Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2a. Supp Info PLN-14-00179 8572 CherokeeMary Cavanagh From: Aldo E. Schindler Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 11:27 AM To: Jim Rodriguez; Yahoo Security Centre; Hector Lujan (hectorlujan @ca.rr.com); Matias Flores; Patrick Owens (pjowensl2 @msn.com) Cc: Yvette M. Abich Garcia; William Davis; Mary Cavanagh Subject: FW: Albert Ball Home info Planning Commission Meeting Attachments: ball 1.JPG; Ball 2.JPG; Ball 3.JPG; Ball 4.JPG; Ball mansion 2 jpg; Ball mansionljpg; Ball Tweedy Citrus Labeljpg; Albert Ball Photo jpg; Ball Tweedy Packing jpg Commissioners; Below please find correspondence from Mr. George Redfox regarding Public Hearing #2 that will be before you at your commission meeting tomorrow. Staff will address Mr. Redfox's concerns. We'll also provide you paper copies of this email and attachments; as well as provide copies for the public. Do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. This email is for Planning Commission information only. If there is a need to respond to this email, please do not hit the "REPLY TO ALL" function as doing so will result in a serial meeting and an inadvertent violation of the Brown Act. (Gov't Code § 54952.2(b)). Aldo E. Schindler Director of Community Development D!, City -, &Downey 11111 Brookshire Avenue Downey, CA 90241 Office: (562) 904 -7168 Email: aschindler @dowheyca.org From: Adria Jimenez Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 9:48 AM To: Aldo E. Schindler Cc: Mary Cavanagh Subject: FW: Albert Ball Home info Planning Commission Meeting Hi Aldo, I received the below email from Mr. Redfox regarding the Albert Ball home. Please make sure each of the Planning Commissioners receives this information and it is officially entered into the record. Thanks! Adria From: george redfox [mailto:redfox113C?yahoo.com1 Sent: Monday, February 16, 2015 7:12 PM To: City Clerk Subject: Albert Ball Home info Planning Commission Meeting Hi Adria, Could you please pass this information along to the planning commission in regards to the Albert Ball property on Cherokee Dr, I think they should be aware of the state of California's survey that has this property listed on the historic resource list. There was a gas pump and storage area located on the property that I don't believe was ever cleaned up. If the gas clean up was taken care of, I would like to see the states paperwork stating that it was. Originally, I was at the design review board meeting back a when this property was originally suppose to be rebuilt. According to the city architect, he stated this property was suppose to be rebuilt as it was before and historical elements were to be saved and reused for the rebuild. I would imagine this should be reflected in the original EIR for this property, I would trust that the city did its due dilagents to make sure these historical isssues were addressed. Please see attachements for the state paperwork and photographs in regards to this historic property. Thank you, George Redfox President The Downey Conservancy r.r.0 ... ........- ...... . .... .. �..� �..... .,v.... , DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION C HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY IDENTIFICATION A 1. Common name: BALL-ST + .RE HOUSE 2. Historic name, if known 3. Street or rural address Al Ball House 8572 Cherokee Drive UTM Q NR 3_ SHL_ Lai Lon Era Sig Adm_ T2 _T3 _ Cat HABS _HAER _ Fed UTM 111396380/3756360 89A e}- 0.1gl -3 City: Downes ZIP: 902111 County: Los Angeles 4. Present owner, if known: Robert P. & Maly M. Maniaci Address: 8572 Cherokee Dr. City: Downey ZIP: 90241 Ownership is: Public ❑ Private 5. Present Use- Private Residence Original Us6: Private Residence Other past uses: DESCRIPTION 6. Briefly describe the present physical appearance of the site orstructure and describe any major alterations from its original. condition: A two- story, Spanish Colonial residence constructed of cement plaster with a hipped, red tile roof. The structure is basically rectangular with two sections extending from the facade. The main entrance, located between the extensions is covered by an arcade porch which extends past the northwest corner of the structure and is supported by round columns. Several of the windows on the second story are arched, and some on the first floor are partially protected by small metal grates. Alterations include interior remodeling and the addition of a solarium to the eastern side. The structure is presently in the process of restoration by the owner. 7. Locational sketch map (draw and label site and surrounding streets, roads, and prominent landmarks): NORTH I IRut 7/79;1 8. Approximate property size: Lot size (in feet) Frontage 14n Depth 341 or approx. acreage 9. Condition: (check one) a. Excellent ❑ b. Good c. Fair ❑ d. Deteriorated ❑ e. 'No longer in existence ❑ 10. Is the feature a. Altered? ® b. Unaltered? ❑ 11. Surroundings: (Check more than one if necessary) a. Open land ❑ b. Scattered buildings ❑ c. Densely built -up ❑ d. Residential 0 e. Commercial ❑ f. Industrial ❑ g. Other ❑ 12. Threats to site: a. None known ❑ b. Private development c. Zoning ❑ d. Public Works project ❑ e. Vandalism ❑ f. Other ❑ t'7 n., +„1,1 ,.c,,.,,.1....,,.a JAniinr7r 1Q77 EJ The following (Items 14 -19) are for structures only. mart' exterior building material: a. Stone ❑ b. Brick ❑ Other FC1 Cement Plaster :he structure: a. On its original site? ❑ b. Moved? ❑ ar of initial construction 1919 This date is: a. Factual ❑ chitect (if known): ilder (if known): H. H. White lated features: a. Barn ❑ b. Carriage house ❑ Windmill ❑ g. Watertower/ta nk house ❑ ANCE c. Stucco ❑ d. Adobe ❑ e. Wood c. Unknown? 0 b. Estimated ❑ c. Outhouse ❑ d. Shed(s) ❑ e. Formal garc h. Other 0 Garage etc. i. I iefly state historical and /or architectural importance (include dates, events, and persons associated with the site wl _ When completed in 1920 the Albert Ball residence was one of the most elab Idences in the community of Dwoney. An adaptation of Spanish Colonial styli : house was designed by Los Angeles architect H.H. Whitley for Ball, part own the Ball and Tweedy Packing Company which was one of Downey's chief industri it time. The house was subsequently owned by Dr. Steere, a local physician, l been deteriorating since before his death in 1973. In 1975 it was purchase present owners who are currently restoring it. The structure is-located-on -ge lot that is all that remains of a huge fruit ranch that has been subdivid ty times for residential units. ain theme of the historic resource: (Check only one): a. Architecture © b. Arts & Leisure ❑ Economic /Industrial 2❑ d. Exploration /Settlement ❑ e. Government ❑ f. Military ❑ 1. Religion D h. Social /Education 0 iurces: List books, documents, surveys, personal interviews, and their dates: Dutheast News & Downey Champion, September 20, 1973; April 2, 1976, p. B -1. iilder & Contractor, May 30, 1919, P. 12. Quinn, Charles Russell. History Dwney: Elenn Quinn, 1973. Assessment Records of Los Angeles County, 1900-19, Zgeles County Archives'. ate form prepared: A r= i 1 L= By (name): Tom Sitton idress: 900 E osition Blvd. City Los Angeles _ _ ZIF ione: (213) 746 -0410 X241 Organization: Natural Histor_r Museum (State Use Only) fISTORIC PROPERTY FILE SINGLE PROPERTY PRINTOUT 'rop. #: 028019 AL BALL HOUSE, BALL STEERE JPISE 'rim. #: 19- 177343 ►ddress: County: LAN 8572 CHEROKEE DR X- Street: DOWNEY 90241 Vicinity: Parcel #: 'ategory: BUILDING )weer Type: PRIVATE 'resent Use: RESIDENTIAL )ther Recognition: CHL #: sates of Construction: 1919 - 0 ,rchitect: WHITELY Builder: istoric Attributes: SING.FAM.PROP., ANCILLARY BLDGS. Eth: revious Determinations on this property: rogram Prog. Ref Number Eval Crit Eval -date Evaluator IST.SURV. 0241 - 0003 -0000 3S PERSON UNKNOWN 02/03 :ey to EVAL: S : Appears eligible to NR as individual prop thru survey evaluation. ' � 4i 7 i� •+r ",�- it `_ x *!� ♦ .; '# , i� -•r (-' '. F �!'�. . - I "r?► a h i' u4 F q*Ob i a z w r � r w� �� , ' P nor 1� F.�� _ '!• • 1\ `.o . ham ho i . � w r' } •k !1 � w a a9` ti M k 9 1 I owI _ — r I �y r1 �""�'. '{� -� - fr4`"5 yi4 �!�` �I ice. P {• ' '� •d'.1�= r . r 'W46 Ar' 1 Poo yr a ;� .�. .�', ' y, '+tl 0 . p/ F'rr',�r •��,±' y ` ! •,a �I " i• r n ,a �""�'. '{� -� - fr4`"5 yi4 �!�` �I ice. P {• ' '� •d'.1�= r . r 'W46 Ar' 1 Poo yr a ;� .�. .�', ' y, '+tl 0 . p/ F'rr',�r •��,±' y ` ! •,a 74- • wow 7-i I u q 1 r �4L 1 ` r ` e, e l ' y ■ r 1 � 1 / i. 'tit ' IL e 1 if 1/ wRRV7 0 J 09 , ~% 4 q s 'r to r. f El Ali fp Page 2 • North /South Elevations. Apply horizontal trim pieces to the first story so they are aligned with the sides of the second -story cross gables. • North /South Elevations. Extend the stone veneer up to the vertical trim piece that are closest to the front porch. • South Elevation. Raise the height of the first -story windows so the bottom of the windows are even with the top of the stone veneer. • North /South Elevations. Apply siding to the second -story elevations or decorative trim. • The exterior of the garage shall match the exterior of the residence with respect to colors and finishes and it shall feature a gable roof. MOVED BY Board Member Ng and SECONDED BY Board Member Flores to approve Design Review Case No. 07 -193, subject to Staff's recommendations and the Board's directions. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Ng, Flores and Chairman Prieto ABSENT: Baca and D'Alessandro 2. Desian Review Board #06 -168(M Location: 8572 Cherokee Drive Owner: Salvador and Maria Cerros Representative: Douglas Fidler Staff: William Davis Request: Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration; and consider a request to modify approved plans for the construction of a two -story addition, a one -story addition, and an addition to the cellar at an existing two - story residence, on property zoned R1 -8,500 (Single Family Residential). William Davis presented a staff report, which described the proposed project. He explained that the Board approved Design Review Board Case No. 06 -168, on December 13, 2006. This case involves the expansion of a two -story house but includes demolition of much of the structure. DRB Case No. 06 -168 sought to maintain the distinctive architectural features of the residence by preserving the front fagade and an arcade porch at the front of the house; however, during the demolition phase of the project, the building contractor observed that the exterior walls of the front fagade are constructed of un- reinforced hollow clay tiles, making the facade extremely vulnerable to seismic forces, structurally unsound, and unsafe for habitation. The applicant proposes to modify the original approval by demolishing the front facade and rebuilding it to resemble the original structure. Mr. Davis explained that the State of California deemed the house eligible for historic preservation due to the cultural significance of its original owner; consequently, the historic significance of the house requires the City to comply with the State and local CEQA guidelines pertaining to historic structures. He said that staff prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Board to review, prior to its decision on the applicant's request to modify DRB Case No. 06 -168. Mr. Davis added that he spoke with George Redfox, a Downey resident and historic preservation advocate, about the project and the Negative Declaration. Mr. Redfox asked that the revised plan provide arched windows to match the original windows and eliminate columns at the front entrance. Mr. Redfox addressed the Board. He expressed opposition to the proposed application. He cited federal guidelines for preserving historic structures, Design Review Board criteria, and the Downey City Code, and challenged the efforts of the applicant and staff to comply with these requirements. Mr. Redfox also requested that the Board require the applicant to prepare an environmental impact report to investigate the loss of the historic resource. Mr. Davis responded to Mr. Redfox's concerns, particularly the assertion that the applicant did not adhere to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings (1995). Other individuals from the audience spoke in favor of demolishing the house and allowing applicant Design Review Board Minutes — April 9, 2008 Page 2 of 9 Page 3 to proceed. They expressed satisfaction that the rebuilt house would resemble the original design and that the requested environmental impact report was unnecessary and time consuming. Board Member Ng offered his professional judgment that the home must be remodeled to maintain the historical features and maintain the historical look. The house should be contemporary and resemble the original house, but it should look slightly different. He said the house should provide compatible architectural elements to preserve the home's architectural integrity while achieving the same look. Therefore, the revised plan should feature arched windows and it should revise the design element at the front entrance. He also said the applicant should work with staff to incorporate these changes. MOVED BY Board Member Ng and SECONDED BY Board Member Flores to adopt a mitigated Negative Declaration and to approve Design Review Case No.06 -168 (M), subject to the Board's conditions of approval along with its direction to work with Staff. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Ng, Flores and Chairman Prieto ABSENT: Baca and D'Alessandro 3. Desian Review Board #08 -12 Location: 9215 Garnish Drive Owner: Juan Vivanco Representative: Efrain Soto Staff: Jessica Halak Request: Consider the design, colors and materials for a 4,810 sq. ft., two -story residence, on property zoned R1 -7500 (Single Family Residential). Assistant Planner II, Jessica Halak, presented the staff report, describing the project. Mrs. Halak went on to mention staff's concerns with the project as described hereunto: Site Plan 1. The new A/C condenser must be located a minimum of 5 feet from any property line. Relocate the proposed A/C as necessary. Floor Plan 2. Switch the door leading from the garage to the laundry room so the door swings in towards the laundry room and does not obstruct the garage area. North Elevation 3. The proposed wood lattice patio cover on the second - floor, master bedroom terrace, should be replaced with an extension of the proposed tile roof. 4. The window at the second -floor master bathroom is drawn too high and should be redrawn under the proposed fascia. West Elevation 5. The proposed wood lattice patio cover on the second - floor, master bedroom terrace, should be replaced with an extension of the proposed tile roof. 6. The proposed double -doors at the first -floor family room should include a tile eyebrow for protection. 7. The windows on the second -floor are drawn too high and should be redrawn under the proposed fascia. Design Review Board Minutes — April 9, 2008 Page 3 of 9