ESCONDIDO: Historians weigh value of 1950s tract homes

By DAVID GARRICK - Staff Writer | Saturday, April 19, 2008 7:03 PM PDT ∞

ESCONDIDO -- As thousands of tract homes in Escondido approach the pivotal 50-year milestone to be considered historically significant, city officials and historians have begun debating how many of the homes should be preserved.

Some say none of the homes built in Escondido during the late 1950s should be saved, because they do not feature remarkable architecture and that they all look similar.

But some contend that at least one house from each of the era's subdivisions should be preserved for educational purposes. And others argue that the city should set aside a small neighborhood or two so that future generations can see what life in Escondido was like when the city began to sprawl away from its urban core.

"There needs to be a deep discussion about what should be preserved from that era of dwelling units," historian Lucy Berk said last week. "We had an easier time when we were preserving stuff built before the turn of the 20th century, because there was a very limited stock. But thousands and thousands of homes that look exactly alike were built in the late '50s."

Bob McQuead, a member of the city's Historic Preservation Commission, said informal discussions among city officials about what to preserve are in the very early stages.

"You could make different arguments for many different approaches, but the key factor is whether the homes are meaningful and representative," said McQuead. "It's not about how many homes were built in the 1950s, it's about how many historically significant homes were built then."

A fine line

Preserving historical homes and buildings virtually always spurs debate in cities and communities.

Historians want to save precious evidence of bygone eras. But city officials worry about impinging on private property rights and the financial losses that come with giving property tax breaks to the owners of historical homes.

The city of San Diego has faced sharp criticism this year for giving a total of $4.7 million in tax breaks to the owners of 805 properties that qualify as historically significant under California's Mills Act.

The state law, passed in 1972, reduces taxes to compensate property owners for the greater maintenance expenses required to keep a historical house in its authentic state.

Escondido has the second-most Mills Act homes in the county, with 69. But property tax losses in Escondido don't even make a dent in the city's $85 million annual budget, because the city only loses about $14,000 per year, according to Joan Ryan, the city's finance manager.

"The amount of money the city is losing is minimal when you compare it to their overall budget," said Wendy Barker, executive director of the Escondido History Center in Grape Day Park.

But city planner Paul Bingham estimated last week that roughly 6,000 of the 47,000 housing units in the city will be greater than 50 years old within the next few years.

Most of the homes about to pass the 50-year milestone were built in large subdivisions of several hundred homes, which are called tract developments.

If the city deems many of those homes historically significant and the owners apply for Mills Act exemptions, there would be a much larger impact on city finances, he said.

Bingham said the city will probably conduct another historical-site survey in 2011 or 2012. Previous surveys in 1983, 1992 and 2001 have placed about 270 properties on the city's Register of Historic Places.

Officials say they rely on a combination of factors to determine historical significance, including whether the structure is at least 50 years old. Other factors include architectural significance, historic events that took place in the structure and whether famous people lived there or visited.

Use carrots, not sticks

Councilman Sam Abed said last week that the city should proceed cautiously with preserving homes built in the late 1950s.

"As one of the oldest cities in the county, we have an obligation to make historic preservation a priority," said Abed. "But we need to ask ourselves how these homes relate to Escondido's history."

Abed said it is especially important that the city use incentives to get people to preserve their homes, as opposed to forcing the issue in a way that does not respect private property rights.

McQuead, the Historic Preservation Commission member, said the city's policies on historical preservation are not very intrusive.

He said that historically significant structures often get moved to alternate locations so property owners can use the land in a different way, and the city often provides incentives other than the Mills Act. Incentives have included discounts on sewer and water hook-ups and other city fees.

McQuead suggested the city should take a conservative approach to designating the homes built in the late 1950s as historically significant, but not give up on them completely.

"Maybe within a district of 100 homes, you would preserve one home or maybe one example of each floor plan," said McQuead, who has lived in Escondido since 1959. "You want to pass along pieces of history so people know what came before."

Flowers and presidents

Councilman Ed Gallo said last week that he saw no reason to preserve late 1950s subdivisions built northeast of downtown in neighborhoods known as "The Flower Streets" and "The President Streets."

The flower streets include Fern, Daisy, Camellia and Begonia, and the president streets include Roosevelt, Harding, Hoover and Buchanan.

"I would really have a hard time accepting that those are historic districts," said Gallo, contending that they are not unique enough. "And those homes are not going to go anywhere anyway, because they were well-built."

Mayor Lori Holt Pfeiler agreed that there is a more authentic and historical feeling in the Old Escondido neighborhood south of downtown, where many homes were built in the late 1800s, than there is in the Flower or President street neighborhoods.

But she also said city officials should consider preserving some homes in those areas, explaining that they might be redeveloped in coming decades as city officials try to add more intensive housing around the urban core.

"We need to think about what things will be like in 100 years," said Pfeiler. "Maybe we could save one small neighborhood so people could see what it was like in the 1950s."

Contact staff writer David Garrick at (760) 740-5468 or dgarrick@nctimes.com.