It's pretty common knowledge that the Berkeley Landmarks Comission is a thinly disguised barrier to any sort of development. Even when it's a small guy looking to secure his retirement, they find a way to screw him in favor of total stasis.

For Victor Touriel the stakes are potentially high. The flower shop occupies the downstairs of the Victorian, while the upstairs is used for storage. If he is not permitted to develop the property, which also includes a small parking lot, its resale value may be affected. “I spent all my money on my family, now this was my retirement,” Touriel said.

But here's the truly amazing statement, but a Commission member:

Tim Kelly, an architectural consultant hired by the developers, agreed with a previous historical resources report that said the Victorian failed to qualify as a “structure of merit” because it had undergone so many changes.

“It’s history, but not significant history,” said Kelly, who pointed out that stucco had been laid on the building and that much of it had been rebuilt after a fire in the 1940s.

Commissioner Becky O’Malley, on the other hand, said the renovations added to Victorian’s significance.

“If you have a building that has changed over time, it in itself is part of the historical record,” she said.

Emphasis added.

The first problem with that: it's a complete Catch-22. Don't renovate your old Victorian? Then it's an old landmark and certainly worthy to be frozen. Renovated it extensively? Shoot, that just makes it even more historical! Landmark that puppy!

And if Ms. O'Malley feels that renovations and changes to historical structures make them even more valuable, then why shut off any possibility of changing it by designating it historical? By her own logic, wouldn't she want the building to be a living, breathing piece of architecture instead of putting it in stasis forever?

Amazing people.Email This Post!