Why Downtown is Suffering - Part II

Continued from “Why Downtown Laguna is Suffering”

In my last PC application, Staff took on the role of “enforcing” their interpretation of what the Commissioners wanted. But they were overzealous. After the PC “implied” that they wanted a major reconstruction of my building façade and “requested” that I hire an architect, and “suggested” that I prepare “higher quality” documents, Staff told me outright that all were required. None were required by any written City rule or recommendation. When the head of Staff raided my construction job and sent Code Enforcement after me, and the Junior Staffer was very uncooperative, how much of that was purely personal retribution, and how much was a desire to pressure me into doing what the PC wanted? In the lack of specificity in written guidelines, and so much subjective leeway given to the PC, Staff seem to have taken on the role of supporting the PC in what they want, as opposed to supporting the actual written documents.

I don’t believe Staff’s role should be to guess what the PC may or may not want and then try to justify it in their report or require it for the submittal to be accepted. They should be neutral and analytical--pointing out all arguments for and against the proposal. Staff’s role should be to review the appropriate written Guidelines and other written laws, regulations, etc.; interpret them in a complete, logical analysis, and present the facts, pertinent Guidelines, etc. in a clear manner. They should provide a recommendation, based upon this analysis, if a clear conclusion can be drawn from a specific rule or a preponderance of evidence supporting one recommendation over the other. Unlike Commissioners, Staff have received formal training in city planning. They are supposed to be familiar with and uphold the actual written City requirements and guidelines. Their reports are supposed to inform and, if necessary, “rein in” or constrain the PC’s decision process in relation to these written rules. Although they do do that to a certain degree, Staff have shifted in deference to the PC’s power to a more accommodating role.

Because of limited criticism, or openness to criticism, I don’t believe Commissioners or Planning Staff are fully in touch with how the public really feels. In speaking with dozens of the local architects in town, I really got an earful of this. But, no matter how frustrated they all are, no matter how much they felt the PC was acting inappropriately, they would never, ever, say anything directly. Their very livelihood is based upon having a favorable relationship with the Commissioners and Planning Staff.

Business and property owners shouldn’t have to hire attorneys to help them prepare and present their applications, but we have a thriving business in such consulting services. All of these factors make submitting proposals all the more difficult and expensive. The point is, the focus should be to encourage building and tenant improvements, not discourage them with excessive fees, long waits, and other aggravating factors. Certainly not to try to bully and coerce them by withholding other approvals, or accepting them as a “bribe” in exchange for allowing businesses that otherwise wouldn’t be approved to move here. [In my opinion, allowing chain businesses to move in in exchange for big bucks to “pretty up” storefronts is a bad deal. The City risks “selling its soul for a new set of clothes” with this approach.]

Big time developers planning to rent to chain operations like Tommy Bahama may be able to afford the time, money, and aggravation involved with submitting proposals, but most small family-owned businesses or property owners just can’t. The little guy submitting the little proposals just can’t justify the cost, time and trouble. Even minor changes to facades needed for business improvement involve so much time, money and stress that it is not worth bothering. It can cost thousands of dollars and several weeks, if not months, just to get approval to paint your storefront a slightly different color. Denial is possible. A modification of your request is almost certain. We are effectively making it harder for the small family owned business to survive. New ones will find it harder to move in and the existing ones will be forced to just “leave everything exactly like it is.” The City does have an “administrative approval” process, but this is only for very minor or inconsequential changes. Because this process comes down to one person’s personal discretion and is not a public process, it is even more subject to personal bias and inconsistent application. It is also not advertised and few applicants know about it. We need something in between, something with public input, but faster, cheaper, and easier. All businesses must change, adopt and improve over time to survive. Unless they are lucky enough to stay exactly the same and still survive, small, family owned businesses are going to be steadily replaced by big operations that have the wherewithal to get things approved. Small property owners are not going to update or renovate their buildings no matter how needed they are.

The relationship between the City planning functions and local business and property owners has gotten so bad, that several owners have told me outright that they would resist making any City requested improvements, even if they liked them, just to spite the City. They would prefer just to let their building sit the way they are forever--anything to avoid dealing with the planning process. Some locals have told me the best way to handle minor improvements is to do them during the dead of night. Although I don’t condone such tactics, I can’t blame others for feeling that way. Some of the dozens of local architects I spoke with (none that I hired) told me that Laguna Beach had the worst planning function in the entire United States. While this may be an exaggeration, and they are talking about all planning functions, not just for the downtown area, these kinds of comments are an indication there is a problem. Changes are needed.

The City Needs to Encourage Unique and Desirable Shops and Favorable Building Improvements it Does Want

I believe our City needs to change its approach from just limiting or restricting what it doesn’t want, to also encouraging what it does want. Businesses aren’t always going to be banging on the door trying to get in like they did in the past. Many business operations would no longer consider downtown Laguna Beach suitable. The trend is to build bigger outlets and situate them in shopping destinations that support larger geographic areas. There are plenty of nearby centers that are much better alternatives.

I think the most effective and easiest to implement change would be to streamline approval for desired things. That is, streamline all applications and communicate better to make it more specific and clear which proposals are unacceptable before hand. There are some situations where one owner can profit at the expense of the town overall, but most property owners want the right tenants and want their storefronts to look good. Business and property owners are also fully aware their success is based upon Laguna’s unique appeal. No one wants to destroy that. Most want to improve their properties or rent to the most favorable types of business. Owners are not the enemy the City must always fight to protect downtown. Local businesses are residents too. Doing things that result in an improved working relationship and reputation with the business community will also encourage more applicants to propose improvements. The City needs to change its attitude and express more appreciation for businesses and property owners.

Some Ways to Encourage Desired Improvements

There are ways to encourage desired businesses and improvements downtown. Something as inexpensive as giving out annual awards for most unique, most improved, best new, etc., businesses and properties shows appreciation and spurs others to compete for recognition. An abbreviated and less expensive process for small projects meeting certain restrictions is another idea. Right now, really small projects cost the same and have to go through the same time consuming processes as really big projects. I’m sure there are many Cities that have come up with innovative ideas. I bring up the City of San Diego because I am somewhat familiar with them. San Diego recently implemented several new programs for its historic downtown Gaslamp District. The City Council, like our own, wanted the best downtown possible. The WORD came down: Improve the downtown area. But instead of just beating owners over the head by condemning buildings, issuing citations, etc., a positive approach was taken. For example, the City Planning and Development Office now works very closely with the downtown Chamber of Commerce and actively communicates with business owners and the real estate community as to the types of businesses and façade improvements desired.

The City implemented a program whereby small business/property owners get free use of a city-assigned architect to help them design and present drawings to Design Review for façade improvements. The architect assigned accepts a lower fee rate from the City and is very familiar with City Guidelines and preferences. Approval is usually granted quickly with few if any subjective changes by DR as long as it meets all written specifications in the Design Guidelines. Because the Gaslamp is a nationally recognized, historically designated district, the Guidelines are much more strict and far more specific than our own Guidelines. Yet, they are flexible enough to allow a variety of architectural styles. Instead of focusing on a particular architectural look, the Guidelines embrace a variety of architectural styles, that are true to the fact the buildings were built up over many different time periods. [In contrast, Laguna has preferred to allow modifications to historical buildings, in favor of what it considers an idealized image of what an arts colony / small town village should look like.] The Gaslamp Planning Commission strongly enforces their Guidelines, yet it also sincerely tries to accommodate local owners requests, allowing for creative approaches and specific exceptions that fall within the spirit of the Guideline’s approach. They may offer, but never impose their own personal ideas or deny anything that is not specifically disallowed in the Guidelines. If someone does something that is really undesirable, they change the Guidelines to prohibit it in future projects.

The Planning Commission itself is composed of 5 local business/property owners, a local architect, and a representative from the City Planning Department. Positions are not permanent. The rotating local architect serves on the Planning Commission for a short time to provide professional input on matters of color, style, and design. The architect is not allowed to opine on any of his own projects while he serves on the Commission.

After approval, the business or property owner then has access to a special free small business “facilitator” to guide them through the entire construction permit process. A new customer survey program has been set up to evaluate Planning and Building staff. The survey results are taken seriously by City management. Promotions, raises, and other incentives are doled out to those who receive favorable feedback from the public, and vice versa.

The City of San Diego’s Planning and Building Departments used to have a horrible reputation and people were very hesitant to do business there. All that is changing rapidly and the downtown area is booming. Major improvement projects, new businesses, and throngs of new residents and visitors are streaming in. People are moving back into the downtown area. The resident population is growing. And this downtown was a lot worse off than Laguna ever was. Just seven years ago, many retail buildings and hotels were boarded up or abandoned to homeless people and drug dealers. Visitors to the sleazy bars were sure to be mugged as they walked out. Rents averaged from $.50 to $2.00 a square foot for the best locations. Yet this area has fantastic weather. It is located right next to a beautiful harbor and popular beaches. It is accessible from major freeways, a metro rail depot right downtown, and an International Class airport and harbor. The whole District was designed for pedestrians. There are 15 foot wide solid brick sidewalks throughout--enough to allow outdoor seating for all the restaurants and still have plenty of room to walk past. It is chock full of marvelous, high-class, historically significant buildings. Grand and artistic hand crafted brick commercial buildings from the 1880’s, elegant Victorian mansions, magnificent Art Deco palaces, and boisterous neon lit classics from the 1950’s. These are the remnants of grand times, and an example and warning of how far a downtown area can decline. This beautiful and desirable place was killed off by the growth of, and exodus to, small communities which became suburbs over the last 60 years. This same growth trend that built up Laguna Beach. But times change and we must change with it to survive and prosper.

These new procedures have been very successful in San Diego. Some versions of them may be useful in Laguna. Other Cities’ ideas may be even better. Perhaps liaisons or facilitators to help with the CUP Application and Design Review processes would be better needed here than the building permit facilitator program they have there. I know first hand and have heard from others that a Staff Planner has refused to provide even the most basic assistance with CUP or façade modification applications. On the other hand, I have personally had the privilege of working with most of the other Staff Planners that were simply wonderful. I have heard some complaints about the Building Department, but I have not experienced any problems myself. Certainly, such a technical area full of codes and legal requirements can be inherently confusing and frustrating, especially for the small property and business owners so common here. Big chains can afford in-house or expensive architects and crews of contractors to easily sort through all that stuff. The main point is, reducing the confusion and streamlining the processes will encourage the desirable applications. The City can still deny undesirable ones just as effectively as they do now.

I’m sure there are tons of good ideas out there. Just soliciting ideas from the local residents and business/property owners may yield a number of great ideas. A mechanism needs to be created to solicit, post and critique new ideas. Most well run businesses have some sort of suggestion box type of mechanism. Perhaps we can solicit more comments and ideas by using the Internet or more public meetings.

alanhall.cpa@verizon.net