Historic district plan disregards diversity.

Byline: NANCY IWAKAWA For The Register-Guard

EUGENE IS RIGHTLY proud of its commitment to diversity. The city states as one of its primary operating principles that "We recognize and honor a diversity of viewpoints, cultures and life experiences." Every year the Eugene Celebration displays and encourages this diversity.

The creation of inclusive neighborhoods that truly welcome diversity is an important cultural heritage that needs to be nurtured and protected by all of us. However, the recent movement to designate certain areas of Eugene as historic districts may have the effect of alienating the very people who most add to the diversity of those neighborhoods. The districts would have this effect by preventing people from expressing their cultural heritage.

Diversity in Eugene is a relatively recent social development. Less than 40 years ago, a housing covenant excluded people of color from owning, using, leasing or occupying houses in the areas now being considered for historic designation. If people of color had been allowed to live in these areas, the historic district design guidelines would no doubt reflect their unique ethnic contributions to the history of Eugene.

When we moved to Eugene from Japan 15 years ago, my husband, son and I bought a very modest house, which has been included in the South University Historic District nomination. We chose this neighborhood for its proximity to the University of Oregon and for the cultural diversity created by its eclectic mix of housing, which included owners and renters of all ages.

Even though we came from a very different culture, we never felt any pressure by our neighbors to change our lifestyle. To the contrary, we enjoyed sharing our cultural heritage with them and likewise we enjoyed seeing the aesthetic expressions of their diverse backgrounds as they gradually changed their houses and yards over time to fit their families' needs and interests.

Over the years, my husband has used his Japanese carpentry skills and his knowledge of traditional Japanese housing construction - which has evolved over many centuries to withstand earthquakes, long rainy seasons and winters of heavy snow - to make many improvements to our home. In addition to reflecting our unique Japanese-American lifestyle, these changes have greatly improved the energy efficiency and durability of our house.

We recently finished adding a Japanese-style room to the front of our house. We asked a professional architect, who lived across the street, to design the addition so that it would be compatible with our house's "minimal traditional" style and would be something that he would enjoy looking at out of his window. An American friend worked with us as general contractor to help us follow the city's building codes, and my husband used his skills to give the project an authentic Japanese touch.

We have received many compliments to the effect that the changes to the front of our house have improved not only the look of our home, but its compatibility with the other homes on our street. We felt that we had succeeded in aesthetically blending our ethnic background with the traditional architecture of the neighborhood.

When we read the South University Historic District nomination's description of our house as having "suffered serious alterations," we were shocked and puzzled: How could anyone describe our house as having "suffered"? After carefully studying the detailed South University Historic District Design Guidelines booklet, we realized that our house was described in such slanderous terms because we had failed to follow the exclusively European standard of architectural style, as stated in the proposed guidelines.

From the perspective of a non-white ethnic background, we are concerned about how the imposition of a white European cultural standard created by segregation in the past would affect the cultural diversity of our present neighborhood. We are sure that this discrimination is unintentional, but it would nonetheless have the effect of excluding the aesthetic expressions of minority cultures, without giving owners the right to opt out of the district guidelines for cultural reasons.

The controversy surrounding the proposed South University Historic District has raised many serious issues concerning the "integrity of the neighborhood" and the merit of limiting the rights of property owners to change the appearance of their homes in order to protect the "greater good of the community." We would like to raise the question of which neighborhood integrity needs to be preserved - that of a group of like-minded property owners who want to preserve an outdated monocultural aesthetic standard, or that of a group of property owners of various ethnic and socio-economic backgrounds who want to preserve the American ideal of cultural diversity?

Nancy Iwakawa lives in Eugene's proposed South University Historic District.