The URL can be used to link to this page

SR-402-002 (38) {Pfl JUL 1 2 2.003, PCD:SF:AS:F:\PLAN\SHARE\COUNCIL\STRPT\2005\921 19 St-Appeal.doc Council Mtg: July 12, 2005 Santa Monica, California TO: Mayor and Council members FROM: City Staff SUBJECT: Appeal 04APP012 of Landmarks Commission Designation of the Property at 921 19th Street as a City Landmark and Associated Discussion of Policy Implications Regarding Appropriate Breadth of Application of Landmark Criteria Appellant: 19th Street Townhomes, LLC APl9li6E.I,t. Michael Klein, Esq. INTRODUCTION This report recommends that the City Council uphold the appeal of the Landmarks Commission's designation of 921 19th Street as a City Landmark. On October 11, 2004, the Landmarks Commission filed the Findings & Determination designating the single- family Craftsman-style bungalow and detached accessory garage as a City Landmark. The property owner has appealed this decision. The appeal statement is contained in Attachment A. DISCUSSION Landmarks DesiQnation Policy Considerations The issue before the Council is an appeal of the landmark designation of the property at 921 19th Street. The appeal raises broader issues for Council discussion that have policy implications regarding the application of the City's landmark designation criteria. 1 ~A JUL 1 2 2005 In the context of rendering a determination on this appeal, Council may wish to consider how broadly the designation criteria in the ordinance should be applied. As noted in SMMC Section 9.36.100 (a), a structure, improvement, natural feature or an object may be designated a landmark if determined to meet one or more of the following criteria: (1) It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history of the City. (2) value. It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other noteworthy interest or (3) It is identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state or national history. (4) It embodies distinguishing architectural characteristics valuable to a study of a period, style, method of construction, or the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship, or is a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or historical type valuable to such a study. (5) It is a significant or a representative example of the work or product of a notable builder, designer or architect. (6) It has a unique location, a singular physical characteristic, or is an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community or the City. It is the responsibility of the Landmarks Commission, or Council on appeal, to make findings under at least one of the above-mentioned criteria in order to approve the Landmark Designation of a structure. If the criteria are applied too broadly, structures with varying levels of significance could be deemed eligible for landmark designation. That result could undermine confidence in the standards and process. 2 The City's Historic Resources Inventory currently identifies a total of 1,324 properties. Of this total, 928 buildings are historic district eligible. The significance of these buildings is linked to their context and grouping, which may demonstrate a particular architectural form or development pattern. The City's Historic Resources Inventory identifies a much smaller number, 396, as individually eligible for recognition as a City Landmark. This evaluation is based on a structure's architectural integrity and the extent to which its character defining features have been preserved. The subject Craftsman-style bungalow and accessory garage is located in a portion of the City that was last surveyed in 1992-1993 for the City's Phase 3 Historic Resources Inventory. The Phase 3 survey did not identify this bungalow as being eligible for individual landmark status or as a contributor to a potential historic district. Consequently, the subject bungalow is not listed on the City's Historic Resources Inventory. BACKGROUND The Landmarks Commission initially reviewed the 921 19th Street property on July 12, 2004 as a demolition permit application. At that hearing, the Landmarks Commission filed an application for Landmark designation of the residence and garage. The Landmarks Commission held a public hearing on September 13, 2004. Staff recommended against the designation. The Commission voted to approve the designation, adopting the findings and determination on October 11, 2004. The September 13, 2004 staff report and the Landmarks Commission's determination are contained in Attachments C and B, respectively; Under the provisions of the Landmarks 3 Ordinance, the City Council may grant the appeal or uphold the decision of the Landmarks Commission in whole or in part and designate the Craftsman-style bungalow residence at 921 19th Street as a Landmark based upon the Landmarks Ordinance criteria contained in SMMC Section 9.36.100. Property Description Constructed in 1923, the subject residence located at 921 19th Street is a typical, one- story wood-framed Craftsman style bungalow. The property also contains a detached, two-car garage, with alley accessed from 19th Court alley. The bungalow is capped by a low-pitched, cross-gabled roof and narrow clapboard siding. The primary elevation includes a grouping of four wood-framed fixed windows, each with four-square upper lights. There is a small entry porch area flanked by large wood-framed casement windows. Above the entry is a front-gabled hood supported by carved brackets. A recent addition to the rear northwest corner of the house is not visible from the street. The detached garage was constructed together with the house and also reflects Craftsman style elements. The residence and garage have generally been well maintained over the years with minimal alterations and appear from both the street and alley to be in good condition. APPEAL SUMMARY In the appeal filed on October 20, 2004, the appellant contends that the designation should be disapproved because the property does not satisfy the criteria for designation. The appellant asserts that the findings and determination are 4 rationalizations of the Commission's action and contradict the City's historic resource consultant's report and the staff analysis and recommendation. ANAL YSIS As the appellant states, and as detailed in the staff report provided for the Landmarks Commission hearing, staff recommends against designation of this property. This assessment, supported by the City's preservation consultants PCR Services Corporation (PCR), found that the property at 921 19th Street, while intact and well maintained, is a typical wood-framed Craftsman style bungalow property. It is not an exceptional example of a California bungalow with Craftsman influences within the architectural history of the City. The analysis further determined that the property did not meet any of the six (6) designation criteria. It was noted that, because the bungalow was constructed in 1923, it could be considered an established or visual feature of a neighborhood. However, this criterion, 9.36.100(a)(6), is used for properties which have "a unique location, a singular physical characteristic, or an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community of the City." For example, the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium meets this criterion as it has a unique location within the Civic Center, at the bend of Main Street. Its grand scale, and unique design with futuristic pylons, commands attention as one travels south along Main Street. The Civic Auditorium is also a familiar and integral part of the Civic Center complex. The Civic Auditorium is, thus, an important visual monument in the City of Santa Monica, and is clearly an established and familiar visual feature of the City. In contrast, the property at 921 19th Street does not have a location 5 or singular physical characteristic that makes it unique. Simply by virtue of having occupied this property since 1923, the property cannot be found to meet this criterion. The property is an example of a modest California bungalow exhibiting typical Craftsman elements. This building style was widespread in the late 1910s and much of the 1920s in Santa Monica and the rest of Southern California. While the house displays features of the style, there are many more superior, representative examples of this architectural style elsewhere in this neighborhood and in other parts of the City. This assessment is confirmed by the context statement that resulted from the Phase 3 Historic Resources Inventory. This statement describes the residential development pattern of the subject property's neighborhood. This area of the City began to develop in the 1920s, containing residential, commercial and industrial uses. The Inventory determined that the most intact street in the neighborhood was 22nd Street. Individual properties that did not possess a strong historical development context were not identified. In addition, the Historic Resource Inventory recognizes an individual property if it contains individual or unique characteristics. The landmark designation analysis considered this source material and concluded that this property appears not to have been listed because it does not contain substantial context, and is not individually significant. Further, when reviewed within the current context of the City's older housing stock, the property is not individually significant as many better representative examples of this development type remain in the City. 6 This designation application was filed by the Landmarks Commission in response to the demolition permit required for development of the property. Several community members who spoke in favor of the designation expressed their appreciation for the long-standing and well-maintained bungalow in the neighborhood. Community members also expressed concern about the proposed development of condominiums on the site. However, if the Landmark designation process appears to overstate a building's contribution to the City's cultural heritage and is viewed as being utilized as a strategy to prevent development, it may devalue the cultural and historical significance of other. Landmarks that have been designated using appropriate application of the criteria. Landmarks Commission Action The Landmarks Commission found that the Craftsman style bungalow and detached garage structure at 921 19th Street meets two of the six Landmark criteria. The Commission found the subject residence reflects many of the features that identify the California Craftsman style bungalow, an architectural form that defined Southern California's development in the 1910s - 1920s. The Commission based its designation primarily with its association to the bungalow building type, and its importance to the City's development. Conclusion The property at 921 19th Street is a typical bungalow property and, while it has been well-maintained over the years, the architecture is not particularly noteworthy. Many other architecturally superior examples of this building type remain throughout the City. While this property is a fairly intact and well-crafted bungalow type, there are many 7 superior examples to inform a study of this style, such as the following designated City Landmarks: 315 10th Street, 142 Adelaide Drive, 2424 4th Street, and 502 Raymond Avenue. In addition, there are many superior examples of the Craftsman style bungalow building type designated as contributing structures within the Third Street Historic District. Further, the property has very little context to provide a meaningful example of this building type and its influence on the City's development patterns. As noted in the Historic Resources Inventory, the most intact street in the neighborhood is 22nd Street which possesses a historical context of several original structures. A careful review reflects that the property at 921 19th Street does not contain substantial context, and is not individually significant. Use of the Landmark Designation process to halt development rather than as means to protect and recognize the City's cultural heritage is a significant policy choice and a departure from widely accepted standards. In determining if this typical bungalow and accessory structure merits Landmarks designation, the Council should consider the threshold for determining the level of historic significance. Specifically, should the buildings of modest architectural quality be recognized and protected as a City Landmark, the City's highest level of designation? Similar structures can be found and as a result, similar criteria can be broadly applied throughout the City. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Notice of this public hearing was published in the California Section of the Los Angeles Times and mailed to all owners and residential and commercial tenants of property 8 located within a 300 foot radius of the project at least 10 days prior to the hearing. A copy of the notice is contained in Attachment D. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT The recommendation presented in this report does not have any budget or fiscal impact. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Council uphold the appeal and overturn the Landmarks Commission's decision to designate 921 19th Street as a City Landmark. Prepared by: . Andy Agle, Interim Director Amanda Schachter, Planning Manager Stephanie Reich, Urban Designer Roxanne Tanemori, Associate Planner City Planning Division Planning and Community Development Department Attachments A. Appeal Statement B. Findings and Determination, Filed October 11, 2004 C. Landmarks Commission Staff Report dated September 13, 2004 D. City Consultant Evaluation Report, dated September 2,2004 E. September 13, 2004 Landmarks Commission Minutes F. Correspondence Received Regarding the September 13,2004 Public Hearing G. Public Notice F:\CityPlanning\Share\COUNCIL\STRPT\2005\921 19 St_Appeal.doc 9 ATTACHMENT A APPEAL STATEMENT 10 Oct 18 04 04:25p oct I~ 2004 2:35PM & WEISZ SANTA MONICA 310 447 772S NO. 4030 P.!./i. p.3 City of Santa Monica Ollpanmenl 01 Planning and COll'lm\Jl'lil)' Oevelopment Plannl/1G and Zoning Division (310) 456.8341 APPEAL FORM Oate F~ed Rece lved By Receipt No. 101 ?o LOj ;:t. 'O~ ~.? Cl ?r ~ Name' 19th. Street Townhomes, LLC Address: 6505. Gayha~t: Street. ('nm1l1P~(""p 1 Contac(?erson Mlchael Kleln, Esq. Kleln & 12424 Wilshire BLvd. #1450, Please describe the project and decisiOn 10 be appealed -rt--!: <1 d- \ l q ..- ,ST. CA 90040 Attn: Mr. Fred WeiszPhOne 310-447-7000 LA, CA. 90025 'lb-- J'b d- II .:.::: cAL *4 Vl' Farzan J)psjgn..,f--jon or q?1 lqt-h St.reet, Santa Monica. CA as a City Landmark (The project is a pending condominium proiect at 917 19th Street and 921 19th street, which is not subject to this appeal.'I) Ca~eNumber LC-04-LM-006 Address: 921 l<nb Street. Santa Monica. CA. Applicant 19th street TownhQmesr LLC Ofl9lna.IHearingOate 'Pllhl ic Hearing9.L13/2004: statement of official t\ction 10/11/2004 Origil1al'Aclion Designation of the Property as a city Landmark Please stale the specific reason(s) ler the appeal We' do not think the property shoula be designated a.s a city Landmark. , Si9(lalu~e i 0 - 111 - 0 1 Date By: -~ .}"\;..,... -- . tiill' U ;,j 11- ATTACHMENT B FINDINGS AND DETERMINATION, FILED OCTOBER 11,2004 FINDINGS AND DETERMINATION OF THE LANDMARKS COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA IN THE MATTER OF THE DESIGNATION OF A LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF LANDMARK FOR THE STRUCTURE LOCATED AT 921 19th Street LANDMARKS COMMISSION HEARING LC-04-LM-006 October 11 , 2004 SECTION I. An application was filed by the Landmarks Commission on July 12, 2004, to designate the property located at 921 19th Street as a City Landmark. The Landmarks Commission of the City of Santa Monica, having held a Public Hearing on September 13, 2004, hereby makes the following findings regarding both the primary residence and accessory garage structure at the property located at 921 19th Street: (1) It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history of the City. The property at 921 19th Street exemplifies and manifests aspects of the social and architectural history of the City Of Santa Monica. The primary structure on the subject property was constructed in 1923 and is a well-preserved, finely detailed Craftsman-style California bungalow. The residence reflects many of the features that identify the Craftsman style, including its low-pitched and cross-gabled roof, extended roof eaves, exposed rafter tails and beam-ends, clapboard wood siding, wood framed windows, and raised front porch area. The accessory garage structure located in the rear yard was designed and constructed with the primary residence. The garage is notable because it exhibits many of the same architectural elements the primary residence features, and exemplifies application of the Craftsman style to accessory structures through el~ments such as a front-gabled roof with deep ,&~ ~. 0013 overhangs, exposed rafters, narrow clapboard siding, and vertical vents in the gable peak. The subject property is located within a portion of the original town site of Santa Monica that remained undeveloped until the early 20th century. This bungalow residence retains strong structural and architectural integrity and exhibits a high level of craftsmanship. As such, it is an exemplary representation of the City's prevailing residential development pattern during the first quarter of the 20th century. Construction of bungalow residences had its genesis in southern California, and was widely used in Santa Monica and throughout the region. Bungalow residences helped address the community's growing need for affordable housing during the 1910s and 1920s. Because the Craftsman-bungalow at 921 19th Street has been carefully maintained and remains in excellent condition, it stands as a strong manifestation of this important aspect of Santa Monica's history. Furthermore, this residence is one of only three extant structures constructed during the 1920s still remaining on the 900 block of 19th Street and it is the most architectural-significant, finely detailed, and highly intact example of the neighborhood's early development. (2) It embodies distinguishing architectural characteristics valuable to a study of a period, style, method of construction, or the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship, or is a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or historical type valuable to such a study. The overall quality and architectural context of the subject property, including its form, massing, materials, workmanship, and unique design elements are valuable to a study of the Craftsman style as it was applied to residential development in Santa Monica during the 1920s. The primary residence is an excellent, highly intact example of late Craftsman-style bungalow architecture in Santa Monica during the 1920s. The bungalow exhibits a number of character-defining features of this style including its low-pitched and cross-gabled roof, extended roof eaves, maintained vents in the gable peak, exposed rafter tails and beam-ends, clapboard wood siding, wood framed windows, and its raised front porch area. The accessory garage ~~ (Jlo14 structure also exhibits many of the same architectural elements of the primary residence including a front-gabled roof with deep overhangs, exposed rafters, narrow clapboard siding, and vertical vents in the gable peak. The front fa9ade of the residence is in pristine condition and shows little alteration beyond maintenance- related activities. The front-gabled hood over the primary fa9ade entry door is supported by carved brackets with a decorative cut-out and squared knobs. This architectural element of the structure exhibits a high level of craftsmanship and is a unique feature of this bungalow. There is also a grouping of four, original, double hung sash windows each with four square upper lights on the primary fayade that remain intact and in excellent condition. A projecting squared bay with a window and well maintained red brick chimney are present on the south elevation of the bungalow. These distinguishing features of late Craftsman-style architecture are strongly expressed in the bungalow residence at 921 19th Street and are valuable to a study of this prevalent style during the development of Santa Monica in the 1920s. Each and all of the findings and determinations are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the Project. All summaries of information contained herein or in the findings are based on the substantial evidence in the record. The absence of any particular fact from any such summary is not an indication that a particular finding is not based in part on that fact. SECTION II. I hereby certify that the above Findings and Determination accurately reflect the final determination of the Landmarks Commission of the City of Santa Monica on September 13, 2004, as determined by the following vote: AYES: NAYES: ABSTAIN: Berley, Fresco, Genser, Kaplan, Lehrer None None ABSENT: Levin, Maduzia Respectfully Submitted October 11, 2004 Roger Genser, Chairperson Attest: Roxanne Tanemori ~t. Uli15 Landmarks Commission Secretary This Statement of Official Action detailing the findings and determination of the Landmarks Commission has been filed with the Director of Planning and Community Development on October 11, 2004, and pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.36.180(b), any notice of appeal shall be filed within 10 days of such filing date. F:\CityPlanning\Share\Landmarks\Designations\2004\Determination_ 921 19th SC V.2. doc ~.. Ov16 ATTACHMENT C LANDMARKS COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATED SEPTEMBER 13, 2004 ~iCt O~17 MEMORANDUM PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF SANTA MONICA PLANNING DIVISION DATE: September 13, 2004 TO: The Honorable Landmarks Commission FROM: Planning Staff 921 19th Street (LC-04LM-006) Public Hearing to Consider a Landmark Designation Application PROPERTY OWNER: 19th Street Townhomes, LLC APPLICANT: Landmarks Commission SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION On July 12, 2004, the Landmarks Commission filed an application for Landmark designation of the subject property. The property contains a one-story, Craftsman-style residence and a one-story garage accessed from the alley. This property has not been previously identified in the City's Historic Resources Inventory. BACKGROUND The subject property is located on Block 14, Lot 17 of Tract 1351 in the City of Santa Monica. The property was included in the survey conducted for the Phase 3 Historic Resources Inventory in 1992-1993. The property owner filed a demolition permit for the existing structure on June 23, 2004. The demolition permit was considered at the Landmarks Commission's July 12, 2004 meeting, at which time the Commission filed this application for Landmark designation. 17 ~. LJv18 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Pursuant to SMMC Section 9.36.120, notice of the public hearing was mailed to all owners and residential and commercial tenants of property within a 300-foot radius of the project and was published in the "California" section of The Los Angeles Times at least ten consecutive calendar days prior to the hearing. A copy of the notice is included as Attachment C. The property owner was notified of this application and hearing date by mail on July 13, 2004. ANAL YSIS Property Information The subject property measures 50' x 160' and is located on the east side of 19th Street between Idaho Avenue and Washington Avenue. The 1372 square-foot residence is set back approximately 15 feet from the front property line, with the entrance on a slightly recessed plane. The property also contains a detached, two-car garage, with alley access from 19th Court. The property has generally been well maintained over the years with minimal alterations and appears from both the street and alley to be in good condition. Constructed in 1923, this was one of at least 16 single-family dwellings erected along the 900 block of 19th Street in the years prior to 1950. Although the neighborhood was substantially built-up by the onset of World War II, a marked change in character occurred in the mid-1950s and early 1960s, when older buildings began to be replaced by modern apartment buildings. Today, much of the area has been in-filled with multi- story condominiums, with older housing stock usually isolated or clustered in small groups. Of the original pre-war houses, only three extant properties were constructed in the 1920s (918 in 1924; 921, the subject property, in 1923; and 944 in 1923). One extant property, a small bungalow court (953 19th Street), was constructed in 1939. All other properties located along the 900 block of 19th Street were developed or redeveloped after World War II. The context statement that resulted from the survey identifying properties for the Historic Resources Inventory in this area (see Attachment E) noted that the initial residential development pattern was mostly set in the 1920s, at the time this property was developed. Area 5, which includes the subject property, contains residential, commercial and industrial uses. For the residential portion, the survey focused on the most intact street in the neighborhood, 22nd Street, and did not recognize individual properties without a strong context of other original structures. In addition, the Inventory 18 JHf (J\19 will recognize an individual property if it contains individual or unique characteristics. The property at 921 19th Street is a typical bungalow property and, while intact, is not particularly noteworthy. It appears this property was not listed because it does not contain substantial context, and does not appear individually significant. Architectural Description This is a typical one-story wood-framed Craftsman style bungalow with detached garage. The bungalow features a low-pitched, cross-gabled roof and narrow clapboard siding. Roof elements include overhanging eaves, exposed rafter tails and beam-ends, carved bargeboards, and a vertical slatted vent in the front-gable peak. The primary (west) elevation features include a grouping of four wood-framed fixed windows each with four-square upper lights and a small entry porch area flanked by large wood- framed casement windows. All windows are framed by flat wood surrounds. Above the entry is a front-gabled hood supported by carved brackets. A squared bay with windows on all faces projects from the south elevation, which also contains a brick chimney that is visible from the street. A recent (1999) addition to the rear northwest corner of the house is not visible from the street. The garage was constructed together with the house and also reflects the Craftsman style, with eave overhangs, exposed rafters, narrow clapboard siding, windows with wood surrounds and vertical vents in the gable peak. This garage, which fronts the 19th Court alley, has been well maintained and is also intact. As mentioned above, while well maintained and reasonably intact, this is a fairly typical bungalow property. While the property does appear to have Craftsman-style elements, 19 . v... I.' 4'"\ ll1 ...- .' '; c.. 0 it is not a particularly significant, unique or exceptional example of Craftsman style bungalow architecture in Santa Monica. Historic Associations According to the building permits, A. Wallace Jamieson was the initial owner/architect/builder of the subject property. City directories indicate that Mr. Jamieson, listed variously as a draftsman; construction engineer; carpenter; and mechanic, and his wife Millie E. Jamieson, occupied the residence from construction until at least 1959. For at least a few years in the late 1940s, Robert W. Jamieson (probably their son), a musician, resided at the address. Rosemary Jamieson (daughter), a librarian with the Santa Monica Public Library, appears in city directories at the address from 1952 and apparently lived in the house until at least 1997, keeping the subject property in the extended Jamieson family for at least 74 years. Research has not indicated that the family was associated with important events in local, state or national history. Landmarks Ordinance The Landmarks Ordinance requires an application for Landmark designation to be scheduled for consideration within 65 days of the date on which the application was deemed complete. This time limitation may be waived with written permission from the applicant/owner of the property. The Landmarks Ordinance requires the Commission to review the building's eligibility as a landmark based on the six criteria discussed below. The Commission may designate 20 ~ W ,I. ~ 2 1 a property as a landmark if it meets one or more of these criteria. If designated, the Commission may consider applications for Certificates of Appropriateness for any proposed alteration, restoration, construction, removal, relocation, or demolition, in whole or in part, to the Landmark structure or parcel. The designation criteria, established in SMMC Section 9.36.100(a) and the statements of significance for 921 19th Street are as follows: (1) It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history of the City. The subject property is a typical example of a California bungalow with Craftsman influences of which many other examples exist in the residential neighborhoods east of 17th Street in the City of Santa Monica. Additionally, two other similar California bungalow-type dwellings from the same time period are located on the 900 block of 19th Street. Although the subject property reflects many of the features that are typical of the style and period, the residence does not rise to the level of representing an exceptional example of a California bungalow with Craftsman influences within the architectural history of the City. Therefore, the subject property does not appear to satisfy this criterion. (2) It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other noteworthy interest or value. Though a good example of a California bungalow with Craftsman influences, the subject property does not articulate a particular or noteworthy concept of design sufficient enough to express an aesthetic ideal beyond that represented by other properties of the same style in the area. Therefore, the subject property does not appear to possess sufficient aesthetic or artistic value necessary for designation under this criterion. (3) It is identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state or national history. Although the extended Jamieson family occupied the dwelling for approximately 74 years, current research did not reveal information to link the subject property with any historic personages or with any important events in local, state, or national history. Therefore, it does not appear to satisfy this criterion. (4) It embodies distinguishing architectural characteristics valuable to a study of a period, style, method of construction, or the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship, or is a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or historical type valuable to such a study. 21 ~ tIS' (j l' '2 2 The subject property is a representative example of a California bungalow with typical Craftsman influences that is reflective of a particular architectural style and historical period. However, the subject property is not considered a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail, or historical type since other comparable examples exist within the neighborhood and throughout the City. For example, a similar dwelling constructed in 1924 is located diagonally across (northwest) from the subject property at 918 19th Street that is similar in type, style, and level of physical integrity to the subject property. Although the subject property also exhibits a high degree of integrity, it does not reflect sufficient architectural context to distinguish its architectural character as a California bungalow from other similar dwellings in the immediate neighborhood or throughout the City. Therefore, the subject property does not appear to satisfy this criterion. (5) It is a significant or a representative example of the work or product of a notable builder, designer or architect. The design and construction of the subject property is attributed to the owner, A. Wallace Jamieson, a draftsman and carpenter. No information regarding Jamieson was found during the current research process to suggest he was a notable builder, designer, or architect. Hence, the property does not appear to satisfy this criterion. (6) It has a unique location, a singular physical characteristic, or is an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community or the City. Application of this criterion does not indicate that the resource has a unique location or singular physical characteristic that makes it unique. It is located along the east (north) side of 19th Street between Washington Avenue and Idaho Avenue, adjacent to other residential properties. By virtue of the fact that this building has been in the neighborhood since its construction in 1923, it has become an established feature of the area; however, this application of this criterion is weak in that this conclusion could be made regarding any structure present for this amount of time. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION The subject property is a typical example of a bungalow property, a popular building type in Santa Monica and the southern California region throughout the first quarter of the twentieth century and thereafter. As a result, many of the streets here in Santa Monica still reflect the popularity of bungalow architecture, for example, the 900 block of 22nd Street as noted in the City's Historic Resources Inventory, among others. There are also many superior individual examples of Craftsman style bungalow architecture. 22 ~ .l) .\. ;l. :j This property does not appear to possess individual significance, or contribute to a potential historic district. Based on the research and evaluation of this property staff concludes that this resource does not meet any of the six designation criteria. Therefore, staff recommends that the Commission deny this application for City Landmark designation. Attachments: A. Landmark Designation Application B. PCR Evaluation Report C. Aerial photo of property D. Letters received regarding application E. HRI Phase 3 Final Report, May 1994, pages 22-23 F. Public Notice F:\PLAN\SHARE\Landmar1<s\Designations\2004\921 19th St desgnation rpt.doc 23 "ki OU2l' ~ '. ,q ATTACHMENT 0 CITY CONSULTANT EVALUATION REPORT, DATED SEPTEMBER 2, 2004 24 Single- Family Residence 92119tb Street Santa Monica, California City Landmark Assessment Report Evaluation Report Building Permit History City Directory Research Additional Photographs Tax Assessor Map Sanborn Maps Prepared for: City of Santa Monica Prepared by: PCR Services Corporation Santa Monica, California September 2, 2004 !IS'. in,t.r- ,;.: .....i Single-Family Residence 92119th Street City of Santa Monica City Landmark Assessment and Evaluation APN: 4277 -011-017 BACKGROUND INFORMATION Description of site, note any major alterations and dates of alterations The property at 921 19th Street is situated along the east side of 19th Street between Idaho Avenue and Washington Avenue. It is located on Block 14, Lot 17 of Tract 1351 in the City of Santa Monica. The property is comprised of a modest bungalow and a detached garage set within a 50 foot by 160 foot parcel. The bungalow is centrally placed at the front (west) end of the parcel with its primary (front) elevation facing 19th Street, while the small detached garage is situated at the parcel's southeast corner (rear) with access from a narrow unnamed alley. The property is sited on a flat lot within a residential neighborhood comprised of both single-family and multi-family residences. The subject property has not been previously identified in the City's Historical Resources Inventory. This one-story wood-framed Craftsman style bungalow, rectangular in plan, is capped by a low-pitched, cross-gabled roof with exterior walls sheathed in narrow clapboard siding. Roof elements include deep overhanging eaves, exposed rafter tails and beam-ends, carved bargeboards, and a vertical slatted vent in the front-gable peak. Notable features along the primary (west) elevation include a grouping of four elongated wood-framed fixed windows each with four square upper lights and a small entry porch area flanked by large wood- framed casement windows. All windows are framed by flat wood surrounds. A front-gabled hood supported by carved brackets, pierced by a decorative cut -out, and embellished with a pair of squared knobs shades the front entry. Concrete steps bordered by stout, square- shaped red brick piers lead to the raised porch area and glazed entrance door. Located along the south (secondary) elevation are a projecting squared bay punctuated by fenestration and an exterior red brick chimney. A recent (1999) addition to the rear northwest corner of the house is not visible from the street. Located on the southeast corner of the parcel behind the dwelling is a me-story detached two-car garage also designed in the Craftsman idiom. The wood-frame garage is accessed via a narrow back alley that runs along the east side of the property. Capped by a front-gabled roof, this structure features many of the same elements as the dwelling including deep overhangs, exposed rafters, narrow clapboard siding, and vertical vents in the gable peak. There are three building permits on file with the City. including the original permit dating from 1923. The building permit was issued to A.W. Jamieson, the property owner at the time, for the construction of a dwelling and garage. According to the permit the residence and garage were built at a cost of $3,500 and $200, respectively, with the owner listed as architect and builder of both structures. In 1938, Jamieson received a building permit for the enlargement of a room costing approximately $200. A later permit from 1999 notes the 921 19" Street City Landmark Assessmen t Report page I ;~H4 0(,27 addition of a bathroom at the rear of the dwelling for an estimated cost of $9,000 by then owner Mayer Aframian. According to Sanborn maps minimal alterations to the property have occurred over the years. Upon visual inspection, the buildings appear to be in good condition with few alterations visible from the public right-of-way. SURVEY EVALUATION S1?tement of Mc:Qilectural Significance The property at 921 19th Street was constructed in 1923, and is a typical example of a modest California bungalow with Craftsman influences once commonly seen in residential neighborhoods throughout Santa Monica and the Los Angeles region. A detached garage of similar design is located at the rear (east) of the lot The bungalow had its genesis in southern California, and was widely used in Santa Monica and throughout the region. During the first quarter of the twentieth century, bungalows were a popular building type in newly developed suburban areas. Because of their relative economy, bungalows answered a growing need for affordable housing during the 1910s and 1920s. Many of the streets here in Santa Monica and elsewhere reflect the popularity of bungalow architecture. Square or rectangular shaped cottages with one to one-and-one half stories and rectilinear porches typify the bungalow form. To this basic form, architects introduced elements of the Craftsman, Spanish, Stick, Colonial Revival. and even Japanese styles to produce a unique building style. The standard bungalow is characterized by simple, horizontal, and craft- oriented natural materials. Common elements of the style include exposed roof beams and rafter tails: battered (tapered) or square porch posts: rectangular shaped windows. usually sash over sash; shingle or clapboard siding; gabled roofs; and simple wood frame surrounds. The features on the subject property that are typical of the style and period include its general scale and massing; low-pitched, cross-gabled roof; overhanging eaves with exposed rafter tails and beam-ends: clapboa~'d siding; wood-framed fenestration with plain surrounds; and' casement and double hung sash windows. Additionally, the Craftsman influence is evident in the grouping of four elongated, fixed windows along the west elevation and barge boards under the extended eaves. The subject property retains a high degree of integrity to convey its particular property type, building style, and period of significance. Statement of Historical Importance Santa Monica. In 1875, the original townsite of Santa Monica was surveyed, including all the land extending from Colorado Street on the south to Montana on the north, and from 26th Street on the east to the Pacific Ocean on the west. Between 1893 and the 1920s, the community operated as a tourist attraction, visited by mostly wealthy patrons. Those areas just outside of the incorporated city limits were semi-rural in setting and were populated with scattered residences. After the advent of the automobile in the 1920s, Santa Monica experienced a significant building boom, with homes being constructed in the tracts north of Montana and east of Seventh Street for year-round residents. A commercial district was established between Wilshire and Colorado, at Second, Third, and Fourth Streets. Also in 921 19'" Street City Landmark Assessment Report page 2 ~. CL28 the 1920s, Santa Monica saw the arrival of large companies, such as Merle Norman Cosmetics and Douglas Aircraft. In the years immediately prior to America's entry into World War II, Santa Monica's development escalated as Douglas Aircraft received increasing numbers of government contracts. After the war, when southern California was flooded with returning veterans and their families seeking homes, the demand for housing continued to be high in Santa Monica, and apartment construction in particular escalated. 900 Block of 19th Street and Vicinity. The neighborhood in which the subject property is located, while part of the original townsite of Santa Monica, stayed unimproved except for widely scattered dwellings until the early twentieth century. Gradually, pockets of hipped roof cottages typical of the first years of the twentieth century were constructed, then were superseded by the quintessential southern California home from the period just after the turn-of-the-century to the early 1920s: the Craftsman bungalow. In the latter part of the 1920s, residential development in the area adopted a new approach predicated on revival styles of architecture that included Spanish Colonial Revival, English Revival, Colonial Revival and other styles. The introduction of courtyard housing also occurred at this time in and around the neighborhood. Remnants of several of these phases of Santa Monica's residential development are still evident in the vicinity of the subject property. This subject property was constructed in 1923 and was one of at least 16 single-family dwellings erected along the 900 block of 19th Street in the years prior to 1950. Of these, only three exta,nt properties were constructed in the 1920s (918 in 1924; 921, the subject property, in 1923; and 944 in 1923). One extant property, a small bungalow court (953 19m Street), was constructed in 1939. All other properties located along the 900 block of 19th Street were built after World War II. The property at 921 19th Street retains good integrity; however, while it was constructed during a particular phase of the neighborhood's residential development and is reflective of a specific property type, it is in no way architecturally distinctive, repeating the themes which characterize literally thousands of houses built during the first quarter of the twentieth century. Construction of residential dwellings in the area continued throughout most of the 1920s and much of the 1930s, spreading a few blocks to the north, south, and east. Although the neighborhood was substantially built-up by the onset of World Will.' II, a marked change in character occurred in the mid-1950s and early 1960s, when older buildings began to be replaced by modern apartment buildings. Today, much of the area has been in-filled with large, multi-story condominiums, with older housing stock usually isolated or clustered in small groups. The subject property is one such extant example of the older housing stock, which remains today in the neighborhood. Person(s) of Historical Importance According to the building permits, A. Wallace Jamieson was the initial owner/architect/builder of the subject property. City directories indicate that Mr. Jamieson, listed variously as a draftsman; construction engineer; carpenter; and mechanic, and his wife 92119"Street City Landmark Assessment Report page 3 ~. tiL29 Millie E. Jamieson, occupied the residence from construction until at least 1959. For at least a few years in the late 1940s, Robert W. Jamieson (probably their son), a musician, resided at the address. Rosemary Jamieson (daughter), a librarian with the Santa Monica Public Library, appears in city directories at the address from 1952 until at least 1961. She is later listed as the owner/tenant on an electrical permit application dated July 1997. Apparently, the subject property remained in the extended Jamieson family for at least 74 years. In concluding the background research, the data did not reveal any information on the Jamieson's to indicate historical significance or notability. Therefore, it does not appear that the property is associated with any person or persons of historical importance. Statement of other significance No other evidence was discovered in current research of the property to indicate other significance. Is the structure representative of a style in the City that is no longer prevalent? The subject property is an example of a modest California bungalow exhibiting Craftsman elements typical of the idiom. The style was widespread in the late 1910s and much of the 1920s here in Santa Monica and the rest of southern California. Though the house exhibits features of the style, other extant representative examples of this architectural style can still be found elsewhere in this neighborhood (for example at 918 and 944 19th Street) and in other parts of the City. Therefore, it is not considered a structure representative of a style in the City that is no longer prevalent. Does the structure contribute to a potential historic district? It does not appear that there is a potential historic district in the area surrounding this property. The area has been severely compromised by the in-fill of post-World War II, multi-story apartment buildings and condominium complexes. Much of the housing stock from the first quarter of the twentieth century has been demolished. CONCLUSION In summary, based on current research and the above assessment, the property located at 921 19th Street appears to meet only one of the City of Santa Monica's Criteria for individual City Landmark status, Criterion 6, that of an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood. The subject property was evaluated according to the following statutory criteria: Landmark Criteria: 9.36.100(a)(1) It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic. political or architectural history of the City. The subject property is a typical example of a California bungalow with Craftsman influences of which many other examples exist in the residenlial neighborhoods east of 1 th Street in the City of Santa Monica. Additionally, two other similar California bungalow- 921 19~ Street City Landmark Assessment Report page 4 ~~. OL30 type dwellings from the same time period are located on the 900 block of 19th Street. Although the subject property reflects many of the features tbat are typical of the style and period, the residence does not rise to the level of representing an exceptional example of a California bungalow with Craftsman influences within the architectural history of the City. Therefore, the subject property does not appear to satisfy this criterion. 9.36.100 (a) (2) It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other noteworthy interest or value. Though a typical example of a California bungalow with Craftsman influences, the subject property does not articulate a particular or noteworthy concept of design sufficient enough to express an aesthetic ideal beyond that represented by other properties of the same style in the area. Therefore, the subject property does not appear to possess sufficient aesthetic or artistic value necessary for designation under this criterion. 9.36.100(a)(3) It is identified with historic personages or with important events in bcal, state or national history. Although the extended Jamieson family occupied the dwelling for approximately 74 years, current research did not reveal information to link the subject property with any historic personages or with any important events in local, state, or national history. Therefore, it does not appear to satisfy this criterion. 9.36. 100 (a) (4) It embodies distinguishing architectural characteristics valuable to a study of a period, style, method of construction, or the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship, or is a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or historical type valuable to such a study. The subject property is a representative example of a California bungalow with typical Craftsman influences that is reflective of a particular architectural style and historical period. The modestly sized dwelling incorporates a number of features of the idiom including an asymmetrical fa~ade; low-pitched cross-gabled roof; clapboard siding; wood framed windows with simple surrounds; exposed rafter tails and beam-ends; overhanging eaves; and a front porch. However, the subject property is not considered a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail, or historical type since other comparable examples exist within the neighborhood and throughout the City. For example, a similar dwelling constructed in 1924 is located diagonillly across (northwest) from the subject property ilt 918 19th Street that is similar in type, style, and level of physical integrity to the subject property. Although the subject property also exhibits a high degree of integrity, it does not reflect sufficient architectural context to distinguish its architectural character as a California bungalow from other similar dwellings in the immediate neighborhood or throughout the City. Therefore, the subject property does not appear to satisfy this criterion. 9.36. 100 (a) (5) It is a significant or a representative example of the work or product of a notable builder, designer or architect. The design and construction of the subject property is attributed to the owner, A. Wallace Jamieson, a draftsman and carpenter. No information regarding Jamieson was found during 921 19" Street City Landmark Assessrneut Repun page 5 r; If l.d- ,3 J the current research process to suggest he was a notable builder, designer, or architect. Hence, the property does not appear to satisfy this criterion. 9.36.100(a)(6) It has a unique location, a singular physical characteristic, or is an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community or the City. Application of this criterion does not indicate that the resource has a unique location or singular physical characteristic that makes it unique. It is situated along the north side of the 900 block of 19th Street between Washington Avenue and Idaho Avenue near other extant dwellings constructed in the mid-1920s (located at 918 and 944 19th Street). Therefore, applying this criterion to dwellings located on the 900 block of 19th Street would suggest that there are three residences, including the subject property, that have become familiar visual features of the neighborhood since the mid-1920s. Nonetheless, by virtue of the fact that the subject property has been in the neighborhood since its construction in 1923, it may be considered an established feature of the area potentially satisfying this criterion. 921 19" Street City Landmark Assessment Report page 6 Wd v~32 Year 1923-24 1925 1927 1928 1930-31 1933 1936 1938 1940 1947-48 1952-53 1954 1958-59 1960-61 CITY DIRECTORY RESEARCH 92119th Street Entry Not listed Jamieson, A. Wallace (Millie Jamieson, A. Wallace (Millie E.), construction engineer Jamieson, A. Wallace (Millie E.), carpenter Jamieson, A. Wallace (Millie E.), carpenter , carpenter Jamieson, A. Wallace (Millie E.), no occupation listed Jamieson, A. Wallace (Millie E.), no occupation listed Jamieson, A. Wallace (Millie E.), no occupation listed Jamieson, A. Wallace (Millie E.), Jamieson, Robert W., musician Jamieson, A. Wallace (Millie E.), no occupation listed Jamieson, Rosemary, librarian Santa Monica Public ~i~~ary _ Jamieson, A. Wallace (Millie E.), no occupation listed Jamieson, Rosema ,librarian Santa Monica Public Librar Jamieson, A. Wallace (Millie E.), no occupation listed Jamieson, Rosem , aide Santa Monica Public Librar , Jamieson, A. Wallace (Millie E.), service station attendant I Jamieson, Rosemar , librarian Santa Monica Public Librar 92119lli Street City Landmark Assessment Report page 7 ~;H' Ot 33 BIBLIOGRAPHY Basten, Fred E. Santa Monica Bay - The First 100 Years. Los Angeles: Douglas-West Publishers, 1974. Basten, Fred E. Santa Monica Bay: Paradise By the Sea. Santa Monica: Hennessey + Ingalls. 2001. City of Santa Monica. Existing Conditions Report. prepared by Historic Resources Group and PCR Services Corporation, 2000. City of Santa Monica Building and Safety Department. Building Permits. City of Santa Monica Building. Santa Monica Historic Resources Inventory (various years). Gebhard. David and Robert Winter. Architecture in Los Angeles. Salt Lake City. Utah: Peregrine Smith Books, 1985. H.M. Gousha Company. Aerial Atlas of Los Angeles County, Adas # LA 315. Santa Ana: Aerial Map Industries, 1965. Ingersoll. Luther A. Ingersoll's Century History: Santa Monica Bay Cities. Los Angeles: Luther A. Ingersoll. 1908. Los Angeles County Tax Assessor. McAlester, Virginia & Lee. A Field Guide to American Houses. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1990. National Park Service. National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. Washington DC: U.S. Dept. of the Interior, National Park Service, Interagency Resources Division, 1990. Newmark, Harris. Sixty Years in Southern California, 1853-1913. New York: Knickerbocker Press, 1916. Polk. Polk's Santa Monica City Directory. Los Angeles. (various years). Robinson, W.W. Santa Monica: A Calendar of Events in the Making of a City. California Title Insurance and Trust Company. 1959. Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps. City of Santa Monica. Storrs, Les. Santa Monica, Portrait oia City, 1875-1975. Santa Monica: Santa Monica Bank, 1874. Ward, Elva. Building A City: Life in Santa Monica From 1872. A Social Studies Resource Reader for Third Grade. Santa Monica: Santa Monica Unified School District, 1962. Warren. Charles S. ed. History of the Santa Monica Bay Region. Santa Monica: Cawston, 1934. 921 19" Street City Landmark Assessment Report page 8 ~Hf LL Q /' . \J ,.j Warren, Charles S. ed. Santa Monica Blue Book. Sanla Monica: Cawston, 1941. Warren, Charles S. ed. Santa Monica Community Book. Santa Monica: Cawston, 1944 White, CoI. Carl F. ed. Santa Monica Community Book (Fifth Edition). Santa Monica: Cawston, 1953. 921 19.5treet City Landmark Assessment Report page 9 ~~~ OL35 PHOTOGRAPHS 900 block of 1 gh Street (subject property on left), looking southeast Primary (west) elevation, looking northeast 921 19- Street City Landmark A~sessment Report page 10 ~~~ lH_36 Detail of primary (west) elevation, looking northeast , , ,!jl ~lljl)1 G.: . .Jtl,>>;-'/\~at>, '1-.; Detail of primary (west) elevation, looking east 921 19" Street City Landmark Assessment Report page 11 ~,LH' 0 \., 3 7 Detail of secondary (south) elevation, looking northeast Rear detached garage (east and north elevations), looking southwest 921 19'" Street City Landmark Assessment Report page 12 ~,t~ OlJ38 918 1 rl Street, primary (east) elevation, looking northwest 921 19. Street City Landmark Assessment Report page 13 ~" U\.;3S ATTACHMENT E SEPTEMBER 13, 2004 LANDMARKS COMMISSION MINUTES 25 8.....- -J MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE City of Santa Monica~ LANDMARKS COMMISSION Founded 1875 "Populus felix in urbe felici" Monday, September 13, 2004 7:00 PM City Council Chambers, Room 213, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica CALL TO ORDER: 7:06 P.M. 1. ROLL CALL Present: John Berley, Commissioner Nina Fresco, Chair Pro Tem Roger Genser, Chairperson Ruthann Lehrer, Commissioner Barbara Kaplan, Commissioner Also Present: Elizabeth Bar-EI, Commission Secretary Stephanie Reich, Urban Designer Roxanne Tanemori. Associate Planner Barry Rosenbaum, Senior Land Use Attorney Michael Feinstein, Council Liaison - arrived @9:56 pm Arlene Johnson, Staff Assistant Absent: Colin Maduzia, Commissioner Deborah Levin, Commissioner 2. REPORT FROM STAFF: Ms. Bar-EI introduced Roxanne Tanemori as the new Commission Liaison. Chairperson Genser asked if an appeal was filed for 1337 Ocean Ave. Ms. Bar-EI stated that there were no appeals, and the property is now an official designated landmark. Chairperson Genser inquired about the Historic Resource Inventory update. Ms. Bar-EI stated that due to budget cuts, the next phase has been reduced. She did not have any information on which area would be next. 3. COMMISSIONER ANNOUNCEMENTS: 26 ~1,j~ OC.11 Commissioner Berley shared an article in the Evening News about a house in Scotland that was demolished while under consideration for landmark status. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Public Input Permitted A. August 9, 2004 Chairperson Genser had corrections on Item 11 B, page 4, paragraph 1, to read as follows: Chairperson Genser stated the Commission looked at a number of downtown buildings that are on the potential National Register list, then ranked them in order of importance, and this building was ranked number one. Chair Pro Tem Fresco made a motion to approve the minutes. Commissioner Lehrer seconded the motion, which passed unanimously by voice vote, with Commissioner Kaplan abstaining. 5. APPROVAL OF STATEMENTS OF OFFICIAL ACTION: A. Statement of Official Action: Certificate of Appropriateness Application LM- 04CA-007, 2402 Fourth Street, #14, Approving Exterior Modifications including New Shed Dormers, Relocation of Stairs, New Doors, Replacement of Damaged Chimney. Commissioner Lehrer made a motion to approve the Statement of Official Action. Chair Pro Tem Fresco seconded the motion, which passed -with four votes and Commissioner Kaplan abstaining. 6. PUBLIC INPUT: (On items not on agenda and within the jurisdiction of the Commission) 7. CONSENT CALENDAR: Public Input Permitted None. 8. OLD BUSINESS: Public Input Permitted A. Discussion to Consider Whether to File an Application For Designation of the Property Located at 225 Santa Monica Boulevard (Bay Cities Guaranty Building) as a Landmark. (Continued from August 9, 2004) 27 ~\j l?J 0 l; 4 2 The property owner was not present at the meeting. However, Ms. Bar-EI stated that she spoke to the owner who was not opposed to the designation and was interested in more detailed information. Due to an error in the City's record, the letter was sent to another address and direct contact was made on Thursday. Commissioner Lehrer stated that this property is generally considered to be an iconic building in the city. It is very meritorious and it is time to move ahead. Commissioner Kaplan stated that the process of selecting a building before it is in danger is a positive one. She hopes we can continue with the designation with the owner's approval. Chairperson Genser stated that he was a little reluctant to proceed because the owner was unable to attend due to short notice. He stated that this building is literally a landmark and warrants consideration. He agreed that this process is proactive and not reactive. Commissioner Berley stated that this building clearly establishes through its stature that it is the center of downtown Santa Monica. He is very much in favor of a nomination for landmark status. Commissioner Lehrer made a motion to file a designation application. Chair Pro Tem Fresco seconded the motion, which passed by the following vote: Ayes: Nayes: Abstain: Absent: Berley, Fresco, Kaplan, Lehrer, Genser None None Levin, Maduzia B. Discussion of the City Processes for Permitting Window Replacement and other Routine Alterations to Potentially Historic Buildings and Consideration of Potential Modifications to Those Processes. (Continued from August 9, 2004) Ms. Reich summarized the application process at the public counter for permitting window replacements, and answered additional questions from the Commission. 9. NEW BUSINESS/PUBLIC HEARINGS: Public Input Permitted A. Certificate of Appropriateness Application LM-04CA-006, 2612 Third Street, for Approval of Demolition of an Existing Garage Structure and Replacement with a New Garage with Roof Deck. Chairperson Genser recused himself from this item. 28 ~!!I l.;\..<43 The following members of the public addressed the Commission: Bea Nemlaha, property owner, Ralph Mechur, architect, Anne Troutman and Adam Finkel. Staff report presented by Ms. Bar-EI. Commissioner Berley questioned the metal fascia and asked about the material used for the new garage door. Ms. Nemlaha stated that the garage door would be made of wood with translucent glass. Commissioner Kaplan commented on a rooftop deck on a landmark structure. She also commented that she wasn't sure if modern lighting on a historic building, that is part of a historic district, was appropriate in that it will change the character of the property from the street. Commissioner Lehrer stated that what's important in the historic district is the unity and cohesion of all the buildings as a whole from the public right-of-way. Most of the garage as proposed in the design was fine and anyway won't be seen unless you are up on the property. However, she was opposed to the proposed use of glass and lighting in the garage. Another concern was that the garage door provides a historical anchor, so there should be more articulation of the door. She felt that vertical wood boards, as staff recommended, would maintain the historical roots of what was there before, and the historical pattern on the street. Overall, she agreed that the structure is a wonderful enhancement to the property. Chair Pro Tem Fresco stated that the accessory structures on the street were really more like barns than garages. She didn't have a problem with the use of some glass. But she would like to see a strong reference to the barn feeling, in that this garage should be compatible with other structures in the neighborhood. Commissioner Berley felt that the proposed garage door looks too commercial in this fashion, especially with the proposed translucent glass panels. He liked the idea of letting light into the garage during the day, but the treatment needs to be modified in a way that is respectful of the historical context. He had no objection to the doors using some translucent glass, but the current design appears to be too contemporary. Commissioner Kaplan agreed with the staff report as written. Chair Pro Tem Fresco made a motion to continue this item to next month and for the applicant to propose revised plans that address the Commissioner's concerns. Commissioner Berley seconded the motion, which passed unanimously by voice vote. 29 r,j_ Ou44 B. Landmark Designation Application LC-04LM-006, 921 19th Street (Craftsman Bungalow), to determine whether the property should be designated as a City Landmark. Staff report presented by Ms. Reich. The following members of the public addressed the Commission: Shahab Ghods, Sue Schuerman, Kelly Swartz (letter read by Ms. Schuerman), Roya Kianmahd, Marlene Saile (letter read by Ms. Kianmahd), Richard Wise, Gary Barkin and Dyanna. Commissioner Lehrer thanked everyone for coming out to support preservation of this property. She disagreed with the staff report's findings. She felt that this property is a gem and has architectural value that was not reflected in the staff report. It is completely intact and pristine. She felt it met Criteria #4 and Criteria #6. It represents what the neighborhood was like when it was first developed. She supports the nomination. While recognizing that the neighborhood has been largely redeveloped, Chair Pro Tem Fresco supported the idea of keeping one intact element of the neighborhood because this building tells the story of the neighborhood's early development best. Chairperson Genser stated that he tended to agree with the staff report because that there are still a lot of Craftsman style homes in this area, and he needed more substantial proof that this one rose to the Landmark level. Commissioner Lehrer stated that this property is an exemplary example of a Craftsman bungalow, and also made note of its fine details. She also stated that it is the jewel of the neighborhood, represents the history of that neighborhood, and is worthy of preserving. The Commission and staff discussed the proper findings to make, including the need to avoid too general of an interpretation for Criteria #6, and the possible applicability of Criteria #1. Commissioner Kaplan stated that this building is of the late Craftsman bungalow period. It stands out as unique, has exquisite details and she supports saving it. Following further discussion, Chairperson Genser stated that he now supports the designation. Commissioner Lehrer made a motion to designate as a landmark based on the architectural qualities listed in criteria #1 and #4, and include the accessory building as a contributing character defining feature. Commissioner Kaplan seconded the motion, which passed by the following vote: 30 ~,~ ~ (J '" 4 5 Ayes: Nayes: Abstain: Absent: Berley, Fresco, Kaplan, Lehrer, Genser None None Levin, Maduzia 10. DISCUSSION ITEMS: Public Input Permitted A. Review of Demolition Permits and Consideration Whether to File an Application For Designation of a Structure as a Landmark or Structure of Merit. Councilmember Feinstein arrives - 9:56 pm. 1. 947 4th Street (PC016339) R3NW-Medium Density Multiple Family Two Story, Single Family Residence w/Detached Garage Structure Not Identified on the Historic Resources Inventory Previous Application (PC014574); Expired: 12/13/03 2. 1603 Dewey Street (PC016380) R1-Single Family Residential Single Family Residence Structure Not Identified on the Historic Resources Inventory 3. 1306 Princeton Street (PC016382) R2-Low Density Multi-Residential Single Family Residence Structure Not Identified on the Historic Resources Inventory 4. 1906-22 Broadway (PC016361) BCD-Broadway Commercial District Commercial Building Structure Not Identified on the Historic Resources Inventory Previous Application (PC010617); Expired: 2/12/01 5. 1730 Franklin Street (PC016390) R2-Low Density Multi-Residential One Unit Structure w/Attached Garage Structure Not Identified on the Historic Resources Inventory 6. 202 21st Place (PC016399) R1-Single Family Residential 1 Story, Single Family Residence w/Detached Garage Structure Not Identified on the Historic Resources Inventory 31 ~.n;q lJ '-' 4 6 7. 422 21st Place (PC016426) R1-Single Family Residential 1 Story, Single Family Residence w/Detached Garage Structure Not Identified on the Historic Resources Inventory 8. 715 25th Street (PC016430) R1-Single Family Residential Single Family Residence w/Detached Garage Structure Not Identified on the Historic Resources Inventory 9. 2218 5th Street (PC016449) OP2-0cean Park Low Multiple Residential 2-Car Detached Garage Structure Not Identified on the Historic Resources Inventory 10. 370 21st Street (PC016297) R1-Single Family Residential 2 Story, Single Family Residence w/Detached 2-Car Garage Structure Not Identified on the Historic Resources Inventory 11. 1204 Pearl Street (PC016492) R1-Single Family Residential Single Family Residence w/Detached Garage Structure Not Identified on the Historic Resources Inventory 12. 1018 Wilshire Blvd (PC016487) C6-Boulevard Commercial District 2-Story Apartment Building and 1-Story Retail Building Structure Not Identified on the Historic Resources Inventory No action was taken on the above items. B. Report from the City's Urban Designer Regarding Recent Architectural Review Board Approvals for Projects Modifying Historic Resources. Ms. Reich presented a PowerPoint presentation showing improved designs based on compliance with the Secretary of Interior Standards for projects that went to the Architectural Review Board at three non-designated inventory properties. She also explained the implementation of the new Landmarks Commissioner liaison to the ARB process and answered questions. C. Discussion of the Governor's Task Force's California Performance Review and the Proposed Structural Changes to Executive and Administrative Branches of the California Government as They May Affect Historic Resource Preservation. 32 rJ In \.' \I 4 7 The Commission discussed the importance of what this agency does for the state, and how this detrimental proposal with would eliminate over $1 million dollars in federal funding that keeps preservation going in the state. The Commission decided to send a letter to the City Council urging them to put the City on record as being opposed to the Governor's plan to consolidate the OHP into a Natural Resources Department and eliminate the State Historic Preservation Commission. Commissioner Lehrer will e-mail to the Council the next day in time to be included in the Council's discussion. D. Discussion to Consider Whether to File an Application For Designation of the Main Street Bridge Over the Interstate 10 Freeway as a Landmark. The Commission discussed the ramifications of designating the bridge. Chair Pro Tem Fresco then suggested that the Main Street Bridge be placed at the end of the downtown nomination priority list. Commissioner Lehrer made a motion to add the Main Street Bridge to the priority list as #8. Commissioner Berley seconded the motion, which passed unanimously by voice vote. E. Discussion of Illegal Alterations to Structures that are Made While a Demolition Permit Application is Pending Review and the City's Mechanisms for Enforcement (Requested by Commissioner Ber/ey). A summary presentation by Ms. Reich was followed by a short discussion. F. Planning Commission Case List (Information Only) 11. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: Public Input Permitted None. 12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: (Requests from Commissioners to add items to upcoming agendas) Chairperson Genser requested to agendize a discussion on the next phase of the Historic Resources Inventory update. 13. NEXT MEETING DATE AND COMMISSION AGENDA: Monday, October 11, 2004. 14. ADJOURNMENT: 11:00 pm 33 r-:i~ OL48 ATTACHMENT F CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED REGARDING THE SEPTEMBER 13,2004 PUBLIC HEARING 34 . .", .. '..... ...,: .'llI' "Il.. ,". .. ..... ... .... ,. . W.' 'a.'. . a..........w . ... " .'" ,,' To the City of Santa Monica and the Landmarks Commission: We. the undersigned. firmly believe the homes at 917 and 92119th Street are an integral part of Santa Monica's history. They represent excellent examples of structures built in the 1920's and 1930's. These style of homes are fast disappearing in our neighborhood. Please consider 917 19th Street as a "Structure of Merit" and 921 19th Street as an II Historic landmark". Address 'j 3 ~ '9i-L:J1- ~..J t) t<oT( sf; -It '/ rr3 lf~~' PhonelEmail @:lrV )jc:<.? -S~-b,7 (J/6) i/S:J.-J'tfL/ ':?J (~ ~ t6j- 2-2- 'Z.7 . '2/0) 'fS$.r---L ~ 9t;J i3 to) 9JU- 5O'If fgi;;Y 45 3--8.,g I Name ff!:!:: ,-I~ ./7ad~ .>4~ .~ ~~ ~dLV\tl G1V"~ 113o!).O Sf Hl'~l~ CCiJtI\€ rot') "f l-f~iPt)'5J-. . ~~~ltlA1 , QZ! 11MM ('3!o) 13153{6 i),.<-JQ KLot~WIJt[p -:'0 t4tCe-~k ~:~:,r(JJLt;s~'t Y J J"V J ~ . s:h eq.ut01P~ . .-- ~3:J-C Mr. ,.J , 'L.lI;, /Ii __ ""Ii- /9:r:- 01+- r:s 10..- 1-/6 j / ' llWA.1!/l 1f&Ll'r,. Sf-t RQ[. ~.':J '" 'i?t> f{G J<Yt"--./ J Ll LJjllj)(J-V ) j:J.O ~.j/7PIJ 3tlF LfjO . I t-r J (tt! C2.. . fi /J . . Act 01 .1#1''12-- IOJ r t (/ lJ. y c~AV-F~;f 112.'-~~ 1f1 ~.. "1'013 ~ 5 1\1\ q ill 1-0 t J ~(lWV1D t70l0j 01311 q+S-tJt~~W\~~jf\ @o) 'b~q ~ 17)iD~ 3DL:>'7 ." ,llIO 1\ ~ r: 0 ",5 \:!! '~l" V . ..... r S I .. . " . ~.,. '" .:t>: '. '. ::~ .. .", .~. ~UJ~ ,"~~ . "r.. ....t.IL .1 ", "'.... -.. ... u .... '."'.'- r:. ....t '.'~' '" ..... .................... . .p........., To the City of Santa Monica and the Landmarks Commission: We, the undersigned, firmly believe the homes at 917 - and 92119th Street are an integral part of Santa Monica's history. They represent excellent examples of structures built in the 1920's and 1930's. These style of homes are fast. disappearing in our neighborhood. Please consider 91119th Street as a "Structure of Merit" and 921 19th Street as an 'IHistoric Landmark". Name HLtdre~ ttu.ss ~~.~ k~ i{ t-l.- 'De c:hU L.. Address q'-l5 iC}t'h st-:lf:-I Gln ~ ~tt ~ PhonelEmail (~lo)82S- ,'-:;$.3 c) t~6) ~? · t.t314 ](00-"7/'1- y{( (1 oj t ~ ~oj-"{:',\-_ J--~~ 310 L-\ '1 0 '6~ ~~' 7Jt? ~~-Y7.-1-~ 1\0 \15"~' ~"IVo :s ~i tj55~ 6tJ &,-; :1)10 rZl -lJ1J ,.~' ,. _ r-z::'" f i)~v.~/-;(rt~.--. .J d{.l{ G\.LR ~ C\f( j)+v~ ~~ ~~wAA .~~ AbuvWl") {y~~ '~~1J.S .~ ffl~.\ '(111 ~U '- . "'- ,j .... toy>w-(' (;. \ VA W" 3(0 ~ l{QS- )j~~3 316 S)"Z-& -rorz-L.., OUd)'It.' L ~"()I.. ee.-. F\;~~~\V"~ . ~a()d- HC$) .' 1\t) t,to' 1 f ~ ~ -~,\'1~. MJ> ~\O ~~~ /~cff5 L1 S) \ qi~ :tk A 3/ 0 ?~<1 0 D t.J ?, r:- 1 ~~ ~ t.. \.: .j . ...".. .. - To the City of Santa Monica and the Landmarks Commission: '. , We, the undersigned, firmly believe the homes at 917 ~ and 92119th Street are an integral part of Santa Monica's history. They represent excellent examples of structures built in the 1920's and 1930's. These style of homes are fast disappearing in our neighborhood. Please consider 917 19th Street as a -Structure of Merif and 921 19th Street as an "Historic Landmark". ~~ Lv.Z- ~ J~~ fY\ \ C\-\~ II~ kk; n ('11.6,. \1 ~~ CJk't{; N 7J f) '~~\.l ~~ J \\ " ., 1fL, t IA A A AA Name \(e,\,~ ~~1.- ;]~ (; L, m6i\~to..- S~\'\ltL Address ~ u:t~8h f~\ t\~ 1- ' PhonelEmail C~1P) '-t,,3 -' if, 't8"'1 ..?/O'- ?o7 - d~ 5 }J-/ ~ J. /3 ~6 bJ-S ~'~4t)~k~ o (D~-i(/tCe 3 /1J~ 3~~'- 41'4 ") \ D .- L\ LP '7 -1 '- ~\I"" ~.11 ~ '5\u'- ,:jv.-::t ~ . {/~5-))S1 3$'e-\\Q~O ''"'"/'--.. ..... ~ h~ ~ \,' '-' 5 2 -- ~. - - ..... - ..u - "0<0 ~.O ..... . QI_ w ~ .. .............. ". .. . ..... .. .. '\110 ......... To the City of Santa Monica and the Landmarks Commission: We. the undersigned. firmly believe the homes at 917 '. '. and 921 19th Street are an integral part of Santa Monica's .. .: history./ They represent excellent ~mples of structures built it 'tin the 1920's and 1930's. These style of homes are fast . , disappearing in our neighborhood. Please consider 917 19th Street as a "Structure of Merit" and 921 19th Sbeet as an C'Historic Landmarkft: Name Address PhoneJEmail 1\811~ I~ ~~ (j:t-- ~ -i;im Y1hL ~ 5>?-9SL(-::tJ3 f) ~'0'7~G'7'iv=> Z1D)~:rl- I ~ #3/0 n/ ,;rpfh 3i 0- )-';2 'it -3 '-r ~ 50b'-d-I'o b c0~--q ~ ) --o~k ~\5 - ~3r:f5-<{J- J-S ~lO -4js-Jlo~ . 3/D-7f) -3)}" 1- , , 3 (0 ,J.:s- t 67Z8 L . 'IV .~ \..... 4..: .... .. .t& '. . G.... _ t ... . It. . . .. t' Jb, #ill- t. To the City of Santa Monica and the landmarks Commission: , , ~ -' We. the undersigned, firmly believe the homes at 917 '. and 921 19th Street are an integral part of Santa Monica's : history. / They represent excellent examples of structures built 'tin the 1920's and 1930's. These style of homes are fast . , disappearing in our neighborhood. Please consider 917 19th Street. as a "Structure of Merit" and 921 19th street as an "Historic landmark".. Name Address PhonelEmail 11<:\ is S c... ~..d1C>0( 0\ '> 1 l" 5 T# .7 l3 10) 2.. f, L\ "" 7 5 0 - /)1. '7.7 l q 51'#5-- 0~. t-e~'V- V '} ~ Ql i7 _ I 9 +h Sf -ft \ JJ\..v>A.J fJch~' I l ----~ A- .:> CfLt~l I Oj1li st:/B "'. :....J ~ MO -" f). Ii Ii If) I 1--/\ h- i ~vetm-- V; 7 3 1 7 /"'Y (wv~ Dl(J JIr{) /1 i ;\{oV\;u.. bVfl?-h. Cilf'7 [1ft, ?~Y{O 'yn.. '1c'(~ i .. _'._~' ,__- .) 1N I q1ASi ('2t) V q (J Jl'5Ju tJ/lJ~ ) -;?, lJ?en - _.--/ . 0 v . r-dtf Si. /j) 0 ) J-J-1~ It;; f-r -r:: _. !~- ~'Q1 937- / OV~ ( J . "!/Jtl'l- .(,f Ol 0 \ ~ (} t~l s:-\-- C 3"t 0') q 63,- 01? q ? ~I\ 6~rm ~ . ~ltC (tWI(l?) flO;It&0o Out (310) 72-'1 7174 '~v.v\ CZ ~\ l<\ tV".' D j 'J d.ttV/ () AJ~ Ii' "" ,I ?l~' ~~'OM \ '10{A-tr-J 'i("~ tqt~ .c~ _ ?7\V ~1 ; . 41.~ Jt()rll;f- ~ no 011 /q , )~10--1 ~ ~((&t!!: ~7}CGt" l- 0 hvq 1 ~ Ho("C.C;4~v\ '),)) E;/'c to. 0...0( Pitts s/o '3S\ C-~f,J } / ,v 'V"t'lAl ce'. clt\ c; 024\ 1Zlch [AN'IcM<; Osi N1lry. }(D'J~1.(7tJ~ ~C1~ O~'54 ~ ~ /. 3. 10- <? d.-f'---s9' 13 3ro.- f'~q - S .;Lloo ~S6 ~'7 6 8<l To the City of Santa Monica and the Landmarks Commission: We, the undersigned, firmly believe the homes at 917 and 921 19th Street are an integral part of Santa Monica's history. They represent excellent examples of structures built in the 1920's and 1930's. These style of homes are fast disappearing in our neighborhood. Please consider 917 19th Street as a "Structure of Merif' and 921 19th Street as an "Historic LandmarklJ. Name ~AWJ \ /'/4AJ'v Address Phone/Email (1/to (Jk ~ 31o'-2b'l-l?OY 3M, CA 10'105 1066 /; Ld II (1[fl( I/n dZ 1'0 '~/h- ,hi!) r;2 D K<f A fillll II ff;trJ {b/i;v c. f /10 ({tv 101 fltf t7" r; b (0 ckv-r II %40 201'h s-.{ rv4o~ 7(0 ~9 -(tr~r A J ITA kAI\'8t:LtJ/& g ,;1J?- rW!(.1 '7D1fr5 3/Q-!f;:3cJ.o fi ft1llf<.1 Ell Pr t) R- c. N frl{ 'JJ ?r;Jl- f /1 {K 5..1- ' q 0 tfD '3> M , (LB".,f L~ fe"1t/ d II, L j("l ~ ~ \ J J h" .... )--.lu ~(:) t{ 6 S fol 14"M5fr~eHFL- CJ(I ( /9 ~ S1 'riel ~ f) f (j-{-7 J~ "1- \ ) i! t) ., ,/;: ';, /~.' :;/ ~kU . (. r: t:: ~;~ ~~ ,) v ;j J Septeumer 13, 2004 To the City of Santa Monica: Please take exception to the demolition of921 19th Street for the sake of history and beauty both of which we find more and more precious as the years go by and the stucco and stories go up. As I walk my daughter each eekday past this house and few others like it we can appreciate the architecture d learn of our past. Surely there is adequate ho ing elsewhere for the 8 to ] 0 :finnilies a new condo would provide. I always felt Santa Monica had a sophistication level that might be immune to the WaIMartizing of housing. I~ / / ~ S<}ll. '~yt~~,- "\..~/\ /y"v.{/C,,'l~ 6 \ ~. Keny S~ \ .l 819 19th'Street, Unit E Ii S~ta Monica, CA 90403 / (J 10) 453-4981 ~r -it (' i t: (" ,:J... }"""-'o ATTACHMENT G PUBLIC NOTICE 35 NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE SANTA MONICA CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Appeal 04-012 921 19th Street APPLICANT: APPELLANT: PROPERTY OWNER: Michael Klein, Esq. 19th Street Townhomes, LLC 19th Street Townhomes, LLC A public hearing will be held by the City Council to consider the following request: An appeal of the Landmarks Commission's decision to designate the Craftsman-style bungalow residence at 921 19th Street as a City Landmark (04LM-006). DATEITIME: TUESDAY, July 12, 2005, AT 6:45 p.m. LOCATION: City Council Chambers, Second Floor, Santa Monica City Hall 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, California HOW TO COMMENT The City of Santa Monica encourages public comment. You may comment at the City Council public hearing, or by writing a letter. Written information will be given to the City Council at the meeting. Address your letters to: City Clerk Re: Appeal (04APP-012) 1685 Main Street, Room 102 Santa Monica, CA 90401 MORE INFORMATION If you want more information about this project or wish to review the project file, please contact Roxanne Tanemori at (310) 458-8341, or bye-mail atroxanne.tanemori@smQov.net. The Landmarks Ordinance is available at the Planning Counter during business hours and on the City's web site at www.santa-monica.orQ. The meeting facility is wheelchair accessible. For disability-related accommodations, please contaCt (310) 458-8341 or (310) 458-8696 TTY at least 72 hours in advance. All written materials are available in alternate format upon request. Santa Monica Big Blue Bus Lines numbered 1, 2, 3. 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10 serve City Hall. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65009(b), if this matter is subsequently challenged in Court, the challenge may be limited to only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Santa Monica at, or prior to, the public hearing. ESPANOL Esto es una noticia de una audiencia publica para revisar applicaci6nes proponiendo desarrollo en Santa Monica. SI deseas mas informaciOn, favor de lIamar a Carmen Gutierrez en la DivisiOn de PlanificaciOn al numero (310) 458-8341. APPROVED AS TO FORM: G~~~ AMANDA SCHACHTER Planning Manager F:\CityPlanning\Share\COUNCIL\NOTICES\2005\04app012 (921 19th St) Notice 7-12-05.doc ~~j 0058