SR 11-01-2016 6A
Ci ty Council
Report
City Council Meeting : November 1, 2016
Agenda Item: 6.A
1 of 6
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director, Planning and Community Development , Planning &
Community Development, City Planning
Subject: Appeal 13APP011 of the Landmarks Commission's Designation of the Home
Savings Building as a Landmark and Landmark Parcel Located at 2600
Wilshire Boulevard
Recommended Action
S taff recommends that the City Council uphold the appeal, in part, and remand the
pending application for Landmark designation to the Landmarks Commission for a
hearing on the pending designation to be conducted by those Landmarks
Commissioners appointed by the City Council after the initial designation hearing o n
December 9 , 2013.
Executive Summary
The Landmarks Commission designated the Home Savings building, located at 2600
Wilshir e Boulevard, as a City Landmark and Landmark parcel on December 9, 2013.
The applicant filed a timely appeal on December 13, 2013 contending that the
Landmarks Commission wrongly designated the building as a City Landmark and the
property as a Landmark pa rcel. Subsequent to the filing of the appeal, a new
development in case law established that the proactive designation procedure used in
this case is legally problematic because it may not comport with D ue P rocess
requirements.
The Landmarks Commission c urrently has one vacancy with the appointment of a new
Commissioner anticipated in the near future . With the appointment of a new Landmarks
Commissioner, four Commissioners , constituting a quorum, will have had no
involvement in the filing or review of th e original Landmark designation. These
circumstances provide the opportunity for an unquestionably neutral determination of
the pending designation.
In order to ensure fair and impartial consideration of the Landmark designation, staff
recommends that th e City Council uphold the appeal, in part, and remand the pending
Landmark designation t o the Landmarks Commission , which will be heard after the
Council appoints a new Commissioner to fill the existing vacancy on the Commission.
Background
2 of 6
The property is located on the southeast corner of Wilshire Boulevard and 26 th Street.
The two -story building, originally constructed in 1969 for bank use, is currently occupied
by a retail tenant. There is a surface parking lot behind the structure and an open plaza
a rea in front at the court of Wilshire Boulevard and 26 th Street.
Landmarks Commission Action
On May 13, 2013, in accordance with authority granted under the Landmarks
Ordinance, the Landmarks Commission proactively filed an application to designate the
fo rmer Home Savings building as a City Landmark. The Landmarks Commission
conducted a duly -noticed public hearing on the application at its December 9, 2013
meeting. As part of the public hearing, the Commission considered the following:
A City historic c onsultant report from ICF International concluded that the
property retains its architectural integrity and the integrated artwork captures the
spirit of Santa Monica and represents the talents of noted artists. The report
recommended that the building in its entirety be designated a City landmark as
the last remaining example of a former Home Savings bank building and related
artwork in the City of Santa Monica that was designed or collaboratively designed
by Millard Sheets;
A staff report that concluded that while the building itself was not exemplary, the
prominent and distinctive art pieces were the most memorable and recognizable
characteristics, and as such, these objects (sculptures, mural and stained glass)
alone should be designated; and
A report from the property owner’s consultant, Chattel Architecture, that
concludes that if the building were considered in a regional context, the building
does not appear eligible for listing on the California register given it is a
derivative, later and altered example of the Home Savings branch design. The
nearly identical Anaheim branch is a better example. However, when viewed in
3 of 6
the context of Santa Monica only, it may be eligible for designation as a
Landmark.
At the hearing, the Commission heard testimo ny from the public that generally endorsed
the designation of the building in its entirety noting that the artwork loses context without
the combined vision of Howard Ahmanson the businessman and Millard Sheets the
artist, and that it is difficult to separ ate the building from the artwork. During
deliberation, the Commission stated that the passing of Mr. Ahmanson did not diminish
the significance of the Home Savings branches constructed after his death, which is the
case for 2600 Wilshire Boulevard. The body discussed the accomplishments of Millard
Sheets and stated that the building exemplified the integration of art and architecture.
Although the building has been altered, the Commission found the changes were
insignificant and did not negatively imp act its historic integrity. The Commission
acknowledged the personal criticism of the mural expressed by its artist Millard Sheets,
but further noted that his reproach was due to its size and not its design. The
Commission voted to designate the building as a City Landmark (6 -0 -1), with one
member not able to participate due to a conflict. The Commission further identified the
following as its character -defining features:
The marriage between public art and commercial architecture;
The simple rectang ular, symmetrical massing;
The flat roofline;
The travertine cladded exterior with gold ceramic frieze at the top;
The full -height window slits;
The prominent mosaic at the focal point in front of the structure;
The front plaza sculpture and the rear entrance;
The stained -glass window;
The structure’s siting on the parcel; and
The dolphin sculpture.
4 of 6
Discussion
Appeal
The applicant filed a timely appeal on December 13, 2013 contending that the
Landmarks Commission wrongly designa ted the subject property as a Landmark and
Landmark Parcel. The appeal statement argues that the property did not meet the
threshold of significance for a City Landmark. The City and the property owner
subsequently agreed to continue the date for hearing the appeal, largely due to the
property owner’s desire to assess any preservation incentives that would be applicable
to the property resulting from the Zoning Ordinance Update in 2015.
In January 2015, while the appeal was still pending before the City C ouncil, a California
Court of appeal issued its ruling in Woody’s Group, Inc. v. City of Newport Beach (2015)
233 Cal.App.4th 1012 (“Woody’s ”). In December of 2015, and January of 2016,
although not raised at the initial hearing to designate the property, the property owner
submitted materials to supplement the previously -filed appeal, asserting due process
violations based on the court’s ruling in Woody’s and arguing that the Landmarks
Commission’s ex parte communications disclosures were inadequate.
Th e Court’s ruling in Woody’s appears to preclude use of the proactive Landmark
nomination process. The procedure has since been discontinued at the Landmarks
Commission level but does not prevent individual Commissioners from filing an
application so long as they recuse themselves from the designation hearing. This is the
last outstanding proactive designation.
In the intervening period, staff and the City Attorney’s office have conferred on how best
to proceed with review of the appeal that ensures fair and impartial consideration of the
pending designation.
Pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section 9.56.040, the Landmarks
Commission shall include at least one registered architect, at least one person with
demonstrated knowledge of local h istory, at least one person with a graduate degree or
5 of 6
demonstrated interest in architectural history, at least one person with practical or
professional experience of architectural history, and at least one person with a
California real estate license. Th e Landmarks Commission currently has one vacancy
that is anticipated to be filled on a forthcoming Council agenda. With the appointment of
the new Landmarks Commissioner, four Commissioners , constituting a quorum will
have had no involvement in the filing or review of the original Landmark designation.
These circumstances provide the opportunity for an unquestionably neutral
determination of the pending designation.
Upholding the appeal in part would not result in a substantive disapproval of the
applica tion for the Landmark designation of the building and parcel located at 2600
Wilshire Boulevard , and would allow the application to be further considered by the
Landmarks Commission. Council remand of the pending designation to the Landmark
Commission woul d address the due process issues raised by the Woody’s case and
provide for fair and impartial review of the pending application for designation. On
remand, the Landmarks Commission’s decision would be consistent with the Woody’s
ruling , and any decision rendered would be appealable to the City Council.
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action as a result of the recommended
action.
Prepared By: Jing Yeo, Planning Manager
Approved
Forwarded to Council
6 of 6
Attachments:
A. Written Comments
A LAN H ESS
A R C H I T E C T
4991 C ORKWOOD L ANE
I RVINE , CA 92612
949 551 5343
alan@alanhess.net
October 24, 2016
Santa Monica City Council
City Hall
1685 Main Street
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: appeal hearing on the landmark designation for Home Savings and Loan
To the City Council:
I am writing as an expert to express my strong support for the historical landmark
designation for the former Home Savings and Loan building, designed by Millard Sheets,
at Wilshire and 26th. It is an exceptional example of Sheets' innovative contribution to
Modern architecture in California.
The midcentury era was an extraordinarily fertile period for California architecture. This
building demonstrates the region's creative aesthetic diversity. From Richard Neutra’s
simplified lines of steel and glass houses to Millard Sheets’ bold abstracted solid forms
reinterpreting historical and vernacular sources, Modernism has many expressions.
Home Savings is richly ornamented with Modern mosaics, stained glass windows, and
sculpture. In addition -- and quite significantly -- its design was shaped by the Modern
car culture urbanism of Los Angeles.
I write this opinion as an architect and historian. I have written nineteen books and
numerous articles for professional and general audience journals, many focused on
California architecture in the twentieth century. I am a contributor to The Architects
Newspaper , grant recipient from the Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the
Fine Arts, and a National Arts Journalism Program Fellow, and have received the Honor
Award from the National Trust for Historic Preservation, Docomomo/US's Award of
Excellence, and the President’s Award from the Los Angeles Conservancy for three
decades of work in preserving Modern architecture. My resume is attached. I have
studied and written on the architecture of Millard Sheets and Home Savings since 1987,
and I am including a chapter on his work in my upcoming book on California Modern
architecture 1900-1975. With Adam Arenson's soon-to-be-published book on Sheets and
Home Savings, it is clear that renewed awareness and appreciation of Sheets'
architectural work is just beginning.
Santa Monica's Home Savings and Loan is particularly significant as an excellent
example of Sheets' approach of creating a total work of art (or gesamtkunstwerk) that
incorporates architecture, art, sculpture, ornament, and mosaics in a unified whole. The
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
artworks are integral to the architecture, and vice versa; the art’s scale, placement, and
subjects are determined by the architecture. This intent is well documented in Adam
Arenson's scholarly book, the first thorough examination of Sheets' architecture.
The idea of architecture as a total work of art is an important concept in Modern
architecture. Frank Lloyd Wright designed many of his houses as such, designing
structure, space, furnishings, and ornament as one unified whole from overall form to the
smallest detail. Richard Neutra, Mies van der Rohe, and many other notable architects
did the same; the entirety of the design was an expression of their architectural concept.
Sheets takes the same approach at his Home Savings and Loan buildings. The art was
planned and fitted to the specific building and site. The building was shaped to the large
central mosaic mural, and elaborated by the gold tile ornament flanking it. The same
grand scale is continued inside in the stained glass window above the tellers desk.
Sheets also often chose a theme rooted in local history or life for his Home Savings
murals; in the case of the Santa Monica branch, the theme is of children playing at the
beach -- one of the prides of Santa Monica life.
In addition, the architectural decisions of siting, orientation, and height were determined
by the artwork. Client Howard Ahmanson and Sheets desired to bring fine art to the
ordinary commercial streets of Southern California; the size and angled orientation of
this building were intended to make the mural clearly and instantly visible to motorists
driving by. The building was meant to be a landmark. This architectural concept was
seen in almost all of Sheets' Home Savings designs, and it is well represented here.
Sheets was the primary designer for most Home Savings from the first buildings in 1956
into the 1970s. Even after his client, Howard Ahmanson, died in 1968, Sheets designed
branch buildings which continued the concepts he had developed with Ahmanson’s
approval. As Sheets historian Adam Arenson writes, "in the years after Howard
Ahmanson’s death, the Sheets studio produced their very best work for Home Savings."
The Santa Monica branch most certainly demonstrates this. As Arenson reports, ”The
Santa Monica branch won an architectural award from the city which cited its
outstanding contribution to the local streetscape.”
Millard Sheets has long been noted as an artist, but the full extent and significance of his
architectural designs have only recently come to light. In intent and execution, the art
and architecture of this Home Savings clearly cannot and should not be separated. As
an architect, historian, and author, I fully support the historical designation of this
building.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Alan Hess
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
RESUME OF ALAN HESS, ARCHITECT
4991 Corkwood Lane, Irvine, CA 92612 949/551 5343 www.alanhess.net
alan@alanhess.net
WORK 1981- Alan Hess, Architect
1986- Architecture critic, San Jose Mercury-News
EDUCATION 1975-78 M.Arch. I, School of Architecture and Urban
Planning, University of California, Los
Angeles
1970-74 B.A., Principia College, Elsah, IL
DESIGN Jamm's Coffee Shop exhibit, Petersen Automotive Museum,
Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History; principal
contributor to interpretive exhibits
Gordon Onslow-Ford guesthouse, Marin County, CA
TEACHING 1989-91 Instructor, University of California, Los Angeles
1986-90 Lecturer, Southern California Institute of
Architecture
PRESERVATION Consultant, Survey LA, Los Angeles Planning Department
Consultant, Architectural Survey, City of Palm Springs
Design Guidelines, Heatherstone Community, Mountain
View, CA
Qualified for National Register of Historic Places:
Norm’s Coffee Shop (Armet and Davis, 1957), Los
Angeles, CA
Johnie’s Coffee Shop (Armet and Davis, 1955), Los
Angeles, CA
Stuart Pharmaceutical Factory (Edward Durell Stone
1958), Pasadena, CA
Bullock's Pasadena (Wurdeman and Becket 1947),
Pasadena CA
McDonald's Drive-In (Stanley C. Meston 1953), Downey,
Valley Ho Hotel (Edward Varney, 1957), Scottsdale, AZ
FELLOWSHIPS Fellow, National Arts Journalism Program, School of
Journalism, Columbia University, 1997-98
GRANTS Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts,
r esearch on Brazilian landscape architect Roberto Burle
Marx, 1990
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
AWARDS President’s Award, Los Angeles Conservancy 2015
Docomomo/US Survey Award of Excellence: Curating the
City: Modern Architecture in L.A. Website (with Los Angeles
Conservancy) 2014
Honor Award, National Trust for Historic Preservation 1997
President’s Award, California Preservation Foundation
LICENSE Licensed architect, California # C 15747
PUBLICATIONS
BOOKS :
Frank Lloyd Wright: Natural Design, Organic Architecture RIzzoli
International, New York, 2012
Casa Modernista: A History of the Brazil Modern House Rizzoli
International, New York 2010
Oscar Niemeyer Buildings Rizzoli International, New York 2009
Frank Lloyd Wright: The Buildings Rizzoli International, New York 2008
Julius Shulman: Palm Springs Rizzoli International, New York 2008
Forgotten Modern: California Houses 1940-1970 Gibbs Smith Publisher,
Layton, UT 2007
Frank Lloyd Wright: Mid-Century Modern , Rizzoli International, New York
2007
Organic Architecture: The Other Modernism Gibbs Smith Publisher, Layton,
UT 2007
Frank Lloyd Wright: Prairie Houses , Rizzoli International, New York 2006
Oscar Niemeyer Houses, Rizzoli International, New York 2006
Frank Lloyd Wright: The Houses, Rizzoli International, New York 2005
The Ranch House, Harry Abrams, Inc., New York 2005
Googie Redux: Ultramodern Roadside Architecture, Chronicle Books, San
Francisco 2004
The Architecture of John Lautner , Rizzoli International, New York 1999
Viva Las Vegas, Chronicle Books, San Francisco, CA 1993
ARTICLES :
“Irvine, CA.” PlacesJournal , Sept. 2014
“Erasing Pereira.” Orange Coast Magazine , July 2014
"Big Man on Campus: Alan Hess on Modernist Maverick, a new exhibition
at the Nevada Museum of Art exploring the architecture of William
Pereira," Architect's Newspaper , Sept. 26, 2013
"Connecting the Dots: Alan Hess on Pacific Standard Time Presents:
Modern Architecture in L.A.," Architect's Newspaper , Sept. 6, 2013
“The Beauty of Authenticity: Dana Point Harbor,” Orange Coast Magazine ,
Aug., 2013
"Wide Angle Lens: Alan Hess on the Getty's new exhibition, Overdrive: LA
Constructs the Future 1940-1990, " Architect's Newspaper , June
21, 2013
"Everyday Modernisms: Diversity, Creativity, and Ideas in L.A.
Architecture, 1940-1990"
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Los Angeles Conservancy, "Curating the City" website, June 2013
“Schindler Goes Hollywood,” Los Angeles Review of Books, May 26,
2012
“New Apple Campus,” San Jose Mercury News , Sept. 2011
“Coming to Terms with the Sixties,” National Trust Forum Journal ,
Summer 2010, vol 24 no 4
“Colorful Landmarks: how color shaped public space in 1950s suburbia,”
New Geographies , Harvard Graduate School of Design, Oct 2010
“The Suburbs and the Ranch House,” California College of the Arts
Architecture Studio Series , 2005
“The Place of Histories,” Architecture California , 04:1, 2003
"Eine kurze Geschichte von Las Vegas," Stadt Bauwelt 143, Sept. 1999
"The Origins of McDonald's Golden Arches," Journal of the
Society of Architectural Historians , XLV: 60-67, March 1986
BROADCAST MEDIA AND FILMS:
“William Krisel, Architect,” DesignOnScreen Foundation, 2010
“A Kick in the Head—The Lure of Las Vegas,” BBC-TV January 2010
“Journeyman Architect: The Architecture of Donald Wexler,”
DesignOnScreen 2009
SELECTED TALKS
LECTURES:
Getty Research Institute; Commonwealth Club of San Francisco;
Columbia University School of Architecture; Walker Art Museum; Chicago
Humanities Festival; Cooper-Hewitt Museum of Design; Yale University
School of Architecture; Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the
Fine Arts; Greenwich (England) National Maritime Museum; Vancouver
(B.C.) Alcan Lecture Series; Monterey Design Conference; University of
British Columbia; Hammer Museum; San Francisco AIA; California
Preservation Foundation; Schusev State Museum of Architecture,
Moscow.
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
October 27, 2016
Santa Monica City Council
City Hall, 1685 Main Street
Santa Monica 90401
Dear Santa Monica Councilmembers,
I write to you as the preeminent expert on the public art and architecture of the
Millard Sheets Studio, finishing a book (out in 2017 from the University of Texas
Press) discussing the historical significance of the art, architecture, and urban
context of the Millard Sheets Studio commissions for Home Savings, including
the former Home Savings and Loan branch at 26 th and Wilshire in Santa Monica.
I urge you to confirm the recognition of this building as a landmark.
A California native, I earned an A.B. at Harvard in 2001 and a Ph.D. at Yale in
2008, and I am currently the director of the Urban Studies program and an
associate professor of history at Manhattan College. I am the author of one
award-winning book, co-editor of two other books, and the author of numerous
academic and popular articles about history, the built environment, and urban
studies.
Over the past five years, I have conducted more than 75 interviews with
architects and artists who worked on these buildings, Home Savings employees,
and preservationists, and I am the first person to comprehensively study the
Millard Sheets Papers, Denis O’Connor Papers, and Ahmanson Foundation
images related to these commissions. I have received fellowships from the
Ahmanson Foundation, the Haynes Foundation, Howard and Roberta
Ahmanson, the Huntington Library, the Jonathan Heritage Foundation, and the
Autry National Center, and I have written about my research for Huntington
Library Frontiers, the KCET website, and my own research blog,
http://adamarenson.com/homesavingsbankart, which has received more than
50,000 visitors.
I have led a tour of Home Savings branches for the Autry’s Pacific Standard Time
Getty Foundation programming, and I coordinated with the L.A. Conservancy to
do a panel on Sheets’s works in the Pomona Valley. I have been interviewed by
the Daily News Los Angeles , the Dallas Morning News , Beverly Hills Television,
and a forthcoming documentary by Paul Bockhorst on Sheets’s architecture. I am
HISTORY
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
completing a book and I am planning a museum exhibition linked to this work.
While Santa Monica had three Sheets Studio designs—including the extant but
altered Fred Roberts-Bay Area Finance building, at 1621 Wilshire; and the former
Home Savings branch that stood at 331 Santa Monica Boulevard but was
destroyed, along with its mosaics, in 2001—the 26 th and Wilshire branch has
always been the most elaborate, and it is also the best preserved. In 1971, the 26 th
and Wilshire branch received a Santa Monica City Beautiful Pacesetter award,
recognition of which is preserved in the Millard Sheets Papers at the Archives of
American Art in the Smithsonian Institution in Washington.
I urge you to build on this recognition and confirm the landmark status of this
building. It represents the height of the Sheets Studio commissions for Home
Savings, integrating architecture, mosaic, stained glass, sculptures, and interior
design elements into an indivisible whole.
This branch is the first instance of a new Home Savings architectural design,
created after Howard Ahmanson’s death, where the arms of the building were
brought forward to embrace the corner, unlike the straight-across design used at
earlier branches, including Hollywood and Studio City. A subsequent version
was constructed in Anaheim, demonstrating the importance of this design
change first seen in Santa Monica.
In my book, I argue that these branches from the end of the 1960s and early 1970s
are the most important, and often the most successful, of the Sheets Studio-Home
Savings designs, and I can provide the Millard Sheets sketches that led to these
new innovations.
Sculptors John Edward Svenson (who created the dolphin and girl in Santa
Monica) and Richard H. Ellis (who created the family group in Santa Monica)
told me that they see their works for this branch as some of their best, and the
stained glass windows (and the entire branch façade) were featured on Home
Savings calendars. All of the art elements reflect the pleasure of spending time
with family, the most important Home Savings art subject, above even their
noted historical compositions.
Sheets was often asked about this branch by interviewers, who found it
memorable and a pleasure to behold. While Sheets was quoted as disliking the
new mosaic design, Sheets affirmed that “I designed it—so I haven't anybody to
blame but myself,” and Sheets understood that this experiment was a crucial
moment in the evolving design of these buildings, to meet both his artistic needs
and the design specifications of Home Savings. Like many other landmark
buildings that represented a struggle between artists and patrons—from
Bernini’s designs in Vatican City to Diego Rivera’s conflict at Rockefeller Center,
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
and on and on—this work demonstrates the importance of those tensions in
some of our greatest art and architecture, and deserves preservation.
Over the decades, the branch has become one of the best known in all of
California, and a symbol of Santa Monica. Tony Berlant, an artist who produced
a pressed-tin mural for a downtown Los Angeles Home Savings branch in 1988,
told me that at the time he thought of Millard Sheets’s work as “vapid.” But,
after living near the Santa Monica branch for decades, “[Sheets’s] things look OK
now, and that is one of those things that has surprised me,” he said, admitting
his own views on art “have gotten a lot more tolerant.” Berlant attributed his
current regard for the branch as related to how “public works of art age, and
carry with them the scent of another time.” They become part of the landscape,
and “you own them experientially, and don’t know the name, and that is really
kinda terrific,” Berlant said. Berlant’s experience is just one of hundreds of
people who saw this work and stopped to comment about it, according to a
search of Foursquare, Flickr, and other geolocation social media sites. It was and
continues to be an important art and architectural asset for Santa Monica, and I
urge you to ensure that it remains so.
I am pleased that the Santa Monica Landmarks Commission is leading the charge
in recognizing the importance of the art and architecture created for Home
Savings, and I hope it will join Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, Pomona, Claremont,
and other local communities in confirming protections for Millard Sheets’s Home
Savings buildings. I look forward to hearing from you about your decision, and
please feel free to contact me with any questions you may have.
Sincerely,
Adam Arenson
Associate Professor of History and Director of Urban Studies,
Manhattan College
Miguel Hall 414
4513 Manhattan College Parkway
Riverdale (Bronx), NY 10471
718-862-7317
adam.arenson@manhattan.edu
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
201 Santa Monica Boulevard
Suite 500
Santa Monica, CA 90401
310.451.4488 phone
310.451.5279 fax
www.esassoc.com
October 23, 2016
Santa Monica City Council
1685 Main Street
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Subject: Landmark Designation for Home Savings and Loan Building, 2600 Wilshire Boulevard
Dear City Council:
I am writing as an expert to express my strong support fo r historic designation of 2600 Wilshire Boulevard as a
City Landmark. My qualifications meet and exceed the S ecretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications
Requirements in history and architectural history. I have a B.A. in Art History from Oberlin College, M.A. in
Architectural History and Certificate of Historic Preserva tion from the University of Vi rginia, and a Doctorate in
Art History from UCLA. I have over 25 years of experience in professional practice, and I have served as a
consultant to the Landmarks Commission from 2006 until the present, but not on this project. I also grew up in
the Santa Monica-Malibu area where I still live and work.
I have conducted extensive research on the life and works of Millard Sheets, the history of the Home Savings and
Loan commissions, and the works of Millard Sheets Studio. I recently completed a rehabilitation project for the
Home Savings and Loan, Montebello Branch, designed by Millard Sheets, to adaptively reuse the building for a
non-profit community health center. I am a recipient of the 2016 Preservation Design Award from the California
Preservation Foundation for the Montebello Branch project , which included conservation of the building and its
art works and installation of an interpretive exhibit.
The striking white travertine commercial building that sta nds crowned with gold at the corner of Wilshire
Boulevard and 26 th Street in Santa Monica features a stunning mosaic designed by artist Millard Sheets and
stained glass window by Susan Hertel. This prominent vi sual landmark possesses unique aesthetic values, and is
a distinctive, outstanding example of Modern architecture and integrated art in Santa Monica. It is a valuable
example of a Modern bank building that was conceived and designed by nationally prominent master artist,
Millard Sheets, in collaboration with associated archit ect G. David Underwood, with integrated art works
fabricated by the artists of Millard Sheets Designs Studio.
What particularly strikes me about the Santa Monica Home Savings, and always has, is the building’s prominent
location and the visibility of the mosaic art on a primary boulevard; especially how the building and integrated art
represents and defines the sense of place and identity of Santa Monica and the recreational lifestyle and relaxed
sociability of our city which is so special. Rather than being too large or overwhelming I think the large mosaic
is fantastic and well balanced by the splayed plan of the bank building which embraces and frames the plaza in
front and its free standing sculpture. This special and unique Santa Monica example improves upon the more
static, rigid, formalistic earlier design in Beverly H ills. The Santa Monica Home Savings invigorates the corner
with a stronger, more energetic, three dimensional, vi sually and spatially integrated, art and architectural
design. While there have been some alterations for tena nt improvements, the important defining character of the
building and art works are all still intact. The whole com position in its entirety, including the building and its art
works (mosaic, stained glass window, sculpture), is a highly va luable ensemble of integrated art and architecture.
Each component part was conceived and fabricated as a part of the larger whole and cannot be separated.
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
City Council
October 23, 2016
Page 2
I reject the argument that the earlier works of Millard Sheets Designs, Inc. are the most important. Each work
was unique and rooted in the community for which it was created. In my experience, Sheets’ buildings and art
only improved over time and became more elegant, be tter executed and more well-conceived as integrated
compositions.
As a work of art and architecture, the Santa Monica exam ple is not diminished in its value or significance by the
passing of Ahmanson, nor is it diminished by the fact that another similar design was used in Anaheim. The
legacy and importance of Ahmanson’s patronage lived on in the Home Savings buildings completed after his
death. It was not uncommon for the Home Savings and Loan buildings to be similar in design, and in fact this
similarity was an essential part of the hallmark Home Savings building design motif which proved to be such a
successful advertising formula.
Notwithstanding the basic similarities of the building designs, a significant amount of creative effort on the part
of Millard Sheets and associated artists went into each ba nk and art design. Sheets was personally involved and
worked closely with the other artists who were masters in their own right and worked collaboratively with him.
To diminish the value of the art or architecture by saying Sheets only provided oversight and they were done by
others is not correct. Sheets signature indicates he was the primary artist and responsible for the design of the
mosaic mural in Santa Monica. Furthermore, Susan Hert el was a distinguished artist in her own right and a
principal designer and studio manager for Millard Sheets Designs. She designed and fabricated many beautiful
stained glass windows for Home Savings and Loan buildings including the one in Santa Monica. Nancy Colbath,
Dennis O’Connor and the other artists were wonderfully talented, highly trained, sophisticated and sensitive
artists who worked together with Sheets and Hertel. They all admired Millard Sheets and had a mutual respect for
one another as artists and designers.
From an architectural perspective, my research in the Millard Sheets papers located in the Smithsonian Archives
of American Art and my review of original architectur al drawings shows that Millard Sheets, who was not a
licensed architect, worked in collabora tion with local architects on the buildi ng designs for all the Home Savings
buildings. He maintained responsibility for the conceptual design of the buildings and relied on local architects to
complete the working drawings and pull the permits. Ar chival documents show he went through an extensive
selection process to obtain bids from architects and to sel ect just the right firm to collaborate with for each
commission. To say this building in Santa Monica is not significant because Sheets didn't design it is highly
misleading and disingenuous. He hand-picked the architect, he did the conceptual design, and he closely oversaw
the design development and approved the working drawings at every step. The Santa Monica Branch is a real
and true work by Millard Sheets and the Millard Sheets Designs Studio.
This particular brand of Modernis m is distinctive and unique in the history of 20th century art and
architecture. While Modernism embraced the idea of inte grated art and architecture, Millard Sheets through the
patronage of Ahmanson was able to develop fine art aesthe tics and material classicism at a much higher level and
with greater detail while at the same time celebrating local identity, yielding a true democratic American
inclusive style that is at once universal and at the same time accessible to any individual person. The celebrated
French, Belgian and Viennese Art Nouveau movements in th e earlier part of the century were part of the first
international style that reinterprete d national and local cultures in a new Modern way. The works of Millard
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
City Council
October 23, 2016
Page 3
Sheets and Millard Sheets Designs Studio as a body of work are next-generation American examples that are on
equal par to contemporary European examples.
Millard Sheets was an internationally known and nati onally prominent artist whose works are exhibited in
museums throughout the world. His murals grace the entran ces to Los Angeles City Hall, the Detroit Institute of
Art, the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, the Library at Notre Dame University, and others. We are so privileged to
have this surviving building with th e art works still intact. We as a commun ity should be inspired by the great
opportunity we have to be careful and thoughtful stewards of this building and its art, now and for future
generations!
I strongly urge you to uphold the designation of 2600 W ilshire Boulevard as a City of Santa Monica Landmark.
Sincerely Yours,
Margarita Jerabek, Ph.D.
Director of Historic Resources
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Oct. 28, 2016
Re: Home Savings Appeal, item 6A on November 1 Council Meeting
Dear Mayor Vazquez and Councilmembers,
As a former Commissioner who was serving at the time that the Home Savings Building was
designated as a Landmark, and who was privileged to serve for three terms on that body, I
would like to offer some comments about the application of Woodys’ Group Inc. v. City of
Newport Beach (2015) as it affects the Landmarks Commission, and the designation of Home
Savings.
Woody’s was a case of flagrant bias by a Newport Beach councilmember who acted individually
as appellant and judge, and whose appeal did not follow city procedures laid out in the code.
In contrast, The Landmarks Commission follows procedures that are clearly defined in our city
code:
Purpose section, 9.36.020:
a) Protect improvements and areas which represent elements of the City’s cultural, social,
economic, political and architectural history.
b) Safeguard the City’s historic, aesthetic and cultural heritage as embodied and reflected
in such improvements and areas.
Section 9.36.060 Powers
a) Designate Structures of Merit, Landmarks and Landmark Parcels, and to make any
preliminary or supplemental designations, determinations or decisions, as additions
thereto, in order to effectuate the purposes of this Chapter.
Subsequently, the ordinance lays out very clearly defined steps required to make a
determination that a property merits such designation, in Section 9.36.100 (criteria for
designation) and Section 9.36.120 (procedure). The final decision by the Commission, approval
of a Statement of Official Action (STOA), is based upon factual findings that show e xactly how a
particular property meets each applicable criteria for designation. The STOA for Home Savings
is attached.
The landmarks ordinance requires the appointment of commissioners with specific expertise
who can ensure that designations are founded on objective factual information that could meet
a court test of a “takings” claim (owners asserting that the historic preservation regulations are
a deprivation of their property rights).
The filing of a nomination for landmark status requires a motion, second and approval by
commission vote. No single individual can take this step, which is done by consent of the entire
body.
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Once a nomination is filed, an evaluation is undertaken with professional consultants who
report back to the Landmarks Commission. The Commission considers that information, along
with other sources of information, before making its final decision to designate – or not.
Nomination does not predict that the outcome will be designation. A number of properties
nominated, and evaluated, have been turned down for designation because the Commission
did not believe that the criteria for designation could be met. Examples include the Papermate
Building, the Midas Building at 5 th and Colorado, and Village Trailer Park. Other lesser examples
include homes slated for demolition, which the Commission passed on with regret, but did not
designate because the criteria could not be met.
Finally, the Santa Monica landmark designation process is distinguished from the Woody ’s case
because the final decision in a disputed case is made by an entirely separate body: Ci ty Council.
The right to appeal a Landmarks Commission decision assures that a different group of
individuals will review the facts and make the final determination.
How was Home Savings identified for designation? With our LUCE having new policies
addressing the City’s historic resources, the Commission undertook the proactive designation of
properties that appeared to be obvious candidates for landmark status: the low ‐hanging fruit.
Examples are the Central Tower building, the Gap building, Sur La Table building downtown; the
Elks Building on Main Street. For buildings so clearly qualified, it seemed to us that defining
those properties as landmarks was helpful overall to the City’s planning pr ocess.
Home Savings at 26 th and Wilshire came to our attention as a result of the Pacific Standard Time
exhibitions presented by the Getty in 2010 and 2011, spotlighting the creative arts in Southern
California in the post ‐war period; lectures presented by Professor Adam Arenson, a historian
who has been studying Millard Sheets and the Home Savings projects for a number of years in
preparation for a book; and a Los Ang eles Conservancy tour in March 2012 featuring works by
Millard Sheets. Those programs resulted in a new awareness and appreciation of the impact
Millard Sheets had on the flourishing of the arts in the region, and the unusual partnership
between the artist and Howard Ahmanson the banker and financier. The Home Savings branch
banks were a unique product of the financier’s commission and the artistic freedom given to
Millard Sheets to design buildings conveying a “brand” image of safety and security, and
connected to the community through thematic decorative arts woven into the building fabric.
The building was identified as a potential landmark back in 2000, when an applicant voluntarily
sought the advice of the Landmarks Commission regarding tenant improvements for the retail
use. Although not designated, the applicant treated the building as if it were a landmark, and
the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards were applied to the prospective alterations. The
Landmarks Commission (reluctantly) approved the alterations in view of the economic needs of
the new retail use of the building. The respect and deference to the building by the applicant
were commendable.
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
The Landmarks Commission performs its work in strict compliance with city codes, in a neutral
and unbiased manner. The evidence for designating Home Savings at 26 th and Wilshire is
compelling and is based upon factual information.
Sincerely,
Ruthann Lehrer
Former Landmarks Commissioner
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016
Item 6-A
November 1, 2016