Riverside City Council
December 12, 2023

Cultural Heritage Board
Memorandum
Community & Economic Development Department Planning Division 3900
Main Street, Riverside, CA 92522 | Phone: (951) 826-5371 | RiversideCA.gov

DP-2023-01017
CULTURAL HERITAGE BOARD M EETING DATE: AUGUST 16, 2023
AGENDA ITEM NO.: 4

PROPOSED PROJECT

RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends that the Cultural Heritage Board:

1. DETERMINE that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review pursuant to Sections 15301 (Existing Facilities), 15331 (Historic Resource Restoration /Rehabilitation), and 15332 (In-fill Development), as it constitutes rehabilitation and less than 10,000 square foot increase in size of an existing his toric resource within an urbanized area that is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties; and

2. APPROVE P lanning Case DP-2023-01017 (Certi ficate of Appropriat eness), based on the facts for findings outlined and summarized in the staff report, and subject to the recommended conditions of approval (Exhibit 1).

Case Numbers DP-2023-01017 (Certificate of Appropriateness) Request
To consider a Certificate of Appropriateness for the following: 1) exterior and interior rehabilitation of the historic stru cture; 2) demolition of the existing 2,650 square foot addition; 3) construction a two-story, 12,000 square foot rear addition; and 4) various site improvements.

Applicant Robyn Peterson, Museum of
Riverside Director
Project
Location
3580 Mission Inn Avenue, at
the southeast corner of
Mission Inn Avenue and
Orange Street.

APN 213-272-011, 213-272-012
Ward 1
Neighborhood Downtown
Historic District Mission Inn and Seventh Street
Historic Districts
Historic
Designation
National Register Listed; City
Landmark #11; District
Contributor
Staff Planner
Scott Watson, Historic Preservation Officer
951-826-5507
[email protected]

DP-2023-01017

BACKGROUND
The project site is located at 3580 Mission In n Avenue (Exhibit 2), within two contiguous parcels totaling 31,363-square-feet. The front parcel was developed with a two-story, with basement, Neo-Classical style with Mission Revival elements, civic building in 1912. The rear addition to the structure was completed in 1928. The structure served as the post office until 1947 when it was sold to the City of Riverside. Between 1948 and 1965 the building was occupied by the Riverside Poli ce Department on the main floors and the museum in the basement. The rear parcel was originally developed with Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Company building, which was demolished circa 1950 and the site was subsequently developed as surface parking. The structure is listed in the National Register of Historic Places, designated as City Landmark #11, and listed as a contributor to both the Seventh Street and Mission Inn Historic Districts.

Character-defining features of the civic building includes: a rectangular ground plan with a box-like massing; a red clay tile topped mansard roof with front and rear facing scalloped parapets, side facing grouped gable dormers, a center sky-light, and wide closed eaves with brackets and dentals; stucco cladding; a symmetrical façade with cascading steps leading to an arched arcade supported by fluted columns with Corinthian capitals; main entry setback within an arcade with a centrically located wood panel double doors flanked by half-glazed wood panel double doors and wood divided- light casement windows, all of which are topped by divided-light hemi-spherical arched transom windows; wood divided-light, recessed, double casement windows with a sill, on the second floor; and decorative features including plaster medallions, a carved plaster tablet, paired pilasters at the building corners, and an outrigger flag pole.

The 1928 addition is more simplistic in desi gn with minimal features. Character-defining features of the addition include: a single-story box-like massing; a flat roof with a parapet and cornice line; stucco cladding; and rece ssed divided-light wood double casement windows with divided-light arched transom.

On October 4, 2022, the City Council approv ed the selection of the architect for the project and the proposal to expand the museum, in concept. A workshop on the proposed project was held by the Cultural Heritage Board (CHB) on April 19, 2023. The workshop provided opportunity for CHB to share preliminary comments. Some comments included consideration of additional articulation, use of design features to reduce graffiti on flat surfaces adjacent to parking, and setting back the massing from Orange Street.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant is requesting a Certificate of Appropriateness for: 1) exterior and interior rehabilitation of the historic structure; 2) demo lition of the existing 2,650 square foot rear addition; 3) construction a 12,000 square fo ot rear addition; and 4) various site improvements. (Exhibit 3).

The proposed project includes:

1. Exterior and Interior Rehabilitation of the historic structure consisting of:
a. Removal of existing the basement stairs within the façade (north elevation) arcade and infill with concrete slab to match existing; b. Removal of existing basement stairs and ramp on the west elevation;

DP-2023-01017
c. Removal of the existing interior elevator; and
d. Removal of a portion of the existing second story floor and ceiling to reveal historic skylight.

2. Complete demolition of the existing 2,650 square foot 1928 addition.

3. Construction of a 107-foot, 4-inch by 59-f oot, 3-inch L-shaped two-story addition to the rear, consisting of:
a. A box-like massing with a roof top terrace partially covered with a photovoltaic metal shade structure;
b. A double-height glass curtain wall connecting the historic structure to the addition and serving as an Orange Street entry. Steps and ADA accessible ramps lead from the sidewalk to the new entry patio.
c. A 44-foot, 5-inch by 53-foot, 6-in ch penthouse housing mechanical equipment, stairs, and the elevator w ill be located on the eastern portion of the addition;
d. Windows will be smaller in size and deep ly recessed with angled side walls to reduce direct sunlight within gallery space;
e. A second story projecting window at the southwest corner of the building; and
f. Materials includes:
i. Stucco cladding in off-white and gray tones;
ii. Composite metal panels, in bronze and white tones;
iii. Low-e glazing with light champagne color mullions; and, iv. A roll-up door matching metal accent panels.

4. Various site improvements consisting of:
a. Removal and replacement of existing planters;
b. Installation of a elevated outdoor nature lab along Orange Street, at the first-floor level; and,
c. Installation of rammed earth site walls, adjacent to new steps and ramps.

As part of the application, the projec t architect, who meets the Professional Qualifications, has completed a Secretary of the Interior Standards (SOIS) analysis (Exhibit 4), and finds the project is consistent with the SOIS for Rehabilitation as applied to both the historic structure and the historic districts. Staff concurs with the findings of the analysis.

PROJECT ANALYSIS

FACTS FOR FINDINGS
Pursuant to Chapter 20.25.050 of Title 20 (Cul tural Resources) of the Riverside Municipal Code, the Cultural Heritage Board and Historic Preservation Officer must make applicable findings of specific Principles and Standards when approving or denying a Certificate of Appropriateness. The applicable findings for the proposed project are as follows:

DP-2023-01017
Chapter 20.25.050 – Principles and Standards of Site Development and Design Review The application proposal is consistent or compatible
with the architectural period and the character-
defining elements of the historic building.

N/A Consistent Inconsistent
☐  ☐
Facts:
 The proposed rehabilitation of the historic structure will be compatible with the original materials and design features, in cluding removal of the basement stairs within the façade arcade, infill of the co ncrete arcade floor to match existing, and restoring the visibility of the historic skylight.
 The proposed addition is contemporary in design with minimal design features to allow the historic structure to remain the prominent feature on the site. The design incorporates some character-defining features of the historic structure, including stucco cladding, a box-like massing, and recessed windows. The glass curtain wall system serves as a “hyphen” to connect the historic structure to the addition while creating a visual separation between the two structures; thereby, allowing the historic structure to not be visually overpowered by the addition.  The site improvements, such as the site wa lls and new planter, will be simple in design with earthy tones and will incorporate landscape features.

The application proposal is compatible with existing
adjacent or nearby Cultural Resources and their
character-defining elements.

N/A Consistent Inconsistent
☐  ☐
Facts:
 Nearby and adjacent Cultural Resources include National Register listed properties, City Landmarks, Structures of Merit, and historic district contributors.

These structures are primarily two-story in height with some as high as five-stories.

Many of the structures feature a box-like massing. Structures are generally setback from Mission Inn Avenue and are situated at the property line along Orange Street.
 The proposed project will be two-story in height with a penthouse, setback from the street as is consistent with the surrounding two-story buildings.  The box-like massing of the addition will be consistent with the massing of the surrounding structure.
 The project will be setback from Mission Inn Avenue, behind the existing structure, and will be slightly setback from Orange Street, approximately 4-feet, 6-inches.

DP-2023-01017
Chapter 20.25.050 – Principles and Standards of Site Development and Design Review The colors, textures, materials, fenestration, decorative features and details, height, scale, massing, and
methods of construction proposed are consistent with
the period and/or compatible with adjacent Cultural
Resources.

N/A Consistent Inconsistent
☐  ☐
Facts:
 The proposed project incorporated materials similar to the historic structure, such as stucco cladding.
 The addition will be off-white and earthy tones, matching the historic structure and surrounding Cultural Resources.
 The overall height, scale, and massing of the proposed project will be consistent with the two-story, box-like massing of the historic structure and other adjacent Cultural Resources.
 The proposed project incorporates new materials such as metal composite panels and a glass curtain wall. These materials will be compatible in terms of color, white or earthy tones, and will serve to differentiate the new construction from the existing structure.

The proposed change does not adversely affect the
context considering the following factors: grading; site development; orientation of buildings; off-street
parking; landscaping; signs; street furniture; public
areas; relationship of the project to its surroundings.

N/A Consistent Inconsistent
☐  ☐
Facts:
 The proposed project will not adversely affect the site orientation as the addition will be at the rear of the existing structure, in approximately the same location as the existing addition to be demolished.
 The existing main entry will remain, an d a secondary entry will be located of Orange Street for ADA accessibility. Both entrances will provide similar access to the building.
 New landscaping and the outdoor nature lab will help soften the transition between the public right-of-way and the new construction.  The overall relationship of the historic structure with a strong presence on Mission Inn Avenue will remain.

DP-2023-01017
Chapter 20.25.050 – Principles and Standards of Site Development and Design Review The proposed change does not adversely affect an
important architectural, historical, cultural, or
archaeological feature or features.

N/A Consistent Inconsistent
☐  ☐
Facts:
 The non-historic architectural features, such as the second story ceiling and the basement stairs within the façade arcade, are not considered important architectural features; therefore, their removal will not have an adverse effect.  Although designed compatibly, the 1928 rear addition is not considered an important architectural or historical feature as the design is simplistic in nature in comparison to the high-style Neo-Classical main structure; therefore, its removal will not have an adverse effect.
 A portion of historic material, including roofing and eaves, will be removed from the rear of the of the historic structure to facilitate the connection or the existing structure to the new addition. As this material is located on the rear of the structure, the overall look a feel of the hi storic structure will remain, as seen from the public right-of-way.
 There are no known archaeological features within or nearby the project site.

The application proposal is consistent with the Citywide Residential Historic District Design Guidelines and the separate guidelines for each Historic District.

N/A Consistent Inconsistent
☐  ☐
Facts:
 The proposed project is not within a residential historic district; therefore, Citywide Residential Historic District Design Guidelines are not applicable.  The proposed project is a Public Project and is exempted from the development standards contained within the Downto wn Specific Plan (Section 19.147 – Downtown Specific Plan Zone) in acco rdance with Section 19.040.110 of the Riverside Municipal Code; however, the proposed project is consistent with guidelines for the Downtown Specific Plan – Raincross District as follows:
o Buildings should have a strong street presence, with public entrances and activity areas oriented toward the street.
 The proposed project is consistent with this guideline because the buildings will have a strong presence on both streets with entries fronting on both Mission Inn Avenue and Orange Street.
o Setback areas should generally includ e a combination of “soft” features (landscaping, water, etc.) and “hard” features (pavers, steps, patios, arcades, porches, etc.)
 The proposed project is consistent with this guideline because the steps and entry patio on Orange Street creates a progression from public to private spaces. Additionally, the project incorporates landscape areas, such as new planters and the nature lab, within

DP-2023-01017
Chapter 20.25.050 – Principles and Standards of Site Development and Design Review the setback areas, creating a “soft” space between the street and the buildings.
o Existing buildings should be restored/maintained in a historic style that reflects the actual, historic appearance of the building at its period of historic significance.
 The proposed project is consistent with this guideline because the existing historic structure will remain and be rehabilitated, removing non-original features.
o The historic fabric in Downtown Riverside is interspersed with “contextual” buildings - buildings that are not historic but contribute to the district character as one traverses the district. Similarly, new buildings should not necessarily be stylistically “historic”, but should be compatible with their historic neighbors in terms of massing, modulation, height, and setbacks.

New buildings should be contemporary interpretations using the signature buildings as a source of design inspiration.
 The proposed project is consistent with this guideline because the proposed addition is contemporary in style, but minimal in design as to allow the existing historic structure to remain a prominent feature. Additionally, the proposed addition is consistent with two- story height, box-like massing, and setbacks of the surrounding historic structures.
o The size and mass of a new building should blend with the surrounding district.
 The proposed project is consistent with this guideline because the proposed addition matches the size and massing of surrounding buildings.
o Detailing of existing buildings should be a restoration or replication of historic detailing during the building’s period of historic significance.  The proposed project is consistent with this guideline because non- original features, including the basement steps and second floor ceiling, will be removed and the original look of the front arcade and the historic skylight will be restored.
o Roof design should reflect/complement significant buildings in the area.  The proposed project is consistent with this guideline because the proposed addition will have a flat roof with a roof terrace, which is present on other buildings in the area.
o Muted earthtones and traditional materials should prevail, with brighter colors limited to trim areas. The Mission Inn is a good example of this type of treatment.
 The proposed project is consistent with this guideline because the proposed addition exhibits colors in off-white, gray, and bronze.

DP-2023-01017
Chapter 20.25.050 – Principles and Standards of Site Development and Design Review The application proposal is consistent with the
Principles of the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.

N/A Consistent Inconsistent
☐  ☐
Facts:
 A full SOIS Analysis for consistency wi th the Rehabilitation Standards was completed by the architect (Exhibit 4). In summary, the report finds that the proposed project is consistent with the Standards as follows:
o The spatial relationship between the historic structure and its surrounding area will remain largely unchanged, as the structure will retain a strong presence on Mission Inn Avenue (Standard 2).
o The 1928 addition is minimal in desi gn and has not acquired historic significance in its own right; therefore, the removal of this feature is consistent with the SOIS (Standard 4).
o The façade (north elevation) will retain all existing historic fabric. While some material on the south and east elevation is proposed to be removed, this material has limited vi sibility from the public right-of-way.

Additionally, the south elevation has already been significantly altered due to the 1928 addition (Standard 5)
o The proposed addition will be compatible with the historic structure and the historic district as it will ma tch the two-story box-like massing of surrounding buildings and will incorporat e design features of the historic structure, such as stucco cladding and recessed windows. The addition will be differentiated from the historic structure through its design and the use of modern materials (Standard 9).
o If the proposed project addition and the nature lab are to be removed in the future, the historic building and historic district would retain its essential form and integrity (Standard 10).

DP-2023-01017

AUTHORIZATION AND COMPLIANCE SUMMARY
Regulatory Codes Consistent Inconsistent
Historic Preservation Code Consistency (Title 20)
The proposed project is consistent with Section 20.25.050 of the City of Riverside Municipal Code because the proposed project is compatible with the massing, size, scale, materials, and use of architectural features of the historic structure and the historic district.
 The proposed addition will be two-story in height with a box-like massing, matching the historic structure and the surrounding area.
 The project incorporated ma terial such as stucco
cladding and earthy colors to match the historic
structure and the surrounding area.
 ☐

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed project is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and therefore is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to the follow:
 Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) – the proposed project consists of modification to an existing structure in a well-developed area with sufficient public services for the development. The project consists of a net increase of less than 10,000 square feet as the existing 2,650 square foot addition is proposed to be removed, resulting in an 9,350 square foot increase.
 Section 15331 (Historic Resource Rest oration/Rehabilitation) –The proposed project has been found consistent with the SOIS for Rehabilitation as applied to both the historic structure and the historic district, as outlined in this report.  Section 15332 (In-fill Development) – The pr oposed project is located within city limits on a parcel no more than 5 acres, is consistent with General Plan 2025 and the Downtown Specific Plan, has adequate utility services, and will not result in any significant affects related to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.

PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENTS
Public notices were mailed to property owners adjacent to the site. As of the writing this report, no comments have been received by Staff.

APPEAL INFORMATION
Actions by the Cultural Heritage Board, including any environmental finding, may be appealed to the Land Use, Sustainability and Resilience Committee (formerly the Land Use Committee) within ten calendar days after the decision. Appeal filing and processing information may be obtained from the Planning Division by calling 951-826-5371.

DP-2023-01017

STRATEGIC PLAN
This item contributes to the Envision Riverside 2025 City Council Strategic Priority 5 – High Preforming Government (Goal 5.3 – Enhance communication and collaboration with community members to improve transparency, build public trust, and encourage shared decision-making).

This item aligns with the following Cross-Cutting Threads:

1. Community Trust: The application for a Certific ate of Appropriateness is being reviewed at a public meeting of the Cultural Heritage Board and notices were sent to adjacent property owners, providing an opportunity to comment on the project.

2. Equity: The application for a Certificate of Appropriateness will be discussed at a Cultural Heritage Board meeting meetings which is available to all residents and can be viewed both in person and virtually.

3. Fiscal Responsibility: The application for a Certificate of Appropriateness has no impact on City General Funds.

4. Innovation: The application for a Certificate of Appropriateness makes use of historic design principle with new constr uction to eliminate potential impacts to the historic resource.

5. Sustainability and Resiliency: The application for a Certificate of Appropriateness provides opportunity for the historic character of the property.

EXHIBITS LIST

1. Staff Recommended Conditions of Approval

2. Aerial Photo/Location

3. Project Plans (3D Views with Materials, Demolition and Proposed Site Plan, Demolition and Proposed Floor Plans, Demolition and Proposed Roof Plan, Existing and Proposed Elevations, Interior Views)

4. Secretary of the Interior Analysis

5. Site Photos

Prepared by: Scott Watson, Hi storic Preservation Officer Reviewed by: David Murray, Principal Planner
Approved by: Maribeth Tinio, City Planner
EXHIBIT 1 - STAFF RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL August 16, 2023

PLANNING CASE: DP-2023-01017 MEETING DATE: August 16, 2023

CASE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Prior to Grading Permit Issuance

1. Submit a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for the project site to the Public Works Department – Land Development Division for review and approval.

Prior to the Issuance of a Building Permit

2. Proposed minor modifications to the appr oved development shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and a pproval by Historic Preservation Staff, including but not limited to alterations to proposed materials.

3. Construction Documents shall clearly indicate exterior building materials, colors and finishes on the elevations as well as rooftop mechanical equipment screening.

Prior to Release of Occupancy:

4. Landscape plans shall be submitted for review and approval by Historic Preservation (HP) Staff.

5. Upon completion of the project, an HP staff inspection must be requested to ensure that the approved plans have been executed and that all conditions have been implemented.

GENERAL CONDITIONS

6. There is a one-year time limit in which to secure the necessary building permits required by this Certificate of Appropr iateness. If unable to obtain necessary permits, a time extension request letter stating the reasons for the extension of time shall be submitted to the Planning Divisi on. HP staff may administratively extend the term of a Certificate of Appropriateness for one year, no more than twice.

PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THE APPLICANT WILL NOT BE NOTIFIED BY THE PLANNING

DIVISION ABOUT THE PENDING EXPIRATION OF THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.

7. The project must be completed in accordance with the Cultural Heritage Board’s (CHB) Certificate of Appropriateness approval, including all conditions listed. Any subsequent changes to the project must be approved by the CHB or HP staff.

8. This approval for the Certificate of Appropriateness is for design concept only and does not indicate the project has been thoroughly checked for compliance with all requirements of law. As such, it is no t a substitute for the formal building permit plan check process, and other changes ma y be required during the plan check process.

EXHIBIT 1 –CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION EXHIBIT 1 - STAFF RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL August 16, 2023

9. Granting this Certificate of Appropriateness shall in no way exclude or excuse compliance with all other applicable rules and regulations in effect at the time this permit is exercised.

N
DP-2023-01017
Exhibit 2 - Aerial/Location Map

ORANGE ST
ALLEY

LEMON ST

NINTH ST LIME ST

MISSION INN AVE

SIXTH ST

UNIVERSITY AVE

MAIN ST
0 200 400
Feet
Parcels
Project Site
Key
Project Site:
3580 Mission Inn Ave
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 1

PPPPPPPPPPPPPPFFFFFEEEEEIIIIFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEEEEEERRR

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMUUUUUUUUUUUUUUSSSSSEEUUMMMM OOOOOOOOOOOOFFF RRRRIIIIVVVVEEEERRRSSSIDDEEEE 11111

RENOVATION & ADDITION
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 2
Orange St. Entry
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 3
Orange St. Entry - materials
mullionss lightt
champagnee low-ee glazing buildingg
wrap
cementt
plasterr 1
compositee
metall panel
cementt
plasterr 2 solarr canopy
compositee
metall panel
shadoww box
clean and paint
(e)) plaster
d
cleann andd paintt
(e)) soffit
cleann andd paintt
(e)) windows
rammed earth
sitee walls
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 4
South Elevation - Gallery
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 5
South Elevation - Gallery
cementt
plasterr 1
cementt
plasterr 2
compositee
metall panel
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 6
East Elevation - Loading and Staff entry
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 7

PROPOSED DEMOLITION
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 8
SITE PLAN- Demo
existing
demo
demoo existingg
addition
removee existingg
planters
orang
ee st
missionn innn ave
ELEMENTSS TOO BEE DEMOLISHED:
• NON-HISTORICC REARR ADDITIONN

ANDD STAIRS
• EXISTINGG PLANTERSS ANDD TREESS

ATT THEE NORTH,, WEST,, ANDD SOUTH

ELEMENTSS SHOWNN

WITHH AA DASHEDD LINEE

WILLL BEE

DEMOLISHED

ELEMENTSS INN YELLOWW

WILLL BEE COMPLETELYY

DEMOLISHED
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 9
BASEMENT - Demo
existing
demo
demoo existingg
addition
removee existingg
stair
ELEMENTSS TOO BEE DEMOLISHED:
• NON-HISTORICC REARR ADDITION
• NON-HISTORICC FRONTT STAIR
• EXISTINGG ELEVATOR
• EXISTINGG RAMP,, STAIRR ANDD DOORR

ACCESSS ATT THEE WESTT SIDE

ELEMENTSS SHOWNN

WITHH AA DASHEDD LINEE

WILLL BEE

DEMOLISHED
removee existingg
elevator

ELEMENTSS INN YELLOWW

WILLL BEE COMPLETELYY

DEMOLISHED
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 10
FIRST LEVEL- Demo
existing
demo
demoo existingg
addition
removee existingg
stair
ELEMENTSS TOO BEE DEMOLISHED:
• NON-HISTORICC REARR ADDITION
• NON-HISTORICC FRONTT STAIR
• EXISTINGG ELEVATOR
• EXISTINGG INTERIORR PARTITIONS
• INTERIORR HCTT ATT PERIMETERR
WALLS;; MARBLEE TOO BEE SALVAGEDD

ANDD REINSTALLED

ELEMENTSS SHOWNN

WITHH AA DASHEDD LINEE

WILLL BEE

DEMOLISHED
removee existingg
elevator

ELEMENTSS INN YELLOWW

WILLL BEE COMPLETELYY

DEMOLISHED
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 11
SECOND LEVEL- Demo
existing
demo
demoo existingg
addition
ELEMENTSS TOO BEE DEMOLISHED:
• NON-HISTORICC REARR ADDITIONN

EXISTINGG ELEVATOR
• PORTIONN OFF SECONDD LEVELL SLABB

ANDD CEILINGG TOO REVEALL THEE

SKYLIGHT

ELEMENTSS SHOWNN

WITHH AA DASHEDD LINEE

WILLL BEE

DEMOLISHED
removee existingg
elevator

ELEMENTSS INN YELLOWW

WILLL BEE COMPLETELYY

DEMOLISHED
removee portionn
off existingg floorr
too reveall
historicc skylight
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 12
ROOF - Demo
existing
demo
demoo existingg
addition
ELEMENTSS TOO BEE DEMOLISHED:
• NON-HISTORICC REARR ADDITION
• PORTIONN OFF EXISTINGG ROOF

ELEMENTSS SHOWNN

WITHH AA DASHEDD LINEE

WILLL BEE

DEMOLISHED
Removee portionn
off existingg rooff
too receivee neww
addition

ELEMENTSS INN YELLOWW

WILLL BEE COMPLETELYY

DEMOLISHED
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 13

PROPOSED PLANS
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 14
Site Plan
OOrang
ee St.

Missionn Innn Ave..
hhistoricc
entry
up
up
up
neww
entry
Existingg Building
Proposedd
Addition
naturediscover
yy
lab
electrica
ll &&
trash
loading
stafff entry
staf
ff parking
0’’ 10’’ 20’’ 40’
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 15

BASEMENT

PROPOSED DESIGN
LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2

BACKK OFF HOUSE

CLASSROOM
LOBBY

BACKK OFF HOUSE
LOBBY

GALLERY GALLERY

GALLERY

GALLERY

OFFICES

OFFICES

ROOFF TERRACE
RETAIL

EXTERIORR

EXHIBIT
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 16

EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 17
West Elevation - Demo
existing demo
69’- 6”
334’- 6”
demoo existingg
addition
removee
existingg door
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 18
West Elevation
existing addition
25’- 0” 35’- 0”69’- 6”
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 19
Proposed Materials
lightt
champagnee low-ee glazing buildingg
wrap
cementt
plasterr 1
compositee
metall panel
cementt
plasterr 2 solarr canopy
clean and paint
(e)) plaster
d
cleann andd paintt
(e)) soffit
cleann andd paintt
(e)) windows
shadoww box
rammed earth
sitee walls
d
h
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 20
North Elevation - Demo
100 ’- 8” 89’- 10”
demoo
existingg
addition
removee
existingg stairr
andd renclosure
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 21
North Elevation
existing addition
20’- 0”89’- 10”
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 22
North Elevation
removee stairr andd
enclosure,,
restoree entry
existing addition
20’- 0”89’- 10”
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 23
South Elevation - Demo
4’’ - 10”
77’’ - 7” 77’’ - 6” 10’’ - 8”
demoo existingg
addition
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 24
South Elevation
110’- 0”
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 25
South Elevation
cementt
plasterr 1
cementt
plasterr 2solarr canopy
compositee
metall panel
110’- 0”
metall doorr too matchh
accentt panels
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 26
East Elevation - Demo
existingdemo
69’- 6”
334’- 6”
demoo existingg
addition
removee
existingg door
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 27
East Elevation
existingaddition
25’- 0” 69’- 6”35’- 0”
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 28
East Elevation
existingaddition
25’- 0” 69’- 6”35’- 0”
cementt
plasterr 1
cementt
plasterr 2
compositee
metall panel
metal fencing
panels
a
d
d
f
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 29

SELECT INTERIOR VIEWS
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 30

PPPPPPPPPPPPPPFFFFFEEEEEIIIIFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEEEEEERRR

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMUUUUUUUUUUUUUUSSSSSEEUUMMMM OOOOOOOOOOOOFFF RRRRIIIIVVVVEEEERRRSSSIDDEEEE 333333300000

HISTORIC INTERIOR

RENOVATION & ADDITION
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 31
BLENDED LOBBIES – LOOKING NORTH
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 32

RECEPTION/EVENT LOBBY LOOKING NORTH
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
PFEIFFER MUSEUM OF RIVERSIDE 33

GALLERY BRIDGE LOOKING NORTH AT HISTORIC SOUTH FACADE
DP-2023-01017
Ex 3 - Project Plans
700 south flower street suite 1150 los angeles, california 90017 t 213.624.775 115 fifth avenue new york, new york 10013 t 212.625.3911 www.pfeifferpartners.com

MEM

ORANDUM
__________________________________________________________________________________ DATE: July 26, 2023
TO: Robyn Peterson, Director – Museum of Riverside
FROM: Kim McCarron and Melissa Boudreau, Pfeiffer
SUBJECT: Museum of Riverside – Phase 2: Renovation & Addition __________________________________________________________________________ Project Introduction
In 2019,
the City of Riverside engaged Pfeiffer to explore the feasibility and design to re- envision the former Riverside Metropolitan Museum, now named the Museum of Riverside (MoR). The Museum, established in 1920, is a resource for the region and offers a wealth of content related to culture and natural history to the community. At its location in the historic 1912 Post Office along Mission Inn Avenue, known as “Museum Row,” the MoR contributes to the rich offerings of the City and region to its residents. In 2022, City Council approved the project, consisting of the renovation/rehabilitation of the historic building and a two -story addition with an occupiable roof terrace.

In exploring thoughtful approaches to the renovation and addition of the museum, the design team proposed creating a new “front door” that is universally accessible while maintaining prominence of the historic building and integrating a contemporary and “eye-catching” addition. This approach allows for an enhanced museum experience through the reconfiguration of additional exhibit and educational spaces, improved loading and circulation, and structural and mechanical upgrades. The application proposal presents this approach through the rehabilitation of the historic 1912 Mission Revival building with a two-story addition with a roof terrace and double-height connector.

Hist
oric Significance
Nati
onal Register of Historic Places1
The Federal Post Office in Riverside California (78000737) is listed on the National Register of Historic places under Criterion C for its significant architecture. It was designed by James K 1 Summary from the NRHP Nomination form: Stoffaire, James J. and Riverside Metropolitan Museum, National Register of Historic Places Inventory – Nomination Form. April 2, 1978.

DP-2023-01017
Ex 4 - Secretary of the Interior Analysis

Museum
of Riverside
SOIS Analysis Memo
Taylor
, a principal at the United States Architects Office, in the neo-classical building style with mission influence. Construction of the post office began in 1912 and was completed in 1913.

The building is of simple and compact geometry, and enhanced by Mission Revival details creating the eclectic architecture of its time. It is comprised of cement stucco and granite walls, wood windows, and a central parapeted gable clay tile roof. The front entrance loggia features a multi-arched arcade with decorative columns, arched window and doorways, and groi n vaulted ceiling. Surrounding the building is an ornate wood overhanging cornice with decorative marble inlay and sills. The first level windows are arched and inset creating definition on the remaining facades. Overall, the building is significant as a successful example of the blended turn-of-the-century architecture with strong Mission Revival details.

Mission Inn Historic District
The Mission Inn Historic District is a locally recognized historic district in the core of downtown Riverside comprised of commercial and civic strictures. This district is distinct for its Mission Revival style architecture, and also includes Spanish Colonial Revival, and Art Deco styles.

Buildings included in this district were built between 1889 and 1946. As a contributor to this district, the Federal Post Office is a key civil representation of the highlighted Mission Revival style architecture.

Proposed P
roject Description
The propos
ed project is the rehabilitation of the historic 1912 Federal Post Office including the removal and replacement of the rear (south) addition with a new 2-story structure with a roof terrace. While the historic building’s exterior remains largely unaltered, the new addition provides a contemporary and complimentary design to the early 1900’s Mission Revival style building. The primary design gesture with the addition is to reflect a more modern approach to Mission Revival and connect the two with a transparent connector and entrance.

Massing
The existing height, scale, and massing of the historic building remains unchanged from its simple two-story cubic form with a gabled roof attic. To the rear (south) side of the building, the new smaller translucent volume slides into the historic building at the Mission parapet to connect to the taller rectangular two-story addition. This larger volume is oriented to obscure its size from the main elevations of the historic building. While it is hidden behind the historic building from the north, the shorter side of the rectangular volume oriented east -west intends to appear smaller upon entry. The connector is also set back from the west facades of the historic and new buildings, providing necessary separation for the historic structure to maintain prominence, and for the addition to be distinctly differentiated.

Orange Street Entry
The historic building is elevated approximately four-feet above street level, creating a challenge for an equitable and unobtrusive entry into the museum. In order to maintain the symmetry and beauty of the primary, north façade of the historic building, the new main DP-2023-01017
Ex 4 - Secretary of the Interior Analysis

Museum of Riverside
SOIS Analysis Memo

entrance is located to the west. Nestled between the new and historic buildings, the new entry plaza is accompanied by a grand stair and ramp integrated with the new landscape design and exterior exhibit space.

Cladding
The exterior design of the historic building is simple with moments of Mission Revival style detailing. The gabled roof is covered with red clay tiles, finished with an ornate painted wood cornice and marble accents. The walls are a white cement stucco with a granite plinth and painted wood trim casement windows. The walls broken into bays of windows within arched reliefs and shallow pilaster at the corners. Similar to the historic materials pallet, the addition is clad with white stucco and white composite metal panels. Accent composite metal panels are used to articulate the window recesses and protrusions, complimenting the façade design of the historic building. Where the massing is intended to recede, a darker stucco color is used at the base, east façade of the connector, and mechanical penthouse. The west side of the connector is a glazed curtain wall with complimentary colored mullions to provide a light touch where new and historic meet.

Landscape
The landscape design features a new, raised, exterior exhibit space/educational garden located at the northwest side of the historic building. This area is supported by new rammed earth retaining walls and fencing, and encapsulates the existing stairs at the west side that are to remain. From the street, new vegetation masks the retaining walls and fencing for an appealing view from both Mission Inn Avenue and Orange Street. New regional and drought tolerant landscaping as well as Low Impact Development planters replaces existing landscaping at the north, east and south elevations.

Back of House
The rear (south) and alley (east) facades function as the back-of-house areas of the building in an effort to move all non-museum functions away from the primary facades. The south façade faces an existing parking lot and includes a loading dock behind an overhead rolling door. At the alley, a staff entry is located below a small overhang. An electrical transformer and dumpsters will sit in a utility yard located in the alley near the southeast corner of the building.

At the roof level, mechanical equipment is screened behind a stucco penthouse wall.

Compatibility within the Mission Inn Historic District

The property is located in the Mission Inn Historic District, a grouping of commercial and civic buildings from the 1880s to the 1940s, and is adjacent to the Seventh Street Historic District which is largely comprised of Mission Revival style buildings. The 1912 building’s contribution to these districts is based on its prominent architectural character and historic features. As such, any commercial infill within the districts shall be compatible in scale, massing, and finishes to the surrounding environment.

DP-2023-01017
Ex 4 - Secretary of the Interior Analysis

Museum of Riverside
SOIS Analysis Memo

The addition follows the Downtown Specific Plan’s Design Guidelines for Infill Construction.

The addition respects the historic building and surrounding context with an entrance set back from the street in order to provide prominence to the 1912 building. The rectangular massing’s roof form additional steps back from the street with the tallest elements located at the rear (southeast) corner. With the use of a light-colored stucco for the main body and darker tones around the windows, the addition will be compatible with nearby buildings that have period- style ornamentation over a light-colored building. The new entry comprised of a double-height curtain wall connector with a projecting vestibule is broken up by the mullions to reduce the appearance of any monumentality, similar to the penalization of the stucco-clad addition.

The site alterations consist of new hardscape design and landscape of native vegetation.

Vines are intended along the raised educational garden to soften the streetscape. Accent plants will be utilized in the sidewalk planters to reduce the scale of the addition. Additionally, a mixture of trees on Mission Avenue and in the parking lot will provide shade opportunities.

The proposed project is intended to be both compatible to the District and surrounding buildings, and also not overwhelm the historic 1912 building.

Project Compliance with SOI Standards for Rehabilitation

Projects that may impact a listed historic resource2 must comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. For this project, the Standards for Rehabilitation (the Standards) are utilized to guide the project design. Compliance with the Standards prevents additional review under CEQA, which requires an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) if a significant or unmitigated impact on a historic resource is found within the project. The Standards offer guidance of rehabilitation best practices to help determine the steps necessary to create a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving those portions or features which convey historical, cultural, or architectural values.”
3 The below discussion analyzes the proposed project’s potential effects and compatibility of the new addition to the 1912 Mission Revival building for compliance with the 10 Standards for Rehabilitation.

2 Historical resource is defined by CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) as any object, building, structure, site (including archaeological sites), area, place, record, or manuscript that is listed in, or is eligible for listing in, the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR); officially designated or recognized as historically significant by a local government pursuant to a local ordinance or resolution; or identified as significant in a historic resource survey conducted in accordance with the requirements of the CRHR statute (Public Resources Code Section 5024.1(g)).

Properties listed in, or determined eligible for listing in, the NRHP are automatically listed in the CRHR and are therefore historical resources under CEQA.

3 National Park Service, “The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties,” Accessed July 24,2023, https://www.nps.gov/tps/standards.htm
DP-2023-01017
Ex 4 - Secretary of the Interior Analysis

Museum of Riverside
SOIS Analysis Memo

Rehabilitation Standard 1
A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces and spatial relationships.

Historically, the building was designed as a public building and will continue to remain as such. By 1940, the original post office had been vacated and occupied with a police station; and in 1950, was fully repurposed for the former Riverside Metropolitan Museum
4 (MoR). The proposed project does not change the existing use.

The project will retain its existing pattern of use as a public building for the community and will improve the level of public access with a new accessible ramp and universal access throughout the building. The project is consistent with Standard 1.

Rehabilitation Standard 2
The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.

The proposed project retains the features and materials that reflect the historic character of the 1912 Mission Revival building. The primary (north) façade on Mission Inn Avenue will retain all existing historic fabric and will be improved by the removal of a non-historic fence within the portico.

The secondary (west) façade on Orange Street will remain mostly unmodified with exception of removal of basement level access from the sidewalk. The spatial relationship will be modified with the introduction of the raised/enclosed educational garden. However, the space remains landscaped and continues to provide engagement with the façade’s historic entry with access to/from the garden.

The new ramp and stairs on Orange Street offer an accessible path to a museum entry point that re-engages the users to the rear (south) façade (via the double-height connector) which has been inaccessible for decades. The connector is set back from the street which allows the projected corner bay to be prominently displayed. An exhibit within the new lobby will display the layers of the south façade’s building phases/construction and will visible beyond the glazed façade of the connector.

Alterations on the alley (east) façade consist of removal of dormer windows for fresh air intake to the attic’s mechanical equipment. The vents will be proportionally the same as the removed casement windows, which will be retained and salvaged in MoR’s collection. Additionally, removal of the building’s elevator will restore the second most bay by refinishing with in-kind materials.

Other alterations include replacement of non-historic hardscape and new landscape design that will not impact the historic character of the building.

4 Historic Resources Group, LLC, “Preservation Overview” in Riverside Metropolitan Museum Preservation Plan Condition Assessment. Drisko Studio Architects, Inc. November 15, 2007.

DP-2023-01017
Ex 4 - Secretary of the Interior Analysis

Museum of Riverside
SOIS Analysis Memo

The project has been designed to retain and preserve the historic character of the 1912 Mission Revival building while also enhancing the public’s engagement. The alterations to the site are compatible in design and compliment the historic features of the building, rather than compete.

The proposed project is consistent with Standard 2.

Rehabilitation Standard 3
Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.

The proposed project does not intend to add historic features from the building, or other buildings, that would create a false sense of historical development. Areas of modern intervention are clearly differentiated as new through their materiality, design, and detailing. The project is consistent with Standard 3.

Rehabilitation Standard 4
Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.

Since construction in 1912, the building has encountered a number of alterations that impacted the interior circulation of the original post office era. Additions from 1928 through 1968 have dramatically altered and modified the south façade. The building was first recognized in 1968 as a local landmark and was placed on the California and National Registers in 1978 for its architectural significance as “a successful example of an attempt to blend the typical turn-of-the-century building with strong Mission Revival detailing”.
5 Although the Drisko Preservation Plan establishes a Period of Significance of 1912-1965 due to its multiple uses, the building’s criteria for nomination has only been established for its architectural significance.

The proposed project intends to remove additions after the date of construction and retain features of the original 1912 Mission Revival building. The project is consistent with Standard 4.

Rehabilitation Standard 5
Distinctive materials, features, finishes and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.

As noted in the discussion of Standard 2, the project retains and preserves the distinctive features and materials of the 1912 Mission Revival building. While Standard 2 discussed the resource and its historic character, Standard 5 focuses on detailing.

5 Stoffaire, James J. and Riverside Metropolitan Museum, National Register of Historic Places Inventory – Nomination Form. April 2, 1978.

DP-2023-01017
Ex 4 - Secretary of the Interior Analysis

Museum of Riverside
SOIS Analysis Memo

The project is designed to be respectful of the existing historic materials on the building. Where the addition interacts with the historic building, the detailing will be done so in a way that can be reversible and restoration of impacted finishes can be restored (refer to Standard 10).

Alterations to the landscaping and site planter walls will be set away from the primary facades to have no or minimal impact to the historic features. Grates and area wells at the raised educational garden and ramp will be attached above the granite building base into the masonry where, if removed, could be repaired in the future (refer to Standard 10).

The proposed project is consistent with Standard 5.

Rehabilitation Standard 6
Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.

The building has a high degree of integrity and retention of historic features with minimal loss or replacement of original exterior elements. At the main (north) portico, the hole from the removed stair will be replaced with in-kind materials to match adjacent. At the alley (east) façade, removal of the outdated elevator will require stucco replacement and infill of the granite building base. Any additional features that may require replacement due to a degree of severe deterioration beyond repair should be replaced in-kind consistent with the Standards. Therefore, the project is consistent with Standard 6.

Rehabilitation Standard 7
Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible.

Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.

The proposed project does not propose the use of any chemical or physical treatments on historic materials. If required during the project, they will be used with the gentlest means possible under the guidance of the National Park Service’s Technical Preservation Briefs. Therefore, this project will be consistent with Standard 7.

Rehabilitation Standard 8
Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.

The proposed project does not currently propose excavation at the property. If any excavation does occur and archaeological material is discovered during the project, the project will follow all regulatory procedures and reported to the local Information Center. The proposed project will be consistent with Standard 8.

DP-2023-01017
Ex 4 - Secretary of the Interior Analysis

Museum of Riverside
SOIS Analysis Memo

Rehabilitation Standard 9
New additions, exterior alterations or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.

The proposed new addition is differentiated in design and compatible with the historic features and massing of the 1912 building.

As discussed within the analysis of Standard 4, alterations to the building that have occurred since the early decades of the twentieth century are not considered historic .

Any non-historic alterations – including alterations completed during occupancy of the police station – do not need to be retained or preserved.

As discussed under the analysis of Standard 3, the project does not propose the addition of false or historic materials or features that could be interpreted as original to the building. Instead, areas of intervention are either clearly differentiated through changes in material or changes in detailing. The alterations to the primary (north) façade of the historic building consist of removal of the incompatible fencing around a non-historic stairwell on the front portico. At the west historic façade, the original stairs to the side entry of the historic post office lobby will be retained in place and encapsulated in the raised plinth/educational garden so that any future removal can return the steps to their historic use. Additionally, basement windows will be retained and enclosed by an area well with a grate to maintain their use for natural ventilation and light to the basement.

Exterior alterations to the south façade will occur for the attachment of the double- height entry massing and two-story addition. The point of connection consists of a expansion control system to allow movement of the two structures over a 14” seismic joint. As discussed in Standard 5, the expansion joint covers adjacent to the west- facing glazing have been designed to minimally touch the historic fabric of the building and will not damage or destroy historic materials (refer to Standard 10 for a discussion of reversibility). At the alley side (east façade), the expansion cover will be more utilitarian along the new cement stucco façade with sensitive attachment back to the historic façade.

Due to the height of the addition at the point of connection and +/-14” movement required at the seismic joint, the project proposes to remove two portions of the decorative eave, corbels, and marble inlay to aid the waterproofing assembly between the two structures, totaling less than 3% of the roof area. The expansion joint assembly will attach to the existing masonry/plaster façade and become a curb at the roof plane in order to retain the historic Mission parapet and dormer window.

The existing south façade was largely compromised during prior non-historic building campaigns. The façade design consists of seven central bays flanked by outer pilasters for 9 total. At the first floor, the historic design consisted of 2x4 casement windows. The second floor included double-height divided-lite windows topped by transom hoppers with rounded corners. During the 1928 building renovation, large DP-2023-01017
Ex 4 - Secretary of the Interior Analysis

Museum of Riverside
SOIS Analysis Memo

openings compromised the first-floor openings while the second-floor openings/windows were bifurcated by the 1920s addition. The transom hoppers are existent and will be salvaged and returned to MoR for the museum collection. The project intends to document and salvage all impacted decorative features including terra cotta roof tiles, wood corbels, wood cornice, and brackets for the potential reinstallation/reconstruction if the addition is ever removed. The design team did explore retention of the cornice and roof in place, however, the expansion joint assembly and waterproofing had potential to compromise the historic features with the possibility of water intrusion. The team elected for removal and salvage as the best approach for possible reconstruction/reinstallation in a future project.

The proposed project is consistent with Standard 9.

Rehabilitation Standard 10
New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.

If the proposed project addition to the south and at the raised educational garden are to be removed in the future, the historic building would retain its essential form and integrity.

At the rear (south) façade, the proposed alterations include the connection of the expansion cover assembly between the two structures and is designed to be reversible and historic fabric may be patched. As discussed in Standard 9, removal of historic fabric consists of two areas of the roof, eave, cornice ornamentation, and altered historic windows. The historic fabric that is impacted by the project will be salvaged as part of MoR’s collection and may be reinstalled and/or reconstructed in the future.

At the west (secondary) façade, alterations consist to the hardscape and basement entry. The historic fabric to remain in place at street level include the secondary entry to the historic lobby and basement level windows within the granite building base.

Removal of the raised education garden will re-expose the elements that will remain protected-in-place.

The proposed project is consistent with Standard 10.

Conclusion:

The project is fully compliant with all of the ten Standards.

The proposed project will not result in a loss of the building’s overall historic integrity or eligibility, and will remain a historic resource. No substantial adverse change in the significance of the resources as defined by CEQA will be caused by the proposed project.

DP-2023-01017
Ex 4 - Secretary of the Interior Analysis
Exhibit 5 – Site Photos
Figure 1 ‐ Front (north) ElevaƟon, view looking southwest Figure 2 – Side (we st) ElevaƟon, view looking east
DP-2023-01017
Ex 5 - Site Photos
Exhibit 5 – Site Photos

Figure 3 ‐ Rear (south) ElevaƟon, view looking north

Figure 4 – Rear (south) and Side (east) ElevaƟons, view looking north DP-2023-01017
Ex 5 - Site Photos
Exhibit 5 – Site Photos

Figure 5 ‐ Side (east) ElevaƟon, view looking west
DP-2023-01017
Ex 5 - Site Photos
1 RiversideCA.gov
1 RiversideCA.gov

MAIN MUSEUM EXPANSON
DP-2023-01017(COA)
Community & Economic Development Department
Cultural Heritage Board
Agenda Item: 4
August 16, 2023
RiversideCA.gov
2 AERIAL PHOTO/LOCATION
1 2
2 RiversideCA.gov
3 EXISTING SITE PHOTOS
12 3
4 RiversideCA.gov
4 PROPOSED PROJECT
3 4
3 RiversideCA.gov
5 PROPOSED DEMOLITION SITE PLAN
RiversideCA.gov
6 PROPOSED DEMOLITION PLANS
5 6
4 RiversideCA.gov
7 PROPOSED SITE PLAN
RiversideCA.gov
8 PROPOSED FLOOR PLANS
7 8
5 RiversideCA.gov
9 PROPOSED COLOR ELEVATION
RiversideCA.gov
10 PROPOSED COLOR ELEVATIONS
9 10
6 RiversideCA.gov
11 STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Strategic Priority No. 5 – High
Preforming Government
Goal 5.3 – Enhance
communication and collaboration
with community members to
improve transparency, build public
trust, and encourage shared
decision-making
Cross-Cutting Threads
RiversideCA.gov
12 Staff recommends that the Cultural Heritage Board :

1. DETERMINE that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review pursuant to Sections 15301 (Existing Facilities), 15331 (Historic Resource Restoration/ Rehabilitation), and 15332 (In-fill Development), as it constitutes rehabilitation and less than 10,000 square foot increase in size of an existing historic resource within an urbanized area that is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties; and

2. APPROVE Planning Case DP-2023-01017 (Cer tificate of Appropriateness), based on the facts for findings outlined and summarized in the staff report, and subject to the recommended conditions of approval .

RECOMMENDATION
11 12
7 RiversideCA.gov
13 PROPOSED RENDERING
(FOR REFERENCE )
RiversideCA.gov
14 PROPOSED REDERING
(FOR REFERENCE)
13 14
8 RiversideCA.gov
15 PROPOSED COLOR ELEVATIONS
(FOR REFERENCE)
RiversideCA.gov
16 PROPOSED COLOR ELEVATIONS
(FOR REFERENCE)
15 16
9 RiversideCA.gov
17 PROPOSED INTERIOR VIEW
(FOR REFERENCE)
RiversideCA.gov
18 PROPOSED INTERIOR VIEW
(FOR REFERENCE)
17 18
10 RiversideCA.gov
19 INTERIOR VIEW
(FOR REFERENCE)
19