ATTACHMENT C: HISTORICAL RESOURCES EVALUATION REPORT Historical Resources Evaluation Report December 2014 State Route 710 North Study SUMMARY OF FINDINGS The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), in cooperation with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, proposes transportation improvements to improve mobility and relieve congestion in the area bounded by State Route 2 (SR 2) and Interstates 5, 10, 210, and 605 (I-5, I-10, I-210, and I-605, respectively) in east/northeast Los Angeles and the western San Gabriel Valley (Historic Property Survey Report [HPSR], Attachment A, Maps 1–3). To accomplish this, four build alternatives are proposed in addition to the No Build alternative. These include the Transportation System Management/ Transportation Demand Management (TSM/TDM) Alternative, Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative; Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative; and Freeway Tunnel Alternative. The proposed action will include, but not be limited to, acquisition of right-of-way; temporary construction and permanent easements; construction of elevated roadways/railways, cut and cover tunnels, bored tunnels, sound walls, retaining walls, concrete barriers, drainage facilities, curbs, and gutters; installation of paving; relocation of utilities; and grading (HPSR, Attachment A, Maps 3A, 3B, and 3C). This Historical Resources Evaluation Report (HRER) was prepared in compliance with the Caltrans Programmatic Agreement among the Federal Highway Administration, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the California State Historic Preservation Officer, and the California Department of Transportation Regarding Compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as it Pertains to the Administration of the Federal-Aid Highway Program in California executed January 1, 2004, and amendments (2014 Section 106 PA). Cultural resources were identified and evaluated for the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) as required by the 2014 Section 106 PA, using the National Register of Historic Places eligibility criteria found in 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 800 and the regulations implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (NHPA). These evaluations comply with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements and evaluates identified cultural resources in accordance with California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 15064.5(a)(2)–(3) using the criteria outlined in PRC Section 5024.1. The document was also prepared in compliance with PRC 5024 for state-owned historical resources. Caltrans is the lead agency under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and CEQA. Archaeological field surveys of the areas of anticipated ground-disturbing activities within the project’s direct Area of Potential Effects (APE) were conducted on various days between September 9 and October 25, 2013. As a result of these surveys, no archaeological resources were identified in the project APE. Architectural surveys of the APE, which includes approximately 2,200 properties, were conducted for the entire APE (direct and indirect) on multiple days from August 26 through October 11, 2013, with follow-up surveys conducted on June 12 and 13, July 25, August 7 and 30, and November 8, 2014. As a result of these surveys, there are a total of 68 properties in the project APE that are either listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register. This includes 43 properties previously listed in or determined eligible for listing in the National Register (including 11 historic districts), 22 properties that were determined eligible for i Historical Resources Evaluation Report December 2014 State Route 710 North Study listing in the National Register as a result of this study (including 2 historic districts and 1 park), and 3 properties (Route 66, 318 Fairview Avenue, and 2020 Fremont Avenue) that are being considered eligible for listing in the National Register for purposes of this study only. In addition to these 68 National Register properties, there are 9 properties (including 1 historic district) that are “historical resources” pursuant to CEQA, but are not eligible for listing in the National Register. As stated in the paragraph above, pursuant to the 2014 Section 106 PA, Stipulation VIII.C.4, Caltrans is considering the various portions of Route 66 within the APE as eligible for the National Register for purposes of this project only. Fifteen bridges were also identified in the APE (HPSR, Attachment B). Of these, the Fair Oaks Overcrossing Bridge #53 0440 is eligible for listing in the National Register as a contributing element of the Arroyo Seco Parkway Historic District. Pursuant to PRC 5024, all the State-owned historical resources within the APE were previously evaluated and the California State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) has concurred with those conclusions. For CEQA purposes, in compliance with PRC 15064.5(a), Caltrans, as the Lead Agency under CEQA, has determined that the 68 resources listed in Table 5 are historical resources pursuant to CEQA. Caltrans, however, is providing this information to the SHPO as a courtesy only and is not seeking the SHPO’s comments. All other historic-period resources within the APE have been determined exempt from further evaluation per the 2014 Section 106 PA. ii Historical Resources Evaluation Report December 2014 State Route 710 North Study TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ...................................................................................................... i TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................... iii I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................... 1 ALTERNATIVES ........................................................................................................ 1 No Build Alternative .............................................................................................. 1 Transportation System Management/Transportation Demand Management (TSM/TDM) Alternative .................................................................................. 1 Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Alternative .................................................................... 3 Light Rail Transit (LRT) Alternative ..................................................................... 4 Freeway Tunnel Alternative ................................................................................... 5 AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS ............................................................................. 7 II. RESEARCH METHODS ........................................................................................... 10 RECORDS SEARCH ................................................................................................. 10 OUTREACH AND ARCHIVAL RESEARCH .......................................................... 11 Formal Outreach ................................................................................................... 11 Archival Research ................................................................................................ 13 III. FIELD METHODS ..................................................................................................... 16 ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY METHODS .............................................................. 16 Potential Historic Districts ................................................................................... 16 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY METHODS .......................................................... 17 IV. HISTORICAL OVERVIEW ...................................................................................... 18 SPANISH/MISSION PERIOD (1769–1821) ............................................................. 18 MEXICAN/RANCHO PERIOD (1821–1848) ........................................................... 20 AMERICAN PERIOD (1848–PRESENT) ................................................................. 21 Community Development .................................................................................... 23 Other Physical Features ........................................................................................ 34 Historic Districts and Neighborhoods .................................................................. 39 Architects and Builders ........................................................................................ 41 V. DESCRIPTION OF CULTURAL RESOURCES ...................................................... 44 NATIONAL REGISTER PROPERTIES ................................................................... 45 Los Angeles County (Unincorporated Area) ........................................................ 45 Los Angeles (City) ............................................................................................... 45 Monterey Park ...................................................................................................... 47 Pasadena ............................................................................................................... 47 San Marino ........................................................................................................... 60 South Pasadena ..................................................................................................... 60 iii Historical Resources Evaluation Report December 2014 State Route 710 North Study HISTORICAL RESOURCES UNDER CEQA ONLY .............................................