|
Exposing Property Rights Myths
March/April 2018
By David Swarens
 |
Editor's note: David Swarens's report is a knowledgeable preservationist's response to misleading statements made by opponents to two new City of San Diego historic districts during a recent City Council meeting. The districts were upheld, but, unfortunately, a San Diego Union-Tribune article about the meeting repeated a lot of misinformation. Read that story HERE
On Tuesday, February 6, 2018, in response to a group of citizen appeals, the San Diego City Council voted unanimously to reaffirm and uphold two new historic districts, and not dissolve those designations. One of these was Valle Vista Terrace in University Heights, the other, the South Park Historic District in the Golden Hill community where I make my home.
The South Park Historic District is the culmination of decades of arduous efforts by our community. It has had broad community support, it implements elements of the recently updated community plan, and it received unanimous designation from the city's Historical Resources Board (HRB) in October 2017.
Those community plan updates for Golden Hill and North Park were also unanimously supported by the City Council in October 2016, with the potential historic districts featured in Council deliberations.
Unfortunately, some Council members were less than happy to supply their vote to uphold the districts on February 6, but acknowledged their obligation under the law. Both Planning Department staff and the City Attorney had advised them that the findings required to overturn the districts could not be made.
This controversy was generated in part by alarmist and mostly false comments from a handful of opponents. As President Reagan famously said, "Trust, but verify." That is often good advice, if not always easy, especially for people in public office making important decisions.
Dislike of government oversight (or overreach, as they would say) seemed to be the primary motivation of the opponents.
- The appellants suggested that the City could not, or should not, be able to create historic districts. But the City of San Diego has designated Historic Districts since the very beginning of their legally adopted program in 1967. In fact HRB Site #1, is a historic district.
- The appellants asserted that historic designation was a constitutional "taking." But for over 40 years, since the Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City decision, courts have agreed that designation is the equivalent of zoning, and often enhances owners' use of property. Authoritative briefs filed from both the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the California Preservation Foundation presented these established legal precedents to the City Council, and we provided an article on the history of this argument from the Georgetown Law Review to clarify the law.
- The appellants declared that solar panels and double-pane windows would be prohibited in the districts. But, while I am a fan of old growth wood and wavy glass, and preservation standards encourage retention of historic windows (and other historic "fabric"), City staff actually accepts appropriate new windows as consistent with the Secretary of Interior Standards. The Airport Authority even provides these free under the Quieter Homes Program (QHP) for identified historic properties in the airport noise impact areas (about half of the South Park Historic District is in the QHP area). And a state law does not allow restrictions for solar panels beyond where they can be appropriately placed on any particular site.
- The appellants argued that it would not be possible to repair or upgrade historically designated properties. But SOHO maintains an online list of professionals, the Old House Resource Directory, that can assist homeowners who don't have such skills to make appropriate decisions that will increase livability and enhance the value of properties without diminishing their historic significance.
- The appellants insisted that additions could not be made to historically designated buildings, and that infill would be prohibited in districts. But additions to historic sites and in historic districts can be seen all over town. Even the Padres' Petco Park was permitted as an "addition to a historic site!" Historic sites can and do accommodate additions, and historic districts can and do accommodate infill. Building and development codes, including the 11th Land Development Code Update now in process, have some special incentives for many such projects associated with historic sites. And the recent Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) program, which allows by right an additional unit on any single-family or duplex zoned property, requires no additional parking for this increased density when it occurs on historically designated properties, facilitating additional density, should owners wish.
- The appellants claimed that the South Park District was rushed. But the adoption of the South Park Historic District has been a long, protracted process. Long-time community members recall efforts starting in the 1970s, and the 1987 Golden Hill Community Plan recommended review of new historic districts in the area. The City's 1996 Mid City Survey recommended the adoption of the South Park District, and the 2016 Golden Hill Community Plan specifically includes the South Park Historic District. Our friend and past SOHO president, the late Beth Montes, was one of the folks who led the last push for the South Park Historic District; the anniversary of her passing was almost ten years shy of the Historical Resources Board action to designate.
- The appellants insisted that there was a lack of due process and a failure to let property owners know about the upcoming district nomination. But there were four notices in the months leading up to the hearings that were sent first-class mail to owners, another one following the October designation, and yet another for the hearing of the appeals at the City Council meeting. Here are a few notices from the past few years, sent to all South Park District area owners:
- May 2012: First Survey Poll, City of San Diego
- Sept 14, 2016: A provocative anti-historic district mailer from a "property rights" group in advance of Planning Commission hearing
- August 2017: Property Owners Workshop, City of San Diego
- August 2017: Survey Poll (#2), City of San Diego
- September 28, 2017: HRB first hearing
- October 26, 2017: HRB second hearing (required), City of San Diego
- October 30, 2017: Notice of HRB's action to designate the district
- January 2018: Notice of February 6 Council meeting to review appeals
- The appellants have also stated that there is no need for protection in their neighborhood. Of course, the primary goal of historic designation is to acknowledge historical and cultural resources, rather than to respond to threats. But threats do occur, and often encourage the process to identify and protect historic sites.
If one has questions about how being in a historic district could affect an owner, the presentation materials from the August Q&A workshop for owners are HERE. The City's website offers other resources under its Historic Preservation program and City staff should be able to answer questions, general or specific.
While the discussion at Council by the unhappy Council Members was fueled largely by misinformation, the political-ideological divide represented is not new.
San Diego's Historic Preservation Program is a compromise forged over the past fifty years, balancing interests and ideas. It is consistent with the law and accepted standards, and the welfare of our community, including the cultural and historical resources, which define much of our city.
This time, the folks who played by the rules and who love and respect the history and character of some of San Diego's most distinctive places, held the field. And the South Park and Valle Vista Historic Districts achieved the recognition they deserve.
Thanks to all the hard-working people, mostly our South Park neighbors, who contributed to this effort with research, letters, and attendance at meetings and hearings for the many years the process has required. The California Preservation Foundation, National Trust for Historic Preservation and, of course, SOHO all supported the district's creation and defense.
Historian Susan Bugbee, author of the book on South Park, did much of the heavy lifting, drafting the context statement for the nomination and providing volumes of original research to the City staff doing the intensive survey. And City staff Kelly Stanco and Bernard Turgeon performed a Herculean task once the work program was adopted to prepare and process, and ultimately to defend, the nomination of the South Park Historic District.
David Swarens is a very active SOHO board member and chair of the Greater Golden Hill Planning Committee.
Co-Editors: Vykki Mende Gray and Ann Jarmusch
|
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
|
