Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
9/2/2009 - STAFF REPORTS - 1.A.
S � ` September 2, 2009 To Whom It May Concern, My husband and I have lived at 367 Tamarisk Rd For 25 years. Our property is directly across the street from 823 Avenida Palos Verde. It is our understanding that the owners are trying to demolish the existing home and rebuild. I hear that there are some people or designations that are trying to prevent this from happening. In our opinion the property owners should be able to do what they want with their property. This home is not historic except for age. Old houses can't withstand time forever. There comes a time when they need to be knocked down and rebuilt. You just can't fix them anymore. Why does the city have the right to prevent a homeowner from making these changes to their property. I have met with my neighbors once or twice in 25 years_ I can not see their home from the street or my home. Other homes in our area have been demolished and rebuilt and have made our neighborhood even better. Please let these property owners continue with the plans they have to rebuild a new home, as is their right. Sincerely, Barbara Keane 367 Tamarisk Rd Palm Springs, Ca 92262 760 808-1199 6q�d�1 R o0 9 ,5%eH4 r 7-r: eY From: RFRENCH<rfrench @ earth link.net> Subject: Sept 2 City Council Case No:3.3352 Date: August 20,2009 12:50,37 PM PDT To: Steve.Poug net@ palmsprings-ca.gov, Ginny.Foal@palmsprings-ca.gov, Flick.Hutcheson@palmsprings-ca.gov, Chris.Mills@palmsprings-ca.gov, Lee.weigel@palmsprings-ca.gov Cc: 'Kirvin Satterwhite'¢kirvin@mae.eomn, gmar@earthlink.ne't, RFRENCh@earthlink.net Dear Mayor and City Counsel Members, My name is Richard E. French. I reside at 898 Avenida Palmas in Palm Springs and am a close neighbor of Kirvin Satterwhite. I am writing to you in support of Kirvin and George's proposal to raze their existing house and build a replacement structure more suitable to their tastes and needs. I believe the plan is for a design that is more contemporary than the Mediterranean building currently on the site. I urge you to approve Kirvin and George's request for the following reasons. The historical authorities have already determined that the current building is not of particular historical importance. I believe I am correct that the Movie Colony is not a declared historical district. People must have the freedom in our over-regulated society to change and improve their property so long as it does not cause harm to others. I know Kirvin and George will build a home that is first quality and in excellent taste. What they are building will very likely be considered of historical importance at some future date I wholeheartedly support the proposed change to their property and urge you to Support it too. Thanks for your consideration. Richard E. French 415-412-6587 From: tstoddardl @dc.rr.com Subject: Case no:3.3352(Request for Demolition Permit) Date: September 1, 2009 8:58:55 AM PDT To: Steve.Pougnet@palmsprings-ca.gov, Ginny.Foat@palmsprings-ca.gov, Rick.Hutcheson@palmsprings-ca.gov, Chris-Mills@palmsprings-ca.gov, Lee.Weigel@palmsprings-ca.gov Cc: kirvin@mac.com To: The Mayor and Council Members/ The City of Palm Springs Re: September 2, 2009, City Council Meeting/Request for Demolition Permit/Case no:3.3352 1 am writing in support of the demolition permit for the Satterwhite/Tucker residence at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes in the Movie Colony. There is no question that the 4,210 sq. ft. house is a lovely example of Spanish-style architecture. I also know that owning and maintaining the house, with its astronomical utility bills that in Summer can approach $3,000./month--is quite another matter. The house, built in 1925 with plaster and stucco-covered block walls varying from 18-in.to 2-ft. thick, cannot be adequately retrofit with a new, more efficient central HVAC system. Sitting with a westerly prospect, and roofed with heat-absorbing Spanish tiles,the house simply guzzles energy. The reason I'm aware of this is I'm very familiar with the house, first via a couple who owned it during the 1980's, and again since 1998 through its current owners, Ms. Satterwhite and her husband George Tucker. Both couples attempted, with little success,10 retrofit the existing HVAC system for greater energy-efficiency. Both also learned that the problem rests with the house itself; its formidable balloon-type construction would require extensive tear-down of multiple wall sections to achieve any real and measurable effect. My understanding is that the house carries a Class 3 historic designation,which applies to all houses built prior to 1945. 1 also understand that Class 3 designations carry some restrictions per se, but not when so many"ex-period"renovations have been added, as is the case with this house. After all,the true design legacy of Palm Springs is rooted in "desert modernism,"as evidenced by the visionary 1940's- 1960's buildings of Albert Frey, Richard Neutra, John Lautner, Lloyd Wright(the junior), Wexler and Williams, and later by the Alexander Brothers. These buildings featured such design innovations as horizontal and butterflytransoms,steel framing, cork walls and flooring, light-reflecting louvers, precast concrete with expansion joints to reduce thermal shock,and deep roof eaves--all of which were selected by the architects to meet the specific challenges posed by our intense desert heat and sun. While central HVAC systems were sometimes employed in the earlier designs, they were both rare and costly until the 1960's, when this technology became more routine and less expensive. For a Comprehensive treatise on the architectural significance of Palm Springs I refer you the 1998, 12-page article in"The New Yorker," which argues that Palm Springs, with its'rare cache of desert modemist buildings and homes, deserves global recognition--if not protection... and is as valid a cultural time-piece as Williamsburg, Virginia.' Spanish-style buildings, by comparison, are no more indigenous to Palm Springs than Sante Fe 'pueblo-style'designs, and are common-place not only throughout California but throughout Latin and South America. People tend to like Old Spanish designs because they are"pretty,"which explains why they are the preferred style for tracts of new houses in such desert cities as Palm Desert, Cathedral City and La 4uinta. When I lived in Las Palmas my friends referred to such dwellings as"Palm Desert houses." This was not intended as a compliment, rather served-up as a kind of code applied to people who didn't really know much about architecture, "just knew what they liked." Of course the real issue here is whether Palm Springs wants to expand on its true architectural heritage--and global reputation —by encouraging residents, buyers and builders to meet today's design challenges. Let's face it There is no greater challenge now and in future than energy conservation. I know that the Satterwhite/Tucker redesign plan is bath beautiful and predicated on the LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Green Rating System, which"encourages and accelerates global adaptation of sustainable green and development practices." I would contend that the City laud and encourage more homeowners and developers do likewise.Adherence to such practices will accomplish several key goals. First, it will preserve Palm Springs'reputation for advanced, cutting-edge and "smart" architecture. Further, it will extend our City's true legacy to promote a future breed of modernism --one that is organically beautiful, and sets a responsible standard for a new brand of 21 st-century"desert cool,"with contemporary designs employing innovative, energy-efficient, alternative materials and concepts. And finally, such practices will help the effort to turn Palm Springs from a mere Winter watering-hole into a true year-round community.This will benefit our city's long-suffering merchants by increasing year-round business, boost sales tax revenues, and help Palm Springs renew the architectural vision it pioneered and further the recognition it so rightly deserves. Yours truly, John Stoddard 610 S. Camino Real Palm Springs, CA 92264 From: JamJensen@aol.com Subject: from James Jensen r' Date: August 28,2009 8:30:21 AM PDT i To: Steve.Pougnet@palmsprings-ca.gov, ginny.foat@palmsprings-ca.gov, rick.hutcheson@palmsprings- ca.gov, chris.mills@palmsprings-ca.gov, lee.weigel@palmsprings-ca.gov Cc- kirvin@mac.com Dear Mayor Pougnel, MS Foat, Mr, Hutcheson, Mr. Mills and Mr.Weigel My name is James Jensen and I am writing in reference to an upcoming issue regarding the stay of demolition and general topic of the Safterwhitef Fucker residence in Central palm springs. (wed Sept.2 council case no.3.3352) My business is an art studio complex and gallery just around the corner from the residence, and 1 am lucky to be in a renovated, beloved, historic building!the EI Paseo building at 800 N Palm Canyon. My point in writing is to address the fact that while Ms. Satterwhilte's residence has It's charms,It may not be the historic structure that one may be hoping for, I've had the privilege of a decade long friendship with the residents and upon closer observation of the house- lovely aS it Is,was a Common structure at the time it was built. While many of the neighbors had interesting celebrity,histories or events, the house at 82$Avenida Palos Verdes has endured a very quite existence without much story. Furthermore,there is a certain hodgepodge series of renovations that had occurred before Ms. Satterwhite bought the property Where once was probably a charming courtyard is now a large enclosed roam, a garage now a guesthouse, bathrooms pushed into spaces etc. The resulting home, still lovingly taken care of by Ms Satterwhite is a patchwork of styles and quite possibly the most energy inefficient home in the area. This alone is a topic of distress to the owners and we've all dialoged on how to bring the structure into a greener more energy efficient era. As friends of the Sattenahitelfucker household,what we've probably enjoyed so much are the grounds,which also have been impeccably maintained by Ms. Satterwhite,and would continue to be intact with a newer structure. This does lead me to chime in on the plans for the new home,which since I've been able to see the plans for the proposed home, there is truly a chance to have a significantly beautiful architectural statement occur on the property, Ms. Satterwhite will be able to bring to our neighborhood a home with tremendous thought in it's energy conservation, use of green materials...and stunning architecture by a noted architect. I hope this letter helps shed an insider's observation. Sincerely. James Jensen From: Clark Bason rclark.bason@verizon.net7 Subject: Issue of 823 Avenida Palos Verdes Date: August 26,2009 2c34:00 PM PDT To: Steve.Pougnet@palmsprings-ca.gov, Ginny.Foat@palmsprings-ca.gov, Rick.Hutcheson@palmsprings-ca.gov, Chris,Mills@palmsprings-ca.gov, Lee.Weigel@palmsprings-ca.gov August 26, 2009 Dear Mayor Pougnet& Palm Springs City Council Members Ms. Foat, Mr. Hutcheson, Mr. Mills, Mr. Weigel: I am writing in reference to an upcoming issue regarding the stay of demolition and general topic of the Satterwhite/Tucker residence (823 Avenida Palos Verdes) in central Palm Springs. Normally, one would have regarded this as a non-issue, but it has unfortunately become what it has became and now is before you. Ms. Satterwhite and Mr. Tucker are asking for the right as homeowners to rebuild a wonderful new home on a property that the dwelling has already been evaluated and confirmed by your staff as having "no defining architectural style of construction characteristics that would argue in favor of defining the subject property a historic site." As a Palm Springs homeowner and concerned citizen for over ten years I have seen my share of unfair politics that I thought were well behind us. I urge you all to do the right thing, and not be swayed by unfair political posturing in this matter. In fact, Ms. Satterwhite and Mr.Tucker are model citizens of this community who not only are outgoing and supportive of our city, but also bring a great and valued business to the valley. I assure you that this couple has impeccable taste and their plans to create the home of their dreams would only enhance their neighborhood and take a hodgepodge structure(s) (which it certainly has became over the years) and make it the property it deserves to be.They have put tremendous effort and thought into this by bringing on a noted architect and are focusing on energy conservation, green materials, etc. to make their home only more livable as they surely deserve. Again, I urge you to do the right thing and grant these folks the right they should have had from the start. Sincerely, Clark Bason From: Kevinhbass@aol.com Subject: Fwd:Case#3.3352 Date: August 25,2009 8:16 48 PM PDT To: kirvin@mac.com Here's the final letter From: Kevinhbass@aol.com Date: August 25, 2009 8:08:20 PM PDT To: Steve.Pougnet@ealmsorinc�s-ca.gov Subject: Case S 3.3352 Kevin H. Bass August 24,2009 This letter is reference to Case No: 3.3352 Request for Demolition Permit at 823 N.Avenida Palos Verdes-Palm Springs Ca. Home of Kirvin Satterwhite and George Tucker Dear Steve, I am writing this letter on behalf of my friends Kirvin Satterwhite and George Tucker in reference to their request to demolish their house. Over the past 14 years, I have spent a great deal of time at this house — and have been made privy of the cost to maintain the house in its current state. Here is a list of reasons I feel the house SHOULD be granted permission to be demolished: 1- As stated in the Historic Site Preservation Board Staff Report of July 14, 2009, "Staff has evaluated the structure at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes and finds no defining architectural style or construction characteristics that would argue in favor of defining the subject property a historic site. Staff consulted with the Palm Springs Historical Society and found the site has no known or significant individuals or events associated with it." As a result of their findings, their recommendation was - "That the Historic Site Preservation Board approve the request to demolish the residence, pool, tennis court, and guesthouse at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes and take no action to re-designate it to a higher, more protective historic status." 2- The house is an energy drain and most occupants would not spend the money the current owners spend to keep the house running. The average electric bill in the summer is 3 times higher than most people pay the entire year. 3- The current landscaping is pleasing; due to the current owner's spending tremendous amounts of money to maintain it. Given the current economy — most people wouldn't have the luxury to maintain it in the current state. 4- Palm Springs prides itself on modern architecture (which is the style of the proposed new house) NOT old, poorly designed Mediterranean/Spanish architecture. I urge you all to make the right decision on this matter, and allow the current house to be demolished. In its place, will be stand a contemporary home with architectural significance and beauty_ If any of you would like to discuss this matter with me privately — my cell is 760 831-7303 Thank you, Kevin Bass August 19, 2009 Dear Mr. Mayor and City Council members: I am writing this letter on behalf of case# 3.3352 (Satterwhite/Tucker property) located at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes. I purchased a home in Palm Springs a couple of months ago. I had been interested in properties dating back to the 1940's. After observing what these people have had to endure I lost interest in any property which would possibly have any historical value. Although I cherish the history of Palm Springs and those properties which strictly lie within the criterion for"historical property", this residence has clearly been altered so many times as to make it unrecognizable horn its original structure. Furthermore,no famous individuals have lived there nor have any famous architects been involved in it's plorming. I believe that if you don't adhere strictly to your requirements for naming historical properties (i.e_ meeting all of the requirements) you will severely restrict the already repressed housing market_ Yours truly, Mitchell A. Atlas, M_D. This letter is in regards to the request for demolition permit at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes. Having previous experience in the building trades profession, I am writing this letter to express my opinion the property at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes. I have worked on many home restoration jobs and also restored my own historical home.The above mentioned site,in my opinion would not be fall into this classification,there has been to many alterations and remodels from its original structure. After looking at pictures of the original home,it is easy to tell the windows and doors have been changed and/or altered.Alterations to the tile- style roof does not hold to the historic integrity. Original opening to the structure have been closed and remodeled over the years. If I can answer any questions feel free to email me or call me. Barbara Atkins Licensed Journeyman Electrician 760-699-3026 Barbaraatkins206@aol.com Frown: Billy Dykes abilly@musictourmgmt.com ' Subject: Case No: 3,3352 Request for Demolition Permit Date: August 28, 2009 6:58:22 AM PDT To: Steve.Pougnet@palmsprings-ca.gov, Ginny.Foat@palmsprings-ca.gov, Rick.Hutcheson@palmsprings-ca.gov, Chris.Mills@palmsprings-ca.gov, Lee.Weigel@palmsprings- ca.gov In support of demolition permit for: Satterwhitefrucker Residence 823 Avenida Palos Verdes To Wham It May Concern: We invested in Palm Springs three years ago. Of the things that drew us to the area, one was the adventurous spirit of the people who live there and the other was the creative and eclectic nature of the architecture. We bought a house that was built in 1959 and fell in love with its simple and elegant design. We realized that, although it had good bones," it was not up to standard and would need major improvements to make it livable and efficient. Upon further inspection we realized that much of structure and infrastructure would need to be rebuilt. In the end, we have a home that we love. It has added significantly to the overall value our neighborhood. If we had not been allowed to be creative and build the house we wanted to live in we would never have bought in Palm Springs and we would never be able to recommend to our friends to invest in the area. Homeowners must be able to control what belongs to them. After all that is why we are OWNERS! Billy Dykes Steve Dixon 2186 N.Starr Rd. Palm Springs From: Paul Michelson cpaul@roeder-johnson.coma Subject: FW:Case No: 3.3352 Request for Demolition Permit Date: August 31, 2009 8:56:55 AM PDT To: kirvin@mac.com Good Morning, Hope this helps. Please keep us posted on the outcome of the meeting. Best, Paul --- Paul Mi chelson ichelson Sent: Sunday, August 30, 2009 7A8 PM To: Steve.Pougnet@palmsprings-ca.gov; Ginny.Foat@palmsprings-ca.gov; Rick.Hutcheson@palmsprings-ca.gov; Chris.Milis@palmsprings-ca.gov; Lee.Weigel@palmsprings-ca.gov Subject: Case No; 3.3352 Request for Demolition Permit Dear Mayor Pougnet, Ms. Foat, Mr. Hutcheson, Mr. Mills and Mr. Weigel My name is Paul Michelson and I am writing in reference to the issue regarding a stay of demolition related to the SatterwhitefTucker residence located in central Palm Springs. I live in a classically modern condominium community in South Palm Springs, designed in 1963 by noted desert architect, William Kreisel, and support the preservation efforts by the city to maintain the architectural integrity of our wonderful city whether traditional or modern. Regarding the Satterwhite/Tucker issue, I wanted to express my opinion that while Ms. Satterwhilte's residence has its charms, in my opinion, it doesn't seem to meet the criteria for historic preservation necessary to stay its planned demolition. Although the house keeps company with other homes with stoned celebrity histories and events, 823 Avenida Palos Verdes has had no significant owners, activities or architectural significance associated with it. In fact the house was renovated without regard to its original design and function before Ms. Satterwhite purchased it. For example, where a charming courtyard was once situated, it has been replaced with a large enclosed room, the former garage has been converted into a guesthouse, configured awkwardly. Although the home is still lovingly taken care of by Ms. Satterwhite, it is a patchwork of styles, not to mention it is very energy inefficient. The grounds, which have been impeccably maintained by Ms. Satterwhite, would continue to be intact with a newer structure. Consequently, I would like you all to consider letting Ms. Satterwhite move ahead with her plans for a new home, which promises to add a significantly beautiful architectural statement to our city. Thank you all for your consideration of my point of view. Sincerely, Paul Michelson Paul Michelson/Steven Aaron 203 East Canyon Vista Drive Palm Springs, CA 92264 --- ------------------------------ _______------------ August 24, 2009 Mr. Rick Hutcheson City Council Palm Springs, California Dear Mr. Hutcheson, I am asking for your consideration in our appeal of the stay of demolition for our residence at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes (Case 3.3352)before the City Council on September 2, 2009- We have been full-time Palm Springs residents since 1995.Although our business interests have grown beyond this region, we would like to stay here. When we bought the house in 1995, it had been empty and in bank foreclosure for over two years- It was in an advanced state of disrepair, as was much of our neighborhood. We have repaired the house as much as possible. The house has been altered significantly over the years with a hodgepodge of added rooms, different roof styles,re-routed HVAC and electrical, etc. We have investigated a thorough remodel to make the place safe and livable, but were told that this is prohibitive due to the condition of due structure_ We must do something as we Minot continue to live in the house full-time- As a courtesy to our neighbors, we have discussed our plans with them. We have strong support from our neighbors, especially those who are full-time residents. bike us, they want to see the neighborhood continue to improve and also prevent another home from being sold and falling into the"seasonal rental/party house" category- City Staff (Assistant City Planner Glenn Mlaker)has recommended approval for a demolition permit and the Palm Springs Historical Society found that the site has "no known or significant individuals or events associated with it". We took a chance 14 years ago on a run-down neighborhood and have been involved in the revival of the Movie Colony. We are fortunate to be in a position to consider building a new, "green"home in a city that we support As with many decisions of this nature, timing is important. We are coming before you with this appeal because we need to make a decision to build here or move on. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Please feel free to call me at 760.831-6236 if you have any questions. Sincerely, George Tucker, CEO Caregivers Inc. (Midwest) Professional Registry Holdings Caregivers Texas From: Kirvin Satterwhite<kirvin@mae.coma '� Subject: Date; August 27, 2009 6:35:46 PM PDT To: Kirvin Satterwhite akirvin@mac.coma I am writing to you to ask for your consideration for a demolition permit at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes. You may have ridden by my husband's and my house and remarked what a beautiful old charming house it is. However, appearances can be deceiving when it comes to whether the house is just beautiful and charming or is truly historic and original. From the moment you turn the corner at Tamarisk Road there is a beautifully landscaped corner just outside the wall. This corner was not originally landscaped but added at a much later date. As you drive up to the house you see a lovely mailbox and planter, not original, added 10 years ago. Every gate to the driveway and yard, as charming as they are, are not original but added probably in the 80's. The original house did not have a circle driveway in front of the house, it only had a cement driveway that led to the garage behind the house. This garage has been turned into a guest house and a new carport was erected directly beside the house. The driveway now has pavers but the original driveway did not. When you look around at the lush landscaping most of this has been done since the 80's. We have planted the ficus all around the perimeter wall and took out the oleanders (which were not original to the property). We also have added fruit trees. Most of the the trees and vegetation are not original to the property. When the house was built it had no tennis court nor did it have a pool. It has both now. You might notice four fountains that look like they are original but they are not, I added those myself. When you walk up to the front door to enter the home you are not entering through the original front door. Every side of the house has had almost all of the original windows and doors removed and replaced mostly with french doors. Only one original door remains. The newer windows and doors were not even positioned where the original windows and doors had been when the house was built. One of the major structural changes is that of an addition of approximate 900 sq. ft., making up almost a third of the square footage of the main house. This extra square footage was gained by enclosing what used to be a tiled, out door lanai with fountain. This area was enclosed by previous owners probably in the 80's. All original windows and doors and fountain have been removed. A new flat roof was installed with skylights, and huge glass sliders. A huge hallway that opened up to the lanai was enclosed. The rear of the house used to be U shaped when the lanai was present and now the facade is flat because of the enclosure. This makes up almost one third of the house. The entire roof was replaced in 1996 with all new tiles and foam on the flat portions. As you can see very little of the original structure is intact except for the wall that surrounds the property. And that wall has had newer driveway gates added to it. You may think my house looks charming and beautiful sitting there on a lush landscaped lot. I won't disagree with you. But don't penalize me for wanting to demolish a "money pit" with electric bills that can reach almost $2,800.00 per month in the summer and prevent me from building a house that is modern, efficient and green. While my house is charming it is not historic. What's left is the bastardized version of what once was. While many of the improvements, some good, some bad, have been somewhat in the style of the house they are not the original house. What you have is a nice old house that has had many changes. While these changes have not made the house look bad it has nonetheless changed it forever. It is no longer the house that was built in 1925. Please do not confuse George and I with anti preservationists. We care about our community and how our choices affect our neighbors and our community. George and I lived in a 100 year old Victorian house in 1987 - 1992. Painted black, it was the ugliest, rundown house in a neighborhood of Victorian homes surrounding a city park. We restored that house inside and out. The house was restored so beautifully that artists painted pictures of our house and many others stopped by to take pictures. Several years later after we sold the house and moved we found out that the house we restored was now a well known bed and breakfast, The Franklin Street Inn in Appleton, Wl. And, we didn't need a Historic Site Classification for us to make the right choice. We know the difference between a house that has it's history intact and just needs attention to shine and a house that shines but most of it's historic elements have already been removed. Sincerely, Kirvin Satterwhite kirvin@bmac.com (760) 323-3723 e Usage History _ 6/8/09 5:37 PM r l 11111 `` `,1'�""� Home About SCE Outage Center Contact US My Account Search E D I S O N Residential Business Customer EnAronment Cam .w Home> My Account a Usage History 0 2009 e SCE.com Log In Usage History Welcome Kirvin Satterwhite, PLAV1vImG SCm,;cF-S lorvin@mac cam DE " n r Customer Account Number : 2-11-334-0244 r Customer Account Name SATTERWHITE, KIRVIN Service Account : 3.010.0464.58 Service Account Address : 823 N AVENIDA PALOS VFROES ., _ , F My Account Home PALM SPRINGS TAKETHE HOME `sit a.1i'.F°} Edit My ProFile CA 02262-5713 ENERGY Rate Schedule : DOMESTIC EFFICIENCY',',^.` s �- �, My Account Home SURVEY About My Account - Update User Profile Usage Calculalor Download Full Usage Data Change Username/ Password Up to 36 statements of Usage history will show below when available Select DETAIL Manage Account List NTY ACCOUNT INFO BILLING&PAYMENT HISTORY USAGE HISTORY RO GROUP a Terms and Conditions Cancel My Account Meter Read KWH KWH Number of Average Daily Charges this Select Service Date Read Usage Days Usage period Privacy Policy � -^ 06103/2009 4382 428000 30 142.67 51,29556 Paperless Billing Pay Online 4276 'T•- ^.� Update Rotating Outage 05/04/2009 Est. 2020.00 32 91 25 S 81917 Contact Info SCE EnergyManagerO& 04/02/2009 4202 2640.00 29 91 03 5 685.05 Demand Response Tools Capacity 13iddmg Program 03/04/2009 4136 2920 00 30 9733 5 76032 02/02/2009 4063 3440 00 31 110 g7 $ Sol 09 ;" 01/02/2009 3977 436000 30 14533 $ 1 17560 ';7I',^,1"•!µ�_�' 12/03/2008 3868 2200.00 33 36.67 $542 21 10/31/2008 3813 4000 09 31 12903 S 1,084 69 F—T7�'"- 09/30/2008 3713 512000 32 160 S 1,051.37 08/29/2006 3585 504000 29 20828 S 1,379.15 0713112008 3434 692000 31 22$23 $ 1,623 25 06/30/2008 3261 536000 31 1729 $ 1,1 G3 35 ", of 05/30/2008 3127 2840.00 29 97.93 S 76765 05/01/2008 3056 2720.00 3o 90.87 $ 732.05 04101I2008 2988 2240 00 29 7724 �$ 593 GG ''fir'ir„11�'"•.,1 . 03/03/2008 2932 304000 32 11375 $ 1 60657 01/31/2008 28,11 400000 29 13793 S 1 117 74 O ?/b.q1,g00g 11tips.//www.sce.tom/SMA/AA/UsageSummary.aspx7SACT=010045458&CACT=1 13 3 402 44&CUST=895953 �7&m ® ''r Page 1of3 �i Usage History 6/8/09 5:37 PM 05/31/2005 9120 404000 32 126.25 S799.63 04/2912005 9019 P720 00 28 97.14 S 498.60 04/01/2005 8951 3C8o 00 29 10021 $ 52374 i--r!.,71'Tm'' 03103/2005 6874 Est 3160 00 30 105.33 S 541.84 F.��,:1R, 02/C1/2005 8705 424000 29 14621 S 735.85 -�d 01/03/2005 6669 496000 33 150.3 S 860.90 ' 1 7 Home � Contact Us Privacy Policy My Account I Regulatory Information Copyright*2009 Southern California Edison.All Rights Reserved Edison International I Press Room I Investors I Careers 111ti( In https-11w -sCu.Com/SMA/AA/UsageSummary.aspx?SAC-r=010046458&CACT-113340244&COST-895953 Page 3 of 3 Page 1 of 1 Jay Thompson From: Craig Ewing Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 9:41 AM To: Chris Mills; David Ready; Ginny Foat; 'tinny Foat at Home'; Jay Thompson; Lee Weigel; Martha Edgmon; 'Rick Hutcheson', Steve Pougnet; Barbara Marshall; 'Brian Strahl', 'John Gilmer'; 'Sheila Grattan'; 'Sidney Williams'; 'Sidney Williams'; 'Tom DeLeeuw' Cc: Glenn Mlaker; Tom Wilson Subject: Appeal Filed on HSPB Decision to Issue Stay or Demolition -823 Avenida Palos Verdes To Al I, On July 15, 2009, the property owner and applicant— Kirvin Satterwhite—filed an appeal of the Historic Site Preservation Board's July 10 decision to issue a Stay of Demolition on the single family dwelling at 823 Avenida PaloS Verdes. Ms. Satterwhite had sought approval to demolish her home, which was originally constructed in the late 1920's. The City Clerk has received the appeal and the item will be heard by the City Council on September 2, 2009. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions, but please do not use the "Reply All" button. Thank you. Craig A. Ewing,AICP Director of Planning Services City of Palm Springs 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Drive Palm Springs, CA 92262 760-323-8245 When 1 am working on a problem I never think about beauty I only think about how to solve the problem. But when I have finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know it is wrong. -Suckminster Fuller(1895-1983) 7/22/2009 Page 1 of J Jay Thompson From: Lucy Swanner[Iswanner@ehblawyers.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 9:40 AM To: Jay Thompson Subject: RE: Case No. 3.3352 SFR Demolition -823 Avenida Palos Verdes Great, thanks. There was some confusion with the fee — the City letter had one amount, but when our client went in on the 15th to file her letter she was told the fee was only $225.00 which we paid, and later verified. Emily felt it necessary to file the letter sent yesterday to conform to the City Codes on appeals, so this is really kind of a supplement to Ms. Satterwhite's letter of July 15th Lucy Swanner Legal Assistant Co Emily Perri Hemphill Ealy, Hemphill & Blasdel, LLP 71780 San Jacinto Drive Building I, Suite 3 Rancho Mirage, California 92270 Telephone: 760-340-0666 Facsimile; 760-340-4666 E-mail: Lswanner@ehblawyers.com This e-mail contains information From the law firm of EALY, HEMPHILL & BLASDEL, LLP, which is confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it thereto, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, dissemination or distribution of this e-mail, or the taking of any action in reliance on its contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please contact the person above immediately. From: Jay Thompson [mailto:Jay.Thompson@palmsprings-ca.gov] Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 9:31 AM To: Jay Thompson; Lucy Swanner Cc: Craig Ewing; Douglas C. Holland; Douglas C. Holland Subject: RE: Case No. 3.3352 SFR Demolition - 823 Avenida Palos Verdes Lucy, I apologize, the appeal fee has already been filed, and I understand the Planning Department has discussed the scheduling and a mutual agreement has been made to schedule the appeal for the City Council meeting of Sept. 2"d. Jay James Thompson, City Clerk City of Palm Springs, California TEL (760) 323-8204 From: Jay Thompson Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 9:21 AM To: 'Iswanner@ehblawyers.com' 7/22/2009 Page 2 of 3 Cc: Craig Ewing; 'Douglas C, Holland'; Douglas C. Holland Subject: FW: Case No. 3.3352 5FR Demolition - 823 Avenida Palos Verdes Lucy, I am in receipt of your appeal to the City Council of the HSPB; however, the appeal fee of$415. was not included. Please forward the appeal fee as soon as possible to complete the appeal as required by the PSMC Checks should be made payable to the City of Palm Springs, and directed to my attention. Jay James Thompson, City Clerk City of Palm Springs, California TEL (760) 323-6204 From: Craig Ewing Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 4:00 PM To: Jay Thompson Subject: FW: Case No. 3.3352 SFR Demolition - 823 Avenida Palos Verdes Jay, Please note the attached appeal letter. Craig A. Ewing, AICP Director of Planning Services City of Palm Springs 3200 E.Taltquitz Canyon Drive Palm Springs,CA 92262 760-323-8245 From: Lucy Swanner [mailto:lswanner@ehblawyers.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 3:43 PM To: Craig Ewing; Glenn Mlaker Cc: dholland@wss-law.com Subject: Case No, 3.3352 5FR Demolition - 823 Avenida Palos Verdes Attached please find our formal appeal letter on behalf of the owner of 823 Avenida Palos Verdes. Lucy Swanner Legal Assistant to Emily Perri Hemphill Ealy, Hemphill &- Blasciel, LLP 71780 San Jacinto Drive Building I, Suite 3 Rancho Mirage, California 92270 Telephone: 760-340-0666 Facsimile: 760-340-4666 E-mail: Lswanner@ehblawyers.com This e-mail contains information from the law firm of EALY, HEMPHILL & BLASDEL, LLP, which is confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it thereto, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, dissemination or distribution of this e-mail, or the taking of any action in reliance on its contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please contact the person 7/22/2009 Page 3 oF3 above immediately. 7/22/2009 Page 1 of 2 Jay Thompson From: Jay Thompson Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 9:31 AM To: Jay Thompson; 'Iswanner@ehblawyers.com' Cc: Craig Ewing; 'Douglas C. Holland'; Douglas C. Holland Subject: RE: Case No. 3-3352 SFR Demolition -823 Avenida Palos Verdes Lucy, I apologize, the appeal fee has already been filed, and I understand the Planning Department has discussed the scheduling and a mutual agreement has been made to schedule the appeal for the City Council meeting of Sept. 211. Jay James Thompson, City Clerk City of Palm Springs, California TEL (760) 323-8204 From: Jay Thompson Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 9:21 AM To: 'Iswanner@ehblawyers.com' Cc: Craig Ewing; 'Douglas C. Holland'; Douglas C. Holland Subject: FW: Case No. 3.3352 SFR Demolition - 823 Avenida Palos Verdes Lucy, I am in receipt of your appeal to the City Council of the HSPB; however, the appeal fee of S415. was not included. Please forward the appeal fee as soon as possible to complete the appeal as required by the PSMC. Checks should be made payable to the City of Palm Springs, and directed to my attention. Jay James Thompson, City Clerk City of Palm Springs, California TEL (760) 323-8204 From: Craig Ewing Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 4:00 PM To: Jay Thompson Subject: FW: Case No. 3.3352 SFR Demolition - 823 Avenida Palos Verdes Jay, Please note the attached appeal letter. Craig A. ) win-, ATCP Director of Plamiing Services City of Palm Springs 3200 E.Tahquitz Canyon Drive Palm Springs,CA 92262 760-323-8245 From: Lucy Swanner [mailto:Iswanner@ehblawyers.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 3:43 PM To: Craig Ewing; Glenn Mlaker Cc: dholland@wss-law.com Subjects Case No. 3,3352 SFR Demolition - 823 Avenida Palos Verdes 7/22/2009 Page 2 of 2 Attached please find our formal appeal letter on behalf of the owner of 823 Avenida Palos Verdes. Lucy Swanner Legal Assistant to Emily Perri Hemphill Ealy, Hemphill Er Blasdel, LLP 71780 San Jacinto Drive Building I, Suite 3 Rancho Mirage, California 92270 Telephone: 760-340-0666 Facsimile: 760-340-4666 E-mail: Lswanner@ehblawyers.com This e-mail contains information From the law firm of EALY, HEMPHILL & BLASDEL, LLP, which is confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it thereto, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, dissemination or distribution of this e-mail, or the taking of any action in reliance on its contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please contact the person above immediately. 7/22/2009 Page 1 of 2 Jay Thompson From: Jay Thompson Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 9:21 AM 2009 JUL 22 AN 31 23 To: 'Iswanner@ehblawyers.com' Cc: Craig Ewing, 'Douglas C. Holland', Douglas C. Holland CITY CLER'' Subject: FW: Case No. 3.3352 SFR Demolition -823 Avenida Palos Verdes Attachments: 07-21-2009-pdf Lucy, I am in receipt of your appeal to the City Council of the HSPB, however, the appeal fee of$415. was not included. Please forward the appeal fee as soon as possible to complete the appeal as required by the PSMC. Checks should be made payable to the City of Palm Springs, and directed to my attention Jay James Thompson, City Clerk City of Palm Springs, California TEL (760) 323-8204 From: Craig Ewing Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 4:00 PM To: Jay Thompson Subject: FW: Case No. 3.3352 SFR Demolition - 823 Avenida Palos Verdes Jay, Please note the attached appeal letter. Craig A. Ewing, AICP Direcior of Planning Services City of Palm Springs 3200 E.Tahquitz Canyon Drive Palm Springs,CA 92262 760-323-9245 From: Lucy Swanner [mailto:lswanner@ehblawyers-cam] Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 3:43 PM To: Craig Ewing; Glenn Mlaker Cc: dholland@wss-law.com Subject: Case No. 3,3352 SFR Demolition - 823 Avenida Palos Verdes Attached please find our formal appeal letter on behalf of the owner of 823 Avenida Palos Verdes. Lucy Swanner Legal Assistant to Emily Perri Hemphill Ealy, Hemphill Er Blasdel, LLP 71780 San Jacinto Drive Building I, Suite 3 Rancho Mirage, California 92270 Telephone: 760-340-0666 Facsimile: 760-340-4666 7/22/2009 Page 2 of 2 E-mail: Lsvvanner@ehblavvyers.com This e-mail contains information from the law firm of EALY, HEMPHILL & BLASDEL, LLP, which is confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it thereto, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, dissemination or distribution of this e-mail, or the taking of any action in reliance on its contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please contact the person above immediately. 7/22/2009 Page I of 1 Jay Thompson From: Craig Ewing Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 4:00 PM UL 22 To: Jay Thompson Subject: FW: Case No, 3.3352 SFR Demolition - 823 Avenida Palos Verdes CITY Attachments: 07-21-2009.pdf Jay, Please note the attached appeal letter. Craig A. Ewing, AICP Director of Planning Services City of Palm Springs 3200 E.Tahquitz Canyon Drive Palm Springs,CA 92262 760-323-8245 From: Lucy Swanner [mailto:lswanner@ehblawyers.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 3:43 PM To: Craig Ewing; Glenn Mlaker Cc: dholland@wss-law.com Subject: Case No. 3.3352 SFR Demolition - 823 Avenida Palos Verdes Attached please find our formal appeal letter on behalf of the owner of 823 Avenida Palos Verdes. Lucy Swanner Legal Assistant to Emily Perri Hemphill Ealy, Hemphill Sr Slasdel, LLP 71780 San Jacinto Drive Building I, Suite 3 Rancho Mirage, California 92270 Telephone: 760-340-0666 Facsimile: 760-340-4666 E-mail: Lsvvanner@ehblavvyers-com This e-mail contains information from the law firm of EALY, HEMPHILL & BLASDEL, LLP, which is confidential and intended solely for the use or the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it thereto, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, dissemination or distribution of this e-mail, or the taking of any action in reliance on its contents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please contact the person above immediately. 7/22/2009 PgLM SA U n k �b R CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATE: September 2, 2009 PUBLIC HEARING SUBJECT: Consideration of an Appeal of the Historic Site Preservation Board action of July 14, 2009 to issue a Stay of Demolition for the property located at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes-, Appellant: Kirvin Satterwhite FROM: David H. Ready, City Manager BY: The Planning Department SUMMARY An appeal filed on July 15, 2009 by Kirvin Satterwhite, requesting the Council overturn the decision of the HSPB to issue a 120-day stay of demolition on the single family dwelling located at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes. No public hearing is required. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Resolution No. "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CALIFORNIA DENYING AN APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE DECISION OF THE HISTORIC SITE PRESERVATION BOARD TO ISSUE A STAY OF DEMOLITION ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 823 AVENIDA PALOS VERDES " ACTIONS TAKEN TO DATE On July 14, 2009, the Historic Site Preservation Board voted 3 to 2 (Strahl, Grattan opposed) to issue a Stay of Demolition for 120 days, and initiated proceedings for possible historic designation of the property by directing staff to schedule a public hearing and prepare a report. On June 15, 2009 the City Clerk received an appeal from the property owner on the Board's actions. The appeal stopped all further work on the matter until Council action. STAFF ANALYSIS: Background The issuance of a Stay of Demolition allows the City 120-day period (which may be ITEM NO. ° . City Council Staff Report September 2, 2009 Case No. 3.3352; Demolition of 823 Avenida Palos Verdes Page 2 of 4 extended an additional 60 days) to determine if a site should be designated as a historic site and, if so, whether to assign Class 1 or Class 2 status to the property. The relevant sections of the Palm Springs Municipal Code are: 8.05.170 Stay of demolition. At any time after the initiation of proceedings for designation of an historic site or district, the historic site preservation board may, upon its own motion or upon the application of any interested person, issue an order staying any proposed or threatened demolition or alteration of the exterior of any structure within or upon such proposed site. Such stay order shall be effective for no longer than one hundred twenty days, and is intended to afford time for necessary studies, hearings and determination whether such site should be designated as an historic site. Such stay order may be extended once for a period not to exceed sixty days. 8.05.175 Effect of stay order—Exceptions. Upon the issuance of a stay order, no permit shall be given for the demolition or exterior alteration of any structure or the interior arrangement of a public building described in such stay order, and any such permit previously issued shall forthwith be revoked; provided, however, that a stay order shall not prevent the performance of any repairs, demolition, or removal necessary for the protection of public health or safety, and ordered by the chief building official of the city to be performed by the owner or occupier of such structure. Upon issuance of a Stay of Demolition, a public hearing would be held by the HSPB and the City Council to determine the property's historic status. However, with the filing of the applicant's appeal, no further action has been taken on the property in this regard. Discussion of A ellant's Arguments Staff has reviewed the appellant's letter of July 15, 2009 and the letter dated July 22, 2009 from Emily Hemphill, an attorney representing the appellant (both attached). No specific reasons for the appeal were given in the letter of July 15th; however, staff has identified in the subsequent letter the following reasons the property owner's appeal. Staff's response to each is provided immediately following each statement. 1. The building does not meet the threshold requirement for a historic designation, "...that being uniqueness or significance in the area of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship or aesthetic effect." The Stay of Demolition is not for buildings that meet the threshold requirements, but for buildings which may be meet them and for which the City needs time to study the matter and determine if a historic designation is warranted. As noted in Section 8.05.170, the purpose of the Stay is to: "...afford time for necessary studies, hearings and determination whether such site should be designated as an historic site." Consequently, the question of whether or not the building meets the threshold 2 City Council Staff Report September 2, 2009 Case No. 3.3352, Demolition of 823 Avenida Palos Verdes Page 3 of 4 requirement for historic designation is typically answered only after conducting the appropriate studies. Nevertheless, the decision to issue a Stay of Demolition is discretionary and suggests that a certain level of analysis must be undertaken regarding the potential for the building to have historic value. In this case, Board members conducted site visits and received third-party comment, and concluded that sufficient potential exists with this building and imposed the Stay of Demolition (see attachments). 2. No historic designation is proper because none of the seven criteria for defining a historic site are met. The appellant correctly identifies the seven criteria contained in Section 8.05.020 that define a historic site. Each of these criteria is addressed by the appellant and the appellant's conclusion is that none of them were found to have been met. As noted above, the Stay would allow the HSPB to conduct a formal study, including a search of information, to determine if there are elements of the building's design or provenance that might be historically significant. Consequently, the assertion that the property does not meet the seven criteria is not directly related to the issuance of a Stay. If information were to be found during a formal study, the building may well be found to meet one or more of the criteria. 3. The issuance of a stay is a hardship on the owner. The appellant identifies certain costs and other concerns that result from delay in demolition of the structure. Specific mention is made of the energy costs required to cool the house. Staff believes that the costs of ownership are not directly related to the consideration of the property's historic value. Homes and other buildings built in a different time often include design and other characteristics that did not take account of energy costs to the extent they are today. Further, structures designated as historic must at times bear additional operating and maintenance costs as the price for preserving the structure. Staff is making no conclusion with regard to this building's historic value; however, it does not appear appropriate to use the costs of operation as a basis for avoiding a look at the building's historic potential. 4. The owner's intent is to build a modern, energy efficient home. The desire to build a new, energy-efficient dwelling is commendable. However, residential properties which are deemed historic may preclude such development. The Stay of Demolition would provide an opportunity for a full investigation into the value of the site as a historic asset. Preparation of Necessary Studies The question of issuing a Stay of Demolition on any structure turns in part on whether or that structure might have historic value such that it warrants consideration for historic designation. To answer that question, an investigation is to be conducted. The City Council Staff Report September 2, 2009 Case No. 3.3352: Demolition of 823 Avenida Palos Verdes Page 4 of 4 applicant/ appellant has indirectly raised the question of whether or not a more detailed investigation would add anything to what is currently known about the property. Staff has concluded that this is a reasonable concern: A report from the Palm Springs Historical Society has revealed no historical records; and the City's own building records trace back only to 1964- The building is known to have been substantially remodeled over the years, including repairs after an electrical fire in 1966 and new windows and additions. A letter presented to the HSPB (McGrew, attached) notes that the home was owned by a local restaurateur. There is a high likelihood that we already know all there is to know about the building. If the City Council believes that the record on this property is in all likelihood complete, and that the record does not support a historic designation, as outlined in the letter of appeal, then the Council may uphold the appeal and vacate the Stay of Demolition. If not, then the Council may deny the appeal and re-instate the Stay of Demolition. CONCLUSION The Historic Site Preservation Board (HSPB) has the authority to issue a Stay of Demolition on any structure in the City (Palm Springs Municipal Code Section 8.05.170). The purpose is to provide time for the City to conduct an investigation into the possibility of designating the site or structure as historic. Staff has concluded that the applicant / appellant has not raised sufficient reasons to overturn the decision of the HSPB and therefore recommends denying the appeal. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal - pact. "n 1I�' � n ti A ems: �(rir wing, AI P Thomas J. Wjtson Dctor of Plannin Services Assistant City Manager, Dev't Svcs David H. Ready City Manager Attachments: 1. Draft City Council Resolution 2. Vicinity Map 3. Appeal letters dated July 15 and July 22, 2009 4. Minutes of HSPB Board, July 14, 2009 5. HSPB Staff report, July 14, 2009 6. HSPB Member Reports on Site Visit 7. Letter, Patrick McGrew, July 12, 2009 8. Letter Whitney Sander, May 26, 2009 9. Survey Record, January 31, 1982 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CALIFORNIA DENYING AN APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE DECISION OF THE HISTORIC SITE PRESERVATION BOARD TO ISSUE A STAY OF DEMOLITION ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 823 AVENIDA PALOS VERDES WHEREAS, the building located at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes was constructed prior to 1945 and is therefore automatically designated a Class 3 Historic Resource under Section 8.05.125 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Historic Site Preservation Board (HSPB) may issue a Stay of Demolition on any Class 3 resource for which a demolition permit has been requested; and WHEREAS, on May 26, 2009, the applicant, Kirvin Satterwhite submitted an application to demolish the existing structures at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes; and WHEREAS, on July 14, 2009 the HSPB held a public meeting on the application for demolition of the buildings located 823 Avenida Palos Verdes; and at which meeting the HSPB considered a staff report, related exhibits and public testimony; and WHEREAS, following consideration of all information presented at the hearing, the HSPB, by a 3 to 2 vote (Strahl and Grattan opposed) approved a Stay of Demolition for 120 days for the subject property; and WHEREAS, on July 15, 2009, the applicant filed an appeal with the City Clerk seeking to overturn the decision of the HSPB regarding the Stay of Demolition; and WHEREAS, a public hearing notice is not required for an appeal of a Stay of Demolition; and WHEREAS, on September 2, 2009, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the appeal of the HSPB decision to issue a stay of demolition on the structures located at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes; and WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully reviewed and considered all of the evidence presented in connection with the meeting on the appeal, including but not limited to the staff report, and all written and oral testimony presented. THE CITY COUNCIL DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: There is sufficient evidence to conclude that the property at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes may qualify for designation as a historic resource in that a dwelling was constructed in 1928 in the Spanish Revival style and subsequently occupied as a single family residence. SECTION 2: In order to determine if either existing or as-yet unidentified evidence would support a historic designation for the property, as determined by Section 8.05 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code, additional time for research and analysis is appropriate and necessary. SECTION 3: In order to provide additional time for discovery and analysis of evidence related to the subject property, a Stay of Demolition will allow for a 120-day period to conduct such investigations and hold required hearings on the property's potential historic value. SECTION 3: Based on the above findings, the City Council hereby denies the appeal of July 15, 2009 and re-instates the Stay of Demolition for the property located at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes. ADOPTED THIS 2"d of September, 2009. David H. Ready, City Manager ATTEST: James Thompson, City Clerk Fp ABM Sw Department of Planning Services Vicinity Maps cq O O Q O W(A< DA VIA A IRA --- TAmAR15K __. Legend Sao Q U ©400'Radros C] CITY OF PALM SPRINGS CASE NO: DESCRIPTION: To consider an appeal by Kirvin 3.3352 / HSPB Stay of Demolition Satterwhite of a Stay of Demolition for the property located at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes, Zoned R-1-13 APPLICANT/APPELLANT: (Single Family Residential), Kirvin Satterwhite 7 July 15, 2009 City of Palm Springs RF: Case No: 3.3352 SFR Demolition To Whom It May Concern: I'd like to appeal the decision made by the HSPB on July 14, 2009 for a stay of demolition for property located at 823 N- Avenida Palos Verdes. Sincerely, ruin Satterwhite roperty Owner CST" LF pqt^� 5°F'Tregti (760) 323-3723 (: GR kirvin@mac.com F4,i ka F;rF,'U7 n TL'CYA"E PATE; O'iilj.'I,n PPi E7 1'7 '5/DLR T-hEP 12c21 r�;f�'lE'T7"ut' `I1GLIhl1 CLL�f iS'F af'F'�pL TIl ;pulrJ[1 iA! bIJG. y;5,D7 DiEK b,;. .L4 .72 1AW OFFICES OF EAL Y, HEMPHILL & BLASDEL, LLP A CALI'FORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY PARMSR5HIP W. Curt Ealy 71780 San Jacinto Drive, Suite I-3, Emily Perri Hemphill Rancho Mirage, California 92270 Diane C. Blasdel Telephone: (760)340-0666 Facsimile: (760)340-4666 July 22, 2009 VIP.ELECTRONIC MAIL AND REGULAR MATT., e Craig Ewing City of Palm Springs — r M _. Iv e 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 Re: Case No. 3.3352 SPR Demolition ~' 823 Avenida Palos Verdes c5 Dear Mr. Ewing: This office represents Kirvin Satterwhite,owner of the above referenced property(the "Property"). As you know,my client has submitted an application for demolition("Application")of the single family home that is currently located on the Property, as she intends to construct a new residence on the site, Because the house currently located on the property was constructed before 1945, under the City's historic preservation ordinance, it was automatically classified a"class 3" structure,necessitating the Historic Site Preservation Board's ("HSPB")review of the Application. The HSPB first considered my client's Application at its June 9, 2009 meeting. At that time, in addition to the staff report, the HSPB has access to the City's official historic preservation survey conducted in 1982,information on the current condition of the Property from my client's architect, and photographs demonstrating the changes made to the house since the 1982 survey and demonstrating that this private home is not visible from any surrounding streets or properties. At the June 9 meeting,the HSPB decided that they required a site visit to the Property before they could make a decision on the ,Application. Representatives of the HSPB did make a site visit to the Property,and as a result,the Application was again considered at the HSPB meeting on July 14. At that time,the HSPB had the staff report that confirmed the condition of the Property has been significantly changed from the original design and that there were structural issues with the Property. The Staff Report went on to recommend that the Application be approved having found no evidence of historic significance for the Property after consulting with the Palm Springs Historical Society. Despite the staff recommendation,the staff s research on the Property,its deteriorated conditions,the changes made �i LAW OFFICES OF F_4LY, NEMPHILL & BL4SDEL, LLP July 22, 2009 Page 2 to the original architeciure eliminating much of its potentially historic fabric, and the fact that it is a private home not open to the public,the HSPB determined to institute a 120 day stay of demolition. On July 15, 2009, my client delivered her request for appeal of this decision, along with the applicable fee. She has been advised that the appeal has been scheduled for Council meeting on September 2, 2009. The purpose of this letter is to provide further support and grounds for my client's appeal. Under the City's Code section 8.05.020,a building may be historic if it is"unique or significant because of its location,design,setting,materials,workmanship or aesthetic effect." The Property in this case does not meet this threshold standard. The Property is part of one of the City's residential neighborhoods and presents nothing unique or significant with respect to location and setting. The design, materials and workmanship are not unique, but rather, result in a traditional Spanish style house which "is part of the most common style in Palm Springs from the 1920's -- 1940's." [Quote from 1982 City survey.] In terms of the Property's aesthetic effect, my client provided several photographs to the HSPB which show that the house,itself,is not visible from any adjoining streets or properties, and therefore, the current structure makes no significant aesthetic effect to the area. In all respects,therefore,this residence does not meet the threshold requirement for a historic designation—that being uniqueness or significance in the area of location, design, setting,materials,workmanship or aesthetic effect. Even if it could be said that the above described threshold criteria were met in this case,nonetheless,no historic designation is proper because the City's ordnance also requires that the property: (1) Be associated with events that have made a meaningful contribution to the nation, state or community; or (2) Be associated with the lives of persons who have made a meaningful contribution to the nation, state or community; or (3) Reflect or exemplify a particular period of national, state or local history; or (4) Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type,period or method of construction;or (5) Present the work of a master designer,architect,etc or possess high artistic value;or (6) Represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction; or (7) Has yielded or may yield information important to national, state or local history or prehistory. Applying the above criteria to the Properly, we first find that no event of historic significance took place on or near the Property. This is a private home which has never been open to the public and according to the Palm Springs Historical Society,no survey of historic records extant in the City indicates any significant events have occurred on or near the Property. LAW OFFICES OF EALY, HEMPHILL &BLASDEL, L L P ]uly 22, 2009 Page 3 The Properly is not associated with the lives of any person who has made a meaningful contribution to the nation, state or community. After being sold by Paul lei Amico (the owner during the 1982 survey), the Property went through several hands and was the subject of a foreclosure sale. My client is the current owner of the Property and uses it as her residence. The nature of the construction of the Properly is not unique,but rather, is the most common form of architecture used from the 1920's-I940's in Palm Springs. This Spanish Style of architecture can be seen today in a large number of the homes and commercial buildings found throughout the City. The Spanish Style continues to be a popular style of architecture in the Valley. Given that the Property fits within one of the most common architectural styles in the Valley it cannot be said to exemplify a particular period in national, state or local history,nor can be it said that it embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction. The architect of the house on the Property is unknown, but there is no evidence to suggest that any master builder,designer,artist or architect was involved.Neither does the Property have high artistic value. As noted by my client's architect and confirmed by the site visit of the HSPB and staff,the Property has been modified from its original design to enclose a lanai, modify roof materials,close window openings,install modern metal framed windows and sliding glass doors that are inconsistent with the original style of architecture, add a carport, and convert a garage to a guest house. In addition,there are several cracked walls,foundations and floors as well as evidence of termite repairs and further termite and dry rot damage. The Property is not a distinguishable entity made of components that lack individual distinction; it is simply a private single family residence that has never been open to the public. A check with the Palm Springs Historic Society by staff confirmed that the Property is not likely to yield significant information important to national, state or local history or prehistory. Given these facts,which have been documented and observed by the HSPB,there is no basis upon which the City could find that the Property requires a historic designation and preservation, and therefore, continuing consideration of the Application for 120 days, plus the additional time for hearings thereafter is not likely to result in any benefit to the City, while it will continue to burden my client unreasonably. With no basis upon which to make a historic designation for the Property,the RSPB nonetheless ordered a 120 stay of demolition in the hopes that some obscure piece of information may be uncovered that somehow justifies the Property's association with some person or event important to history. Yet such a fishing expedition is not in keeping with the intent of the City's ordinance related to historic preservation. By ordinance,the HSPB is admonished"to be lenient in its judgment of plans for structures which have little or no historic value. . ." [PSMC 8.05.195.] LAW OFFICES OF EALY, HEMPHILL &6LASOEL, LLP July 22, 2009 Page 4 The extended stay of demolition violates the ordinance's intent and works ahardship on my client. As has previously been noted in staff reports and the letter from the project architect, there are structural and foundation cracks in the house as well as other deterioration. Further, although my client updated the air conditioning system in the house several years ago in an effort to achieve greater efficiency, the thick walled design of the house prevents installation of ductwork necessary to achieve cooling efficiency. As a result, even with the new RVAC units, my client's electrical bills have averaged$1042 per month for the past 12 months. During the period from 2005 to the present, her bills have ranged from a low of$500 per month to a high of$2753 per month. (Evidence of the Property's electrical usage from 2005—present was submitted to the HSPB and is in the City's project file.) The longer she is delayed in proceeding with demolition and new construction,the longer she is subjected to such exceptionally high electrical bills from inefficient energy consumption by the Property. My client's objective in seeking the demolition permit for the Property is to construct a modern, energy efficient home. If allowed to do so, Ms. Satterwhite will be investing in Palm Springs at a time when such investment should be welcomed, improving the City's housing stock and responding responsibly to the need to increase energy efficiency and reduce the carbon footprint. The demolition of the existing home on the Property does no harm to the historic fabric of the City of Palm Springs as the City has an abundance of homes of similar vintage and design,and the current Property has no historic figures or events associated with it. Further,the house,as it currently exists, is completely hidden from view from the adjoining streets and properties and it therefore makes no contribution to the aesthetics of the area outside its perimeter wall. The loss of an essentially invisible structure cannot be seen to be a significant loss to the City's historic fabric. Continued delays in the proj ect result in a burden to my client and run counter to the need for increasing energy efficiency. We therefore respectfully request that the Council overturn the decision of the HSPB imposing a 120 day of demolition on the Property,and instead approve my client's application for a demolition permit, Sincerely, Emily Pe i emphill Ealy, IIefn 11 &Blasdel, LLP cc: Kirvin Satterwhite Doug Holland Glen Mlaker 12• Historic Site Preservation Board Meeting Page 2 Minutes from the July 14, 2009 Meeting Glen ssistant Planner, presented the staff report and recommended that the Historic Site Pres and recommend denial to the City Council designating 1958 South Navajo Drive a Class The public hearing was opened and closed with no appearances ard. 8. CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL REQUEST(S); 8.A Case 3.3352 —Application by Satterwhite for demolition of the structures located at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes, Zone R-1-13, Section 1, Built 1925 - Class 3 Historic Site. - Assistant Planner Glenn Mlaker, and report from Subcommittee members. Marshall and Grattan Glenn Mlaker, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report and recommended that the Historic Preservation Site Board approve the request to demolish the house, pool, tennis court and guesthouse. M/S/C (DeLeeuw/Gilmer, 3-2, Strahl,Grattan) To issue a Stay of Demolition for 120 days, and direct staff to schedule a public hearing and prepare a report on the possible designation of the property. 9.A Work Program and Budget for 2009 / 10—Adoption of Proposed Work Program ctor Ewing provided background information as outlined in the staff report. M/SIC rattan/Strahl, 6-0) To approve the Historic Preservation Site Board's work program for 2009/2010 fiscal year, 9.13 Historic Ma rs — Review of Marker Locations Director Ewing provided b ground information as outlined in the staff memorandum. M/S/C (Gilmer/Marshall, 6-0) To rove. 9.0 Historic Markers — Review of Ma r Text - No report. 9.1) Case 3. 3228 - HSPB 67 Casino House, 82 North Avenida Palmas — Progress Report—Glenn Mlaker and Subcommittee shall & Williams Glenn Mlaker, Assistant Planner, reported that staff will c inue to work with the owner to set-up a site visit within the next few weeks. 10. COMMITTEE REPORTS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS- 10.A P.S. Preservation Foundation (www.pspreservationfoundation.org) — B d member Strahl provided details on the Retro Martini Party to be held on Friday, Fe ry 19, 2010. The FaIVWinter events will be published on the website. 13 p AA S.n � 2 G� N N FloXnmeo`per it Historic Site Preservation Board Staff Report Date: July 14, 2009 Case No.: 3.3352 Demo Application Type: Demolition Location: 823 Avenida Palos Verdes Applicant: Kirvin Statterwhite, Owner Zone: R-1-B (Residential Zone, 15,000 sf lots minimum) General Plan: L4 (Low density residential, 4 dwelling units per acre) APN: 507-162-003 From: Glenn Mlaker, Assistant Planner PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project is for the complete demolition of a 1925 house to include the a guesthouse, pool and tennis court. The perimeter wall and mature landscaping will remain at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes, a Class 3 historic site. RECOMMENDATION That the Historic Site Preservation Board approve the request to demolish the residence, pool, tennis court, and guesthouse at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes and take no action to re-designate it to a higher, more protective historic status. PRIOR ACTIONS TAKEN ON THE PROJECT None. - ids Historic Site Preservation Board Staff Report July 14, 2009 Case 3.3352 Demolition—823 Avenida Palos Verdes Page 2 of 4 BACKGROUND AND SETTING The subject parcel is a 0.72 acre (31,492 square foot) parcel with an existing 4,700 square foot house, guest house, garage, pool, and tennis court. The site is in the Movie Colony neighborhood on the northwest corner of Avenida Palos Verdes and Tamarisk Road and is surrounded by existing single family homes. DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS The house at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes was constructed in 1925 according to the database in the City's Planning Department. (No building permit records exist in the City's Building Department on the property prior to 1947.) The present day structure can be described as a classic California-Spanish style house with thick stucco walls, barrel tile roof and details most associated with the 85 year old house. The entire site is surrounded by a tall stucco perimeter wall with mature groves of palm trees, fruit trees, ficus and other vegetation. The front of the house facing Avenida Palos Verdes serves as the main entrance with a wide circular driveway. On the north side stands a thick wooden trellis carport and pergola structure with large stone fireplace. The rear of the house has been altered with a 1970's patio enclosure and contains a pool with large tile patio. A two story converted garage into a guest house is located at the northwest corner and a below grade tennis court lies at the southern end of the property. At the tennis court end of the house, the grade change gives the appearance that the house is two stories. On June 2, 2009, staff along with HSPB members Marshall and Grattan walked the site with the owner/applicant. Upon inspection, it is clear that alterations and damages have occurred to the house including visible cracked walls, foundations, and floors. Alterations have included the closing of window openings, the replacement of original windows with efficient modern windows not in keeping with the style of the original house, a 1970'5 patio cover enclosure, and repair of termite damaged wood. Visible cracks can be seen on the exterior stucco walls, and foundations. Board members Marshall and Grattan have submitted their notes on the site visit (please see attached). Staff would like to respond to committee member Marshall's comment regarding the actual age of the house. An exact date of construction cannot be confirmed due to conflicting or non-existent records. It is safe to say that the home was built in the mid to late 1920's. • A 2 Historic Site Preservation Board Staff Report July 14, 2009 Case 3.3352 Demolition—823 Avenida Palos Verdes Page 3 of 4 REQUIRED FINDINGS Definition of an Historic Site. Section 8.05.020 of the Municipal Code provides the definition of an historic site as: follows; (a) Historic Site. An historic site is any real property such as: a building; a structure, including but not limited to archways, tiled areas and similar architectural elements; an archaeological excavation or object that is unique or significant because of its location, design, setting, materials, workmanship or aesthetic effect and: 1. That is associated with events that have made a meaningful contribution to the nation, state or community; or 2. That is associated with lives of persons who made meaningful contribution to national, state or local history, or 3. That reflects or exemplifies a particular period of the national, state or local history; or 4. That embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction; or 5. That presents the work of a master builder, designer, artist, or architect whose individual genius influenced his age; or that possesses high artistic value; or 6. That represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or 7. That has yielded or may be likely to yield information important to national, state or local history or prehistory. Staff has evaluated the structure at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes and finds no defining architectural style or construction characteristics that would argue in favor of defining the subject property a historic site. Those elements of the building which date to 1925 have been altered with 'modern' 'barrel tile-looking' roof tiles, new windows, original window openings being enclosed, and additions unsympathetic to the original structure. Staff therefore believes architectural integrity worthy of a higher more protective designation is not present. Staff consulted with the Palm Springs Historical Society and found the site has no known or significant individuals or events associated with it. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This project is categorically exempt from environmental review per Section 15301(L), (1) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. 6 x1 - J Historic Site Preservation Board Staff Report July 14, 2009 Case 3 3352 Demolition—823 Avenida Palos Verdes Page 4 of 4 NOTIFICATION There are no public notification requirements for this application. Glenn Mlaker, wing, rPAssistant Planner re of Plann AICP ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Photographs 3, Sub-Committee Report ^ 1 � 4 July 8, 2009 TO SHSPB FROM Sheila Grattan, Board Member I met Assistant Planner Glenn Mlakcr and HSPB Board Member Barbara Marshall on June 16, 2009 for an exterior tour of 823 Avenida Palos Verdes. The owner, who is applying for a demolition pem-lit for the Class 3 Historic Site was present along with her contractor, Larry Hochanadel. This home, built in 1928, has had many owners and many alterations. The main house has an enclosed lanai added on with sliding glass doors typical of the 1970s. The roofing material was altered in the process and now has part tile and part hot mop materials. Windows have been covered up with stucco. Larry Hochanadel was helpful in pointing oat the fi-ame lines visible through the newer stucco. He also pointed out dry rot, degraded materials and foundation cracks along with alterations made to the guest house. There is a car port that was added on in more recent years. There is a sunken tennis court that will be eliminated when and if the new home is built. There are magnificent fruit trees on a higher level ringing the tennis court area. The contractor and owner plan to maintain these mature fruit trees along with a stand of stately palms located at the front of the property. . This home may have been typical of early Spanish Revival homes built in Palm Springs during the 1920s and 30s. Over the years, owners mixed in other architectural styles during a series of alterations. Today it is a hybrid in a lovely landscaped setting. The only owner with some local name recognition is restaurant owner Paul Di Amico who owned the home in the 1980s. Paul has moved from the area and has not operated a restaurant here for many years. REPORT FROM HSPB MEMBER BARBARA MARSHALL A site visit was conducted at 823 N. Avenida Palos Verdes on June 16, 2009 at 8:30AM by Barbara Marshall (HSPB), Glenn Mlaker(city plamier), Kirvin Satterwhite (home owner), harry Hochanadel (present at home owners request), and Sheila Grattan (RSPB, who arrived later). The site visit was required because the house was built prior to 1945 (i.e., a Class 3 site) and the home owner is requesting a demolition permit. The exterior of the house, guesthouse, pool, patio, tennis courts, and landscaping all appear well-maintained. MAIN HOUSE: Ms. Satterwhite and Mr. Hochanadel walked us around the exterior of the main house beginning at the southeast corner. Mr. Hochanadel pointed out replaced windows and doors, cracks in the stucco and said that the house is not on a concrete slab foundation. He pointed out several thin cracks in the exterior stucco which may be typical of a house this age or bona fide structural issues. Ms. Satterwhite said that the roof, including all tiles, had been replaced approximately 13 years ago. She also opined that the original "U" shape design of the house was later closed in to include the patio. GUEST HOUSE: Mr. Hochanadel pointed out several larger cracks in the foundation on the south side of the two-story guesthouse which is originally believed to have been a garage. He also pointed out several larger cracks in the stucco along the south wall of the guesthouse. According to Jeri Vogelsang, Director, Palm Springs Historical Society, there is no information on this address other than it was previously the residence of Paul de Arnica. Ms. Vogelsang noted that Mr. de Amico was a Palm Springs restaurateur though not "famous." The June 9, 2009 staff report indicates the house was constructed in 1928, however, it is reported as 1925 on the www.realtor.com website. It is recormnended that city staff verify the date for record accuracy. 119 July 12, 2009 Ms. Sidney Williams, Chair Palm Springs Historic Site Preservation Board Palm Springs City Hall 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, California 92264 Re: Case No . 3.3352 Proposed Demolition 823 Avenida Palos Verdes Dear Ms Williams, I am writing regarding the proposed demolition of the Spanish Colonial Revival residence located at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes that is scheduled for your hearing of July 15, 2009. In handling projects like this one the Board's real purpose is tested, I am strongly opposed to the staff recommendation The recommendation argues the building,automatically granted Class 3 status due to its age,should be demolished while retaining a Class 3 designation for the"perimeter wall and mature landscaping." This is akin to"killing granny for the tiara." The subject property is among the early residences built in the historic Movie Colony district. Like the Heigho Residence I Invemada (which it predates) the home could conceivably qualify for Class 1 designation. It appears eligible for local register listing under Criterion 1 as it is associated with the pattern of events that have made a meaningful contribution to the community; Criterion 3 as it exemplifies a particular period in Palm Springs history; Criterion 4 as it"embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type and period of construction", and Criterion 6 as a potential contributor to a Movie Colony Historic District because it"represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction." The Staff Report alleges the "planning staff has evaluated the structure," but the only evidence of such an evaluation is a one paragraph statement that the building is not worthy of designation above the Class 3 level This statement raises questions aboutthe qualifications of the evaluator who summarily dismisses the potential historic value of the property by concluding that it has"no defining architectural style." This same staff report incorrectly indicates the proposed demolition is exempt from CEQA. CEQA states that historic resources are properties of local significance designated under a local preservation ordinance or properties that have been identified in a local historical resources inventory (such as a Class 3 listing). Under CEQA, these properties may be eligible for listing in the California Register and are presumed to be significant resources unless a preponderance of evidence indicates otherwise(PRO Section 5024.1, 14 CCR§4850).Additionally,the HSPB has identified the Movie Colony as a potential Historic District,to which the subject property might be a contributor However, a resource does not need to have been identified Previously through listing or survey to trigger the requirements of CEQA. Lead agencies must not only determine whether a historic resource exists, but also whether such a resource will be impacted by a proposed project-in this case demolition California law requires the agency evaluate the potential resource against the California Register criteria prior to making a finding(PRO Section 21084.1, 14 CCR Section 15064.5(3)). Such an evaluation must be done by a qualified professional historic resource ARGHITEGTURE + PRESERVATION 674 SOUTH GRENFALL ROAD•PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 92264 •(760)416-7819 MS.Sidney Williams July 12,2449 consultant. t Currently the information provided in the staff report is essentially hearsay, neither objective nor complete. I am requesting that the HSPB stay the demolition permit for six months and request the owner provide an legitimate Historic Resource Evaluation Report. PM:bc 1 Qualified professional historic resource consultants are required under CEgA to meet the History,ArphdeClural History or Historic Architecture professional qualifications as outlined by the federal government in 36 Code of Federal Regulations fit,(see Appendix B) These qualifications,in general,are a graduate degree in history,architectural history or a closely related field or a bachelors degree In the same fields plus at least two years of full-time experience in architectural history related work Having experience In the architectural history of Palm Springs would be helpful ARCHITECTURE + PRESERVATION 674 SOUTH GRENFALL ROAD-PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 92254• (769)416-7819 21 sander architects, LLC 2434 Lincoln Boulevard,Venice,CA 90291 310 822 0300 310 822 0900(fax) www.sander•architects cam RECEIVED "Hi ',16 2009 Palm Springs Planning Commission/ PLANNING SERVICES Historic Site Preservation Board DEPARTMENT 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Sprngs, CA 92262 21 May 2008 To Whom it May Concern: We respectfully apply herewith for a demolition perrnit for the residence at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes. I have carefully reviewed the design and condition of the present structure, and believe that it is better for the owner to demolish the present structure than to try to fix it. There are two main areas of concern with the present struture. 1. Aesthetic Condition: The building is a combination of older and newer sections,and is not, therefrore, an intact old structure. This fact is demonstrated by the roof, which is composed of a number of flat sections, quite unlike authentic Mission style roofs. There are a number of other additions to the building which are inconsistent with Mission style, including sliding doors, new windows, flat roof (mentioned abve), etc. 2. Structural/ Health Corncems: The foundation is substantially insuf- ficient by today's building stanards, and is cracked in many places. All the HVAG systems are insufficent. There are substantial sections of the exterior walls that are riddled with dry rot and termites. Most impor- tantly, the client is experiencing respiratory problems relating directly to the mold that she has found in a number of places. Please feel free to contact me with any questions at 310 822 0300. Sincerely, gE4 ARCHijcp ykORBAyIs is z� G2L1158 Y� Whitney Sander 7 12% CAI 22 �SI COUNTY HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY ,ylARCHITECTURA' , SURVEY FORM Addressit /�,�,, " p Location: a t 'v �i.d A 1 Alm Y I�� am"d+�" City/Town Area &ZIP Gammon name; 7`�l'11i1 Historic name Photo date LRoll it Neg # 0 : Photographer's name, Surveyor's name(s): rAr, Survey �� Surve ' ..� °•:,x'. -"v- .hU!.'. TWIF �:.^f'v,'4• � 'n S'?;r�M I :y�yL,�ix.. date: distri t +� .1 r." - �.. .c'� r'f,, ARCHITECTURAL STYLE, ROOF TYPE: (dates arp a loose guide) Vernacular Adobe 1800-1950 Vernacular Wood Frame 1850-1950 Cable 0 Hip Half-Hipped Gablet 0 Shed Vernacular Brick 1850-1950 Vernacular Ranch House 1850-1950 Vernacular (other) 1850-1950 Gothic Revival 1850-1910 Italianate 1860-188o 0 Gambrel Flat Mansard 0 Hipped Gable 0 Other French Second Empire 1860-1890 Eastlake 1870-1890 PRESENT CONDITION' ALTERATIONS RELATED FEATURES. , Victorian (mixed style) 1870-190a Colonial Revival 1870-1920 Excellent Major Barn Queen Anne 1880-1900 Good inor Carriage house RIUInaltered Classical Revival 1890-1920 Fair Garage Mission Revival 1890-1920 Deteriorated Shed Craftsman Bungalow 1895-1920 Destroyed Describe. Outhouse Bungalow 1895-1930 Wini Prairie Style 1905-1930 Water wer P eblo Revival 1905-1940 Tank Ouse gyptian Revival 1915-1940 Hit ing post Mediterranean/Spanish Rv. 1915-1940 F ce Provincial Revival 1915-1940 aq Tudor Revival 1915-1940 nusual curb Moderne/Art Deco 1920-1940 PRESENT Unusual sidewalk International Style 1925-1950 USE Formal gardens California Ranch House Post-1945 ORIGINAL Unusual trees Commercial USE, Expansive lawns Other: Other SIGNIFICANT DECORATIVE ELEMENTS (describe) PRIMARY BUILDING , J MATERIAL: SURROUNDINGS: Wood frame pe nd 4i7 q'-- �-si uC-��.J' -,'�J�':.C+J Log P",9.atn1,L,:1 Buildings Adobe brick Densely built-up rick USE, �j Stone Residential TALKED TO RESIDENT Name. Stucco Industrial Address/Info. Concrete Commercial Metal -Agricultural 2 3 Other Other RESEARCH Res ,cher Date: , SOURCES Construction l Estimated date: `��",.__ Factual ARCHITECT, BUILDER, t/ ORIGINAL OWNER IMPORTANT OWNERS' OTHER HISTORIC ASSOCIATIONS IS THE STRUCTURE , ff n the original site? Ongmal Address oved? nsure IS THE PROPERTY. . . Parcel Number: [0 Jn public ownership? 5b7 `In private ownership? pl-�L �Z' nC,`3— r_� PRESENT OWNER (if known): F1 same as address on front Name: Address: OFFICE USE Recorder Date MAIN EME• HISTORIC RESOURCE AND LANDMARK STATUS: Architecture YES NO YES NO Arts R Leisure HAGS Recommended by district review committee Economic/Industrial HAER Recommended by County Hist. Commission Exploration/Settlement NR k Included by State Office of Hist. Presv, Government SHL Military Ml-oc UTM: A( , 3 16"B Religion Social/Education Individual nomination C D District nomination THRE S TO SITE: ADDITIONAL SOURCES: (books, documents, records, personal interviews: include dates) None known - Private development Zoning Vandalism Public works project Deterioration Other: Approx. property size (it �� 11 ) Frontage �Depth )-5b Orapprox acreage f1�� LCitr�r u.c'�J /"R..�C J•Grrc`(' -'� c/ r �'� ��Jd�L���r-E;Ft.6r rr e t.('(t t,C/��DC�•GC GJ. � � f--y,n .� r ��• L.Y�L:G-Gr—(� ��dl Cam" � n 1..( I^ ')�. r' f� - ( J � ( �r �-.^ c ,^ ../ ✓°'.•v �.�-Y' '^�i/✓ LTA-t/y� r/��L-Cry l-P•l�_ G7iJC-P ��. t" /z..� L(/�•� / �I IL tiL (r J'i 1..L/-_J 25 - DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND yRECn EATION MASTER FILE HISTORIC RESOURCES DATA ENCODING SHEET NOTE: The numbers in parentheses indicate either the number of characters (letters, numbers, punctuation marks, spaces) that may be entered or the number of lines that may be checked. �.1 —, G 1. Ser. No. - 1 — a7 — 10. Registration Status (1): City Zip (4) Form No. (1-4) Prop. No. (0-4) _1) listed —date (6) / / -___4) may become eligi ble —2) determined eligible — --5) eligible local listing USGS Quad Map No. (4) i����':; year (2) _6) ineligible for above appears eligible —7) undetermined 2. UTM Zone (2) Easting (6) Northing (7) LT A �� - �r �'7'� '" 11. Property Given Registration Status as (1): B C `1y art of district p _ZT) individual property —3) both of above 3. Property Name: _ Common Name (30): �� 12. NR Class Category (1): 1) district—No. of properties (0-3) Historic Name (40): ,4Z3) building —4) structure Parcel No, (0-17) 5? V — x —51 object 4. Address: i) � �' 13. Other Registration (0-9) —UMber(0.51 Street Name (4.20) —1)Historic Am. Sig.Survey —6) Cal. Historical Landmark _2) Historic Am, Eng. Rec. —7) County Pt. of Hist. Interest Ne rest rocs Street(0.20) _3) National Hist- Landmark"8) Local Listing _,4) State Historic Park _9) County/Regional Park City/Town (3.2 ) —6) other 7'Z.( ?r Vicinity of Zlpcode (5) City/Town (J) 14. Property Attributes: County 3-letter designator (3) unknown 92) lake/river/reservoir 2) sing, family prop. —23) ship 5. Type of Ownership (1.7): —3) mult. family prop. —24) lighthouse —4) ancillary big, 95) amusement park _1) unknown T.f4) private —S) hotel/motel —26) monument/mural/gravestone -_-_2) federal —5) county —6) comm, big. 1-3 st. _27) folk art 3) state —6) city —7) comm, big, over 3 st. —28) street furniture 7) special district ^ 8) industrial big. —29) landscape architr. 9) public utility big. _30) trees/vegetation G. Present Use (1-6): _10) theatre _-31) urban open space _11) engineering struct. _32) rural open space _U unknown 4) private non-comm. _7 2) civic auditorium —33) farm/ranch _2) commercial —5) public _13) cmnty entr/soc-hall _..34) military property ,�3) residential 6) none _14) government big, —35) CCC/1NPA structure _15) educational big. —36) ethnic minority property 7. Year of Initial Construction: _16) religious big, ethnic group (5.20) —17) R/R depot Individual Property (4) --.18) train —37) highway/trail District (8) — 19) bridge —38) women's property .....20) canal/aqueduct 40) cemetery E. Architect(s) (0-25): —21) dam —39) other Builder(s)(0-25): 15. Architectural Plans and Specifications: Yes No 9. Year of Survey (2): rj L CITY OF PALM SPRINGS PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION (V PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Craig Ewing, Director of Planning Services Meeting Date: September 2, 2009 Subject: Stay of Demolition Notice of City Council Appeal Hearing 823 Avenida Palos Verdes AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I, Craig A. Ewing, Director of Planning Services of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby certify that a copy of the attached Stay of Demolition Notice was mailed to each and every person on the attached list on August 20, 2009 in a sealed envelope, with postage prepaid, and depositing same in the U.S. Mail at Palm Springs, California. (3 notices) I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. ,r&aiq`A.,Ewing Diror of Plaan in Services 27 A. 7 A L M S.04i City of Palm Springs ]department of Planning Services 3200 I,- TLhl uin. Canyon WaY � Palm SIlangy, C'diForniq 92262 L' �P Trf (760) 323-8245 • 1`ax (760) i22-8360 • Wcb: www.palmvpnngs-ci gav $LIF4RC� August 20, 2009 Patrick McGrew 674 South Grenfall Road Palm Springs, CA 92264 RE: Stay of Demolition Notice of City Council Appeal Hearing; 823 Avenida Palos Verdes Dear Mr. McGrew, At the Historic Site Preservation Board meeting of July 14, 2009, the Board issued a Stay of Demolition for the property located at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes. The Office of the City Clerk received an appeal on July 15, 2009 in reference to the Board's action. The appeal is scheduled to be heard by the City Council at its meeting of September 2, 2009. The City Council meeting begins at 6:00 p.m. The appellant and other citizens are allowed to speak at the hearing regarding this item. A staff report and agenda will be provided to you in advance of the meeting. If you have any questions, feel free to call me at 760-323-8245. Sincer , dCr 'g A ing P Direr, or of PI nni g Services 28 Pnsr nffice 13nti ?74; • Palm Snrin?s r'lifnrnia 937(3-�74a Q V PA M S.o City of Palm Springs A DeparLment of"Planning Services 32M C m,onmw Tnh ui[[ CanS'on W.1 1 • P.ilm Srrw�,, Ca Jirni 1 92262 I RN"P Tel (7(0) 52i-S245 • I;« (760) '��7.5360 • \C,�Li yww.palmslrrmg,-c.��uv 9< FO August 20, 2009 Kirvin Satterwhite 823 Avenida Palos Verdes Palm Springs, CA 92262 RE: Stay of Demolition Notice of City Council Appeal Hearing; 823 Avenida Palos Verdes Dear Ms. Satterwhite, At the Historic Site Preservation Board meeting of July 14, 2009, the Board issued a Stay of Demolition for the property located at 823 Avenida Palos Verdes. The Office of the City Clerk received an appeal on July 15, 2009 in reference to the Board's action. The appeal is scheduled to be heard by the City Council at its meeting of September 2, 2009. The City Council meeting begins at 6:00 p.m. The appellant and other citizens are allowed to speak at the hearing regarding this item. A staff report and agenda will be provided to you in advance of the meeting. If you have any questions, feel free to call me at 760-323-8245. Sinc ai �. Ewin ICP Director of PI ,,Ing Services cc: Emily Hemphill Ealy, Hemphill & Blasdell, LLP 71780 San Jacinto Dr.; Ste. 1-3; Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 22 Pair C)Mr'P Tiny 7743 • Palm Snrinns (_:�Iifnrnrq ())7(,h_774(