P L A N N I N G & C O M M U N I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T
PLANNING DIVISION
February 1, 2022
Natalia Hudson
1118 North Allen Avenue
Pasadena, CA 91104
Via email: [email protected]
NOTICE OF DETERMINATION: Historic Resource Evaluation
1118 North Allen Avenue
Case #: DHP2021-00114 Council District 2
Dear Ms. Hudson:
Acting under the provisions of Section 17.62.040 of the Pasadena Municipal Code (PMC), the staff of the Design & Historic Preservation Section has conducted a Historic Resource Evaluation of the above-referenced address in response to your request. Based on the information available to staff, the Mount Olive Lutheran Church appears to be eligible for landmark designation. This determination is based on the evaluation below:
PROPERTY DATA:
1. Date of
construction:
1930 2. Original architect: Frederick Kennedy, Jr.
3. Architectural
style:
Mission
Revival
4. Original builder: J. Fred Volz
5. Is property included in historic
resources survey?
☐ Yes ☒ No
6. If yes to above indicate survey
name & date:
N/A Survey
rating:
N/A
7. Previous survey evaluation still
apply?
☐ Yes ☐ No
If no, please indicate why not: N/A
8. Applicable historic context: Period Revival Architecture (1915-1942)
9. Known historical events or
development trends with which
the property is associated:
N/A
Attachment C
INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT:
Pursuant to Zoning Code Section 17.62.040.A, a property must retain integrity to be eligible for historical designation. Based on the available and legible permit history in the City’s records (see Attachment A for copies of relevant permits for publicly visible exterior alterations), as well as visual inspection of the property, the following alterations are evident on the building:
☐ Changes to openings ☐ Modification or infill of front porch/entry ☐ Replacement windows ☒ Addition to front of building
☐ Replacement doors ☐ Second-story addition over original one-story volume
☐ Removal of architectural details ☐ Exterior cladding covered or replaced ☐ Modification of roof form or materials ☐ Building has been relocated
As noted above, although a 1,920-square-foot addition was constructed at the south end of the church building in 1951 and a street-facing utility structure was added at the southwest corner of the property at a later date, the design of the addition and auxiliary structure are compatible with and visually differentiated from the original portion of the building. Furthermore, the original building has not been substantially altered from its original appearance and, therefore, retains integrity of location, design, setting, materials, feeling, workmanship, and association. As such, the property may be eligible for landmark designation under one or more of the criteria listed in Zoning Code Section 17.62.040. See further analysis of the designation criteria below.
ARCHITECTURAL ANALYSIS:
See attachment B for photographs of the building and property. As noted above, the building was constructed in 1930 to a design by Frederick Kennedy, Jr., was built by J. Fred Volz, and is an example of the Mission Revival architectural style. Staff evaluated the architectural significance of the property according to the registration requirements outlined in the Period Revival Architecture Historic Context Report and has determined that the property meets the criteria for landmark designation as a significant example of the Mission Revival architectural style and as a work of Frederick Kennedy, Jr., a notable architect who designed numerous important Period Revival buildings in Pasadena during the 1920s and 1930s.
CONCLUSION:
Based on the evaluation above, the above referenced property meets the criteria for designation as a landmark under Criterion C as a notable example of Mission Revival architecture and as a significant work of architect Frederick Kennedy, Jr.
Incentives:
As an eligible historic resource, the use of the State Historical Building Code is allowed. If a property is designated as a landmark or a contributing structure to a landmark district, it will become eligible for additional incentives for preserving historic resources, including reduction of building permit fees and construction tax for certain projects, and eligibility for the Historic Property Contract Program (Mills Act) which provides a reduction of property taxes for performing specified maintenance and rehabilitation work.
Review Procedures for Demolition and Major Projects:
Because the building appears to be an eligible historic resource, demolition or major projects affecting the building will require submittal and review of an application for Certificate of Appropriateness, pursuant to the Category Two review procedures found in PMC Section
17.62.090.E.2. A finding of consistency with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation will be required to be made in order to approve the proposed project. A list of the types of projects that are considered to be major projects can be found in PMC Section
17.62.030.U.
Alternative Evaluation:
This evaluation was conducted based on the available evidence and observation of the exterior of the building. If major changes are proposed to the exterior of this building or it is proposed to be demolished as part of a larger development project, you may wish to hire a qualified professional architectural historian to conduct additional analysis or a more in-depth study of the potential historical significance of the property and the potential impacts of its demolition or modification.
Effective Date Appeals Call for Review
The last day to file an appeal is Friday, February 11, 2022. This decision becomes effective on Saturday, February 12, 2022. Prior to the effective date, the City Council or Historic Preservation Commission may call for a review of this decision. In addition, you or any person affected by this decision may appeal it before the effective date by filing an application for an appeal with a $73.13 all-inclusive fee. Appeals must cite a reason for objecting to a decision. Please note that appeals and calls for review are conducted as de novo reviews, meaning that the lower decision is set aside and the entire application is reviewed as a new proposal.
Please contact Kevin Johnson, Principal Planner at [email protected] if there are any questions regarding this determination.
Sincerely,
David M. Reyes
Director of Planning & Community Development
Attachments:
A. Permit records
B. Photographs of property
C. Photographs of surrounding properties
Cc: Address file; Energov Case; City Manager; City Clerk; City Council; Council District 2 Liaison; Historic Preservation Commission; Director of Planning & Community Development
ATTACHMENT A – PERMIT RECORDS