Attachment 2 - City Council Staff Report and Attachments for January 23, 2023 — City Council / Housing Authority, April 17, 2023

CITY OF POMONA

COUNCIL REPORT
January 23, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: James W. Makshanoff, City Manager
Submitted By: Anita Gutierrez, AICP, Development Services Director SUBJECT: CONTINUATION OF APPEAL OF MAJOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 18024-2022 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED
AT 548 AND 554 W. CENTER STREET
RECOMMENDATION:

It is that the City Council adopt one of the following resolutions (Attachment Nos. 1 & 2):

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-13 – A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF POMONA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING MAJOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (MAJCOA -018024-2022) FOR THE DEMOLITION OF PRE-1945 STRUCTURES ON PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 548 AND 554 W.

CENTER STREET (APN: 8340-030-006 & 8340-030-012)
or
RESOLUTION NO. 2022 -214 – A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF

THE CITY OF POMONA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MAJOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (MAJCOA -018024-2022) TO ALLOW FOR THE DEMOLITION OF PRE -1945 STRUCTURES LOCATED AT 548 AND 554 W.

CENTER STREET (APN: 8340-030-006 & 8340-030-012)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

At the City Council meeting on November 21, 2022, the City Council directed staff to conduct mediation between the property owner and the tenants, represented by Pomona United for Stable Housing (PUSH). Staff conducted this mediation on November 30, 2022. Subsequently, the Applicant requested a continuance to further review the matter with their legal counsel. At the City Council meeting on December 5, 2022, the City Council continued the public hearing to January 23, 2023. The previous City Council staff report is attached for reference (Attachment 3).

Attachment No. 2
Appeal of Denied MAJCOA No.18024-2022

Page 2 of 2 ends

ATTACHMENT:

Attachment No. 1 – Draft City Council Resolution No. 2023-13 (Deny Appeal) Attachment No. 2 – Draft City Council Resolution No. 2023-14 (Approve Appeal) Attachment No. 3 – City Council Meeting Staff Report with Attachments for December 5, 2022 Attachment No. 4 – Staff Presentation

ATTACHMENT NO. 1

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-13

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POMONA,

CALIFORNIA, DENYING MAJOR CERTIFICATE OF
APPROPRIATENESS (MAJCOA-018024-2022) FOR THE DEMOLITION OF PRE-1945 STRUCTURES LOCATED AT 548 AND 554 W. CENTER STREET (APN: 8340-030-006 & 8340-030-012)

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POMONA DOES RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, the applicant, Ali Dashti, has submitted an application for Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJCOA -018024-2022) to allow for the demolition of a multifamily development located at 548 W. Center Street and one single family dwelling located at 554 W.

Center Street (APN 8340-030-006 & 8340-030-012);

WHEREAS, available records indicate that the structures were constructed in approximately 1885 and 1895, respectively;

WHEREAS, the City of Pomona’s Historic Resources Inventory, prepared in 1993 by Diane Marsh, identified the primary structures located on the subject property loca ted at 548 W.

Center Street as Italianate architecture and the subject property located at 554 W. Center Street as Folk Victorian;

WHEREAS, in accordance with Section .5809 -13.F.8(b), all property owners directly adjacent to and across the street from the site were notified of the application on August 5, 2022 and on August 26, 2022, a copy of the public hearing notice was published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin;

WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission shall first consider if the property would likely meet the criteria used in historic landmark designation as described in Section .5809-

13.D of the Pomona Zoning Ordinance (PZO) to approve Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJCOA-018024-2021) for the demolition of any primary structure constructed before 1945;

WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission finds that the subject properties meet one or more of the City of Pomona historic landmark designation, specifically Criteria Numbers 3 and 4, as described in Section 5809 -13.D of the PZO, thus deeming the properties of historical significance;

WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission of the City of Pomona, has, after giving notice thereof as required by law, held a public hearing on September 7, 2022 and October 5, 2022, concerning the requested Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJCOA-018024-2021) and carfully considered all pertinent testimony and the staff report offered in the case presented at the public hearing, and denied the applicant’s request for the demolition of pre-1945 structures on a 4-3-0-0 vote;
Resolution No. 2023-13
January 23, 2023

Page 2 of 5 ends

WHEREAS, the applicant submitted an application to appeal the decision of the Historic preservation Commission to deny Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJCOA 18024 -2022) for the demolition of pre-1945 structures at 548 and 554 W. Center Street;

WHEREAS, the City Council of the city of Pomona has, after giving notice thereof as required by law, held a public hearing on November 21, 2022, December 5, 2022, and January 23, 2023 concerning the appeal of the denial of Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJOA 18024- 2022);

WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully considered all pertinent testimony and the staff report offered in the case presented at the public hearing;

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pomona, California, as follows:

SECTION 1. The City Council hereby determines that, pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), no environmental determination is required for projects that will be rejected or disapproved by a public agency.

SECTION 2. Section .5809-13.F.8 of the PZO requires that it must be determined if the structures meet any of the criteria for designation as local historic landmarks before appro ving a Major Certificate of Appropriateness for demolition of any pre -1945 structure. The City Council hereby finds as follows:

1. It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the city of Pomona's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, architectural, or natural history;

There is no evidence that this property was the site of an event important in history; or that the property exemplified an important trend or pattern of development; or was a remnant feature representing early built resources from the period. While the properties may be a rare remaining example of early residential development in Spadra or Pomona as it may be a rare, remaining examples of some of the city’s earliest residential development, the structures have been altered to the point that they lack integrity because the alterations and additions destroyed the massing, spatial relationships, proportion, and ornamentation features of the property. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

2. The property is identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history.

Based on staff’s research of City directories and literature, there is no evidence creating an association with persons significant in our past, including early pioneers in the history of Spadra or Pomona; or a proven association with a specific significant ethnic or cultural group that made a demonstrable impact on the early community. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

Resolution No. 2023-13
January 23, 2023

Page 3 of 5 ends

3. The property embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.

Despite the properties having been altered, the properties are good or rare examples of architectural styles, property types, or methods of construction. The main volumes of each structure remain and any alterations, such as the application of stucco or the resconstructin of the original wooden porch with CMU block, can be either be removed, restored, or reconstructed back into original condition, therefore the structures meet this criterion.

4. The property contributes to the significance of an historic area, being a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of historic or scenic properties or thematically related grouping of properties that contribute to each other and are unif ied aesthetically by plan or physical development.

The property is located in an area that could be historic based on the theme. The original 1993 Citywide survey identified a potential Center Street Historic District that ends with the house at the corner of Rebecca Street and Center Street. Though the survey evaluated properties west of the proposed boundary and chose not to include them in the historic district, the subject structures, which were approximately built in 1885 and 1895 respectively, could potentially be contributing to a future historic district should one be designated in this area. Staff visited the neighborhood and found that most of the homes west of the proposed district boundary are of a similar time period of the late Nineteenth Century, during the early years of Pomona’s founding and development. The properties in questions possess integrity of design, materials, workmanship, and feeling, which, if the area was made an historic district, would potentially make them contributing resou rces.

Therefore the properties meet this criterion.

5. The property is the work of a notable builder, designer, landscape designer, or architect.

The subject structures were approximately built in 1885 and 1895 with no identifiable builder. Based on staff’s research, there is no evidence that this property is a distinctive work by a noted architect, landscape architect, builder, or designer. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

6. The property has a unique location or singular physical characteristics or is a view or vista representing an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community, or the City of Pomona.

Based on the history in the historic context and the location of the property, staff reviewed the criteria and determined that there is no evidence that the location of this property is unique or has singular physical characteristics, and that they are not a view or vista representing an established and fam iliar visual feature of a neighborhood, community, or the city of Pomona. Therefore, the property does not have a unique established and familiar location or view and does not meet this criterion.

Resolution No. 2023-13
January 23, 2023

Page 4 of 5 ends

7. The property embodies elements of architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship that represent a significant structural or architectural achievement or innovation.

While the property may embodies elements of architectural design, detail, mater ials, or craftsmanship, since this house is one of several examples in Pomona, those elements do not represent a significant structural or architectural achievement or innovation. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

8. The property is simila r to other distinctive properties, sites, areas, or objects based on a historic, cultural, or architectural motif.

The property is similar to other properties from the same time period but there is no evidence that the similarity is based on a historic or cultural motif. In addition, there is no concentration of Italianate and Victorian Vernacular styles of architecture that would show a deliberate architectural motif being used instead of the random coincidence of choosing the same style of home to build or buy. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

9. The property reflects significant geographical patterns, including those associated with different eras of settlement and growth, particular transportation modes, or distinctive example of park or community planning.

There is no evidence that this property was the site of an event important in history; or that the property exemplified an important trend or pattern of development; or was a remnant feature representing early built resources from the period. In, addition, although the properties may be a rare remaining example of early residential development in Spadra or Pomona as it may be a rare, remaining examples of some of the city’s earliest residential development, the structures have been altered to the point that they lack integrity because the alterations and additions destroyed the massing, spatial relationships, proportion, and ornamentation features of the property. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

10. The property is one of the few remaining examples of the City of Pomona, region, state, or nation possessing distinguishing characteristics of an architectural or historical type of specimen.

The properties may be one of the few remaining examples of early residential development in Pomona as it may be a rare, remaining examples of some of the city’s earliest residential development, but they do not possess integrity of design, materials, and workmanship necessary to possess any distinguishing characteristics of an architectural or historical type.

Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

SECTION 3. The City Council hereby denies the Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJCOA-018024-2021) demolition of a multifamily development located at 548 W. Cente r Street and one single family dwelling located at 554 W. Center Street.

Resolution No. 2023-13
January 23, 2023

Page 5 of 5 ends

SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and forward the original to the City Clerk.

APPROVED AND PASSED THIS 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2023.

CITY OF POMONA:

Tim Sandoval
Mayor

APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

Sonia Carvalho Rosalia A. Butler, MMC
City Attorney City Clerk

I, HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Pomona at a regular meeting thereof held on January 23, 2023 by the following vote of the Council:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Rosalia A. Butler, MMC
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-14

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POMONA,

CALIFORNIA, APPROVING MAJOR CERTIFICATE OF
APPROPRIATENESS ( MAJCOA-018024-2022) TO ALLOW FOR THE
DEMOLITION OF PRE-1945 STRUCTURES LOCATED AT 548 AND 554 W. CENTER STREET (APN: 8340-030-006 & 8340-030-012)

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POMONA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, the applicant, Ali Dashti , has submitted an application for Certificate of Appropriateness ( MAJCOA-018024-2022) to allow for the demolition of a multifamily development located at 548 W. Center Street and one single family dwelling located at 554 W.

Center Street (APN 8340-030-006 & 8340-030-012);

WHEREAS, available records indicate that the structure s were constructed in approximately 1885 and 1895, respectively;

WHEREAS, the City of Pomona’s Historic Resources Inventory, prepared in 1993 by Diane Marsh, identified the primary structures located on the subject property located at 548 W.

Center Street as Italianate architecture and the subject property located at 554 W. Center Street as Folk Victorian;

WHEREAS, the H istoric Preservation Commission shall first consider if the property would likely meet the criteria used in historic landmark designation as described in Section .5809-

13.D of the Pomona Zoning Ordinance (PZO) to approve Major Certificate of Appropriatenes s (MAJCOA-018024-2021) for the demolition of any primary structure constructed before 1945;

ATTACHMENT NO. 2

Resolution No. 2023-14
January 23, 2023

Page 2 of 6 ends

WHEREAS, the applicant submitted an application to appeal the decision of the Historic preservation Commission to deny Major Certificate of Appropriat eness (MAJCOA 18024-2022) for the demolition of pre-1945 structures at 548 and 554 W. Center Street;

WHEREAS, the City Council of the city of Pomona has, after giving notice thereof as required by law, held a public hearing on November 21, 2022, December 5, 2022, and January 23, 2023, concerning the appeal of the denial of Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJOA 18024- 2022);

WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully considered all pertinent testimony and the staff report offered in the case presented at the public hearing;

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pomona, California, as follows:

SECTION 1. Pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed project meets the criteria for a Class 1, Section 15301 Categorical Exemption in that the project involves the demolition and removal of a single-family residence.

SECTION 2. Section .5809-13.F.8 of the PZO requires that it must be determined if the structures meet any of the criteria for designation as local historic landmarks before approving a Major Certificate of Appropriateness for demolition of any pre-1945 structure. The City Council hereby finds as follows:

1. It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the city of Pomona's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, architectural, or natural history;

There is no evidence that this property was the site of an event important in history; or that the property exemplified an important trend o r pattern of development; or was a remnant feature representing early built resources from the period. While the properties may be a rare remaining example of early residential development in Spadra or Pomona as it may be a rare, remaining examples of som e of the city’s earliest residential development , t he structures have been altered to the point that they lack integrity because the alterations and additions destroyed the massing, spatial relationships, proportion, and ornamentation features of the property. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

2. The property is identified with person s or events significant in local, state, or national history.

Page 3 of 6 ends

group that made a demonstrable impact on t he early community. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

3. The property embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, per iod or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.

The properties may be a good or rare example of an architectural style, property type, or method of construction, but the structures have been significantly altered and these properties do not retain some basic features, such as conveying massing and has l ost the majority of the features that once characterized its style. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

The property is located in an area that could be historic based on the theme. The original 1993 Citywide survey identified a potential Center Street Historic District the ends with the house at the corner of Rebecca Street and Center Street. The survey evaluated properties west of the proposed boundary but chose not to include them in the historic district. Staff visited the neighborhood and found that most of the homes west of the proposed district boundary had been significantly altered. The properties in questions also do not possess integrity of design, materials, workmanship, and feeling, which, if the area was made an historic district, would make them non-contributing resources. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

5. The property is the work of a notable builder, designer, landscape designer, or architect.

The subject structure s were approximately built in 1885 and 1895 with no identifiable builder. Based on s taff’s research, there is no evidence that this property is a distinctive work by a noted architect, landscape architect, builder, or designer. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

6. The property has a unique location or sin gular physical characteristics or is a view or vista representing an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community, or the City of Pomona.

Based on the history in the historic context and the location of the property, staff reviewed the criteria and determined th at there is no evidence that the location of this property is unique or has singular physical characteristics , and that they are not a view o r vista representing an established and familiar visual feature of a n eighborhood, community, or the City of Pomona. Therefore, the property does not have a unique established and familiar location or view and does not meet this criterion.

Resolution No. 2023-14
January 23, 2023

Page 4 of 6 ends

7. The property embodies elements of architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship that represent a significant structural or architectural achievement or innovation.

While the property may embodies elements of architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship, since this house is one of several examples in Pomona, those elements do not represent a significant structural or architectural achievement or innovation. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

8. The property is similar to other distinctive properties, sites, areas, or objects based on a historic, cultural, or architectural motif.

There is no evidence that this property was the site of an event important in history; or that the property exemplified an important trend or pattern of development; or was a remnant feature representing early built resources from the period. In, addition, although the properties may be a rare remaining example of early residential development in Spadra or Pomona as it may be a rare, remaining examples of some of the city’s earliest residential development, the structures have been altered to the point that they lack integrity because the alterations and additions destroyed the massing, spatial relationships, proportion, and ornamentation features of the property. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

10. The property is one of the few remaining examples of the City of Pomona, region, state, or nation possessing distinguishing characteristics of an architectural or historical type of specimen.

The properties may be one of the few remaining examples of early residential development in Pomona as it may be a rare, remaining examples of some of the city’s earliest residential development, but they do not possess integrity of design, materials, workmanship necessary to possess any distinguishing characteristics of an architectural or historical type.

Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

SECTION 3. The City Council hereby approves the Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJCOA-018783-2021) to allow for the demolition of one structure with the following conditions:

Resolution No. 2023-14
January 23, 2023

Page 5 of 6 ends

1. This approval shall lapse and become void if the privileged authorized is not utilized through the issuance of a building permit for demolition and work has not commenced within one (1) year from the date of approval ( January 23, 2024). The project is subject to a twenty (20) day appeal period. Written appeals may be filed with the City Clerk within twenty (20) days by the applicant or other interested person. The appeal shall be filed with the City Clerk within twenty (20) days from the date of action by the Planning Commission.

2. Before issuance of a building permit for demolition of the existing structure, the applicant is encouraged to take those steps, necessary to either (a) allow interested person or organizations a 30 day period for reasonable salvage opportunity or, (b) instruct the applicant’s demolition contractor to salvage, rather than destroy, those historic elements found within the house.

3. The applicant shall document the structure photographically and present a copy of the record to the Special Collections Division of the Pomona Public Library.

SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and forward the original to the City Clerk.

APPROVED AND PASSED THIS 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2023.

CITY OF POMONA:

______________________________
Tim Sandoval
Mayor

APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

________________________________ ______________________________ Sonia Carvalho Rosalia A. Butler, MMC
City Attorney City Clerk

Resolution No. 2023-14
January 23, 2023

Page 6 of 6 ends

I, HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Pomona at a regular meeting thereof held on January 23, 2023 by the following vote of the Council:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Rosalia A. Butler, MMC
City Clerk

CITY OF POMONA

COUNCIL REPORT
December 5, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: James W. Makshanoff, City Manager
Submitted By: Anita Gutierrez, AICP, Development Services Director SUBJECT: CONTINUATION OF APPEAL OF MAJOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 18024-2022 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED
AT 548 AND 554 W. CENTER STREET
At the City Council meeting on November 21, 2022, the City Council directed staff to conduct mediation between the property owner and the tenants, represented by Pomona United for Stable Housing (PUSH). Staff will report on any outcomes from the mediation at the December 5, 2022 City Council meeting.

Staff is attaching the previous City Council Report for reference.

ATTACHMENT:

Attachment No. 1 – City Council Meeting Staff Report with Attachments for November 21, 2022 ATTACHMENT 3

CITY OF POMONA

COUNCIL REPORT
November 21, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: James W. Makshanoff, City Manager
Submitted By: Anita Gutierrez, AICP, Development Services Director SUBJECT: APPEAL OF MAJOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS NO. 18024-2022 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 548 AND 554 W.

CENTER STREET
RECOMMENDATION:

It is that the City Council adopt one of the following resolutions (Attachment No.s 1 & 2):

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-208 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF POMONA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING MAJOR
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS ( MAJCOA 18024-2022) FOR THE DEMOLITION OF PRE -1945 STRUCTURES ON PROPERTIES
LOCATED AT 548 AND 554 W. CENTER STREET (APN: 8340-030-006 & 8340-030-012)
or
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-212 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF POMONA, CALIFORNIA , APPROVING MAJOR
CERTIFICATE OF APPRO PRIATENESS (MAJCOA -018024-2022) TO ALLOW FOR THE DEMOLI TION OF PRE-1945 STRUCTURE S
LOCATED AT 548 AND 554 W. CENTER STREET (APN: 8340-030-006 & 8340-030-012)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The matter before the City Council is an appeal , by the project applicant , of the Historic Preservation Commission’s decision on Major Certificate of Appropriateness No. 18024-2022. On October 5, 2022, the Historic Preservation Commission ( “Commission”) denied the applicant’s request to allow for the demolition of a six-unit multifamily development located at 548 W. Center Street and one single family dwelling located at 554 W. Center St reet, estimated to have been constructed in 1885 and 1895, respectively. Approval of Resolution No. 2022-208 would uphold the Commission’s decision, deny the Major Certificate of Appropriateness and not allow the demolition to move forward. Approval of Resolution No. 2022 -212 would reverse the

Appeal of Denied MAJCOA No.18024-2022

Page 2 of 4 ends

Commission’s decision, approve the Major Certificate of Appropriateness and allow the applicant to pursue a demolition permit.

PUBLIC NOTICING REQUIREMENTS:

Pursuant to Section .5809-13, of the City of Pomona Zoning Ordinance (Historic Preservation), a notice of public hearing is required to be sent to the applicant and mailed to all owners of property located directly adjacent to and directly across the stre et from the subject site, at least ten days prior to the date of the public hearing. A notice was sent to the applicant, adjoining property owners on November 9, 2022 (Attachment No. 3).

PREVIOUS RELATED ACTION:

On September 7, 2022, the Historic Preservation Commission held a public hearing concerning the requested Major Certificate of Appropriateness (COA). At this hearing, while Planning Division Staff brought forward a recommendation to approve the request, the Commission made a motion to deny Staff’s recommendation and directed Staff to return to Commission with findings for denial on a 5-2-0-0 vote.

At the next regularly scheduled Historic Preservation Commission meeting on October 5, 2022, Planning Division Staff brought forward a similar recommendation to approve the request as Staff had re-evaluated the properties and did not find sufficient evidence to support the designation criteria or the integrity requirements to be designated as local historic landmarks. The Commission made a motion to deny the Major COA based upon their determination that despite alterations, the structures on both properties are contributing and have sufficient integrity, and are deemed to be of historic significance. This motion passed on a 4-3-0-0 vote.

On October 13, 2022, the property owner filed an appeal (Attachment No. 4) of the decision of the Historic Preservation Commission. The staff reports for both the September and October Historic Preservation Commission meetings have been included for your consideration as Attachment s 5 and 6, respectively.

APPLICABLE CODE SECTION:

Pursuant to Historic Preservation Section .5809 -13.G of the Pomona Zoning Ordinance, which establishes appeal procedures for a Major Certificate of Appropriateness, decisions of the Commission may be appealed to the City Council. In addition, the following code section of the Pomona Zoning Code apply to the project:
• Section . 5809-13.F.8 – Special Considerations Regarding Demolition of Pre-1945 Nondesignated Structures
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:

Pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the Calif ornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), no environmental determination is required for projects that will be rejected or disapproved by a public agency. However, should the proposed project be approved by the City Appeal of Denied MAJCOA No.18024-2022

Page 3 of 4 ends

Council, the proposed project meets the criteria for a Class 1, Section 15301 Categorical Exemption (Existing Facilities), pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines.

DISCUSSION:

At the Historic Preservation Commission public hearing on September 7 and October 5, 2022, Staff had determined that the subject properties do not meet the designation criteria or the integrity requirements for local historic landmark designation, nor as a contributor to a potential historic district. T he Commission considered if the properties would meet the criteria used in historic landmark designation and made findings that the subject properties meet Criteria 3 and 4 of the designation criteria listed in the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance.

Criterion 3 reads “ It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanshi p.” Criterion 4 reads “ It contributes to the significance of an historic area, being a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of historic or scenic properties or thematically related grouping of properties which contribute to each other a nd are unified aesthetically by plan or physical development .” By deciding that the properties meet criteria 3 and 4 used in historic landmark designation, the properties are deemed to be of historical significance and the Commission denied the certificate of appropriateness for demolition unless it meets the criteria for economic hardship. The approved Historic Preservation Commission Resolution No. 2022 -026 has been provided as Attachment 7.

Prepared by:

________________________
Alan Fortune
Assistant Planner

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment No. 1 – Draft City Council Resolution No. 2022-208 (Deny appeal) Attachment No. 2 – Draft City Council Resolution No. 2022-212 (Approve appeal) Attachment No. 3 – Public Hearing Notice
Attachment No. 4 – Appeal Application and Letter Submitted by Applicant dated October 13, 2022

Attachment No. 5 – Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Reports (with attachments) for September 7, 2022
Attachment No. 6 – Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Reports for October 5, 2022
Attachment No. 7 – Approved Historic Preservation Commission Resolution No. 2022-026.

Attachment No. 8 – Presentation
Appeal of Denied MAJCOA No.18024-2022

Page 4 of 4 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-208

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POMONA,

CALIFORNIA, DENYING MAJOR CERTIFICATE OF
APPROPRIATENESS (MAJCOA-018024-2022) FOR THE DEMOLITION OF PRE-1945 STRUCTURES LOCATED AT 548 AND 554 W. CENTE R STREET (APN: 8340-030-006 & 8340-030-012)

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POMONA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, the applicant, Ali Dashti , has submitted an application for Certificate of Appropriateness ( MAJCOA-018024-2022) to allow for the demolition of a multifamily development located at 548 W. Center Street and one single family dwelling located at 554 W.

Center Street (APN 8340-030-006 & 8340-030-012);

WHEREAS, available records indicate that the structure s were constructed in approximately 1885 and 1895, respectively;

WHEREAS, the City of Pomona’s Historic Resources Inventory, prepared in 1993 by Diane Marsh, identified the primary structures located on the subject property located at 548 W.

Center Street as Italianate architecture and the subject property located at 554 W. Center Street as Folk Victorian;

WHEREAS, the H istoric Preservation Commission shall first consider if the property would likely meet the criteria used in historic landmark designation as described in Section .5809-

13.D of the Pomona Zoning Ordinance (PZO) to approve Major Certificate of Appropriatenes s (MAJCOA-018024-2021) for the demolition of any primary structure constructed before 1945;

ATTACHMENT NO. 1

Resolution No. 2022-208
November 21, 2022

Page 2 of 5 ends

WHEREAS, the applicant submitted an application to appeal the decision of the Historic preservation Commission to deny Major Certificate of Appropriat eness (MAJCOA 18024-2022) for the demolition of pre-1945 structures at 548 and 554 W. Center Street;

WHEREAS, the City Council of the city of Pomona has, after giving notice thereof as required by law, held apublic hearing on November 21, 2022, concerning the appeal of the denial of Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJOA 18024-2022);

WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission has carefully considered all pertinent testimony and the staff report offered in the case presented at the public hearing;

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pomona, California, as follows:

SECTION 2. Section .5809-13.F.8 of the PZO requires that it must be determined if the structures meet any of the criteria for designat ion as local historic landmarks before approving a Major Certificate of Appropriateness for demolition of any pre-1945 structure. The City Council hereby finds as follows:

1. It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the city of Pomona's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, architectural, or natural history;

There is no evidence that this property was the site of an event important in history; or that the property exemplified an important trend or pattern of development; o r was a remnant feature representing early built resources from the period. While the properties may be a rare remaining example of early residential development in Spadra or Pomona as it may be a rare, remaining examples of some of the city’s earliest re sidential development , t he structures have been altered to the point that they lack integrity because the alterations and additions destroyed the massing, spatial relationships, proportion, and ornamentation features of the property. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

2. The property is identified with person s or events significant in local, state, or national history.

Resolution No. 2022-208
November 21, 2022

Page 3 of 5 ends

3. The property embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, per iod or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.

Despite the properties having been altered, the properties are good or rare example s of architectural styles, property types, or methods of construction. The main volumes of each structure remain and any alterations, such as the application of stucco or the resconstructin of the original wooden porch with CMU bloc k, can be either be removed, restored, or reconstructed back into original condition, therefore the structures meet this criterion.

The property is located in an area that could be historic based on the t heme. The original 1993 Citywide survey identified a potential Center Street Historic District that ends with the house at the corner of Rebecca Street and Center Street. Though the survey evaluated properties west of the proposed boundary and chose not to include them in the historic district, the subject structures, which were approximately built in 1885 and 1895 respectively, could potentially be contributing to a future historic district should one be designated in this area. Staff visited the neighb orhood and found that most of the homes west of the proposed district boundary are of a similar time period of the late Nineteenth Century, during the early years of Pomona’s founding and development. The properties in questions possess integrity of desig n, materials, workmanship, and feeling, which, if the area was made an histori c district, would potentially make them contributing resources.

Therefore the properties meet this criterion.

5. The property is the work of a notable builder, designer, landscape designer, or architect.

The subject structure s were approximately built in 1885 and 1895 with no identifiable builder. Based on s taff’s research, there is no evidence that this property is a distinctive work by a noted architect, landscape architect, builder, or designer. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

6. The property has a unique location or sin gular physical characteristics or is a view or vista representing an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community, or the City of Pomona.

Based on the history in the historic context and the location of the property, staff reviewed the criteria and determined th at there is no evidence that the location of this property is unique or has singular physical characteristics , and that they are not a view or vista representing an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community, or the city of Pomona. Therefore, the property does not have a unique established and familiar location or view and does not meet this criterion.

Resolution No. 2022-208
November 21, 2022

Page 4 of 5 ends

7. The property embodies elements of architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship that represent a significant structural or architectural achievement or innovation.

While the property may embodies elements of architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship, since this house is one of several examples in Pomona, those elements do not represent a significant structural or architectural achievement or innovation. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

8. The property is similar to other distinctive properties, sites, areas, or objects based on a historic, cultural, or architectural motif.

There is no evidence that this property was the site of an event important in history; or that the property exemplified an important trend or pattern of development; or was a remnant feature representing early built resources from the period. In, addition, although the properties may be a rare remaining example of early residential development in Spadra or Pomona as it may be a rare, remaining examples of some of the city’s earliest residential development, the structures have been altered to the point that they lack integrity because the alterations and additions destroyed the massin g, spatial relationships, proportion, and ornamentation features of the property. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

10. The property is one of the few remaining examples of the City of Pomona, region, state, or nation possessing distinguis hing characteristics of an architectural or historical type of specimen.

The properties may be one of the few remaining examples of early residential development in Pomona as it may be a rare, remaining examples of some of the city’s earliest residential development, but they do not possess integrity of design, materials, workmanship necessary to possess any distinguishing characteristics of an architectural or historical type.

Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

SECTION 3. The City Council hereby denies the Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJCOA-018024-2021) demolition of a multifamily development located at 548 W. Center Street and one single family dwelling located at 554 W. Center Street.

Resolution No. 2022-208
November 21, 2022

Page 5 of 5 ends

SECTION 4. The Secretary shall cer tify to the adoption of this Resolution and forward the original to the City Clerk.

APPROVED AND PASSED THIS 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022.

CITY OF POMONA:

______________________________
Tim Sandoval
Mayor

APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

________________________________ ______________________________ Sonia Carvalho Rosalia A. Butler, MMC
City Attorney City Clerk

I, HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Pomona at a regular meeting thereof held on November 21, 2022 by the following vote of the Council:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Rosalia A. Butler, MMC
City Clerk

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-212

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POMONA,

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POMONA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, the applicant, Ali Dashti , has submitted an application for Certificate of Appropriateness ( MAJCOA-018024-2022) to allow for the demolition of a multifamily development located at 548 W. Center Street and one single family dwelling located at 554 W.

Center Street (APN 8340-030-006 & 8340-030-012);

WHEREAS, available records indicate that the structure s were constructed in approximately 1885 and 1895, respectively;

WHEREAS, the City of Pomona’s Historic Resources Inventory, prepared in 1993 by Diane Marsh, identified the primary structures located on the subject property located at 548 W.

Center Street as Italianate architecture and the subject property located at 554 W. Center Street as Folk Victorian;

WHEREAS, the H istoric Preservation Commission shall first consider if the property would likely meet the criteria used in historic landmark designation as described in Section .5809-

13.D of the Pomona Zoning Ordinance (PZO) to approve Major Certificate of Appropriatenes s (MAJCOA-018024-2021) for the demolition of any primary structure constructed before 1945;

ATTACHMENT NO. 2

Resolution No. 2022-212
November 21, 2022

Page 2 of 6 ends

WHEREAS, the applicant submitted an application to appeal the decision of the Historic preservation Commission to deny Major Certificate of Appropriat eness (MAJCOA 18024-2022) for the demolition of pre-1945 structures at 548 and 554 W. Center Street;

WHEREAS, the City Council of the city of Pomona has, after giving notice thereof as required by law, held a public hearing on November 21, 2022, concerning the appeal of the denial of Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJOA 18024-2022);

WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission has carefully considered all pertinent testimony and the staff report offered in the case presented at the public hearing;

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pomona, California, as follows:

SECTION 2. Section .5809-13.F.8 of the PZO requires that it must be determined if the structures meet any of the criteria for designation as local historic landmarks before approving a Major Certificate of Appropriateness for demolition of any pre-1945 structure. The City Council hereby finds as follows:

1. It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the city of Pomona's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, architectural, or natural history;

There is no evidence that this property was the site of an event important in history; or that the property exemplified an important trend or pattern of deve lopment; or was a remnant feature representing early built resources from the period. While the properties may be a rare remaining example of early residential development in Spadra or Pomona as it may be a rare, remaining examples of some of the city’s e arliest residential development , t he structures have been altered to the point that they lack integrity because the alterations and additions destroyed the massing, spatial relationships, proportion, and ornamentation features of the property. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

2. The property is identified with person s or events significant in local, state, or national history.

Resolution No. 2022-212
November 21, 2022

Page 3 of 6 ends

3. The property embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, per iod or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.

The properties may be a good or rare example of an architectural style, property type, or method of construction, but the structures have been significantly altered and these properties do not retain some basic features, such as conveying massing and has lost the majority of the features that once characte rized its style. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

The property is located in an area that could be historic based on the theme. The original 1993 Citywide survey identified a potentia l Center Street Historic District the ends with the house at the corner of Rebecca Street and Center Street. The survey evaluated properties west of the proposed boundary but chose not to include them in the historic district. Staff visited the neighborh ood and found that most of the homes west of the proposed district boundary had been significantly altered. The properties in questions also do not possess integrity of design, materials, workmanship, and feeling, which, if the area was made an historic district, would make them non-contributing resources. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

5. The property is the work of a notable builder, designer, landscape designer, or architect.

The subject structure s were approximately built in 1885 and 1895 with no identifiable builder. Based on s taff’s research, there is no evidence that this property is a distinctive work by a noted architect, landscape architect, builder, or designer. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

6. The property has a unique location or sin gular physical characteristics or is a view or vista representing an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community, or the City of Pomona.

Based on the history in the historic context and the location of the property, staff reviewed the criteria and determined th at there is no evidence that the location of this property is unique or has singular physical characteristics , and that they are not a view or vista representing an established and familia r visual feature of a neighborhood, community, or the city of Pomona. Therefore, the property does not have a unique established and familiar location or view and does not meet this criterion.

Resolution No. 2022-212
November 21, 2022

Page 4 of 6 ends

7. The property embodies elements of architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship that represent a significant structural or architectural achievement or innovation.

While the property may embodies elements of architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship, since this house is one of several examples in Pomona, those elements do not represent a significant structural or architectural achievement or innovation. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

8. The property is similar to other distinctive properties, sites, areas, or objects based on a historic, cultural, or architectural motif.

There is no evidence that this property was the site of an event important in history; or that the property exemplified an important trend or pattern of development; or was a remnant feature representing early built resource s from the period. In, addition, although the properties may be a rare remaining example of early residential development in Spadra or Pomona as it may be a rare, remaining examples of some of the city’s earliest residential development, the structures have been altered to the point that they lack integrity because the alterations and additions destroyed the massing, spatial relationships, proportion, and ornamentation features of the property. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

10. The property is one of the few remaining examples of the City of Pomona, region, state, or nation possessing distinguishing characteristics of an architectural or historical type of specimen.

The properties may be one of the few remaining examples of early residential development in Pomona as it may be a rare, remaining examples of some of the city’s earliest residential development, but they do not possess integrity of design, materials, workmanship necessary to possess any distinguishing characteristics of an architectural or historical type.

Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

SECTION 3. The City Council hereby approves the Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJCOA-018783-2021) to allow for the demolition of a multifamily development located at 548 Resolution No. 2022-212
November 21, 2022

Page 5 of 6 ends

W. Center Street and one single family dwelling located at 554 W. Center Street with the following conditions:

1. This approval shall lapse and become void if the privileged authorized is not utilized through the issuance of a building permit for demolition and work has not commenced within one (1) year from the date of approval (October 5, 2023). The project is subject to a twenty (20) day appeal period. Written appeals may be filed wi th the City Clerk within twenty (20) days by the applicant or other interested person. The appeal shall be filed with the City Clerk within twenty (20) days from the date of action by the Planning Commission.

2. Before issuance of a building permit for demol ition of the existing structure, the applicant is encouraged to take those steps, necessary to either (a) allow interested person or organizations a 30 day period for reasonable salvage opportunity or, (b) instruct the applicant’s demolition contractor to salvage, rather than destroy, those historic elements found within the house.

3. The applicant shall document the structure photographically and present a copy of the record to the Special Collections Division of the Pomona Public Library.

SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and forward the original to the City Clerk.

APPROVED AND PASSED THIS 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022.

CITY OF POMONA:

______________________________
Tim Sandoval
Mayor

APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

________________________________ ______________________________ Sonia Carvalho Rosalia A. Butler, MMC
City Attorney City Clerk

Resolution No. 2022-212
November 21, 2022

Page 6 of 6 ends

I, HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Pomona at a regular meeting thereof held on November 21, 2022 by the following vote of the Council:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Rosalia A. Butler, MMC
City Clerk

CITY OF POMONA PLANNING DIVISION

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

PROPOSED PROJECT

PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION

This is not a citation (Esto no es una citación).

If you are receiving this notice, your property is located directly across or adjacent to the proposed project.

Time & Date City Council Meeting, Monday, November 21, 2022, 7:00 p.m.

Location City Council Chambers, 505 S. Garey, Pomona, CA 91766 (in-person meeting)

Questions Alan Fortune, Assistant Planner
Available to contact at (909) 620-2449 or at [email protected]

Written Comments: Written comments may be submitted to [email protected], by 6:00 p.m. the day of the hearing . Please title your email “ CC Public Comment 11 -21-22”. Comments received via email will be made a part of the official record of the meeting.

The staff report on this matter will be available n o later tha n November 17, 2022 on the City of Pomona website, which may be accessed at https://pomona.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx or by emailing the case planner, Alan Fortune.

PLEASE NOTE: If you challenge th is matter in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Pomona, Planning Division at, or prior to, the public hearing.

Para Información en Español, llame (909) 620-2439.

An appeal of the decision of the Historic Preservation Commission to deny a request for a Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJCOA 18024 -2022) to allow for the demolition of a six -unit multifamily structure and one single family residence, estimated to have been constructed in 1885 and 1895, respectively.

Applicant Ali Dashti
Location 548 and 554 W. Center Street
Assessor’s Parcel No(s). 8340-030-006 & 8340-030-012
Hearing Body City Council
Case File(s) MAJCOA 18024-2022

Environmental Determination
The City of Pomona, as lead agency, has conducted an environmental review on the proposed project per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to the provisions of CEQA (Public Resources Code, Section 21084 et. seq.), no environmental determination is required for projects that will be rejected or d isapproved by a public agency. Should the pro posed project be approved by the City Counil, the proposed project meets the criteria for a Categorical Exemption in compliance with Article 19, Section 150301, Class 1 (Existing Facilities) in that the project consists of the demolition and removal of ind ividual small structures including one single-family residence and one multifamily residential structure, therefore no further environmental review is required.

ATTACHMENT NO. 3

ATTACHMENT NO. 4
Historic Preservation Commission
Staff Report
September 7, 2022
FILE NO: MAJCOA-018024-2022
A request for a Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJCOA-018024- 2022) for the proposed demolition of a six-unit multifamily development and one single family dwelling, estimated to have been constructed in 1885 and 1895, respectively.

ADDRESS: 548 and 554 W. Center Street
APPLICANT: Ali Dashti
PROJECT PLANNER: Alan Fortune, Assistant Planner
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve File No. MAJCOA-18024-2022 and adopt Resolution No. 2022- 025 (Attachment 1)
BACKGROUND:

In May of 2022, Ali Dashti, submitted an application to demolish all structures located on two adjacent properties, one single family dwelling and a six -unit multifamily development, all constructed prior to 1945. According to the City of Pomona Historic Resources Inventory, the six-unit multi-family structure at 548 W. Center Street is estimated to have been constructed in 1885 while the single family dwelling located at 554 W. Center Street is estimated to have been constructed in 1895. The dwelling was listed in the 1993 City Wide Historic Resource Inventory as a Folk Victorian and identified by Planning Staff as Victorian Vernacular style (Attachment 2). The request for demolition is the for the purpose of development of the s ite. The development of the site r equires the approval of a Major Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition of a pre-1945 primary structure.

The properties are located on the south side of W. Center Street approximately mid -block between N.

White Avenue and N. Rebecca Street (Figure 1).

ATTACHMENT NO. 5
September 7, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting File No.: MAJCOA-018024-2022

Page 2 ends

Figure 1. Location Map

ANALYSIS:

The single family dwelling located at 554 W. Center Street is listed in the 1993 City of Pomona Historic Resources Inventory which identifies the structure as Folk Victorian architecture with an estimated construction date of 1895. The condition of the structure is “good” with moderate additions or alterations having been made over the years. The home rated as “CM” which refers to a building which may be contributing in spite of its alterations. Planning Staff conducted a thorough review of archival materia ls and has determined that the subject structure has had the windows replaced , stuccoed over siding, as well as an addition to the rear, altering the original appearance of the structure. Although the structure has been identified as a Folk Victorian, its current condition is not considered a good example of this architectural style due to missing character -defining features. A 384 square foot addition to the house was permitted in 2010 consisting of a master bedroom with a bathroom and walk-in closet. Other building permits associated with the structure include stuccoing house, adding a bathroom, and repairing and remodeling house. The series of alterations has severely affected the structure’s architectural and historic integrity.

The six-unit multi-family development located at 548 W. Center Street is listed in the Historic Resources Inventory and is identified as having Italianate architecture with an estimated construction date of 1885.

N. White Avenue
N. Rebecca Street
W. Monterey Avenue
W. Center Street
554 548
September 7, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting File No.: MAJCOA-018024-2022

Page 3 ends

The condition of the structure is “good” with moderate alterations and additions having been made.

Similarly, this structure is rated as “CM,” referring to be contributing with modifications. The existing development is composed of three attached structures with the two structures at the rear having been added after the initial construction date. Additions to the structure were made in 1925, 1935, 1958, and 1960 according to City of Pomona Building and Safety Division permit records. Other alterations include the changing of the porch from original wood material to a porch composed of CMU block. For this style of home most of the home’s character -defining features would have been contained in the porch. This one alteration severely affects the structure’s architectural and historic integrity.

Neither property was previously identified in the 1993 City of Pomona Historic Resources Inventory as a potential local landmark nor national register candidate.

Due to the severity of the alterations to these structure, both subject structures are no longer considered good examples of their respective architectural style s, Italianate and Folk Victorian . The remaining structures have not retained enough of the character-defining features of these architectural styles to have integrity. Photographs of the exterior of the property are included as Attachment 4.

Archived Publications

Staff has reviewed the archived City Directories available online from the Pomona Public Library to identify any persons associated with the property who may be significant to local, state, or national history. Staff has identified the following persons associated with the subject property as listed below (Figure 4):

Name Occupation Year of Source
554 W. Center Street
Matthew D.

Gantenbein & Anna D.

Not listed 1907, 1911*, 1914*, 1916*, 1919,
1922*, 1931, 1940, 1945, 1948, 1951
Directories
Mr. Dippo Fleming’s Cement Works 1896* Directory

Cyrus Lewis Retired 1898* Directory
Miss Francis Lewis Dressmaker 1898* Directory
Dawson Spence Clerk Bradley & Russell 1903* Directory
Frank Arnold Clerk Saddle Rock Rest 1907* Directory
John King Plaster and Cement Worker 1909* Directory
548 W. Center Street
Harriet A McGilliard Not listed 1926 Directory
*Resident at subject site

Progress Bulletin articles pertaining to these addresses include obituaries for Anna B. Gantenbein and Dawson G. Spence, an article regarding the response of Pomona police officers to a vagrant possum at September 7, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting File No.: MAJCOA-018024-2022

Page 4 ends

554 W. Center Street in 1949, an article regarding a reported suicide victim at 548 W. Center Street in 1958, an article stating that one of the occupants of 548 W. Center Street was involved in an automobile accident in 1949. A Daily Progress article in 1908 identifies Dawson G. Spence, a resident of 554 W. Center Street, was a member of Company D and the Seventh Regiment Band.

As identified in the archived City Directories, Staff has reviewed archived publications to identify those persons associated with the property who may be significant to local, state, or national his tory. The persons associated with the property were not identified as being significant to local, state, or national history in the following publications:

• Pomona Centennial History by Pomona Centennial-Bicentennial Committee (’76). • Pomona Centennial History by Gloria Ricci Lothrop (’88) • History of Pomona Valley California with Biographical Sketches (’20) • Sanborn Maps (1959)

CONCLUSION:

Based on Staff research and analysis, Staff has determined that the property does not meet any of the Historic Landmark Designation criteria as contained in Section .5809 -13(D) of the Pomona Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, the property does not qualify for designation as a local single historic landmark nor a contributing structure to any potential historic district.

REQUIRED FINDINGS:

The findings required in Section .580913(F)(8) of the Pomona Zoning Code shall be considered to determine if the property would likely meet the criteria for historic landmark designation are contained in the attached resolution.

PUBLIC NOTICING:

On August 5, 2022, a public hearing notice was mailed to the applicant and to all owners of properties located directly adjacent to and directly across the street from the subject sites (Attachment 5). On August 26, 2022, a copy of the public hearing notice was published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin. As of the date of this staff report, Planning Division Staff has not received correspondence regarding the proposed project.

September 7, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting File No.: MAJCOA-018024-2022

Page 5 ends

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

The City of Pomona, as lead agency, has conducted an environmental review on the proposed project per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to the provisions of CEQA (Public Resources Code, Section 21084 et. seq.), the guidelines include a list of classes of projec ts which have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and which shall, therefore, be exempt from the provisions of CEQA. Staff has determined that this project is exempt from the CEQA pursuant to Article 19, Section 150301, Clas s 1 (Existing Facilities) in that the project consists of the demolition and removal of individual small structures including one single -family residence and one multifamily residential structure. The proposed project described above hereby meets the guidelines for a Categorical Exemption, therefore no further environmental review is required.

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:

The draft Conditions of Approval are contai ned in the attached resolution, Historic Preservation Commission Resolution No. 2022-025.

ATTACHMENTS:

1: Draft HPC Resolution No. 2022-026
2: Historic Resources Inventory, 1993
3: Site Photographs
4: Public Hearing Notice

HPC RESOLUTION NO. 2022-026

A RESOLUTION OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION

OF THE CITY OF POMONA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING MAJOR
CERTIFICATE OF APPRO PRIATENESS ( MAJCOA-018024-2022) TO ALLOW FOR THE DEMOLITION O F PRE-1945 STRUCTURES
LOCATED AT 548 AND 554 W. CENTER STREET

THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF POMONA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, the applicant, Ali Dashti , has submitted an application for Certificate of Appropriateness ( MAJCOA-018024-2022) to allow for the demolition of a multifamily development located at 548 W. Center Street and one single family dwelling located at 554 W.

Center Street (APN 8340-030-006 & 8340-030-012);

WHEREAS, available records indicate that the structure was constructed in approximately 1885 and 1895, respectively;

WHEREAS, the City of Pomona’s Historic Resources Inventory, prepared in 1993 by Diane Marsh, identified the primary structure located on the subject property located at 548 W.

Center Street as Italianate architecture and the subject property located at 554 W. Center Street as Folk Victorian;

WHEREAS, in accordance with Section .5809 -13.F.8(b), all property owners direc tly adjacent to the site were notified of the application on August 5, 2022;

WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission must make findings as described in Section .5809-13.F.8 of the Pomona Zoning Ordinance (PZO) to approve Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJCOA-018024-2021) for the demolition of any primary structure constructed before 1945;

WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission of the City of Pomona, has, after giving notice thereof as required by law, held a public hearing on September 7, 2022, concerning the requested Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJCOA-018024-2021); and

WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission has carefully considered all pertinent testimony and the staff report offered in the case presented at the public hearing;

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Historic Preservation Commission of the City of Pomona, California, as follows:

SECTION 1. Pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed p roject meets the criteria for a Class 1, Section 15301 Categorical Exemption in that the project involves the demolition and removal of a single-family residence.

HPC Resolution No. 2022-026
548 & 554 W. Center Street (MAJCOA-018024-2022)

Page 2 of 5 ends

SECTION 2. Section .5809 -13.F.6 of the PZO requires the Historic Preservation Commission to determine whether the structure meets any of the criteria for designation as a local historic landmark before approving a Major Certificate of Appropriateness for demolition of a pre- 1945 structure. The Historic Preservation Commission hereby finds as follows:

1. It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the city of Pomona's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, architectural, or natural history;

The City of Pomona Historic Resources Inventory identified 548 W. Center Street as an Italianate structure and 554 W. Center Street as a Folk Victorian home . The structure has been altered to the point where some character de fining features no longer exist . The structure does not exemplify or reflect special elements related to the C ity’s history, according to research conducted through the City permits, directories and literature.

Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

2. The property is identified with person s or events significant in local, state, or national history.

Staff’s research of City directories and literature did not indicate that the structure s could be identified with persons or events significant in local, state or national history. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

3. The property embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, per iod or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.

The structure has been significantly altered and no longer embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, per iod, or method of construction. The materials used in construction are not identified as indigenous materials and it is not a unique example of craftsmanship. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

The structure no longer possesses qualities that could contribute to the area. Though the surrounding and adjoining residential structures were built in same time period between 1880 and 1940, the subject properties and adjacent properties in the neighborhood are not within the boundaries of the nearby Center Street Potential Local Historic District which was listed as a potential historic district in the 1993 Historic Resources Survey, therefore it is not part of a g eographically definable area possessing a concentration of historic or scenic properties. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

HPC Resolution No. 2022-026
548 & 554 W. Center Street (MAJCOA-018024-2022)

Page 3 of 5 ends

5. The property is the work of a notable builder, designer, landscape designer, or architect.

The subject structures were approximately built in 1885 and 1895 with no identifiable builder. Staff’s research did not identify evidence of any involvement with a noted architect, builder, designer, or person with exemplary talents. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

6. The property has a unique location or sin gular physical characteristics or is a view or vista representing an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community, or the City of Pomona.

The structure is located on West Center Street, a residential neighborhood of the City that lies in an urbanized area of the City . Due to urban development throughout the last few decades, the setting, feel, and character of the neighborhood has irreversib ly changed and does not possess a familiar visual feature of a unified physical characteristic or a familiar visual feature. Therefore, the property does not have a unique established and familiar location or view and does not meet this criterion.

7. The property embodies elements of architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship that represent a significant structural or architectural achievement or innovation.

The structure no longer possesses significant architectural character, and does not po ssess any distinguishing details, craftsmanship, structural significance, or architectural innovation. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

8. The property is similar to other distinctive properties, sites, areas, or objects based on a historic, cultural, or architectural motif.

The subject structure has not been found to be similar to distinctive properties, sites, or areas in the City, based on an historic, cultural, or architectural motif. The structures have been identified as Italianate and Folk Victorian; however, they are not considered good examples due to their condition and they are not the last of their style. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

The subject structure does not reflect significant geograph ic patterns of settlement and growth as the neighborhood it is located in, is comprised of single-family structures mostly from the 1890s era. The site does not involve any structures associated with transportation, park or community planning. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

HPC Resolution No. 2022-026
548 & 554 W. Center Street (MAJCOA-018024-2022)

Page 4 of 5 ends

10. The property is one of the few remaining examples of the City of Pomona, region, state, or nation possessing distinguishing characteristics of an architectural or historical type of specimen.

The structure no longer possesses an architectural style or characteristic that distinguishes it from others of its kind. Though there is not an abundance of examples of its architectural type in the City the subject structure is no longer considered a “prime example” of this architectural style. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

SECTION 3 . The Historic Preservation Commission hereby appr oves the Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJCOA -018783-2021) to allow for the demolition of one structure with the following conditions:

1. This approval shall lapse and become void if the privileged authorized is not utilized through the issuance of a building permit for demolition and work has not commenced within one (1) year from the date of approval ( September 7, 2022). The project is subject to a twenty (20) day appeal period. Written appeals may be filed with the City Clerk within twenty (20) days by the applicant or other interested person. The appeal shall be filed with the City Clerk within twenty (20) days from the date of action by the Planning Commission.

2. Before issuance of a building permit for demolition of the existing structure, the app licant is encouraged to take those steps, necessary to either (a) allow interested person or organizations a 30 day period for reasonable salvage opportunity or, (b) instruct the applicant’s demolition contractor to salvage, rather than destroy, those hist oric elements found within the house.

3. The applicant shall document the structure photographically and present a copy of the record to the Special Collections Division of the Pomona Public Library.

SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and forward the original to the City Clerk.

HPC Resolution No. 2022-026
548 & 554 W. Center Street (MAJCOA-018024-2022)

Page 5 of 5 ends

APPROVED AND PASSED THIS 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022.

__________________________________

CHARA SWODECK

HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION CHAIRPERSON

ATTEST:

___________________________________
GEOFFREY STARNS, LEED AP BD+C

HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SECRETARY

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )ss

CITY OF POMONA )

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Pursuant to Resolution No. 76-258 of the City of Pomona, the time in which judicial review of this action must be sought is governed by California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6.

548 W. Center Street

554 W. Center Street

CITY OF POMONA PLANNING DIVISION

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

PROPOSED PROJECT

PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION

This is not a citation (Esto no es una citación).

If you are receiving this notice, your property is located directly across or adjacent to the proposed project.

Time & Date Historic Preservation Commission Meeting, Wednesday, September 7, 2022, 6:30 p.m.

Location City Council Chambers, 505 S. Garey, Pomona, CA 91766 (in-person meeting)

Questions Alan Fortune, Assistant Planner
Available to contact at (909) 620-2449 or at [email protected]

Written Comments: Written comments may be submitted to [email protected], by 5:3 0 p.m. the day of the hearing. Comments must be limited to 200 words. Ple ase title your email “ HPC Public Comment 9-7-22”. Comments received via email will be made a part of the official record of the meeting.

The staff report on this matter will be available no later than September 1, 2022 on the City of Pomona website, which may be accessed at https://pomona.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx or by emailing the case planner, Alan Fortune.

PLEASE NOTE: If you challenge this matter in court, you may be limited to raising only t hose issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Pomona, Planning Division at, or prior to, the public hearing.

Para Información en Español, llame (909) 620-2439.

The Historic Preservation Commission will conduct a public hearing to consider a request for a Major Certificate of Appropriateness ( MAJCOA 18024 -2022) associated with the proposed demolition of a six -unit multi family structure and one single family residence, estimated to have been constructed in 1885 and 1895, respectively.

Applicant Ali Dashti
Location 548 and 554 W. Center Street
Assessor’s Parcel No(s). 8340-030-006 & 8340-030-012
Hearing Body Planning Commission
Case File(s) MAJCOA 18024-2022

Environmental Determination
The City of Pomona, as lead agency, has conducted an environmental review on the proposed project per t he California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to the provisions of CEQA (Public Resources Code, Section 21084 et. seq.), the guidelines include a list of classes of projects which have been determined not to have a significant effect on the envi ronment and which shall, therefore, be exempt from the provisions of CEQA . The Historic Preservation Commission will consider adopting a Categorical Exemption in compliance with Article 19, Section 150301, Class 1 (Existing Facilities) in that the project consists of the demolition and removal of individual small structures including one single -family residence and one multifamily residential structure. The proposed project described above hereby meets the guidelines for a Categorical Exemption, therefore no further environmental review is required.

Historic Preservation Commission
Staff Report
October 5, 2022
FILE NO: MAJCOA-018024-2022 (Continued from September 7, 2022) A request for a Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJCOA-018024- 2022) for the proposed demolition of a six-unit multifamily development and one single family dwelling, estimated to have been constructed in 1885 and 18955, respectively.

ADDRESS: 548 and 554 W. Center Street
APPLICANT: Ali Dashti
PROJECT PLANNER: Alan Fortune, Assistant Planner
RECOMMENDATION: Approve File No. MAJCOA-18024-2022 and adopt Resolution No. 2022- 025 (Attachment 1), approving the Certificate of Appropriateness BACKGROUND:

At the September 7, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission meeting, staff presented an application for a Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJCOA -018024-2022) to demolish two residential structures, a six-unit multi -family development and one single family dwelling , both constructed pri or to 1945.

According to the City of Pomona Historic Resources Inventory, the six -unit multi-family structure at 548 W. Center Street is estimated to have been constructed in 1885 while the single family dwelling located at 554 W. Center Street is estimate d to have been constructed in 1895. Staff recommended that the application be approved because neither structure met the local criteria for designation and, therefore, were not historic. Multiple members of the public provided public comment; two individuals representing the applicant spoke in favor of the request and ten individuals spoke in opposition.

At the meeting, the Commission made two motions. The first was a failed motion to approve Staff’s recommendation and extend the time for the tenants to vacate the property by an additional 60 days for a total of 120 days. The Commission on a second motion, subsequently denied Staff’s recommendation and directed Staff to return to Commission with findings for denial, with attention to several specific criteria for historic designation, including Criteria 1, 2, 6, and 8. This motion passed on a 5-2-0-0 vote.

Staff re-examined Criteria 1, 2, 6, and 8 as well as the all of the local designation criteria to identify reasons that these properties may be historic. When evaluating a property for historic significance, staff takes ATTACHMENT NO. 6
October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 2 ends

into account multiple factors: theme or area of significance, historic significance, period of sign ificance, and historic integrity.

Guidelines for Evaluating Properties
In order to evaluate the properties for historic significance staff utilized the guidance published by the National Park S ervice and guidance in National Register Bulletins . The following guiding documents include:

 The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeological and Historic Preservation
 National Register Bulletin 24: Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis for Preservation Planning  National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation  National Register Bulletin 16A: How to Complete the National Register Registration Form  National Register Bulletin 15: How to Complete the National Register Multiple Property Documentation Form
 National Register Bulletin 39: Researching a Historic Property

Historic Significance
As stated in Appendix C: Guidelines for Evaluation and Registration Programs of the Pomona Citywide Historic Context Statement, “The definition of historic significance used by the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) in its administration of the California Register is based upon the following definition used by the National Park Service for the National Register.” Cities across California have based their own local criteria on this same definition.

That definition (From National Register Bulletin 16A) is as follows:

Historic significance is [defined as] the importance of a property to the history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, or culture of a community, State, or the nation. It is achieved in several ways:

 Association with important events, activities or patterns  Association with important persons
 Distinctive physical characteristics of design, construction, or form  Potential to yield important information

A property may be significant individually or as part of a grouping of properties.

While Pomona has different designation criteria, they fits into these four areas and are consistent with both the California and National Register criteria.

Period of Significance
When evaluating a property for historic significance, a period of significance must also be determined.

The National Park Service defines the Period of Significance as:

October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 3 ends

“the length of time when a property was associated with im portant events, activities or persons, or attained the characteristics which qualify it for…listing. The period of significance usually begins with the date when significant activities or events began giving the property its historic significance; this is often a date of construction.”

Historic Integrity
As stated in our historic context statement, historic integrity is the ability of a property to convey its significance and is defined as the “authenticity of a property’s historic identity, evidenced by the survival of physical characteristics that existed during the property’s historic period.” The National Park Service defines seven aspects of integrity: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association.

These qualities are defined as follows:

 Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event took place.
 Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property.
 Setting is the physical environment of a historic property.  Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property.  Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory.
 Feeling is a property's expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time.  Association is the direct link between an im portant historic event or person and a historic property.

While it is not necessary for a property to retain all seven aspects of integrity, or indeed, “all its historic physical features or characteristics,” the National Park Service notes that the prope rty must retain “the essential physical features that enable it to convey its historic identity. The essential physical features are those features that define both why a property is significant and when it was significant.

Character-Defining Features
Every historic building is unique, with its own identity and its own distinctive character. Character-defining features are those visual aspects and physical features or elements, constructed during the property’s period of significance, that give the buildi ng its historic character and contribute to the integrity of the property. Character-defining features should be considered in the planning and design of a project to preserve them to the maximum extent possible. Character-defining features can identify the building as an example of a specific building type, usually related to the building’s function; they can exemplify the use of specific materials or methods of construction, or embody a historical period or architectural style; and they can convey the sense of time and place in buildings associated with significant events or people.

October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 4 ends

In order to be considered eligible for designation as a historic resource, a property must possess both sufficient historic significance to meet at least one of the designatio n criteria, and sufficient historic integrity to convey its significance through the physical features that reflect the property’s character and identity.

EVALUATION PROCESS:

Staff used the following process to evaluate the properties:

1. Review the Citywide Historic Context Statement and identify what, if any, themes in the Context Statement are applicable to the properties.

2. Review the Context Statement Theme(s) to determine eligibility standards.

3. Review the designation criteria to determine if the properties meet any of the criteria.

4. Review the Theme and criteria to determine the period of significance.

5. Review the Context Statement to determine integrity standards.

6. Review the seven aspects of integrity to see if the properties have integrity.

7. Review Registration Requirements to see if property meets requirements.

8. Make a determination regarding each property.

EVALUATION - 548 WEST CENTER STREET:

As stated in last month’s staff report the estimated construction date is 1885, taken from the 1993 citywide survey. The property is also identified as being designed in the Italianate architectural style. Staff reviewed these determinations and concurred with them.

Step 1: Theme
Staff reviewed the Citywide Historic Context Statement a nd determined that the Growing Community (1865-1887): Residential Development Theme from the Citywide Historic Context Statement is applicable to this property.

Location
The location of this theme is generally downtown. This property is located just north of what we define today as downtown, but is part of the original Pomona Land and Water Company development, and would therefore meet the location requirements. The area, based on the theme could be a potential historic district.

Step 2: Determine Eligibility Standards
The theme has both general Eligibility Standards and Registration Requirements in order to qualify for designations. They are broken down by criteria as follows:

Criteria 1 and 9 (Events/Patterns of Development)
Individual residential properties that are eligible under this criterion may be significant:

 As the site of an event important in history; or
October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 5 ends

 For exemplifying an important trend or pattern of development; or  As a rare remaining example of early residential development in Spadra or Pomona. This includes remnant adobe residences reflecting the city’s association with the Rancho era; or rare, remaining examples of some of the city’s earliest residential development; or  As a remnant feature representing early built resources from the period.

Registration Requirements
To be eligible under this criterion a property must:

 Date from the period of significance; and
 Have a proven association with an event important in history; or  Represent an important catalyst for a pattern or trend in residential development; or  Represent a rare remaining example of early residential development in Pomona or Spadra; and  Display most of the character-defining features of the property type or style; and  Retain the essential aspects of historic integrity.

Criterion 2 (Important Persons)
Individual residential properties eligible under this criterion may be significant:

 For an association with persons significant in our past, including early pioneers in the history of Spadra or Pomona; or
 For a proven association with a specific significant ethnic or cultural group that made a demonstrable impact on the early community.

Note that according to National Park Service guidance, persons significant in our past refers to individuals whose activities are demonstrably importa nt within a local, state, or national historic context. A property is not eligible if its only justification for significance is that it was owned or used by a person who is a member of an identifiable profession, class, or social or ethnic group. In addition, the property must be associated with a person’s productive life, reflecting the time period when he or she achieved significance.

Registration Requirements
To be eligible under this criterion a property must:

 Have a proven association with the produ ctive period of a person important to local, state, or national history; and
 Display most of the character -defining features of the property type or style from the period of significance (i.e., the period when the property was associated with the important person); and  Retain the essential aspects of integrity.

Criteria 3, 5, and 7 (Architecture and Design)
Individual residential properties that are eligible under this criterion may be significant as:

October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 6 ends

 A good or rare example of an architectural style, property type, or method of construction; or  A distinctive work by a noted architect, landscape architect, builder, or designer.

Registration Requirements
To be eligible under this criterion a property must:

 Date from the period of significance; and
 Represent a good/excellent or rare example of a style or type; and  Display most of the character-defining features of the style or type; and  Retain the essential aspects of integrity.

The Theme does not address Criteria 4, 6, 8, and 10. Staff examined those criteria in Step 3.

Step 3: Designation Criteria

Staff examined the designation criteria listed in the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance and followed any eligibility standard or registration requirement in the applicable theme in the Citywide Histor ic Context Statement.

Criterion 1: It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the city of Pomona's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, architectural, or natural history;

Based on the history found for the property and contained in last month’s staff report, staff reviewed it to the eligibility standards and determined the following:

1. There is no evidence that this property was the site of an event important in history; or that the property exemplified an important trend or pattern of development; or was a remnant feature representing early built resources from the period.

2. The property may be a rare remaining example of early residential development in Spadra or Pomona as it may be a rare, remaining examples of some of the city’s earliest residential development. (We will check for integrity later)

Criterion 2: It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history ;

Based on the history found for the property and contained in last month’s staff report, staff reviewed it to the eligibility standards and determined the following:

1. There is no evidence creating an association with persons significant in our past, including early pioneers in the histor y of Spadra or Pomona; or a proven association with a specific significant ethnic or cultural group that made a demonstrable impact on the early community.

Criterion 3: It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of constr uction, October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 7 ends

or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship ;

Based on the architecture of the property and the history found for the property and contained in last month’s staff report, staff reviewed it to the eligibility standards and determined the following:

1. The property may be a good or rare example of an architectural style, property type, or met hod of construction. (We will check for integrity later)

2. There is no evidence that this property is a distinctive work by a noted architect, landscape architect, builder, or designer.

Criterion 4: It contributes to the significance of an historic area, being a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of historic or scenic properties or t hematically related grouping of properties which contribute to each other and are unified aesthetically by plan or physical development;

Based on the history in the historic context, staff reviewed the criteria and determined the following:

1. The location of this property may be located within a potential historic area. (We will check for integrity later)

Criterion 5: It is the work of a notable builder, designer, landscape designer or architect ;

1. There is no evidence that this property is a distinctive work by a noted architect, landscape architect, builder, or designer.

Criterion 6: It has a unique location or singular physical characteristics or is a view or vista representing an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community, or the city of Pomona;

Based on the history in the historic context and the location of the property, staff reviewed the criteria and determined the following:

1. There is no evidence that the location of this property is unique or has singular physical characteristics.

2. It is not a view or vista representing an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community, or the city of Pomona .

Criterion 7: It embodies elements of architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship that October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 8 ends

represent a significant structural or architectural achievement or innovation ;

1. While the property may embodies elements of architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship, since this house is one of several exam ples in Pomona, those elements do not represent a significant structural or architectural achievement or innovation .

Criterion 8: It is similar to other distinctive properties, sites, areas, or objects based on an historic, cultural, or architectural mot if;

1. The property is similar to other properties from the same time period but there is no evidence that the similarity is based on a historic or cultural motif. In addition, there is no concentration of Italianate style architecture that would show a deliberate architectural motif being used instead of the random coincidence of choosing the same style of home to build or buy.

Criterion 9: 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 ;

Based on the history found for the property and contained in last month’s staff report, staff reviewed it to the eligibility standards and determined the following:

2. The property may be a rare remaining example of early residen tial development in Spadra or Pomona as it may be a rare, remaining examples of some of the city’s earliest residential development. (We will check for integrity later)

Criterion 10: It is one of the few remaining examples in the city of Pomona, region, state, or nation possessing distinguishing characteristics of an architectural or historical type or specimen.

Based on the history found for the property and contained in last month’s staff report, staff reviewed it to the eligibility standards and determined the following:

October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 9 ends

1. The property may be one of the few remaining examples of early residential development in Pomona as it may be a rare, remaining examples of some of the city’s earliest residential development. (We will check for integrity later)

Step 3 Conclusion
From this evaluation, staff determined that the property may meet the following criteria , however final determination is based upon the whole review (Steps 1 through 7):

Criterion 1, 3, 4, 9, and 10

Step 4: Period of Significance
Based on the theme, the period of significance would be 1865 -1887. This is limited by the construction date, which is estimated to be 1885. Since there is no evidence of significant events or persons associated with the property, the construction date is used as a period of significance. Therefore the period of significance is 1885.

Step 5: Review the Context Statement to Determine Integrity Standards

Staff reviewed the Growing Community (1865-1887: Residential Development Theme from the Citywide Historic Context Statement for integrity standards for Criterion 1, 3, 4, 9, and 10. Staff found the following:

Criteria 1 and 9

Integrity Considerations
In order to be eligible for designation under this criterion, a property must retain sufficient integri ty to convey its historic significance. Properties from this period are rare and represent early settlement of Spadra and Pomona; therefore, a greater degree of alteration may be acceptable.

 Residential properties from this period should retain integrity of location, design, feeling, and association, at a minimum, in order to convey their significance.  An individual property that is eligible for a historic association must retain the essential physical features that made up its character or appearance duri ng the period of its association with an event or historical pattern.
 A property that has lost some historic materials or details can be eligible if it retains the majority of the features that illustrate its style in terms of the massing, spatial relation ships, proportion, pattern of windows and doors, texture of materials, and ornamentation.  The setting may have changed (surrounding buildings and land uses).  Note that some properties that may not retain sufficient integrity for listing in the National Register may remain eligible for listing at the state and local levels.

October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 10 ends

Criteria 3, 5, and 7

Integrity Considerations
In order to be eligible for designation under this criterion, a property must retain sufficient integrity from the period of significance to convey its architecture. Properties from this period are rare; therefore, a greater degree of alteration may be acceptable.

 Residential properties significant under this criterion should retain integrity of design, materials, workmanship, and feeling, at a minimum.
 A property that is eligible for designation as a good/excellent or rare example of its style or type retains most - though not necessarily all - of the character-defining features of the style.  A property important for illustrating a particular architectural style or construction technique must retain most of the physical features that constitute that style or technique. A property can be eligible if it has lost some historic materials or details but retains the majority of the es sential features from the period of significance. These features illustrate the style in terms of the massing, spatial relationships, proportion, pattern of windows and doors, texture of materials, and ornamentation.
 A property is not eligible if it retain s some basic features conveying massing but has lost the majority of the features that once characterized its style.

Step 6: Review the Integrity

Criteria 1, 3, and 9
Staff first reviewed the integrity considerations for Criteria 1, 3, and 9. The applicable considerations for Criteria 1, and 9 are as follows:

 Residential properties from this period should retain integrity of location, design, feeling, and association, at a minimum, in order to convey their significance.  A property that has lost some historic materials or details can be eligible if it retains the majority of the features that illustrate its style in terms of the massing, spatial relationships, proportion, pattern of windows and doors, texture of materials, and ornamentation.  The setting may have changed (surrounding buildings and land uses).

This property has lost some historic materials or details. Although it could still be eligible, it is not because while it retained the majority of the features that illustrate its style in terms of the pattern of windows and doors, and texture of materials, the alterations and additions destroyed the massing, spatial relationships, proportion, and ornamentation features of the property.

The applicable considerations for Criterion 3 are as follows:

 Residential properties significant under this criterion should retain integrity of design, materials, workmanship, and feeling, at a minimum.

October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 11 ends

 A property that is eligible for designation as a good/excellent or rare example of its style or type retains most - though not necessarily all - of the character-defining features of the style.  A property important for illustrating a particular architectural style or construction technique must retain most of the physical features that constitute that style or t echnique. A property can be eligible if it has lost some historic materials or details but retains the majority of the essential features from the period of significance. These features illustrate the style in terms of the massing, spatial relationships, p roportion, pattern of windows and doors, texture of materials, and ornamentation.
 A property is not eligible if it retains some basic features conveying massing but has lost the majority of the features that once characterized its style.

This property does not retain some basic features , such as conveying massing , and has lost the majority of the features that once characterized its style. Therefore it is not eligible.

Staff then reviewed the seven aspects of integrity for Criteria 4 and 10 since the context does not have any considerations. The applicable considerations for Criteria 4 and 10 are as follows:

Criterion 4 and 10
Since Criterion 4 relates to the property contributing to a historically significant area, staff examined whether or not the area could be a district and whether the property could contribute to it.

Criterion 10 relates to the property being one of the few remaining examples in Pomona possessing distinguishing characteristics of an architectural or historical type or specimen. In order to meet this criterion the property must have integrity of Design and Materials.

Location
The property is in its original location and has integrity of location.

Design
The Design, according to National Register Bulletin 15 “is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property”.

Since the property would be designated because of its architecture National Register Bulletin 15 states:

“The property is not eligible, however, if it retains some basic features conveying massing but has lost the majority of the features that once characterized its style.” October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 12 ends

The property has numerous alterations including the front porch and a large addition in the rear of the building. This property doesn’t even retain the massin g and spatial arrangement portions of design. The addition altered the massing. The architectural details are also missing. The front porch replacement altered the porch roof and architectural details expected to be found on an Italianate building.

Many of the character-defining features of the Italianate architectural style are missing, including:

 Rectangular in plan.
 Large mass to emphasize its vertical proportions.
 Height helped emphasize vertical proportions of building.  Small porches
 Elaborately decorated facades.
 Ornate details.
 Decorative paired brackets and cornices on soffits
 Decorative corner boards
 Spindled balustrades
 Decorative brackets under projecting roof

Staff concluded the property does not have integrity of design.

Setting
The setting has changed, but the Citywide Historic Context recognizes the change in the setting and states that it is acceptable. Therefore, the property has integrity of setting.

Materials
Materials, according to National Register Bulletin 15, “are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property”.

Since the property would be designated because of its architecture National Registe r Bulletin 15 states:

“A property must retain the key exterior materials dating from the period of its historic significance.”

The period of significance for the property is 1885, and there are numerous materials, including concrete block, that are after the period of significance. Staff concluded that the property does not have integrity of materials.

October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 13 ends

Workmanship
Workmanship, according to National Register Bulletin 15, “is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory.”

National Register Bulletin 15 provides examples of workmanship. It states:

“Examples of workmanship in historic buildings include tooling, carving, painting, graining, turning, and joinery.”

The elements that could have showed workmanship have been removed, and therefore staff has concluded that the property does not have integrity of Workmanship.

Feeling
Feeling, according to National Register Bulletin 15, “is a property's expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time.”

National Register Bulletin 15states that feeling:

“Results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the property's historic character.”
This property has been altered to a point that you cannot readily identify it as an Italianate building.

The alterations have caused a loss of the historic character. Staff concluded that the property did not have integrity of Feeling.

Association
This aspect of integrity does not apply since the property is not associated with and important event or person

Staff has concluded that the property does not have the integrity necessary for Criteria 1, 3, 4, 9, and 10.

In addition, based on previous historic district designations, a building with this little integrity would be classified as a non-contributing structure.

Step 7: Registration Requirements

There are registration requirements for Criteria 1, 3, and 9.

Criteria 1 and 9
The registration requirements are as follows:

Registration Requirements
To be eligible under this criterion a property must:

October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 14 ends

Staff has concluded that the property does not retain the essential aspects of historic integrity, and therefore, does not meet the registration requirements.

Criterion 3
The registration requirements are as follows:

Registration Requirements
To be eligible under this criterion a property must:

Staff has concluded that the property does not represent a good/excellent or rare example of a style or type, display most of the character-defining features of the style or type, and does not retain the essential aspects of historic integrity, and therefore, does not meet the registration requirements.

Step 8: Determination

The property lacks the integrity to be designated as a local historic landmark, or as a contributor to a potential historic district, therefore staff determined that the property is not historic.

EVALUATION - 554 WEST CENTER STREET:

As stated in last month’s staff report the estimated construction date is 18 95, taken from the 1993 Citywide survey. The property is also identified as being designed in the Victorian Vernacular architectural style. Staff reviewed these determinations and concurred with them.

Step 1: Theme
Staff reviewed the Citywide Historic Context Statement and determined that the Incorporation and Civic Improvements (1888 -1899): Residential Development Theme from the Citywide Historic Context Statement is applicable to this property.

Location
The location of this theme is generally downtown. This property is located just north of what we define today as downtown, but is part of the original Pomona Land and Water Company development, October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 15 ends

and would therefore meet the location requirements. The area, based on the theme could be a potential historic district.

Step 2: Determine Eligibility Standards
The theme has both general Eligibility Standards and Registration Requirements in or der to qualify for designations. They are broken down by criteria as follows:

Criteria 1 and 9 (Events/Patterns of Development)
Individual residential properties that are eligible under this criterion may be significant:

 As the site of an event important in history; or
 For exemplifying an important trend or pattern of development; or  As a rare remaining example of early residential development in Pomona from an important boom period; or
 As a remnant feature representing early built resources from the period.

Registration Requirements
To be eligible under this criterion a property must:

 Date from the period of significance; and
 Have a proven association with an event important in history; or  Represent an important catalyst for a pattern or trend in residential development; or  Represent a rare remaining example of early residential development in Pomona; and  Display most of the character-defining features of the property type or style; and  Retain the essential aspects of historic integrity.

Criterion 2 (Important Persons)
Individual residential properties eligible under this criterion may be significant:

 For an association with persons significant in our past, including early pioneers in the h istory of Pomona; or
 For a proven association with a s pecific significant ethnic or cultural group that made a demonstrable impact on the early community.

Note that according to National Park Service guidance, persons significant in our past refers to individuals whose activities are demonstrably important w ithin a local, state, or national historic context. A property is not eligible if its only justification for significance is that it was owned or used by a person who is a member of an identifiable profession, class, or social or ethnic group. In addition, the property must be associated with a person’s productive life, reflecting the time period when he or she achieved significance.

October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 16 ends

Registration Requirements
To be eligible under this criterion a property must:

 Have a proven association with the productive period of a person important to local, state, or national history; and
 Display most of the character -defining features of the property type or style from the period of significance (i.e., the period when the property was associated with the important person); and  Retain the essential aspects of integrity.

Criteria 3, 5, and 7 (Architecture and Design)
Individual residential properties that are eligible under this criterion may be significant as:

 A good or rare example of an architectural style, property type, or method of construction; or  A distinctive work by a noted architect, landscape architect, builder, or designer.

Registration Requirements
To be eligible under this criterion a property must:

The Theme does not address Criteria 4, 6, 8, and 10. Staff examined those criteria in Step 3.

Step 3: Designation Criteria

Staff examined the designation criteria listed in the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance and followed any eligibility standard or registration requirement in the app licable theme in the Citywide Historic Context Statement.

Criterion 1: It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the city of Pomona's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, architectural, or natural history;

Based on the history found for the property and contained in last month’s staff report, staff reviewed it to the eligibility standards and determined the following:

October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 17 ends

2. The property may be a rare remaining example of early residential development in Pomona as it may be a rare, remaining example of some of the city’s earliest residential development. (We will check for integrity later)

Criterion 2: It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history ;

Based on the history found for the property and contained in last month’s staff report, staff reviewed it to the eligibility standards and determined the following:

1. There is no evidence creating an association with persons significant in our past, including early pioneers in the history of Pomona; o r a proven association with a specific significant ethnic or cultural group that made a demonstrable impact on the early community.

Criterion 3: It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship ;

1. The property may be a good or rare example of an architectural style, property type, or met hod of construction. (We will check for integrity later)

2. There is no evidence that this property is a distinctive work by a noted architect, landscape architect, builder, or designer.

Based on the history in the historic context, staff reviewed the criteria and determined the following:

1. The location of this property may be located within a potential historic area. (We will check for integrity later)

Criterion 5: It is the work of a notable builder, designer, landscape designer or architect ;

1. There is no evidence that this property is a distinctive work by a noted architect, landscape architect, builder, or designer.

October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 18 ends

Based on the history in the historic context and the location of the property, staff reviewed the criteria and determined the following:

1. There is no evidence that the location of this property is unique or has singular physical characteristics.

2. It is not a view or vista representing an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community, or the city of Pomona .

Criterion 7: It embodies elements of architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship that represent a significant structural or architectural achievement or innovation ;

1. While the property may embodies elements of architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship, since this house is one of many examples in Pomona, those elements do not represent a significant structural or architectural achievement or innovation .

Criterion 8: It is similar to other distinctive properties, sites, areas, or objects based on an historic, cultural, or architectural motif;

1. The property is similar to other properties f rom the same time period but there is no evidence that the similarity is based on a historic or cultural motif. In addition, there is no concentration of Victorian Vernacular style architecture that would show a deliberate architectural motif being used instead of the random coincidence of choosing the same style of home to build or buy.

Based on the history found for the property and contained in last month’s staff report, staff reviewed it to the eligibility standards and determined the following:

October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 19 ends

1. There is no evidence that this proper ty was the site of an event important in history; or that the property exemplified an important trend or pattern of development; or was a remnant feature representing early built resources from the period.

Criterion 10: It is one of the few remaining examples in the city of Pomona, region , state, or nation possessing distinguishing characteristics of an architectural or historical type or specimen.

Based on the history found for the property and contained in last month’s staff report, staff reviewed it to the eligibility standards and determined the following:

1. The property may be one of the few remaining examples of early residential development in Pomona as it may be a rare, remaining example of some of the city’s earliest residential development. (We will check for integrity later)

Step 3 Conclusion
From this evaluation, staff determined that the property might meet the following criteria, however final determination is based upon the whole review (Steps 1 through 7):

Criterion 1, 3, 4, 9, and 10

Step 4: Period of Significance
Based on the theme, the period of significance would be 18 88-1899. This is limited by the construction date, which is estimated to be 1895. Since there is no evidence of significant events or persons associated with the property, the construction date is us ed as a period of significance. Therefore, the period of significance is 1895.

Step 5: Review the Context Statement to Determine Integrity Standards

Staff reviewed the Incorporation and Civic Improvements (1888-1899): Residential Development Theme from the Citywide Historic Context Statement for integrity standards for Criterion 1, 3, 4, 9, and 10. Staff found the following:

Criteria 1 and 9

Integrity Considerations
In order to be eligible for designation under this criterion, a property must retain sufficient integrity to convey its historic significance. Properties from this period are rare and represent early settlement of Pomona; therefore, a greater degree of alteration may be acceptable.

October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 20 ends

 Residential properties from this period should retain int egrity of location, design, feeling, and association, at a minimum, in order to convey their significance.  An individual property that is eligible for a historic association must retain the essential physical features that made up its character or appearan ce during the period of its association with an event or historical pattern.
 A property that has lost some historic materials or details can be eligible if it retains the majority of the features that illustrate its style in terms of the massing, spatial r elationships, proportion, pattern of windows and doors, texture of materials, and ornamentation.  The setting may have changed (surrounding buildings and land uses).  Note that some properties that may not retain sufficient integrity for listing in the National Register may remain eligible for listing at the state and local levels.

Criteria 3, 5, and 7

Integrity Considerations
In order to be eligible for designation under this criterion, a property must retain sufficient integrity from the period of si gnificance to convey its architecture. Properties from this period are rare; therefore, a greater degree of alteration may be acceptable.

 Residential properties significant under this criterion should retain integrity of design, materials, workmanship, and feeling, at a minimum.
 A property that is eligible for designation as a good/excellent or rare example of its style or type retains most - though not necessarily all - of the character-defining features of the style.  A property important for illustrating a particular architectural style or construction technique must retain most of the physical features that constitute that style or technique. A property can be eligible if it has lost some historic materials or details but retains the majority of the esse ntial features from the period of significance. These features illustrate the style in terms of the massing, spatial relationships, proportion, pattern of windows and doors, texture of materials, and ornamentation.
 A property is not eligible if it retains some basic features conveying massing but has lost the majority of the features that once characterized its style.

Step 6: Review the Integrity

Criteria 1, 3, and 9
Staff first reviewed the integrity considerations for Criteria 1, 3, and 9. The applicable considerations for Criteria 1, and 9 are as follows:

October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 21 ends

 The setting may have changed (surrounding buildings and land uses).

This property has lost much of its historic materials and details. Although it could still be eligible, it is not because it did not retain the majority of the features that illustrate its styl e in terms of the pattern of windows and doors, and texture of materials. The alterations and additions destroyed the massing, spatial relationships, proportion, and ornamentation features of the property.

The applicable considerations for Criterion 3 are as follows:

 Residential properties significant under this criterion should retain integrity of design, materials, workmanship, and feeling, at a minimum.
 A property that is eligible for designation as a good/excellent or rare example of its style or type retains most - though not necessarily all - of the character-defining features of the style.  A property important for illustrating a particular architectural style or construction technique must retain most of the physical features that constitute that st yle or technique. A property can be eligible if it has lost some historic materials or details but retains the majority of the essential features from the period of significance. These features illustrate the style in terms of the massing, spatial relation ships, proportion, pattern of windows and doors, texture of materials, and ornamentation.
 A property is not eligible if it retains some basic features conveying massing but has lost the majority of the features that once characterized its style.

This prop erty does not retain some basic features , such as conveying massing , and has lost the majority of the features that once characterized its style. Therefore, it is not eligible.

Staff then reviewed the seven aspects of integrity for Criteria 4 and 10 since the context does not have any considerations. The applicable considerations for Criteria 4 and 10 are as follows:

The property is located in an area that could be historic based on the theme. The original 1993 citywide survey identified a potential Center Street Historic District the en ds with the house at the corner of Rebecca Street and Center Street. The survey evaluated properties west of the proposed boundary but chose not to include them in the historic district. Staff visited the neighborhood and found that most of the homes west of the proposed district boundary had been altered.

October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 22 ends

Location
The property is in its original location and has integrity of location.

Design
The Design, according to National Register Bulletin 15 “is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property”.

Since the property would be designated because of its architecture National Register Bulletin 15 states:

“The property is not eligible, however, if it retains some basic features conveying massing but has lost the majority of the features that once characterized its style.”

The property has numerous alterations including the replacement of windows, wood siding being covered with stucco, removal of window trim, and a large addition in the rear of the building. This property does not even retain the massing and spatial arrangement portions of design. The addition altered the massing. The architectural details are also missing. The stucco and window replacement removed architectural details expected to be found on a Victorian Vernacular building.

Many of the character -defining features of the Victorian Vernacular architectural style are missing, including:

 Cornices with brackets
 Wood siding with corner boards, shingles on gable ro of ends, and simple trim around windows and doors.
 Simple decorative trusses on the gable ends were a common feature.  Bargeboards were very simple. Braces (or brackets) were used to support the eaves.  Very simple trim and details.
 Double hung wood frame windows, arranged in a two over two or a two over one pattern.  Large veranda or porch.
 Simple detailing including the corner posts, porch posts, and railings. Usually flat cut trim.  Spindlework on porches also used.
 Braces (or brackets) were used to support the exposed roof rafters.

Staff concluded the property does not have integrity of design.

Setting
The setting has changed, but the Citywide Historic Context recognizes the change in the setting and states that it is acceptable. Therefore, the property has integrity of setting.

October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 23 ends

Since the property would be designated because of its architecture National Register Bulletin 15 states:

“A property must retain the key exterior materials dating from the period of its historic significance.”

The period of significance for the property is 1895, and there are numerous materials, including stucco and modern windows that are after the period of significance. Staff concluded that the property does not have integrity of materials.

Workmanship
Workmanship, according to National Register Bulletin 15, “is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory.”

National Register Bulletin 15 provides examples of workmanship. It states:

“Examples of workmanship in historic buildings include tooling, carving, painting, graining, turning, and joinery.”

The elements that could have showed workmanship have been removed, and therefore staff has concluded that the property does not have integrity of Workmanship.

Feeling
Feeling, according to National Register Bulletin 15, “is a property's expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time.”

National Register Bulletin 15states that feeling:

“Results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the property's historic character.”

This property has been altered to a point that you cannot readily identify it as a Victorian Vernacular building. The alterations have caused a loss of the historic character . Staff concluded that the property did not have integrity of Feeling.

Association
This aspect of integrity does not apply since the property is not associated with and important event or person
October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 24 ends

Staff has concluded that the property does not have the integrity necessary for Criteria 1, 3, 4, 9, and 10.

In addition, based on previous historic district designations, a building with this little integrity would be classified as a non-contributing structure.

Step 7: Registration Requirements

There are registration requirements for Criteria 1, 3, and 9.

Criteria 1 and 9
The registration requirements are as follows:

Registration Requirements
To be eligible under this criterion a property must:

 Date from the period of significance; and
 Have a proven association with an event important in history; or  Represent an important catalyst for a pattern or trend in residential development; or  Represent a rare remaining example of early residential development in Pomona; and  Display most of the character-defining features of the property type or style; and  Retain the essential aspects of historic integrity.

Staff has concluded that the property does not retain the essential aspects of historic integrity, and therefore, does not meet the registration requirements.

Criterion 3
The registration requirements are as follows:

Registration Requirements
To be eligible under this criterion a property must:

October 5, 2022 Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Staff Report

Page 25 ends

Step 8: Determination

The property lacks the integrity to be designated as a local historic landmark, or as a contributor to a potential historic district, there staff determined that the property is not historic.

CONCLUSION:

Staff has determined that the properties in question do not meet the designation criteria or the integrity requirements to be designated as a local historic landmark, or as a contributor to a potential historic district. Therefore , staff still recommends approving the Certificate of Appropriateness . If the Commission still thinks that these properties meet the requirement s for designation, staff requests that Commissioners detail which criteria the properties meet, and how the properties meet those criteria.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Draft Historic Preservation Commission Resolution No. 2022-026

2. Historic Preservation Commission Staff Report, September 7, 2022

3. Photographs of site and surrounding area

4. Historic Resources Inventory Surveys, 1993

HPC RESOLUTION NO. 2022-026

A RESOLUTION OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION

OF THE CITY OF POMONA, CALIFORNIA DENYING MAJOR
CERTIFICATE OF APPRO PRIATENESS ( MAJCOA-018024-2022) FOR THE DEMOLITION OF PRE-1945 STRUCTURES LOCATED AT 548
AND 554 W. CENTER STREET AND TO DEEM THE PRO PERTIES TO

BE OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE

THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF POMONA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

WHEREAS, the applicant, Ali Dashti, has submitted an application for Certificate of Appropriateness ( MAJCOA-018024-2022) to allow for the demolition of a multifamily development located at 548 W. Center Street and one single family dwelling located at 554 W.

Center Street (APN 8340-030-006 & 8340-030-012);

WHEREAS, available records indicate that the structures were constructed in approximately 1885 and 1895, respectively;

WHEREAS, the City of Pomona’s Historic Resources Inventory, prepared in 1993 by Diane Marsh, identified the primary structures located on the subject property located at 548 W.

Center Street as Italianate architecture and the subject property located at 554 W. Center Street as Folk Victorian;

WHEREAS, in accordance with Section .5809- 13.F.8(b), all property owners directly adjacent to and across the street from the site were notified of the application on August 5 , 2022 and on August 26, 2022, a copy of the public hearing notice was published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin;

WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission shall first consider if the property would likely meet the criteria used in historic landmark designation as described in Section .5809-

13.D of the Pomona Zoning Ordinance (PZO) to approve Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJCOA-018024-2021) for the demolition of any primary structure constructed before 1945;

WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission finds that the subject properties meet one or more of the City of Pomona historic landmark designation, specifically Criteria Numbers 3 and 4, as described in Section 5809- 13.D of the PZO, thus deeming the properties of historical significance;

ATTACHMENT NO. 7

HPC Resolution No. 2022-026
548 & 554 W. Center Street (MAJCOA-018024-2022)

Page 2 of 5 ends

WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission has carefully considered all pertinent testimony and the staff report offered in the case presented at the public hearing;

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Historic Preservation Commission of the City of Pomona, California, as follows:

SECTION 1. The Historic Preservation Commission hereby determines that, pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), no environmental determination is required for projects that will be rejected or disapproved by a public agency.

SECTION 2. Section .5809-13.F.6 of the PZO requires the Historic Preservation Commission to determine whether the structure meets any of the criteria for designation as a local historic landmark before approving a Major Certificate of Appropriateness for demolition of a pre- 1945 structure. The Historic Preservation Commission hereby finds as follows:

1. It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the city of Pomona's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, architectural, or natural history;

There is no evidence that this property was the site of an event important in history; or that the property exemplified an important trend or pattern of development; or was a remnant feature representing early built resources from the period. While the propert ies may be a rare remaining example of early residential development in Spadra or Pomona as it may be a rare, remaining examples of some of the city’s earliest residential development , t he structures have been altered to the point that they lack integrity because the alterations and additions destroyed the massing, spatial relationships, proportion, and ornamentation features of the property. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

2. The property is identified with person s or events significant in local, state, or national history.

Based on staff’s research of City directories and literature, there is no evidence creating an association with persons significant in our past, including early pioneers in the history of Spadra or Pomona; or a proven ass ociation with a specific significant ethnic or cultural group that made a demonstrable impact on the early community. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

3. The property embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, per iod or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.

Despite the properties having been altered, the properties are good or rare examples of architectural styles, property types, or methods of construction. The main volumes of each structure remain and any alterations, such as the application of stucco or the resconstructin HPC Resolution No. 2022-026
548 & 554 W. Center Street (MAJCOA-018024-2022)

Page 3 of 5 ends

of the original wooden porch with CMU block, can be either be removed, restored, or reconstructed back into original condition, therefore the structures meet this criterion.

The property is located in an area that could be historic based on the theme. The original 1993 Citywide survey identified a potential Center Street Historic District that ends with the house at the corner of Rebecca Street and Center Street. Though the survey evaluated properties west of the proposed boundary and chose not to include them in the historic district, the subject structures, which were approximately built in 1885 and 1895 respectively, could potentially be contributing to a future historic district should one be designated in this area. Staff visited the neighborhood and found that most of the homes west of the proposed district boundar y are of a similar time period of the late Nineteenth Century, during the early years of Pomona’s founding and development. The properties in questions possess integrity of design, materials, workmanship, and feeling, which, if the area was made an histor ic district, would potentially make them contributing resources.

Therefore the properties meet this criterion.

5. The property is the work of a notable builder, designer, landscape designer, or architect.

The subject structure s were approximately built in 1885 and 1895 with no identifiable builder. Based on s taff’s research, there is no evidence that this property is a distinctive work by a noted architect, landscape architect, builder, or designer. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

Based on the history in the historic context and the location of the property, staff reviewed the criteria and determined th at there is no evidence that the location of this property is unique or has singular physical characteristics , and that they are not a view or vista representing an established and fami liar visual feature of a neighborhood, community, or the city of Pomona. Therefore, the property does not have a unique established and familiar location or view and does not meet this criterion.

7. The property embodies elements of architectural design, det ail, materials, or craftsmanship that represent a significant structural or architectural achievement or innovation.

While the property may embodies elements of architectural design, detail, materials, or craftsmanship, since this house is one of several examples in Pomona, those elements do HPC Resolution No. 2022-026
548 & 554 W. Center Street (MAJCOA-018024-2022)

Page 4 of 5 ends

not represent a significant structural or architectural achievement or innovation. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

8. The property is similar to other distinctive properties, sites, areas, or objects based on a historic, cultural, or architectural motif.

9. The property reflects significant geographical patter ns, including those associated with different eras of settlement and growth, particular transportation modes, or distinctive example of park or community planning.

There is no evidence that this property was the site of an event important in history; or that the property exemplified an important trend or pattern of development; or was a remnant feature representing early built resources from the period. In, addition, although the properties may be a rare remaining example of early residential development in Spadra or Pomona as it may be a rare, remaining examples of some of the city’s earliest residential development, the structures have been altered to the point that they lack integrity because the alterations and additions destroyed the massing, spatial relationships, proportion, and ornamentation features of the property. Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

10. The property is one of the few remaining examples of the City of Pomona, region, state, or nation possessing distinguishing charac teristics of an architectural or historical type of specimen.

The properties may be one of the few remaining examples of early residential development in Pomona as it may be a rare, remaining examples of some of the city’s earliest residential development, but they do not possess integrity of design, materials, workmanship necessary to possess any distinguishing characteristics of an architectural or historical type.

Therefore the property does not meet this criterion.

SECTION 3. The Historic Preservation Commission hereby denies the Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJCOA-018024-2021) demolition of a multifamily development located at 548 W. Center Street and one single family dwelling located at 554 W. Center Street.

SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and forward the original to the City Clerk.

HPC Resolution No. 2022-026
548 & 554 W. Center Street (MAJCOA-018024-2022)

Page 5 of 5 ends

APPROVED AND PASSED THIS 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022.

__________________________________

CHARA SWODECK

HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION CHAIRPERSON

ATTEST:

___________________________________

GEOFFREY STARNS, LEED
AP BD+C

HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SECRETARY

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )ss

CITY OF POMONA )

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Pursuant to Resolution No. 76-258 of the City of Pomona, the time in which judicial review of this action must be sought is governed by California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. 548 & 554 Center Street
MAJCOA 18024-2022
Applicant: Ali Dashti
City Council Meeting – November 21, 2022
Executive Summary
• The request is an appeal of HPC’s decision on Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJCOA 18024-2022) requesting to allow for the demolition of pre-1945 structures on properties located at 548 and 554 W. Center Street.
 548 W. Center Street is a six-unit multifamily development estimated to have been constructed in 1885
 554 W. Center Street is one single family dwelling estimated to have been constructed in 1895.

Location
N. White Avenue
N. Rebecca Street
W. Monterey Avenue
W. Center Street
554 548
Previous Decisions
• HPC Meeting September 7, 2022 – HPC made a motion to deny Staff’s recommendation and directed Staff to return to Commission with findings for a denial on a 5-2-0-0 vote.
• HPC Meeting October 5, 2022 – Continued public hearing where HPC made a motion to deny the Major Certificate of Appropriateness in that the structures have sufficient integrity and deemed them to be of historic significance on a 4 -3-0-0 vote. • October 13, 2022 – Applicant filed for an appeal.

Background
• Planning Staff evaluated the properties against all 10 Historic Landmark Designation Criteria (Sec. 5809-13.D of PZO) and determined that, because of modifications having been made over the years, the subject properties do not meet the criteria nor the integrity requirements for local historic landmark designation or as contributors to a potential historic district.
• At the HPC meeting of September 7, 2022, Staff brought forward a recommendation to Commission to approve the Major COA request to allow for demolition. Commission instructed Staff to return to Commission with findings for denial. • At the HPC meeting of October 5, 2022, continued public hearing where Staff brought forward a similar recommendation to approve the request after having re- evaluated all designation criteria and did not find sufficient evidence to support the local historic landmark designation.
 HPC made findings that the subject properties met Designation Criteria 3 and 4, therefore denied the request for a COA for demolition and deemed the properties to be of historic significance.

Background (cont.)
• On October 5, 2022, HPC coted to deny the permit based on the following Historic Landmark Designation Criterion (Sec. 5809- 13.D of PZO):
 Criterion 3: “It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.”
 Criterion 4: “It contributes to the significance of an historic area, being a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of historic or scenic properties or thematically related grouping of properties which contribute to each other and are unified aesthetically by plan or physical development.” Background (cont.)
• According to Sec. .5809-13.F.8:
 “In making such a determination [regarding demolition of pre-1945 non-designated structures] the [HPC] shall first consider if the property would likely meet the criteria used in historic landmark designation thus deeming it of historical significance.” • According to Sec. .5809-13.D:
 “A site may be designated an historic landmark by the historic preservation commission and city council…if the building(s) are fifty or more years… and it meets one or more” of the Historic Landmark Designation Criteria.

Site Photographs – 554 W. Center

Site Photographs – 548 W. Center

Similar Houses

Alterations
• 548 West Center
 Addition, porch alteration – 1957-58
• 554 West Center
 Addition, Window Replacement, Stucco –
2004 and 2010
 These alterations were made after the
property was surveyed

Staff Recommendation
Two options for the Council’s consideration:
• Approving Resolution No. 2022-208 would deny the appeal and uphold the Commission’s decision to deny the Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJCOA 18024-2022) and not allow demolition to move forward and would deem the properties to be of historical significance.
or
• Approving Resolution No. 2022-212 would approve the appeal and reverse the Commission’s decision, approve the Major Certificate of Appropriateness (MAJCOA 18024-2022) and allow the applicant to pursue a demolition permit.

City Council / Housing AuthorityApril 17, 2023

City Council / Housing Authority
April 17, 2023