Appendix E Cultural Resources

Appendix E.1 Historical Resource Technical Report

Art Center College of Design Master Plan Pasadena, California

Historical Resource Technical Report

Prepared by:

November 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Purpose and Qualifications ...... 1 1.2 Methodology ...... 2 2. REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ...... 3 2.1 National Register of Historic Places ...... 3 2.2 California Register of Historical Resources ...... 4 2.3 Pasadena Historic Preservation Ordinance ...... 6 3. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ...... 7 3.1 Hillside Campus ...... 7 3.2 South Campus ...... 12 4. PROJECT IMPACTS ...... 16 4.1 Project Description ...... 16 4.2 Determining the Significance of Impacts on Historical Resources ...... 16 4.3 Analysis of Project Impacts ...... 17 5. CONCLUSION ...... 19 6. SOURCES ...... 20

APPENDIX A – Résumés

APPENDIX B – Design & Historic Preservation Comments from City of Pasadena

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

GPA Consulting (GPA) was retained to complete this report as part of the environmental review for the proposed ArtCenter College of Design (ArtCenter) Master Plan (Master Plan, sometimes referred to as "the project") in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). ArtCenter has submitted an application for a new 15-year Master Plan that encompasses development on its Hillside Campus and South Campus. Both campuses are located in the City of Pasadena. GPA conducted a field inspection of each campus to identify known or potential historical resources, and then analyzed the impacts of the Master Plan on the identified historical resources.

The Hillside Campus comprises two permanent buildings, one modular building, one structure, and two surface parking lots in a wooded, hillside setting. The main building, commonly called the Ellwood Building, was designated a City of Pasadena Historic Monument in 2005. It is considered a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. None of the other buildings or structures on the Hillside Campus are historical resources.

The South Campus comprises four buildings and four surface parking lots in an urban setting. The Master Plan would affect buildings within the campus boundaries. However, none of the buildings on the South Campus is a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA.

The City of Pasadena has reviewed the Master Plan and determined the work described therein does not propose any major exterior or interior modifications to the identified historical resource, namely the Ellwood Building, that require review by the City’s Planning & Community Development Department (see Attachment B - Design & Historic Preservation Comments from City of Pasadena).

GPA also analyzed the potential for direct or indirect impacts on the historical resource as a result of work proposed in the Master Plan in compliance with CEQA. GPA concluded that the Master Plan would have a less than significant impact on the historical resource. The project would not affect the physical integrity of the Ellwood Building, the historical resource. It would not be demolished, altered, or relocated as a result of the project. The improvements to the infrastructure and changes to other buildings on the Hillside Campus would not diminish the setting of the Ellwood Building. The ability of the historical resource to convey its significance would not be materially impaired by the project. As the project would have a less than significant impact, no mitigation is required or recommended for historical resources.

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose and Qualifications

The purpose of this report is to determine whether or not a proposed Master Plan (Master Plan) for the ArtCenter College of Design (ArtCenter) would impact historical resources. ArtCenter was established in Los Angeles in 1930 and moved to its current Hillside Campus located at 1700 Lida Street in the City of Pasadena in 1976. In 2004, ArtCenter established a second campus, referred to as the South Campus, at 950 S. Raymond Avenue. As academic programs offered at the South Campus, which is located approximately five miles to the south of the Hillside Campus, have expanded and operations shifted to the South Campus over time, the Hillside Campus and the South Campus have become increasingly connected. Despite the distance between the two campuses, the campuses are integrated functionally and programmatically.

ArtCenter has submitted an application for a new 15-year Master Plan that encompasses development on, and comprehensively identifies a vision for, both the Hillside Campus and the South Campus. ArtCenter would focus growth on its South Campus, while providing for infrastructure improvements and building renovations on its Hillside Campus.1 The Hillside Campus comprises two permanent buildings, one modular building, one structure, and two surface parking lots in a wooded, hillside setting. The main building was designed by noted Modern architect Craig Ellwood and is commonly called the Ellwood Building. On the Hillside Campus, work associated with the Master Plan would be limited to removing a temporary modular building, altering a structure completed in 2001, renovation and expansion of a maintenance building, improving circulation, and enhancing the main vehicular entrance. No major exterior or interior modifications to the Ellwood Building are proposed.

The South Campus comprises four buildings and four surface parking lots in an urban setting. None of the buildings on the campus is currently designated as a landmark under national, state, or local programs. None of the buildings has been determined eligible for listing at the national, state, or local level through previous historic resource surveys. On the South Campus, work associated with the Master Plan would involve renovating and expanding existing buildings, constructing six2 new buildings primarily dedicated to student housing, and improving circulation and connections. GPA Consulting (GPA) was retained to identify known and potential historical resources on the Master Plan project site, and to analyze impacts on the identified historical resources in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Teresa Grimes, Principal Architectural Historian at GPA, and Allison M. Lyons, Associate Architectural Historian, were responsible for the preparation of this report. They both fulfill the qualifications for historic preservation professionals outlined in Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 61. Their résumés are attached in Appendix A.

1 Eyestone Environmental, Initial Study for the ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan (Pasadena, CA: 2016). 2 This number includes the following six buildings: 888 S. Raymond Avenue – Four separate buildings 966 S. Raymond Avenue – One building 1101 S. Arroyo Parkway – One building

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Page 1

1.2 Methodology

In preparing this report, GPA performed the following tasks:

1. Established the study area for the report. The study area was identified as the Master Plan project site. Please refer to Figures 1 and 2 below for maps of the study area.

2. Researched the Hillside Campus and South Campus to determine whether or not buildings on the project site are currently listed as landmarks under national, state, or local programs and whether or not buildings on the campuses have been previously identified or evaluated as historical resources. This involved a search of the California Historical Resources Inventory System (CHRIS) and the City of Pasadena’s California Historical Resources Inventory Database. CHRIS is a database maintained by the State Office of Historic Preservation that includes properties listed and determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, listed and determined eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, California Registered Historical Landmarks, Points of Historical Interest, as well as properties that have been evaluated in historic resource surveys and other planning activities. With the exception of the Ellwood Building, designated a City of Pasadena Historic Monument in 2005, these searches revealed no previously recorded or identified historical resources on the project site.

3. Conducted a field inspection of both campuses site to ascertain the general condition and physical integrity of the buildings and structures. Digital photographs were taken during this field inspection, which was limited to the exterior of the buildings. Photographs of the buildings are located in Section 3: Environmental Setting. It was concluded during the field inspection that none of the buildings or structures on the project site appeared to have the potential to qualify as historical resources due to lack of age, apparent historical or architectural significance, or physical integrity.

4. Researched the project site and surrounding area at local libraries and archives to establish the general history and context, including a review of the relevant databases, newspapers, directories, books, and newspaper articles.

5. Reviewed the Master Plan and analyzed potential project impacts on identified historical resources.

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Page 2

2. REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

Historical resources are considered part of the environment and a project that may cause a substantial adverse effect on the significance of a historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment. The definition of "historical resources" is contained in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. Generally, a lead agency must consider a property a historical resource under CEQA if it is eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register). The California Register is modeled after the National Register of Historic Places (National Register). Furthermore, a property is presumed to be historically significant if it is listed in a local register of historic resources or has been identified as historically significant in a historic resource survey (provided certain criteria and requirements are satisfied) unless a preponderance of evidence demonstrates that the property is not historically or culturally significant.3 The National Register, California Register, and local designation programs are discussed below.

2.1 National Register of Historic Places

The National Register is "an authoritative guide to be used by federal, state, and local governments, private groups, and citizens to identify the nation's cultural resources and to indicate what properties should be considered for protection from destruction or impairment."4

Criteria

To be eligible for listing in the National Register, a property must be at least 50 years of age (unless the property is of “exceptional importance”) and possess significance in American history and culture, architecture, or archaeology. A property of potential significance must meet one or more of the following four established criteria: 5

A. Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or

B. Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or

C. Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or

D. Yield, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

Physical Integrity

According to National Register Bulletin #15, “to be eligible for listing in the National Register, a property must not only be shown to be significant under National Register criteria, but it also must have integrity.” Integrity is defined in National Register Bulletin #15 as "the ability of a

3 Public Resources Code Section 5024.1 and 14 California Code of Regulations Sections 4850 & 15064.5(a)(2). 4 Title 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 60.2. 5 Title 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 60.4.

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Page 3

property to convey its significance.”6 Within the concept of integrity, the National Register recognizes the following seven aspects or qualities that in various combinations define integrity: feeling, association, workmanship, location, design, setting, and materials.

Context

To be eligible for listing in the National Register, a property must also be significant within a historic context. National Register Bulletin #15 states that the significance of a historic property can be judged only when it is evaluated within its historic context. Historic contexts are “those patterns, themes, or trends in history by which a specific...property or site is understood and its meaning...is made clear.”7 A property must represent an important aspect of the area’s history or prehistory and possess the requisite integrity to qualify for the National Register.

2.2 California Register of Historical Resources

In 1992, Governor Wilson signed Assembly Bill 2881 into law establishing the California Register. The California Register is an authoritative guide used by state and local agencies, private groups, and citizens to identify historical resources and to indicate what properties are to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from substantial adverse impacts.8

The California Register consists of properties that are listed automatically as well as those that must be nominated through an application and public hearing process. The California Register automatically includes the following:

 California properties listed in the National Register and those formally Determined Eligible for the National Register;

 State Historical Landmarks from No. 0770 onward; and

 Those California Points of Historical Interest that have been evaluated by the State Office of Historic Preservation (SOHP) and have been recommended to the State Historical Resources Commission for inclusion on the California Register.9

For those properties not automatically listed, the criteria for eligibility of listing in the California Register are based upon National Register criteria, but are identified as 1-4 instead of A-D. To be eligible for listing in the California Register, a property generally must be at least 50 years of age and must possess significance at the local, state, or national level, under one or more of the following four criteria:

1. It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States; or

2. It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history; or

6 National Register Bulletin #15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (Washington D.C.: National Park Service, 2002), 44-45. 7 National Register Bulletin #15, 7. 8 Public Resources Code Section 5024.1 (a). 9 Public Resources Code Section 5024.1 (d).

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Page 4

3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values; or

4. It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important in the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation.

Properties eligible for listing in the California Register may include buildings, sites, structures, objects, and historic districts. A property less than 50 years of age may be eligible if it can be demonstrated that sufficient time has passed to understand its historical importance. While the enabling legislation for the California Register is less rigorous with regard to the issue of integrity, there is the expectation that properties reflect their appearance during their period of significance.10

The California Register may also include properties identified during historical resource surveys. However, the survey must meet all of the following criteria:11

1. The survey has been or will be included in the California Historical Resources Inventory;

2. The survey and the survey documentation were prepared in accordance with office [SOHP] procedures and requirements;

3. The resource is evaluated and determined by the office [SOHP] to have a significance rating of Category 1 to 5 on a DPR Form 523; and

4. If the survey is five or more years old at the time of its nomination for inclusion in the California Register, the survey is updated to identify historical resources that have become eligible or ineligible due to changed circumstances or further documentation and those that have been demolished or altered in a manner that substantially diminishes the significance of the resource.

SOHP Survey Methodology

The evaluation instructions and classification system prescribed by the SOHP in its Instructions for Recording Historical Resources provide a three-digit evaluation code for use in classifying potential historical resources. In 2003, the codes were revised to address the California Register. The first digit indicates the general category of evaluation. The second digit is a letter code to indicate whether the resource is separately eligible (S), eligible as part of a district (D), or both (B). The third digit is a number, which is coded to describe some of the circumstances or conditions of the evaluation. The general evaluation categories are as follows:

1. Listed in the National Register or the California Register.

2. Determined eligible for listing in the National Register or the California Register.

3. Appears eligible for listing in the National Register or the California Register through survey evaluation.

4. Appears eligible for listing in the National Register or the California Register through other evaluation.

10 Public Resources Code Section 4852. 11 Public Resources Code Section 5024.1.

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Page 5

5. Recognized as historically significant by local government.

6. Not eligible for listing or designation as specified.

7. Not evaluated or needs re-evaluation.

2.3 Pasadena Historic Preservation Ordinance

The City of Pasadena’s Historic Preservation Ordinance is codified in Chapter 17.62 of the Pasadena Zoning Code. It includes criteria for Landmarks, Historic Monuments, Historic Signs, Landmark Trees, and Landmark Districts. The criteria for designation of Historic Monuments are outlined in Section 17.62.040 as follows:

1. It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of the history of the region, state or nation.

2. It is associated with the lives of persons who are significant in the history of the region, state or nation.

3. It is exceptional in the embodiment of the distinctive characteristics of a historic resource property type, period, architectural style or method of construction, or that is an exceptional representation of the work of an architect, designer, engineer, or builder whose work is significant to the region, state or nation, or that possesses high artistic values that are of regional, state-wide or national significance.

4. It has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history of the region, state or nation.

5. A historic monument designation may include significant public or semi-public interior spaces and features.

In addition to these criteria, the City’s ordinance states that the seven aspects of integrity shall be applied when determining Historic Monument eligibility (see Physical Integrity under Section 2.1, above).

Demolition of designated or eligible historic resources must be reviewed by the City as part of an environmental study or as an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness (permit) for demolition.

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Page 6

3. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

ArtCenter has two campuses, commonly refered to as the Hillside Campus and the South Campus. The historical development and physical features of each campus are summarized below.

3.1 Hillside Campus

Figure 1: Hillside Campus, buildings and structures outlined in white (GPA Consulting, 2016)

History and Description of the Hillside Campus

The Hillside campus was established in 1976 at 1700 Lida Street in the Linda Vista neighborhood of northwest Pasadena. The 175-acre hillside site spans a man-made ravine and contains one permanent main building (Ellwood Building); one utility and maintenance building (South Building); one structure (Sinclaire Pavilion); one modular building (Annex Building); and two large surface parking lots (North Parking Lot and South Parking Lot). Landscape features include graded lawns and smaller parking areas to the east and west of the Ellwood Building.

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Page 7

Ellwood Building

Photograph 1: Ellwood Building, northeast elevation across ravine (GPA Consulting, 2016)

The Ellwood Building was the first building constructed on the campus. Completed in 1976, the two-story International Style building was designed by prominent designer Craig Ellwood. The building has a rectangular plan and flat roof. It spans a manmade ravine between two hills in the manner of a truss bridge. All materials on the exterior of the building are a uniform black. The east and west elevations of the building are identical with walls of divided tinted square glass panels with wide steel beams at the top and bottom. Walls on the 192-foot bridge portion of the building are recessed to form a walkway, the outside edge of which has massive alternating vertical/diagonal trusses. A simple steel railing spans the walkway just inside the truss framework. The building has multiple entrances at the narrow ends of the north and south elevations, at the center of the underside, ravine-facing elevations, and along western and eastern elevations.

A 25,000-square-foot addition was constructed at the south elevation in 1989-1990 (see Figure 1). Jim Tyler, a former associate in Ellwood’s firm, designed the addition. The addition is the same width as the original building and is contiguous with the original building, connected by an inset hyphen. The addition is differentiated by a fenestration pattern of rectangular, instead of square, glass panels. Rectangular-plan building presents a dichotomy with its natural environment yet is equally compatible with it.

Ellwood was an architectural designer with a reputation for Modern buildings that were completed within tight budgets. This reputation impressed the college. The bridge form happened to be the most economical solution to the school’s hilly, canyon site; leveling the land would have would have required an expensive foundation. Despite Ellwood’s reputation for efficiency, inflation in the early 1970s caused the price of steel to rise. Cost-cutting measures were taken with the air conditioning units and roof system, which failed and had to be replaced five years after the building’s completion in 1976. The ArtCenter bridge building would be one of the final commissions of Craig Ellwood Associates; the firm closed in 1977 when Ellwood moved to Italy to become a painter.12

12 Los Angeles Conservancy, “Art Center College of Design,” Curating the City: Modern Architecture in L.A. (2013), Accessed November 02, 2016. https://www.laconservancy.org/locations/art-center-college-design.

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Page 8

Sinclaire Pavilion

Photograph 2: Sinclaire Pavilion, west elevation (GPA Consulting, 2016)

The Sinclaire Pavilion is an open structure constructed of concrete and completed in 2001. The structure has an asymmetrical butterfly roof supported by steel cross bracing and concrete pylons. Walls are glass and corrugated metal panels. The Sinclaire Pavilion is sited on a promontory overlooking the eastern slope of the campus.

Annex Building

. Photograph 3: Annex Building, northwest elevation (GPA Consulting, 2016)

The Annex Building is a two-story modular building set on a concrete foundation. The building has been located in the northeastern corner of the North Parking Lot since 2002.

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Page 9

South Building

Photograph 4: South Building, view facing west (GPA Consulting, 2016)

The South Building is a one-story, rectangular building with concrete masonry unit cladding. The building is utilitarian in function and style. It was constructed between 1978 and 1979.

North Parking Lot

Photograph 5: North Parking Lot, view facing north (GPA Consulting, 2016)

The North Parking Lot is located near the main entrance to the Hillside Campus, southeast of the entrance at 1700 Lida Street. It is an asphalt surface parking lot.

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Page 10

South Parking Lot

Photograph 6: South Parking Lot, view facing southwest (GPA Consulting, 2016)

The South Parking Lot is located on a raised elevation, south of the Ellwood Building addition. It is an asphalt surface parking lot.

Historical Resources on the Hillside Campus

In 2005, the Ellwood Building was designated a Pasadena Historic Monument under City of Pasadena Criterion C because it is representative of an important architectural style and is a major work of a master architect (Craig Ellwood).13 The nomination cites numerous awards the building received after it was initially constructed in 1976 and a special 25-year award by the Los Angeles chapter of the American Institute of Architects (AIA) in 2001. Although it is compatible with the original design, the addition, designed by Jim Tyler, was not included in the designation application because it was constructed in 1989.14

No other buildings or structures on the Hillside Campus have been designated or determined eligible as historical resources. The State Office of Historic Preservation recommends the evaluation of properties over 45 years of age as potential historical resources. None of the buildings or structures on the Hillside Campus are old enough to warrant evaluation and do not appear to have the potential to be of exceptional significance.

13 Ellwood was not a licensed architect, but is often cited as one. Ellwood took night courses in structural engineering at UCLA but never earned a formal degree. 14 P.M.C. §17.62.40 A.

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Page 11

3.2 South Campus

History and Description of the South Campus

Figure 2: South Campus, five parcels comprising the campus are outlined in black (GPA Consulting, 2016)

In 2004, ArtCenter established a second campus, referred to as the South Campus, at 950 S. Raymond Avenue. The campus is located at the southern end of the City of Pasadena at the terminus of the Arroyo Seco Parkway and Glenarm Street. The urban area contains a mix of commercial and industrial buildings. The Metro light rail Gold Line runs parallel to and between S. Raymond Avenue and S. Arroyo Parkway, through the South Campus. Between 2004 and 2015, the campus grew to include five parcels, on which there are two additional buildings (870 Building and 1111 Building) and one building used for parking and shop space (888 Building) (see Figure 2 above).

870 S. Raymond Avenue Building

Photograph 7: 870 S. Raymond Avenue, view facing northeast (GPA Consulting, 2016)

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Page 12

870 S. Raymond Avenue is a two story, Modern building with boxy massing, a raised parapet, and flat roof constructed in 1979. The building has a double wall of cladding, hovering around the core. Originally used as a post office sorting facility, the concrete building was altered in 2014 when ArtCenter converted it to classrooms, studio spaces, exhibition space, and a sculpture yard.

888 S. Raymond Avenue Building

Photograph 8: 888 S. Raymond Avenue building, view facing southeast (GPA Consulting, 2016)

888 S. Raymond Avenue is a board-formed concrete, single-story building with a rooftop parking deck. A portion of the first floor of the building is utilized as “shop space” for students to work on projects that require spraying paints or adhesive materials. The building has a wide curved ramp on its northwestern side leading up to the upper parking deck. The building was originally constructed as loading dock structure for the Pasadena Refuse Disposal Department in 1951.15

15 “888 South Raymond Avenue,” State of California Department of Parks and Recreation Primary Record, 1996.

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Page 13

950 S. Raymond Avenue Building

Photograph 9: 950 S. Raymond Building, view facing northeast (GPA Consulting, 2016)

950 S. Raymond Avenue is a three-story concrete building originally constructed in 1944 as an enclosure for the Southern California Cooperative Wind Tunnel. The tunnel was removed in 1955.16 The building was substantially altered as part of a comprehensive rehabilitation in 2004 to become the location of ArtCenter’s public programs, graduate art, and graduate media design practices programs. Alterations to the building included: reconfiguration of all entrances; additional exterior circulation staircases; rooftop additions; replacement of all windows and doors; and the addition of decorative features to multiple elevations. 1111 S. Arroyo Parkway Building

Photograph 10: 1111 S. Arroyo Parkway with parking lot in foreground, view facing northeast (GPA Consulting, 2016)

16 “950 South Raymond Avenue,” State of California Department of Parks and Recreation Primary Record, 1996.

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Page 14

The six-story glass office building at 1111 S. Arroyo Parkway was originally constructed in 1983. The first floor of the rectangular building is slightly inset. Above the first floor, the building is clad with glass. The corners of the building feature rounded windows. At the roofline is a flush black stucco cornice. The building is separated from the rest of the South Campus by the Gold Line railroad tracks. An underground garage entrance is located at the west side of the parcel. The building became part of ArtCenter in 2015 and is used for classrooms, administrative offices, and a café. Surface Parking Lots

There are four surface parking lots on the South Campus, three of which are located along the S. Raymond Avenue side of the campus with curb cut entries off S. Raymond Avenue (see Figure 2) and one of which is located on the north side of the 1111 South Arroyo Parkway building and accessible via a curb cut off South Arroyo Parkway.

Historical Resources on the South Campus

None of the buildings on the South Campus have been previously identified or evaluated as eligible for designation as historical resources. The buildings located at 950 S. Raymond Avenue and 888 S. Raymond Avenue are more than 45 years old, and were identified but not evaluated in an undated historic resource survey entered into the CHRIS database. However, information from the undated historic resource survey was not entered into the City of Pasadena’s California Historical Resources Inventory Database.

950 S. Raymond Avenue was built in 1944. In 1996, the South Fair Oaks Specific Plan Inventory assigned the building a status of 6Z, Found ineligible for NR, CR or Local designation through survey evaluation. In an undated historic resource survey, the building was assigned the status code 7R, Identified in Reconnaissance Level Survey: Not evaluated. The building was substantially altered in 2004. Due to substantial alterations, the building does not appear to retain sufficient integrity to be eligible as a historical resource, regardless of any significance it may or may not possess. All but the massing and exterior wall material of the building was altered, diminishing any possible integrity of design, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association with a historic period. While the building was used as a supersonic wind tunnel, the essential physical features that contributed to this historic use have been removed and the portions that remain are unable to convey an association with this function. Therefore, the 950 S. Raymond Avenue building does not appear to be eligible as a historical resource.

888 S. Raymond Avenue was originally constructed in 1951 as a loading dock structure for the Pasadena Refuse Disposal Department. 888 S. Raymond Avenue is currently used as a parking deck and building for art production. In 1996, the South Fair Oaks Specific Plan Inventory assigned the building a status of 6Z, Found ineligible for NR, CR or Local designation through survey evaluation. In an undated historic resource survey, 888 S. Raymond Avenue was assigned a status code of 7R, Identified in Reconnaissance Level Survey: Not evaluated. According to historic aerial maps, the 888 S. Raymond building appears to have been associated with an industrial facility to the north.17 This facility was demolished and replaced with a post office sorting center in 1979, diminishing any possible integrity of feeling or association with a historic industrial complex. The building does not appear to be architecturally significant. The building does not appear to be eligible as a historical resource. Therefore, the 888 S. Raymond Avenue building does not appear to be eligible as a historical resource.

17 “888 S. Raymond Avenue, Pasadena, CA,” Historic Aerials (1952), Accessed November 02, 2016. http://www.historicaerials.com/.

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Page 15

Therefore, there are no designated or eligible historical resources on the South Campus portion of the project site.

4. PROJECT IMPACTS

4.1 Project Description

Hillside Campus

Phase I improvements within the Hillside Campus include removal of the Annex Building, enclosure of the existing open-air Sinclair Pavilion, installation of photovoltaic canopies on the North and South Parking Lots, and modifications to the parking and circulation plan. No changes, alterations, or repair is planned for the Ellwood Building. This work will take place between 2017 and 2021.

Phase II improvements within the Hillside Campus include a renovation and expansion of the South Building. Storage in the Ellwood Building would be relocated to the South Building and the vacated interior spaces would be available for academic and administrative uses. No exterior alternations or major interior alterations are proposed as part of the conversion of space from storage use to academic and administrative uses in the Ellwood building. This work will take place between 2022 and 2032.

South Campus

Phase I improvements within the South Campus include the construction of two new buildings that would be primarily dedicated to student housing. One building would be located on the current site of the southernmost parking lot (988 S. Raymond Avenue parcel). A second new building, 1101 S. Arroyo Parkway, would be located on the current site of the parking lot to the north of 1111 S. Arroyo Parkway. The new 1101 S. Arroyo Parkway building would be located on the same parcel as the 1111 S. Arroyo Parkway building. The Phase I improvements also include interior renovations to the 1111 S. Arroyo building. Phase I would also include the addition of pedestrian campus connections between the 1111 S. Arroyo building and the two proposed student housing buildings. Interior renovations and the addition of exhibition space are also planned for the existing building located at 950 S. Raymond Avenue (referred to as the 950 S. Raymond Building). This work will take place between 2017 and 2021.

Phase II would include construction of four new buildings over a common podium at 888 S. Raymond, on the site of the current location of the 888 S. Raymond building at the same address. In addition, Phase II includes the creation of a North Quad and a northerly extension of a bicycle path to link all buildings along S. Raymond Avenue. This work will take place between 2022 and 2032.

4.2 Determining the Significance of Impacts on Historical Resources

The State CEQA Guidelines set the standard for determining the significance of impacts to historical resources in Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15064.5(b), which states:

A project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment.

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Page 16

Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15064.5(b)(1) further clarifies “substantial adverse change” as follows:

Substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource means physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of an historical resource would be materially impaired.

Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15064.5(b)(2) in turn explains that the significance of a historical resource is “materially impaired” when a project demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of an historic resource that convey its historic significance and that justify its inclusion in or eligibility for the California Register, local register, or its identification in a historic resource survey.

As such, the test for determining whether or not a proposed project will have a significant impact on an identified historical resource is whether or not it will materially impair the physical integrity of the historical resource such that it would no longer be eligible for listing in the National or California Registers or other landmark programs such as the list of Pasadena Landmarks and Historic Monuments.

Projects that may affect historical resources are considered to be mitigated to a level of less than significant if they are consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (Standards).18 Projects with no other potential impacts qualify for a Class 31 exemption under CEQA if they meet the Standards.19 The Standards were issued by the National Park Service, but are also used by the City of Pasadena in the review of alterations to Landmarks and Historic Monuments. The Standards are accompanied by Guidelines for four types of treatments for historical resources: Preservation, Rehabilitation, Restoration, and Reconstruction. The purpose of the Standards is to ensure that a property will retain physical integrity or the ability to convey its significance.

4.3 Analysis of Project Impacts

The Master Plan has the potential to impact only one historical resource: the Ellwood Building on the Hillside Campus. The Master Plan does not propose any major exterior or interior modifications to the Ellwood Building. Therefore, an analysis of the Master Plan for conformance with the Standards is not required. Furthermore, the City of Pasadena has reviewed the Master Plan and determined that the proposed work would not require a Certificate of Appropriateness.20 The Master Plan proposes the introduction of new visual elements to Hillside Campus parking lots, photovoltaic cells, which have the potential to impact the integrity of the historical resource by altering its setting.

On the South Campus, work associated with the Master Plan would involve renovating and expanding existing buildings, constructing six new buildings primarily dedicated to student housing, and improving circulation and connections. The work of the Master Plan would affect buildings within the campus boundaries. Work is not planned beyond the parcels comprising the campus. Because there are no designated or eligible historical resources on the South Campus,

18 14 CCR Section 15126.4(b). 19 14 CCR Section 155331. 20 City of Pasadena, Design & Historic Preservation Comments Case Number: PPR2014-00016 (Pasadena, CA: 2016).

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Page 17

the work of the Master Plan does not have the potential to impact historical resources. The Master Plan does not have potential to affect historical resources beyond the parcels comprising the campus, because of the nature of the proposed work.

There are no designated or eligible historical resources on the South Campus portion of the project site. Therefore, the analysis of project impacts related to historical resources below is limited to a discussion of Master Plan as it applies to the Hillside Campus. The following paragraphs analyze the Master Plan to determine if the proposed changes to the Hillside campus would impact the integrity of the Ellwood Building, a historical resource.

Location Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. The Master Plan does not propose a change to the location of the Ellwood Building and would not affect integrity of location.

Design Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property. The Master Plan does not propose a change to the design of the Ellwood Building and would not affect integrity of design.

Setting Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. It involves how, not just where, the property is situated and its relationship to surrounding features and open space. The physical features that constitute the setting of a historic property can be either natural or manmade.

The natural, tree-covered hillside setting of the Ellwood Building contrasts with angular, dark building. The irregularity of the natural landscape permits the building to be both a starkly contrasting Modernist statement and a nearly invisible stealth box. The setting of the Elllwood Building is characterized by this varying relationship between the building and its hillside setting. One area where the building appears in stark contrast to its natural surroundings is the area where it spans a ravine. One of the primary views of the building is from the road running beneath the ravine. Another view of the building where it appears in stark contrast to its natural surroundings is from the east lawn, which slopes downward from the building, creating the impression of a long, elevated building rescinding into the woods. In other areas of the campus, the Ellwood Building is not visible. A line of trees along the perimeter of the elevated South Parking Lot blocks all views of the Ellwood Building. The North Parking Lot is on a slightly lower plane than the Ellwood Building. The narrow, utilitarian north elevation of the Ellwood Building visible from the North Parking Lot does not communicate the elongated truss-like design of the building.

The Master Plan proposes to install photovoltaic cells on the North and South Parking Lots. This installation would be visible from windows along the north elevation of the Ellwood Building. However, the photovoltaic cells would not affect the primary views of the building from the road in the ravine and from the east lawn.

The contrast of the angular and dark building with its natural setting will be preserved with the proposed Master Plan. The Master Plan would not diminish the integrity of setting.

Materials Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Page 18

historic property. A property must retain the key exterior materials dating from the period of its historic significance. The Master Plan does not propose a change to the materials of the Ellwood Building. The photovoltaic cell installation would not physically contact the Ellwood Building and would not affect integrity of materials.

Workmanship Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. It is the evidence of artisans' labor and skill in constructing or altering a building, structure, object, or site. The Master Plan does not propose a change that would affect the integrity of workmanship for the Ellwood Building.

Feeling Feeling is a property's expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time. It results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the property's historic character. The Master Plan does not propose a change that would affect the integrity of feeling for the Ellwood Building.

Association Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. A property retains association if it is the place where the event or activity occurred and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer. The Ellwood Building will continue to be the main building of the ArtCenter Hillside Campus. The Master Plan does not propose a change that would affect the integrity of association for the Ellwood Building.

Summary of Project Impacts

The Ellwood Building would retain all aspects of integrity and would not be materially impaired through any work associated with the Master Plan; therefore, the Master Plan would have a less than significant impact on the historical resource. Although it would introduce a new visual element to the area, the photovoltaic cells would be completely physically separated from the historical resource, ensuring the addition of the photovoltaic cells is reversible and minimizing the potential for material impairment of the historic resource.

5. CONCLUSION

The Master Plan would have a less than significant impact on historical resources as defined by CEQA. The project would not negatively impact the physical integrity of the Ellwood Building, located on the Hillside Campus of the project site. The Ellwood Building would remain intact and the ability of the historical resource to convey its significance would not be materially impaired by the project. As such, no mitigation is required or recommended.

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Page 19

6. SOURCES

“888 S. Raymond Avenue, Pasadena, CA,” Historic Aerials (1952), Accessed November 02, 2016. http://www.historicaerials.com/.

Bricker, Lauren Weiss. South Fair Oaks Specific Plan Historic Inventory. City of Pasadena, 1996.

City of Pasadena. Design & Historic Preservation Comments Case Number: PPR2014-00016. Pasadena, CA: 2016.

Eyestone Environmental. Initial Study for the ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan. Pasadena, CA: 2016.

Jackson, N. California Modern: The Architecture of Craig Ellwood. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2002.

Los Angeles Conservancy. “Art Center College of Design.” Curating the City: Modern Architecture in L.A., 2013. Accessed November 02, 2016. https://www.laconservancy.org/locations/art-center-college-design.

McCoy, Esther. Craig Ellwood: Architecture. New York: Walker, 1968.

Codes and Guidelines

California Code of Regulations, California Office of Administrative Law, State of California Government.

California Code of Regulations/Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA Section 15000-15387.

Code of Federal Regulations, Title 36: Parks, Forests, and Public Property. Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, United States Government.

National Register Bulletin #15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. Washington D.C.: National Park Service, 2002.

Pasadena Municipal Code.

Public Resources Code Section 21083.2-21084.1

Public Resources Code Section 5024.

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Page 20

Appendix A - Résumés

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Appendix A

TERESA GRIMES is a Principal Architectural Historian at GPA. She has over 25 years of experience in the field of historic preservation in the private, public, and non-profit sectors. Teresa is widely recognized as an expert in the identification and evaluation of historical resources having successfully prepared dozens of landmark and historic district applications for a wide variety of property types. Her many projects have included historic context statements for Riverside, Calabasas, Glendale, and Carmel-by-the- Sea, and historic resource surveys in Riverside, Whittier, Calabasas, Pasadena, Whittier, and Los Angeles. Teresa has also completed numerous environmental compliance documents involving major landmarks; examples include the Cinerama Dome, Dodger Stadium, Los Angeles Sports Arena, Beverly Hills Post Office, and Baldwin Hills Shopping Center. Educational Background: Selected Projects: ▪ M.A., Architecture, University of ▪ City of Hope Master Plan, Duarte, CEQA California, Los Angeles, 1992 Historical Resource Report, 2015-2016 ▪ B.A., Political Science, University of ▪ Los Angeles County Museum of Art Master California, Los Angeles, 1986 Plan, Los Angeles County, CEQA Historical Resource Report, 2015-2016 Professional Experience: ▪ Farmers Insurance Building, Los Angeles, ▪ GPA Consulting, Principal Architectural CEQA Historical Resource Report, 2015-2016 Historian, 2009-present ▪ John Anson Ford Theatres, Los Angeles ▪ Christopher A. Joseph & Associates, County, CEQA Historical Resource Report, Senior Architectural Historian, 2006-2009 2011-2015 ▪ Teresa Grimes/Historic Preservation, ▪ City Market of Los Angeles, CEQA Historical Principal, 1999-2005, 1993-1994, 1991- Resource Report, 2012-2015 1992 ▪ Hollywood and Cherokee, Los Angeles, CEQA ▪ Historic Resources Group, Project Historical Resource Report, 2014 Manager/Architectural Historian, 1994- ▪ LA Biomed Master Plan, Torrance, CEQA 1998 Historical Resource Report, 2013-2014 ▪ Getty Conservation Institute, Research ▪ Coca Cola Building, Los Angeles, CEQA Associate, 1992-1993 Historical Resource Report, 2014 ▪ Los Angeles Conservancy, Preservation ▪ United Artist Theater, Los Angeles, CEQA Officer, 1988-1991 Historical Resource Report, 2011-2013 ▪ Claremont Graduate University Master Plan, Qualifications: CEQA Historical Resource Report, 2013 ▪ Meets the Secretary of the Interior’s ▪ 8899 Beverly Boulevard, West Hollywood, Professional Qualifications Standards for CEQA Historical Resource Report, 2013 architectural history pursuant to the ▪ Hillcrest Motors Building, Hollywood, CEQA Code of Federal Regulations, 36 CFR Historical Resource Report, 2013 Part 61, Appendix A. ▪ New Pershing Apartments, Los Angeles, CEQA Professional Activities: Historical Resource Report, 2012 ▪ West Hollywood Cultural Heritage ▪ Max Factor Building, Hollywood, CEQA Advisory Board, 1990-1994 Historical Resource Report, 2012 ▪ Highland Park Heritage Trust, Board ▪ Sunset Bronson Studios, Hollywood, CEQA Member, 1996-1998 Historical Resource Report, 2010 ▪ Pasadena Heritage Board Member, ▪ Claremont McKenna College Master Plan, 2008-2012 CEQA Historical Resource Report, 2008

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Appendix A

ALLISON M. LYONS is an Associate Architectural Historian at GPA. She has been involved in the field of historic preservation since 2007. At GPA, Allison carries out historic context statements, National Register nominations, HABS/HAER documentation, and CEQA historical resource evaluations. Prior to joining GPA in 2015, Allison’s projects included fieldwork and documentation for several phases of SurveyLA. She is a member of alumni board of Graduate School of Architecture, Planning, and Preservation at Columbia University. Allison is proficient in Geographic Information Systems (ArcGIS).

Educational Background: Selected Projects: . M.S., Historic Preservation, Columbia ▪ West Hollywood Commercial Historic Context University, 2010 Statement and Resource Survey, 2015-2016 . B.A., European Studies, Scripps College, ▪ City of Hope Master Plan, Duarte, CEQA 2006 Historical Resource Report, 2015-2016 ▪ SurveyLA, Jewish Historic Context Statement, Professional Experience: 2015-2016 . GPA Consulting, Associate Architectural ▪ Chicano Moratorium in Los Angeles, Multiple Historian, 2015-Present Property Documentation Form, 2015 . Chattel Inc., Architectural Historian, ▪ La Loma Bridge, Pasadena, HAER 2013-2015 Documentation, 2015 . Architectural Resources Group, ▪ Fremont Mid-Century Historic Context Architectural Historian, 2010-2013 Statement, 2015 . Mellon Graduate Fellowship in Primary ▪ Mills Act, Los Angeles, Application Review Sources, Columbia University, 2009-2010 and Inspections, 2013-2015 . Advisory Council on Historic ▪ Sunkist Building, Los Angeles, CEQA Historical Preservation, Section 106 Essentials Resource Evaluation Report, 2015 Course, 2010 ▪ Haddon Hall, Los Angeles, Historic-Cultural Monument Application, 2015 Qualifications: ▪ 730 S. Los Angeles Street, Los Angeles, Historic- . Meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Cultural Monument Application and Part 1 Professional Qualifications Standards for Federal Tax Credit Application, 2014 architectural history pursuant to the ▪ West Los Angeles Veterans Administration Code of Federal Regulations, 36 CFR Historic District, National Register of Historic Part 61, Appendix A. Places Update, 2014 ▪ San Vicente Inn, West Hollywood, CEQA Professional Activities: Historical Resource Evaluation Report, 2013 . Urban Land Institute, Young Leader’s ▪ Flintridge Sacred Heart Master Plan, La Group Cañada Flintridge, Historical Resource Evaluation Report, 2013 ▪ Westchester/Playa Del Rey Historic Resource Survey, SurveyLA, 2013 ▪ South San Fernando Valley Historic Resource Survey, SurveyLA, 2012 ▪ New Monterey, Historic Context Statement and Reconnaissance Survey, 2012 ▪ South Los Angeles Historic Resource Surveys, SurveyLA, 2011

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Appendix A

Appendix B - Design & Historic Preservation Comments from City of Pasadena

Historical Resource Technical Report – ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Appendix B

DESIGN & HISTORIC Case Number: PPR2014-00016 PRESERVATION COMMENTS: Plan Reviewer: Mark Odell Phone: (626) 744-7101 Email: [email protected]

HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW: Demolition of designated or eligible historic structures must be reviewed by the City as part of an environmental study or as an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness (permit) for demolition. According to PMC §17.61.050 (I) (3) (e), master plans are subject to review by the Historic Preservation Commission for review and a recommendation to the City Council if the plan: 1. Includes any area within a Landmark Overlay District or Historic District; 2. Proposes alteration, demolition, or removal of a landmark, a historic resource, or a work of Greene and Greene; or 3. Includes other historic resources determined to be significant by the Director.

Because the scope-of-work proposed in the Master Plan which consists mainly of interior renovations, exterior modifications to existing non-historic structures, new construction, and site improvements, a Certificate of Appropriateness does not appear required. Any major modifications to existing historic resources on either of the campus sites would follow category two review procedures listed in §17.62.090.E.2 of the zoning code and a public hearing before the Historic Preservation Commission would be required. The Commission may approve, approve with conditions, or delay for up to 180 days applications under category two procedures.

DESIGN REVIEW Because the project in Phase I consists of new construction over 25,000 square feet in size in the South Fair Oaks Specific Plan area, design review is required, with the Design Commission being the reviewing authority. The Design Commission will also act as an advisory body in conjunction with the overall Master Plan proposal. The applicable design guidelines for the project are: the Citywide Design Principles in the land Use Element of the General Plan, the design guidelines in the South Fair Oaks Specific Plan and the Design Guidelines for Neighborhood Commercial and Multi-family Residential Districts and the Central District Specific Plan.

If no zoning entitlements are required for the project, environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) will be conducted in conjunction with design review. Prior to filing an application for design review, it is recommended that the applicant consult with the Transportation Department to begin preparation of any necessary traffic assessment or study that may be required. If the project will involve substantial grading or excavation, (i.e., more than one level of underground parking or 7,000 cubic yards of grading), an air quality analysis may also be required.

Design review is a three-to-four step procedure: 1) a preliminary meeting with staff to review the project and site plans and elevations, to discuss the design guidelines, and to identify additional information that may be needed for a complete application; 2) Preliminary Consultation with the Design Commission to review the preliminary massing and stylistic associations 3) Concept (schematic-level) design review; and 4) Final design review. Concept design review is a noticed public hearing before the Design Commission. Notification for this hearing may be combined with notification for any zoning entitlements, and the zoning

Design & Historic Preservation Section Comments Page 1

and design review hearings may be scheduled concurrently, with the zoning hearing to precede the design hearing.

Concept design review requires: An application with a filing fee and additional materials indicated in the Concept Design Review submittal requirements list.

Concept design review addresses basic project design, including massing, modulation, siting, proportions, solid-to-void relationships, compatibility with surroundings, and compliance with design guidelines. For a project of this scale, we suggest including some or all of the following visual materials: a) a massing model; b) rendered elevations; and c) an eye-level perspective drawings or computer models, concentrating on all three street elevations.

Final Design review requires an application with a filing fee and the additional materials indicated in the Final Design Review submittal requirements list. Although the staff may conduct final design review, the Commission, during concept design review, is likely to request that it conduct final review in place of the staff. You may file for building plan check (for possible building and fire safety corrections) while awaiting approval for the application for Final Design review.

Final Design review focuses on compliance with the conditions of approval (if any) of concept design review and on construction details, paint colors, finishes, doors and windows, landscaping, exterior lighting, location/screening of mechanical equipment, etc.

Appeals/Calls for Review Any person affected by a decision may appeal a Design Commission decision to the City Council. The City Council may also call a Design Commission decision for its review. Appeals or calls for review must be filed during the ten-day appeal period before the decisions become effective (which is on the 11th day following a decision).

Preliminary Design Issues Based on the information contained in the preliminary plans, the following issues are likely to be analyzed during design review:

 The scale, massing, materials, solid-to-void relationships, the interplay of horizontal and vertical elements of the new construction and the modulation of the exterior walls facing public streets.  The introduction of design features that are “human scaled” and inviting to pedestrians. The treatment of private entrances and common entrances facing the streets is part of this review.  The quality of materials and finishes, the proportions of window/door openings, the modulation of building walls, shade and shadow.  Landscaping—especially in the setbacks along the sidewalks—and screening of mechanical equipment.  Views from the interior of the site (and elevations facing the interior courtyard).

Specific Comments on Proposed New Construction

Massing: The proposed massing for new structures (888 and 988 South Raymond Avenue) or structures that are heavily augmented (Hillside campus) in the phased proposal appear appropriate and respond to the design concept discussed in the submittal package, which is,

Design & Historic Preservation Section Comments Page 2

generally, intended to bring in as much natural light to the facility as possible and to maximize the usability of the programmed space. Further refinement of the massing will be undertaken during the progressive stages of design review and continued close attention should be paid as to how the new or modified structures specifically address the public realm and meaningfully engage the more internal areas of the campus.

Siting: The current proposals for improved pedestrian circulation and new construction and/or significant alterations to existing structures are sited well overall and intelligently planned to coordinate with exiting improvements.

Compatibility: The preliminary massing appears to be compatible with the surrounding context and responds well to campus circulation overall. The City of Pasadena’s objective is to achieve architectural and design excellence. Buildings should improve the environment for the public, respond to their context and be compatible to the surroundings. A unique and creative proposal which references its specific site conditions would add interest and vitality to this important location.

Citywide Design Principles: Guiding Principle 1: Enhance the surrounding environment: A development should complement and respond to the immediate area, as well as the larger city environment". Contextual fit: A building should fit with its surroundings".

Landscaping: The design guidelines in the South Fair Oaks Specific Plan require provision of a “private outdoor node” with a minimum size of 300 square feet. This requirement can also be found in the Zoning Code Section 17.35.040.B.3. A defined landscape palette for the Specific Plan area is included on page 21 of the plan. We encourage the landscape architect to prepare landscape plans for the project at an early stage, in consultation with the applicable design guidelines and/or code requirements, as referenced above. We encourage this early discussion of site plantings and configuration in order for the landscape to integrate fully with the building design.

Signage: Signage issues will be considered at Final Design review, however consideration should be given to the location and type of signage that will help to create commercial success while appropriately responding to the design aesthetic for the structure and the surrounding urban context.

Materials: Materials are reviewed at the Final Design review stage. Some general questions about materials may be discussed during concept review. Early consideration of the building materials should be studied by the design team preliminarily to ensure the design incorporates high quality materials and renderings reflect these specifications. Pursuant to the South Fair Oaks Specific plan (pg. 54 -33.3-C.1.7), materials and finishes should be selected, and construction methods utilized, for durability and ease of maintenance. Materials and finishes should be combined to complement each other, adding to the overall architectural statement. The Specific Plan further encourages the use of particular exterior cladding materials, such as: precast or tilt-up concrete, panelized metal, concrete block and smooth-finish stucco.

Below are links to the design guidelines that apply to the project: Visit www.cityofpasadena.net/guidelines to view and download the design guidelines that apply to the project.

Design & Historic Preservation Section Comments Page 3

Estimated Fees: Preliminary Consultation: $693.19 Concept Design Review: $7,4789.89 Final Design Review: $1,967.00

Design & Historic Preservation Section Comments Page 4

Appendix E.2 SCCIC Records Search Results

South Central Coastal Information Center California State University, Fullerton Department of Anthropology MH-426 800 North State College Boulevard Fullerton, CA 92834-6846 657.278.5395 / FAX 657.278.5542 [email protected] California Historical R esources I nformation System Orange, Los Angeles, and Ventura Counties ______

2/16/2017 SCCIC File #: 17199.3311

Stephanie Eyestone-Jones Eyestone Environmental 6701 Center Dr West, Suite 900 Los Angeles, CA 90045

Re: Records Search Results for the ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan Hillside Campus Project – Hillside Campus

The South Central Coastal Information Center received your records search request for the project area referenced above, located on the Pasadena, CA USGS 7.5’ quadrangle. The following summary reflects the results of the records search for the project area and a ½-mile radius. The search includes a review of all recorded archaeological and built-environment resources as well as a review of cultural resource reports on file. In addition, the California Points of Historical Interest (SPHI), the California Historical Landmarks (SHL), the California Register of Historical Resources (CAL REG), the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), and the California State Historic Properties Directory (HPD) listings were reviewed for the above referenced project site. Due to the sensitive nature of cultural resources, archaeological site locations are not released.

RECORDS SEARCH RESULTS SUMMARY

Archaeological Resources Within project area: 0 Within project radius: 0 Built-Environment Resources Within project area: 0 Within project radius: 4 Reports and Studies Within project area: 0 Within project radius: 7 OHP Historic Properties Directory Within project area: 0 (HPD) Within ¼-mile radius: 66 California Points of Historical Within project area: 0 Interest (SPHI) Within ¼-mile radius: 0 California Historical Landmarks Within project area: 0 (SHL) Within ¼-mile radius: 0 California Register of Historical Within project area: 0 Resources (CAL REG) Within ¼-mile radius: 22 National Register of Historic Places Within project area: 0 (NRHP) Within ¼-mile radius: 23

HISTORIC MAP REVIEW – Pasadena, CA (1900) 1:62,500 scale historic maps indicated that in 1900 there was some development already in the area with approximately 10 paved roads and several buildings present. There was also a place name of Linda Vista present in the vicinity.

RECOMMENDATIONS

According to our records, the subject property and almost all of the surrounding radius has not been previously surveyed for the presence of archaeological resources. The project area may be sensitive for pre-historic or historic cultural resources. Therefore, it is recommended that a qualified archaeological consultant be retained to survey any areas that may be affected by the project including staging areas, unimproved areas, and any improved areas scheduled for demolition. It is also recommended that any built-environment properties (45 years and older) be identified, recorded, and evaluated for local, state, or national significance as may be required by the lead agency. Finally, it is also recommended that the Native American Heritage Commission should be consulted to identify if any additional traditional cultural properties or other sacred sites are known to be in the area.

For your convenience, you may find a professional consultant* at www.chrisinfo.org. Any resulting reports by the qualified consultant should be submitted to the South Central Coastal Information Center as soon as possible. *The SCCIC does not endorse any particular consultant and makes no claims about the qualifications of any person listed. Each consultant on this list self-reports that they meet current professional standards.

If you have any questions regarding the results presented herein, please contact the office at 657.278.5395 Monday through Thursday 9:00 am to 3:30 pm.

Should you require any additional information for the above referenced project, reference the SCCIC number listed above when making inquiries. Requests made after initial invoicing will result in the preparation of a separate invoice.

Thank you for using the California Historical Resources Information System,

Michelle Galaz Assistant Coordinator

Enclosures:

(X) Invoice #17199.3311

Due to processing delays and other factors, not all of the historical resource reports and resource records that have been submitted to the Office of Historic Preservation are available via this records search. Additional information may be available through the federal, state, and local agencies that produced or paid for historical resource management work in the search area. Additionally, Native American tribes have historical resource information not in the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) Inventory, and you should contact the California Native American Heritage Commission for information on local/regional tribal contacts.

The California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) contracts with the California Historical Resources Information System’s (CHRIS) regional Information Centers (ICs) to maintain information in the CHRIS inventory and make it available to local, state, and federal agencies, cultural resource professionals, Native American tribes, researchers, and the public. Recommendations made by IC coordinators or their staff regarding the interpretation and application of this information are advisory only. Such recommendations do not necessarily represent the evaluation or opinion of the State Historic Preservation Officer in carrying out the OHP’s regulatory authority under federal and state law.

2/16/2017 SCCIC File #: 17199.3311

Stephanie Eyestone-Jones Eyestone Environmental 6701 Center Dr. West, Suite 900 Los Angeles, CA 90045

Re: Records Search Results for the ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan South Campus Project – South Campus

RECORDS SEARCH RESULTS SUMMARY

Archaeological Resources Within project area: 0 Within project radius: 0 Built-Environment Resources Within project area: 0 Within project radius: 163 Reports and Studies Within project area: 7 Within project radius: 18 OHP Historic Properties Directory Within project area: 1 (HPD) Within ¼-mile radius: 44 California Points of Historical Within project area: 0 Interest (SPHI) Within ¼-mile radius: 0 California Historical Landmarks Within project area: 0 (SHL) Within ¼-mile radius: 0 California Register of Historical Within project area: 0 Resources (CAL REG) Within ¼-mile radius: 11 National Register of Historic Places Within project area: 0 (NRHP) Within ¼-mile radius: 4

HISTORIC MAP REVIEW – Pasadena, CA (1900) 1:62,500 scale historic maps indicated that in 1900, significant urban development was already present. There were many paved roads and buildings, with one road going through the project area (present-day Raymond Ave). One railroad, which appears to be an offshoot of the Atchison Topeka Railroad, was also present and running through the project area. Lastly, the Raymond Hotel was identified within the ½-mile search radius.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The archaeological sensitivity of the project site has not been studied. The project area’s ground-surface appears to be completely obscured by structures or paving. While seven studies have been conducted throughout portions of the project area, ground visibility for all of those studies was also obscured by structures and pavement. Given the area’s long history of urban development, there is the potential for buried resources within the project footprint. Therefore, it is recommended that a qualified archaeological consultant be retained to monitor ground disturbing activities. It is also recommended that any built-environment properties (45 years and older) be identified, recorded, and evaluated for local, state, or national significance as may be required by the lead agency. Finally, the Native American Heritage Commission should be consulted to identify if any additional traditional cultural properties or other sacred sites are known to be in the area.

If you have any questions regarding the results presented herein, please contact the office at 657.278.5395 Monday through Thursday 9:00 am to 3:30 pm.

Thank you for using the California Historical Resources Information System,

Michelle Galaz Assistant Coordinator

Enclosures:

(X) Invoice #17199.3311

Appendix E.3 AB 52 Consultation Request Letter

Appendix E.4 AB 52 Consultation Response Letter

Appendix E.5 City Response as Part of AB 52 Consultation

PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION

October 17, 2017

Andrew Salas, Chairman Gabrielerio Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation PO Box 393 Covina, CA 91723 Email: [email protected]

Subject: ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan, Response to September 2016 Letter

Project: ArtCenter Master Plan, City of Pasadena, California

Dear Mr. Salas:

Thank you for your letter of September 13, 2016 in response to our letter of September 2, 2016 concerning the ArtCenter College of Design Master Plan.

We understand your concern that the project site(s) are located in an area(s) where the "Ancestral territories of the Kizh (Kitc) Gabrielerio's villages adjoined and overlapped with each other. .. ", and therefore it is possible that previously undiscovered cultural resources could be found during ground disturbing activities. You have requested that a certified Native American Monitor be on site(s) during any and all ground disturbing activities.

In response to your request, we have prepared a mitigation measure that requires the developer, ArtCenter, to invite a certified Native American Monitor to be on-site during all grading and excavation activities. We have limited the on-site monitoring to grading and excavation activities, because it is during grading and excavation activities that the greatest potential for uncovered cultural resources could occur. However, there is still a mitigation measure that requires if cultural resources are discovered during construction, all ground-disturbing activities in the immediate vicinity of the find shall be halted until the find is evaluated by a Registered Professional Archaeologist.

Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (626) 744-6766 or [email protected]. sff'IJe! nO~ ~~ Senior Planner

175 North Garfield Avenue . Pasadena, CA 9110J-J704 (626) 744-4009 www.cityofpasadena.net