City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation Report

Transcription

1 Santa Monica, California Prepared for City of Santa Monica Planning Division Prepared by Margarita Jerabek, Ph.D. Amanda Kainer, M.S. Virginia Harness, M.A. Stephanie Hodal, M.H.C. PCR Services Corporation Santa Monica, California January 2016

2 Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION... 2 A. Executive Summary... 2 B. Location and Property Description... 2 C. Methodology... 2 II. REGULATORY FRAMEWORK... 3 A. Local Level City of Santa Monica Designation Criteria... 3 III. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND... 5 A. Development of Ocean Park... 5 B., Property History Construction History Ownership and Occupancy History C. Period Revival Styles: Renaissance Revival Style ( ) IV. EVALUATION OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES A. Previous Evaluations B. Architectural Description C. Integrity Analysis D. Evaluation of Significance Landmark Criteria E. Conclusion APPENDICES... A 1 Appendix A Professional Qualifications Appendix B Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps Appendix C Assessor Index Map Appendix D Assessor Parcel Map Appendix E Building Permits page i

3 I. INTRODUCTION A. Executive Summary PCR evaluated ( subject building or subject property ) against the applicable Landmark and Historic District Criteria for the City of Santa Monica. The subject property was built in 1926 by contractor Western States Construction Company. The architect is listed as Maurice A. Sasso. The four-story plus basement Renaissance Revival style commercial building maintains its original footprint. The subject property is situated near the northwest corner of Barnard Way and Neilson Way. The subject property was constructed for the Santa Monica Bay Telephone Company and is associated with the early 20 th century commercial development of Ocean Park. It was continuously owned and operated by a telephone company for the first 60 years of its existence, and was one of the few early buildings in this section of Ocean Park to survive intensive postwar redevelopment. The subject property is altered, but retains integrity of location, design, feeling, and association, as well as partial integrity of materials and workmanship. Overall, it retains its original appearance and is still able to convey its historic feeling. Therefore, PCR concluded that the subject property meets the local threshold of significance for City of Santa Monica Landmark designation. B. Location and Property Description The subject property is located on Block 10, Lots 30 and 32 of the Bay View Tract and is improved with a four-story Renaissance Revival style commercial building constructed in The lot is rectangular in shape and oriented towards the southeast, and covers an area of approximately 60 feet (width) by 80 feet (length). The property fronts directly onto the sidewalk. The subject property is bordered by Barnard Way to the west and south, Neilson Way to the east, and Pier Avenue and the Sea Colony Condominiums (constructed 1980) to the north. The immediate neighborhood consists of late-twentieth-century, two- to four-story apartment and condominium buildings. Neilson Villas is directly adjacent, Barnard Park Villas are across the street to the south, and a mix of early and late-20 th century commercial buildings are to the east across Neilson way. The Pacific Ocean is less than one quarter of a mile to the west. C. Methodology The evaluation was conducted by PCR s Assistant Architectural Historian, Virginia Harness, M.A., and Historic Resources Intern, Stephanie Hodal, M.H.C., whose qualifications meet the Secretary of the Interior s professional qualifications standards in architectural history. Margarita Jerabek, Ph.D., Director/Principal Architectural Historian, and Amanda Kainer, M.S, Senior Architectural Historian, provided project management and direction, site survey, research review and input, report review, and quality control. Professional qualifications are provided in Appendix A. PCR conducted this assessment to evaluate the existing conditions of the subject property in order to determine its eligibility for designation as a Santa Monica Landmark. A multi-step methodology was utilized to evaluate the property. An intensive pedestrian site survey was page 2

4 conducted by PCR s architectural historians to identify and record physical conditions through digital photography and manuscript notes. The physical inspection included examination of the materials and construction techniques, as well as analysis of the construction chronology as evidenced in the existing built fabric. Historical background research included review of available building permits, historic maps, photographs, newspaper articles, United States Census records, and published secondary sources on the history of Santa Monica. PCR conducted research at the City of Santa Monica Public Library and the City of Santa Monica Building and Safety Division. The information collected from these sources was used to assist in the architectural analysis and the evaluation of the building for designation. Ordinances, statutes, regulations, bulletins, and technical materials relating to federal, state, and local historic preservation, designation assessment processes and related programs were reviewed and analyzed. The evaluation criteria of the City of Santa Monica for the designation of individual properties and districts were utilized to evaluate the current historical and architectural significance of the subject property. II. REGULATORY FRAMEWORK A. Local Level 1. City of Santa Monica Designation Criteria The City of Santa Monica formally initiated a historic preservation program with its 1976 adoption of the Landmark and Historic Preservation Ordinance. The Santa Monica Landmarks and Historic Districts Ordinance was amended in 1987 and again in 1991, to create a more comprehensive preservation program. This ordinance established the Landmarks Commission whose powers include designation of Structures of Merit and Landmarks, and recommendation to the City Council for the designation of Historic Districts. Furthermore, it identified both obligations required of historic property ownership and a broad range of incentives available to owners of historic properties. Individual Landmarks Section of the City of Santa Monica Landmark and Historic Preservation Ordinance authorizes the Landmarks Commission to designate Landmarks or Historic Districts. An individually significant property may be designated a Landmark and such designations may be made provided that the subject properties meet one or more of the following criteria: 1. It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history of the City. 2. It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other noteworthy interest or value. 3. It is identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state or national history. 4. It embodies distinguishing architectural characteristics valuable to a study of a period, style, method of construction, or the use of indigenous materials or page 3

5 craftsmanship, or is a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or historical type valuable to such a study. 5. It is a significant or a representative example of the work or product of a notable builder, designer or architect. 6. It has a unique location, a singular physical characteristic, or is an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community or the City. It should be noted that the City of Santa Monica does not require that a property be of a certain age in order to be eligible for designation as a Landmark. Historic Districts An Historic District is defined by the City of Santa Monica as any geographic area or noncontiguous grouping of thematically related properties that the City Council has designated as and determined to be appropriate for historical preservation pursuant to the provisions of this [ordinance]. In order to be designated an Historic District, an area must meet one of the following criteria, outlined in the Santa Monica Municipal Code [ (b)]: 1. Any of the criteria identified in Section (a)(1) through (6). 2. It is a noncontiguous grouping of thematically related properties or a definable area possessing a concentration of historic, scenic or thematic sites, which contribute to each other and are unified aesthetically by plan, physical development or architectural quality. 3. It reflects significant geographical patterns, including those associated with different eras of settlement and growth, particular transportation modes, or distinctive examples of park or community planning. It has a unique location, a singular physical characteristic, or is an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community or the City. (Prior code 9607; added by Ord. No. 1028CCS, adopted 3/24/76; amended by Ord. No. 1590CCS 1, adopted 7/23/91). Additionally, Section of the City of Santa Monica Landmark and Historic Preservation Ordinance states that the application for the designation of a Historic District shall be automatically nullified if a petition opposing the designation is signed by owners of a majority of the properties to be located within the proposed District and filed with the Commission Secretary prior to the commencement of the Commission hearing on the application. 1 1 Santa Monica Municipal Code (h) Historic District designation procedure. page 4

6 III. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND The historic context developed below presents the background necessary to evaluate the historical and architectural significance of the subject residence, including the development of the Ocean Park, construction history and alterations, and occupancy history. The period of significance associated with subject property is 1926, the year of construction. Historical themes discussed below that are associated with the subject property include the following: Development of Ocean Park, Santa Monica Bay Telephone Company, Maurice Sasso, and Period Revival styles, specifically the Renaissance Revival ( ). A. Development of Ocean Park Ocean Park s early history developed somewhat independently from the rest of Santa Monica due, in part, to the separation of the areas by an arroyo now occupied by the Santa Monica Freeway. A neighborhood of the City of Santa Monica, Ocean Park is bounded by downtown Santa Monica on the north and Venice, a neighborhood of the City of Los Angeles, on the South. Separated from the City of Santa Monica s commercial core by an arroyo, travel between downtown Santa Monica and Ocean Park was very difficult. The sketch of Santa Monica below (Figure 1) from 1877 shows the arroyo and the commercial core of Santa Monica to the north, while the land to the south of the arroyo is sparsely developed. In the late 19th century, the arroyo functioned as a track bed for the Southern Pacific Railroad (SPRR) and the Pacific Electric Railway. Ocean Park was initially oriented toward the beach and the neighborhood s history is closely tied with its early twentieth-century development as an amusement and recreation destination, as a result of the construction of pleasure piers, amusement parks, bathhouses, tourist attractions, and recreational facilities. Figure 1. Sketch of Santa Monica showing the railroad in the arroyo, 1877 (Santa Monica Public Library (Santa Monica Public Library) The initial residential development of what would become Ocean Park occurred in the mid- 1880s when land owned by the Lucas and Vawter families was subdivided into residential tracts clustered on streets between the ocean and the 4 th Street hill, a natural inland boundary. 2 The settlers found the land was fertile and water was easily obtained by putting 2 Luther A. Ingersoll, Ingersoll's century history, Santa Monica Bay cities (Santa Monica: L. A. Ingersoll, page 5

7 down wells and some prosperous little ranches were established here. 3 The housing boom in Southern Santa Monica continued with considerable force until the sudden rise in values in 1887 and 1888 and later the depression abruptly halted this areas development progress. In the early 1890s, Abbott Kinney, who would later create Venice of America, formed a partnership with Francis Ryan to purchase and develop over one mile of land south of Front Avenue (now Pico Boulevard) along the Pacific Ocean. Recognizing that a rail link to Los Angeles would be the key to development of the area, in 1893 Kinney donated land for the right of way and a depot to the Santa Fe railroad. Because the railroad ran down Lucas Street, a block west of 2 nd Street (Main Street), the west side of the street was the railroad right-of-way and remained undeveloped. 4 A passenger depot was constructed at the northwest corner of Lucas Street and Hill Street. Upon completion of the rail line, the partners began subdividing and selling small parcels. Abbott Kinney and Francis Ryan persuaded the Railroad to construct an amusement pier to enhance the area s resort potential. A 500-foot concrete pier was constructed approximately 200 feet south of Hill Street, by 1895 the Railroad began running seven trains daily to the new resort during the summer season. The community was given the name Ocean Park in 1895, and the Santa Fe depot station name was changed from South Santa Monica to Ocean Park. 5 By 1901 Ocean Park contained approximately 200 dwellings (Figure 2), an auditorium (Figure 3), a bathhouse, a racetrack, the Ocean Park amusement pier, a casino (restaurant), and some agricultural plots of land. The adjacent Pier Street became one of the area s early commercial streets. 6 Left to Right: Figure 2.. First houses constructed along the boardwalk in Ocean Park, circa 1900 (Santa Monica Public Library); Figure 3.. Ocean Park Auditorium and the Casino Cafe, Santa Monica, Calif (Santa Monica Public Library) With new business partners Alexander Fraser and several others, Kinney formed the Ocean Park Improvement Company in The partners invested in a sewer system for the community, extended the boardwalk south to the end of their tract, increased the development of the Company s land south of Rose Avenue, and, finally, made plans for the ), p Luther A. Ingersoll, p Sanborn Maps, The Southside Depot Changed, Los Angeles Times, May 26, 1895, p. 11. Fred E. Basten, Santa Monica Bay: Paradise by the Sea: a Pictorial History of Santa Monica, Venice, Marina del Rey, Ocean Park, Pacific Palisades, Topanga & Malibu (Hennessey + Ingalls: Los Angeles, 1997). page 6

8 construction of a large bathhouse. Due to disagreements with his associates, however, Abbott Kinney quit the partnership in January 1904, taking the swampy southern portion of the Company s land for his imagined and soon to be conceived Venice project. Prior to relocating his business interests further south, however, Kinney had set in motion the incorporation of the partnership s property south of Marine Avenue (now Marine Street). On February 12, 1904 a successful vote created a new 6 th class city called Ocean Park. The driving factors behind Ocean Park s growth and development as a beach community were the large piers, bathhouses, boardwalks, plunges, and various pier amusements that were constructed along the beach and into the Pacific Ocean in the first few decades of the twentieth century. The rapid growth of Santa Monica during the 1920s generated an increased need for transportation connectivity and the Main Street Bridge, circa 1926, created a link, via Main Street, between the City s growing commercial core and Ocean Park. Upon completion, the Main Street Bridge extended Main Street across the arroyo. Traveling south, Main Street bisected the mostly vacant area owned by the SPRR until it reached the former Santa Fe Railroad s right of way and a small residential pocket that occupied the southeast corner of the quadrant. From there, Main Street turned diagonally southwest to connect with the existing segment of Main Street in Ocean Park. 7 The Pickering Pier was destroyed by fire in 1924 (Figure 4) and rebuilt in This was also the period during which the subject property was constructed, amidst a time of tremendous growth in Ocean Park and the surrounding beach communities. Modernized connectivity, be it through transport or telephone, was spurred on by the increasing popularity of Santa Monica and nearby environs. Figure 4. Ocean Park Pier Fire, Ocean Park, Calif (Santa Monica Public Library) Ocean Park assumed its modern identity during the 1930s as a year-round community. 8 This change shifted the focus of commercial centers from Pier Avenue to Main Street; and commercial establishments of the period appear to have catered to Ocean Park residents, 7 8 Portions of this section were adapted from the Historic Resources Technical Report Santa Monica Civic Center Specific Plan: Historic Resources Survey, Evaluation, and Analysis of Project Impacts, prepared by PCR Services Corporation for the City of Santa Monica, March James W. Lunsford, The Ocean and the Sunset, The Hills and the Clouds: Looking at Santa Monica, Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps, City of Santa Monica. Paula A. Scott, Santa Monica: A History on the Edge, Charleston, SC: Arcadia Publishing, Myers, William A., and Ira L. Swett, Trolleys to the Surf; The Story of the Los Angeles Pacific Railway (Glendale: Interurban Publications, Inc., 1976). page 7

9 rather than tourists. 9 Main Street became the commercial corridor of the developing Ocean Park community, servicing both permanent residents and visitors who lived in the cottages, bungalows, and courts that sprang up as far east as Lincoln and beyond. By the close of the teens, a substantial portion of Ocean Park was improved. By the 1930s, buildings occupied most of the available parcels in the area and older improvements were removed to provide space for newer development. Following World War II, few new amusement piers were constructed. Soon the familiar cycle of destruction by fire in conjunction with changing economics and new recreation choices led to the demise of the great amusement piers. A short-lived exception to this trend was Pacific Ocean Park (formerly the Lick Pier) which opened in 1958 as a competitor to Anaheim s Disneyland but closed eleven years later in 1967 (Figures 5 and 6). During the early 1970s, local surfers utilized the graveyard pier structure for their daring surfing maneuvers. When Pacific Ocean Park Pier was demolished in 1973/1974, the Santa Monica Municipal Pier became the last remaining amusement pier along the southern California Coast. 10 A reason for the failure of Pacific Ocean Park was because the neighborhood was in decline. During this period, Santa Monica began its urban renewal project that took place beginning with the establishment of the City of Santa Monica Redevelopment Agency in 1957 and identified the southwest corner of Ocean Park as its first redevelopment district. 11 By 1966, Santa Monica demolished an urban district between Ocean Park Boulevard and the Venice Border. Beach cottages, boarding houses, and small businesses within approximately seven city blocks were demolished in order to spur economic growth within the city. 12 Although the subject property was located within the redevelopment area, it escaped demolition. The reason for this is not documented, but is likely related to the fact that the building was still an important part of the local telephone infrastructure at that time. Left to Right: Figure 5.. Aerial of Pacific Ocean Park Pier, 1967 (SMPL Images); Figure 9 Leslie Heumann, Department of Parks and Recreation series 523 form, Blocks of Third Street District. 10 Earnest Marquez, Santa Monica Beach: A Collector s Pictorial History (Santa Monica: Angel City Press, 2004). 11 Historic Resources Group, Historic Resources Survey Update Ocean Park, Prepared for City of Santa Monica, June 2004, Ibid., 26. page 8

10 6. Entrance to POP Pier, 1965 (Santa Monica Public Library) B., Property History 1. Construction History The subject property was improved in 1926 with a Renaissance Revival telephone office and exchange building. An early sketch of the design by engineer Maurice Sasso appeared in the Los Angeles Times in early 1926, and shows that the design originally called for a slightly taller building of six stories, with an elaborate set of arched windows on the topmost floor (Figure 7). 13 What was ultimately constructed was only four stories and some of the detailing of this early sketch, including the arched windows of the top floor, were omitted (Figure 8). 14 The original building permit was issued on April 6, 1926 to the owner Santa Monica Bay Telephone Company with architect Maurice Sasso and contractor Western States Construction Company. 15 The permit indicates a construction cost of $80,000 for the service and office building. The permit specifies a building measuring 60 x 80 feet and 72-7 in height with a steel frame, reinforced concrete slab floors, gypsum tile block partitions, and an ornamental cast stone cornice. 13 Telephone Block Plan Completed, Los Angeles Times, March 21, 1926, E Santa Monica Telephone Exchange, Los Angeles Times, November 23, 1926, City of Santa Monica, Building & Safety, permit no. 573, April 6, page 9

11 Figure 7. March 1926 sketch in the newspaper showing an early design for the subject property (Los Angeles Times) page 10

12 Figure 8. The finished Santa Monica Bay Telephone Exchange in November 1926 (Los Angeles Times) The building was designed by Italian-born engineer Maurice Sasso. Born Mauro Sasso in 1890 in Terlizzi, Italy, Sasso came to the United States in 1913 and was naturalized as a U.S. citizen six years later. 16 It appears that Sasso had a lengthy career as an engineer in Los Angeles. The 1924 Los Angeles City Directory lists him as an engineer for the Union Oil Company. Most of his later work appears to have been for the telephone companies which owned and operated the subject property. The 1930 and 1940 census indicate that Sasso was self-employed, suggesting he served as a consulting engineer to the telephone companies throughout his career. Four of his designs (including the subject property) were written about in the Los Angeles Times, spanning a period from 1926 to His other known works include the Associated Telephone building at th Street in Santa Monica (1937), expansion of the Associated Telephone building in West Los Angeles at 1544 Cotner Avenue (1948), the General Telephone building in Pomona (1957), and an expansion of the General Telephone building in Lakewood (1958). 17 No substantial information was available 16 United States of America, Petition for Naturalization, Maurice Sasso, California Naturalization Records, , Los Angeles, Petitions, , Box 0004, Volume H, accessed January 28, 2016, via ancestry.com. 17 Lowering of New Ceiling Unique Construction Feat, Los Angeles Times, October 6, 1948, B1. Expansion Program, Los Angeles Times, February 10, 1957, F15. page 11

13 regarding other projects he may have worked on. While Sasso completed several building projects for Los Angeles based telephone companies, it does not appear that his design work was significant or influential in the architectural history of Santa Monica or the broader Los Angeles region. Figure 9. Sanborn Fire Insurance Map, City of Santa Monica, detail of sheet 27 (subject property outlined in red), Phone Building to be Enlarged, Los Angeles Times, January 5, 1958, F6. page 12

14 Figure 10. The subject property as seen in 1964, looking at the primary font elevation, view north (Santa Monica Public Library) page 13

15 Figure 11. First floor detail of the subject property as seen in 1964, looking at the primary font elevation, view north (Santa Monica Public Library) Few details about alterations to the building are recorded. In October 1977, $78,000 was invested in repairs to the exterior walls. 18 This would coincide with the time period in which abutting buildings were demolished as part of the Ocean Park Redevelopment effort. A Sanborn Fire Insurance Map dating from 1950 (Figure 9) indicates the footprint of the subject property prior at that time. The subject property was purchased in 1987 by the Broad Family Foundation. In 1988 the new owner invested $500,000 in a remodel of the interior and exterior changing the building s use to art storage and exhibit space. 19 Frederick Fisher is listed as the architect. Alterations during the remodel included re-roofing, extensive interior remodeling, installation of a freight elevator, and the modification of existing windows. These changes are summarized in Table 1 below. 18 City of Santa Monica, Building & Safety, permit no. B City of Santa Monica, Building & Safety, permit no. B60043, May 6, page 14

16 Table Marine Street/ Building Permits Issued Permit# Owner 4/6/ Santa Monica Bay Telephone Company 7/8/1947 B2018 Associated Telephone Company 1/10/1955 B17016 General Telephone Company of California 10/3/1955 B18522 General Telephone Company of California 12/14/ /13/197 7 B39865 B /2/ AA551 Application for Administrati ve Approval General Telephone Company General Telephone General Telephone Company of California/GT E Architect/ Engineer Contractor Value Description Maurice A. Sasso Maurice Sasso Robert Kliegman Western States Constructio n Co Haddock Engineers Ltd. Beyer & Abrahamso n Scott E. Campbell Company Bernard Brothers Inc. $80,000 Service/office building measuring 60x80 x 72 7 high on 60x80 lot. Designed for 6 stories but 4 stories + basement at present. Reinforced concrete slab supported on steel beams and girders, gypsum tile block partitions, reinforced concrete rafters, and ornamental terra cotta cornice $2200 Interior alteration 3 rd floor front. $28,500 Alteration $500 Removal of nonbearing partition. $3000 Install automatic fire sprinkler system in basement. $78,000 Repairs to exterior walls. Existing 24,167sf telephone company switching station on 5271sf lot. Application of Administrative Approval for possible purchase page 15

17 Table 1 (Continued) 155 Marine Street/ Building Permits Issued Permit# Owner 8/5/ DR410 Application for Development Review/Site Review 10/17/ ARB3489 Application for Architectural Review General Telephone Company of California/GT E General Telephone Architect/ Engineer Contractor Value Description by Eli Broad Family Foundation. Barton Myers Associates Proposed use as art foundation HQ, storage and display of artwork open to art scholars and curators. Proposed remodeling of 3000sf on 2 nd floor for 2 offices, conference room, secretarial area, and library. Remodel of small studio for caretaker/securit y residence. Installation of exterior freight lift. Removal of roof HVAC unit and installation of glass windscreen around a sculpture garden. Sketches: East elevation and south west elevation oblique view. Plans: Floors B 4. Remodeling of building for use as headquarters of art foundation in existing 24,500sf building.12/2/19 87 approved with condition that elevator penthouse studies be submitted; 2/1/1988 page 16

18 Table 1 (Continued) 155 Marine Street/ Building Permits Issued Permit# Owner 5/6/1988 B60043 Eli Broad Family Foundation Architect/ Engineer Contractor Value Description penthouse withdrawn and building remodel approved. To include new elevator shaft and glass windscreen, recessed entry doors, modification to existing windows south elevation, minor modification to all other windows, exterior trip to be painted brown. Frederick Fisher Buckley Constructio n $500,00 0 Remodel interior and exterior for art storage and exhibit. 2. Ownership and Occupancy History The ownership and occupancy history for is summarized in Table 2 below. The building housed telephone services from its construction in 1926 through January The original owner was the Santa Monica Bay Telephone Company. The founding date of the company is unknown, but it appears that they were well established by the mid- 1920s. By 1926 the growing company served a large area in and around Santa Monica, including the communities of Santa Monica, Ocean Park, Venice, Brentwood, Sawtelle, Ocean Park Heights, and Playa del Rey. Between 1924 and 1926, the number of telephones in these areas almost doubled, from 6,000 to 11,000 and the company profited handsomely from this growth. They used part of their profits to construct the subject property. 21 By the time the subject property had its grand opening in the fall of 1926, the company s reach extended from Palisades del Rey north along the coast as far as Topanga Canyon, and east as far as Westwood (including service to UCLA and Occidental College). Furthermore, the company owned Redondo Home Telephone Company, servicing Manhattan Beach, Redondo 20 City of Santa Monica, Building & Safety, permit no. 87DR410 file containing letter from Alschuler, Grossman & Pines to the Santa Monica Planning Commission 10/9/1987describing facility phase-out from 1985 January 1987 after General Telephone moved all operations from multiple sites in Santa Monica to Thousand Oaks, CA. Letter and quoting Richard Loyd, Senior Planning Analyst General Telephone. 21 Telephone Company s Profits Up, Los Angeles Times, July 25, 1926, B11. page 17

19 Beach, Hermosa Beach, and Palos Verdes. Thus the Santa Monica Bay Telephone Company provided telephone services to most of the coastal communities between Long Beach and Malibu by the end of In 1928, in a report multi-million dollar deal, the Santa Monica Bay Telephone Company was sold to Associated Utilities Company. 23 The new ownership retained the building in its use as a telephone exchange, and when the General Telephone Company took over ownership in 1953, the original use again persisted. In 1988 the subject property was sold to the Eli Broad Family Foundation, who held the property until Table 2 Occupant/Owner History of Address Year Occupant Source 155 Marine Street/ 3344 Barnard Way /1987 Santa Monica Bay Telephone Company Associated Telephone Company General Telephone Company or General Telephone Company of California Building Permit Santa Monica City Directory Santa Monica City Directory Electrical Permit Santa Monica City Directory Richard Loyd, Senior Planning Analyst General Telephone in letter from Alschuler, Grossman & Pines to the Santa Monica Planning Commission 10/9/1987describing facility phase out from 1985 January Eli Broad Family Foundation Building Permit Santa Monica City Directory C. Period Revival Styles: Renaissance Revival Style ( ) The period revival styles grew in popularity just after World War I, and were patterned after buildings of earlier stylistic periods. The Italian Renaissance Revival style was a common architectural style for public and commercial buildings throughout Southern California. Renaissance Revival commercial buildings were characterized by their Palladian style arched apertures, hipped roof, and wide eaves with brackets. The highly ornate Renaissance Revival buildings were usually designed by architects or master builders. The Italian Renaissance Revival style is an important architectural movement associated with the identity of Southern California as Mediterranean. Closely associated with the Spanish Colonial Revival style, the Italian Renaissance Revival style is a derivative of renaissance-era Italian domestic architecture that differs from Spanish-inspired designs in several identifiable ways. Character-defining features include: 22 Santa Monica Telephone Exchange, Los Angeles Times, November , Bay Telephone Company Sold to Independents, Los Angeles Times, February 12, 1928, F10. page 18

20 Typically rectangular in form and plan; Piazzas, arcades, porticos; Roofs are low-pitched; Arched apertures. IV. EVALUATION OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES A. Previous Evaluations The subject property is not listed in the City of Santa Monica Historic Resources Inventory and does not appear to have been included in any previous surveys of the area. Therefore, no previous evaluations exist for the subject property. B. Architectural Description The subject property is oriented facing southeast toward Barnard Way, and fronts directly on the sidewalk. It exhibits character-defining features consistent with the Renaissance Revival, specifically a symmetrically arranged façade with a distinct base, middle, and top, a rectangular plan and form, and typical decorative elements such as arched apertures, a tall decorative cornice, and the suggestion of an arcade or portico at the street. The building marries this style with several early-20 th century industrial characteristics in keeping with its use, specifically extraordinarily large floor-to-floor heights and oversize multi-light windows (Figure 12). Figure 12. Front (southeast) and northeast elevations, view west (PCR 2016) page 19

21 The front façade is arranged as four bays with an attached arched pink marble arcade at the base surmounted by three floors of brick and glass arranged as four sets of paired multi-light windows, each pair set between vertical piers that rise to a decorative cast stone cornice and shallow brick parapet (Figure 13). The decorative cornice wraps around the east and west corners of the building and continues for several feet before resolving and ending. A penthouse enclosure is visible at the southwest corner of the roof. The front façade has been modified in the following ways: the arched windows at the base have been infilled; the original front entry and doorway has been infilled and a metal entry door installed; some original windows appear to have been removed and replaced with later metal frame units with a different number and pattern of lights, some early windows with an operable awning segment appear to have been modified to fixed, the opacity of the glass varies from window to window; vents have been installed in the top row of lights on all windows in the westernmost bay above the first floor. The marble and cast stone façade decoration is intact. The black marble at the base of the building may be a replacement. Figure 13. Front (southeast) façade, view northwest (PCR 2016) The remaining three walls of the building are undecorated and finished with heavily applied stucco. The northeast elevation, overlooking Neilson Way, is blank white stucco with punched window openings at the third and fourth floors (Figure 14). At the second floor, the wall plane pushes forward several inches suggesting that this area has been patched. The page 20

22 third and fourth floors each have eight large multi-light windows similar to those seen on the front façade. These are identical except for two windows of a different light pattern on the third floor, one at the south corner and one at the north corner. Figure 14. Northeast elevation, view southwest (PCR 2016) The northwest elevation, overlooking the Neilson Villas, is the service and back side of the building (Figure 15). It has a small masonry walled service area at its base a double metal entry door at the center of the first floor. This elevation is asymmetrical with different attributes in each bay. The furthest bay to the east has three tall double-casement windows, one pair each on floors two through four; the bay to the east of center has one large square multi-pane metal frame window each on the third and fourth floors; the bay to the west of center has four double exit doors, one each on floor two through four that access the metal fire escape system, while the door at the base is larger and serves as a service entry; the bar furthest to the west holds four elongated vertical vent panels, one on each floor, and two small rectangular vent panels, one each on the first and third floors. This elevation has exterior plumbing and conduit, security lighting, and two long vertical reaches of metal channel. page 21

23 Figure 15. Rear (southwest) elevation, view northeast (PCR 2016) The southwest elevation, overlooking the parking lot for the Neilson Villas, is loosely organized within four bays with an asymmetrical window pattern within each bay (Figure 16). The wall is blank at the first floor; the wall of a glass enclosure is visible at the roof to the north and the wall of the metal rooftop enclosure is visible at the south as well as the profile of the wall as it pulls back from the parapet. The multi-light windows in the bay furthest to the north are arranged as two tall vertical units at the second floor, two small square units at the third floor and one tall vertical combined with one large undivided square window; the multi-light windows in the bay to the north of center are arranged as three tall vertical units on the second floor, one large undivided square window on the third floor, and two tall vertical units on the fourth floor; the bay to the south of center is arranged with a combination of three small square and two small rectangular multi-light units that alternately ascend up the wall from the second through fourth floors; the multi-light windows in the bay furthest to the south are arranged as paired tall vertical units on the second and third floors with a small square single unit at the fourth floor. The windows appear to have been modified in the two bays to the north with several windows filled in and several window openings enlarged to accept the square window frames. page 22

24 C. Integrity Analysis Figure 16. Southwest elevation, view northeast (PCR 2016) At the local level, a property eligible for local designation as a historic landmark must retain integrity from its period of significance and must retain sufficient historical integrity to physically illustrate its significance from a public right-of-way. As a general rule, properties should retain the majority of the building s original materials; properties may have alterations or additions, but the general form, massing and original stylistic features of the property, the basic elements that allow it to communicate its historic character, should remain intact. The subject property exhibits a high level of physical integrity and retains integrity of location, deign, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. Location The subject property has not been moved; it remains in the location in which it was originally built. Therefore, the subject property retains integrity of location. Design The property retains its original footprint, form, and massing and many of the decorative elements relating to its Renaissance Revival style. The front façade at the base has been altered by the infilling of windows and the main entry, and the replacement of some original windows. However, the front elevation retains its overall design, including the fenestration pattern, decorative brick work, marble base, and cast stone cornice. The three secondary elevations have been heavily stucco coated and their fenestration patterns altered. page 23

25 However, overall, the original design remains intact. Therefore, the subject property retains integrity of design. Setting The setting around the subject property is compromised due to complete demolition of context to the north, west and south that occurred as part of the Ocean Park redevelopment. The commercial context along Neilson Way to the east has also been completely altered by later development and the removal of the original train tracks Barnard Way is the only extant building in the area dating from the early 20 th century. Therefore, the subject property does not retain integrity of setting. Materials The original, 1926 materials of the subject property have been altered with the infilling of the arcade windows on the front façade and the modification or replacement of windows on all elevations of the building. The three secondary elevations have been heavily stucco coated. The building retains its decorative marble base and, cast stone cornice, and its multi-color brick façade. Therefore, the subject property retains partial integrity of materials. Workmanship The subject property preserves its original marble base and cornice as well as its multi-colored brick façade. Replacement windows are in the spirit and same general proportion as the metal-frame multi-light originals. The three secondary elevations have been heavily stucco coated. Therefore, the subject property retains partial integrity of workmanship. Feeling The subject property retains integrity of location, and design, as well as partial integrity of materials and workmanship. Despite some alterations, it overall retains its historic appearance and successfully conveys the feeling of a 1926 Renaissance Revival commercial building. Therefore, the subject property retains integrity of feeling. Association The subject property retains integrity of location, design, and feeling, as well as partial integrity of materials and workmanship. It retains its most significant stylistic elements and continues to convey its historic association as a commercial/ industrial building serving City of Santa Monica in the late 1920s. Therefore, the subject property retains integrity of association. D. Evaluation of Significance The period of significance associated with the subject property is 1926, the original date of construction by Western States Construction Company. Historical themes that are associated with the subject property include the following: Development of Ocean Park and Renaissance Revival architecture. As described above, the subject property retains integrity of location, design, feeling, and association as well as partial integrity of materials and workmanship. The subject property therefore retains sufficient integrity to be eligible as historical resource. It remains an excellent example of an early 20 th century Renaissance Revival commercial building and one of the last remnants of the early period of the commercial development of Ocean Park. page 24

26 1. Landmark Criteria (a) (1) It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history of the City. The subject property is associated with the early commercial development of the Ocean Park area of Santa Monica. Although other examples of commercial buildings are extant along Main Street, these are primarily one- or two-story vernacular examples. The subject property is one of the few commercial buildings from this period of Ocean Park s history that is of a monumental scale and built in a defined style. Furthermore, the subject property was originally constructed as an office and telephone exchange for the Santa Monica Bay Telephone Company (later Associated Telephone and the General Telephone). It was constructed during a period of tremendous growth for the company in the coastal communities around Los Angeles and therefore also represents the modernization and growth of the area during this period. Indeed, it appears likely that the building survived as an invaluable piece of Santa Monica s infrastructure, as it was operated by a telephone company until Therefore, the subject property appears to meet this criterion (a) (2) It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other noteworthy interest or value. The subject property is an excellent example of its architectural style (as discussed below under Criterion 4). However, it does not otherwise appear to have aesthetic or artistic interest or value. Therefore, the subject property does not appear to meet this criterion (a) (3) It is identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state or national history. The subject property is not significantly associated with any known historic personages or events. While the subject property was associated with the Broad family from 1988 to 2015, their ownership of the building occurred in the recent past and it is not appropriate to evaluate the significance of their ownership at this point in time, as insufficient time has passed to allow for proper historical perspective. Therefore, the subject property does not appear to meet this criterion (a) (4) It embodies distinguishing architectural characteristics valuable to a study of a period, style, method of construction, or the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship, or is a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or historical type valuable to such a study. The subject property is an excellent example of the Renaissance Revival style. Though somewhat altered, it retains integrity of location, design, feeling, and association, as well as partial integrity of materials and workmanship. Overall, it retains most of the essential characteristics of its historic appearance, especially on the primary front façade. It exhibits character-defining features consistent with the Renaissance Revival, specifically a symmetrically arranged façade with a distinct page 25

27 base, middle, and top, a rectangular plan and form, and typical decorative elements such as arched apertures, a tall decorative cornice, the suggestion of an arcade or portico at the street, and decorative brickwork. The building marries this style with several early-20 th century industrial characteristics in keeping with its use as a telephone building, specifically extraordinarily large floor-to-floor heights, reinforced concrete slab floors, and oversize multi-light windows. Therefore, the subject property appears to meet this criterion (a) (5) It is a significant or a representative example of the work or product of a notable builder, designer or architect. The subject property was designed by Italian-born engineer Maurice Sasso. While Sasso appears to have had a long career in Los Angeles, he does not appear to meet the threshold of a master designer. Therefore, the subject property does not appear to meet this criterion (a) (6) It has a unique location, a singular physical characteristic, or is an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community or the City. The subject property is visually prominent as one of the few surviving early 20 th century multi-story commercial buildings in this area of Santa Monica. Of an identifiable Renaissance Revival style, it has stood in the same location since 1926, a period of 90 years during which time it has always been a distinctive architectural monument. Furthermore, while somewhat altered, it retains its historic appearance overall. As such, it has become an established visual feature of Barnard Way and of the Ocean Park area of Santa Monica. Therefore, the subject property appears to meet this criterion. E. Conclusion Though partially altered, the overall historic appearance of the subject property remains intact and it retains sufficient integrity to be eligible as a historical resource. The subject property meets the local criteria for designation under criteria 1, 4, and 6. It is an excellent example of a Renaissance Revival commercial building, and one of the few buildings in its immediate vicinity to survive the mid-century redevelopment of Ocean Park. It is also represents the early 20 th century development and modernization of Ocean Park and Santa Monica, and operated in its original use for more than 60 years. Finally, it has stood in Ocean Park for a period of over 90 years and is an established a visual landmark of early 20 th century development surrounded by later infill. Therefore, PCR recommends 3355 Barnard Way eligible as a City of Santa Monica Landmark, and recommends it be assigned a California Historical Resources Status Code of 5S2 or Individual property that is eligible for local listing or designation. page 26

28 V. BIBLIOGRAPHY Basten, Fred E. Santa Monica Bay: Paradise by the Sea: a Pictorial History of Santa Monica, Venice, Marina del Rey, Ocean Park, Pacific Palisades, Topanga & Malibu. Los Angeles: Hennessey + Ingalls, Bay Telephone Company Sold to Independents. Los Angeles Times, February 12, 1928, F10. City of Santa Monica Building and Safety Department. Building Permits. City of Santa Monica, Planning & Community Development. Historic Resources Inventory Inventory/. Expansion Program. Los Angeles Times, February 10, 1957, F15. Heumann, Leslie. Department of Parks and Recreation series 523 form, Blocks of Third Street District. Historic Resources Group. Historic Resources Survey Update Ocean Park. Prepared for City of Santa Monica, June Ingersoll, Luther A. Ingersoll's century history, Santa Monica Bay cities. Santa Monica: L. A. Ingersoll, Lowering of New Ceiling Unique Construction Feat. Los Angeles Times, October 6, 1948, B1. Lunsford, James W. The Ocean and the Sunset, The Hills and the Clouds: Looking at Santa Monica. Santa Monica: James W. Lunsford, Marquez, Earnest. Santa Monica Beach: A Collector s Pictorial History. Santa Monica: Angel City Press, McAlester, Virginia Savage. A Field Guide to American Houses (Revised Edition). New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Myers, William A., and Ira L. Swett. Trolleys to the Surf; The Story of the Los Angeles Pacific Railway. Glendale: Interurban Publications, Inc., National Park Service. National Register Bulletin: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. Washington DC: U.S. Dept. of the Interior, National Park Service, Interagency Resources Division, PCR Services Corporation. Historic Resources Technical Report Santa Monica Civic Center Specific Plan: Historic Resources Survey, Evaluation, and Analysis of Project Impacts. Prepared for the City of Santa Monica, March page 27

29 Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps, City of Santa Monica. Santa Monica Telephone Exchange. Los Angeles Times, November 23, 1926, 10. Scott, Paula A. Santa Monica: A History on the Edge. Charleston, SC: Arcadia Publishing, Telephone Block Plan Completed. Los Angeles Times, March 21, 1926, E13. Telephone Company s Profits Up, Los Angeles Times, July 25, 1926, B11. The Santa Monica Blue Book. (all editions). The Santa Monica Community Books. (all editions). The Santa Monica City Directory, The Southside Depot Changed. Los Angeles Times, May 26, 1895, 11. United States of America. Petition for Naturalization, Maurice Sasso. California Naturalization Records, , Los Angeles. Petitions, , Box 0004, Volume H, accessed, via ancestry.com. page 28

30 APPENDIX A Professional Qualifications B Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps C Assessor Index Map D Assessor Parcel Map E Building Permits

31 Appendix A - Professional Qualifications

32 Margarita Jerabek, Ph.D. ASSOCIATE PRINCIPAL, DIRECTOR OF HISTORIC RESOURCES SUMMARY Margarita Jerabek has 25 years of professional practice in the United States with an extensive background in historic preservation, architectural history, art history and decorative arts, and historical archaeology. She specializes in Visual Art and Culture, 19th 20th Century American Architecture, Modern and Contemporary Architecture, Architectural Theory and Criticism, Urbanism, and Cultural Landscape, and is a regional expert on Southern California architecture. Her qualifications and experience meet and exceed the Secretary of the Interior s Professional Qualification Standards in History, Archaeology, and Architectural History. She has managed and conducted a wide range of technical studies in support of environmental compliance projects, developed preservation and conservation plans, and implemented preservation treatment projects for public and private clients in California and throughout the United States. EXPERIENCE Dr. Jerabek has prepared a broad range of environmental documentation and conducted preservation projects throughout the Los Angeles metropolitan area and Southern California counties. She provides expert assistance to public agencies and private clients in environmental review, from due diligence through planning/design review and permitting and when necessary, implements mitigation and preservation treatment measures on behalf of her clients. As primary investigator and author of hundreds of technical reports, plan review documents, preservation and conservation plans, HABS/HAER/HALS reports, construction monitoring reports, salvage reports and relocation plans, she is a highly experienced practitioner and expert in addressing historical resources issues while supporting and balancing project goals. She is an expert in the evaluation, management and treatment of historic properties for compliance with Sections 106 and 110 of the NHPA, NEPA, Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act, CEQA, and local ordinances and planning requirements. Dr. Jerabek regularly performs assessments to ensure conformance with the Secretary of the Interior s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, and assists clients with adaptive reuse/rehabilitation projects by providing preservation design and treatment consultation, agency coordination, legally defensible documentation, construction monitoring and conservation treatment. She is a regional expert on Southern California architecture. She has prepared a broad range of environmental documentation and conducted preservation projects throughout the Los Angeles metropolitan area as well as in Ventura, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and San Diego counties. Beyond her technical skill, Dr. Jerabek is a highly experienced project manager with broad national experience throughout the United States. She currently manages PCR s on call preservation services with the City of Santa Monica, County of San Bernardino Department of Public Works, City of Hermosa Beach, Los Angeles Unified School District, and Long Beach Unified School District. Education Ph.D., Art History, University of California, Los Angeles, 2005 M.A., Architectural History, School of Architecture, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, 1991 Certificate of Historic Preservation, School of Architecture, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, 1991 B.A., Art History, Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio, 1983 Awards/Recognition 2014 Preservation Award, The Dunbar Hotel, L.A. Conservancy 2014 Westside Prize, The Dunbar Hotel, Westside Urban Forum, 2014Design Award: Tongva Park & Ken Genser Square, Westside Urban Forum 2012 California Preservation Foundation Award, RMS Queen Mary Conservation Management Plan, California Preservation Foundation Professional Affiliations California Preservation Foundation Santa Monica Conservancy Los Angeles Conservancy Society of Architectural Historians National Trust for Historic Preservation Leadership Forum American Institute of Architects (AIA), National Allied Member American Architectural Foundation Association for Preservation Technology PCR SERVICES CORPORATION

33 Amanda Kainer, M.S. SENIOR ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN SUMMARY Amanda Kainer has more than eight years of professional and academic experience in the practice of historic preservation and architectural history. Ms. Kainer has conducted extensive archival research, field observation, recordation, and prepared survey documentation and assisted in database management for numerous PCR historic resources projects. She has training and substantial experience in the evaluation and conservation of art and architecture and passion for interior design. EXPERIENCE Ms. Kainer has completed and co authored a wide range of architectural investigations including historic resources assessment and impacts analysis reports for compliance with CEQA, character defining features reports, plan reviews, investment tax credit applications, Section 106 significance evaluations, and HABS documentations. She has also performed extensive research, survey work, and prepared numerous landmark and preliminary assessment reports as a part of PCR s On Call Historic Preservation Contract with the City of Santa Monica. She is involved a diverse set of projects and analyses. These include anything from a California Register nomination for the UCLA Faculty Center to a paint analysis for a Churrigueresque style 1920s commercial building in Santa Monica. She has co authored Section 106 reports for the residential development in Thousand Oaks, Santa Monica Pier, Avalon Fuel Dock on Catalina Island, and a Mid Century roadside motel in Bakersfield. For LAUSD, Ms. Kainer authored a characterdefining features analysis for seven historic schools, provided historic analysis for an MND, and preliminary resource evaluations and plan reviews for various historic schools. Historic Resources Assessments: Ms. Kainer has contributed to the research, site inspections, and report preparation of a number of historic resources assessments in the Los Angeles metropolitan area for compliance with CEQA. Ms. Kainer has evaluated a number of different types of potential historical resources, including single family and multi family residences, banks, commercial buildings, schools, hotels, and cultural landscapes in Beverly Hills, Venice, Los Angeles, and Santa Monica. Large Scale Survey Experience: She was a contributing author for three major Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Los Angeles Adelante Eastside, Wilshire Center/Koreatown, and Normandie 5 Redevelopment Areas. Ms. Kainer also served as PCR Survey Team Leader and co author for the comprehensive survey of over 4,000 objects of fine and decorative arts aboard the RMS Queen Mary in Long Beach. Additionally, Ms. Kainer helped complete the district wide survey and evaluation of the Long Beach Unified School District and a windshield survey of Hermosa Beach for the Historic Resources Chapter of the Hermosa Beach General Plan Update. Education M.S., Historic Preservation (Emphasis: Conservation Science), Columbia University, New York, New York, 2008 B.S., Design (Emphasis: Interior Architecture), University of California, Davis, 2002 B.A., Art History, University of California, Davis, 2002 Awards/Recognition Joel Polsky Academic Achievement Award, American Society of Interior Designers, 2008 Continuing Education CEQA and Historic Resources: Thresholds, Mitigation & Case Studies, California Preservation Foundation Workshop, March 2011 Professional Affiliations California Preservation Foundation Los Angeles Conservancy Santa Monica Conservancy (Volunteer Docent for the Shotgun House) Docomomo SoCal Association of Preservation Technology Western Chapter PCR SERVICES CORPORATION

34 Virginia Harness, M.A. ASSISTANT ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN SUMMARY Virginia Harness has one year of professional experience and two years of academic experience in the practice of historic preservation and architectural history. Additionally, her professional background includes a year of professional experience in archival work and a summer of training in archaeology. She has also worked in the field of public history, conducting oral history interviews and creating a museum exhibit. She earned her M.A. in Architectural History and Certificate in Historic Preservation from the University of Virginia (UVA) where she studied under architectural historian Dr. Richard Guy Wilson (thesis advisor) and preservationist Dr. Daniel Bluestone. Her wide range of work across preservation and history fields brings a depth of experience to her current work in historic resources. EXPERIENCE Ms. Harness has extensive experience in archival research, first as an archivist with the Brethren Historical Library and Archives and during her time as a student at UVA. While at UVA she worked on the Historic American Building Survey (HABS) recordation of Little Mountain Farm in Albemarle County and was a contributing author of the National Register Nomination for a corridor in Dillwyn, Virginia to assess its eligibility for listing as a historic district on the National Register of Historic Places. As a public history intern with Historic Vienna, Inc. in northern Virginia, she designed and created a small scale museum exhibit which included traditional board mounted displays and a touch screen interface. Since commencing work at PCR, first as an intern and now as a technician, she has worked on historic resources assessment and impacts analysis reports, character defining features reports, plan reviews, and HABS documentation for projects in the greater Los Angeles metropolitan area. Recent projects include HABS documentation, plan review, and construction monitoring for a late 19th century residence in Laguna Beach; a historic resource assessment and impacts analysis report for a new construction project in the Old Pasadena historic district; research for an impact report for a pipeline in San Diego County; historic resource assessments for buildings in Los Angeles, Laguna Beach, South Pasadena and Santa Monica; and a peer review of a Los Angeles Historical Cultural Monument Application. Additionally, Ms. Harness has assisted in the completion of character defining features analysis, most recently for seven historic schools within LAUSD, and also recently completed an architectural survey of the RMS Queen Mary in Long Beach. Education M.A., American Architectural History University of Virginia, Charlottesville, 2014 Certificate in Historic Preservation, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, 2014 B.A., Liberal Arts, St. John s College, Annapolis, Maryland, 2011 Continuing Education Section 106: A Guide to Federal Protections for Historic Properties, California Preservation Foundation Workshop, May 2015 CEQA: How it Really Works, California Preservation Foundation Workshop, May 2015 Professional Affiliations Society of Architectural Historians California Preservation Foundation Los Angeles Conservancy PCR SERVICES CORPORATION

35 Stephanie Hodal ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN INTERN SUMMARY Stephanie Hodal is an experienced professional with expertise in communications for the architectural and engineering sector. She will apply her corporate communication and marketing expertise and academic experience in historic preservation/conservation to support the Historic Resources Division. RELEVANT COURSEWORK History of the American City History of American Architecture and Urbanism Cross Cultural Issues in Landscape Design Topics in Modern Architecture in Southern California Global History of Architecture to 1500 Education Candidate, Master of Heritage Conservation, University of Southern California School of Architecture, 2016 Certificate of Historic Preservation, Boston Architectural College, 2009 A.B., American Studies, Smith College, Northhampton, Massachusetts, 1980 Continuing Education Historic Real Estate Finance + Real Estate Deal Structuring, National Trust for Historic Preservation, Philadelphia PA + Washington DC Introduction to Historic Site Documentation Fundamentals of Historic Preservation Historic Preservation Management, Planning and Development Historic Preservation Philosophy Conservation Methods and Materials Historic Materials and Construction Sustainable Conservation of the Built Environment Smart Growth Planning Urban Villages Design Skills for Urban Planners Introduction to City Planning Communicating City Design PCR SERVICES CORPORATION

36 Appendix B Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps

37

38 Appendix C Assessor Index Map

39

40 Appendix D Assessor Parcel Map

41

42 Appendix E Building Permits

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54