Historic Landmarks Commission accepts Phase 2 De La Guerra Plaza historic‑structure and cultural‑landscape study; two commissioners dissent

The Historic Landmarks Commission voted to accept a Phase 2 historic‑structure/site report and cultural landscape study for the De La Guerra Plaza revitalization project, concluding the revised plans and recommended mitigation would allow the core plaza to remain an eligible historic resource provided the report’s guidance is followed. The motion passed with a majority; two commissioners voted against the acceptance.

Nut graf: The Phase 2 report, prepared for the city by Post Hazeltine Associates, reviewed historical maps, photographs and prior findings and concluded the plaza’s significance is primarily its long‑standing urban form — an open rectilinear civic space framed by surrounding buildings. The report recommended that proposed design changes (including a new level plaza surface, a pavilion at the eastern end, and a ground‑level water feature) could meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards if the report’s mitigation and guidance are implemented. Two commissioners said the report under‑weighted the plaza’s historical pattern of public use and raised objections to removing historic turf and curbing.

What was proposed and reviewed: The project would raise and level the central plaza and reconfigure East De La Guerra Street between Anacapa and State, replace deep turf and mixed paving with a unified, level surface, install a low‑profile water feature that can be activated for play, add a pavilion and stage near the historic footprint of the old adobe, and provide new landscaping and restrooms. The Phase 2 report examined the physical history of the plaza, reviewed prior documentation (including a 2011 study finding the plaza eligible for landmarking and prior 1924 city engineering work), and evaluated whether the proposed project could meet federal preservation standards.

Votes and dissent: A motion to accept the Phase 2 report and cultural landscape study carried on a roll‑call vote; Commissioners Lundbeck and Enzberg voted no. In their statements, each said the analysis did not adequately account for how the plaza historically functioned as a soft‑landscape, multi‑use public gathering space and that removing the turf and curbing risked changing how citizens used the space in ways that could weaken the resource’s historic character. Supporters of the report said the defining characteristic of the plaza is its form — the open rectangle surrounded by buildings — and that the proposed design conserves that fundamental quality while making the space more flexible and accessible.

Why the disagreement matters: The dispute illustrates a recurring tension in preservation practice between preserving specific historic materials (for example, early‑20th‑century curb and turf configurations) and preserving the spatial or experiential qualities that give a place meaning (the plaza as a long‑used public gathering area). Two commissioners asked that the record reflect their concern that the Phase 2 analysis did not fully assess changes to use and how those use changes could affect the plaza’s ability to convey its historic significance.

Next steps: Staff and the project team said the design will continue to be refined; because the project will require environmental review (an EIR is in progress), further design permits and reviews will follow. The accepted Phase 2 report becomes the preservation analysis base for later design reviews and environmental documentation; staff said any significant design changes later would require an addendum or revision to the Phase 2 report.

Ending: The commission’s acceptance clears a major technical step for the De La Guerra Plaza revitalization, but the recorded no votes signal remaining preservation concerns commissioners want addressed as the design and environmental review continue.