TO: ARCHITECTURAL AND PRESERVATION COMMISSION
FROM: BRAD JOHNSON, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
DATE: APRIL 29, 2026
SUBJECT:
Title
ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE PLAN REVIEW #26-A04, REVIEW OF PROPOSED RELOCATION OF AN EXISTING HOUSE LOCATED AT 240 EAST ELEVENTH STREET ON THE SCRIPPS COLLEGE CAMPUS TO A PARCEL OWNED BY THE CLAREMONT GRADUATE UNIVERSITY AT 130 EAST FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND TO CONSTRUCT A NEW DETACHED GARAGE. APPLICANT - SCRIPPS COLLEGE
Body
SUMMARY
On July 23, 2025, the Architectural and Preservation Commission approved Scripps College’s proposal for adaptive reuse of the former Claremont Graduate University (CGU) Art Department building at 251 East Tenth Street and the addition of a new three-story building located at the north end of the existing art building for a new Dance/Psychology building on a 1.65-acre site (#24-A10). The project site was located on the west side of North Columbia Avenue, between Tenth and Eleventh Streets. The new Dance/Psychology Building is currently under construction and involves the relocation of an existing residential structure that is located within the 1.65-acre project site.
The structure to be relocated from its existing address, 240 East Eleventh Street (240 House), was originally built as a residential duplex. Scripps has been using the 2,345 square foot residential structure for staff and faculty offices. As discussed at the July 23, 2025, Architectural and Preservation Commission meeting, the 240 House required removal, either through relocation or demolition, to make room for the construction of the new Dance/Psychology building. A Historic Assessment was prepared by a Historic Preservation professional and presented to the Commission at the time of the public hearing. The Historic Assessment (Attachment B) concluded that the structure was not a mandatory or presumptive historical resource under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); therefore, its removal will not constitute a negative impact to the environment.
Because the 240 House exhibited high architectural integrity, staff has worked with Scripps College over the past nine months to explore many different options to relocate rather than demolish the structure. Options explored included relocating the House to a lot in Altadena to help rebuild the Altadena community after the devastating wildfire in 2025. Ultimately, it was determined that relocation to a site outside the City was not feasible due to cost and logistics. Finally, Claremont Graduate University (CGU) expressed interest in having the House relocated to a vacant parcel on the CGU campus, at 130 East Foothill Boulevard. The new site is approximately 900 feet northwest from the original site of the 240 House.
The vacant mid-block parcel is approximately 200 feet south of Foothill Boulevard and is bounded by Alley 31 to the west and North Dartmouth Place to the south. In addition to relocating the house, construction of a detached garage to the rear of the relocated 240 House is proposed. Once the 240 House has been relocated to the CGU campus, it will be leased to Scripps College as a dormitory for twelve students.
Pursuant to Section 16.300.030.B of the Claremont Municipal Code (“CMC”), relocations of non-single-family residential buildings within and into the City require the review and approval by the Architectural and Preservation Commission. Because the House is already designed, this design review is essentially a review of the proposed site plan and landscaping for the new location of the structure.
RECOMMENDATION
Recommended Action
Staff recommends the Architectural and Preservation Commission adopt A RESOLUTION OF THE CLAREMONT ARCHITECTURAL AND PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE PLAN REVIEW #26-A04, FOR SITING AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE RELOCATED FROM 240 EAST ELEVENTH STREET ON THE VACANT LOT AT 130 EAST FOOTHILL BOULEVARD. APPLICANT - SCRIPPS COLLEGE.
Body
ALTERNATIVES TO RECOMMENDATION
In addition to the staff recommendation, there are the following alternatives:
A. Continue the item for additional information or redesign of the proposal.
B. Approve the project with additional or revised conditions of approval.
FINANCIAL REVIEW
The costs associated with this review have been borne by Scripps College.
ANALYSIS
The application materials, including a letter from the applicant, a letter from the applicant’s engineer, plans, preliminary landscape plan, historic assessment, traffic control plan, and a “swept path analysis” indicating the travel path of the home as it is being relocated, and Claremont Colleges Parking Count have been included in the staff report as Attachments B through I. Photographs of the 240 House at its original location are included in Attachment J. An 11 by 17 inch-sized copy of these plans are available for review at the public counter in City Hall.
Historic Assessment of 240 East Eleventh Street
The 240 House was constructed in 1925 as a duplex. It is generally rectangular and covered by a multi-gabled roof. It was acquired by Scripps College and converted into office use in 1998. Permit records indicate that the building has gone through multiple substantial alterations. The applicant submitted a Historic Assessment prepared by a historic preservation consultant for the building (Attachment B). The report concluded that this building is not a historical resource under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) due to the following reasons:
• It is not listed on any National or State historic registry; therefore, it is not a mandatory historical resource.
• It is not listed on the Claremont Register; therefore, it is not a presumptive historical resource.
• It is not eligible to be listed on the Claremont Register by the Lead Agency (i.e., the City); therefore, it is not a discretionary historical resource.
The determination was drawn because the 240 House’s association with Scripps College is less than 50 years; therefore, it is not significant in the context of higher education. It is also not significant in the context of residential development of Claremont during the early twentieth century; the area was never fully developed as a residential neighborhood. In addition, there are not enough residential properties with shared physical characteristics of historical associations in the area to form a potential historic district. Also, this building is not significant in the context of architecture because no records can be found about the original designer/builder, and it has been heavily altered over time. Further, research on previous residents of the house did not yield any individuals with significant contributions to history.
Therefore, relocating the 240 House will not cause significant negative impacts on the City’s cultural and historical heritage, particularly when it will remain in the City and be available for public view through public streets and alleyways.
Rationale for Relocation and Site Selection
The proposed relocation site was selected to be consistent with industry best practices for ensuring that the 240 House maintains its usability and integrity. The site was selected due to the following qualities:
• It is located approximately 900 feet northwest of the original site of the House.
• It will continue to serve higher education purposes within the City.
• It maintains visibility of the 240 House on a college campus, accessible by public streets and alleyways.
• It maintains the building’s setting with neighboring houses of similar period, style, size, orientation to the street, and landscape features, with similar views to and from the property.
The project submittal includes a photo simulation showing how the 240 House will appear when viewed from North Dartmouth Place and Alley 31. The simulation shows the most character defining feature of the house, its front elevation, which features a multi-gabled roof asymmetrically organized into three bays and centered with an arched opening to the front door. The feasibility of relocating the 240 House, as well as the method of relocation, is documented in a letter provided by the applicant’s Engineer, Traffic Control Plan, and a Swept Analysis for the path of travel for the relocation route (Attachments D, E, F).
Minor Exception Permit
The applicant provided a site plan showing how the 240 House will be placed on its future pad at 130 East Foothill Boulevard. Upon staff review, it was determined that the site planning meets all the development standards set forth for the Educational Institution (IE) district except for the front/south and the left/west side setback.
Section 16.039.050.A. of the Claremont Municipal Code requires a 25-foot setback where a property zoned Educational Institution (IE) is separated from a residential district by a street or alley. This scenario applies to both the front/south and the left/west elevations, where the project site is separated from the side and rear yards of residential properties zoned RS 8,000 by North Dartmouth Place and Alley 31. The applicant is proposing a 20-foot setback along the front/south property line facing North Dartmouth Place, and a 21-foot setback along the left/west property line facing Alley 31, when a 25-foot setback is required for both property lines.
Concurrent with this design review by the Architectural and Preservation Commission, the applicant is pursuing a Minor Exception Permit to reduce the west/left side setback of the property by twenty percent, from 25 feet to 20 feet. This request is to maintain a gravel walkway around the 240 House, and an 8-foot setback along the east/right property line in order to construct an ADA ramp and install landscaping along the east/right side of the house leading to the front door.
Further, the 25-foot setback requirement is generally for larger institutional buildings abutting a residential zone, considering that institutional buildings typically are larger in mass and scale compared to single-family homes; therefore, further setbacks from residential homes are necessary to mitigate massing compatibility. However, in this case, the 240 House to be relocated is a residential structure that is equivalent in scale and mass with existing surrounding residential structures. As such, staff believes that it is more imperative to provide room for the ADA ramp than to require a full 25-foot setback.
Furthermore, there are many existing residential homes along North Dartmouth Place and Alley 31 that do not meet the required 8-foot side and rear setbacks for the RS 8,000 zone. In fact, of the total of ten residential homes along North Dartmouth Place and Alley 31, only three properties complied with the required 8-foot side and rear setback requirements. Two properties (1200 and 1208 North College Avenue) currently have zero setback from Alley 31, while an additional two properties (1280 North College Avenue and 136 North Dartmouth Place) only provide a 3-foot setback. Consequently, the applicant’s proposed 21-foot setback is more than what existing structures have provided and is consistent with the built environment and the character of the neighborhood. Therefore, staff believes all necessary findings for the granting of an MEP can be made and intends to approve the MEP once the Architectural and Preservation Commission has made a decision on the relocation of the 240 House.
Landscaping
The preliminary landscape plan (Attachment I) has been designed to maintain a balanced relationship between trees and the house, but also to add additional plantings to create more visual interest where there is currently no landscaping. The applicant is proposing to add one Southern Live Oak and three Arbutus Marina (Strawberry Trees) to the site, planting them in the front yard as well as the left side yard, so that the two street frontages will be adequately landscaped. Furthermore, a variety of shrubs such as Agave Blue Flame, Smokey Coast Rosemary, White Trailing Lantana, Jerusalem Sage, Huntington Carpet Rosemary, and White Mischief Mexican Bush Sage are proposed in the yard area along the two street frontages.
Parking
The applicant is proposing a detached three-car garage behind the relocated 240 House. The garage will be used by CGU for its parking needs. Meanwhile, three parallel parking spaces are proposed along the left side of the relocated 240 House, adjacent to Alley 31, for the use of the students who will be residing at the relocated 240 House.
Although staff does not have sufficient information to verify the exact property line location at this time, this project will be subject to the Plan Check process consistent with all projects that are approved by the Architectural and Preservation Commission. During the Plan Check process, if it is determined that there is not enough width to meet the City’s requirement for parking spaces, the applicant will then be requested to redesign the landscape area and walkway so that there will be sufficient width to meet the City’s dimension requirements for parking spaces. Planning Condition L has been added to this effect.
Staff notes that both Scripps College and CGU have surplus daytime parking. According to the latest available parking availability worksheet for the Claremont Colleges (Attachment G), Scripps College has a daytime parking surplus of 180 spaces, and CGU has a daytime parking surplus of 286 spaces. Therefore, in the unlikely event that the three proposed parallel parking spaces need to be removed due to a lack of width, the colleges will still have sufficient surplus parking to sustain the parking needs of the 12 students living in the 240 House. Furthermore, Scripps College has expressed that many of its students do not have vehicles as many preferred biking and walking. Therefore, Scripps College is open to installing bike racks for the students living in the 240 House upon occupancy.
STAFF EVALUATION
Staff finds the vacant parcel at 130 East Foothill Boulevard is a suitable new site for the 240 House. Staff also finds that the preservation of the 240 House will enhance the sustainability goals of the City of Claremont and that its continued use for higher education will further Claremont’s community values. Further, staff finds that the 240 House, with its proposed placement on the site, will blend well with adjacent surrounding buildings. Staff further finds the design to be consistent with the review criteria of Chapter 16.300.060 of the Municipal Code as described in detail in the attached draft approval resolution (Attachment A).
CEQA REVIEW
The Project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15061 (Class 32), in that the proposal is consistent with the City’s applicable land use regulations, proposed on an infill site that is less than five acres in size, and is not anticipated to result in any significant environmental impacts. Further, the project does not meet any exceptions to categorical exemptions under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2. Therefore, no further environmental review is necessary.
PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS
The agenda and staff report for this item have been posted on the City website and distributed to interested parties. If you desire a copy, please contact Melissa Sanabria at msanabria@claremontca.gov.
On April 16, 2026, a notice of this review was sent to surrounding property owners of the project site and posted on the City website. Copies of this staff report have been sent to the applicant and other interested parties.
Submitted by: Reviewed by:
Brad Johnson Christopher Veirs
Community Development Director City Planner
Prepared by:
Catherine Lin, AICP
Senior Planner
Attachments:
A - Draft Approval Resolution
B - Historic Assessment of 240 House
C - Letter from Applicant
D - Letter from Applicant’s Engineer
E - Traffic Control Plan
F - Swept Analysis
G - Claremont Colleges Parking Count
H - Project Plans
I - Preliminary Landscape Plan
J - Photos of 240 House