ATTACHMENT 7 Correspondence ATTACHMENT 7 TO CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CORRESPONDENCE 1111 Broadway, 24th Floor T: 510-834-6600 www.wendel.com Oakland, CA 94607-4036 F: 510-808-4751 [email protected] September 1, 2017 Chair Owen and Members of the Historic Preservation Committee City of Belvedere 450 San Rafael Avenue Belvedere, CA 94920 Re: 1 Belvedere Avenue Dear Chair Owen and Members of the Committee: Our firm represents Susan and Justin Kelly (“Clients”) in connection with land use entitlements associated with the construction of a new single-family residence at 1 Belvedere Avenue in Belvedere (the “Project”). At a meeting of the Belvedere Planning Commission on August 15, 2017, the Commission unanimously approved the following: 1) a finding of No Historical or Tribal Cultural Resource pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”); 2) a Demolition Permit to demolish the existing single-family dwelling and detached carport; 3) design review for the property; 4) an exception to the total floor area allowed on the parcel; 5) a variance allowing 12 foot retaining walls within the front yard setback; and 6) recommended approval of a revocable license for improvements within the public street right- of-way. On Monday, August 28, 2017, Daniel Ruark (“Appellant”) filed an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision. Please accept this correspondence submitted on behalf of our Clients in support of the Planning Commission’s determination, that 1 Belvedere Avenue is not an historic resource. The Belvedere City Council is scheduled to consider the Appellant’s appeal on Monday, September 11. Staff has requested the Historic Preservation Committee (“HPC”) review and provide a recommendation to the Council regarding whether 1 Belvedere Avenue is a “historic resource” as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). For the reasons set forth in the Memorandum from staff to the HPC, as well as for the reasons set forth in the entire administrative record on this issue, we contend the structure located at 1 Belvedere Avenue is not a “historic resource” for purposes of CEQA. We further assert there is substantial evidence to support a finding the structure is not a historical resource. 022233.0001\4838051.1 Chair Owen and Members of the Historic Preservation Committee WENDEL, ROSEN, BLACK & DEAN LLP September 1, 2017 Page 2 City’s Documentation Regarding Historic Significance. Appellant contends the City’s documentation regarding the historic significance of 1 Belvedere Avenue is insufficient. We disagree. As the 300-page Memorandum to the HPC explains, there is substantial evidence in the record to support a finding the structure is not historic. In addition to the information contained in the Memorandum, we request the HPC direct its attention to the most recent and up-to-date Historic Resource Evaluation of 1 Belvedere Avenue prepared by Mark Hulbert, dated August 29. That report, which applies relevant criteria from the California Register, concludes the following: • Aaron Green is not identified in any current, objective analysis as a “master architect” as defined by the U.S. Department of the Interior/National Park Service guidance; • The structure at 1 Belvedere Avenue is not a distinctive example of the Second Bay Tradition style of architecture; • The structure at 1 Belvedere Avenue does not represent the residential architecture identified as “Organic” since the structure’s current condition is entirely lacking in interior integrity and overall historic integrity; and • The structure has little to no public exposure, has no associated events of any historical importance and its family of origin are not identifiable as persons of importance to local or regional history. Public Resources Code Section 21084.1 defines “historical resource” to include all resources listed in, or determined eligible for listing in, the California Register of Historical Resources. This section identifies three categories of historical resources: i) mandatory historical resources (those that have been formally listed in or determined eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources); ii) presumptive historical resources (those officially designated in a local register of historic resources); and iii) property that may be found to be historical in the lead agency’s discretion. The structure at 1 Belvedere Avenue has not been formally listed or determined eligible for listing the California Register nor the structure has not been officially designated in a local register. Significantly, the Planning Commission has determined upon extensive information and testimony in the context of two separate land use applications (in November of 2012 and again on August 15, 2017) that the structure is not historic. Historic Preservation Committee Purview In his appeal, the Appellant urges the City Council to disregard the Historic Preservation Committee (“HPC”) input and opinion as “irrelevant”. Appellant argues the HPC was not 022233.0001\4838051.1 Chair Owen and Members of the Historic Preservation Committee WENDEL, ROSEN, BLACK & DEAN LLP September 1, 2017 Page 3 qualified or prepared to address the question of whether the structure was historic when the HPC first considered the question in 2012. We disagree. While the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance contemplates only owner-initiated applications for historic designation, the Ordinance sets forth specific criteria for consideration by the Committee as to eligibility for designation, as stated above. As to the present issue— whether the structure at 1 Belvedere Avenue can be considered a historic resource—it is inconceivable that the City’s appointed committee could not, or should not, opine on the structure’s qualification for such designation. Furthermore, Section 21.16.010(F) of the BMC specifically authorizes the HPC “to review applications to the Planning Commission for construction, alteration or demolition of designated structures and make a written report to the Planning Commission of the Committee’s findings. Therefore, the HPC has the jurisdiction to make recommendations to the City Council in connection with the appeal of the Planning Commission’s approval of the Demolition Permit. Conclusion For the reasons set forth in the Memorandum addressed to the HPC and the entire record before it, we urge the HPC to confirm the conclusion it reached in 2012 and find the structure at 1 Belvedere Avenue to not qualify as a “historic resource.” Very truly yours, WENDEL, ROSEN, BLACK & DEAN LLP Amara L. Morrison ALM/ALM cc: Client Jeff Jungsten 022233.0001\4838051.1 From: Esther Riley <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, September 04, 2017 5:43 PM To: Alison Foulis - City Clerk Subject: For Members of the Belvedere City Council Regarding 1 Belvedere Ave. Dear Members of the Belvedere City Council: Please register my opposition to the proposed plans for 1 Belvedere Ave. Here are my reasons: - It is clear from the architect's rendering of the proposed 7,233-square-foot-house, that it is completely out of scale with the other homes in that neighborhood and thus a visual eyesore. - It would be necessary to cut down many precious trees to build such an enormous house. This would be bad for the environment. - The house designed by Aaron Green is beautiful. It deserves to be preserved because of its unique design and aesthetics, whether or not it is worthy of being on the California Register of Historical Resources. - The Aaron house certainly looks better than the monstrosity that would replace it. - We in Marin County have a special obligation to honor Aaron Green because of his work on completing our stunning Marin County Civic Center. We should honor him by preserving the house that he designed for 1 Belvedere Ave, truly a gem of a house. Sincerely, Esther Riley Marin County resident 1 From: Alan Hess <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2017 8:37 AM To: Rebecca Markwick- Associate Planner Cc: Irene Borba - City Planner; Alison Foulis - City Clerk Subject: RE: public hearing regarding regarding Demolition, New House Plans and Variance Requests at One Belvedere Avenue, Belvedere, California Sept. 5, 2017 To: Belvedere City Council From: Alan Hess, Architect RE: public hearing regarding regarding Demolition, New House Plans and Variance Requests at One Belvedere Avenue, Belvedere, California To the City Council: A key question in the decision to landmark One Belvedere Avenue is architect Aaron Green’s status as a Master Architect. Does solid evidence exist to support this conclusion? Yes. First, my standing to offer an opinion on this. I am writing pro bono as an independent scholar. I am an architect, architectural historian, and author of nineteen books, mostly about twentieth century Modern architecture and California in particular. I curated the exhibit on Aaron Green earlier this year at the Palos Verdes Art Center, and wrote the introduction to the book on Green to be published next month (Aaron G. Green: Organic Architecture Beyond Frank Lloyd Wright, by Randolph Henning, Oro Editions.) I have also successfully helped to landmark several Modern buildings at both local and national levels, and so am familiar with the relevant definitions. I have been the architecture critic of the San Jose Mercury News, a contributor to The Architects Newspaper, a grant recipient from the Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts, and a National Arts Journalism Program Fellow. I have received several awards, including the Honor Award from the National Trust for Historic Preservation, Docomomo/US's Award of Excellence, and the President’s Award from the Los Angeles Conservancy. Because of these experiences, I am able to provide the full context in which Green’s work must be evaluated. Second, some background is useful on how architectural reputations come to be established in the history books. Reputations are, unfortunately, often determined initially by fashion or taste. It often takes time for the facts to emerge so that we can get a balanced sense of an architects’ position.