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