Washington’s Historic Preservation Commission, during its meeting Tuesday, delayed acting on a request for blanket approval of 11 building plans for residences at Moss Landing Harbor Homes.

The commission wants time to investigate issues raised at the meeting.

The developers of Moss Landing Harbor Homes— Beacon Street Development Co. — and the city sought the approval, asking that the plans be considered minor works for future construction. City staff may approve minor works (projects deemed to have little or no significant impact to the historic district) without first consulting with the commission. Projects deemed as major works are brought to the commission for consideration for approval.

“Small changes to individualize the structures will still be considered minor works (i.e. different shutter or door styles). Should a heavily altered variation of a plan or custom plan be submitted, it will go before the commission as a major work,” reads a staff report on the request.

The report notes that Moss Landing, currently, is not a contributing development in the city’s historic district, thereby its noncontributing structures do not need to be held to the same standards as contributing structures. Noncontributing structures may become contributing structures based on their age or historical significance, according to the report.

Emily Rebert, community development planner for the city, said approving the request would make approval of future construction at Moss Landing Harbor Homes “more efficient.”

Several people, including Don Stroud and Dee Congleton, former commission members, opposed the request.

“I don’t believe the legislation that created the historic commission allows you to delegate your authority to staff. As good a job as I think they do, I just don’t the enabling legislation allows you delegate what you’re supposed to do,” said Stroud, who likes the development occurring at Moss Landing Harbor homes.

“There’s probably another way to do this, but I don’t think this is the appropriate way to do it,” he said later.

Stroud said the commission’s guidelines classify new construction as a major work. If the commission approved the request, it would be changing the rule, Stroud said. The commission does not have the power to change the rule, he said, adding only the City Council has that authority.

Stroud asked the commission not to “rush to judgment” on the request could open a “Pandora’s box” when it comes someone possibly challenging such blanket approvals.

Commission Chairman Ed Hodges disagreed with Stroud’s opinion.

Congleton, echoing Stroud’s remarks, said approving the request could set a precedent that might not be in the best interest of the city. She also questioned if other developers or people building several houses would be given blanket approval for their projects.

Jerry Creech opposed the request, questioning the city’s involvement in the request. Giving blanket approval to the plans is wrong, he said.

John Rodman, the city’s director of community and cultural resources, said the city’s involvement is “merely a suggestion” aimed at trying to speed up the process.