Loading...
SR-7-A (37)LUTM:PPD:SF:AS w/~1c0453 CDUNCIL MEETING: September 8, 1992 T~: Mayor and City Council FROM: City Staff ~~ ~~~ " ~ •~~., i ~:.~~ Santa Monica, Ca~ifornia SLTBJECT: Appeal of Landmarks Comnnission Apgroval of Landmark De~ignation LC-04-Q45, 822-824 Third Street, a Streamlin~ Made~ne Apartment Building Known Histaricall~ as the Vanity Fair Apartments. AppZicant: City of Santa Monica Landmarks Commission Appellant: Enayatollah Golshani INTRODUCTTON This report recommends that the City Council deny the appeal and uphold the decisian of the Landmarks Commission to designate the Streamline Moderne apaxtment building located at 822-824 Third Street, knowr~ historically as the Vanity Fair Apartments, as a City Landmark. ~n May 11, 1992 the Landmarks Commission voted 7-0 to designat~ this building as Santa Monzca's twenty-second landmark. The appea]. filed by the proper~y oraner is contained in Attachment A. BAGI{GROUND Landmarks Commissiar~ Act~on On Niarch 9, 1992 ~he Landmarks Cammission, at the request of neiqhborhood residents, fil~d a landmark designatian application for this Streamline Moderne apartmant bui~ding. The landmark ~~ _ ~ _ ~~~ ° :~ ~~~~ designation appZication was subsequently prepared with ~he res~arch assistance of neighborhood residents. At that time, the Commissivn's unanimous vote ta fil~ th~ landmark designation applzcation was based on the building's architectural merit as a Streamline Moderne residential structure. However, the Commission also requested that research be conducted an the building's history to determine if it was also associated with a notable Santa Manica reszdent or with a significant architect or builder. The Landmarks Commissian conducted a public hearing to Farmally eva~uate the landmark designation application at the April 13, 1992 Commissian mee~ing. Following consideration aF the Iandmark application and the publzc testimony, the Cammissian unanimously voted ta set the landmark designation public heari~g for the next regular Com~ission meeting on May Il, 1992. At the May Commissian meating, the appellant sta~ed that, while he had no immediate plans to demolish the building, the structure was in very poor condition and that the cantinual repairs were very costly. In response, Commissianers note~ that the Landmarks Ordinance does provide some incentives to preserve designated st~uctures, such as the elimination of building permit and admznistrative planning application fees and the ability to use the State Historic Building Code rather than the Uniform Building Cvde. Prior to the Commission4s unanimous decision to designa~e the structure, Commissioners praised the architectural quality of - 2 - the Vanity Fair Apart~ents, stating that the building is among the finest examples af Streamline Moderne architecture in the Czty. Landmark Designation Critaria The Landmarks Ordinance requires that proposed landmarks be evaluated against the fallowing ~riteria: (1} 2t exemplif~es, symbolizes, ar manifests elements of the cultural, socia~, economic, political, or a~chiteGtural history of the City. (2) It has a~sth~tic ar artistic interest or value, or other notewor~hy interest or values. (3) It is identified with histaric personages or with ~mportant events in local, state, or na~iana3 history. (4) It embo~~es distinguishing architectural characteristics valuable t~ a study of a period, style, method of construction, or the use of indigenaus materials ar craftsmanship, ar is a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail, or historica~ type valuable to such a study. (5y It is a significant or a representative exampl~ af the work or product of a notable builder, designer, or architect. (6) ~t has a unique locatian, a sing~~ar physical character~stic, ar ~s an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community or the City. The Landmarks Ordinance permits the apprQ~al of a landmark designation if findings can be made to support at leas~ one of the six designation criteria. In th~ case of the Vanity Fair Apartments, the Landmarks Comm~ssion based the buildingfs landmark designation an three af the six criteria. - 3 - Criteria ~: Historical Architectural Significance Built in 1935, the Vani~y Fair Apartments is the oldest known example af Streamline Moderne residentia~ architecture in Santa Mon~ca. The building is representative of the shift in architectural design fram the arnate Art Deco style to the simpler forms and less expensive ma~erials of Streamline Moderne architecture. At the time of ~ts const~uction, the Vanity Fair Apartments were considered a modern, innovative appraach to design. Today, the Vanity Fair Apartments exemplify the Streamline Moderne era in San~a Monica's archi~ectural history, markinq the beginning of the style's influx int~ the City. Criteria 3: Historical Significance Caxl R. Hendarson was a locally praminent businessperson as well as civic leader who was active in Santa Mo~ica realty and praperty awner organizations. His service as captain of the Santa Mvnica Mounted Palice in addition to his interest and effort in promoting the City Manager form of gavernment for Santa Monica demonstrates his commitment to the health, vitality, and future of San~a Monica. Further, his construction of the Vanity Fair Apartments, noted at the time as a distinctive structure, is evidence ot his desire to improv~ and contribute to the physical, as well as functional, appearance of the City. - 4 - Criteria 4: Architectural Significance The Vanity Fair Apartments are a superior example of Streamline Moderne archi~ecture, a style more typ~cally used for commercial buiZding design. The bui~ding embodies ~any notable charac~eristics of the Streamline Moderne sty~e, including the stucco cZad exterior, the asymmetrical facade, the curved corners and overall horizontal appsarance. Classic StreamZine Moderne details valuable ta the study of thzs architectural period include the metal balustrades s~rro~nding the balconies, the horizdntal and vertical bandinq at the nQrtheast ~uilding corner, ~he light fixtures with curved corners abave the front entry of the apartmen~ units, th~ curved banding on the frant daors, and the metal frame windows. Landmark Designation Applicatian The landmark designation application, con~ained in Attachment B, provides a detailed descript~on of th~ property as welZ as a discussian of the building's architectura~ merit and historical signi~icance. The buiZding displays many classic Streamline Mode~n~ design eZe~ents, which are further iZlustrated in the build~ng phatographs contained in Attachment C. Streamline Moderne architecture emerged from an economic need for simpler, inexpensive buildings and a growing fascination with transportatio~ design. The exuberant design of the Art Deco - 5 - period, camplete with delicate metal work, ga~d leaf traczngs, and coZarful mosaic til~s, was replaced with mater~als such a stucco, concrete, and g~ass. The averall building profile shifted from a vertical to a horiaontal emphas~s with a smooth "wind tunnel" appearance inspired by the industrial designs used far ships, airp~anas, and autamobi~es. Streamline Moderne architecture was more commonly used far commarcial bui~ding design. however, residential examples do exist. In Santa Monica, Strea~Zine Moderne architecture is evid~nt, althaugh the exampies are not num~rous. Three residential Streamline Modern buildings were identified in the Phase ~ and Phase Ir Historic Resources rnventory, A11 ~hree were const~uc~ed betU,reen 1937 and 1941. A re~iew of Stream7.ine Moderne residential buildings identified in the Phase III Historic Resources Inventory Preliminary Survey as good examples of the style found that all were constructed in 1937 or later. Therefore, the Vanity Fair Apartmants, with a construction date of 1935, appear to be the oldest example of Santa Monica's best Streamline Moderne residential buildings. Carl R. Henders~n, a praminent Santa Monica resident, businesspersan and active civic leader~ cans~ructed the Vanity Fair Apartments. Mr. Hendersan's prominence is demonstrated by his inclusion in the 1941 edition of th~ Santa Monica Blue Book, a publication that a provided biographies of notable Gity ~esidents. The biography states that, after owning the Santa - 6 - Monica Packard Dealership between Z921 and 1931, he became a lacal real e5tate broker and b~sinessperson. He served as pr~sident o~ the Santa Monica Realty Baard, the Santa Monica Chaptex of the Property 4wner's Association of California, and president a~ the Santa Monica Ta~ayer's Association. In additian, the Blue Soak describes the Vanity Fair Apartment~ as one of Mr. Hendersan's achievements: "He has built se~eral distinctive apartment buildings in Santa Monica, on~ of the best being the Vanity Fair Apartments, erected in 1935, of madernistic architecture, and one af the first of this type erectad in S~nta Monica." Mr. Henderson's biography was also included in the 1944-1948 edition of the Santa Monica Communzty Book. This biography states that "...Mr. Henderson has for a number of years used his influence to bring about the City Manager farm af Government for Santa Monica which has been so successft~l in many other communities." At his death in 1971 the Santa Monica outlook described Mr. Henderson as an f'active civic ~eader" and that, in addition to his real estate activities, he was captain af the Santa Monica Mount~d Police. Appeal statement The appellant atates that, since the bui~ding is o~d and subject to the City's rent control regulations, it is not ecanomically feasible ta ~rnaintain the buiLding in good repai~, Due to the - 7 - cost of basic repairs for items such as the roof, plumbing, and gas lines, the appellant expZains that he wi11 be unable to maintain the apartment building in a safe condition for ~ore than a few years. Due to the economic constraints of Rent Control he states that over the next 10 to 20 ye~rs tha building will deteriorate and became unsafe to inhabit. However, no supporting documentation ather than this b~ief statement of appeal has been submitted to s~pport either the safety concerns or the e~onomic hardship complaint. Planning staff has contacted the Rent Control Board and the awner has not filed an applicatian for a Category C Removal Permit. Al~sent this type of information, the appellant's claita of safety hazards and economic hardship cannot }ae justified. The appel~ant daes not challenge the Vanity Fair Apartment~' 3andmark designation based on the merits of the application reviewed by the L•andmarks Commissidn. Pursuant to Section 9612 of the Lanc~narks Ordinance, the public hearing for an appeal of a Iandmark designatian must be scheduled and held before the City Co~ncil within 45 days after the notice of appeal has bean filed. However, the appellant af the Vanity Fair Apartments was aut af the countr~ during this 45 day period and waived his right to an earlier hearing. A copy of the appellant's statement confirming his agreement to an August llth pub~ic hearing is con~ained in Attachment J. His agreement to a 5ep~ember 8, 1992 publ.ic hearing is contained in Attachment K. - 8 - BIIDGET~FINANCIAL IMPACT The recommendatian presented in this report daes not have a budget or fi5ca~ impact. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the Landmarks Commission to designate the building and site at 822-824 Third Street as a City Landmark with the findings approved by the Landmarks Cammission. Prepared By: Pa~l aerlant, Director of LUTM suzanne Frick, Planning ManagEr Amanda Schachter, Associate Planner L~nd Use and TranspQrtation Management ~epart~ent Program and Palicy DeveZapment Division Attach~ents: A. AppeaZ Filad by EnayatolZah G~lshani B. Landmark Designatian Applicatian C. Building Photographs D. Landmarks CommissiQn Staff Repart, March 9, ~992 E. Landmarks CommissiaM Staf~ Repoxt, Apxil 13, ~992 F. Landmarks ~ommission 5ta~f Rep~rt, May 11, ~992 G. Landmarks Cammission Determination H. Landmarks Cammissian Minutas: March 9, I992 April 13, 1992 May 11, 1992 I. Correspondence J. Appellant's Agreement to the August ilth Public Hearing Data K. Apallant's Agreement to the September 8, Z992 Pub~ic Hearinq Date w/z1e0453 - 9 - A~I-'ACHM~IIT~' A , L 'J t ~ r n~ ~ City of ~ Santa Monica Commun,ty and Econom~c I~eve3opme~t Deparlment Pfannir~ and Zoning Alvision (213~b58-8341 A~P~AL FORM ~~~: s~oo.a~ oatie Faea ~ J~~~~ 2 Rece~ved by ~"? ~, Rece~pt No I'7 °~`a`~~ NaRI@ ~~r I~ ~~ T~~ L L A{~ ~` Q L'y' ~'~ ~~ Address rZ~% yL ~_i !~/~i ~.. ~.~ ~Na c~ t~ ~ r~ nt .D If ~ ~~ C ~ C l~ ~/, ~ c~ ~ Contact PersoR ~-~~' [ae ~ ~-•~~~7' ~ ~ ~ Phone ~ 18 - '~ Y ~ c~ ~3 ~ .~.13 --'~ 3~ S~'~o ,~ Please descnbe the pro~ect an~ deasan io be appealed ~~~$~ 3 :.t~~V 1 r~ Nf~ f"t~ ~~ i~- -~!~ fvt ~~ C~ S Y t~ ~ nrb rn H R~< ~o M rf ~~~ ra rv' ~~ ~?Z~ ~~z`f .~~ .~. ~4~_ ~ -~r- r9g~ Case Number r Aadress ~ ? .~ --~ ~' ~. Y 3`~d ~- APphr,ant - ~- -. , , .. - ~ - Ong~nal hearing date ~~y t~ 1~q ~ Dngu~al act~on A ~ ~ r~ ~~ e l G ~ ~ w, ~ r Y. ~e ~ r ~ ~^ ~ -*~"P ~^ Please state t~e speclik reasQn~a) far t#~e appea~ ~~'--~- l`~ ~r' ,~ f r /~ ~/i R T/~'1,E ~Y T,k~~ t L~ 1~Yl~ ,rslJ a-E~ ~...s~ C'~-~'~ '~~_ ~ ~ .~ ~.~ ~~~ ~7`~a ~u~ ~~ ~ ~-c. ~-~- . .~ C ~ ~.~ C ~ ~ .~ ~f•'l. G~/l~ ~~-U 1Yr., /.~.tl ~ cl~.~'~Ul,ti~ -~. ~ ~ ~ ~Lf~ilY~~i~--~ " G` ~'r~-~.-~- ~~-` ~: f ~ ' k / J n ~~I' ~J ~An~C '~/.~Jl ~t"1~,~ ~/~~[a~ ~~.h u ~D-~7~ 1 ..,d./i . v - ~ - ~f .` D - , [ ~ _~ n 2~y'i~t.~ ..P~ /.~-~-t~8.. `~.v~J4-- (~ ~/~1Z. f~-~.~ ~ ~~~ - ~`~~ i5~z-.~ C E~,~Lc~`~ ~~~ , ~ . J ~ ~ Sgnature ~ r~`/-1~~/ Y:ln~.. ,, It add~twnal space is needed, usa badc o11am~ ~~ ;~ - ~' 1 ~ ~ `~ ~-~~ r n ~ C`s. -~ A~'T'ACHIV~ENT B ~, 4, ~ ~ ~ _ ~, Cit of Santa ~onica Wnd Use and 7ranspor~al~on Managemeni Uepartment Propram 8nd POIEcy Dlvlslon (310} 4§8-8585 . . .. L C Gase iVo Q~ - 0 4 5 Clf"! OF SAF~SA MOh11CA LA~i~MAR1CS COMMiSS~ON APPLICATIQN ~OR LANDMARK DESEGNATION The Landmarks Commassian meets on the second Manday of each month Applicat~ans MCi5T be filed a m:nimum of three weeks before the meeting date. Apphcation N~mber(s} Fded _ Fee ~ Reeerpi By .~ PROJ~C7ADD~iESS $22-$2~ Thzrd Street Land Use E~ement D~str~ct hTc~ 1 t i r^ami ] v Res t r3ent ~ a~ Zo~mg D~sEr~ct NW R3 Legaf Descr~pt~on (Lot, BloCk,TraCt) ~ot E~ ~lock 24 Santa i~onica Tract APPLICQN7 citv of Santa l,onaca Lanc~~ar~ ~omm. PhDne (314} 958-8585 Address ~-665 I~ain Stree~, Raam ~12 Sar~ta Monica, CA 9~402 CONTACT PERSQN Phone Address Al'TBRtJfY Phone Address Proposed Landmark Commonly Knawn as vanit~ r~a~r Apartments Legal Descnpbon ~lat blockand tract) ~ot E~~oc~ 24 Santa Mon~ca ~rract Status :~ OccupGed Unoccup+ed ExisEmg use(s) of Site ~ Residential Apartments Accessible to Pubhc, X Yes, Rest-~cted Yes,Unrestricted Not Access+ble to Pubhc f~BntCDnt~OESta~]5 A11 units controlled Ownerof PrOperty Enayatollah Go].shan~ AddreSS 20254 Wells Drive Clty wood3.and Hills $~,te CA z~p 9~ 3 6~ Pha,e, Ispropertyowr~erawaeofthisapplicat~on X Yes ~a Not~ce of Hearing 5ent 4-~-92 Lot Size 5 0~ x ~ 5 0~ Reeogn~ze~ rh ex~sUng Santa Maroca Histaric Resources Inventory Yes x No Descrip~on Altered X Unaltered Recognxaed in ~~aee zrz ~r~iimanary s+arve~ Conditjon Excellent Goaf X ~au Detenarated Ruir~s Us~exposed Sacchaeoiagscal s~te) BACKGAOUHD II~FORMATION Piease atlach additional shee#s ~f necessary ~escnpt~on of site or structure, note any ma~or afteratrons ar~d dates af alterat~ons s~e A~~aehed Statemento#ArchrtecluralSEgnifFCa~ce• Gpp Attarher3 Statemant a# H~stor~ca,l 4m~ortas~ce s~e Attached Perso~{s) of H~storical fmpartance. lVame _ _ _ _ ___ Local 5taie I~a~onal SEatement ot ather sign~f~cance ~+ .- ,. ~ ~, 1.•' j ,. _ ~ Doc~ments or Publ~cat~ons that relate directly to praposed landmark (bab6ographyy 5ee Attached Attach ~atagraphs af ~te or struciuGe SKETCH MAP In the space below, draw a sketch shaw,ng ~he location of fhe s~te or sEructure bemg proposed Labei streets and roads and show d~stance from nearest rrEa~ar fntersect~on Add an arrow tn show north on the map 7i~ 1 iZD 5-7"3Z ~ ET 111 7 Z > '~ 2 ~ 0 ~ ~~ iV ~ ~rzo~ ~GT 5 tTE ~ I FOfi STR~1~TllRES ONtY. ~ ~~ ~ Santa Monsca Date o! constsucttion of a41 stEUCtsres under cons~deratson ig 3~ Sou~cesu ~~d~:~q ~er~~ts Arch+tect COf1tf2CtOf, Carl Henu~erson {Owner/Build~ry H15tOfIC lJSB Of Stl'uCtllfE(5~ Reside~~.~,al PfBSEIlt U5B Of S~~UChlfB(5} Residential fslAre structure(s) on ong~nal site'~ ~ Yes No IslArestructure(s}threstenedwdhdestruetion Y~S x No, Demolition Perm~ts nat filed If yes, state reason I CERTIFY that the ~nformation cantained in this appEicai~on is cor~ect to the besi of my knawledge and that ihis app~~cat~on ~s made w~ih t~e l~owledge and consent of the ~roperty owner. Applicant's S~gnature Date Drave~s hcense number State Exp~rahon date Date Recerved 3•°1 q Z gy Submittal of Planrnng pirector's ~valuat~ons Date $~ y3 `t Z Acceptance ot EvaluaUon by Landmarks Commiss~on Date ~i ~ 3 a7 Determ~nai,on o- Landmarks Comm~ssEOn tfiat appl+cat~on merits (ormal cans~deration es o Date, 4 i3 Notfficatlons Transmitted: Ta Property Owners and Tenants With~n 30 days of fE1Eng 9~ ~ 4 Z Forr~al Cor~s~deraE~on To Newspapers af genera~ circulaUon Date 4• Z'S ~ To ~wners ar~ reside~ls within 300 ieet Date `~ • 2~q ~ Public Heanng To Newspaper5 af genera4 c~rcula~on Date ~''~ q2 To owners and resrdents w~th~n 300 feet Date ~} - 30 ~ z- Publ~c Hearing Date ~• I1- q Z Cont~nuation Date Commission flecommendatron brn~,rn~p ~ ~~ L~7Z ~1E ~ - I I di • . ~ ~2B 1 I ~~ ~a ~~~-- • ~ ! I ~ N C• ~ , SR ~ U ~~ ~ ~ i~ `A ~N B ~ ; c ~ ' Ijf , ~ ~ 1!p ! F6 8~'/E ~ i ~~ . f .z~' / ! ~~ ~ ~1t7 ~ ~_. ~ . 1D ~ ~ I ~ a~ ~~ ~ ~, ~'?? $pd . ' 1-. ~ -~ 1 i i ~ ~ ~ .~ , ~ [~ ~ [` C~ty Councd Acbon Date, ~ ~~, t ~(~ i ~ g q~,. Den~ed Date Amendments to appl~cation r R ~ ~1 •~ _ ~ LANDMARR DESIGNATION APPLICATION VANITY FAIR APARTMENTS 822-824 TAIRD STRE~T SITE DESCRIPTION This seven unit, three story apa~tment building, original~y named the "Vanity Fair Apartments", was constructsd as a two s~ory six unit building in 1935 for $15,OQ4 by owner/b~ilder Carl R. Henderson. In 1943, according to Santa Moniea Building Permit records, Mr. Henderson added the third floar and an additional unit. The building features an asy~m~trical facade and a smooth stucco exterior. The apartmen~'s overall harizantal appearance is emphasized by th~ bands of windows that wrap araund the building~s curves; the long, low sec~nd floor balcony extending across three quart~rs af the street-facing facade; the horizontal bandxng at the northeast build~ng carner; and ~he flat roof. Other notabZe details include the Iight fixturas above the daorways, the curved banding on the frant doors, and the second floor balcony pole supports which are each hiqhlighted with discs, creating a cyZinder effact. Two large, mature traes located in the parkway strip shade the building and enhance the bui~di~g's placement on the street. ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE Built in 1935, the Vanity Fair apartment building is daszgned a.n the then popular Streamline Moderne sty~e. Streamline Moderne architecture emerged from an economic need for simpler, inexpensive buildings and a growing fascination with transpvrtatiQn design. The exub~rant design o~ the Art Deca periad, camplete with delicate metal work of bronze or silver, ga1.d leaf tracings, and calarful mosaic tiles, was replaced with less costly and less arnate materials ~uch as stucca, concrete, and gl.ass. The classic Streamline Moderne bui~ding shawed a strong horizontal emphasis and a smaath "wind tunnel" appearance inspired by the industrial designs used fox ships, airplanes, and automobiles. Typical design elements included the smooth exteriar wa11 surfaces, horizontai lines or groaves in the walls, horizontal balustrades, asymmetrical facades, curved laui~ding cornexs, and bands of windaws continuous around the curved corners. Typical materials included stucco, aluntinum, stainless steeZ, and glass. Streamline Modern~ architecture was used primarily far commercial structuras; it is found mQre rarely in residential architecture. The Vanity ~'air apartment building ~s one af a comparatively small number of residential Streamline Maderna structures in Santa Monica, whzch is b~ttar known for its examples af Spanish Calonial Revival and Craftsman residentiaZ architecture. The building displays many classic Streamline Moderne elements. It has a smao~h stucca exterior, an asymmetrical facade, cur~ed corners, bands of windows, and a flat roof. Adda.tianal design alements that ex~mplity ~he Stream}.ine Maderne style are the raund metal balustrades surrounding the baiconies, the horizontal -~- ~~,::.. .. ~~ and vertical banding at the northeast building carner, the light fixtures with curvad corners abQVe the front entry of the apartment unit~, the curved banding on the front doors, and the metal frame windows. The Vanity Fair Apartments' architectural significance is increasad by its Art Deco influences. For exa~ple, the front doar peep hale is covered by a metal grilZe embellished with a mixture o~ chevro~ an~ geometric patterns. The mail slot ~or unit 1 at 822 Third 5treet features similar Art Deco detailing. In addition, the corner mo~ding beneath the second floor ba~cony is a sunrise shape, a popular A~t Deco motif; hawever, the ~ypically seen Art Deco patterns and carvings have been "streamlined" away. As noted in the discussion on the b~ilding's architectural significance, the Vanity Fair apartment building i~ one of just a handful af Streamline Maderne mu~tifamily structures in Santa Manica. Three residential Streamline M~derne b~i].dings were identified in the Phase I and Phase II Histaric Resources Inventary. A1~. three were constructed between 1937 and 1941. A re~iew of the Streamlfne Moderne bua.lding~ identifiad in the Phase III Historic Resources Inventory Preliminary Survey as good exampies of the style faund that all of the b~ildings in this group, axcept the Vanity Fair Apartments, were constructed in 1937 or later. Therefare, the Vanity Fair Apartments, with a construction date of 1935, appear to be the oldest in the group af buildings identified as the City's best exampla of Streamline Moderne residential architecture. HISTORICAL SIGNIFTCANCE Carl R. Henderson, who deve3oped and built the Vanity Fair Apartments, was a w~ll knowr~ local businessman whose biography is included ,in the 1941 edition of the Santa Monica Blue Baok. The Blue Book was a publication that provided biagraphies of notable Santa Monica residents. Mr. Henderson was born in Iowa in 1889, and moved ta California at age 17. He attended the University of Southern California, operated farms and ranches in the San Joaquin vaZley, and mo~ed to Santa Monica in 7.920. With his brother he purchased the Santa Monica Packard Dealership in 1921 and operated it until 1931. He then became a local real estate broker and developer. Among Mr. Henderson's achievements noted in his Blue Boak biagraphy is the construction of the Vanity Fair Apa~tments. It states: "He has bui3t several distinctive apa~tment buildings in Santa Monica, ane oF the best being the Vanity Fair Apartments, erected in 1935, of madernistic architecture, and one of the fir~t o~ this type erected in Santa Manica." It is likely that the building appeared both innovat~ve and unusual to City residents and suggests that Mr. Henderson was willing to bet that ~ unique building design was aZso good business. Mr. Henderson maintained his office in the Junipher Building, which, ~ike the Vanity Fair Apartments, still exists and is now known as the Bayside Arts buiZding, ~ocated at the nor~heast corner o~ Santa Monica Boul.evard and the Th~rd Street Pramenade. Mr, Henderson also served as president of the Santa Manica Realty ~ ~~ n . 7 _ 2 _ t. ~, a- - ~ Board and the Santa M~nica chapter of the Prvperty 4wner's Associatian of California. BIBLIOGRAPHY Identifying American Architecture, John J.-G. Blumenson. W.W. Nvrton Company, InC., N~w York, NY. 1982. Los Angeles in the Thirties~ 1931-1941, David Gebhard and ~iarriette Von Breton. Hennessey & Tngal~s, Inc., Los Angeles, CA. 1989. A Field Guide ta American Houses, Virginia & Lee McAlester. A~fred A. Knopf, New York, NY. ~.989. Santa Monica Blue Book, Charles S. Warren. Pages Z98-201. 1941. "Buildings Still Sport Streamline Legacy", Susan Vaughn. Las Angeles Times, Secta.an E, page 6. February 9, 1992 Wf ZLC045 ~; r. ,.. , ,.~ - 3 - s~ J,, _ ~ 14~'ACHMEI~T~' C ~~,~ . n . ~3 M E M O R A N D U M PRDG1~iM & POLICY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION LAND IISE AND TRANSP~RTATION MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT C~TY OF SANTA MONICA DATE: March 9, 1992 TO: The Honorable Landmarks Commission FROM: Amanda Schachter, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Request to Sponsor Landmark Designa~ion Application for the Streamline Moderne Apartment Building Loca~sd at 822-824 Third Street. INTRODUCTION This is a request ta sponsor a landmark designation application for the Streamline Moderne Apartment building located at 822-824 Third Street in the North ot Wilshire neighbarhood. The request is fraxn Architectural Review Board Member Richard Sega~ and other building residents. BACKGROUND Building Description The subject bui3ding is a three stary Streamline Moderne apartment building containing six un~ts. The building features numerous classic Stream~ine Madexna design elements. Thesa incl.ude the asymmetrical facade, the horizontal banding, balustrades and overall horizontal appearance, the curved carners and the smoath stucco exterior. The streamlined, industrzal effect is further emphasized by the bands of trindows that curve araund the building carners. Simple, yet decorative, details enhance ~he buildi,ng's appearance. These include the second fioor balcony pole supports at the buildzng'~ south side which are each highlighted with cy~.inder-like banding, the curved banding on the apartment unit front doors, and the Art Deca designed metal peep-hole covers that feature chevron detailing. H~storic Resources Inventory The pre~iminary survey of ~he Phase III Historic Re~ources Inventory noted that this buil.ding is a good example of a Streamlin~ Modarne structure and that, based an its architectural quality, the building is a potentiaZ landmark. While these preliminary findings have not yet been considered by ~he Invantory Review Committee, ~n~entQry consultant Leslie Heumann has made the potentiaZ City ].andmark or National Register landmark notation on only 5 Streamline building~ in the City. Of ,-. .- .. . r, _~ .. . ~. this number, four buildings are apartments and three are located in the North of Wilshire neighborhoad. The four residential buiZdings that are noted in the pre~iminary survey as ~ollows: Address 40-A Seaview Terrace stories Sty~efUse 1. Spanish/Moderna Influence Apartments Comments ~ntact Gaod Lacatian 5* 822-824 Third St. 947-953 Eleventh St. ].143-Z145 Eleventh St. 2 & 3 Streamline Apartm~nts 2 Streamline Apartments 2 Regency/Maderne Apartments 3* Good Example NR 5* The "5*" notatian identifies the structure as a potentia]. City landmark; the "NR" notation identifies the structure as a potential National Register landmark. Building permit research prepared for the Inventory found that Carl Henderson was the original owner of the property. He obtaihed a permit to canstruct the apartment building in 1935. The apartment building was valued at $Z5,0~0 and the detached garage at $10~0. ~nly one alteratian permit was Pound for the buil~ing. It is a 1961 pa~mit fox a patio dack. Other permits found for the property were ~or general bu~lding repairs. The building permits are contained in Attachm~nt A. PatentiaZ Landxnark S ignif icance Planning staff has reviewed the Landmarks Ordinance designation oriteria and beliaves that findings can be made ta support landmark designation aP this Streamline apartment buildinq. Specificall.y, based on the building's architectural quality and Iack of alterations that could detract from this quality, the structure appears to meet Qrdinance critaria 4 which states; (4) It embodies distinguishing architec~ural charaateri.stics valuable ta a study or a periad, st~r].e, methad of constructiqn, or the use of indigenous ~naterials or craftsmanship, or a.s a unique ar rare example af an architectura~ deszgn, de~ail, or historical type va~uable to such a study, REC4MMENDATION Planning staff recommends that the Landmarks Commission file a ~andmark designation application for the Streamline Moderne apartment 3aui.Iding lacat~d at 822-824 Third Street and schedule a 4' .,~ ., _ ~ hearing to determine whether the structure merit fQrma~ cansideration for April 13, 1992. Attachments: A. Bui~ding P~rn~its B. Site Ph~togr~phs w/lcmem30 r ~ ~- ~ ~ u ~ A~"~C~MEI~TT E ,.. n . . ~.~~ _.~ M E M O R A N D II M PROGRAM & P4LICY DEDEL~PI~IENT nIVTBION LAND IISE AND TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF SANTA MONICA DATE: April 13, 1992 TO: The Honarable Landmarks Commission FROM: Amanda Schaehter, Assaciate Flanner sU~JECT: Landmark Designation LC-04-045. Formal Consideration oF the Landmark Designatian Application for the Streamline Moderne Apartment ~uilding Located at 822-824 Third Street. INTRODUCTION On March 9, 1992 the Landmark~ Commission, at th~ request af neighborhood residents, filed a landmark designation application for the Streaml~ne Moderne apartment building located at 822-824 Third Street. BACKGROUN~ Architectural Significance The three story apartment building, ariginally named the Vanity Fair Apartments, was constructed in 1~35. It is dasignad in the Streamline Moderne architectural style and dispZays many cla~sic Streamline Moderne elements. These include the smooth stucco exterior~ the asymmetrical facade, the curved building carners, the bands of windows that wrap araund th~ corners, and the flat roof. Additional d~sign eZements that exemp~ify the Streamline Moderne style are the round metal balustrades surrounding the balconies, the horizonta~ and vertical banding at the northsast building corner, the Iight fixtures with curved corners above the front entry of the apartmen~ units, and the curved banding on the front doors, A camplete site description and sta~ement af architectural significance is cantained in the Landmark Designation Applicat~on in Attachment A. Streamline Maderne architecture ~as more cammonly used for commercial building design, hawever, residential examples do exist. In Santa Monica, Streamline Moderne architecture is ~vident, althaugh the examples are nat numerous. Threa residen~ial Streamline Moderne buildings were identified in the Phase I and Phase II Historic Resources Inventory. All thr~e were constructed between 1937 and 1941. A revxew o~ tha Strea~~ine Moderne r~sidential buiZdings identified in the Phase xII H~staric Resources Inventory Preliminary Survey as good ~~~ ~.;~ examples ot the style found that all were constructed in 1937 or later. Therefore, the Vanity Fair Apartmen~s, with a construction date af 1935, appear to be the oldest example of Santa MoniCa's best Streamline Mvderne residential buildings. Historical Significance Carl R. Henderson, who developed and built the Vanity Fair Apartments, was a well known ~ocal businessman whose biography was included in the 1941 editian of the Santa Monica B~ue Book. Mr. Henderson was born in Iowa in 1889, moved to Califarnia at age I7, and then to Santa Monica in 1920. He purchased the Santa Monica Packard Dealership in 192I and operated it unti~ 1931. He then became a~ocal rea~ estate broker and developer, serving as president af the Santa Monica Realty Baard and th~ Santa Monica chapter of the Proper~y Owner's Association af California. Mr. Henderson's Biue Boak biagraphy alsa mentions the construction of the Vanity Fair Apartments as one o~ his notab~e achievements. It states: "He has b~ilt ~everal distinctive apartment buildings in Santa Monica, one af the best being the Vanity Fair Apartmants, erected in 1935, of modernistic architecture, and ane of the first af this type erected in Santa Monica . ~~ Lar~dmarks Commzssion Action The Landmarks Commission must make a detersnination on whether this application merits formal consideration. If the Commissian believes that formal consideration is warranted, a public hear~ng on the application determination must be scheduled w~.thin 45 days. The Landmarks Ordinance permits the Commission to des~gnate landmarks if the structure under consideration meets one or more of the fa].lowing criteria: (1) It exempZifies, symbolizes, or manifests aZements of the cultural, social, ecanomic, political, or architectural history of the City. (2) It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value~ or other noteworthy int~rest or valuES. t3) It is identif~ed with histaric personages or with impartant events in local, state, or national history. (4) It embodies distinguishing architectural characteristics valuable to a study of a period, style, ~~thod of constructian, or the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship, ar is a unique ar rare example of an architectural design, detail, ar historica~ type va].uable to such a study. ~~.~---, ~- •.f L . :~ (5) It is a significant or a representative example of th~ work oz product af a notable builder, design~r, or architect. (6) It has a unique locatian, a singular physical characteristic, or is an established and famili~r visual feature of a neighborhood, cammunity flr the City. Planning staff be~ieves that the landmark designation applicatian presents sufficient evidence ta support landmark designation of the Vanity Fair Apartments based an the above refezenced designation criteria. RECOMMENDATION Due to the architectural quality of the Vanity Fair Apartments, the increasing rarity of Streamline Moderna residential architecture in 5anta Monica, and the building's association with a prominent person in Santa Manica histary, Planninq staff balieves that the applicat~.on meri~s formal consideration and ~hat findings can be made ta support the Zandmark designation of the structure. Staff recammends that tha Land~narks Commzssion schedule the pubZic hearing on this issue for May 11, 1992. ATTACHMENTS: A. Landmark Designation Appli.catiQn B. Correspondence w/zIc0451 ~` n .'7 ~~.~.: ~t ATTACHIV~~I1T~ F ~ Y~. l+ . J~~ ~t~ M E M O R A N D U M PROGRAM ~ P~LICY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION LAND U6E AND TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT CITY ~F SANTA MONICA DATE: May 11~ 1992 TO: The Honorabl~ Landmarks Cammissian ~ROM: Amanda Schachter, Ass~ciate Planne~ suBJECT: Landmark Designation LC-04-Q45, 822~24 Third Streat. Determinatian on the Landmark Designation of the streamline Moderne Apartment Building Historically Known as the Vanity Fair Apartments. INTR~DUCTION On April 13, 1992 the Landmarks Commission, following a fdrmal review of the ~andmark designatian application, maved ta hold a landmark designation pub~ic hearing for the Streamline Moderne apart~ent building located at 822-24 Third Street. SACKGROUND Landmark Designation Application The landmark designatian application for the Vanity Fair Apartments, contained in Attach~aent A, provides a detailed description of the property as well as statements of architectura~ and historical 5ignificance. The building was constructed in I935 in the 5treamline Madern~ architectural style. ~t displays many classic Streamline Moderne elements, including tha asymmetrical facada, the curved building corners, and the bands of windo~s that w~ap around the corners. Additional design elements af the Vanity Fair Apartments that exemplify the Streamline Maderne style are ~he horizantal and vertical banding at the northeast build~ng corner, the liqht fixtures with curved corners above the front entry of the apartment units, and the curved banding on the front doors. While Streamline Moderne architecture is evident in Santa MQnica, the examples are not numerous. ~nZy three residential Streamline Moderne structures were identified in the Fhase I and Phase II Historic Resources Inventory. These buildings were canstructed in 1937 and later. A re~iaw of alI the residential Streamline Moderne buildings identified in the Phas~ III Historic Resources Tnventory Preliminary Survey as good examples of the style found that all were constructed in 1937 or Iater. The Vanity Fair Apartments appear to be the oldes~ extant example of Santa Monica's best Streamline Mo~erne Residential structures. - 1 - ~J; .~ In addition, in a process separate from this landmark application, the building was recently reviewed by the Historic Resources Tnventory S~rvey Review Cammittee durinq their on-going evaluation of potential resources identified in the PreZiminary Survey. Sased ~n the building's architectural quality, the Committee rated the Vanity Fair Apartmen~s as el~gible for both City landmark status and listin~ on the National Register of Historic Places. Garl R. Henderson, who developed and buzlt the Vanity Fair Apartments, was a well known local businessman. Prior to becoming a real estate broker and developer, Mr. Henderson owned the Santa Monica Packard Dealership. Mr. Henderson's biography was ~ncluded in the 1941 aditzan of the Santa MQnica Blue Book. In listing Mr. Henderson's achievements, the biagraphy includes a statement regarding the Vanity Fair Apartments: "He has built several distinctive apartment buildings in Santa Monica, one of the best being the Vanity Fair Apartments, erected in 1935, af modernistic architecture, and one o~ the first of this type erected in Santa Monica." Landmark Designatzon Criteria The Landmarks Ordinance requires that the Cainmission evaluate proposed landmarks against the following criteria: (1) It exemplifies, symbolizes, ar manifests elements of the cultural, socialr economic, political~ or architectural history of the City. (2) It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or oth~~ noteworth~ interest or values. (3) ~t is identified with historic personages ar with impartant ~vents in ].ocal, state, or national history. (4} It e~nbodies distinguishing architectural aharacteristics valuable to a study of a period, style, method of constructi~n, or the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship, or is a unique or rara example of an architectural design, detail, or historica7. type valuable to such a study. (5) It is a significant or a representative example of the wark or praduct of a natable builder, designer, or architect. (6) It has a unique loca~ion, a singular physical characteristic, or is an established and fami~zar visual feature of a neighbarhood, cornmunity or the City. The Landmarks Ordinance permits the Cammission to approve a landmark designat~on if findings can be made to support at least one of six designation criteria. In the case af the Vanity Fair Apartments, PZanning staff be].i.eves that findi.ngs can be made to support three vf the six criteria. - 2 - ~!~ ,~ Architectural History Signif~cance Suilt in 1935, the Vanity Fair apartment building was designed at the time when Streamline Moderne architec~ure was gaining papularity. During the early 1930s the mare ornate Art Deca style gave way to the simpler forms and less expensive materials of the Streamline Moderne design. This architectural style was influ~nced by the growing fascinatian with the industrial designs used for ships, airplanes, and auto~obiles, as well as by the need to minimize building costs during the Depression yea~s. The Vanity Fai~ Apartments exemplifies this era in Santa Monica's architectural history, marking the beginning of the influx of Stream~ine Moderne architecture into the City. Local Historical Significance Carl R. Henderson, the owner and build~r of the Vanity Fair Apartments, was a promin~nt 8anta Mvnica resident, businessman, and civic leader, as demonstrated by his inc~~sion in the 1941 editian of the Santa Manica Blue Book, a publication that provided ~iograghies of notable City re5idents. The b~agraphy states that, after owning ~he Santa Monica Packard Dealership between 192i and 1931, he became a locai real estate broker and business man. He served as presidant of the Santa Monica Realty Baard, the Santa Manica Chapter af the Property 4wner's Associatian of California, and president of th~ Santa Monica Taxpayer's Association. Mr. Henderson's significance as a Santa Monica business and civic leader is further ev~nced by the inclusion of his obituary in the Santa Monica Dutlook newspaper. The abituary notes that Mr. Henderson was an "active civic leader" and that, in addition to his real estate activities, he was captain of the Santa Monica Maunted Palice. Mr. Henderson's real estate business was not limited to Santa Monica; he and his brother were initial developers of Palm Dasert. The camplete obit~ary is cantaznad in Attachment S. Architectural Significance The Vanity Fair apartment building is a superi~r example of Streamline Moderne residential architecture. The building displays numarous classic StreamZine MQderne architactural characteristics, including the asymmetrical facad~ and smoath stucco exterior. Streamline Moderne building~ are distinguished by a strong horizontal emphasis and a smooth "wind tunnel" appearance inspired by transpartation desiqn. This character is clearly evident in the design of the Vanity Fair Apartments. The apartment's overal~ horizontal appearance is str~ngthenad by the bands of windows that wrap around the building's curves; the long, law second floor balcany ext~nding across three quarters ~f the straet-~acing facade; the horizontal banding at the northeast building corner; and the flat roaf. 0ther typical Streamline design eZements displayed by the vanity Fair Apartments include the light fixtures above the doorways, the curved banding an the - 3 - ~L~~ ~ front daars, and the second floar ba~cony pale supparts which are each highlighted with discs, creatfng a cylinder affact. The Vanity Fair apartment building is aZso significant as one of a smal~ numlaer of Streamline Moderne residential structures in the City. Streamline Mod~rne architecture was more typ~cal~y used in coinmercial building design; residential buildings in this architectural style are mare ~are. While a handful of other Streamline Moderne residential structures exis~ in Santa Monica, the vanity Fa~r is particularly noteworthy ~or its age, attention to detail, lack of major alterations, and overall design interest and quality. REC~MMENDATION Planning staf€ respectfully reoominends that the Landmarks Co~uxaission designat~ the Vanity Fair Apart~ents and site as a Santa Manica City Landmark with the fallawing findings. FINDINGS ~.. The Vanity Fair Apartments exemplify, symbalize, and manifest eiements of the architect~zral history of the Ci.ty in that the buil.ding, constructed in 1935, is the first known example of Str~amline Moderne residential architecture in Santa Monica and repreaents the shift in architectural design from Art ~eca to Streamline Moderne, a shift which was influenced by both economic necessity and a growing fascination with industrial design. 2. The Vanity Fair Apartments are identified with historic personagas or with impartant events in local, state, ~r nat~.~nal history in that Carl R. Henderson, the builder and developer of the building, was a prominent City resident and civic ~eader. As noted in his Santa Mon~ca Blue Book biography, Mr. Henderson owned the 5anta Monica Packard Dealership between Z921 and 193I, he served as president of the Santa Monica Realty Board, the Santa Manica Taxpayer's Associatian, the Santa Manica Chapter of the Property Owner's Associati~n of California, and as captain of the Santa Monica Maunted Police. Mr. Hendersqn's BZue Book Biography also mentions the Vanity Fair Apartments as one of his notable achievements: ~+He has bui.lt several distinc~ive apartment buiZding in Santa Monica, one af the best being the Vanity Fair Apartm~nts, erec~~d in 1935, af modernistic architecture, and anE of the first of this type eracted in Santa Manica.~~ Mr. Hend~rson's obituary published in the ~utlook in 1971 further describes him as an "active civic leader.'~ 3. The Vanity Fa~r Apartments embody dista,nguishing architectural characteristics valuable to a study o~ a period, sty~.e, method of canstruction, or the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship, and are a unique nr rare example of an architectural design, de'tail, or historical type valuable to such a study in that the - 4 - ~J" 7 ~ ti building is an excel~ent example of Streamline Moderne architecture, a style more typical~y used in commercial building design and found more rarely in residentia~ architecture. The Vanity Fair apartment building displays numerous classic Streaml~ne Moderne characteris~ics. It has a smooth stucca exterior, an asymmetrical facade, curved corners, bands of windows, a fZat raof, and an overall horizontal appearance. Additional elements that exemp~ify the Streamline Moderne style are the round matal balustrades surrounding the baleonies, the horizontal and vertical banding at the northeast building corner, the light fixtures with curved corners abo~e the front entry of the apartment units, the curved banding on the front doors, and the metaZ frame windows. The Vani~y Fair Apartments' architectural signif icance and qua}.ity is haightened by its Art Deco ~nfluences. The front door pe~p ho~.e is covered by a metal grille eml~ellished with a mixture af chevron and geometric patterns and th~ mai]. slats feature similar Art Deco detailing. Attachments: A. Landmark AppZicati.on B. Obituary for Carl R. Hendersan w/zlca452 "' 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ J ~ DAVID G CAMERON HISTORIAf~t POST OFFIGE BOX 61[ SANiA MONIGA CALIFORNIA 90A06-0611 TfiLEPHONE (3501 4520914 30 ~pril 1992 Landmarks Commission City of 5anta Mon~ca 1685 Main Street Santa Monica, CA 90401 Re: Vanity Fair Apartments, 822-826 Third Stree~ Honorable Commissioners: To assz.st in your evalua~ian of the histarical significance of this property, I attach a copy o~ the Outl~ok obituary for Mr. Car1 R. Henderson, the original owner/developer/buil~er of this property. This appeared an Saturday, November 13, 1971, on page 2, and confirms Mr. Henderson's significance as a local business and civic Ieader. Very truly yours, ~~~ David G. Cameron Attachment ~~~ ~~ ~nciuain}~ mcacure~ tn tiel~~ wa~ ai a b~l! h~ ~n '' - 1 ; 1GO~~"'~- c ra~3e cnliP~e farulEti alherl ftod~la ~~ ~ ~ ~~' - salanes help Inw ~ncome ~~~rar~~~ntu wlurh «,~uld studenle an<3 battle ~~+~ r~i+r,i I~cul:ti F„ti h~ _ ~x~lldlfr3 i~• prr rr~l In fuit hr ~ The ~ eteec ~~rre ~n ~ vt 3!~~ prr ~ enr p~~ tx~.~.r ~ ~ nnunced laic Fr•~ia- nr~hl fr~~i•. rhe.»iE Cud~c~ ~ ~ ~ I~rtg aftcr thc ,,~tlu~r. ~~f ~e ~R~n ~~rrl h~ 6ilirr~ ~ 111C 1e~~~~llrnn h.+d ~e11 rlr~ ~'~~'?~1 ~ilk~ hr. ,•i.~ I'~ ~hd +, f " ,• i' rap~lai f~~r thr ~.~ a~klnd oni wirl ~~i~l•~; •~i,~ 1~~ ' ' j `s = F nr tnr .cr ~~nd r~me P.,+~r, n~ diti }. i rh ~~,. ~ . Rea a ~ - . -. - R n,r~,~ed , •alan ~~- ~rr~~ ~h~~~r P,~. i~ r. ~nd ,- _ -- = - - _--- - . ._L.r_ _i~ ~z r„umc a~ c~r•• ~r~ ~:~ r -- "=~, ~ C"' ~ #~ ilfiMr ' i~ hurl~ r, ~ l hr ~~ ~, •~i-~ ~;~i~ld $35 Bil~i ~y~ _ ~ ' ~„~a"" ~ h.~tt ~~~.I 31-'r ~eei ~~,~ ir on 1ii~, n Ih~ ,. •n~r; .~-liy.~~~ ~ ~~~ ti~ ,r la~ ~:i:ti in~ •~ti~;~ ~ OO~ hr.~ 4~-n • ~ : r. ~ . ,,; i ~,~. - _-r 1 JI~C A~ r Qlher Lelnr~ a d Ft~~~~R ,., - . - - _ _ _ ~ e ., . ~~ ;.,~n~~., r~ ~~~..,Y,~~<«~ E;OP ' _ Foiled Hij acker --1 :iil ;~: y ~ ~ rC,~ m.~.s..r. ~~~~'i~9 11 i76. 1~ ~~'I ~ f~'i ~' ir2f r,~rinlc df i ~~ ^ • ~ ~ Il;f~ 5 IR ( w~~~~'.' nti r rlar~~' ~i t .~ ~ .,i lf .~~•t,l .~,~ „~,~,rn~,ri~i~in~; c~, Sen Alan ~rans[on ~a ; r nfwr~i~~9f~nar~ of ~i~~~l~nulu, ` J rtian 'ir r ~,;i-~,,.r r. f• ~rn, ,i xhn ~~,~.,n„~ 1.~ i davcalled.fora Pro ram ~ ~' R ti n„r u3s ;in,~;t k~,r; '~n`'•I' u mrr Fn ~„n-~~~ I~„n~l ,., ~, il~ h~;,; d~`. 'F~ af 1at~nnal qciron and ~~r~~•,~~: {~r•~ ~~e, h~ +~,~ptt ~;,~,~rr 1~l d t~~.i;~~ h•,p~i^~ '' ~ erpenditure nf an adJi Fr~~:n, i~~r s~u ,::~,~r, ,„~; - ~-- ,,..._ [ional f35 bilfior~ l0 5r~n ``~e~'°`'~"~. ',~ ,R~~~..,,~ Act~ve C1v~c C ih~ m~~r~~ K s h l Leader H k J, un c o0 s throughout [he na -- I~pC e~ n~ { c„~~. h. ~<~u.~ ~i u• tinn LO t T ~ t I[ ti t i n! ou~ bCI~P~5y5(CR75 ~re'}~~~1 !i'i~i3= .~I'1 Funera t kl ' ~S f ' ~ ~ l S t M ~ .~ ~ I/ ~L i.l ' ~i Cran~tnn C aeakm~ at a f, ~I~ ral ni~•r~~ ~ nc ~ r• mec[~n r. ( ~ ~ e onda Cpptur , , g o lhe Cali(or^ea Teachera Assnc~ahon ~n ~ 'r~~u~;i' f~i. ;;~~ , : -„ Los Angelec ~a~d "~~~.ed .~ •~•iil, ~,4,~ For Car ~ nr • Henelers8n ~ ~ , .,nriJ .:ri :~~ ; ~~.. p ecidentia] ia~k force ' '~''~' • " h~:d~'r~ ^ r•a n ~ 1 f ~ ! • ~r ~ i~n~ • ,' •, headed bv Sta[e S[honp " •~ t ~H11D! F-1 hiil h• (.isl fi ~fr~dr- ~~•i I Superintendent SY~laon ~ ~ f°il'. •~! u~ ~~ •il~ ~I • • S1 ~ ~l ` ~ Rileshad claim[d the i9~3 8 kndda f~~ r-e ~u ,~ nc w~~r~„~Irri ,~r •r,: ti i , , ` ~ 1~„;•,i:r r. ,i I ,;,,, ,r-, ~ I~. ~ ~ ~+~ ~~~~ •r ] ~ h i I I Eon 6 ud ~ra1c rnunc il +n ~, ~u{,,,, ;1„r„ ;;,,,, ~ Reted [or ~ ~r ~ ~ ; ~ n ,,, . ,~r ~~~ ~ 11~,. . ~' ~'~i: m rr ~ ~ 'r schools thl~ ceaf chou]d b non acc~c~f't~ d c ~~~i, ~;~ , 1„ ; ! . , ~~ ~ ~ .. '' ~~' I~ ~•n~f , ~ . ' cfoser to S9~f 5iflroa e The rounr s ,~° ~r( h r~r ~~,~~~~r. , ,i ~ . . , ~ ~ .~ ~ .. ~ ~ . f ~ ~ , .I ~ ~. r~i , e lr l i... , ,n~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ,~r. _ ~I. ~- .r,~ ~,~ i. i , , ..r ~ ~, PreL rEr ~~r~A,~•~ ev' ;, ~, r monan .,~drec hv ~.F..,~ca •', ~ . , ~ ~ ~r , ~ '' 1~ -rr i„~~i~ ~ ~, r • ~~ , r ld J ~ , L i •I , , J~:i r.~ . . tAe Pfesideh~ s Cnm ~. ` ~ ~ `I•,-~ '~ i i I ~ • '" `~ n• ` • ~ " , , .~ I~ ~ - ~, .., ~` ~i' • "•i,,•r , r~~. ., ; ~ ~ ~~ ~i ~ , , m~csiort nr Schon~ Frnanc - ~ A~~,~ll~. Hr ~; ,i ,~~ • li . ,, „ . . , ,, •~~ ' ' ~ I ,~ i~, , , .•hrt• rri~•:•~~ ~I~ said the Demecrat c u ~' "~~'~~ ~J ~.' ~r .r ~ ., .~ r'~ ' ,•~~• , i - I _ ' i.~. ~ , ' e ,[in~ Ser,ator ahow that sem c nrw ~~rrc ~, , un~r.. distr~cts ~n Calilnr n , ~~"~i~ ~~ ~~ ir -ii. . ~n~~ ~n -~~ ~,~ ~ ~ stl~rle,; ~ h ,~.. ' nia tl~c~P n d9 ~~i,ruhelrtlin~ spend tlp [D fnur IllF1C5 2G rr~urre~r,E ••[ ~ f ~I~S~rt 1fn ,y,p,~ ,{1 „ ~~rr,iJ,r[ .~I Ih~ i~~~~. ~•rl~ ~'•~ ,fll~ i ~ J%'~ ~' ~ f. ~'~t' ~ t hr ! ~ rnueh per pupi! as do other Ic~ r~e,n e,r puhi~c r. , 1,v,• i~ti„~~ ' ~„r- ~~h ~n r~~~r~~ r ~, i ~~~~ distncts in i~e ~~ate ~i„n Urmandti Si i 1f Fh 06v~oush e ~f sp ndinq ti1F UiC1I - 1 h,i' ht ~~ t~~~ i an flor~rm~n 7h~ t,~~,.4or . lf~ ., „ ~ ~~ comparabclit, ha~ 1~.cmhr~u,. m~n 'e s~,n~i a7yihing ~n dn uith l , ~ , `d " ~ ~;'. .~=.~~e~ r,i~ ~~! I~i.,~ rn :a ~~1~!i ~..n i~ ~m• tiG~~~" , cqua i ~ti Fir ~i~~~;t ,~•~ U 1•~. t} of eduCatinnal op 1nEr~e~ re ~ • . ~f:~.,ri~,~, r„„k ~ '~i~ i:',Ir .~ I'qlic E - 1'~rl~~ n ' h. ~ ~ m ~ ing i•~~ ~4rl~alt5% snme of nur ~IdIP ~ ~nurr [n redu~r C~II ~Q[p77 ~ a e he~ ~;, ~~~ ~ , .~ ~r ~~1 ~r~~~ ~c + ~n~r ~~ 1'~;~ i ~~`~r, r" ~~f"i~~~ ,f " " ~ ~~ 1 I I: C ` ` ne cruellv pati men': i~~ f7J~~inq and unconetitu+tonal~y 11n~7P~ u hen til~ d ~ ~,~ f f 5 i ~~~~i.Ifi"F:1 ~71(r~~IGi~r~Ul ~ll~ :~ ^~ -' ~ 1 r...~ ~d:i~+'ilr ~ ~r~~r~c '~~ r:~~ ~ i ~I Cheated SaidCranclna lurd, run ~nnrt Rra~.in Cran c t " ,: i, ~~h• ~ ~~~ ~~" lr~.r~ Lc;~~~n~„ 9s~.r~ ~•~'l,nnn.~ 1~:« s oe a~d he P~ ~aid ihe hill •.~~,chf F kio pfcied [0 5ponso* a bi11 .~~ r - ~ . fiu I~ ~~8v ~e ~~rr•, ~I in 1..~•; ii~~ i:: ~~~ ~I. ui ,•„~ ' ~ p r p'~rrl .~aru4 ~~~ tail~ng Fnr morP ~eder ~ ] r r ~ ~ ' rr~ili~ .t~ ~nE' ihc ti e~ Ir~ ~r~sin l ill~~ ~ r~ . ~ a i rr~. , ~ a~d to ed~cat~on not~ng +~~Rir~tiiF-i ~,I ~• ~.. ~y~~ ~,.1~~ I ~;•,r ,~ r~~-r nt.~~R 3„ ~ ''•~'~ ~rd;r '~'~r . ~~ ~~~ that mcreasEng costs nf 1=.embi~ n+~~ l;.hn F ~ , r.r. ~~ ~ ,_~, II~ ,r ' ~ ~, :L,• ~ , . •u•1 '~~"~l ' educati~n maK~ i[ flun:a~ I~ \~~ a pu[t~ne ; :qv ~1~.,u~~iii ~ •,~,r,•,.,~~cn,nn~~.~,~ ~~ I rx in 1~~~3 ~~ Lirwaltv ~mpn~sible for 'nP ( ~l~lnrn;,, ti~r~aime the loca( 1a~patier to pat ~rer+~m~ r.• r l i P~~~r,r t~~.~;, ~~rr i ~•~~~. ~~~r~~t„~• wrl~i.~f h~. ~;;.~~:i rt ~ , a lr;n in more or eti en maintafn the .ra~e <<,Ilrce «.re~~ .~c,i f,;~- ., ~~i~., i d^, ~,~,n lt,t~,iin 'n~ m.,n I~r i~;. ;~,.., •; . yresen[rates He.,~an ,d~~i „t~iPr C1RI,~IF.~1~tRSr~ti - ahernarne•.n~~ufdhP , 1„~ ,, ~, ,:, '~f ifal~hu , t~~~ urrh,,rm~~r f~.:r ~,. ~ i rr ~,~.~n ![,,rn+,n ~~~ .~rqe~iil I~i~ i ^ ~ ~ rnn '~; ~~ ni~h~ ,~t ;,~ P ~P f T! ~ p i i ~u . , . ~ ~~~~, '';.~~~, '~ ;~~. ~»ti« ~;~ t, ~., ~ i~~~ ~" ~ ~ ~ h ~ ~~ p ~~ti y Hike ir~c-s n; S I! h~ hri a[ ~SI: F i!C ~t ~d~ ~ ,,, ~, t ,i~ ~ ,r ~~ ~ f r. ~~ im 1•u~ ~.i ~n • . ~`~errlblcm ~n ! eo T ~ u~. P~ Co tl r ~ +~~•trr fJr~n, furn.an ,rf Pdrl ~~~ nit f,l ~~ n. ~~ ~ ~f ~~ ~'" n nued From Paee I ~ar:hc Uti~r Fr~n~i,~ ~r fli~da r~~~r. •~t~,n,,,~ , ' ~ ~nd ~n , ~ ~n~ ~~„, ~ ,~ , ; ~ ~ ;n, e I~~l . ~ ..ia,~e,l ,~s~~~r i•i ti~i~r. :cqu~ri~~ !~~r.ii ~ be :ame Su:Re rn the m ~Ir~ric~ ~~ r ernm ~y ~.n n ~~:~~., rh~ '~„rr,~~ ~~r~~. F~~Ifm~i~~; ~crtic~. ~t I~e ~~~~ i • eots t~ -en~~n in ~; ~~~~+1 rate nf ~n1lat:oa a~ thc ' ie ,tarr <~n „rr~~i~a~r~ ":~er~ltdit•en'~~ ~a;f uh~~ Ire , ., rrr~ . , P~rrre 8n~altPr. inter- lu~up~~ •~~•~I • ~, Y eze ~s Idted bv; ar~ued u~ih a new t~~~ Jirecl:rg r~i` ~ntrr~,~, t:,i~r~i ~~~ - Ihat Pati Buard and Pr~ ' r ~ni uiif 1a0.~ pl~~e at fhr ~n~ ~, ~~l ~u. 1 ~ n`~dld"n 1i ce p c~t,t~ Ife ard hi. ~ r~,ih~- Commn~ion rtecisEOns had ~hcm tn rm lemcnt ~ ~ ~~ ~ urn , ~r ~~ h~ur .r ~ i, • ~•f. a 4~ 3n~a tilrmi~~ I grncralplam ~te~~;an,~~~d . _ bcE1i 4~CL saand and ~t~r 3ilf xould ~mpose u [ ~ ~ w [ „ !>~ af[uut~' r ;~~n,~ ~.~u ~~^~ ~t ~ ihHtl. ~ t ar .i .~„I il hr n oa d maice Phase tl a~ dult re~tr~cri~e .[~ie J~C~p~~~, murh ot a~uccexs ~~ ;,he ,le d V~'rf~/ rMy ~rew K,~uld ri„i ,yx•n itM emer~e { ~ ~ c~ re ~ti~nn, freeie had been ~Q~ ~SELOR-~S bil! Av C~~°ued Fram Page 1 , ~~ ~ ~~ ti u in,i~~u he u~~u+~i 5r.,u ~~~a i~ie• . ~~; ,~ •l~.embltma~ Vincr~[ able i^inme :c~r ~![cr ri The Cost oi L~~ing Coun ~~~ ~~c J r~ "' b1 + P~ ~ ticn ~heplane ,m Su ~ r~~e'a L~rr h[~,~~ i It ~ (f ~~l ~aid f r~dati la~ge ~n- Thnmaa D tan t'tdm empimn. ~nd u~d~~r tiun. , ~~ u~i~~ ~ „ it~~l .iirf unuld h.~ti~ ~~ authuf~ting the :taic r~~! ~rc ~ubtr~ctid tr~~m ru., dustr~es cuu3d ra~ie pr:ces ~ ~ ~- -- -t;ep~.~~~~ the R Ertcum~ e es in h~re a foeid to co;er ~he pa~ mcreases F mure 1+heral bw~ner, d S nr Famf,ir~ wiUr E.,r~rr Com~ngdue ia the r~tY; (~w [nunselnr ln ~~~ ~~~~d~~~ rprer~~ ~L~ t~nn rute~ .i,u~~~~ ~ ueek~ ~F:hr,u~ noU[tiin Ea8 ~ h~$ha c~nolstu~ienh ~nc~,mc~ ~he }JL1:1~' S4~Wl1 ~ ~Pa dTF y l~ thN SC11~s~1~1 t3P I<~r~er ~ar p~,nrrr the PrFCe Currtm~ss ~ ~h~ TfCd.lifl 1n c,tiE. eurpura- Continued Fro~n Pa 11t~~~ t i ~on trt ~~read~ hare th~~ authnri E'`t'~""`' u;c ~a~ir4 u~,ufJ advarce fnr rts a~pr4vai ~ y e .lb~~tl1 S~ bl~~i(~~ ~ ~~,.~ in ls~e, i delens~ve weap~~~ ' ~r ~ ~ e ~e+. 41~,t~~e• e1j•• r~~~~c~l 411LTC-•1 5ill hti 1, Ific h~`J n~a ,: i^~+, , M ddF~ [,~e~~me 1~3r~rt [';em~er ~'-;r~ ~ f-oct in [ ;d ' Said ~he ~ I t, ~r~e inc.-ea.es ~~'l~oitm~~ Jnti~ C ~~~'!' ,~ ~ ~ ~ a, ~ r~ a; - ~~f ~,,.< <f.t~ m,.,,e~ e:~~rrcr~~rrr i~ •,.. ~, .. , ~ , i ~ ~~ rn~m~ ~i i• ~ . ~ , _ , r : ~.~ i ~ r ~ ~ ~ 4~ A~'AC~MENT G l_; ~ .. l ~ FINDINGS AND DETERMINATION dF THE LANDMARKS COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA IN THE MATTER ~F THE DESIGNATION OF A LANDMARK DESIGNATION ~F LANDMARK LC-04-045 AT THE SITE LOCATED AT 822-824 THIRD STREET LANDMARKS COMMTSSION HEARING May 11, 1992 SECTIQN I. The Landmarks Cammission o€ the City of Santa Monica, having filed an application on its own motion on MarCh 9, 1992 to designate the Vanity Fair Apartments and site at 822-824 Third S~reet as a City Land~ark, and Pubiic Hearing having been held befare the Landmarks Ca~mission of the City of Santa Monica on May 11, 1992, the Landmarks Commission hereby mak~s the following findings. Section II. Tha Landmarks Commission of the City of Santa Manica in accordance with the provisions of Section 9608 of the Santa Manica Municipal Code hereby determines that the Vanity Fair Apartments and site at 822-824 Third Street is designated as a Landmark. l. The Vanity Fair Apartments exemplify, symbolize, and manifest elements of the architectural history of the City in that the building, canstructed in 1935, is the first known example of Streamline Moderne residential architecture in Santa Monica and rep~~sents the shift in architectural design fro~ Art Deeo to Stream~ine Moderne, a shi~'t which was influenced by bo~h economi.c necessity and a growing fascination with industrial design. 2. The Vanity Fair Apartments are identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state, or national history in that Carl R. Henderson, the }aui~.der and developer of the bu~lding, was a prominent City r~sident and civic leader. As noted in his Santa Monica Blue $oak biagraphy, Mr. Henderson awned the Santa Monica Packard Dealership between ].921 and Z931, he ser~ed as pres~dent of the Santa Monica Realty Board, the santa Nionica Taxpayer's Association, the Santa Monica Chapter of the Property Owner's Assaciation af California, and as captain of the Santa Monica Mounted police. Mr. Hendersan's Blue Book Biography alsa mentions the Vanity Fair Apartments as one nf his notabZe achievemen~s: "He has built severa~ distinctive apartment buildings in Santa Monica, one of the best being the Vanity Fair Apartment, Erected - 1 - ~~~. ~~ ~ ~ .: = 4 in 1935, of ~adernistic architecture, and one of the first of this type erected in Santa Monica." Mr. Henderson's obituary published in the OutZook in Z971 further describes him as an "active civic leadar." 3. The Vanity Fair Apartments embody d~stinguishing architectural characteristics valuable to a study of a period, style, method of construction, or the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship, and are a unique or rare example of an archit~ctural design, detai3., ar histarical type valuab~e to such a study in that the building is an excel~ent example of Stream].ine Moderne architecture, a style mare typi.cally used in commercial architecture. The Vanity Fair apartment building dispiays numerous classic Streamline Moderne characteristics. It has a smooth stucco exterior, an asymmetrical facade, curved carners, bands of windaws, a f~at roof, and an overall horizantal appearanc~. Additianal elemants that examplify the Streamline Moderne style are the raund metal balustrades surrounding the balconies, the harizontal and vertical banding at the northeast building corner, the light fix~ures with curved corners above the front entry of the apartment units, th~ curved banding on the front daars, and the metal frame windows. The Vanity Fair Aprtments' architectural significance and quality is heightened by its Art Deco influencas. The front door peep hole is covered by a metal grille embe~lished with a mixture of chevron and geometrxc patterns and the mail slots featur~ similar Art Deco detailing. Section III. I, Pamela 0'Connor, Chair of the Landmarks Commission of the City of Santa Monica, hereby certify that the abo~e Findings and Determinat~on were adopted on May ~.1, 1992 by the Landmarks Commission of the City o~ Santa Monica by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Fra~znd, Hernandez, Hitchcack, Litvak, Meadows, Welsh, a'Connor N~ES: None Respectfully Submitted May zi, 1.992 Pamela O'Cnnnor Chairperson Attest: -z- C~~_~ Amanda Schachter Acting Commission secretary AS:mt ARB/DETLC045 05/20/92 - 3 - ~r `J .~ - 4~ ATTAC.I-~E~T ~I ~ ,~~ M I N U T E S REGULAR MEETING OF THE LANDMARKS COMMISSION dF THE GITY OF SANTA MONICA MONDAY MARCH 9, 1992 AT 7:30 P.M. Council Chambers 1. CALL TO ORDER: 1685 Main Street Chair Pam O'Conno~ call.ed the mee~ing to order at 7:42 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL: Present: Absent: Dan Freund Naomi Meadows Geri Litvak Pam O'Connor E~.liott Welsh Francia Hernandez Evelyn Hitchcack Also Present: Amanda 5chachter, Acting Landmarks Commi~sion Secretary 3. R£PORT FROM STAFF: Staff reported that the City Council resolution endorsing the City's ef~orts to become a Certified Local GovErnment was scheduled for the March 17th meeting. In addition, the Planning Commission Resolu~ion of Intentian to amend the City's de~olition ordinance was soheduled for April 15th with the public hearing scheduled for May 20th. 4. APPROiIAL OF THE MINUTES: Ms. O'Connar moved to approve the January Landmarks Cammission minutes with the follo~ring corrections: Page 3, paragraph l: "...and replaee it with fixed pane windo~rs . . . " Page 4, paragraph 9: eliminate th~ statament: "... and the Commission is a representative of that change." Page 9, paragraph 7: "Mr. Freund added that the Ba~.dessar~ project showed much ~nore attention to detail and the character o€ the historic structure than this proposa~.." Mr. WeZsh seconded the motion which was approved by a vQice vote of the Commission. r, }v • - 1 - t, ~ ;~ 5. OLD BUSINESS: A. Request to Sponsor Landmark Designation App~icati~n for the Streamline Moderne Apartment B~ilding Located a~ 822-824 Third Street. S~aff reparted that residents of the building, including Architectural Review BQard member Richard Segal, had requested that the Commission consider sponsoring a landmark desiqnati~n app~ication far thia Streamline Moderne apartment building. staff exp~ained that the preliminary survey for the Historic Rasources Inventory identifies this building as a potantial landmark. Staff recommended that the Commissian file a Zandmark applicatian for the property and hald a hearing on formal consideration of the appZicatian at the next regular meeting on April 13th. Ms. Meadows mov~d to open a public hearing permitting speakers three minutes each. Ms. Litvak secanded the motion which was approved ~y a vQice vate af the CQmmission. Richard Segal, 822 Third 8treet, s~ated that he was a 12 year resident af the building. xe presented both interior and exteriar photographs of the building to the Commission and stated that this is one of the iast apportunities to gres~rve the history of Streamline Moderne buildings in Santa Monica. Mr. Segal also presented to the Ca~emissian origina~ reverse blue line prints of the building plans. Ms. Litvak inquired regarding the details shown on the building plans. Mr. WeZsh explained that many af the details, such as the steel frame windows and other hardware eZements shawn on the plans, could be seZected and purchased from catalogues. Betty Victory, 822 Third Street, stated that sha loves the building and would like to see it retained. Ju1ie Wiliams, 824 Third Street, stated that she lives in tha building and that the building has more charm and character than any building she has lived in. It is a character that is not seen anymore. Felice Schachter, 824 Third Street, stated that she laves the building and that it adds to the charm and charac~er of the block. Alicia Fleer, 837 Third Street, s~ated that She lives in the apartment across the s~reet. She stated that the Streamline building is a charming addition to the street and that the building has wonderful detaiis such as moldings, hardwaod floors and high ceilings, C~'.In _i,~, - 2 .. Karen Uris, 828 Third Street, stated that she lives next doar to the building. She stated that it is a wonderful building that can never be repiaced. Mr. Sega~ stated that he was available to answer questians trom the Commission. Mr. Freund inquired i~ the building was currently threatened with demolition. Mr. Segal stated that six months ago the owner stated that the buxlding was in poor condition and, due ta rent control, he could not make the repairs. Ultimately the owner told Mr. Segal in a letter that ha intended to demolish the building. The Cam~ission closed the public hearing, Mr. Welsh maved to ap~rove the staff recammendatian and file a landmark designatian applicatian for the building. Ms. MeadQws seconded the motion. Ms. Litvak stated she wotiLd like to know more about the buildi~g history. Ms, o'Connor stated ~hat she felt this was one of the best example of Streamline architecture in the City and that Santa Monica has fewer and fawer examples of this type of architecture. ayes: Freund, Litvak, Meadows, Welsh, 0'Connar noes: none absent: Hernandez, Hitchcock Public H~arings: B. Certificate of Appropriateness LC-02-005Z, 350 Santa Monica Pier. Review of new signage and calors for the Arcade Building as required by the project conditions of approval. Continued from March 9, 1992. Staff stated that the prapased signage was located in spaces that had been specifically desi.gned for signage display. Appraval of the project as submitted was recammended. Ms. 0'Connor moved to open the public hearing allowing the applicant five minutes and members of the public three minutes. Ms. Lit~ak seconded the motion which was approved by a voice vate of the Commission. Susan Maysels, Fier Restora~ivn Corporation Assistant Director, presented the signage pragram to the Commission. She explained that the building signage was the maj or color elemant of the s~ructure. Ms. O'Connar closed the public hearing. ~ 1+ " ' :3 ~. . _ . -~- M I N U T E S REGULAR MEETING OF THE LANDMARKS CQMMISSION OF THE CI~Y OF SANTA MONICA M~NDAY APRIL 13, 1992 AT 7:30 P.M. Council Chambers 1. CALL TO ORDER• 1685 Main Streat Chair Pam O'Cannor called the meeting to arder at 7:40 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL: Present: Absent: Dan Freund (arrived 7:55 p.m.} Francia Hernandez Evelyn Hitchcack Naomi Meadows Geri Litvak Pam 0'Connor Elliott We~sh None Also Present: Pau1 Rosenstein, Planning Commission Liaison Amanda Schachter, Acting Landmarks Commission Secretary 3. REPORT FROM STAFF: Staff reported that Presarvation Week is May lOth through May 17th and that Commission Chair Pam O'Connor has arranged to have a City Council Proclamatian presented to the Commiss~on by the Mayor ta commamorate the week. This is scheduled for the May 12th Council meeting. At the same time, Ms. O'Connor will present the Landmark plaques to the Council. Staff also noted that the Ci.ty's Certified Local Gnvernment application has been sent to the State far review at the beginning af the month and that a response is expected within 45 days of the submittal. 4. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: Ms. Meadows moved to approve the January Landmarks Commission minutes with the foll.owing correctxons: Pag~ 2, ~ast paragraph: "...hardwaad ~loors and high cei~ings." Throughout the April Minutes, "Fo~onus~~ should be corrected ta "Falunis" . ~'~~ _-i~ - 1 - characteristics of the plants, inforrnation on whether the planting wi11, at some point, obscure the hauses, and the colors of the materia~~. She suggested color xeroxe~ of the proposed p~ants be provided. Sh~ stated that the location of praposed fencing should also be included and that chain link fencing was nat an appropriate material. Some type of waad fence would be more in keeping with the neighborhood. Ms. O'Connor closed the public hearing. Mr. Godfredsen responded to the fence comment by sta~ing that the fence material had not been determined and that wood could be consid2red. However, wood w~uld b~ock light into neighboring yards mare than chainlink. In additian, they plan to have vines grawing on the fencing. Ms. Hernandez inquired where the fences would be located. Mr. Gadfredsan stated that they will show the lacatian Qn the final plans, He noted that the fences will probably run fram the front yaxd setback around the perimeter of the praperty to secure the yard far a dog. Mr. Freund maved to adopt the staff recommendation. Mr. We1sh s~conded the mation. ayes: Freund, Hernandez, Hitchcock, Litvak, Meadows, Welsh, 0'Connor no~s: none B. Landmark Designation LC-04-045, 822-824 Third Street. Formal Cansideration of the Landmark Designation of the Streamline Moderne Apartment Building Historically Known as the Vanity Fair Apartments. Staff reported that research by the building residants has found that the apartment building was constructad by Carl Henderson, ownar of the Santa Monica Packard dealership between 1921 and 1931 and a 1ocal real estate developer. Mr. Henderson's biography is included in the Santa Monica Blue Baok, which also ment~~ns this buiZding, then called the Vanity Fair Apartments. Staff added that, in reviewing the Historic Resources Inventory Phasas I and II as we~l as tha Phase TYI Preliminary SurvEy, of the best Stream3ine Moderne residen~ial structures identified, the Vanity Fair apartments, constructed in 1935, is the oldest example. Staff recommended that the Commission set ~he date for the designation public hearing for May 11, 1992. Richard Sega1, 822 Third Street~ spOke on behalf of the re~idents researching the building for the Iand~ark applicatian. He stated that the Phase III Histaric Resaurcas Inventory Preliminary Survay earmarked this building for landmark designation. After receiving a letter from the owner stating his intent to eventuaZly demolish the building Mr. Segal and other area xesidents felt it was important to protect and preserve the structure, The building is an -4- Cv~~.:~ excellent example of Streamline architecture and is one of the few such examples left in the City. He added that the Landmarks Ordinance only requires that ane designation criteria be met; this bui~ding, based an its architecture and history, meets more than one criteria. J~lie A. Williams, 824 Third Street #6, stated that she is native of Los A~geles and that few other buildings have the architectural quality of this structure. Felice Schachter, 824 Third Straet #6, stated that the building has both artistic and historic value and that it is important to retain due ta its contribution ta the City. Rodeny Punt. 424 22nd Street, stated that he serves on the Architectural Review Board and that he admihister~ the Preservatian pragram for the City of Lns Angeles. He stated that he strongly supparts the landmark application for this building. Streamline Moderne architectu~e is Los AngeZ~s' unique contribution to the architecture warld. However, the best examples are rapid~y disappearing. The Pan Pacific was lost ta fire and the May Company is threatened with demolition. This apartment building is an outstanding example of Streamline architeature, which was primarily used for cammercial build~ngs and is more rare for residential structures. Mr. Punt stated that the building was a jewel that shau~d ba preserved. Mike Golshan~, 2153 Montana Avenue #1, spoke on behalf of his parents who own the building. He stated that they oppose the designatzon, but since they just found out about the applzcation last week they have nat had time to fully prepare for this hearing. However, he stated that the building is an economic liability, it has dry rot, termite problems, and is expensive to maintain. In additian, Mr. Golshani added that Mr. Segal lives in the apartment buil.ding, he did landscape improvements without the owners authorization and expected reimbursement. He stated that the application is due to a financiaZ grudge and that they have no intention of demolishing the bui].ding. Nancy ^esser, 3i1 Montana, stated that she was Vice Chair of the Wilshire-Montana Neighborhood Association. She read a 3etter from the associatian in support of the building's designation. I3avid Cameran, P.O. Box 611, Santa Monica, stated that he cancurred strongly with Mr. Punt's statements. He added that he has served on a].1 three af the Historic Resources Inventory Survey Review Committees and that this building is an outstanding example of Streamline architecture. He urged tha Commission to set the date for a formal designa~ion hearing. He added ~hat the Commission should not let personalities cioud the 155t1e of whether the building merits designation under the ordinance criteria. .. ,. - 5 - i ,~ ., - ~-i Mr. Segal thanked the speak~rs for their suppart in his ~ebutta3. He added that while the awnera are nice peopie he has a letter from them stating their intent to demolish the building. H~ added that he did take it upan himself to landscape the front of the building, but he did not expect reimbursement. He added that he wauld be happy to give any of the Commissioners a tour of the building. Ms. O'Connor cZosed the public hearing. Mr, Welsh moved ta adopt the staff recommendatian and set the date for the designation hearing on May 11, 1992. Ms. Meadows secanded the mation. ayes; Freund, Hernandez, Hitchcack, Litvak, Meadows~ Welsh, o~connor 8:35 p.m. The Commission recessed for a break. s:5o p.m. The Ca~mission reconvened. C. Certificate of Appropriateness LC-O1-042A and Landmark Designation Modification LC-O1-042B. Alteration of the Existing Landmark Parcel by Division into Four Parcels. Continued to May 11, 1992, 10. DISCUSSrON ITEMS: A. Demalition Permits. No Demolitian Permits w~re received since the March meeting. B. Motion to Reconsider Denial of Certificate ~f Appropriateness LC-O1-038B, 2615 Third Street in the Third Street Neighborhood Histaric District. Motion to R~consider Requested by Commissioner Dan Freund. Mr. Freund explained that the owner is interested in trying to redesign this pro3ect and that, becauae the Cammission denied the Certificate request, they cannot refile the app~ication for 12 months. Mr. Freund stated that he felt tha Commission should discuss the possibility of redesign. Ms. Hernandez moved to open a public hearing permitting speaker~ 3 minutes each. Mr. Welsh seconded the motian which was appraved by a vaice vo~e af the ComSaission. Ms. NemZaha stated that sh~ wavad her time. Mr. Te~alcin stated he requested to speak only so he would be available for Commissioner questions. Ms. 4'Cannar closed the public hearing. Ms. Litvak inquired if they ~tarted over wauld the purpose be ta review, again, the elements of the structure and determine what should not be altered and what features may be modified. - 6 - ~J~ ~~ M z x u T E s REGULAR ME~TTNG OF THE LANDMARKS COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA MONDAY MAY 11, 1992 AT 7:30 P.M. Council Chambers 1. CALL TO ORDER: 1585 Main Street Chair Pam O'Cannor called the meeting ta order at 7:50 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL: Present: Dan Freund (arrived 7:55 p.m.) Francia Hernandez ~velyn Hitchcock Naomi Meadows Ger~ Litvak Pam 4'Connor Elliott Welsh Absent: None Also Present: Amanda Schachter, Acting Landmarks Commission Secretary 3. REPORT FROM STAFF: Sta~f raported that the Planning Commissian will consider revisions to the Demolition Ordinance on May 20th. Once tha~ review is completed the prapasa~ wi~.l be forwarded to the ~ity Council for final consideration. 5taff ndted that, due to Council budget hearings, the June Commission meeting will be held at the Fairview Libra~y. Staff reminded the Commission that City Council would be presenting a proclamation to the Cammission the next evening to cammemorate Preservation Week. CommissiQner Freund would be present to accept the Pxoclamation on behalf af ~he Commission. Staff also mentioned to the Commission that the plaques for the Ocean Park Library and the Woman's Club have been installed. Staff explained tha~ the Certificat~ of Apprapriaten~ss application for the subdivision of the Hollister Court site was not on the agenda because the application had been withdrawn. The tenants and tha owner have agreed to a condominium conversian through the TORCA process. In addition, appointments to the Third Street Neighbarhood Historic District Citizen Participation Committee have been postponed since no applications were rec~ived. ~Jv '„ - 1 - _~i 4. 5. APPROVAL ~F THE MINUTES: Ms. Li~vak moved to approve the April Landmarks Comm~ssion minutes with the foZlowing corrections: Page l, iast paragraph: "...Folonis...~~ Page 3, paragraph 7: "Ms. Litvak stated that the elevation drawing shows a lot af greanery." Page 8, paragraph 3: "Ms. O'Connor added that the City's historic consultant is not Zooking at cantextual issues." Mr, Welsh secanded the motian which was approved by a voiee vote nf the Commission. PUBLIC INPUT: David Cameron, P.O. 611, presented a Praclamation to the Landmarks Cammission from the Santa Monica Preservation A1liance. The Proclamation commended the Commission for its successful effort in revising the Landmarks Ordinance. Bea Nemlaha, 2612 Third Street, spoke regarding the Roundtable Discussion for the Third Street Neigh}aarhood Historic District and regarding Prese.rvation Week 1993. Ms. Nemlaha stated that she supparted the concept of a Roundtable DisGUSSion regarding issues in the historic district and urged the Commission to schedule this as soon as possible. She added that she would like to wark with the Commission ta have a Preservation Week 1993 celebration in the historic district. She stated that perhaps the street could be closad off and a garage sale/fair heZd. The proceEds could be p~aced in a fund to support public improvements in the historic district. 6. COMMUNICATIONS: Several cammunicatians items were directed to the Commissioners for their review. 7. C~NSENT CALENDAR: A. Certificate of Appropriateness LC-02-006FF, 250 Santa Monica Pier. New Signage for One Lease Space in the Bi~liard Building. Ms. Litvak moved to approve the Consent Calendar as submitted. Ms. Welsh secanded the mation. aye: Freund, Hernandez, Hitchcock, Litvak, Meadows, Welsh, O~Connor - 2 - ~ `; ~' ~ 8. OLD BUSINES5: A. Landmark De~ignation LC-04-045, 822-824 Third Street. Determination an the Landmark Designation of the Stream~ine Moderne Apartment Bui~ding Historical~y Known as the Vanity Fair Apartments. Staff reported that additional research had been completed since the April Commission meeting. Mr. Henderson's abituary was included in the Out~ook and he was noted as a civic leader. Sta~f explained to the Commission that the building may be designated a landmark if the Commission finds that the building meets at least one of the six designat~on criteria. zn th~ case of the Vanity Fair Apartments, staf€ recommended designation based on three of the six findings: exemplification of Santa Monica's architeatural history, assaciation with a person ~f local szgnificance, and representation af distinguishing architectural characteristics. Richard Sagal, 822 Third Street, spake on hehalf of the residents wha research~d the application for the Commissian. He added that Sam Hall Kaplan, former architecture critic for the LA Times, has submitted a letter in support of the designation. In addition, Mr. Henderson's bioqraphy was included in the 1944-~8 edit~on of the Santa Monica Conuaunity Book. The dacument notes that Mr. Henderson was the leading proponent of the City P~anager style of governmen~ for Santa Monica. Dave Paley, 1233 1/2 llth ~treet, ~pake in support of the landmark designation. He stated that the Vanity Fair Apar~ments was a good additian to the list of C~ty landmarks. He added that he toured the building and that it appeared to be in excelient conditian. Rodney Punt, 424 22nd Street, stated that Streamline Moderne architecture is the most important architectural style that developed in Los Angeles. Many other examples of the style in the Las Angelas azea have been Iost vr are now threatened. In additian, the style is rare in residential architeeture; it was mare commanly used for commercial design. The Vanity Fair Apartments is ona of the oldest examples of Streamline architecture in the City. It is in excellent condit~on and the bui~ding detai~s are preserved. David Cameran, P.O. Box 611, stated that he supported the staff recommendation and the comments of the previous speakers. He added that the Historic Resources In~entory Review Cammittee also fo~nd this building to be of ~andmark quality. It is a spec~aZ example of the s~yle and not an ordinary building. It ciearly meets more than one of the designation criteria. - 3 - r~~~ :~~ Ms. Hitchcock inquired if it was true that there were on~y a handful of Streamline Moderne buildings left in the City, Mr. Cameran responded that there are not a lot of Streamline residential structures left in Santa Monica. Of ~hose remaining, hawever, this one clearly stands out as a fine example of the style. Mr. Cameran added that, once the Historia lnventory is completed, there will be solid infox~mation on the actual number of remaining Streamline structures. Ms. Hitchcock agreed that the Vanity Fair apartment building is the finest of the Streamline residentiai build~ngs in the City that she had seen. Mr. Segal, in his rebuttal, stated that, in his professianal capactiy as a Iandscape architect and in his ~ale as an Architectural ~eview Soard member, he has seen a wide variety of architectural styles of varying quality. He stated that few compare with the Vanity Fair. Ms. O'Cannor clased the public hearing. Ms. Hitchcock movad to adapt the stafP recommendation. Ms. Meadows seconded the motion. Since the property ownex then submitted a letter to the Commission requesting that the decision on the application be pastponed until the sune Landmarks meeting, Ms. Hernandez made a mation to reopsn to the hearing to allow the property owner to speak. Ms. Litvak second~d the motion. The motion was approved by a vaice vote ot the Commission with Ms. 0'Cannor abstaining. Enayatollah Go~~hani made himse~f available for Commissioner questions. Ms Hernandez inquir~d if the awner intended ta demolish the building. Mr. Galshani s~ated that he had no immediate plans to demolish the sturcture at this time. He added that, even if the Commission decides ta designate the bui].ding, he is not planning ta demQlish the structure. Ms. Hernandez asked, if the Commission delayed their decision until the June meeting, what type o~ information wauid Mr. Golshani present ta the Commission. Mr. Golshani sta~ed that he wau~d present information regarding the condition of the builda.ng and the cost of maintenance. Ms. Hernandez inquired if his ob~ection to the designation was due to any potential financial irapact. Mr. Golshani stated this was the case. Ms. Litvak stated that she works in real estate and she understands his concerns. Hawever, this is an outstanding building and a landmark application for it would certainly - 4 - Li~~ ~~ have been presented ~o the Commission at some point. She inquired if he had considered a condominium conversion through the TORCA process. Mr. Golshani statad that he may think about doing thi~. Ms. O'Connor added that the State Histaric Building Code would a~sa be available if the building were designated. This wou~d give him ~are flexibi~ity in repairs as well as alternative salutians to deal with safety issues. Mr. GolShani again stated that he requests more time so that he may consult wi~h other experts on this issue. Ms. o'Connor clos~d tha hearing and stated that a motion was still on the floor €or discussion or vote ta designate the Vanity Fair Apartments a City landmark with the findings in the staff repoxt. ayes: Freund, Harnand~z, O'Connor noes: none 9. NEW BUSINESS: Nana. HitChcock, Litvak, Meadows, Welsh, 1Q. D~SCUSSYON ITEMS: A. Demolitian P~rmits. No Demqlition Permits were r~aeived since the April meeting. B. Discussion af Potential Historica~ or Architectural 5ignificance of 1702 Appian Way. Revisw Reques~ed by the Planning Commission. Cantinued to June 8, 1992. C. Review af Dra€t Third Street Neiqhbarhood Historic District Design Guidelines. Ms. Hitchcock statad that she feit tha Guidelines wEre well done. Her oniy comment was to make the Ianguage less p~rsonal so that the infarmation i~ directed ~t both owners and tenants. Ms. O'Connor stated that one request to speak had been submitted. The Commission agreed to open a public hearing. Bea NemZaha, 2612 Third 5treet, stated that she was pleased to see such a comprehensive document. She recvmmended the purpose of the historic dist~ic~., to protect the neighborhood character as well as th~ zndividual structures, be expanded on page 4. She also recommended, on page 6, that the height of new bu~ldings be addressed and that the slope of the hill be discussed. She alsa stated that open space was a key characteristic of the district and that both lot coverag~ and maintenance af landscaping shauld be discussed. Further, under additions, she recon~rmended that sma].ler, free-standing, (` ^y, r '~` - 5 - `-~ `w A~'ACH~E~ITT I c,~~J,~ . (','; • -- SSS 3RC, s:, ~~v7 _, S/9 N TA ru on~tr~ C R. '9Z : °r: --$ ~': -;4 9~~ n~ ~ -3- ~z pL ANN~n~G D r v~ s r o,~ A~~NDy SGH~atF~T~R ~fAR MS. SCyr9C/aTfR, I f1 /~ L/ r~ Z T~ n/ G c- o N rE R.v 1.+~ G T H E P R o P~ 5 E D L~ ND I~~`!R X S7RTv5 OF ~ 22- S~~ TNr~rD STREET, .£ S~Ro~Gcr UR GE YoU T 0 r~ PPR 0~1E L AND~+~7R/t S~ ni TvJ f ~ R TH1S 0 E LrGy7~vcL r EXE~~TtD EX~MP[E OF TyE STREA~r~.r.uE /1~10D~ltNE STYLE Of ARl/y1TE~7'rIRE. .I A.r.t R I(, y'Ef~~ -~ E S rDENT OF S{~Rli ~1 MON2['A AND NAV~ L rv~n orv T~-r.rs a ~or~r F~n ~ rE~~$. ~ N~uf LONG L r4ly'EN7Ep TNE F~['T TNNr ~+~+~ Sr r1F ~ry~ &v1cDr,vLt 0~ ~`1l?fN~TEr7-uR~L ~E~1T r~v 0~~ n/E1GHBnRtlvo~ Hf7VE ~E~~ REP~Al~D ~iY STf~rcE Fv~n sT4R7 l+'ianlo~2T,yS OF NEG~+TSVf AEST~~~i t~ /N~,Qr7; I' L~.~ s E ~ E~ P u s P R E s E~ vE 7'i/E S E f E w ~ E,~.~ ~.r,vr.v c L S L f~NA S ~ F ~ R~'I-~~ i~ l TvRR2 CNR/~ N1 W h' 1'<E~~ /~f FTEre ~ L L 7'N~ 5 E l7 E~q DES r C or~7 rn~U~ T~ C 0 NTRr6ur~' ~9 S~~ C j A t A~~8 I~//C E A/u D H t/.R1~1 N s C" r4 [~' T/-/ A T T~l,E q ~zG1r-~f9L D E SxG~E~S ~n~TEN4EA. S X/vCF_ {ZG L7 , N12~r-JAEL Fv~(~ET7 ~' ; r ~ L +..i ~ ~ ~ ~•2 •9~ . ~ Julia Annan Henderson S31 -~nd Street, Ttio ~, Santa 11on~ca, ~A 9~~03 ~ ~,: %~~,4~~1/lllll~f~ ~f l~/~j/~ ~ ` '92 ii~Y -~ F~ =~ ~ ~J~z~e.~ G~u,~ ~ ~ae.e._ ~ ~..Qr.-un~~•~-e.J ~ ~~~~~ 4~ ~~ ~.c.~.LC~rJ /D~Lc~~~~ ~ u~ ~zz -- ~z ~ ~~ ~-.~~-- v..~~_ G~ ~ Cr ~ /,~r~l1~Ec.~~ . ~ ~~ ~ ~ecr~cti~~.~ ~ • , D'~G~ ~~l.~i~r u~~~G~~OY~~c.t-~ . ; J . n ~ ~_ ~ ~.~ ~~~ ,~p f~Gu-~,~1,~~ r ~ . ,/ `. ~i`,;.~~ ~%~~C ~r~~1.~1~rr ~ ~ . ~ ~L~ ~'~ ~ ~/c~ ~~ ~ . ~ ~ ta ~ r -'- ~ ! ~ .~ .. ~~ ~~.~/~ `~G.[-C_-~ ~~ ~lC~~ ~ !y~ ~ ~ ,. ` '~,~~ ~; L'za~ri ~ - ~1 ~` , ~ , ~~~v~ -"'?`~`~~~=~i C~ i'(~-7G/ ~ ,_ ' _ . ` `t's ~ic'~~~ rJ~~~~F~~, ~(.~.1.~'~ , J9~y'-/~ - / ~~!/ji~7V~l ~~ . ~~~~~,~ ~~ ~.. ~- ~22-~-z~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~z~ ; -~~ ~- ~ ~ .a _ ~ ti ~.~ .~~~ ~~~-.~~1~~~ ,~~~' ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~~'~~~ ~~~ yf 2~~- ' ~~~'cc~r.~.~,r~ a.~~~ Gly..~~l ~~-~' ~~ ~ ~` `~'~':'~~ ~'~~2ccrf~ ~: 1~{/~~ ~~~ j ~~ ~~ ~~~1~-~F~Iu~G(''~/ ~ • i i ~ ~, i/ ~~.``'~~i ~,`' ~,`- f~~~~ ~ ~~~~ u~.r~'~„~~ ~~' ~~ ~~.,~c~, -.s . ~ ~ ~ ~~~iL~~~u ~.; - c.~c- ~~ ~~~ / ~~ ~~.~L- ~ ~~.,~, ~ ~~~ ~ ~~~- ~- ~~~-I~ - ~' ~~ - ~ ~`~.L ~~/~; ~/ ~CT'~~ v~" ' _-" - ,~~=G~ ~~-- ~~ ~ ~ L~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ -,~-~,~ ~ ~- .~ ~ ~ ~~~- ~ ~~~ ? ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ - ~ 1'~~-~,~ P~,~ ~~~ ~~ . ~ ~ ~,~LJ~,~ ~ ~~ . „ ~~ ~ ~,s~~c~ ~~~'~.~ 2 ~ ~~~-E , ~ ! E'zC~ .J ~~~ ~~~ 3'~~ ~~~ ~g ~~' ~~C~; c~} ~~~3 ~ ~k ~ _ :~ To: R~chard Sega~ From: Sam Ha~l Kaplan ~~'y RE: 822-824 Tn~rd Street Santa Monica, CA. Date: 4 May, 1992 What a p~eas~re ~t was to tour with you the su~~ect structure, and to find somehvw persevering in our city an engaging example o£ the Streamiine Moderne style that once distinquished the ar~a. The sty~~ as d~splayed by th~ sub~ect structure is marked by a s~ooth, asymetrical facade, cur~ed corners accent~d by banded wandows, ste~l railings hinting of nautical themes, a stepped, sensxtzvely scaled facad~, and, in the interior, styliaed de~ailing exudxng a machine aesthetic. Note~ also was that the building was massed and landscaped in a pedestrzan friend~y spirit, lend~ng some relief to an ~ncreas~ngly shadowed and alien streetscape aggravated by the recent constructxon of out-of-scale and over des~gn~d apartment houses. Streamiine Moderne is a style thak I noted and celebrated in my book, "L.A. Lost & Found: An Architectural History of Los Ange~es," in re~iews during my 10 y~ar tenure an the inured Architecture and Design Critic of the Los Angeles Times, and now as a contr~butor ta ~atious pap~lar and professional jaurnals, and a faculty member of the Ar~ Center College of Des~gn in Pasadena. I trust the listing of my credentials will add weigh~ to my warm recommendatzon as both an architectural histor~an and lo~g tim~ resident of Santa Monica that the sub3ect building ~e dec~ared a local landmark. Such buildings are critical to the community's sense of histary, and place. PleaSe fe~l free to use this ~emo ~n your efforts ~o mark and save the structure. r -~ l~ J ~.. : f May 21, 1992 To: LANDMARK COMMTSSIDN , CITY OF SANTA MONICA. From: Ed. Golshani , Owner of 7 un~ts Apartment building B24 3rd st. in Santa Monica Ladies and Gentlemen: Regarding designation above prflperty as a landmark, I strong3y believe this property is not a real candidate or qualified as a Zandmark. and only a dispute between owner and tenan~ zegarding an s~all amount of ~oney caused this case. I believe such a des~gnation is not fair, and will nat help anybody , this is another way of r~nt control ~o restrict ownership in city of santa monica. UnfartunateZy , because of riot in Los Angeles and my involvemen in my damaged praperty in vermant Ave. I was not able ~o hire an attorney or histarian architect to defend me . ~ am asking the commission ta give me more time at least 30 days by continuinq the case to next month meeting .enable me to find experts ta help ~e . I appreciate your understanding , THANK YO ~ ` V~.~ ~n. LSHANI - ~ ~`:~.~ . ~~ /r ~ a W~rsH~x~! MONTqNA N~c~so~oon Conur~orr Batnd afDirectort April 13, 1992 Kenrurh Bsecrcb ~"~~'Y" The Santa Monica- Landmarks Co~naission syiv~aCra~ City of Santa Monica Assl,urDavir 16$5 Maln Street NanryDexur p. 0. $os 220Q JocF:~rr;c,~ Santa Monica, CA 90407-22Q0 Rredy Hoffrna~ ~a,.,y Leuu~ Dear Commiss ianers : SfiaaroR Lav:ng ~~'~~sw"~"` The Preservatian Ccmmittee and the Hoard of the Lo~Mo~ch WfZ~h~re/Montana Nefghborhood Caalftion suppart the P~`~o~~""°T formal consideration of the 3treamline M~derne RurhPollack Apartment Bu~.lding (822-$24 Thi~'d Streetj as S City Naami Ratir~ov Land~nark . LarrySkWCx We look forward ta working with the Con~mission fn identiFyfng other architectural/histor3cal resou.rces in aur neighborhood as the Survey Ren~ew Co~nittee revie~rs the Wilshire/Montana neighborhood over the next few raanths. 3lncerely. ~ ~ ~ Naacy Dess~r Vfce-Chair 61z Colwado Avenue Swoe 106 Sxnm lNoaia. CA 9040E (310) 450-i576 ~ .,y ~ ' ~ FAX (3[o};g~~~ ~ ~_ ; / ~ , ~ , ~ ~~~ . ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~.l ~ ~ I;; • ~ ' ` ~`•'~-., IC~s,.~ 21 2 ~~ '92 f,,~'; ~ 3 ; ~.; ~1 l~ ~s . . . ~~. ~.~, C~~ . 9~ s~o ~ ~ .~-~ : ~~.~„~ ~ - ~ -~ ~~a -.~a s~ ~ : ~-~-~. S~- ~. L ~~.~...~.. . ~ _ ~ .~.F_ ~ ~.t ~,.~,~. _ ~ -~. ~ ~.~,e. ~ .~. ~ _ , ~ .~~- - ~ ~-G~.~ ~'''~e~~~-! ~z,.~. ~~ ~ ~.~~ S-~.~~-~ ~,~ ~ C ~ .~,~..~y ~ ~..Q_. -~..~.~ ~~ ~- ' ~-..~ ~ ~ . ~~ ~ ~ ~ - - - ~-- ~~.~ ~-~.~. ~' , • ~~: a~ ~~ ~++ ~ , ~ , ~~~ ~~=t~~~~~ c.~~-~- y? ~~..~.~.. ~~F~:Y~ ~, _-__~ ~a xl~ ~~~_ ~~ ~ , ~ ~~. 5~...~; n~ ~~ya~ J+ r ~_ ~-r ~ ,~ ~7 A~ACH~VfEIV~' J ~' r` r ~_ ~l _ r~9~ t From: E.GOLSHANI , ~ n _ `. -' - 20254 jael].s Dr . ~;L ~ _ - -~ ~ _ , TnToodland hills , CA 91364 To. A~IA'VDA SHAKNER CITY OF SANTA MONTCA Regarding appeal fi~ec~ for 822-824 3rd st. Santa monica . for landmark commission decision . T hereby confa.rm my agreement on August 11, ~992 for hearing for above subject. THA:~T S ~ ~: G~ E. ~ LSHANI ~ !~ r n . ~ l . ~ A~`ACH~ENT K 06~25-19~? 13~1~ A~~u~~ 25,1992 09 4 1991 1 P.01 Fram: E, Golsh~nf Re. Appeai of Landma~k de~igflation for B24 3rd st. ' At tr~ : a,mend~ shakner ; E. `~ Reqard~.ng your request for c~ange c~f dat~ ft-r mee~ixtg, T hereay declare my agree~-~nt an SQptemrier s. Yours ru Y , ~ E, G sk~ani I