San Diego Debates Softening Historic Preservation Rules

San Diego is on the verge of a significant shift in its approach to historic preservation, a move designed to accelerate homebuilding across the city. The Planning Commission recently greenlit a proposal that would grant the City Council power to override decisions made by the Historic Resources Board, sparking a lively debate among local leaders and experts.

The Heart of the Debate: Balancing History and Housing

For decades, historic preservation has played a key role in shaping San Diego’s urban landscape, sometimes halting development projects in their tracks. A notable example is the California Theatre, which remains abandoned despite its historic designation. The current system empowers the city’s Historic Resources Board (HRB) to designate properties as historic, a decision that can significantly impact future development.

The proposed change aims to inject more flexibility into this process. If approved by the City Council, it would give the Council the ultimate authority to overrule the HRB’s historic designations. This shift is seen by many as a direct response to San Diego’s urgent housing crisis and the high cost of living.

Consider the Ezabelle apartment building in East Village, which famously had to be constructed around an 1881 Italianate-style house because its destruction was prohibited due to historic preservation. Such examples highlight the impact of current rules on modern development. (Civic San Diego)

Why Economists and Business Leaders Advocate for Change

A broad consensus among economists and business executives supports softening the existing historic preservation rules. Their arguments frequently center on the economic realities facing San Diego:

The Housing Crisis and Economic Growth

Many experts emphasize that San Diego desperately needs more housing. Caroline Freund from UC San Diego highlights that preserving history shouldn’t come with abandoned buildings or hinder future growth, urging the city to make hard decisions while considering available resources. Economist Kelly Cunningham of the San Diego Institute for Economic Research adds that preserving historically significant buildings requires balance and flexibility, noting that designating something built over 45 years ago isn’t always sufficient. Both agree that current rules create delays and add costs, exacerbating San Diego’s housing shortage and high cost of living. Alan Gin from the University of San Diego also stresses the need for more housing, acknowledging the importance of heritage but advocating for a balance that doesn’t stymie badly needed development.

Preventing Urban Blight and Promoting Revitalization

Several economists point to the tangible costs of stringent preservation. James Hamilton from UC San Diego observes that historic preservation (and environmental protection) can sometimes be “used as a weapon” by those opposing projects for other reasons. He cites the abandoned California Theatre downtown as “an embarrassment,” underscoring the need for developers to have more clarity and fewer delays. Norm Miller of the University of San Diego argues that unlike older cities, San Diego has “very few truly old buildings” and that preserving “obsolete structures without merit is the same as codifying urban blight.” He advocates for purposeful preservation that supports modernization and adaptive reuse. David Ely of San Diego State University concurs, stating that challenges like the California Theatre site clearly demonstrate the need for reforms, prioritizing housing stock expansion in a city with scarce development space.

Streamlining Development and Accountability

Business leaders universally support easing the rules to foster more efficient development. Phil Blair of Manpower calls for clearer guidelines on what constitutes “truly historic” versus merely “old and sentimental,” noting that such designations often tie up potential development and lead to site deterioration during costly litigation, with the California Theatre being a prime example. Gary London of London Moeder Advisors agrees, stating that the “too broad” definition of historic has delayed or prevented revitalization in communities ripe for upgrading and density. Bob Rauch of R.A. Rauch & Associates believes softened rules would benefit housing supply, affordability, and urban growth by encouraging modern uses and infill projects. Austin Neudecker of Weave Growth points out that properties have sometimes “abused historic designation for the substantial tax benefits,” arguing that enabling the City Council to overrule adds accountability and curbs misuse, thereby safeguarding genuine landmarks while allowing new housing near transit and jobs. Chris Van Gorder of Scripps Health supports easing rules, stating that every government body should report to a higher level, and historical boards can sometimes “go too far,” limiting property owners and what’s best for society.

Comparing Current and Proposed Approaches

To better understand the potential impact, here’s a look at how the current system compares with the proposed changes:

What Happens Next?

The San Diego Planning Commission has unanimously approved this proposal, which now moves to the City Council for a final vote. This crucial decision, expected in December, will determine the future direction of historic preservation and housing development in San Diego.

Frequently Asked Questions About San Diego’s Historic Preservation Debate

• What is the core proposal being considered?
  The proposal would give the San Diego City Council the authority to overrule decisions made by the city’s Historic Resources Board regarding historic property designations.
• Why is San Diego considering softening these rules?
  The primary reason is to accelerate homebuilding and address the severe housing shortage and high cost of living in San Diego, as current preservation rules are seen to cause delays and add costs to new construction.
• Who generally supports this change?
  Economists and business leaders in San Diego largely support the change, citing the need for more housing, economic growth, and less regulatory inertia.
• What are the main concerns about this proposal?
  Preservationists worry that giving the City Council overruling authority could politicize the designation process and lead to the loss of valuable historical sites for development.
• When will the City Council vote on this proposal?
  The City Council is expected to vote on this proposal in December.

As San Diego navigates its future, finding the right balance between honoring its past and building for its future remains a critical challenge. The upcoming City Council vote will be a pivotal moment for both developers and preservationists across the city.

San Diego Weighs Overriding Historic Board for Housing