The Mandatory Ordinance Problem

Any home or building built in Laguna Beach before 1955 will be subject to historic evaluation. Owners may have to hire a historian to prove to the city that their property is not “historic” to do simple remodels or make other changes to the property.

The Voluntary Inclusion Solution

Let Laguna Live! wants a voluntary, incentive-based Historic Preservation Program. Implementation of financial and planning incentives to promote long-term appreciation and preservation of historic resources is the right way to preserve historic properties in our community.

Share On

Old Letter Reflects Original Intent of Historical Preservation Rules

In a letter I found in my files dated April 24, 1992, on city stationary sent to me, I was informed my home had been listed on the city’s Historic Resources Inventory. In the second paragraph of the letter there is the statement “that participation in the city’s Historic Preservation Program is completely voluntary.” Former…

Read More

Hardships for Homeowners Under Proposed Preservation Rules

A new involuntary historic preservation ordinance would create for us a financial disaster. After a lifetime of voluntarily preserving a 1927 cottage, an involuntary ordinance would create a markdown of at least at $1 million. This is in terms of property value for resale and does not include the additional and impossible burden of trying…

Read More

Response to City FAQ by Larry Nokes

  RESPONSE TO CITY “FAQ” By Laurence P. Nokes, Esq. And Let Laguna Live! A.    Introduction We have received and reviewed the City’s “FAQ” letter sent to people who own homes listed on City’s Historic Inventory. While we believe the document was “well intentioned,” it is based on 2 false premises: 1) That houses on…

Read More

Our Request to the City

We have asked that the City make the following disclosures to the public tomorrow night, in light of the FAQ positions they have taken: 1. The current inventory creates no presumption of historicity and is not valid for any CEQA purpose. 2. That the intention of the city is to merge the old inventory into…

Read More

3 Comments

  1. Garnet PIgden on January 24, 2017 at 6:57 am

    I object to my property being classified as a historic property and being encumbered with certain restrictions. None of these restrictions were in place when I purchased this property in 1997. Further, I except that the net result of this classification will be a decrease in property value for there is no incentive – only a disincentive – for a homeowner to posses a historic home.

  2. David Michelsen on January 25, 2017 at 7:37 pm

    I’m OK with a city Historic Preservation Ordinance. What I’m not OK with is the language and processes being discussed in this current Preservation Ordinance. Some people want to preserve their vision of ‘character’. Fine. Just do not trample on the rights of others to maintain that vision.

  3. Roy on August 22, 2017 at 5:13 pm

    The city required me to install “like for like” windows for my “C” rated house. Then the “like for like” windows were required to became double pane, tempered glass window. I don’t know of any double pane window made in 1928. This tripled the cost of the windows that are not “LIKE FOR LIKE”. I spent a lot of time finding someone to make the windows because they are unique.

Leave a Reply