The Carl Rogers House

2311 Via Siena Historical Resource Research Report

November 2019

5645 La Jolla Boulevard La Jolla, CA 92037 (858) 456-8555 State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial NRHP Status Code 5S1 Other Listings Review Code Reviewer Date Page 1 of 88 *Resource Name or #: Carl Rogers House

P1. Other Identifier: N/A *P2. Location: ☐ Not for Publication ☒ Unrestricted *a. County: San Diego *b. USGS 7.5' Quad: La Jolla Date: 1967 c. Address: 2311 Via Siena City: La Jolla Zip: 92037 d. UTM: Zone 11S; 476232.79 mE/ 3634002.93 mN (G.P.S.) e. Other Locational Data: APN: 352-165-01-00 Legal Description: Lot 20 of Hidden Valley Hills Unit No. 1, in the City of San Diego, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 3921, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, June 30, 1958.

*P3a. Description: The Carl Rogers House was constructed in 1961 at the corner of Via Siena and Hillside Drive. The house is accessed via a poured concrete driveway from Via Siena. It is a single story, Contemporary style house with a center courtyard and a double carport (continued page 3).

*P3b. Resource Attributes: HP2 - Single family property *P4. Resources Present: ☒Building ☐Structure ☐Object ☐Site ☐District ☐Element of District ☐Other (Isolates, etc.)

P5a. Photo or Drawing P5b. Description of Photo: North elevation. IS Architecture, 2018.

*P6. Date Constructed/Age: ☒Historic ☐Prehistoric ☐Both 1961

*P7. Owner and Address: Monique Konovalov and David Monzon 2311 Via Siena La Jolla, CA 92037

*P8. Recorded by: Rebecca McManus, MHP IS Architecture 5645 La Jolla Boulevard La Jolla, California 92037

*P9. Date Recorded: March 2019

*P10. Survey Type: Intensive/pedestrian *P11. Report Citation: None.

*Attachments: ☐NONE ☐Location Map ☐Sketch Map ☒Continuation Sheet ☒Building, Structure, and Object Record ☐Archaeological Record ☐District Record ☐Linear Feature Record ☐Milling Station Record ☐Rock Art Record ☐Artifact Record ☐Photograph Record ☒Other (List): HRB Format Attachments

DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information State of California ⎯ The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD *Resource Name: Carl Rogers House *NRHP Status Code: 5S1 Page 2 of 88

B1. Historic Name: N/A B2. Common Name: N/A B3. Original Use: Single Family Residence B4. Present Use: Single Family Residence *B5. Architectural Style: Modern - Contemporary *B6. Construction History: The house was constructed in 1961 by designer Roger Matthews and builder Richard Hamlin. A drawing by Roger Matthews, dated 1961, shows a conceptual design for the house but the site and archival record indicates that the final design, as constructed, was slightly different. It is unclear whether the rear patio and wall were ever constructed. The details of the windows are also not drawn in. There is a vertical delineation marking where the jalousie windows are located on the front elevation but there are not any lines showing the (continued, page 5)

*B7. Moved? ☒No ☐Yes ☐Unknown Date: N/A Original Location: N/A *B8. Related Features: N/A

B9a. Architect: Roger Matthews (Designer) b. Builder: Richard Hamlin *B10. Significance Theme: Contemporary Architecture, Significant Persons Area: La Jolla/Mount Soledad Period of Significance: 1961 (C), 1963-1987 (B) Property Type: HP2 - Single family property Applicable Criteria: B and C The Rogers House is significant both for its connection to prominent psychologist Carl Rogers and for its Contemporary style architecture. The period of significance for the house’s architectural significance under Criterion C is 1961, the date of construction. The period of significance for the house’s significant connection to Carl Rogers under Criterion B is 1963-1987, which reflects the period of Rogers’ residence and work in the home. (continued page 5)

B11. Additional Resource Attributes:

*B12. References: See endnotes.

B13. Remarks: None.

*B14. Evaluator: IS Architecture

*Date of Evaluation: March 2019

(This space reserved for official comments.)

DPR 523 (1/95) *Required information State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Property Name: Carl Rogers House Page 3 of 89

P3a. Description: Continued

The house features a shallow-pitched, hipped roof over both original wings. The roof over these wings is clad in asphalt composite shingles and features a deep, enclosed eave and aluminum gutters. The studio addition features a parapeted roof. The wall surfaces are a heavy sand textured stucco throughout, with the exception of one wall portion in the rear courtyard, which is clad in vertical wood board.

NORTH ELEVATION The north elevation runs parallel to Via Siena. The western half of the elevation features a double-car carport under the main roofline. Square wooden posts separate the bays of the carport from each other and from the western walkway. The carport has two solid walls – the rear and the eastern side – and both are stuccoed. At the rear corner of the eastern wall are a full-height, wooden slab door and two full-height, fixed, single-light windows.

The central portion of the north elevation contains the entrance courtyard. The courtyard is bounded by a concrete block wall. The wall is comprised of square, painted CMUs thirteen courses high, which brings the wall to just above the level of the eaves. Square blocks turned on their side and offset within the wall form regular, decorative piercings in the wall. The full-height, wooden slab door is flanked by two full-height, fixed, single-light windows. The entry door wall is stuccoed. The courtyard floor is tiled with square, red clay tiles. A planting bed runs along the north side of the courtyard and contains bushes.

The eastern portion of the north elevation features an elevated, post-and-beam projection. The decorative, CMU wall continues to the eastern corner of the elevation, underneath the post-and-beam projection, and continues around to the east elevation. The post-and-beam projection features three support posts that reach to the ground, forming three full bays and one partial bay. The support posts are doubled beneath the projection and rest on concrete plinths. The three full bays feature a large, single-light, full-height picture window and a narrow, full-height jalousie window. The partial bay features a large, single-light, full-height picture window that forms a floating corner.

EAST ELEVATION The east elevation of the front wing consists of square CMUs. There are no decorative piercings on this elevation. The CMU continues towards the south, forming a wall that partially encloses the rear courtyard.

The east elevation of the rear wing consists of two glass wall sections flanking a center wall of vertical board siding. To the north of the solid wall is a full-height, single-light, fixed window and a full-height, aluminum sliding glass door with a single light in each door panel. To the south of the wall are (from north to south), three full-height, single-light, fixed windows; a full-height, wooden slab door; and three full-height, single-light, fixed windows. The central of these last windows contains a center, operable portion framed in aluminum.

SOUTH ELEVATION The south elevation of the front wing is split into two sections: one section to the east of the rear wing and a second section to the west of the rear wing. The section to the east of the rear wing consists of two large, single-light, full- height, fixed windows flanking a full-height, aluminum sliding glass door with a single light in each door panel. The section to the west of the rear wing consists of three pairs of full-height, wooden slab doors.

The south elevation of the rear wing consists primarily of stuccoed wall. A narrow, tall, single-light, fixed window and a full-height, wooden slab door pierce the elevation.

WEST ELEVATION The west elevation of the front wing is a blank, stuccoed wall.

The west elevation of the rear wing is in multiple planes. At the northernmost corner of the elevation is a full-height, wooden slab door. Continuing south, the elevation features a vinyl sliding window, an aluminum window with metal vent above, and a projecting bay of windows. The projecting bay contains two groupings of full-height, single-light, fixed windows with three windows per grouping. The center window of each grouping contains an operable, aluminum-framed, central panel. To the south of the projecting bay is a stuccoed wall that projects to the west. To the south of that wall is another grouping of four full-height, single-light, fixed windows. The third of these windows contains an operable, aluminum-framed, central panel. Near the southern corner of the elevation is one more full- height, single-light, fixed window. The wall surfaces in between the fenestration on the west elevation are stuccoed.

ROSENBLUTH STUDIO The Rosenbluth studio addition is a single-story, rectangular addition with a parapeted roof and stuccoed walls. The north elevation features aluminum, sliding glass doors. At the southern extent of the east elevation are six stacked, vinyl, casement windows. The south and west elevation feature blank, stuccoed walls. The parapet of the west elevation continues to meet the north elevation, showing above the hipped roofline of the rear wing of the main house. The Rosenbluth studio falls outside both periods of significance and is excluded from this nomination.

REAR COURTYARD The courtyard is enclosed on the west, north, and south sides by the house and on the east side by three separate walls. The first segment of wall protrudes southward from the front wing of the house and is constructed of square CMUs. The second and third segments of wall are freestanding and are constructed of standard dimension CMUs. The first standard CMU wall is in line with the historic CMU wall, leaving a gap in between for pedestrian access. The second standard CMU wall is set back from the opening between the other two walls, providing visual screening for the pedestrian access opening (see photos, Appendix D). Both walls are stuccoed on the interior. The standard CMU wall is also stuccoed on the exterior. The square CMU wall, attached to the house, is a contributing feature and is included in this nomination. The standard CMU wall, which dates to the Rosenbluth period, falls outside both periods of significance and is excluded from this nomination.

The courtyard features the same square, red clay tile as is in the entry courtyard. The remainder of the ground is grass lawn, with one large, mature Brazilian Pepper tree. Based on an oral interview with Bill Vogt, a long-term neighbor and former member of the local architectural committee, the tree was planted by either the builder or Carl Rogers and his wife in the early 1960’s. The lawn and tree are contributing elements and are included in this nomination.

OTHER SITE FEATURES The following site features are connected to the house’s significance (see Significance, below), and are included in this nomination: - Poured concrete driveway - Poured concrete front walkway - Western site wall, composed of square CMUs

The following site features are not connected to the house’s significance and are excluded from this nomination: - Basketball court at the southeast corner of the property - Concrete site wall at the southeast corner of the property, by the basketball court - All vegetation outside the rear courtyard DPR 523 (1/95) *Required information State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Property Name: Carl Rogers House Page 5 of 89

*B6. Construction History: Continued jalousie slats themselves. The sketch also does not show the operable portion of some windows in the courtyard. Site investigation and oral testimony from neighbors and colleagues of Rogers’ who frequented the house all indicate that these were original features.

Carl Rogers purchased the house on September 20, 1963. On September 27, a permit was issued to Rogers for the addition of a “study room” (Permit No. B66635). Testimony from former colleague Dr. William Stillwell, as well as a set of as-built drawings dating to 1992, suggest that this study was added to the back of the house, forming a third leg around the courtyard.

In 1986, when Rogers was 84, a permit was issued to enclose an atrium and convert it into a maid’s quarters with bedroom, bathroom, and closet (Permit No. A43222). It is unclear in the archival and oral record where the boundaries of this atrium were and exactly what footprint was enclosed at this time. Site investigation suggests that the most likely location of the enclosure is at the southernmost extent of the house’s rear wing.

The Rosenbluths purchased the house in 1990 and, in 1992, pulled a permit (Permit No. C-004980-92) to remove the 1963 studio addition and replace it with a larger art studio addition for Sarah Rosenbluth. The permit also included the addition of two new CMU walls on the east side of the courtyard. The permitted plans note that no work occurred to the rest of the property. The permit included a plan change in 1993, which included relocating windows from one side of the new addition to another and increasing the size of the sliding doors in the new addition.

The current owners installed a basketball court and retaining wall in the rear yard. This feature did not impact any historic features, including the historic CMU retaining wall and the house itself.

The date of the following changes are unknown:

- Possible re-stuccoing. This is unconfirmed, but likely considering the house’s construction history. It may have taken place in 1963 when Rogers’ studio was constructed, in 1986 when Rogers constructed the maid’s quarters, and/or in 1992 when the Rosenbluth studio was constructed. Regardless, the current heavy sand stucco texture is appropriate to the periods of significance (see Integrity, below). - Addition of the red clay tile in the front entry courtyard and the rear courtyard - Replacement of one window in the kitchen

*B10. Significance: Continued

HISTORIC CONTEXT: CONTEMPORARY STYLE ARCHITECTURE

The visual language of California’s post-World War II development was Modernism, an architectural and cultural movement defined by its departure from past stylistic precedents. In architecture, this meant abandoning the popular revival styles of the 1920s and 1930s in favor of an architecture of “rationality and simplicity in resolving design concepts, and the honest expression of the nature of building materials and their structural quality.”1 Walter Gropius and Ludwig Mies van der Rohe were early proponents and prominent developers of the European Modernist movement. They were particularly influential on early American Modernism but American architects Louis Sullivan,

Dankmar Adler, D.H. Burnham, and Frank Lloyd Wright would further define American Modernism out of their Chicago offices during the 1930s.1 The California-Pacific Exposition in 1935 contained several early Modernist buildings, following the example of the Century of Progress Exposition in Chicago. As the Panama-California Exposition in 1915 had done for Spanish Colonial Revival architecture, the California-Pacific Exposition may have helped to popularize early Modernist styles such as Art Deco and Art Moderne in Southern California.

Modern design philosophies continued to grow in popularity following World War II and various subtypes of Modernism began to develop. While suburban tract housing was undoubtedly the most prolific expression of Modernism in the 1950s and 1960s, the commercial strips, civic buildings, and recreation facilities that grew up alongside them were not immune to the Modernist influence. The Minimal Traditional and Art Moderne substyles were joined by the Streamline Moderne, Post and Beam, Ranch, and Tiki-Polynesian substyles. Commercial, civic, and residential architecture all expressed the minimalistic Contemporary subtype and retail shops and restaurants expressed the country’s obsession with the space age with the Futurist (or Googie) subtype. Brutalist architecture became prominent on college and university campuses throughout the country.

The Contemporary substyle of Modernism appears in San Diego from the mid-1950s through the mid-1960s. Both tract developments and individually-designed residential examples of the substyle can be found throughout the city.

The character-defining features of the substyle include:

- Strong roof forms, typically with deep overhangs - Large windows, often aluminum framed - Non-traditional exterior finishes, such as vertical wood siding, concrete block, stucco, flagstone, and mullion-free glass - Angular massing - Sun shades or shadow block accents - Attached garages or carports - Split-level design - Horizontal orientation - Distinctive triangular, parabolic or arched forms

HISTORIC CONTEXT: CARL R. ROGERS

Carl Ransom Rogers was an internationally-known psychologist and humanistic thinker whose legacy includes the client-centered approach, which today is one of the most widely used techniques among therapists and counselors. Together with Abraham Maslow and Rollo May, Rogers became a founder of humanistic psychology, which even then was known as the “Third Force in psychology, to distinguish it from psychoanalysis and behaviorism, the other two dominant schools of thought at the time.”1 His Center for Studies of the Person still exists in La Jolla, California, and continues his work on person-centered counseling, conflict mediation, and research.

Rogers was born on January 8, 1902 in Oak Park, Illinois to Walter A. Rogers, a civil engineer, and Julia M. Cushing. He was the fourth of six children. Rogers grew up in the context of a strict religious and ethical environment, with the combined influence of his mother’s Baptist beliefs and his father’s Congregationalist beliefs. He credits the humanistic tendencies of both his parents’ denominations for his early introduction to the value of individual thought and the freedom of conscience.2 DPR 523 (1/95) *Required information State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Property Name: Carl Rogers House Page 7 of 89

By the time he enrolled in college at the University of Wisconsin – Madison, his first choice in studies was agriculture. He quickly strayed to history, however, and finally settled on religion as his chosen field. In 1920, however, two years into his studies, he attended an international Christian conference in Peking, China. Something at that conference caused him to start doubting his religious convictions. Despite his doubts, he completed his degree in religion in 1924 and enrolled in Union Theological Seminary in New York City that same year. Two years later, however, he left the seminary to attend Teachers College of Columbia University instead.3 Teachers College is the University’s graduate school for education, health, psychology, and leadership studies. He earned his Master of Arts degree in psychology from Teachers College in 1928 and his PhD from the same school in 1931.

While he was pursuing his doctoral degree, Rogers served as the director of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children in Rochester, New York. Rogers left that position to become a lecturer at the University of Rochester in 1935, but his experiences with troubled children while with the SPCC inspired his first publication.4 Rogers published The Clinical Treatment of the Problem Child in 1939. The stated purpose of his book was, in his own words, to “survey the total area of treatment possibilities… in order to summarize the knowledge which we have regarding the treatment of difficult children.”5 The unstated import of this publication, however, was that this was the first time Rogers publicized what would become his client-centered counseling approach.

The following year, Rogers shared thoughts on client-centered psychological work at the University of Minnesota. At the time, he claims he “honestly believed that [he] was speaking for the way other people were thinking, too.” That was not the case, and Rogers soon found himself at the center of a field-wide debate about approaches to psychological counseling. The two camps divided themselves into the Freudians – those who believed it was the duty of the counselor to diagnose and recommend treatment without the input or feedback of the client – and the Rogerians – those who believed that the counselor should serve as a guiding influence for the client’s own self- realization and healing.6

Over the next twenty years, Rogers further developed his psychological theories and treatment methods based around the concept of individual agency leading to self-fulfillment through continual experimentation, renewal, and growth. He published four more books, including his most well-known work, On Becoming a Person. He taught at Ohio State University, the University of Chicago, and the University of Wisconsin – Madison (his undergraduate alma mater). He became president of the American Psychological Association (APA) in 1947, was granted the Award for Distinguished Scientific Contributions from the APA in 1956, became the first president of the new American Academy of Psychotherapists in 1956, and was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1961.7 In September of 1963, Rogers accepted a position at La Jolla’s Western Behavioral Sciences Institute, purchased the house on Via Siena, and moved his family to La Jolla.

The Western Behavioral Sciences Institute was established in 1958 by psychologist Richard Farson, physicist Paul Lloyd, and social psychologist Wayman Crow. The Institute’s purpose is to research, educate, and advance the study of human affairs. The Institute has attracted leaders in the fields of sociology, political science, economics, anthropology, psychology, and other humanistic fields. Carl Rogers quickly rose to prominence among his peers and today is perhaps the Institute’s best-known staff member and researcher. During his time at the Institute, Rogers continued to develop his theory and practice around client-centered counseling and group behavior.8 He also co-developed the Oscar- winning documentary Journey Into Self during his tenure at the Institute. This documentary explored a group therapy session and exposed the general public to the methods and effects of psychological counseling in a new and unusually direct manner.9

In 1968, Rogers established the Center for Studies of the Person at 1125 Torrey Pines Road in La Jolla.10 While the Torrey Pines building housed a conference room and library for the Center, Rogers did not operate the Center’s projects from that building. Instead, according to former colleague Dr. William Stillwell, Rogers would gather his team in his living room on Via Siena to kick off every new project. Rogers also had an office at the rear of his Via Siena house — in a room added for that purpose — that he used as his personal office.11

In 1974, Rogers began to expand the work of the Center on an international scale. He created and implemented Person-Centered Approach workshops throughout the world with his daughter and his colleagues. Rogers also continued to write at an astonishing rate; he researched, wrote, and published three more books between 1977 and 1983.

In 1987, Rogers died of a heart attack following surgery for a broken hip. He was 85 years old.12 In a study by Steven Haggbloom and other psychologists, he was posthumously found to be the second most eminent clinical psychologist of the 20th century, behind only Sigmund Freud himself.13

HISTORIC CONTEXT: MARSHALL ROSENBLUTH

The below is adapted from a biographical memoir published by a former colleague of Rosenbluth’s. The full text of this memoir is attached in Appendix E.

Marshall Rosenbluth was one of the leaders of the international community of scientists and engineers trying to develop fusion as a clean and inexhaustible source of energy. In the United States he was the most important fusion theorist. The driving force of his life and work was his conviction that the power of hydrogen fusion reactors, the power of the bombs that could destroy cities and civilizations, could also be used in peaceful reactors to bring wealth and prosperity to all mankind.

Rosenbluth was born in Albany, New York in 1927 and was a student of Enrico Fermi at the University of Chicago from 1946 to 1949. After a year as an instructor as Stanford, Rosenbluth was recruited by Edward Teller to help develop the hydrogen bomb at Los Alamos. He made major contributions to the design of the first hydrogen bomb, which was exploded in the Mike test of 1952. When Stalin died in 1953, Rosenbluth decided that he no longer wanted to work on nuclear weapons, but he did not leave Los Alamos immediately. He continued to work on the next generation of bombs and in 1954 he was present in the South Pacific at the test of the Castle Bravo bomb. Rosenbluth’s ship was showered with radioactive fallout – the experience settled matters for him and he re-devoted his career to the development of peaceful uses for fusion.

Another contribution that Rosenbluth made while at Los Alamos – in partnership with his first wife, Arianna, Nick Metropolis, and Edward Teller – was the development of the Monte Carlo method, which is a method used to calculate the behavior of many-particle systems in thermal equilibrium. The method is now a standard tool of numerical analyses in many branches of mathematics, physics, and chemistry.

In 1956, Rosenbluth joined General Atomic in San Diego. His purpose at GA was to develop peaceful and commercial applications of atomic energy. Rosenbluth spearheaded the experimental fusion program at GA that was jointly supported by the American and Japanese governments. He also substantially contributed to the development of commercial fission reactors at GA. He briefly returned to the consideration of atomic bombs in 1958 when he and Ted Taylor wrote a paper examining the feasibility of a spaceship propelled by a large number of fission bombs. The idea became the basis for Project Orion, which continued at GA until it was cancelled in 1965.

Rosenbluth also taught plasma physics at the University of California, San Diego from 1960 to 1967. Between 1967 and 1987 he held positions both at Princeton University and the University of Texas. He continued to be recognized for his work during this period. In 1969, he was elected to the National Academy of Science and in 1985 he was awarded the Fermi Prize. When funding for his program failed to renew, Rosenbluth returned to UCSD in 1987. He and his second wife, Sara, purchased the house on Via Siena in 1990.

In 1992, Rosenbluth retired from UCSD. He was not idle during his retirement, however. Rosenbluth became the Chief Scientist at the International Thermonuclear Engineering Reactor project, or ITER. The project was an international effort to build a prototype fusion reactor to demonstrate the feasibility of fusion power. In 1997, Rosenbluth was granted the National Medal of Science, the highest honor in American science, by President Clinton. In 1998, Rosenbluth and Hinton publish a paper on Rosenbluth-Hinton flows. In 2000, he was awarded the Nicholson Medal.

Rosenbluth suffered poor health around the turn of the millennium and died of cancer in 2003, at age 76.

HISTORIC CONTEXT: SARA ROSENBLUTH

Sara Rosenbluth is a locally-known artist. She is, at the time of this report, still living and producing artwork. As her career has not yet been completed and her work, while locally popular, has not been catalogued or studied there has been insufficient passage of time to understand the potential historic impact of her career and her art.

HISTORIC CONTEXT: BATTER KAY ASSOCIATES

Note: The following firm profile has been excerpted in its entirety from ModernSanDiego.com.

“Janice Kay was born in Del Mar, Michael in New Haven, Connecticut. Together they attended the Harvard Graduate School of Design. Upon arriving in San Diego they spoke to Fred Liebhardt and Roy Drew about potential jobs. Instead of joining either firm they started their own office, in the middle of a recession, in 1975.

A house for themselves on Balboa in Del Mar was their first project. Luckily the young upstarts were able to secure jobs from those that learned of their design ethos through the house. And for economy, the Batter Kay office was on the 1st floor of the home.

In the beginning Batter Kay did not break certain rules as they held to a Corbusian discipline. And to this day, the couple believe that every Batter Kay house, having designed over 200 projects since 1975, reflects its site and its clients.

Recognizing Josep Lluis Sert’s imprint, with whom they studied under at Harvard, one’s eye may also be drawn to references to Charles Gwathmey and Architects Collaborative work in the early 1970s. Certainly their work is connected to Le Corbusier, and not via 6-degrees of separation as Sert managed Corbu’s only project built on U.S. soil the Carpenter Center for the Visual Arts (ca. 1963) at Harvard University.

While many of the design/architecture students that attended Harvard built their careers in New York and Boston, Michael and Janice moved to San Diego with the idea they could actually build residential projects (in contrast to commercial projects being largely the available projects in older, more dense northeastern urban settings) as southern California continued to grow and develop.

While they continue to maintain that their projects should be painted white, some of their earlier homes were clad in stained/sealed wood. Their switch to stucco favored a more ‘plastic’ material that could help make real some of their ideas.

Among their principles of design are creating ‘art you live in and feel good about being in’, ‘making all spaces work both inside and out’, and in regards to best siting a home ‘make the house bend toward the view.’

According to the office principals, their reliance on designing homes in white allows the resident and visitor to see the homes as sculpture. The stark color and forms create strong contrasts between indoor and outdoor spaces.

While their early clients wanted 2500-3500 square foot homes, as the years passed clients begged for larger and larger footprints. Paul Jacobs’ residence in La Jolla is likely their largest project of their career, while a small house for a young man in Fallbrook expresses that their clients, like any firm’s, have small budgets too.

Reference Material: Outside Architecture by Susan Zevon.”

CITY OF SAN DIEGO HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA In order to be eligible for designation on the City of San Diego’s Register of Historical Resources, a resource must both have significance under one or more of the City’s Historical Significance Criteria and retain sufficient integrity to convey that significance in its current state. What follows is an evaluation of significance only; see the following sections for an evaluation of integrity and for a final eligibility conclusion.

Criterion A: Exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City’s, a community’s, or a neighborhood’s historical, archaeological, cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, landscaping or architectural development.

The house is not significant under Criterion A. It does not exemplify any special elements of the City’s, community’s, or neighborhood’s development.

Criterion B: Is identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history.

The house is significant under Criterion B for its association with internationally-recognized creator of the so-called “third wave” of psychology, Carl Rogers. Rogers’ significance as established in the above context statement is strongly connected to the house at 2311 Via Siena. According to former CSP colleague Dr. William Stillwell, Rogers used to use his house for most of his business. Rogers would gather the team in his living room to discuss the start of every new project. Rogers also gave media interviews in his living room, wrote some of his published papers in his study, and he and his wife hosted an annual Christmas party at the house. CSP had a conference room and library at 1125 Torrey Pines Road, but that building is not the best representation of Rogers’ work in La Jolla and has undergone significant alterations since the time of CSP’s tenancy.

The house is not significant under Criterion B for its association with National Medal of Science winner Marshall Rosenbluth. Most of Rosenbluth’s significant activities as established in the above context statement occurred before his ownership of the house. Certain activities, such as his work with ITER, the publishing of his paper on Rosenbluth- Hinton flows, and the receipt of two awards for his earlier work, did occur during his residency at 2311 Via Siena. However there is no evidence to say that any of those had an identifiable connection with the house itself.

The house is not significant under Criterion B for its association with locally-known artist Sara Rosenbluth. There has been an insufficient passage of time to evaluate the impact of her work on local history. In addition, while the studio addition that replaced Rogers’ study was completed in 1993 for Sara, it is unknown if she completed any of her potentially significant work in that studio.

The house is not significant under Criterion B for its association with architects Batter and Kay. This association is best evaluated under Criterion D as the work of a potential master.

The house is not significant under Criterion B for any other owner or resident.

No significant historical events have been tied to the house and therefore it is not significant under Criterion B for an association with a significant event.

Criterion C: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.

The house embodies the character-defining features of the Contemporary substyle of Modernism as follows:

✓ Strong roof forms, typically with deep overhangs ✓ Large windows, often aluminum framed ✓ Non-traditional exterior finishes, such as vertical wood siding, concrete block, stucco, flagstone, and mullion-free glass ✓ Angular massing ✓ Sun shades or shadow block accents ✓ Attached garages or carports x Split-level design ✓ Horizontal orientation x Distinctive triangular, parabolic or arched forms

The house displays seven of the nine character-defining features identified in the Modernism Context Statement. Therefore, the house is significant under Criterion C.

Criterion D: Is representative of the notable work of a master builder, designer, architect, engineer, landscape architect, interior designer, artist, or craftsman.

The house is not significant under Criterion D for its association with Roger Matthews. Matthews is not currently a designated master in the City of San Diego and does not appear to be prominent in the archival record.

The house is not significant under Criterion D for its association with Richard Hamlin. Hamlin is not currently a designated master in the City of San Diego and does not appear to be prominent in the archival record.

The house is not significant under Criterion D for its association with the firm Batter Kay. Batter Kay is not a currently designated master in the City of San Diego but is profiled on ModernSanDiego.com as modern architects in San Diego. Batter Kay was not identified in the Modernism Context Statement. This nomination does not propose Batter Kay as a new master. Even if Batter Kay were to be designated as a master in the future, the Rosenbluth studio addition would DPR 523 (1/95) *Required information State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Property Name: Carl Rogers House Page 12 of 89

not be representative of their notable work in San Diego.

Criterion E: Is listed or has been determined eligible by the National Park Service for listing on the National Register of Historic Places or is listed or has been determined eligible by the State Historical Preservation Office for listing on the State Register of Historical Resources.

The house is not significant under Criterion E. It has not previously been listed in or determined eligible for listing in any historical register.

Criterion F: Is a finite group of resources related to one another in a clearly distinguishable way or is a geographically definable area or neighborhood containing improvements which have a special character, historical interest or aesthetic value or which represent one or more architectural periods or styles in the history and development of the City.

The house is not significant under Criterion F. It is not located within an identified, significant grouping, such as a historic district.

INTEGRITY EVALUATION To be eligible for designation under any City of San Diego Historical Significance Criteria, a resource must retain integrity. According to the National Park Service (NPS), the integrity of a resource is determined by “the ability of a resource to convey its significance.” In this case, the house is significant under Criteria B and C. In the context of Criterion C significance the Design, Materials, and Workmanship aspects of integrity are particularly important. In the context of Criterion B significance the Feeling and Association aspects of integrity are particularly important.

What follows is an evaluation of integrity only; see the preceding section for an evaluation of significance and the following section for a final eligibility conclusion.

Location: The place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred.

The house does retain sufficient integrity of location under Criteria B and C to convey its significance. The house has not been moved since its construction.

Setting: The physical environment of a historic property.

The house does retain sufficient integrity of setting to convey its significance under Criteria B and C. The house’s setting is still characterized by single family residences, winding roads, and ocean and city views.

Design: Design is defined as the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property. Criterion B

The house does retain sufficient integrity of design to convey its significance under Criterion B as the residence and workplace of Carl Rogers.

The following alterations from the 1961 design of the house were undertaken by the Rogers family during the period

of significance for Criterion B, 1963-1987, and therefore do not constitute a loss of integrity:

- Rogers study (1963, non-extant) - Enclosure of an atrium to form a maid’s quarters (1986)

The following alterations have occurred to the house since the period of significance for Criterion B, 1963-1987:

- Rosenbluth studio (1992) - Additional courtyard walls (1992)

The 1992 work complies with the Standards for Rehabilitation and therefore does not significantly degrade the house’s integrity of design under Criterion B. The work did not alter the use (Standard 1) or spatial relationships (Standard 2) of the property, as the Rosenbluth studio expanded a previous addition in the same location and with the same use. Elements of the house that have achieved significance in their own rights, such as the maid’s quarters, are maintained (Standard 4). The work did not destroy evidence of construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize the property, such as the glass walls and concrete block (Standard 5). The studio’s massing, parapeted roof, and predominant use of solid walls successfully differentiate it from the original portions of the house while its use of sliding doors and stucco walls make it compatible with the historic design of the house (Standard 9). The addition and the courtyard walls are constructed in such a way that, should they be removed in the future, they would not harm the essential form and integrity of the historic house (Standard 10).

The following alterations are suspected but do not have confirmed dates of construction/alteration: - Re-stuccoing of the house - Tiling of the rear and entry courtyards - Replacement of one kitchen window with a vinyl sliding window

These alterations may have occurred during the period of significance, since it is known that the Rogers family altered the home multiple times and because the Rosenbluth plans indicate no work done to the main house. Even if they were done outside of the period of significance, they are not sufficient to degrade the integrity of design of the entire property. The re-stuccoing of the house, if it occurred, was with a texture appropriate to the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s when Rogers occupied the property. The replacement of a single window on a hidden elevation and the addition of tile to the courtyards do not degrade the integrity of the entire property individually or cumulatively.

Criterion C

The house does retain sufficient integrity of design to convey its significance under Criterion C as a Contemporary single-family residence.

The following extant design alterations were undertaken after the period of significance for Criterion C (1961): - Enclosure of an atrium to form a maid’s quarters (1986) - Rosenbluth studio (1992) - Additional courtyard walls (1992)

The enclosure of an atrium to form a maid’s quarters likely occurred at the rear of the rear wing of the house, is not visible from the public right of way, and represents an alteration of 87 square feet total (according to the building record and permit). This small and hidden alteration does not degrade the ability of the house to convey its DPR 523 (1/95) *Required information State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Property Name: Carl Rogers House Page 14 of 89

Contemporary design under Criterion C.

The 1992 work complies with the Standards and therefore does not significantly degrade the house’s ability to convey its Contemporary design under Criterion C. The work did not alter the use (Standard 1) or spatial relationships (Standard 2) of the property, as the Rosenbluth studio expanded a previous addition in the same location and with the same use. Elements of the house that have achieved significance in their own rights, such as the maid’s quarters, are maintained (Standard 4). The work did not destroy evidence of construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize the property, such as the glass walls and concrete block (Standard 5). The studio’s massing, parapeted roof, and predominant use of solid walls successfully differentiate it from the original portions of the house while its use of sliding doors and stucco walls make it compatible with the historic design of the house (Standard 9). The addition and the courtyard walls are constructed in such a way that, should they be removed in the future, they would not harm the essential form and integrity of the historic house (Standard 10).

These alterations are not sufficient to degrade the integrity of design of the entire property. The re-stuccoing of the house, if it occurred, was with a texture appropriate to the period of significance. The replacement of a single window on a hidden elevation and the addition of tile to the courtyards do not degrade the house’s ability to convey its Contemporary design under Criterion C.

The cumulative changes described above do not degrade the house’s ability to convey its Contemporary design under Criterion C. The house’s main character-defining design features are intact.

Materials: The physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a pattern or configuration or form a historic property.

The house does retain sufficient integrity of materials to convey its significance under Criterion B, as the home and workplace of Carl Rogers, and under Criterion C, as a Contemporary single-family residence.

The following alterations to the house’s materials have occurred at an unknown date:

- Addition of red clay tile to entry and rear courtyards (date unknown) - Re-stuccoing (date unknown, stucco replaced in kind and with an appropriate, heavy sand texture) - Replacement of a kitchen window (original material unknown) with a vinyl window

These alterations are minor and do not degrade the house’s overall integrity of materials.

Workmanship: Workmanship is defined as the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory.

The house does retain sufficient integrity of workmanship to convey its significance under Criterion B, as the home and workplace of Carl Rogers, and under Criterion C, as a Contemporary single-family residence. The two areas of the house where historic workmanship is most evident are the concrete block walls on the front of the house and the DPR 523 (1/95) *Required information State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Property Name: Carl Rogers House Page 15 of 89

post-and-beam living room wall at the front of the house. Both of these elements remain intact and still convey the house’s integrity of workmanship.

Feeling: The property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time.

The house does retain sufficient integrity of feeling to convey its significance. According to a long-time neighbor and to a former associate of Carl Rogers’, the home retains its original feeling and aesthetic.

Association: The direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property.

The house does retain sufficient integrity of association to convey its significance. The house still retains its association to its date of construction, 1961. Also, according to a former colleague of Rogers’, the house still retains its connection to Carl Rogers’ period of occupation to such a degree that the colleague still drives guests of the Center for the Studies of the Person past the house. While Rogers’ study was replaced with the Rosenbluth studio addition, Rogers used the entire house for his significant work (for example, kicking off large new projects in the intact living room), and so the association remains.

ELIGIBILITY CONCLUSION The house is eligible for listing in the San Diego Register of Historical Resources under Criterion B, as the home and workplace of prominent psychologist Carl Rogers, and under Criterion C, as embodying the distinctive characteristics of the Contemporary style of residential architecture. The house maintains all seven aspects of integrity, allowing it to continue to convey its significance under Criteria B and C.

1 Bryant Evans, “New ‘Third Force’ in Psychology Gains Recognition,” San Diego Union, September 8, 1963. 2 Leigh Fenly, “Carl Rogers: Bestowing Freedom to Be,” San Diego Union, July 9, 1978. 3 Ibid. 4 Howard Kirschenbaum, On Becoming Carl Rogers, Delacorte Press, 1979, pp. 92-93. 5 Carl Rogers, The Clinical Treatment of the Problem Child, London: George Allen and Unwin, Ltd., 1939, p.3. 6 Fenly, “Carl Rogers.” 7 “Former APA Presidents,” American Psychological Association, https://www.apa.org/about/governance/president/former-presidents; “About,” American Academy of Psychotherapists, https://www.aapweb.com/home/history.html; “Book of Members, 1780-2010: Chapter R,” American Academy of Arts and Sciences. 8 Richard Farson, “The Legacy of Carl Rogers at WBSI,” Voice of San Diego, April 21, 2005, https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/news/the-legacy-of-carl-rogers-at-wbsi/. 9 “Movie Created in San Diego Up for Oscar,” San Diego Union, February 25, 1969. 10 “Psychology Center Set,” San Diego Union, November 3, 1968. 11 Interview with Dr. William Stillwell, October 22, 2018. 12 Daniel Goleman, “Carl R. Rogers, 85, Leader in Psychotherapy, Dies,” New York Times, February 6, 1987. 13 Steven J. Haggbloom, et al. “The 100 most eminent psychologists of the 20th century.” Review of General Psychology Vol. 7(1), Mar 2003.

ATTACHMENT A Building Development Information

A.1 County Assessor’s Residential Building Record A.2 Notice of Completion A.3 Water and Sewer Connection Records A.4 Building Permits A.5 Site Plan with Building Footprint A.6 County Lot & Block Book Page A.7 Previous Historical Resource Survey Forms

A.1 – County Assessor’s Residential Building Record

A.1 – County Assessor’s Residential Building Record (same as last, edited for text legibility)

A.2 – Notice of Completion

A.3 – Water and Sewer Connection Records

Records not found.

A.4 – Building Permits

A.4 – Building Permits (1992 Demolition Plans)

A.4 – Building Permits (1992 Site Plan)

A.5 – Site Plan with Building Footprint

A.6 – County Lot & Block Book Page

Lot & Block book page not available for 1961

A.7 – Previous Historical Resource Survey Forms

No previous survey of property found.

ATTACHMENT B Ownership and Occupant Information

B.1 Chain of Title B.2 City Directory Listing of Occupants B.3 Deed from Time of Construction

B.1 – Chain of Title

B.2 – City Directory Listing of Occupants

Date(s) Occupants(s) 1961-1963 Lloyd Swortwood and Raymona Swortwood 1963-1980 Carl Rogers and Helen Rogers 1980-1987 Carl Rogers 1987-1990 Vacant 1990-2002 Marshall Rosenbluth and Sara Rosenbluth 2003-2014 Sara Rosenbluth 2014-Present David Monzon and Monique Konovalov

B.3 – Deed from Time of Construction

ATTACHMENT C Maps

C.1 City of San Diego 800’ Scale Engineering Map C.2 USGS Maps C.3 Subdivision Map C.4 Sanborn Fire Insurance Company Maps

C.1 – 800’ Scale Engineering Map

C.2 – USGS Map (1967)

C.2 – USGS Map (1996)

C.3 – Subdivision Map

C.4 – Sanborn Maps

No Sanborn Maps Found

ATTACHMENT D Photographs

D.1 Historic and Transitional Photographs* D.2 Current Photographs – North Elevation D.3 Current Photographs – East Elevation D.4 Current Photographs – South Elevation D.5 Current Photographs – West Elevation D.6 Current Photographs – Rosenbluth studio D.7 Current Photographs – Site features

*No historical photographs were found. Photos were sought in archival repositories, online searches, and through former owners, current and former neighbors, and former colleagues of Rogers and Rosenbluth.

D.1 – Historical and Transitional Photographs

D.1-1. Conceptual sketch of 2311 Via Siena, dated 1961.

D.1-2. Aerial photograph. Real Estate Atlas of San Diego County, 1972, Vol 3. DPR 523 (1/95) *Required information State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Property Name: Carl Rogers House Page 45 of 89

D.1-3. Photograph of Rogers house looking southwest, circa 1992. Courtesy of William Stillwell.

D.1-4. Photograph of Rogers house looking southeast, circa 1992. Note that the entrance courtyard block wall is present but overgrown with vegetation. Courtesy of William Stillwell.

D.2 – Current Photographs (North Elevation)

D.2-1. North elevation overall. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.2-2. Front entry courtyard and carport entry both visible, looking east. IS Architecture, 2018. DPR 523 (1/95) *Required information State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Property Name: Carl Rogers House Page 47 of 89

D.2-3. Carport entry with full-height windows and slab door. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.2-4. Front entrance door with original, full-height windows and slab door. Red, square tile visible. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.2-5. Front entrance courtyard, looking northeast. Planting bed and decorative detailing of the CMU wall visible.

D.2-6. Projecting section at the eastern extent of the north elevation. Looking west. Original windows, window frames, support posts, and CMU detailing visible. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.2-7. Decorative CMU work continues below the projecting living room bay. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.2-8. Doubled support posts beneath the projecting living room bay. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.3 – Current Photographs (East Elevation)

D.3-1. East elevation of the front wing, looking south. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.3-2. East elevation of the front wing, looking north. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.3-3. East elevation of the rear wing. Portion of elevation to the north of the solid wall, where the two wings intersect. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.3-4. Original sliding glass door at the intersection of the two wings. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.3-5. Vertical board siding on the central wall of the rear wing’s east elevation. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.3-6. East elevation of the rear wing. Portion of elevation to the south of the solid wall, where the rear wing meets the Rosenbluth studio. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.3-7. Windows to the right of the slab door (same section of elevation as D.3-6). IS Architecture, 2018.

D.3-8. Windows to the left of the slab door (same section of elevation as D.3-6). IS Architecture, 2018.

D.4 – Current Photographs (South Elevation)

D.4-1. South elevation of the front wing, looking through the living room to the front yard. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.4-2. South elevation of the front wing, behind the carport. Note original doors. IS Architecture, 2018. DPR 523 (1/95) *Required information State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Property Name: Carl Rogers House Page 58 of 89

D.4-3. South elevation of the rear wing. Likely location of atrium infill. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.5 – Current Photographs (West Elevation)

D.5-1. West elevation, looking north from the rear yard. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.5-2. Rear portion of the west elevation, looking northeast. Section behind the projecting wall. IS Architecture, 2018. DPR 523 (1/95) *Required information State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Property Name: Carl Rogers House Page 60 of 89

D.5-3. West elevation, looking northeast. To the north of the projecting wall. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.5-4. West elevation, where the rear and front wings meet. Note the original aluminum window, metal vent, and slab door and the replacement vinyl sliding window. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.6 – Current Photographs (Rosenbluth studio)

D.6-1. North elevation of the Rosenbluth studio. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.6-2. East elevation of the Rosenbluth studio, looking north. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.6-3. South elevation of the Rosenbluth studio. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.6-4. West elevation of the Rosenbluth studio. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.7 – Current Photographs (Site Features)

D.7-1. Square block wall to the west of the carport. Contributing feature. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.7-2. Square block wall continuing to the rear yard, following the planes of the house. IS Architecture, 2018. DPR 523 (1/95) *Required information State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Property Name: Carl Rogers House Page 65 of 89

D.7-3. Basketball court with new, poured concrete wall. Court and new wall are non-contributing. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.7-4. Courtyard, looking southeast. Mature tree, both courtyard walls, and lawn visible. Lawn, original courtyard wall, and tree are contributing. Rosenbluth era courtyard wall non-contributing. IS Architecture, 2018.

D.7-5. Poured concrete and front walkway, both original and both contributing. IS Architecture, 2018.

ATTACHMENT E Supplemental Documentation

E.1 Criterion B Documentation – Carl Rogers E.2 Criterion B Documentation – Marshall Rosenbluth E.3 Criterion C Documentation

E.1 – Criterion B Documentation (Carl Rogers)

September 8, 1963 San Diego Union

August 13, 1964 San Diego Union DPR 523 (1/95) *Required information State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Property Name: Carl Rogers House Page 70 of 89

November 3, 1968 San Diego Union

February 25, 1969 San Diego Union DPR 523 (1/95) *Required information State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Property Name: Carl Rogers House Page 72 of 89

June 22, 1975 San Diego Union

continued on following page) on following continued 1978 9, July Union Diego San ( DPR 523 (1/95) *Required information State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Property Name: Carl Rogers House Page 74 of 89

July 9, 1978 San Diego Union (continued on following page)

1978 9, July Union Diego San DPR 523 (1/95) *Required information State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Property Name: Carl Rogers House Page 77 of 89

continued on following page) on following continued 1982 12, October Union Diego San ( DPR 523 (1/95) *Required information State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Property Name: Carl Rogers House Page 78 of 89

October 12, 1982 San Diego Union

Carl Rogers Timeline 1902 Born in Oak Park, Illinois to a religious Christian family. The fourth of six children. 1920 Enrolled at University of Wisconsin – Madison for agricultural studies… then history… then religion 1922 Took a trip to Peking, China, for an international Christian conference. Started to doubt his religious convictions. 1924 Earned his BA from the University of Wisconsin – Madison Enrolled at Union Theological Seminary in NYC 1926 Left seminary to attend Teachers College, Columbia University 1928 Earned his MA from Teachers College, Columbia University 1930 Director of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children in Rochester, NY 1931 Earned his PHD from Teachers College, Columbia University 1935 Lecturer at the University of Rochester (through 1940) 1939 Published The Clinical Treatment of the Problem Child 1940 Professor of Clinical Psychology at Ohio State University (through 1945) First stated his theories to his peers in a lecture at the University of Minnesota 1942 Published Counseling and Psychotherapy 1945 Professor of psychology at University of Chicago (through 1957) 1951 Published Client-Centered Therapy 1954 Published On Becoming A Person Published Psychotherapy and Personality Change 1956 Award for Distinguished Scientific Contributions from APA Became the first president of the American Academy of Psychotherapists 1957 Professor at the University of Wisconsin, Madison (through 1963) 1961 Elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. 1963 “Soon to join” WBSI (as of Sept. 8th, bought house Sept. 20th) 1964 Humanist of the Year Award by American Humanist Association 1968 Established CSP at 1125 Torrey Pines Road The documentary “Journey Into Self” wins an Oscar. 1972 Award for Distinguished Professional Contributions to Psychology 1974 Began organizing the Person-Centered Approach Workshops with his daughter and colleagues on an international scale. Continued through 1984. 1975 Given an honorary PhD from University of Leiden in the Netherlands 1977 Published Carl Rogers on Personal Power 1980 Published A Way of Being 1983 Published Freedom to Learn for the 80’s 1987 Dies at 85 of a heart attack following surgery 2003 Found to be second most eminent clinical psychologists of the 20th century, only behind Freud (Haggbloom)

E.2 – Criterion B Documentation (Marshall Rosenbluth)

March 14, 1967 San Diego Union

Marshall Rosenbluth Selected Timeline 1950 Started at Los Alamos 1956 Left Los Alamos, started at General Atomics in SD 1960 Professor at UCSD 1964 Wins E.O. Lawrence Prize 1967 Professor at Princeton 1969 Elected to the National Academy of Science 1976 Awarded the Maxwell Prize 1985 Awarded the Fermi Prize 1987 Turns 60, returns to General Atomics and UCSD 1990 Buys house 1992 Remodels house 1993 Retired from UCSD Becomes Chief Scientist at ITER 1997 Awarded the National Medal of Science by Clinton 1998 Publishes on Rosenbluth-Hinton flows 1999 No longer with ITER 2000 Awarded the Nicholson Medal 2003 Dies at 76

E.3 – Criterion C Documentation

San Diego Modernism Context, page 76

DPR 523 (1/95) *Required information