The Downey City Council called to review the decision on Tuesday to renovate the Rives Mansion after many residents protested the proposed design involving the introduction of a “juice bar” obstructing the view of the mansion. The City Council reviewed the decision 7 weeks after Downey’s Planning Commission voted to proceed with plans to develop and restore the Rives Mansion.
On September 7, The Downey Planning Commission hosted a full hall of passionate residents who argued for and against the proposed design of the Rives Mansion. Amongst the crowd were the Downey Historical Society and The Downey Conservancy, who both dedicate time to help preserve the history of Downey.
Collectively, the public agreed that the Rives Mansion was no longer suited for solely residential zoning. A Downey resident mentioned during public comments that it would be great if someone wanted to move in and “live happily ever after,” but this is not the plan, according to the mansion’s current owners. mansion owners Arturo Concha and Erika De La Teja envisioned The mansion to be converted into an event center to host weddings and anniversaries. The proposal was denied after strong arguments were made against the plans, most notably the issue of parking restrictions and noise that would directly affect neighboring residents.
This most recent proposal would convert the mansion into 9 office spaces. Concerns were made involving parking, historic preservation, landscape, and the proposed juice bar.
After the plan was reviewed on September 7, the commission voted in favor of proceeding with the plans, contingent that all city and historical conditions are met.
During Tuesday’s City Council meeting, Concha shared, “We came out of Planning Commission thinking we won with 101 conditions. With 101 conditions we won? It was horrific for us.”
Although for historical preservation projects similar to this one, lists of required conditions are not uncommon and can reach larger numbers, It was noted that 101 is above the norm.
Some of the conditions involving the juice bar include no alcohol sales, and limited operating hours to respect noise concerns.
Last night’s meeting held more public support than the September 7 meeting by the Planning Commission. Some of the arguments presented last night against the project included the appearance of the juice bar, traffic concerns and safety. Safety was brought up regarding the juice bar being in close proximity to the Paramount Blvd and 3rd St. intersection by Councilman Sean Ashton. It was noted that the plans were reviewed by the city’s Public Works Division, traffic engineer and traffic consultants, and concerns were not raised.
Some of the supporting arguments included the restoration of the mansion and it no longer being a vacant magnet to squatters and opportunists looking to break in.
Three votes were needed to reverse or revise the decision made by the Planning Commission. Mayor Rick Rodriguez was absent on medical leave and Councilman Alex Saab abstained from the discussion due to his law office’s location potentially being a conflict of interest. Mayor pro tem Blanca Pacheco, Councilman Sean Ashton and Councilwoman Claudia Frometa did not reach a unanimous decision to reverse or revise the decision.
Councilman Sean Ashton voted against the juice bar, mentioning, “I do feel there is an issue with having that in that site, I know putting it in the back is not an option either, I just know that having it up front definitely is not anything I can support.”
The location of the new building was decided based on existing utility restrictions on the site.
Councilwoman Frometa voted to uphold the Planning Commission’s decision. Formeta defended her stance after several public commenters suggested that the city buy back the property and restore the property. “From a council perspective, this is not always an easy decision. We are here to listen and support what our residents are telling us, at the same time we want to have a global perspective. We want to make decisions that are reasonable.” Frometa added, “Collectively, we have watched this property go from decay to despair to being an eyesore in this community. We all want to preserve the historical presence. In reviewing every single item that was taken to the planning commission and to this public hearing, I have to tell you, it’s the not best solution but it is the best case scenario. We are not in a position to buy this property and restore it. I was elected and entrusted to make sound financial decision on behalf of our community and to protect it.”
Frometa noted the $3.5 million cost to restore the mansion and concluded that “we either let it go and it will continue to fall in disrepair and at some time it will be bulldozed, or we are here to decide [whether or not] we affirm the Planning Commission’s decision.”
Mayor Pro Tem Pacheco also voted in support of the Planning Commission’s decision after noting the long process taken by the Planning Commission to place the conditions to preserve the historical value of the project.