North of Montana could become historic district
“Big Brother” may be moving into the north of Montana Avenue neighborhood.
Residents who live north of Montana are up in arms over a study that could result in their neighborhood becoming an historic district.
The city of Santa Monica has hired an historic preservation company to study whether or not the neighborhood north of Montana should be designated historic. But the study has neighbors fearing excessive government rule more than a history lesson.
The Santa Monica Landmarks Commission heard from dozens of angry and concerned homeowners last week after it emerged that the commission may consider converting the neighborhood.
“For some people it’s a frightening proposition that there is government intrusion on what you can do with your property,” said Tom Larmore, a north of Montana homeowner. “If you are in an historic district you’ve got a problem because you cannot alter your house.”
“For some people it’s a frightening proposition that there is government intrusion on what you can do with your property.”
Larmore, also a member of the newly created Santa Monicans for Responsive Government, distributed 1,000 flyers to residents in the area the weekend before the Dec. 17 landmark commission meeting to inform them that their neighborhood is being considered for historic designation.
“It was designed to get people’s attention,” Larmore said. “If nobody paid attention to this, nothing would happen.”
But Liz Bar-El, a city planner and the liaison to the landmarks commission, said the flyer contained misinformation and was used to infuse fear into neighbors. As a result, many people became emotional and their fears were premature, she added.
“Because of the misinformation out there, people came up in arms,” Bar-El aid. “Districts are not generally designated if there is no support for them. If there is no interest in maintaining that neighborhood, then it won’t be.”
Larmore said people were criticized for being emotional, but the fact is they don’t want the government meddling in their affairs. They fear restrictions would result in a reduction of property values.
Bar-El said the city last conducted an historic resources inventory in 1986. Now it wants to update the list of historic structures within city limits. Part of that study may suggest districts could be created to preserve Santa Monica’s history and character. The first neighborhood on the list is north of Montana. She added that Historic Resources Group, the West Los Angeles-based consultant, is expected to present its report in February. After that, there will be many community meetings to gauge the public’s support.
“That gives me absolutely no comfort whatsoever,” said Larmore. “It doesn’t take too much creativity to think that area will become a district.”
The fundamental question is whether government should be in the business of telling property owners how to maintain their homes, said Jacquie Banks, a realtor at Caldwell Banker, a majority of whose business is north of Montana.
She suggested historic designation could make a neighborhood more desirable. Banks noted a neighborhood in her hometown of San Antonio became a treasured landmark that characterizes the history of the area after it received historic designation. People there are proud to be property owners in the district, she said.
But rather than dictating to property owners, Banks thinks the city should “incentivize” people to preserve the historic character of their neighborhoods, perhaps through tax breaks.
“As an American, I don’t want the government telling me what I can or cannot do with my property,” she said. “I would like the homeowners to have a choice... What I would say to the homeowners is ‘embrace it,’ but to the government I would say, ‘don’t make them embrace it.’”
The idea that historic landmark restrictions devalue the properties is a very real threat to homeowners in the area, Banks agreed. But she added that it’s a “push-pull” situation, because homeowners could find value in being a special part of the town’s history.
“If everyone embraced it, it would be positive because it’s a sought-after neighborhood,” she said, adding it may be a few years before people see value in buying or owning in a historic district. “I would think it would be the transitional period that would be negative.”
“If everyone embraced it, it would be positive because it’s a sought-after neighborhood. I would think it would be the transitional period that would be negative.” — — TOM LARMORE Homeowner — JACQUIE BANKS Caldwell Banker Realtor
There are 256 homes in the neighborhood north of Montana. City officials fear that over time, developers will buy up all the land, demolish the old houses and build bigger ones. Further, some popular U.S. neighborhoods have become virtual ghost towns as mansions become second homes and “go dark.”
“They are not looking at it as a neighborhood, but as a piece of land,” Bar-El said. “They come, build and then they leave and then we will say at some point, ‘how did this happen?’”
Banks points out that many of the homes there may not fall into the category of being historic anymore.
“It’s a wonderful idea at first glance,” she said. “But I think the neighborhood is too far gone, meaning the homes are already changed.”
Bar-El said there are two historic districts in Santa Monica right now — the Third Street neighborhood, which extends from Beach Street to Hill Street and the Bay Street cluster, which is four properties on Bay Street. The next in line to be studied for historic designation could be Ocean Park, although that has not yet been determined, she said.
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on December 21, 2001. Read the original PDF.