Compromise Could Save a Historic Site : * Community Should Find a Way to Move and Restore San Juan Capistrano Cottage

To those who must pay the bills, or those who just wonder what all the fuss is about, advocates of historic preservation may seem overly zealous. Witness the case of a controversial 110-year-old Victorian cottage in San Juan Capistrano, the Hankey/Rowse cottage.

Whatever charm the structure may hold for history buffs, the owners are fed up with its termites, outdated heating and electrical systems. They moved out three years ago and want to tear the house down. The city for a long time said no--the owners couldn’t demolish their own property if it was on the city’s list of historic landmarks.

The dilemma has frayed nerves, summoned high dudgeon and cost the family money in city application fees. Finally the City Council this month granted approval to demolish the building. But should that be the end of it?

Local historians are understandably worried that losing the building will chalk up yet another loss in a region that has changed vastly in recent years. The cottage was one of the area’s earliest citrus farms and, even if nobody can stand to live there now, it was lived in by several prominent people in the city’s history.

What to do before the bulldozers strike? Here is a wonderful opportunity for the high art of compromise.

Why can’t some benefactor come forward and help move the building? It will cost money, probably some private funds to pay for the move and to restore the building. But this ought to be worth it to a community that cherishes its own past.

Even with the approval to demolish, the family has a window to move the structure, if a new location can be found. To date, there haven’t been satisfactory sites suggested.

But here’s a chance to resolve tensions inherent in historic preservation. The community must decide what it’s worth. There ought to be an agreeable way to save an important but troublesome building.