Fullerton Re-Evaluates Historic Sites in Making Way for Future

The Des Granges home, today the oldest home in Fullerton, holds special memories for Mayor Allen Buck Catlin.

Catlin stashed his car there the day before his wedding in 1947, when wedding guests traditionally chased the bride and groom after the reception. That day, Catlin’s best man drove the newlyweds for an hour--through Anaheim, Downey and back to Fullerton--until he lost the cars in tow. The best man then sneaked to the Des Granges home; Catlin picked up his car, and the wedding couple left for their honeymoon.

Putting memories aside, Catlin and his colleagues on the City Council agreed last week that the Des Granges home should be torn down. Apartments will rise in its place.

That decision was one of several the City Council made last week affecting some of Fullerton’s older homes. At issue was which historical houses were worth preserving and which were simply old, and whether the city’s so-called landmark ordinance identifies and protects landmarks or simply blocks new homes.

“We have to examine each and every site,” Catlin said. “What we are saying is that not every property is something that should be preserved. We need to bend.”

Council members voted to uphold the landmark ordinance and vowed to preserve historic buildings in the city. But they also said they would consider altering that law to ensure that it does not prevent “logical” development in an effort to preserve that which is decaying.

The ordinance is tied to a historical building survey, which includes properties on the National Register of Historic Places as well as properties of “local landmark” quality and “properties and features of special mention.” Some of the council members questioned whether all of the structures not on the national register merit a place on the local list.

As an example, a council majority voted to direct a developer to prepare a new plan that will include tearing down trees and a house on the city’s historical survey list to make way for a home for the elderly.

But Councilwoman Molly McClanahan, who voted against the rest home, said, “I guess the message (from the council) is, it is OK to have this historic landmark ordinance, but when it comes down to it, we are not going to take it very seriously.”

Other council members said each case will be considered individually, and McClanahan agreed that not all properties may be worth saving.

The Des Granges home at 2000 E. Wilshire Ave., for example, had been modified so many times “there is little resemblance to being of landmark quality,” Catlin said. The new apartment development will include a plaque or monument to identify the historical significance of the site.

In the case of the home for the elderly at 1510 E. Commonwealth Ave., neighbors had argued that it was not compatible with the area. They also complained the 80-bed facility would increase traffic and create parking problems.

But the residents indicated that if the project was approved, they would prefer that the old house and trees be destroyed so the new building would be farther from their homes.

Integrity of Neighborhood

Councilwoman Linda LeQuire cast the only other vote against the project, because, she said, it did not belong in the neighborhood. But if demolishing the old house made the project more palatable to the neighbors, LeQuire said, she would follow that option.

“I would be more concerned about the integrity of the neighborhood than maintaining that older home,” LeQuire said.

Maintaining the character of the neighborhood was also of concern to residents who attended the City Council meeting on another issue: a proposal to build a 21-unit apartment complex on Brookdale Place and Pomona Avenue near homes built in the 1910s and 1920s.

The council tentatively approved the project with conditions, including a requirement that the developer try to resolve differences with neighbors, who complained that the three-story apartment building would invade their privacy, add street congestion and lead to other apartment complexes in the area.

Jeannie Johnson called the proposal “disastrous.” In an emotional plea, she told officials that “this is an area of Fullerton I love. . . . This is part of history. This is part of what Fullerton stands for.”

Fear of Apartments

Marie Jeanette Ebenhack, whose home was built in 1914, said she was encouraged that council members had told the crowd that there is no future plan to convert the area into a neighborhood of apartments. Nonetheless, Ebenhack and other residents were upset with the council’s decision and said they feared the character of their neighborhood would be altered.

“This isn’t just a lot of flunkies here trying to stop a development,” Kip Tellez told the council. “We want our neighborhood.”

Earlier, Mayor Pro Tem Richard C. Ackerman said he empathized with the homeowners, but the council could not force a developer to build new homes that look like the old homes.

“Most of those houses were built in 1910 and 1920. Nobody who builds now will want the new development to look like that,” Ackerman said. “It would be unreasonable to say that everybody has to build to the standards of the 1920s.”