Council agrees that taskforce is necessary to address complex Historic Preservation Ordinance issues
By LYNETTE BRASFIELD
In Barbara Diamond’s absence, given her well-deserved vacation, I attended the Saturday morning City Council workshop during which staff briefed council members on the new Draft Historic Preservation Ordinance.
The Draft Ordinance was formulated and recommended after approximately 22 public and Planning Commission/Heritage Committee meetings as well as months of research on the question of which structures should be regarded as historical.
For those in the room who fully understood the complex interactions between and among 1997 CEQA rules, the 1981 HRE, the 1989 HPO, and the HRC update, Secretary of the Interior criteria, California Historic Resource Status Codes, the Mills Act, and our Design Review Board, Heritage Committee, Planning Commission, and current Historic Inventory ratings (C, K and E) in determining what structures are of historic importance, I’m sure it was a very enlightening three hours.
And the work that the city staff had put into the presentation was impressive – it’s an incredibly complex issue with many components, legal and otherwise.
Click on photo for a larger image
Photo by Mary Hurlbut
Legion Hall’s historicity is not in doubt – but it’s not usually that easy…
Unfortunately, despite the staff’s fine efforts, I’m still confused (I’m no Barbara, of course). However, I gather that I’m not alone in my confusion: many fellow Lagunans are also unclear on the basics of what is being proposed…and remained unclear after the workshop.
Confusion and misinformation abounds
Essentially, most residents want to know the basics: a) whether their house is on the Historic Inventory or not; b) if it is, why, and what that listing might cost them financially, should they wish to remodel (and on the other hand, what benefits this status might bring); c) whether it is it possible to remove their home from the listing (very important); d) what changes are currently being proposed, why, and how the changes might affect them both negatively and positively and e) how Laguna’s character might change were there no such ordinance.
And they don’t want uncertainty about the status of their homes now or, importantly, in the future, as structures as well as Lagunans themselves all grow older and become more…historical.
Council member Bob Whalen summarized the questions that the City Council still needed to have definitively and simply answered as follows: “What policies are now in place? What changes are recommended? And what are we required to do legally?”
By the end of the workshop, the City Council, faced by the complexity of the issues, came to a unanimous decision: to appoint a taskforce to review the matter and make recommendations.
Key issue: Voluntary vs mandatory inclusion on list
A key issue, raised by many residents during the public comment period, was whether being included on the Historic Inventory should be voluntary or mandatory.
“Today, being a historic resource is not voluntary [if you were placed on the 1981 inventory],” Community Development Director Pfost explained in a follow-up email.
In other words, your property will still be historical – but with new staff recommendations, the implications of that status may change.
At the workshop, Pfost noted that staff is recommending an appeals process, which has not been in place up to now.
Mayor Kelly Boyd noted that inclusion was determined in 1981 based largely on street views, not a full evaluation of each property, and made by residents who did not necessarily have the professional qualifications needed to make those decisions.
Questions about the list being mandatory or voluntary included: If mandatory, should the city be required to assist owners with the extreme financial burdens often encountered in trying to conform roofs, say, and windows, to their historical forms, one resident asked?
If voluntary, would property owners inevitably make changes that would alter the character of Laguna and potential damage property values? Would the Design Review Board be sufficient to safeguard Laguna’s visual character?
Property rights and values a concern
Residents expressed a variety of concerns, including property rights and property values. ”Why have others the right to decide what to do with my property?” one resident asked. “Who will have authority to make these decisions?”
Becky Jones recommended that a citywide inventory be done to identify which structures are historical and which aren’t. Barbara Metzger noted that residents should be made fully aware of the promises they need to make in order to get the incentives for listing their properties on the Historic Register.
Others warned that changing the Register to be a voluntary listing would endanger the ability of the City to protect Laguna’s neighborhood character.
Bob Chapman, realtor and former Planning Commission member, made his point succinctly, “[Let’s start with] the visual outcome we want to have, set up Historic Preservation Guidelines. We don’t have that now.”
Certainty and transparency is needed: that seemed to be the consensus.
What seemed clear also is this: staff is recommending an appeals process; the appointment of a historic preservation planner; the development of a Historical Style Guide; and that C properties be reevaluated as 6Ls based on CEQA criteria.
I think. But don’t quote me.
All agree on setting up a taskforce
At the end of the public comment session, Steve Dicterow suggested a taskforce be set up. “I think we are actually at the beginning of this process,” he said. “Maybe we made a mistake, went about this the wrong way around. We need to fully understand the laws, get a clarification of state mandates and what discretion we do and don’t have.
“I will not vote on this ordinance until I have a better understanding. We need give-and-take on this. It’s working well for the View Restoration taskforce right now.”
Mayor Pro Tem Rob Zur Schmiede agreed that a taskforce would be the best way to go. “There’s a lot of misinformation out there,” he noted. “Today the issue has been made a lot clearer, thanks to staff working nonstop.”
Toni Iseman mentioned that many people aren’t aware of the benefits of being listed on the Historic Inventory. “But we have to fix things, take a look at all the details so we can address the issues.”
Iseman agreed that putting together a taskforce would be the best way to proceed, as did Bob Whalen.
“This was a good discussion, it’s a complex and confusing issue,” Whalen said. “We need simplification, clarity. Let’s set up a taskforce, yes, with an [appropriate] time limit and [give it clearly] articulated guidelines.”
Mayor Kelly Boyd wrapped up the meeting. “Let’s get setting up a taskforce with guidelines onto the agenda for our second meeting in January. I’m a real property rights guy, so I’ll be watching carefully. What a headache, and thanks to the staff and Planning Commission and others for all their hard work on this.”
Notes:
CEQA = California Environmental Quality Act
C = contributive; K = key; E = exceptional architectural examples
