By Michael J. Stepner & Mary Lydon / The Daily Transcript / Dec. 10, 2025
The city of San Diego is going through a process to update their heritage preservation program called “Preservation and Progress.” The initiative is a comprehensive update that will streamline processes for new homes and other uses while protecting places of historic, architectural and cultural importance, and encouraging their adaptive reuse.
Historic preservation has gotten tied into the controversy that every perceived obstacle to more housing needs to be eliminated. This is incorrect, but it has become part of the YIMBY versus NIMBY debates, which have become counterproductive.
The belief that “softening” historic preservation rules is used to stop the development of needed housing is a questionable statement. The same charge is also leveled at the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA.
While the rules and process for both are overly broad in some requirements, we need to remember they were put in place to add to the quality of life we desire. They both contain many requirements that may seem unnecessary and can get in the way of achieving what they set out to do.
Which raises the primary question, why are these rules being used to stop new development? The problem may not be so much with the preservation designations or the CEQA review, but rather they are the available tools people use to stop developments they think should not be built as proposed.
For the balance of this article, please go here.
Michael J. Stepner, FAIA, FAICP, is former City of San Diego Architect and Professor Emeritus of the New School of Architecture and Design. He is the recipient of the 2024 AIA San Diego Lifetime Achievement Award.
Mary Lydon, the principal of Lydon Associates, has held leadership roles within the Urban Land Institute, the Downtown San Diego Partnership, and Housing You Matters. She also served on the City of San Diego Planning Commission. She currently serves on the boards of the National Center for Creative Land Recycling, UCSD Housing Policy and Design Center and Humble Design San Diego.
” ,,, §143.1002 “Application of Complete Communities Housing Solutions Regulations.” Subparagraph (b) states “The regulations in this Division shall not apply to the following types of development: (6) Development located within a designated historical district or subject to the Old Town San Diego Planned District., with the following exceptions.,
(A) Development on properties that are not designated as contributing resources to the Ocean Beach Cottage Emerging Historical District;”
With those words, the protection provided to Ocean Beach in State of California law is taken away. This was such a hasty addition, they forgot to remove the “.” before the “,” that is what was inserted. Only one other District is included, the Asian Thematic District, incideentally located right across the Street from the Convention Center.
Everywhere you go you will see buildings that are NOT in historic districts. I don’t have to tell you what they look like. A SPECIAL Thank you to the OBRag.org for keeping us all informed.
Michael and Mary, I agree with you that there is a polar disagreement regarding the Preservation and Progress Code and Code Modification. I see it a little bit differently. Observation and data crunching can and are used to prove points, and to intentionally set the stage for agenda driven action. If you look at Nostalgic’s writing, who wrote just before me , you will see the word for word Code Modification.
The City is breaking its own laws/rules. They said that Complete Communities could not be built in historic communities. BUT WAIT! Communities actually won at least one battle against a Complete Community based on historic designation. When all of San Diego saw that winning against city hall was possible, groups ’emerged’ all over the city. I have lost count, but at least 20 citizen groups have formed and taken the city officials to task.
Why is there such a divide? Money.
Our council people make a lot of money, here is the breakdown.
Mayor $244,727
City Attorney $244,727 (Equal to the salary of a California Superior Court judge.)
City Council Member $183,545 75% of the salary of a California Superior Court judge.
YOUR TAX dollars pay their salaries, YOU are the constituents. The council is working together with this assumption. Equity means everyone has the RIGHT to live where they choose, even in the most expensive areas of San Diego. To achieve this and housing for everyone, High Density, affordable housing is not only necessary but mandated. (Hence the change in munipal code.)
Community by community the ‘character and charm and life style’ has been erased based on a concept that is not proven. Michael and Mary, you said: ” Which raises the primary question, why are these rules being used to stop new development?” Quite the contrary. Complete Communities and changed M-Code regarding ADUs have invited big corporations to San Diego to overbid on local properties, to build, build, build, up and out and around the historic homes.
High-density affordable Housing is an oxymoron, especially when the government formula for required ‘affordable’ units is based on the price of the land. So if say, a developer wants to build 20 units instead of 8, he only has to declare 10-15% of those expensive Ocean Beach units as affordable. He gets to sell mostly market value units, make a giant profit, and he wins, but the neighborhood loses. I always wondered why the 8 units that were eventually called the Pointe were suddenly transformed into 20 units, using the Complete Community Program and its accelerated timeline. I don’t know what really happened, but I know that a government official or staff member could easily have made a phone call, or taken the developer out to lunch, and said “Hey, I think you are missing the boat. You could build more units, make a lot more money, and we would all win. In 30 days you could be fully permitted, Coastal Zone and CEQA rules would be waived, and neighbors will not know what hit them.” Meanwhile the Governor will be happy that San Diego is meeting the benchmarks for High Density Affordable Housing.” Again, to be fair, I really don’t know that this is how or why the apartment complex grew. I do know that we have a runaway government and the elected officials are not serving their constituents well. So, I don’t see this as Yimby vs Nimby. I see this as a government with extremely high taxes, whose officials pass laws that destroy the local vision, history, and power. The city does not listen to the 40 planning boards around the city. The city, using their ministerial law, does not have to notify local residents of building plans. The city officials can write new laws that meet their agenda, without considering the residents, and they do. The city can declare that Complete Communities buildings are perfect in a location even though there is no rapid transit now, no plans in place for building transit, and no funding to support infrastructure. Again city officials are breaking the laws they wrote. Somehow, this does not sound like a Republic. What would you call it when the people have no power, and no voice?
We now call it California. Brilliant summarization of research, observations, logic and critical thinking Lynne. The time came long ago that this Independent, formerly a life long Democrat, flat out refused to carry water any longer for what was once our state Democratic party.
Now is time for us all to support Rank Choice Voting. We can all pitch in and help our brothers and sisters in Chula Vista make this happen. Chula Vista is the modern day San Diego County Waterloo. We can help beat back and end this vicious cycle of corporate corrupted one party rule forever. Don’t let “the Party” detractors tell you rank choice voting confusing, it is not. Rank Choice Voting is not confusing, it is confounding for corrupting influences and makes prostituting legislation and public policy difficult, if not almost impossible.
? Ranked choice voting ensures that the winner is supported by more voters than any other candidate.
In Chula Vista, the nonpartisan primary will remain exactly the same except five candidates, instead of two, will advance to the general election.
In the general election, you can still vote for only one candidate as you currently do OR you can rank candidates in order of preference.
If a candidate wins a majority (over 50%) among the first-choice votes, that candidate is the winner.
If no candidate wins a majority or more, the winning candidate is determined by ranked choice voting, and the winner is determined by more voters than any other candidate.
Learn more and support Rank Choice Voting at https://morechoicesd.org/faq
Help the cause in Chula Vista and by joining the coalition in San Diego to get Rank Choice Voting on our ballot.
The author does not seem to have read the changes. Only ONE historic, primarily residential district is targeted: The Ocean Beach Historic Emerging Cottage District by name. This is basically opening all of Ocean Beach to developers. Why not La Jolla, for example. Or all Historic Districts. We have developers in hand waiting for this to pass, and say goodbye to Voltaire, West Point Loma, Newport, and Point Loma Ave as we know them. This is the most seriously threatening to Ocean Beach as the neighborhood we live in. Pacific Beach is facing a 22 story building in a one-story commercial neighborhood.
I think the city already gutted the Planning Dept.
That’s a 23 story building. And for some perspective nearly twice the height of the belligerent eyesore that is the “Crappie” Hotel. Taller than the Wells Fargo building downtown, taller than the Todd Gloria asbestos ridden 101 Ash St. (A building so toxic the City Council and Mayor refuse to even enter it, but paid taxpayer cash for it)
Tastes great vs. less filling.
developer bullying…our coast is hyper fragile, especially these future years…
be wise, listen to the environment, hear the ocean,
please, just say “no” for now, let the other future bureaucrats deal with it…
not you…
You, the today bureaucrats, will be blamed for coastal destruction…
just say, “maybe later, we will think about it”
and then, go think about it !
PS the “yimby’s” (yes in my backyard) dont really have any backyards to speak of…in fact they dont really live here