Historic Churches Seek Exemption from Rules : Preservation: Religious leaders complain that a 1985 law prevents them from making badly needed renovations.

The City Council listened to several hours of testimony Tuesday from frustrated parishioners of one of Southern California’s largest Armenian congregations, who complained that their religious and property rights have been suppressed by a controversial historic-preservation law.

Late into the night, the council had still not decided whether to grant a request to exempt St. Mary’s Apostolic Armenian Church--plus local Catholic and Baptist churches--from a list of 34 historic buildings governed by the law, which requires property owners to undergo a rigorous approval process before structural modifications can be made.

The Armenian church was the first to ask to be removed from the list of protected structures, filing a request for an amendment to the city’s General Plan last year.

But after learning that an Environmental Impact Report would be required--costing as much as $50,000 to prepare--church leaders opted instead to simply ask the council to exempt their property from the historic preservation law, enacted in 1985, which is in the process of being streamlined and readopted to simplify city procedures governing protected buildings.

St. Mary’s proposed that the two other churches on the city’s historic preservation roster--Holy Family Catholic Church and First Baptist Church of Glendale--also be exempted. Leaders of both the Roman Catholic and Baptist congregations said they, too, wish to be removed from the law’s special constraints.

Under the proposal, approval of the city’s Historic Preservation Commission would no longer be required for renovations. The requirement has delayed the Armenian Church’s past efforts to reinforce the sanctuary against earthquakes, install stained-glass windows and repaint the exterior, according to church leaders.

City planning officials and members of the Glendale Historical Society have cited the neoclassical architecture of the church, located at 500 S. Central Ave., and declared that major modifications to the building could spoil its future eligibility for state and national registers of historic sites. Church members argue that the property is theirs and that the restrictions have prevented them from freely practicing their religion.

Supporters of the regulations have cited the church’s desire to build a traditional Eastern-style dome atop the roof as an example of a change that would impair the building’s historical value. But church officials say the dome is a long-term project and that their immediate needs include moving the church altar, building a choir loft and enlarging the sanctuary and Sunday school--all of which require the building to undergo the historical review process under the current law.