Restoration of Victorian House Wins Council OK

The Glendale City Council, despite opposition from preservationists, unanimously approved a controversial plan Tuesday to restore the Victorian Goode House as part of a senior citizens’ apartment development.

Members of the Glendale Historical Society and preservation specialists argued during a three-hour hearing before the council that plans by developer Joe Ayvazi of the Cedar Broadway Partnership will destroy the architectural integrity of the house at 119 N. Cedar St.

Ayvazi, a longtime Glendale developer and real estate broker, plans to restore the two-story house and convert it into office space. He also proposes to build a horseshoe-shaped, 40-unit apartment complex around the Victorian house, which is in the middle of the proposed three-lot development.

Only Alternative Floated

The proposal has been the only alternative offered to save the 101-year-old house, considered one of the most valuable historical landmarks in Glendale. The house is the last example of Queen Anne-Eastlake architecture on its original site in Glendale and is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. It was the home of E. D. Goode, a pioneer city founder.

City officials have been seeking alternatives for three years to preserve the privately owned structure, which is vacant, run-down and threatened with demolition.

Ayvazi offered to purchase the property and restore the house more than a year ago, but approval of his plans have been stalled because of lengthy municipal procedures.

Preservationists complain that the apartment development proposed by Ayvazi is too large and would distract from the Goode House. Walls of the two- and three-story development will be built within eight feet of the Victorian structure.

Preservationists Tuesday urged that the council and Ayvazi consider other, lower-density plans. Council members considered delaying a decision on the proposal for 30 days to allow the developer and his critics to discuss changes.

Satisfied With Changes

However, Ayvazi said, he has made enough changes already and wished to move ahead with the project or drop it altogether. He said any reduction in the density of the project would render it economically unfeasible.

Vonnie Rossman of the city’s Historic Preservation Commission, which recommended approval of the project, told the council on Tuesday that the deteriorated house may collapse if repairs are not started soon.

“The house is being held together by termites . . . A good wind will take it down,” Rossman said. “We feel the time is here for a decision.”

Preservationists said they want to see the house restored but fear that the apartment development for senior citizens around it may eliminate any chance for the Goode House to be listed on the national register. Jack H. Rubens, an attorney representing the historical society, said that without registered status, the house “will no longer have any historical significance.”

Council members disagreed. “Who’s going to know the difference, as long as it is preserved?” Councilman John F. Day asked.

Court Fight Threatened

The historical society earlier had threatened to carry its fight to the courts in an effort to block the apartment development. However, Marlene Roth, a consultant to the developer, said the threat of any lengthy court action would kill the preservation project. “The house probably wouldn’t last that long,” she said.

Following the vote on Tuesday, Councilman Jerold F. Milner chided members of the historical society for their belated opposition to the development. “Don’t wait until somebody comes along and makes a proposal and then be against it,” he said. “Be pro-active, not reactive.”