A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Council overturns HRB criterion A designation for Mission Hills property after appellant cites procedural errors and new information

May 13, 2026 | San Diego City, San Diego County, California


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Council overturns HRB criterion A designation for Mission Hills property after appellant cites procedural errors and new information
The San Diego City Council voted 9–0 on March 6 to grant an appeal of the Historical Resources Board’s (HRB) designation under criterion A for the property containing 820 West University Avenue and 3951–3957 Goldfinch Street in Mission Hills.

Senior planner Suzanne Seager summarized the HRB’s March 25, 2021 actions and staff’s analysis; staff recommended reversing the HRB’s criterion A designation for the site because the record lacked sufficient documentation to support the finding that the property exemplified a special element of Mission Hills’ development. Staff recommended leaving the Goldfinch Building’s criterion C designation in place.

The appellant’s representative, Scott Moomjan, urged council to reverse based on three grounds: violations of HRB bylaws and hearing procedures (staff and appellant asserted the board’s motion relied on a Save Our Heritage Organization letter rather than written findings), factual errors in the record (including construction date: appellant presented evidence suggesting 1907 rather than 1913), and new information about alterations that reduce the residence’s integrity. Several public commenters who supported the appeal argued that designation raises development costs and constrains housing supply at a transit‑oriented site.

Assistant City Attorney Jean Jordan advised the council that its authority to reverse or modify HRB decisions is limited to findings of factual error, procedural/bylaw violations, or new information; the council’s decision must be supported by substantial evidence in the record to withstand judicial review. Councilmember Woodburn moved to accept staff’s recommendation to grant the appeal on the basis of bylaw/hearing violations and insufficient documentation; Councilmember LaCava seconded. The motion passed 9–0.

Per the staff recommendation and council action, the HRB’s criterion A designation for the combined site is reversed; the Goldfinch Building’s criterion C designation remains in effect. The council’s action and legal standard cited by the city attorney mean the record and findings will govern any subsequent judicial review.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee