SurveyLA Boyle Heights Pilot Survey Report
Prepared for:
City of Los Angeles Department of City Planning’s Office of Historic Resources
Prepared by:
Architectural Resources Group, Inc Pasadena, CA
April 2010
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Table of Contents
I. INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Project Team ...... 1 1.2 Description of Survey Area ...... 1 1.3 Methodology ...... 5
II. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ...... 5 2.1 Summary of Contexts and Themes ...... 5
2.2 Individual Resources ...... 6
2.3 Historic Districts ...... 23
III: GENERAL COMMENTS, FEEDBACK AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 28
Appendix A. Integrity Thresholds for Potential Historic Districts
ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
I. INTRODUCTION
This Survey Report has been completed on behalf of the City of Los Angeles Department of City Planning’s Office of Historic Resources (OHR) for the SurveyLA Pilot Survey of Boyle Heights. This project was undertaken from December 2008 to December 2009 by Architectural Resources Group, Inc. (ARG) with assistance from Christopher A. Joseph and Associates, Inc. (CAJA). This Survey Report provides a summary of work completed, including a survey area description, a brief summary of the survey methodology, a summary of findings, and recommendations regarding the analysis of survey findings and the completion of further study in Boyle Heights.
1.1 Project Team
The Boyle Heights survey team included ARG staff Katie Horak and Amanda Davis, with project oversight from Charles E. Chase, AIA, and technological support from Takashi Fukuda. Katie Horak served as Project Manager. CAJA team members included Teresa Grimes and Christina Chiang.
1.2 Description of Survey Area
Boyle Heights is located directly east of Downtown and the Los Angeles Civic Center, across the Los Angeles River. The boundaries of the Boyle Heights Pilot Survey are Indiana Street to the east, Olympic Boulevard to the south, Medford/Marengo Streets to the north, and Clarence Street to the west. The total legal parcel count for the survey area is 9,952; approximately 90% of those parcels (8,900) contain resources constructed before 1980. The Pilot Survey did not include parcels that were included in the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) historic resources survey of the Adelante Eastside Redevelopment Area (completed 2008‐09), which focused on commercial corridors and industrial properties.
Boyle Heights has a generally flat topography, with slight elevation changes as the terrain rises eastward from the riverbank. The community was built on the bluffs (inspiring the name Boyle “Heights”) as well as the flats below; several residential neighborhoods have commanding westward views of Downtown. Its elevation ranges from 175 feet in the southern section to 475 feet near the northern boundary. The community is mainly laid out on a grid except at the northeastern area where the streets follow the natural changes in topography. Major thoroughfares in Boyle Heights include east‐west corridors Cesar Chavez (formerly Brooklyn) Avenue, First Street, Fourth Street, Whittier Boulevard and Eighth Street. Major north‐south corridors include Boyle Avenue, Soto Street, Lorena Street and Evergreen Avenue. The survey area is further characterized by a curvilinear network of state and interstate freeways; Interstate 5, Interstate 10, U.S. Route 101, and State Route 60 all converge in Boyle Heights.
1 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Figure 1. SurveyLA Boyle Heights Pilot Survey survey area map. 2 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
An early residential enclave, Boyle Heights predominantly comprises single‐family residences, most dating from 1885 to 1930. Multi‐family properties are generally small in scale, such as bungalow courts, duplexes, fourplexes, and two‐story apartment buildings. Small concentrations of multi‐family properties exist on Soto Street and in the northeastern part of the survey area (north of Cesar Chavez and east of Soto Street), though many isolated examples are scattered throughout. Also present are the public housing developments of Wyvernwood at the southern boundary of the survey area and Ramona Gardens at the northeastern boundary. Commercial properties are almost exclusively found on or adjacent to the east/west corridors of Cesar Chavez Avenue, 1st Street, 4th Street, and Whittier Avenue. Industrial properties are mainly concentrated near the Los Angeles River and in the southern part of Boyle Heights. The community is serviced by a number of local schools, churches, hospitals, and social institutions, many dating to the early part of the 20th century. Area parks include Prospect Park and Hollenbeck Park, along with several local recreation centers. The 67‐acre Evergreen Cemetery is located at the eastern edge of the survey area, and the smaller Independent Order of Odd Fellows Cemetery is at the southeastern edge.
Boyle Heights retains resources dating to nearly all periods of development of the City of Los Angeles. The earliest buildings were predominantly farmhouses relating to the agricultural uses, which gave way in the late 19th century to large mansions belonging to many of Los Angeles’s early landowners and civic leaders. The construction of streetcar lines on nearly all of Boyle Heights’s major thoroughfares connected the area with Downtown, and residential development ensued on a large scale at the end of the 19th century. Residential development dating to the 1880s boom years mainly consisted of modest and large single‐family homes designed in styles associated with the Victorian era: Queen Anne, Eastlake, Stick, and Vernacular Hipped Roof cottages. Residential development continued to proliferate after the turn of the 20th century and Boyle Heights was almost completely built out by the late 1920s. Predominant building styles dating to this era include those relating to the Arts and Crafts Movement and early Period Revival styles: Shingle, Craftsman, Colonial Revival, and Spanish Colonial Revival.
After the turn of the 20th century, Boyle Heights became a point of entry for a number of people moving to Los Angeles from other parts of the world. Widely unplagued by the restrictive covenants that were rampant throughout much of the City in the 1920s and 30s, pre‐World War II Boyle Heights was Los Angeles’s most diverse community with significant concentrations of residents from Mexico, Japan, England, Germany, Russia, and Armenia. Buildings constructed to serve these various groups, such as synagogues, temples, and various social institutions, still exist in the area.
There are a number of resources in Boyle Heights that have already been designated as Los Angeles Historic‐Cultural Monuments or have been listed on the National Register of Historic Places or the California Register of Historical Resources. These include:
3 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Name Address Designation Type
Residence 2700 Eagle Street LA HCM #262
Bridge at Fourth and Lorena Streets 4th Street, Lorena Street LA HCM #265
Malabar Branch Library 2801 E. Wabash Ave. LA HCM #304, National Register
Breed Street Shul 241‐247 N. Breed Street LA HCM #359
Nineteenth Century Los Angeles Chinese 204 N. Evergreen Ave. LA HCM #486 Cemetery Shrine
Santa Fe Hospital 610 S. St. Louis Street LA HCM #713
Boyle Hotel‐Cummings Block 101‐105 North Boyle Ave.; 1781‐1785 LA HCM #891 East 1st Street
Washington Boulevard Bridge, No. 53C1375 E Washington Blvd., between Soto LA HCM #903 Street and E. 23rd Street
Sixth Street Bridge, No. 53C1880 E 6th St. between Mateo Street. and S LA HCM #905 Boyle Ave.
International Institute 435 S Boyle Ave. California Register
Ellis Residence 1914 Michigan Ave. National Register
Residence and Carriage House 1051 Thornton Street National Register
Rhodes Residence 325‐327 S State Street National Register
Robert Louis Stevenson Branch Library 803 Spence Street National Register
4 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
1.3 Methodology
For the completion of the Boyle Heights Pilot Survey, the consultant team followed the guidelines provided by the Office of Historic Resources (OHR) in the Field Guide to Survey Evaluation. The SurveyLA methodology relies on surveyors identifying potentially eligible resources in the field and evaluating them against federal, state and local eligibility criteria, using the pre‐loaded citywide Historic Context Statement (HCS) and eligibility standards. At the time of the Boyle Heights survey, the HCS was still being drafted, so the survey team only evaluated properties that related to the completed contexts and themes. Those properties that could not be evaluated were flagged for follow‐up research and evaluation.
Before deploying surveyors into the field with the FiGSS database, the consultant team initially completed a reconnaissance survey of the Boyle Heights survey area, driving the entire area together in order to familiarize themselves with the resources and begin to identify significant concentrations of buildings. During the reconnaissance survey, team members made notes on paper maps about potential historic district boundaries and the locations of buildings that appeared individually significant. Because the survey area is so large, the consultant team divided it into smaller survey areas to make it more manageable for surveyors. These areas were divided according to the area’s major thoroughfares or natural boundaries (such as freeways or topographic barriers) so as to not bisect cohesive neighborhoods. After the completion of the reconnaissance survey, the survey team broke into two teams of two surveyors each. For the completion of the survey, there were two surveyors meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for Architectural History working together at all times: one driver/photographer, and one data entry/recorder.
For the completion of the Pilot Survey, each survey team was assigned one of the smaller survey areas and drove each area street by street, stopping to document properties that appeared significant individually or as potential historic districts. Resources were identified based on visual analysis and information that had been pre‐loaded into the database by OHR staff and interns prior to the commencement of the survey. For the documentation of individual resources, surveyors would often enter data in the car while taking a photograph of the property on foot from the public right‐of‐way. For the documentation of historic districts or clusters of buildings, surveyors entered data while on foot, walking from building to building.
II. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
2.1 Summary of Contexts and Themes Based on previous knowledge of Boyle Heights, the survey team anticipated finding significant concentrations of late‐19th century and turn‐of‐the‐20th century buildings relating to early patterns of
5 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
residential development and the locations of streetcar lines. Additionally, team members expected to find resources eligible for their cultural significance, important as relating to the various ethnic groups and significant individuals who have lived in the area throughout its history. Generally, these assumptions were confirmed by what the survey teams found in the field. However, because only the contexts relating to Architecture and Engineering were fully developed at the time of the Pilot Surveys, only the resources that are significant under Criterion C/3 (for architecture) could be evaluated using the SurveyLA methodology. All others, such as those significant for patterns of development or their association with significant individuals or groups of people were flagged for resurvey.
The survey team identified a number of resources that were determined to be significant under the context of Architecture and Engineering in accordance with local, state and national eligibility criteria. Specifically, the team identified 33 individually eligible resources and two potential historic districts. The most prominent building styles represented in Boyle Heights are those that were widely popular during the time of Boyle Heights’s initial development (1880s to 1920s), especially those styles associated with the Victorian Era and Arts and Crafts Movement. Expecting a predominance of buildings dating to before the 1920s boom years, surveyors were surprised to find several Spanish Colonial Revival apartment buildings, which are more commonly found in parts of the City that were developed in the mid‐ to late‐1920s.
Eligible resources in Boyle Heights were identified as significant as relating to one of the following Contexts and Themes:
Context: Architecture and Engineering Theme: Late 19th Century Residential Architecture, 1885‐1905
Context: Architecture and Engineering Theme: Arts and Crafts Movement, 1895‐1918
Context: Architecture and Engineering Theme: The Architecture of Fantasy, 1918‐1945
2.2 Individual Resources
Following is a list of resources that were identified as potentially eligible for individual designation, including their address, year built, criteria under which they were determined to be significant, associated status code(s), and reason for significance.
6 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Address: 2100 E. City View Avenue Date: 1928 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3CS / 5S3 Reason: Intact Art Deco apartment building – excellent example of the style (rare in Boyle Heights)
Address: 410 N. Chicago Street Date: 1895 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3CS / 5S3 Reason: Rare survivor of the time period, intact Queen Anne cottage
7 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Address: 634 N. Brittania Street Date: 1888 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3CS / 5S3 Reason: Intact Queen Anne house; rare survivor of the time period
Address: 2616 E. 3rd Street Date: 1893 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3S / 3CS / 5S3 Reason: Grand, exceptional and intact Queen Anne residence; a rarity in Los Angeles. Possible association with Japanese‐American Community.
8 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Address: 911 S. Lorena Street Date: 1936 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 5S3 Reason: Intact example of a Streamline Moderne commercial building; rare in Boyle Heights.
Address: 3420 E. Garnet Street Date: 1908 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3CS / 5S3 Reason: Very unusual Shingle style residence on a street comprising mostly one‐story bungalows.
9 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Address: 709 S. Chicago Street Date: 1895 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3CS / 5S3 Reason: Completely unaltered late Queen Anne residence; rare survivor of its time period.
Address: 706 S. Chicago Street Date: 1900 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3S / 3CS / 5S3 Reason: Unusual house from turn of the twentieth century. Influences include early Arts and Crafts and Richardsonian Romanesque.
10 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Address: 504 S. Boyle Avenue Date: 1906 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3S / 3CS / 5S3 Reason: Intact Arts and Crafts house with Craftsman, English Tudor, and Japanese influences.
Address: 352 S. Boyle Avenue, Neighborhood Music School Date: 1894 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3S / 3CS / 5S3 Reason: Exceptional example of the Queen Anne style. Completely intact.
11 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Address: 338 S. Boyle Avenue Date: 1910 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3CS / 5S3 Reason: Intact Transitional residence with Craftsman and late Victorian elements.
Address: 213 S. Breed Street, Iglesia Del Nazareno Date: 1905 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3S / 3CS / 5S3 Reason: Rare Neoclassical church, completely intact
12 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Address: 2309 E. 3rd Street Date: 1895 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3CS / 5S3 Reason: Rare intact example of the Queen Anne style. Classical details by stained glass windows intact.
Address: 2124 E. 4th Street, St. Mary’s Church Date: 1924 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3S / 3CS / 5S3 Reason: Intact Romanesque church; highly ornate.
13 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Address: 452 S. St. Louis Street Date: 1905 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3CS / 5S3 Reason: Early Arts & Crafts residence, Shingle style; unusual design
Address: 448 S. St. Louis Street Date: 1903 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3CS / 5S3 Reason: Transitional residence with Classical Revival, Arts & Crafts and late Victorian elements. Rare representative of its period.
14 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Address: 444 S. St. Louis Street Date: 1907 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3CS / 5S3 Reason: Intact and ornate early Craftsman house.
Address: 2134 E. Michigan Avenue Date: 1900 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3CS / 5S3 Reason: Intact Queen Anne residence with elaborate Classical ornament. Rare survivor of its period.
15 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Address: 126 N. Chicago Street, Iglesia Bautista Unida Date: 1885 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3S / 3CS / 5S3 Reason: Nineteenth century religious building with Queen Anne and Gothic elements. Rare survivor of its period.
Address: 313 S. Boyle Avenue, Emil Brown Auditorium Date: 1910 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3S / 3CS / 5S3 Reason: Former home of prominent Los Angeles citizen and mayor (1886‐ 88) William Workman. Constructed by architect Robert Farquhar. Likely also eligible under Criterion B/2 for its association with the Workman family.
16 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Address: 739 N. Soto Street Date: 1924 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 5S3 Reason: One of the last intact apartment buildings remaining on Soto. Representative example of Mission Revival style.
Address: 516 N. Soto Street Date: 1931 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 5S3 Reason: Rare example of the Art Deco style in Boyle Heights; also one of the few apartment buildings on Soto to retain integrity.
17 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Address: 2448 E. Fairmount Street
Date: 1931 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 5S3 Reason: Intact example of Spanish Colonial Revival apartment building, unusual in Boyle Heights
Address: 2441 E. Fairmount Street Date: 1930 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 5S3 Reason: Intact example of Spanish Colonial Revival apartment building, unusual in Boyle Heights
18 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Address: 2453 E. Folsom Street Date: 1906 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3CS/5S3 Reason: Rare and intact example of a Dutch Colonial Revival residence.
Address: 2817 E. Cincinnati Street Date: 1932 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 5S3 Reason: Intact example of Spanish Colonial Revival apartment building, unusual in Boyle Heights
19 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Address: 506 N. Evergreen Avenue, Forsythe Building Date: 1914 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3S / 3CS / 5S3 Reason: Representative example of Mission Revival architecture. Also eligible under criterion A/1 for its rich cultural history; it was a temporary home for Japanese‐American Angelenos awaiting internment during WWII.
Address: 201 S. Soto Street Date: 1924 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 5S3 Reason: One of the last intact apartment buildings remaining on Soto. Representative example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style.
20 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Address: 445 S. Mathews Street Date: 1915 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 5S3 / 3CS Reason: An unusual bungalow court type in Los Angeles (buildings also on left and rear of photo, just partially visible).
Address: 3407 E. 4th Street Date: 1895 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3S / 5S3 Reason: Exceptional one‐story example of the Queen Anne style; completely intact.
21 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Address: 3543 E. 4th Street Date: 1905 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 5S3 Reason: Representative of the Dutch Colonial Revival style; completely intact
Address: 3522 E. Percy Street Date: 1890 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3CS / 5S3 Reason: One of only a few Eastlake style residences in Boyle Heights; this was the most representative of the style and most intact
22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Address: 3602 E. Percy Street Date: 1921 Criteria: C/3 Status Code: 3CS / 5S3 Reason: Very unusual design in a single‐family residence. Elements of the Mission Revival and Craftsman styles.
2.3 Historic Districts
For the documentation of historic districts, each property must be photographed and given an assignment of “Contributor” or “Non‐Contributor.” ARG drafted integrity thresholds for the identification of Contributors to potential historic districts (see Appendix A). The survey team identified two historic districts that appear eligible for designation at the national, state and/or local level. Surveyors identified and named the potential Boyle Avenue and Mount Pleasant Historic Districts, described below.
Boyle Avenue Historic District
Context: Architecture and Engineering Theme(s): Late 19th Century Architecture; Arts and Crafts Movement Criteria: C / 3 Status Codes: 3S / 3CS / 5S3 Property Type: District Number of Bldgs: 15 buildings: 14 Contributors, 1 Non‐Contributor
23 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
24 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Boundaries: The potential Boyle Avenue Historic District comprises 15 buildings located on the east side of Boyle Avenue between 4th Street to the north and the Interstate 5 freeway overpass to the south.
Description: The dominant property type in the potential Boyle Avenue Historic District is the single‐family residence, mainly grand two‐story houses that appear to have been architect‐designed for wealthy clients. The remaining buildings are multi‐family dwellings, typically with two to four units and similar in scale to the neighboring single‐family residences. The street, which curves slightly as it heads south and under the Interstate 5 overpass, is shaded with mature trees.
Significance: The potential Boyle Avenue Historic District appears eligible for the National Register, California Register, and for Los Angeles HPOZ designation for its significance within the context of Architecture and Engineering, specifically as relating to the themes of Late 19th Century Architecture and the Arts and Crafts Movement. Of the 15 buildings, 14 were determined to be Contributors. This area is particularly significant due to its high number of contributing resources, the architectural distinction of its buildings, and the retention of its overall district character. There is a wide variety of architectural styles represented, including Queen Anne, Craftsman, American Foursquare, Neoclassical, and Spanish Colonial Revival.
25 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
Mount Pleasant Historic District
Context: Architecture and Engineering Theme(s): Late 19th Century Architecture; Arts and Crafts Movement Criteria: C / 3 Status Codes: 3S / 3CS / 5S3 Property Type: District Number of Bldgs: 112 buildings: 70 Contributors, 41 Non‐Contributors; 1 TBD
Boundaries: The potential Mount Pleasant Historic District is located at the northwestern edge of Boyle Heights. It is generally bounded by Cesar Chavez Avenue to the north, Warren Street to the east, Echandia Street and Boyle Avenue to the south, and U.S. Route 101 to the west. It does not include buildings on either side of Warren Street.
Description: The potential Mount Pleasant Historic District comprises 112 buildings, mainly single‐family residences dating between circa 1885 and 1925. Sited on a small hill (likely providing inspiration for the name “Mount Pleasant”), residences at the northern part of the district have commanding westward views of downtown Los Angeles. The buildings range from small cottages to grand two‐ and two‐and‐a‐half‐story houses. Styles represented include Queen Anne, American Foursquare, Vernacular Hipped Roof Cottage, Mission Revival, Craftsman and Spanish Colonial Revival. Although primarily comprising single‐family dwellings, there are a few multi‐family dwellings, bungalow courts and two churches within the potential historic district. There is one former commercial property: the Mt. Pleasant Bakery Building, which was constructed circa 1885. This building is reportedly the oldest surviving bakery building in Los Angeles and also appears individually eligible for the National Register, the California Register, and as a Los Angeles Historic‐Cultural Monument.
Significance: This potential historic district appears eligible for the National Register, California Register, and for HPOZ status for its significance within the context of Architecture and Engineering, specifically as relating to the themes of Late 19th Century Architecture and the Arts and Crafts Movement. It also appears eligible for its significance within the context of Early Residential Development, specifically relating to the themes of Streetcar Suburbanization. By the late 19th century this area was well‐serviced by streetcar leading to and from downtown Los Angeles; there were tracks on 1st Street and Cesar Chavez (formerly Brooklyn) Avenue, which bookend the district to the north and south. With a large percentage of contributing resources, this area remains an intact enclave of resources dating to the earliest phases of Los Angeles’s development.
26 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
27 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS PILOT SURVEY REPORT APRIL 2010
III. GENERAL COMMENTS, FEEDBACK AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Overall, ARG’s experience with the FiGSS application and the completion of the Pilot Survey of Boyle Heights was very positive. For surveyors accustomed to completing surveys with paper field checklists on clipboards, the SurveyLA methodology represents exponential time savings as well as the elimination of errors common in the transference of data from a paper form to a database back in the office. City of Los Angeles OHR and Systems and GIS Division staff were responsive to survey team feedback and recommendations about the utility of the application; the latest version of FiGSS is substantially easier to use and more effective than the first.
Over the course of the Boyle Heights Pilot Survey, the survey team identified 33 individual properties and two historic districts that appear eligible for listing on the National Register, California Register, and/or Los Angeles’s list of Historic‐Cultural Monuments. In addition to those identified in the field using the SurveyLA methodology, the team flagged a number of properties that should be evaluated during the Implementation Phase of SurveyLA once the Citywide Historic Context Statement is complete. Boyle Heights is an area rich in resources that have potential significance for their association with significant individuals, events, patterns of events and with the various cultural and ethnic groups who have been a part of the community throughout its history. The survey team recommends a follow‐ up survey in Boyle Heights to evaluate these potentially significant resources.
28 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS SURVEY REPORT – APPENDIX A APRIL 2010
Appendix A | Integrity Thresholds for Potential Historic Districts In Boyle Heights
For the identification of Contributors and Non‐Contributors in potential historic districts in Boyle Heights, ARG used the following eligibility standards:
Contributors A Contributor to a potential historic district must first meet the following standards:
It must have been constructed within the preliminarily identified Period of Significance; Relate to the Contexts and Themes for which the district was identified as being potentially significant; and Retain sufficient integrity to convey its significance.
The National Register generally recognizes a resource’s integrity through seven aspects or qualities, including: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. A building does not necessarily need to retain all seven aspects to be eligible for Contributor status; it needs to retain sufficient integrity to convey its significance. Thus, ARG has developed integrity thresholds by making a list of “alteration considerations” which may not compromise a building’s integrity in such a way that it would be precluded from Contributor status. These alteration considerations include:
The addition of removable elements such as security bars on windows, security screens on doors, paint on surfaces which were likely originally unpainted, and window‐mounted air‐ conditioning units Porches which have been enclosed without damaging the original porch configuration, floor or supports Windows and doors which have been replaced without altering the placement, size and overall fenestration patterns of the building’s façade. If one window or door opening has been modified but the overall fenestration configuration has not been compromised, the building may still be considered a Contributor Addition of faux historic or incompatible elements which can be removed Non‐original cladding, such as stucco or asbestos, which may cover original cladding Small additions to the rear of a building or those that do not significantly alter a building’s overall massing
Non‐Contributors As described above, buildings that were constructed outside of the Period of Significance or do not represent one or more of the Context and Themes identified in the HCS are given the status of Non‐ Contributor. Additionally, buildings that do not retain sufficient integrity to convey their significance are identified as Non‐Contributors.
29 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.
SURVEYLA BOYLE HEIGHTS SURVEY REPORT – APPENDIX A APRIL 2010
The following alterations would generally result in the status of Non‐Contributor:
Removal of elements and features which identify a building’s architectural style. Alterations to a building’s original fenestration pattern. The overall placement, size and configuration of doors and windows should remain intact. Substantial change to a building’s overall massing or footprint, such as rooftop additions and other structural additions. A combination of several alterations identified above as considerations for the status of Contributor may result in a finding of Non‐Contributor.
Note: These integrity thresholds are specific to potential historic districts which include residential buildings constructed prior to World War II. Integrity thresholds for postwar neighborhoods would differ slightly to reflect the characteristics of building styles popular during those years.
30 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc.