Historic panel recommends demolition of Marina Village bank building, urges conditions for interim use and future design

The San Buenaventura Historic Preservation Committee on June 11 recommended the demolition of a two‑story former bank at 2497 Harbor Boulevard while asking the city to attach conditions to any coastal development permit to ensure the site is used safely after demolition and that new construction be compatible with the remaining shopping center.

The decision followed more than two hours of presentation, public comment and debate after staff summarized two professional studies that reached opposing conclusions. The HRG Historic Resources Group found the Marina Village Shopping Center could represent a cohesive, potentially eligible local landmark tied to the 1960s designs by architects Fischer & Wild; a later assessment by consultant Cara Brunzelle concluded most of the center lacks integrity and that only the Thrifty Mart grocery rises to potential individual landmark status.

"Where we have two qualified historic preservation professionals that have evaluated a subject property and reached differing conclusions," principal planner Jared Rosen told the committee, "staff reviewed both reports and concluded the subject building does not meet the threshold for designation as an individual landmark." The staff presentation and the two consultant reports formed the basis of the committee's deliberations.

Public speakers emphasized different priorities. Stephen Schaefer, president of the San Buenaventura Conservancy, urged careful attention to the district argument and singled out the grocery store as retaining high integrity: "The supermarket, the Thrifty Mart, is potential and has a lot of integrity," he said during public comment. Neighbors and property‑owners said the vacant bank has become a public‑safety and nuisance concern. "We've been actively trying to lease this building since Chase Bank left," applicant representative Alyssa Gutierz told the committee; she added owners have explored interim uses and said, "Edison disconnected us and Edison will not reconnect us," which she described as a contributor to safety and vacancy problems.

Committee members wrestled with preservation ideals and practical constraints. Several members said the bank is not individually eligible but that losing it could reduce the integrity of the group of 1960s buildings. After two tied votes on alternative motions, the committee adopted a motion finding that the committee did not currently see a historic impact that would prevent demolition and recommended demolition proceed with explicit recommendations to the decision authority for a coastal permit: require a safe and pleasant interim use after demolition and insist that any new construction be compatible with the character of the shopping center and the Thrifty Mart. The final motion passed 3–1 (Member Stratton voted no; Members Uler and Welch and Chair Houston voted yes).

The committee’s recommendation is advisory; the coastal development permit and any mitigation or conditions will be considered by the community development director and other decision‑making bodies. Staff noted the coastal permit process would allow recommended conditions to be incorporated into the entitlement, including requirements for interim site treatment and measures to make future construction compatible with the nearby historic resource.

The committee’s packet included both consultant reports, HRG’s phase‑2 impacts assessment and Brunzelle’s historical resource evaluation, and staff told members those documents — along with the committee’s recommendation — will be part of the record forwarded to the decision authority.