Author: Emily Roe

Part IV of an essay sent in to FFFF.

At present, Fullerton Heritage is applying to place historic preservation layers over four neighborhoods. While we heartily dislike SB 330 and SB 9, our experience with the local players has been negative. There are enough unpleasant memories that we wish we could assign to the scrap bin. But Fullerton Heritage members have been intrusive and confrontational in Skyline Park over things they don’t like. It is hard to shake when you are attacked at your own house. Especially when the neighborhood has never had a historic preservation layer over it, and where all the neighbors have done their best.

FOR A BAR, THE DRINKS COULD BE STRONGER: BOOHOOISM AMONG THE SELF-APPOINTED TASTE ARBITERS

Homeowners without HOAʻs assume they will make their own choices and not hassle with those who think they know better. While Fullerton Heritage isn’t an HOA, some of its members mimic one even if a neighborhood doesn’t fall within their scope.

Heritage proponents have given unsolicited opinions on everything from windows, gardens, and house colors. But their opinions aren’t necessarily rooted in the rules set forth by the city. They like to make stuff up, inferring there are rules in areas where there are none. A Fullerton Heritage board member, even made up a rule about painted bricks and unsuccessfully tried to use it against her neighbor. That this was a neighborhood without a preservation layer, and that the house was built in the mid-1960’s made no difference to her. She just wanted the power to stop her elderly neighbor from painting his fake brick facade. Fortunately, she failed (the house looks great). But it was not her first grab for authority. Many years ago, she took photos of neighborhood homes without the owner’s consent and ran away when people tried to ask who she was. They found she’d had free reign of the FH website and posted rando things about many of the homes. (They were later taken down). But make no mistake: Their lack of boundaries will be your problem, too.

At their worst, a call was made to city planning to complain about new windows, already installed in a house that was in the process of remodeling. Never mind that the city approved the work a year earlier. The city issued a stop-work anyway. The Boohoo-Who didn’t want to accept that the city allows for new energy-efficient double pane windows, and no one (except for someone applying for the Mill’s Act -but that’s another tangled story) is beholden to single-pane wood windows. Replacement metal, vinyl, aluminum clad or composite double-pane windows, with or without grids are allowed. These have all been approved, installed, and scarcely noticed by neighbors already. It’s an environmentally mindful push past the battle cry for wood windows by Fullerton Heritage members with a personal preference.

But we also got the impression of a too-close relationship between the City and Fullerton Heritage. When asked why the stop order work was issued, the city couldn’t say why. But that a Boohoo-Who had the power to bring an approved project to a halt is a forewarning that with this group, there is no discussion.

Just recently, their president tried shut down dissent at an informational meeting. It was next level assholery, but it was on par with the scolding from another FH member who admonished anyone who disagreed with her. Is this a bar or a high school? Did they really think they could have a meeting about other people’s homes without push back? This seems like a group from an era where people were expected to get along by going along. If they’ve spent any time listening or talking with the younger generations, they’d know that the world doesn’t work that way anymore.

Part IV of an essay sent in to FFFF.

EVERYTHING’S GOING UP

But applying preservation layers also will not get rid of badly written partisan bills, set time back, or get rid of high rises. In Los Angeles County alone, if 70% is zoned R-1, this leaves 30% for a combination of single-family houses, townhouses, condos and apartments that encompasses everything from market rate to affordable and Section 8 housing. If the city of Fullerton has a housing element of over 13,000, developments on lands not zoned R 1 will be closely spaced together and many will go vertical. It is a complete shift of how people will live going forward, but ironically, also doesn’t guarantee that they will be able to afford it if wages and jobs stagnate, or if younger generations continue to saddle themselves with staggering debt before they even enter the workforce.

The California Dream of single-family home ownership was born during a time when the population was lower, and land was available. Wages and opportunities went up, there was a plentiful supply of houses, and developers worked with lenders which helped keep the housing supply affordable. But much of this has changed. While the elders of the local preservation movement were able to work, live and retire in the city, it’s been different for the generations following them. People live further away from work in the search for cheaper and new housing. But this has enormous costs: Multi-hour commutes each day, a separation of child and parent as one goes to school in one city, and the parent works (often hours away) in another. Many families and individuals are spending over 50% of their earnings on housing, fuel, utilities, and healthcare. There is not that much left over. In addition, there are the environmental costs -entire swaths of land taken up by single family homes puts stress on the local environment and wildlife. Then there is the problem of water and not enough of it, as developments have been built onto arid lands. R 1 zoning, as we once knew it, is gone.

This next part has already been covered in depth with great insight by commenter Fran J in this blog a few weeks ago. If haven’t searched for her comments -do. They deserve to be taken seriously.

CHARTER CITIES: SEEKING AUTONOMY

If the judges ruling on SB 9 is upheld on appeal it could have an impact on 121 charter cities including plaintiffs Redondo Beach, Torrance, Whittier and Del Mar, and San Diego, San Francisco and Los Angeles. (A charter city has ultimate authority over its municipal affairs and works within a framework of California laws). Fullerton has entered a study phase on becoming a charter city. Fullerton city officials point out the states’ overreaching capacity to run roughshod over municipal zoning (SB 330) and order 13,206 units to be built over 5 years, with no provisions to pay for the expansion of municipal services or first responder coverage, or look how a higher density will impact health, air quality, water availability, and wildlife.

An explosion in growth from the raised Housing Element will be paid by either adding or raising fees, making cuts in programs, or raising taxes. Contrarians (YIMBYs) cite concern for abuse, and cities shirking their role to provide new housing. However, becoming a Charter City could help the city with SB 9 and SB 330. Whether or not Fullerton becomes a Charter City, NIMBYs will continue to fight to preserve even mundane neighborhoods, parks, and buildings. Adding a layer will impact the planning and permitting process, and risks ushering in a cadre of taste arbiters who will be too happy to have a glimmer of official status.

In the question of Skyline Park, this is a tiresome war that has been waged for almost 40 years, pitting neighbors against one another. What’s new is SB 9 and the undoing of R 1 zoning. Rather than grimacing and going along with the notion of establishing a permanent layer of bureaucracy, we used this as a chance to understand the housing crises, the shift in beliefs around urban planning, and the new laws that have been crafted. We also thought it was fair to compile our own experiences and observations of the players, behind this local push. Namely, Fullerton Heritage.

Part III of an essay sent in to FFFF.

THE WHITE PAPER
CAUGHT IN A CULTURE WAR of HISTORIC PRESERVATION

PART III

 In the last article, we covered the introduction of SB 9, which was the YIMBY’s way of taking a hatchet to single family zoning by making it legal not only to build ADUs, but also to subdivide lots and build up to four units per 2400 sq ft lot (now divided into 50/50 or 40/60). Crafted by 7 authors and co-authors, SB 9 had the support from a mix of housing groups and organizations like AARP, big money builders, cities, planners, advocates, urban planners, developers, and companies such as Facebook. The CA YIMBY claimed that it is illegal to build middle income housing in 70% of Los Angeles County because of R-1 zoning. The YIMBY movement adheres to the belief expressed in a paper, “It’s Time To End Single Family Housing,” by Manville, Monkkonen and Lens that R-1 zoning is built on racist and classist assumptions as well as exclusion. The authors call for an outright abolition of R 1 zoning, which is the basis of the YIMBYs view of the future, and it has influenced every bill passed. However, the authors state that ending R-1 zoning will not guarantee the end of segregation, exclusion or housing affordability. In other words, you can do all of this -SB 330, SB 9, but still have dickheads. Because getting rid of assholery is a totally different challenge (which extends to both sides of the aisle). But for the YIMBY movement, passing a bill is where they decided to start.

IN LIEU OF COWS, APPLY PRESERVATION

Because this is politics, there are loopholes, places where SB 9 does not apply: Farms, hazardous waste sites, high fire risk zones, ecological conservation areas, and historic preservation zones. Short of adding cattle or flooding city lots, NIMBYs stepped up to blanket entire neighborhoods as “historic preservation zones” in response to SB 9. Much of it by neighborhood groups or nonprofit organizations like Fullerton Heritage, who have moved aggressively to include downtown adjacent areas.

However, YIMBYs believe that this is an abuse by impassioned locals to ʻweaponize preservation.ʻ They claim NIMBYs donʻt want to preserve as much as they want to keep state-mandated multi-family as well as affordable housing out under the guise of “homey” and “charming.”

But SB 9 is used by NIMBYʻs to get people to side with adding Preservation layers, as happened at a community meeting in Fullerton, requested by Fullerton Heritage and facilitated by City Planning for the purposes of finding out about this top-down proposal. All anyone had to do to gain support was say the word, “four-plex” without being informed of the nuances of SB 9, along with the many restrictions that make the implementation of this bruiser bill both costly and difficult.

PUSHBACK: AB 2580

To help cities ensure that their Housing Element is met, YIMBYs countered this rush to create new preservation zones or move land into land trusts. AB 2580 was passed to monitor them:
“(N) A list of all historic designations listed on the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historic Resources, or a local register of historic places by the city or county in the past year, including an assessment of how those designations affect the ability of the city or county to meet its housing needs.” –Text of Assembly Bill 2580
            The reality is that by declaring entire districts ‘historic’ regardless of whether or not the neighborhoods were built to express one or a few historically significant styles, puts more pressure on adjacent neighborhoods to fill a city’s Housing Element (the required number of state-mandated housing units). Neither style, nor era-based uniformity is required. One such neighborhood, Skyline Park, is an attractive mix of single family homes built over a 100 year period, from Spanish revival, mock colonial, and to houses that reflect a broad scope of styles. To NIMBYs, the loophole exists to highlight and preserve architectural examples for a particular era but keep a districtʻs relationship between buildings and grounds intact. They also seek to prevent, what in their eyes are behemoths or buildings or features not to their taste from being built. What teeth does AB 2580 have if a city runs afoul? It remains to be seen.
AB 2580 was approved by Quirk-Silva and Newman, with solid support from both parties.

BANG BANG: AND THEN A JUDGE CHIMED IN

To the YIMBYs dismay, SB 9 was declared unconstitutional by a Los Angeles judge in 2024. While SB 9 made way for increased housing, it had no provisions for affordable housing as required by the state constitution. The judge ruled in favor of the 5 cities who sued the state: Redondo Beach, Carson, Torrance, Whittier and Del Mar, who no longer must abide by the rules of SB 9.  For now, SB 9 is still in force and could be amended to reflect the same wording in the California constitution. But it has led Fullerton to consider morphing into something different.

FFFF was sent a well-written and thought provoking essay regarding the issue of historic preservation, zoning used to defy Sacramento mandates, and of course freedom of expression. Apparently somebody is making a another attempt to establish a historic district in one of Fullerton’s older neighbor hoods.

This piece is pretty lengthy so I’m presenting it in installments.

Caught in a culture war;
When self determination and neighborhood
trust are at stake

The question of whether or not to approve a historic preservation layer over a neighborhood isn’t one that is new. This is the third fight, which in the past has included protests with pink lawn flamingos. Hells bells and all out, I didn’t mind wading into new waters to gain an understanding of this current push to put several neighborhoods under preservation layers, and how three new laws are shaping our city and its neighborhoods.

NIMBYs and YIMBYs

This is a culture war is between NIMBYs and YIMBYs (Not in My Backyard and Yes in My Backyard). Both are adept at crafting legislation that echo their ideologies. The struggle is between those don’t want any changes in their neighborhoods, and those who insist that the California Dream needs to evolve and that zoning needs to be changed in order to accommodate the needs of cities today. The foot soldiers for this war are embodied by the California Senate and the Assembly. Most of us wouldn’t self-identify as either a NIMBY or a YIMBY, but prefer the term neighbors. Culture wars start with a problem: Californiaʻs population of 39.4 million has resulted in a housing shortage. There aren’t enough places to rent, and the median price for housing in Orange County alone, is well beyond the reach of many. In Sacramento, new laws have been created, the bulk of them are partisan bills introduced and passed in the Newsom era. To make way for building, these new laws override existing municipal zoning combining egalitarian ideals with capitalism.

Re-zoning On Steroids: SB 330

The result of one side of the culture wars is marked by the emergence of high rise apartments, not only in Fullerton, but everywhere. These developments help cities meet a state-assigned number of new units to fulfill its Housing Element (Fullertonʻs HE has been set to 13,206). The law, SB 330, super charges the approval process and prevents cities from adopting new zoning laws that could serve as a barrier to development. Laws like SB 330 are part of the ʻBuilders Remedy,ʻ which applies to a section of the California code for cities who have yet to meet their quota. Present zoning regulations are moot, and developments for housing are planned. These projects get help from Federal economic stimulus plans intended to revitalize cities because they include affordable housing. Programs that provide funding and tax breaks to build new housing are applied for by developers, while cities get development fees and increased tax revenues. Since land is scarce, former commercial, freeway and railroad adjacent lands and urban infill are being developed. With a lower per-unit cost, and a higher ROI, high rises and new subdivisions that cover city blocks are being built for buyers, renters, and includes affordable and low income housing. Thereʻs a lot riding on this. The state is trying to create housing for all, help people avoid homelessness, fuel the economy with the creation of jobs, renew cities, and keep employers in California by producing affordable housing. Housing, jobs, and renewing cities are ways of affirming humanity.