Phoenix Wright House's plans hinge on landmark status

• The David and Gladys Wright House could become a Phoenix landmark
• Plans for tours and weddings depend on designation of 6.1 acres
• Neighbors say the plans go beyond preservation

Permission to turn a Phoenix home into a destination for tours, weddings and concerts in celebration of Frank Lloyd Wright could come down to what is considered "historically significant."

City historic-preservation staffers have little doubt that the 1952 David and Gladys Wright House — designed by Frank Lloyd Wright for his son and daughter-in-law — meets the criteria to become a landmark. The designation would list the home among some of Phoenix’s most significant structures, including the Orpheum Theatre and Tovrea Castle.

But the landmark application recently filed by the owner of the home in the Arcadia neighborhood goes beyond the house itself. Zach Rawling and his team also want the same designation for the surrounding land, for a total of 6.1 acres.

Rawling’s application is the first attempt to protect the house with the designation since the city filed its own application in 2012, as an emergency measure to prevent demolition by a developer.

The Phoenix application has for years been pending to give Rawling's team time to develop a plan. He is now requesting the city withdraw its request.

The recent filing also is likely to be an early battle between Rawling and neighbors who object to his vision to turn the site into a destination. City approval of a special permit allowing tours and other commercial uses requires a landmark designation for the property.

Phoenix preservation staff now will start working on a report to consider the historic merits of the house, especially the proposed boundaries, said Kevin Weight, a planner in the city's Historic Preservation Office. The staff will make recommendations that must be considered by several city bodies before reaching the City Council.

“Is there a historical basis for that?” Weight said. “We’re still evaluating.”

Arcadia's 'real feel'

Rawling’s plans to turn the Wright House into an attraction include more than the home itself. He purchased the Wright House in 2012 as a developer threatened to tear it down, and soon spent millions of dollars buying surrounding properties.

Now, the lots are consolidated into a site that includes 6.1 acres. The land includes a part of the original Wright property previously subdivided and sold, as well as more than 2 acres to the north never owned by the Wright family.

Crews demolished newer homes built on the land to create open space and there are plans to plant citrus trees that once were prolific in the area, Rawling said.

The larger site connects to a church lot used for parking. Preliminary plans include tours of the home as well as the construction of an underground education center and outside event space.

Rawling argues that designating the 6.1 acres of land as a landmark will restore Frank Lloyd Wright's vision for the home, built on a 5-acre parcel adjacent to 5 acres of citrus trees also owned by his son, David.

The house was designed as part of a 10-acre rural estate with unhindered mountain views, according to the application. And the acres not owned by Wright should be included in the boundary to bring back "the integrity of the location and setting underpinning the David Wright House architectural design," it states.

Replanting citrus trees will shield the house from development that encroaches on the original site, said Sarah Levi, David Wright’s great-granddaughter and the house’s first scholar in residence. Plans submitted to the city include the planting of 300 trees.

A sense of openness will showcase Arcadia's “real feel,” before people began building larger homes closer to their neighbors, Levi said.

“It’s a gift back to Arcadia, really,” she said.

Neighborhood concerns

But neighbors, many of whom support saving the house but oppose the additional projects, say the site proposal goes far beyond preservation.

Some dispute the historic significance of the land never owned by Wright, or the integrity of a site that's undergone changes since the house was built.

Others point to a 2012 city report recommending designation of a smaller parcel, roughly 2.5 acres,  to preserve the "most significant work within the city of Phoenix by the most significant architect in American history." The parcel was Rawling's original purchase while surrounding land was under different owners.

Including extra land in the designation is "attempting to lay the ground work for more intense commercial uses," Craig Steblay, president of the Arcadia Camelback Mountain Neighborhood Association, said in an e-mail.

The association supports preserving the home within the smaller boundaries but is already concerned about Rawling’s use of the site, Steblay said.

One grass-roots group opposed to the plans, the Arcadia Community Association, will hold a meeting Tuesday, Sept. 29, to organize neighbors as plans move through the city process. The association has distributed hundreds of the "Wright House; Wrong Location" yard signs seen near the property, said Sue Bloom, an association adviser.

Some residents still don't know the extent of Rawling's plans, Bloom said, and those opposed need a coordinated effort.

"The neighborhood needs to be represented," she said.

What comes next

Now starts the city process to consider the application.

"Landmark" designation requires a higher threshold of significance than the city’s other historic designations. The listing is reserved for the “best of the best,” Weight said.

Criteria include proving the house is significant under one of several categories, such as representing the work of a master, or association with a significant person. Age and integrity are other considerations. Boundaries must meet their own requirements, such as coinciding with historic boundaries.

In this case, Frank Lloyd Wright is the main motivator for designation, Weight said.

“That’s really what we’ve been focusing on with this house,” he said.

If the Wright House property is designated as a landmark, demolition or new construction would require city preservation approval. Staffers would consider the impact on the site's significance when allowing changes, Weight said.

Historic-preservation staff could recommend approving the application, or could suggest modifications. The Historic Preservation Commission will take the first vote before it moves through several other city bodies.

Rawling's team anticipates filing the special-permit application later this year. The City Council will have the final vote on both requests.