44 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Bado Gma <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2025 8:53 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] OpOz Dstruction of any vintage hOm…
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
…SpecLy t 1908 Victorian cottage at 4472 Orange St‼
tu, fiL뛴뛵뛶뛷뛸뛹뜆뛺뛻뛼뛽뛾뛿뜀뜁뜂뜃뜄뜅뜇
45 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Mariela Anguelov <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2025 8:07 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Opposing a demolition
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
I, Mariela Anguelov, am strongly opposing the demolition of a 1908 Victorian cottage located at 4472 Orange St named Riverside Structure of Merit.
Sincerely,
Mariela A.
46 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Alexis Reynoso <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2025 7:39 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Orange Street Home Help
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Hello,
I grew up in Riverside and am now a home owner in ward 1.
How can we help with the Orange street property requested for demolition? I hate to see the history of Riverside taken out for something as depressing as a parking lot.
Parking has become an issue become of all these apartments and multifamily living added downtown.
Which are also not in the character or keeping of the history of the city either.
Best,
47 Maldonado, Matthew
From: M. C.E. <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2025 7:06 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] A Look Back: Scenes From the Old Riverside Vintage Home Tour.
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Mr. Falcone,
This article in this mornings Gazette highlights that the ORV advocates for the preservation of the types of homes that are much like the one on Orange St. Just a thought.
https://www.raincrossgazette.com/a-look-back-scenes-from-the-old-riverside-vintage-home-tour/ A Look Back: Scenes From the Old Riverside Vintage Home Tour
Best,
Mark
48 Maldonado, Matthew
From: M. C.E. <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2025 6:57 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4472 Orange St. and Co Dep t od Education
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Dear Mr. Falcone,
I was most saddened and distressed to hear of the request for demolition of the structure of merit at 4472 Orange St. In Riverside
Further, to learn this request came from our own Co. Board of Education has me puzzled and at a loss.
Surely this must be a mistake as the Board more than any other governing body values the preservation of such notable historic homes, and the priority these buildings are for so many of us here in Riverside.
I have sent a contact request via the website to the administrator in hopes this action can at minimum be paused while seeking alternatives to ensure the buildings preservation.
Sincerely,
Mark Elliott
Lifelong and Resident of Ward 1
7th St. Riverside, CA. 92507
49 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Deanne Moore <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2025 5:43 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4472 Orange St
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Greetings. Please allow this email to serve as my opposition to this home being demolished in favor of a parking lot. The integrity and history of this structure should be preserved.
Thank you.
To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
photo
Deanne Moore
Mortgage Loan Officer, Zillow Home Loans
949-570-4825| [email protected]
2600 Michelson Drive, Irvine, CA 92612
To help
protect your
privacy,
Micro so ft
Office
prevented
auto matic
download of
this picture
from the
Internet.
Green
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail!
To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
App Social Buttons Image
Create your own email signature
To help
protect your
privacy,
Micro so ft
Office
prevented
auto matic
download of
this picture
from the
Internet.
__tpx__
50 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Lisa Alexander <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2025 12:22 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Request to Stop Destruction of historic home on Orange Street
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
As a long-time (48 years) resident of Riverside, a city I’ve come to love and enjoy being community- active in, I respectfully request that those making a final decision to demolish a historic home on Orange Street make that final decision one that will allow the unique old home to remain.
One of the very best highlights in our beautiful city are the older homes built in ways that can never be (and never will be) duplicated.
Please consider (and decide) that this home is more important to preserve than an asphalt parking lot is to create. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Lisa M. Alexander
951-212-5209
Sent from my iPhone
51 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Don Morris <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2025 12:22 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Refuse The Request
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
To Whom It May Concern:
I ask that you refuse the demolition request that has been submitted to demolish the 1908 Victorian cottage at 4472 Orange St. I am totally against considering the request to demolish any Riverside Structure of Merit.
Preserve Riverside’s history. It’s the most valuable asset we share.
Don Morris
Resident of Ward 1
52 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Dane <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 11:13 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4472 Orange Street
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
I am writing to oppose demolition of this historic structure for a parking lot. We need to learn from our past mistakes (think of the many architecturally significant structures that have been forever removed and replaced by randomness). The historic structures we still have are what makes Riverside special when compared to the proliferation of cookie cutter communities in much of Southern California.
Offering incentives for a buyer to restore this structure will serve this city much better the long run! Thank you.
Sent from my iPhone
53 Maldonado, Matthew
From: R hot <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 10:56 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Demolition
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
I know old Victorian homes have been relocated to other lots. Why can't this one also be relocated?
Get Outlook for Android
54 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Joani McGowen <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 11:57 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Help Preserve Riverside’s History
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
To Whom it May Concern,
My husband and I have been informed the city intends to demolish another historic Riverside gem to make way for a parking lot. The property at 4472 Orange Street is valued, precious 1890’s Victorian architecture and an integral piece of Riverside’s charm. Homes like these are not only works of art, they make up the soul of our city. Please take a moment to consider the architecture in this town vs our neighboring cities. If you haven’t really looked lately we encourage you to do so. Riverside is special. It’s unique. It has character and charm precisely because of the historic homes such as the one you’re considering demolishing. Not only do we not need another parking lot but as residents, we do not want our city to look like every other city around. We take pride in the history of our city, the story telling we share when we have guests and the fact that our city’s history is exactly what draws people here.
Please, leave the residence alone along with other historical structures and help do your part in keeping Riverside magical.
Sincerely,
Joani and Pat McGowen
Sent from my iPhone
55 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Tom Coyote Canyon <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 9:52 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Historic home on orange Street
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
The land surrounding this is a parking lot. Tear it down. You and your misdirected efforts. The quality inn is a horrible place to convert into a homeless shelter/ low income housing. The sears property is a ridiculous location for the multi family housing that you endorse.
You do not reflect the wishes of the majority, you clearly have a secret agenda Shame on you
56 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Jessica Sharp <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 9:45 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] opposition to demolishing historical buildings
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Hello,
I'm a riverside resident living off of 4th Street in downtown. People come to Riverside for its charm, which includes its architecture and history. As such, we do not need more parking lots. We need to keep our beauty. Please do not demolish the home in Prospect Place. Build it up and bring life back into it.
Best Regards,
Jessica Sharp
57 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Victoria Lopez <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 8:59 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] No to demolition of this heritage home!
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
I am a resident of Riverside and I own property in the woods street. One of the things that attracted me to Riverside is the unique Victorian homes. Preserving heritage home in Riverside is what makes Riverside special and unique. Parking lots are a dime a dozen but not homes built like the ones in Riverside.
Please reconsider and stop the demolition now!
Respectfully,
Victoria Lopez
626-399-4094
58 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Audrey Ellis <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 8:57 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Please don't do this
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
When I raised in Banning and we would 1 uncle aunt and their children then do same in La please don't this Riverside spend night go back home their hardly nothing Left please don't do this 59 Maldonado, Matthew
From: April Glatzel <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 8:53 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] SAVE 4472 Orange Street, Riverside CA
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
As a longtime Riverside resident, local Realtor, and Chair of Neighbors of the Wood Streets (NOWS), a well-respected community group, I strongly oppose the demolition of the historic 1908 Victorian cottage at 4472 Orange Street to make way for an asphalt parking lot, especially given the ample parking that already surrounds the property.
This property has long been recognized as both a Structure of Merit and a contributing building within the historic district. Approving its demolition would not only be a loss to our architectural heritage but also a disservice to the character and identity of our city.
Riverside has already seen too many of its historic structures erased. If this trend continues, we risk losing the vintage charm that defines and enriches our community. I urge the City to preserve what remains of our past and say no to this unnecessary and irreversible loss.
Kindest regards,
April Glatzel
==============================
Tara and April Glatzel
"The Sister Team"
Your Realtors For Life!
Re/Max Partners Real Estate
April: (951) 205-4429 license #01224102
Tara: (951) 205-4428 license #00981891
Fax: (951) 278-4439
E-mail: [email protected]
Website: www.TheSisterTeam.com
==============================
60 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Leti Bernard <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 7:49 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [URGENT] Opposition to demolishing a Riverside Structure of Merit
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Dear Councilmember Falcone,
Thank you for bringing this important matter to the attention of our Riverside community. I’m writing this email to voice my opposition to the demolition of a Riverside Structure of Merit, located at 4472 Orange St. I urge the Riverside County Office of Education to choose the path of preservation and help protect our historical landmarks. One of the many things I love about Riverside is our rich history and beautiful buildings and structures. We don’t need another concrete parking lot, especially one that destroys a piece of Riverside’s history.
Thank you for advocating for this issue!
Best,
Leti Bernard
61 Maldonado, Matthew
From: AT&T YAHOO SERVICES‣ <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 7:19 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Demolation
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Please stop the demolation of this home.
Thank you,
Ona Wright
Redwood Drive
62 Maldonado, Matthew
From: VALENCIA SMITH <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 7:14 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] No! 4472 Orange St!
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Please do not demolish this home! We can’t replace history!
—V.
Don't just smile in the sun苓苔苖苕?놲?????놳
Dance in the rain????꣩꣪꣫꣬꣭꣮꣯꣰꣱ꣲꣳꣴꣵꣶꣷ꣸꣹꣺ꣻ꣼ꣽꣾ
63 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Richard Stalder <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 7:00 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Thank you
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Philip
Congratulations, after years of your previous council members destroying historic buildings in downtown Riverside we finally have a council member that is willing to stand up and say NO to destroying what few historic buildings we have left. It’s very sad this wasn’t the attitude of previous council members years ago.
Respectfully
Rich Stalder
Sent from my iPad
1 Maldonado, Matthew
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 6:53 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4472 Orange St
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Hello!
The history of Riverside, represented in part by homes such as the one at 4472 Orange St, is a big part of why I moved to Riverside.
I would not like to see 4472 Orange St restored and preserved. I do want to see it demolished for a parking lot.
Best,
Addie Schnirel
4404 11th St, Riverside
2 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Dan Cocco <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 6:57 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Save the house
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Hello Philip, please check with Dave Stolte, May have someone interested in moving it if access is possible to evaluate it!
Dan Cocco
Sent from my iPhone
3 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Teresa Hunter <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 6:49 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Victorian Home Demolition
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Good afternoon:
As part of Riverside’s historic legacy, those Victorian homes that are still in existence represent a wonderful period of the city of Riverside. Please do not remove another historic link to our wonderful past - do not demolish 4472 Orange St. Thank you in advance… Sent from my iPhone
4 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Robert Shaffer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 6:33 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Please to not demolish the house on Orange! Especially not for another black top parking lot! Also the empty gas station on corner of first and main has been broken into and needs to be secured!
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Sent from my iPhone
5 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Linda Bailey <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 6:03 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Demolition of the 1908 Victorian cottage at 4472 Orange St for an asphalt parking lot
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
I oppose the above referenced demolition proposed by the Riverside County Office of Education and would strongly recommend that the Cultural Heritage Board also oppose it when the matter comes before it in June.
Riverside needs to preserve its' history and appreciation for what has come before our current time.
Linda Bailey
[email protected]
=^..^=
6 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Tena Petix <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 5:54 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Destroying Historic Buildings
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
This is a Big NO from me in regard to demolishing the historic structure on Orange Street. The County Office of Education has adequate parking.
Christine W. Petix
951.533.3791
7 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Keely Berry <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 5:43 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Opposing Demolition of 4476 Orange Street
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Hello,
I am writing in to voice my opposition for demolishing the cottage at 4476 Orange Street. Having grown up in Riverside, my reason for staying is the local history, architecture and the opportunity to see this city be recognized for the things that have originally made it wonderful. Demolishing old craftsmanship for “parking” or any structure that isn’t true to the original building is a disservice to our city.
Kind Regards,
Keely Berry Seeger
8 Maldonado, Matthew
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 5:35 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4472 Orange st (Demo)
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
What can we do to stop this?
Sincerely,
R.B.
[email protected]
(951) 755-3253
To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
3145 Market Street
Riverside CA 92501
9 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Tim Maloney <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 5:31 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Salvage
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Typical higher agency scam...
Glad to help....let me know
....
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
Get Outlook for Android
10 Maldonado, Matthew
From: susan pickens <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 5:20 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Demolishing a home in a historical neighborhood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Philip Falcone,
I'm strongly against demolishing a 1908 Victorian Cottage at 4472 Orange Street as you are Philip! Riverside is a very attractive city in part because of our many charming historical neighborhoods!
Have them look instead at some of the boarded up unatractive buildings around town that are not in historical neighborhoods, and tear them down for a parking lot instead!
Sincerely,
Susan Pickens
A proud resident of the City I call my home since 1976.
11 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Rebecca Gross <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 5:18 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Structure of Merit
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
To whom it concerns:
We oppose the wrecking of the burned out house on Orange Street. We would rather see it restored. We do not need any more parking lots in this neighborhood! As it is, the current parking lot in which that house stands is never filled. Why would we want more ugly empty blacktop space for possible homeless encampments?
Furthermore, demolishing it would release a lot of lead dust into our neighborhood with little children! Please save the historic structure. It is an adorable piece of our already too encroached-upon family neighborhood.
I have contacted many neighbors and have gotten their permission to add their signature to this email protesting a demolition of the historic Riverside County Office of Education house.
EVERY neighbor I contacted said to RESTORE the building!
Thank you!
Signed,
Russell and Rebecca Gross
-4493 Orange St.
Matthew and Rachelle Chrzan
-4494 Orange St.
Clara Gross
-4510 Orange St.
Bryan Sherman
-4526 Orange St.
Tim and Christine Henry
-4481 Orange St.
Blanca
-4489 Orange St.
Nancy and Eugene Fenton
-3641 15th St.
Danielle Johnson
-3644 15th St.
Clara Gross
-3643 15th St. (owner)
13 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Tony Elmo <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 5:10 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Victorian Home
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Do not demolish. This is a historical home.
And, apparently the Council approved putting American flags on two streets, Beechwood and Castle Reagh Pl with no notice to the residents. Whether I personally like it or not, the right thing to do is to canvass the people who live on the street or don’t put them up until you do.
When a new development is on the docket, it is typically required to obtain input from those properties affected for Planning Commission review and then Council. Should have been done on these streets also but was not.
Tony Elmo
3733 Castle Reagh Pl
Sent from my iPhone
14 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Burt Williams <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 5:07 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] NO NO NO
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Are you telling me, that in the current real estate market, there is no way for a contractor or home restoration project to be created to save this beautiful home?
How can we save this? Has is been up for auction? Has Ward 1 become so desperate for concrete that this gem gets sacrificed? There are literally hundreds of young talented family’s looking for the opportunity to rehab and live in this Ward. You cannot let this happen.
Best Regards
Burt Williams,
Home owner of a 102 yr old home in Ward 1
“A soft answer turneth away wrath, but grevious words stir up anger” 15 Maldonado, Matthew
From: ArtisanHC <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 4:40 PM
To: Ward1; Janice Penner
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Octopus Systems Rehousing Program
Attachments: Loan Pitch 05192025.pdf
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Hello,
Hope the day finds you well.
Ref: email sent today- Historic Structure Demolition Requested
There may be a way to save this piece of history and bring revenue the city and aid in the homeless crisis.
Let me began by introducing myself:
I am Gilbert Ellsworth Jordan
I am asking for a help to make live better, the pitch is attached, but first about me.
Finding My Path to the Future
My path began when my grandmother had a stroke. She was bound to a wheelchair and lived in an old Victorian built in 1918, a house I love dearly. She needed access to the house upon returning from the hospital.
My uncle, who had just returned home from Vietnam, and I spent the summer building a beautiful wheelchair ramp to match the existing house. I was 8 years old, and it was the first time I met him. The first thing he taught me, after how to hammer a nail, was a lesson that has recurred throughout my life and what I teach my children:
“A carpenter never leaves a bent nail in place even if he must straighten it himself.” It was a life-changing experience, and I will always remember those three weeks during the sweltering summer of 1977. (I lost him after his body gave out from years of abusing heroin. All that knowledge, skill, and life lost so young.)
When we were completing the white exterior siding, I told him, “When I grow up, I will be a carpenter,” like most of the men in my family on both sides, going back as far as the 1700s in St. Mary’s County, Maryland. He simply and directly told me, “The world changes, and we must change with it, but never forget the past.
Remember the forgotten, integrate the past, present, and future. True beauty, he explained in a fashion that my 8-year-old mind would later interpret as meaning the following: Mountains are old and majestic, and trees new and sprightly, but each complements the other. As should your carpentry as an artisan, complement what you are building.”
After completing my training in carpentry and building maintenance at the Western School of Technology & Environmental Science in Catonsville, MD, in 1986, I spent the next years, due to life’s circumstances, traveling and working in the field of carpentry. I worked in Maryland, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Indiana, 16 Missouri, Illinois, and California on some of the most heavily damaged, gorgeous old homes in need of time and care, as well as new homes. Most of those were built between the 1500s and the 1900s. I learned techniques and tricks unique to those regions of the country.
This began my love for restoration.
Now, after 35 years as a carpenter, I feel it is important to teach the trades to young people who do not want to be in “IT” or computer programmer or simply do not find joy working in an office but really enjoy being hands- on.
Artisan Historic Contracting: Works to restore buildings.
Jordan’s Design and Building / J.D.B. Restore L.L.C: Plans to work with schools, churches, at-risk kids, and veterans’ groups to teach and train new craftsmen to keep the trades alive and help build the future.
International Guild of Artisans and Masters Inc. (IGAM): Plans to be a place where those who love the trades can blog/talk, shop, and share old and new ideas. Also, share stories on the Haunted Restoration blog.
It is also planned to have Haunted Restoration appear on multiple types of media broadcasts in the future to help and support ongoing programs.
Mission Statement
I plan to take on projects that aid the community by preserving the history and traditions of the trades, while restoring what is being lost to the ravages of time. By aiding home and building owners, we create a dedicated network of trades, crafts, artisa
ns, business, civic leaders, and all who wish to help. Additionally, we teach those eager to learn these crafts and trades both in the field and in the classroom.
My journey
When I was 15, I found myself suffering from homelessness. The only thing I had was my love of carpentry and a twilight program through the Western Institute of Technology that taught trades. If they knew I was homeless, I could never have attended. Luckily, I could get a work permit and work as an apprentice in Baltimore for 5 years. To have a safe place to stay and sleep, I joined The Guardian Angels. After my apprenticeship and other life-altering factors, I decided to leave Baltimore in December 1992. With $400, I bought a bus ticket to Riverside, CA, and a little food.
In Riverside, I found basic resources to help maintain a person suffering from homelessness. I used to sleep behind the Universalist Unitarian Church of Riverside on Mission Inn Blvd. and Lemon St., where I talked about carpentry and working on old houses with someone involved with the church's restoration board. This was the beginning of my journey in January 1993.
I did not survive well in Riverside. An architect working with the church's restoration board suggested programs in downtown LA (Skid Row) that might help. He gave me $20 and told me to go there. Skid Row was like North Avenue and Pennsylvania Ave (Penn North) in Baltimore but warm year-round. I found structured programs, but something always fell short, and I had to seek resources and other programs the fill the gaps.
Without my trade I would have starved. It took 3 months to find and schedule the 3 programs I needed to get off Skid Row: Education, Training, Therapy, and Access to Resources.
In September 1993, I got my first apartment in LA.; Six months later, I was installing screw jacks in partially collapsed apartment buildings after the January 1994 Northridge earthquake in Reseda California.
On two other occasions I found myself suffering from homelessness again.
In 2000, In January my father died in Baltimore and my second child was due to be born in California. Also, I opened a small construction company in Moreno Valley, and was trying to buy my first house, but the person 17 selling the house did not own it, and the FBI soon showed up. My family had to move, and I went back to Baltimore to rebuild.
In 2007, I lost my handyman service just before the 2008 housing crisis, so I moved my family to Illinois to help a former client start a construction division for his Home & Garden business. In 2009, the mother of my 3 children had a heart attack. Due to the strain of medical issues and having three young kids under 14, work was affected. We were evicted in December 2011, the kids and their mother went to stay with her mother in Mo.
Val., and I followed my family to Riverside in January 2012. I stayed at Hulen Place Homeless Shelter and worked to find a job and a place to stay. By April, I had a motel room and was working for a local contractor. I promised the mother of my children that I would never be more than an hour away from them. She died January 2014
In December 2019, I received my C-6 Contractor’s license and opened Jordan’s Custom Woodwork. Despite the COVID lockdown in January 2020, I persevered. In 2022, I became a General Contractor. However, the 2023 atmospheric river overwhelmed my business, by the third quarter of 2023 I was embroiled in a lawsuit with a client “as a contractor in California you expect to happen sooner or late and you plan for it”. What I did not plan for the scammers gas lighters and the amount of people there are just gaming t he system. Especially the
employment laws, the way their structured small business without backing will not stand and I suffered a stroke February.24,2024
With a heavy heart, I had to shutter Jordan’s Custom Woodwork and file for chapter 7 bankruptcy in March 2024. After taking time to heal, and as I healed physically and mentally, I studied the mistakes, missteps, my naivety and arrogance. I trimmed things, cut thing and changed things. One lesson learned is not to just settle to avoid employee problems i.e... scams. The loss of funds will kill a small business so keep detailed records and learn to represent your Pro Se`
Armed with this new business plan I opened Artisan Historic Contracting, specializing in historic restoration.
Our Services
Repair: A Master Craftsman and a apprentice will be assigned to repair the damaged structure. Renovation: We integrate all elements of your historic structure to use the latest innovations in efficiency.
Historic Restoration: We research the history of the structure to ensure we match every aspect of your structure’s restoration project to the finest possible detail.
Education: Integrating the old and the new, providing our restoration clients with a wealth of design innovations, the unique ability to replicate a lost home with modern amenities seamlessly blended into the design.
Training: In the field and online to give access to all levels of talent to ensure a product that meets our stringent requirements.
Therapy: The foundation of any business is its people.
Access to Resources: An area on the website dedicated to resources.
One thing I’ve learned over the years is that a good, maintainable foundation is key. Even if all you have is a cardboard box to start, maintain it and use it as a jumping-off point or fallback point. This will help you not be afraid to take small risks. Remember each mistake you made and how you made them. Write them down if you must. Look out for the warning signs. Like I tell my 6 children: Please make mistakes but own them and learn from them, for with every mistake comes a lesson.
18 I still live just blocks away from the Universalist Unitarian Church of Riverside. To do my part, I developed a 5-month path out of homelessness program for youths, those newly released from incarceration, returning veterans, and anyone who needs it.
Thank you for letting us help you make your dream a reality.
Gilbert Jordan
Artisan Historic Contracting
CSLB#1060886
P.O. Box 1023
Riverside CA.92502
Direct (951) 500-3050
[email protected]
Jdbrestore.com
Remembering The Forgotten
19 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Crystal Coleman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 4:16 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Opposition to Demolition of Historic Home at 4472 Orange St
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Dear Councilmember,
I’m writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed demolition of the 1908 Victorian cottage at 4472 Orange Street—an officially recognized Structure of Merit and a contributing resource in the Prospect Place Historic District.
This home is not just a fire-damaged building. It is a rare survivor from a pivotal era in Riverside’s history—one that speaks to the craftsmanship, architectural richness, and character that make our city unique. Once demolished, its historic value is lost forever, replaced by yet another patch of asphalt in an already over-paved downtown.
As someone deeply invested in Riverside’s architectural heritage, I believe in restoration over removal. In fact, I would even be open to exploring the possibility of restoring the home myself or partnering with others who are committed to saving this important piece of our shared story. Restoration is not only possible—it’s the responsible and inspired path forward.
We must stop the slow chipping away of our historic districts. This building deserves a second life, not a bulldozer. Please stand with those of us who believe Riverside’s future should honor its past. I urge you to reject the demolition request and pursue alternatives that preserve and celebrate our city’s historic assets.
Sincerely,
Crystal Coleman
Ward 1 resident and Historic Real Estate Specialist
20 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Karl Roemer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 4:15 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Please save the structure at 4472 Orange Street from demotion
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Hello Riverside City,
Please save the structure at 4472 Orange Street from demolition.
Peace - Karl Roemer
(951) 787-6241
21 Maldonado, Matthew
From: DOUGLAS ADAMS <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 4:09 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Demolition of Orange St home
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
We are opposed to the demolition of this home to put in a parking lot. It is important that we restore and save our historic homes as these are some of the jewels of Riverside.
Doug and Jane Adams
5075 Blanchard Dr
Riverside 92504
951-315-7924
Sent from my iPhone
22 Maldonado, Matthew
From: L S <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 4:08 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Do not demolish 4472 Orange St
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Dear Philip:
I adamantly support NOT demolishing the historic home located at 4472 Orange Street. Riversiders are way past demolishing our history and the neighborhoods that represent who we are.
To expect that the residents of Riverside would approve demolishing this, or any other historic home, is madness. The home is literally surrounded by parking lots.
I would suggest that the County of Riverside encourage their employees to use our great transportation system to get to and from work. We are much more sophisticated than we used to be here in Riverside. Our historic buildings are not up for debate. We will fight to save these treasures!
Thank you for your support Philip! This is literally coming on the heels of the fantastic Old Riverside Foundation Home Tour! We are serious here about our history! Tell the County of Riverside "nothing doing!!"
23 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Jeff Cook <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 4:00 PM
To: Ward1
Cc: const.
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4472 Orange st. Demolition...
Attachments: cookcs.vcf
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
To:
Philip Falcone - Ward 1 Councilman / Whom it may concern, Re:
Proposed demolition of the existing home located at 4472 Orange st.
Hearing of this proposed historic home demolition definitely pulls at some particular heart strings for me. I happen to live in one of 4 homes that were moved from the Press Enterprise property on Olivewood St. to it's current location at 3177 Orange st. Our home along with 3 of our direct neighbors' homes' were all moved to their current locations in the early 1990's rather than be demolished to make room for the Press Enterprises' new parking lot and building at the time. We were not the original owner's / Contractor at the time these homes were moved, but have enjoyed living here since the late 1990's. I have witnessed several other homes in the area - (a total of six homes on Orange st. between First and Third Streets alone) - that were moved to Heritage Square and other areas of downtown to escape being demolished.
As a general contractor, I have worked on relocated homes in Riverside and other areas and I have acquired a deeper level of appreciation for the historicity and craftsmanship of these historic homes. As the saying goes, "They don't build 'em like they used to!" rings very true. I also understand current needs for Urban change / updating, however, this particular home already appears to be bounded by two parking lots with another across the street. Why the need for more parking here? I assume the Riverside County Office of Education is the current owner?
The home is obviously in need of repair, but I have personally repaired homes with far more damage.
If the parking requirements are absolutely necessary, why not explore the possibility of moving the home? I know many properties were acquired and homes were moved through the now defunct city Redevelopment Agency. I don't know which city agency would facilitate that now but it seems this home would be a perfect candidate for it.
In conclusion, I would not be in favor of demolishing this home just for the sake of adding parking spaces!, and it should not be left to set as-is / unoccupied. So as an acceptable alternative, I think the 24 process of moving the home should be explored. I see several properties around this area with city owned / for sale signs on them. Possibly this home could be moved to one of them and sold at a reduced cost? I know the city is pushing for higher density rental housing projects, but maybe this home could be incorporated onto one of those available lots. There is still a lot to be said for single family residences.
Rentals are always needed, but people will put down roots and stay invested in their communities when they are home owners much more so than just renters -- and that may be a win-win for all.
Sincerely,
Jeff Cook.
To help protect your privacy,
Micro so ft Office prevented
auto matic downlo ad o f this
picture from the Internet.
Virus-free.www.avast.com
25 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Matthew Hahn <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 4:03 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] No demo!
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Protect 4472 Orange St!
Sent from my iPhone
26 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Mary <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 3:58 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Opposition to Demolition
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed demolition of the 1908 Victorian cottage located at 4472 Orange St for the purpose of constructing an asphalt parking lot.
I believe that the demolition of this historic cottage would be a significant loss to our community. The Victorian architecture of the building is a unique and valuable part of our city's heritage. Preserving such structures enhances the character of our neighborhoods and provides a tangible link to our past.
Furthermore, replacing a historic building with an asphalt parking lot raises concerns about the impact on the local environment and the aesthetic quality of the streetscape.
I urge you to consider alternatives that would preserve the cottage and explore other solutions for parking needs in the area.
Thank you for your time and consideration of this important matter.
Sincerely,
Rick and Mary Arden
3274 Redwood Dr, Riverside, CA 92501
27 Maldonado, Matthew
From: r2rogers <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 3:57 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Historic Home Preservation
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Hi Phillip. I say "NO" to demolition!
l
28 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Mark Debus <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 3:51 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4472 Orange St
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Agree with preserving this location!!
Dept of Education can build a parking lot just about anywhere!!
Thanks for listening!
Mark DeBus
Ward 3
Sent from my iPhone
29 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Kirsten V <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 3:48 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Our beautiful city
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
To Whom it May Concern,
My name is Kirsten Varvi. I live in ward 1. I walk my streets every day. I watch my city like a hawk. I see something and say something. This is my voice.
Please do not tear down a beautiful home, structure and space, with over a hundred years of memory. I moved here with my family in 1978. I was 4 years old. I cried when they tore down the old Victorian home behind the Dairy Queen on Magnolia Ave, when I was little. It felt like a desecration. Like those who once lived there, who built families and nurtured our city, were now without the place they made a stronghold for love and a future. Even though my father explained that it was too far gone for repairs, it made no sense, who let it get to that point? “The City,” he said.
Here we are over 40 years later. Housing crisis. Homeless crisis. A need for space for artists, community outreach facilities and gardens. But we need another pay for parking lot? Really?
Please stop the madness. At least when the Tamale Factory was built the city insisted it have style & architecture. As a collective, the citizens held their breath and rolled their eyes. But the city did right by its constituents. That might be the last time it did.
Sincerely (pissed),
Kirsten Varvi
30 Maldonado, Matthew
From: alina sayshello <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 3:45 PM
To: Ward1; Falcone, Philip
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1908 Victorian cottage at 4472 Orange St
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
In regards, to a demolition request that has been submitted by the Riverside County Office of Education to demolish a 1908 Victorian cottage at 4472 Orange St for an asphalt parking lot. Not only is this home in the Prospect Place Historic District, it was identified decades ago to be a contributing structure to the fabric of that district and is a Structure of Merit – the second highest historic designation a building can obtain in Riverside.
I say no to the chipping away of our historic districts in favor of lifeless, concrete, increased noise, traffic and pollution. While damaged from a fire, the home is not beyond salvage and restoration.
I oppose the demolishing a Riverside Structure of Merit. Riverside Housing Development Corporation, I believe, can rehabilitate the home to original satisfaction with one of their contractor’s implementing a competitive bid process from a local approved contractor and sell to a private buyer while preserving the historical value. This would then contribute to the city’s revenue upon sale of the property.
Sincerely,
Alina Ritchie,
Local Riverside resident, homeowner, tax payer
31 Maldonado, Matthew
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 3:26 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Orange street home demolition
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
I am writing to voice my opposition to the demolition of the historic home at 4472 Orange Street. We need to preserve our historic homes and do not need another parking lot. If the Office of Education needs more parking they can at least move the house to another lot.
Thank you
Julie Boyes
5859 Grand Ave
Riverside, CA 92504
951-788-2294
32 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Teresa Wassman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 3:21 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Opposed to 4472 Orange St being destroyed for a Parking lot
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
I am opposed to the proposal of demolishing a historic landmark at 4472 Orange St located in the Prospect Place Historic District.
Demolishing a County property in a City of Riverside Historic District sets a negative example to homeowners in Historic Districts. It casts the appearance that Government is above the citizens, who mush follow the Historic Districts policies. Secondly, this is a County property, not a City property. The County Must be forced to follow the City Historic District policies, otherwise it is more than just the appearance that Government is above the citizens.
Additionally, if the County needs parking, let them pay to park in a City Garage, like the citizens. Win/Win, we keep our integrity by enforcing the policies of the Historic District while also providing parking for the County.
We are in a historic battle for democracy. The people in the City of Riverside have spoken to their willingness and desire to live in Historic Districts while abiding by the policies, so MUST the County. Riverside Citizens will be appalled and alienated if the Riverside City Counsel permits the demolition of a structure in the Prospect Place Historic District for a Parking lot by the County. Benign neglect at the City, County, State or Federal level is not a reason to grant a demolition permit. It is a reason to stand up and say NO.
We, the citizens are watching, we are concerned about Government overreach, about Government acting as if it is above the very citizens who elected them. Make no mistake, granting this request, will result in citizens taking action at the voting booth. I see you, we see you and we will be heard and seen. Take care.
Nameste
Teresa Wassman
3673 Oakwood Place
34 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Ron Vervick <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 3:20 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] demolition
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
If minimal repairs are needed, I'll put $50K
down if City will carry remainder at
4%. Ron l. Vervick
35 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Ron Vervick <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 3:18 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] demolition
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
How can we stop it? Buy it? For sale?
36 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Trisha Sanzari <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 3:15 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Keep 4472 Orange St
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
I am against the demolition of 4472 Orange St. It should be restored and celebrated for it’s beauty.
Statement of Confidentiality: The contents of this e-mail message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. The information may also be confidential and/or legally privileged. This transmission is sent for the sole purpose of delivery to the intended recipient. If you have received this transmission in error, any use, reproduction, or dissemination of this transmission is strictly prohibited.
37 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Robert Merrill <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 3:12 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4472 Orange St. Demolition Request
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
To Whom It May Concern,
A public entity, such as the Riverside County office of Education, has a heightened responsibility to be a good steward of the community in which it operates. Demolishing a home in a city where housing is at a premium, adding additional asphalt that will reduce greenery while increasing the urban heat sink, and erasing a home of significant character is not good stewardship. Therefore, I asked that you reject the application to demolish 4472 Orange St.
Sincerely,
Robert Merrill
Sent from my iPad
38 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Morrison-Cook, Monique
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 3:07 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Councilmember Philip Falcone: Help us save a historic home from the wrecking ball!
I’m not a resident in Ward 1, but I would hate to see them demolish this home!
Monique Morrison-Cook | Senior Administrative Assistant Assistant to Chief McKinster
City of Riverside | www.RiversideCA.gov
Fire Department - Administration
3401 University Avenue, Riverside, CA 92501
[email protected]
Office: 951-826-5875 Cell: 951-505-4221
From: Philip Falcone Riverside Councilmember, Ward 1 <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 2:34 PM
To: Morrison-Cook, Monique <[email protected]> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Councilmember Philip Falcone: Help us save a historic home from the wrecking ball!
Councilm ember Philip Fal cone: Help us save a historic home from the wre cking ball ! We ne ed your help! Historic Structure Demolition Requested Once historic structures are demolis hed the hist ory, character , and craftsmanship they represe nt are ZjQcmQR YFpfptBa nnerStart
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
ZjQcmQR YFpfptBa nner End
We need your hel p!
To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Ward 1 Falcone News Flash
Historic Structure Demolition Requested
Once historic structures are demolished the history, character, and craftsmanship they represent are gone forever.
42 Maldonado, Matthew
From: christalmomcm <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 3:05 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Demolished if historic buildings
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Please respect the designation given to our historic buildings. From the homes to our Cesar Chavez Community Center, we work to identify, preserve and protect the few buildings that remain to show our past.
Sent from my T-Mobile 5G Device
43 Maldonado, Matthew
From: lee eventsmarketing.us <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 2:55 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Parking lot vs. historic home
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Dear City Council:
Once a piece of history is lost--
You can't change your mind, 20 years later...
In about 2004-2005, when Riverside was "having
a moment," the City Council considered removing the center island rose bushes from Victoria Ave. to allow for more traffic.
The Magnolia/ Jurupa intersection area is ugly compared to Magnolia on the other side of Arlington, with trees and flowers down the center of the street.
We once had a Carnegie Library.
Exchanging an historic home for a parking lot is something that you will regret, years from now, when the parking "issues" are resolved.
Lee Wade
4623 Braemar Pl.
Riverside, CA 92501
(310) 871-8670
44 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Willow Kudla-Smith <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 2:55 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Opposition to the Demolition of 4472 Orange St
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
To Whom it may concern,
I am writing to formally express my strong opposition to the proposed demolition of 4472 Orange St, a historically significant site in our community.
This structure is not merely an old building; it is a tangible reminder of Riverside’s rich heritage and a vital part of our city’s architectural and cultural identity. As a designated Structure of Merit, it represents a unique era in the city’s development and holds immense historical value that should not be overlooked or erased.
The preservation of such structures is essential not only for honoring the past but for fostering a sense of continuity, pride, and place within our community. Once demolished, these irreplaceable landmarks and the stories they hold are lost forever.
I respectfully urge the Riverside County Office of Education to explore alternative options to demolition.
I hope you will choose to protect this valuable piece of our past for the benefit of future generations.
All the best,
Willow Kudla-Smith
Michigan Native | SoCal Resident
Linkedin
She/Her/Hers
To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
45 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Ellen Baer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 2:55 PM
To: Ward1
Cc: Falcone, Philip
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Fw: Councilmember Philip Falcone: Help us save a historic home from the wrecking ball!
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
I am opposed to the demolition of this property, at least move it to another location. It is a beautiful home. When was it purchased, price, and by whom? Is this a residential district, if so, it should stay there.
Ellen Baer
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Ellen Baer <[email protected]>
To: Philip Falcone <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 at 02:51:26 PM PDT
Subject: Fw: Councilmember Philip Falcone: Help us save a historic home from the wrecking ball!
Its adorable! Is it zoned residential? What can be done to save it? It is not listed in Zillow with that address for some reason, FYI.
TY
Ellen Baer
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Philip Falcone Riverside Councilmember, Ward 1 <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 at 02:33:35 PM PDT
Subject: Councilmember Philip Falcone: Help us save a historic home from the wrecking ball!
We need your help!
To help
protect your
privacy,
Micro so ft
Office
prevented
auto matic
download of
this picture
from the
Internet.
Ward 1
Falcone News
Historic Structure Demolition Requested
Once historic structures are demolished the history, character, and craftsmanship they represent are gone forever.
A demolition request has been submitted by the Riverside County Office of Education to demolish a 1908 Victorian cottage at 4472 Orange St for an asphalt parking lot. Not only is this home in the Prospect Place Historic 47 Maldonado, Matthew
From: J R <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 2:48 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] My 1921 cottage bungalow that I added 500 ft. to and built my garage, three car in the back. All with permits and all with cultural heritage. If you boys need help, let me know.
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
48 49
50 51
52 Maldonado, Matthew
From: michelle rivera <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 2:49 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Demolition historic home
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Please don’t destroy this historic home. Instead restore it to its beauty. NO asphalt parking lot!!!
Michelle Rivera
Ward 1
Sent from my iPhone
53 Maldonado, Matthew
From: DUANE PRATT <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 2:48 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4472 Orange St, Riverside,Ca
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
We totally oppose the condemnation of this property. My husband and I have lived just one block over on Orange Grove Ave. There are so few of these homes left in Riverside, we have been on this street for 54 years, it would be a tragic to tear this house down, what would be the purpose, to build another parking lot that we dont need, we say no,no,no
Thank you
Duane and Marlene Pratt
To help protect your privacy,
Micro so ft Office prevented
auto matic downlo ad o f this
picture from the Internet.
Virus-free.www.avast.com
54 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Heather MacPhetridge <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 2:44 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Top Quality Framing
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
How can we help get this building saved?
55 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Rachael Dzikonski <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 2:44 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Opposition to Demolishing a Riverside Structure of Merit
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Hello!
Sending in this email to express my opposition to demolishing a Riverside Structure of Merit. Please let me know if you need anything else from me!
Thank you,
Rachael Dzikonski
56 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Holly Clark <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 2:44 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Don't Demolish 4472 Orange St for an asphalt parking lot
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
I am against the request to demolish 4472 Orange St for an asphalt parking lot.
This seems to go against the tradition of the city, which has been to protect structures of historical merit.
Please seek another solution - both for repair of the home, and for additional parking.
Thank you,
Holly
57 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Malissa Mckeith <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 2:35 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] We oppose demolishing the historic structure
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Thanks Phillip for sharing this request for support. Our unique history is one of the most valuable economic assets of Riverside. Let’s not throw it away for parking lots. I think they made a song about that in the 1960s.
Malissa Hathaway McKeith
Citizens United for Resources and the Environment, Inc. (“CURE”) www.curegroup.org
213-300-3550
58 Maldonado, Matthew
From: WENDY DIMAS <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 2:30 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Opposition to demolition of Orange St structure
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Good Afternoon,
My name is Wendy Dimas and I am a proud resident of Riverside, where I fall under the jurisdiction of Ward 1. I have recently been informed of the demolition of the Victorian cottage at 4472 Orange St. I am writing this email to let you know that I oppose this decision.
What makes Riverside great is our commitment as a community to keep our city beautiful and historic.
Our Victorian style structures give the city character. Tearing it down to build a parking lot goes against our values as a city, especially in this ward. Riverside has made an effort for sustainable development, even being one of the few cities to have an office of sustainability. Parking structures and minimum parking requirements are the antithesis of sustainability. which is the opposite way Riverside is trying to trend, given the 2050 climate action plan.
Let's focus on building affordable housing and developing green spaces without compromising the character of the city and our community here in Ward 1.
Thank you,
Wendy Dimas
59 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Adam Schnirel <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 1:56 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] No to Demo 4472 Orange st
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
I am in opposition to the demolition of the historic cottage at 4472 Orange st.
Thank you,
Adam Schnirel
412-400-9441
60 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Ma See <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 1:56 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Old Home
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Please do not allow for another of our beautiful city's historic homes be demolished...especially for a parking lot! What an unnecessary tragedy that would be.
Sincerely,
Marcy Walter
Riverside
61 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Ross <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 1:47 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Orange Street Demo
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Good afternoon,
Is the property damaged beyond repair? Is it not an option to relocate house to another lot? I was involved with relocating 8 houses downtown, Riverside. There are several infield lots downtown that would benefit from such a
property.
I appreciate your time and effort on this property.
Scott Ross
Sent from my iPhone
62 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Fun time Pasillas <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 1:23 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Historical district structure
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Re: Historical structures Home demolished. This home in the Prospect Place Historic District. A Structure of Merit
A demolition request has been submitted by the Riverside County Office of Education to demolish an 1890s Victorian cottage at 4472 Orange St for an asphalt parking lot.
As citizen and member of this beautiful city I say NO to the demolishing of this historical home. The beauty of our city is built on the history that are forefathers put forth in labor, Love, talent and treasures.
A parking lot should not be considered I strongly oppose.
Sincerely, Mary H Pasillas
Sent from my iPhone
63 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Elizabeth Scott-Jones <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 1:19 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4472 Orange Street Structure of Merit
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Good afternoon,
I am writing to express my opposition to demolishing the Riverside Structure of Merit located at 4472 Orange Street. I believe it is important to preserve as much of our historic and cultural heritage as possible, especially after the losses in the 1980s and 1990s.
Please let me know how else I may assist in preserving this and other structures.
Thank you very much.
Elizabeth Scott-Jones
951-750-9775
[email protected]
64 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Kim Parker <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 1:12 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4472 Orange Street
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
I’m writing to express my opposition to RCOE’s request to demolish the property at 4472 Orange Street in our city.
Aside from this building’s historic significance, the demolition and pavement of this property is simply not necessary when there are plenty of unused pieces of land within the county that the Office of Education could easily procure.
65 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Mary Ward <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 1:07 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Riv County Office of Ed Request to Demolish Structure of Merit
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Dear Ward1, City of Riverside,
I and my neighbors oppose the demolition of an 1890s Craftsman home on Orange Street.
I live in the Downtown Mile Square area, between Cedar and Locust Streets. This is the happiest of neighborhoods due to its friendly people & porches, wide sidewalks for strolling and dog walking, trees, gardens and lovely Craftsman homes. When I am in my front garden, many people out walking inquire about living in the neighborhood. There is high interest in and value of Craftsman homes with their sense of place.
Riverside has a positive reputation for livability, especially in its Historic districts, as we see annually at the ORF Vintage Home Tour of our many beautiful neighborhoods.
I’m sure the home at issue would be lovingly restored if a young couple or family had the chance to purchase it, as we have excellent resources to support Historic restoration.
Prospect Place, adjacent to the Wood Streets Historic district and RCC is a valuable Historic neighborhood worth supporting as another of Riverside’s gems.
Riverside County Office of Education has more than enough parking lots. As a science teacher here for 30 years, I sometimes attended conferences there. Parking was a squeeze, but always available, and then the new large parking structure was built to add to its’ surrounding lots. It looks as if the RivCo Office of Ed may be staking out land in our Historic neighborhoods for their expansion needs.
Please do not trade away our valuable neighborhoods that make people want to come here.
Thank you,
Mary Ward
[email protected]
(909) 633-2124
66 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Debbie Newton <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 12:59 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4472 Orange
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
To Whom it May Concern:
It has been identified that the Riverside County Office of Education plans to demolish a 1890s Victorian cottage at 4472 Orange St for an asphalt parking lot. I feel this rips away another link to our city's past, and that other avenues could be used to expand parking.
--
Debbie Quick Newton
67 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Charlotte McKenzie <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 12:20 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] No demolition for 4472 Orange street
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Hello,
I would Express my opposition to the demolition of the beautiful craftsman at 4472 Orange St. While the building may be in disrepair, it would be a shame to see his historic emblem of our city destroyed. TThe prospect place historic District is one of the few placesThe prospect place historic district is one of Riverside’s best examples of historic preservation. We need to not forget that these lovely homes represent the heritage of our city.
Thank you!
CHARLOTTE RANSOM MCKENZIE
TOP 1% REALTOR®
C. 951.237.2044
CalRE #01721257
[email protected]
RansomMcKenzieTeam.com
Oh by the way... We are never too busy for your referrals!
To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Coldwell Banker Realty
To help protect y our privacy,
Microsoft Office prevented automatic
download of this picture from the
Internet.
Awards
INTERNATIONAL PRESIDENT’S PREMIER
Charlotte Ransom McKenzie
WIRE FRAUD IS REAL. Before wiring any money, call the intended recipient at a number you know is valid to confirm the instructions. Additionally, please note that the sender does not have authority to bind a party to a real estate contract via written or verbal communication. Real estate agents are independent contractor sales associates, not employees. Owned by a subsidiary of Anywhere Advisors LLC.
To help
protect your
privacy,
Micro so ft
Office
prevented
auto matic
download of
this picture
from the
Internet.
68 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Kristyn Williams <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 11:35 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Request to Preserve Historical Building
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to express my deep concern regarding the proposed demolition of the historic building located at 4472 Orange St, reportedly to make space for a parking lot.
This structure is not only a valuable part of our architectural heritage but also a tangible link to our community’s past. Its preservation is vital for maintaining the character and identity of our neighborhood, and it offers the potential to be restored and repurposed in ways that can benefit the community economically, culturally, and environmentally.
I urge you to consider alternatives that would allow for both development and preservation. Many cities have found creative ways to integrate modern needs with historic preservation, and I believe such a solution is possible here.
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this further or to support efforts to preserve this important landmark.
Kristyn Williams
69 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Cory Randle <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 12:09 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Opposed Demolition of 4472 Orange St
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Hello,
I would like to express my concern and opposition to the demolition request of 4472 Orange St for an asphalt parking lot. Not only is this home in the Prospect Place Historic District, it was identified decades ago to be a contributing structure to the fabric of that district and is a Structure of Merit—the second highest historic designation a building can obtain in Riverside.
Riverside is a hidden gem in the IE due the preservation of its history and most importantly architecture. Please please fight hard to continue preserving the very thing that makes Riverside such a beautiful and unique city to live in.
Best regards,
Cory Randle
4389 Glenwood Dr.
Riverside CA 92501
70 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Leanne Austin <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 11:59 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Formal Objection to the Proposed Demolition of 4472 Orange St, Riverside
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Dear City of Riverside Planning Department,
I am writing to formally object to the proposed demolition of the home located at 4472 Orange Street, submitted by the Riverside County Office of Education. This property is located within the Prospect Place Historic District and has been officially designated as a Structure of Merit.
Allowing the demolition of this architecturally and historically significant structure in favor of a parking lot would be a profound loss to our city’s cultural heritage. I urge the City to reconsider this proposal for the following reasons:
1. Historical Significance: The structure is an integral part of the Prospect Place Historic District, which collectively represents an important period in Riverside's architectural and civic development. Removing this contributing home erodes the historical integrity of the entire district.
2. Designation as a Structure of Merit: This is not an ordinary building. Its designation reflects that it has been evaluated and recognized as possessing significant historical, architectural, or cultural value to the community. To allow its demolition sets a troubling precedent for the treatment of other designated structures.
3. Loss of Cultural Identity: Historic buildings provide a sense of place and continuity. As Riverside continues to grow and modernize, preserving these rare and tangible connections to our past becomes even more important. The character of our historic districts cannot be replicated once lost.
4. Environmental Impact: The demolition of structurally sound buildings contributes to unnecessary waste and environmental degradation. Adaptive reuse of historic structures is a more sustainable and community-focused solution than demolition and new construction.
5. Public Interest and Community Character: The continued presence of historic homes like this one adds value not just in architectural beauty, but in community pride and identity. Replacing it with a parking lot offers no comparable benefit to the public.
I strongly urge the City of Riverside to protect this historic home and explore alternatives that meet the parking needs of the Riverside County Office of Education without destroying irreplaceable elements of our city’s heritage.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I trust the City will act in accordance with its stated commitment to historic preservation.
Sincerely,
Leanne Austin
Owner/Agent
7626 Wood Rd
Riverside CA 92508
DRE 01444578
951.205.2657
72 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Freddy C. Guzman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 11:39 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4471 Orange St. / Do Not Demolish
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Hello,
It is ridiculous that this historic structure may be demolished for a PARKING LOT?! Absolutely not, we must preserve our architectural history and character as it is what makes Riverside beautiful and distinct. The razing of historic structures in the LA region has happened far too much and far too long, let’s reverse the trend!!
FG in Magnolia Center
73 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Michael Fore <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 11:37 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4472 Orange St
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Councilmember Falcone,
I've learned that there's been a request to demolish the historic home located at 4472 Orange Ave. I could not be more opposed to this! We are known throughout the region for our historic buildings and insistence of preserving them. Please use every means necessary to save this beautiful property.
Michael Fore
951-990-6868
74 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Kara C <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 11:31 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Please do not demolish historic homes
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Hello,
I am emailing in opposition of demolishing 4472 Orange Street. This home should be restored and used to help maintain the integrity and beauty of Riverside. Instead, find an investor that will redo the home and maintain its character - it will help surrounding property values and attract more value than a parking lot.
Parking is a problem downtown, but (1) many existing parking structures and lots could be revitalized/built up to increase parking space, and (2) we need to invest in last-mile mobility within the city limits in a way that is not car dependent and less likely to make traffic worse - think trollies, not parking lots.
Our historic homes must not be plowed under!!
Thank you,
Kara Crohn
3587 Mount Rubidoux Dr, Riverside, CA 92501
Kara Crohn
m: 951.255.3624
e: [email protected]
LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/kara-crohn-9859456/
1 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Mireya Santos-Pozos <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2025 9:47 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Oppose demolition of 1908 Victorian cottage
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
I oppose the demolition of 1908 Victorian cottage at 4472 Orange St. 2 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Harminder Gill <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2025 8:42 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Good Morning
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Dear Mr. Falcone
I know I never got a chance to introduce myself in person to you at the events for The Riverside Old Foundation and Heritage house, but I do recognize you these past few years. As a docent and even at past places, I've been spending the last 10 days trying to think what would be best for this 1908 Victorian cottage on Orange Street. I do care about our historic landmarks. Perhaps relocating the Victorian cottage in another location if all else fails. It is just a thought. Continue to do the best for our community. Good Morning Again
Sincerely,
Harminder Gill, MS, DTM
Past Board of Library
Trustees, Ward 4
To help
protect your
privacy,
Micro so ft
Office
prevented
auto matic
download of
this picture
from the
Internet.
��
To help
protect your
privacy,
Micro so ft
Office
prevented
auto matic
download of
this picture
from the
Internet.
��
________________________________________________________________________
3 Maldonado, Matthew
From: olivia poe <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2025 10:03 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Demolition
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
the history of Riverside is more important then a parking lot and that Riverside used to be a historical gem. They are removing the character of the city by taking away its history. 4 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Madeline Poe <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2025 9:38 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4472 orange st.
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
As a Riverside native I take pride in the history and stories this city has to offer. I am pregnant with my first child and fear the integrity of Riverside is slowly being chipped away. The demolition of yet another historic home in favor of a parking lot would leave a huge sore on the reputation of the city. It is choices like these that have lead countless people to leave the city in favor of other newer towns. 5 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Learnunltd <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2025 10:30 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Historic buildings
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Please do not destroy the building at 4572 Orange St. or any other historic buildings in Riverside.
Sent from AOL on Android
6 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Bonnie Zylstra <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2025 8:50 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] No demo!
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Please keep our historical buildings!
7 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Sandy Hardina <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2025 12:13 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Historic Home
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
You certainly have my support to prevent yet another parking lot from eating up Riverside’s history and, in the process, contributing to the already poor air quality in our city. The downtown area is well served by public transportation and we should be encouraging its use. Providing more parking options only serves to discourage it.
Sandy Hardina
8 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Sara McDonnell <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2025 8:36 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Home Preservation
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
To Whom it may concern:
Please don’t demolition any historical houses in Riverside, California. We need to preserve our history with all our effort.
Thank you,
Sara McDonnell
Riverside Resident
Sent from my iPhone
9 Maldonado, Matthew
From: katherine Rose brophy <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, May 24, 2025 8:21 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Taking away a part of history.
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
I am so against tearing down this house for a parking lot. The loss to this community is incomprehensible should you tear it down. And just for a parking lot? Aren’t there enough parking lots downtown as it is? Why can’t they use one of them?
Please do not allow this historical house be torn down for this reason.
Thank you
Sent from my iPhone
10 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Addie Schnirel <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, May 24, 2025 5:34 PM
To: Ward1
Cc: Maldonado, Matthew
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] 4472 Orange St
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Hi there,
I worded my original email backwards!
Here is my edited email which accurately reflects my opinion.
The history of Riverside, represented in part by homes such as the one at 4472 Orange St, is a big part of why I moved to Riverside.
I want to see 4472 Orange St restored and preserved. I do not want to see it demolished for a parking lot
--
Addie Schnirel
On May 20, 2025, at 8:53 AM, Ward1 <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Addie,
I want to make sure I understand your email correctly. You state in your email that you are in favor of demolition and want it to be a parking lot? Please confirm so I can categorize your comment accordingly.
Thank you,
<image001.png>
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 6:53 PM
To: Ward1 <[email protected]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4472 Orange St
Hello! The history of Riverside, repres ented in part by homes such as the one at 4472 Orang e St, is a big part of why I moved to Riverside. I would not like to se e 4472 Ora nge St restored and preserved. I do want to see it demolished for a parking ZjQcmQR YFpfptBa nnerStart
11 CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
ZjQcmQR YFpfptBa nner End
Hello!
The history of Riverside, represented in part by homes such as the one at 4472 Orange St, is a big part of why I moved to Riverside.
I would not like to see 4472 Orange St restored and preserved. I do want to see it demolished for a parking lot.
Best,
Addie Schnirel
4404 11th St, Riverside
Stay in-the-know with all things Riverside! Connect with us at RiversideCA.gov/Connect.
12 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Kelsey Minner <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2025 7:36 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Please Preserve the Historic Henry Jacob Gerhardt Hous
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Dear Councilmember,
I am writing to respectfully urge you and the City of Riverside to reconsider the demolition of the Henry Jacob Gerhardt House at 4472 Orange Street. This 1908 Victorian cottage is a rare and valuable piece of Riverside’s architectural and cultural history, and it deserves to be preserved—not replaced by a parking lot.
The Gerhardt House is not only a Structure of Merit (the second-highest historic designation in the city), but also a contributing structure to the Prospect Place Historic District—one of Riverside’s first wholly residential neighborhoods. This neighborhood has already faced significant transformation and loss, and each remaining original structure plays a vital role in maintaining the integrity and story of the district.
Though the home suffered fire damage while vacant, the city has estimated that only 30% of the structure was impacted. Preservationists believe that the building can be restored and continue serving as a symbol of Riverside’s resilience and architectural heritage.
Historic preservation isn’t just about grand mansions—it’s about valuing the working- class homes that tell the stories of ordinary citizens who shaped the city.
The house also has a unique connection to Riverside’s history. Built by George P. Harsh, a short-time but impactful builder, and home to Henry Gerhardt, a painter with Cresmer Manufacturing, the property reflects the craftsmanship and character of early 20th- century Riverside.
I believe our city can honor the past while planning for the future. Saving the Gerhardt House would be a meaningful step in that direction. Please oppose its demolition and support efforts to restore this irreplaceable piece of Riverside’s heritage. 13 Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Kelsey Minner
714.757.9293 | [email protected]
Sent from my iPhone
14 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Debbie Schwartz <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2025 5:00 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Demolition
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Please leave our history alone! It's a great thing to uphold. Demolishing a potentially restored home is wrong. Also tired of all the fields and spaces being taken up by concrete/hotels and expensive apartments.
Debbie Schwartz
Sent from AOL on Android
15 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Bethany Na <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2025 12:13 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Demolition Opposition - 4472 Orange Street
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Hello,
I wanted to voice my opposition to the proposed demolition of the house located at 4472 Orange Street.
The destruction of this property would be adverse the interests of Riverside, both culturally and economically.
It is my understanding that the Riverside County Office of Education wants to demolish this 117 year old home so that it can add some parking spaces to their adjacent parking lot. I have driven by this property several times over the past week, and I have never observed the existing parking lot being more than half full, let alone near capacity. It is inconceivable that a governmental institution ostensibly concerned with education would trade a historical building for a few parking spaces... spaces nobody needs.
While the home is in need of repair, it is not beyond repair. Chapman University in Orange, CA has made good use of the Craftsman bungalows surrounding the campus; for instance, I worked at an elder law clinic while in law school which was located in one of these homes. I see no reason why the Office of Education cannot do something similar.
The environmental impact of the demolition is sure to be another point of contention; the various reports and studies needed as a result of this plan would be time-intensive, labor-intensive- and expensive. I personally will ensure that all appropriate studies are done, and reports made, before this building is reduced to asphalt. I'm sure the neighbors would not be thrilled with the construction and demolition of the building either.
All this to say, I strongly oppose this decision and am disappointed with the Office of Education's proposal. Riverside can do better. Thank you.
Bethany Everson Na, Esq.
--
Sincerely,
Bethany Everson Na
Attorney at Law
16 T: (714) 606-5343
F: (951) 307-1504
17 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Dave Shaw <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2025 12:06 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Oppose demolition of 4472 Orange St.
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
I oppose demolition of 4472 Orange St. to "pave the way" for a parking lot.
Please find an appropriate way to save this wonderful Structure of Merit.
Thanks for your attention.
David Shaw
18 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Hazael calleros <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2025 10:14 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Letter of Support
Attachments: _Letter of Support .pdf
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Below you will find my letter of support.
--
To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Dear Councilmember Falcone,
I am writing to express my strong support for the preservation of the Henry Jacob Gerhardt House, located at 4472 Orange Street. This 1908 Victorian Cottage—crafted by local builder George P. Harsh—is not only a Structure of Merit (#313), but also a rare and valuable contributor to Riverside’s Prospect Place Historic District.
While often mistaken for a Craftsman bungalow, this home’s unique transitional style tells an important story about Riverside’s architectural evolution during the early 20th century. Beyond its design, the home holds social and historical value. It represents the life of Henry Jacob Gerhardt, a working-class painter tied to local industries and family roots in the Cresmer Manufacturing Company. His story is one of many that illustrate Riverside's rich cultural tapestry and the everyday citizens who helped shape it.
The Prospect Place neighborhood has long served as one of the city’s early residential enclaves. While modern development has altered parts of this area, the Gerhardt House stands as one of the few remaining original structures—a physical anchor to Riverside’s past. In the 1970s and 1980s, the city rightly took action to relocate and preserve other historic homes in this neighborhood during freeway expansion. I urge the city to act with the same foresight and commitment today.
Although the Gerhardt House suffered fire damage, estimates show only about 30% of the structure was affected. Historic homes across the country have been restored from far worse. With proper investment and care, this house can once again serve the community—whether through adaptive reuse or as an educational resource—and remain a testament to Riverside’s working-class history.
Historic preservation is not just about saving buildings. It’s about honoring the communities, stories, and identities they represent. The Gerhardt House is a symbol of resilience in a neighborhood that has long fought to retain its character. Demolishing it for additional parking would be an irreversible loss.
Preserving the Gerhardt House is also an opportunity for Riverside to live up to its motto as a City of Arts and Innovation. True innovation honors the past while creating a path for the future. By investing in this property, Riverside can demonstrate that the arts and historic preservation are not in opposition to development—they are powerful tools for shaping thriving, creative, and economically resilient communities.
I respectfully urge the Riverside County Office of Education and the Cultural Heritage Board to reject demolition plans and to work with preservationists and community members to explore rehabilitation options. This is an opportunity to lead by example and show that Riverside values all of its history—not just the grand, but also the humble.
Thank you for your leadership and your consideration.
Sincerely,
Hazael Calleros
19 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Teri G <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2025 2:49 AM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Preservation of the Henry Jacob Gerhardt House at 4472 Orange Street
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
The Henry Jacob Gerhardt House, located at 4472 Orange Street, is among the last original homes in the Prospect Place Historic District. As a designated Structure of Merit, this 1908 home carries substantial architectural and historical value, reflecting the character and craftsmanship of early Riverside.
Though the home has sustained damage, it remains structurally salvageable. With appropriate restoration, it can once again stand as a testament to our city’s roots—something parking lots and short- term development projects cannot replicate.
Moreover, increased hardscaping contributes directly to the urban heat island effect. Demolishing this historic residence in favor of more pavement worsens environmental conditions while erasing a vital part of our collective identity.
Preserving the Gerhardt House is not only an act of historical stewardship but also a commitment to sustainable and community-centered development. I urge you to prioritize long-term legacy over short- term convenience, and to take a stand for the cultural soul of Riverside.
Riverside nearly lost the Mission Inn to demolition and redevelopment. Today, that same building is celebrated as the crown jewel of our city and a vital symbol of our heritage. By contrast, the demolition of the Carnegie Library remains a regretful chapter in our community’s story—one we still mourn. I respectfully urge you not to let history repeat itself.
Sincerely
Teri Geary
20 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Anita <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2025 10:19 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Regarding the proposed demolition of 4472 Orange Street
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
May 22, 2025
To Whom It May Concern
Riverside has options to preserve history, acknowledge architecture and appreciate art in the buildings that have already been built. Centuries earlier or decades earlier- Victorian Cottages like the one on Orange Street, or Mid Century Modern buildings like the Methodist Church on Arlington Avenue, have historical value and are part of the fabric of the city.
Decades ago, when apparently a civic group had the knowledge and foresight to identify the home on 4472 Orange Street as a “Structure of Merit” in the Prospect Place Historic District, they probably did not realize that the hard work and the research they put into this eƯort decades ago would be ignored and dismissed, as the cottage is now scheduled for demolition….For yet another RCOE/RUSD project….a parking lot! There is already a parking lot surrounding the property! (As an aside, all the RCOE/RUSD buildings and structures like ballfields, gymnasiums and theater stages come at quite a high price for any other citizens of Riverside who wish to use RCOE/RUSD facilities). Renovating and repurposing, in a way recycling an older building, seems equitable for all Riverside citizens and an important example of being an environmentally sustainable community.
Fulfillment centers, aka warehouses, and outside and out of state developers who are looking to make a buck at the expense of the quality of life for the local citizenry, find quite a soft target in the City of Riverside. Now, in addition to those rapacious entities, we have buildings with character, charm and historical significance being razed by our own city government.
Riverside has a choice: Become another Albuquerque, NM or San Jose, CA, OR becoming the car wash capital of the USA, OR making it a community where the neighbors are proud of their city, and where the young want to stay be a part of the city where they grew up.
I urge Councilman Philip Falcone to continue the good fight to keep these historical buildings intact, and hope the rest of the city government to follow his lead. I also urge both of them to make Riverside a place where people want to live and work and thrive, and that it not be just a stopping point until they decide to move to the beach.
Sincerely,
Anita K Gorder
21 “A country without a past has the emptiness of a barren continent; and a city without old buildings is like a man without a memory.”
Graeme Shankland
22 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Sandra Boops <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2025 4:48 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Demolition at Orange st.
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
I pray this Historical house will be saved.
Councilman Falcone.
Changes are happening..
I will continue to follow you mails..as to where all this may happen.
Best Regards
Ms Sandra Montes
Resident
23 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Curt Wyrick <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2025 4:47 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Demolishing older homes
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
Sent from my iPadplease stop tearing down older homes. Please stop creating more paved areas, thus making riverside hotter. Please stop. Thank you
24 Maldonado, Matthew
From: Alana A <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2025 12:15 PM
To: Ward1
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1908 Victorian house on Orange Street
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Riverside. It was not sent by any City official or staff. Use caution when opening attachments or links.
I'm a long-time resident of Riverside, born and raised here, and I'll be brief. Regarding the demolition of a 1908 Victorian home for a parking structure, I'm astonished that the city would consider such a move. It's outrageous to prioritize parking over preserving historic buildings. My concerns are that we're losing the beauty that makes Riverside unique.
Sincerely
Alana R Atencio
Resident since 1973
CULTURAL HERITAGE BOARD
MINUTES
WEDNESDAY, June 18, 2025, 3:30 P.M.
PUBLIC COMMENT IN PERSON/TELEPHONE
ART PICK COUNCIL CHAMBER
3900 MAIN STREET
APPROVED Cultural Heritage Board Minutes – June 18, 2025 2 Board Member Hudson to recommend that the City Council: 1) Determine that Planning Case DP -2025-00469 for the designation of Riverside City Hall as a City Landmark is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and 2) Approve Planning Case DP-2025-00469, based on the findings outlined in the staff report, including Vice-Chair Sisson and Chair McDoniel's revisions to the findings, and subject to the recommended conditions. Chair McDoniel advised of the appeal period.
A City Council public hearing is required for final approval.
Motion Carried: 6 Ayes, 0 Noes, 1 Absent, 0 Abstention
AYES: Brown, Sisson, Gamble, Herrera, Hudson, McDoniel
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Castellanos
ABSTENTION: NONE
DISCUSSION CALENDAR
PLANNING CASE DP-2025-00269 – CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS – 4472 ORANGE ST, WARD 1
Proposal by Belen Bobadilla on behalf of the Riverside County Office of Education (RCOE) to consider a Certificate of Appropriateness to demolish an existing fire damaged residential office structure, within the Prospect Place Historic District and designates as a Structure of Merit #313 . Scott Watson , Historic Preservation Officer, presented the staff report. Dr. Scott S. Price, Associate Superintendent of RCOE, along with his team presented the applicant’s presentation. Dr. Price stated they were in agreement with the recommended conditions of approval. There were 5 Public Comment s. Prior to discussion, Board Members disclosed any outside communication. Following discussion, it was moved by Vice Chair Sisson and seconded by Board Member Herrera to continue Planning Case DP-2025-00269 for 90 days, with the direction that the applicant provide information including options for a replacement project , feasibility of a restoration consistent with the California Historic Building Code, and salvage opportunities . The applicant agreed to a continuance to a future date.
Motion Carried: 6 Ayes, 0 Noes, 1 Absent, 0 Abstention
AYES: Brown, Sisson, Gamble, Herrera, Hudson, McDoniel
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: Castellanos
ABSTENTION: NONE
Larson LLP
larsonllp.com
555 South Flower Street, 30th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
P 213.436.4888
F 213.623.2000
Hilary Potashner
Direct: 213.205.2750
[email protected]
September 26, 2025
VIA E-M AIL AND U.S. MAIL
City of Riverside Cultural Heritage Board
Art Pick Council Chamber, City Hall
3900 Main Street
Riverside, California 92501
Re: Planning Case DP-2025-00269 (COA) - 4472 Orange Street
To the Honorable Members of the Cultural Heritage Board:
Larson LLP represents the Riverside County Office of Education (“RCOE”) in connection with its pending application for a Certificate of Appropriateness, Planning Case DP-2025-00269 (the “Project”), to demolish the structure located at 4472 Orange Street (the “Property”).
The purpose of this letter is to address four related issues relevant to the Board’s ongoing consideration of the Project.
First, this letter will address the specific categories of additional information the Board requested before it will consider granting a Certificate of Appropriateness (“COA”). Following the Board’s June 18, 2025 meeting, RCOE has invested significant time and resources obtaining this information, including additional inspections of the Property and retaining outside experts to conduct further assessments regarding the Property’s historic value and the feasibility of conducting a full restoration. The findings from these experts are submitted for the Board’s consideration concurrently herewith.
Second, this letter will address the Board’s question regarding the applicability of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). The proposed Project is exempt from CEQA on the basis that the Project requires only ministerial actions by the City and/or otherwise merely proposes demolition of a Class 1 Existing Facility and construction of a categorically exempt small structure. Accordingly, RCOE requests that the Board file, as necessary, a Notice of Exemption pursuant to RMC section 20.15.020, subdivision B and California Code of Regulations, Title 14, section 15062.
Third, this letter will suggest an alternate course of action should this Board decline to grant a COA. Given the Property’s current designation as a cultural resource, and in an effort to uphold the integrity of the Prospect Place Historic District (“PPHD”), RCOE pursued a COA, ensuring that all applicable requirements were satisfied before obtaining a demolition permit. In furtherance of this effort, RCOE retained a licensed civil engineer to conduct a Structural
City of Riverside Cultural Heritage Board
September 26, 2025
Larson LLP
larsonllp.com
Damage Evaluation Report that was previously submitted to the Board. In light of the findings therein, however, it is evident that the Property constitutes a “dangerous building” under the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings and actually is exempt from the COA requirement pursuant to Riverside Municipal Code (“RMC”) section 20.25.015. As such, if the Board declines a COA, RCOE RCOE requests that the Board direct the City’s Building Official to evaluate the Property and issue findings, consistent with the foregoing, that the Property satisfies the criteria under RMC section 20.25.015 and is therefore exempt from the COA requirement.
Lastly, this letter will address suggestions made by the Board and various public commenters that RCOE sell the Property to an individual or organization interested in undertaking the necessary repairs to restore the building to its pre-damage condition. Setting aside the fact that restoration is both technically and economically infeasible, RCOE is not prepared to sell the Property as doing so would impair the use of RCOE’s adjacent administrative office building, which is critical to RCOE’s continued operations. Any requirement imposed by the Board that RCOE sell or restore the Property would give rise to a claim for inverse condemnation.
Similarly, due to the severity of the fire damage and the associated cost of conducting the necessary repairs, any continued refusal by the Board to authorize demolition would constitute a regulatory taking further giving rise to a claim for inverse condemnation. RCOE is nevertheless more than willing to permit interested community members or organizations to salvage any and all materials from the building prior or subsequent to demolition.
For these reasons, and because there is ample evidence that demolition is the only viable option remaining, RCOE respectfully requests that the Board grant the requested COA or, alternatively, determine that the Project is exempt from the COA requirement.
I. F
ACTUAL BACKGROUND
A. Evidence Presented to the Board
The Property was acquired by RCOE in July 2023 along with the adjacent Thompson/Colegate Building. RCOE leased the Property to a commercial tenant until December 11, 2023 when a transient individual set the structure on fire causing extensive damage. RCOE sought to determine the feasibility of restoring the Property due to its designation as a Cultural Resource, including as a Structure of Merit and contributor to the PPHD.
In furtherance of this effort, RCOE engaged numerous subject matter experts to evaluate the structure. This included the commissioning of Structural Damage Evaluation Report prepared by Brad Lander, a licensed civil engineer with Insight Forensics LLC. RCOE also retained Michael J. Stephens, AIA NCARB, an architect and managing partner with SGH Architects to conduct an architectural survey. Further, RCOE engaged Casey Tibbet, M.A., with LSA to conduct an Historic Resource Assessment of the Property.
City of Riverside Cultural Heritage Board
September 26, 2025
Larson LLP
larsonllp.com
RCOE gave a detailed presentation of the findings made by these experts at the Board’s June 18 regular meeting, during which the following evidence was submitted for the Board’s consideration:
1. S
tructural Damage Assessment
RCOE’s civil engineer, Mr. Lander, conducted a thorough inspection of the Property, which revealed that:
• S
tructural Damage: The extent of the damage caused by the fire satisfies the criteria under the California Building Code for “substantial structural damage” classification, meaning that 60% of the Property’s structural systems have been compromised. In addition, less than 40% of the remaining structural components are considered salvageable. Because of this classification, the Code requires that repairs to both the compromised components and the remaining salvageable components must meet current code requirements in order to satisfy applicable safety standards, meaning that the Property cannot be restored under its prior building standards.
• Roof System:
60% of the roof framing is charred/burned or suffered excessive sapping and is therefore compromised. The remaining elements are not reusable and would not meet current code requirements. Based on the damage in the roof system, the entirety of the roof would require replacement either due to fire damage or implementation of current standards of building. • Floor System:
The fire severely damaged components under the floor and damaged a substantial portion of the overall floor system. More than 50% of the floor system exhibited cross-sectional charring or excessive sapping/glazing and was compromised by exposure to heat/fire.
From these findings, Mr. Lander concluded:
•
Based on the extensive fire damage to the structure and the unsalvageable conditions of the remaining/undamaged framing members and components, any repair scope/recommendations associated with an anticipated/expected repair and code upgrade estimate as a result of the event would be considered infeasible/impractical.
• Due to the severity of damage and demolition requirements of the remaining framing, it is “technically infeasible” under section 202 of the California Building Code to implement repairs and salvage the existing materials that were not damaged by the fire.
City of Riverside Cultural Heritage Board
September 26, 2025
Larson LLP
larsonllp.com
• Based on the extent of structural damage, limited salvageability of the remaining structure and impact of the building code update/upgrade requirements on reuse, it is expected that the subject building will be required to be demolished entirely.
2. A rchitectural Findings
The Property was also inspected by RCOE’s architectural expert, Mr. Stephens, who agreed with Mr. Lander’s assessment and further concluded that:
• Moving the building would be incredibly difficult and would likely result in irreparable damage to the Property. In fact, there would be no guarantee that the Property could be moved effectively, and once moved, the Property may nevertheless require demolition at its new site.
• Salvageable historical building components of the Property are extremely limited.
There are only half a dozen unique components that could be salvaged. • The extent of the fire damage to floor and roof structure prohibits a partial re- build.
• Undertaking new construction to replicate the existing structure could cost taxpayers an estimated $2 million. Conversely, insurance proceeds are limited to the Property’s fair market value, which RCOE’s insurer estimated to be approximately $750,000.
Mr. Stephens further concluded that, in his professional judgment, the building is not suitable for repurposing for any manner.
3. H
istoric Resource Assessment
Aside from the severe damage to the Property, RCOE’s historic preservation expert, Ms. Tibbet, separately evaluated the Property to determine whether it should maintain its current designation as a Cultural Resource. Ms. Tibbet shared the following findings with the Board:
• Radically altered spatial relationships have led to a lack of visual continuity with the PPHD and created an inappropriate historic context that is not associated with the district.
• The spatial relationships that identified it as part of the PPHD no longer exist. The parking lot and the change to the parkway contribute to a break in the visual continuity of the PPHD. Therefore, the Property does not contribute to a significant and distinguishable entity whose components on their own lack individual distinction, namely the PPHD.
• Architectural integrity has been diminished by loss of windows and alterations to the front porch to accommodate an ADA-complaint ramp.
City of Riverside Cultural Heritage Board
September 26, 2025
Larson LLP
larsonllp.com
• This is not a rare resource as there are many examples of Neoclassical cottages in the city, including in the PPHD and the nearby Mile Square neighborhood. • The Property is not architecturally significant.
• T his property does not retain enough integrity to meet any of the Landmark or the Structure of Merit criteria.
4. Additional Evidence Presented to the Board
To further inform the Board’s consideration of the Project, Dr. Scott Price, Associate Superintendent of RCOE, provided additional information to the Board, including that:
• RCOE has afforded the Old Riverside Foundation the opportunity to salvage any materials that can feasibly be recovered. This includes two exterior porch columns and possibly one dormer window that the Old Riverside Foundation has determined to be salvageable.
• Beyond these items, the only other undamaged material is certain portions of the Property’s exterior siding, which the Old Riverside Foundation determined that it would not be practical to salvage.
• Although moving the Property would not be possible, RCOE is willing to have any interested person or organization, in addition to the Old Riverside Foundation, salvage any materials they like.
• If demolition is approved, RCOE intends to explore the construction of a small greenspace and shade structure on the existing lot to serve as an outside break area for RCOE staff.
B. T
he Board Deferred Decision on a Certificate of Appropriateness Despite the foregoing evidence demonstrating that demolition is the only viable option remaining, the Board nevertheless concluded that it needed more information to determine whether the Project should be approved. Rather than granting the COA, the Board continued the matter for ninety days and further requested that RCOE submit substantial additional information before it would consider granting the COA, including:
• The feasibility of completing a restoration of the building consistent with Chapter 8 of the California Historic Building Code (as well as the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties). Yet, RCOE’s subject matter experts already evaluated the Property and determined that restoration is technically infeasible. The findings of these experts were presented to the Board at the June 18 meeting, as summarized above.
City of Riverside Cultural Heritage Board
September 26, 2025
Larson LLP
larsonllp.com
• Aside from the technical infeasibility of restoration as defined by the Building Code, the Board further requested information as to whether it would actually be feasible to replace the damaged portions of the building, including the roof system, the floor system, the interior, the windows, and the studs. The Board requested this information despite the fact that applicable law speaks in terms of technical feasibility and does not mandate restoration whenever it is theoretically possible to do so.
• RCOE’s efforts to find an individual or organization interested in purchasing the Property or salvaging the individual components of the building. As explained during the Board’s June 18 meeting, RCOE has been actively working with the Old Riverside Foundation to salvage certain components of the building. • The Board also requested information regarding the estimated cost of restoration, even though Mr. Stephens provided a $2 million estimate at the June 18 meeting.
As discussed below, RCOE has since obtained a formal cost estimate for the restoration.
• Whether the building’s neoclassical style supports its status as a contributor to the Prospect Place Historic District and whether the structure itself has elements that support its historic status. However, Ms. Tibbet already addressed both issues in her report and specifically concluded that there are many other examples of neoclassical buildings in the surrounding area and that there is nothing historically significant about the Property.
• Whether the proposed project would fall within a CEQA exemption, which it does. The proposed demolition and greenspace are exempt. • The Board also requested additional information regarding the proposed green space that RCOE intends to construct in place of the existing structure. As discussed below, RCOE has prepared a rendering of the proposed greenspace for the Board’s consideration.
II. RCO
E HAS NOW PROVIDED ALL ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
REQUESTED BY THE BOARD
Below is an overview of the additional documentation incorporated herein that RCOE has obtained in response to the Board’s comments at its June 18, 2025 meeting. These additional materials—together with the substantial volume of information that has already been presented to the Board—amply establish that RCOE has satisfied all principles and standards of site development and design review, thereby entitling RCOE to its requested COA.
City of Riverside Cultural Heritage Board
September 26, 2025
Larson LLP
larsonllp.com
Conceptual Cost Estimate (Exhibit A)
Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a Conceptual Cost Estimate prepared by HL Construction Management that extensively details the various items that RCOE would be forced to incur in order to fully restore the Property. The total estimated cost of restoration is $1,596,322—more than double the Property’s fair market value of $750,000.
Critically, as noted in Exhibit A, the cost estimate excludes numerous additional expenses that R
COE would incur as part of the restoration, including soft costs such as architectural and engineering fees, building permits and plan reviews, insurance costs, furniture and equipment, and project management fees. After speaking with the subject matter experts, RCOE has determined that these additional expenses in addition to the cost estimate in Exhibit A will total $2 million—consistent with the estimate that RCOE previously provided to the Board.
Peer Review of Historic Resources Assessment (Exhibit B) Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a Peer Review Memorandum prepared by Bill Wilman, an architectural historical with Wilman Historical Services. Mr. Wilman reviewed the original Historic Resources Assessment prepared by Ms. Tibbet of LSA, which was previously submitted to the Board. In the Memorandum, Mr. Wilman agrees with Ms. Tibbet’s assessment that the Property is ineligible for designation as a either a Structure of Merit or contributor to the PPHD.
This Memorandum provides further evidence that RCOE has satisfied all principles and standards of site development and design review set forth in RMC section 20.25.050.
Conceptual Rendering of Proposed Greenspace (Exhibit C) Attached hereto as Exhibit C is a conceptual rendering of the proposed greenspace that RCOE intends to build in place of the existing structure on the Property. As demonstrated by the rendering, the proposed greenspace will be consistent with the PPHD’s architectural and aesthetic values and will thus meaningfully contribute to the surrounding neighborhood. The rendering also includes a proposed monument that will discuss and memorialize the historical significance of the PPHD.
III. TH
E PROJECT IS EXEMPT FROM CEQA
When approving a project, a local agency, such as the Board, must “decide whether the project is exempt from the CEQA review process under either a statutory exemption or a categorical exemption set forth in the CEQA Guidelines.” (California Building Industry Assn. v. Bay Area Air Quality Management Dist. (2015) 62 Cal.4th 369, 382, citations omitted.) As to statutory exemptions, by its own definition, CEQA applies only to “discretionary projects” and does not apply to “ministerial projects.” (Pub. Resources Code, § 21080, subds. (a), (b)(1).) Thus, if a project is ministerial, it is exempt from CEQA. (Id.) Second, even if a project is discretionary, CEQA nevertheless contains various “categorical exemptions” for certain types of projects.
City of Riverside Cultural Heritage Board
September 26, 2025
Larson LLP
larsonllp.com
Here, because the Property has been locally designated as a Cultural Resource, CEQA considerations come into play. During the Board’s June 18 meeting, certain Board members questioned whether the Project would be exempt from CEQA’s requirements. As discussed below, the Project—including the demolition of the Property and the subsequent proposal to construct a greenspace on the existing lot—is both statutorily and categorically exempt from CEQA.
A. S
tatutory Exemption for Ministerial Projects
A project is ministerial when it “describes a governmental decision involving little or no personal judgment by the public official as to the wisdom or manner of carrying out the project. The public official merely applies the law to the facts as presented but uses no special discretion or judgment in reaching a decision. A ministerial decision involves only the use of fixed standards or objective measurements, and the public official cannot use personal, subjective judgment in deciding whether or how the project should be carried out.” (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15369.) In contrast, a “‘[d]iscretionary project’ means a project which requires the exercise of judgment or deliberation when the public agency or body decides to approve or disapprove a particular activity, as distinguished from situations where the public agency or body merely has to determine whether there has been conformity with applicable statutes, ordinances or regulations.” (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15357.)
A proposed demolition of a Cultural Resource in Riverside would ordinarily be considered a discretionary project because it typically requires an applicant to obtain a COA, which requires the Board to make specific findings that are inherently discretionary.
However, a
s will be discussed further below, if the Board analyzes the Project in li ght of the Property’s status as a dangerous building under RMC section 20.25.015, the decision before the Board is ministerial in nature. Under this framework, RCOE need only obtain a demolition permit before proceeding with the Project, and the procedure for obtaining such a permit is purely ministerial. (Friends of Juana Briones House v. City of Palo Alto (2010) 190 Cal.App.4th 286, 305 [“Under the plain language of the governing municipal code provision, issuance of the demolition permit was ministerial.”]; Bottini v. City of San Diego (2018) 27 Cal.App.5th 281, 295, 301 [“The Municipal Code also establishes procedures that apply to abatement actions involving designated historical resources, which require a property owner to obtain a permit and ensure compliance with all applicable regulations and ordinances prior to the alteration, demolition, or relocation of the designated historical resource. . . . [T]he demolition permit that [the city] authorized the [petitioners] to obtain was, as all parties agree, ministerial.”].) The requirements for obtaining a demolition permit are set forth in RMC section 16.20.130, w
hich requires only ministerial acts by the City, including the determination as to whether “the sewer has been properly capped” and whether “all concrete, weeds, debris, stones or other loose material has been removed from the site.” In other words, the Code affords no discretion to City officials to withhold a building permit once the objective criteria under RMC section 16.20.130 have been met. Once these criteria are satisfied, the applicant is entitled to a demolition permit as
City of Riverside Cultural Heritage Board
September 26, 2025
Larson LLP
larsonllp.com
a matter of right, thereby rendering the demolition permit process ministerial. (See Friends of Juana Briones House, supra, 190 Cal.App.4th at p. 305-306 [“Under the referenced chapter, there are two prerequisites for a permit to demolish any residential structure: the residence must be vacant and any tenants must be notified. . . . Those prerequisites impose fixed standards, capable of objective assessment. There is no dispute that appellants satisfied those prerequisites here.”].)
Furthermore, following demolition of the Property, RCOE intends to construct a greenspace on the existing parcel. This too is ministerial because the proposed construction merely requires RCOE to obtain a building permit. (Friends of Westwood, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1987) 191 Cal.App.3d 259, 277 [“Run of the mill building permits are “ministerial” actions not requiring compliance with CEQA.”], emphasis in original.)
Accordingly, due to the Property’s status as a dangerous building, the Project is ministerial in nature and therefore is statutorily exempt from CEQA.
B. C
ategorical Exemption for Class 1 Existing Facilities and Class 3 Small Structures
Alternatively, even if the Project is construed as discretionary under the COA framework, it nevertheless satisfies the categorical exemption for class 1 existing facilities. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15301.) This exemption applies to certain proposed alterations to existing facilities. It specifically exempts projection involving the “[d]emolition and removal of individual small structures” including “[o]ne single-family residence” or a “store, motel, office, restaurant, and similar small commercial structure if designed for an occupant load of 30 persons or less.” (Id., subd. (l)(1)-(3).) Furthermore, as to the proposed greenspace, this Project component satisfies the categorical exemption for class 3 new construction or conversion of small structures. This exemption specifically includes “construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures” and also “include[s] but [is] not limited to” the construction of “[a]ccessory (appurtenant) structures including garages, carports, patios, swimming pools, and fences.” (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15303.)
The Project therefore falls within categorical exemptions to CEQA.
However, it should be noted that “[u]nlike statutory exceptions, categorical exemptions are subject to exceptions.” (Bottini v. City of San Diego, supra, 27 Cal.App.5th at p. 292.) For instance, projects involving historical resources are not necessarily categorically exempt. (Cal.
Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15300.2, subd. (f) [“A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.”) Nevertheless, the historical resource exception does not apply here. The Property is not included in the California Register of Historical Resources but is instead designated only at the local level as a Cultural Resource. Under CEQA, “[h]istorical resources included in a local register of historical resources . . . are presumed to be historically or culturally significant for purposes of this section, unless the preponderance of the evidence demonstrates that the resource is not
City of Riverside Cultural Heritage Board
September 26, 2025
Larson LLP
larsonllp.com
historically or culturally significant. (Pub. Res. Code § 21084.1.) Thus, it is sufficient for RCOE to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that the Property is not historically or culturally significant. RCOE has plainly made such a showing. Indeed, the Cultural Resource Assessment prepared by LSA concluded that the Property does not retain enough integrity to meet any of the Landmark or the Structure of Merit criteria and does not meaningfully contribute to the PPHD. The thorough analysis and documentation in the Cultural Resource Assessment provides ample evidence—well beyond the preponderance of the evidence standard—upon which the Board could determine that the Property is not historically or culturally significant for the purposes of CEQA.
Accordingly, the historical resource exception does not apply to the Property, and the Project therefore is categorically exempt from CEQA. In light of the statutory and categorical exemptions applicable to the Project, RCOE requests that the Board file, as necessary, a Notice of Exemption pursuant to RMC section 20.15.020, subdivision B and California Code of Regulations, Title 14, section 15062.
IV. S
HOULD THIS BOARD DECLINE A COA, DEMOLITION IS STILL
APPROPRIATE
Chapter 20 of the Riverside Municipal Code sets forth the procedures for designating, altering, and maintaining Cultural Resources located within the City. Once a structure is designated as a Cultural Resource, any proposed alteration, including demolition, typically requires the owner to obtain a COA pursuant to RMC section 20.25.010, which is issued by the Board, or in some cases, by the City’s Historic Preservation Officer. Although no formal public hearing is required, once an application for a COA is submitted, the Board must then set the application as a discussion calendar item during one of the Board’s regularly scheduled meetings and must further provide public notice. (RMC § 20.15.040.) Any such COA application must satisfy the applicable “principles and standards of site development and design review” set forth in RMC section 20.25.050, which further requires the Board to make specific findings under each of the applicable criteria. Separately, if the COA applicant further seeks to demolish a designated Cultural Resource, the proposal is also subject to additional notice requirements pursuant to RMC section 20.15.055.
Critically, however, Chapter 20 also exempts certain Cultural Resources from the foregoing COA requirements and procedures. Specifically, as relevant here:
Modifications to a Cultural Resource does [sic] not require a Certificate of Appropriateness, if the Building Official has determined that structure presents an unsafe or dangerous condition constituting an imminent threat as defined in the California Building Code; [or]
A dangerous building as defined by the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, and the proposed action is necessary to mitigate the unsafe or dangerous condition.
City of Riverside Cultural Heritage Board
September 26, 2025
Larson LLP
larsonllp.com
Before any physical work on any such unsafe structure, the Building Official shall make all reasonable efforts to consult with the Historic Preservation Officer or Qualified Designee to seek feasible alternatives to the proposed action that will adequately protect the public health and safety.
(RMC § 20.25.015.A.1-3. [emphasis added].)
Thus, no COA is required if the City’s Building Official determines that a Cultural Resource presents either (i) an unsafe or dangerous condition constituting an imminent threat under the California Building Code or (ii) a dangerous building under the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings (“Uniform Code”). (Id.)
Here, it is readily apparent that the Property meets the latter condition—i.e. a “dangerous building” under the Uniform Code. The definition of a “dangerous building” is contained in Section 302 of the Uniform Code, which states as follows: “For the purpose of this code, any building or structure which has any or all of the conditions or defects hereinafter described shall be deemed to be a dangerous building, provided that such defects exist to the extent that the life, health, property or safety of the public or its occupants are endangered.” Section 302 further enumerates various conditions under which a structure would be deemed a dangerous building, including, but not limited to:
• Whenever the building or structure, exclusive of the foundation, shows 33 percent or more damage or deterioration of its supporting member or members, or 50 percent damage or deterioration of its nonsupporting members, enclosing or outside walls or coverings.
• Whenever any portion thereof has been damaged by fire . . . to such an extent that the structural strength or stability thereof is materially less than it was before such catastrophe and is less than the minimum requirements of the Building Code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location. • Whenever the building or structure has been so damaged by fire, wind, earthquake or flood, or has become so dilapidated or deteriorated as to become (i) an attractive nuisance to children; (ii) a harbor for vagrants, criminals or immoral persons; or as to (iii) enable persons to resort thereto for the purpose of committing unlawful or immoral acts.
(Uniform Code §§ 302(4), 302(11)-(12).)
RCOE has already submitted ample evidence to the Board demonstrating that the Property satisfies each of the above conditions. For instance, the Structural Damage Evaluation Report prepared by a licensed civil engineer found that:
It is believed that more than 60-percent of the structural load-carrying elements capacity has been compromised due to the fire event, diminishing the reserve strength of the lateral-force-resisting system to resist wind and seismic loads and imposing an immediate
City of Riverside Cultural Heritage Board
September 26, 2025
Larson LLP
larsonllp.com
hazard to life safety. Based on the extensive fire damage to the structure and the unsalvageable conditions of the remaining/undamaged framing members and components, any repair scope/recommendations associated with an anticipated/expected repair and code upgrade estimate as a result of the event would be considered infeasible/impractical.
…
Based on the extent of structural damage, limited salvageability of the remaining structure and impact of the building code update/upgrade requirements on reuse, it is expected that the subject building will be required to be demolished entirely and reconstructed from the ground up to ensure safety, functionality/code compliance. (emphasis added.)
As such, the damage to the Property’s supporting members significantly exceeds the 33% requirement under the Uniform Code. (§ 302(11).)
Furthermore, as RCOE representatives testified at the Board’s June 18 meeting, since the fire occurred, vagrants have continued to break into the Property on numerous occasions. Thus, as a result of the fire, the Property has been rendered a “harbor for vagrants” and further “enable[s] persons to resort thereto for the purpose of committing unlawful or immoral acts,” thereby constituting a dangerous condition under section 302(12) of the Uniform Code.
The evidence presented to the Board therefore conclusively establishes that the Property c
onstitutes a “dangerous building” under the Uniform Code and is therefore exempt from the COA requirement pursuant to RMC section 20.25.015.
For this reason, although RCOE is confident that its application fully satisfies the principles and s
tandards of site development and design review necessary for obtaining a COA, the reality is that the resulting fire damage to the Property has relieved RCOE of the legal obligation to do so.
Accordingly, if the Board declines to issue the requested COA, RCOE requests that the Board direct the City’s Building Official to evaluate the Property and issue findings, consistent with the foregoing, that the Property satisfies the criteria under RMC section 20.25.015 and is therefore exempt from the COA requirement.
V. I
NVERSE CONDEMNATION CONSIDERATIONS
Based on the foregoing, RCOE has readily established its entitlement to proceed with the proposed Project as a matter of law. To the extent the Board determines otherwise as it continues to consider the Project, such a determination necessarily implicates constitutional concerns that could result in legal action against the Board and City.
Both the United States and California Constitutions guarantee real property owners “just compensation” when their land is taken for a public use. (Cal. Const., art. I, § 19; U.S. Const.,
City of Riverside Cultural Heritage Board
September 26, 2025
Larson LLP
larsonllp.com
5th Amend.) If the Board refuses to permit the demolition of the Property, doing so would constitute a “regulatory taking” giving rise to a claim for inverse condemnation. This cause of action lies for the taking of or damage to real property, including real property owned by a public agency. (Marin Mun. Water Dist. v. City of Mill Valley (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 1161, 1165 [a city must compensate a water district franchise in inverse condemnation for unintentional physical damage to water lines.].) It is well established that, “while property may be regulated to a certain extent, if regulation goes too far it will be recognized as a taking.” (Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon (1922) 260 U.S. 393, 415; see also, Prentiss v. City of South Pasadena (1993) 15 Cal.App.4th 85, 94 [“[M]andatory zoning and land use restrictions raise issues of governmental taking of property.”].)
Based on comments by the Board during its June 18 regular meeting, there are two categories of regulatory action by the Board that would constitute a regulatory taking, both of which are discussed below.
First, certain Board members, as well as various public commenters, suggested that RCOE could simply sell the Property as an alternative to demolition. Relatedly, the Board also referenced a letter from a community member offering to salvage certain components of the Property.
However, as RCOE explained at the June 18 meeting, RCOE has already met with the author of that letter, and the proposed salvage project would also require the Property to be sold and would further require splitting the adjacent parking lot. RCOE does not intend to voluntarily sell the Property at this time because doing so would negatively impact RCOE’s continued use of the neighboring administrative office building, which—together with the Property itself—is integral to RCOE’s current operations. Consequently, any requirement imposed by the Board that RCOE sell the Property would constitute a per se regulatory taking. “[R]egulatory action [is] generally deemed [a] per se taking[] for Fifth Amendment purposes . . . where [the] government requires an owner to suffer a permanent physical invasion of her property—however minor. (Dryden Oaks, LLC v. San Diego County Regional Airport Authority (2017) 16 Cal.App.5th 383, 394- 395.)
Thus, to the extent that the Board insists on the sale of the Property, this determination would constitute a per se regulatory taking, and RCOE would have an immediate claim for inverse condemnation.
Nevertheless, as RCOE has already made clear, it is more than willing to allow interested organizations or community members to salvage any portion of the Property to the extent that technical considerations permit. Indeed, RCOE has been actively working with the Old Riverside Foundation for this very purpose.
Second, in addition to the forced sale of the Property, any continued refusal by the Board to permit demolition would further constitute a regulatory taking. This would also include any requirement that RCOE restore the Property in lieu of demolition. (See Prentiss, supra, 15 Cal.App.4th at p. 94, 98 [“[A] properly drafted historical preservation ordinance . . . must carefully draw the line between ‘regulation’ and ‘taking” and “outright denial of the demolition permit might constitute inverse condemnation.”].)
City of Riverside Cultural Heritage Board
September 26, 2025
Larson LLP
larsonllp.com
Here, the Property in its current state is presently unusable in light of the extensive fire damage.
Moreover, the estimated cost of restoring the Property—$2.0 million—far exceeds the Property’s fair market value of $750,000, thereby rendering any proposed restoration economically infeasible. Furthermore, as RCOE’s architectural expert testified to the Board, restoring the Property or physically moving the Property to a different location both would be technically infeasible. Due to these realities, any insistence by the Board that RCOE incur the exorbitant cost of restoration or relocation would further constitute a regulatory taking by depriving RCOE of any economically beneficial use of the Property. (Dryden Oaks, supra, 16 Cal.App.5th at p. 394- 395 [regulatory takings include “regulations that completely deprive an owner of all economically beneficial us[e] of her property.”]; see also, Foundation for San Francisco's Architectural Heritage v. City and County of San Francisco (1980) 106 Cal.App.3d 893, 916- 917 [holding that owner was entitled to demolish of historic building where “the alternatives to demolition were fully considered and reported” and where “there was evidence that restoration was infeasible because of the seismic problems, and that the economics of restoration precluded any reasonable, economic use of the property by the owner.”].) RCOE has diligently pursued all available alternatives, including, at great expense, the commission of architectural surveys, structural damage assessments, and historic preservation studies. These efforts have made clear that demolition is the only technically and economically viable option remaining. To the extent that the Board ultimately disregards this well-supported conclusion and refuses to allow the demolition to proceed, RCOE hereby reserves all available rights and remedies, including bringing an immediate claim for inverse condemnation against the Board and the City.
VI. CO
NCLUSION
RCOE greatly respects the Board’s desire to protect the City’s designated Cultural Resources and fully appreciates the rigorous criteria that ordinarily must be satisfied before obtaining a COA. In turn, however, it is important to note that the Board must equally appreciate the unique and difficult circumstances that made the proposed Project necessary in the first place. The Project does not propose the run-of-the-mill alteration of a Cultural Resource, such as a home remodel or structural addition. Rather, the proposed Project entails the demolition of the subject Property because doing so is the only technically and economically viable option remaining.
RCOE was the victim of a criminal act that resulted in severe and irreparable damage to the Property such that restoration is simply no longer feasible.
It is therefore clear that demolition is necessary, and any further delay or additional conditions imposed by the Board will only require RCOE to expend additional resources and divert critical funds from the thousands of students that it serves throughout Riverside County.
For these reasons, RCOE respectfully requests that the Board take one of the following two actions:
City of Riverside Cultural Heritage Board
September 26, 2025
Larson LLP
larsonllp.com
• Determine that the Project satisfies the Principles and Standards of Site Development and Design findings under RMC section 20.25.050.A, approve Planning Case DP-2025-00269, and grant the requested COA. • Alternatively, because the Project satisfies the criteria for exemption from the COA requirement pursuant to RMC section 20.25.015, RCOE requests that the Board direct the City’s Building Official to evaluate the Property and issue findings that the Property satisfies the criteria under RMC section 20.25.015 and is therefore exempt from the COA requirement.
Additionally, in connection with either of the two aforementioned actions, RCOE further requests that the Board:
• Determine that the Project is exempt from CEQA, and file a Notice of Exemption pursuant to RMC section 20.15.020.B and California Code of Regulations, Title 14, section 15062.
• Facilitate and expedite the granting of the requested demolition permit.
Thank you for your attention to this matter, and please do not hesitate to contact this office should you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Hilary Potashner
EXHIBIT A