torrance tract historic preservation plan

TORRANCE TRACT HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN

TORRANCE, CALIFORNIAMAY 2018

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

CITY COUNCIL Patrick J. Furey, Mayor

Heidi Ann Ashcraft

Tim Goodrich

Mike Griffiths

Milton S. Herring

Geoff Rizzo

Kurt Weideman

CITY CLERK Rebecca Poirier

CITY TREASURER Dana Cortez

PLANNING COMMISSION Robert Rudolph, Chair

Steven Polcari, Vice Chair

Sarah D’anjou

Mary Lou French

Scott Gobble

G. Rick Marshall

Richard Tsao

CITY ATTORNEY John Fellows, III

Patrick Sullivan

CITY STAFF Jeff Gibson, Director of Community

Development Department

Linda Cessna, Deputy Director

Gregg D. Lodan, Planning and Environmental

Manager

Carolyn Chun, Project Manager / Senior

Planning Associate

Kevin T. Joe, Planning Associate

Sunny Lai, Systems Analyst - GIS

PREPARED BY: Page & Turnbull

417 S. Hill Street, Suite 211

Los Angeles, CA 90013

www.page-turnbull.com

John Lesak, Principal

Flora Chou, Project Manager/Cultural Resource

Planner

Kimberly McCarron, Historic Architect

Josh Bevan, GIS Mapping

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1

MISSION STATEMENT ................................................................................................ 4

WHY PRESERVATION MATTERS ................................................................................. 4

PREPARING THE DOCUMENT .................................................................................... 5

2. HISTORY AND CHARACTER ................................................................................. 6 TORRANCE TRACT HISTORY ..................................................................................... 6

NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS ....................................................................... 11

ARCHITECTURAL STYLES ........................................................................................ 13

3. PAST AND CURRENT PRESERVATION EFFORTS .................................................... 15 1979 HISTORIC RESOURCE SURVEY .......................................................................... 15

SMALL LOT, LOW MEDIUM OVERLAY ZONE ............................................................. 15

OLMSTED TRACT SURVEY AND HISTORIC CONTEXT STATEMENT ............................ 16

TORRANCE TRACT OVERLAY ZONE ......................................................................... 20

HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE .................................................................... 20

4. HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN THE TORRANCE TRACT .......................................... 23 TORRANCE REGISTER OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ..................................................... 23

BENEFITS OF HISTORIC DESIGNATION .................................................................... 25

TORRANCE TRACT OVERLAY ZONE VS. HISTORIC DISTRICTS .................................. 27

PROCESS FOR HISTORIC DESIGNATION ................................................................... 30

WHAT MAKES A GOOD HISTORIC DISTRICT? ........................................................... 34

CONCENTRATIONS OF CONTRIBUTING RESOURCES FOR POTENTIAL HISTORIC

DISTRICTS ...................................................................................................... 36

THEMATIC HISTORIC DISTRICTS .............................................................................. 40

5. PROJECT REVIEWS IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS ......................................................... 41 MINOR PROJECT REVIEW ......................................................................................... 42

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (C OF A) ......................................................... 45

CERTIFICATE OF DEMOLITION ................................................................................ 48

CERTIFICATE OF ECONOMIC HARDSHIP .................................................................. 51

6. DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR PROJECTS IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS....................... 53 PROJECTS INVOLVING PARTIAL DEMOLITION .......................................................... 53

NEW CONSTRUCTION IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS ......................................................... 53

THREE COMMON PROJECTS IN THE TORRANCE TRACT ........................................... 55

7. RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................ 62

8. SOURCES CITED ............................................................................................... 63

9. APPENDIX ........................................................................................................ 64 A. 2014 OLMSTED TRACT SURVEY ..........................................................................

B. RELEVANT ORDINANCES ....................................................................................

C. NATIONAL AND STATE PRESERVATION PROGRAMS ............................................

D. SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS FOR THE TREATMENT OF

HISTORIC PROPERTIES .......................................................................................

E. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION

F. PRESERVATION RESOURCES ...............................................................................

G. ABBREVIATIONS AND NOTES .............................................................................

Report is best viewed as a two-page spread with cover sheet and printed double-sided.

May 2018 - 1 - Torrance Tract Final Historic Preservation Plan

1. INTRODUCTION

Torrance has long recognized the original, historic core of the city

as an important part of its identity. Now known as the Torrance

Tract (also as the Old Torrance Tract or Olmsted Tract), the city’s

core was developed by Jared Sidney Torrance in the early

twentieth century as a planned company town for the oil industry

(Figure 1). To lay out the town, Mr. Torrance retained the famed

Olmsted Brothers, sons of master landscape architect Frederick

Law Olmsted. The Olmsted Brothers’ plan divided the

approximately one square mile area into three districts, creating

an area for industry, an area for commercial uses, and an area for

housing defined by a central green. The new town was well

connected to the greater Los Angeles region by railroad and

streetcar lines. The Pacific Electric streetcar line carried people

and goods to and from Torrance with arrival into town punctuated

by Torrance’s signature arched bridge, designed by noted

Southern California architect Irving Gill (Figure 2).

Figure 1: Brochure map showing the planned residential and commercial areas surrounded by industry. Source: Torrance, The Modern Industrial City, 1913.


Over time, the industrial uses found within the Torrance Tract

have evolved and while many of the commercial businesses and

buildings have come and gone, the residential areas have

remained remarkably constant. Primarily developed between

1912 and 1945, the housing stock ranges from grand houses

lining Post Avenue and the El Prado central green to modest

cottages, bungalows, and apartment. The pre-World War II

neighborhood character can still be seen and felt through original

built features: buildings, streets, and landscapes.

Since the 1970s and 1980s, Torrance has approached protecting

the unique character of the Torrance Tract’s residential areas in

mostly informal, voluntary ways. Demolition of older homes that

contributed to the tract’s character was discouraged, but not

prevented. Though new development of properties was

encouraged to be sensitive-- to the street pattern, setbacks, and

scale of the surrounding neighborhood-- compatibility with the

community’s physical character was not required. On some

blocks, accumulated changes over time have created an

inconsistent mix within the streetscape; on other blocks, the sense

of an early twentieth century neighborhood has already been lost.

A survey of the Torrance Tract conducted by the Torrance

Historical Society between 2013 and 2014 documented where

relatively unaltered pre-1945 homes remained, but also where

they no longer exist.

Figure 2: Pacific Electric Railroad Bridge designed by Irving Gill, as seen in 1988. Source: National Register of Historic Places nomination.


In response to the Torrance Historical Society’s survey results,

and to address development pressures, the Torrance City Council

enacted a temporary Torrance Tract Overlay Zone in March 2016

that became permanent in December 2017. As a planning tool,

the Torrance Tract Overlay Zone extended an existing Planning

Commission review process long used in one portion of the

Torrance Tract to about 850 relatively unaltered, pre-1945

residential properties throughout the Torrance Tract boundaries.

The overlay zone covers the area bounded by Dominguez Street

to the north, Western Avenue to the east, Plaza del Amo to the

south and Crenshaw Boulevard to the west (Figure 3).

At the same time, City Council initiated efforts to establish a

historic preservation ordinance to formally recognize and protect

historic buildings and historic districts. The preservation ordinance

offers those who own historic buildings, or live in an area where

there is a concentration of historic buildings, a more proactive and

direct tool to manage change. This Torrance Tract Preservation

Plan is intended to guide property owners, community members,

and the city’s decision makers in using the historic preservation

ordinance within the Torrance Tract. Additionally, the plan

provides references for historic preservation best practices.

Figure 3: Boundary of Torrance Tract Overlay Zone, outlined in orange. SourceLos Angeles County Assessor.

Wes

tern

Ave

.

Carson St.

Cre

nsh

aw B

lvd

.


MISSION STATEMENT

The primary purpose of the Torrance Tract Preservation Plan is to

encourage the listing of historic landmarks and districts in the

Torrance Register of Historic Resources in order to preserve the

Torrance Tract’s unique place in the city’s history, maintain its

neighborhood character, manage appropriate change, and

promote its sense of place. To accomplish this, the Preservation

Plan:

Increases awareness and appreciation for the Torrance

Tract’s founding role in Torrance’s history;

Fosters community pride in the historic and architecturally

distinguished housing stock in the Torrance Tract;

Promotes an understanding of managing growth and

changes based on preservation principles and

approaches;

Outlines processes for designating Historic Landmarks

and Historic Districts as well as project reviews for Historic

Landmarks and Contributing and Non-Contributing

Resources in Historic Districts;

Identifies concentrations in the Torrance Tract to consider

becoming Historic Districts; and

Educates owners and residents about potential benefits

of and incentives available for historic preservation.

The Torrance Tract Preservation Plan focuses on the residentially

zoned areas and does not include industrial or commercial areas.

WHY PRESERVATION MATTERS

The Torrance Tract has in place a Torrance Tract Overlay Zone

as a mechanism to review and manage change. Why is historic

preservation needed as well? Historic preservation is not just

about freezing a building or a neighborhood in time, although in

some cases, that may be appropriate and what the community

wants. More generally, preservation prioritizes keeping the

historically significant features, spaces, and patterns that make a

community special and that give it character and a sense of place.

It creates a process to accommodate change that is respectful to

those features and does not harm them. Like sustainable

development, historic preservation honors the past, meets

contemporary needs, and conserves enough so that future


generations can understand and experience the historic

significance of the place. A fundamental premise of historic

preservation is to keep the authentic, physical fabric of a place—

those things that are tangible and true to the period they were

built—over replacements, copies, or current trends.

However, change can and will still happen, and even historic

places must adapt to new demands so they continue to function

and be occupied. Many cities demonstrate that economic

development and historic preservation can be mutually beneficial,

both in commercial areas and in historic neighborhoods that have

become highly desirable. By approaching change from a

preservation perspective, protecting the historic character of a

place is the focus and ensures that what makes a place unique

will not be lost.

PREPARING THE DOCUMENT

This plan is built upon the foundation of previous preservation

efforts within the City of Torrance related to the Torrance Tract.

The following documents were reviewed and, where appropriate,

incorporated into this plan.

Results of the 1979 survey as published in the California

Historical Resources Information System, Los Angeles

County, 2011

Olmsted Tract Executive Summary and Historic Context

Statement prepared by Nakada+Associates, 2014

Results of the 2014 Olmsted Tract Survey conducted by

the Torrance Historical Society and Nakada+Associates

Torrance Municipal Code and relevant ordinances,

including the Torrance Tract Overlay Zone Ordinance,

Small Lot, Low Medium Overlay Zone Ordinance, and

revised Accessory Dwelling Units ordinance

Presentations from Historic Preservation Workshops

conducted by the City of Torrance in 2014 and 2015

Torrance Architectural Design Guidelines

Torrance Historic Preservation Ordinance, adopted in

December 2017.

Photographs are by Page & Turnbull from 2016 and 2017, unless

otherwise noted.


2. HISTORY AND CHARACTER

TORRANCE TRACT HISTORY

The Torrance Tract dates to the earliest conception of the City of

Torrance after developer Jared Sidney Torrance and his

Dominguez Land Company purchased 3,000 acres of Rancho

San Pedro from the Dominguez family in 1911. Accounting for

roughly 600 acres, the Torrance Tract is bound by Dominquez

Street to the north, Western Avenue to the east, Plaza Del Amo to

the south, and Crenshaw Boulevard to the west (Figure 4).

Torrance hired the Olmsted brothers, Charles and Frederick Law

Olmsted, Jr., sons of renowned landscape architect, Frederick

Law Olmsted, to re-envision the typical company town for

Torrance’s Union Oil Company. Torrance and the Olmsteds

envisioned the ideal, modern city as anchored by industry but

balanced with affordable housing for workers, commercial centers

to serve residents, and an idyllic setting for recreation, culture, and

Figure 4: Aerial of Torrance Tract, ca. 1925, looking south to Palos Verdes. Source: Los Angeles Public Library.


education. Torrance was inspired by the garden city movement,

yet his drive for efficiency altered curvilinear streets typical of

garden city and Olmstedian designs. Using a Y-shaped land

pattern defined by Torrance Boulevard and Cabrillo Avenue, the

business district was in the junction of the Y (Figure 5). Industry

was at the northeast and east outside and around the leg of the Y

away from the residential areas inside the Y. Residential streets

in the Y ran southwest of the business district and surround the

park commons, El Prado Park. Like the streets, the linear park

was angled to the southwest to frame a view of the San Gabriel

Mountains to the northeast and was lined with homes.1

Further beyond the Y-shape, the street pattern shifted to an

orthogonal layout with streets and rectangular blocks aligned

north-south. Not wanting to compromise the picturesque streets

for utilities, the street grids incorporated alleys between residential

blocks for utilitarian needs.

Notable Southern California architect, Irving Gill, was named the

Chief Architect of the city to continue the vision of this redefined

city model. He designed prototypical model homes, of which only

ten were built, as well as reviewed the designs for other Torrance

1 Peggy Coleman Dalton, Torrance: A City for Today, (USA: Windsor Publications, 1990), 15.

Figure 5: Torrance Business District, ca.1920s. Source: Los Angeles Public Library.


Tract residences. Gill also designed other projects within the city

including hotels, commercial buildings, and the gateway bridge for

the Pacific Electric Railway (PE) system. The PE rail system, also

known as the Red Car line, was one of the main manufacturing

firms in Torrance, though its stop allowed workers to commute to

Torrance rather than purchase a home locally.2

Several other industries anchored the early vision of Torrance,

including the Union Tool Company, Llewellyn Iron Works, Pacific

Metal Products, and Moore Motor Truck Company.3

Commercially, the Torrance Athletic Club opened in 1913, with the

First National Bank of Torrance established by Judge George W.

Post in 1914 and the Torrance Herald also printing by 1914.4 The

main building of Torrance High School opened in 1917.

The residential development of the company town did not grow as

rapidly as hoped. Most of the housing from the 1910s was worker

housing, which were either clusters of simple vernacular cottages

at the northern end of the Torrance Tract or modest Craftsman

bungalows on individuals lots found at the northern and southern

ends (Figure 6). A few larger homes scattered along the angled

streets of the Y, but the residential areas of the tract were largely

undeveloped.

2 Dalton, 17. 3 Thomas D. Campbell & Company, Torrance: The Modern Industrial City, (Los Angeles: Thomas D. Campbell & Company, 1913), 8-9. 4 Dalton, 20.

Figure 6: Early photograph of Torrance Tract street, ca. 1913. Source: The ModernIndustrial City courtesy of the Los AngelesPublic Library.


Wary of annexation by the growing City of Los Angeles, members

of the Torrance Chamber of Commerce and the Dominguez Land

Company moved to incorporate the City of Torrance in 1921.5

Shortly after, the discovery of petroleum led to a second wave of

development in the Torrance Tract and an expansion of the city

boundaries to the north, south, and west beyond the original tract.

The 1920s boom in the Torrance Tract resulted in more houses

built that filled in the Y and the creation of several streets toward

the west and northwest (Figure 7). These streets saw modest

houses often with red clay tile roofs in the popular Spanish

Colonial Revival, Mission, and Monterey styles of the period.

The success of the local industrial companies and farming

communities allowed for steady growth and annexing of nearby

neighborhoods. In the Torrance Tract, the Depression years of the

1930s saw some infill residential development, as did the World

War II years in the early 1940s. The war provided several jobs at

the factories within Torrance along with new technologies in

aviation. Zamperini Field, Torrance’s municipal airport, was

established in 1946.6

However, by the end of World War II in 1945, the residential area

of the Torrance Tract had been mostly built out.7 The influx of new

workers and residents to Torrance in the postwar years resulted

in growth in other areas of the city. As the mid-century suburban

development of Torrance converted farmland into housing tracts

and shopping malls, the business district of the Torrance Tract

was no longer the city’s commercial center. The heavy industry of

the early twentieth century also gave way to the business parks of

the late twentieth century. However, the residential areas of the

Torrance Tract remained relatively stable, with their stock of

housing dating from 1912 to 1945.

5 Dalton, 20. 6 Dalton, 22. 7 Nakada+Associates, “Olmsted Tract; Torrance California 2011-2013 Survey of Historic Resources,” Executive Summary.


Figure 7. Residential as well as commercial and industrial parcels in Torrance Tract by date of construction, based onLos Angeles County Assessor data.


NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS

The residential areas in the Torrance Tract share many common

characteristics, but also have distinct sections. A legacy of the

Olmsteds’ design is the pattern of main streets alternating with

service alleys seen throughout the tract (Figure 8). As a result,

primary streets are lined with a consistent rhythm of one- and two-

story houses and not interrupted by driveways. Instead, garages

that became more common with the advent of car ownership in

the 1920s are generally placed toward the rear of the lots and

accessed from the alleys. Utilities, like overhead telephone and

electrical lines, are also located along the alleys.

At the street front, the houses are typically setback from the street

at a consistent distance. The distance varies from sub-area to

sub-area, but provides a constant row of open space along each

block that is reinforced by the presence of a planting strip between

the sidewalks and the main streets (Figure 10 and Figure 11). Few

street trees are found in the planting strips.

Figure 8: Developed blocks in the Torrance Tract from the 1916 Sanborn Fire Insurance map. The area had an alternating pattern of wide streets (light grey) and narrow service alleys (dark grey) as well as consistent front setbacks(blue dashes). Source: Los Angeles Public Library, edited by Page & Turnbull


Different areas within the Torrance Tract have other distinct

characteristics. Railroad tracks continue to crisscross the

Torrance Tract, creating odd lot sizes and physical barriers

between areas of the tract. The houses in the middle of the Y-

shaped plan along Post Avenue are among the largest and

grandest in the tract (Figure 9). Other houses along El Prado Park

also tend to be larger in scale than seen elsewhere in the Torrance

Tract (Figure 10).

Generally, the lots in the center of the Y are 50-foot wide lots that

create a greater sense of openness than the 40-foot wide lots

more commonly found north of Torrance Boulevard, west of

Madrid Avenue and its train tracks, and south of Carson Street on

Arlington, Gramercy, and Andreo avenues. These sub-areas tend

to have a denser feeling (Figure 11). Some streets, such as Beech

Avenue and Acacia Avenue between El Dorado and Carson

streets at the western end of the tract, currently have a consistent

tree canopy created by trees likely planted in the front yards at the

same time the streets and houses were developed (Figure 12).

Figure 9: Larger homes typically found on Post Avenue. Figure 10: Houses facing El Prado Park.

Figure 11: Smaller houses from the earliest development period south of Carson Street.

Figure 12: Consistent tree canopy found on Beech Avenue north of Carson Street.


In general, the residential area in the Torrance Tract is defined by:

Y-shaped street plan laid out by the Olmsted Brothers

further crisscrossed by railroad tracks

Central linear park extending from commercial business

center into residential area

Street pattern with alternating front streets and rear

service alleys

o Detached garages accessed from alleys

o Minimal curb cuts

o Planting strips between sidewalks and front

streets

Single-story and two-story buildings in residential areas

o Various styles and periods

o Consistent setbacks

o Garages and second units at rear

ARCHITECTURAL STYLES

The residential buildings in the Torrance Tract include a variety of

styles typical for the main period of its development from 1912 to

1945 (Figure 13 through Figure 16). The 2014 Olmsted Tract

Survey report (discussed below) identified the styles found in the

tract as:

Craftsman (1895-1925)

Mission Revival (1890-1920)

Spanish Colonial Revival (1916-1931)

Monterey (1853-1955)

Neo-Classical Revival (1893-1940)

Tudor Revival (1910-1940)

Prairie Style (1900-1920)

French Eclectic (1915-1945)

Colonial Revival (1880-1955)

Minimal/Builder (1935-1950)

Modernistic (1920-1960)

Development since 1945 tends to be more recent infill

replacements that are scattered throughout the Torrance Tract.

The 2014 Olmsted Tract Survey in Appendix A provides a more

detailed summary of each style and examples from the survey.


Figure 13: Craftsman style. Source: Olmsted Tract 2014 Survey.

Figure 14: Spanish Colonial Revival style. Source: Olmsted Tract 2014 Survey.

Figure 15: Prairie style. Source: Olmsted Tract 2014 Survey. Figure 16: Tudor Revival style. Source: Olmsted Tract 2014 Survey.


3. PAST AND CURRENT PRESERVATION EFFORTS

Efforts to recognize and protect Torrance Tract’s historic

architecture and neighborhood character started as early as the

late 1970s.

1979 HISTORIC RESOURCE SURVEY

As stated in the Nakada+Associates report,

In 1979 The [sic] City of Torrance completed a city wide

inventory of historic resources. The inventory was

completed by J. Roger Hatheway and John Chase for the

City of Torrance Planning Department [now known as the

Community Development Department] utilizing the State

of California Department of Parks and Recreation Historic

Resources Inventory Sheets which identified each

property by address, its date of construction, its style and

a brief description.8

The survey inventoried over 100 buildings and structures

throughout Torrance that were considered to be potentially

historic. Of those, 84 are in the Torrance Tract.9 The properties

from the survey appear to be listed in the Historic Property

Directory, an inventory of designated and surveyed properties

maintained by the California Historic Resources Information

System (CHRIS). The properties have CHRIS status codes that

are mostly 5S2, meaning the individual property is eligible for local

designation. A few have 3S status codes, meaning they appear

eligible for the National Register of Historic Places through survey

evaluation. The Community Development Department staff

reviewed the list of properties in the Historic Property Directory

and found that some had been demolished but many remain.

SMALL LOT, LOW MEDIUM OVERLAY ZONE

The city first created an overlay zone within the Torrance Tract in

1987 called the Small Lot, Low Medium Overlay Zone. It covers

primarily the residential properties along Gramercy and Andreo

avenues between Carson Street at the north and Plaza del Amo

to the south in the southwest corner of the Torrance Tract.

8 Nakada+Associates, “Olmsted Tract; Torrance California 2011-2013 Survey of Historic Resources,” 11. 9 Nakada+Associates, 11.


Any development, including new construction and remodeling or

enlarging an existing building within the Small Lot, Low Medium

Overlay Zone requires review by the Torrance Planning

Commission. The purpose of the review was to ensure that

The work tended to preserve neighborhood

characteristics;

The intensity of proposed use is compatible with the

surrounding properties;

Parking requirements are met while minimizing the need

for driveway curb-cuts and offering enough storage space

so that garages will be used for cars; and

Suitable open space is provided.

In addition, for projects where the building would exceed a certain

size, the Planning Commission would need to determine that the

project, “would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare

and to other properties in the vicinity.”

If the proposed project does not include demolition of the main

house, does not propose a driveway curb cut on the street, and

provides at least three enclosed garages, then the project does

not require Planning Commission review. However, requests for

tandem parking would require Planning Commission review and

approval.

OLMSTED TRACT SURVEY AND HISTORIC

CONTEXT STATEMENT

In early 2010, the Torrance Historical Society undertook efforts to

survey the Torrance Tract. With assistance from

Nakada+Associates Inc., the Historical Society completed a

survey of the properties in the Olmsted Tract. The Olmsted Tract

corresponds with the Torrance Tract, which has also been

referred to as the Old Torrance Tract. According to the survey

report’s executive summary, community volunteers surveyed

nearly 1,800 residential, commercial, and industrial properties

across about the 100 city blocks between 2013 and 2014. They

were supervised by members of the Torrance Historical Society

and used a framework prepared by Nakada+Associates.

The purpose of the survey was to document all buildings,

designed landscapes, and other features that were considered

contributing elements to an assumed potential historic


preservation district.10 Nakada+Associates prepared historic

contexts on related topics to accompany the survey, which

included sections on:

Torrance and the Garden City Movement

Jared Sydney Torrance, An Urban Design Vision

Fredrick Law Olmsted, Jr., Urban Designer

Irving Gill, Architect

The Birth of Torrance

Design Influences in Torrance

The period of significance identified for the potential historic

preservation district encompassing the entire Torrance Tract was

1912 to 1945. The start date corresponded to the initial

construction of the Olmsted Tract and ended after World War II

when the tract was mostly developed and architectural design

started to change toward Modernism.11

10 Nakada+Associates, 1. 11 Nakada+Associates, 2.

Figure 17: A Spanish Colonial Revival residence identified as a Contributor in the survey.


Nearly 1,800 properties were surveyed across the 100 city blocks

in the Torrance Tract. The properties were categorized as a

“Contributor,” “Altered-Contributor,” or “Non-Contributor” (Figure

17)

“Contributor”: Any building built with in the period of

significance that retains its original form, massing, and

features.

“Altered-contributor”: A structure that has been altered,

but in a manner that is reversible and its historic integrity

remains.

“Non-Contributor”: A building constructed outside the

period of significance.

The survey found 523 Contributor and 327 Altered-Contributor

properties within the Torrance Tract; the remainder are presumed

to be Non-Contributors (Figure 18). Review of some properties

were consistent with the findings of the 1979 survey, while others

found that previously eligible properties were no longer intact or

standing. The survey results are useful as a reference for

identifying potentially historic properties and where they may be

concentrated. See Appendix A for the 2014 Olmsted Tract Survey

Executive Summary, Historic Context Statement, and Historic

Resource Survey Summary.


Figure 18: Properties identified by the 2014 Olmsted Tract Survey as “Contributor” and “Altered-Contributors.”


TORRANCE TRACT OVERLAY ZONE

The 2014 Olmsted Tract Survey indicated that approximately half

of the properties in the Torrance Tract were Contributors or

Altered-Contributors, meaning they were built between 1912 and

1945 and retained some level of their original character, despite

alterations. However, it also showed that much of the area was in

danger of losing more of these older homes, especially in the

areas zoned R3 for multi-family apartments and condominiums,

and in the areas zoned R2, where two units on a lot are allowed

and single-lot townhome subdivisions are increasingly popular.

Community members urged the Torrance City Council to protect

the neighborhood character of the Torrance Tract. The City

Council started efforts to draft a historic preservation ordinance,

but also established the Torrance Tract Overlay Zone (Ordinance

3799) in March 2016. Originally intended as a temporary measure,

it was modeled after the Small Lot, Low Medium Overlay Zone.

The interim Torrance Tract Overlay Zone created a project review

process to manage on-going change, but only for certain

properties. The Planning Commission reviews all new

construction, additions, demolitions, and exterior alterations

affecting residential properties identified by the 2014 Olmsted

Tract Survey as Contributing or Altered-Contributing. In essence,

the Torrance Tract Overlay Zone extended the review process for

the Small Lot, Low Medium Overlay Zone to properties in the

Torrance Tract that retained some amount of historic character.

The interim overlay zone and review process remained in place

while a historic preservation ordinance was crafted. However, in

December 2017, the City Council voted to make the Torrance

Tract Overlay Zone permanent at the same time it adopted the

historic preservation ordinance.

HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE

The adopted Torrance preservation ordinance establishes:

Torrance Register of Historic Resources (Torrance

Register) to safeguard and enhance Torrance’s

architectural, cultural, and historic heritage;

Criteria for designating Historic Landmarks and Historic

Districts to the Torrance Register;

Project review process to manage changes to Historic

Landmarks and Historic Districts;


Historic Preservation Commission to implement the

ordinance; and

Incentives to encourage protection of Historic Landmarks

and Historic Districts.

The ordinance creates a voluntary preservation program where

owners agree to have their properties listed in the Torrance

Register. For individual Historic Landmarks, the property owner,

or authorized agent, must sign the nomination form to start the

designation process. For Historic Districts, all of the property

owners must agree in writing to become a Historic District. Once

designated, every property within the district boundaries is subject

to the preservation ordinance.

The city offers owners incentives to list their properties in the

Torrance Register and ensure that these historic resources will be

taken care of correctly so that their historic character will remain.


THIS PAGE IS INTENTIALLY BLANK


4. HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN THE TORRANCE TRACT

The Torrance Tract Overlay Zone offers a measure of protection

by reviewing a select number of properties identified as potentially

contributing to the historic character of the Torrance Tract.

However, changes to the remaining properties in the tract still

have the potential to alter its character drastically. For those

interested in recognizing and seeking greater protections their

historic home or neighborhood, listing in the Torrance Register of

Historic Resources is available.

TORRANCE REGISTER OF HISTORIC RESOURCES

The Torrance Register of Historic Resources is Torrance’s official

list of locally designated Historic Landmarks and Historic Districts.

Individual buildings, structures, objects, sites, cultural landscapes,

signs, or natural features, or groupings of these elements, can be

listed in the Torrance Register, if they:

1) Meet one or more of the significance criteria for

designation, including:

Figure 19: An intact street in the Torrance Tract reflecting its early 20th century character.


a. association with important persons or events or

patterns in history;

b. architectural distinction as the work of a master

designer or having high artistic value;

c. the potential to yield important information about

history; OR

d. are among the last, best remaining examples of a

type.

2) Retain enough integrity, i.e., has not been changed so

much as to be unrecognizable, AND

3) Have the support and consent of the property owners.

Not all old buildings or areas are historic, nor do they all qualify for

listing in the Torrance Register. On the other hand, not all historic

buildings are grand architectural gems; many are modest yet

intact examples of past eras or represent something important in

history. It is up to the Historic Preservation Commission to decide

if properties meet the criteria for listing and have historic integrity

based on the research and analysis presented in the application.

Torrance’s Community Development Department staff helps to

administer the Torrance Register for the city.

Figure 20: Examples in the Torrance Tract of Craftsman-style (top) and Spanish Colonial Revival-style (below) houses that have architectural integrity. That is, they are still recognized as their styles, despite minor changes.


BENEFITS OF HISTORIC DESIGNATION

The charm and historic character of the Torrance Tract has

fostered a strong sense of pride in the neighborhood. Some

owners recognize that their properties are important to Torrance’s

heritage, and seek to list them as historic. For these owners,

designation as a Historic Landmark or as a Historic District can

also offer the following benefits.

Managed, Predictable Change

Becoming listed in the Torrance Register does not mean the

property will become a museum piece and never change. All

properties will and must change so that they can continue to

function and meet the needs of each generation. But, as a Historic

Landmark or Historic District, the change will be managed in more

predictable ways. Alterations will be reviewed using nationally-

recognized preservation principles known as the Secretary of the

Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (SOI

Standards) and its accompanying Guidelines for Preserving,

Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings

(SOI Guidelines).

Unlike more general architectural or design guidelines, the focus

of the SOI Standards and Guidelines is on keeping the features

that make the property historic—called character-defining

features. These features range from the large scale, like the

overall shape and massing of a building, to the small details like

archways, windows, and materials that give the property its

historic character. In using the SOI Standards as the basis for

reviews, the goal is to ensure that character-defining features will

be maintained so that the property’s historic integrity is

maintained.

Clear Review Process

The Torrance preservation ordinance has set out a clear review

process where city staff can review and approve a wide range of

minor projects that clearly meet the SOI Standards. This allows

for a faster, easier path for those projects that will not alter the

character of a historic district. The Minor Project review (see

Chapter 5, Project Reviews in Historic Districts) can often address

the most common improvements in ways that saves time and

resources for both the owners and the city.

SOI Standards

The Secretary of the Interior’s

Standards for the Treatment

of Historic Properties (SOI

Standards) are a series of

concepts about maintaining,

repairing, and replacing

historic materials, as well as

designing new additions or

making alterations that

promote best practices to help

protect historic, cultural, and

architectural resources. They

provide a framework for

making decisions about work

or changes to these

resources. The SOI Standards

are often the benchmark by

which federal agencies and

many local government

bodies evaluate work on

historic properties.

The SOI Standards offer four

approaches to the treatment

of historic properties:

Preservation,

Rehabilitation,

Restoration, and

Reconstruction.

The appropriate treatment to

use will depend on the project

or project component.

Typically, the Standards for

Rehabilitation are the most

widely used and offer the

greatest flexibility; they are the

SOI Standards approach

referenced in this study.

(See Appendix E and

https://www.nps.gov/tps/stand

ards.htm).


More complicated projects or those that do not clearly meet the

SOI Standards, such as large additions, new buildings, and

demolitions, are reviewed by the Historic Preservation

Commission (HPC). The HPC includes professionals with

expertise in historic preservation, historic architecture,

architectural history, and other related fields who can apply their

know-how in the project reviews.

Stability and Increased Value

Several studies have found that property values in historic districts

often increase faster than similar, non-designated areas because

of the predictability offered by the preservation-based review

process.12 By agreeing to listing in the Torrance Register of

Historic Resources, property owners are assured that the

character of the neighborhood will not change drastically, and they

are more likely to reinvest in their properties knowing that

neighbors will not be allowed to make inappropriate alterations or

build out-of-scale developments. Outsiders looking for speculative

development opportunities may be discouraged from purchasing

in historic districts because of the additional review. Historic

designation may mean more responsibility for each owner, but it

also means more stability that can be a buffer from the extreme

ups and downs in the real estate market.

Incentives

Recognizing that preserving historic properties appropriately may

require more resources, the City of Torrance offers owners of

historic properties several incentives, including:

Mills Act

The Mills Act is a statewide program available through cities to

property owners of historic properties. It offers different ways to

calculate property tax that can provide substantial savings in

exchange for the rehabilitation and long-term maintenance of the

historic property. Owners enter into a contract with the city that

outlines the maintenance, repair, or rehabilitation items that the

12 For example, see “Benefits of Residential Historic District Designation for

Property Owners,” from the Historic Preservation Officer of Tucson, Arizona, which

offers a summary of economic surveys from around the county. It can be found at

the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation’s website on Impacts of Historic

Property and District Designation, along with several other studies,

http://www.achp.gov/economic-designation.html.


owner agrees to complete during the contract’s 10-year term,

which renews continuously.

The City of Torrance is establishing a Mills Act program that will

be available to properties listed in the Torrance Register as

Historic Landmarks or Contributing Resources in Historic Districts.

The amount of tax savings varies property by property, and is

calculated by the Los Angeles County Office of the Assessor.

Typically, recent owners are more likely to see sizable tax savings

than long-time owners. However, the Mills Act can be an attractive

selling point, as the contracts are recorded on the property deed

and transferred to future owners who commit to maintaining the

historic property.

The Mills Act is a voluntary program that owners will apply for and

be approved through the process established by Torrance.

California Historic Building Code

The California Historic Building Code (CHBC) allows for

reasonable alternatives in certain situations when strict adherence

to building codes would affect the historic character of qualified

historic buildings. In Torrance, the CHBC is available to those

properties listed in the Torrance Register as Historic Landmarks

and Contributing Resources in Historic Districts.

Modifications to Development Standards

The city may offer certain reductions or modifications to

development standards for Historic Landmarks or properties in

Historic Districts to encourage preservation of the historic

resource. These may include flexibility in parking design

standards, retaining non-conforming setbacks, or modifications

determined on a case-by-case basis.

TORRANCE TRACT OVERLAY ZONE VS. HISTORIC

DISTRICT

What is the difference between the Torrance Tract Overlay Zone

and designation as a Historic District? There are three key

differences:

The overlay zone is already in place for the entire

boundary of the Torrance Tract, while no Historic District

has been designated yet. If residents in an area of the

Torrance Tract decide they would like to become a


Historic District, they can apply through the new

designation process.

Once an area is designated a Historic District, project

review follows the historic preservation review process,

rather than then the one for the Torrance Tract Overlay

Zone.

Once designated, the Contributing Resources in the

Historic District qualifies for available preservation

incentives, like the Mills Act, the California Historic

Building Code, and modifications to development

standards; these incentives are not available to the other

properties in the Torrance Tract Overlay Zone.

TT Overlay Zone Historic District

Applicability

2014 survey’s Contributors

and Altered Contributors*

Properties in designated

Historic Districts**

Properties Reviewed

Contributor/Contributing Resource Yes Yes

Altered Contributor Yes Yes, as Contributing

Resource

Others/Non-Contributing Resource No Yes, for compatibility

New Infill Construction No Yes, for compatibility

Review Process

Review Body Planning Commission Historic Preservation

Commission

Review Standard Torrance Architectural Design

Guidelines

SOI Standards and

Guidelines

Review delegated to staff Limited minor projects Most minor projects

Incentives No Yes * See Figure 18 map. ** One-time owner approval at designation.

Unlike in the Torrance Tract Overlay Zone, all the properties in a

designated Historic District have some level of review for

changes—for Contributing Resources to protect their historic

features and for Non-Contributing Resources to ensure their

changes be respectful and compatible with the district’s historic

character. This all-around approach assures owners that their

neighborhood will not change drastically over time. With the

Torrance Tract Overlay Zone, that predictability is less certain,

since its reviews are limited only to the properties identified in the

2014 Olmsted Tract Survey.

The project review process is also different in the Torrance Tract

Overlay Zone than in a Historic District. Project review under the

Table 1: Torrance Tract Overlay Zone vs. Historic Districts


Torrance Tract Overlay Zone is primarily based on the Torrance

Architectural Design Guidelines. The Architectural Design

Guidelines describe certain architectural styles typically found in

Torrance, summarize their typical characteristics, and offer simple

guidelines based on the SOI Standards for new construction and

remodels. The CDD staff can review some minor projects under

the Torrance Tract Overlay Zone and the remainder are reviewed

by the Planning Commission.

With a Historic District, reviews are based on the principles in the

SOI Standards. Within the framework of the SOI Standards and

the examples in the SOI Guidelines, CDD staff can review and

approve a wider range of minor projects. Larger and more

complex projects go before the Historic Preservation Commission,

which is a group with expertise in history, design, and historic

preservation.

Torrance’s

Architectural

Design Guidelines

Torrance’s Community

Development Department

offers Architectural Design

Guidelines to assist property

owners in the restoration,

renovation, and preservation

of residential structures with

“special significance to the

heritage of Torrance.”

They describe architectural

styles typically found in

Torrance, including in the

Torrance Tract, and

summarize their typical

characteristics or character-

defining features.

Simple guidelines based on

the SOI Standards for new

construction and remodels are

included, as well as a glossary

of architectural terms.

Torrance’s Architectural

Design Guidelines are

available at the city’s website.

Figure 21: Sample pages from Torrance’s Architectural Design Guidelines


PROCESS FOR HISTORIC DESIGNATION

Any person, group, or the city may begin the designation process

for a Historic Landmark or a Historic District. However, the

property owner(s) must agree to the designation by signing the

application form or petition. As a result, historic designation is

usually initiated and driven by the property owner(s). The process

generally includes:

1. Submitting a completed application form to the Torrance

CDD explaining how the property or area meets one or

more of the designation criteria.

2. CDD staff reviews the application and requests additional

information if the application is incomplete.

3. Once the application is deemed complete, a hearing

before the Torrance Historic Preservation Commission

(HPC) is scheduled.

4. At the HPC hearing, the applicant presents the case for

why the property or area should be designated, and the

HPC makes its determination to approve, modify, approve

with conditions, or deny designation.

The HPC’s decision is final, though an appeals process is

available. It should be noted that a temporary hold on issuing

building permits for major work may be placed on the nominated

property during the designation process. However, minor projects

can still be reviewed and approved at the staff level.

For Historic Districts, the designation process has a few additional

steps, as they involve multiple properties and multiple owners. In

addition to how the group of properties meet the designation

criteria, the Historic District application also needs to

Identify the boundaries of the potential district;

Confirm the integrity threshold of at least 66% of the

properties are Contributing Resources;

Gather supporting signatures from 100% of the owners

within the potential district.

The preliminary hearing is the first of two HPC hearings that is

needed during the approval process. The hearing is an

opportunity for owners, residents, and members of the public to

voice their support, or opposition, to historic district designation. It

is also a chance for HPC to confirm that the district meets the

criteria for listing in the Torrance Register, has enough integrity


both in the required percentage of Contributing Resources as well

as the Contributing Resources themselves having integrity, and to

gauge owner support for the district.

If HPC votes that the historic district qualifies for listing, CDD staff

will prepare a ballot to be sent to all owners within the proposed

boundaries of the historic district. All owners need to return their

written ballots with a yes vote for CDD staff to schedule the second

and final HPC hearing.

At the second hearing, HPC will confirm the balloting and make

findings to approve, modify, approve with conditions, or deny

designation of the historic district. The decision of HPC is final but

can be appealed to City Council within 15 days of the decision.


PROCESS FOR DESIGNATING A HISTORIC LANDMARK

HPC decision may be appealed to City Council within 15 days of

issuance.

Application is filed with CDD and reviewed for completeness with: - How the property meets one or more

designation criteria; - Photographs or other means of

demonstrating historic integrity; - Owner’s signature on the application.

HPC makes findings and approves, or conditionally approves in full or in part, the property as a Historic Landmark.

HPC denies application and the property is not a Historic Landmark.

CDD prepares a designation report and recommendation to HPC. Application is scheduled for review at next available HPC meeting. Notice will be publicly

posted.

HPC hears the application at preliminary hearing. Does HPC find the property meets at least one of the designation

criteria and has integrity?

A permit hold is in place for major work that would require Certificate of Appropriateness

or Certificate of Demolition.

Yes

No

Incomplete application is returned for additional information or revision.


PROCESS FOR DESIGNATING A HISTORIC DISTRICT

Application is filed with CDD and reviewed for completeness with: - Survey map and historic context - 66% contributing properties within

proposed district (required integrity) - Petition of interest from 100% of

owners (required support)

HPC makes findings and approves or conditionally approves in full or in part,

the area as a Historic District

HPC denies application and the district is not established.


issuance.

CDD prepares a designation report and recommendation to HPC. Application is scheduled for review at next available HPC meeting. Notice will be publicly

posted.

HPC hears the application at preliminary hearing. Does HPC find the

potential historic district has merit?

No

A permit hold is placed on properties in the potential historic district for major work that would require Certificate of Appropriateness

or Certificate of Demolition.

Once ballot deadline ends and votes are tallied, second HPC hearing is

scheduled. Notice will be publicly posted.

Have 100% of owners submitted written consent?

Yes

No YesCDD mails ballots for owner consent voting.



WHAT MAKES A GOOD HISTORIC DISTRICT?

A Historic District is a grouping or concentration of buildings,

structures, sites, objects, landscapes, natural features, street

patterns, or other resources that have a special historic, cultural,

architectural, community, or aesthetic value. It is different from

other parts of a city typically because of three things:

Significance

A Historic District has historic or architectural significance

meaning it reflects an important part of history, such as an

association with an important event, trend, or person, or is a

distinctive example of a particular building style or the work of an

architect. A Historic District can also reflect a significant period in

Torrance’s growth, in how the city was planned or shaped, or as

an example of city or community planning. Its typically has a

specific period of significance, which is time frame in which most

of the district was constructed or the important association

occurred. The period of significance can be one year or a range

of years.

Cohesive Character

A Historic District usually has a unified architectural sense as seen

through those character-defining physical features, including the

design of its buildings (by types, scale, styles, etc.), the setting

created by street patterns (straight, curving, cul-de-sacs, alleys,

etc.), topography (flat, hillside, etc.), and landscaping (parkways,

street trees, etc.), or by other physical characteristics. These

features are known as Contributing Resources, which are those

elements that collectively contribute to a district’s historic

importance and special character and were built during its period

of significance. Historic Districts usually also have some Non-

Contributing Resources, those that may not have been built

during the district’s period of significance, or have been so altered

that they no longer contribute to the Historic District’s character.

To be a good district candidate, the area or grouping typically has

more Contributing Resources than Non-Contributing so it can

strongly convey the cohesive character that makes it different from

non-historic areas. The exception is for Thematic Districts, which

are properties related to each by a theme, such as by architectural

style, type of construction, work of a specific architect, or in other

ways unified aesthetically or historically, but are not

geographically adjacent to each other in a grouping.


It should be noted that Contributing Resources can be listed also

as Historic Landmarks, if they individually meet the criteria for

listing. Some Non-Contributing Resources may also be listed

individually as Historic Landmarks, if their importance or period of

significance is different from the Historic District’s.

Support

The most successful Historic Districts are those that choose to

become one, rather than have it imposed on them. In Torrance,

all owners in a Historic District must be in support to establish a

Historic District. This is a high bar, and will need active effort from

property owners interested in becoming a Historic District to

discuss with and educate other owners. Some may feel their rights

as owners are limited by the required project review, even though

the Torrance Tract Overlay Zone already requires review for many

Figure 22: Two examples of streets in the Torrance Tract that have a consistent, cohesive character, as seenin the building scale, shapes, styles, and setbacks from the street.


properties. The preservation review that comes with Historic

District designation assures owners that the neighborhood they

bought into will not change so drastically from what attracted them

to it in the first place. It is this certainty that has brought stability to

Historic Districts and often led to higher property values as owners

feel comfortable investing in improvements.

CONCENTRATIONS OF CONTRIBUTING

RESOURCES FOR POTENTIAL HISTORIC

DISTRICTS

Some select areas within the Torrance Tract may be better suited

to be Historic Districts than others. Areas with fewer changes or

new buildings, and that are more unified with similar buildings from

a defined period would be good candidates to consider for

designation. The 2014 Olmsted Tract Survey helped to identify

where some of those concentrations are located (Figure 24).

Additional research may find that more districts with different

periods of significance are appropriate for certain areas.

Within these concentration areas, smaller, discreet historic

districts may be formed (Figure 25). There are no specific size

requirements for historic districts—large or small—but some

things to consider include:

Consistency in

o Size and scale of the houses;

o Setbacks from the street and between the

houses;

o Location (or lack) of curb cuts and driveways;

o Landscaping like street tree patterns

Consistency of architectural style is not required. Adjacent

houses (or Contributing Resources) of different styles can

still be good candidates for Historic Districts if they are

tied together by several of the above neighborhood

features (Figure 23).

Where these physical features change can signal a

possible boundary line.

o Physical barriers that prevent areas from relating

to each other, such as railroad tracks or major

streets, etc. are good boundary lines.

o Look at both sides of the street when drawing

potential boundaries.

In cases where the streetscapes have not changed

significantly, yet the buildings have been altered like with


replacement windows and doors, review if the original

scale, massing, exterior siding or cladding, and other

distinct architectural features are still present.

Large districts may have a difficult time meeting the

integrity requirement of at least 66% or more Contributing

Resources within its boundaries, plus the 100% owner

support requirement. Smaller districts that exclude Non-

Contributing Resources at the edges usually have a

stronger sense of historic character.

Most historic districts will have some Non-Contributing

Resources; they just should not make up more than a

third or 33% of the properties within the district’s

boundaries (Figure 24 & 25).

Districts that have fewer than ten Contributing Resources

may be appropriate when not enough intact resources are

in an area or if owner support is an issue.

Figure 23: An area with different styles of houses but other unifying features, such as consistent setbacks and scale of the buildings, could still be a historic district.


Figure 24: High concentrations of historic resources from 2014 Olmsted Tract Survey are within the grey lines.


Figure 25: Smaller groupings of historic resources from 2014 Olmsted Tract Survey are within the dotted lines. The blue dots mark the last remaining worker housing designed by Irving Gill.


THEMATIC HISTORIC DISTRICTS

Usually, a historic district in a neighborhood is a geographic

concentration of buildings or features that are linked historically or

visually in a specific area. Geographic Historic Districts will have

Contributing and Non-Contributing Resources within a physical

boundary, but the Contributing Resource should outweigh the

Non-Contributing Resources.

The Torrance Register also offers an option to designate Thematic

Historic Districts. A Thematic Historic District is a collection of

buildings or features related by architectural, historic, or cultural

themes but not in the same geographic area. For example, the

buildings designed by Irving Gill remaining in Torrance may be

part of a Thematic District; any house that was designed by Gill

and has enough integrity could be designated as part of that

Thematic District, even if the houses are not adjacent to each

other. In Thematic Districts, all of the properties would be

Contributing Resources and all would need owner consent to be

included.

Figure 26: Examples of buildings designated under West Hollywood’s thematic Courtyard Historic District.

Case Study: West

Hollywood’s Courtyard

Historic District

The City of West Hollywood

designated a thematic district of 12

courtyard apartment buildings in

1992. Found throughout the city,

these buildings were built in the

1920s to take advantage of

California’s mild climate by

extending interior spaces to the

outdoor. They are defined by a

courtyard surrounded by apartment

units that had direct access to the

shared open space (Figure 26).


5. PROJECT REVIEWS IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS

Once an area becomes a designated historic district, the city and

residents work together to maintain the character of the district.

One way to do this is through a project review process for changes

in the district.

Project review is needed when:

Building permit is required

AND

Any work affecting the exterior of a Historic Landmark or

Contributing Resource, such as alterations, additions,

rehabilitation, restoration, or partial demolition.

Full demolition or relocation of a Historic Landmark or

Contributing Resource.

Exterior work to Non-Contributing Resources is a Historic

District that will be visible from the public right-of-way.

New construction within a Historic District.

Torrance has established different review processes for different

kinds of projects that affect properties in the Torrance Register.

From the simplest to the most complex, they are:

Minor Project Review: Projects that are minor and do not

significantly change the historic character of the Historic

Landmark or Contributing Resource can be reviewed and

approved by CDD staff under the Minor Project Review.

Certificate of Appropriateness: All other projects for

restoration, rehabilitation, additions, and partial

demolition that are not considered a Minor Project are

reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission

(HPC). HPC will issue a Certificate of Appropriateness if

they find that the project will not adversely affect the

historic character of the Historic Landmark or Historic

District and will be compatible.

Certificate of Demolition: Projects that include a full

demolition of a Historic Landmark or Contributing

Resource are reviewed by HPC for a Certificate of

Demolition. A Certificate of Economic Hardship may also

be required, as well as the preparation of environmental

review documents in accordance with the California

Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Projects Exempt

from Review

Some projects do not require historic project review, such as:

Ordinary maintenance and repair work.

Interior work (unless it affects the exterior, like windows).

Plantings that are not character defining.

Stabilizing emergency or hazardous conditions.

Work that does not require a permit.

Generally, projects that are

visible from the public right-of-

way (i.e., from the streets and

sidewalks) and can potentially

change the character of a

historic building will be subject

to review.


MINOR PROJECT REVIEW

Minor Project Review allows the city to review and approve the

most common, minor exterior work that does not change the

building’s appearance. This may include in-kind roof replacement,

repair of exterior siding, and window repair or in-kind replacement

if repair no longer possible. It also includes small additions that

are not visible from the public right-of-way (streets and sidewalks).

Exterior work on Non-Contributing Resources that will be visible

from the street are usually reviewed as Minor Projects, if the work

is not out of character with the historic district.

Examples of Minor Projects

Repair of character-defining features that does not involve

a change of design, appearance, or visibility of the

feature.

Replacement of character-defining features too

deteriorated to repair. Replacement in the historic

material and matching the original details (in kind) is

preferred. Compatible substitute materials that maintain

the historic character in terms of pattern, texture, and

detailing may be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Repair or replacement of roof covering materials, gutters,

and downspouts, provided that the replacement is in kind

or maintains the architectural character of the historic

resource in terms of pattern, texture, and coloration.

Foundation work with no change in appearance.

Chimney repair and retrofit with no change in appearance.

Construction, demolition, or alteration of side, rear, and

front yard fences.

Alterations or removal of landscape features such as

walkways, planter walls, paved areas, and fountains not

identified as character-defining features.

In-kind replacement of historically faithful features that

were previously removed.

Additions and accessory buildings that are one-story, at

the ground floor, not visible from the street, and do not

increase the building’s floor area by more than 25%.

Other minor rehabilitation work as determined by the

Director of CDD.

For Non-Contributing Resources, partial demolitions,

additional stories, and additions that increase the

building’s floor area by more than 25%.

Character-Defining

Features

Character-defining features

are the essential physical

features that enable a historic

property to convey its

significance. They are usually

those elements or

architectural components that

establish the visual character

of the property. They should

be preserved.

Typical character-defining

features include:

Building shape and form

Orientation

Number of stories or

height characteristic

Floor plan or

configuration

Roof forms and materials

Relationship to street and

surrounding buildings

Exterior cladding or finish

Fenestration (window and

door) pattern

Distinct architectural

features, such as

chimneys, porches,

balconies, etc.

Decorative details, like

brackets, railings, arches,

window/door surrounds,

etc.

Landscape features and

support structures/

ancillary buildings


Minor Project Review Process and Findings

CDD staff uses the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the

Treatment of Historic Properties (SOI Standards) in Minor Project

reviews. HPC may also adopt other design guidance for use by

CDD staff in reviewing and approving Minor Projects.

If the staff finds the project complies with the SOI Standards or the

adopted guidelines and does not change the historic character of

the building, then the project can receive approvals from a historic

preservation standpoint. The staff could also approve in part, in

full, or with conditions and modifications. Project applicants can

revise and resubmit projects based on comments from staff.

Once finalized, CDD staff will notify HPC about Minor Project

review decisions, which are appealable to HPC within 15 days of

the decision.

If CDD staff finds a project does not meet the SOI Standards or

would like input from HPC, the project can be referred to HPC for

a public hearing.

Case Study: Preservation Approach to Wood Windows

Wood windows are one of the main character-defining features of early-twentieth-century houses.

They were often made of old-growth wood with simple to elaborate profiles and sometimes highly

decorative surrounds or details. They are one of the tangible architectural elements that help to date

a building to a certain period. Losing original wood windows can drastically change a building’s

appearance and feeling.

The best preservation approach is to retain and repair the wood windows. Common problems can

usually be repaired: Double-hung windows that no longer stay open can have their balancing weights

re-roped; specific pieces that have dry rot can be replaced; drafty windows can be weather-stripped

and the panes re-puttied. In major rehabilitations, windows can be removed and reconditioned to last

another 50 to 80 years (with proper maintenance).

If windows have deteriorated to the point that replacement is needed, the first options should be to

replace them in kind, meaning in the same wood material and with the same pattern, configuration,

operation, and details. If the same material is not possible, then another compatible material can be

considered, but only after the above repair and in-kind replacement options have been explored.

Although replacing wood windows seems like an easy way to update a house and be energy

conscious, the preservation approach—repair first and replace only if needed—can cost less, provide

greater lasting value, be less disruptive, reduce waste, and retain the house’s historic character for

the next generation to enjoy.


MINOR PROJECT REVIEW PROCESS

Application is filed with CDD and reviewed for completeness.

Does proposed project qualify as a Minor Project?

Yes

CDD staff takes action to approve or conditionally approve in full or in part

Application shall go to HPC for a Certificate of Appropriateness review.

CDD decision may be appealed to HPC within 15 days of issuance.

No

Is proposed work consistent with SOI Standards and/or adopted review

guidelines?

Yes


Applicant can revise application based on review comments.


CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (C OF A)

For larger projects that do not meet the definition of a Minor

Project, a Certificate of Appropriateness (CofA) will be needed.

This usually is for major work that affects the exterior of Historic

Landmarks and Contributing Resources, such as alterations,

rehabilitations, larger and/or visible additions, partial demolitions,

reconstruction, and relocation. Work on Non-Contributing

Resources that are highly visible or have the potential to affect the

Historic District’s character may also undergo a CofA review, as

will new construction within a Historic District, including those

replacing Non-Contributing Resources and second units or

accessory buildings in some cases.

Examples of Projects Requiring Certificate of

Appropriateness

Common types of projects that will require a CofA include, but are

not limited to:

Changing the roof line or historic roof cladding material to

a different material.

Changing the exterior cladding material to a different

material, including painting previously unpainted brick or

concrete.

Replacing historic windows with ones that are not the

same in size, configuration, material, proportions, etc.

Removing or demolishing character-defining features,

such as chimneys, porches, towers, etc.

Adding, removing, or relocating window or door openings

on the front or street-facing façades.

Installing features on the roof that are visible from the

public right-of-way (mechanical equipment, skylights,

antennas, etc.).

Additions that add more than 25% of the existing floor

area.

Additions that are visible from the public right-of-way.

Additions that add height or stories.

Demolishing historic garage or accessory structures that

are character-defining.

Second units or accessory dwelling units.

Other exterior work that can change the building’s

character.

For Non-Contributing Resources, large additions, adding

more stories or a second unit, and other work that can be

out of character with the Historic District.

Tips for Submitting

Projects for Review

Meet with CDD early to

discuss your plans; they

can provide some general

comments and guidance on

what type of review is most

appropriate.

Review the SOI Standards

and Guidelines for

Rehabilitation online to

understand what

approaches are or are not

SOI Standards-compliant.

Minor project review is

usually the fastest route to

getting a project approved,

but some back and forth

may be needed before a

SOI Standards-compliant

project is accepted.

Include photographs of the

current building and where

work is proposed, along

with the architectural plans.

Views from the sidewalk or

across the street are helpful

too.

Consider engaging a

historic preservation

professional to assist with

your project. Historic

architects and those with

experience using the SOI

Standards can design

projects with a preservation

mindset and avoid

surprises later on.


Certificate of Appropriateness Process and Findings

If CDD staff determines that a proposed project does not meet the

definition of a Minor Project, the staff will schedule the application

for review at an HPC hearing. HPC will review the project, taking

into consideration several factors. Mainly, they are looking to see

how the proposed project will affect the Historic Landmark,

Contributing Resource, and/or Historic District. They are also

considering if the changes proposed are appropriate for the

historic materials and character of the building and district.

HPC will use the SOI Standards or other adopted guidelines to

guide their review. They can also refer to available design and

technical recommendations from the National Park Service, such

as the SOI Guidelines for the Preserving, Rehabilitating,

Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings, Preservation

Briefs, Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes, etc.

See the appendix for a partial list of preservation resources.

To approve a project and issue a CofA, HPC must find that the

project meets the adopted review standards, or the SOI Standards

if no other standards have been adopted. HPC can approve in full,

in part, or with conditions and modifications. If the project does

strictly comply with the SOI Standards, but still protects and

preserves the historic character of the Historic Landmark or

Historic District, then HPC can issue the CofA. For projects related

to Non-Contributing Resources, HPC should find that the

requirements for review have been met.

Decisions by HPC are final, but they can be appealed to the City

Council within 15 days of the decision.

SOI Guidelines

The Secretary of the Interior’s

Guidelines for the Treatment

of Historic Properties (SOI

Guidelines) offer general

design and technical

recommendations for

applying the SOI Standards

to a specific historic property.

Together, they offer flexibility

to update buildings and make

reasonable changes while

respecting the historic design,

materials, feeling, and

character of the building.

The SOI Guidelines outline a

general hierarchical process

for preservation projects:

1. Identify, retain, and

preserve character-

defining features and

significant spaces;

2. Protect and maintain as

much as possible;

3. Repair when needed in

ways that are appropriate

and sensitive to the

historic materials;

4. Only when repair is not

possible then consider

replacing in kind, i.e.,

matching in configuration

design, materials, details,

finish, etc. Compatible

substitute materials may

be considered at times.

The SOI Guidelines also

provide specific do’s and

don’ts for certain materials

and features.


CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS REVIEW PROCESS


Does proposed project qualify as a Minor Project?

Application shall go to HPC for a Certificate of Appropriateness review.

No

HPC reviews using SOI Standards and/or adopted review guidelines and takes action to approve, conditionally

approve, or deny the application.

Approve

Certificate of Appropriateness is issued.

DenyCertificate of Appropriateness is not

issued

HPC decision may be appealed to City Council within 15 days of issuance.

Application is scheduled for review at next available HPC meeting. Notice will

be publicly posted.

Application can be reviewed as a Minor Project.

Yes



CERTIFICATE OF DEMOLITION

Once designated, the demolition of a Historic Landmark or

Contributing Resource in a Historic District should be a rare event.

A full or substantial demolition of a designated Historic Landmark

is a permanent loss that cannot be reversed or lessened by

photographs or other documentation. Generally, the demolition of

a Contributing Resource does not automatically result in the

permanent loss of the Historic District, but there are some

instances where that may occur, especially if there are only a few

Contributing Resources in the district.

Demolition of a historic resource is strongly discouraged, but there

may be certain situations in which the option of demolition must

be explored. A Certificate of Demolition (CofD) will be needed for

full demolitions.

Certificate of Demolition Process and Findings

If CDD staff determines an application will require a CofD, the staff

will inform the owners and request additional items, including:

An initial study under the California Environmental Quality

Act (CEQA);

An application for a Certificate of Economic Hardship; and

An application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the

replacement project, if in a Historic District.

CEQA is a state environmental law that considers the loss of a

historic resource to be an impact on the environment. The initial

study for CEQA review is to understand whether the demolition

will potentially have a significant adverse effect on a historic

resource. If so, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to explore

preservation alternatives may be required.

The Certificate of Economic Hardship is to consider whether

denying the CofD would create an undue economic hardship on

the owner. To understand that, financial and technical information

related to repair, rehabilitation, relocation, and other alternatives

to demolition may be requested.

In the case of a Contributing Resource in a Historic District, HPC

will also review the proposed replacement and consider its

compatibility with the district. Replacement projects for Historic

Landmarks are not subject to project review by HPC, but HPC

may consider the merits of the replacement project in hearing the

CofD application.

Demolition: Full vs.

Partial

The Torrance Historic

Preservation Ordinance

defines demolitions as full or

partial:

Full Demolition: Demolition

that involves 50% or more of

the exterior walls area or

building floor area.

Partial Demolition: Demolition

that involves less than 50% of

the exterior wall area and

building floor area of the

primary building, and

demolition of other features

on the property.

Demolition of garages or

accessory structures would

be reviewed as partial

demolition.

Full demolitions of Historic

Landmarks and Contributing

Resources will require a

Certificate of Demolition. Full

demolition of a Non-

Contributing Resource does

not require historic review,

but the replacement project

will require a CofA.

Partial demolitions of

Landmarks and Contributing

Resources will require a

CofA.


Both the initial study and the information needed for a Certificate

of Economic Hardship may take months to complete. They are

intended to explore other options to demolition to avoid the loss of

a historic resource. CDD will schedule the CofD application for an

HPC hearing once all of the requested information has been

accepted and deemed complete.

At the hearing, HPC will review the project, taking into

consideration several factors including, but not limited to

The importance of the Historic Landmark or Contributing

Resource to the City of Torrance.

Its historic, architectural, or cultural significance.

Reasons for the demolition.

Feasibility to repair or adaptively reuse the building.

Economic hardship.

Merits of the replacement project (in a Historic District).

Options to mitigate the loss.

HPC also hears the CofA for a replacement project (as a new

construction project) at the same time as the CofD in the cases

involving Contributing Resources.

To approve the CofD, HPC must:

Approve the Certificate of Economic Hardship finding that

denial of the CofD will deprive the owner of substantially

all reasonable use of the property;

Make at least two (2) of the following findings:

o The deterioration that is the basis for the

demolition is not the result of the owner’s failure

to maintain the property.

o There is a compelling public interest that justifies

demolition.

o All reasonable efforts to restore, rehabilitate, or

relocate the building have been exhausted.

o Renovation would require such extensive

alterations that would render the building no

longer historic.

o Demolishing the Contributing Resource will not

detrimentally change, destroy, or adversely affect

the historic character or value of the Historic

District.

Decisions by HPC are final, but they can be appealed to the City Council within 15 days of the decision.


CERTIFICATE OF DEMOLITION PROCESS FOR HISTORIC LANDMARKS & CONTRIBUTING RESOURCES IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS

Yes

Certificate of Demolition is issued.

No HPC denies Certificate of Demolition.


issuance.

Once all received and deemed complete, application is scheduled for review at next available HPC meeting. Notice will be publicly

posted.

Applicant will be requested to provide: - An initial study in accordance with CEQA - An application for Certificate of Economic Hardship - An application for Certificate of Appropriateness for a

replacement project, if in Historic District

Does denial of CofD substantially deprive owner of all reasonable use?

Yes

Can HPC make at least two of the required findings?

Yes

HPC makes findings to approve Certificate of Economic Hardship

YesHas HPC approved a CofA for a

replacement project, if in a Historic District?

No


Is a Certificate of Demolition (CofD) required?



CERTIFICATE OF ECONOMIC HARDSHIP

As with the Certificate of Demolition, HPC may issue a Certificate

of Economic Hardship if denial of the CofA creates an undue

economic hardship on the owner. Economic hardship is not

merely that the preservation requirements will cost more, or that

the property’s highest value use is not available. Evidence must

be provided to the satisfaction of HPC that there would be a

substantial burden on the owner. This can be because a

reasonable rate of return cannot be achieved for an income-

producing property, that the work is not economically reasonable,

practical, or viable, or that a legal “taking” would occur.

HPC may request cost estimates, technical reports, financial data,

and other information to make their decision.


THIS PAGE IS INTENTIALLY BLANK


6. DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR PROJECTS IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS

In reviewing projects in historic districts, CDD staff and the Historic

Preservation Commission may consider the following factors

when determining if the proposed project meets the review

standards or is compatible with the historic resource.

Massing, including building shape form, height, and the

nature of the roof line (Figures 27 & 28)

Proportions between the height of a building and its width;

Nature of the open space around buildings, including

extent of setbacks, the existence of side yards, their sizes,

continuity of such spaces along the street, and the extent

of paving;

Nature of openings in the façade (windows and doors)—

their locations, size, proportions, and hierarchy;

Type of roof, including cladding material;

Nature of projections from the building, such as porches

and balconies;

Nature of the architectural details, and the predominate

architectural style (if any);

Nature of the materials;

Color;

Texture;

Details of ornamentation;

Signs; and

Other character-defining features.

PROJECTS INVOLVING PARTIAL DEMOLITION

When considering projects that involve partial demolitions, HPC

may look at whether character-defining features will be affected or

removed. This may include including garages, accessory

structures, and landscape features as well as the building’s

features. The visibility of the change from the street and the effect

of the entire proposed project, partial demolitions, and any new

construction or additions, will also be factors to consider. If located

within a Historic District, the effect of the project to that Historic

District will also be reviewed.

NEW CONSTRUCTION IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS

New buildings will be constructed in Historic Districts from time to

time. They may be built on vacant lots or to replace a Non-

Contributing Resource. They may also be a second unit that is


allowed by zoning on the lot, or in very rare situations, a new

building replacing a Contributing Resource in the district.

Regardless of the reason, the new construction will be reviewed

for compatibility with the scale, massing, setbacks, and where

appropriate, the original style, of the Historic District’s Contributing

Resources. This usually includes:

A. The height, width, and length of the new building

compared to surrounding Contributing Resources;

B. Floor heights, fenestration patterns, proportions, solid-to-

void ratios, and other the elements and details;

C. Exterior materials and treatments; and

D. Other relevant features of the Historic District and its

Contributing Resources.

The goal is to ensure that new buildings will maintain the overall

character of a Historic District.

Figure 27: Second-story addition setback from the

front, with roofline and materials that take their cues

from the original house and are in keeping with its

Craftsman style.

Figure 28: While setback, the design concept for

this second-story addition is unclear. The narrow

windows, horizontal siding, and flat roofline do not

relate to the original building design.


THREE COMMON PROJECTS IN THE TORRANCE

TRACT

To demonstrate how project reviews in a historic district seek to

emphasize preserving the district’s historic character, three

project types common in the Torrance Tract are discussed below.

1. Creating an Addition to a Single-Family House;

2. Adding an Accessory Dwelling Unit to a lot zoned R-1,

Single-Family Residences; and

3. Developing Two Condominiums to a lot zoned R-2, Two-

Family Residences.

In each of these three cases, HPC will be looking for compliance

with the SOI Standards. The most relevant are Standard 2, 5, 9,

and 10 (refer to Appendix E). In general, these SOI Standards

require that:

The new addition or unit does not alter the building’s

historic character (Standard 2);

Character-defining features and historic materials are not

sacrificed to allow the new addition or unit (Standard 5);

The new addition or unit is both compatible AND

differentiated from the historic (Standard 9); and

The new addition is reversible, so if removed in the future,

the essential form and integrity of the historic building

remains (Standard 10).

Being compatible and differentiated under Standard 9 requires

balance; one without the other may not meet the SOI Standards.

New construction that is identical to the original creates a false

sense of historic development. New construction that is too

different can distract from or overwhelm the historic. Typically, the

design of the new construction should reference the historic

building in terms of scale, massing, proportion, roofline,

fenestration, exterior cladding, and other details. However, to

avoid too closely matching the historic building and giving a false

sense of history, consider simplifying the details, using

contemporary construction methods or compatible materials, or

slightly adjusting proportions or patterns.


1. Creating an Addition to a Single-Family House

In a historic district, small additions that meet certain requirements

can be approved by CDD staff. Larger additions—those that

increase the house’s floor areas by more than 25%--or additions

that are visible from the public right-of-way (streets and

sidewalks), like second-story or side yard additions, will be

reviewed by HPC.

Some recommendations to keep in mind:

The historic building should remain the main focus of the

property. Additions should be secondary to the main,

historic building and not compete with it for attention.

Typically, a one-story addition located at the rear of the

parcel will accomplish this (Figure 27).

Additions should not be at the front of the buildings

(Figure 28). The front, street-facing façade is usually a

key character-defining feature and one of the main ways

a building relates to the other properties in a historic

district. Additions to the front can also alter the

relationship of the building to the street, which is often

consistent in the historic district and gives the district its

character.

Figure 27. One-story additions at the rear that are not visible from the street are preferred.

Figure 28. Front additions are not recommended in historic districts.

Second story additions should be set as far back as

possible, so as not to be readily visible from the street.

For some smaller buildings, a one-story connector placed

between the one and two-story volumes (referred to as a

“hyphen”) helps avoid overwhelming the main, historic

building (Figure 29). The roofline of the second story

addition should also take cues from the historic building,


whether in roof slope, cladding materials, or other

detailing (Figure 30).

Side additions should also be set back from the front

façade building plane, so as not to compete with the

historic building or be confused for an original component.

The roofline should also take its cue from the historic

building, but have a break or visual separation.

Depending on lot size, building size, building design, and

corner lot conditions, an appropriate addition for one site

may not be an appropriate addition for another site.

Figure 29. Two-story additions should be set back from the main building and be compatible in design, rooflines, materials, and detailing.

Figure 30. Two-story additions that contrast too drastically with the main building, or overwhelm the main, historic building should be avoided.

Figure 31. The two-story addition is minimally visible from the street and is stepped back from the side of the front historic building.

Figure 32. Although the two-story addition is set back, its massing overwhelms the front historic building. A roofline that is lower and slopes back from the street, similar to the front building, along with a side step back to the addition would be more appropriate.


2. Adding an Accessory Dwelling Unit to an R-1 Lot

Torrance has recently revised its ordinance governing Accessory

Dwelling Units (ADU) to meet the requirements of state law.13 Also

known as second units or “granny flats,” state laws require cities

to allow ADUs to be added to single-family residences provided

they meet certain requirements, including that the unit is not to be

sold separately or used as a short-term rental. Torrance’s revised

ordinance outlined the development standards for ADUs, which

vary if the unit is within an existing building, if it is newly built and

attached to an existing building, or if it is built as a detached

building. Any ADUs that are not within those limits would need to

be reviewed and approved by the City Planning Commission.

While an ADU that meets Torrance’s revised ordinance is allowed

by right, those that are in a Historic District are still subject to

design review to avoid negatively impacting the district. On the

other hand, being in a Historic District also offers relief with more

flexible parking requirements.

Some things to keep in mind when planning ADUs in a Historic

District:

ADUs in a Historic District can take advantage of the state

exemption from parking requirements—an incentive for

historic districts.

ADUs should generally be sized appropriately to the main

building, placed at the rear, and minimally visible from the

street.

ADUs on properties with Contributing Resources should

be architecturally compatible with the historic building in

terms of architectural vocabulary, cladding materials,

colors, exterior finishes, and landscaping, among other

factors.

Per Torrance’s revised ordinance on ADUs (approved in

April 2017), ADUs in the form of additions to a

Contributing Resources are only allowed if they do not

add more than 30% to the existing living area (Figure 33).

While new detached ADUs can be built up to 1,200

square feet (per Torrance’s ADU ordinance), the floor

area ratio (FAR), lot coverage, and open space

13 Senate Bill 1069 and Assembly Bill 2299 from 2016 are the relevant state laws that triggered the revisions.


requirements for smaller lots may not allow units that

large (Figure 34).

Avoid demolishing the historic garage or accessory

structures to accommodate an ADU. Consider converting

or expanding the garage for the ADU, but keep the garage

doors so it continues to read as a garage.

Figure 33. An attached ADU that adds no more than 25% of a main, historic building’s area should follow the same guidance as for additions.

Figure 34. Although detached ADUs up to 1,200 square feet may be allowed, smaller lots may not accommodate ADUs of that size because other requirements for FAR, lot coverage, and open space still need to be met.

3. Developing Two Condominiums on an R-2 lot

Different from ADUs are the R-2 areas in the Torrance Tract that

allow two separate units to be built. Here, the second unit is not

subordinate to a primary residence; both are essentially primary

residences. An increasingly popular approach in recent years has

been to create two condominium units on R-2 zoned lots where

some of the lot is shared common areas but each unit is sold

separately (ADUs cannot be sold separately from the primary

residence). To maximize the land and value of the condominium

units, new two-story townhouses are built. This has often resulted

in the demolition of the existing building, typically an older,

smaller, one-story single-family house, and the diminishing of a

cohesive neighborhood character.

In a historic district, the ability to have two units in an R-2 lot is not

lost. The approach would be to keep the main building, if it has

been identified as a Contributing Resource, and construct the

second unit in the rear (Figure 35). As the rear unit is usually less

visible from the street, and therefore would have less impact to

the character of the historic district, review in a historic district

would be similar to reviewing a large addition (Figure 36 through

Figure 38). To encourage keeping the Contributing Resource, the


city may consider modifying some development standards, such

as setback and parking design requirements.

Figure 35. A second unit in an R-2 zone can be built while keeping the historic Contributing Resource at the front.

Figure 36. The second unit should be compatible in design with the historic Contributing Resource and avoid overwhelming the front building.

Figure 37. Example of compatible second unit added to the rear of an older (non-historic) house.

Figure 38. The roofline of the second unit is minimally visible from the street.

Figure 39. Another example of compatible second unit added to the rear of an R-2 lot. The roofline takes its cues from the front building but avoids matching too exactly.

Figure 40. From the sidewalk, the second unit is not visible. This example is in the Small Lot, Low Medium Density Overlay Zone in the Torrance Tract.


In the case where a two-condominium development replaces a

Non-Contributing Resource in a historic district, the new

development would also be subject to review by HPC. Here, the

review would center on compatibility of the new development with

the historic district.

Some points to keep in mind:

In terms of site compatibility, avoid placing the garage on

the front, street-facing side where a curb cut would be

needed; Torrance Tract streets typically do not have curb

cuts and garages historically have been facing the alleys.

Another site compatibility feature may also mean keeping

the existing setback that is consistent along the block.

In terms of the buildings’ scale and massing, the main,

historic building may not be required to remain a single

story, though the design should consider a massing that

steps back the second story.

The design should consider a roofline that is pitched

rather than flat, if that is a common feature within the

neighborhood context. The pitch could also follow the

same proportions or slope to minimize the appearance.

Matching the style of the surrounding buildings is also not

required; in historic districts, often many different styles

are found.

o However, the new front building should take cues

from its neighbors, in terms of symmetry or

asymmetry, volumes and wall planes, fenestration

pattern, and use of materials.

o For instance, many traditional designs have more

solid walls than window or door openings (wall to

void ratio), and those openings are not oversized. A

more modern building with walls of glass or large

picture windows may not be compatible.

Where a new development seeks to build in a traditional

style, consider the proportions, craftsmanship, and

materials that also define these styles—the character-

defining features.


7. RECOMMENDATIONS

To further support historic preservation in the Torrance Tract, the

following are recommended:

Encourage the Historical Society and interested owners

to gather support from neighbors and initiate district

nominations.

Update the historic context for Torrance Tract to identify

the development patterns and any significant individuals,

as well as to establish eligibility criteria for significance

and integrity to help guide HPC.

Consider establishing thematic districts.

Continue to develop the Mills Act program, with

application process.

Develop attractive incentives that protect the main (front),

historic buildings but allows flexibility for new additions,

accessory dwelling units, or second unit (as allowed) at

the rear and utilizes alleys to protect the historic street

pattern.

Develop educational and marketing materials promoting

the city’s historic preservation program.

Consider surveying or creating districts in other parts of

Torrance, outside the Torrance Tract.


8. SOURCES CITED

California Office of Historic Preservation. Technical Assistant

Series No. 7, How to Nominate a Resource to the California Register of Historic Resources. Sacramento: California Office of State Publishing, 2001.

Dalton, Peggy Coleman. Torrance: A City for Today. USA:

Windsor Publications, 1990. Nakada+Associates. “Olmsted Tract; Torrance California 2011-

2013 Survey of Historic Resources.” “Rehabilitation as a Treatment.” National Park Service Technical

Preservation Services, U.S. Department of the Interior. Accessed January 29, 2017, https://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/four-treatments/treatment-rehabilitation.htm.

“The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for the

Treatment of Historic Properties.” National Park Service Technical Preservation Services, U.S. Department of the Interior. Accessed January 29, 2017, https://www.nps.gov/tps/standards.htm.

Thomas D. Campbell & Company. Torrance: The Modern

Industrial City. Los Angeles: Thomas D. Campbell & Company, 1913.


9. APPENDIX

A. 2014 OLMSTED TRACT SURVEY

B. RELEVANT ORDINANCES

C. NATIONAL AND STATE PRESERVATION

PROGRAMS

D. SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S

STANDARDS FOR THE TREATMENT OF

HISTORIC PROPERTIES

E. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

ACT AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION

F. PRESERVATION RESOURCES

G. ABBREVIATIONS AND NOTES

torrance tract historic preservation plan

Documents