|
2024 Mayoral and City Council Candidate Historic Preservation Q&A
Candidates for Mayor
Mayor Todd Gloria - Did not respond
Larry Turner
 1. Currently, the city is undertaking an initiative called Preservation and Progress, that aims to "modernize historic property regulations" to "preserve important places," and "streamline new home construction."
What are your preliminary thoughts on the initiative?
Larry Turner: The initiative in its present state is overly broad and vague. It does not provide any specifics as to which portion(s) of the City's Historic Review & Preservation regulations and processes are problematic and in need of reform.
Recently:
- The Mayor has appointed unqualified and clearly conflicted individuals to the important Historical Resources Board.
- The Mayor and the City Council have “cancelled” Uptown Planners, a highly effective and strong voice for the Uptown community, and have essentially engaged in election interference in doing so, as Uptown Planners were duly elected by their constituents.
- “Affordable housing” is used by the Mayor as a shield for developers to instead construct mass amounts of market rate housing
These recent examples reflect a pattern of misuse of power by Mayor Gloria.
The common objective behind all of these activities is to silence the voice of the public regarding matters impacting development within their community, and to transfer all power in these decisions to the Mayor and his compliant City Council.
I believe that this initiative and its “call for reform” is in fact another disguised attempt to continue dismantling critical checks and balances which exist within the City’s urban planning model, for the benefit of developers and to the detriment of the public. The Mayor is justifying his actions behind a false veneer of “equity and reform”. This veneer is simply a smokescreen to hide the seizure of greater centralized control.
It is imperative that any reform or modification of the city's historic resource protections be for the benefit of the citizens of san diego and in keeping with the overarching goals of these protections, and not for the benefit of outside interests such as the development industry, political donors, or the like. As Mayor, I would approach any reform with this as my Administration’s guiding principle.
If elected, will you work directly with the preservation community to oversee this initiative?
Larry Turner: Yes, but with the above thoughts in mind, the initiative’s starting point is too vague and needs more precision before moving forward.
Please elaborate
As a first step, I would direct Staff (including the Historic Resources staff) to prepare a more thorough and specific analysis of which portions of the current regulations and processes are viewed as problematic and why, and to provide specific recommendations to address the issues identified. I would ensure that the community has a sufficient voice in evaluating and commenting on this work, in order to come up with the most relevant and impactful of potential reforms. I would also, on an as-needed basis, invite qualified professionals into the analysis, so that the final work product is a collaboration between relevant City Staff, the Community, and outside Subject Matter Experts.
Final work product would be submitted to the City Council for review, decisioning, and promulgation.
With this approach, several things are accomplished.
- The “regulations and processes" used daily by Staff will be made better, thereby increasing efficiency and effectiveness.
- Partnering with the Community will reflect our valuing of collaboration, thereby increasing faith in government.
- Short-term improvements will allow for adequate time to be spent on a future more thorough comprehensive overview of the economic, societal, and environmental benefits of historic preservation. This is a broadly complex topic, but it is imperative that the City’s leadership understand how historic preservation fits into the broader needs of San Diego as it looks to the future, and how the City can wisely follow best practices in areas such as adaptive reuse and repurposing of historic structures vs. building new, with greater understanding of the economic, societal, and environmental impacts relating to these choices. With a broader knowledge base on these issues, better decisions can be made which will benefit the City and its citizens for decades to come.
2. The Preservation and Progress initiative lacks rigorous, research-based studies on the real impacts of historic preservation. San Diego has never conducted a comprehensive professional analysis of how historic preservation affects its affordable housing, equity, and climate goals. City officials are attempting to address these issues without a clear economic or broader perspective to guide them.
The city currently maintains a historic preservation fund of approximately $90,000. SOHO, alongside the Neighborhood Historic Preservation Coalition—which comprises over a dozen groups and organizations—has proposed that these funds be allocated to this study.
2a. Would you commission a citywide economic study and analysis of historic preservation, as other major cities like Los Angeles, Phoenix, and San Antonio have done?
Larry Turner: Yes, this is the more comprehensive study I was referring to earlier.
Why or why not?
Larry Turner: In order to be truly informative, actionable and cost-effective, the scope of such a study should be carefully proscribed. As appropriate, community input would be solicited to help best define the study's scope and goals.
Such a study is a smart investment, as it will provide the City with valuable information to help it set the best longer-term growth plans, ones which value San Diego’s special sense of place, including its historic built environment.
2b. Would you do this study before making any changes to the current ordinance?
Larry Turner: Maybe
Please explain
Larry Turner: Depending upon the additional detail provided by Staff, it is possible that there may be some easy "low-hanging fruit" in the current regulations and processes which can be addressed first, provided that any such change is not likely to run contrary to any important finding in the more comprehensive analysis. As noted prior, any such changes need to be for the benefit of the citizens and to enhance internal City operations, NOT for the benefit of outside interests, developers, or for political gain.
3. The reuse of older buildings benefits the City’s climate action and housing priorities while supporting historic preservation, neighborhood revitalization, and a circular economy.
What are your views on promoting adaptive reuse projects of our historic buildings to preserve cultural identity while integrating sustainable practices?
Larry Turner: Adaptive reuse can be a great way to preserve a building which might otherwise be considered for demolition or for significant modification, making it unrecognizable as historic. Such reuse can also help to address affordable and Senior housing needs, will not result in additions to landfill, and will save the massive amounts of energy and carbon footprint otherwise required to construct a new building.
As Mayor, I would support including adaptive reuse as a significant strategy in addressing many of our challenges (housing, affordability, small business, environmental, walkability, infrastructure, etc.), and would look to create incentives to promote this strategy to both government as well as the private sector. I would look to the results of the comprehensive study mentioned previously to help guide us on how best to incorporate adaptive reuse into our larger planning model.
How would you encourage the repurposing of historic buildings for modern uses without compromising their architectural integrity and cultural significance?
Larry Turner: One of the goals of the broader study to be commissioned on historic preservation is to acquire factual data on the social, economic, and environmental benefits (or drawbacks) of repurposing historic buildings. Credible research data from qualified professionals in the disciplines of urban planning, historic preservation, density, development, environmental, economics, and other fields of relevant study will provide the City with extremely valuable information needed to understand how adaptive reuse and repurposing of historic buildings can best be incorporated into the larger planning model.
What the City badly needs is unbiased, factual, and non-political information regarding how the concepts of historic preservation and adaptive reuse can be best employed within the broader topics of growth, urban planning, environment, mobility, and affordability. Many successful cities include historic preservation and adaptive reuse as key portions of their larger planning, because they are well-informed on the social, economic, and environmental benefits of doing so. San Diego needs to be similarly well-informed, and as Mayor I would prioritize acquisition of such knowledge in order to help us best navigate this complicated topic.
4. Massive new development in older neighborhoods often tears down the existing Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH) in the form of vintage homes, bungalow courts, and small apartments. The city does not currently address historic buildings in its NOAH plan.
What would you do to make sure that the city’s NOAH plans include and prioritize historic housing?
Larry Turner: The demise of so many older (i.e. late 19th -early 20th Century era) SRO buildings in the downtown area over the past ten years is one of the best examples of how reductions in NOAH directly correlates to an increase in homelessness. NOAH in this part of the City is the most vulnerable, given the extremely high price of land in the downtown core and resultant development potential of these parcels. Much of the SRO housing stock downtown has already been lost and not generally replaced. For that which remains, preserving the remaining stock is problematic, as the gap between the value of the property as-is compared to the value of the property if developed into a high-rise (for example), is large. Public-private partnerships are the most likely to succeed approaches to preserving and rehabilitating what is left of this typology in the downtown core. The City can assist in this preservation via facilitating these public-private partnerships, including seed capital, incentives for adaptive reuse, and regulatory fast-tracking. Speed and creativity is essential to preserve the remaining stock of downtown historic-era NOAH.
Much of what is left of NOAH stock is outside the downtown core, in areas such as University Heights and other low to middle-income neighborhoods. A portion of this stock is pre-WW2, therefore considered “historic” under most definitions of the term.
As Mayor, I would require that any and all NOAH structures which fit into the definition of being of historic age, be further classified as such and afforded additional protections and incentives for preservation, provided they remain as NOAH assets. These protections and incentives could include a Mill-act type of property tax benefit, lower permit fees for rehabilitation, access to loan and grant providers to NOAH properties, and other such similar incentives which would encourage owners of these properties to continue to be contributors to the important NOAH inventory within the City. Such an approach would serve a two-fold benefit: first, it would help in retaining as many NOAH units as possible, and second, it would preserve a greater number of historic buildings.
NOAH units constitute a critical piece of San Diego’s affordable housing inventory, while often also being historic. Both are reasons for us to prioritize the survival of these irreplaceable assets.
5. Despite extensive rhetoric about making housing more affordable, the Mills Act remains San Diego’s only effective incentive for achieving this goal. However, the City of San Diego's designation process poses a significant barrier for those with limited income to apply for designation, as in most cases, homes must be restored first before they can qualify. This prerequisite makes the process financially prohibitive for many. Additionally, the high degree of physical integrity required of the structure to apply for the Mills Act has made the process onerous. This requirement is counter to the reason the Mills Act was enacted and tends to penale those with lesser means who seek to preserve their historic homes.
How would you propose ensuring that everyone has equal access to the benefits of historic designation and the potential property tax relief program?
Larry Turner: Increasing access to Mills Act benefits is a very worthwhile objective, as it can help prevent deterioration and blight in lower-income neighborhoods. As Mayor, I would propose that for those who qualify based upon lower levels of income, Mills Act designation criteria could be relaxed somewhat, to allow greater access to the Act’s financial benefits. Certain restoration expenditures could be deferred and included as part of the homeowner’s ten year Mills Act “home improvements contract” with the City, rather than being required up-front. This would allow a larger number of people to qualify for the Programm, and to pay for the “deferred improvements” over time, using their property tax savings.
Further, if not already in a Historic District, homeowners typically have to commission a $2,000-$3,500 historic report from a qualified specialist, which is included as part of their Mills Act submission. This cost likely proves a barrier to entry for some. For qualified (lower-income) applicants, I would direct that the City set aside a portion of its Mills Act funding to cost-share with an applicant homeowner the cost of such a report. This would increase Mills Act submissions from lower-income applicants.
Finally, an applicant in an already-recognized Historic District has a much easier and less costly path to obtaining Mills Act designation. The City has been slow-walking its processing and approving Historic Districts for some time, which is removing this lower-cost Mills Act path for homeowners in these “slow-walked” Districts. As Mayor, I would direct that City Administration create a more transparent and timely process for processing and approving Historic Districts, and would ask that applications for Historic Districts in lower-income areas be given processing priority for a period of time, after which processing could revert to a first-in-line basis.
Do you support the Mills Act as a means to assist with the cost of restoration and rehabilitation of historic homes?
Larry Turner: Yes, especially if the requirements and processes can be adjusted somewhat to allow greater access, as described above.
6. Many historic district designations have been languishing in city offices for decades, with the city offering a myriad of excuses for refusing to advance them.
6a. Will you actively advocate for the designation of neighborhoods with pending historic district status applications at the Historical Resources Board (HRB)?
Larry Turner: Yes. As discussed above, the City is slow-walking a large number of Historic District applications, presumably to retain greater flexibility in their aggressive development agenda. This is wrong, and substantial funds have been expended by neighborhood groups to prepare their Historic District reports, and they deserve to have their efforts respected rather than stonewalled.
6b. Will you support neighborhoods seeking historic district status by urging the HRB to adhere to a specific, and reasonable timetable for making decisions?
Larry Turner: Yes, for the reasons discussed above. It should be noted here that every applicant for an individual home designation or a District designation has expended significant time and money in the process. Applicants deserve to have their applications processed and considered in a timely manner, but final determination rests with the City. Obtaining historic designation for individual homes as well as Districts has been and should retain a high bar, so that only truly deserving properties receive designation. That said, fairness in the process is paramount, and needs to be the City’s guiding principle, not politics.
6c. Would you endorse a program to fast track these in an effort to create certainty for both the residents and the development community?
Larry Turner: Only in limited circumstances. As noted above, I would give priority for a period of time to applications from lower-income applicants, in order to balance out the Mills Act benefits to a larger portion of our City.
I would be amenable to an “exception provision”, whereby an applicant can petition HRB for expedited review IF there is pending development on an important building that could otherwise be lost to demolition if not given expedited review.
Generally however, if the HRB and City Council return to a normal processing pace, versus the stonewalling we have seen for the past few years, there should be little need for a fast track program, except as noted above.
|
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
|
