California Eminent Domain Report : a blog following condemnation, inverse condemnation, and regulatory takings written by attorneys with Nossaman LLP.

An interesting battle is raging in the Santa Ynez Valley.  Mattei's Tavern, a "landmark" in Los Olivos for more than 100 years, is slated for a redevelopment plan by its owner.  A local activist group, known as the Valley Alliance, wants to stop the owner's plans.  And one arrow in their quiver has been to nominate the tavern for listing as a historical landmark. 

According to an April 29 article by Kathy Cleary in the Santa Ynez Valley Journal Valley Alliance Historic Landmark Nomination:  Eminent Domain Takeover?, the purpose of the nomination is to give the Historic Landmark Advisory Commission (HLAC) the power to approve (or deny) plans to alter the building.  And (at least according to Ms. Cleary), at least one member of the HLAC has expressed sympathy with the Valley Alliance's goal of stopping the owner's plans. 

What does this have to do with eminent domain?  Maybe nothing.  But the possible designation and assertion of control by the HLAC raises the specter of a regulatory takings claim pursuant to the Supreme Court's seminal decision in Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City, 438 U.S. 104 (1978).  That decision established a key, three-part test for analyzing regulatory takings claims: the economic impact of the regulation on the claimant; the extent to which the regulation has interfered with investment-backed expectations; and the character of the governmental action.  

If the owner can prove that the designation and, more particularly, the level of control the designation might place in the hands of the HLAC, meets the three-part Penn Central test, a court may hold that the act constitutes a compensable taking of the owner's property.  Indeed, deciding whether restraints imposed by designation as a historical landmark was the whole point of the Penn Central case (though the court ultimately found that the designation at issue there did not meet the very test established by the case). 

That the owner might assert a claim under Penn Central if the HLAC accepts the property's nomination has not been lost on government officials.  According to Ms. Cleary:

County Counsel has said that decisions on historic landmarking of property without the owners’ consent will be considered in light of the Penn Central eminent domain case.

What happens next?  At the owner's request, the HLAC continued the April 12 hearing on the nomination to its May 10 meeting.  In the meantime, the owner appears to be moving forward with its plans, which are described in more detail in a February 10 article in the Lompoc Record, Debate rages over Mattei’s Tavern future, and a January 19 article in the Santa Ynez Valley News, Landmark protection sought for Mattei’s Tavern,  

Finally, if you're looking for more about the building's history, take a look at a 1974 pamphlet, Mattei's Tavern.

Photo Note:  Image depicts Mattei's as it appeared in about 1888, when it was known as the Central Hotel and was a key stagecoach stop.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

According to a Pasadena Star-News article, "Pasadena may use eminent domain to seize historical building," next month the City of Pasadena will consider authorizing the use of eminent domain to acquire a historical building designed by California's first prominent female architect, Julia Morgan.  The building, located at 78 N. Marengo Ave. near City Hall, was built in 1921, making it one of the earliest historical structures in Pasadena.  Pasadena is apparently ready to turn to eminent domain because the historical site has been fenced up and abandoned for more than a decade.

So far, Pasadena's negotiations with the property's owner have been unsucessful, as the City offered $6 million for the site, and the owner countered with an asking price of $12 million.  Pasadena apparently hopes the threat of eminent domain will drive a settlement, or at least bring the owner back to the bargaining table. 

According to Sue Mossman of the Pasadena Heritage historical preservationist group, the building will be better off in the City's hands than with the owner.  According to Mossman: 

In general, Pasadena Heritage is not in favor of eminent domain.  But there are times when it is the only solution...It just isn't good for a building to sit there boarded up.

If the City plans to use eminent domain to take ownership of the historical site so the property can be repaired and preserved, that would seem appropriate.  However, it's another story if the City is going to simply tear down the historical site and redevelop the property.  Do we really want to see our historical buildings demolished for the sake of new urban development?

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks (1)
• Share Link

In the past, we've reported on the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency's condemnation of the historic Hugo Hotel.  It now appears that city officials in Ukiah may utilize a similar playbook and reinstate the redevelopment agency's power of eminent domain in order to acquire the historic 119-year old Palace Hotel.  According to a Press Democrat article, "Ukiah seeks new life for Palace Hotel," the city may turn to eminent domain after decades of unsuccessfully nudging the hotel's Marin County owners to rehabilitate the historic vine-covered building in the heart of downtown. 

Nearby residents recall the Palace Hotel serving as a hub of activity in the 1970's and 1980's when it housed a restaurant, a bar, and a popular music venue attracting well known acts.  But the Hotel has been sitting vacant since 1988.  According to the article, in 1994, more than 200 downtown merchants and customers signed a petition demanding that the city have the building either cleaned up or torn down.

The property appraised in 2006 for $309,000, but the owners purportedly want over $1 million.  A study commissioned by the city concluded it would cost $4.5 million just to tear the Palace Hotel down.  Like any redevelopment, the proposed use of eminent domain is drawing a wide range of opinions.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

San Francisco's 99-year-old, historic Hugo Hotel, famed for furniture hanging off its outside walls, has been acquired by eminent domain by the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency.  

Kaleene Kenning's October 3, 2009 article, "Furniture on the Outside," explains that the historic site was purchased by the Patels in 1964 for $400,000, but when the Redevelopment Agency came knocking, they wouldn't sell for less than $7 million.  The Redevelopment Agency's $3.25 million offer was not accepted and an eminent domain action was filed.  The owners were eventually awarded $4.6 million for the property.

Kenning reports that:

the historic site is slated to be demolished and replaced with low-cost housing units with stores at street level.

Photo Credit:  Flickr, Whole Wheat Toast

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link