The first report cost him a month delay in construction and $500, he said.

After two months of waiting, Conley said he was told that the report didn’t have enough detail for city staff or the Heritage Preservation Commission to determine if the building needed preservation. He was asked to complete a more in-depth report.

The second report cost about $5,000 to $7,000 and delayed his project by another six weeks, he said.

Conley said he didn’t submit the second report because at this point his $1,000 project was going to cost him an extra $7,500 and been delayed by more than four months.

He said he had no problem with the ordinance to preserve historic buiildings. But the ordinance, as it was currently being enforced, was a burden on property owners and businesses who wanted to redevelop historic properties.

“I don’t want to get rid of the code but I do think the code needs to be polished,” he said.

Kevin Heinonen, who renovated the Tourist Home on South San Francisco Street with his cousin Scott, also said the ordinance was hard to work with, even for people who were trying to do the right thing and preserve a historic building.