorneys and developers against historical and architectural preservationists, by recommending that San Diego City Council members have broader discretion over historical designations.

The commission voted 4-1 June 25 in favor of broadening the council’s discretion in overturning involuntary historical designations for properties. Preservationists were against it, arguing that the council members lacked the expertise to make decisions about historic properties.

Commissioner Gil Ontai cast the lone dissenting vote, with Mary Lydon and Dennis Otsuji absent.

Involuntary historical designations are those initiated by parties other than the property’s owners. Once a property has been designated as historical, developers are required to either incorporate the structures into their redevelopment, or move them to an acceptable site elsewhere to preserve them.

The city’s Historical Resources Board, a 10-member city-appointed advisory body comprised of architectural and historical professionals, evaluates properties 45 years and older for historical designation. The board evaluates the historicity of those properties based on a number of factors, including who built them and whether they exemplify a particular time period or architectural style worthy of preservation.

Sometimes, property owners who don’t wish to have their property declared historical appeal the designation. The new rule, if adopted, would increase the city council’s power over the final designation.

City senior planner Cathy Winterrowd noted in her staff report to commissioners that California cities other than San Diego give their governing bodies similar broadened discretion in rendering decisions on appeals of historically designated properties.

She added the new proposed amendment to expand the city council’s authority in the historical designation appeal process would affect only a limited number of involuntarily designated properties, about five percent of the total. “Only 38 historical appeals have been filed since 2000,” Winterrowd told commissioners, “compared with close to 1,000 properties that have been historically designated in that time.”

Of those 38 historical designation appeals, Winterrowd noted only 10 were overturned by the city council, having their historical designations removed. Eleven of those 38 appeals are still pending.

The planning commission’s vote is a recommendation to the city council. The ordinance will not be amended until the city council votes on it, probably in September.

Speaking on behalf of a team of 10 San Diego land-use attorneys who’ve been working for several years to amend the city’s historical designation appeal process, Marie Burke Lia argued before the commissioners that the appeals process is flawed and needs to be revamped.

“We have a difficult situation where a property owner seeking to redevelop their property learns their rights can be restricted by an advisory appointed board, while they can’t appeal to top-level decisionmakers, the city council, which can only act on it (appeal) on a technicality,” she said.

Burke Lia added San Diego is the only one of 55 local governments in the state that doesn’t give its highest level of government the authority to conduct a full hearing on the merits of a proposed historical designation.
The city’s proposed amendment to the historical resources appeal process would allow for a fourth specified basis for the rejection of a historical designation: When the findings required for designation are not supported by the information provided to the Historical Resources Board.

Prior to the planning commission hearing, Bruce Coons, executive director of Save Our Heritage Organisation (SOHO) – a 40-year-old nonprofit group which works to preserve, promote and support architectural, cultural and historical preservation countywide – said the proposal before commissioners to give the city council more sway was an attempt by land-use attorneys to circumvent a historical designation appeals process that is not broken and does not need fixing. “This is the right way to do it, I think the process has worked very well,” he said. “This amendment proposes changes in the political process instead of a fact-based process.”

Currently, said Coons, the only grounds on which a historical designation appeal can be based is on new information, errors in the original information or a violation of procedures by the Historical Resources Board.
“People are now thinking, ‘If I don’t want my house designated historical, I should be able to appeal it to the city council on a political basis and get it overturned,’” Coons said. “It’s either historical, or it’s not. Any time you bring it into the political realm, that just makes a lot of money for the land-use attorneys and costs the clients. Whether a building is historic, that should be left up to the experts.”

Coons said those experts are the members of the city’s Historical Resources Board, who conduct site visits of structures proposed to be historic. He added city council members would likely not conduct similar site visits, nor are they similarly qualified to evaluate proposed properties on their historical merits.
Planning commissioners didn’t concur with Coons’ view that the city council could not — or should not — be allowed to render a final decision on the historicity of a designated property.

“I have no problem with, or any lack of faith in, the city council’s making the correct decision,” said commissioner Michael Smiley. “To say they’re incapable of making the decision is not fair.”

“I don’t think it’s a fair argument,” agreed commissioner Tim Golba about the argument that city council members can’t properly make historical designation decisions. Golba noted council members have talented support staffs and rely on expert testimony in fields in which they’re not particularly well-versed to render informed decisions in areas where they themselves don’t have expertise.

Commission chair Eric Naslund wasn’t as certain. “Whether the city council is the appropriate body to hear these historical appeals … honestly, I’m in conflict on that point,” he said.

During the planning commission hearing, SOHO’s Coons talked about the significance of historically designating properties. Said Coons: “Each time a new immigrant comes to this country, or there’s a new generation of Americans, we ask,‘How do we teach our values about what’s important to Americans?’ The best way to teach our values is to preserve our historical architecture, because within that architecture is embodied those values. The American dream is embodied in buildings, in small houses within neighborhoods. The stories behind those buildings teach our values and teach our culture. I can’t tell you how important it is to preserve our built environment.”

Dave Schwab has been a journalist in San Diego County for more than 20 years and has worked on several publications including the San Diego Business Journal and the La Jolla Light. He resides in North Park and may be contacted at: dschwabie@journalist.com.