Ch09 CulturalResources 2011-09-09 yo...City of Los Angeles Draft Environmental Impact Report –...

9. Cultural Resources

City of Los Angeles Draft Environmental Impact Report – SCH# 2007052094

Cornfield Arroyo Seco Specific Plan and Redevelopment PlanChapter 9 Cultural Resources

Page 9-1 Arup North America Ltd

September 2011

9 Cultural Resources This chapter discusses cultural resources found in the Project Area, including a description of the cultural setting, the historic context, and the ethnographic history of the general site vicinity. Cultural resources are generally defined as districts, sites, buildings, structures, objects, and landscapes significant in American history, prehistory, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture. Cultural resources may include existing and/or potential historic and prehistoric archaeological sites, historic buildings and structures, and American Indian traditional cultural properties. Cultural resources are protected by statutes and regulations at all levels of government including local, State, and federal.

The information in this chapter is derived from a number of source documents, archival research, field investigation, and evaluation of source documents, including but not limited to the City of Los Angeles’ Los Angeles River Revitalization Master Plan and Los Angeles River Revitalization Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR), City of Los Angeles Cultural Affairs Department’s Cultural Heritage Master Plan, the Cornfield State Park Advisory Committee Recommendations Report, the Los Angeles State Historic Park (State Historic Park) General Plan and EIR, the Central City North Community Plan, and the Northeast Community Plan. All works referenced are noted at the end of the chapter.

9.1 Existing Conditions

This section discusses cultural resources in the Project Area for the Cornfield Arroyo Seco Specific Plan and Redevelopment Plan (Proposed Alternative), including a description of the cultural setting, the historic context, and the ethnographic history of the general site vicinity.

9.1.1 Archaeological Resources

Archaeological resources include precontact, prehistoric or historic, and resources before the arrival of European peoples in the Los Angeles area. Prehistoric archaeological sites may include villages, campsites, lithic or artifact scatters, fishing sites, roasting pits/hearths, milling features, rock art (petroglyphs/pictographs, intaglios), rock features (circles, blinds), and burials. Historic archaeological sites consist of the physical remains (unoccupied ruins) of structures or built objects that result from the work of Euro Americans that are greater than 50 years old but postdate contact between Europeans and Native Americans. Historic archaeological sites may include town sites, homesteads, agricultural or ranching features, mining-related features, and refuse concentration. To date, there have not been any precontact or prehistoric archaeologically significant sites with artifacts discovered within the Project Area (California State Parks Department, 2005).

9.1.2 Ethnographic Resources

Ethnographic resources include sites, areas, and materials important to indigenous peoples for religious, spiritual, or traditional uses. These can encompass the sacred character of physical locations (mountain peaks, springs, and burial sites) or particular native plants, animals, or minerals that are gathered for use in traditional ritual activities. Also included are villages, burials, rock art, rock features, and traditional hunting, gathering, or fishing sites.

Ethnographic resources that meet the definition set forth in Executive Order (EO) 13007 can be considered a sacred site under federal law. Activities that might affect accessibility to or availability of materials used in traditional cultural practices are subject to EO 13007. In some cases, ethnographic resources may overlap prehistoric or historic archaeological resources, or they may be embedded within each other.




September 2011

9.1.3 Built Environment

A number of historic resources as defined for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) exist on or near the Project Area. Architectural resources of the historic built environment can include anything from houses, retail stores, and offices to bridges and community structures. There are several agencies within the City of Los Angeles with policies designed to designate and protect historically significant sites and structures.1

The following are the current historic designations within the City of Los Angeles:

California Point of Historical Interest California Historical Landmark Designation by the Community Redevelopment Agency of Los Angeles (CRA/LA) as

being of cultural or historical significance within a designated redevelopment area Historic-Cultural Monument designation by the Cultural Heritage Commission of the City

of Los Angles and approved by the City Council Inclusion by the City Council in an Historic Preservation Overlay Zone (HPOZ) Listed or eligible for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) Listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)

9.1.4 Cultural Resources Setting

The following sections summarize the prehistoric, ethnographic, and historic setting of the site.

9.1.4.1 Prehistory and Ethnography

Archaeological evidence indicates human occupation of the Los Angeles area from at least 10,000 years before the present (BP). Information on human occupation prior to 3,000 BCE is almost nonexistent in part because of the depositional environment and dramatic environmental change over time.

Evidence suggests that Paleoindian populations (12,000 to 9,000 BP) throughout California and elsewhere were small with subsistence economies that emphasized big game, including now extinct megafauna, such as mammoth and mastodon. Although Paleoindian sites are rare in California, when found, they are often near areas containing pluvial lakes and marshes. During the Archaic Period (9,000 to 4,000 BP), California prehistoric cultures lost their emphasis on large game hunting and subsistence economies diversified somewhat. Archaic people may have begun to use ecological coastal zones more intensively as advances in technology enabled more efficient use of foods. Archaic sites, which are relatively rare in California, can contain large projectile points and milling stones, but a lack of high-density shell deposits indicates early inhabitants of the Project Area relied on hunting and food gathering.

Population densities increased throughout the Pacific Period from roughly 4,000 to 150 BP. Consequently, California populations sought to produce more food from available land and to locate more dependable food supplies. The Pacific Period saw an increase in human occupation and specialization. Populations settled in larger villages, increasing social stratification and ceremonialism, while long-distance trading activity is also evident in the archaeological record.

By 2,000 BP in Southern California, large coastal villages, commonly located near a stream, were established adjacent to resource-rich bayshore and marsh habitats, often evidenced

1 City of Los Angeles Departments with policies that designate and protect historically significant sites and

structures include but are not limited to the following: Office of Historic Resources (Department of City Planning), Department of Cultural Affairs, and Recreation and Parks Department.




September 2011

by stratified deposits of shellfish and other remains from repeated occupation. Beginning around 1,700 BP, there was an increasing complexity in artifact assemblages reflecting intensified hunting, gathering, and fishing adaptation. The introduction of the bow and arrow, harpoon, and the use of clam disk beads as currency for trade indicates that populations were larger and more densely settled. Around 200 to 500 AD, the Tongva (also known as Gabrielino-Tongva, in reference to the Mission San Gabriel Arcangel) settled into what is now the Los Angeles basin and constructed a network of canals that allowed for large settlements. Between 40 and 60 villages were established from San Bernardino to Santa Monica (Steen, 2001).

The Tongva indigenous peoples were known to inhabit the Project Area. Their influence was far reaching and they held extensive areas of territory in Southern California, including much of the Los Angeles Basin and several of the Channel Islands. Academic studies have noted that the Tongva were known to inhabit Southern California as recently as 1,500 ago; other studies indicate they may have occupied the area for over 4,500 years. Archaeological and ethnographic evidence illustrates that the prehistoric Tongva peoples were prosperous, creative, and among California’s most populous indigenous groups.

The Tongva had a complex social system in which hunting, trade, and technological advances were organized and highly regarded. They thrived from the abundance of natural resources and the mild climate and are thought to have moved their village locations from place to place over time. The Yang-na or Yabit village, for instance, is known to have existed near the current State Historic Park property within the Project Area, although it too may have been established at various locations along the Los Angeles River. However, it is now understood that extensive urban development in Los Angeles over the last century and a half has compromised the historic record of Tongva settlement.

9.1.4.2 Spanish and Mexican History

Different parts of California have been governed by several different countries over a 300-year period, including Spain, Russia, Mexico, and lastly the United States, each creating a culturally distinct political landscape.

Spanish Exploration

In 1769, the Portolá expedition provided the first known written description of the Los Angeles River area (Gumprecht, 1999). Several Spanish expeditions arrived at or passed through California beginning in 1772. Beginning in the late 18th century, the Spanish established the first of 21 missions along the California coast, each within a day’s horse ride of another. The missions became prosperous in developing large cattle ranch holdings, and while many indigenous peoples came to live in mission settlements, others rejected this way of life and moved into mountain areas to avoid the Spanish.

In the summer of 1781, a group of settlers from Sonora and Sinaloa in Mexico arrived and began a settlement near the Los Angeles River.

Mexico Period

When Mexico won independence from Spain in 1821, the mission system was dissolved and secularized. During the Mexican period, indigenous people continued to work on the missions and expand pueblo settlements. However, with secularization, ranchero and pueblo enterprises did not offer much recourse to the indigenous population.

During the 19th century, settlers coming to California were welcomed by the Californios, individuals who were more Californian than Mexican or Spanish and who allowed outsiders to settle the land and utilize California’s natural resources.




September 2011

When American rule came in 1846, the economic profile of California changed. Policies such as the Land Act of 1851 stripped Mexicans of their land, and Mexican ranchers who did not have formal titles to their land lost their socioeconomic status.

By the beginning of the 20th century, a thriving agriculture bolstered by construction of the transcontinental railroad and allied with available land were catalysts for the regional growth of Southern California. The population of Los Angeles grew from 100,000 to 250,000 between 1900 and 1906 (Sánchez, 1995). With the growth of industry and commerce, such as the entertainment and aerospace industry, Los Angeles became a metropolis by the middle of the century. There were 3,834,340 residents in the City of Los Angeles in 2007 (Census Bureau, 2007).

9.1.4.3 History of the Project Area

In the late 19th century, the Southern Pacific Railroad (Southern Pacific) acquired and developed the River Station depot on a site adjacent to the Los Angeles River at the edge of the Project Area.2 A parcel of property was donated to Southern Pacific in 1873 to be their Los Angeles hub, and by 1876 the rail yard was connected to the rest of the nation.3 As the area grew and the volume of traffic at the River Station increased, the Arcade Depot was constructed in 1889. The River Station depot and adjacent hotel stayed in operation until 1902 when they were demolished to accommodate the station’s new freight service operations.

The freight service operations brought with it a diverse population and an expanded industrial economy but also the loss of existing agricultural uses. Area growth saw working-class and ethnic communities begin to locate in surrounding communities such as Sonoratown, Solano Canyon, El Pueblo, Chinatown, Lincoln Heights, and along the riverfront, creating the cultural identity of the area. The area was zoned for industrial use in 1908, although lower-income and working-class residents continued to live there.

Currently the area houses mostly light industry and manufacturing uses with a small number of working-class and Hispanic and Asian residents. The existing population reflects to some degree the population that existed at the turn of the 19th century. This profile reinforces the idea that residents in the area are tied to the land and to the cultural history of the area (Griswald del Castillo, 1982).

The total population of the Project Area in 2007 was 4,802 (Arup North America, June 2009). Table 9-1 illustrates the ethnic demographic makeup of the community.

2 The Los Angeles State Historic Park is currently planned for this site, Cornfields Arroyo Seco Project, 2009. 3 Bandini de Stearns donated the first parcel of the property to Southern Pacific in 1873. Arcadia Bandini de Stearns, daughter of a prominent Mexican California family and widow of Abel Stearns, was owner of the property at the time. Abel Stearns was an American merchant who moved to Los Angeles in 1829 and had acquired the property to support his mill located off the south end of the property along the zanja madre.




September 2011

Table 9-1: Project Area/Los Angeles Demographic Profile

Race/Ethnicity Project Area Percent Los Angeles Percent

Asian 928 43% 364,850 10.0%

Black, non-Hispanic 19 1% 401,986 11.0%

Hispanic/Latino 1100 51% 1,719,073 47.0%

Native American 11 1% 8,897 0.2%

Pacific Islander 6 0.3% 4,484 0.1%

White, non-Hispanic 44 2% 1,099,188 30.0%

Other Race 1 .01% 9,065 0.2%

Mixed Race 26 1% 87,277 2.0% Source: US Census Bureau, City of Los Angeles Planning Department, 2000.

9.1.5 Published Records of Cultural Resources in the Project Area

A records search was conducted for the Project Area that included a review of all recorded archaeological sites within one half-mile radius of the Project Area as well as a review of cultural resource reports on file. In addition, the California Points of Historical Interest (PHI), the California Historical Landmarks (CHL), the CRHR, the NRHP, the California State Historic Resources Inventory (HRI), and the City of Los Angeles Historic and Cultural Monuments (LAHCM) listings were reviewed for the Project Area (Foster, 2002).

9.1.5.1 National Register of Historic Places

The NRHP lists seven properties within ½-mile radius of the Project Area.

Plaza Substation, 10 Olvera Street Union Passenger Terminal, 800 North Alameda Street US Post Office – Los Angeles Terminal Annex, 900 Alameda Street Plaza Historic District - Roughly bounded by Spring, Macy, Alameda, and Arcadia

Streets, and Old Sunset Boulevard Lincoln Heights Branch, Los Angeles Public Library 2530 Workman Street Hale House, Heritage Square, 3800 North Homer Street, Highland Park Richard Henry Dana Branch, Los Angeles Public Library, 3320 Pepper Street

9.1.5.2 California State Preservation Office

California State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) maintains regional information centers that compile information on historic and other cultural resources in their service area. The relevant information center that maintains records about cultural resources in the Project Area is the South Central Coastal Information Center.

A review of the historic maps by the South Central Coastal Information Center (Pasadena [1896, 1900] 15’ US Geological Survey [USGS]) indicated that by 1896 the Project Area was highly developed with improved roads, railroads, and buildings. The Atchison, Topeka, Santa Fe Railroad (Santa Fe) and Southern Pacific serviced the Project Area as well as the Los Angeles Terminal Railroad (San Pedro Branch). Other features included the Los Angeles River and Elysian Park. Ten cultural resources are located within the Project Area. Appendix 9A presents the information obtained as a result of a records search request submitted to the South Central Coastal Information Center.




September 2011

9.1.5.3 California Point of Historical Interest

The California Point of Historical Interest (2009) of the Office of Historic Preservation (OHP), California State Parks Department, lists one property within ½-mile radius of the Project Area: Heritage Square, 3800 Homer Street.

This area along the Arroyo Seco channel was set aside in the late 1960s to provide a place to situate and restore buildings of aesthetic and/or historic merit that might otherwise be demolished. At the time of designation, there were four houses and a railroad station in various stages of restoration. All were declared Historical-Cultural Monuments of the City of Los Angeles before they were moved to Heritage Square.

9.1.5.4 California Historic Resources Inventory

The California Historic Resources Inventory lists 37 properties that have been evaluated for historical significance within the Project Area. In addition, 127 studies have been conducted within ½-mile radius of the Project Area. Of these, 27 are located within the Project Area. There are 27 additional investigations located on the Los Angeles, CA. 7.5’ USGS Quadrangle that are potentially within ½-mile radius of the Project Area. However, these reports are currently not mapped due to insufficient information about location.

9.1.5.5 California Historical Landmarks

The California Historical Landmarks (2009) of the Office of Historic Preservation, California State Parks Department, lists nine properties within ½-mile radius of the Project Area.

Nuestra Senora La Reina de Los Angeles La Iglesia de Nuestra Senora la Reina de Los Angeles — the Church of Our Lady the Queen of the Angels — was dedicated on December 8, 1822, during California’s Mexican era. Originally known as La Iglesia de Nuestra Senora de Los Angeles, the church was the only Catholic Church for the pueblo. Today it primarily serves the Hispanic population of Los Angeles. It is located at 535 North Main Street near Macy Street.

Avila Adobe This adobe house was built circa 1818 by Don Francisco Avila, Alcalde (mayor) of Los Angeles in 1810. Used as Commodore Robert Stockton’s headquarters in 1847, it was repaired by private subscription in 1929–30 when Olvera Street was opened as a Mexican marketplace. It is the oldest existing house in Los Angeles. It is located in El Pueblo de Los Angeles State Historic Park, Olvera Street.

Los Angeles Plaza A part of the original pueblo lands of El Pueblo de la Reina de Los Angeles de Porciuncula founded in 1781 under the Spanish Laws of the Indies during the reign of King Carlos III, the plaza is located close to the site of the original plaza. It was the center of the settlement founded by Governor Felipe de Neve. When the Plaza Church was completed in 1822, this site was reserved as a public plaza. It was landscaped in 1871 and has served since that date as a public park. It is located in El Pueblo de Los Angeles State Historic Park, on the 500 block of North Main Street.

Pico House (Hotel) Pio Pico constructed the Pico House in 1869–70. The first 3-story hotel built in Los Angeles, it had about 80 rooms, large windows, a small interior court, and a grand staircase. It is located in El Pueblo de Los Angeles State Historic Park, on the 400 block of Main Street.



-7 Arup North America Ltd

September 2011

Merced Theatre The Merced Theatre, erected in 1870 on North Main Street next to the Pico House, was the first building built expressly for theatrical purposes in Los Angeles. It was built by William Abbot, a cabinetmaker, and named in honor of his wife Merced Garcia. It is located in El Pueblo de Los Angeles State Historic Park, 420 North Main Street.

Lugo Adobe The Lugo Adobe, said to have been built in the 1840s by Don Vicente Lugo, was one of the very few two-story houses in the pueblo of Los Angeles. In 1867, Lugo donated this house on the Plaza to St. Vincent’s School (forerunner of Loyola High School and University). From the 1880s until it was razed in 1951, the building was occupied by the Chinese. It is located in El Pueblo de Los Angeles State Historic Park, on the southeast corner of Los Angeles and Alameda Streets.

Portola Trail Campsite (No. 1) Spanish colonization of California began in 1769 with the expedition of Don Gaspar de Portola from Mexico. With Captain Don Fernando Rivera y Moncada, Lieutenant Don Pedro Fages, Sgt. Jose Francisco Ortega, and Fathers Juan Crespi and Francisco Gomez, he and his party camped near this spot on August 2, 1769, en route to Monterey. It is located at the entrance to Elysian Park at the northwest corner of North Broadway and Elysian Park Drive.

Old Plaza Firehouse The Old Plaza Firehouse was the first building constructed as a fire station in Los Angeles. Built in 1884, it served as a firehouse until 1897. After this it was used for various purposes until restored in 1960 and opened as a museum of fire-fighting equipment of the late 19th century. It is dedicated to the firefighters of the Los Angeles Fire Department, who have served the City of Los Angeles since 1871. It is located in El Pueblo de Los Angeles State Historic Park, 501 North Los Angeles Street.

First Jewish Site in Los Angeles The Hebrew Benevolent Society of Los Angeles (1854), the first charitable organization in the City of Los Angles, acquired this site from the City Council by deed of April 9, 1855. This purchase of a sacred burial ground represented the first organized community effort by the pioneer Jewish settlers. It is located at Chavez Ravine, behind the US Naval and Marine Corps Reserve Center, 800 West Lilac Terrace near Lookout Drive.

9.1.5.6 California Register of Historical Resources

The CRHR lists properties within ½-mile radius of the Project Area. These are properties determined to have a NRHP Status of 1 or 2, a California Historical Landmark numbering 770 and higher, or a Point of Historical Interest listed after January 1, 1998.

The CRHR properties in the Project Area or immediately adjacent include the following:

Plaza Substation, 10 Olvera Street

Union Station Passenger Terminal 800 North Alameda Street

US Post Office—Los Angeles Terminal Annex 900 Alameda Street

Plaza Historic District Roughly bounded by Spring, Macy, Alameda, and Arcadia Streets, and Old Sunset Boulevard

Lincoln Heights Branch of the Los Angeles Library, 2530 Workman Street

Hale House, Heritage Square, 3800 North Homer Street

Richard Henry Dana, Branch of the Los Angeles Library, 3320 Pepper Street




September 2011

9.1.5.7 Los Angeles Historic Cultural Monuments

There are a number of properties in and around the Project Area that have been designated as LAHCMs. Two properties just west of the Project Area have also been listed on the NRHP and an application to include the Zanja Madre has been submitted to the NRHP.

Following is a list of the LAHCM properties within a radius of ½-mile of the Project Area.

Plaza Church

The Palms-Southern Pacific Railroad Depot (Heritage Square)

(Site of) The First Cemetery of the City of Los Angeles

Hale House (Heritage Square)

San Antonio Winery

The Chavez Ravine Arboretum

Plaza Park

Valley Knudson Garden Residence (Heritage Square)

River Station Area/Southern Pacific Railroad

Mt. Pleasant House (Heritage Square)

Union Station Terminal and Landscaped Grounds

Beaudry Avenue House (Heritage Square)

Residence – Nuestra Senora La Reina de Los Angeles

Residence – Avila Adobe

Fire Station No.1 –Los Angeles Plaza

Residence – Pio Pico House (Hotel)

Merced Theatre

Grantile-Block Paving

Macy Street Viaduct

Lincoln Avenue Church Building (Heritage Square)

Lincoln Heights Branch Library

Cathedral High School

Site of Lugo Adobe

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Building

Edison Electric Company, Los Angeles #3, Stream Power Plant

Federal Bank Building

Los Angeles Railway Huron Substation

Octagon House

Albion Cottages and Milagro Market

Bowman Residence




September 2011

Sacred Heart Church

Lincoln Heights Jail/Los Angeles City Jail

Portola Trail Campsite (No. 1)

Old Plaza Firehouse

Jeffries House

First Jewish Site in Los Angeles

Raphael Junction Block/NY Suspenders Building.

North Spring Street Viaduct

North Main Street Bridge

Buena Vista Viaduct (now called the North Broadway-Buena Vista Bridge)

Figueroa/ Riverside Bridge.

Navy and Marine Corps Reserve Center

Hale House

Mt. Pleasant House

Binford Residence

Bernard Street Residence

2800 Manitou Avenue

Todd Residence

Stolenberg Residence

Olin Residence

Savoy Street Residence

Foyen Residence

Source: Los Angeles Historic and Cultural Monuments (LAHCM) (Foster, 2002).

The City of Los Angeles has identified over 1,000 existing Historic-Cultural Monuments throughout the city. The Cultural Heritage Commission (CHC) of the City of Los Angeles is a 5-member, mayoral-appointed commission that considers nominations of sites as City of Los Angeles Historic-Cultural Monuments (designated City of Los Angeles landmarks) and reviews proposed project work affecting these structures. Through the Office of Historic Resources, the CHC and City Council have identified nine historic buildings and structures within or near the Project Area boundaries. Table 9-2 indicates the historic buildings and structures in the area identified by the City of Los Angeles.

Of the nine sites in Table 9-2, two are located outside of the area of potential impact; the Bruno Street Granite Block Paving and the Capitol Milling Company are both located just south of the Project Area boundaries. Of the seven historic sites within the Project Area boundaries, none are planned for any development, reuse, or demolition as a direct result of the Proposed Alternative.




September 2011

Table 9-2: Project Area Historic Resources

LAHCM No.

Resource Designation Type of Resource Listing or Status

Date

82 The River Station Historic Place LAHCM 1876

211 Bruno Street Granite Block Paving*

Historic Street LAHCM 1913

442 Albion Cottages and Milagro Market

Historic Building LAHCM 1870

587 Lincoln Heights Jail Historic Building LAHCM 1931

872 Raphael Junction Block Building

Historic Building LAHCM 1913

900 North Spring Street Bridge Historic Bridge NRHP, LAHCM

1928

901 Main Street Bridge Historic Bridge CRHR, NRHP, LAHCM

1910

Capitol Milling Company* Historic Mill Structure

CRHR, NRHP

1855

Zanja Madre Historic Irrigation Site

CRHR, NRHP

1781

CRHR = California Register of Historical Resources – Eligible; NRHP-L= National Register of Historic Places – Listed; NRHP = National Register of Historic Places – Eligible; CHL = California Historic Landmark; LAHCM = Los Angeles Historical - Cultural Monument

* Not located within the Project Area boundary

Source: Los Angeles Cultural Commission (CHC) http://www.culturela.org/historic/index.html

9.1.5.8 Historic Resources Survey of the Project Area

In early 2011, the City of Los Angeles Department of City Planning in cooperation with the City Office of Historic Resources (OHR), conducted a Historic Resources Survey (HRS) of the Project Area comprising of 660 acres and approximately 1,600 assessor’s parcels. The purpose of the survey is to identify, document, and evaluate, at the intensive level, selected properties for eligibility for the NRHP, CRHR, and/or for designation as a City of Los Angeles Historic Cultural Monument. The survey largely followed the methodology for SurveyLA, the City’s first-ever comprehensive historic resources survey.

The survey team first conducted windshield surveys and limited archival research to identify potentially significant properties. The survey team then conducted an intensive-level survey of the potentially significant properties, using the Field Guide Survey System (FiGSS) developed for SurveyLA (identifying resources by context, theme, and property type), as well as the Historic Architecture Inventory (HAI) (architectural descriptions and DPR 523 forms) for field identification.

The initial windshield surveys identified 50 properties for survey using the FiGSS, including two potential “conservation areas” containing both eligible and ineligible properties related by an overarching theme. Of the 50 properties, 23 met one or more eligibility standards in the FiGSS and were documented on DPR 523 forms. The remaining 27 properties did not ultimately meet any eligibility standards and/or did not retain sufficient integrity. The two conservation areas include the “River Station Historic Landscape” and the “Albion Street




September 2011

Community Conservation Area.” Although neither constitutes an eligible historic district, the distinctive character of each area warranted consideration in future design and planning processes.

Properties assigned a status code of 1–5 are considered “historical resources” for CEQA compliance purposes and City’s Cultural Heritage Ordinance. Properties assigned a status code of 6DQ, 6Z, or 6L do not constitute “historic properties” (Section 106) or historical resources (CEQA) and did not require further cultural resources consideration. Properties assigned a 7RQ status were not identified for intensive-level survey but are identified in a SurveyLA survey. These properties were not evaluated, but they may need to be considered in connection with future development in the Project Area. More information on the results of the HRS is presented in Appendix 9B.

9.1.6 Cultural Features in the Project Area and its Environs

William Mead Homes

An important structure in the area is the William Mead Homes public housing, located at 1300 North Cardinal Street. The project, designed by architects T. A. Elisen, A. R. Walker, Armand Monaco, and Marsh Smith, was completed in 1942 as part of the housing act of 1937 and reflects the modern architectural style of the late 1930s. The 412 units of public housing cover 18 acres and is operated by the Housing Authority of Los Angeles, The William Mead Homes neighborhood has the nickname of "Dogtown," because it was near Los Angeles’ first dog pound.

Zanja Madre

The Project Area has played a historically significant role in the history of Los Angeles. Located within its boundaries are portions of the first irrigation and water supply system in the area, the Zanja Madre or “mother trench.” In addition, the region’s first major line railroad hub (Southern Pacific) is located in the Project Area. These two entities were major catalysts for the growth of the City of Los Angeles. The Zanja Madre provided water to area residents and railroad that connected Los Angeles to the rest of the nation.

Recognition of the Zanja Madre, noted in Table 9-2 is under consideration by the CHC. The CHC has discussed placing a monument in the State Historic Park since remaining portions of the Zanja Madre exist on hillside slopes at Broadway, which forms the western border of the park.

The Zanja Madre was built by Mexican settlers (c. 1781) and was the original aqueduct providing water to the area (Gumprecht, 1999). The Zanja Madre ran from the Los Angeles River near the present day North Broadway bridge to a point south of the original Plaza located at 25 Paseo de la Plaza. During construction of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) Gold Line in 2000, several sections of the Zanja Madre, the “mother irrigation ditch” for the area, were found.

Metro took precautions to ensure the preservation of historical findings during construction. According to the State Historic Park EIR, archaeological studies, conducted between 1999 and 2001 for the Metro Gold Line project, documented Southern Pacific River Station structural remains on the future park property as well as remains associated with the Zanja Madre on adjacent property. However, a report prepared for the Metro concluded that most of the Zanja Madre was destroyed due to early railroad activities.4 In 2005 a 100-foot

4 A full account of the preservation and findings of the Zanja Madre is contained in The Archeology and History of

the Zanja Madre Below Broadway, City of Los Angeles, report prepared by Cogstone Resource Management Inc. for the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 2007.




September 2011

section of the Zanja Madre was discovered immediately inside of the Project Area. As a result the Metro realigned tracks and a roadway to construct a wall to protect the brick-and-concrete-lined channel (National Park Service, 2006). The Metro preserved a 75-foot portion of the Zanja Madre by building a retaining wall to prevent damage from landslides and area drainage (Ripaldi, 2009).

The Los Angeles State Historic Park site has previously been designated as a Historic and Cultural Monument by the City of Los Angeles (River Station/Southern Pacific #82, 1971). Since California State Parks Department acquired the property in 2001, cultural resource specialists have worked on the identification of the property’s cultural and historical resources. In doing so Department cultural resources specialists have determined that the Los Angeles State Historic Park property is potentially eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places due to the significant historic events, individuals and institutions associated with the property and the identification and documentation of significant and intact archaeological resources including building foundations, cobblestone paving surfaces, artifact deposits and other features. State Parks staff have identified the entire 32-acre State Historic Park property as an archaeological site, and updated the archaeological site record for the property (LAN-3120H). Archaeological and historical research is continuing in anticipation of the park’s Phase I development project, opening in 2014.

Murals in the Vicinity of Project Area

In addition to the historic built environment within the Project Area, the production of murals on the exterior of buildings and other structures is considered by some community members as works of community identity. The Project Area is located in City Council District 1, which is a supporter of murals and the cultural significance they represent. However, while there are several important murals in the greater vicinity of the Project Area, according to the Social and Public Art Research Center (SPARC), a leading authority on murals in Los Angeles, there are no known murals within the Project Area.

The Los Angeles State Historic Park

The following information is provided using the State Historic Park EIR (2005). The EIR provides detailed information regarding the historical and cultural significance of the State Historic Park, also locally referred to as the Cornfields site. The following is a summary of the historical resource.

The State Historic Park has recently been a point of cultural interest, generating a lively debate in the community over the future use of the area. The project site was known as the Southern Pacific’s River Station and freight yard and was the first Southern Pacific facility in Los Angeles. It was the site of the first transcontinental railroad station and depot in the region from 1876 through 1888. Later the site became the center of freight operations in Southern California and thus played a crucial role in the growth of the area during the first quarter of the 20th century. The site continued to serve as a freight yard until 1992 and was purchased in 2001 by the State.

In 2002, the Trust for Public Land, with California State Parks Department oversight, conducted a plan to monitor hazardous material remediation work at the site (Cogstone Resource Management Inc., 2005). The remediation project located additional River Station structural remains, artifacts, and deposits, and in 2004 the California State Parks Department began an archaeological survey and testing program in anticipation of construction of interim public improvements. These studies provided a more detailed identification and analysis of the existing archaeological resources located at the site. As a result, further steps have been taken to preserve and acknowledge the history of the site.




September 2011

According to the State Historic Park EIR, the design intent of the park is to “make this historical site a place of inspiration, reflection, and appreciation of history and nature through the interpretation of the Los Angeles River, focusing on its role in shaping the story of Los Angeles.”

Currently, California State Parks Department is seeking long-term financing for full development of the park and design continues to be managed out of its Southern California development office in San Diego. Plans include building a place for cultural events, an open meadow for recreation, and facilities interpreting the cultural significance of the site to the City of Los Angeles and region. In addition, the park is proposed to contain areas of natural habitat with the goal of someday having a physical connection to the Los Angeles River.

The Los Angeles River

The Los Angeles River forms part of the western edge of the Project Area and also bisects the southern part of the site. The river, which runs 51 miles through Los Angeles County, has played a significant role in the growth and development of the City of Los Angeles. Historically, settlers from all eras located near the banks of the river in order to make use of the water source. However, as the City of Los Angeles grew, industrial uses, such as rail yards and warehouses, began to occupy more of the river’s edge, limiting access for local area residents and the general public.

The US Army Corps of Engineers channeled and cemented portions of the river starting in the late 1938 through the 1960s for flood control purposes. These actions completely changed the ecology and landscape of the river from a natural to a built environment. The river area no longer reflected the natural environment but instead became a municipal infrastructure system containing several structured channels. The paving over of the river banks affected the surrounding communities and the City of Los Angles as a whole in terms of aesthetics and use. Over the last decade the City of Los Angeles has taken steps to perform a systemic analysis of the river, its function, and adjacent use. One major goal of the revitalization of the Los Angeles River is the creation of greater public access and the development of more open space and recreational opportunities along its edge. In furthering these goals the City of Los Angeles adopted the Los Angeles River Revitalization Master Plan (2007), which calls for a 32-mile greenway stretching from Canoga Park through downtown Los Angeles.

Los Angeles River Greenway Trail

The Los Angeles River Greenway Trail is a series of trails, parks, and natural land forms located near the Los Angeles River. Interpretive panels associated with the Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail and sculptural installations with design references to the wildlife of the river can be found throughout the trail.

Los Angeles River Center and Gardens

Los Angeles River Center and Gardens is located in the northernmost edge of the Project Area. The Center provides meeting spaces for community forums, is a location for local cultural celebrations and events, and is a hub for nonprofit organizations that promote environmental protection and education. The visitor center provides self-guided tours related to the history and wildlife of the Los Angeles River. It is owned and operated by the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, and several environmental and parkspace advocacy nonprofit groups are located there, including Friends of the Los Angeles River, Northeast Trees, the Los Angeles Conservation Corps, and the National Parks Service Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program.




September 2011

Elysian Park

Elysian Park (544 acres), founded in 1886, is the oldest public park in the City of Los Angeles and the second largest after Griffith Park. It is located just northeast of the Project Area and includes the Dodger Stadium facilities. Amenities at the park include baseball fields, Buena Vista Point, Carob Tree Grove, Chavez Ravine Arboretum, Elysian Maintenance Office, Grace E. Simons Lodge, Grace E. Simons Memorial Sculpture, Jones Memorial, Palm Hill, Point Grand View, Portola Trail Historical Monument, Radio Hill, and Victory Memorial Grove, a World War I Memorial. Picnic areas include the Buena Vista Meadow Picnic Area, Elysian Therapeutic Center Picnic Area, Ficus Tree Grove Picnic Area, Monticello De Leo Politti Picnic Area, and the Solano Canyon Picnic Area/Community Garden.

Rio de Los Angeles State Park

Rio de Los Angeles State Park is located in northeast Los Angeles, approximately 2.5 miles north of downtown and about two miles north of State Historic Park and proximate to the Project Area. The park is located next to the historic Union Pacific Rail Yard (Taylor Yard complex), between the Elysian Park Hills on the southwest and the Repetto Hills to the northeast. The Rio de Los Angeles State Park is one of the largest undeveloped areas along the Los Angeles River.

There is a consensus among the planning community and local organizations working on open space issues that it is important to link the Rio de Los Angeles State Park to the State Historic Park in order to create a large, regional network of greenspace along the Los Angeles River.

Scenic Roads and Highways

The Pasadena Freeway/State Route 110 (SR 110), also known as the Arroyo Seco Parkway, is designated as a National Scenic Byway by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) because it meets the criteria for historic significance. The Arroyo Seco Parkway stretches from the four-level interchange in downtown Los Angeles to Glenarm Street in the City of Pasadena. Officials at Caltrans note that

State Route 110 is not a California Scenic Highway. However, it has been designated by the Legislature as a Historic Parkway (PM 25.7 to 31.9). By statute definition (Section 280 in the Streets and Highways Code) an Historic Parkway is a freeway that has been constructed prior to 1945, has been recognized by the Office of Historic Preservation in the State Department of Parks as having some feature(s) of historical significance that existed or occurred at the time of construction, is bounded on one or both sides by federal, state, or local park land, Native American lands, monuments, or other open space, greenbelt areas, natural habitat or wildlife preserves, and is traversed by not less than 40,000 vehicles per day on an annual basis.

This section of Route 110 has also been designated as a National Scenic Byway by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). It meets the National Scenic Byway criteria because of its historic significance. (Caltrans, 2009)




September 2011

9.1.7 Regulatory Context

Table 9-3 provides a list of laws, regulations, and executive orders related to the protection of cultural resources.

Table 9-3: Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Executive Orders

Type Description

Federal Law

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended 2000 National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended 1994 Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act, 1974 American Indian Religious Freedom Act, 1978 Archaeological Resource Protection Act, 1979 The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 1990

State Law CEQA Section 5024.1 (Defines Eligibility to California Register of Historic Resources)

Executive Order

Executive Order 11593, Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment, 1971 Executive Order 13007, Indian Sacred Sites Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, 2000 White House Memorandum on Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal Governments (April 29, 1994)

Regulations and Guidelines

14 CCR 15126.4 (Mitigation); CEQA Guidelines 15126.4(b)(3) (Mitigation of Found Resources); PRC 21083.2-21084.1 (Mitigation of Found Resources) 36 CFR Part 60, National Register of Historic Places 36 CFR Part 79, Duration of Federally Owned and Administered Archaeological Collections 36 CFR Part 800, Implementing Regulations, including Section 106 CEQA Guidelines Section 15064 et al.; PRC 5024.1 (Effects Definitions) National Register Bulletins (multiple) PRC 5024.1; CEQA Guidelines 15064.5 (Defines Eligibility to California Register of Historic Resources) PRC 5097.94-98; California Health and Safety Code 7050.5 (Discovery of Human Remains) Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation

Notes: CCR = California Code of Regulations; CEQA = California Environmental Quality Act CFR = Code of Federal Regulations; PRC = California Public Resources Code

Source: Arup North America Ltd.




September 2011

9.1.7.1 National Register of Historic Places

The NRHP is the national official list of cultural resources worthy of preservation (NRHP, 2009). Authorized under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and administered by the National Park Service (US Department of the Interior), the NRHP is part of a program to identify, evaluate, and protect historic and archeological resources. Properties listed in the NRHP include districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that are significant in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture. To be listed on the NRHP, a property must be shown to be “significant” at the local, state, or national level under one or more of the following criteria:

Criterion A (Event): That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.

Criterion B (Person): That are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.

Criterion C (Design/Construction): That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction.

Criterion D (Information Potential): That has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

A property must also possess historic “integrity,” defined as “the ability of a property to convey its significance.” The NRHP criteria recognize seven qualities that define integrity: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association:

Location refers to the place where the historic property was constructed.

Design is the combination of architectural elements that create the form, structure, and style of the property.

Setting is the physical environment surrounding a historic property.

Materials are the original physical components that were combined during a particular period in time and in a particular pattern to form the historic property.

Workmanship is the physical evidence of the building crafts and skills of a particular culture during a given period.

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 important historic event or person and a historic property.

Special considerations apply to moved or reconstructed properties; cemeteries, religious or commemorative properties; and properties achieving significance within the past 50 years. Properties listed in the NRHP are automatically listed in the CRHR. There are four buildings or structures in the Project Area or immediate vicinity that are listed in the NRHP as shown in Table 9-2.




September 2011

9.1.7.2 California Register of Historic Resources

The CRHR is the authoritative guide to the state’s historical resources by which properties are considered significant for CEQA purposes (CEQA, 2009). The CRHR includes resources listed in, or formally determined eligible for listing in, the NRHP, California State Landmarks, and Points of Historical Interest. The OHP maintains a list of historic resources by county in the Directory of Properties, Historic Property Data File. A building or structure identified in the OHP Directory with a rating of 1 or 2 (that is on or determined eligible for the NRHP) is considered to be “listed” on the CRHR.

Properties of local significance that have been designated under a local preservation ordinance (e.g., local landmarks), or that have been identified in a local historical resources inventory may also be eligible for listing in the CRHR and are presumed to be significant resources for purposes of CEQA. In order for a resource to meet the criteria for listing in the CRHR, it must satisfy the following three provisions:

1) It meets one of the following four criteria of significance set forth in California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5024.1(c) and CEQA Guidelines 15064.5:

(a) The resource “is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage.”

(b) The resource “is associated with the lives of persons important in our past.”

(c) The resource “embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values.”

(d) The resource “has yielded, or may be likely to yield information important in prehistory or history” (this criterion applies primarily to archaeological sites).

2) The resource retains historic integrity.

3) It is 50 years old or older (except where it can be demonstrated that sufficient time has passed to understand the historical importance of the resource).

The CEQA Guidelines indicate that projects that are consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings generally “shall be considered as mitigated to a level of less than a significant impact on the historic resource” (Section 15064.5(b)(3)). There are nine buildings or structures in the Project Area and vicinity that are listed in, or have been formally determined eligible for listing in the CRHR as shown in Table 9-2.




September 2011

9.2 Standards of Significance

Criteria for determining significant impacts associated with cultural resources have been developed based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines and any relevant agency thresholds. For the purposes of this Draft EIR, implementation of the Proposed Alternative may have significant impacts on cultural resources if it would do any of the following:

Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource, pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines.

Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.

Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of a formal cemetery or burial ground.

Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historic resource, as defined in Section 15064.5.

Following are the standards set forth in the City of Los Angeles CEQA Thresholds Guide that apply to cultural resources:

Paleontological Resources

The determination of significance with respect to a potential impact to paleontological resources is to be made on a case-by-case basis, considering the following factors:

Whether, or the degree to which, the project might result in the permanent loss of, or loss of access to, a paleontological resource

Whether the paleontological resource is of regional or statewide significance

Archaeological Resources

A project would normally have a significant impact on archaeological resources if it could disturb, damage, or degrade an archaeological resource or its setting is found to be important under the criteria of CEQA because it does any of the following:

Is associated with an event or person of recognized importance in California or American prehistory or of recognized scientific importance in prehistory

Can provide information which is both of demonstrable public interest and useful in addressing scientifically consequential and reasonable archaeological research questions

Has a special or particular quality, such as the oldest, best, largest, or last surviving example of its kind

Is at least 100 years old5 and possesses substantial stratigraphic integrity

Involves important research questions that historical research has shown can be answered only with archaeological methods

5 Although the CEQA criteria state that "important archaeological resources" are those which are at least 100

years old, the California Register of Historic Places provides that any site found eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Resources will automatically be included within the California Register of Historic Places and subject to all protections thereof. The National Register of Historic Resources requires that a site or structure be at least 50 years old.




September 2011

Historical Resources

A project would normally have a significant impact on historical resources if it would result in a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource. A substantial adverse change in significance occurs if the project involves any of the following:

Demolition of a significant resource

Relocation that does not maintain the integrity and significance of a significant resource

Conversion, rehabilitation, or alteration of a significant resource which does not conform to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings

Construction that reduces the integrity or significance of important resources on the site or in the vicinity

Also applicable are local plans and policies addressing cultural resources. The City of Los Angeles General Plan (General Plan) policies and other applicable plans and policies that pertain to cultural resources, and that apply to the Project Area, are identified and discussed in the Chapter 3, Land Use. General Plan policies also are addressed in this section, as relevant to the significance criteria noted above. In addition, the CHC works with the OHP to identify historic and cultural monuments throughout the City of Los Angeles.

9.3 Potential Cultural Resources Impacts

This section begins with a description of assumptions that have been incorporated in the analysis of potential cultural resources impacts. Then potentially significant impacts of implementing the Proposed Alternative when compared with the existing conditions in the Project Area are presented, followed by impacts of the Proposed Alternative that are considered to be less than significant. Impacts that are considered to be significant are accompanied by an explanation of why the application of a standard resulted in a determination that the impact would be significant. When a significant impact has been set forth, mitigation measures to address that potential impact are also presented, along with a determination of whether the impact will continue to be significant after implementation of the mitigation measure. The section concludes with a description of the potential impacts of the No Project Alternative.

9.3.1 Assumptions

As discussed in the introduction, and in further detail in other chapters of this Draft EIR (Chapter 3, Land Use; Chapter 7, Hydrology and Water Quality; and Chapter 10, Hazardous Materials), the Project Area has been highly disturbed by previous activities, including highway, railroad, industrial/commercial, and residential development, which involved extensive disturbance to area soils and historic landforms. Although the Project Area has been extensively disturbed over the past 150 years or more, any construction associated with implementation of the Proposed Alternative has the potential to affect the historic integrity of cultural resources.

The evaluation of cultural records for the Project Area took into account provisions outlined in the City of Los Angeles CEQA Thresholds Guide noted above and provisions noted in the Specific Plan document that is a component of the Proposed Alternative. A goal of the Proposed Alternative is to respect historically significant buildings, including massing and scale, while at the same time encouraging innovative architectural design and providing exceptions for identified historic resources related to ground-floor-use window design, lot area, open space, and solar-power systems in certain districts.




September 2011

For the purposes of this Draft EIR, the evaluation of a historic resource includes properties within a historic district that are or appear eligible for the NRHP. The evaluation employs a rating system based on the following criteria:

1) Visual Quality/Design: Evaluation of exterior design, interior design, materials and construction, style or type, supporting elements, feelings of association, and importance of designer

2) History/Association: Association of person or organization, the importance of any event, association with patterns of history, and the age of the building

3) Context: Continuity and familiarity of the building within the City of Los Angeles, neighborhood, or district

4) Integrity and Reversibility: Evaluation of the building’s condition, its exterior and interior alterations, and any structural removals

The following are the assumptions that have been applied in the analysis of potential cultural resources impacts of implementing the Proposed Alternative in the Project Area. The assumptions are based on information gathered during the planning process to develop the Proposed Alternative. This information has been incorporated into plan concepts as a way to avoid or minimize potential environmental consequences.

Evaluation of eligibility would be based on the criteria for the NRHP and the CRHR.

Prior to any future development of the site, consultation would be initiated with the OHP and other interested parties, including the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC).

Construction activities would use standard best management practices and other reasonable care to prevent impacts to known eligible archaeological resources.

Historic architectural resources exist at the site, and therefore impacts to historic architectural resources could occur as a result of implementing the plan concepts.

In response to the City of Los Angeles CEQA Thresholds Guide regarding historical resources, implementation of the Proposed Alternative would conform with the mission of OHR and the findings and recommendations of the Los Angeles Historic Resources Survey (SurveyLA) used to identify cultural resources and develop a comprehensive preservation program.

Key goals of OHR include the following:

Develop a pioneering citywide historic resources survey Integrate historic preservation fully into Los Angeles’ planning process Serve as an expert resource on preservation for the Department of City Planning and

other City departments Provide responsive customer service in conducting historic preservation reviews Create additional incentives and creative partnerships for historic preservation

In support of this effort, owners of qualified historic properties are also entitled to refer to the State Historical Building Code (SHBC) for the rehabilitation of structures (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 8, supplants the Uniform Building Code [UBC]). The SHBC allows greater flexibility in the enforcement of code requirements with respect to requirements for plumbing, electrical, structural, seismic, fire safety, energy requirements, and disabled access.




September 2011

Based on the results of the cultural records search, the Project Area and the surrounding ½-mile radius are sensitive for archaeological and historic built-environment resources. As plans for specific development projects are presented for approval the City of Los Angeles should require that a qualified archaeologist and architectural historian be retained to review any project activities on a case-by-case basis to determine the location of each resource and the type of resources that are present that may be affected by each project. Areas that have not been previously surveyed for cultural resources should be studied by qualified consultants prior to the approval of specific project plans. It should be noted that in some cases, previous studies may be now considered out-of-date and will need to be reevaluated. It is also recommended that the NAHC should be consulted to identify if any additional traditional cultural properties or other sacred sites are known to be in the area.

9.3.2 Potential Cultural Resources Impacts of the Proposed Alternative

9.3.2.1 Potentially Significant Cultural Resources Impacts of the Proposed Alternative

Impact Cultural Resources 1: Implementation of the Proposed Alternative has the potential to disturb cultural resources of the Project Area. The development of new buildings, structures, or infrastructure as a result of the Proposed Alternative could cause adverse changes to currently unknown cultural resources in the Project Area, potentially including paleontological or archaeological resources pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064.5 or 21083.2(g), or the disturbance of any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemetery or burial ground. This potential impact is considered to be significant.

To date, no prehistoric or archaeological sites have been identified or designated within the boundaries of the Project Area. The search that was conducted for the State Historic Park EIR identified that 23 cultural resource studies had been conducted within the vicinity of the State Historic Park but no recorded prehistoric archaeological sites were found within ½-mile radius of the proposed park. As a result, the Project Area would not have a direct significant impact on paleontological or archaeological resources.

However, if during development a specific project would adversely affect archaeological resources, a lead agency shall first determine whether the site is a historical resource, as defined by established criteria. If it is determined that the archaeological site is a historical resource, the provisions of California PRC Section 21084.1 apply. If an archaeological site does not meet the criteria but does meet the definition of a “unique archaeological resource” in Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21083.2 (Archaeological Resources), the site must be treated in accordance with the provisions of Section 21083.2. The PRC section 21083.2, subdivision (g), states that “unique archaeological resource” means an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria:

1) Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information

2) Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type

3) Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person




September 2011

Mitigation Measure Cultural Resources 1(a): In the event that any prehistoric or historic subsurface cultural resources are discovered during ground disturbing activities associated with implementation of the Proposed Alternative, all work shall be halted and the project sponsor and/or lead agency shall consult with a qualified archaeologist or paleontologist to assess the significance of the find according to the CEQA definition of a historical or unique archaeological resource. With the implementation of these mitigation measures this potential impact will be reduced to a level that is less than significant.

If any archaeological materials are encountered during the course of project development, all further development activity shall halt and

The services of an archaeologist shall then be secured by contacting the South Central Coastal Information Center (657-278-5395) located at California State University (CSU) Fullerton, or a member of the Society of Professional Archaeologists (SOPA), or a SOPA-qualified archaeologist, who shall assess the discovered material(s) and prepare a survey, study, or report evaluating the impact.

The archaeologist's survey, study, or report shall contain a recommendation(s), if necessary, for the preservation, conservation, or relocation of the resource.

The applicant shall comply with the recommendations of the evaluating archaeologist, as contained in the survey, study, or report.

Project development activities may resume once copies of the archaeological survey, study or report are submitted to

South Central Coastal Information Center Department of Anthropology McCarthy Hall 477 CSU Fullerton 800 North State College Boulevard Fullerton, CA 92834

Prior to the issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall submit a letter to the case file indicating what, if any, archaeological reports have been submitted, or a statement indicating that no material was discovered.

A covenant and agreement binding the applicant to this condition shall be recorded prior to issuance of a grading permit.




September 2011

Mitigation Measure Cultural Resources 1(b): In the event that human skeletal remains are uncovered in the Project Area during construction or earth moving activities, all work shall immediately halt and the Los Angeles Coroner shall be contacted to evaluate the remains, by following the procedures and protocols pursuant to Section 15064.5 (e)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines. With the implementation of these mitigation measures this potential impact will be reduced to a level that is less than significant.

If any paleontological materials are encountered during the course of project development, all further development activities shall halt and

The services of a paleontologist shall then be secured by contacting the Center for Public Paleontology — the University of Southern California, University of California at Los Angeles, CSU Los Angeles, CSU Long Beach, or the Los Angeles County Natural History Museum. The paleontologist shall assess the discovered material(s) and prepare a survey, study, or report evaluating the impact.

The paleontologist's survey, study, or report shall contain a recommendation(s), if necessary, for the preservation, conservation, or relocation of the resource.

The applicant shall comply with the recommendations of the evaluating paleontologist, as contained in the survey, study, or report.

Project development activities may resume once copies of the paleontological survey, study, or report are submitted to the Los Angeles County Natural History Museum.

Prior to the issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall submit a letter to the case file indicating what, if any, paleontological reports have been submitted, or a statement indicating that no material was discovered.


Impact Cultural Resources 2: The development of individual construction projects through implementation of the Proposed Alternative could result in an adverse change in the significance of a historic building or resource, as defined in Section 15064.5. This potential impact is considered to be significant.

The CHC, through the Office of Historic Resources has identified historic buildings and structures within or near the Project Area boundaries as shown in Table 9-2. Three of the sites listed in Table 9-2 are noted in the NRHP or CRHR. Two of these sites, the Bruno Street Granite Block Paving and the Capitol Milling Company, are just outside the Project Area and are considered to be eligible for consideration. Of the historic sites within the Project Area boundaries, none are planned for any development, reuse, or demolition as a direct result of implementation of the Proposed Alternative. Nevertheless, there exists the potential that in the future new development projects to implement the Proposed Alternative could affect the physical character and cultural value of existing historical structures as referenced in Appendix 9.




September 2011

Mitigation Measure Cultural Resources 2: Proposed development projects that could potentially impact historic structures or resources (this relates to currently identified and potential historic structures and resources) shall demonstrate compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historical Resources by the following measures:

Prior to the issuance of any permit, the project shall obtain clearance from the Department of Cultural Affairs for the proposed work.

A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment.

The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic material or alteration of features and spaces shall be avoided.

Each property shall 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 buildings, shall not be undertaken.

Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved.

Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of skilled craftsmanship which characterize an historic property shall be preserved.

The State CEQA Guidelines indicate that projects that are consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings generally “shall be considered as mitigated to a level of less than a significant impact on the historic resource” (Section 15064.5(b)(3)). With the implementation of this mitigation measures, this potential impact will be reduced to a level that is less than significant.

Review of the projects that could potentially impact historic structures or resources prior to approval of any permits will be required in the Project Area as part of the Proposed Alternative. Conducting a review as a condition of approval is an effective way to protect historic structures and resources.

In addition the following mitigations should be applied as appropriate to specific projects implemented within the Project area as a result of the Proposed Alternative:




September 2011

Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive historic feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities, and where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence.

Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible.

Significant archaeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken.

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

New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall 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.

Environmental impacts may result from project implementation due to discovery of unrecorded archaeological resources. However, the potential impacts will be mitigated to a less than significant level by the following measures:

If any archaeological materials are encountered during the course of project development, all further development activity shall halt and

a) The services of an archaeologist shall then be secured by contacting the South Central Coastal Information Center (657-278-5395) located at California State University Fullerton, or a member of SOPA or a SOPA-qualified archaeologist, who shall assess the discovered material(s) and prepare a survey, study, or report evaluating the impact.

b) The archaeologist's survey, study, or report shall contain a recommendation(s), if necessary, for the preservation, conservation, or relocation of the resource.

c) The applicant shall comply with the recommendations of the evaluating archaeologist, as contained in the survey, study, or report.

Project development activities may resume once copies of the archaeological survey, study or report are submitted to:

SCCIC Department of Anthropology McCarthy Hall 477 CSU Fullerton 800 North State College Boulevard Fullerton, CA 92834 Prior to the issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall submit a

letter to the case file indicating what, if any, archaeological reports have




September 2011

been submitted, or a statement indicating that no material was discovered.


Environmental impacts may result from project implementation due to discovery of unrecorded paleontological resources. However, the potential impacts will be mitigated to a less than significant level by the following measures:

If any paleontological materials are encountered during the course of project development, all further development activities shall halt and

a) The services of a paleontologist shall then be secured by contacting the Center for Public Paleontology — USC, UCLA, California State University Los Angeles, California State University Long Beach, or the Los Angeles County Natural History Museum — who shall assess the discovered material(s) and prepare a survey, study, or report evaluating the impact.

b) The paleontologist's survey, study, or report shall contain a recommendation(s), if necessary, for the preservation, conservation, or relocation of the resource.

c) The applicant shall comply with the recommendations of the evaluating paleontologist, as contained in the survey, study, or report.

d) Project development activities may resume once copies of the paleontological survey, study, or report are submitted to the Los Angeles County Natural History Museum.

Prior to the issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall submit a letter to the case file indicating what, if any, paleontological reports have been submitted, or a statement indicating that no material was discovered.


Environmental impacts may result from project implementation due to discovery of unrecorded human remains.

In the event that human remains are discovered during excavation activities, the following procedure shall be observed:

a) Stop immediately and contact the County Coroner:

1104 N. Mission Road Los Angeles, CA 90033 323-343-0512 (8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday) or 323-343-0714 (After Hours, Saturday, Sunday, and Holidays)

b) The coroner has two working days to examine human remains after being notified by the responsible person. If the remains are Native American, the Coroner has 24 hours to notify the Native American Heritage Commission.

c) The Native American Heritage Commission will immediately notify the person it believes to be the most likely descendent of the deceased Native American.




September 2011

d) The most likely descendent has 48 hours to make recommendations to the owner, or representative, for the treatment or disposition, with proper dignity, of the human remains and grave goods.

e) If the descendent does not make recommendations within 48 hours the owner shall reinter the remains in an area of the property secure from further disturbance, or;

f) If the owner does not accept the descendant’s recommendations, the owner or the descendent may request mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission.

Discuss and confer means the meaningful and timely discussion careful consideration of the views of each party.

9.3.2.2 Potential Cultural Resources Impacts of the Proposed Alternative That Are Less Than Significant

Impact Cultural Resources 3: Implementation of the Proposed Alternative could have an adverse impact on historic and ethnographic resources. The development of new buildings, structures, or infrastructure as a result of the Proposed Alternative could cause adverse changes to currently unknown cultural resources at the site, potentially including cultural resources pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064.5. This potential impact is considered to be less than significant.

The Project Area has played a historically important role in the history of Los Angeles. Located at the meeting place of two waterways, the Los Angeles River and the Arroyo Seco, the area has long been at the crossroads of the cultural, social, and historic development of Southern California. Pre-European contact sites included villages, fishing sites, and places of burial. The Spanish/Mexican period saw the growth of townships and urban settlement, which accelerated with the introduction at the century of American interests during the 19th century. The City has identified over 870 existing Historic-Cultural Monuments throughout the City of Los Angeles. Located within the Project Area boundaries are portions of the first irrigation and water supply system for Southern California, the Zanja Madre, and the region’s first main line railroad hub developed by Southern Pacific.

Implementation of the Proposed Alternative does not include the development of buildings or infrastructures that would impede on the remaining Zanja Madre resources in the area, and the development of the 32-acre State Historic Park can be seen as a community benefit that recognizes the historic importance of the area including the Southern Pacific facilities. Based on the above, the impact on cultural resources is determined to be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure Cultural Resources 3: None required.




September 2011

9.3.3 Potential Cultural Resources Impacts of the No Project Alternative

The analysis of the No Project Alternative provided in this Draft EIR assumes no development within the Project Area that does not conform to the existing General Plan and that existing and proposed conditions would continue into the future, as per the General Plan forecast.

With the No Project Alternative, existing zoning, street designations, and transportation and infrastructure improvements within the Project Area would remain unchanged. Based on current demographic trends, it is assumed that by 2035, the No Project Alternative would have a population of 5,512 residents, 1,635 dwelling units, and 7,940 jobs. For comparison purposes, the Project Area currently has 4,802 residents, 1,266 dwelling units, and 6,791 jobs.

Given this level of development, no new significant development or changes to the Project Area would occur with the No Project Alternative. Therefore, the less-than-significant (after implementation of standard conditions) impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources that would occur due to subsurface activities associated preparation that would occur with implementation of the Proposed Alternative would be avoided with this alternative.

9.3.3.1 Potentially Significant Cultural Resources Impacts of the No Project Alternative

None identified.

9.3.3.2 Potential Cultural Resources Impacts of the No Project Alternative That Are Less Than Significant

None identified.




September 2011

9.4 References

Bancroft, H. H. (1888). California Pastoral. San Francisco: The History Company.

Bancroft, H. H. (1964). Register of Pioneer Inhabitants of California, 1542 to 1848. Los Angeles, CA: Dawson’s Book Shop.

Cadd, D. (2009). State Scenic Highway Coordinator, Landscape Architecture Program, Caltrans, May 5, 2009. Personal Communication.

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). (1970). Retrieved from www.ceres.ca.gov/topic/env_law/ceqa/guidelines/

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)/Historical Resources. (2009). Retrieved from www.ceres.ca.gov/ceqa/

California Office of Historic Preservation. (nd.). Retrieved March 7, 2008 from www.ohp.parks.ca.gov

Camarillo, A. (1984). Chicanos in California: A History of Mexican Americans in California. Sparks: Materials for Today’s Learning, Inc.

Cogstone Resource Management Inc. (2007). The Archeology and History of the Zanja Madre Below Broadway, City of Los Angeles, CA. Prepared for Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

Davis, M. (1992). City of Quartz: Excavating the Future in Los Angeles. New York: Vintage Books.

Foster, J. (2002). Archeological Inventory for Soil Remediation, Cornfield Rail Yard Project, City of Los Angeles, California. Greenwood and Associates for the Trust for Public Land. On file at the South Central Coastal Information Center, California State University, Fullerton.

Garcia, E. (2008). Preservation Planner, Los Angeles Office of Historic Resources, September 15, 2008. Personal Communication.

Griswald del Castillo, R. (1982). The LA Barrio, 1850–1890: A Social History. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Gumprecht, B. (1999). The Los Angeles River: Its Life, Death and Possible Rebirth. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Gutierrez, R. A., & Orsi, R. J. (1998). Contested Eden: California before the Gold Rush. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Hofsommer, D. L. (1986). The Southern Pacific: 1901–1985. Array College Station: Texas A&M University Press.

Jackson, R. H., & Castillo, E. (1995). Indians, Franciscans, and Spanish Colonization: The Impact of the Mission System on the California Indians. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press.

Los Angeles Cultural Heritage Commission (CHC). Retrieved from http://www.culturela.org/historic/index.html

National Park Service. (2006). “Constructing the Future. National Register of Historic Places.” MTA Quarterly (Winter). Retrieved April 9, 2009 from www.nps.gov/nr




September 2011

Office of Historic Resources. SurveyLA. Retrieved from http://www.preservation.lacity.org/survey/

Ripaldi, C. P. (2009). Principal Environmental Specialist, email communication, [email protected], May 27, 2009.

Sánchez, G. J. (1995). Becoming Mexican American: Ethnicity, Culture, and Identity in Chicano Los Angeles, 1900–1945. Oxford University Press, p.71.

The South Central Coastal Information Center. Retrieved from http://anthro.fullerton.edu/sccic/

Steen, F. F. (2001). Local California Chronology, Department of English, UC Santa Barbara. Retrieved from http://cogweb.ucla.edu/Chumash/California_Chumash.html

United States Census. (2000). Los Angeles City Planning Department, Demographics Research Unit.

Warren, C. N. (1984). “The Desert Region.” In California Archaeology. Edited by M. J. Moratto, pp. 339–430. Orlando, Florida: Academic Press.

Woo, M. (2007). The Cornfield: New Ideas for a Sustainable Urban Park. Annenberg Foundation.

Planning Documents City of Los Angeles

Northeast Los Angeles Community Plan, 1999. Central City North Community Plan, 2000. Los Angeles River Revitalization Master Plan, 2007. Cultural Heritage Masterplan, 2000.

City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works/Bureau of Engineering, US Army Corps of Engineer Los Angeles District/Planning Division and Tetra Tech Inc

Los Angeles River Revitalization Master Plan EIR, 2007.

State of California, State Parks Cornfield State Park Advisory Committee Recommendations Report, 2003. Los Angeles State Historic Park General Plan and EIR, 2005. Rio de Los Angeles State Park Preliminary General Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report, 2005.

Ch09 CulturalResources 2011-09-09 yo...City of Los Angeles Draft Environmental Impact Report –...

Documents

Transcript of Ch09 CulturalResources 2011-09-09 yo...City of Los Angeles Draft Environmental Impact Report –...