The Mountain View Preservation Alliance (MVPA) believes that communities benefit tremendously when they adopt effective preservation measures.  We are committed to helping craft state-of-the-art preservation tools for our heritage neighborhoods.  We partner with respected historic preservation organizations like the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the California Preservation Foundation to recommend and advocate for best practices in preservation for our community.

 

• All feasible measures should be taken to make the historic preservation process as simple and inexpensive as possible for property owners.  MVPA has put together 10 suggestions for simplifying the process.  We welcome additional suggestions.

• Informing the community about the substantial benefits and generally accepted practices of historic preservation can be time-consuming work.  If need be, adoption of preservation measures should be slowed down to allow as much of the community as possible to understand and have reasonable input into proposed measures.

• If weak preservation tools are put in place over the long-term, in combination with raised height limits in much of the downtown, it is likely that the legacy of this planning commission and council will be the loss of many of old Mountain View’s most cherished buildings.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

5 reasons for adopting an effective preservation ordinance and inventory of heritage structures:

1.   The community as a whole will benefit.  Study after study shows that commercial and residential neighborhoods that retain their historic features appreciate in value more than neighborhoods that don't.  An ordinance and inventory are simply examples, like zoning and precise plans, of smart planning tools that Mountain View residents deserve to have available to them.  All of these tools, not just preservation planning tools, regulate what property owners can do with their property for the benefit of the community.  Experience shows that many people who were wary when preservation controls were first introduced in their neighborhoods have come to embrace them as they see their effects over time.

2.      Many if not most property owners may be better off owning a designated property than owning an undesignated one.  City staff has proposed including significant benefits to property owners on the inventory that would not apply to other properties.  They include: 

▪   Exceptions and variances that could allow owners of heritage buildings major floor area exceptions, setback variances, covered parking exceptions and continuations of nonconforming uses.  These exceptions and variances can offer owners significant financial benefits. 

▪   Use of the State Historic Building Code (SBHC) can cut the cost of upgrading an older building tremendously, while retaining heritage architecture.  The SBHC allows owners to retain rather than rebuild configurations that are no longer allowed under California’s standard building code.  Viable features such as roof slopes, door widths, ceiling heights, plumbing, heating and ventilation systems that would otherwise have to be torn out can be retained.   

▪   Extended Timeframes.  Time is money and owners of heritage buildings may be given four-year, rather than two-year permits, so that they can finish building more at their leisure.  This would particularly benefit homeowners.

 ▪  Other Benefits.  Other benefits could include methods for automatic exemption from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review, professional design assistance, Mills Act contracts, low interest loans and façade improvement grants.

Property owners may not fully understand the economic and flexibility benefits of these measures.  Staff should send clear and detailed information to owners regarding the benefits.

3.      The recently proposed elevation of the downtown height limit relies on a mandatory ordinance to ensure that downtown's heritage buildings will be not be torn down.  The proposed higher a height limit is in an area, the more incentive owners have to tear down existing historic buildings and rebuild from scratch.  Now that the city plans on raising the height limit in the historic area of the downtown, we have more need than ever for a preservation ordinance with real teeth in it that can ensure that development proposals and proposed demolitions are comprehensively reviewed on the basis of identified structure's historic merit.

4.      Voluntary preservation tools will not protect historic properties and may not even be worth the time and money already spent on creating a preservation process.  Mountain View now has a voluntary neighborhood preservation process.  We have had a set of voluntary Old Mountain View Design Guidelines since 1991.  The people we have spoken to who have applied to the city to modify their homes were never even told that the guidelines exist.  Thus, far “voluntary” has meant “nonexistent.”

5.      Voluntary neighborhood preservation protections would be no more effective than voluntary speed limits or voluntary pollution controls would be.  Several owners of Mountain View historic properties have already applied to tear down their buildings or stated that they would like to do so in the future.  In other words people who want to tear down historic buildings will simply opt out.  The City Council, City Staff, and Mountain View residents will have little or no legal leverage for even reviewing what's proposed on the basis of historic merit-- that's akin to no protection at all for our city's historic landmarks.